I read an NFL History book at My tax guy's office that said: Joe Namath finished his playing career with more interceptions then touch down and a completion rating of barely 50.1 %. I realize it's Joe Im talking about here but is this not a fair agument to say we hold our pressent quarter back to a higher standard then we do our Past super bowl winner. The Book also decribed games where Joe had under 100 yards passing and 4+ Pick's and others where he nearly threw perfect games,they said "He Could be amazingly bad and He could be amazingly good" . The book went on to say that Joes Good games far out shined his bad performances and think about how much more Good he could have done if injuries didnt cut his career short or hamsting his abilities during his career. I Hope we all rally around Chad this coming season. I will !
so this was all a platform for a chad rally. your really trying to compare the two? namath was inconsistent when the game was different. and those games where he appeared great, some of them actually came against elite teams! thats the difference between the two.
Bit unfair to compare Namath to today's QB's. It is a totally different game today. Namath was a gunslinger. He would force the ball into areas where nobody today in their right mind would even attempt to throw. The seventies are where his numbers eroded a lot of his prior success. After the multiple knee injuries, the guy had absolutely no mobilty. Under pressure, he just had to wing it; that is why his INT total went way up. In today's world he would have been told to throw it 30 yards down field, but out fo bounds to avoid the sack. In Namath's era, he had total autonomy. He called his own plays, and he was a gambler in the truist sense, yet, that is what made him a great sportsman. In today's world the leash would have been way, way shorter and a lot tighter.
