He's won two MVP awards. He has a Super Bowl ring, and played in another one.
This year, he has beaten out a boy wonder and taken an unlikely team to the brink of the NFL title game.
But is Kurt Warner bound for Canton?
Hall of Famer Joe Montana told Dan Patrick today that Warner is a "shoo-in" for induction.
Frankly, we're not so sure.
He's not in the top 20 in career passing yards. At 28,591, and he's nearly 5,000 behind the guy who currently occupies the 20th slot, Phil Simms.
Warner is 50 touchdown passes behing Steve Young, who's No. 2o on the all-time list with 232.
Of course, Warner has only spent seven NFL seasons as a primary starting quarterback. So he has put up impressive numbers with limited work. But doesn't the fact that the guy has missed large chunks of time due to injury and/or ineffectiveness say something about whether his career should be immortalized?
We're not saying he shouldn't get in. We think that, if the Cardinals win Super Bowl XLIII, Warner's case will be a lot stronger.
For now, though, it's a stretch, to say the least, to suggest that Warner is a "shoo-in."
He should be in the Hall.
It shouldn't depend on how long you've been in the NFL or have been a starter, it should depend on what you've accomplished in that time.
Few have done as much as Warner in as little time, with odds stacked as high against them.
Is Earl Campbell in the HOF? Didn't he only play like 5 years?
No. No No No.
Not every QB that has a couple good seasons deserves it. If you must consider him then address the lack of OL and Defensive players then put him way down the list of QBs.
Sure if the warnerphiles buy him a ticket... How many times has he been benched? Rams, Giants, Cards? Turnover machine that has had #'s fabricated by playing with elite receivers (Holt Bruce Faulk Fitzgerald, Boldin).
Nahhh
Don't think he is one of the all time greatest to ever play the game....
but then again there are a lot of players in there who don't belong, and you can see coming up there will be several playing today who will get in that don't belong also......
Is it political or are only the greatest of all time getting in??????
Politics gets a lot of guys in, or average guys who happened to be part of great teams, so we'll see......
The guy has been blessed to be on offenses with high-end talent.
By that logic, Drew Bledsoe should be a hall of famer because he's 8th all time in passing yards and 13th for TDs.
I love Drew, but let's be realistic.
This weekends game will spark arguements for "McNabb vs Warner for HOF".....true enough Warner has not played in a whole lot of games, but conversely, look what McNabb has done with MUCH less than Warner, in terms of offensive weapons....Warner played with Faulk/Holt/Bruce, and now plays with Fitz/Boldin/Breaston(?)...all of which are LOADS better than any offensive battery that McNabb has EVER had...I would put McNabb in before Warner...
I agree with virtualplague. HoF isn't a longevity award. People talk about a guy like Brett "INT" Favre as a shoo-in and his passer rating is 8.4 points lower than Warner's, who is at #3 all-time. In a shorter career, Warner has as many championships as Favre and the same number of Super Bowl appearances.
Warner is in if Favre is.
There is plenty of time to sort that out when he retires.
I still don't understand why Ray Guy isn't in the HOF. Yeah, he is a punter. He still should be there.
He definitely didnt have any hall of fame years, games, or even plays when he came to NY.
virtualplague stated Warner's case perfectly. Warner belongs in the Hall. I think McNabb will get in too, especially if he wins a Super Bowl.
Since you brought up Steve Young as a comparision then I will too. If Steve Young got in on the first ballot then Kurt Warner does too. The pro football HOF should look at a players whole Career and personally Steve Young is not a first ballot hall of famer. His play with the L.A. Express in the USFL was marginal at best. His years with the Tampa Bay Bucs were horrible. In 1989 with the 49ers he bitched and whined to be starter even though Joe Montana was there. That was easily ther best team. Plus there was only 4 seasons in his career that Steve started all 16 games.
But if Steve can get in then Kurt belongs there as well.
Also, his wife is really ugly.
He deserves some kind of award for tappin' that.
Just sayin'.
I wrote a article about this very thing yesterday. http://fatguycoalition.blogspot.com/2009/01/kurt-warner-hall-of-famer.html
Warner is most like Rich Gannon with one more Super Bowl Win and one more MVP(which is a lot). Warner has only 3 seasons of starting more than 13 games in a season. He's the Terrell Davis of Quarterbacks.
