(08-05-2021, 10:57 AM)Bullseye Wrote:

(08-05-2021, 08:39 AM)RicoTx Wrote: Meh, I won't disagree that he wasn't the best quarterback.  I'm guessing you never saw him play.  I loved the AFL and he was a star.  It was a different era, so you can't just go by stats.  

Aside from that, that one game gets a lot of credit for the merger.  It showed that the AFL could compete with the big boys.  It was a very important game in the history of the league and he was right in the middle of it.

If you get the chance, re-watch the NFL 75th anniversary special.

Former Raiders owner Al Davis talked about scouting Namath when he (Namath) was in college and raved about his passing ability.

Oh, I loved the AFL.  And I've seen that piece.

I loved Lance Alworth, Kenny Stabler, Cliff Branch, Don Maynard, George Sauer, Joe Namath, John Hadl.  I could rattle off 100 names that most people on this board have never heard of.  My favorite teams were the Jets, Chargers, and Raiders.  They always seemed to be on the national games on NBC.  It's ironic that the 'weaker league' now has some of the more dominant teams now.  Although, it's all different.

---

(08-05-2021, 10:59 AM)Cleatwood Wrote:

(08-05-2021, 10:51 AM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: No one's gonna remember Tyree's name.. or Holmes. That's just reality. I was born in 1985. I know lots about Joe Namath. I barely remember either of those other guys and they played while I was watching.

I remember both of those guys very well actually…. And it mainly has to do with their big plays to win a SB. Maybe we should get Foles in the HOF? Where’s Ronster?!

If Namath doesn’t win that 1 game, he likely isn’t in the Hall and I think that speaks pretty loudly. 1 game shouldn’t determine if a player makes the HOF and yet, here we are.

You're really doing your best to downplay the significance of that 'one win'.  I guess that's you prerogative.  

How many of those players that you mentioned were largely responsible for the landscape of the entire league?  Hell, two leagues.

---