Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Joe Montana: Best QB of all-time?


TheGrunt
 Share

Who is the BEST QB of all-time?  

94 members have voted

  1. 1. Who is the BEST QB of all-time?

    • John Elway
      21
    • Joe Montana
      36
    • Terry Bradshaw
      2
    • Steve young
      5
    • Troy Aikman
      0
    • Jim Kelly
      1
    • Dan Marino
      11
    • John Unitas
      12
    • Roger Staubach
      4
    • Joe Namath
      2


Recommended Posts

elway's supproting wr cast:

83: watson- 1130

84: watson- 1170

85: v. jonson- 712; watson- 915

86: m. jackson- 738; v. jonshon- 363; watson- 699 (the year he started consistantly have 3 solid threats imo)

87: same 3

88: jackson, jonshon, nattiel

89: jackson, jonshon, nattiel, young

90: same 4 + sharpe's 1st year

91-92: same 5 "wr's"

93: lost jackson, young, nattiel

94: got a very talented anthony miller

95:  smith, mccaffrey, miller, v. johnson, sharpe

96:  mc, smith, miller, sharpe, carswell, chamberlain

97: no more miller

98: same

 

1398359[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

and you're saying that's BETTER than the group led by jerry rice, dwight clark, john taylor...and if you can bring sharpe into a discussion about WR, then i can bring in roger craig, who seemed to get about 700 yards receiving every year. you think the vance johnson, steve watson crew are not only as good but BETTER???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 104
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

tyalor had 2 1000 yard season (both 60 or over rec). taylor really help on sp.

 

clark only had 1 1000 yard season. call him a 700-800 yd wr.

 

solomon (whom i loved) call him a 50 rec/ 500 yd wr.

 

personally, i think elway had much more depth at wr longer (more receiving options). joe's system encouraged passes to the rb's because of it......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and you're saying that's BETTER than the group led by jerry rice, dwight clark, john taylor...and if you can bring sharpe into a discussion about WR, then i can bring in roger craig, who seemed to get about 700 yards receiving every year.  you think the vance johnson, steve watson crew are not only as good but BETTER???

 

1398435[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

joe had two rings before rice and taylor showed up.

 

 

edit: so our leading guy was a 7-800 yard guy until then. elway had 2 or three of them much ealier.

 

off to lunch...will check in when i get back.

Edited by Bier Meister
Link to comment
Share on other sites

personally, i think elway had much more depth at wr longer (more receiving options).  joe's system encouraged passes to the rb's because of it......

 

1398438[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

it's not so much great depth the broncos had as it was 3 or 4 guys with different strengths, none of whom were top notch talents. if you've got 3 so-so WRs, you'll probably mix it up and each of them will get 800 yards or so. if you've got a jerry rice and john taylor, your #3 WR isn't going to get as many balls, obviously.

 

one thing i'll agree with you...elway had better talent around him at the END of his career when he won two super bowls than montana had at the BEGINNING of his, when HE won two super bowls. and i think that fact provides a decent argument in montana's favor.

 

but after those two super bowls, when rice came in, montana had the best talent around him of any QB pretty much EVER. and before 97/98, elway had very MARGINAL talent surrounding him.

Edited by Azazello1313
Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's not so much great depth the broncos had as it was 3 or 4 guys with different strengths, none of whom were top notch talents.  if you've got 3 so-so WRs, you'll probably mix it up and each of them will get 800 yards or so.  if you've got a jerry rice and john taylor, your #3 WR isn't going to get as many balls, obviously. 

 

my original statement was that elway had more talent  (at wr) over the duration of his career than montana and i stand by that.  of coarse i'll take rice, taylor, jones over smith, mccaffrey, and sharpe.  but those original wr's: clark, solomon, mike wilson vs. the 3 sons... common.... i take the 3 sons.

 

one thing i'll agree with you...elway had better talent around him at the END of his career when he won two super bowls than montana had at the BEGINNING of his, when HE won two super bowls.  and i think that fact provides a decent argument in montana's favor.

 

montana also made a lot happen in kc with average to less than avg wr's.  (he had a great D, and marcus to help though)

 

but after those two super bowls, when rice came in, montana had the best talent around him of any QB pretty much EVER.  and before 97/98, elway had very MARGINAL talent surrounding him.