Warner has won the same amount of Championships and 1 less MVP in 10 less years of play than the magical Favre. He should be in.
I don't think he gets in, but he does have a fantastic story that would make good PR for him to get into the hall. I guess we'll have to wait and see..
Here's a breakdown of Warner v. recent HOF QBs and recent non-HOF Qbs.
http://fatguycoalition.blogspot.com/2009/01/kurt-warner-hall-of-famer.html
I say Kurt Warner should be in the Hall. Injury plagued turnover machine? well Joe Namath is in and it's safe to say that Kurt's had a much, MUCH better career than he did, and yes I realize those are different era's.
I think that Warner needs to probably get to the SB with the Cardinals (did I just write SB and Cardinals in the same sentence?) AND get the Cardinals into the playoffs next year in order to have a real chance. I don't know that getting to the SB this year would help if he loses his job next year or the Cardinals don't win their stellar division. Too easy to chalk up this year's Cardinals success to a weak division and facing a rookie QB and the Delholmme implosion in the postseason.
Has Warner produced in seasons when he was NOT playing with two of the best wide receivers in the game? Holt/Bruce and Boldin/Fitz come to mind when I think about Warner... but were there seasons when he was productive without that... say like Tom Brady or Donovan McNabb have been?
How many years did Gayle Sayers play? Where is his yardage compaired to other backs in the hall? Is he not considered one of the best of all time - even with limited years and numbers?
What is up with Florio's bias against Warner? I remember a couple years ago Florio confessed that he never thought much of Warner. What's not to like about Kurt Warner?
Is it an east-coast-centric mentality? I mean he actually dissed Warner by comparing him to Phil Simms... Phil Freakin Simms! Too funny!
Phil Simms is the anti-Warner. Simms had 14 seasons -- and all of them mediocre. He never threw more than 22 touchdowns in a single season, had a career completion percentage of 55%, and a career passer rating of 78 over 164 starts. Per start he tossed 1.2 TD's and 204 yards. Ho hum.
Sure, Warner's NFL career has been short, but he started in the NFL in his late 20's -- having risen up from the arena league and NFL Europe. And he suffered a throwing hand injury and was jerked around by the "now-thoroughly-discredited" Mike Martz.
But he's managed to stage a comeback... and in the process he's been dynamite. He's posted a career 93.8 passer rating in 101 starts. Per start, he tossed 1.8 TD's and 283 yards per game. And his accuracy is incredible -- with a career 65.4 completion percentage and 8.0 yards per attempt.
As a result of Warner's success, the arena league and nfl europe leagues only managed to survive as long as they did because of Warner. Fans kept them afloat for years only because of the hope of seeing the "next Kurt Warner", and players joined those leagues in the hope of becoming the next Kurt Warner.
The Canton-worthiness that Montana sees in Warner is likely what I and others see -- a player who has played the game at the highest skill level ever witnessed and is one of the ultimate playoff clutch players (look at Warner's 7-2 playoff record and SB ring & MVP). No matter the length of career.
I highly doubt that all-time great players like Montana are intrigued by piles and piles of mediocre yards piled up only because of long mediocre careers. And I'm absolutely positive that all-time great QB's aren't impressed by quarterbacks who put up big numbers in the regular season, but wilt in the playoffs, such as the one-and-done brothers. Warner -- like a Montana, Bradshaw or Staubach -- has that rare ability to step it up into a higher gear in the playoffs.
Watching Warner at his best is watching NFL football at its best. It was Warner's misfortune to have played for two small-market, horse-shit organizations (Rams and Cardinals), but that made it all the more of an accomplishment when he elevated both to the NFL's largest stage... and he did it as those offenses' ringmaster, not as some "game manager" ala Phil Simms or Eli Manning or Kerry Collins.
I'm in complete agreement with Joe... Warner is definitely a shoe in for Canton. And it must burn the east-coast media types that the best quarterback of all time thinks Warner should be alongside him in the Hall.
There are no written criteria for HOF enshrinement, except a minimum of 40 votes. He has the credentials to be considered. After that, its up to the 50 voters. The voters like titles and stats--call it even money.
Um...player makes 3 Pro-Bowl teams in 10 years. Loses job to mediocre Marc Bulger. Loses job to well-below-mediocre (at the time, although a huge financial investment) to Eli Manning. At any time did you think of Kurt Warner and say "He's in the top 2-3 QBs in the league", or "He's one of the best to ever play."
