Please stop bashing our starting QB

[SultanOfSix]

OK.

Let's let this ride...

You, along with Hos and BP are suggesting that not only is Elway perhaps the most physically gifted QB of all-time (which I may even go along with) but that he's also the most football savvy also?

Wow.


In my book, you're essentially saying that John Elway was the greatest QB of all time.

Before I assault that position let me make sure I'm understanding you-- OK.

LMAO.

And both you and Stautner are (lightly) mocking others for suffering from reading comprehension problems?

My point was simple. I thought I stated it several times, and if not stated explicitly it was obviously implied. There is no way that Elway can be grouped with Bradshaw or Bledsoe on a physical talent level, nor on a "football smarts" level. Period.

He may not be as "football smart" as Marino or Montana - which is debatable, in itself - but he is in no way, shape, or form on the level of Bradshaw or Bledsoe in EITHER category.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Not stars, but not weak links either. Kay was a decent TE too, and one of the strengths was always the Denver O-line.

It's a pretty weak argument to say that Elway got to 3 Super Bowls with no talent around him - as if he were Atlas and propping the entire world on his shoulders.

To be fair I said...." he had inferior WR and RBs on his team for the majority of his career." and that was said as inferior to the other QBs on that list.

But, the bottom line is whether you agree with Micheal Winicki or not, he has some foundation for what he is saying, and a lot (A HELL OF A LOT) of what he has said has been totally twisted and misconstrued.

No more than what you have twisted to infer I said he had NO talent or CRAP.

I happen to think Elway spent much of his career always looking to make the big play, always trying to force the ball downfield even when the plays weren't there to be made. At the end of his career Shanahan came in and installed a West Coast style system and drilled into Elway the way it worked - the idea of smart passes and selective shots downfield rather than trying to do too much and force things.

And I was always talking about his career before Shanny started getting him other players of good to great quality on offense.

I did not even take into consideration of the superior offensive system he was in later in his career.

Look...we can argue all day and all night, but the bottom line is you think Winky is right, I think he is wrong.

 

[gbrittain]

Not stars, but not weak links either. Kay was a decent TE too, and one of the strengths was always the Denver O-line.

It's a pretty weak argument to say that Elway got to 3 Super Bowls with no talent around him - as if he were Atlas and propping the entire world on his shoulders.

BTW, I was going to make the Patriots comparson too - and Brady has a career % of 61.4%.

But, the bottom line is whether you agree with Micheal Winicki or not, he has some foundation for what he is saying, and a lot (A HELL OF A LOT) of what he has said has been totally twisted and misconstrued.

I happen to think Elway spent much of his career always looking to make the big play, always trying to force the ball downfield even when the plays weren't there to be made. At the end of his career Shanahan came in and installed a West Coast style system and drilled into Elway the way it worked - the idea of smart passes and selective shots downfield rather than trying to do too much and force things.

Clearly I am not knee deep in this debate, and honestly just putting my tippy toe in it is enough for me.

I will say one last thing (Maybe), if Dallas had the equivalent of what Elway had at the offensive skill position players in Bobby Humphrey, Vance Johnson, Ricky Nattiel, and Mark Jackson not a single person on this board would have any hopes of us accomplishing anything this year.

Clearly those players were good enough to help Elway get to the Super Bowl and clearly they were only good enough to assisst Elway in getting blown out of the Super Bowl.

No free ride for Elway on this, but clearly the deck was not stacked in his favor.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

LMAO.

And both you and Stautner are (lightly) mocking others for suffering from reading comprehension problems?

My point was simple. I've stated it several times. There is no way that Elway can be grouped with Bradshaw or Bledsoe on a physical talent level, nor on a "football smarts" level. Period.

He may not be as "football smart" as Marino or Montana - which debatable,in itself - but he is in no way, shape, or form on the level of Bradshaw or Bledsoe in EITHER category.

I agree with that. I don't put Elway in Bledsoe/Bradshaw's "class". But he's not at the level of those other guys either IMHO.

Let's call Elway a "Rich Man's Bledsoe".

Or is Bledsoe a "Poor Man's Elway"? :laugh2:

 

[Stautner]

IMO anyone that ever, in almost any way, compares wants to put Bledsoe, Bradshaw and Elway in the same boat...should be laughed at.

Let's see, I'll put all three in the category of being NFL QB's ..... damn, that is laughable.

And lets see, they all were QB's that threw for a lot of yardage ..... jeez, I'm laughing harder.

Ok, lets go on. Bradshaw and Elway are in the same category of multiple SB winners ...... rolling on the floor now.

How about this ...... Bledsoe and Elway are in the same category of QB's that have thrown for over 40,000 yards ...... HYSTERICAL.

