Definitional argument, and those of us old enough to remember the Montana/Elway/Marino fans go at it, are just reliving the past.
Elway finally won 2 SBs, because everything finally clicked in Denver.
Montana won 4 SBs, because the 9ers were a complete team, and he was a QB. He wanted to win games and win SBs. Not rack up points and yards, not be considered a great, he wanted to win games. And he wanted it a lot. You couldn't be around him and not want the trophy -- it was infectious. I guess that's one un-measurable dimension of that mysterious quality we call "leadership".
Marino? Fabulous, talented loser. Whatever it was that allowed Montana to rally his team, Marino never had it. Tell a Fins fan that, and they'll start quoting you yet more stats - 4th quarter comebacks, TDs after halftime, things like that.
It's a team sport. The structure of the season is known at the outset. You succeed, or you fail, to attain the ultimate goal: winning the Lombardi Trophy. All the rest is commentary. And more than anybody else on the field, the QB keeps the team oriented each victory, in pursuit of that final victory.
That's what a great QB is - a guy that you would pick to give the ball, if it was the 4th quarter of a big game (especially the biggest.)
Manning? Yes, he's shown he can do it. Palmer? Not impossible either.
Brady? He carried a team held together with duct tape and bailing wire to the pinnacle in 2001, then excelled with teams in '03 and '04 that were good, but not loaded with talent.
Yeah, of course I'm biased. But I still give Tom Brady the ball in the 4th quarter of that big game, all stats aside.
Now, a caveat: We're homers. Since we are Pats fans, of course we'll see the team perspective, and therefore sing the praises of our otherwise "overrated" players.
The trouble is the Pats excel because they play a team game. And coincidentally -- Hey, whattaya know! -- football is a team game. That's why balanced teams end up winning it all.
What did Manning win when he threw 49 TDs? A one-way ticket back to Indy, courtesy of your New England Patriots. What did Manning win when the offense was balanced, and the D was merely mediocre, not superfantastic cruddy? Yah.
With a QB especially, the ability to put up great stats when called upon is a necessity. The tendency to do so for seasons at a time is a sign of poor coaching, personal self-aggrandizement, or perreniel mediocrity.
You pass a lot when you're behind, ladies and gents -- so how can a perreniel winner also be a stat king?
How can a perreniel stat king also be a winner?
Only through bad coaching, another part of this team sport.
I think we should really only talk about who the best passer is, in all fairness. And we should just drop out and say "well, Tom's definitely in the top 10 -- not anything phenomenal."
And don't even talk about the "best QB," because of the definitional argument.
Talk about "what QB do you want to get you through the big game, down 7 in the 4th quarter? What QB do you want in a 16 game season to even get you to that big game?"
I don't think there are more than 2 legit answers to that question playing today. Peyton got us last time -- or more precisely, his team did. Excuses aside, they did it. Respect to Peyton -- he finally "got it," and was able to get his team to the promised land.
Brady's got that "it" and has had since 2001, if you ask me. Time to go out there and prove it again... we now see how soon "it" is forgotten.
Am I drafting Brady above the 5th round in a fantasy league? No. I'm probably taking Drew Brees before Brady AND Palmer this year. Do I want Brees, Palmer, or Manning at the helm of my REAL team? Not "No" but HELL No!
PFnV
