Following are links to articles about Cunningham's blocking from his college days. Also, the Patriots were heavy with halfbacks. Cunningham was their blocker. So, he did not get the heavy workload of some of the others that you mentioned. And you arbitrarily picked "Top Ten". Who says that is the number anyway? There are a number of forums/blogs from Pats fans that compare Cunningham to Lorenzo Neal as a blocker. That's not an ok blocker. That's a GREAT blocker. So, no, he won't get the huge rushing numbers. But, the backs behind him DID. And Cunningham still managed to put together enough yards to be the team's all-time rusher. If you want to look at stats, look at what these other runners did? Yes, they had John Hannah, but who else? The Bam was clearing the way for his boys. Here and here
<< <i>Following are links to articles about Cunningham's blocking from his college days. Also, the Patriots were heavy with halfbacks. Cunningham was their blocker. So, he did not get the heavy workload of some of the others that you mentioned. And you arbitrarily picked "Top Ten". Who says that is the number anyway? There are a number of forums/blogs from Pats fans that compare Cunningham to Lorenzo Neal as a blocker. That's not an ok blocker. That's a GREAT blocker. So, no, he won't get the huge rushing numbers. But, the backs behind him DID. And Cunningham still managed to put together enough yards to be the team's all-time rusher. If you want to look at stats, look at what these other runners did? Yes, they had John Hannah, but who else? The Bam was clearing the way for his boys. Here and here >>
So now it is what they did in college? lol
I'm not saying he never blocked, but he wasn't used primarily as a lead blocker. I'll look at the gametape I have again to confirm though. I mean if he was, that is proof that he belongs on an all-time great set? I guess my response to this would be, that if he was as GREAT as you say running the football, why wouldn't they give him the ball more? Maybe it was due to his chronic fumbling.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Jason - I do not mean to imply that you are pining for AFL players. I am just pointing out the issues between the eras. I think this is an interesting topic with lots of back and forth. Please don't take it he wrong way. - Kevin
This is not an all-time NFL set, it's an all-time Patriots set.
Collecting PSA graded Steve Young, Marcus Allen, Bret Saberhagen and 1980s Topps Cards. Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
I give up. If I said the sky was blue there would be an argument. It annoys me. I grow weary and tired of the "I've got to be right". It bores me. Cunningham, no Cunningham. Whatever. My life does not revolve around silly arguments, so I will cease to engage in this one.
<< <i>Jason - I do not mean to imply that you are pining for AFL players. I am just pointing out the issues between the eras. I think this is an interesting topic with lots of back and forth. Please don't take it he wrong way. - Kevin >>
Not at all....I think it's safe to say we all agree that it is tough, if not impossible to sensibly compare different eras. So when you have a set that is comprised of a team's entire history, it is important to ensure you are correctly calculating a player's true value and worth to a franchise by looking at what he did in comparison to his contemporaries of his era. Unfortunately, it doesn't make much sense to compare him ONLY to players who played for the same individual franchise during the same era. You would have 300 card team sets.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>This is not an all-time NFL set, it's an all-time Patriots set. >>
And how exactly do you decide which players are worthy and which players are not? Do you compare them ONLY to other Patriots from the exact same era? ONLY vs. Patriots from entirely different eras? I understand what the set is. What I don't understand is how to determine if a player belongs or doesn't belong..Is it just via random memory? Hence the guys with the memorable nicknames get added, but the equally important players at less glamorous positions or without the cool nickname do not? There must be some rhyme or reason, or is it just randomly based on your mood that day?
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>I give up. If I said the sky was blue there would be an argument. It annoys me. I grow weary and tired of the "I've got to be right". It bores me. Cunningham, no Cunningham. Whatever. My life does not revolve around silly arguments, so I will cease to engage in this one. >>
I couldn't agree more with this..lol...I feel the EXACT same way...At times it seems like I am talking to a brick wall, or even multiple brick walls...lol
I thought this issue and debate was over, yet I check the boards and I am being called right back into the mix. I've already said it 100 times. Run the poll, conduct the vote. You want to ruin the set and make it the all 1970's Patriots set, by all means...Have at it...I've tried to interject some reason and logic, just to make sure these issues are being thought through. Because there have been MANY MANY different arguments made for and against Cunningham's addition. And I wish every single Patriots set collector was required to read through those arguments and know the FACTS before voting. That way an accurate poll is conducted.
