Jump to content

Rank your 2017 starting QBs


paul-mac

Recommended Posts

On 9/27/2017 at 2:13 AM, strat1080 said:

The difference between Belichik and the other coaches you mention is that he also runs the personnel department and has accomplished what he has in the free agency era. The Patriots are the only post-FA dynasty. It just simply isn't anywhere near as feasible to have a dynasty and such a continuous run of success in the post free agency era. He continuously lets star players go and finds new players that fit his offensive and defensive systems. He doesn't even really stick to any particular philosophy. He caters his game plans around the talent on the team and exploiting other teams weaknesses. Its difficult to say whether or not any of the coaches you mentioned would have the same success they did without being able to permanently keep all the players they drafted and developed. That's a difficult challenge and why so many teams that go to the Super Bowl don't even make the playoffs the next year. With the exception of maybe Lombardi, and that's a maybe, I just don't see it. 5 Super Bowl victories, 7 Super Bowl appearances, 11 Conference Championship appearances is quite a feat in the free agency era.

Quote

I fully agree that BB's accomplishments are tremendous without a doubt. But if he played in a different era against all the HC's I mentioned all at the same time, He would be in the fight of his life, but I am just as sure, he would still win a few SB's, but I seriously doubt he would dominate like he does today. Those Coaches invented most of how the game is played today, they didn't just coach and also had a lot of say in who played for them. Almost every one of them created an offense or a defense that nobody had ever seen before and that had a lot to do with their dominance in their eras.

Quote

And by the way Al Davis was only a Head Coach for two years and was mostly known for being the owner and GM of the Raiders. Flores and Madden were the highly esteemed coaches of the Raiders when they were good.

Quote

Sorry, but Al Davis also coached in the other pro football league before it joined the NFL. Flores and Madden were simply AL's yes men, he was the defacto HC while they were HC in name only. That's why the Raiders fell apart when Davis got into his late 80's and 90's, he could no longer coach the team and take part in the drills. In his prime Al was a carbon copy of BB, reinventing the game of football over and over. He invented the bump and run defense and won SB's without a franchise QB on a # of occasions. If it wasn't for the emaculate reception by Harris, Oakland goes to that SB as the favourite not Pittsburgh.

They didn't win the Super Bowl without Brady but they've shown they can win without him going 3-1 last year including beating the Houston Texans on the road last year 27-0 with their 3rd string QB. The Patriots can win games against playoff teams without Tom Brady.  Let that sink in. The Texans were a playoff team last year and the Patriots beat them 27-0 in Houston without Tom Brady. They were playing their 3rd string QB. In 2008 they went 11-5 without Tom Brady.

Quote

Look, BB is the genius of his generation, I am not arguing against his success. Nobody today can touch him as a HC, but that does not mean there were not other geniuses of previous generations who were just as great. Chuch Noll won 4 SB's with Terry Bradshaw as his QB and he never completed 60% of his passes in any season, usually could be found around the 53% mark. Most of Al Davis's QB's were castoffs from other teams.

I respect Tom Brady for all his accomplishments but I don't know what you are watching out there when you say that he was far superior to Aaron Rodgers and people are so quick to call him the GOAT. Aaron Rodgers is consistently asked to make superhuman plays in order for his offense to move the ball and score points. Who is the best basketball player ever. Michael Jordan. Who has the most NBA titles in NBA history? Bill Russell. I'm not of the school of thought that awards one player all of the accolades for a team accomplishment. And football is much more of a team sport than basketball. The Patriots as a team simply know how to win games. They play good situational football and are fundamentally sound in all 3 phases of the game. They rarely have mental lapses, mistakes, and poor clock management. They are consistently one of the best red zone defenses year after year. That starts with Bill Bellichik and the program he's built. I think Brady puts them over the top and takes them to the next level but let's not pretend that the Patriots are a 5 win team without him like we've seen in the past when guys like Rodgers or P Manning have missed significant time. Those teams looked completely lost without their starting QB. The Patriots look like they don't even skip a beat blowing out playoff teams by 4 scores without Tom Brady.
 

