Greatest quarterback you have seen? [Archive]

View Full Version : Greatest quarterback you have seen?

Runscott

01-29-2015, 10:47 AM

Last year the talking heads were suggesting it would be Manning if he could win the Super Bowl. This year the same is being said about Brady.

I've seen all of these guys play, and every other quarterback since 1966. To me, it's easily Joe Montana. That might be because when he got behind and my team was on the other end, I was pretty certain we were screwed. Then there was the Super Bowl where he dismantled the Bengals :eek: Staubach was also great, but Montana could be perfect at times, especially when he needed to be. I also believe that if Montana had not existed, people might consider Steve Young to be the best ever, but being Montana's understudy didn't help. Aaron Rodgers, on the other hand, I think is better than Favre.

Who do you think is the greatest quarterback out of the ones you've seen? I won't ask why it isn't Montana, as some of you have only seen him on highlight films.

vintagetoppsguy

01-29-2015, 11:10 AM

For me, it's Manning.

All-time TD pass leader
Single season TD pass leader
Next year: all-time passing yards leader (I think he needs less than 4,000 to pass Favre)

brookdodger55

01-29-2015, 11:43 AM

Johnny U for me

steve B

01-29-2015, 11:51 AM

Just like baseball, I think it's hard to compare players from one period of time to another especially as the game has changed since I started watching in 72-3. There were a lots of great QBs who won't have the numbers of todays guys because of some changes. Guys that played in the 70's didn't have the protection they have today, and the recievers get more protection too. Teams also were more focused on the running game so some situations where todays teams pass were almost always a run.

From the 70's guys
Staubach, Tarkenton, Bradshaw, Kilmer. (A pretty mobile guy for the time, and took a lot of hits since the sliding thing wasn't part of the game. )

80's- 90's

Elway, Farve, Marino, Montana.

00's

There's so many really great quarterbacks now. I think we down play that aspect of it since it's current.

Manning, Rodgers, Brady, Romo, Rivers, ........There were 11 with 4000yards + and Flacco was just under.

For perspective, Tarkenton was only over 3000 twice, Montana was over 3000 8 times, but only came near 4000 once. Staubach twice, his last two years. Bradshaw twice........Now there's so many over 3000 yards it's almost a requirement.

For best I've seen?
Probably Montana, He was pretty amazing and always seemed to make the right play. I'd have to put Elway a close second. Just so many times pulling the game out when it would seem lost.

More modern? Tough to say, most of todays greats are more products of a system than individually great. Manning would be up there, but had trouble in big games. Brady was amazing when given a fantastic group of recievers, and is still great, but his success is more a result of the teams system where they use a lot of hard to defend passes and a crowd of good but not necessarily great recievers (Montana mostly passed to Rice, Brady had three recievers over 900 yards this year. ) I'm hard pressed to think of a QB now that plays for a team that's ambivalent about a great passing game and puts up good numbers on talent alone. Not that todays guys don't have talent, just that it's used much better by nearly every team.

Steve B

Runscott

01-29-2015, 12:07 PM

Just like baseball, I think it's hard to compare players from one period of time to another especially as the game has changed since I started watching in 72-3.

Odd, it wasn't hard for me. I based my opinion on what I saw, which is all I was asking. When you see a quarterback dodging defenders and making a throw, it looks pretty much today the way it did in 1972.

nolemmings

01-29-2015, 12:09 PM

Unitas.

bigtrain

01-29-2015, 12:13 PM

I have been watching NFL (and AFL) football for over 50 years. For me the discussion begins and ends with Joe Montana.

Runscott

01-29-2015, 12:27 PM

Anyone know how to obtain dvd's of old games? Thinking I need to re-live me some Unitas

bbcard1

01-29-2015, 12:36 PM

I am clearly not so out of touch as to represent him as one of the greatest of all time, but had it not been for injuries he might have been. Chad Pennington had a pop-gun arm but a head for the game like very few others. I watched him from the time he was a skinny freshman who was forced into duty when three quarterbacks in front of him were injured. As a pro, I think him taking the Dolphins to the playoffs after the Jets unceremoniously dumped him for Farve was one of the better FUs in pro football history. Have met him on numerous occasions and he is a thoroughly admirable human being.

D.P.Johnson

01-29-2015, 12:44 PM

Montana hands-down...The way he would walk up to the line of scrimmage while analyzing the defense and then call an audible was absolute genius...

D. Bergin

01-29-2015, 02:00 PM

No, he never won a Super Bowl, but the best pure QB I ever saw was Marino. Never had a ton to work with, never paired with an elite level RB or running game that I can recall and his best receivers were tiny men. Despite this, he put up some mind boggling numbers in an era when the defensive rules were much different then they are now.

All respect to anybody who says Montana, Brady, Manning, Unitas, Steve Young.........as I can see those arguments to.

Runscott

01-29-2015, 02:43 PM

Marino in his prime was about as good as anyone.

My favorites to watch were Staubach and Tarkenton. Montana and Marino were almost too perfect to be enjoyable.

HRBAKER

01-29-2015, 03:19 PM

Runscott

01-29-2015, 03:22 PM

No such beast, very dependent on era/rules.
Baugh, Graham, Unitas, Montana, Manning, Brady all in a big group with some others.

There's also a very big championship winner vs. stat accumulator component as well.

Agreed that it's impossible to determine who the greatest ever was, because of the reasons you and Steve have pointed out, but I didn't ask that - I asked:

Who do you think is the greatest quarterback out of the ones you've seen?

HRBAKER

01-29-2015, 03:34 PM

Runscott

01-29-2015, 03:49 PM

Don't think I can answer that either. Certainly I think Montana is better than Manning and possibly Brady. I think that Staubach was probably the best of the 70's which is when I really began to watch football and I would give Montana the nod over him as well.

When I see the size and speed of today's players, I do wonder if you can make comparisons. Linebackers would be impossible. Quarterback might be one where you actually can - it's one position (other than kickers) where physical size has changed the least, for drop-back qb's anyway. Today's qb's have faster, stronger, larger pass rushers to deal with, but they also have much bigger offensive lines in front of them. I think Montana and Staubach would compare favorably or better than today's great drop-back passers.

freakhappy

01-29-2015, 03:57 PM

Good question...I'd probably have to go Montana, but Manning is a real close 2nd. I missed the first half of Montana's career, so it's impossible for me, with my own eyes, to understand how great he really was. On the other hand, I've been able to see every other qb since the 90's. A lot of tough and talented players, but these are the top two for me.

I also think it's hard to go off of stats because every team is different and some are pass happy and others like balance...what makes a great qb is precision, consistency and calmness imo.

HRBAKER

01-29-2015, 04:07 PM

Something about Manning's average success in the postseason makes me very hesitant to rank him close to the top even though I would agree he has certainly been a great QB. He just lacks the cache to me of some of the ones that were able to figure a way to get the ball over the line with regularity. You just never doubted that Montana would find a way and you really never can say that about Manning. Certainly way way upper echelon, close to greatest - eh, dunno.

CMIZ5290

01-29-2015, 04:36 PM

Montana hands-down...The way he would walk up to the line of scrimmage while analyzing the defense and then call an audible was absolute genius...

Plus 1 big time. 4 for 4 in Super Bowls, I'll take this guy...

CMIZ5290

01-29-2015, 04:38 PM

Runscott

01-29-2015, 04:46 PM

This too is a great point by Dave. As far as a pure passer, hard to go against Marino....

I can remember watching Marino and being positive that the other team didn't have a chance - when he was on, he was perfect. The Superbowl ring means nothing to me in terms of evaluating an individual's greatness - it certainly doesn't mean Marino was a choker, and it also doesn't mean that he couldn't have taken his team all the way if he had the kind of defense to go with his offense.

Remember, people were saying the same things about Elway, then he won two when he was near retirement, and he all of a sudden was one of the greatest ever. He arguably wasn't even in his prime when he won the Superbowls.

Tabe

01-29-2015, 06:22 PM

For me, right now the best I've ever seen is Steve Young. Super-accurate, strong arm arm, and could run. Much more of a complete package than Montana or Marino.

After that, probably Brady/Montana (tie).

When it's all said and done, though, the best might be Aaron Rodgers. More of a complete package than Brady/Montana/Marino (since he can run) and already a long string of dazzling seasons.

tedzan

01-29-2015, 07:08 PM

mrmantlecollector

01-29-2015, 07:20 PM

http://i765.photobucket.com/albums/xx299/mrmantlecollector/rookies/IMG_0012-1.jpg (http://s765.photobucket.com/user/mrmantlecollector/media/rookies/IMG_0012-1.jpg.html)

Runscott

01-29-2015, 07:31 PM

Besides being a HOF Quarterback (with many records), he was a defensive back, who would often play a dual role of throwing touchdown passes
while also pulling off interceptions in the same game. Plus he was a fine punter.

2nd best is Sonny Jurgensen.

My 3rd best is Johnny Unitas.

TED Z
.

Never saw Baugh, but I loved watching Jurgensen throw long - straight overhead. I guess I remember him better than Unitas because he was in the same division as Dallas. Seemed like every time we played Baltimore they were down to Earl Morrall again.

Orioles1954

01-29-2015, 08:08 PM

Best all-around quarterback? Steve Young.

clydepepper

01-29-2015, 08:33 PM

Best all-around quarterback? Steve Young.

Young was great but I'll have to include Elway on the same level.

Most dominant in his time has to be Otto Graham.

1960s: Starr, Unitas, Jurgenson, Trakenton

Modern only-
Including post-season: Montana, Bradshaw, Brady, Aikman, Young, Elway, Flacco

Excluding post-season: Manning, Marino, Rogers, Brees, Moon, Farve, Fouts

The bigger discussion is which one had the best team behind him and which one improved his team consistently by his own contribution.

the 'stache

01-29-2015, 08:36 PM

This is going to be a very difficult discussion, because there is, for me at least, no obvious answer. This will be a long post, for sure, so buckle up, everybody.

