- Joined
- Feb 15, 2014
- Messages
- 19,602
- Reaction score
- 11,568
- Location
- South Texas
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
In this passing era lots of QBs are now putting up stats, so how will we rate them beyond SB wins as far as to get into the HOF?
Heres a list of QB stats some active some retired that arent in the hall, which ones would yall put in?
1. 34k yards, 274/93 TD/INT, 103.6 pass rating
2. 34k yards, 247/117 TD/INT, 97.1 pass rating
3. 43k yards, 286/142 TD/INT, 95.4 pass rating
4. 44k yards, 288/153 TD/INT, 94.2 pass rating
5. 35k yards, 221/111 TD/INT, 92.3 pass rating
6. 42k yards, 269/162 TD/INT, 88.1 pass rating
7. 37k yards, 234/117 TD/INT, 85.6 pass rating
8. 46k yards, 302/205 TD/INT, 83.6 pass rating
9. 38k yards, 261/199 TD/INT, 81.5 pass rating
10. 38k yards, 247/184 TD/INT, 81.1 pass rating
11. 35k yards, 203/175 TD/INT, 78.6 pass rating
12. 44k yards, 251/206 TD/INT, 77.1 pass rating
So just based on stats who would you put in(assuming they never played another down)? Then look at the names and see if that changes your opinion
1. Aaron Rodgers
2. Tony Romo
3. Phillip Rivers
4. Ben Rothlisberger
5. Matt Ryan
6. Carson Plamer
7. Donovan McNabb
8. Eli Manning
9. Dave Krieg
10. Boomer Esiason
11. Jim Everett
12. Drew Bledsoe
I would say that it certainly changed my opinion knowing the names but how will it play out? like basketball where all the top names get in, or baseball when you hit certain milestones? Its going to be hard to make a case against #2 and #3 but Im not sure either should be in.
Team Success definitely plays into it; division championships, playoff victories, superbowl appearances / wins
Individual accolades play into it; MVPs? All-Pros?
Stats do play into it. Raw numbers are part of the equation, but not everything due to the realities of the changing NFL. Rankings within their peers is big as well. If a guy is routinely the #8 guy in yards each year, but his amount is more than the #2 guy consistently was getting in the 80's, that doesn't mean I value him more than the #2 guy in that different era.
In terms of the Hall of Fame, it's the pinnacle for that position in that era in my mind. It is for those in a given era who are at the very top of the spot they play in; the exemplary guys, the dominant guys, the guys you look at and routinely go "best in the game".
Manning. Peyton. Rodgers. Brees. That's probably the first four I go to from the recent era, with Roethlisberger and Eli likely being the backend entrants.
It's the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Very Good. #2 and #3 could fit into the second one, but doesn't hit the first for me.
No brady?
If you look at the stats
In this passing era lots of QBs are now putting up stats, so how will we rate them beyond SB wins as far as to get into the HOF?
Heres a list of QB stats some active some retired that arent in the hall, which ones would yall put in?
1. 34k yards, 274/93 TD/INT, 103.6 pass rating
2. 34k yards, 247/117 TD/INT, 97.1 pass rating
3. 43k yards, 286/142 TD/INT, 95.4 pass rating
4. 44k yards, 288/153 TD/INT, 94.2 pass rating
5. 35k yards, 221/111 TD/INT, 92.3 pass rating
6. 42k yards, 269/162 TD/INT, 88.1 pass rating
7. 37k yards, 234/117 TD/INT, 85.6 pass rating
8. 46k yards, 302/205 TD/INT, 83.6 pass rating
9. 38k yards, 261/199 TD/INT, 81.5 pass rating
10. 38k yards, 247/184 TD/INT, 81.1 pass rating
11. 35k yards, 203/175 TD/INT, 78.6 pass rating
12. 44k yards, 251/206 TD/INT, 77.1 pass rating
So just based on stats who would you put in(assuming they never played another down)? Then look at the names and see if that changes your opinion
1. Aaron Rodgers
2. Tony Romo
3. Phillip Rivers
4. Ben Rothlisberger
5. Matt Ryan
6. Carson Plamer
7. Donovan McNabb
8. Eli Manning
9. Dave Krieg
10. Boomer Esiason
11. Jim Everett
12. Drew Bledsoe
I would say that it certainly changed my opinion knowing the names but how will it play out? like basketball where all the top names get in, or baseball when you hit certain milestones? Its going to be hard to make a case against #2 and #3 but Im not sure either should be in.
