PDA

View Full Version : If you had the chance to have any....


thumper
05-24-2011, 07:33 PM
....of these guys in their prime, who would you choose?

Jack Ham
Lloyd
James Harrison.

I go Harrison. Bigger, meaner, stronger, more menacing than
all. He likely won't be as acclaimed, but he is the best among
them from the way I see it.

harrison'samonster
05-24-2011, 09:02 PM
Ah man. I only get one! I'd have to go with Harrison too. I didn't start following football until the mid-90's though. I think any choice would be a winner.

BigRick
05-24-2011, 11:29 PM
I like all 3 but my choice would be Ham.:tt02:

steeltheone
05-25-2011, 08:19 AM
Nobody messed with Greg Lloyd he was a physical masterpiece...

thumper
05-25-2011, 02:05 PM
Nobody messed with Greg Lloyd he was a physical masterpiece...

Lloyd was/is my all-time Steeler favorite. I just loved him. He was a
baaaaaaaaaaaaaadddd man. But I think JH is even nastier. JH seems
to inflict major hurt on every single tackle he makes. He uses his
leverage and explosiveness better than GL. Maybe I will have to give
them a "tie" on being my favorite Steelers of all time. I believe JH lower
body power gives him an edge in getting around OTs and using it to
flip opponents in the air and smash them to the ground. Hell, he even
does it to Browns _fans_ who rush onto the field! I mean, come on!

thumper
05-25-2011, 02:06 PM
I like all 3 but my choice would be Ham.:tt02:

What is it about Ham that makes fans think he was so outstanding? I mean,
he was very good, but not really a menacing LB. Just a proficient one. Good
in coverage, etc. But not really out there making crushing hits that I have seen.

MattsMe
05-25-2011, 04:50 PM
What is it about Ham that makes fans think he was so outstanding? I mean,
he was very good, but not really a menacing LB. Just a proficient one. Good
in coverage, etc. But not really out there making crushing hits that I have seen.

:doh:

Wow. Just wow.

:shake02:

stb_steeler
05-25-2011, 05:12 PM
What is it about Ham that makes fans think he was so outstanding? I mean,
he was very good, but not really a menacing LB. Just a proficient one. Good
in coverage, etc. But not really out there making crushing hits that I have seen.

It wasnt about the hitting part, he was a smart player when it came knowing what the opponents play was. He had quite a few Ints.

55BaileyFan
05-25-2011, 05:28 PM
If Lambert was on this list I would take him...but I think that Lloyd was much better than Harrison and I think he was a bigger animal. I still remember Cowher telling him "rush the passer, you line up how your comfortable and rush the passer"

PhantomJB93
05-25-2011, 06:05 PM
Imagine if James Harrison could have "gotten his shot" in his early-mid 20's instead of being a career backup or special teamer until he was 29...damn. I mean, maybe it was riding the bench so long and having that time to adjust that made him so good once he was finally named a starter, but if he could have been doing what he's done the past few years when he was a lot younger, he could have been the greatest OLB of all time...maybe.

Not sure if I still would choose him over Ham or Lloyd, because we didn't exactly get to see an extended look at him "in his prime," but it's something to think about...

thumper
05-25-2011, 08:13 PM
Imagine if James Harrison could have "gotten his shot" in his early-mid 20's instead of being a career backup or special teamer until he was 29...damn. I mean, maybe it was riding the bench so long and having that time to adjust that made him so good once he was finally named a starter, but if he could have been doing what he's done the past few years when he was a lot younger, he could have been the greatest OLB of all time...maybe.

Not sure if I still would choose him over Ham or Lloyd, because we didn't exactly get to see an extended look at him "in his prime," but it's something to think about...

And all we did get to see him do, in his very shortened career, was
earn DMVP and return the longest int. for a TD in the history of the Super
Bowl. He is more of a monster than any Steeler LB ever.

gameface75
05-26-2011, 09:14 AM
Nobody messed with Greg Lloyd he was a physical masterpiece...

Lloyd took no prisoners.

thumper
05-26-2011, 05:30 PM
:doh:

Wow. Just wow.

