Greatest quarterback you have seen?

[vintagetoppsguy]

For me, it's Manning.

All-time TD pass leader
Single season TD pass leader
Next year: all-time passing yards leader (I think he needs less than 4,000 to pass Favre)

[brookdodger55]

Johnny U for me

[steve B]

Just like baseball, I think it's hard to compare players from one period of time to another especially as the game has changed since I started watching in 72-3. There were a lots of great QBs who won't have the numbers of todays guys because of some changes. Guys that played in the 70's didn't have the protection they have today, and the recievers get more protection too. Teams also were more focused on the running game so some situations where todays teams pass were almost always a run.

From the 70's guys
Staubach, Tarkenton, Bradshaw, Kilmer. (A pretty mobile guy for the time, and took a lot of hits since the sliding thing wasn't part of the game. )

80's- 90's

Elway, Farve, Marino, Montana.

00's

There's so many really great quarterbacks now. I think we down play that aspect of it since it's current.

Manning, Rodgers, Brady, Romo, Rivers, ........There were 11 with 4000yards + and Flacco was just under.

For perspective, Tarkenton was only over 3000 twice, Montana was over 3000 8 times, but only came near 4000 once. Staubach twice, his last two years. Bradshaw twice........Now there's so many over 3000 yards it's almost a requirement.

For best I've seen?
Probably Montana, He was pretty amazing and always seemed to make the right play. I'd have to put Elway a close second. Just so many times pulling the game out when it would seem lost.

More modern? Tough to say, most of todays greats are more products of a system than individually great. Manning would be up there, but had trouble in big games. Brady was amazing when given a fantastic group of recievers, and is still great, but his success is more a result of the teams system where they use a lot of hard to defend passes and a crowd of good but not necessarily great recievers (Montana mostly passed to Rice, Brady had three recievers over 900 yards this year. ) I'm hard pressed to think of a QB now that plays for a team that's ambivalent about a great passing game and puts up good numbers on talent alone. Not that todays guys don't have talent, just that it's used much better by nearly every team.

Steve B

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by steve B

Just like baseball, I think it's hard to compare players from one period of time to another especially as the game has changed since I started watching in 72-3.

Odd, it wasn't hard for me. I based my opinion on what I saw, which is all I was asking. When you see a quarterback dodging defenders and making a throw, it looks pretty much today the way it did in 1972.

[nolemmings]

Unitas.

[bigtrain]

I have been watching NFL (and AFL) football for over 50 years. For me the discussion begins and ends with Joe Montana.

[bbcard1]

I am clearly not so out of touch as to represent him as one of the greatest of all time, but had it not been for injuries he might have been. Chad Pennington had a pop-gun arm but a head for the game like very few others. I watched him from the time he was a skinny freshman who was forced into duty when three quarterbacks in front of him were injured. As a pro, I think him taking the Dolphins to the playoffs after the Jets unceremoniously dumped him for Farve was one of the better FUs in pro football history. Have met him on numerous occasions and he is a thoroughly admirable human being.

[D.P.Johnson]

Montana hands-down...The way he would walk up to the line of scrimmage while analyzing the defense and then call an audible was absolute genius...

[D. Bergin]

No, he never won a Super Bowl, but the best pure QB I ever saw was Marino. Never had a ton to work with, never paired with an elite level RB or running game that I can recall and his best receivers were tiny men. Despite this, he put up some mind boggling numbers in an era when the defensive rules were much different then they are now.

All respect to anybody who says Montana, Brady, Manning, Unitas, Steve Young.........as I can see those arguments to.

[CMIZ5290]

Originally Posted by D.P.Johnson

Montana hands-down...The way he would walk up to the line of scrimmage while analyzing the defense and then call an audible was absolute genius...

Plus 1 big time. 4 for 4 in Super Bowls, I'll take this guy...

[HappyJack41]

Nobody and I mean NOBODY will ever touch Joe Cool. Some say "well yeah but Brady had to do it in the salary cap area!".....who gives a $hit!, Montana actually had to play against REAL defenses who were actually allowed to play defense and weren't neutered so that the offense always has the advantage as it has been in this league for 15 years now.

Brady has never and will never know what it's like to play against defenses allowed to head hunt on him or jam the living crap out of his receivers on every single play all the way up the field. If he did, he wouldn't have 3 Super Bowls with a 4th trophy gift wrapped last night. And he wouldn't have the stats that he's been able to put up while being pampered by this league for his entire career (ESPECIALLY for the last 8 years under Kraft's butt buddy GODell)

[the 'stache]

This is going to be a very difficult discussion, because there is, for me at least, no obvious answer. This will be a long post, for sure, so buckle up, everybody.

