How would former great players go in the modern game?

[The Passenger]

The great players would be great players in any era.

Comparing sizes is a bit moot because humans are getting bigger and more athletic. Nutrition is much better now than it was decades back and with the monetary rewards on offer youngsters are training much more professionally from a younger age. And once they get into the professional ranks they become full time athletes.

Doing the opposite of the OP, if you put Lance Franklin exactly as he is now on the field 50 years ago he'd probably be the best player of all time. But that's unrealistic. There were not many player's his height playing in those days and those that were certainly didn't have anywhere near the speed or aerobic capacity that Buddy does. If Buddy played in the 1960's he'd likely be a couple inches shorter, about 10kg's less and would barely leave the forward 50 because he wouldn't have the training that gives him the capacity to run like he does in the modern game. In any era he'd be regarded as one of the great key position forwards.

The overall talent of the playing pool, and those at the top, largely stays roughly the same. The training, coaching, professionalism, nutrition and tactics all improve over time and our game has been one that has changed considerably over the last 20 to 30 years. Of the sports I follow probably only rugby union has changed more.

 

[Mofra]

I'd say some genuine rebound defenders would be as effective if not moreso today.

Bruce Doull would still be an absolute gun, Brad Hardie would be that small rebounding defender.
Some small forwards would be just as good - Daicos' style would still be welcomed by teams today.

 

[The Passenger]

A good player will probably be be good player in any era. Some players would adapt to certain eras (gameplans, etc) better than others, but basically they should be able to cope - somehow.

So much this.

You can't argue a old time centreman would be s**t in today's game because they'd actually be required to leave the centre square. As I said above tactics and training change with time, so if an old time centreman was to be a youngster coming into the professional ranks now he'd be trained to play as a modern day midfielder and cover the entire field.

 

[RUNVS]

The great players would be great players in any era.

Comparing sizes is a bit moot because humans are getting bigger and more athletic. Nutrition is much better now than it was decades back and with the monetary rewards on offer youngsters are training much more professionally from a younger age. And once they get into the professional ranks they become full time athletes.

It does play a part but not necessarily in the 80's and 90's because humans on average got a lot bigger between 1800 and 1900 and then between 1900 and 1950 but the rate of average growth has slowed quite a bit in recent decades because anyone born in the 1950's or later (at least in Australia) would have had access to proper nutrition, something that was not always possible before that.

 

[The Passenger]

It does play a part but not necessarily in the 80's and 90's because humans on average got a lot bigger between 1800 and 1900 and then between 1900 and 1950 but the rate of average growth has slowed quite a bit in recent decades because anyone born in the 1950's or later (at least in Australia) would have had access to proper nutrition, something that was not always possible before that.

Agreed rate of growth has slowed but nutrition and training amongst teenagers has seen guys come in who are - on average - far more athletic then previous generations. Also attitudes have changed in regards to the athletic capability of taller guys. I was not around in previous generations but imagine taller guys were just seen as beanpoles who wouldn't have the required coordination to play football.

I've not got time to go through every club but looking through the AFL Tables website I've picked out Richmond and Sydney and filtered out all the players list as 195cm and above. Only 8 South Melbourne players at this height were born before 1950, and only 6 for Richmond. None of those 14 players would play 100 games. Not all players have their heights listed (most do) but if you sort by cap number and see the earliest players it's quite obvious very few players were taller than 185cm.

The above also extends to midfielders who are now - on average - much taller then previous generations. Koutifidies, Judd, Pendlebury and co. playing in the midfield at their heights was virtually unheard of prior to 20 years ago (maybe 1 or 2 floating around the entire competition) but now just about every team in the competition has at least one 6'2 midfield and some have more.

 

[Tigersman]

He wouldn't be playing on Jakovich.

Carey would play as a Big Midfielder these days, and Jakovich would play in the WAFL where slow one dimensional types belong.

Carey is pretty much the same size as Nick Riewoldt or Pavlich, so big enough to play as a key forward imo. You can find midfielders everywhere. Carey would play as a forward because elite CHF/ key forwards of that quality are rare.

And as others have said, he would still be a star

 

[Upgrayedd]

He wouldn't be playing on Jakovich.

Carey would play as a Big Midfielder these days, and Jakovich would play in the WAFL where slow one dimensional types belong.

You've had enough beers for the month

 

[MaddAdam]

I'd say some genuine rebound defenders would be as effective if not moreso today.

Bruce Doull would still be an absolute gun, Brad Hardie would be that small rebounding defender.
Some small forwards would be just as good - Daicos' style would still be welcomed by teams today.

Kevin Murray another.

As Tef pointed out, Keith Greig would be a devastating outside midfielder.

 

[MaddAdam]

Carey is pretty much the same size as Nick Riewoldt or Pavlich, so big enough to play as a key forward imo. You can find midfielders everywhere. Carey would play as a forward because elite CHF/ key forwards of that quality are rare.

