Chavez Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 And Sid Luckman, still the all-time Bears passing king, behind all of them. God bless ya, Sid, you're a testimony to how football is meant to be played. 1246736[/snapback] Volume 12 in the "world's thinnest books" collection - Chicago Bear Quarterback Greats Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 Volume 12 in the "world's thinnest books" collection - Chicago Bear Quarterback Greats 1246747[/snapback] Yep, but was football meant to be played by fancy dans throwing the ball 400 yards a game? Or by men hewn from stone plowing through six inches of mud? I know which I prefer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 Yep, but was football meant to be played by fancy dans throwing the ball 400 yards a game? Or by men hewn from stone plowing through six inches of mud? I know which I prefer. 1246751[/snapback] You blend the old with the new - men hewn from stone throwing mud 400 yards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retrograde assault Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 I cannot trust the validity of any Top 10 list that lack the name Staubach. Particularly if it contains names of losers like Marino, Tarkenton, Fouts and Kelly. 1246325[/snapback] That aint no spit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bier Meister Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 I guess you would have had to watch them more closely over the years. The only "talents" on that list were Sterling Sharpe and Ahman Green. The reason you see the production from everyone else can be summed up in two words. BRETT FAVRE. He made the players around him better. He made them look good. He was a great point guard, distributing the ball to the right guy at the right time (which could be debated as he often put the ball into places another quarterback would have never considered trying to throw it). You have essentially given the best argument so far as to how great Favre was/is. 1246298[/snapback] not true...i watched them/him very closely (part of why i ranked him 6th ALL TIME). Stats does not equal talent. These guys did jack after leaving the Packers, that's my point. I know they had good stats with the Packers. But even then, did you watch Billy Schroeder out there? A few moments of looking good, but mainly #$%@ 1246583[/snapback] i would definitely agree that stats don't always equate to talent. the trend i saw was that there was a rise and fall of talented players on the team. by the time they let the players go they didn't have much left (as evidenced by their fade in gb). i saw schroeder make a lot of good plays.... plus, if you approached nfl qb's and asked how they would feel about a #2 or 3 guy putting up 900 yards per year and about 6 td's...i think a strong majority would appreciate that production. my responses earlier where reactionary to the comments made by swiss. i am trying to think about what favre had over: marino- had wr's but never a rb and by the time he had a decent defense, things were in poor shape. kind of push imo (or very close) elway had wrs and a good d. elway was a much better qb imo. montana didn't have rice until 85 (already won 2 sb's); didn't have a 1000 yd rusher until 84 (84, 85, 88, 89); only had 2 years with 2 1000 yd wr's..... i think he's very under-rated by quite a few of you. only attribite that favre had over joe was arm-strength. 49ers also did have very good to great defenses along the way (as did GB- and let's not forget the role of desmond howard in 96). the biggest hangup i have with favre was/is his decision making (impulsivenss). favre was a great qb, but imo doesn't crack the top 5, though close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 what a drooling homer. according to passer rating, kurt warner is the greatest QB of all time. and your butt-boy favre is behind jeff garcia (figuratively ). so let's set that one aside, shall we? 1246305[/snapback] When did I say that QB rating was the one and only measure of QBs? I just said Elway's rating should disqualify him as the "Best Ever". I mean, it's average at best. He had some truly BAD statistical years -- after he was out of the deer-in-headlights, young-QB stage. He never played great in a SuperBowl and he finally got dragged to a couple of championships by Terrell Davis. Elway certainly ranks as one of the greats. But he just can't be called the "Greatest of All Time" with a CAREER rating in the 70s. It's just silly to me. some things to consider for judging favre and elway head-to-head. elway's post-season record, 14-8. favre's, 11-9. and of course there's that one time they played head-to-head. and before you get all hung up on passer rating and such, remember elway played most of his career being coached by dan reeves. brett came up under holmgren (with mooch, gruden at all as assistants). 1246305[/snapback] Did you mean "et al."? Anyway... I'll agree that Favre's only-decent postseason record is probably the biggest blemish on his resume'. Still, I wouldn't say that Favre was the product of a bunch of great coaches. I mean, it certainly helped, but the main factor was Holmgren's direct relationship with Favre. Reid, Mooch, Gruden, Jauron, et al. haven't done much since leaving Favre in GB. In fact, Gruden is the only one with a HC's SB ring, and he did it with an outrageous Bucs defense. So, aside from their postseason records (including the SuperBowls), why do you rank Elway ahead of Favre? He's no longer ahead of Favre in any other meaningul career statistic that comes to mind. While calling me a "drooling homer", you forgot to state your case for the Best QB Ever, who coincidentally played in your home state. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady.hawke Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 (edited) Very Interesting Topic. I do not think anyone can assess this with stats alone, but think that the environment at any QB's time must be considered. Of course that is like Olympic judging of figure skating - and certainly subjective - I'll nevertheless try. Starr was a star before the Super Bowl existed and was the MVP of the first two. Obviously he performed to get that award - and helped to make the SB the extravanganza we all enjoy today, and put Green Bay on the map as the first NFL super power, and not from a very big city. Namath, coming from the low-life AFL at the time, guaranteed the Jets SB win. When that happened, in a nail-biter, there was new respect. Not to mention the incedible publicity the flamboyant Joe brought to the game. And most likely female viewers. Those facts should not be discounted. Favre's legacy will certainly include that he was a good guy! But I think the greats need a story. I'm not sure of the order, but Montana, Starr, Bradshaw and Namath would be at the top of my list because of information other than stats. Please add Elway. Offenses evolve over the years - you all know that. It's simply unfair to compare the contemporary QB stars to the retired ones. But it is fun! And what school did the first three SB MVP's go to? It's my favorite winning bar-bet question! Edited January 4, 2006 by Lady.hawke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 And what school did the first three SB MVP's go to? It's my favorite winning bar-bet question! 