For the longest time, I thought Joe Montana was the greatest quarterback ever. He won, and when he won, he played at such a high level, so for somebody to match him on the all-time rankings, I thought they would have to achieve the same level of greatness. But I've really gone back and thought about this a lot within the last year, and I've changed my thinking. It is so important to remember that football is a team game, and now more than ever, I hate people who use championships as one of the first few points of consideration in this kind of discussion. I've heard "Eli Manning is a Hall of Famer because he won two Super Bowls" more times than I care to count in the last few years. Actually, the words "Eli Manning" and "should be in the Hall of Fame" don't belong in the same sentence. But that is another discussion.

Montana will always be one of the guys I have at the very top of the list, because in any possible way you could measure a quarterback, he was great. But we also need to remember the level of talent around him was spectacular. He had a Head Coach in Bill Walsh that revolutionized the game of football with his offensive schemes. He had one of the best two receivers in NFL history in Jerry Rice for most of, but not all his career (and the "not all" his career point is important, and something I'll come back to. It strengthens Montana's standing). And he had all kinds of great players in the locker room with him, year after year, season after season.

Montana really became the full-time starter in 1981. That was the first year he started 16 games, and he won 13 of them. Oh yeah, and the Super Bowl. Not a bad start, huh? He started and played in some other games before 1981, throwing 189 passes between 1979 and 1980. But 1981 is when Joe Montana started down the road to immortality. And, again, he won those 13 games without Jerry Rice. It should be pointed out that the Niner defense was second in the NFL in yards allowed, and points allowed. That's why it's always important to look at the big picture. Yes, Montana was great, completing 63.7% of his passes for 3,565 yards, 19 TD and 12 INT. 19 TD passes doesn't seem like a lot today, but to compare, his 17 TD passes the next season led the NFL. 12 INT in 488 pass attempts is pretty good. Montana never threw a lot of interceptions. He threw 16 in 1990 when he was 14-1 as the starter, also tossing 26 TD passes.

In 1982, Joe was 3-6 as the starter. Bad year for him? No. He had an 88.4 QB rating in 1981. He had an 88.0 QB rating in 1982. The defense fell apart, going from #2 and #2 to #23 in points allowed, and #21 in yards allowed.

Keep that in mind, guys. A quarterback can still have a good year, and the team can still suck.

So, anyway, we all know what Montana did. Perfect in the Super Bowl. He had a 127.8 QB rating in four Super Bowl wins. 11 TD passes, no interceptions. And that is a big part of his reputation. In the biggest games, he played big. Now, here's where it gets interesting. Troy Aikman, generally looked at as being a really good quarterback, had a 111.9 QB rating in his three Super Bowls. He threw 5 TD passes and only 1 pick. And, like Joe, Troy won all his games. The two men combined for 7 Super Bowl wins in 7 games played.

Yet, Montana is viewed as an all-time great, and Aikman, while a Hall of Famer, is a tier below. But why?

Montana had a career interception rate of 2.6%. Aikman's was 3.0%. Not a big difference. But, Montana threw more touchdown passes by far, 5.1% of his passes being touchdowns to 3.5% for Aikman.

But as good as some of Joe's running back's were (Wendell Tyler and Roger Craig were a hell of a 1-2 punch), they weren't Emmitt Smith.

The Cowboys finished drives running. The Niners finished them passing. Craig never had ten rushing touchdowns in any season, even when he ran for 1,500 yards in 1988.

Montana is remembered as this post season assassin. But, while he did win those Super Bowls, he also had some pretty awful games. In 1984, against the Bears in the NFC Championship Game, he had a 60.0 QB Rating. Granted, the Bears were the best defense in the NFL. But Montana struggled. Then he went off in the Super Bowl. The next three games in the post season? 1985, 1986 and 1987, he lost all three. His QB ratings? 65.6 against the Giants in 1985, 34.2 against the Giants in 1986, and 42.0 against the Vikings in 1987.

Montana was human. Or was he? Rice was huge in 1986 and 1987. But they got on the page in the 1988 playoffs. Montana's next 8 playoff starts saw him having QB ratings of 100.0 +.

The point to all this is that it's too easy just to look at a player's stat line, or their career record, and make an argument for or against the player in question. It is always more complex than that.

I think right now, Aaron Rodgers is playing the quarterback position at as level as high as I've ever seen it played. Yet, he's only 6-5 in the playoffs, with one Super Bowl win. As we've already discussed, his defense has been deplorable in each year but 2010. In 2009, his D gave up 51 to Kurt Warner and the Cardinals. In 2011, the Giants put up 37 on the Packer D. In 2012, Colin Kaepernick ran for more yards as a quarterback than any quarterback had in any game in NFL history. The Niners put up 500 + yards on Dom Capers' unit, and scored 45 points. Rodgers and the Packers put up 31 points. If you score 31 points in a playoff game, you expect to win 2 out of 3 games played, if not more. Against a pretty damned good Niners defense, Rodgers completed 67% of his passes for 257 yards, throwing 2 TD and 1 INT. In 2013, the defense held the Niners in check, as did the Niner D against Rodgers. Yet the Niners won 23-20. This year, Rodgers, playing hurt, put his team up by 12 with under 4 minutes to go, and the defense blew it again. After not giving up a single point for 56 minutes, they gave up 21 in the final 4 minutes plus one overtime possession. Yet again, Rodgers did enough hurt, on the road, against one of the best defensive units in NFL history. And when he got the ball back after losing the lead, he led his offense down the field, and got Mason Crosby into field goal range to tie it, and put it into overtime. He never saw the ball again.

Did he have his best game ever? No. He threw two picks, though one of which was a forced throw he never makes if he's healthy. I've watched every game he's ever played, and he doesn't throw the ball like that healthy, usually because he's running around making something happen.

Yet with a 6-5 record in the playoffs, basically a .500 record, he's 3 points behind Bart Starr for the highest QB rating in NFL post season history. He's the highest rated QB in NFL history, a Super Bowl MVP, and about to be a two time NFL MVP.

So, if Joe Montana is not the best QB in NFL history, Rodgers could be, right?

Well, no. I loved Rodgers. He does things I've never seen any other quarterback do. And I'm not the only one saying that. I watch ESPN, and NFL Network, and the former NFL quarterbacks they both have as analysts, Ron Jaworski, Steve Young and others, they gush about Rodgers. His accuracy in the pocket and out. The throws he makes 50 yards down field while running. Multiple times, I have heard these men say Rodgers has reached a level that's never been seen before. Jaworski said that Rodgers has all the throws, and he's so smart, and makes his reads so fast, that he doesn't make mistakes. And he's careful to point out that the low interception rate is not because he's making safe dump off passes. In 2011 and in 2014, Rodgers led the NFL in adjusted net yards per pass attempt, and he's #1 all-time in that metric, too. 7.75 yards every time he throws the ball, best all-time. Rodgers pushes the ball down field more than any other quarterback in the game. Jordy Nelson by himself, since week 1 of the 2011 NFL season, has more 60 yard catches than anybody else in the NFL. Twelve catches of 60 or more yards, 9 of which have gone for scores. Victor Cruz is the only other receiver with ten, and DeSean Jackson, with eight, is the only other receiver with more than six. Rodgers has 20 passes of 60 or more yards, besting Eli Manning (16), Tony Romo (12) and Drew Brees (11) for most in the last four years.

But again, Rodgers is not the best all-time, either. Talk to me when his career is done. He's certainly on his way to Canton, but he has a long way to go yet.

Montana was Iceman in the Super Bowl. Rodgers makes all the plays, and has the highest rating ever.

Neither are the best ever.

Steve Young? After all, before Peyton Manning came along, Young's 96.8 QB rating was #1 all-time.

Nope.

What about Manning? He's put up video game numbers in the regular season. But in the post season? He's been hit and miss. He has a 97.5 QB rating in the regular season, but an 88.5 in the post season. In 2006, when he won the Super Bowl, the Colts won 4 games though Manning didn't have a single game with a 100 + QB rating. In fact, he threw 3 TD passes, and 7 INT in those four games. The Colts won in spite of him. But the Colts wouldn't have gotten to the Super Bowl without him. The Broncos wouldn't have made it there without him last year. Manning is 1-2 in the Super Bowl with an 81.0 rating. 2 TD passes, 3 INT.

Post season aside, is he the best ever? Nope.

Everything considered, it's my opinion that Dan Marino is the greatest quarterback to ever play the game. And my opinion might change in a few months once I've considered this question more. It might be John Elway. That's kind of what I'm trying to say more than anything. I don't know if you can really ever say definitively that one quarterback is the best of all-time.

Do we overlook Bart Starr? "You're kidding, right? Bart Starr?" Well, the guy lost the first NFL Championship Game he ever played in against the Eagles. He fell about 15 yards short of the end zone as he was driving down the field for what would have been the winning score. He just ran out of time. Then, he never lost another post season game again. He was 9-1 in post season, winning 5 NFL Championships. His 104 QB Rating in the post season is the best in NFL history, against the toughest defenses of his day. When he retired, his 57.4% completion percentage was the best by any QB in NFL history. His 81.0 QB Rating at retirement was second all-time to only Otto Graham.

When he retired, he was the best there was. Best completion percentage in an era when football was played by men with blood streaming down their faces. You didn't come out with a broken nose, or a pulled muscle. You played. There were no roughing the passer penalties like today. And Starr retired with a .900 post season winning percentage, and 5 NFL Championships.

He's not the best ever, though he could be in the conversation. Probably in the second tier with guys like Roger Staubach, Joe Namath, Dan Fouts, Kurt Warner, Brian Griese, Ken Stabler, Joe Theisman, Jim Kelly, Terry Bradshaw, and Otto Graham. I put Aaron Rodgers here with Drew Brees. Brees has the numbers, but I think he's padded his stats a lot. Rodgers has the numbers, but needs to play longer yet.

