CelticPatriot
Third String But Playing on Special Teams
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2011
- Messages
- 768
- Reaction score
- 114
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Another anti-brady list, no surprise. IMO the first tier is obvious, and I would rank the QBs like this.
Tier I: First ballot HOF QBs that can carry their teams.
Brady
Manning
Rodgers
Brees
Tier II: Russell Wilson tier- is so far ahead of the other young kids at QB.
Wilson
Tier III: Clutch QBs with rings and playoff performances that need a great team around them to have success; they can't carry weak teams.
Roethlisberger
Flacco
Manning
Tier IV: The Loser Tier. They are great fantasy football QBs, but are just losers. Ranking them anywhere in the top 8 I just disagree with.
Rivers
Romo
Ryan
Stafford
Cutler
Tier V: Promising kids.
Luck
Newton
Foles
Glennon
Tannehill
Kaepernick
RGIII
Can't argue with your first tier.
Wilson still has to prove something in January and, just as importantly, consistently on the road, away from his noisy Home before I'd put him in a class by himself above other good, young QB's.
Your third tier? Not so sure at all. Roethlisberger has, in years past, carried his team both on his arm and his legs. He might be done now, both mentally and physically, though, but he got it done in the past. Eli is just plain inconsistent and streaky, but the fact is that he did carry his team for two memorable runs that will put him in Canton, whether we like it or not (I sure don't). Flacco's play in OT in Denver in January argues against your characterization; inconsistent? erratic? Yes, indeed, but he carried the Ravens into the SB that day. Careers are framed by runs like Eli's and games like Flacco's in frigid Denver.
Fourth tier. Stafford sure didn't look like a loser on Thursday. And, I really don't think we can characterize any of those competitors as "losers." Underachievers? Erratic? Unreliable? Whatever? Yes, but I dare you to call any of them "loser" to his face.
Five. Yeah, sure. They are all "promising."
Meh, it's based on numbers from the whole season. You remember the early part of the season, right?
Meh, it's based on numbers from the whole season. You remember the early part of the season, right?
Then why is Aaron Rodgers up there?
Andrew Luck has a lower QBrating, fewer TDs, fewer yards, lower Comp% and yet is ranked 2 slots ahead of Brady.
Doesn't seem like its based on numbers to me.
Meh, it's based on numbers from the whole season. You remember the early part of the season, right?
Then why is Aaron Rodgers up there?