Is Ben Roethlisberger as good as Tom Brady? (1 Viewer)

[treat88]

I do watch a lot of football but you are right I do not watch every Steelers game, but yes Scott and Flozell are probably equal to Bushrod and Stinchcomb. Bushrod was a 4th round pick out of Towson and Stinchcomb is lucky he still plays. The Saints drafted a tackle this past season C.Brown but he was not ready. Maybe the Steelers should stop calling 7 step drops if they can't protect.

yup... you would assume that would be the logical next step but it just hasn't happened.

I'm not concerned with when they were drafted as often times that is not relevant to how they play. Players play regardless of where they are picked. You have a better chance of getting a stud earlier in the draft but its not always the case.

and for the record Jonathan Scott was a 5th rd pick out of Texas in 2006 and Flozell is lucky he still plays.

Although he has played pretty damn well this year.He's been an upgrade to Willie Colon in every sense of the word.

 

[Godsbrother]

I do watch a lot of football but you are right I do not watch every Steelers game, but yes Scott and Flozell are probably equal to Bushrod and Stinchcomb. Bushrod was a 4th round pick out of Towson and Stinchcomb is lucky he still plays. The Saints drafted a tackle this past season C.Brown but he was not ready. Maybe the Steelers should stop calling 7 step drops if they can't protect.

yup... you would assume that would be the logical next step but it just hasn't happened.

I'm not concerned with when they were drafted as often times that is not relevant to how they play. Players play regardless of where they are picked. You have a better chance of getting a stud earlier in the draft but its not always the case.

and for the record Jonathan Scott was a 5th rd pick out of Texas in 2006 and Flozell is lucky he still plays.

Although he has played pretty damn well this year.He's been an upgrade to Willie Colon in every sense of the word.

Willie who?

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

Two guys who know something about football.

"Bottom line, if you ask football people, they're going to put Ben Roethlisberger up there with [Manning and Brady] almost unanimously," said Bill Polian, Colts president. "No one would leave him out. And others who have made the Pro Bowl, for example, wouldn't even get consideration if you took a poll of all 32 general managers."

"There ought to be a stat for 'What did you do when you needed a pass completion to win the game,' " Hall of Fame coach John Madden said in a phone interview. "That's where Ben's stats would show up, when you make the play when you need to. A lot of guys get stats when they don't need them. Ben doesn't."

Link

 

[Steelers4Life]

Checkmate. Per Rotoworld.... unless you feel you know more about talent evaluation than Bill Polian, of course.

According to Colts president Bill Polian, it's "almost unanimous" that NFL talent evaluators place Ben Roethlisberger in the elite category with Peyton Manning and Tom Brady.

And there's not a more respected or decorated talent evaluator in the league than Polian, architect of the Bills' Super Bowl teams as well as the past decade's Colts' dominance. Big Ben is 10-2 (.833) in the postseason compared to 14-5 (.737) for Brady and 9-10 (.474) for Manning. The truth is that Roethlisberger has been dominant since he entered the league. His regular-season winning percentage is second only to Brady's, and no QB tops his 8.0 yards per pass attempt.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I also find it fascinating that a QB's whole career is pretty much taken into account when comparing him to his peers, but that usually doesn't apply when comparing other positions. For example, no one is gonna said Tomlinson is better than Chris Johnson right now (even though LT2's career to date as a whole has been clearly better), but Brady's three Super Bowl wins from 6-9 years ago are enough to elevate him above almost everyone, including Roethlisberger, who is a win in nine days away from having won THREE titles since the last time Brady won one.

Not drawing any direct conclusions...I just find it fascinating.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

I can't see an NFL GM taking Big Ben over Brady, Manning, Brees, Rodgers, or Rivers. If you want to slot him somewhere in the next 5, I can live with that, but I just don't see the Top 5.

"Bottom line, if you ask football people, they're going to put Ben Roethlisberger up there with [Manning and Brady] almost unanimously," said Bill Polian, Colts president. "No one would leave him out. And others who have made the Pro Bowl, for example, wouldn't even get consideration if you took a poll of all 32 general managers."

Link

David.... your rebuttal?Um, we have no response. That was perfect.

YES !!! That's how you debate !

 

[Carolina Hustler]

NE ran the ball on 46% of their offensive plays. The Steelers ran the ball on 47% of their offensive plays.

So, the Steelers ran the ball 1% more often than the Patriots, but the Patriots had a higher YPC (4.3) than the Steelers (4.1).

Thru 18 games 2010 Steelers ran the ball 545 times and passed the ball 530 times, 50.7% rushing vs 49.3% passingThru 17 games 2010 Patriots ran the ball 482 times and passed the ball 552 times, 46.6% rushing vs 53.4% passing

Steelers run the ball a larger percentage of the time.... As I said... and not 1% as you described but 4.1%

As far as YPC goes, that's more of an individual stat, though you need yards, the more important stats would be first downs and TD's, that is the success of this game. That and turnover ratio... And if you're so worried about Yardage when it comes to a running game discussion, then it should be included in the Ben vs Brady discussion as well.. Which had more yardage this year?

Pitt scored 15 rushing TDs, but 2 came from Roethlisberger. NE scored 19 rushign TDs, with 1 from Brady. So, the Steelers scored a slightly higher % of their TDs on non-QB running plays, but it's a small margin (32% of NE's TDs were non-QB rush TDs, while 35% of Pitt's TDs were non-QB rush TDs).

Thru 18 games 2010 Steelers scored 19 times rushing and 24 times passing, 45% rushing vs 55% passingThru 17 games 2010 Patriots scored 19 times rushing and 39 times passing, 33% rushing vs 67% passing

Steelers score a larger percentage of there TD's on running plays then does NE... As I said... and not 3% as you described but 12%

Thru 14 games (that Ben played) the steelers scored 36 total offensive TD's, of which Ben (rushing and passing) scored 22.. Ben scored 61% of Steeler TD's

Thru 17 games the Patriots scored 58 total offensive TD's of which Brady (rushing and passing) scored 39.. Brady scored 67% of Patriots TD's

On a higher scoring team, Brady scores a larger % of the TD's.. That says something...

Finally, you say "1st down % is pretty equal." NE had a 26.2 1st down% when rushing, while the Steelers had a 22.5 1st down% when rushing.

Thru 18 games 2010 Steelers ran for 123 1st downs and passed for 195, 38.7% on rushing 1st downs vs 61.3% passingThru 17 games 2010 Patriots ran for 125 1st downs and passed for 215, 36.8% on rushing 1st downs vs 63.2% passing

So that's not exactly equal, but not tipped to the favor of the Ben as you suggest, but in Brady's favor instead.. So when I said relatively equal, I was doing you a favor..

Thru 14 games (that Ben played) the Steelers gained 268 offensive 1st downs, of which Ben (rushing and passing) gained 189.. Ben gained 70.5% of Steeler 1st downs

Thru 17 games the Patriots gained 340 offensive 1st downs, of which Brady (rushing and passing) gained 219.. Brady gained 64.5% of Patriots 1st downs

So Ben does better in that break down..

I'm not going to crunch any more stats.. This is getting ridiculous.. You haven't shown any solid evidence that suggests Ben is better than Brady... These above are all hard #'s, You may try to confuse the subject and call on my credibility, but the #'s above can be backed up. If you want to disprove me, disprove the #'s.. The facts.. It doesn't matter how you try to spin it, or what direction I've come from.. The #'s above tell no lies...

Brady scores more and at a higher percentage, he wins more, he turns the ball over less, he's a bigger % of his teams offensive plays and scores...

Ben made it further in the 2010 playoffs... Because of his defense and running game owning the first half of the Jets matchup... Sure he had a few good plays, most QB's at that level do.. It amounts to him "not losing the game".. The Defense and Running game won it..

So, to sum up, you contend that the Steelers running game supports Roethlisberger more than the Patriots running game supports Brady. To try to "prove" this point, you stack the facts to give the illusion that this is true.

If by Illusion, you mean showing you cold hard, indisputable #'s, %'s, and Stats... I guess you're right

When the % of rushing plays is 1% more for the Steelers, you say "Pitt relies on the run a larger % of the time."

X

When the % of rushing TDs is 3% more for the Steelers, you say "Pitt scores a larger % of their TDs by runs."

Way off on this one

XX

You completely ignore the fact that NE ran for a higher YPC, and rushed for more yards.

Didn't ignore it, noted it, but YPC doesn't mean a whole lot if you can't score or get first downs and that obviously shows above. And You're talking about total rushing yards by NE vs Pit, rather than % of NE offensive yards that are rushing vs the same percentage for Pit... Which is another stat that will favor NE.. but whatever

XXX

When NE has a higher 1st down %, you say "1st down % is pretty equal."

Sorry you're all out of strikes...

 

[Carolina Hustler]

I can't see an NFL GM taking Big Ben over Brady, Manning, Brees, Rodgers, or Rivers. If you want to slot him somewhere in the next 5, I can live with that, but I just don't see the Top 5.

"Bottom line, if you ask football people, they're going to put Ben Roethlisberger up there with [Manning and Brady] almost unanimously," said Bill Polian, Colts president. "No one would leave him out. And others who have made the Pro Bowl, for example, wouldn't even get consideration if you took a poll of all 32 general managers."

Link

David.... your rebuttal?Um, we have no response. That was perfect.

YES !!! That's how you debate !

Pre-SB hype....

 

[David Yudkin]

I can't see an NFL GM taking Big Ben over Brady, Manning, Brees, Rodgers, or Rivers. If you want to slot him somewhere in the next 5, I can live with that, but I just don't see the Top 5.

"Bottom line, if you ask football people, they're going to put Ben Roethlisberger up there with [Manning and Brady] almost unanimously," said Bill Polian, Colts president. "No one would leave him out. And others who have made the Pro Bowl, for example, wouldn't even get consideration if you took a poll of all 32 general managers."

Link

David.... your rebuttal?Um, we have no response. That was perfect.

YES !!! That's how you debate !

