Now that Favre is officially done, where does he rank all time?

What Warner did at the turn of the century should classify him as one of the games greats. Should 3 excellent years put him in the top 20 of all time? Probably not. But a lot of the other guys had the benefit of stability that Warner never had. He still performed well in bad situations after St. Louis, and that's the mark of a great player. Not historically great, but great.

I'm all for giving Favre the benefit of the doubt due to longevity, but I'm a firm believer that a QB should be graded by his 3-5 best years, and not by how long he played. Too much of the latter is based on circumstance (injuries, coaching stability, QB depth chart).

yeah, I'm always torn on that kind of stuff. It's sort of how I feel about Presidents (not to go off on too much tangent here). It's like FDR was widely considered a great President. But how much of it was due to the fact that he had a 3rd term and I think a year into a 4th to see some of his ideas through? I mean what if Eisenhower had an extra four years? By the same token guys like Jim Brown and Sandy Koufax are considered among the greatest in their respective sports, but what if each had played another 10 years but rode the bench (not likely) for the last five. How would we remember their careers?

This has nothing to do with Favre, but I thought it would just be something to chew on regarding Elway, when compared to another player who shared a similar prime career era.

John Elway, career:

Yards/Attempt: 7.08
Comp% 56.9
TD%: 4.1
Int %: 3.1

Mystery Player, career:

Yards/Attempt: 6.92
Comp%: 59.6
TD%: 4.0%
Int%: 2.3%

Here's the peak year performance for Elway, and mystery player:

John Elway, 93, 97, 98:

Comp%: 60.2%
Yards/Attempt: 7.23

Mystery Player, 96, 97, 99:

Comp%: 61.1%
Yards/Attempt: 7.47

So this mystery player from the 90's was far less likely to hurt his team with a turnover, and gave similar offensive production with far less fanfare. So who is the mystery player? Steve Young? Troy Aikman? Dan Marino?

The mystery player in this case, is Mark Allen Brunell.

Absolutely Elway, 5 SB over the life of his career including 2 wins, the king of the comeback victory (47 career), had running skills (7 seasons over 200 yds rushing) and passing (7 seasons over 3,000 yards).. Dude is a legend..
I thought he had 6 SB's. Didn't they loose 4 in a row then won those two back to back.

I thought he had 6 SB's. Didn't they loose 4 in a row then won those two back to back.

Off the top of my head they lost to the Giants, 49ers (ass whooping), and the Redskins (another ass whooping).

Afterwards they won two in a row beating the Packers then the Falcons and Chris Chandler.

So 5 Super Bowls with a 2-3 record.

ranks #1 for me :)

Even with the records, I think Favre's best attribute isn't measurable. Guys seemed to try harder when he was on the field and Favre just never quit.
It's nearly impossible to rate guys from different eras, but look at what they meant to the sport when they played. Baugh and Graham both revolutionized the position during their eras. Joe Montana and Johnny Unitas both could throw for 6000 yds under todays rules. IMO, you have those 4, and then a cluster of 10 or so that would include Favre. Though he's my favorite to watch.

But he shouldn't be punished for that. If anything it should be the opposite, I'd think. I mean would you rank Kurt Warner one of the game's bests because of 1999 (and maybe 2001?)
You're right, I don't believe he should be punished for his stats, they are great accomplishments. My point is that although he is #1 in several QB stat categories some people are elevating him based on those numbers alone.

Obviously I wouldn't have Kurt Warner ranked as an all-time great, while he did have a great run for 2-3 years he doesn't have the longevity of the all-time greats mentioned. And if I'm on the sandlot field picking teams and I have 1st pick to chose from the all-time greats to be my QB, he isn't in the discussion.

When I think of "best of all-time", I think of stats, championships, Pro Bowls / All Pro awards, and the dreaded cliche "dominance in his era". The other thing I think about is who would I want to build a team around.

I thought he had 6 SB's. Didn't they loose 4 in a row then won those two back to back.
That was Jim Kelly and the Bills, except he never won.

That was Jim Kelly and the Bills, except he never won.
Ok, I knew that.

What Warner did at the turn of the century should classify him as one of the games greats. Should 3 excellent years put him in the top 20 of all time? Probably not. But a lot of the other guys had the benefit of stability that Warner never had. He still performed well in bad situations after St. Louis, and that's the mark of a great player. Not historically great, but great.

I'm all for giving Favre the benefit of the doubt due to longevity, but I'm a firm believer that a QB should be graded by his 3-5 best years, and not by how long he played. Too much of the latter is based on circumstance (injuries, coaching stability, QB depth chart).

You can never have truly compare greats from different era's, but we can never have an objective conversation until you agree on the definition of "greatest." If we confine the argument a bit you can start to rank players on an apples to apples basis. Everyone has their own definition of great, unfortunately.

Personally, I think you have to look at the whole package, so my criteria would be as follows:

Wins - Did the player win on a consistent basis
Stats - Did the player contribute significantly on a statistical basis
Longevity - How long did they contribute at a high level
Peak Performance - At their best, how good were they relative to their peers, and how long did they perform at that level.
Intangibles - How did this player affect the outcome of games beyond their play? Where they a great leader, a great personality, did they elevate the play of their teammates?

Based on these 5 criteria, I would have to rank Favre top 10 of all time. He played extremely well, for a very long time. At his best he was equal or better than any of his contemporaries, and he owns almost all of the records. He didn't have the intangibles that a Montana had, and his game management signficantly lowers his ranking, but he certainly elevated the play of those around him. Had he not had several down years at the end of his career, I suspect there would be little question about his place in history.

FWIW, here are my top 10

1) Starr (simply the greatest, 5 NFL championships, owned all the stat records when he retired, lead the league in all statistical categories while he played, 7.85 YPA career and beat 8.2 YPA six times, more than anyone; played best when it mattered - 106 rating and 9.6 YPA in championships; extemely high intangibles...teammates were inspired by and would die for Starr, incredible leader)
2) Montana (4 championships, quickest release ever, pure winner, most clutch player, HUGE leadership intangibles, 127.4 rating in superbowls is INSANE, icewater in his veins)
3) Baugh (2 NFL championships, greatest two way player ever, perfected the forward pass, 109 rating in '45 compared to league average of 43, 7.3 YPA when the rules allow d'backs to mug the receiver)
4) Unitas (3 championships, threw for 40,000 in defensive era, called own plays, 7.8 YPA career)
5) Grahm (3 NFL championships plus 4 AFL championships, gaudy 9.0YPA, only played for 6 years in NFL)
6) Brady (3 championships, best season ever, insane post season stats, finds a way to win)
7) Marino (purest passer ever, limited wins and limited intangibles)
8) Bradshaw (4 championships, great arm, pure winner)
9) Favre (Owns all the records now, and won consistently with flair)
10) Elway (best comeback QB, great deep arm, lots of intangibles, great runner)

Honorable Mention: Manning, Tarkenton, Fouts, Moon, Griese (Bob), Luckman, Staubach