Stop the madness. Warner shouldn't get into the Hall without a ticket, regardless of what the Cardinals do this year.
Come on Florio, you must be bored. Anyone who wins two NFL MVP awards is obviously an elite player. You add a Super Bowl title as a starting QB and that is more than good enough for the Hall of Fame. You talk out of your ass sometimes dude.
Can you name another two-time MVP who is NOT in the Hall (and who of course is eligible)?
Right now, he's very, very close. If his career ended today, I think he might get in, but I would understand if he didn't.
If he wins the SB this year, he should be a lock: 2-1 in SBs, and 2 league MVPs. I think that makes you an all-time great.
kurtwarnerfumbledagain wrote:
"Turnover machine that has had #’s fabricated by playing with elite receivers (Holt Bruce Faulk Fitzgerald, Boldin)."
This may be the dumbest thing I've ever seen posted on the internet.
Did anybody hold it against Joe Montana that he played with guys like Jerry Rice? Did anybody hold it against Troy Aikman that he played with Michael Irvin? That kind of thought-process is asinine.
Give me a break. Don't penalize the guy because his general managers had a knack for putting a talented team together.
Similar argument to Terrell Davis--brilliant over a short period of time. I am a big Warner fan (and a Rams fan). If he wins the Superbowl this year, he should walk in. What one can say on Warner's behalf is his passer rating is very high compared to the all-time greats. I'm rooting for him, but haven't seen enough (if his career ended today) to say he belongs.
Warner should get into the HOF. His body of work, though short, is incredibly impressive. Particularly since he's done it with different teams, coaches and players.
Sigh, Florio. You make me sad. You're saying his team has to win the Superbowl for him to be relevant. Why does the outcome of a single game matter to much to people? Did it make Eli Manning a better QB? Was Peyton Manning not as good until he finally won?
If he wins on Sunday - he's going to be awfully hard to ignore come induction time.
Warner is a new version of Mark Rypien. If you give him all day to throw the ball ... he'll kill you. If you pressure him, he'll fold quicker than a chair sat on by LenWhale.
Also, Warner is a spokesperson for Depends:
http://phsports.blogspot.com/2009/01/nfl-championship-weekend-pre-game.html
I think it depends on how much longer he plays. If he's a starter for another 2 seasons, it's plausible to think he could pass the # 20 ranking in passing yards and TD's that Florio used as a benchmark.
I know where Warner is not heading. To this year's Super Bowl in Tampa.
McNabb is in if he wins the Super Bowl.
He should definitely get into the HoF. When you give him weapons and protection, he is as good a QB as has ever played in the NFL.
Who cares. Put Stabler in and then we can talk HOF QB's again.
If you're not sure, then you're a dope.
He's a stone cold lock for the HoF even prior to this season.
Sayers only really played 5 full seasons, but he was a 5 time pro bowler and 4 time All Pro. I guess he's the Koufax of the NFL.
Running backs and Quarterbacks are apple and oranges.
If being blessed with high-end talent is a reason NOT to get in Dan Fouts should not be in there (he shouldn't be anyway)nor should Manning.
The truth of the matter is, The NFL Hall lets too many players in to begin with. Thye let in about 6 a year. At that rate, in another 100 years, they will have added another 600 players. Isn't this watering down the whole thing?
No question, he's in.
G-Man: "Did anybody hold it against Joe Montana that he played with guys like Jerry Rice? "
I understand what you're saying, but Montana won two Super Bowls without Rice.
warner's a hall of famer , he'll get in doing more than drew brees ever will, and brees is going to get in on the sympathy vote
He is the Sandy Koufax of the NFL.
Sure he belongs in the HoF.
Grocery Bagger to Arena Leaguer
to NFL Europe to a Supe?
Greatest Show On Turf? He's in.
truetruth,
600 players over 100 years would be less than 1% of total players over that time.
@ virtual plague
his wife is ugly comment is gold. unfortunately thats the type of ass you tap as a grocery clerk. he should be eliminated from HOF consideration for not trading up.
but then reconsidered because he draws a pretty solid "jesus"
"If being blessed with high-end talent is a reason NOT to get in Dan Fouts should not be in there (he shouldn’t be anyway)nor should Manning."
