<< <i>Bill Walsh said the quarterback position is the most important on a football team.
Yet we all know that a great QB needs great players around him in order to win.
Terry was fortunate enough to play on a dynasty, and he was an important part of that dynasty.
Bart Starr, Unitas, Elway, Montana, Marino, Staubach, Steve Young, and many others could have flourished with those Steeler teams the same way that Terry did.
I thought Terry Bradshaw was incredible. He could always make a big play in the big games. He never choked in important games the way Romo does.
The Bradshaw Steelers and Romo Cowboys have played some big, important games. Terry always seemed to lift his team when the game was on the line, whether he played great or average. Romo has been prone to make bonehead plays when games are on the line, whether he's played great during that game, or average.
Terry always came through for those great Steeler teams, and he was awesome. >>
Bradshaw was good. He just isn't as good as people make him out to be when they cite those four rings and use that to say he is better than guys with less.
QB is the single most important position on the team...however, it isn't more important than the entire defense, or rest of the offense.
The offensive/defensive line as a whole are more important...as they can turn the ordinary into extraordinary!
If he was as important as people say, then he would have led them to more than two playoff wins when he didn't have the best supporting cast ever.
Bradshaw choked...he got benched in the midst of one of those Super Bowl runs! lol.
His backups did better. If he was as important as you say, then how could backup scrubs lead the team to a better record AND have better individual performances?? >>
You're talking about Mike Kruczek, correct ?
Is this the same Mike Kruczek who didn't beat Terry for the starting job his next three years in Pittsburgh ?
If this the same Mike Kruczek who Chuck Knoll said benefited from the Steeler team rallying around him when Terry was out, and played harder knowing that Terry wasn't in there ?
If this Kruczek was so much better than Terry, then why did Hall of Fame coach Chuck Knoll sit Mike for his next three years in Pittsburgh ?
You're smarter then Hall of Fame coach Chuck Knoll, because you're saying that Kruczek was better then Terry because of Kruczek's record.
I would love for you to make an appearance on the NFL network and explain to all the former NFL players how Kruczek was better than Terry. Or you could sit with Terry, Howie Long, and Jimmy Johnson and tell them that Terry was not as good as people say he was. I would actually pay to watch that. Me and popcorn girl next to my side.
I would have no problem at all pointing all these things out to them. None at all. The very first post in this thread is pretty clear, and only a fool would continue to think Bradshaw was the main reason why they won. I would invite them to my venue, rather than theirs though
Yes, Bradshaw's backups did better. That does not mean I claim they were better QB's, you are way off in that thinking. It does highlight very clearly(along with all the other evidence), that the team won for many very important reasons, many of which had NOTHING to do with Bradshaw.
In fact, the other reasons were so strong and prevalent, that they were able to do just as good with scrub QB's in Bradshaw's sted! LOL.
You are so dumb, because your link to the top ten steeler QB highlihgts my point, lol! None of Bradshaw's scrubs come close to making that list, and they shouldnt'....yet THEY DID JUST AS GOOD WHEN GIVE THE REIGNS to 'Bradshaw's' teams, lol! If scrubs can do just as good, that doesn't say a whole lot about Bradshaw's impact on the teams!
The final blow to their(and your) argument would be to invite them to play in the proposed game we(you and I) have on the table. Then we will see if your theories in use matches your espoused theories
Enter Franco Harris 1972........11-3.............5th...........5th.................6.1..............................12/12..................64.1
Bradshaw improved a hair(due to less INT), and was still mediocore, but they improved on the strength of the defensive gain, and Harris's 5.6 yds per carry and 1,055 yards.
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating 1973.........10-4...........8th............4th...................6.6...............................10/15..................54.5 Bradshaw regressed, but they still go 10-4. 1974.........10-3-1........2nd...........6th...................5.3.................................7/8.....................55.2. Bradshaw is benched! Goes 5-2 ....................................................... .GILLIAM.......6.0.................................4/8.....................55.4 Gilliams plays Goes 4-1-1. SUPER BOWL YR
Enter Swann/Stallworth as starters Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating 1975..........12-2............2nd..........5th....................7.2................................18/9...................88. Bradshaw's 1st big year. Thanks Lynn&John.
Notice how Bradshaw's Yards per attempt took a big leap with the addition of Swann and Stallworth as starters. They win anthother Super Bowl thanks to the defense again, and the two new receiving threats who boosted Bradshaw's game. Bradshaw had FIVE years of mediocore passing numbers. It didn't change until Swann and Stallworth were playing.
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating 1976........10-4............1st............5th...................6.1...........................10/9........................65.4. Huge step backwards for Terry & is Benched! Bradshaw goes 4-4, Krucek 6-0........... Krucek:..8.9............................0/3..........................74.5. Krucek outplays Terry. This is the year Bradshaw should have won another Super Bowl with the best defense, and weapons all around. Basically he regressed and blew it, and got benched for the second time in the midst of the Super Bowl years.
It is the super Bowl years and the years inbetween that show how much Bradshaw relied on his teammates. When his backups got significant plying time, they did as well, or Better in both performance and team record.
I know! That is extremely funny! That guy did better than Bradshaw when given the same team to work with. Bradshaw got benched, lol. I would be embarrassed if I were Bradshaw or a Bradshaw fan.
I would be very proud to be a Steeler or Steeler fan of those teams though. One of the all time greatest teams.
Heck, they took a dumb, strong armed QB that had FIVE previous years of poor to mediocre NFL QB performance, and carried him to four Super Bowls. Thanks to the D, RB's, and WR's primarily....and the O-line.
It is all laid out in the first post like detective work.
But, Terry Bradshaw has made it in..................................
Hollywood as an "Actor".
Does not his success in Hollywood trump all of his shortcomings (perceived or real) as an NFL Quarterback and require that he be sainted, or knighted?
Again he is an "Actor". He is also Superbowl Champion and on TV every Sunday during the NFL Season. He is thus is so much better all of the rest of us.
I know! That is extremely funny! That guy did better than Bradshaw when given the same team to work with. Bradshaw got benched, lol. I would be embarrassed if I were Bradshaw or a Bradshaw fan.
I would be very proud to be a Steeler or Steeler fan of those teams though. One of the all time greatest teams.
Heck, they took a dumb, strong armed QB that had FIVE previous years of poor to mediocre NFL QB performance, and carried him to four Super Bowls. Thanks to the D, RB's, and WR's primarily....and the O-line.
It is all laid out in the first post like detective work.
<< <i>Tom Brady 2 Super Bowl MVPs Joe Montana 3 Super Bowl MVPs Bart Starr 2 Super Bowl MVPs Terry Bradshaw 2 Super Bowl MVPs
Terry Bradshaw 14-5 in playoff games
Terry was a huge big game performer. Tony Romo is a huge big game choker.
Brady, Bradshaw, Montana, and Starr equals huge big time Quarterbacks who LED their teams to impressive Super Bowl wins.
Mike Krucek >>
Krucek did better than Bradshaw when given the same team, and that tells you how it was the team winning the games, and not the QB You are right to laugh at Krucek doing better...glad to see you finally understood and learned something, lol.
Bradshaw didn't lead them to anything. He was lead, carried by his teammates, plain and simple. He owes all his thanks to his defense, 0-line, RB's, WR's, and coaching stuff for utilizing his skill of throwing the ball deep(which was only taken advantage of when Swann and Stallworth MADE the catches on the deep jump balls, just like in the Super Bowls).
All highlighted below, step by step, how the team was built and lead Bradshaw to any individual success, and to any team success. You see, without those guys leading him, Bradshaw couldn't led a team to any Super Bowl win(and he had his chances to, but couldn't):
Way too much credit goes to the QB when a team wins the Super Bowl. They don't win anything without their teammates. In Terry Bradshaw's case, he receives so much credit for the rings, and he just happened to have the best situation in history for a QB, enabling him to BE A PART of four Super Bowl champions.
The problem is that people rate Bradshaw ahead of other superior QB's who did not have the enviable situation of HOF teammates leading the way to Super Bowl victories. Lets breakdown the building of the Bradshaw myth....
