Spaceman Spiff Posted August 30, 2005 Share Posted August 30, 2005 I gotta say it's Joe Namath who's in the Hall of Fame despite the fact that he threw more ints than td's in his career. This bugs the crap out of me because I know he's in there based on the fact of his superbowl performance, people remember him for that great moment. Someone like, oh, I dunno, ART MONK, doesn't get in the hall because they don't have a highlight reel like that. Anyway, thats my take on the most overrated player ever. What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogie Posted August 30, 2005 Share Posted August 30, 2005 Take a look at Bradshaw's stats. Grab a barf bag first though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophet Posted August 30, 2005 Share Posted August 30, 2005 I agree with namath 173 tds 220 ints atleast bradshaw was 212 tds 210 ints Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailYeah Posted August 30, 2005 Share Posted August 30, 2005 I agree with namath 173 tds 220 intsatleast bradshaw was 212 tds 210 ints wow I didn't know Namath's were that bad. That's not even close to being a decent TD/INT ratio. That's horrendous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophet Posted August 30, 2005 Share Posted August 30, 2005 wow I didn't know Namath's were that bad. That's not even close to being a decent TD/INT ratio. That's horrendous. not to mention in his 13 years in the league 7 of those years he passed for under 50% and had a career avg of 50.1% he would never have made it in todays game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted August 30, 2005 Share Posted August 30, 2005 isn't it ironic that he is considered the best player in Jets' history? Just goes to show you how poor that history has been since 1969. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted August 30, 2005 Share Posted August 30, 2005 Namath played in a different era guys. He gets in for more than his TD/INT ratio. I'd like to say Deion, simply because chest-thumpers always seem to get extra consideration, and Deion was the biggest chest-thumper ever. But really, for me I think I'd have to say Troy Aikman. He was a great QB and I like the way he calls a game, but I think he benefitted from having an amazing team around him. His stats are rather unremarkable (He only surpassed 20 TDs once, and what other QB goes to the pro-bowl with 13 TDs 12 INTs and 2600 yards?) and when his supporting cast started to deteriorate, he was unable to elevate the play of his offense the way a truly great QB, such as Elway, Favre or Marino (his contemporaries) could. Instead, he started blaming coaches and WRs. But the man has three rings as a starter and is a shoe-in for the HOF. But to me, it's a bit like Ringo getting into the Rock 'n Roll HOF. Right place at the right time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scskin Posted August 30, 2005 Share Posted August 30, 2005 I'm going to say Lavar, and hope it PISSES him off!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted August 30, 2005 Share Posted August 30, 2005 I gotta say it's Joe Namath who's in the Hall of Fame despite the fact that he threw more ints than td's in his career. This bugs the crap out of me because I know he's in there based on the fact of his superbowl performance, people remember him for that great moment. Someone like, oh, I dunno, ART MONK, doesn't get in the hall because they don't have a highlight reel like that. Anyway, thats my take on the most overrated player ever. What do you think? To be fair looking at QBs in the 60s or earlier and comparing them to QBs today is not apples to apples. Back then receivers could be ass-raped on every single play without interference, holding or illegal contact being called. Needless to say it was a little tougher to complete a pass. You could also destroy the QB well after the pass was released. Here are some numbers for guys that were considered at least very good QBs back then John Brodie--214/224 Dan Fouts--254/242* Sammy Baugh--187/203* Otto Graham--88/94* John Hadl--244/268* Jim Hart--209/247* Jack Kemp--114/183* Bobby Layne--196/243* Eddie LaBaron--104/141* Archie Manning--125/173* Jim Plunkett--164/198 Norm Snead--196/257* Ken Stabler--194/222* Y.A. Tittle--212/221* George Blanda--236/277* Don Breaux--7/9 :point2sky * Made Pro-Bowl in one or more years without having a positive TD/Int ratio. Example: Norm Snead made the 1963 ProBowl with 13 TDs 27 Ints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceman Spiff Posted August 30, 2005 Author Share Posted August 30, 2005 Namath played in a different era guys. He gets in for more than his TD/INT ratio.I'd like to say Deion, simply because chest-thumpers always seem to get extra consideration, and Deion was the biggest chest-thumper ever. But really, for me I think I'd have to say Troy Aikman. He was a great QB and I like the way he calls a game, but I think he benefitted from having an amazing team around him. His stats are rather unremarkable (He only surpassed 20 TDs once, and what other QB goes to the pro-bowl with 13 TDs 12 INTs and 2600 yards?) and when his supporting cast started to deteriorate, he was unable to elevate the play of his offense the way a truly great QB, such as Elway, Favre or Marino (his contemporaries) could. Instead, he started blaming coaches and WRs. But the man has three rings as a starter and is a shoe-in for the HOF. But to me, it's a bit like Ringo getting into the Rock 'n Roll HOF. Right place at the right time. I understand the different era argument...but 50+ more Ints? thats a lot in ANY era... haha, Aikman...i was going to say him to rile up and piss off the cowboy fans on this board but thought better of it... ...anyone got any eagles we can call overrated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted August 30, 2005 Share Posted August 30, 2005 Jurgensen's stats were a LOT better. Ditto for Johnny Unitas. Ditto for Bart Starr. Ditto for Fran Tarkenton and Bob Griese, all guys that played during the time Namath was in the NFL Namath is in the HOF for ONE GAME. Let's be honest. And if that ONE GAME had not been won by a NEW YORK team, he wouldn't be in either If the Colts win that game 16-7 Namath goes down as a guy that has one season with 4,007 yards and other than that is remembered more for his gimpy knees and injury problems than anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pskins Posted August 30, 2005 Share Posted August 30, 2005 Well Deion Sanders of course! Most overrated offensive player - Drew Bledsoe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gambit187 Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Lets compare Superman Lavar to Dextar Coakley STATS FOR THEIR FIRST FOR YEARS COAKLEY Year Team G Total Tckl Ast Sacks Int Yds Avg Lg TD Pass Def 1997 boys 16 95 72.0 23 2.5 1 6 6.0 6 0 2 1998 boys 16 81 63.0 18 2 1 1 8 18.0 18 0 4 1999 boys 16 86 70.0 16 1 4 119 29.8 46 1 2 2000 boys 16 90 78.0 12 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 3 ARRINGTON Year Team G Total Tckl Ast Sacks Int Yds Avg Lg TD Pass Def 2000 Wash 16 55 44.0 11 4 0 0 0.0 0 0 4 2001 Wash 14 99 82.0 17 0.5 3 120 40.0 67 1 6 2002 Wash 16 92 67.0 25 11 0 0 0.0 0 0 8 2003 Wash 16 88 75.0 13 6 0 0 0.0 0 0 10 LAVAR Stats are very comparable to those of Coakley, Lavar has more sacks, but Coakley has more INT's. If Coakley is considered an above average starter, then Arrington could be consideted that way. Espically when you factor in where they were both drafted. Oh and espcially if you consider how way much more Arrington is making Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDSKNfaithfull Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Lets compare Superman Lavar to Dextar CoakleySTATS FOR THEIR FIRST FOR YEARS COAKLEY Year Team G Total Tckl Ast Sacks Int Yds Avg Lg TD Pass Def 1997 boys 16 95 72.0 23 2.5 1 6 6.0 6 0 2 1998 boys 16 81 63.0 18 2 1 1 8 18.0 18 0 4 1999 boys 16 86 70.0 16 1 4 119 29.8 46 1 2 2000 boys 16 90 78.0 12 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 3 ARRINGTON Year Team G Total Tckl Ast Sacks Int Yds Avg Lg TD Pass Def 2000 Wash 16 55 44.0 11 4 0 0 0.0 0 0 4 2001 Wash 14 99 82.0 17 0.5 3 120 40.0 67 1 6 2002 Wash 16 92 67.0 25 11 0 0 0.0 0 0 8 2003 Wash 16 88 75.0 13 6 0 0 0.0 0 0 10 LAVAR Stats are very comparable to those of Coakley, Lavar has more sacks, but Coakley has more INT's. If Coakley is considered an above average starter, then Arrington could be consideted that way. Espically when you factor in where they were both drafted. Oh and espcially if you consider how way much more Arrington is making Poke fan get a clue :doh: You can't judge a defensive player off stats alone. You ever think if a player is better he may change what a offense does? Maybe try to run away from him or pass the other direction? Your example is almost as bad as somebody trying to argue the best Corner becasue of ints :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FootballGuy2677 Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 he might of got in with those stats becuase defences were allowed to tackle the player:laugh: . But now that your not allowed to get the guy down in the back off the jersey...:doh: ... ect...those are considered really bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gambit187 Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Poke fan get a clue :doh: You can't judge a defensive player off stats alone. You ever think if a player is better he may change what a offense does? Maybe try to run away from him or pass the other direction? Your example is almost as bad as somebody trying to argue the best Corner becasue of ints :doh: Sorry dude stats are what they are FACTS Also Lavar is very well know for free lancing and blowing assignments Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 The Boz(o) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Mexico Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Many may not agree with me but im going to say Emmitt Smith. As much as it hurts me to say, he had a good team around him. I could have run through the holes that were opened for him. The main reason I say Smith is because he was injured at least 3 times every game and when he would make an "amazing" return, the announcers would go on and on about how much of a "warrior" he was. The guy seemed to have some kind of injury every time he was tackled, not to mention he would often run out of bounds to avoid contact. :dallasuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luciusism Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 I know some sports writers mention Lynn Swann when it comes to overrated players. Always wondered about that since all I remember are his amazing super bowl highlights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. S Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 my roommate complains about Joe Namath all the time. I would like to say Lavar, but he is not the most overrated of all time, and he has had more than 1 good seasons. Stats are facts, but they do not demonstrate everything that there is to a player. Coakley may be similar to Lavar stat wise, but people are not idiots to rate Lavar as a top 20 Linebacker still. Do stats show teams double covering him letting a teammate get the sack? Do sacks show him playing against TE's and WR's due to his speed? If Coakley was blocked the same way Lavar was in his pro-bowl years, then im sure Coakley's stats would be pretty low. I sorta agree on Emmit Smith, just cause of how he stayed in the league extra to pad his yards up. Barry Sanders should never be contested as the best running back ever in my opinion, and he woulda had that record had he stayed in the extra 5-6 seasons like Emmit did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Micahel Vick, probably the most overrated player of all time. He's a QB, and Josh McCown threw for more yards then him last year. . . JOSH McCOWN :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Poke fan get a clue :doh: You can't judge a defensive player off stats alone. You ever think if a player is better he may change what a offense does? Maybe try to run away from him or pass the other direction? Your example is almost as bad as somebody trying to argue the best Corner becasue of ints :doh: I wouldn't say Lavar is the MOST overrated, but he is not a good LB. Physical skills do not make a LB, playing your position correctly does. Until he starts to stay at his position, stops overpursuing backs and starts to learn how to correctly take on a block, he will always be overrated in my eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThornWithin Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 I wouldn't say Lavar is the MOST overrated, but he is not a good LB. Physical skills do not make a LB, playing your position correctly does. Until he starts to stay at his position, stops overpursuing backs and starts to learn how to correctly take on a block, he will always be overrated in my eyes. :applause: Also, saying Troy Aikman is the most overrated player in history instead of Joe Namath is insane. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devman91 Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Many may not agree with me but im going to say Emmitt Smith. As much as it hurts me to say, he had a good team around him. I could have run through the holes that were opened for him. The main reason I say Smith is because he was injured at least 3 times every game and when he would make an "amazing" return, the announcers would go on and on about how much of a "warrior" he was. The guy seemed to have some kind of injury every time he was tackled, not to mention he would often run out of bounds to avoid contact. :dallasuck lmao, if you were his size you would have done the same thing, calling the all-time leading rusher is ridiculious as thornwithin already said "stats are just what they are...facts" so take it up the booty and know you'll NEVER have a RB close to the calibur player or person that emmit smith was and is i bet you think walter peyton and barry sanders are overrated too:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyKilmer Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 Currently playing its Warren Sapp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.