Is Kurt Warner a HOF'er?

[Shayn•Da•Pain]

I dont know where you guys are getting this idea that Warner has only had 5 good seasons.

He's had 5 DOMINANT seasons (99-01, 08-09), and two years where he was very good when he had a chance to play (05 & 07). He was mediocre in '04 with the Giants. He was injured/concussed/punch drunk in '02, '03, '06. Those are the only three seasons where he really fell off the map. Alot of great players have gotten hurt.

DOMINANT? I'll give you 2 DOMINANT seasons for sure '99 and '01, he got hurt in '00 but he was playing at a dominant level that season so I'll give you one more. So tell me one more season when Warner has DOMINATED any single season stat category? He hasn't. He hasn't lead the league in any of the major stat categories since '01.

Warner rankings since '01
'02-sucked
'03-I thought he died.
'04-had two maybe three above average games, still sucked.
'05-In the 5 games he threw 300+ yards, three he threw more picks than TDs. I'd clock some good and some bad games, saying the "given a chance to play" should be more like "he played himself onto and off the bench, but wasn't really great."
'06-One great game, maybe another good game, overall a shitty year.
'07-Better than '05 that's for sure, but had some real struggles, overall a good season, but not great or dominant.
'08-Began having more of those 3+ TD games again, but wasn't the best QB in any significant category again. That playoff run was the bright spot of the season, with 2 4th quarter comebacks and game winning drives. Great year, significant for his story.
'09-Much of the same. A very good season but not dominant in any category. 2 more game winning drives.

To date, he's got 3 great seasons, two maybe three more good years, and the rest are very forgettable out of the 12 years he's been in the league. So I don't mind anybody arguing against a guy who's only been HOF worthy half of his career. He doesn't even have a full decade of dominance. That said I think he's an amazing story, an amazing talent, and I'll never forget Warner. He's HOF worthy to me, BUT not worth all the hand jobs he gets on VSN.

 

[FirstTimer]

CFL accomplishments don't get you in the HOF and they don't help or hurt you from getting in. Plus, I'm pretty sure there are no mention of Moon's CFL stats in the HOF.

Actually they do. Read the AP story.

Also, while his CFL stats aren't there in his HOF bio it mentions the years spent in the CFL, the championships, etc. The voters took his CFL years into account as well. Read the HOF selection criteria.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

DOMINANT? I'll give you 2 DOMINANT seasons for sure '99 and '01, he got hurt in '00 but he was playing at a dominant level that season so I'll give you one more. So tell me one more season when Warner has DOMINATED any single season stat category? He hasn't. He hasn't lead the league in any of the major stat categories since '01.

Warner rankings since '01
'02-sucked
'03-I thought he died.
'04-had two maybe three above average games, still sucked.
'05-In the 5 games he threw 300+ yards, three he threw more picks than TDs. I'd clock some good and some bad games, saying the "given a chance to play" should be more like "he played himself onto and off the bench, but wasn't really great."
'06-One great game, maybe another good game, overall a shitty year.
'07-Better than '05 that's for sure, but had some real struggles, overall a good season, but not great or dominant.
'08-Began having more of those 3+ TD games again, but wasn't the best QB in any significant category again. That playoff run was the bright spot of the season, with 2 4th quarter comebacks and game winning drives. Great year, significant for his story.
'09-Much of the same. A very good season but not dominant in any category. 2 more game winning drives.

To date, he's got 3 great seasons, two maybe three more good years, and the rest are very forgettable out of the 12 years he's been in the league. So I don't mind anybody arguing against a guy who's only been HOF worthy half of his career. He doesn't even have a full decade of dominance. That said I think he's an amazing story, an amazing talent, and I'll never forget Warner. He's HOF worthy to me, BUT not worth all the hand jobs he gets on VSN.

'99 & '01 are no brainers. Two of the best seasons ever for a QB.

