How come Terry Bradshaw is never brought up in the GOAT argumemt?

[amfootball]

i highly doubt that. Considering you think Ortiz is the most clutch player in history, i question your education of the mlb as a whole

Who are you putting with him or ahead of him? Reggie. Jeter.

[Shane Bond]

Who are you putting with him or ahead of him? Reggie. Jeter.

 

Your NFL knowledge is startling enough, now taking up on MLB?. 

 

Exactly what the DRs ordered on a Monday morning.

[jvan1973]

Who are you putting with him or ahead of him? Reggie. Jeter.

those two plus Pete Rose, Babe Ruth, Mickey Mantle, Roy Campanella. These are just off the top of my head.

There are many pitchers i could name as well

[Shane Bond]

those two plus Pete Rose, Babe Ruth, Mickey Mantle, Roy Campanella. These are just off the top of my head.

There are many pitchers i could name as well

Starts with Mariano

[JerodMayo51]

Bradshaw - 4

Brady - 3

As per your logic, Bradshaw is better.

 

 

Pretty sure Bradshaw's nickname was not "The Steel Curtain."  That Steelers team was stacked with so many hall of famers it was silly, and in an era with no salary cap or free agency, they never had to worry about keeping the team together.

 

Most everyone knows and understands that Brady is better than Bradshaw, but Terry does have 1 more ring... for now...

[Shane Bond]

Pretty sure Bradshaw's nickname was not "The Steel Curtain."  That Steelers team was stacked with so many hall of famers it was silly, and in an era with no salary cap or free agency, they never had to worry about keeping the team together.

 

Most everyone knows and understands that Brady is better than Bradshaw, but Terry does have 1 more ring... for now...

 

Oh now it is all about the team and players.

 

Ironic.

[Moose Of Woe]

Pretty sure Bradshaw's nickname was not "The Steel Curtain."  That Steelers team was stacked with so many hall of famers it was silly, and in an era with no salary cap or free agency, they never had to worry about keeping the team together.

 

I'm pretty sure Brady's nickname isn't, "That Bill Belichick coached defense". 

 

Wilfork, Ty Law, Rodney H, Teddy B, Willie Mcginist, Richard Seymour, Asante Samuel......

 

What a bunch of bums!

 

Seriously. That's not even all of the great to good players they had.

[amfootball]

those two plus Pete Rose, Babe Ruth, Mickey Mantle, Roy Campanella. These are just off the top of my head.

There are many pitchers i could name as well

I was not talking pitchers. That is a whole other can of wax.

 

I would put Ortiz right alongside those players and ahead of many of them.

[amfootball]

Your NFL knowledge is startling enough, now taking up on MLB?. 

 

Exactly what the DRs ordered on a Monday morning.

And yet you are my number one fan up here.

[TAPLOOK]

And yet you are my number one fan up here.

 

I thought he was my #1 fan?

[No 1 Manning Fan]

Pretty sure Bradshaw's nickname was not "The Steel Curtain." That Steelers team was stacked with so many hall of famers it was silly, and in an era with no salary cap or free agency, they never had to worry about keeping the team together.

Most everyone knows and understands that Brady is better than Bradshaw, but Terry does have 1 more ring... for now...

I think you just made his point. You have to give as much credit to the defense as you do the offense. You can't base one person's personal greatness spelt on the number of rings he has.

[Shane Bond]

I thought he was my #1 fan?

Amf beats you by her sheer knowledge quotient

[JerodMayo51]

I think you just made his point. You have to give as much credit to the defense as you do the offense. You can't base one person's personal greatness spelt on the number of rings he has.

 

Yea but you can use them as a barometer of success when you factor in the Quarterback's contribution to those Championships.  Brady wasn't sitting on the sidelines, he was putting together game winning drives in playoff games and Super Bowls with a bunch of average to maybe above average (in Branch's case) receivers, Jermaine Wiggins at Tight End and Antwain Smith at RB.  

 

You're right though, the Pats defense was really great in those years as well and came up big in some big games.  The defense was a huge part of those Championship runs, but what good is a defense when you don't have a QB that can get it done in crunch time when all bets are off and lead a game winning offensive drive?  

 

Building a team with a strong defense and an elite QB at the helm has proven to be a pretty good formula for success.  If you start to stack more towards the offensive side of the ball for higher point totals, you have to take from the defense.

 

 At the end of the day, you need a balance of offense and defense to win in this league, with special teams sprinkled in as well... but you also need a captain of the ship, a franchise QB that can lead in big games late in the season and throughout the gauntlet that is the playoff tournament.

[Moose Of Woe]

 The defense was a huge part of those Championship runs, but what good is a defense when you don't have a QB that can get it done in crunch time when all bets are off and lead a game winning offensive drive?  

 

Ask Trent Dilfer.

Or Ken Stabler.

Or Jim Plunkett.

Or Brad Johnson.

Or Joe Namath.

Or Jeff Hostetler.

Or Roethlisberger. Twice. (Good, not great QB)

Or  Bradshaw. Four times. (Good, not great QB)

 

To name a few.

 

The defense carried all of them. You could put just about any halfway decent (or in some cases, below average) QBs on those teams and win it all.

 

Whoop de do at a game winning drive when the other team can't drive on your defense for most/all of a game. Not to mention the D often getting points directly if not great field position for your offense.

[The Old Crow]

Jordan no, Johnson yes. Even without rings, LeBron did more to effect the rest of his team than Johnson. Better scorer, just about equal as a ball handler. The number of championships have no bearing in my mind. Karl Malone and Charles Barkley are still the best power forward I have ever seen and never won a championship.

Was Joe DiMaggio truly better than Ted Williams because he had more championships? His teams certainly were, no doubt, but is that really a knock on Williams' greatness?

I am not going to dishonor someone's reputation when his Herculean efforts have gone I rewarded because his team couldn't hold up its part. These are team games. They're not boxing or MMA. Those are one on one sports and winning the title is the only way to be ranked number 1.

I honestly don't know why Terry isn't brought up more often. He seems to have been a great QB in a run and defense dominated league. But I won't say he's the greatest because he has 4 rings. I'm not sure he was better than Tarkenton who has zero. I think Montana was great, but I honestly don't know if he was better than Marino. Bart Starr had a ton of championships, and I've never heard anyone argue that he was better than Unitas. Granted Unitas had 3 titles, but not nearly as many as Starr's 5.

I think too many people get hung up on team accomplishments when talking about individual greatness.

As I said earlier, if you add the Championships to the other relevant stats, you get a better picture of GOAT. It's hard to pick a player in any sport as the GOAT if he has never won a Championship, because that is the defining moment in most of the greats careers. Bradshaw could be a top 10 guy, but his other stats are poor, but the 4 Super Bowls are very impressive.

[GoColts8818]

Because rings measure teams not individual players. He's the poster child for this. Don't get me wrong really good QB, Hall of Fame QB. Greatest ever? Steeler fans would have a hard time agreeing to that.

[TAPLOOK]

Ask Trent Dilfer.

Or Ken Stabler.

Or Jim Plunkett.

Or Brad Johnson.

Or Joe Namath.

Or Jeff Hostetler.

Or Roethlisberger. Twice. (Good, not great QB)

Or  Bradshaw. Four times. (Good, not great QB)

 

To name a few.

 

The defense carried all of them. You could put just about any halfway decent (or in some cases, below average) QBs on those teams and win it all.

 

Whoop de do at a game winning drive when the other team can't drive on your defense for most/all of a game. Not to mention the D often getting points directly if not great field position for your offense.

Bad list

[No 1 Manning Fan]

I want to know why we even get caught up in this kind of argument. There is NO greatest of all-time! You cannot compare players from different eras. It is hard enough to compare players from the same era. Without playing with the exact same team around them in the same circumstances, it is impossible to make a qualitative comparison.

Can we really compare Sammy Baugh to modern QBs? We have no idea how he would fare in today's NFL, and we have no idea how today's greats would have done back then.

We can talk about who has the best stats, but that can be misleading. We can talk about the number rings, but that is the product of a whole team. There is no definitive answer. So I fail to see why so many people are getting so hot under the collar.

[Moose Of Woe]

Bad list

 

Ken Stabler: Oakland:32        Vikings: 14

Trent Dilfer: Ravens 34           Giants: 7

Jim Plunkett:  LA Raiders 38      Redskins: 9            ALSO   Oakland Raiders: 27   Eagles: 10

Brad Johnson: Raiders:  21  Tampa Bay: 48

Joe Namath: Jets 16            Colts 7  

Jeff Hostetler Giants 20 Bills 19

Roethlisberger and Bradshaw need no explanation of the Steeler's defense. We see now what Ben is doing without such a defense. (Or an O-line)

 

All of those QB's were/are good to below average - none of them great, and the primary reason they all won those SBs was having their D play lights out most of the way sans Brad Johnson. (Who had a great D up until the SB with Tampa Bay, where it still let up only 21)

 

Manning and Brady had great defenses in their combined four playoff championship runs as well, but they've consistently excelled at their position regardless of how well their defense plays.

[Yehoodi]

I want to know why we even get caught up in this kind of argument. There is NO greatest of all-time! You cannot compare players from different eras. It is hard enough to compare players from the same era. Without playing with the exact same team around them in the same circumstances, it is impossible to make a qualitative comparison.

Can we really compare Sammy Baugh to modern QBs? We have no idea how he would fare in today's NFL, and we have no idea how today's greats would have done back then.

We can talk about who has the best stats, but that can be misleading. We can talk about the number rings, but that is the product of a whole team. There is no definitive answer. So I fail to see why so many people are getting so hot under the collar.

 

I hear ya . . . but we are humans and like to discuss things . . . I guess is how things go . . .

 

but regarding this thread I am glad that someone started it as I do not think Bradshaw gets enough credit . .. so ya it might be a tired subject as to who, if possible, is #1 overall, it is refreshing and nice to have a conversation if we think Bradshaw should have a seat at the table of candidates . . .

[TAPLOOK]

As I said earlier, if you add the Championships to the other relevant stats, you get a better picture of GOAT. It's hard to pick a player in any sport as the GOAT if he has never won a Championship, because that is the defining moment in most of the greats careers. Bradshaw could be a top 10 guy, but his other stats are poor, but the 4 Super Bowls are very impressive.

Dilfer, Johnson and Hostetler I'll agree. The rest are a huge stretch.