- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Joe Namath was a very, very overrated quarterback in the 60's and 70's...
Posted on 3/27/15 at 1:19 pm to dukke v
Posted on 3/27/15 at 1:19 pm to dukke v
quote:
James Harris from the 70's Rams should be on there before Luck. As well as Bob Griese...
Griese maybe, but James Shack Harris was a part time starter at best.
1
Posted on 3/27/15 at 1:22 pm to H-Town Tiger
The biggest reason Staubach isn't higher was that he was only a full time starter from 1972-1979--I believe.
But I disagree with the logic.
But I disagree with the logic.
Posted on 3/27/15 at 1:33 pm to TTsTowel
I saw Namath play and I never had the feeling watching him play that he was overrated.
He was the first QB in NFL history to throw for 4,000 yards, and he did that during a 14 game season (1967). No one else did that until 1979, when Dan Fouts broke the 4,000 yard mark during a 16 game season. Think about that for awhile. Namath played in a pre-'West Coast offense' era where lower completion percentages were not uncommon. He threw deep often, which results in fewer passes completed and more interceptions, but more yards gained overall. He didn't play in an offense where he threw a lot of 5 yard slants and quick outs.
I found this quote:
So I'll vote no, not overrated.
He was the first QB in NFL history to throw for 4,000 yards, and he did that during a 14 game season (1967). No one else did that until 1979, when Dan Fouts broke the 4,000 yard mark during a 16 game season. Think about that for awhile. Namath played in a pre-'West Coast offense' era where lower completion percentages were not uncommon. He threw deep often, which results in fewer passes completed and more interceptions, but more yards gained overall. He didn't play in an offense where he threw a lot of 5 yard slants and quick outs.
I found this quote:
quote:
Namath threw for 4,000 yards under old rules that gave much less protection to both the quarterback and receivers. Namath's play on the field in the years before his knees seriously limited his mobility helped evolve the quarterback position and the NFL style of play from a run oriented ball control game to today's more open passing style. Hall of Fame coach Bill Walsh stated that Namath was "the most beautiful, accurate, stylish passer with the quickest release I've ever seen." Hall of Fame coach Don Shula stated that Namath was "one of the 3 smartest quarterbacks of all time."
So I'll vote no, not overrated.
This post was edited on 3/27/15 at 1:37 pm
Posted on 3/27/15 at 1:38 pm to L.A.
So you're saying he's the Roger Maris of pro football? I don't know if that helps or hurts your argument .
Posted on 3/27/15 at 1:42 pm to L.A.
Well when you're not scared of throwing interceptions, you can throw for a ton of yards.
Heck, you can ask Andrew Luck :D
Heck, you can ask Andrew Luck :D
Posted on 3/27/15 at 1:46 pm to lsutigers1992
quote:You lost me there. How does what I wrote have anything to do with a baseball player? In which part do you see a correlation?
So you're saying he's the Roger Maris of pro football?
Posted on 3/27/15 at 1:46 pm to L.A.
quote:I'll strongly disagree and leave it at that.
I saw Namath play and I never had the feeling watching him play that he was overrated.
Posted on 3/27/15 at 1:48 pm to Jcorye1
quote:Namath was fearless, no doubt about that. And confident to the point of over-confidence. A lot of his interceptions came from trying to squeeze the ball into too tight an area.
Well when you're not scared of throwing interceptions, you can throw for a ton of yards.
Posted on 3/27/15 at 1:50 pm to L.A.
One great season in a career of mediocrity =/= HOF.
Posted on 3/27/15 at 1:51 pm to TTsTowel
quote:Of course, that's the purpose of threads like this. We're just sharing opinions. Let it be noted, however, that I actually saw Namath play (I'm 59), and you didn't. So I'm giving you impressions I had WHILE watching him play, not while reading his career stats.
I'll strongly disagree and leave it at that.
Posted on 3/27/15 at 1:53 pm to lsutigers1992
quote:Exactly, and my OP says it all.
One great season in a career of mediocrity =/= HOF.
Joe Namath was an inaccurate turnover machine that ended his career with an all-time losing record.
Posted on 3/27/15 at 1:55 pm to L.A.
quote:Good for you.
Let it be noted, however, that I actually saw Namath play (I'm 59), and you didn't. So I'm giving you impressions I had WHILE watching him play, not while reading his career stats.
As previously stated, I saw him play some, too (just not in real time). I didn't just look at stats, even though they pretty much tell the whole story in this case.