Didn't Joe Montana play on some pretty good teams, as did Steve Young. Last time I checked Troy Aikman and Jim Kelly has some talent to play with also. I guess by this logic they did not belong in the hall either..
No way is Warner is a "shoo-in" candidate.
If the Cards win the SB and Warner is MVP this year
then perhaps he'll get in eventually, but there aren't
very many "shoo-in" cadidates.
Joe Namath is in because of Super Bowl 3 - nothing else.
His career statistics are pedestrian.
Warner is a victim of the inability to evaluate ability. He was ignored after college
and replaced by QB's who didn't perform as well.
Put him on the bears teams of the last few years and what could he have done.
Someone will try to put eli in the hall someday for no good reason,
Warner has been a lot better than him.
I'd like to see the Cards win the Super Bowl the most out of the four remaining teams....to me, this is the only knock against them. Kurt Warner is NOT a Hall of Famer, and I knew the potential for 2 SB rings and 2 MVPs would bring up this crap again. THREE times he has started 16 games in a season. THREE. In two of those, he was exceptional, and in one he was very very good. Last year he was also quite good. Aside from that, he's been essentially a backup QB. Had he gotten a shot sooner, who knows? But you can't look at someone who was dominant two out of three years, essentially a backup for the next 5, then good for the next 2, and say they had a Hall of Fame CAREER. If we pick and choose the very best 4 seasons of a lot of QB's careers, and ignore the rest, we'd have a lot more HOF.
Warner's probably going to get in. Two-time MVP, Super Bowl Champ, Super Bowl MVP, taking two teams to the conference title. This isn't baseball where a bunch of stat geeks determine who gets in. this is football, which is about WINNING. Warner should get the nod over McNabb who is a big-time choker, with some of his worst performance in the most important games.
the whole '08 Cards team should be for simply winning a playoff game.
He's in, but many will argue. But if they go all the way this year slam dunk / no argument.
Fully agree on Namath btw. He's only in because of that guarantee.
This is yet ANOTHER attempt by florio to knock the cardinals. Pretty deperate if you ask me. Why is this question even being asked right now? I think hall of fame shoo ins are rare at best. Is warner a shoo in? I doubt it. Will he make it. I think so. But consider the timing of this article. This is the artcile that made it to the top of the list? Florio continues his cardinals bashing. I expect no one else would be happier than florio if the cards lose. If they do, watch florio overload this website with negative cardinal articles. For a team that is trying to change its reputation and ways, the cardinals are on course. FLorio will try to have you believe, that anything short of a cardinals super bowl win by 40 or more points is a failure. I have never seen such a desperate pathetic sportwriter. And I use that term as loosely as florio uses his position.
And the Warner/Terrell Davis argument would be very valid....if Davis' career had been cut short by him sucking for a large part of it, and not by a debilitating injury. Warner's career hasn't been cut short....it's been interrupted repeatedly. And THAT doesn't happen to an all time great.
Little known fact. Warners QB rating with the Giants is better than any season that Eli has put together.
The Sandy Koufax of the NFL. Yeah okay... Koufax is easily one of the all time greats. 75% of the NFL qb's during his Rams years would have put up equal or better #'s with that talent, scheme and OC.
The same can be said with this years Cards team 75% of qb's can throw to a wide open BOldin, Fitz and Breaston...
Warner has been given the keys to great offensive machines.
If Trent Green doesn't blow a knee in 99, nobody would have heard of Warner or his butt ugly butch wife.
I think you're putting too much focus on just the statistical part of it. He's a leader and the type of player who has a positive impact on and off the field. When it's all said and done and people are looking back, they will see ALL the contributions he's made. But it helps getting to those two Super Bowls and being a two-time MVP whose finishing his career on a high note as of late. After this weekend, the tea leaves will be more easily read.
It's the Hall Of Fame. FAME. Carreer stats might influence, records may, Super Bowls definitely do, but it all comes down to if enough of the voters remember you those years after you retire. Also, this isn't baseball. Football is an ever changing sport, where a few year-to-year rule changes make the average points scored in a game go from 17 to 40. Warner's stats and Otto Graham's aren't an apples-to-apples comparison.
BTW, the only thing I think that justifies any HOF consideration for Warner is that his story is a great one. Remember SI's cover with him? Who IS this guy? It's pretty cool a guy worked his way out of the arena league to become an NFL starter. That said, he's been beaten out by plenty of mediocre QBs. He's been way too inconsistent.
