1. Manning...When it's all said and done, he will be regarded as #1
2. Johnny U...Tough as nails winner that even his meanest opponents respected
3. Otto Graham...read up on him and you'll wonder why nobody ever mentions him too often
4. Montana....4 rings for maybe the most clutch QB ever
5. Farve....tough as nails gun slingin throwback
6. Marino....never winning a ring should overshadow his rocket arm
7. Young...greatest left hand QB could have played in any era >>
Agree on all of these comments above. Manning has 3 more years like this one, and he will be #1 ALL TIME...Most unstoppable QB I've ever seen. If he can get past the earlier career chocking and win a couple more Super Bowls its a wrap...
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>I've got nothing to add other than to say hi to Jason - I don't see you around much!
When I first came to CU - didn't have have another avatar? The 10th mt division or something?
mike >>
Well, first it was 82nd Airborne patch..Then Honor Guard..And current assignment is Drill SGT..lol
I usually just post on the NFL HOF Rookie Players thread on the Set Registry forum..This message board just got way outta control...But always willing to chime in on football related threads since that is my specialty...
Good to see a few of the old timers still around!
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>So making the playoffs and then winning the Conference Championship is a negative?
Why are great stats in the regular season worth so much, but winning games is not; while winning games in the playoffs worth so much, but great stats during those games worth nothing?
Why do I feel like that was a completely incorrect use of a semi-colon?
Why make zero adjustments for teammates and rule changes and game conditions? A high completion percentage and lots of yards and TD passes after roughing the quarterback changed to touching the quarterback is a lot different than before >>
I said it was just for fun. I'm not a statistician with all the time in the world to dissect every single stat from every QB in the annals of history. FOR FUN.
<< <i>I said it was just for fun. I'm not a statistician with all the time in the world to dissect every single stat from every QB in the annals of history. FOR FUN. >>
How about instead of every single one, you focus on the ones that best correlate with winning?
Isn't it more fun to understand and learn about the sport, instead of just punching a few digits into a calculator and learning virtually nothing?
<< <i>I said it was just for fun. I'm not a statistician with all the time in the world to dissect every single stat from every QB in the annals of history. FOR FUN. >>
How about instead of every single one, you focus on the ones that best correlate with winning?
Isn't it more fun to understand and learn about the sport, instead of just punching a few digits into a calculator and learning virtually nothing? >>
Seriously, make your own rankings instead of bashing mine. Let's see what you can come up with instead of accomplishing "virtually nothing" by by talking down my rankings. Have at it.
<< <i>Seriously, make your own rankings instead of bashing mine. Let's see what you can come up with instead of accomplishing "virtually nothing" by by talking down my rankings. Have at it. >>
Relax Francis. You're not the ONLY one entitled to an opinion.
In this big, cruel world, there will be people that disagree with you and many other things. Being hypersensitive to criticism certainly won't lead to making too many friends. Most people, at least the regulars, are not only thick-skinned, but are seasoned veterans with regard to lambasting folks that see their opinions as a one-way street. Dialog, discussion, acceptance and rebuttal in a civil manner typically result in great conversation and productive intercourse.
Go ahead and pile on but Brady played for a coach found guilty of cheating. Nothing against Tom as a QB but that takes some of the luster off the NE dynasty. Going a step further look how well Casell (sp?) did in that system. You can't tell me that if a backup QB jumped in the Indy system they would be a playoff team.
Again, you have the allow a QB to complete an entire body of work. For all of the problems Peyton had early in his playoff career he was able to get his postseason record to .500. If Indy wins tomorrow night Peyton is 7-2 in his last 9 playoff starts with a 2-0 SB record. Let's let these guys finish their careers before we argue for or against their place in history.
<< <i>Seriously, make your own rankings instead of bashing mine. Let's see what you can come up with instead of accomplishing "virtually nothing" by by talking down my rankings. Have at it. >>
Relax Francis. You're not the ONLY one entitled to an opinion.
In this big, cruel world, there will be people that disagree with you and many other things. Being hypersensitive to criticism certainly won't lead to making too many friends. Most people, at least the regulars, are not only thick-skinned, but are seasoned veterans with regard to lambasting folks that see their opinions as a one-way street. Dialog, discussion, acceptance and rebuttal in a civil manner typically result in great conversation and productive intercourse. >>
Tell that to the guy I was talking to. Why is it your business what I do or what I say? If you don't like me or what I have to say, why are you even in the thread? Are you simply trolling for a response from me? Well, you got it. lol Nice job!
<< <i>Seriously, make your own rankings instead of bashing mine. Let's see what you can come up with instead of accomplishing "virtually nothing" by by talking down my rankings. Have at it. >>
Relax Francis. You're not the ONLY one entitled to an opinion.
In this big, cruel world, there will be people that disagree with you and many other things. Being hypersensitive to criticism certainly won't lead to making too many friends. Most people, at least the regulars, are not only thick-skinned, but are seasoned veterans with regard to lambasting folks that see their opinions as a one-way street. Dialog, discussion, acceptance and rebuttal in a civil manner typically result in great conversation and productive intercourse. >>
Tell that to the guy I was talking to. Why is it your business what I do or what I say? If you don't like me or what I have to say, why are you even in the thread? Are you simply trolling for a response from me? Well, you got it. lol Nice job! >>
C'est la vie... Some people just don't get it . . .
BTW, you've been added to my IGNORE list so don't expect any more of your PM barrages to go through.
In fact, I'm just going to ignore you all together since anything I suggest and any advice I offer is considered nothing more than a "personal attack" and I'm not "man enough" to talk to you privately...
<< <i>Seriously, make your own rankings instead of bashing mine. Let's see what you can come up with instead of accomplishing "virtually nothing" by by talking down my rankings. Have at it. >>
Relax Francis. You're not the ONLY one entitled to an opinion.
In this big, cruel world, there will be people that disagree with you and many other things. Being hypersensitive to criticism certainly won't lead to making too many friends. Most people, at least the regulars, are not only thick-skinned, but are seasoned veterans with regard to lambasting folks that see their opinions as a one-way street. Dialog, discussion, acceptance and rebuttal in a civil manner typically result in great conversation and productive intercourse. >>
Tell that to the guy I was talking to. Why is it your business what I do or what I say? If you don't like me or what I have to say, why are you even in the thread? Are you simply trolling for a response from me? Well, you got it. lol Nice job! >>
C'est la vie... Some people just don't get it . . .