Please guys, let's move on shall we. Just let us know how the vote turns out.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>This is not an all-time NFL set, it's an all-time Patriots set. >>
And how exactly do you decide which players are worthy and which players are not? Do you compare them ONLY to other Patriots from the exact same era? ONLY vs. Patriots from entirely different eras? I understand what the set is. What I don't understand is how to determine if a player belongs or doesn't belong..Is it just via random memory? Hence the guys with the memorable nicknames get added, but the equally important players at less glamorous positions or without the cool nickname do not? There must be some rhyme or reason, or is it just randomly based on your mood that day?
Jason >>
You compare him against other Patriots. In this case, he is the all-time leading rusher, and he is a member of the team HOF. I have already stated this, why you want me to repeat myself is beyond me. I understand, and believe me, the whole forum understands, this is not enough in your book. You are acting insulted that anyone, and in this case it appears the majority, do not share your opinion. Well guess what Jason, this set has nothing to do about you.
If you can get PSA to remove "all-time" from the set, I will change my opinion in that the all-time leaders should be a part of it. Likewise, if you can get them to include "Jason's" I will agree with you they do not fit your level of greatness.
Collecting PSA graded Steve Young, Marcus Allen, Bret Saberhagen and 1980s Topps Cards. Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
You compare him against other Patriots. In this case, he is the all-time leading rusher, and he is a member of the team HOF. I have already stated this, why you want me to repeat myself is beyond me. I understand, and believe me, the whole forum understands, this is not enough in your book. You are acting insulted that anyone, and in this case it appears the majority, do not share your opinion. Well guess what Jason, this set has nothing to do about you.
If you can get PSA to remove "all-time" from the set, I will change my opinion in that the all-time leaders should be a part of it. Likewise, if you can get them to include "Jason's" I will agree with you they do not fit your level of greatness. >>
What other Patriots? From other eras? Which others have posted in this thread how difficult if not impossible to compare players from different eras? This is where I lose the logic. Obviously logic doesn't have a place in this debate. You are gung ho to add one guy, yet completely silent on why other players with similar Patruot resumes from different eras.
Certainly not my set. How many times do i need to tell you to go make your vote an let the collectors decide? Of course since you'd rather argue than the sky is blue you don't read that part. Won't hurt me one bit if you add 50 new players/cards to your set. I don't collect the set anymore, as most of these sets jumped the shark thanks to many sets of rose colored glasses who joined. Suckle on Sam Bam all you want. Add a guy who isn't even a top 10 player at his position from his own playing days. Let's mark this date and revisit a couple of years from now and see what the set looks like and how many collectors are still interested in collecting it. I'm sure you could care less, but here I am the one being called selfish with my view of who belongs.
Typical moronic fandom. Sad and somewhat pathetic.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Typical Jason reply, someone doesn't agree and he has to throw insults.
Every team's all-time leading rusher, all-time leading passing and all-time leading receiver, should be part of the all-time sets, in my opinion. That's hardly a moronic statement, nor is in an invitation for 50 others to join. I would even agree the all-time leading scorers, which are usually going to be kickers, should be included.
Can one argue there are players with similar careers? Of course they could, one could make the same arguement with many Pro Football Hall of Fame selections, but there is a difference in similar and leading.
