Hat Trick Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 C'mon, you certainly didn't expect that !!! You've been bragging that defense up non-stop. Yup, sure did....the defense is much improved.....but they didn't come to play at all....nobody on either side of the ball did. I still like what the defense is doing...it was a trap game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 (edited) OMG, a response!!!!! Not sure where the man-love for Dilfer comes from, but that's OK. Dilfer QBed a team without much talent at WR, but the running game and defense were outstanding. His team was BUILT for him to be nothing more than what he was. He didn't produce much and he didn't have to, and he did exactly what the Ravens need him to in order to win. Well, let's just look at the Ds & running games that each guy played with: PIT running game & Ds for Roethlisberger: 2004 D #1 in NFL Rushing O #2 in NFL 2005 D #4 in NFL Rushing O #5 in NFL ---------------------------------------------------- TB & BAL running game & D during Dilfer’s time: 1995 D #25 in NFL Rushing O #19 in NFL 1996 D #9 in NFL Rushing O #22 in NFL 1997 D #3 in NFL Rushing O #11 in NFL 1998 D #2 in NFL Rushing O #4 in NFL 1999 D #3 in NFL Rushing O #15 in NFL 2000 D #1 in NFL Rushing O #5 in NFL Roethlisberger played with Ds & running games easily comparable or exceeding that of what Dilfer had, and Roethlisberger had studs for wideouts. Yet despite that, as I pointed out before, despite the absolute crap at WR and comparable or worse Ds & running games, Dilfer became an all-pro QB and also won a Super Bowl, just like Big Ben has. Put Dilfer on those PIT teams, and he would have put up at least as good of numbers as Roethlisberger. LOFL @ Roethlisberger doing more for the team than Dilfer. His PIT teams have been loaded with oustanding vets. Roethlisberger had to do little besides not turn the ball over. Dilfer had to squeeze passing numbers out of literally nothing to balance the offense on the teams he played for. And please stop with the "man-love" crap. That's not only the epitome of irony when you have Roethlisberger's semen running down your chin, but also implies that I have some kind of urge to masturbate relentlessly when I am thinking about Dilfer, as you apparently do with Roethlisberger. I'm simply pointing out facts that you apparently have no knowledge of when you make your ridiculous arguments and then have the cajones to throw others under the bus when they have the temerity to rightfully disagree with you. And BTW - I like what Roethlisberger does as a QB and recognize that he may someday grow to be a superb NFL QB. But he ain't there yet, and his bad personal decisions have set him & consequently his team back badly this year. That's the antithesis of being a leader & a great NFL QB. Edited October 18, 2006 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steelers4Life Posted October 18, 2006 Author Share Posted October 18, 2006 Roethlisberger played with Ds & running games easily comparable or exceeding that of what Dilfer had, and Roethlisberger had studs for wideouts. Yet despite that, as I pointed out before, despite the absolute crap at WR and comparable or worse Ds & running games, Dilfer became an all-pro QB and also won a Super Bowl, just like Big Ben has. Put Dilfer on those PIT teams, and he would have put up at least as good of numbers as Roethlisberger. LOFL @ Roethlisberger doing more for the team than Dilfer. His PIT teams have been loaded with oustanding vets. Roethlisberger had to do little besides not turn the ball over. Dilfer had to squeeze passing numbers out of literally nothing to balance the offense on the teams he played for. And please stop with the "man-love" crap. That's not only the epitome of irony when you have Roethlisberger's semen running down your chin, but also implies that I have some kind of urge to masturbate relentlessly when I am thinking about Dilfer, as you apparently do with Roethlisberger. I'm simply pointing out facts that you apparently have no knowledge of when you make your ridiculous arguments and then have the cajones to throw others under the bus when they have the temerity to rightfully disagree with you. And BTW - I like what Roethlisberger does as a QB and recognize that he may someday grow to be a superb NFL QB. But he ain't there yet, and his bad personal decisions have set him & consequently his team back badly this year. That's the antithesis of being a leader & a great NFL QB. First, people only compare Ben to Dilfer on the Ravens, and the Ravens defense in 2000 was among the best in the history of the game. The running game between Holmes and Lewis was dominant, too. Roethlisberger did more for the Steelers' to win the Super Bowl than Dilfer did by FAR, and the numbers bear that out clearly. CLEARLY. The Ravens didn't have great WRs, and that's true, but Dilfer didn't have to do anything because of it. And