ajh2 Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 Farve is a great QB. As for ranking great QBs, it is impossible to do because of the changes to the game - in preparation, rules, player size, athletic abilty, etc. Farve is a great competitor and plays for the love of the game. I respect him for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budlitebrad Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 As far as the best QB when comparing eveything on paper, he'd probably be around 4 under Montana, Elway, and Marino. Unitas would be 5. If we're talking about who is my favorite to watch, he'd definitely be #1. Watching this guy run out and throw a block for his receiver against the Vikes and jump up all excited like Flutie is much more fun to watch than seeing Vick scramble 80 yds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 He belongs with the legendary bunch of QBs that stand out when people talk about football. QBs like Bradshaw, Namath, Starr. I just don't think that Marino and Elway fit that category, though Montana would... 1244774[/snapback] Bradshaw, Namath, and Starr were mediocre passers who happened to play on good teams. Marino and Elway were far superior QBs to those three. BTW, I forgot to add Len Dawson to my list. I'd put him at about #8. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted January 2, 2006 Author Share Posted January 2, 2006 This deserves a bump with Sherman's firing! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 Bradshaw, Namath, and Starr were mediocre passers who happened to play on good teams. Marino and Elway were far superior QBs to those three. 1244868[/snapback] I'd agree; I saw one statistical breakdown that indicated that Namath was the 2nd most marginal player in the Hall of Fame behind Paul Hornung. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 (edited) I'd agree; I saw one statistical breakdown that indicated that Namath was the 2nd most marginal player in the Hall of Fame behind Paul Hornung. 1245074[/snapback] That's my point. As far as history is concerned, Namath's numbers don't matter. He will always be remembered by the general population. Favre fits in that mold where the legend eclipses the actual performance... Edited January 2, 2006 by cre8tiff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 That's my point. As far as history is concerned, Namath's numbers don't matter. He will always be remembered by the general population. Favre fits in that mold where the legend eclipses the actual performance... 1245200[/snapback] OK, that's fair. And it's one hell of a legend, given the level of his performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 That's my point. As far as history is concerned, Namath's numbers don't matter. He will always be remembered by the general population. Favre fits in that mold where the legend eclipses the actual performance... 1245200[/snapback] Based mostly on 1 season (1967, when he became the first QB to throw for 4000 yds) + 1 game (SB III, mainly due to the guarantee). Even comparing them to apples to apples with their relative performances vs QBs playing at the same time, Namath can't carry Favre's jock - he was the Michael Vick of his day, image superceding actual on-field production. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 Based mostly on 1 season (1967, when he became the first QB to throw for 4000 yds) + 1 game (SB III, mainly due to the guarantee). Even comparing them to apples to apples with their relative performances vs QBs playing at the same time, Namath can't carry Favre's jock - he was the Michael Vick of his day, image superceding actual on-field production. 1245213[/snapback] Actually 1968. The Packers won SB II in the 1967 season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 Actually 1968. The Packers won SB II in the 1967 season. 1245261[/snapback] No, Namath threw for 4000 yds in 1967. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 No, Namath threw for 4000 yds in 1967. 1245266[/snapback] The way it was written, it looked like you meant the SB III year. :doah: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 Otto Graham Joe Montana Tom Brady John Elway Brett Favre And i'm a Packer homer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luger Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 Favre gets a lot of bonus points for his energy, recklessness, charisma and talent. But objectively he lost a superbowl to Denver when they were likely the better team. One ring puts him down on my list I's say 7 or 8. Montana, Johnny U, Elway, Brady, Marino would be my top 5 atm. If you want to kick Marino for not winning then put in Young. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 But objectively he lost a superbowl to Denver when they were likely the better team. 1245272[/snapback] I wouldn't say that it was Favre's fault. Denver won because their O-line beat the snot out of GB's D-line. I also wouldn't weigh "number of SB rings" heavily in determining the worth of a QB. It's something to consider for sure, but winning a SB is truly a team effort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 objectively he lost a superbowl to Denver when they were likely the better team. 1245272[/snapback] In that game, he completed 60% of his passes for 256 yds and 3 tds with an int. Aside from jumping in at defensive end to help stop Terrell Davis' 157 yd, 3 td performance, I don't think there was much more he could do to win that game. The 24 pts GB scored, all things being equal, would have been enough to win all but 4 of the 38 other SBs. It always baffles me that QBs get downgraded for winning or not winning SBs when even in the best case, they have little to no control over what happens on the field when the defense and special teams are out there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luger Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 I also wouldn't weigh "number of SB rings" heavily in determining the worth of a QB. It's something to consider for sure, but winning a SB is truly a team effort. I Agree. My only point is Favre gets alot of credit since he is very likable. People i think tend to glorify his sucesses and ignore his faults. I think when your the QB of the best team in the league and you lose it should count against you. Favre is a Great Qb i would love to have him on my team in his prime, hes just not top 5 imho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pirate lookin' at 40 Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 The thing that everyone seems to be forgetting is that Favre has never had that Hall of Fame reciever that those other