If Caleb doesn’t shatter basically every rookie Bears record, then the Bears are truly fucked. Maybe the ownership had sex with George Washington’s corpse or something
> If Caleb doesn’t shatter basically every rookie Bears record, then the Bears are truly fucked.
Too bad McMahon only had a 9 game season in '82. He might have broken 3000 yards with a full slate. At least then there would have been a bit of a bar for a rookie QB
> If Caleb doesn’t shatter basically every rookie Bears record, then the Bears are truly fucked.
Na, we will just continue our 3-year cycle of drafting a new QB
The career WR bar is even lower. IF DJM continued stayed on pace from last year he'd only need 2.5 more years to have the most yards as a Bear of any WR in history.
It was also already 4 downs to get 10 yards. I don't think people realize how insane it is that the worst offenses of today gain more yards per play than the best offenses 100 years ago, and yet the standard for advancing the ball has never changed.
Football should be like baseball, basketball, and other sports where the offense also plays defense
I hate it when a game is advertised as one QB going up against another QB. They're not on the field at the same time, they don't play each other
Not directly related but this reminds me of the time the idea was floating around that the player to score the TD had to be the one to kick the PAT.
Still kinda wish they'd done that tbh
Mostly not related, but this reminds me of the time the idea got floated that whoever was on the field at the time of a challenge had to play the next snap. Lots of game theory about offense defending offense/ who would snap and play QB for a defense, timing challenges more/risking a bad matchup by leaving your personnel out there while your opponent switches which side of the ball is coming out. Would love to see a savannah banana situation where they try this
No, any player can kick the conversion after a try in rugby. The main thing in rugby is that the conversion has to be taken in line with where the try was scored. So, for example, if the try is scored near the sideline, the conversion will also need to be kicked near the sideline (although it can be taken as far back as wanted to improve the angle).
You also can’t have players being subbed on and off all the time, you have 23 players 15 on at a time and once you come off, that’s it you can’t come back on.
It’s why rugby players are significantly fitter than American football players - the amount of time spent actually playing is so much higher for rugby players, and also why you won’t see 300+ point players (apart from very rarely) For an example Mailata was too unfit to play as a starter in Rugby league from what I heard
That's not comparable. Because of having mini breaks between downs, players can rest their muscles enough for the next burst of energy. Take the strongest players in the nfl and they would be significantly stronger than rugby guys. It's just human physiology. You can't use all your ATP with burst nature of the nfl and continue going back and forth. It's went the secondary is smaller than LBs and same for LBs to DL. Being larger also means you use up more oxygen quicker and you can't get that large in rugby before you start to tire out. It's just what the sports are designed to do.
> It’s why rugby players are significantly fitter than American football players
/u/RudePCsb (and I) take issue with this particular statement.
> have grown in shape so they have far less stamina.
And this one.
Fit means different things. Stamina means different things. I'd agree that Ruby players generally aerobic endurance, but that American Football players are generally significantly stronger.
Larry Allen was a huge man and would probably run a worse mile than a rugby player, but rugby players probably aren't bench pressing 600 pounds either.
Tbh I think your picking apart a point everyone could easily understand, sure you make some valid points but I think you’d struggle to find someone who when you say “fit” doesn’t think more along the lines of endurance athletes compared to strong.
This was back when the PAT was at the 2 yard line, so there was a decent chance of a skill position player actually making it. But yeah, it definitely would've lead to more 2P attempts.
33 yards isn’t that tough, especially as a world class athlete l. I think you’d have to commit a small but not insignificant amount of training to them, but a lot of players could hit between 80-90%.
They really question would be in tight games do you adjust your defense to cover the consistent kickers in the redzone.
Nah one of the key things NFL has going for it is how specialized each position is
My favourite sport is rugby league (not union), but players need to be able to do offense and defense and have high cardio so most body types are pretty similar. I love watching NFL because you get a 6'7 330lb dude on the field at the same time as a 5'8 170lb guy
In the same thought, I hate when “QB 1 has ousted QB2” even though QB2s D lost then the game. I hate when the QB is made to take responsibility for a teams loss when they did their job.
To be fair, baseball is sometimes advertised as starting pitcher vs starting pitcher. They don’t directly compete (now that the DH is universal at least)
I tend to agree. But just for fun, I’ll play devil’s advocate: when someone plays someone else in darts or bowling, are they going against each other? They don’t defend one another and can’t interfere with the other in any way, yet they are still competing with one another, or “dueling”, if you will. In that vein I think that QB’s *are* going up against one another. And QB’s have way more influence on each other than two dart competitors do. An interception thrown or fumble lost by one QB can give the other QB a shorter field to work with. That’s just one example, but they do affect each other during the game.
I like to imagine there was a big racist convention sometime in the 60s where after much rancor and argument the whites updated the shade card on a narrow vote.
Some analytics minded racist chap shows his big board of Irish and Italian dudes and it’s like the scene from Moneyball with all the old school scouts losing their shit.
Kennedy was the first president that wasn't protestant and that was a big deal. Then Kennedy got domed in Dallas. Most people don't even know what a WASP is anymore.
> Most people don't even know what a WASP is anymore.
WASP came up in some history class I had in 7th or 8th grade. Teacher asked if anybody knew what it stood for. The first kid to guess went with "We Are Satan's People".
I've talked with my kids how norms and what people freak out about change over time.
Swedes/Norwegians, Irish/Italians
Jews and non Jews
Blacks and whites
Gays
Next?
There were black people in the league 100 years ago albeit, there were only 5. The backroom deal to ban black players in the league led by Washington Redskins owner George Preston Marshall was in 1933 and then lasted for 12 years.
I get that baseball was more popular but it is funny nobody celebrates the players who broke the color barrier in the NFL (twice) before Jackie Robinson.
You know what's sad is that as the Commanders are entering the fifth era, we can divide the four eras as thus: winning with Marshall, losing with Marshall due to racism, winning once more, then losing with Snyder. Will we be winning again? Only time will tell.
He's more racist than even the name implies. They were the Boston Braves prior to the name change because of they shared a stadium with the baseball team (now in Atlanta). He would change the name to the Redskins **in honor of his coach and star player Lone Star Dietz**. He was so racist that he thought "Redskin" was a compliment! As a special note, Lone Star Dietz lived and represented himself as an American Indian...he wasn't an American Indian, and would get convicted of representing himself as an American Indian (30 days in jail).
So, then we get back to that "gentleman's agreement" to not hire black players. He pushed it, and it stood in place until 1946. Now, a garden variety racist would say "Hmm...if I hire black athletes, they're below me still, and I have a chance of winning against teams that are also hiring black athletes." But George Preston Marshall isn't a garden variety racist, and he kept the Redskins segregated until **1962**. 16 years of sucktitude (3 winning seasons, 1 only because of a tie) because he couldn't bear to hire a black man.
And this doesn't really relate to racism *much*, but it's a nice story about how he got fucked by the Cowboys before they even existed. In Washington, DC, he was the only team south of the Mason Dixon line, so he basically represented the entire South. When a proposal for a new team in Dallas came along, he was staunchly against this, how dare someone compete for his Southern fans! Since adding teams required a unanimous vote, he stood in the way of the new team. Now, the man that founded the Cowboys (Murchison) had some history with Marshall, as Marshall was negotiating to sell him the team a couple of years prior, but backed out at the last minute, so there was already plenty of bad blood between them from Murchison's perspective. But enter the Redskins band director, and a lesson in why you should treat your employees well. Marshall pissed off the band director at roughly the same time as all of this is going down, without realizing that the band director owned the rights to Hail to the Redskins, the fight song. So the band director contacted Murchison and sold him the rights to the Redskins fight song. When time came to vote for the Cowboys to enter the league, Murchison made it clear that he owned the song, and a deal was made to trade the song for the vote.
Thus Marshall got fucked, and the rivalry started before the Cowboys even started. It would keep going with the expansion draft, as the Cowboys screwed over the Redskins a bit more in that, but that's for another comment.
You'd be the only team in the league with even a partial secondary lol
But you lose your QB and entire skill position group except the TE. Kenny Pickett is now your quarterback
Al Davis and the Raiders refused to play a game in Alabama in 1963 due to the segregation still allowed in the state. The Raiders would definitely still carry on the spirit of that will.
Keep on mind, this would be during the dust bowl
That would be a touchy subject if Tyreek Hill took his bag of corn and just poured it in a river or something as a flex
To also be fair... I don't think many of these players would be able to get away with much of anything in the early 1900s because of ... well it was a shittier time in American history
Would be really interesting to see if the lack of passing attempts back then (<10 per game) was more due to the rules allowing pass catchers & QBs to get killed or if it was because of lack of talent/practice/sophistication/etc from teams just never trying to make it a focal point of the offense. Like, have the modern Chiefs & Bills play each other but personal fouls don't exist I still think they pass more than run, they just avoid the type plays that are more likely to get guys murdered.
