Will Rodgers break Joe Namath's 55 year old Jets record of 4,007 passing yards in a season?

[Larz]

The best offenses recently, be it a WR or TE, have a nearly unstoppable combination.  I think Rodgers/Wilson has that potential. When you think about the injuries to the O-line, Hall, the garbage at QB and Wilson still went off, these two could have a record breaking season as far as Jets records 

[FidelioJet]

Rodgers would only have to throw for 314 more yards than he did last year.  I think it's pretty reasonable he breaks the Jets record.

[bonkertons]

I think the passing yards and TDs records are both pretty likely to be broken, assuming AR stays healthy.  REC TDs will be a tougher one, but Wilson definitely has the potential to do it.  If he and Rodgers really click and Rodgers returns to his MVP form or anywhere near it, Wilson will be poised for a massive year statistically.  

 

I'm sure there will be times when this offense struggles, but I'm also sure there will be times when they are clicking on all cylinders.  I can't wait to see what they look like when that happens.  Going to be scary good.  

[rangerous]

Not for nothing but Namath passed for around 2800 during the Super Bowl season. That’s about 200 ypg.  I don’t care how many yards Rodgers gets as long as they get the w.  And if he passes for 200 ypg then he will end up with 3400.  The key is to have enough passing ability so the defense has to respect it and can’t play 8 in the box.

[#27TheDominator]

1 hour ago, rangerous said:

Not for nothing but Namath passed for around 2800 during the Super Bowl season. That’s about 200 ypg.  I don’t care how many yards Rodgers gets as long as they get the w.  And if he passes for 200 ypg then he will end up with 3400.  The key is to have enough passing ability so the defense has to respect it and can’t play 8 in the box.

That was the year after the super bowl.  They lost to the champion Chiefs in the divisional round. 

[rangerous]

8 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

That was the year after the super bowl.  They lost to the champion Chiefs in the divisional round. 

He threw for a little over 3100 during his Super Bowl year. 4007 yards was in the 1967 season. During the 1969 season he threw for about 2800. The point is his passing yardage was way down for the championship season. Of course it’s a little apples to oranges comparison since his passing rate was around 50%. With the same number of attempts Rodgers is almost sure to exceed namaths record.

[Joe W. Namath]

If Rodgers cannot throw for more then 4,000 yards in 17 games, it would be an outright embarrassment.

[BornJetsFan1983]

On 6/5/2023 at 3:45 PM, Sarge4Tide said:

Will this be the year it Joe's record finally falls?

great post and poll, every time someone every brings up that Namath isnt the goat I try to remind them he was throwing 4k when you were allowed to shoot and mug a QB and WR. What he did is incredible, hard to equate to todays game because the effect he had on the game was so much more than anyone playing today. He is an all time great, but at the task at hand let me just give you the detials of the future.

AR is goign to throw for over 35 TD's

GW is going to catch 15 or 16 of them. 

And he is going to throw for 4k. I honesly believe he can hit 40 TD this season if we can stay healthy.

[UntouchableCrew]

If Rodgers is healthy and starts 17 games I would say TDs and yard records are very likely to be broken.

Receiving TDs are probably 50/50.

[jgb]

12 hours ago, FidelioJet said:

Rodgers would only have to throw for 314 more yards than he did last year.  I think it's pretty reasonable he breaks the Jets record.

But the decline! It’s irreversible!

[rangerous]

Another point to consider is just how these yards will be attained. Say Rodgers throws for 250 ypg and his average yards per attempt is 7. He has about a 65% pass completion average so his yards per attempt will average around 11. This means he’s passing about 25 or so attempts per game.  This leaves about 25 running attempts per game.  IMO this is about where the jets will need to be.

[Maynard13]

On 6/5/2023 at 8:07 PM, Jetsfan80 said:

All he needs is like 6 games to break all the records.  

Even if he does, it’s not as impressive as when Namath did it. Rules back then were defense oriented, less games and QB’s were free game back then. 

[Jetsfan80]

1 hour ago, Maynard13 said:

Even if he does, it’s not as impressive as when Namath did it. Rules back then were defense oriented, less games and QB’s were free game back then. 

668 yards per game wouldn’t be as impressive as Namath’s 286 per?

[Biggs]

On 6/9/2023 at 5:50 PM, BornJetsFan1983 said:

great post and poll, every time someone every brings up that Namath isnt the goat I try to remind them he was throwing 4k when you were allowed to shoot and mug a QB and WR. What he did is incredible, hard to equate to todays game because the effect he had on the game was so much more than anyone playing today. He is an all time great, but at the task at hand let me just give you the detials of the future.

AR is goign to throw for over 35 TD's

GW is going to catch 15 or 16 of them. 

And he is going to throw for 4k. I honesly believe he can hit 40 TD this season if we can stay healthy.

In 1967 Sonny Jurgensen threw for 3747 yards had 31 TD's and 16 INT's.  Namath was terrific and a lot of fun to watch.  He was far from the best QB in football in his era.  

Rodgers has actually been a lot better on a comparative basis in his era than Namath was in his era.  

I loved Namath and he was a HOF QB but he wasn't top 5 in the era he played in.  Rodgers is.  

[rangerous]

4 hours ago, Biggs said:

In 1967 Sonny Jurgensen threw for 3747 yards had 31 TD's and 16 INT's.  Namath was terrific and a lot of fun to watch.  He was far from the best QB in football in his era.  

Rodgers has actually been a lot better on a comparative basis in his era than Namath was in his era.  

I loved Namath and he was a HOF QB but he wasn't top 5 in the era he played in.  Rodgers is.  

