Is Ben Roethlisberger as good as Tom Brady? (2 Viewers)

[Bayhawks]

You don't trade Ben, he's too good, it would be like trading your nose to spite your face.

You are of course correct. The best part?Since the decision was made to trade Holmes but hold onto Roethlisberger, we haven't had to listen to Steelers fans talk about how their organization is so much classier than everyone else's.

This has definitely been nice. It was such a pain having to listen to local sports talk radio (hosts and callers) talk about guys not being a "Steeler kind of player" when FAs were discussed, or when players got released for not living up to the "Steelers way." Of course, the hypocrisy of cutting Cedrick Wilson shortly after his domestic abuse arrest, while keeping James Harrison who was arrested on similar charges around the same time.

Of course, Steeler fans are still holding tight onto the "no one else could do what Ben does behind Pittsburgh's offensive line" foolishness, but hey... baby steps.

I'm not saying no one else can do what Ben does, but try to think about this without the homer glasses.The Steelers O-line is BAD, no debate needed. Much of Roethlisberger's success has been in spite of his O-line, not a result of it. Brady's success has been, at least partially, a result of his O-line. Most pundits and experts agree that the best way to try to defend the Patriot's offense, is to get after Brady, and hit him.With those facts, it is completely fair to say that Brady would not have had the same success in Pittsburgh, behind Pittsburgh's O-line, as Roethlisberger has had.If you would like to present an argument as to why you think Brady would have been as successful in Roethlisberger's situation, I'd like to hear it.

 

[Adebisi]

Someone already posted this, and Pats fans will deny it until the end of time, but Roethlisberger has produced much the same results as Brady has. Brady is 5 years older than Roethlisberger, and its in the last 5 seasons where Brady has put up monster numbers. Maybe that's a product of him getting older, more knowledgeable, more comfortable in the NE system, having better players. Maybe it's a combination of all these things. Look at Brady when he was 28, and look at Ben now. Ben has played 1 more season than Brady did when he was 28 (two, if you dis-count Brady's rookie year, since he didn't play). Ben has averaged slightly fewer yards and TDs (per year) than Brady did to this point in their respective careers, but Ben has completed a slightly higher percentage of his passes and averaged slightly fewer INTs (per year) than Brady has to this point in their respective careers.Wins-Brady averaged 11.6 wins/season, Roethlisberger has averaged 9.9 wins/season. Brady's winning percentage was .744, Roethlisberger's is .704. Brady was 10-1 in the playoffs, Roethlisberger is 8-2 (with this post-season to be added). Brady won 3 SBs, Roethlisberer has won 2 (so far).Keep in mind that much of what is being held against Roethlisberger now (great defense, team wins the games, not him) could (and was) said about Brady when he was younger.Is Roethlisberger as good, RIGHT NOW, as Brady is? No. Is Roethlisberger very comparable to Brady when he was 28? Absolutely. If you disagree, you are ignoring facts.

dang does this mean Big Ben has a shot at someone like Giselle down the road?!!

I'm pretty sure he could overpower her, so sure.

 

[Adebisi]

You don't trade Ben, he's too good, it would be like trading your nose to spite your face.

You are of course correct. The best part?Since the decision was made to trade Holmes but hold onto Roethlisberger, we haven't had to listen to Steelers fans talk about how their organization is so much classier than everyone else's.

This has definitely been nice. It was such a pain having to listen to local sports talk radio (hosts and callers) talk about guys not being a "Steeler kind of player" when FAs were discussed, or when players got released for not living up to the "Steelers way." Of course, the hypocrisy of cutting Cedrick Wilson shortly after his domestic abuse arrest, while keeping James Harrison who was arrested on similar charges around the same time.

Of course, Steeler fans are still holding tight onto the "no one else could do what Ben does behind Pittsburgh's offensive line" foolishness, but hey... baby steps.

I'm not saying no one else can do what Ben does, but try to think about this without the homer glasses.The Steelers O-line is BAD, no debate needed. Much of Roethlisberger's success has been in spite of his O-line, not a result of it. Brady's success has been, at least partially, a result of his O-line. Most pundits and experts agree that the best way to try to defend the Patriot's offense, is to get after Brady, and hit him.With those facts, it is completely fair to say that Brady would not have had the same success in Pittsburgh, behind Pittsburgh's O-line, as Roethlisberger has had.If you would like to present an argument as to why you think Brady would have been as successful in Roethlisberger's situation, I'd like to hear it.

When you say, "Most pundits and experts agree that the best way to try to defend the Patriot's offense, is to get after Brady, and hit him," what do you mean, and which experts are you referring to? Regardless, I am assuming you're calling for more blitzing (otherwise, it's just stating the obvious to say that a quarterback will be less effective if he's given less time). But blitzing is more or less feeding right into Brady's hands. I'm surprised that anyone would go on record disagreeing with that.I will wait for you to respond before I go any further because I'm not sure I understood your point correctly here.

 

[cvnpoka]

Maybe Drew Brees at times (I gotta tell ya, he seems to FORCE the ball under pressure quite a bit... doesn't do that well extending plays when the initial reads aren't there)

hahaid imagine the saints have the most players with a catch in the league and its not bc of injury.

 

[Road Warriors]

You don't trade Ben, he's too good, it would be like trading your nose to spite your face.

You are of course correct. The best part?Since the decision was made to trade Holmes but hold onto Roethlisberger, we haven't had to listen to Steelers fans talk about how their organization is so much classier than everyone else's.

This has definitely been nice. It was such a pain having to listen to local sports talk radio (hosts and callers) talk about guys not being a "Steeler kind of player" when FAs were discussed, or when players got released for not living up to the "Steelers way." Of course, the hypocrisy of cutting Cedrick Wilson shortly after his domestic abuse arrest, while keeping James Harrison who was arrested on similar charges around the same time.

Of course, Steeler fans are still holding tight onto the "no one else could do what Ben does behind Pittsburgh's offensive line" foolishness, but hey... baby steps.

I'm not saying no one else can do what Ben does, but try to think about this without the homer glasses.The Steelers O-line is BAD, no debate needed. Much of Roethlisberger's success has been in spite of his O-line, not a result of it. Brady's success has been, at least partially, a result of his O-line. Most pundits and experts agree that the best way to try to defend the Patriot's offense, is to get after Brady, and hit him.With those facts, it is completely fair to say that Brady would not have had the same success in Pittsburgh, behind Pittsburgh's O-line, as Roethlisberger has had.If you would like to present an argument as to why you think Brady would have been as successful in Roethlisberger's situation, I'd like to hear it.

Not addressed to me, but I'll take a shot at this...I think it comes down to offensive philosophy. If Brady was behind the Steelers O-Line *AND* the playcalling stayed in line with what the Steelers have been doing, near the top of the league in deep passes ( thrown > 15 yrds ), he may not have the same success as Roethlisberger in the same situation. Roethlisberger has a unique size/mobility/strength combination that allows him to elude or shake off defenders while allowing the play to develop downfield that Brady doesn't possess. Brady does well evading the rush by sliding in the pocket ( assuming there is one ) but doesn't have the foot speed to elude the rush if the protection breaks down.However, I would contend that the Patriots line isn't exactly a dominant line, either. The Patriots have adjusted their playcalling to match both the skillset of their receiving corps ( small, quick, precise routes ) and lessened the demand on the pass blocking to hold for more than 3ish seconds. This scheme demands an accurate passer and very quick recognition of coverages and excellent decision making. So, if the Steelers were to adjust their passing scheme to better match the ability of the line to hold up, Brady would do very well behind that line. If the plan was to throw downfield alot, Brady would probably do worse in that situation.

 

[kyoun1e]

Also worth noting Ben owns two of the most important plays in Steelers, if not NFL history.1) Best TD pass -SB XLIII2) Best tackle - Nick Harper, Division Rd of XL title runBrady's 3 rings are certainly well deserved but have also been greatly assisted:1) Bledsoe bailing him out in Pittsburgh 2001 AFC Championship.2) Tuck rule.3) Vinatieri4) Spy gate

How can you possibly have the balls to speak of any "assists" to Brady's rings when this was Ben's line in Super Bowl XL:* 9-21-123-0-2* Passer rating of 22.6...the LOWEST BY A STARTING QB IN SUPER BOWL HISTORYCertainly, the rest of the Steeler team along with that lousy holding call against Seattle ASSISTED this super bowl win.All that said, rings are what matters. I'm a Brady fan and I'm no hypocrite. Big Ben's stats suck seaweed in that game, but the greats somehow manage to get it done. An example of "getting it done" is converting 8 third downs in the game and converting a 3rd and 28 to setup a TD. Big Ben is a winner.But give me a break.KY

 

[kyoun1e]

In the past 5 years, Manning has been to more SBs and won more SBs.

You do realize how convenient this analysis is...right?Gee, how many years ago did NE win their third super bowl?Oh yeah, that's right.Pathetic.KY

 

[kyoun1e]

This year's playoffs could make this very close. If Big Ben goes into New England, beats them and wins the SB earning his 3rd ring, it will be very close.

Yup.If the Steelers and Big Ben somehow get it done this year all the Brady vs. Manning threads will be replaced by Brady vs. Rothlesberger threads.KY

 

[kyoun1e]

Of course Big Ben has better numbers statistically through age 28. Brady started 80 games in that time. Ben has started 98. Roethlisberger started his first game at 22. Brady didn't start a game until he was 24. And we also already know that Brady missed a season at age 31, so Roethlisberger will have that advantage in a few years as well.Because Big Ben began starting at such an early age, he ranks 5th in passing yards through age 28 after Peyton, Bledsoe, Marino, and Favre.

So what does that mean? How do you compare the two? If we can't use numbers, how do you say Brady is definitively better?

Pick the same (or close to) number of starts for both players.Brady through 2006:96 GP, 1896 completions, 3064 attempts, 21564 passing yards, 7.04 YPA, 147 TD, 78 INT, 88.4 passer rating70-24 regular season as a starter (.745)12-2 post season, 3 SB winsBig Ben to date:99 GP, 1766 completions, 2800 attempts, 61.9%, 22502 passing yards, 8.0 YPA, 144 TD, 86 INT, 92.5 rating69-29 regular season as a starter (.704)8-2 post season, 2 SB winsOne thing I would say that is a factor is that in the last few years passing totals have gone through the roof, so Ben gets the benefit of that and Brady doesn't.Brady's best numbers occurred in the years NOT included in the above totals. From 2007 - 2010, here are Brady's numbers:49 games, 1100 completions, 1646 attempts, 66.8%, 13180 passing yards, 8.01 YPA, 114 TD, 25 INT, 107.9 passer ratingI already said earlier in the thread that there was not a huge difference between Brady and Roethlisberger, and these numbers go to illustrate that.

I edited to post similar stats, and it seems like we may be making the same point, which is to say that Brady, while widely regarded as a better QB than Roethlisberger, isn't light years ahead.

Perception is more powerful than reality.All Big Ben needs for this Brady vs. Rothlesberger discussion to narrow is for one of two things to happen:1) Win another bowl (while brady doesn't), or2) Have an absolutely lights out regular season as an elite passer across all key passing metrics.That will do it.Until then, the media and the masses will place Ben a notch below. When it's all said and done, all these guys (Brady, Manning, Rothlesberger) will have plenty of "stats." Fair or not, what's going to separate them is Rings and performance when it counts.Stats are for losers. KY

 

[Godsbrother]

Of course Big Ben has better numbers statistically through age 28. Brady started 80 games in that time. Ben has started 98. Roethlisberger started his first game at 22. Brady didn't start a game until he was 24. And we also already know that Brady missed a season at age 31, so Roethlisberger will have that advantage in a few years as well.Because Big Ben began starting at such an early age, he ranks 5th in passing yards through age 28 after Peyton, Bledsoe, Marino, and Favre.

Bayhawks already did a good job comparing Brady and Roethlisberger's first 7 seasons to refute this a bit so I won't speak to that but the the prevailing thought in the NFL is that it is a distinct disadvantage for a QB to start right away in their career. Most teams want a rookie QB to sit on the bench for a season or two before seeing game action. I know the Steelers had no intention of starting Roethlisberger his rookie season but were forced into it when Tommy Maddox went down in the season opener.The fact that Roethlisberger came out of a MAC school as a junior and had such immediate success in the NFL at age 22 is pretty remarkable. He isn't the only rookie QB to have success right away but they are the exception rather than the rule.

 

[Godsbrother]

Of course, Steeler fans are still holding tight onto the "no one else could do what Ben does behind Pittsburgh's offensive line" foolishness, but hey... baby steps.

Not sure if this is directed at me but I never said "no one else could do what Ben does behind Pittsburgh's offensive line". What I did say is that given the Steelers offensive philosophy and the state of their offensive line over the past few years I would rather have Roethlisberger than Brady. If that makes me a fool in your eyes I am going to have to get over it but it won't be easy.

 

[Bayhawks]

When you say, "Most pundits and experts agree that the best way to try to defend the Patriot's offense, is to get after Brady, and hit him," what do you mean, and which experts are you referring to? Regardless, I am assuming you're calling for more blitzing (otherwise, it's just stating the obvious to say that a quarterback will be less effective if he's given less time). But blitzing is more or less feeding right into Brady's hands. I'm surprised that anyone would go on record disagreeing with that.I will wait for you to respond before I go any further because I'm not sure I understood your point correctly here.

Blitzing is a part of it, but generally, when you hear the ex-coaches, ex-players, and sportscasters on ESPN, CBS, FOX, Showtime, etc talk about one of the keys to beating the Patriots, they talk about getting after Brady, and hitting him. The most recent example was yesterday on NFL Live. Eric Mangini was talking about how the Browns beat the Pats this year, and they were saying how pressure and hits on Brady are the best way to defend him. If you sit back and try to cover, he'll pick you apart, but if you can get pressure and hits on him, that's a defense's best bet.With that being said, Brady would not have been as effective in Pittsburgh's offense & with their O-line. They have more of a vertical passing offense, and their O-line has been inferior to NE's. Brady would have been subjected to more pressure & more hits. Roethlisberger seems to thrive on that type of environment, and Brady doesn't (I'm not saying Brady would turn into a Jake Delhomme, but that he wouldn't have been as effective in Pittsburgh as he has been in NE)

 

[Bayhawks]

Not addressed to me, but I'll take a shot at this...

I think it comes down to offensive philosophy. If Brady was behind the Steelers O-Line *AND* the playcalling stayed in line with what the Steelers have been doing, near the top of the league in deep passes ( thrown > 15 yrds ), he may not have the same success as Roethlisberger in the same situation. Roethlisberger has a unique size/mobility/strength combination that allows him to elude or shake off defenders while allowing the play to develop downfield that Brady doesn't possess. Brady does well evading the rush by sliding in the pocket ( assuming there is one ) but doesn't have the foot speed to elude the rush if the protection breaks down.

However, I would contend that the Patriots line isn't exactly a dominant line, either. The Patriots have adjusted their playcalling to match both the skillset of their receiving corps ( small, quick, precise routes ) and lessened the demand on the pass blocking to hold for more than 3ish seconds. This scheme demands an accurate passer and very quick recognition of coverages and excellent decision making.

So, if the Steelers were to adjust their passing scheme to better match the ability of the line to hold up, Brady would do very well behind that line. If the plan was to throw downfield alot, Brady would probably do worse in that situation.

Perhaps you are right, but that's not the Steelers' offense. Looking at the flip side of that argument, however, Roethlisberger has the exact same career completion % as Brady, despite playing in a more vertical passing game, which usually causes a lower completion %. He is just as accurate as Brady, and his decision making and recognition of coverages is quite good, as well. If Roethlisberger were in the Pats offense, behind their O-line, I would imagine he'd do very well in that situation/behind that O-line.

 

[Bayhawks]

In the past 5 years, Manning has been to more SBs and won more SBs.

You do realize how convenient this analysis is...right?Gee, how many years ago did NE win their third super bowl?Oh yeah, that's right.Pathetic.KY

It's no more convenient than using the last 10 years as a measuring stick (as was done in another thread started, I'd assume, by a NE homer) since that is conveniently when the Pats won their first SB.

 

[kyoun1e]

In the past 5 years, Manning has been to more SBs and won more SBs.

You do realize how convenient this analysis is...right?Gee, how many years ago did NE win their third super bowl?Oh yeah, that's right.Pathetic.KY

It's no more convenient than using the last 10 years as a measuring stick (as was done in another thread started, I'd assume, by a NE homer) since that is conveniently when the Pats won their first SB.

It's playing games with statistics.As many like to do around here.I swear 95% of the posters on this board never watched many of these games and are just having fun with excel in their mommy's basement.KY

 

[Evilgrin 72]

This year's playoffs could make this very close. If Big Ben goes into New England, beats them and wins the SB earning his 3rd ring, it will be very close.I think right now you have to give the edge to Tom Brady, he's earned it.I love this thread because you guys finally got it right. Ben Roethlisberger needs to be compared to Tom Brady and Peyton Manning, not Aaron Rodgers, Tony Romo and Phillip Rivers.Ben's a stud and knows how to win when everything is on the line. Of course Tom Brady is but that's more commonly accepted but Ben is a lot better than the credit he gets and love that he's right up there with the big boys in the league.The only thing that I'll never forget from this board is a large majority of Pittsburgh fans ready to kick Big Ben to the curb after his problems last year. So many of you guys wanted him traded or let go for what he did and now you'll defend him against the top Qb's in the league and certainly wouldn't let him go from your team right now. I'm glad that I felt and showed support about Big Ben's situation on this board because he is indeed one of the top 4 Qb's at worst in this league.

If you go back and look, you'll see I was right there with you saying to trade him would be sheer lunacy. I'm glad cooler heads prevailed.

 

[Road Warriors]

Not addressed to me, but I'll take a shot at this...

I think it comes down to offensive philosophy. If Brady was behind the Steelers O-Line *AND* the playcalling stayed in line with what the Steelers have been doing, near the top of the league in deep passes ( thrown > 15 yrds ), he may not have the same success as Roethlisberger in the same situation. Roethlisberger has a unique size/mobility/strength combination that allows him to elude or shake off defenders while allowing the play to develop downfield that Brady doesn't possess. Brady does well evading the rush by sliding in the pocket ( assuming there is one ) but doesn't have the foot speed to elude the rush if the protection breaks down.

However, I would contend that the Patriots line isn't exactly a dominant line, either. The Patriots have adjusted their playcalling to match both the skillset of their receiving corps ( small, quick, precise routes ) and lessened the demand on the pass blocking to hold for more than 3ish seconds. This scheme demands an accurate passer and very quick recognition of coverages and excellent decision making.

So, if the Steelers were to adjust their passing scheme to better match the ability of the line to hold up, Brady would do very well behind that line. If the plan was to throw downfield alot, Brady would probably do worse in that situation.

Perhaps you are right, but that's not the Steelers' offense.

One thing I've always admired about the Patriots attack is that they don't have a "Patriots" offense. Most frequently using a short passing attack, but have at times been a balanced attack, a power run attack, ( after picking up Moss ) or a vertical passing attack. They adjust their offense to the abilities of the players they have, and they trust the QB to be able to run all these styles effectively and efficiently.

Looking at the flip side of that argument, however, Roethlisberger has the exact same career completion % as Brady, despite playing in a more vertical passing game, which usually causes a lower completion %. He is just as accurate as Brady, and his decision making and recognition of coverages is quite good, as well. If Roethlisberger were in the Pats offense, behind their O-line, I would imagine he'd do very well in that situation/behind that O-line.

I don't know that Roethlisberger would thrive in the Patriots offense. He is not widely regarded as a quick decision maker, and is often called out for holding the ball too long waiting for the receiver to come open. Part of that is the more vertical attack that is part of the Steelers scheme, and part of it is Ben trusting his physicality to be able to extend the play until it comes open. He is not a timing passer, which is a critical component of what makes the Patriots attack so difficult to defend. I tend to believe that these 2 QBs are more successful where they are than they would be running the others offense.

 

[The Westin]

Of course Big Ben has better numbers statistically through age 28. Brady started 80 games in that time. Ben has started 98. Roethlisberger started his first game at 22. Brady didn't start a game until he was 24. And we also already know that Brady missed a season at age 31, so Roethlisberger will have that advantage in a few years as well.Because Big Ben began starting at such an early age, he ranks 5th in passing yards through age 28 after Peyton, Bledsoe, Marino, and Favre.

So what does that mean? How do you compare the two? If we can't use numbers, how do you say Brady is definitively better?

Pick the same (or close to) number of starts for both players.Brady through 2006:96 GP, 1896 completions, 3064 attempts, 21564 passing yards, 7.04 YPA, 147 TD, 78 INT, 88.4 passer rating70-24 regular season as a starter (.745)12-2 post season, 3 SB winsBig Ben to date:99 GP, 1766 completions, 2800 attempts, 61.9%, 22502 passing yards, 8.0 YPA, 144 TD, 86 INT, 92.5 rating69-29 regular season as a starter (.704)8-2 post season, 2 SB winsOne thing I would say that is a factor is that in the last few years passing totals have gone through the roof, so Ben gets the benefit of that and Brady doesn't.Brady's best numbers occurred in the years NOT included in the above totals. From 2007 - 2010, here are Brady's numbers:49 games, 1100 completions, 1646 attempts, 66.8%, 13180 passing yards, 8.01 YPA, 114 TD, 25 INT, 107.9 passer ratingI already said earlier in the thread that there was not a huge difference between Brady and Roethlisberger, and these numbers go to illustrate that.

I edited to post similar stats, and it seems like we may be making the same point, which is to say that Brady, while widely regarded as a better QB than Roethlisberger, isn't light years ahead.

Perception is more powerful than reality.All Big Ben needs for this Brady vs. Rothlesberger discussion to narrow is for one of two things to happen:1) Win another bowl (while brady doesn't), or2) Have an absolutely lights out regular season as an elite passer across all key passing metrics.That will do it.Until then, the media and the masses will place Ben a notch below. When it's all said and done, all these guys (Brady, Manning, Rothlesberger) will have plenty of "stats." Fair or not, what's going to separate them is Rings and performance when it counts.Stats are for losers. KY

Stats aren't for losers, they tell part of the story. Just as rings tell part (but not all) of the story. Winning another Superbowl wouldn't even Ben with Tom in my eyes. It's a nice achievement but again, rating QB's by Superbowls is just ridiculous. There is too much that goes into a Superbowl to credit only the QB. Having a lights out season wouldn't do much either. It'd prove he's more than what I currently think he is, but it wouldn't bring him close to Brady. Now if Ben has two of the greatest seasons any quarterback in the history of the game, as Brady did....then yes maybe we can talk about Brady and Ben. But these arguments in this thread are based off of two things:1) Superbowls2) Ben compared to Brady when Brady was thought by many to be a mediocre QB in a great system. It's what Brady did after the age of 29 that makes him great in most people's eyes. Proving it wasn't just the system. Ben has yet to do that. (Yes, I know he had a good drive in the Superbowl) So we can throw out that Brady/Ben are equals. Brady made a HUGE leap when he turned 30. Maybe Ben can do that, maybe not. But to assume he is equal is a stretch, he has much to prove.We can play the stat comparison game all day. For example, since 2008...compared to Aaron Rodgers and Phillip Rivers, Ben Roethlisberger has thrown for:Less yards every year than bothLess yards per attempt every year (except had .4 more than Rodgers in '09)Less Touchdowns every yearMore interceptions in '08 and '09, less in '10 Had a lower QB rating than both every yearMy point isn't Ben is worse than Rodgers/Rivers. My point is good QB's will have comparable stats over a span of years. What sets Brady apart from all three of these guys is that he has played two of the best seasons I've certainly seen in my lifetime. Ben hasn't done that. Ben's Super Bowls don't mean much when comparing Brady to Ben because there is much more than SUper Bowl wins that makes Brady great. When Ben puts up a season like Tom did in 07 and '10 then let's have this talk. Until then, let's stop drinking the kool aid a bit.

 

[Godsbrother]

When Ben puts up a season like Tom did in 07 and '10 then let's have this talk. Until then, let's stop drinking the kool aid a bit.

Perhaps your problem is that you only look at a great statistical year as a measure of a great QB. While stats are certainly important the goal of each QB every year is to lead his team to the championship. It isn't just about their performance in the Super Bowl -- it starts in Week 1 and goes through all the ups and downs of the regular season, carries through in the playoffs and finishes in the Super Bowl. You can have all the stats you want but the bottom line is winning the championship.I agree Brady is the better QB (I have said that at least 3 times in this thread), but only other active quarterback that has been able to win more than one championship is Roethlisberger and it hasn't been a fluke.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I agree Brady is the better QB (I have said that at least 3 times in this thread), but only other active quarterback that has been able to win more than one championship is Roethlisberger and it hasn't been a fluke.

Not counting first or second year starters, how many other current quarterbacks have had the luxury of a top 10 defense in every season they have been in the NFL?

 

[GoodLloydHaveMercy]

In regards to his first Super Bowl...you're making excuses for the guy's poor play. This is where I have a problem. You make excuses for his poor play in the game (his age), while at the same time using that same game as evidence of his greatness....soley based on the fact that it makes his number of Super Bowl wins higher. You ignore his play, and instead focus on the result. The result was a win for the Pittsburgh Steelers, not Ben Roethlisberger.

The second Superbowl...he was outplayed by Kurt Warner. The fumble was already explained by another poster. The interception was a poor throw in an otherwise great day against the best defense in the NFL. Warner didn't have the luxury of having to manage the game to win like Ben did. Warner had to win it. Roethlisberger, for his entire career, has had the luxury and comfort of always being able to fall back on having the best defense in the league.

I won't address the first point. Ben had a bad game in SB XL, there's no denying that. He did, however, carry the team on his back in the playoffs to get to the SB, is all I'll say.To the second point "he was outplayed by Kurt Warner." Is only QB allowed to play well in the SB? Jake Delhomme outplayed Brady in SB XXXVIII, does that de-value that SB as one of Brady's accomplishments? You could actually make the argument that Brady was outplayed by his QB counterpart in ALL 4 SBs he's played in. (I'm not saying I'd buy that argument, but that you could make it) Does that mean that Brady's SB wins don't count?

And as for Roethlisberger being able to manage the game, and not having to win it. Are you serious? Roethlisberger had to drive his team 88 yards with under 2.5 minutes left to WIN THE GAME. No running plays, no Steelers defense on the field. How exactly did Ben only have to "manage the game," and not win it?

Finally, you said "Roethlisberger, for his entire career, has had the luxury and comfort of always being able to fall back on having the best defense in the league." Football is a team game, and every QB who wins a SB does so with a great supporting cast. Maybe it's a great offense, maybe it's a great defense, but no QB does it alone. Joe Montana had a great offense AND great defense; does that diminish his legacy? Troy Aikman had a great offensive line, one of the best RBs to ever play the game, a HOF WR, and a great defense; do his SBs not count? Tom Brady, in all 3 SBs, had the luxury and comfort of being able to rely on the solid play of his veteran defense; do his SBs stand invalidated?

The only legitimate point you made was about Roethlisberger's poor play in SB XL, but your other points are either weak or flat out wrong.

You're just supporting my point further. Superbowls are not the only measuring stick when talking about QB's, I've been making that point in almost every post I made. There are 53 players on a team. Aikman, Montana, Brady....none of them do it alone. That's my whole point in this thread. I don't think Brady is great just because of the Superbowls, he and Manning are on a completely different level than every other quarterback in the league and have been for quite some time. We are talking about Roethlisberger in here like he's on the same level and I don't see it. Yes he had a good drive in the Superbowl, I get it. That doesn't make him the quarterback of the decade, that doesn't make him surpass Brady as Quarterback of this generation. What about Manning? I understand the article leaves a lot open. But most people would agree that there is Manning and Brady. Right now, no, one drive does not make Roethlisberger in the same league as Manning and Brady. Nobody playing today is. Every quarterback in the league has A LOT more to prove before being in the discussin.

Wait, I'm proving your point by showing that your reasoning for downplaying Roethlisberger's play in the playoffs/SB were almostly completely without merit or supported by reality? OK You say that SBs aren't the only measuring stick when talking about QBs, so what are?

Wins

Brady through age 28: 58

Roethlisberger currently: 69

Winning percentage

Brady through age 28: .744

Roethlisberger currently: .704

Touchdowns

Brady through age 28: 123+3 rushing TDs

Roethlisberger currently: 144+14 rushing TDs

TD %

Brady through age 28: 4.8

Roethlisberger currently: 5.1

Pass yards

Brady through age 28: 18035 yards

Roethlisberger currently: 22505 yards

YPA

Brady through age 28: 7.1 YPA

Roethlisberger currently: 8.0 YPA

Completion %

Brady through age 28: 62%

Roethlisberger currently: 63%

Interceptions

Brady through age 28: 66

Roethlisberger currently: 86

INT %

Brady through age 28: 2.6

Roethlisberger currently: 3.1

4th Quarter comebacks/Game winning drives

Brady through age 28: 21 (including playoffs)

Roethlisberger currently: 24 (including playoffs)

Playoff record

Brady through age 28: 10-1

Roethlisberger currently: 8.2

SBs won

Brady through age 28: 3

Roethlisberger currently: 2

So, please show me how, exactly, Brady was so vastly superior (at 28) to where Roethlisberger now is?

Roethlisberger has more wins, Brady had a higher winning percentage.

Roethlisberger has more TDs, a higher TD %, more pass yards, a higher YPA, & higher completion %.

Brady had fewer INTs, and a lower INT %.

Roethlisberger has more comebacks/game-winning drives.

Brady had a 91% winning percentage in the playoffs, Roethlisberger has a 80% winning percentage in the playoffs.

Brady had 3 SBs, Roethlisberger has 2 (& a shot at 1 more this year).

I don't see either QB being vastly superior, as you seem to believe. Rather I see 2 QBs who have produced very similar stats, wins, and championships for their teams.

this is dang

I'm not sure how this can be argued!!

 

[GoodLloydHaveMercy]

Maybe Drew Brees at times (I gotta tell ya, he seems to FORCE the ball under pressure quite a bit... doesn't do that well extending plays when the initial reads aren't there)

hahaid imagine the saints have the most players with a catch in the league and its not bc of injury.

who said anything about an injury? I didn't say he doesn't spread the ball I'm just saying sometimes he feels pressure when the pressure isn't really there... Most of his picks this year were just plain and simple BAD throws... Protection was a problem for them this year and an inconsistent running game at times was also problematic. Forcing the ball in pressure situations just doesn't work. He can dink and dunk all the way down the field but go back and look at his INTs. Obviously nobody is immune to pressure in the pocket but some are just more adept (or in Ben's case... FAT) in dealing with the pressure.

 

[GoodLloydHaveMercy]

You don't trade Ben, he's too good, it would be like trading your nose to spite your face.

You are of course correct. The best part?Since the decision was made to trade Holmes but hold onto Roethlisberger, we haven't had to listen to Steelers fans talk about how their organization is so much classier than everyone else's.

This has definitely been nice. It was such a pain having to listen to local sports talk radio (hosts and callers) talk about guys not being a "Steeler kind of player" when FAs were discussed, or when players got released for not living up to the "Steelers way." Of course, the hypocrisy of cutting Cedrick Wilson shortly after his domestic abuse arrest, while keeping James Harrison who was arrested on similar charges around the same time.

Of course, Steeler fans are still holding tight onto the "no one else could do what Ben does behind Pittsburgh's offensive line" foolishness, but hey... baby steps.

I'm not saying no one else can do what Ben does, but try to think about this without the homer glasses.The Steelers O-line is BAD, no debate needed. Much of Roethlisberger's success has been in spite of his O-line, not a result of it. Brady's success has been, at least partially, a result of his O-line. Most pundits and experts agree that the best way to try to defend the Patriot's offense, is to get after Brady, and hit him.With those facts, it is completely fair to say that Brady would not have had the same success in Pittsburgh, behind Pittsburgh's O-line, as Roethlisberger has had.If you would like to present an argument as to why you think Brady would have been as successful in Roethlisberger's situation, I'd like to hear it.

Not addressed to me, but I'll take a shot at this...I think it comes down to offensive philosophy. If Brady was behind the Steelers O-Line *AND* the playcalling stayed in line with what the Steelers have been doing, near the top of the league in deep passes ( thrown > 15 yrds ), he may not have the same success as Roethlisberger in the same situation. Roethlisberger has a unique size/mobility/strength combination that allows him to elude or shake off defenders while allowing the play to develop downfield that Brady doesn't possess. Brady does well evading the rush by sliding in the pocket ( assuming there is one ) but doesn't have the foot speed to elude the rush if the protection breaks down.However, I would contend that the Patriots line isn't exactly a dominant line, either. The Patriots have adjusted their playcalling to match both the skillset of their receiving corps ( small, quick, precise routes ) and lessened the demand on the pass blocking to hold for more than 3ish seconds. This scheme demands an accurate passer and very quick recognition of coverages and excellent decision making. So, if the Steelers were to adjust their passing scheme to better match the ability of the line to hold up, Brady would do very well behind that line. If the plan was to throw downfield alot, Brady would probably do worse in that situation.

very well said... Ben suits the Steelers just fine. Brady suits the Patriots style as well.

 

[Godsbrother]

I agree Brady is the better QB (I have said that at least 3 times in this thread), but only other active quarterback that has been able to win more than one championship is Roethlisberger and it hasn't been a fluke.

Not counting first or second year starters, how many other current quarterbacks have had the luxury of a top 10 defense in every season they have been in the NFL?

The Steelers have been Top 10 in five of Roethlisberger's 7 seasons. The New England Patriots have been Top 10 in 8 of Tom Brady's 10 season. If having a great defense is a knock on the QB then I guess Tom Brady isn't that good afterall.

Pittsburgh Steelers Defensive Rankings since Ben Roethlisberger has been the starting QB:2010 12009 122008 12007 22006 112005 32004 1New England Defensive Rankings since Tom Brady has been the starting QB2010 82009 52008 82007 42006 22005 172004 22003 12002 172001 6Source: Pro-Football-Reference.com

 

[Copeman]

I agree Brady is the better QB (I have said that at least 3 times in this thread), but only other active quarterback that has been able to win more than one championship is Roethlisberger and it hasn't been a fluke.

Not counting first or second year starters, how many other current quarterbacks have had the luxury of a top 10 defense in every season they have been in the NFL?

The Steelers have been Top 10 in five of Roethlisberger's 7 seasons. The New England Patriots have been Top 10 in 8 of Tom Brady's 10 season. If having a great defense is a knock on the QB then I guess Tom Brady isn't that good afterall.

Pittsburgh Steelers Defensive Rankings since Ben Roethlisberger has been the starting QB:2010 12009 122008 12007 22006 112005 32004 1New England Defensive Rankings since Tom Brady has been the starting QB2010 82009 52008 82007 42006 22005 172004 22003 12002 172001 6Source: Pro-Football-Reference.com

wned:

 

[az_prof]

Yes, he is. I think he is better because he can beat you even if you get pressure on him. Brady folds if you can bring the heat. Ben hangs in there, shrugs off sackers, and makes the play anyway.

 

[Road Warriors]

I agree Brady is the better QB (I have said that at least 3 times in this thread), but only other active quarterback that has been able to win more than one championship is Roethlisberger and it hasn't been a fluke.

Not counting first or second year starters, how many other current quarterbacks have had the luxury of a top 10 defense in every season they have been in the NFL?

The Steelers have been Top 10 in five of Roethlisberger's 7 seasons. The New England Patriots have been Top 10 in 8 of Tom Brady's 10 season. If having a great defense is a knock on the QB then I guess Tom Brady isn't that good afterall.

Pittsburgh Steelers Defensive Rankings since Ben Roethlisberger has been the starting QB:2010 12009 122008 12007 22006 112005 32004 1New England Defensive Rankings since Tom Brady has been the starting QB2010 82009 52008 82007 42006 22005 172004 22003 12002 172001 6Source: Pro-Football-Reference.com

What criteria has the Patriots D ranked 8 this year? They're middle to bottom of the pack in most rankings defensively this season.ETA: Found it... Scoring D. Bizarre year for the Patriots bucking trends. Low yards on offense (8th in yards), High yards against ( 25th ) but 1st in scoring O ( by a wide margin ) and 8th in scoring D.

 

[Road Warriors]

Yes, he is. I think he is better because he can beat you even if you get pressure on him. Brady folds if you can bring the heat. Ben hangs in there, shrugs off sackers, and makes the play anyway.

Folds if you bring the heat? Well, then, I guess they have no shot now that you've exposed this fact. Ben makes more plays on the move and shrugs off more tacklers than Brady while waiting for something downfield to develop, but unless you're getting to Brady in 2 counts, the ball is out... to the right guy, on time, with accuracy that allows for significant YAC. Ben is unique in his ability to make plays while being hit, I'll give you that, but to claim that is the primary quality that defines him as a better QB than Brady? I would prefer the guy that gets the ball out quickly to the right guy and avoids getting hit, while leading his team to the highest scoring offense in the league.

 

[Godsbrother]

I agree Brady is the better QB (I have said that at least 3 times in this thread), but only other active quarterback that has been able to win more than one championship is Roethlisberger and it hasn't been a fluke.

Not counting first or second year starters, how many other current quarterbacks have had the luxury of a top 10 defense in every season they have been in the NFL?

The Steelers have been Top 10 in five of Roethlisberger's 7 seasons. The New England Patriots have been Top 10 in 8 of Tom Brady's 10 season. If having a great defense is a knock on the QB then I guess Tom Brady isn't that good afterall.

Pittsburgh Steelers Defensive Rankings since Ben Roethlisberger has been the starting QB:2010 12009 122008 12007 22006 112005 32004 1New England Defensive Rankings since Tom Brady has been the starting QB2010 82009 52008 82007 42006 22005 172004 22003 12002 172001 6Source: Pro-Football-Reference.com

What criteria has the Patriots D ranked 8 this year? They're middle to bottom of the pack in most rankings defensively this season.

The criteria I used was points against.

 

[Ghost Rider]

The Steelers have been Top 10 in five of Roethlisberger's 7 seasons. The New England Patriots have been Top 10 in 8 of Tom Brady's 10 season. If having a great defense is a knock on the QB then I guess Tom Brady isn't that good afterall.

Nowhere did I say that having a great defense is a knock on a QB. My point (which I shouldn't have to repeat, but I apparently do) is that having a great defense every year is a huge advantage for Roethlisberger that no other QB has has in the last decade.

wned:

Hardly. He posted their rankings based on points against, not on yards allowed (probably because he thinks it weakens my point), the latter of which is the general consensus for saying where a defense is ranked. For example, at the beginning of every game, when the networks talk about where the offenses and defenses rank, they say where they rank based on yards, not points.

 

[Road Warriors]

Pittsburgh Steelers Defensive Rankings since Ben Roethlisberger has been the starting QB:2010 12009 122008 12007 22006 112005 32004 1New England Defensive Rankings since Tom Brady has been the starting QB2010 82009 52008 82007 42006 22005 172004 22003 12002 172001 6Source: Pro-Football-Reference.com

What criteria has the Patriots D ranked 8 this year? They're middle to bottom of the pack in most rankings defensively this season.

The criteria I used was points against.

I saw that, see above. It'd look different if you called out how many top 3 defenses, though.

 

[PhD]

When you say, "Most pundits and experts agree that the best way to try to defend the Patriot's offense, is to get after Brady, and hit him," what do you mean, and which experts are you referring to? Regardless, I am assuming you're calling for more blitzing (otherwise, it's just stating the obvious to say that a quarterback will be less effective if he's given less time). But blitzing is more or less feeding right into Brady's hands. I'm surprised that anyone would go on record disagreeing with that.

What do you mean by this? By my read, Brady is the king of the 5-step drop dink and dunk. If you blitz, what are you feeding into?

 

[Godsbrother]

Hardly. He posted their rankings based on points against, not on yards allowed (probably because he thinks it weakens my point), the latter of which is the general consensus for saying where a defense is ranked. For example, at the beginning of every game, when the networks talk about where the offenses and defenses rank, they say where they rank based on yards, not points.

Nice back peddle. The most important stat for a defense is points against. I will gladly have my defense give up some yardage if they are keeping the opponent off the scoreboard. Look at any printing of the NFL standings and you will see W, L, T, PF, & PA. The reason for this is that, other than W & L, points for/against are the most important statistic in measuring a team.But hey, if you don't want to admit that Tom Brady has had 8 Top Ten defenses in his 10 years then you don't have to.

 

[Ghost Rider]

It wasn't a back peddle. It was stating a fact. If you personally think that points against is more important, then that is fine (and there is a lot of merit to that, as both yards allowed and points allowed can be skewed by various factors), but the total defense stat ALWAYS refers to a ranking based on yards, not points. Do you disagree? And I am not talking about what you personally think is better. I am talking about what is commonly referred to as a total defensive ranking.

 

[David Yudkin]

Since 2001, the Pats have allowed 17.95 ppg. Since 2004, the Steelers have allowed 16.71 ppg.

 

[Road Dogg]

c'mon man

 

[Godsbrother]

It wasn't a back peddle. It was stating a fact. If you personally think that points against is more important, then that is fine (and there is a lot of merit to that, as both yards allowed and points allowed can be skewed by various factors), but the total defense stat ALWAYS refers to a ranking based on yards, not points. Do you disagree? And I am not talking about what you personally think is better. I am talking about what is commonly referred to as a total defensive ranking.

It can be stated either way. I went to Pro-Football-Reference.com and looked at each team's yearly records and under off & def rankings it lists points first and then yardage. And as I said when you look in the NFL standings it lists PF & PA and not yardage against.But I think we're getting off topic here. I believe your original point was to say that Roethlisberger's winning percentage was due in large part to having a great defense. If that is the case then I do think that a defense's Points Against total has more influence than Yards Against when evaluating a QB's W-L percentage. Afterall, the job of the QB is to score more points than their opponent -- it doesn't matter who has more yards at the end of the game.

And if you accept that (which you probably won't) then Tom Brady has had the luxury of having a top 10 defense in 8 of his 10 years.

 

[Godsbrother]

Since 2001, the Pats have allowed 17.95 ppg. Since 2004, the Steelers have allowed 16.71 ppg.

Sure but they were top 10 in PA 8 of those years so Brady has had a top 10 defense 8/10 years compared to Roethlisberger's 5/7 years so Brady hasn't been playing with chopped liver.

 

[Road Dogg]

Just use your eyes people

i understand steelers fans like Ben, but come on

 

[The_Man]

You know, I really hope the Ravens win tomorrow. But if they don't, the liveliness of this debate in the week ahead will be a silver lining.

FWIW, I think the point of the original post was to point out that Ben isn't regarded at the same "elite" level as Brady, and yet the level of his play is very comparable. As a Ravens fan, I totally support that. Roethlisberger is an incredible QB (although he did lay a total stinker in the Super Bowl vs. Seattle). That being said, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Brady is able to put up elite numbers for a greater number of years than Ben. So much of Ben's success stems from his ability to get away from tacklers and extend plays downfield - I have to think the wear and tear of that style will catch up with him eventually. Even if he's not injured, I'd be surprised if his body allows him to do in 5 years the kinds of things he can do now. Whereas Brady seems like he'll be able to keep going for a long time.

For the record, I think Brady is incredible, too. I've always though of him as kind of like Joe Montana, but with a stronger arm. It's not a coincidence that Bellichick's evolution from a lifelong .500 coach to the greatest genius of our time coincides with the emergence of one of the greatest QBs ever.

 

[Godsbrother]

Just use your eyes peoplei understand steelers fans like Ben, but come on

Road Dogg, I have said that Brady is better than Roethlisberger. I can't state it any clearer than that.Most of my posts have been in response to the posts that say that Roethlisberger is only a game manager and that his winning percentage is only because of having a great defense.

 

[The Westin]

When Ben puts up a season like Tom did in 07 and '10 then let's have this talk. Until then, let's stop drinking the kool aid a bit.

Perhaps your problem is that you only look at a great statistical year as a measure of a great QB. While stats are certainly important the goal of each QB every year is to lead his team to the championship. It isn't just about their performance in the Super Bowl -- it starts in Week 1 and goes through all the ups and downs of the regular season, carries through in the playoffs and finishes in the Super Bowl. You can have all the stats you want but the bottom line is winning the championship.I agree Brady is the better QB (I have said that at least 3 times in this thread), but only other active quarterback that has been able to win more than one championship is Roethlisberger and it hasn't been a fluke.

Perhaps your problem is you look only at Super Bowls, and try to shrug off stats. I think Super Bowls are highly over rated. You need more to judge a player. You want to give Ben all the credit in the world for something 52 other guys had a part in. You want to give him all the credit for two Super Bowls because of a drive in one of them. I would love to see half of these QB's in the league have the privilege of playing with a top 3 defense very single year and the results they would achieve. One passing touchdown in 2 SUPER BOWLS. One good drive. Don't tell me he did it on his own. When he does something remotely close to what Brady has done then I'll take notice. until then, this thread is a joke.

 

[cvnpoka]

Maybe Drew Brees at times (I gotta tell ya, he seems to FORCE the ball under pressure quite a bit... doesn't do that well extending plays when the initial reads aren't there)

hahaid imagine the saints have the most players with a catch in the league and its not bc of injury.

who said anything about an injury? I didn't say he doesn't spread the ball I'm just saying sometimes he feels pressure when the pressure isn't really there... Most of his picks this year were just plain and simple BAD throws... Protection was a problem for them this year and an inconsistent running game at times was also problematic. Forcing the ball in pressure situations just doesn't work. He can dink and dunk all the way down the field but go back and look at his INTs. Obviously nobody is immune to pressure in the pocket but some are just more adept (or in Ben's case... FAT) in dealing with the pressure.

well, i thought it was clear what my point was, but i will attempt to reiterate it to you.you say brees doesnt do well when under pressure and his initial reads arent there. to dispute that, i say that brees utilizes far more pass catchers than almost all other qbs. (the injury thing wasnt really relevant i guess, just wanted to head off a potential argument.) what this shows is that he is stellar at moving on from his initial reads and finding the open 3rd through 5th option. upon rereading, i also take issue with your contention that he handles pressure poorly. his sack rates are among the best in the league over the last over the last 5 yrs, since arriving in new orleans. the only qb with sack rates likely better over that span was manning. roethlisberger, on the other hand is one of the worst in the league at taking sacks.

but go back and look at his INTs

his int rate was fine. 3.3% this year is indeed up from previous seasons and not elite, but realize that int rate has very little year to year correlation. also a lack of running and throwing a ton is gonna drive bulk ints up and rate (since the defense knows passes are coming.) over the last 4 years, on a much higher volume, brees int rate is 2.8. roeth is 2.4. if you look at their stats pages, these cherrypicked endpoints actually favor roethlisberger as brees had a career high in 5 yrs ago, while roeth posted a 4.9.so to summarize. brees throws the ball a ton more, gets sacked a ton less, and throws similar amount of ints to roeth. and you are trying to say that roeth deals with pressure better?

 

[Godsbrother]

When Ben puts up a season like Tom did in 07 and '10 then let's have this talk. Until then, let's stop drinking the kool aid a bit.

Perhaps your problem is that you only look at a great statistical year as a measure of a great QB. While stats are certainly important the goal of each QB every year is to lead his team to the championship. It isn't just about their performance in the Super Bowl -- it starts in Week 1 and goes through all the ups and downs of the regular season, carries through in the playoffs and finishes in the Super Bowl. You can have all the stats you want but the bottom line is winning the championship.I agree Brady is the better QB (I have said that at least 3 times in this thread), but only other active quarterback that has been able to win more than one championship is Roethlisberger and it hasn't been a fluke.

Perhaps your problem is you look only at Super Bowls, and try to shrug off stats. I think Super Bowls are highly over rated. You need more to judge a player. You want to give Ben all the credit in the world for something 52 other guys had a part in. You want to give him all the credit for two Super Bowls because of a drive in one of them. I would love to see half of these QB's in the league have the privilege of playing with a top 3 defense very single year and the results they would achieve. One passing touchdown in 2 SUPER BOWLS. One good drive. Don't tell me he did it on his own. When he does something remotely close to what Brady has done then I'll take notice. until then, this thread is a joke.

You are correct: the only thing that Roethlisberger has accomplished in his career is one good drive in one Super Bowl. You win.

 

[cvnpoka]

this is dang I'm not sure how this can be argued!!

its really easy and obv to "argue" it. brady has become a much better qb since the arbitrary 28 yr old endpoint. its highly unlikely anyone will develop in that fashion.

 

[The_Man]

I can't believe this thread is going to make me defend Ben friggin Roethlisberger the day before the Ravens play the Steelers. But if Pats fans are truly saying that Ben is overrated, or that he's won only because of his defense, or that he's a game manager and not an elite QB, then they either aren't watching or don't understand what they're seeing.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

When Ben puts up a season like Tom did in 07 and '10 then let's have this talk. Until then, let's stop drinking the kool aid a bit.

Perhaps your problem is that you only look at a great statistical year as a measure of a great QB. While stats are certainly important the goal of each QB every year is to lead his team to the championship. It isn't just about their performance in the Super Bowl -- it starts in Week 1 and goes through all the ups and downs of the regular season, carries through in the playoffs and finishes in the Super Bowl. You can have all the stats you want but the bottom line is winning the championship.I agree Brady is the better QB (I have said that at least 3 times in this thread), but only other active quarterback that has been able to win more than one championship is Roethlisberger and it hasn't been a fluke.

Perhaps your problem is you look only at Super Bowls, and try to shrug off stats. I think Super Bowls are highly over rated. You need more to judge a player. You want to give Ben all the credit in the world for something 52 other guys had a part in. You want to give him all the credit for two Super Bowls because of a drive in one of them. I would love to see half of these QB's in the league have the privilege of playing with a top 3 defense very single year and the results they would achieve. One passing touchdown in 2 SUPER BOWLS. One good drive. Don't tell me he did it on his own. When he does something remotely close to what Brady has done then I'll take notice. until then, this thread is a joke.

What does the # of TDs he throws have to do with it? What if he had gone 26 for 26 for 493 yards and led them on 5 TD drives, but on all of them, the TDs were scored on the ground? You also neglect to mention that he had a rushing TD. You're partially right in that Super Bowls are overrated, because a QBs performance in that one game alone doesn't tell the story. You have to win 2 or 3 games just to GET to a Super Bowl. All playoff performances should be considered. The fact is, he was the player most responsible for both those Lombardi trophies. No other one player on EITHER SB winning team was more responsible for the trophy won in that year than Roethlisberger. Any Steelers fan will tell you this is the case. So, we're not giving him sole credit for winning 2 Super Bowls, but we are giving him the credit for being the one player most responsible for bringing those trophies home.And no one is ignoring stats either. In fact, the entire article in the OP was built on stats. If you want more stats, check this out :

Average playoff game for Brady (18 starts) and Roethlisberger (10 starts) - career :

Brady : 62.0% completion, 232 yards (228 pass / 4 rush), 1.66 TDs (1.55 pass / .11 rush), .83 INT, 85.5 passer rating

Roethlisberger : 61.9% comp %, 237 yards (224 pass / 13 rush), 1.70 TDs (1.5 pass, .2 rush), 1.2 INT, 87.2 passer rating

Those stats aren't cherry picked, that's a per game average of every single playoff game both guys have played, Ben's SB XL stinker included. They look damn near identical to me. So, it's not like Ben was riding the shoulders of a mighty defense while Brady was single-handedly winning games. And this isn't even factoring in the fact that Brady has averaged 35.4 att/game for his playoff career to Roethlisberger's 27.8. Brady's Y/A in the playoffs for his career is 6.5 and Roethlisberger's is 8.1, so the argument could be made that Ben has done just as much on a per game basis, but done so even more efficiently.

 

[Copeman]

Brady cheats.

Ben doesn't.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

I can't believe this thread is going to make me defend Ben friggin Roethlisberger the day before the Ravens play the Steelers. But if Pats fans are truly saying that Ben is overrated, or that he's won only because of his defense, or that he's a game manager and not an elite QB, then they either aren't watching or don't understand what they're seeing.

and You've got 26 minutes before you begin drinking heavily. Are you fully equipped?

 

[cvnpoka]

I can't believe this thread is going to make me defend Ben friggin Roethlisberger the day before the Ravens play the Steelers. But if Pats fans are truly saying that Ben is overrated, or that he's won only because of his defense, or that he's a game manager and not an elite QB, then they either aren't watching or don't understand what they're seeing.

hes def overrated if ppl think hes on bradys level. or brees manning rivers rodgers.