[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Lol, I could see that. Most people love him or hate him. I think he’s one of the best if not the best ever. [/quote]
One ring and a shit load of throwing it to the wrong team?
Brent isn’t even in the same room as Montana and the rest of the elite QB’s.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Lol, I could see that. Most people love him or hate him. I think he’s one of the best if not the best ever. [/quote]
One ring and a shit load of throwing it to the wrong team?
Brent isn’t even in the same room as Montana and the rest of the elite QB’s. [/quote]
People like to forget he also has just about every passing record under the sun and most wins…
His team’s weren’t all that awesome either.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Lol, I could see that. Most people love him or hate him. I think he’s one of the best if not the best ever. [/quote]
One ring and a shit load of throwing it to the wrong team?
Brent isn’t even in the same room as Montana and the rest of the elite QB’s. [/quote]
People like to forget he also has just about every passing record under the sun and most wins…
His team’s weren’t all that awesome either.
[/quote]
I’m grumpy today, and just arguing to argue, but come on man.
There is no way on Earth you can think Brent “I texted dic picks to anyone who would look at em” Farve is better than Montana.
Marino has some pretty hot stats too…
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Lol, I could see that. Most people love him or hate him. I think he’s one of the best if not the best ever. [/quote]
One ring and a shit load of throwing it to the wrong team?
Brent isn’t even in the same room as Montana and the rest of the elite QB’s. [/quote]
People like to forget he also has just about every passing record under the sun and most wins…
His team’s weren’t all that awesome either.
[/quote]
I’m grumpy today, and just arguing to argue, but come on man.
There is no way on Earth you can think Brent “I texted dic picks to anyone who would look at em” Farve is better than Montana.
Marino has some pretty hot stats too… [/quote]
And Joe Flacco broke on of Montana’s records just 2 years ago (TD to interception ratio in the playoffs). It’s all relative.
Marino was very good, but he couldn’t carry a team to the SB, obviously. *Brett still has more records than Marino if I’m not mistaken. More than Montana as well.
He’s got a ring and he’s got the stats (a lot of them). He also played just prior to the new “all we care about is points on the board” NFL of today.
Don’t forget at least one of Brady’s rings was a gift via the tuck rule.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
He’s got a ring and he’s got the stats (a lot of them). He also played just prior to the new “all we care about is points on the board” NFL of today. [/quote]
Whole lot of people with more than one ring played in tougher times too.
[quote]Don’t forget at least one of Brady’s rings was a gift via the tuck rule.
[/quote]
I didn’t know on call the game before beat St Louis…
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Whole lot of people with more than one ring played in tougher times too. [/quote]
There’s only 11 qb’s with multiple sb wins if Wikipedia is right.
Are we saying Bob Griese is better than Favre? Than Manning? Than Marino?
They shouldn’t have played in Super Bowl XXXVI. The “tuck rule” fumble would of almost definitely lost them the game. Yes they beat the Rams. Too bad they didn’t really beat the Raiders.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Are we saying Bob Griese is better than Favre? Than Manning? Than Marino?
[/quote]
The ultimate stat is wins.
The ultimate win is the last game of the year.
So, by that measure, the one I personally hold most important, sure, he is.
However, that was an era where a QB didn’t have to be top tier in order to win, so I concede there is some play in the use of SB wins as ultimate stat. That said, SB wins trumps most stats as far as “greatness” is concerned, in my book. Doesn’t mean people weren’t great QB’s, but it does knock them down the GOAT list.
[quote]
They shouldn’t have played in Super Bowl XXXVI. The “tuck rule” fumble would of almost definitely lost them the game. Yes they beat the Rams. Too bad they didn’t really beat the Raiders. [/quote]
Like I said, it really doesn’t matter to me, and I’m arguing for the sake of it today, but this sounds like whining more than a valid point.
They beat the Rams. They won the game. The Rams were a superior group of players in almost all regards and positions (by most measures at that point.) That win wasn’t a “gift” nor was is not earned. Marshal Faulk still cries like a child about it too, lol.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
defense looks porous, o[/quote]
lol… Last night maybe, but the 7 quarters without a touchdown prior I would argue differently.
D had a SHIT night last night for sure, but it is far from the weak spot on this team. In fact D and special teams are fine… It’s the offense, which is Brady.
People can blame the line all day if they want, and there is much merit to that argument, but Brady looks like shit and has since the last game or two last year. [/quote]
Can we at least put to bed any Brady > Manning talk now?? Manning propped up a 2-14 team for two or three years and had them winning 12 plus games and in the playoffs every year. Brady can barely keep a team with a solid D at .500[/quote]
No. Manning didn’t do that at 37, and neither can Brady, as of right now. The Broncos are a damn good team.