he really didn't do much - it's not like his arm balanced out the Ravens' offense. His passing numbers sucked in every respect other than the fact that he didn't throw INTs. It doesn't matter if the reason is that Ben had better WRs (which I don't feel is the entire reason, either). The fact is that Ben had a lot more of an impact on the Steelers winning than Dilfer did on the Ravens winning. You haven't pointed out anything that I didn't already know, and I don't throw anyone under the bus for disagreeing. It's lame, however, when people have nothing to add to a discussion other than a pointless one-liner or insult. At least you had an opinion and you had reasons for it. My ridiculous arguments are supported by statistical evidence on both players, including my comparison to Aikman. What I said from the get-go is that Roethlisberger is more on the Aikman track than the Dilfer track after 2 years in the league. The numbers and the talent level of their supporting cast support that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 (edited) Well, let's just look at the Ds & running games that each guy played with: PIT running game & Ds for Roethlisberger: 2004 D #1 in NFL Rushing O #2 in NFL 2005 D #4 in NFL Rushing O #5 in NFL ---------------------------------------------------- TB & BAL running game & D during Dilfer’s time: 1995 D #25 in NFL Rushing O #19 in NFL 1996 D #9 in NFL Rushing O #22 in NFL 1997 D #3 in NFL Rushing O #11 in NFL 1998 D #2 in NFL Rushing O #4 in NFL 1999 D #3 in NFL Rushing O #15 in NFL 2000 D #1 in NFL Rushing O #5 in NFL Roethlisberger played with Ds & running games easily comparable or exceeding that of what Dilfer had, and Roethlisberger had studs for wideouts. Yet despite that, as I pointed out before, despite the absolute crap at WR and comparable or worse Ds & running games, Dilfer became an all-pro QB and also won a Super Bowl, just like Big Ben has. Put Dilfer on those PIT teams, and he would have put up at least as good of numbers as Roethlisberger. LOFL @ Roethlisberger doing more for the team than Dilfer. His PIT teams have been loaded with oustanding vets. Roethlisberger had to do little besides not turn the ball over. Dilfer had to squeeze passing numbers out of literally nothing to balance the offense on the teams he played for. And please stop with the "man-love" crap. That's not only the epitome of irony when you have Roethlisberger's semen running down your chin, but also implies that I have some kind of urge to masturbate relentlessly when I am thinking about Dilfer, as you apparently do with Roethlisberger. I'm simply pointing out facts that you apparently have no knowledge of when you make your ridiculous arguments and then have the cajones to throw others under the bus when they have the temerity to rightfully disagree with you. And BTW - I like what Roethlisberger does as a QB and recognize that he may someday grow to be a superb NFL QB. But he ain't there yet, and his bad personal decisions have set him & consequently his team back badly this year. That's the antithesis of being a leader & a great NFL QB. I absolutely refuse to respond to a thread that uses the words temerity and antithesis............ Wait.... Homer: Hmm. I wonder why he's so eager to go to the garage? Moe: The "garage"? Hey fellas, the "garage"! Well, ooh la di da, Mr. French Man. Homer: Well what do you call it? Moe: A car hole! Edited October 18, 2006 by Menudo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 lets sum this up shall we... Aikman>Big Ben>Dilfer happy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hat Trick Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 lets sum this up shall we... Aikman>Big Ben>Dilfer happy? No it's Aikman=<Big Ben>Dilfer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steelers4Life Posted October 18, 2006 Author Share Posted October 18, 2006 No it's Aikman=<Big Ben>Dilfer No, only a fool would say Ben's better than Aikman. I never said that. I said Ben's season statistically compares favorably to all of Aikman's seasons but one, but Aikman had a long, productive, and successful career that Ben can only dream of at this point. If Ben continues putting up the numbers and wins like he has, time will judge him in comparison to guys like Aikman, but that's a long way off. I said Ben has started out his career being the same TYPE of QB as Aikman and has had similar success doing it over 2 seasons. I've also said he did a lot more for the Steelers in 2005 than Dilfer did for the Ravens in 2000, and the numbers in support of that are clear. It's been pointed out that Dilfer did less with less talent at WR, and I agree with that. Dilfer had very little talent at WR to work with, but that's likely why he was never asked to do much. I want to make sure it's clear that I'm not saying Ben's better than Aikman was. When looking for a comparison, the numbers and situations compare much more accurately to Aikman than Dilfer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 I absolutely refuse to respond to a thread that uses the words temerity and antithesis............ Wait.... Homer: Hmm. I wonder why he's so eager to go to the garage? Moe: The "garage"? Hey fellas, the "garage"! Well, ooh la di da, Mr. French Man. Homer: Well what do you call it? Moe: A car hole! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 For reasons I have never fully understood, any team that wins the superbowl has their fans get surprisingly sensitive the next year when anyone dares to criticize or poke fun at them. I mean they should be way above that coming off a championship but for some reason many fans just become rather defensive the next year which only fans the flames. Go figure. I'd say that the way the Steelers won that Superbowl is a little different and has inspired more understandable defensiveness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 First, people only compare Ben to Dilfer on the Ravens, and the Ravens defense in 2000 was among the best in the history of the game. The running game between Holmes and Lewis was dominant, too. Roethlisberger did more for the Steelers' to win the Super Bowl than Dilfer did by FAR, and the numbers bear that out clearly. CLEARLY. The Ravens didn't have great WRs, and that's true, but Dilfer didn't have to do anything because of it. And he really didn't do much - it's not like his arm balanced out the Ravens' offense. His passing numbers sucked in every respect other than the fact that he didn't throw INTs. It doesn't matter if the reason is that Ben had better WRs (which I don't feel is the entire reason, either). The fact is that Ben had a lot more of an impact on the Steelers winning than Dilfer did on the Ravens winning. You haven't pointed out anything that I didn't already know, and I don't throw anyone under the bus for disagreeing. It's lame, however, when people have nothing to add to a discussion other than a pointless one-liner or insult. At least you had an opinion and you had reasons for it. My ridiculous arguments are supported by statistical evidence on both players, including my comparison to Aikman. What I said from the get-go is that Roethlisberger is more on the Aikman track than the Dilfer track after 2 years in the league. The numbers and the talent level of their supporting cast support that. I wish you would stop being so damn reasonable and take the tantalizing bait that I'm plainly dangling in front of you to piss you off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conehead116 Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 After reading this entire thread and acting as an unbiased observer, I offer a judgement to your initial question, "Can this stop now?". Simply put, not until more data is aquired. You have not presented enough evidence to overule any further discussion of the comparison of Rothlesberger to Dilfer. Bronco Billy has presented compelling arguements to support the comparison. Your only response to him has been that the numbers support your case, but the general consensis is that this, at this point, is not true. I appreciate your dedication to your QB, but the comparison is still valid at this point. What the future holds we shall all see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 Did I mention that Batch has the best record of any QB in Pitt history? Oh I did?.....nevermind then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
policyvote Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 (edited) I'm obviously quite late to the party. However, I think the problem is that history has chosen to remember the Trent Dilfer of 2000 as a "game manager" and a "great leader", when in fact he was neither of those things. He was, in fact, just plain bad. The running game and defense of the 2000 Ravens were so dominant that it simply didn't matter that Dilfer sucked out loud. The 2000 Ravens went FIVE STRAIGHT GAMES without an offensive touchdown that year; people seem to forget that. I should know, I had Quadry Ismail that year and routinely smacked my forehead at just how incredibly bad Dilfer was. I clearly remember watching a game during the TD-less stretch where it was man coverage, and the guy on Quadry fell down. The Missile, wide-stinkin'-open on the sideline. Nobody around, twenty yards downfield. All Dilfer has to do is get the ball to him, and it's a guaranteed TD. Dilfer rears back, and lets one fly . . . a spiralless, wobbling duck that falls five yards short and nearly ten yards out of bounds. I practically threw my TV. Peace policy Edited October 18, 2006 by policyvote Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 (edited) I'm obviously quite late to the party. However, I think the problem is that history has chosen to remember the Trent Dilfer of 2000 as a "game manager" and a "great leader", when in fact he was neither