From my comments above, Marino only really had the pieces in place one time(in terms of a team capable of winning a Super Bowl), super defense, excellent WR's, home field advantage... And in that one time, he brought them to the Super Bowl. No, they didn't win it. They lost to a Superior team, the team of the decade. Miami's defense couldn't stop them, they had to play catch up, and interceptions come in bunches when playing catch up.
Bradshaw had those pieces in place all the time, and in to such a higher degree it is silly to compare. When Bradshaw was only missing the top flight defense from his parts, he was only able to lead them to a 34-30 record.
When Bradshaw had to play teams on the road in the playoffs, he was 2-3, and he performed as good as Rex Grossman in four of those five games.
Marino is superior to Bradshaw. The notion that Bradshaw was a good fit for that team may be true, but that doesn't elevate him better than somebody else simply because he happened to be a good fit in that one particular situation. I dont' see how any QB would have struggled winning games in the height of the Steeler dynasty. Heck, Jeff George would have been a good fit for that team too, he threw a good deep ball as well. Even their backup scrub led them to 6-0 when he was QB.
Saberman - Just to be clear I am not saying that Bradshaw is better than Marino. Marino is a top 5 QB of all-time and Bradshaw would struggle to make most people's top 10 or top 15 list.
Bradshaw was a perfect fit for the Steelers. His ability to throw the deep ball was crucial to their success and a huge factor in their last two Super Bowl triumphs.
For the Steelers of the 70's he would be my choice to be the QB ahead of Marino. I do not think Dan would have been satisfied or capable of handing the ball off 30-40 times a game and letting his defense win the game. At least he was not when that is what Jimmy Johnson wanted to do.
Marino had two chances 1984 AND 1985. The got smoked by New England in the AFC Championship game in 1985 as a heavy favourite depriving fans of a chance to see the 85 Bears in a rematch with the Fish.
Bradshaw had those pieces in place all the time, and in to such a higher degree it is silly to compare. When Bradshaw was only missing the top flight defense from his parts, he was only able to lead them to a 34-30 record.
Yep. Even when Bradshaw didnt have good defenses, he STILL HAD A WINNING RECORD. Even though the offense got old in the 80's.
Marino is superior to Bradshaw. >>
In what world? I base a great hall of fame qb on how they performed during the regular season combined with how well they played in post-season. Last i checked, its not called the regular season hall of fame.
Marino played on superior teams and 10 playoff teams and choked everytime. Marino was great and a top 10 qb of all time. But there are easily 5-6 qb's that were better than him.
None of the QB's that you so passionately speak about can measure up in greatness [based upon statistics; and based upon nothing other than viewing his performances during his 16 year career and realizing, based upon your gut instinct alone] of John Elway.
He is the best.
Period.
End of discussion ( If you must post again to this thread, do so only to acknowledge that you agree with me).
All of the rest are just fighting over second place
That is my extremely biased opinion and I am sticking to it
Bradshaw was a perfect fit for the Steelers. His ability to throw the deep ball was crucial to their success and a huge factor in their last two Super Bowl triumphs.
YEP!!
For the Steelers of the 70's he would be my choice to be the QB ahead of Marino.
A NO BRAINER. THE COWBOYS OF THE 70'S WOULDVE BEATEN THEM FOR SURE WITH MARINO AT THE HELM.
Marino had two chances 1984 AND 1985. The got smoked by New England in the AFC Championship game in 1985 as a heavy favourite depriving fans of a chance to see the 85 Bears in a rematch with the Fish. >>
ALSO IN 1990 MIAMI HAD THE 4TH BEST DEFENSE IN THE NFL. AND 1998 MIAMI HAD THE #1 DEFENSE AND MARINO STILL FAILED IN THE PLAYOFFS.
None of the QB's that you so passionately speak about can measure up in greatness [based upon statistics; and based upon nothing other than viewing his performances during his 16 year career and realizing, based upon your gut instinct alone] of John Elway.
He is the best.
Period.
End of discussion ( If you must post again to this thread, do so only to acknowledge that you agree with me).
All of the rest are just fighting over second place
That is my extremely biased opinion and I am sticking to it >>
You may be biased but its hard to argue with Elways greatness. Only qb to start in 5 super bowls. Most comeback wins. He's #1 on my list. Guy was amazing.
I put Elway in the top 5. Elway is one of the greatest ever. I can't rank guys like Unitas and Otto Graham, since I didn't see them. Here is the top ten since I've been watching (1973-now) in my humble opinion:
1. Joe Montana 2. John Elway 3. Peyton Manning 4. Tom Brady 5. Dan Marino 6. Brett Favre 7. Steve Young 8. Jim Kelly 9. Troy Aikman 10. Roger Staubach
I'd probably have Bradshaw in the next five or so. You could probably convince me to flip flop a spot or two on any of these guys. I know there are times I have felt that Elway was the greatest player of all-time. The only thing that has me put Montana above him is the ridiculous Super Bowl performances of Montana in addition to his superb regular season work. He was also a superior passer to Elway. I'm not even sure Elway was that great of a passer. He just had the biggest heart of any player I have ever seen. I see a lot of that in Favre. Elway would do anything it took to win. Not trying to start an argument. Just my opinion.
You guys are just wasting your time trying to talk sense to Black Label...it's obvious he is unable to comprehend anything beyond the most rudimentary of football facts and like most ignorant fans he is totally unwilling to even entertain any notion but his own misguided ones. In essence, you can keep telling him the world is round but he will keep insisting it's flat until you finally give up.
What is quite amusing, though, is that he copied and pasted aro's opinion on Bradshaw vs Marino and stated "Well Said," as if aro was agreeing with him when anyone who had even basic reading comprehension skills could see that aro was indeed implying the exact opposite, LOL..
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>You guys are just wasting your time trying to talk sense to Black Label...it's obvious he is unable to comprehend anything beyond the most rudimentary of football facts and like most ignorant fans he is totally unwilling to even entertain any notion but his own misguided ones. In essence, you can keep telling him the world is round but he will keep insisting it's flat until you finally give up.
>>
Are you like 9 years old or something? You obviously were too stupid to read my posts with all of the facts stated. In a sports debate like "who's the best," no one is right. And no one is wrong. Everyone has their own opinion, and everyone has different views.
Blacklabel, umm you can't keep glossing over why Bradhsaw's team's won...
For instance, Bradshaw's teams only had to play five road playoff games in all those years. What happened when they had to play in a tougher situation like that?? They went 2-3.
What were Bradshaw's QB ratings in those games?
57 40 44.5 158 59.7
So now lets play detective on what we know.
1) When a back up scrub got significant playing time on the same team, he went 6-0, and Bradshaw 4-4.
2) When Bradshaw's defense was not an elite defense, and only mediocre, Bradshaw only managed a 34-30 record with them.
3) When Bradshaw was put in a situation where he had a tough playoff situation of playing on the road, and playing against a team as good or better, he went 2-3. And his game by game performance of QB rating was 57, 40, 44, 158, 59. Understand that superior QB's who were not lucky enough to have Bradshaw's situation usually had to go into the playoffs in this situation as the norm, thus VERY hard to win anything, JUST LIKE BRADSHAW couldn't.
4) Bradshaw had how many HOF teammates??
5) Bradshaw's big games were aided by the acrobatic catches of Lynn Swann. Without such heroics, he doesn't have those big games.
6) Bradshaw was lucky to even stay alive in the playoffs on Franco Harri's famous catch. Pure luck, and nothing to do with him.
7) A famous drop by Jackie Smith allowed Bradshaw's team to win a Super Bowl. Pure luck.
As you see, with lots of help from teammates, and some good fortune of weird plays, and with Bradshaw being good himself, that is why the Steelers won those Super Bowls. It isn't much different than a guy winning 20 games for a couple of years because he has good infielders, and great run support. Give the credit APPROPRIATELY son!
<< <i>Blacklabel, umm you can't keep glossing over why Bradhsaw's team's won...
Uh, the guy's a 2-time super bowl mvp, season mvp, ap player of year, and SI player of the year. To give everyone else credit but him is insane.
For instance, Bradshaw's teams only had to play five road playoff games in all those years. What happened when they had to play in a tougher situation like that?? They went 2-3.
Of course he would. Teams historically playing at home always have an advantage. Bradshaw rarely lost at home. He was 12-0 at home against their biggest rival, cleveland browns. Most of Marino's playoff losses were at home...cough cough choke.
1) When a back up scrub got significant playing time on the same team, he went 6-0, and Bradshaw 4-4.
wow 6 games. Rothlisberger won his first 11 games as a starter. If Bradshaw wasnt injured that year they may have went 14-0. Two starters that year resulted in playoff loss.
4) Bradshaw had how many HOF teammates??
Usually happens when teams win 3-4 super bowls. Helps in the voting. The other hall of fame steelers players couldnt throw a football 80 yards.
5) Bradshaw's big games were aided by the acrobatic catches of Lynn Swann. Without such heroics, he doesn't have those big games.
Thanks for making my point about swann being a legit hall of famer Took a powerful arm to get those passes to catch. His nickname was "MR STEEL ARM." In high school he set a national record for throwing a javelin 245 feet.
6) Bradshaw was lucky to even stay alive in the playoffs on Franco Harri's famous catch. Pure luck, and nothing to do with him.
Lucky it was. Wouldnt have happenned if bradshaw threw it one-tenth of a second slower. He threw a bullet. Every passer has lucky throws that goes both ways.
7) A famous drop by Jackie Smith allowed Bradshaw's team to win a Super Bowl. Pure luck.
Not luck at all that the steelers defense intimidated the opposition to force dropped passes. Even if the cowboys scored a td on that drive, we would still never know what the outcome of the game wouldve been?