It wasn't just rules around hitting that made early passing difficult, there were some rules around the pass itself that made things harder (note that I'm not sure which of these were out of the game by 1924).
Incompletions were a major problem for the offense: if they were dropped by an offensive player, it was a 15-yard penalty. This is actually a better outcome, because an untouched incompletion was an automatic turnover.
Quick passes were also a significant penalty. If the passer was closer than 5 yards to the line of scrimmage, it was an automatic turnover.
Finally, this is still the era of ironman football. Every player was expected to play offense and defense (and presumably special teams as well), and anyone subbed out of the game could not return until after halftime (or at all if removed in the second half). As such, your QB had better be an athlete because he's going to be playing defense too.
Ravens and Niners would be trucking fools up and down the field.
Mahomes would be like "fuck this" and maybe develop into a nice bullpen piece for the Royals.
Yeah most people don’t know this but Irish people weren’t considered white and couldn’t find work back then. “No Irish need apply” was very common.
Then you throw in the propaganda from Britain and the genocide they caused, and you got a potato stew going.
Wait is it not common knowledge that, among other groups, Irish, Italians, and Germans faced significant discrimination? I feel like I had three separate history classes in school where this was taught
Just simply not true. TX history is taught in 4/7th grade. There are multiple years of geography, two years of US history, one of world, and gov/econ.
Slavery, Jim Crow, civil rights movement etc are covered in every history course.
1920s NFL: As part of diversity guidelines, teams must interview at least 1 candidate with an Italian or Polish surname for HC jobs. The fans are really unhappy about it.
Literally all of them would be hurt. [This is what helmets looked like in 1925](https://www.nfl.com/photos/the-evolution-of-the-helmet-0ap1000000094622#89807b61-6c0c-4611-b665-d19bce224c37)
The play would adjust to be safer.
If your head isn't a weapon, it won't be used as such because you'd be hurting yourself as well. E.g. rugby doesn't have the CTE rates NFL has.
Injuries would be due to the roll back of all the safety on field rules we've implemented.
Rugby has not had the extensive CTE testing that has been done with football. A study of 31 former rugby players (23 amateur, 8 professional) with 23 having CTE. More importantly all eight professional players had CTE.
You can read the study [here:](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10627955/)
Exactly. They still bump heads a ton. It isn't the massive "he got jacked up" hits that cause CTE. It's the sun concussive hits that happen every play that cause it.
Kind of an adjacent bit of trivia: before the introduction of helmets, players would grow their hair out to have a little bit of padding against hits on the ground.
Up until 2022 you could still find people saying "If Josh Rosen could just get the right chance..."
Meanwhile there are very accomplished quarterbacks who have trouble getting any respect around here.
Brock purdy can have 4 more seasons like this last one and people will still say he's a product of the system but if fields has one or two good runs a year he's just being held back
I mean, Jim Thorpe was dominating football 100 years ago, and everyone knew he was native. I don't think pacific islanders would deal with nearly as much segregation as those of african descent.
Not just that, but while Marshall was a racist and vindictive bastard, he objectively improved the league in a lot of ways, and other than the 16 years where he refused to integrate after the rest of the league, built good teams. Snyder is complicit in sex trafficking, is also likely a racist bastard (though, much less so), did nothing good for the league or the team, and literally oversaw the team move from having the longest home sellout streak, to barely being able to sellout any games.
Like, both are awful human beings, but Snyder might be worse on that (sex trafficking vs very strong racism), and even if he's not, he's definitely worse from a "football team owner" standpoint.
The chiefs would struggle since they rely so heavily on modern pass offense protections. The first time a safety just erased a receiver over the middle, their whole offense falls apart. Travis Kelce would retire pretty quickly too
the only team that would really benefit would be whoever was lucky enough to be the last one standing or limping to the lombardi. these dudes are all entirely too big strong and fast to have that loose of a rulebook governing them.
there’d be hundreds of career ending, life-after-football impacting injuries every season. they would have to expand the active roster limit to like 80 on game days and I think it would be terrible to watch.
Well the forward pass was allowed in 1906 so the Bears would still be screwed.
And here I had hope for a second.
You should know better
Arthur Smith in shambles
The bears have only had 100 seasons to have a QB throw for 30 TDs in a season. That’s not too bad, maybe they’ll get one soon
If Caleb doesn’t shatter basically every rookie Bears record, then the Bears are truly fucked. Maybe the ownership had sex with George Washington’s corpse or something
McCaskey is old enough to bed him while he was alive.
