- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Can you spot the NFL HOF Quarterback?
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:11 pm
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:11 pm
Player A - 177 games, 2668-4326, 61.7%, 29,054 yards, 166 td's, 122 int's. One Ring
Player B - 140 games, 1886-3762, 50.1%, 27,663 yards, 173 td's, 220 int's. One ring
Player B - 140 games, 1886-3762, 50.1%, 27,663 yards, 173 td's, 220 int's. One ring
8
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:13 pm to BBATiger
I go with player B cause I think it's Namath
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:14 pm to danfraz
quote:
go with player B cause I think it's Namath
Pretty easy. Player A.......Brad Johnson
Dilfer and Hasselbeck rival Namath's numbers. Most overated player in history ... IMHO.
This post was edited on 1/29/10 at 12:16 pm
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:15 pm to BBATiger
I go with B because if it wasn't, you wouldn't have started the thread
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:15 pm to BBATiger
Namath was all about the Super Bowl game. Everythng else was middle of the road.
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:16 pm to BBATiger
I'm the first to say Joe Namath is overrated and so is his stupid "guarantee" but seriously: :beatdeadhorse:
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:23 pm to BBATiger
quote:
Player A - 177 games, 2668-4326, 61.7%, 29,054 yards, 166 td's, 122 int's. One Ring
Player C - 165 games, 2898-4715, 61.5% 32942 yards, 165 TDs, 141 Ints.
Player A, as stated above, is Brad Johnson. I think this is a more interesting comparison as far as overrated HOF QBs go.
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:26 pm to JEAUXBLEAUX
quote:
Namath was all about the Super Bowl game
17-29 195 yards, 0 td's, 0 int's
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:28 pm to Jamohn
quote:
Player C - 165 games, 2898-4715, 61.5% 32942 yards, 165 TDs, 141 Ints.
Didn't cheat. I'm thinking Griese.
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:34 pm to BBATiger
quote:
Dilfer and Hasselbeck rival Namath's numbers. Most overated player in history ... IMHO.
yes because comparing QBs from eras that are 30yrs apart makes perfect sense in your world
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:35 pm to supatigah
I guess that the rule changes did affect anyones numbers at all.
I would take Griese, Dawson, and Bradshaw over Warner anytime still.
I would take Griese, Dawson, and Bradshaw over Warner anytime still.
This post was edited on 1/29/10 at 12:36 pm
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:36 pm to supatigah
quote:
yes because comparing QBs from eras that are 30yrs apart makes perfect sense in your world
esp without considering how these numbers compare against their contemporaries.
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:40 pm to el tigre
Which player is HOF Sid Luckman whom is considered one of the greatest QBs of all time and which is Kordell Stewart?
Player A
904/1744 51.8% 14686yds 137TD 132INT
Player B
1316/2358 55.8% 14746yds 77TD 84INT
Player A
904/1744 51.8% 14686yds 137TD 132INT
Player B
1316/2358 55.8% 14746yds 77TD 84INT
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:43 pm to supatigah
quote:
yes because comparing QBs from eras that are 30yrs apart makes perfect sense in your world
So is your argument that Namath was great? Please take a stand and submit your case.
I realize the era's a not the same. By the way, the NFL has no trouble comparing Chris Johnson's stats to O J and Dickerson.
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:44 pm to BBATiger
quote:
Player B - 140 games, 1886-3762, 50.1%, 27,663 yards, 173 td's, 220 int's. One ring
Is one of - if not THE- most overrated player in NFL history.
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:49 pm to RandyMarsh
How about this...
122gms 2697 4164 64.8% 30646yds 202tds 110ints 91.9rat
122gms 2697 4164 64.8% 30646yds 202tds 110ints 91.9rat
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:51 pm to BBATiger
quote:
So is your argument that Namath was great? Please take a stand and submit your case.
we already did that here
quote:
I realize the era's a not the same. By the way, the NFL has no trouble comparing Chris Johnson's stats to O J and Dickerson.
the NFL was a run first league since its existence. The Mel Blount rule change in 1978 and the West Coast offenses of the 80s changed the way the game is played. So comparing RBs through the years is much simpler than comparing QBs that played under a different set of rules.
IMHO it was easier to run the ball and pick up yardage in OJ's era than it is now in Johnson's.
ETA:
OJ in 1973
14 games
332 carries
23.7 Attp/G
2003 yards
6.0 Y/A
12 TD
CJ in 2009
16 games
358 carries
22.4 Attp/G
2006 yards
5.6 Y/A
14 TD
This post was edited on 1/29/10 at 12:59 pm
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:53 pm to BBATiger
quote:
Player A - 177 games, 2668-4326, 61.7%, 29,054 yards, 166 td's, 122 int's. One Ring Player C - 165 games, 2898-4715, 61.5% 32942 yards, 165 TDs, 141 Ints. Player A, as stated above, is Brad Johnson. I think this is a more interesting comparison as far as overrated HOF QBs go.
quote:Troy Aikman
Didn't cheat. I'm thinking Griese.
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:55 pm to BBATiger
So Player A passes for 800 more completions and gets only 1300 more yards for those completions.
Different era. Different style of football. Different standard.
Different era. Different style of football. Different standard.
This post was edited on 1/29/10 at 12:56 pm
Posted on 1/29/10 at 12:55 pm to BBATiger
quote:
So is your argument that Namath was great? Please take a stand and submit your case.
I'll take a shot:
1. Namath was the first QB with the extremely quick release. Before him, QBs wound up to throw.
2. Namath played with mediocre WRs. Don Maynard (who had reached his peak by the time Namath arrived) and George Sauer.
3. Namath's early career knee injuries made him a sitting target. His numbers would have been much better if he had been able to move out of the pocket as he often did pre-injuries.
4. Namath played too long. His latter years hurt his career stats. He wasn't that old, but he was physically done two years before he retired.
Page 1 of 5
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News