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

[skinsfan_nn]

Very simply put, IMO there are many ways to look at stats and pick them to pieces for a lot of folks. But this guy not only has broke most all of the greatest stats of all time and yes a few of the worst.

But this simple man took the chances that most QB's are scared to take to just let it rip and play ball 100% leaving it all on the field, the way football was meant to be played.

IMO he is one of the very best the game has ever seen, in the Top 10 QB list of all time! This class act is leaving this great game on his terms and of course a first time nod in the Hall of Fame. Well Done Brett, even though I'm not a GB fan, you where fun to watch play!

[Riggo44]

This would be my top 10 QB's of all time.

#1 John Elway
#2 Joe Montana
#3 Johnny Unitas
#4 Sammy Baugh
#5 Bart Starr
#6 Bret Farve
#7 Dan Marino
#8 Otto Graham
#9 Terry Bradshaw
#10 Troy Aikman

[SmootSmack]

I've mentioned him before but when I think of top 10 QBs-and for my purposes here I'll only consider a.) retired players and b. players I've actually had the chance to see play, so this eliminates guys like Tom Brady and Sammy Baugh-one name I always come back to that is always overlooked is Neil Lomax.

I can't rank them, but 10 best (retired) QBs that I've seen:

-Troy Aikman
-John Elway
-Brett Favre
-Jim Kelly
-Neil Lomax
-Dan Marino
-Joe Montana
-Warren Moon
-Phil Simms
-Steve Young

I don't remember Fouts and Bradshaw well enough

And, not to be a homer, but I think Theismann was/is underrated

[GTripp0012]

One last point. EVERYTHING that happens between the white lines is measured in some way. The score, the yards gained, the downs, every carry, every reception, every pass attempt, every field goal kick...all these things are measured by statistics.

So obviously, we can draw the conclusion that everything that determines the outcome of a football game can and is measured. That's pretty obvious when you think about it.

The only thing that is left for human interpretation is how the specific outcomes are achieved by the individual players. Because we know the team output is a sum of the total output of the individuals. Stats won't come out and tell you why thing's just happened, but they will tell you exactly what happened.

Therefore, we can say that anything that is intangible had no effect on the game. If it effected the outcome, it was measured in some way. Which is not to say that these things aren't important...maybe they just aren't intangible after all?

[GTripp0012]

1. Steve Young
2. Dan Marino
3. Otto Graham
4. Joe Montana
5. Roger Staubach
6. Bart Starr
7. Sammy Baugh
8. Brett Favre
9. Jim Kelly
10. Johnny Unitas

A list I put together using my criteria, but it's still off the top of my head, and rough around the edges. List excludes Peyton Manning for not being retired.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

1. Steve Young
2. Dan Marino
3. Otto Graham
4. Joe Montana
5. Roger Staubach
6. Bart Starr
7. Sammy Baugh
8. Brett Favre
9. Jim Kelly
10. Johnny Unitas

A list I put together using my criteria, but it's still off the top of my head, and rough around the edges. List excludes Peyton Manning for not being retired.

Not a bad list.
Here is mine:
1- Steve Young
2- Brett Favre
3- Joe Montana
4- Dan Marino
5- Otto Graham
6- Johnny Unitas
7- Roger Staubach
8- Jim Kelly
9- Fran Tarkenton
10- Peyton Manning

I have Peyton Manning 10th cause if he were to retire tomorrow, that's where he'd be in my book...possibly higher. I could easily see Manning as #1 by the time his career is over, and I'm sure Brady would make it too, but if he retired tomorrow he would not be in the top 10.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by jsarno

Not a bad list.
Here is mine:
1- Steve Young
2- Brett Favre
3- Joe Montana
4- Dan Marino
5- Otto Graham
6- Johnny Unitas
7- Roger Staubach
8- Jim Kelly
9- Fran Tarkenton
10- Peyton Manning

I have Peyton Manning 10th cause if he were to retire tomorrow, that's where he'd be in my book...possibly higher. I could easily see Manning as #1 by the time his career is over, and I'm sure Brady would make it too, but if he retired tomorrow he would not be in the top 10.

If Peyton retired tomorrow, he'd be no. 3 on my list.

I just chose to exclude him for the reason you explained at the top of the thread...he's probably going higher than that by the time he retires.

I'm not penalizing Young for the time he spent in San Francisco as a backup, and also in Tampa Bay. For the time he started for the 49ers, he did things that simply were never matched again, even by Marino who had better "tools" from the pocket.

Likewise, I wouldn't punish Peyton for only playing ten years. The only hurdles that Peyton has left en route to topping my list is to prove that he can still perform at a high level into his mid thirties and with coaching turnover.

And that he can outperform Tom Brady over the next few years.

We already know that Manning peaked at a higher level than any QB in history, he simply has to decline gracefully, as opposed to abruptly. No player in NFL history has been more valuable to his team over a 4 year span than Peyton Manning was to the Colts between 2003-2006.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

If Peyton retired tomorrow, he'd be no. 3 on my list.