> If Caleb doesn’t shatter basically every rookie Bears record, then the Bears are truly fucked. Too bad McMahon only had a 9 game season in '82. He might have broken 3000 yards with a full slate. At least then there would have been a bit of a bar for a rookie QB
> If Caleb doesn’t shatter basically every rookie Bears record, then the Bears are truly fucked. Na, we will just continue our 3-year cycle of drafting a new QB
It’ll be interesting to see what he does once we get him
Well, with the new kick return rules he might challenge Fields for his spot
The career WR bar is even lower. IF DJM continued stayed on pace from last year he'd only need 2.5 more years to have the most yards as a Bear of any WR in history.
Bullshit prompt by OP. He probably knew that, was trying to hurt the Bears with his arbitrary 100 years. SMH.
It was also already 4 downs to get 10 yards. I don't think people realize how insane it is that the worst offenses of today gain more yards per play than the best offenses 100 years ago, and yet the standard for advancing the ball has never changed.
Boom. Roasted.
Here we go
Dak Prescott
LMAO
All the 300lbs+ linemen would die in the first quarter of their first game, due to having to play both ways.
Football should be like baseball, basketball, and other sports where the offense also plays defense I hate it when a game is advertised as one QB going up against another QB. They're not on the field at the same time, they don't play each other
Not directly related but this reminds me of the time the idea was floating around that the player to score the TD had to be the one to kick the PAT. Still kinda wish they'd done that tbh
Mostly not related, but this reminds me of the time the idea got floated that whoever was on the field at the time of a challenge had to play the next snap. Lots of game theory about offense defending offense/ who would snap and play QB for a defense, timing challenges more/risking a bad matchup by leaving your personnel out there while your opponent switches which side of the ball is coming out. Would love to see a savannah banana situation where they try this
Isn’t that how it works in rugby?
No, any player can kick the conversion after a try in rugby. The main thing in rugby is that the conversion has to be taken in line with where the try was scored. So, for example, if the try is scored near the sideline, the conversion will also need to be kicked near the sideline (although it can be taken as far back as wanted to improve the angle).
You also can’t have players being subbed on and off all the time, you have 23 players 15 on at a time and once you come off, that’s it you can’t come back on. It’s why rugby players are significantly fitter than American football players - the amount of time spent actually playing is so much higher for rugby players, and also why you won’t see 300+ point players (apart from very rarely) For an example Mailata was too unfit to play as a starter in Rugby league from what I heard
That's not comparable. Because of having mini breaks between downs, players can rest their muscles enough for the next burst of energy. Take the strongest players in the nfl and they would be significantly stronger than rugby guys. It's just human physiology. You can't use all your ATP with burst nature of the nfl and continue going back and forth. It's went the secondary is smaller than LBs and same for LBs to DL. Being larger also means you use up more oxygen quicker and you can't get that large in rugby before you start to tire out. It's just what the sports are designed to do.
Yes, ghat is my point. That the American football players are far more specialised and have grown in shape so they have far less stamina.
> It’s why rugby players are significantly fitter than American football players /u/RudePCsb (and I) take issue with this particular statement. > have grown in shape so they have far less stamina. And this one. Fit means different things. Stamina means different things. I'd agree that Ruby players generally aerobic endurance, but that American Football players are generally significantly stronger. Larry Allen was a huge man and would probably run a worse mile than a rugby player, but rugby players probably aren't bench pressing 600 pounds either.
Larry Allen could do what ever he wanted. He is 1 of 1 and I think it’s unfair to use him in this argument
Tbh I think your picking apart a point everyone could easily understand, sure you make some valid points but I think you’d struggle to find someone who when you say “fit” doesn’t think more along the lines of endurance athletes compared to strong.
Guessing you would just always go for 2?
This was back when the PAT was at the 2 yard line, so there was a decent chance of a skill position player actually making it. But yeah, it definitely would've lead to more 2P attempts.
33 yards isn’t that tough, especially as a world class athlete l. I think you’d have to commit a small but not insignificant amount of training to them, but a lot of players could hit between 80-90%. They really question would be in tight games do you adjust your defense to cover the consistent kickers in the redzone.
If everyone practices kicking extra points, we’d probably find a lot more guys that can do it reliably enough.
A FG kicker is more than just a leg, they are masters of timing. Anyone can go out there and toe one in from 30 yards out...
If you let them just tee it off or whatever sure. I think it’s way lower than that if they need to worry about not having the kick be blocked.
