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

[Defensewins]

It is easy to compare, but the judgments are just that..judgments; and the judgments may not always be that sound. It is still a team sport and they ran diffrent play books.
I am not sure who was better. It is not so clear cut.
Stats are not the tell all/end all of who was better.
There were guys like Gayle Sayers and Jim Brown who had relatively short careers but they were incredible. Their stats are not going to be the best because they did not play 12-18 years. Stats do not tell the whole story.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

It is easy to compare, but the judgments are just that..judgments; and the judgments may not always be that sound. It is still a team sport and they ran diffrent play books.
I am not sure who was better. It is not so clear cut.
Stats are not the tell all/end all of who was better.

I tend to agree with you.

The truth is we can nitpick anyone's career to suit our own argument.

But in the end it's still a fun debate to have.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

It is easy to compare, but the judgments are just that..judgments; and the judgments may not always be that sound. It is still a team sport and they ran diffrent play books.
I am not sure who was better. It is not so clear cut.
Stats are not the tell all/end all of who was better.
There were guys like Gayle Sayers and Jim Brown who had relatively short careers but they were incredible. Their stats are not going to be the best because they did not play 12-18 years. Stats do not tell the whole story.

But I am not comparing someone from yesteryear to someone of today. That leaves too much to interpretation. So in that respect, you are right, and I agree. However, I am comparing 2 guys that played in the same era and played the EXACT same amount of years with the EXACT same teams for their careers. You can't ignore the stats I provided in comparison of the two. I know 1 person PMed me and said they had no idea that Favre did that much better than Elway...for some reason Elway is held in high regard while Favre is thought of as wreckless. Some perceptions are hard to break. No matter what, people will believe what they want to believe, and that's thier choice...more power to you. SOmetimes you can provide concrete proof in black and white and people won't see it...oh well. It's not like this discussion is life or death. LOL.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by jsarno

But I am not comparing someone from yesteryear to someone of today. That leaves too much to interpretation. So in that respect, you are right, and I agree. However, I am comparing 2 guys that played in the same era and played the EXACT same amount of years with the EXACT same teams for their careers. You can't ignore the stats I provided in comparison of the two. I know 1 person PMed me and said they had no idea that Favre did that much better than Elway...for some reason Elway is held in high regard while Favre is thought of as wreckless. Some perceptions are hard to break. No matter what, people will believe what they want to believe, and that's thier choice...more power to you. SOmetimes you can provide concrete proof in black and white and people won't see it...oh well. It's not like this discussion is life or death. LOL.

I think it's funny how people secretly PM you to commend you. I think you said the same thing happened with your roulette strategy and your opinion of Vince Young.

I wish I had secret admirers

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I think it's funny how people secretly PM you to commend you. I think you said the same thing happened with your roulette strategy and your opinion of Vince Young.

I wish I had secret admirers

Who says they are secret? I got positive rankings from the Vince Young thread. Only the blind lovers of the inadaquate tend to say anything negative on here. Some are afraid to say anything in fear they will be blasted by some...I am speaking of the Vince Young thread in particular.

Nice way to make a thread more of a personal issue...what exactly does this have to do with this thread? Maybe you should take your advice and follow your own rules???

Maybe I shoud throw in this so I don't get another unwarranted negative rep points from you.

Are you ready to get back to the subject now?

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by jsarno

Who says they are secret? I got positive rankings from the Vince Young thread. Only the blind lovers of the inadaquate tend to say anything negative on here. Some are afraid to say anything in fear they will be blasted by some...I am speaking of the Vince Young thread in particular.

Nice way to make a thread more of a personal issue...what exactly does this have to do with this thread? Maybe you should take your advice and follow your own rules???

Maybe I shoud throw in this so I don't get another unwarranted negative rep points from you.

Are you ready to get back to the subject now?

Good God man, chill out. You said one person PMed you about what you said here (and I know you've said it before). And all I was saying is that it's kind of unique/cool/different/interesting/curious/pick your own adjective that you'd be PMed that instead of (in addition) to someone just stating it publicly on the thread.

