PDA

View Full Version : Where would another SB MVP trophy place Eli



GIANT JC
06-25-2013, 12:41 PM
among todays NFL quarterbacks? Who would he pass?

Rudyy
06-25-2013, 12:47 PM
Whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

RoanokeFan
06-25-2013, 12:50 PM
A day without an Eli standing thread is like a day without sunshine :cool:

NYGabriel
06-25-2013, 12:52 PM
Dan Marino was voted no.25 on the NFL top 100 list and Terry Bradshaw, with 4 rings in 4 SB's and 2 SB MVP's, was no.50.

Morehead State
06-25-2013, 12:54 PM
Dan Marino was voted no.25 on the NFL top 100 list and Terry Bradshaw, with 4 rings in 4 SB's and 2 SB MVP's, was no.50.
Because Dan Marino was ten times better than Terry Bradshaw.

Morehead State
06-25-2013, 12:55 PM
A day without an Eli standing thread is like a day without a root canal. :cool:
Fixed it RF.

giantscolombia
06-25-2013, 12:55 PM
WOAH!!! DANGEROUS THREAD TO START MY CHILD!! VERY DANGEROUS!

and... its your 4th post...

Morehead State
06-25-2013, 12:56 PM
WOAH!!! DANGEROUS THREAD TO START MY CHILD!! VERY DANGEROUS!

and... its your 4th post...
Trust me....Its not his 4th post.

NYGabriel
06-25-2013, 12:59 PM
Because Dan Marino was ten times better than Terry Bradshaw.

Lol. That was kind of my point. More rings doesn't automatically make you a better player. You need to win one though. Marino isn't a top 5 all time QB because he has no jewelry.

RoanokeFan
06-25-2013, 01:00 PM
WOAH!!! DANGEROUS THREAD TO START MY CHILD!! VERY DANGEROUS!

and... its your 4th post...

A lot of folks just hide in the rafters and then decide to participate. And then some branch out into a new persona.

Morehead State
06-25-2013, 01:00 PM
Lol. That was kind of my point. More rings doesn't automatically make you a better player. You need to win one though. Marino isn't a top 5 all time QB because he has no jewelry.
No you don't and yes he is.

RoanokeFan
06-25-2013, 01:01 PM
Lol. That was kind of my point. More rings doesn't automatically make you a better player. You need to win one though. Marino isn't a top 5 all time QB because he has no jewelry.

That's not true, I've seen his watch :rolleyes:

GIANT JC
06-25-2013, 01:16 PM
A new Eli thread is like someone walking into the party with a cold case of good beer. It gets everybody involved. I was banished from the board a few years ago and I have been watching 'from the rafters' since.

RoanokeFan
06-25-2013, 01:23 PM
The "value" of an Eli thread is, as you know, in the eye(s) of the beholder(s).

GameTime
06-25-2013, 01:29 PM
Eli is the best
Eli is very good
Eli is just ok
Eli sucks....

take your pick

FIFTY6G-MAN
06-25-2013, 01:31 PM
among todays NFL quarterbacks? Who would he pass?where in Ocean Springs are you? I live here as well.

RoanokeFan
06-25-2013, 01:32 PM
where in Ocean Springs are you? I live here as well.

And a life long friendship unfolds :popcorn:

GIANT JC
06-25-2013, 01:39 PM
I operate a pharmacy in St. Martin. When you walk in you know you are in Giants Country.

Delicreep
06-25-2013, 02:02 PM
where in Ocean Springs are you? I live here as well.

The post came from upstairs....GET OUT NOW!!!

Delicreep
06-25-2013, 02:03 PM
among todays NFL quarterbacks? Who would he pass?

I'm not sure, but I do think it would really give him a leg up on next years camp QB competition.

TCHOF
06-25-2013, 02:07 PM
I cannot wait for training camp . . . .

nhpgiantsfan
06-25-2013, 02:15 PM
I don't care where he would rank among NFL QBs but two things for sure.

He'd be a HOF lock and the debate will be over about who is the best Giants QB ever.

GameTime
06-25-2013, 02:32 PM
another SB would place Eli in the class of QBs and teams that have multiple SB wins.

If you want to pair it down to pure talent. He will never be the best among his peers. But there is so much more that goes into to QBing than just talent and thats where Eli, most times, shines.

titwio
06-25-2013, 02:33 PM
According to ESPN he'd probably bottom out the top 10 rankings inbetween Matt Shaub and Tony Romo.

ChuckKnoxx
06-25-2013, 02:34 PM
At that point he would probably earn the right to be in the top 25.

- Kurt Warner.

bigblue58
06-25-2013, 02:53 PM
I 'm sorry, but I have never understood this fascination with someone having to be "the best of all time" or "top 5" or "Top 100" or where this accomplishment or that accomplishment "places a player"???
Who cares? what the hell does it mean anyway???
If Eli helped us win another SB it would mean that he won us 3 SB's. Do we have to forfeit the Lombardi trophy if that isn't enough to get him into the HOF?
It's such a stupid, tired, totally meaningless and worn out debate.
My team winning a game or championship is an "in the moment" thing. I could care less who is "the best" because:
A-it isn't a requirement to win it all
B- It's too subjective for anyone to be absolutely sure the pick is the right one!
Is Eli a top 5 QB? I don't know and further more, I don't care...........he's a 2 time SB MVP winning QB for the NY Giants, and that's all I give a damn about!!!

Astorian
06-25-2013, 02:54 PM
among todays NFL quarterbacks? Who would he pass?No question in my mind: he'd leave Carr in the dust.

EliDaMANning
06-25-2013, 04:06 PM
No question in my mind: he'd leave Carr in the dust.LOL

Rudyy
06-25-2013, 04:13 PM
No question in my mind: he'd leave Carr in the dust.Not so sure about that...

EliDaMANning
06-25-2013, 04:56 PM
among todays NFL quarterbacks? Who would he pass?Everybody.

ShakeandBake
06-25-2013, 05:42 PM
Everybody.

You should change your sig to say unless you are a Saint, Patriot, Bronco or Green Bay fan

miked1958
06-25-2013, 06:49 PM
Because Dan Marino was ten times better than Terry Bradshaw.still it comes down to getting your team to the big game and once there winning it and performing at a high level.. I don't think steelers fans mind him being 25 places behind Marino cause they have the. Hardware and dolphins fans only have distant memories of days gone by

miked1958
06-25-2013, 06:50 PM
among todays NFL quarterbacks? Who would he pass?it would make Eli even more ELITE!!!

Morehead State
06-25-2013, 09:13 PM
still it comes down to getting your team to the big game and once there winning it and performing at a high level.. I don't think steelers fans mind him being 25 places behind Marino cause they have the. Hardware and dolphins fans only have distant memories of days gone by
Teams win SB's, not players.
Unfortunately the one man team that Dan Marino led, couldn't win with just one great player. Even though he was especially great.

Buddy333
06-25-2013, 10:05 PM
Teams win SB's, not players.Unfortunately the one man team that Dan Marino led, couldn't win with just one great player. Even though he was especially great.This.

appodictic
06-25-2013, 11:02 PM
A third super bowl would put him in more commercials then peyton, and in NY it would mean he NEVER has to pay for a hair cut again!

fizzlesticks
06-25-2013, 11:08 PM
Disney Land.

Rudyy
06-25-2013, 11:16 PM
A 3rd Super Bowl would mean more and more Eli threads. Yaaaaaaaaay.

appodictic
06-26-2013, 12:07 AM
It would mean any time after the 3rd super bowl, he will have a swarm of homers so fierce, that even if he has 4 games in a row 0 passer rating with three INT's, if Kurt warner does not put him in his top 10 quarter backs list, this message board will light up like forth of july....

IamGiantsfan
06-26-2013, 04:08 AM
I 'm sorry, but I have never understood this fascination with someone having to be "the best of all time" or "top 5" or "Top 100" or where this accomplishment or that accomplishment "places a player"???
Who cares? what the hell does it mean anyway???
If Eli helped us win another SB it would mean that he won us 3 SB's. Do we have to forfeit the Lombardi trophy if that isn't enough to get him into the HOF?
It's such a stupid, tired, totally meaningless and worn out debate.
My team winning a game or championship is an "in the moment" thing. I could care less who is "the best" because:
A-it isn't a requirement to win it all
B- It's too subjective for anyone to be absolutely sure the pick is the right one!
Is Eli a top 5 QB? I don't know and further more, I don't care...........he's a 2 time SB MVP winning QB for the NY Giants, and that's all I give a damn about!!!

People want to see their favorite players do well. The same could be said for why do you want them to win another championship? to increase their number?

NYGabriel
06-26-2013, 05:37 AM
Teams win SB's, not players.
Unfortunately the one man team that Dan Marino led, couldn't win with just one great player. Even though he was especially great.

One man team?
Marino twice had the leagues no.1 scoring defense.
In '03 the pats won the SB averaging 3.4 yards per rushing attempt whilst the dolphins averaged more than that 14 times in Marino's 17 seasons.
Marino played with 55 pro bowlers in his 17 years as a dolphin. He had two all pro wideouts for a good chunk of his career.
Marino played most of his career for Don Shula - The most winningest coach in NFL history.
Marino's regular season passer rating is 86.4 and in the post season that dropped to 77.1 with the same teammates.
Marino played in 18 playoff games and won 8. He threw a pick in 13 of those 18 games. He threw 2 picks or more in 10 of those 18 games. The dolphins record was 1-9 in post season games where Marino threw 2 or more picks.
In 1998 the phins had the no.1 ranked defense and made the post season. Marino threw 2 picks against denver and had a passer rating of 66.5

Great player but he wasn't himself during the post season and deserves some of the blame.

Providence
06-26-2013, 07:55 AM
A 3rd Super Bowl would mean more and more Eli threads. Yaaaaaaaaay.

If you don't like the topic then why respond? I've never understood that. This is the New York Giants message board and you think it's strange that many people want to talk about Eli Manning. I find that puzzling. It's like going on a message board for pickup trucks and writing, "OH MY GOD ANOTHER THREAD ABOUT FORD!!!!!"

Anyway, to the OP, I think another ring for Eli would put him in a special place. Debating who's "top 5 right now" or "top 10 all time" or "who's elite" etc is all pointless as there are no standardized qualifications to measure such things. Ultimately however, in this world where there's constant best of lists and everyone's got an opinion that they think matters, consistently being mentioned in such discussions shows your skill. So if Eli were to get another ring I think he would be a lock to be in every "Who are the best QB's to ever play" conversation from here on out. Obviously he's never going to be labeled as the best (nor should he be in my opinion), but you know in such arguments people are going to mention that the number one task of a QB is to win rings, at which point someone is going to bring Eli's name up.

B&RWarrior
06-26-2013, 08:12 AM
One man team?
Marino twice had the leagues no.1 scoring defense.
In '03 the pats won the SB averaging 3.4 yards per rushing attempt whilst the dolphins averaged more than that 14 times in Marino's 17 seasons.
Marino played with 55 pro bowlers in his 17 years as a dolphin. He had two all pro wideouts for a good chunk of his career.
Marino played most of his career for Don Shula - The most winningest coach in NFL history.
Marino's regular season passer rating is 86.4 and in the post season that dropped to 77.1 with the same teammates.
Marino played in 18 playoff games and won 8. He threw a pick in 13 of those 18 games. He threw 2 picks or more in 10 of those 18 games. The dolphins record was 1-9 in post season games where Marino threw 2 or more picks.
In 1998 the phins had the no.1 ranked defense and made the post season. Marino threw 2 picks against denver and had a passer rating of 66.5

Great player but he wasn't himself during the post season and deserves some of the blame.

good post

It's what I say all the time. He had a great arm but he was a gambler.

