Top QBs of All-Time

[HarveyWallbangers]

Vote! Unless your name is Rastak or Bulldog.
:D

http://sports.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnation/listranker?id=479

Right now, it stands:
1 Montana
2 Marino
3 Elway
4 Unitas
5 Favre
6 Bradshaw
7 Young (Steve Friggin' Young?)
8 Starr
9 Aikman
10 Staubach
11 Brady
12 Namath (overrated, had more interceptions than TDs in his career)
13 Manning
14 Tarkenton
15 Kelly
16 Fouts
17 Graham
18 Moon
19 Baugh
20 Griese

The old guys get no love. Graham should be much higher. Baugh should be a higher also.

[Rastak]

Too late ..... :cool:

Johnny U is my choice.....

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Brett Favre would be the greatest of all time if he has another ring.

It is a tragedy, at least in the football lore, to have to watch Favre go through a 4-12 campaign. You can send your thanks to one Mr. Polar Bear.

[Charles Woodson]

Favre is now 4!

[Harlan Huckleby]

i'm no historian, but I think Otto Graham has to be in top 5.

[Guiness]

These type of polls are worth the paper they're written on. As mentioned, the old guys get no love - they played a different game, w/o the benefit of pass interference calls.

One guy who should be higher though: Moon. He got shafted at the begining of his career, and dominated in the CFL back when it was a comparable league.

[RashanGary]

Favre will be a undisputed top 5 guy if he can break at least half of Marino's records.

Right now it's tough. There are a couple guys you know are in the conversation.

Montanta
Unitas
Elway

Marino Favre and a whole slew of others are just behind. I think Favre can cement his name as one of the undisputed top 4 by breaking a few more records. If he won another ring it could be argued he's the best of all time.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'd agree with your breakdown on the QBs, NC.

[oregonpackfan]

I am old enought to have seen Johnny Unitas when I was a kid.

I am not old enough to have seen Otto Graham.

He was the greatest QB I have ever seen play.

Oregonpackfan

[b bulldog]

Graham,Montana,Unitas,Elway,bradshaw,Favre,Marino, Brady,Moon

[GBRulz]

favre passed Unitas for the #4 spot.

I'm sorry but I don't agree with Dan Marino being at #2 right now. Just wait until his records are shattered this year!!!

[Charles Woodson]

Favre is now 4!


Damn michele thats old news

[b bulldog]

Montana's numbers are sick!

[HarveyWallbangers]

My Rank:
1 Otto Graham
2 Joe Montana
3 Johnny Unitas
4 John Elway
5 Brett Favre
6 Dan Marino
7 Peyton Manning
8 Bart Starr
9 Tom Brady
10 Terry Bradshaw
11 Fran Tarkenton
12 Steve Young
13 Dan Fouts
14 Troy Aikman
15 Roger Staubach

Unless he wins another Super Bowl title, I can't see Favre moving into the top 3. If he finishes his career with a couple of solid seasons and leads the Packers into the playoffs, I'll probably move him ahead of Elway.

[mraynrand]

Why is Unitas dividing us?

[PackerTimer]

Brett Favre would be the greatest of all time if he has another ring.

It is a tragedy, at least in the football lore, to have to watch Favre go through a 4-12 campaign. You can send your thanks to one Mr. Polar Bear.

More thanks or blame for 4-12 lies with Mike Sherman that TT. Thompson is showing he knows how to put together a football team.

[rpiotr01]

Isn't it kinda futile to rank QBs after a certain point? I tend to think of it this way: there is a pantheon of great NFL QBs, and only a few guys belong there. Favre absolutely belongs there, as do greats throughout the leagues history.

It's a very select ticket, but once you're in, you're all on equal ground.

[Maxie the Taxi]

As Brett Favre approaches this weekend and his assault on Dan Marino’s all-time record, we are heaping praise on the stellar Packer quarterback. And rightfully so. Favre has been an icon in Green Bay for going on 17 years. No one is more deserving of the accolades.

Because of Favre’s expected record-breaking performance on Sunday, we engage in the “Who’s the Best Quarterback of All Time” game. Lists of the top five or top ten NFL quarterbacks are as common this week as grocery lists on refrigerators. These lists are of questionable merit, but they are fun. And they all seem to have many names in common: Montana, Marino, Elway, Unitas and, yes, Favre. But these lists also have in common one name which is notable by its absence, or in this case, by it's distance from the top.

Bart Starr played 16 years in Green Bay. His greatness is chronicled in the article below.

I didn’t make this post and include the article below to take anything away from Brett Favre. I’m his biggest fan. But in this week of commemorating great quarterbacks I think it’s appropriate to remind all football fans -- national and local, young and old -- that Brett Favre is not the only Green Bay Packer quarterback who deserves to be numbered among the best to ever have played the game. Indeed, I would argue that Bart Starr might be the best quarterback ever to have played the game in Green Bay.

Why is Starr consistently overlooked by fans and media alike. Allen Barra covers some possible reasons in his article. But I think one big reason Starr is overlooked – at least among loyal Packer fans – is his mediocre nine year tenure as coach and general manager of the team. Perhaps, if Starr had appeared in just a fraction as many post season games as a coach as he had a player, his reputation as a player would be undiminished.

But I don’t hold Starr’s coaching failures against his sterling record as a Packer quarterback. He was one of the best signal callers ever, in Green Bay or anywhere else. Brett Favre will shine in glory on the field and in the media this weekend. But today, as of this moment, I agree with Barra. Bart Starr is the best ever…
-----


The greatest quarterback of all time,
Overlooked by most polls, the best person to ever take a snap in the NFL is Bart Starr.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Allen Barra

Dec. 5, 2001 | Last week I wrote that in the NFL, good passing beats good running, and I think I got a nasty e-mail from every reader who ever played high school football. Please, no more "My coach has 35 years' worth of experience and he says ..." e-mails! I know what your coach said; that's why he's still a high school coach.

And, please, no more with "Your theory ..." What I've done is taken 40 years of accumulated football wisdom and tried to cull some lessons from it. So, I'm pleased to see I have a lot of readers. And I'm sure to get a lot more nasty e-mails when I weigh in on the oldest of pro football debates: Who is the best quarterback of all time?

Depends. Are you talking best athlete, most potential, most career value? I'm never sure what someone else is asking, but I know what I want. For instance, is the "best" quarterback the one you want playing for your team in the big game? If it is, then the end-of-century polls have got it all wrong: The best quarterback in pro football history isn't Joe Montana or Johnny Unitas or Otto Graham or Dan Marino or John Elway. If by best you mean most likely to win championships, then the man you want in back of your center is Bart Starr.

Why do I have to go back 30-some years to pick my best quarterback? Well, for starters, it's the last time in football when they were full, complete players, as God and Vince Lombardi intended them to be. Unlike the generation that followed, '60s quarterbacks weren't automatons, mere "snap-takers" acting out the orders of sideline brain trusts.

Quarterbacks were expected to help conceive and carry out game plans, and call their own plays. Bart Starr did this better than any quarterback he played against and perhaps better than anyone ever. Starting with the last four games of the 1959 season through a handful of injury-riddled
appearances in 1969, Starr posted a standard of clutch performances in big games unmatched in NFL history.

To appreciate Starr's greatness it's necessary to look beyond the popular measurements for quarterbacks. Early in 1974, while previewing the Miami Dolphins-Minnesota Vikings Super Bowl, pioneer football analyst Bud Goode revealed that yards per throw -- just plain yards gained passing divided by the number of throws -- was pro football's premier statistic, the one that correlated best with winning. Goode quipped that he wanted the inscription on his headstone to read "Here lies Bud Goode: He told the world about yards per throw."

A quarter of a century later the football world has yet to fully absorb Goode's wisdom, even though great NFL coaches have always instinctively known it: Over four decades, from Johnny Unitas' sudden-death victory over the New York Giants to last year's Super Bowl, only one team, Bill Parcells' 1996 New England Patriots, has played for the NFL championship while failing to average more yards per throw on offense than it gave up on defense. Over the last 20 years, the team that averaged the highest number of yards per throw in a game has won more than 80 percent of the time. And interception percentage, the ratio of interceptions per 100 passes, ranked just slightly behind yards per throw as an indicator of offensive strength. (Pass completion percentage was relatively unimportant; one-of-three completed for 10 yards beats two-of-three for nine yards every time.)

Starr dominated these passing stats in the 1960s. His career interception percentage is the lowest of any passer in the decade, and his yards-per-pass mark of 7.85 is better than that of a score of quarterbacks who are generally regarded as among the best in history, including Dan Marino (7.37), Joe Montana (7.52), Roger Staubach (7.67), Dan Fouts (7.68), Sonny Jurgensen (7.56), Fran Tarkenton (7.27), Y.A. Tittle (7.52), Terry Bradshaw (7.17) and Joe Namath (7.35).

And then, there is clutch performance. In 1960 the Western Conference Green Bay Packers lost to the Eastern leader, the Philadelphia Eagles, in the NFL championship game, 17-13. It was to be the first and last big game he ever lost.

In 1961 and again in 1962, the Packers faced the New York Giants in the NFL championship game. Both team's rosters were littered with All Pros, many of them future Hall of Famers. The most prominent Giant was the balding veteran quarterback Y.A. Tittle, who was enjoying the first two years of an amazing three-season run in which he would throw 86 touchdown passes in 41 games. But in frozen Green Bay on New Year's Eve in 1961, and then the following year on Dec. 30 in an even more frozen Yankee Stadium, Starr was 19 of 38 for 249 yards, nearly 6.5 yards per pass, while Tittle was able to complete just 24 of 61 passes for 262 yards, just a little over five yards a throw. Tittle failed to throw a touchdown pass in either game and was picked off five times; Starr had three touchdown passes with no interceptions. The Packers won both games by a combined score of 53-7.

