couldnt agree more. everyone points to his INTs and stuff. they also forget he played in an era where DB's could basically clothesline a WR at any point in time. him and Unitas put passing on the map. He also made the QB position the glamour position it is today. call it bravado call it what you want but alot of QB's have him to thank for the money they make
the other guys in his era played by the same rules and he didn't seperate himself from those guys, all that matters is what he did in his era vs. his peers. Speculating about him playing in today's era(he was brittle when guys weren't half the size, speed and stregnth they are now so I doubt he survives in this era) doesn't really help the argument for him. I agree he helped make the QB position a glamorous one, he helped make athletes stars, he is vital to the histpry of the league but he wasn't great long enough mostly due to durability.
This thread is a reminder how obnoxious know nothing arrogant newbie fans can and have infected the Jet fan base just like all the rest. Namath was the man. He got it done. Not like #6, for example.
#6 has 4 playoff wins(2 more than "the man"), all on the road. "The man" never won a road playoff game.
I've read this entire thread and I just don't understand the mindset of our fan base that has so many problems in "this era", with a team that has no direction and no leadership, a team that hasn't been relevent since Namath took them to SB III, and actually won it. But has time to ask a silly question titled "Joe Namath overrated?"... the people on here who actually watched him play on his gimpy knees know the answer to that, those who only look at stats, have no clue. Namath was more then mere stats, he had heart, leadership and intangibles that today's players only wish for. I became a Jets fan because they drafted him out of Alabama... and have stuck with the Jets even after Namath... still hoping for just one more SB. Namath was the best QB the Jets have ever had and brought a trophy to our team, that alone makes him immune to the youngsters that do not appreciate greatness. Solve our current QB problem, our current team problem and let this thread go. :jets:
My God! That's it... that is what's important, winning road playoff games? And all this time I thought winning the SB was every teams goal in the NFL... well hell, we actually do have a great team, we've won some playoff games on the road. :jets:
As a new poster here you will see plenty more of that poster's nonsense here. Unless of course you cut to the chase and do the smart thing: This message is hidden because nyjunc is on your ignore list.
It's funnier because what I said is dead on accurate. Not saying he's bad, but not top 20 of all time like most of these fans think. It's funny people LOVE Namath yet won't give Sanchez or anyone else on the Jets a chance. The same people that criticize Holmes and others for talking to the media and being confident, loved when Namath did it. Just sayin bro. Yes, Jets fans over rate him, so he is over rated. If you think he's top 20, I'd be interested in your list of top 20 QBs in NFL history. Like I said, he makes top 40, but not top 20. That's my rank of him. People on here treat him like the second coming because the Jets have sucked for so long.
I'm not saying mark is better than Joe but that other ignorant, gutless poster fails to acknowledge what mark has done. they credit the D but the 1968 jets had the #1 ranked D but it was all Joe, right? in 1968 they didn't eanr homefield in the title game and didn't have to win to get to the title game. To bash what mark has done in 3 years isn't fair and anyone who knows anything about pro football history knows Joe is overrated, that doesn't mean he was bad but he's not as goopd as his reputation and based on his play on the field does not deserve to be a HOFer. We can still be good fans and discuss the truth. What's funny is if this board was around in the 60s and 70s all of you guys would be bashing Joe and wanting him traded and Weeb fired.
I dunno, man. Eli gets more credit for his 2 SB rings than Simms for his (or even for his one that he played for, if you want to discount the 2nd completely) in my eyes because he's simply better. Simms was really damn good, but I think Eli's command of the offense, ability to improve WRs that he works with, and durability make him a clearly better QB than Simms. I love Phil, but I think Eli's pretty clearly the better QB. He deserves the credit he gets.
Your take on Namath is not a subject I agree with you on. You are looking at him through your current state of the Jets glasses, specifically your current take on the team. Namath and Sanchez have nothing in common other than that they both played Qb for the Jets. That's it. I rank Namath top ten, but not top five. You have to look at what he did in the context of the rules and the competition, what others were doing, the state of coaching, how he took hits that affected his production that Qb's today are protecte from, those sorts of things. You are not doing those things, and obviously are trying to make Sanchez look better by tearing down Namath. That's not good.