guys had. Sharpe maybe, if he had been able to play longer. Could you imagine if Favre would have had a guy like Jerry Rice to throw to for several years?? Also, as a Cowboys homer, I would have Staubach in my top 10 and Steve Young would probably not be in my top 25. I also don't think that Terry Bradshaw belongs in the top 10. I think Bradshaw would probably even agree with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrainySmurf Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 I don't think you can rank Favre even at the top of the currently active QBs. When all is said and done, Manning and Brady will be ahead of him, and maybe some others. I like Favre personally, he has infectious enthusiasm and can improvise with the best of them. But he was not the consummate professional. He rarely seemed to start well in the game, threw too many interceptions, and couldn't seem to discipline himself not to throw back across the field. If there were a Hall of Fame for raw athletic ability, he'd be somewhere near the top of the list, but a QB is the whole package, including what's between the ears, and I think he was too undisciplined to rate anywhere near the top 10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eraser Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 Otto GrahamJoe Montana Tom Brady John Elway Brett Favre And i'm a Packer homer. 1245270[/snapback] Finally... it took 40 or so posts, but somebody finally mentioned Otto Graham. I'm not sure if he is #1, but he is no doubt a top 5! E Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted January 3, 2006 Author Share Posted January 3, 2006 The thing that everyone seems to be forgetting is that Favre has never had that Hall of Fame reciever that those other guys had. Sharpe maybe, if he had been able to play longer. Could you imagine if Favre would have had a guy like Jerry Rice to throw to for several years?? Also, as a Cowboys homer, I would have Staubach in my top 10 and Steve Young would probably not be in my top 25. I also don't think that Terry Bradshaw belongs in the top 10. I think Bradshaw would probably even agree with that. 1245307[/snapback] I agree with the receiver idea; I brought that up to my friends in the argument. I don't know how you can say Steve Young isn't top 25; he did everything right, and explanation please? Just curious that is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bier Meister Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 freeman, brooks, sharpe, bennett, green, chumura, k jackson, levens, beebe, schroeder........ he has had a pretty decent supporting cast over the years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 freeman, brooks, sharpe, bennett, green, chumura, k jackson, levens, beebe, schroeder........ he has had a pretty decent supporting cast over the years. 1245955[/snapback] Sharpe was the only "star" amongst them, Favre turned a few of them into players, others were there for only a short time. And how can you put Schroeder and decent in the same sentence? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 Personally, I LOVE the "Greatest-QB-of-All-Time Debate". Probably the best sports debate out there. Logically, I think Favre is tied with Unitas for the #1 spot. However, since I happen to be a Packer fan with the privelege of watching #4 for his entire careeer, I put Favre at 1a and Unitas at 1b. There are so many factors involved in The Debate that I think it's actually easier to state the reasons why some of the QBs DON'T deserve to be #1. For instance... Elway: The best QB of all time simply can't have a career rating below 80.0. Elway seems like a good guy and he had his share of great performances, but he's the most overrated player in sports history. I think a lot of that started before he was even drafted. Marino: The best QB of all time has to own a SuperBowl ring. I don't knock Marino much for it, but I don't necessarily think he would be the automatic #1 with a ring on his finger, either. Montana: The best QB of all time can't be the first guy to operate the greatest, most QB-friendly offensive system ever devised. I'm a big Montana fan -- he was fun to watch -- but it's impossible to say how good he really was as a pure quarterback. The WCO was just too revolutionary at the time. When I really think about it, Favre/Unitas just have the best combination of everything, PLUS they have/had the galvanizing personalities of a leader. Also, I think Favre's amazing consecutive-starts streak is an extremely underrated part of the discussion. It's not just that it speaks to his toughness, but it means that his franchise NEVER had to worry about having to play the backup. That's HUGE for any team. Look what happens when most teams lose their starting QBs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 I don't think you can rank Favre even at the top of the currently active QBs. When all is said and done, Manning and Brady will be ahead of him, and maybe some others. I like Favre personally, he has infectious enthusiasm and can improvise with the best of them. But he was not the consummate professional. He rarely seemed to start well in the game, threw too many interceptions, and couldn't seem to discipline himself not to throw back across the field. If there were a Hall of Fame for raw athletic ability, he'd be somewhere near the top of the list, but a QB is the whole package, including what's between the ears, and I think he was too undisciplined to rate anywhere near the top 10. 1245856[/snapback] Wow. WAAAY off-base. In his prime under Holmgren (3 straight MVPs), every other coach in the NFL would have traded their QB for Favre. You say "undisciplined", most NFL observers would have called it "the ability to win a game on his own". You're letting recent memory cloud the big picture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcmast Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 freeman, brooks, sharpe, bennett, green, chumura, k jackson, levens, beebe, schroeder........ he has had a pretty decent supporting cast over the years. 1245955[/snapback] Are you kidding me? Freeman - #4 WR after leaving the Packers Brooks - Pretty good #2 Bennett - slightly better than average Green - Stud for a couple years Chmura - Pretty Good TE K Jackson - at the very end of career...limited ability Levens - slightly better than average Beebe - special teamer, but a WR? Give me a break Javon Walker - Finally a legit #1 WR, but towards the end of Favre's career Driver - Solid #2 WR Did anyone leave the team and do anywhere near what they did with the Packers? No way. Why? Favre. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.