I mean Trent Dilfer has better career numbers than Namath (it's true, go to NFL.com and look it up), and they both have a ring. Does that mean Dilfer is a HoF'er (hell no, btw).
Namath threw more INT's than TD's, for gods sake!
2007-08-06 08:02:46 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Football (American)
Joe Namath deserves to be there more than Michael Irivin does.
At least Namath didn't get caught red-handed with coke and whores.
2007-08-06 08:11:02 · answer #1 · answered by thatwench 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Don't be fooled by the numbers, especially for QB who played in completely different eras. As many people said, rules have changed to open more and more the passing games and seasons have been extended from 12 to 14 and then 16 games.
Sammy Baugh retired with most of the passing records, broken by Otto Graham then by Unitas then by Tarkenton and the last decade by Marino.
And when Marino's records looked unreachable, Brett Favre has a shot to them, and probably will be broken by Peyton Manning.
Imagine Unitas, Bradshaw, Griese, Staubach numbers nowadays. Now an ordinary QB like Dilfer, Brad Johnson or Kerry Collins can put apparently better numbers than Sammy Baugh 40 years ago.
Broadway Joe had at least 4 seasons with numbers among the 3 best, a couple of AFL MVP awards is considered the best QB who played in the AFL.
2007-08-06 15:37:37 · answer #2 · answered by M. Diego 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Namath was more of a personality than a player and NO he does not belong in the H O F. But Dilfer doesn't either.
2007-08-09 11:34:00 · answer #3 · answered by robertlnngr 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the answer is no, I've said that a long time
a few things you probably did not know about Joe Namath
13 year career
Threw more Int's than TD passes in 11 of them, including his final 8 season's in a row. I thought Qb's were supposed to get better after they got used to playing in the league?
threw more than 20 Int's 5 times in 13 seasons. Four of those seasons, he only played a handful of games (6 or less) so he threw more than 20 Int's in 5 of 9 complete seasons in the NFL. And remember, they only played 14 game seasons back then.
Career 173 TD's 220 Int's .... Could this be the biggest discrepancy in the history of the NFL? 47 less TD's than Int's?
Threw the 2nd most Int's returned for TD's in the history of the NFL
Completed less than 50% of his passes in 7 of his 13 career seasons.
All-time completion percentage is 50.13%
Failed to make the playoffs in 10 of 12 career seasons with the Jets. The playoff appearance with the Rams does not count since he did not get the team there
Career playoff victories - 2, and he never won another playoff game after the "guarantee" against the Colts.
ranks 44th all-time in pass attempts
Does Not rank in the top 50 all-time in completions
Ranks 42th all-time in passing yards
Ranks 43th all-time in TD passes
Trails the illustrious Craig Morton in all these statistical categories
2007-08-06 16:09:17 · answer #4 · answered by d b 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your question prompted me to review his career numbers more closely. Wow, you are right - his stats are not that great and his overall won/loss record was not either.
The quarterback position has changed somewhat since Namath's time in that more yards, touchdowns, etc. etc. would be expected from one of today's players.
Namath retired before I followed football, so I just have to guess his Super Bowl III victory really won voters over - he did put the AFC on the map and that can not be undercounted.
I guess we have to trust the voters that Namath had the intangibles that made him a great quarterback in his era. But you are correct in that statistcially speaking, he would not be considered close in today's era.
2007-08-06 15:10:33 · answer #5 · answered by Matt G 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
You can't compare numbers from the beginning of the 80's to those of the 70's and before. There were many rule changes that were made to help the offense, and especially the passing game. If Roger Staubach had played 10 years later, his numbers would have been through the stratosphere!
2007-08-06 15:07:30 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I would say yes. By defeating the Colts in the Super Bowl, he and the Jets changed the face of pro football. Numbers are important. But they don't tell the whole story. Broadway Joe is a legend.
2007-08-06 15:08:07 · answer #7 · answered by Robin D 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Joe Namath deserved it but lots of people have better numbers.
Kerry Collins's numbers shatter Troy Aikmans and MArino.
Drew Bledsoe's numbers are better than John Elway
But those guys are jokes. Now any QB that plays for 15 years will have huge numbers but
Its all about Super Bowls too
2007-08-06 15:05:38 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
the answer is no. flat out. he was a fan favorite. he was trash who won a SB. thats like putting vick in the HOF. namath was a great show because of the jacket and the prediction but the answer is flat out NO. if hes in the HOF then go ahead and put jake delholme in.
2007-08-06 15:09:44 · answer #9 · answered by betwithjoe1217 1 · 2⤊ 1⤋
You cannot compare quarterbacks of different eras because of rule changes and other advances in technology (dome stadiums, turf, gloves, medical advancements, etc.).
But Namath is probably one of the all-time most overrated quarterbacks. Yeah, he won arguably the biggest landmark game in pro football history ... but what else of notoriety did he do?
And, no ... doing advertisements for panty hose do not count.
I'm convinced only footbal die-hards would recognize his name today if he didn’t play in New York.
2007-08-06 15:08:26 · answer #10 · answered by Noah’s Dad 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