Is Ben Roethlisberger as good as Tom Brady? (3 Viewers)

[Bayhawks]

Brees, Manning and Brady wouldn't last the entire season with Ben's current OL

This is such a misconception. All of those guys are terrific at immediately finding an open receiver (if there is one), which isn't necessarily Roethlisberger's biggest asset, so the team would likely run a different offense if any of those other guys were the Steelers QB instead of BR. The offense the Steelers run generally plays to Roethlisberger's strengths.

Likewise, if Ben played on one of those other offenses he would do great as well as noted by his passer accuracy #'s, etc....

I think Roethlisberger would be successful in the Pats, Colts, Saints, etc system, but I don't think he would be as successful as the incumbent QBs there. In those systems (and with those O-lines), his size, ability to shrug off defenders and still make great throws, gain yardage running, etc would not be as advantagious, because they wouldn't be as necessary.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Brees, Manning and Brady wouldn't last the entire season with Ben's current OL

This is such a misconception. All of those guys are terrific at immediately finding an open receiver (if there is one), which isn't necessarily Roethlisberger's biggest asset, so the team would likely run a different offense if any of those other guys were the Steelers QB instead of BR. The offense the Steelers run generally plays to Roethlisberger's strengths.

It's not a misconception, it's the way you are interpreting it. This isn't FF, where if a FF team acquires a new QB, you merely get to plug in his stats. You have to consider offensive system, other players, and O-line when you have these discussion. Although I worded it differently, this is what I posted earlier. Roethlisberger is the perfect QB for the Steelers offense. Those other QBs don't have the skill set, and they wouldn't be as successful (and would not have won the Jets game) with that offense and that offensive line. They would still have success, but not (IMO) to the same level as Roethlisberger does. Likewise, if Roethlisberger were in their systems, he would (IMO) still be successful, but not to the same level as they have been/will be.

Wouldn't the offense be different if they had a different QB? Why would they build and run an offense that suits Ben if Peyton is the QB, the same as the fact they don't run a Peyton Manning style offense with Ben...

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Hey EG,

Not sure I can stomach 11 pages of this but I was thinking about this topic on my drive in this morning and I thought to myself if you strip away the fantasy angle and you were to ask NFL GMs who likely do not play FF like the rest of us and you asked them their top5 QBs...I can almost guarantee that Big Ben would be on most of those short lists. We get a skewed opinion in FF but most experts would have Big Ben on their must have list. He is 10-2 in the playoffs, not even 30 yet, and has 2 Super Bowl rings. Granted he plays on a very talented team and has a great organization at the top but that shouldn't detract from the greatness he has accomplished on the field.

-MOP

 

[Copeman]

Brees, Manning and Brady wouldn't last the entire season with Ben's current OL

This is such a misconception. All of those guys are terrific at immediately finding an open receiver (if there is one), which isn't necessarily Roethlisberger's biggest asset, so the team would likely run a different offense if any of those other guys were the Steelers QB instead of BR. The offense the Steelers run generally plays to Roethlisberger's strengths.

It's not a misconception, it's the way you are interpreting it. This isn't FF, where if a FF team acquires a new QB, you merely get to plug in his stats. You have to consider offensive system, other players, and O-line when you have these discussion. Although I worded it differently, this is what I posted earlier. Roethlisberger is the perfect QB for the Steelers offense. Those other QBs don't have the skill set, and they wouldn't be as successful (and would not have won the Jets game) with that offense and that offensive line. They would still have success, but not (IMO) to the same level as Roethlisberger does. Likewise, if Roethlisberger were in their systems, he would (IMO) still be successful, but not to the same level as they have been/will be.

Wouldn't the offense be different if they had a different QB? Why would they build and run an offense that suits Ben if Peyton is the QB, the same as the fact they don't run a Peyton Manning style offense with Ben...

Who knows. It depends on the HC, the OC, and the rest of the type of playmakers that particular offense might have. Give Brady/Brees a top flight RB, that team might run more (than usual), or make more dump passes out of the backfield, etc etc...All depends on the surrounding cast.

 

[David Yudkin]

Hey EG,Not sure I can stomach 11 pages of this but I was thinking about this topic on my drive in this morning and I thought to myself if you strip away the fantasy angle and you were to ask NFL GMs who likely do not play FF like the rest of us and you asked them their top5 QBs...I can almost guarantee that Big Ben would be on most of those short lists. We get a skewed opinion in FF but most experts would have Big Ben on their must have list. He is 10-2 in the playoffs, not even 30 yet, and has 2 Super Bowl rings. Granted he plays on a very talented team and has a great organization at the top but that shouldn't detract from the greatness he has accomplished on the field. -MOP

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.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Hey EG,Not sure I can stomach 11 pages of this but I was thinking about this topic on my drive in this morning and I thought to myself if you strip away the fantasy angle and you were to ask NFL GMs who likely do not play FF like the rest of us and you asked them their top5 QBs...I can almost guarantee that Big Ben would be on most of those short lists. We get a skewed opinion in FF but most experts would have Big Ben on their must have list. He is 10-2 in the playoffs, not even 30 yet, and has 2 Super Bowl rings. Granted he plays on a very talented team and has a great organization at the top but that shouldn't detract from the greatness he has accomplished on the field. -MOP

I agree 100%. Right now, I'd put him behind Brady and Manning, but just ahead of Rodgers, Brees, and Rivers. Some agree based on his track record of making big plays at crucial times and playing well in the playoffs, others disagree because they believe that putting up big #s (and hence, "carrying the team") are better indicators of QB quality than the relatively small sample size afforded by comparing post-season numbers, and the inherent inequality of players' supporting casts.Don't bother reading all 11 pages, we've just gone around and around and many of the points being made on pages 10-11 were already made on page 2, page 5, etc.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Hey EG,Not sure I can stomach 11 pages of this but I was thinking about this topic on my drive in this morning and I thought to myself if you strip away the fantasy angle and you were to ask NFL GMs who likely do not play FF like the rest of us and you asked them their top5 QBs...I can almost guarantee that Big Ben would be on most of those short lists. We get a skewed opinion in FF but most experts would have Big Ben on their must have list. He is 10-2 in the playoffs, not even 30 yet, and has 2 Super Bowl rings. Granted he plays on a very talented team and has a great organization at the top but that shouldn't detract from the greatness he has accomplished on the field. -MOP

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.

Depends on what you want out of your QB. Also depends on whether you're talking about 1 season or a guy to build a team around. If the latter, age is going to factor heavily into that, and the guys I think are the 2 best QBs on this list might sink to the bottom of it only because they're in their 30s, while the others are all in their 20s.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Hey EG,Not sure I can stomach 11 pages of this but I was thinking about this topic on my drive in this morning and I thought to myself if you strip away the fantasy angle and you were to ask NFL GMs who likely do not play FF like the rest of us and you asked them their top5 QBs...I can almost guarantee that Big Ben would be on most of those short lists. We get a skewed opinion in FF but most experts would have Big Ben on their must have list. He is 10-2 in the playoffs, not even 30 yet, and has 2 Super Bowl rings. Granted he plays on a very talented team and has a great organization at the top but that shouldn't detract from the greatness he has accomplished on the field. -MOP

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.

Depends on what you want out of your QB. Also depends on whether you're talking about 1 season or a guy to build a team around. If the latter, age is going to factor heavily into that, and the guys I think are the 2 best QBs on this list might sink to the bottom of it only because they're in their 30s, while the others are all in their 20s.

I don't think the age difference makes him a better QB than Brady.... And I don't think it helped him win the games he has won...I agree, if we're talking long term franchise QB from here out, that his age is an asset and needs to be considered, but I don't agree that it makes him a better QB, before or after that consideration...

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Hey EG,Not sure I can stomach 11 pages of this but I was thinking about this topic on my drive in this morning and I thought to myself if you strip away the fantasy angle and you were to ask NFL GMs who likely do not play FF like the rest of us and you asked them their top5 QBs...I can almost guarantee that Big Ben would be on most of those short lists. We get a skewed opinion in FF but most experts would have Big Ben on their must have list. He is 10-2 in the playoffs, not even 30 yet, and has 2 Super Bowl rings. Granted he plays on a very talented team and has a great organization at the top but that shouldn't detract from the greatness he has accomplished on the field. -MOP

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.

Depends on what you want out of your QB. Also depends on whether you're talking about 1 season or a guy to build a team around. If the latter, age is going to factor heavily into that, and the guys I think are the 2 best QBs on this list might sink to the bottom of it only because they're in their 30s, while the others are all in their 20s.

I don't think the age difference makes him a better QB than Brady.... And I don't think it helped him win the games he has won...I agree, if we're talking long term franchise QB from here out, that his age is an asset and needs to be considered, but I don't agree that it makes him a better QB, before or after that consideration...

I never said nor implied that his age had anything to do with being a better QB. All I'm saying is that if they threw all the players in the NFL into a pool and the teams had to re-draft from scratch, that Roethlisberger, Rivers, Rodgers, and Brees would likely be taken before Manning or Brady, only because they would give you similar production, but for a much longer time-frame. Whereas if David's talking about "an NFL GM taking Big Ben over Brady, etc..." for one season or one game only, then it'd be a very different story.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Hey EG,Not sure I can stomach 11 pages of this but I was thinking about this topic on my drive in this morning and I thought to myself if you strip away the fantasy angle and you were to ask NFL GMs who likely do not play FF like the rest of us and you asked them their top5 QBs...I can almost guarantee that Big Ben would be on most of those short lists. We get a skewed opinion in FF but most experts would have Big Ben on their must have list. He is 10-2 in the playoffs, not even 30 yet, and has 2 Super Bowl rings. Granted he plays on a very talented team and has a great organization at the top but that shouldn't detract from the greatness he has accomplished on the field. -MOP

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.

Depends on what you want out of your QB. Also depends on whether you're talking about 1 season or a guy to build a team around. If the latter, age is going to factor heavily into that, and the guys I think are the 2 best QBs on this list might sink to the bottom of it only because they're in their 30s, while the others are all in their 20s.

I don't think the age difference makes him a better QB than Brady.... And I don't think it helped him win the games he has won...I agree, if we're talking long term franchise QB from here out, that his age is an asset and needs to be considered, but I don't agree that it makes him a better QB, before or after that consideration...

I never said nor implied that his age had anything to do with being a better QB. All I'm saying is that if they threw all the players in the NFL into a pool and the teams had to re-draft from scratch, that Roethlisberger, Rivers, Rodgers, and Brees would likely be taken before Manning or Brady, only because they would give you similar production, but for a much longer time-frame. Whereas if David's talking about "an NFL GM taking Big Ben over Brady, etc..." for one season or one game only, then it'd be a very different story.

In a discussion where we're talking about "Who is better" aren't we talking about in any stage of their career? I don't think age is part of the discussion..Better question would be, in hindsight looking over what we know about these guys, if they were all in the draft this year, which 5 would be drafted first?I'm thinking Manning and Brady would certainly go top 2Rivers, Brees, Rogers.. Next ThreeVick (maybe he's up a tier), Roth and a pile of other guys... Freeman, Bradford.. etcBen does a good job being part of that offense and offensive game plan, but I don't think he matches up well against many of these other guys as far as ability goes..

 

[Bayhawks]

Brees, Manning and Brady wouldn't last the entire season with Ben's current OL

This is such a misconception. All of those guys are terrific at immediately finding an open receiver (if there is one), which isn't necessarily Roethlisberger's biggest asset, so the team would likely run a different offense if any of those other guys were the Steelers QB instead of BR. The offense the Steelers run generally plays to Roethlisberger's strengths.

It's not a misconception, it's the way you are interpreting it. This isn't FF, where if a FF team acquires a new QB, you merely get to plug in his stats. You have to consider offensive system, other players, and O-line when you have these discussion. Although I worded it differently, this is what I posted earlier. Roethlisberger is the perfect QB for the Steelers offense. Those other QBs don't have the skill set, and they wouldn't be as successful (and would not have won the Jets game) with that offense and that offensive line. They would still have success, but not (IMO) to the same level as Roethlisberger does. Likewise, if Roethlisberger were in their systems, he would (IMO) still be successful, but not to the same level as they have been/will be.

Wouldn't the offense be different if they had a different QB? Why would they build and run an offense that suits Ben if Peyton is the QB, the same as the fact they don't run a Peyton Manning style offense with Ben...

That's possible, but the Steelers offense wasn't built around Roethlisberger, he just happens to fit that offense. That being said, that isn't what is being discussed. What I've said is that in the game on Sunday, with the circumstances what they were (current Steelers offense, current Steelers O-line), Roethlisberger was successful when those other QBs wouldn't have been.

 

[Sheriff66]

Vick (maybe he's up a tier), Roth and a pile of other guys... Freeman, Bradford.. etc

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Brees, Manning and Brady wouldn't last the entire season with Ben's current OL

This is such a misconception. All of those guys are terrific at immediately finding an open receiver (if there is one), which isn't necessarily Roethlisberger's biggest asset, so the team would likely run a different offense if any of those other guys were the Steelers QB instead of BR. The offense the Steelers run generally plays to Roethlisberger's strengths.

It's not a misconception, it's the way you are interpreting it. This isn't FF, where if a FF team acquires a new QB, you merely get to plug in his stats. You have to consider offensive system, other players, and O-line when you have these discussion. Although I worded it differently, this is what I posted earlier. Roethlisberger is the perfect QB for the Steelers offense. Those other QBs don't have the skill set, and they wouldn't be as successful (and would not have won the Jets game) with that offense and that offensive line. They would still have success, but not (IMO) to the same level as Roethlisberger does. Likewise, if Roethlisberger were in their systems, he would (IMO) still be successful, but not to the same level as they have been/will be.

Wouldn't the offense be different if they had a different QB? Why would they build and run an offense that suits Ben if Peyton is the QB, the same as the fact they don't run a Peyton Manning style offense with Ben...

That's possible, but the Steelers offense wasn't built around Roethlisberger, he just happens to fit that offense. That being said, that isn't what is being discussed. What I've said is that in the game on Sunday, with the circumstances what they were (current Steelers offense, current Steelers O-line), Roethlisberger was successful when those other QBs wouldn't have been.

Pure speculation... And I'm sure plenty here would speculate otherwise..I think the question I asked above would be a better measure..

If they were both in the draft this season, you GM'ed an expansion team, and you knew about them what we already know, which would you take? You have first pick, are you picking a rookie Roth, or rookie Brady as your first player in the draft, and first player to your new team...?

 

[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.

