Your numbers are a little off.

Otto Graham NFL Football Statistics | Pro-Football-Reference.com

174 TD's to 134 INT's

 

I'm sorry, you must have misread. I said "in the NFL". My numbers are correct when read correctly.

 

I was quoting his NFL numbers.

Actually five bad throws I thought. I would add the miss of Edelman the first time and the two that went straight into the ground (one of which could have been grounding).

 

The Patriots earned the win and Brady made the plays he needed. That's what I took from last night. But what was Brady's longest completion last night? Not run after catch but completion?

 

Back to the thread. Is he the greatest ever? I'd put him in the conversation and possibly at the top of the list at the end of the day.

 

BTW, congrats UKMustang. :thumb:

 

I Dont get people now questioning the passes Brady threw yesterday because there were not to many down field. You Dont throw down field just to throw.Seattles defense is weakest in the middle and so the Pats took advantage of what they gave them. Let's not forget this defense demolished last years super bowl participant and was one of the best again this year. So if someone throws 4 TDs with a 70 completion percentage and over 300 yards with basically a bunch of slot receivers, running backs and a te that is impressive. He missed a few throws but even the one pick I would say was just a great play by that defender.

 

It was particularly weaker in the middle as the game went on when they lost a DB and LB to injuries.

I'm sorry, you must have misread. I said "in the NFL". My numbers are correct when read correctly.

 

Yeah, anything that happened before the NFL is meaningless IMO.

Did anyone actually see Graham ever play? Dude retired 60 years ago, so my guess is no.

Actually five bad throws I thought. I would add the miss of Edelman the first time and the two that went straight into the ground (one of which could have been grounding).

 

The Patriots earned the win and Brady made the plays he needed. That's what I took from last night. But what was Brady's longest completion last night? Not run after catch but completion?

 

Back to the thread. Is he the greatest ever? I'd put him in the conversation and possibly at the top of the list at the end of the day.

 

BTW, congrats UKMustang. :thumb:

 

Did anyone actually see Graham ever play? Dude retired 60 years ago, so my guess is no.

 

No, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.

Did anyone actually see Graham ever play? Dude retired 60 years ago, so my guess is no.

 

I never did. Does that even make a difference? I mean, those claiming Brady to be the greatest are only saying that because of 6 Super Bowl appearances. So if that is the criteria it really doesn't matter if you seen anyone play. the only thing that matters is how many championship games Brady or anyone else made.

I'm not going to get in the direct argument of who is the greatest. I'm impressed by all the ones listed. I don't care about the numbers, so much as the leadership qualities exhibited under stressful conditions. The great ones have an uncanny internal clock when they go into the two minute offense. They rally their teammates to make extraordinary plays whether it be a great catch or fighting for additional yards. Even though they lose on occasion, they EXPECT to win and succeed. The numbers take care of themselves. I'd rather have a proven winner who has some fire in his gut. So, based on the qualities in MY definition of a great QB, how many do you think our beloved Bengals QB has?

I never did. Does that even make a difference? I mean, those claiming Brady to be the greatest are only saying that because of 6 Super Bowl appearances. So if that is the criteria it really doesn't matter if you seen anyone play. the only thing that matters is how many championship games Brady or anyone else made.

 

Not a single person has said that. His # of SB's and rings is a part of it for sure, but not one person has said that's the sole reason he's the GOAT. His stats, his playoff achievements, and his Super Bowl success all factor in. When you put everything together, IMO, it's a no-brainer.

Not a single person has said that. His # of SB's and rings is a part of it for sure, but not one person has said that's the sole reason he's the GOAT. His stats, his playoff achievements, and his Super Bowl success all factor in. When you put everything together, IMO, it's a no-brainer.

 

I say yes. He has QB'd his team to 6 Super Bowls and his team has now won 4, both are records or tied for the record.

 

That is the first line of the threads original post.

 

I understand you would say it's a no-brainer, he is the QB for your team you root for. I being an outsider and not affiliated with the team in any way don't think it's a no brainer as you state.

 

I think QB's in this era have it a lot easier than any QB's of the past even just going back 20 years. They have a clear advantage if you simply look at stats. I would if just looking in my lifetime list several others as the greatest of this era. Joe Montana being at the top. I also think greatest and best in this debate are two different things. Peyton Manning for instance is a better QB as far as being a QB in a game and as far as preparation etc. That doesn't always translate to winning championships though. Dan Marino was probably the best pure passer I've ever seen, but he played on some bad teams and a QB can't do it all.