As you see, with lots of help from teammates, and some good fortune of weird plays, and with Bradshaw being good himself, that is why the Steelers won those Super Bowls. It isn't much different than a guy winning 20 games for a couple of years because he has good infielders, and great run support. Give the credit APPROPRIATELY son! >>
You call it luck. I call it skill. Bradshaw was born with a talented strong throwing arm that cannot be taught. Every great team has luck. Look at the patriots first super bowl year in a game against the raiders with the fumble in the snow. Eli mannings super bowl with the fluke catch in the winning drive. Giants super bowl win against the bills on the missed field goal. on and on.
Blacklabel, all the stuff you say is why it is folly to judge a QB on Super Bowl wins, because in order for them to happen, they have to have a A LOT of factors outside their control to make it happen. In Bradshaw's case, he had such strong prevailing factors in his favor(outside his control), that it wasn't that great a personal accomplishment of HIS DOING. Had he done all that with crummy defenses, non-acrobatic receivers, all on the road in the playoffs, then it would be more impressive...but we all saw what was at work(except you).
By the way, we know Bradshaw wasn't a very smart man, but with your assertion that he was a 'big game player', you are saying he is even more dumb.
Why?
If he truly did have an ability to rise to the occasion in the big game, why did he just save it for certain games? Why didn't he call upon that ability every game? He could have then played well in all the playoff games and won every Super Bowl. But he didn't, he had some real stinkers.
He could have used that ability in all the regular season games as well, and they would have barely lost. But he didn't, he had A LOT of real stinkers.
So, with this ability you claim he had...why did he only reserve it for a few games when all along he could have been playing like that on a regular basis?
He just happened to have some very nice games in the Super Bowl(aided by a nice receiving corps and running game). Big game players don't exist, otherwise they would be doing it all the time. It is mostly randomness, luck, chance, and circumstance that creates these so-called big game players in PRO SPORTS.
<< <i>Blacklabel, all the stuff you say is why it is folly to judge a QB on Super Bowl wins, because in order for them to happen, they have to have a A LOT of factors outside their control to make it happen. In Bradshaw's case, he had such strong prevailing factors in his favor(outside his control), that it wasn't that great a personal accomplishment of HIS DOING. >>
Theres no denying that Bradshaw was a tough competitor. His physical skills and on-the-field leadership played a major role in the steelers success. Every qb has bad years. Bradshaw had his share of injuries and throughout his career often times played hurt. A elbow injury forced him into retirement after the 83 season. He played in a era where qb's had little protection before the rule changes. He still led the steelers to 8 AFC CENTRAL CHAMPIONSHIPS.
If you want to take away Bradshaw's successes, then its only fair that we take away Montana's achievements for having the credit of throwing to the best reciever of all-time.
In a sports debate like "who's the best," no one is right. And no one is wrong. Everyone has their own opinion, and everyone has different views.
When all factors and conditions are equal, or even arguably equal, that MAY be the case. But in the case where one guy had the fortune of playing with multiple HOFers on both sides of the ball vs. another guy who was lucky to even play with a few All Pros (at least on the defensive side of the ball), such a comparison is obiously skewed from the onset. That is the concept you are obviously incapable of realizing or comprehending. As Powedered H2O also tried to illustrate to you (unsuccessfilly, of course) above, if two players of equal talent get are assigned to separate teams and one of those teams is significantly better than the other, which player will (obviously) be more successful? (I'll give you a hint: it's not the guy playing with the lousier players.) And as Saberman also illustrated quite clearly, if a Steelers backup scrub QB can step in for an injured Bradshaw and go 6-0, what does that say about the team as a whole around Bradshaw? At the very least, even you must admit that Bradshaw had a great advantage playing for the Steelers teams he did, as those teams were not just playoff teams, or even championship teams, but arguably the best TEAMS (especially defensively) of ALL TIME. I don't think ANYONE, even the most lunatic of Dolphin fans, has ever suggested that ANY of the Dolphins' TEAMS that Marino played for were among the best ever, not even by a long shot, and there you have the great disparity. I realize such advanced anlaysis may be beyond the levels of your present day comprehension, but maybe someday the light will dawn upon you and you can come back to this thread amd realize that virtually everyone else who posted and who bothers to follow the game of football is correct and that you were poorly misguided. I doubt it, but hey, there's always hope! Even for alts like you, LOL!
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
To be honest, I'm not sure that there is ANY WAY that you take an in-his-prime Terry Bradshaw and an in-his-prime Peyton Manning, put them on the same team (in the same situation) and Bradshaw outperforms Manning. I don't see it happening.
John
<< <i>Lol wow gotta love the Steelers haters. STAUBACH AHEAD OF BRADSHAW
Its like what one fan told me about a year ago. The Steelers are the yankees of pro football. Very true. You either love em or hate em.
Top 10 ever
1) Elway 2) Montana 3) Unitas 4)Favre 5)Bradshaw 6)Manning(probably top 5 when career over) 7)Brady(same with manning) 8Marino 9)Moon 10)Tarkenton >>
<< <i>To be honest, I'm not sure that there is ANY WAY that you take an in-his-prime Terry Bradshaw and an in-his-prime Peyton Manning, put them on the same team (in the same situation) and Bradshaw outperforms Manning. I don't see it happening.
>>
As stated in my post, when Manning has called it a career, he will probably most certainly be a top 5 qb of all-time. And maybe the greatest ever.
~"7) A famous drop by Jackie Smith allowed Bradshaw's team to win a Super Bowl. Pure luck."~
Not to go too far off topic, but, why do Cowboy fans (and others) always imply the drop by Smith cost them the game? It occured in the 3rd quarter. Had he caught the ball the game would have been tied. After the drop and cosequently the field goal that made it 21-17, the Steelers scored 2 touchdowns in a row to make it 35-17 and the Cowboys scored twice after that to make it close. Best case scenario for Dallas the game would have been tied but the Steelers D would have played differently in a closer game.
Not to keep defending Bradshaw but the last 3 SuperBowls they won, they won the games through the air. In all 4 SuperBowls Bradshaw was the better quarterback that day and in the last three the Steelers ran the ball 107 times for 299 yards or not even 3 yards a pop. In the those same games Bradshaw completed 40 passes for 836 yards - almost 21 yards a catch.
As I mentioned earlier, I like Bradshaw. I think he was a darned fine quarterback and he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. First Ballot. But the thread was whether we rate QB's based upon, did they win the Super Bowl or not and I guess how many? I take nothing away from him. I just feel that there are another 10-15 guys over the past 40 years that would be his equal, or better, that don't have those four rings because they didn't have the supporting cast that he had. Someone mentioned Peyton manning. If Peyton Manning of today was the QB of the Steelers of the 70's do they still win 4 Super Bowls? Probably. If Terry Bradshaw of the 70's was the QB of the Colts of today, do they even win one? I doubt it. Bradshaw could air it out in the big games with confidence because 1) The Steelers had a tremendous running attack and other teams had to be wary of it on defense and 2) If he screwed up he had the greatest defense in history to bail him out. Gotta feel pretty confident in your throws when you've got those things going for you. But, wouldn't any other great QB have done just as much?
PowderedH20, he could also air it out because he had the receivers that could catch it...and in the own words of the Bradshaw fanatic, he had a receiver that could do acrobatic catches.
Aro, Bradshaw had a few nice games in the Super Bowl, but that has more to do with randomness than some perceived big game ability. In another Super Bowl, he could have just as easily gone the other way. However, are those nice games if the acrobatic receiver is a normal receiver...and instead of a 60 yard td catch, it is a 60 yard INT?? The supporting cast still plays a great role even in his random big games.
Why was Bradshaw so bad in those road playoff games?? Why didn't he use his 'big gameness'? Because big gameness is randomness, and not a trait. If it were a trait to call upon, then the player is a moron for not calling upon it in all games.
Is Bradshaw going to average 21 yards a pass if they had no capable running game to confound the defense? No.
Like I said before, Jeff George could air it out too, and give the same surroundings as Bradshaw...
You say Bradshaw was the better QB that day in the Super Bowl. That doesn't make sense. Was Bradshaw going against the best defense ever?? Because his opponent was. I would expect the opponents QB to not have a good game when he has to face the best defense ever. It still comes down to the surrounds making it happen.
Saberman - In the three Super Bowl's I mentioned the Steelers running game got shut down. Bradshaw was forced to throw to deep to beat the opposition. He did. Also, the defenses they were playing were very good.
1975 Steelers defense 4th in the NFL Cowboys defense 5th in the NFL
Bradshaw 9 for 19 209 yards 2 TD's 0 Int's sacked twice Staubach 15 for 24 204 yards 2 TD's 3 Int's sacked seven times
Close game with an edge for Bradshaw over Staubach.
1978 Steelers defense 3rd in the NFL Cowboys defense 2nd in the NFL
Bradshaw 17 for 30 318 yards 4 TD's 1 Int sacked four times Staubach 17 for 30 228 yards 3 TD's 1 Int sacked five times
Rushing Steelers 24 for 66 Cowboys 32 for 154
Close game again but the difference was Bradshaw was superior to Staubach in the game. The Cowboys had a prolific running attack and completely shut down the Steelers run and still lost the game.
1979 Steelers defense 2nd in the NFL Rams defense 7th in the NFL
Bradshaw 14 of 21 309 yards 2 TD's 3 Int not sacked Ferragamo 15 of 25 212 yards 0 TD's 1 Int sacked 4 times
Rushing Steelers 37 for 84 Rams 29 for 107
Once again a close game decided by the arm of Bradshaw. The Steelers running game was completely shut down.
It was not random. The opposition shut down the run and Bradshaw was able to beat them with the long ball like few other quarterbacks in history could have. He does not have some kind of big game magic, and he did fail often but in 3 of the 4 biggest games of his career he was the difference and that has to count for something.
<< <i>. But the thread was whether we rate QB's based upon, did they win the Super Bowl or not and I guess how many? >>
The answer is YES we do. Otherwise Marino would be ranked ahead of Montana, because Marino put up bigger numbers in the regular season. But just about everyone ranks Montana 1 or 2 all time. Must be because of his 4 super bowls because Marino broke all the records.
<< <i>Saberman - In the three Super Bowl's I mentioned the Steelers running game got shut down. Bradshaw was forced to throw to deep to beat the opposition. He did. Also, the defenses they were playing were very good.
1975 Steelers defense 4th in the NFL Cowboys defense 5th in the NFL
Bradshaw 9 for 19 209 yards 2 TD's 0 Int's sacked twice Staubach 15 for 24 204 yards 2 TD's 3 Int's sacked seven times
Close game with an edge for Bradshaw over Staubach.
1978 Steelers defense 3rd in the NFL Cowboys defense 2nd in the NFL
Bradshaw 17 for 30 318 yards 4 TD's 1 Int sacked four times Staubach 17 for 30 228 yards 3 TD's 1 Int sacked five times
Rushing Steelers 24 for 66 Cowboys 32 for 154
Close game again but the difference was Bradshaw was superior to Staubach in the game. The Cowboys had a prolific running attack and completely shut down the Steelers run and still lost the game.
1979 Steelers defense 2nd in the NFL Rams defense 7th in the NFL
Bradshaw 14 of 21 309 yards 2 TD's 3 Int not sacked Ferragamo 15 of 25 212 yards 0 TD's 1 Int sacked 4 times
Rushing Steelers 37 for 84 Rams 29 for 107
Once again a close game decided by the arm of Bradshaw. The Steelers running game was completely shut down.
It was not random. The opposition shut down the run and Bradshaw was able to beat them with the long ball like few other quarterbacks in history could have. He does not have some kind of big game magic, and he did fail often but in 3 of the 4 biggest games of his career he was the difference and that has to count for something. >>
Good research. Also a couple more things to point out. One of those interceptions against the Rams was not Bradshaws fault. He threw a perfect pass to one of his recievers, and it bounced off of his chest and into the hands of a rams defender. The reciever clearly should have caught the ball.
In 79, the steelers offense was ranked #1 in the NFL.
Before the draft of 74 hall of famers(swann, lambert, stallworth, webster) Bradshaw turned one of the worst offenses in the league and made the steelers into playoff contenders in 72 and 73.
Blacklabel, you said that Terry Bradshaw turned the steelers around in '72 and '73 and made them playoff contenders. Huh? On what planet?
IN 1971 with Bradshaw, the Steelers had the 17th best offense, and the 17th best defense. They finished 6-8 WITH BRADSHAW
In 1972 with Bradshaw, the Steelers jumped to the 5th best offense, and the 2nd best defense. Yes 2nd! They went 11-3. But wait, why did their offense all of a sudden get so good??? Don't you think it had something to do with Franco Harris coming onto the scene to average 5.5 yards a carry, and getting 1,055 yards? Bradshaw didn't do anything. It was their running and defense why they won.
What did Bradshaw do passing that year? 12 Td, 12 INt, and a 64.1 QB rating. Why you say HE led them to the playoffs when they had the 2nd best defense, and one of the top running backs is beyond me. He was there the year before, produced similarly mediocore, but only had a mediocore defense, and no Franco Harris, and they went 6-8!! He didn't do anything to lead them, he road coattails.
In fact, Bradshaw was producing mediocore passing results for a couple more seasons, and didn't 'win' his first Super Bowl until they got Swann and Stallworth, and their defene regained the dominance. And he didn't have his first good passing season (88 rating)until 1975!!
Then in 1976 Bradshaw got benched because with all those weapons he only had a 65 passer rating, the scrub came in, procued a BETTER passer rating of 77.6, and a better W/L record.
1977 he had Swann and Stallworth, and he had a passer rating of 71. That isn't ok. Franco harris had 1,100 yards. Their defense slumped to 17th, and they went 9-5. See the recurring theme with their defense? Any year their defense was ot of the top 10, they were not serious contenders.
1978 and '79, they are back to the best defense ever, have Swann and Stallworth in full bloom, Harris and Bleier in full bloom. Bradshaw plays well too. There you have a fantastic team of the ages. But why you guys keep giving Bradshaw allt his credit is dumb.
In 1980, their defense falls to 15th in the league, and they go 9-7 again. Bradshaw produces more of the same.
Aro,
A few things.
1) Defensive rankings based no points allowed or yards? The Steelers defense was the best ever.
2) It is very telling how you say that the Steelers had the run game shut down. How do you think that usually happens in football? The defense plays more for the run, making it easier to take advantage of the pass. Football 101. If you look above, you will see that the NFL saw why the Steelers were winning, and they tried to take the running game away. Bradshaw threw a few nice long passes, and his receivers got him the glory.
3) So Bradshaw was playing against a defense intent on shutting down the run game. This is part of the whole point. Without HOF running backs, he faces a different defense. How you guys still don't understand this is beyond me. How should he get 'credit' over a superior QB just because he had an enviable situation.
4) He threw a few long passes, and his acrobatic HOF receivers came down with them...some of them mighty fine catches. YOu keep saying "HE" was the difference with his long passes. Do you think those passes are caught if Tom Waddle was his receiver?
5) What it boils down to is that he had a strong arm, the defense had to protect the run, and he had great receivers where he could just throw it deep and have a good chance of them coming down with it.
6) Like I said, Jeff George could do the same thing. He just didnt' have the same enviable situation for his skills to shine like Bradshaw did.
7) Doug Williams played a heckuva Super Bowl game too. So he only did it once, but Bradshaw three times, so I guess he has 'proven' he could handle the big games better than Marino, thus better as well. That is if you think one game proves anything. Why you think four games proves anything is a mystery as well. That is what I mean by randomness. Four games proves NOTHING.
Knowing that the defenses played the run helps prove something, and knowing that the Wide Receivers made fantastic catches proves another thing. Please dont' say it is because Bradshaw could throw it that far...a lot of guys could, including Jeff George.
And finally, blacklabel, you keep saying Joe Montana is ranked ahead of Marino because of Super Bowl titles. Maybe by you and other ignorant fans he may be ahead of him based on that criteria. But actually, his body of work and his ability to play QB, and his results over the course of his career cause him to be ranked ahead of Marino.
Career Passer ratings:
Joe Montana 93.2 Dan Marino 86.4
Montana had single seasons over 100 four different times, Marino once.
I for one NEVER used the Super Bowl criteria to determine that Montana was better than Marino. The 100+ regular season games tell one all you need to know. To rely on the information of a handful of post season games is a poor study. Aro, you should be ashamed for doing that. I would expect that from this blacklabel guy, but not you.
1) I never once said Bradshaw was better than Marino. I DID SAY that Bradshaw was probably better suited for the Steelers of the 70's than Marino. I think Marino is a top 5 QB of all-time. I would not put Bradshaw in the top 10. Given the choice to start a team I would take Marino over Bradshaw.
2) Bradshaw deserves credit for his performance in the Super Bowls. It could have been random luck, it could have been a number of things. Nonetheless, it did happen.
3) The notion that Bradshaw was carried by the running game and his defense and any quarterback could have won with the Steelers is nonsense. The Cowboys had a better running game and a comparable defense and they won less than the Steelers.
4) I would not use Super Bowl performance to say Bradshaw is better than Marino or others who won less Super Bowls but if I thought Marino and Bradshaw were equal QB's the Super Bowl performance would elevate Bradshaw slighly ahead in my eyes. If one views Peyton Manning and Dan Marino as being equal QB's and I was forced to choose one or the other I would choose Manning based on the SB victories. If I viewed Marino as being superior the lack of a Super Bowl truimph would not change my view.
5) You can look at shutting down the running game in a couple of ways. I do not remember if the other team stacked the box and dared Pittsburgh to throw, but I think it was more along the lines of the opposition putting Pittsburgh into obvious passing downs and Bradshaw still found a way to beat them. In the 1998 AFC Conference Championship Game between the Jets and the Broncos I remember Bill Parcells saying all week that stopping Terrell Davis was the entire focus. The Jets would give John Elway every opportunity to beat them because they feared Terrell Davis far more. Elway, despite playing against a team entirely focused on stopping Davis, and a defense that gave him good field position most of the afternoon finished the day 13 for 34 for 173 yards. He made one big passing play all day against a defense totally designed to stop the run. That never happened once to Bradshaw in these games.
IN 1971 with Bradshaw, the Steelers had the 17th best offense, and the 17th best defense. They finished 6-8 WITH BRADSHAW
LOL. Again not giving Bradshaw credit where credit is due, is just insane. Bradshaw was voted the best offensive Steeler player in history. Not Franco or anyone else. Fact remains, the Steelers were losers before Bradshaw.
Its just common sense that when qb's have better team players, they have better records.
In 1980, when the 49'ers had the 26th worst defense in the NFL, Montana's record was 2-5.
All the sudden, the next year in 1981, the 49'ers have the 2nd best defense and Montana's record is a whopping 13-3.
Then in 1982, the 49'ers have the 23th defense in the NFL, Montana's record is only 3-6.
And finally, blacklabel, you keep saying Joe Montana is ranked ahead of Marino because of Super Bowl titles. Maybe by you and other ignorant fans he may be ahead of him based on that criteria. But actually, his body of work and his ability to play QB, and his results over the course of his career cause him to be ranked ahead of Marino.
Career Passer ratings:
Joe Montana 93.2 Dan Marino 86.4
>>
If this was the case then, both Kurt warner and Steve Young would be ranked ahead of Montana because they have higher ratings. And there are several other current qb's including Tony Romo that have a higher passing rating than Montana so i guess that means Romo is better than Montana.
Marino broke all the records. More passing yards, more tds.
