1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Jets-Colts Super Bowl - a tangent

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by poindexter, May 11, 2011.

  1. shockey

    shockey Active Member

    UM, THAT GAME WAS IN BALTIMORE. i saw it on tv....
     
  2. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    I can't weigh in on that argument. I remember seeing film of the game, but all I remember is it was played on a field that was pretty much dirt, which covers both Shea and Memorial Stadium.
     
  3. shockey

    shockey Active Member

    that's a load of bull. even if he did have a 'tell,' his release was wo amazing and his arm so strong db's couldn't take advantage. no, joe ints were largely due to his ego, always thinking he could zing the ball into the tiniest spaces; inability to move, and godawful decisions throwing into multi-coverage when pressure -- he was so eager to avoid sacks and he'd just get rid of that thing with little regard for the consequences.

    namath gave the jets the ol' 'puncher's chance' going into every game, 'cause you never knew when he'd have one of those games like the shhotout withose performances were few and far between....
     
  4. shockey

    shockey Active Member

    it was sept. 24, '72 at baltimore's memorial stadium. both unitas and namath were well past their prime but sure put on a great show for old-time's sake.
     
  5. Brooklyn Bridge

    Brooklyn Bridge Well-Known Member

    You talkin' about Broadway Joe or Brett Favre?
     
  6. Stoney

    Stoney Well-Known Member

    But, Shockey, he only had those ego and decision-making problems because of "bad knees."

    I will say the "slap the ball tell" is a new one. Has any other athlete every had people bending over backwards to make excuses for poor performance as much as Namath?

    I'll stand by my prior statement about the merger being the most under-discussed explanation for the dropoff. The striking correllation between the merger date and the start of Namath and Jets' sharp decline is so exact, not sure how it hasn't been mentioned more often. He was simply throwing against better defensive backs and pass rushers on average in the 70s than he was in the 60s. He could get away with more of those reckless risk-taking throws in his early AFL years, but there were more DBs capable of making him pay for those decisions from 1970 onward.
     
  7. cyclingwriter

    cyclingwriter Active Member

    I'm not making an excuse for him. I'm pointing out a flaw in his ability and talent with patting the ball.
     
  8. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    Stoney, are there stats for how the WHOLE AFL did against the WHOLE NFL after the merger, in terms of quarterbacks, etc? Because if those stats exist, and don't show an overall decline in AFL player/team performance, the merger theory as applied to Namath has a problem, and we must look to other causes of his decline. I am still inclined to think that it's physical. We have here an athlete with a chronic injury who is really famous for not taking care of himself at all. Sonny Jurgensen (again, by far better than Namath, and most other QBs in history) declined rapidly the same way, and the same injury/alcohol dynamic was at work.
     
  9. Cubbiebum

    Cubbiebum Member

    QB's and their styles are different. Just because a group as a whole doesn't decline much doesn't mean a couple individuals can't have. Namath's style of chucking it, especially when pressured, makes him more susceptible to it. NFL teams could get better pressure and had more talent in the secondary. It's not the only reason, injuries are a factor too, but it certainly played a part.
     
  10. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    If the guy at the time considered the best QB in the AFL declined sharply because he was suddenly facing NFL players, but the other AFL QBs did not, then how could the problem NOT be with said QB? Not "styles." They didn't call Lamonica the Mad Bomber for no reason. Did his stats decline too? If not, then logic suggests Namath's problem was Namath. In fact, you can substitute "shouts" for "suggests" in that last sentence.
     
  11. Stoney

    Stoney Well-Known Member

    YES. As a matter of fact, 1970, the first year that he faced NFL opponents, also marks the year that Lamonica's stats took a significant drop and diminshed rapidly every year thereafter: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/L/LamoDa00.htm Same pattern as Namath.

    The evidence overwhelmingly indicates that it was far easier to throw against AFL defenses than NFL defenses during the pre-merger era. Neither Lamonica nor Namath's 1960s numbers would've been the same in the other League. And both stopped being the same prolific passers immediately after the merger.
     
  12. Bubbler

    Bubbler Well-Known Member

    In 1970, the Raiders (8-4-2) and Chiefs (7-5-2) were the only pre-common draft AFL teams that had a winning record. The Jets were 4-10, though it must be said they had massive injury woes that season, Namath among them.

    I don't count the Dolphins because they only had one season (1966) where they didn't participate in the common draft and the Bengals were created after the merger agreement in '66.

    Though the meme exists that the AFL had reached parity with the NFL by the merger, the numbers don't show it. The old-line AFL teams struggled mightily from 1970-72. Some of the individual AFL players were clearly on par, but the teams were not from top to bottom.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page