PDA

View Full Version : What the Hell is a "System QB" and why is it bad to be one?


Amnorix
03-19-2008, 08:00 AM
I just saw this in another thread (Ryan's Pro Day workout at BC) and it brought to mind why this phrase gets tossed around all the time as some kind of insult. As I understand it, "He's just a system QB" is generally thrown out there to say that a QB looks better than he really is, presumably because the "system" that he is in MAKES him look better. In other words, it's not the QB that is good/great, it's the system.

This entire concept makes NO sense to me. EVERY QB, especially in the NFL, plays in a fantastically complicated offensive "system" that is DESIGNED to make him look good. Coaches and players spend hundreds of hours every week (combined) analyzing weaknesses in the opposing defense and trying to adapt their "system" and plays to take advantage of the weaknesses.

The only way this makes any sense is to suggest that a system QB isn't as good as a "non-system" QB in the sense that when the play breaks down, the QB can't improvise. In other words, he's not a Favre or Elway.

The severe problem with this statement is that there are very, very few Favre's or Elways. If by "system QB" you mean that he's not a highly athletic runner who also has a shotgun, accurate arm and is one of the top 10 QBs in history, then that's no insult at all. It applies to 99.9% of the quarterbacks in NFL history.

I note, also, that if this is what you mean by "system QB", then Marino, Brady, Manning, Fouts, and god-knows how many other awesome QBs who couldn't run well are also "just system QBs" and therefore subject to insult.

I don't get it. Am I missing something?

I honestly would like to see this phrase disappear from NFL-fan lexicon. It's worthless as a statement.

vailpass
03-19-2008, 08:03 AM
Good analysis, I agree with the way you define 'system QB'. I'd add Montana to that list, he was definetely a system QB. Things didn't turn out to bad for that little guy.

Amnorix
03-19-2008, 08:07 AM
I also note that "non-system" guys might be freelancers like Michael Vick, Kordell Stewart and a number of other guys who think that the play call is more of a suggestion than anything else.

And those QBs tend to suck at the NFL level because the defenses are too disciplined for all that freelance stuff to work consistently. SOMETIMES it turns out great, but soemtimes it's a disaster, and/or your QB gets blown up.

StcChief
03-19-2008, 08:09 AM
The few great ones are more that "system QBs"

Farve, Elgay, Montana, ....


the rest are just good system QBs. If they adapt and move around in enough systems they can get to the next level maybe.

vailpass
03-19-2008, 08:09 AM
I also note that "non-system" guys might be freelancers like Michael Vick, Kordell Stewart and a number of other guys who think that the play call is more of a suggestion than anything else.

And those QBs tend to suck at the NFL level because the defenses are too disciplined for all that freelance stuff to work consistently. SOMETIMES it turns out great, but soemtimes it's a disaster, and/or your QB gets blown up.

Yep. Another way to say 'system QB' might be 'QB who knows the offense front and back and can run the team accordingly'.
Vick et al don't have what it takes to go outside the system.
If you are going to go off script and improvise you had better be damn good, Marlon Brando good, or you mess the whole scene up.

vailpass
03-19-2008, 08:10 AM
The few great ones are more that "system QBs"

Farve, Elgay, Montana, ....


the rest are just good system QBs. If they adapt and move around in enough systems they can get to the next level maybe.

I respectfully disagree with you about Montana.
Montana was every inch a system QB. If he would have lived outside the play, outside the pocket, where Elway and Favre regularly played little Joe would have been killed. He had neither the arm nor the body for it.

Amnorix
03-19-2008, 08:10 AM
The few great ones are more that "system QBs"

Farve, Elgay, Montana, ....


the rest are just good system QBs. If they adapt and move around in enough systems they can get to the next level maybe.

So Marino, Manning and Brady are "just good system QBs"?

:spock:

Amnorix
03-19-2008, 08:12 AM
Montana was every inch a system QB. If he would have lived outside the play, outside the pocket, where Elway and Favre regularly played little Joe would have been killed. He had neither the arm nor the body for it.


His success was primarily in the West Coast Offense which was patterned on very precise timing.

So unless someone here wants to tell Vailpass and I that Hall of Fame Coach WALSH!! didn't have a very advanced system....

eazyb81
03-19-2008, 08:16 AM
I've always defined system QBs as guys who put up ridiculous stats in a wide-open, pass-happy system but are easily replaceable by other guys that can put up the same stats. Thus, they get undeserved hype based on their stats, and most of the time they underperform in an NFL pro offense.

System QBs that come to mind right now are Hawaii QBs (Colt Brennan, Timmy Chang), Tedford QBs (Kyle Boller, Aaron Rodgers, Joey Harrington, Akili Smith), and Spurrier QBs (Rex Grossman, Danny Wuerffel).

Brock
03-19-2008, 08:21 AM
I've always defined system QBs as guys who put up ridiculous stats in a wide-open, pass-happy system but are easily replaceable by other guys that can put up the same stats. Thus, they get undeserved hype based on their stats, and most of the time they underperform in an NFL pro offense.

System QBs that come to mind right now are Hawaii QBs (Colt Brennan, Timmy Chang), Tedford QBs (Kyle Boller, Aaron Rodgers, Joey Harrington, Akili Smith), and Spurrier QBs (Rex Grossman, Danny Wuerffel).

And Chase Daniel.

Rooster
03-19-2008, 08:25 AM
The few great ones are more that "system QBs"

Farve, Elgay, Montana, ....


the rest are just good system QBs. If they adapt and move around in enough systems they can get to the next level maybe.

Montana was the poster boy for the System QB.

Brock
03-19-2008, 08:26 AM
Montana was the poster boy for the System QB.

Complete horse shit.

Amnorix
03-19-2008, 08:28 AM
I've always defined system QBs as guys who put up ridiculous stats in a wide-open, pass-happy system but are easily replaceable by other guys that can put up the same stats. Thus, they get undeserved hype based on their stats, and most of the time they underperform in an NFL pro offense.

System QBs that come to mind right now are Hawaii QBs (Colt Brennan, Timmy Chang), Tedford QBs (Kyle Boller, Aaron Rodgers, Joey Harrington, Akili Smith), and Spurrier QBs (Rex Grossman, Danny Wuerffel).

This definition would make much more sense to me. College QBs who put up absurd stats based on a run-and-shoot or other wide-open system in the NFL that won't translate well to the NFL.

But by definition, you couldn't use that label on an NFL QB because no NFL team runs such a system. Adn yet I've seen that label applied to Tom Brady nad other NFL QBs.

