Now that Favre is officially done, where does he rank all time?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by jsarno

Kosar was definitely underrated, but his injuries over the years kept him from being a good QB over any long period of time. He only played in a full season 3 times in his career.

I am surprised Sonny Jergensen doesn't get more votes. He was better than Baugh as a QB.

I guess it depends. You have to stand on one side of the era adjustments or the other:

1) All player statistics are already representitive of the competition they faced and the weapons they had, and era adjustments are not necessary.

2) The game has changed in a way that has put past performances at a decisive disadvantage. We must adjust their accomplishments accordingly to some benefits the new rules would have given then.

I think saying that Sammy Baugh in his prime would throw for 6,000 yards every year in today's game is pretty ridiculous, but there have been enough rule changes over time that he didn't benefit from that I would say he would rank among the top 3 passers of the 90's with that sort of assistance. It's a tough thing, the toughest thing about all-time QB rankings.

I think it would be a totally reasonable argument for someone to say that Sammy Baugh's skill set (mental and physical) would produce a below average NFL QB today (and a sub-Jurgensen level QB in the 60s) because a lot of QBs today are just better than he ever was. I just tend to think that he was too great for that to be the case.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I guess it depends. You have to stand on one side of the era adjustments or the other:

1) All player statistics are already representitive of the competition they faced and the weapons they had, and era adjustments are not necessary.

2) The game has changed in a way that has put past performances at a decisive disadvantage. We must adjust their accomplishments accordingly to some benefits the new rules would have given then.

I think saying that Sammy Baugh in his prime would throw for 6,000 yards every year in today's game is pretty ridiculous, but there have been enough rule changes over time that he didn't benefit from that I would say he would rank among the top 3 passers of the 90's with that sort of assistance. It's a tough thing, the toughest thing about all-time QB rankings.

You definitely make good points, he did afterall lead the league in passing yards 4 times. However, he lead the league in int's 3 times, and even worse, threw 203 int's to only 187 passing tds. I can't put this guy in the top ten when he threw more ints than tds. He was one hell of a punter though.

[Mc2guy]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I guess it depends. You have to stand on one side of the era adjustments or the other:

1) All player statistics are already representitive of the competition they faced and the weapons they had, and era adjustments are not necessary.

2) The game has changed in a way that has put past performances at a decisive disadvantage. We must adjust their accomplishments accordingly to some benefits the new rules would have given then.

I think saying that Sammy Baugh in his prime would throw for 6,000 yards every year in today's game is pretty ridiculous, but there have been enough rule changes over time that he didn't benefit from that I would say he would rank among the top 3 passers of the 90's with that sort of assistance. It's a tough thing, the toughest thing about all-time QB rankings.

I think it would be a totally reasonable argument for someone to say that Sammy Baugh's skill set (mental and physical) would produce a below average NFL QB today (and a sub-Jurgensen level QB in the 60s) because a lot of QBs today are just better than he ever was. I just tend to think that he was too great for that to be the case.

I appreciate your earlier feedback, and I think this is one of the great debates in all of sport...how to you objectively quantify players of different eras? Because we have no consistent imperical evidence against which to base our opinions, any arguement has to be heard frankly. You can make a strong case that the players of the past were slower, smaller, and played weaker competition (lack of full integration in league sports). On the other hand you can argue that with the benefit of modern coaching, training, and rules, some past players would be even better than their modern bretheren.

Personally, I think there is a little of both. I'll take your example:
Sammy Baugh played when the rules were squarely set against the forward pass, yet he succeeded at doing just that. With a rounder ball, no personal foul rules, and with D-backs mugging the receiver, he accomplished stats that would be impressive even in the modern era. This is while he was on the field for every snap of the game, mind you, with no TV timeouts to catch his breath. Now, would that traslate to 6000 yards in the modern era...impossible to tell, but one has to believe an athlete that gifted could succeed under any conditions, but even Sammy didn't have Peyton's mind or body.

For others on this board looking at the gaudy stats of the modern "live ball" era, you are missing some of the true greats. Yes, Steve Young took the WCO to levels never seen, even under Montana. He had a great arm and was as efficient as any quarterback could be in that system and more. That said, Young only had one championship and benefited from having Jerry Rice and one of the best offensive minds ever. How can you overlook guys like Star who had 5 NFL championships, more than Bradshaw, more than Brady, more than Montana?

[Dirtbag59]

I would say Ryan Leaf is the greatest of all time but that joke ain't funny.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag359

I would say Ryan Leaf is the greatest of all time but that joke ain't funny.

Leaf (2008)

[Hijinx]

I have to go Favre over Elway, the teams Elway was on were much better than Favre's. I can name a heck of a lot of really good RBs and WRs on those Broncos teams but I can't name hardy anyone really good like that for Green Bay. Quick name a pro bowl Packers RB in the last 15 years.

I also think when you talk about Favre it isn't just about the performance on the field. The guy is well loved by millions of fans who aren't Packer fans. The fact that he plays for a scrappy small market team, with history like none other only adds to the reverence fans have for him. The fact he came from a college no one ever heard of and he was nearly doomed to be a career backup. I loved the boyish way he had FUN playing the game , the gunslinger way he played it, and the fact he started over 250 straight games in some of the hardest playing conditions in the NFL. The guys has a "Joe Everyman" quality like no other sports star I can think of.

Statistically speaking or in terms of SB wins Favre may not be in the top ten but he'll always my favorite QB. (well non Redskin QB at least).

[budw38]

Originally Posted by Hijinx

I have to go Favre over Elway, the teams Elway was on were much better than Favre's. I can name a heck of a lot of really good RBs and WRs on those Broncos teams but I can't name hardy anyone really good like that for Green Bay. Quick name a pro bowl Packers RB in the last 15 years.

I also think when you talk about Favre it isn't just about the performance on the field. The guy is well loved by millions of fans who aren't Packer fans. The fact that he plays for a scrappy small market team, with history like none other only adds to the reverence fans have for him. The fact he came from a college no one ever heard of and he was nearly doomed to be a career backup. I loved the boyish way he had FUN playing the game , the gunslinger way he played it, and the fact he started over 250 straight games in some of the hardest playing conditions in the NFL. The guys has a "Joe Everyman" quality like no other sports star I can think of.

Statistically speaking or in terms of SB wins Favre may not be in the top ten but he'll always my favorite QB. (well non Redskin QB at least).

You don't think S. Sharpe was any good ? Freeman / Brooks / Churma and Levens ?

[Hijinx]

Originally Posted by budw38

You don't think S. Sharpe was any good ? Freeman / Brooks / Churma and Levens ?

Sharpe was very good however he only played 6 or 7 years and only 1 full season(1993) with Favre. Freeman played 10 seasons(7 with Green Bay) for a grand total of 477 rec and 7251 yards. He went to 1 pro bowl. Those aren't great numbers. Brooks played 6 and half (injury) seasons for about 300 rec and 4300 yards. No pro bowls, again not great numbers.

Churma was only a starter for 4 years and was good. Three pro bowls and an average of 40 rec over those years. However I will always remember that jerk for having the stones not show up at a white house visit by saying he wouldn't go because Clinton had no morals, then he got arrested for raping a 17 year old girl. Stay classy Green Bay.

Levens only had 1 good year(1997) before that he was a back up and in 1998 he had that knee injury and was never the same after.

Now compare that to Shannon who might be a first year selection into the hall of fame in 2009. Terrell Davis who might have been in the hall if he just had 1 or 2 more seasons. Rod Smith who was the best undrafted WR in NFL history. Plus the Broncos had a pretty good OL with at least 1 hall of famer.

[MTK]

When Favre was drafted I was 18 and a senior in high school. Damn I feel old now.