Depends on the era they played in.
QB ratings have skyrocketed over the last 10-15 years or so.
I've looked at the stats, and I commented in my earlier post about how much they factor into things for me.
Second, as I said (or meant to say); Manning, Peyton, Rogers, and Brees are the ones I'd say are definites for the recent era. As it stands, I wouldn't really make the push for Roethlisberger or Eli, but I see them as likely being tail end entrants because of each having two super bowl rings and that is usually hard for people to look past when it comes to the Superbowl.
Also, I don't think it's that hard to say that Ben belongs in but the other two don't. The reality is, super bowl championships have historically been given a lot of stock when it comes to the Hall of Fame. You may disagree with that because it matters whether they're on the "right teams" or not, but that's just the reality of things. Roethlisberger's stats are ridiculously similar (if not arguably better) to #2 and #3, but the reality is that #2 and #3 don't have superbowl rings and Ben has two. And that weighs massively on the hall of fame voters minds.
Two superbowl rings to 0 appearances, let alone victories, in the biggest game. That's why it's not hard, at all, to say that Ben belongs in but the other two don't.
The QB rating is OK as a metric of a daily performance...but it really doesnt meand much as far as the role of the QB and their actual 'rating'. Case in point...Brett Favre.
Favre ranks 24th with a rather pedestrian QB rating of 86. But Favre was a gunner and he was a leader. Often he led is teams to win on sheer will. And sometimes that cost him interceptions.
You can use the rating as a metric. Career longevity is another metric. Stats. Overall record. Record in the playoffs. Come from behind victories. And of course...playoff wins and Super Bowl rings.
In this passing era lots of QBs are now putting up stats, so how will we rate them beyond SB wins as far as to get into the HOF?
Heres a list of QB stats some active some retired that arent in the hall, which ones would yall put in?
1. 34k yards, 274/93 TD/INT, 103.6 pass rating
2. 34k yards, 247/117 TD/INT, 97.1 pass rating
3. 43k yards, 286/142 TD/INT, 95.4 pass rating
4. 44k yards, 288/153 TD/INT, 94.2 pass rating
5. 35k yards, 221/111 TD/INT, 92.3 pass rating
6. 42k yards, 269/162 TD/INT, 88.1 pass rating
7. 37k yards, 234/117 TD/INT, 85.6 pass rating
8. 46k yards, 302/205 TD/INT, 83.6 pass rating
9. 38k yards, 261/199 TD/INT, 81.5 pass rating
10. 38k yards, 247/184 TD/INT, 81.1 pass rating
11. 35k yards, 203/175 TD/INT, 78.6 pass rating
12. 44k yards, 251/206 TD/INT, 77.1 pass rating
So just based on stats who would you put in(assuming they never played another down)? Then look at the names and see if that changes your opinion
1. Aaron Rodgers
2. Tony Romo
3. Phillip Rivers
4. Ben Rothlisberger
5. Matt Ryan
6. Carson Plamer
7. Donovan McNabb
8. Eli Manning
9. Dave Krieg
10. Boomer Esiason
11. Jim Everett
12. Drew Bledsoe
I would say that it certainly changed my opinion knowing the names but how will it play out? like basketball where all the top names get in, or baseball when you hit certain milestones? Its going to be hard to make a case against #2 and #3 but Im not sure either should be in.
Team Success definitely plays into it; division championships, playoff victories, superbowl appearances / wins
Individual accolades play into it; MVPs? All-Pros?
Stats do play into it. Raw numbers are part of the equation, but not everything due to the realities of the changing NFL. Rankings within their peers is big as well. If a guy is routinely the #8 guy in yards each year, but his amount is more than the #2 guy consistently was getting in the 80's, that doesn't mean I value him more than the #2 guy in that different era.
In terms of the Hall of Fame, it's the pinnacle for that position in that era in my mind. It is for those in a given era who are at the very top of the spot they play in; the exemplary guys, the dominant guys, the guys you look at and routinely go "best in the game".
Manning. Peyton. Rodgers. Brees. That's probably the first four I go to from the recent era, with Roethlisberger and Eli likely being the backend entrants.
It's the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Very Good. #2 and #3 could fit into the second one, but doesn't hit the first for me.