I just chose to exclude him for the reason you explained at the top of the thread...he's probably going higher than that by the time he retires.

I understand. I just have trouble putting him higher just in case he starts to suck. It's hard to rank players when they are still playing. You are probably right though, he could deserve a 3 spot.

[Redskins8588]

Originally Posted by jsarno

Not a bad list.
Here is mine:
1- Steve Young
2- Brett Favre
3- Joe Montana
4- Dan Marino
5- Otto Graham
6- Johnny Unitas
7- Roger Staubach
8- Jim Kelly
9- Fran Tarkenton
10- Peyton Manning

I have Peyton Manning 10th cause if he were to retire tomorrow, that's where he'd be in my book...possibly higher. I could easily see Manning as #1 by the time his career is over, and I'm sure Brady would make it too, but if he retired tomorrow he would not be in the top 10.

Me and you have had this discussion before, so I mostly know where you stand, but I do have to ask this question to you. Why, on your list, is Favre higher than Montana? I am just wondering if you are weighing more on stats vs. championships? Or better players for one and not the other (ie. Montana to Rice vs. Favre to Freeman, Driver, Sharp, or whoever...)

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Redskins8588

Me and you have had this discussion before, so I mostly know where you stand, but I do have to ask this question to you. Why, on your list, is Favre higher than Montana? I am just wondering if you are weighing more on stats vs. championships? Or better players for one and not the other (ie. Montana to Rice vs. Favre to Freeman, Driver, Sharp, or whoever...)

No problem skins8688...I've always enjoyed our debates. No matter what side of the fence we're on, we always seem to be informative and respectful...I'll discuss any issue with you.

Just for the record, it was VERY tough for me to rank Favre over Montana, I almost put Farve as 2a, and Montana as 2b, but you can't do a tie, so I chose Favre for his intangibles. I do weigh stuff like the amazing starting streak of 253 games. Montana played only 2 seasons of 16 regular season games, Favre had 15. So no matter what, you could count on your best player taking the field every Sunday, while with Montana, you couldn't. Montana had 4 seasons in which he played 11 or fewer games.
When it comes to turnovers, Montana was very cautious and gets high praise from me on that, however, Favre's TD to INT ratio was +145, and Montana's was +134. Not a whole lot different, but Favre has him by 11. Montana never had a 4000 yard season, and only threw for 30 or more tds 1 time (31 in 87). Not that he needs to top those marks, but they are factors in my mind. Stats are means to compare players, when you pick a fantasy team, do you go for Albert Pujols or Kevin Youkilis? What makes a player better than another? It's their production of course. I do weigh super bowls, but not nearly as much as others here. To me, there is no TEAM game in the world more TEAM oriented than football. 1 person, even QB, can never ever be the sole difference. That in mind, if a guy goes 4 times, or 2 times to the super bowl, that won't be a factor in my decision. Also, to me, if you factor in the 2 super bowls a guy wins, you need to factor in the 3 he lost in (ala John Elway and the fact that when he did win, it was because he rode an RB that had arguably the best back to back seasons ever). So if you can say he got them there, and assume it was him, then you need to assume he lost those games as well. I weigh playoff appearance play, and more importantly regular season performances more than super bowls. Like I have stated before, if you judge someone on their super bowls, then trent dilfer should be ranked higher than Marino, and that is lunacy. You can't have it work for one argument, then dismiss it in another.
About weighing the players around them (Rice vs Freeman etc), that is a small factor, but I also feel certain players make other players better. Would Rice have been the massive stud he was if he didn't have two hall of fame qb's to throw to him? I would say he wouldn't have been as good. Freeman / Driver and even Sharpe were made better by Favre's play. Rice and Taylor were made better by Montana's play. We as fans seem to think that the QB position is like the Michael Jordan of football, and it's not. Jordan COULD do things himself, and had a much easier team sport. If someone sucked, he could neutralize it. If Montana or Favre had a horrible tackle, it would be hard for them to perform, and that's just one of 11 on only offense. Sure QB is important, but you can't be the only good player on your team, or you will lose, and that has nothing to do with the QB.
(btw- Montana played in 15 seasons, so to compare numbers is fairly easy)
I also almost gave Montana the nod for his passer rating, which might be the single most important stat to me in ranking players. No matter what, that stat is the most universal throughout qb's.
I will try to come up with a formula as to how I rank players...you raise an interesting question, because everyone ranks differently in their own mind, so I'll work on trying to get a numerical system on paper.

I hope this long essay gave you the info you were looking for...sorry for it's length.

[Redskins8588]

Originally Posted by jsarno

No problem skins8688...I've always enjoyed our debates. No matter what side of the fence we're on, we always seem to be informative and respectful...I'll discuss any issue with you.

