Where does Big Ben Rank among 2005 QBs? (1 Viewer)

[PACKER 7]

Friday night I made the statement to one of my diehard Steelers' fan buddies that Big Ben wasn't one of the 10 best QBs in the game. Of course he went into a tissy and couldn't believe that I had said that. I realize that he has won a lot of games, but I don't think he is the main reason the Steelers win ball games. So I started to think of where he does actually rank among this year's QBs and this is what I came up with.... (and this is fantasy aside mind you, pure QB type stuff, Good passer, manager of the game, leader on the field, clutch performer, and ability to play to the position)This list is purely my feeling as to position on the list, but in my mind there are at least 15 QBs in the league right now that are better QBs than Big Ben. 1. Peyton Manning2. Tom Brady3. Carson Palmer4. Matt Hasselbeck5. Donovan McNabb6. Jake Delhomme7. Trent Green8. Jake Plummer9. Marc Bulger10. Kurt Warner11. Byron Leftwich12. Eli Manning13. Drew Brees14. Micheal Vick15. Daunte Culpepper16. Ben RoethlisbergerFor reference I included the current QB leaders in passer rating. Now of course Big Ben is 3 on this list, but he has only attempted 156 passes. So I don't think he really belongs on that list so high. He only does what he has to. He manages the game and well I'll admit, but a game manager doesn't make a great QB in my opinion. Dilfer is a good manager of the game, but I figure he wouldn't rank high on the list of QB's today either.Rank Player Team Yds Att Cmp TDs Ints Long Rating 1 Carson Palmer CIN 2922 361 252 23 7 70 107.1 2 Peyton Manning IND 2779 341 232 22 8 80 104.5 3 Ben Roethlisberger PIT 1316 156 96 12 4 85 103.5 4 Marc Bulger STL 2297 287 192 14 9 57 94.4 5 Jake Plummer DEN 2236 314 193 14 4 72 92.5 6 Drew Brees SD 2653 346 223 18 11 43 91.8 7 Drew Bledsoe DAL 2557 335 214 16 9 70 91.8 8 Tom Brady NE 3030 387 237 18 10 71 90.5 9 Byron Leftwich JAC 2123 302 175 15 5 45 89.3 10 Matt Hasselbeck SEA 2606 353 221 14 8 52 88.8 11 Trent Green KC 2694 360 224 11 7 60 87.2 12 Jake Delhomme CAR 2438 303 183 16 12 80 87.0 13 Mark Brunell WAS 2356 349 202 15 5 78 86.8 14 Kurt Warner ARI 1989 279 178 8 6 63 85.6 15 Donovan McNabb PHI 2507 357 211 16 9 91 85.0 Also before people start hopping in there, I'm not trying to say that Big Ben wont be a top 10 QB at some point, but I think right now there is no way anyone can say that.So, I'd like to hear people's opinions on this and if I'm wrong I'll be glad to admit it. Let me know what you think.Thanks guys.

 

[Bayhawks]

I definitely wouldn't rank Culpepper ahead of him, and I probably wouldn't rank Warner ahead of him. There are a few others who I am not sure of, but those two jumped out at me.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

You are wrong. Your friend is right.It's really not that close. Big Ben is top 6 or 7 easy.

 

[PACKER 7]

You are wrong. Your friend is right.

It's really not that close. Big Ben is top 6 or 7 easy.

Ummm.. can you be a little more specific as to why you think that? What has he specifically done that warrants that?

 

[The Man Who Met Andy Griffith]

Here are QB's on your list that are clearly (IMO) inferior to Roethlisberger6. Jake Delhomme10. Kurt Warner11. Byron Leftwich13. Drew BreesHere are ones that I think are probably inferior to Roethlisberger7. Trent Green9. Marc Bulger12. Eli Manning (close to a toss up)15. Daunte CulpepperHonestly, I would not put him over Manning or Brady because of all they accomplished, but I would probably put him #3 after those guys. I said that going into this year, and nothing has happened to change my opinion.

 

[4thAndForever]

He doesn't seem to come through when they need him to. He seems to simply be along for the ride.

 

[4thAndForever]

Honestly, I would not put him over Manning or Brady because of all they accomplished, but I would probably put him #3 after those guys.

 

[PACKER 7]

He doesn't seem to come through when they need him to. He seems to simply be along for the ride.

This is kind of my general perception of him so far in his career. That's not to say that in 5 years from now he wont be a top guy, but to me it just seems down right ludicrous to say that there aren't at least 10 QBs in the league right now that are better than he is right now.

 

[PACKER 7]

Here are QB's on your list that are clearly (IMO) inferior to Roethlisberger

6. Jake Delhomme

10. Kurt Warner

11. Byron Leftwich

13. Drew Brees

Here are ones that I think are probably inferior to Roethlisberger

7. Trent Green

9. Marc Bulger

12. Eli Manning (close to a toss up)

15. Daunte Culpepper

Honestly, I would not put him over Manning or Brady because of all they accomplished, but I would probably put him #3 after those guys. I said that going into this year, and nothing has happened to change my opinion.

Why does Jake Delhomme always get thrown under the bus when it comes to ranking him among the QB elite. This guy is awesome. He reminds me so much of Favre sometimes. He can will teams to victory. Also imo, he does it with not the best talent in the league either. Steve Smith is great of course, but his other WR are not really good at all. Delhomme is really good and I don't understand why people don't see it.

 

[Steelers4Life]

I've learned to not debate how good Roethlisberger is with anyone who thinks he's a game manager type like Trent Dilfer was. If you think he is, your ranking makes perfect sense.But...He's anything but a game manager, and if he was on a team without a good running game and/or defense, he's got the talent to put up awesome numbers. Nevermind the fact that after Burress left, he's now got no one reliable to throw to other than Hines Ward. He's a playmaker with exceptional talent, and he's only going to get better.With all the hype he's gotten, people forget that he's only 23 years old.

 

[-OZ-]

As far as the NFL goes, Ben is easily a top 10 QB this year. Pittsburgh was pathetic without him, and if you watched the game today, I'm truly surprised that you can say he wasn't the glue that kept it close. Keep in mind he was hurting pretty bad throughout the game. Without Ben, the Steelers aren't even a .500 team. With him, they're among the top 4 in the NFL. That makes him a top 10 QB. For your rankings, as much as I like Trent Green, I'd rank Ben above him and maybe Delhomme.

 

[4thAndForever]

I've learned to not debate how good Roethlisberger is with anyone who thinks he's a game manager type like Trent Dilfer was. If you think he is, your ranking makes perfect sense.

But...

He's anything but a game manager, and if he was on a team without a good running game and/or defense, he's got the talent to put up awesome numbers. Nevermind the fact that after Burress left, he's now got no one reliable to throw to other than Hines Ward. He's a playmaker with exceptional talent, and he's only going to get better.

But don't you agree that his superior running game alone opens up his passing game and makes it easier on him? And don't you also agree that his go-to receiver is better than at least 75% of other teams' go-to receivers?

With all the hype he's gotten, people forget that he's only 23 years old.

I don't forget that he's only 23 years old, but I'm not going to put him higher in my rankings because of that, either.

 

[4thAndForever]

Without Ben, the Steelers aren't even a .500 team. With him, they're among the top 4 in the NFL. That makes him a top 10 QB.

Where would the Pats be without Brady? The Colts without Manning? The Bengals without Palmer? The Panthers without Delhomme? The Falcons without Vick? The Chiefs without Green?Your argument is flawed, in my opinion, because there are quite a few teams in this league that would be under .500 without their starting quarterbacks. Pittsburgh just happens to be one of them.It's also very, very debatable as to whether Pittsburgh is one of the top 4 teams in the NFL, but that's an argument for another thread.

 

[PACKER 7]

I've learned to not debate how good Roethlisberger is with anyone who thinks he's a game manager type like Trent Dilfer was. If you think he is, your ranking makes perfect sense.

But...

He's anything but a game manager, and if he was on a team without a good running game and/or defense, he's got the talent to put up awesome numbers. Nevermind the fact that after Burress left, he's now got no one reliable to throw to other than Hines Ward. He's a playmaker with exceptional talent, and he's only going to get better.

With all the hype he's gotten, people forget that he's only 23 years old.

OK, I didn't mean that he was no better than Trent Dilfer, but I don't see him as a "playmaker" yet. I watch him all the time and I think one day he will be among the elite, but I'm talking today, 2005 December. He is not one of the top 10 QBs in the league.Also, yes Pittsburgh does have a good running game. 9th in rushing offense in the NFL. I think, and again at this moment, Pittsburgh runs the ball first and only throws when and if they have to. Today, obviously they were in a shoot-out and had to throw. Ben did well, but it's one game. Other than that game, he always has just game management type statistics. In my opinion if they thought he could do everygame what he did today then they would rely on his arm more instead of the running game.

