If you had the chance to have any....

[thumper]

Originally Posted by PhantomJB93

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]

Originally Posted by steeltheone

Nobody messed with Greg Lloyd he was a physical masterpiece...

Lloyd took no prisoners.

[thumper]

Originally Posted by MattsMe

Wow. Just wow.

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]

Originally Posted by 55BaileyFan

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]

Originally Posted by thumper

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]

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

[thumper]

Originally Posted by MaidenIndiana

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

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]

Originally Posted by thumper

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.

[Buddha Bus]

Originally Posted by thumper

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.

Originally Posted by thumper

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!

[thumper]

Originally Posted by Buddha Bus

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.




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!

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.