Top 5 Quaterbacks ever?

Oh wow really? why do you think he's overrated?

OU, I didn't say rings make you better than everyone that doesn't have rings. All I'm saying if someone is to be considered top 5 of all time he has to have at least 1 ring. Numbers mean nothing without winning.

freakzilla wrote:

OU, I didn't say rings make you better than everyone that doesn't have rings. All I'm saying if someone is to be considered top 5 of all time he has to have at least 1 ring. Numbers mean nothing without winning.

Not going to the superbowl has absolutely no bearing on the worth and measure of a single player on an NFL team. This isn't the NBA where one elite player can take an average team to a championship. Barry Sanders never even got close to a lombardi trophy and he's arguably the best running back to ever put on pads(second only to Emmett Smith and Walter Payton in yardage even though he played 5 and 7 years less than they did).

Measuring QB's by superbowl rings is like measuring singular hockey players on stanley cups. It's definitely a nice thing to have in the discussion but it doesn't necessarily mean anything. Just look at Jim Kelly. Dude goes to four straight, let Me repeat, four straight superbowls. We're talking a regular season record of 49-15 over those four seasons. Not only did the Bills lose every one of those superbowls, but got pretty much demolished in three out of four. Would I rank Jim Kelly in My top 30 all time? Absolutely not. There are current QB's other than Brady and Manning I would rank far ahead of Kelly all time.

The reason(s) Manning is in discussions as possibly the best ever isn't because he has a superbowl ring. His performance over the last fourteen years collectively surpasses "how many rings does he have?". Not all superbowls are created equal.

Manning can never be considered the best after choking in the playoffs time and time again with teams that had the best regular season record.

Quarterback is possibly the only position in football where I can agree with team success being of any relevance when ranking positions.   If you want to rank the Top 5 NFL Passers, that's fine, but Quarterback is a leadership and decision-making position every bit as much as it is a 'throw the football' position.

Troy Aikman is a first ballot hall of fame inductee and one of 23 only QB's inducted in the modern era (dating back to the 40's).  Jim Kelly is too.  Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but there are a lot of people who get paid to voice their opinion who clearly hold team success (in the case of above average quarterbacks) in some degree of regard.

Edit: Typo

I agree. Quarterback is way more important than any other position by far.

freakzilla wrote:

Manning can never be considered the best after choking in the playoffs time and time again with teams that had the best regular season record.

That first round bye has been known to be more of a curse than a blessing.

in how many games did manning personally choke freak? last year for example, manning didn't choke, if anyone 'choked' it was rahim moore.

the colts just got done by the better team on all but one or two occasions. QB's just get more credit than they deserve win their team wins and more blame than they deserve when they lose.

It's honestly how you structure a team that determines how important the QB is. What role he is supposed to play versus what role he actually plays in your offensive scheme means alot here.

Trent Dilfer won a superbowl on an offense that was middle of the pack in scoring that year. It just so happens he had a monster style running game(think today's 49ers but more physical) and was supposed to manage the game. Dilfer wasn't a great QB. He wasn't overly fast, or strong, or accurate, but he took care of the ball (think Alex Smith without all the scrambling) and let the run game do it's thing. Between Dilfer and the other QB that year they threw 20 TD's and 19 INT's.

Depending on the team/offensive scheme the quarterback is not the most important part of a team.

cheekynffc wrote:

in how many games did manning personally choke freak? last year for example, manning didn't choke, if anyone 'choked' it was rahim moore.

the colts just got done by the better team on all but one or two occasions. QB's just get more credit than they deserve win their team wins and more blame than they deserve when they lose.

Pretty much the only game I remember Manning "choking" was the Jets in 2002 where he had like 171 yards and no points.

Ludo wrote:

cheekynffc wrote:

in how many games did manning personally choke freak? last year for example, manning didn't choke, if anyone 'choked' it was rahim moore.

the colts just got done by the better team on all but one or two occasions. QB's just get more credit than they deserve win their team wins and more blame than they deserve when they lose.

Pretty much the only game I remember Manning "choking" was the Jets in 2002 where he had like 171 yards and no points.

i can't think of a superbowl champion off the top of my head that did it only on the strength of their QB's arm.

even brees' saints and rodgers packers had defenses that produced a hell of a lot of turnovers, even if they weren't that good statistically.