of those things. He was, in fact, just plain bad. The running game and defense of the 2000 Ravens were so dominant that it simply didn't matter that Dilfer sucked out loud. The 2000 Ravens went FIVE STRAIGHT GAMES without an offensive touchdown that year; people seem to forget that. I should know, I had Quadry Ismail that year and routinely smacked my forehead at just how incredibly bad Dilfer was. I clearly remember watching a game during the TD-less stretch where it was man coverage, and the guy on Quadry fell down. The Missile, wide-stinkin'-open on the sideline. Nobody around, twenty yards downfield. All Dilfer has to do is get the ball to him, and it's a guaranteed TD. Dilfer rears back, and lets one fly . . . a spiralless, wobbling duck that falls five yards short and nearly ten yards out of bounds. I practically threw my TV. Peace policy You know, for having such a great memory of the 2000 Ravens, it’s amazing that you forgot that the QB during the predominance of that 5 game streak with 0 offensive TDs was Tony Banks - not Trent Dilfer. Yep, you failed to recall that Banks started the first 4 games of that 5 games streak, with Billick finally getting so fed up that he pulled Banks in the second half of the 4th game of the streak & inserted Dilfer (week 8). After not getting an offensive TD in week 9 (the first week that Dilfer started, against a dominant PIT D) that Dilfer then went on a 5 games streak where he threw for at least 2 TDs a game and BAL averaged 28 pts/game over the remainder of the season and then averaged 24 pts/game in the playoffs. It should also be noted that BAL in the regular season, when Dilfer was starting, averaged more points than the season average of the team that lead the NFL in scoring over the 2000 regular season - the STL Rams - by 0.2 pts/game. Sorry to interrupt. Now, you were saying how clearly you remembered that year... Edited October 18, 2006 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 You know, for having such a great memory of the 2000 Ravens, it’s amazing that you forgot that the QB during the predominance of that 5 game streak with 0 offensive TDs was Tony Banks - not Trent Dilfer. Yep. they went to Dilfer and the offense picked up. was not great mind you but how good could it have been with the line and weapons that Dilfer had. Dilfer was not a great QB. but he was solid. and that is all it takes if you have a great defense and adequate running game. I think that is where the Big Ben comparisons come from as the Steelers have done it the same way since Big Ben has been there. If I was gonna try and compare Big Ben with a QB I have watched play it would be Brad Johnson. Still early in Big Bens career and I won't go as far as saying Big Ben is as good as Johnson has been. but in another 2 or 3 years we will have a better idea of what kind of QB Big Ben is. Right now we have only seen him play in great circumstances. it is how you handle yourself when your team is not that good that defines you. at least IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 Without looking at any stats, I would be more accurate to compare Ben to Brad Johnson than it would be to compare him to Dilfer. He is a more than servicable QB, but far from a stud. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Copeman Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 People think they can compare players by their stats from different years? Disregarding what teams are in their division, how good they are, their offensive or defensive rankings of that year even though they played all different teams? Wow. Good luck with that. Anyone that has seen Ben play in more than a couple games knows he is the real deal. He stinks as a fantasy player, but give him to me any day to lead a team to the SB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primetime9287 Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 You know, for having such a great memory of the 2000 Ravens, it’s amazing that you forgot that the QB during the predominance of that 5 game streak with 0 offensive TDs was Tony Banks - not Trent Dilfer. Yep, you failed to recall that Banks started the first 4 games of that 5 games streak, with Billick finally getting so fed up that he pulled Banks in the second half of the 4th game of the streak & inserted Dilfer (week 8). After not getting an offensive TD in week 9 (the first week that Dilfer started, against a dominant PIT D) that Dilfer then went on a 5 games streak where he threw for at least 2 TDs a game and BAL averaged 28 pts/game over the remainder of the season and then averaged 24 pts/game in the playoffs. It should also be noted that BAL in the regular season, when Dilfer was starting, averaged more points than the season average of the team that lead the NFL in scoring over the 2000 regular season - the STL Rams - by 0.2 pts/game. Sorry to interrupt. Now, you were saying how clearly you remembered that year... Wow, I just realized that if I ever argue with my boy Bronco Billy, I better get all my facts straight. I'm gonna stick around to see policy's apology.