Kurt Warner: HOFer or Not [Archive] - Front Office Football Central

Chief Rum

01-19-2009, 02:57 PM

I think a key issue will be "85 regular season starts". Although taking the Arizona Cardinals to the Super Bowl has to be a huge plus...

Who says he's done? Sure, he's older now, but I can see Warner getting another two years in with someone (and that's even assuming at some point the Cards just decide they must go with Leinart because of the money they're paying him).

GoSeahawks

01-19-2009, 02:58 PM

yup. he's got more rings than Jim Kelley. not many starting QB's have gone to the SB with 2 different teams.

Who are the other QB's that have taken more than one team to a Super Bowl? I'm drawing a blank on this one.

MrBug708

01-19-2009, 02:59 PM

The NFL has always been about the impact you made in the NFL during your time there. I'd say Warner has certainly made an impact on the NFL. I think if Arizona wins it, he's a lock for the HOF. He's one of the best QB's in NFL history in regards to passing timing

Maple Leafs

01-19-2009, 02:59 PM

Who are the other QB's that have taken more than one team to a Super Bowl? I'm drawing a blank on this one.
He's the third QB to take two teams to a championship as a starter. Can't remember the other two off the top of my head but I've seen that stat mentioned a few times today.

JediKooter

01-19-2009, 03:02 PM

Who are the other QB's that have taken more than one team to a Super Bowl? I'm drawing a blank on this one.

Hint: He played for Dallas and Denver...

cartman

01-19-2009, 03:02 PM

Who are the other QB's that have taken more than one team to a Super Bowl? I'm drawing a blank on this one.

Craig Morton is the only I can think of off the top of my head. He took over for Staubach when he got hurt one season, then QB'd the Broncos to their first Super Bowl.

Danny

01-19-2009, 03:05 PM

Morton lost both times though.

Hannibal Lecter

01-19-2009, 03:06 PM

2 time MVP only what 45 MVPs in history. Cant stand the guy but its a no brainer.

Chief Rum

01-19-2009, 03:10 PM

Cant stand the guy but its a no brainer.

Heh...this is the first time I have seen someone say he can't stand him. So I am curious how you can not like a guy like that? Too preachy? :)

Radii

01-19-2009, 03:12 PM

So I am curious how you can not like a guy like that? Too preachy? :)

Titans fan maybe? :D

miami_fan

01-19-2009, 03:17 PM

Heh...this is the first time I have seen someone say he can't stand him. So I am curious how you can not like a guy like that? Too preachy? :)

Take a look in the archives when the Cards signed him.;)

Tasan

01-19-2009, 03:24 PM

In the NFL its a no-brainer. They let just about everyone who ever had any kind of success in, especially QBs.

Young Drachma

01-19-2009, 03:26 PM

Given he's a two-time MVP and now only the 2nd QB ever to take two different teams to the Super Bowl -- especially previously moribund franchises like the Rams and Cardinals -- yeah, I gotta say you have to let him in.

RainMaker

01-19-2009, 03:30 PM

I think it's a no-brainer. Not huge longevity but his accomplishments are solid. If he played for a major market like New York, this wouldn't even be a conversation.

Maple Leafs

01-19-2009, 03:38 PM

I think it's a no-brainer. Not huge longevity but his accomplishments are solid. If he played for a major market like New York, this wouldn't even be a conversation.

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/pho/aagk193_b~Kurt-Warner-04-Press-Conference-w-NY-Giants-Posters.jpg

Chief Rum

01-19-2009, 03:40 PM

...especially previously moribund franchises like the Rams and Cardinals...

To be fair, the moribund stretch by the Rams was because She Who Will Not Be Named tanked the team for 4-5 years to get them out of LA, and she kept the morons she hired to do the tanking (Shaw & Zygmunt) in place with her in St. Louis, allowing the team to continue to struggle after the move. Most of the history of the Rams is not moribund. ;)

That said, point taken.

