Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
The Moz

All time top 10's

Recommended Posts

QB

 

1. Joe Montana - could be overtaken by Peyton if Peyton win more superbowls.

2. Peyton Manning - Never misses a game , if basically the OC of his team , and is the best pure in the league.

3. Johnny Unitas - The original ( Modern Day ) QB - turned a running sport into a passing one..

4. Dan Marino - The best pure passer ever

5. Brett Favre - Don't like him as much as I did but guy has played every week since My last year of HS -- I am 37.

6. Tom Brady - Made a perenial losing franchise into the most successful.

7. Steve Young - Unreal passer rating several years together.

8. Troy Aikman - The most accurate QB I have watched play.

9. John Elway - Some might have him higher but he had no stats -- though he did just win games.

10. Jim Kelly - No rings but 4 trips - best hurry up offense QB ever.

 

RB

 

1. Jim Brown - No one is close

2. Barry Sanders - No player has EVER been as fun to watch play. An almost all NFL fans agree on that.

3. Walter Payton - I know he won a SB but most of his career his team sucked -- too bad as he was great.

4. Eric Dickerson - For a 4-5 year stretch he looked unstoppable on the Rams.

5. O.J. Simpson - his personal life aside he was GREAT runner.

6. Earl Campbell - Short career but the most punishing RB I ever saw myself.

7. Marshall Faulk - Best dual threat ever rb for recieving and rushing.

8. Emmitt Smith - Personally I find him vastly overated but the rushing king deserves a little love

9. Gale Sayers - Maybe better than Walter but just didn't play enough.

10. John Riggins - best White RB ever but a hell of a clutch RB.

 

WR

 

1. Jerry Rice -- Duh.

2. Randy Moss - No other WR is as raw talented as Randy - Give Randy 15 years of Montana and Young and who knows.

3. Terrell Owens - People hate him but he has been so good for so long.

4. Lance Allworth - Best pre 70's wr ever

5. Cris Carter - all he did was catch TD's

6. Michael Irvin - all he did was make plays

7. Tim Brown - Played great for a long time

8. Don Hutson - the Original great WR

9. Marvin Harrison - Played with Peyton his whole career but still the best route runner ever.

10. Steve Largent - Could never play in todays game - too high of character. He owned all the records till Rice broke em all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good lists

 

As a Steeler fan, it I don't like seeing the list of QBs without Bradshaw (4 SB wins) but I know where you're coming from.

 

Seeing Kelly on your list, I know Superbowl wins don't necessarily translate into best QBs but if the guy can't win the big game (Kelly 0-5) just how good is he?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kris Jenkins would be in this discussion if only he could stay on the field :(

 

though he doesn't rack up the sacks, his is a beast inside and completely changes the game from the 3-4 NT position.

Very, very good lists.

 

I think you nailed the top7 QB's. But I'd still swap Aikman & Elway (I've always been a diehard Aikman supporter - and you're completely right. He's the most accurate QB I've ever watched). And as someone else mentioned, I'd probably put Bradshaw & his 4 SB's ahead of Kelly.

 

RB's are probably the hardest to rank. What has more meritt - raw talent? Physical abilities? Total stats (yards/TD's)? Efficiency (ypc)? Obviously some combination of both. There's been some talk that Smith is overrated...really? As a 5'9" RB, he was one of the toughest the sport has ever seen. Unbelievable vision, shiftiness, and could explode through the hole be4 most RB's even recognized it. The game against the Giants, the biggest game of the season, where he broke his collarbone in the 1st half, and played thru it and ended up with like 230 total yards and 2 TD's pretty much sums up his career.

 

Like your WR list, but I can't put Irvin quite that high...maybe #8-12. Harrison needs to be higher. I know the argument is he played with one of the best QB's of all time...Rice had Montana/Young, Irvin had Aikman, Moss had Brady, TO had Young, McNabb, Romo. All WR's who put up great stats are going to have good QB's. Like you said, Marvin is the greatest route-runner of all time. Most of his #'s rank top3-5 all time. And he put up one of the most impressive seasons for a WR ever (143 catches, 1,722 yards, 11 TD's).

 

But overall, really good job :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would move Brady ahead of Favre. Brady is about winning and Favre is about stats. As for Physical talent, there is no comparison between Favre and Brady. But when it comes down to who is smarter and who will make the right decisions for their team. Brady dominates Favre. Brady works his butt off the field and studies films nonstop like manning. Favre skips training camp and has never been studious in his preparations. I also think Brady is a much better leader and much more respected by his teammates. Even players who no longer play with New England revere Brady.

 

I think your QB list is probably weighted by looking at stats. QB ratings have skyrocketed each decade based on how the game has evolved. I think Staubach is probably the greatest Cowboy qb of all time not Aikman. Staubach was a great leader and a pure winner.

 

Other great qb's from different Eras:

 

Otto Graham - 10 seasons, 10 championship games, 7 championships. In his 10 years in the league, his team lost 13 total games.

 

Bradshaw

Bart Starr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it is somewhat skewed as I am only 25 and did not get to watch many of these players, however I think that LT should be in the group of top ten Rbs ever. At the age of 31, has amassed 13 thousand rushing yards,4,100 yards receiving, 158 total TDs, 5 pro bowls, 6 time all pro,8 seasons rushing for over 1,000 yards, 3 seasons with over 2,000 combined yards (God it sucked being an Oakland fan). There could be an argument made for Curtis Martin as well with the stats he amassed. I know he has yet to win a title, but I believe he is at the VERY least in the top 10. Otherwise I like the lists a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How did 2 people mention Bradshaw :blink:

 

Half of his years he had more picks than TD's, his QB rating was always terrible, and his passing yardage sucked. Even though he had hall of famers at every skill position around him. I would take 10-15 QB's that are playing today ahead of Terry Bradshaw in his prime.

