SBN Wisconsin Hall of Fame Nomination #9 - Bart Starr
by Brandon on Aug 5, 2010 7:01 AM CDT
in Green Bay Packers History
Email
PrintQB Bart Starr always seemed to be held in the highest regard by fans of the Green Bay Packers. I grew up believing he was the greatest player in the team's history. His stats don't look remarkable compared to the quarterbacks of today (for instance his career completion percentage is 57.4%, and he never attempted more then 295 passes in a season or threw for more than 2438 yards) but you have to adjust it for the era and playing for a run-first offensive team. The other great quarterback of the 1960s was QB Johnny Unitas and his career completion percentage is only 54.6%.
Starr was an unlikely legend. He was drafted in the 17th round in 1956 and didn't become the full-time starter until his fifth season. Even after Vince Lombardi became the head coach in 1959, he didn't immediately believe in Starr. Over time he learned that Starr was tireless and a great decision-maker on the field.
And he was the best player in the biggest games with a career playoff record of 9-1, and his career quarterback rating for the postseason is 104.5. He was the quarterback for 5 NFL championship (including MVP of Super Bowl I and II), and only QB Otto Graham has won more (7).
But what really surprised me was that he's rarely mentioned as one of the all-time greats outside of Packer fans.
It's always appeared that he's received "minimal personal recognition", possibly because he played alongside so many great teammates. After a brief Google search, I came across an article on the best quarterbacks of all time written in 2010 by a New York newspaper and Starr doesn't even get a mention.
5 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
He is often overlooked
For exactly the reason you mention. He was a quarterback in a run centric league. I’ve included a link to an article I ran across a couple of years ago that I believe really nails it from a stats perspective as well as a contributions to the game perspective. Here are a couple pretty intriguing excerpts from the attached article
“He led the NFL in passer rating five times. Johnny Unitas led the league in passer rating just twice. Ditto Joe Montana. Only Steve Young surpassed Starr’s mark (six).”
“Starr averaged a remarkable 7.85 YPA over the course of his entire career, the 8th-best mark in history, and better than that of a slate of quarterbacks who are generally regarded as the best passers in history, including Dan Marino (7.37), Joe Montana (7.52), Roger Staubach (7.67), Dan Fouts (7.68), Sonny Jurgensen (7.56), Fran Tarkenton (7.27), Y.A. Tittle (7.52), Terry Bradshaw (7.17) and Joe Namath (7.35).
Six times in the 1960s, Starr surpassed 8.2 YPA for a season. To put that into context, Peyton Manning has surpassed 8.2 YPA just twice in his brilliant 10-year career.”
When you look at the facts you can’t deny that Starr should ALWAYS be mentioned as one of the greatest of all time…
by GreenandGolder on Aug 5, 2010 8:37 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
lies, damned lies, and statistics
The eras were so different that stats can be used to make a case either for or against Starr.
That said, to me the most telling stat is Starr’s QB ratings, especially in the playoffs. In those days, a QB rating in the 70s or 80s was good, and a rating over 100 was practically unheard of. So, it’s like how Babe Ruth’s home run stats are great in their own right, but they become eye-popping when you compare them to others in his era (when hitting double digit HRs in a season was considered impressive). In the same way, Starr’s efficiency was impressive regardless of who you put him up against, but, when you compare him to those in his era, you see that he was downright groundbreaking. I mean, George Blanda once threw 41 interceptions in one season. In those days, it was customary to just chuck it deep and they figured that a pick was as good as a punt, so they didn’t really care too much about it. It wasn’t until 10 or so years after Starr that people started really emphasizing things like rating.
So, in the final analysis… what Unitas was to productivity… that’s what Starr was to efficiency. Maybe not as glamorous of an area as TDs or yds, but… Which is a more important change in the game, slinging it around like crazy or moving the chains and avoiding turnovers?
So, in the final analysis… what Unitas was to productivity… that’s what Starr was to efficiency.
The boys over at that ColdHardFootballFacts website have made a damned convincing case for a correlation between winning, and excellence in efficiency.
They have shown that efficiency has much more of such a correlation than productivity (volume stats).
That would help explain why Starr helped his team win five championships, while Unitas’ team won only three.
-
The glass is more than half-full.
Perhaps it's better
to regard him as an all time great team leader rather than as a great quarterback. That way you avoid the pesky (and dissembling) stats.
Imagine having such charisma (in a footballing sense) that, every time you took the field your team mates simply believed, KNEW, everything would turn out OK. How many others reach that level and for as long as Starr managed it? Montana, Bradshaw and not many others, frankly.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
