The next thing to do is look at the next best quarterbacks who were contemporaries of Namath. In other words, the good ones who did not make the Hall of Fame. In alphabetical order- John Brodie... 1957-73, 214 TDs, 224 INTs, 1970 NFL MVP, 2 all-pro seasons, 1 time 1st team all-pro, 2 Pro Bowls Roman Gabriel... 1962-77, 201 TDs, 149 INTs, 1969 NFL MVP, 2 all-pro seasons, 1 time 1st team all-pro, 4 Pro Bowls John Hadl... 1962-77, 244 TDs, 268 INTs, 4 all-pro seasons, 1 time 1st team all-pro, 6 Pro Bowls Jim Hart... 1966-84, 209 TDs, 247 INTs, 1 all pro season, 4 Pro Bowls Charley Johnson... 1961-75, 170 TDs, 181 INTs, 1 all-pro season, 1 Pro Bowl Jack Kemp... 1957, 1960-67, 1969, 114 TDs, 183 INTs, 5 all-pro seasons, 2 time 1st team all-pro, 7 Pro Bowls Daryle Lamonica... 1963-74, 164 TDs, 138 INTs, 1967 AFL Player of the Year, 1969 AFL Player of the Year, 5 all-pro seasons, 2 time 1st team all-pro, 5 Pro Bowls Archie Manning... 1971-84, 125 TDs, 173 INTs, 1 all-pro season, 2 Pro Bowls Don Meredith... 1960-68, 135 TDs, 111 INTs, 1966 Bert Bell Trophy, 2 all-pro seasons, 3 Pro Bowls Craig Morton... 1965-82, 183 TDs, 187 INTs, 1 all-pro seasons Ken Stabler... 1970-84, 194 TDs, 222 INTs, 1974 NFL MVP, 3 all-pro seasons, 2 time 1st team all-pro, 4 Pro Bowls Those are probably the next best 11 who played during the Namath era. You will see most threw more interceptions than touchdowns. These quarterbacks were competing with Hall of Famers Namath, Len Dawson, Fran Tarkenton, Bart Starr, Roger Staubach, Y.A. Tittle, Sonny Jurgensen, George Blanda, Bob Griese, and Johnny Unitas. Still, these 11 non-Hall members noted above won MVP awards and took Pro Bowl spots and all-pro votes from the future Hall of Famers. Yet, these guys, as a group, threw more interceptions than touchdowns. Again, Namath is in the bottom tier of Hall of Fame QBs for me. I would do three tiers. Tier 1 would be Montana, Unitas, Graham, Baugh. Tier 2 would have guys like Starr and Staubach on it. Tier 3 would be for Namath, Jurgensen, Parker and a few others. Namath was not good in TD/INT ratio compared to other top flight QBs. However, he wasn't all that off the mark as evidenced above. It is the Hall of Fame. Namath left an indelible mark on the sport and the league. He is easily top five all-time in the Fame factor. Grange, Sayers, Butkus, Namath, and Montana might be the top five. Somebody could argue Unitas or Rice, but whatever. Namath would not be someone you would remove to make a spot for Unitas or Rice or anybody else. Namath was so great to watch, so good when healthy that he was able to overcome sloppy stats in a couple areas to leave a bigger mark on the sport than Tarkenton and Starr and Dawson, etc.
For his gametime performance, Namath was the most valuable quarterback the Jets ever had. Let the games begin.
I said if he retired immediately after SB II he wouldn't have made it b/c he had only played 4 years, he needed to keep playing regardless of what he did and he was mostly mediocre post SB III so that is proven. Some guys take longer to develop than others, TB became a good QB long before massive rule changes. he made the Hall based on what he meant to the game, not the way he actually performed. It is what I have been saying forever. he belongs in but if it was strictly on performance he'd be nowhere near the Hall w/o a ticket.
so basically he was worse than most of those non HOFers? again, in the Hall in his era only one threw more INTs than TDs and that player didn't make the Hall b/c of his QB abilities.
Namath played five full seasons after the Super Bowl. Included in that was a 1st team all-NFL season (1972), Comeback Player of the Year award (1974), some All-Pro recognition in 1969 (not sure off top of my head whether it was first team or not) and two putrid seasons after his body completely broke down and the team was bad. Bradshaw was not the Steelers QB to start the 1974 season due to poor performance. He played good enough to remain the starter once Gilliam ended up failing, but the Junc Factor (aka TD to INT ratio aka The Only Stat That Matters) indicates that Bradshaw was a Namath-level hack prior to 1978.
What posted above indicates Namath was worse than the 11 Hall of Famers I listed? I see nothing there based on my presentation of the Junc Factor and the awards info. I am not going to get into the era stuff until I see you list the different eras in league history. I am not being a jerk about it. I just need to see how you determine the different eras.
who said that was the only stat that matters? I love when you get flustered. again I was discussing peers, QBs that played around the time of Joe whether the actual era changed or not. you haven't presented any case for Joe other than trying to twist the #s of other QBs that have no relevance to this discussion.