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 Wow, I just realized that if I ever argue with my boy Bronco Billy, I better get all my facts straight. I'm gonna stick around to see policy's apology.... Let's not make any mistakes, Dilfer wasn't a great QB. Banks actually averaged more yds passing per game that year than Dilfer, and he also averaged less INTs/game than Dilfer. But the reason Banks' numbers look good is because he had a huge week 2 game where he threw for 262 yds & 5 TDs. Other than that, the offense went completely stagnant when Banks was in. In the second game Dilfer started, he threw for 244 yds & 3 TDs, and then the next 4 games he threw for at least 2 TDs in all 4 games and 240+ yds in 2 of them. What he did was give BAL a legit passing game that had to be respected, whereas Banks didn't. With the D that BAL had giving the O great field position, and the running game moving the chains, the addition of a solid but not spectacular passing game allowed BAL's O to just skyrocket. Dilfer was also a calming influence & didn't lose his cool at all. Banks was a wildly erractic QB. That Dilfer had become a pro-Bowl QB with a TB passing offense that absolutely had no real receiving talent was remarkable and really helped Dilfer develop as a solid leader who learned to take what the other team's D gave him. He learned how to run an offense efficiently, even if he wasn't capable of putting up huge numbers. That's what he brought to the table in BAL. The guy wasn't a world beater, but he was solid, and he was a leader. Roethlisberger could do exactly that with his career, and there's nothing wrong with that. Marino put up the standard of the industry in NFL history for passing stats, and Favre isn't far behind. Marino won 0 SBs, and Favre has won 1. There is something to be said for being a solid leader and a merely capable passer, and sometimes that's all a QB needs to be a winner. Right now, that's the path Roethlisberger seems to be headed down - well, at least it was until this past summer. Now the jury is out again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovers Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 You know, for having such a great memory of the 2000 Ravens, it’s amazing that you forgot that the QB during the predominance of that 5 game streak with 0 offensive TDs was Tony Banks - not Trent Dilfer. Yep, you failed to recall that Banks started the first 4 games of that 5 games streak, with Billick finally getting so fed up that he pulled Banks in the second half of the 4th game of the streak & inserted Dilfer (week 8). After not getting an offensive TD in week 9 (the first week that Dilfer started, against a dominant PIT D) that Dilfer then went on a 5 games streak where he threw for at least 2 TDs a game and BAL averaged 28 pts/game over the remainder of the season and then averaged 24 pts/game in the playoffs. It should also be noted that BAL in the regular season, when Dilfer was starting, averaged more points than the season average of the team that lead the NFL in scoring over the 2000 regular season - the STL Rams - by 0.2 pts/game. Sorry to interrupt. Now, you were saying how clearly you remembered that year... Bronco Billy, your next mission, should you choose to accept it, is to tell Avernus how over rated Barry Sanders was (is) . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skippy Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 (edited) And BTW - I like what Roethlisberger does as a QB and recognize that he may someday grow to be a superb NFL QB. But he ain't there yet, and his bad personal decisions have set him & consequently his team back badly this year. That's the antithesis of being a leader & a great NFL QB. I really do hate to agree with Pony boy but the truth is that this is a pretty accurate assesment. He, Ben, played pretty darn bad in the begging of this year. He has, however, showed plenty to suggest that he is a pretty darn good QB. However, it will take time before the final verdict is in on him. Anyone that has seen Ben play in more than a couple games knows he is the real deal. He stinks as a fantasy player, but give him to me any day to lead a team to the SB. We must be blind ass homers because I 100% agree with this. He sure did have his head in his ass three games this year and I was worried, (still a little), that maybe some head trama screwed him up but after last week I am starting to relax a little. Edited October 18, 2006 by Skippy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steelers4Life Posted October 18, 2006 Author Share Posted October 18, 2006 The guy wasn't a world beater, but he was solid, and he was a leader. Roethlisberger could do exactly that with his career, and there's nothing wrong