[coggs]

I have felt Favre has been overrated for a while now. He was great from 1995-1998, 1999ish. Since then, in my mind, he hasn't been anything special. I think he gets a lot of hype because he is perceived as being tough, he can be fun to watch, and by all accounts he is a regular guy. People make a big deal of him kicking the vicodin addiction, overcoming his wife's illness, the game he played after his dad passed. He won plenty of games for the Packers, but he was responsible for plenty of Packer losses as well. Relatively speaking he is not as overrated as Cal Ripken, but might be the Ripken of football.

As compared to guys I saw, I do not put him ahead of Elway, Montana, Aikman, Young, Brady, Peyton Manning, or Marino. Maybe even a few others who I can't think of right now. I do not remember guys like Fouts, barely remember guys like Theismann or Plunkett, so I won't include them in my list.

[GTripp0012]

And the Broncos were over the cap when they won both SBs, which is against league rules.

Think how many SBs Brunell would have won here if the team could have blatently ignored the cap free of charge.

[Defensewins]

Maybe he did not want tot include them.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

Maybe he did not want tot include them.

I just did...see above. It's moot though since Favre beats the daylights out of him in td / int ratio.
Over DOUBLE!

Sorry guys, those above stats tell it all. There is just no argument that holds water to have Elway above Favre.

[Defensewins]

Who really cares how we rank the top 10 QB's of all time?
It is too subjective, nobody is right or wrong.
Looking at stats however is a mistake. You can not compare Qb stats of guys that played prior to the rule changes implemented in the 80's, 90's and 2000's to increase offense. The rule changes changed the game. It is comparing apples and oranges if you look at stats of guys in diffrent eras.
It only works to compare guys from the same era.
Prior to the rule changes, as long as the ball was not in the air any receiver was fair game to get hit and knocked down.
LB's used to level receivers that wondered into their area.
Now you can not even breath on a WR after 3 to 5 yards.
Not to mention the the dresses the NFL has put on the QB with the whole roughing the passer crap. If a DL so much as touches a QB's helmet he is called for a 15 yard personal foul. Bradshaw, Staubach, Starr, Namath, Jurgenson, etc did not benefit form the rule changes.
Plus add the changes to OL holding rules. You can now hold a DL as long as you do it a certain way.
Plus guys like Marino played in pass first offenses. Some great QB played on more balanced offenses.
The one thing that tuned me off about Farve is he first broke the most pass attempts record before he broke most of the other records. If you threw the most passes of any QB you should have the other records.
The other things is the miserable season or two he had just recently.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

Who really cares how we rank the top 10 QB's of all time?
It is too subjective, nobody is right or wrong.
Looking at stats however is a mistake. You can not compare Qb stats of guys that played prior to the rule changes implemented in the 80's, 90's and 2000's to increase offense. The rule changes changed the game. It is comparing apples and oranges if you look at stats of guys in diffrent eras.
It only works to compare guys from the same era.
Prior to the rule changes, as long as the ball was not in the air any receiver was fair game to get hit and knocked down.
LB's used to level receivers that wondered into their area.
Now you can not even breath on a WR after 3 to 5 yards.
Not to mention the the dresses the NFL has put on the QB with the whole roughing the passer crap. If a DL so much as touches a QB's helmet he is called for a 15 yard personal foul. Bradshaw, Staubach, Starr, Namath, Jurgenson, etc did not benefit form the rule changes.
Plus guys like Marino played in pass first offenses. Some great QB played on more balanced offenses.
The one thing that tuned me off about Farve is he first broke the most pass attempts record before he broke most of the other records. If you threw the most passes of any QB you should have the other records.
The other things is the miserable season or two he had just recently.

That is very true...which makes it tough to rank players like Otto Graham etc. That's why threads like these are fun.
However, in terms of Elway vs Favre...they played around the same time, in fact 7 years were overlapping. So it's quite easy to compare those stats and make a sound judgement.