A Football Life - The Forward Pass

[sport historian]

The NFL Network's A Football Life features "The Forward Pass," a history of passing. It premieres at 9 pm ET Tuesday and repeats the rest of the week.

 

[Thrashen]

What’s the point of creating all these new threads promoting NFL Network’s upcoming programming? A few months ago, you created a thread urging CF posters to tune in to “Barry Sanders – A Football Life.†Last week, it was a one of NFLN’s racially-biased “list†shows concerning the “Top Ten Rushing Seasons of All Time.†I don’t have NFLN, but even if I did, I certainly wouldn’t waste an hour of my time sitting through stomach-turning praise for numerous black running backs…hoping that they’ll mention John Riggins, Larry Csonka, Jim Taylor, Craig James, or Peyton Hillis.

That Marxist Network should only be mentioned at CF in the context of derision. Does anyone disagree?

 

[Don Wassall]

These shows can have value, especially an older one such as this one about the history of the forward pass. Hopefully it won't focus on Terrelle Pryor just recently learning how to throw one.

 

[davidholly]

The Forward Pass one was a bit of a let down. All over the place, some of the history seemed a little off to me as well. Firstly the idea that the forward pass saved football by making it safer is a huge exaggeration. The forward pass was introduced with a number of other rule changes at the time designed to make the game safer. Even though it was in the rule books in 1906 most teams never ran forward passing plays. How can something most teams never even attempt save football? The other rules implemented at the same time are what made the game safer.

At the end of the episode they even talk about the song American Pie for some stupid reason.

 

[sport historian]

What’s the point of creating all these new threads promoting NFL Network’s upcoming programming? A few months ago, you created a thread urging CF posters to tune in to “Barry Sanders – A Football Life.†Last week, it was a one of NFLN’s racially-biased “list†shows concerning the “Top Ten Rushing Seasons of All Time.†I don’t have NFLN, but even if I did, I certainly wouldn’t waste an hour of my time sitting through stomach-turning praise for numerous black running backs…hoping that they’ll mention John Riggins, Larry Csonka, Jim Taylor, Craig James, or Peyton Hillis.

That Marxist Network should only be mentioned at CF in the context of derision. Does anyone disagree?

In a program on this subject, everyone interviewed and nearly all shown figured to be white and that is how it turned out.

 

[foreverfree]

At the end of the episode they even talk about the song American Pie for some stupid reason.

Well, that song (full version) *does* have the lines "the players tried for a forward pass/with the jester in a sideline in a cast"...

John

 

[jaxvid]

I think Sport Historian is just mentioning shows that may be of interest to people who like NFL history. Obviously some of them will be all about black players but some will show guys from the old days when it was more balanced. The agenda of that station is clear though and while I won't bother to watch it some may be interested.

 

[dwid]

I just wish these lists had more fairness to them. They are just filling up space while usually reminding us how great affletes are. They are running out of top ten things, top ten left handed qbs? top 10 players named Steve? top backup qbs?

they have the footage to show us a lot of older White players, I think I saw some of it on one of their shows about how nfl films came about which showed a few interesting things, and thats about the best they have come up with. NFL Films seems like they were basically a bunch of nerds who wanted to film every aspect of the game, and they explain why so many older games are in slow motion, they wanted to get more detail which required more film which was expensive, I guess something about making each play look like an art form, which does make it look interesting but slow motion footage gives the impression that these White players were just slow.

 

[sport historian]

I think Sport Historian is just mentioning shows that may be of interest to people who like NFL history. Obviously some of them will be all about black players but some will show guys from the old days when it was more balanced. The agenda of that station is clear though and while I won't bother to watch it some may be interested.

Yep, and I mentioned this program because most everybody interviewed or featured would be white.

However, it left a lot out. They said Coryell and Walsh revived the passing game in the late 70's, but neglected to mention the 1978 rule changes.

 

[sport historian]

I just wish these lists had more fairness to them. They are just filling up space while usually reminding us how great affletes are. They are running out of top ten things, top ten left handed qbs? top 10 players named Steve? top backup qbs?

they have the footage to show us a lot of older White players, I think I saw some of it on one of their shows about how nfl films came about which showed a few interesting things, and thats about the best they have come up with. NFL Films seems like they were basically a bunch of nerds who wanted to film every aspect of the game, and they explain why so many older games are in slow motion, they wanted to get more detail which required more film which was expensive, I guess something about making each play look like an art form, which does make it look interesting but slow motion footage gives the impression that these White players were just slow.

NFL Films was founded by Ed Sabol and his son Steve, officially around 1964. It was Ed Sabol's idea to film every game in slow motion from the mid-60's.

This DOES make people think the game was slower than it actually was. I recently saw the actual broadcast of two 1970 games. The action was very fast, somewhat different from NFL Films footage of the same games.

Some posters at the PFRA Forum have noted that the people who run the NFL Network don't like to show anything before the 1990's.

 

[Don Wassall]

NFL Films was founded by Ed Sabol and his son Steve, officially around 1964. It was Ed Sabol's idea to film every game in slow motion from the mid-60's.

This DOES make people think the game was slower than it actually was. I recently saw the actual broadcast of two 1970 games. The action was very fast, somewhat different from NFL Films footage of the same games.

