Bledsoe > Roethlisburger

[StarAmongStars]

You credit Bledsoe for getting to the SB and blame the special teams for losing it. Yet, you blame Manning for not getting to the big game. I don't see you blaming the special teams for missing a game tying field goal or the defense for getting pushed around.

The Patriot's defense and special teams are more responsible for the teams success in the playoffs than Drew's performances. He played a part, but not as much as you make it out to be.

Manning deserves blame for not reaching the SB, but again he is not alone in that blame.

Peyton Manning in the playoffs
59.9% completion percentage
7.6 yards per attempt
15 TDs for a 4.7% per attempt
8 INTs for a 2.5% per attempt which is lower than his regular season
89.1 rating

Drew Bledsoe in the playoffs
51.2% completion percentage
5.3 yards per attempt
6 TDs for a 2.4% per attempt
12 INTs for a 4.8% per attempt
54.9 rating

The only stat that matters is playoff W/L record....

Manning: 3-6
Bledsoe: 4-3 (2 afc championship wins)

Also consider that Mannings 3 wins were against weak defenses (KC & Den) and two of them came at home.

Back to the superbowl....yes the Special teams lost the game because it was a 3 score advantage when Bledsoe started chucking the football downfield and the INT's happened. It was long over, and it's hard for any QB to come back against the a top 5 defense especially in the superbowl.

 

[DragonCowboy]

Homer alert.

Is it not true?

After Bledsoe's game against Jacksonville, how many called for his head?

After Roethlisberger's game against Jacksonville, how many called for his head?

I bet you more called for Bledsoe's head.

I am by no means saying that Bledsoe is better than Roethlisberger, just that it's unfair that there's this double standard.

Roethlisberger > Bledsoe, it's just dumb that when two players have similarly bad games, one gets roasted, while the other isn't.

 

[joseephuss]

The only stat that matters is playoff W/L record....

Manning: 3-6
Bledsoe: 4-3 (2 afc championship wins)

Also consider that Mannings 3 wins were against weak defenses (KC & Den) and two of them came at home.

Back to the superbowl....yes the Special teams lost the game because it was a 3 score advantage when Bledsoe started chucking the football downfield and the INT's happened. It was long over, and it's hard for any QB to come back against the a top 5 defense especially in the superbowl.

There you go giving Bledsoe all the credit for the wins and none for Manning. You do realize that the Pats already had the lead in the game before Drew came in for Brady And how about the special teams scoring two TDs in that game. Or the defense stifling Kordell Stewart. That doesn't seem to matter to you. Only that Drew won the game or as you say led them to victory. The rest of the team gets no credit, but you sure are ready to blame them when Drew is part of the losing team.

The only stat that matters? If that is so, then why discount three wins for Peyton? It only matters if it benefits Bledsoe, right?

Well, why don't you count Drew's one Superbowl win to his record? He did a great job standing on the sideline earning his ring. There is no other QB that could do that as well as him. The defense had nothing to do with it, nor Viniteri kicking the game winning FG. It was all Drew.

I don't blame Bledsoe fully for his losses in the playoffs, but if you look at his performance, he didn't help them win those games. And over the last several years, he hasn't helped his teams make the playoffs. Peyton can be looked at the same way in the playoffs. If you are going to criticize one, you have to do it to the other as well.

 

[Cochese]

The only stat that matters is playoff W/L record....

Manning: 3-6
Bledsoe: 4-3 (2 afc championship wins)

Also consider that Mannings 3 wins were against weak defenses (KC & Den) and two of them came at home.

Back to the superbowl....yes the Special teams lost the game because it was a 3 score advantage when Bledsoe started chucking the football downfield and the INT's happened. It was long over, and it's hard for any QB to come back against the a top 5 defense especially in the superbowl.

Oooh the weak defense argument, really grasping for straws now, right?

The pats were only down 13 at the half, thirteen. Not exactly a blow out, or a cuase to jump out of your game plan for 2 entire quarters.

 

[DragonCowboy]

SAS, give it up, Bledsoe is not that good.

 

[Cochese]

Dont forget about your vaunted AFC championship games, Bledsoe diddnt throw a TD in 96, and only threw one in 01. What a fantastic BIG GAME player...

 

[Chocolate Lab]

IMO all you have to know about Pittsburgh's running game is that IIRC they ran the ball *far* more than anyone else. That alone tells me they have an excellent running game, because many coaches would love to run as much as the Steelers do... But they aren't able to.

Now will that change without Bettis? Probably. I doubt Parker is good enough to really be a full time back.

So Big Ben hasn't had to carry teams... But he's made all the right plays when he needs to. And he's maddeningly hard to get to the ground when you do get some pressure on him, which is huge.

 

[Pats Fan]

I really, and I am not just saying it think that the Packers were a better team in 1996. I really do not. And I do not say things unless I believe them. I believe Bledsoe, if he was a leader, could have brought our team to a victory that year.

