Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

NWebster wrote:Have the same feeling here I've always had about the NCAA tournament or the new college FB playoffs, expanding it just creates contraversy around people who are clearly not THE best.

Plus, do they really expect their fan bases to blindly follow them around the company for three (or more) postseason games.

I'm meh on Namath. Had a couple big seasons. Overall career is HOVG but I admit that being an outsized personality with an outsized reputation got him in, what can you do. Zero chance to make the team.

Young is number one all time in many adjusted passer rating metrics and was also one of the first great mobile QBs. His 3-year peak is second only to Marino's. Not sure why anyone would eliminate him. Do people just not value peak for QB?!?!

With regard to CFP, the 4 seed won the first year so I think that vouches for its existence. Also, North Dakota State should start getting an autobid if it expands to 8 soon.

Namath may have been overrated when he played, but it seems like he's underrated now. Too many people look at his raw statistics and proclaim he wasn't any good..
He was a consensus All AFL in 1968, split the All AFL teams with Lamonica in 1967 and 1969, and was near consensus All AFL in 1972. The AP voted for Earl Morrall, who was incredibly efficient, but only started 9 games.

conace21 wrote:Namath may have been overrated when he played, but it seems like he's underrated now. Too many people look at his raw statistics and proclaim he wasn't any good..
He was a consensus All AFL in 1968, split the All AFL teams with Lamonica in 1967 and 1969, and was near consensus All AFL in 1972. The AP voted for Earl Morrall, who was incredibly efficient, but only started 9 games.

Yeah, he was certainly top tier in his (short) prime. It's his last few years that drag him into the depths. He has the same problem as Unitas, he wore out his welcome and hung on as a scrub for a few years too many. Should their legacy be damaged by that? Most seem to say no, but I don't like it. You're hurting the team, let them know it's okay to move on.

conace21 wrote:Namath may have been overrated when he played, but it seems like he's underrated now. Too many people look at his raw statistics and proclaim he wasn't any good..
He was a consensus All AFL in 1968, split the All AFL teams with Lamonica in 1967 and 1969, and was near consensus All AFL in 1972. The AP voted for Earl Morrall, who was incredibly efficient, but only started 9 games.

I agree. It's not all about raw stats. Namath helped changed the game. He also won big games and it is not fair to directly compare his stats to those of modern QBs like Drew Brees. It's not apples-to-apples.