The only way we would know is to actually poll "the football people." You basically have the opinion of ONE GUY speaking on behalf of everyone else. And who exactly are these "football people"? Until we poll all 32 teams to rank 5 guys that they would want at QB right now for the upcoming season, none of us (myself included) would be able to have more than a guess. And I also suspect that if you asked these guys to narrow it down to five, they probably would name about 8 guys. Kinda like asking people who the Top 10 fantasy RBs will be for next year, where people will start listing 15 guys. That being said . . .The league gets involved in who makes the Pro Bowl. I generally agree that sometimes guys make it that shouldn't. Why has Roethlisberger only been to asked one Pro Bowl, on par with the Youngs, Cassells, and Garrards of the world? (I realize Ben has rings and the others don't.) The fans haven't supported him, the players haven't selected him, and the league hasn't chosen him even to replace guys that are hurt or opted not to attend. I don't remember Bill Polian or other "football people" being outraged by Ben's abscence.

As for Ghost Rider talking about Brady and his titles from several years ago, it's not like he's done nothing since then. He lead a team with a perfect regular season and another team with 14 wins. He won two MVPs. He's set various records. I don't recall Roethlilsberger ever receiving even one league MVP vote.

If things like league MVP and Pro Bowls and All Pro selections had no part of the game, then why bother having them? Again, I am not knocking Roethilisberger's play or accomplishments, only that in things that reward player performance he has been noticably absent. Did the voters for these things all suddenly forget that Roelisberger played in the NFL all at the same time and foget to vote for him?

Even Troy Aikman, who many thought was a game manager and had the benefit of a phenomenal support cast, was selected to 6 Pro Bowls. Again, it's not a perfect measure of rewarding player performance, but that's one of the ways people reward great accomplishments.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

The Indy GM just said that Big Ben deserves to be mentioned with the likes of Tom Brady and Peyton Manning.

If he wins, that's 3 Sb's. Guys like Rivers doesn't have any and some of you think GM's would take Rivers over Big Ben? Come on, that doesn't even make sense.

When Big Ben wins his 3rd SB, he will go down in history as a Great QB, not a good one. He can put up stats just like all of the other big name Qb's but the guy wins and in a pass happy age where Qb's are putting up crazy numbers like 5000 passing yards and 50 Td's, all that really matters in the end is Sb's.

I'd love to hear the argument of why GM's would want Phillip Rivers over Ben Roethlesberger. Please leave out off the field stuff because if they were worried about that, then we'd have priests being the Qb's of all the NFL teams.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

The Indy GM just said that Big Ben deserves to be mentioned with the likes of Tom Brady and Peyton Manning.If he wins, that's 3 Sb's. Guys like Rivers doesn't have any and some of you think GM's would take Rivers over Big Ben? Come on, that doesn't even make sense.When Big Ben wins his 3rd SB, he will go down in history as a Great QB, not a good one. He can put up stats just like all of the other big name Qb's but the guy wins and in a pass happy age where Qb's are putting up crazy numbers like 5000 passing yards and 50 Td's, all that really matters in the end is Sb's.I'd love to hear the argument of why GM's would want Phillip Rivers over Ben Roethlesberger. Please leave out off the field stuff because if they were worried about that, then we'd have priests being the Qb's of all the NFL teams.

SB XLB. Roethlisberger - 9/21 for 123 - 5.9 average - 0 passing TD's - 2 INT's - 7 rushing attempts for 25 yards - 3.6 rushing average - 1 rushing TDI'd dare say, that SB doesn't belong to Ben...M. Hasselbeck 26/49 - 273Yards - 1TD - 1INT - 3 carries for 35 yards 11.7 rushing averageSB XLIIIB. Roethlisberger 21/30 for 256 - 8.5 average - 1 passing TD - 1 INT - 3 rushing attempts for 2 yards - 0.7 rushing average - 0 rushing TDMaybe better but I'm not sure he was such a fantastic QB in this one either..Kurt Warner 31/43 - 377Yards - 3TD - 1INT

 

[Steelfan7]

The Indy GM just said that Big Ben deserves to be mentioned with the likes of Tom Brady and Peyton Manning.

If he wins, that's 3 Sb's. Guys like Rivers doesn't have any and some of you think GM's would take Rivers over Big Ben? Come on, that doesn't even make sense.

When Big Ben wins his 3rd SB, he will go down in history as a Great QB, not a good one. He can put up stats just like all of the other big name Qb's but the guy wins and in a pass happy age where Qb's are putting up crazy numbers like 5000 passing yards and 50 Td's, all that really matters in the end is Sb's.

I'd love to hear the argument of why GM's would want Phillip Rivers over Ben Roethlesberger. Please leave out off the field stuff because if they were worried about that, then we'd have priests being the Qb's of all the NFL teams.

SB XLB. Roethlisberger - 9/21 for 123 - 5.9 average - 0 passing TD's - 2 INT's - 7 rushing attempts for 25 yards - 3.6 rushing average - 1 rushing TD

I'd dare say, that SB doesn't belong to Ben...

M. Hasselbeck 26/49 - 273Yards - 1TD - 1INT - 3 carries for 35 yards 11.7 rushing average

SB XLIII

B. Roethlisberger 21/30 for 256 - 8.5 average - 1 passing TD - 1 INT - 3 rushing attempts for 2 yards - 0.7 rushing average - 0 rushing TD

Maybe better but I'm not sure he was such a fantastic QB in this one either..

Kurt Warner 31/43 - 377Yards - 3TD - 1INT

That 1 Int was a 14 pt swing.

 

[Bayhawks]

Thru 18 games 2010 Steelers ran the ball 545 times and passed the ball 530 times, 50.7% rushing vs 49.3% passing

Thru 17 games 2010 Patriots ran the ball 482 times and passed the ball 552 times, 46.6% rushing vs 53.4% passing

Steelers run the ball a larger percentage of the time.... As I said... and not 1% as you described but 4.1%

These above are all hard #'s, You may try to confuse the subject and call on my credibility, but the #'s above can be backed up. If you want to disprove me, disprove the #'s.. The facts.. It doesn't matter how you try to spin it, or what direction I've come from.. The #'s above tell no lies...

Again, you are changing your argument to try to save face. THIS is what you said:

During the regular season Pitt relies on the run a larger % of the time than does NE, and scores a larger % of their TD's on running plays then does NE.. 1st down % is pretty equal

Regular season-last time I checked the regular season was 16 games, not 17 or 18. Yet since adding the playoff games "proved" your point (in your mind), you are trying to back-track, AGAIN. You said if I "want to disprove you, disprove the #s", so here goes (but I'm going to use the REGULAR SEASON numbers, since that was your original contention, not the cherry-picked ones you used to try to prove your point).

1) "During the regular season Pitt relies on the run a larger % of the time than does NE..."

Regular season:

NE-507 pass attempts, 25 sacks, 454 rushes-986 total offensive plays. 454/986=46% rush plays.

Pitt-479 pass attempts, 43 sacks, 471 rushes-993 total offensive plays. 471/993=47% rush plays.

See, sacks are offensive plays, so they need to be counted. When you count ALL the plays (not just the ones that make your argument look stronger), you see that the Steelers rushed the ball 47% of the time & the Pats rushed the ball 46% of the time. That's a 1% difference, hardly significant.

2) "and scores a larger % of their TD's on running plays then does NE..."

Regular season:

Pitt scored 37 offensive TDs in the 2010 regular season. 15 of these were from the rushing game, but 2 of those were from Roethlisberger. 13/37=35% of Pitt's offensive TDs were scored by non-QB rushes.

NE scored 56 offensive TDs in the 2010 regular season. 19 of these were from the running game, with 1 from Brady. 18/56=32%. That's a 3% difference.

Since your original point was that the running game "carried" Roethlisberger, while Brady's didn't, it makes sense to take out the QB rushing scores, because all including them would show is the QBs "carrying" themselves.

3) "1st down % is pretty equal"

**When you said 1st down% is pretty equal, I assumed you meant the amount of rushing 1st downs converted out of chances. That's where my numbers were from. Going on what you meant:

Regular season:

NE rushed for 119 1st downs, and passed for 196. That's 315 total. 119/315=38%

Pitt rushed for 106 1st downs, and passed for 175. That's 281 total. 106/281=37%

NE was still better, although not by the 4% margin advantage they had with the conversion stat.

So, Pitt ran the ball 1% more of the time. Pitt's non-QB rushing TDs accounted for 3% more of the offensive TDs than NE's non-QB rushing TDs. And NE had a 1% better 1st down %.

That seems pretty equal to me. 1% differences and 3% differences are not statistically significant.

There you go. I dis-proved your points. Please feel free to try to change your argument again to try to look like you aren't just throwing stuff against the wall, hoping it sticks.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

The Indy GM just said that Big Ben deserves to be mentioned with the likes of Tom Brady and Peyton Manning.

If he wins, that's 3 Sb's. Guys like Rivers doesn't have any and some of you think GM's would take Rivers over Big Ben? Come on, that doesn't even make sense.

When Big Ben wins his 3rd SB, he will go down in history as a Great QB, not a good one. He can put up stats just like all of the other big name Qb's but the guy wins and in a pass happy age where Qb's are putting up crazy numbers like 5000 passing yards and 50 Td's, all that really matters in the end is Sb's.

I'd love to hear the argument of why GM's would want Phillip Rivers over Ben Roethlesberger. Please leave out off the field stuff because if they were worried about that, then we'd have priests being the Qb's of all the NFL teams.

SB XLB. Roethlisberger - 9/21 for 123 - 5.9 average - 0 passing TD's - 2 INT's - 7 rushing attempts for 25 yards - 3.6 rushing average - 1 rushing TD

I'd dare say, that SB doesn't belong to Ben...

M. Hasselbeck 26/49 - 273Yards - 1TD - 1INT - 3 carries for 35 yards 11.7 rushing average

SB XLIII

B. Roethlisberger 21/30 for 256 - 8.5 average - 1 passing TD - 1 INT - 3 rushing attempts for 2 yards - 0.7 rushing average - 0 rushing TD

Maybe better but I'm not sure he was such a fantastic QB in this one either..

Kurt Warner 31/43 - 377Yards - 3TD - 1INT

That 1 Int was a 14 pt swing.

Agreed, that changed the whole outcome of the game... Went from going into the second half down 11 points to being up by 10..

Harrison is one of my favorite defensive players... Steeler Def is amazing.. I don't follow close enough to know how but that Def is definitely a dynasty... I can't remember the last time they flat out sucked.. I'm sure I could go back and figure it out.. But they've been great for quite some time..

