Greatest QB Ever Debate (2 Viewers)

[bostonfred]

For my money, I think it's Favre. I can't remember another quarterback who elevated the play of the rest of his team so much. He willed his team to a lot of wins. What happened when he lost his #1 receiver, Robert Brooks? He turned Antonio Freeman (8 catches, 106 yards, 1 TD the year before) into a pro bowler, put in his best season ever, and won the Superbowl. Wow.

He went to two Superbowls, and won one while losing the other in a 31-24 game to an offense led by a HOF quarterback, head coach, tight end, offensive lineman, and a running back who was so good that he is debatably a HOF candidate for what amounts to a three and a half year career.

Statistically, this might be the best four year stretch in NFL history, not just because of his statistics, but because of his stats compared to his contemporaries:

1994 top ten passing TDs

S Young 35

B Favre 33

D Marino 30

D Bledsoe 25

J George 23

J Everett 22

J Kelly 22

J Hostetler 20

W Moon 18

B Esiason 17

S Humphries 17

1995

B Favre 38

W Moon 33

S Mitchell 32

E Kramer 29

J Blake 28

J Elway 26

J Everett 26

J George 24

D Marino 24

J Kelly 22

1996

B Favre 39

V Testaverde 33

D Bledsoe 27

J Elway 26

J Blake 24

J Hostetler 23

B Hebert 22

M Brunell 19

S Humphries 18

B Johnson 17

S Mitchell 17

D Marino 17

1997

B Favre 35

J George 29

D Bledsoe 28

J Elway 27

W Moon 25

K Stewart 21

T Dilfer 21

C Chandler 20

B Johnson 20

T Aikman 19

S Mitchell 19

S Young 19

In each of those years he was in the top 5 in passing yards, and led the league in passing yards in one of them.

I know the argument that the INTs are a blemish against him. But anyone who has ever seen him play knows he makes throws that most quarterbacks won't even try. When the team around him wasn't enough to win, he did everything in his power to will them over the top. That's what I'd want on my quarterback's epitaph.

 

[Marc Levin]

And I'm a Marino fan.

The true turnaround overboth of those was Favre to the Packers - he practically single handedly turned around a franchise that had not seen the postseason since before we sent men to the moon.

With Favre, they were an annual playoff contestant.

 

[Liquid Tension]

top 5montanamarinoelwayunitasfavre

I like that list.I'd add some honorable mentions for Young and Moon - and I am still not familiar enough with some of the older guys who revolutionized the positon - but it is hard to put a dent in that list if you go from 1970 forward.

I would put Young above Elway. A guy who could scramble like him, have the highest QB rating of anyone and win the big games is deserving of top 5 status. He took the Montana teams and was even better from a statistical standpoint and about equal on the wins (I think)

 

[Liquid Tension]

Give me marino with no systemMontanta (West Coast)Elway's 2 SB (Shanny)Brady (coach who is a HOF with the hood)I guess if Delhomme had won the SB he might be talked about.

Yeah, I feel bad for him getting stuck with Shula. Shula was 71-18-4 (an incredible .80 winning percentage) in the regular season and 2-2 in the playoffs in Baltimore. He was 130-53-2 (.71) in the regular season and 11-7 in the playoffs in Miami before Marino. He was 127-80 (.61) and 6-7 in the playoffs in Miami with Marino. Maybe I should feel bad for Shula instead.

Uh, and your point is?

 

[Sidewinder16]

I have to limit this to QB's I have seen play,...

Why?

Because, otherwise I would just be judging on stats and reputation. I need to see a QB play a game before I can give my opinion. Too much just doesn't show up in the stat columns, like coolness under pressure, leadership and poise.

Really?So you have no opinion on anything that occured before you were born just because you didn't "see" it?

I just don't get why some insist on ignoring 60 years of NFL history (and nearly 100 years of football history). Like any other historical occurances, the information (including video) is out there.

I highly recommend, to anyone and everyone, spending some time studying some history.

At the very least, catch an "NFL Films Presents" program every once in a while.

You'll be glad you did.

 

[bostonfred]

Give me marino with no systemMontanta (West Coast)Elway's 2 SB (Shanny)Brady (coach who is a HOF with the hood)I guess if Delhomme had won the SB he might be talked about.

Yeah, I feel bad for him getting stuck with Shula. Shula was 71-18-4 (an incredible .80 winning percentage) in the regular season and 2-2 in the playoffs in Baltimore. He was 130-53-2 (.71) in the regular season and 11-7 in the playoffs in Miami before Marino. He was 127-80 (.61) and 6-7 in the playoffs in Miami with Marino. Maybe I should feel bad for Shula instead.

Uh, and your point is?

Out of your reach?

 

[Marc Levin]

Give me marino with no systemMontanta (West Coast)Elway's 2 SB (Shanny)Brady (coach who is a HOF with the hood)I guess if Delhomme had won the SB he might be talked about.

Yeah, I feel bad for him getting stuck with Shula. Shula was 71-18-4 (an incredible .80 winning percentage) in the regular season and 2-2 in the playoffs in Baltimore. He was 130-53-2 (.71) in the regular season and 11-7 in the playoffs in Miami before Marino. He was 127-80 (.61) and 6-7 in the playoffs in Miami with Marino. Maybe I should feel bad for Shula instead.

Uh, and your point is?

Out of your reach?

B-Fred =

 

[marinolives13]

For my money, I think it's Favre. I can't remember another quarterback who elevated the play of the rest of his team so much. He willed his team to a lot of wins. What happened when he lost his #1 receiver, Robert Brooks? He turned Antonio Freeman (8 catches, 106 yards, 1 TD the year before) into a pro bowler, put in his best season ever, and won the Superbowl. Wow. He went to two Superbowls, and won one while losing the other in a 31-24 game to an offense led by a HOF quarterback, head coach, tight end, offensive lineman, and a running back who was so good that he is debatably a HOF candidate for what amounts to a three and a half year career. Statistically, this might be the best four year stretch in NFL history, not just because of his statistics, but because of his stats compared to his contemporaries:1994 top ten passing TDsS Young 35B Favre 33D Marino 30D Bledsoe 25J George 23J Everett 22J Kelly 22J Hostetler 20W Moon 18B Esiason 17S Humphries 171995B Favre 38W Moon 33S Mitchell 32E Kramer 29J Blake 28J Elway 26J Everett 26J George 24D Marino 24J Kelly 221996B Favre 39V Testaverde 33D Bledsoe 27J Elway 26J Blake 24J Hostetler 23B Hebert 22M Brunell 19S Humphries 18B Johnson 17S Mitchell 17D Marino 171997B Favre 35J George 29D Bledsoe 28J Elway 27W Moon 25K Stewart 21T Dilfer 21C Chandler 20B Johnson 20T Aikman 19S Mitchell 19S Young 19In each of those years he was in the top 5 in passing yards, and led the league in passing yards in one of them. I know the argument that the INTs are a blemish against him. But anyone who has ever seen him play knows he makes throws that most quarterbacks won't even try. When the team around him wasn't enough to win, he did everything in his power to will them over the top. That's what I'd want on my quarterback's epitaph.

I know he was great during that stretch, but I like these stats better!1984Passing TDsD Marino 48D Krieg 32N Lomax 28J Montana 28L Dickey 25J Theismann 24T Eason 23P Simms 22D Fouts 19S Deberg 191985Passing TDsD Marino 30D Krieg 27B Esiason 27J Montana 27D Fouts 27K O'Brien 25P Simms 22J Elway 22D White 21T Kramer 19S Deberg 191986Passing TDsD Marino 44K O'Brien 25B Esiason 24T Kramer 24J Schroeder 22J Kelly 22P Simms 21D Krieg 21T Eason 19J Elway 191987Passing TDsJ Montana 31D Marino 26N Lomax 24R Cunningham 23D Krieg 23B Kosar 22W Moon 21J Elway 19J Kelly 19P Simms 17no is even close on 84 and 86Marino should have had several mvps.

 

[Marc Levin]

Anticipating BFred's response:

B-ween '94 and '97, Favre went to quite a few NFC cHamp games, won two of them plus a Super Bowl, in addition to getting some MVP awards.

Marino didn't get those accdolades (as much as I love the man, gotta see the other side, too)

 

[bostonfred]

I know he was great during that stretch, but I like these stats better!1984Passing TDsD Marino 48D Krieg 321985Passing TDsD Marino 30D Krieg 271986Passing TDsD Marino 44K O'Brien 251987Passing TDsJ Montana 31D Marino 26no is even close on 84 and 86Marino should have had several mvps.

No doubt. 148 TDs in four years vs. 145 for Favre. Marino had a couple incredible years, and a couple of very solid years. But I still give the nod to Favre for putting it together for a longer stretch, and because he had massive turnover at receiver, even midseason. Favre's leading receiver in each of those years? 1994 (9-7) Sterling Sharpe1995 (11-5) Robert Brooks1996 (13-3) * Robert Brooks (hurt midseason), 2nd year Antonio Freeman the rest of the way1997 (13-3) ** Antonio Freeman* Won Superbowl** Went to Superbowl Marino's?1984 (14-2) ** Clayton/Dupre1985 (12-4) Clayton/Dupre1986 (8-8) Clayton/Dupre1987 (8-7) Clayton/DupreFavre led his team to winning seasons and Superbowls during his prime, going 8-3 in the playoffs during that stretch. Marino went to the playoffs twice, going 3-2 during his prime. Marino 61361 yards, 420 TDs and 252 INTs in 17 seasonsFavre 55983 yards 409 TDs and 262 INTs in 15 seasonsIt looks like the numbers would favor Favre when he retires if he can throw just 2800 yards and 6 TDs a year for the next two years (not even counting the rest of this year). Favre has never thrown for less than 3200 yards or 18 TDs in a season, and averages over 3900 yards and 25 TDs per year the past two years. If he finishes this year and plays just one more year, he still has a reasonable shot at the record next year. The real question is whether he will play long enough, but I certainly don't give the nod to Marino based on longevity - especially his last year, which was embarrassing. I don't think you can look at a player and by just statistics or just championships or just leadership or just arm strength or just confidence or just love of the game or really any one thing that makes a quarterback great. But Favre is as good or better than Marino in every one of those categories. I just don't see any way you can give the nod to Marino over Favre.

 

[marinolives13]

Anticipating BFred's response:B-ween '94 and '97, Favre went to quite a few NFC cHamp games, won two of them plus a Super Bowl, in addition to getting some MVP awards.Marino didn't get those accdolades (as much as I love the man, gotta see the other side, too)

Marino went to 2 AFC Championships but only won one. Favre also had a guy named REGGIE WHITE! The stat was passing tds and Marino threw for more in a 4 year span and is the only player to throw for over 40 tds in a season twice. Favre had a great run, but had some serious weapons, Marino had duper and clayton and that was it. He made that team competitve and he would have definetely won in 1986, but Lawrence Taylor had to have an incredible season. This is without a doubt my favorite topic to talk about.By the way I am not a Brady or Manning fan but both of them are going to be in this discussion in a couple of years.

 

[Marc Levin]

I've said more than a few times that, before he's done, Favre will flirt with many, if not all, of Marino's all-time numbers.

 

[bostonfred]

Anticipating BFred's response:B-ween '94 and '97, Favre went to quite a few NFC cHamp games, won two of them plus a Super Bowl, in addition to getting some MVP awards.Marino didn't get those accdolades (as much as I love the man, gotta see the other side, too)

Marino went to 2 AFC Championships but only won one. Favre also had a guy named REGGIE WHITE! The stat was passing tds and Marino threw for more in a 4 year span and is the only player to throw for over 40 tds in a season twice. Favre had a great run, but had some serious weapons, Marino had duper and clayton and that was it. He made that team competitve and he would have definetely won in 1986, but Lawrence Taylor had to have an incredible season. This is without a doubt my favorite topic to talk about.By the way I am not a Brady or Manning fan but both of them are going to be in this discussion in a couple of years.

Favre won plenty of games without Reggie White, and Reggie didn't help him throw for 38 and 39 TDs in back to back years. I know 38 and 39 don't compare with 40, because there's a magical line that says that 40 is better, but Favre had 77 TDs in back to back seasons compared with Manning and Marino, who each have 78 in their best two season stretch. Overall, their statistics are remarkably similar, and statistics are about the only thing Marino has over his contemporaries. The nod has to go to Favre.

 

[Marc Levin]

Overall, their statistics are remarkably similar, and statistics are about the only thing Marino has over his contemporaries. The nod has to go to Favre.

Why?Marino still has the edge in stats - and, IMO, he has the edge in some more important stats - comeback/2 min. wins.Some folks poo-poo those stats, saying a good QB shouldn't be in those positions - well, no, good TEAMS shouldn't be in those positions, and the QB saves their butts - Marino's all-time # of wins is a testament to him as a QB, not how good his teams were. Good TEAMS also win Super Bowls - not good QBs.If comeback/2 min wins are unimportant, then why are Super Bowl wins important? Is it because Super Bowl wins are a testament to a QB leading his team in the most important game?Well, aren't comeback/2 min. wins a testament to a QB leading his team in the most important PARTS OF GAMES?Not sure why Favre is better than Marino - as good, sure. But both QBs are inthe second tier of all time greats. Behind a guy in a tier by himself - Montana.Arguing which is #2 and which is #3 seems pretty silly. Suffice to say, they are both top-5 all-time great QBs behind Montana at #1.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I like the fact that Marino finished one win behind Elway all-time, despite the fact that he played one more season than Elway.

 

[Ralley Monkeys]

Johnny Unitas.

He was the John Wayne of quarterbacks. Tough as nails on the field, and a natural leader, an all american type of guy. He had more grit than anyone I've seen on the field with the possible exception of Favre and had the skill to back it up. He had many accomplishments, most have been listed already but most people forget that he called his own plays, 100% of the time. He basically won or lost for his team and carried them not only with his arm but with his knowledge of playcalling.

The photograph of him launching a pass with his non throwing arm outstretched in the 1958 NFL Championship vs the NY Giants is my favorite sports photo ever. It's brilliant. If you were to define quarterback with only a photo this would fit the bill completely. Others might have been blessed more physically, but Unitas was a leader and certainly had intangible qualities that won games. The man with the golden arm will be number 1 for me for a long time.

 

[moleculo]

Overall, their statistics are remarkably similar, and statistics are about the only thing Marino has over his contemporaries. The nod has to go to Favre.

Why?Marino still has the edge in stats - and, IMO, he has the edge in some more important stats - comeback/2 min. wins.Some folks poo-poo those stats, saying a good QB shouldn't be in those positions - well, no, good TEAMS shouldn't be in those positions, and the QB saves their butts - Marino's all-time # of wins is a testament to him as a QB, not how good his teams were. Good TEAMS also win Super Bowls - not good QBs.If comeback/2 min wins are unimportant, then why are Super Bowl wins important? Is it because Super Bowl wins are a testament to a QB leading his team in the most important game?Well, aren't comeback/2 min. wins a testament to a QB leading his team in the most important PARTS OF GAMES?Not sure why Favre is better than Marino - as good, sure. But both QBs are inthe second tier of all time greats. Behind a guy in a tier by himself - Montana.Arguing which is #2 and which is #3 seems pretty silly. Suffice to say, they are both top-5 all-time great QBs behind Montana at #1.

Ironically, as GR mentioned, the stats you toss out in support of Marino above - wins and comeback/2min wins, are all owned by Elway.For the record, I still claim it's Unitas, but I'm starting to re-consider. Favre make s a strong case, and I like Montana as well. I just love to argue Elway s Marino - I consider it a hobby, especially being a Bronco fan living in the Miami area.

 

[trennr]

I don't know if anyone else considers him one of the "Greatest Ever"...but the reason I Love Football to this day is because of #14 Dan Fouts.

I was about 10 when the Air Coryell Era started. That was some fun stuff to watch.

 

[Brunell4MVP]

I think you need to section out each area it takes to be a great a QB. Eras are different, some great QBs played on bad teams, etc.

Accuracy - Marino, Montana, P Manning, Young

Leadership - Johnny U, Montana, Bradshaw, Starr

Arm Strength - Marino, Farve, Elway

Pocket Presence - Montana, Marino, Johnny U

Scrambling Ability (while still being a real QB) - Tarkenton, Elway

Making players around them better - Farve, Montana, Johnny U

So, I'd say Montana based on the above. And I HATE the 49ers.

Unitas and Marino are close seconds.

 

[sib]

This is a cool topic to discuss, but we may be watching the 2 best QBs of all time right now in their prime (Brady and Manning)

If your a stat-junkie, Manning is your guy. Marino & Favre are keeping a lot of records warm for Manning. Barring injury, Manning will break a lot of the passing records Marino/Favre currently have.

And Brady? This guy has 3 Super Bowl rings right now. He's got every intangible you're looking for (leadership, accuracy, playing big in big games, and making players around him better (how many Pro-Bowlers has he played with on the offensive side of the ball?) He's also averaged 25TDs and 3600 passing yds since 2001.

And both guys are far from done....

 

[hitmenssharpshooters]

Give me marino with no systemMontanta (West Coast)Elway's 2 SB (Shanny)Brady (coach who is a HOF with the hood)I guess if Delhomme had won the SB he might be talked about.

Yeah, I feel bad for him getting stuck with Shula. Shula was 71-18-4 (an incredible .80 winning percentage) in the regular season and 2-2 in the playoffs in Baltimore. He was 130-53-2 (.71) in the regular season and 11-7 in the playoffs in Miami before Marino. He was 127-80 (.61) and 6-7 in the playoffs in Miami with Marino. Maybe I should feel bad for Shula instead.

Uh, and your point is?

He doesnt have one

 

[marinolives13]

I know he was great during that stretch, but I like these stats better!1984Passing TDsD Marino 48D Krieg 321985Passing TDsD Marino 30D Krieg 271986Passing TDsD Marino 44K O'Brien 251987Passing TDsJ Montana 31D Marino 26no is even close on 84 and 86Marino should have had several mvps.

No doubt. 148 TDs in four years vs. 145 for Favre. Marino had a couple incredible yearsMarino 61361 yards, 420 TDs and 252 INTs in 17 seasonsFavre 55983 yards 409 TDs and 262 INTs in 15 seasonsIt looks like the numbers would favor Favre when he retires if he can throw just 2800 yards and 6 TDs a year for the next two years (not even counting the rest of this year). Favre has never thrown for less than 3200 yards or 18 TDs in a season, and averages over 3900 yards and 25 TDs per year the past two years. If he finishes this year and plays just one more year, he still has a reasonable shot at the record next year. The real question is whether he will play long enough, but I certainly don't give the nod to Marino based on longevity - especially his last year, which was embarrassing. I don't think you can look at a player and by just statistics or just championships or just leadership or just arm strength or just confidence or just love of the game or really any one thing that makes a quarterback great. But Favre is as good or better than Marino in every one of those categories. I just don't see any way you can give the nod to Marino over Favre.

You should add Marino played in 242 gMES WHILE fAVRE HAS PLAYED IN 235! mARINO MISSED A WHOLE SEASON IN 93 AND alot of games in his last season. The stats are alot closer that you are making it look.You said MArino had reliable receivers over those years, what you didn't say was that Farve had Edgar Bennett and dorsey levens run for 1000yards. Defenses had to play the run against favre while they knew Marino was going to throw it and still couldn't stop him. THE PROBLEM WAS his defense couldn't stop anybody! THAT IS WHERE THE BEST DEFFENSIVE LINEMAN REGGIE WHITE COMES IN and Green Bay stopped a lot of people with that defense! Things were alot easier for favre than and that is why Marino was better!

 

[-OZ-]

Sean Salisbury

 

[sib]

You should add Marino played in 242 gMES WHILE fAVRE HAS PLAYED IN 235! mARINO MISSED A WHOLE SEASON IN 93 AND alot of games in his last season. The stats are alot closer that you are making it look.

You said MArino had reliable receivers over those years, what you didn't say was that Farve had Edgar Bennett and dorsey levens run for 1000yards. Defenses had to play the run against favre while they knew Marino was going to throw it and still couldn't stop him. THE PROBLEM WAS his defense couldn't stop anybody! THAT IS WHERE THE BEST DEFFENSIVE LINEMAN REGGIE WHITE COMES IN and Green Bay stopped a lot of people with that defense! Things were alot easier for favre than and that is why Marino was better!

