Joe Flacco vs. Johnny Unitas first five years

[SteelersProphet]

one of my hobbies is to compare stats

 

and I thought someone might find this interesting

 

          Comp %  Yards  TD  Int  Avg  Rush TD

 

Joe Flacco        60.5/ 17,633 /102/ 56/ 7.1/ 7

 

Johnny Unitas   53.6/ 12,053/ 109/ 72/ 7.9/ 7

 

 

[SecretAgentMan]

Put Unitas in today's Flag Football era... He'd be miles better than everyone

[PolishRifle]

one of my hobbies is to compare stats

 

and I thought someone might find this interesting

 

          Comp %  Yards  TD  Int  Avg  Rush TD

 

Joe Flacco        60.5/ 17,633 /102/ 56/ 7.1/ 7

 

Johnny Unitas   53.6/ 12,053/ 109/ 72/ 7.9/ 7

The league was way different back then. Defense prevailed in those days.

[SteelersProphet]

I like that they both got 7 Rush TD's

 

and in the same way, in the five years they both got 3,1,1,2,0

[Tank 92]

No way you can make this comparison. Different times, different game.

 

Johnny U was THE innovator in the use of the pass, called his own plays and set records in an era when defensive penalties were offside and offside.  There will never be another Johnny U.

[1/28/01]

Could you actually imagine JU having the treatment of Brady and the soft game of 2013? Holy goodness...he would be unreal!

[Ravenslifer]

Unitas' first five years he was putting up numbers that would have been considered above average in the 1980s-1990s - difference is he was doing it in the 1950s.  Joe has a ton of talent, one of the best arms in the league, but Unitas is the best for a reason.

[JacktheRaven]

In all honesty, Johnny U. probably wouldn't make it in todays game, but QBs today, couldn't make it back then. Different era, different game.

[1/28/01]

In all honesty, Johnny U. probably wouldn't make it in todays game, but QBs today, couldn't make it back then. Different era, different game.

Please, do tell how one of the toughest QB's to ever play the game couldn't make it in this sissified league?

[GrimCoconut]

If Johnny played the game today he would probably have thrown over 5k with a ridiculous amount of touchdowns. He's the greatest quarterback to ever play t this game. He's better than Manning IMO. The stats he put up in that era of football are remarkable.

[cobrajet]

Agreed.....not fair to compare. Same game but played very differently.

[Guest Moderator 6]

Unitas also played in fewer games each season.

[Bravens292]

Its hard to compare eras. It was still a rushing league back in his day. He played in fewer games and he had to play against tougher defenses (because they didn't have to deal with a penalty for tapping a QB like suggs did to brady). There are too many factors to be accounted for. I like the Flacco vs Eli comparison better or even Ben 

[Alexir]

one of my hobbies is to compare stats

and I thought someone might find this interesting

Comp % Yards TD Int Avg Rush TD

Joe Flacco 60.5/ 17,633 /102/ 56/ 7.1/ 7

Johnny Unitas 53.6/ 12,053/ 109/ 72/ 7.9/ 7

In a run first league this doesn't impress me. Game was different back then. How many attempts did they each have?

[Alexir]

Please, do tell how one of the toughest QB's to ever play the game couldn't make it in this sissified league?

Agreed. I would down vote but I'm on mobile.

This league is a joke

[SteelersProphet]

The reason I found this interesting is for the reason many of you have already stated

 

even though the era was different, and he played in less games his stats are still remarkably similar

 

I find that telling and fascinating.......but im odd lol

[HomeoftheBRAVENS]

1/28/01, on 11 May 2013 - 09:41 AM, said:
Please, do tell how one of the toughest QB's to ever play the game couldn't make it in this sissified league?

Just because the rules lightened up doesn't mean he'd light up the league.Today's game is faster with stronger and bigger defenders and is more about the mental.If you took a qb from the 50's,gave him one of these intricate 2010's playbooks and told him go execute this at 10 times the pace you're used to vs a defense that's just as confusing as the playbook I gave you,he'd fail miserably.The "you can't compare the two era's" arguement goes both ways.It's unfair to judge Unitas' stats to Flacco's and its unfair to just assume any qb from the past would excel in what the game has become today.