Chief Rum

01-19-2009, 03:42 PM

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/pho/aagk193_b~Kurt-Warner-04-Press-Conference-w-NY-Giants-Posters.jpg

Ha! Good response.

I think Rainmaker stretched a bit there, although, to be fair, Warner's time with the Giants was sabotaged from the start, since everyone knew he was only brought on to hold the spot until Eli was ready.

Izulde

01-19-2009, 03:42 PM

Eh, I'm a little iffy because of the longevity issue, but it's not like it'd be a horrible thing if he was admitted.

JonInMiddleGA

01-19-2009, 03:43 PM

Yeah, I have no problem with Warner getting in but would have at least a minor problem with him not getting in.

RainMaker

01-19-2009, 03:54 PM

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/pho/aagk193_b%7EKurt-Warner-04-Press-Conference-w-NY-Giants-Posters.jpg

Crap, I forgot all about that. Still, if he did what he did in St. Louis in New York, this wouldn't even be a discussion. The guy would be the Tom Brady of New York minus the dating of supermodels.

The thing with Warner is that he's been in positions where he's got a young guy pushing him out a lot. I believe that if Arizona hadn't stuck with Leinert so long last year, they would have been a nice playoff team.

Warhammer

01-19-2009, 04:03 PM

In one of the few intelligent statements Colin Cowherd has ever said, if you can sum up a player's case in one sentence for the HoF he should be in.

You can do that with Warner, he took two teams to three Super Bowls, and was the QB of the NFL's most prolific offense, the Greatest Show on Turf.

Hannibal Lecter

01-19-2009, 04:12 PM

Heh...this is the first time I have seen someone say he can't stand him. So I am curious how you can not like a guy like that? Too preachy? :)
exactly, hes a used car salesman selling you jesus.

kcchief19

01-19-2009, 04:19 PM

In the NFL its a no-brainer. They let just about everyone who ever had any kind of success in, especially QBs.
That's the argument I'll buy. Warner's the new benchmark for low achievement.

The asterisk is that he's only had three full seasons as starter. He has been benched four times in his career having nothing to do with injury for three different teams. How many Hall of Fame quarterbacks get benched for Josh McCown?

Other stats to consider: Warner is up there with Marino as one of the most immobile quarterbacks in history. Warner has one of the highest sack numbers in NFL history at 2.75 per start. He also fumbled the ball at a record rate -- if he played as many games as Moon, Krieg and Elway did, he would hold the all-time record for most fumbles in a career and most sacks in a career, and it wouldn't be close. If he played as long as Favre, Warner would be second all-time in interceptions Anyone think sacks, fumbles and interceptions are key for a quarterback?

I think he's a great story and he's a great inspiration. But for a guy who had such bad luck getting a break in the NFL for such a long time, he's been fortunate to fall into a great situation in St. Louis and now has caught lightening in a bottle with a 9-7 team that's made it to the Super Bowl because the defense suddenly woke up.

I don't think he's had the longevity of success to justify being in the HOF, but as noted by Tasan that doesn't matter in football.

Chief Rum

01-19-2009, 04:36 PM

exactly, hes a used car salesman selling you jesus.

I have never viewed him as "selling Jesus". He displays his spirituality more openly than most, but other than thanking God and all that in post-major-game or award interviews (like most players), I don't recall him pushing the religious line on anyone else. If anything, it's the media that jumps on it and gets him to talk about it, because they know how much meaning it has to him.

His wife, on the other hand, well, you got one there. She's a borderline nutcase (as if that wasn't obvious from the Howie Long haircut).

larrymcg421

01-19-2009, 04:57 PM

That's the argument I'll buy. Warner's the new benchmark for low achievement.

The asterisk is that he's only had three full seasons as starter. He has been benched four times in his career having nothing to do with injury for three different teams. How many Hall of Fame quarterbacks get benched for Josh McCown?