BTW, you've been added to my IGNORE list so don't expect any more of your PM barrages to go through.
In fact, I'm just going to ignore you all together since anything I suggest and any advice I offer is considered nothing more than a "personal attack" and I'm not "man enough" to talk to you privately... >>
Advice? Attacking me is giving advice??? Answering your PM is "barraging" you with PMs??? LOL You have some SEEERIOUS issues my friend. Please ignore every word I type... PLEASE. lol
<< <i>I said it was just for fun. I'm not a statistician with all the time in the world to dissect every single stat from every QB in the annals of history. FOR FUN. >>
How about instead of every single one, you focus on the ones that best correlate with winning?
Isn't it more fun to understand and learn about the sport, instead of just punching a few digits into a calculator and learning virtually nothing? >>
Seriously, make your own rankings instead of bashing mine. Let's see what you can come up with instead of accomplishing "virtually nothing" by by talking down my rankings. Have at it. >>
I already did. I can't help it if you choose to ignore them. Wasn't trying to bash your picks, only asking questions about their rationale
<< <i>I said it was just for fun. I'm not a statistician with all the time in the world to dissect every single stat from every QB in the annals of history. FOR FUN. >>
How about instead of every single one, you focus on the ones that best correlate with winning?
Isn't it more fun to understand and learn about the sport, instead of just punching a few digits into a calculator and learning virtually nothing? >>
Seriously, make your own rankings instead of bashing mine. Let's see what you can come up with instead of accomplishing "virtually nothing" by by talking down my rankings. Have at it. >>
I already did. I can't help it if you choose to ignore them. Wasn't trying to bash your picks, only asking questions about their rationale >>
I kept it as simple as possible as to keep it from being time consuming. I only used QBs who have won Super Bowls and I added the times they led the league, so it doesn't really matter when they played, they got points for leading their peers. I never claimed it was perfect and stated it was for fun right off the bat.
The highest rated QB in playoff history, including the entire modern era where passing was and is much easier.
Won many playoff games in terrible weather conditions where passing was more difficult.
Low turnover's in these key playoff games where careful ball control is most important.
Who is this QB :
Compare Starr's playoff records to Unitas'. Go ahead. There's no comparison.
Considering the fact that Starr was drafted in the 17th round and was a backup for a few years on some terrible teams, it's amazing what he accomplished in the 1960's. The ultimate rags to riches story.
The highest rated QB in playoff history, including the entire modern era where passing was and is much easier.
Won many playoff games in terrible weather conditions where passing was more difficult.
Low turnover's in these key playoff games where careful ball control is most important.
Who is this QB :
Compare Starr's playoff records to Unitas'. Go ahead. There's no comparison.
Considering the fact that Starr was drafted in the 17th round and was a backup for a few years on some terrible teams, it's amazing what he accomplished in the 1960's. The ultimate rags to riches story. >>
Don't forget that Unitas was cut by the Steelers and picked up off the sandlots by the Colts...
Starr's postseason record is amazing, and is worthy of consideration, but I think the overall accomplishments throughout his career puts Johnny U at the top of my list. And to be honest, as a kid growing up, I hated Unitas and Namath, but loved some of the games that they played against each other.
Bradshaw - Best deep passer in the history of the game...Ummm..No...Great deep passer, but NO ONE had the gun that Joe Namath had..PERIOD..
Jason >>
Thats laughable at best. The difference between Namath and Bradshaw is Bradshaw could throw the bomb and get it there and Namath would throw interceptions. 47 more interceptions than TD's. Bradshaw...first ballot hall of famer..Namath....questionable hall of famer
The highest rated QB in playoff history, including the entire modern era where passing was and is much easier.
Won many playoff games in terrible weather conditions where passing was more difficult.
Low turnover's in these key playoff games where careful ball control is most important.
Who is this QB :
Compare Starr's playoff records to Unitas'. Go ahead. There's no comparison.
Considering the fact that Starr was drafted in the 17th round and was a backup for a few years on some terrible teams, it's amazing what he accomplished in the 1960's. The ultimate rags to riches story. >>
I think Starr is often overlooked. He is most certainly one of the greats of all time and right up there with Montana and Bradshaw for best ever post-season QB's in history.
I agree that Starr is overlooked and merits consideration. He's like the inverse of Unitas. If a quarterback existed with Unitas's regular season stats and Starr's playoff stats, there probably wouldn't be any debate who the greatest quarterback was.
Bradshaw - Best deep passer in the history of the game...Ummm..No...Great deep passer, but NO ONE had the gun that Joe Namath had..PERIOD..
Jason >>
Thats laughable at best. The difference between Namath and Bradshaw is Bradshaw could throw the bomb and get it there and Namath would throw interceptions. 47 more interceptions than TD's. Bradshaw...first ballot hall of famer..Namath....questionable hall of famer >>
You sure about that?
Career numbers... Namath- 5.8 int %, 14.7 yards per completion Bradshaw- 5.4 int%, 13.8 yards per completion
Bradshaw played with 2 HOF WRs, a HOF RB and a HOF Center...Not to mention a defense that was amongst the best in history and consistently held opponents to low scores. Namath played with 1 HOF WR (who was slow BTW)...Namath also had a devastating knee injury his 6th year in the league and was never the same after that.
Rather than stating stats, I challenge you to find some of Namath's and Bradshaw's highlight reels and compare the two. I love Bradshaw, but he was NOT the best deep passer of all-time. Top 3, I'll give him that, but why overstate him?
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>I agree that Starr is overlooked and merits consideration. He's like the inverse of Unitas. If a quarterback existed with Unitas's regular season stats and Starr's playoff stats, there probably wouldn't be any debate who the greatest quarterback was. >>
You know the QB you just described might be Joe Montana. He put up big regular season numbers, high QB ratings, and was easily one the top three best post season QB's ever, in any era.
I gotta say, I'm not a big fan of Namath, but he was a great, great down the field passer. Maynard and Sauer caught a lot of deep passes from him in his first 5-6 years. Those Jets weren't a screen passing team in those days, so his INT totals were a little higher than some other QB's of his era.