Collecting PSA graded Steve Young, Marcus Allen, Bret Saberhagen and 1980s Topps Cards. Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
<< <i>Every team's all-time leading rusher, all-time leading passing and all-time leading receiver, should be part of the all-time sets, in my opinion. That's hardly a moronic statement, nor is in an invitation for 50 others to join. I would even agree the all-time leading scorers, which are usually going to be kickers, should be included. >>
These are the Pats All-Time Leaders Passing- Tom Brady ** in the Set** Rusher- Sam Cunningham (Not in the Set) Recieving-Stanley Morgan **in the Set** Leading Scorer -Adam Vanatieri **in the Set**
Cunningham should be part of this set, I don't care if he fumbled 100 times, he's the franchise all-time leading rusher and in the teams HOF. I guess that doesn't count!!!! I'm not a Pats fan, but I did grow up in New England (Maine) I saw and been to a lot of Pats games in my time. Cunningham had a lot of intangibles you don't teach on the football field, but does carry over to the locker room. I believe the people collecting the Patriots all-time set will vote Sam in.
"EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY IT SAYS IT RIGHT THERE ON THE WALL" - JACKIE MOON
<< <i>Cunningham should be in plus I really like his nickname, "Sam Bam." Does it get any cooler than that? This may be adding fuel... >>
Apparently, that's all you NEED! lol
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>I have changed my opinion. The All Time leading rusher SHOULD be included in this set of a 50 year old Franchise. >>
Me too. I agree as well. With a nickname like Bam, and the great memories of his 49 fumbles vs. his 49 TDs, who cares if the all-time franchise leader only has 5,400 yards over the last 50 years!
Let's start the VOTE SAM BAM movement to make sure this guy gets added...What kind of set is this when you are missing a guy with 1 career Pro Bowl! I mean the Patriots franchise themselves where so into this dude, they only waited 28 years to put him in the Patriots Hall of Fame...Slam dunk if I've ever seen one...
I'm gonna start the set just to make sure he gets the proper vote!
Thanks for teaching me all about Sam Bam. Without this message board, I'd still be thinking that Steve Grogan was the all-time leading rusher.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
He may have had 49 fumbles but those were always on drives when they didn't score anyway. When the Pats did score, it was often Sam Bam diving over the middle. I've never seen a player in full gear jump like that guy. He even did it in cold weather, which can be tough for a guy that played college ball in a warmer climate.
<< <i>He may have had 49 fumbles but those were always on drives when they didn't score anyway. When the Pats did score, it was often Sam Bam diving over the middle. I've never seen a player in full gear jump like that guy. He even did it in cold weather, which can be tough for a guy that played college ball in a warmer climate. >>
Sounds like the greatest RB in Patriots history to me. Why isn't he on the set already? I won't bother posting the number of times he was stuffed inside the 3 yard line. Don't want those 27 stuffs to affect the vote here.
Although. Since the Patriots franchise that he played for made him wait 28 years before putting him in their own HoF, we need him on this All-Time Patriots set NOW! It's an invalid set without the franchises all-time rushing leader and winner of best nickname. I wonder if we could get PSA to label the card as Sam Bam Cunningham on the set? How cool would that be? Email Gayle and ask.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>He may have had 49 fumbles but those were always on drives when they didn't score anyway. When the Pats did score, it was often Sam Bam diving over the middle. I've never seen a player in full gear jump like that guy. He even did it in cold weather, which can be tough for a guy that played college ball in a warmer climate. >>
Sounds like the greatest RB in Patriots history to me. Why isn't he on the set already? I won't bother posting the number of times he was stuffed inside the 3 yard line. Don't want those 27 stuffs to affect the vote here.
Although. Since the Patriots franchise that he played for made him wait 28 years before putting him in their own HoF, we need him on this All-Time Patriots set NOW! It's an invalid set without the franchises all-time rushing leader and winner of best nickname. I wonder if we could get PSA to label the card as Sam Bam Cunningham on the set? How cool would that be? Email Gayle and ask.
Jason >>
I believe we have regressed to our grade school days on this thread.
<< <i> I believe we have regressed to our grade school days on this thread. >>
That happened LONGGG ago. So now, we all just need to agree instead of giving opinions. Really unsure why the OP even asked. Let's just rah-rah cheer the guy on and vote him to the set already.