 

 

 

 

I do not see how TO is #3 all time. He is a headache waiting to happen, and he drops the ball in clutch moments. I would not have him in the top 10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good lists

 

As a Steeler fan, it I don't like seeing the list of QBs without Bradshaw (4 SB wins) but I know where you're coming from.

 

Seeing Kelly on your list, I know Superbowl wins don't necessarily translate into best QBs but if the guy can't win the big game (Kelly 0-5) just how good is he?

 

These lists should NEVER include Championships as part of the criteria. We are talking PURE talent for a given position. I dont know why but too many fans always jump on the "He has more Super Bowls than the other guy blah, blah...". It doesnt work and it cant be part of the formula. Otherwise, you'd have Doug Williams and Trent Dilfer ahead of Marino which is absolutely silly and you guys know it.

 

Overall the lists are pretty good although I will offer some opinions:

 

- Barry Sanders is better than Jim Brown. Sorry, but the Jim Brown fan club is too big and unreasonable.

- Dan Fouts needs to be on the QB list. Maybe in place of the blessed Troy Aikman.

- Move Brady down the list. Hes above average but did/is doing all his damage on incredibly good teams that seem to always have everything fall into place for them. Just like this year.

 

- Pretty good list though...very good actually. :doublethumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate the QB rating. i think its a crappy way to judge best QB. Here is an article about a different way to measure the Qb. I think it accurately reflects the best QB's of all time better.

 

http://www.informativesports.com/NFL/0709/Sabermetrics_Passer_Rating.htm

 

 

Introducing Sabermetrics to the NFL:

 

Passer Rating+

 

by Joel Ruff

 

 

Sabremetrics have rapidly become a mainstay in the world of baseball. VORP, WHIP, ERA+ and other statistics have been created to help shed light on what may not be easily seen through raw totals. Major league front offices have quickly, and smartly, embraced this trend. Many teams employ individuals who do nothing but sit behind closed doors crunching numbers trying to discover the metrics that most closely correlate with team success.

 

Football, meanwhile, has largely ignored this statistical shift. There are some websites and individuals who have taken on the mammoth task of trying to discern both the quality of a player, and the impact that player makes on a team, through statistical means. It is a very difficult process. Unlike baseball, which in many ways is a series of separate individual matchups, football is a strongly team-oriented game. On any given play, one player blowing an assignment will reflect poorly on the team as a whole even if the other 10 players are performing their duties perfectly.

 

But simply because a task is difficult, that does not make it not worth doing. Rather than throw our collective hands up, curse and give up because the task seems impossible, we should investigate the matter a bit further.

 

Let’s start with the building block -- passer rating. It is a flawed place to begin, but at least it is something. First some explanation of what the passer rating is, and is not. It is a measure of how efficient a quarterback is when he throws the ball. It is not a measure of how good a quarterback necessarily is. Rushing ability, sack avoidance, leadership, and many other factors are left out of this calculation.

 

 

However, there is some worth to it.

 

We can all agree that completing a higher percentage of passes is better than completing fewer, right?

 

We can also all agree that touchdowns are good and interceptions are bad, right?

 

And gaining yards when throwing the ball is better than not gaining yards, right?

 

 

Those elements are really the backbone of the passer rating statistic. Some don’t like the mix. Perhaps too much weight is given to some aspects and too little to others, but regardless, it’s hard to argue that higher is not better and that lower is better when it comes to the rating. There is at least some evidence that the best individual passing seasons in NFL history have yielded the highest passer ratings (Peyton Manning 2004/121.1, Tom Brady 2007/117.2, etc.). And it’s not merely coincidence that some of the worst quarterbacks in NFL history have very low passer ratings. So let’s take this statistic for what it currently is: a useful, but flawed representation of how good a QB throws.

 

Now let’s go a step further. I would also submit that it is the best objective means of measuring a quarterback. A discerning mind that knows football is probably the best means, but that is not objective. It is subject to bias and fuzzy, vague conclusions. There simply are no other better statistics. Total yards? Too easily skewed by increased opportunity. No one would suggest with a straight face that Drew Bledsoe is superior to Johnny Unitas by virtue of his greater yards. Total touchdowns? Same problem. Compilers, those who simply hung around a long time, will appear superior to those truly great talents who had shorter careers. Completion percentage? Hardly. In David Carr’s final year as a starter in Houston he led the league in completion percentage while being a truly awful quarterback. He simply refused to throw downfield so he completed a lot of checkdowns.

 

If we are going to find a better way to objectively measure a quarterback we have some work to do. Let’s look a little closer at quarterback rating to see what problems it has.

 

The first major objection people have is that they don’t understand the QB rating and thus do not trust its conclusions. This is silly. Very few people understand the inner workings of a car yet only the very foolish would choose to walk everywhere until they fully understood the function of every belt and gasket under the hood. No, we turn the key and drive, because it is the best means of getting around that we have. The results are what is relevant, not the process.

 

The second major objection that has been voiced concerning the passer rating is that it is heavily biased against older quarterbacks. Now we are getting somewhere. I would argue that the formula is not biased against older players, but rather it is biased against inefficient offenses. Let’s state the obvious: passing games have improved over time. Gone are the days of the duck-and-chuck. Gone is the “three yards and a cloud of dust” era. Today passing games are efficient, with high-percentage passes, more formations, film study, 3-, 4- and 5-receiver sets, and pass-catching tight ends. All of these things give modern quarterbacks an advantage over quarterbacks from the 50s, 60s and 70s. The passer ratings reflect this.

 

In 1950, NFL teams combined to have a passer rating of 53.7. This is atrocious by today’s standards. But that does not mean the quarterbacks themselves were bad, merely that the offenses they were saddled with were not well designed. The league as a whole completed 46.6% of passes and the average team had 16.9 touchdown passes and 26.3 interceptions. Compare 1950 to 2008, where the league completed 61% of its passes and the average team had 20.2 touchdown passes and 14.5 interceptions. The passer rating reflects this change, as the 2008 average passer rating was 83.1. On average, the passer rating of the league has improved by about 0.42 points per year since 1950.

