it's a combination of everything homie. you can't judge someone on just one stat. you can't judge someone on just stats. this leaves these arguments up to a lot of speculation, but pretty much anyone with any credibility will have Favre in the discussion of top QB's. if you're so knowledgeable and objective like you say you should agree.
So let me get this straight? Elway gets credit for getting to 3 SB's and getting BLOWN OUT in two of them and still losing the 3rd. At the same time, Favre gets no credit for getting to a SB and also losing? He even had a better performance than Elways 3 SB losses and one of his SB wins! And you claim objectivity. It is priceless. You are without a doubt the least "objective" person I've debated with. And that is saying a lot because my two best friends are BRONCO fans. Even they can admit that Favre clearly outplayed Elway in the SB and that Elway came up very short in the "big game" until he had TD to run behind him.
This thread is the sort of gem that we've been missing. It's like the 3rdand15draw vs. junc slugfests of old. :up: Carry on. . . .
It amazes me that junc can bash Favre for getting to the Super Bowl only twice, winning only once, losing in conference championships... And then raise Herm up for playoff appearances.
You are correct it is a combination of many things and that's why I have Favre as an all-time great just not on the short list in the discussion for best ever. There are too many guys that were better than him. Like Winston said, he's not even the best in his era so how is he the best all time? Favre gets credit for getting them to a 2nd SB but the big difference is Elway carried his team, Favre had a great team around him and Favre was a big favorite while in 2 of the 3 SB losses Elways's team was a huge underdog. From 1984-2006 the NFC won EVERY Super Bowl until the Favre led Packers lost in '97. Please shoe me where I have bashed? b/c I don't get on my knees and praise everything the guy does doesn't mean I bashed. bringing up Herm has nothing to do w/ this discussion.
Who cares if he's not the clear-cut best QB in his "era". You could still make a solid argument that he is actually the best in his era. Since many of the QB's in his "era" are up there as all-time greats (ie. Montana, Young, Elway, Aikman, Marino, Manning, Brady, etc.), if Favre was indeed the best in his own era he would likely be the best of all time as well. Of course, there are some pre Favre-era QB's that would be in the discussion as well (ie. Johnny Unitas, Bart Starr, Bradshaw, Staubach, Tarkenton, etc.) but a good majority of great ones played into Favre's time.
A good majority of the ones you saw. Guys like Staubach and Bradshaw who people all to casually forget to mention both of whom were hands down as good as anyone in the current era.
I confess I'm still here pretty much only to piss gasoline on the fire every now and then. There's really no point in trying to really say anything anymore, it just goes into the black hole of reason anyway.
I'm not a huge Elway suck up, for my money Staubach is the best all around QB I ever saw followed by Bradshaw. Montana is a different kind of QB but he and Brady were the best technicians I ever saw. Favre is still in the argument but it's based on longevity. Elway carried at best mediocre teams to SB and when he had good teams way past his prime he won two in a row. Favre went to SB with outright great teams and he was part of them. Elway in his prime was better. No question TD was the big weapon on those Denver teams and I always believe TD deserves to go into the HOF. That said there are people on this board who would argue that Curtis Martin is a much better back than TD. That is essentially the same argument for Favre. Top 5 his entire career, long career but clearly not the best.
yes they are part of that "etc." that i didnt type out. I can name the top QB's of the past 20 years much more quickly than i could ones from 20-40 years ago so i listed more of them
passer rating is cited too often in rating QBs. yes, it is an overrated stat but it does give us somewhat of an indication of QB play. tough to compare QB ratings of today's players vs. those who played before 2003. Those new rules with DBs and WRs has opened the game up more for offenses. So Favre isn't top 10 in QB rating? Who's ahead of him? Guys like Romo, Carson Palmer, Ben Rothlisberger and Jeff Garcia? Does that make them better than Favre? You probably think so.
Oh, I get it. Favre gets less credit because he had too much talent around him when his teams went to the super bowl. LOL yeah....that makes sense. Watch the fuckin' games for fuks sake. Favre made a lot of great throws against the Panthers in the 1996 nfc title game. He threw for 2 TDs and ran for another in the super bowl win over the pats. Good thing he did that, because the Pats defense wasn't allowing GB to eat up clock and move the ball down the field. Brett audibled to the play that ended up being Rison's long TD early in the 1st Quarter. Brett shouldn't get credit though because of the talent around him. Brett threw an absolute stike to Freeman for an 81 yard TD in the 2nd Quarter. If he doesn't hit Freeman perfectly in stride, Free is tackled and who knows if they end up scoring then? But still.....Brett had too much talent around him so he gets no credit for that throw. Brett's mobility in his youth enabled him to get to the outside and outrun defenders for a TD and secure a 13 point halftime lead. But Brett had too much talent around him so athleticism or not, Brett just doesn't deserve any credit for that one. So Desmond Howard won that Super Bowl for Favre? Really? The team had the lead before Desmond scored. Stupid fuckin' claim to say the Pats would have won if not for Desmond. Howard certainly put another nail in the coffin though, and Reggie White sealed it. That's what great teams do. But lets give Brett no credit. Why? Because he had too much talent around him. Oh.....and one more thing. That TD that Desmond scored.........guess who threw the 2 point conversion? Some guy who deserves no credit.
I didn't bring up passer rating, you guys did. comapring against certain QBs who has a better passer rating thsn it's ok to use passer rating but not against those that have a better rating. Why is that?
Maybe I need to make myself a bit more clear on this one since you didn't get it the first two times. If you're going to compare QB ratings, do it between guys of similar eras. Don't compare Favre's rating to Palmer's. Its easier to put up big numbers since the Colts whined about the Pats DBs molesting them. The rules changes happened in 2003 or 2004. Most of Favre's numbers came before those changes. You're trying to knock Favre down a peg or two by citing ratings of a modern day crop of QBs who clearly benefit from the rules changes.
