re: In defense of Tommy Casanova

Yeah, I think some of these guys aren't falling into Ivan Drago type hysteria about the supposed superiority of the modern athlete. Take Casanova and the current LSU receiving corp at birth, then raise them to be football players, and it's ludicrous to think that Casanova couldn't cover them.

Just look at the demographics and numbers, and you should see the story. The U.S. population might have been about 40% bigger in 1990 than in 1950, but the relative popularity of football from the 60's and the 00's is probably roughly comparable. Even if you assume the NFL is calling 5 times as many top-notch athletes now as it used to back then, I still don't see how you get to the point of an NFL All-Pro DB not being able to cover LSU's current receivers. That's just absurd.

TC could probably tackle also. Something 90% of modern day defensive backs lack the ability to do.

WRONG BIG CAT. Crag Burns ran back 2 punts.
Casanova ran back only 1 that night, right?

quote:

---

WRONG BIG CAT. Crag Burns ran back 2 punts.
Casanova ran back only 1 that night, right?

---

That is correct, BC.

quote:

---

Are you kidding me......in this day and age the NFL is a league of pussies. You take TO, Plexi-glass, Ocho Cinco, or any other receiver in the league today back to the 70s or 80s and they would get crushed cause they wouldn't be protected by the refs the way that players are now. This is probably even more true for qb's.

---

If this is the type of argument that you are trying to combat, then you have my sympathies.

This is ridiculous. Casanova was 6-2 210 lbs and amazingly fast. How many safeties in the NFL are taller than him? Do u not think Bob Hayes was fast enough to play in todays NFL? How about Paul Warfield? Lynn Swann, John Stallworth? Cliff Branch? Casanova played against all these guys. It is not even debatable Casanova was an athlete who could play in any era up to now and be a star.

This thread should be ended it is not worth debating any more. It is like debating the earth revolves around the sun. It does end of story!

Durand40

I was a co-ed from 1966-1970 and had
the pleasure of watching Tommy Casanova
play. Not only was he an amazing athlete,
he was drop dead gorgeous.

Carry on.

quote:

---

Going back to the 70's would be even worse. Casanova under today's training regemine wouldn't be bad, but he would be second team all SEC.

---

:lol: :lol:

Ok, now let's get serious. It's amazing that some folks actually think this way: Athletes who played in the 60 and 70s or even 80s can't possibly be as good as those today. Sorry, but that is pure bunk. Cassanova's size is, as has been pointed out, on par with today's players. So that argument is out of the window. I think it is pretty obvious that with today's training, he would be among the best today.

Think of it in terms of horse racing. How many "Secretariats" have there been since Secretariat? How long ago was that? Do you think Secretariat couldn't compete in today's racing?

Casanova ran back one for 61 yards and one for 74 yards on that night (December 5, 1970). Beat Ole Miss 61-17. Archie was wearing a cast on his left arm. Burns only had one.