Quarterbackery: Round 2, Heat 3

[Mile High Mania]

I went with the Giants as having the best, specifically most consistent over the last 50 years. Giants have 4 SBs, 2 of them with Eli over Brady. Not a knock on Brady, but if you're looking at the bigger picture... what was NE really before Brady?

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Mile High Mania

I went with the Giants as having the best, specifically most consistent over the last 50 years. Giants have 4 SBs, 2 of them with Eli over Brady. Not a knock on Brady, but if you're looking at the bigger picture... what was NE really before Brady?

You're normally a pretty rational poster, but really? You're awarding the quarterback award to the Giants based on the fact that they won four SBs based almost entirely on awesome defenses.

Neither Phil Simms nor Eli are getting into the Hall of Fame. Actually, for what it's worth, Brady has double the Pro Bowls of the two of them put together (11 to 6), and more everything else in terms of awards (MVP, All Pro, etc.).

And this is football. Eli didn't beat Brady. The Giants DLine dominated the Pats OLine to win those SBs (plus Gronk was hurt in '11).

If you want to vote Miami over Pats, I can see it. Giants? errr....no.

[Mile High Mania]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

You're normally a pretty rational poster, but really? You're awarding the quarterback award to the Giants based on the fact that they won four SBs based almost entirely on awesome defenses.

Neither Phil Simms nor Eli are getting into the Hall of Fame. Actually, for what it's worth, Brady has double the Pro Bowls of the two of them put together (11 to 6), and more everything else in terms of awards (MVP, All Pro, etc.).

And this is football. Eli didn't beat Brady. The Giants DLine dominated the Pats OLine to win those SBs (plus Gronk was hurt in '11).

If you want to vote Miami over Pats, I can see it. Giants? errr....no.

Don't take it too personal, dude. Pro bowls are like American Idol voting now. I gave serious consideration to Miami and Brady had some badass defense help early on too, now. I get it - he's amazing, but this was a 50 year view and an opinion, it's ok.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by Mile High Mania

Don't take it too personal, dude. Pro bowls are like American Idol voting now. I gave serious consideration to Miami and Brady had some badass defense help early on too, now. I get it - he's amazing, but this was a 50 year view and an opinion, it's ok.

Are you implying that Matt Cassel's pro bowl appearance in 2010 was anything other than a well-deserved accolade for a fine season?

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Mile High Mania

Don't take it too personal, dude.

I don't, honest.

Pro bowls are like American Idol voting now. I gave serious consideration to Miami and Brady had some badass defense help early on too, now. I get it - he's amazing, but this was a 50 year view and an opinion, it's ok.

Sure, but I'm trying to point out why your opinion doesn't make much sense.

Just by way of example, the Redskins (3 SB wins, with Joe Theisman (who is famous but not in the Hall of FAme and for good reason), Nobody #1 and Nobody #2) did not have better quarterbacks during the 80s than the Dolphins (zero SB wins, but Dan freaking Marino).

Heck, if you want to look at it from your point of view, the Patriots have GONE to an NFL-record-tying EIGHT SBs during the 50 years, while the Giants have only gone to five. Does that automatically give the Patriots the crown? I don't think so.

If you want to argue that Eli Manning is underrated and hey, those were pretty good five years from TArkenton that nobody remembers now, I would get that. To say "hey, 4 SBs over a longer period of time" makes no sense when the SBs were largely defense-oriented.

I don't hate the Giants any more than the Dolphins, and I'll gladly admit it's a pretty close call whether the Pats or 'phins had better QBs over the 50 years. But I wouldn't argue that the Patriots DEFENSES over 50 years are better than the Giants' DEFENSES, because I dont' think that makes much sense. Neither do I think Giants having better QBs than the Patriots makes much sense.

[Mile High Mania]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

I don't, honest.





Sure, but I'm trying to point out why your opinion doesn't make much sense.

Just by way of example, the Redskins (3 SB wins, with Joe Theisman (who is famous but not in the Hall of FAme and for good reason), Nobody #1 and Nobody #2) did not have better quarterbacks during the 80s than the Dolphins (zero SB wins, but Dan freaking Marino).

Heck, if you want to look at it from your point of view, the Patriots have GONE to an NFL-record-tying EIGHT SBs during the 50 years, while the Giants have only gone to five. Does that automatically give the Patriots the crown? I don't think so.

If you want to argue that Eli Manning is underrated and hey, those were pretty good five years from TArkenton that nobody remembers now, I would get that. To say "hey, 4 SBs over a longer period of time" makes no sense when the SBs were largely defense-oriented.

I don't hate the Giants any more than the Dolphins, and I'll gladly admit it's a pretty close call whether the Pats or 'phins had better QBs over the 50 years. But I wouldn't argue that the Patriots DEFENSES over 50 years are better than the Giants' DEFENSES, because I dont' think that makes much sense. Neither do I think Giants having better QBs than the Patriots makes much sense.

I might have added more if I thought it would develop into this... I wasn't basing it just on that alone. Comparing eras is always tricky, but fun.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Mile High Mania

I might have added more if I thought it would develop into this... I wasn't basing it just on that alone. Comparing eras is always tricky, but fun.

True.

Scoreboard of this poll suggests you're in the vast minority on this, so I'll let the masses decide.