Those of you who are regular readers of STRAIGHT CASH HOMEY!!!! have probably guessed that I’m not a fan of the Diva that is Brett Favre. I am not going to go into why at this point (To find out why, please click “July” on the list of months that are located to the right of this entry. Then click and read the entry titled “THE BIGGEST DIVA IN THE NFL”), but I will admit that he is among the best to ever play the game. Notice I said among the best, NOT THE BEST! However, it is true that if you asked a group of KNOWLEDGABLE football fans to name the top five quarterbacks of all time, he should be in discussion. Personally I don’t think that he’s a top five quarterback, but I can understand how some people feel that he is. If you take it one step further and ask the same group of fans to name the top ten quarterbacks of all time, his name must be on the list. Even as a Brett Favre hater, I must admit that he is hands down a top ten quarterback. Anyone who disagrees simply doesn’t know football.
That being said, I know of one quarterback whose name wouldn’t come up in either discussion. This quarterback has the same amount of Super Bowl victories of the “great” Brett Favre. At the end of this season, he could also have the same number of MVP awards (3) as Favre. However, he’s rarely considered by anyone to be an all-time great. As a matter of fact if you compare his career numbers to those of Favre, I would say that they are just as good, if not better. I would take him over Favre any day of the week, because his career stats are better, he has never spoken out against a teammate in search of a new contract, he doesn’t annually hold his team hostage each off-season by threatening to retire, he doesn’t give inside information about his former team to their opponents, and most importantly he doesn’t do commercials for Wrangler Jeans. The player I’m describing deserves all of the love that Brett Favre receives, if not more. That player is none other than the incredibly underappreciated Kurt Warner.
I am by no means the president of the Kurt Warner fan club. I am simply singing his praises because he doesn’t get the credit that he deserves, while Favre doesn’t get all of the blame that he deserves. I knew that some of you reading this wouldn’t believe me and think that I am making this stuff up. Being prepared for that criticism, I have actually done a little research and a little math and came up with an accurate comparison of the two quarterbacks. Due to the fact that Brett Favre has played in 164 more games than Kurt Warner, I used average/game statistics in order to make the comparison even.
Both quarterbacks average approximately 21 completions a game. In doing so Favre has completed 58.6% of his passes, while Warner has completed 62.4% of his passes. Let’s take this comparison one step further and look at their average QB rating. Kurt Warner has an average QB rating of 86.66, which compares quite favorably to Favre’s 81.74. Still not convinced, let’s look at the all-important touchdown to interception ratio. This also favors Kurt Warner’s 1.61 touchdowns thrown for every interception over Favre’s ratio of 1.53 to 1. Just for perspective’s sake, let’s compare their touchdown to interception ratios to other all-time greats. Dan Marino’s career ratio is 1.67 to 1, Peyton Manning’s is 1.99 to 1, Tom Brady’s is 2.29 to 1, and Joe Montana’s is 1.96 to 1. This is one of the most important stats for quarterbacks, and it’s obvious that Warner’s ratio is much closer to that of other great quarterbacks than Favre’s.
I am by no means saying that Brett Favre isn’t a great player, but what I am saying is that it’s time for Kurt Warner to get the respect that he deserves. He is A HALL OF FAME QUARTERBACK, yet no one seems to notice his accomplishments. His career has been just as good as Favre’s (without all of the dramatics). If Warner wins the MVP award this season (which will be his third), his career will undoubtedly be better than Favre’s, and no one could argue otherwise.
There are those who will always consider Brett Favre the best quarterback ever. They love his gun-slinger mentality. I don’t consider him a gun-slinger, I simply see him as a careless and quarterback that takes unnecessary chances. This “gun-slinger” is the only quarterback in NFL history to throw 300 interceptions. Somehow that gets lost in all the praise of Favre. I sure hope that is a cap-gun that he is slinging, since he misses his target so much.
These are two quarterbacks that have certainly had their highs and lows. When they are good, they are both awesome. When they are bad, they are both terrible. What is really funny is that fact that when discussing Favre, only the good seems to get mentioned. On the other hand when discussing Warner, the bad is what usually comes up. Everyone thought that Warner was done when he struggled near the end of his career with St. Louis and during his tenure with the Giants, yet no one felt that Favre was done when he struggled mightily in 2005 and 2006. I wonder why? Even this year, Kurt Warner is having a much better year than Favre. Going into this week’s games, Warner has already thrown for 3,155 yards, 20 touchdowns, and only 7 interceptions. These are by far better than Favre’s numbers of 2,273 yards, 18 touchdowns and a whopping 12 interceptions (which leads the league going into Week 12).