Depends on what you want out of your QB. Also depends on whether you're talking about 1 season or a guy to build a team around. If the latter, age is going to factor heavily into that, and the guys I think are the 2 best QBs on this list might sink to the bottom of it only because they're in their 30s, while the others are all in their 20s.

I don't think the age difference makes him a better QB than Brady.... And I don't think it helped him win the games he has won...I agree, if we're talking long term franchise QB from here out, that his age is an asset and needs to be considered, but I don't agree that it makes him a better QB, before or after that consideration...

I never said nor implied that his age had anything to do with being a better QB. All I'm saying is that if they threw all the players in the NFL into a pool and the teams had to re-draft from scratch, that Roethlisberger, Rivers, Rodgers, and Brees would likely be taken before Manning or Brady, only because they would give you similar production, but for a much longer time-frame. Whereas if David's talking about "an NFL GM taking Big Ben over Brady, etc..." for one season or one game only, then it'd be a very different story.

In a discussion where we're talking about "Who is better" aren't we talking about in any stage of their career? I don't think age is part of the discussion..Better question would be, in hindsight looking over what we know about these guys, if they were all in the draft this year, which 5 would be drafted first?I'm thinking Manning and Brady would certainly go top 2Rivers, Brees, Rogers.. Next ThreeVick (maybe he's up a tier), Roth and a pile of other guys... Freeman, Bradford.. etcBen does a good job being part of that offense and offensive game plan, but I don't think he matches up well against many of these other guys as far as ability goes..

I was speaking specifically to David's point, not to the general discussion. But in this scenario, I agree Manning and Brady would probably be the top 2 taken (in some order) but I strongly disagree that Roethlisberger would definitely be below Vick, Rivers, Brees, and Rodgers if teams were drafting knowing exactly what we know right now. And putting him in a category with Freeman and Bradford, again based only on what we already know right now, is borderline insulting. It would really depend on the team picking and how you'd want to construct it. I think if the Steelers were presented with those options (off the field crap aside), they'd re-take Roethlisberger over any of those guy save for Manning and Brady. Do you want Elway or Marino? That sort of thing.

 

[treat88]

Hey EG,Not sure I can stomach 11 pages of this but I was thinking about this topic on my drive in this morning and I thought to myself if you strip away the fantasy angle and you were to ask NFL GMs who likely do not play FF like the rest of us and you asked them their top5 QBs...I can almost guarantee that Big Ben would be on most of those short lists. We get a skewed opinion in FF but most experts would have Big Ben on their must have list. He is 10-2 in the playoffs, not even 30 yet, and has 2 Super Bowl rings. Granted he plays on a very talented team and has a great organization at the top but that shouldn't detract from the greatness he has accomplished on the field. -MOP

Exactly.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Vick (maybe he's up a tier), Roth and a pile of other guys... Freeman, Bradford.. etc

weigh in...

 

[Carolina Hustler]

I was speaking specifically to David's point, not to the general discussion. But in this scenario, I agree Manning and Brady would probably be the top 2 taken (in some order) but I strongly disagree that Roethlisberger would definitely be below Vick, Rivers, Brees, and Rodgers if teams were drafting knowing exactly what we know right now. And putting him in a category with Freeman and Bradford, again based only on what we already know right now, is borderline insulting. It would really depend on the team picking and how you'd want to construct it. I think if the Steelers were presented with those options (off the field crap aside), they'd re-take Roethlisberger over any of those guy save for Manning and Brady. Do you want Elway or Marino? That sort of thing.

Is there anyone who would put him ahead of Brady in that situation? If not, then I guess that would be my only point..Ben vs Rivers vs Rodgers vs Vick vs Brees could be another discussion, but with the criteria above, I wouldn't rank Ben on top of that tier either...

 

[Sheriff66]

Vick (maybe he's up a tier), Roth and a pile of other guys... Freeman, Bradford.. etc

weigh in...

You're lumping Ben's career and telent in with Stafford and Freeman? I don't have to say anything, you just said it all

 

[David Yudkin]

To clarify my position, if I were a GM looking for a QB for a competitive team for the next year or two, Big Ben would not be in my Top 5 (unless I were GM of the Steelers). If it were a 5-10 year window, that would be a different list.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Vick (maybe he's up a tier), Roth and a pile of other guys... Freeman, Bradford.. etc

weigh in...

You're lumping Ben's career and telent in with Stafford and Freeman? I don't have to say anything, you just said it all

Drafting Stafford or Ben.. I know enough about Stafford to say, I think he has it.. And I don't think I'd be out of line in thinking he is a better talent with better skill set..Remember, I'm not drafting any of the current Steelers team, only Ben or Stafford... The rest of the team comes after.. This is my first pick of an expansion teamI get Ben abilities, the ones we have seen, not the wins...

 

[Evilgrin 72]

I was speaking specifically to David's point, not to the general discussion. But in this scenario, I agree Manning and Brady would probably be the top 2 taken (in some order) but I strongly disagree that Roethlisberger would definitely be below Vick, Rivers, Brees, and Rodgers if teams were drafting knowing exactly what we know right now. And putting him in a category with Freeman and Bradford, again based only on what we already know right now, is borderline insulting. It would really depend on the team picking and how you'd want to construct it. I think if the Steelers were presented with those options (off the field crap aside), they'd re-take Roethlisberger over any of those guy save for Manning and Brady. Do you want Elway or Marino? That sort of thing.

Is there anyone who would put him ahead of Brady in that situation? If not, then I guess that would be my only point..Ben vs Rivers vs Rodgers vs Vick vs Brees could be another discussion, but with the criteria above, I wouldn't rank Ben on top of that tier either...

I wouldn't put him ahead of Brady, but then this must be the 10th time I've said that I believe Brady is better. I wouldn't put him ahead of Manning either.However, I'd strongly consider him first in that next tier. People are mislead by statistics oftentimes, they don't realize that if Ben played in an aerial attack, his numbers would likely be very impressive. Just for laughs, I used the game log dominator here at FBGs to isolate Ben's career 40+ attempt games. He's only had 15 out of the 111 career starts he's made (9.6%) and in those 15 games is operating at a 64% completion rate and has thrown for 4,872 yards (325 a game.) Imagine what kind of #s he could put up if he got to throw that often as regularly as Brees (34.3% of his starts have been 40+ attempts), Manning (28.3%), or even Brady (19.6%) and Rodgers (19.2%.) Now granted, Ben's TD/INT #s in those games is only 23/23, but he had 6 TDs and 11 picks in his first four 40+ attempt games, which came in his first two years in the league. Since then, he's averaged the same amount of yards, but has a more respectable 17/12 TD/INT ratio. Again, the TDs don't dazzle you, but then, the Steelers don't throw as often in the red zone - using data dominator, NE, INDY, NO, and GB are 1-2-3-4 in red zone attempts since 2004, while the Steelers are 12th. Inside the opponent's 10, they rank 1-3-4-5, while Pittsburgh is 18th. Inside the opponent's 5, all four of those teams are in the top 7, while Pittsburgh is 28th.

 

[Bayhawks]

Wouldn't the offense be different if they had a different QB? Why would they build and run an offense that suits Ben if Peyton is the QB, the same as the fact they don't run a Peyton Manning style offense with Ben...

That's possible, but the Steelers offense wasn't built around Roethlisberger, he just happens to fit that offense.

