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

[Bayhawks]

Say what you want about Roethlisberger, but if the defense gives up a ton of yards, way more points than they normally allow, don't force turnovers, and don't produce any points on DEF/ST, the chances of them winning are not great . . . which would be the same for any other team under the same circumstances. But I am not buying that adding Roethlisberger to those other games = more playoff wins and titles for the Steelers.

While this may be true, you yourself admitted that the same could be said for any other QBs.I will point out, however, that in the SB against the Cardinals, the Steelers D allowed over 400 points when they had averaged just 237/game during the whole season, and the allowed 23 points to the Cardinals, when they had averaged just 13.9 during the season. So Roethlisberger did overcome a defense that "gave up a ton of yards" & "way more points than they normally allow."

I believe I said that in those circumstances, the team would be in grave danger of losing. PIT was behind and needed a miracle throw and catch to win. That sounds pretty dire to me. Again, that is no slight on Roethlisberger, as on that drive he obviously was a difference maker and was worthy of accolodes.

You said " the chances of them winning are not great," and that illustrates what has always been one of my points. Roethlisberger doesn't always put up big stats (b/c the Steelers offense/game plan is not formulated for him to do that), but he has a knack for making crucial, clutch plays when they matter most; that is what makes him "great."You also went on to say "But I am not buying that adding Roethlisberger to those other games = more playoff wins and titles for the Steelers."

Maybe Roethlisberger doesn't put up significantly better stats than those other Steelers QBs in those games, but has shown the ability to make the clutch plays that none of those QBs ever showed. That's why (I would imagine) many Steelers fans would argue that he would have made a difference in those games. I really can't speak from an informed point of view with regards to those games as I can't recall watching many of them.

 

[Godsbrother]

But I am not buying that adding Roethlisberger to those other games = more playoff wins and titles for the Steelers.

Yes because we all know that Roethlisberger is no better and could add nothing more than the great quintet of Steelers QBs in the 90s & 00s: Brister, O'Donnell, Tomczak, Stewart & Maddox

Did you bother to read what I posted? The defense didn't do anything in many of the games and on several occasions the PIT QB did very well. Or are you going to suggest that instead of 350 passing yards, Ben would have had 500. Or instead of 3 TD passes he would have had 6. Or that if the defense gave up 400 yards, he'd go in as a LB and shave off 100 yards. Or he would go in at CB and generate a couple of picks when the rest of the defense could not force a single one. Or that he would prevent punt returns or blocked kick returns for TDs.The QB IS ONE GUY on a team of 45 players. While hard to believe, OTHER PLAYERS can have a greater impact on the game than the QB. I listed 7 seasons that ended for PIT where the defense did not play anywhere near as well as they did the rest of the season. If one side of the ball doesn't play well, that team is in grave danger of losing the game.

I read what you posted. The problem is that I am not sure you even watched the games you noted. You just look at stats and make a ton of assumptions. For instance, in 1994 statistically O'Donnell had a nice game against the Chargers but he could not put points on the board. The game ended with a crappy throw to Barry Foster in the endzone that would have won the game and put the Steelers in the Super Bowl. O'Donnell just wasn't a quarterback that could rally the team to victory, especially from behind. The same can be said for the other QBs the Steelers had in the 80s, 90s & early 00s.I have been watching the Steelers since my first game at Pitt stadium in 1967 and I can tell you the difference between the Steelers of 1983-2003 and those of the SB years in the 70s and now is they did not have a franchise QB like Bradshaw and Roethlisberger.ETA: I am not suggesting the Steelers would have won the Super Bowl in all of those years with Brad & Big Ben, but I do think they would have won at least another title or two.

 

[David Yudkin]

I am not suggesting the Steelers would have won the Super Bowl in all of those years with Brad & Big Ben, but I do think they would have won at least another title or two.

What I am suggesting is that the Steelers would not have won anymore titles if their defense gave up twice as many points than they usually did, allowed way more yards, and forced no turnovers. I suspect that usually would be the case for more teams, and in the 90s and early 00s, the PIT defense had games that would have given them a small percentage chance of winning. Maybe they could have eked a win out here or there across all those games, but maybe some credit to the temas they faced might be due. Obviously we will never know what could have happened with a different QB, but if the same outcomes would be expected from the defense, I don't see how Ben would make up for games where the Steelers lost by 21 points.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

I am not suggesting the Steelers would have won the Super Bowl in all of those years with Brad & Big Ben, but I do think they would have won at least another title or two.

What I am suggesting is that the Steelers would not have won anymore titles if their defense gave up twice as many points than they usually did, allowed way more yards, and forced no turnovers. I suspect that usually would be the case for more teams, and in the 90s and early 00s, the PIT defense had games that would have given them a small percentage chance of winning. Maybe they could have eked a win out here or there across all those games, but maybe some credit to the temas they faced might be due. Obviously we will never know what could have happened with a different QB, but if the same outcomes would be expected from the defense, I don't see how Ben would make up for games where the Steelers lost by 21 points.

These were all tight games decided largely by QB play in the 4th quarter:

1995 AFC Championship: O'Donnell couldn't punch in the game winner vs. SD with 4 downs and goal to go. Neil played well but didn’t make the big play with the game on the line.

Super Bowl XXX. O'Donnell threw 3 INT and could have easily thrown 5-6 had Hastings, Mills and Thigpen not made tremendous catches. The Steelers ran the ball effectively and the defense controlled Emmitt Smith. Clearly Neil O'Donnell was the Steelers biggest disappointment in this game.

1997 AFC Championship: Steelers lose to Denver 24-21 as Kordell commits 4 turnovers. QB play was the difference.

In the 2001 AFC Championship NE scored one offensive TD. Kordell Stewart had 3 INT and a fumble. He threw 2 INT in the final 3 minutes when the Steelers were down 7.

 

[David Yudkin]

Not to knock the Steelers fans, but are there non-Steelers fans making much of a case for Roethlisberger?

 

[Adebisi]

Not to knock the Steelers fans, but are there non-Steelers fans making much of a case for Roethlisberger?

Of course not. You didn't really expect this thread to go any other way, did you?

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

Not to knock the Steelers fans, but are there non-Steelers fans making much of a case for Roethlisberger?

Just Bill Polian, John Madden, Brian Baldinger. But they're all fluff and bs, those guys don't look at stats and awards.