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating 1970........5-9...............16th.........21st...............6.5...............................6/24..................30.4 1971........6-8...............17th.........17th...............6.1..............................13/22.................59.7 1972........11-3.............5th...........5th.................6.1..............................12/12..................64.1 They added Franco Harris this year 1973........10-4....... ....8th............4th...................6.6............................10/15..................54.5 1974.........10-3-1........2nd...........6th...................5.3......................... ....7/8.....................55.2 SB 1975..........12-2............2nd..........5th...................7.2...........................18/9.....................88. Swann and Stallworth become starters SB 1976........10-4............1st............5th...................6.1............................10/9......................65.4. 1977.......9-5...............17th..........7th...................8.0...........................17/19......................71.4 1978.......14-2..............1st............5th...................7.9..........................28/20.....................84.7 League Wide uptick in passing offense SB 1979........12-4.............5th............1st...................7.9..........................26/25.....................77 SB 1980........9-7..............15th...........10th.................7.9..........................22/24.....................81.4 1981........8-8...............11th...........8th.................7.8...........................22/14.....................83.9 1982........9-7...............4th.............8th.................7.4...........................17/11.....................81.4
Some hard facts: 1)Bradshaw had a sustained level of yards per pass for his first five years. It took a noticeable jump with the addition of Swann/Stallworth as starters
2)Pittsburgh's offense joined the top of the league with the addition of Franco Harris. Before Franco Harris, Bradshaw could only lead them to the 17th best offense
3)In the four Super Bowl years, Pittsburgh's defense was in the top five in each of those years. Nothing to do with Bradshaw.
4)Bradshaw did not make the top ten in the league in passer rating or yards per pass, UNTIL he had Swann and Stallworth as starters. He had FIVE years prior to that to show that HE was the man...but he wasn't good enough to break those ranks.
6)Bradshaw was benched TWICE during the Super Bowl run! In fact, the combined records of his back ups were BETTER than Bradshaw's. The combined passer ratings of his backups were BETTER than Bradshaw's. The team didn't miss a beat with a scrub at the helm.
With this, it is quite evident that Bradshaw led a mediocore team offense until Franco Harris arrived. Bradshaw remained mediocore himself, and didn't improve upon his passing until Swann and Stallworth became full-time starters.
Super Bowl performance?
First Super Bowl was all Harris. 34 carriers 158 yards. Bradshaw only threw 14 times, and complete 9. One 4 yd Td boosted his rating.
Second Super Bowl was all Swann. 4 catches 161 yards. Catches that had all to do with HIS skill.
Third Super Bowl Swann 7 catches 124 yards. Stallworth 3 for 115. More of the same for them.
Fourt Super Bowl Swann 5 for 79, Stallworth 3 for 121.
As you noticed in the regular season, Bradshaw was mediocore until he got those two receivers. They had more to do with his success, than he did. Sure, he could throw it far, but so could Jeff George!
I would have been more impressed with Bradshaw's Super Bowl performances if his third or fourth receiver was getting all those yards(like Manning's in the AFC championsip this year). But it was the same two guys in all three Super Bowls who were doing the catching. So why on earth do people give Bradshaw all that credit??? They need a hero, thats why.
Enter Franco Harris 1972........11-3.............5th...........5th.................6.1..............................12/12..................64.1
Bradshaw improved a hair(due to less INT), and was still mediocore, but they improved on the strength of the defensive gain, and Harris's 5.6 yds per carry and 1,055 yards.
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating 1973.........10-4...........8th............4th...................6.6...............................10/15..................54.5 Bradshaw regressed, but they still go 10-4. 1974.........10-3-1........2nd...........6th...................5.3.................................7/8.....................55.2. Bradshaw is benched! Goes 5-2 ....................................................... .GILLIAM.......6.0.................................4/8.....................55.4 Gilliams plays Goes 4-1-1. SUPER BOWL YR
Enter Swann/Stallworth as starters Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating 1975..........12-2............2nd..........5th....................7.2................................18/9...................88. Bradshaw's 1st big year. Thanks Lynn&John.
Notice how Bradshaw's Yards per attempt took a big leap with the addition of Swann and Stallworth as starters. They win anthother Super Bowl thanks to the defense again, and the two new receiving threats who boosted Bradshaw's game. Bradshaw had FIVE years of mediocore passing numbers. It didn't change until Swann and Stallworth were playing.
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating 1976........10-4............1st............5th...................6.1...........................10/9........................65.4. Huge step backwards for Terry & is Benched! Bradshaw goes 4-4, Krucek 6-0........... Krucek:..8.9............................0/3..........................74.5. Krucek outplays Terry. This is the year Bradshaw should have won another Super Bowl with the best defense, and weapons all around. Basically he regressed and blew it, and got benched for the second time in the midst of the Super Bowl years.
It is the super Bowl years and the years inbetween that show how much Bradshaw relied on his teammates. When his backups got significant plying time, they did as well, or Better in both performance and team record.
<< <i>Tom Brady 2 Super Bowl MVPs Joe Montana 3 Super Bowl MVPs Bart Starr 2 Super Bowl MVPs Terry Bradshaw 2 Super Bowl MVPs
Terry Bradshaw 14-5 in playoff games
Terry was a huge big game performer. Tony Romo is a huge big game choker.
Brady, Bradshaw, Montana, and Starr equals huge big time Quarterbacks who LED their teams to impressive Super Bowl wins.
Mike Krucek >>
Still the funniest thing ever, Krucek a backup scrub, doing better than Bradshaw on the elite team. You keep laughing, yet that is a point against your stance, not for it...but you are just too dumb to even realize that!
LOL, according to YOUR logic, Joe Flacco, Mark Rypien, Doug Williams, and Jim Plunkett...all Super Bowl MVP's...and equal to Manning, Brees, Aaron Rodgers, Staubach, Aikman, Elway, Kurt Warner, Steve young, who all have equal(one) Super Bowl MVP's. Then better than Favre, Unitas, Marino, with no Super Bowl MVP's. LOL.
OR,
A more comprehenisve, objective, and LOGICAL analysis that shows the true 'value' of Bradshaw among his steeler teammates, and the anatomy of their winning ways:
Way too much credit goes to the QB when a team wins the Super Bowl. They don't win anything without their teammates. In Terry Bradshaw's case, he receives so much credit for the rings, and he just happened to have the best situation in history for a QB, enabling him to BE A PART of four Super Bowl champions.
The problem is that people rate Bradshaw ahead of other superior QB's who did not have the enviable situation of HOF teammates leading the way to Super Bowl victories. Lets breakdown the building of the Bradshaw myth....
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating 1970........5-9...............16th.........21st...............6.5...............................6/24..................30.4 1971........6-8...............17th.........17th...............6.1..............................13/22.................59.7 1972........11-3.............5th...........5th.................6.1..............................12/12..................64.1 They added Franco Harris this year 1973........10-4....... ....8th............4th...................6.6............................10/15..................54.5 1974.........10-3-1........2nd...........6th...................5.3......................... ....7/8.....................55.2 SB 1975..........12-2............2nd..........5th...................7.2...........................18/9.....................88. Swann and Stallworth become starters SB 1976........10-4............1st............5th...................6.1............................10/9......................65.4. 1977.......9-5...............17th..........7th...................8.0...........................17/19......................71.4 1978.......14-2..............1st............5th...................7.9..........................28/20.....................84.7 League Wide uptick in passing offense SB 1979........12-4.............5th............1st...................7.9..........................26/25.....................77 SB 1980........9-7..............15th...........10th.................7.9..........................22/24.....................81.4 1981........8-8...............11th...........8th.................7.8...........................22/14.....................83.9 1982........9-7...............4th.............8th.................7.4...........................17/11.....................81.4
Some hard facts: 1)Bradshaw had a sustained level of yards per pass for his first five years. It took a noticeable jump with the addition of Swann/Stallworth as starters
2)Pittsburgh's offense joined the top of the league with the addition of Franco Harris. Before Franco Harris, Bradshaw could only lead them to the 17th best offense
3)In the four Super Bowl years, Pittsburgh's defense was in the top five in each of those years. Nothing to do with Bradshaw.
4)Bradshaw did not make the top ten in the league in passer rating or yards per pass, UNTIL he had Swann and Stallworth as starters. He had FIVE years prior to that to show that HE was the man...but he wasn't good enough to break those ranks.
6)Bradshaw was benched TWICE during the Super Bowl run! In fact, the combined records of his back ups were BETTER than Bradshaw's. The combined passer ratings of his backups were BETTER than Bradshaw's. The team didn't miss a beat with a scrub at the helm.
With this, it is quite evident that Bradshaw led a mediocore team offense until Franco Harris arrived. Bradshaw remained mediocore himself, and didn't improve upon his passing until Swann and Stallworth became full-time starters.
Super Bowl performance?
First Super Bowl was all Harris. 34 carriers 158 yards. Bradshaw only threw 14 times, and complete 9. One 4 yd Td boosted his rating.
Second Super Bowl was all Swann. 4 catches 161 yards. Catches that had all to do with HIS skill.
Third Super Bowl Swann 7 catches 124 yards. Stallworth 3 for 115. More of the same for them.
Fourt Super Bowl Swann 5 for 79, Stallworth 3 for 121.
As you noticed in the regular season, Bradshaw was mediocore until he got those two receivers. They had more to do with his success, than he did. Sure, he could throw it far, but so could Jeff George!
