NFL Final Four

Remove all ads!

This year yes. Overall, who knows, he's the Wild Card. Though teams started to figure out what Reid was doing with him at the end. Vick was taking alot of big hits. If he does that next year, he won't last 8 weeks.

 

On Vick - I agree with Blades that 1) He gets hurt and 2) other teams seemed to be onto his game by the end of the year.

However, there is a 3rd factor that I'd list. In the NFL, more than any other major sport, what you do in the postseason is a major factor in your legacy. In his career, Vick has exactly one playoff win (versus Green Bay when Bret Favre was still good). So when speaking of active QBs and their career, I'm not completely sold on Vick yet.

That's also why I have a hard time elevating Rodgers to the same level as Brees, Brady, or Manning, and also why I'm not even sure that his career to date has been better than Eli Manning or Big Ben. To be considered a "great" QB, you gotta have at least one ring IMO. If he wins the SB in two weeks, yep, he's on the list of current great QBs for sure.

[rant]

How many rings does Big Ben have to win before he is considered one of the great QBs in the league? Here's the complete list of QBs with more than one Super Bowl win:

Joe Montana - 4
Terry Bradshaw - 4
Tom Brady - 3
Troy Aikman - 3
John Elway - 2
Bart Starr - 2
Roger Staubach - 2
Jim Plunkett - 2
Phil Simms* - 2
Ben Roethlisberger - 2

* - Simms has two rings, but he was only the QB for one of them. The second ring was earned when he got hurt during the regular season, and Jeff Hostetler started, and won every playoff game, including the Super Bowl against the Buffalo Bills, which turned out to be the first of four consecutive SB losses for that Bills team.

Anyway, a bunch of those QBs are already in the HoF - Montana, Bradshaw, Aikman, Elway, Starr, and Staubach. Jim Plunkett is the only starting QB with more than one ring that isn't in the HoF who is eligible for the HoF (as previously stated, Simms has two, but he was only the QB for one of them, so that really doesn't count). Brady was considered a HoF lock as soon as he won his 3rd SB. That was before his statistically magnificent seasons he has put up since. (Remember, he hasn't won a SB since 2005, and all of his best seasons have happened since then, including his 2007 MVP, and his likely second MVP this year.) The point is that Brady was considered HoF material back in 2005 by dint of winning 3 SBs.

So the fact remains that if Ben gets #3 this year (and he's only 28 by the way), he immediately enters into the HoF discussion. I would argue that he would be a lot like Troy Aikman, in that like Troy, he was not considered the best player on the team. (The best player for the Cowboys those years was unquestionably Emmitt Smith.) But Troy immediately became HoF worthy upon winning that 3rd SB.

Roethlisberger was interviewed about a week ago, and he said he knows he'll likely never win an MVP or a passing title, or any other individual award - he just wins football games... including post-season games (10-2 all time) and Super Bowls (2-0). What does the guy have to do to get some respect?

[/rant]

 

Which makes Big Ben much like Bradshaw in that respect. Bradshaw didn't have great numbers, just decent numbers. His TD/INT ratio was pretty bad. I believe it's the worst in the Hall actually. It's Ben's off-the-field issues that bring him down a bit. But if he is a good boy the rest of the way, he should be a lock, as I see him playing for several more years, possbily passing the 35K passing yard mark.

QBs don't actually win the playoff games, the team does. Take last year's GB-Arizona game for instance. What more could Rodgers do? His defense was atrocious. He put up alot of points to no avail. He got them close though. this year he just took the next step. Maybe he wins, maybe he loses. But if Pitt puts up 40+ points with no or minimal Rodgers turnovers, you can't blame him. His numbers have been excellent, with no running game this year to boot. Luckily, the Defense is picking it up even with all the injuries they suffered this year. And low pay-roll. Remember that when thinkinig of Rodgers. GB doesn't spend alot because of their ownership situation. They get alot out of their players. To me, that is a plus on Rodger's side. He is playing with a financial handicap.