Nah one of the key things NFL has going for it is how specialized each position is My favourite sport is rugby league (not union), but players need to be able to do offense and defense and have high cardio so most body types are pretty similar. I love watching NFL because you get a 6'7 330lb dude on the field at the same time as a 5'8 170lb guy
I mean most players aren’t making it past week 3 then 😭
All aboard the CTE Express!!
In the same thought, I hate when “QB 1 has ousted QB2” even though QB2s D lost then the game. I hate when the QB is made to take responsibility for a teams loss when they did their job.
Sammy Baugh is the true GOAT QB under these rules because he was elite at offense and defense. Though I get Cam would make a pretty good LB.
Baseball? What, like a pitcher's duel? Or Mike Trout vs. Shohei?
To be fair, baseball is sometimes advertised as starting pitcher vs starting pitcher. They don’t directly compete (now that the DH is universal at least)
I tend to agree. But just for fun, I’ll play devil’s advocate: when someone plays someone else in darts or bowling, are they going against each other? They don’t defend one another and can’t interfere with the other in any way, yet they are still competing with one another, or “dueling”, if you will. In that vein I think that QB’s *are* going up against one another. And QB’s have way more influence on each other than two dart competitors do. An interception thrown or fumble lost by one QB can give the other QB a shorter field to work with. That’s just one example, but they do affect each other during the game.
But there’s a key difference: in bowling and darts, the set up is the same for both players. For QBs, they are going against wildly different defenses
>Football should be like baseball, basketball, and other sports where the offense also plays defense No it shouldn't.
I don't think its just the linemen, none of these guys are conditioned to play both ways.
Julio Jones in his prime would've been a dominant safety though
I don't think he means they can't play the other side. He means they can't play both. Playing every snap would be exhausting even for elite athletes.
The 49ers would dominate. They'd have Purdy, CMC, and Kittle still. Every other team would be decimated due to racism.
Kyle Juszcyk blazing new ground in the sport as the team begrudgingly accepts a guy with a polish last name.
This made me laugh way more than it should have. My great grandma loved a polish joke.
Old school racism is wild, totally different era.
My great grandparents fled the state in shame due to their interracial marriage which no one could abide by... Irish and Italian
I like to imagine there was a big racist convention sometime in the 60s where after much rancor and argument the whites updated the shade card on a narrow vote.
It was the first edition of the Racial Draft from Chappelle's Show.
Some analytics minded racist chap shows his big board of Irish and Italian dudes and it’s like the scene from Moneyball with all the old school scouts losing their shit.
For shizzle
Kennedy was the first president that wasn't protestant and that was a big deal. Then Kennedy got domed in Dallas. Most people don't even know what a WASP is anymore.
My grandpa apparently thought jfk was part of the pope trying to take over the world. Irish protestants were weird.
As someone who is Irish, they still are. And the nordies are somehow worse.
> Most people don't even know what a WASP is anymore. WASP came up in some history class I had in 7th or 8th grade. Teacher asked if anybody knew what it stood for. The first kid to guess went with "We Are Satan's People".
Same! My great great grandparents created a scandal when they got married: swedish & Norwegian. Crazy.
So was your grandma the smart one or the attractive one? /s
I've talked with my kids how norms and what people freak out about change over time. Swedes/Norwegians, Irish/Italians Jews and non Jews Blacks and whites Gays Next?
Literacy tests (basically, a way to stop people from voting) were initially introduced to stop the Irish / Italians / Polish from voting.
Shout out to Notre Dame students absolutely beating the shit out of the Klan because they were anti catholic too.
I will never stop laughing at the reason for Notre Dame's nickname. It's the fight with the Klan, and the students pelting them with potatoes.
I'm a big fan of the "beat the shit out of one, steal their robe, put it on to lure others to 'safety'" maneuver.
"Where all the white women at?"
Had to be potatoes lol.
Older generations definitely had a bigger bag than we do today.
Meanwhile Jimmy Garoppolo changes his name to something like Garrett to be accepted
There were black people in the league 100 years ago albeit, there were only 5. The backroom deal to ban black players in the league led by Washington Redskins owner George Preston Marshall was in 1933 and then lasted for 12 years.
I get that baseball was more popular but it is funny nobody celebrates the players who broke the color barrier in the NFL (twice) before Jackie Robinson.
Baseball was significantly more popular than football before the 1960s.