If Montana won 0 championships, and Marino won 4 than everyone would have Marino #1 on the list without question.
If you just rank a qb on how well they perform during the regular season, than hands down i would go with Marino over Bradshaw. Even though Bradshaw played in a different era when qb's threw more interceptions and 4000 yd seasons were harder to come by.
When i rank a qb, i look at how well they did in BOTH the regular season AND post-season where it really counts. The main goal of any qb is to win champioships and it is a must for qb's to play great in big games. Marino did not. Marino was a stud during the regular season and proved he could beat any team during the regular season...case in point...the 85 BEARS.
So if i was to start a team, i would pick Bradshaw over Marino because i would want a winner instead of a choker who time upon time, laid an egg during big games.
Aro, you keep saying Bradshaw had the big games in the SUper Bowl, and it has to count for something. You are STILL neglecting the fact that he had two HOF wide receivers who made those long passes possible.
The first Super Bowl was ALL Franco Harris and the defense. Harris had 34 carriers for 158 yards. Bradshaw threw 14 passes in the game and completed 9. He was a caretaker who threw only the safe passes in that game. He had one four yard touchdown pass which gave him high QB rating for the game...an artificial rating so to speak.
Swann owned the second Super Bowl, and it was HIS fantastic catches that made Bradshaw's game, not hte other way around. 4 catches 161 yds.
Swann and Stallworth owned the next Super Bowl. Swann 7 catches 124 yards. Stallworth 3 for 115.
Swann and Stallworth in the last one. 5 for 79, and 3 for 121 for Stallworth.
I will break down for you guys how Bradshaw's success was a product of his teammate, and his passing was owed a great deal to the ability of Swann and Stallworth.
Blacklabel, before you confuse yourself more, you need to read this again, because it totally blows your theory away of Bradshaw...
Blacklabel, you said that Terry Bradshaw turned the steelers around in '72 and '73 and made them playoff contenders. Huh? On what planet?
IN 1971 with Bradshaw, the Steelers had the 17th best offense, and the 17th best defense. They finished 6-8 WITH BRADSHAW
In 1972 with Bradshaw, the Steelers jumped to the 5th best offense, and the 2nd best defense. Yes 2nd! They went 11-3. But wait, why did their offense all of a sudden get so good??? Don't you think it had something to do with Franco Harris coming onto the scene to average 5.5 yards a carry, and getting 1,055 yards? Bradshaw didn't do anything. It was their running and defense why they won.
What did Bradshaw do passing that year? 12 Td, 12 INt, and a 64.1 QB rating. Why you say HE led them to the playoffs when they had the 2nd best defense, and one of the top running backs is beyond me. He was there the year before, produced similarly mediocore, but only had a mediocore defense, and no Franco Harris, and they went 6-8!! He didn't do anything to lead them, he road coattails.
In fact, Bradshaw was producing mediocore passing results for a couple more seasons, and didn't 'win' his first Super Bowl until they got Swann and Stallworth, and their defene regained the dominance. And he didn't have his first good passing season (88 rating)until 1975!!
Blacklable, I used QB rating for Montana and Marino because they were in the same era. Crossing era's isn't really effective for that(Warner, Romo etc...). Montana was better than Marino without taking into consideration any playoff games.
I don't think many people understand the need for "money players".
I've said before that I'd rather have a guy who hits .290 with 18 HR's and 78 rbi's in the regular season, but hits .350 in the postseason, then someone who hits .323 with 43 HR's in the regular season, but hits .133 in the postseason.
Here in lies Bradshaw's greatness. He was a decent QB on a very good football team, but he achieves greatness status because he was money in the playoffs.
<< <i>Aro, you keep saying Bradshaw had the big games in the SUper Bowl, and it has to count for something. You are STILL neglecting the fact that he had two HOF wide receivers who made those long passes possible.
The first Super Bowl was ALL Franco Harris and the defense. Harris had 34 carriers for 158 yards. Bradshaw threw 14 passes in the game and completed 9. He was a caretaker who threw only the safe passes in that game. He had one four yard touchdown pass which gave him high QB rating for the game...an artificial rating so to speak.
Swann owned the second Super Bowl, and it was HIS fantastic catches that made Bradshaw's game, not hte other way around. 4 catches 161 yds.
Swann and Stallworth owned the next Super Bowl. Swann 7 catches 124 yards. Stallworth 3 for 115.
Swann and Stallworth in the last one. 5 for 79, and 3 for 121 for Stallworth.
I will break down for you guys how Bradshaw's success was a product of his teammate, and his passing was owed a great deal to the ability of Swann and Stallworth.
>>
These statements right here should discredit anything you say. Bradshaw was 2-time super bowl mvp and to say his teammates deserves the credit and was the only reason why they won is LAUGHABLE at best. Bradshaw also WON alot of OTHER BIG GAMES to get to the BIG GAME. So not only did he come up big in the super bowl, but he played great in other playoff games. In his last playoff game in 1982, he was 28 of 39 passes for 325 yards and 2 td's. A year later he retired.
Bradshaw's 64 yard TD pass in the 76 super bowl travelled 70 YARDS IN THE AIR and is considered ONE OF THE GREATEST PASSES IN NFL HISTORY!!!!
Saberman you act like these guys are robots, get real. Some players freeze up on the big stages and some can relax and perform. The more often someone reaches the big show the more of a chance they will eventuallly perform. You have to give credit for a player to make the plays when possible. To say it was all one player (Swann making the catch) is silly since the ball had to be thrown. You act like a monkey could just throw a ball up and these guys would catch it.
BTW the best player on the steelers teams was Mike Webster.
Currently completing the following registry sets: Cardinal HOF's, 1961 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, 1972 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, 1980 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, Bill Mazeroski Master & Basic Sets, Roberto Clemente Master & Basic Sets, Willie Stargell Master & Basic Sets and Terry Bradshaw Basic Set
Morgoth, you believed in the myth of Big game Ryan Howard as well. If it were true that the more often they get there, the more comfortable they get, then you would expect players to have poor experiences in their firs time, and have that table rise every time they get there. That isn't the case. Post season experiences are all ups and downs. It is more like the results of a blind dart throw(in comparison to their natural ability).
If Bradshaw were truly money, and a big game player, how do you explain the horrible games he had on the road in the playoffs??
I just posted the timeline of Bradshaw's success in another thread. You will see that Bradshaw's passing game only materialized when Swann and Stallwroth becames starters. Swann/Stallworth were constants in the Super Bowls. I didn't see any 3rd or 4th receiver having big games (like Manning had this year). Why? Because they weren't good enough to catch jump balls or deep balls. Bradshaw relied on those two.
Edmundfitzgerald, all those post season baseball numbers you talk about are pure randomness. Go look at Andruw Jones, Bernie Williams, Reggie Jackson(yes Reggie. He was AWFUL in a lot of post season series). The more they play, the more their post season totals resemble their regular season totals. No such thing as a player as you describe. They are just as likely to revert the other way the next time i.e, Ryan Howard.
Morgoth, for the record, I don't say it was all one palyers doing, Swann making the catch. YOU GUYS are saying it was all one players doing(bradshaw), by giving him so much credit for those Super Bowl titles. The record shows, that without the top flight defense, his teams didn't come close to winning.
I am saying it takes a super cast to do what the Steelers did, Bradshaw could have been Jeff George.
Without Harris, his offenses were mediocore. Without Swann/Stallworth, his passing was mediocore. In fact, he got benched two different years because he couldn't take advantage of the weapons...and his backups Did BETTER!
Blacklable, I could still throw the footbal over 50yds, and I have no shoulder left. Jeff George could throw it as far too, only if there is no receiver open or there to catch it, so waht. Why didn't Bradshaw have those passing yards before Swann/Stallworth??????? Afterall, he could throw it 70 yards in the air.
Finally, the best way to illustrate a point, is to put a person into the situation. I will make a bet with you...
We will play a four on four game of football. We will each quarterback our team. I will pick the other three players that play on your team, and also pick the three players that play on my team.
Only, there is no complaining about your teammates, and you can't use that as a reason why you lost. If you lose, it is because you can't play well. How about 2k per game?
If Bradshaw were truly money, and a big game player, how do you explain the horrible games he had on the road in the playoffs??
Bradshaw was 14-5 during the post-season. Not too shabby.
The record shows, that without the top flight defense, his teams didn't come close to winning.
Much like every other great super bowl winning team.
I am saying it takes a super cast to do what the Steelers did, Bradshaw could have been Jeff George.
Oh please. George was a flake and was not mentally capable of leading a team to a championship.
Without Harris, his offenses were mediocore. Without Swann/Stallworth, his passing was mediocore. In fact, he got benched two different years because he couldn't take advantage of the weapons...and his backups Did BETTER!
In 76, Bradshaw suffered both a neck and wrist injury, so no surprise the backup did better that year. Still it was Bradshaw who won the playoff game that year over the colts, 40-14 with 3 touchdowns.
Bradshaw's backup did just as good in his stead. That is ONE of the points to illustrate that Bradshaw's 'success' was a product of his teammates. Without the top flight teammates, he never won any Super Bowl. Without the top flight receivers, he was a mediocore passer.
You mention Bradshaw 'winning' the playoff game that year he came back, but you always never mention 'losing' the next one. A better QB would have given Pittsburgh Six or Seven Super Bowls. Bradshaw was a big dissapointment in '76 and '77. Those teams were primed to win again with all the weapons, but he wasn't good enough.
Lucky for him, Swann and Stalloworth made circus catches to make him look good.
Oh, and if you don't believe the receivers matter, lets play that game between us for two grand.
<< <i>Saberman you act like these guys are robots, get real. Some players freeze up on the big stages and some can relax and perform. The more often someone reaches the big show the more of a chance they will eventuallly perform. You have to give credit for a player to make the plays when possible. To say it was all one player (Swann making the catch) is silly since the ball had to be thrown. You act like a monkey could just throw a ball up and these guys would catch it.