 

I agree that QBs shouldn't take all the blame for a loss - well maybe except Cutler. But it does affect their legacy, and that was the point I was making. One of the big knocks against Manning is that he is 9-10 in the postseason. One would actually expect that many good QBs would have a good postseason record because while it is possible to win more than one postseason game in a given year, you can never lose more than 1. So with Manning, since he's won a SB, and lost 10 times in the playoffs, we can conclude he's been to the playoffs 11 times in his career - and that alone should count for something. It's astounding that Big Ben has more playoffs wins (10-2 presently), when one considers he's been to the playoffs just 5 times.

On the flip side of that arguement, when a team wins, the QB gets also gets a disproportionate amount of credit, even if they didn't play particularly well. Big Ben has two SB rings - he played rather poorly in the first, and extremely well in the second, but both wins count the same.

On the Packer's financial handicap, I cannot say that I am familiar what the numbers were this year, as there was no cap. However, prior to this year, every team spent about the same amount on their teams. The CBA that expired did set a salary cap, but it also set a minimum. Specifically, it required that all teams spend at least 85% of the maximum on their players, so even if GB was near that threshold most years, it's not like other teams were massively overspending them. As an example, we'll use 2009, as there was a cap that year. The maximum you could spend was approximately $130 million, but you had to spend at least $110 million.

---------- Added 1 hours, 14 minutes and 40 seconds later... ----------

EDIT: After posting my point on Big Ben, I saw a mailbag column from Peter King, in which one of his readers makes the same point:

Read it here.'

One point that is brought up is something I completely missed: The millions of people who play fantasy football. Big Ben is not a great fantasy QB. In fact, he's barely average. And since so many people play fantasy football, I think a lot of people undervalue Roethlisberger because of this. That's not the only reason, and I'm not suggesting that Roethlisberger is the best QB ever, but I think he's better than he's typically given credit for.

 

I have have been absent on the NFL discussion this year. But my favourite team is still in it. I have never seen so many games due to the recorder in the set-top box. About 4 a week, and that is a lot in Europe. I am hard pressed to find one person in my town who knows the rules.

I expected more from the Bears. I am not going to debate over Jay Cutler, but that third QB did a surprising job. I would have preferred the Bears against the Steelers.

Green bay is sneaky.

To aim lower? You mean the nuts?

 

No, no, no. I imagine most NFL players were cups, so it wouldn't do you much good anyway. What King meant when he said the new rule makes defenders aim lower was lower than the head. You cannot go helmet-to-helmet against a QB. So the implication is they should hit them in the torso.

 

I know, but it would have been funny to see a player go down.

I took Monday 7 off from work. It starts after midnight here.

 

Dan Marino.

 

Poor Dan. Just like Ivan Lendl without Wimbledon.

---------- Added 0 hours, 0 minutes and 37 seconds later... ----------

In Brett Favre not on the list of great players?

 

T2, that's kind of the point. Whenever you hear anyone talk about HoF QBs, when they get to Marino, one of the first comments always made is "He never won a SB."

Winning a SB does not automatically make someone great. No one, for example, is clamoring for Trent Dilfer's enshrinement into Canton. Failure to win one does not disqualify you from being a great player, but it pretty much does stop you from being one of the all-time bests. Marino would be on the short list of all time great QBs if he won a SB. If he won 2 or 3, he'd likely be considered the greatest QB ever to play the game.

 

I agree, no SB wins always takes Marino out of the "Greatest QB" converstaion.

 

Well, Brett Favre is certainly going to the Hall of Fame - hell he owns every significant passing record there is (much like Marino did when he retired). And he does have one SB win (in two appearances).

That said, in my book, he doesn't even make the team picture for best QB ever. I do not put him in the same class as Montana, Elway, Bradshaw, Aikman, Starbauch, Starr et al... and that's just considering retired QBs. There are at least two - and possibly more - active ones that will have surpassed him by the time he is up for enshrinement.

Not the drag the Marino conversation on, but I just realized an apt comparison. John Elway didn't go from great QB to all-time great QB until after he won those two SBs - even though by that time his best years were behind him. He went from very good to top 5 all-time with those last two years.

