Having elected Haley and now Greene, I think the voters have done an excellent job of clearing some of the logjam. Of this year's finalists who didn't get in, none had made the cut more than 3 times (Lynch, Andersen and Coryell). Warner and TD were the only others with multiple years as a finalist. That said, here are my uber early thoughts on 2017:
Lock: Tomlinson
Highly Likely: Warner, TO
Good Shot: Andersen, Coryell, Lynch
I don't think Jason Taylor or Brian Dawkins will get in first try, and I just feel like next year might be Andersen's year. He better get in before Vinatieri breaks his points record, or he might never (see Gary Anderson). I wouldn't be shocked to see any of this year's finalists slide into the 4 and 5 spots, so we shall see. Also, I believe they are back to one Senior spot next year as they've been alternating years with the new format. Fingers crossed that it's Kramer or Howley!
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
LaDanian Tomlinson Kurt Warner Terrell Owens John Lynch Don Coryell
Tomlinson and Warner really the only locks...I do think they need to get Owens in before Moss comes up next year or they risk another Carter/Reed standoff in future discussions...Same with Lynch, we have Ed Reed and Polamalu coming soon, plus Dawkins and At-water...Yet they haven't put in a Safety from the modern era in many years...
The 5th spot as usual probably up for grabs. Other than Coryell, guys with a shot at the 5th spot:
Joe Jacoby, Morten Andersen, Jason Taylor.In that order of likelihood.
I didnt think Jacoby had a chance, but making top 10 with just two more years of eligibility left probably means he gets in the next 2 classes. If he falls back in 2017, meaning he doesn't at least make the top 10, then he won't get in as a modern candidate. Andersen will get in at some point, but Coryell been waiting longer. Taylor I seriously doubt, as I don't think most view him as a first ballot guy. He should make the top 15 at least, and who knows after that. Will be interesting to see where Brian Dawkins slots in...IMO, he was better than At-water, so wonder if he will jump him in the Safety pecking order. Ed Reed comes eligible in 2019 and Polamalu in 2020, so between Lynch, Dawkins and At-water, at least one, and probably two get elected in the next couple of classes...If not, going to be quite a wait after that.
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Originally posted by: Fabfrank I agree with Jason's list except I would move Elway ahead of Marino. To me the Super Bowls get additional weighting in my mind. I wanted to see Dan Fouts, Warren Moon or Jim Kelly on this list, but couldn't justify taking anyone out of the top 10 for them.
Hard to argue that. Only reason I still have Marino higher is that both of Elway's rings, were mostly due to Terrell Davis. Elway's career Super Bowl numbers (3TD-8 INT) weren't very good at all, and I just liked Marino's pure passer game more than I liked Elway's gunslinger, scrambler game. Marino, when on his game, was as unstoppable as they come. Elway always found a way to win and was better at improvising, but rarely saw him play unstoppable type football. His teams typically had pretty good defenses, where as Miami's Defense almost always sucked during the Marino years...Descent D and Marino probably has a couple of rings as well.
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
For Senior Candidate, have to think almost certainly a defensive player this go round...
Top candidates: LC Greenwood Chuck Howley Eddie Meador Johnny Robinson
But really almost impossible to guess at this point. Super Bowl is in Houston, so maybe Howley makes sense.
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
They just put in two Interior Offensive Lineman, with Stanfel and Tingelhoff...Unclear how either went in over Kramer, but would be pretty surprising to see another OL go for a 3rd year in a row.
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I'm no expert either, just giving my opinion. I like these kinds of discussions.
Edit to add: I hope Greenwood and Kramer both get in eventually. And I'd have a hard time choosing between Dawkins and Lynch, although I think they're both better than At-water.
While I'm a huge Johnny Unitas fan, I find it kind of laughable that anyone would put him as the #1 all-time QB on any list. He did cut a dynamic image, with his black high top shoes and crew cut haircut.
Johnny's peak was the decage of the 1960's, right?
Trivia - How many playoff games did Unitas win in the 1960's?
Anyone...??
The answr is ZERO. Not a single one.
Unitas was the Dan Marino and to some extent the Drew Brees of his era. Always putting up great regular season numbers, yet doing little in the playoffs against the best competition.
Johnny U's historical rep is mostly based on his two back to back Championships won in '58 and '59 against the Giants. Those were huge games and the '58 game with it's national TV broadcast, kind of put pro Football on the map. So I'll give him that.
Afterwards, in the 1960's, Unitas keep piling up great regular season stats. He also won three MVP's in the 1960's. Plus he had many pro bowl appearances too to add to his mystique.
But team success and mainly playoff wins just weren't there. From 1960-63, these were the years where he was 27-30 years old and most QB's have their best years during this time frame. Unitas' Colts team's record was 29-25 in this stretch. He threw 84 TDs, and had 83 INTS's during this four year run. He passed for tons of yardage, over 12,000 in this 4-year run. Lot's of volume, but hardly the stats of a QB rated the best by many so-called experts.
In 1964's Championship game, Unitas was outplayed at QB by the Browns Frank Ryan and the Colts were shutout 27-0 in that game.
In the 1965 playoffs, Unitas didn't play due to injuries and the Colts lost a close divisional playoff game against the Packers (with Starr getting knocked out early too in the game) to advance to meet the Browns.
In the Colts great 1968 13-1 season, Unitas was hurt most of that year and the Colts were lead by longtime journeyman Earl Morrall, who also won the leagues MVP. The Colts lost SB 3 to the Jets and Namath, so not really Unitas' fault there.
During his career, his numbers in the playoffs actually regressed from his regular season totals. In nine playoff games, the Colts were 6-3, but in those games Unitas threw only 7 TD's, had 10 INT's, a 53.1 Comp. Pct. and QB rating of 68.9. Those w-l numbers are padded by the 3-0 1970 postseason in which Unitas completed just 35% of his passes in the playoffs. By this time his arm was shot and the Colts were winning due to their great defense.
If Unitas is the number one QB of all-time in many peoples minds, I'd like to know why.
Those top 10 all-time QB lists above are pretty good, but are lacking two players, Steve Young and Bart Starr. I'd drop Elway and Marino.
I find it laughable that anyone would compare numbers from Unitas in his era vs. Drew Brees of this era. The tules were so different they aren't comparable.
The reason Unitas is #1 on most lists, is similar to the same reason Jim Brown is the #1 RB of all-time on most lists. Its not how they compare to today, its how they compared vs. the other players of their era.
Johnny U did what he did playing against REAL DEFENSE...ANY holding of defensive pass rushers was NOT allowed, unlike today where blockers can hold inside...Receivers would get mugged all the way down the field, unlike today where any contact beyond 5 yards gets a flag...Comparing his stats to todays stats as a reason he wasnt all that great is just not a sensible argument.
Unitas practically invented the QB position as we know it today. In 1950, the average passing yards per team, per game was 165.7...In 1955 it was 159.8...In 1957 is was 153.4, Unitas' first year as starter..Unitas YPG in 1957 was 212.5...He called his own plays, he perfected the two minute drill, no one was gunslinging like Unitas...
He retired as the All-Time NFL leader in every significant passing category..The argument about Championships, while important to QBs, doesn't cut it with me or my rankings...Was Marino responsible for making tackles and getting defensive turnovers? So lets take the greatest pure passer off the list because his team never had a great running game or consistently good defense..Unitas all-time playoff record is 6-2, hardly a choke artist.
IMO, anyone who doesn't have Unitas at a minimum in their top 3, either doesn't know anything about pre-1980 football, or simply hasn't seen enough to justify...Starr was better because he played for the Packers? A team with more HOF caliber players than any other? Because they had the defense dominant enough to assist Starr in being a great game manager? Unitas was the Joe Montana of his era, while Starr was the Troy Aikman...
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I stand behind my previous post. The facts are there. I simply don't believe the myth that Johnny U is the best at his position.
I don't like being misquoted either. I never compared era's in my post so half of your above argument is moot. What I said was : Unitas was the Dan Marino and to some extent the Drew Brees of his era. Always putting up great regular season numbers, yet doing little in the playoffs against the best competition. The facts bear this out.
Maybe you should re-read that again. Unitas put up big numbers in his time, and so did Marino, and so does Brees today. That's a given. All while not winning enough. That was the comparison: winning, while having big stats. Pretty explicit. I didn't say compare Unitas' stats to the other guys' stats, ie Marino and Brees.
What does Jim Brown have to do with quarterbacking? Again, I never compared era's saying Unitas had it any easier than the modern guys. And yes I do believe Jim Brown was the best RB ever, in any era.
Unitas practically invented the QB position, huh? I think other old time HOF QB's, guys like Benny Friedmann, Sammy Baugh, Sid Luckman, Otto Graham, Bobby Layne, and Norm Van Brocklin would take exception to that remark. Did the game begin in 1957 when Unitas became a starter? WTF!
Unitas' set all the all-time records, breaking marks of Tittle, Layne, etc.. That is true. Just a few years later, Unitas' records were all topped by Tarkenton. I don't see his name on your all-time top ten QB list for some reason. Tarkenton was soon topped by Marino, who was topped by Favre, who is now being surpassed by Peyton Manning.
So your argument that Unitas once held all these records says exactly nothing about him being number one all-time. The great Sonny Jurgensen threw the most TD's in the 1960's by the way. Just another fact.
Championships, that's the only thing that matters. Do you think Johnny U. was more interested in piling up his great stats year after year, or was he more interested in winning rings? I would think the later. That's why they play the games. Great statistics mean nothing without the rings to back them up. I guess leading the league in passing yardage is more important than winning, heh?
You said he was 6-2 in the playoffs. Techinically he was 6-3 in all playoff games. He did come on in relief of Morrall in SB 3 and the Colts still lost. They were favored by 18 and had the BEST def. in Football that year. Still lost the big game. Starr never lost to the AFL in the SB, did he?
In SB 5, Unitas started that game too, but only played in the first half. Yet he gets credit for the win as a starter. In that game he was 3-9 for 88 yards, I TD, 2 INT's. Earl Morrall played the entire second half and the Colts won a close one 16-13 over the Cowboys. It's too bad Roger Staubach didn't play in that game, the Cowboys might have won. Oh yeah, in 1970 Unitas was a 'game manager' by this time. Maybe that's why they won SB 5. That and his great Colts team defense. The Colts had the second best record in Football that year and the #2 ranked defense in the AFC.
In 1958, the Colts' first championship, the Colts had the # 2 defense that year, they also had the #2 rushing attack in the league.
You said they never had a great rushing attack. I guess the facts prove you wrong here too.
After Alan Ameche hurt his knee in 1959, the Colts team did suffer from the lack of a solid RB. That's why the Colts were about a .500 team during his prime years, Unitas being a gunslinger, throwing all those INT's, all that yardage, but not winning or making the playoffs during this time frame.
In 1967, Unitas won the MVP, the Colts were 11-1-2, the Colts had the #2 ranked defense that year.
You said the Colts never had a consistently 'good' defense.
Geez, they were ranked # 2 in 1958, a Championship win, were ranked #2 in 1967 which was Unitas' last great season, were ranked #1 in 1968 a SB 3 loss, and were ranked #2 in the AFC in 1970, a SB 5 win, game finished by Morrall at QB.
