Herman Edwards, ladies and genlemen

[#27TheDominator]

That doesn't include the great defensive players we had where we always had a top 6 D in those 5 years. I can give him a pass for '65 as he was a rookie and maybe '66 but by '67 we should have been a playoff team. he was hurt alot after 1969 but once again durability counts.

Great defensive players? Lambert, Ham, Greene, Greenwood, Blount, etc? Oh no, you meant all those Jets Hall of Famers. Who were they again? Top 6 defense? There were only 8 or 9 teams in the NFL. Maybe you need to learn a little about the AFL before you continue this comparison.

[MSGold12]

'65: Snell, Mathis at RB. Maynard, Sauer, Turner at WR. Herman, Hill, Plunkett on the OL.

'66: Boozer and Snell at RB, Maynard & sauer at WR, Lammons at TE. Plunkett, Herman, Hill on the OL

'67: Boozer and Snell at RB, Maynard & Sauer at WR, Lammons at TE, Plunkett, Herman, Hill on the OL.

'68: Boozer and Snell at RB, Maynard & Sauer at WR, Lammons at TE, Herman, Hill, Rasmussen,Talamini on the OL

'69: Boozr and Snell at RB, Maynard & sauer at WR, Lammons at TE, Herman, Hill, Talamini, rasmussen OL

That doesn't include the great defensive players we had where we always had a top 6 D in those 5 years. I can give him a pass for '65 as he was a rookie and maybe '66 but by '67 we should have been a playoff team. he was hurt alot after 1969 but once again durability counts.

OK, this is a good example of what I am tlaking about in that you cannot just look at a roster or stat sheet and make a judgement.

IMO, Namath's best teams talent wise were 66-70.

In 66 the team definatelty collapsed towards the end of the season. Thye were 4-1-1 and ended 6-6-2. Namath played well that year but the team didnt finsih strong.

In 67 they were WELL on their way to a division title. They were crusing and then disaster strucj in that they lost BOTH starting Rbs to season ending knee injuries. Namath arm was their only O for the last 3rd of the season. They went from 6-2-1 to 8-5-1 and missed the playoffs by a game. The D also gave up an average of nearly 30 a game in that last stretch of the season.

68 and 69 they made the post season.

70 they were immensely talnted but lost an immense number of players to injury IN ADDITION to Joe who was lost for the year in week 5. But they had major injuires to no less then 6 starters hurt BEFROE the season even started and actually started 4 rookies on defense in the 70 opener. Thye started 104 wiht a depleted squad and then namath went down wiht a broken wrist in week 5 for the year.

As to the D, the Jets were NEVER known for having a very good D (finishing top 6 in a league of 12 teams is not a definition of "great". The D didnt really become very good until the SB year of 68, prior to that they weregiving up 25 a game pretty regualrly. And who were these great players? Aside from Phibin and maybe Atkinson, there was not one Jet defender form those years who is considered an all time great. Guys ike Baker, Grantham, Hudson and Biggs were solid players...but FAR from dominant. PLus yo had the lieks of Jim harris, Clyde Washington, Wahoo McDaniel and Cornell Grdon starting back then...not exactly houshold names.

The boottom line is that unlike now where teams can rebuild on the fly, back then it took years. The jets were not a true playoff contender until 67 when the players the aquired in 65 and 66 had gottne some experience. 67 they were on their way before injuries huit and they made it in 68 and 69. 70 began the overall donwfall of the teams talent base as Ewbank had seriously lost it by then. Do take my owrd for it, go loko at their drfats during those years. Riggins aside, not an impact player among them.

What I am saying is you put FAR too much on namath for the post season issue. The jets lack of post season appearances in that strech you mention had a LOT more to do wiht injury then namath's injury or play. Namath didnt miss a game from 65-69.

Look, the fact is you can loko at stat sheets and watch film but you can't make the defniive judgements oyu are making if you dont know the history BEHIND the stats. Football is the ultimate team game. It takes more then a QB to take ateam to the playoffs. MANY old timers will tell you the most talented QB to play the game was Archie manning...how many post seaosns did he see and was HE to blame???? Ted Williams only made the post seaosn once...is that HIS fault? Len Dawsons mid 70s Chiefs teams were lousy...was that on him or the fact that the talent base eroded? How about Jim PLunkett...he was crap in NE and SF...did he suddenyl;learn how to play when he got to oakland? Kneny Stabler was a God in oak...then nothing in Houston and NO. Was uit him or his supporting cast?

