Join Our Green Bay Packers Interactive Community!

We have been providing fans with the best source of Packers information since 2006!
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
4 Pages<1234>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Dexter_Sinister  
#51 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 1:46:59 PM(UTC)
Dexter_Sinister

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 6/12/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 292
Applause Received: 266

Originally Posted by: OlHoss1884 Go to Quoted Post
Here's the crux of it. I agree that an eye test is not even as scientific as what you are doing, but there is a reason for the term "lies, damned lies and statistics". It's because used in a vague way, they can be incredibly misleading, yet they still carry the weight of authority so people assume they are true. Here's an example, though not really applicable here but it illustrates the problem with statistics and how they are presented if vague.

Taste test....80% say no difference between A and B. 11% say A, 9% say B. Commercial? "91% say A as good or better than B"

True, but misleading. In Brady's 70% 4th quarter comeback success, what was the average margin of deficit? How many of those comebacks were spurred by defensive turnovers? I am not saying Favre was a better QB than Brady, nor better at comebacks, but knowing the team he had around him for most of his career, that Favre had a percentage just over half as good as Brady's in this regard is probably more significant. Brady has had a Super Bowl contending team around him every year and nearly for every snap he's ever taken. Not true of Favre. Both clearly made the people around them a lot better but on the whole Favre had less talent to work with, tougher division opponents and for a few years even inferior coaches.





And the eye test, hypothetical illustrations, conjectured opinions of people you don't know and media hype is even less credible than that taste test. Easier to manipulate and misrepresent. Less honest and completely unprovable.

Stats aren't perfect, but they are better than what you have used for proof by several orders of magnitude.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.

Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Offline Dexter_Sinister  
#52 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 1:59:24 PM(UTC)
Dexter_Sinister

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 6/12/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 292
Applause Received: 266

Originally Posted by: doddpower Go to Quoted Post
I just wish Favre had the luxury of offense lines the likes that Tom Brady has had. Or even better, Aaron Rodgers. As long as our defense was just average, there would be no way to stop Aaron Rodgers if he had a great offensive line. Too bad it doesn't appear like that's ever going to happen. Some of the protection Tom Brady has had, or even P. Manning in Denver last season is just . . . well amazing. At least as a Packer fan.


You mean like that line Favre had in '03 that got the backs 250 rushing yards and allowed 1 sack in the playoff game against Philly. When Favre put up an 82.4 rating and threw up the pick in OT.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.

Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Offline Dexter_Sinister  
#53 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 4:46:36 PM(UTC)
Dexter_Sinister

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 6/12/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 292
Applause Received: 266

Originally Posted by: OlHoss1884 Go to Quoted Post
By your own logic, if they trail 42-10 at the start of the 4th quarter, and lose 42-41, that's a failure to come back despite putting up 31 in the quarter. THAT's why I said you statistics are meaningless. I've watched a lot of football since I started paying attention to it and specifically a lot of Packer games dating back to the days when John Hadl was thought to be an upgrade, and never saw anyone who could pull a victory out of nowhere like that. His own coach would have said the same things I have, and announcer after announcer DID say it.

It's not hard to find statistics to support your case, especially when they are really vague. Like look at the Packers record before his tenure and immediately after, when he didn't have an experienced A-Rod to take his place, and the team record is pretty abysmal. Is that all to his credit? Of course not, so I am not cherry picking it as a vague stat to support my opinion, and unlike you, I don't allow a (clear, in your case) dislike for Favre to color my judgment about his play, despite the fact that I like and respect him no more than you do.



I am not the one using a single hypothetical situation to support an argument against facts.

In all of his comeback attempts, Favre really was successful 30% of the time. Nothing vague about it. It was and is a direct counter to your opinion that Favre stepped up when it mattered. That isn't a cherry picked either because it was your point to say he was MORE successful than he was guilty of failure. Unlike your cherry picked vague hypothetical situation you used to dispute a real concrete, to the point fact that he wasn't.

Before Favre and during his first few years there was not much difference. Dickey led a decent offense and the D sucked. Majkowski lead the Packers to a 10-6 record his only heathy full year. Favre led the Packers to three consecutive 9-7 records until he had the best D in the league.

That myth that Favre is the reason they started winning is another example of Favre being over rated. What did Favre do with the Packers after Holmgren? He had 4 years with ratings in the 70s, 1 with a rating in the 80s and 4 with ratings in the 90s. He was pretty average.

Harlan, Wolf and Holmgren changed the fortunes of the Packers. Not Favre.

He was an improvement. Mostly because he was healthy. He was only about a 2.5 increase over Dickey's career as a Packer and Majkowski couldn't stay healthy.

Personally, I don't give a QB credit for wins. To paraphrase the greatest coach in the history of the game. Teams win, QBs play. They either play well or they don't.

Favre played like the 46th best QB ever. That was pretty good. But not as great as everyone likes to say.