I would have been more impressed with Bradshaw's Super Bowl performances if his third or fourth receiver was getting all those yards(like Manning's in the AFC championsip this year). But it was the same two guys in all three Super Bowls who were doing the catching. So why on earth do people give Bradshaw all that credit??? They need a hero, thats why.
Enter Franco Harris 1972........11-3.............5th...........5th.................6.1..............................12/12..................64.1
Bradshaw improved a hair(due to less INT), and was still mediocore, but they improved on the strength of the defensive gain, and Harris's 5.6 yds per carry and 1,055 yards.
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating 1973.........10-4...........8th............4th...................6.6...............................10/15..................54.5 Bradshaw regressed, but they still go 10-4. 1974.........10-3-1........2nd...........6th...................5.3.................................7/8.....................55.2. Bradshaw is benched! Goes 5-2 ....................................................... .GILLIAM.......6.0.................................4/8.....................55.4 Gilliams plays Goes 4-1-1. SUPER BOWL YR
Enter Swann/Stallworth as starters Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating 1975..........12-2............2nd..........5th....................7.2................................18/9...................88. Bradshaw's 1st big year. Thanks Lynn&John.
Notice how Bradshaw's Yards per attempt took a big leap with the addition of Swann and Stallworth as starters. They win anthother Super Bowl thanks to the defense again, and the two new receiving threats who boosted Bradshaw's game. Bradshaw had FIVE years of mediocore passing numbers. It didn't change until Swann and Stallworth were playing.
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating 1976........10-4............1st............5th...................6.1...........................10/9........................65.4. Huge step backwards for Terry & is Benched! Bradshaw goes 4-4, Krucek 6-0........... Krucek:..8.9............................0/3..........................74.5. Krucek outplays Terry. This is the year Bradshaw should have won another Super Bowl with the best defense, and weapons all around. Basically he regressed and blew it, and got benched for the second time in the midst of the Super Bowl years.
It is the super Bowl years and the years inbetween that show how much Bradshaw relied on his teammates. When his backups got significant plying time, they did as well, or Better in both performance and team record.
These self-proclaimed knucklehead football experts on here are just hilarious in their all knowing attempts to discredit someone with their ridiculous hypothesis' .
You'll have to excuse them, because they actually believe the stupid stuff they write. Its a mental disorder.
Terry Bradshaw Troy Aikman
I loved watching them both play, they were both great QB's who led two of the NFL's greatest dynasty's
Awesome players Both. Two of the greatest field generals you'll ever see! And they have the hardware to prove it.
But... But....But... Please give it a break. Your not as smart as you think you are.
They were on two of the greatest teams, that does not mean they were the reasons they won. There are hundreds of other important variables that go into winning a Super Bowl.
Bradshaw didn't lead them to victory, he was led to victory.
Read the first post, it is all laid out.
According to YOUR theory, that makes Plunkett better than Rodgers, Manning, and Brees.
I have to ask, if Bradshaw was indeed the main reason they won, then how did they have a better winning percentage when his backups took the helm of the team?? It just shows that the other dominant prevailing factors were making them win games. Those elite teams did just as good without Bradshaw.
Never claimed I was the smartest. However, if I am dumbing it down, it is probably because of the clientele I am talking to you(which you are a part of).
How about we play that football game, and lets see if you really believe what you say?
I understand that guys like Edmundfitzgerald, Corncobb, and Soundgard need heroes, and so they deeply believe the myth building process that the media does to guys like Bradshaw. It is understandable, as that is why Superhero movies are so popular...as people need a hero, someone better than they are, to fill a missing void.
Heck, children believe in Santa and the Easter bunny, and that isn't much different.
Do you guys still believe in that too? LoL.
With the way you guys continue to bring up EMPTY and invalid points, next you are going to try and convince me that Santa is real, and you will hold up the DVD of Tim Allen's, The Santa Clause, as your proof! The funny thing about that, is that it will be a better argument than anything any of you have ever posted in a thread in CU!
They were on two of the greatest teams, that does not mean they were the reasons they won. There are hundreds of other important variables that go into winning a Super Bowl.
Bradshaw didn't lead them to victory, he was led to victory. >>
They were on two of the greatest teams, that does not mean they were the reasons they won. There are hundreds of other important variables that go into winning a Super Bowl.
Bradshaw didn't lead them to victory, he was led to victory. >>
Um, it was Bradshaw who called the plays >>
Um, no he ran the plays he was given. BTW, he threw for a total of 305 yards in his first 2 SBs combined.
They were on two of the greatest teams, that does not mean they were the reasons they won. There are hundreds of other important variables that go into winning a Super Bowl.
Bradshaw didn't lead them to victory, he was led to victory. >>
Um, it was Bradshaw who called the plays >>
Um, no he ran the plays he was given. BTW, he threw for a total of 305 yards in his first 2 SBs combined. >>
Bradshaw's strong arm, toughness, and him calling the plays are what keeps him a HOF QB, despite having several poor years when he didn't' have an elite team(and was not able to carry a team), and despite the elite teammates being good enough where any scrub QB was winning with them. The defense and the running game are what made those teams. The acrobatic receivers, coupled with Bradshaw's strong arm, gave them the deep game to compliment the running game. All of that is detailed in the first post.
Great team. For all those citing the Super Bowls and playoff records, that certainly affirms the greatness of the 70's Steelers, but doesn't affirm the ability of Bradshaw. His backups also 'led' that team to superb records, showing that pretty much any joe could win with them.
Credit goes where credit is due...to their defense and running game first and foremost, then the rest of the guys can fight for what is left of the pie.
I love the idea that soundgard is not quoting yahoo answers as 'articles'! Love it, and proves just how deeply ignorant he chooses to be.
Bradshaw had a great career, but to sit there and suggest that he's even in the same realm as Montana is as idiotic and I'll say it, dumb, as can be. The numbers don't lie, and the numbers that prove without a doubt that Bradshaw's replacements had even better numbers than he did prove the Steelers won games and super bowls, and not Bradshaw.
But these old folks (I'm looking at you fitz, soungard, and corncob) absolutely refuse to look at the statistical analysis so helpfully provided here that proves Bradshaw was not the amazing QB they've bought into for years - they simply do not want to see behind the curtain despite it being held wide open for them. They would rather close their eyes, stomp their feet, and say over and over again 'Bradshaw is amazing! Bradshaw is amazing!' rather than have their long-held beliefs overturned. There is no amount of evidence (and there's plenty) that will change these people's minds.
<< <i>Bradshaw's strong arm, toughness, and him calling the plays are what keeps him a HOF QB, despite having several poor years when he didn't' have an elite team(and was not able to carry a team), and despite the elite teammates being good enough where any scrub QB was winning with them. The defense and the running game are what made those teams. The acrobatic receivers, coupled with Bradshaw's strong arm, gave them the deep game to compliment the running game. All of that is detailed in the first post.
Great team. For all those citing the Super Bowls and playoff records, that certainly affirms the greatness of the 70's Steelers, but doesn't affirm the ability of Bradshaw. His backups also 'led' that team to superb records, showing that pretty much any joe could win with them.
Credit goes where credit is due...to their defense and running game first and foremost, then the rest of the guys can fight for what is left of the pie. >>
You're forgetting one important issue. The Blount rule(which totally changed the game) didn't go into affect until 1978. It wasn't until then, the steelers became a passing team. Before the rule change, running backs were every bit as important as quarterbacks. First year of the rule change, Bradshaw wins the league MVP and a new era in the NFL begins.
Could it be skin/1985 IS Mike Kruczek? His wife? >>
Do you realize how dumb you are? You keep laughing at the backups...but the fact that the backups did better than Bradshaw, pokes big holes into your theory that Bradshaw was the reason they won. In the midst of their Super Bowl years, when Gilliam and Kruczek were the starting QB's, they led those Steeler teams to a combined 10-1-1 record. Now tell me genius, if Bradshaw was the reason they won, then how did two backup scrubs lead the team to a better record?
Bradshaw's yards per attempt before Swann and Stallworth were: 6.5 6.1 6.1 6.6 5.3 When Swann and Stallworth became starters it jumped to: 7.2 The following year when Pittsburgh should have won another Super Bowl, but Bradshaw was so bad it fell to: 6.1 Then the following year it jumped to: 8.0
That was ALL before the league wide uptick in passing that started in 1978. So you see, a large part of Bradshaw's passing game goes to Swann and Stallworth...unless Bradshaw was throwing those passes to himself.
Previous to Swann and Stallworth, Bradshaw could not produce passing numbers like that. If your theory is correct in that Bradshaw gets all that credit, then he should have been able to produce those passing performances BEFORE Swann and Stallworth, yet he could not.