The 2000 Rams were 6-0 when Warner broke his thumb vs KC, a game the Rams lost. Trent Green went 2-3 as the starter, before Warner came back and brought the Rams back from the dead and made the playoffs. He threw for 3500 yards and led the league in completion percentage, while putting up a 98.3 rating. Anyone who followed the Greatest Show will tell you that the 2000 team probably had the best offense out of the run, and Warner was on pace to smash every record in the book before he broke the thumb. They were most likely a muffed Hakim punt away from going to three straight SB's.

If you don't think he's been dominant the last two years for the Cards, I don't know waht league you're watching. He threw for 4500 yards and 30 TD's last year, and had an all time postseason run. He threw for nearly 3800 yards this year, with 24 TD's, and just had an all time playoff performance. The team is brutal and cant move the ball when he dosent play.

Whenever the guy starts and finishes the year as a starter, he pretty much dominates the league. It cant be analyzed any other way.

EDIT: 2007 is always overklooked. He threw for 3400 yards and 27 TD's in eleven starts. All the guy does is produce when he plays.

 

[Shayn•Da•Pain]

Actually they do. Read the AP story.

Also, while his CFL stats aren't there in his HOF bio it mentions the years spent in the CFL, the championships, etc. The voters took his CFL years into account as well. Read the HOF selection criteria.

I think this is true. I remember anytime the discussion of Moon's induction into the HOF came up it was at the very least mentioned he was great in the CFL. I think though most of the time it was simply to bring up that NFL teams wanted Moon to convert to WR to play in the NFL, but he new his true calling and stuck to his guns to play QB, and to elude to the idea that Moon would have been that much better if he played his first 6 seasons in the NFL instead. Either way it was at the very least mentioned over and over again around his induction, but I doubt he really needed it to get in, it was more or less padding for his resume.

 

[DoubleDeuce]

Kurt Warner is more of a HOF'er than Nuke is a movie critic. Take that as you will.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Warner dominated the Arena Legaue, and NFL Europe--are we padding his resume, too?

Nobody gives a shit about minor leagues. If anyone voted for Moon based on anything he did in the CFL, shame on them.

 

[elbingz]

Actually they do. Read the AP story.

Also, while his CFL stats aren't there in his HOF bio it mentions the years spent in the CFL, the championships, etc. The voters took his CFL years into account as well. Read the HOF selection criteria.

It doesn't and that's why they aren't in his HOF bio. Cause it doesn't matter. Like the other guy said, it's just to pad his resume. They just use it to show the struggle he went through and tell his story. That's it.

 

[Nukleopatra]

Are you guys still talking about that worthless piece of shit, Warren Moon?

''He was playing under harder rules.''

Lmao.

''Winning is a team thing.''

Yeah. When your QB puts up a 58% completion %, 80 QB rating, you won't win too many games.. That explains the 101 career losses, I guess.. Worst hall of fame QB I've ever had the displeasure of seeing play.

He's the perfect example of why any average NFL player should get into the hall. Again, I'd like to thank the person who mentioned his fucking name, 100 times, if I could. It made me laugh.

 

[Shayn•Da•Pain]

'99 & '01 are no brainers. Two of the best seasons ever for a QB.

The 2000 Rams were 6-0 when Warner broke his thumb vs KC, a game the Rams lost. Trent Green went 2-3 as the starter, before Warner came back and brought the Rams back from the dead and made the playoffs. He threw for 3500 yards and led the league in completion percentage, while putting up a 98.3 rating. Anyone who followed the Greatest Show will tell you that the 2000 team probably had the best offense out of the run, and Warner was on pace to smash every record in the book before he broke the thumb. They were most likely a muffed Hakim punt away from going to three straight SB's.

If you don't think he's been dominant the last two years for the Cards, I don't know waht league you're watching. He threw for 4500 yards and 30 TD's last year, and had an all time postseason run. He threw for nearly 3800 yards this year, with 24 TD's, and just had an all time playoff performance. The team is brutal and cant move the ball when he dosent play.

Whenever the guy starts and finishes the year as a starter, he pretty much dominates the league. It cant be analyzed any other way.

