Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Great read from Brad Oremland: NFL top 100 QBs of all time


Recommended Posts

I don't know anyone who views the W-L record like that. Anyone watching the game understands the QB does not control everything but his influence is greater than any other player in any other team sport and most factors into a team winning. Like I said, it is one factor of many when judging a QB.

 

 

So Aaron Rogers plays a nice clean game . Only throws for 180 but GB goes conservative with the big lead. He gets a loss credited to his " win loss category." Wilson throws 4 ints , sacked 5 times , completes less than 50% for 209 yards. Much of that was vs a prevent and an overtime that should have never happened. He's credited with a 'win?" 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 167
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

because it doesnt have anything to do with peyton, I was just comparing his stats to prove the other poster wrong. if you wanna compare, peyton doesnt get blamed for his playoff loses. theres always an excuse. dalton gets thrown into the frying pan

Don't you think it's too early to compare Dalton to Peyton?.

Peyton has 12 playoffs victories and has been to 3 SBs and won 1 and how is that a playoffs failure?.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't you think it's too early to compare Dalton to Peyton?.

Peyton has 12 playoffs victories and has been to 3 SBs and won 1 and how is that a playoffs failure?.

Shane, there's always going to be some that knock Peyton, no matter what he's accomplished, or continues to acconplish, for some it is not enough. And that's okay, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

My opinion is that he's the greatest I've ever had the pleasure of watching, and I'm good with that opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shane, there's always going to be some that knock Peyton, no matter what he's accomplished, or continues to acconplish, for some it is not enough. And that's okay, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

My opinion is that he's the greatest I've ever had the pleasure of watching, and I'm good with that opinion.

Class act on and off the field.

 

People don't understand the pressure he endures. He was a rich kid growing up. He really didn't have any hardship. He wasn't drafted at 20th round to use that as a motivation. He just has the hunger within. He was expected to perform before his draft. He was thrown as a starter in his rookie year. He was number 1 draft pick. He made Indianapolis, the city it is today. And he delivered and continue to deliver.

 

He is the only player I have spent 100s of dollars and my time for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Class act on and off the field.

People don't understand the pressure he endures. He was a rich kid growing up. He really didn't have any hardship. He wasn't drafted at 20th round to use that as a motivation. He just has the hunger within. He was expected to perform before his draft. He was thrown as a starter in his rookie year. He was number 1 draft pick. He made Indianapolis, the city it is today. And he delivered and continue to deliver.

He is the only player I have spent 100s of dollars and my time for.

You don't have to convince me. I'm on your side. :hello:

Link to post
Share on other sites

So Aaron Rogers plays a nice clean game . Only throws for 180 but GB goes conservative with the big lead. He gets a loss credited to his " win loss category." Wilson throws 4 ints , sacked 5 times , completes less than 50% for 209 yards. Much of that was vs a prevent and an overtime that should have never happened. He's credited with a 'win?" 

I think you can always look at one off games like that but I think we both know that GB is a 10+ win team every year because of Rodgers so in that respect I think his win/loss record is reflective of just how good of a QB he really is.

 

But again my argument was more based on influence over the game. We both know that if Rodgers converts TDs on those first three possessions (2 of which came from turnovers) then GB blows out the Hawks. So while him getting a loss for playing Ok is not accurate his influence over the game is such that a better performance would have yielded a win. That is how much influence his play has over the outcome. That is not separate of course from the rest of the team as we know that no win or loss in football is ever 100 percent on the QB but he controls more of the game than any other position in all of sports. So W-L for QBs is never going away IMO nor should it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So Aaron Rogers plays a nice clean game . Only throws for 180 but GB goes conservative with the big lead. He gets a loss credited to his " win loss category." Wilson throws 4 ints , sacked 5 times , completes less than 50% for 209 yards. Much of that was vs a prevent and an overtime that should have never happened. He's credited with a 'win?" 

Also, I believe it was John Fox a couple of years ago who said that in order to win in the post-season you need your best players to play the best. So while Rodgers had a nice, clean game, the Packers needed him to be better to win. They needed him to perform like the best player on the field that he is. This is the part about QBs leading their teams to championships that put them on the list of the greatest of all time or best of their era. Being able to channel your best football in the biggest moments. That is what separates the great from the greatest IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't you think it's too early to compare Dalton to Peyton?.

Peyton has 12 playoffs victories and has been to 3 SBs and won 1 and how is that a playoffs failure?.

 

9 one and dones

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I believe it was John Fox a couple of years ago who said that in order to win in the post-season you need your best players to play the best. So while Rodgers had a nice, clean game, the Packers needed him to be better to win. They needed him to perform like the best player on the field that he is. This is the part about QBs leading their teams to championships that put them on the list of the greatest of all time or best of their era. Being able to channel your best football in the biggest moments. That is what separates the great from the greatest IMO.

Thats a great quote. But it is not all encompassing. Sometimes you need EVERYONE to play their best to win. You can't have mental lapses that put your star behind the 8 ball. You can't make blunders that win your star takes you down the field with a winning drive then give up a hail mary (I think you of all people can appreciate that). There is only so much one player can do to help his team win a game. If you drag in a mediocre team into the playoffs its hard to expect to win it all. I mean Lebron James just played the greatest finals I've personally ever seen (although there have been some other great finals I haven't) and they still lost. I think Tom actually played as well if not better in his loses in the SB as he did in the wins....minus maybe the Carolina and this recent one. Sometimes your coaches make bad adjustments...play calls and decisions....and sometimes when your team isn't playing well you try to do too much and it just builds on itself. I think for the most part to win a championship you need all your players or at least a great deal of them to make plays when called on...but yes certainly your stars have to do a bulk of the load. Tom played terrific but if Butler plays like a rookie and doesn't remember what Bill told him about that formation...well the Pats still lose....most of the time you need guys to step up and make a play when they need you. You need stars to set the tone...to LEAD...but you need your teammates to make the plays when they are asked to....to make a catch...to make a tackle...to make a fg. World Champions......its plural for a reason....because it takes a team. I know you know that....I'm not going to pretend that if Peyton had played better in some of his games we couldn't have won more....but for the most part...I think he has played well enough to win multiple titles...but he hasn't always had his team put it all together.

 

That all said....I think there is a TON more interesting things about the list than just what some people want to turn it into.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I believe it was John Fox a couple of years ago who said that in order to win in the post-season you need your best players to play the best. So while Rodgers had a nice, clean game, the Packers needed him to be better to win. They needed him to perform like the best player on the field that he is. This is the part about QBs leading their teams to championships that put them on the list of the greatest of all time or best of their era. Being able to channel your best football in the biggest moments. That is what separates the great from the greatest IMO.

 

 

Rodgers played very well considering he did it on one leg. Not sure if he needed to be better if Bostic blocks on the onside kick like he was instructed to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh my goodness. It's part of the game. You win and you lose. That's sports.

You just completely ignored all the wins I listed in playoffs.

If you don't like him, just say it. If not, explain this wins.

 

again I will repeat myself. this has nothing to do with peyton. I was comparing stats to make a point

Link to post
Share on other sites

again I will repeat myself. this has nothing to do with peyton. I was comparing stats to make a point

I get what you're saying, and I understand the comparisons with the playoffs.

More than a few differences when comparing those two.

Although the Bengals continue to at least make it to the playoffs with Andy. (Notice I said the team makes it) they've failed to win a playoff with him yet. Also, he's anything but consistent in the regular season, and Peyton's one of the best and most consistent there.

But once again, I get the playoff comment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I get what you're saying, and I understand the comparisons with the playoffs.

More than a few differences when comparing those two.

Although the Bengals continue to at least make it to the playoffs with Andy. (Notice I said the team makes it) they've failed to win a playoff with him yet. Also, he's anything but consistent in the regular season, and Peyton's one of the best and most consistent there.

But once again, I get the playoff comment.

 

in no way am I saying dalton is comparable to peyton. peyton is one of the greatest. I was answering a poster that said dalton doesnt put up good stats and hes wrong 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rodgers played very well considering he did it on one leg. Not sure if he needed to be better if Bostic blocks on the onside kick like he was instructed to do.

His stats were 19 for 34 for 178 with 1 TD and 2 picks. I would not call that playing well even with the injury. And he had several short fields courtesy of his defense getting him 5 turnovers. Really the GB defense is the one that played lights out until the final few minutes. Had Rogers been able to convert some of the short fields into TDs than the game is a blow out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rodgers played very well considering he did it on one leg. Not sure if he needed to be better if Bostic blocks on the onside kick like he was instructed to do.

Agree. Anyone who thinks he's not the best in the game right now is biased. There are a lot of great players on this list, and while he hasn't had enough years in yet to put him up at the top overall, there is no doubt, right now, in the here and now, amongst those still playing he's at the top.

And that is what this thread was about. Viewing these guys as indivdual players.... Aaron is at the top of his game right now, and it's really unfortunate that he had that injury at the end of the season last year. I felt certain they were headed to the SB.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This all goes back to what I said and ya'll are exemplifying it whether you admit it or not. Playoff wins (well all wins and losses) have to be taken in context. Sometimes the quarterback wins the game, sometimes he loses it. Other wins and losses are more team oriented.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This all goes back to what I said and ya'll are exemplifying it whether you admit it or not. Playoff wins (well all wins and losses) have to be taken in context. Sometimes the quarterback wins the game, sometimes he loses it. Other wins and losses are more team oriented.

All wins and losses are team oriented.  It's a team sport.  And, yet I get what you're saying about the QB.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This all goes back to what I said and ya'll are exemplifying it whether you admit it or not. Playoff wins (well all wins and losses) have to be taken in context. Sometimes the quarterback wins the game, sometimes he loses it. Other wins and losses are more team oriented.

I think it goes deeper than this BC. We all understand that if you make the playoffs then you are playing very good teams each and every game. There are no walk overs so to speak so the play of the QB gets magnified even more so. Can he harness his best football against the very best teams is always the question. If you had told me heading into the NFCCG last year that Rodgers would throw for under 200 yards have a TD and 2 picks, I would have said that is not nearly good enough to beat the defending champs on the road.

 

Also, it was Rodgers who said this two years when asked about legacy:

"I really believe that you earn your paycheck during the season," Rodgers told Bob Costas. "[You] play at a high level and get your team to the playoffs. And then the postseason is all about creating your legacy. The great quarterbacks are remembered for their playoff successes and triumphs and Super Bowl championships and Super Bowl MVPs. We've got one here, and we want to add to that."

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/52037/packers-49ers-ii-legacy-of-aaron-rodgers

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I guess by certain logic....... Eli was the better QB..??

I think when determining a greatest list, everything comes into play - stats, wins, regular season, post-season, era played in, coaching, teammates, etc. For whatever reason this writer does not to weigh in the post-season much at all which is how he comes to his conclusions and that is fine as that is his opinion but also makes his list incomplete and lopsided IMO. Post-season play in the players minds is paramount as that is why you play the game to win the SB. So when do any ranking of the absolute greatest it is critical that this part of a player's career enter the discussion and be weighted accordingly. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think when determining a greatest list, everything comes into play - stats, wins, regular season, post-season, era played in, coaching, teammates, etc. For whatever reason this writer does not to weigh in the post-season much at all which is how he comes to his conclusions and that is fine as that is his opinion but also makes his list incomplete and lopsided IMO. Post-season play in the players minds is paramount as that is why you play the game to win the SB. So when do any ranking of the absolute greatest it is critical that this part of a player's career enter the discussion and be weighted accordingly.

This writer has weighed in post season. Like you said, it was just one of the parameters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are moments when a QB makes an amazing play that you can't believe.  Years later, it is just a stat but if you saw it in person, you knew it was incredible.  I think the writer nailed it by saying Manning is the best he's ever seen and it's situations like I am talking about that display his greatness.  If you are going to make a list, this one is a good one.  You simply cannot judge a QB solely on Super Bowls or championships.  I'm a Johnny Unitas fan.  He had his share of championships, but I don't judge him by that.  I judged him by the same characteristics that the writer did.  How he managed a game.  Peyton is the same. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to have watched the games. I'm sure that writer is a smart guy. He also seems way less annoying than your typical sportswriter but...yeah.

Stats shmats. We'll never have them down to a science or a math problem that applies to every era.

I've watched everybody since the late 80s. Guys like Rodgers and Brady wish they could win a game like Peyton did on MNF agaist TB, Favre on MNF against SF, etc. That's what puts them above the rest, and not necessarily because I put all the weight there. If you stack everything up alongside each other, that stack is missing from Rodgers, Brady, Romo etc.

Before am has a spazfit yes I know Brady had that comeback win against Peyton in 2013. That's just not up there with the comebacks that a prime Peyton, Favre, and Montana ripped out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

His stats were 19 for 34 for 178 with 1 TD and 2 picks. I would not call that playing well even with the injury. And he had several short fields courtesy of his defense getting him 5 turnovers. Really the GB defense is the one that played lights out until the final few minutes. Had Rogers been able to convert some of the short fields into TDs than the game is a blow out.

Would you consider 16/27 145 yards and one td a championship performance?

Link to post
Share on other sites

His stats were 19 for 34 for 178 with 1 TD and 2 picks. I would not call that playing well even with the injury. And he had several short fields courtesy of his defense getting him 5 turnovers. Really the GB defense is the one that played lights out until the final few minutes. Had Rogers been able to convert some of the short fields into TDs than the game is a blow out.

 

Certainly way more impressive playing on 1 leg vs the Seattle defense at almost "full strength" when compared to what WR did. Point is RW got the W and Rodgers the L.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Certainly way more impressive playing on 1 leg vs the Seattle defense at almost "full strength" when compared to what WR did. Point is RW got the W and Rodgers the L.

I am not sure why you are calling his performance impressive. It was not at all. But if you want to give him a pass for being injured Ok. But he looked a lot more hampered by his calf vs Dallas than vs Seattle and as you said, the Seattle secondary was injured for the fourth quarter and he still did not take advantage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to have watched the games. I'm sure that writer is a smart guy. He also seems way less annoying than your typical sportswriter but...yeah.

Stats shmats. We'll never have them down to a science or a math problem that applies to every era.

I've watched everybody since the late 80s. Guys like Rodgers and Brady wish they could win a game like Peyton did on MNF agaist TB, Favre on MNF against SF, etc. That's what puts them above the rest, and not necessarily because I put all the weight there. If you stack everything up alongside each other, that stack is missing from Rodgers, Brady, Romo etc.

Before am has a spazfit yes I know Brady had that comeback win against Peyton in 2013. That's just not up there with the comebacks that a prime Peyton, Favre, and Montana ripped out.

Some players just have magic. Favre played some games that you just the couldn't explain. Manning routinely had games like his infamous 15min Miami game in which everyone tried their hardest to lose that game but Manning and the offense refused to give. I don't think I've ever seen a QB be more effecient with his time than Manning in that game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, an unbiased informed opinion would be great, but that's a higher standard that you originally asked for. No matter...

 

The truth is that it doesn't take a peer reviewed study to figure what kind of coach Jim Caldwell was with the Colts. I don't dislike him and wasn't part of the group that wanted him run out of town, but it's not hard to look at his body of work and determine that he was below average as a head coach. You scoff at the timeout criticism, but that speaks to his poor game management, and there are other examples. There's no reason to be dismissive of the opinion of Colts fans with regard to Jim Caldwell (and isn't Bloody Champ a Packers fan??), as if they don't know what they're talking about.

 

Most importantly, he spent two years as an assistant, working for a really well run organization and a well respected and successful head coach. Just because he was bad in Indy doesn't mean he's doomed to be bad forevermore. It stands to reason that he's a better coach now than he was three years ago, and there are plenty of guys about whom we could say that. 

 

In the context of this thread, it seems like a waste to spend more than 30 seconds on Jim Caldwell. If the question is whether he's even comparable to Belichick, we all know the answer to that.

 

fair enough, we are just going to have to have a difference of opinion on Coach Caldwell.  Not sure you can ask for more than 14-0 and being in the SB down by 7 points late in the 4th qtr, but that is me.   There are not many teams, players or coaches that are on teams that are that close to the end of the season.  And for me that is a testament to coach, players and certainly the subject player of this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you know that you are downplaying Bill's influence and success. That's why you referred to those guys as first rounders. Jamarcus Russell, Christian Ponder and many other guys were first rounders. They're not in the HoF with all those guys not drafted in the 1st, or at all (yes there are undrafted HoF quarterbacks).

 

I am not downplaying Bill's success, I have said many times that he did well in Cleveland given where the team was prior to him coming to the team.  At the same time I will not say that his QBs have been average, that is my only point.  We can still praise BB's success at the same time as saying that is QB were not average.  Also, Bernie Kosar and Vinny T. has success outside of BB so there are not like the QBs you quoted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

fair enough, we are just going to have to have a difference of opinion on Coach Caldwell.  Not sure you can ask for more than 14-0 and being in the SB down by 7 points late in the 4th qtr, but that is me.   There are not many teams, players or coaches that are on teams that are that close to the end of the season.  And for me that is a testament to coach, players and certainly the subject player of this thread.

 

And yet, agreed or not, in comparison to Bill Belichick, there's nothing to talk about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet, agreed or not, in comparison to Bill Belichick, there's nothing to talk about.

 

Yes agree with you 100%, to date BB is a better coach imo than Coach Caldwell.  And I would rather have BB than Caldwell.   It will be fun to see how Caldwell does in Detroit and he can write his own legacy good or bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not downplaying Bill's success, I have said many times that he did well in Cleveland given where the team was prior to him coming to the team. At the same time I will not say that his QBs have been average, that is my only point. We can still praise BB's success at the same time as saying that is QB were not average. Also, Bernie Kosar and Vinny T. has success outside of BB so there are not like the QBs you quoted.

I mentioned that Bernie was in his postprime. He had no success elsewhere in that period and those old Browns teams were stacked anyway. And Vinny really :-|

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...