Quote

 

A player's career speaks for itself. Brady came close to winning even more SB's than he already has. Rodgers and Peyton were not in his class as a clutch performers in the playoffs. How many solid receivers have both Peyton and Rodgers had, Brady had one great receiver for 1 year and went undefeated during the regular season, but for almost all of his career, he has has to make due with rather mediocre talents at WR and still wins SB's at an unprecedented rate.

BB, if he thought for a minute, he could win SB's without Brady, using another QB, he would do so, but he is not stupid enough to believe it, just because he has survived without Brady for long periods, doesn't mean he does not recognize Brady as the great QB he is. BB knows he is tied at the hip to Brady and knows full well, he does not win anywhere near 5 SB's with another QB even if it were a another franchise QB. He knows Brady is special or didn't you watch last year's SB. When you are down that much in a SB, coaching is not going to win the game. It takes a tremendous clutch performer to lead that kind of comeback in such a huge game, against a team that has dominated you the whole game.

So quick to call him the goat, are you serious??? He has accomplished what no other QB has ever done in his career in 100 years of pro football, 5 SB's and you want to mention Peyton and Rodgers in the same breath. Pro sport is all about "just win baby".

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 1:36 AM, Iamcanadian said:

 

Do you care to add some facts to this or just your opinion? I just posted a few links that completely debunk everything youve said. You say Brady is clutch in the playoffs.  Look at his passer rating in "clutch" moments of playoff games from 2001-2014 in the link I posted. Its a terrible 63.8. Thats awful. In 11 AFC title games Brady threw 15 TDs and 12 INTs. You say Brady was close to winning even more Super Bowls. I could make the argument that he very easily could have lost all of his Super Bowls as well. None of them were convincing wins. I thought Montana was a more dominant player in Super Bowls. 

The Patriots are just simply a very good team and are very well coached. Hint, they dont really skip a beat when Tom Brady misses games. You cant have it both ways. Give him ALL the credit when he wins but then ignore that the Patriots have won 70% of the games hes missed over the last 10 years. Its a large sample size too. We arent talking a handful of games here.

Thats my problem with people thinking that playoff wins and Super Bowl wins are the only way to rank QBs. I agree about Peyton. He didnt get it done in the playoffs and had inferior performance despite having ridiculous talent around him on offense. He simply regressed in the playoffs. But you or nobody else can credibly say Rodgers has simply choked in the playoffs. 36 TDs and 10 INTs in 16 playoff games for Rodgers is pretty remarkable. In 7 playoff losses his team gave up at least 37 points in 4 of those losses. I can assure you Brady aint no 5x Super Bowl champion with lackluster defensive play like that.

Football is the ultimate team sport. You cant give one guy all the credit. Thats just simply ridiculous. The Patriots defense made some clutch plays in many of the Super Bowls that allowed Brady to win in the clutch. What about that INT by Malcom Butler? What about Donta Hightower's strip sack and then another sack on the next drive that knocked Atlanta out of FG range? What about holding one of the best offenes in NFL history to 17 points in Bradys first Super Bowl win? Dont pretend that it was all Brady. 

There are some pretty brilliant football minds out there that have played or coached in the NFL that dont rank Brady is the GOAT. Some think Montana is the best. Others say Elway. Rodgers is starting to enter the discussion as his career progresses. There will never be a consensus about ranking QBs because there are just too many variables. Eras, quality of teams, etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brady v Manning was legitimate until we saw how Manning's postseason problems were more than just a fluke.  And still, Manning has a case for greatest regular season QB ever.  

Brady v Rodgers is legitimate, but it's hard to argue in favor of anyone over Brady after these last two superbowls.  If Rodgers gets another one himself, it becomes a serious conversation IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 02/10/2017 at 8:34 AM, strat1080 said:

Do you care to add some facts to this or just your opinion? I just posted a few links that completely debunk everything youve said. You say Brady is clutch in the playoffs.  Look at his passer rating in "clutch" moments of playoff games from 2001-2014 in the link I posted. Its a terrible 63.8. Thats awful. In 11 AFC title games Brady threw 15 TDs and 12 INTs. You say Brady was close to winning even more Super Bowls. I could make the argument that he very easily could have lost all of his Super Bowls as well. None of them were convincing wins. I thought Montana was a more dominant player in Super Bowls. 

