hockey-fights.com
 Page 3 of 20 « First<3456>» Last
Username Post: NHL Top 20 All-time thread        (Topic#303764)
Badduke14
superstar
Total Posts: 4786
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-10-04 08:55 PM - Post#304558    


    In response to Badduke14

"Guys like Probert, Brown, Wilson, Gillies...true heavys in any era. Guys like Jonathan, Nystrom, Semenko & Playfair super tough, but limited footage of them in their prime."
Nick, I'm not sure where I would rank Fotiu. As for the fighters of the present, how can you say they aren't as tough as they were back then? Guys like Laraque, Cairns, Brashear etc..would kick ass over guys like O'Reilly, Schultz, Maloney, etc..IMO. They are WAY better conditioned, & the fights in the '70s didn't last 45 seconds-two minutes long. A guy like Langdon would be just as tough as a Fotiu or Wilson because he can take a punch, & he'd wear them out...they'd be spent after 20 seconds with him.
Guys with small fight cards are hard to judge. We have no idea how a Fotiu would match up vs Laraque. Both are great punchers, but Laraque would kill him in the conditioning department & guys in the '70s didn't have the strength of guys today, whether they be on roids or not. There are just too many enforcers that Fotiu never fought, & I wouldn't wanna rank him too high purely on reputation, that would be wrong. As for Playfair, Mann, Gassoff, Maloney, these guys have VERY limited footage, & IMO, I think Playfair in his PRIME could probably hang with anyone.
Don't get me wrong, I do think Fotiu was extrememly tough, his win over Wilson was impressive, & what he did to Coxe, way after his prime was impressive as well, but he lost to Paterson & never fought a lot of guys. Not sure where I'd rank him. I do have a top 20, & like most, it would change, but I haven't done one in a while, & where do you rank Jonathan? Could he beat Domi?
David Jesiolowski: Likeable balding WHL gonk. (Napes)


 
chaser
hall of famer
Total Posts: 8410
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-10-04 08:59 PM - Post#304560    


    In response to Badduke14

Duke, we don't see eye to eye much, especially on Brashear, Odjick and Twist.. However I totally agree with your last post on the newer guys vs the older ones.. I do see your point on Brashear as well, I think when he is retired you will see him in many top 20 list, or top 10.
THE ORIGINAL CHASER!!


 
espo
captain
Total Posts: 996
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-10-04 09:29 PM - Post#304581    


    In response to chaser

Badduke 14:
Remember your statements 20 years from now, when everyone is saying that yesterdays (Laraque, Cairns & Brashear) fighters wouldn't stand a chance against todays (year 2024) fighters who all weigh 300+ lbs of steroid muscle and stand 6'10" tall!

Believe me, it's going to hurt when you read it. So keep that open mind when they say your heros would get toasted.

As for me, fuck being fair about it! I prefer to live in the dark recesses of my memories and watch fuzzy tapes till I die.
 
merlin401
captain
Total Posts: 834
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-10-04 10:26 PM - Post#304631    


    In response to espo

Here's mine ( i may forget a name so forgive me)

Not on my list due to no footage not neglect: Ferguson, Gassoff, Howe, Fontinado, Kurtenbach...and anyone before

1. Probert
2. Brown
3. Behn Wilson
4. Gillies
5. Kocur
6. Playfair
7. Fotiu
8. McSorely
9. Jonathan
10.Wensink
11.Domi
12.Hunter
13.Kordic
14.Nystrom
15.Bridgman
16.Holmgren
17.Cochrane
18.Grimson
19.Nilan
20.Miller

I feel bad neglecting... Semenko, Twist, Berube, McCarthy

I really think deep down that McCarthy deserves a spot, but I don't think its the popular opinion and I want to review everything he ever did before it becomes my official opinion. Hopefully I can make a strong case for him being top 20. Take him side by side with Grimson for example (just to start). If you take these last two years and put them at the start of McCarthy's career and let him end in 01-02 with a few losses and a bunch of very good wins, I say he will be in people's top 20s. Grimson started slow, got better, peaked, and then went out still good. Only McCarthy's slow time being his last few years have undermined his first 10. His dominance was incredible and nearly unparalleled.
 