If your definition was used by everyone, I'd have no problem with it.

beavis
03-19-2008, 08:36 AM
And Chase Daniel.

That's funny.

keg in kc
03-19-2008, 08:43 AM
All great QBs are system QBs. Nobody plays on an island and, in football, nobody can really "take a team on his shoulders." It's a nice sentiment to hear, but the reality is that every star is the product of the team around him, and QBs fit that bill more than anybody else. Success is a combination of a line blocking for him, most often a back providing some kind of threat to keep defenses honest, receivers capable of getting open and then catching the pass when they do, and an offense that takes advantage of his singular strengths while mitigating whatever weaknesses he may have in his game (and they all have weaknesses, make no mistake...). If he doesn't have all of that, any QB is going to fail.

That's why football is such a great game. It's as "team" a contest as you'll find in sports.

ChiefsCountry
03-19-2008, 09:01 AM
A system guy in college football refers to the option, spread, and the Run N Shoot which those 3 do not normally become great QB's in the NFL.

Bowser
03-19-2008, 09:07 AM
That's what always irritated me about Trent Green's detractors, throwing the "system" label on him like it was a bad thing, or some type of weakness of his. I'll take a "system" QB that throws for 4,000 yards and 20+ TD's on a yearly basis over a guy who can "do it all".

Direckshun
03-19-2008, 09:11 AM
I think when they say system QBs, they're talking about how particular colleges rely on the shotgun or unusual formations that you don't see in the NFL, and that these formations will generally be pass-friendly and kind to his numbers, making the prospect look a lot better on paper and in the field than he will in the NFL.

Like, look at Hawaii. They run out of a shotgun every single play, with zero running game. That makes Brennan's numbers great, making him a system QB.

vailpass
03-19-2008, 09:24 AM
Complete horse shit.

I'm interested in hearing why you think Montana was not a system QB.

Brock
03-19-2008, 09:31 AM
I'm interested in hearing why you think Montana was not a system QB.

Montana won many, many games on the strength of his ability. There is a lot more to being a quarterback than how far you can throw a ball.

DTLB58
03-19-2008, 09:37 AM
Complete horse shit.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't that when this phrase (system QB) started? Was with Montana and the Bill Parcels dubbed Bll Walsh ran West coast offense.

beach tribe
03-19-2008, 09:41 AM
Trent Green. Yes, Joe Montana was a west coast system QB.

DTLB58
03-19-2008, 09:42 AM
Montana won many, many games on the strength of his ability. There is a lot more to being a quarterback than how far you can throw a ball.

I agree completely. The thing that Walsh was so great at was taking advantage of the QB's ability, then game planning and putting that together then creating situations to be succesful.

Now, was it all the system? of course not. But he did benifit greatly from it.

Chiefnj2
03-19-2008, 09:45 AM
To me when someone says a college QB is a "systems QB" it is a negative way of saying the coaches built a limited offensive playbook around the QB that didn't require the QB to do all of the things an NFL QB is needed to do. It also tends to inflate a college QB's stats. Often it utilizes a shotgun formation and spread offense (like Brennan and/or Woodson in this years draft or Leftwich from years ago). Those QB's will have a more difficult time in the NFL taking snaps from center and their accuracy may not be as good as what in college because in college they had 4-5 WR's going up against inferior defensive talent.

Brock
03-19-2008, 09:47 AM
David Klinger, Andre Ware, etc. were system quarterbacks. That is why they couldn't cut it in the NFL. You could have put Montana in any system and he would have looked good, because he was good.

beach tribe
03-19-2008, 09:52 AM
That's what always irritated me about Trent Green's detractors, throwing the "system" label on him like it was a bad thing, or some type of weakness of his. I'll take a "system" QB that throws for 4,000 yards and 20+ TD's on a yearly basis over a guy who can "do it all".

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a system QB. As long as he's playing in the right system.

vailpass
03-19-2008, 10:06 AM
Montana won many, many games on the strength of his ability. There is a lot more to being a quarterback than how far you can throw a ball.

You can be a Montana fan and still acknowledge he was a system QB, probably the best system QB to ever play the game.
Do you think Montana would have won as many games as Favre or Elway if he had played on the teams either of those had; teams that required the QB to carry the game in many of their seasons?

BTW, I'm not saying 'system QB' is a negative, I don't think it is at all. I consider the term to mean the QB has mastered the offense and runs it at top capacity.

Mr. Laz
03-19-2008, 10:24 AM
it's only bad if you have your QB in the wrong system.

EVERY quarterback should be a system QB for YOUR system.



it's just an excuse for coaches who don't know how to really teach a QB how to play.

ChiefGator
03-19-2008, 10:31 AM
Yep.. that term always angered me. Of course Alex Smith and Tim Tebow are both QB's who made it in Meyer's "system". Maybe some truth to the Smith thing though.

Either way, we should definitely never draft system qb's until we get an actual system.

Mr. Flopnuts
03-19-2008, 10:32 AM
Amnorix, everyone knows that Matt Ryan is wicked awesome. Now clean that sand out of your gina. ;)

Reerun_KC
03-19-2008, 10:38 AM
Either way, we should definitely never draft system qb's until we get an actual system.
Can He hand off consistently?

IF so he is the man for the job...

Rooster
03-19-2008, 10:43 AM
Can He hand off consistently?

IF so he is the man for the job...

Herm needs a QB that can hand off and punt. :)

DTLB58
03-19-2008, 10:58 AM
David Klinger, Andre Ware, etc. were system quarterbacks. That is why they couldn't cut it in the NFL. You could have put Montana in any system and he would have looked good, because he was good.

Yes he was good. But how good would have depended on which system and the talent and coaches around him. Hence, his time in KC.

JakeT
03-19-2008, 01:36 PM
nfl system qb = Steve Bono

NaptownChief
03-19-2008, 01:55 PM
One of my other favorite media topics to yammer about is "so tough to follow a legend..."

They always talk about how tough it is to follow a legend but I largely call BS. Yes there is some higher expectations of play because the fans have just gone through a period of seeing high level of play at that position from a legend. But let me ask you this.....Of all these QB's that failed following a legend, how many of them moved on and really shined? I can't think of any. They failed because they sucked not because they followed a legend. Steve Young followed one of the biggest legends and he succeeded because he was good.

If several QB's that followed legends struggled following the legend but then moved on and really did well then that would help make that argument but the reason most of them struggle is because the team had a legend at the QB position and didn't bother investing a high pick or a lot of free agent money on the position. So they usually have very average to below average QB's as backups that then get pushed into the position upon the departure of the legend.