In those two Super Bowls(after the league wide uptick in passing) where Bradshaw had two good passing games, it was Swann and Stallworth getting open deep, and making acrobatic catches. As outlined above, without those two, Bradshaw couldn't get it done, and that is when they only won when the defense was phenomenal, or the running game absolutely carried them.
Never forget the FACT that the defense and running game is what made those teams win! Even in the Super Bowl where the defense gave up points, they still got them top seed and advantageous playoff games to get to the Super Bowl. Then it was Swann/Stallworth making the plays in the actual Super Bowl.
Looking at all the evidence, it boils down to the following two facts:
1. Terry Bradshaw played mediocre to poor when he was not surrounded by elite teammates on offense and Defense.
2. When those same elite teammates had backup scrub QB's running their team, they did even better than when Bradshaw was running their team!
None of the factual evidence leads to any sort of claim that Bradshaw was the main reason they won.
<< <i>Looking at all the evidence, it boils down to the following two facts:
1. Terry Bradshaw played mediocre to poor when he was not surrounded by elite teammates on offense and Defense.
2. When those same elite teammates had backup scrub QB's running their team, they did even better than when Bradshaw was running their team!
None of the factual evidence leads to any sort of claim that Bradshaw was the main reason they won. >>
How many of those backup scrubs played in and won a Super Bowl?
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
<< <i>Looking at all the evidence, it boils down to the following two facts:
1. Terry Bradshaw played mediocre to poor when he was not surrounded by elite teammates on offense and Defense.
2. When those same elite teammates had backup scrub QB's running their team, they did even better than when Bradshaw was running their team!
None of the factual evidence leads to any sort of claim that Bradshaw was the main reason they won. >>
How many of those backup scrubs played in and won a Super Bowl? >>
None of them played in the Super Bowl...they are backup scrubs. Hence the word, backups.
However, there were 45 players on each Super Bowl team, each with a share of the victory(whether their contribution was in the regular season to get them there, the playoffs, or the bowl itself).
What we do know is that there were several elite players, and the best All-Time defense that carried that great team to the Super bowls, and that those players were so good that it didn't matter if their QB's name was Bradshaw, Gilliam, or Kruczek, as they won at the same rate with each of them.
Do we know if the backups would have won the SB? Don't know. They may not have. They may have won more. There are a lot of things we do know....the backups won with that team, the team itself was led by the defense first and foremost, and they took a QB who spent five years in the NFL with a track record of a mediocre QB, and carried him to four super Bowls.
All football officianatos understand that Bradshaw played in an era when the deep ball was the emphasis of the passing game.
Bill Walsh and Joe Montana (and all the QB's after Montana) benefitted from the short passing game, incorporated mostly with the west coast offense.
Before 1980, the passing game was mostly used for the deep strike, not the 10 yard pass.
You'll easily see that all the high rater passers of all time are from the current era. The old pros would have easily flourished in todays game too, because their arm strength and accuracy are the same. No difference.
But let's make this clear. Tony Romo would be a choke artist in any era.
Everyone has their view of the top 25-50 QB's of all-time...but the reality is that nobody can really prove any of those rankings, even the #1 ranking, because each QB has completely different sets of teammates, systems, and coaches. It is very possible that someone's 29th best QB, that if given the exact same scenario as their #3 QB, that they could have done better. We just don't know because they are never given the opportunity to play in each others situation.
The unique thing about Bradshaw is that he did have backups that got some good chunks of playing time, playing in the same surroundings as Bradshaw, and the Steelers didn't miss a beat. So we don't have to guess how another QB would have done....we saw what the backups did, and the Steelers were 10-1-1 in the midst of their Super Bowl years with them.
Now if Bradshaw was the main reason why those Steeler teams won, then without him, I certainly would expect some sort of drop off with mere backups taking the helm...but there was none.
Add in the fact that we know that they had the best defense ever, one of the best RB's ever, and two of the most acrobatic receivers ever(whom we saw make unbelievable catches)....and that Bradshaw had plenty of years to show he could carry a team without the elite cast(and he failed to carry anything), we find that it makes no sense to be giving Bradshaw all this extra 'credit' over his Super Bowl teammates, OR over other elite QB's who didn't have such luxuries...yet that is what people are doing when they cite Championship rings as their main piece of evidence of how good Bradshaw was.
Those rings, as pointed out several times with detail in this thread, are an affirmation of the greatness of the PIttsburgh Steelers...but they don't affirm anything about Bradshaw(compared to other elite QB's who did not have the luxury of the same situation), because we see how important the elite teammates were, and how easy it was for scrub QB's to come in and do just as well.
PS. THe main thing that this thread has reaffirmed is that Edmundfitzgerald, soundgard, Dimeman, and corncobb are the absolute worst debaters, and the dumbest posters in the history of C/U. They STILL do not understand the point about the backups. That, and the myth of Terry Bradshaw as being the reason why the Steelers won, has been completely broken and decimated.
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>Is that a Spanish or English word anyway ? >>
I believe it's Native American..
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 really have to cease opening up threads like this during the day. The next step is getting canned and dialing up Mr. and Mrs. 1985fan to inquire about basement vacancy.
I give a rats arse about Romo, lol. But since you keep bringing up Redskins like an idiotic fool, you still have someone to answer to, so man up and call him. You need to stop with the ridiculous tone. Time for you to go away.
Please send me any phone number Edmund via PM as I am attending a Native Wellness Training in San Diego at the moment. You can view their website on the web. Anyhow, I am in one class of about sixty people right now and you can ask each person on their view of the term used in this survey or just call them the name on the phone to see the reaction you will get. I got the okay and our class of Natives are willing to talk to you tomorrow. I think you would be quite surprised if you truly believe the numbers above. Of course, these are a lot of educated Indians so you may simply dismiss it and chose to "survey" other Indians to come up with the numbers you cited above. I also have a theory on why some Natives may be okay with the term but that is for another post. Hope you can carve out a little time for us. My best. Rob >>
Fitz continues to ignore this very generous offer. Why? >>
I am waiting for the day that the defenders, the actual people, of native mascots decide to name one of their community little league or pop warner football teams after another race instead of Indians and honor them too because they deserve it. The honorers of racist mascots can dress up like them, portray the stereotypes of them to the nth degree and see the outrage that would come their way. Name your team with a non-racist term like Kings after MLK. In the mean time, be sure to dress up like him (black paint necessary if you are white), imitate his speeches to others, includes aspects of religion in here as many deeply spiritual experiences are basically ridiculed by others when in a sports context, and do nothing but honor the team and I am sure you will be making the news in no time. You could literally be on ABC, NBC, CBS all of them.....and I am sure you would be known as the town racist or bigot and people and/or businesses would want to distance themselves from you, to not be associated with you, and depending where you work fired or on ad min leave. Yet it is perfectly okay for mascots to happen to native people, why?
I say that Edmund should dress up as blackface for a Halloween party while his friends dress up as Indians and wonder why it is okay for his friends to not get the grief that he would get. America is pretty slow to acknowledge Native people like they have for other races......it is a mystery to me.
I'll take Jim Plunkett. what a great QB he was, and a very inspiring story of how he over came early failures to become an all-time great NFL QB. Just like Bradshaw did.
Great TEAMS start with Great QB Play. No other sport relies so heavily on a single position.
Number are fine, but the real measure of great QB's is their on field presence and Swagger. Their Demeanor more than ANY other player in sports is what changes momentum and more often than not effects the outcome of the game. Regardless of all the stats and numbers The Greatest QB's in NFL history ALL had that Special something that sets them apart from the rest of the pack and NOBODY did it better Than Terry Bradshaw.
or Jim Plunkett in his Super Bowl runs or Roger Staubach or Joe Montana or Bart Starr or The GREAT Earl Morral (who was largley responsible for that 72 Dolphin season)
There's a reason the Great ones have the hardware and its not just a stat line.
That Great Steeler Defense gave up 31 points to the Cowboys in SB 10
So what was the difference in the Game.....? Terry Bradshaws Play and arm, thats what! Swan and Stallworth didn't deliver the perfect pass, Bradshaw did.
Comments
Call this number 1-800-wah wah wah--wah wah wah wah
<< <i>blah blah
Call this number 1-800-wah wah wah--wah wah wah wah >>
I appreciate you completely and fully validating my point with this.
<< <i>
<< <i>Bill Walsh said the quarterback position is the most important on a football team.
Yet we all know that a great QB needs great players around him in order to win.
Terry was fortunate enough to play on a dynasty, and he was an important part of that dynasty.
Bart Starr, Unitas, Elway, Montana, Marino, Staubach, Steve Young, and many others could have flourished with those Steeler teams the same way that Terry did.
I thought Terry Bradshaw was incredible. He could always make a big play in the big games. He never choked in important games the way Romo does.
