Brett Favre notoriously has the two playoff overtime losses that keep him off that list.

My question is why is Steve Young on that list. What exactly did he ever do besides drive a Lexus when John Elway and Dan Marino drove Ford Pintos for most of their careers.

The one play I remember about Steve Young was the pass to Owens for the win when Darlene was again out of postition. Young is not worthy of that list.

---

I almost made this same argument, but then I realized that there is at least one other QB (Tom Brady) on the list who is still in the league, so I'm not sure that's the real reason.

---

Couple more words to my sentence.



Favre is a diva to many. Brady isn't.

---

The one play that really sticks out in my mind on Steve is I think he came in for Joe vs the Vikings..He scrambled and ran like 40 yards then almost was tackled, kept his balance but stumbled into endzone

If this factored into the author's analysis, I imagine the omission of Favre had more to do with the perceived diva behavior than his status in the league.

Technically, however (and I know this is quibbling, but . . .), Favre is not in the league right now. NFL.com lists him as an "historical player ." His name doesn't even pop up if you do a search for him under "Current Players."

---

Video profile of Bart Starr:

http://www.nfl.com/videos/green-bay-packers/09000d5d810a571b/Top-Ten-Clutch-QBs-Bart-Starr 

---

Wait 5 years...

There will be two Packers on the list.

---

Starr wasn't a physically imposing player, but he called all the plays, and was always on top of what the D was doing. He truely "managed" the game on the field.

---

Favre's news is getting tiring to many and him playing actually. He's perceived to be a "diva" to many. Once he retires for good, that "diva" status will go away. That's what I'm getting at. It goes hand and hand.

Michael Irvin is a diva and out of the league and most people tolerate him or like him even now because he's not in the news. Deion Sanders is another one. He does his thing on NFLN, but beyond that, he's more low key now.

Those guys are more appreciated now than they were when they actually played. I think the same will happen with Favre. Of course it's just speculation, but this always seems to happen with people.

---

Porky - You're kidding, right?

We're talking clutch here, and clutch is when it matters most. Take a look at John Elway's SB stats and immediately, he should be dropped off the list.

SB 21: 22 37 304 8.2 1 1 54 83.6
comments - mediocre, especially when on the other side, Phil Simms completed 22 out of 25 passes with 3 TDs and no INTs. Clutch? Um, no. Simms though was.

SB 22: 14 38 257 6.8 1 3 56 36.8
comments - Whoa. Is the Zombieslayer making this up? Heh. No, I'm not. John Elway really did this poorly. Remind me not to depend on John Elway when we the zombie plague starts or we'll all be zombies.

SB 24: 10 26 108 4.2 0 2 27 19.4
comments - As if his last SB sucked enough, this one he's even worse. Anyone who puts John Elway and clutch in the same sentence you wonder what they're smoking.

SB 32: 12 22 123 5.6 0 1 36 51.9
comments - Elway should drop to his knees and kiss Terrell Davis on the buttocks, for had the Broncos gone to the air that game, Favre, Reggie, and friends would have 2 SB rings. Easily. Favre on the other hand threw for 3 TDs and had a 91.0 QB rating.

SB 33: 18 29 336 11.6 1 1 80 99.2
comments - So, John Elway finally gets it right after FIVE chances. FIVE! One for five. That's even bad for baseball.

So, five SBs, 8 INTs, and only 3 TDs. Like I said before, clutch and John Elway don't belong in the same sentence.

---