On sending an athlete back in time 50 years

“Forget Barry Sanders. He was just quick. He wasn’t even super fast.”

Because of his incredible ability to stop and go, it is easy to think that is the case. However, as mentioned earlier…he ran a 4.37 40 yard sprint at the NFL Team Workout is a pretty casual manner as remembered below:

“…So he flew into Tulsa and came right from the airport to the workout. He got out of the car, got into some sweats, limbered up a little bit and ran a 4.37 in the 40-yard dash.”

Deion Sanders, by way of comparison, ran a 4.28 and I think most people can agree that he is one of the fastest to ever play the game.

My apologies for repearing Marley23’s points. I got distracted from posting

To follow up on this point, here’s an article arguing that Groat might be the best college basketball player of all time. And yet he chose a career in baseball.

Which reinforces what I’m saying. I think poeple are underestimating the abilities of baseball players of yore if they think a modern player could step out of a time machine and make a huge splash. Baseball in the 50s was the place to find America’s best athletes. Not so today.

Football and basketball are different stories.

The 100 meter would be interesting, but not as decisive as you think. Take away the steroids, HGH/other PEDs, “fast tracks,” hi-tech spikes/blocks, cutting-edge training techniques and put today’s guy on a cinder track and his time would slow markedly. Be lucky to break 10.25

There is no possible way you can claim the fielding 50 years ago was better than the fielding today. Fielders today, by any objective measurement and more than a few subjective ones, are BETTER, not worse.

As I explained, the baseball of fifty years ago was a fairly slugger-heavy baseball; the small niceties of the game were mostly lost for 20, 30 years by that point.

The star players of 1955 were not superzillionaires like today, but they sure as hell didn’t have to have offseason jobs if they didn’t want to. A player of Johnson’s magnitude would have likely made somewhere between $25,000 and $35,000; $25,000 in today’s money would be about $170,000. The AVERAGE 1955 player made approximately $14,000, or about $100,000 in today’s dollars. Major league stars have always been very handsomely paid.

Compulsory figures were removed from competetion in 1991, IIRC, which means that Kwan only would’ve competed with them in place at the lower levels and since I hadn’t even heard of her yet then, I have no idea how good she was at them. Going back a little ways, Brian Orser was a prime example of someone who could freeskate with the best of them, but consistently took himself out of the competition with his poor performance in compulsory figures. At least in Canada, they quit teaching figures almost 10 years ago, so pretty much none of the current skaters would have much of a shot in that respect if sent back 50 years.

However, I’d love to send someone like Plushenko (assuming he can get healthy again), just to watch everyone’s head explode seeing him casually toss off quads and triples - after all, not even the men were doing triple lutzes or axels 50 years ago. In fact, looking at this site, the first triple landed in competition was just in 1952, so anything any of the top skaters in the world are currently doing in the way of jumps would be unheard of 50 years ago.

I think the track and field events would be pretty interesting. I know that some (pole vault as a primary example) couldn’t happen due to the differences in technology, but it would be pretty wild to see the Fosbury Flop introduced 15 or so years early.

Ah, I just thought of another one…

Could we send back Extreme Sports folks, like Tony Hawk, with today’s equipment? Or the guys that do the crazy freestyle stuff on motorcycles? Bikes, skateboards, motocross, skiing (both downhill and freestyle) and snowboards. Fifty years ago no one would know what to do with that stuff. With the exception of downhill skiing none of it had even been thought of yet.

Shaq would probably do a lot better against Wilt, even despite the fact that Wilt was physically stronger than Russell, because Wilt’s game was more offensive than defensive. Russell never averaged more than 20 ppg, but he averaged at least 23 rebounds per game for nine consecutive seasons. His thing was defense, and specific to that defensive positioning.

And remember that Wilt’s 50 ppg season, and several other high-powered offensive seasons, came in a league where other than Russell there wasn’t much in the way of a strong center presence on any team. George Mikan was coaching before Wilt started his first game for the Warriors. That season also didn’t see Chamberlain winning an NBA championship, something Russell’s Celtics did for eight straight years in the 1960s.

The reverse to this, of course, is what several people have said: that Wilt, transported to this year and in his prime, could average 50 (he said 60) ppg in the NBA. If you put a good team around him, I don’t doubt that he could get 40 a game. But the thing is that you take any modern strong center back to the 1950s and, aside from prejudice, be pretty well assured that such a player would dominate just as Wilt and Russell did.

I’m hesitant to send a cut-back runner back to a time when there were no dome stadia and where quite often you’d be playing in mud by the end of the second quarter. There’s a reason players like Jim Brown and Larry Czonka were successful: they ran over and through defenders. I’m just not sure who today has the straight-ahead power and the breakaway speed (which is what disqualifies Alstott, in my view) to be able to go back to that time and be the difference in the game.

I’d be interested to see the results of sending back an O-Line featuring Nate Newton, Jonathan Ogden, one or two of the Hogs (c’mon, you think I can name notable beefy O-Line guys this early in the morning?) and Tony Gonzales at tight end. Implement Paul Brown’s passing pocket (he was the one who first used it, yes? I thought it was either the Browns or Lions, but I can’t remember), get a nice thick RB in there and let fly.

Show me a measure of how “rated” he is and then we can discuss if he’s “overrated”.

What he is is a perennial pro-bowler, won a Superbowl in which he was MVP, has 961 career tackles in 128 games, led the lowest scoring defense in history, and has 20 career regular season interceptions. The last 2 years he’s been 3rd in the league and 2nd in the league in tackles.

He was the leader of a defense that went (about) 40 games straight without allowing a 100 yard rusher.

So, just what is this measure of “rating” you possess that exceeds his actual accomplishments. . .or is that just one of those “blah blah bullshit” statements that people make about stports that can’t really be defended, but sound big when they want to slam a guy?

