Is Tom Brady greatest QB ever???

[oldgrappler]

Since the number of interceptions thrown by Otto Graham has been used to dismiss him from the discussion I thought I would look into it. I had suggested before that the high number in comparison to a modern quarterback had more to do with the nature of the game then, as compared to the game now. I suggested more interceptions were thrown then as a result of many factors. I was interested to know if Graham was worse than other quarterbacks of his era. I also wanted to compare Brady to his peers. Here’s what I discovered in several statistical categories.

 

1. Graham led the league with the lowest percentage of Interceptions to Passing Attempts for 4 seasons.

1946 – 2.9%

1947 – 4.1

1949 – 3.5

1953 – 3.5

 

In comparison, Tom Brady led the league in this category for 2 seasons.

2010 – 0.8%

2012 – 1.3 tied with RGIII

 

In 1955, when Graham retired, he was the leader in this category. He had the lowest career percentage of interceptions per attempts. Brady is #2 in this category among current QBs.

 

 

2. Graham was the leader in Touchdown Percentage in two seasons— # of TDs per passing attempts.

1947 – 8.1%

1955 – 9.3

 

Tom Brady led the league in two of the seasons that he has played.

2007 – 8.7%

2010 – 7.3

 

On the list of every quarterback who ever played, Graham is #4 in this category at 6.6%. Brady is tied at #22 with 5.5%.

 

 

3. Graham led the league in Completion Percentage for 4 seasons.

1947 – 60.6%

1953 – 64.7

1954 – 59.2

1955 – 53.0

 

Brady led the league for 1 season out of his 14 seasons.

2007 – 68.9%

 

When Graham retired in 1955 he was #2 on the all-time list. Tom Brady is #12 among modern quarterbacks.

 

4. League leaders in touchdowns.

Graham was at the top for 3 seasons.

Brady also led the league for 3 seasons.

When Graham retired in 1955, he was #2 on the all-time list. Brady is currently #5.

 

You can draw your own conclusions about whether Graham belongs in the discussion.

[75center]

Forgive me. I just can't help myself. The lack of respect for Graham is intolerable.

 

Peter King is on the selection committee of the Hall of Fame. He wrote the book on Greatest Quarterbacks and he had Graham #1. Tony Grossi is also on the Hall of Fame selection committee and this is what he wrote on the subject:

 

1. Otto Graham, 1946-55, 114-20-4 record as starter, 10 championship game appearances in 10 years, seven league titles.

 

If you discount Graham’s four seasons in the All-America Football Conference – unfortunately, too many historians do – Graham directed the Browns to a record of 57-13-1 in six NFL seasons. The Browns appeared in the league championship game in each of his six NFL seasons and won three of them.

 

Graham won 81 percent of the NFL games he started at quarterback. His career figure rises to 84 percent when 67 games in the AAFC are included. Winning percentage of the others – Brady, 77 percent; Montana, 72 percent; Manning, 68 percent; Unitas, 65 percent; Elway, 64 percent; Marino, 61 percent.

 

Those are the relevant numbers, not completion percentage, yards, TDs-vs.-interceptions and passer rating – all of which Graham suffers in comparison to the modern passers because of changes in the sport. Some football analysts maintain the most relevant statistic for a quarterback other than wins is average yards per pass attempt. Graham’s career mark of 8.62 is an NFL record.

 

So your assumption regarding Graham not being listed as #1 by anyone on the HOF selection committee is wrong and I only checked two people on the list.

 

One way to understand his TD passes to INT ratio is to consider the rule changes and the field conditions which made it harder to complete passes. But another significant factor is that qbs then were not given as many opportunities to throw touchdowns. Especially two, three, and four yard touchdowns. That was running territory for sure. QBs today have the benefit of a pass first game with all the advantages of current rules. Not being able to throw as often down on the goal line negatively effected Graham's TD #s for sure.

 

But as Grossi points out, knowing how to win no matter what the rules and field condition is the most important skill-set a qb can have. That is where the playing field is level for every player in every era. In every game, one quarterback will win and one quarterback will lose. Who wins those match-ups is the MOST important stat out of all the stats, esp. in title games.

 

Whether you count AAFC games or only NFL games, Graham stands head-and-shoulders above all others.

