Results 37 to 48 of 67
-
01-24-2013, 04:18 PM #37
Re: Premature Discussion of Flacco's Mounting Hall of Fame Credentials
There is a difference between first 5 years and first 5 years as a starter when making comparisons - in Joe's case, those facts align. Favre, Brees and Brady didn't start right away, and Brady was a ball control manager, to a certain extent, out of the box. My point was Joe is young enough that he has 10 more years to make his case.
-
Re: Premature Discussion of Flacco's Mounting Hall of Fame Credentials
-
Re: Premature Discussion of Flacco's Mounting Hall of Fame Credentials
-
01-24-2013, 04:36 PM #40
Re: Premature Discussion of Flacco's Mounting Hall of Fame Credentials
Bradshaw had the "steel curtain" to lean on though. if you look at his statistics, they are average at best. Wins and SB appearances got him in, not his talent.
As far as the Pro-Bowl. He will never have a shot at the Pro-Bowl as long as Manning and Brady are in the league. He just won't. It's why everyone else gets picked as alternates. And why the Pro-Bowl is a complete joke. That's ok though, because Joe has better things to do right now. :)
Honestly, whether he truly is or is not on trajectory for the HOF, it's just damn nice to actually have a QB that we can talk about like this.
-
01-24-2013, 04:50 PM #41
Re: Premature Discussion of Flacco's Mounting Hall of Fame Credentials
I guess. On Bradshaw, though, going back to a point made earlier, if you trade out Ken Anderson (or, for that matter, say, Joe Theismann, Steve Bartkowski, Joe Ferguson, etc.), the Steelers likely still win a few SBs, while Bradshaw likely gets shut out.
Namath is a weaker case. In the 9 seasons he started at least half of his team's games, in only 2 was his TD - INT ratio positive, and even then, not by much. The year he broke 4,000 yards he threw 28 interceptions. He was a turnover machine who could sling it, helped pull the greatest upset ever and who scored with the ladies. That's it.
-
Re: Premature Discussion of Flacco's Mounting Hall of Fame Credentials
Good players certainly. But their resumes were both boosted by extraneous factors. Namath was boosted into the HOF because of the "Guarantee" and Bradshaw won 4 rings playing for the most popular football team (at the time). Flacco won't ever have those extraneous factors, he's going to have to get in on stats and wins alone.
-
Re: Premature Discussion of Flacco's Mounting Hall of Fame Credentials
-
-
Re: Premature Discussion of Flacco's Mounting Hall of Fame Credentials
The point is that winning can cover for a lot of stats for the HOF votes. Flacco is on track to do a lot of winning. Winning at an unprecedented level, for that matter. People can make all the excuses they want about Brady not starting his rookie year or whoever, the fact remains that Flacco is the only QB in the SB era to start in and win a playoff game in each of his first five season- and when (not if! :)) they win SB XLVII he's really going to be on a pace no other QB has been.
You have to go back to Otto Graham to find a QB with more success.
Now, I'm among those who think the W-L measuring of QB's is mostly bunkum, but the first two things most people talk about when comparing QB's is wins, losses, and Super Bowls. That seems to be true of the HOF voters, too.
Given how long they took to put Art Monk in the Hall, I don't have a lot of respect for it as an institution.
-
01-24-2013, 05:11 PM #46
Re: Premature Discussion of Flacco's Mounting Hall of Fame Credentials
I will give you the 4 Pro-Bowl selections, but Jim Kelly never won a Super Bowl.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Kelly
http://www.profootballhof.com/hof/me...x?PlayerId=112
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Flacco
ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?!
-
01-24-2013, 05:15 PM #47
Re: Premature Discussion of Flacco's Mounting Hall of Fame Credentials
Yep. And you can add to that some other facts:
In a 12+ year career, he guided his team to the playoffs exactly 2 times.
He has a career record below .500 (62 wins, 63 losses, 4 ties).
He had a career QB rating of 65.8, for cripes sakes. Yes, it was a very different era, but even compared to the legitimately great QBs of his own era (Stabler - 75.3, Griese - 77.1, Staubach - 83.4, Tarkenton - 80.4), a 65.8 just doesn't measure up.
Even making allowances for the fact that it is called the Hall of FAME, not the Hall of Greatness, popularity should only account for so much. Not only was Namath not "great", he honestly just wasn't even particularly good.Last edited by MarkS; 01-24-2013 at 05:25 PM.
-
01-24-2013, 05:22 PM #48Legendary RSR Poster
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
- Location
- New York City
- Posts
- 37,626
- Blog Entries
- 4
Re: Premature Discussion of Flacco's Mounting Hall of Fame Credentials
Joe Namath, personality aside, put the AFC/AFL on the NFL map. First time an NFC team lost to the upstart counterpart. That really was his great contribution... Bc
Bookmarks