
I was talking to someone the other day about the way football has changed through the years, and here's a quick way of saying it: The 2008 Lions would beat the 1972 Dolphins.
That year's Dolphins were the only undefeated, untied team ever, and this year's Lions have a good chance of becoming the first 0-16 team. But athletes are so much bigger, stronger and faster today that if we could fit the Lions' entire 53-man roster into a DeLorean, take them back to 1972 and line them up against those Dolphins, Detroit would crush Miami.
The 2008 Lions have the worst defensive line in football, and they routinely get pushed up and down the field. But they would destroy the 1972 Dolphins, whose best offensive lineman was the 247-pound Bob Kuechenberg. The 2008 Lions have an inept offensive line, but it's an inept offensive line that outweighs the 1972 Dolphins' defensive line by 50 pounds a man.
For that matter, Lions quarterback Daunte Culpepper outweighs everyone on the 1972 Dolphins. Culpepper reportedly weighs 280 pounds; the biggest guy on the '72 Dolphins, defensive tackle Jim Dunaway, weighed 277. And don't even get me started on what wide receiver Calvin Johnson would do to to the 1972 Dolphins' secondary. The '72 Dolphins could double Johnson on every single play and not come close to stopping him.
None of this changes the simple fact that the 2008 Lions suck and the 1972 Dolphins were great. It's simply a reminder that the game of football has progressed so far, and athletes are so vastly superior, that when we watch a terrible team in 2008, what we're watching would beat a great team in 1972.
Worst Teams in NFL History
Team: 2008 Detroit Lions | Record: Currently 0-13
The Lions are rapidly closing in on immortality and an 0-16 record. Dating back to last year, Detroit is 1-20 in its last 21 games. Click through to see how these Lions stack up to the worst teams in NFL history.
Christian Petersen, Getty Images
Team: 1980 New Orleans Saints | Record: 1-15
This team gained a cult following of fans known as "The Aints" - who came to every home game wearing paper bags over their heads. The Saints beat the Jets, 21-20, in their 15th game.
Manny Rubio, NFL Photos/Getty Images
Team: 1989 Dallas Cowboys | Record: 1-15
Things would improve for Troy Aikman eventually, but in '89, America's Team only won once - at Washington in Dallas' ninth game. The 'Boys were shut out three times.
Allen Dean Steele, Getty Images
Team: 1991 Indianapolis Colts | Record: 1-15
Like the 1980 Saints, only a one-point win over the Jets kept Indianapolis from a winless season. The Colts set a record for least touchdowns (14) in a 16-game season and scored seven points or less in 11 games.
Don Larson, NFL/Getty Images
Team: 1981 Baltimore Colts | Record: 2-14
Baltimore managed to beat 2-14 New England twice - in the season opener and season finale, by a combined three points. The Colts allowed an average of 33.3 points per game.
Al Messerschmidt, Getty Images
Team: 1996 New York Jets | Record: 1-15
The J-E-T-S were A-W-F-U-L in 1996, with their lone win coming at Arizona in Week 9. New York had three turnovers or more in eight of 16 games.
Andy Lyons, Getty Images
Team: 2000 San Diego Chargers | Record: 1-15
Highly-touted Ryan Leaf was the poster child for this miserable bunch of losers. The Chargers managed only a one-point win over Kansas City in Week 13, and Leaf finished the season with an abysmal 56.2 QB rating.
Stephen Dunn, Getty Images
Team: 2001 Carolina Panthers | Record: 1-15
Things started so well. The Panthers opened the year with an 11-point win at Minnesota - and then lost 15 straight, scoring in single figures five times.
Eliot Schechter, Getty Images
Team: 2007 Miami Dolphins | Record: 1-15
This bunch was close to 0-16 - real close. Miami started 0-13 before sneaking past Baltimore in overtime, but only after the Ravens kicked a game-tying field goal from the Miami 1-yard line late in the fourth.
Al Messerschmidt, Getty Images
Team: 1976 Tampa Bay Bucs | Record: 0-14
Was this the worst team in NFL history? The Bucs certainly have a great case. Under QB Steve Spurrier, they lost all 14 games by an average of 20 points and suffered through five shutouts.
NFL Photos/Getty Images


















Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
12-12-2008 @ 4:47PM
Mike said...
Umm... since when does being bigger make a team better? According to your logic, teams would be better off just signing fat guys. You know, the kind that explode their ankles when they try to turn, like Hollis Thomas. This is one of the stupidest things I have read in a while,
Reply
12-12-2008 @ 5:43PM
Chino said...
there is a reason he did not say Fatter
the writer means Bigger Faster
all in all he means more athletic
12-13-2008 @ 1:41PM
Seanan said...
Mike, your an idiot. you are saying that he meant fat, which he didn't say in that article at all, and if you had any common sense about football you would know that you have to be strong, large, and athletic to even be a backup in the NFL. Or in other words big for NFL terms. When you say fat in the NFL it means heavy, but strong, and someone who could whoop many people's asses. Especially with today's NFL, they would run right through lots of teams o lines from the past. So basically what I'm saying is your comment was the stupidest thing I've read in a while.
12-16-2008 @ 10:08PM
David said...
I think this article is comparing apples and oranges. Lets put the 08 Lions in that DeLorean and play the game with the same rules the NFL had in 72.
QBs got no love and got hit almost every play. Ask any NFL player from 72 what a late hit is? Helmet to Helmet tackles and finger breaking on the bottem of piles.
