Jets unveil Ring of Honor

[#27TheDominator]

Age means nothing. Anyone who says that is ignorant.

More ignorant than somebody claiming an all-time great that they never saw "sucks"? Being completely educated on the point in several rational and well reasoned posts and still standing by that "assertion"?

[Sperm Edwards]

Age means nothing. Anyone who says that is ignorant.

It isn't how old you are. It's how old you were when claiming to have witnessed the difference among different players, most of whom you never saw. You cannot possibly claim any credibility in grading a player - and comparing him to every single other player in team or NFL history - from what you remember from ages 5-10.

Hence, you're judging players by numbers rather than with your eyes. Someday you will understand what others are telling you, that you can't read a stat line and judge a player's career based on accumulated totals in hindsight.

Say a player carried the ball 24 times for 40 yards and the offense punted all game. By the late 4th quarter, that player's team is losing 21-6. Then with 2 minutes left, the player rips off an 80-yard TD run. His team loses 21-13. You would look at the player's stat line of 25 carries, 120 yards, 1 TD and say, "Well it isn't his fault; he had a great game. He showed up and no one else did." Having not seen the game, you would be ignorant to the fact that this player, as well as the stubborn OC/HC who kept feeding him the ball, were major reasons for the loss and conclude that he was the only bright spot on the team.

This is exactly how you're judging Martin and Namath and every other player by only looking at their stats. THAT is ignorant.

[Biggs]

Numbers don't lie. Show me your analysis, Einstein. I'm a numbers type of person when it comes to the HoF. It doesn't matter what he did for football, the truth is, he had horrible numbers for a supposed "great" player. Prove me otherwise.

Am I the only non-biased Jets fan on this board?

5 time pro bowl, 1st team All Pro once, same as Tom Brady

68 AFL Player of the year and SB MVP

69 and 74 Comeback player of the year

72 NFL 1st in Yards and TD's

Passing yards per game 1st 66, 67, 72(NFL)

Yards per pass attempts 14.7, Tom Brady's is 11.5 of course Brady completes a much higher % of his passes although Namath still has a higher Yards per attempt at 7.4 than Brady's 7.3. Essentially what that means is Namath moved the Jets as far down the field completing 50% of his passes as Brady does completing over 63% of his passes.

You also have to remember that Namath through down the field with a classic deep drop back. Offensive lineman where not allowed to extend their arms. Defensive lineman could go to the head. Defensive secondary players routinely speared, horse collared, pushed and held opposing WR and the hash marks were out farther meaning the ball was spotted closer to one side line eliminating many WR options when working a short sideling.

Than you have guys like Lombardi, Walsh and Madden pretty much saying he was great. Than you have a guy who was loved and hated pretty much voted right in by the HOF committee. Maybe he was great?

[Falcon63]

More ignorant than somebody claiming an all-time great that they never saw "sucks"? Being completely educated on the point in several rational and well reasoned posts and still standing by that "assertion"?

Who said I've never seen film of him? Just because of haven't seen him live doesn't mean I haven't seen him.

[jgb]

Exactly. I honestly think Curtis was the best player to ever play for the Jets. And unlike the egotistical Joe Namath, Martin never talked trash or paraded around with the media. He is one of the most classiest players ever, and I hope that when he finally buys his NFL team, that it's the Jets.

you must really hate rex, then.

[Falcon63]

5 time pro bowl, 1st team All Pro once, same as Tom Brady

68 AFL Player of the year and SB MVP

69 and 74 Comeback player of the year

72 NFL 1st in Yards and TD's

Passing yards per game 1st 66, 67, 72(NFL)

Only 1 Pro Bowl in NFL

Only 1 CPOTY in NFL

Led the league in pass yards per game 1 time in NFL

Led the league in passes intercepted 2 times in NFL

Notice how all of them say IN THE NFL. I'm not denying he was a good player, I'm denying he was a good NFL player. His accomplishments in the AFL mean NOTHING when it comes to the NFL.

[#27TheDominator]

Who said I've never seen film of him? Just because of haven't seen him live doesn't mean I haven't seen him.

Ah, so you aren't ignorant, just blind...

[Falcon63]

It isn't how old you are. It's how old you were when claiming to have witnessed the difference among different players, most of whom you never saw. You cannot possibly claim any credibility in grading a player - and comparing him to every single other player in team or NFL history - from what you remember from ages 5-10.