Too many of these guys can legitimately be in the conversation for best of all-time: Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Johnny Unitas, Joe Montana, Dan Marino, Fran Tarkenton, Steve Young, John Elway, Brett Favre.

Too many quarterbacks that I do not know enough about, even with all the reading I have done, are going to unfairly be excluded from consideration because of my age: Y.A. Tittle, Bobby Layne, Sid Luckman, Sammy Baugh, Tobin Rote, Norm Van Brocklin, Darryl Lamonica

Wait a minute, Favre holds like most of the records, right? Well, for now. Isn't he the best all-time?

No. I loved Favre, still do. And he won 3 NFL MVPs. Peyton has 5 now. But as great as Favre could be, he could also make the game killing mistake. He had one of the strongest arms ever. But, unfortunately, he had one of the biggest egos ever, too. In the NFL, that's called the "gunslinger mentality". It's romanticized. I call it careless. Favre would try to force throws instead of throwing it away. He's one of the best ever, but he didn't have the discipline to be the best ever. He was a tough sob, and played every week. His knee could be floating by his ankle, and he's still play. And, with the toughness came the enthusiasm that endeared him to every person in Wisconsin, and a lot of people outside the cheesehead state. When he made a great throw, or won a game, he'd race downfield, headbutt his receiver, pick him up, throw him over his shoulder, and carry him off the field. When his wife was diagnosed with cancer, when his father died, he came out, played as a tribute to them, and he destroyed his opponents. The Raiders game after Big Irv died is now a thing of legend.

But, unfortunately, so is the meltdown playoff game against the Rams when he threw five interceptions. Or was it six?

This is a great discussion, Scott, because it seems like a simple question. But it's really like asking an Irish Catholic man in Boston "which of your eight sons is your favorite."

I think Marino did more with less than any great quarterback. He had Mark Duper and Mark Clayton, and not much else.

In 1983, Marino's first year in the NFL, the Dolphins had the #1 scoring defense in the league. He was 7-2, David Woodley and Don Strock combined to go 5-2. Marino had a 96 QB Rating and was a Pro Bowler. 1984 was his monster season, 5,084 yards passing, 48 TD passes. Miami had the #7 scoring defense, and the Dolphins lost the Super Bowl to Joe Montana and the 49ers. After that season, the defense started to falter. The next five seasons, the Dolphins scoring defense was 12th, 26th, 16th, 24th, 22nd in the NFL. In 1990, they were 4th before falling back to 24th, 11th, 24th and 17th the next four years. And they had no running game to speak of. Marino played between 1983 and 1999, and Miami had a single 1,000 yard running back in all those seasons: Karim Abdul-Jabbar, who had 1,116 yards in 1996. But he had to carry 307 times to get those yards, a meager 3.6 yards per carry. The next year, he had 892 yards, and his per carry average dropped to an anemic 3.2 yards. With a wildly inconsistent, bad most of the time defense, and no running game, Marino was a one man show. He had Mark Clayton and Mark Duper, and that was really it. They combined for 140 TD passes from #13, and 9 1,000 yard seasons. Duper made 3 Pro Bowls, Clayton 5. So, while Marino never won the Super Bowl, his 147-93 record as a starting quarterback is pretty remarkable, as are his 420 TD passes and 61,361 yards passing. With no running game at all, defenses knew Marino was going to pass. He managed six 4,000 yard passing seasons, and two others with 3,970 and 3,997. He had four 30 TD seasons, and thirteen seasons of 20 or more.

Imagine if Marino had played in San Francisco. Or, imagine if he'd had the Cowboys offensive line and Emmitt Smith to keep defenses honest. He'd have scored 40 points a game, then they wouldn't have needed a defense.

So, with that, I will enjoy what everybody else thinks, and maybe some of you will be able to convince me that your choice for best of all-time deserves consideration above Marino.

the 'stache

01-29-2015, 09:11 PM

Excluding post-season: Manning, Marino, Rogers, Brees, Moon, Farve, Fouts

Just curious why you would pick Rodgers in the regular season only. He may only be 6-5 as a starter, but in the 5 games he lost, his defense surrendered 184 points, or 37 points a game.

Rodgers numbers in the post season? 253-387 (65.37%), 2,983 yards, 23 TD, 7 INT. 101 QB rating. 35 carries, 192 yards, 3 TD.

The all-time post season QB ratings:

104.8 Bart Starr
102.8 Kurt Warner
101.0 Aaron Rodgers
100.7 Drew Brees

Those are the only four guys with 100 + QB ratings in post season history.

And in the last game against Seattle, the one he lost, where the defense blew a 12 point lead with 3:53 to play, when Seattle went ahead, and Green Bay got the ball at their own 22 with 1 time out and 1:19 left, Rodgers moved them 42 yards in 3 plays, and then set up Crosby with a 6 yard completion to Nelson for the game tying field goal.

Isn't that EXACTLY what Tom Brady did to win his first two Super Bowls? Take the ball, move his team into field goal range, and win it? Rodgers faced the same pressure, if not more. His team, which looked to be going to Arizona for the Super Bowl, had just watched his defense and special teams choke giving away a touchdown, and onside kick, another touchdown, and a 2 point conversion. What does he do then? 15 yard pass completion to Jordy Nelson. Next play, 15 yard pass completion to Randall Cobb. Next play, hurt, he runs for 12 yards. In 36 seconds, against the best defense in the NFL two years running, in Seattle, he moves the ball 42 yards with the crowd going nuts, and the defense playing on adrenaline.

If that's not clutch, and performing great with the game on the line, I don't know what is. The week before, against Dallas, Rodgers, playing hurt, completed all 10 of his passes in the 4th quarter.

The man threw for 423 yards and 4 TD passes, and ran another score in, in his first ever playoff start against Arizona. Is it his fault the defense gave up 51 points? Is it his fault the refs blew a roughing the passer call on the last play of the game when the Cardinal defender speared him under his freaking face mask, causing him to fumble to ball away?

When he won the Super Bowl in 2010, his team had been completely obliterated by injuries in the regular season. He lost Ryan Grant, his #1 running back who ran for 1,253 yards and 11 TD the season before, in week 1 for the season. He lost Jermichael Finley, his #1 tight end who had 676 yards and 5 TD the year before, in week 3 for the season. Mark Tauscher, his right tackle, missed the last 12 games of the season. Grant's backup, James Starks, missed all but three games in the regular season. And as bad as those losses were on offense, they were nothing compared to the MASH unit the Packers had on defense. It caused them to go 10-6 on the season. Buy they won on the road in Philadelphia, Atlanta and Chicago to get to the Super Bowl, then they beat the #1 defense in the NFL in Pittsburgh to win Super Bowl XLV.

Rodgers is a very, very good post season quarterback. He's only had two poor post season starts, the 2010 NFC Championship Game at Chicago where it was freezing cold (20 degrees, 20 mph wind gusts), and the game against Seattle where he was hurt. Both teams had incredible defenses. The Bears had the #4 scoring defense in the NFL, and Seattle was #1.

the 'stache

01-29-2015, 09:19 PM

Never saw Baugh, but I loved watching Jurgensen throw long - straight overhead. I guess I remember him better than Unitas because he was in the same division as Dallas. Seemed like every time we played Baltimore they were down to Earl Morrall again.

I forgot about Sonny. Funny, as I just watched the Lombardi HBO documentary a few nights ago, and it talked about how happy he was to get Vince in Washington. They referred to him as Washington's own Bart Starr.

Hell, Sam Huff, who had retired, came out of retirement to coach the linebackers, and play it. He had 3 picks, including a TD. If Lombardi hadn't gotten sick, I wonder if the Steelers would have been the team of the 70s. Look what he did with the Redskins in one season. From 5-9 to 7-5-2, the same record (well, 7-5) he had in his first season in Green Bay.

The Steelers won it all in 1974 and 1975. Lombardi would have been, what, 60, or maybe 61 in 1974? With three more years to coach that team, with Jurgensen at 36 after the 1969 season, I wonder if Lombardi doesn't draft a young quarterback to succeed him. Remember, he was the Head Coach and GM. Might he have taken Terry Bradshaw in 1970?

Runscott

01-29-2015, 09:29 PM

That's all interesting - the stats and all - but for me this was one of the simplest questions I've ever personally tried to answer, mainly because it didn't require looking at stats - just remembering what I saw with my own two eyes.

Looks like I need to start a separate thread asking who the greatest quarterback ever was. I think baseball card collectors have to answer everything based on stats - it goes with the territory.

What's your favorite color? Well, blue reflects x amount of light, while yellow...but green has historically been the most natural color, but purple has been the most successful :( this is tough. There are probably more brown things, but there is more blue space...I guess it's an impossible question.

the 'stache

01-29-2015, 10:03 PM

Runscott

01-30-2015, 09:52 AM

It's not difficult because of the stats. It's difficult because the game that Joe Montana and Dan Marino played share only a passing resemblance to the game Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers play now. And the game that Drew Brees plays now is the same game Johnny Unitas played in name only.

Bill, I completely disagree with you. I can watch a quarterback playing football and tell if he's 'great', and compare him across eras to other quarterbacks, regardless of how the game has changed, and other people can as well - I know, because I've discussed it with other people in "real life". Some people get so hung up on things like stats, that they miss other parts of the picture - I meet such people all the time, both on the internet and in "real life". Perhaps it's right brain vs left brain usage.

Tabe

01-30-2015, 11:26 AM

I've seen lots of people slag the Dolphins' running game during Marino's tenure and they ignore Marino's part in its failures. Even in his youth, Marino was incredibly slow afoot. His technique in all facets of the running game was awful, amplified by his lack of quickness. He did nothing to hide the football in any way on running plays. His slowness limited where his running backs could go and what they could do. And not hiding the ball telegraphed plays.

Did Dan have HOFers back there to run the ball? No. But if you rotate every part of a car except one - in this case Marino - and it still fails, maybe the problem is really the one part you didn't change.

That said, nobody could fling the ball like Marino. He was amazing, that's for sure.