I guess being ranked # 1 or # 2 is not considered a consistenly good defense in your eyes?
Johnny U called his own plays. That's cool. Maybe he should've let his coaches call the plays, because he wasn't winning enough for me if he's cosidered the #1 QB by all these so-called football experts.
Gunslinger, another cool term to use for a QB with a big arm, who throws for a lot of yardage, and TDs, but at the end winds up more on the losing side games. Yeah, but those 'gunslingers' sure put up great numbers, don't they? This isn't Fantasy Football.
Championship wins. To me, is all that matters. That's why they play the games, to win. It's not about padding stats and having the most yardage. They don't keep score by yardage. I'll take a so-called 'game manager' like Starr, with his 9-1 playoff mark, 15-3 TD/INT, his stellar 104 playoff QB rating against the best competition in the biggest games and moments, and FIVE Championship wins, over a gunslinger any day. It's simply about winning. Great statistics are a by product and mean virtually nothing without the rings to back those numbers up. Starr has the rings AND the playoff numbers. Unitas has the regular season stats and less rings. Oh yeah, but Unitas' called his own plays, so that must make him better.
I feel anyone who doesn't consider Bart Starr a Top ten all-time QB, should maybe look a little deeper into the history of the game and not rely on so-called experts opinions. All opinions matter to me. Some are just not backed up by cold hard facts.
Don't get me wrong, I have every single Unitas card in PSA 8 or 9 in my collection. I think he was great. I definitely think Unitas is in the top five of all-time QB's. I just don't think he's #1.
There is a myth about him being the greatest. Many myths can be dispelled with facts, which is what I tried to do with my posts. I never knew he never won a playoff game in the entire decade of the 1960's until I a few years ago when I looked deeper into the history of the game.
There's a great line in the classic western movie, 'The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance'. Said by a newspaper reporter at the end of the movie:
If Championships are all that matters, shouldn't Bradshaw be tops on your list?
Also, you quoted Johnny U numbers in your initial post. Specifically:
" He threw 84 TDs, and had 83 INTS's during this four year run. He passed for tons of yardage, over 12,000 in this 4-year run. Lot's of volume, but hardly the stats of a QB rated the best by many so-called experts."
And
"but in those games Unitas threw only 7 TD's, had 10 INT's, a 53.1 Comp. Pct. and QB rating of 68.9."
None of these are inherently bad statistics for those years, when measured vs. the league averages of those years. So I infer that you are comparing to todays QBs since you names them in comparison.
I base my rankings on my personal eye test. I've been able to watch probably somewhere between 40-50% of the snaps Unitas took in his career. Probably have been able to watch about the same, if not a few more of Bart Starr's snaps. While Starr was a great game manager and very proficient QB, he certainly IMO was not as talented at improvising and overcoming as Johnny U. was. His OL was WAY better, Unitas had better receiving weapons, but the Packers run game was the feared weapon of that offense, not Starr. Exactly the opposite of Johnny U and the Colts. While the Colts had a few good years of defensive play, they weren;t good consistently like the Packers Defense was. Especially in big games.
Johnny Unitas all-time W/L record was 118-64-4, playing for a TEAM that was only good enough to win 2 titles...Note, I said team, as I do not subscribe to the argument that Championships are the only way to measure any particular position..Take a TRUE team effort to win an NFL Championship.
Bart Starr's career W/L record was 94-57-6..PLAYING FOR THE LOMBARDI PACKERS! A team with more HOF players than any other, as well as having the greatest Coach of all-time. My modern comparison being Troy Aikman, who I guess like Bradshaw is in your top 4-5 QBs since he had more Championships...
But to really see how these QBs affected the game, lets look at comparable games/years. For Unitas, NFL Championship Game numbers from 58-59, when the Colts on it all...And for Starr, NFL Championship game numbers from 60-61, when the Packers won it all..
Unitas two game totals: 44 of 69, 613 yards Starr two game totals: 19 of 38, 342 yards
Honestly, there is really no comparison to these 2 QBs game styles...
BTW, Here is a quote from Sid Luckman in regards to Unitas, I guess he didn;t take too much exception to it..lol
Sid Luckman, a fellow Pro Football Hall of Fame member, said Unitas was the best quarterback ever. "Better than me," he said, "better than Sammy Baugh, better than anyone."
Anyone comparing the QB game those guys played to what Unitas played simply is ill-informed. Unitas was the first MODERN STYLE QB..Those guys from the 30-40-50s olayed a WAY different game...Only guy you could really make a case for before Unitas was Otto Graham, who along with Paul Brown somewhat invented the pro style Offense we see today. Unitas was the first true drop back gunslinger. Go watch the film.
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Why would Bradshaw be # 1? He won four titles, Aikman only three. Starr won five.
The stats quoted from 1960-63 were of Johnny's prime years, in which he was average. Volume high, rating average, Colts' team record mediocre to average.
"but in those games Unitas threw only 7 TD's, had 10 INT's, a 53.1 Comp. Pct. and QB rating of 68.9."
Those were Unitas' stats in ALL of his playoff games. When you compare his playoff stats to other QB's that played at least five playoff games, Unitas' playoff numbers would rank right near the bottom of the list. In any era. Look it up.
Here's Bart Starr's playoff numbers ,aka 'the dreaded game manager QB who's looked down upon', 15 TD's, 3 INT's, a 61% comp. pct. and QB rating of 104.8 . That rating is well over 20 points HIGHER than the league average during that era. There's not a single other QB in his era that comes close to his numbers and winning, when it counted, and that would be in the NFL playoffs.
John Unitas' playoff QB rating is 15 points LOWER than the league averages in his era and a whopping 35 rating points LOWER than Starr's , his contemporary.
Oh yeah, and Starr's Packers were 9-1 too with five rings. But who cares about winning, we're only looking to rest on our regular season laurels and awards, right?
I again, wasn't comparing Unitas' rating, numbers, or production to the modern era. That would be foolish with all the rule changes. I was simply using Marino and Brees as similar type QB's that produced big regular season numbers in their era's, just like Unitas did in his era. Apparently this flies over your head like a Johnny U. int.
For the 'eye test' you claim to be the expert on, I think you need glasses.
You mentioned that the Colts had better receiving weapons. I agree with you on that. Raymond Berry, Lenny Moore, and John Mackey, were all HOF players at WR, HB, and TE. The Packers passing game was Dowler, McGee, and Ron Kramer. All very solid ends but none of them will ever make the HOF. So Unitas, even with more talented HOF receivers to throw to, put up worst numbers than Starr. Unitas put up more volume, but with that volume came turnovers, a lower comp. mark, lower average gain, higher int pct., lower rating, etc.... and less winning than the Packers. I guess the 'game manager' type of QB is what I'd rather have if I wanted to win, instead of the huge stat producing gunslinger type QBs.
Your total W-L comparison is weak too. You mention the Lombardi years. Well Starr only played nine years under Lombardi. Lets compare those years side by side. Starr's W-L during that time frame was a stellar 77-23-4, that's a .770 winning pct. Add in his playoff 9-1 record, and you're looking at 86-24-4, the winning pct. increases to an astounding .781.
Let's see how John Unitas did, again from 1959-67, the Lombardi years.
Unitas had a W-L of 78-37-3 with a .678 winning pct. Not bad at all, in fact very respectable. Add in the 1-1 playoff mark and he's 79-38-3 for a .675 winning pct.
But that's still a full point below Starr's winning pct. But I guess you can go ahead and blame the Colts poor line play, or lack of a running game, or their inconsistent defenses during this era as the reason for this winning pct. difference. You gotta come up with something to say, so maybe use this extensive snap count you've witnessed in all your tape study.
1957 is the modern style quarterbacking in your mind and Johnny U invented it. Interesting. So because of this, he's the best.
So if you say Unitas is # 1, what exactly are you basing your flimsy argument on?
If it's not championships, then what QB rating? Team success? The art of quarterback play? What is it? Because in all of the above, Starr out duels Johnny U.
If it's in your extensive Football film study where you surmised this mythology, you've failed that course my friend. LOL.
You do understand that typically LOWER volume induces better ratings right? I mean is it easier to complete 60% of your passes when you are throwing 15 times a game or 30 times a game? Starr was certainly one of the most efficient QBs of all-time. As was Troy Aikman, who also has three rings..I would have to assume that you have Aikman and Starr close in your ratings, no?
I'm ok with agreeing to disagree on this. I actually enjoy these discussions immensely, even more so when we can debate the finer points and disagree on what we see.
IMO, ALL THESE THINGS roll into how I personally rank a QB on an all-time list...His regular season performances, playoff performances, who he played with, who he played for, how much he did above and beyond the average player of his era, etc. To say Championships carry the most weight, particularly for a QB in the 50s/60s just doesn't cut it for me. In today's game? Maybe..But in those years, if you watch or have watched how the game was played, defense and running game were paramount. You didn't win Championships without them.
There aren't many QBs, hell many PLAYERS who you can look back and saw "he revolutionized the game",but Unitas is one, plain and simple. His skill in the pocket was such that if you placed him in a time machine he would have translated to a good QB even in 2015. Bart Start probably wouldn't be a starting QB in 2015. If this hypothetical doesn't make sense to you and what I mean by saying it, well, that's why you don't have Unitas #1. I can tell you, the majority of football historians that I know and have spoken with over the years would also call Unitas, at the very least, the best of his era.
Its great that you are a Starr guy and have him as your profile picture, but that's not going to mean he's worthy of the top 10 on my list (he isn't). If he's #1 on yours, congrats. You are surely entitled to have that bias to believe that. I'm not a Colts fan or a Unitas fan in particular. I don't own his RC anymore, nor do I own Starr's. My hobby is football history, which is mostly what led to my card collecting over the years, as well as other memorabilia and game tapes that do exist if you ever want to become an expert on Starr rather than what your bias leads you to believe. Starr was as good as, maybe even a tad better than Troy Aikman all-time...He'd probably fall somewhere between 15-20 on my list. His throwing mechanics were pedestrian, he won the majority of his games and was very efficient because defenses were stacking to stop the Packer Sweep. Super smart player, great in clutch situations, but when his running game went south, so did Starr's numbers. How many of those games that he won did the Packers have more rushing yards than passing yards? I mean seriously...
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Unitas was great, probably somewhere between 3rd and 7th on my list, but not #1. Completion percentage and turnovers matter, regardless of era. Unitas is proof that a player can be simultaneously an all time great and still overhyped. So he created the prototype for a pocket passer and a modern style passing game? Great, but just because you're the first to do it doesn't mean you're the best to do it. Randall Cunningham was the first QB in the modern era to really be a runner, more so than Tarkenton. But he's not better than cam newton or Russell Wilson. They followed cunningham's template and improved it, just like Staubach and Montana did with Johnny U's template.
I have no issue with anyone putting Joe Montana over Johnny U. Its really tough to compare the two, specifically the statistics that you mentioned. Completion % and turnovers for QBs pre-Mel Blount rule just aren't in the hemisphere of QBs after the rule was enacted prior to the 1978 season and they will never be comparable. They played QB with similar style and attitude and I have considered putting Montana over Unitas on my list many times over the years, mostly due to Montana's "greatest ever" clutch-time play. In the end, playing during the 80s/90s NFL while it was evolving to a passing game keeps me from putting Montana on top. Montana simply had it easier, and had quite a few QBs who could match his annual numbers where as Unitas had far fewer QBs in his era who compare favorably numbers wise year-to-year.
