The most overrated player in NFL history

Originally posted by TheGore49er:

lol? maybe in his first few season, but last couple of years that defense hasn't been good, no running game either, and Russell has been carrying them. don't like the midgets personality, but can't deny his skill.

That defense has been elite every single year until this last year. The offense hasn't ever been elite.

Carrying a mediocre offense isn't worthy of HOF talk.

Originally posted by SisterFister:

Eli Manning. Case dismissed.

Disagree. The guy won 2 super bowls against the greatest dynasty ever and in both games he led, game winning drives. The last couple of years he's been bad but not overrated.

I think the only way to see if an older player is overrated is to check their Madden Rating on the throwback team they are on.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by TheGore49er:

lol? maybe in his first few season, but last couple of years that defense hasn't been good, no running game either, and Russell has been carrying them. don't like the midgets personality, but can't deny his skill.

That defense has been elite every single year until this last year. The offense hasn't ever been elite.

Carrying a mediocre offense isn't worthy of HOF talk.

Yup. Notice since Midget Wilson's stats have gotten better the Seahawks record has gotten worse? The defense carried that team. Frodo Wilson was Just along for the ride.

Originally posted by Stud:

Yup. Notice since Midget Wilson's stats have gotten better the Seahawks record has gotten worse? The defense carried that team. Frodo Wilson was Just along for the ride.

What's up my dude guap... how you been homie?

Originally posted by SoCold:
Aikman 12 seasons
comp % 61.5 - yards 32,942 - ypp 7.0 - td 165 - int 141

Alex Smith 12 seasons
comp % 62.4 - yards 31,888 - ypp 6.9 - td 183 - int 96

lol

Wow.....very good research. This is eye opening, particularly the TD, INT numbers. We should also take into account the talent that Aikman had around him compared to the talent around Smith (at least for much of his career).

Originally posted by KID9R:
This. And Lynn Swann. Probably the two worst players statistically in the Hall of fame. They just got a lot of pub and Swann really only made it because he made some iconic playoff catches on a stacked team.

You.....are absolutely correct, sir! John Taylor deserves to be in the Hall and Lynn Swann deserves...

Originally posted by darockzillahitman:
Responses to some of the players mentioned in this thread:

Joe Namath: What isn't mentioned is he also won passing yard titles and the like. The game was so different back then it's hard to really process the numbers. Then again, the AFL was always the inflated passing league, where you saw things like the Houston Oilers receivers putting up bogus numbers (which is why I don't take Lance Alworth seriously), etc. Haven't seen him play nearly enough to know what's what.

True, however, he threw a lot to get those yards. His yards per attempt never led the league. Just saying, man.

Namath got in the Hall on the basis of 3 things...the Jets victory over the Colts in SB III, his strong arm, and the fact that he played in NY. As a player however, he simply was not a HOFer. Incidentally, the Jets win in SB III was mainly on the backs of their defense, not the Joe-led offense.

Originally posted by Young2Rice:
Lynn Swann also grossly overrated. Only played 8 years and never eclipsed 1000 yards receiving

You.....are absolutely correct, sir!

Elvis Grbac

Originally posted by longterm9erfan:

Originally posted by darockzillahitman:
Responses to some of the players mentioned in this thread:

Joe Namath: What isn't mentioned is he also won passing yard titles and the like. The game was so different back then it's hard to really process the numbers. Then again, the AFL was always the inflated passing league, where you saw things like the Houston Oilers receivers putting up bogus numbers (which is why I don't take Lance Alworth seriously), etc. Haven't seen him play nearly enough to know what's what.

True, however, he threw a lot to get those yards. His yards per attempt never led the league. Just saying, man.

Namath got in the Hall on the basis of 3 things...the Jets victory over the Colts in SB III, his strong arm, and the fact that he played in NY. As a player however, he simply was not a HOFer. Incidentally, the Jets win in SB III was mainly on the backs of their defense, not the Joe-led offense.

Joe Namath is overrated, but you're being too harsh on him.

