Who is better, Tarkenton or Bell?
Fran Tarkenton leads with a GOAT score of 81.9 against 81.9 for Le'Veon Bell — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently scores Fran Tarkenton and Le'Veon Bell level at 81.9. Fran Tarkenton leads on Longevity. Le'Veon Bell leads on Peak, Honours, Dominance.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Tarkenton wins: Longevity
Bell wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/fran-tarkenton-vs-leveon-bell
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Tarkenton leads in 1 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 |
| 🇺🇸 Bell | 0 | 0 | 860 | 2,221 | 5,336 | 6,707 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | TarkentonRetired | BellRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Passing yards | 47,003 | — |
| Passing touchdowns | 342 | — |
| League MVP awards | 1 | — |
| Pro Bowls | 9 | 3 |
| Super Bowl appearances | 3 | — |
| First-team All-Pro selections | — | 2 |
| Career rushing yards | — | 6,554 |
| Career scrimmage yards | — | 9,636 |
| Best season scrimmage yards | — | 2,215 |
| Dominance w25% | 78 | 80 |
| Peak w20% | 84 | 94 |
| Longevity w20% | 88 | 70 |
| Honours w20% | 74 | 78 |
| Statistics w15% | 88 | 90 |
Fran Tarkenton leads with a GOAT score of 81.9 against 81.9 for Le'Veon Bell — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Bell scores higher on peak, dominance, honours, statistics. Tarkenton leads on longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Tarkenton: 81.9, Bell: 81.9.
Make your case for Tarkenton vs Bell. 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.