As far as Staubach goes, I have him 10th on my list...Mostly due to the fact that he only started 114 regular season games and 17 playoff games.He is IMO, the greatest QB of the 1970s..Better than Tarkenton, Bradshaw, Stabler, Griese...Had he been able to play more seasons and start more games (he missed a few while serving his country) no doubt I would feel better about putting him higher. Staubach was the rare player who could be the gunslinger when he needed to be, as well as the great game manager when that was needed. He had a ton of talent around him, but don't think the Cowboys come anywhere close to their level of success in the 1970's with any other QB. I do value longevity in my rankings however. The longer a player can be at the top of his game, IMO, the better he represents how a true "all-time great" can be defined. I think it is important to look at all aspects of a player if you want to put together an honest/unbias list you can be proud of. Also doesn't help Staubach's case that he was never considered the best QB in the game during his time. You look at 1st Team All-Pro QBs over the 1970s and Staubach has zero. Again, for me that doesn't prevent me from knowing what I watched and putting Staubach as the top QB of the 1970s IMO, but it does keep me from placing him above some other QBs on my list from other eras.
Would love to hear who is 3-4-5-6 over Unitas if he were to fall to 7th on your list. I think its one of the traps we tend to fall in with the "overrated vs underrated" debate. With so many over the years calling Johnny U. the greatest QB of all-time, it gives some the idea that he was perfect, which he wasn't and no QB is. Its the same with players considered "underrated" where we subconsciously begin to anoint them to be a little better than they actually were for the simple fact that they don't get enough respect or accolades.
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Thanks for the Starr interview but the link doesn't work. I'll try to find that on youtube.
We can agree to disagree on the all-time QB.
Honestly, if you had posted any of these QB's as # 1 : Baugh, Graham, Starr, Montana, Young, Manning, Brady, or Staubach, I wouldn't have bothered to post on this thread, as a valid argument could be made for any of them to be considered #1 all-time. Just not Unitas, at least not to me.
He's about 4th best all-time in my opinion, for all the reasons I've posted about above.
Just for the heck of it, I compared Starr and Unitas's marks during the Lombardi era, that's 1959-67, here's what they did:
So as you can see, Unitas' obviously put up more TDs, yards, completed more passes, threw more INT's. Unitas has the edge in one major category and that is TD pct. A high volume passer like he was. Fine. To be fair too, Unitas won three MVP's during this time frame, and Starr only won one. But that award is based on regular season accomplishments and really goes to the offensive player who puts up the 'biggest stats', so without winning rings, it loses some of it's luster in my opnion.
The important numbers, comp. pct., Avg. Gain, Int %, overall rating, better W-L mark, and finally more Championships all give the edge to Bart Starr. Game managers RULE!
Head to head, Starr has Unitas beat there as well, with better numbers across the board and more head to head team wins when the Packers played the Colts. If Unitas was the best all-time, why did he suck against the best team in Football for so many years? Shouldn't the greatest QB of all-time rise above their best competition?? He didn't. Few other teams did either during this nine season era though.
I'm not really sure how anyone would think Unitas is the better QB during the 1960's.
Question, when a player is said to be 'revolutionary' at his position, is he the best ever then? Then I submit that soccer style kicker Pete Gogolak is the greatest kicker ever. He revolutionized the art of kicking the football with his side winding, soccer style kicking. He virtually invented that kicking style and brought it into professional football in 1964.
As I've stated several times on this thread, no one area or category should be used to decide where a player ranks on your all-time greats list. All things should be considered. "Revolutionizing" a position certainly plays a part, as does longevity, numbers in comparison to peers of their era, awards and accolades, stats, Championships, etc. Unitas rates highly in every single category.
Look at the numbers of Unitas vs. Starr...Over 50% more pass attempts over the same time period. Almost 100 more TD passes and almost 10k more yards...I mean they are so different in their style of play and what was asked of them its silly. Starr had titles because he QB'd Lombardi's Packers...He was a key player and played a big role in that, but as you can see by his numbers, he wasn't the feared player. Defenses did not have to game plan to stop Starr, rather it was the Packers dominant run game they had to game plan for. Against Baltimore, it was Unitas.
I mean hey, maybe even the voters of that era got it wrong too? The ones who watched Unitas and Starr in person, the ones who voted for the All-Pro teams. On FIVE occasions Unitas was voted over Starr and everyone else as the best QB of that season..Starr was selected for that honor just ONCE. That isn't revisionist history of 2016 looking back at the "myth and legend" of Johnny U. That's voters and writers from THOSE particular seasons making that decision.
Unitas is your 4th best QB, I'm fine with that. You might be one of the few guys on the planet who have Starr above him, but that's ok too. That's why we do these top 10 lists, everyone gets to make their own decisions on what they think. Being that I've watched enough of Starr and Unitas, I wouldn't in could conscious ever be able to get Starr into my top 10..Maybe could be persuaded to put him 12-15 at best. Anything higher simply isn't a realistic view of who Starr was as a QB in the NFL.
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
10. Brodie Croyle 0-10 in his career. Somehow played five years in the NFL 9. Billy Joe Hobert in his first start he threw four picks. And anyone with the name Billy Joe must be on this list. 8. David Carr - lead the league is times sacked three of his first four seasons. 7. Vinny Testaverde - drafted 1/1 and compared himself to Favre. 6. Stoney Case - his name sounds like a disease and he played in the NFL, NFL Europe, and the Arena league. 5. Todd Marinovich - Raider great QB of the future in 1991. He only played two years and was 3-5. His last game he completed as many passes to the Eagles as he did to his own teammates. 4. Ryan Leaf - no comment 3. Joey Harrington - was a major reason the Lions were so bad in the 2000's 2. Art Schlichter - if you don't know the Art Schlicter story go google him. 1. Jay Cutler
You guys forgot Mike Phipps, another dud that played for the Browns.
Jasp24, you do know the all-pro teams are solely based on the regular season, right? Because if they were also based on the playoffs, on the games that mean the most, Unitas doesn't compare to Starr.
All the important numbers and accomplishments, ie: rings, playoff accomplishments. comp. pct, int pct., avg. gain, QB rating, are all in Starr's favor over Unitas.
The only edge Unitas has on Starr is TD pct., and volume, which created more opportunities for more total yards, TDs, completions.
So you'd rather have a QB pass for 300 yards, 2 TD's and 2 INTs and lose the game? Or, would you rather have the QB be a true field general and make the proper decisions while posting 150 yards, 1 TD, and 0 Ints, oh yeah and also win the game?
I'll take the later.
I never said they were the same in style, only that Starr won more and was more efficient in the numbers that really count. He was that way in the regular season and on the big stage, when it counted, in the playoffs, and in the Super Bowls.
Try naming several of Unitas' defining moments in his career? I can think of the 1958 Championship game, the game tying drive to set up the FG to put the game into OT, and then the Colts winning on a Ameche plunge in sudden death. That's about it. Oh yeah, he also had great regular season numbers, won several MVP's, and had some great W-L records along the way. All excellent.
For Starr : 1961 Champ. game, a 37-0 shutout of the Giants, where he only threw 17 passes but 3 went for TD's, 130 QB rating in the bitter cold. Super Bowl 1 and 2. Biggest games in NFL history, Starr was MVP of both. The whole NFL was watching and the Packers didn't fold under that pressure and lose to the AFL. SB 1: 250 yards, 2 TDs, 116 rating, won 35-10 over the Chiefs. SB 2: 202 yards, 1 TD, 96 rating, won 33-14 over Oakland
The Ice Bowl where he threw for 191 yards, 2 TD's, 111 rating, and won the game on a rushing play as the clock was running out. Accounting for all of the scoring in sub zero temps.
The 1967 Jan 1st. playoff game against the Cowboys, leading up to SB 1, where he out gunslung Don Meredith in a high scoring game by throwing for 304 yards, 4 TD's, 143 QB rating, the Pack won 34-27 in a shootout on the road in Dallas.
In '65 beating the Browns in the cold mud 23-12, Starr managed the game here, passing for only 147 yds on 10/18 with a TD and only a 77 rating. That game was won by the Packers defense and the running of Taylor and Hornung.
The year before against the same Browns team, Unitas put up this line: 12/20, 95 yards, 0 TDs, 2 INT's, 33 rating, losing 27-0 with four other HOF'ers on his offense. That Browns team didn't have a single HOF'er on defense either. In 1964 the Colts were 12-2 in the regular season, Unitas was the MVP, and they probably had the best team in Football that year, that is until the playoffs came and the Colts choked.
So these are the reason why I'd pick Starr over Unitas. I don't care about who ran the best 2 min. offense, who had more style, who might have defined the QB position, who put up larger volume numbers, who sported a cooler haircut, etc..... none of this means anything without the wins and rings.
Unitas was picking up all the pro bowls and the all-pro teams, and MVP's based on the regular season. That's fine. That's why he is considered great.
Starr was performing the BEST in the playoffs, when it mattered the most, and simply winning. In any weather conditions too.
"So you'd rather have a QB pass for 300 yards, 2 TD's and 2 INTs and lose the game? Or, would you rather have the QB be a true field general and make the proper decisions while posting 150 yards, 1 TD, and 0 Ints, oh yeah and also win the game"
Also left out Bubby Brister from that list FavreFan..lol
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
"So you'd rather have a QB pass for 300 yards, 2 TD's and 2 INTs and lose the game? Or, would you rather have the QB be a true field general and make the proper decisions while posting 150 yards, 1 TD, and 0 Ints, oh yeah and also win the game"
Well, wouldn't this depend on what you have on Defense? And Offensive Running Game? Guy throwing for 150, 1, 0, arguably didnt win the game. Game managers aren't tasked with winning the game, but rather limiting the damage so Defense and running game can win it... So if I am ranking which QB is better, am I going to put the guy who can manage a game well enough for his high end defense and running game to win? Or do I rank the QB who can take a team on his back and win games with his arm? Personally I give more credit to the QB 's who can take over a game and play unstoppable type football vs. a guy who's good at handing off,running the clock and making only 2-3 important plays per game...
Starr played for the BEST TEAM, the TEAM OF THE DECADE 1960s. He won more playoff games by default. Look over the numbers, both via Packers Defense and Packers running game, then compare what Starr did in those wins...Other than his 1 yard dive in the Ice Bowl (where most credit goes to Jerry Kramer BTW) he didn't do anything that just about any other top 20-30 QB could do on a team of that magnitude and talent.
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I have always found it interesting that QB's like Starr, Bradshaw, and Aikman are often underrated because of the teams they played for. Starr was great because he had Taylor, Hornung, and a stong OL; Bradshaw was great because he had Harris, and two HOF WR's; Aikman was great because he was surrounded by HOF'ers and All Pro's. Yet we never hear the name of one of those "supporting" players as the best at their positions. The closest might be E. Smith and F.Gregg but if someone described them as the top Tackle or top Running Back I am guessing the pitch forks would come out.lol In my opinion the easiest way to go after some of they guys is to attack the quality of the team they we on but oddly enough some players are immune to this. Montana, Graham, Unitas (going with the names already mentioned and sticking with the QB postion) some how are not affected when most rankings are put together. I just thought this was worth noting because maybe Starr, Bradshaw, and Aikman could of posted better stats if their teams wanted them to be "gunslingers" rather than work within their offensive systems.
