Caveman_Nick Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 There are many QB comparisons that get thrown around. Some people like them and some are annoyed, and it's hard to get people to agree. Post your QB comparisons here for discussion. The obvious ones are: Brady - Montana Brady - Aikman Manning - Marino McNabb - Elway So what about: McNair? Green? Vick? Culpepper? Pennington? Delhomme? Or from the older days: Jim Kelley? Boomer Esiason? Steve Young? Phil Sims? Bradshaw? Can you draw lines between the generations? The Manning - Marino and Brady - Montana (Or for the people that don't want to give him that much credit, Aikman) comparisons are a bit over done. McNabb's play does remind me of Elway's, with just a little less accuracy on the ball. Plays on a good team, carries the offense, and as of yet just hasn't been given the skill player compliment to get the job done. He is evasive in the same fashion, and just as tough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Delhomme became famous for constantly taking a drive downfield for a last second TD or FG to win it. Which QB was famous for that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Brady - Bradshaw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 28, 2005 Author Share Posted January 28, 2005 Brady - Bradshaw 676356[/snapback] IHMO Brady is a much better passer than Bradshaw was, but the two do share the same kind of on the field grit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKF Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Vick - Randall Cunningham 676344[/snapback] I was just about to say that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilthorp Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Cade McNown to Peter Tom Willis Steve Stenstrum to Moses Moreno Steve Walsh to Jim Miller Jonathon Quinn to Will Furrer Shane Mattews to Danny Wuerfel Craig Krenzel to Henry Burris Ooops....sorry about that---were we comparing sucky Bears QB's to other sucky Bears QB's??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengal Mania Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Garcia - Namath. You see, they were both Playboys who hung around w/ Playmates.....ah, forget it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 (edited) McNair - Randall Cunningham Green - Bledsoe Vick - Plummer (good day), Kordell (bad day) Culpepper - Cunningham Pennington - Dan Fouts Delhomme - ditto McNabb - Steve Young/John Elway Or from the older days: Jim Kelley - Marino/Fouts Boomer Esiason - Bledsoe Steve Young - Fran Tarkenton Phil Sims - Aikman Bradshaw- Jim McMahon Edited January 28, 2005 by Bill Swerski Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 IHMO Brady is a much better passer than Bradshaw was, but the two do share the same kind of on the field grit. 676408[/snapback] I made the comparison based on the facts that (1) both have won numerous superbowl rings based largely on the strength of their defenses, and (2) I don't like either one of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vet Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 (edited) McNair = Archie Manning -tough, very good arm, poor supporting cast Green = Dan Pastorini - middle of the road, nondescript QB Vick = Randall Cunningham - before Randall learned how to play QB Culpepper = Steve Bartkowski - I don't know, it just popped into my head Pennington = Browning Nagle - the last great Jets QB, almost Delhomme = Ken Stabler - is Delhomme lefty? I know Snake was. Edited January 28, 2005 by Vet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted January 29, 2005 Share Posted January 29, 2005 I think the truly, truly great QBs aren't the "next" or "first" anything, they are who they are. My "next Boomer Esiason" thread was an (apparently subtle) rip on Boomer's dogging of Marino/Manning - y'know, because Boomer apparently had a better career than EITHER. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 29, 2005 Author Share Posted January 29, 2005 I think the truly, truly great QBs aren't the "next" or "first" anything, they are who they are. My "next Boomer Esiason" thread was an (apparently subtle) rip on Boomer's dogging of Marino/Manning - y'know, because Boomer apparently had a better career than EITHER. 678358[/snapback] Put some ice on that ego, there, Chavez. I started the thread because this discussion about comparisons comes up ALL THE TIME. I can see how you would mistake yourself for the inspiration though... But if you have a real opinion, please share... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted January 29, 2005 Share Posted January 29, 2005 That IS the opinion - Manning isn't the "next" Marino, he's Manning. His career might have a similar arc, but I think he's pretty well established that aside from being a pocket passer with playoff struggles, he's got a somewhat different game. They were BOTH predated by Dan Fouts - screw that, Jim Hart! - so we should really boot Marino out of the occasion and call every passer running a high-octane offense who doesn't win in the SB "The Next Jim Hart". (John Hadl might fit as well) Same thing with Brady/Montana - let's stop the talk right friggin' now; first things first, Montana was the raison d'etre of the 9er first SB win (because it sure as hell wasn't Earl Cooper), Brady was just ridin' shotgun on the Belicheck Express. Pats "Team D" should've been the MVP of that SB. And in most/many cases you're at best shoe-horning the guy into the archetype. Is Favre "the next Bradshaw"? They've got plenty of similar characteristics, but their careers have plenty of DISsimilarities as well. It's certainly fine to say Brady/Manning REMIND you of Montana/Marino in whatever quality, but for every quality they share, there's going to be a quality they differ in. These comparisons are bogus for the most part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 29, 2005 Author Share Posted January 29, 2005 That IS the opinion - Manning isn't the "next" Marino, he's Manning. His career might have a similar arc, but I think he's pretty well established that aside from being a pocket passer with playoff struggles, he's got a somewhat different game. They were BOTH predated by Dan Fouts - screw that, Jim Hart! - so we should really boot Marino out of the occasion and call every passer running a high-octane offense who doesn't win in the SB "The Next Jim Hart". (John Hadl might fit as well) Same thing with Brady/Montana - let's stop the talk right friggin' now; first things first, Montana was the raison d'etre of the 9er first SB win (because it sure as hell wasn't Earl Cooper), Brady was just ridin' shotgun on the Belicheck Express. Pats "Team D" should've been the MVP of that SB. And in most/many cases you're at best shoe-horning the guy into the archetype. Is Favre "the next Bradshaw"? They've got plenty of similar characteristics, but their careers have plenty of DISsimilarities as well. It's certainly fine to say Brady/Manning REMIND you of Montana/Marino in whatever quality, but for every quality they share, there's going to be a quality they differ in. These comparisons are bogus for the most part. 678377[/snapback] You playin' the role of Fun Police today? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted January 29, 2005 Share Posted January 29, 2005 (edited) You playin' the role of Fun Police today? 678381[/snapback] "You are the f*cking FUN POLICE! Back off, fun pig! You wanna fun-f*cking-arrest me? You better get a fun-f*cking-warrant! Otherwise, stay outta my... fun-f*cking-face!" Edited January 29, 2005 by Chavez Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted January 29, 2005 Share Posted January 29, 2005 Ladies and Gentlemen, welcome to David M. Dorey's The Huddle. You have the right to fun. If you choose not to have fun, fun will be provided for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 29, 2005 Author Share Posted January 29, 2005 Ladies and Gentlemen, welcome to David M. Dorey's The Huddle. You have the right to fun. If you choose not to have fun, fun will be provided for you. 678385[/snapback] Should we ask Dirty Sanchez if he is available for the role of Fun Enforcement? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted January 29, 2005 Share Posted January 29, 2005 Same thing with Brady/Montana - let's stop the talk right friggin' now; first things first, Montana was the raison d'etre of the 9er first SB win (because it sure as hell wasn't Earl Cooper), Brady was just ridin' shotgun on the Belicheck Express. Pats "Team D" should've been the MVP of that SB. 678377[/snapback] Agreed that Montana was a much more effective QB than Brady in their first years. Brady threw one TD pass in the '01 playoffs and somehow became SB 36 MVP. That said, he developed into a very good QB shortly after and certainly did deserve the SB 38 MVP award. If you'll recall, Montana's Super Bowl teams also had pretty *** good defenses (2nd, 1st, 8th, and 3rd in the league in '81, '84, '88, and '89, respectively). Brady's SB teams had similar defensive talent (8th, 1st, and 2nd in the league). I'm curious to see if Brady can take his team to The Show with, say, the 15th-ranked defense in the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 29, 2005 Author Share Posted January 29, 2005 Agreed that Montana was a much more effective QB than Brady in their first years. Brady threw one TD pass in the '01 playoffs and somehow became SB 36 MVP. That said, he developed into a very good QB shortly after and certainly did deserve the SB 38 MVP award. If you'll recall, Montana's Super Bowl teams also had pretty *** good defenses (2nd, 1st, 8th, and 3rd in the league in '81, '84, '88, and '89, respectively). Brady's SB teams had similar defensive talent (8th, 1st, and 2nd in the league). I'm curious to see if Brady can take his team to The Show with, say, the 15th-ranked defense in the league. 678417[/snapback] Does effective QB == better passer? I think that the debate surrounding Brady, and particularly the arguments from his supporters center around the concept that being an effective QB does not always mean being the best passer. It means running the offense, calling the plays, and executing the plays. It means running a good huddle, having a good report with your players, and being a good communicator. It means adjusting what needs to be adjusted on the field. It means understanding your own offense as well as understanding opposing defenses and what will be effective in the situation at hand. I have a hard time agreeing that being a 'great' or 'effective' quarterback equated to throwing the winning TD pass. Passing is an important component of the job , but there is so much more to it than that. It was the Weakest part of Tom Brady's game in 2001 as a QB, but it is also something he has improved on massively. Accuracy and arm strength are much, much easier to improve than the mental and emotional aspects of the game. It is the latter part that earns Brady his comparisons with Montana, not a signature play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted January 29, 2005 Share Posted January 29, 2005 It means calling the plays678439[/snapback] Brady calls the plays? I thought that Weiss did and that Belichick gives him relatively little discretion in terms of calling audibles? Agreed that being the best passer does not necessarily make one the best QB. Then again, being at least a "very good" passer is typically a requirement (e.g., Michael Vick). And, FWIW, nobody's saying that Brady isn't a "very good" passer. The point of my last post was that guys like Brady and Montana have been aided significantly by consistently good defenses. It's a lot easier to win championships when your teammates on the other side of the ball can force turnover and keep you from playing from behind. Guys like Marino and Fouts, who were both great passers, didn't have that luxury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 29, 2005 Author Share Posted January 29, 2005 Brady calls the plays? I thought that Weiss did and that Belichick gives him relatively little discretion in terms of calling audibles? Agreed that being the best passer does not necessarily make one the best QB. Then again, being at least a "very good" passer is typically a requirement (e.g., Michael Vick). And, FWIW, nobody's saying that Brady isn't a "very good" passer. The point of my last post was that guys like Brady and Montana have been aided significantly by consistently good defenses. It's a lot easier to win championships when your teammates on the other side of the ball can force turnover and keep you from playing from behind. Guys like Marino and Fouts, who were both great passers, didn't have that luxury. 678447[/snapback] I am saying Brady wasn't a very good passer in '01, and that he still did a great job. He has gotten better, and I would rate him as a capable NFL thrower. He's not a spectaculaer thrower, but he does occasionally make a great throw. In terms of calling the plays, of course I was referring to calling audibles at the line. Belichick and Weis do not give him Manning-like freedom, but he does audible and check down at the line. Think about the Givens TD in the AFC CHampionship game. He has the freedom to make adjustments as he sees fit. Just because he isn't doing it madcap doesn't mean he's not involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted January 29, 2005 Share Posted January 29, 2005 I am saying Brady wasn't a very good passer in '01, and that he still did a great job. He has gotten better, and I would rate him as a capable NFL thrower. He's not a spectaculaer thrower, but he does occasionally make a great throw. 678460[/snapback] Well, that depends on how you define "great job." If you mean "great job of not turning the ball over" or "great job for a guy with minimal NFL playing time," I agree. That said, Brady did a "great job" in last year's Super Bowl by anyone's definition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.