Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Who really is the greatest of all time? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Dancing Bear
- Start date
Gawain
Footballguy
For 2018, I'd probably take Gore.
Where do you fall on Hutson? I'm a fan of the Hutson #1 WR overall argument that can easily be made for Hutson from deviation from contemporaries baseline.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
I would still rank Jerry Rice over Hutson, but I would put Hutson either 2 or 3. I also like Lance Alworth in the top 3.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
Good question. Here's the thing, when I opine on Unitas and Starr I actually watched them play back when they were playing. My analysis of them is not simply statistical. I was not around when Hutson was doing his thing. He clearly was a player out of time, one who transcended his generation of football. There are not many of those.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
Bambi
I always felt Paul Warfield never got his due, nor Sterling Sharpe. As for Rice v. Hutson, I saw Rice, he was awesome. Hutson I only saw in a few film clips, really outside of the numbers I don't know him so I don't know how to make a comparison.
Koya
Footballguy
I can see leaving out Staubach and Baugh... to leave out Unitas, who for much of modern NFL history was considered the greatest "modern" QB and the first of his mild, is, imo, to have a list that is not worth having.Dancing Bear said:
Unitas should be on that list without dispute, none whatsoever. And there is ZERO question he is a far far better all time QB than Bradshaw, and I believe Bradshaw would admit as such. Rings in football have a whole lot to do with those other 21 players on the field. A list of all time greats without Unitas is simply not a list worth having.
Ron_Mexico
I Love Doggies
There should be no other options to click beyond Brady and Montanaby_the_sea_wannabe said:
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
This. It simply means people don't want to think about how many people both on and off the field go into winning Super Bowls & playoff games.
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
Good post. Like comparing Babe Ruth's HR totals to modern day players, it's all relative.
Gawain
Footballguy
By Game Receptions Yards TD
Rice 5.8 90 0.88
Hutson 4.2 69 0.85
Next Best Receptions Yards TD
Rice Comp 6.5 91 0.86
Huts Comp 3.4 55 0.64
Take Don Hutson's 11 year career. Then, by year, add up the guy not named Don Hutson that had the most receptions, then the most receiving yards, then the most TDs. This makes a mythical WR that had the best possible yearly stats by anyone not named Don Hutson.
Hutson had 25% more receptions, 26% more receiving yards and 34% more receiving TDs more than the best possible receiver that could be put together from everyone else's yearly totals.
When you do the same exercise for Rice, Rice has 11% fewer receptions, 1% fewer yards and 2% more receiving TDs than the best player from 86-96, Rice's best comp years. If you take Rice's career as a whole, that number is much lower.
Rice 5.8 90 0.88
Hutson 4.2 69 0.85
Next Best Receptions Yards TD
Rice Comp 6.5 91 0.86
Huts Comp 3.4 55 0.64
Take Don Hutson's 11 year career. Then, by year, add up the guy not named Don Hutson that had the most receptions, then the most receiving yards, then the most TDs. This makes a mythical WR that had the best possible yearly stats by anyone not named Don Hutson.
Hutson had 25% more receptions, 26% more receiving yards and 34% more receiving TDs more than the best possible receiver that could be put together from everyone else's yearly totals.
When you do the same exercise for Rice, Rice has 11% fewer receptions, 1% fewer yards and 2% more receiving TDs than the best player from 86-96, Rice's best comp years. If you take Rice's career as a whole, that number is much lower.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/pass_rating_career_playoffs.htm
Notice who leads the list. Notice also that he is a man completely out of time. he leads this list yet he played in a time where the rules and the game made it nearly impossible to obtain that rating. all the others high on the list, yet not as high as he, come from the last 20 years or so. I submit that those who do not consider Starr for this choice simply do not understand what he accomplished or the game of football, including the rules changes which have enabled the play and the numbers of Brady and such.
Notice who leads the list. Notice also that he is a man completely out of time. he leads this list yet he played in a time where the rules and the game made it nearly impossible to obtain that rating. all the others high on the list, yet not as high as he, come from the last 20 years or so. I submit that those who do not consider Starr for this choice simply do not understand what he accomplished or the game of football, including the rules changes which have enabled the play and the numbers of Brady and such.
Stompin' Tom Connors
Footballguy
And, gauging by the way he pancakes so many of Ming's guards, Flash (unlike Brady, Montana, et al) could have played both sides of the ball as LB. Versatiity and heroism!
Not sure Marino's names fits as cleanly in this debate. The guy was fantastic, but imo not a csndidate for GOAT.