Morgoth, you believed in the myth of Big game Ryan Howard as well. If it were true that the more often they get there, the more comfortable they get, then you would expect players to have poor experiences in their firs time, and have that table rise every time they get there. That isn't the case. Post season experiences are all ups and downs. It is more like the results of a blind dart throw(in comparison to their natural ability).
If Bradshaw were truly money, and a big game player, how do you explain the horrible games he had on the road in the playoffs??
I just posted the timeline of Bradshaw's success in another thread. You will see that Bradshaw's passing game only materialized when Swann and Stallwroth becames starters. Swann/Stallworth were constants in the Super Bowls. I didn't see any 3rd or 4th receiver having big games (like Manning had this year). Why? Because they weren't good enough to catch jump balls or deep balls. Bradshaw relied on those two.
Edmundfitzgerald, all those post season baseball numbers you talk about are pure randomness. Go look at Andruw Jones, Bernie Williams, Reggie Jackson(yes Reggie. He was AWFUL in a lot of post season series). The more they play, the more their post season totals resemble their regular season totals. No such thing as a player as you describe. They are just as likely to revert the other way the next time i.e, Ryan Howard.
Morgoth, for the record, I don't say it was all one palyers doing, Swann making the catch. YOU GUYS are saying it was all one players doing(bradshaw), by giving him so much credit for those Super Bowl titles. The record shows, that without the top flight defense, his teams didn't come close to winning.
I am saying it takes a super cast to do what the Steelers did, Bradshaw could have been Jeff George.
Without Harris, his offenses were mediocore. Without Swann/Stallworth, his passing was mediocore. In fact, he got benched two different years because he couldn't take advantage of the weapons...and his backups Did BETTER!
Blacklable, I could still throw the footbal over 50yds, and I have no shoulder left. Jeff George could throw it as far too, only if there is no receiver open or there to catch it, so waht. Why didn't Bradshaw have those passing yards before Swann/Stallworth??????? Afterall, he could throw it 70 yards in the air.
Comments
From my comments above, Marino only really had the pieces in place one time(in terms of a team capable of winning a Super Bowl), super defense, excellent WR's, home field advantage... And in that one time, he brought them to the Super Bowl. No, they didn't win it. They lost to a Superior team, the team of the decade. Miami's defense couldn't stop them, they had to play catch up, and interceptions come in bunches when playing catch up.
Bradshaw had those pieces in place all the time, and in to such a higher degree it is silly to compare. When Bradshaw was only missing the top flight defense from his parts, he was only able to lead them to a 34-30 record.
When Bradshaw had to play teams on the road in the playoffs, he was 2-3, and he performed as good as Rex Grossman in four of those five games.
Marino is superior to Bradshaw. The notion that Bradshaw was a good fit for that team may be true, but that doesn't elevate him better than somebody else simply because he happened to be a good fit in that one particular situation. I dont' see how any QB would have struggled winning games in the height of the Steeler dynasty. Heck, Jeff George would have been a good fit for that team too, he threw a good deep ball as well. Even their backup scrub led them to 6-0 when he was QB.
Bradshaw was a perfect fit for the Steelers. His ability to throw the deep ball was crucial to their success and a huge factor in their last two Super Bowl triumphs.
For the Steelers of the 70's he would be my choice to be the QB ahead of Marino. I do not think Dan would have been satisfied or capable of handing the ball off 30-40 times a game and letting his defense win the game. At least he was not when that is what Jimmy Johnson wanted to do.
Marino had two chances 1984 AND 1985. The got smoked by New England in the AFC Championship game in 1985 as a heavy favourite depriving fans of a chance to see the 85 Bears in a rematch with the Fish.
<< <i>Aro,
Bradshaw had those pieces in place all the time, and in to such a higher degree it is silly to compare. When Bradshaw was only missing the top flight defense from his parts, he was only able to lead them to a 34-30 record.
Yep. Even when Bradshaw didnt have good defenses, he STILL HAD A WINNING RECORD. Even though the offense got old in the 80's.
Marino is superior to Bradshaw. >>
In what world? I base a great hall of fame qb on how they performed during the regular season combined with how well they played in post-season. Last i checked, its not called the regular season hall of fame.
Marino played on superior teams and 10 playoff teams and choked everytime. Marino was great and a top 10 qb of all time. But there are easily 5-6 qb's that were better than him.
None of the QB's that you so passionately speak about can measure up in greatness [based upon statistics; and based upon nothing other than viewing his performances during his 16 year career and realizing, based upon your gut instinct alone] of John Elway.
He is the best.
Period.
End of discussion ( If you must post again to this thread, do so only to acknowledge that you agree with me).
All of the rest are just fighting over second place
That is my extremely biased
<< <i>
Bradshaw was a perfect fit for the Steelers. His ability to throw the deep ball was crucial to their success and a huge factor in their last two Super Bowl triumphs.
YEP!!
For the Steelers of the 70's he would be my choice to be the QB ahead of Marino.
A NO BRAINER. THE COWBOYS OF THE 70'S WOULDVE BEATEN THEM FOR SURE WITH MARINO AT THE HELM.
Marino had two chances 1984 AND 1985. The got smoked by New England in the AFC Championship game in 1985 as a heavy favourite depriving fans of a chance to see the 85 Bears in a rematch with the Fish. >>
ALSO IN 1990 MIAMI HAD THE 4TH BEST DEFENSE IN THE NFL. AND 1998 MIAMI HAD THE #1 DEFENSE AND MARINO STILL FAILED IN THE PLAYOFFS.
<< <i>Let me let you all in on a secret.
None of the QB's that you so passionately speak about can measure up in greatness [based upon statistics; and based upon nothing other than viewing his performances during his 16 year career and realizing, based upon your gut instinct alone] of John Elway.
He is the best.
Period.
End of discussion ( If you must post again to this thread, do so only to acknowledge that you agree with me).
All of the rest are just fighting over second place
That is my extremely biased
You may be biased but its hard to argue with Elways greatness. Only qb to start in 5 super bowls. Most comeback wins. He's #1 on my list. Guy was amazing.
1. Joe Montana 2. John Elway 3. Peyton Manning 4. Tom Brady 5. Dan Marino 6. Brett Favre 7. Steve Young 8. Jim Kelly 9. Troy Aikman 10. Roger Staubach
I'd probably have Bradshaw in the next five or so. You could probably convince me to flip flop a spot or two on any of these guys. I know there are times I have felt that Elway was the greatest player of all-time. The only thing that has me put Montana above him is the ridiculous Super Bowl performances of Montana in addition to his superb regular season work. He was also a superior passer to Elway. I'm not even sure Elway was that great of a passer. He just had the biggest heart of any player I have ever seen. I see a lot of that in Favre. Elway would do anything it took to win. Not trying to start an argument. Just my opinion.
What is quite amusing, though, is that he copied and pasted aro's opinion on Bradshaw vs Marino and stated "Well Said," as if aro was agreeing with him when anyone who had even basic reading comprehension skills could see that aro was indeed implying the exact opposite, LOL..
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Its like what one fan told me about a year ago. The Steelers are the yankees of pro football. Very true. You either love em or hate em.
Top 10 ever
1) Elway
2) Montana
3) Unitas
4)Favre
5)Bradshaw
6)Manning(probably top 5 when career over)
7)Brady(same with manning)
8Marino
9)Moon
10)Tarkenton
<< <i>You guys are just wasting your time trying to talk sense to Black Label...it's obvious he is unable to comprehend anything beyond the most rudimentary of football facts and like most ignorant fans he is totally unwilling to even entertain any notion but his own misguided ones. In essence, you can keep telling him the world is round but he will keep insisting it's flat until you finally give up.
>>
Are you like 9 years old or something? You obviously were too stupid to read my posts with all of the facts stated. In a sports debate like "who's the best," no one is right. And no one is wrong. Everyone has their own opinion, and everyone has different views.
For instance, Bradshaw's teams only had to play five road playoff games in all those years. What happened when they had to play in a tougher situation like that?? They went 2-3.
What were Bradshaw's QB ratings in those games?
57
40
44.5
158
59.7
So now lets play detective on what we know.
1) When a back up scrub got significant playing time on the same team, he went 6-0, and Bradshaw 4-4.
2) When Bradshaw's defense was not an elite defense, and only mediocre, Bradshaw only managed a 34-30 record with them.
3) When Bradshaw was put in a situation where he had a tough playoff situation of playing on the road, and playing against a team as good or better, he went 2-3. And his game by game performance of QB rating was 57, 40, 44, 158, 59. Understand that superior QB's who were not lucky enough to have Bradshaw's situation usually had to go into the playoffs in this situation as the norm, thus VERY hard to win anything, JUST LIKE BRADSHAW couldn't.
4) Bradshaw had how many HOF teammates??
5) Bradshaw's big games were aided by the acrobatic catches of Lynn Swann. Without such heroics, he doesn't have those big games.
6) Bradshaw was lucky to even stay alive in the playoffs on Franco Harri's famous catch. Pure luck, and nothing to do with him.
7) A famous drop by Jackie Smith allowed Bradshaw's team to win a Super Bowl. Pure luck.
As you see, with lots of help from teammates, and some good fortune of weird plays, and with Bradshaw being good himself, that is why the Steelers won those Super Bowls. It isn't much different than a guy winning 20 games for a couple of years because he has good infielders, and great run support. Give the credit APPROPRIATELY son!
<< <i>Blacklabel, umm you can't keep glossing over why Bradhsaw's team's won...
Uh, the guy's a 2-time super bowl mvp, season mvp, ap player of year, and SI player of the year. To give everyone else credit but him is insane.
