The single season TD leaders list if you don't count 2010 and beyond

[BloodyChamp]

Tom Brady 50 2007

Peyton Manning 49 2004

Dan Marino 48 1984

Dan Marino 44 1986

Kurt Warner 41 1999

Brett Favre 39 1996

Daunte Culpepper 39 2004

Brett Favre 38 1995

Kurt Warner 36 2001

Steve Beuerlein 36 1999

And since this forum is basically made up of Peyton and Tom fans, you wouldn't know it by the opinions here but many people would argue that stat inflation was as big as it is now as far back as 2007. My personal opinion is 2010 is the first year of stat inflation as we know it.

[ColtsLegacy]

[amfootball]

Tom Brady 50 2007

Peyton Manning 49 2004

Dan Marino 48 1984

Dan Marino 44 1986

Kurt Warner 41 1999

Brett Favre 39 1996

Daunte Culpepper 39 2004

Brett Favre 38 1995

Kurt Warner 36 2001

Steve Beuerlein 36 1999

And since this forum is basically made up of Peyton and Tom fans, you wouldn't know it by the opinions here but many people would argue that stat inflation was as big as it is now as far back as 2007. My personal opinion is 2010 is the first year of stat inflation as we know it.

Every QB on that list besides Culpepper and Beuerlein are great QBs and/or HoF's.

 

I never get too hung up on the stat thing. For sure it is easier to throw TDs the last few years with the defensive rules and all but defenses are also stronger, bigger more athletic, better coached, and have more intricate schemes. I think much of it does balance out between the eras.

[oldunclemark]

Tom Brady 50 2007

Peyton Manning 49 2004

Dan Marino 48 1984

Dan Marino 44 1986

Kurt Warner 41 1999

Brett Favre 39 1996

Daunte Culpepper 39 2004

Brett Favre 38 1995

Kurt Warner 36 2001

Steve Beuerlein 36 1999

And since this forum is basically made up of Peyton and Tom fans, you wouldn't know it by the opinions here but many people would argue that stat inflation was as big as it is now as far back as 2007. My personal opinion is 2010 is the first year of stat inflation as we know it.

appreciating the effort....BC..

That's like looking at NBA scoring leaders before the 3-point shot..

You can debate it..but you're drawing an arbitrary line that leaves out Michael Jordan. LeBron James, Kevin Durant etc..

[dgambill]

I like to look at qbs during their era. IMO you have Joe Montana, Dan Marino, and Warren Moon in the 80s and a pretty big gap to the next ones and you have Brett Favre, Steve Young, and Troy Aikman in the 90s and a gap to the next. Then you have Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, and Kurt Warner in the 00s. This next decade while there is some overlap for sure I would say will be defined by Rodgers and we have yet to see who else.

[BloodyChamp]

What I've been looking at lately is how a quarterback's season stats used to be a direct indication of the team's success. Half of that list played in the SB the year they made the list, and all but 2 guys won a playoff game the year they made the the list. The real list now actually includes a guy/team with a losing record and several who went 1 and done after an easy schedule.

I think am is giving defenses way to much credit. For every new plateau they've reached on their own, they've been drug back 3 or 4 plateaus by the rules.

I don't like the basketball comparison either. Jordan would have just dunked every time if there were never a 3 point line. Basketball players also have other jobs to do besides score. Quarterbacks today don't.

[BOTT]

Beuerlein threw 39? Lol who knew?

[Kyle]

Now THAT right up there, is stat inflation 

[amfootball]

What I've been looking at lately is how a quarterback's season stats used to be a direct indication of the team's success. Half of that list played in the SB the year they made the list, and all but 2 guys won a playoff game the year they made the the list. The real list now actually includes a guy/team with a losing record and several who went 1 and done after an easy schedule.

I think am is giving defenses way to much credit. For every new plateau they've reached on their own, they've been drug back 3 or 4 plateaus by the rules.

I don't like the basketball comparison either. Jordan would have just dunked every time if there were never a 3 point line. Basketball players also have other jobs to do besides score. Quarterbacks today don't.

To your first paragraph, you have to factor in FA/cap era. QBs can have eye popping stats but still lose because the team around them is not as good as pre-mid 90's. If a QB pre 1995 put up 250 yards and 2 TDs his team usually won because the teams were so much stronger all around. Now a days, QBs have to compensate so much more for the flaws in their teams that are inherit in the cap/FA era.

[BloodyChamp]

No they don't. All they have to do is move the slowest guy on the team to the Slot and have him run 5 yd curls and he'll have 1000 yards. That's the end of that flaw.

They have eye popping stats because it's just easier to do what a quarterback does now than it was a short time ago.