EDIT: 2007 is always overklooked. He threw for 3400 yards and 27 TD's in eleven starts. All the guy does is produce when he plays.

I don't know why you spout off his '99-'01 accomplishments, I already agreed they were excellent seasons and I'm well aware of all of his stats/accomplishments that season.

As for your edit: I haven't overlooked '07. I know what he did. He had a few great games, a handful of good games, and a few bad ones. He also played some bad teams, it has to be said.

Analyze this. In '07 Warner was 10th in yards per game, so he was above average, not dominant when compared to his contemporaries. In a year when Brady broke 50 TD's, Derek Anderson had 29 tds and 19 ints, Warner had 27 tds and 17 ints. Warner wasn't quite dominant, nor was he bad. He had a very good year, but he wasn't a top 5 QB in any category. In fact he was 17th in completion percentage as well. The Cardinals didn't make the playoffs, Warner didn't make the pro-bowl, and he went 5-6. So tell me how Warner dominated in '07? Analyze that for me. A good/great season doesn't make a dominating season, and this wasn't a great season, it was largely forgettable...maybe that's why you feel it's overlooked.

 

[Shayn•Da•Pain]

Are you guys still talking about that worthless piece of shit, Warren Moon?

''He was playing under harder rules.''

Lmao.

''Winning is a team thing.''

Yeah. When your QB puts up a 58% completion %, 80 QB rating, you won't win too many games.. That explains the 101 career losses, I guess.. Worst hall of fame QB I've ever had the displeasure of seeing play.

He's the perfect example of why any average NFL player should get into the hall. Again, I'd like to thank the person who mentioned his fucking name, 100 times, if I could. It made me laugh.

When your QB gets lost half his career due to injuries and being "punch drunk", you aren't going to win many games either. It's lucky for Warner that time spent riding the bench/on IR isn't a factor for the HOF, otherwise Warner won't get in. Outside of this cloud of injury/"punch drunkedness"/time spent in Canada, he is HOF worthy. He gets my vote, but my vote doesn't count but I won't be mad if he doesn't get in the HOF one bit.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

I don't know why you spout off his '99-'01 accomplishments, I already agreed they were excellent seasons and I'm well aware of all of his stats/accomplishments that season.

I went into detail about 2000, because you kinda gave him a backhanded compliment for that season, and FirstTimer didnt include it as a great season either, which is baffling.

As for your edit: I haven't overlooked '07. I know what he did. He had a few great games, a handful of good games, and a few bad ones. He also played some bad teams, it has to be said.

No, it dosent need to be said. Who cares who he played? I covered that in my response to the awful killgod post.

Analyze this. In '07 Warner was 10th in yards per game, so he was above average, not dominant when compared to his contemporaries. In a year when Brady broke 50 TD's, Derek Anderson had 29 tds and 19 ints, Warner had 27 tds and 17 ints. Warner wasn't quite dominant, nor was he bad. He had a very good year, but he wasn't a top 5 QB in any category. In fact he was 17th in completion percentage as well. The Cardinals didn't make the playoffs, Warner didn't make the pro-bowl, and he went 5-6. So tell me how Warner dominated in '07? Analyze that for me. A good/great season doesn't make a dominating season, and this wasn't a great season, it was largely forgettable...maybe that's why you feel it's overlooked.

I never said he did, I just said it's an overlooked year in his career. He came in, played significantly better than Leinart, and put up what amounted to very good full season numbers--in only eleven starts.

'99
'00
'01
'08
'09

Five dominant seasons. He's started at least 11 games 6 times, and has had 5 outstanding seasons, and another very good one.

 

[Nukleopatra]

When your QB gets lost half his career due to injuries and being "punch drunk", you aren't going to win many games either. It's lucky for Warner that time spent riding the bench/on IR isn't a factor for the HOF, otherwise Warner won't get in. Outside of this cloud of injury/"punch drunkedness"/time spent in Canada, he is HOF worthy. He gets my vote, but my vote doesn't count but I won't be mad if he doesn't get in the HOF one bit.

