If Peyton Manning retires tommorow, is he in the Hall of Fame?

[tanglewood]

I say yes.

[Greyroofoo]

yup

[st.cronin]

I say yes.

Also, I think he should really consider retiring. What else does he have to prove?

[RedKingGold]

If he changed his name to Jebus, his name would be Jebus Manning.

[14ers]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I say yes.

Also, I think he should really consider retiring. What else does he have to prove?

Could you please go talk to Brett Favre.

[INDalltheway]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I say yes.

Also, I think he should really consider retiring. What else does he have to prove?

a true pats fan! at least a smart one...

[RedKingGold]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I say yes.

Also, I think he should really consider retiring. What else does he have to prove?

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by INDalltheway

a true pats fan! at least a smart one...

That's right, I have no class.

[dj_morton]

Yes all the way

[TroyF]

I voted yes before I looked at the last option. Hell, the guy will be 31 in a couple of months and he's already has the 13 most yards passing all time, ranks 7 in TD passes, made the pro bowl 8 times and has won 10 games or more a season 7 times in his 9 year career.

Were he to have thrown 7 INT last week, then had his career end with two torn ACL's and a broken neck, he'd be a hall of famer.

[Buccaneer]

Yes.

How about this comparison:

QB1:

Played 9 seasons
22 completions per GS
64.0% total completion rate
261 passing yards per GS
1.9 TDs per GS
1.0 INTs per GS
about 94.0 total QB Rating
1 SB ring

QB2:

Played 9 seasons
22 completions per GS
65% total completion rate
278 passing yards per GS
1.7 TDs per GS
1.1 INTs per GS
about 94.0 total QB Rating
1 SB ring

[tanglewood]

Steve Young?

[henry296]

I think it's Kurt Warner.

[firebirds]

Does a one legged duck swim in a circle?

Of course he belongs in the HOF, even before the SB. Look how many QB's are there that haven't won a SB plus all those who haven't won an NFL Championship. His numbers are top notch and now that we are getting more and more political in the voting process, his image is about as crystal clean as there ever was. Can't see how he won't be a first time ballot entry.

[WVUFAN]

No, for no other reason other than my hatred for him.

If you have to go by STATS or WINS or some other stupid logical reasoning for going into the HoF, than I suppose yes.

Screw logic and stats, though. I hate him, so I vote no. :-)

[RedKingGold]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

No, for no other reason other than my hatred for him.

If you have to go by STATS or WINS or some other stupid logical reasoning for going into the HoF, than I suppose yes.

Screw logic and stats, though. I hate him, so I vote no. :-)

Typical West Virginia fan. Tell your sistwife I said hi!

[Marathoner]

without a doubt

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by firebirds

Does a one legged duck swim in a circle?

Of course he belongs in the HOF, even before the SB. Look how many QB's are there that haven't won a SB plus all those who haven't won an NFL Championship. His numbers are top notch and now that we are getting more and more political in the voting process, his image is about as crystal clean as there ever was. Can't see how he won't be a first time ballot entry.

Well, the question was right now. The only question left for Manning is if he'll break every major career passing record in the book.

An average of 4000 yards and 24 TD's a year will see him top Marino in six years.

[KWhit]

He was a sure fire Hall of Famer even before winning the SB. Hell yes, he's in the hall. The only question is whether he'll be viewed as the best ever.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by henry296

I think it's Kurt Warner.

Looks like you're right, but Bucc's stats are misleading... Yeah, Kurt has been in the league 9 years, but he has 3 seasons with more than 10 starts whereas Peyton started 16 games in all 9 seasons. So Bucc picks some specific states to try to illustrate his points, while not mentioning that Peyton has 37,500 yards to Kurt's 20,591 or Peyton's 275 TD's to Kurt's 125.

It's very easy to make weird comparisons by using only bulk states or only "rate" states (that's what I call them, don't know the real term). Not to mention W/L record which I don't know an easy way to look up.

Sorry, Kurt Warner and Peyton Manning have had very different careers.

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by RedKingGold

Typical West Virginia fan. Tell your sistwife I said hi!

Jackass. Must be a Va Tech fan.

And we don't marry sisters in West Virginia. That's Georgia. We marry cousins.

[gottimd]

Doesn't it depend on where he retires? If Manning comes over my house tomorrow and retires, then no, he won't be in the Hall of Fame. Now if he were to go to Canton, step foot in the building and retire, then yes when he would retire tomorrow he would be in the Hall of Fame.

It all comes down to location.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Looks like you're right, but Bucc's stats are misleading... Yeah, Kurt has been in the league 9 years, but he has 3 seasons with more than 10 starts whereas Peyton started 16 games in all 9 seasons. So Bucc picks some specific states to try to illustrate his points, while not mentioning that Peyton has 37,500 yards to Kurt's 20,591 or Peyton's 275 TD's to Kurt's 125.

It's very easy to make weird comparisons by using only bulk states or only "rate" states (that's what I call them, don't know the real term). Not to mention W/L record which I don't know an easy way to look up.

Sorry, Kurt Warner and Peyton Manning have had very different careers.

I wondered when someone would pick that up. Yes, it was presented out of context. Starting half of your games is different than starting all of your games but going with a "per GS" rate is one of way comparing what happened when a QB started when it is so different (people do this all of the time with Koufax). I am not saying that Warner can be compared to Manning as a first-ballot HOFer but you have to admit that the production (Warner's sample size is not too small, I don't think) makes one play the 'what if' game.

[ISiddiqui]

Undoubtably yes.

[Raiders Army]

Begrudging yep.

[Antmeister]

I didn't realize this was even debatable. He was a record breaking QB even before the Super Bowl.

[molson]

The NFL HOF isn't like the Baseball HOF in that mere accumulation of stats isn't necessary. Manning would have been in last year.

[tanglewood]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

I wondered when someone would pick that up. Yes, it was presented out of context. Starting half of your games is different than starting all of your games but going with a "per GS" rate is one of way comparing what happened when a QB started when it is so different (people do this all of the time with Koufax). I am not saying that Warner can be compared to Manning as a first-ballot HOFer but you have to admit that the production (Warner's sample size is not too small, I don't think) makes one play the 'what if' game.

A better 'what if' with Warner imho is what if the Rams won their second Superbowl? Even if Warner still completely collapses over the rest of his career can you turn a two time Superbowl winning QB with stunning numbers for 3 seasons away from the Hall? And if the answer to that is no, then why are we putting so much emphasis on one game in his career?

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

I wondered when someone would pick that up. Yes, it was presented out of context. Starting half of your games is different than starting all of your games but going with a "per GS" rate is one of way comparing what happened when a QB started when it is so different (people do this all of the time with Koufax). I am not saying that Warner can be compared to Manning as a first-ballot HOFer but you have to admit that the production (Warner's sample size is not too small, I don't think) makes one play the 'what if' game.

I see what you're trying to say, but I think you really have to look at Warner's career on the whole and realize there is no comparison. Warner had 3 good years. Outside of those three years he never has more than 3000 yards, 11 TD's, or 10 starts. I don't know his W/L, but I'm pretty sure it's terrible. The reason his overall per game numbers look so good, mostly, is because he had those 3 good years on an amazingly good offensive team.

[st.cronin]

I'd rather see Kurt Warner in the Hall of Fame than Michael Irvin, that's for sure.

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I'd rather see Kurt Warner in the Hall of Fame than Michael Irvin, that's for sure.

Art Monk deserves in the HoF over Michael Irvin.

[Buccaneer]

The NFL HOF is full of players having had 3-4 good/great years, plus those that stuck (or will stick) around to get the high career numbers, and then there are those handful that were among the best at their positions.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

The NFL HOF is full of players having had 3-4 good/great years, plus those that stuck (or will stick) around to get the high career numbers, and then there are those handful that were among the best at their positions.

Yeah, but even those with 3-4 good/great years at least have full seasons surrounding those years, even if they're not very good. I challenge you to find a QB who only started 16 games twice and only double digits four times and is in the HOF.

[Daimyo]

Kurt Warner? Seriously? The guy had two and two-thirds great years and then five more years where he wasn't even the best QB on his own team... If we have to pick a short career guy from that era, I think I'd prefer Terrell Davis over Kurt Warner.

[clintl]

There also aren't a lot QBs in the Hall of Fame who lost several starting jobs to QBs who aren't going to be in the Hall of Fame.

[Daimyo]

I think when all is said and done we'll be debating rather or not Manning was the greatest of all time. Next season he'll really start climbing the all-time stats leaderboards very likely passing up guys like Montana, Elway, and Unitas in career touchdowns and passing yards (even a "mediocre" 3000 yards and 25 TD would do it). Assuming he continues to avoid injury he could pretty realistically own every passing record before he turns 36.

[ISiddiqui]

Yep... his numbers right now are surreal. Add to that the fact that he calls a lot of his own plays and he'll probably be considered the best ever if he can keep up a good rate until the end of his career.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

he'll probably be considered the best ever.

Not by me.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Daimyo

I think when all is said and done we'll be debating rather or not Manning was the greatest of all time. Next season he'll really start climbing the all-time stats leaderboards very likely passing up guys like Montana, Elway, and Unitas in career touchdowns and passing yards (even a "mediocre" 3000 yards and 25 TD would do it). Assuming he continues to avoid injury he could pretty realistically own every passing record before he turns 36.

Agreed. I think if he really wants to solidifies it though, and this is from a huge Manning supporter, he has to win 2 more Bowls.

Work with me here.

He can be arguably the best QB ever if he doesn't win another bowl and keeps putting up the numbers.

But if he wins 2 more bowls and puts up the numbers, I think he becomes the hands-down, no questions asked, best QB ever.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by tanglewood

A better 'what if' with Warner imho is what if the Rams won their second Superbowl? Even if Warner still completely collapses over the rest of his career can you turn a two time Superbowl winning QB with stunning numbers for 3 seasons away from the Hall? And if the answer to that is no, then why are we putting so much emphasis on one game in his career?

