PDA

View Full Version : Greatness = Consistency



NorthCoast
12-21-2009, 07:41 PM
In the NFL I think you define greatness as being a consistent performer over many seasons. So I was thinking about who the current Steeler 'greats' are. The list is actually fairly short in my view:

1) Hines Ward (no one can question his heart, passion, or attitude for the game).
2) Aaron Smith (we don't hear his name called a lot, but to those that know the game, he is the key reason why our defense works.)

3) Heath Miller (when called upon to come up with a big play he is almost always able to produce. Will go down as the greatest pass-catching TE in Steelers history).

4) Ben (yes, he has had a few rough games, but you can't deny his will in trying to turn a game.)

5) Troy Polamalu (no explanation needed here after what we have witnessed for the last 1 1/2 months).

A few that might get mentioned but I don't think have the long term consistency include:

J. Harrison (can be a game changer but need more evidence to know whether last season was the rule or the exception).

S. Holmes (no, makes some amazing plays but also can be invisible for stretches).

steelblood
12-21-2009, 08:22 PM
1. Aaron Smith
2. Hines Ward
3. Heath

That's about it for me. Ben is inconsistent. He is sometimes the best QB I've ever seen and sometimes pretty human (this isn't a slight, just part of being a QB). I suppose for a QB, he is consistently good. Troy is a risk taker and therefore inconsistent. OL is inconsistent. LB, CB, heck even Punter are inconsistent. I guess you could make the case that Reed is consistent. His FG kicking is very dependable. His kickoffs are consistently terrible.

Captain Lemming
12-21-2009, 08:43 PM
I disagree with your definition. Consistent is a similar level of play over a long time. "great" is a higher level than merely consistent.

We do not have many "great" players. Troy is one. Ben will get there. Hines, very borderline, depends on how heavy you factor in his blocking ability.

The rest? No.


In the NFL I think you define greatness as being a consistent performer over many seasons. So I was thinking about who the current Steeler 'greats' are. The list is actually fairly short in my view:

1) Hines Ward (no one can question his heart, passion, or attitude for the game).
2) Aaron Smith (we don't hear his name called a lot, but to those that know the game, he is the key reason why our defense works.)

3) Heath Miller (when called upon to come up with a big play he is almost always able to produce. Will go down as the greatest pass-catching TE in Steelers history).

4) Ben (yes, he has had a few rough games, but you can't deny his will in trying to turn a game.)

5) Troy Polamalu (no explanation needed here after what we have witnessed for the last 1 1/2 months).

A few that might get mentioned but I don't think have the long term consistency include:

J. Harrison (can be a game changer but need more evidence to know whether last season was the rule or the exception).

S. Holmes (no, makes some amazing plays but also can be invisible for stretches).

NWNewell
12-22-2009, 11:35 AM
I disagree with your definition. Consistent is a similar level of play over a long time. "great" is a higher level than merely consistent.

We do not have many "great" players. Troy is one. Ben will get there. Hines, very borderline, depends on how heavy you factor in his blocking ability.

The rest? No.



I disagree with you. Consistency and level of performance are two different variables that factor into how great a player is.

The absents of constancy or a high level of performance result in a player not being great.

Jerome Harrison just ripped off one of the greatest rushing performances in NFL history (3rd best to be specific). But he has not done anything constantly.

JaMarcus Russell has been consistent... constantly bad, and does not perform at a high level.

Ben Performance is very high, but his consistency is not quite so high. I'd consider him a great QB, but because his consistency suffers a bit, I don't consider him an elite QB. There are a couple others that have performed just as high or higher, and have done it just as constantly or more constantly in recent years.

BradshawsHairdresser
12-22-2009, 12:58 PM
I disagree with your definition. Consistent is a similar level of play over a long time. "great" is a higher level than merely consistent.

We do not have many "great" players. Troy is one. Ben will get there. Hines, very borderline, depends on how heavy you factor in his blocking ability.

The rest? No.





I agree with you that "great" has to be more than merely "consistent." However, I have to disagree with YOUR definition of "great."

Hines Ward may not be "great" when all you are looking at is pure receiving ability...but factor in his toughness, and his blocking, and the way that he has elevated the play of his teammates, and I think it adds up to "great."

By the same standard, Aaron Smith is "great." He may not make the Hall of Fame, which, IMO, might require just a notch above "great." But certainly, Smith has been a "great" Steeler.

I think Ben is already "great." The Steelers wouldn't have gotten to Super Bowl XL without him, and they wouldn't have gotten to, nor won, XLIII without him. How many times does he need to carry the team to a win to qualify in your book? How many come-from-behind game-winning drives does he need to produce? How many clutch game-winning throws to the corner of the end zone? Does he have room to improve? Absolutely. He drives me crazy many times taking a sack when he ought to throw the ball away, or trying to make the big play 30 yards downfield when he ought to just hit an underneath receiver with a quick pass. But I've seen him make enough unbelievable freelance plays that no other QB in the league could make to convince me he's "great."

BTW, if we factor in "winning" (which I would think would be the biggest factor of all in determining "greatness"), I would think Ben would compare very favorably to someone like Tom Brady. Although Brady has one more Super Bowl and a few more regular season wins under his belt, many of those wins were achieved, at least partially, by cheating.

flippy
12-22-2009, 01:10 PM
Great Players:
1. Aaron Smith
2. Troy P
3. Hines
4. Ben
5. Casey Hampton

On the Path:
1. Lamar Woodley
2. Santonio Holmes

Could Be Special / Jury is Still Out
1. Rashard
2. Timmons

I see everyone else as Good/above average at best with the closest runner up being Farrior.

Captain Lemming
12-22-2009, 06:47 PM
I disagree with your definition. Consistent is a similar level of play over a long time. "great" is a higher level than merely consistent.

We do not have many "great" players. Troy is one. Ben will get there. Hines, very borderline, depends on how heavy you factor in his blocking ability.

The rest? No.



I disagree with you. Consistency and level of performance are two different variables that factor into how great a player is.

The absents of constancy or a high level of performance result in a player not being great.

Jerome Harrison just ripped off one of the greatest rushing performances in NFL history (3rd best to be specific). But he has not done anything constantly.

JaMarcus Russell has been consistent... constantly bad, and does not perform at a high level.

Ben Performance is very high, but his consistency is not quite so high. I'd consider him a great QB, but because his consistency suffers a bit, I don't consider him an elite QB. There are a couple others that have performed just as high or higher, and have done it just as constantly or more constantly in recent years.

Actually NOTHING you said disagrees with me. You merely expanded on my points. I ALMOST made the Jamarcus example myself.

Within the scope of a CAREER, consistency is indeed a factor in considering greatness. You yourself just said Harrison had a "great" season. By that standard he was "great".

Nevertheless, this lack of "consistency" is the only reason I never mentioned Harrison myself. We do not disagree.

pick6
12-22-2009, 06:57 PM
James Harrison is an all-time steeler great. that run back in the bowl. open up another window and youtube it. i dont have the words for the man. you and i are in debt. 14 point swing gentlemen going into the half.

Captain Lemming
12-22-2009, 07:17 PM
I agree with you that "great" has to be more than merely "consistent." However, I have to disagree with YOUR definition of "great."

Hines Ward may not be "great" when all you are looking at is pure receiving ability...but factor in his toughness, and his blocking, and the way that he has elevated the play of his teammates, and I think it adds up to "great."

This is why I said "depends on how heavy you factor in his blocking ability."


By the same standard, Aaron Smith is "great." He may not make the Hall of Fame, which, IMO, might require just a notch above "great." But certainly, Smith has been a "great" Steeler.

Nope. Not close. So often Steeler fans think purely in terms of how important a player is to the Steelers. Was Brian Sipe a "great" QB? He was MVP of a Browns team for years. IMO "great" has to take into consideration how a player ranks league wide. You mention HOF. While a "great" player may not make the Hall, it seems to me that you should be able to at least make a case for any player who is truly "great". Outside of homer Steeler fans, people would laugh at the idea of Aaron Smith in the HOF.


