Enough is enough. Peyton Manning is the greatest QB of all time.

[bucky]

Peyton Manning 9-11 career playoff record, Brett Favre 13-11.

Bart Starr 9-1

[jms493]

I concede...Peyton is the best QB ever.

[Maynard]

And Eli over Ken Anderson is just...wow. I can't even wrap my head around that.

Anderson was one of the most accurate and efficient passers of his time, and put up numbers that would hold up today without adjustment for his era. Dude was completing 65, even 70% of his passes in the early 80's. He played 30 years before Eli andhas the same QB rating. He never threw picks, leading the league in INT% multiple times while Eli is the most proficient pick tosser in the league. Anderson's page is full of black ink in all of the big boy stats, yards, rating, completion percentage, meanwhile Eli struggles to finish top ten in anything but picks. Anderson also played a Super Bowl game as good or better than any Super Bowl Eli played, and had only one bad playoff game in six tries. I don't see how Eli is better than Anderson in any way, shape, or form. Anderson did everything better.

except for the not winning part....why do you keep comparing eli to everyone else? why not look at eli for what he has accomplished. HOF voting isnt all about the numbers, and in Eli case its about the intangibles.

[bucky]

Nothing counts except for Super Bowls to some people, you will never convince the ring crowd otherwise.

Two things make seemingly intelligent men lose all common sense & critical thinking ability. Hot women, and the relationship between Super Bowl rings & QB's. Smart men get real simple when it comes to both of these things.

It's not rings, it's success in high pressure playoff games. I can't put Manning as GOAT because of this. Just like I could never put Favre as GOAT because of this.

[jms493]

If only Football was a one on one sport....

[bucky]

If he doesn't make it in, he would be, by far, not even close, the most accomplished QB NOT in the Hall of Fame. I'd say the best player, period...but Jerry Kramer not being in the Hall of Fame is a crime.

Thanked for the Jerry Kramer comment.

[bucky]

Warner, I think you put to much emphasis on regular season stats and not enough on playoff performance. Starr's regular season stats aren't anything special, but look at his playoff performances. Not the Championship rings, but the playoff performances. That's what really sets Starr as one of the all time greats.

Favre - great regular season, average playoff
Manning - GOAT regular season, so far, somewhat average playoff
Starr - above average regular season, clutch in playoffs

I wouldn't argue that Starr is greater than Manning, he's not. Just that playoff performance is what gets Starr in the HOF, not regular season performance. That's where I put most of my emphasis on HOF worthy. With the games that matter most, playoff games.

Manning is a first ballot HOF'er, elite QB, but to me, not the GOAT. I'd have to go with Montana, and maybe OLD SCHOOL with Unitas.

[Aso]

The point isn't regular season stats > Post season performance. It's overall - "Is Eli one of the greatest QBs in NFL history?" Thats what the HOF is for. The greatest to ever play the sport... and the answer to that question is no.

[bucky]

The point isn't regular season stats > Post season performance. It's overall - "Is Eli one of the greatest QBs in NFL history?" Thats what the HOF is for. The greatest to ever play the sport... and the answer to that question is no.

Not saying Eli is HOF worthy. Just saying that Peyton's regular season stats don't mean as much to me as somebody else's playoff performances when discussing GOAT. Regular season stats just don't mean as much to me or I'd be talking about B. Favre as GOAT.

[dell71]

Warner, I think you put to much emphasis on regular season stats and not enough on playoff performance. Starr's regular season stats aren't anything special, but look at his playoff performances. Not the Championship rings, but the playoff performances. That's what really sets Starr as one of the all time greats.

Favre - great regular season, average playoff
Manning - GOAT regular season, so far, somewhat average playoff
Starr - above average regular season, clutch in playoffs

I wouldn't argue that Starr is greater than Manning, he's not. Just that playoff performance is what gets Starr in the HOF, not regular season performance. That's where I put most of my emphasis on HOF worthy. With the games that matter most, playoff games.

Manning is a first ballot HOF'er, elite QB, but to me, not the GOAT. I'd have to go with Montana, and maybe OLD SCHOOL with Unitas.

Truth is, even during the regular season Bart Starr was better than "above average" and was statistically one of the best QBs in football year after year. He was the highest rated passer 3 times and finished with a career rating of 80.5 at a time when the league rating was usually in the mid 60s. He's another guy who threw more TDs than picks for his career when the league as a whole threw far more interceptions than TDs. His career totals in yards and TDs just aren't eye-popping because Vince Lombardi was his coach. Let's not pretend he was just some OK guy who suddenly turned into a beast during the post-season. He was great all the time. I'd argue that without the titles, he's still a HoF worthy player. Only a handfull Of players of his era or earlier have the raw stats to compare to his, without the adjustments of advanced passing: Otto Graham (criminally overlooked in this thread), Sonny Jurgensen, and Len Dawson. And this is regular season ONLY. However, we can't separate the man from the titles. The fact he was so great in winning 5 of them is what gets him into the conversation for being called the GOAT. He won them because he was great, not the other way around.

The opposite is true of Eli. Eli is not a great QB, he has just made a couple of great runs. To make the HoF, I think you should be truly great. Like Warner (I think), I put more emphasis on the regular season because that's the overwhelming majority of any player's career. What he does during the playoffs I do weigh more than the average game, because the situation is the most pressure-cooked atmosphere they'll ever be in. It's all on the line. That said, I can't say let's put an average guy into the Hall because he was great twice in the playoffs.

As all of this relates to Peyton and who is the GOAT. I'll definitely listen to the argument that Starr is that guy. I'd do the same for Montana, Graham, Unitas, Brady, Tarkenton and Peyton. For me, there is a clear line of demarcation between this group and whoever is in the next tier. Playoff performance does figure into this. Having no titles is a knock on a guy (as a QB, I don't do this for any other position in football). Hence, I would put Tarkenton at the bottom of that list and I don't include Marino at all, another regular season king. I've seen Montana, Brady, and Peyton with my own eyes and I'd take Manning over the three of them (and I grew up a Montana guy). Manning truly changed the position. Not many players in the history of any sport can say that. Still, I probably lean toward Graham and Unitas. They also changed the sport and were both just playing a different game than their contemporaries.

[bucky]

Truth is, even during the regular season Bart Starr was better than "above average" and was statistically one of the best QBs in football year after year. He was the highest rated passer 3 times and finished with a career rating of 80.5 at a time when the league rating was usually in the mid 60s.

Starr was ahead of his time. Best QB of that time was usually between he and Unitas. He was one of the first QB's to exhaustively study film and he was very accurate. One of the ONLY QB's of his time to have a completion % of 60 for a regular season. But his playoff performances were EXCEPTIONAL. Far greater than his regular season play. Playoffs, you are playing the best teams, against the best defenses, and the most high pressure games. That's when Starr shined the most.

As far as HOF goes, we just see things differently. Post season play just means so much more to me than regular season stats.

EDIT: I always LOVE your posts dell.

[dell71]

Starr was ahead of his time. Best QB of that time was usually between he and Unitas. He was one of the first QB's to exhaustively study film and he was very accurate. One of the ONLY QB's of his time to have a completion % of 60 for a regular season. But his playoff performances were EXCEPTIONAL. Far greater than his regular season play. Playoffs, you are playing the best teams, against the best defenses, and the most high pressure games. That's when Starr shined the most.

As far as HOF goes, we just see things differently. Post season play just means so much more to me than regular season stats.

EDIT: I always LOVE your posts dell.

Thanks for the last part...

As for Starr, it's true his post-season play was unbelievable. My contention is not that it doesn't count for much, but that even without those games he'd be a great QB.

[Warner2BruceTD]

Truth is, even during the regular season Bart Starr was better than "above average" and was statistically one of the best QBs in football year after year. He was the highest rated passer 3 times and finished with a career rating of 80.5 at a time when the league rating was usually in the mid 60s. He's another guy who threw more TDs than picks for his career when the league as a whole threw far more interceptions than TDs. His career totals in yards and TDs just aren't eye-popping because Vince Lombardi was his coach. Let's not pretend he was just some OK guy who suddenly turned into a beast during the post-season. He was great all the time. I'd argue that without the titles, he's still a HoF worthy player. Only a handfull Of players of his era or earlier have the raw stats to compare to his, without the adjustments of advanced passing: Otto Graham (criminally overlooked in this thread), Sonny Jurgensen, and Len Dawson. And this is regular season ONLY. However, we can't separate the man from the titles. The fact he was so great in winning 5 of them is what gets him into the conversation for being called the GOAT. He won them because he was great, not the other way around.

The opposite is true of Eli. Eli is not a great QB, he has just made a couple of great runs. To make the HoF, I think you should be truly great. Like Warner (I think), I put more emphasis on the regular season because that's the overwhelming majority of any player's career. What he does during the playoffs I do weigh more than the average game, because the situation is the most pressure-cooked atmosphere they'll ever be in. It's all on the line. That said, I can't say let's put an average guy into the Hall because he was great twice in the playoffs.

As all of this relates to Peyton and who is the GOAT. I'll definitely listen to the argument that Starr is that guy. I'd do the same for Montana, Graham, Unitas, Brady, Tarkenton and Peyton. For me, there is a clear line of demarcation between this group and whoever is in the next tier. Playoff performance does figure into this. Having no titles is a knock on a guy (as a QB, I don't do this for any other position in football). Hence, I would put Tarkenton at the bottom of that list and I don't include Marino at all, another regular season king. I've seen Montana, Brady, and Peyton with my own eyes and I'd take Manning over the three of them (and I grew up a Montana guy). Manning truly changed the position. Not many players in the history of any sport can say that. Still, I probably lean toward Graham and Unitas. They also changed the sport and were both just playing a different game than their contemporaries.

BOOM.

Eli is an average player who won two Super Bowls. Eli is proof you don't have to be a great QB to make a great run in the postseason. HE WON RINGZ HE MUST BE GREAT is the lowest level shit around. It makes smart men sound like complete morons.

I start my analysis with the regular season. If you're a regular season bum (Dilfer) or barely average (Eli, Plunkett, Flacco) I don't care what you do in the postseason in terms of Hall of Fame analysis. Eli could win a third SB, but unless his career arch dramatically changes along with it (wins an MVP, breaks some records, puts up some amazing stats, something, anything the true greats of his era are doing), it means nothing to me in the context of this discussion. Three Super Bowls, cool, great accomplishment. But not a great player. Not a hall of famer. Insulting to include him with truly great players.

[jms493]

I just Love that Eli gets all this attention....LOVE IT!!

[bucky]

BOOM.

Eli is an average player who won two Super Bowls. Eli is proof you don't have to be a great QB to make a great run in the postseason. HE WON RINGZ HE MUST BE GREAT is the lowest level shit around. It makes smart men sound like complete morons.

Not disagreeing with this.

I start my analysis with the regular season. If you're a regular season bum (Dilfer) or barely average (Eli, Plunkett, Flacco) I don't care what you do in the postseason in terms of Hall of Fame analysis. Eli could win a third SB, but unless his career arch dramatically changes along with it (wins an MVP, breaks some records, puts up some amazing stats, something, anything the true greats of his era are doing), it means nothing to me in the context of this discussion. Three Super Bowls, cool, great accomplishment. But not a great player. Not a hall of famer. Insulting to include him with truly great players.

For GOAT, I start my analysis with the post season. If they don't perform well and choke in the post season, then I don't really care what they do in the regular season. A player doesn't have to win in the post season, but they have to perform very well for me to consider them the GOAT. If you choke often in the post season, like Brett did, then I can't consider them the GOAT.

I think we are talking about 2 different things. I'm talking GOAT, you seem to be talking HOF. You guys keep discussing HOF. I was addressing the thread title of Peyton GOAT. I'm not sure we are disagreeing.