For instance, Bradshaw's teams only had to play five road playoff games in all those years. What happened when they had to play in a tougher situation like that?? They went 2-3.
Of course he would. Teams historically playing at home always have an advantage. Bradshaw rarely lost at home. He was 12-0 at home against their biggest rival, cleveland browns. Most of Marino's playoff losses were at home...cough cough choke.
1) When a back up scrub got significant playing time on the same team, he went 6-0, and Bradshaw 4-4.
wow 6 games. Rothlisberger won his first 11 games as a starter. If Bradshaw wasnt injured that year they may have went 14-0. Two starters that year resulted in playoff loss.
4) Bradshaw had how many HOF teammates??
Usually happens when teams win 3-4 super bowls. Helps in the voting. The other hall of fame steelers players couldnt throw a football 80 yards.
5) Bradshaw's big games were aided by the acrobatic catches of Lynn Swann. Without such heroics, he doesn't have those big games.
Thanks for making my point about swann being a legit hall of famer
6) Bradshaw was lucky to even stay alive in the playoffs on Franco Harri's famous catch. Pure luck, and nothing to do with him.
Lucky it was. Wouldnt have happenned if bradshaw threw it one-tenth of a second slower. He threw a bullet. Every passer has lucky throws that goes both ways.
7) A famous drop by Jackie Smith allowed Bradshaw's team to win a Super Bowl. Pure luck.
Not luck at all that the steelers defense intimidated the opposition to force dropped passes. Even if the cowboys scored a td on that drive, we would still never know what the outcome of the game wouldve been?
As you see, with lots of help from teammates, and some good fortune of weird plays, and with Bradshaw being good himself, that is why the Steelers won those Super Bowls. It isn't much different than a guy winning 20 games for a couple of years because he has good infielders, and great run support. Give the credit APPROPRIATELY son! >>
You call it luck. I call it skill. Bradshaw was born with a talented strong throwing arm that cannot be taught. Every great team has luck. Look at the patriots first super bowl year in a game against the raiders with the fumble in the snow. Eli mannings super bowl with the fluke catch in the winning drive. Giants super bowl win against the bills on the missed field goal. on and on.
By the way, we know Bradshaw wasn't a very smart man, but with your assertion that he was a 'big game player', you are saying he is even more dumb.
Why?
If he truly did have an ability to rise to the occasion in the big game, why did he just save it for certain games? Why didn't he call upon that ability every game? He could have then played well in all the playoff games and won every Super Bowl. But he didn't, he had some real stinkers.
He could have used that ability in all the regular season games as well, and they would have barely lost. But he didn't, he had A LOT of real stinkers.
So, with this ability you claim he had...why did he only reserve it for a few games when all along he could have been playing like that on a regular basis?
He just happened to have some very nice games in the Super Bowl(aided by a nice receiving corps and running game). Big game players don't exist, otherwise they would be doing it all the time. It is mostly randomness, luck, chance, and circumstance that creates these so-called big game players in PRO SPORTS.
<< <i>Blacklabel, all the stuff you say is why it is folly to judge a QB on Super Bowl wins, because in order for them to happen, they have to have a A LOT of factors outside their control to make it happen. In Bradshaw's case, he had such strong prevailing factors in his favor(outside his control), that it wasn't that great a personal accomplishment of HIS DOING. >>
Theres no denying that Bradshaw was a tough competitor. His physical skills and on-the-field leadership played a major role in the steelers success. Every qb has bad years. Bradshaw had his share of injuries and throughout his career often times played hurt. A elbow injury forced him into retirement after the 83 season. He played in a era where qb's had little protection before the rule changes. He still led the steelers to 8 AFC CENTRAL CHAMPIONSHIPS.
If you want to take away Bradshaw's successes, then its only fair that we take away Montana's achievements for having the credit of throwing to the best reciever of all-time.
When all factors and conditions are equal, or even arguably equal, that MAY be the case. But in the case where one guy had the fortune of playing with multiple HOFers on both sides of the ball vs. another guy who was lucky to even play with a few All Pros (at least on the defensive side of the ball), such a comparison is obiously skewed from the onset. That is the concept you are obviously incapable of realizing or comprehending. As Powedered H2O also tried to illustrate to you (unsuccessfilly, of course) above, if two players of equal talent get are assigned to separate teams and one of those teams is significantly better than the other, which player will (obviously) be more successful? (I'll give you a hint: it's not the guy playing with the lousier players.) And as Saberman also illustrated quite clearly, if a Steelers backup scrub QB can step in for an injured Bradshaw and go 6-0, what does that say about the team as a whole around Bradshaw? At the very least, even you must admit that Bradshaw had a great advantage playing for the Steelers teams he did, as those teams were not just playoff teams, or even championship teams, but arguably the best TEAMS (especially defensively) of ALL TIME. I don't think ANYONE, even the most lunatic of Dolphin fans, has ever suggested that ANY of the Dolphins' TEAMS that Marino played for were among the best ever, not even by a long shot, and there you have the great disparity. I realize such advanced anlaysis may be beyond the levels of your present day comprehension, but maybe someday the light will dawn upon you and you can come back to this thread amd realize that virtually everyone else who posted and who bothers to follow the game of football is correct and that you were poorly misguided. I doubt it, but hey, there's always hope! Even for alts like you, LOL!
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
John
<< <i>Lol wow gotta love the Steelers haters. STAUBACH AHEAD OF BRADSHAW
Its like what one fan told me about a year ago. The Steelers are the yankees of pro football. Very true. You either love em or hate em.
Top 10 ever
1) Elway
2) Montana
3) Unitas
4)Favre
5)Bradshaw
6)Manning(probably top 5 when career over)
7)Brady(same with manning)
8Marino
9)Moon
10)Tarkenton >>
HOF SIGNED FOOTBALL RCS
<< <i>To be honest, I'm not sure that there is ANY WAY that you take an in-his-prime Terry Bradshaw and an in-his-prime Peyton Manning, put them on the same team (in the same situation) and Bradshaw outperforms Manning. I don't see it happening.
>>
As stated in my post, when Manning has called it a career, he will probably most certainly be a top 5 qb of all-time. And maybe the greatest ever.
Not to go too far off topic, but, why do Cowboy fans (and others) always imply the drop by Smith cost them the game? It occured in the 3rd quarter. Had he caught the ball the game would have been tied. After the drop and cosequently the field goal that made it 21-17, the Steelers scored 2 touchdowns in a row to make it 35-17 and the Cowboys scored twice after that to make it close. Best case scenario for Dallas the game would have been tied but the Steelers D would have played differently in a closer game.
Not to keep defending Bradshaw but the last 3 SuperBowls they won, they won the games through the air. In all 4 SuperBowls Bradshaw was the better quarterback that day and in the last three the Steelers ran the ball 107 times for 299 yards or not even 3 yards a pop. In the those same games Bradshaw completed 40 passes for 836 yards - almost 21 yards a catch.
Aro, Bradshaw had a few nice games in the Super Bowl, but that has more to do with randomness than some perceived big game ability. In another Super Bowl, he could have just as easily gone the other way. However, are those nice games if the acrobatic receiver is a normal receiver...and instead of a 60 yard td catch, it is a 60 yard INT?? The supporting cast still plays a great role even in his random big games.
Why was Bradshaw so bad in those road playoff games?? Why didn't he use his 'big gameness'? Because big gameness is randomness, and not a trait. If it were a trait to call upon, then the player is a moron for not calling upon it in all games.
Is Bradshaw going to average 21 yards a pass if they had no capable running game to confound the defense? No.
Like I said before, Jeff George could air it out too, and give the same surroundings as Bradshaw...
You say Bradshaw was the better QB that day in the Super Bowl. That doesn't make sense. Was Bradshaw going against the best defense ever?? Because his opponent was. I would expect the opponents QB to not have a good game when he has to face the best defense ever. It still comes down to the surrounds making it happen.
1975
Steelers defense 4th in the NFL
Cowboys defense 5th in the NFL
Bradshaw 9 for 19 209 yards 2 TD's 0 Int's sacked twice
Staubach 15 for 24 204 yards 2 TD's 3 Int's sacked seven times
Rushing Steelers 46 carries 149 yards
Cowboys 31 carries 108 yards
Close game with an edge for Bradshaw over Staubach.
1978
Steelers defense 3rd in the NFL
Cowboys defense 2nd in the NFL
Bradshaw 17 for 30 318 yards 4 TD's 1 Int sacked four times
Staubach 17 for 30 228 yards 3 TD's 1 Int sacked five times
Rushing Steelers 24 for 66
Cowboys 32 for 154
Close game again but the difference was Bradshaw was superior to Staubach in the game. The Cowboys had a prolific running attack and completely shut down the Steelers run and still lost the game.
1979
Steelers defense 2nd in the NFL
Rams defense 7th in the NFL
Bradshaw 14 of 21 309 yards 2 TD's 3 Int not sacked
Ferragamo 15 of 25 212 yards 0 TD's 1 Int sacked 4 times
Rushing Steelers 37 for 84
Rams 29 for 107
Once again a close game decided by the arm of Bradshaw. The Steelers running game was completely shut down.
It was not random. The opposition shut down the run and Bradshaw was able to beat them with the long ball like few other quarterbacks in history could have. He does not have some kind of big game magic, and he did fail often but in 3 of the 4 biggest games of his career he was the difference and that has to count for something.
<< <i>. But the thread was whether we rate QB's based upon, did they win the Super Bowl or not and I guess how many? >>
The answer is YES we do. Otherwise Marino would be ranked ahead of Montana, because Marino put up bigger numbers in the regular season. But just about everyone ranks Montana 1 or 2 all time. Must be because of his 4 super bowls because Marino broke all the records.
<< <i>Saberman - In the three Super Bowl's I mentioned the Steelers running game got shut down. Bradshaw was forced to throw to deep to beat the opposition. He did. Also, the defenses they were playing were very good.
