What undefeated run would be more impressive?

[Dave Gray]

FYO, what I am saying is that athletes of yore were conditioned in the way that athletes from yore were conditioned.  Could Jesse Owens have run with Usain Bolt if he'd been raised in our environment?  I think yes.  Are you saying no?  Like humans have evolved so much in the last 60 years (now there's a steaming pile of bullcrap) that athletes from the past would have no chance against them?

With "non" sports, sure -- racing, golf, bowling, or anything else where you don't play against anyone else.

But in football, basketball, and baseball, your opponents also have access to the same training supplies that you do.  Defenses hit harder, safeties are faster, schemes are more complex.  So, if you just transplant Gale Sayers to today's NFL, sure he'd benefit from the great equipment, doctors and regimens, but he'd be playing across from a guy who had done the same.  It would likely even out to a similar result.

[fyo]

FYO, what I am saying is that athletes of yore were conditioned in the way that athletes from yore were conditioned.  Could Jesse Owens have run with Usain Bolt if he'd been raised in our environment?  I think yes.  Are you saying no?

No, I'm not saying no. You are completely not getting what I'm saying.

It's the if he'd been raised in our environment that completely invalidates the comparison.

You seem to be comparing some theoretical "raw talent" and presuming that the athletes, regardless of era, "do the same stuff" (put in the same number of practice hours, have access to the same equipment / drugs / whatever, are challenged by the same level of competition from their surroundings). That's BUNK. That's like saying, well, I could be as successful as Bill Gates if only I'd...

And that's just one of the two main issues I see.

The second is the size of the talent pool and the efficiency of "the system" (High School, College and NFL) in isolating the most talented players. Clearly, the talent pool is A LOT bigger now and the system seems a lot better at evaluating talent, with fewer biases (racism, academic requirements, etc) along the way. The end result is better players.

[fyo]

Oh my God, you've got to be kidding me fyo. Todays players ARE NOT TOUGHER than the ones who made the league.

Nowhere did I say anything about toughness. Not one bit. I don't question for a second that players were generally a lot tougher in the "old days" and there are certainly a lot more pansies in football today. It took a completely different skill set to compete then, which just underlines my point.

[NADS]

Saints because of the way they pulled it off--one sector of the game always steps up.  Sean Payton must have had half a box of Lucky Charms crammed up his ass to get that Redskins win though.  It reminds me of the Pats/Baltimore game during New England's run. 

[YoFuggedaboutit]

Looks like the Saints have fallen from the ranks of the unbeaten.  Only the Colts remain.

[Denver_Bronco]

Now that's the playoff New Orleans Saints that we're gonna see.....

That was a nice preview....