Super Bowl XXVIII: Buffalo Bills vs Dallas Cowboys - Running back Emmitt Smith rushed for 132 yards and 2 touchdowns earning Super Bowl MVP honors as the Cowboys defeated the Bills 30-13 to win their second consecutive NFL title.
In Unitas 6 playoff wins, here are the AVG TEAM STATS: 117.3 Yards rushing, 217.7 yards passing, 241 yards allowed by Defense in Starr's 9 playoff wins, here are the AVG TEAM STATS: 142.2 yards rushing, 204.9 yards passing, 235.1 yards allowed by Defense
The Packers defensive yard average a bit skewed by a 418 yard performance by the Cowboys in 66 playoffs...Colts defensive numbers skewed a bit the opposite way by a game vs. the Bengals in 1970 where the Bengals managed 139 yards...lol
Starr did have a couple of big numbers in playoff games, the shootout vs. the Cowboys being one, I mean can't take anything away from Starr being one of the all-time greats almost SOLELY on his playoff performances and game management...As I've said, he's still probably somewhere between 15-20 on my list, and I could probably be talked into putting him as high as 11-15, although would be tough...But to say Unitas was a bad playoff QB, 6 wins, 2 championships simply untrue. You listed him as the 4th best QB of all-time, he obviously did something right to get that high on your list...
Again, admire your fortitude to continue pushing Starr as better than Unitas. But Starr himself learned to become a better passer by watching Unitas. If Starr played for the Colts instead of the Team of the Century the 1960s Packers, I doubt we'd be having the same conversation.
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
dfr52, that is a VERY VALID debate, and I agree 100%. Its hard to compare guys who played a completely different game and style of game. All we can do is judge what we see, the numbers, the accolades, etc. The ones who tend to be a little more "immune" like Montana, Unitas, Graham is because they could play ANY STYLE and win any way. They all have lots (well Otto's AAFL games not so much) you can find and watch and see what you see on the field...Its the whole chicken or the egg..Did the QB make the players around him better, or did the players make the QB better...
For me, it comes down to big plays and big throws...Did or could that QB throw a precision pass under duress? Could he hit the out-rout for the 1st down? Did he make good reads on the defense? Did he make plays that you don;t see the average QB make? Could you put the team on his back and win when his defense and/or running game wasn't up to snuff? All those things play a part for me to try and distinguish the differences.
The Peyton/Brady debate will be a big one down the road based on much if this...No one made better reads or better throws than Peyton. But you can't discount how well Tom Brady played even when his defense was weak, his running game weak, his receiving core was weak, etc. Peyton is the guy I want as my starter. Play-for-play, pound for pound, never seen anyone better at playing the position of QB...But in clutch situations, he was easily rattled...Hell, put any good rush on the guy and all his strengths dipped down a bit...The opposite for Brady..So for me, trying to tell the difference between these 2 on an all-time list is WAYYYYY tougher than seeing the difference between say a Unitas and a Starr...
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
s...Other than his 1 yard dive in the Ice Bowl (where most credit goes to Jerry Kramer BTW)
Go look at that play again and tell me Ken Bowman is not the hero of that play. Kramer getting all of the attention over that play has been a 50 year old lie.
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Thank you! If it were centered just a tad lower, I'd try for the 8.5 bump review. It's focused, no print issues, sharp corners. Just the centering t-b.
Richard that is one awesome Johnny U. Brilliant color and white borders.
I have enjoyed the conversation about the two QB's. Both the gentleman certainly know more than me.
I am working on both their card player sets. The problem with collecting Unitas is he has to many card #1's.
The 1960 and 1962 are killers in PSA 8 and go for a decent buck. Starr cards also get a premium.
I went back and reviewed quite a bit of Unitas' film. One thing that comes to mind....John Mackey was a absolute beast.
Unitas had a good enough arm that seems accurate and often has a nice touch. Certainly no rifle.
He gets introduced often as the "great Johnny Unitas." By the way I loved some of the introductions of the 1950's.
The legend of Johnny U certainly started in his earlier playing years if you listen to the announcers of the games.
In most interviews of this specific era by HOFers most will say the greatest was Johnny U. I have personally asked this exact question to a
several of them at sports events. All said Johnny U. The Colts were Johnny's team and he was the undisputed leader.
Here lies the problem. Starr is overshadowed by the great Packers teams of that era and Lombardi was the leader. Starr was the field
general along with the other great HOF packers. It was a great system and all the players benefited from that teamwork.
The individuals get lost vs the one recognized leader. The QB position is the one position where leadership is a very important factor.
IMO football history doesn't look at the two of them in the same light.
Football may be the hardest sport to claim best of position. When we talk of winning and championships being part of the
overall picture its hard because FB has separate defense and offensive players. (minus the older 60 min guys).
Most other sports: baseball, hockey, basketball, soccer have the same guys on the playing field on offense and defense.
An individual may be considered better at one part of the game. In SB 50 can we say the great Peyton Manning led his team to a SB victory?
No way, but the 2nd SB victory may well cement Manning from being the greatest regular season QB to the greatest ever. Period.
My point is that in FB there as so many variables that it's hard to say who was the best. I would have np problem simply saying both Unitas and Starr are in the top 5.
I had Unitas as my #1. Mainly because of the legend created. I didn't see both their whole careers. Still sticking with it.
Collecting PSA... FB,BK,HK,and BB HOF RC sets 1948-76 Topps FB Sets FB & BB HOF Player sets 1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
Originally posted by: cardbender Thank you! If it were centered just a tad lower, I'd try for the 8.5 bump review. It's focused, no print issues, sharp corners. Just the centering t-b.
I didn't even notice the centering at first. That's an eight that presents much better than its assigned grade. Unless the t-b centering is terrible I never notice it at first glance, usually only after giving a card a closer inspection.
Super Bowl XXVIII: Buffalo Bills vs Dallas Cowboys - Running back Emmitt Smith rushed for 132 yards and 2 touchdowns earning Super Bowl MVP honors as the Cowboys defeated the Bills 30-13 to win their second consecutive NFL title.
Thank you! If it were centered just a tad lower, I'd try for the 8.5 bump review. It's focused, no print issues, sharp corners. Just the centering t-b.
I didn't even notice the centering at first. That's an eight that presents much better than its assigned grade. Unless the t-b centering is terrible I never notice it at first glance, usually only after giving a card a closer inspection.
I agree that on most cards T/B centering is a lot less distracting than L/R centering.
Speaking of Unitas 8's, I still have the one I bought from Jason P. years ago. And I still love it as much as the day I got it!
I didn't weigh in on the all-time great QBs discussion, but I will say this now. In my 42+ years on Earth, this best QB I saw in his prime was (drumroll please)...Steve Young. He was (again, in his prime) as close to a perfect QB as I've ever seen. Pinpoint accuracy, a pretty spiral and unbelievable scrambling ability. If I needed a QB for one game, he's my guy. It's a shame that so much of his career was wasted in the USFL, Tampa Bay and sitting behind Joe Montana, and that injuries derailed the latter part of his career. Oh, what could have been.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
With Jared Allen announcing his retirement today, I'm curious to know how you guys feel about his HOF chances. He retires with 136 career sacks, which ties him with Peppers for 9th on the all-time list. But Peppers and Ware will bump him down to 11th place next year. Allen made 5 Pro Bowls and was named All-Pro 4 times in 12 years. He was on the fast track to the HOF for a while, but the wheels really fell off after he left Minnesota, presumably because his body started breaking down. To me he's a very borderline candidate. I could see him maybe getting in the Kevin Greene route (waiting a looooooong time), but I'm not so sure. Thoughts?
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
Well #1 I think Andy has the best cards on the registry quality wise. I for sure trust his eagle eye. All are very high end. That Johnny U is jaw dropping.
Jared Allen falls short IMO.
I can't agree more on Steve Young. Who expected it after the great Montana. If that one game were the SB I still choose Montana. He was at his very best when it counted the most.
Recent discussion by Jason P about rattlin Peyton's cage (both the Mannings) and even Brady......Not even a MVP Newton could have survived the Bronco's onslaught with Miller and Ware in the last SB. The ONLY QB I have ever seen that could have won that game was Steve Young. He would have scrambled away, kept his head and found a way to win.
Collecting PSA... FB,BK,HK,and BB HOF RC sets 1948-76 Topps FB Sets FB & BB HOF Player sets 1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
Jay, nice post and thoughts on the all-time QB. All good points of view on the debate. Here's one, which QB would you guys want to have on the field if they had to play both ways? I'm going to go with the old guy, Slingin' Sammy Baugh, who was also a great DB for about six years, plus add in the punting and he would always be on the field.
Andy, funny you say Steve Young, because he's my favorite modern day QB. I loved Montana too obviously, as I'm a huge 49ers fan. But once Young got his shot, his fine accuracy, low int pct., toughness in the pocket, and then scrambling ability when the heat was on, puts him near the top all-time. Who can forget his 6 TD passes against the Chargers in the Super Bowl? Plus he did this while following a legend.
Similar to what Aaron Rodgers is doing for the Packers now, after following Favre.
Andy has some of the nicest centered cards in the world.
I know I am biased, but I agree with Jay earlier about Starr. If not for those entire great Packer teams of the sixties, he I believe would be thought of in even higher regards than Unitas.
Originally posted by: cardbender Jay, nice post and thoughts on the all-time QB. All good points of view on the debate. Here's one, which QB would you guys want to have on the field if they had to play both ways? I'm going to go with the old guy, Slingin' Sammy Baugh, who was also a great DB for about six years, plus add in the punting and he would always be on the field.
Andy, funny you say Steve Young, because he's my favorite modern day QB. I loved Montana too obviously, as I'm a huge 49ers fan. But once Young got his shot, his fine accuracy, low int pct., toughness in the pocket, and then scrambling ability when the heat was on, puts him near the top all-time. Who can forget his 6 TD passes against the Chargers in the Super Bowl? Plus he did this while following a legend.
Similar to what Aaron Rodgers is doing for the Packers now, after following Favre.
Andy has some of the nicest centered cards in the world.
If Young had more starts, he undoubtedly would be higher on my list...Some of the greatest single season QB performances I've seen were by Steve Young...The USFL/Bucs/waiting on Montana years holds him back a bit for me in the grand scheme...He'd certainly be in my top 20, and likely higher than 15...Might be a fun project for me to try and build a top 20, I would have to go back and re-look some guys to be able to slot them against one another in those areas...
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Originally posted by: shagrotn77 Speaking of Unitas 8's, I still have the one I bought from Jason P. years ago. And I still love it as much as the day I got it!
I didn't weigh in on the all-time great QBs discussion, but I will say this now. In my 42+ years on Earth, this best QB I saw in his prime was (drumroll please)...Steve Young. He was (again, in his prime) as close to a perfect QB as I've ever seen. Pinpoint accuracy, a pretty spiral and unbelievable scrambling ability. If I needed a QB for one game, he's my guy. It's a shame that so much of his career was wasted in the USFL, Tampa Bay and sitting behind Joe Montana, and that injuries derailed the latter part of his career. Oh, what could have been.
