NFL Network's list of top ten Steelers of all time (1 Viewer)

[Tau837]

Wow. Very surprising to me about Webster. He was 1st team All Pro 5 times. He started 150 straight games at center for the Steelers during a span that definitely included the last two Super Bowl wins in the 1970s, and I think he also started for their second Super Bowl win, but I'm not sure where to find that info. He was one of two centers on the NFL's 75th Anniversary team (with Mel Hein), and the only Steeler to make that team on offense. He made both the 1970s and 1980s All Decade teams. To me, he is a nobrainer. It's really hard for me to believe, for example, that anyone would rank Hines Ward higher than Webster. IMO that is crazy talk.

It's an interesting debate but I think you're selling Hines short. He's been the face of the team for most of the past decade. He's 8th all-time in receptions. He'll likely finish 2nd in career postseason receptions, he owns a Super Bowl MVP and has all the intangibles Webster had (toughness, durability, leadership).

I could not disagree more with this. I can only assume it is the recency effect, with Ward still playing and Webster retired for 20 years. But it's really not close.First off, I disagree that Ward has been the face of the team for most of the past decade. IMO Bettis and Roethlisberger and Polamalu have been the faces of the team moreso than Ward. Certainly, Ward is not a Peyton Manning like guy where you always thought of him first when you think of the Steelers during his playing career.

But that's really not what is important here. The crux of the matter is this: Webster is viewed by everyone to be one of the few best of all time at his position, possibly *the* best of all time. Ward is not viewed by anyone other than possibly Steelers fans as one of the few best WRs of all time.

This point is backed by the honors each of them has received. Ward doesn't come close to Webster there. His Super Bowl MVP and 4 Pro Bowls do not come close to comparing to Webster's 5 1st Team All Pro selections, 9 Pro Bowls, two All Decade team selections, and NFL 75th Anniversary team selection.

It is also arguable that a dominant center is more valuable than a dominant WR.

I respect Ward a lot. There is no slight in not ranking in the top 10 Steelers of all time. Look at the names on the list. I'm sorry, he just doesn't merit being up there. IMO he would be in the next 5.

Really not close? Ward holds ever major Steelers receiving record in the regular and postseason (ahead of two HOFers) and ranks among the all-time NFL leaders in numerous categories. He also has a Super Bowl MVP. This is a list of all-time Steelers not who's the best at their position in NFL history. Webster was a HOF player and an all-time great center but I don't believe his impact was equal to that of Hines Ward. The NFL Network had Ward ahead of Webster so I'm not exactly on a limb here.

I really don't think it's close, and I'm extremely surprised that you disagree. The fact that Ward is better than Swann and Stallworth doesn't carry much weight with me... I don't have either of them in my top 10 either. Your comment that Ward ranks among the all-time NFL leaders in numerous categories also doesn't carry as much weight with me, since there were too many of his WR peers that were better year in, year out as well as overall... which wasn't an issue with Webster, who was quite clearly the best of his era.As for the fact that the NFL Network ranked Ward higher, that doesn't carry much weight with me. They have done a number of features that were substantially off base IMO (e.g., the recent top 100 players series).

I guess at this point I will agree to disagree.

 

[Tau837]

no knock against Webster but many believe he's not even the Steelers best center ever.

It's hard for me to use an article like the one you posted to draw any conclusions about whether or not Dawson was better than Webster. Most of those quoted in the article had a bias from playing with or coaching Dawson. The guard quoted played with Dawson in his prime, but played with Webster at the end of his career. I'd imagine that if the writer of that article polled teammates and opponents from Webster's prime, you'd get just as many superlative quotes about him.The only thing the article really highlights is how athletic Dawson was, and that he was perhaps the most athletic center to ever play. But does that make him the best? Does that make his career the best?

They have comparable honors and awards, but Webster made a strong contribution to multiple Super Bowl championships. That's a huge factor that does not work in Dawson's favor.