Despite it largely being a team game and Manning being saddled with a terrible defense and incompetent general managers (and sometimes coaches, looking at you Caldwell), people will gladly overlook these facts and just point to the rings. In order to be the GOAT in the eyes of the masses, you must play on a good team with a good coach and have relatively good luck in single elimination playoffs. Your individual play is merely a minor factor.
ESPN makes the argument for Tom Brady:
Tom Brady's GOAT status clear after a look at NFL playoff records
Tom Brady's GOAT status clear after a look at NFL playoff records
Koya
Footballguy
Hutson was further beyond his contemporaries than any other WR ever, possibly any other player, period (I suppose Jim Brown could be included there in terms of sheer dominance, if not quite the number separation).
That said, when you are starting at "such" a low relative basis, that has to account for something, even in the face of the sheer magnitude of 99 freakin TDs when guys could all but tackle him on the way to those receptions. It's hard for me to put any WR above Rice, but I also don't see anyone on the plateau of those two to bridge the old game with the new.
Koya
Footballguy
I disagree - I think many of us take all that into consideration, and it certainly boosts Manning's resume and placement, as such. However, he himself was simply not quite the gamer in those huge games, not on par with some of the others. That's why this is not a list of all time greats, but even more elite in terms of who is the absolute greatest - and even compensating for the items you list, Manning is simply not there.
I disagree, but FWIW, I think Rodgers is the GOAT. He's been saddled with McCarthy, though.
But really, if you think about it, basing this on single elimination playoff games with only about 11 minutes play per game is pretty silly. I get it - the sport is just too tough on the human body to play more than 1 game per week, but that doesn't change the fact that there's a reason why all meaningful playoffs are set to 7 game series when possible. One game is just not enough to really tell who is best and football is probably the most fickle. A single kickoff, a tipped pass, a bad call, a fumble for a touchback... any of these can totally turn a game around. In baseball and basketball, a single slip up or lucky bounce doesn't have nearly the impact... yet both of those sports utilize best of seven.
This idea that championships are any more than a bonus for individual players is silly I think. They are a team accomplishment, and if you give credit to any one person for it, it should likely go to the GM/Coach who acquired all those players to begin with.
One player doesn't win a championship in football, its simply not possible. So saying so and so has this many rings so he's better than someone who had less is starting with a bad argument. For example, Joe Flacco and Aaron Rodgers both became starters in 2008, they each have 1 ring, are they equals? Obviously not, Rodgers is better than Flacco in every conceivable way, other than agent hiring(maybe don't use State Farm for NFL contracts Aaron.) Similar examples would be Peyton Manning=Trent Dilfer, or Brett Favre=Brad Johnson.
The team with the best QB doesn't win the Super Bowl every year, in fact it almost never happens. Looking through history, I see the following examples where the best QB won the Super Bowl:
1999=Kurt Warner
1996=Brett Favre
1994=Steve Young
1989=Joe Montana
1978=Terry Bradshaw
1966=Bart Starr
6 times in the entire Super Bowl era.
One player doesn't win a championship in football, its simply not possible. So saying so and so has this many rings so he's better than someone who had less is starting with a bad argument. For example, Joe Flacco and Aaron Rodgers both became starters in 2008, they each have 1 ring, are they equals? Obviously not, Rodgers is better than Flacco in every conceivable way, other than agent hiring(maybe don't use State Farm for NFL contracts Aaron.) Similar examples would be Peyton Manning=Trent Dilfer, or Brett Favre=Brad Johnson.
The team with the best QB doesn't win the Super Bowl every year, in fact it almost never happens. Looking through history, I see the following examples where the best QB won the Super Bowl:
1999=Kurt Warner
1996=Brett Favre
1994=Steve Young
1989=Joe Montana
1978=Terry Bradshaw
1966=Bart Starr
6 times in the entire Super Bowl era.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
I read the article. It says Brady has benefited mightily from competing in a pass happy rules area, in a era of expanded playoffs providing more games and therefor opportunities, and he has had the good fortune to have benefitted from flukey rules, the legs of a kicker, the hands of a D.B and he has played in a weak ### division in a weak ### conference. Its all right there. It does not go into the nomenclature change from Championship to Super Bowl so as to avoid having to address the accomplishments of his betters, but the transparency of that ploy is an admission.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
Tarkenton is always tough to rank. he lacks the championship, but he t tended to exceed the yardage and completion numbers of his generation.
Fear The Turtle
Footballguy
Exactly. Baugh should BE the cut, with the rest jockeying for 2nd. Only player who has led/will ever lead the league in passing, punting, and interceptions as a DB. Dude still holds NFL punting records even though he retired 65 years ago. Enshrined in the HOF's first class, whereas Luckman and Graham had to wait a few years.