 

So I respect and understand your feelings for the team you root for QB but I don't think it's as clear an open and shut case as you want to make it out to be. what I'm trying to say is your home team bias is coming through a little and I think even you could say that maybe that has a little to do with your choice also.

How do you come up with 1 extra team makes the playoffs now when 12 teams made the playoffs this year compared to 2 making it when Otto played and then 4 back then?

 

If it's around the same as back then as if what I'm reading from your post you are suggesting, then that adds more to the point of Otto being better because he has made it to 10 straight championship games in a row. Brady hasn't made it to half that in a row.

 

He played in the AFL correct? Wasn't the NFL the better of the two leagues back then? So he won championships playing in a league that was not even the best in America?

 

Also still interested in your take on if Brady didn't even make the two super bowls that he lost in, if that would change your opinion then. Since he would then be 4 and 0? Which still makes no sense to me how you can say someone would look better if they didn't make the Super Bowl instead of losing in it.

I say yes. He has QB'd his team to 6 Super Bowls and his team has now won 4, both are records or tied for the record.

 

That is the first line of the threads original post.

 

I understand you would say it's a no-brainer, he is the QB for your team you root for. I being an outsider and not affiliated with the team in any way don't think it's a no brainer as you state.

 

I think QB's in this era have it a lot easier than any QB's of the past even just going back 20 years. They have a clear advantage if you simply look at stats. I would if just looking in my lifetime list several others as the greatest of this era. Joe Montana being at the top. I also think greatest and best in this debate are two different things. Peyton Manning for instance is a better QB as far as being a QB in a game and as far as preparation etc. That doesn't always translate to winning championships though. Dan Marino was probably the best pure passer I've ever seen, but he played on some bad teams and a QB can't do it all.

 

So I respect and understand your feelings for the team you root for QB but I don't think it's as clear an open and shut case as you want to make it out to be. what I'm trying to say is your home team bias is coming through a little and I think even you could say that maybe that has a little to do with your choice also.

 

Obviously I'm biased. Never said otherwise. What I think is interesting is pretty much everyone else in this thread, sans you, is at least in agreement that he's right up there at the top and in the conversation. None of them are Patriots fans.

 

Obviously everyone's entitled to their opinion. JMO, but your disdain for the Patriots, which has been evident on here, is making you a bit biased as well. I think it's pretty telling that most on here (including many who dislike NE) are willing to admit that while he may not be the GOAT, he's at least in the conversation. To me, it's absurd to not include him in the conversation.

I say yes. He has QB'd his team to 6 Super Bowls and his team has now won 4, both are records or tied for the record.

 

That is the first line of the threads original post.

 

I understand you would say it's a no-brainer, he is the QB for your team you root for. I being an outsider and not affiliated with the team in any way don't think it's a no brainer as you state.

 

I think QB's in this era have it a lot easier than any QB's of the past even just going back 20 years. They have a clear advantage if you simply look at stats. I would if just looking in my lifetime list several others as the greatest of this era. Joe Montana being at the top. I also think greatest and best in this debate are two different things. Peyton Manning for instance is a better QB as far as being a QB in a game and as far as preparation etc. That doesn't always translate to winning championships though. Dan Marino was probably the best pure passer I've ever seen, but he played on some bad teams and a QB can't do it all.

 

So I respect and understand your feelings for the team you root for QB but I don't think it's as clear an open and shut case as you want to make it out to be. what I'm trying to say is your home team bias is coming through a little and I think even you could say that maybe that has a little to do with your choice also.

 

Im still curious that besides the rules that do help the offenses more, what in today's age favors QB more? The defenses were very basic back then from my understanding, so much easier to read and throw against. The types of pressures coming at them, made it probably a lot easier to feel comfortable in the pocket. The amount of mental preparation probably didn't even come close to how it is today. Teams back then probably focused more on stopping the run than the pass, etc. So yes the rules today favor the QB more, however there are a lot of other things today that make it harder on the QB than it was back then too. If anything if a QB could truly throw an accurate ball back then, they probably had it easier because there wouldn't be as much to prepare for or read. See the open guy, hit the open guy.

Im still curious that besides the rules that do help the offenses more, what in today's age favors QB more? The defenses were very basic back then from my understanding, so much easier to read and throw against.

You just answered your own question.