 

but for those runs prior to rice, he had average to slightly better than avg wr's.  and even after rice, thye were were lookign for a consistant #2.  i guess i would look at it like a FF draft->  with rice being #1, denver being towards the end but getting 2 better than avg wr's then sf waiting for it to come back to them.  of course that's after rice enters the league.  i certainly would rate smith,mc, and sharpe as a top trio in the history of #1, #2, and te combos.

 

1398458[/snapback]

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll give Elway the fact that until about '94, the best he had was Steve Watson - a QB shouldn't be able to complain about having Anthony Miller and Shannon Sharpe as his main targets.

 

I've always been thoroughly unimpressed by the "3 Amigos" - absolute creation of the two-week gap from the conference championship to the Super Bowl.

 

Of course, part of the whole "Elway's poor WRs" issue could very well have had something to do with Dan Reeves' offense; if you're going to pound for 3 yds and a cloud of dust and not unwrap the passing game until the 4th quarter, your WRs numbers probably aren't gonna be that great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway, for my dollar, the best ever was probably Johnny U - look at his stats at retirement compared to the #2 guy. The difference is absolutely staggering; same reason it took a long time for me to put Jerry Rice above Don Hutson - comparing apples to apples, Hutson and Unitas managed to stand SO far above their peers in production it was absolutely ridiculous.

 

(I put Rice past Hutson when he started opening significant gaps between himself and the #2 guys in most categories - which, with the talent level evening out and increasingly pass-friendly offenses, is a pretty amazing feat)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, part of the whole "Elway's poor WRs" issue could very well have had something to do with Dan Reeves' offense; if you're going to pound for 3 yds and a cloud of dust and not unwrap the passing game until the 4th quarter, your WRs numbers probably aren't gonna be that great.

 

1398595[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Coaching makes a HUGH difference. Put Reeves in charge of the Montana-era 49ers and there's no way in hell that Joe Cool wins 4 SBs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Coaching makes a HUGH difference.  Put Reeves in charge of the Montana-era 49ers and there's no way in hell that Joe Cool wins 4 SBs.

 

1398682[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

i think we can all agree that reeves is far inferior to walsh. but, there's a good chance he doesn't draft montana.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why does everyone think anthony miller was so great? he was supposed to be a great player when the broncos brought him in as a free agent (after the raiders matched the offer they signed tim brown to :D ), but miller was a bit of a disappointment, really. he had two pretty good seasons with the broncos and that was it.

 

the best receiver the broncos had during elway's career was probably steve watson, unless you count sharpe, then probably him. steve watson was a big slow white guy with good hands. kind of a poor man's dwight clark. after that would probably be mark jackson. smallish guy who played hard, but with average speed...a guy who specialised in sitting down in soft spots in zone defenses. then there was vance johnson, whose primary asset was that he was fast as heck. same with ricky nattiel, and anthony miller for that matter. elway had rod smith and mccaffrey his last few years, and those guys were obviously pretty good. most of his career, he was throwing to guys who weren't total stiffs, but definitely not pro-bowl type talent.

 

better than what joe montana was working with in san fran? uhhhh, that would be no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why does everyone think anthony miller was so great?  he was supposed to be a great player when the broncos brought him in as a free agent (after the raiders matched the offer they signed tim brown to :D ), but miller was a bit of a disappointment, really.  he had two pretty good seasons with the broncos and that was it. 

 

the best receiver the broncos had during elway's career was probably steve watson, unless you count sharpe, then probably him.  steve watson was a big slow white guy with good hands.  kind of a poor man's dwight clark.  after that would probably be mark jackson.  smallish guy who played hard, but with average speed...a guy who specialised in sitting down in soft spots in zone defenses.  then there was vance johnson, whose primary asset was that he was fast as heck.  same with ricky nattiel, and anthony miller for that matter.  elway had rod smith and mccaffrey his last few years, and those guys were obviously pretty good.  most of his career, he was throwing to guys who weren't total stiffs, but definitely not pro-bowl type talent. 

 

better than what joe montana was working with in san fran?  uhhhh, that would be no.

 

1398689[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

of coarse i'll take rice, taylor, jones over smith, mccaffrey, and sharpe. but those original wr's: clark, solomon, mike wilson vs. the 3 sons... common.... i take the 3 sons.

 

a. miller had 5 1000 yard seasons (and almost a 6th in 10 years)

Edited by Bier Meister
Link to comment
Share on other sites

montana also made a lot happen in kc with average to less than avg wr's.