Other stats to consider: Warner is up there with Marino as one of the most immobile quarterbacks in history. Warner has one of the highest sack numbers in NFL history at 2.75 per start. He also fumbled the ball at a record rate -- if he played as many games as Moon, Krieg and Elway did, he would hold the all-time record for most fumbles in a career and most sacks in a career, and it wouldn't be close. If he played as long as Favre, Warner would be second all-time in interceptions Anyone think sacks, fumbles and interceptions are key for a quarterback?

I think he's a great story and he's a great inspiration. But for a guy who had such bad luck getting a break in the NFL for such a long time, he's been fortunate to fall into a great situation in St. Louis and now has caught lightening in a bottle with a 9-7 team that's made it to the Super Bowl because the defense suddenly woke up.

I don't think he's had the longevity of success to justify being in the HOF, but as noted by Tasan that doesn't matter in football.

I agree with everything you say here, except for the part about Marino being immobile. Sure, his 40 time was probably 100.9, but he was very mobile in the pocket. He was only sacked 1.2 times per start.

larrymcg421

01-19-2009, 04:58 PM

I have never viewed him as "selling Jesus". He displays his spirituality more openly than most, but other than thanking God and all that in post-major-game or award interviews (like most players), I don't recall him pushing the religious line on anyone else. If anything, it's the media that jumps on it and gets him to talk about it, because they know how much meaning it has to him.

His wife, on the other hand, well, you got one there. She's a borderline nutcase (as if that wasn't obvious from the Howie Long haircut).

I really didn't like Warner's involvement in the stem cell debate during the 2006 midterm elections.

BishopMVP

01-19-2009, 06:09 PM

In the NFL its a no-brainer. They let just about everyone who ever had any kind of success in, especially QBs.:confused: QB's I can understand slightly, but overall the NFL Hall of Fame is probably the most stringent of the 4 major sports.

Cringer

01-19-2009, 06:14 PM

That's the argument I'll buy. Warner's the new benchmark for low achievement.

The asterisk is that he's only had three full seasons as starter. He has been benched four times in his career having nothing to do with injury for three different teams. How many Hall of Fame quarterbacks get benched for Josh McCown?

Other stats to consider: Warner is up there with Marino as one of the most immobile quarterbacks in history. Warner has one of the highest sack numbers in NFL history at 2.75 per start. He also fumbled the ball at a record rate -- if he played as many games as Moon, Krieg and Elway did, he would hold the all-time record for most fumbles in a career and most sacks in a career, and it wouldn't be close. If he played as long as Favre, Warner would be second all-time in interceptions Anyone think sacks, fumbles and interceptions are key for a quarterback?

I think he's a great story and he's a great inspiration. But for a guy who had such bad luck getting a break in the NFL for such a long time, he's been fortunate to fall into a great situation in St. Louis and now has caught lightening in a bottle with a 9-7 team that's made it to the Super Bowl because the defense suddenly woke up.

I don't think he's had the longevity of success to justify being in the HOF, but as noted by Tasan that doesn't matter in football.

That would have been my arguement. I say no, but won't be surprised if he gets in. Thankfully he will try to keep playing and then there are 5 years between retirement and eligibility for the HoF. The emotion and 'coolness' of this season will have long been washed away and people can look at him with a clear mind.

MizzouRah

01-19-2009, 06:19 PM

Yes, for sure.

kcchief19

01-19-2009, 06:31 PM

:confused: QB's I can understand slightly, but overall the NFL Hall of Fame is probably the most stringent of the 4 major sports.
By almost any standard you want to apply, the opposite is true.

Logan

01-19-2009, 06:34 PM

Crap, I forgot all about that. Still, if he did what he did in St. Louis in New York, this wouldn't even be a discussion. The guy would be the Tom Brady of New York minus the dating of supermodels.

Yes. If there's anything that could ever be universally agreed on at FOFC, it's that Brenda Warner != supermodel.