I would like for everyone reading this that doesn’t see Warner as Favre’s equal or superior to explain why he isn’t. They both have 1 Super Bowl championship, and at least 2 MVP awards. If Warner wins it this year, they will both have three. It’s now time for real football fans to recognize Kurt Warner’s accomplishments and give him the respect that he deserves.
****NOTE****
FOR ALL OF THE REGISTERED VOTERS WHO HAPPEN TO LIVE IN GEORGIA THAT ARE READING THIS, I WOULD LIKE TO ENCOURAGE YOU TO VOTE ON DECEMBER 2nd IN THE RUNOFF ELECTION FOR ONE OF OUR SENATE SEATS. JIM MARTIN IS ATTEMPTING TO UNSEAT THE INCUMBANT SAXBY CHAMBLISS. THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT ELECTION, AND I AM URGING EVERYONE TO SPEAK UP AND LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD THROUGH YOUR VOTE.
14 comments:
Northside Marty here to give yall some real perspective on who is the better QB. Hello to all my fans out there!
Brett Favre is the better QB! Why? Throw all stats and numbers and wins and whatever out of the window. BRETT WOULD BE COOLER TO HANG OUT WITH! And that, my friends, is why he is the better QB. If you had to chose between the 2 to go have a beer with, it would be Brett Favre. I bet Brett would mix it up at the bar. Most importantly, Brett is probably better at spitting game to the ladies. Brett, you can be my wing man anytime. Kurt? Not so much. In fact, Kurt is probably worse than me which is an epic failure on his part.
Who would you want to have your back in a bar fight? The guy who breaks his pinky every year and misses 6 games or the guy who never misses a game even if he has a broken pinky, concussion, and thigh contusion all at the same time.
In conclusion, Brett Favre is the better QB because he is cooler.
LETS GO FALCONS! 12-4!!!!!!
That's quite an interesting way to look at it. However your logic has one huge problem. BRETT FAVRE CAN'T GO TO BARS! HE HAS A HISTORY OF SUBSTANCE ABUSE! I am not sure what the substance was (I think alcohol or some type of pills), but he can't go to the bar with you. However, he would be much cooler to hang out with if your idea of fun is putting on the Wrangler Jeans and Camouflage Jacket and riding your tractor out to the woods to do a little hunting. It's not my idea of fun, but to each its own. If that's your thing, have fun.
On the football side of things, you are right about Favre's toughness. It is second to none and I admire that about him. The problem is that he would tough it out and play with a broken finger, but he would also throw 12 interceptions in that game. I would rather him sit one out than totally destroy my team's chance of winning.
Also, you are Northside Marty. So you have to be the ultimate ladies man. Kurt can't out do you, and neither can Brett. You have a reputation to uphold, so get it together. Just tell the ladies that you are cool with STRAIGHT CASH HOMEY!!!! That should be enough.
First of all to answer the question, who's the better OVERALL Quarterback, it's Brett Favre. Kurt Warner is on the same level, but statistically the numbers are skewed. Kurt Warner has started 96 games vs. Favre starting 264. How do you compare that? By average? 164 games is a very very large gap.
The numbers are very close, that being said Favre has done it consistently for a very long time. Kurt Warner is a good qb, but his fatal flaw deals with an automatic give away a game. Favre may throw it away, but atleast the chance is there. He is a true gunslinger. A gunslinger is a risk taker..."you HIT or MISS, but you have to take the shot".
I believe Kurt Warner is gravely underrated and that his name should be mentioned with the elite. He's been blessed to be able to throw to Tory Holt, Isaac Bruce, Larry Fitzgerald, and Anquan Boldin. He was the leader of the GREATEST SHOW ON TURF and during that time he put up immaculate numbers BUT he's only played 2 full seasons(Favre 15...yeah). He can't stay healthy. That is the number 1 reason why Brett is better. Kurt will be at the game, but Brett will be on the field, that's where it counts. Kurt has 5 GOOD legitimate seasons and he has been in the league for 11 years( really 10 not including 98). Brett has 11 good seasons in 18 seasons(really 17, didn't play in 91).
You just can't disqualify TIME. Brett has put the TIME in. If Kurt can play 3 to 5 more solid seasons he COULD be Brett's superior. But until that TIME, Brett's better.