How would you know whether I am flustered or not? I might write with a certain style or tone, but I don't think I've ever actually been mad on the internet in quite a while. Heck, I didn't even say anything to the moderator who banned me from this site for a full year. The old version of me would have started a war when I returned (and then summarily be banned for another two or more years, probably). Anyway, you and I are not actually that way off in our opinions on Namath if you actually analyze these posts. My biggest issue with your Namath opinion is that you make too much of a big deal out of the TD to INT ratio. He did throw some picks that really hurt the Jets, sure. It is for this reason that he was not a 1st ballot Hall of Famer. This issue is also why I rank Namath as one of the lesser Hall QBs. The first tier QBs of the Namath era (which we will define as the exact 13 years of his career) are the ones who made the Hall of Fame. The second tier group have numbers that are not that far off from Namath. Namath rose above them and made the HOF due to Super Bowl 3, his style of play and his fame and what he meant to the sport. He also won enough awards to not make it all about Super Bowl 3 and impact on the sport.
Ahh, but they are relevant. It is like in this day and age, is Ben Roethlisberger only going to be judged against Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, and Tom Brady? If so, he's not going to be a slam dunk enshrinee, his numbers just don't stand up. When you start analyzing the league as a whole and the second tier QBs during the Roethlisberger era, then you will see Roethlisberger is likely a Hall of Famer down the road. Or one can look at the games and realize, like Namath, that Roethlisberger was/is a really good QB and won a title (in B.R.'s case, two so far, of course). Point is, I cannot only compare potential Hall of Famers to other Hall of Famers. I have to analyze when the player played and what the environment was as far as rules, field conditions, home stadium, etc. There are a plethora of factors.
Another way to put all that (and I did write about this yesterday a bit, but in a different way), is to say that you kill Namath for not matching up to the statistical marvels of his time based on one stat (TD to INT ratio). We can all do the same with Roethisberger vs Manning, Brady and Brees. Roethlisberger could be made to look like a piece of shit based on some stats, just like some people like to make Namath look like a piece of shit compared to Starr, Tarkenton, and company. Namath comes out looking really good in YPA and yards per completion. YPA has proven to be the most illuminating stat for the passing game and Namath is good there.
Ben is a lock HOFer , his #s may not be as crazy as some of the other guys but he ahs excellent #s. I am not making a huge deal out of TD to INT ratio just presenting facts. -47 is not good in any era. Namath "rose above" that 2nd tier b/c of his contributions off the field which those others did not have. if it was strictly a #s thing he wouldn't be in. he also played in a wide open era in the AFL and the Jets had a great downfield passing attack. it was boom or bust w/ him. long completions, a lot of incompletions and a lot of INts.
I also have Roethlisberger as a 1st ballot guy in my book. I used him as the example because I know you also like him as a QB and the example works really good anyway. Namath rose above the 2nd tier group based on impact on the sport. The Super Bowl 3 win helped too. So, yeah, no disagreement there and you got my point. Furthermore, what I intimated was that Namath was enshrined in the Hall of Fame (and is permanently in the club with the 1st tier guys based on impact on the sport, some awards, and a Super Bowl win).
Reasons Namath is in the Hall: - arguably the most important player in the AFL - was an intregal part of an AFL wave which changed the offensive game, and the way the QB position was played - SB III - most important player in Jets franchise history Did he need SB III? absolutely. But most QB's do need that win, and it was one of the biggest wins in league history. He was an OG, original gunslinger. The INT's were not the brightest spot on his resume, but he's clearly not a QB you just line up statistics and compare based on that. If i had to pick a QB to begin a team in the era they played, I'm taking Namath over many other HOF QB's.
I would maybe take Starr or Staubach over Namath. I would take Namath over Jurgensen, Tarkenton, Dawson, and the other guys. I would obviously take Unitas over Namath too, but can we even mention Unitas here? Much of Unitas's career was before Namath entered the league. Yesterday, I was told to leave pre-1965 guys out of the mix.
you weren't told to leave anyone out, Unitas finished his career in 1973 only a few years before Joe retired. That is a little different than comparing him to a QB that started playing almost 20 years before Joe and wa retired before Joe became a pro.
Unitas's best years were during the time Tittle played. Much of this stuff overlaps. If we narrow this stuff down to when Namath played, there are not many comparisons to make unless we disregard major chunks of players' careers. I think the eras can be defined thusly: 1920-32... pre-stats, "Wild West" days, franchises coming and going every year, pro football looked down upon by the public for the most part, a niche league like MLS is today 1933-49... a lot more stability and organization, two-way football 1950-1965... substitution rules changed, single wing goes away by 1952, almost nobody playing offense and defense anymore 1966-1977... early Super Bowl era, schematics, rules, fields not much different from prior era, so I have no problem with 1950-77 being looked at as one big era 1978-1992... major rules changes to open up the passing game 1993-2014... free agency Six eras there. Someone else can break it down in a different manner, but it wouldn't be radically different than the way I did it.
in my scenario, i was referencing starting a team in any era, but taking a QB from that era. So sure you can mention Unitas, and of course i would take Unitas over Namath. My point was i would take Namath before i would take a lot of other HOF QB's in the eras they played. I feel he was someone you could build a franchise around, and would have succeeded anywhere. Many HOF QB's were great where they were, with a great team, and/or perfect coaching/scheme to fit them. I don't necessarily think they were better QB's than Namath, regardless of statistics or number of championships. Other QB's, like Unitas, Elway, etc, would however be at the top of my list for the same reason.
I agree. I think there are only a few who would have been good anywhere and Namath would probably be on that list. Starr and Dawson, to name two, were in perfect systems for their abilities.
