Cowboys Release TO (1 Viewer)

[Avery]

I wonder if the 6-time champion Steelers might take a look. I know they're not known for bringing malcontents or ego trips into the locker room, but I think Silverback and Hines along with Tomlin might be able to keep him in check. He'd be playing for a contender with a top-3 QB and a coach who's about the same age as he is. The 6-time chamion Steelers' WR corps would be lethal with Ward, Owens, and Holmes.. provided Owens would be willing to sign a 1 or 2 year incentive-laden deal with a low base salary.

Ben is a "top-3 QB"?!

Yep.

Peyton ManningBrees

Brady

Cutler

Rodgers

Which three of these five would you choose Ben over?

Brees, Cutler, Rodgers, without even the slightest hesitation. Brees puts up great #s but throws 8,000 times a year. Let's not forget, he was so awesome the Chargers let him walk for Philip Rivers. Cutler and Rodgers... please.

Real football <> fantasy football.

I am aware of that although this is a fantasy football website so we often discuss things in fantasy terms. Regardless of "real" or "fantasy", there would be some hesitation to easily put Ben as the #3 QB behind Manning and Brady for those that don't see the world through black and gold colored glasses.

I don't know, that game winning drive in the SB sure puts him close.

I wouldn't have put him close before the Superbowl but now I think it's a legitimate discussion.However...

legitimate discussion <> without even the slightest hesitation

 

[PewterFan]

I'm betting on New York Giants, Oakland, New England, Minnesota or Seattle as his next stop.

There are probably only a couple of landing spots for him, that include crazy money and idiots that think he'll help...OAK, MIN come to mind.

Just WOW.

Childress testifies that, as contrasted with the first year of their relationship, Owens was incommunicative. From the first time they met in training camp that second year, he says, he was met “with nothing, no response, just kind of a straight-ahead stare.? Childress continued to greet the Player for some seven or eight nights until Owens, at one point, said: “Why do you talk to me? I don’t talk to you. You don’t talk to me. There’s no reason for you to talk to me."

Thanks for putting that on the table BJ®.

TO sure burn bridges like no other in the league.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

I wonder if the 6-time champion Steelers might take a look. I know they're not known for bringing malcontents or ego trips into the locker room, but I think Silverback and Hines along with Tomlin might be able to keep him in check. He'd be playing for a contender with a top-3 QB and a coach who's about the same age as he is. The 6-time chamion Steelers' WR corps would be lethal with Ward, Owens, and Holmes.. provided Owens would be willing to sign a 1 or 2 year incentive-laden deal with a low base salary.

Ben is a "top-3 QB"?!

Yep.

Peyton ManningBrees

Brady

Cutler

Rodgers

Which three of these five would you choose Ben over?

Brees, Cutler, Rodgers, without even the slightest hesitation. Brees puts up great #s but throws 8,000 times a year. Let's not forget, he was so awesome the Chargers let him walk for Philip Rivers. Cutler and Rodgers... please.

Real football <> fantasy football.

I am aware of that although this is a fantasy football website so we often discuss things in fantasy terms. Regardless of "real" or "fantasy", there would be some hesitation to easily put Ben as the #3 QB behind Manning and Brady for those that don't see the world through black and gold colored glasses.

I don't know, that game winning drive in the SB sure puts him close.

I wouldn't have put him close before the Superbowl but now I think it's a legitimate discussion.However...

legitimate discussion <> without even the slightest hesitation

Put it this way : The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.

How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

 

[Avery]

Put it this way : The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

I get it.You love the Steelers.You love Ben.You wouldn't want any other QB over him and that feeling furhter leads you to believe that every NFL franchise would likely feel the same.Heard.I like Ben. He's fun to root for and I respect him as an NFL QB much more after his Superbowl performance. Having said that, having a QB who has a pension for running around like it's backlot football looking for the open guy isn't a good fit for every team.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

"While rumors fly about where Terrell Owens will land next, rest assured he will play for the Eagles again before he plays in San Diego on a team put together by A.J. Smith." -- Kevin Acee

Sounds about right.

 

[Trey]

I wonder if the 6-time champion Steelers might take a look. I know they're not known for bringing malcontents or ego trips into the locker room, but I think Silverback and Hines along with Tomlin might be able to keep him in check. He'd be playing for a contender with a top-3 QB and a coach who's about the same age as he is. The 6-time chamion Steelers' WR corps would be lethal with Ward, Owens, and Holmes.. provided Owens would be willing to sign a 1 or 2 year incentive-laden deal with a low base salary.

Ben is a "top-3 QB"?!

Yep.

Peyton ManningBrees

Brady

Cutler

Rodgers

Which three of these five would you choose Ben over?

Brees, Cutler, Rodgers, without even the slightest hesitation. Brees puts up great #s but throws 8,000 times a year. Let's not forget, he was so awesome the Chargers let him walk for Philip Rivers. Cutler and Rodgers... please.

Real football <> fantasy football.

I am aware of that although this is a fantasy football website so we often discuss things in fantasy terms. Regardless of "real" or "fantasy", there would be some hesitation to easily put Ben as the #3 QB behind Manning and Brady for those that don't see the world through black and gold colored glasses.

I don't know, that game winning drive in the SB sure puts him close.

I wouldn't have put him close before the Superbowl but now I think it's a legitimate discussion.However...

legitimate discussion <> without even the slightest hesitation

Put it this way : The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.

How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

 

[Tony Jabroni]

Without reading through 8 pages, is there any early speculation as to where he would land?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/03/05/the-anti-to-list/

THE ANTI-T.O. LIST

As we’re doing with Mike Vick, we’ll be keeping a running tally of all of the teams that have said ”thanks” followed immediately by “no thanks” to the possibility of signing receiver Terrell Owens.

Please note that this only reflects teams that already have said that they’re not interested:

The Dallas Cowboys. (Duh.)

The New York Giants.

The Washington Redskins.

The Baltimore Ravens.

The San Francisco 49ers.

The Minnesota Vikings.

The Atlanta Falcons.

The Cleveland Browns.

The San Diego Chargers.

The Philadelphia Eagles.

The New York Jets.

The Tennessee Titans.

The St. Louis Rams.

Here are the teams that likely will join the list soon:

The Miami Dolphins.

 

[Sonny Lubick Blowup Doll]

im not Dal fan but i cant belive or understand there move to cut T.O.

he maybe not "quiet" or team player.. but when he is on the field he give his most effort to win .

he have the skills

he bring results

he draw the D rival attention

he made to Romo.. not easy to find WR to pair ur QB

and after all that.. who do the Cowboys think can replace him? Roy.W? not as number 1 thats for sure . who left with big skills (at least as much as T.O.) in the market? and they dont have alot of draft pick after they gave ALOT to Det.. so what now?

i think the sun of owners drive him crazy.. coz the owner loved him

ashame.. it was fun to see the Cowboys the last 2 years.. whether they won or lost

He wasn't the whole problem for sure. I think this move is more about moving to a different style of Offense and to take away some of the media hype/interest for this club. Perhaps half the problem was...to use your own words......It was fun to see the Cowboys. Perhaps it's time for it's NOT fun to see the Cowboys. Running the ball, playing good defense and being about nothing but WINNING football games.I can dream can't I?

Hey Bankerguy. I'm on record as saying he wouldn't be released, and this move definitely surprised me. I still don't think it makes much sense

I think I'll stop there too. REALLY?You honestly think it doesn't make sense? How exactly, does it not make sense? They've decided to go with the Wittens (team), for example, and delete the Pacmans (individuals/cancers).

Now, I have no problem with people not agreeing with it, that's one thing, but I don't get how people don't "understand" the move. It's plain as day, and makes perfect sense.

yep, im from Israel & english is our second lan.second, i dont "understand" their move -from my point of view and be honest-without him they have less chance (on paper) getting into the SB .

TE dont win games, no matter its the No.1 fantasy TE in FFL .

yeah... the team "won" but they dont also lost when T.O upgrade their Off., made them No.1 in the NFC last year, made them ALOT of money from the media cover and merchendise (and MONEY count to the owners and the NFL organization the most - even like winning da championship ring) and alot more .

Bill Parcell- yeah he build organizations.. even bring them to the playoff.. but what then? nothing . what was the last time he got to the finals ?

the 5 best WR's now in the NFL (in any order) : Moss, Fitz, Wayne, T.O, Steve Smith

and i mean now- not in 1 or 2 years .

u can say TJ Hosh - but we need to wait see his stat without Palmer, or Plaxico or Marshall- sometimes arrested- sometimes not, M.Colston- was inj. (after 1 year wonder?), Ocho Sinco- maybe after a trade to good team with QB.. and so on- although C.Johnson (Det- without QB for now) and R.White (Atl) looks great .

p.s.

here is a good move from the Cowboys- they release Roy.W the S that wasnt good for them and cost also alot for nothing .

 

[FavreCo]

Without reading through 8 pages, is there any early speculation as to where he would land?

Basically teams are lining up.......to state that they have no interest in signing TO.

 

[foxco]

Without reading through 8 pages, is there any early speculation as to where he would land?

Basically teams are lining up.......to state that they have no interest in signing TO.

This is awesome.

 

[Kowskull]

Carolina would be the place i could see TO getting a ring. Awesome running game, across from Steve Smith. Decent QB with Jake Decent Defense.

 

[Sonny Lubick Blowup Doll]

im not Dal fan but i cant belive or understand there move to cut T.O.

he maybe not "quiet" or team player.. but when he is on the field he give his most effort to win .

he have the skills

he bring results

he draw the D rival attention

he made to Romo.. not easy to find WR to pair ur QB

and after all that.. who do the Cowboys think can replace him? Roy.W? not as number 1 thats for sure . who left with big skills (at least as much as T.O.) in the market? and they dont have alot of draft pick after they gave ALOT to Det.. so what now?

i think the sun of owners drive him crazy.. coz the owner loved him

ashame.. it was fun to see the Cowboys the last 2 years.. whether they won or lost

He wasn't the whole problem for sure. I think this move is more about moving to a different style of Offense and to take away some of the media hype/interest for this club. Perhaps half the problem was...to use your own words......It was fun to see the Cowboys. Perhaps it's time for it's NOT fun to see the Cowboys. Running the ball, playing good defense and being about nothing but WINNING football games.I can dream can't I?

Hey Bankerguy. I'm on record as saying he wouldn't be released, and this move definitely surprised me. I still don't think it makes much sense

I think I'll stop there too. REALLY?You honestly think it doesn't make sense? How exactly, does it not make sense? They've decided to go with the Wittens (team), for example, and delete the Pacmans (individuals/cancers).

Now, I have no problem with people not agreeing with it, that's one thing, but I don't get how people don't "understand" the move. It's plain as day, and makes perfect sense.

You are such a one trick pony. I do "get it", but it sucks.Oh and I guess Ratliffe is a cancer too then?

Davis Smoak....

I just spoke with Cowboys nose tackle Jay Ratliff, and here’s what he said about the release of Terrell Owens.

I also recorded our interview and that will air today at 4:34pm on KTBB.

Meanwhile, here are some quotes from our conversation that I thought you’d be interested in reading.

Smoaky: What is your reaction to T.O.’s release?

Ratliff: “Wow, I’m shocked, wow…I’m just sitting here and I just don’t know, I just don’t know.”

Smoaky: When did you learn about this, last night, this morning?

Ratliff: “He sent me a text last night telling me he was no longer a Dallas Cowboys, and I thought he just wanted to talk and was joking, but we talked and he was very shocked, so am I, and we’re just surprised by it, this was like in boxing—a rabbit punch from out of nowhere.” Ratliff continued, “He will be fine, he’s a competitor, no one wants to win like he does, and the only thing you can blame him for is wanting to win, and so I guess you can blame me for that too.”

Smoaky: What do you think was the overall reason behind this decision?

Ratliff: “I don’t know, I never understood all the hype and controversy about him being a distraction, because he’s been a great teammate, at least from my experience.” Ratliff continued, “I guess he’s the fall guy, I just don’t understand it, and I don’t know what else to say.”

Smoaky: If he was a great teammate to you or even others, could this create more divisiveness in the locker room?

Ratliff: “I sure hope not, we all—those of us left most move forward regardless of what we think of this decision, and figure out a way to come together and be a team,” Ratliff continued, “no matter how talented we are, if there’s no chemistry or trust within that locker room, it affects us on the field, we must be one, as I told you earlier this week, we must find a way to all become one.”

David Smoak

This is great. You spent time digging up a quote from TO's only friend to make your point? Let's review...

You say the move doesn't make sense.

I say it does make sense. Oh you may not agree with it, fine, but to say it makes no sense would mean there is no point in it, at all. Well, obviously there is. And Dallas is not the only team that thinks it's best to just show him the door. That's as good of evidence as any...like it or not.

Okay, so hopefully we're good on that little matter...

Now, can you tell me why what some nose tackle thinks or says is important in all of this?

 

[BassNBrew]

Carolina would be the place i could see TO getting a ring. Awesome running game, across from Steve Smith. Decent QB with Jake Decent Defense.

a) No cap room with Peppers being tagged.b) Panthers ownership would never have him. Heck, you get the boot from the stadium for cheering too loud or taking off your shirt.c) Steve Smith is a better WR.

 

[the branded hand]

Maybe TO just needs Parcells' foot in his ### for him to perform without the drama queen antics...

 

[Raider Nation]

From respected scribe Rick Gosselin:

Terrell Owens has the statistics to gain enshrinement in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. But at his position, the numbers are no longer the ticket. Art Monk had the statistics. He retired after the 1993 season as the NFL's all-time leader in receptions with 940. But he wasn't elected until his eighth year of eligibility in his eighth year as a finalist. And he had three Super Bowl rings.

Terrell Owens has none. Owens is tied for sixth all-time with Andre Reed with 951 receptions. Reed played in four Super Bowls and went to more Pro Bowls (seven) than Owens (six). Reed retired after the 2000 season and has been a finalist three times. But he's still waiting for his Canton call.

Cris Carter retired as the NFL's second all-time leading receiver with 1,101 catches. He's been a finalist twice without gaining enshrinement. Bob Hayes changed the game with his speed. He waited 29 years to get the call. Tommy McDonald waited 25 years, Lynn Swann 14.

There are only 16 modern era (since 1960) wide receivers in the Hall of Fame. Jerry Rice will be the 17th when he becomes eligible in 2010. But there are no guarantees for any other wide receivers, and that includes Owens.

http://nflblog.dallasnews.com/archives/200...antees-for.html

 

[obxlegends]

From respected scribe Rick Gosselin:

Terrell Owens has the statistics to gain enshrinement in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. But at his position, the numbers are no longer the ticket. Art Monk had the statistics. He retired after the 1993 season as the NFL's all-time leader in receptions with 940. But he wasn't elected until his eighth year of eligibility in his eighth year as a finalist. And he had three Super Bowl rings.

Terrell Owens has none. Owens is tied for sixth all-time with Andre Reed with 951 receptions. Reed played in four Super Bowls and went to more Pro Bowls (seven) than Owens (six). Reed retired after the 2000 season and has been a finalist three times. But he's still waiting for his Canton call.

Cris Carter retired as the NFL's second all-time leading receiver with 1,101 catches. He's been a finalist twice without gaining enshrinement. Bob Hayes changed the game with his speed. He waited 29 years to get the call. Tommy McDonald waited 25 years, Lynn Swann 14.

The problem is we're in a pass happy era where catches just aren't a big deal anymore. Up to the 1980's there were only 2 or 3 guys who had ever caught 100 passes in a season. Now there are over 50.Touchdowns is another story. Owens is 4th ALL TIME in TD's. Not just for WR's, but of everyone who's EVER played the game.

He may be a jerk. You may hate him, but he'll be a 1st ballot HOF'er!

 

[FUBAR]

From respected scribe Rick Gosselin:

Terrell Owens has the statistics to gain enshrinement in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. But at his position, the numbers are no longer the ticket. Art Monk had the statistics. He retired after the 1993 season as the NFL's all-time leader in receptions with 940. But he wasn't elected until his eighth year of eligibility in his eighth year as a finalist. And he had three Super Bowl rings.

Terrell Owens has none. Owens is tied for sixth all-time with Andre Reed with 951 receptions. Reed played in four Super Bowls and went to more Pro Bowls (seven) than Owens (six). Reed retired after the 2000 season and has been a finalist three times. But he's still waiting for his Canton call.

Cris Carter retired as the NFL's second all-time leading receiver with 1,101 catches. He's been a finalist twice without gaining enshrinement. Bob Hayes changed the game with his speed. He waited 29 years to get the call. Tommy McDonald waited 25 years, Lynn Swann 14.

The problem is we're in a pass happy era where catches just aren't a big deal anymore. Up to the 1980's there were only 2 or 3 guys who had ever caught 100 passes in a season. Now there are over 50.Touchdowns is another story. Owens is 4th ALL TIME in TD's. Not just for WR's, but of everyone who's EVER played the game.

He may be a jerk. You may hate him, but he'll be a 1st ballot HOF'er!

So because we now play in an era where more WRs are getting more receptions, TO will get in the HOF over past great WRs with more receptions who played in an era where WRs didn't get many receptions?

 

[obxlegends]

So because we now play in an era where more WRs are getting more receptions, TO will get in the HOF over past great WRs with more receptions who played in an era where WRs didn't get many receptions?

I'm saying receptions alone aren't an indicator of how great a WR is like they use to be. Touchdowns are a better indicator.Either way TO still has the receptions. I figure he'll end up Top 2 to 3 before his career is done.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Put it this way : The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

I get it.You love the Steelers.You love Ben.You wouldn't want any other QB over him and that feeling furhter leads you to believe that every NFL franchise would likely feel the same.Heard.I like Ben. He's fun to root for and I respect him as an NFL QB much more after his Superbowl performance. Having said that, having a QB who has a pension for running around like it's backlot football looking for the open guy isn't a good fit for every team.

I do love Ben, but I still think Peyton and Brady are better, so no, it's not true that I wouldn't want any QB over him. Short of those two, I wouldn't though. I do believe every NFL franchise would feel similarly - in the hypothetical I gave above, I don't know how many teams would turn down an even swap of starting QBs.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Put it this way :

The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.

How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

Ben is what, 6 years younger and has already had a better postseason career (statistically, even, not just winning/losing.) It's not absurd to think that Indy would consider that trade. Hell, there are some on this board that would tell you they'd take it.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Put it this way : The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

I get it.You love the Steelers.You love Ben.You wouldn't want any other QB over him and that feeling furhter leads you to believe that every NFL franchise would likely feel the same.Heard.I like Ben. He's fun to root for and I respect him as an NFL QB much more after his Superbowl performance. Having said that, having a QB who has a pension for running around like it's backlot football looking for the open guy isn't a good fit for every team.

I do love Ben, but I still think Peyton and Brady are better, so no, it's not true that I wouldn't want any QB over him. Short of those two, I wouldn't though. I do believe every NFL franchise would feel similarly - in the hypothetical I gave above, I don't know how many teams would turn down an even swap of starting QBs.

This is the most ridiculous fishing trip in the pool in weeks.

 

[Maroney=Sped]

Put it this way :

The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.

How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

I get it.You love the Steelers.

You love Ben.

You wouldn't want any other QB over him and that feeling furhter leads you to believe that every NFL franchise would likely feel the same.

Heard.

I like Ben. He's fun to root for and I respect him as an NFL QB much more after his Superbowl performance. Having said that, having a QB who has a pension for running around like it's backlot football looking for the open guy isn't a good fit for every team.

Does he get French benefits?

 

[puckalicious]

So because we now play in an era where more WRs are getting more receptions, TO will get in the HOF over past great WRs with more receptions who played in an era where WRs didn't get many receptions?

I'm saying receptions alone aren't an indicator of how great a WR is like they use to be. Touchdowns are a better indicator.Either way TO still has the receptions. I figure he'll end up Top 2 to 3 before his career is done.

Not to mention he will easily end up #2 or #3 in receiving yards. His only competition for #2 at this point is Moss, heck TO will probably be #2 after this season (I'm assuming he plays and gets 822 more yards than Bruce).

 

[Dexter Manley]

Put it this way :

The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.

How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

Ben is what, 6 years younger and has already had a better postseason career (statistically, even, not just winning/losing.) It's not absurd to think that Indy would consider that trade. Hell, there are some on this board that would tell you they'd take it.

 

[PewterFan]

Ben is what, 6 years younger and has already had a better postseason career (statistically, even, not just winning/losing.) It's not absurd to think that Indy would consider that trade. Hell, there are some on this board that would tell you they'd take it.

Yeah, other Steelers fan. Big Ben wasn't the chief reason the Steelers won the Superbowls. He surely helped, but wasn't the main reason. It was a healthy combination of their defense, FWP and refs that won them those rings. As an unbiased fan, I see that.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Put it this way : The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

I get it.You love the Steelers.You love Ben.You wouldn't want any other QB over him and that feeling furhter leads you to believe that every NFL franchise would likely feel the same.Heard.I like Ben. He's fun to root for and I respect him as an NFL QB much more after his Superbowl performance. Having said that, having a QB who has a pension for running around like it's backlot football looking for the open guy isn't a good fit for every team.

I do love Ben, but I still think Peyton and Brady are better, so no, it's not true that I wouldn't want any QB over him. Short of those two, I wouldn't though. I do believe every NFL franchise would feel similarly - in the hypothetical I gave above, I don't know how many teams would turn down an even swap of starting QBs.

This is the most ridiculous fishing trip in the pool in weeks.

I notice people keep saying this, but then not backing it up. If you were an NFL GM, who would you rather have as your franchise QB right now before Ben (other than Manning or Brady)? You want a stat-hound who's never won anything like Brees, Romo, Palmer, Cutler, Rivers, McNabb, or Rodgers? A 37-year old Warner? A "too soon to tell" guy like Flacco or Ryan? An inconsistent guy like Eli?

 

[SuperJohn96]

Isn't he always good for one year?

Make him a decent offer on a 1 year deal with a 2nd year team option. If he acts up, you can drop him after 1 year, but he always seems to be on good behaviour for one season.

It should be a team that is a Super Bowl contender that needs a WR.

I think TEN or SD (previously mentioned). Maybe Pacman's issues keep TEN out of the mix, but the have a vet QB, so that might help for one season.

MIN would fit the bill as being close and needing a real #1 WR, but his past with Childress, and the lack of a strong Vet QB presence takes them out IMO.

Hmm, maybe the Bears could handle him for a year...

But I think the Chargers or Titans might be the best bets.

So of course he'll go to the Skins or Raiders where it will be a big mistake...LOL

 

[Ghost Rider]

He may be a jerk. You may hate him, but he'll be a 1st ballot HOF'er!

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Put it this way :

The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.

How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

Ben is what, 6 years younger and has already had a better postseason career (statistically, even, not just winning/losing.) It's not absurd to think that Indy would consider that trade. Hell, there are some on this board that would tell you they'd take it.

Laugh all you want, but it's true. I myself said I think Manning is better, but there are people (and not just fans of the 6-time champion Steelers) that have said they'd rather have Ben.

 

[Wu-banger]

Put it this way :

The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.

How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

Ben is what, 6 years younger and has already had a better postseason career (statistically, even, not just winning/losing.) It's not absurd to think that Indy would consider that trade. Hell, there are some on this board that would tell you they'd take it.

Laugh all you want, but it's true. I myself said I think Manning is better, but there are people (and not just fans of the 6-time champion Steelers) that have said they'd rather have Ben.

.....and they all have a name that starts with an "R" and ends in "berger".No way anyone in Indy would even considering sending Manning away.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Ben is what, 6 years younger and has already had a better postseason career (statistically, even, not just winning/losing.) It's not absurd to think that Indy would consider that trade. Hell, there are some on this board that would tell you they'd take it.

Yeah, other Steelers fan. Big Ben wasn't the chief reason the Steelers won the Superbowls. He surely helped, but wasn't the main reason. It was a healthy combination of their defense, FWP and refs that won them those rings. As an unbiased fan, I see that.

You're right. He had almost nothing to do with winning the Super Bowl this year. Parker ran amok on Arizona and Ben rode his coattails. He also didn't carry the team through the AFC playoffs leading up to XL as a second-year pro (110 QB rating through 3 games.)

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Put it this way :

The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.

How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

Ben is what, 6 years younger and has already had a better postseason career (statistically, even, not just winning/losing.) It's not absurd to think that Indy would consider that trade. Hell, there are some on this board that would tell you they'd take it.

Laugh all you want, but it's true. I myself said I think Manning is better, but there are people (and not just fans of the 6-time champion Steelers) that have said they'd rather have Ben.

.....and they all have a name that starts with an "R" and ends in "berger".No way anyone in Indy would even considering sending Manning away.

I wouldn't either. I'm just saying, some have said they might. Probably because Ben is 8-2 in the playoffs to Manning's 7-8 and has twice as many rings in less than half the appearances (and a higher passer rating to boot.)

 

[Wu-banger]

Put it this way :

The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.

How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

Ben is what, 6 years younger and has already had a better postseason career (statistically, even, not just winning/losing.) It's not absurd to think that Indy would consider that trade. Hell, there are some on this board that would tell you they'd take it.

Laugh all you want, but it's true. I myself said I think Manning is better, but there are people (and not just fans of the 6-time champion Steelers) that have said they'd rather have Ben.

.....and they all have a name that starts with an "R" and ends in "berger".No way anyone in Indy would even considering sending Manning away.

I wouldn't either. I'm just saying, some have said they might. Probably because Ben is 8-2 in the playoffs to Manning's 7-8 and has twice as many rings in less than half the appearances (and a higher passer rating to boot.)

LOL ... Ben never had to carry an entire team's offense while having one of the worst defenses in the league...Change the exact situations and Ben would not even have the ONE ring with the Colts.

Personaly I like Ben better ... fan wise etc... but no way he is close to Manning in playiing QB.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Put it this way : The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

I get it.You love the Steelers.You love Ben.You wouldn't want any other QB over him and that feeling furhter leads you to believe that every NFL franchise would likely feel the same.Heard.I like Ben. He's fun to root for and I respect him as an NFL QB much more after his Superbowl performance. Having said that, having a QB who has a pension for running around like it's backlot football looking for the open guy isn't a good fit for every team.

I do love Ben, but I still think Peyton and Brady are better, so no, it's not true that I wouldn't want any QB over him. Short of those two, I wouldn't though. I do believe every NFL franchise would feel similarly - in the hypothetical I gave above, I don't know how many teams would turn down an even swap of starting QBs.

This is the most ridiculous fishing trip in the pool in weeks.

I notice people keep saying this, but then not backing it up. If you were an NFL GM, who would you rather have as your franchise QB right now before Ben (other than Manning or Brady)? You want a stat-hound who's never won anything like Brees, Romo, Palmer, Cutler, Rivers, McNabb, or Rodgers? A 37-year old Warner? A "too soon to tell" guy like Flacco or Ryan? An inconsistent guy like Eli?

What's to back up? Brees, Romo, Palmer, Cutler, Rivers, McNabb, Warner, Rodgers, Brad Johnson, Jeff Garcia, Chad Pennington and Rex Grossman all could have won two superbowls on those Pittsburgh teams. Roethlesberger is good, I'd love to have him in Minnesota, but he's not as good as you think he is. It is laughable that you discount Drew Brees as someone who has won nothing, when Roethlesberger will never be able to achieve what he does for a passing game. You're being silly.

 

[Phase of the Game]

He may be a jerk. You may hate him, but he'll be a 1st ballot HOF'er!

 

[Chase Stuart]

From respected scribe Rick Gosselin:

Terrell Owens has the statistics to gain enshrinement in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. But at his position, the numbers are no longer the ticket. Art Monk had the statistics. He retired after the 1993 season as the NFL's all-time leader in receptions with 940. But he wasn't elected until his eighth year of eligibility in his eighth year as a finalist. And he had three Super Bowl rings.

Terrell Owens has none. Owens is tied for sixth all-time with Andre Reed with 951 receptions. Reed played in four Super Bowls and went to more Pro Bowls (seven) than Owens (six). Reed retired after the 2000 season and has been a finalist three times. But he's still waiting for his Canton call.

Cris Carter retired as the NFL's second all-time leading receiver with 1,101 catches. He's been a finalist twice without gaining enshrinement. Bob Hayes changed the game with his speed. He waited 29 years to get the call. Tommy McDonald waited 25 years, Lynn Swann 14.

There are only 16 modern era (since 1960) wide receivers in the Hall of Fame. Jerry Rice will be the 17th when he becomes eligible in 2010. But there are no guarantees for any other wide receivers, and that includes Owens.

http://nflblog.dallasnews.com/archives/200...antees-for.html

He may be a respected scribe, but he's off his rocker if he thinks Owens' numbers don't merit first ballot inclusion. Reed, Monk and even Carter were no Owens. And at Lynn Swann waiting 14 years. The only one Gosselin forgot was Charlie Joiner.

He's right about McDonald, though, no reason he should have waited 25 years. He was one of the top WRs in pre-merger history.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Put it this way :

The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.

How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

I get it.You love the Steelers.

You love Ben.

You wouldn't want any other QB over him and that feeling furhter leads you to believe that every NFL franchise would likely feel the same.

Heard.

I like Ben. He's fun to root for and I respect him as an NFL QB much more after his Superbowl performance. Having said that, having a QB who has a pension for running around like it's backlot football looking for the open guy isn't a good fit for every team.

I do love Ben, but I still think Peyton and Brady are better, so no, it's not true that I wouldn't want any QB over him. Short of those two, I wouldn't though. I do believe every NFL franchise would feel similarly - in the hypothetical I gave above, I don't know how many teams would turn down an even swap of starting QBs.

This is the most ridiculous fishing trip in the pool in weeks.

I notice people keep saying this, but then not backing it up. If you were an NFL GM, who would you rather have as your franchise QB right now before Ben (other than Manning or Brady)? You want a stat-hound who's never won anything like Brees, Romo, Palmer, Cutler, Rivers, McNabb, or Rodgers? A 37-year old Warner? A "too soon to tell" guy like Flacco or Ryan? An inconsistent guy like Eli?

What's to back up? Brees, Romo, Palmer, Cutler, Rivers, McNabb, Warner, Rodgers, Brad Johnson, Jeff Garcia, Chad Pennington and Rex Grossman all could have won two superbowls on those Pittsburgh teams. Roethlesberger is good, I'd love to have him in Minnesota, but he's not as good as you think he is. It is laughable that you discount Drew Brees as someone who has won nothing, when Roethlesberger will never be able to achieve what he does for a passing game. You're being silly.

Re-read the bolded part and then tell me I'm being silly.I like Brees too, but to say it's laughable to discount him as someone who's never won anything? What HAS he won? He's 1-2 lifetime in the playoffs. Sure, he puts up tremendous numbers, but he also throws the ball 600-650 times a year. Ben usually has about 400-450 attempts. Not comparable. Ben's stat lines are rarely eye-popping because of the nature of the offense, but you go back and re-watch SB XLIII and then tell me that list of QBs you posted all could have done what he did all game long and won that game. Please. HE won that game, not the defense, and certainly not the running game.

And if anyone could have won 2 SBs with those Steelers teams, explain why they went 25 years without winning one when they had a number of outstanding defenses and running games (in many cases better then the 2 SB teams) and only even made it to the big game once. Ask anyone who's followed the team all these years and they'll tell you : it's the QB.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Put it this way :

The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.

How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

I get it.You love the Steelers.

You love Ben.

You wouldn't want any other QB over him and that feeling furhter leads you to believe that every NFL franchise would likely feel the same.

Heard.

I like Ben. He's fun to root for and I respect him as an NFL QB much more after his Superbowl performance. Having said that, having a QB who has a pension for running around like it's backlot football looking for the open guy isn't a good fit for every team.

I do love Ben, but I still think Peyton and Brady are better, so no, it's not true that I wouldn't want any QB over him. Short of those two, I wouldn't though. I do believe every NFL franchise would feel similarly - in the hypothetical I gave above, I don't know how many teams would turn down an even swap of starting QBs.

This is the most ridiculous fishing trip in the pool in weeks.

I notice people keep saying this, but then not backing it up. If you were an NFL GM, who would you rather have as your franchise QB right now before Ben (other than Manning or Brady)? You want a stat-hound who's never won anything like Brees, Romo, Palmer, Cutler, Rivers, McNabb, or Rodgers? A 37-year old Warner? A "too soon to tell" guy like Flacco or Ryan? An inconsistent guy like Eli?

What's to back up? Brees, Romo, Palmer, Cutler, Rivers, McNabb, Warner, Rodgers, Brad Johnson, Jeff Garcia, Chad Pennington and Rex Grossman all could have won two superbowls on those Pittsburgh teams. Roethlesberger is good, I'd love to have him in Minnesota, but he's not as good as you think he is. It is laughable that you discount Drew Brees as someone who has won nothing, when Roethlesberger will never be able to achieve what he does for a passing game. You're being silly.

Re-read the bolded part and then tell me I'm being silly.I like Brees too, but to say it's laughable to discount him as someone who's never won anything? What HAS he won? He's 1-2 lifetime in the playoffs. Sure, he puts up tremendous numbers, but he also throws the ball 600-650 times a year. Ben usually has about 400-450 attempts. Not comparable. Ben's stat lines are rarely eye-popping because of the nature of the offense, but you go back and re-watch SB XLIII and then tell me that list of QBs you posted all could have done what he did all game long and won that game. Please. HE won that game, not the defense, and certainly not the running game.