And as others have said, he would still be a star

Carey played as a midfielder a fair bit towards the end of his career. He had amazing field kicking and handball skills.

He'd be a Bontempelli/Cripps style big mid who changed through the fwd line now

 

[Pessimistic]

The elite is much more athletic etc than before but most schools could tell you average running times across the population are worse than a decade ago

 

[Bedi]

Ignore small forwards, Dunstall was probably the greatest forward who applied defensive pressure. Where Dunstall would fail is that there is about 1-2 moments in an AFL game nowdays where a forward is toe to toe with a defender wrestling for position. In todays game any defender worth his salt would come over and just kill the ball.

His tackling was ferocious.

 

[krisholio14]

I think it was Fred Goldsmith who said 'If I played today, I wouldn't get a kick. However, if anyone from today's game came back to my time and played on me, they wouldn't get a kick.'

That pretty well sums it up.

 

[juss]

I think it was Fred Goldsmith who said 'If I played today, I wouldn't get a kick. However, if anyone from today's game came back to my time and played on me, they wouldn't get a kick.'

That pretty well sums it up.

I'd be backing players these days to simply outrun their opponents given as time goes on they get bigger, faster stronger, but it really depends how far back you go. Jack Dyer was a great ruckman at 185cm 89kg, he'd be destroyed by Nankervis who is an average ruck. That's why you can only compare players against their peers. Players and tactics evolve, as do sports science improvements, but ability and performance among peers is the only thing you can really compare.

Eg. was a player the best in his position at the time?

 

[krisholio14]

I'd be backing players these days to simply outrun their opponents given as time goes on they get bigger, faster stronger, but it really depends how far back you go. Jack Dyer was a great ruckman at 185cm 89kg, he'd be destroyed by Nankervis who is an average ruck. That's why you can only compare players against their peers. Players and tactics evolve, as do sports science improvements, but ability and performance among peers is the only thing you can really compare.

They wouldn't run away because 1. They'd be playing one on one, not the zones they do now, 2. They wouldn't be playing on a bowling green surface every week like they do now, and 3. They'd just get knocked out in some way, legal or illegal.

 

[juss]

They wouldn't run away because 1. They'd be playing one on one, not the zones they do now, 2. They wouldn't be playing on a bowling green surface every week like they do now, and 3. They'd just get knocked out in some way, legal or illegal.

If you don't think a team of the best players now would pants a team from 30 years ago, you're undervaluing just how far the elite level has come.

 

[Leeda]

shunting carriages from one section to another and well the Ghan,, the Indian Pacific the Brisbane to Rockie, the Melb to Mildura are gathering
passengers and we are all aboard..

slowly losing interest when they are driving a poor pony to the lesser than average walls...

The Ghan was a fantastic story last Sunday and may it be repeated with a slow, but impressive story...

 

[krisholio14]

If you don't think a team of the best players now would pants a team from 30 years ago, you're undervaluing just how far the elite level has come.

I think you're missing the point. If you took a team from today back to the 50's, hell, even back to the early 90's, they'd be destroyed.

It is like this with almost everything else in life. Most people today, if they went much more than 5 years outside of the day they were born, or their commencement in whatever field, wouldn't know what hit them. Just the same if it was the other way around.

I don't think it can be argued that while today's footballer is a ridiculously finely tuned athletic machine, if they went back to anything prior to 2000, they'd all be considered mug lair posers who needed to be taken down a peg or two. Then consider hard nuts over the years like Mopsy Fraser, Delicate Des Dickson or Big John Nicholls, on a ground covered in six inches of mud, during a wet, frigid Melbourne winter, and there wouldn't be enough stretchers to get them all off the ground. They'd be going down faster than 2 bob hookers, either from their finely tuned bodies being too finely tuned and muscles and ligaments pinging left right and centre, or types like the aforementioned big fellas running through them, with or without elbows, forearms, fists, boots and knees tucked in.

 

[juss]

I think you're missing the point. If you took a team from today back to the 50's, hell, even back to the early 90's, they'd be destroyed.

It is like this with almost everything else in life. Most people today, if they went much more than 5 years outside of the day they were born, or their commencement in whatever field, wouldn't know what hit them. Just the same if it was the other way around.

I don't think it can be argued that while today's footballer is a ridiculously finely tuned athletic machine, if they went back to anything prior to 2000, they'd all be considered mug lair posers who needed to be taken down a peg or two. Then consider hard nuts over the years like Mopsy Fraser, Delicate Des Dickson or Big John Nicholls, on a ground covered in six inches of mud, during a wet, frigid Melbourne winter, and there wouldn't be enough stretchers to get them all off the ground. They'd be going down faster than 2 bob hookers, either from their finely tuned bodies being too finely tuned and muscles and ligaments pinging left right and centre, or types like the aforementioned big fellas running through them, with or without elbows, forearms, fists, boots and knees tucked in.