[oldunclemark]

To your first paragraph, you have to factor in FA/cap era. QBs can have eye popping stats but still lose because the team around them is not as good as pre-mid 90's. If a QB pre 1995 put up 250 yards and 2 TDs his team usually won because the teams were so much stronger all around. Now a days, QBs have to compensate so much more for the flaws in their teams that are inherit in the cap/FA era.

That's a good point..

pro-rate some of Johnny Unitas' too years....and project what those same numbers would be today

[Superman]

Why would you arbitrarily pick 2010? If there's any line of demarcation in recent history it's 2004. But even then, you still have Warner and Favre with huge numbers.

The truth is that every era, there are a couple/three really good QBs who push the boundaries and threaten the record books. Before Warner and Favre, it was Marino. And so on. Sports records will always be temporary.

[BloodyChamp]

Why would you arbitrarily pick 2010? If there's any line of demarcation in recent history it's 2004. But even then, you still have Warner and Favre with huge numbers.

The truth is that every era, there are a couple/three really good QBs who push the boundaries and threaten the record books. Before Warner and Favre, it was Marino. And so on. Sports records will always be temporary.

2010 is just where I saw stat inflation to the extent that it happens now, happening first. I pointed out that others go back even further. The rise wasn't as progressively patterned as you think. Not far behind Steve Beuerline was Daryl Lamonica and Y.A. Tittle.

[Synthetic]

Great topic here as you pointed out stat inflation, some of those numbers truly were incredibly back in their day. 

 

I remember the Kurt Warner 2001 season, he almost passed for 5,000 too, which was insane when you think about that Rams team. They were loaded, Marshall Faulk averaged 98 yards a game on the ground and Warner still had those huge numbers. 

[amfootball]

No they don't. All they have to do is move the slowest guy on the team to the Slot and have him run 5 yd curls and he'll have 1000 yards. That's the end of that flaw.

They have eye popping stats because it's just easier to do what a quarterback does now than it was a short time ago.

How many slot receivers had 1000 yards this year?

[amfootball]

That's a good point..

pro-rate some of Johnny Unitas' too years....and project what those same numbers would be today

Unitas is interesting. He more or less introduced the passing game to the league at a time when defenses were not prepared to defend it. He was certainly a special player with tremendous foresight but I do wonder how he would have performed against defenses that are built to defend the pass.

[oldunclemark]

Unitas is interesting. He more or less introduced the passing game to the league at a time when defenses were not prepared to defend it. He was certainly a special player with tremendous foresight but I do wonder how he would have performed against defenses that are built to defend the pass.

True, there was basically just man to man coverage then but to counter that, you have to add that defenses were allowed to hold the WRs and face mask them in the late 50s....tackling with the head gear or striking with the forearm simply wasnt a penalty..

...and that anything done to the QB was legal. there was no 'roughing the passer' in the 50s and 60s

[dgambill]

Like I said. I like to try to look at players relative to their era. Were they the best of their era etc....I'm not interested in saying Unitas was better than Manning or Brady was better than Montana. To me there is to many variables to try to do that. As I mentioned in my previous post. I look at eras and what Peyton did last year isn't comparable to what he did in 04 or what Dan did in 84. Between rule changes, growth of players and different eras of defenses I think it would be an injustice to compare across decades. Heck we even have more games now than we used to so there is that too. I think every single guy on that list had an AMAZING season and most of their careers reflect the ability of those players.

[BloodyChamp]

How many slot receivers had 1000 yards this year?

I honestly have no clue but some of those guys (Cole Beasly, Wes Welker, etc) wouldn't have the numbers they have every year if they played before 2010. Heck some of them wouldn't have a career in football. Being a Pats fan, I think you know that.

[amfootball]

I honestly have no clue but some of those guys (Cole Beasly, Wes Welker, etc) wouldn't have the numbers they have every year if they played before 2010. Heck some of them wouldn't have a career in football. Being a Pats fan, I think you know that.

Huh? You had said it is easy for slot receivers to just line up and run curls and get 1000 yards. Again, how many slot guys have 1000 yards? The Pats receivers getting a lot of yards is an anomaly in the league because 1) their offense is predicated on the short to intermediate passing game and 2) Brady is the best QB of his generation. Those things would not change no matter what year they played in.

[BloodyChamp]

Huh? You had said it is easy for slot receivers to just line up and run curls and get 1000 yards. Again, how many slot guys have 1000 yards? The Pats receivers getting a lot of yards is an anomaly in the league because 1) their offense is predicated on the short to intermediate passing game and 2) Brady is the best QB of his generation. Those things would not change no matter what year they played in.