 

Knowing this, how should we compare modern quarterbacks with those who came before? We already know that raw numbers will not do justice to the older players. We also know that the passer rating will make a modern mediocre player -- for example Brian Griese, with a career rating of 82.7 -- appear better than a Hall of Famer like his father, Bob Griese, who had a career rating of 77.1. We know that Chad Pennington is not the 8th best quarterback in history, yet that is where his rating would have him placed on the All-Time list. So what do we do? How can we fix these obvious flaws?

 

For the answer we need only look to what has already been done in baseball. To reflect the changing nature of the game baseball adopted ERA+. For those of you not familiar, ERA+ tracks how well a pitcher does compared to the league averages of his time. Basically, it measures how much above (or below) average a player is in his time. This is our answer.

 

Passer Rating+

 

Passer Rating+ is the passer rating adjusted for the overall performance of the league a player is in. If we wish to compare Dan Marino to Y.A. Tittle, the most fair and enlightening way to do it is to measure how much better each was than the average quarterback of his time. We need to find how much each separated himself, or distinguished himself from his peers. That is a true measure of greatness. For those of you who want an explanation of the statistics involved, keep reading. For those who don’t care, skip the next paragraph.

 

I started by compiling the league average passer rating of every season since 1950. I did not go back prior to this point, as there was difficulty discerning whether to include statistics from the AAFC and other conferences that did not compete against each other. Instead I just stuck with the NFL and the teams therein after 1950. Then I would select a player and compare how each season of their career compared with the league average passer rating of that year (20% above, 12% below, etc.) Then I did a weighted average based on the number of passes thrown each season, then scaled it to 100. The result quantifies how much above or below the norm a player is.

 

For example, a player scoring 110 in Passer Rating+ would have passer ratings 10% higher than the league average for his career. A player scoring 95 would be slightly below average. 100 is strictly average, and the higher the number the better the player. So let’s see how well this works.

 

Let’s start by looking at the “modern” quarterbacks in the Hall of Fame. All of them should be over 100, that is, above average. And the higher they are, the more they separated themselves from their peers. After the list we will see how well they stack up with what most people believe to be the greatest quarterback list.

 

 

1. Otto Graham - 138.8

 

2. Roger Staubach - 127.6

 

3. Steve Young - 125.7

 

4. Len Dawson - 125.3

 

5. Sonny Jurgenson - 125.0

 

6. Norm Van Brocklin - 124.0

 

7. Joe Montana - 122.8

 

8. Fran Tarkenton - 122.0

 

9. Bart Starr - 121.5

 

10. Johnny Unitas - 118.9

 

11. YA Tittle - 118.4

 

12. Bob Griese - 117.7

 

13. Dan Marino - 113.5

 

14. Dan Fouts - 112.1

 

15. Jim Kelly - 110.9

 

16. Bobby Layne - 107.5

 

17. Warren Moon - 105.8

 

18. Troy Aikman - 105.8

 

19. Terry Bradshaw - 105.2

 

20. John Elway - 104.7

 

21. Joe Namath - 99.5

 

22. George Blanda - 95.6

 

 

*Bob Waterfield was not included as he only had three seasons after 1950 to use.

 

Otto Graham may not be a name familiar to a lot of young fans, but let me assure you that his spot atop the list is a good sign for the accuracy of the Passer Rating+ statistic. Despite playing from 1946-1955 (in the era of crude passing games) Graham currently has the 15th best passer rating in NFL history -- above Dan Marino, Brett Favre, and hundreds of other players who had the benefit of playing in modern offenses. What is even more remarkable about the distance between Graham and the pack is that I did not include his AAFC years (1945-1949). During those seasons he had 86 touchdown passes, 41 interceptions and a passer rating of 99.1, which is superb even by today’s standards. The extent to which Graham was able to outshine his peers has been unparalleled in the NFL in the years since.

 

Another good sign is that only two players scored as sub-par, and that those two are Joe Namath, who is widely considered to be overrated and in the Hall of Fame largely for his guarantee before Super Bowl III as much as anything else; and George Blanda, who is in the Hall for his versatility and decades of playing as a kicker, but was not necessarily a very good QB.

 

The rest of the list looks very sound. Many names are lower than where some might have them ranked (Marino and Elway, for example) but remember that this list is not designed to acknowledge longevity and compiling stats. It is only designed to measure how far away from their peers a player managed to perform.

 

Also of note is that the list seems to favor older players... perhaps too much. However, there is an explanation for this. As offenses have progressed, they have tightened up the difference between the very good and the very bad offenses. It’s not fathomable for a modern team to throw 4 touchdowns and 31 interceptions as the 1974 Falcons did. The schemes simply will not allow it. Even the most bumbling and incompetent replacement player of today would do better with the structure of the passing games in places. Overall, it is harder to deviate from the norm today than it was 50 years ago. Excellence and putridity were both in ample supply in the 50s through 70s and the contrast makes the excellence stand out even more by comparison. Let’s throw in some quarterbacks who might one day be in the Hall of Fame with a few more years and see how they stack up with the older generations.

 

 

  • Peyton Manning - 118.4 (almost equal to Unitas)
  • Kurt Warner - 117.1
  • Tom Brady - 115.2
  • Drew Brees - 109.8
  • Brett Favre - 108.2
  • Donovan McNabb - 106.7

This looks like a fairly representative ranking of these quarterbacks. Of course, postseason is not factored into these equations, so Brady is a bit lower most people would consider him. But that he is very close to Manning is representative of how good both of them are. Kurt Warner is a bit surprising that high, but he produces at an extremely high rate when given a chance. With a few more years to solidify his overall numbers he’s right in the Hall of Fame discussion. Based solely on efficiency, he’s right there.