 

In your mind and Peter Kings, not too many others and never "head and shoulders". There is a reason for the lack of respect and it isn't a lack of knowledge, it's just opinions differ as to his place among the best. He is usually in the top ten, sometimes in the top five but he is also sometimes listed lower than 15.

 

As to the AAFC I am not sure but the NFL used to not recognize their stats as it was on a level similar to the United States Football League. They may now as I haven't checked in a long time. I don't know the overall level of competition there was but only 2-3 teams were folded into the NFL when they merged. I suspect that means they did not have enough talent in the league to support all those teams.

[oldgrappler]

^ The "head-and-shoulders" remark you noted had to do with winning percentage in both the NFL and AAFC. 10 straight seasons in title game with 7 championships. Or 6 straight title games with 3 championships and in no season did he fail to reach the title game. Yes, that's head-and-shoulders above. Who compares to that?

 

The stats I provided in post #286 demonstrate the # of interceptions Graham threw was not out of line for his era due to the nature of the game then. In fact, he led the league in lowest percent of interceptions to attempts for his career and stood among his peers on a par with Brady among his peers. Most any category you look at Graham is either equal to or better than Brady when judged in the context of his era -- like I did in my statistical analysis.

 

Touchdowns per passing attempt, again Graham compares quite well, actually leading Brady in this category.

 

I don't see how on any objective scale you can leave Graham out of the discussion. Most people look at the prolific totals that modern players have and think that means they are so much better than the guys of a bygone era. It only means they played in a time when there were more games per season and rule changes that promote offense and passing that allow them to accumulate those prolific totals. It doesn't mean they were better players. They could be, but to be able to compare players from different eras and not just dismiss the ones from the era we're biased against requires a bit more analysis. Baseball does this pretty well. I suggest you look at this article to see how one man evaluates the greatest hitter of all time Baseball?s All-Time All-Stars | National Review Online

 

Brady has an excellent INT per Pass Attempt ratio, and so do many modern players, esp. when compared to QBs from the 1950's. It has as much to do with the nature of the game and its rules today as it does with the relative skill of the QB. In the list I saw, Neil O'Donnell was one spot below Brady in INT per Pass attempts. Don't tell me you believe Neil O'Donnell was a better QB than Otto Graham.

[oldgrappler]

In your mind and Peter Kings, not too many others and never "head and shoulders". There is a reason for the lack of respect and it isn't a lack of knowledge, it's just opinions differ as to his place among the best. He is usually in the top ten, sometimes in the top five but he is also sometimes listed lower than 15.

 

As to the AAFC I am not sure but the NFL used to not recognize their stats as it was on a level similar to the United States Football League. They may now as I haven't checked in a long time. I don't know the overall level of competition there was but only 2-3 teams were folded into the NFL when they merged. I suspect that means they did not have enough talent in the league to support all those teams.

 

BTW, I do not consider it disrespectful to put Graham in the top 5 or top 10. That is a reasonable starting place for a discussion. I have no quarrel with someone who comes to that conclusion. At least they were aware of him and must have used a reasonable set of criteria to make their decision.

 

As to why the AAFC folded: it had more to do with a poor business model. Cleveland succeeded because Paul Brown was already a well-respected coach in Ohio and the Browns drew large crowds. The Cleveland Rams were the NFL franchise at the time and when they heard Paul Brown was starting a pro team to play in Cleveland they quickly left town and went to LA. They knew they couldn't compete with Brown for fans.

[75center]

BTW, I do not consider it disrespectful to put Graham in the top 5 or top 10. That is a reasonable starting place for a discussion. I have no quarrel with someone who comes to that conclusion. At least they were aware of him and must have used a reasonable set of criteria to make their decision.

 

As to why the AAFC folded: it had more to do with a poor business model. Cleveland succeeded because Paul Brown was already a well-respected coach in Ohio and the Browns drew large crowds. The Cleveland Rams were the NFL franchise at the time and when they heard Paul Brown was starting a pro team to play in Cleveland they quickly left town and went to LA. They knew they couldn't compete with Brown for fans.

 

I agree that those putting him lower than 15 are showing disrespect for his accomplishments. I don't believe anyone in the top ten is disrespected as there have been many top quarterbacks to play the game.