Message modified by user Saturday, June 22, 2013 5:17:48 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.

Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Offline porky88  
#54 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 6:59:13 PM(UTC)
porky88

Rank: Pro Bowl

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2012Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2013Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2014

Joined: 4/26/2007(UTC)

Applause Given: 195
Applause Received: 409

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister Go to Quoted Post
Look up every post season game and see how well he played.

There are too many moving parts to sports, especially the NFL, to simply look at a piece of paper and definitively conclude player A is superior to player B. That’s why we watch the games.

For example, fourth quarter comebacks are a theme in your arguments, yet you leave out the fact that Favre gave Green Bay the lead with two minutes remaining at San Francisco in ‘98. The defense couldn’t stop the 49ers’ offense twice (Jerry Rice fumbled).

Your data does not take into account dropped passes, missed blocks, missed reads, etc….

Another issue in your analysis is your diminishing the play of quarters 1-3 to support your argument that Favre didn’t have as much to do with the Super Bowl win. Those quarters happened. They are apart of history, specifically, Packer history. Would Favre’s darts to Rison and Freeman mean more in the 4th quarter? The answer is no. They would’ve meant six points in quarter one and six points in quarter four. However, you feel the need to emphasis that particular 15 minutes rather than the first 45 minutes.

What I see is somebody putting in place their own guidelines to get the predetermined result they want. There’s no factual account here, but rather a flawed narrative of the bigger picture. There’s a reason coaches, players, and scouts, actually watch (perhaps study is a better word) film and not rely on stats on a page sheet.
thanks Post received 2 applause.
wpr on 6/22/2013(UTC), DoddPower on 6/22/2013(UTC)
Offline Dexter_Sinister  
#55 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 8:48:59 PM(UTC)
Dexter_Sinister

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 6/12/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 292
Applause Received: 266

Originally Posted by: porky88 Go to Quoted Post
There are too many moving parts to sports, especially the NFL, to simply look at a piece of paper and definitively conclude player A is superior to player B. That’s why we watch the games.

For example, fourth quarter comebacks are a theme in your arguments, yet you leave out the fact that Favre gave Green Bay the lead with two minutes remaining at San Francisco in ‘98. The defense couldn’t stop the 49ers’ offense twice (Jerry Rice fumbled).

Your data does not take into account dropped passes, missed blocks, missed reads, etc….

Another issue in your analysis is your diminishing the play of quarters 1-3 to support your argument that Favre didn’t have as much to do with the Super Bowl win. Those quarters happened. They are apart of history, specifically, Packer history. Would Favre’s darts to Rison and Freeman mean more in the 4th quarter? The answer is no. They would’ve meant six points in quarter one and six points in quarter four. However, you feel the need to emphasis that particular 15 minutes rather than the first 45 minutes.

What I see is somebody putting in place their own guidelines to get the predetermined result they want. There’s no factual account here, but rather a flawed narrative of the bigger picture. There’s a reason coaches, players, and scouts, actually watch (perhaps study is a better word) film and not rely on stats on a page sheet.


Again, using one game to prove or disprove a trend.

Sure, that game may have been an exception. Or Favre may had another shot at it but went 0-4 and turned the ball over on downs. Thay may not have happene that game, but it did in the '97 super bowl.

But the point that was made is, Favre led the Packers to a win more times than not when he had the ball in his hand and it was score or go home. 30 out of 100 is a pretty solid trend where an exception or two doesn't disprove it.

His late game heroics are over stated. Yes it matters to THEIR point that Favre threw those passes in the first half and not when playing from behind in the 4th because it doesn't support their argument.

2 good TD passes that had 80 combined YAC is not a great game. That is not a "carry the team" kind of performance. There is no way that you can credtit Favre with winning that game with performances the ST and D put up. The best you can say about Favre is that he didn't choke. One of the times he listened to Holmgren and threw it away rather than make a mistake.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.

Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Offline wpr  
#56 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 8:57:24 PM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 3,152
Applause Received: 1,522

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister Go to Quoted Post
Favre was almost as likely to turn the ball over as score when the game was not on the line.

When it was on the line, he was more likely to fail than he was to succeed. Look up every post season game and see how well he played.

In 9 of 10 playoff runs, Favre personally choked, played poorly or with time on the clock, the ball in his hands and within a score, He failed to generate a first down.

'93 playoff game against Dallas, 2 picks and a fumble lost.

'95 in the middle of a great NFC Championship game where the Packers were matching the Cowboys blow for blow, he was driving to take the lead back in the 4th quarter. He threw a bad pass into the chest of a DB who set up a score by the Cowboys. Giving them a 2 score lead. After which a suddenly ineffective Favre failed to complete a pass, then never got the ball back.

'98 playoff game against the 49er had a 79.7 rating with 57% completions and threw 2 picks in a 3 point loss.

'01 The 6 interception game vs the Rams, Favre threw 3 pick 6s and another one returned to inside the 5. Essentially giving the Rams the margin of victory by handing them 28 points.