Of all the cards I've sold off, this Unitas and my Jimmy Brown are the two I miss the most...
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Originally posted by: shagrotn77 With Jared Allen announcing his retirement today, I'm curious to know how you guys feel about his HOF chances. He retires with 136 career sacks, which ties him with Peppers for 9th on the all-time list. But Peppers and Ware will bump him down to 11th place next year. Allen made 5 Pro Bowls and was named All-Pro 4 times in 12 years. He was on the fast track to the HOF for a while, but the wheels really fell off after he left Minnesota, presumably because his body started breaking down. To me he's a very borderline candidate. I could see him maybe getting in the Kevin Greene route (waiting a looooooong time), but I'm not so sure. Thoughts?
I think Jared Allen and Calvin Johnson will present a couple of interesting cases in 2021 (assuming Megatron does actually retire). Neither is a lock, I'd say both have a 20-30% shot. Both probably slot in just below Patrick Willis (eligible 2020). Depends on if/how soon they make the top 15 Finalists. I think both will make the top 25 Semifinalists, very likely their first year, which will bode well for them although an extended wait will be in store for each of them.
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Hey HOF RC guys. Long time, no see. I just posted a big list of some tough high grade HOF RC's over in the Buy /Sell / Trade board. These are all from the old Skinsfan (Art Miller) collection. Some of you probably remember him from the boards about 5 years ago. One nice thing about this last bit of his collection ... is that most of his cards were graded prior to 1/2 point grade bumps. So there may be some bumpable cards in there. Anyway, PM me with any questions or interest. Thanks - Mike T.
Class of 2021 looking very strong with Peyton, Woodson and possibly Tom Coughlin...
A Few of the guys better get in during the only two weak years in the next 5 which are 2017 and 2020. Good possibility of 3 first ballot guys in the other upcoming classes.
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
As a long time Giants fan, and as an ex-photographer for a website that covered the Giants, I'm of the opinion Tom Coughlin is over rated and is not an HOFer.
As a long time Giants fan, and as an ex-photographer for a website that covered the Giants, I'm of the opinion Tom Coughlin is over rated and is not an HOFer.
As a longtime Giants fan, I'm of the belief that you're wrong.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
Comments
If you factor in the CFL then you have to rate Moon in the top 10.
Nobody cares about the CFL though.
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
Lock:
Tomlinson
Highly Likely:
Warner, TO
Good Shot:
Andersen, Coryell, Lynch
I don't think Jason Taylor or Brian Dawkins will get in first try, and I just feel like next year might be Andersen's year. He better get in before Vinatieri breaks his points record, or he might never (see Gary Anderson). I wouldn't be shocked to see any of this year's finalists slide into the 4 and 5 spots, so we shall see. Also, I believe they are back to one Senior spot next year as they've been alternating years with the new format. Fingers crossed that it's Kramer or Howley!
LaDanian Tomlinson
Kurt Warner
Terrell Owens
John Lynch
Don Coryell
Tomlinson and Warner really the only locks...I do think they need to get Owens in before Moss comes up next year or they risk another Carter/Reed standoff in future discussions...Same with Lynch, we have Ed Reed and Polamalu coming soon, plus Dawkins and At-water...Yet they haven't put in a Safety from the modern era in many years...
The 5th spot as usual probably up for grabs. Other than Coryell, guys with a shot at the 5th spot:
Joe Jacoby, Morten Andersen, Jason Taylor.In that order of likelihood.
I didnt think Jacoby had a chance, but making top 10 with just two more years of eligibility left probably means he gets in the next 2 classes. If he falls back in 2017, meaning he doesn't at least make the top 10, then he won't get in as a modern candidate. Andersen will get in at some point, but Coryell been waiting longer. Taylor I seriously doubt, as I don't think most view him as a first ballot guy. He should make the top 15 at least, and who knows after that. Will be interesting to see where Brian Dawkins slots in...IMO, he was better than At-water, so wonder if he will jump him in the Safety pecking order. Ed Reed comes eligible in 2019 and Polamalu in 2020, so between Lynch, Dawkins and At-water, at least one, and probably two get elected in the next couple of classes...If not, going to be quite a wait after that.
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I agree with Jason's list except I would move Elway ahead of Marino. To me the Super Bowls get additional weighting in my mind.
I wanted to see Dan Fouts, Warren Moon or Jim Kelly on this list, but couldn't justify taking anyone out of the top 10 for them.
Hard to argue that. Only reason I still have Marino higher is that both of Elway's rings, were mostly due to Terrell Davis. Elway's career Super Bowl numbers (3TD-8 INT) weren't very good at all, and I just liked Marino's pure passer game more than I liked Elway's gunslinger, scrambler game. Marino, when on his game, was as unstoppable as they come. Elway always found a way to win and was better at improvising, but rarely saw him play unstoppable type football. His teams typically had pretty good defenses, where as Miami's Defense almost always sucked during the Marino years...Descent D and Marino probably has a couple of rings as well.
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Top candidates:
LC Greenwood
Chuck Howley
Eddie Meador
Johnny Robinson
But really almost impossible to guess at this point. Super Bowl is in Houston, so maybe Howley makes sense.
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Edit to add: I hope Greenwood and Kramer both get in eventually. And I'd have a hard time choosing between Dawkins and Lynch, although I think they're both better than At-water.
the #1 all-time QB on any list. He did cut a dynamic image, with his black high top shoes and crew cut haircut.
Johnny's peak was the decage of the 1960's, right?
Trivia - How many playoff games did Unitas win in the 1960's?
Anyone...??
The answr is ZERO. Not a single one.
Unitas was the Dan Marino and to some extent the Drew Brees of his era. Always putting up great regular season numbers,
yet doing little in the playoffs against the best competition.
Johnny U's historical rep is mostly based on his two back to back Championships won in '58 and '59 against the Giants.
Those were huge games and the '58 game with it's national TV broadcast, kind of put pro Football on the map. So I'll give him that.
Afterwards, in the 1960's, Unitas keep piling up great regular season stats.
He also won three MVP's in the 1960's. Plus he had many pro bowl appearances too to add to his mystique.
But team success and mainly playoff wins just weren't there. From 1960-63, these were the years where he was 27-30 years old and most QB's have their best
years during this time frame. Unitas' Colts team's record was 29-25 in this stretch. He threw 84 TDs, and had 83 INTS's during this four year run. He passed for
tons of yardage, over 12,000 in this 4-year run. Lot's of volume, but hardly the stats of a QB rated the best by many so-called experts.
In 1964's Championship game, Unitas was outplayed at QB by the Browns Frank Ryan and the Colts were shutout 27-0 in that game.
In the 1965 playoffs, Unitas didn't play due to injuries and the Colts lost a close divisional playoff game against the Packers (with Starr getting knocked out early too in the game) to advance to meet the Browns.
In the Colts great 1968 13-1 season, Unitas was hurt most of that year and the Colts were lead by longtime journeyman Earl Morrall, who also won the
leagues MVP. The Colts lost SB 3 to the Jets and Namath, so not really Unitas' fault there.
During his career, his numbers in the playoffs actually regressed from his regular season totals.
In nine playoff games, the Colts were 6-3, but in those games Unitas threw only 7 TD's, had 10 INT's, a 53.1 Comp. Pct. and QB rating of 68.9.
Those w-l numbers are padded by the 3-0 1970 postseason in which Unitas completed just 35% of his passes in the playoffs.
By this time his arm was shot and the Colts were winning due to their great defense.
If Unitas is the number one QB of all-time in many peoples minds, I'd like to know why.
Those top 10 all-time QB lists above are pretty good, but are lacking two players, Steve Young and Bart Starr.
I'd drop Elway and Marino.
The reason Unitas is #1 on most lists, is similar to the same reason Jim Brown is the #1 RB of all-time on most lists. Its not how they compare to today, its how they compared vs. the other players of their era.
Johnny U did what he did playing against REAL DEFENSE...ANY holding of defensive pass rushers was NOT allowed, unlike today where blockers can hold inside...Receivers would get mugged all the way down the field, unlike today where any contact beyond 5 yards gets a flag...Comparing his stats to todays stats as a reason he wasnt all that great is just not a sensible argument.
Unitas practically invented the QB position as we know it today. In 1950, the average passing yards per team, per game was 165.7...In 1955 it was 159.8...In 1957 is was 153.4, Unitas' first year as starter..Unitas YPG in 1957 was 212.5...He called his own plays, he perfected the two minute drill, no one was gunslinging like Unitas...
He retired as the All-Time NFL leader in every significant passing category..The argument about Championships, while important to QBs, doesn't cut it with me or my rankings...Was Marino responsible for making tackles and getting defensive turnovers? So lets take the greatest pure passer off the list because his team never had a great running game or consistently good defense..Unitas all-time playoff record is 6-2, hardly a choke artist.
IMO, anyone who doesn't have Unitas at a minimum in their top 3, either doesn't know anything about pre-1980 football, or simply hasn't seen enough to justify...Starr was better because he played for the Packers? A team with more HOF caliber players than any other? Because they had the defense dominant enough to assist Starr in being a great game manager? Unitas was the Joe Montana of his era, while Starr was the Troy Aikman...
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I don't like being misquoted either. I never compared era's in my post so half of your above argument is moot.
What I said was : Unitas was the Dan Marino and to some extent the Drew Brees of his era. Always putting up great regular season numbers,
yet doing little in the playoffs against the best competition. The facts bear this out.
Maybe you should re-read that again. Unitas put up big numbers in his time, and so did Marino, and so does Brees today. That's a given.
All while not winning enough. That was the comparison: winning, while having big stats.
Pretty explicit. I didn't say compare Unitas' stats to the other guys' stats, ie Marino and Brees.
What does Jim Brown have to do with quarterbacking? Again, I never compared era's saying Unitas had it any easier than the modern guys.
And yes I do believe Jim Brown was the best RB ever, in any era.
Unitas practically invented the QB position, huh? I think other old time HOF QB's, guys like Benny Friedmann, Sammy Baugh, Sid Luckman,
Otto Graham, Bobby Layne, and Norm Van Brocklin would take exception to that remark. Did the game begin in 1957 when Unitas became a starter? WTF!
Unitas' set all the all-time records, breaking marks of Tittle, Layne, etc.. That is true.
Just a few years later, Unitas' records were all topped by Tarkenton. I don't see his name on your all-time top ten QB list for some reason.
Tarkenton was soon topped by Marino, who was topped by Favre, who is now being surpassed by Peyton Manning.
So your argument that Unitas once held all these records says exactly nothing about him being number one all-time.
The great Sonny Jurgensen threw the most TD's in the 1960's by the way. Just another fact.
Championships, that's the only thing that matters. Do you think Johnny U. was more interested in piling up his great stats year after year, or
was he more interested in winning rings? I would think the later. That's why they play the games. Great statistics mean nothing without the rings
to back them up. I guess leading the league in passing yardage is more important than winning, heh?