Is the team we take back going to shrink, be slower, not jump as high, lose all their conditioming and forget everything they know about tactics? You do realise things improve over time, they grow, they evolve. You also realise that guys like Fraser for example are listed at 183cm 86kg. Why do you think that someone like Patrick Cripps at 195 and 93 would not just run right through him if the rules allowed it?

Thats just what happens over time, its not a knock on the oldies, we can just cant compare them to the modern day, peer performance is the only relevant guide.

 

[gigantor77]

https://afltables.com/afl/stats/alltime/highs.html

There are 5 players at the top of the list who played long enough to test this question.
They played good football in 3 decades.
There skills, endurance and speed adapted and evolved in the decades they played (allowing for old age towards the end).
eg Bartlett, a player from the 60s was able to play well in the 80s.
eg Fletcher and Harvey are from the 90s, and were still playing well in 10s

It is very likely players transplanted from the past to the present would adapt perfectly fine.
The reverse would also be true.

 

[Duskfire]

https://afltables.com/afl/stats/alltime/highs.html

There are 5 players at the top of the list who played long enough to test this question.
They played good football in 3 decades.
There skills, endurance and speed adapted and evolved in the decades they played (allowing for old age towards the end).
eg Bartlett, a player from the 60s was able to play well in the 80s.
eg Fletcher and Harvey are from the 90s, and were still playing well in 10s

It is very likely players transplanted from the past to the present would adapt perfectly fine.
The reverse would also be true.

Yup agreed. Can’t hold back talent; Lockett all of a sudden wouldn’t lose all those footy smarts and general ball reading if transported to today’s game. He may play a bit differently and have a different role, but a great player he would still be.

 

[Resigned]

My grandfather said that John Coleman was the best player he had seen and the only from that era whom could compete with modern players.

 

[Kwality]

Is the team we take back going to shrink, be slower, not jump as high, lose all their conditioming and forget everything they know about tactics? You do realise things improve over time, they grow, they evolve. You also realise that guys like Fraser for example are listed at 183cm 86kg. Why do you think that someone like Patrick Cripps at 195 and 93 would not just run right through him if the rules allowed it?

Thats just what happens over time, its not a knock on the oldies, we can just cant compare them to the modern day, peer performance is the only relevant guide.

We all know the modern day athlete achieves better times than say Dawn Fraser or Herb Elliot, but thats not what is being discussed IMHO. Take Polly Farmer, his man on man skills in a ruck contest sets him as outstanding - that he is not a giant is irrelevant.

 

[Pessimistic]

neither Harry madden nor Paul salmon could displace Simon madden in ruck in the Essendon team.

Once I saw the three on a panel (2000 gf I think) they stood up to make the point. Salmon and Harry towered over Simon

 

[Royce Hafey]

Sort of like the title suggests I thought it would be interesting to discuss former players, probably not the really recently retired players but players who have been out of the game a few years and how you think they would go in the modern game, or if their styles and how they played would work in the modern game.

I think an interesting example of this, though this is going back some way is Polly Farmer who is the AFL team of the century ruckman, and while I did not see him play he was undoubtably an amazing player to get in that team. Only problem, he is 191cm tall. If he was in the modern game there is no way he would be a ruckman. He would have to either be a medium defender (or forward) or if he had the tank go in the midfield but he would not be the top ruckman in the modern game at that height.

What about guys like Stephen Silvagni as well, as he was supposedly the best key defender of the modern age but I have also heard he was an expert at tactics that would in the modern game be considered a free kick against him. Would he be as effective in 2017/2018 if he had to follow the modern rules?

and what about great power forwards like Locket and Dunstall, both of whom were big (width wise), excellent kicks, reasonably fast on the lead but also surprisingly short (Lockett at 191cm and Dunstall at 188cm) and also could not apply defensive pressure if their lives depended on it. Could they be taught to apply pressure? Also how would their roles be different in 2017 than it was in the late 80's and early 90's?

So how do you think former great players would go in the modern game?

Polly Farmer is tall enough to ruck for Richmond - he's taller than Grigg! But, seriously, the size thing is really significant. I read a report on the 1934 Grand Final which had the player heights and there was only one player on the ground who was taller than Dustin Martin (and he was on the bench for South Melbourne!). Jack Dyer, who played in the ruck, was exactly the same height as Dusty as was Royce Hart playing at CHF in the 60s/70s.

Other intangibles include modern professional fitness aided by state of the art facilities versus semi-amateur players who had full-time jobs. So that if you landed an old-time footballer via a tardis into a modern match he'd be blown away by the speed of the game and be run off his feet pretty quickly; though, if he was given a preseason with modern equipment to get his fitness up that might not be a problem. Then there's the question of the umpiring. How would Captain Blood react to not being able to break opponents' collar bones?

Regarding the speculation of how a modern player would go if sent back into the past. My own guess is that they would dominate in the game up until the point the opposition sent their enforcer to deal with them.

 

[gavaniacono]

I'm still recovering from the comment that Dunstall didnt provide defensive pressure!