Runscott

01-30-2015, 12:30 PM

Did Dan have HOFers back there to run the ball? No. But if you rotate every part of a car except one - in this case Marino - and it still fails, maybe the problem is really the one part you didn't change.

So the offense during Marino's years was failing? I didn't realize that - I thought they scored a lot of points.

Runscott

01-30-2015, 12:48 PM

I just checked the Dolphin's stats during the Marino years. The offense was the highest scoring in their division 8 times and 2nd 6 times. Yet they finished first in their division only 5 times and 2nd 4 times. The offense was ranked at least as high in their division in point scoring, as they finished, all but 3 years - in one of those they still won the division. The other 2 took place in 1997 and 1998 at the end of his career.

Sounds like a defensive problem, which is how most people viewed it at the time.

You can change all the cogs in the offense you want, but Marino was able to score with any of them. Unfortunately, the other teams continued to score against his defense. Perhaps Marino scored too fast, leaving his defense on the team too much?

steve B

01-30-2015, 01:35 PM

Ok, Ok, I'll keep it simple and pick just one......

Julian Edelman.

Can't get much better than perfect right? :D

Steve B

Runscott

01-30-2015, 01:57 PM

Ok, Ok, I'll keep it simple and pick just one......

Julian Edelman.

Can't get much better than perfect right? :D

Steve B

...and I'll go with Jon Ryan :)

Tabe

01-30-2015, 06:29 PM

So the offense during Marino's years was failing? I didn't realize that - I thought they scored a lot of points.
I was referring to the running game, not the offense in general. Apologies if I wasn't clear.

the 'stache

01-30-2015, 11:33 PM

Bill, I completely disagree with you. I can watch a quarterback playing football and tell if he's 'great', and compare him across eras to other quarterbacks, regardless of how the game has changed, and other people can as well - I know, because I've discussed it with other people in "real life". Some people get so hung up on things like stats, that they miss other parts of the picture - I meet such people all the time, both on the internet and in "real life". Perhaps it's right brain vs left brain usage.

Scott, I understand that this should be a pretty easy answer, and I promise you I don't go out of my way to complicate things. But it's just not an easy question to me.

If you're removing statistical analysis from the picture, how, then, are you going to consider any quarterbacks that played the game before you were alive? You're asking an all-encompassing question here. "Who is the greatest quarterback ever." Not the greatest quarterback from the last twenty years, or your lifetime. Who, in the history of the NFL, is the best to ever play the position.

I'm sorry, but the answer just isn't something I can just blurt out based on personal experience. I am far more analytical than that. I realize that there were far too many greats that I never got to see play, so I have to utilize the tools available to include them in my consideration, and even that is an imperfect way of doing it. You don't have to think like that. But you also don't have to dis me the way that you did because you don't place as much thought into it as I do.

Joe Montana was a great, great quarterback. But it's not just enough for me to say he's the best to ever play the game, because I simply can't say that. Was he the best ever? Or, was he just a really, really good quarterback that was put into a perfect situation? The Niners don't get past the Cowboys without "The Catch", and as great a throw as Montana made on the roll out, it's just another incompletion unless Dwight Clark goes up and makes a sensational catch in the endzone. How many other outstanding quarterbacks will not make your consideration because they didn't have the supporting cast around them that Montana did? Brett Favre is one of the greatest quarterbacks to ever play the game. I think most people will agree with that. But if he hadn't been rescued off the scrap heap in Atlanta, he may have never been a starter. If Don Majkowski doesn't get hurt, maybe he's in this discussion now instead of him. After all, in 1989, he was the NFL MVP runner up. Majkowski had one guy on his entire offense worth a darn in Sterling Sharpe. He lost out to Montana. But was Montana better than Majkowski? Or did he simply have a better line, and better receivers who could catch better, and gain better separation from the men covering them?

We have guys completing 70% of their passes now. 70%! But, is it that Drew Brees is better than Bart Starr was in Green Bay? Starr retired the all-time leader in NFL history for completion percentage, and he was under 58%. How can you look at two men playing the same position from different eras, and just say one was better than the other? Well, again, why? Was Montana just smarter? Was he more careful with the football? Was he on a more talented team? How would Montana have done playing back in the 60s, when the rules were even tougher?

You want my simple, don't over-think it answer then? Ok, fine. Aaron Rodgers is the best quarterback I have ever seen. He doesn't have the rings Montana did, but he is a better passer. He combines the arm strength of Elway, and Marino, and Favre with the accuracy of Steve Young, with the cool under pressure of Joe Montana. He makes impossible throws look routine, and if he played twenty years ago, or fifty years ago, he'd still be the best. Regardless of what else he accomplishes, he is the best I have ever seen play the game.

There's your simple answer.

billyb

01-30-2015, 11:34 PM

Best I ever saw play, it is two and hard to choose between them both. Bart Starr and Johnny Unitas.
These guys were field generals. And right behind them was Y. A. Tittle.

jimm

01-31-2015, 12:37 AM

Joe Cool

familytoad

01-31-2015, 10:40 AM

Ok, so to simplify the answer I am going to give...Dan Marino is the greatest QB to ever play in the years I watched football.

He was the best pure passer in an era not protected with "Peyton Rules". I don't want to belabor that discussion but passing in today's NFL is not the same as it was. Simply compiling "Peyton Stats" wouldn't be that difficult if you had an average team around you in today's game (see Philip Rivers for example)

Other QB's:

Johnny Unitas and Bart Starr are personal favorites too, but they were in the last years of their careers when I watched them play, so I have to set them aside for this purpose.

I thought Steve Young was better than Joe Montana, but the whole idea that you could plug in another QB into that system and succeed made me think it was the system and not the man.

Question for Bill, what made you call out Drew Brees as someone who "pads their stats"? I think his numbers are obviously terrific, his defense is historically terrible, running game nothing better than mediocre and his team must pass a lot to win. Sounds like he's playing to the situation. Not many better passers in the game past or present in my opinion. What stood out to you that he's padding any differently than say "Peyton"?

Aaron Rodgers, Brett Favre. Great quarterbacks on a fun team to watch. They are in the discussion as "my" best ever, especially Favre. He led the team with a certain gusto that's unmatched. Packers football history is the NFL. Watch how those GB teams specifically changed from the 60's to the current era and you'll see a good example of the NFL transition. Max McGee to Jordy Nelson, nuff said.

Not much mention above for Tom Brady. Granted, he plays in this passing friendly era and he certainly benefits from the rules (even the bent ones:cool:)
He is an all-time great. His records and wins are not flukes. Sometimes you just have to give credit where it's due.

Runscott

01-31-2015, 11:18 AM

Scott, I understand that this should be a pretty easy answer, and I promise you I don't go out of my way to complicate things. But it's just not an easy question to me.

If you're removing statistical analysis from the picture, how, then, are you going to consider any quarterbacks that played the game before you were alive? You're asking an all-encompassing question here. "Who is the greatest quarterback ever." Not the greatest quarterback from the last twenty years, or your lifetime.

No, Bill - that is not what I asked. Go re-read the original question and don't miss the word "seen". I have even repeated myself in two other posts, emphasizing the word "seen". In fact, I expected you and others to comment that I was being a smart-ass by repeating myself so many times. Any discussion is fair game in my mind, regardless of the original question, but please don't tell me I asked a question that I did not.

There is a huge difference between 'greatest ever' and 'greatest you have seen'. My focus was on the latter.

Runscott

01-31-2015, 11:24 AM

the 'stache

02-01-2015, 01:31 AM

No, Bill - that is not what I asked. Go re-read the original question and don't miss the word "seen". I have even repeated myself in two other posts, emphasizing the word "seen". In fact, I expected you and others to comment that I was being a smart-ass by repeating myself so many times. Any discussion is fair game in my mind, regardless of the original question, but please don't tell me I asked a question that I did not.

There is a huge difference between 'greatest ever' and 'greatest you have seen'. My focus was on the latter.

Okay then, now I'm on the same page. If your intent was to ask who's the best we've ever seen, and I missed it, then I'm dense, and apologize. That would, of course, change my whole approach to this conversation. If I'm not having to worry about the Ghosts of Quarterbacks Past, I am content to exclude Norm, Otto and the Gang.

I'd still enthusiastically give Rodgers as my ultimate answer, especially after he was awarded his second NFL MVP last evening. :D But if he were in a horse race with Joe Montana, I must say it would be a photo finish. And Dan Marino would only be a bridle's width behind them both.

Oh, how I am dying to call John Elway "ol' horse face" right now, but I am going to refrain. :p

itjclarke

02-01-2015, 01:59 AM

Ok, Ok, I'll keep it simple and pick just one......

Julian Edelman.

Love this guy! Edelman might be my favorite player in the league right now. I'm a little biased because he went to my HS, but he's just a ball player... QB, WR, DB, return man, he'll do whatever.
His college highlights are pretty electric
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sqr-fAkrcV8
And found his HS champ game highlights.. Wood-SIDE!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmZViAEuAt8t

Love the earlier mention Chad Pennington also. He was never gonna be in any "greatest ever" conversation (except this), but he got absolutely everything out of what he was given. I also loved the press conference when he turned the tables on the a group of reporters, and ended up lecturing them on journalistic integrity, etc. Super smart, super classy guy.

As far as greatest I've ever seen, for me it's gotta be Joe for many of the reasons already mentioned. He was so calm, so cool, and made everything look for effortless that I think it's taken for granted how great an athlete he was (especially when young). I also think his arm strength was often underrated.

Others that were great to watch-
Steve Young- the ultimate dual threat. His running ability was second to none, and I think compares favorably with any of today's dual threat guys (just watch his 49yd game winner against Vikes in 1988). I think he became truly great when he learned to settle down in the pocket, and for a few years from about 1993 on, he was so efficient passing and running.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9O5fXUOAvoY

Brett Favre- IMO he was the most fun QB of that 1990's era to watch. It's fitting that Rodgers followed him because both these guys had absolute lazers, and could throw from any position/angle while on the move. I think Favre probably rubbed off on Rodgers a bit, especially in their willingness to take risks. Favre just got burned a lot more doing so, but his unpredictability, especially when completing passes or TDs on throws he NEVER should have attempted, was always entertaining.