[ravensdfan]

The reason I found this interesting is for the reason many of you have already stated

 

even though the era was different, and he played in less games his stats are still remarkably similar

 

I find that telling and fascinating.......but im odd lol

Do please elaborate.....why is it telling?

[SteelersProphet]

Do please elaborate.....why is it telling?

 

well Unitas played 12 games a season, over five years that's 20 less games, which is 1 and a fourth of a season

 

so that's roughly 5000 yards average, which would put their yardage totals pretty close

 

also unitas threw for 109 touchdowns.....which are great modern era numbers

 

and unitas had a lower completion percentage but threw for .8 more yards per throw, which IMO makes those numbers comparable

 

im just amazed unitas's stats hold up so well after so long is all

[Tank 92]

In all honesty, Johnny U. probably wouldn't make it in todays game, .

 

 

Well Jack, in all honesty, you don't know jack!

[mgridda]

Please, do tell how one of the toughest QB's to ever play the game couldn't make it in this sissified league?

 

Defenders were much slower, much less gifted athletes back then. The playbook was much more simple. The game has evolved, and it's a passing league, sure, but making it on a roster is much more difficult now. Scrutiny, there's more of that. It would be really strange to see Unitas field a 2013 offense. 

 

It's all about arm strength and the precision of passes. His decision making skills might be great, but there's more film study, more complexity, more understanding. 

[frozen joe flacco fan]

Just because the rules lightened up doesn't mean he'd light up the league.Today's game is faster with stronger and bigger defenders and is more about the mental.If you took a qb from the 50's,gave him one of these intricate 2010's playbooks and told him go execute this at 10 times the pace you're used to vs a defense that's just as confusing as the playbook I gave you,he'd fail miserably.The "you can't compare the two era's" arguement goes both ways.It's unfair to judge Unitas' stats to Flacco's and its unfair to just assume any qb from the past would excel in what the game has become today.

It is patently obvious you never saw the great Johnny U play except for some old black and white film clips of yesterday.  He played when men were men and boys were boys so there is no comparison.  Johnny U was simply in a league of his own and was without peers.  He was as gifted at throwing a football as any human being ever was.  He was born to play football.  Notre Dame University and the Pittsburgh Steelers failed to recognize his potential greatness but the Baltimore Colts saw it immediately.  The greatest tip Dan Fouts ever received was from one Johnny Unitas who said, "I always aim at the receivers' nose; then they make sure they catch it or it will break their nose."  Of all the modern day QBs I've seen, John Elway probably came the closest to Johnny U in God-given ability and talent.  Ironically, he was drafted by the Colts in 1983 but refused to play in B'more.  Maybe he was afraid of following a living legend, huh?  He didn't make his living throwing little dink and dunk passes like Joe Montana either.  QBs like Marino, Manning, Montana, Elway and Brady can lay claim to being the greatest QB of their era.  Johnny U was the greatest of any era with all due respect to Sammy Baugh, Norm VanBrocklin and Otto Graham.  Study the history of football!

[Tank 92]

Just because the rules lightened up doesn't mean he'd light up the league.Today's game is faster with stronger and bigger defenders and is more about the mental.If you took a qb from the 50's,gave him one of these intricate 2010's playbooks and told him go execute this at 10 times the pace you're used to vs a defense that's just as confusing as the playbook I gave you,he'd fail miserably.The "you can't compare the two era's" arguement goes both ways.It's unfair to judge Unitas' stats to Flacco's and its unfair to just assume any qb from the past would excel in what the game has become today.

 

 

Sorry, but this holds no water.  Johnny was an offensive genius and laid the groundwork for today's passing game. In fact, when you say "more about the mental", this only strengthens the argument for him.  He was the O coordinator AND the QB in one package. Confusion with today's playbook? He WROTE the playbook. There are few in today's game that could game plan, call their own plays and throw the ball as well. And there is no one, nor will there be anyone, who can lay claim to being the innovator he was.

