Favre

Makelele

Is Brett Favre the best ever.Yes?

Orizio

Funnily enough, I came in here to make a thread about the obssessive attitude of the American commentators towards him. They seem intent on mentioning him in every ****ing sentence.

eagle eye

Makelele wrote: »

Is Brett Favre the best ever.Yes?

No, he is a great quarterback but not nearly the best ever. Brady and Manning are the only QBs currently playing that are in that discussion well thats of course excluding young guys who have yet to make their mark.

mikemac

Johnny Unitas, enough said

tallaghtoutlaws

Best ever probably not. I would say the man is a legend to be sure. Definitely up there with the best of them regardless of what people have said about him over the last 2 years. He is playing like he is in his early 30's again.

themont85

Certainly he has a couple of the strings to his bow in such an argument. Durability (undoubtably the most durable of all time), good stats and a championship. Personally I would rank him high enough in the top 10 but he lags in the discussion behind the likes of Manning and Brady with the former the ability to carry the whole offence on his shoulders and the latter his clutch and ability to execute the game plan and kill teams. I don't think he ever carried the things which Manning and Brady exhibit in the same way shown by the high number of interceptions at critical times. He always needs to be on a good team to win a lot of games (and at times has been wanting when his good teams have been in position) where as Manning has consistancy of excellence and playoffs and Brady has come of trumps for the Pats 90% of the time.

Chanandler Bong

Not the best QB ever, but be sure we'll never see his like again:)

Makelele

Do you not think that these interceptions were of comical importance though and added to his overall entertainment value as a player?

TheHeadhunter

I don't think he is the best ever, I believe Peyton Manning when he finishes up will be considered the best ever to be honest.

I think Favre is a serious contender for MVP this year.

tallaghtoutlaws

Makelele wrote: »

Do you not think that these interceptions were of comical importance though and added to his overall entertainment value as a player?

Im not sure I know what you mean. Are you suggesting he threw every Int on purpose for the fun of it? Or do you just associate every Int he has thrown as an attribute to his career and it adds to his character?

Before you write of Favre and all his picks read this Interesting Article:

http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/29/brett-favre-and-the-interception-myth/

Pop quiz: Which of these quarterbacks proved (or has proven) to be the toughest to intercept?

a) Johnny Unitas

b) Roger Staubach

c) Bart Starr

d) Bob Griese

e) Boomer Esiason

f) Brett Favre

Well, it couldn’t be Favre, right? His interceptions, according to a small but loud anti-Favre faction, have all but canceled out his prodigious production.

So let’s see…. The answer must be the great Johnny U, known for his pinpoint accuracy. Then again, maybe it’s Staubach; “Roger the Dodger” never seemed to make mistakes. No, wait; it’s got to be Starr or Griese, those ultra-cool and efficient generals of ball-control offenses. Or… could it be Esaison? He has been such an outspoken critic of Favre that certainly he couldn’t have been more pick-prone, right?

Actually, he was, and so were the others. The correct answer to our quiz is Brett Favre. Surprised?

After landing in Minnesota this season, Favre got off to the best start of his career and effectively silenced some critics — but not all.

You’ve no doubt heard analysts and talking heads insist that his throwback passing — 12 touchdowns, three interceptions through Week 7 — is a mirage, that Favre’s “volatile side” (as one writer put it) will eventually force itself free. Conveniently for them, the decisive play in the Vikings’ loss to the Steelers last Sunday (Oct. 25) was a Pittsburgh interception. Never mind that the pass hit Minnesota halfback Chester Taylor’s hands, and that it was the only pick among Favre’s 50 attempts. It’s now in the books as a crunch-time “INT,” and it gives “Favre haters” new ammunition. It was, after all, the 313th of his career.

But to deride — or define — Favre for that one stat is shortsighted. After all, he has thrown more than 9,500 passes in regular-season games. That’s 1,000-plus pass attempts beyond the No. 2 guy, Dan Marino, and nearly 2,500 attempts beyond the No. 3 guy, John Elway. Favre has also thrown for more yards (66,808 through Week 7), completed more passes (5,878), and tossed more TDs (476) than any quarterback in history.

We’re talking quantity, yes, but we’re also talking quality, which brings us to the point: Favre’s interception total is overrated. Way overrated. He has played so long and so well that his 313 INTs amount to just 3.3 percent of his attempts. In fact, he has been less prone to interceptions than all but five Hall of Fame quarterbacks. Check it out; every name below has been enshrined in Canton except for Esiason (we included him just for fun):

QUARTERBACK: INTERCEPTION PCT.

