This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Marino....And I do like Brett Favre.. but Marino didn't throw all the horrible interceptions like Favre does... marino would have favre's stats CRUSHED if it weren't for losing a season in his prime with that Achilles injury.Marino never had a team quite as good as Favre's '96/'97 packers team... that is one reason he didn't get a ring.Without a doubt I'll take Marino, the best pure thrower of all time, and see where it goes.Brett is great.. but all the wild interceptions would drive me nutsI don't think it matters what kind of team, but let's assume that you have a solid team all around. Who do you want to QB your team for the next 240 games (they start as a rookie and play the next 242 games -where they are at right now)
I guess that was targeted at Broadway?I will reserve some comments until we get more commentary. BTW, can I add a poll after I started this?
You say you are a Packer fan so that may sway you some, but wouldn't you agree the talent around Brett was greater than Marino had? Favre had some top defenses, Marino was not that fortunate. Favre also had better RB's. I am just playing some devil's advocate here to try and get some discussion.They were/are both great competitors.
Favre never had the receivers Marino did in his prime. Marino got to play a large part of his prime with the Mark brothers, then got Irvin Fryar. The only receiver Favre got to play with that I'd put on level with those guys is Sterling Sharpe, who's career was cut short. If anything, Favre's better running game/defense is no more than countered by Marino's better receivers.Now, I disagree with the original post that states it doesn't matter what type of team they are on. If we're talking 250 games, no team is going to be solid that whole time. A team is going to have its ups and downs. If I truly have a solid team all around, then I'll go with Marino, simply because he took care of the ball better. But, if I'm truly going to have a team that is good some years, and bad others, then I want Favre, because Marino never outshone Favre with less than superior receivers, and Favre put up similar numbers with lesser receivers for most of his career.
One could argue that the receivers were helped by the QB to "make" them. However, you don't come close to offsetting a better defense with a slight upgrade at WR. A matter of fact a better defense is worth more than a better QB in terms of winning a game. In terms of the team, I tried to state that they would have similar teams so that we wouldn't get into as much of a discussion about if there was a better RB I would want Favre, but if it was a pass friendly offense I would want Marino. Let's just assume you are building your franchise and you could take the QB to lead it for their career.
Salary cap is not part of the equation as they would be paid equally.In terms of out in front leading a block, I would agree that favre would be there way more than Marino and his scrambling should be part of the equation for who you like better. In terms of toughness Marino would stand in and wait until the last second to get rid of the ball with his quick release and while he didn't take sacks, he took a beating. They are both very tough.You touch on all the other parts of being a QB which is the interesting part of the discussion...I hope we get there.
If you're building your franchise, and looking at it realistically, then give me Favre. I'd have more faith in him to do with less.As far as QBs making their receivers, I think it goes without saying that Favre has made a number of receiver. Sharpe was a talent, no doubt. But, I don't think Robert Brooks, Antonio Freeman, Bill Schroder, or Donald Driver are top line talents (Freeman was good, but not great and didn't do anything when he left, much like Schroeder). I don't think, or at least I haven't heard, anyone claim Duper and Clayton weren't serious talents. Maybe I've missed that talk. Fryar was unquestionably talented. Marino definitely made McDuffie look better than he was, and I'd put him on par with a Donald Driver, a solid but unspectacular WR who suceeds due to the chemistry with the QB. Favre definitely made most of his receivers. Marino made his receivers better, but her certainly didn't "make" his best ones.
I believe labelling Favre a turnover machine when compared to Marino is a mistake.Favre 8223 attempts, 273 intsMarino 8358 attempts, 252 ints3% interception rate for both QBs.we're talking about approx. 1 more int. per season by Favre.I'm not saying I know which QB I'd take.I just think that fantasy football has magnified Favre's interceptions... especially since Fantasy has boomed over the last few seasons; the very seasons that Favre had career worst years for INT's.you could easily make the argument that you'd trade that one extra int a season to have the advantage of Favre's mobility.anyone who's claims this is a slam dunk decision based on Favre's "terrible turnovers" is oversimplifying this.
The thing that amazes me is when people talk about mobility. Marino's footwork was maybe the best ever, because he would slide around in the pocket and not break the pocket so the defensive ends would not gain the advantage on the offensive tackles. I agree that Holmgren brought out the best in favre, but he regressed once he left. Favre is the most durable player ever probably, but Marino did start every game except strike games in 1987 from 1983-1993. Thats not too bad for a guy who knee surgeries every off season. I know alot of poeple never saw Marino in his prime 83-93, but if they ever show some old games on espn classic I suggest you take a peek.
Cerainly I have a bias, but I also get to see the context of a lot of Brett's mistakes and realize that many of the interceptions were the result of inexperienced receivers. A lot were also on Brett's shoulders as well, but I think he made mediocre recievers look better than they were. Look at what Freeman, Brooks, Bradford, and Schroeder did when they left Green Bay. And I believe Sharpe only had two or three full years with Brett and that was proir to his MVPs (I may be off a year). You do bring up a good point in that it would depend on the offense. Favre does better when he has some run support. Marino was at his best out of shot gun passing every down.
This by no means is a slam dunk. I have agruments for both QBs. To me, from a production standpoint is like comparing apples to apples. They have different ways of producing the same results.
It does matter what type of team. Marino on a stronger team and Favre on a weaker team.I don't think it matters what kind of team, but let's assume that you have a solid team all around. Who do you want to QB your team for the next 240 games (they start as a rookie and play the next 242 games -where they are at right now)Poll now open
I don't think it's a slam dunk, because both were fantastic QBs for a long time, but Favre turned the ball over more.Does anyone know the answer to my question? Does Favre hold the all time turnover record?
I think marino would have had a ring with reggie or if he had Bruce Smith.
How many does Bruce have again? Where Favres MVPs a result of Reggie as well?
No, but the team accomplishment of winning a SuperBowl was definitely partly due to Reggie.
Haha! No, I do what everyone else does, ignore the ones I don't like.You can ignore these:Marino played in 242 games. He had 64 multi pick games and 21 3+ pick games. There was a 26% chance he would throw a 2+ INT game and a 9% chance he would throw a 3+ INT game. Brett Favre played so far in 241 games. He currently has 77 multi pick games and 34 3+ pick games. There is a 32% chance he will throw a 2+ INT game and a 14% chance he will throw a 3+ INT game. Now, I didn't go back and see when these interceptions were thrown, because I think both QBs had generally the same situations with their teams where they were forced to carry them seemingly by themselves (Marino less so in 83, Favre less so when he won his super bowl, but that evens out) so I couldn't tell when they were playing catch up and when they were throwing early picks, but I but that evens out as well, considering the state of their teams, nor did I look up with the particular high interception games were wins or losses, that's definitely something to look at.Look, no one is going to change anyone's minds here. We all have our biases and that's OK. There are just too many great QBs to pick just one, right? I'm sure if Marino wore #4 and played for Green Bay you'd have a change of heart, and the same with me, I think the best use people get out of this message board is to just see something by someone else's perceptions and perspectives, not to "beat" them in a debate, or throw tomatoes at them when you think they say something wrong.
Then definitely Favre. Marino limited the offensive style, great passer, but wasn't able to do much if all the pieces weren't perfect. Favre is a gamer, more suited for a variety of offensive styles.
Then Jimmy Johnson came and waived every good receiver and drafted terrible. Yeah! Favre had some VERY GOOD RECEIVERS THAT MADE THE PRO BOWL! Robert Brooks 102 1497 14.7 13 had some incredible numbers in 1995, The Marks brothers never had a season like that. Sterling Sharpe's three seasons w/ Favre| 1992 gnb | 16 | 4 8 2.0 0 | 108 1461 13.5 13 || 1993 gnb | 16 | 4 8 2.0 0 | 112 1274 11.4 11 || 1994 gnb | 16 | 3 15 5.0 0 | 94 1119 11.9 18 and lets not forget about Antonio Freeman, Keith Jackson, Javon Walker, and Donald driver.The whole receiver argument does not hold water.
Robert Brooks? Nice to quote his only season with over 60 catches. A career year does not a great receiver make. I'm not going to go through all the stats, but will if I need to. Robert Brooks had one great season, one good season and nothing else. Freeman had one pro bowl year. Brooks never made the pro bowl. I've already admitted Sharpe was as good as anyone Marino played with, but that was for only 3 years. Keith Jackson was way past his prime and caught less than 60 balls in his 2 GB seasons. Marino got to play with Duper for 11 seasons, where he went to 3 pro bowls. He got to play with Clayton for ten seasons where he went to 5 pro bowls. After they left, in comes Irving Fryar for two more pro bowls in his 3 Miami seasons. Marino's last few years were easily his worst where his main receiving option was OJ McDuffie, but that doesn't counter the solid 10+ years Marino had the same two guys to sling the ball to.
Actually it just shows how much better Favre made his receivers than they really are. He took basically nobody's and turned them into Pro Bowl WRs.
Limted offensive style?
I love the favre is a gamer, variety of offenses? he has played in the west coast his entire career. With free agency, Favre has always had the peices. Its hard for people to realize that Marino was stuck with the same terrible draft picks year after year. Marino took a team with 7 rounder clayton and 3 rounder duper receivers and helped them become pro bowl players. favre is great, but to call Marino limited is absolutely absurd. The young audience most be voting now because favre has caught up. Thats really the only problem with this poll, people who never saw Marino in his prime which is alot because it was before footballguys and the internet.switz said:
Brooks ahd good size and speed and was 3rd round pick, sterling was already a probowler before fvare. Keith Jackson was a #1 te, freeman another good wr coming out Vatech. I know I won't persuade you, but if you are going to disagree check some facts before you make statements that are totally inaccurate.
The most damaging weather condition for throwing the football is wind. Is it usually windier in Green Bay than Miami? Also, the most ideal weather conditions are in a dome. Favre doesn't have the best reputation in domes. I think I've read that his numbers aren't as bad as advertised in domes, but they aren't nearly his best. I'm not sure how Marino did in domes. I don't think he played in nearly as many as Favre, though, since Favre has Detroit and Minny in his division.
Marino's accomplishments occured without a defense or a running game. That probably trumps multiple GMs, coaches, and players and definitely trumps having two home fields.Marino's defense averaged a 17th ranking against yards. Favre's averaged 11.6. Marino's two best defenses against yards were his final two years, far from his prime. Favre's 2nd through 7th seasons (during his prime), his defenses averaged an 8th ranking against yards.
And Marino proved he is the biggest choker in the game.