So that's why I think that, at least for now, he is a game manager type QB.

Please don't think that I believe he's terrible and can't play QB. All I mean to say is that right now he's not among the game's elite.

I agree his future is bright.

 

[Steelers4Life]

I've learned to not debate how good Roethlisberger is with anyone who thinks he's a game manager type like Trent Dilfer was.  If you think he is, your ranking makes perfect sense.

But...

He's anything but a game manager, and if he was on a team without a good running game and/or defense, he's got the talent to put up awesome numbers.  Nevermind the fact that after Burress left, he's now got no one reliable to throw to other than Hines Ward.  He's a playmaker with exceptional talent, and he's only going to get better.

But don't you agree that his superior running game alone opens up his passing game and makes it easier on him? And don't you also agree that his go-to receiver is better than at least 75% of other teams' go-to receivers?

With all the hype he's gotten, people forget that he's only 23 years old.

I don't forget that he's only 23 years old, but I'm not going to put him higher in my rankings because of that, either.

ALL QBs benefit from a good running game. Ben is no different. And yes, Hines is a great WR, but Ben and the offense would be even better if they had a 2nd option to take away some of the coverage. Burress did that, Randle El doesn't.I don't rank Ben as high as I do because he's 23. But if I was starting an NFL franchise, there aren't more than 4 or 5 QBs who I'd even consider before him. Anyone after Manning and Brady I'd have really think hard about. As far as NFL QBs go, I put him in the next tier.

 

[-OZ-]

Without Ben, the Steelers aren't even a .500 team. With him, they're among the top 4 in the NFL. That makes him a top 10 QB.

Where would the Pats be without Brady? The Colts without Manning? The Bengals without Palmer? The Panthers without Delhomme? The Falcons without Vick? The Chiefs without Green?Your argument is flawed, in my opinion, because there are quite a few teams in this league that would be under .500 without their starting quarterbacks. Pittsburgh just happens to be one of them.

It's also very, very debatable as to whether Pittsburgh is one of the top 4 teams in the NFL, but that's an argument for another thread.

Let's count.1. Manning

2. Palmer

3. Delhomme

4. Vick

5. Green

yep, that leaves 5 more spots for the top 10.

Just watch the games. If you aren't convinced, after watching the Steelers with Maddox and then with Ben, there won't be any convincing you.

 

[4thAndForever]

ALL QBs benefit from a good running game. Ben is no different.

That is, of course, true. But Ben has a stronger running game than most, and he therefore benefits more than most. Agreed?

And yes, Hines is a great WR, but Ben and the offense would be even better if they had a 2nd option to take away some of the coverage. Burress did that, Randle El doesn't.

I agree with you, but understand, most quarterbacks don't even have a first option as good as Ben's.

I don't rank Ben as high as I do because he's 23. But if I was starting an NFL franchise, there aren't more than 4 or 5 QBs who I'd even consider before him. Anyone after Manning and Brady I'd have really think hard about. As far as NFL QBs go, I put him in the next tier.

Agreed.

 

[PACKER 7]

Without Ben, the Steelers aren't even a .500 team. With him, they're among the top 4 in the NFL. That makes him a top 10 QB.

Where would the Pats be without Brady? The Colts without Manning? The Bengals without Palmer? The Panthers without Delhomme? The Falcons without Vick? The Chiefs without Green?Your argument is flawed, in my opinion, because there are quite a few teams in this league that would be under .500 without their starting quarterbacks. Pittsburgh just happens to be one of them.

It's also very, very debatable as to whether Pittsburgh is one of the top 4 teams in the NFL, but that's an argument for another thread.

Let's count.1. Manning

2. Palmer

3. Delhomme

4. Vick

5. Green

yep, that leaves 5 more spots for the top 10.

Just watch the games. If you aren't convinced, after watching the Steelers with Maddox and then with Ben, there won't be any convincing you.

Not to be a smart alic, butIn no particular order here are 10 more guys that qualify under that list: Each of their teams are or would be under .500 without them... IMO

6. Bulger

7. McNabb

8. Bledsoe

9. E. Manning

10. Leftwich

11. Brunell

12. Hasselbeck

13. Brees

14. Brady

15. Plummer

 

[4thAndForever]

Without Ben, the Steelers aren't even a .500 team. With him, they're among the top 4 in the NFL. That makes him a top 10 QB.