Brother Carlos, please stop trying to create a new bandwagon for you, and only you to follow. It is what it is. The public doesn't lie, at all. The public creates heroes, and they decided on the cool kid in the hall that can ball. Not to go away from your daunting numbers, because that's all that matters; however, we also have to look at numbers in a different context. Look at Green Bay juxtaposed to the Rams. The Rams were built around throwing the ball, not running. Even their beast of a tailback is most known for catching passes out of the backfield and flats. That only help to secure this astranged legacy. Kurt Warner made a living out of a lopsided sytem in which he thrived, no doubt. Favre, on the other hand, had a more traditional system which was neatly groomed by Holmgren. Holmgren and Favre often bumped heads and hairy chins due to a stagnate playbook. This hurt Favre's stats in your measuring cup of runner ups. Kurt Warner is a fine quarterback, and maybe one day a great quarterback. But now, this hand sanitizer user can't be compared to the mud tossing, good ole' boy from Mississippi. And no, this is not an emotional plea. This is just real facts. If numbers were the only to judge an player's performance, then riddle me this Batman? Who is better, Peyton Manning or Tom Brady? Over their careers Manning has put up more impressive numbers, but Brady is more respected by his peers, because he doesn't pout like Manning on the field. I have seen Warner poke out his bottom lip more than Bubba Gump when things don't go his way. Nobody wants to follow a punk in the field of battle. You want to follow a soldier, a true soldier that will lead his troops to victory. It is respect that weighs more in the brutal sport of football, not just numbers. Ask any player in the league and they would tell you that they would rather play with Brady over Manning, as well as, Favre over Warner. I don't see people following behind Warner, ever.
I am not sure why Favre fans are so emotional, but based on some of the comments posted it is clear that they are. Some of you think that being a fun guy to hang out with makes one a superior quaterback while others are making arguments supporting Brett that don't make sense even to them.
Let's start with the "cooler to hang out with" argument. Brett is a backwoods, tractor ridin, muddin redneck so the moniker of "cooler to hang out with" is more than arguable.
The argument that Brett wins simply because he's played longer and started more games is really an argument in Warner's favor. If his numbers and achievements are comparable having started a little more than a third of the games Brett has that makes Warner the better quaterback. Goolsby you are basically saying that the running back who has 1000 yards at week 7 and ends with 1500 yards after missing week three weeks isn't as good as the back who plays every game and ends the season with 1500 yards. In reality what that says is what would have happened if Warner had played as much as Favre, especially since he is less prone to the INT.
Finally there's Carl who as hard as he tries every week not to get emotional in his arguments, just can't seem to help himself. Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are a 1a and 1b argument regardless of who you favor. The point of this blog entry is that Favre who is widely considered one of the best to have played the game and Warner who is never given that type of respect are comparable in that same way. So in trying to prove Straight Cash Homey wrong you essentially have proved him right, though your analysis of Brady and Manning are bizarre.
Ultimately what you all are missing is that with that gunslingger style of Favre's it is feast or famen. He will either go for 3-4 touchdowns or 3-4 interceptions. Many would say it is better to have a QB who will play more intelligently and you won't have to worry about him losing the game for you. Playing longer than everybody else is what has gotten Favre many of the records he holds not his acumen. Never let us forget that one of the records he holds is most interceptions thrown by a QB.
So as I believe is the point of this blog, step back from fandom for a moment and recognize that in blindly idolizing some, we totally overlook the talent of others who are just as good and deserve to be appreciated as well.
No, I'm saying that Warner has thrown for 30 or more touchdowns twice and Favre has done 8 times. Time cannot be taken out of this equation.
Like I've said they're on the same level, but if I have to say who is better it's Brett. He beats Kurt in all the intangibles: Heart, leadership, improvisation, and toughness. That's what seperates them.
Kurt is a very good qb, but he does not have the time when compared to Brett or most of the other greats: Joe Montana 16yrs, John Elway 16yrs, Dan Marino 17yrs, Warren Moon 17yrs, Johnny Unitas 17yrs, Bart Starr 16 yrs. Don't get me wrong it's not all about the time, but it's not all about the stats either.
Once again when Kurt plays 3 to 5 more seasons and he actually plays through them, then I'll put him above Brett.
Quick example: It's 4th and goal and you're on your opponents 25 and the defensive ends have their ears pinned back. The ball is snapped and a linebacker slips in through the gap, an end is closing on the back end...honestly who would you want with the ball between Warner and Favre? The "Fumbler" or the "Gunslinger"?
In response to the first comment from Pharoah Goolsby....
Through all of the extensive math classes that I have taken through my life, I have learned to use averages to compare things that did not happen over the same period of time. The fact of the matter is that Kurt Warner is more productive when he plays, than Favre is when he plays.
The two most important stats for quarterbacks are td/int ratio and completion %. Warner is ahead in both. ENOUGH SAID!