Levans had a good run in Green Bay, but Edgar Bennett was a mediocre running back in GB. Below are Bennett's numbers. If you watched Green Bay while Bennett was there, you would know that Sterling Sharpe was option #1, 2 and 3...followed by the TE and throwing passes to the RB. At 3.5 ypc Edgar Bennett didn't scare any defenses.

| 1992 gnb | 16 | 61 214 3.5 0 | 13 93 7.2 0 |

| 1993 gnb | 16 | 159 550 3.5 9 | 59 457 7.7 1 |

| 1994 gnb | 16 | 178 623 3.5 5 | 78 546 7.0 4 |

| 1995 gnb | 16 | 316 1067 3.4 3 | 61 648 10.6 4 |

| 1996 gnb | 16 | 222 899 4.0 2 | 31 176 5.7 1 |

 

[marinolives13]

You should add Marino played in 242 gMES WHILE fAVRE HAS PLAYED IN 235! mARINO MISSED A WHOLE SEASON IN 93 AND alot of games in his last season. The stats are alot closer that you are making it look.You said MArino had reliable receivers over those years, what you didn't say was that Farve had Edgar Bennett and dorsey levens run for 1000yards. Defenses had to play the run against favre while they knew Marino was going to throw it and still couldn't stop him. THE PROBLEM WAS his defense couldn't stop anybody! THAT IS WHERE THE BEST DEFFENSIVE LINEMAN REGGIE WHITE COMES IN and Green Bay stopped a lot of people with that defense! Things were alot easier for favre than and that is why Marino was better!

Levans had a good run in Green Bay, but Edgar Bennett was a mediocre running back in GB. Below are Bennett's numbers. If you watched Green Bay while Bennett was there, you would know that Sterling Sharpe was option #1, 2 and 3...followed by the TE and throwing passes to the RB. At 3.5 ypc Edgar Bennett didn't scare any defenses.| 1992 gnb | 16 | 61 214 3.5 0 | 13 93 7.2 0 || 1993 gnb | 16 | 159 550 3.5 9 | 59 457 7.7 1 || 1994 gnb | 16 | 178 623 3.5 5 | 78 546 7.0 4 || 1995 gnb | 16 | 316 1067 3.4 3 | 61 648 10.6 4 || 1996 gnb | 16 | 222 899 4.0 2 | 31 176 5.7 1 |[/quotI was talking about the best years of favre 95-98, because that is when favre was considered one of the bests. When he doesn't have a 1000 yard back he tends to force the ball and makes too many mistakes. Sharpe was last year was 94 and that is when favre became an elite qb. Bennett played like roger craig and people did try to stop him. 95 was his best year with 1700 combined yards rushing and receiving.

 

[Mario Kart]

In comparing Favre vs. Marino... Marino does not throw the ball as much if he has a "better" runner thus negating some of his stats. Marino had wide receivers that were consistent and knew the system. Marino did not have to adjust anything for nearly a decade as he was throwing to the same guys. Put Marino on the Packers in the 90's in Marino's prime and the Packers do not do as well. Put Favre on those same Dolphin teams Marino played on and it would be very difficult to say that the Dolphins do worse with Favre.

On the flip side, Marino does not pass the ball as much if he has wide receivers that change every couple of years. Marino in a comfortable system for a long period of time was a great QB but once diversity started to set in with the players around him all hell broke loose and not in a good way. Favre, through many revolutions of the players has put up near consistent numbers showing he is a player. What other QB has had a revolving door when it comes to top players?

Instead of comparing total passing yards of each QB.. compare the total yards the offense gained in those years. Were the offenses more powerful with a runner or was it because the passer could pass the ball. I would think if there were 2/3 threats receving it would be just as easy to run the ball.

 

[icehouse]

Young/Elway/Moon/ etc in tier three

Moon was good, but ranking him here (despite the added "etc") is a slap in the face to greats like Starr, Jurgenson, Tarkenton, Baugh and Blanda.Just my

Why is that? Moon's numbers are great, has longevity matched by few and he didn't have a world of talent around him either. Every other QB in this convo had more offensive help than Moon. Moon had some stud lineman, but that strength was negated because the R&S gave him less protection so he got hit a lot. If you think Marino's RB's sucked please see the ones during Moon's tenure. He had midget WR's that did make pro-bowls, but he never had a passing option like Rice, one of the Sharpe brothers, Super Duper or Clayton, etc. Correction, he did hook up with stud Viking WR's when he was what, around 40? In most of his playoff losses he gave his team a lead in the closing seconds and the defense blew it.Moon was awesome. He did more with less than most of the "great" QB's.

 

[icehouse]

I'll take Montana every day of the week.

You can have everyone else.

its funny how some baseball fans thinks barry bonds is the best ever, yet he was terrible in the postseason but when it comes to the quarterback position in football he has have a super bowl ring. You have to depend on at least 21 other people to do their jobs extremely well to be successful. My opinion Marino would have had 5 rings with the 49ers, bears, or the bills. He was never surrounded by hall of fame talent!

Montana was better than Marino with or without the Super Bowl rings. Marino had loads more physical talent than Montana, but Joe always got it done in crunch time. Objectively, Montana had a higher career QB rating as well. Even if there were no such thing as the Super Bowl, Montana would still be my choice over Marino. Montana was a winner, you could see it in his demeanor.

He was such a winner that another QB came in right after he left and was almost as successful (yeah, less rings but he was going against the Cowgirls prior to free agency)?I think I could be a huge winner too with Rice, Criag, the TE (forget his name), that defense, etc. The 49ers were STACKED any way you look at it.

 

[bostonfred]

You should add Marino played in 242 gMES WHILE fAVRE HAS PLAYED IN 235! mARINO MISSED A WHOLE SEASON IN 93 AND alot of games in his last season. The stats are alot closer that you are making it look.You said MArino had reliable receivers over those years, what you didn't say was that Farve had Edgar Bennett and dorsey levens run for 1000yards. Defenses had to play the run against favre while they knew Marino was going to throw it and still couldn't stop him. THE PROBLEM WAS his defense couldn't stop anybody! THAT IS WHERE THE BEST DEFFENSIVE LINEMAN REGGIE WHITE COMES IN and Green Bay stopped a lot of people with that defense! Things were alot easier for favre than and that is why Marino was better!

I don't understand. It appears you're saying that Marino's better because Favre had the better defense. But that would seem to imply that Marino would be coming from behind more often, and therefore forced to throw more often. Which would imply, if anything, that his stats are inflated, while Favre's were deflated by the huge lead he assumably got with Reggie White behind him. Are you trying to say that Favre's stats are more impressive because he compiled them in victories?

 

[H.K.]

No other QB can claim all of the following

1) Had his own cereal

2) Winning record in USFL, CFL & NFL

3) Converted a drop kick

Doug Flutie is without equal. Period. End of argument.

 

[alg]

I always hate this conversation. You know, the part that says a QB has to win a SB before being considered great.

Joe Theisman

Doug Williams

Mark Rypien

Trent Dilfer

Because everyone thinks its all about the QB, Troy Aikman ends up being discussed as one of the greatest. And Jim Kelly doesn't even make a top 15-20 list.

And another thing.... ....so many fans are so young that the 'greatest' invariably come from the last 10 years or so - see Barry Sanders and Emmit Smith RB discussion.

I never make a list for this stuff, but now that Ive opened my big mouth, I give you some names. But in no particular order. These are guys I have watched personally. Many others before my time. See? Not so hard to acknowledge the past and the limits of our knoweledge...

Unitus

Marino

Tarkington

Stabler

Montana

P Manning

Kelly

Stauback

Bradshaw

Young

Elway

Farve

---------

Brady

Namath

A Manning

Kemp

Lamonica

Greise

Dawson

Fouts

Aikman

And I'm sure I forgot some guys too. Of course everyone is going to want to include Brady. I have always considered Brady a system QB. :ducking: And that brings up my other bugaboo: QBs on good teams have all these magical qualities somehow missing from the also rans. Could it be that maybe, just maybe, the rest of the players and coaches have something to do with it? Brady doesn't look much like a HoFer this year, now does he? For that matter, one could argue the same thing about Montana and Young. Is it a coincidence that SF has TWO HoF caliber QBs on a roster at the same friggin time? Pleaaase. The appearance of greatness isn't that friggin common. If you put Fouts in the NE system he would have done just as well or better then Brady, but as of right now he is simply an also ran.

So this is my rundown of the annual Greatest discussion. Or should I call it my rant? Thanks for listening.

alg

 

[icehouse]

You should add Marino played in 242 gMES WHILE fAVRE HAS PLAYED IN 235! mARINO MISSED A WHOLE SEASON IN 93 AND alot of games in his last season. The stats are alot closer that you are making it look.You said MArino had reliable receivers over those years, what you didn't say was that Farve had Edgar Bennett and dorsey levens run for 1000yards. Defenses had to play the run against favre while they knew Marino was going to throw it and still couldn't stop him. THE PROBLEM WAS his defense couldn't stop anybody! THAT IS WHERE THE BEST DEFFENSIVE LINEMAN REGGIE WHITE COMES IN and Green Bay stopped a lot of people with that defense! Things were alot easier for favre than and that is why Marino was better!

I don't understand. It appears you're saying that Marino's better because Favre had the better defense. But that would seem to imply that Marino would be coming from behind more often, and therefore forced to throw more often. Which would imply, if anything, that his stats are inflated, while Favre's were deflated by the huge lead he assumably got with Reggie White behind him. Are you trying to say that Favre's stats are more impressive because he compiled them in victories?

I could see that argument. Everything is relative really. Some argue that Marino would have won more if he had a better running game, but fail to discount how much better his stats are because he didn't (same goes for Moon, even though he isn't in the debate for the greatest ever). Some say it's about winning even though football is such a team sport and plenty of crap QB's have titles.It seems like Elway is the only QB (post 80) that has:1) Posted great stats.2) Had success without a lot of help (even though he got trounced in the bowls, he got his team there).3) Won when he did have help.

 

[Urine_Idiot]

No other QB can claim all of the following

1) Had his own cereal

2) Winning record in USFL, CFL & NFL

3) Converted a drop kick

Doug Flutie is without equal. Period. End of argument.

What's the saying: if Chuck Norris needed a qb to run his flag football team, then Doug Flutie would be it...

EDIT TO ADD:

Many people here have spun their wheels on these threads and several have pointed out that each poster is going to be biased by what he or she thinks is of value. The tier system works as does the Letterman way of lumping, so to chime in with mine:

Tier 1 (Great QB's with rings/championships (ie won THE BIG GAME) that are retired)

(John Elway, Otto Graham, Joe Montana, Johnny U, Steve Young, ect)

Tier 2 (Great QB's without rings/championships that are retired)

(Dan Fouts, Steve Grogan, Jim Kelly, Dan Marino, Warren Moon, ect)

Tier 3 (Great QB's with or without rings whose history is not yet finished)

(Tom Brady, Brett Farve, Peyton Manning, Phillip Rivers(yes I said it), ect)

Tier 4 (the rest of the bunch)

(insert the quarterbacks that you though stunk it up...ie Tony Eason, Ryan Leaf, Chuck Long, Ken O'Brien, ect)

If you want to make a list from those tiers than have at it.... There are many great QB's out there even some of the tier 4 and below.... And the wonderful thing about it is that some may be moving into the tier ones....

 

[Marc Levin]

Overall, their statistics are remarkably similar, and statistics are about the only thing Marino has over his contemporaries. The nod has to go to Favre.

Why?Marino still has the edge in stats - and, IMO, he has the edge in some more important stats - comeback/2 min. wins.Some folks poo-poo those stats, saying a good QB shouldn't be in those positions - well, no, good TEAMS shouldn't be in those positions, and the QB saves their butts - Marino's all-time # of wins is a testament to him as a QB, not how good his teams were. Good TEAMS also win Super Bowls - not good QBs.If comeback/2 min wins are unimportant, then why are Super Bowl wins important? Is it because Super Bowl wins are a testament to a QB leading his team in the most important game?Well, aren't comeback/2 min. wins a testament to a QB leading his team in the most important PARTS OF GAMES?Not sure why Favre is better than Marino - as good, sure. But both QBs are inthe second tier of all time greats. Behind a guy in a tier by himself - Montana.Arguing which is #2 and which is #3 seems pretty silly. Suffice to say, they are both top-5 all-time great QBs behind Montana at #1.

Ironically, as GR mentioned, the stats you toss out in support of Marino above - wins and comeback/2min wins, are all owned by Elway.For the record, I still claim it's Unitas, but I'm starting to re-consider. Favre make s a strong case, and I like Montana as well. I just love to argue Elway s Marino - I consider it a hobby, especially being a Bronco fan living in the Miami area.

Elway owns 2 min wins, Marino owsn comeback wins (or vice versa ) - and noone is close to either of them.

 

[Marc Levin]

On the flip side, Marino does not pass the ball as much if he has wide receivers that change every couple of years. Marino in a comfortable system for a long period of time was a great QB but once diversity started to set in with the players around him all hell broke loose and not in a good way.

There is no way you watched Marino from the beginning to the end and could say this with a straight face.He, Favre, Elway - all did it regardless of the receivers in front of them.

 

[Urine_Idiot]

No other QB can claim all of the following

1) Had his own cereal

2) Winning record in USFL, CFL & NFL

3) Converted a drop kick

Doug Flutie is without equal. Period. End of argument.

What's the saying: if Chuck Norris needed a qb to run his flag football team, then Doug Flutie would be it...

EDIT TO ADD:

Many people here have spun their wheels on these threads and several have pointed out that each poster is going to be biased by what he or she thinks is of value. The tier system works as does the Letterman way of lumping, so to chime in with mine:

Tier 1 (Great QB's with rings/championships (ie won THE BIG GAME) that are retired)

(John Elway, Otto Graham, Joe Montana, Johnny U, Steve Young, ect)

Tier 2 (Great QB's without rings/championships that are retired)

(Dan Fouts, Steve Grogan, Jim Kelly, Dan Marino, Warren Moon, ect)

Tier 3 (Great QB's with or without rings whose history is not yet finished)

(Tom Brady, Brett Farve, Peyton Manning, Phillip Rivers(yes I said it), ect)

Tier 4 (the rest of the bunch)

(insert the quarterbacks that you though stunk it up...ie Tony Eason, Ryan Leaf, Chuck Long, Ken O'Brien, ect)

If you want to make a list from those tiers than have at it.... There are many great QB's out there even some of the tier 4 and below.... And the wonderful thing about it is that some may be moving into the tier ones....

and as to the question of the thread: My answer is Steve "the human neck" Grogan despite his shortcomings.

 

[Marc Levin]

I'll take Montana every day of the week.

You can have everyone else.

its funny how some baseball fans thinks barry bonds is the best ever, yet he was terrible in the postseason but when it comes to the quarterback position in football he has have a super bowl ring. You have to depend on at least 21 other people to do their jobs extremely well to be successful. My opinion Marino would have had 5 rings with the 49ers, bears, or the bills. He was never surrounded by hall of fame talent!

Montana was better than Marino with or without the Super Bowl rings. Marino had loads more physical talent than Montana, but Joe always got it done in crunch time. Objectively, Montana had a higher career QB rating as well. Even if there were no such thing as the Super Bowl, Montana would still be my choice over Marino. Montana was a winner, you could see it in his demeanor.

He was such a winner that another QB came in right after he left and was almost as successful (yeah, less rings but he was going against the Cowgirls prior to free agency)?I think I could be a huge winner too with Rice, Criag, the TE (forget his name), that defense, etc. The 49ers were STACKED any way you look at it.

Also, if Montana was such a "winner," what happened in KC? Great D, great run game, good enough receivers, yet the team always lost to Marino's phins in the playoffs.Montana's the greatest QB BECAUSE OF those Super Bowl rings and his performances in the playoffs. Marino owned every QB in the regular season - you take the post-season out of it, Marino wins this debate.

 

[Lemmiwinks]

I'll take Montana every day of the week.

You can have everyone else.

its funny how some baseball fans thinks barry bonds is the best ever, yet he was terrible in the postseason but when it comes to the quarterback position in football he has have a super bowl ring. You have to depend on at least 21 other people to do their jobs extremely well to be successful. My opinion Marino would have had 5 rings with the 49ers, bears, or the bills. He was never surrounded by hall of fame talent!

Montana was better than Marino with or without the Super Bowl rings. Marino had loads more physical talent than Montana, but Joe always got it done in crunch time. Objectively, Montana had a higher career QB rating as well. Even if there were no such thing as the Super Bowl, Montana would still be my choice over Marino. Montana was a winner, you could see it in his demeanor.

He was such a winner that another QB came in right after he left and was almost as successful (yeah, less rings but he was going against the Cowgirls prior to free agency)?I think I could be a huge winner too with Rice, Criag, the TE (forget his name), that defense, etc. The 49ers were STACKED any way you look at it.

Also, if Montana was such a "winner," what happened in KC? Great D, great run game, good enough receivers, yet the team always lost to Marino's phins in the playoffs.Montana's the greatest QB BECAUSE OF those Super Bowl rings and his performances in the playoffs. Marino owned every QB in the regular season - you take the post-season out of it, Marino wins this debate.

He was old and on the downside of his career when he played in KC. He was also hurt. Check this out: Regular season QB rating for career:

Montana - 92.3

Marino - 86.4

I could go into other stats like how many regular season late game comebacks Montana made vs. how many Marino had, but it's pointless. If you watched football in the '80's, it should be blatantly obvious that Marino was a stats hog and Montana was a winner. And even more damning, in the most important stat: QB rating, Montana was better for his whole career.

As to the other guy, who said "if montana was such a 'winner', why did another QB come in and do just as well". Well, that "other QB" is FREAKIN' STEVE YOUNG who is, in my opinion, the second greatest QB of all time. That's not much of an indictment against Montana, that props to Bill Walsh, who had the foresight to pick up two amazing QB's.

Yawn, this debate is BORING. People still talking about Marino. Hell, he's not even top two since the 80's, Montana and Young were clearly the best 2 QB's of that era.

 

[Marc Levin]

I could go into other stats like how many regular season late game comebacks Montana made vs. how many Marino had, but it's pointless.

for you.Marino/Elway own those records by a landslide.

 

[Lemmiwinks]

I could go into other stats like how many regular season late game comebacks Montana made vs. how many Marino had, but it's pointless.

for you.Marino/Elway own those records by a landslide.

Montana 31 4th Quarter comebacksMarino 37 4th Quarter comebacksMontana 192 games playedMarino 242 games playedMontana - .16 4th quarter comebacks/games playedMarino - .15 4th quarter comebacks/games playedMontana wins again if you pro-rate comebacks over games played. You didn't respond to my other statement about montana also having the higher regular season QB rating. Anything to say? Even without the playoffs, Montana was just bettter under the most objective standard... QB rating.ETA: even if you don't pro rate like I did, 37 to 31 is hardly a "landslide".

 

[KingEl]

What happened in KC?? Always lost to the Phins in the playoffs?

1. Montana had great moments in KC- even old and at the end of his carreer.

His Wr's were mediocre and Montana raised their level. I mentioned in an earlier post some moments:

Montana's first year in KC: Playoffs: 1st game: 4th down, last play of game, Montana throws a TD to tie a tough Pitts. Leads them in overtime for the win!! Headline of USA Today Sports which I still have: JOE COOL STRIKES AGAIN

2nd game: Against Houston and Moon that was on some kind of big win streak and breaking all kind of offensive records: In a shootout, Montana lead KC in a 4th Quart comeback and wins: Montana Magic again.

3rd game: In buffalo: frozen game: Montana looked great- KC"s def got destroyed, Montana led KC to a potential td late in 1st half and the WR has it bounce off his chest in the endzone and is intercepted. I beleive in the 1st couple plays of 2nd half, Montana gets slammed to the frozen turf and suffers a horrible concussion. KC loses

Still a great run that most Qb's don't accomplish in a year.

2nd year in KC

Montana goes to San Fran and beats San Fran and Young.

Montana leads KC to a last second win against Elway and Broncos is what was voted best Monday night game ever recently.

and last, in the Playoff wildcard game: Montana and Marino start a 1st half shootout where I think they both could not miss, and were scoring td's at will. KC then fell apart,droppd passes. Montana kept them in it, but Dolphins pulled away in 2nd half.

So yes, the dolphins beat KC with Montana once in the playoffs, but you indicate incorrectly it was more than once.

And what did he do in KC? In two years, more than most great QB's have done in their whole carreers.

As someone else said, Young being successful is no knock on Montana. Young was great in his own right, and Walsh has said several times that It was an open competition between Montana and Young to be the starter even with Montana's credentials, and Montana won out every time. Even when he was traded, the 49ers were going to give him the starting job back after he had been injured for a year, but Montana asked to be traded. Montana would have won more SuperBowls with the dominant 49ers than Young did. Easily would have won the game that Young did win and prob would have delivered another one.

 

[marinolives13]

You should add Marino played in 242 gMES WHILE fAVRE HAS PLAYED IN 235! mARINO MISSED A WHOLE SEASON IN 93 AND alot of games in his last season. The stats are alot closer that you are making it look.You said MArino had reliable receivers over those years, what you didn't say was that Farve had Edgar Bennett and dorsey levens run for 1000yards. Defenses had to play the run against favre while they knew Marino was going to throw it and still couldn't stop him. THE PROBLEM WAS his defense couldn't stop anybody! THAT IS WHERE THE BEST DEFFENSIVE LINEMAN REGGIE WHITE COMES IN and Green Bay stopped a lot of people with that defense! Things were alot easier for favre than and that is why Marino was better!