I actually wonder how many of the posters in this thread saw JWN play from his rookie year till his last year as a NYJ? I qualify now how many do?
A 7-loss team would not have made the playoffs in Namath's era, so let's not give Sanchez any credit for two of those road playoff wins.
If I think about it, I feel really sorry for fans of the NY Jets that didn't get to experience the years that Namath played. So I don't think about it very often.
You talk about narrowing windows? taking a 7 game sample against a 21 game sample and comparing them? Talk about cherry picking stats. you take a sample size 1/3 the size and rely on 3 years where Namath was clearly done to illustrate our point, but basically ignore the previous 10 years of his career total. But yes, I'm the one narrowing stats to make a player look better /sarcasm. I'm not arguing that Namath at the end of his career sucked, He should have retired due to injuries and performance decline 3 or 4 years before he did. And Yes Great players do elevate the team around him, Just as he did do when he elevated the Happles Titans/Jets from laughing stock to a dangerous team and eventual superbowl winner. Do yes, great Quarterbacks DO elevate the play of the players around him. The problem is by 1974 Namath was no longer a great Quarterback, his knees were gone, his arm had lost it's zip and after the 74 season Namath probably should have hung up the cleats, he was cleary done as an elite QB. But I am saying that Namath carried the team for a good part of his career when he was under center, is it asking to much that he be given a break for playing on a crap poor team his last two years with the Jets that couldn't even help him out a little when he was no longer a star QB? But back to your point, if you want to narrow a window to make a player work much worse than he was in reality? Go right ahead. It's clear you never saw him play, it's clear you never watched the game back in the day when players didn't sit out two weeks for a hang nail. And it's also pretty clear you don't like the flamboyance of Namath. That's all fine and good, but to knock a guy for his play when he was basically done as an elite Quarterback and ignore the play when he was, that's just silly.
I was watching the Pats and AFL games when I was 7, so 1967 is probably my first real year of watching him. What I remember is the Pats were on at 1pm every week, and after they would lose by 30 points the national game would feature the Jets, Raiders, and Chiefs mostly... so I'd say in the late 60's to 71 or so I saw him play 4 or 5 games a year (2 vs Pats and 2 or 3 vs other teams). I remember the Jets win in the Championship game and the win over the Raiders pretty well.
Thing is, "the best QB the Jets ever had" doesn't necessarily translate into "One of the top 10 or 20 QBs in the history of the NFL". It's similar to how saying that Namath was the best QB to ever play at Alabama doesn't tell you where he falls on the list of greatest College QBs to ever play the game. I'm sure it hurts to think that the best Jet QB ever might struggle to crack the top 30 NFL QBs.
Yeah and BenJarvus Green-Ellis fumbles less frequently than did Walter Payton. Also, let's keep in mind it is easier to make the playoffs these days. In 1967, the Jets had a .615 winning percentage but did not make the playoffs. Sanchez' "brilliant" QB play led the Jets to a .563 winning percentage in 2009 and it was enough to squeak into the playoffs. I did not rank Namath. So where is this top 20 and top 50 stuff coming from? Since you went there let's see your top 20 and top 50 lists.
Super Bowl 3 was played in New York? Okay, okay. It was a neutral site game. This again? This will be my final time writing about it. Then when you take this route again, which you will, I'll simply revert back to this thread or the old ones and provide links. They earned home field advantage by going 11-3 in the regular season and winning their division. You have a 1980s-2010s mindset. You need to break free from that to understand the scene in the 1960s. Put on some beads and smoke some pot to get in the groove and help you see, man. All the Jets had to do in 1968 was win their division. That was determined prior to the season. The Jets accomplished that goal. So the Raiders and Chiefs each went 12-2. Tough shit for them.