EDIT: To be fair to Favre - here are twp other QBs whose peak years roughly coincided with Favre's peak, who I work rank BEHIND Favre - Kurt Warner and Donovan McNabb - and both of them are considered borderline HoFers. (I think Warner's case is a little better - 3 SB appearances and one victory. The hardest part with him is explaining the donut hole in the middle of his career.)

 

??? Aldeth, are you serious? Favre is not in the same league as Aikman? What? I put Favre above everyone of those guys you listed except for Elway and Montana. Bradshaw? Come on... the Steelers biggest strength was the Defense when he played. Guys like Aikamn, Starbauch, Bradshaw, they played with a lot of Hall of Famers. Favre didn't. He was clearly the leader of his team. Bradshaw wasn't. Aikman wasn't. Bradshaw played with Hall of Fame Running Back Franco Harris and the greatest Defense ever. Starbauch with Dorsett and another good defense and slew of HoFers. Aikman with Emmitt Smith, Michael Irvin, Moose and a slew of great players on his defense at any given time and many great O-lineman. Favre had who? Dorsey Levens? Edgar Bennett? Ahman Green the fumbler? Sterling for a few years and Reggie for a few years. That's it. Look at what he did at his age for the Vikes in 2009. Possibly his best year. There is no comparison between Favre and Aikman/Bradshaw/Starbauch.

Greatest QBs list, not necessarily this order, though I stand by the 1st 3.(Retired players that is, giving that Favre will retire. Brady and Manning are obviously in the mix as well. Not sure where they fall, as neither are done yet by a long shot)

Montana
Unitas
Elway
Favre
Tarkenton
Young
Starr
Marino

And the rest lump in togerther for me like Title, Jurgenson, Fouts, Kelly, Moon, Dawson, Aikamn, Bradshaw, Starbauch, etc.. basically the rest of the QBHoFers.

Favre had more TD passes than Aikman and Bradshaw combined. That alone puts him above those two clowns.


1 BRETT FAVRE 508
2 Dan Marino420
3 PEYTON MANNING399
4 Fran Tarkenton342
5 John Elway300
6 Warren Moon291
7 Johnny Unitas290
8 Vinny Testaverde275
9 Joe Montana273
10 TOM BRADY261 - Dave Krieg261
12 Sonny Jurgensen255
13 Dan Fouts254
14 Drew Bledsoe251
15 Boomer Esiason247
16 John Hadl244
17 Y.A. Tittle242
18 Len Dawson239
19 Jim Kelly237
20 George Blanda236

 

I still have a jersey from Warner when he played for the Admirals, in the NFL Europa division.

 

Settle down a bit Blades. The first thing I need to say is that when I rank the all-time greats, it's really hard to tell how good a guy is who you've never seen play. I'm sure Johnny U is a great QB, but it's hard to tell by direct experience, because his best years were in the 1960s, before he was born, and his career ended when I was still an infant. So when people tell me how great people like Unitas were, it's not that I don't believe them, but I'm pretty much taking their word for it. For example, I think my impression of Joe Namath has been permanently tainted in that my only memories of him were when he was well past his prime.

Still if that's the metric we're using, there are a few other members besides Unitas that belong ahead of Favre. Like Slingin' Sammy Baugh, Otto Graham, and Sid Luckman.

That said - I'm not saying Favre is crap - just that I don't consider him among the best QBs of all time. The most remarkable aspect of Favre's career was it's longevity. The guy played for 20 years, he and pretty much played every play of every game during that span. That alone is an incredible accomplishment, but partly explains his career numbers. His career completion percentage isn't the greatest, but when you throw so many more times than everyone else, of course you're going to rack up yardage, TDs, completed passes, etc. It's also why he leads the career list in interceptions.

Over his career, he averaged about 3,500 yards, 25 TDs and 17 INTs per season with a career passer rating of 86.0, which is right around what you get from a lot of those other people on your list who played contemporanously with Favre. While I won't compare those people who played in the 70s and prior, owing to the more run-oriented nature of play in those years, let's look at some of the other guys you listed, counting only the season where they played in at least half of their team games:

Joe Montana - 12 seasons where he played in at least half the games, 3400 yards per season, 23 TDs, 11 INTs, 92.3 passer rating.

