Why is Joe Namath in the HOF?

[NewEra]

Just now, Alphadawg7 said:

 

I wasn't saying no prediction and he lost.  I am saying, if he still wins the game without the prediction he definitely does NOT make the HOF.  

But the prediction made him “FAME”ous.  
 

for the record, i agree with you that his play on the field is not HoF worthy.  His place in NFL history is worthy according to the HoF itself....which matters more than anyone’s opinion.  Especially guys you you and I

[Alphadawg7]

Just now, RoyBatty is alive said:

 

That is not accurate at all. It wasnt just "one game", in fact in the Super Bowl he wasnt great.   For a couple of years, for HIS TIME and ERA, Namath was one of the best quarterbacks.  He was a two time AFL MVP, a four time all star..he was drafted 1st for a reason, AFL rookie of the year then years later AFL comeback player of the year.

 

I know that stuff...but that says a lot more about the AFL at that time than Namath.  Sorry he wasn't a good QB, he was flashy and loud and got him fame.  A prediction and fur coats are his legacy, not his great QB play.

[Logic]

The bigger qualm I have with the Hall is its total lack of special teams representation. One kicker, one punter, no other special teams players. Nonsense.

[Malazan]

 

11 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

I have to disagree that just being part of the NFL's story makes you HOF worthy.  And while its called the Hall of Fame, we all know that the basis of the HOF is to enshrine its best.  Not its most flamboyant, flashy, or famous.  Otherwise guys like Jim McMahon would be in there too.  

 

That is not the basis of it. That is what you *want* it to be. You're gonna have to get over the fact that it's not the Hall of Really Great Stats.

[Gugny]

32 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Seriously, every time I see him doing a commercial I just look at him and ask why?  
 

In his entire career, he only had 2 seasons where he had more TDs than INTs (and barely had more in those 2 seasons).  I mean he literally made the HOF over one game prediction and wearing fur coats.  It’s a travesty he’s in the HOF while so many other players with substantially better careers are not.  
 

I mean he finished his career with 173 TDs to 220 INTs and a dismal 65 QB Rating.  

 

Some will say he deserves to be in because he "changed the game."

 

I disagree with those people and do not believe he belongs in Canton.

 

[Alphadawg7]

14 minutes ago, NewEra said:

Seems to me that you’re wrong here my man.  
 

Namath is IN the HoF.  He wasn’t a good QB.....yet he is enshrined.  You disagree of what the HoF “should” be, but your question has been answered. @Logic just told you

 

14 minutes ago, NewEra said:

You don’t agree....but your question has been answered.

 

Fair enough on that point...still disagree that his play warranted HOF credentials when there are a lot better players still on the outside looking in.  

Edited September 4, 2020 by Alphadawg7

[Saxum]

I am pretty sure he is in Hall of Fame for 2 reasons:

1. NYC is a very big market.  If he was in a smaller market less likely.

2. Beer and alcohol are big advertisers of NFL.

[RobbRiddick]

Guy is one of my heroes. He just had 'it', plus he had to balls to stand up to the giant that was the NFL and deliver. For that alone (and the effect it had on pro football's popularity) he deserves to be in the hall.

[Alphadawg7]

1 minute ago, Logic said:

The bigger qualm I have with the Hall is its total lack of special teams representation. One kicker, one punter, no other special teams players. Nonsense.

 

Totally agree on this...ST is such an important part of the game and we even have a SB MVP from special teams...the lack of acknowledgement from the hall in this area is long been an issue.  Every coach in history will tell you that you need to be good in all 3 phases of the game...HOF seems to think there is only 2 phases.

[RoyBatty is alive]

Just now, Alphadawg7 said:

 

I know that stuff...but that says a lot more about the AFL at that time than Namath.  Sorry he wasn't a good QB, he was flashy and loud and got him fame.  A prediction and fur coats are his legacy, not his great QB play.

 

No it says a lot more about how professional football has evolved over time.  Namath took more brutal hits in one year than Brady has taken in 20.  The game has been wildly skewed in favor of the receivers and QBs.  400 yard games used to be a rarity, one for the history books, now they happen multiple times a year.

[Chaos]

In person Joe Namath is one of the nicest most personable people you could ever meet. I suspect the sports writers who vote for the hall of fame truly liked the  guy. 

Edited September 4, 2020 by Chaos

[Alphadawg7]

I will acknowledge some of you have some compelling counter points, and some of you are old enough to lived his era so he carries more meaning and impact to you.  All good, I still don't think he was HOF worthy even though I fully acknowledge his contributions to the story of the NFL.  At the end of the day, I am not convinced he makes the HOF if he doesn't make the prediction, even still winning the game.  