Kurt Warner was an amazing QB for 3 years, possibly the most "fun" team to watch in the 90/00s, and damn close to the K-Gun Bills for the most enjoyable team to watch ever.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Yeah, but even those with 3-4 good/great years at least have full seasons surrounding those years, even if they're not very good. I challenge you to find a QB who only started 16 games twice and only double digits four times and is in the HOF.

No, I wasn't thinking of QBs (WRs and RBs come to mind plus some piggyback LBs) and like I said, I was not making a case for Warner being in the HOF right now but in illustrating that in starting 74 games, he has the stats that are comparable to about anyone. Shit, I really don't remember what made me think of him...

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

No, I wasn't thinking of QBs (WRs and RBs come to mind plus some piggyback LBs) and like I said, I was not making a case for Warner being in the HOF right now but in illustrating that in starting 74 games, he has the stats that are comparable to about anyone. Shit, I really don't remember what made me think of him...

I guess I'm not sure what point you were trying to illustrate then. It seemed to be that Manning was comparable to some unnamed QB. But when you compare their full picture, they're really not comparable.

if you were trying to say you can manipulate some key stats to make it look like someone we wouldn't expect is as good as Manning, then yeah, you can do that.. but you can't find a guy like that and show the whole picture and have it be comparable.

[TroyF]

I'll always have the what if thing with Warner. I still think that thumb injury is the thing that derailed his career. He was by far and away the most accurate passer I've ever seen, especially on deep balls. He had an incredible recognition of where to throw the football.

He had a ton of weapons, sure, but it's tough to penalize people for having weapons. Those three years were not just good, they may have very well been the greatest three year performence in the history of the game. You are talking about a guy who completed 67% of his passes for over 9 yards per pass attempt, insane numbers no matter how you choose to look at them. Add in the fact that he threw for over 365 yards in four of his seven playoff starts over that stretch and it becomes almost surreal.

He's not a hall of famer, but it still goes down in my mind as some of the best pure QB play I've ever witnessed.

[Terps]

Didn't see the last poll option until after I voted yes, but he's in even without a ring, no doubt about it.

[SteveMax58]

Originally Posted by TroyF

I'll always have the what if thing with Warner. I still think that thumb injury is the thing that derailed his career. He was by far and away the most accurate passer I've ever seen, especially on deep balls. He had an incredible recognition of where to throw the football.

He had a ton of weapons, sure, but it's tough to penalize people for having weapons. Those three years were not just good, they may have very well been the greatest three year performence in the history of the game. You are talking about a guy who completed 67% of his passes for over 9 yards per pass attempt, insane numbers no matter how you choose to look at them. Add in the fact that he threw for over 365 yards in four of his seven playoff starts over that stretch and it becomes almost surreal.

He's not a hall of famer, but it still goes down in my mind as some of the best pure QB play I've ever witnessed.

Absolutely agree with this. Never have I seen such incredible QB play over a few seasons subsequently followed by a complete dropoff in performance. I think Warner had "it" & once he injured his thumb lost "it" by not being able to adjust to his body's capabilities after the injury.

You could certainly argue about the weapons around him, and that Faulk's decline was the real collapse of that offense...but the Rams offense was "that" good when Warner was at QB...not Green and not Bulger. And not many offenses have been that good ever.

BTW...I think Manning had a HOF reservation before this year.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by SteveMax58

Absolutely agree with this. Never have I seen such incredible QB play over a few seasons subsequently followed by a complete dropoff in performance. I think Warner had "it" & once he injured his thumb lost "it" by not being able to adjust to his body's capabilities after the injury.

You could certainly argue about the weapons around him, and that Faulk's decline was the real collapse of that offense...but the Rams offense was "that" good when Warner was at QB...not Green and not Bulger. And not many offenses have been that good ever.

BTW...I think Manning had a HOF reservation before this year.

FWIW, I think you could pretty easily argue that Manning had a span of 3 years as good (or better) than Warner, and really you could take 3 year chunks from the last 6 years and do it, not just 3 select seasons.

[rkmsuf]

Wait, he's retiring? Big booyah for Jim Sorgi.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I say yes.

Also, I think he should really consider retiring. What else does he have to prove?

I agree. He and Tom Brady should make a pact to retire together this offseason.

[SteveMax58]

Originally Posted by wade moore

FWIW, I think you could pretty easily argue that Manning had a span of 3 years as good (or better) than Warner, and really you could take 3 year chunks from the last 6 years and do it, not just 3 select seasons.

I agree with that...I was pointing out that Warner went from Manning-like numbers to Ryan Leaf-like numbers following that 3 year span...and that it would have been interesting to see what might have happened with Warner's career had his thumb injury, IMO, not essentially ended his days as a top QB.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by SteveMax58

I agree with that...I was pointing out that Warner went from Manning-like numbers to Ryan Leaf-like numbers following that 3 year span...and that it would have been interesting to see what might have happened with Warner's career had his thumb injury, IMO, not essentially ended his days as a top QB.

That was more to the claim above yours that Warner was some superhuman so far above any other 3 year performance ever I guess.