Is Bart Starr Overrated? Maybe yes, maybe no. (1 Viewer)

[JohnnyU]

I know that what I'm about to say isn't popular (I don't blame you), and GB is the best franchise in the history of the NFL, but I also say that Lombardi is that franchise, and Starr happen to be along for the ride (bad stats and all). I will state that he doesn't belong with the all time great QBs because of his bad career passing stats (see below). Lombardi is however, the greatest coach that ever lived. We all know that.

Bart Starr's stats just don't add up to being one of the best ever. You can't include him in the same breath as Unitas, Montana, Elway, Marino, Graham, Favre, Young, and countless others. His numbers DON'T support being one of the best QB's ever, but with the rings, some will think so. He was a great team player and ran the Packer sweep to perfection, and was a great role player. I'm sure that if a lot of QBs played in that system, they would have been considered the best ever. Marino doesn't have a ring, but most consider him one of the best ever. I personally believe you have to consider stats when labeling someone one of the best ever. Is it the only criteria? No, but if you are going to label someone the best ever, you have to include stats with other intangibles. Here are some stats for Starr.

24,000+ yds, 57% completion rate, and NEVER THREW FOR 20 tds,

152 tds / 138 ints.

ONLY THREW DOUBLE DIGIT TDs 7 TIMES in 16 YEARS.

For those of you who forgot, and not to insult your intelligence, double digit = 10.

Rypien, D Williams, J McMahon, and Dilfer won championships, and they will never be mentioned with the elite qb's of all time. I think that if Trent Dilfer played for those 60's Packer teams, he would be considered in the same light as Starr. Maybe Jim McMahon would be a better example? Maybe you can fill in the blanks yourself?

With all the "is he overrated" threads over the years, if this guy doesn't qualify,

then no one does.

Edit - I thought Chase Stuart had an interesting post

Bart Starr's passing statistics are being overrated. You are forgetting to remember that there were only 13 teams in the NFL in 1960.

So when Starr ranked 9th in passing yards in 1960, that's not like ranking 9th in the modern NFL. In 1966 when he ranked 8th in passing yards, there were only 15 teams.

An interesting post by DawnBTVS -

9/16 (56.3%) for 125 yards av. per game.

.048 TD per Attempt and .044 INT per Attempt.

13.67 YPC and 7.85 YPA.

Appearances in Top 10 PY since 1960...