Bradshaw and Elway were mobile QB's ...... A RIOT.

All three fall into the category of strong armed QB's ..... DAMN, my sides hurt now!

WOW, YOUR RIGHT! IT IS LAUGHABLE TO PUT THESE GUYS IN ANY CATEGORY TOGETHER.

And you know what, to put them in ANY category together obviously means you think they are EXACTLY the same caliber player ....... RIGHT?

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

I agree with that. I don't put Elway in Bledsoe/Bradshaw's "class". But he's not at the level of those other guys either IMHO.

Let's call Elway a "Rich Man's Bledsoe".

Or is Bledsoe a "Poor Man's Elway"? :laugh2:

Let's not put Bledsoe and Elway in the same sentence.

Let's leave Bledose in the same sentence with Bradshaw.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Clearly I am not knee deep in this debate, and honestly just putting my tippy toe in it is enough for me.

I will say one last thing (Maybe), if Dallas had the equivalent of what Elway had at the offensive skill position players in Bobby Humphrey, Vance Johnson, Ricky Nattiel, and Mark Jackson not a single person on this board would have any hopes of us accomplishing anything this year.

Clearly those players were good enough to help Elway get to the Super Bowl and clearly they were only good enough to assisst Elway in getting blown out of the Super Bowl.

No free ride for Elway on this, but clearly the deck was not stacked in his favor.

I agree with you on the talent around Elway... it was not "pristine".


HOWEVER...


I see Denver getting to those SB's being as much a factor of the overall weakness of the AFC in the 80's (as compared to the NFC) as much as anything else.

The AFC in the 1980's (overall) was not a strong conference.

 

[LaTunaNostra]

Let's call Elway a "Rich Man's Bledsoe".

Well then, that rich man better have more money than Bill Gates.

I prefer Bledsoe is a sane man's Jeff George.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Let's not put Bledsoe and Elway in the same sentence.

Let's leave Bledose in the same sentence with Bradshaw.

I was just funin ya.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Well then, that rich man better have more money than Bill Gates.

I prefer Bledsoe is a sane man's Jeff George.

:laugh1:

Yeah... I could see that.

 

[SultanOfSix]

Let's not put Bledsoe and Elway in the same sentence.

Let's leave Bledose in the same sentence with Bradshaw.

Seriously. At least Elway could scramble, and do it well. Bledsoe can only scramble an egg (maybe).

And he never consistently threw a boneheaded pick, or made a braindead decision.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Let's see, I'll put all three in the category of being NFL QB's ..... damn, that is laughable.

And lets see, they all were QB's that threw for a lot of yardage ..... jeez, I'm laughing harder.

Ok, lets go on. Bradshaw and Elway are in the same category of multiple SB winners ...... rolling on the floor now.

How about this ...... Bledsoe and Elway are in the same category of QB's that have thrown for over 40,000 yards ...... HYSTERICAL.

Bradshaw and Elway were mobile QB's ...... A RIOT.

All three fall into the category of strong armed QB's ..... DAMN, my sides hurt now!

WOW, YOUR RIGHT! IT IS LAUGHABLE TO PUT THESE GUYS IN ANY CATEGORY TOGETHER.

And you know what, to put them in ANY category together obviously means you think they are EXACTLY the same caliber player ....... RIGHT?

That post is laughable.

So let me ask you.

If you could take Bledsoe, Bradshaw or Elway in their prime and put them on this dallas cowboys team who would you take.

If you say anything other than Elway.

You could say bledsoe and I would laugh.

You could say bradshaw and I would laugh and say...remember the oline we have.


Have to head out, not sure when I will get back on.

Can not say this has been fun, as I think QB debates suck...but it has made a dull friday go by quickly.

later.

 

[gbrittain]

I agree with you on the talent around Elway... it was not "pristine".


HOWEVER...


I see Denver getting to those SB's being as much a factor of the overall weakness of the AFC in the 80's (as compared to the NFC) as much as anything else.

The AFC in the 1980's (overall) was not a strong conference.

I agree 100%.

 

[Stautner]

Clearly I am not knee deep in this debate, and honestly just putting my tippy toe in it is enough for me.

I will say one last thing (Maybe), if Dallas had the equivalent of what Elway had at the offensive skill position players in Bobby Humphrey, Vance Johnson, Ricky Nattiel, and Mark Jackson not a single person on this board would have any hopes of us accomplishing anything this year.

Clearly those players were good enough to help Elway get to the Super Bowl and clearly they were only good enough to assisst Elway in getting blown out of the Super Bowl.

No free ride for Elway on this, but clearly the deck was not stacked in his favor.

Yeah, all that offensive firepower surrounding Tom Brady is a different story entirely.

