In his career, Bart Starr only lost ONE playoff game.
In his career, Bart Starr only lost ONE playoff game.
Watch and learn
whoonose wrote:
Some sources indicate that Joe Montana high jumped 6’9 at age 15. He was not a running QB per se but he did rush for 1676 yards and 20 TD.
Some say . . .
LOL
Steelers Fan wrote:
jecht wrote:
Agree with this. I wish our FQB, Bernie Kosar, was as good as Montana.
I've got a story about Bernie as well. This one came from a Sports Illustrated article. I am in my mid 50's and going from memory so I may not have it 100% accurate.
Jim Kelly used to hast a huge barbeque each offseason at his ranch. Every NFL QB and their families were invited. The only thing they did beyond tell stories and joke around was a football accuracy contest. Jim had a tire hanging from a rope and each player tried their skill. I think they did 20 throws each. I don't remember the distance but most players got 4-5 through so it must've been a decent distance. But Bernie would get 15 or so. He would throw off the wrong foot, while falling down, on his knees,....and would still put them through and blow everyone away. The article quoted Kelly as saying Bernie's accuracy was incredible and all the others were spellbound watching him.
This has nothing to do with how good or bad he was as an NFL QB, just a fun story.
Yep, I have this article. 8/29/88 SI with Dr. Z. The only other QB that threw the football through the tire was Jack Trudeau (Colts).
That's not accurate, what let the Browns down from '85 to '89 was Marty, Elway and Byner. And a D that got old in '89 and couldn't stop Elway in the third AFC title game.
Poster, poster, poster ... wrote:
Montana had something broken in his back, 1987 season. By the time he went to Kansas City, he was about 37 years old. Thirty-seven was old then, especially post back surgery. He took a lot of hits. I don't know about wide open receivers. Montana did not have a good throwing arm. That's why he was a 4th rounder if I recall. Montana threw a lot of 3 yard, 5 yard and 8 yard passes, sometimes when receivers were well covered. Montana knew how to throw guys open. When a QB is throwing short passes, no one is wide open. Do know, Montana won two Superbowls before Jerry Rice got to the team. Steve Young, if I recall won no Superbowls without Jerry Rice. Didn't Young only win one Superbowl as a starter?
I think that was '86, they lost to the Giants 49-3 in the divisional that year.
Bart Starr was like Terry Bradshaw, they got lucky to have a great HC and 8 future hall of famers surrounding them. Bradshaws stats are terrible anyway,
Unitas, Tittle, Jurgenson and Tarkenton the best of those in the 60's. Len Dawson and Joe Namath played vs inferior defenses in the AFL, so we can't count them.
jecht wrote:
Poster, poster, poster ... wrote:
Montana had something broken in his back, 1987 season. By the time he went to Kansas City, he was about 37 years old. Thirty-seven was old then, especially post back surgery. He took a lot of hits. I don't know about wide open receivers. Montana did not have a good throwing arm. That's why he was a 4th rounder if I recall. Montana threw a lot of 3 yard, 5 yard and 8 yard passes, sometimes when receivers were well covered. Montana knew how to throw guys open. When a QB is throwing short passes, no one is wide open. Do know, Montana won two Superbowls before Jerry Rice got to the team. Steve Young, if I recall won no Superbowls without Jerry Rice. Didn't Young only win one Superbowl as a starter?
I think that was '86, they lost to the Giants 49-3 in the divisional that year.
Montana had back trouble due to something broken in his back versus Minnesota Vikings playoff loss, 1987-1988 season. I don't doubt Montana also had back issues, 1986-1987 season.
Vineyard Vines wrote:
Real Obvi wrote:
Montana? Yes!
Brady? Yes!
Starr? Is this some kind of joke? As a long time Packers fan I can tell you Starr was maybe above average. Best of his era? Hilarious.
Should have said 60s-70: Bart Starr. He didn't play past '71 or '72.
His record holds up. Still has the highest postseason passer rating (104.8) of any quarterback in NFL history. Went 9–1 in the playoffs. Career completion percentage of 57.4 was an NFL best when he retired in 1972. Multiple league championships, two Super Bowl wins, a Super Bowl MVP, NFL MVP, led the league 5 times in passer rating. Yeah, just a little above average.
Very far above average!
bigmig19 wrote:
Vineyard Vines wrote:
Should have said 60s-70: Bart Starr. He didn't play past '71 or '72.
His record holds up. Still has the highest postseason passer rating (104.8) of any quarterback in NFL history. Went 9–1 in the playoffs. Career completion percentage of 57.4 was an NFL best when he retired in 1972. Multiple league championships, two Super Bowl wins, a Super Bowl MVP, NFL MVP, led the league 5 times in passer rating. Yeah, just a little above average.