Rudyy
06-26-2013, 08:28 AM
If you don't like the topic then why respond? I've never understood that. This is the New York Giants message board and you think it's strange that many people want to talk about Eli Manning. I find that puzzling. It's like going on a message board for pickup trucks and writing, "OH MY GOD ANOTHER THREAD ABOUT FORD!!!!!"Anyway, to the OP, I think another ring for Eli would put him in a special place. Debating who's "top 5 right now" or "top 10 all time" or "who's elite" etc is all pointless as there are no standardized qualifications to measure such things. Ultimately however, in this world where there's constant best of lists and everyone's got an opinion that they think matters, consistently being mentioned in such discussions shows your skill. So if Eli were to get another ring I think he would be a lock to be in every "Who are the best QB's to ever play" conversation from here on out. Obviously he's never going to be labeled as the best (nor should he be in my opinion), but you know in such arguments people are going to mention that the number one task of a QB is to win rings, at which point someone is going to bring Eli's name up.Can't take a joke? I'm going to start typing in red again.

Providence
06-26-2013, 08:34 AM
Can't take a joke? I'm going to start typing in red again.

If you had only responded once to this thread in that vein I may have thought you were joking, but with three responses, none of which actually contribute to the conversation, I thought your disappointment with the thread topic was sincere. Perhaps I was wrong.

Morehead State
06-26-2013, 08:39 AM
One man team?
Marino twice had the leagues no.1 scoring defense.
In '03 the pats won the SB averaging 3.4 yards per rushing attempt whilst the dolphins averaged more than that 14 times in Marino's 17 seasons.
Marino played with 55 pro bowlers in his 17 years as a dolphin. He had two all pro wideouts for a good chunk of his career.
Marino played most of his career for Don Shula - The most winningest coach in NFL history.
Marino's regular season passer rating is 86.4 and in the post season that dropped to 77.1 with the same teammates.
Marino played in 18 playoff games and won 8. He threw a pick in 13 of those 18 games. He threw 2 picks or more in 10 of those 18 games. The dolphins record was 1-9 in post season games where Marino threw 2 or more picks.
In 1998 the phins had the no.1 ranked defense and made the post season. Marino threw 2 picks against denver and had a passer rating of 66.5

Great player but he wasn't himself during the post season and deserves some of the blame.

Hah! The fact that you counted pro bowlers is a victory for me.

Rudyy
06-26-2013, 08:41 AM
If you had only responded once to this thread in that vein I may have thought you were joking, but with three responses, none of which actually contribute to the conversation, I thought your disappointment with the thread topic was sincere. Perhaps I was wrong.You were wrong lol, just a little sarcasm.

Buddy333
06-26-2013, 08:58 AM
Well 3 Super Bowl MVP's is a big deal. What about a 3rd ring but not the MVP. Unless he had a horrible game but was bailed out by the run or defense it's still quite an accomplishment.

GameTime
06-26-2013, 10:02 AM
Teams win SB's, not players.
Unfortunately the one man team that Dan Marino led, couldn't win with just one great player. Even though he was especially great.


One man team?
Marino twice had the leagues no.1 scoring defense.
In '03 the pats won the SB averaging 3.4 yards per rushing attempt whilst the dolphins averaged more than that 14 times in Marino's 17 seasons.
Marino played with 55 pro bowlers in his 17 years as a dolphin. He had two all pro wideouts for a good chunk of his career.
Marino played most of his career for Don Shula - The most winningest coach in NFL history.
Marino's regular season passer rating is 86.4 and in the post season that dropped to 77.1 with the same teammates.
Marino played in 18 playoff games and won 8. He threw a pick in 13 of those 18 games. He threw 2 picks or more in 10 of those 18 games. The dolphins record was 1-9 in post season games where Marino threw 2 or more picks.
In 1998 the phins had the no.1 ranked defense and made the post season. Marino threw 2 picks against denver and had a passer rating of 66.5

Great player but he wasn't himself during the post season and deserves some of the blame.
Nice........buzzinga

GCGiant
06-26-2013, 10:04 AM
Nice........buzzingaYes...very well put. I thought something similar when I read that response. Well done, NYG...and you, too, GT.

B&RWarrior
06-26-2013, 10:27 AM
One man team?
Marino twice had the leagues no.1 scoring defense.
In '03 the pats won the SB averaging 3.4 yards per rushing attempt whilst the dolphins averaged more than that 14 times in Marino's 17 seasons.
Marino played with 55 pro bowlers in his 17 years as a dolphin. He had two all pro wideouts for a good chunk of his career.
Marino played most of his career for Don Shula - The most winningest coach in NFL history.
Marino's regular season passer rating is 86.4 and in the post season that dropped to 77.1 with the same teammates.
Marino played in 18 playoff games and won 8. He threw a pick in 13 of those 18 games. He threw 2 picks or more in 10 of those 18 games. The dolphins record was 1-9 in post season games where Marino threw 2 or more picks.
In 1998 the phins had the no.1 ranked defense and made the post season. Marino threw 2 picks against denver and had a passer rating of 66.5

Great player but he wasn't himself during the post season and deserves some of the blame.

So in your opinion is Montana better?


Teams win SB's, not players.
Unfortunately the one man team that Dan Marino led, couldn't win with just one great player. Even though he was especially great.

I told you Montana was better, and why did I say it- decision making among other things. The numbers support my argument.

GameTime
06-26-2013, 10:32 AM
So in your opinion is Montana better?



I told you Montana was better, and why did I say it- decision making among other things. The numbers support my argument.
and the bottom line is to be considered one of the great QBs of all time that alone is the best it gets. The rankings of who sits where is the fluff, subjectivity, and fandom that surrounds the top guys.....

gumby74
06-26-2013, 10:34 AM
One man team?
Marino twice had the leagues no.1 scoring defense.
In '03 the pats won the SB averaging 3.4 yards per rushing attempt whilst the dolphins averaged more than that 14 times in Marino's 17 seasons.
Marino played with 55 pro bowlers in his 17 years as a dolphin. He had two all pro wideouts for a good chunk of his career.
Marino played most of his career for Don Shula - The most winningest coach in NFL history.
Marino's regular season passer rating is 86.4 and in the post season that dropped to 77.1 with the same teammates.
Marino played in 18 playoff games and won 8. He threw a pick in 13 of those 18 games. He threw 2 picks or more in 10 of those 18 games. The dolphins record was 1-9 in post season games where Marino threw 2 or more picks.
In 1998 the phins had the no.1 ranked defense and made the post season. Marino threw 2 picks against denver and had a passer rating of 66.5

Great player but he wasn't himself during the post season and deserves some of the blame.

Marino's best teams came in the twilight of his career with Jimmy Johnson. In his prime, Marino had bad defenses and no running game. What does #1 scoring defense tell you? Nothing. The Lions also led the league in Sacks one year when they were terrible. You have issues when Bobby Humphries and OJ McDuffie are your leading rusher and receiver.

You really should have watched Marino in his prime.

GameTime
06-26-2013, 10:38 AM
Marino's best teams came in the twilight of his career with Jimmy Johnson. In his prime, Marino had bad defenses and no running game. What does #1 scoring defense tell you? Nothing. The Lions also led the league in Sacks one year when they were terrible. You have issues when Bobby Humphries and OJ McDuffie are your leading rusher and receiver.

You really should have watched Marino in his prime.
dont think he was saying Marino wasnt great but that he should shoulder some of the blame for no SB wins. He wasnt a one man team as was stated.

gumby74
06-26-2013, 10:46 AM
dont think he was saying Marino wasnt great but that he should shoulder some of the blame for no SB wins. He wasnt a one man team as was stated.

No one person is a one man team, but he was as close to a one man team as I've seen. I'm not exonerating Marino from not playing well in the post season, but the list the poster created showed little.

FIFTY6G-MAN
06-26-2013, 06:37 PM
Whats the name of the Pharmacy? I will stop in.

Morehead State
06-26-2013, 08:28 PM
dont think he was saying Marino wasnt great but that he should shoulder some of the blame for no SB wins. He wasnt a one man team as was stated.
Yes he was.
The only thing he had was a good O line. But he had no running game, a bad defense and small WR's, who HE made. When Mark Clayton went to GB he did NOTHING.
Marino carried those WR's and that team.

uther99
06-26-2013, 09:26 PM
The D won the 2007 SB, even though there was some magic going on with Tyree catch and other events. So I consider Eli as having one SB MVP

GIANT JC
06-26-2013, 09:41 PM
Whats the name of the Pharmacy? I will stop in.

Save Rite, between M & M Bank and Broome's. Be happy to meet another Giants fan.

speedman
06-26-2013, 09:48 PM
The D won the 2007 SB, even though there was some magic going on with Tyree catch and other events. So I consider Eli as having one SB MVP If the Pats would have stopped us on that last drive and won the game, who do you think would have been the MVP? Brady or the Pats defense?

nhpgiantsfan
06-26-2013, 09:50 PM
The D won the 2007 SB, even though there was some magic going on with Tyree catch and other events. So I consider Eli as having one SB MVP

SMH, this post might catapult this thread into the longest in GMB history.

speedman
06-26-2013, 09:51 PM
Yes he was.The only thing he had was a good O line. But he had no running game, a bad defense and small WR's, who HE made. When Mark Clayton went to GB he did NOTHING.Marino carried those WR's and that team.Duper and Clayton weren't good receivers?

gumby74
06-26-2013, 10:12 PM
Duper and Clayton weren't good receivers? They were better than OJ McDuffie that's for sure. But if you watched Marino, it was obvious that he made them.

giantsfan420
06-26-2013, 10:13 PM
i just want to clarify something, marino, who some feel is the greatest qb of all time, had an 86 qb rating career for the reg season and whatever it was, 70 or something, in the postseason?

maybe the longivity of his career is adding into the memory of the player. wonder if eli will last as long as marino did.

speedman
06-26-2013, 10:24 PM
They were better than OJ McDuffie that's for sure. But if you watched Marino, it was obvious that he made them.The QB has to throw the ball and the WR has to catch the ball. How do you make WR's?

Roosevelt
06-26-2013, 11:15 PM
The D won the 2007 SB, even though there was some magic going on with Tyree catch and other events. So I consider Eli as having one SB MVP


It was a total team effort that propelled us through both post-seasons and ultimately those two Super Bowls, unlike XXI, when Phil's performance was legendary.

JJC7301
06-26-2013, 11:55 PM
WOAH!!! DANGEROUS THREAD TO START MY CHILD!! VERY DANGEROUS!

and... its your 4th post...
HA!

JJC7301
06-26-2013, 11:58 PM
The D won the 2007 SB, even though there was some magic going on with Tyree catch and other events. So I consider Eli as having one SB MVP
+1. Eli played very well against a tough NE defense, but the Giants D was the MVP for shutting down possibly the most prolific O in history.

A better case could be made for Eli in SB 46.

giantsfan420
06-27-2013, 01:09 AM
+1. Eli played very well against a tough NE defense, but the Giants D was the MVP for shutting down possibly the most prolific O in history.