Marino- I always thought his throwing motion was ugly, but he had a lightning quick release and could put it where he wanted. He was 20 years ahead of his time.

Aikman- perfectly proficient, almost a robot. Statistically, he never put up really gaudy passing numbers, but as a Niner fan, I remember his converting many a 3rd and long on those square ins to Irvin and Harper. In the Super Bowl he was lights out.

Kurt Warner- Warner was like a Koufax to football, at his peaks he was amazing. I think he gets short changed a lot because he was surrounded by amazing skill players, but he had a cannon arm and was incredibly decisive (as important as anything). His comeback years with the Cards, after everyone had written him off, were an awesome cap to his career.

Elway- I was never a huge Elway guy, but no one in the era combined his arm (strongest of the era) and athleticism. I do think he legacy is totally different if he doesn't win the SB in his final 2 years.

Current-
Brady and Rodgers- I think these guys are one and two of the modern era. I give Brady the edge because of the rings, and the fact he's helped keep the Pats near the top for 15 years. They've had talented teams, but I think there are several years during that run where they'd have been under .500 without him. His calm and confidence (like a Jeter) is a huge part of winning, since I think it rubs off on anyone he plays with. On the field he's incredibly consistent, play to play, game to game, season to season.. I think he has an underrated arm and THE PERFECT throwing motion, is supremely decisive, and for a slow guy, he moves really well in the pocket. I think the term "functional mobility" was made for Brady.

I'm with Bill on Rodgers, he is virtually the perfect quarterback. He may have the greatest combination of measurable talent (speed, arm), smarts, and intangible traits (leader, calm and full awareness in the pocket and down field). I read an article criticizing him and saying he'd never be truly great because he doesn't take enough chances, using his low INT% to prove this point. IMO this was some of the laziest professional analysis I've seen... just watch the guy! He not only fits the ball into tight windows as well as anyone, he's able to identify windows that will open for a split second. The TD pass to Richard Rogers against the Cowboys is the perfect example. Based on his amazing individual play, and even if he doesn't win another SB, I still put him above the others (except Brady) of this era.

Manning- I love watching Manning, have great respect for him, but I also think he's often been affected the pressure of big games. I also think he's one of the most stat conscious QBs around. I've seen him throw so many TDs inside the 5, or while up 4 TDs. I don't hold it against him, he earned the right to call his own plays from very early in his career, which is a feat in its own right. It does however make it hard for me to use his other worldly stats to place him above guys like Montana or Brady though.

Brees- love Brees, another guy who gets everything out of the body he's been given. He's a very good athlete, moves very well in the pocket, and has enough arm to make the throws. He's also the poster boy for QB footwork. Watch him, getting squared and stepping into nearly every throw, compared with guys like Cutler and Stafford.

Big Ben- I think Big Ben is underrated. He has all the prototypical pocket attributes- size, cannon arm, decisive.. but he separates himself with his strength and elusiveness, and ability to extend plays. I think he's a pure winner (on the field that is).

Russell Wilson- Wilson seems like he's a bit polarizing, with a lot of people saying he overrated, being the beneficiary of a good system. He does play for a team with a great D, and does have a great running back... but even when they run, he's often not just handing off. He's often making a split second read whether to hand off or keep. Those plays often succeed because of his decisiveness, and the Seahawks seem to be the most effective team running zone read plays, after Cam, Kaep and RGIII took the league by storm a few years ago. I also think Wilson can be really decisive in the pocket, especially on 3rd downs, where he keeps lots of drives alive with his arm (loves those slants)... and then his ability to improvise and make plays outside the pocket is obvious. I think he's the single most elusive QB I've ever seen, and this includes great running QBs like Young and Kaep. Wilson seems fully aware in the pocket (of rushers) at all times, while also maintaining awareness down field. His pocket movement is so quick, he can wait just a split second longer, making it tougher for defensive players to adjust their angles whenever he spins, ducks, or shuffles... this is very different than a guy like Kaep, who just runs away, and often seems to lose down field awareness when the sh*t hits the fan right in front of him.

Luck- he's got a long way to go, but he's a closest thing to Rodgers' total QB package- smarts, leadership, speed/elusiveness, and though he may not fully have Rodgers' arm strength, the makes up for it with the ability to run like a full back. I can't wait to see him develop even more over the next 5-10 years.

It's amazing how much football changes every 10-20 years, and with each shift, stats become almost useless when comparing each era's greats. I'm with Scott in that you almost have to do this with your eyes. Good thing the NFL is as well film documented as it is.

the 'stache

02-01-2015, 02:06 AM

Question for Bill, what made you call out Drew Brees as someone who "pads their stats"? I think his numbers are obviously terrific, his defense is historically terrible, running game nothing better than mediocre and his team must pass a lot to win. Sounds like he's playing to the situation. Not many better passers in the game past or present in my opinion. What stood out to you that he's padding any differently than say "Peyton"?

Brian, I'd have to go back and look for other examples, and there have been many. But the one that stands out the most was the final game of the 2011 season. Rodgers sat out the final game of the season, ending with 45 TD passes. He was leading the NFL. Well, Drew Brees had 41 TD passes, and in a completely meaningless game (the Saints came in at 12-3), and against an opponent with nothing to play for (the 6-9 Panthers), Brees came out airing it out because he wanted to set the all-time single season passing yards mark, AND he wanted to lead the NFL in touchdown passes. He threw 35 passes, and many of them 30-40-50 yards downfield, trying to pad his stats, and late in the game, after the game had already been won. With his team up by 2 touchdowns, and the Panthers showing no signs of life, Brees was still in there throwing bombs. He had three touchdown passes, but was still behind Rodgers. So, after a couple deep passes, he moves the Saints down the field to the 1 yard line, and gets a dinky little pass for #45 to tie Rodgers. Now they're up 21 points. Instead of getting the backup some work, with the Saints securing a 13-3 record, and the #2 seed, the highest they could get, as the Packers came in to the day at 14-1, out came Drew Brees, wanting that TD pass #46. And he's throwing the ball all over the field, and my friend, Chris, a huge Saints fan, is sitting there saying "why is he still out there?" And I told him "he wants to lead the NFL by himself. It's not enough to tie for the NFL lead in TD passes. He has to lead by himself." Sure enough, down in the red zone, they set up a little dink pass to Sproles, and he scoots in. And afterwords, Drew Brees is mugging for the camera, saying "but it's all about my teammates. I didn't care for the records." LOL, what a bunch of bullshit.

Here are some other posts on other forums, people doing a better job than I can:

Drew Brees' history as a stat padder during his tenure as a Saint (http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/2000211-sports-and-racing-nfl/65660937)

Just Google it. Funny the things you find. SOme other guys in the league obviously don't like Drew.

https://nesncom.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/drew-brees.gif?w=1500&h=885

"Hey Drew, go ask the league if Sean Payon can get a night off from his season-long suspension to watch you break a record NOW!"

I don't know if Peyton is worse than Brees. I've seen him do it, too. But Brees has never seen a pass he didn't like. The guy will throw 700 times in a season, if they let him. Then he'll blow wind up everybody's ass about how "it's all about the team."

Yeah, right.

the 'stache

02-01-2015, 02:27 AM

I'm with Bill on Rodgers, he is virtually the perfect quarterback. He may have the greatest combination of measurable talent (speed, arm), smarts, and intangible traits (leader, calm and full awareness in the pocket and down field). I read an article criticizing him and saying he'd never be truly great because he doesn't take enough chances, using his low INT% to prove this point. IMO this was some of the laziest professional analysis I've seen... just watch the guy! He not only fits the ball into tight windows as well as anyone, he's able to identify windows that will open for a split second.

Hey Ian,

It is very lazy analysis. He doesn't take enough chances? LOL, Aaron Rodgers pushes the ball down the field more than any quarterback in the NFL:

Adjusted net yards per pass attempt 2014

1. Rodgers, GB 8.65
2. Romo, Dal 8.11
3. Roethlisberger, Pitt 7.82
4. Manning, Den 7.68
5. Luck, Ind 7.28

Rodgers gets, on average, a half more yard per pass attempt than any other quarterback in the NFL. He gets more than a yard more per pass attempt than every quarterback in the NFL, save for Romo, Roethlisberger and Manning. Yet he also....has the lowest interception rate in the NFL. He throws the longest passes, but gets intercepted the least.

Interception rate 2014

1. Rodgers, GB 1.0
2. Smith, KC 1.3
3. Palmer, Cinn 1.3
4. Roethlisberger, Pitt 1.5
5. Brady, NE 1.5%
6. Wilson, Sea 1.5%
7. Stafford, Det 2.0%
8. Carr, Oak 2.0%
9. Tannehill, Mia 2.0%
10. Romo, Dal 2.1%

What wide receiver has the most 60 + yard receptions since the start of the 2011 season?

Jordy Nelson has 12 of them to lead the NFL. 9 for touchdowns.
Victor Cruz is second with 10.
Only Cruz and DeSean Jackson (8) even have half as many as Nelson over that span.

Not surprisingly, since 2011, Rodgers leads the NFL with 20 passes of 60 + yards.

But yeah, he doesn't take chances. :rolleyes: Methinks that writer is a moron. Or he doesn't watch Green Bay play. Or both. I can't tell you how many times I've seen Rodgers chuck it downfield 40 yards on 3rd and 3. And he makes a lot of them. But it sometimes makes me nuts.

"What the hell are you DOING, Aar....oh, never mind. Touchdown, Packers. What a great throw!"

I've said that at least three times in the last year. That's why he gets the big bucks/MVPs/Olivia Munn.