[HomeoftheBRAVENS]

It is patently obvious you never saw the great Johnny U play except for some old black and white film clips of yesterday.  He played when men were men and boys were boys so there is no comparison.  Johnny U was simply in a league of his own and was without peers.  He was as gifted at throwing a football as any human being ever was.  He was born to play football.  Notre Dame University and the Pittsburgh Steelers failed to recognize his potential greatness but the Baltimore Colts saw it immediately.  The greatest tip Dan Fouts ever received was from one Johnny Unitas who said, "I always aim at the receivers' nose; then they make sure they catch it or it will break their nose."  Of all the modern day QBs I've seen, John Elway probably came the closest to Johnny U in God-given ability and talent.  Ironically, he was drafted by the Colts in 1983 but refused to play in B'more.  Maybe he was afraid of following a living legend, huh?  He didn't make his living throwing little dink and dunk passes like Joe Montana either.  QBs like Marino, Manning, Montana, Elway and Brady can lay claim to being the greatest QB of their era.  Johnny U was the greatest of any era with all due respect to Sammy Baugh, Norm VanBrocklin and Otto Graham.  Study the history of football!

So because you may have seen his games live and I've seen re runs of his games,that makes you an expert on how he played?You sound like you're letting your bias towards him impede your judgment."He played when were men and boys were boys"?Are you saying these 300 pound pure muscle lineman running 4.7 40's aren't men?It's a well known fact that football players weren't as gifted physically back then as they are today.To say that a player from that era would dominate today's faster and more detailed game just because you can't tackle the same way you could have 50 years ago is wrong.Maybe he would be the Brady and Manning of today had he grew up in this era or maybe he wouldn't.But if you had a time machine and plucked him from his prime years to come step on the NFL field this fall,he wouldn't play like the HOFer he he was back then.

[JacktheRaven]

Please, do tell how one of the toughest QB's to ever play the game couldn't make it in this sissified league?

I didn't say he wasn't tough. He was the toughest. Also, I didn't say he wasn't good. He was great. My point was just trying to compare the NFL 40-50 years ago, to today, is hard to do.

[JacktheRaven]

Well Jack, in all honesty, you don't know jack!

You took my comment out of context. Please read my whole post.

[frozen joe flacco fan]

So because you may have seen his games live and I've seen re runs of his games,that makes you an expert on how he played?You sound like you're letting your bias towards him impede your judgment."He played when were men and boys were boys"?Are you saying these 300 pound pure muscle lineman running 4.7 40's aren't men?It's a well known fact that football players weren't as gifted physically back then as they are today.To say that a player from that era would dominate today's faster and more detailed game just because you can't tackle the same way you could have 50 years ago is wrong.Maybe he would be the Brady and Manning of today had he grew up in this era or maybe he wouldn't.But if you had a time machine and plucked him from his prime years to come step on the NFL field this fall,he wouldn't play like the HOFer he he was back then.

No.  I'm no expert, just a long-time football fanatic.  Keep indulging yourself in your fantasy football league!  John Unitas was incomparable.  If you were a true B'more fan, you would be as proud of him as I am and would extol his praises like I am doing because he was simply the best.  That's not bias or bragging.  Like Ray Lewis, Johnny U backed it up by his play.  Speaking of bias, you seem to have a bias for 300 pound men who run 4.7 40's so what's the difference.  As the Dallas Cowboys' Bob "The Sheriff" Lilly once said, "its not the size of the dog in the fight; its the size of the fight in the dog."  A classic example of this is Drew Brees who ironically broke Johnny's longstanding record for 47 consecutive games with at least one passing TD.  Are you saying that in order to play in today's game that bigger is better?  Tell Drew Brees and Ray Rice.  The O-linemen couldn't hold back then like they do now on almost every play.  They had to learn to hold their blocks.  Yes. It was a different game.    

[ravensdfan]

So because you may have seen his games live and I've seen re runs of his games,that makes you an expert on how he played?You sound like you're letting your bias towards him impede your judgment."He played when were men and boys were boys"?Are you saying these 300 pound pure muscle lineman running 4.7 40's aren't men?It's a well known fact that football players weren't as gifted physically back then as they are today.To say that a player from that era would dominate today's faster and more detailed game just because you can't tackle the same way you could have 50 years ago is wrong.Maybe he would be the Brady and Manning of today had he grew up in this era or maybe he wouldn't.But if you had a time machine and plucked him from his prime years to come step on the NFL field this fall,he wouldn't play like the HOFer he he was back then.

