Older generation QBs who would still excel today

[Tk3]

I'll fire off some shots here

Quote

“I had an argument with a coach in Triple-A about Babe Ruth’s effectiveness in today’s game,” Ottavino recalled, via USA Today. “I said, ‘Babe Ruth, with that swing, swinging that bat, I got him hitting .140 with eight homers.’

“He was like, ‘are you nuts? Babe Ruth would hit .370 with 60 homers,’ and I’m like, ‘I would strike Babe Ruth out every time.’

“I’m not trying to disrespect him, you know, rest in peace, you know, shout out to Babe Ruth,” Ottavino said. “But, it was a different game, I mean the guy ate hot dogs and drank beer and did whatever he did. It was just a different game.”

I'm not saying the 80s were the same as the 30s, but simiarly to Ottavino's argument, the talent in the league is just so much more than it was 40 years ago

You can compare within an era, you can even compare one era to the previous or the subsequent eras. But like, Terry Bradshaw was the first overall pick and won 4 super bowls, yet he wouldn't even make the practice squad in the current era

 

Two things can be true at once

1. We can call Montana a top 5 all time QB or whatever, based on his comparable dominance in his era
2. His performance in this era would be nothing resembling stardom.

Very few if any QBs from before 2000 would be good, let alone great in this era

[Tk3]

If anything I'll say the Cunninghams, Culpeppers, McNabbs, even Vince Youngs might have fared better with some of the offensive schemes that are more commonplace today

But I'm not buying the argument that the "prototype" guys from the 80s would be legit today

[biggie.]

3 hours ago, Tk3 said:

If anything I'll say the Cunninghams, Culpeppers, McNabbs, even Vince Youngs might have fared better with some of the offensive schemes that are more commonplace today

But I'm not buying the argument that the "prototype" guys from the 80s would be legit today

Cunninham absolutely, Culpepper maybe but strong no on McNabb and VY.

Those two were dumb as bricks and more erratic than a woman on her period.

[Glen]

3 hours ago, biggie. said:

Cunninham absolutely, Culpepper maybe but strong no on McNabb and VY.

Those two were dumb as bricks and more erratic than a woman on her period.

Tell me you’ve never watched McNabb without telling me you’ve never watched McNabb

[NYRaider]

Rich Gannon would be good

[biggie.]

6 hours ago, Glen said:

Tell me you’ve never watched McNabb without telling me you’ve never watched McNabb

I've watched McNabb. His Eagles were the most confident against all of our SB opponents.

[HerbertGOAT]

On 6/12/2022 at 2:14 AM, ronjon1990 said:

I think most of the greats would look even better in the modern game. 

Moreover, guys like Cunningham, Young,  Tarkenton, Kordell Stewart, Steve McNair, Bobby Douglass.....they would probably absolutely terrorize the league. 

A guy like Stewart, McNair, or even a Jake Plummer probably consistently rank in the top 10 or so every year of their prime. McNair was already really good. But I could see the narrative changing for these sorts of guys a lot. They wouldn't be as forgotten by the league 20ish years later like they have been. 

Bobby Douglass might terrorize the league as a Tight End. He would not make a single D1 College team as a QB nowadays.

[MSURacerDT55]

Warren Moon would average 5k yards easily with the rules today

 

 

[THE DUKE]

Put me in the "all of them" camp.  With access to modern medicine, training, techniques, rules changes, they were absolutely elite in their era amongst their peers and they would be today, except they were tougher than most of the athletes today because they had to deal with all the crap they did.

[BeaReylo]

On 4/30/2022 at 3:54 PM, DontTazeMeBro said:

Probably all of them. Elway would probably terrorize today’s game.

Yep.  The rule changes would be like night and day to them.  Even a mediocre QB from that time period would go up a notch because of it.

[BayRaider]

A lot of them. Young, Montana, Elway, Marino, Favre, Moon. People forget Montana had legs and could scramble in the pocket like Rodgers. Not to mention razor sharp football IQ and ball placement and one of the most clutch sports players of all time. 

[TecmoSuperJoe]

On 6/14/2022 at 11:49 PM, THE DUKE said:

Put me in the "all of them" camp.  With access to modern medicine, training, techniques, rules changes, they were absolutely elite in their era amongst their peers and they would be today, except they were tougher than most of the athletes today because they had to deal with all the crap they did.

Even the "bad" passers from eras past would just be in better situations to succeed all around. Even talented-deprived squads now have entire coaching staffs that are offensive-oriented. I can't imagine a coach like Ditka or Ryan coaching now that is all defensive-minded, and the offense is essentially considered an after-thought that needs to just do enough, and be content with that. I was just thinking to myself the other today in the 80's where would a young QB want to go where they'd feel like they'd actually have a chance to succeed as a passer? Walsh, Gibbs, Coryell, Wyche, Shula...maybe Rutigliano and Robinson? Slim pickings compared to now. 

Edited June 21, 2022 by TecmoSuperJoe

[CP3MVP]

On 6/12/2022 at 5:13 PM, Tk3 said:

I'll fire off some shots here

I'm not saying the 80s were the same as the 30s, but simiarly to Ottavino's argument, the talent in the league is just so much more than it was 40 years ago

You can compare within an era, you can even compare one era to the previous or the subsequent eras. But like, Terry Bradshaw was the first overall pick and won 4 super bowls, yet he wouldn't even make the practice squad in the current era

 

Two things can be true at once

1. We can call Montana a top 5 all time QB or whatever, based on his comparable dominance in his era
2. His performance in this era would be nothing resembling stardom.

Very few if any QBs from before 2000 would be good, let alone great in this era

Ryan Fitzpatrick played for 17 years 

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

2 hours ago, CP3MVP said:

Ryan Fitzpatrick played for 17 years 

And if Ryan Fitzpatrick was still Ryan Fitzpatrick in 1930's he'd have a statue outside of Canton memorializing the greatest QB of all time.

[OkeyDoke21]

2 hours ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

And if Ryan Fitzpatrick was still Ryan Fitzpatrick in 1930's he'd have a statue outside of Canton memorializing the greatest QB of all time.

Maybe if he gets to step in a time machine, and have all of the modern advantages.  If he was born in the 1910's though, like his peers would be, there isn't a chance in hell.  He's still going to be pedestrian.  

The vast majority of the older qbs would be better today, if they were actually born in this era, and were able to come up through it like the modern qbs.  The game is slanted in the positions favor more than it ever has been.