The original post, and the question don't even say "greatest QB of all time," just "greatest." But since Rice and Hutson weren't on the list, I decided to limit my response to QBs.
Still, just because you have to be a QB to qualify for this odd list doesn't mean we have to only look at QB accomplishments. Two-way play had a ton of value in the days of low revenue and expensive contracts. Three-way play was unprecedented even then, and in Baugh we have a player capable of playing each at an All-Pro level.
Nothing Brady has done comes close to that. His next forced fumble will be the 1st of his career, and he's behind Big Ben in punting by a 5:1 margin at least.
mikel2014
Footballguy
Bossman
Footballguy
Championships are a team stat.
I wish there were a better measuring stick.
Which of these players did more with less?
Which of these QB's carried their teams? ... and which of these QB's were CARRIED by their team?
Bradys first 2 had more to do with his defense than his QB play.
I wish there were a better measuring stick.
Which of these players did more with less?
Which of these QB's carried their teams? ... and which of these QB's were CARRIED by their team?
Bradys first 2 had more to do with his defense than his QB play.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
The sad part is that the original poster knows that if he had included Unitas he would have stolen enough votes to cause either Brady to lose to Montana or visa versa. In other words, he wanted this poll to be about Montana vs Brady. He included the other QBs to complete this list.
If I had to rank the greatest QBs of all time QBs I would rank them as follows
1 - Joe Montana
2 - John Unitas - he invented the modern day QB and the two minute drill. A master who would have been even better had he played now. He commanded the huddle and called his own plays. A true field general.
3 - Tom Brady
4 - Peyton Manning
5 - John Elway
6 - Dan Marino
7 - Otto Graham
8 - Brett Favre
9 - Roger Staubauch
10 - Terry Bradshaw
Honorable mention - Warren Moon.
If I had to rank the greatest QBs of all time QBs I would rank them as follows
1 - Joe Montana
2 - John Unitas - he invented the modern day QB and the two minute drill. A master who would have been even better had he played now. He commanded the huddle and called his own plays. A true field general.
3 - Tom Brady
4 - Peyton Manning
5 - John Elway
6 - Dan Marino
7 - Otto Graham
8 - Brett Favre
9 - Roger Staubauch
10 - Terry Bradshaw
Honorable mention - Warren Moon.
Last edited by a moderator:
For comparisons sake, my top-10 would be:
1= Peyton Manning, its amazing to me how little credit he gets for basically being in the MVP conversation from 1999 through 2014. Nobody touches his longevity as an elite player, and his peak was the best passing season in NFL history. We've seen what happened to the Colts and Broncos without him.
2= Otto Graham
3= Johnny Unitas
4= Sid Luckman
5= Sammy Baugh
6= Tom Brady
7= Brett Favre
8= Dan Marino
9= Joe Montana
10= Y.A. Tittle
Honorable mention= Steve Young
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Luckman, Baugh, and Tittle, especially Tittle, shouldn't be on the list. As a Colts fan I've been for 52 years no way is Manning #1. You talk about his longevity, what about Brady's and he's still producing at a high level? Manning is however in the top 5 and I have him #4. No one loves Peyton Manning as much as I do. No way is Montana #9, he's the best ever IMO. I do think Otto Graham is underrated however. Graham - 3× NFL champion (1950, 1954, 1955), 5× Pro Bowl (1950–1954), 4× First-team All-Pro (1951, 1953–1955), 3× NFL Most Valuable Player (1951, 1953, 1955). He led the Cleveland Browns to 10 championship games in the 10 seasons
Last edited by a moderator:
Grigs Allmoon
Footballguy
Of course they do... You think if they published an article right now about Montana or Manning being the greatest of all time it would get anywhere near the same number of clicks? Heck no...
How you feel about Luckman, Baugh and Tittle is how I feel about Elway and Staubach. Good QB's who were carried by great teams, Staubach in particular.
Brady's longevity was part of being on the best coached team of the last 20 years, and arguably didn't really start until 2007, as the Pats were considered a defense first team until then. Manning had Jim Mora, Jim Caldwell, and while Dungy was good, he contributed nothing offensively, and was not even remotely on Belichick's level. I'd also argue Brady has had a better supporting cast than Manning did. Not in 2001, when he took over, but in the years since. Manning never had a WR as talented as Moss, or anybody who was a mismatch on the level of Gronkowski.
