Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Peyton Manning - Where does he rank now all time? « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3

RedAlert

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4657
Offline
#30 : February 06, 2007, 03:13:29 PM


For my money, if you ask me who I want QB-ing my team thru the post-season. It's Montana-Brady-Aikman, in no particular order. Aikman didn't have the gaudy numbers of Marino or Manning, but he was as money in the clutch as any QB. The rings don't lie.

I guess it all comes down to what your own personal criteria is for the greatest QB, but to say Aikman will never make the conversation is pretty short-sighted..

He clearly did not follow Staubach directly, not saying that. But Roger had all the charisma and led the team to great heights with an All time coach in Laundry. He is Dallas' great qb. Aikman falls in comparison to Staubach - hard to get to one of the best of all time when he is #2 at his club. Aikman played with a great team build by Johnson and others that has had issues and stories about conduct, failures and successes. When you look at his individual stats he just does't get there like the others.

Montana-Brady-Aikman misses a lot of qbs as well. Folks like Elway, Farve, Unitas, Peyton and Archie Manning, Tarkington, man the list can go on forever. Montana and Brady were machines. Aikman and his group had a lot of success, but some real failures as well. Lot of issues in that team that have come out over the years as well. Good that off the field issues don't keep folks out of the HOF.

Aikman get some consideration due to the number of rings, but he doesn't have the numbers. Brady doesn't belong there yet maybe - but he will get there bc he gets it done and has the numbers, especially in the big games. Like you said - a lot of way to look at it, but other than rings Troy Aikman doesn't get there.

It's apparent that you value statistics over titles, and that makes sense because Marino will always be considered a better QB than the likes of SB winners Mark Rypien, Jim McMahon, Trent Dilfer, Jeff Hostetler... etc.

But I prefer what my eyes behold over what numbers indicate. Although I have been blessed enough to have seen Montana, Aikman, Elway, Favre and Marino all play in person, I've also been witness to QB flotsam like Dieter Brock, Hugh Millen, Eric Hipple and the like. So I can honestly say that numbers don't tell the whole story, at least not in my perspective..

BTW, when I was in Dallas on Thanksgiving, I saw many more #8 jerseys than I did #12's...





tampabayfan

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1925
Offline
#31 : February 06, 2007, 03:48:14 PM

Right now the only qbs that I would put above Manning are Favre, Marino, Elway and Montana.  Thats right now. I think in the end he ends in the top 2. 

OpTiOnMaStA

*
Practice Squad

Posts : 0
Offline
#32 : February 06, 2007, 04:53:30 PM

Although I do think that he is currently top two in the NFL, I still don't consider him a winner. I see him, still, as more of the Dan Marino I have all the stats but never won type of guy. Yes, he has won a Super Bowl and I realize that but I still can't see him as the "winner" like Tom Brady or Montana.

I think Montana is the best QB of all time. Right after him I would put Brady, Marino, Elway, Manning, Favre. Manning will surpass Marino, however, but I don't think he will ever surpass Brady.

Pick6

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 5150
Offline
#33 : February 06, 2007, 05:00:19 PM

Although I do think that he is currently top two in the NFL, I still don't consider him a winner. I see him, still, as more of the Dan Marino I have all the stats but never won type of guy. Yes, he has won a Super Bowl and I realize that but I still can't see him as the "winner" like Tom Brady or Montana.

I think Montana is the best QB of all time. Right after him I would put Brady, Marino, Elway, Manning, Favre. Manning will surpass Marino, however, but I don't think he will ever surpass Brady.

i dunno, i think he's lost fewer regular season games in the last 4 seasons than the bucs did this year alone. and he's come back to win games in spectacular fashion.  i know this is becoming a mantra for me, but 11 out of 12 teams finish the playoffs losing.  it's pretty steep stuff to call a guy a loser because he isn't consistently on the good side of that 8% chance of not losing in the playoffs or the 3% chance of being part of the last team standing in the league....

besides, his legacy is still being built, who knows what next postseason holds?

dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46214
Offline
#34 : February 06, 2007, 06:19:38 PM


For my money, if you ask me who I want QB-ing my team thru the post-season. It's Montana-Brady-Aikman, in no particular order. Aikman didn't have the gaudy numbers of Marino or Manning, but he was as money in the clutch as any QB. The rings don't lie.

I guess it all comes down to what your own personal criteria is for the greatest QB, but to say Aikman will never make the conversation is pretty short-sighted..

He clearly did not follow Staubach directly, not saying that. But Roger had all the charisma and led the team to great heights with an All time coach in Laundry. He is Dallas' great qb. Aikman falls in comparison to Staubach - hard to get to one of the best of all time when he is #2 at his club. Aikman played with a great team build by Johnson and others that has had issues and stories about conduct, failures and successes. When you look at his individual stats he just does't get there like the others.

Montana-Brady-Aikman misses a lot of qbs as well. Folks like Elway, Farve, Unitas, Peyton and Archie Manning, Tarkington, man the list can go on forever. Montana and Brady were machines. Aikman and his group had a lot of success, but some real failures as well. Lot of issues in that team that have come out over the years as well. Good that off the field issues don't keep folks out of the HOF.

Aikman get some consideration due to the number of rings, but he doesn't have the numbers. Brady doesn't belong there yet maybe - but he will get there bc he gets it done and has the numbers, especially in the big games. Like you said - a lot of way to look at it, but other than rings Troy Aikman doesn't get there.

It's apparent that you value statistics over titles, and that makes sense because Marino will always be considered a better QB than the likes of SB winners Mark Rypien, Jim McMahon, Trent Dilfer, Jeff Hostetler... etc.

But I prefer what my eyes behold over what numbers indicate. Although I have been blessed enough to have seen Montana, Aikman, Elway, Favre and Marino all play in person, I've also been witness to QB flotsam like Dieter Brock, Hugh Millen, Eric Hipple and the like. So I can honestly say that numbers don't tell the whole story, at least not in my perspective..

BTW, when I was in Dallas on Thanksgiving, I saw many more #8 jerseys than I did #12's...

Flotsam is a great word for that crew, and I agree that numbers don't do it all - especially with the way the game has changed over the years.  Best I ever saw live was Marino - for a pure qb.  Best leader I ever saw was Unitas - not live - on TV.  Most overrated (and I am a reformed Steeler fan) was Bradshaw.  It is interesting to note the number of rings on his hand - kinda like keeping Marino at the top without one.  Bradshaw was one tough SOB, but without the rings no HOF in sight.  It is funny how things work out. 

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

RedAlert

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4657
Offline
#35 : February 06, 2007, 06:42:14 PM


Flotsam is a great word for that crew, and I agree that numbers don't do it all - especially with the way the game has changed over the years. Best I ever saw live was Marino - for a pure qb. Best leader I ever saw was Unitas - not live - on TV. Most overrated (and I am a reformed Steeler fan) was Bradshaw. It is interesting to note the number of rings on his hand - kinda like keeping Marino at the top without one. Bradshaw was one tough SOB, but without the rings no HOF in sight. It is funny how things work out.


Yea, I noticed no one had mentioned Bradshaw. But I agree, those Steeler teams of the 70's were so dominant on both sides of the ball, replace Bradshaw with Mike Phipps (haha) and you'd still win a couple SB's at least. But Bradshaw was a good fit on those teams, toughness and personality-wise..

Side note: When I was a little kid, my cousin and I used to play catch with Gerry Mullins in his parent's front yard..





JavaBuc

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 28661
Offline
#36 : February 06, 2007, 07:48:54 PM

I don't think the Steelers would have won any superbowls without Bradshaw.   He was good.   Sure, the rest of the team was awesome, but there was a drastic difference in that team when Bradshaw played rather than another QB.   I remember that game where Bradshaw was hurt with a shoulder injury so he wasn't playing.   The Steelers could hardly get a first down with Mark Malone at QB.   They were getting killed.   In the 3rd quarter, Noll decided to try Bradshaw even though he was hurt.   Bradshaw came in and threw TD after TD, it was a totally different game.

OpTiOnMaStA

*
Practice Squad

Posts : 0
Offline
#37 : February 06, 2007, 08:37:30 PM

Although I do think that he is currently top two in the NFL, I still don't consider him a winner. I see him, still, as more of the Dan Marino I have all the stats but never won type of guy. Yes, he has won a Super Bowl and I realize that but I still can't see him as the "winner" like Tom Brady or Montana.

I think Montana is the best QB of all time. Right after him I would put Brady, Marino, Elway, Manning, Favre. Manning will surpass Marino, however, but I don't think he will ever surpass Brady.

i dunno, i think he's lost fewer regular season games in the last 4 seasons than the bucs did this year alone. and he's come back to win games in spectacular fashion.  i know this is becoming a mantra for me, but 11 out of 12 teams finish the playoffs losing.  it's pretty steep stuff to call a guy a loser because he isn't consistently on the good side of that 8% chance of not losing in the playoffs or the 3% chance of being part of the last team standing in the league....

besides, his legacy is still being built, who knows what next postseason holds?

You are correct on all counts. I was referring to postseason play, not regular season. He clearly dominates the regular season. There is no way anybody could dispute that. And who knows, perhaps he will win more Super Bowls than any QB to play. I doubt it, though, which is the point of my first post.
Page: 1 2 3
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Peyton Manning - Where does he rank now all time? « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools