Brady named to NFL 100 All-Time team

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

This is what the list should be:

Brady
Montana
Baugh
Graham
Starr
Unitas
Manning
Staubach
Luckman
Layne

Elway is 11 and could replace Luckman or Layne.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

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.

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.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

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

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.

 

[upstater1]

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

Marino is in my top 3.

I've been watching football since the 1970s, and if I were the coach of a team and we have one game to play tomorrow, facing any QB from the last 50 years on the other team, I'd only be more afraid of facing Montana and Brady.

I can't emphasize enough how threatening this guy was. People might remember the immobile bootlegged INT throwing QB from the last 3 years of his career when Miami devolved, but from age 22-35, only Montana was better until Brady came along.

 

[Ring 6]

Marino is in my top 3.

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.

 

[Ring 6]

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.

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.
You certainly can grade on who you think had the best arm or whatever criteria you want but most times disagreement in ranking players starts with different yardsticks.

 

[Deus Irae]

Ok, we've now got people putting Layne and Luckman in the top 10, and Marino in the top 3. Sharks have been jumped.

 

[upstater1]

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.

I watched practically every one of his games. He was must watch TV back then. I don't even need to go back to look at the numbers to know these things about him:

1. He has the fastest release ever.
2. He is the most accurate QB ever.
3. He had the best pocket presence of any QB I've ever seen.

I know Montana was Brady's favorite QB growing up, but it would not surprise me in the least if Brady acknowledged that he modeled his game after Marino's. Brady has the second quickest release I've seen after Marino; Brady's pocket presence (moving around and commanding the pocket) is second only to Marino's; Brady too is very accurate, but not in Marino's territory.

4. We know what Marino's problem was. He did not have the supporting cast for much of his career. & he was the quickest to meltdown and become furious. Marino is like Phillip Rivers but with 10x the talent. That certainly contributed, because when Marino was frustrated with teammates--the way Rivers and Manning always get frustrated--he would take on too much and start throwing INTs. He was too much of a hothead to have a career like Brady's But if Marino had Brady's mettle, and if Marino didn't have an addled head coach, he would have won multiple Super Bowls in that era.

In terms of comebacks though and bringing his team back into the game, no one could do it quicker.

EDIT: Just wanted to add this: Monday Night Upset: Dan Marino vs. '85 Chicago Bears

He drove a stake through the Bears in the first half.

When New England ground-&-pounded Miami in the AFCCG, the '85 Bears drank more champagne and partied 10x harder than the '74 Dolphins after the Bears/Phins.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Comparing Bledsoe to Aikman is ridiculous

No it isn't

 

[RobertWeathers]

That’s a cop out

So is saying he was a major part of the team. Did he carry them or not?

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

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

 

[Deus Irae]

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

They're really not that close in comparisons. Klis just wrote a lousy article trying to make it seem so.

 

[sean10mm]

No it isn't

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.

 

[RobertWeathers]

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.

Did Dallas have better teams than the Patriots?

How did Aikman do in years in which they did not win the Super Bowl? (Hint- I know the answer and the #s are similar to Bledsoe's)

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

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.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

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.

Point noted on Layne. But he was a 3X champion and 7X all-pro (1st or 2nd team), and member of 50s all-decade team. Left game as leader in passing yards and TDs. His accomplishments are bordering top 10. You can be a tick below your contemporary rival and still make the team. Hence, Manning still makes it despite Brady being better.

Comparing before 78 is clearly necessary considering there are quite a few QB as finalists, though it isn’t easy. That’s why I think accomplishments (team success, individual awards) trump stats that are hard to contextualize.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

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.

Hard to blame coaching/support when you played your whole career for winningest coach ever (at the moment.) Marino was a bad choker...maybe even worse than Manning. If we’re just going on “how great they look at throwing the ball” and devalue accomplishments we have a whole new (very subjective) list.

 

[Deus Irae]

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.

I'm not sure where you're getting '78 as the cutoff season, but why would the likes of Staubach and Unitas somehow not match up with the modern players?

 

[Deus Irae]

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.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

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.

There are a some QBs that really cause a lot strong opposing opinions, with some feeling they are extremely overrated and others feeling they are obvious choices. Those that have the most opinion volatility:

• Dan Marino
• Terry Bradshaw
• Aaron Rodgers
• Brett Favre
• Drew Brees
• John Elway

Most other QBs I think most people have in the same general range.