'02 Packers first home playoff loss to the Falcons as Favre turned the game over in the second half with a pick and a lost fumble. He had 47.6% completions and a 54.4 rating

'03 The 4th and 26 game, Favre couldn't move the ball in spite of over 200 yards by the running backs, 7 sacks by the D and 2 forced turnovers. One more yard and the ball never goes back to McNabb. Ending in an OT pick.

'04 he threw 4 picks to the 8-8 MN Vikings and 54.4 rating

'07 Lame duck in the Giants game after a whole game of looking like an old man in the cold. 70.7 rating, 2 picks and 54.3% completions..

The '96 Super Bowl was pretty much 2 passes to WRs that ran about 80 yards after the catchs and then Favre getting nothing down field to his WRs after about 20 minutes into the game. He wasn't needed to step up because of the D and ST, so they won.

The '97 Super Bowl, Favre got the ball back with time and failed to complete a pass. I wouldn't say he lost the game, played poorly or anything other than he didn't step up like Starr would have.

His come from behind wins are way over stated. He had the most opportunities by a long shot. If he were just average at comebacks, he would easily lead the league. But since he was only about 30% successful, he actually blew more chances than he won. By a wide margin.

If he played in the '70s people wouldn't be excusing and glossing over Favres post season failures.


Dex I know what you re trying to say. But those loses were not were not completely Favres' fault. I won''t go through the whole list but if I recall the 2001 game in St Louis the Packers were underdogs. None of us knows what their game plan was but it was clear Brett was trying to throw the team on his shoulders and carry them to victory. The line was porous and favre was under pressure the whole game. He certainly was forcing passes. Way too many times but if we were able to get on honest answer from him he would tell us that taking chances would be the only way to win that game.

The next year in 2002 the team was pretty beat up by the end of the season. Green was the leading rusher with only 34 yards. That indicates issues beyond just the qb.

And the 4th and 26 Phillie game was more a defensive failure than a Favre loss.

Did Brett push it more than he should? Certainly. That was a part of his mantra. It worked some times and didn't work other times. Thing is if the team is trailing late int e game the opponent expects your team to throw the ball and they have a defense that is designed to prevent your success.
UserPostedImage

"Will you follow me, one last time?" Thorin Oakenshield
Offline Dexter_Sinister  
#57 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 9:09:18 PM(UTC)
Dexter_Sinister

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 6/12/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 292
Applause Received: 266

Originally Posted by: porky88 Go to Quoted Post
There are too many moving parts to sports, especially the NFL, to simply look at a piece of paper and definitively conclude player A is superior to player B. That’s why we watch the games.

What I see is somebody putting in place their own guidelines to get the predetermined result they want. There’s no factual account here, but rather a flawed narrative of the bigger picture. There’s a reason coaches, players, and scouts, actually watch (perhaps study is a better word) film and not rely on stats on a page sheet.


OK, give me your unbiased rating of Otto Graham. Without using stats.

If anyone is going to say Favre is greatest all time, all time goes a long way back.

How does Favre stack up against Tarkenton? Johnny U? Kenny Anderson?

How does John Elway stack up against Joe Namath or Sonny Jergenson?

Since you didn't watch every QB take every snap in every game since 1920, comparing QBs cannot be done without stats unless you resort to opinions that you heard from someone else. So calling any QB great without stats is a BS waste of time. Because you really can't compare them without stats.

I am really offended you would say I am using stats to support a predetermined result.

The ranking system I use has a lot of results I don't like. Putting a Bears QB at all time greatest is not something I would aim for because I don't like the Bears. Ranking Staubach ahead of Starr is pretty offensive because I hate the Cowboys.

But the stats are what they are. They can't be biased, subject to hype or fooled. They are more honest than people's perceptions.

I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.

Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Offline Dexter_Sinister  
#58 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 9:28:35 PM(UTC)
Dexter_Sinister

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 6/12/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 292
Applause Received: 266

Originally Posted by: wpr Go to Quoted Post
Dex I know what you re trying to say. But those loses were not were not completely Favres' fault. I won''t go through the whole list but if I recall the 2001 game in St Louis the Packers were underdogs. None of us knows what their game plan was but it was clear Brett was trying to throw the team on his shoulders and carry them to victory. The line was porous and favre was under pressure the whole game. He certainly was forcing passes. Way too many times but if we were able to get on honest answer from him he would tell us that taking chances would be the only way to win that game.

The next year in 2002 the team was pretty beat up by the end of the season. Green was the leading rusher with only 34 yards. That indicates issues beyond just the qb.

And the 4th and 26 Phillie game was more a defensive failure than a Favre loss.

Did Brett push it more than he should? Certainly. That was a part of his mantra. It worked some times and didn't work other times. Thing is if the team is trailing late int e game the opponent expects your team to throw the ball and they have a defense that is designed to prevent your success.


