Rank the NFL QB's - Let's Settle It

[justinsayne]

Ben has going to his 3rd SBs in 6 yrs., and has won 2 already, a team can carry a sub-par QB to one SB, and win, however I don't recall a team carrying the same sub-par QB to multiple SB's, when needed Ben steps up big, when put in big games situations the guy makes the plays he needs to make, that's what puts him at #4 on my list

I hate the guy with a passion and want nothing more than to see him fail miserably, but I just can't see the team having the success they've had without Ben at QB

 

[TheOneBigWill]

Uhm, Irish - Big Sexy, you're apparently both messed up in the head. Never once will you find that I placed Ben at #2 on any list I have. Anywhere. At. Any. Time. edit: correction, if it was a matter of how many Championships he's won in a recent span - he'd be #2.

I was purely pointing out that they have a vastly greater chance to win WITH him, and how overall important he is to that team.. than the likes of a Dennis Dixon, or Charle Batch. I never once said they couldn't win off their Defense, either; but to claim they could have won the Championships they have - without a QB like Ben, is ludicrous.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

I wouldn't put Ben Roethlisberger in a Top 5 list of "all-time QBs" for stats, but he'd be tied for #1, or #2 on a list of "Championship caliber QBs". So, while I'm all for compiling a list of names - I need to know how I'm meant to look at them.

Interesting...

As an "overall" stand-point, which means I'm factoring in the way their team plays around them as well. (accounting for crappy Defenses, Special Teams, and the lack of actual offensive weapons) This would be my Top 5 list.

1. Drew Brees
2. Tom Brady
3. Peyton Manning
4. Philip Rivers
5. Aaron Rodgers
------------------

Gimme something more to work with, and I'll give you a longer list.

Yep.. no Ben in my Top 5.

 

[X]

Brees over Brady is pure nonsense. Brady has done far more with far less. Brees over Manning is arguable, but not over Brady.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

Brees over Brady is pure nonsense. Brady has done far more with far less. Brees over Manning is arguable, but not over Brady.

This sounds like a homer type of statement.

Brady had Randy Moss, and Wes Welker (two of the <arguable> better WRs in the league) as well as a better Defense, which lead them to an 18-0 record before losing to the Giants.

Brees used less talent at the WR position, along with a less impressive Defense - that didn't go 18-0 heading into a Superbowl, and won.

Once again, every bit of the argument can be had that Brady is better and has more rings. However, in that same argument tied in with the shit-fest over whether Big Ben is worthy of anything above 5th or lower.. if Ben wins a ring in a little over a week and a half, he'll match Brady's in less years. Would that suddenly make him better? No. (the answer is no)

So using "winning Championships" is not a valid excuse.

 

[X]

This sounds like a homer type of statement.

Brady had Randy Moss

For one season. Just so happened to break every passing record the one time he has an actual star on his offense.

, and Wes Welker (two of the <arguable> better WRs in the league) as well as a better Defense, which lead them to an 18-0 record before losing to the Giants.

Our defense has been shit for several years now and hasn't been a Top 5 defense since our last Super Bowl win. Brady won 3 rings with Deion Branch as his "star" offensive player.

Brees used less talent at the WR position, along with a less impressive Defense - that didn't go 18-0 heading into a Superbowl, and won.

The NO WR corps is excellent and has been for several years now, apart from the one year Brady had Moss NO has had a better corps than the Pats pretty much every year.

Once again, every bit of the argument can be had that Brady is better and has more rings. However, in that same argument tied in with the shit-fest over whether Big Ben is worthy of anything above 5th or lower.. if Ben wins a ring in a little over a week and a half, he'll match Brady's in less years. Would that suddenly make him better? No. (the answer is no)

So using "winning Championships" is not a valid excuse.

Winning championships + stats = how you grade a QB. Brady is superior to Brees in both categories. Seems pretty clear to me who the better QB is.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

For one season. Just so happened to break every passing record the one time he has an actual star on his offense.

Drew Brees has broken records, too. Without a top #1 WR the caliber of Randy Moss.