Bottom line, if the general belief is that Dawson is the best ever, why has he been waiting for 5 years to get in? I think he deserves it, and I would vote him in this year. But his wait doesn't seem to support your viewpoint.

Obviously you're entitled to your opinion but I think it's illogical to site the importance of synthetic AV scores at one point in this thread and later question the opinions of reputable contemporaries that played, coached or covered the players. Chase Stuart had an interesting piece on AV Scores, centers and Dirt Dawson. Here's a clip.

Dawson's career AV grade is 83, which probably underrates how good he was. Dawson rarely played on good offenses, which tends to cap how much AV a player can earn. Twenty-nine of the 39 first-team All-Pro centers named by the Associated Press since the merger played on teams that finished in the top in the league in scoring. Dawson was the center named in four of those other ten occasions, and he played on by far the worst scoring team ('98 Steelers) of any AP first-team All-Pro center. While one could argue that the Steelers lack of offensive success is evidence that Dawson was overrated and was earning his accolades based on reputation, I think the more likely argument is that Dawson's AV score is underrated because he was snapping to Kordell Stewart and Mike Tomczak.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=5273

I don't see the issue with referring to AV and questioning whether Bill Cowher, Rod Woodson, et al are objective when they say Dawson was the best center ever. Perhaps you can explain the illogical part.As for AV, I said from the outset that it is not a perfect metric for ranking players. The post you quoted alludes to one reason why. However, the gap between Webster's career AV with the Steelers and Dawson's career AV is substantial enough that I don't see the quoted factor as making up the difference. Yes, Dawson played on a team with a smaller AV pie to divvy up, but he also had fewer quality players to share that pie with in comparison to Webster, who had to share the AV pie with 4 HOFers: Bradshaw, Harris, Swann, and Stallworth. I seriously doubt this issue makes up the gap. (Webster had 135 career AV in 194 starts with the Steelers; Dawson had 106 career AV in 181 starts).

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

no knock against Webster but many believe he's not even the Steelers best center ever.

It's hard for me to use an article like the one you posted to draw any conclusions about whether or not Dawson was better than Webster. Most of those quoted in the article had a bias from playing with or coaching Dawson. The guard quoted played with Dawson in his prime, but played with Webster at the end of his career. I'd imagine that if the writer of that article polled teammates and opponents from Webster's prime, you'd get just as many superlative quotes about him.The only thing the article really highlights is how athletic Dawson was, and that he was perhaps the most athletic center to ever play. But does that make him the best? Does that make his career the best?

They have comparable honors and awards, but Webster made a strong contribution to multiple Super Bowl championships. That's a huge factor that does not work in Dawson's favor.

Bottom line, if the general belief is that Dawson is the best ever, why has he been waiting for 5 years to get in? I think he deserves it, and I would vote him in this year. But his wait doesn't seem to support your viewpoint.

Obviously you're entitled to your opinion but I think it's illogical to site the importance of synthetic AV scores at one point in this thread and later question the opinions of reputable contemporaries that played, coached or covered the players. Chase Stuart had an interesting piece on AV Scores, centers and Dirt Dawson. Here's a clip.

Dawson's career AV grade is 83, which probably underrates how good he was. Dawson rarely played on good offenses, which tends to cap how much AV a player can earn. Twenty-nine of the 39 first-team All-Pro centers named by the Associated Press since the merger played on teams that finished in the top in the league in scoring. Dawson was the center named in four of those other ten occasions, and he played on by far the worst scoring team ('98 Steelers) of any AP first-team All-Pro center. While one could argue that the Steelers lack of offensive success is evidence that Dawson was overrated and was earning his accolades based on reputation, I think the more likely argument is that Dawson's AV score is underrated because he was snapping to Kordell Stewart and Mike Tomczak.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=5273