I am in no way saying that Favre is bad however, I am saying that people refuse to acknowlege the fact that there are less heralded players that are his equal if not his superior.
I will not discount Favre's toughness and the fact that he is out there every game. However, he less effective when he plays than Warner.
Be perfectly honest with yourself and admit that 100 out of 100 people would think that Favre had better numbers is you ask them without allowing them to look at the numbers. My point here was simply to say, 'Hold on, he isn't as good as you thought and here is someone who is better.'
It is amazing however to see people justify Favre being better without using statistics, because they now know that statistics don't reflect their perception of the situation.
That was the point of the entry, and I feel as though I accomplished it.
In response to the comment from Carl....
I really appreciate your comments because you often make my point stonger while "trying" to discredit them. Your arguments for Favre are the same as my arguments against him. You could have co-wrote this with me. This is very helpful. Thanks for the support.
First of all you comment about the public creating heros is exactly my point. He is a hero but not the best quarterback. The public does create heros, however performance creates greatness.
Secondly, I would ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO SOME RESEARCH before challenging anything that I say (because I have done the research before I said it in the first place). It will go a long way in helping your arguments. You referenced the advantage that Warner has in the numbers due to the "lopsided" system that he played in. Once again, you have fallen victim to perception.
Now I am about to give you a quick offensive football lesson. Get a pencil and paper. You ready? Ok, here we go. Warner did play in a wide open offense in St. Louis, but Favre spent most of his career in the West Coast offense, which is about as pass happy as you can get. In the West Coast Offense, the short pass is used as an extension of the running game. The Rams ran the ball about as much as a West Coast Offense team does. To make a long story short, Favre (34 attempts a game) attempted more passes a game than Warner (33 attempts per game). Warner just completed more. I really thought that you knew about football and knew the principles of the West Coast Offense.
Just keep this in mind. Peyton Manning is having the worst year of his career since his rookie year. HIS NUMBERS ARE STILL BETTER THAN FAVRE'S (and he is a legit MVP candidate). ALSO, IF YOU AVERAGE BRETT FAVRE ENTIRE CAREER NUMBERS, THEY WON'T COME CLOSE TO PETYON'S NUMBERS THIS SEASON. Which once again are his worst ever. To put it simply. Even on his worst day, Manning is still better than Favre.
You have proven that it is public perception that thinks Favre is great and not his actual play. I appreciate the assist.
In response the the comment from Jamila....
I am starting to think that you know more about football than a lot of the people who read this blog!
In response to the second comment from Pharoah Goolsby....
As for the intangibles, I will give Favre toughness and that's it. I will never question either of their heart. Favre is out there regardless and I have never seen him run and hide during a game. On the other hand, Kurt Warner will stand in the pocket until the very last second to allow a receiver to get open. He gets hit every play and simply gets up and does it again. Also remember the path that Warner took to get to the NFL. That my brother took heart to travel that tough road to his dream and never give up. Heart is a tie.
Leadership isn't even close. Anyone who interferes (negatively) in a teammates contract negotiation and thinks that he is bigger than the team is not a leader. End of story.
About improvisation, Favre does improvise more, but sometimes he shouldn't (hence the 300 interceptions).
As for your time argument, it does matter to an extent. However we can not give it too much credence. For instance are you saying that Jim Brown isn't as good as Emmitt Smith because he didn't play as long? or was Gail Sayers and Terrell Davis just average players because their careers were cut short? Time matters, but that doesn't make someone better. Production does. Just because you played forever doesn't make you better than someone who decided not to (by choice or injury).
Also, it is unrealistic to ask Kurt to play 3 to five more seasons because he is 37 years old. He doesn't have to. He has already laid out his body of work and proven that he is better than Favre.
In response to the third comment from Pharoah Goolsby....
I would take Warner 10 out of 10 times for several reasons. First of all, he doesn't fumble in crunch time. It usually happens early in the game. Also, he will stand in there and wait for a receiver to come open, and take the hit while completing the pass. Favre on the other hand will simply throw a jump ball, which will probably be intercepted. Remember Kurt fumbles once a game, which you have a chance to recover. Favre would probably have thrown 2 interceptions already in that game to make it that close, then he will finish off the game with another one.
REMEMBER HOW THE NFC CHAMPIONSHIP GAME ENDED LAST YEAR! With a Super Bowl berth on the line, FAVRE THREW AN INTERCEPTION TO END THE GAME!!!!
Warner FUMBLED IN THE SUPER BOWL!!! I rather him throw an interception, than a fumble. You don't even get a chance when you fumble LIKE IN THE SUPER BOWL!!! HA!
Post a Comment