How do you explain away all of the interceptions, and yet condemn Geno for the same thing? ......answer: you are remembering his 1 good year, and his SB win. Having said that, he might still deserve to be in the Hall because that SB win was so influential in uniting the AFL and NFL. (and such a huge upset)
Joe was involved in a watershed event in the history of U.S. football. In fact, he was the star of that event. That goes a long way towards his induction. He was always kind of an all or nothing QB. That was why the SB win was so surprising. He was just the kind of QB the Colts thought they could eat alive. So for that game he made himself into another kind of QB. Maybe he became Bart Starr for a day. Who knows? I kept waiting for the deep ball. I think he overthrew Maynard once.
And that overthrow was the greatest overthrow in NFL history because it completely loosened up the Colts defense. I've heard folks likening it to a flame throwing relief pitch coming into a game and throwing the first pitch to the back stop. No batter is going to dig in. _
How do you even bring Geno into the discussion? That's ridiculous. Btw, According to the odds makers it was an upset. It turned out that it was a huge overlay because of the lack of respect the AFL got. Weeb and the team knew better, and Joe's temper got the better of him in the face of the media bleating about how superior the Colts were; And that's where Joe's prediction stemmed from. And they proved it. It was not a fluke or anything close, understand that.
I'll bet that a lie. Ok I'm illiterate. Is that all you can say? It ok I can take it.. I really feel sorry for you. All that built up anger from getting fuck up so much.
Dude, the pool is 85 degrees, the Sav Blanc is 37 degrees, the steaks are sizzling and the music out on the patio is cool, living life with zero time for anger. I don't have time for your bullshit trolling tonite you illiterate piece of garbage. _
It's called an iPad jerkoff. It's how I'm playing my music on the system out at my pool. Want me to post pics? Loser leaves the board forever. And I do mean "loser". _
This is not the Make Believe section of TGG - you left that back in the BS section. Why would you say I condemn Geno for interceptions? You're making that up - something for which you seem to have a penchant. I don't need to explain away anything. I watched the man play within the perspective of how the game was played at the time; I read the newspapers, listened to the radio and watched television reports. I know how Namath was perceived in the context of professional football 40-50 years ago. Perhaps the door to the Hall of Fame should be sealed and a Hall of Statistics opened to satisfy the criteria of all of today's internet wizards.
The Colts were waiting for the long ball. Namath's slight overthrow (that Maynard attributed to a slight stumble on his part) put the fear of the bomb in the Colts secondary freeing up Sauer. Maynard, post-game: "I didn't catch a single pass but I had a great game." Namath didn't turn himself into a "different QB" or "Bart Starr" that game. Part of the Jets' game plan included a quicker break from the huddle so as to give Namath a longer pre-snap look at the Colts's defensive formation once they got to the line of scrimmage. Namath as it turned out audibled the majority of plays that day at the line of scrimmage. Translation? The Jets brain trust put their trust in Namath's already established football acumen; this in a Super Bowl game vs. a 18-point favorite no less. Apples to Range Rovers. I don't know if it was in the haste to argue for the sake of arguing but whatever, the overall "downfield style" gist has been lost. In Namath's case, for all his screwy picks, he still kept the Jets in the game, throwing for four TDs and two of them in the 4th quarter while racking up 35 points. In the case of Sanchez it was INTs and nothing else, moreover with Sanchez floundering despite a Jets rushing attack that accounted for OVER THREE HUNDRED YARDS that day. Further, Sanchez threw his 5 INTs while averaging a miserable ("lower risk") 3.3 yards per pass which would even stink as a rushing average, this again while enjoying a 300+ yard rushing attack and as a result of off-the-Mark's complete ineptness, the Jets scored a measly 13 points in an overtime game - apples to oranges context-wise. While Namath was the chief contributor to that loss, paradoxically Namath was also the chief reason why they were in the game at the end. Mark Sanchez on the other hand contributed nothing besides INTs in that game and (along with Rex Ryan) was the reason why Jets lost that game, with Ryan's undisciplined Jets racking up 14 penalties. sidebar: I don't know which poster stated this earlier but whoever it was, to say that Yelverton Abraham Tittle "hardly played" with the NYG is an absurd contention of a below-average fan. To put it into context, during his tenure with the Giants, Tittle had some monster seasons: in his first three of his four seasons with the football Giants, Tittle posted a very impressive 33-8-1 record while throwing over 30 TDs in back to back seasons, and while leading the Giants to THREE CONSECUTIVE NFL CHAMPIONSHIP GAMES. Not bad for a guy who "hardly played" for them. : )
Good post Joe, I can't argue with people that never were at Shea watching that perfect spiral zip thru the wind like a howitzer...
Look I saw Joe play too, including at Shea. His stats including picks are fair game. It's a legit conversation to question his Tds to picks ratio. And you didn't have to be there watching him live to have an opinion. Just like you didn't have to see Otto Graham play to evaluate him in history. You can throw in as many variables you want to and they're legit too. Except if you start trying to make excuses for him. He doesn't need it. As pointed out he had great spurts as a Qb and at times he was the king. Imo HOF. Besides he made it and it's history.
Joe Namath's career, the 1968 season and Super Bowl III have been extensively documented. If someone can't see his important place in the history and development of the NFL, then there's not much to say. Do you think they argue whether Red Grange belongs in the HOF in Chicago?
For Joe there is a legit argument. Because of his negative pick stats and the losing records over the course of his career. But I agree that he should be in the HOF. Not for the history shit but for his contributions on the field. He was a superior player. I don't think he had that many great years. Reminds me a little of Sandy Koufax who was great for a short period of time. But Sandy was a lot better than Joe ever was. And Koufax retired at 30 due to health reasons. Joe could have retired early too for the same reason because he was banged up his entire career.