She actually looks very much like a friend of mine...we called him Brenda during the Rams first SB run. He didn't appreciate the comparison.

Warhammer

01-19-2009, 06:54 PM

By almost any standard you want to apply, the opposite is true.

Considering the number of players involved and the fact that there are only so many players inducted per year actually make it better than the other HoFs, in my opinion.

Each game, there are a minimum of 24 starters (includng kickers). Compare that to baseball in which you are talking about 9 guys, 13 if you are talking about a 5 man rotation. In baseball it becomes primarily about the numbers. If the guy takes 20 years to get 3000 hits, he's in. Why? Because that is one of the sacred baseball numbers. Look at Nolan Ryan, people actually questioned whether or not he should be in because his winning percentage was so low. Talk to an Angels fan from the 70s and they'll tell you that they basically had Tanana, Ryan, and few stiffs. Look at their ERA, and their run support. Look at how dreadful those Angel teams were and tell me that he wasn't a damn good pitcher. Heck, for position players it has become the Hall of the Stellar Offensive Numbers, not the Hall of Fame. Have a guy that was an awesome defensive player, the best of his generation that has terrible offensive numbers and the guy probably is not going to get in.

In baseball there is nothing that stops a player from being inducted on the first ballot. Well, aside from guys that won't vote someone in on the first ballot because some guy 50 years ago wasn't so therefore guy X can't be. For the football HoF, 5 guys go in. Now, are QBs over represented? Probably.

adubroff

01-19-2009, 07:00 PM

Warner is such a tricky case. I imagine that he has to win this game to get in, or at least play very, very well. I think it's going to be very hard for people to look past how little he played(overall) and how bad he was in some of his down years.

I do think "taking two teams to the Super Bowl" is as much a dark mark as a positive. Tom Brady could probably take ten teams in the league to the Super Bowl if he was to go play for them, but he'll never do it because he'll never be allowed to go elsewhere, or if he is it will be at the very end of his career.

I also think that the reason this hasn't happened all that often thus far is that for the first 30+ Super Bowls, it was impossible for a QB to move to a new team.

Young Drachma

01-19-2009, 07:51 PM

As for him selling Jesus.

Consider this.

He married a chick with two kids and he worked at a supermarket. He played ARENA FOOTBALL for goodness sakes. He'd gone to Europe a few times to get battered around in NFL Europe.

The high school QB was probably treated better at work than Kurt was. After the big game, he packed his bags, went back home to Brenda to help her raise her kids and then went to the supermarket to stock more shelves.

To go from that to where he is and I'd be thanking Yahweh and anyone else, because there just aren't many people who could've performed how he did, the way he did, when he did.

And Mark Bulger would beg to differ on how easy it was to run the Greatest Show on Turf.

Maple Leafs

01-19-2009, 07:53 PM

By almost any standard you want to apply, the opposite is true.
Well, not the exact opposite, at least if you still count the NHL (and it's Hall of Not Bad) as a top four sport.

Bad-example

01-19-2009, 08:35 PM

Too soon to tell. Not yet.

ISiddiqui

01-19-2009, 08:58 PM

Have a guy that was an awesome defensive player, the best of his generation that has terrible offensive numbers and the guy probably is not going to get in.

What in the Hell are you talking about? Or did you miss Ozzie Smith and Bill Mazeroski getting in?

Raiders Army

01-19-2009, 09:11 PM

Other stats to consider: Warner is up there with Marino as one of the most immobile quarterbacks in history. Warner has one of the highest sack numbers in NFL history at 2.75 per start. He also fumbled the ball at a record rate -- if he played as many games as Moon, Krieg and Elway did, he would hold the all-time record for most fumbles in a career and most sacks in a career, and it wouldn't be close. If he played as long as Favre, Warner would be second all-time in interceptions Anyone think sacks, fumbles and interceptions are key for a quarterback?
I'd agree with everything except for this. Look at Mike Martz's QBs and they get sacked and throw INTs. They also get injured a lot. Fumbles come with getting hit. Is it a product of the system or was he just a better QB in the system?