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Thru 18 games 2010 Steelers ran the ball 545 times and passed the ball 530 times, 50.7% rushing vs 49.3% passing

Thru 17 games 2010 Patriots ran the ball 482 times and passed the ball 552 times, 46.6% rushing vs 53.4% passing

Steelers run the ball a larger percentage of the time.... As I said... and not 1% as you described but 4.1%

These above are all hard #'s, You may try to confuse the subject and call on my credibility, but the #'s above can be backed up. If you want to disprove me, disprove the #'s.. The facts.. It doesn't matter how you try to spin it, or what direction I've come from.. The #'s above tell no lies...

Again, you are changing your argument to try to save face. THIS is what you said:

During the regular season Pitt relies on the run a larger % of the time than does NE, and scores a larger % of their TD's on running plays then does NE.. 1st down % is pretty equal

Regular season-last time I checked the regular season was 16 games, not 17 or 18. Yet since adding the playoff games "proved" your point (in your mind), you are trying to back-track, AGAIN. You said if I "want to disprove you, disprove the #s", so here goes (but I'm going to use the REGULAR SEASON numbers, since that was your original contention, not the cherry-picked ones you used to try to prove your point).

1) "During the regular season Pitt relies on the run a larger % of the time than does NE..."

Regular season:

NE-507 pass attempts, 25 sacks, 454 rushes-986 total offensive plays. 454/986=46% rush plays.

Pitt-479 pass attempts, 43 sacks, 471 rushes-993 total offensive plays. 471/993=47% rush plays.

See, sacks are offensive plays, so they need to be counted. When you count ALL the plays (not just the ones that make your argument look stronger), you see that the Steelers rushed the ball 47% of the time & the Pats rushed the ball 46% of the time. That's a 1% difference, hardly significant.

2) "and scores a larger % of their TD's on running plays then does NE..."

Regular season:

Pitt scored 37 offensive TDs in the 2010 regular season. 15 of these were from the rushing game, but 2 of those were from Roethlisberger. 13/37=35% of Pitt's offensive TDs were scored by non-QB rushes.

NE scored 56 offensive TDs in the 2010 regular season. 19 of these were from the running game, with 1 from Brady. 18/56=32%. That's a 3% difference.

Since your original point was that the running game "carried" Roethlisberger, while Brady's didn't, it makes sense to take out the QB rushing scores, because all including them would show is the QBs "carrying" themselves.

3) "1st down % is pretty equal"

**When you said 1st down% is pretty equal, I assumed you meant the amount of rushing 1st downs converted out of chances. That's where my numbers were from. Going on what you meant:

Regular season:

NE rushed for 119 1st downs, and passed for 196. That's 315 total. 119/315=38%

Pitt rushed for 106 1st downs, and passed for 175. That's 281 total. 106/281=37%

NE was still better, although not by the 4% margin advantage they had with the conversion stat.

So, Pitt ran the ball 1% more of the time. Pitt's non-QB rushing TDs accounted for 3% more of the offensive TDs than NE's non-QB rushing TDs. And NE had a 1% better 1st down %.

That seems pretty equal to me. 1% differences and 3% differences are not statistically significant.

There you go. I dis-proved your points. Please feel free to try to change your argument again to try to look like you aren't just throwing stuff against the wall, hoping it sticks.

First you argue about playoffs, then super bowls, then regular season... Why not take the whole body of work? And no you didn't disprove my point, I took the whole body of work.. You "cherry picked"..

O and thank you for pointing out that Rothlisberger gets sacked nearly twice as much as Brady....

No matter how you try to prove it, Brady is better than Rothlisberger, no matter the arrangement of my or your posts... But it's pointless to argue it with you..

 

[David Yudkin]

The Indy GM just said that Big Ben deserves to be mentioned with the likes of Tom Brady and Peyton Manning.If he wins, that's 3 Sb's. Guys like Rivers doesn't have any and some of you think GM's would take Rivers over Big Ben? Come on, that doesn't even make sense.When Big Ben wins his 3rd SB, he will go down in history as a Great QB, not a good one. He can put up stats just like all of the other big name Qb's but the guy wins and in a pass happy age where Qb's are putting up crazy numbers like 5000 passing yards and 50 Td's, all that really matters in the end is Sb's.I'd love to hear the argument of why GM's would want Phillip Rivers over Ben Roethlesberger. Please leave out off the field stuff because if they were worried about that, then we'd have priests being the Qb's of all the NFL teams.

I don't know how many times we have to keep repeating this. Just because a team wins a SB does not mean the QB of that team is an all time great. Unless of course you are a Redskins fan, in which case Joe Theismann, Doug Williams, and Mark Rypien are all HOFers.Rivers has the second best Passer Rating in the history of the NFL (after Aaron Rodgers for those that were wondering). He also has lead the league the past 3 seasons in YPA. He's had 3 straight 4,000 yard passing seasons. Under his watch, the Chargers have gone 55-25 in the regular season. How much of the Chargers not advancing to or winning the SB can you pin on him? The Chargers had the top rated offense in the league. Is it his fault SD's special teams could not tackle anyone? Is it his fault his team had really stupid turnovers after catching passes? He can't play every other position on the field. Did you happen to notice how well he played this year with Vincent Jackson, Antonio Gates, Ryan Matthews, and Malcolm Floyd out? Or does that not matter?There is really no arguing that Roethlisberger has benefited in the Steelers SB years by great play by the PIT DEF/ST in the post season. In 3 trips to the SB, the PIT DEF/ST had generated 19 turnovers (over 2 per game) and 3 TD. Again, this is no slight to Roethlisberger, but if the Steelers defense had not been so good in the post season, we would not be here talking about how Ben is in line to get his third ring.AND I WILL BE THE FIRST TO ADMIT that the same can be said about Brady . . . and to an even greater extent. In the 3 seasons the Pats won the SB, the Pats DEF/ST was even better than PIT. They forced 25 turnovers (almost 3 per game), had 4 TD (and added a safety for good measure).Which gets us back to what I have mentioned all along. Winning or losing in the post season usually has so much more to do with other factors than just the QB. If the Pats D didn't step it up in 01/03/04, Brady would not have won. Exhibit A: the Pats in 2007. The defense forced 5 turnovers (almost half as many per game compared to what they did in their SB winning years) and put up 0 TD.But because we like to have heroes or villians, we annoint the QB as the victor or the choker and isolated plays become the only things that matter. Manning throws a pick six, he's the goat, the Colts lose. Holmes makes the best catch of his life, the Steelers win, Roethlisberger is a hero. Warner thows a pick six, Cardinals lose, he becomes the goat. Everything nice and sanitized and nothing else matters.So while I agree that all that really matters in the end is SBs, just because a guy is on a good TEAM that plays well for a month at the end of a season does not automatically make the QB of said team an all time great player. Maybe both the team and the player are great and the team will win a SB in any given year. But just because a player doesn't win a SB doesn't mean he isn't great. But do we elevate the Trent Dilfer's or Brad Johnson's of the world to greatness because they won a ring?

 

[Bayhawks]

Thru 18 games 2010 Steelers ran the ball 545 times and passed the ball 530 times, 50.7% rushing vs 49.3% passing

Thru 17 games 2010 Patriots ran the ball 482 times and passed the ball 552 times, 46.6% rushing vs 53.4% passing

Steelers run the ball a larger percentage of the time.... As I said... and not 1% as you described but 4.1%

These above are all hard #'s, You may try to confuse the subject and call on my credibility, but the #'s above can be backed up. If you want to disprove me, disprove the #'s.. The facts.. It doesn't matter how you try to spin it, or what direction I've come from.. The #'s above tell no lies...

Again, you are changing your argument to try to save face. THIS is what you said:

During the regular season Pitt relies on the run a larger % of the time than does NE, and scores a larger % of their TD's on running plays then does NE.. 1st down % is pretty equal

Regular season-last time I checked the regular season was 16 games, not 17 or 18. Yet since adding the playoff games "proved" your point (in your mind), you are trying to back-track, AGAIN. You said if I "want to disprove you, disprove the #s", so here goes (but I'm going to use the REGULAR SEASON numbers, since that was your original contention, not the cherry-picked ones you used to try to prove your point).

1) "During the regular season Pitt relies on the run a larger % of the time than does NE..."

Regular season:

NE-507 pass attempts, 25 sacks, 454 rushes-986 total offensive plays. 454/986=46% rush plays.

Pitt-479 pass attempts, 43 sacks, 471 rushes-993 total offensive plays. 471/993=47% rush plays.

See, sacks are offensive plays, so they need to be counted. When you count ALL the plays (not just the ones that make your argument look stronger), you see that the Steelers rushed the ball 47% of the time & the Pats rushed the ball 46% of the time. That's a 1% difference, hardly significant.

2) "and scores a larger % of their TD's on running plays then does NE..."

Regular season:

Pitt scored 37 offensive TDs in the 2010 regular season. 15 of these were from the rushing game, but 2 of those were from Roethlisberger. 13/37=35% of Pitt's offensive TDs were scored by non-QB rushes.

NE scored 56 offensive TDs in the 2010 regular season. 19 of these were from the running game, with 1 from Brady. 18/56=32%. That's a 3% difference.

Since your original point was that the running game "carried" Roethlisberger, while Brady's didn't, it makes sense to take out the QB rushing scores, because all including them would show is the QBs "carrying" themselves.

3) "1st down % is pretty equal"

**When you said 1st down% is pretty equal, I assumed you meant the amount of rushing 1st downs converted out of chances. That's where my numbers were from. Going on what you meant:

Regular season:

NE rushed for 119 1st downs, and passed for 196. That's 315 total. 119/315=38%

Pitt rushed for 106 1st downs, and passed for 175. That's 281 total. 106/281=37%

NE was still better, although not by the 4% margin advantage they had with the conversion stat.

So, Pitt ran the ball 1% more of the time. Pitt's non-QB rushing TDs accounted for 3% more of the offensive TDs than NE's non-QB rushing TDs. And NE had a 1% better 1st down %.

That seems pretty equal to me. 1% differences and 3% differences are not statistically significant.

There you go. I dis-proved your points. Please feel free to try to change your argument again to try to look like you aren't just throwing stuff against the wall, hoping it sticks.

First you argue about playoffs, then super bowls, then regular season... Why not take the whole body of work? And no you didn't disprove my point, I took the whole body of work.. You "cherry picked"..

Really? Show me where I argued playoffs, then SBs, then regular season.YOU posted about the running game during the regular season, not I. You then changed it to the playoffs, because you felt it better proved your point.

I'm not sure you realize this or not, but on these message boards, what you say (type) is saved. I've already shown how IN YOUR OWN posts, you make comments about the regular season, then when you're proven wrong, try to include playoff games to "prove your point."

Feel free to find my posts from this thread where I discuss the running game in the SB or playoffs before you first bring them up. Good luck, because they ain't there.

Or you could just man up and admit you were wrong.

 

[Ballstein]

went 15-1 first year

youngest Super Bowl-winning quarterback in NFL history

Roethlisberger has been one of the most efficient passers in NFL history, 8th all-time in NFL passer rating

2 sb

one of ten nfl players to ever pass for 500 yds in a game

and he's still going.....

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Thru 18 games 2010 Steelers ran the ball 545 times and passed the ball 530 times, 50.7% rushing vs 49.3% passing

Thru 17 games 2010 Patriots ran the ball 482 times and passed the ball 552 times, 46.6% rushing vs 53.4% passing

Steelers run the ball a larger percentage of the time.... As I said... and not 1% as you described but 4.1%

These above are all hard #'s, You may try to confuse the subject and call on my credibility, but the #'s above can be backed up. If you want to disprove me, disprove the #'s.. The facts.. It doesn't matter how you try to spin it, or what direction I've come from.. The #'s above tell no lies...

Again, you are changing your argument to try to save face. THIS is what you said:

During the regular season Pitt relies on the run a larger % of the time than does NE, and scores a larger % of their TD's on running plays then does NE.. 1st down % is pretty equal

Regular season-last time I checked the regular season was 16 games, not 17 or 18. Yet since adding the playoff games "proved" your point (in your mind), you are trying to back-track, AGAIN. You said if I "want to disprove you, disprove the #s", so here goes (but I'm going to use the REGULAR SEASON numbers, since that was your original contention, not the cherry-picked ones you used to try to prove your point).

1) "During the regular season Pitt relies on the run a larger % of the time than does NE..."

Regular season:

NE-507 pass attempts, 25 sacks, 454 rushes-986 total offensive plays. 454/986=46% rush plays.

Pitt-479 pass attempts, 43 sacks, 471 rushes-993 total offensive plays. 471/993=47% rush plays.

See, sacks are offensive plays, so they need to be counted. When you count ALL the plays (not just the ones that make your argument look stronger), you see that the Steelers rushed the ball 47% of the time & the Pats rushed the ball 46% of the time. That's a 1% difference, hardly significant.

2) "and scores a larger % of their TD's on running plays then does NE..."

Regular season:

Pitt scored 37 offensive TDs in the 2010 regular season. 15 of these were from the rushing game, but 2 of those were from Roethlisberger. 13/37=35% of Pitt's offensive TDs were scored by non-QB rushes.

NE scored 56 offensive TDs in the 2010 regular season. 19 of these were from the running game, with 1 from Brady. 18/56=32%. That's a 3% difference.

Since your original point was that the running game "carried" Roethlisberger, while Brady's didn't, it makes sense to take out the QB rushing scores, because all including them would show is the QBs "carrying" themselves.

3) "1st down % is pretty equal"

**When you said 1st down% is pretty equal, I assumed you meant the amount of rushing 1st downs converted out of chances. That's where my numbers were from. Going on what you meant:

Regular season:

NE rushed for 119 1st downs, and passed for 196. That's 315 total. 119/315=38%

Pitt rushed for 106 1st downs, and passed for 175. That's 281 total. 106/281=37%

NE was still better, although not by the 4% margin advantage they had with the conversion stat.

So, Pitt ran the ball 1% more of the time. Pitt's non-QB rushing TDs accounted for 3% more of the offensive TDs than NE's non-QB rushing TDs. And NE had a 1% better 1st down %.

That seems pretty equal to me. 1% differences and 3% differences are not statistically significant.

There you go. I dis-proved your points. Please feel free to try to change your argument again to try to look like you aren't just throwing stuff against the wall, hoping it sticks.

First you argue about playoffs, then super bowls, then regular season... Why not take the whole body of work? And no you didn't disprove my point, I took the whole body of work.. You "cherry picked"..

Really? Show me where I argued playoffs, then SBs, then regular season.YOU posted about the running game during the regular season, not I. You then changed it to the playoffs, because you felt it better proved your point.

I'm not sure you realize this or not, but on these message boards, what you say (type) is saved. I've already shown how IN YOUR OWN posts, you make comments about the regular season, then when you're proven wrong, try to include playoff games to "prove your point."

Feel free to find my posts from this thread where I discuss the running game in the SB or playoffs before you first bring them up. Good luck, because they ain't there.

Or you could just man up and admit you were wrong.

You made a point to mention the SB wins, you argued specific plays and production in the jets game, and you've now posted 3 long threads about regular season..

No I didn't specifically say only regular season.. And I'm well within my rights to modify my stance... Especially if it is more relevant... I'm also well within my rights to change my opinion.. I am also within my rights to be wrong sometimes, so are you.. Like you are if you say Ben is as good or better than Brady.. I said they had a better run game this year.. And I feel like the Steelers have.. They set up the pass with the run, they need the run... But even if they didn't, or if it is close as you say, what does it matter? Brady is better than Ben.. That's the point of the thread.. You're so caught up and finding me wrong... My opinion is that Brady is better than Ben, you haven't proven otherwise.. You seem to have lost interest in the thread topic and now are only interested in me.. I'm flattered..

You haven't proven anything wrong.. You've only shown your perspective..

 

[Bayhawks]

You made a point to mention the SB wins, you argued specific plays and production in the jets game, and you've now posted 3 long threads about regular season..

As I'm sure you can agree, this 14 page thread has covered many different topics.Yes, I mentioned SB wins, MANY PAGES AGO, and not with regards to your claim that Pitt's running game has carried Roethlisberger, but NE's hasn't done the same for Brady.

Yes, I discussed specific plays/production from the Jets game; again not with regards to this point.

No I didn't specifically say only regular season..

YES, YOU DID! I quoted your post where you said it. I bolded it, I enlarged it. It's there for everyone to see. You look foolish denying it when the proof is only a few posts up.

And I'm well within my rights to modify my stance...

Yes, you are. When you do that, however, (and especially if you only do it because your original stance has been proven false), you lose credibility. If you change your stance because your realize you were wrong, or because some new information caused you to change your stance, that's one thing. But you've been changing your stance to try to prove a point that has been proven false.

I said they had a better run game this year.. And I feel like the Steelers have..

Exactly, you feel (think) the Steelers have a stronger run game than the Brady, and that was part of your justification for claiming he is so much better than Roethlisberger. The facts show that your feeling was wrong. Thanks for finally admitting that it was your feeling, and not based in fact.

You haven't proven anything wrong.. You've only shown your perspective..

But I have, and you've admitted it here. I've proven that your feeling that Roethlisberger relies on his run game more than Brady is nothing more than that, a feeling, and one that is not backed up with the facts.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Yadda Yadda...

You seem to always skip over the part where I remind you that we're talking about who is better Brady or Ben.. Seems you are in your own Hustler or Bayhawks thread...Nothing I've seen points to Ben being better, and you haven't given anything to substantiate such a claim.. I assume since you keep dodging the original thread topic and try to divert attention to me, you have nothing..

 

[cvnpoka]

yudkin is on point in this thread. too bad no one is really listening to him.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

So you know what you are dealing with...

watch the replay again. He wasn't drilled and there is no way it should have been a fine. It's become a Mickey mouse league.

Aren't you the guy who was just bit chin about the slap Seymour gave Ben?.. lol I bet you'd like to see him fined.. right? You call it a mickey mouse league but you expect your boy Ben should be able to get in peoples faces and mouth off without repercussion... He got popped, it happens all the time, and he deserved it... Get over it...Should have known I'd find you in a Steelers thread...

By the way, not sure who you are but most people who know me will tell you that I'm one of the more objective Steelers fans on the board. If you want to attack me personally, find some better bait...........

There's a long list of reasons why Ben needs a smack in the face.. It's not bait... Ben is a do uche bag... Yesterday he put his hands on someone wasn't a female and was bigger than him... And he was served..

Don't get me wrong, I don't dislike the Steelers, I dislike Ben for the way he is, and his apologists for their blind logic in defending him..

Don't go around the language filter and don't use a team specific thread like this to troll.

J

 

[Bayhawks]

Yadda Yadda...

You seem to always skip over the part where I remind you that we're talking about who is better Brady or Ben.. Seems you are in your own Hustler or Bayhawks thread...

Nothing I've seen points to Ben being better, and you haven't given anything to substantiate such a claim.. I assume since you keep dodging the original thread topic and try to divert attention to me, you have nothing..

I'm not sure if you have reading problems or what. How am I dodging the original thread topic. I replied early on that Brady is better, but that Roethlisberger isn't far behind, and in a post that was a direct response to a question by you, I said:

I feel that Brady is better than Roethlisberger, although I feel that Roethlisberger's current numbers are comparable to when Brady was at this point in his career.

I also do not think that, statistically, Roethlisberger will catch Brady, since I do not see the Steelers offensive philosophy changing to allow him to put up the kind of numbers that Brady has done in the last 3-4 years.

I feel that Brady, Manning, Brees, Rodgers, and Roethlisberger are the top 5 QBs (not FF QBs) in the NFL. Put them in whatever order you want.

I feel that Roethlisberger is the perfect QB for the Steelers system, and that none of those other 4 (with the possible exception of Rodgers) would be as successful in that system, and with that O-line.

None of those things preclude me from discussing facts in this thread on a FF message board.And one of those facts is that while Brady is (RIGHT NOW) the better QB (IMO) than Roethlisberger, Roethlisberger is right there with him.

Another fact is that Brady, in the last few years, has been unable to win the big game, while Roethlisberger has consistently demonstrated the ability step up in big situations, and deliver clutch plays, helping his team win.

A third fact is that you are trying to de-emphasize some of Roethlisberger's accomplishments by suggesting that his running game is inferior to Brady's, when the stats show that you are wrong.

 

[DropKick]

Thru 18 games 2010 Steelers ran the ball 545 times and passed the ball 530 times, 50.7% rushing vs 49.3% passing

Thru 17 games 2010 Patriots ran the ball 482 times and passed the ball 552 times, 46.6% rushing vs 53.4% passing

Steelers run the ball a larger percentage of the time.... As I said... and not 1% as you described but 4.1%

These above are all hard #'s, You may try to confuse the subject and call on my credibility, but the #'s above can be backed up. If you want to disprove me, disprove the #'s.. The facts.. It doesn't matter how you try to spin it, or what direction I've come from.. The #'s above tell no lies...

Again, you are changing your argument to try to save face. THIS is what you said:

During the regular season Pitt relies on the run a larger % of the time than does NE, and scores a larger % of their TD's on running plays then does NE.. 1st down % is pretty equal

Regular season-last time I checked the regular season was 16 games, not 17 or 18. Yet since adding the playoff games "proved" your point (in your mind), you are trying to back-track, AGAIN. You said if I "want to disprove you, disprove the #s", so here goes (but I'm going to use the REGULAR SEASON numbers, since that was your original contention, not the cherry-picked ones you used to try to prove your point).

1) "During the regular season Pitt relies on the run a larger % of the time than does NE..."

Regular season:

NE-507 pass attempts, 25 sacks, 454 rushes-986 total offensive plays. 454/986=46% rush plays.

Pitt-479 pass attempts, 43 sacks, 471 rushes-993 total offensive plays. 471/993=47% rush plays.

See, sacks are offensive plays, so they need to be counted. When you count ALL the plays (not just the ones that make your argument look stronger), you see that the Steelers rushed the ball 47% of the time & the Pats rushed the ball 46% of the time. That's a 1% difference, hardly significant.

2) "and scores a larger % of their TD's on running plays then does NE..."

Regular season:

Pitt scored 37 offensive TDs in the 2010 regular season. 15 of these were from the rushing game, but 2 of those were from Roethlisberger. 13/37=35% of Pitt's offensive TDs were scored by non-QB rushes.

NE scored 56 offensive TDs in the 2010 regular season. 19 of these were from the running game, with 1 from Brady. 18/56=32%. That's a 3% difference.

Since your original point was that the running game "carried" Roethlisberger, while Brady's didn't, it makes sense to take out the QB rushing scores, because all including them would show is the QBs "carrying" themselves.

3) "1st down % is pretty equal"

**When you said 1st down% is pretty equal, I assumed you meant the amount of rushing 1st downs converted out of chances. That's where my numbers were from. Going on what you meant:

Regular season:

NE rushed for 119 1st downs, and passed for 196. That's 315 total. 119/315=38%

Pitt rushed for 106 1st downs, and passed for 175. That's 281 total. 106/281=37%

NE was still better, although not by the 4% margin advantage they had with the conversion stat.

So, Pitt ran the ball 1% more of the time. Pitt's non-QB rushing TDs accounted for 3% more of the offensive TDs than NE's non-QB rushing TDs. And NE had a 1% better 1st down %.

That seems pretty equal to me. 1% differences and 3% differences are not statistically significant.

There you go. I dis-proved your points. Please feel free to try to change your argument again to try to look like you aren't just throwing stuff against the wall, hoping it sticks.

You can bicker about this until the SB but the only thing significant about this tabulation is the proficiency of the offense. 56 offense TDs for NE vs 37 for Pittsburgh. That is significant. You can cat fight about percentage of first downs converted by the pass/rush and argue about small percentages all day if that's what keeps you happy.Bottom line: Brady had a more prolific, MVP caliber season. Roethlisberger may get a SB. I'm sure Brady would prefer the SB but it is, what it is.

 

[Bayhawks]

The Indy GM just said that Big Ben deserves to be mentioned with the likes of Tom Brady and Peyton Manning.

If he wins, that's 3 Sb's. Guys like Rivers doesn't have any and some of you think GM's would take Rivers over Big Ben? Come on, that doesn't even make sense.

When Big Ben wins his 3rd SB, he will go down in history as a Great QB, not a good one. He can put up stats just like all of the other big name Qb's but the guy wins and in a pass happy age where Qb's are putting up crazy numbers like 5000 passing yards and 50 Td's, all that really matters in the end is Sb's.

I'd love to hear the argument of why GM's would want Phillip Rivers over Ben Roethlesberger. Please leave out off the field stuff because if they were worried about that, then we'd have priests being the Qb's of all the NFL teams.

I don't know how many times we have to keep repeating this. Just because a team wins a SB does not mean the QB of that team is an all time great. Unless of course you are a Redskins fan, in which case Joe Theismann, Doug Williams, and Mark Rypien are all HOFers.

David, I'm not sure if this was a shot at me or not, but since I seem to be the only one in this thread who has claimed to be a Redskins fan, I'll assume it was. If it was, what's the point?Just because I'm a Redskins fan doesn't mean I can't be objective. Joe Theismann was a good player, but not (IMO) a HOFer. Doug Williams was a great story, but not a HOFer. Mark Rypien had one good season, but not much else. Does that mean I didn't go nuts when those 3 QBs won SBs for the Skins? Hell no, I was thrilled.

To your discussion of Philip Rivers. He's a great QB, however, Roethlisberger compares favorably to him. Rivers has started 80 regular season games, and Roethlisberger has started 98, so I avoided using their career numbers. Averages, however, demonstrate that both are great QBs.

Roethlisberger-.704 Win %, 229.6 pass yds/game, 63.1% completion, 8.0 YPA, 92.5 QB rating, 25 4th quarter/game winning drives, .800 playoff win %, & 2 SBs.

Rivers-.688 Win %, 245.7 pass yds/game, 63.7% completion, 8.0 YPA, 97.2 QB rating, 15 4th quarter/game winning drives, .429 playoff win %, & 0 SBs.

Roethlisberger has a slightly higher win% and has led his team to 10 more 4th quarter/game-winning drives.

Rivers has averaged about 16 more yards/game, has a .6% higher completion rating, and a slightly higher QB rating. They both have averaged 8.0 YPA.

The stats are fairly similar, so in that case, you have to look at playoff success and SBs. Yes, no QB wins a SB all by himself, but they are important pieces of the puzzle. The reason Montana is universally regarded as possibly the greatest QB of all time, while Marino is "merely" seen as a great QB is because Montana won the big games.

Since Roethlisberger and Rivers are statistically similar, playoff/SB success places Roethlisberger slightly ahead.

 

[David Yudkin]

David, I'm not sure if this was a shot at me or not, but since I seem to be the only one in this thread who has claimed to be a Redskins fan, I'll assume it was. If it was, what's the point?Just because I'm a Redskins fan doesn't mean I can't be objective. Joe Theismann was a good player, but not (IMO) a HOFer. Doug Williams was a great story, but not a HOFer. Mark Rypien had one good season, but not much else. Does that mean I didn't go nuts when those 3 QBs won SBs for the Skins? Hell no, I was thrilled.

Didn't know you were a Skins fan. Not a shot at anyone in particular. The point was that QBs can win SBs and not be HOFers. Trent Dilfer won a SB, but I doubt anyone would argue that he was the main cog that got BAL a title.To be clear, I am not suggesting that Roethlisberger is soley a came manager and has never had big games or timely production. He has had his share of big plays and big moments.I know people are pointing to the Jets came and saying what did people expect him to do, the Steelers went into ultra conservative mode on offense. However, I think plenty of teams have shown that a short passing game can be just not as effective (and as safe) as a running game. That's where I think other QBs could have been used slightly differently and the game could have been won much earlier. Obviously no one knows what could have happened with another QB, but maybe that QB wouldn't have thrown 2 picks and maybe drives that stalled in the second half could have ended in points.Yes, some of the clutch runs that Ben had would not have resulted in first downs, and maybe the mystery QB might not have completed a pass to get a game clinching first down. But mystery QB may also have been in a position where he didn't have to do those things. No one seems to have answered my question on why after 7 seasons, 3 SB appearances, and a 1 loss season why Roethlisberger has only been named to one Pro Bowl. In that time, here were all the Pro Bowl QBshilip Rivers Peyton Manning Drew Brees Matt CassellTom Brady Matt Ryan Michael VickBrett FavreDavid GarrardDonovan McNabbAaron RodgersTony RomoMatt SchaubVince YoungKerry CollinsJay CutlerEli ManningKurt WarnerDerek AndersonJeff GarciaMatt HasselbeckMarc BulgerCarson PalmerJake DelhommeTrent GreenSteve McNairJake PlummerDaunte CulpepperObviously guys other than Brady and Peyton were named to the Pro Bowl (since that was the argument initially). So how does it happen that all those guys made it and Ben was just an after thought, basically a last minute replacement for Brady IIRC in 2007? Given that "football people" clearly have him in the same class as Brady and Manning, how is it that the fans, the players, the coaches, and the league have only rewarded him with one Pro Bowl appearance?Again, I realize the Pro Bowl is flawed, but wouldn't this be an area that the powers that be would give the game's biggest stars and best players recognition?

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Yadda Yadda... I feel that Brady is better than Roethlisberger.....

Thankyou....

 

[Bayhawks]

No one seems to have answered my question on why after 7 seasons, 3 SB appearances, and a 1 loss season why Roethlisberger has only been named to one Pro Bowl.

So how does it happen that all those guys made it and Ben was just an after thought, basically a last minute replacement for Brady IIRC in 2007? Given that "football people" clearly have him in the same class as Brady and Manning, how is it that the fans, the players, the coaches, and the league have only rewarded him with one Pro Bowl appearance?

Again, I realize the Pro Bowl is flawed, but wouldn't this be an area that the powers that be would give the game's biggest stars and best players recognition?

I'm not sure how the Pro Bowl is really relevant, as you yourself admits its flawed, but you have to take a couple of things into consideration.1-Fan voting is strictly a popularity contest, and the largest fan bases or most popular players will always win this part of the vote, regardless of which players actually deserve the Pro Bowl "honor."

2-The players' vote isn't a much better measure. See the article below detailing some of the flaws with the player votes.

Pro bowl voting among players

3-So the "football people" you speak of (coaches, scouts, GMs, etc) only get 1/3 of the vote, and they will almost always be outweighed by the popular fan pick, and the flawed players votes.

BTW-Roethlisberger was voted to the Pro Bowl in 2007, not an injury replacement for Brady. Derek Anderson was the injury replacement for Brady that year. The next year, Roethlisberger was offered a Pro Bowl roster spot, but turned it down because of an injury.

 

[Bayhawks]

Yadda Yadda... I feel that Brady is better than Roethlisberger.....

Thankyou....

You're welcome.If it makes you happy to pretend like you didn't come out of this conversation looking like a fool, then by all means, continue with that pretense.

ETA-using the quote function to change what I wrote merely shows that you realize that you have no point.

 

[Chaz McNulty]

No one seems to have answered my question on why after 7 seasons, 3 SB appearances, and a 1 loss season why Roethlisberger has only been named to one Pro Bowl.

So how does it happen that all those guys made it and Ben was just an after thought, basically a last minute replacement for Brady IIRC in 2007? Given that "football people" clearly have him in the same class as Brady and Manning, how is it that the fans, the players, the coaches, and the league have only rewarded him with one Pro Bowl appearance?

Again, I realize the Pro Bowl is flawed, but wouldn't this be an area that the powers that be would give the game's biggest stars and best players recognition?

I'm not sure how the Pro Bowl is really relevant, as you yourself admits its flawed, but you have to take a couple of things into consideration.1-Fan voting is strictly a popularity contest, and the largest fan bases or most popular players will always win this part of the vote, regardless of which players actually deserve the Pro Bowl "honor."

2-The players' vote isn't a much better measure. See the article below detailing some of the flaws with the player votes.

Pro bowl voting among players

3-So the "football people" you speak of (coaches, scouts, GMs, etc) only get 1/3 of the vote, and they will almost always be outweighed by the popular fan pick, and the flawed players votes.

BTW-Roethlisberger was voted to the Pro Bowl in 2007, not an injury replacement for Brady. Derek Anderson was the injury replacement for Brady that year. The next year, Roethlisberger was offered a Pro Bowl roster spot, but turned it down because of an injury.

Wouldn't a QB from Pittsburgh do extremely well in a popularity contest? The Steelers have a huge following throughout the US.

 

[Ghost Rider]

As for Ghost Rider talking about Brady and his titles from several years ago, it's not like he's done nothing since then. He lead a team with a perfect regular season and another team with 14 wins. He won two MVPs. He's set various records. I don't recall Roethlilsberger ever receiving even one league MVP vote.

True, but the a similar scenario applied back in '04/'05 when Patriots fans everywhere were saying that Brady was better than Manning because, while Manning was putting up better numbers and winning awards, Brady was winning titles. Now, it is Brady putting up the numbers and winning awards, while Roethlisberger is winning titles. Granted, Manning didn't have titles from years before to fall back on back then like Brady does now, but I guess it comes down to asking how much do Brady's titles 6-9 years ago have to do with how good he is now, especially when another top tier QB is winning multiple titles.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

He has had his share of big plays and big moments.

David, you would admit that was an understatement? He's actually had more then his share. Like Tom and Peyton have also.

 

[Thunderlips]

As for Ghost Rider talking about Brady and his titles from several years ago, it's not like he's done nothing since then. He lead a team with a perfect regular season and another team with 14 wins. He won two MVPs. He's set various records. I don't recall Roethlilsberger ever receiving even one league MVP vote.

True, but the a similar scenario applied back in '04/'05 when Patriots fans everywhere were saying that Brady was better than Manning because, while Manning was putting up better numbers and winning awards, Brady was winning titles. Now, it is Brady putting up the numbers and winning awards, while Roethlisberger is winning titles. Granted, Manning didn't have titles from years before to fall back on back then like Brady does now, but I guess it comes down to asking how much do Brady's titles 6-9 years ago have to do with how good he is now, especially when another top tier QB is winning multiple titles.

It seems like the rules always shift when defending Brady's greatness against any other QB.

 

[Steelfan7]

He has had his share of big plays and big moments.

David, you would admit that was an understatement? He's actually had more then his share. Like Tom and Peyton have also.

By stating Ben has had his share implies that all qb have had big plays and big moments. The great ones make big plays AT big moments. That is a huge difference.

 

[Bayhawks]

No one seems to have answered my question on why after 7 seasons, 3 SB appearances, and a 1 loss season why Roethlisberger has only been named to one Pro Bowl.

So how does it happen that all those guys made it and Ben was just an after thought, basically a last minute replacement for Brady IIRC in 2007? Given that "football people" clearly have him in the same class as Brady and Manning, how is it that the fans, the players, the coaches, and the league have only rewarded him with one Pro Bowl appearance?

Again, I realize the Pro Bowl is flawed, but wouldn't this be an area that the powers that be would give the game's biggest stars and best players recognition?

I'm not sure how the Pro Bowl is really relevant, as you yourself admits its flawed, but you have to take a couple of things into consideration.1-Fan voting is strictly a popularity contest, and the largest fan bases or most popular players will always win this part of the vote, regardless of which players actually deserve the Pro Bowl "honor."

2-The players' vote isn't a much better measure. See the article below detailing some of the flaws with the player votes.

Pro bowl voting among players

3-So the "football people" you speak of (coaches, scouts, GMs, etc) only get 1/3 of the vote, and they will almost always be outweighed by the popular fan pick, and the flawed players votes.

BTW-Roethlisberger was voted to the Pro Bowl in 2007, not an injury replacement for Brady. Derek Anderson was the injury replacement for Brady that year. The next year, Roethlisberger was offered a Pro Bowl roster spot, but turned it down because of an injury.

Wouldn't a QB from Pittsburgh do extremely well in a popularity contest? The Steelers have a huge following throughout the US.

One would think so. However, from what I understand, he wasn't even that popular with his own teammates.Article

He also wasn't popular with many fans of the team, even before the GA issue. Basically, he was an egotistical, arrogant, jack###.

Article #2

And, let's face it, he's butt-ugly. He didn't do many endorsements before the off-season issues, so his face wasn't out there like Manning's, Brady's, Matty Ryan, Drew Brees, Eli Manning, etc.

Just because the Steelers are popular, or a player plays for a Pittsburgh team doesn't mean that player is popular.

That doesn't take anything away (or add anything to) his on-field play, though. But since the Pro-Bowl is more a popularity contest than an actual determination of a player's worth, value, or talent; a player's popularity (with fans and players) is important there.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

If The Steelers lose the SB, or if Ben stinks it up and they carry a win with the Def and running game, will this thread continue? I hope not..

 

[mcintyre1]

No one seems to have answered my question on why after 7 seasons, 3 SB appearances, and a 1 loss season why Roethlisberger has only been named to one Pro Bowl.

So how does it happen that all those guys made it and Ben was just an after thought, basically a last minute replacement for Brady IIRC in 2007? Given that "football people" clearly have him in the same class as Brady and Manning, how is it that the fans, the players, the coaches, and the league have only rewarded him with one Pro Bowl appearance?

Again, I realize the Pro Bowl is flawed, but wouldn't this be an area that the powers that be would give the game's biggest stars and best players recognition?

I'm not sure how the Pro Bowl is really relevant, as you yourself admits its flawed, but you have to take a couple of things into consideration.1-Fan voting is strictly a popularity contest, and the largest fan bases or most popular players will always win this part of the vote, regardless of which players actually deserve the Pro Bowl "honor."

2-The players' vote isn't a much better measure. See the article below detailing some of the flaws with the player votes.

Pro bowl voting among players

3-So the "football people" you speak of (coaches, scouts, GMs, etc) only get 1/3 of the vote, and they will almost always be outweighed by the popular fan pick, and the flawed players votes.

BTW-Roethlisberger was voted to the Pro Bowl in 2007, not an injury replacement for Brady. Derek Anderson was the injury replacement for Brady that year. The next year, Roethlisberger was offered a Pro Bowl roster spot, but turned it down because of an injury.

Wouldn't a QB from Pittsburgh do extremely well in a popularity contest? The Steelers have a huge following throughout the US.

One would think. But Pitt never really lights up the Pro bowl rosters, for whatever reason. Take this year, for example: They're tied with Oakland, Miami, Tennessee, and San Diego for PB players, and one of those is a replacement that, honestly, didn't really deserve it (Keisel). They got beat out by Baltimore (5), Indy (5), KC (5), and NE (8). I'll admit to not having the numbers from previous years handy, but this seems like a normal year for Pittsburgh. I can't explain why, but despite winning 2 SB in the last 5 years, the Steelers just do not show up in the Pro Bowl.

 

[dwyadog]

"But mystery QB may also have been in a position where he didn't have to do those things. "

This for me is a huge thing though nearly impossible to quantify. It reminds me of Elway when I was growing up. Sure it's great that the QB makes the great play late in the 4th quarter but isn't it better if he isn't put, or more specifically doesn't put himself, in that position? People point to the Jets game and how Ben made some great plays at the end. He surely did but he shouldn't have put himself in that position. He made some really poor throws earlier in the game.

I'm a biased Pats fan and I think Brady is better than Ben though Ben is young enough that given enough years I could see a way that he surpasses Brady. Both of them have had the benefit of defenses, and overall team system/structure, that has helped them immensely. Brady with his solid D earlier this decade, pittsburgh with their ferocious and opportunistic D for almost all of Bens career. Awesome coaches/coordinators and good personnel people. I see Brady as a better qb, especially with making reads, his progressions and so on. It's an interesting debate, aside from the put player A on team B shenanigans and I'm glad that we get to watch them both for hopefully several more years.

 

[David Yudkin]

I went and did some research on defenses of the SB winning teams going back to the 1985 Bears (including both GB and PIT this year as SB winners). This really had nothing to do with Roethlisberger directly, and it was more to satisfy my curiosity as to how things played out. On a number of occasions, the defenses of the SB played out of their minds and almost literally a maroon at QB would have won.

For example, the defense on the 1985 Bears scored more points (23) in the playoffs than they allowed (10). Quite literally, all Jim McMahon had to do was not fumble the snap or the handoff and they would have had a huge probablity of winning. The only time the defense allowed more points than it gave up was in the SB against NE when they allowed 10 points and the defense only scored 9.

Ditto the 2000 Ravens, where the defense scored 28 points in the post season while allowing only 23. (It should be noted that this is LITERAL defensive points scored of TDs and safeties. Setting up the offense with a short field is not included in this at all.)

There were several other SB champs that allowed very few points in the postseason (1986 NYG 7.7 PPG, 1989 SF 8.7, 1988 SF 9.3, 1998 DEN 10.7). Again, while some all time great QBs led those teams and may have put up some impressive offensive numbers, the defense was just as big or more a part of those teams than say Montana or Elway.

Of the 27 teams in question here, only 3 teams allowed 20 or more points per game. The 1994 Niners were the worst in terms of points allowed at 23 PPG. When you average 44 PPG in the post season, who needs defense. The other two teams were . . . the 2008 Steelers at 20.3 and the 2010 Steelers at 21.5 (and they haven't won the SB yet).

