favre's starting streak record may hold for quite a while longer

AllouezPackerFan

Section 121 Row 47
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
1,597
Reaction score
164
Location
Green Bay, WI
All the QBs you've mentioned are overrated. My two cents. There's reasoning behind that, but it'll take quite a while to demonstrate.

In short, postseason performance. Not losses or wins, performance as a whole. Not saying they're not HoF worthy, they are. But they're overrated. The only one lacking in this group is Aikman...


Aikman has multiple Super Bowls. What is your criteria for post season success? You can't have it both ways. You can't say a guy is overrated because he has a lack of post season success but then say Troy Aikman is overrated when he has had a lot of post season success.
 

JJP41

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
934
Reaction score
215
Location
Indiana
I understand where Bogart is coming from calling Peyton overrated.
The kind of QB Peyton is with all the hype that comes with it, makes him seem like he should be better than he is with playoff and SB wins.
Yes, he looks good on paper but not in the post. So that, in my book, makes him overrated.

If you go by postseason wins that means Terry Bradhsaw is better than Marino, Elway, Manning and so on. Something which I highly doubt.

Being overhyped and being overrated are 2 different things.
 

metallicblaze

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
240
Reaction score
7
Location
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
I don't think Manning is over-rated. Just look at the Colts offense and the Colts in general when he's not in the game. That Painter kid looks terrible! I do hope Brett keeps this record though.
 

PackersRS

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
969
Location
Porto Alegre, Brazil
Aikman has multiple Super Bowls. What is your criteria for post season success? You can't have it both ways. You can't say a guy is overrated because he has a lack of post season success but then say Troy Aikman is overrated when he has had a lot of post season success.

Read my post. Postseason performance, not success.

Aikman has a 88.3 QB rating in the postseason, in a pass friendly era. Manning is 88.4. Marino is 77.1

Montana is 95.6, in a less friendly era.

Bart Starr is 104.8. In the deadball era.

Bart Starr won 5 titles, but was also named MVP of the SB both instances he participated. Montana has 3 SB MVPs. When in the most important games of their careers, they were the best players on the field, and made the difference to their teams.

Aikman did win a SB MVP in a game he played close to perfect. But it was the only instance in his postseason career that he threw for more than 2 tds. Again, this in a pass-friendly era.

It's all about HOW you do it. Obviously, we're talking about hall of famers in here, so these QBs were great. And you can't win multiple SBs without being an elite QB. But the most important player on that Cowboys team was Emmitt Smith. In fact, in the game Aikman was named MVP (against Buffallo), Smith carried the ball 30 times for 132 yards and 2 TDs.

Another stat that shows Emmitt was the most important player on their team: Aikman NEVER threw for more than 18 TDs in a season. Again, this in the liveball era.

When I talk about the best QBs of all time, I want a guy that elevated his game when he reached the playoffs. Montana did it. Starr did it. Rodgers does it. Favre, Marino, Manning, those guys played worse in the playoffs than in the regular season, and as a result they didn't win many SBs. Aikman is a distinct case, he maintained his play, which was average, but he was a great leader and a great game manager. A guy that is similar to Aikman is Matt Ryan, though Ryan has not played well in the playoffs...
 

AllouezPackerFan

Section 121 Row 47
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
1,597
Reaction score
164
Location
Green Bay, WI
Read my post. Postseason performance, not success.

Aikman has a 88.3 QB rating in the postseason, in a pass friendly era. Manning is 88.4. Marino is 77.1

Montana is 95.6, in a less friendly era.

Bart Starr is 104.8. In the deadball era.

Bart Starr won 5 titles, but was also named MVP of the SB both instances he participated. Montana has 3 SB MVPs. When in the most important games of their careers, they were the best players on the field, and made the difference to their teams.

Aikman did win a SB MVP in a game he played close to perfect. But it was the only instance in his postseason career that he threw for more than 2 tds. Again, this in a pass-friendly era.

It's all about HOW you do it. Obviously, we're talking about hall of famers in here, so these QBs were great. And you can't win multiple SBs without being an elite QB. But the most important player on that Cowboys team was Emmitt Smith. In fact, in the game Aikman was named MVP (against Buffallo), Smith carried the ball 30 times for 132 yards and 2 TDs.

Another stat that shows Emmitt was the most important player on their team: Aikman NEVER threw for more than 18 TDs in a season. Again, this in the liveball era.