If he gets in then does Bo Jackson?
First, some history: Namath is in because he won a Super Bowl in New York, as is Simms. Aikman is in because he won Super Bowls in Dallas and because, for some reason, people like the Cowboys. Montana won a Bowl withour Rice, if I remember correctly, but he also led two last minute drives to win also. A clutch performer and probably the best QB ever (or at least top 5).
To put Warner in with these guys is borderline rediculous. He had two great years in St. Louis and a pretty good year so far this season. On the other hand, he's been beaten out by Trent Green (who will go down in history as the Willie Pepp of football for getting injured on the cusp of leading the most talented offense in history), Mark Bulger, Eli Manning (the next mediocre NY QB to be enshrined) and Matt Leinhert - who'd still be starting now if not for hot tubs and beer bongs. And don't forget, Warner had his best years playing in a dome and in the benign weather of Arizona.
All you people saying he has done more than Favre in less time, yada yada yada. Are you guys high? By Favre's 6th full year of starting he had won 3 MVP's, 1-1 Super Bowl Record, and had 182 TDs, which is the exact number Warner has now. So that extra 11 years really has no bearing what-so-ever. And on top of that Warner played on extremely talented teams, the only talented teams Favre ever played on were the two that HE brought to the Super Bowl. There is a reason Warner was bagging groceries and not playing in the NFL. The Packers actually cut him in like 94 or something like that.
Yeah he should get in. The numbers and SBs alone should do it. I think he's getting the short end of the "qb is the entire team" thinking that seems to be popular with the kids. Let's go thru the arguments about why people think he shouldn't get in.
1. He's had super talented receivers that hide his failures.
He has. He has also used those receivers successfully. Consider how those teams did with other qb's after he left. Bulger - kacked. Manning- team went from a winning record to a losing one, then took a few years to settle in. McCown/Leinart - kacked.
2. He turns the ball over.
The only years where he's had a bunch of turnover (ints and lost fumbles) were 2000, 2001 and 2007. 2000-1 were during his peak and can be attributed to the offensive scheme and the fact he injured his hand. Regardless the team went to the playoffs both years and the SB in 01. In 07 the team was in transition and he won the job from Leinart. I think we remember how that went down.
3. He can't handle the pass rush.
He's never had a great o-line. Name me any qb whose stats go up in blitzing situations with an average o-line.
He's a very good qb who has been unfairly been labeled as savior when he arrives at a team. This is unfair to anyone considering that football is really a team game and the qb can only control things so much. That said, his teams have always had good offenses. And shouldn't he be judged on that rather than the success of the entire team? His numbers alone have been awesome considering the situations and playing time he's had. I think he's just received a lot of hate for someone who came in to immediate success after a long period of obscurity on a team that annoyed some because it had a non-traditional scheme. The team got tagged with the gimmick offense pejorative and he's had to deal with that one-dimensional perception ever since. The truth is he's an elite qb, and if he plays on a team that gives him protection he'll bring you deep in the playoffs. Which is exactly the same thing you'd say about other all the other elite qbs that are currently playing.
One of the dumbest arguments against KW getting in the HOF is that he has played with really top notch supporting casts. Joe Montana had jerry Rice and co.- Peyton nad harrison, wayne, edge, Clark - Bradshaw had franco, stallworth, swann - Kelly had Andre Reed, Thuman Thomas and Lofton - Troy Aikmen had Irvin, harper, Smith.
I guess the only QBs that should be in the HOF are Elway and Marino. I would say Brady but knowing the opponents defense proir to the play kinda helps.
Warner is no doubt a Hall of Famer if he makes it to Tampa this year, whether he wins it or not he should be in. If they lose to the Eagles its up in the air.
Warner is a great guy to have an argument about. My friends and I have been arguing about his possible induction all year. I like Warner a lot and am rooting for him - but I think he is just a bit shy of HOF right now. His candidacy reminds me of Jim Edmonds' for the baseball hall of fame, a guy who put up some monster years, but was always injured and doesn't quite have all the aggregate stats.
I will say that if he can play even one more year as well as last year, that will probably be enough for me to support him.
Does anyone remember how he was playing for the Giants when he din't have some of the best WR's in the game catching his ball?