kcchief19

01-19-2009, 09:28 PM

Considering the number of players involved and the fact that there are only so many players inducted per year actually make it better than the other HoFs, in my opinion.
The thing that will always devalue the football Hall of Fame is the four minimum to in. The line ever year in Kansas City is that Derrick Thomas will go into the Hall of Fame eventually in a year when there aren't a lot of guys that are automatic picks. Of course, the other thing that gets argued ever year is that the Chiefs do a horrible job of politicking for Thomas, and that the football HOF voting is almost entirely about politics.

Right now, to me Kurt Warner is Dale Murphy -- two time MVP,. If Dale Murphy won a ring and made two World Series, I don't think that adds a lot to his resume.

For another football comparison, how about Rich Gannon? Their career totals are very close (Warner is 38th and 40th all time in yards and TDs, Gannon is 36th and 43rd). Gannon was the consensus MVP in 2002 and won an MVP Award in 2000 (Gannon won the Bert Bell, Faulk won AP). Gannon was a four-time pro-bowler (Warner has three) and both were twice all-pro.

Both were late bloomers. Warner threw 11 NFL passes before he was 28, the year he became a starter. Gannon was 32 when he reemerged as a starter for KC.

My question is this -- would our opinion of Warner be different if instead of going undrafted and playing in the Arena league that he was a miserable failure for three years as a starter in Minnesota before working as a stock boy at Hy-Vee, then getting back into football and hitting the jackpot?

kcchief19

01-19-2009, 09:34 PM

I'd agree with everything except for this. Look at Mike Martz's QBs and they get sacked and throw INTs. They also get injured a lot. Fumbles come with getting hit. Is it a product of the system or was he just a better QB in the system?
That's a slippery slope because if we say the sacks, interceptions and fumbles are a product of the system, aren't the yards and touchdowns product of the system too? His best years were in St. Louis running an offense where Trent Green and Marc Bulger took over for him when he to hurt and the team didn't miss a beat. The current Arizona scheme isn't terrible different from what St. Louis did -- step back and throw timed passes quickly. When Warner ran more traditional offenses in New York and earlier in Arizona, he didn't fare well. Is he a product of a system?

Dan Fouts was a system QB too and he's in the Hall of Fame. But he didn't turn the ball over and take sacks with the frequency of Warner either.

RedKingGold

01-19-2009, 09:47 PM

I think the interest in Warner is because of the story.

I know it's a shallow argument, but if it is the "Hall of Fame", then there is legitimate thought in letting Warner in because of his story combined with achievements where his achievements alone are not Hall worthy.

EDIT: A good case example would be Joe Namath. No way his stats alone are Hall-of-Fame worthy, but he had that "mystique" because of Super Bowl III

RainMaker

01-19-2009, 10:15 PM

The tough part about Warner is that he's either a top flight QB or a horrible QB. He has never been consistent in his career. It's why he can go from an MVP to a guy getting benched for trash. It's one of the most unique cases for the Hall of Fame.

It would be like a baseball player having 3 great seasons, winning the MVP in them and leading his team to the World Series. Then in the rest of his seasons hitting .250 and being a borderline backup.

MizzouRah

01-19-2009, 10:32 PM

Did someone mention immobile Bugler in this thread?

RainMaker

01-19-2009, 10:59 PM

Brenda Warner did go through a makeover.

Busted Coverage: Booze, Ladies And Football » When Did Brenda Warner Stop Looking Like Ivan Drago And Start Getting Hot? (http://www.bustedcoverage.com/?p=10103)

ISiddiqui

01-19-2009, 11:24 PM

Ha, I just saw that comparison between the old Brenda Warner and the new one a few minutes ago on Deadspin. :D

cuervo72

01-19-2009, 11:24 PM

Craig Morton is the only I can think of off the top of my head. He took over for Staubach when he got hurt one season, then QB'd the Broncos to their first Super Bowl.

