The Gipper Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 Ron Jaworski says that if Tom Brady wins this Super Bowl that he will consider him the greatest QB of all time. Well, sometimes Jaws downs bit too much of the ESPN guano juice (yes, he drinks bat piss). But I suspect that if Brady isn't the GOAT....he is in the team picture. Who else should be in that picture? You can start with the guys who have won the titles.....be they the stat machines or not: Otto Graham....7 titles Bart Starr.....5 titles Sid Luckman....4 titles Terry Bradshaw....4 titles Joe Montana....4 titles Unitas....3 titles Aikman...3 titles Then there are the "stat" guys.....guys who may have won a title or two....but are high on the all time statistics list: Brett Favre Peyton Manning Dan Marino John Elway Fran Tarkenton Drew Brees You have some guys who could still add to their resumes in either category: Aaron Rodgers Ben Roethlisberger Eli Manning You have some HOFers who might be considered a notch or two below: Jim Kelly Roger Staubach Sammy Baugh Steve Young Dan Fouts Joe Namath Am I leaving anything out? And where do you stand on Brady being the GOAT......and if not him,,,,,,,who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballpeen Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 There is no way to really rate it. It depends on who you are, where you live and probably the time of day factors in to the mix. As an example, I can assure you that not many people outside of Cleveland fans, or serious historians of the game are going to have Otto on the list. It's simply subjective. In my case, I would rate Manning better than Brady, but Brady has more rings. Going back to the near past, I'd rate Marino right up there, but he doesn't have any. Shrug Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 27, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 There is no way to really rate it. It depends on who you are, where you live and probably the time of day factors in to the mix. As an example, I can assure you that not many people outside of Cleveland fans, or serious historians of the game are going to have Otto on the list. Actually, it is the serious historians who would have Otto at the top of the list. They are the ones who know. But yes, it is the non-historians who would not have a clue. Many younger. They can't see before the Super Bowl era so when they say "who is the g.o.a.t. they are only talking since the mid 70s. They would probably not even include Bart Starr and JU......because they are just too far back in time. It's simply subjective. In my case, I would rate Manning better than Brady, but Brady has more rings. Going back to the near past, I'd rate Marino right up there, but he doesn't have any. On pure arm delivery Marino is hard to match. That is why this is so difficult. Marino's team rarely had decent defenses....where some multiple winning QBs had teams with great defenses. While I consider Terry Bradshaw a great QB.....a lot of his team's success was equally reliant on that great defense. Shrug Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vagitron Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 Jaws is an idiot. Tom Brady should have an asterisks next to every Super Bowl title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballpeen Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 Unfortunatly, Otto is 3-4 eras ago. An era to me is about 20 years. (40'S and 50's), (60's and 70's), (80's and 90's). (2000 to present) Lot's of changes in those 20 yearspreads. Look at the rules, let alone the number of teams and the condition of players. It's why you can't compare....too much has changed. That is what made baseball pretty cool up until they started looking away at the meathead steroid players. Not much in the rules has changed over the last 100 years and most of the measurables in the players was similar.....meaning as an example that Walter Johnson threw it as hard and Bob Feller, who threw it as had as Sandy Kofax, who threw it as hard as Randy Johnson, who threw it as hard as whoever you want to inset out of todays crop. Football seems to have 4-5 rules changes per year. Baseball lowered the mound in 69, added a DH in one league in whatever, and now has some limited instant replay. Oh....they outlawed the spitball in maybe the 40's. The point is it is impossible to compare football players as easily as you can compare baseball players, but since the comparison game between fans originated with baseball, it is what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 I think there's only three guys worth mentioning here. Brady, Montana and Graham. I realize graham is probably homerism but it is what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Jaws is an idiot. Tom Brady should have an asterisks next to every Super Bowl title. Come on dude. That's ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBrown Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Agree with the Steeler, fuck Brady. Piece of cheating shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 My all time favorite QB would be Joe Montana. He was probably the most clutch quarterback I ever saw. Cool under pressure. I read when he drove the 49ers to to the winning score in the Super Bowl against the Bengals he spotted John Candy in the crowd and mentioned it to the players in the huddle. I don't think most quarterbacks would be in that frame of mind. As for the best quarterback ever I don't think you can single one out. You could make a good case for a number of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Baby crying: http://youtu.be/qS7nqwGt4-I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beare Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 I tend to agree with the cheating scandals i wouldnt put him in my top 5 qbs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Stupid steelers, cheating patriots.... Blount plays the fool, then arranges? his chance to get the hell out of three rivers scumland... and goes right back to the patriots, one day after Ridley gets hurt.... As the NFL World Turns.... http://sports.yahoo.com/news/the-other-patriots-conspiracy-theory--legarrett-blount-s-scheme-to-reunite-with-bill-belichick-233502306-nfl.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickers Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Jaws is an idiot. Tom Brady should have an asterisks next to every Super Bowl title. Just Like the Steelers should have one too! An(Ass-ter-isk) after each SB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Interesting that Unitas is given credit for 3 titles, but it was Earl Morrall who brought them back for the win in the 1971 Superbowl win over the Cowboys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 28, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Unfortunatly, Otto is 3-4 eras ago. An era to me is about 20 years. (40'S and 50's), (60's and 70's), (80's and 90's). (2000 to present) Lot's of changes in those 20 yearspreads. Look at the rules, let alone the number of teams and the condition of players. It's why you can't compare....too much has changed. All the above being true, I think that the offense that OG ran was really pretty much the same as the WCO that the 9ers and Joe Montana ran. Walsh simply adapted his boss's (PB ) offense to that time. Move OG up into the 80s and I think he and Joe are very similar in style and capability. Just a projection on my part. That is what made baseball pretty cool up until they started looking away at the meathead steroid players. Not much in the rules has changed over the last 100 years and most of the measurables in the players was similar.....meaning as an example that Walter Johnson threw it as hard and Bob Feller, who threw it as had as Sandy Kofax, who threw it as hard as Randy Johnson, who threw it as hard as whoever you want to inset out of todays crop. Football seems to have 4-5 rules changes per year. Baseball lowered the mound in 69, added a DH in one league in whatever, and now has some limited instant replay. Oh....they outlawed the spitball in maybe the 40's. The point is it is impossible to compare football players as easily as you can compare baseball players, but since the comparison game between fans originated with baseball, it is what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 28, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Interesting that Unitas is given credit for 3 titles, but it was Earl Morrall who brought them back for the win in the 1971 Superbowl win over the Cowboys. Fair point.....as a general rule, the QB that starts a game get "credit" for the win....even if another QB comes in later. Like last year.....Brian Hoyer gets credit for that win against Buffalo.....a game in which he was hurt in the first quarter and where Brandon Weeden actually is the one whose performance led to the win.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Unfortunatly, Otto is 3-4 eras ago. An era to me is about 20 years. (40'S and 50's), (60's and 70's), (80's and 90's). (2000 to present) Lot's of changes in those 20 yearspreads. Look at the rules, let alone the number of teams and the condition of players. It's why you can't compare....too much has changed. That is what made baseball pretty cool up until they started looking away at the meathead steroid players. Not much in the rules has changed over the last 100 years and most of the measurables in the players was similar.....meaning as an example that Walter Johnson threw it as hard and Bob Feller, who threw it as had as Sandy Kofax, who threw it as hard as Randy Johnson, who threw it as hard as whoever you want to inset out of todays crop. Football seems to have 4-5 rules changes per year. Baseball lowered the mound in 69, added a DH in one league in whatever, and now has some limited instant replay. Oh....they outlawed the