Very far above average!
^ Found someone who never watched him play.
Starr was a "great" QB in the same way that Eli Manning or Bob Griese were "great" QBs. 100% product of the system and a team that would have steamrolled everyone even with a hedgehog under center.
DinoZ wrote:
Bart Starr was like Terry Bradshaw, they got lucky to have a great HC and 8 future hall of famers surrounding them. Bradshaws stats are terrible anyway,
Unitas, Tittle, Jurgenson and Tarkenton the best of those in the 60's. Len Dawson and Joe Namath played vs inferior defenses in the AFL, so we can't count them.
A better comparison for Terry Bradshaw is Troy Aikman. A guy who was pretty good and had a great team around him.
Starr is far, far and away better. You seem to be judging these 1960s guys on the sheer number of completions or something and not what they actually won and how they played in big games. Fran Tarkenton, really? We're talking GOATs here. Tarkenton was 6-5 in the playoffs with a miserable 17 INTs to only 11 TDs, a qb rating of under 60. GOATs elevate, not get worse, when the pressure is on.
fastboy77 wrote:
His stats are trash.
Stupid people and their opinions....
If Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers played in the 80's they'd have retired after 3 games.
Comparing stats between eras is ridiculous.
Real Obvi wrote:
Vineyard Vines wrote:
60s-70s GOAT: Bart Starr
80s-90s GOAT: Joe Montana
00s-present GOAT: Tom Brady
All GOATs, different eras.
Montana? Yes!
Brady? Yes!
Starr? Is this some kind of joke? As a long time Packers fan I can tell you Starr was maybe above average. Best of his era? Hilarious.
Bart Starr wasn't the greatest of his era but he was really good for that time. His passer rating in the playoffs was better than Favre's, even though Favre played in a much more passer-friendly era.
Vineyard Vines wrote:
DinoZ wrote:
Bart Starr was like Terry Bradshaw, they got lucky to have a great HC and 8 future hall of famers surrounding them. Bradshaws stats are terrible anyway,
Unitas, Tittle, Jurgenson and Tarkenton the best of those in the 60's. Len Dawson and Joe Namath played vs inferior defenses in the AFL, so we can't count them.
A better comparison for Terry Bradshaw is Troy Aikman. A guy who was pretty good and had a great team around him.
Starr is far, far and away better. You seem to be judging these 1960s guys on the sheer number of completions or something and not what they actually won and how they played in big games. Fran Tarkenton, really? We're talking GOATs here. Tarkenton was 6-5 in the playoffs with a miserable 17 INTs to only 11 TDs, a qb rating of under 60. GOATs elevate, not get worse, when the pressure is on.
Obviously you never saw Starr/Tarkenton play, Tarkenton on a whole other level.
fastboy77 wrote:
His stats are trash.
You ain't made a dime off running...
Pipe down junior .
If you know what is good for you.
Last two minutes of Joe's Super Bowl win against Cincinnati. Genius, cool as a cuke.
DinoZ wrote:
Vineyard Vines wrote:
A better comparison for Terry Bradshaw is Troy Aikman. A guy who was pretty good and had a great team around him.
Starr is far, far and away better. You seem to be judging these 1960s guys on the sheer number of completions or something and not what they actually won and how they played in big games. Fran Tarkenton, really? We're talking GOATs here. Tarkenton was 6-5 in the playoffs with a miserable 17 INTs to only 11 TDs, a qb rating of under 60. GOATs elevate, not get worse, when the pressure is on.
Obviously you never saw Starr/Tarkenton play, Tarkenton on a whole other level.
I saw Tarkenton play a lot and he was a hack. He had a lot of records because of longevity and because he called his own plays and passed too much. The quarterback from that era who played like a modern guy was Staubach.
Too hard to compare eras to say Montana is overrated if you are using his stats vs todays QBs
You gotta out Stafford up there too, if he wasn't in such a bad lions team I'd imagine he'd be top 3 in stats by now easily and the rams will win sb easily this year and probably next 5 years
DinoZ wrote:
Vineyard Vines wrote:
A better comparison for Terry Bradshaw is Troy Aikman. A guy who was pretty good and had a great team around him.
Starr is far, far and away better. You seem to be judging these 1960s guys on the sheer number of completions or something and not what they actually won and how they played in big games. Fran Tarkenton, really? We're talking GOATs here. Tarkenton was 6-5 in the playoffs with a miserable 17 INTs to only 11 TDs, a qb rating of under 60. GOATs elevate, not get worse, when the pressure is on.
Obviously you never saw Starr/Tarkenton play, Tarkenton on a whole other level.
I saw both and you're wrong