Arnie Herber: 9.0 (1,175 attempts, 106 INTs)

Bob Waterfield: 7.9% (1,617 attempts, 128 INTs)

Sid Luckman: 7.6% (1,744 attempts, 132 INTs)

George Blanda: 6.9% (4,007 attempts, 277 INTs)

Sammy Baugh: 6.8% (2,995 attempts, 203 INTs)

Bobby Layne: 6.6% (3,700 attempts, 243 INTs)

Norm Van Brocklin: 6.1% (2,895 attempts, 178 INTs)

Joe Namath: 5.8% (3,762 attempts, 220 INTs)

Y.A. Tittle: 5.6% (4,395 attempts, 248 INTs)

Terry Bradshaw: 5.4% (3,901 attempts, 210 INTs)

Otto Graham: 5.1% (2,626 attempts, 135 INTs)

Bob Griese: 5.0% (3,429 attempts, 172 INTs)

Johnny Unitas: 4.9% (5,186 attempts, 253 INTs)

Len Dawson: 4.9% (3,741 attempts, 183 INTs)

Bart Starr: 4.4% (3,149 attempts, 138 INTs)

Sonny Jurgensen: 4.4% (4,262 attempts, 189 INTs)

Dan Fouts: 4.3% (5,604 attempts, 242 INTs)

Fran Tarkenton: 4.1% (6,467 attempts, 266 INTs)

Roger Staubach: 3.7% (2,958 attempts, 109 INTs)

Jim Kelly: 3.7% (4,779 attempts, 175 INTs)

Boomer Esiason: 3.5% (5,205 attempts, 184 INTs)

Warren Moon: 3.4% (6,823 attempts, 233 INTs)

Brett Favre: 3.3% (9,280 attempts, 310 INTs)

Furthermore, Favre’s interception percentage isn’t terribly higher than that of these Hall of Famers:

John Elway: 3.1 (7,250 attempts, 226 INTs)

Dan Marino: 3.0 (8,358 attempts, 252 INTs)

Troy Aikman: 3.0 (4,715 attempts, 141 INTs)

The stingiest QBs in the Hall are Joe Montana and Steve Young, each of whom had a 2.6 interception percentage. Current “overprotective” stars include Peyton Manning (2.8 percent), Drew Brees (2.7), Tom Brady (2.3) and Donovan McNabb (2.1).

Otherwise, our Hall of Fame chart shows that even the most talented QB legends made mistakes. Some of them even threw more INTs than TDs. Tittle, who played for the Colts, 49ers, and Giants from 1950 through 1964, threw 242 TD passes vs. 248 picks. Layne, the original gunslinger, had 243 of his passes go to the wrong team (vs. 196 TD passes). Namath also threw 47 more interceptions (220) than touchdowns (173).

But because Favre’s career started during boom eras for cable TV and the Internet, his interceptions have been … louder. Certainly he has thrown some ill-advised passes at inopportune times, but compared with most Hall of Famers, he has been careful with the ball.

None of this is to deny that Favre is a risk-taker. In fact, there’s a catch here: the evolution of pro football offenses. With the safer, more efficient game plans of today, all kinds of “ordinary” QBs have even lower interception percentages than Favre. Among them: Chad Pennington (2.6 percentage), Byron Leftwich (2.7) and Marc Bulger (2.9). Of course, those aren’t the types of QBs who lead the league in touchdowns and yardage and who win MVPs and Super Bowls. Maybe today’s QBs need to roll the dice a little more ….

Ultimately, Favre has been the best kind of gunslinger: one who wins. His total of 175 victories as a starter is a record, and his winning percentage of .634 is better than all but a handful of Hall of Fame QBs. And you could make the case that he’s getting better with age. The teams he has quarterbacked since the second half of the 2006 season have won 32 of 43 games — an amazing .744 clip.

Tristram

Lies, damn lies and statistics!

tallaghtoutlaws

Tristram wrote: »

Lies, damn lies and statistics!

Care to elaborate?

eagle eye

TheHeadhunter wrote: »

I don't think he is the best ever, I believe Peyton Manning when he finishes up will be considered the best ever to be honest.