He only needed a few years to surpass anything Warren Moon has ever done, of any importance. So, if they let that piece of donkey spunk in the hall, and not a sure fire legend, I'd be a bit upset.

I'm not worried though, he's a lock.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

When your QB gets lost half his career due to injuries and being "punch drunk", you aren't going to win many games either. It's lucky for Warner that time spent riding the bench/on IR isn't a factor for the HOF, otherwise Warner won't get in. Outside of this cloud of injury/"punch drunkedness"/time spent in Canada, he is HOF worthy. He gets my vote, but my vote doesn't count but I won't be mad if he doesn't get in the HOF one bit.

Again, plenty of players lose time to injury. He bounced back and is playing at the same level he was early in his career. If anything, that's a positive.

He lost two years to injury/post concussion issues ('02-'03). The rest of those muddled years ('04-'06) were teams using him to mentor young QB's. He's been dominant the rest of the time.

 

[mgoblue2290]

Warner's regular season numbers are good, but the fact that he also dominates in the playoffs against higher level teams is even more telling of his talent. He's a first ballot hall of famer in my mind.

 

[Shayn•Da•Pain]

Five dominant seasons. He's started at least 11 games 6 times, and has had 5 outstanding seasons, and another very good one.

What are you saying? Are you saying he's had 5 dominant seasons, 5 outstanding seasons, and 1 more very good season? Are you really claiming Warner has had 11 productive seasons?

 

[FirstTimer]

I went into detail about 2000, because you kinda gave him a backhanded compliment for that season, and FirstTimer didnt include it as a great season either, which is baffling.

.

21TD 18INT is not something I consider a great/dominant season. To have a "dominant" or "great" season in my book you need to have very good numbers across the board. I'm not saying Warner didn't do some good things that season but I wouldn't label a year with that TD/INT ratio as dominant or "great".

Then again at the end of the day I included 2007 as a great season(albeit hesitantly) for him so it evens out.

 

[FirstTimer]

It doesn't and that's why they aren't in his HOF bio. Cause it doesn't matter. Like the other guy said, it's just to pad his resume. They just use it to show the struggle he went through and tell his story. That's it.

The article directly refutes that and so do the stories about how the voters took those into account. I never said it was the main crux of him getting in but to ignore it played a factor is just not factually accurate.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

21TD 18INT is not something I consider a great/dominant season. To have a "dominant" or "great" season in my book you need to have very good numbers across the board. I'm not saying Warner didn't do some good things that season but I wouldn't label a year with that TD/INT ratio as dominant or "great".

Then again at the end of the day I included 2007 as a great season(albeit hesitantly) for him so it evens out.

He led the league in completion percentage, yards per game (311), yards per attempt (an UNREAL 9.9) and yards per completion (an equally UNREAL 14.6). His net yards per attempt was an all time record, 9.0.

And as I said, that was probably the best of the GSOT offenses, and he was the catalyst. The team was 2-3 without him.

Simply looking at TD/INT dosnt do that season justice.

 

[FirstTimer]

He led the league in completion percentage, yards per game (311), yards per attempt (an UNREAL 9.9) and yards per completion (an equally UNREAL 14.6). His net yards per attempt was an all time record, 9.0.

And as I said, that was probably the best of the GSOT offenses, and he was the catalyst. The team was 2-3 without him.

Simply looking at TD/INT dosnt do that season justice.

I didn't just look at that. I looked at his other stats too....which I pointed out....but for a season to be dominant in my mind, especially for a QB you can't have a borderline TD/INT ratio. A dominant season, by my definition has to be the entire package.

In the end it's all semantics. You havea different definition of what "dominant" is. You take away 2007, I took away 2000. At the end of the day we each gave the guy 5 season that were at least "great" with 2-3 "dominant" ones mixed in there. Just give it a rest.

 

[MrBill]

Simply looking at TD/INT dosnt do that season justice.

Brett Favre agrees.