You said he was 6-2 in the playoffs. Techinically he was 6-3 in all playoff games. He did come on in relief of Morrall in SB 3 and the Colts still lost.
They were favored by 18 and had the BEST def. in Football that year. Still lost the big game. Starr never lost to the AFL in the SB, did he?
In SB 5, Unitas started that game too, but only played in the first half. Yet he gets credit for the win as a starter. In that game he was 3-9 for 88 yards, I TD, 2 INT's.
Earl Morrall played the entire second half and the Colts won a close one 16-13 over the Cowboys. It's too bad Roger Staubach didn't
play in that game, the Cowboys might have won. Oh yeah, in 1970 Unitas was a 'game manager' by this time. Maybe that's why they won SB 5.
That and his great Colts team defense. The Colts had the second best record in Football that year and the #2 ranked defense in the AFC.
In 1958, the Colts' first championship, the Colts had the # 2 defense that year, they also had the #2 rushing attack in the league.
You said they never had a great rushing attack. I guess the facts prove you wrong here too.
After Alan Ameche hurt his knee in 1959, the Colts team did suffer from the lack of a solid RB. That's why the Colts were about a .500 team during his prime years, Unitas being a gunslinger, throwing all those INT's, all that yardage, but not winning or making the playoffs during this time frame.
In 1967, Unitas won the MVP, the Colts were 11-1-2, the Colts had the #2 ranked defense that year.
You said the Colts never had a consistently 'good' defense.
Geez, they were ranked # 2 in 1958, a Championship win, were ranked #2 in 1967 which was Unitas' last great season,
were ranked #1 in 1968 a SB 3 loss, and were ranked #2 in the AFC in 1970, a SB 5 win, game finished by Morrall at QB.
I guess being ranked # 1 or # 2 is not considered a consistenly good defense in your eyes?
Johnny U called his own plays. That's cool. Maybe he should've let his coaches call the plays, because he wasn't winning enough for me if he's
cosidered the #1 QB by all these so-called football experts.
Gunslinger, another cool term to use for a QB with a big arm, who throws for a lot of yardage, and TDs, but at the end winds up more on the
losing side games. Yeah, but those 'gunslingers' sure put up great numbers, don't they? This isn't Fantasy Football.
Championship wins. To me, is all that matters. That's why they play the games, to win. It's not about padding stats and having the most yardage. They don't keep score by yardage. I'll take a so-called 'game manager' like Starr, with his 9-1 playoff mark, 15-3 TD/INT, his stellar 104 playoff QB rating against the best competition in the biggest games and moments, and FIVE Championship wins, over a gunslinger any day. It's simply about winning. Great statistics are a by product and mean virtually nothing without the rings to back those numbers up. Starr has the rings AND the playoff numbers. Unitas has the regular season stats and less rings. Oh yeah, but Unitas' called his own plays, so that must make him better.
I feel anyone who doesn't consider Bart Starr a Top ten all-time QB, should maybe look a little deeper into the history of the game and
not rely on so-called experts opinions. All opinions matter to me. Some are just not backed up by cold hard facts.
Don't get me wrong, I have every single Unitas card in PSA 8 or 9 in my collection. I think he was great. I definitely think Unitas is in the top five of all-time QB's. I just don't think he's #1.
There is a myth about him being the greatest. Many myths can be dispelled with facts, which is
what I tried to do with my posts. I never knew he never won a playoff game in the entire
decade of the 1960's until I a few years ago when I looked deeper into the history of the game.
There's a great line in the classic western movie, 'The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance'. Said by a newspaper reporter at the end of the movie:
'when the legend becomes fact, print the legend.
That's what they did for the legend of Johnny U.
Also, you quoted Johnny U numbers in your initial post. Specifically:
" He threw 84 TDs, and had 83 INTS's during this four year run. He passed for
tons of yardage, over 12,000 in this 4-year run. Lot's of volume, but hardly the stats of a QB rated the best by many so-called experts."
And
"but in those games Unitas threw only 7 TD's, had 10 INT's, a 53.1 Comp. Pct. and QB rating of 68.9."
None of these are inherently bad statistics for those years, when measured vs. the league averages of those years. So I infer that you are comparing to todays QBs since you names them in comparison.
I base my rankings on my personal eye test. I've been able to watch probably somewhere between 40-50% of the snaps Unitas took in his career. Probably have been able to watch about the same, if not a few more of Bart Starr's snaps. While Starr was a great game manager and very proficient QB, he certainly IMO was not as talented at improvising and overcoming as Johnny U. was. His OL was WAY better, Unitas had better receiving weapons, but the Packers run game was the feared weapon of that offense, not Starr. Exactly the opposite of Johnny U and the Colts. While the Colts had a few good years of defensive play, they weren;t good consistently like the Packers Defense was. Especially in big games.
Johnny Unitas all-time W/L record was 118-64-4, playing for a TEAM that was only good enough to win 2 titles...Note, I said team, as I do not subscribe to the argument that Championships are the only way to measure any particular position..Take a TRUE team effort to win an NFL Championship.
Bart Starr's career W/L record was 94-57-6..PLAYING FOR THE LOMBARDI PACKERS! A team with more HOF players than any other, as well as having the greatest Coach of all-time. My modern comparison being Troy Aikman, who I guess like Bradshaw is in your top 4-5 QBs since he had more Championships...
But to really see how these QBs affected the game, lets look at comparable games/years. For Unitas, NFL Championship Game numbers from 58-59, when the Colts on it all...And for Starr, NFL Championship game numbers from 60-61, when the Packers won it all..
Unitas two game totals: 44 of 69, 613 yards
Starr two game totals: 19 of 38, 342 yards
Honestly, there is really no comparison to these 2 QBs game styles...
BTW, Here is a quote from Sid Luckman in regards to Unitas, I guess he didn;t take too much exception to it..lol
Sid Luckman, a fellow Pro Football Hall of Fame member, said Unitas was the best quarterback ever. "Better than me," he said, "better than Sammy Baugh, better than anyone."
Anyone comparing the QB game those guys played to what Unitas played simply is ill-informed. Unitas was the first MODERN STYLE QB..Those guys from the 30-40-50s olayed a WAY different game...Only guy you could really make a case for before Unitas was Otto Graham, who along with Paul Brown somewhat invented the pro style Offense we see today. Unitas was the first true drop back gunslinger. Go watch the film.
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
The stats quoted from 1960-63 were of Johnny's prime years, in which he was average. Volume high, rating average, Colts' team record mediocre to average.
"but in those games Unitas threw only 7 TD's, had 10 INT's, a 53.1 Comp. Pct. and QB rating of 68.9."
Those were Unitas' stats in ALL of his playoff games. When you compare his playoff stats to other QB's that played at least five playoff games, Unitas' playoff numbers would rank
right near the bottom of the list. In any era. Look it up.
Here's Bart Starr's playoff numbers ,aka 'the dreaded game manager QB who's looked down upon',
15 TD's, 3 INT's, a 61% comp. pct. and QB rating of 104.8 . That rating is well over 20 points HIGHER than the league average during that era.
There's not a single other QB in his era that comes close to his numbers and winning, when it counted, and that would be in the NFL playoffs.
John Unitas' playoff QB rating is 15 points LOWER than the league averages in his era and a whopping 35 rating points LOWER than Starr's , his contemporary.
Oh yeah, and Starr's Packers were 9-1 too with five rings. But who cares about winning, we're only looking to rest on our regular season laurels and awards, right?
I again, wasn't comparing Unitas' rating, numbers, or production to the modern era. That would be foolish with all the rule changes.
I was simply using Marino and Brees as similar type QB's that produced big regular season numbers in their era's, just like Unitas did in his era.
Apparently this flies over your head like a Johnny U. int.
For the 'eye test' you claim to be the expert on, I think you need glasses.
You mentioned that the Colts had better receiving weapons. I agree with you on that. Raymond Berry, Lenny Moore, and John Mackey, were all HOF
players at WR, HB, and TE. The Packers passing game was Dowler, McGee, and Ron Kramer. All very solid ends but none of them will ever make the HOF.
So Unitas, even with more talented HOF receivers to throw to, put up worst numbers than Starr. Unitas put up more volume, but with that volume came turnovers, a lower comp. mark, lower average gain, higher int pct., lower rating, etc.... and less winning than the Packers. I guess the 'game manager' type of QB is what I'd rather have if I wanted to win, instead of the huge stat producing gunslinger type QBs.
Your total W-L comparison is weak too. You mention the Lombardi years. Well Starr only played nine years under Lombardi. Lets compare those years side by side.
Starr's W-L during that time frame was a stellar 77-23-4, that's a .770 winning pct.
Add in his playoff 9-1 record, and you're looking at 86-24-4, the winning pct. increases to an astounding .781.
Let's see how John Unitas did, again from 1959-67, the Lombardi years.
Unitas had a W-L of 78-37-3 with a .678 winning pct. Not bad at all, in fact very respectable.
Add in the 1-1 playoff mark and he's 79-38-3 for a .675 winning pct.
But that's still a full point below Starr's winning pct. But I guess you can go ahead and blame the Colts poor line play, or lack of a running game, or their inconsistent defenses
during this era as the reason for this winning pct. difference. You gotta come up with something to say, so maybe use this extensive snap count you've witnessed in all your tape study.
1957 is the modern style quarterbacking in your mind and Johnny U invented it. Interesting. So because of this, he's the best.
So if you say Unitas is # 1, what exactly are you basing your flimsy argument on?
If it's not championships, then what QB rating? Team success? The art of quarterback play? What is it?
Because in all of the above, Starr out duels Johnny U.
If it's in your extensive Football film study where you surmised this mythology, you've failed that course my friend. LOL.
I'm ok with agreeing to disagree on this. I actually enjoy these discussions immensely, even more so when we can debate the finer points and disagree on what we see.
IMO, ALL THESE THINGS roll into how I personally rank a QB on an all-time list...His regular season performances, playoff performances, who he played with, who he played for, how much he did above and beyond the average player of his era, etc. To say Championships carry the most weight, particularly for a QB in the 50s/60s just doesn't cut it for me. In today's game? Maybe..But in those years, if you watch or have watched how the game was played, defense and running game were paramount. You didn't win Championships without them.
There aren't many QBs, hell many PLAYERS who you can look back and saw "he revolutionized the game",but Unitas is one, plain and simple. His skill in the pocket was such that if you placed him in a time machine he would have translated to a good QB even in 2015. Bart Start probably wouldn't be a starting QB in 2015. If this hypothetical doesn't make sense to you and what I mean by saying it, well, that's why you don't have Unitas #1. I can tell you, the majority of football historians that I know and have spoken with over the years would also call Unitas, at the very least, the best of his era.
Its great that you are a Starr guy and have him as your profile picture, but that's not going to mean he's worthy of the top 10 on my list (he isn't). If he's #1 on yours, congrats. You are surely entitled to have that bias to believe that. I'm not a Colts fan or a Unitas fan in particular. I don't own his RC anymore, nor do I own Starr's. My hobby is football history, which is mostly what led to my card collecting over the years, as well as other memorabilia and game tapes that do exist if you ever want to become an expert on Starr rather than what your bias leads you to believe. Starr was as good as, maybe even a tad better than Troy Aikman all-time...He'd probably fall somewhere between 15-20 on my list. His throwing mechanics were pedestrian, he won the majority of his games and was very efficient because defenses were stacking to stop the Packer Sweep. Super smart player, great in clutch situations, but when his running game went south, so did Starr's numbers. How many of those games that he won did the Packers have more rushing yards than passing yards? I mean seriously...
