 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Other Stuff » Sports Talk » Best QB of all-time
tworoosters
I would have thought that was too obvious to mention, also Mark Rypien much better than Marino and don't even get me started about how much better Trent Dilfer was than Marino .
September 17, 2010 at 03:19PM View BBCode
Originally posted by tm4559
yes, Joe Theisman, super bowl title. Joe Theisman, better than dan marino.
I would have thought that was too obvious to mention, also Mark Rypien much better than Marino and don't even get me started about how much better Trent Dilfer was than Marino .
tm4559
September 17, 2010 at 04:20PM View BBCode
i thougt everybody knew hostettler was better than everybody.
dirtdevil
September 17, 2010 at 05:07PM View BBCode
they should. also, chris simms' dad won a superbowl, which is more than marion or his dad ever did. so chris simms: better than dan marino.
vurbil
September 17, 2010 at 05:45PM View BBCode
Wait, is the posse making fun of me again? If so, I'd like to point out that I never said any of those people were better than Marino, nor was my argument even based on Superbowl wins. I said Marino's stats were not what people think they are.
dirtdevil
September 17, 2010 at 05:51PM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
they are, actually. you've based your entire argument on one stat. since that stat is qb rating, it's not even that good of an argument.
barterer2002
September 17, 2010 at 06:20PM View BBCode
Actually I think the mocking is more aimed at foli for this:Originally posted by folifan19
If you base it on Super Bowl (NFL Championships) wins, Bradshaw, Montana, Staubach abd Brady shoul dbe at the top. Not very good on NFL history before 1968. Unitas, Star, Graham, Baugh, Tittle... should be on the list too. Right? And if we're talking titles, Bobby Layne was a decent QB for Detroit.
tm4559
[Edited on 9-17-2010 by tm4559]
September 17, 2010 at 08:12PM View BBCode
i was just clowning around. foli wasn't even advocating that position, he was referencing something from above where it was mentioned i believe. he can say whatever he wants, his boys there in cincy are a lock this season.[Edited on 9-17-2010 by tm4559]
dirtdevil
September 17, 2010 at 09:06PM View BBCode
what, you don't believe in dennis dixon, or whatver his actual name is?
vurbil
I think I mentioned interceptions and completion percentage as well, to which someone replied that QB rating is a flawed stat. The focus on QB rating wasn't mine. It was just one of 3 stats I mentioned in regards to Dan Marino.
The only stats that can really be pointed to in support of Marino being some god of the stat sheet are counting stats, and we all know what they are worth.
If you're just trolling me, that's cool, because that's your thing. But if you truly believe that my argument is incorrect, please enlighten me with the facts because I am definitely open to receiving your wisdom.
To clarify, my argument is in two parts:
1. I have heard many people state the opinion that Dan Marino is the best QB of all time (or very high on the list) even though he failed to win a Superbowl (or win as much as other top QBs) on the basis that his stats are uniquely impressive.
2. His stats are not uniquely impressive; in fact, they are inferior to several other top QBs I have looked at. Namely, Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, and Joe Montana. (Those are just the ones I looked up after seeing how average Marino's stats seemed. I suspect other top QBs also have better stats.) I base this opinion on the fact that his completion percentage, TD/INT ratio, and passer rating are all only above average. Certainly not in the elite level, and certainly not on a level to justify the assumption that Dan Marino is a statistical god.
[Edited on 9-17-2010 by vurbil]
September 17, 2010 at 09:14PM View BBCode
Originally posted by dirtdevil
they are, actually. you've based your entire argument on one stat. since that stat is qb rating, it's not even that good of an argument.
I think I mentioned interceptions and completion percentage as well, to which someone replied that QB rating is a flawed stat. The focus on QB rating wasn't mine. It was just one of 3 stats I mentioned in regards to Dan Marino.
The only stats that can really be pointed to in support of Marino being some god of the stat sheet are counting stats, and we all know what they are worth.
If you're just trolling me, that's cool, because that's your thing. But if you truly believe that my argument is incorrect, please enlighten me with the facts because I am definitely open to receiving your wisdom.
To clarify, my argument is in two parts:
1. I have heard many people state the opinion that Dan Marino is the best QB of all time (or very high on the list) even though he failed to win a Superbowl (or win as much as other top QBs) on the basis that his stats are uniquely impressive.
2. His stats are not uniquely impressive; in fact, they are inferior to several other top QBs I have looked at. Namely, Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, and Joe Montana. (Those are just the ones I looked up after seeing how average Marino's stats seemed. I suspect other top QBs also have better stats.) I base this opinion on the fact that his completion percentage, TD/INT ratio, and passer rating are all only above average. Certainly not in the elite level, and certainly not on a level to justify the assumption that Dan Marino is a statistical god.
[Edited on 9-17-2010 by vurbil]
dirtdevil
2) as with most great players in most sports, the stats aren't the entire story of a career, they need to be examined in context. marino played in an age that wasn't as easy to pass in as brady and manning do today. by the same token it was easier for a team to pass successfully then than it was when, say staubach and unitas played.
marino is 2nd all-time in passing yards. two of the other guys in the top 5- elway (83-98) and moon (84-00)- have careers that match almost exactly to the season with marino (83-99). and he absolutely blew them away in yardage- by roughly 10,000 and 12,000 yards, respectively. in terms of career TD's marino destroyed those guys again with 420 to elway's 300 and moon's 291. that's ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY more touchdown passes than his next closest contemporary. keep in mind that those two guys elway, arguably one of the greatest scramblers ever, and moon were also sacked 516 and 458 times, respectively. elway is the career leader. yet marino, who had all the mobility of a statue, was sacked only 270 times in his career. that's almost 50% less than elway, and marino had over 1000 more attempts. that's how quick marino's release was.
in marino's entire career, he played on a team that had a 1000-yard rusher once. one time. elway's teams had one eight times. marino had to throw it, and they still couldn't stop him.
September 17, 2010 at 10:00PM View BBCode
1) as has been said, no one here has marino higher than 7th on their list. i'm not about to start defending someone else's argument that i don't agree with. as has been suggested here though, superbowl wins is hardly the best measure of a quarterback.2) as with most great players in most sports, the stats aren't the entire story of a career, they need to be examined in context. marino played in an age that wasn't as easy to pass in as brady and manning do today. by the same token it was easier for a team to pass successfully then than it was when, say staubach and unitas played.
marino is 2nd all-time in passing yards. two of the other guys in the top 5- elway (83-98) and moon (84-00)- have careers that match almost exactly to the season with marino (83-99). and he absolutely blew them away in yardage- by roughly 10,000 and 12,000 yards, respectively. in terms of career TD's marino destroyed those guys again with 420 to elway's 300 and moon's 291. that's ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY more touchdown passes than his next closest contemporary. keep in mind that those two guys elway, arguably one of the greatest scramblers ever, and moon were also sacked 516 and 458 times, respectively. elway is the career leader. yet marino, who had all the mobility of a statue, was sacked only 270 times in his career. that's almost 50% less than elway, and marino had over 1000 more attempts. that's how quick marino's release was.
in marino's entire career, he played on a team that had a 1000-yard rusher once. one time. elway's teams had one eight times. marino had to throw it, and they still couldn't stop him.
Hamilton2
No one has made that argument here. The fact that you are listing his failure to win a Superbowl as a negative has been extensively demonstrated to fall victim to the fallacy of "the argument proves to much." The reason listed for Dan Marino was that he accomplished as much as he did in spite of having literally NO running game at all and a highly suspect defense for much of his career (so they were playing from behind) and having a mostly below average receiving corps. No one said anything about his stats. Neither that they were unique, nor that they are impressive. (They are both. More on this in a minute.)
