Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

Hey Guys,

I recently re-read Jack Tatum's book "They Call me Assassin." In it he really doesn't have many flattering things to say about Pittsburgh middle linebacker Jack Lambert. Tatum's opinions of Lambert being overrated got me to thinking. Does anyone out there feel that former Baltimore Colts middle linebacker Mike Curtis was a better MLB than Lambert? Keep in mind the players who comprised the rosters on each of their teams. I'd love to hear your opinions. Thanks!

Sincerely,
Joe Zagorski

I don't think Curtis was a better MLB than Lambert.

In some respects, I think Lambert is underrated. His best years were after the heydey of the Steel Curtain, yet one perception is that Lambert was a product of Joe Greene's and Ernie Holmes' greatness. Watching Lambert play, his best quality IMO was always being around the ball, run or pass. He wasn't a big hitter or really a physical MLB, but he was able to keep blockers off him and diagnose plays quickly. I think Lambert probably had better coverage skills than Curtis, especially later in his career. It would be interesting to compare unofficial tackle numbers between Curtis and Lambert, because it seemed like Lambert was always in on the play.

I never saw Curtis play first-hand. One unique thing about Curtis is that he was an all-pro at both OLB and MLB. I think he freelanced a bit more than other LBs. Comparing his career to Lambert, Curtis had a later start. Lambert was an immediate success. While Lambert's career was cut short with his toe injury in 1984, Curtis' had a pro bowl season at age 31 and then bounced around for a few more years as a serviceable but not remarkable starter. So it looks like Lambert had more "above average" seasons as well as a higher peak in a shorter amount of time.

This is just my opinion, though. Mike Curtis was a great player and I'm sure some people feel he was better than Lambert and should be in the HOF. His autobiography "Keep Off My Turf" is one of the most interesting NFL player books I have ever read. An interesting guy who had an interesting career.

In response to "keeping in mind the players who comprised the rosters", I think the 1971 Colts defense is the most underrated defense of all-time. Curtis had a ton of talent surrounding him from 1968-1971. Jerry Logan and Rick Volk were fine safeties (especially Logan). Ted Hendricks was a HOFer. Bubba Smith was a top player for that period. DTs Fred Miller (Alex Karras favorite) and Billy Ray Smith were very good.

Mike Curtis' book "Keep Off My Turf" was mainly about the 1971 season and the title referred to an incident in a late-season Colt-Dolphin game. A drunken fan ran on the field and scooped up the ball. Curtis ran over and knocked him down. The "fan" was so drunk he was still smiling afterward.

The book was also a counter to the anti-football books that were the rage in the early 70's, "Out of Their League" and "High For The Game." Curtis ripped these books and told how much he liked football.

The Raiders of that era are notorious for their hatred of the Steelers, so it shouldn't come as a surprise that Tatum would make a comment like that.

BD Sullivan wrote:The Raiders of that era are notorious for their hatred of the Steelers, so it shouldn't come as a surprise that Tatum would make a comment like that.

In the book, Tatum ripped Franco Harris (to say nothing of Lynn Swann) more than he did Jack Lambert. He said Franco would "slip or fall, cake out" or "head for the sidelines" to avoid contact. Another one was something like "even Franco Harris could play middle linebacker behind the Steeler front four."

Speaking of Jack Tatum, I recall a telecast of a 1978 Ram-Raider preseason game. Ram RB Wendell Tyler ran right over Tatum on his was to a TD. Incidentally, it was the week after the Darrell Stingley incident.

BD Sullivan wrote:The Raiders of that era are notorious for their hatred of the Steelers, so it shouldn't come as a surprise that Tatum would make a comment like that.

In the 1979 book, Tatum said the perfect QB would be Kenny Stabler's mind in Terry Bradshaw's body...not because Terry was dumb, but because "Stabler is a physical wreck."
He ripped Franco Harris for running out of bounds or slipping and falling when defenders neared. That may have been true, but Franco does move around today much better than Earl Campbell.
His criticism of Lambert was basically that he hid behind the Steel Curtain. He was a good pass defender on his own, but was too undersized and would have been a liliability against the run without the defensive line .
Tatum wrote that some fans would conclude he was biased against Pittsburgh. He defended himself by calling Jack Ham the best OLB in the league, who would have been great even if he had been on the NY Giants

SixtiesFan wrote:

BD Sullivan wrote:The Raiders of that era are notorious for their hatred of the Steelers, so it shouldn't come as a surprise that Tatum would make a comment like that.

In the book, Tatum ripped Franco Harris (to say nothing of Lynn Swann) more than he did Jack Lambert. He said Franco would "slip or fall, cake out" or "head for the sidelines" to avoid contact. Another one was something like "even Franco Harris could play middle linebacker behind the Steeler front four."

Speaking of Jack Tatum, I recall a telecast of a 1978 Ram-Raider preseason game. Ram RB Wendell Tyler ran right over Tatum on his was to a TD. Incidentally, it was the week after the Darrell Stingley incident.

Tatum wrote in his book that he was stunned by Stingley's injury and the following week, he played passively for the first time in his career. I think he mentioned getting run over by Tyler.

Lambert was very good in coverage.

First problem with the comparision is they did not play in their primes at the same time. I think you could make a case that Curtis may have been a bit more versitile since he did start at all three LB positions in his career but that wouldn't make him a better MLB. All things considered I think Lambert was a better MLB but if you switched their situations it wouldn't surprise me if Curtis was in the HOF and Lambert wasn't.

Talent wise they were close, edge to Lambert but I think several other factors help seperate them. I think that Lambert had the benefit of playing in an organization that was much more stable during his career. The only major change was switching to the 3-4 defense in 1982. I think the overall talent around him offensively and defensively during the course of his career was better. Until the end of Lamberts career he was able to stay injury free.

JKelly wrote:First problem with the comparision is they did not play in their primes at the same time. I think you could make a case that Curtis may have been a bit more versitile since he did start at all three LB positions in his career but that wouldn't make him a better MLB. All things considered I think Lambert was a better MLB but if you switched their situations it wouldn't surprise me if Curtis was in the HOF and Lambert wasn't.

Talent wise they were close, edge to Lambert but I think several other factors help seperate them. I think that Lambert had the benefit of playing in an organization that was much more stable during his career. The only major change was switching to the 3-4 defense in 1982. I think the overall talent around him offensively and defensively during the course of his career was better. Until the end of Lamberts career he was able to stay injury free.

Tatum's assessment of Lambert might have been seemingly accurate at the time the book was written, but Lambert's subsequent play disproved it. Before 1979, Lambert had made just one AP 1st Team, and in two other years, he had been selected First Team All Pro by another body .
1979 marked the first of five consecutive seasons where Lambert was a consensus 1st Team All Pro. This was despite a decline in talent around him. By 1979, White was a backup, Holmes was gone, and age and injury had reduced Greene's effectiveness. Jack Ham was never the same player after a toe injury suffered in 1979.