I think Favre is a serious contender for MVP this year.

Not a chance of Manning being considered the best ever. Brady has a shot if he gets another ring and even then it would be hard.

Over my lifetime Montana is the best I've seen, I never seen Bart Starr but when I was living in Boston I went to games with five guys and I was the youngest by ten years of that group. The two oldest of that group who were in their sixties at the time both say that Bart Starr was better than him. One of the other guys said Unitas was the greatest, another said Marino and the other guy agreed with me that it was Montana. But all except one of them had Starr in their top two.

Si Conando

eagle eye wrote: »

Not a chance of Manning being considered the best ever. Brady has a shot if he gets another ring and even then it would be hard.

Over my lifetime Montana is the best I've seen, I never seen Bart Starr but when I was living in Boston I went to games with five guys and I was the youngest by ten years of that group. The two oldest of that group who were in their sixties at the time both say that Bart Starr was better than him. One of the other guys said Unitas was the greatest, another said Marino and the other guy agreed with me that it was Montana. But all except one of them had Starr in their top two.

Maybe not by you, but there will certainly be a lot of people picking Manning whenever he retires. Its not inconceivable that he wins his 2nd ring this year, and goes 19-0. For some reason, even if this happened, i imagine you still wouldnt give him a chance.

eagle eye

Si Conando wrote: »

Maybe not by you, but there will certainly be a lot of people picking Manning whenever he retires. Its not inconceivable that he wins his 2nd ring this year, and goes 19-0. For some reason, even if this happened, i imagine you still wouldnt give him a chance.

Really. I rate him as one of the greats, in fact I rate him in the top four I've personally seen play the game. Those being him, Brady, Young and Montana.

I am saying that its very hard to beat Montana and Starr. You would need at least four rings to be in there with a shout. Thats why I say that even if Brady was to get another ring he might not be considered in the converstaion with those two.

Max Power1

Chanandler Bong wrote: »

Not the best QB ever, but be sure we'll never see his like again:)

I dont know if you were being sarcastic here or not, but a +1 if you were serious.

He's an upper echelon QB and a sure fire hof but i dont think he is the best ever. In fact I dont think he's the best in the league now - that honour would go to brady or manning.

Very interesting article that TallaghtOutlaws posted btw. A big kudos to you as i have to say i never knew that!!

TheHeadhunter

eagle eye wrote: »

Not a chance of Manning being considered the best ever.

Why is there "not a chance" of this happening? Can you see years into the future?

frostie500

TheHeadhunter wrote: »

I think Favre is a serious contender for MVP this year.

Definitly, when you look at the Vikings team this year it is pretty much the same roster as last year but suddenly with a functional QB in they are one of the top teams in the league. Favre has been able to get more out of all of their skill players. Even Adian Peterson is becoming more of a recieving threat with an average recpetion of 15 yards. Rice and Shiancoe having exceptional years. Does anyone believe these guys would play as productivily without Farve(AP not included in that obviously!)

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

Before you write of Favre and all his picks read this Interesting Article:http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/29/brett-favre-and-the-interception-myth/

Great article Tallaght, I always thought that it was unfair to Farve when he was lauded for being the all time passing attempts leader and then also critised as being the interception leader

eagle eye wrote: »

Not a chance of Manning being considered the best ever. Brady has a shot if he gets another ring and even then it would be hard.

How can you say that Manning has no chance? he has been durable(current start streak 187), productive(not even going to give stats on that one!), most importantly a winner(six seasons and soon to be seven 12 win seasons as well as a Superbowl), a consistant pro bowler(9 in 11 years), 4 time all pro, 3 time league MVP. Yeah it really does seem that he doesnt deserve to be even considered doesnt it?

eagle eye

frostie500 wrote: »

How can you say that Manning has no chance? he has been durable(current start streak 187), productive(not even going to give stats on that one!), most importantly a winner(six seasons and soon to be seven 12 win seasons as well as a Superbowl), a consistant pro bowler(9 in 11 years), 4 time all pro, 3 time league MVP. Yeah it really does seem that he doesnt deserve to be even considered doesnt it?

The reasons are simple, lack of rings, a horrific playoff record for someone so good. There are too many questions to be answered regarding his postseason record.


Peyton Manning -
Career postseason record 7-8
Career postseason statistics: 348 of 565, 4,207 yards, 22 TD, 17 INT, 84.9 passer rating.

