Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
*** Pass just off the fingertips of Mark Duper, meanwhile, back in the huddle ***
Marino: "Why the fuck didn't you catch that?, It hit your hands, you should have caught it!"
Duper: "Fuck you, you make all the money, hit me in the numbers!"
True story .....
Rivers is not comparable to Marino. He is the latest incarnation of Dan Fouts and John Hadl. San Diego QBs who put up awesome numbers and couldn't win in the play offs. Big passing numbers come with playing in San Diego. So does failing in the play offs
Rod Carew is not an all time great. He is not even top 20. Singles hitter who got 3000 hits. Since we are talking San Diego, Tony Gwynn was much better than Carew
You really need to get off this san diego trip.Rivers has won some playoff games so whats your point? Your the one that keeps talking about putting up big numbers but cant win the big game so AGAIN,Marino is in the same boat as Rivers is if you are going to keep saying he isnt as good as Rodgers for not winning the superbowl.
and you got to be joking about Carew,he is easily an all time great.maybe not in the top 20 but for sure in the top 30 which is still a great accomplishment..One of the best clutch hitters ever.again you need to get off this san diego trip thing,but since you bring up Gwynn,he wasnt that great a hitter either then according to you since he never made it to the world series. this is really getting tiresome going round and round with you on this.
Rivers is a very good QB. There is one thing holding him back from being an all time great QB....He never led his team to a championship. More than a first baseman who gets five plate appearances a game, A QB touches the ball on every snap. He is the one, fairly or not, who is judged on "winning the big one"
Over time, Rivers may put up numbers comparable to Marino. Maybe win an MVP. But like Marino, he would be considered a very, very good QB, but not an all time great
Marino had better skills than Montana, Staubach, Elway, Bradshaw but never had that huge highlight in a big game to be his signature play. Rivers is in the same boat
Rivers is not comparable to Marino. He is the latest incarnation of Dan Fouts and John Hadl. San Diego QBs who put up awesome numbers and couldn't win in the play offs. Big passing numbers come with playing in San Diego. So does failing in the play offs
Rod Carew is not an all time great. He is not even top 20. Singles hitter who got 3000 hits. Since we are talking San Diego, Tony Gwynn was much better than Carew
You really need to get off this san diego trip.Rivers has won some playoff games so whats your point? Your the one that keeps talking about putting up big numbers but cant win the big game so AGAIN,Marino is in the same boat as Rivers is if you are going to keep saying he isnt as good as Rodgers for not winning the superbowl.
and you got to be joking about Carew,he is easily an all time great.maybe not in the top 20 but for sure in the top 30 which is still a great accomplishment..One of the best clutch hitters ever.again you need to get off this san diego trip thing,but since you bring up Gwynn,he wasnt that great a hitter either then according to you since he never made it to the world series. this is really getting tiresome going round and round with you on this.
Rivers is a very good QB. There is one thing holding him back from being an all time great QB....He never led his team to a championship. More than a first baseman who gets five plate appearances a game, A QB touches the ball on every snap. He is the one, fairly or not, who is judged on "winning the big one"
Over time, Rivers may put up numbers comparable to Marino. Maybe win an MVP. But like Marino, he would be considered a very, very good QB, but not an all time great
Marino had better skills than Montana, Staubach, Elway, Bradshaw but never had that huge highlight in a big game to be his signature play. Rivers is in the same boat
Marino covered up a lot of really shitty reads on account of being the most accurate passer to ever play the game. But make no mistake about it, had he been able to read a defense as well as Montana or Brady, he'd probably have about 5 SB rings.
What is it with the hype of Rivers? He's a good QB-but somehow he gets really overrated (not just on here). I still take Brady, P. Manning, Roethlisberger, Brees, Vick (and I think he's very overrated) and Rodgers over him any day.
Rivers may be the best QB in the NFL right now without a ring, I guess it can be debated-but even if he won a ring, he'd still be at the bottom among current superbowl winning QBs, with only Eli not being as good as him.
I'm not sure who I'd put on my Mt. Rushmore of all time greatest QBs. With quarterbacks, I think there are some intangibles that require your having seen them play, appreciating their situation, and ultimately factoring those intangibles into a group of subjective data that adds or subtracts from the decision.
For example, I don't think Steve Young is worthy of being on my Mt. Rushmore of 4 greatest QBs? Why? He never started until Montana left. He would have likely started for 27 other football teams but the point is; he didn't. Fate!
If you look at passing yards alone, Drew Bledsoe is #8 all time with 44,611 yards. Anybody want to put him in their Top 10 based on that objective data alone?
I would definitely put Montana on there. Along with Marino, Elway, and Brady. Obviously, I think the best active QB is Tom Brady who is just a machine when it comes to performing on the field.
Theres room for more on the mountain for more but if you're going with a top 4 of all time in the last 40 years or so; I think you can't do much better than these gentlemen.
I'm not sure who I'd put on my Mt. Rushmore of all time greatest QBs. With quarterbacks, I think there are some intangibles that require your having seen them play, appreciating their situation, and ultimately factoring those intangibles into a group of subjective data that adds or subtracts from the decision.
For example, I don't think Steve Young is worthy of being on my Mt. Rushmore of 4 greatest QBs? Why? He never started until Montana left. He would have likely started for 27 other football teams but the point is; he didn't. Fate!
If you look at passing yards alone, Drew Bledsoe is #8 all time with 44,611 yards. Anybody want to put him in their Top 10 based on that objective data alone?
I would definitely put Montana on there. Along with Marino, Elway, and Brady. Obviously, I think the best active QB is Tom Brady who is just a machine when it comes to performing on the field.
Theres room for more on the mountain for more but if you're going with a top 4 of all time in the last 40 years or so; I think you can't do much better than these gentlemen.
I would find room for Peyton Manning
If we want to go Old School
1. Johnny Unitas
2. Otto Graham
3. Sammy Baugh
4. Bart Starr
If we want to go Old School
1. Johnny Unitas
2. Otto Graham
3. Sammy Baugh
4. Bart Starr
Can't comment; didn't see any of them really play. As I said earlier, I think when judging a QB, you have to take into account some intangibles that you don't really have to take into account when you're picking the greatest pitchers or basketball players or cornerbacks. Theres leadership for sure but I go more into the era. Joe Montana did his business when the books were more evenly balanced between the offense and defense. Lester Hayes used to do things to receivers that would get you arrested today. I have a slightly more jaundiced view of today's QBs who get all sorts of benefits from the referees. Michael Irvin spent 1/2 the game pushing off of his defenders.
I'm sure that the guys you mentioned above would be licking their chops to get out there today when you can't touch a wide receiver. Can you imagine Kellen Winslow or Ozzie Newsome in today's NFL? They'd be unstoppable!
I'm not sure who I'd put on my Mt. Rushmore of all time greatest QBs. With quarterbacks, I think there are some intangibles that require your having seen them play, appreciating their situation, and ultimately factoring those intangibles into a group of subjective data that adds or subtracts from the decision.
For example, I don't think Steve Young is worthy of being on my Mt. Rushmore of 4 greatest QBs? Why? He never started until Montana left. He would have likely started for 27 other football teams but the point is; he didn't. Fate!
If you look at passing yards alone, Drew Bledsoe is #8 all time with 44,611 yards. Anybody want to put him in their Top 10 based on that objective data alone?
I would definitely put Montana on there. Along with Marino, Elway, and Brady. Obviously, I think the best active QB is Tom Brady who is just a machine when it comes to performing on the field.
Theres room for more on the mountain for more but if you're going with a top 4 of all time in the last 40 years or so; I think you can't do much better than these gentlemen.
I would find room for Peyton Manning
Peyton Manning....wow; I would feel very comfortable with him as my quarterback any day of the week. I think if Mount Rushmore had 5 heads, Peyton's may well be there....but let me ask you this; is he better than Brady? I don't think so--just my personal opinion. If you're not the best QB in the league when you played; I don't think your mug goes up there. Just a subjective choice on my part.
I would find room for Peyton Manning
Peyton Manning....wow; I would feel very comfortable with him as my quarterback any day of the week. I think if Mount Rushmore had 5 heads, Peyton's may well be there....but let me ask you this; is he better than Brady? I don't think so--just my personal opinion. If you're not the best QB in the league when you played; I don't think your mug goes up there. Just a subjective choice on my part.
I think Manning's better than Brady.He's able to adapt and react to plays/games better than Brady. But you certainly can make the argument either way. They're both the top 2 QBs in the game right now-I think it just depends on who you prefer.