The Bradshaw Steelers and Romo Cowboys have played some big, important games. Terry always seemed to lift his team when the game was on the line, whether he
played great or average. Romo has been prone to make bonehead plays when games are on the line, whether he's played great during that game, or average.
Terry always came through for those great Steeler teams, and he was awesome. >>
Bradshaw was good. He just isn't as good as people make him out to be when they cite those four rings and use that to say he is better than guys with less.
QB is the single most important position on the team...however, it isn't more important than the entire defense, or rest of the offense.
The offensive/defensive line as a whole are more important...as they can turn the ordinary into extraordinary!
If he was as important as people say, then he would have led them to more than two playoff wins when he didn't have the best supporting cast ever.
Bradshaw choked...he got benched in the midst of one of those Super Bowl runs! lol.
His backups did better. If he was as important as you say, then how could backup scrubs lead the team to a better record AND have better individual performances?? >>
You're talking about Mike Kruczek, correct ?
Is this the same Mike Kruczek who didn't beat Terry for the starting job his next three years in Pittsburgh ?
If this the same Mike Kruczek who Chuck Knoll said benefited from the Steeler team rallying around him when Terry was out, and played harder knowing that Terry wasn't in there ?
If this Kruczek was so much better than Terry, then why did Hall of Fame coach Chuck Knoll sit Mike for his next three years in Pittsburgh ?
You're smarter then Hall of Fame coach Chuck Knoll, because you're saying that Kruczek was better then Terry because of Kruczek's record.
I would love for you to make an appearance on the NFL network and explain to all the former NFL players how Kruczek was better than Terry.
Or you could sit with Terry, Howie Long, and Jimmy Johnson and tell them that Terry was not as good as people say he was.
I would actually pay to watch that. Me and popcorn girl next to my side.
Yes, Bradshaw's backups did better. That does not mean I claim they were better QB's, you are way off in that thinking. It does highlight very clearly(along with all the other evidence), that the team won for many very important reasons, many of which had NOTHING to do with Bradshaw.
In fact, the other reasons were so strong and prevalent, that they were able to do just as good with scrub QB's in Bradshaw's sted! LOL.
You are so dumb, because your link to the top ten steeler QB highlihgts my point, lol! None of Bradshaw's scrubs come close to making that list, and they shouldnt'....yet THEY DID JUST AS GOOD WHEN GIVE THE REIGNS to 'Bradshaw's' teams, lol! If scrubs can do just as good, that doesn't say a whole lot about Bradshaw's impact on the teams!
The final blow to their(and your) argument would be to invite them to play in the proposed game we(you and I) have on the table. Then we will see if your theories in use matches your espoused theories
Enter Franco Harris
1972........11-3.............5th...........5th.................6.1..............................12/12..................64.1
Bradshaw improved a hair(due to less INT), and was still mediocore, but they improved on the strength of the defensive gain, and Harris's 5.6 yds per carry and 1,055 yards.
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating
1973.........10-4...........8th............4th...................6.6...............................10/15..................54.5 Bradshaw regressed, but they still go 10-4.
1974.........10-3-1........2nd...........6th...................5.3.................................7/8.....................55.2. Bradshaw is benched! Goes 5-2
....................................................... .GILLIAM.......6.0.................................4/8.....................55.4 Gilliams plays Goes 4-1-1. SUPER BOWL YR
Enter Swann/Stallworth as starters
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating
1975..........12-2............2nd..........5th....................7.2................................18/9...................88. Bradshaw's 1st big year. Thanks Lynn&John.
Notice how Bradshaw's Yards per attempt took a big leap with the addition of Swann and Stallworth as starters. They win anthother Super Bowl thanks to the defense again, and the two new receiving threats who boosted Bradshaw's game. Bradshaw had FIVE years of mediocore passing numbers. It didn't change until Swann and Stallworth were playing.
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating
1976........10-4............1st............5th...................6.1...........................10/9........................65.4. Huge step backwards for Terry & is Benched!
Bradshaw goes 4-4, Krucek 6-0........... Krucek:..8.9............................0/3..........................74.5. Krucek outplays Terry. This is the year Bradshaw should have won another Super Bowl with the best defense, and weapons all around. Basically he regressed and blew it, and got benched for the second time in the midst of the Super Bowl years.
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating
1977.......9-5...............17th..........7th...................8.0.........................17/19......................71.4
1978.......14-2..............1st............5th...................7.9..........................28/20.....................84.7
It is the super Bowl years and the years inbetween that show how much Bradshaw relied on his teammates. When his backups got significant plying time, they did as well, or Better in both performance and team record.
<< <i>Mike Kruczek
I know! That is extremely funny! That guy did better than Bradshaw when given the same team to work with. Bradshaw got benched, lol. I would be embarrassed if I were Bradshaw or a Bradshaw fan.
I would be very proud to be a Steeler or Steeler fan of those teams though. One of the all time greatest teams.
Heck, they took a dumb, strong armed QB that had FIVE previous years of poor to mediocre NFL QB performance, and carried him to four Super Bowls. Thanks to the D, RB's, and WR's primarily....and the O-line.
It is all laid out in the first post like detective work.
When are we playing our game big guy??
Joe Montana 3 Super Bowl MVPs
Bart Starr 2 Super Bowl MVPs
Terry Bradshaw 2 Super Bowl MVPs
Terry Bradshaw 14-5 in playoff games
Terry was a huge big game performer. Tony Romo is a huge big game choker.
Brady, Bradshaw, Montana, and Starr equals huge big time Quarterbacks who LED their teams to impressive Super Bowl wins.
Mike Krucek
Mike Kruczek
Hollywood as an "Actor".
Does not his success in Hollywood trump all of his shortcomings (perceived or real) as an NFL Quarterback and require that he be sainted, or knighted?
Again he is an "Actor". He is also Superbowl Champion and on TV every Sunday during the NFL Season. He is thus is so much better all of the rest of us.
<< <i>Mike Kruczek
I know! That is extremely funny! That guy did better than Bradshaw when given the same team to work with. Bradshaw got benched, lol. I would be embarrassed if I were Bradshaw or a Bradshaw fan.
I would be very proud to be a Steeler or Steeler fan of those teams though. One of the all time greatest teams.
Heck, they took a dumb, strong armed QB that had FIVE previous years of poor to mediocre NFL QB performance, and carried him to four Super Bowls. Thanks to the D, RB's, and WR's primarily....and the O-line.
It is all laid out in the first post like detective work.
When are we playing our game big guy??
<< <i>Tom Brady 2 Super Bowl MVPs
Joe Montana 3 Super Bowl MVPs
Bart Starr 2 Super Bowl MVPs
Terry Bradshaw 2 Super Bowl MVPs
Terry Bradshaw 14-5 in playoff games
Terry was a huge big game performer. Tony Romo is a huge big game choker.
Brady, Bradshaw, Montana, and Starr equals huge big time Quarterbacks who LED their teams to impressive Super Bowl wins.
Mike Krucek
Krucek did better than Bradshaw when given the same team, and that tells you how it was the team winning the games, and not the QB
Bradshaw didn't lead them to anything. He was lead, carried by his teammates, plain and simple. He owes all his thanks to his defense, 0-line, RB's, WR's, and coaching stuff for utilizing his skill of throwing the ball deep(which was only taken advantage of when Swann and Stallworth MADE the catches on the deep jump balls, just like in the Super Bowls).
All highlighted below, step by step, how the team was built and lead Bradshaw to any individual success, and to any team success. You see, without those guys leading him, Bradshaw couldn't led a team to any Super Bowl win(and he had his chances to, but couldn't):
Way too much credit goes to the QB when a team wins the Super Bowl. They don't win anything without their teammates. In Terry Bradshaw's case, he receives so much credit for the rings, and he just happened to have the best situation in history for a QB, enabling him to BE A PART of four Super Bowl champions.
The problem is that people rate Bradshaw ahead of other superior QB's who did not have the enviable situation of HOF teammates leading the way to Super Bowl victories. Lets breakdown the building of the Bradshaw myth....
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating
1970........5-9...............16th.........21st...............6.5...............................6/24..................30.4
1971........6-8...............17th.........17th...............6.1..............................13/22.................59.7
1972........11-3.............5th...........5th.................6.1..............................12/12..................64.1 They added Franco Harris this year
1973........10-4....... ....8th............4th...................6.6............................10/15..................54.5
1974.........10-3-1........2nd...........6th...................5.3......................... ....7/8.....................55.2 SB
1975..........12-2............2nd..........5th...................7.2...........................18/9.....................88. Swann and Stallworth become starters SB
1976........10-4............1st............5th...................6.1............................10/9......................65.4.
1977.......9-5...............17th..........7th...................8.0...........................17/19......................71.4
1978.......14-2..............1st............5th...................7.9..........................28/20.....................84.7 League Wide uptick in passing offense SB
1979........12-4.............5th............1st...................7.9..........................26/25.....................77 SB
1980........9-7..............15th...........10th.................7.9..........................22/24.....................81.4
1981........8-8...............11th...........8th.................7.8...........................22/14.....................83.9
1982........9-7...............4th.............8th.................7.4...........................17/11.....................81.4
Some hard facts:
1)Bradshaw had a sustained level of yards per pass for his first five years. It took a noticeable jump with the addition of Swann/Stallworth as starters
2)Pittsburgh's offense joined the top of the league with the addition of Franco Harris. Before Franco Harris, Bradshaw could only lead them to the 17th best offense
3)In the four Super Bowl years, Pittsburgh's defense was in the top five in each of those years. Nothing to do with Bradshaw.
4)Bradshaw did not make the top ten in the league in passer rating or yards per pass, UNTIL he had Swann and Stallworth as starters. He had FIVE years prior to that to show that HE was the man...but he wasn't good enough to break those ranks.
6)Bradshaw was benched TWICE during the Super Bowl run! In fact, the combined records of his back ups were BETTER than Bradshaw's. The combined passer ratings of his backups were BETTER than Bradshaw's. The team didn't miss a beat with a scrub at the helm.
With this, it is quite evident that Bradshaw led a mediocore team offense until Franco Harris arrived. Bradshaw remained mediocore himself, and didn't improve upon his passing until Swann and Stallworth became full-time starters.
Super Bowl performance?
First Super Bowl was all Harris. 34 carriers 158 yards. Bradshaw only threw 14 times, and complete 9. One 4 yd Td boosted his rating.
Second Super Bowl was all Swann. 4 catches 161 yards. Catches that had all to do with HIS skill.
Third Super Bowl Swann 7 catches 124 yards. Stallworth 3 for 115. More of the same for them.
Fourt Super Bowl Swann 5 for 79, Stallworth 3 for 121.
As you noticed in the regular season, Bradshaw was mediocore until he got those two receivers. They had more to do with his success, than he did. Sure, he could throw it far, but so could Jeff George!
I would have been more impressed with Bradshaw's Super Bowl performances if his third or fourth receiver was getting all those yards(like Manning's in the AFC championsip this year). But it was the same two guys in all three Super Bowls who were doing the catching. So why on earth do people give Bradshaw all that credit??? They need a hero, thats why.
Enter Franco Harris
1972........11-3.............5th...........5th.................6.1..............................12/12..................64.1
Bradshaw improved a hair(due to less INT), and was still mediocore, but they improved on the strength of the defensive gain, and Harris's 5.6 yds per carry and 1,055 yards.
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating
1973.........10-4...........8th............4th...................6.6...............................10/15..................54.5 Bradshaw regressed, but they still go 10-4.
1974.........10-3-1........2nd...........6th...................5.3.................................7/8.....................55.2. Bradshaw is benched! Goes 5-2
....................................................... .GILLIAM.......6.0.................................4/8.....................55.4 Gilliams plays Goes 4-1-1. SUPER BOWL YR
Enter Swann/Stallworth as starters
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating
1975..........12-2............2nd..........5th....................7.2................................18/9...................88. Bradshaw's 1st big year. Thanks Lynn&John.
Notice how Bradshaw's Yards per attempt took a big leap with the addition of Swann and Stallworth as starters. They win anthother Super Bowl thanks to the defense again, and the two new receiving threats who boosted Bradshaw's game. Bradshaw had FIVE years of mediocore passing numbers. It didn't change until Swann and Stallworth were playing.
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating
1976........10-4............1st............5th...................6.1...........................10/9........................65.4. Huge step backwards for Terry & is Benched!
Bradshaw goes 4-4, Krucek 6-0........... Krucek:..8.9............................0/3..........................74.5. Krucek outplays Terry. This is the year Bradshaw should have won another Super Bowl with the best defense, and weapons all around. Basically he regressed and blew it, and got benched for the second time in the midst of the Super Bowl years.
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating
1977.......9-5...............17th..........7th...................8.0.........................17/19......................71.4
1978.......14-2..............1st............5th...................7.9..........................28/20.....................84.7
It is the super Bowl years and the years inbetween that show how much Bradshaw relied on his teammates. When his backups got significant plying time, they did as well, or Better in both performance and team record.
<< <i>Tom Brady 2 Super Bowl MVPs
Joe Montana 3 Super Bowl MVPs
Bart Starr 2 Super Bowl MVPs
Terry Bradshaw 2 Super Bowl MVPs
Terry Bradshaw 14-5 in playoff games
Terry was a huge big game performer. Tony Romo is a huge big game choker.
Brady, Bradshaw, Montana, and Starr equals huge big time Quarterbacks who LED their teams to impressive Super Bowl wins.
Mike Krucek
Still the funniest thing ever, Krucek a backup scrub, doing better than Bradshaw on the elite team. You keep laughing, yet that is a point against your stance, not for it...but you are just too dumb to even realize that!
LOL, according to YOUR logic, Joe Flacco, Mark Rypien, Doug Williams, and Jim Plunkett...all Super Bowl MVP's...and equal to Manning, Brees, Aaron Rodgers, Staubach, Aikman, Elway, Kurt Warner, Steve young, who all have equal(one) Super Bowl MVP's. Then better than Favre, Unitas, Marino, with no Super Bowl MVP's. LOL.
OR,
A more comprehenisve, objective, and LOGICAL analysis that shows the true 'value' of Bradshaw among his steeler teammates, and the anatomy of their winning ways:
Way too much credit goes to the QB when a team wins the Super Bowl. They don't win anything without their teammates. In Terry Bradshaw's case, he receives so much credit for the rings, and he just happened to have the best situation in history for a QB, enabling him to BE A PART of four Super Bowl champions.
The problem is that people rate Bradshaw ahead of other superior QB's who did not have the enviable situation of HOF teammates leading the way to Super Bowl victories. Lets breakdown the building of the Bradshaw myth....
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating
1970........5-9...............16th.........21st...............6.5...............................6/24..................30.4
1971........6-8...............17th.........17th...............6.1..............................13/22.................59.7
1972........11-3.............5th...........5th.................6.1..............................12/12..................64.1 They added Franco Harris this year
1973........10-4....... ....8th............4th...................6.6............................10/15..................54.5
1974.........10-3-1........2nd...........6th...................5.3......................... ....7/8.....................55.2 SB
1975..........12-2............2nd..........5th...................7.2...........................18/9.....................88. Swann and Stallworth become starters SB
1976........10-4............1st............5th...................6.1............................10/9......................65.4.
1977.......9-5...............17th..........7th...................8.0...........................17/19......................71.4
1978.......14-2..............1st............5th...................7.9..........................28/20.....................84.7 League Wide uptick in passing offense SB
1979........12-4.............5th............1st...................7.9..........................26/25.....................77 SB
1980........9-7..............15th...........10th.................7.9..........................22/24.....................81.4
1981........8-8...............11th...........8th.................7.8...........................22/14.....................83.9
1982........9-7...............4th.............8th.................7.4...........................17/11.....................81.4
Some hard facts:
1)Bradshaw had a sustained level of yards per pass for his first five years. It took a noticeable jump with the addition of Swann/Stallworth as starters
2)Pittsburgh's offense joined the top of the league with the addition of Franco Harris. Before Franco Harris, Bradshaw could only lead them to the 17th best offense
3)In the four Super Bowl years, Pittsburgh's defense was in the top five in each of those years. Nothing to do with Bradshaw.
4)Bradshaw did not make the top ten in the league in passer rating or yards per pass, UNTIL he had Swann and Stallworth as starters. He had FIVE years prior to that to show that HE was the man...but he wasn't good enough to break those ranks.
6)Bradshaw was benched TWICE during the Super Bowl run! In fact, the combined records of his back ups were BETTER than Bradshaw's. The combined passer ratings of his backups were BETTER than Bradshaw's. The team didn't miss a beat with a scrub at the helm.
With this, it is quite evident that Bradshaw led a mediocore team offense until Franco Harris arrived. Bradshaw remained mediocore himself, and didn't improve upon his passing until Swann and Stallworth became full-time starters.
Super Bowl performance?
First Super Bowl was all Harris. 34 carriers 158 yards. Bradshaw only threw 14 times, and complete 9. One 4 yd Td boosted his rating.
Second Super Bowl was all Swann. 4 catches 161 yards. Catches that had all to do with HIS skill.
Third Super Bowl Swann 7 catches 124 yards. Stallworth 3 for 115. More of the same for them.
Fourt Super Bowl Swann 5 for 79, Stallworth 3 for 121.