1975
Steelers defense 4th in the NFL
Cowboys defense 5th in the NFL
Bradshaw 9 for 19 209 yards 2 TD's 0 Int's sacked twice
Staubach 15 for 24 204 yards 2 TD's 3 Int's sacked seven times
Rushing Steelers 46 carries 149 yards
Cowboys 31 carries 108 yards
Close game with an edge for Bradshaw over Staubach.
1978
Steelers defense 3rd in the NFL
Cowboys defense 2nd in the NFL
Bradshaw 17 for 30 318 yards 4 TD's 1 Int sacked four times
Staubach 17 for 30 228 yards 3 TD's 1 Int sacked five times
Rushing Steelers 24 for 66
Cowboys 32 for 154
Close game again but the difference was Bradshaw was superior to Staubach in the game. The Cowboys had a prolific running attack and completely shut down the Steelers run and still lost the game.
1979
Steelers defense 2nd in the NFL
Rams defense 7th in the NFL
Bradshaw 14 of 21 309 yards 2 TD's 3 Int not sacked
Ferragamo 15 of 25 212 yards 0 TD's 1 Int sacked 4 times
Rushing Steelers 37 for 84
Rams 29 for 107
Once again a close game decided by the arm of Bradshaw. The Steelers running game was completely shut down.
It was not random. The opposition shut down the run and Bradshaw was able to beat them with the long ball like few other quarterbacks in history could have. He does not have some kind of big game magic, and he did fail often but in 3 of the 4 biggest games of his career he was the difference and that has to count for something. >>
Good research. Also a couple more things to point out. One of those interceptions against the Rams was not Bradshaws fault. He threw a perfect pass to one of his recievers, and it bounced off of his chest and into the hands of a rams defender. The reciever clearly should have caught the ball.
In 79, the steelers offense was ranked #1 in the NFL.
Before the draft of 74 hall of famers(swann, lambert, stallworth, webster) Bradshaw turned one of the worst offenses in the league and made the steelers into playoff contenders in 72 and 73.
IN 1971 with Bradshaw, the Steelers had the 17th best offense, and the 17th best defense. They finished 6-8 WITH BRADSHAW
In 1972 with Bradshaw, the Steelers jumped to the 5th best offense, and the 2nd best defense. Yes 2nd! They went 11-3. But wait, why did their offense all of a sudden get so good??? Don't you think it had something to do with Franco Harris coming onto the scene to average 5.5 yards a carry, and getting 1,055 yards? Bradshaw didn't do anything. It was their running and defense why they won.
What did Bradshaw do passing that year? 12 Td, 12 INt, and a 64.1 QB rating. Why you say HE led them to the playoffs when they had the 2nd best defense, and one of the top running backs is beyond me. He was there the year before, produced similarly mediocore, but only had a mediocore defense, and no Franco Harris, and they went 6-8!! He didn't do anything to lead them, he road coattails.
In fact, Bradshaw was producing mediocore passing results for a couple more seasons, and didn't 'win' his first Super Bowl until they got Swann and Stallworth, and their defene regained the dominance. And he didn't have his first good passing season (88 rating)until 1975!!
Then in 1976 Bradshaw got benched because with all those weapons he only had a 65 passer rating, the scrub came in, procued a BETTER passer rating of 77.6, and a better W/L record.
1977 he had Swann and Stallworth, and he had a passer rating of 71. That isn't ok. Franco harris had 1,100 yards. Their defense slumped to 17th, and they went 9-5. See the recurring theme with their defense? Any year their defense was ot of the top 10, they were not serious contenders.
1978 and '79, they are back to the best defense ever, have Swann and Stallworth in full bloom, Harris and Bleier in full bloom. Bradshaw plays well too. There you have a fantastic team of the ages. But why you guys keep giving Bradshaw allt his credit is dumb.
In 1980, their defense falls to 15th in the league, and they go 9-7 again. Bradshaw produces more of the same.
Aro,
A few things.
1) Defensive rankings based no points allowed or yards? The Steelers defense was the best ever.
2) It is very telling how you say that the Steelers had the run game shut down. How do you think that usually happens in football? The defense plays more for the run, making it easier to take advantage of the pass. Football 101. If you look above, you will see that the NFL saw why the Steelers were winning, and they tried to take the running game away. Bradshaw threw a few nice long passes, and his receivers got him the glory.
3) So Bradshaw was playing against a defense intent on shutting down the run game. This is part of the whole point. Without HOF running backs, he faces a different defense. How you guys still don't understand this is beyond me. How should he get 'credit' over a superior QB just because he had an enviable situation.
4) He threw a few long passes, and his acrobatic HOF receivers came down with them...some of them mighty fine catches. YOu keep saying "HE" was the difference with his long passes. Do you think those passes are caught if Tom Waddle was his receiver?
5) What it boils down to is that he had a strong arm, the defense had to protect the run, and he had great receivers where he could just throw it deep and have a good chance of them coming down with it.
6) Like I said, Jeff George could do the same thing. He just didnt' have the same enviable situation for his skills to shine like Bradshaw did.
7) Doug Williams played a heckuva Super Bowl game too. So he only did it once, but Bradshaw three times, so I guess he has 'proven' he could handle the big games better than Marino, thus better as well. That is if you think one game proves anything. Why you think four games proves anything is a mystery as well. That is what I mean by randomness. Four games proves NOTHING.
Knowing that the defenses played the run helps prove something, and knowing that the Wide Receivers made fantastic catches proves another thing. Please dont' say it is because Bradshaw could throw it that far...a lot of guys could, including Jeff George.
And finally, blacklabel, you keep saying Joe Montana is ranked ahead of Marino because of Super Bowl titles. Maybe by you and other ignorant fans he may be ahead of him based on that criteria. But actually, his body of work and his ability to play QB, and his results over the course of his career cause him to be ranked ahead of Marino.
Career Passer ratings:
Joe Montana 93.2
Dan Marino 86.4
Montana had single seasons over 100 four different times, Marino once.
I for one NEVER used the Super Bowl criteria to determine that Montana was better than Marino. The 100+ regular season games tell one all you need to know. To rely on the information of a handful of post season games is a poor study. Aro, you should be ashamed for doing that. I would expect that from this blacklabel guy, but not you.
1) I never once said Bradshaw was better than Marino. I DID SAY that Bradshaw was probably better suited for the Steelers of the 70's than Marino. I think Marino is a top 5 QB of all-time. I would not put Bradshaw in the top 10. Given the choice to start a team I would take Marino over Bradshaw.
2) Bradshaw deserves credit for his performance in the Super Bowls. It could have been random luck, it could have been a number of things. Nonetheless, it did happen.
3) The notion that Bradshaw was carried by the running game and his defense and any quarterback could have won with the Steelers is nonsense. The Cowboys had a better running game and a comparable defense and they won less than the Steelers.
4) I would not use Super Bowl performance to say Bradshaw is better than Marino or others who won less Super Bowls but if I thought Marino and Bradshaw were equal QB's the Super Bowl performance would elevate Bradshaw slighly ahead in my eyes. If one views Peyton Manning and Dan Marino as being equal QB's and I was forced to choose one or the other I would choose Manning based on the SB victories. If I viewed Marino as being superior the lack of a Super Bowl truimph would not change my view.
5) You can look at shutting down the running game in a couple of ways. I do not remember if the other team stacked the box and dared Pittsburgh to throw, but I think it was more along the lines of the opposition putting Pittsburgh into obvious passing downs and Bradshaw still found a way to beat them. In the 1998 AFC Conference Championship Game between the Jets and the Broncos I remember Bill Parcells saying all week that stopping Terrell Davis was the entire focus. The Jets would give John Elway every opportunity to beat them because they feared Terrell Davis far more. Elway, despite playing against a team entirely focused on stopping Davis, and a defense that gave him good field position most of the afternoon finished the day 13 for 34 for 173 yards. He made one big passing play all day against a defense totally designed to stop the run. That never happened once to Bradshaw in these games.
<< <i>
IN 1971 with Bradshaw, the Steelers had the 17th best offense, and the 17th best defense. They finished 6-8 WITH BRADSHAW
LOL. Again not giving Bradshaw credit where credit is due, is just insane. Bradshaw was voted the best offensive Steeler player in history. Not Franco or anyone else. Fact remains, the Steelers were losers before Bradshaw.
Its just common sense that when qb's have better team players, they have better records.
In 1980, when the 49'ers had the 26th worst defense in the NFL, Montana's record was 2-5.
All the sudden, the next year in 1981, the 49'ers have the 2nd best defense and Montana's record is a whopping 13-3.
Then in 1982, the 49'ers have the 23th defense in the NFL, Montana's record is only 3-6.
And finally, blacklabel, you keep saying Joe Montana is ranked ahead of Marino because of Super Bowl titles. Maybe by you and other ignorant fans he may be ahead of him based on that criteria. But actually, his body of work and his ability to play QB, and his results over the course of his career cause him to be ranked ahead of Marino.
Career Passer ratings:
Joe Montana 93.2
Dan Marino 86.4
>>
If this was the case then, both Kurt warner and Steve Young would be ranked ahead of Montana because they have higher ratings. And there are several other current qb's including Tony Romo that have a higher passing rating than Montana so i guess that means Romo is better than Montana.
Marino broke all the records. More passing yards, more tds.
If Montana won 0 championships, and Marino won 4 than everyone would have Marino #1 on the list without question.
When i rank a qb, i look at how well they did in BOTH the regular season AND post-season where it really counts. The main goal of any qb is to win champioships and it is a must for qb's to play great in big games. Marino did not. Marino was a stud during the regular season and proved he could beat any team during the regular season...case in point...the 85 BEARS.