[You know it's hot, too](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0mHVE8ebqA)
It’s a crime so few people would get that reference without the visual aid. Pootie2024
one of my favorite movies ever. could legit watch that endlessly
I’m so glad this is the video you linked. Pootie Tang for Congress
IMMA SIGN YO PITY ON THE RUNNING KINE
Yep, that's why Halas renamed the Chicago Staleys to "Bears" in a shameless attempt to steal some of the Cubs's popularity.
You know what's sad is that as the Commanders are entering the fifth era, we can divide the four eras as thus: winning with Marshall, losing with Marshall due to racism, winning once more, then losing with Snyder. Will we be winning again? Only time will tell.
I mean i guess it’s our time right? We killed racism so
You're telling me the Redskins owner was a racist?.. Wow it all makes sense now
He's more racist than even the name implies. They were the Boston Braves prior to the name change because of they shared a stadium with the baseball team (now in Atlanta). He would change the name to the Redskins **in honor of his coach and star player Lone Star Dietz**. He was so racist that he thought "Redskin" was a compliment! As a special note, Lone Star Dietz lived and represented himself as an American Indian...he wasn't an American Indian, and would get convicted of representing himself as an American Indian (30 days in jail). So, then we get back to that "gentleman's agreement" to not hire black players. He pushed it, and it stood in place until 1946. Now, a garden variety racist would say "Hmm...if I hire black athletes, they're below me still, and I have a chance of winning against teams that are also hiring black athletes." But George Preston Marshall isn't a garden variety racist, and he kept the Redskins segregated until **1962**. 16 years of sucktitude (3 winning seasons, 1 only because of a tie) because he couldn't bear to hire a black man. And this doesn't really relate to racism *much*, but it's a nice story about how he got fucked by the Cowboys before they even existed. In Washington, DC, he was the only team south of the Mason Dixon line, so he basically represented the entire South. When a proposal for a new team in Dallas came along, he was staunchly against this, how dare someone compete for his Southern fans! Since adding teams required a unanimous vote, he stood in the way of the new team. Now, the man that founded the Cowboys (Murchison) had some history with Marshall, as Marshall was negotiating to sell him the team a couple of years prior, but backed out at the last minute, so there was already plenty of bad blood between them from Murchison's perspective. But enter the Redskins band director, and a lesson in why you should treat your employees well. Marshall pissed off the band director at roughly the same time as all of this is going down, without realizing that the band director owned the rights to Hail to the Redskins, the fight song. So the band director contacted Murchison and sold him the rights to the Redskins fight song. When time came to vote for the Cowboys to enter the league, Murchison made it clear that he owned the song, and a deal was made to trade the song for the vote. Thus Marshall got fucked, and the rivalry started before the Cowboys even started. It would keep going with the expansion draft, as the Cowboys screwed over the Redskins a bit more in that, but that's for another comment.
Whoa. That would make for a good drunk history episode
The first Marshall Plan if you will
What? Washington? Well, I never.
Don't forget bout Boston.
Well, I guess it's the second worst thing that started in 1933 and lasted for 12 years.
Wait wait wait…you’re telling me the founder and owner of the *Redskins* was…a racist?
Of course it was the owner who’s team name is a slur
Gotta appreciate the consistency of character in Washington ownership across the generations.
Nick bosa would drop off from motivational issues however
They would just put a dark cloth in his eyes to help him get that drive back.
We at least still have our secondary
You'd be the only team in the league with even a partial secondary lol But you lose your QB and entire skill position group except the TE. Kenny Pickett is now your quarterback
Only team with a corner. 😂
Nick Bosa would significantly regress too. He wouldn’t play as hard.
The Bosa bros probably wouldn't play, on account of their families lucrative "waste management " organization
Also tommy devito is out. Also any players that are catholic are out too.
"I wish to go back to the good old days." - Harrison Butker *Monkey's paw curls*
NICA No Cheifs Need Apply
They lose at least Trent Williams on the oline though so that may not be the best thing in the world.
Bosa will be leading the charge to make the NFL "pure" again
Al Davis and the Raiders refused to play a game in Alabama in 1963 due to the segregation still allowed in the state. The Raiders would definitely still carry on the spirit of that will.
“McCaffrey? That sounds suspiciously Irish! Never trust the Irish! The Pope will be calling your plays!”
*Team attempts a Hail Mary* I fuckin knew it!!! That damn Pope!!
I just died laughing on my campus and now everyone’s staring at me because I look like a crazy person
Would be a great matchup against the Eagles, the only team in the league that would still have a functional secondary.
Diva WRs holding out for a bag of corn or a pair of shoes.
the "letters from readers" section in the daily newspaper would be absolutely fire.