Earl Morrall deserves at least an Honorable Mention, even though he didn't start for the '72 Dolphins, he did steer the ship for most of the season (after getting to SB III with the Colts).

DanGarion

01-20-2009, 12:47 AM

So if Warner is in so is Terrell Davis.... right?

Terrell Davis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrell_Davis)

Career stats
Rushing Yards 7,607
Average 4.6
Touchdowns 60
Stats at NFL.com
Career highlights and awards

* 3x Pro Bowl selection (1996, 1997, 1998)
* 3x First-team All-Pro selection (1996, 1997, 1998)
* 2x Super Bowl champion (XXXII, XXXIII)
* NFL 1990s All-Decade Team
* 1998 NFL MVP
* 1998 PFWA NFL MVP
* 2x NFL Offensive Player of the Year (1996, 1998)
* 1996 UPI AFL-AFC Player of the Year
* 1997 Super Bowl MVP

Glengoyne

01-20-2009, 02:19 AM

It's kind of funny in that I'm an original believer. I drafted him as a taxi squader when Trent Green(?) went down, or maybe I dropped someone and picked him up because I knew who he was from Arena ball. In any case, I've always been a fan, even cursing the Rams and pretty much anyone else who benched the guy. IMO he is a solid performer.

I'm just not convinced that he is HOF material. Going against him are his benchings/inconsistency and a relatively short career. Going for him are his on the field and post season results as well as some big time stats like completion percentage and QB rating.

Raiders Army

01-20-2009, 06:30 AM

That's a slippery slope because if we say the sacks, interceptions and fumbles are a product of the system, aren't the yards and touchdowns product of the system too? His best years were in St. Louis running an offense where Trent Green and Marc Bulger took over for him when he to hurt and the team didn't miss a beat. The current Arizona scheme isn't terrible different from what St. Louis did -- step back and throw timed passes quickly. When Warner ran more traditional offenses in New York and earlier in Arizona, he didn't fare well. Is he a product of a system?

Dan Fouts was a system QB too and he's in the Hall of Fame. But he didn't turn the ball over and take sacks with the frequency of Warner either.

Good points. You're right.

Autumn

01-20-2009, 07:33 AM

I think if they win this Super Bowl he'll almost definitely get in. I agree with the sentiment that he's probably not as talented as his numbers seem, and he will get in because of the success of the teams he's been on, luck and a great story. But that's sports, right? We all know there might be some guys getting cut off the team right now who are better than the rest but just didn't get things to roll their way. It's futility to approach the Hall of Fame as anything that can be done on a rational basis.

stevew

01-20-2009, 07:31 PM

Daimyo

01-20-2009, 08:06 PM

If Big Ben wins this Super Bowl doesn't it pretty much punch his ticket as well. The only QBs to start and win 2 bowls and not make the HoF are plunkett and Brady. A good game here in victory and 5 or so more solid seasons make Ben a virtual lock. Despite what you haters think. :)

The Pittsburgh Steelers won Super Bowl XL 21–10 over the Seattle Seahawks in Detroit on February 5, 2006. Roethlisberger had one of the worst passing games of his career, completing just 9 of 21 passes for 123 yards and two interceptions; his passer rating of 22.6 was the lowest in Super Bowl history by a winning quarterback.
Super Bowl wins is such a junk stat for quarterbacks...

Autumn

01-20-2009, 08:09 PM

Super Bowl wins is such a junk stat for quarterbacks...

True, but if the HoF was based on stats it would be easy, we'd just check the chart and admit the right people. Admittance clearly bears little relation to rational stat checking, and clearly fans and voters often correlate greatness with winning. In a sport so team-driven as football that ensures some craziness in selection.

MizzouRah

01-20-2009, 11:09 PM

So 17 people know nothing about football? :)

SFL Cat

01-20-2009, 11:11 PM

Cant stand the guy but its a no brainer.

Sure you're not confusing Kurt with his wife?

http://multimedia.premierespeakers.com/speaker/web/10823.jpg

Although in all honesty, she's looking better these days than she did when Kurt was with the Rams.

Warhammer

01-21-2009, 12:05 AM

Someone made an interesting argument today. Look at Manning's rate and average stats over the regular season. Compare those to Warner and they are nearly identical. Then take a look at the playoff stats and see who you would prefer. Its an interesting debate.

RainMaker

01-21-2009, 01:51 AM

I know I've been sticking up for Warner, but after more thought, I don't think he deserves it. I still think he was a product of that system and those players. He had one of the greatest offensive weapons in football on his squad, along with two perrenial Pro Bowl Wide Receivers. He has had some real bad seasons and been benched for crap.

He had some great years, and won a couple MVPs (although one of them should have gone to Faulk). But he wasn't consistently a top QB. He was never on that level of Manning or Brady. He was never a QB that could win a game by himself.

I think he's a great QB when surrounded by talent. That's about it. Deserves a lot of credit for a great career, but not Hall of Fame worthy.

M GO BLUE!!!

01-21-2009, 02:05 AM

Ha, I just saw that comparison between the old Brenda Warner and the new one a few minutes ago on Deadspin. :D

http://www.dack.com/images/scary.jpg

RainMaker

01-21-2009, 02:07 AM

http://www.dack.com/images/scary.jpg

That's just wrong. :lol:

Sgran

01-21-2009, 08:06 AM

I voted yes, but it's not a highly committed yes. My problem is that he didn't play particularly well in the 2 super bowls he played in. His big touchdown throw against the Titans (my favorite SB, by the way) was a badly underthrown pass that Holt (?) had to come back for and the Titans dbs overran. Other than that I don't remember him doing much, certainly not as much as McNair, who almost killed himself on that final drive. But Warner was the heart of the Greatest Show on Turf. The funny thing for me now is hearing how he isn't mobile, but I remember him rolling out a lot for the Rams with that mobile pocket they would set up. Absolutely deadly.

Sweed

01-21-2009, 09:16 AM

I voted yes. I think when he has played with some talent around him he has performed very well. He's certainly not the only QB that succeeded because he was in the right system with talented people around him.

Looking over the list of HOF QB's I don't see anyone that didn't play for some good teams. The only one I'm not sure of is Sonny Jurgenson and how good the Eagles were when he was there. I don't recall the Redskins being very good until the end of his career when George Allen arrived and he was fighting Kilmer for playing time. I think the least worthy on the list is Namath, and has been mentioned made it mostly on the strength of beating the Colts.

One more thing about him being a "system" QB with the Rams. Too my mind he not only benefited from the system but he ended up being a victim of it. Martz being the genius he was (sarcasm intended) would never make any adjustments, specifically keeping in blockers, to the offense to help Warner. His attitude was he would dictate the play ie send out five into the pattern and rely on Kurt to find the right guy before he got hit. Meanwhile the rest of the NFL is making adjustments to the Rams and getting better and quicker pressure on the pocket, knowing the Rams weren't keeping in anyone to block on virtually any play, with Warner taking a beating. Let Warner go and bring in Bulger and now keep in extra blockers because of his inexperience. If he had bothered to do this with Warner, and we're not talking every play but at least mix it up, the team would have been much better off as well as Kurt himself.

Abe Sargent

01-21-2009, 09:34 AM

M GO BLUE!!!

01-21-2009, 10:28 PM

If I had a vote, I'd vote in those with shorter but massive careers cut short by injury such as TD or another case - Tony Boselli.

True.

If a RB came into the league and absolutely DOMINATED. Ran for over 2500 yards as a rookie, had 30+ TD's and won the Super Bowl, then could never play again due to some reason not involving steroids... he would go in no problem.