Jamal Lewis come to mind for a blend of great speed and power. I’m reluctant to nominate him because he has a pretty dodgy injury history, which would only be worse in the fifties.

Barry did not miss a lot of games. A parallel to Barry would be Sayers in the mid sixties. He played for Chicago in and did not seem to be adversely affected by the conditions. With the slight exception of his knees.

First off, Rick, regarding my Randy Johnson/Babe Ruth analogy, I confess I went back well beyond the 50 years in the thread title.

Regardless, while Randy Johnson would have been paid a comfortably upper-middle-class income for the time, he would NOT have been rich until the free agency era. That has a LOT of repercussions.

He would not have had an air-conditioned weight room in the clubhouse…or any weight room at all- he might well have been FINED for trying to lift weights, since everyone “knew” until fairly recently that weightlifting would make you “muscle-bound.”

He wouldn’t have had a personal trainer. SInce travel was by train, he wouldn’t have had time to go for a jog or to spend a few hours in the hotel fitness center (good luck finding one of those in the distant past) while he waited for a game.

I admit I’ve never liked Johnson, but I don’t mean to pick on him. ANY modern ballplayer with any kind of fitness regimen would have had an equally tough time.

And in other sports, “real” off-season jobs were a simple reality. Until the late 60’s, an NFL season was only 12 games. From mid-December until July, there was no football, and unless you were a superstar with a hefty bonus check, you had to sell cars or insurance in the off-season. Hence, if Orlando Pace stepped in a time machine and got out in 1962, he’d be an unstoppable force as a lineman for one season. After that, he’d start to lose the huge edge that current training and fitness practices has given him. After 6 months selling insurance, he’d be unlikely to show up at training camp the same behemoth he is now.

To use a crude analogy, one company of latter day U.S. Marines with the right equipment could step into a time machine and annihilate any of ancient Rome’s legions… but they’d be in trouble once their 21st century ammo began to run out, and they’d be screwed if their 21st century motor vehicles began to run down or break down. EVENTUALLY, they’d have to fight on the legions’ terms. And while I’m second to no one in my admiration of the Marines, it’s not obvious they’d remain dominant forever.

This is all a pretty silly speculation, of course, because there are no time machines, and athletics evolve gradually.

Think of this: baseball changed drastically between 1907 (dead ball era) and 1927, but somehow Ty Cobb managed to hit over .350 in both years.

Baseball in 1957 was vastly different from what it had been in 1943 (when there were no black players, and even the best white players were overseas), but somehow, Stan Musial managed to lead the NL in batting both years.

Baseball changed drastically between 1969 and 1990, but somehow, Nolan Ryan managed to strike people out in both seasons.

So, while there’s some fun in playing “what if” games, the reality is, games evolve, and the players adapt. THat’s why, while Curt Schjilling is right to say Babe Ruth could never get his heavy bat around on a Randy Johnson fastball, the reality is, the Babe WOULDN’T have tried to do so. Over time, he’d have adjusted and adapted. Maybe he’d have worked out and trained better. Maybe he’d have spent more time on batting practice. Regardless, over time, he’d have upped his game to meet the improved competition.

That’s just what professionals do, in any sport.

Are you smoking crack?!?! Darrell Green was named the World’s Fastest Athlete in 1991 and has been the winner of the NFL’s Fastest Man competition four times during his career cite . And he competed in that same competition again this year at 44! His best times (from here ) are:

a 44.3 second 400-meter dash
a 20.5 second 200-meter dash
a 10.08 second 100-meter dash
a 4.15 40-yard dash

Deion Sanders wasn’t even the fastest corner back when he was playing, much less ever.

Gretzky would probably outperform Maurice Richard.

And Richard would flatten him when the ref wasn’t looking.

Maybe we’d have to send back Semenko as well.

For those advocating sending Shaq back, remember there was no dunking back then. Wilt was a master at the finger roll, I don’t think I’ve ever seen Shaq try one. I’d bet Shaq gets 40% of his points on dunks.

For all athletes, I think that MJ would have the best chance of success as his work ethic would’ve allowed him to quickly adjust to the idiosyncrancies of the '50s-era game, and he would play through his injuries. And I think MJ, of all possible candidates, has the best chance of dominating until the natural end of his career

For tennis, I would send Serena Williams back if I believed her talent would not be snuffed out. Probably better for everybody all around that she’s playing today…

If not Serena, then Andre Agassi.

For golf, I’d send David Duval. Maybe the weaker competition will give him the boost he needs. :frowning:

Football: Michael Vick, or if I’m allowed to cheat a little bit, the Joe Montana/Jerry Rice combo. That would make them sit up and take notice!

Baseball: I would be interested in seeing how Greg Maddux would fare in the 50s. I think pinpoint control is a worthwhile skill in any era, dead ball or lively.

Cite for no dunking allowed? I’m aware of the college rules in place while (then) Alcindor and Walton were around, but to the best of my knowledge it was only ever the case that players thought it was a cheap, show-boating shot. Beside which, with all the point-blank dunks Shaq gets, he could just do what Bill Walton did: dump the ball in right straight over the basket so there’s no reasonable chance of it not going in.

Regarding QB/WR tandems, this cite gives 1946 as the year the passing pocket was implemented by Paul Brown, but it doesn’t indicate how widespread it was by 1955. Given that Brown’s Cleveland team won four consecutive championships, I’d guess it would not be unexpected to have every team using it, but even after that you’ve still got to deal with different rules on defense and the culture shock of Rice being expected to play corner (and Montana possibly expected to kick or do something other than just throw the ball).

Dunking was illegal only in college basketball and only in the late 1960s through the late 1970s. The NBA never prohibited dunking.

50 years ago though players could get away with a lot more in the way of goaltending however.