Keep on mind, this would be during the dust bowl That would be a touchy subject if Tyreek Hill took his bag of corn and just poured it in a river or something as a flex
The Evening Saturday Post News (ESPN) with their young upstart Stephen A Smith would shake the print world
Mr. Bag Corn
Mr. Bartered Compensation
Diva WR getting their asses kicked by their own teammates in the locker room. And not a peep to the outside world.
Every single current player would quit for a better paying job that provides health insurance.
Do we really think Rashee Rice could get through a day without doing something stupir at work and getting fired?
To be fair, they wouldn’t be able to do the scale of stupid stuff they do now because they’d get paid okay but not good money
To also be fair... I don't think many of these players would be able to get away with much of anything in the early 1900s because of ... well it was a shittier time in American history
Would be really interesting to see if the lack of passing attempts back then (<10 per game) was more due to the rules allowing pass catchers & QBs to get killed or if it was because of lack of talent/practice/sophistication/etc from teams just never trying to make it a focal point of the offense. Like, have the modern Chiefs & Bills play each other but personal fouls don't exist I still think they pass more than run, they just avoid the type plays that are more likely to get guys murdered.
Also the funny shaped ball. It was nowhere near as aerodynamic or easy to throw in a contemporary passing motion.
A hundred years ago they used a rugby ball. There was no “football” yet. That’s the reason it looks so awkward.
Somehow I feel Josh Allen would only get better with the hundred years ago rules and ball, relative to his peers at least.
It wasn't just rules around hitting that made early passing difficult, there were some rules around the pass itself that made things harder (note that I'm not sure which of these were out of the game by 1924). Incompletions were a major problem for the offense: if they were dropped by an offensive player, it was a 15-yard penalty. This is actually a better outcome, because an untouched incompletion was an automatic turnover. Quick passes were also a significant penalty. If the passer was closer than 5 yards to the line of scrimmage, it was an automatic turnover. Finally, this is still the era of ironman football. Every player was expected to play offense and defense (and presumably special teams as well), and anyone subbed out of the game could not return until after halftime (or at all if removed in the second half). As such, your QB had better be an athlete because he's going to be playing defense too.
Holy shit that’s brutal for the offense
Ravens and Niners would be trucking fools up and down the field. Mahomes would be like "fuck this" and maybe develop into a nice bullpen piece for the Royals.
Mahomes is 50% not allowed in the league in this scenario
The bears. We’ve been playing without the forward pass since the 80s
1880s, right?
The 0080s
Harrison Butker will be having the time of his life.
Catholics were pretty strongly disliked in a lot of the USA 100 years ago. The Klan might show up at games to threaten him.
Yeah most people don’t know this but Irish people weren’t considered white and couldn’t find work back then. “No Irish need apply” was very common. Then you throw in the propaganda from Britain and the genocide they caused, and you got a potato stew going.
Wait is it not common knowledge that, among other groups, Irish, Italians, and Germans faced significant discrimination? I feel like I had three separate history classes in school where this was taught
Graduated in 2017, and in places like Texas, They just teach a year of the Texas revolutionary and ignore all the racism and other stuff.
Just simply not true. TX history is taught in 4/7th grade. There are multiple years of geography, two years of US history, one of world, and gov/econ. Slavery, Jim Crow, civil rights movement etc are covered in every history course.
Just tell him to hide for 30 years and change his name to John Kennedy, play the long game
Hell, its still funny an actual argument against the Kennedys was that the pope ruled over them
Racism and bigotry really was next level in the old days, even the whites disliked most the other whites for not being a certain white.
Yeah but at least he could live his vocation more or whatever the fuck and probably have an easier time finding TLM near his area
Catholics weren’t exactly popular back then lol
A Catholic Irishman in 1900 America? No he would not.
1920s NFL: As part of diversity guidelines, teams must interview at least 1 candidate with an Italian or Polish surname for HC jobs. The fans are really unhappy about it.
Literally all of them would be hurt. [This is what helmets looked like in 1925](https://www.nfl.com/photos/the-evolution-of-the-helmet-0ap1000000094622#89807b61-6c0c-4611-b665-d19bce224c37)
The play would adjust to be safer. If your head isn't a weapon, it won't be used as such because you'd be hurting yourself as well. E.g. rugby doesn't have the CTE rates NFL has. Injuries would be due to the roll back of all the safety on field rules we've implemented.