GOON 21
superstar
Total Posts: 2779
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-10-04 10:37 PM - Post#304639    


    In response to espo

These lists are so subjective i love it, Posux i thnk we agree on that rivalry (Brown + Kordic) but when Brownie beat Jay he usually beat J pretty ez imo..(I STRONGLY believe he is under .500, and that hurts him alot!!) BTW i look at this list and there are some awesome fighters i think Jay is in the 30 or so range all time..

There are about 12-15 lists and only 2-3 people have Stu Grimson, i think you have to find a place for Stu somewhere. I will try and post 20 tommorrow..

BTW a quikie for the board, is Jim McKenzie or early Gino possibly on list? (1990-95) I think Jimmy Mac should get some consideration, simply put the guy was a "top 5-10" guy for about 8-10 years and beat ALOT of heavies.. A motivated Jimmy Mac could beat ANYONE!!!
 
merlin401
captain
Total Posts: 834
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-10-04 10:37 PM - Post#304640    


    In response to merlin401

My official, "people i see listed that i don't want to see" list:

Simon (seen him at #4): Bah... he's one of my favorites all-time but what has he done to merit top 10 or top 20 status? More of an enforcer/policeman type who will go after anyone and pound them than a pure fighter, he just doesn't have the big wins over great competition to be here. Plus his prime was way to short due to injury. When you consider that McCarthy was even more dominant (slightly) at the same time with a muuuch better card (and won their only head-to-head) there is no way Simon can be behind McCarthy. And a similar case can be made for at least 20 others.

O'Reilly (seen him at #19, #20): I think he was conistent and very good, but not all time great to be mentioned with the names around him. Was he ever top 5 even? Its hard to remember a time when he was ever even #1 on his team (which really takes a lot of pressure of a fighter). He has too many losses and not an illustrious enough path of destruction to be placed here IMO.

Howatt (seen him at #20): Why? He's just a glorified middle weight with a great career. But I dont' see him measuring up to the heavyweights that could be in place of him at all. Not sure plett quite belongs either but, alas, i really don't know enough about him to be a fair judge

Brashear (seen him at #8, #12, #20): I'm uncomfortable seeing him be with these great names. This has already been discussed but, dominance is a very poor word to use for Brashear. Undefeated (or close to it) is a fair word. He doesn't let himself be beaten. And he's won a good number of fights cleanly or even dominantly. But how is he a feared force in this league? Anyone could hug back and avoid any sort of major damage. He has very little FEAR factor because of his style and that serves as a major detractor from his all time ranking IMO.
 
merlin401
captain
Total Posts: 834
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-10-04 10:39 PM - Post#304641    


    In response to GOON 21

Quote:

A motivated Jimmy Mac could beat ANYONE!!!




Yeah, but how often was he motivated? Not that often... He was a very passive, almost gentlemanly fighter throughout his career. Not taking anything away from how good he was, but he didn't have the killer instinct of a grimson or a twist or a mccarthy so I think he should be behind all those guys, despite his solid and long career.
 
Badduke14
superstar
Total Posts: 4786
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-10-04 10:48 PM - Post#304646    


    In response to merlin401

I don't think "fear" should be taken into consideration because "fear alone" isn't gonna win you many bouts. As for style, it's what works for you, & if Brashear's style is so lame, why can't anyone adopt his style & clearly beat him? Brashear has KO power, great strength & stamina, all important qualities needed to be an elite enforcer, along with a very strong fight card & willingness to go, mostly in his first 4 seasons, but he's kept to at least 10 per season over the last 4 or so years. Not alot, but more than some.
David Jesiolowski: Likeable balding WHL gonk. (Napes)


 
the hammer
superstar
Total Posts: 3893
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-10-04 10:51 PM - Post#304647    