In 2001, Brady took over the same team Bledsoe had. The same team folks. I don't remember how many games we lost at the beginning of the season. But I do remember Bledsoe saying over and over again, I take responsibility, it is my fault. The fans, well it is the offensive line. Blah, blah, blah. Now it is 2006, same old song.

Brady came in brought us to the AFC championship game. Brady won that game for us, not Bledsoe. He came in for a short time when Brady went down and held the lead. And when he was better, did BB put Bledsoe in or Brady. We all know the answer to that.

I am not knocking anyone, just stating was is.

As for Brady, he has had a good run. But I have watched him and believe I know how he plays. I think he is flat out bummed this year. Givens, gone. Branch, gone (his friend and the guy he loved to throw to). Adam, gone. McGinnest, gone.

I think reality is hitting home. Football is business. Sometimes not so great for the players. I think we should have kept all four. That's just me. But I think the lose of Branch really hurt Brady.

I don't see that fire, I will not lose in his eyes.

Quote me, Brady will retire soon. I believe that. He comes from a good family, puts everything into the game, probably would like to start a family of his own.

Quote me, Brady will be done by age 31.

Bledsoe will still be playing somewhere, fooling no one at that point.

Just my thoughts.

 

[DragonCowboy]

IMO all you have to know about Pittsburgh's running game is that IIRC they ran the ball *far* more than anyone else. That alone tells me they have an excellent running game, because many coaches would love to run as much as the Steelers do... But they aren't able to.

Now will that change without Bettis? Probably. I doubt Parker is good enough to really be a full time back.

So Big Ben hasn't had to carry teams... But he's made all the right plays when he needs to. And he's maddeningly hard to get to the ground when you do get some pressure on him, which is huge.

My biggest problem with Bledsoe is that he'll make some of the prettiest passes I've ever seen, and then next play, throw the WORST INT I've ever seen.

Roethlisberger wouldn't aggravate me as much if he were our QB. He might not make some of the best passes, but atleast he won't make bone-headed plays.

This year is a test for Roethlisberger, but I think he'll pass.

 

[gbrittain]

Is it not true?

After Bledsoe's game against Jacksonville, how many called for his head?

After Roethlisberger's game against Jacksonville, how many called for his head?

I bet you more called for Bledsoe's head.

I am by no means saying that Bledsoe is better than Roethlisberger, just that it's unfair that there's this double standard.

Roethlisberger > Bledsoe, it's just dumb that when two players have similarly bad games, one gets roasted, while the other isn't.

The reason for this is quite simple actually. Ben R is only in his third year, the year in which most QBs are supposed to start getting into a groove.

His first year he was 13-0 as the starter during the regular season.

His second year he was 9-3 as a starter during the regular season.

His career QB rating to date is 95.1

His playoff record as a starter is 5-1 as a starter.

He is coming off a Super Bowl victory in only his second year in the league.

Pittsburgh has had a top 10 defense 13 years in a row. They had Bettis as their RB since 1996. They had Hines Ward as their WR since 1998.

What they did not have is Ben R. Given his immense accomplishments in only two years and the fact that he is recovering from a near fatal motorcycle accident, an appendectomy, and no preseason playing time will buy you "benefit of the doubt" more than it would if were say Drew Bledsoe.

 

[Pats Fan]

Big Ben is a leader.

You can see it on the field.

That doesn't change a thing about what I feel about the Steelers. But, Big Ben is a leader. Makes up for average talent.

The team responds, and believes. Think that doesn't make a difference!!!!!!

 

[DragonCowboy]

The reason for this is quite simple actually. Ben R is only in his third year, the year in which most QBs are supposed to start getting into a groove.

His first year he was 13-0 as the starter during the regular season.

His second year he was 9-3 as a starter during the regular season.

His career QB rating to date is 95.1

His playoff record as a starter is 5-1 as a starter.

He is coming off a Super Bowl victory in only his second year in the league.

Pittsburgh has had a top 10 defense 13 years in a row. They had Bettis as their RB since 1996. They had Hines Ward as their WR since 1998.

What they did not have is Ben R. Given his immense accomplishments in only two years and the fact that he is recovering from a near fatal motorcycle accident, an appendectomy, and no preseason playing time will buy you "benefit of the doubt" more than it would if were say Drew Bledsoe.

Well I understand what you're saying.

My opinion is, if you're injured, why even play?

That's what I thought about the Bledsoe thing. If he was really injured (not sure if he was), then why doesn't he own up to it and tell the coach? He was being selfish, and he deserves to get a big spike up his butt for it.

Roethlisberger on the other hand, if he was hurt, why would he play? Shouldn't he have just told the coach, "Man, I'm really hurting from all this stuff, so I think it'd be better if I sat out this week.", or something to that effect.

My point is, even when Bledsoe was said to have back pain (or something), he was bashed. People all said, "he's just being selfish, because he didn't wnat to lose his starting job", which I fully agree with. However, when it happens with Roethlisberger, shouldn't he have to shoulder some of the blame also?

 

[gbrittain]

Well I understand what you're saying.

My opinion is, if you're injured, why even play?