And of course it's secret. I have no idea who PMs you or sends you rep points.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

It is easy to compare, but the judgments are just that..judgments; and the judgments may not always be that sound. It is still a team sport and they ran diffrent play books.
I am not sure who was better. It is not so clear cut.
Stats are not the tell all/end all of who was better.
There were guys like Gayle Sayers and Jim Brown who had relatively short careers but they were incredible. Their stats are not going to be the best because they did not play 12-18 years. Stats do not tell the whole story.

Both your posts in this thread have brought out a plethora of good points, but your conclusion of "x is a problem so we shouldn't even try to form a list" is ignorant at best. It's not a worthy conclusion of good points such as era adjustments matter, the rules have changed, and it's a team sport. All very good points...so how exactly are you going from making good points to sticking your head in the sand and ignoring all arugments?

Jim Brown ranks 2nd in YPC (all-time) behind Bo Jackson, and Gale Sayers ranks fifth, so thier stats DO look very good. This is because they were two of the five best RBs of all time (and both played longer than Bo Jackson). I have no idea why you are saying "Their stats are not going to be the best because they did not play 12-18 years." That makes no sense, and shows a very shallow understanding of statistical analysis.

Since stats are reliant on human interpretation to have any value, at least you are consistent in your belief that we should do no interpreting, because we should not use statistics. I guess we just don't know anything about the game of football then, other than what people we meet can tell us.

[Longtimefan]

Not sure where Favre officially ranks all-time, but these are some things we do know.

Brett Favre: Where he stands in the history.

Passing Attempts: 8,757 (#1 all-time)

Passing Completions: 5,377 (#1 all-time)

Touchdown Passes: 442 (#1 all-time)

Interceptions: 288

Passing Yards: 61,655 (#1 all-time)

Incredible:

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Longtimefan

Not sure where Favre officially ranks all-time, but these are some things we do know.

Brett Favre: Where he stands in the history.

Passing Attempts: 8,757 (#1 all-time)

Passing Completions: 5,377 (#1 all-time)

Touchdown Passes: 442 (#1 all-time)

Interceptions: 288

Passing Yards: 61,655 (#1 all-time)

Incredible:

I believe the Packers also had more wins than any other team since Favre started his streak. Not bad, especially considering how mediocre the Packers were back in the 1980s

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I believe the Packers also had more wins than any other team since Favre started his streak. Not bad, especially considering how mediocre the Packers were back in the 1980s

Mediocre is being nice...before Favre the Packers won only .406% of the games.

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I believe the Packers also had more wins than any other team since Favre started his streak. Not bad, especially considering how mediocre the Packers were back in the 1980s

Favre has been the heartbeat of the Packers since taking over there. I forgot to mention his consecutive game streak which is unlikely to be matched.

[erik2680]

I would say top 5 of all time

[skinsguy]

My Top QB list comes from my era of watching football up to this point:

Elite QBs of the 80's/90's:

1. Joe Montana
2. Dan Marino
3. Steve Young
4. Bret Favre
5. John Elway
6. Troy Akiman
7. Jim Kelly
8. Phil Simms

Very Good QBs of the 80's that are probably a class just below great:

1. Bernie Kosar
2. Warren Moon
3. Randall Cunningham
4. Joe Theismann
5. Dave Krieg

[prinzeofmoval]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

My Top QB list comes from my era of watching football up to this point:

Elite QBs of the 80's/90's:

1. Joe Montana
2. Dan Marino
3. Steve Young
4. Bret Favre
5. John Elway
6. Troy Akiman
7. Jim Kelly
8. Phil Simms

Very Good QBs of the 80's that are probably a class just below great:

1. Bernie Kosar
2. Warren Moon
3. Randall Cunningham
4. Joe Theismann
5. Dave Krieg

i hate when they rate Montana as number one all time. He played in the best system and had the best cast around him. Same as Steve Young..Hall of Famer?Yes...Great player?Yes but not number 1

[budw38]

Originally Posted by prinzeofmoval

i hate when they rate Montana as number one all time. He played in the best system and had the best cast around him. Same as Steve Young..Hall of Famer?Yes...Great player?Yes but not number 1

I can't stand the 9ers either , but Montana was not a system qb , That man took a beating many times and hit guys dead on the money < see comeback vs Philly '88 or 89 > ? He was as good as it gets with the game on the line . 49ers still suck of course