    In response to espo

First off, i'd like to say why do you need to see dozens of some players fights in order to judge him in the top 20? Even a guy like Gassoff who only played in the NHL for 2 seasons has enough fights that are either on tape or documented in print in order to make a judgment on him. Also i'm shocked that anyone would even consider Jay Miller in the top 20 of all time. Byers was a much better fighter and should be mention ahead of Miller. Here's my Top 20:

1) Bob Probert - His great feat was always avenging any of his few losses.
2) Bob Nystrom - Surprised? Just look at the record: one of only a few that beat Fotiu, manhandled Wensink like nobody had ever done, out-slugged Playfair in one of the top 10 fights of all time in my opinion, had only 2 or 3 losses in a 14 year career and may have the best win-lose % of any fighter. In fact Gillies may have more losses than him. Best two fisted thrower of all time
3)Behn Wilson - Very few losses, one of the best uppercuts in the business.
4)Nick Fotiu - His few losses are for some reason always mention but he usually lost to the excellent fighters: Holmgren, Jack Carlson who may have been the best WHA fighter of all time. His lose to Patterson is overrated, Patterson never hurt him in any way.
5)tie Clark Gillies - Gillies had the best and hardest punch maybe of all time. If he fought more i'd have him much higher.
5)tie Dave Brown - Best lefty of them all. The only knock on him was he didn't have a good right.
6)Stan Jonathan - Gillies was the only player that ever decked him. Excellent win-lose percentage. Only bad showing against an above average fighter was against Nill.
7) Larry Playfair - Had a booming right, second to only Gillies or Kocur. Very few losses.
8)Bob Gassoff - Very few players ever had the impact in their first 2 seasons like he did. Hammered Howatt,pounded Bridgman, great toe to toe with Mulvey(all of these are either on video or audio). Two pounding of Tiger Williams. Very few losses(Schultz, Turnbull) and maybe the best rep during his too short years in hockey. Just read any old articles or talk to players that were around back then and you'll see why us old-timers rate him so high.
9)Glen Cochrane - Great brawler that took on and beat most of the best in his day.
10)Dave Schultz - This guy just doesn't get his due, probably because he was so hated outside Philly. Sure he had some losses but look at his card: A draw with Dan Maloney who most people consider the best back then, out punched Gassoff and that rarely happened against Bob, out-pointed or a draw at the worst against Jonathan(who's in alot of people's top 15), slight edge against Gillies in their first fight, many poundings on Howatt, Solid draw against Behn Wilson, who's in everyones top 3.
11) Marty McSorley - He got better as he aged.
12) Jay Wells - You may be shocked at this but how many guys besides Brown beat him? He hammered Tim Hunter twice and who else can make that claim? I just got a tape on him and after watching it i'm convinced he was as tough as anyone from 1980 to 1990.
13)John Wensink - Always in the top 3 when ever he played. Only bad loss was to Nystrom
14) John Ferguson - Just on what i've read this guy can count his losses on one hand. Would have been in the top 3 in any decade that he played. If there was any tape on him he'd would be more appreciated.
15) Tim Hunter - Very very underrated fighter. Beat Semeneko and had very few bad fights. His worst defeats were probably against Jay Wells.
16) Gordie Howe - If any Gordie's fights were on tape you younsters would appreciate him more. He was as feared as Gillies was, maybe more. Fred Shero was once quoted as saying "in the last 10 years of Gordie's career in the NHL nobody even challenged him".
17) Dan Maloney - Maybe Dan should be higher on the list. Went undeafted in his first 6 years. Another guy who people would rate higher if there was more of his fights avaiable.
18)Paul Holmgren - Doesn't get the credit he deserves from some people but he one of the best and busiest fighters in his time.
19)Craig Berube
20) Orland Kurtenbach - Only Ferguson and Howe may have been better fighters during the 60's. Like Fotiu he boxed more than brawled. Didn't have many losses from what i've read and heard. Though he did lose to Bobby Orr.

