Jump to content

What's the weight of rings compared to individual awards when we talk about QB legacies?


notthatbluestuff

Recommended Posts

MVP is an "individual" achievement.

Rings are a team achievement. 

 

I think most would openly say they are playing for the team achievement.  Privately it may be different.  

The difference between 1 ring and 2 is rather significant.  1 can be more of a fluke vs 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Manning brothers are a very interesting case.

Peyton is clearly and obviously the better passer, leader, teammate, winner, stats guy, and so on.

 

Then you look at the playoffs. They have identical passer ratings in the playoffs.

Peyton got 15 tries and won 2 SBs with lackluster performances. His offenses averaged a net 12 points per game in 4 Super Bowls.

Eli had 6 tires and he won 2 SBs by going nuts in 2007 and 2011.

Eli had 5 games of 100+ rating in those 8 playoff games to earn 2 rings.

Peyton had 5 games of 100+ rating in his entire 27 game playoff career.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, SkippyX said:

The Manning brothers are a very interesting case.

Peyton is clearly and obviously the better passer, leader, teammate, winner, stats guy, and so on.

 

Then you look at the playoffs. They have identical passer ratings in the playoffs.

Peyton got 15 tries and won 2 SBs with lackluster performances. His offenses averaged a net 12 points per game in 4 Super Bowls.

Eli had 6 tires and he won 2 SBs by going nuts in 2007 and 2011.

Eli had 5 games of 100+ rating in those 8 playoff games to earn 2 rings.

Peyton had 5 games of 100+ rating in his entire 27 game playoff career.

 

Just demonstrates how small sample sizes the like playoffs can skew stats, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SkippyX said:

The problem is that the whole point of the sport is to dominate those small sample sizes.

Crazy how those two are kind of polar opposites of one another in that regard. If somehow Arch Manning can find a way to be somewhere in the middle he might win 3 rings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, SkippyX said:

The problem is that the whole point of the sport is to dominate those small sample sizes.

I want to agree with this but I feel like the whole point of the sport is to win Super Bowls, not playoff games, therefore why not judge only according to SB success in that case.

If we include playoff games because obviously you need to play well in the playoffs to get to the Super Bowl, then why do we discredit the even bigger sample size that it takes to get to the playoffs lol. 

I'm not disagreeing with you whatsoever that postseason success weighs more (specifically with regards to career legacy), but I personally just can't convince myself to not take playoff splits with a grain of salt, especially when it comes to "how good was X QB".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Soggust said:

I want to agree with this but I feel like the whole point of the sport is to win Super Bowls, not playoff games, therefore why not judge only according to SB success in that case.

If we include playoff games because obviously you need to play well in the playoffs to get to the Super Bowl, then why do we discredit the even bigger sample size that it takes to get to the playoffs lol. 

I'm not disagreeing with you whatsoever that postseason success weighs more (specifically with regards to career legacy), but I personally just can't convince myself to not take playoff splits with a grain of salt, especially when it comes to "how good was X QB".

Playoffs are certainly a smaller sample size, but also against (typically) better quality teams.  Not much opportunity to fatten up the stats against bottom feeder teams.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/17/2022 at 6:40 PM, lancerman said:

I don’t think anybody honestly believes Brady would trade a ring for an MVP. He doesn’t value it as much. 

Also going from 7 rings to 5 hurts his legacy more even if it ties him with Manning in MVP’s. 
 

There will always be guys winning MVP’s. Only 1 guy even has 5 rings. 20 years from now there will be another guy that wins a bunch of MVP’s and makes amazing throws like Manning, Marino, Rodgers or Mahomes. But 20 years from now people will still go “yeah but nobody is ever getting close to Brady with 7 rings across two teams” 

The only way I think Brady would ever trade a ring is if it’s for another ring in 2007 so he can be undefeated that year. And he’s said as much. Which goes back to him valuing winning. 

 

 

 

 

No SB winning QB would.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, squire12 said:

MVP is an "individual" achievement.

Rings are a team achievement. 

 

I think most would openly say they are playing for the team achievement.  Privately it may be different.  

The difference between 1 ring and 2 is rather significant.  1 can be more of a fluke vs 2.

Kinda.  As others have pointed out in this thread if you have 2 equally impressive players worthy of the award the MVP will go to the guy whose team has the better record or makes the playoffs.

I agree, rings are a team achievement so it is a little funny we attach a players greatness to the number of rings he acquires in his career.   However, there are only 5 QBs in the HOF that do not have at least one ring: Marino, Kelly, Fouts, Moon and Tarkenton.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jalen Hurts belongs in the NFL as 1 of 32 starting QBs (right now) He might be proven too limited or he might improve. He might just be a 6-9 win guy most years. Its hard to say. What's easy to say is that he beat the crud out of really bad teams this year (and also played well vs the Saints) No way can you value anything that Hurts did this year as much as what Allen or Mahomes did last weekend.

Dak Prescott lighting up the Covid WFT and the Eagles backups is nothing compared to his playoff choke.

Regular season stats and wins are cheap compared to playoff stats.

Each week in the regular season half the teams lose and get to play again the next week. In the playoffs, not so much.

 

Almost no one gets to play a bad team in the playoffs. If you are the best then you get a bye and the few bad teams lose before you play.

We can agree that a few mediocre teams got their butts kicked last weekend, but blowouts happen in Super Bowls too.

Philly, Pittsburgh, and Arizona did not turn into the Jets. They just got stomped by good teams (combined with having bad days)

Playing a crap team in the regular season is like a 45/55 shot from week to week.

 

Or do we need to discuss the greatness of Andy Dalton because he averaged about a 140 rating in 2 games against 3-13 Cleveland in 2015?

Are those 2 of the great games in NFL history?

 

Rodgers vs Warner was an epic battle even in defeat. That playoff game goes on Rodgers resume.

How long did Goff get to ride the credit from that KC - LA regular season shootout? 6 weeks?

It sure did not survive his 1 TD pass in 3 playoff game run where he screwed up a wide open TD pass in the Super Bowl.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm over 40 so my sentiment might be different but here goes. The weight given is subject and always requires context. You could have a QB get 2 regular season MVPs and a ring while objectively being worse for their career than a guy who never won a regular season MVP or a Super Bowl. Welcome to team sports in a nut shell. People give me strange looks I constantly put Hakeem Olajuwan alongside Jordan for NBA greats and I tell them to actually go watch some games and understanding the context (like Hakeem playing during Ramadan). The greatest extreme examples of contest are the careers of Troy Aikman and Dan Marino. There is no objective debate to be had who was the greater Quarterback. Marino DID have one regular season MVP but he only made 1 Super Bowl getting somewhat crushed and not much playoff success thereafter, he retired with career most TDs and yards. Troy Aikman didn't win a regular season MVP but won 3 rings in 3 appearances including game's MVP.

Sport in general is about winning, the stats are there to show value but even then context should be considered, like wide receivers playing with Peyton Manning.

But back to the OP, there is no fine metric comparison. I cannot say 3 rings equals a regular season MVP or something of that nature. Playoffs now are going to be 4 consecutive elimination games, with the pressure and matchup that contains. The regular season is a far less pressure, sometimes constantly facing poorer teams in a 17 game schedule where you probably need to win 10-11 games to qualify for playoffs and then what difference does it make? Does throwing 4 TDs in a meaningless game to pad stats make one greater?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...