 

"Unitas wasn't a product of a system like today's quarterbacks. He didn't benefit from the Run-and-Shoot like Warren Moon or the West Coast offense like Montana and Steve Young. Unitas was the system. He called his own plays, at times even drawing them up in the dirt. And he didn't have five receivers and five options in a pattern like a Kurt Warner does in today's game.

Unitas had two receivers running downfield patterns in the 1950s and three in most patterns in the 1960s. If his receivers weren't open, it was his responsibility to create daylight for them with laser-like spirals. His job was to complete passes, no matter how tight the coverage"

 

"With his crew cut, sloped-shoulders and black high-tops, Unitas single-handedly ushered in the quarterback as the premier player in football and put the position atop the salary chart. The Roger Staubachs, Terry Bradshaws, Joe Montanas, Brett Favres and Kurt Warners all owe him a debt of gratitude."

 

source: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/749285/posts

 

To give you an idea of what the point was regarding saying the game today would be too complicated for Unitas.

 

Sidenote:

 

Many call Harrison a Baltimore mistake because we had him on our PS and cut him. Unitas could then be called Pittsburgh's colossal mistake as he spent 1955 on their PS (or equivalent thereof in that time).

 

Favorite quote:

 

""There is a difference between conceit and confidence. Conceit is bragging about yourself. Confidence means you believe you can get the job done."

 

 

....remind you of anything? :)

[HomeoftheBRAVENS]

Sorry, but this holds no water.  Johnny was an offensive genius and laid the groundwork for today's passing game. In fact, when you say "more about the mental", this only strengthens the argument for him.  He was the O coordinator AND the QB in one package. Confusion with today's playbook? He WROTE the playbook. There are few in today's game that could game plan, call their own plays and throw the ball as well. And there is no one, nor will there be anyone, who can lay claim to being the innovator he was.

Yes,he was an innovator and the greatest of his era,but in his era players didn't have the muscle building supplements,advanced training regiments and video technology to study the game like we have today.As I just told Frozen Joe Flacco fan,if he grew up in this era there's a chance he couldve been the Manning or Brady of today's game,but if he came straight from his prime years to play football for the ravens this fall,there's no guarantee it would work out so well for him.

[Tank 92]

So because you may have seen his games live and I've seen re runs of his games,that makes you an expert on how he played?You sound like you're letting your bias towards him impede your judgment."He played when were men and boys were boys"?Are you saying these 300 pound pure muscle lineman running 4.7 40's aren't men?It's a well known fact that football players weren't as gifted physically back then as they are today.To say that a player from that era would dominate today's faster and more detailed game just because you can't tackle the same way you could have 50 years ago is wrong.Maybe he would be the Brady and Manning of today had he grew up in this era or maybe he wouldn't.But if you had a time machine and plucked him from his prime years to come step on the NFL field this fall,he wouldn't play like the HOFer he he was back then.

 

 

You are missing huge parts of the comparison. Do you think those "300 pound pure muscle lineman running 4.7 40's" would be as fast and be considered "gifted athletically" if they were playing in the mud or on frozen tundra without the benefit of A/C and heat? Half of those guys wouldn't even be playing or wouldn't last a season. Today's game is faster because it is played on artificial surfaces and a lot of times, indoors. The guys playing in the past played under much tougher conditions and played in pain much more, without the benefit of today's pain killers and performance enhancers. Yes, it was an era when "men were men", because they had to be. And there hasn't been some sort of evolutionary physical change in the human species that makes today's athlete more "gifted".

 

There's no way of really telling how Johnny would perform in today's game. But given that he was THE innovator of the passing game and had the mental capacity to game plan and call his own plays, it's safe to say if he had all of the advantages given to today's QBs he would be a beast.

 

 

*Didn't see your last post until I had already posted this.