So if i was to start a team, i would pick Bradshaw over Marino because i would want a winner instead of a choker who time upon time, laid an egg during big games.
Aro, you keep saying Bradshaw had the big games in the SUper Bowl, and it has to count for something. You are STILL neglecting the fact that he had two HOF wide receivers who made those long passes possible.
The first Super Bowl was ALL Franco Harris and the defense. Harris had 34 carriers for 158 yards. Bradshaw threw 14 passes in the game and completed 9. He was a caretaker who threw only the safe passes in that game. He had one four yard touchdown pass which gave him high QB rating for the game...an artificial rating so to speak.
Swann owned the second Super Bowl, and it was HIS fantastic catches that made Bradshaw's game, not hte other way around. 4 catches 161 yds.
Swann and Stallworth owned the next Super Bowl. Swann 7 catches 124 yards. Stallworth 3 for 115.
Swann and Stallworth in the last one. 5 for 79, and 3 for 121 for Stallworth.
I will break down for you guys how Bradshaw's success was a product of his teammate, and his passing was owed a great deal to the ability of Swann and Stallworth.
Blacklabel, before you confuse yourself more, you need to read this again, because it totally blows your theory away of Bradshaw...
Blacklabel, you said that Terry Bradshaw turned the steelers around in '72 and '73 and made them playoff contenders. Huh? On what planet?
IN 1971 with Bradshaw, the Steelers had the 17th best offense, and the 17th best defense. They finished 6-8 WITH BRADSHAW
In 1972 with Bradshaw, the Steelers jumped to the 5th best offense, and the 2nd best defense. Yes 2nd! They went 11-3. But wait, why did their offense all of a sudden get so good??? Don't you think it had something to do with Franco Harris coming onto the scene to average 5.5 yards a carry, and getting 1,055 yards? Bradshaw didn't do anything. It was their running and defense why they won.
What did Bradshaw do passing that year? 12 Td, 12 INt, and a 64.1 QB rating. Why you say HE led them to the playoffs when they had the 2nd best defense, and one of the top running backs is beyond me. He was there the year before, produced similarly mediocore, but only had a mediocore defense, and no Franco Harris, and they went 6-8!! He didn't do anything to lead them, he road coattails.
In fact, Bradshaw was producing mediocore passing results for a couple more seasons, and didn't 'win' his first Super Bowl until they got Swann and Stallworth, and their defene regained the dominance. And he didn't have his first good passing season (88 rating)until 1975!!
Blacklable, I used QB rating for Montana and Marino because they were in the same era. Crossing era's isn't really effective for that(Warner, Romo etc...). Montana was better than Marino without taking into consideration any playoff games.
In 1971 Bradshaw was a very young QB adjusting to the speed and physicality of the NFL.
I've said before that I'd rather have a guy who hits .290 with 18 HR's and 78 rbi's in the regular season, but
hits .350 in the postseason, then someone who hits .323 with 43 HR's in the regular season, but hits .133 in the postseason.
Here in lies Bradshaw's greatness. He was a decent QB on a very good football team, but he achieves greatness status
because he was money in the playoffs.
<< <i>Aro, you keep saying Bradshaw had the big games in the SUper Bowl, and it has to count for something. You are STILL neglecting the fact that he had two HOF wide receivers who made those long passes possible.
The first Super Bowl was ALL Franco Harris and the defense. Harris had 34 carriers for 158 yards. Bradshaw threw 14 passes in the game and completed 9. He was a caretaker who threw only the safe passes in that game. He had one four yard touchdown pass which gave him high QB rating for the game...an artificial rating so to speak.
Swann owned the second Super Bowl, and it was HIS fantastic catches that made Bradshaw's game, not hte other way around. 4 catches 161 yds.
Swann and Stallworth owned the next Super Bowl. Swann 7 catches 124 yards. Stallworth 3 for 115.
Swann and Stallworth in the last one. 5 for 79, and 3 for 121 for Stallworth.
I will break down for you guys how Bradshaw's success was a product of his teammate, and his passing was owed a great deal to the ability of Swann and Stallworth.
>>
These statements right here should discredit anything you say. Bradshaw was 2-time super bowl mvp and to say his teammates deserves the credit and was the only reason why they won is LAUGHABLE at best. Bradshaw also WON alot of OTHER BIG GAMES to get to the BIG GAME. So not only did he come up big in the super bowl, but he played great in other playoff games. In his last playoff game in 1982, he was 28 of 39 passes for 325 yards and 2 td's. A year later he retired.
Bradshaw's 64 yard TD pass in the 76 super bowl travelled 70 YARDS IN THE AIR and is considered ONE OF THE GREATEST PASSES IN NFL HISTORY!!!!
BTW the best player on the steelers teams was Mike Webster.
If Bradshaw were truly money, and a big game player, how do you explain the horrible games he had on the road in the playoffs??
I just posted the timeline of Bradshaw's success in another thread. You will see that Bradshaw's passing game only materialized when Swann and Stallwroth becames starters. Swann/Stallworth were constants in the Super Bowls. I didn't see any 3rd or 4th receiver having big games (like Manning had this year). Why? Because they weren't good enough to catch jump balls or deep balls. Bradshaw relied on those two.
Edmundfitzgerald, all those post season baseball numbers you talk about are pure randomness. Go look at Andruw Jones, Bernie Williams, Reggie Jackson(yes Reggie. He was AWFUL in a lot of post season series). The more they play, the more their post season totals resemble their regular season totals. No such thing as a player as you describe. They are just as likely to revert the other way the next time i.e, Ryan Howard.
Morgoth, for the record, I don't say it was all one palyers doing, Swann making the catch. YOU GUYS are saying it was all one players doing(bradshaw), by giving him so much credit for those Super Bowl titles. The record shows, that without the top flight defense, his teams didn't come close to winning.
I am saying it takes a super cast to do what the Steelers did, Bradshaw could have been Jeff George.
Without Harris, his offenses were mediocore. Without Swann/Stallworth, his passing was mediocore. In fact, he got benched two different years because he couldn't take advantage of the weapons...and his backups Did BETTER!
Blacklable, I could still throw the footbal over 50yds, and I have no shoulder left. Jeff George could throw it as far too, only if there is no receiver open or there to catch it, so waht. Why didn't Bradshaw have those passing yards before Swann/Stallworth??????? Afterall, he could throw it 70 yards in the air.
We will play a four on four game of football. We will each quarterback our team. I will pick the other three players that play on your team, and also pick the three players that play on my team.
Only, there is no complaining about your teammates, and you can't use that as a reason why you lost. If you lose, it is because you can't play well. How about 2k per game?
<< <i>
If Bradshaw were truly money, and a big game player, how do you explain the horrible games he had on the road in the playoffs??
Bradshaw was 14-5 during the post-season. Not too shabby.
The record shows, that without the top flight defense, his teams didn't come close to winning.
Much like every other great super bowl winning team.
I am saying it takes a super cast to do what the Steelers did, Bradshaw could have been Jeff George.
Oh please. George was a flake and was not mentally capable of leading a team to a championship.
Without Harris, his offenses were mediocore. Without Swann/Stallworth, his passing was mediocore. In fact, he got benched two different years because he couldn't take advantage of the weapons...and his backups Did BETTER!
In 76, Bradshaw suffered both a neck and wrist injury, so no surprise the backup did better that year. Still it was Bradshaw who won the playoff game that year over the colts, 40-14 with 3 touchdowns.
>>
You mention Bradshaw 'winning' the playoff game that year he came back, but you always never mention 'losing' the next one. A better QB would have given Pittsburgh Six or Seven Super Bowls. Bradshaw was a big dissapointment in '76 and '77. Those teams were primed to win again with all the weapons, but he wasn't good enough.
Lucky for him, Swann and Stalloworth made circus catches to make him look good.
Oh, and if you don't believe the receivers matter, lets play that game between us for two grand.
<< <i>Saberman you act like these guys are robots, get real. Some players freeze up on the big stages and some can relax and perform. The more often someone reaches the big show the more of a chance they will eventuallly perform. You have to give credit for a player to make the plays when possible. To say it was all one player (Swann making the catch) is silly since the ball had to be thrown. You act like a monkey could just throw a ball up and these guys would catch it.
>>
If Bradshaw were truly money, and a big game player, how do you explain the horrible games he had on the road in the playoffs??
I just posted the timeline of Bradshaw's success in another thread. You will see that Bradshaw's passing game only materialized when Swann and Stallwroth becames starters. Swann/Stallworth were constants in the Super Bowls. I didn't see any 3rd or 4th receiver having big games (like Manning had this year). Why? Because they weren't good enough to catch jump balls or deep balls. Bradshaw relied on those two.
Edmundfitzgerald, all those post season baseball numbers you talk about are pure randomness. Go look at Andruw Jones, Bernie Williams, Reggie Jackson(yes Reggie. He was AWFUL in a lot of post season series). The more they play, the more their post season totals resemble their regular season totals. No such thing as a player as you describe. They are just as likely to revert the other way the next time i.e, Ryan Howard.
Morgoth, for the record, I don't say it was all one palyers doing, Swann making the catch. YOU GUYS are saying it was all one players doing(bradshaw), by giving him so much credit for those Super Bowl titles. The record shows, that without the top flight defense, his teams didn't come close to winning.
I am saying it takes a super cast to do what the Steelers did, Bradshaw could have been Jeff George.
Without Harris, his offenses were mediocore. Without Swann/Stallworth, his passing was mediocore. In fact, he got benched two different years because he couldn't take advantage of the weapons...and his backups Did BETTER!
Blacklable, I could still throw the footbal over 50yds, and I have no shoulder left. Jeff George could throw it as far too, only if there is no receiver open or there to catch it, so waht. Why didn't Bradshaw have those passing yards before Swann/Stallworth??????? Afterall, he could throw it 70 yards in the air.