The Patriots are just simply a very good team and are very well coached. Hint, they dont really skip a beat when Tom Brady misses games. You cant have it both ways. Give him ALL the credit when he wins but then ignore that the Patriots have won 70% of the games hes missed over the last 10 years. Its a large sample size too. We arent talking a handful of games here.

Thats my problem with people thinking that playoff wins and Super Bowl wins are the only way to rank QBs. I agree about Peyton. He didnt get it done in the playoffs and had inferior performance despite having ridiculous talent around him on offense. He simply regressed in the playoffs. But you or nobody else can credibly say Rodgers has simply choked in the playoffs. 36 TDs and 10 INTs in 16 playoff games for Rodgers is pretty remarkable. In 7 playoff losses his team gave up at least 37 points in 4 of those losses. I can assure you Brady aint no 5x Super Bowl champion with lackluster defensive play like that.

Football is the ultimate team sport. You cant give one guy all the credit. Thats just simply ridiculous. The Patriots defense made some clutch plays in many of the Super Bowls that allowed Brady to win in the clutch. What about that INT by Malcom Butler? What about Donta Hightower's strip sack and then another sack on the next drive that knocked Atlanta out of FG range? What about holding one of the best offenes in NFL history to 17 points in Bradys first Super Bowl win? Dont pretend that it was all Brady. 

There are some pretty brilliant football minds out there that have played or coached in the NFL that dont rank Brady is the GOAT. Some think Montana is the best. Others say Elway. Rodgers is starting to enter the discussion as his career progresses. There will never be a consensus about ranking QBs because there are just too many variables. Eras, quality of teams, etc. 

You're attributing the playoffs with just the superbowl with Brady there. All our Super Bowl wins have been close, but he's annihilated some good teams in the playoffs leading up to those super bowls. He's also played out of his skin in games where we should have been blown out. Watch our loss to Denver in 2015 , for example, and try not to be in awe of Brady. Literally carried the entire team (minus Gronk) and came within a 2p conversion and against arguably the greatest D ever, in a game where he was hit or pressured on well over half of his drop backs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/27/2017 at 9:05 AM, Hunter2_1 said:

Based off the first 3 games?

1. Brady

Sits atop of stats, most yards, making some of his best throws in his career, has added a deeper threat (highest average yardage and downfield attempts), and has a perfect QBR when under pressure

=2. Smith and Brees

Both have lit teams up, to be honest. Brees has been without favourite targets but still doing his thing, still manipulating defenses and dropping dimes. Smith has added a deep game finally

3. Rodgers

Hasn't been at his best, but still showing off ridiculous talent and has a game tieing and game winning drive

Then you're looking at Goff, Ryan, Ben, Cousins, Carr, maybe....? Shout out to Wilson behind that god awful line. 

Could also make a case for Stafford and Watson to be lumped in with those guys on the bottom. Maybe even over Ben and Carr up to this point in the season anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:

You're attributing the playoffs with just the superbowl with Brady there. All our Super Bowl wins have been close, but he's annihilated some good teams in the playoffs leading up to those super bowls. He's also played out of his skin in games where we should have been blown out. Watch our loss to Denver in 2015 , for example, and try not to be in awe of Brady. Literally carried the entire team (minus Gronk) and came within a 2p conversion and against arguably the greatest D ever, in a game where he was hit or pressured on well over half of his drop backs. 

I was responding specifically to iamcanadian's premise that Brady could have won even more Super Bowls than he has. Because he lost a couple close ones. I was simply pointing out that he easily could have lost all the Super Bowls. Don't get me wrong. I have Brady ranked way up there on the all time lost. I just think that people need to pump the brakes a little calling him the GOAT just because he's won the most Super Bowls of any QB. I really fail to see your point about that game against Denver. Tom Brady threw 1 TD and 2 INT and posted a 56.4 passer rating in that game. Aaron Rodgers plays like that and people will say he choked. That is basically what I'm talking about. Tom Brady gets all this credit for being this clutch QB in the playoffs but he has actually had quite a few garbage performances. He played in 11 AFC Championship Games and had 15 TDs and 12 INTs in those games.