:shake02:

Nice completely unspecific response. You didn't refute anything, just
said "wow." Ham was not intimidating. Didn't crush ball carriers. He
was a finesse guy. He was good in coverage. He knew where to be.
But Harrison is more of a game changer than Ham ever was, plus
Ham had the ultimate supporting cast. I don't see any Joe Greenes,
Mel Blounts, LC Greenwoods, Jack Lamberts out there with Harrison.

thumper
05-26-2011, 05:31 PM
If Lambert was on this list I would take him...but I think that Lloyd was much better than Harrison and I think he was a bigger animal. I still remember Cowher telling him "rush the passer, you line up how your comfortable and rush the passer"

Lambert played inside, or I would have included him. These guys were
all OLBs.

SH-Rock
05-26-2011, 08:15 PM
What is it about Ham that makes fans think he was so outstanding? I mean,
he was very good, but not really a menacing LB. Just a proficient one. Good
in coverage, etc. But not really out there making crushing hits that I have seen.

Ask for an opinion and then say the opinion is wrong. Good going OP.

MaidenIndiana
05-26-2011, 08:31 PM
Let's see......Lambert to this day will say that Ham was the best and smartest linebacker he ever played with. While I love both Lloyd and Harrison I don't believe that either will go into the HOF. Ham IS in the HOF and was named to the 75th NFL anniversary team. Hmmmm tough choice:hatsoff:

thumper
05-26-2011, 11:00 PM
Let's see......Lambert to this day will say that Ham was the best and smartest linebacker he ever played with. While I love both Lloyd and Harrison I don't believe that either will go into the HOF. Ham IS in the HOF and was named to the 75th NFL anniversary team. Hmmmm tough choice:hatsoff:

Ham was on a team that won 4 SBs. Had he played in the time that
Lloyd or Harrison did, he wouldn't have made the Hall.

BigRick
05-27-2011, 03:45 PM
Ham was on a team that won 4 SBs. Had he played in the time that
Lloyd or Harrison did, he wouldn't have made the Hall.

Well, that's your opinion and you know what they say about opinions.:rofl:

Buddha Bus
05-27-2011, 04:20 PM
Nice completely unspecific response. You didn't refute anything, just
said "wow." Ham was not intimidating. Didn't crush ball carriers. He
was a finesse guy. He was good in coverage. He knew where to be.
But Harrison is more of a game changer than Ham ever was, plus
Ham had the ultimate supporting cast. I don't see any Joe Greenes,
Mel Blounts, LC Greenwoods, Jack Lamberts out there with Harrison.


I think he was referring to the fact that Jack Ham is a Hall of Famer and played on one of the greatest, if not THE greatest, defense in NFL history. Also, if you feel that way about Ham, why the hell put him on your list of 3 to begin with? Seems pointless if all you were going to do is try to refute anyone who chose him. :hunch:

Ham was on a team that won 4 SBs. Had he played in the time that
Lloyd or Harrison did, he wouldn't have made the Hall.


I've really got to pick me up one of these "Thumper Brand Crystal Balls" that tell you exactly what would happen concerning any subject throughout history/alternate realities. I'd be a rich man by now! :chuckle:

thumper
05-27-2011, 05:36 PM
I think he was referring to the fact that Jack Ham is a Hall of Famer and played on one of the greatest, if not THE greatest, defense in NFL history. Also, if you feel that way about Ham, why the hell put him on your list of 3 to begin with? Seems pointless if all you were going to do is try to refute anyone who chose him. :hunch:




I've really got to pick me up one of these "Thumper Brand Crystal Balls" that tell you exactly what would happen concerning any subject throughout history/alternate realities. I'd be a rich man by now! :chuckle:

Ham was 6-3, 224. He'd get tossed around like a rag doll in the
era that Lloyd and Harrison played in. 6-3, 224 is a thin guy. He's get
pounded today, hence if I had my choice, I'd take the other two guys
since they can bring the thunder than Ham never could. Harrison is
6-0, 242. Now that is SIZE and leverage. He totally disrupts offenses.
Ham was more of a put himself in position kind of guy - not a wrecking
ball, which both GL and JH are. You want my Crystal Ball? You got it.
It's called 224 is too small and no way does a 224 lb OLB make the
hall of fame on Pgh's recent teams.