Honerable Mention
Link Gaetz - If he played more in the NHL and wasn't such a fuck-up, Link would have been in the top 5 of all time IMO
Terry O'Reilly - Though he had his share of losses, he beat some of the best(Schultz, Gillies, Maloney).
 
Badduke14
superstar
Total Posts: 4786
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-10-04 11:03 PM - Post#304653    


    In response to the hammer

Interesting take, I can respect that. Nice write ups as well.
One thing though; I'm not a big fan of a hockey writer stories about fighting, because you just have to look & read some of the writer's opinion on who they have as a top 10 or best fighters of ..pick an era. Alot of them, aren't into this "hobby" as much as we are, & I think many of their "top lists" are usually way off.
Just my opinion.
David Jesiolowski: Likeable balding WHL gonk. (Napes)


 
merlin401
captain
Total Posts: 834
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-10-04 11:15 PM - Post#304659    


    In response to Badduke14

Quote:


I don't think "fear" should be taken into consideration because "fear alone" isn't gonna win you many bouts. As for style, it's what works for you, & if Brashear's style is so lame, why can't anyone adopt his style & clearly beat him? Brashear has KO power, great strength & stamina, all important qualities needed to be an elite enforcer, along with a very strong fight card & willingness to go, mostly in his first 4 seasons, but he's kept to at least 10 per season over the last 4 or so years. Not alot, but more than some.





A few points of rebuttle:

* Of course fear should be taken into consideration! You say fear wont win you fights, and maybe that is true (except it may make your opponents more defensive). But I say, what good is fighting if it doesn't generate fear? For a show, for somethign to do? An enforcers job is to bring fear and I believe most of the greatest enforcers created it (either 'i'm going to break your face' fear like Brown or Kocur or 'what the hell is this nutcase going to do next' fear like Semenko or Domi perhaps, or at least 'better not wake this giant cause he'll pummell us' fear like Gillies or Playfair). Yes fear is important. Its an important goal of an enforcer, and one that Brashear does not bring enough of for his capability.

* I won't call Brashear's style lame. I've never contributed to his bash thread here. It works for him, good for him. But its not threatening, not intimidating, not fear-inspiring, and not worthy to stand next to someone with a "better" style such as, say, Grimson. Also its never been copied because he's stronger than almost everyone.

* Brashear does have KO power, great stamina, and strength. I wish he'd use it toe-to-toe and not act afraid of being hit. Imagine if he drilled people like he did to Peat this year all season long...he'd be a legend.

* "willingness to go"... now thats got to be a joke?? His first few years we should not count because he wasn't that good. Since he has been the antichrist of "willingness to go." All his turn-downs, fake glove drops and turtles to draw penalties... to me that is a serious detractor from an overall fighter's record. And 10 fights a year is nothing, honestly, especially considering that at least HALF of those are crap fights.
 
Fubu
hall of famer
Total Posts: 6493
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-10-04 11:27 PM - Post#304664    


    In response to the hammer

Hike, BullDog, and Hammer: I love Cochrane, but all of you guys put him pretty high. I never thought of him as an elite fighter, or one of the best of the best. He's probably one of the most exciting fighters, and a great fighter no doubt, but I'd have a hard time ranking him near the top ten all time. Just curious why you guys are placing him so high?

And since I took the time to critique your guys' lists, I'll add one of my own which will likely be worse than anyone's. Just some of the guys I think were the toughest all time. And this is just based on guys I think are tough regardless of card, number of fights, power, length of prime, bad losses, etc. It's a list of guys I think could fight anyone and come out all right, and is in no particular order:

Brown, Kocur, Wilson, Twist, Probert, Gaetz, McSorely, Domi, Jonathan, Fotiu, Gillies, Schultz, Ray, Ferguson (just based on what I have read), Simon, O'Reilly, Maloney (based on what I've read in publications and a bit of what I read from Espo and the rest of the LA crew), Cochrane (okay, but not near the top ten - I'd put Gaetz over him to be honest), Williams, Miller, and Semenko.