1960: 9th

1961: 4th

1962: 8th

1964: 8th

1965: 10th

1966: 8th

1967: 10th

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

You are now officially an idiot. Sorry Joe B. that Johnny has no clue.Bart Starr had a career passer rating of 104.8 in the postseason.Starr Shines Bright for PackersBy Mike PumaSpecial to ESPN.com"He always wanted to be the best. And he never quite felt he was the best. And that's why he worked so hard," says former teammate Gary Knafelc about Bart Starr on ESPN Classic's SportsCentury series.If Fantasy Football existed in the 1960s, Bart Starr wouldn't have topped your wish list for quarterbacks. Not that he wasn't capable of producing huge numbers, but under coach Vince Lombardi, the Green Bay Packers were a run-oriented team that asked the quarterback to lead and forget about statistics.In that sense, few were better than Starr. The proof exists in the five championships he won, the most by any NFL quarterback. Joe Montana and Terry Bradshaw are second with four.The winner of the first two Super Bowl MVP awards, he also made the Pro Bowl four times and was voted MVP once. He finished his 16-year career with 24,718 yards passing, 152 touchdowns and 138 interceptions while completing 57.4 percent of his passes. A mainstay under center, Starr played in 196 games. In 1977, he was inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame."Bart Starr stands for what the game of football stands for: courage, stamina and coordinated efficiency," Lombardi said. "You instill desire by creating a superlative example. The noblest form of leadership is by example and that is what Bart Starr is all about."One place Starr didn't find success was on the sidelines. In nine years as Packers head coach, his teams went 52-76-3 and had only two winning seasons.But it's Starr the player who is remembered in Titletown USA. "Earlier in my career, many fans misinterpreted my calm demeanor for lack of imagination," Starr wrote in his autobiography. "They believed that Lombardi programmed me to follow his orders and not worry about originality. But … I [became] a creative and confident leader who could stand beside, not behind, our admired coach."The older of Ben and Lulu Starr's two sons, Bryan Bartlett Starr was born on Jan. 9, 1934 in Montgomery, Ala. The family moved often in Bart's youth; Ben bounced between jobs before his National Guard unit was activated for World War II. During one stretch, Bart went four years without seeing his father, who served in the Pacific and became a career military man after joining the Army Air Corps.The family finally returned to Montgomery, where Bart entered Sidney Lanier High School. In his junior year, he became the starter when another quarterback suffered a broken leg. He earned All-State honors as a senior and was recruited by every Southeastern Conference school except Tennessee.Starr chose Alabama to appease his father, but also in part because it afforded him the opportunity to continue seeing his high-school sweetheart, Cherry Morton, who would attend Auburn.In his sophomore season he helped the Crimson Tide reach the 1954 Cotton Bowl, where it lost to Rice. He also shared punting duties, finishing second nationally with his 41.1-yard average.In the spring, he eloped with Cherry, keeping the marriage secret for months.Starr was not so successful as a junior and senior on the football field as he was a sophomore. A back strain kept him sidelined for most of his junior season. In his senior year, the offensive scheme changed, calling for a more mobile quarterback. Starr sat for an 0-10 team. His punting duties were curtailed because of a severe ankle sprain.Still, Starr held hope he would receive a look in the NFL. His chance came when the downtrodden Packers selected him with their 17th pick, No. 200 overall, in 1956. Starr signed for $6,500.After being a backup as a rookie, he shared the position the next season before becoming the starter for a 1-10-1 team in 1958.Then everything changed in 1959. Lombardi, an offensive assistant coach with the New York Giants, was hired as the Packers' head coach and general manager. He quickly made Starr a believer."I remember going downstairs after one of our first practices," Starr said. "I called my wife in Birmingham. All I said was, 'Honey, we're going to begin to win.' " In 1959, Starr didn't start until the final five games, but he led the Packers to a four-game winning to end the season. They finished 7-5, only their second winning record in 11 years, as Starr completed 70-of-134 passes for 972 yards with six touchdowns and seven interceptions. The next season, Starr became a Pro Bowl quarterback as he helped Green Bay win the Western Conference before it lost to the Philadelphia Eagles 17-13 in the NFL championship game. Starr had another Pro Bowl season in 1961, surpassing 2,000 passing yards for the first time (he finished with 2,418 yards, 16 touchdowns and 16 interceptions). The Packers walloped the Giants 37-0 for the NFL championship as Starr threw three touchdown passes.The Packers were champions again in 1962, a season in which Starr made another Pro Bowl appearance and threw for a career high 2,438 yards. He led Green Bay to a 16-7 victory over the Giants for the title.Starr's Pro Bowl streak and the team's championship run ended in 1963, the first of successive years the Packers missed the playoffs. They rebounded in 1965, when Starr had a Pro Bowl season, tying a career high with 16 touchdown passes. The Packers beat the Cleveland Browns 23-12 in the NFL championship game.In 1966, Starr was named league MVP after throwing for 14 touchdowns and a career-low three interceptions. After beating the Dallas Cowboys 34-27 in the NFL title game, the Packers routed the Kansas City Chiefs 35-10 in Super Bowl I as Starr won MVP honors by passing for 250 yards and two touchdowns.Before the Packers could reach Super Bowl II, they had to beat the Cowboys in the NFL championship game. The "Ice Bowl" was played on Dec. 31, 1967 in sub-zero temperature in Green Bay. Starr scored the decisive touchdown with 13 seconds left, lunging across the goal line on a quarterback sneak that gave the Pack a 21-17 win. Then he led Green Bay to a 33-14 victory over the Oakland Raiders for the championship. Throwing for 202 yards and one touchdown, Starr was again the Super Bowl MVP. The next season, with Lombardi retired to the front office, Starr completed a career high 63.7 percent of his passes, but the Packers missed the playoffs with a 6-7-1 record.Starr remained the starter two more years. He played four games in 1971 and announced his retirement in training camp the following summer. He accepted an offer to become the Packers' quarterbacks coach, staying one season before returning home to Alabama, where he became part owner of several car dealerships throughout the Southeast. In December 1974, he signed a three-year contract to become the Packers' head coach and general manager. The franchise was in the same disarray as when he had arrived as a player. But this time, Starr couldn't work magic. In his nine years, the Packers made the playoffs only once, in the strike-shortened 1982 season. He was fired after an 8-8 campaign in 1983.After moving to Phoenix, he attempted to land an expansion franchise as part of a perspective ownership group. But that deal failed to materialize.In 1988, Starr's youngest son, Bret, who had a cocaine addiction, was found dead in his home in Tampa. Authorities concluded the 24-year-old died of heart failure caused by drug abuse. The next year, Starr moved back to Birmingham, where he could be close to his grandchildren and older son Bart Jr. In 1994, Starr took another shot at returning to the NFL as part of a group of investors interested in buying the Tampa Bay Bucs. Again, a deal wasn't struck.Starr remains in high demand as a motivational speaker and is chairman of a company that develops medical centers for groups of doctors. Since 1965, he and Cherry have supported a home for wayward boys in Wisconsin called the Rawhide Foundation.