 

There seems to be a cut off around 106. Quarterbacks in the 100-110 range are good, solid, above average quarterbacks, but may only be fringe Hall of Fame candidates if they did not play long enough. Here are some good examples:

 

 

  • Ken Stabler - 110.6
  • Boomer Esiason - 106.9
  • Randall Cunningham - 106.9
  • Phil Simms - 105.1
  • Steve McNair - 104.3
  • Jim Everett - 102.9
  • John Hadl - 102.6
  • Drew Bledsoe - 98.0

So, we know that the top of the curve holds up well. But what about the bottom? Do the dregs of the quarterbacking world appear as sub-par as they should? I performed a sampling of lousy passers that popped immediately to mind, and here are the results:

 

  • Tim Couch - 95.6
  • Mike Vick - 94.0
  • David Carr - 92.3
  • Dave Brown - 87.0
  • Kyle Orton - 86.6
  • Rex Grossman - 86.6
  • Joey Harrington - 85.4
  • Rick Mirer - 81.7
  • Alex Smith - 78.6
  • Akili Smith - 67.8
  • Ryan Leaf - 63.9

Now, there are probably numerous other bad quarterbacks out there that fit in somewhere on this list. This was merely an attempt to check that sub-par quarterbacks are in fact consistently sub-par by this measurement. And indeed they are. Just to give you an idea of how bad Ryan Leaf was, his passer rating was only 63.9% of the league’s average whenever he threw the ball. It’s amazing he lasted as long as he did.

 

 

So it seems to this point that Passer Rating+ holds water. It’s purely objective and matches reasonably well with common opinion about quarterbacks. This may be tremendously useful. On a large scale the wisdom of the masses is a fairly good means of determining who is good and who is not, but on specifics, it is prone to error. It is very easy for certain players who do not achieve notoriety to be thought inferior to those who are at the forefront of the scene. For example, players who spend their careers in large media markets are more likely to have the best and worst parts of their careers exaggerated, while a player in a small market may be largely overlooked. A decent player for the Cowboys may be thought of as better than a good player on a traditionally bad team just because of the amount of exposure each player receives.

 

One more list before we wrap this up. Let’s take a look now at all of the projected starters in the NFL for the coming 2009 season and rank them by their Passer Rating+. If we have a good metric, then these rankings should match up fairly well with what the consensus opinions are of these quarterbacks:

 

1. Peyton Manning - 118.4

 

2. Kurt Warner - 117.1

 

3. Tom Brady - 115.2

 

4. Tony Romo - 115.2

 

5. Philip Rivers - 113.2

 

6. Chad Pennington - 111.3

 

7. Aaron Rodgers - 110.5

 

8. Drew Brees - 109.8

 

9. Ben Roethlisberger - 109.2

 

10. Carson Palmer - 109.1

 

11. Shaun Hill - 109.0 (small sample size, though)

 

12. Donovan McNabb - 106.7

 

13. Matt Cassel - 106.5

 

14. Marc Bulger - 105.6

 

15. Matt Ryan - 105.5

 

16. Jay Cutler - 105.4

 

17. Jake Delhomme - 105.1

 

18. Matt Hasselbeck - 104.7

 

19. Matt Schaub - 104.4

 

20. David Garrard - 104.1

 

21. Sage Rosenfels - 98.8

 

22. Jason Campbell - 97.5

 

23. Joe Flacco - 96.6

 

24. Trent Edwards - 95.4

 

25. Eli Manning - 93.3

 

26. Kerry Collins - 92.9

 

27. Jamarcus Russell - 88.9

 

28. Kyle Orton - 86.6

 

29. Brady Quinn - 79.2 (also a very small sample size)

 

* Matt Stafford, Mark Sanchez, and Josh Freeman are rookies and cannot be ranked.

 

 

Mostly predictable, with a few surprising results. First, Eli Manning is not running with the right crowd. It seems team success and a famous last name have masked the fact that he is simply a below average quarterback. Chad Pennington seems rather high. However, the knock on him has never been his ability to put the ball where it needs to go, but rather it’s whether he’ll be healthy enough to do it. But when he plays, he’s far better than he gets credit for. Another thing to note is that 20 of the 29 quarterbacks are above average for their careers. I interpret this to mean a few things. One notable is that this is part of the reason passer rating has been trending up for decades. The bad quarterbacks are dismissed, and the good ones take their jobs. Another reason all these players are above 100 is that these are only the projected starters. Inevitably, some of these players will get injured and be replaced by, in all likelihood, below average players who will drag the league average down. Thus, most of the starters should be above average.

 

Also of note is that this is based on their entire careers. If there are major disagreements with the rankings it is probably due to the fact that a player is coming off injury, which might make them less likely to be as effective as they were previously (Marc Bulger and Carson Palmer notably). Passer Rating+ does not account for that. That is why you need objective measurement. This is why you need statistics. Not as a means to definitively state one player is better than another, but rather a tool to be used to check our collective assumptions and reveal potential biases and mistakes. It makes us think about why we consider one player better than another and question whether that judgment stands up to scrutiny.

 

Hopefully Passer Rating+ has been shown to be a better measuring stick than anything else currently in existence. While I don’t expect it to concretely prove anything, I do hope that it becomes more widely accepted as a means of evaluation. It is merely a tool. But it may be the most useful tool on a bear market. The NFL is such a large business, and the fact that it spends so much money on players while relying merely on subjective observation for talent evaluation is foolhardy. A better grasp of statistics, and a more inventive way of looking at the game, will give a marked advantage to those teams that choose to embrace it.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To defend, TO's numbers are amazing. If we are talking about just talent then he undoubtedly deserves to be top 5. If you add in the headaches then yea you would obviously drop him lower, but his talent can not be argued. 9 years with over 1,000 yards (would be 10 but had 936 in 97, may be ten following this year). 15,500 yards receiving (2nd most all time), 1,051 receptions (currently 5th all time, will be passing Brown, Carter, Harrison to move into second if he plays one more year), 149 receiving TDs (3rd all time, unless he passed Moss this year). I do not see how it can be argued against him. Although I think Moss has much more talent then Owens, I would have Owens as 2nd on the list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How did 2 people mention Bradshaw :blink:

 

Half of his years he had more picks than TD's, his QB rating was always terrible, and his passing yardage sucked. Even though he had hall of famers at every skill position around him. I would take 10-15 QB's that are playing today ahead of Terry Bradshaw in his prime.