I didn't say it was Favre's fault that they lost.

The losses are the teams. Not the QBs.

To paraphrase Lombardi, Teams win, QBs play. They play good or they don't.

The point was that 9 of 10 post seasons ended with Favre playing poorly, choking at the last minute or with the ball in his hands, time on the clock and it is win or go home, he failed to get a first down. I am talking about how he played. Not if they won or not.

If the running backs (who had put up about 207 yards) had gotten 1 more yards, McNabb doesn't get the ball back. If the D that held the Phily RBs to 28 yards, had 7 sacks, 2 turnovers and held McNabb to a 53.7 rating got to him 1 more time, he doesn't make that throw. Or if Favre is better than 15 of 28 for 180 yards 2 TDs and a pick, maybe they win the game.

I would say that Favre played worse than the D or the running game. He is responsible for that AND the pick.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.

Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Offline texaspackerbacker  
#59 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 9:36:18 PM(UTC)
texaspackerbacker

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Gold: 2014

United States
Joined: 3/4/2013(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 482
Applause Received: 292

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister Go to Quoted Post
OK, give me your unbiased rating of Otto Graham. Without using stats.

If anyone is going to say Favre is greatest all time, all time goes a long way back.

How does Favre stack up against Tarkenton? Johnny U? Kenny Anderson?

How does John Elway stack up against Joe Namath or Sonny Jergenson?

Since you didn't watch every QB take every snap in every game since 1920, comparing QBs cannot be done without stats unless you resort to opinions that you heard from someone else. So calling any QB great without stats is a BS waste of time. Because you really can't compare them without stats.

I am really offended you would say I am using stats to support a predetermined result.

The ranking system I use has a lot of results I don't like. Putting a Bears QB at all time greatest is not something I would aim for because I don't like the Bears. Ranking Staubach ahead of Starr is pretty offensive because I hate the Cowboys.

But the stats are what they are. They can't be biased, subject to hype or fooled. They are more honest than people's perceptions.



OK, I'll bite since I seem to be the primary one saying Favre is the greatest of all time. Anything I say is prefaced by the fact it's kinda an educated gut feeling - I am too lazy to dig and get exact stats, etc.

I consider Tarkenton to be very high on the list of all time greats, along with Dan Marino. As for Otto Graham, he is at the outer limit of my memory - he was at the end of his career when I was first old enough to be conscious of football. My impression of Graham, though, is that his career didn't last all that long - he was a truly outstanding QB, but much like Namath, didn't pass the test of longevity. Staubach also was really excellent, but had a relatively short career.

Yeah, stats are important, but selectively - Career Totals trump percentages, ratings, even playoff performances.

Bart Starr deserves special recognition, but as much as I respect one of my childhood heroes, consideration of him is tempered slightly by the fact that he had more talent surrounding him than just about anybody ever, and the fact that in his time "playoffs" consisted of one game, then two when the Super Bowl era began.

Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Offline Dexter_Sinister  
#60 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 10:26:40 PM(UTC)
Dexter_Sinister

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 6/12/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 292
Applause Received: 266

It has always been my stance that "Gunslinger" should be an insult to a QB.

The only year we won the super bowl with Favre is when Holmgren had him under control.

His first 3 years, we were 9-7.

When Holmgren got through to him, he had his best season as a Packer in '95.

We should have won the super bowl that year, but Favre went all Gunslinger in the NFCCG and screwed it up.

In a great seesaw battle against Dallas, we had the lead, they came back, Favre was driving and looking unstoppable. Then he goes all gunslingery and throws a pick into one of the Dallas defenders chest. After that, he was unable to recover and didn't complete another pass.

In '96 he finally got it. They didn't put the ball in his hand to win it all. They put it in Reggie's. I don't think people give enough credit to that D. They were 0.75 points per game behind the '85 Bears. 12 points in the regular season. At a time when it was easier to throw and the average passer rating for the NFL was higher. Trent Dilfer won a Super Bowl with a D that wasn't as good as the '96 Packers' D.

After Holmgren left with his 9-5 post season record, the Gunslinger was back and we were 3-5 in the post season.

If it were Favre who was so great and saved us from the mediocrity of the '80s, why couldn't he play that well in years after Holmgren left. We had Shermans line protecting him and giving us the Packers all time leading rusher. The D was also really good at times. 5 times they were top 10 and 3 times they were top 5.

After Holmgren left, Favre had 4 years with ratings in the 70s. They were 75, 78, 71 and 73. He had one 85.6 and 4 years rated in the 90s. they were 95.7, 94.1, 92.4 and 90.4. So Favre was essentially average in the 9 years after Holmgren left. Mostly because of the 193 INTs.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.

Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
Zero2Cool on 6/23/2013(UTC)
Offline Dexter_Sinister  
#61 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 10:36:35 PM(UTC)
Dexter_Sinister

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 6/12/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 292
Applause Received: 266

This is my ranking by how good they were compared to the NFL average for their careers.
Sid is over 25 above average
The Mr Average award goes to John Hadl. He was the most average QB in the history of the NFL. He did set 1 record though.

Most tie games.

Rank Quarterback QBPRD
1 Sid Luckman+ 25.80
2 Sammy Baugh+ 22.02
3 Otto Graham+ 22.00
4 Aaron Rodgers  21.78
5 Steve Young+ 20.55
6 Roger Staubach+ 17.75
7 Joe Montana+ 17.40
8 Tommy Thompson 17.30
9 Norm Van Brocklin+ 16.00
10 Len Dawson+ 15.55
11 Sonny Jurgensen+ 15.47
12 Tom Brady 14.82
13 Peyton Manning  14.47
14 George Ratterman 13.81
15 Bart Starr+ 13.46
16 Kurt Warner 13.43
17 Fran Tarkenton+ 13.28
18 Ken Anderson 12.73
19 Tony Romo 12.51
20 Drew Brees 12.22
21 Philip Rivers 11.41
22 Johnny Unitas+ 11.32
23 Y.A. Tittle+ 11.19
24 Bob Griese+ 10.57
25 Bob Berry 10.41
26 Bert Jones 10.34
27 Dan Marino+ 10.18
28 Danny White 10.03
29 Dan Fouts+ 9.97
30 Ben Roethlisberger 9.61
31 Frank Ryan 9.32
32 Chad Pennington 8.85
33 Matt Schaub 8.81
34 Neil Lomax 8.44
35 Jim Kelly+ 8.25
36 Charlie Conerly 7.99
37 Joe Theismann 7.46
38 Earl Morrall 7.40
39 Daunte Culpepper 7.35
40 Rich Gannon 7.24
41 Ken Stabler 7.11
42 Jeff Garcia 7.05
43 Roman Gabriel 6.90
44 Arnie Herber+ 6.77
45 Bob Waterfield+ 6.63
46 Brett Favre 6.55
47 Matt Ryan 6.52
48 Trent Green 6.25
49 Billy Wade 6.15
50 Bernie Kosar 5.87
51 Brian Sipe 5.84
52 Bobby Thomason 5.80
53 Craig Morton 5.80
54 Dave Krieg 5.76
55 Don Meredith 5.68
56 Daryle Lamonica 5.19
57 Ken O'Brien 5.11
58 Boomer Esiason 5.06
59 Randall Cunningham 5.01
60 John Brodie 4.99
61 Gary Danielson 4.93
62 Steve Bartkowski 4.63
63 Bill Munson 4.63
64 Tony Eason 4.61
65 Warren Moon+ 4.55
66 Greg Landry 4.48
67 Donovan McNabb 4.48
68 Billy Kilmer 4.48
69 Jeff Hostetler 4.47
70 Troy Aikman+ 4.43
71 Neil O'Donnell 4.08
72 Milt Plum 3.97
73 Glenn Dobbs 3.93
74 Phil Simms 3.83
75 Mark Brunell 3.75
76 John Elway+ 3.73
77 David Garrard 3.71
78 Steve McNair 3.58
79 Terry Bradshaw+ 3.27
80 Carson Palmer 3.11
81 Brad Johnson 3.07
82 Steve Beuerlein 3.04
83 Marc Bulger 3.00
84 Jeff George 2.98
85 Shaun Hill 2.78
86 Bill Kenney 2.76
87 Brian Griese 2.72
88 Jim McMahon 2.43
89 Jim Everett 2.37
90 Bobby Layne+ 2.36
91 Bobby Hebert 2.07
92 Lynn Dickey 4.95
93 Mark Rypien 1.94
94 Joe Flacco 1.92
95 Bill Nelsen 1.86
96 Ron Jaworski 1.73
97 James Harris 1.65
98 Elvis Grbac 1.65
99 Chris Chandler 1.51
100 Charley Johnson 1.50


I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.

Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
porky88 on 6/23/2013(UTC)
Offline Dexter_Sinister  
#62 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 10:53:38 PM(UTC)
Dexter_Sinister

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 6/12/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 292
Applause Received: 266

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker Go to Quoted Post
OK, I'll bite since I seem to be the primary one saying Favre is the greatest of all time. Anything I say is prefaced by the fact it's kinda an educated gut feeling - I am too lazy to dig and get exact stats, etc.

I consider Tarkenton to be very high on the list of all time greats, along with Dan Marino. As for Otto Graham, he is at the outer limit of my memory - he was at the end of his career when I was first old enough to be conscious of football. My impression of Graham, though, is that his career didn't last all that long - he was a truly outstanding QB, but much like Namath, didn't pass the test of longevity. Staubach also was really excellent, but had a relatively short career.

Yeah, stats are important, but selectively - Career Totals trump percentages, ratings, even playoff performances.

