Bleacher report top 25 QBs of all time

[PATSYLICIOUS]

I absolutely love drew bledsoe, hes the reason i started following the team but him at 20 is pretty questionable too lol

 

[ChessToCheckers]

IMO: Brady should be #1 through #10. Montana and the rest should start at #11

 

[chris_in_sunnyvale]

Alex Smith.

Ladies and gentlemen: Bleacher Report.

Regards,
Chris

 

[sean10mm]

Brady's even numbered and odd numbered seasons each get into the HOF separately.

Even Brady: 4x SB champ (2004, 2014, 2016, 2018) 2x Super Bowl MVP (2014, 2016), 1x MVP (2010, unanimous!) 1x 1st Team All-Pro (2010) 6x Pro Bowl (2004, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018)

Odd Brady: 2x SB champ (2001, 2003) 2x Super Bowl MVP (2001, 2003) 2x MVP (2007, 2017) 2x 1st Team All-Pro (2007, 2017) 8x Pro Bowl (2001, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2013, 2015, 2017), Comeback Player of the Year (2009)

 

[Deus Irae]

It's a bad list but, looking at some of the complaints and proposed alternatives in this thread, I find that I don't want most of you making the evaluations any more than I want to creator(s) of that list doing it.

 

[sean10mm]

It's a bad list but, looking at some of the complaints and proposed alternatives in this thread, I find that I don't want most of you making the evaluations any more than I want to creator(s) of that list doing it.

You can have good arguments below 1) Brady 2) Montana, but the list has a lot of automatic fails. Off the top of my head:

1. Alex Smith
2. Drew Bledsoe
3. Carson Palmer
4. Tony Romo
5. Bob Griese
6. Phil Simms
7. Alex Smith

 

[Deus Irae]

Bart Starr isn't on the list but Alex Smith and Carson Palmer are?

3 of the 6 greatest QBs in NFL history (Starr, Baugh, Graham) didn't even make that list of 25.

 

[Ring 6]

LOL at this list. Look at #25

7 and 19 are kind of hilarious too.

View attachment 23736

20 too

 

[Wheelman]

Ah bleacher report. Always good for entertainment value. Not for taking seriously.

 

[Wheelman]

#9 Terry Bradshaw

51.9% career completion rate
212 TDs
210 INTs

Oh you think that's bad....

#7 Joe Namath:
50.1% career completion rate
173 TD
220 INT

People say Julian Edelman shouldn't be in the hall of fame. But the only reason Joe Namath is in the hall of fame is because of his guarantee. So why shouldn't Edelman be a HoFer simply for his playoff performance?

 

[luuked]

At least they got Brees into the right neighbourhood.

 

[sean10mm]

Oh you think that's bad....

#7 Joe Namath:
50.1% career completion rate
173 TD
220 INT

People say Julian Edelman shouldn't be in the hall of fame. But the only reason Joe Namath is in the hall of fame is because of his guarantee. So why shouldn't Edelman be a HoFer simply for his playoff performance?

#7 for Namath is nutty, but uh you can't just compare stats from the NFL's Dead Ball Era to the passing numbers today. For his era he was a good player, even if he got way overhyped because of the guarantee.

His # of Top 10 seasons by stat:

Completions: 7
Attempts: 7
Yards: 8
Touchdowns: 8
Passer rating: 5
Yards/attempt: 7
Yards/completion: 8
Adjusted yards/attempt: 6
Completion %: 5
Comebacks: 6
Game winning drives 6
Total offense: 8

Until the end of his career when he was totally busted, his interception % was either league average or a bit better while everything else was in the top 5-10. Heck, he had 5 seasons in the top 10 LEAST intercepted QBs by % of throws.

 

[Ring 6]

It's a joke.

Winning and Super Bowls are 10X more important that stats

A lot of things are more important than stats. In football. The validity of stats and reliance on them in baseball has bastardized the value people put in them in football.
In baseball you do mostly the same thing 600 times and it’s you against the pitcher. Football is nothing like that and stats have questionable value without loads of context that is necessary for them to be meaningful.

 

[Ring 6]

#7 for Namath is nutty, but uh you can't just compare stats from the NFL's Dead Ball Era to the passing numbers today. For his era he was a good player, even if he got way overhyped because of the guarantee.

His # of Top 10 seasons by stat:

Completions: 7
Attempts: 7
Yards: 8
Touchdowns: 8
Passer rating: 5
Yards/attempt: 7
Yards/completion: 8
Adjusted yards/attempt: 6
Completion %: 5
Comebacks: 6
Game winning drives 6
Total offense: 8

Until the end of his career when he was totally busted, his interception % was either league average or a bit better while everything else was in the top 5-10. Heck, he had 5 seasons in the top 10 LEAST intercepted QBs by % of throws.

