Big Ben's Even Better

[tyke1doe]

i just think ben gets far to much credit winning in pitt when i really dont see him as much more than a bus driver, he has the benifit of a good line, good recievers, and a solid core of rb's to takes the pressure off of him, and when he is asked to pass it seems like its rather high percentage throws.

as for aikman, i think he also had the benifit of being surrounded by very good players, and he may have gotten more credit than hem deserved

So you're saying that Aikman was a bus driver?

 

[koolaid]

yes, a very good one

 

[tyke1doe]

yes, a very good one

Well, then Ben is a very good bus driver.
And Montana and Brady are great bus drivers too.

 

[burmafrd]

Our secondary at that time was not playing all that well. So I would not read a whole lot into Roth at that time. Later in the season he got worse. Last year he finally started to play well- BUT he was still a bus driver. It will be interesting to see if he continues to improve.

 

[big dog cowboy]

If VT doesn't fumble, we probably would have won. I knew it at the time and still believe it today. I have always felt we simply gave that game away.

 

[tyke1doe]

Our secondary at that time was not playing all that well. So I would not read a whole lot into Roth at that time. Later in the season he got worse. Last year he finally started to play well- BUT he was still a bus driver. It will be interesting to see if he continues to improve.

Yawn.

I guess you have to play against the best defense every game of the season, play in the style of offense that supports gaudy stats and never have an off day to be considered great by some posters' estimation.

 

[Fla Cowpoke]

Hmmm,

Super Bowl champion with a QB rating over 90 for his career versus a guy that couldn't even beat out scrubs to back up in the CFL...nice comparison.

Comparing the players wasn't the point. Comparing the way they were developed was. When it came out that the Cowboys were having Carter read one side of the field, there was a rash of posters that suggested that Carter was the only QB ever that was limited in what he was given to do. People would be surprised to know that it is pretty common practice with young QB's.

Still talking about old Crankcase, huh?

I loved that translation! I guess I wish I hadn't mentioned the name...it was just the reference to what they were doing that caught my attention. It was a point I argued many times.

Carter still had the offense dumbed down for him in his third year.

Well, remember it was just his first year with Parcells and Bill. He had to be cleansed of the mistake that was Bruce Coslet. Is it surprising that his best year was when the Cowboys limited his responsibilities? And Parcells must have felt he was improving because the only addition was Testaverde. Coming into the 2004 season there was no doubt they were going with Carter.


I was completely on board with Carter being hosed when he was.

As for the Rothlisberger debate, it is hard to ignore his stats. The wins in particular. Yes, he had a very good team around him. So did Aikman back in the day. So does Brady now. There are a lot of QB's that don't perform even with a great supporting cast. Bradshaw is a joke. He was carried by those Steeler teams and some impossible catches by Swann and Stallworth.

If I was building a team, Big Ben would be in the top five for QB's. He's young, has all the physical tools, and has the intangibles. What is there not to like?