The Top Stories on the Radar This A.M.:
*Should the Falcons trade Vick!
*McGwire WON'T make Hall in '07!
*How low has Brett Favre sunk!
*Are the Magic the NBA's best!
*Are the Sox crazy to trade Manny!
Vick's Dirty Bird, Day 2: He says he's sorry and – really – the hubbub over the gesture itself is overblown. But what's not overblown is that this incident symbolizes his fractured relationship with fans and begs the question: Is it time for the Falcons and Vick to part ways?
Here's the crux of the debate: As a fan, would you rather win a Super Bowl or get to watch arguably the most exciting player in the league every week?
Because the Falcons won't win a Super Bowl with Vick as QB. On the other hand, he is the city's greatest sports icon and one of those rare athletes who could do something ridiculous on any given play.
But that makes him Vince Carter or Allen Iverson or Ken Griffey (in his prime): Individually brilliant but highly unlikely to actually lead their team to a championship. It's not a bad strategy to focus on putting asses in seats -- but at the cost of a title?
McGwire/Hall a Non-Starter? He's got virtually no chance at induction this year if the AP's research is right. They polled 20 percent of all voters; only 25 percent of those said they would vote for McGwire's entry into the Hall. That seems statistically significant enough to suggest that he's got no shot in '07. (But will they continue to reject him annually or is this some sort of first-year punishment?)
Seahawks beat Packers in
Magic beat Jazz in
Manny being... moved? I know Manny has wanted out of
More Quick Points:
So Eli hates Plax? He joins the rest of us. Between drafting Manning and signing Burress as a free agent, is there a more pitiable GM than NYG's Ernie Accorsi? Don't let the door hit you on the way out to retirement.
Cowboys cut Vanderjerkoff: But only after giving him a $2.5 million signing bonus. Worst NFL offseason signing of the year?
Jay Cutler will make Broncos fans forget about Jake Plummer before the end of the first quarter next weekend.
Bulls uphold no-headband policy: This could be the stupidest decision of the NBA season. How out of touch does the Bulls management want to be? And to tick off their cornerstone free-agent acquisitions? Mind-boggling.
No one wants the Bama job? Understandable. Spurrier feels like he's got a better shot of winning an SEC title at
Lost in the McGwire/HOF mess is that there is absolutely no excuse for Ripken and Gwynn not to make the Hall unanimously. But you just KNOW there will be some ass-hat voter who abstains on them.
Posts
129 comments:
Speaking of someone who gets to watch Lebron James every couple nights, give me a championship any day of the week and twice on Sundays. You can always find one player to adore on your championship team, a player you'll like more than the best player in the league (let alone a schmuck who can't play his position).
I'm apparently too late to find the original story - what the hell is the point of a no-headband policy, to begin with?
Anything that makes any sense?
Why on earth would you stick it to a historically fragile guy you just paid so much cash, all over a stupid policy with no real purpose? You know what happened last year, and Flip didn't even come up with any lousy rules like this one.
sigh... back in that "I almost feel sorry for you, but you got what you had coming to you" Pistons fan zone.
Vanderjerkoff?
That's the best you can come up with???
This blog gets dumber every day.
I'd say since he's currently out of a job, he should be Mike Van-down-by-the-river, but he DOES have that signing bonus. Maybe it's a pimped out van?
Yeah, because the Packers' run defense letting Shaun Alexander run silly all over them means Favre sucks and should retire. Excellent analysis there Dan, really...
Can you just not comment on Favre the rest of the year if you're not going to watch the game!?! Until the Packers were down 2 scores (from a BS Roughing the Passer penalty, I might add) Favre played a good game. It's not his fault he had no support from the running game or the defense in the 2nd half. He can only play his position.
By your logic, shouldn't Hasselbeck retire? He had a pretty rotten game too (with better supporting talent)
Up until now, there has been no way to move Vick because of the revenue he brought into the city/team. People go just to see Vick. Prior to Vick they wouldn't sell out and the games weren't on tv.
This is the first incident where the fans are really starting to turn on him. If this continues, they may actually consider moving him.
I don't think they will/can, I'm not sure what team would be willing to give up enough to get him. And I don't know what's so great about Schaub, a guy who has started ONE game.
I wish the Red Sox would trade Manny to Atlanta for Andruw Jones. That would work on both sides, except for Papi.
I forget who it was on TV that said he got.. Vander-jacked-up.
Eli hates Plax? Not good when you start hating your only wide receiver....especially when you're not that good of a QB.
Favre's interceptions (at least two of them) were down field passes to one on one receivers - his receivers just didn't make any plays for him. QBs throw the ball up for their receivers in those coverage situations all the time expecting them to make a play on the ball and at least try to make a catch, not let a DB out jump them or make a better play than them. You really need to shut the hell up about Favre...he's doing a pretty good job with a pretty bad team.
Jason and other haters:
I'm just kinda curious, why do all of you bother reading and commenting if you hate Dan so much? Aren't there better things to do with your time?
Adam Archuleta (Skins) and Kalimba Edwards (Lions) were probably worse signings than Mike V. Both will be cut after the season and got 8-10M guaranteed I believe.
The AP has UCLA as #1. The "Coaches" poll has OSU at #1. Sad to say it, but I have to side with the media & go with UCLA.... if only because I trust them more than a collection of sophomore interns at various I-A schools (who, as we all know, actually do the rankings for the "Coaches").
@brave sir robin
People like jason amount to little more than forum trolls. They act like tools on web forums and blogs because they're anonymous and can say whatever they want without getting punched in the mouth.
As an Atlanta resident I can assure you, the media here is not blaming Vick for anything. They are fixated on running Jim Mora Jr. out of town. The Vick bashing is centered around national media not named ESPN who likes him for ratings.
Personally, I'm not a Falcons fan, but I've said the past two years that a Vick for Roy Williams (Detroit) trade would make the birds instant Super Bowl contenders.
Dan you right on when you say that some "asshat" will not vote for Gwynn or Ripken and deny them 100% of the vote. When Fat Fuck Conlin was the only guy to not vote for Nolan Ryan his reasoning was if Babe Ruth cannot get 100% than no one should. You just know some idiot will do the same thing with Gwynn and Ripken and then they will not be able to make anymore TV appearances and break anymore chairs like Conlin.
Yeah, that would work great for Detroit. Trade their one good receiver for a QB who can't complete passes.
Go Magic!
Can you believe it? Man the weren't really dumb for taking Dwight over Okafor were they ESPN? Dick Vitale?
Joe (Dayton)
Interesting ESPN.com poll about Hall of Fame Balloting asking the fans who they would vote for, here are the top 10 as of 2 minutes ago.
Which players would get your Hall of Fame vote? (Check all that apply)
86.3% Tony Gwynn:
86.1% Cal Ripken, Jr
52.6% Andre Dawson
40.9% Lee Smith
39.9% Don Mattingly
38.4% Rich Gossage
33.4% Jim Rice
32.8% Mark McGwire
31.6% Bert Blyleven
24.1% Tommy John
I'll go on a limb, Rich Rodriguez will be the next coach of Alabama. Money Talks.