The Packers need a new defensive coordinator. They need to resign Randall Cobb and Bryan Bulaga, and add two new middle linebackers-one via the draft, one via free agency. If they do that, I guarantee they win the Super Bowl again within two years.

The middle linebacking unit, which is the key to the 3-4 defense, is the weakest position on the Packers by far. And they keep burning the Packers.

Brad Jones doesn't need to be anywhere near Green Bay next year. He's the guy that blew it on the fake field goal touchdown. I was yelling at my tv. Apparently he's too dumb to see what was going on.

And A.J. Hawk, God love him, he just doesn't have it anymore. He's taken pay cut after pay cut to stay in Green Bay, and I'll always love his loyalty to the team. But he can't start anymore, and he really doesn't offer much from a rotational standpoint, either. These guys can't wrap up on anybody. And they don't have the speed to close gaps. You're constantly seeing our safeties having to run up because our linebackers lose contain, and running backs shoot up through the gap, and right by them. We were much better in the second half when we folded Clay into the middle linebacking rotation, but it wore him down.

Chase the quarterback. Shoot the gap. Chase the quarterback. Shoot the gap.

Is it any wonder he was gassed at the end of the 4th quarter?

itjclarke

02-01-2015, 03:38 AM

It is very lazy analysis. He doesn't take enough chances? LOL, Aaron Rodgers pushes the ball down the field more than any quarterback in the NFL:

That's why he gets the big bucks/MVPs/Olivia Munn.

He's with Olivia Munn?? Had no idea, but great score. My wife is in love with her character on HBO's Newsroom. We're down to our last episode.

You guys are so lucky he wore his hat backwards (allegedly) to his interview with the Niners in 2005. This, and Rodgers' overwhelming self assuredness, supposedly turned Mike McCarthy off so much, they took Alex at #1. By the next year you had both guys!! (though I think McCarthy is the interchangeable of the two)

He is such a beast of a player. I went to Lambeau for the first time this year, and watched him play the Bears on Sunday night. He was throwing darts all night, and the 40+ yard throw, while running hard to his right, was so typically Rodgers. He's athletic enough to escape the pressure, and can still square up enough to get that ball off and downfield with velocity, and he put it into the only spot it could go.

To the point of stat padding, Rodgers threw 6 TDs in the first half!! I can assure Manning finishes with 8 and a new NFL record... or at least dies trying. There's a great clip of his back up (Osweiler) getting pissed when Manning trots back on the field up 3-4 TDs toward the end of a game. Rodgers took one shot at the end zone in the 3rd quarter, on a 3rd down, then never took another. If guys wanna pad stats, so be it, it gets them paid, but it was impressive to see the Pack's restraint in this game. He played nearly 2 full quarters, one TD short of the NFL record. All his stats were fully in the context of the game, none coming via the late game hard play action fake on the 1 yard line while up 28.

Glad you agree with my take on the writer. I'll ask my friend to re-send the link, and forward to you. OT, my friend reads everything and is one who seems to form many/most of his opinions based what is written. It is amazing to me though how many people writing have no business writing! and as result how many opinions they affect. I mentioned in another thread, I once lived with a sports radio talk show host (some time nationally syndicated), who really knew very very little about anything he talked about, especially football... he mostly prepped by listening to the other talking heads.

Prof_Plum

02-01-2015, 07:40 AM

When I was growing up it was Johnny U and those funky looking high tops. After him it became Elway for me. I just thought Elway was able to do more with less talent around him than any other QB.

Runscott

02-01-2015, 10:24 AM

Bill, it's okay. I have enjoyed reading the analyses that you and Ian have put together. Thanks.

Ian - you really brought back memories. I forgot how much I enjoyed watching Aikman. After the Danny White years he was a real pleasure to have on those 3rd down plays.

The thing I remember most about Montana and Young was that pinpoint accuracy. Kaepernick actually has the ability to make similar throws, but doesn't have the brains and has too much ego. I know this sounds biased, but Wilson has his passing moments as well - not just receivers getting open and lobbing it in, like he did against Green Bay, but some real pin-point stuff. Unfortunately, he mixes that with periods of horror that you would never see out of the top-tier players unless they were injured (like Manning in the playoffs this year).

billyb

02-01-2015, 02:01 PM

itjclarke

02-01-2015, 02:46 PM

One reason I mentioned Y.A. Tittle, right behind Unitas and Starr was, not only was Tittle an outstanding Quarterback, he was the innovator of the, then termed, "alley-oop" play.
RC Owens was one of his receivers and when they got near the end zone, Tittle would throw a lob pass to Owens and he would out jump the defenders for the ball. Back then, DBs could not defend against the play.
That pay still goes on as you know.

As a man living about 6 blocks from old Kezar (now very much downsized), it makes me happy to this see mentioned. We all knew about it as kids from watching the old NFL films stuff. I so wish the Niners were still a neighborhood team playing at Kezar.

Tabe

02-02-2015, 10:38 AM

Here are some other posts on other forums, people doing a better job than I can:

Drew Brees' history as a stat padder during his tenure as a Saint (http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/2000211-sports-and-racing-nfl/65660937)

I agree that Drew is a stat padder but that article doesn't really help the case. I mean, he includes stuff like this:

"Winning by 11 points in the 4th quarter, Brees throws a TD to Heath Evans to go up by 18 points with 8:38 remaining."

Cuz, yeah, you shouldn't throw TDs when you're only up 2 scores. :rolleyes:

clydepepper

02-02-2015, 11:25 AM

Hey, where have all the Ryan Leaf fans gone?

HappyJack41

02-02-2015, 09:55 PM

Nobody and I mean NOBODY will ever touch Joe Cool. Some say "well yeah but Brady had to do it in the salary cap area!".....who gives a $hit!, Montana actually had to play against REAL defenses who were actually allowed to play defense and weren't neutered so that the offense always has the advantage as it has been in this league for 15 years now.

Brady has never and will never know what it's like to play against defenses allowed to head hunt on him or jam the living crap out of his receivers on every single play all the way up the field. If he did, he wouldn't have 3 Super Bowls with a 4th trophy gift wrapped last night. And he wouldn't have the stats that he's been able to put up while being pampered by this league for his entire career (ESPECIALLY for the last 8 years under Kraft's butt buddy GODell)

EvilKing00

02-04-2015, 04:27 AM

top 6 in order IMO - taking into account stats, teams the played for, over all talent and EVERYTHING in general

Manning
Elway
marino
montana
Johnny u
brady

the 'stache

02-06-2015, 06:25 PM

I agree that Drew is a stat padder but that article doesn't really help the case. I mean, he includes stuff like this:

"Winning by 11 points in the 4th quarter, Brees throws a TD to Heath Evans to go up by 18 points with 8:38 remaining."

Cuz, yeah, you shouldn't throw TDs when you're only up 2 scores. :rolleyes:

I only skimmed the post. I agree after looking at it in a little more detail there are some points made that are not good examples of stat padding. Up by 11 with 8 + minutes to go, you should go for the kill shot. I felt that way before the NFC Championship Game, and I definitely feel even more so, now.

But there are clear examples when the Saints are up big, where the other team is clearly inferior, and out of the game, where Brees is throwing the deep ball looking for more yardage and touchdowns to make his box score look better. Then he has the nerve to say "it was all about my team, not me" after the game.

Please.

By the way, I am not meaning to suggest Brees is the only one that does this. But it sure seems to me that Brees has done it more often than the other quarterbacks I've watched.

the 'stache

02-06-2015, 06:30 PM

Nobody and I mean NOBODY will ever touch Joe Cool. Some say "well yeah but Brady had to do it in the salary cap area!".....who gives a $hit!,

Well, you should, because it's a valid point. Keeping a great team together today is much more difficult than it was in Montana's day.

Think Bradshaw wins four Super Bowls in the salary cap era? No way. He doesn't have Swann, Stallworth, Franco Harris, that offensive line, and a defense with Mean Joe Green, Jack Ham, Jack Lambert, L.C. Greenwood, etc in the cap era. Other teams start offering money the Steelers can't compete with. The team falls apart.

The same thing would have happened to Montana. Rice was otherworldly. As I said before, the second best receiver to ever play the game, and the greatest in modern football. The Niners would have kept Montana and Rice. That means they lose the complimentary pieces like Tom Rathman, Roger Craig, John Taylor, etc. They don't keep that offense together. Montana is having to get used to new young guys much more often. I'm not saying that Montana isn't able to develop great chemistry with those new receivers, but it would take a while.

HRBAKER

02-06-2015, 06:49 PM

itjclarke

02-06-2015, 08:42 PM

Ask yourself how many of the offensive players that Brady has played with (for any extended period time) will make it to Canton. Not the in-and-outs like Randy Moss - I mean a sustained period of time - it ain't many I can think of. Sort of puts his skill in perspective for me.

I honestly can't think of a single skill player, aside from Moss that is a HOFer. On this team, Edelman is a very very good slot guy, but I think Gronk is the only pass catcher/skill man that even has a shot at the HOF. I think he'd still need 5-6 more years at peak production to have a shot.

He also hasn't had many All Pro or Pro Bowl caliber guys either. I'm not gonna dig through the past 15 years' worth of rosters right now, but just thinking back, the best skill guys I remember (Pro Bowl worthy or close) were Troy Brown, Corey Dillon, Wes Welker, BenJarvus Green Ellis, Edelman, Hernandez, Branch (barely), Blount (barely)

Others- Jermaine Wiggins, Ben Watson, Reche Caldwell, Stevan Ridley, David Patten, Givens, Antowaine Smith, Woodhead, Maroney, LaFell, etc were solid producers but not league stars.

Almost no one jumps out at you, yet he's amassed some amazing stats and 4 rings. One thing the Pats have done so effectively is to identify individuals' strengths and put them in, or even create, rolls that are ideal for them. I can't think of another team where each guy seems to fill his specific role so well, and these roles really accentuates their skills.. sorta like the NFL's Spurs. Brady as a QB has been able to take full advantage of these players' talents/roles and should be credited for doing this so effectively.

rats60

02-08-2015, 06:43 AM

HRBAKER

02-08-2015, 07:33 AM

Wrong. Barry Bonds never won anything.
His postseason BA = .245 including three postseasons where he batted under .200.

