As always...the best tactic is to hit him hard on the weekend...when his wife doesn't let him on the interweb.
Yeah, I wonder if his boss knows how much time he spends here since 95% of his posts are 9 - 5, M - F? Wonder what kind of job a guy like that can hold down?
Ouch. That's pretty harsh. Juns ain't so bad. He shouldn't piss on the fan base as often as he does though. That's just narrow minded.
His Mondays mornings are a frenzy of non-work related activity. His boss hears fervent clickety-clack typing emanating from his cubicle and thinks "that Junc is a real go-getter..."
Historically,Bill Walsh is the ultimate evaluator of QBs.Ever hear him talk about Namath? That's all you need to know. Great talent w/ incredible charisma who famously fell alittle short in some milestones but delivered on the biggest stage when it counted most. That's HOF.
I don't use stats w/o context, I don't simply say "Joe threw 47 more INTs than TDs so he wasn't good" or "Joe threw for 4,000 yds so he was a God". I back up what I post. In that particular post I was showing how easy it was to make the playoffs in those late 60s years, a weak division w/ only 4-5 teams. I don't know, you don't know either. I am sure there were plenty where they weren't his fault just as I am sure he threw TDs that were spectacular catches. that stuff tends to even out. all you have to say is" I have nothing to counter what you wrote? rather than trying to rally the troops against me. Most had many more attempts, the only player from his era that had a higher INT rate was George Blanda and Blanda made it b/c he was also a kicker.
as usual you ignore info b/c you have nothing to combat it. It wasn't just about INTs, you present a biased view ignoring the negative aspects of his career and focusing on positives. to you if he throws 1 TD and 4 INTs you talk about the TD. I talk about everything. I didn't ignore the role Joe played in the 8 wins, I simply discussed the role in the losses that cost them a division title which you ignored. I have no idea if they compete for the div title, my guess is if we had a decent QB we easily win that division which is why the defense was so frustrated w/ Joe. What does what KC did against Houston have to do w/ 6 INTs, 2 returned for TDs in a tie game the week before? Many QBs play in different offenses, Montana played in an innovative QB friendly offense and it is widely considered the greatest of all time. so what they played in a different O? Dawson had a better career than Joe, was he a better player? more talent? No but he was consistently good/great, Joe was not a consistent top QB. I don't solely focus on INTs, that was a focus of the '67 season being thrown away but it's one factor why he did not have a great career. Brady vs. Manning is one guy w/ incredible stats and one guy w/ great stats. One has won more w/ less which overcome the incredible stats. Joe doesn't have wins to overcome his mostly mediocre career #s. Namath played on some great teams up until the 70s. His TD/INT ratio 1965-1970 on those very talented teams was -14. Better than the rest of his career but still far from great. Take away 1975-1977 and his career TD/INT ratio is still -20. The AFL East was pretty weak in the late 60s. he had a 25% chance to make it, then 20 then 40% before merger. we have a 25% chance to win division, and 17% chance to earn WC. 25% is similar but we have a dynasty team in our division so every year we are playing for WC where the chances are much lower than the Namat era AFL days.
who cares what he says? we know Namath is one of the most physically gifted passers in the history of the game, that doesn't change the fact that he had a mostly mediocre career mostly due to injuries BUT durability counts.
Really? The only player from his era? It looks to me like a lot of players from his era had equal or greater INT rates: Here are some guys who played in the 60's and/or 70's with INT rates similar to or worse than Namath's (5.8%) George Blanda 6.9% Ed Brown 6.9% Babe Parilli 6.6% Bobby Layne 6.6% Cotton Davidson 6.2% Norm Van Brocklin 6.1% Mike Phipps 6.0% Jack Kemp 6.0% Norm Snead 5.9% Charlie Conerly 5.9% Ken Stabler 5.9% Steve Grogan 5.8% Lynn Dickey 5.7% John Hadl 5.7% Y.A. Tittle 5.6% Vince Farragamo 5.6% Earl Morral 5.5% In fact, I could only find three guys who had careers that overlapped with Namath (played any years between 1965-77) with INT rates lower than 3.8% (a number Rex Grossman of all people achieved in the modern era): Ken Anderson 3.6%, Joe Theisman 3.8%, and Roger Staubach 3.7%. Just to show you how ridiculous this argument is-- if you measure all QBs by their INT rates, Neil Freaking O'Donnell is the third best passer to ever take a snap.
We must all consider the rules that Joe played under! Totally different game compareds to what QB's face today. QB's of today would have mediocre TD-Intc ratio's as well. Those rules did not favor QB's, if Joe was young and starting, his numbers would be much better. Put Peyton Manning in Joe's ERA.........., he would suck!! Put Joe into today's game, he would be much more successful than he was......."I guarantee it!!!"
absolutely agree... today's QB's are far better protected than his era of football. The NFL does all it can now to promote offense and hinder defense with rules that are continually changing.
Well Carmen Policy did.Likely anyone devoted to the west coast offense..certainly. Great evaluator of talent who was incredible at articulating the craft of playing Quarterback. Yes he had a few misses after coaching as a consultant w/ the Niners..Gino Carmazzi/Jim Druckenmiller.But he's widely regarded as one of the all time QB Experts. Junc, I respect you & I don't normally call other folks out like this,I'm just not really sure why you go so stir crazy about anything associated w/ Namath on this board. Should we not celebrate our ONLY super bowl clinching QB?? Nobody has ever said the guy was John Elway or Joe Montana...but he was a Great player who achieved some impressive heights. Stats be damned
Here is a great article explaining concisely why Joe Namath was widely considered to be the best QB in football early in his career with the Jets. http://www.footballperspective.com/...-misunderstood-quarterback/#identifier_1_1843 The key things to realize when you look at the comparison chart are that Joe Namath got sacked a *lot* less than any of his contemporaries despite putting up more pass attempts per season than most of them. From 1965 to 1974 he was sacked on just 3.8% of his drop backs. Despite this he averaged 15.1 yards per catch made. This was also the best figure for that DECADE. Like many other records that Namath and the Jets quietly set, the 10 sacks in 1966 in more than 500 dropbacks held up until Dan Marino, the QB most like Joe Namath in his era, and the Fins did it back to back years in 1988 and 1989. Namath's 50.5 career completion percentage looks a lot better when you realize that he was throwing the ball quickly and avoiding sacks in the process. The other figure that is huge is the yards per pass attempt. Joe Namath had a 6.99 yards per pass attempt figure from 1965 to 1974. Among his contemporaries the next highest figure was Craig Morton's 6.48 yards per pass attempt. That's a half a yard more per pass that Namath got than his contemporaries. Half a yard per pass attempt is a phenomenal difference. That's between him and the next highest guy, not between him and the league average. People who don't understand what he was and what he did are really clueless. You can't look back at a guy who played as well as he did for a decade with a declining team and see anything other than a hall of fame player. If you are seeing something else that's your problem and your lack of vision. BTW, just a little more on the Bill Walsh angle. In 1982 the NY times interviewed him about his QB Joe Montana and about two other QB's he had developed, Ken Anderson and Dan Fouts. All 3 were in the final 4 that year and Walsh had developed all of them and was coaching Montana. http://www.nytimes.com/1982/01/10/sports/by-sports-of-the-times-bill-walsh-s-quarterback.html Who did he mention specifically in relation to Montana early in the article? Joe Namath. A guy he had never coached and in fact had never been associated with. What was the comment? "Joe is the QB of the future. He's got a fine arm and he's got the quickness of feet that Joe Namath had." What other QB's did Walsh compare Montana too specifically in the interview? Anderson and Fouts. both of whom were great QB's widely recognized as such at the time. This was 5 years after Namath had retired. He was not in the Hall of Fame yet. Walsh was talking about 3 great QB's he had developed, including one now widely seen as one of the best of all time and the only QB he chose to insert in the interview was Joe Namath. Think about it.