My issue with Montana is somewhat similar to why I don't have Favre higher. When he left, he wasn't missed at all. If Rodgers plays at the level he was at before this year, he'll crack this list in a couple years. Also, how much of Montana was Bill Walsh? How much was Jerry Rice? I can see having Montana higher than 9th, I have him Brady, Favre and Marino in the same tier.
What is it you don't like about Tittle, Baugh and especially Luckman?
Last edited by a moderator:
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Tittle simply isn't in the same league as the top QBs of all time. He had 248 ints to 242 tds and only had 2 great years (1962 and 1963). I will give him credit however that those two years were at the end of his career. You talk about Manning never having a WR as talented as Moss, but you forget he had Harrison, Wayne, James, and Clark. Don't talk to me about Manning with lack of offensive weapons. What he didn't have compared to Brady was a defense. Also, Adam Vinatieri did bail Brady out early in his Super Bowls and he seemed to be a part of great teams that won Super Bowls, not the reason for winning them. However, Brady has been great all these years and set records too and is still playing at a high level. You cannot take that away from him. IMO Montana was the most Unitas like QB of his era. He was the most field general like QB since Unitas IMO. Yes, he had great players and coach around him, but so did Unitas in 1958 and 1959 (Raymond Berry, Lenny Moore, Gino Marchetti, Gene Lipscomb, Art Donavan, Jim Parker). With Montana and Unitas you could get a sense of their greatness when they played. The same cannot be said about a lot of other QBs when talking about the greatest ever. The thing about Manning that still bothers to me this day is that he played some of his worst games on the biggest stage. Even the Super Bowl he won he was pedestrian and almost seemed like his MVP was a gift of past accomplishments. Dominic Rhodes should have been MVP. Don't get me wrong, I think Manning is one of the greatest QBs of all-time (#4), but his deficiencies stand out on the biggest stage and as a Colts fan I cannot rank him #1 as you do.
Last edited by a moderator:
I had Tittle and Young as a tossup for 10th. Considering your view of Montana, I'm very curious on your view of Young then, especially since he didn't get to start until Walsh was gone.
My point wasn't that Manning didn't have weapons, it was that he didn't have superior weapons to Brady. I certainly didn't forget those guys, but Harrison was the only truly elite player of that bunch. Moss and Gronk were superior to all those guys, and Welker was right there with them.
Montana had some pretty awful playoff games himself. He was awful in 85-86-87 playoffs. He generated 0 TD's in any of those years. Granted he got hurt against the Giants in 86 and again against the Vikings in 87, but in both cases he wasn't helping at all, and in the Vikings game the offense got a shot in the arm once he was replaced by Young who quickly led the 49ers back into the game, though they still lost.
Manning's big game history is interesting, he had some excellent games that he lost because the defense was awful, and some bad games he won(such as that Bears Super Bowl) that were mostly based of the work of others.
I won't argue Manning was a better big game QB than Montana was because he wasn't. That said, Manning was a significantly better regular season QB and getting to the big games counts just as much as the games themselves in my opinion.
Also, I agree Manning had no business winning the MVP of that Super Bowl. I thought that Kelvin Hayden deserved it. His pick-6 sealed the game. Until that play, the Bears had a decent shot of winning. Rhodes and Addai were interchangeable in that game, Rhodes had a better day on the ground, but Addai kept multiple drives moving with his receiving work. At least that is how I remember that game as a Bears fan.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
No, you don't give the MVP because of one interception, even the clincher. Dominic Rhodes clearly won MVP of that Super Bowl.
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, Hayden he also contained Berrian, who had been the only big play weapon for the Bears offense that year. 38 yards on 7 targets, mostly in Hayden's coverage.
How was Rhodes clearly better than Addai? Rhodes had 121 yards on 22 touches. Addai had 143 on 29 touches, including catching 10 of 10 targets.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Fair enough.
I would like to steer back into your opinion on Steve Young, as you had Montana #1 and Young outside the top-11.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
I certainly like Steve Young more than Y A Titlte and had him #12 in my list, just missing out on honorable mention. He had 4 great years and finally got the monkey off his back with a Super Bowl win. I like Young a lot because he was a good passer and could run. I have no problem to replace Moon with Young in the Honorable mention spot, but I had to choose one.
Last edited by a moderator:
Tau837
Footballguy
One of the best posts I have seen on this subject that illustrates why championships are often overrated as a point of comparison for the greatest QBs.
Tau837
Footballguy
There was a time when I thought Unitas and Montana were alone in the top tier, but I think Brady has surpassed them as GOAT, leaving Unitas and Montana as the only members of tier 2.