Amnorix
03-19-2008, 02:13 PM
Amnorix, everyone knows that Matt Ryan is wicked awesome. Now clean that sand out of your gina. ;)


Actually, it's when it's applied to Tom Brady that it really irritates me. I honestly don't care THAT much about BC or Ryan. I'm a casual fan of BC footbal. I didn't go there, but they're the only 1-A program in New England.

But, honestly, I'm a tightass when it comes to langauge, and thsi "system QB" stuff is stupid because (as this thread clearly shows) nobody really agrees on what it means, or to whom it should be applied. The only definition I've seen that makes any sense is when it's applied to a college QB in a wide-open system, which results in stat pumping, and yet I've seen the label slapped on MANY NFL QBs, which makes no sense at all.

I honestly think it's just a stupid term.

mlyonsd
03-19-2008, 02:17 PM
...Coaches and players spend hundreds of hours every week (combined) analyzing weaknesses in the opposing defense and trying to adapt their "system" and plays to take advantage of the weaknesses.

Somebody should make Herm aware of this.

Taco John
03-19-2008, 02:33 PM
A system QB is a guy with no intangibles. If the system breaks down, he is worthless. The offense is only as good as he is, and he is only as good as the weakest link in the system.

Brian Griese is a good example of a system QB.

vailpass
03-19-2008, 02:52 PM
A system QB is a guy with no intangibles. If the system breaks down, he is worthless. The offense is only as good as he is, and he is only as good as the weakest link in the system.

Brian Griese is a good example of a system QB.

Your point is well taken but is there any way you could avoid mentioning that name again?:cuss:

Valiant
03-19-2008, 02:55 PM
I've always defined system QBs as guys who put up ridiculous stats in a wide-open, pass-happy system but are easily replaceable by other guys that can put up the same stats. Thus, they get undeserved hype based on their stats, and most of the time they underperform in an NFL pro offense.

System QBs that come to mind right now are Hawaii QBs (Colt Brennan, Timmy Chang), Tedford QBs (Kyle Boller, Aaron Rodgers, Joey Harrington, Akili Smith), and Spurrier QBs (Rex Grossman, Danny Wuerffel).

If thats the case.. EVERY QB that is surrounded with a Great Line or Great WR's is a system QB in the NFL.. (system QB's can be great, but they are still in a system to make them look that way..)

I agree on the college level of system QB's, kind of like MU now..

Amnorix
03-19-2008, 03:02 PM
A system QB is a guy with no intangibles. If the system breaks down, he is worthless. The offense is only as good as he is, and he is only as good as the weakest link in the system.

Brian Griese is a good example of a system QB.

Makes no sense to me. What intangibles are you talking about other than being fleet of foot? And being fleet of foot is quite TANGIBLE in my mind.

What intangible is there? Improvisional ability? WTF is that?

Tribal Warfare
03-19-2008, 03:03 PM
System's QB has to be put in the right situation right offense, and sufficient talent. For anyone to be considered a top 5 QB they'd have to an all-round stud with no weakness what so ever I mean he has to have accuracy, a strong arm, leadership intangibles, ability to run and scramble like an RB ect.. Someone who can take a team on their back to the SB on their sheer talent alone like John Elway.

Amnorix
03-19-2008, 03:03 PM
If thats the case.. EVERY QB that is surrounded with a Great Line or Great WR's is a system QB in the NFL.. (system QB's can be great, but they are still in a system to make them look that way..)

I agree on the college level of system QB's, kind of like MU now..


IMHO there's no such thing as a "system QB" in the NFL. It's a meaningless phrase. Without a good system, no QB in the NFL is any good.

Amnorix
03-19-2008, 03:04 PM
System's QB has to be put in the right situation right offense, and sufficient talent. For anyone to be considered a top 5 QB they'd have to an all-round stud with no weakness what so ever I mean he has to have accuracy, a strong arm, leadership intangibles, ability to run and scramble like an RB ect.. Someone who can take a team on their back to the SB on their sheer talent alone like John Elway.


This also makes no sense. What doess "System QB" have to do with being a top 5 QB? If you're not a top 5 QB all-time you're automatically a "system QB"?

Tribal Warfare
03-19-2008, 03:07 PM
This also makes no sense. What doess "System QB" have to do with being a top 5 QB? If you're not a top 5 QB all-time you're automatically a "system QB"?


Look at the top 5 of all-time the onl yone that wasn't in the right situation and that was John Elway that man had shit around him including coaches for most of his career that man literally took his teams on his back to the SB when he was young.

Amnorix
03-19-2008, 03:09 PM
Look at the top 5 of all-time the onlyone that wasn't in the right situation was John Elway that man had shit around him including coaches for most of his career that man literally took his teams on his back to the SB when he was young.

So....in your mind a System QB is any QB not named what -- Montana, Elway, Unitas, Favre, Marino and Manning (or Brady), or some combination like that.

What's the point of having a specific phrase that means "not among the top 5 NFL QBs in history"?

And, to push it further -- in your mind Michael Vick was a "system QB" I guess.

I don't get it.

Tribal Warfare
03-19-2008, 03:13 PM
.

I don't get it.



Precisely, 98% being successful in the NFL is being in right situation at the right time, and John Elway for top 5 picks concerning talent is the benchmark and anything less is asking for trouble.

alanm
03-19-2008, 06:04 PM
I've always defined system QBs as guys who put up ridiculous stats in a wide-open, pass-happy system but are easily replaceable by other guys that can put up the same stats. Thus, they get undeserved hype based on their stats, and most of the time they underperform in an NFL pro offense.

System QBs that come to mind right now are Hawaii QBs (Colt Brennan, Timmy Chang), Tedford QBs (Kyle Boller, Aaron Rodgers, Joey Harrington, Akili Smith), and Spurrier QBs (Rex Grossman, Danny Wuerffel).
You may also add any QB who's played at Texas Tech.

the Talking Can
03-19-2008, 06:13 PM
Brock is on target.

People use "system QB" to mean that a QB's talent can only be exploited by one particular system.

Great QBs can generally be imagined to succeed in any system, or when systems break down.

And anyone who thinks that Montana could only thrive in a west coast system....well, ditto brock again: "horse shit"

that's as dumb as gochiefs claiming that Chris Carter couldn't separate from CBs....

Tribal Warfare
03-19-2008, 06:30 PM
Brock is on target.

People use "system QB" to mean that a QB's talent can only be exploited by one particular system.

Great QBs can generally be imagined to succeed in any system, or when systems break down.