Joe Montana -
Career postseason record 16-7
Career postseason statistics 460-734, 5772 yards, 45 TD, 21 INT, 95.6 passer rating.

Bart Starr -
Career postseason record 8-1
Career postseason statistics 130-213, 1753 yards, 15 TD, 3 INT, 104.8 passer rating

You can talk about Dan Marino and Jim Kelly all day long and they were greats but when it comes down to the best of all time, postseaon records are going to decide who is the greatest ever. Peyton Manning is way behind in the big leagues.

The guy who is unlucky as far as the argument for the greatest ever is Kurt Warner. The guy has only played 3 full seasons and as a result his numbers have suffered but he is undoubtedly one of the greatest postseason QBs in history.

Makelele

Makelele wrote: »

Do you not think that these interceptions were of comical importance though and added to his overall entertainment value as a player?

His last throw in a Packers shirt...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSdtkMiAKak

frostie500

eagle eye wrote: »

The reasons are simple, lack of rings, a horrific playoff record for someone so good. There are too many questions to be answered regarding his postseason record.

The guy who is unlucky as far as the argument for the greatest ever is Kurt Warner. The guy has only played 3 full seasons and as a result his numbers have suffered but he is undoubtedly one of the greatest postseason QBs in history.

Are really saying that while Manning doesnt deserve to included in the conversation for the greatest of all time, you think that a journeyman pro does? Im a fan of Warner and he should go to Canton but come on! Theres no way that Warner gets mentioned and Manning goes down as only a good QB. How much of Manning's failure to win in the post season falls on the defence and the Colts managments inability for a long period of time to draft quality players on the defensive side of the ball?

Also to add, I don't believe that Manning is the greatest QB ever, but he definitly deserves to be mentioned with the Montana's, Marinos, Elways, Starr's, Staubach's, Unitas, Otto Graham's and Brady's of NFL lore

frostie500

frostie500 wrote: »

the Montana's, Marinos, Elways, Stars, Staubach's, Unitas, Otto Graham's and Brady's of NFL lore

Bart Starr and Fran Tarkenton?

frostie500

Deleted User wrote: »

Bart Starr and Fran Tarkenton?

Yeah I mispelled Starr, apologies, and was just reaming off guys names. Im sure I left far more then Tarkenton off the list as well. But yeah he is another guy to be included

eagle eye

frostie500 wrote: »

Are really saying that while Manning doesnt deserve to included in the conversation for the greatest of all time, you think that a journeyman pro does?

No I don't. I said he is unlucky, his injury record makes it impossible.

frostie500 wrote: »

Also to add, I don't believe that Manning is the greatest QB ever, but he definitly deserves to be mentioned with the Montana's, Marinos, Elways, Starr's, Staubach's, Unitas, Otto Graham's and Brady's of NFL lore

Yeah I agree he belongs in that list you mention there.

Its when you are discussing the greatest ever Quarterback, there are only two names in the picture at the present time.

Oh and you also left out Steve Young there.

Chanandler Bong

TheHeadhunter wrote: »

Why is there "not a chance" of this happening? Can you see years into the future?

EE's fond of his broad prospective anti-Colts strokes, but we love him for it

Its pretty hard to compare from different era's, so these debates are pretty useless as no-one posting here is old enough to see what old QB's like Starr were like, so no-one will ever really come up with a conclusive answer. Especially with the never-ending Stats vs. Team achievemnets debate

eagle eye

Chanandler Bong wrote: »

EE's fond of his broad prospective anti-Colts strokes, but we love him for it

Its pretty hard to compare from different era's, so these debates are pretty useless as no-one posting here is old enough to see what old QB's like Starr were like, so no-one will ever really come up with a conclusive answer. Especially with the never-ending Stats vs. Team achievemnets debate

Who uses stats and who uses team achievements?

I just used stats on this page to explain why he is not worthy of being in the conversation for greatest QB ever.

I'm not anti-Colts either unless the Patriots are playing them. The only person I dislike in the Colts organisation is Bill Polian.
I have great respect for Peyton Manning, Reggie Wayne, Dallas Clark, Dwight Freeney and Marvin Harrison. They are all great players in their own right and I expect all of them to make the HOF some day.

davyjose

Favre isn't just one of the best QB's ever - he's one of the best sportsmen ever. I didn't watch NFL in the 90's, but he was the one name I recognised. He has the all time record in EVERYTHING!!! He has three straight MVP's, and with any justice a fourth (MVP on team that contains All Day :eek:). He's FORTY YEARS OLD, and in what is one of the elite teamsports in the world (32 professional teams compared to about 800 professional soccer teams), he is the best player in the league.
All this after already cementing his name in the very foundations of the hall of fame at the age of (this needs repeating) ... AT FORTY!!!!!!
Legend.

