Are we leaving the Golden era of QBs?

[jimnance]

I disagree. I'll take Brady, Manning, Ben, and Rodgers over Montana, Young, Elway, Marino and Kelly.

No way. If youre going to objectively rank them, and keep in mind you need to adjust stats for rules changes-so td passes and yards are less meaningful today than they were 15 or 20 years ago,most people with any credibility(and to be credible you MUST have watched every qb on the list play their entire career)-would put brady and montana as the top 2. Personally i go with brady at #1, but you can make a case for montana. But after that elway and marino both rank higher than anyone else of the current crop. Dont care if marino never won a SB-he was hands down the best passer of alltime-acknowledging that passing is only one aspect of qbing. but he never had a run game or a defense under rules that allowed you to mug receivers and crush qbs. If rodgers played then his #'s would not have equaled marinos and reversely, if marino played today hed break every passing stat that exists. That being said, ben and rodgers COULD bypass those guys by the time their careers are done, but not as of today. I agree about kelly. So id rank em: 1. brady 2. montana
3. elway 4. marino 5. brees 6. young 7. ben 8. rodgers 9. kelly. so the older group better overall. but that could change in a few years. Personally i think rodgers is overrated. Fantasy geeks love him, but we're talking realty here, not fantasy.

 

[fnordcircle]

Bernie Sanders is going to fix Quarterback Inequality.

 

[Tony2046]

Bernie Sanders is going to fix Quarterback Inequality.

"I know the QB's.....they love me....seriously...they're great people.....I've hired QB's....great people.....great people....believe me......We're going to create a great QB rating system...you're gonna love it....believe me"

Sincerely

Donald Trump

 

[brdmaverick]

I think the fact that there are only 4 teams in a division has hurt some of the QB rivalries as the odds of having two great QBs in one division has gone down significantly.

There were years in which Kelly, Marino, and Bledsoe were all in the same division and thus created great QB matchups with regularity year in and year out.


The other problem is that QBs of today don't have much staying power. Outside of Brady and Rodgers, there have been many QBs who shine briefly but then have bad years.......think Kaepernick, RGIII, Eli, Roethlisberger (injuries), Romo (injuries and game ending INTs), Brees (his team etiher seems to be first or last in the division).

Let's see if Cam can last or if he is just a flash in the pan.

Hopefully Luck and Wilson can prove to have staying power.......Wilson is doing a good job at this point.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

Great arms come along all the time.

The key is putting them in the right system to succeed.

In two years someone will take the qb from Ucla #1 in the draft and if he lands in the right system, he will be great. Maybe even better than luck.

 

[JetFan79]

Luck, Wilson, Newton, Goff and Wentz?

Uh... think you're forgetting Geno.

80's and 90's win it for me. Perhaps it's because I was a kid then, but it just seemed there were always 12+ "star" QBs at all times. Enough for calendars (yes I had a calendar full of guys but it was pre-pubescent), QB skills challenges and so on...

Nowadays we have to change the rules to make the game easier for QBs, just to keep the remaining few great QBs playing close to, or into, their 40s.

When Brady hangs 'em up, I'll be thrilled as a Jet fan. However as a football fan, it will blow. These young QBs suck.

Edit: Credit to Wilson though. Guy could be pretty darn good.

 

[TheFlyingWedge]

Credit to Wilson though. Guy could be pretty darn good.

I agree - he could be really good.

If the Seahawks manage the team well over the course of his career, he might win a couple more titles. He might not be a prototypical QB in every way, but he is a natural leader, and seems very cerebral and mature - especially for a young QB. His leadership, I would say, is reminiscent of Brady, but he doesn't seem to have the same competitive fire.

 

[supafly]

Uh... think you're forgetting Geno.

80's and 90's win it for me. Perhaps it's because I was a kid then, but it just seemed there were always 12+ "star" QBs at all times. Enough for calendars (yes I had a calendar full of guys but it was pre-pubescent), QB skills challenges and so on...

Nowadays we have to change the rules to make the game easier for QBs, just to keep the remaining few great QBs playing close to, or into, their 40s.

When Brady hangs 'em up, I'll be thrilled as a Jet fan. However as a football fan, it will blow. These young QBs suck.

Edit: Credit to Wilson though. Guy could be pretty darn good.

As far as Jet fans go, you're not too bad.

 

[supafly]

Personally i go with brady at #1, but you can make a case for montana. But after that elway and marino both rank higher than anyone else of the current crop. Dont care if marino never won a SB-he was hands down the best passer of alltime-acknowledging that passing is only one aspect of qbing.

