Why is Joe Namath in the HOF?

[Alphadawg7]

Seriously, every time I see him doing a commercial I just look at him and ask why?  
 

In his entire career, he only had 2 seasons where he had more TDs than INTs (and barely had more in those 2 seasons).  I mean he literally made the HOF over one game prediction and wearing fur coats.  It’s a travesty he’s in the HOF while so many other players with substantially better careers are not.  
 

I mean he finished his career with 173 TDs to 220 INTs and a dismal 65 QB Rating.  

[loyal2dagame]

Because he looked like a pimp with his fur coats........ and where he played.

He was also a TV and movie star. 

Edited September 4, 2020 by loyal2dagame

[Mike in Horseheads]

Alpha you just set off the @Gugny alarm.

[Logic]

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.

[wnyguy]

Perhaps it's because he and the New York Jets legitimized the teams from the old AFL as being as good as the established NFL teams. 

[MJS]

People bring it up that it was a different era and there are other QB's in the HofF who also have thrown more picks than TD's.

 

But what they fail to mention is that Namath also lost more games than he won.

[GunnerBill]

Just now, 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.

 

Agree. And this is absolutely my criteria. It is the hall of FAME not the hall of TALENT. Now often times those two intersect.... but you have the odd exception. Joe Namath is one. Eli Manning will be another. On the pure numbers Eli Manning is not a Hall of Famer. But the story? The two drives to win Superbowls? You can't tell the tale of the NFL without them. So Eli will make it. 

[BringBackFlutie]

4 minutes 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.

 

Oh, stop it.  He's like, second on my list, behind Brett Favre.

Edited September 4, 2020 by BringBackFlutie

[Captain Hindsight]

5 minutes 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.

Was just coming here to say exactly this

[Alphadawg7]

I have to disagree that just being part of the NFL's story makes you HOF worthy.  And while its called the Hall of Fame, we all know that the basis of the HOF is to enshrine its best.  Not its most flamboyant, flashy, or famous.  Otherwise guys like Jim McMahon would be in there too.  

 

I don't disagree that Namath has a place in the story of the history of the NFL, but so do a lot of people also not in the HOF.  I mean, he has a case to be the worst player of any sport enshrined into its HOF.  

 

Namath was not a good QB, thats just the facts.  And no one would care at all about him had he not made that prediction, just like no one cares about many underdog teams QB's who won the SB.  Without the prediction, he's just a flashy but bad QB from NY who hit lightning in a bottle one time...for one game.   

 

 

Edited September 4, 2020 by Alphadawg7

[NewEra]

15 minutes 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.

This 

[BuffaloBillies]

I don't care. I just want to kiss you.

[Alphadawg7]

2 minutes ago, NewEra said:

This 

 

But its not the hall of history.  And while it contains the word "fame", and obviously Namath did have fame as part of his legacy, the grounds for enshrinement have always been about enshrining its best, not its most famous.  True for all sports.  So again, just can't agree that being part of the story of the early years makes one HOF worthy.  

[NewEra]

2 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

I have to disagree that just being part of the NFL's story makes you HOF worthy.  And while its called the HOF, we all know that the basis of the HOF is to enshrine its best.  Not its most flamboyant, flashy, or famous.  Otherwise guys like Jim McMahon would be in there too.  

 

I don't disagree that Namath has a place in the story of the history of the NFL, but so do a lot of people also not in the HOF.  

 

Namath was not a good QB, thats just the facts.  And no one would care at all about him had he not made that prediction, just like no one cares about many underdog teams QB's who won the SB.  Without the prediction, he's just a flashy but bad QB from NY who hit lightning in a bottle one time...for one game.   

 

 

Seems to me that you’re wrong here my man.  
 

Namath is IN the HoF.  He wasn’t a good QB.....yet he is enshrined.  You disagree of what the HoF “should” be, but your question has been answered. @Logic just told you

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

I have to disagree that just being part of the NFL's story makes you HOF worthy.  And while its called the HOF, we all know that the basis of the HOF is to enshrine its best.  Not its most flamboyant, flashy, or famous.  Otherwise guys like Jim McMahon would be in there too.  

 

I don't disagree that Namath has a place in the story of the history of the NFL, but so do a lot of people also not in the HOF.  

 

Namath was not a good QB, thats just the facts.  And no one would care at all about him had he not made that prediction, just like no one cares about many underdog teams QB's who won the SB.  Without the prediction, he's just a flashy but bad QB from NY who hit lightning in a bottle one time...for one game.   

 

 

 

Jim McMahon isn't nearly as much part of the story of the NFL as Joe Namath. And you are right, the prediction is a part of it..... if that never happened and the Jets never caused that upset maybe Joe Namath is not in the HoF. Maybe the merger doesn't go down the way it did. Maybe the history of the sport is different. That game is one of the most important games in NFL history.  If had gone another way maybe nobody outside of New York remembers Namath. But enough of the ifs.... if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle. 

[NewEra]

Just now, Alphadawg7 said:

 

But its not the hall of history.  And while it contains the word "fame", and obviously Namath did have fame as part of his legacy, the grounds for enshrinement have always been about enshrining its best, not its most famous.  True for all sports.  So again, just can't agree that being part of the story of the early years makes one HOF worthy.  

You don’t agree....but your question has been answered.

[RoyBatty is alive]

2 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

I have to disagree that just being part of the NFL's story makes you HOF worthy.  And while its called the HOF, we all know that the basis of the HOF is to enshrine its best.  Not its most flamboyant, flashy, or famous.  Otherwise guys like Jim McMahon would be in there too.  

 

I don't disagree that Namath has a place in the story of the history of the NFL, but so do a lot of people also not in the HOF.  

 

Namath was not a good QB, thats just the facts.  And no one would care at all about him had he not made that prediction, just like no one cares about many underdog teams QB's who won the SB.  Without the prediction, he's just a flashy but bad QB from NY who hit lightning in a bottle one time...for one game.   

 

 

 

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.

[Alphadawg7]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

Jim McMahon isn't nearly as much part of the story of the NFL as Joe Namath. And you are right, the prediction is a part of it..... if that never happened and the Jets never caused that upset maybe Joe Namath is not in the HoF. Maybe the merger doesn't go down the way it did. Maybe the history of the sport is different. That game is one of the most important games in NFL history.  If had gone another way maybe nobody outside of New York remembers Namath. But enough of the ifs.... if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle. 

 

I wasn't saying no prediction and he lost.  I am saying, if he still wins the game without the prediction he definitely does NOT make the HOF.  

[GunnerBill]

Just now, Alphadawg7 said:

 

But its not the hall of history.  And while it contains the word "fame", and obviously Namath did have fame as part of his legacy, the grounds for enshrinement have always been about enshrining its best, not its most famous.  True for all sports.  So again, just can't agree that being part of the story of the early years makes one HOF worthy.  

 

I don't agree that the hall is just about enshrining the best. I don't think that is what it should be about and I don't think that is what it is about, as evidenced by guys like Namath. What is Al Davis the best at? Best coach? No. Best owner? Definitely not. But you can't tell the story of the NFL without Al Davis. 

[mykidsdad]

He is a borderline HOF-er on merit. Being in New York and legitimizing the AFC put him over the top.