That being said, that isn't what is being discussed. What I've said is that in the game on Sunday, with the circumstances what they were (current Steelers offense, current Steelers O-line), Roethlisberger was successful when those other QBs wouldn't have been.

Pure speculation... And I'm sure plenty here would speculate otherwise..I think the question I asked above would be a better measure..

If they were both in the draft this season, you GM'ed an expansion team, and you knew about them what we already know, which would you take? You have first pick, are you picking a rookie Roth, or rookie Brady as your first player in the draft, and first player to your new team...?

So, you want to assume that we know how their careers will unfold, and that they are both the same age (or at least both rookies), right? With these assumptions, you would like to know who I would take?

In that situation, I'd take Roethlisberger, since you said it's an expansion team. Most expansion teams have poor offensive lines, because of their nature, and because offensive line play involves the unit being able to work together, cohesively. Since it will (normally) take a while to build that cohesion, I'd take the QB who I know will be more able to make plays out of situations when the O-line falters, and not the QB who typically needs a clean pocket to be at his best.

Now that I've answered your question, perhaps you'd answer mine (since you said others would speculate otherwise, I will assume you are one such person):

In the Jets-Steelers game on Sunday, WITH THE CURRENT STEELERS OFFENSIVE SYSTEM AND O-LINE, what other NFL QB would have been able to do what Roethlisberger did?

 

[David Yudkin]

In the Jets-Steelers game on Sunday, WITH THE CURRENT STEELERS OFFENSIVE SYSTEM AND O-LINE, what other NFL QB would have been able to do what Roethlisberger did?

This one is close to impossible to answer, as I suspect you are looking for a QB that on a handful of plays broke tackles, ran for first downs, and made a couple of timely short to intermediate passes ON JUST THOSE HANDFUL OF PLAYS.I would argue that in the other plays other QBs may have been more than capable or done better than Ben did across the entire game, especially given a 24-0 lead.So to your point, there may not have been a better option for the 5 plays that would would like to focus on, but there might have been plenty of better options on the other plays.This is not to short Roethisberger, as he fits the scheme and the system as proven by the Steeler wins and titles. But I still think Brady, for example, may not have had to worry about getting sacked or scrambling by hitting guys on shorter routes. But that is even tough to project as the PIT scheme might not fit Brady as well as the NE one does.

 

[The Westin]

I still don't see which QBs you think would have been able to do what Ben did. Why are you avoiding the question?You're the one who said other QBs could have won that game. So, who are they? Why are you now trying to suggest that with other QBs, the playcalling would have been different, or the game would have unfolded differently. You made a statement, support it, please. Who are these other QBs?The Steelers' offensive weapons wouldn't be any different, the Steelers philosophy wouldn't have been any different, the Steelers O-line wouldn't have been any different. For another QB to win that game, they would have had to make the same type of plays that Roethlisberger did. You said there were "quite a few." Who are they?

BradyManningRiversBreesRodgersI feel like every one of those guys... although in their own way, could win that game.Yes Roethlisberger is better at avoiding the sack than most of those guys...but there is more to a quarterback than just that. Just because Ben makes a couple plays, you think only he could win that game? Another QB may make plays Ben did not. Very rarely are there football games where a QB is the ONLY one in the league who could win it...usually that would have to be quite a performance. I find it odd that you think Ben is the only one who could win that game...especially with the average (at best) performance he had.I'd be hard pressed to say that about most QB's in any game. Not just Ben.

 

[Godsbrother]

BradyManningRiversBreesRodgersI feel like every one of those guys... although in their own way, could win that game.Yes Roethlisberger is better at avoiding the sack than most of those guys...but there is more to a quarterback than just that. Just because Ben makes a couple plays, you think only he could win that game? Another QB may make plays Ben did not.

In the Jets game that I watched I saw a line that wasn't pass protecting very well. That game required a QB that could move out of the pocket just to get the pass off, not to mention completeing some clutch passes AND running for 4 first downs and a TD. Given the same circumstances and calling the same plays the only other QB on your list that I think could have done that would have been Rodgers. Disagree if you want but I have never seen Brady, Manning, Rivers or Brees move like that.

 

[GoodLloydHaveMercy]

If Brady is the Steelers QB yesterday, the Jets are playing in the SB. If Manning is the Steelers QB yesterday, the Jets are playing in the SB. If Brees is the Steelers QB yesterday, the Jets are playing in the SB. If Rivers is the Steelers QB yesterday, the Jets are playing in the SB. If Rodgers is the Steelers QB yesterday, the Jets are playing in the SB (although I love Rodgers mobility as a QB, he is not as big or strong as Roethlsiberger, and I don't think Rodgers would have been able to bull for the extra rushing yards that Ben did on at least 2 rushes for 1st downs).

I'll make you a deal. You admit that without Ben the Steelers wouldn't have won yesterday, and I'll admit that without their defense, they wouldn't have won yesterday.

You want to see if people would give him credit for yesterday's win. Well, guess what? He deserves it. Not all of it, but they don't win that game with many other people at QB.

You got this part wrong, If Roethlisberger was the Saints Qb then they do not make playoffs this year or win the Super Bowl last year...If Roethisberger was the Colts QB then they would be 8-8 consistently every year until they get some offensive balance. Ben does not carry teams! He is good but take off the Black and yellow glasses and realize that. He is not a HOF but might get in because ESPN controls everything about sports. I wish Brees only had to make 2 or 3 plays a game then he might have 4 rings.

I'm not sure how I got anything wrong. I never made any claims about what Roethlisberger would or would not do as Saints or Colts QB. Perhaps you should try reading the entire thread, or at least the parts applicable to what you quote, before you post foolish commentary?Brees is a better fit for the Saints offense than Roethlisberger, and Manning is a better fit for the Colts offense than Roethlisberger, but (and this was my point), Roethlisberger is a better fit for the Steelers offense than Manning, Brees, Brady, Rivers, Rodgers, etc is.

With the Steelers offense (and their underwhelming O-line), to win 2 SBs (and have a shot at a 3rd) a QB would need to be able to withstand hits, make throws after taking hits/escaping pressure, run for yardage when necessary, and be able to throw the ball deep. In the Jets game, a QB without those skills would not have been able to help the Steelers win. Roethlisberger is the best QB with that skill-set in the NFL.

HTH.

ETA-I'm not a Steelers fan, so there's no homerism here. Unfortunately, I'm a Redskins fan, which has sucked for, oh I don't know, the last decade. That being said, I am also a football fan, and Roethlisberger is a good (and under-rated) football player.

Or he could just post a QB rating of 22.6 and hope the running game and the defense bail him out in the Superbowl. But lets face it. If Manning, Montana, Elway, Unitas, Marino, or Superman would have played in that Superbowl then Pittsburgh would have lost.You crack me up.

seriously, Ben didn't have a good game at all statistically but if you watched the game you can't deny that he made critical plays at critical times.

5 pass attempts in the second half..... hmmm.....

 

[Godsbrother]

If Brady is the Steelers QB yesterday, the Jets are playing in the SB. If Manning is the Steelers QB yesterday, the Jets are playing in the SB. If Brees is the Steelers QB yesterday, the Jets are playing in the SB. If Rivers is the Steelers QB yesterday, the Jets are playing in the SB. If Rodgers is the Steelers QB yesterday, the Jets are playing in the SB (although I love Rodgers mobility as a QB, he is not as big or strong as Roethlsiberger, and I don't think Rodgers would have been able to bull for the extra rushing yards that Ben did on at least 2 rushes for 1st downs).