spitball in maybe the 40's. The point is it is impossible to compare football players as easily as you can compare baseball players, but since the comparison game between fans originated with baseball, it is what it is. You're out of your mind. An era is defined by some major change in rules or something that would make comparisons before and after more challenging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaconHound Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 Brady/Montana.....everyone else Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 age old debate that never gets settled..... But I will guess that if you polled everybody for their top 3 all-time QB's....that Montana would show up in all of them, but he's probably the only one that does.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larryfine Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 There is no way to really rate it. It depends on who you are, where you live and probably the time of day factors in to the mix. As an example, I can assure you that not many people outside of Cleveland fans, or serious historians of the game are going to have Otto on the list. It's simply subjective. In my case, I would rate Manning better than Brady, but Brady has more rings. Going back to the near past, I'd rate Marino right up there, but he doesn't have any. Shrug Your right. No one would have otto on that list. Four of his "championships" was in the AAFC, that had eight teams two of which were called the Yankees and the Dodgers! LOL. As far as I'm concerned the Super bowl era is where the Championships should be considered worthwhile, not that ancient history bullshit where lineman weighed 220 lbs. Of course if your a "Homer" those "championships" 70 years ago make you pround, go for it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlaygroundLegend Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 Brady is the GOAT.. no questions asked.. You need the stats.. AND the rings.. and he has both. Its really between him and Peyton.. they both put up over 50 TDs in a season, but Brady has the rings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zombo Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 Last year, this very week, the talk was that if Manning won he would be cemented as the Greatest of All Time. Seattle crushed him. So let's play the game first. If the Patriots win because of Brady and he is MVP then I revisit this. Peyton Manning is the greatest QB I have ever watched. I never watched Otto Graham. I rate Montana over Brady. Let's see what happens Sunday. For you ring counters, Wilson moves alongside Eli, Ben, Griese, Plunkett, Staubach, Elway and Starr with a win ... and one behind Brady. He's 26 and plays with the best defense in the league. Zombo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 29, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 Your right. No one would have otto on that list. Four of his "championships" was in the AAFC, that had eight teams two of which were called the Yankees and the Dodgers! LOL. As far as I'm concerned the Super bowl era is where the Championships should be considered worthwhile, not that ancient history bullshit where lineman weighed 220 lbs. Of course if your a "Homer" those "championships" 70 years ago make you pround, go for it! You are an idiot. The game say, in the 70s was a lot more like the game played in the 40s/50s than it is to today's game. Ergo, since the game was so different....we MUST discount any titles won in the 70s....per your theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 29, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 Brady is the GOAT.. no questions asked.. You need the stats.. AND the rings.. and he has both. Its really between him and Peyton.. they both put up over 50 TDs in a season, but Brady has the rings Their stats are enhanced by the current rules of the game. You can't breathe on a receiver hardly, and you can't breathe on a QB. Their stats would certainly NOT be the same as they are today if they had to play by the rules in place in the 60s/70s. I don't know about the titles....it may have been more difficult, who knows. That is why those who say you can hardly compare eras are perfectly correct. The one thing you can look at is "how dominant was that person during his own particular era". A lot of things are different between eras.... You have to look at each era so, here are the "dominant QBs" in each era in terms of getting their teams to championship games and playoff games. For prior to the mid-60s you had just the NFL title game and AAFC/AFL title game. Since them I am looking at AFC/NFC title games and Super Bowls: Who dominated the 1930s? Arnie Herber and Ed Danowski Who dominated the 1940s? Sid Luckman, Sammy Baugh, Bob Waterfield and Otto Graham later Who dominated the 1950s? Otto Graham, Johnny Unitas, Bobby Layne, YA Tittle Who dominated the 1960s? Bart Starr, Unitas, Len Dawson (AFL guys like Blanda, Kemp, Namath) Who dominated the 1970s? Terry Bradshaw, Roger Staubach, Bob Griese, Ken Stabler, Fran Tarkenton Who dominated the 1980? Joe Montana, John Elway, Bernie Kosar, Dan Marino Who dominated the 1990s? Troy Aikman, Steve Young, Jim Kelly, John Elway, Brett Favre Who dominated the 2000s? Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Donovan McNabb, Ben Roethlisberger, Kurt Warner 2010s so far? Brady, Joe Flacco, Russel Wilson, Aaron Rodgers So what you may do is take each era and pick the one guy from there that was the cream of the crop....and try to narrow it down from there. I have done that with my highlighted picks. One problem here is that some guys cross "eras" in terms of decades. Graham, Unitas, Elway...now maybe Brady had careers that spanned two decades. Sometimes a "decade" goes from a middle to a middle decade. So, to me, it gets boiled down to like these guys: Luckman Graham Unitas Starr Bradshaw Montana Elway Brady (Sorry Peyton/Favre lovers....if they can't dominate their decades then they can't be the GOAT) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 McNabb, Flacco, Wilson???.....but no Drew Brees? Curious, what is the criteria for "dominant"....team victories or QB stats? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 29, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 Last year, this very week, the talk was that if Manning won he would be cemented as the Greatest of All Time. Seattle crushed him. So let's play the game first. If the Patriots win because of Brady and he is MVP then I revisit this. Peyton Manning is the greatest QB I have ever watched. I never watched Otto Graham. I rate Montana over Brady. Let's see what happens Sunday. For you ring counters, Wilson moves alongside Eli, Ben, Griese, Plunkett, Staubach, Elway and Starr with a win ... and one behind Brady. He's 26 and plays with the best defense in the league. Zombo Can't count? Starr has 5 rings. Or don't you count those before the Super Bowl. What are you? A Steeler fan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 29, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 McNabb, Flacco, Wilson???.....but no Drew Brees? Curious, what is the criteria for "dominant"....team victories or QB stats? For the post I made above, yes, I was listing postseason team accomplishment. No system to measure this is perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zombo Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 Can't count? Starr has 5 rings. Or don't you count those before the Super Bowl. What are you? A Steeler fan? I meant super bowl ring counters, of which I don't prescribe to. It weighs into things, but it is a team game. If your running back fumbles or your safety falls down in coverage you are not automatically a worse QB than the other guy. I take everything into perspective, regular and post season. Zombo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 29, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 My argument for Brady being abovehis contemporaries is this: Brady IS a stats master.... the guys that are in the contemporary picture with him are Peyton, Favre, Brees, BR. He has the stats and the SB wins and appearances that they all have combined: Brady stands in these positions all time for each of these stats: Yards #5 Completions #5 Attempts #6 TDs #5 Rating #5 Yards per game #8 Completion % #12 Lowest Int. % #2 TD% #22 (note.....all of top ten here are pre-1975 QBs except Rodgers) And note, the guys that are ahead of him in the all time career stats had/have played longer than he has: Favre 20 years Peyton 17 years Marino 17 years Only Brees at 12 years is on a better pace than he with some of these stats. Brady has played 15 years. Give him 17-20 and he will lead most of those guys in the gross statistic department. (Brees needs 5 SB appearances though to give him the same credence) Also note: for Postseason play Brady is #1 in attempts/Completions/yards/TDs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 29, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 I meant super bowl ring counters, of which I don't prescribe to. It weighs into things, but it is a team game. If your running back fumbles or your safety falls down in coverage you are not automatically a worse QB than the other guy. I take everything into perspective, regular and post season. Zombo I know that is all true. That goes back to the whole 1970 QB debate. If Mike Phipps had been taken #1 overall and the Browns had gotten Bradshaw at #3....would it have been Phipps who has 4 Super Bowl rings? Or would the Browns have had a much superior team in the 70s with just Bradshaw. Butterfly effect. (but see my prior post....I say that Brady's regular season records are pretty every bit as good as Peyton's....and that there is no comparison when it comes to postseason). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.