Notable omissions: Kordic (never thought much of him), and Playfair (never saw much of him), along with Nystrom (he'd probably just miss), Crowder, and Gassoff (only saw about two or three of his fights). I'm probably missing someone else. Also, current guys that have a chance to be a top fighter (in my mind) including Brashear, Worrell, Parker, Cairns, and Laraque.

Obviously my list is a little biased toward the 80's and 90's, and I'm sure I am leaving out some guys that played on the west coast - Hunter, etc - simply because I don't know enough about them. Basically, I think some guys deserve a top fighter status because of power (Ray), ability to take a punch like no other (Domi), what they did for the game (Ferguson and Schultz), dominance (Probert), inner toughess (Williams), and a whole lot of factors. I wouldn't rank each according to the same set of standards. That kind of makes the entire process a little boring. If I see a guy fight and he looks like a fighter (not just someone who is going to outland an opponent) I like him.
 
Badduke14
superstar
Total Posts: 4786
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-10-04 11:30 PM - Post#304666    


    In response to merlin401

You can't discount his willingness to go in his first 4 seasons because he wasn't that good. The FACT IS he did go, often & I'm sure he led the league or was second in majors in 97-98. Sure that was a while ago, but rarely does an enforcer ,as they age fight more often. He does have some decent skill & wants to play more than the role of just a goon. Sure his fights declined but so did Odjick, McCarthy, Laraque, Domi, etc...these guys didn't or aren't racking up 19-20 majors per season.
As for the fake gloves drop, or skating away, yes, not a good sign, but that doesn't take away the FACT that he DOES NOT LOSE very often.
On the fear thing...Yes some guys were feared more than others, but that isn't gonna win you a lot of fights, if it did, Twist & Kocur would be undefeated.
David Jesiolowski: Likeable balding WHL gonk. (Napes)


 
Posux
Senior Vet
Total Posts: 31533
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 01:17 AM - Post#304697    


    In response to Badduke14

Probert
Brown
Wilson
Gillies
Fotiu
Playfair
Nystrom
Kocur
Hunter
Jonathan
Semenko
Miller
Domi
Wensink
Twist
Domi
Bridgman
Grimson
Holmgren
Nilan


 
chaser
hall of famer
Total Posts: 8410
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 01:34 AM - Post#304704    


    In response to Posux

Duke, I also look at the card and the win/lost ratio when doing a top 20 list..

Let me ask you this.. Out of 10 fights how do you see Brashear doing with a PRIME Twist and Kocur.. These are two guys I have rated higher then him purely because I feel if they went with Brash 10x they would have more wins. Just my opinion.
THE ORIGINAL CHASER!!


 
Posux
Senior Vet
Total Posts: 31533
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 01:50 AM - Post#304706    


    In response to chaser

Chaser: It's win/loss!


 
shanny14
all star
Total Posts: 1486
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 04:17 AM - Post#304729    


    In response to Posux

Here's mine:

1 Probert
2 Brown
3 Fotiu
4 Wilson
5 Gillies
6 Schultz
7 Kocur
8 Nystrom
9 McSorley
10 Domi
11 Playfair
12 Bridgman
13 Twist
14 Grimson
15 Semenko
16 Jonathon
17 Hunter
18 Nilan
19 O'Reilly
20 Kordic


 
Bridgman
Senior Vet
Total Posts: 9382
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 05:34 AM - Post#304734    


    In response to shanny14

Good read guys.

Badduke, you mention Langdon's stamina. I like Langdon a lot so my comments aren't a knock on him.