 

1398519[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

i don't disagree that he was reasonably impressive during his short stint in KC, given his age and the offensive talent around him. but when you say he "made a lot happen", let's keep in mind that he threw for 5400 yards over two seasons. not exactly lighting it up. when he was surrounded by average talent he put up average numbers. montana's legacy is what he did in san fran, running bill walsh's offense and throwing to three pro bowl receivers, including the greatest to ever play the game. to say he was surrounded by average talent is a bit silly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i don't disagree that he was reasonably impressive during his short stint in KC, given his age and the offensive talent around him.  but when you say he "made a lot happen", let's keep in mind that he threw for 5400 yards over two seasons.  not exactly lighting it up.  when he was surrounded by average talent he put up average numbers.  montana's legacy is what he did in san fran, running bill walsh's offense and throwing to three pro bowl receivers, including the greatest to ever play the game.  to say he was surrounded by average talent is a bit silly.

 

1398694[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

he got kc to the afc championship with that crap! gee, i guess if he had td he would have gotten some more rings there too.

 

pre-rice... it was pretty average. so much so that they need to throw to rb's (rb's being so-so with the ground game also necesitated passing to them). winder made pro-bowl a couple of times...humphrey, green, davis, gary, anderson, portis..... a lot of ground support imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

he got kc to the afc championship with that crap!  gee, i guess if he had td he would have gotten some more rings there too.

 

pre-rice... it was pretty average. so much so that they need to throw to rb's (rb's being so-so with the ground game also necesitated passing to them).  winder made pro-bowl a couple of times...humphrey, green, davis, gary, anderson, portis..... a lot of ground support imo.

 

1398697[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

:D i love how you try and turn having a RB who can catch for 1000 yards into some kind of negative.

 

also, minor point...but gary, anderson and portis were all after elway retired. and if you're going to include backs that made elways job easier, don't forget steve sewell. that guy was a pretty nice little weapon coming out of the backfield as a third down back.

 

anyway, you dont really want to try and argue that sammy winder and bobby humphrey were better than roger craig now, do you? :doah:

 

to listen to you in this thread, you'd think montana was the only thing going for niners of the 80s. :D best offensive coach ever, best WR ever, hall of famers on defense, the only back ever to rush and receive for 1000 yards in the same season....meh, not so great....it was all joe!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:D i love how you try and turn having a RB who can catch for 1000 yards into some kind of negative. 

 

also, minor point...but gary, anderson and portis were all after elway retired.  and if you're going to include backs that made elways job easier, don't forget steve sewell.  that guy was a pretty nice little weapon coming out of the backfield as a third down back. 

 

anyway, you dont really want to try and argue that sammy winder and bobby humphrey were better than roger craig now, do you? :doah:

 

to listen to you in this thread, you'd think montana was the only thing going for niners of the 80s.  :D  best offensive coach ever, best WR ever, hall of famers on defense, the only back ever to rush and receive for 1000 yards in the same season....meh, not so great....it was all joe!

 

1398721[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

no. i said that montana had avg wr's until rice came along... i also said he had less run support (didn't have a 1000 yd back until the 84-85 season). the powerhouse 49ers teams came later. that 15-1 year 84-85 montana had craig (but not rice yet). that 1000/1000 came in 85/86. i believe that elway had better wr's earlier in his career than joe. i also believe that (although 49ers had the best ever) had a better core of wr's for more of his career than joe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, dwight clark was pretty good before montana took over, wasn't he?  and jerry rice and john taylor didnt exactly go in the tank when he left, now did they. 

 

sorry bro, but the argument that elway had better WR talent around him than montana did is NOT a strong one.

 

1398427[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

That wasn't my agrument at all Az. My arguement was that a QB makes the WR and vice versa. I never said that Elway had better talent. That would be ludicrous.

 

Montana, as the best QB ever, had the ability to make not just future HoF'ers head to the ProBowl, but other WR's head that way too..... while Elway, who is not the best QB ever, couldn't.

 

There is no doubt in my mind that it takes two to tango.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no.  i said that montana had avg wr's until rice came along... i

1398731[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

well, what you first said was that elway had better WRs over the course of his career than montana did. we could argue all day long over who's better between dwight clark and steve watson, solomon and mark jackson, etc. montana had decent but not great WRs his first two years, elway had decent but not great WRs his entire career except for the last 2 or 3 seasons. i think that's the bottom line.

 

That wasn't my agrument at all Az. ...I never said that Elway had better talent. That would be ludicrous.

 

1398750[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

umm, i know that wasn't your argument, sky. it was bier's argument. :D i agree with you it's ludicrous :D

 

az..... i think you ought to drive up and continue discussing the virtues of each qb over some wine

 

1398763[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

if you ran it by me two hours ago i probably would have. not doing squat tonight, just watching the ucla/lsu game now. i do have those two chards though, so i'll pop into the skybox in a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, what you first said was that elway had better WRs over the course of his career than montana did.  we could argue all day long over who's better between dwight clark and steve watson, solomon and mark jackson, etc.  montana had decent but not great WRs his first two years, elway had decent but not great WRs his entire career except for the last 2 or 3 seasons.  i think that's the bottom line.

umm, i know that wasn't your argument, sky.  it was bier's argument. :D  i agree with you it's ludicrous :D

if you ran it by me two hours ago i probably would have.  not doing squat tonight, just watching the ucla/lsu game now.  i do have those two chards though, so i'll pop into the skybox in a bit.

 

1398771[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

yes... he had constistantly had 2+ wr options.

 

clark:

 

+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| Rushing | Receiving |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| 1979 sfo | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 18 232 12.9 0 |

| 1980 sfo | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 82 991 12.1 8 |

| 1981 sfo | 16 | 3 32 10.7 0 | 85 1105 13.0 4 |

| 1982 sfo | 9 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 60 913 15.2 5 |

| 1983 sfo | 16 | 3 18 6.0 0 | 70 840 12.0 8 |

| 1984 sfo | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 52 880 16.9 6 |

| 1985 sfo | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 54 705 13.1 10 |

| 1986 sfo | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 61 794 13.0 2 |

| 1987 sfo | 13 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 24 290 12.1 5 |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| TOTAL | 134 | 6 50 8.3 0 | 506 6750 13.3 48 |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

 

 

taylor:

 

+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| Rushing | Receiving |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| 1987 sfo | 12 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 9 151 16.8 0 |

| 1988 sfo | 12 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 14 325 23.2 2 |

| 1989 sfo | 15 | 1 6 6.0 0 | 60 1077 17.9 10 |

| 1990 sfo | 14 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 49 748 15.3 7 |

| 1991 sfo | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 64 1011 15.8 9 |

| 1992 sfo | 9 | 1 10 10.0 0 | 25 428 17.1 3 |

| 1993 sfo | 16 | 2 17 8.5 0 | 56 940 16.8 5 |

| 1994 sfo | 15 | 2 -2 -1.0 0 | 41 531 13.0 5 |

| 1995 sfo | 12 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 29 387 13.3 2 |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| TOTAL | 121 | 6 31 5.2 0 | 347 5598 16.1 43 |

 

 

Solomon:

 

+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| Rushing | Receiving |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| 1975 mia | 14 | 4 87 21.8 0 | 22 339 15.4 2 |

| 1976 mia | 10 | 4 60 15.0 1 | 27 453 16.8 2 |

| 1977 mia | 13 | 6 43 7.2 0 | 12 181 15.1 1 |

| 1978 sfo | 16 | 14 70 5.0 1 | 31 458 14.8 2 |

| 1979 sfo | 15 | 6 85 14.2 1 | 57 807 14.2 7 |

| 1980 sfo | 16 | 8 56 7.0 0 | 48 658 13.7 8 |

| 1981 sfo | 15 | 9 43 4.8 0 | 59 969 16.4 8 |

| 1982 sfo | 9 | 1 -4 -4.0 0 | 19 323 17.0 3 |

| 1983 sfo | 13 | 1 3 3.0 0 | 31 662 21.4 4 |

| 1984 sfo | 14 | 6 72 12.0 1 | 40 737 18.4 10 |

| 1985 sfo | 16 | 2 4 2.0 0 | 25 259 10.4 1 |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| TOTAL | 151 | 61 519 8.5 4 | 371 5846 15.8 48 |

 

 

 

montana played a miniscule amount in 79, then started to get some decent PT in 80.. and started in 81. kind of came in with clark, but really boosted solomon's stock imo. joe did not play in 91 and only 1 game in 92. so only got 2 good seasons from taylor. it's been said that joe had soooo much support, he didn't have rice, taylor, clark all at the same time at the peaks of their game. l

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok i was with you up until this.  :D

 

1981 was montana's first full year as a starter.  he was throwing to dwight clark (who went to the pro bowl that year), and freddie solomon, who had 969 yards and 9 TDs.  in 1982 thru 84, solomon and clark again, with clark in the pro bowl again in 82, and renaldo nehemiah thrown in as an interesting weapon as well.  in 1985, he had rice and clark.  starting in 1987, he had john taylor.