That's what I thought about the Bledsoe thing. If he was really injured (not sure if he was), then why doesn't he own up to it and tell the coach? He was being selfish, and he deserves to get a big spike up his butt for it.

Roethlisberger on the other hand, if he was hurt, why would he play? Shouldn't he have just told the coach, "Man, I'm really hurting from all this stuff, so I think it'd be better if I sat out this week.", or something to that effect.

My point is, even when Bledsoe was said to have back pain (or something), he was bashed. People all said, "he's just being selfish, because he didn't wnat to lose his starting job", which I fully agree with. However, when it happens with Roethlisberger, shouldn't he have to shoulder some of the blame also?

I honestly can't speak as to wether Bledsoe or Ben R were hurt before the game. Of course we know that Ben R had recently had surgery, but not sure if it was bothering him during the game (at least until he got nailed and it appeared to hurt badly).

No matter though. I hear what you are saying, but Ben R is naturally going to get more leeway than Bledsoe at this point.

 

[DragonCowboy]

I honestly can't speak as to wether Bledsoe or Ben R were hurt before the game. Of course we know that Ben R had recently had surgery, but not sure if it was bothering him during the game (at least until he got nailed and it appeared to hurt badly).

No matter though. I hear what you are saying, but Ben R is naturally going to get more leeway than Bledsoe at this point.

Yeah, you're right. The one with the more success will get the leeway.

I just think that it's wrong for it to be that way. No matter how good you are, you should be looked upon in the same way. Roethlisberger and Bledsoe had pretty similar nights against Jacksonville.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Jim Plunkett, I believe.

Wrong.


Next...

 

[MichaelWinicki]

You credit Bledsoe for getting to the SB and blame the special teams for losing it. Yet, you blame Manning for not getting to the big game. I don't see you blaming the special teams for missing a game tying field goal or the defense for getting pushed around.

The Patriot's defense and special teams are more responsible for the teams success in the playoffs than Drew's performances. He played a part, but not as much as you make it out to be.

Manning deserves blame for not reaching the SB, but again he is not alone in that blame.

Peyton Manning in the playoffs
59.9% completion percentage
7.6 yards per attempt
15 TDs for a 4.7% per attempt
8 INTs for a 2.5% per attempt which is lower than his regular season
89.1 rating

Drew Bledsoe in the playoffs
51.2% completion percentage
5.3 yards per attempt
6 TDs for a 2.4% per attempt
12 INTs for a 4.8% per attempt
54.9 rating

Nors would say they're identical...

 

[percyhoward]

Kilyin, I'll keep it simple. Bettis and Parker and the Steelers' OL did NOT get 140 yards per game by themselves.

Bettis and Parker and the Steelers' OL got 4.0 yards per carry.

Bettis, Parker, the Steeler's OL, the Steelers' 4th ranked defense, and their
3rd ranked QB all got the Steelers to 140 yards per game.

 

[percyhoward]

IMO all you have to know about Pittsburgh's running game is that IIRC they ran the ball *far* more than anyone else. That alone tells me they have an excellent running game, because many coaches would love to run as much as the Steelers do... But they aren't able to.

What it should tell you is that their running game isn't terrible. IOW, it isn't so bad that it fails despite everything the defense and QB do for it. That doesn't mean it's excellent.

There are reasons they are able to run as much as they do that have absolutely nothing to do with their running game.

In 2003 the Cowboys ran the ball more than 28 other teams.

2003.

 

[Kilyin]

What it should tell you is that their running game isn't terrible. IOW, it isn't so bad that it fails despite everything the defense and QB do for it. That doesn't mean it's excellent.

There are reasons they are able to run as much as they do that have absolutely nothing to do with their running game.

In 2003 the Cowboys ran the ball more than 28 other teams.

2003.

I've never seen someone so stubborn they can't admit that a team had a good running game.

You're so hung up on rushing attempts and YPC. You're like the reporter at the Parcells press conference during preseason, trying to grill him about JJ's low YPC. Oddly enough, Parcells response was basically "Who cares?"

Who gives a shart how many rushing attempts the 2003 Cowboys had? Talk about irrelevance. In 2003 the Cowboys didn't even make the top 10 in rushing. The Steelers were in the top 5 last year. Notice the difference? You probably don't. On that note, I've decided you just don't have the propensity to admit what an idiotic comment you made by calling a top 5 ranked running game "below average", and therefore I won't waste any more time on this conversation.

The state of Ignorance, population: you.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

What it should tell you is that their running game isn't terrible. IOW, it isn't so bad that it fails despite everything the defense and QB do for it. That doesn't mean it's excellent.

There are reasons they are able to run as much as they do that have absolutely nothing to do with their running game.

In 2003 the Cowboys ran the ball more than 28 other teams.

2003.

Right... We had the highest number of rushes, didn't we? Helped by a very good defense that excelled at getting teams off the field.

I was actually thinking of percentage... Didn't Pitt run the ball something like 55% of the time? To me, if you can do that and win the Super Bowl, you have a darn good running game.

Not that I'm trying to get in the middle of your argument. Obviously it all depends on how you define it.