Namath and Hadl both had a high pct. of int's, both played in down the field passing offenses.
<< <i>I agree that Starr is overlooked and merits consideration. He's like the inverse of Unitas. If a quarterback existed with Unitas's regular season stats and Starr's playoff stats, there probably wouldn't be any debate who the greatest quarterback was. >>
You know the QB you just described might be Joe Montana. He put up big regular season numbers, high QB ratings, and was easily one the top three best post season QB's ever, in any era.
I gotta say, I'm not a big fan of Namath, but he was a great, great down the field passer. Maynard and Sauer caught a lot of deep passes from him in his first 5-6 years. Those Jets weren't a screen passing team in those days, so his INT totals were a little higher than some other QB's of his era.
Namath and Hadl both had a high pct. of int's, both played in down the field passing offenses. >>
100000% agree with all of the above. I'm not really a Namath guy either, but if you are going to break it down to deep passing game and start naming the BEST, you gotta at LEAST put Namath right there with the greatest deep passers...His arm was ridiculous.
Can't knock anything Montana...I rank Unitas above him mainly because of that toughness and grit he played with in an era where QBs really took a beating...Montana was also tough, but didn't play with the MLB mentality such as Unitas did..Unitas also called his own plays! Very close between the 2 IMO..Peyton is getting there..He's a wuss when the pass rush gets to him and doesn't throw well on the move..But he is 1000% the greatest pocket passer I've ever seen orchestrate an offense...I hate watching the guy play..It's like playing Madden on Rookie, its stupid how good he is...Most times unstoppable.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Bradshaw - Best deep passer in the history of the game...Ummm..No...Great deep passer, but NO ONE had the gun that Joe Namath had..PERIOD..
Jason >>
Thats laughable at best. The difference between Namath and Bradshaw is Bradshaw could throw the bomb and get it there and Namath would throw interceptions. 47 more interceptions than TD's. Bradshaw...first ballot hall of famer..Namath....questionable hall of famer >>
You sure about that?
Career numbers... Namath- 5.8 int %, 14.7 yards per completion Bradshaw- 5.4 int%, 13.8 yards per completion
Bradshaw played with 2 HOF WRs, a HOF RB and a HOF Center...Not to mention a defense that was amongst the best in history and consistently held opponents to low scores. Namath played with 1 HOF WR (who was slow BTW)...Namath also had a devastating knee injury his 6th year in the league and was never the same after that.
Rather than stating stats, I challenge you to find some of Namath's and Bradshaw's highlight reels and compare the two. I love Bradshaw, but he was NOT the best deep passer of all-time. Top 3, I'll give him that, but why overstate him?
Jason
Jason,
Nevermind Black Label...he has shown time and time again on the Sports Talk forum that his opinions have no basis in reality. To him, ring count is the only way to evaluate the stature of an NFL QB. regardless of the factors that contribute to that aspect. Terry Bradshaw is arguably the only QB that had better timing than Troy Aikman when it came to winning championships with the team that had been assembled around him. The Steelers of the '70s were arguably one of the best TEAMS of all time, but Bradshaw as good as he was, was not one of the primary reasons for that. The defense, one of the best OL in history with possibly the best center of all-time in Mike Webster, two acrobatic HOF receivers and a HOF running back and terrific running attack, were all bigger contributors to the Steelers' success. Heck, in 1976 the Steelers backup QB Mike Kruckek was 6-0 as a starter when Bradshaw got hurt, their D was that good!
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> Bradshaw - Best deep passer in the history of the game...Ummm..No...Great deep passer, but NO ONE had the gun that Joe Namath had..PERIOD..
Jason >>
Thats laughable at best. The difference between Namath and Bradshaw is Bradshaw could throw the bomb and get it there and Namath would throw interceptions. 47 more interceptions than TD's. Bradshaw...first ballot hall of famer..Namath....questionable hall of famer >>
You sure about that?
Career numbers... Namath- 5.8 int %, 14.7 yards per completion Bradshaw- 5.4 int%, 13.8 yards per completion
Bradshaw played with 2 HOF WRs, a HOF RB and a HOF Center...Not to mention a defense that was amongst the best in history and consistently held opponents to low scores. Namath played with 1 HOF WR (who was slow BTW)...Namath also had a devastating knee injury his 6th year in the league and was never the same after that.
Rather than stating stats, I challenge you to find some of Namath's and Bradshaw's highlight reels and compare the two. I love Bradshaw, but he was NOT the best deep passer of all-time. Top 3, I'll give him that, but why overstate him?
Jason
Jason,
Nevermind Black Label...he has shown time and time again on the Sports Talk forum that his opinions have no basis in reality. To him, ring count is the only way to evaluate the stature of an NFL QB. regardless of the factors that contribute to that aspect. Terry Bradshaw is arguably the only QB that had better timing than Troy Aikman when it came to winning championships with the team that had been assembled around him. The Steelers of the '70s were arguably one of the best TEAMS of all time, but Bradshaw as good as he was, was not one of the primary reasons for that. The defense, one of the best OL in history with possibly the best center of all-time in Mike Webster, two acrobatic HOF receivers and a HOF running back and terrific running attack, were all bigger contributors to the Steelers' success. Heck, in 1976 the Steelers backup QB Mike Kruckek was 6-0 as a starter when Bradshaw got hurt, their D was that good! >>
You completely ignore the facts and your posts are almost identical to SABERMANS....your other alt ego perhaps?
You completely ignore the facts and your posts are almost identical to SABERMANS....your other alt ego perhaps?
Now that is funny!
In reality, though, virtually everyone who posted is basically saying the same thing, so maybe it's time you took the next step and re-evaluated your perspective on this topic. Just a thought...
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>I did this just for fun. I only allowed QBs with at least one Super Bowl victory with at least one appearance in a top ten all-time stat category and every QB with two Super Bowl victories. They received 10 points for a Super Bowl victory, -3 points for a Super Bowl loss, 5 points for a Super Bowl MVP Award, 4 points for a League MVP Award, 4 points for every top-five finish in an all-time stat category, 2 points for every top-ten finish in an all-time stat category, 2 points for being number one all-time in any all-time stat category and 1 point every time he led the league in any meaningful stat category. This is what I came up with.