As for Manning, I actually kind of agree with eagle eye - his Post season denies him best QB of all time award. But that's it. That's all that keeps his name off that title. In the regular season he is so far ahead of the competition as to make it scary. Pretty much raised the bar of what it takes through 16 games. But yeah, his Post Season lets him down badly. Still, at his age Elway had 0 rings, so who knows.

tallaghtoutlaws

davyjose wrote: »

Favre isn't just one of the best QB's ever - he's one of the best sportsmen ever. I didn't watch NFL in the 90's, but he was the one name I recognised. He has the all time record in EVERYTHING!!! He has three straight MVP's, and with any justice a fourth (MVP on team that contains All Day :eek:). He's FORTY YEARS OLD, and in what is one of the elite teamsports in the world (32 professional teams compared to about 800 professional soccer teams), he is the best player in the league.
All this after already cementing his name in the very foundations of the hall of fame at the age of (this needs repeating) ... AT FORTY!!!!!!
Legend.

As for Manning, I actually kind of agree with eagle eye - his Post season denies him best QB of all time award. But that's it. That's all that keeps his name off that title. In the regular season he is so far ahead of the competition as to make it scary. Pretty much raised the bar of what it takes through 16 games. But yeah, his Post Season lets him down badly. Still, at his age Elway had 0 rings, so who knows.

I have to agree 100% with Davyjose on all of this. I did have something more written to explain why nut my laptop killed itself so I will echo what Davyjose says.:D

davyjose

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

I have to agree 100% with Davyjose on all of this. I did have something more written to explain why nut my laptop killed itself so I will echo what Davyjose says.:D

Except you watched NFL in the 90's, right?

tallaghtoutlaws

davyjose wrote: »

Except you watched NFL in the 90's, right?

Yeah it was part of my long post :D:D

Chanandler Bong

eagle eye wrote: »

Who uses stats and who uses team achievements?

I just used stats on this page to explain why he is not worthy of being in the conversation for greatest QB ever.

I'm not anti-Colts either unless the Patriots are playing them. The only person I dislike in the Colts organisation is Bill Polian.
I have great respect for Peyton Manning, Reggie Wayne, Dallas Clark, Dwight Freeney and Marvin Harrison. They are all great players in their own right and I expect all of them to make the HOF some day.

Nah I wasnt saying specifically people on here use stats vs. achievements, but in general QB debate, different analysts place different emphasis on career stats and championships won respectively

TheHeadhunter

eagle eye wrote: »

Who uses stats and who uses team achievements?

It can't work like that because if you go on Stats Dan Marino is the man, if you go on team achievements Trent Dilfer should be in the HOF!?!

Its not as simple as just stats or achievements.

Chanandler Bong

TheHeadhunter wrote: »

It can't work like that because if you go on Stats Dan Marino is the man, if you go on team achievements Trent Dilfer should be in the HOF!?!

Its not as simple as just stats or achievements.

+1 on Dilfer for HOF

_Buck Rogers

Favre, the last gunslinger.

What I love about favre is not his ability but his attitude.

He is the one QB that would get stuck in to any body to defend a team mate. He is simply the last gunslinger of football.

I think he is proving how good he really can be this season and I would rate him better than brady. . much better.

As far as comparing him to Manning, I think Manning has better WR;s to work with but then again manning pretty much calls the plays on the spot. He is Captain Qb and OC.

It would be a disgrace if favre doesnt get MVP this year ( assuming he finishes the season as he's been going)

themont85

_Buck Rogers wrote: »

Favre, the last gunslinger.

What I love about favre is not his ability but his attitude.

He is the one QB that would get stuck in to any body to defend a team mate. He is simply the last gunslinger of football.

I think he is proving how good he really can be this season and I would rate him better than brady. . much better.

As far as comparing him to Manning, I think Manning has better WR;s to work with but then again manning pretty much calls the plays on the spot. He is Captain Qb and OC.

