Who is better, Tarkenton or Pollard?
Fritz Pollard leads with a GOAT score of 82.0 against 81.9 for Fran Tarkenton — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Fritz Pollard above Fran Tarkenton: 82.0 vs 81.9. Fritz Pollard leads on Honours, Peak, Dominance. Fran Tarkenton leads on Longevity, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Pollard wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours
Tarkenton wins: Longevity, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/fran-tarkenton-vs-fritz-pollard
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Pollard leads in 3 of 5 weighted categories.
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Tarkenton | 0 | 0 | 1,997 | 4,592 | 12,018 | 23,140 |
| 🇺🇸 Pollard | 0 | 0 | 55 | 150 | 307 | 460 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | TarkentonRetired | PollardRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Passing yards | 47,003 | — |
| Passing touchdowns | 342 | — |
| League MVP awards | 1 | — |
| Pro Bowls | 9 | — |
| Super Bowl appearances | 3 | — |
| League titles | — | 1 |
| All-Pro selections | — | 1 |
| Seasons played | — | 7 |
| Teams played for | — | 4 |
| Firsts as a Black head coach | — | 1 |
| Dominance w25% | 78 | 82 |
| Peak w20% | 84 | 90 |
| Longevity w20% | 88 | 70 |
| Honours w20% | 74 | 86 |
| Statistics w15% | 88 | 82 |
Fritz Pollard leads with a GOAT score of 82.0 against 81.9 for Fran Tarkenton — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Tarkenton scores higher on statistics, longevity. Pollard leads on peak, dominance, honours.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Tarkenton: 81.9, Pollard: 82.0.
Make your case for Tarkenton vs Pollard. The scoring is published in full — if you can point at the pillar or the weight you disagree with, we read it. Read the methodology paper.