Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

MarbleEye wrote:Warren Moon had a huge passing day of 500+ yards and was taken out of the game. He was asked if he wanted to go back in when it was realized he had a chance to take out Norm Van Brocklin's single game passing yardage record of 554 but he declined.

Moon played the entire game. With about 2 minutes left the Oilers intercepted Steve DeBerg in the endzone, but the Oilers handed off to Allen Pinkett a few times to bleed the clock (much to broadcaster Bob Trumpy's dismay) before having Moon take a final knee to end the game. So if Warren Moon is circulating a story where he has been taken out of the game and graciously declines to go back in, then that story is patently false. I'd love to see what sportswriter/source supplied you with that information.

TanksAndSpartans wrote:Thanks Bryan. I'll count the whole career. I'd take Waterfield (who arguably took two teams to the title as well given what a different era it was in '45) then Layne then Van Brocklin then Tittle and I'm guessing I'm the only one who would have that order. Waterfield like Baugh had some seasons where he did pretty well intercepting passes and then evolved into a successful modern QB as well, but doesn't seem to get much credit.

I don't think there is any consensus 'order'. Those QBs are all difficult to assess, and then to compare them relative to one another is virtually impossible. But here is my attempt:

Waterfield - I think Waterfield is the easiest to assess, because he was basically great every year he played...he just retired early (but he also didn't get to the NFL until age 25 due to WWII). A few things I find interesting about Waterfield...1) The Rams never had a winning season in franchise history prior to Waterfield's arrival. Waterfield shows up and they immediately win the league title. 2) In a 1948 game against the eventual champion Eagles, the Rams trailed 28-0 late in the 3rd period. Waterfield led a comeback which featured 3 TD passes from Waterfield the QB and an INT and a FR from Waterfield the DB. Perhaps just a meaningless regular season game in retrospect, and the Rams didn't actually win (they tied 28-28), but I thought that was a neat accomplishment nonetheless. 3) The story goes that a Ram player was complaining in the offensive huddle...Waterfield didn't say anything, he just walked over to the guy and punched him.

Layne - Layne had the most 'normal' career of this group, but its really hard for me to define his 'greatness'. I think at one point he had the most passing yards and the most rushing yards by a QB (which was then quickly surpassed by Tobin Rote). He was not an efficient passer, yet he could make 1st team All-Pro with passing stats that were right around the league average. The postseason games of the 1950's and early 1960's featured some really bad weather, but Layne's postseason stats are abysmal. His pass to Jim Doran was his only TD against 12 INTs. To make an argument for Layne is to cite his intangibles and rings. He was seemingly a 'clutch' player who was a very good runner. Perhaps I am selling him short.

Tittle & Van Brocklin - Kind of already covered them. I think Tittle's big seasons with the Giants sets him apart. I get your point of Van Brocklin having 1.5 titles, but I also think its significant that Van Brocklin defeated Otto Graham's Browns and Vince Lombardi's Packers to win his 1.5 titles. Its more impressive to me than Tobin Rote defeating Tommy O'Connell's Browns and Babe Parilli's Patriots. An interesting tidbit about Van Brocklin is that when he was coaching the Falcons, he adopted the three young children who lived across the street from him when their parents tragically died in an auto accident.

Anyways, I would rank them Waterfield, Tittle, Van Brocklin, Layne.

I recall reading sometime in the late 60's-early 70's that Norm Van Brocklin in 1960 had the best year a QB ever had in leading the Eagles to the NFL Championship. The idea was the 1960 Eagles were the "weakest" team to win the title but having Van Brocklin at QB made the difference.

Bryan, thanks for the additional analysis - glad I'm not the only one with Waterfield first. That 28-28 game sounds familiar - I had forgotten it, but now that you mention it I think it is discussed in the Rams "great teams great years" book. I especially appreciated your perspective on Layne - I hadn't looked too closely at his career beyond thinking two title wins over the Browns was pretty impressive. You're point on the All-Pro voters liking him reminded me of Doak Walker - he wasn't making all-pro halfback based on statistics either given some of those seasons he didn't lead his own team in rushing.

SixtiesFan - that was the kind of point used in comparing Graham and Van Brocklin on the other site I linked to. I thought it was an interesting argument, there's just no way to know whether any other QB could have pulled that off - except I guess by trying it in a board or video game

TanksAndSpartans wrote:Here's a discussion on another site comparing Graham and Van Brocklin. I warn you its long though....

http://www.footballperspective.com/tag/ ... -brocklin/

Also, just to clarify, I didn't really mean 50s - I meant Otto Graham's contemporaries and more specifically NFL QBs who were active and at the top of their game at the same time ('50 to '56), so I didn't mean to include Baugh or Unitas, but I'm fine with Waterfield who played in two championship games against Graham, Conerly is a good one, Tobin Rote. And I'm fine with looking at the QB's entire career - not trying to isolate certain seasons.

