The standards for QBs in the past are totally different from today; Terry Bradshaw’s numbers cannot be looked at with 2018 standards. Last season the NFL’s average TD/INT ratio was about 1.8 to 1, and for regular QBs it was better than 2-to-1. 28 of 32 teams threw more TD passes than interceptions, and those numbers are fairly typical ones in the last 10-15 years.
In Terry Bradshaw’s prime, there were more interceptions than TD passes, every single year, and usually by a very wide margin. If you were throwing more TDs than picks, as Bradshaw did in his prime, you were a really good QB. in 1978, when Bradshaw won the Super Bowl and the MVP award, his 28 TD passes led the league. Second place was Dan Fouts, who threw 24 TDs but was picked off 20 times, and everyone thought he was a star. Bradshaw’s numbers today would get him benched, but in those days he was quite good. He wasn’t the best QB around, that just wasn’t Pittsburgh’s game, but he was above average in a long career and, obviously, was rather successful in the playoffs.
Joe Namath is a pretty good answer to the OP, but on looking at some records, I’;m kind of amazed at the blandness of Troy Aikman. He was efficient and didn’t make a lot of mistakes, but he passed very little; he only got over 20 TD passes in a season once, which I have to admit surprises me (I was just amazed to see that Michael Irvin’s career high in TDs was ten, and he only did it once) and he was rather significantly helped by having a ludicrous amount of talent around him. I knew he wasn’t Brett Favre, but the numbers were far, far less impressive than I’d have expected.
I’ll take the bait. (and assuming that Roethlisberger does indeed make the HoF)
Not sure where you’re getting your QBR stat, but maybe you mean in the superbowl game itself? In which case I assume you’re talking about Superbowl XL where he had a pretty poor stat line (but did add a rushing TD). Admittedly Big Ben did not have a great game in the Superbowl, but he was pretty brilliant in the 3 **road **playoff games that got them there:
Wild Card round: beat the Bengals 31-17: 14/19, 208yds, 3TD, 0INT, passer rating 148.7
Divisional Round: beat the Colts 21-18: 14/24, 197yds, 2TD, 1INT, passer rating 95.3
AFC Championship: beat the Broncos 34-17: 21/29, 275yds, 2TD, 0INT, passer rating 124.9 (and a rushing TD)
So if Ben does make the HoF, with multiple superbowl victories, a gawdy career winning percentage as starting QB, and top 10 in every passing stat, I don’t think he belongs in this conversation.
Much like U.S. presidents and the economy, NFL quarterbacks frequently get too much of the credit when their team is doing well, and too much of the blame when their team is doing poorly.
When one sees discussions about quarterbacks’ qualifications for the Hall of Fame, one of the metrics which often gets pointed to is championships. Giants fans will often tout Eli Manning’s two Super Bowl rings as proof of his Hall worthiness, but one could argue that his stats haven’t been particularly great – for example, he’s led the NFL in interceptions three times, and his career completion percentage is only 60%, which isn’t even at the league average these days.
My football ‘awareness’ starts around 1971. Super bowl VI is the first one I remember watching. I was 10 years old. I’ve watched all those guys play, the ones who played from 1971 on.
Of those guys, to me, Bob Griese is the least great.
I remember reading about a Monday Night Football game where the Jets had to play the Raiders with virtually no running back because the one good guy they had was injured. The Raiders played with SIX defensive backs the entire game, spurning the run and daring Namath to beat them. He had an incredible night and ran up huge stats against the “you ain’t gonna’ pass” defense of the Raiders, but they still lost because their defense totally sucked.
That brings me to another point. The Jets were pretty much a bad team through most of his career. The only great quarterback who spent almost his entire career with a team that was worse was Archie Manning. I have no doubt that, with a franchise that was respectable, he’d be in the Hall, too.
He played before protecting players in general and the quarterback specifically became a league goal. He was physically abused on a regular basis. Now, the league is structured so that quarterbacks can produce Arena Football level throwing stats without getting their uniforms stained.
Finally, the Hall isn’t and shouldn’t be just about raw stats. As its name suggests, it should be about FAME and a player’s impact on the game. Namath pretty much invented the modern Tight End as a passing weapon using Richard Caster as his target. He had charisma, leadership, and guts.