I'll make you a deal. You admit that without Ben the Steelers wouldn't have won yesterday, and I'll admit that without their defense, they wouldn't have won yesterday.

You want to see if people would give him credit for yesterday's win. Well, guess what? He deserves it. Not all of it, but they don't win that game with many other people at QB.

You got this part wrong, If Roethlisberger was the Saints Qb then they do not make playoffs this year or win the Super Bowl last year...If Roethisberger was the Colts QB then they would be 8-8 consistently every year until they get some offensive balance. Ben does not carry teams! He is good but take off the Black and yellow glasses and realize that. He is not a HOF but might get in because ESPN controls everything about sports. I wish Brees only had to make 2 or 3 plays a game then he might have 4 rings.

I'm not sure how I got anything wrong. I never made any claims about what Roethlisberger would or would not do as Saints or Colts QB. Perhaps you should try reading the entire thread, or at least the parts applicable to what you quote, before you post foolish commentary?Brees is a better fit for the Saints offense than Roethlisberger, and Manning is a better fit for the Colts offense than Roethlisberger, but (and this was my point), Roethlisberger is a better fit for the Steelers offense than Manning, Brees, Brady, Rivers, Rodgers, etc is.

With the Steelers offense (and their underwhelming O-line), to win 2 SBs (and have a shot at a 3rd) a QB would need to be able to withstand hits, make throws after taking hits/escaping pressure, run for yardage when necessary, and be able to throw the ball deep. In the Jets game, a QB without those skills would not have been able to help the Steelers win. Roethlisberger is the best QB with that skill-set in the NFL.

HTH.

ETA-I'm not a Steelers fan, so there's no homerism here. Unfortunately, I'm a Redskins fan, which has sucked for, oh I don't know, the last decade. That being said, I am also a football fan, and Roethlisberger is a good (and under-rated) football player.

Or he could just post a QB rating of 22.6 and hope the running game and the defense bail him out in the Superbowl. But lets face it. If Manning, Montana, Elway, Unitas, Marino, or Superman would have played in that Superbowl then Pittsburgh would have lost.You crack me up.

seriously, Ben didn't have a good game at all statistically but if you watched the game you can't deny that he made critical plays at critical times.

5 pass attempts in the second half..... hmmm.....

Yep. His 4 rushing first downs and TD run were huge but don't show up in the passing stats.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

Brian Baldinger, last week:

In my mind, Roethlisberger is tougher to defend than both Peyton Manning and Tom Brady. The Jets have beaten both, but neither plays like Roethlisberger. They don’t get out of the pocket, extend plays or break down defenses the way Roethlisberger does, which can be frustrating and irritating for a defense. Roethlisberger plays with no conscience. He will throw the ball 65-yards downfield on a third-and-19. He doesn’t care. If he doesn’t make the throw, the Steelers punt and put the defense back out on the field. It’s true that you can hit Brady and Manning early and frustrate them by getting them off of their spot. I’ve seen Roethlisberger go through every situation imaginable, and nothing phases him. He just comes back on the next play.

Really, no one in the league outside of Michael Vick has more to prove to his city, his fans or his own teammates than Roethlisberger. He let them down the first quarter of the season and put the proudest organization in the league through a bad offseason. Even though he’s won two Super Bowls, no one deep down needs this more than Roethlisberger to erase the stain he put on the organization. I think he deep down feels like he owes everyone something. No one scares you more at the end of a game. This all makes Roethlisberger very dangerous.

Link

 

[Bayhawks]

In the Jets-Steelers game on Sunday, WITH THE CURRENT STEELERS OFFENSIVE SYSTEM AND O-LINE, what other NFL QB would have been able to do what Roethlisberger did?

This one is close to impossible to answer, as I suspect you are looking for a QB that on a handful of plays broke tackles, ran for first downs, and made a couple of timely short to intermediate passes ON JUST THOSE HANDFUL OF PLAYS.

It's not impossible, I'm looking for a QB who is ABLE to break tackles (consistently), run for first downs (when needed), and make timely throws (consistently), all while being under constant pressure because of poor performance by his O-line.

I would argue that in the other plays other QBs may have been more than capable or done better than Ben did across the entire game, especially given a 24-0 lead.

IMO, that would be a poor argument. Roethlisberger never took the field with a 24-0 lead. After the defense scored to make it 24-0, the Jets scored a FG. Roethlisberger took 1 knee with a 24-3 lead. To start the second half, the Jets scored to make it 24-10. The first meaningful snap Roethlisberger took in the 2nd half was with a 24-10 lead.In the second half, the Steelers ran only 25 plays. 11 of those were runs by RBs. That left 14 other plays. 2 were fumbles during the exchange with the back-up center. The 1st fumble looked to be Roethlisberger's fault, but the one for a safety was on the center (although charged to Roethlisberger). The ball never reached Roethlisberger's hands, it was snapped between his legs. Roethlisberger was sacked two times, and took 3 knees to end the game. He threw 5 passes in the entire 2nd half. He threw 1 INT, and completed 3 of the other 4 passes. ALL THREE of his completions were 3rd down conversions; he also ran for a first down (on 3rd down), to go along with 2 HUGE first down runs on the 1st TD drive of the game.

I don't see how these other QBs would have done better, seeing as how they would not have gotten many pass attempts, adn would have had to deal with the Jets defenders being in the backfield everytime they did try to throw.

So to your point, there may not have been a better option for the 5 plays that would would like to focus on, but there might have been plenty of better options on the other plays.

No, there wouldn't have been, not likely. The Steelers went into a grind-out-the-clock offense in the 2nd half, and that is their style. When they get up, they take their foot off of the gas and try to let the running game eat the clock, so these other QBs wouldn't have had more opportunities to make additional plays. Perhaps they would have throw 1 fewer interception, perhaps they would have completed 1 more pass. When you consider, however, that the INT came after Roethlisberger didn't have time to throw the pass when it was intended, and had to scramble to try to make the throw, I don't see Brady, Manning, Rivers, or Brees having much more success. It's more likely that they would have been sacked, and would have been forced to punt anyway (unless they converted a 3rd and long on the next play). In addition, those other QBs likely wouldn't have gained the 2 key first downs on runs during the opening TD drive, and the game may have been much different, anyway.

This is not to short Roethisberger, as he fits the scheme and the system as proven by the Steeler wins and titles. But I still think Brady, for example, may not have had to worry about getting sacked or scrambling by hitting guys on shorter routes. But that is even tough to project as the PIT scheme might not fit Brady as well as the NE one does.

The Steelers don't run those routes nearly as much as the Patriots do, so that option wouldn't have been as readily available as you seem to believe. Furthermore, if Brady would have been able to do that (in the Steelers system, with their poor O-line), why couldn't he do it in in the Patriots system, with their better O-line?

Some of this is hypothetical, since we haven't seen Rodgers or Rivers play the Jets, but we saw Manning and Brady fail when they played the Jets, so it seems fool-hardy to assume they would be successful, when they weren't.

 

[David Yudkin]

Bayhawks -

As I mentioned, you are looking to shoehorn in an exact duplicate for Roethlisberger and not change a single thing, play, or alignment. I suspect that with other QB options they would have fared just as well if the scheme and playbook were slighlty adjusted to better fit that QB. So if your argument is that some other QB would have to run the EXACT same plays in the EXACT same way as Roethlisberger did, then you are probably right, but I think that is a bit over the top.

Using Brady as an example, you're right. Brady would not run the ball 10-12 times. The question would then be in those plays would Brady have thrown the ball instead of run and perhaps been more effective passing the ball and/or would they have run different plays with Brady than with Ben.

That's the part that is impossible. We have no idea what the Steelers would do/scheme differently with someone else.

 

[The Westin]

BradyManningRiversBreesRodgersI feel like every one of those guys... although in their own way, could win that game.Yes Roethlisberger is better at avoiding the sack than most of those guys...but there is more to a quarterback than just that. Just because Ben makes a couple plays, you think only he could win that game? Another QB may make plays Ben did not.

In the Jets game that I watched I saw a line that wasn't pass protecting very well. That game required a QB that could move out of the pocket just to get the pass off, not to mention completeing some clutch passes AND running for 4 first downs and a TD. Given the same circumstances and calling the same plays the only other QB on your list that I think could have done that would have been Rodgers. Disagree if you want but I have never seen Brady, Manning, Rivers or Brees move like that.

Just read David Yudkin's post above this one. That's what I'm trying to say

 

[David Yudkin]

Some of this is hypothetical, since we haven't seen Rodgers or Rivers play the Jets, but we saw Manning and Brady fail when they played the Jets, so it seems fool-hardy to assume they would be successful, when they weren't.

This is partly why I started a thread the other day on the perception of how Brady and Big Ben played against the Jets.I realize we can't simply move production around, but Brady pretty much had 300/2 against the Jets and the offense produced 21 points against the Jets.Ben had 120 something yards and a rushing TD and led the offense to 17 points (less 2 points on a safety for those that want to factor that in).Theortetically, one could argue that in total Brady had a stronger game against the Jets than Roethlisberger looking only at stat lines.In reality, we have no idea how anyone other than Ben would have done in that game, so it's totally based on presumptions and guesswork.

 

[GoodLloydHaveMercy]

I would think Manning would end up in the fetal position a lot wouldn't you?

That's not a serious question is it?

yes... a serious question.... what happens when a free rusher gets to Peyton? Have YOU seen him break a tackle and make a throw downfield?

 

[Godsbrother]

Some of this is hypothetical, since we haven't seen Rodgers or Rivers play the Jets, but we saw Manning and Brady fail when they played the Jets, so it seems fool-hardy to assume they would be successful, when they weren't.

This is partly why I started a thread the other day on the perception of how Brady and Big Ben played against the Jets.I realize we can't simply move production around, but Brady pretty much had 300/2 against the Jets and the offense produced 21 points against the Jets.Ben had 120 something yards and a rushing TD and led the offense to 17 points (less 2 points on a safety for those that want to factor that in).Theortetically, one could argue that in total Brady had a stronger game against the Jets than Roethlisberger looking only at stat lines.In reality, we have no idea how anyone other than Ben would have done in that game, so it's totally based on presumptions and guesswork.

I don't dispute a thing you say but I would add the 4 rushing first downs to Ben's stat line. Those were really big, especially the 3rd and 12 which came right after he took a knee to the hip.

 

[GoodLloydHaveMercy]

If Brady is the Steelers QB yesterday, the Jets are playing in the SB. If Manning is the Steelers QB yesterday, the Jets are playing in the SB. If Brees is the Steelers QB yesterday, the Jets are playing in the SB. If Rivers is the Steelers QB yesterday, the Jets are playing in the SB. If Rodgers is the Steelers QB yesterday, the Jets are playing in the SB (although I love Rodgers mobility as a QB, he is not as big or strong as Roethlsiberger, and I don't think Rodgers would have been able to bull for the extra rushing yards that Ben did on at least 2 rushes for 1st downs).

I'll make you a deal. You admit that without Ben the Steelers wouldn't have won yesterday, and I'll admit that without their defense, they wouldn't have won yesterday.

You want to see if people would give him credit for yesterday's win. Well, guess what? He deserves it. Not all of it, but they don't win that game with many other people at QB.

You got this part wrong, If Roethlisberger was the Saints Qb then they do not make playoffs this year or win the Super Bowl last year...If Roethisberger was the Colts QB then they would be 8-8 consistently every year until they get some offensive balance. Ben does not carry teams! He is good but take off the Black and yellow glasses and realize that. He is not a HOF but might get in because ESPN controls everything about sports. I wish Brees only had to make 2 or 3 plays a game then he might have 4 rings.

I'm not sure how I got anything wrong. I never made any claims about what Roethlisberger would or would not do as Saints or Colts QB. Perhaps you should try reading the entire thread, or at least the parts applicable to what you quote, before you post foolish commentary?Brees is a better fit for the Saints offense than Roethlisberger, and Manning is a better fit for the Colts offense than Roethlisberger, but (and this was my point), Roethlisberger is a better fit for the Steelers offense than Manning, Brees, Brady, Rivers, Rodgers, etc is.

With the Steelers offense (and their underwhelming O-line), to win 2 SBs (and have a shot at a 3rd) a QB would need to be able to withstand hits, make throws after taking hits/escaping pressure, run for yardage when necessary, and be able to throw the ball deep. In the Jets game, a QB without those skills would not have been able to help the Steelers win. Roethlisberger is the best QB with that skill-set in the NFL.

HTH.

ETA-I'm not a Steelers fan, so there's no homerism here. Unfortunately, I'm a Redskins fan, which has sucked for, oh I don't know, the last decade. That being said, I am also a football fan, and Roethlisberger is a good (and under-rated) football player.

I've never said a single bad thing about Ben's play, And I agree that he is a good fit for the team. But your point - that the Steelers couldn't win with a different QB is nutty. They could win with Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers, Vick, Rivers, Freeman, Ryan, Eli, Schaub, Romo, Bradford, etc.

yesterday? behind THAT O-Line?

 

[GoodLloydHaveMercy]

14/23 208 3TDs (down 17-7, brings em back to win)

14/24 197 2TDs 1int (against the super power colts and the game saving tackle?)

21/29 275 3TDs (third in a row on the road)

BigBen year #2 playoff totals, incl Super Bowl ...

58/93 62.5% 803 9TDs 1Int. (4g)

Brady in year #2, his first Super Bowl win...

60/97 61.9% 573 2TDs 1Int. (3g)

PManning year #2, playoff...

19/42 45.2% 227 1TD 0Int. (1g lost)

Brees in year #2... watching TV.

BGP!

haha... dang

 

[switz]

I would think Manning would end up in the fetal position a lot wouldn't you?

That's not a serious question is it?

yes... a serious question.... what happens when a free rusher gets to Peyton? Have YOU seen him break a tackle and make a throw downfield?

Anyone who watches the Colts has seen that plenty of times. However, Peyton is also far more likely to get the pass off before the pass rush gets to him. Ben holds the ball too long so he gets hit more.

 

[David Yudkin]

Some of this is hypothetical, since we haven't seen Rodgers or Rivers play the Jets, but we saw Manning and Brady fail when they played the Jets, so it seems fool-hardy to assume they would be successful, when they weren't.

This is partly why I started a thread the other day on the perception of how Brady and Big Ben played against the Jets.I realize we can't simply move production around, but Brady pretty much had 300/2 against the Jets and the offense produced 21 points against the Jets.Ben had 120 something yards and a rushing TD and led the offense to 17 points (less 2 points on a safety for those that want to factor that in).Theortetically, one could argue that in total Brady had a stronger game against the Jets than Roethlisberger looking only at stat lines.In reality, we have no idea how anyone other than Ben would have done in that game, so it's totally based on presumptions and guesswork.

I don't dispute a thing you say but I would add the 4 rushing first downs to Ben's stat line. Those were really big, especially the 3rd and 12 which came right after he took a knee to the hip.

Clearly the only thing that matters is winning or losing. But if we added up Ben's rushing yards, Brady had twice as many total yards and twice as many TD with half as many turnovers (and no safety) compared to Roethlisberger. Yet the perception of many is that Ben was a man amoungst boys while Brady puked on his shoes and choked the game away.I understand Roethlisberger had fewer passing attempts, but as already mentioned, maybe Brady or someone else might have been better able to get some completions without the need to scramble. Or with another QB perhaps there was a better game plan that would have been more effective.Who knows, maybe with another QB the Steelers would have won by 3 TD instead of a handful of points. I'm not saying that would have happened, but once you start changing the players and the game plan you can imagine different outcomes in both directions.I'm not comparing Ben to Trent Dilfer directly, but couldn't a case be made that with a better QB the Ravens team that won the SB would have been exponentially better and still won? I won't deny that the plays Roethlisberger made were gutsy and he took a beating to pull them off. That doesn't mean someone else would not have had similar (or greater) success. Put another way, stake another QB to 7 points from the defense, only 60 yards allowed in the first half, and a 24-3 halftime lead and I think a number of QBs could have come out of that game with a win. The Steelers ended up with 74 yards of offense in the second half on 26 plays with a net -2 points scored. Taken on a whole and given what the lead was, that really overall is not all that impressive. But yes, when it mattered most Ben pulled it out. The question then becomes would other QBs have even had to have gotten to the point where they needed to scramble and make clutch first downs or complete a last minute pass to ice the game. Perhaps they would have been ahead by enough that it never got to that point. It's theoretical, so clearly there are arguments on all fronts on t his one . . .

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

John Elway isn't measured by his stats. They pale in comparison to the other top QB of his era. However, when games were on the line and in games that mattered most John Elway was the most feared QB in football. Defenses feared him because he extended plays outside of the pocket and made clutch throws in any situation to any point on the field. At some point Roethlisberger will be held in the same regard.

 

[GoodLloydHaveMercy]

I think you could have picked any number of QB's that would have won Sunday's game. Ben only made a couple plays and was rather pedestrian for the rest of the game.You're correct on that one play though. Manning wouldn't have been able to escape the rush only to throw an interception. He would have just been sacked.I don't think the game would have been that close with most of the other elite QB's. They alude pressure by making quick reads and getting the ball out way quicker than Ben does. He's pretty slow at going through his progressions, but he does make up for that a bit with his escapability.

You still aren't getting it... read what is written... Yes Tom and Peyton get rid of the ball quicker and make "snap" decisions... The Jets defense in the playoffs was a bit different than the regular season. They had been covering the short quick routes with bracket coverage basically daring you to try and beat them deep which plays right into the hands of their stellar CBs... Maybe you've heard of Revis and Cromartie? Brady (the master) was unsuccessful against this defense.... why? Because his receivers were reaching the end of their short routes and Brady (master of the quick decisions and short passes) had been unable to "solve" the puzzle. After his initial reads and progressions were finished... what did Brady do? Ummmm.... mostly looked confused and a little paranoid by the pressure from the D-Line that was now "getting home." What does (or did) Ben do when faced with this same defensive scheme? How about running for first downs... How about scrambling around and finding receivers for big time conversions (especially) on the last drive.See... it's easy to SAY that Manning or Brady would have been able to do better against that Defense....... except they didn't. Snap decisions and quick releases don't do much when the initial "planned plays" and "short routes" are disrupted.How have Tom and Peyton dealt with that in the past? How did they deal with it this time? How does Phil deal with that type of situation? How about Drew?Rodgers would be the next best option (possibly the best) but Ben's just done it a little longer.Am I missing anyone? Romo? hahaha... sorry

 

[Evilgrin 72]

John Elway isn't measured by his stats. They pale in comparison to the other top QB of his era. However, when games were on the line and in games that mattered most John Elway was the most feared QB in football. Defenses feared him because he extended plays outside of the pocket and made clutch throws in any situation to any point on the field. At some point Roethlisberger will be held in the same regard.

As I said earlier, who do you take if you're drafting a team from scratch, Marino or Elway? Some would say the former, some the latter. All depends what you look for in a QB.

 

[GoodLloydHaveMercy]

Brees, Manning and Brady wouldn't last the entire season with Ben's current OL and the Steelers current offense

This is such a misconception. All of those guys are terrific at immediately finding an open receiver (if there is one), which isn't necessarily Roethlisberger's biggest asset, so the team would likely run a different offense if any of those other guys were the Steelers QB instead of BR. The offense the Steelers run generally plays to Roethlisberger's strengths.

Now I agree.

 

[David Yudkin]

You still aren't getting it... read what is written... Yes Tom and Peyton get rid of the ball quicker and make "snap" decisions... The Jets defense in the playoffs was a bit different than the regular season. They had been covering the short quick routes with bracket coverage basically daring you to try and beat them deep which plays right into the hands of their stellar CBs... Maybe you've heard of Revis and Cromartie? Brady (the master) was unsuccessful against this defense.... why? Because his receivers were reaching the end of their short routes and Brady (master of the quick decisions and short passes) had been unable to "solve" the puzzle. After his initial reads and progressions were finished... what did Brady do? Ummmm.... mostly looked confused and a little paranoid by the pressure from the D-Line that was now "getting home." What does (or did) Ben do when faced with this same defensive scheme? How about running for first downs... How about scrambling around and finding receivers for big time conversions (especially) on the last drive.See... it's easy to SAY that Manning or Brady would have been able to do better against that Defense....... except they didn't. Snap decisions and quick releases don't do much when the initial "planned plays" and "short routes" are disrupted.How have Tom and Peyton dealt with that in the past? How did they deal with it this time? How does Phil deal with that type of situation? How about Drew?Rodgers would be the next best option (possibly the best) but Ben's just done it a little longer.Am I missing anyone? Romo? hahaha... sorry

People can dissect these games over and over. But riddle me this . . .Did Brady have anything to do with botching an ill-advised punt that gave the Jest a gift TD to end the first half? If that never happened, maybe we are not talking about how the Jets master plan beat the Bieber clone. Instead, maybe we are discussing how Brady led the Pats to an OT victory.Did Roethlisberger have anything to do with the Steelers getting a gift TD from the fumble and return for a TD?Let's flip flop those things and where are we? Give Brady and the Pats a gift defensive TD and take away the botched punt and that's a 14 point swing. Then who would have won the NE/NYJ game? Take away the PIT defensive TD and instead have the Steelers mess up a fake punt or have a punt block that resulted in a TD. That's also a 14 point swing. Who would have won the PIT/NYJ game?My point being that so much of the outcome of a game has nothing at all to do with the QBs that end up getting credit for winning or get bashed for choking. And all of that has NO DIFFERENCE for what defense the Jets were using.Again, that's not how it happened, so we will never know how things "could" have turned out . . .

 

[David Yudkin]

As I said earlier, who do you take if you're drafting a team from scratch, Marino or Elway? Some would say the former, some the latter. All depends what you look for in a QB.

Speaking of Elway, he was a good QB for years and would have gone down in history as such after years of almost winning. But add Terrell Davis to the mix, DEN wins back to back rings, and suddenly Elway is a legend and the myth and the stories of how good he was are embellished and to many people his status changes. Such is life . . .

 

[Stillers Jr.]

Or he could just post a QB rating of 22.6 and hope the running game and the defense bail him out in the Superbowl. But lets face it. If Manning, Montana, Elway, Unitas, Marino, or Superman would have played in that Superbowl then Pittsburgh would have lost.

You crack me up.

Well, do you have a point. Most 23 year olds tear up the NFL. Play lights out and win three straight games on the road in the playoffs, and then go onto the SB.

What was Drew Brees doing when he was 23 again?

14/23 208 3TDs (down 17-7, brings em back to win)14/24 197 2TDs 1int (against the super power colts and the game saving tackle?)

21/29 275 3TDs (third in a row on the road)

BigBen year #2 playoff totals, incl Super Bowl ...

58/93 62.5% 803 9TDs 1Int. (4g)

Brady in year #2, his first Super Bowl win...

60/97 61.9% 573 2TDs 1Int. (3g)

PManning year #2, playoff...

19/42 45.2% 227 1TD 0Int. (1g lost)

Brees in year #2... watching TV.

BGP!

Game, set....match.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

As I said earlier, who do you take if you're drafting a team from scratch, Marino or Elway? Some would say the former, some the latter. All depends what you look for in a QB.

Speaking of Elway, he was a good QB for years and would have gone down in history as such after years of almost winning. But add Terrell Davis to the mix, DEN wins back to back rings, and suddenly Elway is a legend and the myth and the stories of how good he was are embellished and to many people his status changes. Such is life . . .

True. Much is judged based on winning it all. Yet, Roethlisberger has 2 rings already at 28 and is frequently not held in any esteem whatsoever. Many in this thread have said or insinuated that he's no better than the 7th best QB of the 32 currently starting, so I guess it happens more from the rearview mirror than it does when looking at contemporaries.People like to pick Ben's 2 rings apart and say it was the defense, the run game, whatever, but no QB wins titles on his own. Does Bradshaw have 4 rings without Swann, Stallworth, Franco, Lambert, Greene, etc? No. Does Elway have 2 rings with out TD? No. Does Montana have 4 rings without Ronnie Lott, Jerry Rice, etc? No. It's a team game. But ultimately, QBs are judged by rings because the prevailing belief is that QBs who win it all multiple times must have a certain "it" factor that enables them to raise their games when the stakes are highest, and make plays when their team needs them to. I think it's fair to say that Roethlisberger is just such a player and I believe that he'll be much more highly regarded after he's retired for years than he is now.I still think Brady and Manning are better players.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

As I said earlier, who do you take if you're drafting a team from scratch, Marino or Elway? Some would say the former, some the latter. All depends what you look for in a QB.

Speaking of Elway, he was a good QB for years and would have gone down in history as such after years of almost winning. But add Terrell Davis to the mix, DEN wins back to back rings, and suddenly Elway is a legend and the myth and the stories of how good he was are embellished and to many people his status changes. Such is life . . .

Tell that to the good folks of Cleveland.

 

[Copeman]

As I said earlier, who do you take if you're drafting a team from scratch, Marino or Elway? Some would say the former, some the latter. All depends what you look for in a QB.

Speaking of Elway, he was a good QB for years and would have gone down in history as such after years of almost winning. But add Terrell Davis to the mix, DEN wins back to back rings, and suddenly Elway is a legend and the myth and the stories of how good he was are embellished and to many people his status changes. Such is life . . .

True. Much is judged based on winning it all. Yet, Roethlisberger has 2 rings already at 28 and is frequently not held in any esteem whatsoever. Many in this thread have said or insinuated that he's no better than the 7th best QB of the 32 currently starting, so I guess it happens more from the rearview mirror than it does when looking at contemporaries.People like to pick Ben's 2 rings apart and say it was the defense, the run game, whatever, but no QB wins titles on his own. Does Bradshaw have 4 rings without Swann, Stallworth, Franco, Lambert, Greene, etc? No. Does Elway have 2 rings with out TD? No. Does Montana have 4 rings without Ronnie Lott, Jerry Rice, etc? No. It's a team game. But ultimately, QBs are judged by rings because the prevailing belief is that QBs who win it all multiple times must have a certain "it" factor that enables them to raise their games when the stakes are highest, and make plays when their team needs them to. I think it's fair to say that Roethlisberger is just such a player and I believe that he'll be much more highly regarded after he's retired for years than he is now.

I still think Brady and Manning are better players.

I don't know about that anymore. I would use the term "different".

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Wouldn't the offense be different if they had a different QB? Why would they build and run an offense that suits Ben if Peyton is the QB, the same as the fact they don't run a Peyton Manning style offense with Ben...

That's possible, but the Steelers offense wasn't built around Roethlisberger, he just happens to fit that offense.

That being said, that isn't what is being discussed. What I've said is that in the game on Sunday, with the circumstances what they were (current Steelers offense, current Steelers O-line), Roethlisberger was successful when those other QBs wouldn't have been.

Pure speculation... And I'm sure plenty here would speculate otherwise..I think the question I asked above would be a better measure..

If they were both in the draft this season, you GM'ed an expansion team, and you knew about them what we already know, which would you take? You have first pick, are you picking a rookie Roth, or rookie Brady as your first player in the draft, and first player to your new team...?

So, you want to assume that we know how their careers will unfold, and that they are both the same age (or at least both rookies), right? With these assumptions, you would like to know who I would take?

In that situation, I'd take Roethlisberger, since you said it's an expansion team. Most expansion teams have poor offensive lines, because of their nature, and because offensive line play involves the unit being able to work together, cohesively. Since it will (normally) take a while to build that cohesion, I'd take the QB who I know will be more able to make plays out of situations when the O-line falters, and not the QB who typically needs a clean pocket to be at his best.

Now that I've answered your question, perhaps you'd answer mine (since you said others would speculate otherwise, I will assume you are one such person):

In the Jets-Steelers game on Sunday, WITH THE CURRENT STEELERS OFFENSIVE SYSTEM AND O-LINE, what other NFL QB would have been able to do what Roethlisberger did?

Vick, Freeman...

And I think if Brees/Manning/Brady were there, they wouldn't have had to do it the way Ben did, they would have employed a stronger passing attack..

I would say that any of the top 5 QB's that have been batted around could have won that game...

 

[Carolina Hustler]

BradyManningRiversBreesRodgersI feel like every one of those guys... although in their own way, could win that game.Yes Roethlisberger is better at avoiding the sack than most of those guys...but there is more to a quarterback than just that. Just because Ben makes a couple plays, you think only he could win that game? Another QB may make plays Ben did not.

In the Jets game that I watched I saw a line that wasn't pass protecting very well. That game required a QB that could move out of the pocket just to get the pass off, not to mention completeing some clutch passes AND running for 4 first downs and a TD. Given the same circumstances and calling the same plays the only other QB on your list that I think could have done that would have been Rodgers. Disagree if you want but I have never seen Brady, Manning, Rivers or Brees move like that.

Why would they call the same plays when they could have called better place since they would then have a better QB? lol