[nyjunc]

Great defensive players? Lambert, Ham, Greene, Greenwood, Blount, etc? Oh no, you meant all those Jets Hall of Famers. Who were they again? Top 6 defense? There were only 8 or 9 teams in the NFL. Maybe you need to learn a little about the AFL before you continue this comparison.

The jets have a ton of AFL HOFers and they had great defensive players like Gerry Philbin, Al Atkinson, Johnny Sample, Verln Biggs, John Elliott, etc...

[MSGold12]

The jets have a ton of AFL HOFers and they had great defensive players like Gerry Philbin, Al Atkinson, Johnny Sample, Verln Biggs, John Elliott, etc...

Does the AFL even have a HOF????

As to all time AFL team players the jets have 3...Philbin, Maynard and NAMATH!

[nyjunc]

OK, this is a good example of what I am tlaking about in that you cannot just look at a roster or stat sheet and make a judgement.

IMO, Namath's best teams talent wise were 66-70.

In 66 the team definatelty collapsed towards the end of the season. Thye were 4-1-1 and ended 6-6-2. Namath played well that year but the team didnt finsih strong.

In 67 they were WELL on their way to a division title. They were crusing and then disaster strucj in that they lost BOTH starting Rbs to season ending knee injuries. Namath arm was their only O for the last 3rd of the season. They went from 6-2-1 to 8-5-1 and missed the playoffs by a game. The D also gave up an average of nearly 30 a game in that last stretch of the season.

68 and 69 they made the post season.

70 they were immensely talnted but lost an immense number of players to injury IN ADDITION to Joe who was lost for the year in week 5. But they had major injuires to no less then 6 starters hurt BEFROE the season even started and actually started 4 rookies on defense in the 70 opener. Thye started 104 wiht a depleted squad and then namath went down wiht a broken wrist in week 5 for the year.

As to the D, the Jets were NEVER known for having a very good D (finishing top 6 in a league of 12 teams is not a definition of "great". The D didnt really become very good until the SB year of 68, prior to that they weregiving up 25 a game pretty regualrly. And who were these great players? Aside from Phibin and maybe Atkinson, there was not one Jet defender form those years who is considered an all time great. Guys ike Baker, Grantham, Hudson and Biggs were solid players...but FAR from dominant. PLus yo had the lieks of Jim harris, Clyde Washington, Wahoo McDaniel and Cornell Grdon starting back then...not exactly houshold names.

The boottom line is that unlike now where teams can rebuild on the fly, back then it took years. The jets were not a true playoff contender until 67 when the players the aquired in 65 and 66 had gottne some experience. 67 they were on their way before injuries huit and they made it in 68 and 69. 70 began the overall donwfall of the teams talent base as Ewbank had seriously lost it by then. Do take my owrd for it, go loko at their drfats during those years. Riggins aside, not an impact player among them.

What I am saying is you put FAR too much on namath for the post season issue. The jets lack of post season appearances in that strech you mention had a LOT more to do wiht injury then namath's injury or play. Namath didnt miss a game from 65-69.

Look, the fact is you can loko at stat sheets and watch film but you can't make the defniive judgements oyu are making if you dont know the history BEHIND the stats. Football is the ultimate team game. It takes more then a QB to take ateam to the playoffs. MANY old timers will tell you the most talented QB to play the game was Archie manning...how many post seaosns did he see and was HE to blame???? Ted Williams only made the post seaosn once...is that HIS fault? Len Dawsons mid 70s Chiefs teams were lousy...was that on him or the fact that the talent base eroded? How about Jim PLunkett...he was crap in NE and SF...did he suddenyl;learn how to play when he got to oakland? Kneny Stabler was a God in oak...then nothing in Houston and NO. Was uit him or his supporting cast?

A QB who is supposedly great has to setep up when other players do not or when you lose players. They had some players stp in for the injured RBs and play as well. Snell and Boozer averaged 3.6 YPC so it wasn't like they were tearing it up. He still had the Wrs and the TE healthy to throw to.

