- Joined
- Apr 3, 2006
- Messages
- 26,124
- Reaction score
- 52,123
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.Some stats need to be accounted for & measured different. Like pressure & sacks. Those have a lot more to do with QBs than OL. QB wins is another that needs big time context. Definitely not all the same.QB stats and wins are often inversely correlated so it is very difficult to assess QB's without looking at the entire picture and the context in which they played. Aikman played for a dynasty with a great running game and defense so he was rarely asked to carry the load. We'll never know if he could have but we do know he was extremely successful in what he was asked to do.
A bad defense hurts your chances to win but helps a QB statistically as they are playing catch up and often passing against prevent for much of the game. No reason to pass for 5,000 yards when your defense is solid. Brees is the perfect example - great QB whose stats are over inflated due to his defense being gashed and because he played in a dome. (the dome hurt his defense as well) If Brees had played outdoors his numbers would have dropped but maybe his wins increased as his defense may have been more effective.
Did Brady play better against the Eagles in the 1st or the 2nd Super Bowl? In the 1st game the defense was solid and Brady was playing ball control much of game/4th quarter. In the 2nd game the defense stunk so the Pats passed the ball 70% of the time.
In terms of passers there weren't many better throwing the football. He stuck big time in that regard, his arm & game were ahead of the times. Lombardi called him one of the best ever.Jurgensen didn’t win a championship. He sat on the bench for one. In fact he only played in one post season game and that was in relief and was 6/12 with 3 picks
Not sure where all the Aikman talk is coming from lol. He was just mentioning that he should be a finalist, not that he’s top 10 of all time or anything. Lmao at Namath being a finalist though. Sucks that two of
Marino
Favre
Rodgers
Brees
will probably make it. I personally think all 4 are overrated. Hopefully only one will make it at most
Some day when you have time go take a look at Marino’s numbers in his last game of each season (is the playoff loss or the game they were eliminated) His play in those games was horrible and you would never consider him anywhere near the top 3 looking at how he played in his biggest games.Marino is in my top 3.
Everyone has their own scale. Mine is what you accomplish. I don’t put stock in could have or would have. To me the most important talent is the one that gets the job done and the reason you play is to win.In terms of passers there weren't many better throwing the football. He stuck big time in that regard, his arm & game were ahead of the times. Lombardi called him one of the best ever.
This list is awful & these things should be done by eras bc it's silly to compare anything before 78-80.
Still my understanding is it's supposed to be the greatest players. Not most accomplished or w/e. And I get most won't have him in there but he's as skill as anyone from that era imo.
List is also terrible for only allowing a certain amount of spots. If it's the best of the best we shouldn't have a cut off at 7-10 guys. This is just paying respect to certain players in many cases.
Some day when you have time go take a look at Marino’s numbers in his last game of each season (is the playoff loss or the game they were eliminated) His play in those games was horrible and you would never consider him anywhere near the top 3 looking at how he played in his biggest games.
No it isn'tComparing Bledsoe to Aikman is ridiculous
So is saying he was a major part of the team. Did he carry them or not?That’s a cop out
Ok, we've now got people putting Layne and Luckman in the top 10, and Marino in the top 3. Sharks have been jumped.
Layne/Graham and Luckman/Baugh are both fairly close in comparisons.
Klis: Manning vs. Brady looks like Baugh vs. Luckman in NFL history book – The Denver Post
No it isn't
Did Dallas have better teams than the Patriots?Bledsoe threw twice as many interceptions as touchdowns in the postseason.
In his three Super Bowl runs, Aikman threw 17 touchdowns to 4 interceptions. 8 out of 9 of those games he had a passer rating over 100. In his second of 3 Super Bowl runs he completed over 70% of his passes in every single game.
Aikman was infinitely more clutch.
Layne was a good tick below imo. Threw 50 more picks than TDs & was a career 49% cmp not that cmp% means everything. Just not the passer the others were. Comparing anything before 78 is silly season though.Layne/Graham and Luckman/Baugh are both fairly close in comparisons.
Klis: Manning vs. Brady looks like Baugh vs. Luckman in NFL history book – The Denver Post
Layne was a good tick below imo. Threw 50 more picks than TDs & was a career 49% cmp not that cmp% means everything. Just not the passer the others were. Comparing anything before 78 is silly season though.
Some day when you have time go take a look at Marino’s numbers in his last game of each season (is the playoff loss or the game they were eliminated) His play in those games was horrible and you would never consider him anywhere near the top 3 looking at how he played in his biggest games.
Layne was a good tick below imo. Threw 50 more picks than TDs & was a career 49% cmp not that cmp% means everything. Just not the passer the others were. Comparing anything before 78 is silly season though.
For the record, I've got nothing against Layne, Luckman or Marino, in the general sense. I'm just, as we all are, placed in a position where it's a comparison of the best of the best, and that means you'll sometimes seem as if you're bashing a guy you think is great, but just not as good as the guy he's being compared to.