with that. Marino put up the standard of the industry in NFL history for passing stats, and Favre isn't far behind. Marino won 0 SBs, and Favre has won 1. There is something to be said for being a solid leader and a merely capable passer, and sometimes that's all a QB needs to be a winner. Right now, that's the path Roethlisberger seems to be headed down - well, at least it was until this past summer. Now the jury is out again. Hey man, thanks for at least having opinions and backing them up with something other than sarcasm. My point, and it's one that hasn't really been addressed, is that Roethlisberger is on a path much different than Dilfer was, and the only similarity is that they both won Super Bowls. I understand that Dilfer's weapons weren't as good at WR on the 2000 Ravens, but that only contributes to the fact that Ben was asked to do and DID much more for the 2005 Steelers than Dilfer did. From a strictly numbers standpoint, I've shown the disparity in how productive they were. And if you want to go back to Dilfer's TB days, that's fine too. Ben had more TDs per game, fewer INTs per game, more yards per game, and a MUCH higher yards per attempt than any season in Dilfer's entire career. Not to mention the fact that even in conservative, ball control offenses, Dilfer never even eclipsed a 60% completion percentage in any season of his career. That's a far cry from Ben the past 2 years, also. Ben accounted for 20 TDs in 12 regular season games last season (and 9 more in 4 playoff games). In Dilfer's best year, he accounted for 23 in 16 games for TB and had only 1 other year even close to that. And Ben is only 24. If people think he's a game-manager, hey, people will think that no matter what evidence there is to the contrary. But a comparison to Dilfer in terms of what he was asked to do and what he did on a Super Bowl winning team is insulting to Roethlisberger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
policyvote Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 You know, for having such a great memory of the 2000 Ravens, it’s amazing that you forgot that the QB during the predominance of that 5 game streak with 0 offensive TDs was Tony Banks - not Trent Dilfer. Yep, you failed to recall that Banks started the first 4 games of that 5 games streak, with Billick finally getting so fed up that he pulled Banks in the second half of the 4th game of the streak & inserted Dilfer (week 8). After not getting an offensive TD in week 9 (the first week that Dilfer started, against a dominant PIT D) that Dilfer then went on a 5 games streak where he threw for at least 2 TDs a game and BAL averaged 28 pts/game over the remainder of the season and then averaged 24 pts/game in the playoffs. It should also be noted that BAL in the regular season, when Dilfer was starting, averaged more points than the season average of the team that lead the NFL in scoring over the 2000 regular season - the STL Rams - by 0.2 pts/game. Sorry to interrupt. Now, you were saying how clearly you remembered that year... Forgot about the Banks thing. Fair enough. Dilfer still is no great shakes, though. I would like to point to his super-awesome career passer rating of 71.3, including a magnificent 76.6 in 2000, the year where, according to you, he took over the reins of the worst offensive team in the league, and singlehandedly transformed them into an offensive juggernaut, carving his name into the record books forevermore as the all-time greatest QB ever to win a Super Bowl and be given a ticket on the next bus out of town. Peace policy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 Forgot about the Banks thing. Fair enough. Dilfer still is no great shakes, though. I would like to point to his super-awesome career passer rating of 71.3, including a magnificent 76.6 in 2000, the year where, according to you, he took over the reins of the worst offensive team in the league, and singlehandedly transformed them into an offensive juggernaut, carving his name into the record books forevermore as the all-time greatest QB ever to win a Super Bowl and be given a ticket on the next bus out of town. Peace policy You should have kept reading...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rellen13 Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 My point, and it's one that hasn't really been addressed, is that Roethlisberger is on a path much different than Dilfer was, and the only similarity is that they both won Super Bowls. I understand that Dilfer's weapons weren't as good at WR on the 2000 Ravens, but that only contributes to the fact that Ben was asked to do and DID much more for the 2005 Steelers than Dilfer did. This is the part of your arguement that I really don't understand. Are you trying to say that because Roethlisberger had better WR's than Dilfer, it was harder to put up better stats than him? 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.