Where would the Pats be without Brady? The Colts without Manning? The Bengals without Palmer? The Panthers without Delhomme? The Falcons without Vick? The Chiefs without Green?Your argument is flawed, in my opinion, because there are quite a few teams in this league that would be under .500 without their starting quarterbacks. Pittsburgh just happens to be one of them.

It's also very, very debatable as to whether Pittsburgh is one of the top 4 teams in the NFL, but that's an argument for another thread.

Let's count.1. Manning

2. Palmer

3. Delhomme

4. Vick

5. Green

yep, that leaves 5 more spots for the top 10.

I don't know if you're just fishing or not, but I think you and I both know there are at least 5 more QBs whose teams would be far worse off with them on the sidelines.

Just watch the games. If you aren't convinced, after watching the Steelers with Maddox and then with Ben, there won't be any convincing you.

I'm not debating you on this; I agree that Pittsburgh is far better off with Roethlisberger in there instead of Maddox. But take Dallas - they are far better off with Bledsoe rather than Tony Romo or Drew Henson, but that doesn't make Bledsoe a top 10 QB.

 

[EBF]

I think he's clearly below Manning and McNabb. I'd also put him below Palmer due to Palmer's superior supporting cast/system, although I think that he's in the same class in terms of talent. I think he's probably a bit better than Brady for FF purposes because he has a stronger arm and a higher ceiling, but I can understand why someone would prefer Brady. Those are the only four QBs who I'd consider ranking above him for talent purposes. The main problem with Ben is his system and his supporting cast. People have this notion that the Steelers are a powerhouse with tons of weapons. That's just not the case. They have a handful of mediocre RBs, one very good WR, a good TE, and not much else. Ben has enough talent to produce monster numbers, but it may take a while for it to happen. He could use another good WR and a coach who doesn't call such conservative games. Still, I think he'll end up being a consistent top 10 QB even without any major changes. He's probably right in that range this year if you look strictly at points/game.

 

[Future Sox DOc]

Just watch the games. If you aren't convinced, after watching the Steelers with Maddox and then with Ben, there won't be any convincing you.

I've watched the games. Ben has lost 3 games this year- The Colts, the Pats, and the Bengals. He does what needs to be done against the bad teams, he just can't beat the good teams. Last year in the playoffs, he all but gave the game to the Jets, but they couldn't win it. He tries to do too much. And comparing Ben to Maddox is like comparing anything to a big, steaming pile of poo.

Ben will get better, however the ridiculous hype that he recieves in Pittsburgh is probably what get people so riled up.

 

[Steelers4Life]

ALL QBs benefit from a good running game.  Ben is no different.

That is, of course, true. But Ben has a stronger running game than most, and he therefore benefits more than most. Agreed?

And yes, Hines is a great WR, but Ben and the offense would be even better if they had a 2nd option to take away some of the coverage.  Burress did that, Randle El doesn't.

I agree with you, but understand, most quarterbacks don't even have a first option as good as Ben's.

I don't rank Ben as high as I do because he's 23.  But if I was starting an NFL franchise, there aren't more than 4 or 5 QBs who I'd even consider before him.  Anyone after Manning and Brady I'd have really think hard about.  As far as NFL QBs go, I put him in the next tier.

Agreed.

I agree that Ben benefits more than most. However, it also prevents people who only look at box scores from realizing how talented he is because the running game and defense - until recently - were good enough to hold their own every week. He's got a huge arm and he's accurate throwing downfield, he's great at elluding pass-rushers, and most importantly, he has "it." It's going to be fun watching him develop.

 

[-OZ-]

And yes, Hines is a great WR, but Ben and the offense would be even better if they had a 2nd option to take away some of the coverage. Burress did that, Randle El doesn't.

I agree with you, but understand, most quarterbacks don't even have a first option as good as Ben's.

Let's see how many QBs you rank higher don't have a better #1 or a great group?1. Peyton Manning - no debate

2. Tom Brady - group is better, but maybe arguable

3. Carson Palmer - no debate

4. Matt Hasselbeck - DJax? Close

5. Donovan McNabb - with TO, but now - ok.

6. Jake Delhomme - no debate

7. Trent Green - no debate

8. Jake Plummer - Rod / Ward? Toss up

9. Marc Bulger - - no debate

10. Kurt Warner - no debate

11. Byron Leftwich - Jimmy / Ward? Toss up

12. Eli Manning - Close IMO, plus Shockey

13. Drew Brees - no debate

14. Micheal Vick - ok

15. Daunte Culpepper - now, ok

16. Ben Roethlisberger

I don't see any that I'd say for sure have lesser receivers except McNabb, CPep and Vick.