Just for the record, it was VERY tough for me to rank Favre over Montana, I almost put Farve as 2a, and Montana as 2b, but you can't do a tie, so I chose Favre for his intangibles. I do weigh stuff like the amazing starting streak of 253 games. Montana played only 2 seasons of 16 regular season games, Favre had 15. So no matter what, you could count on your best player taking the field every Sunday, while with Montana, you couldn't. Montana had 4 seasons in which he played 11 or fewer games.
When it comes to turnovers, Montana was very cautious and gets high praise from me on that, however, Favre's TD to INT ratio was +145, and Montana's was +134. Not a whole lot different, but Favre has him by 11. Montana never had a 4000 yard season, and only threw for 30 or more tds 1 time (31 in 87). Not that he needs to top those marks, but they are factors in my mind. Stats are means to compare players, when you pick a fantasy team, do you go for Albert Pujols or Kevin Youkilis? What makes a player better than another? It's their production of course. I do weigh super bowls, but not nearly as much as others here. To me, there is no TEAM game in the world more TEAM oriented than football. 1 person, even QB, can never ever be the sole difference. That in mind, if a guy goes 4 times, or 2 times to the super bowl, that won't be a factor in my decision. Also, to me, if you factor in the 2 super bowls a guy wins, you need to factor in the 3 he lost in (ala John Elway and the fact that when he did win, it was because he rode an RB that had arguably the best back to back seasons ever). So if you can say he got them there, and assume it was him, then you need to assume he lost those games as well. I weigh playoff appearance play, and more importantly regular season performances more than super bowls. Like I have stated before, if you judge someone on their super bowls, then trent dilfer should be ranked higher than Marino, and that is lunacy. You can't have it work for one argument, then dismiss it in another.
About weighing the players around them (Rice vs Freeman etc), that is a small factor, but I also feel certain players make other players better. Would Rice have been the massive stud he was if he didn't have two hall of fame qb's to throw to him? I would say he wouldn't have been as good. Freeman / Driver and even Sharpe were made better by Favre's play. Rice and Taylor were made better by Montana's play. We as fans seem to think that the QB position is like the Michael Jordan of football, and it's not. Jordan COULD do things himself, and had a much easier team sport. If someone sucked, he could neutralize it. If Montana or Favre had a horrible tackle, it would be hard for them to perform, and that's just one of 11 on only offense. Sure QB is important, but you can't be the only good player on your team, or you will lose, and that has nothing to do with the QB.
(btw- Montana played in 15 seasons, so to compare numbers is fairly easy)
I also almost gave Montana the nod for his passer rating, which might be the single most important stat to me in ranking players. No matter what, that stat is the most universal throughout qb's.
I will try to come up with a formula as to how I rank players...you raise an interesting question, because everyone ranks differently in their own mind, so I'll work on trying to get a numerical system on paper.

I hope this long essay gave you the info you were looking for...sorry for it's length.

I also like our discussions because, IMO, we both try our best to back up our opinions and thoughts with some sort of stat or fact. Never is it "He is great because I think he is," and thats all you get. I understand what you are doing better now and why you rank they way you rank. And I agree that the QB position is too often weighed too heavily. However,I am not sure how you think about this, and I have said it before, when you have a HOF QB, (ie. Favre, Elway(I know how you feel about him, but he is a HOF'er), Marino, Montana...) that QB is so good that they can make average WR's look good. My point is that, IMO, Favre made Freeman look great those seasons that they went to the SB. Marino, again IMO, made Dupper and Clayton look good. And the list goes on, but then you have anomilies where you get HOF WR's to go with HOF QB's. Montan and Young to Rice, Manning to Harrision, Bradshaw to Lynn and Stallworth.

All I am getting at is that if a Team has a HOF caliber player on it, that player will make average players look above average. Too many times have you see a player shine with another player only to leave and fall flat on there face. Example, Culpepper without Moss, Freeman without Favre and many others I am sure.

[Redskins_P]

Heres my list:

-Troy Aikman
-Joe Montana
-John Elway
-Brett Favre
-Steve Young
-Jim Kelly
-Dan Marino
-Warren Moon
-Phil Simms

[Redskins_P]

I forgot to add #10. I'm going with Bernie Kosar.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Redskins_P

I forgot to add #10. I'm going with Bernie Kosar.

I love, LOVE Bernie Kosar (I was a big Browns fan back in the day) and I actually used to (kind of still do) throw a football side arm. It's weird, I know

Still, I don't know if he's top 10 for me. It'd be very, very close

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I love, LOVE Bernie Kosar (I was a big Browns fan back in the day) and I actually used to (kind of still do) throw a football side arm. It's weird, I know

Still, I don't know if he's top 10 for me. It'd be very, very close

Kosar was definitely underrated, but his injuries over the years kept him from being a good QB over any long period of time. He only played in a full season 3 times in his career.

I am surprised Sonny Jergensen doesn't get more votes. He was better than Baugh as a QB.