Where did stamina get him in multiple fights with Grimson? Grimson is a throwback to the old time fighters. I know 2 fights at least Grimson owned him and my memory, the Hartford fight is Langdon's biggest loss. I honestly don't see Langdon doing well against a Brown. I see Fotiu actually murdering him and I see him outpunched and outlasted!

Another rebutt-longevity of a fight. Bridgman-Nystrom, Dudley-Kelly, the list goes on and on.

But your right about conditioning. Today's guys are behemoths and conditioned 20x over the older guys. Does that make Jay Caufield a threat? Look at the UFC, do the big conditioned guys always do well?

The heart and passion of the 70's and 80's guys overwhelm the conditioning of the new guys. You're going to tell me Laraque in 2003-04 looked like he could hang with anyone in my top 10? He's 5 years in the NHL and washed up. Brashear's lack of passion in many fights is pathetic. He's a shadow though of McKenzie. The more and more I watch Brashear(PHI) puss out and hold onto a primed Worrell(FLA) is a stamping over and over of a label I put on him. Probert pussed out ONCE against Brownie and never did that again in his career.

I put Domi in my top 20 and he's moving up fast. Jonathan right around 20-23.

Badduke, I know you said your lists change but who's roughly in your top 10?


 
Hike
Veteran
Total Posts: 6905
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 06:34 AM - Post#304747    


    In response to Bridgman

I'll bite, LOL.

Comparing these guys outside of their eras is really an exercise in futility, but since it came up, what the hell.

We are talking about two entirely different games. Players such as Gillies, Wilson, Playfair, and many of the others late 70/early 80 fighters were players that could fight, and not fighters that could play. These guys were called upon to do much more than just fight. They were solid players and skated regular shifts.

Guys like Gillies, Playfair, Holmgren, Maloney, Plett, and Wilson weren't just fighters. These guys made all-star squads.

Even the Wensink's, Jonathan's, Howatt's, and Nystrom's skated regular shifts and contributed more to their teams than just fighting.

Maybe today's guys are better conditioned, but most of them log 30 seconds of ice time a game while those guys I mentioned were logging 15-20 minutes and still fighting. I give them much more credit for that than I do these guys who skate one 30 second shift, drop their gloves for their one obligatory fight, and than don't see the ice for the remainder of the game.

Playfair, Gillies, Wilson, these guys were not just great fighters and solid hockey players, they were also great intimidators. In the era they played in, intimidation was as much a part of the game as scoring. Without intimidation, fighting means nothing. And in the current game, intimidation has been completely eliminated. It wasn't always that way.

In their era, it wasn't the fights and brawls that made hockey great, it was the passion, the intensity of the game and thought that anything could, and often did, happen. When fighters are taking regular shifts and something could happen at any time, that's interesting, exciting hockey. That was the very fabric of what made hockey great and that's what is missing from today's game.

When you talk about enforcers being impact players I think more in the mode of a Gillies, a key contributor to 4 Stanley Cup winners, an all-star player, and a feared enforcer. You want to talk about enforcers being impact players, look at Bobby Nystrom. Had a fight, a ten-minute misconduct, and scored the cup winning goal in overtime of game 6.

Badduke mentions these giant, well-trained, professional fighters of today against those small, ill-trained, out of shape fighters of the 70's. Lets take Brashear. How can anyone not see that a fighter like Behn Wilson wouldn't stand a chance against this monster? Worrell against Playfair? You can't be serious if you think Playfair belongs in the same class of fighter as Worrell. Worrell would simply dominate Playfair. Parker and Fotiu? Total mismatch. Parker would dispense of Fotiu in no time. Laraque vs Gillies? That one is laughable. What other "Giants" do we have today. I guess Cairns belongs in that class. So we can match up Cairns with Holmgren. What chance would a guy like Holmgren really have with as skilled a fighter as Cairns.