I don't see the issue with referring to AV and questioning whether Bill Cowher, Rod Woodson, et al are objective when they say Dawson was the best center ever. Perhaps you can explain the illogical part.As for AV, I said from the outset that it is not a perfect metric for ranking players. The post you quoted alludes to one reason why. However, the gap between Webster's career AV with the Steelers and Dawson's career AV is substantial enough that I don't see the quoted factor as making up the difference. Yes, Dawson played on a team with a smaller AV pie to divvy up, but he also had fewer quality players to share that pie with in comparison to Webster, who had to share the AV pie with 4 HOFers: Bradshaw, Harris, Swann, and Stallworth. I seriously doubt this issue makes up the gap. (Webster had 135 career AV in 194 starts with the Steelers; Dawson had 106 career AV in 181 starts).

We are getting off-base here so this will be my last comment on Webster-Dawson. Set aside the "objectivity" of HOFers and future HOFers Rod Woodson, Bill Cowher and Bill Belichick. Tunch Ilkin was a 14-year NFL O-lineman, two-time Pro Bowler. He played with both Mike Webster and Dirt Dawson. Since retiring in 1993 Tunch has been a broadcaster for the Steelers and also has a consulting business, working with agents to train their young offensive linemen pre-combine and draft. Among those that know the Steelers and also know offensive line play there is nobody more in-tune. I think it's logical to put more weight on his opinion than an AV score that is admittedly misleading.

 

[Sheriff66]

Wow. Very surprising to me about Webster. He was 1st team All Pro 5 times. He started 150 straight games at center for the Steelers during a span that definitely included the last two Super Bowl wins in the 1970s, and I think he also started for their second Super Bowl win, but I'm not sure where to find that info. He was one of two centers on the NFL's 75th Anniversary team (with Mel Hein), and the only Steeler to make that team on offense. He made both the 1970s and 1980s All Decade teams. To me, he is a nobrainer. It's really hard for me to believe, for example, that anyone would rank Hines Ward higher than Webster. IMO that is crazy talk.

It's an interesting debate but I think you're selling Hines short. He's been the face of the team for most of the past decade. He's 8th all-time in receptions. He'll likely finish 2nd in career postseason receptions, he owns a Super Bowl MVP and has all the intangibles Webster had (toughness, durability, leadership).

I could not disagree more with this. I can only assume it is the recency effect, with Ward still playing and Webster retired for 20 years. But it's really not close.First off, I disagree that Ward has been the face of the team for most of the past decade. IMO Bettis and Roethlisberger and Polamalu have been the faces of the team moreso than Ward. Certainly, Ward is not a Peyton Manning like guy where you always thought of him first when you think of the Steelers during his playing career.

But that's really not what is important here. The crux of the matter is this: Webster is viewed by everyone to be one of the few best of all time at his position, possibly *the* best of all time. Ward is not viewed by anyone other than possibly Steelers fans as one of the few best WRs of all time.

This point is backed by the honors each of them has received. Ward doesn't come close to Webster there. His Super Bowl MVP and 4 Pro Bowls do not come close to comparing to Webster's 5 1st Team All Pro selections, 9 Pro Bowls, two All Decade team selections, and NFL 75th Anniversary team selection.

It is also arguable that a dominant center is more valuable than a dominant WR.

I respect Ward a lot. There is no slight in not ranking in the top 10 Steelers of all time. Look at the names on the list. I'm sorry, he just doesn't merit being up there. IMO he would be in the next 5.

I'm not sure if Ward is one of the best 10 Steelers ever, but he's been one of the best 5 or so WRs in his conference at least four times that I can remember.

Exactly. A top 5 AFC WR 4 times... not comparable.

Ward is a top 10 Steeler of all time, he is what Steeler football is all about, stats don't mean anything, he is maybe the most loved Steeler ever. You really have no clue what you're talking about if you're using stats, this isn't FF or a HOF vote(which he will be in, lock it up), this is a Steeler legend with great respect amongst the fanbase. I have issues with the list, Webster not on being my main one, but I would take Troy off to put Webster on, not Ward. Woodson above Blount, even Rod knew it was wrong on the show.