 

[JohnnyU]

I even voted no to give Starr a head start.

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

I even voted no to give Starr a head start.

You forgot add your analysis of the type of pass Starr threw.

 

[JohnnyU]

I even signed in with my alias and voted no to give Starr a 2 vote head start.

 

[Prime]

Honestly? How would we know?

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

http://archive.sportingnews.com/nfl/100/list-complete.html

1. Jim Brown

2. Jerry Rice

3. Joe Montana

4. Lawrence Taylor

5. Johnny Unitas

6. Don Hutson

7. Otto Graham

8. Walter Payton

9. **** Butkus

10. Bob Lilly

11. Sammy Baugh

12. Barry Sanders

13. Deacon Jones

14. Joe Greene

15. Gino Marchetti

16. John Elway

17. Anthony Munoz

18. Ray Nitschke

19. Night Train Lane

20. John Hannah

21. Gale Sayers

22. Reggie White

23. Ronnie Lott

24. Jim Parker

25. Merlin Olsen

26. O.J. Simpson

27. Dan Marino

28. Forrest Gregg

29. Roger Staubach

30. Jack Lambert

31. Lance Alworth

32. Marion Motley

33. Earl Campbell

34. Alan Page

35. Bronko Nagurski

36. Mel Blount

37. Deion Sanders

38. Eric Dickerson

39. Sid Luckman

40. Raymond Berry

41. Bart Starr

42. Willie Lanier

43. Larry Wilson

44. Terry Bradshaw

45. Herb Adderley

46. Steve Largent

47. Jack Ham

48. John Mackey

49. Bill George

50. Willie Brown

51. Randy White

52. Bobby Layne

53. Tony Dorsett

54. Chuck Bednarik

55. Art Shell

56. Mike Singletary

57. Roosevelt Brown

58. Bruce Smith

59. Fran Tarkenton

60. Paul Warfield

61. Ken Houston

62. Gene Upshaw

63. Steve Young

64. Ted Hendricks

65. Joe Schmidt

66. Bobby Bell

67. Buck Buchanan

68. Emmitt Smith

69. Willie Davis

70. Emlen Tunnell

71. Lenny Moore

72. Marcus Allen

73. Kellen Winslow

74. Mel Hein

75. Mike Webster

76. Sam Huff

77. Steve Van Buren

78. Jim Otto

79. Larry Little

80. Red Grange

81. Darrell Green

82. Brett Favre

83. Franco Harris

84. Dwight Stephenson

85. Charley Taylor

86. Jack Christiansen

87. Rod Woodson

88. Jim Thorpe

89. Elroy Hirsch

90. Mike Ditka

91. Art Monk

92. Dan Fouts

93. Mike Haynes

94. Fred Biletnikoff

95. Troy Aikman

96. Joe Namath

97. Lem Barney

98. George Blanda

99. Lou Groza

100. Charlie Joiner

 

[JohnnyU]

Honestly? How would we know?

