T.Brady,P.Manning & ?? Then who is 3rd best QB of the decade? - Page 2 - New England Patriots Forums

***jmt57*** · 01-19-2009, 09:02 PM

I'd put McNabb, Brees and Warner ahead of Roethlisberger.

We're comparing quarterbacks, not the team they've played on, so I don't put a lot of credence on playoff wins and Super Bowl appearances. If Roethlisberger played on teams with defenses that Brees had alongside him, he wouldn't be in the discussion at all.

Triggerfish · 01-21-2009, 03:04 PM

I can see what you're getting at when mentioning solid defenses contributing to a QB's success, BUT I think the same argument can be made a number of ways. For one example, Kurt Warner....great QB. Probably headed to the HOF. HOWEVER, had he not been surrounded by such tremendous talent at WR (or pass-catching RB from his days with Marshall Faulk), I seriously doubt he'd be in this conversation either. It's a lot easier to be a successful QB when you have guys like Fitzgerald, Boldin, Holt, Bruce, Faulk, etc. to pass to.

That being said, I think Big Ben is a great QB in his own right. Not statistically really, but definitley in his playmaking ability. He's only had one really solid statistical season, but you still can't deny his results when he's behind center. He gives the Steelers their best chance to win with his ability to keep plays alive, no doubt. There's still a good chance he'll make the HOF, but I can't see him as #3 for the past decade. He has a tremendous amount of heart, and he's definitely a gamer, but I think it's still to early to call him top 3 in the past decade YET. My feeling might change a little if he gets another ring this year and continues his solid play.

I'm not a huge McNabb fan, but again, I can't deny the fact that he's accomplished a lot with little support. Westy has helped inflate his stats for sure. But aside from his year with TO, he certainly hasn't had the benefit of an elite receiving corp. McNabb and the Eagles will definitely go down in the books as choke artists, which doesn't exactly help his case, but I still think he's at least close to #3. I can't believe I just typed that. I'm really not much of a fan of him or their organization.

ScottieC · 01-21-2009, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PATRIOTSFANINPA

We can safely say that Tom Brady and Peyton Manning are the #1 and #2 QBs of this decade if not top 5 of all time but after Brady and Manning who would you say has earned the title as 3rd best QB this decade?

IMO Ben Roethlisberger is clearly the 3rd best QB of this decade despite only being in the league 5 years,He could very well be on his way to a hall of fame career going by the success in his first few year which could very well include 2 Super Bowl titles that only Brady and a few former QBs in Canton can top.

If you look at the rest,I would say Kurt Warner who could also be the QB of 2 Super Bowl titles should he win SB 43 and SHOULD have already had 2 but the Pats took care of that

Drew Brees looks to be the QB of the next decade but does not yet show enough to put him up there.

Anyone else I missed?

It's really difficult because Tom and Peyton are really ONCE in a decade (if not generation) type of QB's and they just so happen to be playing at the same time - Too bad for Peyton.

Farve will be in the mix. Although I hate him.

Synovia · 01-21-2009, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Triggerfish

I can see what you're getting at when mentioning solid defenses contributing to a QB's success, BUT I think the same argument can be made a number of ways. For one example, Kurt Warner....great QB. Probably headed to the HOF. HOWEVER, had he not been surrounded by such tremendous talent at WR (or pass-catching RB from his days with Marshall Faulk), I seriously doubt he'd be in this conversation either. It's a lot easier to be a successful QB when you have guys like Fitzgerald, Boldin, Holt, Bruce, Faulk, etc. to pass to. .

And if Brady didn't have Moss and Welker last year, he'd be a guy who was basically a guaranteed 24 Tds and 14 Ints for 3700 yds. GOod, but not great.

I really like Roethlisburger, and I think he gets a raw deal because the the Pittsburgh offensive line is god-awful, but his teams have won/gotten to the superbowl on elite defenses and mediocre offenses.

Triggerfish · 01-21-2009, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Synovia

And if Brady didn't have Moss and Welker last year, he'd be a guy who was basically a guaranteed 24 Tds and 14 Ints for 3700 yds. GOod, but not great.

I really like Roethlisburger, and I think he gets a raw deal because the the Pittsburgh offensive line is god-awful, but his teams have won/gotten to the superbowl on elite defenses and mediocre offenses.

Exactly my point. You can make a case FOR or AGAINST just about any QB based on the "what if's". What if his defense wasn't so dominant? What if his receivers were mediocre? It could go on and on. I would have to admit, just standing back and looking at the "big picture", it PROBABLY would have to be Tom and Peyton #1 and #2. But, as you pointed out, before Moss became a Patriot, Brady was very Big Ben-ish in terms of stats. He was good, efficient, and was able to take control of a game when needed, but statistically....he wasn't GREAT. So, maybe he isn't as ELITE as everyone seems to think? Tough to say. I think there's a certain intangible that makes a QB special. In my opinion, Brady has it. Peyton has it. Ben has it. The more I think about it though....not so sure McNabb has "it".