It would be a disgrace if favre doesnt get MVP this year ( assuming he finishes the season as he's been going)

Hardly a disgrace to be fair, he does have AD back there who softens coverage. Brees has been awesome and has great stats, albeit with a great run game. And Manning too has been great in a team which relies solely on him. Not saying Rice, Berrien or Harvin were stud receivers previous to this year but Collie and Garcon were complete nobodies before the Colts.

Not saying Farve doesn't deserve recognition for a incredible season but it would hardly be a disgrace for him not to win.

TheHeadhunter

_Buck Rogers wrote: »

It would be a disgrace if favre doesnt get MVP this year

C'mon man!

It wouldn't be a disgrace, i'd like to see him get it he has been great and i'm a fan of his also but if Chris Johnson gets the 2,000 yard season he is a lock for it no questions, bear in mind he could still break Dickerson's record.

Si Conando

Chris Johnson wont be a lock at all if he gets to 2000, and if they dont make the playoffs i dont think he has much hope. Manning and Mcnair shared the MVP the year Jamal Lewis went over 2000yds. In 97 when Barry Sanders did it, he shared the MVP with Favre.

If either Brees or Manning goes undefeated, then i would imagine they will be a lock. If both do, who knows what will happen.

eagle eye

Yeah the RBs never get the credit they deserve. Imo if Johnson breaks 2000 yards he should get it on his own unless a QB breaks 5,000 yards or throws 45+ tds, and if that happens they should share it.

I was disgusted when Favre got a share of it with Sanders, and Sanders should have got it more than once also.

Imo Barry Sanders is the best player in any position to ever play the game. Follwed closely by Deion Sanders.

Tristram

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

Care to elaborate?

wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies,_damned_lies,_and_statistics wrote:

"Lies, damned lies, and statistics" is the persuasive power of numbers, particularly the use of statistics to bolster weak arguments, and the tendency of people to disparage statistics that do not support their positions.

The term is part of a phrase attributed to the 19th Century British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli, among others, and later popularized in the United States by, among others, Mark Twain: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." The phrase is not found in Disraeli's works nor is it known within his lifetime and for years afterward. Many coiners have been proposed. The most plausible, on current evidence, is Charles Wentworth Dilke (1843-1911).
[edit] History

Twain popularized the saying in "Chapters from My Autobiography", published in the North American Review, No. DCXVIII., July 5, 1907. "Figures often beguile me," he wrote, "particularly when I have the arranging of them myself; in which case the remark attributed to Disraeli would often apply with justice and force: 'There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.'"[1]

Alternative attributions include, among many others (e.g., Walter Bagehot and Arthur James Balfour) the radical journalist and politician Henry Du Pré Labouchère (1831-1912), and Leonard H. Courtney, who used the phrase in 1895 and two years later became president of the Royal Statistical Society.[2] Courtney referred to a future statesman, not a past one.[3]

As of August 2009[update], the earliest instance of the phrase found in print dates to a letter written June 8, 1891, published June 13, 1891, The National Observer p.93(-94): NATIONAL PENSIONS [To the Editor of _The National Observer_] London, 8th June, 1891 "Sir,--It has been wittily remarked that there are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third and most aggravated is statistics. It is on statistics and on the absence of statistics that the advocate of national pensions relies....." Later, in October 1891, as a query in Notes and Queries, the pseudonymous questioner, signing as "St Swithin", asked for the originator of the phrase, indicating common usage even at that date.[3] The pseudonym has been attributed to Eliza Gutch.[4] Charles W. Dilke is reported twice in Oct. 1891 to have used the phrase, without attributing it to others. "Sir Charles Dilke [1843-1911] was saying the other day that false statements might be arranged according to their degree under three heads, fibs, lies, and statistics." The Bristol Mercury and Daily Post, Monday, October 19 1891

PUBLIC MEN ON PUBLIC AFFAIRS The Derby Mercury (Derby, England), October 21, 1891; Issue 9223 "SIR CHARLES DILKE AND THE BISHOPS" "A mass meeting of the slate quarry-men of Festiniog [Ffestiniog, Wales] was held Wednesday night [Oct. 14] to protest against certain dismissals from one of the quarries...." He [Dilke] observed that the speeches of the Bishops on the disestablishment question reminded him that there were three degrees of untruth--a fib, a lie, and statistics (Laughter)"