For the longest time, I thought Joe Montana was the greatest quarterback ever. He won, and when he won, he played at such a high level, so for somebody to match him on the all-time rankings, I thought they would have to achieve the same level of greatness. But I've really gone back and thought about this a lot within the last year, and I've changed my thinking. It is so important to remember that football is a team game, and now more than ever, I hate people who use championships as one of the first few points of consideration in this kind of discussion. I've heard "Eli Manning is a Hall of Famer because he won two Super Bowls" more times than I care to count in the last few years. Actually, the words "Eli Manning" and "should be in the Hall of Fame" don't belong in the same sentence. But that is another discussion.

Montana will always be one of the guys I have at the very top of the list, because in any possible way you could measure a quarterback, he was great. But we also need to remember the level of talent around him was spectacular. He had a Head Coach in Bill Walsh that revolutionized the game of football with his offensive schemes. He had one of the best two receivers in NFL history in Jerry Rice for most of, but not all his career (and the "not all" his career point is important, and something I'll come back to. It strengthens Montana's standing). And he had all kinds of great players in the locker room with him, year after year, season after season.

Montana really became the full-time starter in 1981. That was the first year he started 16 games, and he won 13 of them. Oh yeah, and the Super Bowl. Not a bad start, huh? He started and played in some other games before 1981, throwing 189 passes between 1979 and 1980. But 1981 is when Joe Montana started down the road to immortality. And, again, he won those 13 games without Jerry Rice. It should be pointed out that the Niner defense was second in the NFL in yards allowed, and points allowed. That's why it's always important to look at the big picture. Yes, Montana was great, completing 63.7% of his passes for 3,565 yards, 19 TD and 12 INT. 19 TD passes doesn't seem like a lot today, but to compare, his 17 TD passes the next season led the NFL. 12 INT in 488 pass attempts is pretty good. Montana never threw a lot of interceptions. He threw 16 in 1990 when he was 14-1 as the starter, also tossing 26 TD passes.

In 1982, Joe was 3-6 as the starter. Bad year for him? No. He had an 88.4 QB rating in 1981. He had an 88.0 QB rating in 1982. The defense fell apart, going from #2 and #2 to #23 in points allowed, and #21 in yards allowed.

Keep that in mind, guys. A quarterback can still have a good year, and the team can still suck.

So, anyway, we all know what Montana did. Perfect in the Super Bowl. He had a 127.8 QB rating in four Super Bowl wins. 11 TD passes, no interceptions. And that is a big part of his reputation. In the biggest games, he played big. Now, here's where it gets interesting. Troy Aikman, generally looked at as being a really good quarterback, had a 111.9 QB rating in his three Super Bowls. He threw 5 TD passes and only 1 pick. And, like Joe, Troy won all his games. The two men combined for 7 Super Bowl wins in 7 games played.

Yet, Montana is viewed as an all-time great, and Aikman, while a Hall of Famer, is a tier below. But why?

Montana had a career interception rate of 2.6%. Aikman's was 3.0%. Not a big difference. But, Montana threw more touchdown passes by far, 5.1% of his passes being touchdowns to 3.5% for Aikman.

But as good as some of Joe's running back's were (Wendell Tyler and Roger Craig were a hell of a 1-2 punch), they weren't Emmitt Smith.

The Cowboys finished drives running. The Niners finished them passing. Craig never had ten rushing touchdowns in any season, even when he ran for 1,500 yards in 1988.

Montana is remembered as this post season assassin. But, while he did win those Super Bowls, he also had some pretty awful games. In 1984, against the Bears in the NFC Championship Game, he had a 60.0 QB Rating. Granted, the Bears were the best defense in the NFL. But Montana struggled. Then he went off in the Super Bowl. The next three games in the post season? 1985, 1986 and 1987, he lost all three. His QB ratings? 65.6 against the Giants in 1985, 34.2 against the Giants in 1986, and 42.0 against the Vikings in 1987.

Montana was human. Or was he? Rice was huge in 1986 and 1987. But they got on the page in the 1988 playoffs. Montana's next 8 playoff starts saw him having QB ratings of 100.0 +.

The point to all this is that it's too easy just to look at a player's stat line, or their career record, and make an argument for or against the player in question. It is always more complex than that.