 

so for 6 seasons from 82 until 87, he had dwight clark, who went to two pro bowls during that time.

for 6 more seasons, from 85 until 90, he had the greatest WR of all time, rice, who of course went to the pro bowl every year

for 4 seasons, 87-90, he had john taylor, who went to two pro bowls

 

now i don't think elway EVER had a SINGLE pro bowl WR on his team, throughout his entire 16 year career.  rod smith didnt make the pro bowl until 2000, after elways was gone.  while montana was throwing to dwight clark, jerry rice, and john taylor...elway was throwing to steve watson, vance johnson, and ricky nattiel.  not total scrubs, but not even CLOSE to the talent montana was working with.  :D

 

1398016[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

What? None of the Three Amigos went to the pro bowl? :D

 

I'll give Elway the fact that until about '94, the best he had was Steve Watson - a QB shouldn't be able to complain about having Anthony Miller and Shannon Sharpe as his main targets.

 

I've always been thoroughly unimpressed by the "3 Amigos" - absolute creation of the two-week gap from the conference championship to the Super Bowl.

 

Of course, part of the whole "Elway's poor WRs" issue could very well have had something to do with Dan Reeves' offense; if you're going to pound for 3 yds and a cloud of dust and not unwrap the passing game until the 4th quarter, your WRs numbers probably aren't gonna be that great.

 

1398595[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Yup. As a long-time Denver fan, I suffered through many years of "3 yards and a cloud of dust" football - Dan Reeves football. This is probably why I appreciated Elway so much - he won a lot of games they should have lost.

 

he got kc to the afc championship with that crap!  gee, i guess if he had td he would have gotten some more rings there too.

 

pre-rice... it was pretty average. so much so that they need to throw to rb's (rb's being so-so with the ground game also necesitated passing to them).  winder made pro-bowl a couple of times...humphrey, green, davis, gary, anderson, portis..... a lot of ground support imo.

 

1398697[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

This is a great reminder to is that at least we can argue over who the greatest QB was. A similar thread on WRs would be a very short thread. :D

 

It's no coincidence that Montana and Young both excelled. Both were great talents in their own rights, but having the greatest WR to ever play the game working the field certainly doesn't hurt. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Montana, as the best QB ever, had the ability to make not just future HoF'ers head to the ProBowl, but other WR's head that way too..... while Elway, who is not the best QB ever, couldn't.

 

1398750[/snapback]

 

 

 

When all is said and done I agree with you on this one. Montana was an amazing QB who not only helped Jerry Rice become the most dominating WR ever--and vice versa--but was able to improvise and adapt to lesser talanted WR's making them produce higher stats. Some of those WR's most likely would not have produced those kind of stats with any other QB throwing to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's no coincidence that Montana and Young both excelled.  Both were great talents in their own rights, but having the greatest WR to ever play the game working the field certainly doesn't hurt.  :D 

 

1398816[/snapback]

 

 

 

I agree with you to an extent on that one, but it can also be argued that Young and Montana helped Rice become the great WR he is known as today. Although, that is not to take away from the work and effort Rice put into perfecting his performance on the field. I think when you put the greatest QB and play him with the greatest WR you get the powerhouse 49ers we saw play in the 80's and 90's. I consider myself lucky to have been around to see it because there will be a day when people just won't understand the true talant these players possessed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why does everyone think anthony miller was so great?  he was supposed to be a great player when the broncos brought him in as a free agent (after the raiders matched the offer they signed tim brown to :D ), but miller was a bit of a disappointment, really.  he had two pretty good seasons with the broncos and that was it. 

I can see how he'd appear to be a disappointment, but his two seasons were solid-to-darn good. Those two seasons were more productive than ANY the 3 Amigos had, so by the numbers, he was one of the better receiving threats Elway had for his early-to-mid career. I'm assuming he ranks as a disappointment because he went *poof* after a mere two years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information