But hey, don't take my word for it...
Bart Starr interviewed about Johnny Unitas
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
As far as Staubach goes, I have him 10th on my list...Mostly due to the fact that he only started 114 regular season games and 17 playoff games.He is IMO, the greatest QB of the 1970s..Better than Tarkenton, Bradshaw, Stabler, Griese...Had he been able to play more seasons and start more games (he missed a few while serving his country) no doubt I would feel better about putting him higher. Staubach was the rare player who could be the gunslinger when he needed to be, as well as the great game manager when that was needed. He had a ton of talent around him, but don't think the Cowboys come anywhere close to their level of success in the 1970's with any other QB. I do value longevity in my rankings however. The longer a player can be at the top of his game, IMO, the better he represents how a true "all-time great" can be defined. I think it is important to look at all aspects of a player if you want to put together an honest/unbias list you can be proud of. Also doesn't help Staubach's case that he was never considered the best QB in the game during his time. You look at 1st Team All-Pro QBs over the 1970s and Staubach has zero. Again, for me that doesn't prevent me from knowing what I watched and putting Staubach as the top QB of the 1970s IMO, but it does keep me from placing him above some other QBs on my list from other eras.
Would love to hear who is 3-4-5-6 over Unitas if he were to fall to 7th on your list. I think its one of the traps we tend to fall in with the "overrated vs underrated" debate. With so many over the years calling Johnny U. the greatest QB of all-time, it gives some the idea that he was perfect, which he wasn't and no QB is. Its the same with players considered "underrated" where we subconsciously begin to anoint them to be a little better than they actually were for the simple fact that they don't get enough respect or accolades.
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
We can agree to disagree on the all-time QB.
Honestly, if you had posted any of these QB's as # 1 : Baugh, Graham, Starr, Montana, Young, Manning, Brady, or Staubach, I wouldn't
have bothered to post on this thread, as a valid argument could be made for any of them to be considered #1 all-time.
Just not Unitas, at least not to me.
He's about 4th best all-time in my opinion, for all the reasons I've posted about above.
Just for the heck of it, I compared Starr and Unitas's marks during the Lombardi era, that's 1959-67, here's what they did:
Att. Comp. Pct. Yards Avg.Gain TDs TD% INT INT% Rating W-L-T Pct. Playoff W-L Titles
Unitas 3335 1843 55.2 26966 8.09 200 6.0 155 4.6 82.4 78-37-3 .678 1-1 1
Starr 2114 1224 57.9 17320 8.19 107 5.1 83 3.9 85.0 77-23-4 .770 9-1 5
So as you can see, Unitas' obviously put up more TDs, yards, completed more passes, threw more INT's. Unitas has the edge in one
major category and that is TD pct. A high volume passer like he was. Fine. To be fair too, Unitas won three MVP's during this time frame,
and Starr only won one. But that award is based on regular season accomplishments and really goes to the offensive player who puts up the 'biggest stats',
so without winning rings, it loses some of it's luster in my opnion.
The important numbers, comp. pct., Avg. Gain, Int %, overall rating, better W-L mark, and finally more Championships
all give the edge to Bart Starr. Game managers RULE!
Head to head, Starr has Unitas beat there as well, with better numbers across the board and more head to head team wins when the Packers played the Colts.
If Unitas was the best all-time, why did he suck against the best team in Football for so many years?
Shouldn't the greatest QB of all-time rise above their best competition?? He didn't. Few other teams did either during this nine season era though.
I'm not really sure how anyone would think Unitas is the better QB during the 1960's.
Question, when a player is said to be 'revolutionary' at his position, is he the best ever then?
Then I submit that soccer style kicker Pete Gogolak is the greatest kicker ever. He revolutionized the art of kicking the football
with his side winding, soccer style kicking. He virtually invented that kicking style and brought it into professional football in 1964.
Look at the numbers of Unitas vs. Starr...Over 50% more pass attempts over the same time period. Almost 100 more TD passes and almost 10k more yards...I mean they are so different in their style of play and what was asked of them its silly. Starr had titles because he QB'd Lombardi's Packers...He was a key player and played a big role in that, but as you can see by his numbers, he wasn't the feared player. Defenses did not have to game plan to stop Starr, rather it was the Packers dominant run game they had to game plan for. Against Baltimore, it was Unitas.
I mean hey, maybe even the voters of that era got it wrong too? The ones who watched Unitas and Starr in person, the ones who voted for the All-Pro teams. On FIVE occasions Unitas was voted over Starr and everyone else as the best QB of that season..Starr was selected for that honor just ONCE. That isn't revisionist history of 2016 looking back at the "myth and legend" of Johnny U. That's voters and writers from THOSE particular seasons making that decision.
Unitas is your 4th best QB, I'm fine with that. You might be one of the few guys on the planet who have Starr above him, but that's ok too. That's why we do these top 10 lists, everyone gets to make their own decisions on what they think. Being that I've watched enough of Starr and Unitas, I wouldn't in could conscious ever be able to get Starr into my top 10..Maybe could be persuaded to put him 12-15 at best. Anything higher simply isn't a realistic view of who Starr was as a QB in the NFL.
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
10. Brodie Croyle 0-10 in his career. Somehow played five years in the NFL
9. Billy Joe Hobert in his first start he threw four picks. And anyone with the name Billy Joe must be on this list.
8. David Carr - lead the league is times sacked three of his first four seasons.
7. Vinny Testaverde - drafted 1/1 and compared himself to Favre.
6. Stoney Case - his name sounds like a disease and he played in the NFL, NFL Europe, and the Arena league.
5. Todd Marinovich - Raider great QB of the future in 1991. He only played two years and was 3-5. His last game he completed as many passes to the Eagles as he did to his own teammates.
4. Ryan Leaf - no comment
3. Joey Harrington - was a major reason the Lions were so bad in the 2000's
2. Art Schlichter - if you don't know the Art Schlicter story go google him.
1. Jay Cutler
Tim Couch
Brady Quinn
Brandon Weeden
Colt McCoy
Charlie Frye
Johnny Neverwas
And those are just the 1st rders.
Jasp24, you do know the all-pro teams are solely based on the regular season, right?
Because if they were also based on the playoffs, on the games that mean the most, Unitas doesn't compare to Starr.
All the important numbers and accomplishments, ie: rings, playoff accomplishments. comp. pct, int pct., avg. gain, QB rating,
are all in Starr's favor over Unitas.
The only edge Unitas has on Starr is TD pct., and volume, which created more opportunities for more total yards, TDs, completions.
So you'd rather have a QB pass for 300 yards, 2 TD's and 2 INTs and lose the game?
Or, would you rather have the QB be a true field general and make the proper decisions while posting 150 yards, 1 TD, and 0 Ints, oh yeah and also
win the game?
I'll take the later.
I never said they were the same in style, only that Starr won more and was more efficient in the numbers that really count.
He was that way in the regular season and on the big stage, when it counted, in the playoffs, and in the Super Bowls.
Try naming several of Unitas' defining moments in his career? I can think of the 1958 Championship game, the game tying drive to set up the FG to
put the game into OT, and then the Colts winning on a Ameche plunge in sudden death. That's about it.
Oh yeah, he also had great regular season numbers, won several MVP's, and had some great W-L records along the way. All excellent.
For Starr :
1961 Champ. game, a 37-0 shutout of the Giants, where he only threw 17 passes but 3 went for TD's, 130 QB rating in the bitter cold.
Super Bowl 1 and 2. Biggest games in NFL history, Starr was MVP of both. The whole NFL was watching and the Packers didn't fold under that pressure and lose to the AFL.
SB 1: 250 yards, 2 TDs, 116 rating, won 35-10 over the Chiefs.
SB 2: 202 yards, 1 TD, 96 rating, won 33-14 over Oakland
The Ice Bowl where he threw for 191 yards, 2 TD's, 111 rating, and won the game on a rushing play as the clock was running out. Accounting for all of the scoring in sub zero temps.
The 1967 Jan 1st. playoff game against the Cowboys, leading up to SB 1, where he out gunslung Don Meredith in a high scoring game by throwing for
304 yards, 4 TD's, 143 QB rating, the Pack won 34-27 in a shootout on the road in Dallas.
In '65 beating the Browns in the cold mud 23-12, Starr managed the game here, passing for only 147 yds on 10/18 with a TD and only a 77 rating.
That game was won by the Packers defense and the running of Taylor and Hornung.
The year before against the same Browns team, Unitas put up this line: 12/20, 95 yards, 0 TDs, 2 INT's, 33 rating, losing 27-0 with four other HOF'ers on his offense.
That Browns team didn't have a single HOF'er on defense either. In 1964 the Colts were 12-2 in the regular season, Unitas was the MVP, and they probably had the best team in Football that year, that is until the playoffs came and the Colts choked.
So these are the reason why I'd pick Starr over Unitas. I don't care about who ran the best 2 min. offense, who had more style, who might have defined the
QB position, who put up larger volume numbers, who sported a cooler haircut, etc..... none of this means anything without the wins and rings.
Unitas was picking up all the pro bowls and the all-pro teams, and MVP's based on the regular season. That's fine. That's why he is considered great.
Starr was performing the BEST in the playoffs, when it mattered the most, and simply winning. In any weather conditions too.
Case closed.
Or, would you rather have the QB be a true field general and make the proper decisions while posting 150 yards, 1 TD, and 0 Ints, oh yeah and also
win the game"
Ask the Bronco fans this year that question.
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Or, would you rather have the QB be a true field general and make the proper decisions while posting 150 yards, 1 TD, and 0 Ints, oh yeah and also
win the game"
Well, wouldn't this depend on what you have on Defense? And Offensive Running Game? Guy throwing for 150, 1, 0, arguably didnt win the game. Game managers aren't tasked with winning the game, but rather limiting the damage so Defense and running game can win it... So if I am ranking which QB is better, am I going to put the guy who can manage a game well enough for his high end defense and running game to win? Or do I rank the QB who can take a team on his back and win games with his arm? Personally I give more credit to the QB 's who can take over a game and play unstoppable type football vs. a guy who's good at handing off,running the clock and making only 2-3 important plays per game...
Starr played for the BEST TEAM, the TEAM OF THE DECADE 1960s. He won more playoff games by default. Look over the numbers, both via Packers Defense and Packers running game, then compare what Starr did in those wins...Other than his 1 yard dive in the Ice Bowl (where most credit goes to Jerry Kramer BTW) he didn't do anything that just about any other top 20-30 QB could do on a team of that magnitude and talent.
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Super Bowl XXVIII: Buffalo Bills vs Dallas Cowboys -
Running back Emmitt Smith rushed for 132 yards and 2
touchdowns earning Super Bowl MVP honors as the Cowboys
defeated the Bills 30-13 to win their second consecutive NFL
title.