I don’t think you can just use yardage and tds to rate a qb.  Sure Jorgensen put up some serious yards and tds but just how did the redskins do that season?  I remember reading one of those pulpy qb magazines back in the early 70’s and they ranked Namath number one.  There were some other highly rated guys like Hadl and staubach.  The issue people ought to have with Namath is his commitment to the game after the Super Bowl. He had all that controversy with bachelors three. And then there was just a long string of injuries that held him back.

[Biggs]

12 minutes ago, rangerous said:

I don’t think you can just use yardage and tds to rate a qb.  Sure Jorgensen put up some serious yards and tds but just how did the redskins do that season?  I remember reading one of those pulpy qb magazines back in the early 70’s and they ranked Namath number one.  There were some other highly rated guys like Hadl and staubach.  The issue people ought to have with Namath is his commitment to the game after the Super Bowl. He had all that controversy with bachelors three. And then there was just a long string of injuries that held him back.

I loved Namath.  He's not even remotely close to being in Staubach's league.  If he came into the league healthy he might have been the best ever.  He didn't.  He was a shell of the talent that played at Alabama when he came into the pro's.  He was great and he was electric.  He wasn't near the best of his generation.  HOF sure.  1st ballot HOF all time great NFL QB.  No.

[BornJetsFan1983]

7 hours ago, Biggs said:

In 1967 Sonny Jurgensen threw for 3747 yards had 31 TD's and 16 INT's.  Namath was terrific and a lot of fun to watch.  He was far from the best QB in football in his era.  

Rodgers has actually been a lot better on a comparative basis in his era than Namath was in his era.  

I loved Namath and he was a HOF QB but he wasn't top 5 in the era he played in.  Rodgers is.  

Doesnt seem accurate to me. Namath literaly made jets and he was chucking it. Naming one guy who lost 6 and won 5 doesnt really make me think differently.

 

in 68 when you say he was not top 5 qb he was the following:

AP AFL Player of the Year: Joe Namath
UPI AFL Player of the Year: Joe Namath
Sporting News Player of the Year: Joe Namath
Super Bowl MVP: Joe Namath

top 3 passing off - among whatever other stats you want to think of.

Lets not try to pretend he was not da man. He was. end of stroy. 

[Biggs]

40 minutes ago, BornJetsFan1983 said:

Doesnt seem accurate to me. Namath literaly made jets and he was chucking it. Naming one guy who lost 6 and won 5 doesnt really make me think differently.

 

in 68 when you say he was not top 5 qb he was the following:

AP AFL Player of the Year: Joe Namath
UPI AFL Player of the Year: Joe Namath
Sporting News Player of the Year: Joe Namath
Super Bowl MVP: Joe Namath

top 3 passing off - among whatever other stats you want to think of.

Lets not try to pretend he was not da man. He was. end of stroy. 

He was the man.  He just wasn't a top 5 QB of his generation.  HOF on the third year eligible.  About right.  

[Arsis]

On 6/5/2023 at 8:30 PM, Legend Killa7 said:

I don’t care about that record as much as Namath’s other record: only Jets QB to win a SB. THATS the record I want him to beat!

Lucky you A A Ron wins two with the Jets.

[rangerous]

7 hours ago, Biggs said:

I loved Namath.  He's not even remotely close to being in Staubach's league.  If he came into the league healthy he might have been the best ever.  He didn't.  He was a shell of the talent that played at Alabama when he came into the pro's.  He was great and he was electric.  He wasn't near the best of his generation.  HOF sure.  1st ballot HOF all time great NFL QB.  No.

I think you have to define namaths “era”.  Is it 1965 to 1972 or 1965 to 1975?  I agree that staubach was a heck of a qb but those cowgirl teams were loaded. I’ll say the jets Super Bowl team had more talent than people are led to believe but I don’t think that talent was as long lived.  I think on the Namath era basis he is in the top five and maybe the best.  Who was better? Tark? Griese? Unitas? Starr? Gabriel?

[jgb]

On 6/7/2023 at 2:37 PM, chirorob said:

If he's healthy he should break it by week13

It’s pathetic it has taken this long 

[bostonmajet]

So, he would break the record with 17 games which would be 5 more than Joe - that is 40% more games; so Joe averaged over 333yds/game - that is amazing; especially in an era where you could practically maul the WR; for Aaron to do it, he only needs to average 235 yards/game

[chirorob]

21 minutes ago, bostonmajet said:

So, he would break the record with 17 games which would be 5 more than Joe - that is 40% more games; so Joe averaged over 333yds/game - that is amazing; especially in an era where you could practically maul the WR; for Aaron to do it, he only needs to average 235 yards/game

333 yards per game in a 14 game season would be 4662.

Yes, the game has changed.   People act like we are pooping on Namath saying his team record should fall.   It is pathetic the team hasn't had a 4000 yard season since the 60s.

[chirorob]

21 hours ago, rangerous said:

I think you have to define namaths “era”.  Is it 1965 to 1972 or 1965 to 1975?  I agree that staubach was a heck of a qb but those cowgirl teams were loaded. I’ll say the jets Super Bowl team had more talent than people are led to believe but I don’t think that talent was as long lived.  I think on the Namath era basis he is in the top five and maybe the best.  Who was better? Tark? Griese? Unitas? Starr? Gabriel?

Unitas peak was before Namath, but he was definitely better.

Joe's carreer is basically 5 seasons. He did lead the league in passing yards 3 times.  He also led in interceptions 4 times.

[jgb]

33 minutes ago, bostonmajet said:

So, he would break the record with 17 games which would be 5 more than Joe - that is 40% more games; so Joe averaged over 333yds/game - that is amazing; especially in an era where you could practically maul the WR; for Aaron to do it, he only needs to average 235 yards/game

3 games more. They played 14-game seasons then. Namath threw for 286 YPG in '67. Still amazing for the time.