And if anyone could have won 2 SBs with those Steelers teams, explain why they went 25 years without winning one when they had a number of outstanding defenses and running games (in many cases better then the 2 SB teams) and only even made it to the big game once. Ask anyone who's followed the team all these years and they'll tell you : it's the QB.

What happens if we compare Brees and Ben on a per attempt basis instead of their raw totals?

 

[ScottyFargo]

Re-read the bolded part and then tell me I'm being silly.

I like Brees too, but to say it's laughable to discount him as someone who's never won anything? What HAS he won? He's 1-2 lifetime in the playoffs. Sure, he puts up tremendous numbers, but he also throws the ball 600-650 times a year. Ben usually has about 400-450 attempts. Not comparable. Ben's stat lines are rarely eye-popping because of the nature of the offense, but you go back and re-watch SB XLIII and then tell me that list of QBs you posted all could have done what he did all game long and won that game. Please. HE won that game, not the defense, and certainly not the running game.

And if anyone could have won 2 SBs with those Steelers teams, explain why they went 25 years without winning one when they had a number of outstanding defenses and running games (in many cases better then the 2 SB teams) and only even made it to the big game once. Ask anyone who's followed the team all these years and they'll tell you : it's the QB.

They went 25 years without a QB the quality of McNabb, Hasselbeck, etc, etc, etc. Ben Roethlesberger was good enough to get them by on what has possibly been their best defenses in that time. Please. As if Bubby Brister or Kordell Stewart were just as good as these guys you're saying aren't as good as Roethlesberger. The Saints throw 600 times because they have a QB who can throw that much and be successful. The Steelers throw 400 times because they have a running game and D that can allow that. The Steelers are a team whose passing game is complementary to their better qualities. The Saints are a team who have to rely on their passing game as it's their identity.However, they DID make it to a superbowl with Neil O'Donnel. He didn't win because of a 4 INT performance, but I doubt very much at the time you were saying PGH wouldn't trade O'Donnel short of anyone but Aikman.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Put it this way :

The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.

How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

I get it.You love the Steelers.

You love Ben.

You wouldn't want any other QB over him and that feeling furhter leads you to believe that every NFL franchise would likely feel the same.

Heard.

I like Ben. He's fun to root for and I respect him as an NFL QB much more after his Superbowl performance. Having said that, having a QB who has a pension for running around like it's backlot football looking for the open guy isn't a good fit for every team.

I do love Ben, but I still think Peyton and Brady are better, so no, it's not true that I wouldn't want any QB over him. Short of those two, I wouldn't though. I do believe every NFL franchise would feel similarly - in the hypothetical I gave above, I don't know how many teams would turn down an even swap of starting QBs.

This is the most ridiculous fishing trip in the pool in weeks.

I notice people keep saying this, but then not backing it up. If you were an NFL GM, who would you rather have as your franchise QB right now before Ben (other than Manning or Brady)? You want a stat-hound who's never won anything like Brees, Romo, Palmer, Cutler, Rivers, McNabb, or Rodgers? A 37-year old Warner? A "too soon to tell" guy like Flacco or Ryan? An inconsistent guy like Eli?

What's to back up? Brees, Romo, Palmer, Cutler, Rivers, McNabb, Warner, Rodgers, Brad Johnson, Jeff Garcia, Chad Pennington and Rex Grossman all could have won two superbowls on those Pittsburgh teams. Roethlesberger is good, I'd love to have him in Minnesota, but he's not as good as you think he is. It is laughable that you discount Drew Brees as someone who has won nothing, when Roethlesberger will never be able to achieve what he does for a passing game. You're being silly.

Re-read the bolded part and then tell me I'm being silly.I like Brees too, but to say it's laughable to discount him as someone who's never won anything? What HAS he won? He's 1-2 lifetime in the playoffs. Sure, he puts up tremendous numbers, but he also throws the ball 600-650 times a year. Ben usually has about 400-450 attempts. Not comparable. Ben's stat lines are rarely eye-popping because of the nature of the offense, but you go back and re-watch SB XLIII and then tell me that list of QBs you posted all could have done what he did all game long and won that game. Please. HE won that game, not the defense, and certainly not the running game.

And if anyone could have won 2 SBs with those Steelers teams, explain why they went 25 years without winning one when they had a number of outstanding defenses and running games (in many cases better then the 2 SB teams) and only even made it to the big game once. Ask anyone who's followed the team all these years and they'll tell you : it's the QB.

What happens if we compare Brees and Ben on a per attempt basis instead of their raw totals?

Brees throws less INTs per attempt (2.7% to 3.6%) but otherwise :Roethlisberger : 7.9 YPA / 6.8 AYPA, 5.3% TD percentage

Brees : 7.2 YPA / 6.4 AYPA, 4.6% TD percentage

I think it's safe to say that on a per attempt basis that Roethlisberger is superior. His AYPA is higher than Brees' despite being sacked 400 times a year.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Re-read the bolded part and then tell me I'm being silly.

I like Brees too, but to say it's laughable to discount him as someone who's never won anything? What HAS he won? He's 1-2 lifetime in the playoffs. Sure, he puts up tremendous numbers, but he also throws the ball 600-650 times a year. Ben usually has about 400-450 attempts. Not comparable. Ben's stat lines are rarely eye-popping because of the nature of the offense, but you go back and re-watch SB XLIII and then tell me that list of QBs you posted all could have done what he did all game long and won that game. Please. HE won that game, not the defense, and certainly not the running game.

And if anyone could have won 2 SBs with those Steelers teams, explain why they went 25 years without winning one when they had a number of outstanding defenses and running games (in many cases better then the 2 SB teams) and only even made it to the big game once. Ask anyone who's followed the team all these years and they'll tell you : it's the QB.

They went 25 years without a QB the quality of McNabb, Hasselbeck, etc, etc, etc. Ben Roethlesberger was good enough to get them by on what has possibly been their best defenses in that time. Please. As if Bubby Brister or Kordell Stewart were just as good as these guys you're saying aren't as good as Roethlesberger. The Saints throw 600 times because they have a QB who can throw that much and be successful. The Steelers throw 400 times because they have a running game and D that can allow that. The Steelers are a team whose passing game is complementary to their better qualities. The Saints are a team who have to rely on their passing game as it's their identity.

I'd venture to say that a lot of their QBs were as good as Rex Grossman, who you listed above. O' Donnell was as good as several QBs on your list.The bolded part proves my point exactly. Roethlisberger is never going to be a favorite of the stat-hounds, but to say he can't carry an offense is nuts. Watch the SB again. Hell, watch this whole season. Yeah, the defense was spectacular all year, but they had NO running game whatsoever and Ben spent half the year running for his life behind a line that couldn't pass block at all. He carried the offense when it counted, and his performance in the Super Bowl was a virtuoso one.