The totals don't seem impressive by today's standards, but championship games in Starr's era weren't played under domes or in palm tree country. It's difficult for today's fans to appreciate the hardship quarterbacks faced trying to put together an offensive attack on sheets of ice or frozen slush. Many of Starr's great performances came under conditions so horrendous that other fine passers were completely nullified. In 1968, in perhaps the most famous pro football game of all time, Don Meredith was completely ineffective in Green Bay's sub-zero temperature, gaining just 59 yards on 25 passes. Starr threw 24 times for 191 yards as the Packers won their third straight title and fifth in seven years.

In nine postseason games against the best defenses in the National Football League -- and at the cap of the 1966 and '67 seasons, the American Football League -- Starr bettered his career averages in yards per throw and interception rate.

Why isn't Starr's star higher on the list of all those fans and writers who voted in these all-century polls? The only logical answer I can think of is that Vince Lombardi's shadow was so huge it made Starr seem like a mere appendage. Starr finished his career throwing nearly 2,000 fewer passes than his great rival, Johnny Unitas, for just 24,718 yards to Unitas's 40,234 (their career yards per pass average was identical, 7.8). From 1965 through 1967, Starr and the Packers won six consecutive postseason games en route to three championships, and in five of those the first Green Bay touchdown came on a pass from Starr.

Green Bay's image as a running team, exemplified by the title of Lombardi's book with W.C. Heinz, "Run to Daylight," was so strong that it overcame reality. In both 1961 and 1962, the Packers, paced by fullback Jim Taylor and halfback Paul Hornung, led the league in both rushing yards and yards per carry, and Starr's gaudy passing stats were regarded as a byproduct of the running game. But by the mid-'60s the Packers' running game had faded badly -- in 1965, Green Bay was 11th among 14 teams in yards per rush, and in '66 they were next to last -- and Starr's passing statistics got better. In 1966, his best season, he threw for 14 touchdowns against just three interceptions and averaged an amazing nine yards per throw.

Starr also played in the shadow of his great rival, John Unitas. From 1958 to 1968, 11 seasons, either the Green Bay Packers or Baltimore Colts went to the NFL championship game in every season but one, 1963. In five of the nine years both men threw enough passes to qualify, Starr was ranked higher than Unitas by the NFL's system, and in five of those nine seasons, Starr had a higher yards-per-pass average than Unitas. There is a tendency among football writers and historians to write off Starr's domination of Unitas as evidence of the Packers' superiority, but in fact from 1960 to 1969, Starr's last season as a starter, the Packers were 96-37-5 to the Colts' 92-42-4 -- exactly the edge the Packers held over the Colts in head-to-head competition.

Even when Johnny Unitas and the Colts were good, Bart Starr and the Packers were better. In 1967 Unitas was the NFL's player of the year, and the 11-0-2 Colts played the 10-1-2 Los Angeles Rams for their division's playoff spot; the Rams, with their great defensive line, "The Fearsome Foursome," crushed Unitas and the Colts 34-10. Shortly afterward, in the first round of the playoffs, Starr quarterbacked a masterpiece, completing 17 of 23 passes for 222 yards as the Packers trounced those same Rams 28-7, going from there to beat Dallas and then Oakland in the Super Bowl. Bart Starr won on the field, but history has reversed the decision and given Unitas the wins in the popularity polls. No matter; all the polls in the world can't take those rings away.

From: http://archive.salon.com/news/sports/col/barra/2001/12/05/starr/index.html

[HarveyWallbangers]

I like Bart, but I'm sure people in Dallas (Aikman) and Pittsburgh (Bradshaw) say the same things. We aren't talking about team success, but individual greatness. There's no question Starr played with many more great players (a couple of Hall of Famers at RB, some Hall of Famers in the OL, and one of the better defenses of all-time for much of his career).

Starr was clutch. No question. I don't think it's an insult to Starr to rank Favre higher--just like I don't think it's an insult to Favre to rank Elway higher. Somebody made a good point of tiers being a better system--because it's hard to rank guys from different eras.

How many Hall of Famers did Starr play with? Favre played with three Hall of Fame caliber players--Reggie White, Sterling Sharpe, and LeRoy Butler.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I like Bart, but I'm sure people in Dallas (Aikman) and Pittsburgh (Bradshaw) say the same things. We aren't talking about team success, but individual greatness. There's no question Starr played with many more great players (a couple of Hall of Famers at RB, some Hall of Famers in the OL, and one of the better defenses of all-time for much of his career).

Starr was clutch. No question. I don't think it's an insult to Starr to rank Favre higher--just like I don't think it's an insult to Favre to rank Elway higher. Somebody made a good point of tiers being a better system--because it's hard to rank guys from different eras.

How many Hall of Famers did Starr play with? Favre played with three Hall of Fame caliber players--Reggie White, Sterling Sharpe, and LeRoy Butler.

That's kind of a chicken-or-the-egg argument, Harvey. Would the Packers have been the Championship team they were without Starr, a Hall of Famer himself? I don't think so. Was it the team that made Starr or Starr that helped make the team? I think it was Starr. All those Hall of Fame players didn't do a whole lot until Starr started as QB.

[BallHawk]

Damn, when I first saw this thread I thought Tank had come back.

Alas, it was months ago that the post took place.

[KYPack]

My Rank:
1 Otto Graham
2 Joe Montana
3 Johnny Unitas
4 John Elway
5 Brett Favre
6 Dan Marino
7 Peyton Manning
8 Bart Starr
9 Tom Brady
10 Terry Bradshaw
11 Fran Tarkenton
12 Steve Young
13 Dan Fouts
14 Troy Aikman
15 Roger Staubach

Unless he wins another Super Bowl title, I can't see Favre moving into the top 3. If he finishes his career with a couple of solid seasons and leads the Packers into the playoffs, I'll probably move him ahead of Elway.

Good list Harv.

Missed this one the first time thru.

I'd go like this:

1 Johnny Unitas
2 Joe Montana
3 Otto Graham
4 John Elway
5 Brett Favre
6 Dan Marino
7 Peyton Manning
8 Bart Starr
9 Tom Brady
10 Terry Bradshaw
11 Fran Tarkenton
12 Steve Young
13 Sammy Baugh
14 Troy Aikman
15 Roger Staubach

A real Packer freak would toss Arnie Herber in here someplace, but honestly, the guy had a cannon.

Sammy Baugh has to be in any all-time 15. He had as good an arm as player on this list. He won the rings to match his talent and was an effective QB for 16 years and played for 17 seasons.

[4and12to12and4]

Brett Favre is the greatest QB to ever step on a football field. No other QB has even come close to retaining his high level of play that he has exhibited all these years. A few breaks here and there, and he could have four Superbowl rings. If he wins one more, it's not even worth discussing. The man is an ironman, plays through every injury possible at a high level, no other QB can boast having only ONE losing season his entire career, and half our team was hurt that year. and we were about 15 points from being 8-8 that year. What he is doing this year is one of, if not the greatest feat in all of football. He looks like the best QB in the game and is throwing every type of pass dead on the money, still scrambling in the pocket avoiding sacks. Marino ahead of him, jesus, he could'nt even walk his last three seasons. Montana had a ridiculous amount of talent around him year in and year out. Elway, how is he better, cuz Davis won him a Superbowl against us? He sure didn't win it for them. Our defense couldn't handle the run game, and we still almost beat them. Plus, Favre's numbers are much better than Elways. Two very similar QB's but I give the edge to Brett.

The older guys, who knows. But Bart Starr had almost as many picks as he did touchdown passes. Brett to me, when you take in everything he can do, is the more complete player than anyone else in these lists. I'm a homer, kiss my ass.

[The Shadow]

I am old enought to have seen Johnny Unitas when I was a kid.

I am not old enough to have seen Otto Graham.

He was the greatest QB I have ever seen play.

Oregonpackfan

I agree completely.

[HarveyWallbangers]

That's kind of a chicken-or-the-egg argument, Harvey. Would the Packers have been the Championship team they were without Starr, a Hall of Famer himself? I don't think so. Was it the team that made Starr or Starr that helped make the team? I think it was Starr. All those Hall of Fame players didn't do a whole lot until Starr started as QB.

Who knows. I can't say that I watched anybody before about 1980.

[Rastak]

That's kind of a chicken-or-the-egg argument, Harvey. Would the Packers have been the Championship team they were without Starr, a Hall of Famer himself? I don't think so. Was it the team that made Starr or Starr that helped make the team? I think it was Starr. All those Hall of Fame players didn't do a whole lot until Starr started as QB.

Who knows. I can't say that I watched anybody before about 1980.


You lack perspective Harv.... :wink: :wink:

Shit, that year Rashad caught a hail mary against the Browns to send the Vikes into the playoffs. I just moved out on my own and leaped over the coffee table with popcorn and beer flying everywhere.


oops....I digress.......LOL......

[Joemailman]

I like Bart, but I'm sure people in Dallas (Aikman) and Pittsburgh (Bradshaw) say the same things. We aren't talking about team success, but individual greatness. There's no question Starr played with many more great players (a couple of Hall of Famers at RB, some Hall of Famers in the OL, and one of the better defenses of all-time for much of his career).

Starr was clutch. No question. I don't think it's an insult to Starr to rank Favre higher--just like I don't think it's an insult to Favre to rank Elway higher. Somebody made a good point of tiers being a better system--because it's hard to rank guys from different eras.

How many Hall of Famers did Starr play with? Favre played with three Hall of Fame caliber players--Reggie White, Sterling Sharpe, and LeRoy Butler.

That's kind of a chicken-or-the-egg argument, Harvey. Would the Packers have been the Championship team they were without Starr, a Hall of Famer himself? I don't think so. Was it the team that made Starr or Starr that helped make the team? I think it was Starr. All those Hall of Fame players didn't do a whole lot until Starr started as QB.

Of course, none of those Hall Of Famers, including Starr, did anything until Lombardi showed up. Starr was the perfect extension of Lombardi on the field, and that alone makes him great. It certainly is true that in 1966 with the Packers running game not as dominant as it once was, Starr was able to pick up more of the offensive load. I've always debated whether the Packers were a very talented team that underachieved pre-Lombardi, or whether they were a reasonably talented team that overachieved with Lombardi.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I like Bart, but I'm sure people in Dallas (Aikman) and Pittsburgh (Bradshaw) say the same things. We aren't talking about team success, but individual greatness. There's no question Starr played with many more great players (a couple of Hall of Famers at RB, some Hall of Famers in the OL, and one of the better defenses of all-time for much of his career).

Starr was clutch. No question. I don't think it's an insult to Starr to rank Favre higher--just like I don't think it's an insult to Favre to rank Elway higher. Somebody made a good point of tiers being a better system--because it's hard to rank guys from different eras.

How many Hall of Famers did Starr play with? Favre played with three Hall of Fame caliber players--Reggie White, Sterling Sharpe, and LeRoy Butler.

That's kind of a chicken-or-the-egg argument, Harvey. Would the Packers have been the Championship team they were without Starr, a Hall of Famer himself? I don't think so. Was it the team that made Starr or Starr that helped make the team? I think it was Starr. All those Hall of Fame players didn't do a whole lot until Starr started as QB.

Of course, none of those Hall Of Famers, including Starr, did anything until Lombardi showed up. Starr was the perfect extension of Lombardi on the field, and that alone makes him great. It certainly is true that in 1966 with the Packers running game not as dominant as it once was, Starr was able to pick up more of the offensive load. I've always debated whether the Packers were a very talented team that underachieved pre-Lombardi, or whether they were a reasonably talented team that overachieved with Lombardi.

To your last point, in my opinion BOTH are true. No doubt the team had many talented individuals, but it also had many average players. Lombardi brought the best out of all of them and got them all to overachieve. It's what a superb coach does.

Starr is a perfect example. He was nothing special coming out of college. Just average. Drafted in the 17th round, I think. He learned to overachieve. Or, better stated, learned to give 110% each and every time he took the field.

Lombardi was mostly about attitude and commitment, more than talent. He knew what made the difference between a championship team and all the rest was will -- his teams wanted the win more than the other guys.

I think McCarthy understands that too. I've heard him say many times he wants players with character before anything else. I think he'd rather have a team of young men like Greg Jennnings and James Jones than a veteran group of prima donnas like Randy Moss and Terrell Owen.

[4and12to12and4]

Bart Starr had approximately 9 more touchdown passes than interceptions. Check those numbers against Bretts touchdowns vs. interceptions. Was Start going against better defenses? Yeah right. If Starr had to go against teams like the Chargers and Bears, he would be eaten alive.

[Partial]

Who is Otto Graham? Kind of sad that #1 on HW's list and #2 on KFC's list I have never heard of.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Otto Graham played in the late 40s and 50s. He played 10 years, his team made the championship game in all 10 years and won the title 7 times.


During an astounding career in which the Browns compiled a 105-17-4 record.

In his final year of play, Graham won the Hickok Belt as top professional athlete of the year, and ten years later, he was inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame. In 1999, he was ranked number 7 on The Sporting News' list of the 100 Greatest Football Players.

Otto Graham is considered by many historians to be one of the greatest winners in the history of professional sports. Graham played six seasons in the NFL and took the Cleveland Browns to the NFL Championship Game all six seasons, winning three NFL titles. Including four seasons in which his team captured four AAFC titles, Graham played ten total seasons of professional football and made the league championship game all ten seasons, winning seven league titles.

In his 10 years in the NFL and AAFC, he was his league's MVP 5 times.

[4and12to12and4]

Otto Graham played in the late 40s and 50s. He played 10 years, his team made the championship game in all 10 years and won the title 7 times.


During an astounding career in which the Browns compiled a 105-17-4 record.

In his final year of play, Graham won the Hickok Belt as top professional athlete of the year, and ten years later, he was inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame. In 1999, he was ranked number 7 on The Sporting News' list of the 100 Greatest Football Players.

Otto Graham is considered by many historians to be one of the greatest winners in the history of professional sports. Graham played six seasons in the NFL and took the Cleveland Browns to the NFL Championship Game all six seasons, winning three NFL titles. Including four seasons in which his team captured four AAFC titles, Graham played ten total seasons of professional football and made the league championship game all ten seasons, winning seven league titles.

In his 10 years in the NFL and AAFC, he was his league's MVP 5 times.

Yeah, and there were like 10 teams in the league at the time and seven of them were as bad as Notre Dame is this year. Big deal.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Yeah, and there were like 10 teams in the league at the time and seven of them were as bad as Notre Dame is this year. Big deal.

10 teams (actually 12-14 teams) means 2 out of every 3 players in the league today wouldn't make it. Mark Tauscher? Wouldn't start. Willis McGahee? Wouldn't start. If you want to go by that, then we might as well give back 11 of our 12 championships.

I can't wait until you're 50, and some 20-something talks about how shitty the league was back in your day. That Brett Favre couldn't hold a candle to the best QBs of the modern era.

The athletic ability of those guys weren't as far off from today as you think. You ever see Gale Sayers or Jim Brown run? How about James Lofton? In his younger days, that guy was comparable to the Randy Moss' of the league. Phenomenal athlete. World class.

[4and12to12and4]

Yeah, and there were like 10 teams in the league at the time and seven of them were as bad as Notre Dame is this year. Big deal.

10 teams (actually 12-14 teams) means 2 out of every 3 players in the league today wouldn't make it. Mark Tauscher? Wouldn't start. Willis McGahee? Wouldn't start. If you want to go by that, then we might as well give back 11 of our 12 championships.

I can't wait until you're 50, and some 20-something talks about how shitty the league was back in your day. That Brett Favre couldn't hold a candle to the best QBs of the modern era.

The athletic ability of those guys weren't as far off from today as you think. You ever see Gale Sayers or Jim Brown run? How about James Lofton? In his younger days, that guy was comparable to the Randy Moss' of the league. Phenomenal athlete. World class.

I agree that some skill players like Sayers, Lofton, Brown may have been able to hold their own and maybe even be probowlers, but the lineman were so small in comparison to today. The backers were smaller and slower. There is way more strength, size and speed all over the field to keep these skill players in check as they weren't when they played. Plus, Lofton, Sayers, you're getting into the late 70's, 80's, I'm talking the 40's and 50's. Smaller, slower guys that played football parttime, while they worked at the mill all week. I mean come on. Guys like TO would score 10 touchdowns a game against those guys. The size, speed, agility, knowledge of a huge playbook would make the games a laugher. If you put a Lombardi team against a Brett Favre team this Sunday, we would destroy the Lombardi team, and embarass them off the field. Can you imagine Lombardi's o-line trying to keep our d-line off Bart? We'd kill him. Brett would be slinging 10 touchdown passes at will against that team. Our average offensive and defensive lineman are 300 lbs. and agile. It would be a masacre.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Depends on how you want to compare them. The best you can do is view their dominance in their respective eras. That's the way I judge them, and I think most fair-minded people would judge them that way. Jim Brown was the most dominant RB in NFL history in my book (and he is a guy that could play today). Babe Ruth and Willie Mays were the most dominant baseball players, IMHO. Don Hutson and Jerry Rice were the most dominant WRs. Carl Lewis was the most dominant track star in his era.

[motife]

I think Sonny Jurgenson has to rank in the Top 20.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Bart Starr had approximately 9 more touchdown passes than interceptions. Check those numbers against Bretts touchdowns vs. interceptions. Was Start going against better defenses? Yeah right. If Starr had to go against teams like the Chargers and Bears, he would be eaten alive.

You just don't get it.

Yes, any of today's hurdlers could smoke Jesse Owens. Modern decatheletes would eat Jim Thorpe alive. Albert Einstein would make Isaac Newton look like a kindergarten student. Does this diminish the greatness of these historical men?

Every conversation I've ever been in comparing one generation to the other degenerates into " those old guys couldn't hold a candle to modern guys." If you're gonna say that then why even have the discussion in the first place?

Obviously, we can't compare Bobby Jones and Tiger Woods in the exact same environment and time frame. But we can compare and contrast the two with respect to their competitiveness and dominance within their respective eras!

[The Shadow]

Since I never was able to see Graham or Baugh, my rankings are based only on quarterbacks I've observed :

1 Johnny Unitas
2 Bart Starr
3 Joe Montana
4 John Elway
5 Tom Brady
6 Peyton Manning
7 Brett Favre
8 Dan Marino
9 Fran Tarkenton
10 Roger Staubach
11 Terry Bradshaw
12 Sonny Jurgenson
13 Steve Young
14 Dan Fouts
15 Troy Aikman

[Maxie the Taxi]

Since I never was able to see Graham or Baugh, my rankings are based only on quarterbacks I've observed :

1 Johnny Unitas
2 Bart Starr
3 Joe Montana
4 John Elway
5 Tom Brady
6 Peyton Manning
7 Brett Favre
8 Dan Marino
9 Fran Tarkenton
10 Roger Staubach
11 Terry Bradshaw
12 Sonny Jurgenson
13 Steve Young
14 Dan Fouts
15 Troy Aikman

Shadow, I could quibble but it's a good list. I've seen them all play too. I know why you topped the list with Unitas. He was the better passer; Starr the better field general. Unitas played with probably five or six Hall of Famers. Speaking of which, Raymond Berry was perhaps the best wide receiver I've ever seen play (apologies to Jerry Rice).

[The Shadow]

Since I never was able to see Graham or Baugh, my rankings are based only on quarterbacks I've observed :

1 Johnny Unitas
2 Bart Starr
3 Joe Montana
4 John Elway
5 Tom Brady
6 Peyton Manning
7 Brett Favre
8 Dan Marino
9 Fran Tarkenton
10 Roger Staubach
11 Terry Bradshaw
12 Sonny Jurgenson
13 Steve Young
14 Dan Fouts
15 Troy Aikman

Shadow, I could quibble but it's a good list. I've seen them all play too. I know why you topped the list with Unitas. He was the better passer; Starr the better field general. Unitas played with probably five or six Hall of Famers. Speaking of which, Raymond Berry was perhaps the best wide receiver I've ever seen play (apologies to Jerry Rice).

What made Berry so special was the fact that he was a short, slow glasses-wearing fellow that MADE himself, thru incredible diligence, into the most precise route-runner of all time.
No one will ever run the 'out' as well.

[MadtownPacker]

Sammy Baugh has to be in any all-time 15. He had as good an arm as player on this list. He won the rings to match his talent and was an effective QB for 16 years and played for 17 seasons.I dont know nada about any QBs before Montana but awhile back I was watching NFL Network and they had an NFL Films special talking about QBs. They showed Sammy Baugh who's name I had heard before. It was cool, showed how he was one of the first QBs to use the pass a lot at least by that times standards. They interviewed him and he talked about how he would have loved to play today game. It was interesting when he talked about the game back then. Was his nickname Slinging Sammy, right?

[KYPack]

Sammy Baugh has to be in any all-time 15. He had as good an arm as player on this list. He won the rings to match his talent and was an effective QB for 16 years and played for 17 seasons.I dont know nada about any QBs before Montana but awhile back I was watching NFL Network and they had an NFL Films special talking about QBs. They showed Sammy Baugh who's name I had heard before. It was cool, showed how he was one of the first QBs to use the pass a lot at least by that times standards. They interviewed him and he talked about how he would have loved to play today game. It was interesting when he talked about the game back then. Was his nickname Slinging Sammy, right?

He was arguably the first modern QB. Baugh made teams swiich to the "T" formation. If you watch the films, Baugh had a funny throwing motion (hence the Slingin Sam nickname) but he could throw long accurate spirals all over the field.

Sam would've been a atar in any era.

He was pretty Favre like and him and the gunslinger could have a beer and bullshit about the position easily.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Right now, it stands:
1 Montana
2 Marino
3 Elway
4 Unitas
5 Favre
6 Bradshaw
7 Young (Steve Friggin' Young?)
8 Starr
9 Aikman
10 Staubach
11 Brady
12 Namath (overrated, had more interceptions than TDs in his career)
13 Manning
14 Tarkenton
15 Kelly
16 Fouts
17 Graham
18 Moon
19 Baugh
20 Griese


I think the voting should be limitted to people over 50. Or maybe 70.

Most people voting in this thing think Montana is an old-timer who played in era with funny helmets that didn't have radio recievers in them. Back when they stole defensive signals just by sneaking a peak.

[4and12to12and4]

I regress and will admit I have been arguing this in the manner of who would beat who if matched up now. That is unfair. In terms of greatness, when speaking in terms of how good an athlete is in its own era, then, Unitas wins hands down. Nobody was even close to as good as him in his era. After that, Montana, Marino, Elway, heck even Boomer Esiason if given a good team around him were all excellent QB's but none of them STOOD head and shoulders above the other. Some may argue that. Montana had a cast and coaching staff that made him "appear" better than he really was. Not saying he wasn't one of the most calm, cerebral, accurate throwers of all time. But, he had weaknesses.

I just think that with Brett breaking all these records, being the toughest QB easily of all those, and his streak, and all the winning seasons, there is just so much he has done, he, to me stands out at #1 regardless of era. If he can win another SB, the balloting is closed.

[motife]

Modern QB's in Hall of Fame :

Troy Aikman 1989-2000
George Blanda (Also PK) 1949-1958, 1960-1975
Terry Bradshaw 1970-1983
Len Dawson 1957-1975
John Elway 1983-1998
Dan Fouts 1973-1987
Otto Graham 1946-1955
Bob Griese 1967-1980
Sonny Jurgensen 1957-1974
Jim Kelly 1986-1996
Bobby Layne 1948-1962
Dan Marino 1983-1999
Joe Montana 1979-1994
Warren Moon 1984-2000
Joe Namath 1965-1977
Bart Starr 1956-1971
Roger Staubach 1969-1979
Fran Tarkenton 1961-1978
Y.A. Tittle 1948-1964
Johnny Unitas 1956-1973
Norm Van Brocklin 1949-1960
Bob Waterfield 1945-1952
Steve Young 1985-1999

[motife]

Tom Brady is on pace to have the best season in almost every category by a QB.

[motife]

Other decent QB;s :

John Brodie
Ken Anderson
Ken Stabler
John Hadl
Roman Gabriel
Jack Kemp
Bert Jones
Jim Hart
Steve Bartkowski
Tommy Kramer
Boomer Esiason
Ron Jaworski
Jeff George
Randall Cunningham
Drew Bledsoe
Kurt Warner
Bernie Kosar

[motife]

Number of attempts per TD :

1 Dawson, Len 15.65
2 Baugh, Sammy 16.02
3 Jurgensen, Sonny 16.71
4 Blanda, George 16.98
5 Graham, Otto 17.78
6 Manning, Peyton 17.83
7 Griese, Bob 17.86
8 Unitas, Johnny 17.88
9 Young, Steve 17.88
10 Tittle, Y.A. 18.00
11 Bradshaw, Terry 18.40
12 Tarkenton, Fran 18.91
13 Hadl, John 19.21
14 Staubach, Roger 19.33
15 Montana, Joe 19.75
16 Favre, Brett 19.88
17 Marino, Dan 19.90
18 Brady, Tom 20.08
19 Kelly, Jim 20.16
20 Starr, Bart 20.72
21 Namath, Joe 21.75
22 Fouts, Dan 22.06
23 Dickey, Lynn 22.16
24 Anderson, Ken 22.72
25 Moon, Warren 23.45
26 Elway, John 24.17

[motife]

Completion %age :
1 Young, Steve 64.3%
2 Manning, Peyton 64.1%
3 Montana, Joe 63.2%
4 Brady, Tom 62.4%
5 Favre, Brett 61.1%
6 Kelly, Jim 60.1%
7 Marino, Dan 59.4%
8 Anderson, Ken 59.3%
9 Fouts, Dan 58.8%
10 Moon, Warren 58.4%
11 Starr, Bart 57.4%
12 Dawson, Len 57.1%
13 Jurgensen, Sonny 57.1%
14 Tarkenton, Fran 57.0%
15 Staubach, Roger 57.0%
16 Elway, John 56.9%
17 Baugh, Sammy 56.5%
18 Griese, Bob 56.2%
19 Dickey, Lynn 55.9%
20 Graham, Otto 55.7%
21 Tittle, Y.A. 55.5%
22 Unitas, Johnny 54.6%
23 Bradshaw, Terry 51.9%
24 Hadl, John 50.4%
25 Namath, Joe 50.1%
26 Blanda, George 47.7%

[motife]

Number of attempts per interception :
1 Brady, Tom 39.90
2 Montana, Joe 38.78
3 Young, Steve 38.78
4 Manning, Peyton 35.65
5 Marino, Dan 33.17
6 Elway, John 32.08
7 Favre, Brett 30.36
8 Moon, Warren 29.28
9 Anderson, Ken 27.97
10 Kelly, Jim 27.31
11 Staubach, Roger 27.14
12 Tarkenton, Fran 24.31
13 Fouts, Dan 23.16
14 Starr, Bart 22.82
15 Jurgensen, Sonny 22.55
16 Unitas, Johnny 20.50
17 Dawson, Len 20.44
18 Griese, Bob 19.94
19 Bradshaw, Terry 18.58
20 Hadl, John 17.49
21 Dickey, Lynn 17.46
22 Tittle, Y.A. 17.27
23 Namath, Joe 17.10
24 Graham, Otto 16.65
25 Baugh, Sammy 14.75
26 Blanda, George 14.47

[motife]

Yards per attempt :

1 Graham, Otto 8.63
2 Young, Steve 7.98
3 Starr, Bart 7.85
4 Unitas, Johnny 7.76
5 Manning, Peyton 7.71
6 Fouts, Dan 7.68
7 Dawson, Len 7.67
8 Staubach, Roger 7.67
9 Jurgensen, Sonny 7.56
10 Montana, Joe 7.52
11 Dickey, Lynn 7.46
12 Tittle, Y.A. 7.42
13 Kelly, Jim 7.42
14 Namath, Joe 7.35
15 Marino, Dan 7.34
16 Anderson, Ken 7.34
17 Griese, Bob 7.32
18 Baugh, Sammy 7.31
19 Tarkenton, Fran 7.27
20 Moon, Warren 7.23
21 Bradshaw, Terry 7.17
22 Hadl, John 7.15
23 Brady, Tom 7.12
24 Elway, John 7.10
25 Favre, Brett 6.99
26 Blanda, George 6.72

[motife]

Yards per completion :

1 Graham, Otto 15.48
2 Namath, Joe 14.67
3 Unitas, Johnny 14.22
4 Hadl, John 14.18
5 Blanda, George 14.09
6 Bradshaw, Terry 13.82
7 Starr, Bart 13.67
8 Staubach, Roger 13.47
9 Dawson, Len 13.44
10 Tittle, Y.A. 13.38
11 Dickey, Lynn 13.35
12 Jurgensen, Sonny 13.24
13 Fouts, Dan 13.05
14 Griese, Bob 13.03
15 Baugh, Sammy 12.93
16 Tarkenton, Fran 12.75
17 Elway, John 12.48
18 Young, Steve 12.42
19 Anderson, Ken 12.37
20 Moon, Warren 12.37
21 Marino, Dan 12.35
22 Kelly, Jim 12.34
23 Manning, Peyton 12.03
24 Montana, Joe 11.90
25 Favre, Brett 11.44
26 Brady, Tom 11.42

[motife]

QB Rating :

1 Young, Steve 96.88
2 Manning, Peyton 94.56
3 Montana, Joe 92.17
4 Brady, Tom 89.80
5 Marino, Dan 86.21
6 Favre, Brett 85.22
7 Kelly, Jim 84.30
8 Staubach, Roger 83.52
9 Jurgensen, Sonny 82.79
10 Dawson, Len 82.66
11 Anderson, Ken 81.70
12 Moon, Warren 80.78
13 Tarkenton, Fran 80.49
14 Fouts, Dan 80.31
15 Starr, Bart 80.26
16 Elway, John 79.86
17 Unitas, Johnny 78.37
18 Graham, Otto 78.07
19 Griese, Bob 77.07
20 Tittle, Y.A. 73.55
21 Baugh, Sammy 72.18
22 Dickey, Lynn 71.09
23 Bradshaw, Terry 71.03
24 Hadl, John 67.21
25 Namath, Joe 65.66
26 Blanda, George 60.57

[motife]

Favre may want to go for Blanda's longevity record.

Longevity :

1 Blanda, George 27
2 Dawson, Len 19
3 Jurgensen, Sonny 18
4 Tarkenton, Fran 18
5 Unitas, Johnny 18
6 Marino, Dan 17
7 Favre, Brett 17
8 Moon, Warren 17
9 Tittle, Y.A. 17
10 Montana, Joe 16
11 Anderson, Ken 16
12 Starr, Bart 16
13 Elway, John 16
14 Baugh, Sammy 16
15 Hadl, John 16
16 Young, Steve 15
17 Fouts, Dan 15
18 Dickey, Lynn 15
19 Griese, Bob 14
20 Bradshaw, Terry 14
21 Namath, Joe 13
22 Kelly, Jim 11
23 Staubach, Roger 11
24 Manning, Peyton 10
25 Graham, Otto 10
26 Brady, Tom 8

[b bulldog]

All opinion and every city that has a qb on this list will say their guy is number one.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I think it's obvious, from all the stats that Motife has published, that the greatest QB who ever lived is Bart Starr. :D

[motife]

I think ...the greatest QB who ever lived is Bart Starr.

If I had to guess off the top of my head where Starr's best numbers came from I would have said Most Attempts per interception. And.. I would have thought that was where Favre was worst.

But Favre is 7th on this list as the least intercepted QB... Starr was 14th.

Favre throws an interception every 30.36 attempts, while Starr threw one every 22.82 attempts. Starr once had a streak of 294 passes without an INT.

Similarly, who would have thought Len Dawson needed the fewest attempts to get a TD pass? With Sammy Baugh, Sonny Jurgensen, George Blanda, Otto Graham leading Peyton Manning?

And Favre trailing further, Bob Griese, Johnny Unitas, Steve Young, Y.A. Tittle, Terry Bradshaw, Fran Tarkenton, John Hadl, Roger Staubach and Joe Montana in TD's per attempt?

And that of the list of TD passes per attempt for this group, John Elway would be DEAD LAST.

[Maxie the Taxi]

But Favre is 7th on this list as the lesst intercepted QB... Starr was 14th.


Kind of stands to reason. Favre played in the West Coast Offense. Most of Starr's throws were downfield.

Are you familiar with Bud Goode's site?
http://mule.he.net/~budsport/index.php

He says the key statistic to predicting wins is yards/throw. Very interesting stuff.

[motife]

But Favre is 7th on this list as the lesst intercepted QB... Starr was 14th.


Kind of stands to reason. Favre played in the West Coast Offense. Most of Starr's throws were downfield.

Are you familiar with Bud Goode's site?
http://mule.he.net/~budsport/index.php

He says the key statistic to predicting wins is yards/throw. Very interesting stuff.

But if you look at yards per attempt, of the top Ten most are in the pass downfield pre-West Coast era. The only exceptions are Steve Young, Peyton Manning and Joe Montana.

Tom Brady, John Elway and Brett Favre are at the bottom of the list.

Yards per attempt is a function of the scheme and the completion %age. In historical comparisons, it seems to be somewhat unpredictive. With the exception of Young, Manning and Montana.

[woodbuck27]

That article certainly draws a strong argument for Bart Starr.

I really enjoyed reading it because I saw Starr play and he was Mr. Clutch and the consomate PRO. A very fine man.

Rankings do not speak to my heart though. :)

All that Favre is. . . does. :)

Brett Favre is easily the most exciting QB I have ever watched. He is also top five ALL TIME and with better support how many Super Bowls might he have won (Question Mark)

He will own ALL the records and yes even the record for most picks. Yet look at all the throws and to many WRs that he made look decent to very good. Look at his arm , the strength of that when discussing his soon to be pick record.

Johnny U was very special as was Joe Montana. I liked to see Fran Tarkenton play. He could bring you out of your seat similiar to Favre but not the way Favre can.

Favre will go down as simply the best ALL TIME in my book of rankings. If anyone disagrees then that is just fine with me too. :)

[motife]

The stat that MOST seperates modern QB'a from the pre-Walsh era is Yards per completion.

At the bottom of the list are Marino, Kelly, Manning, Montana, Favre and Brady.

The top 10 are Graham, Namath, Unitas, Hadl, Blanda, Bradshaw, Starr, Staubach, Dawson, and Y.A. Tittle.

[The Shadow]

"......Rankings do not speak to my heart though"

.................................................. .................................................
And that is one of the major reasons that Starr appears so high on my rankings.
If you check the records, he seemed to learn, after the first lost championship to the Eagles (with Jim Taylor falling only 9 yards short of a touchdown) how to find a way to win the big games - even as his supporting cast changed.
He did not possess the physical gifts of many of the top quarterbacks, but he was the ultimate field general - an extension of Lombardi himself -and had the uncanny ability to win under diverse circumstances.
The Ice Bowl drive in the closing moments was the single greatest, gutsiest feat of quarterbacking I've ever seen.

[Noodle]

I've never been of the view that Favre was at the very top of NFL quarterbacks because to me his suspect decisionmaking left him short of guys like Montana, Unitas, and Starr.

But I'm changing my mind. Favre this year has put it all together. I cannot believe how well he is playing. This quote from Sharper after the game today says it all:

"He's making all the proper decisions. You don't see him making some of the decisions he made in the past," Sharper said. "They're putting a lot on him, throwing the ball a lot, and he's not making too many bad throws. He's playing at the MVP level that he has played at before."

Remember people saying that Favre would hurt his legacy by continuing to play because his skills were going to betray him? Last year, that looked to be the case. But not now. We are seeing some of the most amazing, intelligent QBing ever.

[Rastak]

I've never been of the view that Favre was at the very top of NFL quarterbacks because to me his suspect decisionmaking left him short of guys like Montana, Unitas, and Starr.

But I'm changing my mind. Favre this year has put it all together. I cannot believe how well he is playing. This quote from Sharper after the game today says it all:

"He's making all the proper decisions. You don't see him making some of the decisions he made in the past," Sharper said. "They're putting a lot on him, throwing the ball a lot, and he's not making too many bad throws. He's playing at the MVP level that he has played at before."

Remember people saying that Favre would hurt his legacy by continuing to play because his skills were going to betray him? Last year, that looked to be the case. But not now. We are seeing some of the most amazing, intelligent QBing ever.


He was laying the ball in exactly where it needed to be. I was very impressed and very pissed.

[oregonpackfan]

I've never been of the view that Favre was at the very top of NFL quarterbacks because to me his suspect decisionmaking left him short of guys like Montana, Unitas, and Starr.

But I'm changing my mind. Favre this year has put it all together. I cannot believe how well he is playing. This quote from Sharper after the game today says it all:

"He's making all the proper decisions. You don't see him making some of the decisions he made in the past," Sharper said. "They're putting a lot on him, throwing the ball a lot, and he's not making too many bad throws. He's playing at the MVP level that he has played at before."

Remember people saying that Favre would hurt his legacy by continuing to play because his skills were going to betray him? Last year, that looked to be the case. But not now. We are seeing some of the most amazing, intelligent QBing ever.


He was laying the ball in exactly where it needed to be. .

I agree with Rastak on this point. Favre's throws are primarily short passes but he made long passes to Jennings, Jones(TD's) and a long one to Lee where the ball landed smack in the receiver's hands while he was in full stride.

[vince]

This is a great debate with so many great perspectives on different quarterbacks from different eras that I wanted to add a good article by Terry Bradshaw...

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/7283620


Favre is the best in the business

Hey folks, I'm not kidding around. I really meant it when I said that Brett Favre is the best quarterback I've ever seen play. I will say it again. I have documented it. I put it on the cover of a book. He's the best there ever was and that covers everybody.

I know people are going to get on me and say Joe Montana. Joe and I both won four Super Bowls. But you know I don't believe in all these 1-2-3 systematic quarterbacks that run that West Coast offense that we've seen for so many years now — with all that great talent around them, too. Just think of that. I know that Favre has thrown a lot of interceptions (49 since the '05 season), but when you think of all the great quarterbacks in the modern era — I don't even know if you would call me a modern quarterback — all of us have had a stable set of wide receivers.
Look at Dan Marino with Mark Clayton and Mark Duper when he started. Look at me with Lynn Swann and John Stallworth and Montana with Jerry Rice, Dwight Clark and some of the others. Dan Fouts had great receivers in San Diego his entire career. All of them had a steady, very reliable complement of receivers.

But look at Favre. He's had to endure so much there. Antonio Freeman was a good receiver but wasn't in the same class as a Rice or a Swann or a Kellen Winslow. Now he has Donald Driver, and he's solid. But he also has a rookie receiver in James Jones and he might be good some day, but he's a rookie. Brett is doing so much just leading that team, and it just looks like he's playing so smart.

Favre has now thrown 210 more touchdown passes than I did. He's attempted over 4,000 more passes than me. So it's not necessarily all him, either. In this day and age, the game is so wide open that you better put up great numbers. I'm sure someone like Peyton Manning or possibly even Tom Brady, with the offense he has right now, could threaten Favre's records some day, who knows?

It's like I said on the show: Not too many people ever ask me how many touchdown passes I threw in my career. In all the corporate outings I've been on, all the speeches and conventions and Q&As I've given, nobody has ever asked me that. Never.

Now, I'm not putting down his record. I'm just stating a fact that I'm not that impressed with records like these. I'm more impressed with the fact that Favre has started 240 consecutive regular-season games. Now that my friend is the most incredible record and I truly believe it will never be broken.

You can tell by watching the Packers play and that shot in the locker room after the game that everybody loves Favre. He's a pied piper. He's someone that people get behind. And you know what? No disrespect to the Dan Marinos of the world and guys who screamed and hollered all the time, but you never really see Favre scream and holler at guys out on the field. He's loved. Now I've seen him get upset with some of their rookies, but that's understandable for what he knows and what they don't know yet about pro football.

Brett has always been one of those "aw shucks" kind of guys, but you know that he's very proud. He's a proud person.

And have we ever seen a player in our lifetime, or anyone that we know in today's electronic media, whose family has suffered more in front of our eyes only to have him come out and punctuate it with a phenomenal effort? If it's not his family, it's his wife's family or the time that Deanna was fighting cancer — and it seems that all the adversity, the doubt, all the stories about him going to retire just motivates him even more. He keeps coming back and playing so well and his team is 4-0 and it seems like he's throwing every down because they still don't have a running back.

Brett gives us so much to talk about in so many ways. I mean, from adversity to the painkiller addiction to the tragedies in his personal life to the great Super Bowl win over New England, to all the interceptions, back to being a gunslinger, something that Mike Holmgren tried to get out of his system to back to where he is now, carrying this football team to an unbeaten record.

But it's early folks. It's only four games. The season has a long ways to go.

He's been great for us. He appears to be media friendly. And I think that's a great compliment to him; he seems to be very much approachable to the average Joe out there. And there is probably no bigger superstar in our game than Brett. Now, he doesn't have the Super Bowl rings like Brady, who tends to be quieter about his career.

But I don't mind that Favre wears his career on his sleeve for all to see. There is no mystique here. We are all drawn to that because we feel that we know everything about him. And we love what we see. He's truly loved.

I mean, we don't see him do a thousand commercials so when we see one like Wrangler, I say he must really like those jeans. He must wear them. It's refreshing. When he leaves this game, I don't know if there is another Brett Favre out there.

[The Leaper]

Bradshaw and Starr have it right. There have been other QBs who were more successful in terms of titles, but they all had significantly more talent around them to work with and far less instability with their coaching staff. In terms of raw talent, desire to win, and critical leadership in the time of change and uncertainty, there might not an equal to Favre in the history of the league.

Favre has had 4 different coaching regimes to play through while remaining with the same team. How many QB icons have had that kind of disruption to work through? Most had one coach, and typically a great one at that, through the majority of their career...maybe switching over to another one for several years at the end of their lengthy career, like Marino or Elway.

The constant change around Favre, both in coaching philosophy and talent on the roster, makes his ability to continue to play at an elite level over 15+ years even more remarkable. There are very few QBs in the history of the league that could have matched what Favre has done.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Kind of interesting that Sal likes Starr more than Unitas, and he has some pretty damn convincing numbers to use.


Barry failed in big games; Deion flourished
By Sal Paolantonio, ESPN

In his new book, "The Paolantonio Report: The Most Overrated and Underrated Players, Teams, Coaches & Moments in NFL History," Sal Paolantonio challenges some of your long-held beliefs about America's popular game.

Here's what we think about Johnny Unitas: With one magical stroke in 1958, he changed the game of pro football forever. Each year, it seems, a new book mythologizes his status as a cultural icon. In short, he gets the John Lennon treatment. Bart Starr? He gets treated like Ringo -- not Jim Ringo, the great Green Bay Packers center, but Ringo Starr, the Beatles drummer who always seems to be overlooked and undervalued.

Starr has been dismissed as the caretaker of great Packers teams. Not so. Take a second look by comparing him to Unitas, who posted a career playoff passer rating of 68.9 with seven touchdown passes and 10 interceptions. Starr? He had a career playoff passer rating 104.8, the highest in NFL history, safely ahead of the next best guy, Joe Montana (95.6).

Starr threw just three interceptions in 213 career postseason attempts. And get this: When Tom Brady threw four picks during the playoffs last year, Starr reclaimed the career record for fewest interceptions per pass attempt in NFL postseason history.

Starr -- who won more championships than Unitas, Steve Young, Dan Marino and (thus far) Brett Favre combined -- is the most underrated quarterback in NFL history.

That's what "The Paolantonio Report: the Most Overrated and Underrated Players, Teams, Coaches & Moments in NFL History" is all about. It provides a fresh perspective. It's an attempt to set the record straight -- or at least provide plenty to debate.

So much of what we know about pro football has been catapulted through the star-maker machinery, achieving mythical status -- undeservedly so. Take the 1985 Chicago Bears. A great, great team. But shouldn't we hoist the 1976 Oakland Raiders on the same pedestal?

Both teams lost only one regular-season game. But, to get their Lombardi Trophy, the Raiders had to beat teams for the ages with Hall of Fame quarterbacks -- first Terry Bradshaw and the Steel Curtain, then Fran Tarkenton and the Purple People Eaters. The Bears? They beat the Rams with Dieter Brock at the helm, then the Patriots with Steve Grogan at quarterback.

If it's not being overhyped, so much of the NFL is now being processed through the meat grinder of our current national obsession, fantasy football. So, while it contains plenty of statistical analysis, this book consciously avoids a slavish obedience to numbers and trends, instead considering the historical impact of the team, coach or player.

For example, the drafting of Bob Hayes is one of the most underrated moments in NFL history. His speed changed the game forever. You can't write a history of the league without Bullet Bob. Yet he's not in Canton. That should be corrected.

So, here's a snapshot of the book. Two guys named Sanders, two huge stars -- one overrated, one underrated. Let the debate begin.

Barry Sanders -- Overrated

Barry Sanders, who was inducted into the Hall of Fame in 2004 (his first year of eligibility), scored one touchdown for every 35 touches in his 153 regular-season games, but just one touchdown in 112 postseason touches in six playoff games.

Indeed, Sanders' only career playoff touchdown was a 47-yard run against the Dallas Cowboys in a 1991 divisional-round playoff game in the Pontiac Silverdome. The Lions won that game 38-6. Sanders' touchdown came in the final minutes of the fourth quarter with Detroit already leading 31-6. The following week, the Lions went on the road to play the Washington Redskins at RFK Stadium. Sanders was not a factor. Detroit took a 41-10 beating.

Sanders' postseason performance supports the notion that he was a product of the cozy, climate-controlled Silverdome. Nice carpet for easy, stop-on-a-dime maneuvering. Seventy-two degrees. Detroit faithful keeping the defensive line off balance with high decibel support.

In four career outdoor postseason games, Sanders averaged a paltry 2.8 yards per carry. He never scored a touchdown. And he never ran for more than 65 yards in a single game. With Sanders, the Lions went 0-4 in outdoor playoff games, losing by an average of 17 points.

Nobody is suggesting that a bust of Barry should not be in Canton. He's the third-leading rusher of all time with 15,269 yards. He holds the all-time NFL record for consecutive 1,000 seasons with 10, from 1989 to 1998. Sanders was the first player to rush for 1,500 yards in a season five times. He was selected to 10 Pro Bowls. In 1997, when he rushed for 2,053 yards, he was NFL co-MVP, an honor he should have not had to share with Brett Favre that season. In 1988, Sanders won the Heisman Trophy at Oklahoma State.

But this picture of perfection has a nasty blemish. Once Sanders got to the big stage, and got out of the Silverdome, he was a bust.

Take the wild-card playoff game at Lambeau Field in 1994. That season, Sanders averaged 5.7 yards per carry -- the second-highest total of his career. In the first round of the playoffs against the Green Bay Packers, on Lambeau Field's frozen tundra, Sanders set an NFL postseason record for rushing futility. He had 13 carries for minus-one yard. He had four catches that day -- for four yards. Which means he had 16 touches for a total of three yards -- 2.7 yards less than he averaged per rush in the regular season.

Now, the spirited defense of putting him in the Hall of Fame on the first ballot always includes the theory that Sanders was the only thing the Lions had going for them in The Barry Sanders Era. That's exactly what it is -- a theory, and a bad one at that.

Did we forget about wide receivers Herman Moore and Brett Perriman? The Lions stretched the field for Sanders -- especially in the Dome. This helped him be wildly successful -- in the regular season. And in the years when the Lions went to the playoffs, their defense was not awful. It was middle of the pack -- ranked 11th in 1991, 15th in 1993, 19th in 1994, 14th in 1995 and 10th in 1997.

There is another ugly scar on Sanders' career: His Greta Garbo act on the way out the door.

After rushing for 1,491 yards in 1998, Sanders abruptly and mysteriously retired. At the time, he was 1,457 yards shy of Walter Payton's all-time rushing record. His defenders say Sanders -- who played the game with dignity and class -- did not owe anybody anything. As long as he was at peace with the decision, that was enough. That's bunk.

Here was a man who benefited greatly from the support of his teammates, his organization and his fans -- and he just turned his back on them without a word of gratitude. He left his teammates and a franchise in the lurch, to the point that the Lions demanded he return $7.3 million of his signing bonus.

Years later, when it was time for him to become eligible for Canton, Sanders had to be coaxed into providing some kind of explanation for his untimely retirement.

It was too little, too late.

Postscript: Of the five leading rushers in NFL history, Sanders is the only one to never reach a Super Bowl. The others -- Emmitt Smith, Walter Payton, Curtis Martin and Jerome Bettis -- all reached at least one Super Bowl. And all but Martin won at least one NFL championship ring.

Deion Sanders -- Underrated

You hear it all the time: Deion Sanders wasn't a great cornerback because he never tackled anybody. That's like saying Dan Marino wasn't a great quarterback because he couldn't run.

Sanders was the best cover corner in NFL history. Who cares how many tackles he made? The game is about making explosive plays and preventing them. Sanders did both.

With his astonishing makeup speed, remarkable instincts, and knack for reading quarterbacks, Sanders routinely blotted out the best receiver on the other side of the line of scrimmage.

And once he got the football in his hands, Sanders became a magician. Think Devin Hester skateboarding on the Millennium Falcon. Sanders was better than any defensive back in NFL history at transforming himself into an offensive weapon and going the other way with the football.

"There's two kinds of corners in the NFL," Bengals receiver Chad Johnson said. "Regular corners play not to get beat. Deion Sanders played the game to make a play."

The problem with Sanders is that there was always so much going on with him, it tended to overshadow his performance on the football field. He was "Prime Time" in M.C. Hammer's world. He recorded a rap album with song titles like "House of Prime," "Time for Prime," "Prime Time Keeps on Ticking," "Must Be the Money" and "Y U NV Me?"

Sanders hosted "Saturday Night Live." He appeared in commercials for Nike, Burger King, Visa and Pizza Hut. For a while there, he was everywhere, and the focus drifted away from Deion Sanders the cornerback to Neon Deion.

The image -- the designer suits, the controversial interviews, the celebrity appearances -- all served to distract people from his astonishing ability. And don't let that unparalleled speed and athleticism fool you. Sanders was a true student of the game. His film study and preparation were legendary. Most times, he knew the wide receivers better than their own quarterbacks. He had a catalogue of tics and tells on every guy he faced.

This rare combination of preparation and physical skill made him the greatest shut-down cornerback -- ever.

Even though opposing quarterbacks tried to throw nowhere near Sanders, he still finished his career with 53 interceptions in 173 NFL games, or one every 3.3 games.

And once the ball was in his hands, Sanders truly became Prime Time. His 1,331 career return yards are the second-most in NFL history, as are his nine touchdown returns. His average of 25.1 yards per interception return is an NFL record.

And true to his nickname, he really was a prime-time player. He's one of only five cornerbacks in NFL history to win Super Bowls for two different teams, the 49ers in 1994 and the Cowboys in 1995. He had an interception in the 49ers' Super Bowl win over the Chargers, and he shares the NFL postseason record with at least one interception in three consecutive games.

Sanders was such a skilled cornerback that when he came out of retirement with the Ravens in 2004 -- four years after he last played a game -- he had three interceptions in nine games playing almost exclusively in nickel situations, then two in '05 at age 38.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Kind of interesting that Sal likes Starr more than Unitas, and he has some pretty damn convincing numbers to use.


Re: Starr -- What I said. When the money was on the line, Starr shined. Not only does he have the championship rings, he's got the MVP awards in those games.

Re: Barry Sanders -- Don't know if I agree. When you played Detroit, it was Barry Sanders you feared would beat you. Yeah, Herman Moore was good, but who did Detroit have throwing the ball. It seemed Detroit was always quarterbacked by some QB wannabee named Erik or Milt. Anyone doubt the Packers would have been champions if they had drafted Sanders?

Re: Dion Sanders -- I agree the guy was good, but the greatest shut down corner in NFL history? Boy, there's an argument waiting to happen. I saw Dick "Night Train" Lane play at the tail end of his career and that old man was awe-inspiring then. And if I had first dibbs on any cornerback who ever played, I wouldn't choose Sanders. I'd choose Herb Adderley.

In many ways Herb was like Sanders. He returned kicks with the best of them. He was a master of making game-changing picks and taking them to the house. He was a many time all-pro. And he could shut down receivers with the best of them. Plus, he could tackle.

There was another major difference between Adderley and Sanders. Adderley was no showboat; he just played. He's one of the major reasons Unitas' quarterback rating was so low in the post season.

[The Leaper]

I love all the haters on Barry Sanders. Stick Emmitt Smith on those Lions teams, and he is lucky to ever run for 1000 yards in a season.

Barry Sanders put up insane rushing numbers on a team without a passing game most of the time and that was typically playing from behind much of the time. Who the hell cares if he gets stopped for -2 yards on one play when his next one is for 27? The key with Sanders was his consistency...he DID always come back and make the big play. He never did anything in the postseason because the teams he played on were horrible and coached by an idiot in Wayne Fontes.

Hey Sal! What the hell did Walter Payton ever do in the postseason? Do you hold that against him too? Sure, Walter won a Super Bowl...but it wasn't because of him. In his illustrious career, Walter had exactly TWO...count them...TWO postseason TDs. He averaged only 3.5 yards a carry in the postseason as well. I guess Walter Payton is overrated as well.

To me, Sanders and Favre are the same guy in terms of their approach to the game. Both were willing to take risks to do what is necessary to lead their team to victory. Barry wasn't going to win games for the Lions by plugging it up the gut for 3 yards every time. Brett wasn't going to win games for the Packers by being risk-aversive either. Their negative runs and INTs are what made them great...because that kind of go-for-broke attitude helped their teams far more than it hindered them.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I was listening to Aaron Schatz of Pro Football Prospectus on the radio this summer. Their org. did a comparision of QBs, and in his opinion Bart Starr was much better than Favre, and it wasn't even close.

What they did was choose stats/indicators that are most closely tied to the team winning, and place greater weight on those stats. I think passing efficiency is at top of that last. I think they rated Starr as the best QB to ever play. It would be interesting to see their analysis, maybe I can find it.

[The Leaper]

Did they rate Starr's efficiency before Lombardi showed up and surrounded him with talent? I'd like to see that analysis of how putrid Starr was when he didn't have a wing of Canton around him to utilize.

I don't give a rat's ass what some pundit thinks...especially if his name is Schatz. That is roughly equivalent to where I thought his information was coming from.

Want the straight up butter? BART STARR says Brett is a far better QB than he ever was. I think that is enough for me.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Want the straight up butter? BART STARR says Brett is a far better QB than he ever was. I think that is enough for me.

And Brett Favre has said that Dan Marino is a far better QB than him. What do you expect these guys to say?
Favre is obviously more physically gifted than Starr, so it is certainly sincere for Starr to say he is better.

BTW, Schatz predicted that the PAckers would be an excellent team, tops in the NFC North, and this was back in mid July when most thought the Pack would suck. His thinking was mainly maturation of younger players, I think.


Schatz was very impressive (to me), I think you are foolish to just dismiss an objective analysis.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Doesn't seem to be the Schatz comparison on the web, but I stumbled across this:

The 100 Greatest Quarterbacks of the Modern Era (http://www.armchairgm.com/index.php?title=The_100_Greatest_Quarterbacks_of_t he_Modern_Era)
1 Johnny Unitas
2 Joe Montana
3: Fran Tarkenton
4: Dan Marino
5: John Elway
6: Steve Young
7: Ken Anderson
8: Dan Fouts
9: Brett Favre
10: Roger Staubach
11: Sonny Jurgensen
12: Len Dawson
13: Bart Starr
14: Warren Moon
15: Peyton Manning
16: Roman Gabriel
17: Norm Van Brocklin
18: Y.A. Tittle
19: Terry Bradshaw
20: Bob Griese

[HarveyWallbangers]

Interesting site. It's hard to take seriously Ken Anderson at #7. That would be like ranking Marc Bulger high because his passer rating is good. I know Anderson is better than that, but Bulger were to have another 6-7 years like he has had the last few years that would be comparable.

[The Leaper]

Schatz was very impressive (to me), I think you are foolish to just dismiss an objective analysis.

An analysis of data that is "most closely tied to winning" seems rather unobjective to me. Who the hell makes the rules on what is most closely tied to winning.

Using individual stats alone, without any barometer for the talent level of the team around the QB, is a foolish way to determine who is a better QB. Sure, QBs on more talented teams are going to do more to win...because they have the talent around them to utilize efficiently. That is all you are proving in something like that.

Of course, I'm getting this second hand. For all I know, Schatz did a more objective analysis...but from the sound of it, he didn't. No one in their right mind would consider Bart Starr a better QB than Favre. Yes, he won more. That doesn't make you a better QB. Perhaps he was saying Starr was more efficient...I could see that.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Schatz was very impressive (to me), I think you are foolish to just dismiss an objective analysis.

An analysis of data that is "most closely tied to winning" seems rather unobjective to me. Who the hell makes the rules on what is most closely tied to winning.

Using individual stats alone, without any barometer for the talent level of the team around the QB, is a foolish way to determine who is a better QB. Sure, QBs on more talented teams are going to do more to win...because they have the talent around them to utilize efficiently. That is all you are proving in something like that.

Of course, I'm getting this second hand. For all I know, Schatz did a more objective analysis...but from the sound of it, he didn't. No one in their right mind would consider Bart Starr a better QB than Favre. Yes, he won more. That doesn't make you a better QB. Perhaps he was saying Starr was more efficient...I could see that.

I watched Bart Starr for 16 years and Brett Favre for all of his time in Green Bay. I guarantee you Bart Starr was a better playcaller than Brett Favre. You will answer that Favre doesn't call plays. See? So much of this comparing generations stuff just doesn't translate.

I never saw Starr panic under fire or succumb to pressure. I saw him get sacked countless times rather than throw a "gamble" pass. It was frustrating watching sometimes, but it was an efficient and winning strategy. Starr also stayed in the pocket and threw many a pass knowing he was gonna get creamed. In many ways Starr and Favre are similar as QB's in terms of toughness and courage. Starr got injured more because he was physically weaker than Favre. Starr wasn't a gunslinger like Favre. He was more Montana-like.