In Unitas 6 playoff wins, here are the AVG TEAM STATS: 117.3 Yards rushing, 217.7 yards passing, 241 yards allowed by Defense
in Starr's 9 playoff wins, here are the AVG TEAM STATS: 142.2 yards rushing, 204.9 yards passing, 235.1 yards allowed by Defense
The Packers defensive yard average a bit skewed by a 418 yard performance by the Cowboys in 66 playoffs...Colts defensive numbers skewed a bit the opposite way by a game vs. the Bengals in 1970 where the Bengals managed 139 yards...lol
Starr did have a couple of big numbers in playoff games, the shootout vs. the Cowboys being one, I mean can't take anything away from Starr being one of the all-time greats almost SOLELY on his playoff performances and game management...As I've said, he's still probably somewhere between 15-20 on my list, and I could probably be talked into putting him as high as 11-15, although would be tough...But to say Unitas was a bad playoff QB, 6 wins, 2 championships simply untrue. You listed him as the 4th best QB of all-time, he obviously did something right to get that high on your list...
Again, admire your fortitude to continue pushing Starr as better than Unitas. But Starr himself learned to become a better passer by watching Unitas. If Starr played for the Colts instead of the Team of the Century the 1960s Packers, I doubt we'd be having the same conversation.
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
For me, it comes down to big plays and big throws...Did or could that QB throw a precision pass under duress? Could he hit the out-rout for the 1st down? Did he make good reads on the defense? Did he make plays that you don;t see the average QB make? Could you put the team on his back and win when his defense and/or running game wasn't up to snuff? All those things play a part for me to try and distinguish the differences.
The Peyton/Brady debate will be a big one down the road based on much if this...No one made better reads or better throws than Peyton. But you can't discount how well Tom Brady played even when his defense was weak, his running game weak, his receiving core was weak, etc. Peyton is the guy I want as my starter. Play-for-play, pound for pound, never seen anyone better at playing the position of QB...But in clutch situations, he was easily rattled...Hell, put any good rush on the guy and all his strengths dipped down a bit...The opposite for Brady..So for me, trying to tell the difference between these 2 on an all-time list is WAYYYYY tougher than seeing the difference between say a Unitas and a Starr...
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
You guys forgot Mike Phipps, another dud that played for the Browns.
s...Other than his 1 yard dive in the Ice Bowl (where most credit goes to Jerry Kramer BTW)
Go look at that play again and tell me Ken Bowman is not the hero of that play. Kramer getting all of the attention over that play has been a 50 year old lie.
Link
Quote from an interview with Bowman.
"THE GLORY HOG
The blocking pattern on the winning play was known as a "post drive."
Kramer stood Pugh up, and Bowman knocked him back, paving the
way for Starr.
And this is how the winning run would have been described to the
world, except for something Kramer said to Bowman as he laid a hand
on the youngster's shoulder before the postgame interview session.
"He said, "Kenny, let an old man have his moment in the
spotlight. You have 10 more years to be here,' " Bowman said. "I
was so young and dumb, I believed him. I believed I would make
another block and be involved in a big play like this again."
Today, as a generally anonymous public defender in Tucson,
Ariz., watching Kramer reap the rewards of being a famous author
and Packer hero, Bowman sometimes wonders.
"I never realized that I would never make another block like
that," he said. "And I never realized that that would be the play
of the century."
Johnny U at the beginning -
Johnny U at the end - I'm totally digging that Chargers uni. Always a fan of the 'Bolts.
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I have enjoyed the conversation about the two QB's. Both the gentleman certainly know more than me.
I am working on both their card player sets. The problem with collecting Unitas is he has to many card #1's.
The 1960 and 1962 are killers in PSA 8 and go for a decent buck. Starr cards also get a premium.
I went back and reviewed quite a bit of Unitas' film. One thing that comes to mind....John Mackey was a absolute beast.
Unitas had a good enough arm that seems accurate and often has a nice touch. Certainly no rifle.
He gets introduced often as the "great Johnny Unitas." By the way I loved some of the introductions of the 1950's.
The legend of Johnny U certainly started in his earlier playing years if you listen to the announcers of the games.
In most interviews of this specific era by HOFers most will say the greatest was Johnny U. I have personally asked this exact question to a
several of them at sports events. All said Johnny U. The Colts were Johnny's team and he was the undisputed leader.
Here lies the problem. Starr is overshadowed by the great Packers teams of that era and Lombardi was the leader. Starr was the field
general along with the other great HOF packers. It was a great system and all the players benefited from that teamwork.
The individuals get lost vs the one recognized leader. The QB position is the one position where leadership is a very important factor.
IMO football history doesn't look at the two of them in the same light.
Football may be the hardest sport to claim best of position. When we talk of winning and championships being part of the
overall picture its hard because FB has separate defense and offensive players. (minus the older 60 min guys).
Most other sports: baseball, hockey, basketball, soccer have the same guys on the playing field on offense and defense.
An individual may be considered better at one part of the game. In SB 50 can we say the great Peyton Manning led his team to a SB victory?
No way, but the 2nd SB victory may well cement Manning from being the greatest regular season QB to the greatest ever. Period.
My point is that in FB there as so many variables that it's hard to say who was the best. I would have np problem simply saying both Unitas and Starr are in the top 5.
I had Unitas as my #1. Mainly because of the legend created. I didn't see both their whole careers. Still sticking with it.
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
Thank you! If it were centered just a tad lower, I'd try for the 8.5 bump review. It's focused, no print issues, sharp corners. Just the centering t-b.
I didn't even notice the centering at first. That's an eight that presents much better than its assigned grade. Unless the t-b centering is terrible I never notice it at first glance, usually only after giving a card a closer inspection.
Super Bowl XXVIII: Buffalo Bills vs Dallas Cowboys -
Running back Emmitt Smith rushed for 132 yards and 2
touchdowns earning Super Bowl MVP honors as the Cowboys
defeated the Bills 30-13 to win their second consecutive NFL
title.
Thank you! If it were centered just a tad lower, I'd try for the 8.5 bump review. It's focused, no print issues, sharp corners. Just the centering t-b.
I didn't even notice the centering at first. That's an eight that presents much better than its assigned grade. Unless the t-b centering is terrible I never notice it at first glance, usually only after giving a card a closer inspection.
I agree that on most cards T/B centering is a lot less distracting than L/R centering.
I didn't weigh in on the all-time great QBs discussion, but I will say this now. In my 42+ years on Earth, this best QB I saw in his prime was (drumroll please)...Steve Young. He was (again, in his prime) as close to a perfect QB as I've ever seen. Pinpoint accuracy, a pretty spiral and unbelievable scrambling ability. If I needed a QB for one game, he's my guy. It's a shame that so much of his career was wasted in the USFL, Tampa Bay and sitting behind Joe Montana, and that injuries derailed the latter part of his career. Oh, what could have been.
I for sure trust his eagle eye. All are very high end.
That Johnny U is jaw dropping.
Jared Allen falls short IMO.
I can't agree more on Steve Young. Who expected it after the great Montana.
If that one game were the SB I still choose Montana. He was at his very best when it counted the most.
Recent discussion by Jason P about rattlin Peyton's cage (both the Mannings) and even Brady......Not even a MVP Newton could have survived the Bronco's onslaught
with Miller and Ware in the last SB. The ONLY QB I have ever seen that could have won that game was Steve Young. He would have scrambled away, kept his head and found a way to win.
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
Here's one, which QB would you guys want to have on the field if they had to play both ways?
I'm going to go with the old guy, Slingin' Sammy Baugh, who was also a great DB for about six years, plus add in the punting and he would always be on the field.
Andy, funny you say Steve Young, because he's my favorite modern day QB. I loved Montana too obviously, as I'm a huge 49ers fan.
But once Young got his shot, his fine accuracy, low int pct., toughness in the pocket, and then scrambling ability when the heat was on, puts him near the top all-time.
Who can forget his 6 TD passes against the Chargers in the Super Bowl? Plus he did this while following a legend.
Similar to what Aaron Rodgers is doing for the Packers now, after following Favre.
Andy has some of the nicest centered cards in the world.
Plus he did this while following a legend.
Similar to what Aaron Rodgers is doing for the Packers now, after following Favre.
That's somewhat rare. Most teams wander in the QB wilderness for some time after the retirement of a HOFer.
Jay, nice post and thoughts on the all-time QB. All good points of view on the debate.
Here's one, which QB would you guys want to have on the field if they had to play both ways?
I'm going to go with the old guy, Slingin' Sammy Baugh, who was also a great DB for about six years, plus add in the punting and he would always be on the field.
Andy, funny you say Steve Young, because he's my favorite modern day QB. I loved Montana too obviously, as I'm a huge 49ers fan.
But once Young got his shot, his fine accuracy, low int pct., toughness in the pocket, and then scrambling ability when the heat was on, puts him near the top all-time.
Who can forget his 6 TD passes against the Chargers in the Super Bowl? Plus he did this while following a legend.
Similar to what Aaron Rodgers is doing for the Packers now, after following Favre.
Andy has some of the nicest centered cards in the world.
If Young had more starts, he undoubtedly would be higher on my list...Some of the greatest single season QB performances I've seen were by Steve Young...The USFL/Bucs/waiting on Montana years holds him back a bit for me in the grand scheme...He'd certainly be in my top 20, and likely higher than 15...Might be a fun project for me to try and build a top 20, I would have to go back and re-look some guys to be able to slot them against one another in those areas...
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Speaking of Unitas 8's, I still have the one I bought from Jason P. years ago. And I still love it as much as the day I got it!
I didn't weigh in on the all-time great QBs discussion, but I will say this now. In my 42+ years on Earth, this best QB I saw in his prime was (drumroll please)...Steve Young. He was (again, in his prime) as close to a perfect QB as I've ever seen. Pinpoint accuracy, a pretty spiral and unbelievable scrambling ability. If I needed a QB for one game, he's my guy. It's a shame that so much of his career was wasted in the USFL, Tampa Bay and sitting behind Joe Montana, and that injuries derailed the latter part of his career. Oh, what could have been.
Of all the cards I've sold off, this Unitas and my Jimmy Brown are the two I miss the most...
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
With Jared Allen announcing his retirement today, I'm curious to know how you guys feel about his HOF chances. He retires with 136 career sacks, which ties him with Peppers for 9th on the all-time list. But Peppers and Ware will bump him down to 11th place next year. Allen made 5 Pro Bowls and was named All-Pro 4 times in 12 years. He was on the fast track to the HOF for a while, but the wheels really fell off after he left Minnesota, presumably because his body started breaking down. To me he's a very borderline candidate. I could see him maybe getting in the Kevin Greene route (waiting a looooooong time), but I'm not so sure. Thoughts?
I think Jared Allen and Calvin Johnson will present a couple of interesting cases in 2021 (assuming Megatron does actually retire). Neither is a lock, I'd say both have a 20-30% shot. Both probably slot in just below Patrick Willis (eligible 2020). Depends on if/how soon they make the top 15 Finalists. I think both will make the top 25 Semifinalists, very likely their first year, which will bode well for them although an extended wait will be in store for each of them.
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
A Few of the guys better get in during the only two weak years in the next 5 which are 2017 and 2020. Good possibility of 3 first ballot guys in the other upcoming classes.
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
As a longtime Giants fan, I'm of the belief that you're wrong.