Couldn't agree more. I'd have Brady as #1 due to the fact that he's had less to work with, the fact that he's been to 6 SB's (obviously, should be more), and the fact that he's had to overcome NFL obstacles and public scrutiny. Add in his insane winning percentage and consistency, and he's my clear #1.

That said, I also agree that Dan Marino was probably the best pure passing QB of all time, understanding that is only one piece of the puzzle. No one threw a prettier ball than Dan Marino (IMO).

 

[mgteich]

We're certainly leaving one of the Golden Ages of quarterbacks.

IMHO, Brady, Manning, Rodgers, Roth, Brees
are much better than what is coming up now.

 

[DarrylS]

It is difficult to compare different era's of players, how would Otto Graham do today and how would Brady do in the 60's?? It is foolish to even consider that..

This has been the golden age for a while now, there is nothing current in the NFL or in the pipeline that makes me think different or there will be a change in the future.. the game will probably change before we see any new really great QB play..

 

[Ring 6]

Brady > Montana
Manning > Elway
Marino > Rogers
Kelly > Ben

So I'd call that a draw, but I think one of the key reasons why I agree with @BobDigital here is that after you get through the cream of the crop there's a much bigger drop off in the 2000s than there was in the 80s and 90s. There's a lot of people not listed who are heads and shoulders above everyone currently playing and not in your list other than probably Rivers and Cam.

Moon, Favre, Cunningham, Young, hell even Testaverde and Everett.

The problem with that approach is you are taking an era and lumping them together vs a single point in time. People are comparing Montana and young together to the current group for example and when Montana was playing young wasn't ( for the most part). Same goes for other names on the list. No doubt the best QBs from the 80s and 90s are better than the QBs from 2015 because there were a whole lot more if them.

And lol at testaverde and Everett

 

[Ring 6]

We're certainly leaving one of the Golden Ages of quarterbacks.

IMHO, Brady, Manning, Rodgers, Roth, Brees
are much better than what is coming up now.

This will always happen. The league keeps changing the rules to make qb numbers look better. Stats accumulators who don't win a whole lot like Brees get overrated because if you put some players around them and change the rules the numbers look good.
But when the top QBs go someone has to win so whoever does that is the new winner who is elevated in rating due to success. It's all relative. There are 32 and the the best of each era compared to the other 31 end up reveered.

 

[Tony2046]

The problem with that approach is you are taking an era and lumping them together vs a single point in time. People are comparing Montana and young together to the current group for example and when Montana was playing young wasn't ( for the most part). Same goes for other names on the list. No doubt the best abs from the 80s and 90s are better than the QBs from 2015 because there were a whole lot more if them.

And lol at testaverde and Everett

I'd say my best abs were in the 80's and 90's too.

Now it's just one rounded ab.

 

[Galeb]

Brady > Montana
Manning > Elway
Marino > Rogers
Kelly > Ben

So I'd call that a draw, but I think one of the key reasons why I agree with @BobDigital here is that after you get through the cream of the crop there's a much bigger drop off in the 2000s than there was in the 80s and 90s. There's a lot of people not listed who are heads and shoulders above everyone currently playing and not in your list other than probably Rivers and Cam.

Moon, Favre, Cunningham, Young, hell even Testaverde and Everett.

I think a big part of that is that coaches had longer tenures in the 80s and 90s. Constantly changing systems aren't just bad for team success, they can stunt the development of young QBs. When you have a large body of players that are fluent in a system, it is much easier to get the newer players up to speed. A QB is much more likely succeed when everyone on the offense knows where they're supposed to be.

 

[1960Pats]

I don't follow college football, but I get the sense that coaches at that level were developing QBs for pro style offenses but then went away from that thinking. I think they realized that they needed to win games to keep their jobs and started to use the running QBs that could win games instead. It looks like there are more running QBs coming up to the NFL.

 

[jah]

I don't follow college football, but I get the sense that coaches at that level were developing QBs for pro style offenses but then went away from that thinking. I think they realized that they needed to win games to keep their jobs and started to use the running QBs that could win games instead. It looks like there are more running QBs coming up to the NFL.

One could argue that if this is indeed true, this trend will weed out the "fakes" like Gabbert.

 

[Deus Irae]

It depends on how you're framing "age".

 

[fair catch fryar]

At least until the next one.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

I don't follow college football, but I get the sense that coaches at that level were developing QBs for pro style offenses but then went away from that thinking. I think they realized that they needed to win games to keep their jobs and started to use the running QBs that could win games instead. It looks like there are more running QBs coming up to the NFL.

The spread offense is all the rage in college football.