 

 

 

 

I do not see how TO is #3 all time. He is a headache waiting to happen, and he drops the ball in clutch moments. I would not have him in the top 10.

 

Bradshaw I agree he never was great - just played with the best defense ever , an incredible Oline , great running game , and 2 great wr's in Stallworth and Swann that made him look good or better than he was. When you got a guy like Hollywood Hnederson call you out for being stupid - you mus not be dat edjumuchated.

 

TO is IMO the 3rd best ever -- He is called all these things -- Let me ask has he ever been in trouble off the field? Has he ever taken plays off? Is there anyone else on his team that wants to win a game more than him? He never respected Garcia becasue he didn't have the arm and TO was much more hostile than he needed to be in SF. In Philly McNabb is a D!ck an most people around him know it and he was jealous of TO getting the attention. What McNabb was pissed TO called him out for being an idiot in the superbowl? That was some of the worst clock management anyone had ever seen in a big game so yeah McNabb did suck and had a tummy ache and threw up the whole 4th qaurter - he wasn't in shape to play 4 qaurters??? yet TO comes back from a broken leg MUCH earlier than he should have risking further injury and plays his ass off and has a great game. Most of the TO hate comes from his Philly stint and it wasn't even really him it was mostly McNabb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These lists should NEVER include Championships as part of the criteria. We are talking PURE talent for a given position. I dont know why but too many fans always jump on the "He has more Super Bowls than the other guy blah, blah...". It doesnt work and it cant be part of the formula. Otherwise, you'd have Doug Williams and Trent Dilfer ahead of Marino which is absolutely silly and you guys know it.

 

Overall the lists are pretty good although I will offer some opinions:

 

- Barry Sanders is better than Jim Brown. Sorry, but the Jim Brown fan club is too big and unreasonable.

- Dan Fouts needs to be on the QB list. Maybe in place of the blessed Troy Aikman.

- Move Brady down the list. Hes above average but did/is doing all his damage on incredibly good teams that seem to always have everything fall into place for them. Just like this year.

 

- Pretty good list though...very good actually. :doublethumbsup:

 

Got to disagree with Brady man. Who was New England before Brady? a perrenial loser. Who has Brady had to throw to in his superbowls? Branch and Troy Brown --- oh and David Pattern a terrible wr core. What great RB? other than 1 year Dillon he has had garbage ( Antoine Smith ).

 

Barry maybe should be but I only keep him from #1 due to all the negative plays.

 

I disagree with Aikman as I think he puts up those gawdy stats if he had too - but with the greatest run blocking line of all time and truck size holes for Emmitt to run through he didn't have to. Fouts was good though I agree there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get pretty sick of the whole Jim Brown is the greatest ever crap, like there is no debate. I'd take Peterson over Brown in todays game playing against players of equal skill vs. Brown playing against slow white dude. Put Chris Johnson back in Brown's days and he'd run for 2900 yards and average 8.0 ypc with 35 td's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will not quibble about everyone in your lists. Most who should be there are. QBs I still put Johnny U at the top. Won an NFL title and a Super Bowl and did things no other QB was doing at the time. Manning #2 and will eventually move to #1 when he owns all the records and/or wins another title. Everyone drools over Montana, but to me he does not live up to the hype people give him. He was throwing to the best football player ever, plus the teams were stacked at every position.

 

Brown definitely #1. I put OJ #2 just because he was good for a long time and he ran for over 2K in a friggin' 14 game schedule. That's averaging 143 yards per game.

 

Rice best ever at any position. T.O. #2. Not the best hands (Marvin Harrison) but has excelled for a long time and putting up 9/122 in a SB on a half healed broken leg is just amazing. Throw in The Sharpie and he gets my vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will not quibble about everyone in your lists. Most who should be there are. QBs I still put Johnny U at the top. Won an NFL title and a Super Bowl and did things no other QB was doing at the time. Manning #2 and will eventually move to #1 when he owns all the records and/or wins another title. Everyone drools over Montana, but to me he does not live up to the hype people give him. He was throwing to the best football player ever, plus the teams were stacked at every position.

 

Brown definitely #1. I put OJ #2 just because he was good for a long time and he ran for over 2K in a friggin' 14 game schedule. That's averaging 143 yards per game.

 

Rice best ever at any position. T.O. #2. Not the best hands (Marvin Harrison) but has excelled for a long time and putting up 9/122 in a SB on a half healed broken leg is just amazing. Throw in The Sharpie and he gets my vote.

 

Agree about Montana - he was as blessed as Aikman was with the enormous talent behind him along with owners that were willing to mortgage the future for the present. Id take Manning, Marino, or Elway over Montana any day without blinking. But, as always, the Super Bowl argument is what people cling to. Idiots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get pretty sick of the whole Jim Brown is the greatest ever crap, like there is no debate. I'd take Peterson over Brown in todays game playing against players of equal skill vs. Brown playing against slow white dude. Put Chris Johnson back in Brown's days and he'd run for 2900 yards and average 8.0 ypc with 35 td's.

 

 

ask all the RB's I listed who the best RB of all time is ... you will only hear 1 name - Jim Brown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree about Montana - he was as blessed as Aikman was with the enormous talent behind him along with owners that were willing to mortgage the future for the present. Id take Manning, Marino, or Elway over Montana any day without blinking. But, as always, the Super Bowl argument is what people cling to. Idiots.