As you noticed in the regular season, Bradshaw was mediocore until he got those two receivers. They had more to do with his success, than he did. Sure, he could throw it far, but so could Jeff George!
I would have been more impressed with Bradshaw's Super Bowl performances if his third or fourth receiver was getting all those yards(like Manning's in the AFC championsip this year). But it was the same two guys in all three Super Bowls who were doing the catching. So why on earth do people give Bradshaw all that credit??? They need a hero, thats why.
Enter Franco Harris
1972........11-3.............5th...........5th.................6.1..............................12/12..................64.1
Bradshaw improved a hair(due to less INT), and was still mediocore, but they improved on the strength of the defensive gain, and Harris's 5.6 yds per carry and 1,055 yards.
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating
1973.........10-4...........8th............4th...................6.6...............................10/15..................54.5 Bradshaw regressed, but they still go 10-4.
1974.........10-3-1........2nd...........6th...................5.3.................................7/8.....................55.2. Bradshaw is benched! Goes 5-2
....................................................... .GILLIAM.......6.0.................................4/8.....................55.4 Gilliams plays Goes 4-1-1. SUPER BOWL YR
Enter Swann/Stallworth as starters
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating
1975..........12-2............2nd..........5th....................7.2................................18/9...................88. Bradshaw's 1st big year. Thanks Lynn&John.
Notice how Bradshaw's Yards per attempt took a big leap with the addition of Swann and Stallworth as starters. They win anthother Super Bowl thanks to the defense again, and the two new receiving threats who boosted Bradshaw's game. Bradshaw had FIVE years of mediocore passing numbers. It didn't change until Swann and Stallworth were playing.
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating
1976........10-4............1st............5th...................6.1...........................10/9........................65.4. Huge step backwards for Terry & is Benched!
Bradshaw goes 4-4, Krucek 6-0........... Krucek:..8.9............................0/3..........................74.5. Krucek outplays Terry. This is the year Bradshaw should have won another Super Bowl with the best defense, and weapons all around. Basically he regressed and blew it, and got benched for the second time in the midst of the Super Bowl years.
Year......TEAM W/L....."D" Rank..."O" Rank.....Bradshaw Y/A.......Bradshaw TD/INT....Bradshaw QB Rating
1977.......9-5...............17th..........7th...................8.0.........................17/19......................71.4
1978.......14-2..............1st............5th...................7.9..........................28/20.....................84.7
It is the super Bowl years and the years inbetween that show how much Bradshaw relied on his teammates. When his backups got significant plying time, they did as well, or Better in both performance and team record.
Mike Kruczek
to discredit someone with their ridiculous hypothesis' .
You'll have to excuse them, because they actually believe the stupid stuff they write. Its a mental disorder.
Terry Bradshaw
Troy Aikman
I loved watching them both play, they were both great QB's who led two of the NFL's greatest dynasty's
Awesome players Both. Two of the greatest field generals you'll ever see! And they have the hardware to prove it.
But... But....But... Please give it a break. Your not as smart as you think you are.
They were on two of the greatest teams, that does not mean they were the reasons they won. There are hundreds of other important variables that go into winning a Super Bowl.
Bradshaw didn't lead them to victory, he was led to victory.
Read the first post, it is all laid out.
According to YOUR theory, that makes Plunkett better than Rodgers, Manning, and Brees.
I have to ask, if Bradshaw was indeed the main reason they won, then how did they have a better winning percentage when his backups took the helm of the team?? It just shows that the other dominant prevailing factors were making them win games. Those elite teams did just as good without Bradshaw.
Never claimed I was the smartest. However, if I am dumbing it down, it is probably because of the clientele I am talking to you(which you are a part of).
How about we play that football game, and lets see if you really believe what you say?
Heck, children believe in Santa and the Easter bunny, and that isn't much different.
Do you guys still believe in that too? LoL.
With the way you guys continue to bring up EMPTY and invalid points, next you are going to try and convince me that Santa is real, and you will hold up the DVD of Tim Allen's, The Santa Clause, as your proof! The funny thing about that, is that it will be a better argument than anything any of you have ever posted in a thread in CU!
EOM
<< <i>Corncobb,
They were on two of the greatest teams, that does not mean they were the reasons they won. There are hundreds of other important variables that go into winning a Super Bowl.
Bradshaw didn't lead them to victory, he was led to victory.
>>
Um, it was Bradshaw who called the plays
<< <i>
<< <i>Corncobb,
They were on two of the greatest teams, that does not mean they were the reasons they won. There are hundreds of other important variables that go into winning a Super Bowl.
Bradshaw didn't lead them to victory, he was led to victory.
>>
Um, it was Bradshaw who called the plays
Um, no he ran the plays he was given. BTW, he threw for a total of 305 yards in his first 2 SBs combined.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Corncobb,
They were on two of the greatest teams, that does not mean they were the reasons they won. There are hundreds of other important variables that go into winning a Super Bowl.
Bradshaw didn't lead them to victory, he was led to victory.
>>
Um, it was Bradshaw who called the plays
Um, no he ran the plays he was given. BTW, he threw for a total of 305 yards in his first 2 SBs combined. >>
He called his own plays.
Nice try.
Good article
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100824191551AAfGN5H
Great team. For all those citing the Super Bowls and playoff records, that certainly affirms the greatness of the 70's Steelers, but doesn't affirm the ability of Bradshaw. His backups also 'led' that team to superb records, showing that pretty much any joe could win with them.
Credit goes where credit is due...to their defense and running game first and foremost, then the rest of the guys can fight for what is left of the pie.
Bradshaw had a great career, but to sit there and suggest that he's even in the same realm as Montana is as idiotic and I'll say it, dumb, as can be. The numbers don't lie, and the numbers that prove without a doubt that Bradshaw's replacements had even better numbers than he did prove the Steelers won games and super bowls, and not Bradshaw.
But these old folks (I'm looking at you fitz, soungard, and corncob) absolutely refuse to look at the statistical analysis so helpfully provided here that proves Bradshaw was not the amazing QB they've bought into for years - they simply do not want to see behind the curtain despite it being held wide open for them. They would rather close their eyes, stomp their feet, and say over and over again 'Bradshaw is amazing! Bradshaw is amazing!' rather than have their long-held beliefs overturned. There is no amount of evidence (and there's plenty) that will change these people's minds.
<< <i>Bradshaw's strong arm, toughness, and him calling the plays are what keeps him a HOF QB, despite having several poor years when he didn't' have an elite team(and was not able to carry a team), and despite the elite teammates being good enough where any scrub QB was winning with them. The defense and the running game are what made those teams. The acrobatic receivers, coupled with Bradshaw's strong arm, gave them the deep game to compliment the running game. All of that is detailed in the first post.
Great team. For all those citing the Super Bowls and playoff records, that certainly affirms the greatness of the 70's Steelers, but doesn't affirm the ability of Bradshaw. His backups also 'led' that team to superb records, showing that pretty much any joe could win with them.
Credit goes where credit is due...to their defense and running game first and foremost, then the rest of the guys can fight for what is left of the pie. >>
You're forgetting one important issue. The Blount rule(which totally changed the game) didn't go into affect until 1978. It wasn't until then, the steelers became a passing team. Before the rule change, running backs were every bit as important as quarterbacks. First year of the rule change, Bradshaw wins the league MVP and a new era in the NFL begins.
<< <i>Mike Kruczek
Could it be skin/1985 IS Mike Kruczek? His wife?
<< <i>
<< <i>Mike Kruczek
Could it be skin/1985 IS Mike Kruczek? His wife?
Do you realize how dumb you are? You keep laughing at the backups...but the fact that the backups did better than Bradshaw, pokes big holes into your theory that Bradshaw was the reason they won.
In the midst of their Super Bowl years, when Gilliam and Kruczek were the starting QB's, they led those Steeler teams to a combined 10-1-1 record. Now tell me genius, if Bradshaw was the reason they won,
then how did two backup scrubs lead the team to a better record?
Bradshaw's yards per attempt before Swann and Stallworth were:
6.5
6.1
6.1
6.6
5.3
When Swann and Stallworth became starters it jumped to:
7.2
The following year when Pittsburgh should have won another Super Bowl, but Bradshaw was so bad it fell to:
6.1
Then the following year it jumped to:
8.0
That was ALL before the league wide uptick in passing that started in 1978. So you see, a large part of Bradshaw's passing game goes to Swann and Stallworth...unless Bradshaw was throwing those passes to himself.
Previous to Swann and Stallworth, Bradshaw could not produce passing numbers like that. If your theory is correct in that Bradshaw gets all that credit, then he should have been able to produce those passing performances BEFORE Swann and Stallworth, yet he could not.