Calvin Johnson would never complete a route. He would have no clue what to do after 5 yards and the Defenders are still pushing him off his route or knocking him to the ground.
So to draw a comparision. The 08 Lions might be a Indy Car, faster and more atheletic. But, if the game was played with the 72 rules, the race is an off-road dirt rally. Try winning the baja 1000 with an Indy car. Just not going to happen.
David
Just like "giant fan since 57" said. My money is the Dolphins. Todays atheletes are bigger and faster. But they are by no means meaner or as tough as the players of the past.
Sure, todays athelets
12-12-2008 @ 4:50PM
tien said...
MDS is right..these guys are not just bigger but are also a lot more athletic than the guys in the past, better conditioned and will have infinitely better play calling abilities.
It'd be the same as basketball--but I'd be curious to see how a modern day baseball team would stack up against one from the past.
Reply
12-12-2008 @ 5:07PM
Dan said...
The 2008 lions are bigger, faster, and stronger, and yet don't know how to play football. They are awful. Just the worst team in the history of football.
They 1972 dolphins would win 28-0.
Reply
12-12-2008 @ 6:09PM
kilroy said...
The Kansas City Royals would sweep the 1928 N.Y. Yankees in a weekend series, also.
Reply
12-21-2008 @ 1:32PM
Kagan said...
OK, this is where I draw the line. The argument can be made for football, as it is almost purely a contact sport, and the size, power, and athleticism of the players are a major factor. Not so much with baseball. How many times does this have to be proven? One of the greatest athletes of our generation (Michael Jordan) tried and failed miserably to play this game. In baseball, athleticism is an advantage ONLY when all else is even.
If we're looking only at power numbers, yes, today's baseball player is superior to the past. They are more athletic, have far better conditioning, and lots of trainers, coaches, and other assistants that players of the past did not. However, once again, baseball is an extremely intuitive sport. The most important factors determining a player's success are traits that are either intangible, or achieved only through many years of experience. Today's truly great players would be great back then and vice versa. Example: Derek Jeter, while his greatness can be argued, IS a premier player in today's MLB, not because he is bigger, faster, stronger, but mainly for his intangible talents. Pete Rose is another great example of a player achieving greatness without the physical skills of others. Maddux would have been a great pitcher in ANY era. The list goes on and on. Great baseball players would be great no matter when they played. OK, here's a counter argument; Jose Canseco was an average player at best, but he achieved some success (with the help of steroids) by belting huge homeruns. However, there isn't even an argument over who was greater, Canseco or Reggie Jackson. Why? Because, once again, what made Jackson great wasn't just his power, it was his ability to rise to the occasion. His ability to carry a team when they needed it. His ability to simply WIN. This holds true in EVERY era. Baseball is a game where these sorts of questions can never be answered. Great players would be great whenever.
1-13-2009 @ 5:14AM
duswdav said...
i don't know what we're YELLING ABOUUTTTT!!!
Reply
12-12-2008 @ 6:36PM
giant fan since 57 said...
MDS I believe you have lost your mind. OK lets say they play.
To be fair the game would be played under rules from 1972 and the gear from that era, such as much smaller facemasks. There would be no penalties for late hits or piling on fallen quarterbacks, and defensive backs would be able to mug receivers all the way down the field, then hammer them Jack Tatum style when they dare cross the middle. When running backs get close to the sidelines they would have to actually finish the play on the field instead of tiptoeing out of bounds. Of course if they played by 72 rules they wouldn't be throwing any yellow hankies when they got blasted by two or thre defenders on their way out and drilled at they hit the ground.
My money is on the Dolphins.
Reply
12-12-2008 @ 7:44PM
dolphin fan said...
Agreed, they are tougher in 72. And the lions would lose. (With alot of injured players)
12-13-2008 @ 9:54AM
ken said...
to giants fan sine 57, It doesn't matter what rules you go by, any team in that era would not stand a chance against teams of today. None of the players on the 72 Dolphins team would even make the practice squad on today's team.
Today's Florida Gator's team would crush the 72 Dolphins team.
12-13-2008 @ 7:33PM
Corey said...
No they would have to play under rules that both agreed on because the 2008 loins have never played under 72 rules so it wouldnt be fair.
12-12-2008 @ 6:34PM
Skippy said...
Geez...please don't tell me this will bring the 72 Dolphins back into the media spotlight. They were annoying enough last year.
Reply
12-12-2008 @ 6:48PM
dan said...
I thought this was obvious. The gators and sooners would probably beat the lions, much less a professional team.
Reply
12-12-2008 @ 6:54PM
dan said...
**i meant the gators and sooners would probably beat the 72 dolphins, much less a professional teams like the lions
12-12-2008 @ 6:55PM
giant fan since 57 said...
By the way, tien in comment #3...players today don't call plays. they listen to little voices in their helmets telling them what to do. Bob Greise used to call his own plays as did Nick Bonocatti on defense.
Reply
12-13-2008 @ 6:12PM
T-REX1240 said...
Players do call their own plays. (see: Manning, Peyton)
12-12-2008 @ 7:25PM
Joe Sixpack said...
Of course the Lions would beat the '72 Dolphins. I think they would win by a touchdown.
Just remember, the Dolphin players are all in their 60's...!!!
Reply
12-12-2008 @ 8:34PM
Steve said...
You're too young to remember what we learned in Viet Nam.
All highs are not good highs. Whatever you're smoking is doing you some real harm.
Reply