 

 

He was? Montana had Rice 2 superbowls as 81 and 84 he won without him. Who was the great RB he had? The defense was always good as is I assume the oline but him having the GREAT offense gets a little stretched.

 

In 1984 he has Wendel Tyler and Roger Craig at RB and the great WR duo of Dwight Clark and Freddie Soloman ( neither had 1000 yards ) Craig led the team in receptions with 70.

 

In 81 he had the remarkable duo of Ricky Patton and Earl Cooper and the WR giants of Dwight Clark and Freddie Soloman again.

 

As for Superbowls while not nearly the only measure SB's have be a part of it. Getting to and wining Superbowls says a lot about a player leadership and skills when it means the most. Montana played his best when it mattered most.

 

granted if I was building a franchise and could have any QB ever I would take Manning 1st but Montana would be second.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you got a guy like Hollywood Hnederson call you out for being stupid - you mus not be dat edjumuchated.

 

Bradshaw called all his own plays and beat Henderson in every Super Bowl they played agains each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bradshaw called all his own plays and beat Henderson in every Super Bowl they played agains each other.

 

 

I just thought the whole " he can't spell CAT if you spotted him the C and the T " was funny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He was? Montana had Rice 2 superbowls as 81 and 84 he won without him. Who was the great RB he had? The defense was always good as is I assume the oline but him having the GREAT offense gets a little stretched.

 

In 1984 he has Wendel Tyler and Roger Craig at RB and the great WR duo of Dwight Clark and Freddie Soloman ( neither had 1000 yards ) Craig led the team in receptions with 70.

 

In 81 he had the remarkable duo of Ricky Patton and Earl Cooper and the WR giants of Dwight Clark and Freddie Soloman again.

 

As for Superbowls while not nearly the only measure SB's have be a part of it. Getting to and wining Superbowls says a lot about a player leadership and skills when it means the most. Montana played his best when it mattered most.

 

granted if I was building a franchise and could have any QB ever I would take Manning 1st but Montana would be second.

 

Yeah, getting to the Big game and winning it is a big deal...but football is such a team sport. Unlike Hockey or Basketball where one player can literally make a team great it doesnt work like that in the NFL. Thats why these lists have to use like 99% pure talent as the gauge for greatness. The other 1% can be used for titles, MVP's and stuff like that.

 

Agreed that Monmtana didnt always have the best teams but they were damned good. In fairness, Peyton has been blessed with great WRs too but NEVER had a good defense. Neither did Marino or Fouts. I will also admit that Brady hasnt had much for WRs but has had GREAT o-lines(like Aikman) and a ridiculuosly opportunistic defense. You could argue that the top 4 or 5 all time QB's could be interchanged. They are all terrific, no doubt there!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, getting to the Big game and winning it is a big deal...but football is such a team sport. Unlike Hockey or Basketball where one player can literally make a team great it doesnt work like that in the NFL. Thats why these lists have to use like 99% pure talent as the gauge for greatness. The other 1% can be used for titles, MVP's and stuff like that.

 

Agreed that Monmtana didnt always have the best teams but they were damned good. In fairness, Peyton has been blessed with great WRs too but NEVER had a good defense. Neither did Marino or Fouts. I will also admit that Brady hasnt had much for WRs but has had GREAT o-lines(like Aikman) and a ridiculuosly opportunistic defense. You could argue that the top 4 or 5 all time QB's could be interchanged. They are all terrific, no doubt there!

For any other position you would be right. But Qaurterback is the only true position where you can win a title alone at the position. So Superbowls or at least how they play in the playoffs should have decent weight here. I agree at RB and WR and basically any other it has little.

 

QB's are always drafted 1st for a reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aikman is so overrated, he never had great stats and was a typical product of his team/system. john elway didnt have stats??? isnt he top 5 on pretty much every category? Marino was wiped out of the record books by favre, hence wiped off of his qb ranking by favre. the lone SB is gravy, favre erased marino from existence. Marino has crap stats in most of his seasons compared to favres dominant string of high td, mvp, yardage years. Montana, manning, favre, elway, young, marino, unitas. Period.

 

 

Also I hate to say it but ladainian has better stats than most of those rbs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For any other position you would be right. But Qaurterback is the only true position where you can win a title alone at the position. So Superbowls or at least how they play in the playoffs should have decent weight here. I agree at RB and WR and basically any other it has little.

 

QB's are always drafted 1st for a reason.

I disagree, partially.

 

I agree that QB's have the most impact in a game, over any other position. But he can't single-handedly win or lose a SuperBowl. Maybe a few games here or there, and he can certainly be a big difference maker whether you win or lose, but you can't ride a QB to a SuperBowl.

 

Manning's SB run - his DEF stepped up big time.

Brady had a top DEF and the most ridiculous display of clutch kicking ever.

Drew Brees' had tons of weapons, an underrated running game, and a DEF that made timely TO's just about every game.

Eli's DEF stifled the Patriots offense.

 

Think about it this way: Even if a QB should take full responsibility for their offense, that's only 50% of the game. Actually, probably more like 40% (40/40/20 - Offense/Defense/ST). So the absolute most that a QB can influence a game is 40% of it. Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Tom Brady, literally have nothing to do with how their DEF performs...Therefore making it impossible for a team to win a SB based only on their QB's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a hard time doing a top 10 without having:

Raymond Berry at WR

Dan Fouts at QB

 

But all and all, a good job, and it's always fun to do these kind of things.

 

On a side note too.

I always wondered what Warren Moon and Doug Fluties careers would look like, if they had started in the NFL the whole time?

 

:thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ask all the RB's I listed who the best RB of all time is ... you will only hear 1 name - Jim Brown.