A better case could be made for Eli in SB 46.why do people always fail to realize, that due in large part to the opening drive, the NYG D, which did stop the most prolific O of all time, only had to do so for about 20 minutes (and maybe even less if u take away the drives they scored on), instead of 30 or more, which DOES make a HUGE difference. The D absolutely did a bang up job, but the offense did an amazing job of setting them up to do so, which can never be reflected on a stat sheet. a person just has to be able to recognize that first 9 minute drive combined with the rest of our TOP forced NE into having, what was it, 5, 6 drives as opposed to the 8 or 10 or whatever they avg.d a game.

fizzlesticks
06-27-2013, 02:20 AM
why do people always fail to realize, that due in large part to the opening drive, the NYG D, which did stop the most prolific O of all time, only had to do so for about 20 minutes (and maybe even less if u take away the drives they scored on), instead of 30 or more, which DOES make a HUGE difference. The D absolutely did a bang up job, but the offense did an amazing job of setting them up to do so, which can never be reflected on a stat sheet. a person just has to be able to recognize that first 9 minute drive combined with the rest of our TOP forced NE into having, what was it, 5, 6 drives as opposed to the 8 or 10 or whatever they avg.d a game.

Woah...this is an Eli thread, I know I haven't been around that long but I don't think you're allowed to use logic here.

giantsfan420
06-27-2013, 03:04 AM
lol, my bad ur right. eli threads end up being dominated by the same group of posters anyways after a while, and the discussion doesnt even focus on eli manning, instead pages are spent cwa cwa cwying about the big bad evil eli fans.

NYGabriel
06-27-2013, 08:32 AM
Yes he was.
The only thing he had was a good O line. But he had no running game, a bad defense and small WR's, who HE made. When Mark Clayton went to GB he did NOTHING.
Marino carried those WR's and that team.

Clayton was a good WR, Marino didn't make him. That is an absurd notion. There have been thousands of receivers to play with elite qbs and not many can match the numbers he put up. He had a bad year in GB at the age of 32 and then retired. Marino may have carried that team but he didn't do a stellar job as he never won the big game. He didn't carry them that far did he? People say Elway carried the broncos for years and he got them to 3 SB's in the 1st half of his career. Marino choked.

I should have qualified my earlier statement by saying it's only IMHO that Marino isn't top 5 all time. He's top 15 for sure. Maybe even top 10. Without the jewelry I can think of many qb's I'd prefer behind centre.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 08:45 AM
Clayton was a good WR, Marino didn't make him. That is an absurd notion. There have been thousands of receivers to play with elite qbs and not many can match the numbers he put up. He had a bad year in GB at the age of 32 and then retired. Marino may have carried that team but he didn't do a stellar job as he never won the big game. He didn't carry them that far did he? People say Elway carried the broncos for years and he got them to 3 SB's in the 1st half of his career. Marino choked.

I should have qualified my earlier statement by saying it's only IMHO that Marino isn't top 5 all time. He's top 15 for sure. Maybe even top 10. Without the jewelry I can think of many qb's I'd prefer behind centre.

At worst he's top 3.

The kid was great. And both Clayton and Duper were overrated WR's. Mainly because they had the best natural passer in NFL history getting them the ball.

I will NEVER understand how some fans don't understand that chamionships are won by TEAMS. Not individual players.

gumby74
06-27-2013, 08:51 AM
Clayton was a good WR, Marino didn't make him. That is an absurd notion. There have been thousands of receivers to play with elite qbs and not many can match the numbers he put up. He had a bad year in GB at the age of 32 and then retired. Marino may have carried that team but he didn't do a stellar job as he never won the big game. He didn't carry them that far did he? People say Elway carried the broncos for years and he got them to 3 SB's in the 1st half of his career. Marino choked.

I should have qualified my earlier statement by saying it's only IMHO that Marino isn't top 5 all time. He's top 15 for sure. Maybe even top 10. Without the jewelry I can think of many qb's I'd prefer behind centre.

Clayton is 50th in all team receiving yards. In this day in age, playing with one QB almost your entire career is rare. The WRs that got to play with great QBs the entire time, HAD better numbers. Heck, Harrison and Wayne are 6 and 14 and they had the opportunity to play with Peyton most the time. Heck, even Rod Smith, Chad Johnson, Galloway, and Santana Moss have better numbers.

As for not doing a stellar job, Marino had 1 SB appearance. He did a phenomenal job given the talent that his team had. Elway didn't win a SB until he was at the end of his career and Shanahan, T Davis, that offensive line, Shannon Sharpe came along. Elway also had better overall teams.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 08:54 AM
Clayton is 50th in all team receiving yards. In this day in age, playing with one QB almost your entire career is rare. The WRs that got to play with great QBs the entire time, HAD better numbers. Heck, Harrison and Wayne are 6 and 14 and they had the opportunity to play with Peyton most the time. Heck, even Rod Smith, Chad Johnson, Galloway, and Santana Moss have better numbers.

As for not doing a stellar job, Marino had 1 SB appearance. He did a phenomenal job given the talent that his team had. Elway didn't win a SB until he was at the end of his career and Shanahan, T Davis, that offensive line, Shannon Sharpe came along. Elway also had better overall teams.

Put Dan Marino on that Denver team with Shannon Sharp, Davis and Smith and how many SB's would they have won?

NYGabriel
06-27-2013, 09:03 AM
At worst he's top 3.

The kid was great. And both Clayton and Duper were overrated WR's. Mainly because they had the best natural passer in NFL history getting them the ball.

I will NEVER understand how some fans don't understand that chamionships are won by TEAMS. Not individual players.

It's because pretty much all of the great qb's have a ring. I watched a vhs tape of Marino's '84 season years ago and as a pure passer he's probably the best ever. Taking everything into consideration it's pretty easy to put him behind Unitas, Graham, Montana, Young, Staubach, Elway, Favre, Brady, Manning P.

gumby74
06-27-2013, 09:11 AM
It's because pretty much all of the great qb's have a ring. I watched a vhs tape of Marino's '84 season years ago and as a pure passer he's probably the best ever. Taking everything into consideration it's pretty easy to put him behind Unitas, Graham, Montana, Young, Staubach, Elway, Favre, Brady, Manning P.

Compare their SB winning teams with the teams Marino had in his prime.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 10:05 AM
It's because pretty much all of the great qb's have a ring. I watched a vhs tape of Marino's '84 season years ago and as a pure passer he's probably the best ever. Taking everything into consideration it's pretty easy to put him behind Unitas, Graham, Montana, Young, Staubach, Elway, Favre, Brady, Manning P.
Not as a pure passer. In this context. I'm not talking about an overall QB. I'm talking about a passer. The only guy who was in his class as a pure passer to me was Namath.

GameTime
06-27-2013, 10:07 AM
Not as a pure passer. In this context. I'm not talking about an overall QB. I'm talking about a passer. The only guy who was in his class as a pure passer to me was Namath.
and he had more pics than TDs....

had to add that....:D

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 10:09 AM
and he had more pics than TDs....

had to add that....:D
I am aware of his stats.
I was talking about his talent. Which was tremendous.

GameTime
06-27-2013, 10:12 AM
I am aware of his stats.
I was talking about his talent. Which was tremendous.

Easy Big Fella.....just busting you....

A pure passer doesnt equate to a great QB all the time. Marino was the fashizzle back in the day. You can point to too many reasons why the Fins didnt win and SBs with him. He may have felt he "needed" to do too much. I think Peyton gets caught up in the same thing. They push and press too hard and mistakes happen. Mix that with low talent and you have the chance for choking or costly mistakes.

TrueBlue@NYC
06-27-2013, 10:25 AM
Don't think another SB MVP or SB win really moves Eli around too much on the "ranking" of QBs. I think the only thing that can change his top 5-7 ranking would be a season MVP, which in my mind holds more weight than a SB MVP, as it shows sustain greatness throughout a season, not just a single game. Dunno if that'll ever happen, but as long as Eli's playing well and helping the team to win, I don't care where people have him "ranked".

Rudyy
06-27-2013, 10:33 AM
Don't think another SB MVP or SB win really moves Eli around too much on the "ranking" of QBs. I think the only thing that can change his top 5-7 ranking would be a season MVP, which in my mind holds more weight than a SB MVP, as it shows sustain greatness throughout a season, not just a single game. Dunno if that'll ever happen, but as long as Eli's playing well and helping the team to win, I don't care where people have him "ranked".This should be the only thing that matters to everyone. Eli realist and homer. All of the rankings and top 5 lists yadda yadda is distracting us from what is ultimately more important. I'm guilty of arguing about lists and incomsistency and providing evidence of God knows what, at the end of the day, winning matters, not rankings. 20 years from now, nobody is going to remember if Eli was ranked number 6 on Kurt Warner's lists, or that Phil Simms said he wasn't elite. That's why it's ridiculous.

giantsfan420
06-27-2013, 10:41 AM
i dont see where there can be any confusion. Marino was an awful lot like Peyton Manning was (before he had that SB run of 3 tds and 7 ints that got him his ring). Great, almost unreal at times in the regular season...and then enter the postseason, and Marino wasn't nearly as effective. His postseason #s don't lie. I know its a team sport, but his team was good enough to make the postseason all those times. its not like the league removed the most successful players on that team once the playoffs came, the same guys Marino was looking all world with during the reg season were the same guys he was looking pretty awful with in the postseason

giantsfan420
06-27-2013, 10:46 AM
and whats especially interesting, "the top 3 QB of all time" has an 86 career QB rating...hmmm...so you mean a guy with a QB Rating in the 80s can be a top 3 QB all time when so many of his peers and QBs now have QB ratings in the mid to high 90s????

I wonder what the excuse will be when Eli has had a career that has been as long as Marinos, where ELi actually outdoes Marino statistically across the board, and will have a similar QB rating, with a TON more postseason success, and people call Eli one of the top whatever, 5 lets say, QB of all time...bc, eli's career and marinos career will end up being very very similar imho in terms of longivity, and statisitical success (when elis career is all said n done)

Rudyy
06-27-2013, 11:15 AM
and whats especially interesting, "the top 3 QB of all time" has an 86 career QB rating...hmmm...so you mean a guy with a QB Rating in the 80s can be a top 3 QB all time when so many of his peers and QBs now have QB ratings in the mid to high 90s???? I wonder what the excuse will be when Eli has had a career that has been as long as Marinos, where ELi actually outdoes Marino statistically across the board, and will have a similar QB rating, with a TON more postseason success, and people call Eli one of the top whatever, 5 lets say, QB of all time...bc, eli's career and marinos career will end up being very very similar imho in terms of longivity, and statisitical success (when elis career is all said n done)You can't worry about what other people think 420.

Ntegrase96
06-27-2013, 11:52 AM
and whats especially interesting, "the top 3 QB of all time" has an 86 career QB rating...hmmm...so you mean a guy with a QB Rating in the 80s can be a top 3 QB all time when so many of his peers and QBs now have QB ratings in the mid to high 90s????

I wonder what the excuse will be when Eli has had a career that has been as long as Marinos, where ELi actually outdoes Marino statistically across the board, and will have a similar QB rating, with a TON more postseason success, and people call Eli one of the top whatever, 5 lets say, QB of all time...bc, eli's career and marinos career will end up being very very similar imho in terms of longivity, and statisitical success (when elis career is all said n done)

When you say his 'peers' who exactly do you mean?