I really can't see how anyone can claim that Brashear, Worrell, Laraque, Parker, or Cairns would cruise through the fighters of the 70's. Does anyone really think Worrell or Brashear would dominate any one of those fighters mentioned above? Who wins those matchups? I really don't know, but I sure wouldn't be able to say that today's group would dominate the 70's group. IMO, the top 10 or 15 fighters from the 70's could certainly fight in any era, including todays.

While maybe most would concur that the top fighters of the 70's, (Fotiu, Gillies, Playfair, Wilson) could compete with the bigger fighters of today. The major disagreement seems to be with the "smaller" fighters of the 70's; guys like Gassoff, Nystrom, Jonathan, Bridgeman, Battleship Kelly, Maloney, etc.. Gassoff and Jonathan were of similar stature to Domi, and Domi has done pretty well for himself against some of the bigger fighters. Yet, I don't necessarily think Domi is better than either Gassoff or Jonathan, or even John Ferguson for that matter.

Guys like Bridgeman, Maloney, Kelly, Nystrom, and O'Reilly are of similar size to Langdon and Laus. Langdon and Laus have been competitive with the current crop of heavy's and have been consistently competitive for several years now. And again, I don't really think that Laus and Langdon are any better than Nystrom, Maloney, Bridgeman or O'Reilly. Therefore, if the "smaller" fighters of today can compete with the big boys, I would think that those fighters of similar stature in the 70's could also compete.

I'd venture to guess that these "smaller" fighters would do as well as, or maybe even better than, Laus, Langdon, and Domi. Maybe not contend for the title, but they really weren't title contenders back in the 70's either. Well, outside maybe of Maloney contending in the very early 70's.

I've said it before and I continue to feel that way, that the best of any era could compete in any era. That goes for the best of the 70's, 80's, and 90's

To me, the 70's game was so much better and the fights were just much more real. Players fought for pride, team, jobs, and most often because they were just pissed.

I think another reason alot of us prefer the 70's brand of hockey is because back than all players were expected to stand up for themselves. If a player was to throw a cheap shot, that was the player that was held accountable, not the other teams designated heavyweight.

Another difference is that most everyone could, or would, at least have to fight back than. As a comparison, the 3 best offensive defensemen back than were Orr, Park, and Potvin. All three were not just offensive defensemen, they were all physical and all could fight. How would they compare fight wise with the 3 best offensive defensemen in today's game? Just pointing out one aspect, in the 70's you had to be able to play and take care of yourself, unlike todays game.

Guess what I'm trying to say is that both the 70's and 80's were good years for hockey fans. Just that toward the latter stages of the the 80's, more second rate goons entered the league and that padded alot of fight cards.

Those of us that were there in the 70's witnessed the very best, most exciting hockey ever played. Those that missed out on it, I feel bad for you, but at least you got to see the 80's.
When you have bacon and eggs for breakfast, the chicken makes a contribution, but the pig makes a committment


 
ILB
superstar
Total Posts: 4270
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
 
08-11-04 06:42 AM - Post#304748    


    In response to Hike

Great post Hike and I agree with alot of your points.

This has been a great thread so far so please keep up the excellent debate guys - Its been really interesting to see which qualities that some people emphasize when they rank the "best" fighters of all time, and how the comparison of different time and playing eras plays a factor in each individual list. To those who have posted their top 20 list thank you, and to those who have yet to post their top 20 (BADDUKE ) please do so... Your input could help make this one of the most authorative lists of top 20 fighters ever compiled.
"The Hand is fine, I got a shot of chromosome yesterday."

John Kordic on the status of his hand.


 
 Page 3 of 20 « First<3456>» Last
Icon Legend Permissions & Sharing Options Topic Options
Print Topic


73917 Views
Follow
51 Online Now
3 viewable users and 2 hidden plus 46 guests are online now.
Ad
FusionBB™ Version 3.2 | ©2003-2017 InteractivePHP, Inc.
Execution time: 0.328 seconds.   Total Queries: 348   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT-5). Current time is 02:01 PM
Top