Warrior General Games

Originally posted by kr0n
Attention whore shows love for another attention whore ITT

Don't start.

I'm trying to be a nice guy this year, but if you continue to poke and prod then I'll go MDTerps on you.

Play nice, or I won't.

Nah, my top 5 QBs of all time are as follows:

Dan Marino
Brett Favre (it is my honest opinion, but I fully understand my honest opinion is still bias)
John Elway
Johnny U
Joe Montana

The top 3 players on that list played with very little their entire careers, Dan Marino most of all. I cannot name 1 running back off the top of my head from the 'fins in Marino's time and their defense was never great, yet he put up the best stats of any QB in history.

Favre MADE wide receivers. Sharpe and Freeman both did nothing when Favre was not throwing to them. Driver is good, but he is a possession receiver, not the kind of receiver that would pad the stats of too many QBs. The only legit GREAT receiver Favre had was Robert Brooks, but Brooks got hurt on a cheap play and was never the same after. The only things that keeps me from putting Favre at the top were his INTs (if he had 20-30 less, I would give him the top spot, but he did throw too many) and he did play with a monster defense for 3 years (95-98). He never had a really great running back. Sure, Green had 2 great years, but I still think that was a product of Favre more then his own skill. Everytime a team decided to "stop Green and let Favre beat us" those seasons, Favre did just that. Analyists kept saying how teams should put 7 or 8 in the box to stop Green, but they never really did it.

Elway played with very little most of his career as well. His prime was completly wasted on poor teams that he carried. They finally tossed a good team around him at the end of his career and he got them 2 Super Bowls. I'll tell you what though, Elway could make some throws that just shocked me and he was as competative as anyone. He could win a game on heart alone.

Johnny U played in a time where it was TOUGH to be a QB (which is a reason I do not have Payton Manning or Brady up there. Both are great QBs, but I think it is just so much easier to be a QB now then it was in the 70s, 80s or 90s). He still put up numbers that would be consistered "good" today, and that is really saying something. Not only that, but he was one of the smartest football players out there. He knew his wide receivers better then they knew themselves.

Joe Montana was a GREAT QB, but he played on some of the best teams in NFL history. I hate to penalize someone for that, but I honestly believe that if any of the 4 I put above him played on his teams they would have done just as good if not better. Yeah, he did okay with the Chiefs. He was a servicable QB for them, but he did not have even a 20 TD pass season with them. He was just a "pretty good" quarterback for the Chiefs. I do not count that against him because that was at the very end of his career when age was catching up to him. We will never know if he could singal handedly carry a team though because he never had to.

These are just my opinions though, and I understand there are as many views on this subject as there are football fans in the world.

In Joe Montana's 15 year career, there were only TWO seasons that his completion % wasn't over 60%

That is fucking ridiculous - and will never be matched again.

His rookie season he was 13/23 passing which is only 56.5%
In 1988 he was 59.9% Complete

Career Completion % is 63.2%

Nobody else comes close to that.

Elways = 56.9% and was only over 60% twice
Marino = 59.4% and was over 60% 5 times
Favre is a LOT closer in that regard, but he also threw 150 more Interceptions

Originally posted by PhireHawk

Favre is a LOT closer in that regard, but he also threw 150 more Interceptions

And 169 more TDs. . .

That is the problem with Montana though. I do not know how he would play on a crappy team because he has never been on one. I would argue that if he was better then Elway, Favre or Marino his stats should be MUCH better then theirs because his teams were MUCH better then theirs.

So who's Brett Favre?...

J-E-T-S JETS JETS JETS....

My fantasy team just got a helluva boost. Thanks Green Bay.

Originally posted by PhireHawk
Originally posted by Beaker

(I still think Dan Marino's story is one of the most tragic in sports. That guy was the best QB of all time).

No.

Joe Montana was the best QB of all time, who also happened to have the best team around him.

Marino was AMAZING, but Montana was better.

I think you'd be surprised what Marino could do with the 49ers of old. imo...

Also, it's an unwritten rule that when comparing stats among QBs, the guy who had Jerry Rice the longest drops a peg.

Marino's receivers weren't exactly Shlubs...

I think if anybody loses respect because of the supporting class, it's Warren Moon. That guy had an absolute cannon but the first thing people say is "Oh, well he was throwing the ball to Drew Hill and Ernest Givens"

Same thing with Mark Ripien on the '91 Skins team. "Oh, he's got Art Monk..."

Who cares. It doesn't matter how good a receiver is if the QB can't get him the ball. Want proof? Watch the fucking Lions...

