If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
If you are having difficulty logging in, please REFRESH the page and clear your browser cache and try again.
If you still can't get logged in, please try using Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome, Firefox, Opera, or Safari to login. Also be sure you are using the latest version of your browser. Internet Explorer has not been updated in over seven years and will no longer work with the Forum software. Thanks
You also have to account for the fact that rule changes have made passing yardage totals skyrocket like pinball machines over the past decade.
And nobody has been a greater benefactor of those changes than Peyton. Nobody has even come close to him in perfecting the act of marketing Personal Foul flags.
Just imagine how protective the league would be if came back to play this season.
The more I read and learn about the NFL, the clearer it gets that the rules changes that passed in the late 1970s made NFL football an entirely different game. That makes comparing QBs from different eras even more maddeningly difficult than historical comparisons in sports usually are. If you look at the all-time leaders in QB rating(a statistic that values completion percentage and TD/INT ratio highly), all but one of the top 30 in that statistic started his career after the rules changes. The only QB in the top 30 in passer rating that played before 1975 is Otto Graham, which is just another piece of evidence demonstrating how phenomenally good that guy must have been(and how good the teams he played on were). If you look at the all-time leaders in yards per completion(a measure of how aggressive a passer was asked to be down the field in his offensive system), it's the exact opposite-- of the top twenty in this statistic, only #20 Steve Grogan played after 1975. You can't just look at the career numbers of guys like Joe Namath or Bart Starr from a current perspective and think you know how good those players were in their prime.
Otto Graham -- now there's a guy who should be in every "greatest of all-time" discussion.
I dunno -- like I said, I think you try to figure out who was the best 1 or 2 or 3 of a given era, and then begin the impossible task of comparing cross-era QBs. So, for me, it's not so much Bart Starr's numbers that concern me, it's that he was only MVP 1 time, only all-pro 1 time and in the pro-bowl 4 times. That strongly suggests to me that contemporaneous assessments of Starr were that he wasn't the best QB of that era, or, frankly top 2 or 3.
Otto Graham, in contrast, won 3 MVPs and was first team all-pro 4 times in his 6 NFL seasons. A number of QB in this era will blaze by Graham's numbers, but only 1 or 2 -- if any -- will match his contemporaneous honors.
Last edited by iam416; January 26, 2012, 12:21 PM.
Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]? Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.
Home games or no home games, when you are 9-10 in the playoffs, you just aren't the G.O.A.T. or even the G.O.H.E. Peyton did diminish his propensity to choke from his Vol days but he's not the guy I would want in there in a must win situation. Give me Montana, Brady, Elway, Staubach and maybe a couple of others before him. QB is THE impact position and he had plenty of talent around him (James, Harrison, Wayne, Clark, Addai when healthy) as well as good coaches.
I'd take him over Favre, though. He's in my Top 10.
The other major change was the liberalization of the pass blocking rules-- offensive linemen were allowed to extend their arms and use their hands. That also makes historical comparisons difficult to make between offensive linemen of the two eras. Imagine how good guys like Jim Parker, Art Shell, and Forrest Gregg must have been to become elite offensive linemen without being able to use their hands legally.
So, for me, it's not so much Bart Starr's numbers that concern me, it's that he was only MVP 1 time, only all-pro 1 time and in the pro-bowl 4 times. That strongly suggests to me that contemporaneous assessments of Starr were that he wasn't the best QB of that era, or, frankly top 2 or 3.
For much of Starr's career, only two QBs were named to the Pro Bowl. This hurt Starr, because his career overlapped primarily with Johnny Unitas, but also with guys who were often asked to throw much more than Starr was-- Y.A. Tittle, Norm Van Brocklin, Sonny Jurgensen, etc. Even with that, Starr made the all-decade team for the 1960s, which ought to get him into the discussion somewhere, IMO. The best contemporary analogue to Bart Starr I can think of is Troy Aikman. You might not rank either Aikman or Starr among the ten best ever to play the position, and that's fine, but you have to admit both Starr and Aikman were essential parts of dynasty teams, and perfect QB complements to their power rushing games. I tend to think both Starr and Aikman tend to get overlooked when great QBs are discussed, because of the systems in which they played.
I concur re Aikman and Starr and almost everything else. I would not, however, put them in my top 10.
Aikman and Starr do, however, raise an interesting point. For many QBs, we reward the happenstance of surrounding talent, but for those two, I think, they get dinged. It's almost like they played with too much talent (also, Bradshaw). They're not quite in the sweet spot of really good team but not dominatingly good. Heh.
Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]? Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.
Tweet
Comment