Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack
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.