And anyone who thinks that Montana could only thrive in a west coast system....well, ditto brock again: "horse shit"

that's as dumb as gochiefs claiming that Chris Carter couldn't separate from CBs....

back to the point of the arguement unless one is talking about an all-world talent like John Elway which it doesn't matter what situation he's in then I'd pass on the guy who has to be in the right situation and right system. Ryan can be good, but he'll need help

vailpass
03-19-2008, 06:33 PM
Brock is on target.

People use "system QB" to mean that a QB's talent can only be exploited by one particular system.

Great QBs can generally be imagined to succeed in any system, or when systems break down.

And anyone who thinks that Montana could only thrive in a west coast system....well, ditto brock again: "horse shit"

that's as dumb as gochiefs claiming that Chris Carter couldn't separate from CBs....

So you feel that Montana would have taken the same Denver teams to the SB that Elway did?

the Talking Can
03-19-2008, 06:46 PM
So you feel that Montana would have taken the same Denver teams to the SB that Elway did?

yes, Montana would have still been a great QB if he played for Shanahan instead of Walsh...

anyone who doesn't think so is embarrassingly dumb...

Mr. Laz
03-19-2008, 06:49 PM
So you feel that Montana would have taken the same Denver teams to the SB that Elway did?
no .... but they wouldn't of built the team the same if it was montana instead of Elway.


just like most other nfl players need to be used in schemes that fit their talents.

Iowanian
03-19-2008, 06:55 PM
Kliff Kingsberry put up huge numbers in Texas Tech's System....couldn't hack it.

Spread the defense out with 4-5 quick wrs and throw slants and fly patterns.....big numbers, but they often can't make the nfl throws.....the 15 yard outs across the field etc.

beach tribe
03-19-2008, 07:02 PM
So you feel that Montana would have taken the same Denver teams to the SB that Elway did?

Probably would have won more.

Bearcat
03-19-2008, 07:31 PM
IMHO there's no such thing as a "system QB" in the NFL. It's a meaningless phrase. Without a good system, no QB in the NFL is any good.

I don't think of a system QB as worthless outside of a system, like others... I think of it when looking at stats and wondering "is this guy that good or could anyone throw for 4000 yards in that offense?"

I think it's possible to have a system QB in the NFL, it's just that the systems are so close to being the same, NFL teams don't waste the time on them unless they are a Vick-like athlete or they're desperate.

Enter Kurt Warner (uh, the desperate part). He would have been a backup for a while and mediocre at best in the NFL if the Rams weren't desperate and he didn't happen to step into Martz's system. It wasn't the quarterback, it was the system. Anyone can throw for 4000 yards in the system, and Kurt Warner hasn't done a whole lot outside of it.

KCTitus
03-19-2008, 07:38 PM
Brock is on target.

People use "system QB" to mean that a QB's talent can only be exploited by one particular system.

Great QBs can generally be imagined to succeed in any system, or when systems break down.

And anyone who thinks that Montana could only thrive in a west coast system....well, ditto brock again: "horse shit"

that's as dumb as gochiefs claiming that Chris Carter couldn't separate from CBs....

I would agree somewhat...Montana succeeded with the Chiefs despite Marty. That's the sign of a great QB.

Green was always said to be a system QB...not so great with Wash, but good with KC. A system could also be a QB behind a great line and helped by a super RB.

vailpass
03-19-2008, 08:40 PM
Probably would have won more.

ROFLROFLROFLROFL
Stop dude,you're killing me. Little Joe wouldn't have lasted 2 seasons.
You either have no idea what the Elway years pre-Shanny looked like or are just being silly.

vailpass
03-19-2008, 08:41 PM
yes, Montana would have still been a great QB if he played for Shanahan instead of Walsh...

anyone who doesn't think so is embarrassingly dumb...

I wasn't talking about the Shanny teams. Are you familiar with the teams Elway carried to the SB pre-Shanny?

milkman
03-19-2008, 10:19 PM
I wasn't talking about the Shanny teams. Are you familiar with the teams Elway carried to the SB pre-Shanny?

John Elway brought an unmatched ability to improvise and carried some pretty mediocre teams to the SB.

He also overcame handcuffing by Dan Reeves.

Still, Montana brought that leadership and quiet confidence.

I don't know that he could have taken the Donks to those 3 pre-rat SBs, but I wouldn't bet against him.

the Talking Can
03-19-2008, 10:32 PM
I wasn't talking about the Shanny teams. Are you familiar with the teams Elway carried to the SB pre-Shanny?

sure....and your point that Montana would only be a great QB in San Fran remains stupid....

Mile High Mania
03-19-2008, 10:37 PM
The deal is this... as originally stated, guys like Elway and Favre are rare and you should cherish them while they're playing.

Chiefs_5627
03-19-2008, 10:44 PM
So you feel that Montana would have taken the same Denver teams to the SB that Elway did?

That could be spun around and asked back, could Elway have taken Joes teams to the big one?

Tribal Warfare
03-19-2008, 10:49 PM
That could be spun around and asked back, could Elway have taken Joes teams to the big one?

uuuh, yeah

Mile High Mania
03-19-2008, 10:51 PM
That could be spun around and asked back, could Elway have taken Joes teams to the big one?

I don't why he couldn't... those teams were more talented at WR/TE/RB/DEF.

Chiefs_5627
03-19-2008, 10:52 PM
uuuh, yeah

Uuuuh no. All 4(?), John couldve stepped right in and hit all those precision passes? Doubt that, Joe probably couldnt have done what Elway did with his teams. They each did it their own way.

Mile High Mania
03-19-2008, 10:57 PM
Uuuuh no. All 4(?), John couldve stepped right in and hit all those precision passes? Doubt that, Joe probably couldnt have done what Elway did with his teams. They each did it their own way.


Hmmm... John was a gun slinger, but that doesn't mean he wasn't precise.

Chiefs_5627
03-19-2008, 10:59 PM
Hmmm... John was a gun slinger, but that doesn't mean he wasn't precise.

You'd put him in the same category as Joe in that regard?

Mile High Mania
03-19-2008, 11:01 PM
You'd put him in the same category as Joe in that regard?


They were both great... if I were building a team, I'd take John over Joe for all the other things Elway brought to the game.

Chiefs_5627
03-19-2008, 11:06 PM
They were both great... if I were building a team, I'd take John over Joe for all the other things Elway brought to the game.

Agreed they were both something special i just cant commit to say "he couldve done this with that team" or whatever because 1. debates could go on forever :) 2. nobody really knows until they saw it happen. Maybe Joe wouldnt have been able to be the gunslinger John was with the Donks and maybe John couldnt have handled to finesse nature of that offense and turned into a turn over machine. Ya never know. My 2.

Mile High Mania
03-19-2008, 11:07 PM
Seriously... Montana took over a KC team that had 20 wins the previous 2 seasons and won exactly 20 in his 2 seasons. Hell, Bono followed Joe and had 22 wins in 2 seasons.

Steve Bono > Joe Montana

(sarcasm) :-)

Chiefs_5627
03-19-2008, 11:10 PM
Seriously... Montana took over a KC team that had 20 wins the previous 2 seasons and won exactly 20 in his 2 seasons. Hell, Bono followed Joe and had 22 wins in 2 seasons.

Steve Bono > Joe Montana

(sarcasm) :-)


Both were a combine 147 y/o when they played for KC. :)

Mile High Mania
03-19-2008, 11:12 PM
Agreed they were both something special i just cant commit to say "he couldve done this with that team" or whatever because 1. debates could go on forever :) 2. nobody really knows until they saw it happen. Maybe Joe wouldnt have been able to be the gunslinger John was with the Donks and maybe John couldnt have handled to finesse nature of that offense and turned into a turn over machine. Ya never know. My 2.

True. But, we did see what Joe did when he took over KC with what I think is fair to say... less talent than what he had in SF. Granted, he was older. Then, Shanahan changed the dynamics around Elway and they won a ton of games and 2 titles.

It's splitting hairs... there are QBs you debate (Aikman, Bradshaw, Namath, etc) and you can really have fun. Others, like Elway and Montana... well, you should just agree they're 2 of the best ever and few others can be mentioned in the same breath.

Mile High Mania
03-19-2008, 11:14 PM
Oh and look at that... surpassed the 20k posts mark.

(and it was a post about Elway, how fitting)

Chiefs_5627
03-19-2008, 11:16 PM
True. But, we did see what Joe did when he took over KC with what I think is fair to say... less talent than what he had in SF. Granted, he was older. Then, Shanahan changed the dynamics around Elway and they won a ton of games and 2 titles.

It's splitting hairs... there are QBs you debate (Aikman, Bradshaw, Namath, etc) and you can really have fun. Others, like Elway and Montana... well, you should just agree they're 2 of the best ever and few others can be mentioned in the same breath.


Joe did lead us to the Champ game his first year after getting his elbow put back together but i get what your saying. Your last sentence says it all, i wouldnt bet against either.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-19-2008, 11:43 PM
You can be a Montana fan and still acknowledge he was a system QB, probably the best system QB to ever play the game.
Do you think Montana would have won as many games as Favre or Elway if he had played on the teams either of those had; teams that required the QB to carry the game in many of their seasons?

BTW, I'm not saying 'system QB' is a negative, I don't think it is at all. I consider the term to mean the QB has mastered the offense and runs it at top capacity.

Does your dumbass realize that Favre spent every year of his starting career as a West Coast QB??

You dipf*cks act like Montana had a noodle arm--he actually had good arm strength, and was laser accurate. He could have played in any system--Coryell, WCO, Herm Ball, and won.

People also forget that he was a hell of an athlete. He ran for a lot of yards early in his career and he was very, very mobile.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-19-2008, 11:47 PM
Look at the top 5 of all-time the onl yone that wasn't in the right situation and that was John Elway that man had shit around him including coaches for most of his career that man literally took his teams on his back to the SB when he was young.

It was a hell of an accomplishment, but the AFC from the mid 80's to the mid 90's was probably the weakest conference in the history of professional football. They didn't just lose Super Bowls, they got massacred (with the exception of the Bengals and the first Bills team).

That's like praising LeBron for taking the Cavs to the finals in the East when Tim Duncan is going through hell and back (albeit with more talent), coming out of the West, and still stomping a mudhole when he gets to the championship game.

DenverChief
03-19-2008, 11:52 PM
David Klinger, Andre Ware, etc. were system quarterbacks. That is why they couldn't cut it in the NFL. You could have put Montana in any system and he would have looked good, because he was good.

Montana would not have survived a Run-N-Shoot offense

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-19-2008, 11:56 PM
Montana would not have survived a Run-N-Shoot offense

Who gives a rat f*ck? That was an awful system that flourished for about 4 years, then burned out faster than Milli Vanilli.

That's like saying that Barry Sanders wasn't an all-around great back because he wasn't designed to run in the Bill Cowher pound-me-in-the-ass 71 times a game offense.

Tribal Warfare
03-20-2008, 12:18 AM
Uuuuh no. All 4(?), John couldve stepped right in and hit all those precision passes? Doubt that, Joe probably couldnt have done what Elway did with his teams. They each did it their own way.



obviously you don't remember how good John Elway was, the guy was an absolute stud. He threw ball very accurately too

DenverChief
03-20-2008, 12:31 AM
Who gives a rat f*ck? That was an awful system that flourished for about 4 years, then burned out faster than Milli Vanilli.

That's like saying that Barry Sanders wasn't an all-around great back because he wasn't designed to run in the Bill Cowher pound-me-in-the-ass 71 times a game offense.

no it is not...it is like saying the Sanders wouldn't have been the back he was if he was thrust into the Bill Cowher pound-me-in-the-ass 71 times a game offense.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-20-2008, 12:42 AM
no it is not...it is like saying the Sanders wouldn't have been the back he was if he was thrust into the Bill Cowher pound-me-in-the-ass 71 times a game offense.

The Run N' Shoot was proven to be an illegitimate system. It's not a viable test of a QB's skills.

Montana also wouldn't have prospered had they run the swinging gate offense. BFD.

DenverChief
03-20-2008, 12:47 AM
The Run N' Shoot was proven to be an illegitimate system. It's not a viable test of a QB's skills.

Montana also wouldn't have prospered had they run the swinging gate offense. BFD.

uh okay Montana was successful BECAUSE he was a west coast offense QB....if Montana was thrust into a P-A-F al la Steve DeBerg type offense he would not have been as successful ...Christian Okoye would not have been the back he was if he played in a run outside the tackles type offense....

Amnorix
03-20-2008, 05:00 AM
So....back to the basics.

"System QB" means any QB not named Favre, Elway, and maybe Montana.

Great -- what a dumb f**king term. Remind me to blast anyone who ever uses it in that type of context.

The ONLY definition of that term I've seen on here that makes any sense at all is for a college QB who is from a ridiculously wide open system that results in crazy stats for a QB who is doomed to fail in the NFL because that system can't work at the pro level.

DenverChief
03-20-2008, 05:14 AM
So....back to the basics.