HOWEVER, before people run and say this proves that the Steelers defense isn't that good, the defense has stepped things up in other areas. Steel Curtain version 2010 has reduced their yards allowed from 277 yards to 208 yards. Steel Curtain version 2008 upped their turnover production vs. the regular season by a turnover per game and also chipped in 7 PPG in DEF/ST.

So that 2008 team had an aggregate 13.3 adjusted points allowed when you factor in what the DEFENSE scored. In other words, even though the Steelers defense gave up 20.3 points, Big Ben only needed to get 13.3 points out of the offense to tie across those 3 games.

The 2000 Buccaneers scored so many DEF/ST points that year that the offense only needed to score 3 points on average to tie. Of the teams in the data set, 15 of them needed fewer than 14 points from the offense to win. 9 teams only needed the offense to average scoring 10 or fewer points when adjusted for defensive scoring. That means you, Tom Brady in 2001, as NE only need 8.7 PPG from the offense to win that year.

On average, all 27 teams averaged 14.9 PPG allowed in the post season. But when you take out the points scored by DEF/ST, on average of all the SB winning teams since 1985 (including both the 2010 teams), the offense only needed to score 11.7 points per game to win across the post season.

Turnovers (as expected) were also huge. 23 of the teams averaged 2 or more turnovers on defense in their post season games. 9 teams averaged 3 turnovers. 6 teams averaged 4 turnovers. And the 1992 Cowboys averaged 5 turnovers produced per game. Defensive turnovers, on average, were up 30% compared to how those teams fared in the regular season.

Points allowed by teams as a whole were lower by 7-8% compared to the regular season (16.1 regular season vs. 14.9 in the post season). You would think that against better teams defenses would do worse, but on the flip side the mantra of "playoff football" is usually tougher and points harder to come by.

 

[Bayhawks]

Thru 18 games 2010 Steelers ran the ball 545 times and passed the ball 530 times, 50.7% rushing vs 49.3% passing

Thru 17 games 2010 Patriots ran the ball 482 times and passed the ball 552 times, 46.6% rushing vs 53.4% passing

Steelers run the ball a larger percentage of the time.... As I said... and not 1% as you described but 4.1%

These above are all hard #'s, You may try to confuse the subject and call on my credibility, but the #'s above can be backed up. If you want to disprove me, disprove the #'s.. The facts.. It doesn't matter how you try to spin it, or what direction I've come from.. The #'s above tell no lies...

Again, you are changing your argument to try to save face. THIS is what you said:

During the regular season Pitt relies on the run a larger % of the time than does NE, and scores a larger % of their TD's on running plays then does NE.. 1st down % is pretty equal

Regular season-last time I checked the regular season was 16 games, not 17 or 18. Yet since adding the playoff games "proved" your point (in your mind), you are trying to back-track, AGAIN. You said if I "want to disprove you, disprove the #s", so here goes (but I'm going to use the REGULAR SEASON numbers, since that was your original contention, not the cherry-picked ones you used to try to prove your point).

1) "During the regular season Pitt relies on the run a larger % of the time than does NE..."

Regular season:

NE-507 pass attempts, 25 sacks, 454 rushes-986 total offensive plays. 454/986=46% rush plays.

Pitt-479 pass attempts, 43 sacks, 471 rushes-993 total offensive plays. 471/993=47% rush plays.

See, sacks are offensive plays, so they need to be counted. When you count ALL the plays (not just the ones that make your argument look stronger), you see that the Steelers rushed the ball 47% of the time & the Pats rushed the ball 46% of the time. That's a 1% difference, hardly significant.

2) "and scores a larger % of their TD's on running plays then does NE..."

Regular season:

Pitt scored 37 offensive TDs in the 2010 regular season. 15 of these were from the rushing game, but 2 of those were from Roethlisberger. 13/37=35% of Pitt's offensive TDs were scored by non-QB rushes.

NE scored 56 offensive TDs in the 2010 regular season. 19 of these were from the running game, with 1 from Brady. 18/56=32%. That's a 3% difference.

Since your original point was that the running game "carried" Roethlisberger, while Brady's didn't, it makes sense to take out the QB rushing scores, because all including them would show is the QBs "carrying" themselves.

3) "1st down % is pretty equal"

**When you said 1st down% is pretty equal, I assumed you meant the amount of rushing 1st downs converted out of chances. That's where my numbers were from. Going on what you meant:

Regular season:

NE rushed for 119 1st downs, and passed for 196. That's 315 total. 119/315=38%

Pitt rushed for 106 1st downs, and passed for 175. That's 281 total. 106/281=37%

NE was still better, although not by the 4% margin advantage they had with the conversion stat.

So, Pitt ran the ball 1% more of the time. Pitt's non-QB rushing TDs accounted for 3% more of the offensive TDs than NE's non-QB rushing TDs. And NE had a 1% better 1st down %.

That seems pretty equal to me. 1% differences and 3% differences are not statistically significant.

There you go. I dis-proved your points. Please feel free to try to change your argument again to try to look like you aren't just throwing stuff against the wall, hoping it sticks.

You can bicker about this until the SB but the only thing significant about this tabulation is the proficiency of the offense. 56 offense TDs for NE vs 37 for Pittsburgh. That is significant. You can cat fight about percentage of first downs converted by the pass/rush and argue about small percentages all day if that's what keeps you happy.Bottom line: Brady had a more prolific, MVP caliber season. Roethlisberger may get a SB. I'm sure Brady would prefer the SB but it is, what it is.

No one's arguing that NE's offense this year wasn't more prolific (at least I wasn't).No one's arguing that Brady did not have a MVP caliber season (at least I wasn't).

What this argument was about was Carolina Hustler using Pit's "superior running game" to devalue Roethlisbergers' accomplishment with regards to Brady's. He first suggested that historically Pitt's run game was better, and was shown that this was false. Then he suggested that this regular season Pitt's run game was better, and was shown that was false. Then he included the playoffs to try to make his point, since the rushing stats were skewed b/c NE played most of their 1 game from behind, while Pitt played over 5 of 8 quarters with the lead.

Brady leads a higher-powered offense. Granted.

Brady put up a MVP-caliber season. Granted.

Pitt's run game has been/is superior to NE's and has "carried" Roethlisberger more than NE's has "carried" Brady. Proven false with stats.

That's what this argument was about.

 

[DropKick]

Thru 18 games 2010 Steelers ran the ball 545 times and passed the ball 530 times, 50.7% rushing vs 49.3% passing

Thru 17 games 2010 Patriots ran the ball 482 times and passed the ball 552 times, 46.6% rushing vs 53.4% passing

Steelers run the ball a larger percentage of the time.... As I said... and not 1% as you described but 4.1%

These above are all hard #'s, You may try to confuse the subject and call on my credibility, but the #'s above can be backed up. If you want to disprove me, disprove the #'s.. The facts.. It doesn't matter how you try to spin it, or what direction I've come from.. The #'s above tell no lies...

Again, you are changing your argument to try to save face. THIS is what you said:

During the regular season Pitt relies on the run a larger % of the time than does NE, and scores a larger % of their TD's on running plays then does NE.. 1st down % is pretty equal

Regular season-last time I checked the regular season was 16 games, not 17 or 18. Yet since adding the playoff games "proved" your point (in your mind), you are trying to back-track, AGAIN. You said if I "want to disprove you, disprove the #s", so here goes (but I'm going to use the REGULAR SEASON numbers, since that was your original contention, not the cherry-picked ones you used to try to prove your point).

1) "During the regular season Pitt relies on the run a larger % of the time than does NE..."

Regular season:

NE-507 pass attempts, 25 sacks, 454 rushes-986 total offensive plays. 454/986=46% rush plays.

Pitt-479 pass attempts, 43 sacks, 471 rushes-993 total offensive plays. 471/993=47% rush plays.

See, sacks are offensive plays, so they need to be counted. When you count ALL the plays (not just the ones that make your argument look stronger), you see that the Steelers rushed the ball 47% of the time & the Pats rushed the ball 46% of the time. That's a 1% difference, hardly significant.

2) "and scores a larger % of their TD's on running plays then does NE..."

Regular season:

Pitt scored 37 offensive TDs in the 2010 regular season. 15 of these were from the rushing game, but 2 of those were from Roethlisberger. 13/37=35% of Pitt's offensive TDs were scored by non-QB rushes.

NE scored 56 offensive TDs in the 2010 regular season. 19 of these were from the running game, with 1 from Brady. 18/56=32%. That's a 3% difference.

Since your original point was that the running game "carried" Roethlisberger, while Brady's didn't, it makes sense to take out the QB rushing scores, because all including them would show is the QBs "carrying" themselves.

3) "1st down % is pretty equal"

**When you said 1st down% is pretty equal, I assumed you meant the amount of rushing 1st downs converted out of chances. That's where my numbers were from. Going on what you meant:

Regular season:

NE rushed for 119 1st downs, and passed for 196. That's 315 total. 119/315=38%

Pitt rushed for 106 1st downs, and passed for 175. That's 281 total. 106/281=37%

NE was still better, although not by the 4% margin advantage they had with the conversion stat.

So, Pitt ran the ball 1% more of the time. Pitt's non-QB rushing TDs accounted for 3% more of the offensive TDs than NE's non-QB rushing TDs. And NE had a 1% better 1st down %.

That seems pretty equal to me. 1% differences and 3% differences are not statistically significant.

There you go. I dis-proved your points. Please feel free to try to change your argument again to try to look like you aren't just throwing stuff against the wall, hoping it sticks.

You can bicker about this until the SB but the only thing significant about this tabulation is the proficiency of the offense. 56 offense TDs for NE vs 37 for Pittsburgh. That is significant. You can cat fight about percentage of first downs converted by the pass/rush and argue about small percentages all day if that's what keeps you happy.Bottom line: Brady had a more prolific, MVP caliber season. Roethlisberger may get a SB. I'm sure Brady would prefer the SB but it is, what it is.

No one's arguing that NE's offense this year wasn't more prolific (at least I wasn't).No one's arguing that Brady did not have a MVP caliber season (at least I wasn't).

What this argument was about was Carolina Hustler using Pit's "superior running game" to devalue Roethlisbergers' accomplishment with regards to Brady's. He first suggested that historically Pitt's run game was better, and was shown that this was false. Then he suggested that this regular season Pitt's run game was better, and was shown that was false. Then he included the playoffs to try to make his point, since the rushing stats were skewed b/c NE played most of their 1 game from behind, while Pitt played over 5 of 8 quarters with the lead.

Brady leads a higher-powered offense. Granted.

Brady put up a MVP-caliber season. Granted.

Pitt's run game has been/is superior to NE's and has "carried" Roethlisberger more than NE's has "carried" Brady. Proven false with stats.

That's what this argument was about.

Are we wound a little too tight? Do you see the futility in extended debate with people who have an inherent bias (fans)?Teams have a certain persona based on years of play and coaching philosophy. The 49ers were known for the innovation on offense; the Giants and Bears for great defensive teams; and the Steelers for defense and a stout running game. In the fantasy realm, people underestimate the Patriots running game partly because they use the short passing game as a substitute for the run and because their rushing numbers are often distributed between several backs. These perceptions don't change in the short run; Pittsburgh's D is still strong while their run game has slipped with the O-line.

Even though teams are commonly identified from one side of the ball, usually well balanced teams win championships. Let's consider such an imaginary team; with a good defense and a well balanced offense that can run and pass effectively. The team is led by "Joe QB"... no - too boring and there is possible confusion with Montana, a real life QB.... Let's call this guy "Troy Aikman". Troy has a hall of fame running back (we'll call him Emmitt Smith), who runs behind a hall of fame caliber line.

For sake of argument, let's say our imaginary team wins three championships (same as Brady and possibly Roethlisberger). Smith is wildly successful - he becomes the only running back to ever win a Super Bowl championship, the NFL Most Valuable Player award, the NFL rushing crown, and the Super Bowl Most Valuable Player award in the same season. He becomes one of only four backs to lead the NFL in rushing three or more consecutive seasons and joins Jerry Rice's exclusive club of players who have scored more than 1000 career points (sorry - no kickers allowed).

Despite our imaginary teams' huge personal and team success, I could guarantee that many NFL fans would dislike this bunch, probably discredit Emmitt, who had the benefit of a great line. And discredit Troy who had the benefit of a great running game.

Fair? No.

Accurate? No.

Typical of fans? Yes, unfortunately.

 

[Devine Intervention]

They are both overrated in the same right! They both have had success when they did not have to depend on their play to win. Look at NEs success ever since they started depending on him putting up big numbers.... 0 Rings. Same thing with Ben, they are better when they can depend on a good run game and great defense. Look at this years playoff vs Jets..

Manning 18/26 225 1TD 0 INT

Rushing 27 93 0 TD

Def 0 sacks 1 INT 0 FF/FR 0 TD

Brady 29/45 299 2TD 1 INT

Rushing 28 113 0 TD

Def 0 sacks 0 INT 0 FF/FR 0 TD

Big Ben 10/19 133 0 TD 2 INT

Rushing 43 166 2TD

Def 2 sacks 0 INT 1 FF/FR 1 TD

All played the same team, Indy and NE counted on their QB, obviously Pitt didnt. So this whole discussion is pointless because there are too many things that go into wins and losses. Unfortionately for Brady and Manning counting on perfect QB play is not the answer. Even in Mannings most successful playoffs he played terrible and got alot of help from his defense.

 

[cvnpoka]

right i think bradys career in particular is an illuminating expose of the fallacy of the rangzzz argument. no one in their right mind would consider the super bowl winning brady incarnation superior to the current mvp winner that has flamed out in the playoffs the last 3 times.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

Wonder if Brady is available to toss the coin for the Steelers again next Sunday?

 

[GoodLloydHaveMercy]

I also find it fascinating that a QB's whole career is pretty much taken into account when comparing him to his peers, but that usually doesn't apply when comparing other positions. For example, no one is gonna said Tomlinson is better than Chris Johnson right now (even though LT2's career to date as a whole has been clearly better), but Brady's three Super Bowl wins from 6-9 years ago are enough to elevate him above almost everyone, including Roethlisberger, who is a win in nine days away from having won THREE titles since the last time Brady won one. Not drawing any direct conclusions...I just find it fascinating.

never really thought about that but you are exactly right.

 

[GoodLloydHaveMercy]

No one seems to have answered my question on why after 7 seasons, 3 SB appearances, and a 1 loss season why Roethlisberger has only been named to one Pro Bowl.

So how does it happen that all those guys made it and Ben was just an after thought, basically a last minute replacement for Brady IIRC in 2007? Given that "football people" clearly have him in the same class as Brady and Manning, how is it that the fans, the players, the coaches, and the league have only rewarded him with one Pro Bowl appearance?

Again, I realize the Pro Bowl is flawed, but wouldn't this be an area that the powers that be would give the game's biggest stars and best players recognition?

I'm not sure how the Pro Bowl is really relevant, as you yourself admits its flawed, but you have to take a couple of things into consideration.1-Fan voting is strictly a popularity contest, and the largest fan bases or most popular players will always win this part of the vote, regardless of which players actually deserve the Pro Bowl "honor."

2-The players' vote isn't a much better measure. See the article below detailing some of the flaws with the player votes.

Pro bowl voting among players

3-So the "football people" you speak of (coaches, scouts, GMs, etc) only get 1/3 of the vote, and they will almost always be outweighed by the popular fan pick, and the flawed players votes.

BTW-Roethlisberger was voted to the Pro Bowl in 2007, not an injury replacement for Brady. Derek Anderson was the injury replacement for Brady that year. The next year, Roethlisberger was offered a Pro Bowl roster spot, but turned it down because of an injury.

Wouldn't a QB from Pittsburgh do extremely well in a popularity contest? The Steelers have a huge following throughout the US.

yeah but other than on these message boards how many Steelers fans know how to get on the internet and submit votes?

haha

 

[Evilgrin 72]

I can't see an NFL GM taking Big Ben over Brady, Manning, Brees, Rodgers, or Rivers. If you want to slot him somewhere in the next 5, I can live with that, but I just don't see the Top 5.

"Bottom line, if you ask football people, they're going to put Ben Roethlisberger up there with [Manning and Brady] almost unanimously," said Bill Polian, Colts president. "No one would leave him out. And others who have made the Pro Bowl, for example, wouldn't even get consideration if you took a poll of all 32 general managers."

Link

David.... your rebuttal?Um, we have no response. That was perfect.

YES !!! That's how you debate !

The only way we would know is to actually poll "the football people." You basically have the opinion of ONE GUY speaking on behalf of everyone else. And who exactly are these "football people"? Until we poll all 32 teams to rank 5 guys that they would want at QB right now for the upcoming season, none of us (myself included) would be able to have more than a guess. And I also suspect that if you asked these guys to narrow it down to five, they probably would name about 8 guys. Kinda like asking people who the Top 10 fantasy RBs will be for next year, where people will start listing 15 guys. That being said . . .The league gets involved in who makes the Pro Bowl. I generally agree that sometimes guys make it that shouldn't. Why has Roethlisberger only been to asked one Pro Bowl, on par with the Youngs, Cassells, and Garrards of the world? (I realize Ben has rings and the others don't.) The fans haven't supported him, the players haven't selected him, and the league hasn't chosen him even to replace guys that are hurt or opted not to attend. I don't remember Bill Polian or other "football people" being outraged by Ben's abscence.

As for Ghost Rider talking about Brady and his titles from several years ago, it's not like he's done nothing since then. He lead a team with a perfect regular season and another team with 14 wins. He won two MVPs. He's set various records. I don't recall Roethlilsberger ever receiving even one league MVP vote.

If things like league MVP and Pro Bowls and All Pro selections had no part of the game, then why bother having them? Again, I am not knocking Roethilisberger's play or accomplishments, only that in things that reward player performance he has been noticably absent. Did the voters for these things all suddenly forget that Roelisberger played in the NFL all at the same time and foget to vote for him?

Even Troy Aikman, who many thought was a game manager and had the benefit of a phenomenal support cast, was selected to 6 Pro Bowls. Again, it's not a perfect measure of rewarding player performance, but that's one of the ways people reward great accomplishments.

I was only kidding. I just wanted to get some "Old School" lines in there.

 

[The Westin]

If The Steelers lose the SB, or if Ben stinks it up and they carry a win with the Def and running game, will this thread continue? I hope not..

No matter how poorly he plays...if they win the Superbowl, three things will be said in this thread:1) The Steelers couldn't have got to the Super Bowl without him. 2) They will point out one or two plays where he completed a pass or ran for a key third down. They will say he is the only player in the NFL who could do it.3) He has 3 Superbowl rings. The guy just wins.I'd bet my house on it.

 

[r3t2]

If The Steelers lose the SB, or if Ben stinks it up and they carry a win with the Def and running game, will this thread continue? I hope not..

No matter how poorly he plays...if they win the Superbowl, three things will be said in this thread:1) The Steelers couldn't have got to the Super Bowl without him. 2) They will point out one or two plays where he completed a pass or ran for a key third down. They will say he is the only player in the NFL who could do it.3) He has 3 Superbowl rings. The guy just wins.I'd bet my house on it.

...how about if he plays WELL like the last time and takes his team 78 yards in 2 minutes and wins the game with a perfect pass in the back corner of the end zone? three things will be said in this thread:1. even though he's one of only a few players in league history with a 500 yd passing game, had a season of over 30 TDs, passed for 4300 yds last year, has as many great playoff games as tom brady, and has one of the best YPAs in league history, he's just a "game manager." yep, just another trent dilfer. 2. even though he has a career passer rating higher than drew brees and joe montana, he only has a top 5 winning % all-time at the position and the 2nd best in the playoffs because of the defense...which was horrible last year but let's not let that get in the way of the narrative...it'll only confuse things. also, he cant even be as good as david garrard because garrard made the pro bowl. 3. even though he was the offensive rookie of the year and has as many (or more, depending on the source) come-from-behind wins than any other qb since he came into the league (this one is really confusing because that "great defense/running game" argument is kind of built on the idea that theyre always ahead) and outplayed peyton manning decisively in their playoff matchup in 2006, he's clearly inferior to philip rivers who was the best fantas...err, the best qb in the league on the team with the top ranked offense and defense who somehow didnt make the playoffs because they dont make big plays when it counts. also, did i mention that drew brees had a TON of picks this year? of course it turns out he was hurt...although i seem to recall ben breaking a bone in his foot while he kept playing pretty damned good football. oh...and his nose. i could be wrong though. i'd bet that previous guy's house on it.