 

But that is mostly a by-product of the old school media and players not wanting to be a guy that said "F Jim Brown, Sanders was plain and simply better. Barry played against better competition on a terrible teams and put up as good or better stats."

 

Brown by being first might be the greatest, but he ain't the best that ever lived.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have a couple of token old guys on the list, but overall, it seems the NFL started operations in 1980 based on the lists. No offense intended as this is typical of the "fan" type of list where we weren't around to see alot of the geezers. If you look at the NFL network top 100, you see that fans votes are all newer players while the "experts" have quite a bit more oldies.

 

In the end, you cant look at just stats and SBs. Players need to be judged against their own eras. How did they stand out against those on an even playing field?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have a couple of token old guys on the list, but overall, it seems the NFL started operations in 1980 based on the lists. No offense intended as this is typical of the "fan" type of list where we weren't around to see alot of the geezers. If you look at the NFL network top 100, you see that fans votes are all newer players while the "experts" have quite a bit more oldies.

 

In the end, you cant look at just stats and SBs. Players need to be judged against their own eras. How did they stand out against those on an even playing field?

 

 

Maybe 2 lists would be a better way to do things.

 

A superbowl era list. And a pre superbowl list.

 

 

The part I like the best about that NFL network special is seeing film on some old guys. Then hearing alittle bit about them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get pretty sick of the whole Jim Brown is the greatest ever crap, like there is no debate. I'd take Peterson over Brown in todays game playing against players of equal skill vs. Brown playing against slow white dude. Put Chris Johnson back in Brown's days and he'd run for 2900 yards and average 8.0 ypc with 35 td's.

:thumbsup:

 

Jim Brown played before steroids and giant linebackers that could run a 4.6.

 

Like an era, in any sport, you simply cannot compare them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

List is pretty good. Everyone loves to argue over this stuff though.

 

Someone mentioned that a QB is the only position that can win it all by himself. Well, no position can. And what about the SB 35 Ravens D? Surely the worst SB winning QB of all time! Some may argue that Ray Lewis won that SB.

 

Someone mentioned that Manning is only this good because he's had great WR's. If true, how did those WR's play at their other teams? They didn't have other teams, so we can't know! I'm 6-1 265, white, slow, with brick hands but I think Manning could make me look good. He is undoubtedly the best QB of all time and the best OC in the league today. He may even be the best player of all time at any position. Montana is overrated in my opinion but still very good. Brady is low, Aikman is high, and Staubach should be in the list (but I'm a cowboy fan and he was better than Aikman just maybe not smarter). And if you want to go on wins and SB's, be prepared to put Big Ben in the list a few years from now. That sounds crazy to me too! It will be even harder to make these arguments going further because the defense will have to play "two below" with the QB's and the WR's!

 

Many of you are tired of the Jim Brown Fan Club (and I'm not in it), but no RB has ever rushed for as many yards in as few games. Emmitt is not overrated because he played through injury, age, and became the all time rushing leader with no real top end speed. Defensive linemen could catch him. But his initial burst was incredible and gave him a decent 40 time. He won several rushing titles in a time when Sanders and T. Thomas were in their primes. And I agree that Barry Sanders was the most entertaining player to watch in my short 32 year lifetime (and my favorite). Martin, Bettis, and LT have to be put in the top 15!

 

 

I like the WR list, but think Irvin is high and Harrison is low. But he may have shot some people, so maybe he's not so low. TO should be above Moss because he's not a quitter, but the top 3 are the top 3!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aikman is so overrated, he never had great stats and was a typical product of his team/system. john elway didnt have stats??? isnt he top 5 on pretty much every category? Marino was wiped out of the record books by favre, hence wiped off of his qb ranking by favre. the lone SB is gravy, favre erased marino from existence. Marino has crap stats in most of his seasons compared to favres dominant string of high td, mvp, yardage years. Montana, manning, favre, elway, young, marino, unitas. Period.

 

 

Also I hate to say it but ladainian has better stats than most of those rbs.

 

Manning has thrown for more that 4k yards in 10 of 12 seasons. He has better than a 2 to 1 TD/INT ratio in 8 of those seasons (and in his overall career), and will add 1 more positive year to all of those stats this season as he already has over 2100 yards and 15 TD with only 2 INT's! And, unlike Favre, he's started every game in his career (favre didn't start in Atlanta as a Rookie). Excluding extra SB rings; In what way could Montana ever be listed as the best QB ever? That's ridiculous! And to say Marino has crap stats is even more absurd. Did you even look at them when you posted this? You obviously are a Favre fan, and that's ok. But think about this..

 

Favre has a career passer rating of 86.3 which, compared to active QB's today, is lower than Carson Palmer and about even with McNabb. Nowhere close to:

Manning

Rivers

Brees

Brady

Big Ben

Romo (shouldn't count because he hasn't played that long, but still!)

 

Favre has a 1.54-1 TD/INT ratio in his career, and almost a 1-2 ratio this year. He has 6 years passing over 4K yards, which is tied with Marino, but he has played in 2 more seasons and working on his 3rd. Marino has a 1.67 - 1 TD/INT ratio and an 86.4 career passer rating. Marino has 255.67 yds/start, 1.75 TD/start, and 1.05 int/start average vs. Favre's 242.39, 1.73 and 1.12. So other than his ring, how is he better? Because he's gonna play til he's dead? Looks pretty much the same to me. He certainly didn't ERASE Marino.

 

Manning 95.5 career passer rating.

1.91 TD/start

262.87 yds/start

.92 int/start

 

Montana 92.3 career passer rating.

1.66 TD/start (1 season over 30 TD vs. Mannings 5)

247.26 yd/start (only 7 of 15 seasons over 3K yards, and no season over 4K)

.85 int/start (incredible!)

 

Stats aren't everything when deciding who's the best, but if you're gonna quote them and try to use them in your favor, you should at least see if you're right!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But that is mostly a by-product of the old school media and players not wanting to be a guy that said "F Jim Brown, Sanders was plain and simply better. Barry played against better competition on a terrible teams and put up as good or better stats."