"System QB" means any QB not named Favre, Elway, and maybe Montana.

Great -- what a dumb f**king term. Remind me to blast anyone who ever uses it in that type of context.

The ONLY definition of that term I've seen on here that makes any sense at all is for a college QB who is from a ridiculously wide open system that results in crazy stats for a QB who is doomed to fail in the NFL because that system can't work at the pro level.

I think that you are correct in your initial assessment that the majority of QB's are system QB's and will flourish or falter depending on the offense they play in (as well as with just about every position on the football field...I mean Dante Hall would not be a good fit as a #1 WR for a team the relied heavily on its #1 WR to block LB's in the running game) so in essence everyone is a "system" something or other with the few exceptions of truly gifted athletes who can excel in any system

Amnorix
03-20-2008, 05:38 AM
I think that you are correct in your initial assessment that the majority of QB's are system QB's and will flourish or falter depending on the offense they play in (as well as with just about every position on the football field...I mean Dante Hall would not be a good fit as a #1 WR for a team the relied heavily on its #1 WR to block LB's in the running game) so in essence everyone is a "system" something or other with the few exceptions of truly gifted athletes who can excel in any system

Which is why I think the phrase "system QB" is meaningless. It's just a useless phrase when applying it to a NFL QB, especially since it' smeant to be derogatory.

If having a system QB means being stuck with Tom Brady or Peyton Manning, then sign me up for having a system QB.

DenverChief
03-20-2008, 05:46 AM
Which is why I think the phrase "system QB" is meaningless. It's just a useless phrase when applying it to a NFL QB, especially since it' smeant to be derogatory.

If having a system QB means being stuck with Tom Brady or Peyton Manning, then sign me up for having a system QB.


I agree wholeheartedly sir...where do I sign?

vailpass
03-20-2008, 10:41 AM
John Elway brought an unmatched ability to improvise and carried some pretty mediocre teams to the SB.

He also overcame handcuffing by Dan Reeves.

Still, Montana brought that leadership and quiet confidence.

I don't know that he could have taken the Donks to those 3 pre-rat SBs, but I wouldn't bet against him.

Fair enough. My only rebuttal would be that when you have a line that can't hold anyone out and your plays break down regularly it's kinda nice to have a big tough frame and a cannon arm to go with the quiet confidence.

vailpass
03-20-2008, 10:42 AM
That could be spun around and asked back, could Elway have taken Joes teams to the big one?

You're frigging kidding me right? You picture Elway with the weapons Montana had and tell me how many rings he would have won.

chiefscafan
03-20-2008, 10:54 AM
I'm sorry but montana had no arm and was little?


I may not have enough posts to say an opinion but I have to tell this little tidbit.



I lived in topeka , ks and my dad , brother and me would take turns going to the chiefs games with our season tickets.

I saw JOe's first game as a chief.

I was about 17 and me and my dad were at the game and we were watching warm up drills. This drill was the qb would throw an out pattern to the receiver.

My dad turns to me and says "justin do you want to see the difference between a pro bowl qb and a hall of fame qb in the NFL."

of course I said sure.

he says watch Dave Krieg . So krieg goes back and the receiver stutters and catches the ball. he then says now watch Joe.

JOe goes back and the receiver never breaks stride.

joe may have been small by today standards and couldn't throw a 70 yd bomb. But he is by far the most accurate passer I've ever seen.

I'm sorry I would take joe montana over any qb today or any in the last 50 years.

heck thanks to him petterson actually did win some playoff games LOL

chiefscafan
03-20-2008, 11:03 AM
hey bronco fans that are proclaiming how great elway was compared to joe montana remember the monday night game. The look on Elway and the rest of the bronco team's faces when joe won the game in denver with no time left was priceless.

4 superbowls fellas

2 superbowls

enough said and by the way elway had great tallent around him during those losses too. He just couldn't win the superbowl till '97 which I still think the game against us was very shaddy.

vailpass
03-20-2008, 11:35 AM
hey bronco fans that are proclaiming how great elway was compared to joe montana remember the monday night game. The look on Elway and the rest of the bronco team's faces when joe won the game in denver with no time left was priceless.

4 superbowls fellas

2 superbowls

enough said and by the way elway had great tallent around him during those losses too. He just couldn't win the superbowl till '97 which I still think the game against us was very shaddy.

It is probably best you don't post that much, come back when your football knowledge has grown.
It's perfectly okay to be a blind homer (if you really think of Montana as a Chief although KC is just where he came to die) especially on your own board but it doesn't translate well to a factual conversation. Len Dawson was 10x the QB for KC that Montana ever was when he was a Chief.

Mile High Mania
03-20-2008, 11:36 AM
hey bronco fans that are proclaiming how great elway was compared to joe montana remember the monday night game. The look on Elway and the rest of the bronco team's faces when joe won the game in denver with no time left was priceless.

4 superbowls fellas

2 superbowls

enough said and by the way elway had great tallent around him during those losses too. He just couldn't win the superbowl till '97 which I still think the game against us was very shaddy.

You're retarded for a number of reasons...

First off, in every SB game coached by Dan Reeves, the opposing team's QB was the SB MVP. Simms, Williams, Montana, Elway (fitting end)

Elway had good talent, not great in the mid/late 80s. You can't compare the skill players from those teams to what Joe had and say they were equal.

Yes, I remember the Monday night game you referenced... I also remember the Sunday game in Denver the previous season b/t Elway and Montana. I was at the game... Elway won with a 4th quarter comeback that was spectacular.

Again - both players are true greatness, the type of greatness that only a few QBs have achieved.

Elway is still the only QB to start in 5 SBs... yes, he lost 3, but again... not many other QBs could have led those teams to the title game. Elway never had a complete team around him and when you look back at the player comments from those teams ... Reeves never installed a game plan until they arrived at the SB city. Preparation wasn't the greatest and that goes on the coach.

All you have to do is look at Elway's production under Reeves (controlled and lacking skill players) to what he did when Shanahan took over. It's crazy.

Amnorix
03-20-2008, 11:38 AM
You're frigging kidding me right? You picture Elway with the weapons Montana had and tell me how many rings he would have won.


As many as Montana, perhaps, but NO MORE. NFC was awesome back then. And you're not going to convince me that Elway was actually better than Montana. As good, MAYBE, but not better.

vailpass
03-20-2008, 11:46 AM
As many as Montana, perhaps, but NO MORE. NFC was awesome back then. And you're not going to convince me that Elway was actually better than Montana. As good, MAYBE, but not better.

