Why is Joe Namath in the HOF?

[Doc Brown]

3 hours 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.

Michael Vick is pry an exception to this rule.

[Buffalo716]

Different style game

 

Dude threw for like 4000 yards in the 60s

 

[Alphadawg7]

58 minutes ago, Chandler#81 said:

I’m surprised -and frankly disappointed in this thread. Your only saving grace may be your age (not old enough to know better).The number 1 reason a player gets voted into the HOF is if he changed the game during his career. Joe Willie Whiteshoes altered the pro game as few others have. The most gifted passer to ever come out of college, he was given a jaw-dropping rookie contract to sign with the AFL during the player wars of the early/mid ‘60s. Truly staggering for the time, it gave absolute legitimacy to the upstart League. This was an era where the best pro players had to have offseason jobs just to sustain.  Watching him throw a football was a wonder to behold. More awe-inspiring than the rookie Marino would do 20 years later. His signing and the national hoopla surrounding him literally forced the merger of the 2 Leagues -something no other upstart League has done since. In just his 5th year, he led his team to the undisputed greatest upset in sports history. A million+ nfl players since owe and have paid a great debt of gratitude to him for their personal opportunity. Using today’s passing stats have nothing to do with the awesome fear he struck in every opponent he faced. He was one if the very few in the Leagues’ first half century who was a threat on every play.

 

So, if you’re an uniformed Whippersnapper, you get a mulligan on this unwitting snafu. If not, turn in your man card.

 

Well, I wasn't around to see him play...even though I am not that young at 44.   

 

And yeah, I bet it was wonder to behold watching a 50%, turnover over prone, QB throw a ball since it was anyones guess if he was going to throw it to his own team or the other team 🤣...hahaha I jest, I jest...

 

Thread was not meant to offend anyone, just some fun convo.  Also acknowledged other posters have made some valid and good counter points, especially those who lived in his era to watch him play.  

 

Without the context of living through his era in awe of him, he's a pretty underwhelming QB historically to me.  Maybe its because he was in NY, and I grew up on the west coast, but even the people I know older than me out here who did live in through his era feel he is the most over rated player.  

Edited September 4, 2020 by Alphadawg7

[MJS]

2 hours ago, Bray Wyatt said:

He was also the first to pass for over 4k yards in a season

 

Lasted until 1979 when Fouts broke it, but did so in a 16 game season where Namath did it in 14

That's the first legit argument I've seen in support of Namath. Nice job.

[Stanley Lombardi]

3 hours ago, sherpa said:

Regardless of his stats, or the fact that he was responsible for AFL credibility, the man was a simply great "thrower."

I used to go to those games two hours early, because a friend's dad was an usher.

I watched all of the QB's throw during warm ups.

 

Nobody, Bills QB or visitors, threw lasers like he did.

His ball was like a snap. Incredibly quick release, almost no trajectory.

It was a string, whether a five yard out or a thirty yard post.

He's in the Hall of Fame because he beat the Colts, but that man could throw.

 

I also got to see him at the Rockpile in his heyday.  So pardon me for waxing rhapsodic, but Joe Namath was the most effortless and elegant  passer the game has ever known.   His passes were more poetical than mechanical.  If they don't belong in the the Halll of Fame, then they belong in the Louvre.
And, lest we forget, he happened to win the most historically significant game in the history of the sport.
 

[Wizard]

Simple....

 

He won one historical game, played in a large market, polarizing figure, fur coats, a celebrity.

 

It is amazing how close these characteristics resemble politicians, many athletes, entertainers, media personalities, and high-level CEO's.

 

The best part is that these characteristics transcend time period, race, political persuasion, and so much more.

 

 

[HOUSE]

Boy, do we need a football game or what?

[Chandler#81]

7 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

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.  

Like all of your verbose ramblings, you’re long on verbiage, short on facts. The Beatles are widely considered the greatest band ever, then and still. Their albums Still rank high on sales 50 years after breaking up. They first appeared on Sullivan February 9th, 1964. Namath was Drafted in the 1st Round of ‘65. Hardly the ‘end of the era’.

 

[Malazan]

4 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Im just saying, when was the last time Namath was really talked about?  When he seemed drunk and told the female reporter on camera he just wants to kiss her.  

 

We're talking more about Namath than we are Brady and he's still playing.

[Turk71]

Namath was famous, but is that what is required for the HOF? Like someone else mentioned, there are a lot of guys who were famous in their time and played a big role in NFL history that are not in the HOF. They shined brightly in their time but their body of work over their career did not make the grade for inclusion. Namath should definitely be one of those guys instead of a HOFer. Hall of Famous yes, NFL HOFer no way should he have qualified imo.

[Charles Romes]

He had a rocket arm and before injuries in college he had great running ability.  What could have been. Most QBs had bad stats in the days before they put dresses on receivers.  

[Turk71]

22 minutes ago, Charles Romes said:

He had a rocket arm and before injuries in college he had great running ability.  What could have been. Most QBs had bad stats in the days before they put dresses on receivers.  

HOF Qbs from that era had stats that were way better than Namath's, in fact I bet there are no qbs in the HOF with worse career stats than Joe Namath. 

[BuffBillsForLife]

How is this even a topic?  The merger might have never happened had Namath not won that superbowl and the AFL might have folded like every other NFL competitor.  And throwing for 4000 yards in 1967 is insane.  You can go on about NYC team, fur coats, boastful guarantee if you want but Namath absolutely deserves to be in the HoF.

[RevWarRifleman]

11 hours ago, K-9 said:

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. 

Well put K-9. We who remember the beginning years of the AFL also remember the barbs/insults from the NFL & sports writers. Like him or not being in the Hall,

Namath did a lot to raise the popularity of the league. More people started paying attention to the AFL and their faster paced, more modern style of play. The fact that

he was the qb for the AFL's first SB win didn't hurt his chances of being in the HOF as well as putting the AFL firmly in the minds of all pro football fans across the nation.

11 hours ago, K-9 said:

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. 

Well put K-9. We who remember the beginning years of the AFL also remember the barbs/insults from the NFL & sports writers. Like him or not being in the Hall,

Namath did a lot to raise the popularity of the league. More people started paying attention to the AFL and their faster paced, more modern style of play. The fact that

he was the qb for the AFL's first SB win didn't hurt his chances of being in the HOF as well as putting the AFL firmly in the minds of all pro football fans across the nation.

[TroutDog]

What other NFL player was in the Brady Bunch? Hello?!!!!  😃 

[Augie]

2 minutes ago, TroutDog said:

What other NFL player was in the Brady Bunch? Hello?!!!!  😃 

 

Wasn’t he in PlayGirl too? That seems like an odd combo! 

 

He was right there as a pivotal character when the league changed in a huge way. I don’t care if he never bagged Suzy Kolber, he’s HOF’er in my book!  

[K-9]

1 hour ago, BuffBillsForLife said:

How is this even a topic?  The merger might have never happened had Namath not won that superbowl and the AFL might have folded like every other NFL competitor.  And throwing for 4000 yards in 1967 is insane.  You can go on about NYC team, fur coats, boastful guarantee if you want but Namath absolutely deserves to be in the HoF.

The merger was agreed to a couple years before Namath won that SB. But Namath’s signing by the AFL out of college certainly contributed to NFL owners not wanting to keep competing for talent at record contract prices for rookie stars that the AFL was more than willing to pay. 

[Bob in STL]

10 hours ago, 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.

 

Agree.  Stats just don’t tell the story on how he played in his prime.  
 

He was the best player coming out of college and he fulfilled his promise with the Super Bowl win. 
 

He had tons of serious injuries.  Played for good teams and bad. It was a different era and a different game.  An era where  quarterbacks were given a long time to develop, and yet he was one that made an immediate impact.  

 

[Chandler#81]

the Legend.

[SinceThe70s]

10 hours ago, TroutDog said:

What other NFL player was in the Brady Bunch? Hello?!!!!  😃 

 

Hall of Famer Deacon Jones.