All time greats-- Unitas had a rating of 78.2
Same great status, and draft class -- Elway had a rating of 79.9, Jim Kelly a rating of 84.4 (Bonus: Moon had an 80.9)


Eli will likely have to play until he's 38 or 39 to outdo Marino's numbers and not have a significant drop off as he gets older. I don't think it's likely but it's not impossible.

Eli will likely never be compared to the greats in history because he's often been out-shined by the greats in his own era (Manning, Brady, Brees, and now Rodgers).

But like Rudyy says, can't care what other people think. If he's winning then be happy.

gumby74
06-27-2013, 12:33 PM
and whats especially interesting, "the top 3 QB of all time" has an 86 career QB rating...hmmm...so you mean a guy with a QB Rating in the 80s can be a top 3 QB all time when so many of his peers and QBs now have QB ratings in the mid to high 90s????

I wonder what the excuse will be when Eli has had a career that has been as long as Marinos, where ELi actually outdoes Marino statistically across the board, and will have a similar QB rating, with a TON more postseason success, and people call Eli one of the top whatever, 5 lets say, QB of all time...bc, eli's career and marinos career will end up being very very similar imho in terms of longivity, and statisitical success (when elis career is all said n done)


When you say his 'peers' who exactly do you mean?

All time greats-- Unitas had a rating of 78.2
Same great status, and draft class -- Elway had a rating of 79.9, Jim Kelly a rating of 84.4 (Bonus: Moon had an 80.9)


Eli will likely have to play until he's 38 or 39 to outdo Marino's numbers and not have a significant drop off as he gets older. I don't think it's likely but it's not impossible.

Eli will likely never be compared to the greats in history because he's often been out-shined by the greats in his own era (Manning, Brady, Brees, and now Rodgers).

But like Rudyy says, can't care what other people think. If he's winning then be happy.

+1

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 12:51 PM
and whats especially interesting, "the top 3 QB of all time" has an 86 career QB rating...hmmm...so you mean a guy with a QB Rating in the 80s can be a top 3 QB all time when so many of his peers and QBs now have QB ratings in the mid to high 90s????

I wonder what the excuse will be when Eli has had a career that has been as long as Marinos, where ELi actually outdoes Marino statistically across the board, and will have a similar QB rating, with a TON more postseason success, and people call Eli one of the top whatever, 5 lets say, QB of all time...bc, eli's career and marinos career will end up being very very similar imho in terms of longivity, and statisitical success (when elis career is all said n done)
Are we aware of rule changes that now favor the passing game?

NYGabriel
06-27-2013, 01:44 PM
Eli's regular season passer rating is 82.7 and in the post season 89.3
Dan Marino's regular season passer rating is 86.4 and in the post season that dropped to 77.1

Some QB'S light it up in the tournament whilst others fall apart.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 01:54 PM
Eli's regular season passer rating is 82.7 and in the post season 89.3
Dan Marino's regular season passer rating is 86.4 and in the post season that dropped to 77.1

Some QB'S light it up in the tournament whilst others fall apart.
I'm sorry...but Dan Marino was a hell of a lot better than Eli.

zeph1
06-27-2013, 02:01 PM
here's the thing about saying he gets outshined by some of his historical peers. Of course he does. Peyton and Brady are two of the five or six best quarterbacks of ALL TIME. not this era, all eras. Personally, Montana, Marino, Brady, Peyton and Unitas. I think Bradshaw and Elway are better comparisons to Eli then any of that top five but that's just me. Especially considering postseason success. Another SB win, regardless of whether or not he gets the MVP would definitely cement him as a top twenty quarterback of all time, maybe higher, regardless if he posts prodigious regular season stats for the rest of his career.

NYGabriel
06-27-2013, 02:10 PM
I'm sorry...but Dan Marino was a hell of a lot better than Eli.

Regular season yes. Post season no.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 02:26 PM
Regular season yes. Post season no.
Regular season, Pre season, post season, winter, spring, summer and fall...Marino was better than Eli.
But since he's a top 3 all time QB, that's no slight on our boy.

NYGabriel
06-27-2013, 02:42 PM
Regular season, Pre season, post season, winter, spring, summer and fall...Marino was better than Eli.
But since he's a top 3 all time QB, that's no slight on our boy.

In one game, for all the marbles, with equally matched teams I'd probably agree with you (even though I don't agree that he's top 3 all time). I'm presuming Montana is one but who's the other QB you have ranked higher?

GameTime
06-27-2013, 02:45 PM
I'm sorry...but Dan Marino was a hell of a lot better than Eli.

maybe physically but his big game results sure weren't.....team sport....blah blah blah...I get it
Namath ahd more pics than TDs too....incase you didnt know that.....:)

giantsfan420
06-27-2013, 02:52 PM
here's the thing about saying he gets outshined by some of his historical peers. Of course he does. Peyton and Brady are two of the five or six best quarterbacks of ALL TIME. not this era, all eras. Personally, Montana, Marino, Brady, Peyton and Unitas. I think Bradshaw and Elway are better comparisons to Eli then any of that top five but that's just me. Especially considering postseason success. Another SB win, regardless of whether or not he gets the MVP would definitely cement him as a top twenty quarterback of all time, maybe higher, regardless if he posts prodigious regular season stats for the rest of his career.

+1. When I said peers in another post, I meant QBs considered of the HoF class/All Time Greats/and even the future/current all time greats of this era...Marino compared to those QBs is going to be how Eli is compared to those QBs imho when Eli's career is all said n done.

i just found it interesting, that even with the rule changes, that posters have used QB rating as this measure of how Eli falls short compared to other QBs past and present all the while Marino has a similar QB rating. And zephs post here is a good one I'd just add my slightly differing opinion that Eli compares bet to Montana in post season play.

Ntegrase96
06-27-2013, 03:03 PM
here's the thing about saying he gets outshined by some of his historical peers. Of course he does. Peyton and Brady are two of the five or six best quarterbacks of ALL TIME. not this era, all eras. Personally, Montana, Marino, Brady, Peyton and Unitas. I think Bradshaw and Elway are better comparisons to Eli then any of that top five but that's just me. Especially considering postseason success. Another SB win, regardless of whether or not he gets the MVP would definitely cement him as a top twenty quarterback of all time, maybe higher, regardless if he posts prodigious regular season stats for the rest of his career.



It's hard to compare QBs across eras, but a 'greatest of all time candidate' gets there by being regarded as better than his current competition first. Then it's a matter of making a big enough impression with their play, accolades, and honors to be considered among the greats.

So yes, Peyton and Brady are all time greats that outshine Eli, but they had to get there first. They did that by showing the world something they'd never seen before. They 'upped the ante' so to speak to be mentioned alongside Unitas and Montana.

And as the league moves even more toward a passer friendly league, the next guys to be mentioned with Brady and Peyton will have to do even better or bring something to NFL lore that no other NFL QB has. And I'd say that the closest guy to doing that is not Eli-- It's Rodgers.

gmen46
06-27-2013, 03:09 PM
At worst he's top 3.

The kid was great. And both Clayton and Duper were overrated WR's. Mainly because they had the best natural passer in NFL history getting them the ball.

I will NEVER understand how some fans don't understand that chamionships are won by TEAMS. Not individual players.

Because football is understood by all (or certainly should be understood by all) to be a team sport. That's why it is referred to as a "team sport".

Therefore, ipso facto, it is assumed in all arguments about specific players' abilities, rankings, whatever, that "championships are won by teams". That should not need to be a stated proviso in every single debate about specific football players, it seems to me.

Likewise, it is universally understood that "QBs careers are judged by number of championships played and won"--whether you or anyone else agrees with that premise, it is a fact of sports and and of judgements about QBs' careers.

Ntegrase96
06-27-2013, 03:12 PM
+1. When I said peers in another post, I meant QBs considered of the HoF class/All Time Greats/and even the future/current all time greats of this era...Marino compared to those QBs is going to be how Eli is compared to those QBs imho when Eli's career is all said n done.

i just found it interesting, that even with the rule changes, that posters have used QB rating as this measure of how Eli falls short compared to other QBs past and present all the while Marino has a similar QB rating. And zephs post here is a good one I'd just add my slightly differing opinion that Eli compares bet to Montana in post season play.

QB rating isn't the best gauge, but it seems like that's kind of what your saying anyway. Eli gets criticized for passer rating, so on and so forth.

I read an article recently trying to defend Romo (a topic I don't really care to get into) that had a 66.7 rating as a terrible game, but admitted it would have been a mediocre to decent game by QBs in a different era. This is also evident in the fact that 7 of the top 10 passer ratings all time are currently playing in the NFL (15 of 20 are still playing or hung them up within the last 3 years).

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 03:28 PM
Because football is understood by all (or certainly should be understood by all) to be a team sport. That's why it is referred to as a "team sport".

Therefore, ipso facto, it is assumed in all arguments about specific players' abilities, rankings, whatever, that "championships are won by teams". That should not need to be a stated proviso in every single debate about specific football players, it seems to me.

Likewise, it is universally understood that "QBs careers are judged by number of championships played and won"--whether you or anyone else agrees with that premise, it is a fact of sports and and of judgements about QBs' careers.

By who? By folks who don't have a complex understanding of the game and how it actually works. A QB is an important player, but still just one player on the team. Did John Elway suck until he won a SB after 14 years in the league? The answer is no.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 03:31 PM
In one game, for all the marbles, with equally matched teams I'd probably agree with you (even though I don't agree that he's top 3 all time). I'm presuming Montana is one but who's the other QB you have ranked higher?
I think Montana was a great QB but I just don't think he could succeed at that level in another system. He definitely benefited from the West Coast system.
Quite honestly, I think the two guys in the league right now may be the best 2 QB's of all time.
Brady is super clutch and a great leader, and I don't think there is a QB with as much responsibility for his offense than Peyton. And who has as much success no matter what the supporting cast is around him.

But that's just me.

gmen46
06-27-2013, 03:36 PM
Not as a pure passer. In this context. I'm not talking about an overall QB. I'm talking about a passer. The only guy who was in his class as a pure passer to me was Namath.

Ah, finally, the heart of the debate. As a pure passer, Marino was superior to any passer before him, superior to all his contemporaries, and was superior to all but arguably 3-4 passers since his retirement. I've never once seen anyone--on this board, or anywhere else--give a serious rebuttal to that fact.

(Because of that fact, it is always irrelevant in my opinion to use Marino as the example--favored exclusively by all who make the argument--of why a given QB's (say, for example, Eli) SB wins have no meaning in judging a QB's value or have little to no meaning in projecting HOF potential; Marino is an exception that proves the rule in judging QB careers.)

The problem (and primary reason for these endless QB debates whenever Marino is introduced into them) as I see it is that you, and many others, don't say "passer"--pure or not. You say QB.

There is so much more to being an effective QB, a great QB, or an "all time great" QB. Passing talent and stats are an important factor in evaluating a QB's effectiveness to a team, but not the only factor, and not always the most important factor. And I suspect you know that very well.