These are the league-wide averages in these years:
1967: 47.6% completion percentage ... 58.5 passer rating
1968: 47.5% completion percentage ... 59.5 passer rating
1969: 49.8% completion percentage ... 61.5 passer rating
1970: 51.1% completion percentage ... 62.5 passer rating
1971: 50.9% completion percentage ... 59.3 passer rating

As darock mentioned, the era was simply too different to cite raw numbers without context. Yeah, Namath's numbers comparatively look awful to players today, but it's an apples and oranges comparison.

Originally posted by theduke85:

Originally posted by longterm9erfan:

Originally posted by darockzillahitman:
Responses to some of the players mentioned in this thread:

Joe Namath: What isn't mentioned is he also won passing yard titles and the like. The game was so different back then it's hard to really process the numbers. Then again, the AFL was always the inflated passing league, where you saw things like the Houston Oilers receivers putting up bogus numbers (which is why I don't take Lance Alworth seriously), etc. Haven't seen him play nearly enough to know what's what.

True, however, he threw a lot to get those yards. His yards per attempt never led the league. Just saying, man.

Namath got in the Hall on the basis of 3 things...the Jets victory over the Colts in SB III, his strong arm, and the fact that he played in NY. As a player however, he simply was not a HOFer. Incidentally, the Jets win in SB III was mainly on the backs of their defense, not the Joe-led offense.

Joe Namath is overrated, but you're being too harsh on him.

This are the league-wide averages in these years:
1967: 47.6% completion percentage ... 58.5 passer rating
1968: 47.5% completion percentage ... 59.5 passer rating
1969: 49.8% completion percentage ... 61.5 passer rating
1970: 51.1% completion percentage ... 62.5 passer rating
1971: 50.9% completion percentage ... 59.3 passer rating

As darock mentioned, the era was simply too different to cite raw numbers without context. Yeah, Namath's numbers comparatively look awful to players today, but it's an apples and oranges comparison.

Right. Its just like when people were trying to compare Alex Smith to Troy Aikman in here. Sure the stats look similar. Aikman was a perennial top 5 quarterback and Smith has been an average to below average quarterback in every year of his career except one.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by theduke85:

Originally posted by longterm9erfan:

Originally posted by darockzillahitman:
Responses to some of the players mentioned in this thread:

Joe Namath: What isn't mentioned is he also won passing yard titles and the like. The game was so different back then it's hard to really process the numbers. Then again, the AFL was always the inflated passing league, where you saw things like the Houston Oilers receivers putting up bogus numbers (which is why I don't take Lance Alworth seriously), etc. Haven't seen him play nearly enough to know what's what.

True, however, he threw a lot to get those yards. His yards per attempt never led the league. Just saying, man.

Namath got in the Hall on the basis of 3 things...the Jets victory over the Colts in SB III, his strong arm, and the fact that he played in NY. As a player however, he simply was not a HOFer. Incidentally, the Jets win in SB III was mainly on the backs of their defense, not the Joe-led offense.

Joe Namath is overrated, but you're being too harsh on him.

This are the league-wide averages in these years:
1967: 47.6% completion percentage ... 58.5 passer rating
1968: 47.5% completion percentage ... 59.5 passer rating
1969: 49.8% completion percentage ... 61.5 passer rating
1970: 51.1% completion percentage ... 62.5 passer rating
1971: 50.9% completion percentage ... 59.3 passer rating

As darock mentioned, the era was simply too different to cite raw numbers without context. Yeah, Namath's numbers comparatively look awful to players today, but it's an apples and oranges comparison.

Right. Its just like when people were trying to compare Alex Smith to Troy Aikman, Marino , Brady.. in here. Sure the stats look similar. Aikman was a perennial top 5 quarterback and Smith has been an average to below average quarterback in every year of his career except one.

FTFY

i could say john elway is in the top ten. what did he do aside from getting kicked by the niners till they got him davis? marino is another one. and entire vikings teams from the 70s,

Originally posted by cciowa:
i could say john elway is in the top ten. what did he do aside from getting kicked by the niners till they got him davis? marino is another one. and entire vikings teams from the 70s,

Those guys were pretty good. Their respective teams couldn't put a team together that could beat the super teams of that era.

Marino was especially spectacular.