The rules changes have afforded QB's a much easier path to success. Simply look at the stats over the past 20 - 30 years. A simple one to look at right up front is the completion percentage for QB's in 1980 compared to 2015. For example in 1985 there were only 2 QB's in the entire league that completion % was 60% or higher. The highest in 1985 was a 61% completion percentage and that was Dan Marino. In 2015 you had 10 QB's that threw for over 60% completion percentage. 7 QB's with 20 or more attempts.

 

As far as coverages etc. Back 30 etc. years ago DB's could basically harass a WR all the way down the field so to think it was easier completing passes back then is not true at all.

 

Defenses may have gotten more sphiisticated but you are taking it for granted that QB's back then if they had the same resources the QB's have todya have that they wouldn't be able to read defenses. I will present to you a local QB who was among the best at disecting defenses when he played and that was Ken Anderson. He also was teh QB's coach for the Steelers with Big Ben when they won the SB and if I remember correctly Big Ben had a pretty good year that season and who was his coach? Ken Anderson, so to think Anderson along with others from that era couldn't read or disect defenses is also a myth.

 

In no way, as anyone who have watched the game back then, would ever say the QB's felt more comfortable back then than they do today. Defenders could do a lot more back then than they can today. There is a Hall of Famer defensive player that lived off of a move where he would basically knock his opponent in the head with what is basically a forearm punch, he would hit them right in the ear hole to basically ring their bell every play. You could do that back then, you could close line players, you could rip their helmets off etc. No way was it easier back then than it is today.

Obviously I'm biased. Never said otherwise. What I think is interesting is pretty much everyone else in this thread, sans you, is at least in agreement that he's right up there at the top and in the conversation. None of them are Patriots fans.

 

Obviously everyone's entitled to their opinion. JMO, but your disdain for the Patriots, which has been evident on here, is making you a bit biased as well. I think it's pretty telling that most on here (including many who dislike NE) are willing to admit that while he may not be the GOAT, he's at least in the conversation. To me, it's absurd to not include him in the conversation.

 

I never said he wasn't in the conversation. The only difference is I don't have him listed as #1.

 

I also am not the only one to think that in this thread as you have made a claim to.

 

Again, I never once said he isn't in the conversation. That is my Un-Biased opinion. Just because I don't think he is #1 doesn't mean I think he isn't among the greatest. You don't have to like a team to appreciate their players. You think because I am not a PAtriots fan that is the reason I don't think he should be #1. I really hope you have seen the post where I talked about Joe Montana. The reason I say that is because there is only 1 team I truly can not stand and that is the 49ers. Mainly because they beat my Bengals in the only 2 SB's they made it to. I have a high disdain for that team in San Francisco and always have. That hatred for the team doesn't mean I do not have respect for some of the players.

 

I hate the Yankees, but I think Jeter was one of the best players of his time. Always respected him. Same for many other players. Don't let someone's fandom get in the way of individual players respect and I don't.

Im still curious that besides the rules that do help the offenses more, what in today's age favors QB more? The defenses were very basic back then from my understanding, so much easier to read and throw against. The types of pressures coming at them, made it probably a lot easier to feel comfortable in the pocket. The amount of mental preparation probably didn't even come close to how it is today. Teams back then probably focused more on stopping the run than the pass, etc. So yes the rules today favor the QB more, however there are a lot of other things today that make it harder on the QB than it was back then too. If anything if a QB could truly throw an accurate ball back then, they probably had it easier because there wouldn't be as much to prepare for or read. See the open guy, hit the open guy.

 

I'm really not certain how to approach this post. There is very little, and I thought most would say almost nothing, that does not favor the modern QB. I mean, is it an accident that there was one 5,000 yard season by a QB before 2008 and now there have been seven since? Quarterbacks have thrown for more than 4,000 yards in a season 130 times now. It happened 11 times this season. It happened 16 times before 1990 in total, and only 38 times before 2000. We've had guys like Elvis Grbac, Kerry Collins, Trent Green, and Jon Kitna throw for over 4,000 yards since 2000. And the rules get more slanted in favor of the offense all the time, with the recent emphasis on offensive PI finally checking it a bit.

 

Talking about pressures on QBs? I mean, maybe. But there's also a lot of things the defensive guys can't do that they once could do, like the head slap to an offensive lineman and hitting the quarterback anywhere that isn't the torso. And even then if it looks too funny the QB will get a call.

 

It just feels like you're burying a lot when you say "besides the rules." Well that's a whole heck of a lot of stuff that explains why modern QBs go bonkers on stats and why it has evolved into a passing league.