Moss was there for 3+ years - he will be a HOF. He was one bf he got there.
Welker has a shot - Wayne has just a good a shot to me and certainly Harrison does too.
Gronk looks like he is well on his way but he has shown a proclivity to get injured.

Id also say Edgerrin James will be a HOFer long bf any back Brady played an extended period of time with.
Same can be said for Roger Craig.

I don't remember the Wayne play but I would also say that playing less than ordinary against the Seattle D cost Manning his second Super Bowl as well.
Good thing Tom knew exactly what D they would be in every play this time around - especially the fourth quarter.

You've added a whole new spin to this though - Tom owes his success largely to his kicker.

TUM301

02-08-2015, 07:38 AM

steve B

02-08-2015, 09:51 AM

Brady also had the greatest kicker of all time. How many does he win without him? He has had great defenses on the first 3 and he knew what defense the other team was in. I'm still waiting for Brady to win something without cheating. Just look at his playoff record between Spygate and Deflategate and that tells you what you need to know about him. He's the Barry Bonds of the NFL.

While Vinateri is among the best, he's not even the best the pats have had. He was great in bad weather, which counts for a lot here, but was pretty average on longer kicks ~ 50+. Gostkowski is 3% better overall, and much better beyond 50 yards 13/17 compared to 23/41. Vinateri has been much better indoors at Indy. He gets a lot of props for kicking so many winners in big games. Only time will tell if Gostkowski keeps up the pace he's on.

I'm a Pats fan and a big fan of both Brady and Vinateri but wouldn't rank either as #1 all time at their position. Brady wins a lot, and with supposedly very little, but there's always at least one very good receiver and a bunch of guys who would be farther up the depth chart anywhere else. That's makes for odd statistical stuff because of a system that emphasizes individual matchups and depth. Not many players will put up huge numbers in NE, but more will get decent playing time. The exceptions are the guys like Moss, Welker, and Gronk. And even Gronk has games where he's not a primary part of the offense. Hard to keep him out of it, but there's games where you can tell he's doing more blocking and pulling defenders away from the play than being the primary receiver.

To keep on topic- I've been thinking over the original question and keep coming back to some interviews with players who mentioned Bradshaw as the smartest player they'd played with or against and that he called his own plays. If that's correct, I'd have to lean toward him as the best I've seen.

Steve B

HRBAKER

02-08-2015, 10:40 AM

Steve as more of an interested observer - have any of NE's skill folks ever left and "blown up" somewhere else?

rats60

02-08-2015, 12:24 PM

I don't remember the Wayne play but I would also say that playing less than ordinary against the Seattle D cost Manning his second Super Bowl as well.
Good thing Tom knew exactly what D they would be in every play this time around - especially the fourth quarter.

You've added a whole new spin to this though - Tom owes his success largely to his kicker.

You must not watch the Super Bowl when NE doesn't play. In the Colts-Saints SB, Manning was driving to tie the game in the 4th quarter. Manning audibled to a quick pass against a Saints blitz. For some reason Wayne half-assed his route and it resulted in a pick 6 that put the game away.

You really don't think Brady owes a big part of his success to Adam Vinateri? If he doesn't make two kicks in the snow vs. the Raiders, Brady doesn't come close to SB 36, won on his last second FG. SB 38 also won on his last second FG. Be glad Scott Norwood wasn't your kicker or Mike Vanderjagt who was one of the most accurate kickers of all time, but missed key playoff FGs against the Dolphins and Steelers, ending two Manning playoff runs.

HRBAKER

02-08-2015, 01:30 PM

I simply said I don't remember the play, I didn't say it didn't happen. Manning had ample chance to win a 2nd Super Bowl last year again - he came up noticeably short, again. He has 3 TD passes in 132 SB pass attempts. That's not all lazy route running.

They're not my kickers - I'm an Arizona Cardinals fan not a Pats fan. And no, I don't think Brady or NE owes an inordinate amount of their success to their kickers. It's an interesting narrative though. It is certainly better to have a good one than one that sucks. At the end of the day someone has to put the kicker in the position to win it for you.

itjclarke

02-08-2015, 02:58 PM

Welker, Gronk and Moss are as good any other qb has had. They are all potential hofers. Montana had Rice, that's it. Clark or Taylor weren't as good as those guys and Montana won 2 without Rice. Manning had Harrison who is struggling to make the hof. Wayne sucks, all he did is quit on his route costing Manning his 2nd Super Bowl. He does have Welker helping extend his career. Marino, Elway and Favre had little to help them.

... I'm still waiting for Brady to win something without cheating. Just look at his playoff record between Spygate and Deflategate and that tells you what you need to know about him. He's the Barry Bonds of the NFL.

You're all over the map. First, Taylor was a great receiver and an absolute physical specimen when he played. I'm guessing your opinion isn't going much further than his statistics here, but at 6' 1" he had the leaping ability (think 40"+) to play like a guy 6' 5". He was incredibly strong (routinely ran through safeties/corners), was an incredible blocker, had great hands and ability to adjust to the ball, and had equal to or better than run after catch skills than Rice (watch highlights). If he'd been a number 1, or if the Niners threw as much/ran as many play as current offenses, he could have been a 1200-1500 yard guy routinely. Clark and Soloman were very good receivers too.

Montana also had Craig, who won't make the HOF, but at the time was one of strongest runners in the league, and was no doubt the most versatile back (original Marshall Faulk, but stronger). Craig and Tyler (another 1,000+ guy) overlapped for a few years, with Craig playing as fullback. Except for 1981 the Niners were stacked offensively, also having a string of very productive WRs/TEs/FBs (TE/FB being very important to the old West Coast offense). Manning had Edge, and used the play action pass as well as anyone in his time. Play action success is wholly dependent on a good running game.. and it's a heck of a lot easier to throw when LBs, even safeties take 1-2 steps forward before back peddling. Dillon was probably the only true #1 (top 10) back Brady's had, and think he was only on one SB team. This year against the Seahawks, the Pats' short passing game (especially early) basically took the place of any running game. Brady and Co executed it to near perfection.

Welker won't sniff the hall of fame, but I'll give you he was a very very good receiver for Brady. On Welkers level though, you could then make arguments for the very good guys Marino had- Marks brothers (Duper and Clayton), the whole lot of guys Favre had- Sterling Sharpe (HOFer if not for neck injury), Anotinio Freeman/Robert Brooks/Donald Driver/Chmura/K Jackson/J Walker (all top performers at their peak), and the incredible trio Elway had when he finally won the SB- Ed McCaffrey, Rod Smith, Terrell Davis.

Brady's cast (save for maybe 2007) has never been as dynamic as these other QBs'.

itjclarke

02-08-2015, 03:11 PM

BTW- to say Reggie Wayne sucks based on one play (which I doubt you really understand) is crazy. One, Porter's jump was incredible, two, how do you know how Wayne is supposed to run his route on any given look? Their inside guy is running a slant as well.. do you want him to run a hard slant up his back? Over his career he's been one of the most reliably consistent receivers in the league. He's not the most flashy or athletic, but gets open and catches the ball. I can assure QBs love his type of receiver because he's a dependable safety net and they know where he's going to be. He is also a likely HOFer (as is Harrison, and Edge). Add Stokely as the slot guy, Dallas Clark at TE and I think it's tough to argue Manning's Colts teams weren't totally stacked.

... and look what he's had in Denver?!?!? Demarious, Decker, Julius Thomas, and any of the string of productive RBs.

Manning does get great credit for play calling, spreading the ball around, giving his guys an opportunity to succeed.. but you cannot even compare the skill guys Brady has had to the ones he's had.

HRBAKER

02-08-2015, 03:30 PM

Stop it Ian, you're making too much sense.

Manning is a GREAT QB, Brady is better, particularly @ nut cuttin' time.

itjclarke

02-08-2015, 03:51 PM

Stop it Ian, you're making too much sense.

Manning is a GREAT QB, Brady is better, particularly @ nut cuttin' time.

I keep telling myself to just move on, to ignore these threads... (cue Pacino voice) but they keep pulling me back in!

FenwayFaithful

02-08-2015, 04:00 PM

steve B

02-08-2015, 06:01 PM

Steve as more of an interested observer - have any of NE's skill folks ever left and "blown up" somewhere else?

Short answer - Hardly any that I can recall, and none recently (Plunkett won a SB after he left but was pretty much the same just on a better team)

Longer answer -
Quite a few have come to NE either underused or coming from roles that weren't appropriate - like Welker. He was really good in Miami, but they had him only doing returns the first couple years - Averaged around 3 targets a game. His last year there he averaged 6 targets a game, but only caught about half. Totally killed NE though. And while he's not Mannings favorite he's still doing very well for the number of times he's thrown to. Best catch % since 07 not as good yards/catch, but he is 33 and a most guys who go over the middle as much as he does/did drastically slow down after 30.

Some came here with supposed "issues" Like Corey Dillon. Yeah he bitched a lot after a few years in Cincinnati, but that team was really bad the whole time he was there but kept claiming they were going to get it together. 7 years of that along with the constant turnover of very mediocre QBs would make anyone interested in winning a bit grouchy.
Moss also came in as a washed up malcontent. I was actually disappointed they took him instead of T.O. (So yes, my football skills judgements may be a bit suspect :o )
Many of those guys were at or near the end of their careers and got in a year or a few more playing at a decent level. Or in the case of Moss a very high level.

A LOT of NE players who have left, skills players or otherwise have done well after leaving. Not blown up, but not much falloff if any. With the number of supporting cast getting moved every year it was and still is fun to see how many EX NE players were in any particular game. Almost all the playoff contenders had a couple.

What fascinates me is the system - I've watched a few shows that actually had access to Bellicheck coaching, and even the approach is somewhat different than some coaches. And it all seems to be geared towards having the people who are happy with a role, and not overloading the guys with potential. One interview with a player who'd been and gone in a year or two was interesting. The player said his first team basically handed him a thousand pages of plays and said "learn this by the end of camp" Then sent him out on plays he wasn't suited for or into bad matchups. Result? Poor performance and poor confidence. Patriots? He said they had him learn basic stuff in camp but focused on skills and work. First week he had a total of two plays he had to know inside out and had to know what situation they thought those plays might be used. And when that situation came up he had to be standing there ready to go in. Week 2 a few more plays. And if he was ready he got to go in on plays he was suited for usually with a decent matchup. Result? Less playing time fewer plays, but far better results and very high confidence.
(I don't have the skills for sure, but I've heard that knowing you can do what's needed to compete is way more important than it might seem)

Steve B

itjclarke

02-08-2015, 06:21 PM

Steve- interesting comments regarding Bellicheck. I've thought, throughout the Pats' run that they've created ideal niche roles for many of their players. Welker is a great example, as was Woodhead and now Edelman. Once these guys are inserted in their role, they perfect that role. Then through a well crafted game plan and a QB who executes it, they can all flourish within that role... rarely stepping outside it. I have seen on occasion Welker and Edelman beat guys deep, but it's been far and few between. I saw Moss catch a few underneath, but that was few and far between.

I don't think you see such clearly defined player roles on many/any other NFL teams... and with these role players contributing at "star" levels. The Spurs over the years are very similar in basketball, and this year maybe the Hawks/Warriors.

Over the offseason, the Niners were reportedly interested in signing Edelman, however I have little faith they'd have come anywhere close to using him as effectively as the Pats have.. Especially with Kaep at QB.

steve B

02-09-2015, 08:32 AM

Of course the flip side of that is guys like Troy Brown who did reasonably well when he was needed as a defensive back, and the bunch of other guys who have stepped outside any traditional role. Edelman throwing, Vinateri throwing for a TD, Vrabel with 8 TDs as a receiver(Plus two more with KC after) I'm sure there are a few I've forgotten.

Brown was "cut" a few times to make cap room, and usually went "fishing" and wasn't available for other teams to talk to. Then was signed just before camp. A very odd sort of flexibility that really requires trust on both sides.

Steve B
Steve- interesting comments regarding Bellicheck. I've thought, throughout the Pats' run that they've created ideal niche roles for many of their players. Welker is a great example, as was Woodhead and now Edelman. Once these guys are inserted in their role, they perfect that role. Then through a well crafted game plan and a QB who executes it, they can all flourish within that role... rarely stepping outside it. I have seen on occasion Welker and Edelman beat guys deep, but it's been far and few between. I saw Moss catch a few underneath, but that was few and far between.

I don't think you see such clearly defined player roles on many/any other NFL teams... and with these role players contributing at "star" levels. The Spurs over the years are very similar in basketball, and this year maybe the Hawks/Warriors.

Over the offseason, the Niners were reportedly interested in signing Edelman, however I have little faith they'd have come anywhere close to using him as effectively as the Pats have.. Especially with Kaep at QB.

itjclarke

02-09-2015, 06:43 PM

Of course the flip side of that is guys like Troy Brown who did reasonably well when he was needed as a defensive back, and the bunch of other guys who have stepped outside any traditional role. Edelman throwing, Vinateri throwing for a TD, Vrabel with 8 TDs as a receiver(Plus two more with KC after) I'm sure there are a few I've forgotten.

Brown was "cut" a few times to make cap room, and usually went "fishing" and wasn't available for other teams to talk to. Then was signed just before camp. A very odd sort of flexibility that really requires trust on both sides.

Steve B

I loved Troy Brown when he played DB those couple years. Edelman played some DB as well (both out of necessity). They, and Woodhead were all incredibly versatile.. pure football players who will do anything asked. I'm sure Edelman could kick/punt too.

I'm not really saying these guys can only do one thing.. But that their roles are so well utilized, they can flourish within them. I don't think Edelman likely becomes a star anywhere else. I'm not sure he even gets a shot anywhere else, but the Pats have a knack at finding malleable pieces that can fit their system. Edelman is a great slot guy, and also nicely fills the roll of the old wing or "fly back" on those quick running sweeps. I'm guessing he'll pass out of the look at some point too.

Player versatility is always a good thing. Guys like Harbaugh (Roman) made a living with that at Stanford and the NFL. He could just as easily pass out of a two TE, one fullback, jumbo package as he could out of 4-5 wides, just because his players could perform both rolls. The Niners were at their peak when they had both Delaney Walker and Vernon Davis because both could run block, allowing the Niners to pound it, and both were really fast, creating major mismatches... Thus the Niners could accomplish a wider range of things out of a single look than is the norm. This, when working was a nightmare for defenses trying to sub to the right personnel packages, and make their calls. I think losing Delaney this past year was a pretty big blow to the Niners, because they lost some of that versatility.

steve B

02-09-2015, 07:37 PM

Versatility is always good.

Some of the doing well in the role is because the roles are adjusted to the players best skills. I think it was in the episode of a football life Bellicheck talked about how if a route calls for a player to get to a spot say going 15 yards deep and cutting left but it needs to be done in a certain time like 3 seconds and the guy you have isn't quick enough? Then you adjust the route to maybe 12 yards or a softer cut so he's in place right on time (Assuming proper execution) There was also talk about not adjusting towards a teams weaknesses, but more towards limiting their strengths by play selection and matchups. Very interesting stuff. The scene where Brady is in his office either early or late and watching video of plays until he notices some tiny thing that's tipping when the opponent might be out of position.....Great behind the scenes stuff.

Steve B

I loved Troy Brown when he played DB those couple years. Edelman played some DB as well (both out of necessity). They, and Woodhead were all incredibly versatile.. pure football players who will do anything asked. I'm sure Edelman could kick/punt too.

I'm not really saying these guys can only do one thing.. But that their roles are so well utilized, they can flourish within them. I don't think Edelman likely becomes a star anywhere else. I'm not sure he even gets a shot anywhere else, but the Pats have a knack at finding malleable pieces that can fit their system. Edelman is a great slot guy, and also nicely fills the roll of the old wing or "fly back" on those quick running sweeps. I'm guessing he'll pass out of the look at some point too.

Player versatility is always a good thing. Guys like Harbaugh (Roman) made a living with that at Stanford and the NFL. He could just as easily pass out of a two TE, one fullback, jumbo package as he could out of 4-5 wides, just because his players could perform both rolls. The Niners were at their peak when they had both Delaney Walker and Vernon Davis because both could run block, allowing the Niners to pound it, and both were really fast, creating major mismatches... Thus the Niners could accomplish a wider range of things out of a single look than is the norm. This, when working was a nightmare for defenses trying to sub to the right personnel packages, and make their calls. I think losing Delaney this past year was a pretty big blow to the Niners, because they lost some of that versatility.

t206blogcom

02-10-2015, 10:13 AM

Joe Montana #1 all time.

Favre and Brady are tied for 2nd in my opinion.

drcy

02-10-2015, 01:01 PM

While I wouldn't say the best while playing, a major positive in Favre's favor is played so many games-- has the consecutive game's record. As I've often said, a good player in the game is more valuable than a the all-time best sitting on the bench. As a coach, I might pick Favre over all others merely because I know he'll be playing all the games.

I think a fair argument is Favre was the best in the 'real world, when the rubber hits the road' sense (versus the abstract geek sense, bleeping over games missed), because he played never missed a game.

Just saying that's a fair argument in Favre's favor, and one that I think is often overlooked.

I am a lifelong loyal Packers fan, but, for the record, Favre began to majorly annoy me when he did that annual retiring-retraction schtick and leaving for the VIkings was the opposite of endearing. And he did throw too many interceptions. So my homer bias is sweet and sour as far as he goes.

Runscott

02-10-2015, 02:42 PM

Brett Favre didn't leave Green Bay for the Vikings.

Mainstreetsportscards

02-10-2015, 11:48 PM

Aaron Rodgers is the best Qb I have seen play the game... I am a 49ers fan and want to say Joe Montana is the best ever, but my eyes tell me Rodgers is the best I've ever seen...

CMIZ5290

02-12-2015, 05:31 PM

Steve Bartkowski...:D:D

Runscott

02-12-2015, 05:37 PM

Truthfully, for me it's a tie between Clint Longley and Doug Flutie. I only saw each one of them throw one pass, but they were good ones.

Lgarza99

02-13-2015, 04:55 PM

Joe Montana will always be the greatest QB imho. Whatever "it" is? Joe had "it"!!

vintagebaseballcardguy

02-13-2015, 08:03 PM

I enjoyed watching Dan Fouts...

CMIZ5290

02-14-2015, 07:01 PM

Truthfully, for me it's a tie between Clint Longley and Doug Flutie. I only saw each one of them throw one pass, but they were good ones.

priceless:D

freakhappy

02-14-2015, 08:10 PM

Joe Montana will always be the greatest QB imho. Whatever "it" is? Joe had "it"!!

Well, we just found out that he had stickum :D

All jokes aside, Montana was the dude

RTK

02-14-2015, 09:10 PM

Montana & Favre

rsn1661

02-15-2015, 08:25 AM

I think it was in 71 l saw Unitas play, although it was just in the college all star game at Soldiers Field in Chicago. If I am not mistaken the quarterback for the college team was Jim Plunkett. Needless to say the Colts won.

talkinbaseball

02-15-2015, 10:33 AM

the best ones I've seen through the years:
I'm 58

Gabriel
Starr
Joe Willie
Staubach

then you have the next level.

Montana
Bradshaw
Brady
Unitas
Otto Grahman
Bobby Layne

Peter_Spaeth

02-15-2015, 06:57 PM

Best pure passer -- Jurgensen.
Best combination passer and runner -- Young.
Best overall QB including intangibles -- Brady.