I could make a post about peanut butter and jelly samdwiches and you would make it into a 1 man Tom Brady lovefest.

There is no way in Haiti that an offense could live of off dink and dunk the way the Pats do before 2010, even with Pro Bowl caliber WRs of the previous eras. Their offense is predicated to the short to immediate passing game because rules basically give offenses those passes now comared to what it used to take to gain 5 yards over the middle.

[amfootball]

I could make a post about peanut butter and jelly samdwiches and you would make it into a 1 man Tom Brady lovefest.

There is no way in Haiti that an offense could live of off dink and dunk the way the Pats do before 2010, even with Pro Bowl caliber WRs of the previous eras. Their offense is predicated to the short to immediate passing game because rules basically give offenses those passes now comared to what it used to take to gain 5 yards over the middle.

You brought up Brady/Pats. And the Pats won their first three Super Bowls dinking and dunking.

[BloodyChamp]

You brought up Brady/Pats. And the Pats won their first three Super Bowls dinking and dunking.

So you want the list altered to include nothing before 2001 because of all of Tom Brady's stat inflation then?

All I said was being a Pats fan, you should know that.

[amfootball]

So you want the list altered to include nothing before 2001 because of all of Tom Brady's stat inflation then?

What? I don't even understand what point you are trying to make with this thread. As has been pointed out, great QBs will be great regardless of the rules. Volume stats for sure have been effected but winning and losing have not as each team is playing with the same rules. Teams in the cap/FA era are flawed compared to the teams pre mid 90's so QBs are asked to do more to win. Stats are nice but in the end it still comes down to wins and great players know how to win regardless of the rules.

[BloodyChamp]

What? I don't even understand what point you are trying to make with this thread. As has been pointed out, great QBs will be great regardless of the rules. Volume stats for sure have been effected but winning and losing have not as each team is playing with the same rules. Teams in the cap/FA era are flawed compared to the teams pre mid 90's so QBs are asked to do more to win. Stats are nice but in the end it still comes down to wins and great players know how to win regardless of the rules.

You claim the Pats won 3 SBs with dink and dunk (even though 1 of those team's only Pro Bowlers, of which their were several, were on defense and even though that Tuck Rule thing happened another year but that's another post). Dink and dunk is where a considerable amount of stat inflation (stat inflation being my original point before you got another case of PreBrady Syndrome) comes from.

[amfootball]

You claim the Pats won 3 SBs with dink and dunk (even though 1 of those team's only Pro Bowlers, of which their were several, were on defense and even though that Tuck Rule thing happened another year but that's another post). Dink and dunk is where a considerable amount of stat inflation (stat inflation being my original point before you got another case of PreBrady Syndrome) comes from.

Again, what? The Pats offense was dink and dunk those years. What does the defense or Tuck Rule have to do with that? You said offenses post 2010 could win with dink and dunk because of the new rules as slot receivers can get 1000 yards by running 5 yard curls and then when I pointed out that the Pats won their SBs before the new rules with dink and dunk, you now say stats are inflated. What!?

[BloodyChamp]

Right the top defenses and the tuck play had nothing to do with that. They didn't win anything because of their offense. They won in spite of it. What what huh...

[amfootball]

Right the top defenses and the tuck play had nothing to do with that. They didn't win anything because of their offense. They won in spite of it. What what huh...

Way to change the argument when you lost the original one ...

[BloodyChamp]

Way to change the argument when you lost the original one ...

A) the argument never changed

B) you lost it

[amfootball]

A) the argument never changed

B) you lost it

lol. Wasn't it even an argument or just a lot of false information from you?

 

1) The rules changed in 2004, not 2010

2) There are a minimum number of slot receivers to reach 1,000 yards and they did not do it running 5 yard curls

3) Pats won SBs with dink and dunk prior to rules being changed

4) You have yet to prove stat inflation at all with your own logic

[BloodyChamp]

Stat inflation isn't as simple changing the rules. Several of the rules we complain about now go very far back. It's the fact that the rules no longer dictate over the games, they also dictate over common sense. When 2 hips brush together a half a yard after the 5 yds, is that really illegal contact? When a guy swats at the ball and 4 of his fingers brush the guy's helmet, etc etc etc.

That got out of control in about 2010. It happened a few times before then but never to the point that it yielded stat inflation imo. I mentioned that others would disagree and go back even further, which only gives more merit to the fact that stats are inflated!

The Pats wons SBs with the Tuck Play, 2 #1 ranked defenses and a #6 ranked defense.

This wasn't about proving stat inflation. It was about exemplifying it. You could take any number of stats and see stat inflation. I chose single season TD passes. Me not posting it or you not admitting it doesn't make it any less real.