1. Joe Montana (4SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(10TTx2)+(17LL)+(0SBLx-3)+(3SBMVPx5)+(2LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 100 2. Peyton Manning (1SBx10)+(5T5x4)+(14TTx2)+(19LL)+(0SBLx-3)+(1SBMVPx5)+(4LMVPx4)+(1#1ATx2)= 100 3. Steve Young (1SBx10)+(2T5x4)+(7TTx2)+(34LL)+(0SBLx-3)+(1SBMVPx5)+(2LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 79 4. Brett Favre (1SBx10)+(3T5x4)+(7TTx2)+(22LL)+(1SBLx-3)+(0SBMVPx5)+(3LMVPx4)+(4#1ATx2)= 75 5. Tom Brady (3SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(8TTx2)+(10LL)+(1SBLx-3)+(2SBMVPx5)+(1LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 67
6. Terry Bradshaw (4SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(0TTx2)+(7LL)+(0SBLx-3)+(2SBMVPx5)+(1LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 61 7 Johhny Unitas (1SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(2TTx2)+(33LL)+(SBLx-3)+(SBMVPx5)+(3LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 59 8. Kurt Warner (1SBx10)+(1T5x4)+(8TTx2)+(22LL)+(2SBLx-3)+(1SBMVPx5)+(2LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 59 9. Bart Starr (2SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(1TTx2)+(13LL)+(0SBLx-3)+(2SBMVPx5)+(1LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 49 10. John Elway (2SBx10)+(3T5x4)+(4TTx2)+(5LL)+(3SBLx-3)+(1SBMVPx5)+(1LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 45
11 Len Dawson (1SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(2TTx2)+(27LL)+(1SBLx-3)+(1SBMVPx5)+(0LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 43 12. Troy Aikman (3SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(0TTx2)+(4LL)+(0SBLx-3)+(1SBMVPx5)+(0LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 39 13. Roger Staubach (2SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(1TTx2)+(14LL)+(2SBLx-3)+(1SBMVPx5)+(0LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 35 14. Ben Roethlisberger (2SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(3TTx2)+(4LL)+(0SBLx-3)+(0SBMVPx5)+(0LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 30 15. Bob Griese (2SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(0TTx2)+(5LL)+(1SBLx-3)+(0SBMVPx5)+(0LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 22 16. Jim Plunkett (2SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(0TTx2)+(1LL)+(0SBLx-3)+(0SBMVPx5)+(0LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 21
>>
Namath won a super bowl and is not even on this list. Although Namath was talented he is borderline hofamer. Not even top 30 qb's of all time so to compare him with Bradshaw is just insane. Namath led the NFL in interceptions 4 times, had a completion rating of under 50% 7 times, and had a losing record as a starter. Bradshaw was 107-51 as a starter because they had one of the best offenses in the NFL and had the #1 offense in 1979. It takes more than just a great defense usually to win championships. You need a great QB and the last 3 super bowls the steelers won with Bradshaw was won in the air.
In reality, though, virtually everyone who posted is basically saying the same thing, so maybe it's time you took the next step and re-evaluated your perspective on this topic. Just a thought... >>
Uh, no. You and saberman have been quoting the exact same lines for about a week now.
n reality, though, virtually everyone who posted is basically saying the same thing, so maybe it's time you took the next step and re-evaluated your perspective on this topic. Just a thought... >>
Uh, no. You and saberman have been quoting the exact same lines for about a week now.
Did you even bother to read JasP's post? Or any of the other posters in the Bradshaw thread on the Sports Talk forum? Or are they all Sabeman alts also? Surely you can't be that dense..
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.
Namath won a super bowl and is not even on this list. Although Namath was talented he is borderline hofamer. Not even top 30 qb's of all time so to compare him with Bradshaw is just insane. Namath led the NFL in interceptions 4 times, had a completion rating of under 50% 7 times, and had a losing record as a starter. Bradshaw was 107-51 as a starter because they had one of the best offenses in the NFL and had the #1 offense in 1979. It takes more than just a great defense usually to win championships. You need a great QB and the last 3 super bowls the steelers won with Bradshaw was won in the air. >>
My comparison was STRICTLY and SPECIFICALLY addressing the comment of "best deep passer in the history of the game". If I'm ranking the all-time QBs, Bradshaw is well above Namath in those rankings, but not because he threw a better deep ball. Rather all of the other intangibles such as toughness, durability, improvisation skills and leadership abilities.
As I showed with the FACTUAL (not opinion) stats that I posted, Namath averaged almost a full yard more in his average yards per completion, and only threw 0.4% more interceptions than Bradshaw...Aside from what you see on paper, WATCH THE GAMES, WATCH the highlights. Focus only on their passes over 25 yards, then come back and tell me you saw Bradshaw throw a sharper, better aimed deep ball than Namath on a consistent basis...
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
As Jasp said, Bradshaw's RB and two HOF receivers made Bradshaw look better than he was.
With Bradshaw being mediocre, his team was 17th ranked in offense ........................ADD FRANCO HARRIS THE NEXT YEAR...............
With Bradshaw STILL being mediocre, then they were 5th ranked offensively.
With 'normal' Wide Receivers as his starters, Bradshaw's yearly yard per attempt was
6.5 6.1 6.1 6.6 5.3 ADD SWANN AND STALLWORTH AS STARTERS, HIS YARDS PER ATTEMPT JUMPED TO: 7.2 6.1(partial season. His sub went 6-0 and had a y/a of 8.9!!) 8.0 7.9
This is not even accounting for any offensive line additions that helped him as well.
It is very obvious why Bradshaw 'got better', both with the numbers and with watching those games. Harris, Swann, and Stallworth. Bradshaw was nothing special before them.
<< <i>For me, the measure is simply # of Super Bowl wins. Therefore, its Montana, with Bradshaw and Brady on his heels, and then everybody else. >>
This thinking makes no sense to me. Take Kurt Warner for example. If Vinatieri goes wide right with a FG and Santonio Holmes doesn't get a toe down, Warner is 3-0 in the Super Bowl. Neither of those plays had anything to do with Warner. Yet, somehow they are held against him. Makes no sense.
Comments
<< <i>I got to get my votes in
1. Manning...When it's all said and done, he will be regarded as #1
2. Johnny U...Tough as nails winner that even his meanest opponents respected
3. Otto Graham...read up on him and you'll wonder why nobody ever mentions him too often
4. Montana....4 rings for maybe the most clutch QB ever
5. Farve....tough as nails gun slingin throwback
6. Marino....never winning a ring should overshadow his rocket arm
7. Young...greatest left hand QB could have played in any era >>
Agree on all of these comments above. Manning has 3 more years like this one, and he will be #1 ALL TIME...Most unstoppable QB I've ever seen. If he can get past the earlier career chocking and win a couple more Super Bowls its a wrap...
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
When I first came to CU - didn't have have another avatar? The 10th mt division or something?
mike
<< <i>I've got nothing to add other than to say hi to Jason - I don't see you around much!
When I first came to CU - didn't have have another avatar? The 10th mt division or something?
mike >>
Well, first it was 82nd Airborne patch..Then Honor Guard..And current assignment is Drill SGT..lol
I usually just post on the NFL HOF Rookie Players thread on the Set Registry forum..This message board just got way outta control...But always willing to chime in on football related threads since that is my specialty...
Good to see a few of the old timers still around!
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>So making the playoffs and then winning the Conference Championship is a negative?
Why are great stats in the regular season worth so much, but winning games is not; while winning games in the playoffs worth so much, but great stats during those games worth nothing?
Why do I feel like that was a completely incorrect use of a semi-colon?
Why make zero adjustments for teammates and rule changes and game conditions? A high completion percentage and lots of yards and TD passes after roughing the quarterback changed to touching the quarterback is a lot different than before >>
I said it was just for fun. I'm not a statistician with all the time in the world to dissect every single stat from every QB in the annals of history. FOR FUN.
<< <i>I said it was just for fun. I'm not a statistician with all the time in the world to dissect every single stat from every QB in the annals of history. FOR FUN. >>
How about instead of every single one, you focus on the ones that best correlate with winning?
Isn't it more fun to understand and learn about the sport, instead of just punching a few digits into a calculator and learning virtually nothing?
<< <i>
<< <i>I said it was just for fun. I'm not a statistician with all the time in the world to dissect every single stat from every QB in the annals of history. FOR FUN. >>
How about instead of every single one, you focus on the ones that best correlate with winning?
Isn't it more fun to understand and learn about the sport, instead of just punching a few digits into a calculator and learning virtually nothing? >>
Seriously, make your own rankings instead of bashing mine. Let's see what you can come up with instead of accomplishing "virtually nothing" by by talking down my rankings. Have at it.
<< <i>Seriously, make your own rankings instead of bashing mine. Let's see what you can come up with instead of accomplishing "virtually nothing" by by talking down my rankings. Have at it. >>
Relax Francis. You're not the ONLY one entitled to an opinion.
In this big, cruel world, there will be people that disagree with you and many other things. Being hypersensitive to criticism certainly won't lead to making too many friends. Most people, at least the regulars, are not only thick-skinned, but are seasoned veterans with regard to lambasting folks that see their opinions as a one-way street. Dialog, discussion, acceptance and rebuttal in a civil manner typically result in great conversation and productive intercourse.
Again, you have the allow a QB to complete an entire body of work. For all of the problems Peyton had early in his playoff career he was able to get his postseason record to .500. If Indy wins tomorrow night Peyton is 7-2 in his last 9 playoff starts with a 2-0 SB record. Let's let these guys finish their careers before we argue for or against their place in history.
Ripken in the Minors * Ripken in the Minors Facebook Page
<< <i>
<< <i>Seriously, make your own rankings instead of bashing mine. Let's see what you can come up with instead of accomplishing "virtually nothing" by by talking down my rankings. Have at it. >>
Relax Francis. You're not the ONLY one entitled to an opinion.
In this big, cruel world, there will be people that disagree with you and many other things. Being hypersensitive to criticism certainly won't lead to making too many friends. Most people, at least the regulars, are not only thick-skinned, but are seasoned veterans with regard to lambasting folks that see their opinions as a one-way street. Dialog, discussion, acceptance and rebuttal in a civil manner typically result in great conversation and productive intercourse. >>
Tell that to the guy I was talking to. Why is it your business what I do or what I say? If you don't like me or what I have to say, why are you even in the thread? Are you simply trolling for a response from me? Well, you got it. lol Nice job!
he said intercourse
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Seriously, make your own rankings instead of bashing mine. Let's see what you can come up with instead of accomplishing "virtually nothing" by by talking down my rankings. Have at it. >>
Relax Francis. You're not the ONLY one entitled to an opinion.
In this big, cruel world, there will be people that disagree with you and many other things. Being hypersensitive to criticism certainly won't lead to making too many friends. Most people, at least the regulars, are not only thick-skinned, but are seasoned veterans with regard to lambasting folks that see their opinions as a one-way street. Dialog, discussion, acceptance and rebuttal in a civil manner typically result in great conversation and productive intercourse. >>
Tell that to the guy I was talking to. Why is it your business what I do or what I say? If you don't like me or what I have to say, why are you even in the thread? Are you simply trolling for a response from me? Well, you got it. lol Nice job! >>
C'est la vie... Some people just don't get it . . .
BTW, you've been added to my IGNORE list so don't expect any more of your PM barrages to go through.
In fact, I'm just going to ignore you all together since anything I suggest and any advice I offer is considered nothing more than a "personal attack" and I'm not "man enough" to talk to you privately...
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Seriously, make your own rankings instead of bashing mine. Let's see what you can come up with instead of accomplishing "virtually nothing" by by talking down my rankings. Have at it. >>
Relax Francis. You're not the ONLY one entitled to an opinion.
In this big, cruel world, there will be people that disagree with you and many other things. Being hypersensitive to criticism certainly won't lead to making too many friends. Most people, at least the regulars, are not only thick-skinned, but are seasoned veterans with regard to lambasting folks that see their opinions as a one-way street. Dialog, discussion, acceptance and rebuttal in a civil manner typically result in great conversation and productive intercourse. >>
Tell that to the guy I was talking to. Why is it your business what I do or what I say? If you don't like me or what I have to say, why are you even in the thread? Are you simply trolling for a response from me? Well, you got it. lol Nice job! >>
C'est la vie... Some people just don't get it . . .
BTW, you've been added to my IGNORE list so don't expect any more of your PM barrages to go through.