He's in, but many will argue. But if they go all the way this year slam dunk / no argument. Warner is like the nuclear cockroach, every time they try to say he's done he comes right back even stronger. I like that.
Fully agree on Namath btw. He's only in because of that guarantee and he was a larger-than-life character.
I agree 100% that when Warner is done he will be in the HOF. Just a simple comparison to Troy Aikman who I believe is deserving of being in the HOF,Warner has more tds, higher completion %, will have more yards, less ints, all done in less games played. Sure Aikman has 2 more titles but the argument could be made (even though it doesnt take away what he did) that he played on even better teams than Warner ever had. When you take the numbers he will have at the end of his career, been to 2 SB's, 2 MVP's and add in his character and his story of coming from a grocery store to the super bowl MVP its a no brainer to me.
So now the argument is that winning is what is important, and not stats?
Ok....well, aside from 1999 and 2001, Warner's regular season record as a starter is 30-39.
I'm not saying the guy hasn't been a really good quarterback in spurts....but he is definately not an all-time great, and I will be really disappointed in the voting body should he make it. Hell, by the time he's eligible, he'll be about 20 years removed from his last GREAT season.
Im still trying to figure out how Lynn Swann is in the Hall of Fame!!! Look at this numbers! IF Swann is in, then Alvin Harper should be in too! What a joke the whole HOF process is anyways. It's all about politics and who the writers like and dont like. And for fans to come on here and site how many probowls a players makes or doesnt make as a reason as not being a HOFer is a a joke too. The Probowl is a popularity contest and nothing more. John Lynch was a pro bowler last year in the AFC and Alstott was voted into the Pro Bowl several times as well when anyone who knew anything knew that he was a joke of a true FB.
I love Kurt........but Matt Leinart is hardly a boy wonder. More like a draft blunder!
EVERY ONE OF YOU is overlooking the criteria that separates the very good from the great. What IMPACT did the player have on the game? Warner's impact has been nil when compared to QB's like Young (who didn't start until he was nealy 30) or Namath (whose numbers weren't all that great). The difference is IMPACT!!
The only criteria should be whether or not a majority of teams in the league would have wanted that guy playing for them instead of the guy they had in that position.
QBs are handed MVPs and other accolades when they win. When they lose, they had a crap o-line or crap receivers or they didn't have a running game to keep the D honest.
Warner isn't a HOF.
If 2 time sb winner Jim Plunkett is'nt in no way warner gets in.
Warner has accomplished everything Brett Favre has but for longevity. And he has ruined many fewer seasons than Favre has. He should be in.
He has lost his job, based on performance, to some serious scrubs and the Giants did the right thing moving him when Manning was ready.
Warner has been the beneficiary of playing in ideal conditions for teams with ultimate weapons. Florio rates him over Tom Brady, which is ridiculous. Brady makes receivers rich. Receivers make Warner rich. Huge difference.
Hey, I love the Ray Guy discussion. He's the most overrated NFL player of all time. His net punting yardage was not that great and he was never known as someone who pinned teams back. Feagles has had a much better career.
"SteelyJ says:
Warner is no doubt a Hall of Famer if he makes it to Tampa this year, whether he wins it or not he should be in. If they lose to the Eagles its up in the air. "
Umm....So your argument is that this week's game decides whether his CAREER is definitively one of the greats....or a borderline case?
One game decides a career. Good position.
Hmmm...I don't see Tom Brady on that passing or touchdown list...does that mean he won't go to Canton either? I think not.
Since entry is based on the opinion of a group of sportswriters who never played a down in the NFL, don't know sh*t about football, and have no set parameters as to what makes a "Hall of Famer" beyond who they personally like, this discussion is kinda pointless. They'll do whatever they damn well please - like always. Warner will get in if they "like" him. If they don't, he won't.
JSpicoli, I agree about Stabler. When will they finally put him in?
Kurt Warner is unquestionably an NFL Hall of Famer. This argument is not much of an argument.
"SteelyJ says:
January 15th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
One of the dumbest arguments against KW getting in the HOF is that he has played with really top notch supporting casts. Joe Montana had jerry Rice and co.- Peyton nad harrison, wayne, edge, Clark - Bradshaw had franco, stallworth, swann - Kelly had Andre Reed, Thuman Thomas and Lofton - Troy Aikmen had Irvin, harper, Smith."
