Bradley Bozeman

[HotInHere]

You can’t tell the history of the NFL without Namath, Aikman, and Warner. Stabler and Kelly, eh.

If only that were the criteria for getting into the Hall of Fame.

[Dirt1]

That doesn’t make me optimistic about resigning Zeus, with the timing.

You can’t tell the history of the NFL without Namath, Aikman, and Warner. Stabler and Kelly, eh.

Do you think the plan for Phillips is to get him experience at RG, and then slide him over to RT if Zeus Deuce gets a big payday elsewhere after next season?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JimZipCode]

You are putting way too much emphasis on Super Bowls IMO. Winning Super Bowls is a function team talent.

I 100% agree that winning SBs is a team accomplishment. I'm not one of those clowns

(Hi Lax!)

who tries to advance an argument that Trent Dilfer was a better QB than Dan Marino or Dan Fouts.

But it is a fact that championships matter at least somewhat, to the HOF selection committee. It's tough to figure out exactly how much weight they "should" get; but it's not zero. They're not completely irrelevant.

MVPs, All-Pro seasons, and championships. The HOF voters love that shit, when they look at QBs. Warner's got 'em. That's really all there is to it.

Bledsoe was light years better than Warner IMO. Had he had the talent around him of Warner, he'd be sitting in Canton right now.

That's nonsense.

It's one thing to hold a "Warner falls below HOF thresholds" opinion; it's another to try to prop up longtime stiff Drew Bledsoe over him. I mean, Bledsoe was a fine QB; but he wouldn't be among my first ten or fifteen QBs in a "Hall Of Very Good".

How would you rate Bledsoe compared with decidedly-non-HOF-QB Joe Flacco? Was Bledsoe ever better at anything than good-Flacco was?

I don't have the time to find/post it right now, but you should look at Warner's stats in cold weather games. He was pretty bad. That's why he failed so miserably in New York.

Was Warner bad in NY? Warner went 5-4 his one season in NY, for a team that went on to finish 6-10. They were 16-23 without him over the three season "around" his games (year before, season with, and year after). His yards-per-attempt were among the top dozen in the league, and he had more TDs than INTs.

Actually it looks like Warner was pretty good his first seven starts, with a passer rating that would have ranked among the top dozen in the league that year, for a team that had lost 12 games the year before. Then they lost two games, and Warner got knocked around pretty good (13 sacks in the two games). Coughlin benched him.

I have no problem believing that Warner wasn't a great fit with Coughlin. Or believing that Warner was impatient with a "veteran mentor to your 1st-rd QB" role. But I'd need to see some tape to back up the assertion that Warner actually played terribly in NY.
(I have no direct memories: I promise you I wasn't paying the slightest attention to NY Giants football in 2004.)

I also wonder if Trent Green would now have a bust in Canton if not for that injury in 1999. A lot of QBs would have looked like HOFers playing in a dome/ desert with that offensive talent.

Dick Vermeil tried to re-create the Greatest Show On Turf with Trent Green in KC. Geen led the league in most interceptions in 2001, while playing with Tony Gonzalez & Derrick Alexander & Priest Holmes. Maybe Green would have posted multiple MVP seasons with that Rams team. But the available evidence is not encouraging.

Anyway: at some point the guy who actually does something, has to get some credit for it. We can construct a scenario where Phil Simms goes to Bill Walsh & the Niners in the 1979 draft, and Joe Montana fails to cut it in the NFL. Success in a team sport is ALWAYS the result of multiple factors coming together: the right player in a perfect situation. I don't see the logic in singling out Warner, as opposed to say Steve Young or Emmitt Smith.

---

This belongs somewhere, so I'll stick it here. Only ten players have ever won the Super Bowl and league MVP in the same season:

Bart Starr – 1966
Terry Bradshaw – 1978
Mark Moseley – 1982
Lawrence Taylor – 1986
Joe Montana – 1989
Emmitt Smith – 1993
Steve Young – 1994
Brett Favre – 1996
Terrell Davis – 1998
Kurt Warner – 1999

Hasn't been done in over 20 years. Of the ten, only the kicker (who was named MVP in a strike season) is not in the Hall.


By the way, I screwed this up earlier:

Warner is one of only 9 players to ever win MVP two times. Seven (incl Warner) of the nine are in the Hall; the other two are Tom Brady & Aaron Rodgers.