 

[-OZ-]

Just watch the games. If you aren't convinced, after watching the Steelers with Maddox and then with Ben, there won't be any convincing you.

I've watched the games. Ben has lost 3 games this year- The Colts, the Pats, and the Bengals. He does what needs to be done against the bad teams, he just can't beat the good teams. Last year in the playoffs, he all but gave the game to the Jets, but they couldn't win it. He tries to do too much. And comparing Ben to Maddox is like comparing anything to a big, steaming pile of poo.

Ben will get better, however the ridiculous hype that he recieves in Pittsburgh is probably what get people so riled up.

Gee, a rookie couldn't win the playoff game by himself? How'd Kaeding manage when it was his turn?

Losing to the Colts isn't any sign of anything this year.

He beat the Bengals on Oct 23rd.

And he lost to the defending SB champs, when they were healthy.

I'm not saying he's the best QB in the league, but he's easily top 10.

 

[jonessed]

And he lost to the defending SB champs, when they were healthy.

San Diego demolished them minus Rodney Harrison which was out for the 4th quarter of the Pittsburgh game anyway. Somehow I don't think Rodney single-handedly stops 3+ TDs.These are the 2004 and 2005 (to-date) regular season stats QB-------- Yds Att Cmp Per TDs IntsRoth------ 3937 451 292 65% 29 15Del-------- 6324 836 493 59% 45 27Brees----- 5812 746 485 65% 45 18Why would he rank any higher than Delhomme or Brees? Brees' numbers are clearly better and Delhomme's are similar.

 

[-OZ-]

And he lost to the defending SB champs, when they were healthy.

San Diego demolished them minus Rodney Harrison which was out for the 4th quarter of the Pittsburgh game anyway. Somehow I don't think Rodney single-handedly stops 3+ TDs.These are the 2004 and 2005 (to-date) regular season stats

QB-------- Yds Att Cmp Per TDs Ints

Roth------ 3937 451 292 65% 29 15

Del-------- 6324 836 493 59% 45 27

Brees----- 5812 746 485 65% 45 18

Why would he rank any higher than Delhomme or Brees? Brees' numbers are clearly better and Delhomme's are similar.

You may be surprised at just how good Rodney Harrison is. Brees's stats are clearly better? I'll give you TD/INT ratio for 04/05.

Brees YPA is 7.79 vs. Ben's 8.73.

Same % completion.

Tomlinson and Gates vs. Betts and Ward? I'll take LT/Gates any day.

The question is about 2005 though, so check: http://www.nfl.com/stats/leaders/NFL/PRAT/2005/regular

That's Ben @ #3, only behind Peyton and Palmer.

 

[PACKER 7]

And he lost to the defending SB champs, when they were healthy.

San Diego demolished them minus Rodney Harrison which was out for the 4th quarter of the Pittsburgh game anyway. Somehow I don't think Rodney single-handedly stops 3+ TDs.These are the 2004 and 2005 (to-date) regular season stats

QB-------- Yds Att Cmp Per TDs Ints

Roth------ 3937 451 292 65% 29 15

Del-------- 6324 836 493 59% 45 27

Brees----- 5812 746 485 65% 45 18

Why would he rank any higher than Delhomme or Brees? Brees' numbers are clearly better and Delhomme's are similar.

You may be surprised at just how good Rodney Harrison is. Brees's stats are clearly better? I'll give you TD/INT ratio for 04/05.

Brees YPA is 7.79 vs. Ben's 8.73.

Same % completion.

Tomlinson and Gates vs. Betts and Ward? I'll take LT/Gates any day.

The question is about 2005 though, so check: http://www.nfl.com/stats/leaders/NFL/PRAT/2005/regular

That's Ben @ #3, only behind Peyton and Palmer.

Yes he is at 3 in Passer rating as I pointed out in the beginning, but he's only attempted less than half of the passes 75% of that list have. Not saying he's a dud, but I need to see more over time to know. Charlie Frye had a passer rating of 154 at one point in the Jags game, but that doesn't make him a good QB does it? Like I said, Ben is right now 2005, no better than 11-15th QB in the league. We'll see next year and the next if that changes.

 

[Ghost Rider]

How in the hell is Brees at 13? He is probably a top 5 NFL QB right now. Look at his play and his numbers. As for Roethlisberger, there is no doubt the Steelers are better with him. I would put him around the 8-10 range now when ranking NFL QB's.