Like I said, could anyone argue that if Trent Dilfer played for GB during that time that he would be considered one of the all time greats? He probably would have had better numbers than Starr, which isn't saying much.

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

NFL Highlights: • Named NFL MVP (1966)• Won Six Western Division Titles• Won Five NFL Championships• Won Two Super Bowl Victories (I,II)• Named MVP of Super Bowls I and II• Led the NFL in passing in 1962, 1964 and 1966• Named to the Pro Bowl Four Times

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

Honestly? How would we know?

He probably would have had better numbers than Starr, which isn't saying much.

This is the type of comment that deserves one of these........

 

[JohnnyU]

http://archive.sportingnews.com/nfl/100/list-complete.html41. Bart Starr

That doesn't say much when considering "all time great QBs". Not that I agree with him being that high. His TD / INT ratio was very bad.

 

[Rhino]

http://archive.sportingnews.com/nfl/100/list-complete.html

41. Bart Starr

That doesn't say much when considering "all time great QBs". Not that I agree with him being that high. His TD / INT ratio was very bad.

If you notice, that's ALL players - not just QB'sStarr is the 10th QB on the list. (If I counted right - there are some pretty old names on there that I "think" were QB's... excuse me for having rusty NFL History skillz)

You did notice:

27. Dan Marino

(who is the 6th QB if I count right...)

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

http://archive.sportingnews.com/nfl/100/list-complete.html

41. Bart Starr

That doesn't say much when considering "all time great QBs". Not that I agree with him being that high. His TD / INT ratio was very bad.

Keep digging your hole, JohnnyTool.

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

I like this one...

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/list/2004playoffsQB.html

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

Not a bad stat....Starr had no equal in the postseason. He won all but one of the 10 games he started, and his playoff passer rating of 104.8 is nearly 10 points greater than that of second-place Joe Montana.

 

[Noahs Troopers]

Honestly? How would we know?

Bart Starr over Steve Young??????

 

[JohnnyU]

http://archive.sportingnews.com/nfl/100/list-complete.html

41. Bart Starr

That doesn't say much when considering "all time great QBs". Not that I agree with him being that high. His TD / INT ratio was very bad.

Keep digging your hole, JohnnyTool.

No need to get personal, which you are famous for.

Oh yes... there is a need when you have turned up the tool factor.

Just because I think Starr is overrated when comparing him to the all-time greats, doesn't make me a tool. Why do you have to do that?

 

[thammond]

I would rank him among the best based on most championships of any QB's and career win-loss record of 62-24-4.

 

[Noahs Troopers]