The difference is that most of those players were (at least arguably), made better (or in some cases, MADE) by their QB. Jerry Rice was great with Montana and Young....however, Montana won without him. How goot has Edge been since leaving Peyton's side? You have no idea how good Harrison and Wayne would have been without Peyton (oh wait, yeah you can....Harison was an 800 yard receiver before Peyton hit his stride)....and the others? Most spent their entire careers with those same QBs.
The difference is that when Warner is surrounded by the best skill position talent in football, he excels. When he's not, he can't keep his job. Warner has never made anyone around him better. Again, I'm not saying he hasn't been good, because he has....but a truly great player elevates the play of those around him, and if he's dumped into a situation where he isn't surrounded by elite talent, he can at least keep his job, and produce at an above-average level.
no way does Warner deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. i beg everyone here to look at his stats. he's had 3 great seasons and 2 pretty good seasons. he's had 5 miserable, and i mean absolutely miserable seasons. his career stats aren't very impressive, DeBerg and Simms-like. the Hall of Fame should be reserved for those who were at the top of their league for most of their career. not half their career. and believe me, i bet there are at least 5-10 qb's that are playing today that gm's would rather have. nobody this side of Testeverde can implode quite like Warner. Warner=Mattingly'd
The NFL HOF is a joke anyway.It's a popularity contest. There is no legitimate reason that one of the greatest quarterbacks to ever play the game is still not in the HOF. Yet, quarterbacks like Jim KellY and Warren Moon are in the HOF. And now Montana says Kurt Warner is a shoo-in.The quarterback I refering to is Kenny (the snake) Stabler. Stabler is not in because he didn't like to speak with the media very often an rubbed some sports writers the wrong way. Zimmermann even admitted that he would never vote for Stabler to get in the HOF.Kelly and MOON couldn't hold Stabler's jock strap. Ask Sula and Knoll to name a few coaches who's teams got beat when Stabler had the ball with less than 2 minutes to play.His not being in the HOF along time ago is a travesty.
Warner's case is a bit different since he got a late start - and I agree with Florio for once - a Superbowl or alternatively 2-3-more years of playing at this level would put him over the top. His age is going to make the later a bit tougher - his best shot would be with the Cards - but they have a lot tied up in Matt L. If you look at his career stats he had a nice three year run in St Louis and this year with the cards - in 85 starts he is 48-37
The guy Florio hates is 39-16 in 55 career starts in a five year career.
Finally - if you open it up to Warner you have a hard time arguing against the Vinny Testeverde's and Steve DeBerg's...
Any great quarterback will make those around him better. Take a receiver like John Taylor...he would've been just an 'ok' receiver, but with Montana he was made better. And now look at him, he's running the CollegeFootballTalk page. Good for him!
BuckFutter says:
January 15th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
“SteelyJ says:
Warner is no doubt a Hall of Famer if he makes it to Tampa this year, whether he wins it or not he should be in. If they lose to the Eagles its up in the air. ”
Umm….So your argument is that this week’s game decides whether his CAREER is definitively one of the greats….or a borderline case?
One game decides a career. Good position.
__________________________
Buckfutter...
You do realize he will be leading 2 different teams to the Super Bowl if he wins that game sunday? That will push him over top, since he has a smaller body of work, that will be huge. That's my point sorry if it needs to be spelled out for you.. moron
i've always thought warner was somewhat overrated. he's put up some great numbers, but look at the supporting casts around him. in st. louis he had holt, bruce, and faulk. in arizona he has fitz and boldin.
give the guy charles johnson and torrence small and then see how good he is.
"SteelyJ says:
January 15th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
Buckfutter…
You do realize he will be leading 2 different teams to the Super Bowl if he wins that game sunday? That will push him over top, since he has a smaller body of work, that will be huge. That’s my point sorry if it needs to be spelled out for you.. moron"
Right....and that's a statistical abnormality, not an indicator of how successful he's been IN HIS CAREER. It suggests that he happened to be in the right place at the right time twice.
You said, flat out, that ONE GAME will decide if he makes it or it is still open to debate. That is completely retarded. This week's game, ONE GAME, determines the success of his career. What if he gets injured early and the team loses a close one? Does he still get in because they might have won if he had stayed in? What if he plays atrociously bad, turns the ball over 14 times, but the team wins 2-0 on the strength of the defense? That makes him a better quarterback than if he throws 5 TDs, no INTs, but loses because McNabb throws for 6? That's A-S-I-N-I-N-E.