I think Ben is already "great." The Steelers wouldn't have gotten to Super Bowl XL without him, and they wouldn't have gotten to, nor won, XLIII without him. How many times does he need to carry the team to a win to qualify in your book? How many come-from-behind game-winning drives does he need to produce? How many clutch game-winning throws to the corner of the end zone? Does he have room to improve? Absolutely. He drives me crazy many times taking a sack when he ought to throw the ball away, or trying to make the big play 30 yards downfield when he ought to just hit an underneath receiver with a quick pass. But I've seen him make enough unbelievable freelance plays that no other QB in the league could make to convince me he's "great."

I am not saying he has not played at a "great" level. I'm not even saying he needs to improve to be considered great (although there is room for him to improve). My point is that IMO he is on the verge of getting there just by virtue of the length of his career. He is on pace.


BTW, if we factor in "winning" (which I would think would be the biggest factor of all in determining "greatness"), I would think Ben would compare very favorably to someone like Tom Brady. Although Brady has one more Super Bowl and a few more regular season wins under his belt, many of those wins were achieved, at least partially, by cheating.

I am not arguing that Brady is better or worse. He has been doing it longer thats all. Heck, I agree about winning. Especially when it comes to Peyton "the chocker" Manning. Ben is truly clutch. That is more important than ANYTHING when it comes to QBs who win championsips.

BradshawsHairdresser
12-23-2009, 01:12 AM
By the same standard, Aaron Smith is "great." He may not make the Hall of Fame, which, IMO, might require just a notch above "great." But certainly, Smith has been a "great" Steeler.

Nope. Not close. So often Steeler fans think purely in terms of how important a player is to the Steelers. Was Brian Sipe a "great" QB? He was MVP of a Browns team for years. IMO "great" has to take into consideration how a player ranks league wide. You mention HOF. While a "great" player may not make the Hall, it seems to me that you should be able to at least make a case for any player who is truly "great". Outside of homer Steeler fans, people would laugh at the idea of Aaron Smith in the HOF.

I said that, IMO, HOF status could be a notch above "great." That said, Aaron Smith would have been a "great" 3-4 DE no matter what team he played for in the NFL, and those in the know recognize that. I believe the league just named him to the all-decade team. Just because he doesn't get all the media attention doesn't mean he isn't a "great" player.


I think Ben is already "great." The Steelers wouldn't have gotten to Super Bowl XL without him, and they wouldn't have gotten to, nor won, XLIII without him. How many times does he need to carry the team to a win to qualify in your book? How many come-from-behind game-winning drives does he need to produce? How many clutch game-winning throws to the corner of the end zone? Does he have room to improve? Absolutely. He drives me crazy many times taking a sack when he ought to throw the ball away, or trying to make the big play 30 yards downfield when he ought to just hit an underneath receiver with a quick pass. But I've seen him make enough unbelievable freelance plays that no other QB in the league could make to convince me he's "great."


I am not saying he has not played at a "great" level. I'm not even saying he needs to improve to be considered great (although there is room for him to improve). My point is that IMO he is on the verge of getting there just by virtue of the length of his career. He is on pace.

And I'm saying he's THERE. He's played on a "great" level for enough years that he's THERE.




BTW, if we factor in "winning" (which I would think would be the biggest factor of all in determining "greatness"), I would think Ben would compare very favorably to someone like Tom Brady. Although Brady has one more Super Bowl and a few more regular season wins under his belt, many of those wins were achieved, at least partially, by cheating.


I am not arguing that Brady is better or worse. He has been doing it longer thats all. Heck, I agree about winning. Especially when it comes to Peyton "the chocker" Manning. Ben is truly clutch. That is more important than ANYTHING when it comes to QBs who win championsips.

Not sure what winning has to do with "championSIPS" :) ...I think there are plenty of champion "sippers" who are losers. :D

Actually, I don't think we're that far apart on this.