 

[PACKER 7]

How in the hell is Brees at 13? He is probably a top 5 NFL QB right now. Look at his play and his numbers.

As for Roethlisberger, there is no doubt the Steelers are better with him. I would put him around the 8-10 range now when ranking NFL QB's.

I'm not going to argue with you that Brees is good or not, but top 5? c'mon? If he didn't have LT2 how good would his numbers be? Again, he's good and I'd sure love to have him in GB, but Top 5 no way.As I mentioned, my list was just feeling mostly, but my main point was that in my mind there are at least 15 guys that right now 2005 are better at the QB position than Ben. Brees may be top 10 or slightly lower. I just am not sure how good he is without LT2, so I put him lower.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I'm not going to argue with you that Brees is good or not, but top 5? c'mon? If he didn't have LT2 how good would his numbers be? Again, he's good and I'd sure love to have him in GB, but Top 5 no way.

As I mentioned, my list was just feeling mostly, but my main point was that in my mind there are at least 15 guys that right now 2005 are better at the QB position than Ben. Brees may be top 10 or slightly lower. I just am not sure how good he is without LT2, so I put him lower.

As awesome as Tomlinson is (best player in the NFL), San Diego didn't start winning games consistently until Brees broke out and became a great NFL QB. The Chargers are 20-9 since last season.

 

[Future Sox DOc]

Just watch the games. If you aren't convinced, after watching the Steelers with Maddox and then with Ben, there won't be any convincing you.

I've watched the games. Ben has lost 3 games this year- The Colts, the Pats, and the Bengals. He does what needs to be done against the bad teams, he just can't beat the good teams. Last year in the playoffs, he all but gave the game to the Jets, but they couldn't win it. He tries to do too much. And comparing Ben to Maddox is like comparing anything to a big, steaming pile of poo.

Ben will get better, however the ridiculous hype that he recieves in Pittsburgh is probably what get people so riled up.

Gee, a rookie couldn't win the playoff game by himself? How'd Kaeding manage when it was his turn?

Losing to the Colts isn't any sign of anything this year.

He beat the Bengals on Oct 23rd.

And he lost to the defending SB champs, when they were healthy.

I'm not saying he's the best QB in the league, but he's easily top 10.

I didn't say anything about winning a playoff game by himself. I did say that he did everything he could do to lose it, which he almost did if the Jets didn't blow it.

The Pats weren't healthy, even then calling them the "depending Super Bowl Champs" is overrating their talent level this year.

He lost to the Bengals today.

You are still ignoring the issue, comparing a rookie kicker to a QB. Ben is a decent QB right now, now way he is as good as Pittsburgh fans think he is.

Plain and simple- when he plays within his means, he is fine- when he tries and do too much (like today, any game vs. the Patriots) he loses. I don't think he's a bad QB, I just don't believe he's top 10 yet- maybe he will be someday.

 

[valhallan]

Brees may be top 10 or slightly lower. I just am not sure how good he is without LT2, so I put him lower.

Uhm, you can tell how good a QB is by watching him.My list would be:

1. Brady

2. Manning

3. Palmer

4. Brees

5. Delhomme

6. McNabb

7. Hasselbeck

8. Bulger

9. Roethlisberger

10. Plummer

 

[-OZ-]

And he lost to the defending SB champs, when they were healthy.

San Diego demolished them minus Rodney Harrison which was out for the 4th quarter of the Pittsburgh game anyway. Somehow I don't think Rodney single-handedly stops 3+ TDs.These are the 2004 and 2005 (to-date) regular season stats

QB-------- Yds Att Cmp Per TDs Ints

Roth------ 3937 451 292 65% 29 15

Del-------- 6324 836 493 59% 45 27

Brees----- 5812 746 485 65% 45 18

Why would he rank any higher than Delhomme or Brees? Brees' numbers are clearly better and Delhomme's are similar.

You may be surprised at just how good Rodney Harrison is. Brees's stats are clearly better? I'll give you TD/INT ratio for 04/05.

Brees YPA is 7.79 vs. Ben's 8.73.

Same % completion.

Tomlinson and Gates vs. Betts and Ward? I'll take LT/Gates any day.

The question is about 2005 though, so check: http://www.nfl.com/stats/leaders/NFL/PRAT/2005/regular

That's Ben @ #3, only behind Peyton and Palmer.