First of all, EVERY QB's stats are UNIQUE. They are entirely dependent upon the personal they play with, the coaching staff they play for and the scheme they utilize. Second of all, given that all QB stats are unique, there is a huge degree of subjectivity involved in rating QB's. I think that every person here will agree that Brady is a better QB than Mark Sanchez, even if the J-E-T-S come out and beat the Patriots this Sunday night. Being a QB isn't about one statistic, or one game, or one season, or even about an entire career's worth of statistics. What it is about is the entire body of work from the player: was he a workhorse? was he a leader? did he make the players around him look better than they were? did he elevate his team? did he throw accurate passes? did he win some games in some situations where an average QB would not have won? The answer to all of those questions, as they relate to Dan Marino, is YES! That is what makes him one of the greatest QB's of all time.
September 17, 2010 at 10:04PM View BBCode
1. I have heard many people state the opinion that Dan Marino is the best QB of all time (or very high on the list) even though he failed to win a Superbowl (or win as much as other top QBs) on the basis that his stats are uniquely impressive.
No one has made that argument here. The fact that you are listing his failure to win a Superbowl as a negative has been extensively demonstrated to fall victim to the fallacy of "the argument proves to much." The reason listed for Dan Marino was that he accomplished as much as he did in spite of having literally NO running game at all and a highly suspect defense for much of his career (so they were playing from behind) and having a mostly below average receiving corps. No one said anything about his stats. Neither that they were unique, nor that they are impressive. (They are both. More on this in a minute.)
2. His stats are not uniquely impressive; in fact, they are inferior to several other top QBs I have looked at. Namely, Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, and Joe Montana. (Those are just the ones I looked up after seeing how average Marino's stats seemed. I suspect other top QBs also have better stats.) I base this opinion on the fact that his completion percentage, TD/INT ratio, and passer rating are all only above average. Certainly not in the elite level, and certainly not on a level to justify the assumption that Dan Marino is a statistical god.
First of all, EVERY QB's stats are UNIQUE. They are entirely dependent upon the personal they play with, the coaching staff they play for and the scheme they utilize. Second of all, given that all QB stats are unique, there is a huge degree of subjectivity involved in rating QB's. I think that every person here will agree that Brady is a better QB than Mark Sanchez, even if the J-E-T-S come out and beat the Patriots this Sunday night. Being a QB isn't about one statistic, or one game, or one season, or even about an entire career's worth of statistics. What it is about is the entire body of work from the player: was he a workhorse? was he a leader? did he make the players around him look better than they were? did he elevate his team? did he throw accurate passes? did he win some games in some situations where an average QB would not have won? The answer to all of those questions, as they relate to Dan Marino, is YES! That is what makes him one of the greatest QB's of all time.
Hamilton2
Bring it. On.
September 17, 2010 at 10:07PM View BBCode
Originally posted by dirtdevil
marino is 2nd all-time in passing yards. two of the other guys in the top 5- elway (83-98) and moon (84-00)- have careers that match almost exactly to the season with marino (83-99). and he absolutely blew them away in yardage- by roughly 10,000 and 12,000 yards, respectively. in terms of career TD's marino destroyed those guys again with 420 to elway's 300 and moon's 291. that's ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY more touchdown passes than his next closest contemporary. keep in mind that those two guys elway, arguably one of the greatest scramblers ever, and moon were also sacked 516 and 458 times, respectively. elway is the career leader. yet marino, who had all the mobility of a statue, was sacked only 270 times in his career. that's almost 50% less than elway, and marino had over 1000 more attempts. that's how quick marino's release was.
Bring it. On.
bpearly69
I see your argument DD but at the same time, if Elway had a crappy running game would he have been able to have a bit more yardage? Who knows, I mostly agree with what you said, it is a good point that Marino never had a running game or defense but I then think making the defense that Elway had one almost makes it look like well if he didn't, he could have put up just as much.
Also, the scrambling QB thing, I agree, sort of, a lot of times a qb scrambles but doesn't always get away and if he's taken down behind the line it does count as a sack right?
Finally, I think Marino was a great qb, if he had a better running game and receivers he would have been even better, yeah people can say his numbers didn't look that good.
But, Elway had Davis, Brady had a solid running game for a while now Moss and Welker, Manning has basically all the weapons possible :) Young and Montana had Rice, only other guy I can think of that hasn't always had great weapons is Favre, if your gonna go by just stats those two guys, Marino and Favre, who didn't always have the best weapons should be considered top qb's, obviously guys like Brady, Manning, Young, Montana, all great qb's but without the weapons they had, the defenses they had, no way their numbers are good as they are
September 17, 2010 at 10:58PM View BBCode
haha niceI see your argument DD but at the same time, if Elway had a crappy running game would he have been able to have a bit more yardage? Who knows, I mostly agree with what you said, it is a good point that Marino never had a running game or defense but I then think making the defense that Elway had one almost makes it look like well if he didn't, he could have put up just as much.
Also, the scrambling QB thing, I agree, sort of, a lot of times a qb scrambles but doesn't always get away and if he's taken down behind the line it does count as a sack right?
Finally, I think Marino was a great qb, if he had a better running game and receivers he would have been even better, yeah people can say his numbers didn't look that good.
But, Elway had Davis, Brady had a solid running game for a while now Moss and Welker, Manning has basically all the weapons possible :) Young and Montana had Rice, only other guy I can think of that hasn't always had great weapons is Favre, if your gonna go by just stats those two guys, Marino and Favre, who didn't always have the best weapons should be considered top qb's, obviously guys like Brady, Manning, Young, Montana, all great qb's but without the weapons they had, the defenses they had, no way their numbers are good as they are
barterer2002
1. QBs from different eras often play under different rules. Particularly different are the rules in effect to protect a QB from being hit and the rules allowing a receiver to run down the field. Marino's era was more qb friendly than Layne or Graham but not as much as Brady or Manning.
So I wanted to look at some of Marino's contemporaries. I took the 1983 draft class and the 4 classes on either side of it so 9 years total. Listed all 1st round QBs as well as other significant QBs drafted that year (essentially those who threw for 10K or more in a career). Here they are with the stats you're citing (completion percentage, TD/Int, QB Rate). I would contend that Marino is clearly the class of this group with two exceptions (Montana and Young). Since those two exceptions are often in the conversation for greatest as well, I don't see an issue but it shows that Marino's numbers, compared to his comtemporaries is better than what you're maintaining. Comparing them to Brady and Manning is somewhat akin to comparing the SB totals of Ty Cobb to Jackie Robinson or the Home Run totals of Gavvy Cravath to Babe Ruth or to be more modern, Mike Schmidt to Sammy Sosa
1979 draft
Montana 63.2% 273/139 TD/INT 92.3 Rate
Fuller 56.8% 28/41 70.1
Thompson 53.1% 33/45 63.4
1980 draft
M. Wilson 52.1% 86/102 67.7
Malone 50.9% 60/81 61.9
Hipple 53.7% 55/70 68.7
1981 draft
Lomax 57.6% 136/90 82.7
W. Wilson 57.3% 99/102 75.6
D. Wilson 53% 36/55 63.8
Campbell 45.6% 3/9 38.8
1982 draft
McMahon 58% 100/90 78.2
Pagel 50.1% 49/63 63.3
Schliester 45% 3/11 42.6
1983 draft
Marino 59.4% 420/252 86.4
Elway 56.9% 300/226 79.9
Kelly 60.1% 237/175 84.4
O'Brien 58.6 128/98 80.4
Eason 58.2% 61/51 79.7
Blackledge 48.1 29/38 60.2
1984 draft
Young 64.3% 232/107 96.8
Esiason 57.0% 247/184 81.1
Hostlester 58.0% 94/71 80.5
Schroeder 50.8% 114/108 71.7
1985 draft
Cunningham 56.6% 207/134 81.5
Kosar 59.3% 124/87 81.8
Flutie 54.7% 86/68 76.3
1986 draft
Everett 57.7% 203/175 78.6
Rypien 56.1% 115/88 78.9
Brister 54.6 81/78 72.3
Trudeau 53.1% 42/69 63.3
Long 54.5% 19/28 64.5
Bono 54.9% 62/42 75.3
1987 draft
Testaverde 56.5% 275/267 75.0
Gannon 60.2% 180/104 84.7
Beuerlein 56.9% 147/112 80.3
Harbaugh 58.8% 129/117 77.6
Miller 54.6% 123/102 74.9
Majkowski 55.4% 66/67 72.9
Stoffer 51.5% 7/19 54.5
September 17, 2010 at 10:59PM View BBCode
Personally I would certainly say that Marino is a top 10 QB. There are several reasons I'm going to use.1. QBs from different eras often play under different rules. Particularly different are the rules in effect to protect a QB from being hit and the rules allowing a receiver to run down the field. Marino's era was more qb friendly than Layne or Graham but not as much as Brady or Manning.
So I wanted to look at some of Marino's contemporaries. I took the 1983 draft class and the 4 classes on either side of it so 9 years total. Listed all 1st round QBs as well as other significant QBs drafted that year (essentially those who threw for 10K or more in a career). Here they are with the stats you're citing (completion percentage, TD/Int, QB Rate). I would contend that Marino is clearly the class of this group with two exceptions (Montana and Young). Since those two exceptions are often in the conversation for greatest as well, I don't see an issue but it shows that Marino's numbers, compared to his comtemporaries is better than what you're maintaining. Comparing them to Brady and Manning is somewhat akin to comparing the SB totals of Ty Cobb to Jackie Robinson or the Home Run totals of Gavvy Cravath to Babe Ruth or to be more modern, Mike Schmidt to Sammy Sosa
1979 draft
Montana 63.2% 273/139 TD/INT 92.3 Rate
Fuller 56.8% 28/41 70.1
Thompson 53.1% 33/45 63.4
1980 draft
M. Wilson 52.1% 86/102 67.7
Malone 50.9% 60/81 61.9
Hipple 53.7% 55/70 68.7
1981 draft
Lomax 57.6% 136/90 82.7
W. Wilson 57.3% 99/102 75.6
D. Wilson 53% 36/55 63.8
Campbell 45.6% 3/9 38.8
1982 draft
McMahon 58% 100/90 78.2
Pagel 50.1% 49/63 63.3
Schliester 45% 3/11 42.6
1983 draft
Marino 59.4% 420/252 86.4
Elway 56.9% 300/226 79.9
Kelly 60.1% 237/175 84.4
O'Brien 58.6 128/98 80.4
Eason 58.2% 61/51 79.7
Blackledge 48.1 29/38 60.2
1984 draft
Young 64.3% 232/107 96.8
Esiason 57.0% 247/184 81.1
Hostlester 58.0% 94/71 80.5
Schroeder 50.8% 114/108 71.7
1985 draft
Cunningham 56.6% 207/134 81.5
Kosar 59.3% 124/87 81.8
Flutie 54.7% 86/68 76.3
1986 draft
Everett 57.7% 203/175 78.6
Rypien 56.1% 115/88 78.9
Brister 54.6 81/78 72.3
Trudeau 53.1% 42/69 63.3
Long 54.5% 19/28 64.5
Bono 54.9% 62/42 75.3
1987 draft
Testaverde 56.5% 275/267 75.0
Gannon 60.2% 180/104 84.7
Beuerlein 56.9% 147/112 80.3
Harbaugh 58.8% 129/117 77.6
Miller 54.6% 123/102 74.9
Majkowski 55.4% 66/67 72.9
Stoffer 51.5% 7/19 54.5
vurbil
Except one point wasn't that good. Someone said something like everyone's stats are unique? That didn't really make sense. I used the term "uniquely impressive". In that phrase, the word "uniquely" is modifying the word "impressive". It's not saying his stats were unique in the sense you were. Perhaps my wording was awkward. Maybe I should have said "singularly impressive". You basically just twisted my words without getting at anything constructive. Pretty bush league. Ah well, anyway.