Brady is better than Manning. Not by much, a hair maybe, but he is. Neither are the best to ever play, but both are in the conversation. [/quote]
Brady cant win without a spectacular team around him. He has had one of the top 10 defenses in football his first few years and still couldn’t outright win games. He had to have Vinatari to do it. Brady cant make bad teams good. Manning can. I am not saying the Broncos are a bad team. The Colts were a bad team for several years. You give Manning Brady’s teams and you have the most dominant team of all time, you give Brady Manning’s Colts and you don’t know Tom Brady’s name.
EDIT: And Manning is the best QB of all time. Belichik is the greatest coach in this era and Brady got lucky enough to be the one to play for him. If you put Brady, Manning, Montana, and Marino on this years Jaguars, who do you think would win the most games?? That is who you should consider the best QB of all time and I think that would easily be Manning.
[/quote]
Manning ring: 1
Brady’s rings: 3
Brady is better.
[/quote]
By that logic, Trent Dilfer is better than Dan Marino and Jim Kelly… You also believe Eli Manning and Ben Roetlisberger are better QB’s than Rodgers and Brees… And Terry Bradshaw is equal to Joe Montana as the two greatest QB’s to ever play the game.
It amazes me how no one sees the glaringly obvious holes in that logic. Brady won Superbowls because he played for a great coach with a great (and hugely underrated) defense on the other side of the ball to keep the scores low. And he still had to lead “game winning” drives that put Adam Vinateri in position to win the game. Adam Vinateri has “won” more Superbowls than Brady has.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
The ultimate TEAM stat is wins.
[/quote]
Up until the last 5 years, Defense wins championships, not QB’s. With rare exception superbowl teams all have great defenses. That’s why QB’s cannot be judged by wins or losses in one game. You have to take their whole body of work, factor in the supporting cast they managed to do it with and evaluate from their. Manning easily comes out on top their. Marino gets pretty solid nod.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Are we saying Bob Griese is better than Favre? Than Manning? Than Marino?
[/quote]
The ultimate stat is wins.[/quote]
Favre has the most career wins for any qb…
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
By that logic, Trent Dilfer is better than Dan Marino and Jim Kelly…[/quote]
Change “logic” to “metric” and yes, you are correct. Otherwise you’re making object measure subjective to try and make you point.
Your point is dually noted and taken into account. However, particularly if we’re comparing two players who have played in the league at the same time, yes, rings count, and they count for a whole hell of a lot. Yes the rapist rates better than Manning in my book. He had the will to win, and the team to lead to it.
Sorta, yeah.
Different eras so see the flexibility using that metric, but it is hard to discount Bradshaw’s rings and place him low on the list simply because he doesn’t fit the modern definition of QB.
It isn’t logic, it is a metric. An objective, observable metric by which to measure one’s success in their career, and “greatness”.
One people like to poo-poo because the flashy 390 yard passers dont’ always measure up to.
[quote] Adam Vinateri has “won” more Superbowls than Brady has.
[/quote]
Again, I’m really just fucking with you guys, but come on… This is ridiculous. Brady is on the field for how many snaps and you want to give more of the credit to the kicker? This sounds like the a statement made by a jealous non-NE fan.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Are we saying Bob Griese is better than Favre? Than Manning? Than Marino?
[/quote]
The ultimate stat is wins.
The ultimate win is the last game of the year.
So, by that measure, the one I personally hold most important, sure, he is.
However, that was an era where a QB didn’t have to be top tier in order to win, so I concede there is some play in the use of SB wins as ultimate stat. That said, SB wins trumps most stats as far as “greatness” is concerned, in my book. Doesn’t mean people weren’t great QB’s, but it does knock them down the GOAT list.
[quote]
They shouldn’t have played in Super Bowl XXXVI. The “tuck rule” fumble would of almost definitely lost them the game. Yes they beat the Rams. Too bad they didn’t really beat the Raiders. [/quote]
Like I said, it really doesn’t matter to me, and I’m arguing for the sake of it today, but this sounds like whining more than a valid point.
They beat the Rams. They won the game. The Rams were a superior group of players in almost all regards and positions (by most measures at that point.) That win wasn’t a “gift” nor was is not earned. Marshal Faulk still cries like a child about it too, lol. [/quote]
I don’t understand how you can argue the greatest QB of all time is based soley or mostly on the number of Super Bowl wins he has. Ben Roethlisberger is not > than Peyton Manning. Eli is not > Peyton.
Hell Super Bowl wins are more about circumstance & timing anyway. Raven’s had no business winning the Super Bowl a couple of years ago, but they got hot and got some breaks at the right time.
How many season’s in Indy did Peyton have a team damn near undefeated to only lose int he 1st or 2nd round? How about the fluke play to Jacoby Jones in the AFC Championship game, does that count against Manning?
You can call it whining if you want. Bottom line is the Patriots shouldn’t even have had the opportunity to play the Rams. The officials gave them that opportunity by taking it from the Raiders. Ya they won. Must be nice to be the Pats and get to play double elimination in the playoffs…
“Come on man!”
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Are we saying Bob Griese is better than Favre? Than Manning? Than Marino?
[/quote]
The ultimate stat is wins.[/quote]
Favre has the most career wins for any qb…[/quote]
But he lost the last one of the year quite a few times because he threw the ball to the wrong team.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
You can call it whining if you want.[/quote]
Pretty sure you sound like a jealous EX Girlfriend right now, lol.
[quote] Bottom line is the Patriots shouldn’t even have had the opportunity to play the Rams. The officials gave them that opportunity by taking it from the Raiders. Ya they won. Must be nice to be the Pats and get to play double elimination in the playoffs…
“Come on man!”
[/quote]
Right, because you know the outcome of the game with yout crystal ball that allows you to see into an alternate universe?
Look, you can cling to the woulda/shoulda or you can live in reality. Reality is they won a ring that year, and the story is closed. Why this bothers people so much is beyond me.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Ben Roethlisberger is not > than Peyton Manning. Eli is not > Peyton.[/quote]
If I needed a QB for one game, I’d pick both over Payton. They have done it more.
Skill is irrelevant, except when ranking Marino empty fingers against those with jewelry…
Raven’s were a damn good team with a great ground game and defense that had been knocking at the door for like 5 years… Please.
lol, right… But he’s the GOAT… Rrrrriiiiiiiggggghhhttt
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Are we saying Bob Griese is better than Favre? Than Manning? Than Marino?
[/quote]
The ultimate stat is wins.[/quote]
Favre has the most career wins for any qb…[/quote]
But he lost the last one of the year quite a few times because he threw the ball to the wrong team. [/quote]
He only lost the SB once, but I understand what you mean.
Do Brady’s two SB losses hurt his legacy?
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Do Brady’s two SB losses hurt his legacy?
[/quote]
Without question. The first was the most important game of his career, and he came out in the second half with his head firmly up his ass.
Those losses took him clearly out for the GOAT conversation. He won those? You’re looking at comparing him to Montana and maybe coming out on top.
But yeah, big picture, those losses hurt him, and he hasn’t ever been the same since the first loss.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
You can call it whining if you want.[/quote]
Pretty sure you sound like a jealous EX Girlfriend right now, lol.
[quote] Bottom line is the Patriots shouldn’t even have had the opportunity to play the Rams. The officials gave them that opportunity by taking it from the Raiders. Ya they won. Must be nice to be the Pats and get to play double elimination in the playoffs…
“Come on man!”
[/quote]
Right, because you know the outcome of the game with yout crystal ball that allows you to see into an alternate universe?
Look, you can cling to the woulda/shoulda or you can live in reality. Reality is they won a ring that year, and the story is closed. Why this bothers people so much is beyond me.
[/quote]
Dude, take your fan boy glasses off for a couple of seconds and look at the game objectively. The Patriots were losing. It was the 4th quarter with 2 minute left to play. I don’t need a crystal ball to know a turn over there is almost 100% a lose.
You’re right though. Maybe the Raider’s throw 3 incomplete passes, punt, and Brady marches down the field for the win. He had already scored a whopping 10 points the whole rest of the game so that’s likely…
I’d use the term “won” loosely.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Ben Roethlisberger is not > than Peyton Manning. Eli is not > Peyton.[/quote]
If I needed a QB for one game, I’d pick both over Payton. They have done it more.
Skill is irrelevant, except when ranking Marino empty fingers against those with jewelry…
Raven’s were a damn good team with a great ground game and defense that had been knocking at the door for like 5 years… Please.
lol, right… But he’s the GOAT… Rrrrriiiiiiiggggghhhttt[/quote]
You’re making my head explode… Skill is irrelevant??? WHUT??? Tell Pitt to log off your account please…
The Raven’s were the 3rd or 4th best team in the AFC that year. I’m not saying they weren’t good. I’m just saying the “best” isn’t always the team that ends up winning.
I don’t think Manning is GOAT. I think Favre is. He never had close to the weapons Brady, Manning, or Montana had. The run game in Green Bay has always been a joke.
Don’t get me wrong, he’s a piece of work, but a great qb.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Dude, take your fan boy glasses off for a couple of seconds and look at the game objectively. [/quote]
I am… Good teams outplay bad calls.
If I was to take your tact the Pats should have beaten the Panthers last year because Gronk was interfered with to the point of ass raping and it was a no call.
However, I don’t give a fuck. Good teams play good enough to over come bad calls. If you “lose” because of a “bad call” you weren’t that good of a team to begin with.
Period… End of story.