Not saying Elway was better, saying Elway was better suited to win with less talent around him than Montana.

Joe was the master of the West Coast System no question about it. He played that O like a violin; with the talent he had around him it was a work of art.

John had more ability to put a team on his back by creating plays where there were none, making ungodly cross field throws, etc. Each was something to behold.

As to your NFC love, well, what can I say? At least you are man enough to admit your fears :p

We have to find a way to work in some Steve Grogan love; I used to dig watching him play.

Mile High Mania
03-20-2008, 11:48 AM
As many as Montana, perhaps, but NO MORE. NFC was awesome back then. And you're not going to convince me that Elway was actually better than Montana. As good, MAYBE, but not better.

That's the beauty of these debates... nobody knows.

If you were to simply trade QBs b/t Denver and SF during the 80s... would either team be better or worse off? I dunno... I don't see the 49ers dropping in value at all, but I can't say that I see Joe leading the Broncos to 3 out of 4 SBs.

Amnorix
03-20-2008, 11:52 AM
Not saying Elway was better, saying Elway was better suited to win with less talent around him than Montana.

Joe was the master of the West Coast System no question about it. He played that O like a violin; with the talent he had around him it was a work of art.

John had more ability to put a team on his back by creating plays where there were none, making ungodly cross field throws, etc. Each was something to behold.

As to your NFC love, well, what can I say? At least you are man enough to admit your fears :p

We have to find a way to work in some Steve Grogan love; I used to dig watching him play.


Grogs was fun. Tough as nails.

Didn't love the NFC, just recognizing reality. They dominated the whole decade. Skins, Niners, Giants, Bears were in one gruop, and the rest of the NFL was in another.

vailpass
03-20-2008, 11:56 AM
Grogs was fun. Tough as nails.

Didn't love the NFC, just recognizing reality. They dominated the whole decade. Skins, Niners, Giants, Bears were in one gruop, and the rest of the NFL was in another.

Sam Bam Cunningham, Russ Francis, Stanley Morgan....Grogan had some good years.

Yeah, I really liked watching da Bears when they were kicking ass.

banyon
03-20-2008, 11:59 AM
So....back to the basics.

"System QB" means any QB not named Favre, Elway, and maybe Montana.

Great -- what a dumb f**king term. Remind me to blast anyone who ever uses it in that type of context.

The ONLY definition of that term I've seen on here that makes any sense at all is for a college QB who is from a ridiculously wide open system that results in crazy stats for a QB who is doomed to fail in the NFL because that system can't work at the pro level.

I thought the guy who gave the example of the Spurrier QB's was right on. Wuerffel, Grossman, Dean, Doug Johnson.

Basically Spurrier did not trust his QB's to make reads very much. In his genius, he would tell his QB's, "I'm calling the play, you just throw the ball where I'm telling you to". Then he would draw up the play and point out where the QB was supposed to throw when the shifts and patterns had been run. When those QB's got to the league, they weren't used to reading and reacting to Defenses when things broke down.

Mile High Mania
03-20-2008, 12:01 PM
Grogs was fun. Tough as nails.

Didn't love the NFC, just recognizing reality. They dominated the whole decade. Skins, Niners, Giants, Bears were in one gruop, and the rest of the NFL was in another.

There's no denying how dominant the NFC was during that time.

The NFC dominated for 13 years... 1985 (SB XIX) through 1997 (SB XXI)

During those 13 seasons, 7 AFC teams reached the SB and lost:

Bills - 4
Broncos - 3
Patriots - 2
Bengals / Dolphins / Chargers / Steelers -

The Broncos broke that streak when they defeated the Packers. :clap:

Chiefnj2
03-20-2008, 12:03 PM
Which is why I think the phrase "system QB" is meaningless. It's just a useless phrase when applying it to a NFL QB, especially since it' smeant to be derogatory.

If having a system QB means being stuck with Tom Brady or Peyton Manning, then sign me up for having a system QB.

I agree. In the NFL it is meaningless. In the NFL you should be building a system around your franchise QB, or finding a player that fits into your system. It's all about the system in the NFL. You don't want Pennington trying to run the Colts offense and you don't need Manning to run an offense that Herm would like in KC.

Mile High Mania
03-20-2008, 12:03 PM
I thought the guy who gave the example of the Spurrier QB's was right on. Wuerffel, Grossman, Dean, Doug Johnson.

Basically Spurrier did not trust his QB's to make reads very much. In his genius, he would tell his QB's, "I'm calling the play, you just throw the ball where I'm telling you to". Then he would draw up the play and point out where the QB was supposed to throw when the shifts and patterns had been run. When those QB's got to the league, they weren't used to reading and reacting to Defenses when things broke down.

That's what I think of when someone says "System QB".

If a QB can have repeatable success in various offenses, he's not a system guy. Guys like those mentioned above are DEFINITIONS of system QB.

Guys like Aikman... they're not system guys, they're not put a team on their back guys... those are QBs that rock when the talent is amazing (early 90s) and suck when the talent is average (mid/late 90s).

Chiefs_5627
03-20-2008, 02:17 PM
You're frigging kidding me right? You picture Elway with the weapons Montana had and tell me how many rings he would have won.

You talk like Joe had Jerry through all 4 rings...NOPE. He was successful with big old threat Dwight Clark and no name RBs. Try again. Go ahead and tell me how many of his first sb team are household names.


Offense
WR 87 Dwight Clark (8)
LT 78 Lindsey Mason (8)
LG 8 John Ayers (8)
C 56 Fred Quillan (9)
RG 51 Randy Cross (8)
RT 71 Keith Fahnhorst (9
TE 86 Charle Young (8)
WR 88 Freddie Solomon (6)
QB 16 Joe Montana (8)
RB 25 Jeff Moore (4)/
30 Bill Ring (1)
RB 49 Earl Cooper (5)/
30 Bill Ring (2)

Defense
LE 79 Jim Stuckey (7)/
65 Lawrence Pillers (2)
NT 67 Pete Kugler (4)/
75 John Harty (4)/
65 Lawrence Pillers (1)
RE 75 John Harty (3)/
65 Lawrence Pillers (2)/
76 Dwaine Board (1)/
79 Jim Stuckey (1)/
67 Pete Kugler (1)/
72 Jeff Stover (1)
LOLB 59 Willie Harper (5)/
53 Milt McColl (2)
LILB 64 Jack Reynolds (8)
RILB 55 Bob Horn (6)/
57 Dan Bunz (2)/
64 Jack Reynolds (1)
ROLB 58 Keena Turner (9)
LCB 42 Ronnie Lott (9)
RCB 21 Eric Wright (7)
SS 27 Carlton Williamson (8)
FS 22 Dwight Hicks (9)

Tribal Warfare
03-20-2008, 02:23 PM
Which is why I think the phrase "system QB" is meaningless. It's just a useless phrase when applying it to a NFL QB, especially since it' smeant to be derogatory.