In those two Super Bowls(after the league wide uptick in passing) where Bradshaw had two good passing games, it was Swann and Stallworth getting open deep, and making acrobatic catches. As outlined above, without those two, Bradshaw couldn't get it done, and that is when they only won when the defense was phenomenal, or the running game absolutely carried them.
Never forget the FACT that the defense and running game is what made those teams win! Even in the Super Bowl where the defense gave up points, they still got them top seed and advantageous playoff games to get to the Super Bowl. Then it was Swann/Stallworth making the plays in the actual Super Bowl.
Looking at all the evidence, it boils down to the following two facts:
1. Terry Bradshaw played mediocre to poor when he was not surrounded by elite teammates on offense and Defense.
2. When those same elite teammates had backup scrub QB's running their team, they did even better than when Bradshaw was running their team!
None of the factual evidence leads to any sort of claim that Bradshaw was the main reason they won.
<< <i>Skin please do not confuse soundgard with facts. If it aint on yahoo answers, it didn't happen. >>
I still can't get over he linked a yahoo answer as evidence. Absolutely hilarious.
<< <i>Looking at all the evidence, it boils down to the following two facts:
1. Terry Bradshaw played mediocre to poor when he was not surrounded by elite teammates on offense and Defense.
2. When those same elite teammates had backup scrub QB's running their team, they did even better than when Bradshaw was running their team!
None of the factual evidence leads to any sort of claim that Bradshaw was the main reason they won. >>
How many of those backup scrubs played in and won a Super Bowl?
<< <i>
<< <i>Looking at all the evidence, it boils down to the following two facts:
1. Terry Bradshaw played mediocre to poor when he was not surrounded by elite teammates on offense and Defense.
2. When those same elite teammates had backup scrub QB's running their team, they did even better than when Bradshaw was running their team!
None of the factual evidence leads to any sort of claim that Bradshaw was the main reason they won. >>
How many of those backup scrubs played in and won a Super Bowl? >>
None of them played in the Super Bowl...they are backup scrubs. Hence the word, backups.
However, there were 45 players on each Super Bowl team, each with a share of the victory(whether their contribution was in the regular season to get them there, the playoffs, or the bowl itself).
What we do know is that there were several elite players, and the best All-Time defense that carried that great team to the Super bowls, and that those players were so good that it didn't matter if their QB's name was Bradshaw, Gilliam, or Kruczek, as they won at the same rate with each of them.
Do we know if the backups would have won the SB? Don't know. They may not have. They may have won more. There are a lot of things we do know....the backups won with that team, the team itself was led by the defense first and foremost, and they took a QB who spent five years in the NFL with a track record of a mediocre QB, and carried him to four super Bowls.
Thanks 44 teammates
Bill Walsh and Joe Montana (and all the QB's after Montana) benefitted from the short passing game, incorporated mostly with the west coast offense.
Before 1980, the passing game was mostly used for the deep strike, not the 10 yard pass.
You'll easily see that all the high rater passers of all time are from the current era.
The old pros would have easily flourished in todays game too, because their arm strength and accuracy are the same. No difference.
But let's make this clear. Tony Romo would be a choke artist in any era.
Mike Kruczek
<< <i>
But let's make this clear. Tony Romo would be a choke artist in any era.
>>
Pats have 3 losses this year that ended when Brady threw an INT in the end zone.
The unique thing about Bradshaw is that he did have backups that got some good chunks of playing time, playing in the same surroundings as Bradshaw, and the Steelers didn't miss a beat. So we don't have to guess how another QB would have done....we saw what the backups did, and the Steelers were 10-1-1 in the midst of their Super Bowl years with them.
Now if Bradshaw was the main reason why those Steeler teams won, then without him, I certainly would expect some sort of drop off with mere backups taking the helm...but there was none.
Add in the fact that we know that they had the best defense ever, one of the best RB's ever, and two of the most acrobatic receivers ever(whom we saw make unbelievable catches)....and that Bradshaw had plenty of years to show he could carry a team without the elite cast(and he failed to carry anything), we find that it makes no sense to be giving Bradshaw all this extra 'credit' over his Super Bowl teammates, OR over other elite QB's who didn't have such luxuries...yet that is what people are doing when they cite Championship rings as their main piece of evidence of how good Bradshaw was.
Those rings, as pointed out several times with detail in this thread, are an affirmation of the greatness of the PIttsburgh Steelers...but they don't affirm anything about Bradshaw(compared to other elite QB's who did not have the luxury of the same situation), because we see how important the elite teammates were, and how easy it was for scrub QB's to come in and do just as well.
PS. THe main thing that this thread has reaffirmed is that Edmundfitzgerald, soundgard, Dimeman, and corncobb are the absolute worst debaters, and the dumbest posters in the history of C/U. They STILL do not understand the point about the backups. That, and the myth of Terry Bradshaw as being the reason why the Steelers won, has been completely broken and decimated.
<< <i>All football officianatos understand that Bradshaw played in an era when the deep ball was the emphasis of the passing game.
>>
What's an officanato?
If you're going to use big words, you should at least know how to spell them!
<< <i>
<< <i>
But let's make this clear. Tony Romo would be a choke artist in any era.
>>
Pats have 3 losses this year that ended when Brady threw an INT in the end zone. >>
To be fair - one of those was a terrible no-call on a pass interference and another came after a game-winning TD was dropped.
How many does his backup have ?
What's his name ?
Who told you how to spell that, Dimeman? 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>Is that a Spanish or English word anyway ? >>
I believe it's Native American..
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.
you'll never be able to outrun a bad diet
Tony Romo looks like he has Redskin in his bloodline. I wonder if he's Native American ?
Romo's grandfather, Ramiro Romo Sr., emigrated from Múzquiz, Coahuila, Mexico, to San Antonio, Texas, as an adolescent.
<< <i>Still waiting.....
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>CBS Sports Poll - 2013...........90% of Native Americans say it's not offensive, and they even name their own schools Redskins !!!!!!!! >>
Please send me any phone number Edmund via PM as I am attending a Native Wellness Training in San Diego at the moment. You can view their website on the web. Anyhow, I am in one class of about sixty people right now and you can ask each person on their view of the term used in this survey or just call them the name on the phone to see the reaction you will get. I got the okay and our class of Natives are willing to talk to you tomorrow. I think you would be quite surprised if you truly believe the numbers above. Of course, these are a lot of educated Indians so you may simply dismiss it and chose to "survey" other Indians to come up with the numbers you cited above. I also have a theory on why some Natives may be okay with the term but that is for another post. Hope you can carve out a little time for us. My best. Rob >>
Fitz continues to ignore this very generous offer. Why? >>
I am waiting for the day that the defenders, the actual people, of native mascots decide to name one of their community little league or pop warner football teams after another race instead of Indians and honor them too because they deserve it. The honorers of racist mascots can dress up like them, portray the stereotypes of them to the nth degree and see the outrage that would come their way. Name your team with a non-racist term like Kings after MLK. In the mean time, be sure to dress up like him (black paint necessary if you are white), imitate his speeches to others, includes aspects of religion in here as many deeply spiritual experiences are basically ridiculed by others when in a sports context, and do nothing but honor the team and I am sure you will be making the news in no time. You could literally be on ABC, NBC, CBS all of them.....and I am sure you would be known as the town racist or bigot and people and/or businesses would want to distance themselves from you, to not be associated with you, and depending where you work fired or on ad min leave. Yet it is perfectly okay for mascots to happen to native people, why?
I say that Edmund should dress up as blackface for a Halloween party while his friends dress up as Indians and wonder why it is okay for his friends to not get the grief that he would get. America is pretty slow to acknowledge Native people like they have for other races......it is a mystery to me.
he over came early failures to become an all-time great NFL QB. Just like Bradshaw did.
Great TEAMS start with Great QB Play. No other sport relies so heavily on a single position.
Number are fine, but the real measure of great QB's is their on field presence and Swagger.
Their Demeanor more than ANY other player in sports is what changes momentum and more often than not effects
the outcome of the game. Regardless of all the stats and numbers The Greatest QB's in NFL history ALL had that
Special something that sets them apart from the rest of the pack and NOBODY did it better Than Terry Bradshaw.
or Jim Plunkett in his Super Bowl runs
or Roger Staubach
or Joe Montana
or Bart Starr
or The GREAT Earl Morral (who was largley responsible for that 72 Dolphin season)
There's a reason the Great ones have the hardware and its not just a stat line.
That Great Steeler Defense gave up 31 points to the Cowboys in SB 10
So what was the difference in the Game.....? Terry Bradshaws Play and arm, thats what! Swan and Stallworth didn't deliver the perfect pass, Bradshaw did.
Jim Plunkett?
Terry Bradshaw?
Dan Marino?
<< <i>I would rather have Mike Kruczek. >>
Did you get that answer from Yahoo answers too?