You've got to admit that Mark Clayton isn't even in the same class as Jerry Rice. Hell Jerry Rice had the most QB - WR Touchdown connections with Montana more than Marino to Clayton and then He beat it with Young. To say that about Favre's 169 more touchdowns. Well that's what happens when your team can't run the ball. It's such a tough argument among the top 5 - 8 QB's who should be where.

Montana
Elway
Marino
Favre
Brady
Unitis
Manning
Moon

I think these 8 could go in any order you could make an argument for each and every one as the best of all time. Say what you will about Manning and Brady and how it's easy to be a quarterback now. Then how come most all new QB's fail. Bring Johnny U in to one of these teams. I bet he's no better than the likes of Philip Rivers. The teams were slower and not as skilled back then. Put Manning in Johnny U's position and I bet he would be even better then than now. Old School Football homers fail to realize the new level of play that is being played in the game now days. They never saw talent at CB like Champ Bailey or Charles Woodson(before injury).

That's ignorant, because they also never saw penalties like "Roughing the Passer", "Facemask", and "Spearing"

Back then, if you ran over the middle you were going to get smashed. Guys played against defenses that literally put the fear of God into you. Guys may be overall faster and taking supplements that make them stronger, but it's a 100% different mind-set than football was 40 years ago.

I dare you to tell me LaDanian Tomlinson could have the same kind of success Jim Brown had if he played in that era.

Originally posted by PhireHawk
That's ignorant, because they also never saw penalties like "Roughing the Passer", "Facemask", and "Spearing"

Back then, if you ran over the middle you were going to get smashed. Guys played against defenses that literally put the fear of God into you. Guys may be overall faster and taking supplements that make them stronger, but it's a 100% different mind-set than football was 40 years ago.

I dare you to tell me LaDanian Tomlinson could have the same kind of success Jim Brown had if he played in that era.

Exactly. The game of football was so much more violent then. This "west coast" style of football, short little dinks and dunks to move the ball upfield with high comp % and YAC would have NEVER worked in the 70s, 80s and early 90s. You did NOT throw to a WR when he was near a linebacker because the linebacker would KILL him.

And no, Brady has yet to prove that he is in the talk for greatest QB of all time. He had an incredible season last year, but the only reason you are giving him consiteration is due to his super bowls. Everyone says football is the ultimate team sport, yet when ranking QBs they immediatly run to the guy with the most rings and I think that is wrong. Brady maybe among the greatest to ever play, but he has more to prove first. With good WRs around him now, I expect him to do just that, but I am holding out judgement for a season or 2. Manning I will give you.

I agree with beaker.

Originally posted by Beaker


Exactly. The game of football was so much more violent then. This "west coast" style of football, short little dinks and dunks to move the ball upfield with high comp % and YAC would have NEVER worked in the 70s, 80s and early 90s. You did NOT throw to a WR when he was near a linebacker because the linebacker would KILL him.



The WCO took root in the mid to late 80's. The offense isn't based on dinks and dunks. It is based on exploiting matchups with the defense. There are incredible variants within the WCO which has made it so popular.

Bill Walsh = WCO ... I think it worked pretty well for San Francisco during a significant part of the era you've mentioned.

Ok now. I will give you the fact that it was a more violent game in that era. I will give you the fact about the West Coast Offense not working. I will not give you that fact about Ladanian because LT and Jim Brown have completely different styles. LT would have been comparable to Walter Payton or Gale Sayers style. Bettis is more like Jim Brown and I am not saying Bettis would have been as good. But he is the same bruiser style RB.

I also will not give Beaker that about Brady not being proven and I only rate him high because of his rings.

Brady has averaged over his starting career: 3700+ yards per season, 28 TD's per season, 12 INT's per season, 63% completions, and a 92.9 QB rating.

Now lets take Manning(with all the weapons he's ALWAYS had around him): 4100+ yards per season, 31 TD's per season, 15 INT's per season, 64% completions and a 94.7 QB rating.

Considering he has 3 more years under his belt and has had all the weapons surrounding him for most of his career I would say that Brady is higher on my list of QB's than Manning. I am a huge Manning fan and I HATE Brady. (I Am a Raider Fan and still Loath him for the Tuck Rule!) So I am able to see beyond my hatred and see how good he is.

I still believe these 2 QB's, and only these 2, back in the day would have still been superstars. I don't believe Johnny U would have been as big now as he was then. I will not speak badly about him he was a great one of his time. It was another era and I was mearly stating that it's a different league and those of you who think it's easy to be a QB today are mistaken.