The bottom line is the Patriots have won a lot of playoff games and Super Bowls because the Patriots are a well coached and well prepared team. Not because Tom Brady plays better than guys like Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers in the playoffs. That's just a simple fact and isn't really debatable. The numbers don't lie. Tom Brady statistically is not a better playoff QB than many of his contemporaries. He has consistently had the best team around him though. Just looking at those charts posted earlier in this thread. Tom Brady has always got more help from the defense and running game than P Manning, Rodgers, and Brees. Year after year the Patriots have one of the best red zone defenses. They are always competent on that side of the ball. They consistently play tremendous situational football. Look at whats going on now. When Tom Brady has a defense that guys like Brees and Rodgers have been saddled with over the years and he's a .500 QB. You see. When your defense is giving up 40 points every other game it doesn't matter who your QB is you are going to lose a lot of games. You have to have a defense that can make plays in key parts of the game in order for the QB to be in position to be "clutch". That NE game against Carolina last week is a microcosm of what has happened to Aaron Rodgers in just about every one of his close games. He comes back and ties the game or takes the lead and the defense just allows the opponent to effortlessly go down the field for the win.  Aaron Rodgers has lost 7 playoff games. His defense gave up 45, 45, 37, and 44 points in four of those losses. Tom Brady loses every single one of those games. I guarantee it. In Rodgers other three playoff losses, twice he lost in OT without ever possessing the ball. His other loss was from a game winning FG by SF as time expired in the 4th quarter. So basically in 7 playoff losses for Rodgers his defense just got throttled in 4 games and he watched his defense from the sideline give up the game winning drive in the other three. The Patriots have only given up 37+ points in a playoff game once with Brady at QB. That's happened to Rodgers 4 times in 16 playoff games. Basically one out of 4 games. That's awful.  

That's my problem with the notion of simply crowning the guy with the most titles as the GOAT. That doesn't even fly in basketball which is much less of a team sport. Michael Jordan is widely regarded as the best basketball player ever but he didn't ever come close to having the most titles. So its even more ridiculous to try to do that in football. If Brady has a defense that constantly gives up massive games to opposing offenses in the playoffs he aint no 5x champion. That is basically the story of Dan Marino and Aaron Rodgers. Incredible QB talent on very average teams. Every single of his Super Bowls was a tight win and involved clutch plays by the defense late in game to put Brady in a position to win the game.

Tom Brady was held to a sub 90 passer rating in 17 out of his 34 playoff starts. Aaron Rodgers was held to a sub 90 passer rating in only 4 out of 16 starts. Keep drinking the Kool Aid bud.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎10‎/‎3‎/‎2017 at 9:43 AM, Pats#1 said:

So I see Brady v Rodgers is the new Brady v Manning.

 

Kinda cool how Brady has been so good for so long for that to actually happen.

That is pretty cool. Its amazing how Brady looks even at age 40.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/3/2017 at 11:43 AM, Pats#1 said:

So I see Brady v Rodgers is the new Brady v Manning.

 

Kinda cool how Brady has been so good for so long for that to actually happen.

Its a large Packers fan base that's obviously biased towards their player. There isn't a real argument to be made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, SteelKing728 said:

Its a large Packers fan base that's obviously biased towards their player. There isn't a real argument to be made.

I honestly don't have a big problem with it. Career accomplishment wise of course Brady is above everyone by a large margin.

 

But there's no denying how talented and great Rodgers is. He can certainly make throws on the run that Brady can't.

It's actually a really unique comparison because Brady v Manning was with two very similarly styled pocket QBs, and Rodgers has a MUCH more loose style in the pocket because he is so mobile as well. 

Physically, Rodgers over Brady. I just think Brady is able to make up for that physical disadvantage with his football IQ and steadiness under pressure. 

My comment was more along the lines of now every QB thread eventually turns into a Brady v Rodgers one just like they did with Brady v Manning. 

I wasn't necessarily saying the comparison is invalid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...