SteelCityMom
05-27-2011, 06:03 PM
Ham was 6-3, 224. He'd get tossed around like a rag doll in the
era that Lloyd and Harrison played in. 6-3, 224 is a thin guy. He's get
pounded today, hence if I had my choice, I'd take the other two guys
since they can bring the thunder than Ham never could. Harrison is
6-0, 242. Now that is SIZE and leverage. He totally disrupts offenses.
Ham was more of a put himself in position kind of guy - not a wrecking
ball, which both GL and JH are. You want my Crystal Ball? You got it.
It's called 224 is too small and no way does a 224 lb OLB make the
hall of fame on Pgh's recent teams.

Ok...but he DIDN'T play in the same era as Lloyd and Harrison. With strength and conditioning being different now for athletes, he'd probably be bigger just because of that.

As has been mentioned already (and skipped over by you twice now), why did you put him on the list if you were just going to trash the opinions of those that chose him? He did make the HOF...that means he's not a total scrub. And Lambert was pretty skinny too, but put fear into other players.

If you were looking for big, new era players, why didn't you include Greene or Kirkland or Porter?

Ham is widely considered to be one of the best linebackers to ever play the game. Not by Steelers standards either...by NFL standards. Harrison and Lloyd don't even crack the top 20 list on most (if not all) reputable lists.

MattsMe
05-27-2011, 06:27 PM
Ham was 6-3, 224. He'd get tossed around like a rag doll in the
era that Lloyd and Harrison played in. 6-3, 224 is a thin guy. He's get
pounded today, hence if I had my choice, I'd take the other two guys
since they can bring the thunder than Ham never could. Harrison is
6-0, 242. Now that is SIZE and leverage. He totally disrupts offenses.
Ham was more of a put himself in position kind of guy - not a wrecking
ball, which both GL and JH are. You want my Crystal Ball? You got it.
It's called 224 is too small and no way does a 224 lb OLB make the
hall of fame on Pgh's recent teams.

According to nfl.com, Lloyd was 6'2" and 228.

Ham was 6'1" and 225.

SteelCityMom
05-27-2011, 07:00 PM
According to nfl.com, Lloyd was 6'2" and 228.

Ham was 6'1" and 225.

What a *****. He'd never make it in today's NFL.

MattsMe
05-27-2011, 07:11 PM
What a *****. He'd never make it in today's NFL.

Exactly. Everyone knows Ham would have been incapable of gaining those last 3 pounds (that's where all the talent is) if he played in the 90's instead of the 70's.

It's not like there's a difference between a 4-3 olb and a 3-4 olb.

It's not like sports writers voted him the greatest outside linebacker of all time or anything.

I mean it would be different if he was known for his game changing big plays............................................. .................................................. ..

SteelCityMom
05-27-2011, 07:21 PM
Here's a decent write up on Ham from Bleacher Report. Yes, I know they're not the most reputable source, but if you look up any info on him, you'll find about the same.

Ham has been called the most technically sound linebacker to ever play the game. There was no weakness in his game, he rarely missed time to injuries, rarely had a penalty called on him, and was never out of place. Some of the more fiery players from the era may be remembered a little better, but Ham was by all accounts what every coach in the league wanted.

Ham went to eight consecutive Pro Bowls, was a six-time first team All-Pro, and had a Steeler linebacker record 32 interceptions.


http://bleacherreport.com/articles/434232-40-years-of-greatness-the-steelers-linebackers/page/19

Buddha Bus
05-27-2011, 09:58 PM
According to nfl.com, Lloyd was 6'2" and 228.

Ham was 6'1" and 225.


This whole list sucks!!!! I say scrap it and start over with the 3 heaviest Steelers OLBs of all-time. Surely they must be the most dominant. :thmbup:


Everybody knows speed, instincts, skill, awareness, stamina, intelligence, etc. are all completely irrelevant to the equation. :jerkit:

thumper
05-28-2011, 01:03 PM
Ok...but he DIDN'T play in the same era as Lloyd and Harrison. With strength and conditioning being different now for athletes, he'd probably be bigger just because of that.

As has been mentioned already (and skipped over by you twice now), why did you put him on the list if you were just going to trash the opinions of those that chose him? He did make the HOF...that means he's not a total scrub. And Lambert was pretty skinny too, but put fear into other players.