Continuing to discuss it is futile. Just let it go man, let it go.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I agree that my comment was grade-school level. Just having fun in between my real work. Jason has put in a lot more work than I on this project and I respect the commitment. This thread was for more enjoyable than some of the others on the board. - Kevin
<< <i>I agree that my comment was grade-school level. Just having fun in between my real work. Jason has put in a lot more work than I on this project and I respect the commitment. This thread was for more enjoyable than some of the others on the board. - Kevin >>
Absolutely...FYI, I took no offense what so ever. If guys can't laugh about all this, they have more serious issues to deal. No worries on this end Kevin.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I don't collect many registry sets other than the local teams, just because its a little too competitive for my taste. But, I have thought a little about all of the individual team sets, and especially now with how they are incorporated into one large all time set, and why couldn't there be some very static rules, that could apply equally across the board, and be relatively fair for everyone involved.
Obviously teams are all different ages. Chiefs vs Panthers for example. So, the Chiefs have a much larger selection to draw from simply because they've been around longer. Adopt a format, based on years of existance, and allot a number of cards to their set. Sure, in the Chiefs case, that means they aren't going to have 33 players in their set and the Joe Delaney's get pruned. But, as the team ages, whats to say they don't hit the next age bracket and have a card added to their total?
So, an expansion team like the Panthers or Jags could have, I don't know, 4 or 5 cards in their set. As the years go by, they hit another age bracket and have a card(s) added? It gets voted on by all contributing collectors to see who the players are to fill the new slots. It could even be voted on each year to replace questionable selections that are currently on the all time team sets. Of course this would cause the smaller sets to be more volatile, until they become more "established", but all of these subjective sets are works in progress anyway.
Its just a thought, and would need alot of tuning, but it would give a sense of a static value to the team sets, that would hopefully allow only the best of each team to get selected. Maybe there is a guy on the Cowboys that doesn't make the final cut that would be on 31 other team sets had he played there, but thats the breaks, no? If someone like me who is a Chiefs collector wants to include Joe Delaney, we can create a Chiefs Ring of Honor set that is based on the teams own HOF, and have that all to itself.
Some good ideas. But question is, who is policing this? PSA is not interested in adding these type of policies on to sets. It would have to be self/policed and unfortunately not everyone who collects these sets is on the mill or on board with these types of ideas. All it would take is one guy not agreeing and requesting different cards and your regulating is not longer possible.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I agree, its probably not a practical solution. I know on the few sets I collect, the subjectiveness is bad and a few of the sets break their own "rules" simply because the contributor didn't have the correct card in his/her collection at the time. They instead submitted what I would call their best-effort card, and it got accepted. So, when it gets proposed to be corrected it gets voted down. Why? Because the original person nixed it so they wouldn't have to update their collection...regardless of making a correct, and otherwise fun, set to pursue.
So with that said, you're absolutely right. There are enough collectors with different tastes to ever really allow a "format" to be developed and followed without PSA itself stepping in and playing dictator.
<< <i>I agree with Vince Wilfork addition to the set...however, why is it his Bowman and not Topps Chrome? >>
I had the same question. Seems like the wrong card was chosen for the set.
Super Bowl XXVIII: Buffalo Bills vs Dallas Cowboys - Running back Emmitt Smith rushed for 132 yards and 2 touchdowns earning Super Bowl MVP honors as the Cowboys defeated the Bills 30-13 to win their second consecutive NFL title.