http://archive.sportingnews.com/nfl/100/list-complete.html

1. Willis McGahee

2. Jerry Rice

3. Joe Montana

4. Lawrence Taylor

5. Johnny Unitas

6. Don Hutson

7. Otto Graham

8. Walter Payton

9. **** Butkus

10. Bob Lilly

11. Sammy Baugh

12. Barry Sanders

13. Deacon Jones

14. Joe Greene

15. Gino Marchetti

16. John Elway

17. Anthony Munoz

18. Ray Nitschke

19. Night Train Lane

20. John Hannah

21. Gale Sayers

22. Reggie White

23. Ronnie Lott

24. Jim Parker

25. Merlin Olsen

26. O.J. Simpson

27. Dan Marino

28. Forrest Gregg

29. Roger Staubach

30. Jack Lambert

31. Lance Alworth

32. Marion Motley

33. Earl Campbell

34. Alan Page

35. Bronko Nagurski

36. Mel Blount

37. Deion Sanders

38. Eric Dickerson

39. Sid Luckman

40. Raymond Berry

41. Bart Starr

42. Willie Lanier

43. Larry Wilson

44. Terry Bradshaw

45. Herb Adderley

46. Steve Largent

47. Jack Ham

48. John Mackey

49. Bill George

50. Willie Brown

51. Randy White

52. Bobby Layne

53. Tony Dorsett

54. Chuck Bednarik

55. Art Shell

56. Mike Singletary

57. Roosevelt Brown

58. Bruce Smith

59. Fran Tarkenton

60. Paul Warfield

61. Ken Houston

62. Gene Upshaw

63. Steve Young

64. Ted Hendricks

65. Joe Schmidt

66. Bobby Bell

67. Buck Buchanan

68. Emmitt Smith

69. Willie Davis

70. Emlen Tunnell

71. Lenny Moore

72. Marcus Allen

73. Kellen Winslow

74. Mel Hein

75. Mike Webster

76. Sam Huff

77. Steve Van Buren

78. Jim Otto

79. Larry Little

80. Red Grange

81. Darrell Green

82. Brett Favre

83. Franco Harris

84. Dwight Stephenson

85. Charley Taylor

86. Jack Christiansen

87. Rod Woodson

88. Jim Thorpe

89. Elroy Hirsch

90. Mike Ditka

91. Art Monk

92. Dan Fouts

93. Mike Haynes

94. Fred Biletnikoff

95. Troy Aikman

96. Joe Namath

97. Lem Barney

98. George Blanda

99. Lou Groza

100. Charlie Joiner

Fixed

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

http://archive.sportingnews.com/nfl/100/list-complete.html

41. Bart Starr

That doesn't say much when considering "all time great QBs". Not that I agree with him being that high. His TD / INT ratio was very bad.

Keep digging your hole, JohnnyTool.

No need to get personal, which you are famous for.

Oh yes... there is a need when you have turned up the tool factor.

Just because I think Starr is overrated when comparing him to the all-time greats, doesn't make me a tool. Why do you have to do that?

Mr. Pickles pays me.

 

[GRIDIRON ASSASSIN]

Bart Starr isn't overrated as a player.He did suck as a coach though.However, Bob Griese is the most overrated piece of feces in the HOF at the quarterback position.

 

[JohnnyU]

I would rank him among the best based on most championships of any QB's and career win-loss record of 62-24-4.

Like I said, if Dilfer, McMahon, Doug Williams, or Rypien played for that team instead of Starr, would they be considered one of the best ever? Considering how mediocre Starr was throwing the ball (see stats), IMO, it stands to reason anyone of those QBs would have enjoyed those championships. Right time, right place means everything. Having that team, the way it was, doesn't hurt.

 

[Rhino]

Honestly? How would we know?

Bart Starr over Steve Young??????

Why does that seem so far fetched? I mean we are talking about a quarterback that won five Championships, including two Super Bowls. Young was great, but is he that much better than Starr?I think all these arguements really boil down to what you believe is a bigger indicator of success - statistics or championships. Both measuring sticks are highly subjective because they are effected by factors like offensive scheme, supporting teammates, coaching styles, era of play, etc... etc..

But I think one thing you'll always hear players agree on, they would trade ANYTHING for a Championship. You NEVER hear a guy say, "You know what, I'd give my Super Bowl Ring if only I'd thrown for more yards that season."

 

[GRIDIRON ASSASSIN]

What do Bart Starr and two other Super Bowl winning QBs have in common?

 

[JohnnyU]

What do Bart Starr and two other Super Bowl winning QBs have in common?

What's that Grid?

 

[DawnBTVS]

Some more stats...9/16 (56.3%) for 125 yards av. per game..048 TD per Attempt and .044 INT per Attempt.13.67 YPC and 7.85 YPA.Appearances in Top 10 PY since 1960...1960: 9th1961: 4th1962: 8th1964: 8th1965: 10th1966: 8th1967: 10th

 

[JohnnyU]

Some more stats...

9/16 (56.3%) for 125 yards av. per game.

.048 TD per Attempt and .044 INT per Attempt.

13.67 YPC and 7.85 YPA.

Appearances in Top 10 PY since 1960...