Our defense has been shit for several years now and hasn't been a Top 5 defense since our last Super Bowl win. Brady won 3 rings with Deion Branch as his "star" offensive player.

If your Defense isn't worthy enough to get the credit it deserves for winning, or helping to win games - and you're saying Brady is the main reason for it, then explain Matt Cassel.

How many wins did he collect for them? 10-11? Does that mean Cassel is on Brady's level? No, it means (as you said before) the Coaching staff and the way they play allows anyone who plays at that position, for that team, to win multiple games and look impressive.

The NO WR corps is excellent and has been for several years now, apart from the one year Brady had Moss NO has had a better corps than the Pats pretty much every year.

Coltston has butter fingers and is not consistent. Henderson is a deep threat, nothing more. Moore is a relative no-name who is similar to Welker, but not as good. Meachem is still progressing. None are better than Moss - and yet Brees lead them to a Superbowl victory, and Brady (with greater talent than his actual Superbowl wins) couldn't produce a victory - how does that work?

You said yourself, Brady with lesser talent won Superbowls. So, when he actually HAS greater talent - breaks multiple records - how does he fail in the most important game there is?

Let me guess, his line, right?

Winning championships + stats = how you grade a QB. Brady is superior to Brees in both categories. Seems pretty clear to me who the better QB is.

Once again.. Brees doesn't have the rings Brady does; but in two weeks Ben could have, and will have done it in less time. Does that make him greater? I say no, my guess is you will as well. And yet it'll contradict your "winning championships" part of the theory.

You don't have to break records to be the greatest QB in the league. If that's the case, perhaps Manning should be put above Brady?

 

[justinsayne]

Brady is one of the few QB's in the league that can make everyone around him better, he took a team full of young unproven guys and made them look like they've been playing together for years, that's something that only great QB's can do and Brady has been doing it for years, you look at the "star" WR he's had in the past, what have those guys done with others teams, not a damn thing that's noteworthy, Brady has proven time and time again through out his career that he is the best QB in the league, to say Bree's is better is just silly, Bree's has shit loads of great talent all around him

 

[Big Sexy]

Any list that doesn't have Manning and Brady at numbers 1 and 2 is wrong. Flat out. You can argue it all you want but it would all be bullshit. The order isn't important but Manning and Brady are 1 and 2

 

[Stormtrooper]

Any list that doesn't have Manning and Brady at numbers 1 and 2 is wrong. Flat out. You can argue it all you want but it would all be bullshit. The order isn't important but Manning and Brady are 1 and 2

It doesn't matter how often you say it, people won't listen.

You're 100% right, but sadly most people can't comprehend something as simple as 2 of the greatest all-time QBs still close to (or in) their prime being the top 2 active QBs.

If I was starting a franchise and had to worry about 5 years from now, maybe I wouldn't take them, but if I need to win a game, a regular season, postseason, Super Bowl, whatever, everyone SHOULD take Peyton Manning or Tom Brady.

 

[The Bearded One]

Jags fans are way too hard on Garrard. He has never had a qb rating below 80, never had a completion % below 60, never thrown more int's then td's. The guy isn't an elite qb by any means but he is consistently solid and anyone having him outside the top 20 qbs in the league is crazy.

In 2009, he had more turnovers (ints and fumbles) than td's. But the thing isn't that, though. Those numbers look fine and dandy, but they don't tell you what he really plays like. He makes stupid mistakes at crucial times of a game. He misses wide open receivers several times a game only to dump it off for a 2 yard gain. He looks only at one side of the field. He has no pocket awareness whatsoever. He sacks himself constantly at stupid times in the game. He throws the ball away on 4th down (no joke). He continuously does things that make you shake your head. He is not a smart qb. The Jags will never win anything as long as he is the starting qb (and JDR is the hc).

 

[Big Sexy]

It doesn't matter how often you say it, people won't listen.

You're 100% right, but sadly most people can't comprehend something as simple as 2 of the greatest all-time QBs still close to (or in) their prime being the top 2 active QBs.

If I was starting a franchise and had to worry about 5 years from now, maybe I wouldn't take them, but if I need to win a game, a regular season, postseason, Super Bowl, whatever, everyone SHOULD take Peyton Manning or Tom Brady.

I'd even go as far to say that the top 6 qbs in the league should be a lock for every person. Manning and Brady are 1 and 2, order not important. Drew Brees is number 3. Then Rodgers, Roethlisberger, and Rivers are 4-6, again order not important for those 3.

 

[Stormtrooper]

I'd even go as far to say that the top 6 qbs in the league should be a lock for every person. Manning and Brady are 1 and 2, order not important. Drew Brees is number 3. Then Rodgers, Roethlisberger, and Rivers are 4-6, again order not important for those 3.

I agree, except I personally believe that it should be Brady and Manning 1/2, Brees and Roethlisberger 3/4, and Rodgers and Rivers 5/6. To me, because he's back in the Super Bowl again, I jumped Ben over Brees (Brees jumped to 3 last season because of his Super Bowl run).

 

[IrishCanadian25]

I'd even go as far to say that the top 6 qbs in the league should be a lock for every person. Manning and Brady are 1 and 2, order not important. Drew Brees is number 3. Then Rodgers, Roethlisberger, and Rivers are 4-6, again order not important for those 3.

I'm cool with this. It seems to be largely the consensus 1-6. Those folks who are trying to peg Michael Vick above ANY of these guys after one year as a starter for the first time in YEARS, and after seeing how average he can be when teams are more ready for his type of game, are insane.

I'd also be alright with the argument that Peyton Manning isn't in the top 3. But only in favor of Brees, really.

Is it safe to say that, whomever wins the Super Bowl (Ben or Aaron) is #3 or #4?

 

[Big Sexy]

I'm cool with this. It seems to be largely the consensus 1-6. Those folks who are trying to peg Michael Vick above ANY of these guys after one year as a starter for the first time in YEARS, and after seeing how average he can be when teams are more ready for his type of game, are insane.

I'd also be alright with the argument that Peyton Manning isn't in the top 3. But only in favor of Brees, really.

Is it safe to say that, whomever wins the Super Bowl (Ben or Aaron) is #3 or #4?

No matter who wins the SB Manning and Brady stay at 1 and 2. If the Steelers win and Ben has a good game I could see people putting him at 3 ahead of Brees. If Rodgers wins I say he stays at 4 but another great season next year would easily change that.

 

[Stormtrooper]

I'm cool with this. It seems to be largely the consensus 1-6. Those folks who are trying to peg Michael Vick above ANY of these guys after one year as a starter for the first time in YEARS, and after seeing how average he can be when teams are more ready for his type of game, are insane.

this definitely. I love Vick, and I believe I actually have him at 7. However it'll take a few years of success for me to put him any higher then that. The other guys all have had similar or greater success for longer.

I'd also be alright with the argument that Peyton Manning isn't in the top 3. But only in favor of Brees, really.

Is it safe to say that, whomever wins the Super Bowl (Ben or Aaron) is #3 or #4?

I wouldn't put Rodgers #3 at all after this year, and even 4 is hard. The main reason being that he'll be doing the same thing that all the guys above him have done (Brady/Manning/Brees/Ben). Is Rodgers better then Ben, whom would have been to 3 Super Bowls and win 2 (one of which he was the reason they won)? I'd say no, unless Ben has a shit game (which would be his 2nd bad Super Bowl game) and Rodgers goes off. Is he better then Brees, who just last year was the best QB in the league and won the Super Bowl? I'd say no there too. And since he clearly isn't passing Brady/Manning (consensus 1/2), then I'd not be able to put him in the top 3.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

Michael Vick fell apart as the season went on. You can chalk it up to gameplanning becoming better, the season being long enough that it finally caught up with him for missing 2 years worth of action, or the natural Vick coming out - showing how he played in the past for Atlanta.

Aaron Rodgers is without question a very solid player, but no better than #4-5th on any rankings list. Now, ask again after this time next year and depending on how the Superbowl goes, and following season, and that could change.

One Superbowl run does not make you a great QB, if it did, Jake Delhomme wouldn't be left out of Top 20 lists.

 

[IrishCanadian25]

Honestly, Will, being the #4 or #5 quarterback in a league as stacked with QB's as the NFL is now is nothing for fans of Aaron to be upset with. Brady and Manning are sure fire hall of famers, and Aaron is in just his 3rd year replacing another sure fire hall of famer in Favre. Brees is amazing, Rivers is solid, and Ben is just a winner.

This may be another thread idea in its infancy, but I'd put the current top 5 NFL QB's (Brady, Manning, Brees, Rodgers, Roethlisberger) against any top 5 from any period in history.

Hmmm...mid 90's...Favre, Young, Aikman, Marino, Elway. That's a REALLY tough group to beat.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

Honestly, Will, being the #4 or #5 quarterback in a league as stacked with QB's as the NFL is now is nothing for fans of Aaron to be upset with. Brady and Manning are sure fire hall of famers, and Aaron is in just his 3rd year replacing another sure fire hall of famer in Favre. Brees is amazing, Rivers is solid, and Ben is just a winner.

Must everything come off as if I'm against you? I mean, honestly, Irish. I wasn't saying him being #4-5th was a bad thing. Shit, man, if anything I believe Aaron Rodgers is one of the best QB's in the game today and I seem to even recall telling Justin, or someone else, just not that long ago how it sucked that we passed him by in that draft.

Rodgers in the early stages seemed to battle injuries a lot, and it was a worry in the beginning that he could be injury prone; thus far, minus the concussion, he has overcome that thought and proven far more worth than any other QB around.

I admire and respect everything Brady and Manning have done, but quite honestly I'm tired of seeing people ride them like they're the fucking 2nd coming (in football terms). What have either done in the past 2-3 yr's, that the likes of Brees, Ben, or Rodgers hasn't?

I get Brady and Manning have a storied career/legacy, and they are sure-fire Hall of Fame QBs.. but in recent terms, neither has done anything compared to what they've done 3+ years ago.

People ride Brady because of his rings. They say he's clutch, and he carries/leads his team to major wins. Well, for anything thinking Ben hasn't done the same - recall the Superbowl against Arizona. I seem to remember a late 4th Quarter, time expiring drive, in which Ben was the individual who marched his team down field and won them the game.

Now, you wanna know something Ben has done that neither Manning or Brady has? He's beaten the fucking Jets in the post-season, this year. I don't give a shit about some 40+-whatever regular season game Brady had. In the more important meeting, the post-season meeting, Brady did shit.

I'm still not saying Ben is better than Brady as far as stats, or rings, or any of that.. but as far as RECENT.. as far as CURRENT situations are concerned.. Ben trumps both Brady and Manning, because he's still playing for something, and neither one of them could get the job done. Same goes for Rodgers.

This may be another thread idea in its infancy, but I'd put the current top 5 NFL QB's (Brady, Manning, Brees, Rodgers, Roethlisberger) against any top 5 from any period in history.

Hmmm...mid 90's...Favre, Young, Aikman, Marino, Elway. That's a REALLY tough group to beat.

Nice idea, but it can't work.

You can't compare yester-year's All-Stars to today's. Even one's from 2 decades ago. The game has still changed. Back then, they didn't have all the QB-protection rules. Guys like Brady, Manning, they'll trump the numbers simply because the era's are different.

 

[justinsayne]

I'd even go as far to say that the top 6 qbs in the league should be a lock for every person. Manning and Brady are 1 and 2, order not important. Drew Brees is number 3. Then Rodgers, Roethlisberger, and Rivers are 4-6, again order not important for those 3.

I agree with this 100%

Shit, man, if anything I believe Aaron Rodgers is one of the best QB's in the game today and I seem to even recall telling Justin, or someone else, just not that long ago how it sucked that we passed him by in that draft.

I don't remember this at all....unless it was before the games last weekend, when I was trying to do about 30 things while talking to you, I remember very little from convo

Rodgers in the early stages seemed to battle injuries a lot, and it was a worry in the beginning that he could be injury prone;

You mean when he was Favres back-up and played maybe 3 qtrs. worth of total game time a season..., half the time he was coming off the bench with little to no time stretch or warm up

thus far, minus the concussion, he has overcome that thought and proven far more worth than any other QB around.

You can not fault him for his two concussions

I admire and respect everything Brady and Manning have done, but quite honestly I'm tired of seeing people ride them like they're the fucking 2nd coming (in football terms). What have either done in the past 2-3 yr's, that the likes of Brees, Ben, or Rodgers hasn't?

As far as this generation of QB's is concerned, they are the second coming, when you have to QB's that good, and that have pretty much been the focus of their respective teams and both have pretty much made those teams good with talent that wouldn't and in many cases hasn't amounted to shit for any other franchise, they make mediocre players and elevate them, in the process building a SB contender out of pretty much nothing

I get Brady and Manning have a storied career/legacy, and they are sure-fire Hall of Fame QBs.. but in recent terms, neither has done anything compared to what they've done 3+ years ago.

Their career stats come into play in ranking them, and both are still easily the single most important players to their teams, with Brady the Pats are shit this year, same with Manning and the Colts

BTW Manning lead his Colts to the SB last year, and Barady lead his team to 13 wins and a Division title this year

People ride Brady because of his rings. They say he's clutch, and he carries/leads his team to major wins. Well, for anything thinking Ben hasn't done the same - recall the Superbowl against Arizona. I seem to remember a late 4th Quarter, time expiring drive, in which Ben was the individual who marched his team down field and won them the game.

Stats. Brady's are better than Bens, his clutchness, SB wins, and stats are the reason he's in the top two and Ben isn't

Now, you wanna know something Ben has done that neither Manning or Brady has? He's beaten the fucking Jets in the post-season, this year. I don't give a shit about some 40+-whatever regular season game Brady had. In the more important meeting, the post-season meeting, Brady did shit.

How in the fuck is this relevant at all?!?

I'm still not saying Ben is better than Brady as far as stats, or rings, or any of that.. but as far as RECENT.. as far as CURRENT situations are concerned.. Ben trumps both Brady and Manning, because he's still playing for something, and neither one of them could get the job done. Same goes for Rodgers.

When the fuck did this become about what they've done just RECENTLY?

 

[IrishCanadian25]

Must everything come off as if I'm against you? I mean, honestly, Irish. I wasn't saying him being #4-5th was a bad thing. Shit, man, if anything I believe Aaron Rodgers is one of the best QB's in the game today and I seem to even recall telling Justin, or someone else, just not that long ago how it sucked that we passed him by in that draft.

Are you fucking high? My post was 100% in agreement with your prior point.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

Are you fucking high? My post was 100% in agreement with your prior point.

Then by all means, my apologies.

 

[Ty Burna]

Manning beat the Jets to go the Super Bowl last year, so that's still relevant since it's only a year removed. Manning had a broken down Colts team that he basically threw on his shoulders and dragged them to the playoffs by himself, and also a big help from their division basically failing miserably when the Colts were vulnerable to lose the division this year. If the Colts stay healthy next year, no doubt they can and likely will be one of the top teams in the AFC again.

Like everyone else said, Brady had Moss for only part of the season, and then after Moss left he basically torched the league with no big time receiver. And that honestly might be Brady at his best, the short passing game and just chewing up yards in small chunks rather than the big play. Think about that, Brady played better without a big name receiver.Take that and with his stats, SB wins and usual clutch self, he's definitely in the top 2 and it shouldn't be close. Manning had one slightly off year where half his team got bit by the injury bug, and how many undersized white receivers did he actually go through this year? And yet that one off year now he shouldn't be considered in the top 2 even though he was the only reason why the Colts made the playoffs? Not likely.

 

[IrishCanadian25]

Then by all means, my apologies.

Accepted. I was simply trying to say that, as a Packers fan, I am perfectly fine with Aaron being #4 or #5 when you consider the company he's in. I could have been clearer, I suppose.