Comments
<< <i>Following are links to articles about Cunningham's blocking from his college days. Also, the Patriots were heavy with halfbacks. Cunningham was their blocker. So, he did not get the heavy workload of some of the others that you mentioned. And you arbitrarily picked "Top Ten". Who says that is the number anyway? There are a number of forums/blogs from Pats fans that compare Cunningham to Lorenzo Neal as a blocker. That's not an ok blocker. That's a GREAT blocker. So, no, he won't get the huge rushing numbers. But, the backs behind him DID. And Cunningham still managed to put together enough yards to be the team's all-time rusher. If you want to look at stats, look at what these other runners did? Yes, they had John Hannah, but who else? The Bam was clearing the way for his boys. Here and here >>
So now it is what they did in college? lol
I'm not saying he never blocked, but he wasn't used primarily as a lead blocker. I'll look at the gametape I have again to confirm though. I mean if he was, that is proof that he belongs on an all-time great set? I guess my response to this would be, that if he was as GREAT as you say running the football, why wouldn't they give him the ball more? Maybe it was due to his chronic fumbling.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
<< <i>Jason - I do not mean to imply that you are pining for AFL players. I am just pointing out the issues between the eras. I think this is an interesting topic with lots of back and forth. Please don't take it he wrong way. - Kevin >>
Not at all....I think it's safe to say we all agree that it is tough, if not impossible to sensibly compare different eras. So when you have a set that is comprised of a team's entire history, it is important to ensure you are correctly calculating a player's true value and worth to a franchise by looking at what he did in comparison to his contemporaries of his era. Unfortunately, it doesn't make much sense to compare him ONLY to players who played for the same individual franchise during the same era. You would have 300 card team sets.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>This is not an all-time NFL set, it's an all-time Patriots set. >>
And how exactly do you decide which players are worthy and which players are not? Do you compare them ONLY to other Patriots from the exact same era? ONLY vs. Patriots from entirely different eras? I understand what the set is. What I don't understand is how to determine if a player belongs or doesn't belong..Is it just via random memory? Hence the guys with the memorable nicknames get added, but the equally important players at less glamorous positions or without the cool nickname do not? There must be some rhyme or reason, or is it just randomly based on your mood that day?
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>I give up. If I said the sky was blue there would be an argument. It annoys me. I grow weary and tired of the "I've got to be right". It bores me. Cunningham, no Cunningham. Whatever. My life does not revolve around silly arguments, so I will cease to engage in this one. >>
I couldn't agree more with this..lol...I feel the EXACT same way...At times it seems like I am talking to a brick wall, or even multiple brick walls...lol
I thought this issue and debate was over, yet I check the boards and I am being called right back into the mix. I've already said it 100 times. Run the poll, conduct the vote. You want to ruin the set and make it the all 1970's Patriots set, by all means...Have at it...I've tried to interject some reason and logic, just to make sure these issues are being thought through. Because there have been MANY MANY different arguments made for and against Cunningham's addition. And I wish every single Patriots set collector was required to read through those arguments and know the FACTS before voting. That way an accurate poll is conducted.
Please guys, let's move on shall we. Just let us know how the vote turns out.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>
<< <i>This is not an all-time NFL set, it's an all-time Patriots set. >>
And how exactly do you decide which players are worthy and which players are not? Do you compare them ONLY to other Patriots from the exact same era? ONLY vs. Patriots from entirely different eras? I understand what the set is. What I don't understand is how to determine if a player belongs or doesn't belong..Is it just via random memory? Hence the guys with the memorable nicknames get added, but the equally important players at less glamorous positions or without the cool nickname do not? There must be some rhyme or reason, or is it just randomly based on your mood that day?
Jason >>
You compare him against other Patriots. In this case, he is the all-time leading rusher, and he is a member of the team HOF. I have already stated this, why you want me to repeat myself is beyond me. I understand, and believe me, the whole forum understands, this is not enough in your book. You are acting insulted that anyone, and in this case it appears the majority, do not share your opinion. Well guess what Jason, this set has nothing to do about you.
If you can get PSA to remove "all-time" from the set, I will change my opinion in that the all-time leaders should be a part of it. Likewise, if you can get them to include "Jason's" I will agree with you they do not fit your level of greatness.
Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
<< <i>
You compare him against other Patriots. In this case, he is the all-time leading rusher, and he is a member of the team HOF. I have already stated this, why you want me to repeat myself is beyond me. I understand, and believe me, the whole forum understands, this is not enough in your book. You are acting insulted that anyone, and in this case it appears the majority, do not share your opinion. Well guess what Jason, this set has nothing to do about you.
If you can get PSA to remove "all-time" from the set, I will change my opinion in that the all-time leaders should be a part of it. Likewise, if you can get them to include "Jason's" I will agree with you they do not fit your level of greatness. >>
What other Patriots? From other eras? Which others have posted in this thread how difficult if not impossible to compare players from different eras? This is where I lose the logic. Obviously logic doesn't have a place in this debate. You are gung ho to add one guy, yet completely silent on why other players with similar Patruot resumes from different eras.
Certainly not my set. How many times do i need to tell you to go make your vote an let the collectors decide? Of course since you'd rather argue than the sky is blue you don't read that part. Won't hurt me one bit if you add 50 new players/cards to your set. I don't collect the set anymore, as most of these sets jumped the shark thanks to many sets of rose colored glasses who joined. Suckle on Sam Bam all you want. Add a guy who isn't even a top 10 player at his position from his own playing days. Let's mark this date and revisit a couple of years from now and see what the set looks like and how many collectors are still interested in collecting it. I'm sure you could care less, but here I am the one being called selfish with my view of who belongs.
Typical moronic fandom. Sad and somewhat pathetic.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Every team's all-time leading rusher, all-time leading passing and all-time leading receiver, should be part of the all-time sets, in my opinion. That's hardly a moronic statement, nor is in an invitation for 50 others to join. I would even agree the all-time leading scorers, which are usually going to be kickers, should be included.
Can one argue there are players with similar careers? Of course they could, one could make the same arguement with many Pro Football Hall of Fame selections, but there is a difference in similar and leading.
Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
<< <i>Every team's all-time leading rusher, all-time leading passing and all-time leading receiver, should be part of the all-time sets, in my opinion. That's hardly a moronic statement, nor is in an invitation for 50 others to join. I would even agree the all-time leading scorers, which are usually going to be kickers, should be included. >>
These are the Pats All-Time Leaders
Passing- Tom Brady ** in the Set**
Rusher- Sam Cunningham (Not in the Set)
Recieving-Stanley Morgan **in the Set**
Leading Scorer -Adam Vanatieri **in the Set**
Cunningham should be part of this set, I don't care if he fumbled 100 times, he's the franchise all-time leading rusher and in the teams HOF. I guess that doesn't count!!!! I'm not a Pats fan, but I did grow up in New England (Maine) I saw and been to a lot of Pats games in my time. Cunningham had a lot of intangibles you don't teach on the football field, but does carry over to the locker room. I believe the people collecting the Patriots all-time set will vote Sam in.
<< <i>Cunningham should be in plus I really like his nickname, "Sam Bam." Does it get any cooler than that? This may be adding fuel... >>
Apparently, that's all you NEED! lol
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>I have changed my opinion. The All Time leading rusher SHOULD be included in this set of a 50 year old Franchise. >>
Me too. I agree as well. With a nickname like Bam, and the great memories of his 49 fumbles vs. his 49 TDs, who cares if the all-time franchise leader only has 5,400 yards over the last 50 years!
Let's start the VOTE SAM BAM movement to make sure this guy gets added...What kind of set is this when you are missing a guy with 1 career Pro Bowl! I mean the Patriots franchise themselves where so into this dude, they only waited 28 years to put him in the Patriots Hall of Fame...Slam dunk if I've ever seen one...
I'm gonna start the set just to make sure he gets the proper vote!
Thanks for teaching me all about Sam Bam. Without this message board, I'd still be thinking that Steve Grogan was the all-time leading rusher.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>He may have had 49 fumbles but those were always on drives when they didn't score anyway. When the Pats did score, it was often Sam Bam diving over the middle. I've never seen a player in full gear jump like that guy. He even did it in cold weather, which can be tough for a guy that played college ball in a warmer climate. >>
Sounds like the greatest RB in Patriots history to me. Why isn't he on the set already? I won't bother posting the number of times he was stuffed inside the 3 yard line. Don't want those 27 stuffs to affect the vote here.