Bart Starr deserves special recognition, but as much as I respect one of my childhood heroes, consideration of him is tempered slightly by the fact that he had more talent surrounding him than just about anybody ever, and the fact that in his time "playoffs" consisted of one game, then two when the Super Bowl era began.



So Vinny Testeverdy is a great QB. Top 10 all time?

Drew Bledsoe, Warren Moon, Kerry Collins.

That is a list of players with top 10 or near top 10 total stats.

Heck John Hadl is 17th all time for TDs. He is the most average QB in the history of the NFL.

Dave Kreig is 12th.

Steve DeBerg is almost tied with Troy Aikman in passes completed and yards. Kerry Collins is above Joe Montana.

If you want to win games, do you want a player who was average for 20 years or a player who was the best ever for 15?



I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.

Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Offline porky88  
#63 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 12:37:19 AM(UTC)
porky88

Rank: Pro Bowl

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2012Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2013Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2014

Joined: 4/26/2007(UTC)

Applause Given: 195
Applause Received: 409

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister Go to Quoted Post
This is my ranking by how good they were compared to the NFL average for their careers.

Stats can be helpful in analyzing players, especially from previous eras where there’s a lack of film. However, you’re glorifying stats and particularly the QB rating, which in itself is flawed. Therefore, the formula you are using to reach your conclusions is using a flawed stat. The QB rating emphasizes completion percentage. The problem with that is going 3 for 3 for 8 yards gives you a better rating than 1 for 3 for 25 yards. This is why Chad Pennington ranks above Brett Favre, John Elway, and Warren Moon. Pennington didn’t have the arm to stretch the field. Defenses happily gave up the short to intermediate completions. They literally let him have that play. They didn’t care. There’s no skill in that whatsoever. It led to a pretty good QB rating, but his teammates had to pickup the slack. This is just one of a number of problems with the QB rating, which is central to your argument.

Your formula seems to be an attempt at an all-time list. You deserve credit for putting in that work. However, all-time lists are trivial and really have nothing to do with the evaluation of a player. No matter how you slice it, such a list is based upon subjective viewpoints.

Message modified by user Sunday, June 23, 2013 12:54:30 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Offline texaspackerbacker  
#64 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 4:45:46 AM(UTC)
texaspackerbacker

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Gold: 2014

United States
Joined: 3/4/2013(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 482
Applause Received: 292

Dexter, your list above is LAUGHABLE. This whole discussion is STUPID. YOU should be ashamed to call yourself a Packer fan.

BRETT FAVRE IS THE GREATEST QUARTERBACK/THE GREATEST PLAYER IN NFL HISTORY. HE WILL BE THAT UNTIL GOD-WILLING, AARON RODGERS SURPASSES HIM.

Everything else here is irrelevant bullshit. Case closed, end of discussion - something I almost never do, I hereby stop reading or discussing the topic.
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Offline buckeyepackfan  
#65 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 5:23:13 AM(UTC)
buckeyepackfan

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2012Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2014

Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: Lima, Ohio

Applause Given: 355
Applause Received: 457

After going through 5 pages of opinions, I have come to the conclusion that once again Brett Favre has came out on top.

Brett is clearly the Top overrated and the Top underrated Packer of all time!!!
Depending on who you believe.

ONLY BRETT FAVRE COULD BE #1 IN BOTH CATEGORIES!!!!

Way to go Brett!!!!!!!



Enjoy the ride – It kicks and just keeps on kickin’. "Stats are for Losers"
Offline Zero2Cool  
#66 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 6:12:54 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool

Rank: Legend

Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Gold: 2009FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2011ESPN NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI

Applause Given: 1,968
Applause Received: 2,229

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan Go to Quoted Post
After going through 5 pages of opinions, I have come to the conclusion that once again Brett Favre has came out on top.

Brett is clearly the Top overrated and the Top underrated Packer of all time!!!
Depending on who you believe.

ONLY BRETT FAVRE COULD BE #1 IN BOTH CATEGORIES!!!!

Way to go Brett!!!!!!!





Fitting as it may be as he does have the most Touchdowns AND most Interceptions ... would one expect anything less?
"I do not think there is any thrill that can go through the human heart like that felt by the inventor as he sees some creation of the brain unfolding to success... such emotions make a man forget food, sleep, friends, love, everything." - Nikola Tesla

UserPostedImage
Offline nerdmann  
#67 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 10:48:35 AM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,713
Applause Received: 665

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker Go to Quoted Post
Dexter, your list above is LAUGHABLE. This whole discussion is STUPID. YOU should be ashamed to call yourself a Packer fan.

BRETT FAVRE IS THE GREATEST QUARTERBACK/THE GREATEST PLAYER IN NFL HISTORY. HE WILL BE THAT UNTIL GOD-WILLING, AARON RODGERS SURPASSES HIM.

Everything else here is irrelevant bullshit. Case closed, end of discussion - something I almost never do, I hereby stop reading or discussing the topic.