I think right now, Aaron Rodgers is playing the quarterback position at as level as high as I've ever seen it played. Yet, he's only 6-5 in the playoffs, with one Super Bowl win. As we've already discussed, his defense has been deplorable in each year but 2010. In 2009, his D gave up 51 to Kurt Warner and the Cardinals. In 2011, the Giants put up 37 on the Packer D. In 2012, Colin Kaepernick ran for more yards as a quarterback than any quarterback had in any game in NFL history. The Niners put up 500 + yards on Dom Capers' unit, and scored 45 points. Rodgers and the Packers put up 31 points. If you score 31 points in a playoff game, you expect to win 2 out of 3 games played, if not more. Against a pretty damned good Niners defense, Rodgers completed 67% of his passes for 257 yards, throwing 2 TD and 1 INT. In 2013, the defense held the Niners in check, as did the Niner D against Rodgers. Yet the Niners won 23-20. This year, Rodgers, playing hurt, put his team up by 12 with under 4 minutes to go, and the defense blew it again. After not giving up a single point for 56 minutes, they gave up 21 in the final 4 minutes plus one overtime possession. Yet again, Rodgers did enough hurt, on the road, against one of the best defensive units in NFL history. And when he got the ball back after losing the lead, he led his offense down the field, and got Mason Crosby into field goal range to tie it, and put it into overtime. He never saw the ball again.

Did he have his best game ever? No. He threw two picks, though one of which was a forced throw he never makes if he's healthy. I've watched every game he's ever played, and he doesn't throw the ball like that healthy, usually because he's running around making something happen.

Yet with a 6-5 record in the playoffs, basically a .500 record, he's 3 points behind Bart Starr for the highest QB rating in NFL post season history. He's the highest rated QB in NFL history, a Super Bowl MVP, and about to be a two time NFL MVP.

So, if Joe Montana is not the best QB in NFL history, Rodgers could be, right?

Well, no. I loved Rodgers. He does things I've never seen any other quarterback do. And I'm not the only one saying that. I watch ESPN, and NFL Network, and the former NFL quarterbacks they both have as analysts, Ron Jaworski, Steve Young and others, they gush about Rodgers. His accuracy in the pocket and out. The throws he makes 50 yards down field while running. Multiple times, I have heard these men say Rodgers has reached a level that's never been seen before. Jaworski said that Rodgers has all the throws, and he's so smart, and makes his reads so fast, that he doesn't make mistakes. And he's careful to point out that the low interception rate is not because he's making safe dump off passes. In 2011 and in 2014, Rodgers led the NFL in adjusted net yards per pass attempt, and he's #1 all-time in that metric, too. 7.75 yards every time he throws the ball, best all-time. Rodgers pushes the ball down field more than any other quarterback in the game. Jordy Nelson by himself, since week 1 of the 2011 NFL season, has more 60 yard catches than anybody else in the NFL. Twelve catches of 60 or more yards, 9 of which have gone for scores. Victor Cruz is the only other receiver with ten, and DeSean Jackson, with eight, is the only other receiver with more than six. Rodgers has 20 passes of 60 or more yards, besting Eli Manning (16), Tony Romo (12) and Drew Brees (11) for most in the last four years.

But again, Rodgers is not the best all-time, either. Talk to me when his career is done. He's certainly on his way to Canton, but he has a long way to go yet.

Montana was Iceman in the Super Bowl. Rodgers makes all the plays, and has the highest rating ever.

Neither are the best ever.

Steve Young? After all, before Peyton Manning came along, Young's 96.8 QB rating was #1 all-time.

Nope.

What about Manning? He's put up video game numbers in the regular season. But in the post season? He's been hit and miss. He has a 97.5 QB rating in the regular season, but an 88.5 in the post season. In 2006, when he won the Super Bowl, the Colts won 4 games though Manning didn't have a single game with a 100 + QB rating. In fact, he threw 3 TD passes, and 7 INT in those four games. The Colts won in spite of him. But the Colts wouldn't have gotten to the Super Bowl without him. The Broncos wouldn't have made it there without him last year. Manning is 1-2 in the Super Bowl with an 81.0 rating. 2 TD passes, 3 INT.

Post season aside, is he the best ever? Nope.

Everything considered, it's my opinion that Dan Marino is the greatest quarterback to ever play the game. And my opinion might change in a few months once I've considered this question more. It might be John Elway. That's kind of what I'm trying to say more than anything. I don't know if you can really ever say definitively that one quarterback is the best of all-time.

Do we overlook Bart Starr? "You're kidding, right? Bart Starr?" Well, the guy lost the first NFL Championship Game he ever played in against the Eagles. He fell about 15 yards short of the end zone as he was driving down the field for what would have been the winning score. He just ran out of time. Then, he never lost another post season game again. He was 9-1 in post season, winning 5 NFL Championships. His 104 QB Rating in the post season is the best in NFL history, against the toughest defenses of his day. When he retired, his 57.4% completion percentage was the best by any QB in NFL history. His 81.0 QB Rating at retirement was second all-time to only Otto Graham.