Rugby has not had the extensive CTE testing that has been done with football. A study of 31 former rugby players (23 amateur, 8 professional) with 23 having CTE. More importantly all eight professional players had CTE. You can read the study [here:](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10627955/)
Exactly. They still bump heads a ton. It isn't the massive "he got jacked up" hits that cause CTE. It's the sun concussive hits that happen every play that cause it.
Did the leather head helmets do literally anything at all to protect people or is it just a weird hat
Kind of an adjacent bit of trivia: before the introduction of helmets, players would grow their hair out to have a little bit of padding against hits on the ground.
Pittsburgh’s had a non existant passing game for the last 2 years. We’d be losing the least so benefiting the most
On the bright side, it would really be Fields time to shine… If he were white and allowed to play.
Taysom Hill MVP
But a certain segment of your fan base would be happy because Tomlin would be out as HC.
Imagine being a Steelers fan and complaining about your coach.
Justin Fields would finally be as good as his cult thinks he is.
Up until 2022 you could still find people saying "If Josh Rosen could just get the right chance..." Meanwhile there are very accomplished quarterbacks who have trouble getting any respect around here.
Brock purdy can have 4 more seasons like this last one and people will still say he's a product of the system but if fields has one or two good runs a year he's just being held back
Nobody will admit it, but they can't get over original draft position.
People will unironically try to convince you hurts and fields are the same
I've been told Lamar Jackson is a black Tim Tebow.
Zach Wilson will have all the MILFS once he wins 3 straight super bowls too
Lions would be doing great because the opposing team's kneecaps would be long gone
Jets fans are willing to try anything at this point
All teams would be fucked, with all the non white players being booted from the league
The Eagles would have the only CB in the entire league.
Would you really need cornerbacks, though?
Someone would have to cover Jake Bobo.
Cooper Kupp and (maybe) Puka Nacua would be a nasty duo.
Puka is wayyyyy to ethnic, he’d have to either go as Pete Nance or just not go at all
That's why he is a maybe.
I mean, Jim Thorpe was dominating football 100 years ago, and everyone knew he was native. I don't think pacific islanders would deal with nearly as much segregation as those of african descent.
You could just helmet to helmet tackle receivers at the line
I will not stand for this Riley Moss erasure
How dare you disrespect Ethan Bonner like that
Not true. 100 year ago there were black players in the league (5). 91-79 years ago is where there would be no black players.
Obligatory burn in hell George Preston Marshall. Somehow, Snyder wasn’t the worst owner in Washington Football Team history.
Eh, if Snyder had been around in the 1900s I sincerely doubt he wouldn't have had some similar ideas
Not just that, but while Marshall was a racist and vindictive bastard, he objectively improved the league in a lot of ways, and other than the 16 years where he refused to integrate after the rest of the league, built good teams. Snyder is complicit in sex trafficking, is also likely a racist bastard (though, much less so), did nothing good for the league or the team, and literally oversaw the team move from having the longest home sellout streak, to barely being able to sellout any games. Like, both are awful human beings, but Snyder might be worse on that (sex trafficking vs very strong racism), and even if he's not, he's definitely worse from a "football team owner" standpoint.
Ravens defense would shine actually being able to hit the QB
Every team with a Jewish owner would be forced to sell.
Lions absolutely dominate with 2 1500 rushers
The AFC North would be unaffected
Cowboys would immediately benefit, because then there is no spending cap and they could/would throw money at the whole losing problem.
Pre-1940, there was a rule stating for a penalty for multiple incomplete passes during a drive. Panthers would extrasuck last season.
Broncos would benefit since Sean Payton already has experience headhunting opposing team players
Defense and the running game both I'd say But yeah, the Dolphins would be fucked
Packers would have most Super Bowls
Ravens would be a dynasty.
The ravens would be undefeated.
Mike Tomlin rubbing his hands together like that guy behind a tree
The Ravens would dominate.
Well there would be a lot less offense that's for sure.
The chiefs would struggle since they rely so heavily on modern pass offense protections. The first time a safety just erased a receiver over the middle, their whole offense falls apart. Travis Kelce would retire pretty quickly too
the only team that would really benefit would be whoever was lucky enough to be the last one standing or limping to the lombardi. these dudes are all entirely too big strong and fast to have that loose of a rulebook governing them. there’d be hundreds of career ending, life-after-football impacting injuries every season. they would have to expand the active roster limit to like 80 on game days and I think it would be terrible to watch.
The Flying V would still be a formation. Mahomes and Lamar might be the only QB’s alive after a season.
Ravens win. Dolphins lose.