1247026[/snapback] Alabama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitem0nkey Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 And Sid Luckman, still the all-time Bears passing king, behind all of them. God bless ya, Sid, you're a testimony to how football is meant to be played. 1246736[/snapback] Luckman retired in 1950, and we the bears are still looking for his replacement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 Elway's postseason record previous to TD....8-7... 1246741[/snapback] well that's random. what's favre's postseason record post-holmgren? or post-sharpe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 (edited) So, aside from their postseason records (including the SuperBowls), why do you rank Elway ahead of Favre? He's no longer ahead of Favre in any other meaningul career statistic that comes to mind. 1247015[/snapback] how about WINS!! He never played great in a SuperBowl and he finally got dragged to a couple of championships by Terrell Davis. 18 of 29 for 336, 2 TDs (one rushing) and super bowl MVP isn't playing great? Edited January 4, 2006 by Azazello1313 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 All I know for sure is that Staubach won more Super Bowls without Dorsett than Elway won without TD or Favre won without Freeman, Holmgren or Sharpe. :oldrolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 id rank him between 7 and 21 or so Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 how about WINS!! 18 of 29 for 336, 2 TDs (one rushing) and super bowl MVP isn't playing great? 1247333[/snapback] According to you no. Staubach went 12-19-119-2-0 and Super Bowl MVP in Super Bowl VI and that doesn't qualify for Top 10 in yer own book. Try again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 According to you no. Staubach went 12-19-119-2-0 and Super Bowl MVP in Super Bowl VI and that doesn't qualify for Top 10 in yer own book. Try again. 1247350[/snapback] dumb ass. of course one game doesn't qualify for top 10 all-time. but if someone says "staubach never played well in a super bowl", well then you sure as chit have an effective retort there. just like i did. let me repeat something for you: Roger Staubach is not in the all-time top 50 in ANY major category. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 dumb ass. of course one game doesn't qualify for top 10 all-time. but if someone says "staubach never played well in a super bowl", well then you sure as chit have an effective retort there. just like i did. let me repeat something for you: Roger Staubach is not in the all-time top 50 in ANY major category. 1247376[/snapback] How many QBs have won two Super Bowls? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 How many QBs have won two Super Bowls? 1247378[/snapback] Starr Staubach Bob Griese Bradshaw Stabler Montana Simms McMahon (1 as a backup) Aikman Young (1 as a backup) Elway Brady Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 StarrStaubach Bob Griese Bradshaw Stabler Montana Simms McMahon (1 as a backup) Aikman Young (1 as a backup) Elway Brady 1247382[/snapback] So 10? Interesting unless winning Super Bowls is not considered a majory category. Of course I'm wondering what in the NFL is more major than winning Super Bowls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengal Mania Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 This thread reminds me of the Argument Sketch on Monty Python. (This is futile! No it isn't. Look, I came 'ere for an argument. No you didn't, you came here for an argument, etc) Whoever said throw him in the list of the top 10 or 15 and leave it at that was on the money. Everyone wants to look at Superbowls as the primary factor in ranking. It's definitely a factor, but not the only one. The quality of team around is HUGE. Montana was a great QB, so was Marino. Have them change teams, and Marino has a SB ring or two, Montana has a few less. Elway took teams to the Superbowl (where he admittedly sucked) completely on his back alone. Quick, name a WR on the early Denver Superbowl teams. Now, quick, name the WRs on Montana's SF teams. Stauback was a good QB, but so was Kenny Anderson. The Boys were an overall better team in so many ways, but I'm not buying that Staubach was LIGHT years ahead of Anderson. I'm also not gonna argue Anderson deserves to be in this conversation. I will only say that there are many less-talented QBs in the Hall of Fame than Kenny Anderson, if stats count for anything. Brett Favre was a great QB (isn't anymore), so were most of the other guys mentioned, give it a rest. Let's all be like Brett, and pop a "muscle relaxer" and leave it at that. (or was it "pain killers"?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 StarrStaubach Bob Griese Bradshaw Stabler Montana Simms McMahon (1 as a backup) Aikman Young (1 as a backup) Elway Brady 1247382[/snapback] staubach wouldn't even make the top 10 on that list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idahov Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 I think Aikman deserves some props. That guy had some nice years. Cut down in his prime..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 So let me get this straight. Starting and winning two Super Bowls is so commonplace for a QB that it isn't a major category? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengal Mania Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 I think Aikman deserves some props. That guy had some nice years. Cut down in his prime..... 1247400[/snapback] He is definitely in the top 10 list of gay QBs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 So 10? Interesting unless winning Super Bowls is not considered a majory category. Of course I'm wondering what in the NFL is more major than winning Super Bowls. 1247390[/snapback] There are a few more, but I listed those who started at least 1 of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 So 10? Interesting unless winning Super Bowls is not considered a majory category. Of course I'm wondering what in the NFL is more major than winning Super Bowls. 1247390[/snapback] so staubach is in the top 10 if you measure by super bowl victories only. bring in ANY other consideration and he sinks like a rock. even something like super bown winning % knocks him out (since he lost 2), puts him behind people like dilfer and hostetler. and you think the guy deserves consideration as one of the 10 greatest QBs ever? that is absolutely preposterous and illogical. 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.