LesBaker
Mr. Savant
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2012
- Messages
- 17,460
- Name
- Les
I agree on Namath, but let me say this about Swann:
What he lacked in numbers he made up for in substance. His catches counted. He was clutch. He was tough, and went across the middle fearlessly. The whole business about him being a wussy was crap. The dude went over the middle and took big hits. He never complained.
Swann played at a time when guys did not put up big receiving numbers. It was more about the run. Compare his numbers to guys from the seventies. The dude was amazing. It's not about the stat sheet.
*Edit: Actually, this argument is the exact one people use to say Kurt Warner does not belong in the Super Bowl. He transcends numbers. "You had to be there" right? He was just great.
View: https://youtu.be/4GRs5nrzqlY
Nah, Swann was pretty average overall. A few good years, and a couple of decent playoff games but overall he wasn't even the #1 on his team and without Stallworth drawing the attention he didn't do all that well.
By this standard B grade players are making it into a place that should be for A-Plus players.
How does Warner not belong in the SB? He didn't transcend numbers, he SET them. He earned his way into all three SB's.