In fact, I'm just going to ignore you all together since anything I suggest and any advice I offer is considered nothing more than a "personal attack" and I'm not "man enough" to talk to you privately... >>
Advice? Attacking me is giving advice??? Answering your PM is "barraging" you with PMs??? LOL You have some SEEERIOUS issues my friend. Please ignore every word I type... PLEASE. lol
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I said it was just for fun. I'm not a statistician with all the time in the world to dissect every single stat from every QB in the annals of history. FOR FUN. >>
How about instead of every single one, you focus on the ones that best correlate with winning?
Isn't it more fun to understand and learn about the sport, instead of just punching a few digits into a calculator and learning virtually nothing? >>
Seriously, make your own rankings instead of bashing mine. Let's see what you can come up with instead of accomplishing "virtually nothing" by by talking down my rankings. Have at it. >>
I already did. I can't help it if you choose to ignore them. Wasn't trying to bash your picks, only asking questions about their rationale
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I said it was just for fun. I'm not a statistician with all the time in the world to dissect every single stat from every QB in the annals of history. FOR FUN. >>
How about instead of every single one, you focus on the ones that best correlate with winning?
Isn't it more fun to understand and learn about the sport, instead of just punching a few digits into a calculator and learning virtually nothing? >>
Seriously, make your own rankings instead of bashing mine. Let's see what you can come up with instead of accomplishing "virtually nothing" by by talking down my rankings. Have at it. >>
I already did. I can't help it if you choose to ignore them. Wasn't trying to bash your picks, only asking questions about their rationale >>
I kept it as simple as possible as to keep it from being time consuming. I only used QBs who have won Super Bowls and I added the times they led the league, so it doesn't really matter when they played, they got points for leading their peers. I never claimed it was perfect and stated it was for fun right off the bat.
Two Super Bowl MVP's.
Five NFL championships won in a seven year span.
The highest rated QB in playoff history, including the entire modern era where passing was and is much easier.
Won many playoff games in terrible weather conditions where
passing was more difficult.
Low turnover's in these key playoff games where careful ball control is most important.
Who is this QB :
Compare Starr's playoff records to Unitas'.
Go ahead. There's no comparison.
Considering the fact that Starr was drafted in the 17th round and was a backup for a few years on some terrible teams, it's amazing
what he accomplished in the 1960's. The ultimate rags to riches story.
<< <i>9-1 playoff mark as starting QB.
Two Super Bowl MVP's.
Five NFL championships won in a seven year span.
The highest rated QB in playoff history, including the entire modern era where passing was and is much easier.
Won many playoff games in terrible weather conditions where
passing was more difficult.
Low turnover's in these key playoff games where careful ball control is most important.
Who is this QB :
Compare Starr's playoff records to Unitas'.
Go ahead. There's no comparison.
Considering the fact that Starr was drafted in the 17th round and was a backup for a few years on some terrible teams, it's amazing
what he accomplished in the 1960's. The ultimate rags to riches story. >>
Don't forget that Unitas was cut by the Steelers and picked up off the sandlots by the Colts...
Starr's postseason record is amazing, and is worthy of consideration, but I think the overall accomplishments throughout his career puts Johnny U at the top of my list. And to be honest, as a kid growing up, I hated Unitas and Namath, but loved some of the games that they played against each other.
<< <i>
Bradshaw - Best deep passer in the history of the game...Ummm..No...Great deep passer, but NO ONE had the gun that Joe Namath had..PERIOD..
Jason >>
Thats laughable at best. The difference between Namath and Bradshaw is Bradshaw could throw the bomb and get it there and Namath would throw interceptions. 47 more interceptions than TD's. Bradshaw...first ballot hall of famer..Namath....questionable hall of famer
<< <i>9-1 playoff mark as starting QB.
Two Super Bowl MVP's.
Five NFL championships won in a seven year span.
The highest rated QB in playoff history, including the entire modern era where passing was and is much easier.
Won many playoff games in terrible weather conditions where
passing was more difficult.
Low turnover's in these key playoff games where careful ball control is most important.
Who is this QB :
Compare Starr's playoff records to Unitas'.
Go ahead. There's no comparison.
Considering the fact that Starr was drafted in the 17th round and was a backup for a few years on some terrible teams, it's amazing
what he accomplished in the 1960's. The ultimate rags to riches story. >>
I think Starr is often overlooked. He is most certainly one of the greats of all time and right up there with Montana and Bradshaw for best ever post-season QB's in history.
<< <i>
<< <i>
Bradshaw - Best deep passer in the history of the game...Ummm..No...Great deep passer, but NO ONE had the gun that Joe Namath had..PERIOD..
Jason >>
Thats laughable at best. The difference between Namath and Bradshaw is Bradshaw could throw the bomb and get it there and Namath would throw interceptions. 47 more interceptions than TD's. Bradshaw...first ballot hall of famer..Namath....questionable hall of famer >>
You sure about that?
Career numbers...
Namath- 5.8 int %, 14.7 yards per completion
Bradshaw- 5.4 int%, 13.8 yards per completion
Bradshaw played with 2 HOF WRs, a HOF RB and a HOF Center...Not to mention a defense that was amongst the best in history and consistently held opponents to low scores.
Namath played with 1 HOF WR (who was slow BTW)...Namath also had a devastating knee injury his 6th year in the league and was never the same after that.
Rather than stating stats, I challenge you to find some of Namath's and Bradshaw's highlight reels and compare the two. I love Bradshaw, but he was NOT the best deep passer of all-time. Top 3, I'll give him that, but why overstate him?
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>I agree that Starr is overlooked and merits consideration. He's like the inverse of Unitas. If a quarterback existed with Unitas's regular season stats and Starr's playoff stats, there probably wouldn't be any debate who the greatest quarterback was. >>
You know the QB you just described might be Joe Montana.
He put up big regular season numbers, high QB ratings, and
was easily one the top three best post season QB's ever, in any era.
I gotta say, I'm not a big fan of Namath, but he was a great, great down the field passer. Maynard and Sauer caught a lot of deep passes from him in his first 5-6 years. Those Jets weren't a screen passing team in those days, so his INT totals were a little higher than some other QB's of his era.
Namath and Hadl both had a high pct. of int's, both played in down the field passing offenses.