Warner is one of only 9; but it's actually six of the nine that are in the Hall. The other three are Tom Brady & Aaron Rodgers & Peyton Manning.

Honestly I make this exact mistake all the time: routinely forget that Peyton is not already IN the HOF. Obviously it would take a meteor destroying Canton to keep Peyton out; but technically he's not in right now.

---

What Warner doesn't have is the long string of Pro Bowl seasons to pad out his career. He's exactly the opposite of, say, Philip Rivers. Rivers has 14 seasons (and counting) as the primary starter for his teams, and 8 Pro Bowls. Zero All-Pro seasons, MVPs, and championships. Warner took teams to the SB in three different seasons, and for two different organizations. Rivers has never appeared in a SB.

Kenny Anderson is another good comp for Warner. Anderson is a popular "almost or should be" in the Hall candidate for a lot of people. Kurt Warner's career is exactly like Kenny Anderson's, if you:

• add two more SB appearances for Anderson
• win one of those extra appearances
• double the MVP seasons
• double the All-Pro seasons
• make the overall career shorter, so you only get 2/3 the seasons as primary starter & 2/3 the Pro Bowls

The difference between Warner's & Anderson's careers lies exactly in the things that Hall voters love most: MVPs, All-Pros, and championships. Anderson's career also has the same problem Warner's does – weak seasons in the middl – but Anderson more so. And Warner has the peak that Anderson doesn't have/

I think Warner's the obvious HOFer over Rivers & Anderson, if you're going to put one of the three in. If you want to put none of them in – well, it would be unprecedented to keep a 2-time MVP and SB-winning QB out of the Hall. I'd a lot rather kick out Troy Aikman or Jim Kelly. Hell, even Warren Moon has a weaker resume than Warner's (I would never advocate for Moon not being in the Hall).

How do you get from Kurt Warner's career to Dan Fouts' career? Easy:

• Subtract three SB appearances
• Subtract one championship
• Subtract two MVP awards
• Add an extra 4 seasons as the primary starter
• and 2 Pro Bowl appearances

There's a very solid argument that if only one of the two should be in, it should be Warner. But I agree with the Hall voters, that both Fouts and Warner should be in.



I dunno man. I think you're swimming uphill on this one. I thought he might be borderline back when he was admitted; but the more I look at Warner, the more he seems an obvious selection.

[JimZipCode]

You can’t tell the history of the NFL without Namath, Aikman, and Warner.

Aikman?!?

Eh. If I were "telling the story" of the Dallas championships of the 90s, I'd talk about Emmitt and the O-line, and Michael Irvin & Deion, before I mentioned Aikman.

[JimZipCode]

not Joe Namath? surprising

Sonny, Griese, Moon & Dawson all show up as "less qualified" in their scoring system. Which, it's not intended as Gospel, just an attempt.

Here's their list:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/hof/hofm_QB.htm

[WNCRavensFan]

Sonny, Griese, Moon & Dawson all show up as "less qualified" in their scoring system. Which, it's not intended as Gospel, just an attempt.

Here's their list:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/hof/hofm_QB.htm

Eh. Using career AV Namath is only ahead of Bart Starr among HOF QBs.

He's also only one of two modern era QBs in Canton with more career INT than TD passes (Ken Stabler).

So I guess it depends on which metric you wish to emphasize. Namath is not a HOF caliber QB to me.

I fail to understand why Namath has a higher Monitor score than Len Dawson, who is superior to him in every other statistic:

Championships (2 to 1)
All Pros (2 to 1)
Pro Bowls (7 to 4)
Games Started (159 to 129)
Yards (28711 to 27663)
Yards/Attempt (7.7 to 7.4)
Completion % (57.1 to 50.1)
TDs (239 to 173)
INTs (183 to 220)
AV (109 to 94)
QBR (82.6 to 65.5)

[Laxdad24]

While I LOvE being mentioned in threads ....lmao. ....I’ve NEVER posted that Dilfer was a better QB than ...well anyone. First ...Dilfer didn’t “win” us that Super Bowl. Defense and Spec teams did. Second ...Dilfer wasn’t even good enough to Start for us the whole season.

Basically Dilfer was Foles before Foles. Only Foles actually had to make plays because Philly didn’t have our 2000 Defense! I wouldn’t pick neither over Marino if I were building a team.