Although. Since the Patriots franchise that he played for made him wait 28 years before putting him in their own HoF, we need him on this All-Time Patriots set NOW! It's an invalid set without the franchises all-time rushing leader and winner of best nickname. I wonder if we could get PSA to label the card as Sam Bam Cunningham on the set? How cool would that be? Email Gayle and ask.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>
<< <i>He may have had 49 fumbles but those were always on drives when they didn't score anyway. When the Pats did score, it was often Sam Bam diving over the middle. I've never seen a player in full gear jump like that guy. He even did it in cold weather, which can be tough for a guy that played college ball in a warmer climate. >>
Sounds like the greatest RB in Patriots history to me. Why isn't he on the set already? I won't bother posting the number of times he was stuffed inside the 3 yard line. Don't want those 27 stuffs to affect the vote here.
Although. Since the Patriots franchise that he played for made him wait 28 years before putting him in their own HoF, we need him on this All-Time Patriots set NOW! It's an invalid set without the franchises all-time rushing leader and winner of best nickname. I wonder if we could get PSA to label the card as Sam Bam Cunningham on the set? How cool would that be? Email Gayle and ask.
Jason >>
I believe we have regressed to our grade school days on this thread.
<< <i>
I believe we have regressed to our grade school days on this thread. >>
That happened LONGGG ago. So now, we all just need to agree instead of giving opinions. Really unsure why the OP even asked. Let's just rah-rah cheer the guy on and vote him to the set already.
Continuing to discuss it is futile. Just let it go man, let it go.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>I agree that my comment was grade-school level. Just having fun in between my real work. Jason has put in a lot more work than I on this project and I respect the commitment. This thread was for more enjoyable than some of the others on the board. - Kevin >>
Absolutely...FYI, I took no offense what so ever. If guys can't laugh about all this, they have more serious issues to deal. No worries on this end Kevin.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Obviously teams are all different ages. Chiefs vs Panthers for example. So, the Chiefs have a much larger selection to draw from simply because they've been around longer. Adopt a format, based on years of existance, and allot a number of cards to their set. Sure, in the Chiefs case, that means they aren't going to have 33 players in their set and the Joe Delaney's get pruned. But, as the team ages, whats to say they don't hit the next age bracket and have a card added to their total?
So, an expansion team like the Panthers or Jags could have, I don't know, 4 or 5 cards in their set. As the years go by, they hit another age bracket and have a card(s) added? It gets voted on by all contributing collectors to see who the players are to fill the new slots. It could even be voted on each year to replace questionable selections that are currently on the all time team sets. Of course this would cause the smaller sets to be more volatile, until they become more "established", but all of these subjective sets are works in progress anyway.
Its just a thought, and would need alot of tuning, but it would give a sense of a static value to the team sets, that would hopefully allow only the best of each team to get selected. Maybe there is a guy on the Cowboys that doesn't make the final cut that would be on 31 other team sets had he played there, but thats the breaks, no? If someone like me who is a Chiefs collector wants to include Joe Delaney, we can create a Chiefs Ring of Honor set that is based on the teams own HOF, and have that all to itself.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
So with that said, you're absolutely right. There are enough collectors with different tastes to ever really allow a "format" to be developed and followed without PSA itself stepping in and playing dictator.
<< <i>I agree with Vince Wilfork addition to the set...however, why is it his Bowman and not Topps Chrome? >>
I had the same question. Seems like the wrong card was chosen for the set.
Super Bowl XXVIII: Buffalo Bills vs Dallas Cowboys -
Running back Emmitt Smith rushed for 132 yards and 2
touchdowns earning Super Bowl MVP honors as the Cowboys
defeated the Bills 30-13 to win their second consecutive NFL
title.