The jets were never known to have a good D? 6 of 12 doesn't sound that impressive but what about. Unfortunaely the stats don't tell me how many INts Joe had returned for Tds or set up easy TDs bu in '65 the D gave up 20 PPG, in '66 22, in '67 24, in '68 20, in '69 19. You have to figure a few PPG went to Joe's arm. marino led dolphin teams to the playoffs when his D gave up 20 3 times and 21 once AND led his team to a SB giving up 19 PPG. Len Dawson led KC to SB I when his D gave up 20 PPG. Unitas led Bal to the NFL title w/ a D giving up 18 a game and another giving up 20 a game. So please stop pretending like we had the 1996 Jets defense.

I do't put far too much into making the playoffs for Namath. To be great you either have to win alot, put up great #s or a combo of both and Namatah didn't win alot and didn't put up great #s so he did not have a great overall career.

Archie manning asn't great, he was justthe face of theSaints for a long time.

Ted Williams played baseball, one OF doesn't determine the fate of a team the way a great QB can.

Len dawson was OLD in the mid 70s and he went 8-6 and 5-9 his lst 2 years- not great but not awful.

Jim plunkett just took longer to develop.

Stabler was OLD and washed up in Hou and NO and he stil led Houston to the playoffs in 1980 and led NO to only their 2nd .500 season ever.

[MSGold12]

A QB who is supposedly great has to setep up when other players do not or when you lose players. They had some players stp in for the injured RBs and play as well. Snell and Boozer averaged 3.6 YPC so it wasn't like they were tearing it up. He still had the Wrs and the TE healthy to throw to.

The jets were never known to have a good D? 6 of 12 doesn't sound that impressive but what about. Unfortunaely the stats don't tell me how many INts Joe had returned for Tds or set up easy TDs bu in '65 the D gave up 20 PPG, in '66 22, in '67 24, in '68 20, in '69 19. You have to figure a few PPG went to Joe's arm. marino led dolphin teams to the playoffs when his D gave up 20 3 times and 21 once AND led his team to a SB giving up 19 PPG. Len Dawson led KC to SB I when his D gave up 20 PPG. Unitas led Bal to the NFL title w/ a D giving up 18 a game and another giving up 20 a game. So please stop pretending like we had the 1996 Jets defense.

I do't put far too much into making the playoffs for Namath. To be great you either have to win alot, put up great #s or a combo of both and Namatah didn't win alot and didn't put up great #s so he did not have a great overall career.

Archie manning asn't great, he was justthe face of theSaints for a long time.

Ted Williams played baseball, one OF doesn't determine the fate of a team the way a great QB can.

Len dawson was OLD in the mid 70s and he went 8-6 and 5-9 his lst 2 years- not great but not awful.

Jim plunkett just took longer to develop.

Stabler was OLD and washed up in Hou and NO and he stil led Houston to the playoffs in 1980 and led NO to only their 2nd .500 season ever.

Look I am trying to be civil here but you insist on being ill informed and outrageously stubborn.

On Namath...the guy landed up thowing for 400 yards in 67...exactylhow much more did you want him to "step up". Ad who said Namath was marino? I think if you read my intital post I said I wasnt comparing him to the top 5 or even 10.

As to the jets D, I dont give a crap what stats you want to spew, the jets D was NEVER known for being very good until the SB season. If you were watching them back then you would know this....but you werent. And you my friend used the word "great" to describe them. You said they had "great" players and considered it "great" that they finsihedin the top 6 of a 12 team league. BL, They were an average D at best until 68. And again, your PPG stat is skewed...they played Boston and expansion Mami twice each, and usually got rung up by the KCs, Oaks and SDs and both teams. Give up 35-40 to SD and 10 to Boston and your D on paper looks a lot better then it is.

Manning? NOW you are emabarassing yourself. I have spoken TO Namath as well as other former QBs about Manning and to a man they will say he was among the most taloented to ever play...but he was on terrible teams. I'll take these guys opinions over yours on the subject thanks. Especially since they SAW Manning play.

PLunkett took longer to develop? And you accuse ME of making excuses? 10 years to develop????? The guy has immense talent but was garbage on 2 garbage teams...then he went ot agood team and won 2 SBs. Deveop? Please.

Stabler was 32 when he got to Houston...hardly washed up.