The other guys did have some good points, though. I'm still not sure I am 100% convinced, but there is definitely an argument that can be made either way.
[Edited on 9-18-2010 by vurbil]
September 18, 2010 at 05:04AM View BBCode
Interesting points. Perhaps I was mistaken.Except one point wasn't that good. Someone said something like everyone's stats are unique? That didn't really make sense. I used the term "uniquely impressive". In that phrase, the word "uniquely" is modifying the word "impressive". It's not saying his stats were unique in the sense you were. Perhaps my wording was awkward. Maybe I should have said "singularly impressive". You basically just twisted my words without getting at anything constructive. Pretty bush league. Ah well, anyway.
The other guys did have some good points, though. I'm still not sure I am 100% convinced, but there is definitely an argument that can be made either way.
[Edited on 9-18-2010 by vurbil]
tm4559
(and i am anything but a Miami Dolphins fan.)
September 18, 2010 at 02:22PM View BBCode
you were right to idolize marino. he was easily one of the 10 finest quarterbacks that ever put on a uniform. that is enough.(and i am anything but a Miami Dolphins fan.)
tm4559
peyton manning
unitas
marino
brady
montana
baugh
staubach
favre
elway
joe kapp
September 18, 2010 at 02:29PM View BBCode
a top ten, in no particular order.peyton manning
unitas
marino
brady
montana
baugh
staubach
favre
elway
joe kapp
tm4559
September 18, 2010 at 06:02PM View BBCode
it was tough. but they swear baugh was better than kubiak. i wanted to put namath there instead of kapp, but i couldn't bear the ridicule i was going to get.
tm4559
staubach (wow)
aikman (double wow. robot troy aikman was the business)
meredith (the favorite for packers fans)
romo (hah. get a life.)
danny white (white is the number one cowboy quarterback for redskins fans)
morton (colts fans' favorite. he was sent to denver for the express purpose of making the team lose)
clint longley (the nemesis of whoever that team was he beat. i want to think it was washington, but i cannot swear to it.)
jason campbell (yes, he was a double agent)
okay, eight is all i have. maybe roman gabriel, when he was with the rams he might as well have been a cowboy.)
September 18, 2010 at 06:08PM View BBCode
how about a top 10 just for the cowboys?staubach (wow)
aikman (double wow. robot troy aikman was the business)
meredith (the favorite for packers fans)
romo (hah. get a life.)
danny white (white is the number one cowboy quarterback for redskins fans)
morton (colts fans' favorite. he was sent to denver for the express purpose of making the team lose)
clint longley (the nemesis of whoever that team was he beat. i want to think it was washington, but i cannot swear to it.)
jason campbell (yes, he was a double agent)
okay, eight is all i have. maybe roman gabriel, when he was with the rams he might as well have been a cowboy.)
dirtdevil
gary hogeboom (appeared on survivor)
steve beurlein (lost to detroit in the playoffs)
drew bledsoe (made marino look mobile)
drew henson (took up baseball)
steve walsh (played for jimmy johnson in college)
September 18, 2010 at 06:19PM View BBCode
might i also suggest:gary hogeboom (appeared on survivor)
steve beurlein (lost to detroit in the playoffs)
drew bledsoe (made marino look mobile)
drew henson (took up baseball)
steve walsh (played for jimmy johnson in college)
tm4559
September 18, 2010 at 09:30PM View BBCode
hogeboom. i couldn't bring it up. great name though.
tworoosters
Seriously I mean christ almighty his nickname was Whiskey and he put Sonny Jurgenson on the bench .
[Edited on 9-18-2010 by tworoosters]
September 18, 2010 at 09:39PM View BBCode
Kilmer, gotta be on some lists.Seriously I mean christ almighty his nickname was Whiskey and he put Sonny Jurgenson on the bench .
[Edited on 9-18-2010 by tworoosters]