Brady's case is pretty clear.
While #1 has a lot to do with teammates and coaching, it is still very impressive, especially in the salary cap era when rosters turn over regularly.
Brady's case is pretty clear.
- Won more regular season games, post season games, division titles, conference championship games, and Super Bowls than any other QB in history.
- Impressive awards: 2 MVPs, 4 SBMVPs, 2 OPOYs, CBPOY, 3 1st team All Pros, 2 2nd team All Pros, 13 Pro Bowls
- Impressive ranks in all time accumulated statistics, notably #4 in passing yards and #3 in passing TDs
- Impressive ranks in all time rate statistics, notably #3 in passer rating
- Clutch player: #2 in both game winning drives and comebacks in the regular season, #1 in both in postseason
While #1 has a lot to do with teammates and coaching, it is still very impressive, especially in the salary cap era when rosters turn over regularly.
JuniorGong
Footballguy
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
[icon]
Insoxicated
So Brady’s 4Q comebacks in multiple superbowls doesn’t count as being his best in biggest games?
Brady’s 4Q vs Atlanta last year might be the best quarter by a QB in the history of the super bowl, all things considered.
Dedfin
Footballguy
Probably the best 4th quarter in the history of football. No hyperbole here. I challenge anyone to find anything better.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
To be fair, Brady was a big reason why they were behind in the first place in that game. Sure he had a great quarter, but he had a pretty awful entire first half.
Taking the entire game into account, I wouldn't even call that a top-2 game in Brady's Super Bowl career. Both the Seattle and Carolina games were more impressive. I'd probably have it in the 6-10 range just among QB's in the Super Bowl that overcame a deficit in the 4th quarter. The best Super Bowl QB 4th quarter in my opinion is Montana in Super Bowl 23 against the Bengals.
From a comeback perspective, I still think Frank Reich is responsible for the the all-time best comeback, but that wasn't in a Super Bowl.
GregR
Footballguy
Wow, I couldn't be more diametrically opposed to you here.
If we want to discuss "who was the most successful QB" then it becomes a more straightforward question of counting up championships, playoff runs and wins. Though equating different eras with different numbers of teams is still an issue.
But if "greatest" means the best player and not the player with the most/best team results, then to me the conversation has to include how would both players do in similar situations. If you judge that one player would get the better results in both the situation he played in, and the situation another player you're comparing him played in, then you'd kind of have to pick him as the better of the two.
[icon]
Insoxicated
Joe Montana (SB23): 23 of 36 (64%) / 357yd / 2TDtravdogg said:
Tom Brady (SB51 4th Qtr ONLY): 21 of 27 (78%) / 246yds / 1TD
Tom Brady (SB51): 43 of 62 (69%) / 466yds / 2TD
Led 3 scoring drives in 4th: Two TDs (BOTH w/ 2pt conversions), and a FG. Then led a TD Drive (5 for 7 for 63yds) in OT as a cherry on top.
You are insane, IMO
Tom Brady(SB51), completely useless in the first half. Was responsible for Patriots being behind in the first place. Created more points for Falcons than Patriots until late in the 3rd quarter.Joe Montana (SB23): 23 of 36 (64%) / 357yd / 2TD
Tom Brady (SB51 4th Qtr ONLY): 21 of 27 (78%) / 246yds / 1TD
Tom Brady (SB51): 43 of 62 (69%) / 466yds / 2TD
Led 3 scoring drives in 4th: Two TDs (BOTH w/ 2pt conversions), and a FG. Then led a TD Drive (5 for 7 for 63yds) in OT as a cherry on top.
You are insane, IMO
Look Brady had an awesome 4th quarter, but overall, it wasn't that great a game. He was awful until halfway through the 3rd quarter, and was a major(arguably the biggest) reason why the comeback was needed.
moleculo
Footballguy
just a reminder:
every time Manning had his team in position to win a playoff game with a kick, his kicker missed. Every time his opponent was in position to win a game by FG, they converted.
every time Brady had his team in position to win a playoff game with a kick, his kicker converted. Every time his opponent was in position to win a game by FG, they missed.
It baffles my mind that perception of QB greatness depends so much on the performance of kickers.
every time Manning had his team in position to win a playoff game with a kick, his kicker missed. Every time his opponent was in position to win a game by FG, they converted.
every time Brady had his team in position to win a playoff game with a kick, his kicker converted. Every time his opponent was in position to win a game by FG, they missed.
It baffles my mind that perception of QB greatness depends so much on the performance of kickers.
Similar threads