1960: 9th

1961: 4th

1962: 8th

1964: 8th

1965: 10th

1966: 8th

1967: 10th

:X

 

[thammond]

I would rank him among the best based on most championships of any QB's and career win-loss record of 62-24-4.

Like I said, if Dilfer, McMahon, Doug Williams, or Rypien played for that team instead of Starr, would they be considered one of the best ever? Considering how mediocre Starr was throwing the ball (see stats), IMO, it stands to reason anyone of those QBs would have enjoyed those championships. Right time, right place means everything. Having that team, the way it was, doesn't hurt.

I don't think you can assume any of those QB's would win 5 championships with that team. The bottom line is that he won 5 and no one else has ever done that.

 

[JohnnyU]

I would rank him among the best based on most championships of any QB's and career win-loss record of 62-24-4.

Like I said, if Dilfer, McMahon, Doug Williams, or Rypien played for that team instead of Starr, would they be considered one of the best ever? Considering how mediocre Starr was throwing the ball (see stats), IMO, it stands to reason anyone of those QBs would have enjoyed those championships. Right time, right place means everything. Having that team, the way it was, doesn't hurt.

I don't think you can assume any of those QB's would win 5 championships with that team. The bottom line is that he won 5 and no one else has ever done that.

That's true, but what I can assume is that any number of QBs (NOT CONSIDERED IN ELITE CLASS) would have better stats that Starr. Giving a chance to play for Lombardi in that system, at that time, yes, they would have been considered as good as Starr, IMO. Timing is everything.

 

[thammond]

I would rank him among the best based on most championships of any QB's and career win-loss record of 62-24-4.

Like I said, if Dilfer, McMahon, Doug Williams, or Rypien played for that team instead of Starr, would they be considered one of the best ever? Considering how mediocre Starr was throwing the ball (see stats), IMO, it stands to reason anyone of those QBs would have enjoyed those championships. Right time, right place means everything. Having that team, the way it was, doesn't hurt.

I don't think you can assume any of those QB's would win 5 championships with that team. The bottom line is that he won 5 and no one else has ever done that.

That's true, but what I can assume is that any number of QBs (NOT CONSIDERED IN ELITE CLASS) would have better stats that Starr. Giving a chance to play for Lombardi in that system, at that time, yes, they would have been considered as good as Starr, IMO. Timing is everything.

True, there are many QB's that you would expect to put up better stats than Starr. That still does not mean they would win. There are other intangables, leadership, intellegance, etc. that can make or break a champion.

 

[GRIDIRON ASSASSIN]

What do Bart Starr and two other Super Bowl winning QBs have in common?

What's that Grid?

Starr, Namath and Stabler - all Bama QBs.Most from one college that started for the winning team in the Super Bowl I believe.

 

[Rhino]

I would rank him among the best based on most championships of any QB's and career win-loss record of 62-24-4.

Like I said, if Dilfer, McMahon, Doug Williams, or Rypien played for that team instead of Starr, would they be considered one of the best ever? Considering how mediocre Starr was throwing the ball (see stats), IMO, it stands to reason anyone of those QBs would have enjoyed those championships. Right time, right place means everything. Having that team, the way it was, doesn't hurt.

I don't think you can assume any of those QB's would win 5 championships with that team. The bottom line is that he won 5 and no one else has ever done that.

That's true, but what I can assume is that any number of QBs (NOT CONSIDERED IN ELITE CLASS) would have better stats that Starr. Giving a chance to play for Lombardi in that system, at that time, yes, they would have been considered as good as Starr, IMO. Timing is everything.

Time out - why can you make one assumption but not the other?!? An assumption is an assumption - either way it makes an ### outta U and ME.You have no problem assuming that a quarterback like Trent Dilfer, Jim McMahon or Doug Williams would have had better statistics on a Vince Lombardi coached team than Bart Starr.

But you conceed that you would NOT assume those same quarterbacks would have won as many championships as Bart Starr on that same Vince Lombardi coached team?