Marino, as a passer, was so far beyond virtually all other passers over the course of his regular season career, that it is almost silly to bring him into other QB discussions concerning championships, QB historical rankings and such.

gumby74
06-27-2013, 03:40 PM
I think Montana was a great QB but I just don't think he could succeed at that level in another system. He definitely benefited from the West Coast system.
Quite honestly, I think the two guys in the league right now may be the best 2 QB's of all time.
Brady is super clutch and a great leader, and I don't think there is a QB with as much responsibility for his offense than Peyton. And who has as much success no matter what the supporting cast is around him.

But that's just me.

Peyton #1 imo. Nobody did what he does now at the line of scrimmage. He's a coach in a players body. He gets hurt and the team goes 2-14.

giantsfan420
06-27-2013, 03:51 PM
Ah, finally, the heart of the debate. As a pure passer, Marino was superior to any passer before him, superior to all his contemporaries, and was superior to all but arguably 3-4 passers since his retirement. I've never once seen anyone--on this board, or anywhere else--give a serious rebuttal to that fact.

(Because of that fact, it is always irrelevant in my opinion to use Marino as the example--favored exclusively by all who make the argument--of why a given QB's (say, for example, Eli) SB wins have no meaning in judging a QB's value or have little to no meaning in projecting HOF potential; Marino is an exception that proves the rule in judging QB careers.)

The problem (and primary reason for these endless QB debates whenever Marino is introduced into them) as I see it is that you, and many others, don't say "passer"--pure or not. You say QB.

There is so much more to being an effective QB, a great QB, or an "all time great" QB. Passing talent and stats are an important factor in evaluating a QB's effectiveness to a team, but not the only factor, and not always the most important factor. And I suspect you know that very well.

Marino, as a passer, was so far beyond virtually all other passers over the course of his regular season career, that it is almost silly to bring him into other QB discussions concerning championships, QB historical rankings and such.great post.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 03:52 PM
Ah, finally, the heart of the debate. As a pure passer, Marino was superior to any passer before him, superior to all his contemporaries, and was superior to all but arguably 3-4 passers since his retirement. I've never once seen anyone--on this board, or anywhere else--give a serious rebuttal to that fact.

(Because of that fact, it is always irrelevant in my opinion to use Marino as the example--favored exclusively by all who make the argument--of why a given QB's (say, for example, Eli) SB wins have no meaning in judging a QB's value or have little to no meaning in projecting HOF potential; Marino is an exception that proves the rule in judging QB careers.)

The problem (and primary reason for these endless QB debates whenever Marino is introduced into them) as I see it is that you, and many others, don't say "passer"--pure or not. You say QB.

There is so much more to being an effective QB, a great QB, or an "all time great" QB. Passing talent and stats are an important factor in evaluating a QB's effectiveness to a team, but not the only factor, and not always the most important factor. And I suspect you know that very well.

Marino, as a passer, was so far beyond virtually all other passers over the course of his regular season career, that it is almost silly to bring him into other QB discussions concerning championships, QB historical rankings and such.
OK 46...He's a great QB. Not just a great passer.
Honestly, I'd put him behind only Peyton and Brady.

gmen46
06-27-2013, 03:53 PM
i dont see where there can be any confusion. Marino was an awful lot like Peyton Manning was (before he had that SB run of 3 tds and 7 ints that got him his ring). Great, almost unreal at times in the regular season...and then enter the postseason, and Marino wasn't nearly as effective. His postseason #s don't lie. I know its a team sport, but his team was good enough to make the postseason all those times. its not like the league removed the most successful players on that team once the playoffs came, the same guys Marino was looking all world with during the reg season were the same guys he was looking pretty awful with in the postseason

Very good, and pertinent, points, especially the last sentence.

But don't forget--which most seem to when discussing Marino's career-- Shula's role in the ultimate championship trophy failure of Marino. Shula not only had more wins during his career than any other NFL HC has (or likely ever will), but he took 2 different teams to the Super Bowl, his teams appeared in 6 SBs (including 1 with a 2-headed QB tandem of Strock/Woodly for god's sake, the year before drafting Marino). And yet, as HC for most of Marino's career, and certainly most or all of his prime, he could not get Dolphins to another SB after Marino's 2nd year in the league, let alone win one.

NYGabriel
06-27-2013, 03:58 PM
OK 46...He's a great QB. Not just a great passer.
Honestly, I'd put him behind only Peyton and Brady.

Montana was easily the best. Look at what he did in an era when defenses were allowed to play defense. Touch Brady or Manning and it's a flag. Brady when pressured is a shell of a great QB.

gumby74
06-27-2013, 04:01 PM
Very good, and pertinent, points, especially the last sentence.

But don't forget--which most seem to when discussing Marino's career-- Shula's role in the ultimate championship trophy failure of Marino. Shula not only had more wins during his career than any other NFL HC has (or likely ever will), but he took 2 different teams to the Super Bowl, his teams appeared in 6 SBs (including 1 with a 2-headed QB tandem of Strock/Woodly for god's sake, the year before drafting Marino). And yet, as HC for most of Marino's career, and certainly most or all of his prime, he could not get Dolphins to another SB after Marino's 2nd year in the league, let alone win one.

As you said, Marino was the exception. So why bother talking about SB appearances/wins as if they mean something? You win as a team, you lose as a team. If there is any doubt why Marino doesn't have a ring, i suggest you compare rosters of the teams Marino had what the other QBs had.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 04:09 PM
As you said, Marino was the exception. So why bother talking about SB appearances/wins as if they mean something? You win as a team, you lose as a team. If there is any doubt why Marino doesn't have a ring, i suggest you compare rosters of the teams Marino had what the other QBs had.
I just think that team accomplishments when we are talking about individual greatness of a given player is interesting but doesn't have the weight that some think it does.
Or at least it shouldn't.

gmen46
06-27-2013, 04:16 PM
Are we aware of rule changes that now favor the passing game?

All the more reason why winning championships--and the quantity of them-- is more crucial to an NFL QB's career evaluation.

Rules can, and do, change from one generation to another and affect various aspects of the game and often result in affecting stats as has relatively recently occurred with the passing (and presumably the receiving) game you allude to.

On the other hand, the degree of difficulty in teams (led by their QB and coaching staff) in winning multiple SBs-- has only become more difficult the last 15-16 years as the modern era of FA and Salary Cap has become entrenched..

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 04:19 PM
All the more reason why winning championships--and the quantity of them-- is more crucial to an NFL QB's career evaluation.

Rules can, and do, change from one generation to another and affect various aspects of the game and often result in affecting stats as has relatively recently occurred with the passing (and presumably the receiving) game you allude to.

On the other hand, the degree of difficulty in teams (led by their QB and coaching staff) in winning multiple SBs-- has only become more difficult the last 15-16 years as the modern era of FA and Salary Cap has become entrenched..

When you evaluate an individual's greatness, you can't throw in things that are out of his control, like the quality of the team around him.
In today's hyper intense sports fans world, way too much emphasis is placed on championships when evaluating a player.
"Championships" is the most important thing as a fan of a team. But a player's greatness has to stand alone.

Delicreep
06-27-2013, 04:21 PM
I just think that team accomplishments when we are talking about individual greatness of a given player is interesting but doesn't have the weight that some think it does.
Or at least it shouldn't.

But it does.
Cunningham is an easy case (and one you actually agree with), but there are many more.

It's not the Hall of Consistency.
It's not the Hall of Stats

It's the Hall of Fame.

As for QB rankings, the same applies, although to a lessor degree.
Eli ranked about in the middle of the pack stats was, yet Warner has him at 6. Why?

Big
Game
Success

I have no idea why any of you are arguing that this is not true.

Delicreep
06-27-2013, 04:25 PM
When you evaluate an individual's greatness, you can't throw in things that are out of his control, like the quality of the team around him.
In today's hyper intense sports fans world, way too much emphasis is placed on championships when evaluating a player.
"Championships" is the most important thing as a fan of a team. But a player's greatness has to stand alone.

If you are a math major with a pocket protector, then yes. Otherwise, it's based on memory and emotion. You have said enough times that it's the eye test or some such thing. What you see.
You see numbers when you look at Eli
I see the results.

gumby74
06-27-2013, 04:27 PM
I just think that team accomplishments when we are talking about individual greatness of a given player is interesting but doesn't have the weight that some think it does.
Or at least it shouldn't.

I agree, but at the end it's the media that drives perception a lot of times. And who do the media cover most? The winners of coarse. And by virtue of that, the SB winning QBs will get all the glory. There is definitely a correlation between being a great QB and winning Championships though. However, people need to realize that winning a championship doesn't mean that you're a great QB and vice versa. Winning a championship just means that you're on a great team. A QB contributes greatly to that of course, but he's just a part of the whole.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 04:28 PM
But it does.
Cunningham is an easy case (and one you actually agree with), but there are many more.

It's not the Hall of Consistency.
It's not the Hall of Stats

It's the Hall of Fame.

As for QB rankings, the same applies, although to a lessor degree.
Eli ranked about in the middle of the pack stats was, yet Warner has him at 6. Why?

Big
Game
Success

I have no idea why any of you are arguing that this is not true.

Maybe you can explain why **** Butkus and Gayle Sayers were first ballot HOF'rs.
I disagree completely DC, the Hall is for the "great" players of the game.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 04:29 PM
If you are a math major with a pocket protector, then yes. Otherwise, it's based on memory and emotion. You have said enough times that it's the eye test or some such thing. What you see.
You see numbers when you look at Eli
I see the results.
And I don't see numbers when I look at Eli. I see a very good football player but not a HOF'r. (yet) I go by what I see on the field. That's why I think Joe Namath was a worthy HOF recipient.

Delicreep
06-27-2013, 04:32 PM
Maybe you can explain why **** Butkus and Gayle Sayers were first ballot HOF'rs.
I disagree completely DC, the Hall is for the "great" players of the game.

Great players like Troy Aikmen?

I didn't say that greatness was something that kept you out of the HOF, I just said that one path into the HOF is big game success.

Delicreep
06-27-2013, 04:34 PM
And I don't see numbers when I look at Eli. I see a very good football player but not a HOF'r. (yet) I go by what I see on the field. That's why I think Joe Namath was a worthy HOF recipient.
OK...but you are now proving my point.

Namath's stats were never great. You know this.
His success was. His impact could be seen as immeasurable.
And one could easily argue that his SB win is why we are even talking about foot all at all - you young guys need to research that.

gmen46
06-27-2013, 04:43 PM
By who? By folks who don't have a complex understanding of the game and how it actually works. A QB is an important player, but still just one player on the team. Did John Elway suck until he won a SB after 14 years in the league? The answer is no.

You are so right! I was so wrong to think folk like Charlie Casserly (former GM for a few NFL teams), Michael Lombardi (former GM of nineties and early 2000s and newly current GM of Browns), Brian Bilick, Kurt Warner, Willie McGinest--all of whom are just a few among many who have made the statement in so many words on NFL Network on various occasions--have no complex understanding of the game and how it works. How could I have been so foolish to take their word for it?

As for Elway, no, he didn't "suck" until he won a SB. But he was considered by some in the sport who know what they're talking about to be a disappointment for not winning one---until he won one. But the fact is, he DID win two SBs, regardless of when in his career he won them. And he took his team to 3 othe SBs before then, with entirely different coaches and players.

gumby74
06-27-2013, 04:44 PM
But it does.
Cunningham is an easy case (and one you actually agree with), but there are many more.

It's not the Hall of Consistency.
It's not the Hall of Stats

It's the Hall of Fame.

