Two time NFL mvp, super bowl winner, super bowl MVP, and a lot of years where he didn't do a whole lot.

has as good a shot as kenny stabler and dan fouts..

so 50/50...

hmm... i think its a toss up.

no. HOF is for players who were good to great consistently over their career (or at least an extended period of time). I think we've seen that many qb's can put up big #'s in Mike Martz's offense (though to Warner's credit, he did better than any of them). I think his numbers for those 2 seasons were largely overinflated, and now, he's just sort of a journeyman, who's done well on occasion, but not over the course of multiple seasons.

No, but it will be an interesting case of having all the resume bullet points, but his career never having the 'feel' of HOF-worthy.

Other two+ time NLF MVP's:

Johnny Unitas (3)
Jim Brown (3)
Joe Montana (2)
Steve Young (2)
Brett Favre (3)
Peyton Manning (2)

right, but those other guys had many good years. warner basically had the two mvp years, and the rest, he's barely ever played the whole year. granted, he's in a fairly unique situation, but it's not like those guys listed are in the HOF SOLELY because of their MVP seasons. You'd be putting him in the HOF for essentially 2 seasons.

go look at these stats:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/stats?playerId=1682

do those look like the stats of a hall of famer?

I see 2 phenomenal seasons, 2 pretty good seasons (3 if you include this season) and a bunch of crap.

That's a good question.

I tend to agree with Squirrel. He will have big time stats, but I have never thought of him as a HOFer. Very good QB, but not a HOFer.

No, and I don't think it will even be close. His greatness was in too short of a burst, and he spent the rest of his career as a journeyman.

what about Terrell Davis? He's kind of in a similar situation to Warner

Exactly. He won't make it either.

yeah, i think that terrell davis is slightly above warner, but just didn't do it for long enough.

another thing to keep in mind: both were in offenses that emphasized their position, to the point that other players have come in and played very well in those systems. it kinda takes a bit of the luster off of their stats.

no way does TDavis make it. He was the first of 4 RB's that were amazing in the Denver system.

dp

[This message has been edited by Bob the Enzyte Guy (edited 11/3/2008 8:58p).]

Terrell Davis has been a semi-finalist (made the top 25) the past two years but hasn't been able to make it into the finalist list of 15. So considering they only induct a max of 7 of the 17 finalists (after you add in the two senior committee nominees) and he hasn't cracked the finalist list of 15, he won't get close. I think Warner will see the same fate. He'll come up, he'll be a semi-finalist and may even crack the bottom of a finalist list or two, but he won't come close to actually getting inducted.

What is Warner's career QB rating?

I believe it's the highest of all time, or darn close.

Also, can someone explain why Joe Namath is in the HOF?

Wikipedia has the answer:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_career_quarterback_rating_leaders

Young is #1, Warner is #2, Manning is #3, and Brady is #4.

Joe Namath sucked ass but he legitimized the AFC. Thats why.

Joe Namath will always be a HOF in my book based on this great moment in NFL history:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gc65NC44dSk

quote:

---

Joe Namath sucked ass but he legitimized the AFC.

---

Sure, he was Super Bowl III MVP, but in the game he was only 17/26 for 208 yards, no TDs, and no picks. The Jets won because of their defense.

One mediocre game gets you into the HOF?

When does Doug Williams make it for his historic achievement? At least he put up big numbers in his Super Bowl MVP performance.

Two years ago or so there was a similar thread abou the same topic and I wholeheartedly agreed that Kurt Warner had not done enough to get into the HOF. However I will change my mind if these two things happen.
a) Somehow the Cardinals wind up on a run and get into the Super Bowl and win it. As inconsistent as teams have been this year it could happen. That would give him 2 Super Bowl wins with 2 different teams. There aren't many QBs with multiple Super Bowl wins that aren't in the HOF. There are several with only one win that are not in.
b) This year is no fluke and he has 2 or 3 more solid years as a starter and helps his team to be in contention each year.

I think the fact that he was written off as a starter and has caught on again helps his cause but he is not there yet IMO.

notice how many of those qb's on the rating list are current qb's.

culpepper, pennington et al. alone should tell you that that stat needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

True, there are a lot of current QBs, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. The fact that Warner tops the list of his contemporaries has to be regarded as a plus.

trent green has a higher career qb rating than dan marino?

what?!?!

let me back up the OP a little bit...

why is Terry Bradshaw in the hall of fame?

With 212 career TD's and 210 career INTs

Career passer rating of 70.9. Only played in 3 Pro Bowls. And only really had 3 or 4 very good to great statistical seasons

Most of us posting on this thread could have handed off to Franco Harris 30 times a game.

by the way, Warner has a 5-2 career playoff record

i don't think you can compare stats from that era vs. today and draw any real conclusions. the game was very different back then and qb's were asked to do different things (note the difference in qb rating between qb's then and today).

that said, I would say that Bradshaw falls into the same category as Aikman; they both were largely credited for having won 3+ super bowls. I think you could argue both would not have made it on their stats, but having won 3 and 4 super bowls puts them over the top. winning a super bowl is a big feat, but something that many have done...only a few have won 3+ super bowls (Montana, Brady, Aikman, Bradshaw). I can find you many more who can match what Warner has done.

Warner won one, and played in another. no easy feat, but again, there's not that much to back him up past that. compare him to his contemporaries and while his rating is high, that's partially because he only played 4 full seasons. if he did it for a few more years, the way he's playing now, I'd say absolutely. I doubt he will though.

his rating is high but his body of work isn't that large though because in spite of his unbelievable ability, he couldn't win the starting job from some pretty big spares over the years.

I agree with the comment above though that if the Cards win a SB and/or Warner can sustain this level of play for a few more years, then his chances increase dramatically.

all in all, you have to compare QB's and WR's to players in their own era. the passing game has changed WAY too much as the current rules are infinitely more pass-friendly now.

[This message has been edited by Bob the Enzyte Guy (edited 11/3/2008 9:03p).]

warner was a grocery bagging qb. no one else has done this ----- HOF him

***********************************************

WAR EAGLE!
GIG 'EM!
***********************************************

quote:

---

I can find you many more who can match what Warner has done.

---

Really? How many two time league MVP and Super Bowl winners are there?

so you believe he should go to the hall of fame because he had two really good years?

Not necessarily, but I take issue with your statement of "I can find you many more who can match what Warner has done." That's simply not true.

fair enough...we can agree he had two amazing seasons. That still doesn't mean he's a HOFer.

There are different reasons why QBs are in the HOF. Namath is there because he was the first real star in the AFL/AFC and won a Super Bowl. It probably helped that he played in New York. Len Dawson may be there because he was an AFL star. Bradshaw, Starr, Staubach, Aikman, Elway, Griese and Montana are there because they were great leaders and won big games not necessarily because they had the best stats. Marino, Favre, Unitas, Fouts, Tarkenton, Moon, Kelly, Jurgenson and Y.A. Tittle were inducted mainly because of longevity and stats although some did have Super Bowl titles. Some of these guys had 17-20 years in the league and led the league multiple years.

Right now I don't see that Kurt Warner has done enough in any way. He doesn't have enough consistency with impressive stats or enough championships.
I would almost compare him to Steve Young. Young was 30 years old before he got a chance to really show what he could do in the league. He only had 7 years in the league when he was full time but in that time he was dominant and finally winning the Super Bowl solidified his HOF status.
As I stated earlier I think Warner could be considered if he somehow wins another Super Bowl and puts together a few more productive years with the same team. Right now he will fall into the same category with Jim Plunkett, Vinny Testaverde, Drew Bledsoe, Mark Rypien and other good QBs that will never be in the HOF.