Hence, you're judging players by numbers rather than with your eyes. Someday you will understand what others are telling you, that you can't read a stat line and judge a player's career based on accumulated totals in hindsight.

Say a player carried the ball 24 times for 40 yards and the offense punted all game. By the late 4th quarter, that player's team is losing 21-6. Then with 2 minutes left, the player rips off an 80-yard TD run. His team loses 21-13. You would look at the player's stat line of 25 carries, 120 yards, 1 TD and say, "Well it isn't his fault; he had a great game. He showed up and no one else did." Having not seen the game, you would be ignorant to the fact that this player, as well as the stubborn OC/HC who kept feeding him the ball, were major reasons for the loss and conclude that he was the only bright spot on the team.

This is exactly how you're judging Martin and Namath and every other player by only looking at their stats. THAT is ignorant.

Who said I was judging them JUST by stats?

[jgb]

Only 1 Pro Bowl in NFL

Only 1 CPOTY in NFL

Led the league in pass yards per game 1 time in NFL

Led the league in passes intercepted 2 times in NFL

Notice how all of them say IN THE NFL. I'm not denying he was a good player, I'm denying he was a good NFL player. His accomplishments in the AFL mean NOTHING when it comes to the NFL.

haha... thought joe willy killed this debate in '69

[Falcon63]

Ah, so you aren't ignorant, just blind...

Why? Because I've seen film of Joe Namath and I can clearly see that he is nothing special? I don't care what you guys think, I will never change my opinion on him. He was one of the greatest players of all-time.....for the AFL. I don't care what he did in the AFL, when he came to the NFL, he sucked. One game (SB III) doesn't define an entire player's career, and most people forget that. Just because I don't agree with you, you don't have to lash out.

[jgb]

Why? Because I've seen film of Joe Namath and I can clearly see that he is nothing special? I don't care what you guys think, I will never change my opinion on him. He was one of the greatest players of all-time.....for the AFL. I don't care what he did in the AFL, when he came to the NFL, he sucked. One game (SB III) doesn't define an entire player's career, and most people forget that. Just because I don't agree with you, you don't have to lash out.

[SMC]

I give him a 50/50 chance on first-year HOF entry. He has the career totals to get in but was never, ever that "incredible" RB that you'd think of when you think HOF and the writers who vote know it. He'll get in because players like Monk are in. And if you're going to allow Monk, it makes no sense to deny Martin.

Just by looking at the first website I'm checking, also eligible that same year:

- Marshall Faulk

- Jerome Bettis (who I also classify in the never "un-freaking-real" category of RB's)

- Willie Roaf

- Deion Sanders

Beating out any of Faulk and Roaf and Sanders will be tough.

I agree with you on Sanders and Faulk, of course. But Martin would get more consideration over Roaf (position) and Bettis (not as good career as Martin) IMO.

There are 7 inductees each year right? So that would be Martin, Faulk, and Sanders. The key is there are 4 or more holdovers from previous years that gain momentum for the HOF vote. If so, Martin would get bumped because of those holdovers. He's not getting bumped because of Roaf or Bettis.

Regardless, this discussion has gone on a tangent away from the OP. I don't see anyone who is worthy of replacing Martin as 1 of the 6 considering the era the people were chosen.

From the Golden Age of Jet Football:

Weeb Ewbank

Winston Hill

Don Maynard

Joe Namath

The Dark Ages

Joe Klecko

The Silver Age

Curtis Martin

There is no Silver Age Jet player more worthy than Martin of being included. That had to get someone from the present because the Jets brass (finally embracing the team's history), wants a tie from the past to the present.

[Biggs]

Age means nothing. Anyone who says that is ignorant.

Unless you're a running back than age means quite a bit. Or unless your commenting on a player in context of an organization that has been around since the early 60's and you have only seen players from the mid 90's.

Regarding numbers. Please explain statistically why Curtis Martin is a better Jets player than Kevin Mawae, Winston Hill, Marvin Powell, Mark Gastineua, Mo Lewis, Joe Kleckco, Gerry Philbin, Marty Lyons Verlon Biggs, John Elliot, John Schmitt or Dave Herman.

If you look back to Parcells and the aquisition of Martin, I would argue that Mawae was the better player. He was consistently either the No. 1 or No. 2 center in the league. Martin while consistent was maybe the No. 2 back in the league in 04.

[Falcon63]

you have only seen players from the mid 90's.

Says who?

[SMC]

Why? Because I've seen film of Joe Namath and I can clearly see that he is nothing special? I don't care what you guys think, I will never change my opinion on him. He was one of the greatest players of all-time.....for the AFL. I don't care what he did in the AFL, when he came to the NFL, he sucked. One game (SB III) doesn't define an entire player's career, and most people forget that. Just because I don't agree with you, you don't have to lash out.

Nobody wants to change your opinion.

Being stupid is a God-given right.

[Falcon63]

Nobody wants to change your opinion.

Being stupid is a God-given right.

How am I being stupid? You guys keep saying that, but no one will explain it. The only one who gave ANY type of argument was JoeWillie, that's it.

[#27TheDominator]

Why? Because I've seen film of Joe Namath and I can clearly see that he is nothing special? I don't care what you guys think, I will never change my opinion on him. He was one of the greatest players of all-time.....for the AFL. I don't care what he did in the AFL, when he came to the NFL, he sucked. One game (SB III) doesn't define an entire player's career, and most people forget that. Just because I don't agree with you, you don't have to lash out.

Good luck looking at film in college if you've watched "film" of Joe Namath and "can clearly see that he is nothing special". Even the truly misguided who believe that his career was not HOF worthy admit that he was one of the single most special players ever to play the game.

Based on this bull**** I guess you've seen the "magic bean" episode of NFL films and decided that because Snell had such a good game Namath's career equates with Kellen Clemens in Tampa.

[jgb]

How am I being stupid? You guys keep saying that, but no one will explain it. The only one who gave ANY type of argument was JoeWillie, that's it.

you already said you will never change your mind so why should we piss into the wind to try to convince you that 1 and 1 is 2?

[Falcon63]

Based on this bull**** I guess you've seen the "magic bean" episode of NFL films and decided that because Snell had such a good game Namath's career equates with Kellen Clemens in Tampa.

Huh?

[Biggs]

Says who?

You did claim to be playing High School football in 2010. I guess you could have been redshirted 10 years. If you're 18 now that would put you at about 3 in 95.

[Falcon63]

you already said you will never change your mind so why should be piss into the wind to try to convince you that 1 and 1 is 2?

Okay, but you're sitting here calling me stupid because I don't suck Joe Namath's dick...I don't think he was a good player, he was just overrated by his SuperBowl guarantee and his AFL accomplishments.

[Falcon63]

You did claim to be playing High School football in 2010. I guess you could have been redshirted 10 years. If you're 18 now that would put you at about 3 in 95.

And? That doesn't mean that I've never watched film before.

[jgb]

Okay, but you're sitting here calling me stupid because I don't suck Joe Namath's dick...I don't think he was a good player, he was just overrated by his SuperBowl guarantee and his AFL accomplishments.

i never called you stupid. but you are stubborn which is a cousin of stupidity. i say that because you admit that you will "never change" your mind. no matter what evidence or argument someone else can produce you will "never" change your mind? assuming you know all of the variables that can ever been accounted for in the future is stubborness. but you're 18 so you get a pass, kid.

[slats]

Okay, but you're sitting here calling me stupid because I don't suck Joe Namath's dick...I don't think he was a good player, he was just overrated by his SuperBowl guarantee and his AFL accomplishments.

He wasn't even good?

[SMC]

How am I being stupid? You guys keep saying that, but no one will explain it. The only one who gave ANY type of argument was JoeWillie, that's it.

See below:

you already said you will never change your mind so why should we piss into the wind to try to convince you that 1 and 1 is 2?

You obviously have no clue how football was played in the 1960s with QBs not being protected by the rules as they are now and WRs allowed to be sodomized in their routes by defenders.

A "short" pattern in the 1960s was a 15-20 yrd out. You needed to have a strong arm just to compete. For that reason, QBs in that era had low completion percentages and high INT totals.

Plus, you try to discount Namath's AFL accomplishments as if he was playing in the minor leagues. Newsflash! Besides the Packers and the 1st 2 SBs, the AFL teams (now in the AFC) dominated the post merger NFL and it wasn't until the 1980s when the old NFL teams drafted better and, in fact, instituted a brand new offense (the West Coast Offense) to have weaker arm QB succeed. The NFL in the 1970s were playing AFL brand football and the old NFL teams couldn't compete.

Again, you're willingly clueless and as such are deserving of the heat you're getting.

[MadBacker Prime]

Joe Namath-

Super Bowl MVP

2 time AFL MVP

5 pro bowls AFL/NFL

1 All-Pro

The kicker is in 1974 he won the comeback player of the year.

Not good? His stats are not amazing but in his time he was great!

[Biggs]

And? That doesn't mean that I've never watched film before.

Most of the film on Namath are highlight reels. To say he is nothing special based on his highlight reels is just plain stupid. The man had a cannon of an arm, the quickest release among every HOF QB with the possible exception of Marino and threw perhaps the greatest deep ball in NFL history.

Feel free to come up with film clips of Namath that show a QB that's nothing special.

If you looked at the highlight reels of every QB in the HOF, Namath would be at the top of the something special catagory. Not that looking great on film makes him great just that you are an outright liar in regards to your argument being based on anything other than stats.

Nothing wrong with making an argument just on stats by the way. It's more credible than making stuff up.

[Falcon63]

Joe Namath-

Super Bowl MVP

2 time AFL MVP

5 pro bowls AFL/NFL

1 All-Pro

The kicker is in 1974 he won the comeback player of the year.

Not good? His stats are not amazing but in his time he was great!

AFL accomplishments don't matter! Well, they do, but when it comes to him being the NFL HoF, AFL doesn't matter.

[SMC]

AFL accomplishments don't matter! Well, they do, but when it comes to him being the NFL HoF, AFL doesn't matter.

Actually, it does because the leagues were MERGED and AFL stats and records became NFL stats and records.

Why did they just celebrate the 50th anniversary of the AFL???

Get a clue.

[Biggs]

Actually, it does because the leagues were MERGED and AFL stats and records became NFL stats and records.

Why did they just celebrate the 50th anniversary of the AFL???

Get a clue.

Of course and Namath was 1st in yards and TD's in 72, Yards per pass attempt, Yards per pass completion, Yards per game. He was also the NFL comeback player of the year in 74.

[MadBacker Prime]

AFL accomplishments don't matter! Well, they do, but when it comes to him being the NFL HoF, AFL doesn't matter.

Oh I wasn't aware accomplishing things does not matter.

I guess you should tell the NFL that because they have some AFL only players in their HOF.

[#27TheDominator]

Actually, it does because the leagues were MERGED and AFL stats and records became NFL stats and records.

Why did they just celebrate the 50th anniversary of the AFL???

Get a clue.

+1

Besides, the AFL was winning that ****ing war. The NFL pussied out and merged because the AFL was going to win the war. Al Davis may be a senile old **** now, but he was kicking the living **** of those old ****s.

[JoeWillie]

i never called you stupid. but you are stubborn which is a cousin of stupidity. i say that because you admit that you will "never change" your mind. no matter what evidence or argument someone else can produce you will "never" change your mind? assuming you know all of the variables that can ever been accounted for in the future is stubborness. but you're 18 so you get a pass, kid.

Bingo.

Let's move on.

[Jbro22]

Glad I missed this. What a(n) ...... <- Your call.

[Sperm Edwards]

I agree with you on Sanders and Faulk, of course. But Martin would get more consideration over Roaf (position) and Bettis (not as good career as Martin) IMO.

There are 7 inductees each year right? So that would be Martin, Faulk, and Sanders. The key is there are 4 or more holdovers from previous years that gain momentum for the HOF vote. If so, Martin would get bumped because of those holdovers. He's not getting bumped because of Roaf or Bettis.

Regardless, this discussion has gone on a tangent away from the OP. I don't see anyone who is worthy of replacing Martin as 1 of the 6 considering the era the people were chosen.

From the Golden Age of Jet Football:

Weeb Ewbank

Winston Hill

Don Maynard

Joe Namath

The Dark Ages

Joe Klecko

The Silver Age

Curtis Martin

There is no Silver Age Jet player more worthy than Martin of being included. That had to get someone from the present because the Jets brass (finally embracing the team's history), wants a tie from the past to the present.

Interesting way of looking at it broken down by era.

First off, I never said Martin shouldn't be included. I merely scoffed at the notion that he was the best player the Jets ever had.

As far as Roaf, I doubt I would be the only one who thought he was a more dominant LT than Martin was a dominant RB year after year. It's opinion, but that's all this stuff is anyway.

I think he's got a 50% chance of getting in his first year, not a 5% chance. And it was only in response to the (conservatively) hundreds of times I've read how he's a "sure thing first-ballot HOF'er" when (as you now acknowledge) he is not.