Besides Manning, Brady and Rodgers do you see any other current QB being a top 10 QB by the time they retire? Andrew Luck? Drew Brees?

freakzilla wrote:

Besides Manning, Brady and Rodgers do you see any other current QB being a top 10 QB by the time they retire? Andrew Luck? Drew Brees?

Rodgers isn't top ten all time, not even close.

Ludo wrote:

freakzilla wrote:

Besides Manning, Brady and Rodgers do you see any other current QB being a top 10 QB by the time they retire? Andrew Luck? Drew Brees?

Rodgers isn't top ten all time, not even close.

I didn't mean he's top 10 right now but I think he will be when it's all said and done.

freakzilla wrote:

Ludo wrote:

freakzilla wrote:

Besides Manning, Brady and Rodgers do you see any other current QB being a top 10 QB by the time they retire? Andrew Luck? Drew Brees?

Rodgers isn't top ten all time, not even close.

I didn't mean he's top 10 right now but I think he will be when it's all said and done.

Hard to say. I'm seeing Rodgers possibly having durability issues in the next few years and it could hurt his legacy. He's definitely one of the best in the league right now and might go down as a great, but it's more likely that Brees goes in that top ten list before Rodgers. Rodgers has already spent eight seasons in the league, unfortunately for him he rode the bench for three of them. He's going to have to produce a ton in the next five to six years or so, assuming he plays that long, to catch a top ten spot.

At their best in a single season who would you take?

A) Aaron Rodgers
B) Brett Favre

freakzilla wrote:

At their best in a single season who would you take?

A) Aaron Rodgers
B) Brett Favre

Who's receivers? Favre's best receivers(Sharpe, Freeman, young Driver) or Rodgers' best(Nelson, more experienced Driver, and Jennings)? Also, who's getting handoffs(Ahman Greene or Ryan Grant)?

I meant playing with the same cast. Let's say the current Superbowl teams. If you were the coach of either Denver or Seattle and you had to replace your QB with either Rodgers or Favre at their peak which QB would you take?

freakzilla wrote:

I meant playing with the same cast. Let's say the current Superbowl teams. If you were the coach of either Denver or Seattle and you had to replace your QB with either Rodgers or Favre at their peak which QB would you take?

Gotta roll with Favre. If he had the kind of receiving core Manning is working with this year it'd be absolute fireworks. Rodgers would also produce huge numbers, but Favre at his best was ridiculous. He's not the only player to win league MVP three years in a row for nothing.

Wow, I didn't see much of him but from the way Stephan A Smith talks it's as if Rodgers is way better.

i think rodgers is a more efficient QB than favre was and may very well end up with more superbowl titles.

there haven't been many who were more fun to watch than favre though. watching him throw a 40 yard bullet completion into triple coverage with a defensive tackle hanging off his back was a thing of beauty.

freakzilla wrote:

Wow, I didn't see much of him but from the way Stephan A Smith talks it's as if Rodgers is way better.

Rodgers is definitely a great quarterback, no doubt about it. But Favre did his thing and he did it for a long long time on three different teams with very different receiving cores and still made things happen. He was what you might call a master of improv without the kind of legs guys like Vick or Kaepernick or Tarkenton had. He didn't miss a single start for 16+ straight seasons even with a broken thumb on his throwing hand or when his father passed away the night before he played the Raiders on Monday Night Football and threw five touchdown passes.

I don't think Aaron Rodgers is any better then Drew Brees, who has been elite for longer.

Honestly I feel like Roethelisberger has a better chance at being a top ten all time quarterback than Rodgers does. I'm not even sure Rodgers is a first ballot hall of fame candidate just yet. Brees is most likely a first ballot guy due to his consistency since leaving San Diego, also his story gives him a boost. Other than Brady, Manning, Roethelisberger, and Brees, and possibly Stafford(this is a bit of a stretch I know) I'm not seeing any candidates right now for top ten guys playing right now.

I consider Aaron to be a much much better QB then Ben. I think Aaron still has a chance to put himself among the greats. The guy has plenty of time and talent to move up the ranks.