<< <i>
<< <i>I agree that Starr is overlooked and merits consideration. He's like the inverse of Unitas. If a quarterback existed with Unitas's regular season stats and Starr's playoff stats, there probably wouldn't be any debate who the greatest quarterback was. >>
You know the QB you just described might be Joe Montana.
He put up big regular season numbers, high QB ratings, and
was easily one the top three best post season QB's ever, in any era.
I gotta say, I'm not a big fan of Namath, but he was a great, great down the field passer. Maynard and Sauer caught a lot of deep passes from him in his first 5-6 years. Those Jets weren't a screen passing team in those days, so his INT totals were a little higher than some other QB's of his era.
Namath and Hadl both had a high pct. of int's, both played in down the field passing offenses. >>
100000% agree with all of the above. I'm not really a Namath guy either, but if you are going to break it down to deep passing game and start naming the BEST, you gotta at LEAST put Namath right there with the greatest deep passers...His arm was ridiculous.
Can't knock anything Montana...I rank Unitas above him mainly because of that toughness and grit he played with in an era where QBs really took a beating...Montana was also tough, but didn't play with the MLB mentality such as Unitas did..Unitas also called his own plays! Very close between the 2 IMO..Peyton is getting there..He's a wuss when the pass rush gets to him and doesn't throw well on the move..But he is 1000% the greatest pocket passer I've ever seen orchestrate an offense...I hate watching the guy play..It's like playing Madden on Rookie, its stupid how good he is...Most times unstoppable.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Bradshaw - Best deep passer in the history of the game...Ummm..No...Great deep passer, but NO ONE had the gun that Joe Namath had..PERIOD..
Jason >>
Thats laughable at best. The difference between Namath and Bradshaw is Bradshaw could throw the bomb and get it there and Namath would throw interceptions. 47 more interceptions than TD's. Bradshaw...first ballot hall of famer..Namath....questionable hall of famer >>
You sure about that?
Career numbers...
Namath- 5.8 int %, 14.7 yards per completion
Bradshaw- 5.4 int%, 13.8 yards per completion
Bradshaw played with 2 HOF WRs, a HOF RB and a HOF Center...Not to mention a defense that was amongst the best in history and consistently held opponents to low scores.
Namath played with 1 HOF WR (who was slow BTW)...Namath also had a devastating knee injury his 6th year in the league and was never the same after that.
Rather than stating stats, I challenge you to find some of Namath's and Bradshaw's highlight reels and compare the two. I love Bradshaw, but he was NOT the best deep passer of all-time. Top 3, I'll give him that, but why overstate him?
Jason
Jason,
Nevermind Black Label...he has shown time and time again on the Sports Talk forum that his opinions have no basis in reality. To him, ring count is the only way to evaluate the stature of an NFL QB. regardless of the factors that contribute to that aspect. Terry Bradshaw is arguably the only QB that had better timing than Troy Aikman when it came to winning championships with the team that had been assembled around him. The Steelers of the '70s were arguably one of the best TEAMS of all time, but Bradshaw as good as he was, was not one of the primary reasons for that. The defense, one of the best OL in history with possibly the best center of all-time in Mike Webster, two acrobatic HOF receivers and a HOF running back and terrific running attack, were all bigger contributors to the Steelers' success. Heck, in 1976 the Steelers backup QB Mike Kruckek was 6-0 as a starter when Bradshaw got hurt, their D was that good!
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>
Bradshaw - Best deep passer in the history of the game...Ummm..No...Great deep passer, but NO ONE had the gun that Joe Namath had..PERIOD..
Jason >>
Thats laughable at best. The difference between Namath and Bradshaw is Bradshaw could throw the bomb and get it there and Namath would throw interceptions. 47 more interceptions than TD's. Bradshaw...first ballot hall of famer..Namath....questionable hall of famer >>
You sure about that?
Career numbers...
Namath- 5.8 int %, 14.7 yards per completion
Bradshaw- 5.4 int%, 13.8 yards per completion
Bradshaw played with 2 HOF WRs, a HOF RB and a HOF Center...Not to mention a defense that was amongst the best in history and consistently held opponents to low scores.
Namath played with 1 HOF WR (who was slow BTW)...Namath also had a devastating knee injury his 6th year in the league and was never the same after that.
Rather than stating stats, I challenge you to find some of Namath's and Bradshaw's highlight reels and compare the two. I love Bradshaw, but he was NOT the best deep passer of all-time. Top 3, I'll give him that, but why overstate him?
Jason
Jason,
Nevermind Black Label...he has shown time and time again on the Sports Talk forum that his opinions have no basis in reality. To him, ring count is the only way to evaluate the stature of an NFL QB. regardless of the factors that contribute to that aspect. Terry Bradshaw is arguably the only QB that had better timing than Troy Aikman when it came to winning championships with the team that had been assembled around him. The Steelers of the '70s were arguably one of the best TEAMS of all time, but Bradshaw as good as he was, was not one of the primary reasons for that. The defense, one of the best OL in history with possibly the best center of all-time in Mike Webster, two acrobatic HOF receivers and a HOF running back and terrific running attack, were all bigger contributors to the Steelers' success. Heck, in 1976 the Steelers backup QB Mike Kruckek was 6-0 as a starter when Bradshaw got hurt, their D was that good! >>
You completely ignore the facts and your posts are almost identical to SABERMANS....your other alt ego perhaps?
Now that is funny!
In reality, though, virtually everyone who posted is basically saying the same thing, so maybe it's time you took the next step and re-evaluated your perspective on this topic. Just a thought...
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>I did this just for fun. I only allowed QBs with at least one Super Bowl victory with at least one appearance in a top ten all-time stat category and every QB with two Super Bowl victories. They received 10 points for a Super Bowl victory, -3 points for a Super Bowl loss, 5 points for a Super Bowl MVP Award, 4 points for a League MVP Award, 4 points for every top-five finish in an all-time stat category, 2 points for every top-ten finish in an all-time stat category, 2 points for being number one all-time in any all-time stat category and 1 point every time he led the league in any meaningful stat category. This is what I came up with.