And you somehow feel this makes Bart Starr an overrated quarterback?

Where are you getting this? Am I just crazy or does anyone else fail to see the logic in this arguement?

 

[gump]

For someone who claims to love Unitas, you seem to know very little about leadership and what it means to a football team.

 

[shakeybarn]

NFL Highlights:

• Named NFL MVP (1966)

• Won Six Western Division Titles

• Won Five NFL Championships

• Won Two Super Bowl Victories (I,II)

• Named MVP of Super Bowls I and II

• Led the NFL in passing in 1962, 1964 and 1966

• Named to the Pro Bowl Four Times

I agree that Starr is up there... but the "won championships" being on that Packer team LOADED with Hall of Famers... to me goes with the Bradshaw argument... what would of Bradshaw looked like on the St Louis Cardinals... without Jack Ham, Lambert, Mean Joe, Franco Harris, Lynn Swann, Mel Blount, John Stallworth, Mike Webster, Art Rooney, Chuck Knoll.... 10 ppl consider in the elite of their position.Leading the NFL in passing a number of times, one NFL MVP and some pro bowl nods is "good" but not "great", given the team he had.

The 2nd Super Bowl MVP nod wasn't much... the Pack controlled the game with the running attack... Starr had one pass that (I can't remember his name) really broke open into a 50yd plus TD. Starr was such a darling from Super Bowl I that the biasm shone thru, and there really wasn't much else to point to. I'd say Starr didn't lose the game for them. Sound vicious, but what I know of.

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

For someone who claims to love Unitas, you seem to know very little about leadership and what it means to a football team.

 

[JohnnyU]

For someone who claims to love Unitas, you seem to know very little about leadership and what it means to a football team.

That is not true, but IMO, to be considered one of the best, you HAVE TO HAVE BETTER NUMBERS THAN STARR.

 

[shakeybarn]

and BTW you can't just look at stats (see Troy Aikman), especially when you are crossing/comparing eras.

 

[IanTucker]

Comparing stats across generations of football players is useless.Why would he have a lot of TD passes when he had Hornung and Taylor running the ball like they did?It was a different era...McNabb passes on almost every down now for example.I watched Starr's career and I believe he was one of the very best.

 

[shakeybarn]

Johnny U was the most dominant QB ever... a la Babe Ruth. Johnny rewrote the book on the output and game control a QB could have period. Marino, Montana, Young, Elway... have played within the same era and style of offense. Maybe the Vick-style of QBing will be the wave of the future and our kids will be saying ... "but Marino couldn't run... look at his total rushing yards vs Steve Young"...Thusly why need to group QBs within eras, and/or look at them respective AMONGST THEIR PEERS... thusly why NOONE is close to Unitas. Period, end of story.

 

[JohnnyU]

Comparing stats across generations of football players is useless.

Why would he have a lot of TD passes when he had Hornung and Taylor running the ball like they did?

It was a different era...McNabb passes on almost every down now for example.

I watched Starr's career and I believe he was one of the very best.

How could you consider him throwing 138 INTs to 152 tds one of the all time greats? That is beyond me. I'm blown away by that. Hell, 7 times he thew at least 10 tds in 16 years. Best of all time? Hell, Jeff George could have accomplished that.

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

Comparing stats across generations of football players is useless.

Why would he have a lot of TD passes when he had Hornung and Taylor running the ball like they did?

It was a different era...McNabb passes on almost every down now for example.

I watched Starr's career and I believe he was one of the very best.

How could you consider him throwing 138 INTs to 152 tds one of the all time greats? That is beyond me. I'm blown away by that. Hell, 7 times he thew at least 10 tds in 16 years. Best of all time? Hell, Jeff George could have accomplished that.

Paging Shick..............this is just begging for it.

 

[KingPrawn]

Jim mcMahon playing for Lombardi? That has to be one of the funniest things I have ever heard.The funniest would be that Starr was over-rated!

 

[shakeybarn]

Comparing stats across generations of football players is useless.

Why would he have a lot of TD passes when he had Hornung and Taylor running the ball like they did?