Keep clicking those ruby slippers together.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
thanks Post received 1 applause.
Dexter_Sinister on 6/23/2013(UTC)
Offline earthquake  
#68 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 11:34:20 AM(UTC)
earthquake

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/11/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 194
Applause Received: 63

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker Go to Quoted Post
Dexter, your list above is LAUGHABLE. This whole discussion is STUPID. YOU should be ashamed to call yourself a Packer fan.

BRETT FAVRE IS THE GREATEST QUARTERBACK/THE GREATEST PLAYER IN NFL HISTORY. HE WILL BE THAT UNTIL GOD-WILLING, AARON RODGERS SURPASSES HIM.

Everything else here is irrelevant bullshit. Case closed, end of discussion - something I almost never do, I hereby stop reading or discussing the topic.


I have to say this is a really childish response. "Don't agree with me? FU, I'll take my football and go home." What are you, 12 years old?

You've yet to provide an argument as to why Favre is the greatest ever, other than "Favre is the greatest ever, because he is!". Again, what has he done that would put him over someone like Joe Montana? Favre played in more games and missed less games due to injury, which is in itself very impressive, but thats it. Montana accomplished much more in his shorter career.

Its hugely disrespectful to discount the effort of others here who at least bothered to give some supporting evidence (even if you disagree with the outcome or method) when you're too lazy to do any research or even provide a compelling, rational argument.

You put others down for emotions clouding judgement (ie, due to the last few years of his career), however, its clear that you yourself can not come even close to separating your emotional attachment of Favre from reality.
blank
Offline Bigbyfan  
#69 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 12:05:33 PM(UTC)
Bigbyfan

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 26
Applause Received: 81

This had the potential to be a very entertaining thread, but then I saw the last 4 pages were completely taken over by the never ending "Favre argument."

Back to the original question, I'm only going to use players that I have had the pleasure to watch (a little over 20 years).

Overrated: Cullen Jenkins - he was a beast the last few years in Green Bay, when he was healthy. Emphasis on "when he was healthy." He really couldn't be counted on for an entire season. The only reason I put him as overrated is due to pretty much everyone, sometimes myself included, bitching about Ted Thompson not shelling out the cash to resign him and how different our team would have been with him. Giving a big money deal to a 30 year old defensive lineman is not a good business move. I'm also willing to bet he would not have accepted the same deal the Eagles gave him if the Packers offered it to him. That probably had more to do with joining the "Dream Team" and chasing another title.

Underrated: William Henderson - He isn't underrated by most Packer fans, but IMO, is underrated by most football fans. He had the ability to do it all. He could run for some short yardage, catch the ball, and both run and pass block. He was a leader in the locker room. His longevity was also a big plus. He never played less than 14 games in a single season.
blank
thanks Post received 2 applause.
buckeyepackfan on 6/23/2013(UTC), DakotaT on 6/23/2013(UTC)
Offline DakotaT  
#70 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 1:03:15 PM(UTC)
DakotaT

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 669
Applause Received: 1,374

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker Go to Quoted Post
Dexter, your list above is LAUGHABLE. This whole discussion is STUPID. YOU should be ashamed to call yourself a Packer fan.

BRETT FAVRE IS THE GREATEST QUARTERBACK/THE GREATEST PLAYER IN NFL HISTORY. HE WILL BE THAT UNTIL GOD-WILLING, AARON RODGERS SURPASSES HIM.

Everything else here is irrelevant bullshit. Case closed, end of discussion - something I almost never do, I hereby stop reading or discussing the topic.


Pussy! Dex just cleaned your clock and you run like a little girl, excuse last word freak little girl. Laughing
UserPostedImage
Offline texaspackerbacker  
#71 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 3:15:57 PM(UTC)
texaspackerbacker

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Gold: 2014

United States
Joined: 3/4/2013(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 482
Applause Received: 292

Originally Posted by: DakotaT Go to Quoted Post
Pussy! Dex just cleaned your clock and you run like a little girl, excuse last word freak little girl. Laughing


I borrowed that last line from you, Dakota hahahahaha.

These other sick trolls just seem to get off on their Favre hate. I didn't think you swung that way, though, Dakota. You may be a loon in politics, but you're usually pretty sensible when it comes to football.

Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Offline dfosterf  
#72 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 3:19:16 PM(UTC)
dfosterf

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

United States
Joined: 8/19/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 208
Applause Received: 430

Originally Posted by: DakotaT Go to Quoted Post
Pussy! Dex just cleaned your clock and you run like a little girl, excuse last word freak little girl. Laughing




Well, it's an actual GBP football discussion, vs apple/oranges off-season stuff. I suspect Texas will do just fine in the GBP arena.

What did he do? Attack Dakota on a personal level at some point?