I didn't say it would work for Detroit.
actually the last 2 Favre interceptions were typical Favre. The First one was on First and 10 with almost 6 minutes left in the game and there was no reason to try and force the ball down field like and the fact that he completly under thrwe the receiver and the second was a completely bad throw into tirple coverage, so for the person who said Brett;s WR's did not make a play for the ball go watch the game again they were horrible throws. The kind that Favre makes alot.
Regarding the hall of fame, I have just one rule. When in doubt, leave him out. So just Ripken and Gwynn for me.
It's actually worse for the Giants. They didn't draft Manning -- they drafted Rivers and traded him plus 2 more picks for Manning. Why not use 2 picks to move up one draft position to take an over-rated quarterback with a meddling father who said Eli wouldn't sign for San Diego, which prompted the trade to begin with.
The last one was bad - the second to last one looked like a jump ball - honestly i didn't see it live, just on SC this morning while i was walking out the door. I just like to give Dan a hard time and like Favre a lot.
Yes...because the AP is far more knowledgeable when it comes to voting in polls... lol
What's really cool is the possibility that Ohio State could wind up with the #1 in Football, Men's Bball AND Women's Bball.
Has a trifecta like that happened before?
QB class of 2003:
Roethlisberger (one bad season does not ruin him)
Rivers (though tailing off...but that might be more due to LDT taking off)
Manning (He'll have a 12 year career...only cuz of his name)
Losman (hm...he's in the league right?)
Hall of Famers
Gwynn
Ripken
Dawson (sentimental fave)
I know a Skins fan who curses Adam Archuleta nightly, but for my money the worst signing in the offseason was making McCarthy the head coach of the Packers. The guy coached the WORST offense in the league last year, and now that he's gone, look at the Niners now. This is the guy who is supposed to get something out of the crap Green Bay has brought in over the last few years? (Quick: Name 2 GB recievers not named Donald "50-50" Driver.)
On the Alabama head coaching job. I've got two words for ya --
Romeo Crennel.
Think about how many times an average NFL head coach goes down to the college ranks and dominates. What kind of cred would Romeo bring to Alabama? He'd be an African American head coach in the South, in the SEC, he's got super bowl rings, he's got NFL connections and players absolutely LOVE HIM (you think #55 would be in Cleveland otherwise).
I'm not sure Alabama will call Romeo but they should. Cleveland is stuck in neutral and if the right deal is sent out there I think Romeo and the Browns would happily part ways. I'm just throwing that out there but I wouldn't be surprised if his name comes up a lot when the bowl season ends.
cal ripken is a class act and i hope his induction does not get overshadowed by any of the controversy surrounding other picks this year. a little hometown balmer bias, perhaps.... :)
I propose that any asshat that votes "no" on Gwynn or Ripken should get tossed out of the Hall of Fame voting commitee, to be replaced by...Shanoff? *gasp* Would he dare take the job?
thirdstringjd, I don't know where you've been for months, but you come back and all of a sudden you have great ideas. I love that, somebody needs to pass the thought process along to the people who should be thinking it.
Come on - Mattingly's gotta get in one of these years. Best defensive first baseman of his generation. Nine gold gloves, .304 BA, 200+ HRs, 1000+ RBIs. If not for a nagging back injury woulda been one of the best - and with the injury still had a great career. Gotta give Donny Baseball some love.
Dan, how exactly is this loss a sign that Favre should get out? The Packers, expected to be a bad team this year, lost a close Monday Night game on the road in the loudest environment in the NFL against a playoff bound Seattle team.
I don't even like Favre, but I don't understand your hatred and constant bickering about him. Is it the fact that the media loves him? You've never really expalined why you take shots at him wherever possible.
ndyanksfan05 - No on Mattingly as long as Rice and Dawson are not in. Both have far superior overall Offensive numbers and both also have MVP's.
Raise your hand if you predicted the Magic and the Jazz to have the best records in their respective conferences nearly a month into the NBA season.
I would raise my hand half-way for calling the Magic, but honestly I have no idea how anyone was not calling the Magic. Unless it was obvious to everyone but me that the last few weeks of last season were a complete fluke.
Mattingly is one of those guys what won't get in. He is loved by the hometown crowd and was a great player, but because he didn't do backflips or have some dumb streak he won't ever get proper consideration.
Does most consecutive years playing for the Yankees without making the playoffs count as a dumb streak?
Why do poeple not like Favre? It is pretty simple he may be one of the most overrated QB's in the History of the Game. Is a QB who's career rating is 85.6 really that good?
"some dumb streak"
I will assume that you are referring to cal ripken's streak here.
a dumb streak is "consecutive wins in a dome when its a full moon" or "games won after trailing a home team in the third quarter by ten or more points when the opposing team is above .500 and its raining"
have you ever tried to play 16 seasons of a professional sport without missing a SINGLE game due to injury or sucking?
say what you will about mattingly deserving to get in, and i don't necessarily disagree with you there... but there's no need to detract from other nominees achievements.
I just think Ripken's streak is more a result of good luck than anything else. Congrats, you didn't get hurt and showed up to play.
Adam Archleta is the worst player in the NFL. He is getting paid millions to make sure that the player's bench does not spontaneously fly away.
When Troy Vincent replaced Archuleta in the line-up then got hurt, Vernon Fox came in instead of AA. I'm a diehard Skins fan and for the first time I can remember I looked at the TV and wondered who that was in a Skins jersey. "Who's Fox?"
The Lions think he still plays for them: http://www.detroitlions.com/bio.cfm?bio_id=251&season=7
The NFL just used his Lions picture on his Skins site: http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/303361
And I was glad to see him. Adam Archuleta got on the field again in the backfield on punt coverage for last man defense. He looked directly at his man then inexplicably stepped to the side resulting in a blocked punt. I'm not exagerating here. It looked like Carolina was the team paying him millions on that play.
Sorry for the rant but a day after our signing of him I had a custom stitched Archuleta jersey made. I have been the butt of all my friends jokes. A girly girl even busted on me. It was unfortunately hilarious too. I can't take it anymore. Archuleta for an extra headpiece for the Chief and two pig noses for the Hogettes would be a great trade right now.
From Jim Rice up.
first of all, given the state of professional sports today, "not getting hurt and showing up to play" is no small feat.
second of all, its not like he spent 20 years sucking. he played in 19 all star games. he earned a couple MVPs and rookie of the year. he was an all around good player and arguably one of the best shortstops to play the game.
Brave Sir Robin, He bravely ran away, he lived to flee another day.
Sorry I know I'm off with the lyrics but I couldn't help myself.
Mattingly had one year in the playoffs and had a monster series against the Mariners in the year that edgar doubled to left to win the stupid game. Donny hit like 400 with a couple homers in the series. Can't fault him for having absolutely NO supporting cast.
Ripken batted 30 points lower than him, had 600 more RBIs, 200 more home runs, seven less gold gloves and played 7 more years than Mattingly. He did have a couple MVP years though which is good. But strictly by the numbers, why is Ripken iron clad in the hall? Other than the streak (which is admirable and pretty amazing) he didn't put up monster numbers especially considering he played for 21 years.
The streak is good for the media and fans, but he struggled a lot during those last 9 years and hurt his team. Average for the last ten years of his career:
251, 257, 315, 262, 278, 270, 271, 340 (86 games), 256 (83 games), 239.