It was a different era...McNabb passes on almost every down now for example.

I watched Starr's career and I believe he was one of the very best.

How could you consider him throwing 138 INTs to 152 tds one of the all time greats? That is beyond me. I'm blown away by that. Hell, 7 times he thew at least 10 tds in 16 years. Best of all time? Hell, Jeff George could have accomplished that.

Paging Shick..............this is just begging for it.

I somewhat agree with this, even though I feel a stats only approach is folly. Nonetheless, I look at the teams he played for and he DID for them. He was one of the greats, but a bit down the list IMHO.

 

[Rhino]

Johnny U was the most dominant QB ever... a la Babe Ruth. Johnny rewrote the book on the output and game control a QB could have period. Marino, Montana, Young, Elway... have played within the same era and style of offense.

Maybe the Vick-style of QBing will be the wave of the future and our kids will be saying ... "but Marino couldn't run... look at his total rushing yards vs Steve Young"...

Thusly why need to group QBs within eras, and/or look at them respective AMONGST THEIR PEERS... thusly why NOONE is close to Unitas. Period, end of story.

This is a good point, and one of the reasons I feel like Championships are a better indicator of true success than statistics.Championships show that you were the best of the best AT THAT TIME. For that year that you were the Champion, no one was better. Five Times a Green Bay Packer team led by Bart Starr proved that they were the best of the best.

Statistics are fickle. How many times do you see a player's stats look great in the paper on Monday morning, but the "true" story was that he got most of them in garbage time in the 4th quarter trying to come back in a blowout loss? Granted - that tends to even itself out over the course of a career, but there are plenty of other factors that can effect career stats. QB's that live in the West Coast Offense are going to have higher completion percentages and more passing yards than teams that rely more on the run. Modern day teams throw much more than teams from 30 years ago did.

Like Shakey points out - the QB's of the future may be more moblie and run more, so people will look at QB's of the 70's and 80's and say, "Wow, Joe Montana couldn't run at all - he sure was overrated."

 

[Challenge Everything]

Numbers need to be put into perspective per the era they played in. Would Starr be considered "great" now, of course not, but compare him to the QB's he was playing against in that time. With a couple and only a couple of exceptions during his era, Starr was better then them all. Comparing Starr's numbers to todays QB's is a highly flawed argument.

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

Numbers need to be put into perspective per the era they played in. Would Starr be considered "great" now, of course not, but compare him to the QB's he was playing against in that time. With a couple and only a couple of exceptions during his era, Starr was better then them all.

Comparing Starr's numbers to todays QB's is a highly flawed argument.

That is why these feats take on more importance.....

NFL Highlights:

• Named NFL MVP (1966)

• Won Six Western Division Titles

• Won Five NFL Championships

• Won Two Super Bowl Victories (I,II)

• Named MVP of Super Bowls I and II

• Led the NFL in passing in 1962, 1964 and 1966

• Named to the Pro Bowl Four Times

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Watch the second half of the ice bowl, or even just the last drive, and get back to us.5 ringstwo-time superbowl MVPOf course Starr is one of the greatest ever.

 

[JohnnyU]

[i agree that Starr is up there... but the "won championships" being on that Packer team LOADED with Hall of Famers...

Like I said, with the crappy numbers of Starr, a number of QB's given the same oppurtunity at that time, would be considered one of the all time greats.

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

[i agree that Starr is up there... but the "won championships" being on that Packer team LOADED with Hall of Famers...

Like I said, with the crappy numbers of Starr, a number of QB's given the same oppurtunity at that time, would be considered one of the all time greats.

You just don't get it.

 

[JohnnyU]

Maybe I shouldn't have voted for Starr with my 2 votes, lol. I really believed that most posters would agree that he simply was a product of the times. Any number of QBs, with better numbers would have accomplished the same thing. He sucked as a passing QB, but was a great leader, so I guess that has to account for something. Is that enough to rank him among the best of all time? Especially when it was the system, not the man. How many times have we seen this?, and not anointed that QB one of the best of all time?