When he retired, he was the best there was. Best completion percentage in an era when football was played by men with blood streaming down their faces. You didn't come out with a broken nose, or a pulled muscle. You played. There were no roughing the passer penalties like today. And Starr retired with a .900 post season winning percentage, and 5 NFL Championships.

He's not the best ever, though he could be in the conversation. Probably in the second tier with guys like Roger Staubach, Joe Namath, Dan Fouts, Kurt Warner, Brian Griese, Ken Stabler, Joe Theisman, Jim Kelly, Terry Bradshaw, and Otto Graham. I put Aaron Rodgers here with Drew Brees. Brees has the numbers, but I think he's padded his stats a lot. Rodgers has the numbers, but needs to play longer yet.

Too many of these guys can legitimately be in the conversation for best of all-time: Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Johnny Unitas, Joe Montana, Dan Marino, Fran Tarkenton, Steve Young, John Elway, Brett Favre.

Too many quarterbacks that I do not know enough about, even with all the reading I have done, are going to unfairly be excluded from consideration because of my age: Y.A. Tittle, Bobby Layne, Sid Luckman, Sammy Baugh, Tobin Rote, Norm Van Brocklin, Darryl Lamonica

Wait a minute, Favre holds like most of the records, right? Well, for now. Isn't he the best all-time?

No. I loved Favre, still do. And he won 3 NFL MVPs. Peyton has 5 now. But as great as Favre could be, he could also make the game killing mistake. He had one of the strongest arms ever. But, unfortunately, he had one of the biggest egos ever, too. In the NFL, that's called the "gunslinger mentality". It's romanticized. I call it careless. Favre would try to force throws instead of throwing it away. He's one of the best ever, but he didn't have the discipline to be the best ever. He was a tough sob, and played every week. His knee could be floating by his ankle, and he's still play. And, with the toughness came the enthusiasm that endeared him to every person in Wisconsin, and a lot of people outside the cheesehead state. When he made a great throw, or won a game, he'd race downfield, headbutt his receiver, pick him up, throw him over his shoulder, and carry him off the field. When his wife was diagnosed with cancer, when his father died, he came out, played as a tribute to them, and he destroyed his opponents. The Raiders game after Big Irv died is now a thing of legend.

But, unfortunately, so is the meltdown playoff game against the Rams when he threw five interceptions. Or was it six?

This is a great discussion, Scott, because it seems like a simple question. But it's really like asking an Irish Catholic man in Boston "which of your eight sons is your favorite."

I think Marino did more with less than any great quarterback. He had Mark Duper and Mark Clayton, and not much else.

In 1983, Marino's first year in the NFL, the Dolphins had the #1 scoring defense in the league. He was 7-2, David Woodley and Don Strock combined to go 5-2. Marino had a 96 QB Rating and was a Pro Bowler. 1984 was his monster season, 5,084 yards passing, 48 TD passes. Miami had the #7 scoring defense, and the Dolphins lost the Super Bowl to Joe Montana and the 49ers. After that season, the defense started to falter. The next five seasons, the Dolphins scoring defense was 12th, 26th, 16th, 24th, 22nd in the NFL. In 1990, they were 4th before falling back to 24th, 11th, 24th and 17th the next four years. And they had no running game to speak of. Marino played between 1983 and 1999, and Miami had a single 1,000 yard running back in all those seasons: Karim Abdul-Jabbar, who had 1,116 yards in 1996. But he had to carry 307 times to get those yards, a meager 3.6 yards per carry. The next year, he had 892 yards, and his per carry average dropped to an anemic 3.2 yards. With a wildly inconsistent, bad most of the time defense, and no running game, Marino was a one man show. He had Mark Clayton and Mark Duper, and that was really it. They combined for 140 TD passes from #13, and 9 1,000 yard seasons. Duper made 3 Pro Bowls, Clayton 5. So, while Marino never won the Super Bowl, his 147-93 record as a starting quarterback is pretty remarkable, as are his 420 TD passes and 61,361 yards passing. With no running game at all, defenses knew Marino was going to pass. He managed six 4,000 yard passing seasons, and two others with 3,970 and 3,997. He had four 30 TD seasons, and thirteen seasons of 20 or more.

Imagine if Marino had played in San Francisco. Or, imagine if he'd had the Cowboys offensive line and Emmitt Smith to keep defenses honest. He'd have scored 40 points a game, then they wouldn't have needed a defense.

So, with that, I will enjoy what everybody else thinks, and maybe some of you will be able to convince me that your choice for best of all-time deserves consideration above Marino.