Interesting debate there. A minor point was how the Browns collapsed in 1956 that I want to talk about here.

In 1956, both of Cleveland's quarterbacks (George Ratterman and Babe Parilli) had season ending injuries after only about 3 games. So, there was more to the Browns collapse that year than Graham's retirement.

It was mentioned that in 1957, Cleveland got Jim Brown and because of that, they won the Eastern Conference title that year. I don't completely agree with that. Sure, Jim Brown was great, but at the time I was expecting the Browns to improve and make a run at the Eastern Conference championship even before they drafted Jim Brown.

After both of Cleveland's quarterbacks went down with injuries in 1956, the Browns picked up a free agent quarterback named Tommy O'Connell on waivers, and O'Connell started in Cleveland's last 5 games. The Browns won 3 of those 5 games including a win over the 1956 champion New York Giants.

Anyway, I and many Cleveland fans had a feeling that Cleveland, with O'Connell at quarterback, was going to be right back in the mix for the eastern title, and that was before Cleveland drafted Jim Brown. Cleveland still contended from 1957 until 1961 in the east. Jim Brown sure helped, but so did Cleveland's great defense, great offensive line, and some other things.

In the 1957 opener, Cleveland beat the arch rival Giants 6 to 3. This was a key game for the Browns to win that year, and their defense took most of the credit for that.

The Browns were not as successful during the 1957-60 seasons as they were during the Graham years, but their receivers were not quite as good as Graham's receivers Dante Lavelli, Mac Speedie, and Dub Jones, and Milt Plum was no Otto Graham (O'Connell retired to take a coaching job after 1957 leaving the starting QB job to Plum), but they were still contenders. They came pretty close in 1958 and 1960 where one official's call made the difference between an eastern championship and 2nd place both years.

Anyway, Cleveland's improvement from 1957 through 1960 was more than just Jim Brown, as great as Brown was.

In 1961, the Giants got Y.A.Tittle, Del Shofner, and Erich Barnes, and thus had a lock on the Eastern Conference for the next 3 years.

Bryan wrote:

TanksAndSpartans wrote:Thanks Bryan. I'll count the whole career. I'd take Waterfield (who arguably took two teams to the title as well given what a different era it was in '45) then Layne then Van Brocklin then Tittle and I'm guessing I'm the only one who would have that order. Waterfield like Baugh had some seasons where he did pretty well intercepting passes and then evolved into a successful modern QB as well, but doesn't seem to get much credit.

I don't think there is any consensus 'order'. Those QBs are all difficult to assess, and then to compare them relative to one another is virtually impossible. But here is my attempt:

Waterfield - I think Waterfield is the easiest to assess, because he was basically great every year he played...he just retired early (but he also didn't get to the NFL until age 25 due to WWII). A few things I find interesting about Waterfield...1) The Rams never had a winning season in franchise history prior to Waterfield's arrival. Waterfield shows up and they immediately win the league title. 2) In a 1948 game against the eventual champion Eagles, the Rams trailed 28-0 late in the 3rd period. Waterfield led a comeback which featured 3 TD passes from Waterfield the QB and an INT and a FR from Waterfield the DB. Perhaps just a meaningless regular season game in retrospect, and the Rams didn't actually win (they tied 28-28), but I thought that was a neat accomplishment nonetheless. 3) The story goes that a Ram player was complaining in the offensive huddle...Waterfield didn't say anything, he just walked over to the guy and punched him.

Layne - Layne had the most 'normal' career of this group, but its really hard for me to define his 'greatness'. I think at one point he had the most passing yards and the most rushing yards by a QB (which was then quickly surpassed by Tobin Rote). He was not an efficient passer, yet he could make 1st team All-Pro with passing stats that were right around the league average. The postseason games of the 1950's and early 1960's featured some really bad weather, but Layne's postseason stats are abysmal. His pass to Jim Doran was his only TD against 12 INTs. To make an argument for Layne is to cite his intangibles and rings. He was seemingly a 'clutch' player who was a very good runner. Perhaps I am selling him short.

Tittle & Van Brocklin - Kind of already covered them. I think Tittle's big seasons with the Giants sets him apart. I get your point of Van Brocklin having 1.5 titles, but I also think its significant that Van Brocklin defeated Otto Graham's Browns and Vince Lombardi's Packers to win his 1.5 titles. Its more impressive to me than Tobin Rote defeating Tommy O'Connell's Browns and Babe Parilli's Patriots. An interesting tidbit about Van Brocklin is that when he was coaching the Falcons, he adopted the three young children who lived across the street from him when their parents tragically died in an auto accident.

Anyways, I would rank them Waterfield, Tittle, Van Brocklin, Layne.

I'll make it 3 votes for Waterfield, but I'd rank the other three QBs in this order: Van Brocklin, Layne, Tittle.

Chuckin' Charlie, anyone?

Bryan wrote: *Do you think Van Brocklin retired too early? Does that count against him?

I think Van Brocklin had another good season left in him, just as I think Elway and Joe Montana and Kurt Warner had a good season left in them when they walked away. I started watching football in 1972, and most of my memories of Johnny Unitas are in a Chargers uniform getting pummeled every game because he tried to stretch his career one season too long. I am reminded of the scene in the movie "Moneyball" when the scout says something to the extent of "we're all told at some point we can no longer play the game, sometimes it's when we're 18, sometimes it's when we're 40, but we're all told." Sometimes people figure it out for themselves, or feel they've had enough.

My favorite quarterback of all time is probably Joe Montana, because he never seemed to make a mistake on the field, it seemed he was always one step ahead of the defense at all times. His motion on the field was fluid and graceful, although he didn't have the strongest arm in the world, and he wasn't the fastest guy or the world's greatest athlete, and he took the game seriously but he knew at the end of the day it was just a game. In many ways, he always struck me as the football equivalent of Joe DiMaggio, a guy you could tell was an absolute perfectionist on the field who would retire once he felt his skills had diminished, even if it wasn't visible to anybody else. There is something to the show business adage of "Always leave them wanting more."

As for Van Brocklin, I think he might have been the difference in getting past the Giants for the 1961 Eastern Division crown, but I don't think there was any way the Eagles were going to beat the Packers in a Championship game rematch in Green Bay. On the other hand, I don't think Sonny Jurgensen was exactly chopped liver either.

Bryan wrote:

MarbleEye wrote:Warren Moon had a huge passing day of 500+ yards and was taken out of the game. He was asked if he wanted to go back in when it was realized he had a chance to take out Norm Van Brocklin's single game passing yardage record of 554 but he declined.

Moon played the entire game. With about 2 minutes left the Oilers intercepted Steve DeBerg in the endzone, but the Oilers handed off to Allen Pinkett a few times to bleed the clock (much to broadcaster Bob Trumpy's dismay) before having Moon take a final knee to end the game. So if Warren Moon is circulating a story where he has been taken out of the game and graciously declines to go back in, then that story is patently false. I'd love to see what sportswriter/source supplied you with that information.

Moon is not floating any such story. I watched the game and from what I remember he either left the game or else stopped throwing passes & went to runs to chew up the clock. I suppose I'd need a play by play of the game to see exactly how the 4th quarter unfolded at this late date (28 years later). I dont have to be right, but my memory is that the chance to do it was there and for whatever reason he didnt. Perhaps he said in post game interviews that he didnt care about missing the record. A comment many players make about such matters.

I was "supplied with that information" by watching the game as it happened. As I said, I don't have to be right and perhaps I am not, but it's what I remember. The box score indicates that Moon was the only Oiler to throw a pass, but a backup (Cody Carlson) could have come on and run nothing but running plays (and not carried the ball at all himself) and in doing so left no statistical imprint on the game. << EDIT: He didn't. Carlson never played in the game, unless he held for XP/FG kicks.

EDIT to add content. This link explains both what you state AND what I remember. What I recall happened did happen but later in the game than the way I remembered it.

https://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shut ... 51268.html

MarbleEye wrote:EDIT to add content. This link explains both what you state AND what I remember. What I recall happened did happen but later in the game than the way I remembered it.

https://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shut ... 51268.html

The link doesn't explain anything. I don't know who Eric Edholm is, nor have I ever heard of "Shutdown Corner", but the title of Edholm's article is beyond ridiculous. Moon should have thrown for 650 yards that game?! Based on what? The Oilers had the ball with 2 minutes left. Moon needed 28 passing yards to break Van Brocklin's record. The final 4 plays were 3 runs and a kneel down. Could Moon have possibly broken the record on that last possession? Of course. Could Moon have tried to break the record and failed? Of course. The author's idea that Moon could have added an additional 123 passing yards in the final two minutes of the game isn't even worth merit. Your implication that Moon breaking Van Brocklin's record was a mere formality, but the coaches took him out of the game and Moon refused to return is also wrong. If that isn't what you are trying to imply, then I really have no idea what your point is with all of this.

Again, Moon played the entire game. He fell 28 yards short of breaking Van Brocklin's record. He was not taken out of the game. Obviously, he did not refuse to return to the game since he was never taken out of the game.