[CoMoChief]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

They matter, but in the margins. And ultimately, a ton of it is rear-view mirror analysis. Brett Favre is 'a leader' but had he not had Reggie White on his team, we'd look back at him as a dipshit rube gunslinger that frat-boyed the Packers out of a championship or two.

If John Elway doesn't get Terrel Davis in the backfield, he's still a punchline.

We call those guys great leaders in hindsight because they won, but it's a Chicken/egg argument, IMO.

There are a handful of truly great leaders that have come into the league. Montana is among them and perhaps Brady as well. Those guys are outliers and not what you demand in a QB.

I don't think either Manning falls into that category and I'm not convinced Rodgers does either. Those are just excellent QBs with insane talent. What separates Rodgers from Cutler is accuracy, decisionmaking and to a lesser degree, mobility. Oh, and Cutler is revered by his teammates, for what it's worth. Folks in Chicago say that his leadership in that lockerroom is superlative. But sometimes he's just a goddamn lunatic on the field and thats why they don't win.

What kept Marino from a Super Bowl was no running game and no pass rush. Had he had either of those things, he'd have gotten a ring or two and we wouldn't be blitzing him as a shitty leader, just as we don't blitz Elway or Favre.

A complete lack of leadership and character will kill a QB, look at Fatmarcus. But most of them have enough to pass the litmus test question. At that point its talent and decisionmaking - which you can see on the tape.

The panting 'leader' platitudes are for national talking heads that love to analyze in the rearview rather than do their homework ahead of time.

RB's in that Broncos running scheme are/were expendable...they were churning out 1,000 yd backs like it was nothing after TD. Broncos would have been fine and IMO still would have made the SB.