ETA: Not to sound like a dick.
This post was edited on 3/27/15 at 1:56 pm
Posted on 3/27/15 at 1:59 pm to ragincajun03
quote:
Bart Starr, Len Dawsom, Johnny U, Bob Gresie, Frank Tarkenton...all FAR greater QBs in the same 60s-early 70's era that Namath played in.
The common denominator with all the quarterbacks you listed is that they all played with far better head coaches than Namath did. Broadway Joe was a gunslinger, no doubt but he didn't have the strong minded head coach to reel him & limit his mistakes. His cannon arm & quick release lead him to taking chances that he shouldn't have. Weeb Ewbank enabled & encouraged Namath's gunslinger mentality.
LINK
Even late in the Jets Super Bowl win, Ewbank wanted Namath to keep passing when running the ball to milk out the clock was the more logical strategy. Namath took it upon himself to keep feeding the ball to Matt Snell which was the right decision.
quote:
Namath won the MVP award over Snell.
"It was a close call,'' Hill said. "Joe controlled the game. A lot of plays were sent from the sideline, but the quarterback called plays as well and changed plays.''
Boozer added, "Namath was the same positive guy he was all season long. He called the play he wanted. He was as calm and cool as he could be.''
Namath came into the AFL with a huge target on his back for signing a then record then $427,000 contract. He got his share of punishment by the opposition who wanted all wanted a piece of the flamboyant quarterback but by the time Joe's knees really began to give out, players started pulling up & not burying him like they could have. Nothing speaks more than earning the respect of your peers & Namath accomplished that. I wouldn't go as far as saying as Namath name belongs with the best to ever play but him being considered overrated is overrated. So is the emphasis of his overall career numbers.
This post was edited on 3/27/15 at 2:31 pm
Posted on 3/27/15 at 2:02 pm to lsutigers1992
quote:
One great season in a career of mediocrity =/= HOF.
AP AFL Rookie of the Year (1965)
2x AP AFL MVP (1968, 1969)
AP First Team All-AFL (1968)
3x AP Second Team All-NFL/AFL Team (1967, 1969, 1972)
4x AFL All-Star selection (1965, 1967, 1968, 1969)
PFW NFL Comeback Player of the Year (1974)
AFL All-Time Team
Super Bowl III Champion
Super Bowl III MVP
Posted on 3/27/15 at 2:08 pm to RollTide1987
Those type of facts aren't needed because we have stats & stuff. Those individual awards are overrated. 
Posted on 3/27/15 at 2:15 pm to TTsTowel
quote:Just out of curiosity, where does one find old AFL games like that to watch? I would love to watch some of those.
As previously stated, I saw him play some, too (just not in real time).
Posted on 3/27/15 at 2:22 pm to LSUlefty
How did he throw so many picks. Are his stats as bad as testaverde
Posted on 3/27/15 at 2:32 pm to lsucoonass
quote:
How did he throw so many picks. Are his stats as bad as testaverde
different rules and game back then, you have to compare his numbers to his peers. but i always thought he was overrated I'm not old enough to have seen his heyday with the Jets, but do remember the end of his career when he was traded to the Rams and didn't play much.
Posted on 3/27/15 at 2:37 pm to TTsTowel
Archie Manning was worse by far. Archie is the most overrated player in the history of sports.
edit: They both sucked apparently.
Archie career:
125 TD's, 173 INT's
Sacked:
Archie 396 sacks in 151 career games
Namath 109 sacks in 140 career games
I know the Saints OL sucked but Archie was not very elusive to say the least.
edit: They both sucked apparently.
Archie career:
125 TD's, 173 INT's
Sacked:
Archie 396 sacks in 151 career games
Namath 109 sacks in 140 career games
I know the Saints OL sucked but Archie was not very elusive to say the least.
This post was edited on 3/27/15 at 2:45 pm
Posted on 3/27/15 at 2:38 pm to TTsTowel
Agreed.
The craziest stat of all is that the Baltimore Colts in SuperBowl 3 was the last team with a winning record Namath ever beat. He played nine more seasons.
If he hadn't played in NYC, he woulda never sniffed the HOF.
The craziest stat of all is that the Baltimore Colts in SuperBowl 3 was the last team with a winning record Namath ever beat. He played nine more seasons.
If he hadn't played in NYC, he woulda never sniffed the HOF.
Page 3 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News