Get the fuck over it you crybaby bitch, the man has things to say, and your fucking whining is INTERRUPTING them. I want to hear what he has to say without your commie bitchin'.

imo
UserPostedImage
damn skippy I'm an owner. I currently own a full .00001924537805515393 % of the Green Bay Packers.



Offline DakotaT  
#73 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 3:55:50 PM(UTC)
DakotaT

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 669
Applause Received: 1,374

Originally Posted by: dfosterf Go to Quoted Post
Well, it's an actual GBP football discussion, vs apple/oranges off-season stuff. I suspect Texas will do just fine in the GBP arena.

What did he do? Attack Dakota on a personal level at some point?


Get the fuck over it you crybaby bitch, the man has things to say, and your fucking whining is INTERRUPTING them. I want to hear what he has to say without your commie bitchin'.

imo


Fuck you, old grouchy bastard. All Texas ever has to say is Liberals this and that. Brett Favre is the greatest - no reasons why - just take his word for it. Texas has spread a really wide wake in all forums and if these guys want to rip him an asshole, I think it is funny. That OK with you?
UserPostedImage
Offline DakotaT  
#74 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 4:04:43 PM(UTC)
DakotaT

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 669
Applause Received: 1,374

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker Go to Quoted Post
I borrowed that last line from you, Dakota hahahahaha.

These other sick trolls just seem to get off on their Favre hate. I didn't think you swung that way, though, Dakota. You may be a loon in politics, but you're usually pretty sensible when it comes to football.



All you have is calling people un-American, loons, or whatever shit you spew just because they don't agree with you. It really is sad that you believe the America that you grew up in was the pinnacle of civilization. That era really sucked for minorities, but hey, they made good servants.

When we talk about Favre, with the exception of his three MVP years, he really was a choke artist because he lacked the discipline to become one of the greats. But you go ahead and believe what you think is "right".
UserPostedImage
Offline Dexter_Sinister  
#75 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 5:00:23 PM(UTC)
Dexter_Sinister

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 6/12/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 292
Applause Received: 266

Originally Posted by: porky88 Go to Quoted Post
Stats can be helpful in analyzing players, especially from previous eras where there’s a lack of film. However, you’re glorifying stats and particularly the QB rating, which in itself is flawed. Therefore, the formula you are using to reach your conclusions is using a flawed stat. The QB rating emphasizes completion percentage. The problem with that is going 3 for 3 for 8 yards gives you a better rating than 1 for 3 for 25 yards. This is why Chad Pennington ranks above Brett Favre, John Elway, and Warren Moon. Pennington didn’t have the arm to stretch the field. Defenses happily gave up the short to intermediate completions. They literally let him have that play. They didn’t care. There’s no skill in that whatsoever. It led to a pretty good QB rating, but his teammates had to pickup the slack. This is just one of a number of problems with the QB rating, which is central to your argument.

Your formula seems to be an attempt at an all-time list. You deserve credit for putting in that work. However, all-time lists are trivial and really have nothing to do with the evaluation of a player. No matter how you slice it, such a list is based upon subjective viewpoints.


Yards per attempt matters. So 8 yards in 3 attempts is not better than 25 yards in 3 attempts.

The passer rating is not a stat. It is a combination of ratios of several different stats weighted for importance.

It is essentially
Completion %
Yards per attempt
TD %
INT %

But not in equal amounts.

What it tells you is how efficient a QB is. A great arm like Cutler and Jeff George doesn't mean much if they struggle to complete passes 10+ yards down field. Accuracy, decision making, ball security and scoring mean more than a big arm.

QBs are rewarded for being able to complete passes down field. Not for being able to throw it 70 yards and have it intercepted. Rodgers is better than Brees because he has more yards per attempt, more TDs per attempt and fewer INTs per attempt. While Brees has more totals, his attempts are so high, it brings down his rating.

It may be flawed, but the correlation to winning is stronger than any stat out there. It is unbiased and unaffected by hype or opinion. Teams that have a higher passer rating and allow the opponents a lower passer rating win the most.

If adjusted for the years that they QB played in, you eliminate any changes in the NFL from rules to equipment.

Modern QBs have an extremely large number of advantages QBs from the '40s didn't have. From schemes, rules protecting the QB and WR from injury and being interfered with, helmets, medical care, nutrition, workouts etc.

Come up with a better way to rate a QB all the way back to 1940 that is more accurate and not subject to people's obviously biased opinions and I will drop passer rating then and there.

I have said that probably 50 times. Nobody has even tried yet.

Message modified by user Sunday, June 23, 2013 7:17:58 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Removing redundancy and adding alliteration.

I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.

Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
earthquake on 6/23/2013(UTC)
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
4 Pages<1234>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Tweeter

Recent Topics
24m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

56m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Laser Gunns

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Laser Gunns

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Laser Gunns

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nyrpack

13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dhazer

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dhazer

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / packman82

16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

26-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / rabidgopher04

26-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

26-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

25-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Rios39

25-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

24-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr