Mile High Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 Article. Marino vs. the QBs of the '90's is a tougher one. Young, Elway and Aikman, one, two, three. I don't think we can get a lot of argument about the first two. Marino was impressive, of course, but I thought that just a tiny bit had slipped from his game. He wasn't quite the QB he'd been a decade earlier, although tough enough, oh my goodness yes. But in Aikman we're talking about a unique player who sacrificed everything for the team concept. You need someone to put something up early and then spend the rest of the day handing the ball off to Emmitt, fine. You need a more modest approach, no problem. Whatever it took. Plus he was simply terrific when the pressure was on him to perform. Also-and this shouldn't really figure into it, but we all know it does -- Marino already had had his decade in which he made this list. Aikman never had. Finally the current quarterbacks. Many would rank Brett Favre No. 1. Thrilling, yes. Could be spectacular. But I just can't get away from those interceptions in big games. Peyton Manning has come on in the last few years, but Tom Brady is the ultimate quarterback for the big moment in the big game, and that's a very seductive recommendation. I know I'm going to get killed by the e-mailers who have managed, or will manage, to get their hooks on this book. Be kind, folks. I really did a lot of work on this thing. Pretty good read..... Long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 Tom Brady is the ultimate quarterback for the big moment in the big game, and that's a very seductive recommendation. I can't help but laugh. 20 yards + a field goal = ULTIMATE QUARTERBACK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mile High Posted October 28, 2005 Author Share Posted October 28, 2005 I can't help but laugh. 20 yards + a field goal = ULTIMATE QUARTERBACK 488532[/snapback] 3 superbowls in four years. 3 superbowls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 3 superbowls in four years. 3 superbowls. 488535[/snapback] Sweet lets start *another* debate about Brady. Aikman did the exact same thing that Brady did. I do not see anybody calling him the "Ultimate Quarterback" or "the greatest ever" or whatever ball sucking people around here do to Brady. Give me one reason why you worship Brady and not Aikman? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnTheRocks Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 Sweet lets start *another* debate about Brady. Aikman did the exact same thing that Brady did. I do not see anybody calling him the "Ultimate Quarterback" or "the greatest ever" or whatever ball sucking people around here do to Brady. Give me one reason why you worship Brady and not Aikman? 488546[/snapback] it is all a matter of what have you done for me lately. Aikman won his Super Bowls in the early 90's...by the time the decade came to a close everyone was licking Brett Favre's balls. Trust me....by the time this decade is over....no one will be saying Brady is the "Ultimate QB" either. However...for the 1st half of this decade....it is hard to argue with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 it is hard to argue with 488551[/snapback] It's not hard to argue with, actually it's rather easy. The problem it's just annoying to argue with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 3 superbowls in four years. 3 superbowls. 488535[/snapback] There were a lot of players on that team that were part of all three Superbowls. By that logic they should all be on the all-decade team. That's where I find problems in this whole "Brady went to three Bowls in 4 years so he must be the best" arguement. In my opinion, the coaching, the defense, and the kicker had far more to do with those championships than Brady did. It's been argued in countless other threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigAL Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 Sweet lets start *another* debate about Brady. Aikman did the exact same thing that Brady did. I do not see anybody calling him the "Ultimate Quarterback" or "the greatest ever" or whatever ball sucking people around here do to Brady. Give me one reason why you worship Brady and not Aikman? 488546[/snapback] Not that I worship either one, but Aikman had Emmit Smith and Micheal Irvin, while Brady has Vinateri. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 There were a lot of players on that team that were part of all three Superbowls. By that logic they should all be on the all-decade team. That's where I find problems in this whole "Brady went to three Bowls in 4 years so he must be the best" arguement. In my opinion, the coaching, the defense, and the kicker had far more to do with those championships than Brady did. It's been argued in countless other threads. 488624[/snapback] NO...it was JUST Brady...by himself, damnit! (OK, maybe Bill B did a little to help.) Brady ran, Brady threw, he blocked for himself and caught his own passes. He played all the positions on special teams and was a DEMON on defense. The reason for the few losses the Pats had the last few years were other people's fault. Brady is down-right Flutie-like. Don't you forget it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortured Soul Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 Sweet lets start *another* debate about Brady. Aikman did the exact same thing that Brady did. I do not see anybody calling him the "Ultimate Quarterback" or "the greatest ever" or whatever ball sucking people around here do to Brady. Give me one reason why you worship Brady and not Aikman? 488546[/snapback] Since I didn't participate in the other Brady thread...differences between Brady and Aikman - Brady has done this all in his first 5 years, and first four as a starter. Aikman was similar, and I'm sure if Brady doesn't win another in the next decade, history will place him alongside Aikman. For now, many pundits, including Dr. Z., probably expect one or two more. All talent and contribution arguements aside, I think that's the big difference right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 it is all a matter of what have you done for me lately. Uh...so that means in ten years Tom Brady won't be one of the greatest QBs ever anymore? I can't wait!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 ...while Brady has Vinateri. 488628[/snapback] and Seymour, and Harrison, and Buschi, and McGinest... ..and of course, seeing as how he sold his soul, Brady had satan himself on his side, so that probably helped also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mile High Posted October 28, 2005 Author Share Posted October 28, 2005 Sweet lets start *another* debate about Brady. Aikman did the exact same thing that Brady did. I do not see anybody calling him the "Ultimate Quarterback" or "the greatest ever" or whatever ball sucking people around here do to Brady. Give me one reason why you worship Brady and not Aikman? 488546[/snapback] I worship Brady? Hardly. Didn't want to start a debate, that wan't my intentions. You're the one who brought it up, not I. It's all about the rings. Not the stats, period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromagnum Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 and Seymour, and Harrison, and Buschi, and McGinest... ..and of course, seeing as how he sold his soul, Brady had satan himself on his side, so that probably helped also. 488778[/snapback] You sound like a typical tortured redsox fan, who are nourished before birth to despise the yankees....Allthough we had $$$$$$$$money discrepancy to bolster our arguments.....And now you want to say brady sold his soul to satan, YOU rtconner who is from the evil empire.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 oh c'mon you can't see the humor in that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zonabb Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 What a ridiculous stance this RTConnor or whatever has taken. You're right, there is no argument to be made. Brady is the best QB in the game right now. WHo has more Super Bowls in the last 10 years? Sure, you can say "well, it's a team, game." But this isn't a team argument, it's a QB argument, so anything relating to his team is null. The bottomline is that decision-making, management and intelligence are what makes him great. He makes the big plays when he needs to, has a knack for limited errors and mistakes and plays intelligently, meaning he knows when to throw our of bounds, take a sack or throw under to a TE. That's what makes him good. Forget the stats, the arm stregnth, the fact that he's a so-called "pretty boy" (not my quote so don't hold me too it), it's the intangibles. See, everyone hates the guy IMO for one simple reason (aside from the fact that we're Bills fans!), he's not a gambling gunslinger. He's cerebral and that goes against the perception of what a QB is and should be. Drew Bledsoe, Jim Kelly, Dan Marino, Peyton Manning, and on and on.... where are their titles? But if I said it once, I've said it a million times. Give me intelligent, studious, passionate, selfless players over stats and rep guys anyway. I'd love someone to prove my hypothesis that NE has the highest either average team IQ or Wonderlic score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 What a ridiculous stance this RTConnor or whatever has taken. You're right, there is no argument to be made. Brady is the best QB in the game right now. WHo has more Super Bowls in the last 10 years? Sure, you can say "well, it's a team, game." But this isn't a team argument, it's a QB argument, so anything relating to his team is null. I'm not the one who brought Emmit, and Irvin into the argument The bottomline is that decision-making, management and intelligence are what makes him great. He makes the big plays when he needs to, has a knack for limited errors and mistakes and plays intelligently, meaning he knows when to throw our of bounds, take a sack or throw under to a TE. That's what makes him good. Forget the stats, the arm stregnth, the fact that he's a so-called "pretty boy" (not my quote so don't hold me too it), it's the intangibles.At least you have a realistc view of the guy. Though I'd argue that he doesn't make big plays when he needs to. He makes small plays, which are just enough to get into field goal range so Vinatieri can kick a game winning field goal. When has he ever made a game winning big play all by himself? See, everyone hates the guy IMO for one simple reason (aside from the fact that we're Bills fans!), he's not a gambling gunslinger. He's cerebral and that goes against the perception of what a QB is and should be. Drew Bledsoe, Jim Kelly, Dan Marino, Peyton Manning, and on and on.... where are their titles?Heck yeah, I'm sicking of watching BILLS fans stick their noses inside of Marsha's butthole. The guy is good, not "the greatest ever", not "the return of the messiah", not "the ultimate quarterback", he's (as many have said before) not even the best QB playing right now. He's just a good qb. I normally wouldn't care one way or the other but this repeated worship of him on this board, in the media and all over the place is just sickening. And as far as that "intelligent, studious, passionate, selfless players" crap, I'll mantain that his success was the product of the system. I'm glad you overrate him so much. I have no doubt that the next few years will prove me right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 Sweet lets start *another* debate about Brady. Aikman did the exact same thing that Brady did. I do not see anybody calling him the "Ultimate Quarterback" or "the greatest ever" or whatever ball sucking people around here do to Brady. Give me one reason why you worship Brady and not Aikman? 488546[/snapback] While both players have the same number of Super Bowl rings, Aikman was surrounded by far better overall talent than Brady. The Cowboys had probably the deepest and best defense in football (at the time, not all-time), the best offensive line in football, and Pro-Bowlers at practically every offensive skill position. They had the NFL's all-time rushing yardage leader in Emmitt Smith. In contrast, Brady won a Super Bowl ring when his starting running back was Antowain Smith. Brady's advantage over Aikman is that he makes decisions faster and gets rid of the ball quicker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 It's not hard to argue with, actually it's rather easy. The problem it's just annoying to argue with. 488571[/snapback] If it's annoying to argue with then why did you bring it up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 Sweet lets start *another* debate about Brady. Aikman did the exact same thing that Brady did. I do not see anybody calling him the "Ultimate Quarterback" or "the greatest ever" or whatever ball sucking people around here do to Brady. Give me one reason why you worship Brady and not Aikman? 488546[/snapback] Aikman had emmitt smith, and the great wall of china blocking for him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts