Q: In the book, you name the Top 100 players of all-time. Your No. 1 player is Don Hutson, the WR. How difficult is it to compare guys from the 30s and 60s to guys in the 1990s? Isnt it impossible because they are three completely different eras?
A: If you sat down and asked a very big baseball fan, who is the best baseball player of all-time? I dont know that hed say Babe Ruth, but hed be in the discussion. Whenever I say that I think the two best football players of all-time are Don Hutson and Otto Graham, people look at me like I have three heads. Im trying to respect history. Im trying to judge apples with apples. Otto Graham played 10 years of pro football. Seven of those years, he quarterbacked his team to the Championship. Seven of those 10 years, he was the leading passer in his league. You could argue about Joe Montana and say he played against better players and all that stuff, its a fine argument. But the thing that I cant understand is when people dismiss that when Don Hudson retired, when passing was a nascent thing when he retired, he had three times as many touchdowns as anybody else in the first 30 years, and twice as many receptions and yards. His touchdown record lasted until 1989. People totally dismiss that.
Its possible that if we compared everything and talked to people, that everybody, with the exception of me, would say that Jerry Rice is the best receiver of all-time. And quite possibly the best player of all-time. Thats fine. Thats why we all have opinions. I dont begrudge anybody their opinion. But to dismiss Don Hutson as possibly the greatest receiver of all-time would be the same thing as to dismiss the fact that Babe Ruth shouldnt be considered the greatest player of all-time. Or that Gordie Howe shouldnt be considered the greatest hockey player of all-time.