Steve Young - 3,000 yards, 21 TDs, 9 INTs, 96.8 rating.

Dan Marino - (maybe a more apt comparison, as he also played until he was nearly 40, and had 17 seasons, unlike Young and Montana) - 3800 yards, 26 TDs, 15 INTs, 86.4 rating. That's eerily similar to Favre - although a bit better in every category - and I don't consider Marino an all time great either.

 

Marino was great. He lsot alot of games where he put up big points. He didn't have the luxury of a grat running game or defence for most of his career either. Though the "Killer Bees" were very good the year they went to the SB. Baugh, Luckman and crew are also big QBs of their days. I was going to add them as well, but drew the line to shorten the post. While Longevity is an obvious asset for Favre, his willingness and ability to make the big throw in the crucial moment is what puts him above many of hte others. He had and still posses an awesome armn. He did throw some big INTs as well, I won't argue that, but when the game was on the line and time is running out, I would take Favre over all of the others to run my last drive, with the obvious exception of Elway, he was the best 2-minute guy ever, bar none.

On the subject of Longevity, I feel it deserves more consideration than many of the other categories when discussing one's greatness. Nobody played as many games at QB as him, taking the hits and keep on trucking. He was incredibly durable. That is Great in itself. He was the total package at QB. Don't get me wrong, I am not a Pakers fan and would never own a Favre jersey, but I will give him his do. I do own an Orange Crush Elway Jersey from when I was a kid. (Though a dedicated Philly fan, Elway and Mattingly were my favorite FB and BB players when I was young )He was a great player and a Great QB. Know matter how much they want to deny it, every breathing Bears fan would of loved to had Favre at QB instead of taking whooping after whooping from him.

 

Of hell yes. I cannot even name most of the Bears QBs from the 90s and early 2000s when Favre was with the Packers. Jim McMahon was probably the last good (and by no means great) QB the Bears had. Now I have to look up the list.

*me does google search*

OK, here's the list (excluding backups who may have played a game or two):

Jim Harbaugh 90-93
Steve Walsh 94
Erik Kramer 95-98
Shane Matthews 99
Cade McNown 00
Jim Miller 01-02
Kordell Stewart 03
Chad Hutchinson 04
Kyle Orton 05
Rex Grossman 06-07
Kyle Orton (again) 08
Jay Cutler 09-present

With the exception of Harbaugh, who was a journeyman and had some decent seasons (took the Colts to the AFC Championship game one year), that's a sorry list of has-been's and wanna-be's. So uh ... yeah, I think you'd rather have Favre. (And I understand your larger point that you'd rather have Favre over a lot of other guys.)

I had some time to think on this a bit this weekend, and do a bit more research. Maybe I'm being a bit too harsh with Favre. He had 3 MVP seasons, and five other very good years. So eight very good to exceptional years. I think my problem is remembering the recent Favre better than the past Favre. If you want to split his career in half with 1992-2001 as the first half, and 2002-2011 as the second half, six of those eight seasons happened in the first half of his career. His two great seasons of the second half of his career were 2009 with the Vikings, and 2007 - his last year with the Packers.

Most of the rest of the second half of his career was pretty pedestrian ... except for his yardage totals. That's a testament to his great arm actually. With the exception of this past season and his rookie year where he only had two starts, he had at least 3,200 yards every year of his career.

I guess the other thing I have against Favre as an all-time great, is he didn't really have a "wow" moment, and with the exception of 2009, didn't have a "wow" season since 1997. About the most memorable moment is when he played on MNF right after his father died. I'm sure he had a bunch of come from behind last minute victories, but I don't seem to recall any of them occurring in the postseason. His postseason record itself is not particularly spectacular at 13-11, especially when you consider that over his first five years it was 10-4 and included two SB appearances. That's 3-7 since 1997. I also looked him up on Pro-Football Reference. One of the things that site does is compare any given player to other players who were similar. You can do it by year, or by career. For his very good years, he compares closely with Tom Brady. For his MVP years, he compares closely with Johnny Unitas. And for his career, the most similar player is Fran Tarkenton.

 

In the end it was the turnovers that did it.

 

Indeed. Bummer.