Thats one good year, one good half year and 7 1/2 mediocre years. Only once during that span did he break 100 RBIs (102).
Ripken's streak should be in the HOF, but I don't know about the player.
I think Cal Ripken is a stand up guy and did a lot for baseball, but just by the numbers he doesn't necessarily deserve that first ballot.
How is McCarthy the worst signing of the offseason? He has done a faily good job turning the Packers around. Sure, there is work still to be done (i.e. the secondary), but he has coached the team to a better record (thus far) and most of the losses have been very close games. He's doing a good job bringing the young players on the team up right, and he's gotten Favre to buy into his gameplan. I'm not saying he's perfect, but he a big improvement over Mike Sherman.
second of all, its not like he spent 20 years sucking. he played in 19 all star games.
Because fan voting and other factors he made some of those all star team more by name then actually being an all star but Ripken does deserve to be in the hall of fame for more then just is record streak of consecutive games played.
Stats Speak:
BA- .276 - borderline
HR - 431 - Yes
RBI - 1695 - YEs
Hits - 3184 - Yes
Runs - 1647 - Yes
Doubles - 603 - Yes
BB - 1129 - Yes
OBP - .340 - Yes
Slg. - .447 - borderline
37th all time in HR
20th All time in RBI
31st in Runs Scored
14th all time in hits
13th in Doubles
if players were in or out of the hall of fame based SOLELY on their numbers... pete rose would be in.
that being said, what keeps pete rose out of the HOF is the same premise that should ensure cal ripken's induction. hall of fame selection is not based entirely on RBIs or batting average. its based also on what the player has meant to the sport.
Those numbers are a bit skewed by the fact that he played for 21 years though. If you go through on a year to year basis he had a lot of mediocre years that combined together to make a solid final total.
This is not a bash on Ripken by the way - i actually like this guy a lot. Just going by his numbers though, he's not exactly blowing me away.
Pete Rose broke a sacred rule in baseball - you don't get in for being a standup guy. You get in for being the best and playing honestly/fairly
which is exactly my point, nd.
In that case, no player has meant more to the sport than Pete Rose.
:)
Let Pete in!!
btw, Pete Rose did play honestly and fairly. More so than most...
it was that little , tiny problem while managing that got him...
haha, rafael. :)
Here are some stats to back up why mattingly should not be in the Hall of Fame before Ripken, Rice or Dawson
BA -
Mattingly - .307
Rice - .298
Dawson - .279
Ripken - .276
HR -
Dawson - 438
Ripken - 431
Rice - 382
Mattingly - 222
RBI -
Ripken - 1695
Dawson - 1591
Rice - 1451
Mattingly - 1099
Hits -
Ripken - 3184
Dawson - 2774
Rice - 2452
Mattingly - 2153
Runs Scored -
Ripken - 1647
Dawson - 1373
Rice - 1249
Mattingly - 1007
Sheldiz makes a good point there and I have to agree, no way cal shouldn't make it in first time, 100% of vote.
you can get in the hall for having sick numbers, breaking or setting an untouchable record, or doing something that is tremendously impactful to baseball.
ripken is the iron man, and the face of good guy baseball...he gets in. Gwynn has sick batting stats, he gets in.
Mcqwire gets in if people really think that is home run derby with sosa was impactful to baseball, because his stats dont get him in and his record didnt last long.
Rose bet on baseball, and though he didnt bet against his team and only for his team occasionally, by not betting on his team sometimes is as much an indictment as betting against your team. However, by far, his stats are all time hall worthy.
cmfost - I think you may want to reconsider your argument. Mr. Favre had the 12th best QB rating of all-time entering the season. Some of the quarterbacks in front of him (Green, Bulger, Hasselbeck) cannot compare to Favre’s body of work. So, even by your notion that QB rating is the end-all of the worth of a QB, Farve is still a top 10 QB of all time.
However, the QB rating rewards high completion percentage and is punishing on QBs who take risks (or have to take risks) due to the devastating effect of an interception on the rating. Mr. Elway finished his career with a rating of 79.9 – not many people will argue that he wasn’t one of the best. For players like Favre, Elway, and Marino, who played on teams with much less talent than, say, Joe Montana or Peyton Manning, their rating suffers because they are forced to take risks in order to try and pull out a victory. Completion percentages go down and INTs go up. Mr. Favre isn’t overrated. I have had the pleasure of watching all but 4 or 5 of his games. I cannot imagine having anyone else quarterback the Pack. Currently, only Tom Brady and Peyton Manning compare to Favre in his prime. If he had ever had a WR like Marvin Harrison he’d have Marino’s TD record by now.
Needless to say, Dan’s incessant whining about how “washed up” Favre is comes across as ignorant to anyone who has been watching the Pack this year (and last year). The team has no running game or TE threat. One WR will be very good some day, but he still makes rookie mistakes. And the defense is a sieve, so the offense has to score 25-30 each week if the Packers are going to win. Is Favre as good as he was 5 years ago? No. Is he still a top 10 QB in the league? Of course.
Cal and Tony – they will both get in, but let’s not get on a high horse about a unanimous vote. That’s silly. If a voter has ridiculously high standards or if he/she thinks no one should ever get 100%, fine, that’s why we have so many voters. It isn’t about whether someone gets 100% of the vote – they don’t put that on the bust. It’s whether they get in. And they’ll get in.
Falcons shouldn’t trade Vick, but they should hire someone to help him “grow up.” They should also hire a VP of common sense to talk to the coaching staff and Vick – this is an offense that can dominate using a simple offense. There is no need to go pass-wacky. Use the run to set up the pass. They have 3 excellent RBs (including Vick). They have zero excellent WRs. This isn’t rocket science.
The Giants need a new coach.
Big Papi - Manny = Barry Bonds. I.e., at least a walk per game average.
Unfortunately, Ortiz won't win any MVP awards for being the most pitched around player in baseball (like Bonds was).
Why do poeple not like Favre? It is pretty simple he may be one of the most overrated QB's in the History of the Game. Is a QB who's career rating is 85.6 really that good?
Tom Brady: 88.1 career QB rating
Dan Marino: 86.4 career QB rating
Those are two other quarterbacks that enter into the "greatest QB ever" discussion with very similar ratings. To borrow from the posts about Don Mattingly and Cal Ripken Jr., on-field contributions and stats don't make the complete package. Some things, like leadership, don't show up in Favre's stats (or Brady's, etc.)
cmfrost I'm with you.
If Mattingly gets serious consideration for the hall there is absolutely NO way that you don't put Jim Rice in. Nobody is going to ever convince me that Mattingly deserves to be in Cooperstown over Jim Rice.
The First Player that should be a unanimous first ballot hall of famer(but he will not since someone will leave him off the ballot once he eligible) should be ROGER CLEMENS. Ripken and Gwynn to not come up to the level of achievement that Roger has thus they should not be unanimously voted in but they should be definetly be in along with Dawson, Lee Smith and Jim Rice.
Mattingly should not be in the HOF. He had a few HOF seasons, but sadly, injuries kept him from keeping the years necessary to get him in. In 1988 he seemed like a lock to get in. But hiss tats from 1989 just did him in.
He's not a HOFer he's just another Hall Of Very Good... (Just like Kirby Puckett, but that's another story).
I agree witht the idea, if there's a debate, they probably shouldn't be in.
Ok, Favre is a good QB but he is not one of the top 5 ever. He makes to many stupid mistakes and what has he ever really done other then winning one super bowl in 15 years which really is not that much of an achievement considering that Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson have been super bowl winning QB's
Dawson and Ripken played seven more seasons than Mattingly. He needs six hundre hits, 500 RBIs, and 300 runs to top Dawson in those categories and 600 RBI and 600 runs to top Ripken. If he had seven more years he probably would have passed them or at least equaled them. Again you are looking at sums instead of how they played each year.
I think Jim Rice definitely deserves to get into the hall...ahead of Mattingly. I am not so sure about Dawson
but ndyank that is how you judge a person worthyness to be in the hall of fame. You have to look at there whole career and unfortunately for mattingly is did not have the longevity or the numbers to be a hall of famer. If I was a voter for the Hall my ballott would be:
Ripken
Gywnn
Rice
Dawson
Lee Smith
cmfrost - who are the QBs you would rate ahead of Favre? I'll give you Montana, but who else? Brady, someday, perhaps. Elway? I wouldn't agree, but I couldn't disagree, either. Who else?
Also, I would note that Mr. Favre was in the middle of a back-to-back-to-back NFL MVP run when the Packers won the Superbowl - it isn't like the Packers won the Championship IN SPITE of him (like Johnson and Dilfer). They won, in great part, because of him. The Packers' defense wasn't like the Ravens' D, or even the Tampa D.
Unitas
Namath
Elway
Marino
Bradshaw
Montana
Brady
Manning
Bart Starr
Sid Luckman
Steve Young
Roger Staubach
Troy Aikman
Fran Tarkenton
Warren Moon
Jim Kelly
Why is Favre DEFINITIVELY better than any of these guys. He was a good QB, he won a super bowl. Some of the people on the list haven't, some have one multiple. The point is he isn't on the "Mount Rushmore" of QB's and he's debateably top 10. Hero worship from his fans and some members of the media does not automatically make him one of the greatest to ever play the game. I'm sorry, grab a little perspective.
I'm not saying Cal Ripken doesn't deserve to be in the HOF. But acting like it is an outrage that some people didn't vote him in is absurd. Based on the numbers alone he is a pretty good candidate but not a 100% guy. It's the streak that people remember and that is more a result of good luck in a sport that is fairly easy physically. A.C. Green's streak is far more impressive and no one ever mentions it.
This is actually kind of ironic. You can't look only at Farve's QB rating. I have no strong feelings for the guy either way, but he's started 250 (ish?) straight games...he's the CAL RIPKEN of football!
I don't think there's any doubt that Favre is a Hall of Famer, he has something that Marino and Peyton don't have... championships. I haven't seen enough of him this year to say one way or the other whether he should hang it up or not. I thought he should have hung it up after last year.
geoff, i'll definitely grant you the premise that Ripken should not be a 100% in. I get that. We'll have to agree to disagree on the meaning of the streak. I think there are a couple hundred pro baseball players out there that might take issue with your analysis of the physical aspect of their sport.
A.C. Green? My brain doesn't speak NBA, sorry :)
For me, Favre's streak is tainted by the fact that for 3-4 years it was his addiction to painkillers that kept the streak alive. So I prefer not to count that for or against him, but I do think of it everytime some broadcaster talks about his streak.
Dave,
People that don't belong on that list:
Kelly, Moon, Naimath, Bradshaw, and Aikman.
Favre's a lot better than all of those guys, as are the rest of the people on your list.
He's better than Manning because Manning's losing bitch.
I put Favre definitely above Young because he never had Jerry Rice to throw to.
Marino never won anything and wasn't a very good leader on those teams.
Elway and Favre are really close in my opinion. I like Favre better, but that has a lot to do with Elway ramming the Browns in the ass repeatedly.
I like Brady, but I don't know if I'd put him in the all-time greats. Despite his Super Bowls, I still think Montana was better
I can't really judge the rest of the people on the list because I wasn't alive to see them play and I don't care enough to really look up the numbers.
Yes, because no one ever takes painkillers in professional sports. What the hell is wrong with you? Just because Favre had a major problem with them doesn't mean taht's the only way he managed to keep the streak going. Should we just rule anyone who receives a cortisone shot as not having played a game?
tf,
Good call. I remember draft day a few years ago when me and my brother almost came to blows becuase I said Dwight would be better player then Okafur. I'm still smiling on that call.
personally I think Favre's Streak is more impressive then Ripken's in shear terms that Favre plays a physical sport though Favre's Streak is not a NFL Record. The NFL Record for Consecutive games excluding Kickers is by Jim Marshall - DE - Cleveland Browns 1960 and Minnesota Vikings 1961-1979 - for 282 Games which is extermly impressive considering how much of a physical pound a DE takes during a game.
ndyanksfan:
Comparing raw numbers is only telling half the story. Ripken was a SS, a historically weak hitting position. Pitting his numbers against Mattingly makes Mattingly look that much worse.
Ripken was one of the greatest SS's to ever play, based on offense and above average defense for most of his career. Mattingly was a great defensive 1B, and an "average" guy w/ middling power. Two hundred something HRs does not a HoF 1B make, especially since he played in the '80s and not the '10s.
How in the world can Mark McGwire EVER be considered for the Hall of Fame? Wouldn't that require "talking about the past"?
The entire process is a joke. The thing I hate about McGwire is that his "enhanced" stats make it difficult for deserving players, like Jim Rice, to get serious consideration.
As a side note, I'm still mad about Tom Seaver not being a unanimous Hall of Fame selection years ago simply because a couple of voters decided to boycott the voting in protest of Pete Rose not being eligible.
Hey Dan,
Can we at least give Bama a day to find a coach before you say no one wants the job!?! Your examples were Spurrier and Saban and it's not like anyone thought for a second they would get either and there has been no evidence that Bama wanted or had contacted either. So can we relax on the "No one wants the Bama job" talk.
Robin, this is exactly the kind of hero worship that I was talking about. It's perfectly fine to like Favre. It's fine that he might be your favorite player but I'm trying to be objective about it.
You dismissed 5 (including 8 Super Bowl Wins) guys immediately for no reason:
Kelly: Went to 4 consecutive SB; HOF
Moon: One of the best pure passer in pro-football history; HOF
Namath: Won 1 Super Bowl (as many as Favre; Legitimized the game as we now know it; HOF
Bradshaw: Won 4 (!) Super Bowls; HOF
Aikman: Won 3 (!) Super Bowls; HOF
Manning and Marino are great QB's with great winning percentages. You can't dismiss them for not winning Super Bowls, when you dismiss others who have won multiple Super Bowls. Both are (going to be) HOF.
Young has 1 SB (Same as Favre). He's a toss-up over Favre. Give me something better than "he never had Rice."
Elway has 2 SB, Brady has 3, Montana has 4. You don't really seem to dispute them, because it can't be done.
The fact is, you give no reason why Favre is better, except that he just is because you like him. And the fact that you discount everybody that came before you and him because you never saw them is just plain naive. If you want to consider his place among the all time greats, than you have to consider the all-time greats.
As far as him taking painkillers. He did. He put a foreign substance into his body that allowed him to perform at a higher level/perform at all when he otherwise shouldn't have been able to for a period of 3-4 years! Sound familiar? "Addiction to painkillers" doesn't carry the same stigma as "steroid user" but for all intensive purposes its the exact same thing.
Dave – I think the perspective you are suggesting is a good thing. Being a fan of Favre certainly influences my judgment, to be sure. So let me defend Favre’s “hero worship.”
First – he had three skill players on offense that could reasonably be said to have been good. Sterling Sharpe was tremendous, but injuries shortened his career and Favre didn’t get to play with him while he was in his prime. Flash forward six or seven years – Ahman Green. An absolute monster cutback runner for 3 seasons. Alas, it was not to last. For the past 4 seasons, Donald Driver has been a good player. But that’s it. I mean, that’s it. For all of his touchdown passes, Brett wasn’t throwing to the Marks Brothers, or Jerry Rice and John Taylor, or Rice and Owens. Or two Hall of Fame WRs, like Bradshaw. These are some of the differences. Plus, only Elway threw harder. Only a few more accurately. And, of course, the intangibles. I love Steve Young, but no one in SF rallied around him like the Pack rally around Favre. On to your list:
Unitas – Different era. I can’t intelligently comment. I can’t argue the pick.
Namath – Sorry, it’s a different era, but I won’t entertain this one. He wasn’t a dominant player during his era. A loud and famous one, but not dominant.
Elway – Can’t argue. He worked with just as many crappy offensive players as Favre
Marino – There is no reason he didn’t win the big one other than he was flawed in one major way – a lack of leadership. I wasn’t on the team, of course, but given the testimonials of former players and the glaring lack of a title, he must have been a poor leader. He’s beneath Favre.
Bradshaw – He couldn’t have been in a better situation. Only Montana played with better offensive players. And, like Namath, he didn’t dominate his era (though he had a great 78 season)
Montana – I can’t argue, although it is tempered because he played with the best
Brady – the jury is out – let’s see 3-4 more excellent years first. He’s not in Favre’s league yet, but he could be one day.
Manning – I hope you don’t mean Peyton. C’mon – he’s this generation’s Marino. All stats, no results. Teammates don’t like him. He isn’t a leader. Not in Favre’s league. Not even close.
Bart Starr – Great leader. Couldn’t throw the ball much more than 45 yards. If he played today, his name would be Plummer.
Sid Luckman – Different era. I can’t intelligently comment. I’d like to argue, but I can’t.
Steve Young – Not enough good years. Sat the bench too long.
Roger Staubach – Played on great teams. 6 pro bowls. No MVPs. Eh. He’s a step below Favre.
Troy Aikman – The Terry Bradshaw of the 90s, and the 2nd most overrated QB of all time. Only Namath gets more love for less.
Fran Tarkenton – Yep, he belongs in the conversation, but why didn’t they ever win the big one? We’re talking about a great defense and a 9 time pro bowl QB (with an MVP to boot). The lack of the ring puts him below Favre in my mind.
Warren Moon – C’mon
Jim Kelly – Again, C’mon
That gives you four – Elway, Montana, Luckman, and Unitas. I disagree with the rest.
If he was such a masteful SS why did he only win two gold gloves in 21 years?
Pain-killers = steroids? Really? come on now...
Pain killers allow you to play at a level consistent with where you would be healthy, steriods allow you to pass your normal limit and achieve a higher level of performance. Ridiculous comment. Using cortisone, aspirin, etc. is alot different than steroids.
Eli Manning is a TOOL. Power Tool. Black and Decker.
I was so fired up when he said he didn't want to go to SD if they drafted him. I was hoping that all of the teams would say "Ok then, BUH-BYE!" but of course, the name will forever carry him and he'll keep making money being a crappy QB. Now, I know Elway said he didn't want to go to the Colts (I think??) but I wasn't paying attention to the draft back in the 80's, so I don't care what he did then, but Eli Manning is a total dork who is so lucky his crazy-suit-wearing dad was a professional QB before him.
I think Cal and Tony deserve to get into the HOF. I don't agree with Pete being denied either.
Go Buckeyes! That trifecta would be sweet. The basketball season has just begun, so I'll be happy when they are still at the top come March Madness.
defining performance enhancing drugs is a joke in all sports.
ask kirk gibson if he could even get out of bed to hit that home run with out some serious meds. no such thing as a pure sport anymore. Hell, rumor has it that the babe did his best work wasted/hungover, good thing prohibition ended.
Why in the hell would we trade Manny? I just don't get it.
The only explanation I can come up with is that there's something the Red Sox doctors know that we don't, or that he really did in effect quit on the team last year, and said so to teammates.
People keep saying that his trade value might never be higher, but doesn't that mean that his "keep" value is just as high? I mean J.D. Drew is a good player, but he doesn't have anywhere near the power or consistency that Manny has.
The names I keep hearing too in trade possibilities aren't great either. At least not in the category of anything to get excited over. I sincerely doubt the Giants would give us Matt Cain, the Angels don't appear interested, and unless the Dodgers offer James Loney plus either Chad Billingsley or Jonathan Broxton, I don't see much to get excited about there either.
I just don't get it.
-Todd (Boston)
Brady – the jury is out – let’s see 3-4 more excellent years first. He’s not in Favre’s league yet, but he could be one day.
If you made the arguement the Favre has never had anyone in the skill position then what do you make of Brady. Since he has been the Patriots starter he has 1 WR with 100 Catches in a Season and 1 WR with 1000+ yards in a season but yet he still lead his team to 3 Super Bowl Championships.
Yet Brady is not in Favre's league??
Just as a comparsion a took a look at Favre's first 5 seasons as a starter versus Brady.
Completion %
Favre - 62.0%
Brady - 61.9%
Yards
Favre - 18,724
Brady - 18,035
TD's
Favre - 147
Brady - 123
INT's
Favre - 77
Brady - 66
Super Bowls
Favre - 1
Brady - 3
Just to add to the Brady vs. Favre Comparision.
In Brady first 5+ Season including this year he has never had more TD's then INT's, Favre had 2 Season in is first 6 with more INT's then TD's
Not to go all Bill James on you. But in most Win Share, average win share/season and runs created above average per position, Cal Ripken is usually 6th for shortstops of all time in each category. Mattingly is usually in the 20s for most first baseman rankings. When you combine everything, Ripken is a slam dunk first-ballot nominee.
Just a quick note on some revisionist history, discarding marino's accomplishments and place on the QB pantheon. I was never his biggest fan, although I was always envious throughout the 80's and early 90's, because he coulda,woulda,shoulda been a steeler (except he wasn't going to be better than mark malone, oh no...).
Anyway, to say the man wasn't a leader because he didn't lead the dolphins to any superbowls is just wrong. The dolphins had a pretty horrible defense most of his years (let's just say there were no Reggie Whites on his sideline), and never a running back to speak of (he never had a terrell davis, either), maybe in part because marino was so good, and shula wouldn't commit to it enough, or find the right O-lineman for run-blocking. Every year they said they were going to try to run more, but I don't remember any first round running back picks by them, back in the day. And how good would marino's receivers have been without him. In terms of releasing the ball at the perfect time and finding his guys in stride, he was awesome. The best pure passer I ever saw. And the opponents defense never had to worry about the run game, and the dolphs still couldn't run it.
So maybe you guys arguing here are too young to know better, or you really buy this instant history crap. Elway, Montana, and Marino were the best QBs of the 80's, and deservedly belonging on any top ten list, although I hate such lists, and favre does too.
cmfrost - I love Brady. I'm just saying his body of work isn't large enough to compare him to Farve yet. If he suffered a career ending injury this weekend or if he started sucking for the next few years and then retired, it might be silly to compare him to Favre. I agree, that if he keeps this up, he's in Favre's league, maybe even above Favre. But we have to wait a little while to see if he keeps it up.
Brady is probably going to be one of the greats but he does need to play some more before we put him up there. His immediate success is obvious but does not put him above Favre yet - see Warner, Kurt.
nyc-steelers - I agree Marino is top ten. I just rate Favre above him. Many players have said or hinted at the fact that Dan wasn't a good leader/guy/or likable. These qualities count with QBs.
As for Danny's defenses - the 83 team had the best scoring defense in the league - same as the 96 Packers.
Hey, no mention of the Warriors beating the once undefeated Road Warriors, aka the Spurs, with out Boom Dizzle (B.Diddy to some) and Pietrus. However, the new fantasy stud, Biedrins, had 18 pts., 15 rebs., 4 asts., and 6 blks!
Not to mention that they blew up the Jazz by 13 this past Sat.
The Warriors are 2nd in the division and 7th in the conference. The 12-year playoff drought might be over.
Hey, I've been calling for Favre to retire, and I hate people who make excuses for him.
But he actually had a good game. Their defense is legitimate.
It's not an awesome performance or anything, either, but he shouldn't be called out just because he lost on Monday Night to a Super Bowl contender.
As for the all-time argument for Favre? Iron-clad. Mr. Football, as far as I'm concerned, he won a couple, he had a lot of memorable comebacks and gutsy scrambles. My generation's Elway.
btw, anyone notice that JP Losman has similar stats to Favre with very similar help (one good WR, Favre has better RB, better O-line)? Funny how history colors everything.
Did Montana play with the best...or did he make a slew of them into great players?
And Young riding the bench is a bad argument...he was behind teh best QB of all time, Montana. Favre would have ridden the bench too.
This is getting long winded, but I'm enjoying it. Also nice that there is civil conversation on the page today.
Dominant player? What does that mean? That he didn't have sustained sucess? If that's the case how can you dismiss Kelly,Tarkenton, Aikman, Bradshaw, Marino, Manning. All of these guys were/are "dominant." They were good year in and year out.
Warren Moon thew to nobody:Haywood Jefferies, Webster Slaughter.
While we're talking about it, who did Elway throw to? Vance Johnson isn't making any all time WR lists.
You know what else? Sometimes the level of play by the QB has a lot to do with how "good" a WR is considered.
Brady has already accomplished more in his short time than Favre did in his whole career. 3 Super Bowls.
Staubach, Namath, Aikman...you can't give me anything except for you just don't like them as much. You're not giving me real reasons why they aren't as good.
As far as Namath being the most celebrated for doing the least, I'd give that to Favre. Who is a more celebrated QB who only won one Super Bowl? People LOVE the guy and that's all right, but I'm saying seperate the two.
The painkillers issue is why I don't consider the streak. They are on the same level with steroids in the sense that they allowed his body to recouperate faster than it otherwise would have and allowed him to play in games and maintain a level of "dominance" that he would not have otherwise been able to play in, much less play well.
I was a huge Mattingly fan, but he is definitely not a true Hall of Fame guy. His back cost him his ticket to Cooperstown....I do still think it is possible to see him get in though because the standards have dropped over the years.
As for Ripken's streak, it is meaningless. The guy should have had a day off several times during it and yes it was due to sucking. And let's not forget about the O's cancelling a game due to a "power outage" when Cal wouldn't play after finding his wife in bed with Costner. Anyway, he is a Hall of Famer with or without the streak though. He led the way for the bigger, more offensive shortstops.
On a basketball note, it's nice to see Randy Foye finally getting some playing time. Hopefully that huge 4th quarter he had over the weekend woke his dumb ass coach up.
Mike James is no Randy Foye.
i'll gloss over the "meaningless streak" comment because i love me some randy foye!
and i agree with whomever above me said that the discussions today are both interesting and civil.
good work team.
http://www.snopes.com/movies/actors/costner.htm
regarding kelly ripken and kevin costner.
Hey dave,
Get your facts straight. painkillers don't help your body to recuperate. And I'd imagine there's not an NFL player out there who hasn't taken them (not necessarily just on game day, but on Monday morning). They will allow you to play in spite of pain, but it doesn't make the bones or muscles heal faster. If anything, playing on them would diminish your play, since it can both leave you somewhat woozy and a bit sluggish (try popping some vicodin and then playing some b-ball; not that I'd know).
Favre got addicted - I don't know what his status is now with regard to taking them, but if he hasn't taken a painkiller in the last few years, I'd argue that it is pretty damn impressive.
They are not illegal (with prescription, that is) in part because they are medically necessary, and they are NOT performance enhancing in the way steroids or amphetamines might be. They certainly are addictive; as far as I can tell Favre addressed that addiction. I can't see how painkillers have any bearing on the validity of his streak (if it was steroids, yeah, that's cheating). And just taking the painkillers doesn't make the pain go away, it merely dulls it, allows you to forget it just a bit; you do still have to play through it.
Regardless if you like favre or not, or think he should retire, how can anyone possibly argue that he is not one tought Mother?
Hey Jen, any chance you could get your Browns to trade Kellen Winslow to the Giants for draft picks so that we could have the 3 biggest tools in the universe all on the same team? They would need a bigger tool shed to hold the likes of Manning, Shockey and Winslow.
This is rather civil today, must not be many of those trouble trolls around.
As for today's debates
Hall of Fame: Ripken and Gwynn defintly in but not with 100% of the vote neither them deserve it.
QB's: Favre is one of the top 20 of all time but I do think people tend to overrate him.
NBA - I know nothing about the NBA
College Basketball - Talk to me in March
Manny- either trade him and get over with or do not trade him do not stretch it out like last time, it only hurts the team..
The painkiller arugment is beyond stupid.
Every player for decades has been getting pain killers. Favre's addiction had to do with painkillers when he wasn't playing and in the offseason. It's like takling about LT's stats not being as impressive because he did coke.
Prep To Pros is a bad idea? Isn't Howard in his third or fourth season in the league? Didn't it take the likes of Kobe & Garnett a couple seasons to break through?
Look at Jermaine O'Neil - he rode the pine in Portland and couldn't get his game together until he ended up in Indiana, which I beleive was his fourth year in the league.
Rather that languishing on the bench for a season or two, maybe it is better to have the young players go to the next level for a season or two to prove their mettle.
I, for one, wouldn't dare pay $40 or more to watch sloppy high schoolers play. So why should I do it at the pro level?
Why the random Griffey dig? His 1.026 OPS in 59 post-season at bats not good enough for you?
As for Plax, I will gladly take him back in Pittsburgh. In his rookie season, Big Ben developed a nice chemistry with him. Then he got hurt down the stretch and Ben struggled a bit, partly because of it.
"Because he was addicted" is exactly what I was talking about when I said they hold a different stigma. No, they don't actually allow your body to recouperate faster, but practically they achieve the same things. In reality they serve the same purpose and allow him to play at times when he otherwise couldn't have and achieve what otherwise would not have been possible. Those are the facts.
Using Super Bowl wins as a measuring stick for how good a quarterback plays is DUMB. It is a team game, with too much left to other factors.
Bradshaw? He has admitted himself that Favre is the best to ever play the game. Winning 4 titles on the backs of other HOF'ers doesn't mean much to me. Reggie White is the only other possible HOF'er that has played with Favre that I can think of.
Aikman was ok, but with that defense, offensive line, receivers, and of course Emmitt Smith, he didn't have to do much of anything.
Naimath? Are you kidding? He pulled one upset, and because he had the stupidity to "guarantee" it, he is in the hall of fame. He shouldn't even be mentioned in Favre's company.
All of these guys were good in their own way. I look at it like this: replace Favre with Brady (or Manning, or whoever). Brady would be playing exactly like Favre if he was on the toilet of a team that the Packers have. Same with Manning. Are they good? Undoubtably. But put them in Favre's place, and everyone would be saying how "over the hill" they are.
Favre won 3 straight MVPs too. Along with being at the top of the list in touchdowns and wins in NFL history, how can anyone say he is overrated? Is he as good as he was in 1996? No. Does he get a handjob from the media? Sure. But he still belongs on an all time top 5 list, if not top 3 or best ever.
The point is talking about Brett Favre and painkillers is NOT the same as everybody else if you're talking about it in the context of the streak, "iron man", etc. Which is why I don't acknowledge that as a reason why he is one of the "greats."
Regarding Favre's painkillers:
I don't think it is a coincidence that as soon as Favre admitted his addiction and sought help (summer of 1996), he immediately won the Super Bowl and then made it to the next, and strung together 3 straight NFL MVP awards. I wonder how good he could've been those first couple years had it not been for the painkillers. Maybe another Super Bowl victory, maybe another MVP or two...
The point is talking about Brett Favre and painkillers is NOT the same as everybody else if you're talking about it in the context of the streak, "iron man", etc. Which is why I don't acknowledge that as a reason why he is one of the "greats."
Fine, then take 60 games off his start streak, since he was addicted for up to that many games. He gave up his addiction OVER TEN YEARS AGO. That means the streak is "untainted", if that's how you want to look at it, for 160+ games. Still is the top streak among QBs...still makes him an ironman!
Dave - I guess I’m defining dominant by a sustained success measured by achievement.
I refuse to talk about Jim Kelly (four pro bowls, no rings or MVPs) as he wasn’t even the best player on his team. Warren Moon had a gimmick offense for many years and while he was very good (9 pro bowls) he was never the man (no rings or MVPs). To add them to this list is silly and it debases any actual point you may have had.
Troy Aikman went to 6 pro bowls, but was never league MVP. He was arguably the 3rd best (most important) player on his team. And he had the 3rd best supporting cast of all time. Was he a good QB? Yes. But, again, he does not belong in this discussion (nor does he belong in Canton – but that’s another story).
Why bring up Elway? I think he is on Favre’s level, maybe even above him. I said that in the last post.
Staubach – Very much like Aikman – 6 pro bowls, no MVPS, played on AWESOME teams. Statistically, he didn’t jump out amongst his peers. Favre does.
Namath is a joke. Hard to judge, sort of, given the AFL/NFL divide. He just doesn’t belong in this convo – awful stats compared to his peers. He’s remembered because of that great “guarantee” and his mink jackets. And a great nickname. That’s it.
Tark was tough to omit, but I put him a peg below Favre because he never won the ring, even though he was on teams that could/should have. I’d say the same argument goes for Marino.
Bradshaw – not a long period of excellence. Just 4 years, really. But he was on amazing teams – that’s why most people would bring him up in this argument.
Brady – If all you use to measure accomplishments by are rings, then this is an easy discussion. But we know that’s all silly. It’s a big part of the discussion, but that’s not the only part. Longevity is certainly part of it. Brady isn’t there yet. I think he’ll get there. Hell, I think he’ll end up just below Montana and above Elway on this list. But to borrow a line from Tarantino – “Let’s not start sucking each other’s cocks just yet.”
Favre – 8 Pro Bowls, 3 MVPs, I Ring and will leave the game throwing for more TDs than anyone. That’s sustained excellence and ultimate dominance of the sport, as an individual and as a teammate. Does the media love him? Yep. Do they overhype him? Yep. Is he a top 5 QB of all time? Yep.
- The Yankees have never won a title while Mattingly was in the dugout. As a player '82-'95 or as a coach '03-present. They won the year after he retired. Irony? Whatever, I think it's hilarious.
- I don't want to see Manny in another uniform, but he may have completely worn out his welcome when he took vacation time last September.
- I had VanderJ on my Fantasy team, dammit.
- Someone tried to trade me Eli for Bush, i flatly refused. Eli sucks.
Eric, you make some good points but I'm still not convinced he belongs on the Mt. Rushmore of QB's as I said before.
Rather than rehashing everything you said, I'll just point to this.
You admit that Favre is a media darling AND that he is overhyped, yet your main reason for his greatness is his pro-bowls and MVP's. Doesn't the media play a substantial role in the voting for pro-bowls and MVP's?
@ Dave
If you read my post, I said that I couldn't judge the rest because I didn't see them play. I didn't dismiss them. Also, I don't put Favre in as number one. I'm just saying your list needed to be pruned down to a little more realistic list of comparable quarterbacks.
Moon was a BS hall of fame quarterback. He wracked up huge numbers in excessively pass happy schemes.
Naimath is famous because he mouthed off and backed it up. He got in the hall of fame based off Super Bowl III. Broadway Joe really was quite overrated.
Kelly also LOST 4 Super Bowls. Talk about not being able to win the big one.
Aikman had Emmitt Smith and merely had to not throw tons of picks to win those Super Bowls. Also, having Michael Irvin to throw to helps a helluvalot.
Terry Bradshaw only had 215 TD's or something like that and 211 picks. Those are not hall of fame numbers. He's in the hall of fame because he was teh face of the Steelers along with Mean Joe Greene. Yeah, he won four Super Bowls and that also probably gave him the nudge into the hall of fame, but he's not in Favre's league as far as being a quarterback.
As for Young, what you're telling me is throwing to Jerry Rice in his prime had nothing to do with his numbers being as good as they were. That's just wrong. Having to plan for Rice just ruins defenses, making it even easier to get other guys open. I'm not dismissing Young as a good quarterback, I'm just saying I think Favre's better because he has better numbers without having the best wide receiver ever to throw to.
And I said what I did about liking Favre only because I was explaining why I would take him over Elway in a toss up. I don't really think one is that much better than the other, nor did I say that they were the 1 and 2 quarterbacks ever. Elway was just the last quarterback I could judge. The rest were before my time.
Relatedly, I hadn't read Eric's post which I ended repeating quite a bit. Sorry about that.
I guess I just feel like the only reasons anyone can give me why Favre is better than all those other guys is by discounting all the things that all those other guys did. He won 3 Super Bowls, that doesn't count he was on a good team. He has great stats, that doesn't count he was in a "pass-wacky" offense. He's in the hall of fame, that doesn't count he shouldn't have even gotten in. etc. etc. etc. So really by this definition the reason Favre is at the top of the qb's is because he did the most with the least talent, was never part of a dynasty, played for a long time, and was beloved by the everyman as one of their own.
I guess that's as good away to rank him as any other way, but to me it doesn't seperate him from the other greats of the game.
First I do want to commend everyone who is leaving comments on this thread for not only great information and interesting reads, but also for the amount of civility being displayed. (not a single "you're an idiot" or anything similar has been thrown around. Kudos to you all.
As far as Favre goes, I think he like most athletes today get a little more hype due to instant history. I think it is impossible to judge someone's body of work until it is complete. Therefore, the jury is still out on Favre, Brady, Manning and anyone else who is still lacing 'em up every Sunday. When all is said and done, I think Favre is a hall of famer, as I think Brady and Peyton will be as well. I personally wouldn't rank Favre in my top 3, but I'll listen to the arguement. Either way he is a great QB, and I think a majority of NFL teams would take him under center every week if given the chance, with the exception a few of the top tier teams with solid QB situations.
I think the painkiller reference is irrelevant. Painkillers are not by any means a performance enhancer, and every pro athlete uses pain killers to a certain degree. Do you think my boy Schilling would have pitched game 6 of the '04 ALCS without some serious pain meds? Does that diminish what he accomplished in that game, the guts and character it took to fight through that pain? of course not, nor should it diminish Favre's truly amazing ironman streak.
Ripken is definitely a hall of famer. his streak was also amazing, though I do have to agree with other posters that in the final years of the streak, there were times where Cal was hurting the Orioles by being out there, but overall you can't deny his accomplishments either. You can say that his yearly numbers weren't mind boggling, but you have to look at the overall body of work, and that gets him in on the first try in my opinion.
Mattingly was without a doubt a great player and it sucks that his back cost him a chance at the hall, or at least put it in serious doubt. But I think that the fact that he didn't have great power numbers while playing what has become known as a power position will definitely hurt him.
And Pete Rose should be in the Hall for what he accomplished on the field, but his bust should have the disclaimer that he was banned from Baseball for gambling while he was a manager. To exclude him and his numbers from the hall is basically the 800ld gorilla in the room that no one wants to talk about. Ignoring Rose's numbers doesn't make him go away. He played, he put up sick numbers, he should be in the hall because he was part of the game. That is what the Hall is meant to be for any sport, a monument to the game's history, good and bad.
Steve said...
Hey Jen, any chance you could get your Browns to trade Kellen Winslow to the Giants for draft picks so that we could have the 3 biggest tools in the universe all on the same team? They would need a bigger tool shed to hold the likes of Manning, Shockey and Winslow.
HAHAHAHA--SO true!!!
Steve, I think Edwards is trying to take over Winslow's top spot as the Browns' Power Tool. We'll send him to the Giants too. Then you'd need an airplane hangar!
Whoever said Peyton Manning's teammates don't even like him needs to back that up with some sources. I live in Indy and I have never heard a peep about the Colts players being disgruntled with Peyton. When it is all said and done, Peyton will be the #1 all time QB. He alone is changing the way NFL teams play offense. How many teams are now slowly transitioning to the no-huddle offense? Why is that? Because Peyton Manning was skilled enough to pull it off and it gave the Colts a huge edge against most teams. I have heard numerous NFL analysts say that in the near future the entire NFL will be running the no-huddle.
I love Favre, and I would be one of those that put him in the top 10 and maybe higher. But don't come on here and slam Peyton in the discussion when we all know that the body of work is going to blow Favre out of the water when it is all said and done.
Pete Rose in the HOF.. It amuses me to no end that he isn't. He bet on baseball, then lied about it for years and years. Now he is trying to cash in with those apology baseballs. They can put him in when he dies if you ask me. His numbers demand he be in there, but his actions say otherwise, so that is the only real option I see.
One more thing about HoF QBs: Kelly ran his own no huddle offense on one of the top scoring offenses of all time. He deserves to be in.
Having a kicker miss an FG is the only thing keeping him from having a ring. Doesn't make him bad.
Dave - you've absolutely misconstrued the arguments made on Favre's behalf (you know this). Why do that? That only weakens your own argument. You keep doing that.
Farve has the numbers, pro bowls (which the media does not vote for), and MVPs (who could not hype him enough during those years - trust me, Brett was alone on offense), and the ring. It's a trifecta. As I mentioned in earlier posts, many of the players you listed lacked some of these qualities. Brett has them all. Montana has them all, too. So does Elway. Unitas as well. (I don't know much about Baugh's career stats or awards). Who else? Nobody. That's the key.
Also, if you were a careful reader, you'd know I said the media overhypes Favre - I did not mean to imply they used to do this. Quite the contrary, in fact. Every game hyped as a Brett Favre game seems silly when he's only one of the top 10 active QBs. Hyping him in 1997, when he was the undisputed best player in the NFL - no problem with that. I mean, C'mon. Think Jordan on the Wizards. Was he still good? Yes. Was he 97 Mike? No way. MJ earned the hype in 97, but not in 04.
Solom - no, Kelly does not deserve to be in. If he was that good, they'd have had more than 19 points when that figgie went wide right. (plus, Thomas was more valuable, Kelly was never mentioned as an MVP of the league, etc).
That reminds me...
Dave - Do you think Favre didn't deserve his MVPs? Who would you have voted for?
gotta agree with sol rex on that one, eric. we could say the same thing about brady, if he didn't have vinateiri (if he was that good, he would have had more than 17 pts when the rams won that superbowl). Ridiculous; if not for norwood, you wouldn't be able to say kelly had no ring. He was good. Not marino/elway/montana/favre/manning good (i.e. not one of the top 5 QBs of the past 25 yrs), but that offense was SCARY in the 90's (and who said manning was bringing in the no-huddle? The bills would say been there, done that). Without thomas and reed would kelly have had as good stats? Hell no. But what about vice versa? He's HOF worthy, imo. By your argument, it seems hostetler (and rypien?) would be rated as the better QB than kelly. And if elway didn't get davis and shanahan in the waning years of his career, he would have been branded as 'Not a good leader' or some bullshit, and would rank behind simms and williams in terms of quarterback leadership qualities...
Norwood barely missed a 47 yard field goal with no time on the clock in the super bowl - he has about a 50/50 shot of making that kick...not entirely his fault they didn't win that super bowl.
I would say the wide right is similar to a QB being down by six and not being able to complete a 15 yard pass to the end zone on third and fourth down to win the game...if I had to make an analogy. A great QB gets it done, but its certainly no gaurantee.
I said the Colts were bringing in the no-huddle. I didn't say they were the first, but Peyton and the Colts run it so effectively that other teams are actually starting to emulate it. How many teams did the Bills have emulating their offensive scheme?
Dan is great, but his Falcons analysis needs some work. See me for Vick/Falcons analysis. I actually watch the games. http://leave-the-man-alone.blogspot.com/search/label/State%20of%20the%20Falcons
Post a Comment