Re: Bob Cryin: Manning is the better QB
My opinion on this is that stats are nice to look at but you play to win.
Compiling better stats while losing is not better than compiling lesser stats while winning.
Naturally, everything is not black and white, there must be a gray area.
The gray area comes in when comparing winners to winners, and determining their impact.
In other words:
Marino doesnt get in the discussion because he never won, so the stats that were compiled on the way to ultimately losing are not relevant.
Manning, Dilfer, Favre, Doug Williams, Mark Rypien, Jim McMahon, etc won one SB.
You distingusih between them by looking at how much they had to do with winning it all. You also look at the quality of their play when they didn't win because we are comparing careers not just one season. (For example Mark Rypien played better the year he won a SB than Manning did the year he won one, but Rypien did pretty much nothing else)
I could accept the argument that 0 wins vs 1 especially when considering how vital the QB was to the win, is reasonable, because of the flukiness of one win vs a career.
I could agree with lumping the QBs who 3 with the ones who won 4, and judging on contribution as well as if they had played well enough to win another but the supporting cast let them down. I do not think QBs who won less than 3 belong in the same group as those who won more than 3.
With that in mind, IN TE SB ERA, because I have no clue where to put Otto Graham or Johnny Unitas who played when the game was entirely different, I conclude the following rankings.
The top group should only include 3 time winners.
Terry Bradshaw with 4 is downgraded IMO because his contribution was the least, overall, partly due to era, and partly due to having dominant defenses that aided him. Nonetheless, and this is the point people seem to want to ignore, 4 times Terry Bradshaw went through a full season, playoffs and a SB making the plays at the QB position that were necessary to win. That destroys making a lot of good plays, but not the ones required to win (Marino).
I would have had Brady ahead of Montana (so far) up until the 2007 SB loss, because up to then, he was ahead at the same stage, but had not yet reached Montanas accomplishments but appeared likely to. Since, I no longer say he is aheadof Montana (so far) but that will still be determined.
I put Troy Aikman closely behind. He was a smaller part of the puzzle for the Cowboys, as unlike Brady and Montana, the team revolved around a group of players that included him, not just him.
Therefore, I limit my top 4 to those who have won 3 or more, and rank them
Montana
Brady
Aikman
Bradshaw
Again, I must be clear, I am not ranking simply who I would want on the field on a given day, but I am HEAVILY weighting what they accomplished over what people think they could have accomplished under diferent circumstances.
For example, in 2004 when Manning broke all the records, and Brady beat him and won the SB, some would argue Manning would have won if they switched teams. I put ZERO weight on that argument, because each had the opportunity to accomplish a title, and I find it foolish to grade them on what may have been when you have the exact plays they made on the field to judge it for you, with the understanding that the only reason you play is to win.
The next level would be 1 or 2 time winners.
Without listing all, I would consider Manning, Starr, Favre, Elway, Young, Warner, in this group. (NOTE I AM GOING FROM MEMORY AND MAY HAVE LFET SOMEONE OUT)
Interestingly, along with Marino, those 1 time winners, (Favre, Manning, Young) were often the reason their team, when it contended, lost, due to their poor play, even given the fact that they were asked to carry the team. (I do not believe a player who is asked to carry the team is forgiven for not carrying it in the big game because he didnt have a running game or defense or whatever caused him to be rated higher to begin with due to 'havng to carry the team')
So my second group would go, starting at 5th
Elway
Starr (by far hardest to rank becuase the game has changed so much)
Manning
Favre
Young
It should be noted that what Manning lacks at this point, is substance behind the numbers, that is add the numbers up as high as you wish, but they only resulted in one title, and great numbers with ultimate failure did not bring the only sought after result. Manning, with a win next week moves to the head of this group (past Elway because Elway won only after his role was made less critical by adding a 2000 yard runner)
Manning certainly could move into the top group within his career. If he were to reach 3 SB wins, he may be considered ahead of Brady and even possibly Montana, although that will probably require 4, because winning 4 as the center piece of a team is unique.
But he hasn't done that. Until he fulfills the minimum requirement for consideration, which is by far the factor that separates the greatest, and the one that is the rarest quality of all, you can't just give them to him.
Roethlisberger, IMO, has the opportunity to join both of these groups, with 2 under his belt, but so far, he is not near the top of the 1 or 2 time winners. But he has the opportunity to get there, and if he does win another, there really aren't any factors that should preclude him from being consider with the 4 others who have accomplished more than any other QBs who have played in the SB era.
