Read the debate intro and the opposing argument from Loyal Homer that Arizona Cardinals quarterback Kurt Warner is not a hall of famer.
These are the types of questions that The Sports Debates was launched to answer. These questions, folks, are also the most compelling to Sports Geeks like me.
It is a simple question – is Kurt Warner a hall of fame caliber quarterback? Such a simple question deserves a simple answer. It would be great to give one, too.
Instead, a simple examination of his statistics, followed by a comparison to current pro football hall of fame quarterbacks, proves without a doubt that Kurt Warner, even if he does decide to retire this season as the still young(ish) age of 38, deserves to be recognized as a hall of famer.
Kurt Warner in just 125 career starts – thanks to injuries – has compiled one of the best careers for any quarterback of all time. From 1999-2001 Kurt Warner strung together one of the greatest runs by any measure. In 1999 (when Warner completed one of the greatest seasons for pro quarterback ever) he threw a whopping 41 touchdowns against just 13 interceptions and led the NFC with a completion percentage of over 65 percent. In 2000 he managed to improve his completion percentage to 67.7 percent and lead the NFC in seven notable statistical categories, despite starting just 11 games. In 2001 he led his team with an amazing season-long performance where he completed nearly 69 percent of his passes, threw for nearly 5,000 yards, and averaged 301.9 yards passing per game. Perhaps Warner benefited from the offensive scheme the Rams employed, but he is also responsible for making it work like no other quarterback could.
The biggest threshold Warner has to pass for many was the ability to perform outside of the late 1990s St. Louis Rams’ offenses. Sure, Kurt Warner was great during the Greatest Show On Turf days. But, how good of a quarterback was Warner after St. Louis? No worries – he was great. After a couple of injury-riddled seasons he posted nearly 3,500 yards and 27 touchdowns in 2007, then followed that up with 4,583 yards passing and 30 touchdowns along with a Super Bowl appearance (and a brutal loss that could have been a great win if not for some bad defense down the stretch). This season Warner led the team to another season of double-digit wins and tossed over 3,700 yards with 26 touchdowns. Warner’s skills are not exactly in decline.
Warner also has a 9-3 career playoff record, a Super Bowl win and Super Bowl MVP trophy.
So, what is the threshold for the hall of fame? On the surface Warner seems worthy of consideration. I offer two quarterbacks that Kurt Warner compares to similarly to prove that he is worthy of being a hall of famer: Dan Fouts and Troy Aikman.
Dan Fouts, like Kurt Warner, threw for over 4,000 passing yards three times in his career. Unlike Warner, who spread his performances out throughout his career, Fouts reached that magical season benchmark in three consecutive seasons. Dan Fouts was a very accurate passer, one of the reasons he reached the hall of fame. Kurt Warner’s completion percentage for a season only once dipped below 60 percent. Fouts failed to reach 60 percent 10 times. Fouts also finished his career just two games over .500 as a starter, with a career playoff record of 3-4. Warner is currently 13 games over .500.
Troy Aikman is another hall of fame quarterback that Kurt Warner already leads in many statistical categories. Obviously, Aikman’s playoff record is incomparable, finishing 11-4 with several rings. But, Aikman never threw 25 touchdown passes in a season, notching 23 in 1992 as a career high. Warner surpassed 25 TD passes on five separate occasions. The highest passing yards per game Aikman ever averaged is 229.5. Sure, Aikman was a great quarterback, but on a team with a great running back, too. The burden for Warner to carry the team’s offensive output and continue to perform at a high level separates him from other players he compares favorably to, like Troy Aikman.
If 2009 proves to be Warner’s last, he will have ended strongly, unlike the aforementioned hall of famers. Fouts ended his career with a five win season, just 2,517 passing yards and 10 touchdowns. Aikman ended with just four wins, fewer than 2,000 passing yards and seven touchdowns. Both Fouts and Aikman are deserving of hall of fame recognition. By the threshold their careers have established, so is Kurt Warner.
What, truly, is the knock against Kurt Warner’s hall of fame credentials? His stats are great. His performance on the biggest stage is great. He has a Super Bowl MVP. He is a great player, a great story, and one of the best of all time. The only true knock against Warner is that he has not played very long. He has only started 125 games. For Warner, however, his relatively short playing time turns out to be a positive when considering his hall of famer worthiness. The only factor that makes Kurt Warner’s accomplishments more noteworthy is the fact that he accomplished so much in such a relatively short span of time.
I could take up twenty-five pages of point by point comparison of Warner and other pro football hall of fame quarterbacks. I simply do not have to do that. Warner’s statistics, his consistency, and his dominance of the game during his prime are remarkable, and worthy of recognition of the highest honor as one of the best quarterbacks ever to play the game of football.
Posted by Sports Geek 