Yes he is at 3 in Passer rating as I pointed out in the beginning, but he's only attempted less than half of the passes 75% of that list have. Not saying he's a dud, but I need to see more over time to know. Charlie Frye had a passer rating of 154 at one point in the Jags game, but that doesn't make him a good QB does it? Like I said, Ben is right now 2005, no better than 11-15th QB in the league. We'll see next year and the next if that changes.

We'll just have to disagree here, no biggie. Nothing you're showing here explains why you rank him lower than #10. It's just your opinion, I have mine.

 

[-OZ-]

he just can't beat the good teams.

He beat the Bengals on Oct 23rd.

He lost to the Bengals today.

you said he can't beat good teams, which is wrong. If you mean he can't beat them every game, sure, who can?

You are still ignoring the issue, comparing a rookie kicker to a QB. Ben is a decent QB right now, now way he is as good as Pittsburgh fans think he is.

Plain and simple- when he plays within his means, he is fine- when he tries and do too much (like today, any game vs. the Patriots) he loses. I don't think he's a bad QB, I just don't believe he's top 10 yet- maybe he will be someday.

How am I ignoring the issue? Those playoffs were LAST YEAR. The comment was about 2005. You're simply using extraneous information to try to make your point. My point was simple, rookie QBs are never counted on to win big games. at your last line, sounds an awful lot like Peyton Manning. How did Peyton do as a rookie? Until this year he couldn't win big games either, was he not a top 10 QB?

BTW, I'm far from a Steeler fan, but I don't have to be to see Ben's value.

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

Without Ben, the Steelers aren't even a .500 team. With him, they're among the top 4 in the NFL. That makes him a top 10 QB.

Where would the Pats be without Brady? The Colts without Manning? The Bengals without Palmer? The Panthers without Delhomme? The Falcons without Vick?

You're contradicting yourself here. I don't see how you can say that Ben is just "along for the ride" and then agree that Pittsburgh is significantly worse without him in there.

 

[jwvdcw]

You are wrong.  Your friend is right.

It's really not that close.  Big Ben is top 6 or 7 easy.

Ummm.. can you be a little more specific as to why you think that? What has he specifically done that warrants that?

The job of a QB is to win. His team loses a lot without him and wins a lot with him. I'd put him in the top 5.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Without Ben, the Steelers aren't even a .500 team. With him, they're among the top 4 in the NFL. That makes him a top 10 QB.

Where would the Pats be without Brady? The Colts without Manning? The Bengals without Palmer? The Panthers without Delhomme? The Falcons without Vick?

You're contradicting yourself here. I don't see how you can say that Ben is just "along for the ride" and then agree that Pittsburgh is significantly worse without him in there.

Have you seen the backup Steelers' QB's? They are terrible. Pittsburgh is definitely better with Roethlisberger in there, but he hasn't done enough to be considered a top 5 QB yet. If we are ranking QB's by just winning or losing, then Kyle Orton is a top one, too.

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

I'm didn't say anywhere I thought he was top 5. But I do think he's likely top ten. Prior to his injury he was leading the league in passer rating and was winning games. He's had a couple subpar games since he's been back, but I'm not jumping ship.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

How in the hell is Brees at 13? He is probably a top 5 NFL QB right now. Look at his play and his numbers.

As for Roethlisberger, there is no doubt the Steelers are better with him. I would put him around the 8-10 range now when ranking NFL QB's.

I'm not going to argue with you that Brees is good or not, but top 5? c'mon? If he didn't have LT2 how good would his numbers be? Again, he's good and I'd sure love to have him in GB, but Top 5 no way.

Brees was #3 in passer rating last year behind only Manning and Culpepper. He is #3 this year behind only Manning and Palmer. Over the last two seasons combined, Brees is #2. (Edit: that was before his poor game last week. I haven't checked the numbers after that.)I'm not saying you have to put him in your top five. But it's certainly not ridiculous to put him there.

It is ridiculous to put him outside the top ten, IMO.

 

[PACKER 7]

How in the hell is Brees at 13?  He is probably a top 5 NFL QB right now.  Look at his play and his numbers.

As for Roethlisberger, there is no doubt the Steelers are better with him.  I would put him around the 8-10 range now when ranking NFL QB's.

I'm not going to argue with you that Brees is good or not, but top 5? c'mon? If he didn't have LT2 how good would his numbers be? Again, he's good and I'd sure love to have him in GB, but Top 5 no way.

Brees was #3 in passer rating last year behind only Manning and Culpepper. He is #3 this year behind only Manning and Palmer. Over the last two seasons combined, Brees is #2. (Edit: that was before his poor game last week. I haven't checked the numbers after that.)I'm not saying you have to put him in your top five. But it's certainly not ridiculous to put him there.