As for QB rankings, the same applies, although to a lessor degree.
Eli ranked about in the middle of the pack stats was, yet Warner has him at 6. Why?

Big
Game
Success

I have no idea why any of you are arguing that this is not true.

Obviously, it holds some weight. It actually holds a lot of weight - winning championships. But to too many people it hides the bigger picture. And that is QBs who've won multiple championships, also usually have great stats, and usually have great teams around them.

It's far too convenient a justification as to why player X is better than player Y, just to say, "He's won 2 SBs". It doesn't work that way. And it shouldn't work that way.

And as 46 brought up, Marino is one of the exceptions of great players in the Hall not to have a ring. Fouts, Moon, Kelly, and others as well. They are the exception as most others have the total package - stats and rings. And if Eli holds his current trajectory, he'll be an exception as well. He'll have the rings, but not the stats and everything that comes with it.

And for the record, If Eli retires in a few years playing the way he has and doesn't win another SB, I still think he goes into the HoF. Everyone has their view on what the HoF should be. But as it stands, the HoF looks at # of rings as a key requirement.

gumby74
06-27-2013, 04:48 PM
Great players like Troy Aikmen?

I didn't say that greatness was something that kept you out of the HOF, I just said that one path into the HOF is big game success.

You mean the free way.

Delicreep
06-27-2013, 04:48 PM
Obviously, it holds some weight. It actually holds a lot of weight - winning championships. But to too many people it hides the bigger picture. And that is QBs who've won multiple championships, also usually have great stats, and usually have great teams around them.

It's far too convenient a justification as to why player X is better than player Y, just to say, "He's won 2 SBs". It doesn't work that way. And it shouldn't work that way.

And as 46 brought up, Marino is one of the exceptions of great players in the Hall not to have a ring. Fouts, Moon, Kelly, and others as well. They are the exception as most others have the total package - stats and rings. And if Eli holds his current trajectory, he'll be an exception as well. He'll have the rings, but not the stats and everything that comes with it.

And for the record, If Eli retires in a few years playing the way he has and doesn't win another SB, I still think he goes into the HoF. Everyone has their view on what the HoF should be. But as it stands, the HoF looks at # of rings as a key requirement.

I am not arguing that there's any sense or logic or fairness to it, just that it is.
And I'm never gonna choke out that Aikmen is better than Cunningham (or Simms) because he's in the HOF.

Delicreep
06-27-2013, 04:50 PM
You mean the free way.
As a fan of the Giants, I very much consider it nearly priceless, not free.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 04:52 PM
You are so right! I was so wrong to think folk like Charlie Casserly (former GM for a few NFL teams), Michael Lombardi (former GM of nineties and early 2000s and newly current GM of Browns), Brian Bilick, Kurt Warner, Willie McGinest--all of whom are just a few among many who have made the statement in so many words on NFL Network on various occasions--have no complex understanding of the game and how it works. How could I have been so foolish to take their word for it?

As for Elway, no, he didn't "suck" until he won a SB. But he was considered by some in the sport who know what they're talking about to be a disappointment for not winning one---until he won one. But the fact is, he DID win two SBs, regardless of when in his career he won them. And he took his team to 3 othe SBs before then, with entirely different coaches and players.

I'm glad you finally see it my way.
Let that be a lesson to you.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 04:53 PM
Great players like Troy Aikmen?

I didn't say that greatness was something that kept you out of the HOF, I just said that one path into the HOF is big game success.
If you are saying that the HOF voting is often based on specious criteria....I agree.

gmen46
06-27-2013, 04:59 PM
As you said, Marino was the exception. So why bother talking about SB appearances/wins as if they mean something? You win as a team, you lose as a team. If there is any doubt why Marino doesn't have a ring, i suggest you compare rosters of the teams Marino had what the other QBs had.

Wow.

So now SB appearances and wins don't "mean something"??

Now the whole point of NFL players is to sharpen their individual stats and skills? The most important goal is for individual players to make the Pro Bowl and not the Super Bowl? That explains why hundreds of millions of people from all over the world watch the Super Bowl each year now, while the Pro Bowl's very existence is--and has been for a few years--in jeopardy?

Now you've jumped the shark of any form of credibility.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 05:03 PM
Wow.

So now SB appearances and wins don't "mean something"??

Now the whole point of NFL players is to sharpen their individual stats and skills? The most important goal is for individual players to make the Pro Bowl and not the Super Bowl? That explains why hundreds of millions of people from all over the world watch the Super Bowl each year now, while the Pro Bowl's very existence is--and has been for a few years--in jeopardy?

Now you've jumped the shark of any form of credibility.

The goal of every player is to contribute to a championship. The measure of an individual player is the quality their play on the field in that effort.

NYGabriel
06-27-2013, 05:03 PM
How many truly great qb's don't have a ring? Sure teams win championships but the qb makes the difference.

Delicreep
06-27-2013, 05:06 PM
If you are saying that the HOF voting is often based on specious criteria....I agree.

Now...if you are saying that the two SB wins and the two MVP's are specious, then we disagree.
Both are very meaningful to me as a fan.
When I visit the HOF, I want to seen these things.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 05:08 PM
How many truly great qb's don't have a ring? Sure teams win championships but the qb makes the difference.
Jim Kelly, Warren Moon, Dan Marino, Randall Cunningham, Fran Tarkenton.......just to name a few.........

gumby74
06-27-2013, 05:20 PM
Wow.

So now SB appearances and wins don't "mean something"??

Now the whole point of NFL players is to sharpen their individual stats and skills? The most important goal is for individual players to make the Pro Bowl and not the Super Bowl? That explains why hundreds of millions of people from all over the world watch the Super Bowl each year now, while the Pro Bowl's very existence is--and has been for a few years--in jeopardy?

Now you've jumped the shark of any form of credibility.

I'm just following the context of your post. You said in so many words that Marino was the exception, when people were to judge QBs based on SBs. Then, you turned around and started judging him based on his lack of SBs - not winning one despite having Shula, blah blah blah. If i'm missing something, correct me. I'm still at work and alt tabbing like crazy.

gumby74
06-27-2013, 05:21 PM
I think Sanchez deserves to be in the Hall of Fame for that butt fumble alone. That was brilliant.

gmen46
06-27-2013, 05:30 PM
The goal of every player is to contribute to a championship. The measure of an individual player is the quality their play on the field in that effort.

This I would agree with. Except I would add that of all the players on any team, the overall success (sometimes stats, but always the ability to set the "tone" of the offense and the ability to establish confidence among all the other players on both offense and defense, especially in the big games), the QB is the single most important individual player on that team.

It can be--and often has been--argued that Trent Dilfer was an accidental SB winning QB on a SB winner. But, again, he was an exception. It is no accident that the vast majority of the 47 SB winning teams have won with a QB that has had the "it" factor. The ability (differs among various QBs) to lead his team to victories when it matters the most--the regular season game that is crucial to win in order to make the post season. The first post season game that is crucial to win in order to advance to the next post season game. And, of course, the final Big Game of the season, the Championship Game.

Eli has--and only mid way into his career--shown that he has that "it" factor more situations than not. Has he won every single game that meets that "crucial" standard? No, of course not. Nobody does. Not Brady (ha ha!), not Peyton, not Rodgers, not Brees, not Roethlisberger, not Montana (1990 NFC Championship game, anyone?). And not Marino.

But if you look at all the Super Bowl games, over the different "eras" of the past 47 years, you will notice that the vast majority of the winners have been with QBs who at the time did have that "it" factor going for them. That's why guys like Bradshaw and Aikman, just 2 examples, each have multiple SB rings and are in the Hall. And deservedly so.

NYGabriel
06-27-2013, 05:43 PM
Jim Kelly, Warren Moon, Dan Marino, Randall Cunningham, Fran Tarkenton.......just to name a few.........

Truly great? C'mon man! Warren Moon never even played in conference championship game. Matt Ryan has amazing regular season stats but he was mocked relentlessly for not having won a playoff game before last season. It must be a statistical anomaly that the true greats end up on great teams an overwhelming majority of the time.

gmen46
06-27-2013, 06:31 PM
Jim Kelly, Warren Moon, Dan Marino, Randall Cunningham, Fran Tarkenton.......just to name a few.........

I'm probably overreacting here, but you imply, with your "just to name a few" phrase, that there are too many truly great QBs without a ring for you to name them all. Fact is, you did name just about all the exceptions.

Add Fouts, and drop Cunningham, and you have the small list of QBs who are in fact in the HOF without benefit of any SB ring.

I'm guessing omission of Fouts was simply an oversight, since he was the "air" of the "air Coryell" Chargers.

Cunningham doesn't really belong with those 5. He didn't have enough complete seasons (maybe 7 out of his 16 seasons in the league were what could be called "complete" and only 3 of those were actually 16 game seasons). He had some extraordinary skills, and was the forerunner of a "type" of new NFL QB like Vick, Cam, RGIII, and Kaepernick, for sure, but I really don't see the entirety of his career to fall with the other 5. In my opinion.

giantsfan420
06-27-2013, 06:35 PM
All the more reason why winning championships--and the quantity of them-- is more crucial to an NFL QB's career evaluation.

Rules can, and do, change from one generation to another and affect various aspects of the game and often result in affecting stats as has relatively recently occurred with the passing (and presumably the receiving) game you allude to.

On the other hand, the degree of difficulty in teams (led by their QB and coaching staff) in winning multiple SBs-- has only become more difficult the last 15-16 years as the modern era of FA and Salary Cap has become entrenched..can i ask you what it is you do? you gotta be a writer of some sort, your ability to turn your thoughts into well formed sentences and structured paragraphs...i know i cant be the only one who appreciates it. great posts too by the way as usual

giantsfan420
06-27-2013, 06:39 PM
You are so right! I was so wrong to think folk like Charlie Casserly (former GM for a few NFL teams), Michael Lombardi (former GM of nineties and early 2000s and newly current GM of Browns), Brian Bilick, Kurt Warner, Willie McGinest--all of whom are just a few among many who have made the statement in so many words on NFL Network on various occasions--have no complex understanding of the game and how it works. How could I have been so foolish to take their word for it?

As for Elway, no, he didn't "suck" until he won a SB. But he was considered by some in the sport who know what they're talking about to be a disappointment for not winning one---until he won one. But the fact is, he DID win two SBs, regardless of when in his career he won them. And he took his team to 3 othe SBs before then, with entirely different coaches and players.another great point. ppl forget, before elway won those sb's, he was actually facing more n more scrutiny. not in the sense he wasnt this great qb, but in the sense kinda like peyton with the question "can they get it done on the biggest of stages against the toughest of opponents", he was finally able to but i'd bet anything elway would tell u himself he wouldnt be truly happy with his career until he got that 1 ring... which he now has 2 and so the questions fade. but they were there for a while even.

gmen46
06-27-2013, 06:43 PM
I'm just following the context of your post. You said in so many words that Marino was the exception, when people were to judge QBs based on SBs. Then, you turned around and started judging him based on his lack of SBs - not winning one despite having Shula, blah blah blah. If i'm missing something, correct me. I'm still at work and alt tabbing like crazy.

Sorry, perhaps I was a bit harsh.

