Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

After Kirk Cousins threw his first touchdown pass today, the announcers told us that Cousins is the first Redskin to throw at least one TD in every game -- this despite the fact that Sonny Jurgensen did that in 1967. I wouldn't be at all surprised if somebody saw that Jurgensen did it in 14 games and figured that meant he had two games with no TDs.

Then the wire story on the game offered this gem: "Cousins is likely to lead the NFL with a 69.8 completion percentage. Jurgensen was the only other Washington quarterback to do that, in 1970." Yes, Jurgensen was the only other Washington player to do that, aside from the SEVEN times Sammy Baugh did it.

That's just pathetic, even by the usual standards.

Complete ignorance. I always get frustrated when I hear of these kind of things. Totally pathetic.

Just preface everything they say with "In the Super Bowl era..." and you'll save yourself a lot of frustration.
Maybe add a year or two to your life expectancy...

GRRR...

Speaking of that Baugh fellow (whoever he is); have you guys seen the color film on YouTube of the 1943 game against Detroit where he threw for 4 TDs and had 4 interceptions?

Disgusting!!!

See occ post in John Grasso thread: How Soon They Forget

Just said in reference to Kirk Cousins on the NFL N, "After his best season in Redskins quarterback history...".

The Chicago Tribune published a decade by decade (excluding 1919, of course) history book on the Bears last year.

Bronko Nagurski's entry in their Greatest Running Backs list notes:- "Ran for 2,778 yards in career but longest run was 11 yards"

I wasn't optimistic, but really?!

LJP wrote:The Chicago Tribune published a decade by decade (excluding 1919, of course) history book on the Bears last year.

Bronko Nagurski's entry in their Greatest Running Backs list notes:- "Ran for 2,778 yards in career but longest run was 11 yards"

I wasn't optimistic, but really?!

That's not just ignorance of history, but ignorance of football. It's just not possible.

Funny about how he had those two seasons with seven total rushing TDs but no actual rushing yards at all, though....

Worst I have ever seen is a "football book" that said that the Cleveland Browns were like the little girl with the curl. When they were good they were very good, but when they were bad, they were horrid. An example of this that they used was when they "lost" 56 to 10 in the 1954 NFL championship game. The fact is, Cleveland won that game 56 to 10 against the Detroit Lions.

I can understand using that line for the Browns of the late 1960's that were very good at times, but lost badly to the best teams at times, like 55 to 7 to Green Bay in 1967, or 52 yo 14 to Dallas in a playoff game that same year. There was also a 49 to 13 loss to the Cardinals in 1965, or the 34 to 0 loss to Baltimore in the 1968 NFL championship game (a letdown from the playoff win over Dallas IMO), and the 51 to 3 loss to the Vikings in 1969.

In the Graham era Browns (1946-55) Cleveland maybe let a few game get away from them, but were always tough in championship games, even in games where there were major injuries like in 1952.