I remember Blanda coming off the bench to lead the Raiders to come from behind victories in the early 1970s. The ageless wonder bailed out a young and struggling Ken Stabler, in Stabler’s formative years. What Blanda did prior to the 1970s, I can’t speak to.
Terry Bradshaw was great, definitely. He won early with a strong running game, Harris and Bleier, and later as he matured he won with his strong arm. Super Bowl XIV is good evidence of that. Also, the two Super Bowls against Roger Staubach and the Cowboys are classics.
In the '50s, he was a quarterback (though he wasn’t often the starter) and kicker for the Bears. After ten seasons with the Bears, he was out of football entirely in 1959.
When the AFL started up in 1960, he joined the Oilers, and became their QB and kicker. The Oilers were one of the exemplars of the wide-open offenses that the AFL was known for, and Blanda threw a lot of passes (and, thus, a lot of interceptions). But, in his seven seasons as the Oilers’ quarterback, he was an All-Star three times, was player of the year in 1961, and won the first two AFL championship games.
After the Oilers released him in 1967 (just shy of his 40th birthday), he caught on with the Raiders as their kicker and backup quarterback. In 1970, in particular, he repeatedly came off the bench in relief of starting QB Daryl Lamonica and led the Raiders to several wins. He kept playing with the Raiders through 1975, and retired at age 48.
Just to clarify, is this thread discussing which QB in the HoF was not as good as the others in the HoF, or which QB in the HoF doesn’t actually belong there? Because I feel like the OP was asking the former but some replies assume the latter.
For Namath (whom I don’t have an opinion on personally), and people who object to him being mentioned, it’s not being suggested he was bad and doesn’t belong there. Someone in the HoF has to be the worst among that great bunch and if it’s not Namath it is someone else. If you say it’s not Namath, then who? Because it has to be someone.
My opinion is that you have to be really good to even be considered for inclusion, and everyone in the HoF currently was great.
I’m too lazy to do it, but is there a HoF QB who went an entire career without leading the league in major passing categories like completion percentage or yards passing?
Just to go outside the box I’ll vote for Steve Young. He had maybe 4 or 5 truly remarkable seasons, but the rest of his career is kind of ho-hum. Although, its certainly arguable that those 4-5 seasons were SO remarkable that they completely over shadow the mediocre years and the years sitting behind Montana.
My heart really isn’t in this vote, but usually the Hall requires longevity and Young seems to have made it based on just a few great seasons (though his career TD-INT ratio is pretty dang good: 232-107
From a quick look I think Aikman and Jim Kelly almost fit what you’re looking for. Aikman led in completion % once in his entire career and that’s it. Kelly led once in completion % and once in TDs. I never felt like Aikman was a guy that was going to carry a team on his shoulders, and he never had to in Dallas. But he was still very good for his era.
Going strictly by stats, I still say Namath is the worst among HOF QBs because in that regard he’s pretty average to downright bad. He threw a ton of INTs and his completion % was not very good.
He was backup to arguably the greatest QB of their era.
I think Young was a great QB - maybe not quite Joe Montana or Brett Favre but still great. He could throw a deep ball as accurately as anyone I’ve ever seen, and while he didn’t have blazing speed, he recognized opportunities to pick up 20 yards with the occasional run.
Griese never averaged 200 yards per game passing, ever in his entire career. He was a game manager on a team where Csonka, Kiick, and Morris controlled the ball. Griese passed only when he had to. Compare that to the other HOF QBs of his era (Namath, Bradshaw, Staubach, Tarkenton, and Stabler), and they each had at least three seasons where they averaged over 200 yards a game. Namath did it 5x. Griese’s best seasons for that stat were 1968 and 1969, for 190.2 and 188.3 yards per game. Other than that he never exceeded 170 yards a game for a season, ever.
I still think it’s Griese who is the worst HOF QB.
I’ll grant you that he didn’t pass the ball a lot, but when your offense can win with the running game (as the Dolphins frequently did), that “never averaged 200 yards passing” probably had more to do with the Dolphins’ run-first offensive strategy than it did with any shortcomings Griese may have had. (Miami also had a Hall of Fame wide receiver during their dominant run in the early 1970s, in Paul Warfield, and Warfield never caught more than 43 passes in a season as a Dolphin.)
I’d agree that Griese is in the bottom half of HOF QBs, but I’m not convinced he was the worst. If he is, I’m not at all sure that the stats you’re pointing to are proof of it.