It is ridiculous to put him outside the top ten, IMO.

I'll agree with you. I guess it would have been better for me not to rank the QBs when I posted this. I simply wanted to know if what I believe is true... Are there 10-15 QBs, right now 2005 that you would take to win a game today over Ben. In my mind there are possibly 15 guys, but at least 10. So that's what I was trying to say to my friend.

This doesn't mean that next year or the year after I wouldn't take Big Ben, but right now no. Definitely I would rather have Brees over this guy. So that's why he was in my list. Did I rank him too low, most likely.

 

[-OZ-]

I simply wanted to know if what I believe is true... Are there 10-15 QBs, right now 2005 that you would take to win a game today over Ben. In my mind there are possibly 15 guys, but at least 10. So that's what I was trying to say to my friend.

Has your friend stopped laughing yet?

 

[Black Sunday]

I simply wanted to know if what I believe is true... Are there 10-15 QBs, right  now 2005 that you would take to win a game today over Ben.  In my mind there are possibly 15 guys, but at least 10.  So that's what I was trying to say to my friend. 

Has your friend stopped laughing yet?

 

[SoloMatisse]

Top 10????.....try top THREE. And Im not including Manning in that threesome....

 

[TheLaw]

at Eli being ahead of Big Ben.

 

[jurb26]

Let the haters continue to live with their heads in the clouds.

 

[Blick]

BradyManningThen make an arguement out of the following:BenPalmerMcNabbCulpepperHasselbeckSo, at very worst, he is 8. At best, 3.

 

[Cookiemonster]

I got off the 'game manager' idea last year w/ the (Mon. nite) game vs. the Jaguars. Leftwich and Ben have been viewed much the same thanks to good Ds and good running games. That game last year, the running games were pretty much taken out of it all by the defenses, and it really became a shootout between two of the young, up and coming gunslingers in the league. Both did a lot to impress me and start changing my opinions of them, with Ben getting the better end of it in my opinion. I think this year, Ben has taken a huge step up from his rookie year, and I'd defiinately put him over Lefty, Eli and others of that category. Delhomme is, in my opinion, underrated and ranks just above Ben. Palmer is maybe a slot higher, but below Delhomme.#1 Brady#2 Manning#3 McNabb#4 Hass#5 Delhomme#6 Palmer#7 BenNot sure what to do w/ C'Pep @ this point. Could be #5. Could be out of the top 10. Many reasons to debate either after this season.straight from the mouth of a fan. I do think that in another year or two, Palmer and Ben w/ be better than McNabb and Hass. NFL wise, just outside of the top 5 for now, but there is no disrespect to anyone rated in the top 10 QBs in the world. Fantasy wise, I wouldn't put Ben in the top 10 AT ALL, for the simple fact that Cowher will be there as long as Ben is and they will always be a run 1st team. Cowher let his team go pass heavy out of necessity a couple years ago and it left a nasty taste in his mouth.Good job mining this thread from the depths of the shark pool pages. You must have been waiting for a while to bring this one up w/ a game that could definitively back up your position, and Sunday did just that.

 

[The Hank]

He doesn't seem to come through when they need him to.  He seems to simply be along for the ride.

This is kind of my general perception of him so far in his career. That's not to say that in 5 years from now he wont be a top guy, but to me it just seems down right ludicrous to say that there aren't at least 10 QBs in the league right now that are better than he is right now.

Which current NFL quarterback has led his team to two consecutive conference championship games besides Manning, Brady, and McNabb?Roethlisberger.

This is Ben's 2nd professional year as starter for the steelers.

With a career regular season record of 24-4 and 4-2 post season record from his FIRST 2 YEARS IN THE LEAGUE, I see no reason for him not to be considered a top 5 QB. Statistics aside, it doesnt matter how many yards you throw when it comes to the final score, what matters is being a field general, managing the game and not making mental mistakes.

Ben has been nearly unflappable during this stretch, while playing injured atleast 35-45% of most the games he's played. He's a born leader and makes alot of plays with his legs that most quarterbacks couldnt fathom of.

He's that good.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

This is probably for another thread and certainly coming from a homer but ...when age/ability is factored in I can't think of any QB I'd rather have.

 

[The Hank]

This is probably for another thread and certainly coming from a homer but ...when age/ability is factored in I can't think of any QB I'd rather have.