When I talk about the best QBs of all time, I want a guy that elevated his game when he reached the playoffs. Montana did it. Starr did it. Rodgers does it. Favre, Marino, Manning, those guys played worse in the playoffs than in the regular season, and as a result they didn't win many SBs. Aikman is a distinct case, he maintained his play, which was average, but he was a great leader and a great game manager. A guy that is similar to Aikman is Matt Ryan, though Ryan has not played well in the playoffs...


Those are all fair points. My point is simply that stating that Peyton Manning is overrated as a player is nonsense. He has the Super Bowl, and most importantly he has the stats to back it up. When you talk about Manning, Marino, Elway....none of these guys are overrated. When people talk about great quarterbacks their names always come up for a reason.

Underrated is a completely different discussion. Bart Starr is the only name that belongs in this conversation. He is a top 5 all time QB and no one gives him credit. I would take Starr over just about anyone. The man. For sure.
 

PackersRS

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
969
Location
Porto Alegre, Brazil
Those are all fair points. My point is simply that stating that Peyton Manning is overrated as a player is nonsense. He has the Super Bowl, and most importantly he has the stats to back it up. When you talk about Manning, Marino, Elway....none of these guys are overrated. When people talk about great quarterbacks their names always come up for a reason.

Underrated is a completely different discussion. Bart Starr is the only name that belongs in this conversation. He is a top 5 all time QB and no one gives him credit. I would take Starr over just about anyone. The man. For sure.

That's a fair point.

I'm probably nitpicking here, when I say overrated, it's because I hear those guys talked about as if they're the best of all time, and they're not IMHO. They're great QBs, anyone that says that Marino wasn't a GREAT QB because he doesn't have a SB ring is an idiot. But I can't consider a guy that didn't play his absolutely best in the most important time to be the best of all time, and when I hear people say they are, I think that's overrating them.

But then again, the distinction between the greatest QB of all time and the #20 is pretty small...
 

ivo610

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
16,588
Reaction score
2,250
Location
Madison
yeah it slightly annoys me when I hear people refer to Peyton as the best of all time. And seeing him in the top 10 of the 100 players of all time was just adding fuel to that fire.
 

JJP41

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
934
Reaction score
215
Location
Indiana
That's a fair point.

I'm probably nitpicking here, when I say overrated, it's because I hear those guys talked about as if they're the best of all time, and they're not IMHO. They're great QBs, anyone that says that Marino wasn't a GREAT QB because he doesn't have a SB ring is an idiot. But I can't consider a guy that didn't play his absolutely best in the most important time to be the best of all time, and when I hear people say they are, I think that's overrating them.

But then again, the distinction between the greatest QB of all time and the #20 is pretty small...

Fair enough. But if one goes by passer ratings then Mark Sanchez is better than Manning or Brady and nearly as good as Montana. And just my opinion, but I don't think he's in the ball park with any of them.

I do find it puzzling that people single out the quarterback position amd say a player is overrated or the best of all time based on postseason performances or Super Bowl titles.

Walter Payton was one of the greatest, if not the greatest of all time at RB, and he never rushed for over 100 yards in the postseeson and only won 1 Super Bowl. Does that make him overrated or less of a player than maybe Franco Harris? I don't think so.

In Manning's 13 years with Indy, the Colts have won division titles 8 times and made the playoffs 11 timres. Before Manning, the Colts had made the postseason twice in the previous 10 seasons. Just my opinion but I think that says a lot about how valuable he is to his team. And his stats speak for themselves.

It's also why he probably receives so much attention. Any QB throwing for over 4,000 yards year in and year out will get a lot of attention. But I fail to see how it makes them overrated.
 

PackersRS

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
969
Location
Porto Alegre, Brazil
Fair enough. But if one goes by passer ratings then Mark Sanchez is better than Manning or Brady and nearly as good as Montana. And just my opinion, but I don't think he's in the ball park with any of them.
In postseason, yes, but in the regular season, on a period that the passing game is the focus of the league and stats are generated more easily, his stats are too awful. Plus, he's also, like Aikman, not the most important player in his offense, as it is tailored to the running game.

I do find it puzzling that people single out the quarterback position amd say a player is overrated or the best of all time based on postseason performances or Super Bowl titles.

Walter Payton was one of the greatest, if not the greatest of all time at RB, and he never rushed for over 100 yards in the postseeson and only won 1 Super Bowl. Does that make him overrated or less of a player than maybe Franco Harris? I don't think so.
Well, that's because the QBs are far and away the single most important position in any of the modern professional sports. Their impact in the wins and losses are tremenduous, they can almost single-handedly win a game. If an NFL team failed to reach a championship in 15+ years, and if he wasn't able to perform well when it mattered, it is most certainly is his fault, unless that he played on really inept teams, which isn't the case of Marino, Manning, Elway... And even in the RBs' case, there are people that question whether Jim Brown is the greatest ever because he failed to win a title, and because his postseason stats are awful. So, why, if they're so talented, they failed to perform well when it mattered, against great competition, when they had talented teams, and other guys like Montana and Starr were able to?

In Manning's 13 years with Indy, the Colts have won division titles 8 times and made the playoffs 11 timres. Before Manning, the Colts had made the postseason twice in the previous 10 seasons. Just my opinion but I think that says a lot about how valuable he is to his team. And his stats speak for themselves.
Well, I believe it coincided with the arrival of Bill Polian. His team winning so much in the regular season doesn't mean that Manning is really good, it just means that his team is really good. The teams under Starr, Montana... did the same.

It's also why he probably receives so much attention. Any QB throwing for over 4,000 yards year in and year out will get a lot of attention. But I fail to see how it makes them overrated.
It's not that because HE gets the attention that he is thought of as overrated. It's because some people consider that yards and tds are measurables of greatness, and some people think that those stats are overrated.

Not trying to be belligerent in here, in the end it's a discussion about a matter of opinion, or football philosophy in the professional's case.
 

JJP41

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
934
Reaction score
215
Location
Indiana
In postseason, yes, but in the regular season, on a period that the passing game is the focus of the league and stats are generated more easily, his stats are too awful. Plus, he's also, like Aikman, not the most important player in his offense, as it is tailored to the running game.


Well, that's because the QBs are far and away the single most important position in any of the modern professional sports. Their impact in the wins and losses are tremenduous, they can almost single-handedly win a game. If an NFL team failed to reach a championship in 15+ years, and if he wasn't able to perform well when it mattered, it is most certainly is his fault, unless that he played on really inept teams, which isn't the case of Marino, Manning, Elway... And even in the RBs' case, there are people that question whether Jim Brown is the greatest ever because he failed to win a title, and because his postseason stats are awful. So, why, if they're so talented, they failed to perform well when it mattered, against great competition, when they had talented teams, and other guys like Montana and Starr were able to?


Well, I believe it coincided with the arrival of Bill Polian. His team winning so much in the regular season doesn't mean that Manning is really good, it just means that his team is really good. The teams under Starr, Montana... did the same.


It's not that because HE gets the attention that he is thought of as overrated. It's because some people consider that yards and tds are measurables of greatness, and some people think that those stats are overrated.

Not trying to be belligerent in here, in the end it's a discussion about a matter of opinion, or football philosophy in the professional's case.

I won't argue the fact that QB's are important because they are. However, last time I checked, they don't play defense or special teams. Football isn't basketball and a QB can't carry an entire team on his shoulders.

So basically you're saying that a player that doesn't play well in certain situations is at fault, but when he does play well, it's more the fact that he is just on a very good team? In the caes of Montana and Starr, both played on teams that had defenses that were far better than any the Colts have had.

Sorry, but it makes no sense that Manning can play well during the season and it's because of Polian and the fact he's on a great team but when the Colts lose in the playoffs, it's his fault because he didn't play up to expectations.

It really comes down to whether a player's worth is based on his postseason performances or his overall body of work.

I believe it's his overall body of work but that's just my opinion.
 

greenandgold

I'm Dirty Hairy Callahan
Joined
Jul 8, 2010
Messages
1,826
Reaction score
424
Location
Mobile, AL.
Those are all fair points. My point is simply that stating that Peyton Manning is overrated as a player is nonsense. He has the Super Bowl, and most importantly he has the stats to back it up.

Too bad until he won that Superbowl, he was known as the guy that could not win the big game. Tennessee did not win a college national championship until the year AFTER he was gone. And all the times he lost to Brady when it counted.
 

AllouezPackerFan

Section 121 Row 47
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
1,597
Reaction score
164
Location
Green Bay, WI
I do think sometimes we tend to over value the quarterback position to an extent. The Ravens and Buccaneers proved you can win a Super Bowl with a stout defense, a good running game, and average quarterback play.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
Really good discussion in this thread - much better than just sticking to the thread title IMO.

Bart Starr is the only name that belongs in this (underrated) conversation. He is a top 5 all time QB and no one gives him credit.
Not quite “no one”. Check out this top 10 NFL QBs of all time from Cold Hard Football Facts. For those unfamiliar with CHFF, when they write something like, “Keep in mind that all other lists are wrong. Only this list is correct.”, they’re kidding.
 

ivo610

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
16,588
Reaction score
2,250
Location
Madison
as far as the streak goes, how many times was Favres streak in jeopardy? How many times was it late in the week and all we heard was about the back up warming up, but every single time Favre made the start. Thats why I think Peyton will.

The only thing that realistically might keep peyton from getting the record would be a concussion. The rules have changed so much on that.
 

AllouezPackerFan

Section 121 Row 47
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
1,597
Reaction score
164
Location
Green Bay, WI
Really good discussion in this thread - much better than just sticking to the thread title IMO.

Not quite “no one”. Check out this top 10 NFL QBs of all time from Cold Hard Football Facts. For those unfamiliar with CHFF, when they write something like, “Keep in mind that all other lists are wrong. Only this list is correct.”, they’re kidding.


People that know anything about the game give him his credit that he is due, my point is that the average fan does not recognize Bart Starr as one of the all-time greats. There very few quarterbacks I would put ahead of Bart Starr. In fact, I don't know that there is anyone I would put ahead of him. He's pretty much the standard in my opinion.
 

JJP41

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
934
Reaction score
215
Location
Indiana
as far as the streak goes, how many times was Favres streak in jeopardy? How many times was it late in the week and all we heard was about the back up warming up, but every single time Favre made the start. Thats why I think Peyton will.

The only thing that realistically might keep peyton from getting the record would be a concussion. The rules have changed so much on that.

I agree to an extent. I think if it's left up to Peyton, he will go. But things have changed some and now doctors are much more cautious with head and neck issues.
 

realcaliforniacheese

A-Rods Boss
Joined
Jul 26, 2011
Messages
2,278
Reaction score
708
Location
Yucaipa, Ca
The way Peyton was talking in the interview at the game he seemed pretty optimistic in his tone even if hi was trying to controll expectations. Of particular note was how he talked about never missing a game since he was 13. I think he goes even if he is still border line, as long as he can't injure it anymore. 3/4 of Peyton manning is better than 100% of their other choices.
 
OP
OP
cupacker

cupacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
103
Reaction score
15
Location
Greenville, SC
Except that he plays for another team, why the “hate” for Peyton Manning? He’s one of the great QBs to play the game and has more responsibility at the LOS than any QB in the game today. From a distance, he seems like a decent human being to me.

As for Favre, if you aren’t a Favre “lover”, why would you be “excited” if he holds onto the starting streak record for a long time? I don’t care if he does or not as it won’t change my opinion of him one way or another.

by "Favre lover" I mean I'm not one of the ones who wanted to hold on to him and then started hating TT and MM for letting him go.
 

PackersRS

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
969
Location
Porto Alegre, Brazil
I won't argue the fact that QB's are important because they are. However, last time I checked, they don't play defense or special teams. Football isn't basketball and a QB can't carry an entire team on his shoulders.

So basically you're saying that a player that doesn't play well in certain situations is at fault, but when he does play well, it's more the fact that he is just on a very good team? In the caes of Montana and Starr, both played on teams that had defenses that were far better than any the Colts have had.

Sorry, but it makes no sense that Manning can play well during the season and it's because of Polian and the fact he's on a great team but when the Colts lose in the playoffs, it's his fault because he didn't play up to expectations.

It really comes down to whether a player's worth is based on his postseason performances or his overall body of work.

I believe it's his overall body of work but that's just my opinion.
No, you're taking words off my mouth. What I'm saying is if he doesn't play well in those crucial situations in 15+ years it is his fault.

Or are you gonna say to me with a straight face that those GB teams weren't very good, and that Favre was playing his best in the postseason? That Manning didn't always have HoF players with him, yet failed to do better in the postseason?

Starr had better players on his defense, but Manning had better weapons. So when Starr plays really well in the postseason and win games, it's his defense, but when Manning puts up huge stats in the regular season, it's him?

Manning, Elway, Favre, Marino, they had really good teams, teams good enough to win a championship with, if they had played better football when it mattered.

For all the weapons and defense GB has, if Rodgers doesn't play the way he did in the postseason, we do not win that SB.

For all that those Lombardi Packers had, if Starr doesn't play lights out, if he doesn't have the balls to call a sneak on 3rd and short with seconds to go, hell, if he's not masterful and can't engineer a long 2 minute drive to win the game, if he doesn't play really well in the other postseason games, those Packers teams are as good as the 70's Vikings's teams.

Football isn't decided by who wins more games. It's decided by who wins the most important games. Why wouldn't you rate a QB by how he fares on those games?

If they ever change the formula, and make it as a soccer league, then guys like Manning and Marino will be thought of as the best possible players. Until then...
 

okcpackerfan

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
743
Reaction score
133
as far as the streak goes, how many times was Favres streak in jeopardy? How many times was it late in the week and all we heard was about the back up warming up, but every single time Favre made the start. Thats why I think Peyton will.

The only thing that realistically might keep peyton from getting the record would be a concussion. The rules have changed so much on that.

This.

I think you are dead on with the concussion factor. I personally don't think that I will see Favre's streak broken in my lifetime, but thats what makes sports exciting to watch, someone better always comes along.
 

PackersRS

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
969
Location
Porto Alegre, Brazil
People that know anything about the game give him his credit that he is due, my point is that the average fan does not recognize Bart Starr as one of the all-time greats. There very few quarterbacks I would put ahead of Bart Starr. In fact, I don't know that there is anyone I would put ahead of him. He's pretty much the standard in my opinion.

The only guy I can think of is Montana, because he had a very similar career, not the best during the regular season, but when the game was on the line, he would give you the best chance to win.

One thing that happens, people get too caught up in the scouting aspect. Montana and Starr didn't have the arm to run any kind of system, so they're labelled system QBs.

But leadership, perseverance, intelligence, scouts can't measure that, and those play a much bigger role than arm strenght.

For all his attributes, Peyton Manning is scared the hell out of the pass rush. He steps backwards, almost closes his eyes, and throws the ball up for grabs more often than not when pressured. Usually, because of his amazing work ethic and intelligence, he's able to recognize the blitz much sooner than it can get to him, and when it's a straight 4 man rush, his weapons can get open, and his protection can hold down, before the rush gets to him. Manning is, after all, maybe the best decision-maker in the game.

But when it gets to the postseason, and the quality and preparation of the defense are so good, things will break down much more often than in the regular season. And, in the postseason, it is simply impossible to win a game if your QB is throwing it up for grabs. And that's why Manning struggles in the postseason, IMHO.

When I talk about playing better in the postseason, it's not something magical that happens. There's reasoning to it. Marino was never a student of the game, but he had out of this world field vision. In the playoffs, you can't win with just an amazing arm and field vision. And on and on...

BTW, famous conversation between Walsh and Marino. Walsh was amazed with Marino's ability, and he asked him: "what do you see out there? How do you go through your progressions, the 1st and 2nd WR?" And Marino said: "I don't do anything of that. I just throw to the open man." How can anyone consider that the greatest QB of all time? Most gifted? Perhaps. But you can't go just "throwing to the open man" in the postseason, against elite competiton, no matter how gifted you are.
 

PackersRS

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
969
Location
Porto Alegre, Brazil
Regarding Peyton's streak:

What gives the Colts the best chance to win? a 30% Peyton or Dan Orlovski or Curtis Painter? Of course it's Manning. Manning isn't about streaks, he's about winning.

If Peyton can play without jeopardizing the rest of the season, he will play. Their backup situation is too putrid to do otherwise.
 

Forget Favre

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
9,115
Reaction score
1,807
I've stopped caring about this issue.
1st of all, I don't see any reason to celebrate or be disappointed if Peyton starts or not.
Farve's starts are 297. For those concerned about it being broken, you all are acting like Peyton is at 296.
He still has quite a ways to go and even if he starts on opening day, anything could still happen to him at some point.
Peyton will have to play injury free for 5 seasons plus 10 more games to break the record.
Which also means that he would have to be approx. 41 yrs of age.
So just relax until it gets closer to that point.

Now as who is the best QB. Really. Why care?
It's the one you think is the best, that's all that matters and no one can take that away from you.
I have my reasons to think Peyton is overrated and Joe Montana is the best.
(if A-Rod keeps this up, then I will think he is the best.)
You don't. OK fine. Let's move on.

Really, these arguments are like trying to say this shade of red is better than that shade of the exact same red.
It doesn't matter.

If it matters to you, whatever. Keep arguing but it's not going to go anywhere or change anyone's mind.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top