There are a lot of factors. For example, I will adamantly and definitively state that Barry Sanders was the best running back of all time. That he was significantly better than Emmitt Smith. Why? Because Smith had a lot going for him. During his earlier years on the Cowboys, even a mediocre RB could have put up good numbers. Barry Sanders had nothing going for him. Everything he got he did himself, he did it despite having a horrible team with poor coaching.
Whoops.
I had it reading "Manning. Brady. Rodgers. Brees"
Then I realized I probably need to make it clear I was talking about Peyton, since some may think Eli is up there and I was going to go into Eli later.
Then I must've highlighted "Brady" instead of "Manning" when I typed in Peyton. Thus why it's "Manning. Peyton...."
Thanks for the catch.
Second, as I said (or meant to say); Manning, Peyton, Rogers, and Brees are the ones I'd say are definites for the recent era. As it stands, I wouldn't really make the push for Roethlisberger or Eli, but I see them as likely being tail end entrants because of each having two super bowl rings and that is usually hard for people to look past when it comes to the Superbowl.
Also, I don't think it's that hard to say that Ben belongs in but the other two don't. The reality is, super bowl championships have historically been given a lot of stock when it comes to the Hall of Fame. You may disagree with that because it matters whether they're on the "right teams" or not, but that's just the reality of things. Roethlisberger's stats are ridiculously similar (if not arguably better) to #2 and #3, but the reality is that #2 and #3 don't have superbowl rings and Ben has two. And that weighs massively on the hall of fame voters minds.
Two superbowl rings to 0 appearances, let alone victories, in the biggest game. That's why it's not hard, at all, to say that Ben belongs in but the other two don't.
Yes being on the right teams has certainly a lot to do with the team accomplishment of a superbowl win
Big ben has had both a top 10 rushing game and a 10 defense for 5 years during his career
What exactly do you have to back that up? Smith only really missed 2 games (while he was holding out) and in those 2 games Derick Lassic ran 35 times for 127 yards for a whopping 3.6 YPC and 63.5 YPG. That year Emmitt averaged 5.3 YPC and 106.61YPG
You mean a guy who only had 75 carries his entire career had a 3.6 YPC? Emmitt Smith, the all time leading rusher had 4.2? Legarette, the #5 rusher this season is 3.8? Yeah, I'd say that guy getting 3.6 ypc was pretty outstanding.
Not much of a football fan I see, anything under 4 is bad and Blunt is 32nd so far this year in YPC thats not good
NE doesn't rely on the run to move the ball as much as it does to keep the defense honest.
The mindset and skillset of the NE O-line is for pass protection first.
If Blount was in Dallas, I am sure he would be well over 4 yards a carry with those 5-6 Greyhound buses on the O-line.
Team Success definitely plays into it; division championships, playoff victories, superbowl appearances / wins
Individual accolades play into it; MVPs? All-Pros?
Stats do play into it. Raw numbers are part of the equation, but not everything due to the realities of the changing NFL. Rankings within their peers is big as well. If a guy is routinely the #8 guy in yards each year, but his amount is more than the #2 guy consistently was getting in the 80's, that doesn't mean I value him more than the #2 guy in that different era.
In terms of the Hall of Fame, it's the pinnacle for that position in that era in my mind. It is for those in a given era who are at the very top of the spot they play in; the exemplary guys, the dominant guys, the guys you look at and routinely go "best in the game".
Manning. Peyton. Rodgers. Brees. That's probably the first four I go to from the recent era, with Roethlisberger and Eli likely being the backend entrants.
It's the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Very Good. #2 and #3 could fit into the second one, but doesn't hit the first for me.
Blount has the most carries in the NFL and NE has the 4th most as a team, NE is doing more than just keeping defenses honest
Not much of a football fan I see, anything under 4 is bad and Blunt is 32nd so far this year in YPC thats not good
What does Blunt have to do with Legarrette being the #5 rusher this year with a 3.8 YPC average, which you say is bad? What is difficult to understand that 3.6 YPC for someone who had a total of 75 carries in his entire career is pretty good considering what was being worked with. To even go back to my original statement that a mediocre RB could have put up good numbers, in what world is someone who had 75 career carries considered mediocre? That's not mediocre, that bench warming garbage (not to disparage the player as a person).
But what he did have was leadership and heart. That goes a long way. When you are rating a QB, its more than just the one factor.Its not really the INTs that hurt Favre if you dropped off 100 his INTs away he still only has a 90 passer rating. He played a lot of his career when comp % was lower and he didnt have much of a vertical passing game.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?