Mostly being in the top 10 in most stats in most seasons isn’t what makes me think top 7 all time. Top 7 of the era maybe.

 

[Patstastic]

Brady's even numbered and odd numbered seasons each get into the HOF separately.

Even Brady: 4x SB champ (2004, 2014, 2016, 2018) 2x Super Bowl MVP (2014, 2016), 1x MVP (2010, unanimous!) 1x 1st Team All-Pro (2010) 6x Pro Bowl (2004, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018)

Odd Brady: 2x SB champ (2001, 2003) 2x Super Bowl MVP (2001, 2003) 2x MVP (2007, 2017) 2x 1st Team All-Pro (2007, 2017) 8x Pro Bowl (2001, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2013, 2015, 2017), Comeback Player of the Year (2009)

I was thinking about the moment Brady became a slam dunk hall of famer. Would it have been after SB 39? 07? He would've been a first ballot hall of famer if he had retired before the 2014 season!! Amazing when you think of it.

 

[Patstastic]

A lot of things are more important than stats. In football. The validity of stats and reliance on them in baseball has bastardized the value people put in them in football.
In baseball you do mostly the same thing 600 times and it’s you against the pitcher. Football is nothing like that and stats have questionable value without loads of context that is necessary for them to be meaningful.[/QUOTE]

Bingo. If a random fan just looked at stats, Kirk Cousins would be on their top 5 QB list. That is until you watch the games and realize he throws most of his big yards during garbage time. Rodgers never throws any picks. But that's because he has the most throw aways of any QB. Meaning he isn't likely to take a risks. He protects his stats.

 

[jmt57]

At least they got Unitas on there.

@Deus Irae beat me to it, but off the top of my head, if this is truly an all-time list then somewhere it needs to include not necessarily all, but at least some of these names:

Otto Graham
Bobby Layne
Sammy Baugh
Bart Starr
Bob Waterfield
Norm Van Brocklin​

And there are plenty of others that I probably would not place in the top 25, but would still rank higher than Alex Smith, Carson Palmer, etc., such as:

Fran Tarkenton
Y.A. Tittle
Ken Stabler
Len Dawson
Daryle Lamonica
John Hadl
Dan Fouts
​

Was it click bait, or genuinely uneducated?

 

[jmt57]

#7 for Namath is nutty, but uh you can't just compare stats from the NFL's Dead Ball Era to the passing numbers today. For his era he was a good player, even if he got way overhyped because of the guarantee.

His # of Top 10 seasons by stat:

Completions: 7
Attempts: 7
Yards: 8
Touchdowns: 8
Passer rating: 5
Yards/attempt: 7
Yards/completion: 8
Adjusted yards/attempt: 6
Completion %: 5
Comebacks: 6
Game winning drives 6
Total offense: 8

Until the end of his career when he was totally busted, his interception % was either league average or a bit better while everything else was in the top 5-10. Heck, he had 5 seasons in the top 10 LEAST intercepted QBs by % of throws.

I really do like to use this type of compilation when comparing players of different eras. In fact, I use this myself quite often.

However:

One needs to dig a little deeper here. Reason for that is that those rankings are only for the AFL!

In Namath's first five seasons there were this many teams (and starting QBs):
1965: 8
1966: 9
1967: 10
1968: 10
1969: 10

In other words - he (and every other AFL starter) was guaranteed to rank in the top ten!


The top 10/top 5/top 3 ranking is still a useful tool - you just have to be careful when using it prior to 1970.

 

[Ring 6]

I really do like to use this type of compilation when comparing players of different eras. In fact, I use this myself quite often.

However:

One needs to dig a little deeper here. Reason for that is that those rankings are only for the AFL!

In Namath's first five seasons there were this many teams (and starting QBs):
1965: 8
1966: 9
1967: 10
1968: 10
1969: 10

In other words - he (and every other AFL starter) was guaranteed to rank in the top ten!


The top 10/top 5/top 3 ranking is still a useful tool - you just have to be careful when using it prior to 1970.

Lol

 

[Deus Irae]

G.O.A.T. discussions are inherently problematic. If you can find some parameters that hold up for all involved, that makes it easier to slot the players. But, the discussions involve a lot of players over a lot of years. They involve the struggles of recency bias and stat inflation v. nostalgia. And, more importantly, they involve those players while requiring those in the discussions to adjust for changes in the rules, the equipment and other physical components, and the players. And, on top of that, the discussions have the inherent problems of transition issues, particularly of transitional/transformational players.

So, all we can do is our best, and to try to be consistent in our internal evaluations. But, if you're leaving Bart Starr off a top 25 QB list, or slotting Jim Kelly above Bradshaw/Favre/Roethlisberger, or slotting Aikman/Manning above Staubach, or putting Namath in the top 10, or putting Tony Romo or Alex Smith in the top 25, you have to know that your analysis sucks, and go back to the drawing board.