 

[The Jerk]

this discussion baffles me. i dont mean that to be condescending at all. i really am stunned that so many people think ben isn't a top 5 qb in the league. i think he's closer to #1 than #7. and i was one of the people that wanted him run out of town because he's a creep. it still wouldnt be terrible if it happened, but the steelers would stop going to the super bowl.

btw, all their top 3 defenses in the 90s didnt win anything. five straight years they were in the top 3 in pts or yds.

I'm glad that you brought up the 90s teams, as there are easy reasons to cite for why they didn't win.1990: PIT ranked 1st in yards allowed and 3rd in points allowed. But their biggest producers were Merril Hoge running the ball and Louis Lipps cathing it. Didn't mkae the playoffs.

1992: Ranked 2nd in the league in points allowed at 14 PPG. They averaged 2.7 turnovers generated per game. The defense allowed 24 points and produced 0 turnovers in losing to the Bills.

1993: The defense ranked 3rd in yards allowed (283 yards) and averaged 2.4 turnovers produced per game. They allowed 400+ yards to the Chiefs, gave up 27 points, and produced 0 turnovers. You can't blane Neil O'Donnell. He put up 286/3/0 with a 99.9 passer rating.

1994: PIT ranked 2nd in points and yardage allowed and averaged 2 turnovers a game. The defense played very well against the Chargers (226 yards, 17 points allowed and1 turnover produced). Not sure you can blame O'Donnell . . . 349/1/0 .

1995: Even though they went to the SB, the defense was not as good as other seasons, ranking 9th in points allowed at 20.4. Like most defense, they blew out the Bills when they forced 4 turnovers. They didn't force any turnovers against the COlts and barely advanced to face Dallas. They against did not force a turnover against the Cowboys. O'Donnell didn't play well, but the defense was unspectacular.

1996: PIT ranked 4th in points allowed (16 ppg) and 2nd in yards. They allowed almost 350 yards and 28 points to the Patriots. Tomczak didn't play well, but they defense didn't show up either.

2001: The Steelers allowed 13 PPG on the season and created around 2 turnovers a game. They did not force any against the Pats, who scored on a punt return and a blocked FG. NE scored 24 points, well above the Steelers average for points allowed.

2004: Big Ben's rookie year and a sterling 16-1 record before facing the Pats again. The defense ranked #1 in points allowed (15.7) and #1 in yardage allowed. Again averagin 2 turnovers a game, the defense produced 0 turnovers and they allowed 41 points.

The bottom line in all these seasons, for the most part, the defense laid an egg in their last game. Say what you want about Roethlisberger, but if the defense gives up a ton of yards, way more points than they normally allow, don't force turnovers, and don't produce any points on DEF/ST, the chances of them winning are not great . . . which would be the same for any other team under the same circumstances. But I am not buying that adding Roethlisberger to those other games = more playoff wins and titles for the Steelers.

I think this summarizes the entire debate. We are debating great QBs on a FF website. Of course the emphasis is on stats and rankings and we can each highlight a stat and build an argument around it. Stats have become so pivitol to fans that we don't often appreciate what we see. Exactly why it's important to get a frame of reference from a real football person, like Bill Polian. As one who attended most of the games in seasons mentioned above I can tell you that Ben Roethlisberger MOST CERTAINLY would have meant more playoff wins than Bubby Brister, Neil O'Donnell, Mike Tomczak, Kordell Stewart and Tommy Maddox. It's really amazing that we could even debate that point. I'd even argue that QB play has been the biggest reason for almost every Steelers home AFC Championship/Super Bowl loss.

Off the top of my head I can think of four of the biggest games where Roethlisberger's proven clutch play could have easily swung the outcome.

1995 AFC Championship: O'Donnell couldn't punch in the game winner vs. SD with 4 downs and goal to go. Neil played well but didn’t make the big play with the game on the line.

Super Bowl XXX. O'Donnell threw 3 INT and could have easily thrown 5-6 had Hastings, Mills and Thigpen not made tremendous catches. The Steelers ran the ball effectively and the defense controlled Emmitt Smith. Clearly Neil O'Donnell was the Steelers biggest disappointment in this game.

1997 AFC Championship: Steelers lose to Denver 24-21 as Kordell commits 4 turnovers. QB play was the difference.

In the 2001 AFC Championship NE scored one offensive TD. Kordell Stewart had 3 INT and a fumble. He threw 2 INT in the final 3 minutes when the Steelers were down 7.

Frenchy, you beat be to it.We have entered a far different debate. This isn't Roethlisberger vs. Brady. It's not even Roethlisberger vs. Rivers, etc. This is Roethlisberger vs. Neil O'Donnell and Kordell Stewart.

Personally, my thoughts on "would Ben have made a difference" went immediately to the 1994 AFCC. This was the worst of all playoff losses under Bill Cowher. SD was nothing special. It's hard to argue Ben wouldn't have been more likely to get a TD on four shots from close, if for no reason other than his vastly greater mobility than O'Donnell. It's also possible that the Steelers maintain possession instead of giving the ball back to SD when up 13-10. Really, the 1994 AFCC 4th quarter foreshadows the 4th quarter of SB XLIII. Steelers up double digits, then give up two TDs to go behind. The only difference is the Steelers trailing by 4 instead of 3. But in either case, Ben got the TD that O'Donnell could not. The argument over the Steelers defense is irrelevant here. In each case, they failed to protect a sizable lead in the 4th quarter.

I can see a strong argument in the 1997 and 2001 AFCCs as well. As duly noted by Frenchy, the QB play was high on the list of reasons the Steelers lost. For some reason, I'm less inclined to agree with SB XXX being different. I'm all too painfully aware of the Larry Brown INTs, but it always seemed to be that the Steelers were fortunate just to be that close. I can still see an argument that QB play was the decider, but it's just not as strong as the other three games listed by Frenchy.

For all the brilliant insights so many people have on this board, I find it amazing that posters can accurately understand and instruct on how valuable it is to have a strong defense and how that should be considered alongside discussion of QB play in relation to Super Bowl wins and appearances, but they can't reconcile how offensive line play and the running game are also ingredients in that same championship recipe. The argument can be made that the Steelers defense from 2004-2010 is stronger than it was from 1994-2001. I certainly lean that way. However, the offensive line and running game of the Steelers was far stronger on average from 1994-2001 than it has been for most of the 2004-2010 era. But once again, facts that support Ben's value to the Steelers are conveniently left out of the discussion by posters who I believe should or at least could know better.

In both 1997 and 2001, the Steelers led the league in rushing yards, but couldn't win the AFCC. In 2008, the Steelers were 23rd in rushing and 29th in yards per rush, yet they won the Super Bowl. There is no doubt the defense in 2008 was stronger than in 1997 or 2001. The 2008 defense was historically good, the best of the past decade and given the current prolific era of offensive football, among the best of the past quarter century. However, that defense lost a 13 point lead in the Super Bowl. I won't argue that Ben carried the 2008 Steelers. That's absurd. But could we at least agree than both the defense and the QB were integral parts of leading a team to a championship when only three teams were worse in yards per rush?

During the 1994-2001 run of five division titles, the Steelers averaged being 5th-6th in rushing yards and 9th in yards per rush, and went 1-4 in AFCC, 0-1 in SB.

During the 2004-2010 run of five division titles, the Steelers averaged being 10th-11th in rushing yards and 16th in yards per rush, and are 3-1 in AFCC, 2-0 in SB.

It's either inconsistent, ignorant or dishonest to credit defense alone as the reason the Steelers have won two SBs and made a third in the past six seasons. The more I consider it, the more absurd it becomes to suggest QB play essentially doesn't make a difference.

 

[Adebisi]

Not to knock the Steelers fans, but are there non-Steelers fans making much of a case for Roethlisberger?

Just Bill Polian, John Madden, Brian Baldinger. But they're all fluff and bs, those guys don't look at stats and awards.

Bill Polian hates the Patriots, John Madden is old & confused, and Brian Baldinger has a weird & crazy finger. Next?

 

[The Jerk]

Not to knock the Steelers fans, but are there non-Steelers fans making much of a case for Roethlisberger?

Of course not. You didn't really expect this thread to go any other way, did you?

I won't place Ben alongside Brady, but when it's suggested that Ben is at or below the level of O'Donnell or Stewart, then you'll get a response from me and many other Steeler fans. Steeler fans are not necessarily more provincial than others, but they are certainly biased in favor of their team. However, I believe they are exquisitely qualified to describe reasons why the Steelers have gotten over the hump from 2005-2010 when they could not in the previous decade.

 

[David Yudkin]

Not to knock the Steelers fans, but are there non-Steelers fans making much of a case for Roethlisberger?

Of course not. You didn't really expect this thread to go any other way, did you?

I won't place Ben alongside Brady, but when it's suggested that Ben is at or below the level of O'Donnell or Stewart, then you'll get a response from me and many other Steeler fans. Steeler fans are not necessarily more provincial than others, but they are certainly biased in favor of their team. However, I believe they are exquisitely qualified to describe reasons why the Steelers have gotten over the hump from 2005-2010 when they could not in the previous decade.

In case anyone is misinterpreting what I said, I was not saying that Ben is not better than the other 90s PIT QBs, but I am saying that in certain individual games he may not have made any difference. That part is certainly hard to prove one way or the other, which is why I said maybe the opponents played well and nothing would have changed that.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

this discussion baffles me. i dont mean that to be condescending at all. i really am stunned that so many people think ben isn't a top 5 qb in the league. i think he's closer to #1 than #7. and i was one of the people that wanted him run out of town because he's a creep. it still wouldnt be terrible if it happened, but the steelers would stop going to the super bowl. btw, all their top 3 defenses in the 90s didnt win anything. five straight years they were in the top 3 in pts or yds.

I'm glad that you brought up the 90s teams, as there are easy reasons to cite for why they didn't win.1990: PIT ranked 1st in yards allowed and 3rd in points allowed. But their biggest producers were Merril Hoge running the ball and Louis Lipps cathing it. Didn't mkae the playoffs.1992: Ranked 2nd in the league in points allowed at 14 PPG. They averaged 2.7 turnovers generated per game. The defense allowed 24 points and produced 0 turnovers in losing to the Bills.1993: The defense ranked 3rd in yards allowed (283 yards) and averaged 2.4 turnovers produced per game. They allowed 400+ yards to the Chiefs, gave up 27 points, and produced 0 turnovers. You can't blane Neil O'Donnell. He put up 286/3/0 with a 99.9 passer rating.1994: PIT ranked 2nd in points and yardage allowed and averaged 2 turnovers a game. The defense played very well against the Chargers (226 yards, 17 points allowed and1 turnover produced). Not sure you can blame O'Donnell . . . 349/1/0 .1995: Even though they went to the SB, the defense was not as good as other seasons, ranking 9th in points allowed at 20.4. Like most defense, they blew out the Bills when they forced 4 turnovers. They didn't force any turnovers against the COlts and barely advanced to face Dallas. They against did not force a turnover against the Cowboys. O'Donnell didn't play well, but the defense was unspectacular.1996: PIT ranked 4th in points allowed (16 ppg) and 2nd in yards. They allowed almost 350 yards and 28 points to the Patriots. Tomczak didn't play well, but they defense didn't show up either.2001: The Steelers allowed 13 PPG on the season and created around 2 turnovers a game. They did not force any against the Pats, who scored on a punt return and a blocked FG. NE scored 24 points, well above the Steelers average for points allowed.2004: Big Ben's rookie year and a sterling 16-1 record before facing the Pats again. The defense ranked #1 in points allowed (15.7) and #1 in yardage allowed. Again averagin 2 turnovers a game, the defense produced 0 turnovers and they allowed 41 points.The bottom line in all these seasons, for the most part, the defense laid an egg in their last game. Say what you want about Roethlisberger, but if the defense gives up a ton of yards, way more points than they normally allow, don't force turnovers, and don't produce any points on DEF/ST, the chances of them winning are not great . . . which would be the same for any other team under the same circumstances. But I am not buying that adding Roethlisberger to those other games = more playoff wins and titles for the Steelers.

1995, O' Donnell didn't play well, but the defense was unspectacular? That game was against the Aikman/Emmitt/Irvin Cowboys at their peak and that game was 20-17 in the 4th quarter until O'Donnell threw the ball DIRECTLY to Larry Brown, who returned it inside the PIT 5. The defense played pretty damn well in that game considering that same Dallas team put up, what, 55 in another Super Bowl? O'Donnell single-handedly blew that game. Roethlisberger instead of O'Donnell in that game and the Steelers very possibly have 7 trophies already.And if Neil O'Donnell, Mike Tomczak, Tommy Maddox, or any of those guys were QBing the Steelers in SB XLIII, the Cardinals have a Lombardi right now. The defense laid an egg in that game too, allowing 21 points and over 400 yards of offense (both above season averages) but notice that they WON that one?

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Not to knock the Steelers fans, but are there non-Steelers fans making much of a case for Roethlisberger?

His single biggest proponent in this thread (Bayhawks) is a Redskins fan. Iwannabeacowboybaby probably isn't a Steelers fan either.What I find weird is that people seem to think Steelers fans have some genetic predisposition towards defending Ben Roethlisberger. Not the case. We defend him because his play warrants defending. Ask Kordell Stewart how automatically kind to their QB Steelers fans are. You can dig up stats all day long, but when every Steelers fan, essentially to a man, is telling you that after watching every single game of the guy's career that he's the biggest reason for their recent success, why not listen to them instead of automatically chalking it up to homerism? David, this isn't directed at you, but to the entire forum in general.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Not to knock the Steelers fans, but are there non-Steelers fans making much of a case for Roethlisberger?

Of course not. You didn't really expect this thread to go any other way, did you?

I won't place Ben alongside Brady, but when it's suggested that Ben is at or below the level of O'Donnell or Stewart, then you'll get a response from me and many other Steeler fans. Steeler fans are not necessarily more provincial than others, but they are certainly biased in favor of their team. However, I believe they are exquisitely qualified to describe reasons why the Steelers have gotten over the hump from 2005-2010 when they could not in the previous decade.

PRECISELY.

 

[Bayhawks]

Not to knock the Steelers fans, but are there non-Steelers fans making much of a case for Roethlisberger?

I'm not a Steelers fan, however since I live in western PA and can't afford direct ticket to watch the Redskins, I watch their games.I've watched Roethlisberger his entire career, and I've read/listened to what Steelers fans think of him in local newspapers and on local radio.He is, IMO, a very good QB who is great in clutch situations. His skill-set and the Steelers philosophy doesn't translate to the kind of stats that Manning and Brady (currently) are putting up, but he is an elite QB; he can do things that the "average" NFL QB can't. To me, that qualifies as elite.Steelers fans either love him or hate him. Before this season, there was much more hate than love. It seems like the perceived attack on Roethlisberger from "outsiders" (and his success this season) has led to more people loving him now, than hating him.But, David, IMO that question is somewhat silly. When a thread from a few years ago about "Is Brady better than Manning" popped up, most of the people who posted were going to be Colts or Patriots fans. Why are you surprised that you and other Patriots fans are on one side of this debate, while Steelers fans are on the other?

 

[southeastjerome]

People in this thread aren't actually claiming Ben is as good as Brady are they? I take joy in seeing Brady fail, but he's undoubtedly a better QB than Ben is. Brady was bad against the Jets, but still had a better game than Roethlisberger did.

I would bet a ton of money that Brady doesn't feel this way.

There are no individual wins... The team lost.. As a QB, Brady had a better game, as a team player he didn't...

While I agree with this I still that if you ask Brady who had the better game he would say Roethlisberger. Stat lines don't tell the whole story, the players understand this but the FF community does not. As Belichik says "stats are for losers".

Forget stats, Brady played better. Roethlisberger was very bad against the Jets, Brady wasn't much better, but he was better. And I hate Brady. This talk is nonsense. So what if Ben plays well and wins this super bowl, he's still not as good as Brady. Does that mean that Bradshaw is better than Brady too? He won 4 super bowls.

 

[Godsbrother]

Not to knock the Steelers fans, but are there non-Steelers fans making much of a case for Roethlisberger?

I'm not a Steelers fan, however since I live in western PA and can't afford direct ticket to watch the Redskins, I watch their games.I've watched Roethlisberger his entire career, and I've read/listened to what Steelers fans think of him in local newspapers and on local radio.

He is, IMO, a very good QB who is great in clutch situations. His skill-set and the Steelers philosophy doesn't translate to the kind of stats that Manning and Brady (currently) are putting up, but he is an elite QB; he can do things that the "average" NFL QB can't. To me, that qualifies as elite.

Steelers fans either love him or hate him. Before this season, there was much more hate than love. It seems like the perceived attack on Roethlisberger from "outsiders" (and his success this season) has led to more people loving him now, than hating him.

But, David, IMO that question is somewhat silly. When a thread from a few years ago about "Is Brady better than Manning" popped up, most of the people who posted were going to be Colts or Patriots fans. Why are you surprised that you and other Patriots fans are on one side of this debate, while Steelers fans are on the other?

I think another reason for the bolded part is that Pittsburghers (and Americans in general) like to give someone that has screwed up and apologizes a second chance. Maybe we are naiive but we are hoping the guy truly has changed. If he reverts back to his womanizing, boozing and selfish ways then he won't be given a third chance and likely won't be with the team for very long after.

 

[Godsbrother]

Forget stats, Brady played better. Roethlisberger was very bad against the Jets, Brady wasn't much better, but he was better. And I hate Brady.

This is where you and I disagree. I wouldn't call it his best performance but it wasn't "very bad".Two of the Steelers three scoring drives were set up by the pass and he ran in the other for a TD. He only had 19 pass attempts and most of those were on the run because the pass protection was breaking down. He also rushed for 4 first downs including a 3rd and 6 and another 3rd and 12 which came immediately after taking a knee to his hip.

On the final drive when the Steelers needed to kill the clock he completed 2 passes for first downs that kept the chains and clock moving and secured the win.

Opposing coach Rex Ryan said of Roethlisberger's performance "Ben was the best player on the field".

 

[Adebisi]

Not to knock the Steelers fans, but are there non-Steelers fans making much of a case for Roethlisberger?

I'm not a Steelers fan, however since I live in western PA and can't afford direct ticket to watch the Redskins, I watch their games.I've watched Roethlisberger his entire career, and I've read/listened to what Steelers fans think of him in local newspapers and on local radio.

He is, IMO, a very good QB who is great in clutch situations. His skill-set and the Steelers philosophy doesn't translate to the kind of stats that Manning and Brady (currently) are putting up, but he is an elite QB; he can do things that the "average" NFL QB can't. To me, that qualifies as elite.

Steelers fans either love him or hate him. Before this season, there was much more hate than love. It seems like the perceived attack on Roethlisberger from "outsiders" (and his success this season) has led to more people loving him now, than hating him.

But, David, IMO that question is somewhat silly. When a thread from a few years ago about "Is Brady better than Manning" popped up, most of the people who posted were going to be Colts or Patriots fans. Why are you surprised that you and other Patriots fans are on one side of this debate, while Steelers fans are on the other?

I think another reason for the bolded part is that Pittsburghers (and Americans in general) like to give someone that has screwed up and apologizes a second chance. Maybe we are naiive but we are hoping the guy truly has changed. If he reverts back to his womanizing, boozing and selfish ways then he won't be given a third chance and likely won't be with the team for very long after.

Unless, of course, he keeps winning.

 

[Bayhawks]

Not to knock the Steelers fans, but are there non-Steelers fans making much of a case for Roethlisberger?

I'm not a Steelers fan, however since I live in western PA and can't afford direct ticket to watch the Redskins, I watch their games.I've watched Roethlisberger his entire career, and I've read/listened to what Steelers fans think of him in local newspapers and on local radio.

He is, IMO, a very good QB who is great in clutch situations. His skill-set and the Steelers philosophy doesn't translate to the kind of stats that Manning and Brady (currently) are putting up, but he is an elite QB; he can do things that the "average" NFL QB can't. To me, that qualifies as elite.

Steelers fans either love him or hate him. Before this season, there was much more hate than love. It seems like the perceived attack on Roethlisberger from "outsiders" (and his success this season) has led to more people loving him now, than hating him.

But, David, IMO that question is somewhat silly. When a thread from a few years ago about "Is Brady better than Manning" popped up, most of the people who posted were going to be Colts or Patriots fans. Why are you surprised that you and other Patriots fans are on one side of this debate, while Steelers fans are on the other?

I think another reason for the bolded part is that Pittsburghers (and Americans in general) like to give someone that has screwed up and apologizes a second chance. Maybe we are naiive but we are hoping the guy truly has changed. If he reverts back to his womanizing, boozing and selfish ways then he won't be given a third chance and likely won't be with the team for very long after.

Unless, of course, he keeps winning.

I realize you were trying to be "funny" or sarcastic, but you're not far off.No one was all over Mike Vick's jock until he started playing well this year. As a back-up last year, people weren't saying "look at how well he's done," or anything like that.

If Roethlisberger hadn't played well this year and helped his team reach the SB, people wouldn't be talking about his road to redemption or stuff like that.

 

[NE_REVIVAL]

Forget stats, Brady played better. Roethlisberger was very bad against the Jets, Brady wasn't much better, but he was better. And I hate Brady.

This is where you and I disagree. I wouldn't call it his best performance but it wasn't "very bad".Two of the Steelers three scoring drives were set up by the pass and he ran in the other for a TD. He only had 19 pass attempts and most of those were on the run because the pass protection was breaking down. He also rushed for 4 first downs including a 3rd and 6 and another 3rd and 12 which came immediately after taking a knee to his hip.

On the final drive when the Steelers needed to kill the clock he completed 2 passes for first downs that kept the chains and clock moving and secured the win.

Opposing coach Rex Ryan said of Roethlisberger's performance "Ben was the best player on the field".

I would tend to agree; he didn't have a great game, but he made big plays when he needed to and much as it pains me to say, Brady did not.

 

[Adebisi]

Not to knock the Steelers fans, but are there non-Steelers fans making much of a case for Roethlisberger?

I'm not a Steelers fan, however since I live in western PA and can't afford direct ticket to watch the Redskins, I watch their games.I've watched Roethlisberger his entire career, and I've read/listened to what Steelers fans think of him in local newspapers and on local radio.

He is, IMO, a very good QB who is great in clutch situations. His skill-set and the Steelers philosophy doesn't translate to the kind of stats that Manning and Brady (currently) are putting up, but he is an elite QB; he can do things that the "average" NFL QB can't. To me, that qualifies as elite.

Steelers fans either love him or hate him. Before this season, there was much more hate than love. It seems like the perceived attack on Roethlisberger from "outsiders" (and his success this season) has led to more people loving him now, than hating him.

But, David, IMO that question is somewhat silly. When a thread from a few years ago about "Is Brady better than Manning" popped up, most of the people who posted were going to be Colts or Patriots fans. Why are you surprised that you and other Patriots fans are on one side of this debate, while Steelers fans are on the other?

I think another reason for the bolded part is that Pittsburghers (and Americans in general) like to give someone that has screwed up and apologizes a second chance. Maybe we are naiive but we are hoping the guy truly has changed. If he reverts back to his womanizing, boozing and selfish ways then he won't be given a third chance and likely won't be with the team for very long after.

Unless, of course, he keeps winning.

I realize you were trying to be "funny" or sarcastic, but you're not far off.No one was all over Mike Vick's jock until he started playing well this year. As a back-up last year, people weren't saying "look at how well he's done," or anything like that.

If Roethlisberger hadn't played well this year and helped his team reach the SB, people wouldn't be talking about his road to redemption or stuff like that.

I was not even remotely trying to be funny or sarcastic.

 

[southeastjerome]

Forget stats, Brady played better. Roethlisberger was very bad against the Jets, Brady wasn't much better, but he was better. And I hate Brady.

This is where you and I disagree. I wouldn't call it his best performance but it wasn't "very bad".Two of the Steelers three scoring drives were set up by the pass and he ran in the other for a TD. He only had 19 pass attempts and most of those were on the run because the pass protection was breaking down. He also rushed for 4 first downs including a 3rd and 6 and another 3rd and 12 which came immediately after taking a knee to his hip.

On the final drive when the Steelers needed to kill the clock he completed 2 passes for first downs that kept the chains and clock moving and secured the win.

Opposing coach Rex Ryan said of Roethlisberger's performance "Ben was the best player on the field".

Ok, sorry. He was not very good. And he is not is good as Brady and there is a reason only Steelers fans are saying that he is.

 

[fred_1_15301]

Forget stats, Brady played better. Roethlisberger was very bad against the Jets, Brady wasn't much better, but he was better. And I hate Brady.

This is where you and I disagree. I wouldn't call it his best performance but it wasn't "very bad".Two of the Steelers three scoring drives were set up by the pass and he ran in the other for a TD. He only had 19 pass attempts and most of those were on the run because the pass protection was breaking down. He also rushed for 4 first downs including a 3rd and 6 and another 3rd and 12 which came immediately after taking a knee to his hip.

On the final drive when the Steelers needed to kill the clock he completed 2 passes for first downs that kept the chains and clock moving and secured the win.

Opposing coach Rex Ryan said of Roethlisberger's performance "Ben was the best player on the field".

Ok, sorry. He was not very good. And he is not is good as Brady and there is a reason only Steelers fans are saying that he is.

From what I can tell, most Steelers fans in this thread have already conceeded that he is not as good as Brady. But hey.....don't let the facts get in the way of anything.............

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Not to knock the Steelers fans, but are there non-Steelers fans making much of a case for Roethlisberger?

You got :curbstomped: in your supposition and then attacked the posters. You should take your gig to the free-for-all, would fit right in.

 

[The Jerk]

Forget stats, Brady played better. Roethlisberger was very bad against the Jets, Brady wasn't much better, but he was better. And I hate Brady.

This is where you and I disagree. I wouldn't call it his best performance but it wasn't "very bad".Two of the Steelers three scoring drives were set up by the pass and he ran in the other for a TD. He only had 19 pass attempts and most of those were on the run because the pass protection was breaking down. He also rushed for 4 first downs including a 3rd and 6 and another 3rd and 12 which came immediately after taking a knee to his hip.

On the final drive when the Steelers needed to kill the clock he completed 2 passes for first downs that kept the chains and clock moving and secured the win.

Opposing coach Rex Ryan said of Roethlisberger's performance "Ben was the best player on the field".

Ok, sorry. He was not very good. And he is not is good as Brady and there is a reason only Steelers fans are saying that he is.

Very few posters, Steeler fans or otherwise, are saying Ben is as good as Brady. Remember, KC Joyner's article started this debate. Oh, and I don't recall him being a Steeler fan, but I could be wrong. And perhaps the biggest Ben booster in this thread professes to be a Redskins fan. But don't let that stop you.Most Steelers fans are suggesting Ben's worth as a QB is not adequately captured in passing statistics, which is interesting because I believe he has the 8th all time and 6th active highest QB rating and is #1 (tied with Romo) in YPA. And in fact, I believe up to the moment, Brady's postseason rating is 85.7 to Ben's 85.4 or something like that.

Steelers fans believe -- rightly or wrongly -- that making big plays in big games, otherwise known as being clutch, should count for something. And a QB being able to make plays with his legs could also be a worthy factor. And more than just Steeler fans are pondering exactly how much to weight postseason specific success compared to big regular season numbers. Naturally, then, Ben's proponents may argue that postseason performance should matter more than regular season success. Steeler fans or not, the question of regular season vs. postseason performance is a legitimate topic of debate. Rather than trashing Steeler fans, perhaps you could actually offer insight as to how little or how much big plays and/or running plays and/or postseason performance should factor into determining a QB's worth.

I am a proud fan of the Pittsburgh Steelers. I don't believe Ben is anywhere near Brady's level on balance, although it's interesting that pro-football-reference considers Roethlisberger a similar player to Brady among QBs with 7 seasons of experience. However, I will contend that there are considerable similarities in their postseason performances, well beyond the aforementioned passer rating.

Brady's averages for 19 playoff games:

22.3 comp, 35.9 att, 231.9 yards, 1.58 TD, 0.84 INT; 3.7 rush yds, 0.11 TDs

secondary stats: 62.2% completions, 85.7 rating, 6.46 yards per attempt

Ben's averages for 12 playoff games:

16.8 comp, 27.4 att, 216.5 yards, 1.42 TD, 1.17 INT; 13.1 rush yards, 0.25 TDs

secondary stats: 61.1% completions, 85.4 rating, 7.90 yards per attempt

Note when the passing and rushing is combined:

Brady averages 235.6 yards, 1.684 TDs

Ben averages 229.6 yards, 1.667 TDs

Brady's biggest edge arguably is in 0.33 fewer INTs per game, pretty significant

Ben's biggest edge is in an extra 1.44 yards per attempt

Perhaps one stat leads into the other with Pittsburgh's preference for longer passes and the Patriots preferring a shorter passing game, but whatever the reason, those are the largest differences.

However, a difference of 6 combined yards and 1/60th of a TD per playoff game is the statistical difference between the two QBs in terms of their playoff averages. Not exactly a huge difference. People can say whatever they want, but I'll admit to being surprised that on a per game basis, the difference between Brady and Ben is 6 yards and 0.017 TDs per playoff game.

It clearly remains to be seen if Ben can continue at similar production levels in future playoff games. He very well may not, but I'm totally happy to let all of you message board warriors anoint Philip Rivers as the greatest QB of the 2004 draft and describe Ben as a QB between #7-#10 while Steeler fans focus on conference championships and Super Bowls. It doesn't ruin my enjoyment of the Steelers recent run of success one bit. I just like talking about football.

 

[Breesisdaman]

Ben isnt in my top 5 active QB's at the moment. No he is not in Bradys league./thread

He is below

P. Manning

T. Brady

D. Brees

A.Rogers

P.Rivers

T.Romo

M.Vick

Also without that Steeler defense and solid run support he would have 0 rings.

 

[Bayhawks]

Ben isnt in my top 5 active QB's at the moment. No he is not in Bradys league./threadHe is belowP. ManningT. BradyD. BreesA.RogersP.RiversT.RomoM.VickAlso without that Steeler defense and solid run support he would have 0 rings.

Romo and Vick ahead of Roethlisberger?Sure, this is a realistic list.Arguments can be (and have been) made for the other 6 QBs to be ahead of Roethlisberger, as arguments can be made to why Roethlisberger should be ahead of some of them. But I have a hard time believing anyone would realistically put Romo or Vick ahead of Roethlisberger. Would you mind sharing your reasoning behind those 2 QBs?

 

[Adebisi]

Ben isnt in my top 5 active QB's at the moment. No he is not in Bradys league./threadHe is belowP. ManningT. BradyD. BreesA.RogersP.RiversT.RomoM.VickAlso without that Steeler defense and solid run support he would have 0 rings.

You completely discredited yourself when you threw Romo's name in there. You could have at least made a reasonable argument for the rest of those guys.

 

[Breesisdaman]

Ben isnt in my top 5 active QB's at the moment. No he is not in Bradys league./threadHe is belowP. ManningT. BradyD. BreesA.RogersP.RiversT.RomoM.VickAlso without that Steeler defense and solid run support he would have 0 rings.

You completely discredited yourself when you threw Romo's name in there. You could have at least made a reasonable argument for the rest of those guys.

Romo has better stats than Ben, He hasnt won a SB but the SB is a team thing. Individually I would take Romo over Ben any day.Ditto Vick.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

stats

 

[fred_1_15301]

Ben isnt in my top 5 active QB's at the moment. No he is not in Bradys league./threadHe is belowP. ManningT. BradyD. BreesA.RogersP.RiversT.RomoM.VickAlso without that Steeler defense and solid run support he would have 0 rings.

You completely discredited yourself when you threw Romo's name in there. You could have at least made a reasonable argument for the rest of those guys.

I would also say that Vick needs to play at this level for more than one season to be considered in the same breath as some of these other guys. I agree about Romo and LOL @ the guy completey discounting playoff success. I think Manning and Brady are clearly ahead of Ben and a strong case could easily be made for Brees, Rogers and Rivers.

 

[fred_1_15301]

Ben isnt in my top 5 active QB's at the moment. No he is not in Bradys league./threadHe is belowP. ManningT. BradyD. BreesA.RogersP.RiversT.RomoM.VickAlso without that Steeler defense and solid run support he would have 0 rings.

You completely discredited yourself when you threw Romo's name in there. You could have at least made a reasonable argument for the rest of those guys.

Romo has better stats than Ben, He hasnt won a SB but the SB is a team thing. Individually I would take Romo over Ben any day.Ditto Vick.

How many playoff games has Romo even won? You're telling me that Dallas hasn't been loaded with talent the last few years? Romo is a choker. Ben is not.

 

[Adebisi]

Romo is a choker. Ben is not.

:softball:

 

[Bayhawks]

Ben isnt in my top 5 active QB's at the moment. No he is not in Bradys league./threadHe is belowP. ManningT. BradyD. BreesA.RogersP.RiversT.RomoM.VickAlso without that Steeler defense and solid run support he would have 0 rings.

You completely discredited yourself when you threw Romo's name in there. You could have at least made a reasonable argument for the rest of those guys.

Romo has better stats than Ben, He hasnt won a SB but the SB is a team thing. Individually I would take Romo over Ben any day.Ditto Vick.

Wait, are you Daniel Snyder? Or Vinny Cerrato? Because this is the kind of stupid #### I've heard from them since 1999.

 

[Breesisdaman]

Ben isnt in my top 5 active QB's at the moment. No he is not in Bradys league./threadHe is belowP. ManningT. BradyD. BreesA.RogersP.RiversT.RomoM.VickAlso without that Steeler defense and solid run support he would have 0 rings.

You completely discredited yourself when you threw Romo's name in there. You could have at least made a reasonable argument for the rest of those guys.

Romo has better stats than Ben, He hasnt won a SB but the SB is a team thing. Individually I would take Romo over Ben any day.Ditto Vick.

Wait, are you Daniel Snyder? Or Vinny Cerrato? Because this is the kind of stupid #### I've heard from them since 1999.

One thing I noticed when Ben faced the Saints earlier in the season is that if he faces a good secondary, apply some heat and shut down the run game he is a pretty big choker himself. 3 points was all the Steelers mustered that day. Ben is a system QB playing in the right system for his abilities with a decent head coach. Romo has not had either of those things in place and has played for a dunce head coach in Wade Phillips for an offense that has lacked an indenity. Put Romo in a Steelers uniform and give him all the advantages Ben has had and I think you sing a different tune. If you Remember right even the Steelers backup QB's won games in that system while Ben was out serving his suspension. As far as the playoff success of the Steelers goes, when you think of the Steelers, you think of Polamalu and the DEFENSE and that IMO is what gave the Steelers the edge in the post season. Ben is also not a technically proficient QB and he will never be regarded as Elite.

 

[Bayhawks]

One thing I noticed when Ben faced the Saints earlier in the season is that if he faces a good secondary, apply some heat and shut down the run game he is a pretty big choker himself.

Oh, is that all? Good secondary to shut down receivers, apply "some heat" presumably while only rushing 4 to maintain the "good secondary," and shut down the run game. That sounds simple. I wonder what QB wouldn't have trouble with that combination

Ben is also not a technically proficient QB and he will never be regarded as Elite.

You know "never" is a very absolute term, and it doesn't apply here.Roethlisberger is on of the NFL's elite players

From the article:

"Bottom line, if you ask football people, they’re going to put Ben Roethlisberger up there with [Manning and Brady] almost unanimously,” Polian told Sam Farmer of the Los Angeles Times.

and

it’s hard to dispute that he’s one of the league’s elite players

Hmm, I guess never came early, huh?

 

[The Jerk]

"Bottom line, if you ask football people, they’re going to put Ben Roethlisberger up there with [Manning and Brady] almost unanimously,” Polian told Sam Farmer of the Los Angeles Times.

and

it’s hard to dispute that he’s one of the league’s elite players

Hmm, I guess never came early, huh?

Polian = biased Steeler fanMike Wilbon = biased Steeler fan: Ben Roethlisberger faces a different blitz

Since he led the Steelers to a second championship two years ago, I've made the case that if I had one game to win and my life was on the line, I'd want Roethlisberger to be my quarterback. Not Tom Brady, not Peyton Manning, who would be the choice for 99 percent of the people, but Roethlisberger, who throws for fewer yards and fewer touchdowns, takes more sacks and is never ever mentioned as the league's best quarterback.

All Roethlisberger does is make the plays that are there, create the ones that aren't, make a sometimes average line look superior, win in the playoffs and win the Super Bowl. I'll take Roethlisberger.

 

[Bayhawks]

"Bottom line, if you ask football people, they’re going to put Ben Roethlisberger up there with [Manning and Brady] almost unanimously,” Polian told Sam Farmer of the Los Angeles Times.

and

it’s hard to dispute that he’s one of the league’s elite players

Hmm, I guess never came early, huh?

Polian = biased Steeler fanMike Wilbon = biased Steeler fan: Ben Roethlisberger faces a different blitz

Since he led the Steelers to a second championship two years ago, I've made the case that if I had one game to win and my life was on the line, I'd want Roethlisberger to be my quarterback. Not Tom Brady, not Peyton Manning, who would be the choice for 99 percent of the people, but Roethlisberger, who throws for fewer yards and fewer touchdowns, takes more sacks and is never ever mentioned as the league's best quarterback.

All Roethlisberger does is make the plays that are there, create the ones that aren't, make a sometimes average line look superior, win in the playoffs and win the Super Bowl. I'll take Roethlisberger.

Thanks for providing the Wilbon link. That's AT LEAST 2 people who consider him elite, so as I said, the term "never" doesn't apply here.

 

[The Jerk]

Thanks for providing the Wilbon link. That's AT LEAST 2 people who consider him elite, so as I said, the term "never" doesn't apply here.

Sure.I'm a proud Steeler fan, but I'm not a huge Ben fan. I am, however, a proponent of winning football and distinguishing good stats from winning play. I realize that's a bigger challenge on a site anchored by FF fanatics. I also like to look at the data myself and draw my own conclusions instead of believing what the so-called experts tell us over and over and over again. Of course, around here, I'll be branded as a homer by the usual posters, but as I've said elsewhere, that's a small price to pay for talking football and enjoying the Steelers in another SB run. Where I'm typically the biggest homer is in being an advocate for the Steelers defense.I realize you're a Redskins fan... you have my sympathy. Hope Pittsburgh as a city has been good to you, however.

 

[Steelfan7]

Ben isnt in my top 5 active QB's at the moment. No he is not in Bradys league./threadHe is belowP. ManningT. BradyD. BreesA.RogersP.RiversT.RomoM.VickAlso without that Steeler defense and solid run support he would have 0 rings.

You completely discredited yourself when you threw Romo's name in there. You could have at least made a reasonable argument for the rest of those guys.

Romo has better stats than Ben, He hasnt won a SB but the SB is a team thing. Individually I would take Romo over Ben any day.Ditto Vick.

Romo can't even handle the pressure of a routine play like handle the snap on a kick attempt let alone lead a team to the Superbowl and engineer the game winning drive and throw the game winning TD.

 

[fred_1_15301]

Oh, is that all? Good secondary to shut down receivers, apply "some heat" presumably while only rushing 4 to maintain the "good secondary," and shut down the run game. That sounds simple. I wonder what QB wouldn't have trouble with that combination

I found this part of his post funny as well. I'm sure Brady and Manning would play great against a shut down secondary, good pass rush and lack of running game..............

 

[Godsbrother]

Oh, is that all? Good secondary to shut down receivers, apply "some heat" presumably while only rushing 4 to maintain the "good secondary," and shut down the run game. That sounds simple. I wonder what QB wouldn't have trouble with that combination

I found this part of his post funny as well. I'm sure Brady and Manning would play great against a shut down secondary, good pass rush and lack of running game..............

Brady and Manning are at their best when they have time and can pick you apart. If I am facing a defense like mentioned above then I would be MORE apt to want a QB like Roethlisberger that is stronger, more mobile and adept at improvising when the pass protection breaks down.

 

[Adebisi]

Oh, is that all? Good secondary to shut down receivers, apply "some heat" presumably while only rushing 4 to maintain the "good secondary," and shut down the run game. That sounds simple. I wonder what QB wouldn't have trouble with that combination

I found this part of his post funny as well. I'm sure Brady and Manning would play great against a shut down secondary, good pass rush and lack of running game..............

Brady and Manning are at their best when they have time and can pick you apart. If I am facing a defense like mentioned above then I would be MORE apt to want a QB like Roethlisberger that is stronger, more mobile and adept at improvising when the pass protection breaks down.

No, you would still take Brady or Manning. If you weren't a Steeler fan.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

I don't think this thread has left the front page since I started it.

 

[Adebisi]

I don't think this thread has left the front page since I started it.

If the Steelers win on Sunday, I propose you start a Tomlin vs. Belichick thread. If necessary, I promise that I will say ridiculous things to keep it going for at least a week.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

I don't think this thread has left the front page since I started it.

If the Steelers win on Sunday, I propose you start a Tomlin vs. Belichick thread. If necessary, I promise that I will say ridiculous things to keep it going for at least a week.

No need. Whether the Steelers win or lose on Sunday, one side or the other in this thread (or preferably both) will be saying "I told you so" well into next week, and probably beyond.

 

[fred_1_15301]

Oh, is that all? Good secondary to shut down receivers, apply "some heat" presumably while only rushing 4 to maintain the "good secondary," and shut down the run game. That sounds simple. I wonder what QB wouldn't have trouble with that combination

I found this part of his post funny as well. I'm sure Brady and Manning would play great against a shut down secondary, good pass rush and lack of running game..............

Brady and Manning are at their best when they have time and can pick you apart. If I am facing a defense like mentioned above then I would be MORE apt to want a QB like Roethlisberger that is stronger, more mobile and adept at improvising when the pass protection breaks down.

If you're facing a defense as mentioned above, you're in trouble no matter who you are.

 

[PhD]

Oh, is that all? Good secondary to shut down receivers, apply "some heat" presumably while only rushing 4 to maintain the "good secondary," and shut down the run game. That sounds simple. I wonder what QB wouldn't have trouble with that combination

I found this part of his post funny as well. I'm sure Brady and Manning would play great against a shut down secondary, good pass rush and lack of running game..............

Brady and Manning are at their best when they have time and can pick you apart. If I am facing a defense like mentioned above then I would be MORE apt to want a QB like Roethlisberger that is stronger, more mobile and adept at improvising when the pass protection breaks down.

No, you would still take Brady or Manning. If you weren't a Steeler fan.

If I needed a FG to win at the end of the game in that scenario I'd take Brady + Pats special teamsIf I needed a TD I'd want Manning or Roethlisberger and their respective teams

 

[Steelfan7]

I don't think this thread has left the front page since I started it.

If the Steelers win on Sunday, I propose you start a Tomlin vs. Belichick thread. If necessary, I promise that I will say ridiculous things to keep it going for at least a week.

Are we talking cheating years or post-cheating?