Hmmm...this conversation was good...when I wrote about it a month ago:
http://www.zoneblitz.com/2008/12/12/footballhall-of-fame-worthy/
first of all to all people who thought that Kurt got benched. HE DID NOT GET BENCHED he gave ELi, Mark, and Matt, the Job. he told the coaches that they were the future and that they should get the nod so that they could grow faster. If kurt benfits from great recevies then why have Matt and Mark, been medicor? In conculision Kurt should get in, not mabey for the numbers but for what he has done for the game. he helped Eli become a better QB he has also helped Mark, Matt well he needs to get his head out of the LA. Kurt should get in for his contribution to the game.
You said, flat out, that ONE GAME will decide if he makes it or it is still open to debate. That is completely retarded. This week’s game, ONE GAME, determines the success of his career. What if he gets injured early and the team loses a close one? Does he still get in because they might have won if he had stayed in? What if he plays atrociously bad, turns the ball over 14 times, but the team wins 2-0 on the strength of the defense? That makes him a better quarterback than if he throws 5 TDs, no INTs, but loses because McNabb throws for 6? That’s A-S-I-N-I-N-E.
__________________________________
Hey ButtBoy
Where did I say flat out this game decides if his career is great? The point I was making was that if you win 2 MVPS, make 2 superbowls with one team, winning 1, then lead a perenial loser to the Superbowl he will get voted in. What's your problem? Why is that such a crazy statement? I can come up with all kinds of crazy scenarios where Kurt Warner comes out on a wheel chair and throws 6tds but loses, then his wife comes on the field and makes a tackle.
all you idiots know nothing. if Montana says he's in, then he's in.
So, Kurt Warner sucks because he played with Faulk/Holt/Bruce, and now Fitz/Boldin/Breaston. Okay, great logic! Who was the quarterback when they were posting crazy numbers? Kurt Warner.
Look, besides awesome production the IDEA of Warner has value: a stock boy goes to Europe to play football, moves to the Arena League, then the Rams & wins the Super Bowl in a wild video game offense. It's a great story. (Plus it was one of the greatest Super Bowls of all time.)
Hopefully, the 50 voters understand the power of the message that "dreams come true" -- no matter how hokey that sounds -- because no one captures the improbable spirit of that better than Warner.
Warner may not be a great all-timer, but we're talking about a club that enshrines Warren Moon and shuns Ray Guy. Warner is a guy who earned everything he has-except maybe his wife. He works hard. He signs autographs. He shows up on time for interviews. He took the Cardinals to the NFC finals. He can play. He's not a dickhead. Why shouldn't he be considered?
Kurt Warner has 48 300-Yard games in 109 starts (that's one more than Peyton Manning has in 176 starts), Dan Marino, the All-Time 300 Yard game leader has 63 in 242 starts. Nearly half the games Warner starts he puts up 300 yards. That's not the end all be all but it's pretty darn impressive.
Let us not overlook his 2 MVP awards (1999 & 2001), 5 career 400 yard passing games including the only one in SB history, a Super Bowl Win & MVP (1999), an overall 7-2 post-season record (both losses were by 3 points each, which mean he does not choke when it matters).
He belongs in the Hall.
BTW since Bob Griese is in then Jim Plunkett should be in, same for Ken Stabler.
Years 99-01 were pretty great, and almost a decade later he still puts up big numbers,still plays in January....he's getting in shoo territory
here's a thought for taco bill, based on a seinfeld reference...
a pic of the day (and tee shirts?) with the whis inserted into a display where whis wears a crown and says "nobody beats the whis - nobody!"
Gang, you are mostly crazy. I think Kurt Warner is one of the greatest people to be in the NFL. As a person I find him intriguing and generally kind to others. Great story, and mix in the fact that he is a good qb, well the NFL just drools over the thought of him having played consistently. But Kurt Warner has not been consistent in his career, he's anything but. Using the word if in your argument means you are a fool, because if I won the lottery, I would be rich but I haven't so I am not.
So, Kurt Warner right now as a hof qb, no. Two years from now if he is consistently good and the team plays well, than yes. Kurt must remove the doubt about his performance from 2002-2006 otherwise he isn't in.