If having a system QB means being stuck with Tom Brady or Peyton Manning, then sign me up for having a system QB.



Tom Brady, is a guy who was in the right place at the right time, KC would've destroyed his development

vailpass
03-20-2008, 02:34 PM
You talk like Joe had Jerry through all 4 rings...NOPE. He was successful with big old threat Dwight Clark and no name RBs. Try again. Go ahead and tell me how many of his first sb team are household names.


Offense
WR 87 Dwight Clark (8)
LT 78 Lindsey Mason (8)
LG 8 John Ayers (8)
C 56 Fred Quillan (9)
RG 51 Randy Cross (8)
RT 71 Keith Fahnhorst (9
TE 86 Charle Young (8)
WR 88 Freddie Solomon (6)
QB 16 Joe Montana (8)
RB 25 Jeff Moore (4)/
30 Bill Ring (1)
RB 49 Earl Cooper (5)/
30 Bill Ring (2)

Defense
LE 79 Jim Stuckey (7)/
65 Lawrence Pillers (2)
NT 67 Pete Kugler (4)/
75 John Harty (4)/
65 Lawrence Pillers (1)
RE 75 John Harty (3)/
65 Lawrence Pillers (2)/
76 Dwaine Board (1)/
79 Jim Stuckey (1)/
67 Pete Kugler (1)/
72 Jeff Stover (1)
LOLB 59 Willie Harper (5)/
53 Milt McColl (2)
LILB 64 Jack Reynolds (8)
RILB 55 Bob Horn (6)/
57 Dan Bunz (2)/
64 Jack Reynolds (1)
ROLB 58 Keena Turner (9)
LCB 42 Ronnie Lott (9)
RCB 21 Eric Wright (7)
SS 27 Carlton Williamson (8)
FS 22 Dwight Hicks (9)

That defense was one of the most dominant of the decade and carried the '49ers that year. SF played a ball-control, dink&dunk offense with Clark catching a lot of short balls and Solomon going long every now and again. Montana played his role within the system very well.

Again, Montana was a fine QB for the offense he was in; however he was not the kind of QB (Favre, Elway) who could carry a team on his own.

Why is it so hard to see this? Why do you take it as some sort of insult?

milkman
03-20-2008, 08:19 PM
That defense was one of the most dominant of the decade and carried the '49ers that year. SF played a ball-control, dink&dunk offense with Clark catching a lot of short balls and Solomon going long every now and again. Montana played his role within the system very well.

Again, Montana was a fine QB for the offense he was in; however he was not the kind of QB (Favre, Elway) who could carry a team on his own.

Why is it so hard to see this? Why do you take it as some sort of insult?

Just so you don't misunderstand, and mistake me a Montana homer, I've argued before that it was a mistake, long term, for the Chiefs to make the trade that brought Montana to KC.

That being said, Montana was a different kind of QB than Elway and Favre, but I would argue that his time with the Chiefs actually stands as proof that he could carry a team on his own.

What he borught to the table was an understanding of what the players around him were capable of and raising the level of their play.

He was working with guys like Willie Davis and Keith Cash, and still manged to take that team to the AFC Championship game, and this in spite of the worst playoff coach in NFL history.

Mile High Mania
03-20-2008, 08:37 PM
Just so you don't misunderstand, and mistake me a Montana homer, I've argued before that it was a mistake, long term, for the Chiefs to make the trade that brought Montana to KC.

That being said, Montana was a different kind of QB than Elway and Favre, but I would argue that his time with the Chiefs actually stands as proof that he could carry a team on his own.

What he borught to the table was an understanding of what the players around him were capable of and raising the level of their play.

He was working with guys like Willie Davis and Keith Cash, and still manged to take that team to the AFC Championship game, and this in spite of the worst playoff coach in NFL history.

The did make it to the AFC Title game, so that was improvement... but, he joined a team coming off two 10 win seasons... so, he didn't really carry the team. Know what I mean?

He wasn't taking over a 7 win team...

milkman
03-20-2008, 08:42 PM
The did make it to the AFC Title game, so that was improvement... but, he joined a team coming off two 10 win seasons... so, he didn't really carry the team. Know what I mean?

He wasn't taking over a 7 win team...

I get that.

But, how many playoff games did the Cheifs win without Montana?

the Talking Can
03-20-2008, 08:44 PM
Again, Montana was a fine QB for the offense he was in; however he was not the kind of QB (Favre, Elway) who could carry a team on his own.

Why is it so hard to see this? Why do you take it as some sort of insult?

because it is just so dumb....just so god damned stupid....

Mile High Mania
03-20-2008, 08:52 PM
I get that.

But, how many playoff games did the Chiefs win without Montana?

Or since... (sorry)

milkman
03-20-2008, 08:58 PM
Or since... (sorry)

I'm used to it.

Chiefs_5627
03-21-2008, 12:35 AM
That defense was one of the most dominant of the decade and carried the '49ers that year. SF played a ball-control, dink&dunk offense with Clark catching a lot of short balls and Solomon going long every now and again. Montana played his role within the system very well.

Again, Montana was a fine QB for the offense he was in; however he was not the kind of QB (Favre, Elway) who could carry a team on his own.

Why is it so hard to see this? Why do you take it as some sort of insult?

I just dont get how Montana's achievments could be written over so easily bcuz John was a great QB. You make it sound like anyone could have filled in for Joe and did what he did and to me thats foolish. Nobody knows, maybe neither wouldve turned into shit but acting like you have some divine knowledge of what wouldve happened is silly. Just my 2.

JohnnyV13
03-21-2008, 05:56 PM
I would say a "system qb" is a guy that plays very well within a particular system, but will not thrive outside that system.

Montana is likely the best "system qb" ever. Though I am not sure he really fits the definition because I think Montana would have excelled in ANY short passing system, not just the West Coast Offense.

Elway is the perfect example of a "non-system" qb, because Elway played in an offense that featured his cannon arm early in his career, and then won two Super Bowls in a West Coast system.

Montana NEVER could have played in the Bronco offense that Elway used to take his team to two Super Bowls in the 80's. I do suspect, however, that Montana would have picked short options within that system and still been a good player. But, he never would have been a superstar had a coach tried to play him that way.