The phrase, as noted by Robert Giffen in 1892, was a variation on a phrase about three types of unreliable witnesses, a liar, a damned liar, and an expert (Economic Journal 2 (6) (1892), 209-238, first paragraph; the paper was previously read at a meeting of the Australasian Association for the Advancement of Science at Hobart in January 1892). 1892 Jan talk, June pub Robert Giffen (1837-1910, Walter Bagehot's asstistant editor at The Economist 1868ff; 1882-4 President of the Statistical Society): "An old jest runs to the effect that there are three degrees of comparison among liars. There are liars, there are outrageous liars, and there are scientific experts. This has lately been adapted to throw dirt upon statistics. There are three degrees of comparison, it is said, in lying. There are lies, there are outrageous lies, and there are statistics."

That earlier (still post-Disraeli) phrase is first found in Nature in 1885, page 74 Nov 26, 1885 "A well- known lawyer, now a judge, once grouped witnesses into three classes: simple liars, damned liars, and experts. He did not mean that the expert ..."

Dr. E.R.L. Gould, who used the phrase in 1892 himself (2 Dec Prof. Alfred Marshall examination of Gould for the Royal Commission on Labour, Minutes of Evidence Taken Before the Commission Sitting as a Whole, response no. 6743) attributed it to Dilke. The Temperance Problem: Past and Future, Page 15 by Elgin Ralston Lovell Gould (1894); 15 pages reprinted from The Forum, November 1894. "Sir Charles Dilke in one sense was right when he said, 'There are three degrees of untruth,--a fib, a lie, and statistics' ..."

These and other relevant quotations are at American Dialect Society list archives posts by Stephen Goranson.

Statistics are fun

Tristram

_Buck Rogers wrote: »

He is the one QB that would get stuck in to any body to defend a team mate.

No problem with the rest of your post but I think we've all seen Favre 'attempt' a tackle

Idu

Favre Mic'd up for the Lions game. Very good watching

_Buck Rogers

Idu wrote: »

Favre Mic'd up for the Lions game. Very good watching

Hahaha amazing. . pissing vinegar. . hahaha.

I probably was a little OTT with saying it would be a disgrace if he didnt win it so I'll rephrase.

It'll be a disgrace if any QB this season gets it over him.. . . or even any player except Johnson

TheHeadhunter

That mic'd up is brilliant he is like a kid just playing the game because he loves it. a tremendous character.

Morrisseeee

Yeah, Favre, what a character (and a QB aswell !!!).
I gues this could be 'one' of the many reasons why Manning is so highly acclaimed : BLITZ, COVER ME!! , how the heck did he see it :eek:

tallaghtoutlaws

Tristram wrote: »

Statistics are fun

Too long I couldn't be bothered to read. But the sad thing is for you anyways you actually bolstered your own argument with an irrelevant piece from Wikipedia of all places.

Fact of the matter is statistics can be used to support arguments when it comes to the NFL. But what failed for you is I wasn't using them to bolster anything. I merely posted a piece that I thought was interesting about interceptions.

This is what I said:

Before you write of Favre and all his picks read this Interesting Article:

http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2...rception-myth/

So my argument was neither weak nor strong because I wasn't making one. Everyone knows on here how much I like Brett Favre anyways. It wouldn't be the first time I defended him and it wont be the last. I started following the NFL a year before he started and practically followed his career.

Next time you add to a thread be a tad more constructive. Its annoying when someone writes a one liner that makes no sense and follow it up later on in the thread with dribble.

Tristram

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

Too long I couldn't be bothered to read. But the sad thing is for you anyways you actually bolstered your own argument with an irrelevant piece from Wikipedia of all places.

Fact of the matter is statistics can be used to support arguments when it comes to the NFL. But what failed for you is I wasn't using them to bolster anything. I merely posted a piece that I thought was interesting about interceptions.

This is what I said:

yadda yadda yadda

So my argument was neither weak nor strong because I wasn't making one. Everyone knows on here how much I like Brett Favre anyways. It wouldn't be the first time I defended him and it wont be the last. I started following the NFL a year before he started and practically followed his career.

Next time you add to a thread be a tad more constructive. Its annoying when someone writes a one liner that makes no sense and follow it up later on in the thread with dribble.

I'm confused... I didn't have an argument. You appear to have constructed one for me though, and rebutted it. Fair play!

(I thought the article was interesting too btw.)