1. Joe Montana (4SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(10TTx2)+(17LL)+(0SBLx-3)+(3SBMVPx5)+(2LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 100
2. Peyton Manning (1SBx10)+(5T5x4)+(14TTx2)+(19LL)+(0SBLx-3)+(1SBMVPx5)+(4LMVPx4)+(1#1ATx2)= 100
3. Steve Young (1SBx10)+(2T5x4)+(7TTx2)+(34LL)+(0SBLx-3)+(1SBMVPx5)+(2LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 79
4. Brett Favre (1SBx10)+(3T5x4)+(7TTx2)+(22LL)+(1SBLx-3)+(0SBMVPx5)+(3LMVPx4)+(4#1ATx2)= 75
5. Tom Brady (3SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(8TTx2)+(10LL)+(1SBLx-3)+(2SBMVPx5)+(1LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 67
6. Terry Bradshaw (4SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(0TTx2)+(7LL)+(0SBLx-3)+(2SBMVPx5)+(1LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 61
7 Johhny Unitas (1SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(2TTx2)+(33LL)+(SBLx-3)+(SBMVPx5)+(3LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 59
8. Kurt Warner (1SBx10)+(1T5x4)+(8TTx2)+(22LL)+(2SBLx-3)+(1SBMVPx5)+(2LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 59
9. Bart Starr (2SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(1TTx2)+(13LL)+(0SBLx-3)+(2SBMVPx5)+(1LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 49
10. John Elway (2SBx10)+(3T5x4)+(4TTx2)+(5LL)+(3SBLx-3)+(1SBMVPx5)+(1LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 45
11 Len Dawson (1SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(2TTx2)+(27LL)+(1SBLx-3)+(1SBMVPx5)+(0LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 43
12. Troy Aikman (3SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(0TTx2)+(4LL)+(0SBLx-3)+(1SBMVPx5)+(0LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 39
13. Roger Staubach (2SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(1TTx2)+(14LL)+(2SBLx-3)+(1SBMVPx5)+(0LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 35
14. Ben Roethlisberger (2SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(3TTx2)+(4LL)+(0SBLx-3)+(0SBMVPx5)+(0LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 30
15. Bob Griese (2SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(0TTx2)+(5LL)+(1SBLx-3)+(0SBMVPx5)+(0LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 22
16. Jim Plunkett (2SBx10)+(0T5x4)+(0TTx2)+(1LL)+(0SBLx-3)+(0SBMVPx5)+(0LMVPx4)+(0#1ATx2)= 21
>>
Namath won a super bowl and is not even on this list. Although Namath was talented he is borderline hofamer. Not even top 30 qb's of all time so to compare him with Bradshaw is just insane. Namath led the NFL in interceptions 4 times, had a completion rating of under 50% 7 times, and had a losing record as a starter. Bradshaw was 107-51 as a starter because they had one of the best offenses in the NFL and had the #1 offense in 1979. It takes more than just a great defense usually to win championships. You need a great QB and the last 3 super bowls the steelers won with Bradshaw was won in the air.
<< <i>
In reality, though, virtually everyone who posted is basically saying the same thing, so maybe it's time you took the next step and re-evaluated your perspective on this topic. Just a thought... >>
Uh, no. You and saberman have been quoting the exact same lines for about a week now.
Uh, no. You and saberman have been quoting the exact same lines for about a week now.
Did you even bother to read JasP's post? Or any of the other posters in the Bradshaw thread on the Sports Talk forum? Or are they all Sabeman alts also? Surely you can't be that dense..
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>
Namath won a super bowl and is not even on this list. Although Namath was talented he is borderline hofamer. Not even top 30 qb's of all time so to compare him with Bradshaw is just insane. Namath led the NFL in interceptions 4 times, had a completion rating of under 50% 7 times, and had a losing record as a starter. Bradshaw was 107-51 as a starter because they had one of the best offenses in the NFL and had the #1 offense in 1979. It takes more than just a great defense usually to win championships. You need a great QB and the last 3 super bowls the steelers won with Bradshaw was won in the air. >>
My comparison was STRICTLY and SPECIFICALLY addressing the comment of "best deep passer in the history of the game". If I'm ranking the all-time QBs, Bradshaw is well above Namath in those rankings, but not because he threw a better deep ball. Rather all of the other intangibles such as toughness, durability, improvisation skills and leadership abilities.
As I showed with the FACTUAL (not opinion) stats that I posted, Namath averaged almost a full yard more in his average yards per completion, and only threw 0.4% more interceptions than Bradshaw...Aside from what you see on paper, WATCH THE GAMES, WATCH the highlights. Focus only on their passes over 25 yards, then come back and tell me you saw Bradshaw throw a sharper, better aimed deep ball than Namath on a consistent basis...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
With Bradshaw being mediocre, his team was 17th ranked in offense
........................ADD FRANCO HARRIS THE NEXT YEAR...............
With Bradshaw STILL being mediocre, then they were 5th ranked offensively.
With 'normal' Wide Receivers as his starters, Bradshaw's yearly yard per attempt was
6.5
6.1
6.1
6.6
5.3
ADD SWANN AND STALLWORTH AS STARTERS, HIS YARDS PER ATTEMPT JUMPED TO:
7.2
6.1(partial season. His sub went 6-0 and had a y/a of 8.9!!)
8.0
7.9
This is not even accounting for any offensive line additions that helped him as well.
It is very obvious why Bradshaw 'got better', both with the numbers and with watching those games. Harris, Swann, and Stallworth. Bradshaw was nothing special before them.
Kiss me twice.....let's party.
<< <i>Where is Trent Dilfer on the list ? >>
He is not in a top ten all-time list in any stat category, nor did he win 2 SBs, so he did not make the cut.
<< <i>For me, the measure is simply # of Super Bowl wins. Therefore, its Montana, with Bradshaw and Brady on his heels, and then everybody else. >>
This thinking makes no sense to me. Take Kurt Warner for example. If Vinatieri goes wide right with a FG and Santonio Holmes doesn't get a toe down, Warner is 3-0 in the Super Bowl. Neither of those plays had anything to do with Warner. Yet, somehow they are held against him. Makes no sense.
Tabe
<< <i>For me, the measure is simply # of Super Bowl wins. Therefore, its Montana, with Bradshaw and Brady on his heels, and then everybody else. >>
Aikman and Brady are tied but of course Brady may get more. And who knows how many more Brees will get?