Some posters at the PFRA Forum have noted that the people who run the NFL Network don't like to show anything before the 1990's.

When I've watched rebroadcasts of college games from the late '60s to early '70s, I've been impressed by the speed of the players and how they appear to be in better shape and have more stamina than today's college and especially pro players, who often are easily gassed and need constant infusions of Gatorade from the pathetic drones who roam the sidelines squirting it into their mouths. The fundamentals are of course better too in the old games.

I have no doubt that ESPN and the NFL Network at least occasionally speed up the action from highlights. One reason could be to save a few seconds; another could be for propaganda purposes: everything today is supposed to fit the oft-repeated lie of "bigger, faster and stronger" which means "yesterday's" black and white footage contains too many Whites, who must always be derided as "smaller, slower and weaker."

 

[Carolina Speed]

When I've watched rebroadcasts of college games from the late '60s to early '70s, I've been impressed by the speed of the players and how they appear to be in better shape and have more stamina than today's college and especially pro players, who often are easily gassed and need constant infusions of Gatorade from the pathetic drones who roam the sidelines squirting it into their mouths. The fundamentals are of course better too in the old games.

I have no doubt that ESPN and the NFL Network at least occasionally speed up the action from highlights. One reason could be to save a few seconds; another could be for propaganda purposes: everything today is supposed to fit the oft-repeated lie of "bigger, faster and stronger" which means "yesterday's" black and white footage contains too many Whites, who must always be derided as "smaller, slower and weaker."

There is no doubt that today's athletes are bigger, faster and stronger. However, I've noticed that athletes today do
seem to get winded faster and seem to have less stamina. There also seems to be more frequent injuries, especially to the knee and shoulder area. There are many opinions on this I'm sure. Someone should begin a thread on this, unless there is already a thread out there. What do ya'll think?

 

[Ieroner]

This is off-topic but I know that with racehorses back in the late 1800s and early 1900s, the horses used to not even START their racing careers before they were 5 years old, then once they started their racing careers they often had fairly long careers. They also seemed to be much sturdier and hardier, fewer injuries. But then breeders starting breeding for SPEED SPEED SPEED and now racehorses typically start their careers when they are 2 or 3 and their careers are VERY brief and they are more prone to injuries. Coupled with the fact that more Americans live in cities now, the fragility and short careers of most racehorses is part of the reason most of America doesn't care about horse racing anymore and probably couldn't name more than 2 or 3 current top racehorses--their careers just don't last long enough for their names to become household names.

So what's my point? Well, while there doesn't seem to be anybody out there *breeding* faster blacks that we know of, if horses are any indication, extreme speed comes at a price. Horses are faster nowadays but they are very delicate. Men who are a bit physically slower but more durable and who could potentially have 10-15+ year careers in the NFL don't get a shot anymore. We get to watch the super duper fast guys who are plagued with injuries and who careers last like 5 years and then they're "past their prime."

 

[Carolina Speed]

This is off-topic but I know that with racehorses back in the late 1800s and early 1900s, the horses used to not even START their racing careers before they were 5 years old, then once they started their racing careers they often had fairly long careers. They also seemed to be much sturdier and hardier, fewer injuries. But then breeders starting breeding for SPEED SPEED SPEED and now racehorses typically start their careers when they are 2 or 3 and their careers are VERY brief and they are more prone to injuries. Coupled with the fact that more Americans live in cities now, the fragility and short careers of most racehorses is part of the reason most of America doesn't care about horse racing anymore and probably couldn't name more than 2 or 3 current top racehorses--their careers just don't last long enough for their names to become household names.

So what's my point? Well, while there doesn't seem to be anybody out there *breeding* faster blacks that we know of, if horses are any indication, extreme speed comes at a price. Horses are faster nowadays but they are very delicate. Men who are a bit physically slower but more durable and who could potentially have 10-15+ year careers in the NFL don't get a shot anymore. We get to watch the super duper fast guys who are plagued with injuries and who careers last like 5 years and then they're "past their prime."

Ok, I'll start a thread on "Happy Hour", if there are no objections, please elaborate Ieroner.

 

[Awake in America]

One of the often overlooked reasons that today's athletes are bigger (apart from drugs, which most people underestimate) is the way that football was played 50 years ago. In the early 60s there were still substitution rules in college football, repealed in 1964. The repeal ushered in two platoon football, or "chickensh!t football" as General Neyland called it. Coaches were still recruiting players like the old days as late as ten years later. It was a big deal when Bear Bryant signed John Hannah. At 265, Hannah was HUGE.

Imagine today's sumos running down on kickoff and punt coverage! It took well into the 70s for coaches to realize that players didn't need nearly the stamina they did in the old days playing both ways. Also, weight training and dianabol became more than just fringe issues. By the late 80s college teams were fielding offensive lines that all weighed over 300 lbs, dwarfing the lines of just 20 years earlier.

The fastest players of old would still be plenty fast, and the linebackers and defensive backs of today are not much bigger than they were 40 years ago. Most (not all) speed increases over the last 50 years have been due to better tracks, better shoes, and drugs. Billy Cannon would still be a very big, very fast running back. At 6'3, 245, Butkus would still be plenty big to play the middle, and advanced medicine would likely have extended his career, and that of many others. It's the linemen that have ballooned up.