 

Fun discussion none the less so far

[C.Biscuit97]

You know how many chicks he nailed???

but he is one of the most overrated players of all time.  But that SB win was legendary status.  He is in for that alone.

 

and apparently, Terry Bradshaw kinda sucked. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BradTe00.htm

[Sherlock Holmes]

16 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Jim McMahon isn't nearly as much part of the story of the NFL as Joe Namath. And you are right, the prediction is a part of it..... if that never happened and the Jets never caused that upset maybe Joe Namath is not in the HoF. Maybe the merger doesn't go down the way it did. Maybe the history of the sport is different. That game is one of the most important games in NFL history.  If had gone another way maybe nobody outside of New York remembers Namath. But enough of the ifs.... if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle. 

Nowadays he'd still be your aunt, with balls...

Edited September 4, 2020 by Sherlock Holmes

[DrDawkinstein]

37 minutes ago, Logic said:

When it comes to Hall of Fame inclusion, I’ve always subscribed to the criteria “can you tell the story of the NFL without including this player?”
 

In the case of Joe Namath, you cannot.

 

33 minutes ago, Captain Hindsight said:

Was just coming here to say exactly this

 

And I was beaten to it at least twice over.

 

I agree with Alpha that his stats arent there, but ultimately agree with the theory that stats arent the only qualifier.

[Alphadawg7]

2 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

You know how many chicks he nailed???

but he is one of the most overrated players of all time.  But that SB win was legendary status.  He is in for that alone.

 

and apparently, Terry Bradshaw kinda sucked. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BradTe00.htm

 

Yeah, I am big time in the camp that Bradshaw is one of the most over rated players in the HOF.  But he did still get all those SB wins, and that definitely gives him some hall credentials.  Bradshaw was nothing more than a game manager on an insanely talented team.  But hey, he still made enough plays to get to all those SB's and win them, so I dont have an issue with his HOF presence so much.  I only take issue with my Steeler fan friends who try and convince me he was a top 5 QB all time, which is just hysterically false.  

[K-9]

Because in an era when QBs ran the show, he was one of the best at it. The game he called against the Colts in SBIII is a great example. Not a statistical masterpiece by any stretch, but when you look at how he had one of the defenses in the league on its heels the entire game, it’s easy to see how much of a masterpiece it was and why he was the MVP. He had numerous games like that in his career. HOF voters realized that. 

[nucci]

42 minutes ago, MJS said:

People bring it up that it was a different era and there are other QB's in the HofF who also have thrown more picks than TD's.

 

But what they fail to mention is that Namath also lost more games than he won.

but won the most important one

[noacls]

1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Seriously, every time I see him doing a commercial I just look at him and ask why?  
 

In his entire career, he only had 2 seasons where he had more TDs than INTs (and barely had more in those 2 seasons).  I mean he literally made the HOF over one game prediction and wearing fur coats.  It’s a travesty he’s in the HOF while so many other players with substantially better careers are not.  
 

I mean he finished his career with 173 TDs to 220 INTs and a dismal 65 QB Rating.  

Totally different game back then. Can barely be compared to today's game. Have you compared his stats to the peers of his time?

 

[Shaw66]

44 minutes ago, Logic said:

When it comes to Hall of Fame inclusion, I’ve always subscribed to the criteria “can you tell the story of the NFL without including this player?”
 

In the case of Joe Namath, you cannot.

The perfect explanation.  

 

I don't know how old Alpha is, but if you weren't a football fan during that period, you almost can't understand. 

 

My son asked me once whether there would even be another Beatles, and the answer is clearly "no."  The Beatles were the Beatles not because they were the greatest band ever; they weren't.  Not because they had the longest run of excellence; they didn't.  They were the Beatles because they became superstars at a time when it was still possible to get the attention of the entire country.  EVERYBODY knew about the Beatles, and practically EVERYBODY watched the Ed Sullivan Show when they were on. 

 

Namath caught the end of that era, and era when it was possible to be a true nation-wide phenomenon.  He was in the news all the time - everyone knew what Namath was wearing, whom he was dating, everything.   At that moment in time the Packers seemed to have proved what most people thought - that the AFL teams were inferior to the NFL team.  Along comes the guy who is probably the most famous - not the best, but most famous - team sport athlete in the country, and he proves the Packers wrong.  It was huge news, a defining moment in the emergence of professional football as the number one professional sport in the country.   Joe Namath was on the Ed Sullivan Show after he won the Super Bowl.

 

Mahomes is a good comparison.  Mahomes captured the imagination of the football public like Namath did, but in the modern world of 24-7 sports coverage, his impact never could be as great as Namath's was.  Mahomes wins the Super Bowl, and he's on late-night shows.  The whole country watched Namath; some nightowls watched Mahomes.  

 

Namath just happened to be the right guy in the right place at the right time.