 

Brown by being first might be the greatest, but he ain't the best that ever lived.

 

Agreed 1 million percent. For whatever reason, noone wants to be the guy that just comes out and says Barry is better then Brown. For fear of what? Being right? Its the truth. Barry >>>>> anyone else ever. Period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QB

 

1. Joe Montana - could be overtaken by Peyton if Peyton win more superbowls.

2. Peyton Manning - Never misses a game , if basically the OC of his team , and is the best pure in the league.

3. Johnny Unitas - The original ( Modern Day ) QB - turned a running sport into a passing one..

4. Dan Marino - The best pure passer ever

5. Brett Favre - Don't like him as much as I did but guy has played every week since My last year of HS -- I am 37.

6. Tom Brady - Made a perenial losing franchise into the most successful.

7. Steve Young - Unreal passer rating several years together.

8. Troy Aikman - The most accurate QB I have watched play.

9. John Elway - Some might have him higher but he had no stats -- though he did just win games.

10. Jim Kelly - No rings but 4 trips - best hurry up offense QB ever.

 

seriosuly no offense but i would never put manning ahead of montana no matter what he does from here on out...he is not better then marino or unitas or brady imo...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that nobody cares about the old timers, but there is a case to be made for Don Hudson as the #1 WR. At the very least higher than where he is listed. Also, I would think Bart Starr has a place in the QB conversation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that nobody cares about the old timers, but there is a case to be made for Don Hudson as the #1 WR. At the very least higher than where he is listed. Also, I would think Bart Starr has a place in the QB conversation.

:thumbsup:

He'd be #2 on my list.

 

1. Rice

2. Hutson

3. Berry

4. Largent

5. Allworth

6. Moss

7. Owens

 

Would be locked and loaded as my official top 7.

8,9,10 would be something I'd really have to do my homework on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QB

9. John Elway - Some might have him higher but he had no stats -- though he did just win games.

WR

8. Don Hutson - the Original great WR

10. Steve Largent - Could never play in todays game - too high of character. He owned all the records till Rice broke em all.

Four arguements:

1. Any wide receiver list without mention of Don Hutson being in the top five has failed. He was as good as Jerry Rice for his time.

 

2. Steve Largent could play in any era!

 

3. John Elway. Didn't have the stats?

*Third all-time in passing yards

*Fifth all-time in passing TD's

*Third all-time in completions & attempts

*12 seasons of at least 3000 yds passing, third best all time

Regular season MVP and Super Bowl MVP.

Went to five Super Bowls, winning two.

 

4. Emmitt Smith. I really can't stand the guy, hate the Cowboys and hated him. However, what he did was rediculous. NFL's all-time leading rusher, ran with pain, broken bones...did everything you would want out of your running back. He has to be higher. Everyone wants to discount some of his accomplishments due to his offensive line, but OJ Simpson and Jim Brown had phenomenal lines and nothing is ever mentioned about their line, insert John Riggins as well. Gotta give more props to Emmitt.

 

Overall though, I really enjoyed the list!!

 

Sidenote: Otto Graham. 10 Professional football season, 7 rings, 10 title games. BEFORE entering NFL, played one professional season of basketball, you bet, his team won the championship!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

any RB list that doesnt have LT top 10 is just dumb. Hes the most complete back ever to play the game.

 

I stopped taking it seriously after seeing that.

 

When doing top 10 lists I like to take the best player at each position from a given decade

 

60's Brown

70's OJ

80's Payton

90's Barry

00's LT

 

my 5 wildcards are

Dickerson, Marshall, Emmitt, Sayers, Campbell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i thought staubach would crack the top 10 QB's

 

 

and I know i have a mancrush on Tomlinson but he HAS to be in the top 10 RB's. Dude has the 3rd most TD's alltime behind Emmitt and Jerry, and is still getting it done at 31.

 

 

Infact, Im not sure how Faulk makes the list but not LT. LT is a better version of Faulk, imho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get pretty sick of the whole Jim Brown is the greatest ever crap, like there is no debate. I'd take Peterson over Brown in todays game playing against players of equal skill vs. Brown playing against slow white dude. Put Chris Johnson back in Brown's days and he'd run for 2900 yards and average 8.0 ypc with 35 td's.

 

Jim Brown was a machine. Played 9 seasons without missing a game. Led the NFL in rushing 8 years and made the Pro Bowl every single year he was in the league (capturing NFL-MVP three times). Averaged over 100 yards per game for his career (only back in history to make that claim). For his career, averaged 5.2 yards per carry. All the while every defense in the league focused on trying to stop him in a period when football wasn't as wide open as it is now. The guy was impossible to bring down, set his records in much shorter seasons than we have now, and didn't play beyond the age of 29. Your boys AP and CJ have their work cut out for them.

 

"Make sure when anyone tackles you he remembers how much it hurts"

- Jim Brown

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i thought staubach would crack the top 10 QB's

 

 

and I know i have a mancrush on Tomlinson but he HAS to be in the top 10 RB's. Dude has the 3rd most TD's alltime behind Emmitt and Jerry, and is still getting it done at 31.

 

 

Infact, Im not sure how Faulk makes the list but not LT. LT is a better version of Faulk, imho.

 

 

first off, nice work Moz... I like the list; you can never please everyone with these lists.

 

Secone, I can't really stand LT, but if you take a hard look at his numbers, STATISTICALLY he's put up the most dominant numbers for the longest period of time.

With fantasy football, we've seen RBs from Emmitt Smith and Barry Sanders thru Faulk, Priest, and LT. LT not only dominates from a "single best season" perspective, he dominates from a "consecutive/consistent" season perspective as well.

As much as it pains me to say it, LT was the KING of fantasy football and virtually untouchable statistically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×