Greatest quarterback you have seen?

[the 'stache]

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.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

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]

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]

Originally Posted by Tabe

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]

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]

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

Julian Edelman.

Can't get much better than perfect right?

Steve B

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by steve B

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

Julian Edelman.

Can't get much better than perfect right?

Steve B

...and I'll go with Jon Ryan

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by steve B

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.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Runscott

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.

[billyb]

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.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by Runscott

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.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

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.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by Runscott

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. 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.