If you were looking for big, new era players, why didn't you include Greene or Kirkland or Porter?

Ham is widely considered to be one of the best linebackers to ever play the game. Not by Steelers standards either...by NFL standards. Harrison and Lloyd don't even crack the top 20 list on most (if not all) reputable lists.

Oh wait, I'm not allowed to have an opinion now? I included Ham
because he belonged in the conversation but in MY OPINION, he
wouldn't be nearly as productive as Lloyd or Harrison if you had
a choice of all three in their prime IN THE CURRENT
ERA OF FOOTBALL.

And, I had to correct another poster about this, but INSIDE LBS ARE NOT
THE SAME AS OUTSIDE LBS! Kirkland was an inside LB as was Lambert
hence not in the discussion. Maybe I should have included Rod Woodson
on the list too - and Mike Webster while I am at it. :sofunny:

If you were putting a team together, right NOW, and had all three in their
prime, Ham would be too skinny. And, this just in, they did lift weights in
the 70s, and the Steelers were infamous for having the most players
on juice in that era. So, Ham was still a chicken legged light weight and
would still be if he were in his prime today. At 224 lbs, he'd get erased
out there. Imagine him trying to shed the block of a 260 lb TE. Good
luck with that. :thumbsup:

thumper
05-28-2011, 01:06 PM
This whole list sucks!!!! I say scrap it and start over with the 3 heaviest Steelers OLBs of all-time. Surely they must be the most dominant. :thmbup:


Everybody knows speed, instincts, skill, awareness, stamina, intelligence, etc. are all completely irrelevant to the equation. :jerkit:

Go ahead and point out the current OLBs who are probowlers at 225 lbs.

Hell, find me decent starting OLBs at 225 or less. Most are all over
240 and a good deal are over 250. Ham would be like a bug getting
hit by a windshield at 80 MPH.

thumper
05-28-2011, 02:23 PM
Here's a decent write up on Ham from Bleacher Report. Yes, I know they're not the most reputable source, but if you look up any info on him, you'll find about the same.



http://bleacherreport.com/articles/434232-40-years-of-greatness-the-steelers-linebackers/page/19

Oh there is no doubt he was an extremely good player in his day.
He has endless accolades to prove it.

MattsMe
05-28-2011, 03:16 PM
I blame mainstream media and the government for making us believe Ham was a great player.

We are all sheep.

Buddha Bus
05-28-2011, 03:21 PM
Go ahead and point out the current OLBs who are probowlers at 225 lbs.

Hell, find me decent starting OLBs at 225 or less. Most are all over
240 and a good deal are over 250. Ham would be like a bug getting
hit by a windshield at 80 MPH.

As has already been pointed out, if Jack Ham had played in THIS era with more modern training methods and supplements, he would probably have been a larger OLB. That, or he may have played a different position.

bornaSteelersfan
05-28-2011, 05:28 PM
OK, I get it, at Jack Ham's size, he would get smashed as an OLB today. However, at his size and skill in todays game, Jack Ham would be one of the best Strong Safeties around. I also am a little disappointed you didn't put Jason Gildon on your short list of OLB's. What about Kevin Greene (I know he only played with us for 3 years, but he helped us get to a SB)?

MasterOfPuppets
05-29-2011, 01:00 AM
Ham was 6-3, 224. He'd get tossed around like a rag doll in the
era that Lloyd and Harrison played in. 6-3, 224 is a thin guy. He's get
pounded today, hence if I had my choice, I'd take the other two guys
since they can bring the thunder than Ham never could. Harrison is
6-0, 242. Now that is SIZE and leverage. He totally disrupts offenses.
Ham was more of a put himself in position kind of guy - not a wrecking
ball, which both GL and JH are. You want my Crystal Ball? You got it.
It's called 224 is too small and no way does a 224 lb OLB make the
hall of fame on Pgh's recent teams.
greg lloyd was listed as 6-2 , 228 lbs...:noidea:
Greg Lloyd

Height: 6-2 Weight: 228 Age: 46

Born: 5/26/1965 Miami , FL

College: Fort Valley State

Experience: 11 Seasons


i'm pretty sure ham could have bulked up to meet the demands of todays NFL.

besides nfl.com has him listed at...
Jack Ham
Height: 6-1 Weight: 225 Age: 62
Born: 12/23/1948 Johnstown , PA
College: Penn State
Experience: 12 Seasons
Hall of Fame Induction: 1988

MDSteel15
05-31-2011, 04:03 PM
For one thing, Ham was a 4-3 OLB and was as good as they come, PERIOD! You can't compare him to the guys we have running as 3-4 OLBs who are pretty much just pure rush artists! The DEs of the 70s were more like the LBs of today...

thumper
05-31-2011, 04:09 PM
OK, I get it, at Jack Ham's size, he would get smashed as an OLB today. However, at his size and skill in todays game, Jack Ham would be one of the best Strong Safeties around. I also am a little disappointed you didn't put Jason Gildon on your short list of OLB's. What about Kevin Greene (I know he only played with us for 3 years, but he helped us get to a SB)?

Gildon sucked so bad his later years, that most Steeler fans I know really
loathed watching him play. He did put up record-setting sack #s before
he sucked, but his last few seasons, he didn't even appear to ever hustle.
I think he cherry picked much of his stats because he had so many good
players around him and he was sent to the QB more than anyone else.

Greene was great, but much/most? of his career was not as a Steeler. Ham
was a great player in his day. But the question was, who would you sign, if
all in their prime right NOW? I still take Harrison. He is an incredible disrupting
force and "brings it" every single play. I realize he will never get his due or
be in the Hall, but that is kind of my point: sometimes those who don't sniff
the Hall are superior, in their day, to those who do make it.

Lloyd did only go 228 but he was big for his size; he had that tiny waist,
et al. He was like a cheetah, or some quick big cat. I take Lloyd over
any of the OLBs of the 70s if we are playing in the modern era.

thumper
05-31-2011, 04:17 PM
As has already been pointed out, if Jack Ham had played in THIS era with more modern training methods and supplements, he would probably have been a larger OLB. That, or he may have played a different position.

You mean he might get juiced up? They had juice in the 70's and Pgh was
notorious for having the most players on juice in that era.

MDSteel15
05-31-2011, 07:20 PM
That's incorrect. They were known to have STARTED it, Oakland's entire team was on it!

DanRooney
05-31-2011, 09:38 PM
I believe Jason Gildong still plays on the Steelers

MattsMe
05-31-2011, 11:46 PM
That's incorrect. They were known to have STARTED it, Oakland's entire team was on it!

Not really relevant to this thread, but the idea that the Steelers started, or even popularized the use of steroids in the NFL is completely false.

It's pretty well known that the Chargers started steroid use in the NFL 11 years before the Steelers won their first Super Bowl.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/otl/news/story?id=3866837

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2008-06-14/sports/17900026_1_anabolic-steroids-san-francisco-49ers-training-bob-waters/3

http://www.steroidsinbaseball.net/steroidtimeline.html

http://www.steroidtimes.com/chemical-history-anabolic-steroids-invade-football-in-the-50s-70s/2009

The Chiefs, Cowboys and Raiders all used them before the Steelers did.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/232404-the-steelers-steroids-and-profound-misconceptions

Fire Arians
06-01-2011, 03:54 AM
harrison. lloyd was mean but harrison would steal his lunch money

james doesn't just hit people, he freakin executes them

SacknificentStew56
06-01-2011, 04:18 AM
Not taking anything away from Ham and Lloyd but Harrison is a serious force to be reckoned with. He does so much for his small size but his strength speaks volumes on the field.

thumper
06-01-2011, 07:38 PM
Not taking anything away from Ham and Lloyd but Harrison is a serious force to be reckoned with. He does so much for his small size but his strength speaks volumes on the field.

:thumbsup:

thumper
06-01-2011, 07:39 PM
That's incorrect. They were known to have STARTED it, Oakland's entire team was on it!

Started it _and_ had lots of players on it.

thumper
06-01-2011, 07:40 PM
harrison. lloyd was mean but harrison would steal his lunch money

james doesn't just hit people, he freakin executes them

:thumbsup:

MattsMe
06-01-2011, 09:09 PM
Started it _and_ had lots of players on it.

Not really relevant to this thread, but the idea that the Steelers started, or even popularized the use of steroids in the NFL is completely false.

It's pretty well known that the Chargers started steroid use in the NFL 11 years before the Steelers won their first Super Bowl.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/otl/news/story?id=3866837

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2008-06-14/sports/17900026_1_anabolic-steroids-san-francisco-49ers-training-bob-waters/3

http://www.steroidsinbaseball.net/steroidtimeline.html

http://www.steroidtimes.com/chemical-history-anabolic-steroids-invade-football-in-the-50s-70s/2009

The Chiefs, Cowboys and Raiders all used them before the Steelers did.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/232404-the-steelers-steroids-and-profound-misconceptions

Let me guess, it's the mainstream media, working with the government, in cooperation with countless former players and coaches, that is feeding sheep like me the idea that the Steelers DID NOT start or popularize the use of steroids in the NFL?

I'm sorry I don't have any links to youtube videos or personal blogs written by conspiracy theorists.

thumper
06-02-2011, 12:29 AM
Let me guess, it's the mainstream media, working with the government, in cooperation with countless former players and coaches, that is feeding sheep like me the idea that the Steelers DID NOT start or popularize the use of steroids in the NFL?

I'm sorry I don't have any links to youtube videos or personal blogs written by conspiracy theorists.

:eyecrazy::eyecrazy:

MattsMe
06-02-2011, 01:32 AM
:eyecrazy::eyecrazy:

This post is woefully lacking in youtube links and recently learned pseudo intellectual buzzwords.

Come on thumper, you can do better.

thumper
06-02-2011, 01:14 PM
This post is woefully lacking in youtube links and recently learned pseudo intellectual buzzwords.

Come on thumper, you can do better.

:blah::blah::blah:

Buddha Bus
06-03-2011, 05:20 AM
You mean he might get juiced up? They had juice in the 70's and Pgh was
notorious for having the most players on juice in that era.

Yes. That's what I'm saying. :doh:

Idiot. :shake01:

gameface75
06-03-2011, 01:34 PM
....of these guys in their prime, who would you choose?

Jack Ham
Lloyd
James Harrison.

I go Harrison. Bigger, meaner, stronger, more menacing than
all. He likely won't be as acclaimed, but he is the best among
them from the way I see it.

Gregg Lloyd,

thumper
06-03-2011, 02:27 PM
Gregg Lloyd,

Do you think Lloyd brought as much

1.) Pass rush abilities
2.) Hard hits all over the field

Than Harrison does? I love Lloyd. But Harrison seems to be
even more of a beast and playmaker in my eyes

bornaSteelersfan
06-03-2011, 04:36 PM
....of these guys in their prime, who would you choose?

Jack Ham
Lloyd
James Harrison.

I go Harrison. Bigger, meaner, stronger, more menacing than
all. He likely won't be as acclaimed, but he is the best among
them from the way I see it.

This is how you began this thread. Why would you even ask the question if every time someone has a differing opinion, you tell them how wrong they are?! You are simply a troll wearing black and gold. This will be the last time I post on any one of your biased threads. I also expect your reply of this post to be full of your opinions and your attempt at getting me into some sort of debate. You are clearly not open-minded to debate anything with so don't expect any more replies from me.

GO STEELERS!! :tt02:

thumper
06-03-2011, 05:29 PM
This is how you began this thread. Why would you even ask the question if every time someone has a differing opinion, you tell them how wrong they are?! You are simply a troll wearing black and gold. This will be the last time I post on any one of your biased threads. I also expect your reply of this post to be full of your opinions and your attempt at getting me into some sort of debate. You are clearly not open-minded to debate anything with so don't expect any more replies from me.

GO STEELERS!! :tt02:

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa. I will send you a wammmmmmmmmmmmmbulance.
boooooooooooooo hoooooooooooooo. So, I'm not allowed to express my
opinion but others are? What a F---g joke.

Buddha Bus
06-03-2011, 06:51 PM
What a F---g joke.



Yes, you are.

We finally agree on something, thump and thumper.

solardave
06-05-2011, 12:27 PM
I like all 3 but my choice would be Ham.:tt02:

Absolutely. Smart player who definitely over achieved.