Are Superbowl Wins a Fair Way to Rate QBs?

[Pneumonic]

I see what you are saying but I go the other way. Rings get you in the conversation, then you get thrown out based on other factors.

I suppose your "other factors" is simply my "being equal, or close to equal" qualifier.

[Rico]

 

Rings get you in the conversation, then you get thrown out based on other factors.

Agreed. Like being 9-11 as a starting QB in the post-season with 8 one-and-done's.

[The Rev.Mattb74 ESQ.]

I suppose your "other factors" is simply my "being equal, or close to equal" qualifier.

I understood your statement as you take great qbs then use championships as a way to separate them. I look at it as you don't get into the conversation as great unless you have them, then you sort out the best of that group. That does not mean all those with rings are great quarterbacks, and there are plenty of really good qbs without rings, but all great qbs have them.

 

Agreed. Like being 9-11 as a starting QB in the post-season with 8 one-and-done's.

yes

Edited October 17, 2013 by The Rev.Mattb74 ESQ.

[Boatdrinks]

Funny how different your assessment of Jim Kelly is based on the accuracy of a kick he had nothing to do with.

 

Viniaterri & Vandejagt's performances have more impact on your perception of Manning and Brady than Manning & Brady's performances do.

Yes. It is conveniently forgotten that Brady never led a Super Bowl winning TD drive. Each Pats victory came courtesy of a Vinatieri FG. Testament to an excellent defense. Once that defense was dismantled in order to give TB the big $$$ , 0 SB wins. That should can the Montana comparisons in my book.

[zonabb]

First define "fair" and define "rate." Fair and rate and not mutually exclusive. Any rating is going to result in a ranked list, correct? So the best way if you really wanted, to be empirical, would be to develop an index (like QB rating or QBR) based on variables that everyone considers "fair" (ie, they're relevant... wins matter but height doesn't and isn't a fair varuable so Doug Flutie doesn't lose points!). Then you weight certain variables... Super Bowls are weighted more than regular season wins. It gets to be cumbersome, complex and still arguably subjective. I also think the QB Rating and QBR attempts in some way to do this...

 

All that aside, I look at it this way.... who would I want starting for my team in one Super Bowl in his prime. Or whose career would I take to enjoy for its totality and his team's success and the answer is clear... Tom Brady hands down. Although in my lifetime of being a fan includes some of the greats, Brady is the guy. I believe in cerebral QBs and I'd take Montana second, Manning third. You want to standardize or normal stats to compare guys across eras and schemes... look at TD to INT ratios. A high TD total is meaningless if you're comparing this era to prior eras given the propensity to pass more. But the TD:INT ratio, in my mind, explains decision making and brains and not turning the ball over is certainly a predictive variable for wins. Brady's ratio is 2.69:1. Manning's 2.17:1. Montana's 1.96:1 and Marino's who I think is the most overrated QB of my lifetime was a dismal 1.66:1.

 

Any by the way Montana had some guy name Rice he threw too and Manning some dudes named Harrison and Wayne. Brady's cast of characters is a litany of number 2 QBs.

 

The problem here is, people have so much distain, like I used to for Brady, that they refuse to look at the guy objectively, instead trying to cut him down with stupid arguments like "He didn't kick the SB winning FGs." SO myopic.

[Utah John]

SB wins are an important factor but not the only factor. The most important factors for me are not measurable by considerations that depend on the others on the team or the coaches. To me, it's looking at who's the best student of the game -- who prepares most effectively to attack and defeat the opponent -- who shows leadership and poise under pressure -- who could make all the throws -- who handled the ball most effectively.

 

To me, the top three all-time are Peyton Manning, Montana, and Brady, even though I think Brady has a better arm than Montana did.

 

SB wins can be over-weighted. To say Eli Manning is better than those three, or Troy Aikman, or Drew Brees, is just not realistic. They're all excellent but just not in the same class.