Agaijn, you obvsouly have the ability to go look up stats and numbers whihc is fine. But until you fully understand that there are FACTORS behind those stats and numbers, you still wont ever get it.

No, namath was not as great as he COULD have been. No, he is not a top 10 QB of al time. But from 65-74, he put up numbers that very few f the pre 1978 QBs can touch. And from 65-69 he was simply a dominant player. IMO, that makes him a HOF and a great player despite the end of his career in which he was physically shot and/or on horrid teams.

Serious question...how old are you? I am curious to kow who youhave actually seen play when you make these comparisons and who you are just looking up nhmbers for.

[JoeWillie]

First, let me apologize in advance for the length of this post, and some of this I've already said in previous posts over the past year, but I always get a kick out of when younger guys who never saw Joe Namath play try and argue that he wasn

[drago]

That's a lot of typing. i didn't read anything but the bottom, so i think that was about Namath. Let me know of any speaches you guys are in to make sure i'm away.

[#27TheDominator]

The jets have a ton of AFL HOFers and they had great defensive players like Gerry Philbin, Al Atkinson, Johnny Sample, Verln Biggs, John Elliott, etc...

Etc.? A ton? Of the guys you mention, only Philbin and Biggs are even in the farcical AFL HOF. Along with Grantham who might have been best of the bunch. As for their top D, let's use a simple stat, points against. '65 they were 6th out of 8 teams, '66 6th out of 9 teams, '67 they were 5th out of 9, '68 4th out of 10 and '69 3rd out of 10. Their top 6 D was only better than mid-pack twice in those five seasons and the one time they had a truly good D, they won it all.

I understand your listing durability as a factor, but anybody that has ever seen Namath play knows he was great. He was the definition of great. Not good or very good. Maybe not the best there ever was, but capable of carrying a team against any defense and outgunning any qb, even a top 5 qb. Certainly Terry Bradshaw.

[Jet Moses]

First, let me apologize in advance for the length of this post, and some of this I've already said in previous posts over the past year, but I always get a kick out of when younger guys who never saw Joe Namath play try and argue that he wasn

[johnny green balls]

First, let me apologize in advance for the length of this post, and some of this I've already said in previous posts over the past year, but I always get a kick out of when younger guys who never saw Joe Namath play try and argue that he wasn’t that good to people who saw him play.....

POTW lock. maybe POTY. great post Joe.

edit: i know this looks daunting in its length but take 5 minutes to read the whole thing. helluva posts. this is what sports messageboards are all about.

[docdhc]

I thought MSGold had summed it up pretty well but JoeWillie's analysis of Namath's career is fantastic. This to me debunks the argument that Namath was more legend than great player. I did see him play, although I was only 11 when the Jets won the Super Bowl, but he was clearly the best player in the league at that time and beating the Colts was one of the greatest sports accomplishments of the century. Anyone who watched the Jets during the injury plagued years knew what kind of drop off the Jets had when he was out. Imagine what the Colts of today would be like without Peyton Manning and you get the idea of how valuable Namath was. I am a lifelong die hard Jet fan solely because of Joe Namath and have really enjoyed and appreciated reading the great posts defending his career, especially Joe Willie's.

[JoeWillie]

I thought MSGold had summed it up pretty well but JoeWillie's analysis of Namath's career is fantastic. This to me debunks the argument that Namath was more legend than great player. I did see him play, although I was only 11 when the Jets won the Super Bowl, but he was clearly the best player in the league at that time and beating the Colts was one of the greatest sports accomplishments of the century. Anyone who watched the Jets during the injury plagued years knew what kind of drop off the Jets had when he was out. Imagine what the Colts of today would be like without Peyton Manning and you get the idea of how valuable Namath was. I am a lifelong die hard Jet fan solely because of Joe Namath and have really enjoyed and appreciated reading the great posts defending his career, especially Joe Willie's.

Thanks to Johnny, Jet Moses and Doc for the kind words.

Thought MSGold did a great job expressing his thoughts. I just felt compelled to throw in my two cents, as I think his thoughts about Namath were also right on the mark.

Cheers.

[Jet Moses]

Thanks to Johnny, Jet Moses and Doc for the kind words.

Thought MSGold did a great job expressing his thoughts. I just felt compelled to throw in my two cents, as I think his thoughts about Namath were also right on the mark.

Cheers.

MSGold is the man!