Yes, this defense might have been the best Steeler D I've seen in some time, but they had NO running game. In XL, that team had a good running game, but not great, and a very good defense, but not as good as MANY Steeler Ds in the 90s. Each team was flawed, the X factor was the QB. In '06 they wouldn't have been there without him, and this year they wouldn't have won without him. To say he piggy-backed good fortune to 2 rings is fallacy.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Put it this way :

The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.

How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

I get it.You love the Steelers.

You love Ben.

You wouldn't want any other QB over him and that feeling furhter leads you to believe that every NFL franchise would likely feel the same.

Heard.

I like Ben. He's fun to root for and I respect him as an NFL QB much more after his Superbowl performance. Having said that, having a QB who has a pension for running around like it's backlot football looking for the open guy isn't a good fit for every team.

I do love Ben, but I still think Peyton and Brady are better, so no, it's not true that I wouldn't want any QB over him. Short of those two, I wouldn't though. I do believe every NFL franchise would feel similarly - in the hypothetical I gave above, I don't know how many teams would turn down an even swap of starting QBs.

This is the most ridiculous fishing trip in the pool in weeks.

I notice people keep saying this, but then not backing it up. If you were an NFL GM, who would you rather have as your franchise QB right now before Ben (other than Manning or Brady)? You want a stat-hound who's never won anything like Brees, Romo, Palmer, Cutler, Rivers, McNabb, or Rodgers? A 37-year old Warner? A "too soon to tell" guy like Flacco or Ryan? An inconsistent guy like Eli?

What's to back up? Brees, Romo, Palmer, Cutler, Rivers, McNabb, Warner, Rodgers, Brad Johnson, Jeff Garcia, Chad Pennington and Rex Grossman all could have won two superbowls on those Pittsburgh teams. Roethlesberger is good, I'd love to have him in Minnesota, but he's not as good as you think he is. It is laughable that you discount Drew Brees as someone who has won nothing, when Roethlesberger will never be able to achieve what he does for a passing game. You're being silly.

Re-read the bolded part and then tell me I'm being silly.I like Brees too, but to say it's laughable to discount him as someone who's never won anything? What HAS he won? He's 1-2 lifetime in the playoffs. Sure, he puts up tremendous numbers, but he also throws the ball 600-650 times a year. Ben usually has about 400-450 attempts. Not comparable. Ben's stat lines are rarely eye-popping because of the nature of the offense, but you go back and re-watch SB XLIII and then tell me that list of QBs you posted all could have done what he did all game long and won that game. Please. HE won that game, not the defense, and certainly not the running game.

And if anyone could have won 2 SBs with those Steelers teams, explain why they went 25 years without winning one when they had a number of outstanding defenses and running games (in many cases better then the 2 SB teams) and only even made it to the big game once. Ask anyone who's followed the team all these years and they'll tell you : it's the QB.

What happens if we compare Brees and Ben on a per attempt basis instead of their raw totals?

Brees throws less INTs per attempt (2.7% to 3.6%) but otherwise :Roethlisberger : 7.9 YPA / 6.8 AYPA, 5.3% TD percentage

Brees : 7.2 YPA / 6.4 AYPA, 4.6% TD percentage

I think it's safe to say that on a per attempt basis that Roethlisberger is superior. His AYPA is higher than Brees' despite being sacked 400 times a year.

AY/A doesn't include sack numbers. ANY/A does, and Brees is ahead of Ben in that statistic.It's a bit misleading to use their whole careers, though. Last year, Brees averaged 8.0 yards per pass, 7.3 adjusted yards per pass (TD/INT included), 7.7 net yards per pass (sacks included) and 7.0 adjusted net yards per pass (TD/INT/Sacks included). Ben was at 7.0 y/a, 6.0 ay/a, 5.9 net yards per pass and 4.9 adjusted net yards per pass.

Two of the last three years, Ben's been below 5.0 adjusted net yards per pass. Two of the last three years, Brees was above 7.0 adjusted net yards per pass. It's not even close.

 

[ScottyFargo]

I'd venture to say that a lot of their QBs were as good as Rex Grossman, who you listed above. O' Donnell was as good as several QBs on your list.

And if you notice, those two were on teams that made it to a Superbowl and didn't win. The Superbowl is one game. These are average to below average (Grossman) QB's who were just good enough to get a team to the big game. Roethlesberger has been good enough to be a part of getting the Steelers to two superbowls. If you think Brees wouldn't have done even better on those steelers teams...

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Put it this way :

The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.

How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

I get it.You love the Steelers.

You love Ben.

You wouldn't want any other QB over him and that feeling furhter leads you to believe that every NFL franchise would likely feel the same.

Heard.

I like Ben. He's fun to root for and I respect him as an NFL QB much more after his Superbowl performance. Having said that, having a QB who has a pension for running around like it's backlot football looking for the open guy isn't a good fit for every team.

I do love Ben, but I still think Peyton and Brady are better, so no, it's not true that I wouldn't want any QB over him. Short of those two, I wouldn't though. I do believe every NFL franchise would feel similarly - in the hypothetical I gave above, I don't know how many teams would turn down an even swap of starting QBs.

This is the most ridiculous fishing trip in the pool in weeks.

I notice people keep saying this, but then not backing it up. If you were an NFL GM, who would you rather have as your franchise QB right now before Ben (other than Manning or Brady)? You want a stat-hound who's never won anything like Brees, Romo, Palmer, Cutler, Rivers, McNabb, or Rodgers? A 37-year old Warner? A "too soon to tell" guy like Flacco or Ryan? An inconsistent guy like Eli?

What's to back up? Brees, Romo, Palmer, Cutler, Rivers, McNabb, Warner, Rodgers, Brad Johnson, Jeff Garcia, Chad Pennington and Rex Grossman all could have won two superbowls on those Pittsburgh teams. Roethlesberger is good, I'd love to have him in Minnesota, but he's not as good as you think he is. It is laughable that you discount Drew Brees as someone who has won nothing, when Roethlesberger will never be able to achieve what he does for a passing game. You're being silly.

Re-read the bolded part and then tell me I'm being silly.I like Brees too, but to say it's laughable to discount him as someone who's never won anything? What HAS he won? He's 1-2 lifetime in the playoffs. Sure, he puts up tremendous numbers, but he also throws the ball 600-650 times a year. Ben usually has about 400-450 attempts. Not comparable. Ben's stat lines are rarely eye-popping because of the nature of the offense, but you go back and re-watch SB XLIII and then tell me that list of QBs you posted all could have done what he did all game long and won that game. Please. HE won that game, not the defense, and certainly not the running game.

And if anyone could have won 2 SBs with those Steelers teams, explain why they went 25 years without winning one when they had a number of outstanding defenses and running games (in many cases better then the 2 SB teams) and only even made it to the big game once. Ask anyone who's followed the team all these years and they'll tell you : it's the QB.

What happens if we compare Brees and Ben on a per attempt basis instead of their raw totals?

Brees throws less INTs per attempt (2.7% to 3.6%) but otherwise :Roethlisberger : 7.9 YPA / 6.8 AYPA, 5.3% TD percentage

Brees : 7.2 YPA / 6.4 AYPA, 4.6% TD percentage

I think it's safe to say that on a per attempt basis that Roethlisberger is superior. His AYPA is higher than Brees' despite being sacked 400 times a year.

AY/A doesn't include sack numbers. ANY/A does, and Brees is ahead of Ben in that statistic.It's a bit misleading to use their whole careers, though. Last year, Brees averaged 8.0 yards per pass, 7.3 adjusted yards per pass (TD/INT included), 7.7 net yards per pass (sacks included) and 7.0 adjusted net yards per pass (TD/INT/Sacks included). Ben was at 7.0 y/a, 6.0 ay/a, 5.9 net yards per pass and 4.9 adjusted net yards per pass.

Two of the last three years, Ben's been below 5.0 adjusted net yards per pass. Two of the last three years, Brees was above 7.0 adjusted net yards per pass. It's not even close.

Why is it misleading to use their whole careers? The last three years you talk about - two of them Ben played despite a litany of injuries (3 years ago) and absolutely no O-line and no running game (this year.) The one year he had a good line and played healthy, he posted terrific numbers. Ben also suffers from being sacked non-stop in the numbers you posted. Some of that is on him, but not all of it.Look, Brees is a very, very good QB, no doubt. But until he shows he can take a team to the next level, he's a tier below Ben. Fantasy, he'll be my QB1. In reality, though, he's 4th at best. You put him at QB in that Super Bowl and I think the Steelers lose.

 

[Dexter Manley]

Put it this way :

The 6-time Champion Steelers announce to the league : We're done with Roethlisberger. We'll trade him even-up for another starting QB. Throw your name in the hat and whoever we like best, we'll swap Ben for one-for-one. Imagine $$$ is not an issue.

How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade their starting QB for Ben in an even swap? I can't think of any team that would turn that deal down save for new England or Indianapolis, and Indy might even think long and hard before they turned it down.

I get it.You love the Steelers.

You love Ben.

You wouldn't want any other QB over him and that feeling furhter leads you to believe that every NFL franchise would likely feel the same.

Heard.

I like Ben. He's fun to root for and I respect him as an NFL QB much more after his Superbowl performance. Having said that, having a QB who has a pension for running around like it's backlot football looking for the open guy isn't a good fit for every team.

I do love Ben, but I still think Peyton and Brady are better, so no, it's not true that I wouldn't want any QB over him. Short of those two, I wouldn't though. I do believe every NFL franchise would feel similarly - in the hypothetical I gave above, I don't know how many teams would turn down an even swap of starting QBs.

This is the most ridiculous fishing trip in the pool in weeks.

I notice people keep saying this, but then not backing it up. If you were an NFL GM, who would you rather have as your franchise QB right now before Ben (other than Manning or Brady)? You want a stat-hound who's never won anything like Brees, Romo, Palmer, Cutler, Rivers, McNabb, or Rodgers? A 37-year old Warner? A "too soon to tell" guy like Flacco or Ryan? An inconsistent guy like Eli?

What's to back up? Brees, Romo, Palmer, Cutler, Rivers, McNabb, Warner, Rodgers, Brad Johnson, Jeff Garcia, Chad Pennington and Rex Grossman all could have won two superbowls on those Pittsburgh teams. Roethlesberger is good, I'd love to have him in Minnesota, but he's not as good as you think he is. It is laughable that you discount Drew Brees as someone who has won nothing, when Roethlesberger will never be able to achieve what he does for a passing game. You're being silly.

Re-read the bolded part and then tell me I'm being silly.I like Brees too, but to say it's laughable to discount him as someone who's never won anything? What HAS he won? He's 1-2 lifetime in the playoffs. Sure, he puts up tremendous numbers, but he also throws the ball 600-650 times a year. Ben usually has about 400-450 attempts. Not comparable. Ben's stat lines are rarely eye-popping because of the nature of the offense, but you go back and re-watch SB XLIII and then tell me that list of QBs you posted all could have done what he did all game long and won that game. Please. HE won that game, not the defense, and certainly not the running game.

And if anyone could have won 2 SBs with those Steelers teams, explain why they went 25 years without winning one when they had a number of outstanding defenses and running games (in many cases better then the 2 SB teams) and only even made it to the big game once. Ask anyone who's followed the team all these years and they'll tell you : it's the QB.

What happens if we compare Brees and Ben on a per attempt basis instead of their raw totals?

Brees throws less INTs per attempt (2.7% to 3.6%) but otherwise :Roethlisberger : 7.9 YPA / 6.8 AYPA, 5.3% TD percentage

Brees : 7.2 YPA / 6.4 AYPA, 4.6% TD percentage

I think it's safe to say that on a per attempt basis that Roethlisberger is superior. His AYPA is higher than Brees' despite being sacked 400 times a year.

I'm pretty sure Big Ben's 7.9 YPA is primarily due to him being the best in the league at moving in the pocket, scrambling, and buying time, which allows his wr's to get open downfield (as db's can only cover wr's for so long) and make big plays.IMO, if the Steelers and Saints swapped qb's, it would have a significantly negative effect on both teams' offenses, as each qb is perfect for the offensive system they are currently running now. Neither team would be interested in a Ben for Brees swap.

Oh, and to help get this thread back on track. A text sent in to Rome's show yesterday:

"Welcome back!"

Signed,

TO's driveway

 

[ScottyFargo]

Why is it misleading to use their whole careers? The last three years you talk about - two of them Ben played despite a litany of injuries (3 years ago) and absolutely no O-line and no running game (this year.) The one year he had a good line and played healthy, he posted terrific numbers. Ben also suffers from being sacked non-stop in the numbers you posted. Some of that is on him, but not all of it.Look, Brees is a very, very good QB, no doubt. But until he shows he can take a team to the next level, he's a tier below Ben. Fantasy, he'll be my QB1. In reality, though, he's 4th at best. You put him at QB in that Super Bowl and I think the Steelers lose.

And if you put Ben on the Saints last year... they're what? Winning the superbowl?

 

[Chase Stuart]

It's misleading because Brees wasn't very good when he was younger. Three of the last five years he's played at an elite level.

Put Ben on the Saints and I don't think they win 8 games.

 

[Stillers Jr.]

Evil Grin is a one man wrecking crew

 

[Stillers Jr.]

It's misleading because Brees wasn't very good when he was younger. Three of the last five years he's played at an elite level.Put Ben on the Saints and I don't think they win 8 games.

With all due respect...I would liquidate my 401k and take OVER 7 wins with BR and last years Saints team.Say what you will about #'s and percentages, but generally speaking, the guy just wins.