But my point was only to highlight even more the anomaly that was Marino's failure to win at least 1 SB in spite of his unique awesomeness as a passer. It's not like he played his entire career with lousy HCs. In fact, even though it was very near the end of his career, didn't he also have Jimmy Johnson as HC for at least 1 year? That's 2 HCs, with 8 SB appearances combined--and 4 SB wins--between them, and still no SB ring for Marino. Must have been indescribably frustrating for Dan.

giantsfan420
06-27-2013, 06:43 PM
I'm probably overreacting here, but you imply, with your "just to name a few" phrase, that there are too many truly great QBs without a ring for you to name them all. Fact is, you did name just about all the exceptions.

Add Fouts, and drop Cunningham, and you have the small list of QBs who are in fact in the HOF without benefit of any SB ring.

I'm guessing omission of Fouts was simply an oversight, since he was the "air" of the "air Coryell" Chargers.

Cunningham doesn't really belong with those 5. He didn't have enough complete seasons (maybe 7 out of his 16 seasons in the league were what could be called "complete" and only 3 of those were actually 16 game seasons). He had some extraordinary skills, and was the forerunner of a "type" of new NFL QB like Vick, Cam, RGIII, and Kaepernick, for sure, but I really don't see the entirety of his career to fall with the other 5. In my opinion.and dont forget, it wasnt really til cunningham resurrected his career in Minnesota that he was viewed more as a QB than athlete. We all love his highlight reel plays and loved watching him play even if it was at our expense, but he really wasnt this coveted passer for most of his career. When he was able to become more of a passer out of necessity (older age and loss of athletic skill) was when the image/understanding of him as a player began to shift.

theres no way Id associate Cunningham with the all time great qbs...i would consider him one of the all time great athletes of the league, def not qb and i think looking back on his career thats fair. i wouldnt vote him in the HoF as a QB and understand why he hasnt been as of yet, but i completely disagree with keeping him out as an athlete. he pretty much revolutionized the game like vick has, only when football was much tougher and qbs could get leveled. imagine how vick would last back then with all the pouting he does now about the hits lol he wouldnt have lasted a week in cunninhams shoes

gmen46
06-27-2013, 06:46 PM
can i ask you what it is you do? you gotta be a writer of some sort, your ability to turn your thoughts into well formed sentences and structured paragraphs...i know i cant be the only one who appreciates it. great posts too by the way as usual

Thanks. You make me blush.

It's in the genes, maybe. I'm no pro, for certain. :)

giantsfan420
06-27-2013, 07:10 PM
Thanks. You make me blush.

It's in the genes, maybe. I'm no pro, for certain. :)u are a writer tho, am i right?

id put money on writer or editor. and did u see my last comment about cunninham? id like ur take on it when u got the time

brad
06-27-2013, 07:16 PM
Maybe we are looking at this discussion wrong, rather than trying to name great QBs that didn't win the SB, how about looking at teams that won the SB after their great QB was injured or left the team? Obviously the Giants come to mind with Simms getting injured and Hostetler finishing what he started. Another one would be the 49ers where Young managed a few SBs after Montana went to KC. Were those SB wins the result of great QBs, or great teams? You can argue that Young was truly great, but Hostetler?

This debate is really a chicken or the egg discussion, are teams great because of the QB or are the QBs great because of the team. I would guess it's a little of both. The QB is obviously important, but without the right people around him and a system that plays to his strengths, we probably would end up putting him in the good but not great category.

TroyArcher
06-27-2013, 07:18 PM
Dan Marino was voted no.25 on the NFL top 100 list and Terry Bradshaw, with 4 rings in 4 SB's and 2 SB MVP's, was no.50.

Terry Bradshaw played on maybe the greatest team ever. Almost half the team is in the HOF. I could have one a SB or 2 with that roster.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 07:20 PM
Truly great? C'mon man! Warren Moon never even played in conference championship game. Matt Ryan has amazing regular season stats but he was mocked relentlessly for not having won a playoff game before last season. It must be a statistical anomaly that the true greats end up on great teams an overwhelming majority of the time.
All but one are in the HOF. And the one exclusion is better than the rest of them.

giantsfan420
06-27-2013, 07:23 PM
Maybe we are looking at this discussion wrong, rather than trying to name great QBs that didn't win the SB, how about looking at teams that won the SB after their great QB was injured or left the team? Obviously the Giants come to mind with Simms getting injured and Hostetler finishing what he started. Another one would be the 49ers where Young managed a few SBs after Montana went to KC. Were those SB wins the result of great QBs, or great teams? You can argue that Young was truly great, but Hostetler?

This debate is really a chicken or the egg discussion, are teams great because of the QB or are the QBs great because of the team. I would guess it's a little of both. The QB is obviously important, but without the right people around him and a system that plays to his strengths, we probably would end up putting him in the good but not great category.thats a good way of describing it, and i think its also the answer. i think its great teams. but, great at the right times. no one would argue our D was great for much of 2011. But, there was also times our Offense wasn't great. When the postseason arrived, I'd argue that our team was playing great football both phases and ST even.

Are there examples of QBs getting in the zone come playoffs? yeah eli being one a couple times, Montana, Rodgers, Brady...but for as many as there are of those examples, there are also teams with Trent Dilfer leading the team. WHile I'd argue a SB without at least an occassionaly special QB is much more rare, it still happens.

I dont know tho, u really do present the issue accurately and i think it only goes to show how the question doesnt have one set answer.

AllHailEli
06-27-2013, 07:41 PM
Maybe we are looking at this discussion wrong, rather than trying to name great QBs that didn't win the SB, how about looking at teams that won the SB after their great QB was injured or left the team? Obviously the Giants come to mind with Simms getting injured and Hostetler finishing what he started. Another one would be the 49ers where Young managed a few SBs after Montana went to KC. Were those SB wins the result of great QBs, or great teams? You can argue that Young was truly great, but Hostetler?

This debate is really a chicken or the egg discussion, are teams great because of the QB or are the QBs great because of the team. I would guess it's a little of both. The QB is obviously important, but without the right people around him and a system that plays to his strengths, we probably would end up putting him in the good but not great category.

Didn't Steve Young only win one Super Bowl after Montana? I mean, the Niners have 5 Super Bowls, and Montana won 4 of them. Anyway, Steve Young is also a HOFer. You can say the same thing about Aaron Rodgers. Or how about Brady taking over Bledsoe? Those teams transitioned to great QBs. I am not sure you can necessarily compare that to what happened to the Giants when Simms went down.

AllHailEli
06-27-2013, 07:52 PM
thats a good way of describing it, and i think its also the answer. i think its great teams. but, great at the right times. no one would argue our D was great for much of 2011. But, there was also times our Offense wasn't great. When the postseason arrived, I'd argue that our team was playing great football both phases and ST even.

Are there examples of QBs getting in the zone come playoffs? yeah eli being one a couple times, Montana, Rodgers, Brady...but for as many as there are of those examples, there are also teams with Trent Dilfer leading the team. WHile I'd argue a SB without at least an occassionaly special QB is much more rare, it still happens.

I dont know tho, u really do present the issue accurately and i think it only goes to show how the question doesnt have one set answer.

Trent Dilfer was carried by a great team, there's a huge difference.

giantsfan420
06-27-2013, 07:54 PM
Trent Dilfer was carried by a great team, there's a huge difference.ur right but that was my point. i prob just did a poor job of explainin it. my point was while there are situations where guys like Dilfer are the GW SB QB, that usually happens less than a team with a great QB winning it...but yeah u do make a good point

Roosevelt
06-27-2013, 08:31 PM
Maybe we are looking at this discussion wrong, rather than trying to name great QBs that didn't win the SB, how about looking at teams that won the SB after their great QB was injured or left the team? Obviously the Giants come to mind with Simms getting injured and Hostetler finishing what he started. Another one would be the 49ers where Young managed a few SBs after Montana went to KC. Were those SB wins the result of great QBs, or great teams? You can argue that Young was truly great, but Hostetler?

This debate is really a chicken or the egg discussion, are teams great because of the QB or are the QBs great because of the team. I would guess it's a little of both. The QB is obviously important, but without the right people around him and a system that plays to his strengths, we probably would end up putting him in the good but not great category.

Hostetler's career speaks for itself. He was a solid player that benefited in 1990 because teams weren't well prepared for his skill-set.

As for the chicken and the egg, just look at our season last year. How many people are pointing to the Nicks injury and attributing that as a major reason for Eli's drop-off?

The fact is that all 10 guys on offense need to do their jobs in order for the QB to be successful at his.

NYGabriel
06-27-2013, 09:04 PM
All but one are in the HOF. And the one exclusion is better than the rest of them.

Fair enough. I actually rate those guys and I'd add Fouts to the list. My point stands though. If you asked most people to do a list of the top 6 QB'S in the league today they'd all be players that have won a ring. Even if they didn't have the best team in the league they found a way to win. We have to agree to disagree. Rings don't mean everything but I'm one of those guys that likes to see it on a QB'S resume. Marino is the only QB without a ring that I'd consider top 10 all time.

gumby74
06-27-2013, 09:05 PM
Fair enough. I actually rate those guys and I'd add Fouts to the list. My point stands though. If you asked most people to do a list of the top 6 QB'S in the league today they'd all be players that have won a ring. Even if they didn't have the best team in the league they found a way to win. We have to agree to disagree. Rings don't mean everything but I'm one of those guys that likes to see it on a QB'S resume. Marino is the only QB without a ring that I'd consider top 10 all time.

Marino was just that good. His throws under pressure were unbelievable.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 09:16 PM
Fair enough. I actually rate those guys and I'd add Fouts to the list. My point stands though. If you asked most people to do a list of the top 6 QB'S in the league today they'd all be players that have won a ring. Even if they didn't have the best team in the league they found a way to win. We have to agree to disagree. Rings don't mean everything but I'm one of those guys that likes to see it on a QB'S resume. Marino is the only QB without a ring that I'd consider top 10 all time.
Forgot about Fouts.

Delicreep
06-27-2013, 09:19 PM
Marino was just that good. His throws under pressure were unbelievable.

He had a motion that not only looked perfect, but it was so compact that he just got the ball out of his hands so quickly.

Great, great QB

Delicreep
06-27-2013, 09:20 PM
Forgot about Fouts.

Just curious...why?

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 09:23 PM
Just curious...why?
Because I'm old.

giantsfan420
06-27-2013, 09:26 PM
Im curious bc I saw Randall CUnningham being tossed around as an example of a QB who should be in the HoF.

Do most you guys feel that he should be in as a QB? I posted earlier, and I'll try to be short (as possible): Cunningham was an all world athlete with Philly. Highlight reel type player. But wasnt a QB really in the pocket, at least not to the level of other HoF QBs of his time. Its my opinion, that it was when he revived his career @ Minnesota that the perception on him changed. In large part due to getting older and losing the athleticism he depended on so long. edit-it wasnt until Minny that I feel he developed the pocket passer aspect of his game to levels he coulda exceeded earlier in his career.

I wouldnt put him in the HoF as a QB, I'd put him in as an athlete if such a thing were possible. He was practically Deon Sanders @ the QB position most his career. He was Vick at his most exciting, during an era when QBs could get leveled (Vick cries about every little touch and throws himself down and all that bs).

I dont really hold Cunningham anywhere near the level I do as other HoF QBs. But other tremendous atheltes in the Hall at diff positions? I put him right up there with them.

Delicreep
06-27-2013, 09:30 PM
Because I'm old.

He's one of the guys who I think doesn't get a lot of respect from younger generations, so roll with that.
Tough SOB too.

Delicreep
06-27-2013, 09:37 PM
Im curious bc I saw Randall CUnningham being tossed around as an example of a QB who should be in the HoF.

Do most you guys feel that he should be in as a QB? I posted earlier, and I'll try to be short (as possible): Cunningham was an all world athlete with Philly. Highlight reel type player. But wasnt a QB really in the pocket, at least not to the level of other HoF QBs of his time. Its my opinion, that it was when he revived his career @ Minnesota that the perception on him changed. In large part due to getting older and losing the athleticism he depended on so long. edit-it wasnt until Minny that I feel he developed the pocket passer aspect of his game to levels he coulda exceeded earlier in his career.

I wouldnt put him in the HoF as a QB, I'd put him in as an athlete if such a thing were possible. He was practically Deon Sanders @ the QB position most his career. He was Vick at his most exciting, during an era when QBs could get leveled (Vick cries about every little touch and throws himself down and all that bs).

I dont really hold Cunningham anywhere near the level I do as other HoF QBs. But other tremendous atheltes in the Hall at diff positions? I put him right up there with them.

I could go on and dispute what you are saying about not being a QB, but I'm gonna try it another way: He was extremely tough to defend against. His speed was lethal, but like RGIII, he could throw very accurately and had the bonus arm strength to really, really add to the difficulties of playing against him.

giantsfan420
06-27-2013, 09:42 PM
I could go on and dispute what you are saying about not being a QB, but I'm gonna try it another way: He was extremely tough to defend against. His speed was lethal, but like RGIII, he could throw very accurately and had the bonus arm strength to really, really add to the difficulties of playing against him.

yeah, I probably worded it terribly. i dont mean to imply he wasnt a good qb while at philly. i meant in terms of comparing him to the guys of his era that made the Hall as a QB. He really never tried, or seemed to try, to progress that aspect of his game. but perhaps its exactly how you describe it, his skill set was so lethal vs defenses, it'd be stupid to try and pigeon hole him there and waste a lot of his talents.

giantsfan420
06-27-2013, 09:43 PM
but at least in my memory of the guy, Cunningham was far better as a "pocket passer" in Minny...but perhaps that too is because he lost part of that dynamic, unique skill set and thus didnt have to relegate snaps towards the application of said athletic talents...

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 09:51 PM
I could go on and dispute what you are saying about not being a QB, but I'm gonna try it another way: He was extremely tough to defend against. His speed was lethal, but like RGIII, he could throw very accurately and had the bonus arm strength to really, really add to the difficulties of playing against him.
My view is that if one was a Giants fan in the 80's thru the mid 90's, you knew how good Cunningham was.
Absolute Giants killer. Kid was a great QB.
I was NEVER afraid of Troy Aikman. I was of the Cowboys but not Aikman. I was afraid of Randall Cunningham.
I was at the stadium where he had a 90 yard punt to kill our chances to win a football game in the 4th quarter.

Roosevelt
06-27-2013, 09:55 PM
Im curious bc I saw Randall CUnningham being tossed around as an example of a QB who should be in the HoF.

Do most you guys feel that he should be in as a QB?

No, as a punter.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 09:56 PM
No, as a punter.
Actually Rosie...he was probably one of, if not the greatest punter in NFL history.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 09:59 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MeycJbMIAw

Delicreep
06-27-2013, 10:00 PM
My view is that if one was a Giants fan in the 80's thru the mid 90's, you knew how good Cunningham was.
Absolute Giants killer. Kid was a great QB.
I was NEVER afraid of Troy Aikman. I was of the Cowboys but not Aikman. I was afraid of Randall Cunningham.
I was at the stadium where he had a 90 yard punt to kill our chances to win a football game in the 4th quarter.

I don't remember anything about a punt.
I also don't remember anything to do with Herm Edwards either

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 10:02 PM
I don't remember anything about a punt.
I also don't remember anything to do with Herm Edwards either
Let me remind you. Hahaha!!! And that was one cold *** day to be sitting in the upper deck end zone with the wind in your face.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQKHOMHKT00

Delicreep
06-27-2013, 10:04 PM
Let me remind you. Hahaha!!! And that was one cold *** day to be sitting in the upper deck end zone with the wind in your face.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQKHOMHKT00

Nope...never happened.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 10:08 PM
Nope...never happened.
And we ALL remember this....like it was yesterday.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjtJxZclkVc

Rusty192
06-27-2013, 10:10 PM
And we ALL remember this....like it was yesterday.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjtJxZclkVcYou seem strangely giddy about these, MH.

Delicreep
06-27-2013, 10:17 PM
And we ALL remember this....like it was yesterday.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjtJxZclkVc

Look...I saw Jurassic Park, but that don't make dinosaurs real.
Your little computer generated clips are nifty and all, but I only need to see what my mind actually allows itself to remember.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 10:17 PM
You seem strangely giddy about these, MH.
Enough time has passed to admire his ability.

I can tell you that I hated Randall Cunningham. (Not as a man, but as a player of course) I also hated Bobby Orr. Its the reasons that I hated Bobby Orr that cause me to believe that he was the greatest hockey player I ever saw. The dread i felt when Orr had the puck was similar to the dread I felt when Cunningham was extending plays.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 10:18 PM
Look...I say Jurassic Park, but that don't make dinosaurs real. Your little computer generated clips are nifty and all, but I only need to see what my mind actually allows itself to remember.
I can respect that.

Rusty192
06-27-2013, 10:24 PM
Enough time has passed to admire his ability.

I can tell you that I hated Randall Cunningham. (Not as a man, but as a player of course) I also hated Bobby Orr. Its the reasons that I hated Bobby Orr that cause me to believe that he was the greatest hockey player I ever saw. The dread i felt when Orr had the puck was similar to the dread I felt when Cunningham was extending plays.I never hate players as people personally. (well except for maybe Asante Samuel. lol j/k) but definitely the jersey that they wear or the team they play on.

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 10:28 PM
I never hate players as people personally. (well except for maybe Asante Samuel. lol j/k) but definitely the jersey that they wear or the team they play on.
I remember a few years ago after TO was in Dallas for a few years, that as much as we ragged on him, I thought if I met him in a bar, he would be a cool guy to talk to.

Roosevelt
06-27-2013, 10:28 PM
Actually Rosie...he was probably one of, if not the greatest punter in NFL history.

I remember him having an extreme leg for a short period of time. I don't recall it defining his career. Am I wrong?

Morehead State
06-27-2013, 10:30 PM
I remember him having an extreme leg for a short period of time. I don't recall it defining his career. Am I wrong?
No not at all. They just brought him out when they needed a huge kick.
Plus for a year or two, they did a lot of quick kicks on third and long.

Put it this way...his average was higher than Ray Guy.

gmen46
06-27-2013, 10:35 PM
u are a writer tho, am i right?

id put money on writer or editor. and did u see my last comment about cunninham? id like ur take on it when u got the time

Well, I would agree with the consensus of Cunningham as an outstanding athlete and football player (after all, he could throw a 50 yard pass in the air, run for a 50 yard gain, and kick a 90 yard punt in the air--I think we all remember that one). And in retrospect I believe he was tougher mentally than I and many others gave him credit for at the time, although he did miss big chunks of seasons due to injury in 9 of his 16 seasons,

And I'd be less than honest if I didn't remind us all that Buddy Ryan deliberately hindered his progress as a maturing pro QB. He truly believed defense was the only important aspect of the team. He believed and acted as such as Bears' DC (hard for him not to, I suppose, given all the media attention to his defense ). And of course everyone seems to remember Houston DC Ryan punching OC Gilbride on the sidelines of a game.

I say this because as Eagles HC he virtually ignored the offense. Sure, many former DCs promoted to a HC tend to retain DC duties, or at the very least pay a bit more attention to the defense in coordination with a DC. But Buddy actually did not care what his offense did. It became widely known, at least in Philly where I lived at the time, that he pretty much told the Eagles OC to give Randle the ball and "let him do what he does". That was his offensive game plan. Every game.

And RC definitely settled into more of a pocket passer in his late years (3 yrs, I think) with Vikes due to age and injuries catching up to him, and had his best year as such that one year in 98 with Randy Moss as rookie killing it.

But in my opinion he does not belong in the company of Moon, Kelly, Fouts, Tarkenton, and of course Marino, as I said to MS, and it is extremely unlikely that--as opposed to those 5 QBs--he will land in the Hall..

Buddy333
06-27-2013, 10:59 PM
No not at all. They just brought him out when they needed a huge kick.Plus for a year or two, they did a lot of quick kicks on third and long.Put it this way...his average was higher than Ray Guy.Didn't he have a record at one point for distance?

giantsfan420
06-27-2013, 11:31 PM
Well, I would agree with the consensus of Cunningham as an outstanding athlete and football player (after all, he could throw a 50 yard pass in the air, run for a 50 yard gain, and kick a 90 yard punt in the air--I think we all remember that one). And in retrospect I believe he was tougher mentally than I and many others gave him credit for at the time, although he did miss big chunks of seasons due to injury in 9 of his 16 seasons,

And I'd be less than honest if I didn't remind us all that Buddy Ryan deliberately hindered his progress as a maturing pro QB. He truly believed defense was the only important aspect of the team. He believed and acted as such as Bears' DC (hard for him not to, I suppose, given all the media attention to his defense ). And of course everyone seems to remember Houston DC Ryan punching OC Gilbride on the sidelines of a game.

I say this because as Eagles HC he virtually ignored the offense. Sure, many former DCs promoted to a HC tend to retain DC duties, or at the very least pay a bit more attention to the defense in coordination with a DC. But Buddy actually did not care what his offense did. It became widely known, at least in Philly where I lived at the time, that he pretty much told the Eagles OC to give Randle the ball and "let him do what he does". That was his offensive game plan. Every game.

And RC definitely settled into more of a pocket passer in his late years (3 yrs, I think) with Vikes due to age and injuries catching up to him, and had his best year as such that one year in 98 with Randy Moss as rookie killing it.

But in my opinion he does not belong in the company of Moon, Kelly, Fouts, Tarkenton, and of course Marino, as I said to MS, and it is extremely unlikely that--as opposed to those 5 QBs--he will land in the Hall..

wow such a good point. no one hit on that. the whole buddy ryan aspect. that is so true. he really was almost disgusted with offense side of football. i guess he was so enamored with the defensive side of the ball, he couldnt do anything but hate the offense lol. nah i know thats extreme but he really did almost have a dislike for the offense didnt he? came off that way. Man, imagine Cunningham under the tutelage of Josh McDaniels or Gary Kubiak or Mike SHannahan or Andy Reid et al...u summed it up perfectly tho imo. I wouldnt put him in the Hall as a QB, but, I'd almost make it possible to put a guy in as an athlete, bc if anyone warranted it, its Cunninham.

AllHailEli
06-28-2013, 01:04 PM
I remember a few years ago after TO was in Dallas for a few years, that as much as we ragged on him, I thought if I met him in a bar, he would be a cool guy to talk to.

For sure, someone who'd shed crocodile tears for Romo must be loads of fun. "That is my quarterback. BOO HOO HOO."

Morehead State
06-28-2013, 01:14 PM
For sure, someone who'd shed crocodile tears for Romo must be loads of fun. "That is my quarterback. BOO HOO HOO."
The adults are talking now.