Bears best-ever linebackers WHO YA GOT

**soulman** · 06-04-2011, 02:39 PM

Originally Posted by GeorgiaJeff

Looks like I was wrong about "Moon" doing a separate list for fullbaclks. That's a shame because not putting Nagurski on the RB list is an egregious omission.

I don't particularly like this list either. I'd prefer to break the LB positons down to best 3 for middle, weakside (RLB) and strongside (LCB).

Using that format rather than lumping them all together I'd go...

Middle - Butkus, Urlacher, Singletary
Weakside - Marshall, Briggs, Larry Morris
Strongside - Otis Wilson, Joe Fortunato (5-time Pro Bowler & 3-time First-Team All-Pro), Doug Buffone

I'm not really sure where Connor fits in as far as linebackers. According to this he only played the linebacker position 3 years two at strongside and one at weakside...

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...C/ConnGe00.htm

dabears54, I'm surprised you'd neglect to mention Fortunato. Are you slipping?

Edit: Looking at the Bears' starting lineups from 1948-1955 (the years Connor played) it confirms he only played LB for three years (as a starter anyway). The body of work is not long enough for me to list him with the others above. He also started at DT one year. He started at LT from 1948-1953. LT is the position he should be discussed as to his place on the all-time depth chart.

I like your approach to it Jeff and both Fortunato and Morris deserve some consideration. He's certainly one of the best SLB's we've ever had and worth inclusion on the list. Morris is worthy of that spot behind Marshall and Briggs although he was never the impact player that two of them were/are.

**soulman** · 06-04-2011, 02:49 PM

Originally Posted by dabears54

yeah, worry about briggs when comes to hall of fame- in today's "highlight media', bcuase he Does't gets sacks, and just does his job and a tackling machine, he will get lost. Its one of my pet peeves at most of the national media, to so focus on sacks, over proper linebacking position and tackling, and ignore some of these OLB's, that run past the play, get burned in coverage( Briggs very good in coverage), and get killed in he run game, but because gets sacks( merriman,kevin greene etc), they are hyped as great linebackers and many times not, and better positional linebackers and tackling machines like Briggs and london fletcher, get overlooked and never should

I'd have to agree that Briggs is very overlooked my most of the media few who know how to actually evaluate a player anyway other than by virtue of his "big plays". Mullins printed comments from NFL coaches says it all. The guy is an exceptional player. How strange that the talking heads mentions CB's who have poorer stats because no one throws to thier side while ignoring how a player like Briggsy does much the same. If you can avoid going at him you do.

**soulman** · 06-04-2011, 02:55 PM

Originally Posted by Dagan81

I think it's pretty damn funny how the NFL Network ranked Lawrence Taylor AHEAD of Dick Butkus in the Top 100 Greatest Players of All-Time. Granted, I think Taylor should have been in the top 10, but in no way is he ahead of Butkus. The only reason I see that he is ranked ahead of Butkus, and let's keep in mind that he's some seven slots ahead of Butkus in this category at #3 while Dick Butkus was only at #10, is because he played on two Super Bowl championship teams and played 13 seasons, while Butkus only played on two winning teams and nine seasons in the NFL. Butkus was not only better than Taylor, he was the greatest defensive player in the history of the NFL. Period.

One issue I have with Taylor is that he used a performance enhancing drug throughout most of his career. Most people claim that cocaine enhances your sexual performance so it must to the same thing on the football field as well. I say disqualify the beotch.

**Dagan81** · 06-04-2011, 09:28 PM

Originally Posted by soulman

One issue I have with Taylor is that he used a performance enhancing drug throughout most of his career. Most people claim that cocaine enhances your sexual performance so it must to the same thing on the football field as well. I say disqualify the beotch.

I could go for that!

**short faced bear** · 06-04-2011, 10:39 PM

In an alternate reality I would have loved to see L.T. or Bruce Smith on the '85 team.

**dabears54** · 06-05-2011, 06:03 AM

Originally Posted by soulman

One issue I have with Taylor is that he used a performance enhancing drug throughout most of his career. Most people claim that cocaine enhances your sexual performance so it must to the same thing on the football field as well. I say disqualify the beotch.

Yeah never liked the media turned a blind eye to taylors drug use, and also because they never kept track of sacks, give butkus creditfor sacks and ability to get to the Qb, i'e seen things saying he would ahve had 18-24 acks in 1967 alone for instance

http://espn.go.com/sportscentury/features/00014131.html
For eight straight years Butkus led the Monsters of the Midway in tackles, averaging 120 tackles and 58 assists a season. In 1967, he recorded a career-high 18 sacks.

And butkus also had 22 INT's and 27 fumble recoveries( ad if did forced fumbles back then probably be 40+) an talyor only had 9 INT's and 11 Fumble recoveries... Think Butkus the better all around Linebacker with an edge to taylor for pass rushing

**soulman** · 06-05-2011, 09:41 AM

I'm a Bears fan so of course I'm biased but I would never put LT ahead of Butkus in a list of all time great LB's. LT was a sack artist extrordinaire but Butkus was a far better all around player and was just absolutely the most dominant defensive player of his era in the late 60's. He was as much a physical freak in his era as Urlacher is today. Most lineman were only as big as Butkus so when you have a guy that big who could run and hit like he could you really couldn't stop him. He and Sayers in the same draft. That was incredible drafting on Halas' part.

**dabears54** · 06-05-2011, 10:12 AM

Originally Posted by soulman

I'm a Bears fan so of course I'm biased but I would never put LT ahead of Butkus in a list of all time great LB's. LT was a sack artist extrordinaire but Butkus was a far better all around player and was just absolutely the most dominant defensive player of his era in the late 60's. He was as much a physical freak in his era as Urlacher is today. Most lineman were only as big as Butkus so when you have a guy that big who could run and hit like he could you really couldn't stop him. He and Sayers in the same draft. That was incredible drafting on Halas' part.

unfort the rest of halas's drafting not so good in the mid 60's, as those teams from 1966-71 only had one seaosn with even a winning record. halas never should have gotten rid of george allen and allwoed him to be the Head Coach of bears instea of jerking him around, and the tragic death of gallimore really hurt the team also, can you imagine what a backfield of willie the wisp and sayers woudl have been? talk about fits for a "D" Soul : )

**soulman** · 06-05-2011, 10:44 AM

Yeah the Bears luck with their rookies took a turn for the worse from then on. Maybe that's the price the gods make you pay when you get two guys like Sayers and Butkus in the same draft. Steve DeLong wasn't a bad pick either but his best days were spent with the Chargers if I recall correctly. He only played a year or two with the Bears at the end of his career.

Do you think that maybe Halas traded his soul to the devil for the opportunity to get both Sayers and Butkus? Seems like we had a lot of bad drafts following that right up until the old man died.

**XaosGorilla** · 06-05-2011, 09:45 PM

Don't think I'd rank Urlacher the best Bears linebacker of all time, but he did get voted #49 on the NFL top 100.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-top100...?module=HP_cp2

Thread: Bears best-ever linebackers WHO YA GOT

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Posting Permissions