Whether Starr is ranked above Favre or visa versa, who can say? That's why we have bar room discussions to settle the matter. ( :D ) All I know is that it's been a privilege to watch both great QB's wear Green and Gold.

However -- and this is the bar room part and unfair as well because younger people on this board were not able to see Starr play -- if I had to choose one as my QB in a "must win" game even today, I'd choose Bart Starr (provided Starr and not McCarthy calls the plays).

This is by no means a knock against Favre. It's more a deep respect for Bart Starr's coolness under fire.

Of course, the other possibility is that I might not be in my right mind. :? :twisted: Ha! Ha!! You!!! In the tennis shoes!!! Get out of the pool!!! :!:

[The Shadow]

Schatz was very impressive (to me), I think you are foolish to just dismiss an objective analysis.

An analysis of data that is "most closely tied to winning" seems rather unobjective to me. Who the hell makes the rules on what is most closely tied to winning.

Using individual stats alone, without any barometer for the talent level of the team around the QB, is a foolish way to determine who is a better QB. Sure, QBs on more talented teams are going to do more to win...because they have the talent around them to utilize efficiently. That is all you are proving in something like that.

Of course, I'm getting this second hand. For all I know, Schatz did a more objective analysis...but from the sound of it, he didn't. No one in their right mind would consider Bart Starr a better QB than Favre. Yes, he won more. That doesn't make you a better QB. Perhaps he was saying Starr was more efficient...I could see that.

I watched Bart Starr for 16 years and Brett Favre for all of his time in Green Bay. I guarantee you Bart Starr was a better playcaller than Brett Favre. You will answer that Favre doesn't call plays. See? So much of this comparing generations stuff just doesn't translate.

I never saw Starr panic under fire or succumb to pressure. I saw him get sacked countless times rather than throw a "gamble" pass. It was frustrating watching sometimes, but it was an efficient and winning strategy. Starr also stayed in the pocket and threw many a pass knowing he was gonna get creamed. In many ways Starr and Favre are similar as QB's in terms of toughness and courage. Starr got injured more because he was physically weaker than Favre. Starr wasn't a gunslinger like Favre. He was more Montana-like.

Whether Starr is ranked above Favre or visa versa, who can say? That's why we have bar room discussions to settle the matter. ( :D ) All I know is that it's been a privilege to watch both great QB's wear Green and Gold.

However -- and this is the bar room part and unfair as well because younger people on this board were not able to see Starr play -- if I had to choose one as my QB in a "must win" game even today, I'd choose Bart Starr (provided Starr and not McCarthy calls the plays).

This is by no means a knock against Favre. It's more a deep respect for Bart Starr's coolness under fire.



Maxie : You are an astute poster. Could not agree with you more.
I was lucky enough to fully follow Starr's career, and there was never a cooler, smarter quarterback.
His Ice Bowl drive in impossible conditions against a very good opponent stands - at least in my opinion - as the greatest, gutsiest performance I've ever seen.

[Cheesehead Craig]

The problem with Sal is that he uses a double standard. For Barry Sanders, he mentions the running ability, but then dismisses it as a product of the dome. Then for Deion Sanders, he's praised for being a "magician" with his running style.

Plus, you can tell that he's mad how Barry left the game and that clearly colors his analysis. Gotta love writers who go an make up a list like this just to get pub.

[Harlan Huckleby]

An analysis of data that is "most closely tied to winning" seems rather unobjective to me. Who the hell makes the rules on what is most closely tied to winning.

that part is simple, requires no judgements. just see how each QB stat correlates with winning (looking at ALL QBs).

[Freak Out]

Bart Starr is the reason I became a packer fan in the first place and his game demeanor has only been matched by Montana. Just pure gridiron cool. Favre is the exact opposite of the Starr/Montana field general...a powerful fearless berserker almost...Thor under center.

[ZachMN]

I think I have seen that special about Sammy Baugh. After watching it I absolutely loved the guy. Someone correct me if I'm wrong about this but I believe he played both ways i.e. he was what we'd now call a corner back but then it was just a 'back'. I thinkthey showed him throwing the ball through a tire that was swinging back and forth....


Awesome thread.

[KYPack]

I think I have seen that special about Sammy Baugh. After watching it I absolutely loved the guy. Someone correct me if I'm wrong about this but I believe he played both ways i.e. he was what we'd now call a corner back but then it was just a 'back'. I thinkthey showed him throwing the ball through a tire that was swinging back and forth....


Awesome thread.

Baugh was a safety and an excellent one. He lead the NFL in interceptions one season.

He was also a great punter, he still ranks as the all time NFL punting leader.

He is a player who would have been great in any era.

[The Leaper]

However -- and this is the bar room part and unfair as well because younger people on this board were not able to see Starr play -- if I had to choose one as my QB in a "must win" game even today, I'd choose Bart Starr (provided Starr and not McCarthy calls the plays).

This is by no means a knock against Favre. It's more a deep respect for Bart Starr's coolness under fire.

Perhaps.

But it is DAMN EASY to make playcalls when you had the talent around you that Bart Starr did...and defenses were not anything close to the confusing units they are today.

I think you discount just how much the game has changed. I'm not saying Starr was a lousy QB. I never got to see him personally, but I can tell from the film I see today and the stuff I've read that he was a fierce competitor and unrivaled field general. I'm as proud of Bart Starr as I am Brett Favre. They both are all-time greats...and we are lucky to have both of them.

What Favre has done in the modern era is truly remarkable, and the fact he has done it WITHOUT a coach like Lombardi and WITHOUT HOF caliber players like Hornung, Kramer, Taylor, etc makes it even more impressive to me.

I'm sorry, but there is no doubt in my mind that Bart Starr wouldn't come close to registering the accolades or wins that Favre has if he was placed in the same situation as Favre in 1992. Starr struggled notably in his first few seasons before Lombardi took the reins, where Favre immediately was a game-changer even with Kitrick Taylor on the field. However, I don't get the feeling that Favre would have faltered much if placed in control of that ridiculously talented 60s Packer dynasty. His talent is simply too great.

[Carolina_Packer]

http://www.grandstandsports.com/images/13243.jpg

Nuff Said!

[The Shadow]

However -- and this is the bar room part and unfair as well because younger people on this board were not able to see Starr play -- if I had to choose one as my QB in a "must win" game even today, I'd choose Bart Starr (provided Starr and not McCarthy calls the plays).

This is by no means a knock against Favre. It's more a deep respect for Bart Starr's coolness under fire.

Perhaps.

But it is DAMN EASY to make playcalls when you had the talent around you that Bart Starr did...and defenses were not anything close to the confusing units they are today.

I think you discount just how much the game has changed. I'm not saying Starr was a lousy QB. I never got to see him personally, but I can tell from the film I see today and the stuff I've read that he was a fierce competitor and unrivaled field general. I'm as proud of Bart Starr as I am Brett Favre. They both are all-time greats...and we are lucky to have both of them.

What Favre has done in the modern era is truly remarkable, and the fact he has done it WITHOUT a coach like Lombardi and WITHOUT HOF caliber players like Hornung, Kramer, Taylor, etc makes it even more impressive to me.

I'm sorry, but there is no doubt in my mind that Bart Starr wouldn't come close to registering the accolades or wins that Favre has if he was placed in the same situation as Favre in 1992. Starr struggled notably in his first few seasons before Lombardi took the reins, where Favre immediately was a game-changer even with Kitrick Taylor on the field. However, I don't get the feeling that Favre would have faltered much if placed in control of that ridiculously talented 60s Packer dynasty. His talent is simply too great.

I would imagine you are under 50 years of age.

[MJZiggy]

I just wanted to mention that this is a GREAT thread...

[4and12to12and4]

I have held this opinion for the last few years. I think all in all, taking everything into consideration, you have to say Brett is the best ever. The record games in a row is a huge reason alone, but he also has all the statistics. Three MVP's. A Superbowl. And the most impressive thing besides the streak is that he has only that one losing season in all these years, with all these player and coaching changes. No other QB can boast that. We are the winninest football team in the last 13 years. No organization has more wins then us. That is mostly all Favre as the team and coaching around him gets shuffled every few years. Manning has stability. My god, I can't even imagine how many rings Brett would have if he had that team around him for 6 straight years, with almost no changes. Montana the same, the proof in that is how great Young looked when he replaced him. Compare that to how bad Young was in Tampa. Yes, a couple more rings would make this argument not even worth talking about. He would stand head and shoulders above all if he had two more rings. But, is it his fault he hasn't had a stable team around him for years and years to help him win more than one? Elway didn't win those two Superbowls, his running game did. He helped some, but many QB's could've won with the team he had around him. When you take in all the variables, I don't see how any other QB can be put above Brett, considering his ironman streak, all the winning seasons, and his unbelievable toughness and desire to win. He's the best ever in my book.

[4and12to12and4]

Just a reminder. Even Peyton Manning, as great as he is, had a horrible game last playoffs against the Ravens, and almost lost. His defense won that game and if Mcnair and Co. could've done ANTHING offensively, Manning would still be searching for that 1st ring. Favre had much better competition against him in the NFC in the 90's than there is today, and he still took us to the playoffs almost every single year. Look at Aikman, they rebuild and he goes 1-15. Marino had many a losing season and a lot of 8-8 type years also. A lot of Elways teams were losing teams. Favre is the only guy that kept his team winning through rebuild after rebuild. Manning has many winning seasons under him, but let's see what happens if he loses his line, receivers, backs, etc.. That will be his 1st true test. Brady has always had that great defense to rely on and help him win. Last year, he did have few good offensive weapons, but the defense kept him in the games. Favre has had winning seasons with porous defenses where he had to game after game outscore the opponent, and did. OK, that's all I got.