[Fx Stryker]

Unitas is interesting. He more or less introduced the passing game to the league at a time when defenses were not prepared to defend it. He was certainly a special player with tremendous foresight but I do wonder how he would have performed against defenses that are built to defend the pass.

This isn't a serious post is it...

[amfootball]

Stat inflation isn't as simple changing the rules. Several of the rules we complain about now go very far back. It's the fact that the rules no longer dictate over the games, they also dictate over common sense. When 2 hips brush together a half a yard after the 5 yds, is that really illegal contact? When a guy swats at the ball and 4 of his fingers brush the guy's helmet, etc etc etc.

That got out of control in about 2010. It happened a few times before then but never to the point that it yielded stat inflation imo. I mentioned that others would disagree and go back even further, which only gives more merit to the fact that stats are inflated!

The Pats wons SBs with the Tuck Play, 2 #1 ranked defenses and a #6 ranked defense.

This wasn't about proving stat inflation. It was about exemplifying it. You could take any number of stats and see stat inflation. I chose single season TD passes. Me not posting it or you not admitting it doesn't make it any less real.

That is about as vanilla of an explanation as I have ever read on anything. So you think the enforcement of rules that existed before is the main reason for stat inflation? Not the fact of how football is actually played - from the intricacies of play design, exotic formations, etc not to mention the superior athletes who run those plays? Or the fact that the game has become much more offensively dominated especially the passing game since the 1980's? And I have not even touched on the coaching ...

 

Sure it was the Tuck Play and not Brady throwing for 300 yards in the second half in a blizzard .. and of course it was ALL the defense and not the 6th ranked and 4th ranked offense in points scored 2 of those 3 championship years along with Brady making the pro bowl those two years that contributed at all to those rings or his comebacks in 2 of those 3 SBs when the defense wilted ...

 

So again, are you going to actually post anything factual in this thread or more straw men for me to knock down?

[BloodyChamp]

I've posted several facts. You going what huh I don't get it are you going to post facts doesn't void any of them.

[amfootball]

I've posted several facts. You going what huh I don't get it are you going to post facts doesn't void any of them.

What facts? You are drawing correlations. Or at least are trying to and doing a poor job of it. Football is just not that simple and cherry picking a stat like TDs only hurts whatever case it is you were trying to make re: stat inflation.

[BloodyChamp]

Yardage, completions, etc have also gone up. I just chose TDs and I have the numbers right in front of you. Meanwhile I don't think you've even looked at the actual list of single season TD leaders because you can clearly see the stat inflation in it. Hey how about you supply some stats or correlatioms to prove that the defense and the tuck play didn't win those SBs.

[amfootball]

Yardage, completions, etc have also gone up. I just chose TDs and I have the numbers right in front of you. Meanwhile I don't think you've even looked at the actual list of single season TD leaders because you can clearly see the stat inflation in it. Hey how about you supply some stats or correlatioms to prove that the defense and the tuck play didn't win those SBs.

All that indicates is the game has changed from a running game to a pass game. If you check rush attempts and yardage and TDs those are down. So does that mean today's RBs are not as good as the RBs from the 60s and 70s? Again, one set of stats effects the other and really does not prove anything factually.

 

To the bolded - I already did see post #33.

[BloodyChamp]

Rushing attempts, yardage and TDs are down. Passing attempts, yardage and TDs are up. And you don't understand the inflation of stats in the passing game :-|

Even if you give Brady credit for the tuck game, it only proves an earlier point. A quarterback's stats used to be an indication of overall success. Now they usually don't. Drew Brees set a yardage record in the 2013 divisional game even though they never had a chance.

[amfootball]

Rushing attempts, yardage and TDs are down. Passing attempts, yardage and TDs are up. And you don't understand the inflation of stats in the passing game :-|

Even if you give Brady credit for the tuck game, it only proves an earlier point. A quarterback's stats used to be an indication of overall success. Now they usually don't. Drew Brees set a yardage record in the 2013 divisional game even though they never had a chance.

?? Brady's stats for the Tuck game were 32 for 52 for 312 yards, 1 TD (rushing) and 1 pick. And he did this in a blizzard.

In comparison, Rich Gannon's stats were 17 for 31 for 159 yards, 1 TD, no picks.

 

Brady had the better stats and won the game.

[BloodyChamp]

Unlike the game years later that I referenced where Drew Brees threw for a divisional playoff record of 309 yards and a TD vs Russell Wilson's 103 yards and 0 touchdowns. And I didn't look this substat up but I think I remember reading that Wilson had 30 yards in the first half, yet it was 16-0 Seahawks. Stats Shmats when it comes to anything after 2010 tbh.