As far as Warner...eh. In a world where a 2x Super Bowl Champ and one of only 4 players to win the Heisman, Super Bowl, and Super Bowl MVP isn’t in the Hall...who cares??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BcRaven]

Do you think the plan for Phillips is to get him experience at RG, and then slide him over to RT if Zeus Deuce gets a big payday elsewhere after next season?

While it's possible, I don't think it's probable. These 2020 Ravens are primed for major success, so this is not a year for experimentation. Apparently Phillips beat out Fluker (who has OT experience), Powers, and Bredeson for the position vacated by Yanda. Those are BIG shoes to fill... Bc

[JimZipCode]

So I guess it depends on which metric you wish to emphasize. Namath is not a HOF caliber QB to me.

Namath is not necessarily a "metrics" guy for me.

Bill James had a short-&-sweet little checklist for HOF players. The more questions you could answer "yes" to, the more likely it was that the player in question was a HOFer. Some of the questions were things like:

Was he the best player on his team?
If this man were the best player on his team, could that team win the pennant?
and
Was he famous?

Here's a version of the list:

https://www.cooperstowncred.com/stat...y/keltner-list

“It’s actually my favorite way of trying to figure out how a guy ranks, but, because it involves a series of subjective questions, it doesn’t necessarily work as a formal methodology. You can’t total up the score and say that everybody who is at eight or above should be in, or anything like that. It’s purpose is more to help you clarify your own thinking on the issue, by breaking the great question into smaller questions.”

Weirdly, that last question "famous" does not appear on the page linked above. I definitely remember it from the book; James spends a paragraph it. But the page does list this question, which I had forgotten about:

What impact did the player have on baseball history? Was he responsible for any rule changes? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way?

Those four might be the most important of the questions. Namath is a resounding "yes" to all four.

Obviously that's all about SB3, and fur coats and guarantees. Just one game. But the two most important games in NFL history are the '58 championship and SB3. If only two QBs were in the Hall, and they were Unitas & Namath – I could understand it.

I fail to understand why Namath has a higher Monitor score than Len Dawson, who is superior to him in every other statistic:

Championships (2 to 1)
All Pros (2 to 1)
Pro Bowls (7 to 4)
Games Started (159 to 129)
Yards (28711 to 27663)
Yards/Attempt (7.7 to 7.4)
Completion % (57.1 to 50.1)
TDs (239 to 173)
INTs (183 to 220)
AV (109 to 94)
QBR (82.6 to 65.5)

I'd have to go thru the calculations. Here's their methodology page:

https://www.sports-reference.com/blo...or-methodology

Here's one thing that might trip us up:

0.75 point penalty for each year played in the AFL

Did Dawson play more seasons in the AFL than Namath did? He might be getting hurt in the metric by having a longer career!

Just a guess.

[JimZipCode]

While I LOvE being mentioned in threads – lmao. – I’ve NEVER posted that Dilfer was a better QB than – well anyone.

Typical. You always back off it when confronted with it; but you're also always the first one to discount any detailed player eval with "WINNING THE SB IS WHY YOU PLAY THE GAME!"

Make up your mind.

[Laxdad24]

Typical. You always back off it when confronted with it; but you're also always the first one to discount any detailed player eval with "WINNING THE SB IS WHY YOU PLAY THE GAME!"

Make up your mind.

It is. I still stand by that. Super Bowls are why they play and we watch. Period. No discussion.

Individual awards mean squat to me as a fan. When Steeler fans brag ...they don’t brag about how many Pro Bowls Bens been to. How many All Pros Bus was. Patriots fans don’t talk up Brady’s Pro Bowls. Nope. They all brag about Super Bowls! Period.

That is THE reason why 95% of the NFL fan base ranks Mahommes number 1 over LJ8. Super Bowl win + Super Bowl MVP. Until LJ8 gets himself one ...he’s always gonna be number 2.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Shas]

I just want to mention that Bozeman was a sixth round pick three drafts ago, who a lot of people wrote off as worthless, just like the guy who he was drafted to replace, Jensen, until Jensen wasn't worthless. Keep that in mind as we wait to see what they have in Mekari, Powers (who took the shit-on-me baton from Bozeman), Bredesen and Phillips. We have a history of declaring lineman as crap prematurely.