I don't understand. It appears you're saying that Marino's better because Favre had the better defense. But that would seem to imply that Marino would be coming from behind more often, and therefore forced to throw more often. Which would imply, if anything, that his stats are inflated, while Favre's were deflated by the huge lead he assumably got with Reggie White behind him. Are you trying to say that Favre's stats are more impressive because he compiled them in victories?

Obviously favre's stats are inflated because he is the one throwing on 1st and goal evry game and throwing ints. Reggie and defense helped put favre in better field position so he would have easier td passes. teams knew Marino was only option and still couldn't stop him. His stats would have even better if he had played in a west coast offense! He had to play for jimmy johnson his last 4 years and constantly tried to run, but johnson never got a capable running back. He also got rid of irving fryar and replaced him broken down fred barnett. 4 years of Marino's career were taken away by Jimmy, so I would have to say that his stats were deflated. Favre has had the same system every since he has been in green bay. West Coast Offense is a stat oriented offense that inflates alot of stats! Maybe Favre's stats are inflated!

 

[Lemmiwinks]

What happened in KC?? Always lost to the Phins in the playoffs?1. Montana had great moments in KC- even old and at the end of his carreer.His Wr's were mediocre and Montana raised their level. I mentioned in an earlier post some moments:Montana's first year in KC: Playoffs: 1st game: 4th down, last play of game, Montana throws a TD to tie a tough Pitts. Leads them in overtime for the win!! Headline of USA Today Sports which I still have: JOE COOL STRIKES AGAIN2nd game: Against Houston and Moon that was on some kind of big win streak and breaking all kind of offensive records: In a shootout, Montana lead KC in a 4th Quart comeback and wins: Montana Magic again. 3rd game: In buffalo: frozen game: Montana looked great- KC"s def got destroyed, Montana led KC to a potential td late in 1st half and the WR has it bounce off his chest in the endzone and is intercepted. I beleive in the 1st couple plays of 2nd half, Montana gets slammed to the frozen turf and suffers a horrible concussion. KC losesStill a great run that most Qb's don't accomplish in a year.2nd year in KCMontana goes to San Fran and beats San Fran and Young.Montana leads KC to a last second win against Elway and Broncos is what was voted best Monday night game ever recently.and last, in the Playoff wildcard game: Montana and Marino start a 1st half shootout where I think they both could not miss, and were scoring td's at will. KC then fell apart,droppd passes. Montana kept them in it, but Dolphins pulled away in 2nd half.So yes, the dolphins beat KC with Montana once in the playoffs, but you indicate incorrectly it was more than once.And what did he do in KC? In two years, more than most great QB's have done in their whole carreers.As someone else said, Young being successful is no knock on Montana. Young was great in his own right, and Walsh has said several times that It was an open competition between Montana and Young to be the starter even with Montana's credentials, and Montana won out every time. Even when he was traded, the 49ers were going to give him the starting job back after he had been injured for a year, but Montana asked to be traded. Montana would have won more SuperBowls with the dominant 49ers than Young did. Easily would have won the game that Young did win and prob would have delivered another one.

Great posting, except the Montana vs. Young game was in KC, not SF. I know because I was there!

 

[marinolives13]

I'll take Montana every day of the week.

You can have everyone else.

its funny how some baseball fans thinks barry bonds is the best ever, yet he was terrible in the postseason but when it comes to the quarterback position in football he has have a super bowl ring. You have to depend on at least 21 other people to do their jobs extremely well to be successful. My opinion Marino would have had 5 rings with the 49ers, bears, or the bills. He was never surrounded by hall of fame talent!

Montana was better than Marino with or without the Super Bowl rings. Marino had loads more physical talent than Montana, but Joe always got it done in crunch time. Objectively, Montana had a higher career QB rating as well. Even if there were no such thing as the Super Bowl, Montana would still be my choice over Marino. Montana was a winner, you could see it in his demeanor.

He was such a winner that another QB came in right after he left and was almost as successful (yeah, less rings but he was going against the Cowgirls prior to free agency)?I think I could be a huge winner too with Rice, Criag, the TE (forget his name), that defense, etc. The 49ers were STACKED any way you look at it.

Also, if Montana was such a "winner," what happened in KC? Great D, great run game, good enough receivers, yet the team always lost to Marino's phins in the playoffs.Montana's the greatest QB BECAUSE OF those Super Bowl rings and his performances in the playoffs. Marino owned every QB in the regular season - you take the post-season out of it, Marino wins this debate.

He was old and on the downside of his career when he played in KC. He was also hurt. Check this out: Regular season QB rating for career:

Montana - 92.3

Marino - 86.4

I could go into other stats like how many regular season late game comebacks Montana made vs. how many Marino had, but it's pointless. If you watched football in the '80's, it should be blatantly obvious that Marino was a stats hog and Montana was a winner. And even more damning, in the most important stat: QB rating, Montana was better for his whole career.

As to the other guy, who said "if montana was such a 'winner', why did another QB come in and do just as well". Well, that "other QB" is FREAKIN' STEVE YOUNG who is, in my opinion, the second greatest QB of all time. That's not much of an indictment against Montana, that props to Bill Walsh, who had the foresight to pick up two amazing QB's.

Yawn, this debate is BORING. People still talking about Marino. Hell, he's not even top two since the 80's, Montana and Young were clearly the best 2 QB's of that era.

92.3 inflated overrated stat that the west coast offense helps tremendously! Lets talk about steve young in tampa.1985 tam | 5 | 72 138 52.2 935 6.8 3 8 | 40 233 1 |

| 1986 tam | 14 | 195 363 53.7 2282 6.3 8 13 | 74 425 5

Absolutely brutal! but put him on the most talented team in the league in the genius'(bill walsh) offense and he excels. Young sat behind montana because he was not better than him. As far Marino not close sorry! Steve Bono, Jeff Garcia, and Matt Cavanaugh even looked great in that offense. Young was good, but not top 5!

 

[marinolives13]

I'll take Montana every day of the week.

You can have everyone else.

its funny how some baseball fans thinks barry bonds is the best ever, yet he was terrible in the postseason but when it comes to the quarterback position in football he has have a super bowl ring. You have to depend on at least 21 other people to do their jobs extremely well to be successful. My opinion Marino would have had 5 rings with the 49ers, bears, or the bills. He was never surrounded by hall of fame talent!

Montana was better than Marino with or without the Super Bowl rings. Marino had loads more physical talent than Montana, but Joe always got it done in crunch time. Objectively, Montana had a higher career QB rating as well. Even if there were no such thing as the Super Bowl, Montana would still be my choice over Marino. Montana was a winner, you could see it in his demeanor.

He was such a winner that another QB came in right after he left and was almost as successful (yeah, less rings but he was going against the Cowgirls prior to free agency)?I think I could be a huge winner too with Rice, Criag, the TE (forget his name), that defense, etc. The 49ers were STACKED any way you look at it.

Also, if Montana was such a "winner," what happened in KC? Great D, great run game, good enough receivers, yet the team always lost to Marino's phins in the playoffs.Montana's the greatest QB BECAUSE OF those Super Bowl rings and his performances in the playoffs. Marino owned every QB in the regular season - you take the post-season out of it, Marino wins this debate.

He was old and on the downside of his career when he played in KC. He was also hurt. Check this out: Regular season QB rating for career:

Montana - 92.3

Marino - 86.4

I could go into other stats like how many regular season late game comebacks Montana made vs. how many Marino had, but it's pointless. If you watched football in the '80's, it should be blatantly obvious that Marino was a stats hog and Montana was a winner. undefined

As to the other guy, who said "if montana was such a 'winner', why did another QB come in and do just as well". Well, that "other QB" is FREAKIN' STEVE YOUNG who is, in my opinion, the second greatest QB of all time. That's not much of an indictment against Montana, that props to Bill Walsh, who had the foresight to pick up two amazing QB's.

Yawn, this debate is BORING. People still talking about Marino. Hell, he's not even top two since the 80's, Montana and Young were clearly the best 2 QB's of that era.

94.1 Kurt Warner, St. Louis, 1998-2003; N.Y. Giants, 2004; Arizona, 2005 Kurt Warner must be better than both of them! OVERRATED STAT!

 

[Marc Levin]

I could go into other stats like how many regular season late game comebacks Montana made vs. how many Marino had, but it's pointless.

for you.Marino/Elway own those records by a landslide.

Montana 31 4th Quarter comebacksMarino 37 4th Quarter comebacksMontana 192 games playedMarino 242 games playedMontana - .16 4th quarter comebacks/games playedMarino - .15 4th quarter comebacks/games playedMontana wins again if you pro-rate comebacks over games played. You didn't respond to my other statement about montana also having the higher regular season QB rating. Anything to say? Even without the playoffs, Montana was just bettter under the most objective standard... QB rating.ETA: even if you don't pro rate like I did, 37 to 31 is hardly a "landslide".

Can you point me to a good site with those stats so I can take a peek and then comment?I agree that Montana was the ultimate winner - his leadership skills and composure under pressure were (are) beyond compare. As I have said multiple times now, he's my call for greatest ever QB.

 

[Marc Levin]

4 years of Marino's career were taken away by Jimmy, so I would have to say that his stats were deflated.

Not completely true - Marino was horrendous in '99, but these are not particularly bad stats the previous three years: 1996 mia | 13 | 221 373 59.2 2795 7.5 17 9 | 11 -3 0 || 1997 mia | 16 | 319 548 58.2 3780 6.9 16 11 | 18 -14 0 || 1998 mia | 16 | 310 537 57.7 3497 6.5 23 15 | 21 -3 1 |32.4 pass attempts per game, near 58.3% completion rate, 223.8 pass yards/game, 1.2 pass TDs/game, .77 INTs per gameLooks like that is basically in line with his previous career stats under Shula.

 

[Lemmiwinks]

I could go into other stats like how many regular season late game comebacks Montana made vs. how many Marino had, but it's pointless.

for you.Marino/Elway own those records by a landslide.

Montana 31 4th Quarter comebacksMarino 37 4th Quarter comebacksMontana 192 games playedMarino 242 games playedMontana - .16 4th quarter comebacks/games playedMarino - .15 4th quarter comebacks/games playedMontana wins again if you pro-rate comebacks over games played. You didn't respond to my other statement about montana also having the higher regular season QB rating. Anything to say? Even without the playoffs, Montana was just bettter under the most objective standard... QB rating.ETA: even if you don't pro rate like I did, 37 to 31 is hardly a "landslide".

Can you point me to a good site with those stats so I can take a peek and then comment?I agree that Montana was the ultimate winner - his leadership skills and composure under pressure were (are) beyond compare. As I have said multiple times now, he's my call for greatest ever QB.

I used Wikipeidia (the marino and montana pages) for the 4th quarter comeback stats. They have a lot of good info.I totally disagree on Young. How can you point to those years in Tampa? That was the worst team ever and Young was basically an NFL rook! The guy was the smartest football player ever AND he was the best running QB of all time (Sorry but Mike Vick is not a QB, IMO). His QB rating was amazing. If you want to credit the surrounding cast, the coach, that's all fine and dandy, but the fact is, you can't seperate the QB from the team. Every QB has a system to work in. Young and Montana excelled in the system they were given. Plus, it's not like Don Shula was a slouch at coaching!!

 

[Marc Levin]

I assume you are responding to someone else, right - Young was amazing to watch play.

 

[Lemmiwinks]

I'll take Montana every day of the week.

You can have everyone else.

its funny how some baseball fans thinks barry bonds is the best ever, yet he was terrible in the postseason but when it comes to the quarterback position in football he has have a super bowl ring. You have to depend on at least 21 other people to do their jobs extremely well to be successful. My opinion Marino would have had 5 rings with the 49ers, bears, or the bills. He was never surrounded by hall of fame talent!

Montana was better than Marino with or without the Super Bowl rings. Marino had loads more physical talent than Montana, but Joe always got it done in crunch time. Objectively, Montana had a higher career QB rating as well. Even if there were no such thing as the Super Bowl, Montana would still be my choice over Marino. Montana was a winner, you could see it in his demeanor.

He was such a winner that another QB came in right after he left and was almost as successful (yeah, less rings but he was going against the Cowgirls prior to free agency)?I think I could be a huge winner too with Rice, Criag, the TE (forget his name), that defense, etc. The 49ers were STACKED any way you look at it.

Also, if Montana was such a "winner," what happened in KC? Great D, great run game, good enough receivers, yet the team always lost to Marino's phins in the playoffs.Montana's the greatest QB BECAUSE OF those Super Bowl rings and his performances in the playoffs. Marino owned every QB in the regular season - you take the post-season out of it, Marino wins this debate.

He was old and on the downside of his career when he played in KC. He was also hurt. Check this out: Regular season QB rating for career:

Montana - 92.3

Marino - 86.4

I could go into other stats like how many regular season late game comebacks Montana made vs. how many Marino had, but it's pointless. If you watched football in the '80's, it should be blatantly obvious that Marino was a stats hog and Montana was a winner. undefined

As to the other guy, who said "if montana was such a 'winner', why did another QB come in and do just as well". Well, that "other QB" is FREAKIN' STEVE YOUNG who is, in my opinion, the second greatest QB of all time. That's not much of an indictment against Montana, that props to Bill Walsh, who had the foresight to pick up two amazing QB's.

Yawn, this debate is BORING. People still talking about Marino. Hell, he's not even top two since the 80's, Montana and Young were clearly the best 2 QB's of that era.

94.1 Kurt Warner, St. Louis, 1998-2003; N.Y. Giants, 2004; Arizona, 2005 Kurt Warner must be better than both of them! OVERRATED STAT!

No it's not when used properly. And I think Kurt Warner is vastly underrated and might have made the HOF if his career had been longer. He's obviously not better than Montana or Marino to anyone who watched the game, but he is left out of the top 5 QB's of the current era discussion way too often.