brett favre

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Mc2guy

If were building a modern-era team (which would exlude Unitas, Graham, Baugh, and maybe Starr), I'd put him in front of all of them except Manning, Young, and Montana, and tied with Marino. One factor you must consider is durability. Do I want the guy who will give me the single greatest game? (Warner could qualify for that one). Or do I want the guy who will give me the greatest decade? If the latter, you have to give more credit for Favre's durability and consistently high-level of play over a long period.

You said Favre was top 3 all-time. You cannot take out Unitas (3 championships), Graham (7 championships), Baugh (greatest player to ever play, 2 championships), and Starr (5 championships). These guys played in the pre-pass interference days when DBs could basically hold a WR all the way downfield.

You must be kidding if you would take Favre over; Elway (5 SB appearances, 2 rings), Brady (3 rings), Aikman (3 rings) and Jim Kelly (4 straight SB appearances)

EDIT: At the end of the day being a QB is more than just passing numbers, it's being a leader of men. And being a leader means you put your ego on the back burner for the sake of your teammates. Make the 5 yd pass when necessary, run and slide when necessary, be a good mentor and backup as your career winds down, the goal is for the team to win the game, not you (Favre) make the winning play to win the game. Favre's ego is what has cost his teams over the last few years.

[Mc2guy]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

You said Favre was top 3 all-time. You cannot take out Unitas (3 championships), Graham (7 championships), Baugh (greatest player to ever play, 2 championships), and Starr (5 championships). These guys played in the pre-pass interference days when DBs could basically hold a WR all the way downfield.

You must be kidding if you would take Favre over; Elway (5 SB appearances, 2 rings), Brady (3 rings), Aikman (3 rings) and Jim Kelly (4 straight SB appearances)

EDIT: At the end of the day being a QB is more than just passing numbers, it's being a leader of men. And being a leader means you put your ego on the back burner for the sake of your teammates. Make the 5 yd pass when necessary, run and slide when necessary, be a good mentor and backup as your career winds down, the goal is for the team to win the game, not you (Favre) make the winning play to win the game. Favre's ego is what has cost his teams over the last few years.

First, I didn't say Favre was all time top 3...another poster did. I said his play THIS year was top 5 in the league.

Second, if you want to make this a "best of all time" thread, you're going to have define "best". Is it stats, wins, championships, intangibles? You're never going to get everyone to agree on the definition of "best." That's why we have forums for debate.

BTW, I am on record in this forum suggesting that Bart Starr is the greatest QB of all time by any measurement, statistical or otherwise. I still wouldn't pick him to run a modern offense over Favre...different era, different type of player. Does that mean he's "worse"? Of course not.

At the end of the day, the best measure of a player can be assessed in a myriad of ways. Football is entertainment after all, and I doubt many would say that Favre is not one of, if not the most entertaining to watch.

Here is the link from this discussion two years ago...FWIW, Manning would now be on my top ten list.

http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-l...tml#post429191

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Mc2guy

First, I didn't say Favre was all time top 3...another poster did. I said his play THIS year was top 5 in the league.

You responded and I assumed you were agreeing with skinsfaninok, my fault.

Second, if you want to make this a "best of all time" thread, you're going to have define "best". Is it stats, wins, championships, intangibles? You're never going to get everyone to agree on the definition of "best." That's why we have forums for debate.

BTW, I am on record in this forum suggesting that Bart Starr is the greatest QB of all time by any measurement, statistical or otherwise. I still wouldn't pick him to run a modern offense over Favre...different era, different type of player. Does that mean he's "worse"? Of course not.

At the end of the day, the best measure of a player can be assessed in a myriad of ways. Football is entertainment after all, and I doubt many would say that Favre is not one of, if not the most entertaining to watch.

The measurement is certainly not cut in stone. If I'm a GM building a team and I can pick any QB, I'm considering the best in each era. I make the assumption that these great players of earlier eras given access to the advances in sports training/nutrition/medicine/film study/coaching/rule changes/better field conditions, they would be just as great in the modern era.

If I'm a GM in that scenario I don't take Favre over any of the guys on my list.