What about our own Roger Staubach in the early 1970's - Other than Bob Hayes there wasn't a star player surrounding him in the bunch, and even Hayes was one dimesnional - not a well rounded WR.

 

[Jack-Reacher]

While I have enjoyed the discussion about Elway and his rightful place in the mention of the all-time greats, I want to answer a post from page 8..bear with me..lol

Mumbles knew there would be some growing pains, but also realized Tom's knowledge of the defensive formations in front of him, the understanding of what one defender shifting meant, his comprehension of the possibilities the shifts gave him as options meant he had an elite QB in Brady. Brady knew where to attack..based on weaknesses or possibilities he saw. He was both a proactive and reactive thinker. He looked to exploit, not 'handle', and exploit in a fraction of a second.

I wont argue the fact that Parcells strength has not been with evaluating QB's, the one fallacy in your argument is that BB had the opportunity to see Brady in action during the regular season. Brady didn't beat out Bledsoe in camp earlier in the year, it was after Bledsoe got hurt that he took over and never looked back. Should Bledsoe get hurt again, or get benched and Romo comes in and lights it up, then I too would be all for Romo being the starter.

I don’t think that Bledsoe is the be all end all, if he was, he never would have been available in the first place. I have the mindset of working with what you know, ie, poor pocket presence, holding the ball too long, slow release etc. Rather than bringing in an unknown. Romo could very well be the next Brady, but the simple fact is we don’t know. Bledsoe while he hasn't been stellar and certainly has his faults has not been horrific either. I know he had two bad games and I am not going to excuse that by saying he was hurt, but he hasn't played as poorly as some make it out though.

OK, we can continue the debate on Elway now....:laugh2:

Jon

 

[Stautner]

That post is laughable.

So let me ask you.

If you could take Bledsoe, Bradshaw or Elway in their prime and put them on this dallas cowboys team who would you take.

If you say anything other than Elway.

You could say bledsoe and I would laugh.

You could say bradshaw and I would laugh and say...remember the oline we have.


Have to head out, not sure when I will get back on.

Can not say this has been fun, as I think QB debates suck...but it has made a dull friday go by quickly.

later.

Of course I would take Elway - hands down.

You still can't get a grasp on the idea that Michael Winicki was only putting QB's into categories, not saying everyone in that category is equal.

Hell, I've repeated that over and over and over and over and over again ......

I could say Michael Vick, Bobby Douglas and Fran Tarkenton were all QB's that relied heavily on mobility, but that doesn't mean I think they are equal QB's. Tarkenton blows the other 2 away.

I've made it VERY clear that I think Elway is better than those guys, and I've made it especially clear that I think Elway became a much better QB late in his career when he matured and became a smarter more efficient passer.

Yet you continue to try and force a bogus point that no one is arguing.

WE ALL AGREE ELWAY WAS BETTER THAN BRADSHAW AND BLEDSOE.

Get it now? It's JUST a category - it was NEVER meant to say all three were equal - we NEVER said all 3 were equal.

 

[Clove]

bledsoe sucks

Nice post.

 

[LaTunaNostra]

I wont argue the fact that Parcells strength has not been with evaluating QB's, the one fallacy in your argument is that BB had the opportunity to see Brady in action during the regular season. Brady didn't beat out Bledsoe in camp earlier in the year, it was after Bledsoe got hurt that he took over and never looked back. Should Bledsoe get hurt again, or get benched and Romo comes in and lights it up, then I too would be all for Romo being the starter.

True enough, Jon.

But you know what? Mumbles had a pretty good idea that Tom was something special, and that is why he had moved him up to the second team qb spot, getting rid of Michael Bishop so he could develop Brady. Yes, it took the Bledsoe injury to get Tom on the field, but Mumbles has subsequently hinted Drew's days wre numbered anyway, and that he realized in practice and preseason that Brady could read the field very well.

COULD be just post-mortem self back-slapping, but the bottom line is it was field processing that Belichick saw as Tom's advantage.

How I hope Tony has it too...and that same germ of recognition is festering inside the Big Tuna's gut, even if it's just a suspicion. Only that element could sway the balance this year....Drew's arm, and experience will always trump Tony's 'mobility'..it's got to be something more 'important' than the ability to evade a blitz, imo, for Bill to make a switch.

 

[Stautner]

True enough, Jon.

But you know what? Mumbles had a pretty good idea that Tom was something special, and that is why he had moved him up to the second team qb spot, getting rid of Michael Bishop so he could develop Brady. Yes, it took the Bledsoe injury to get Tom on the field, but Mumbles has subsequently hinted Drew's days wre numbered anyway, and that he realized in practice and preseason that Brady could read the field very well.

COULD be just post-mortem self back-slapping, but the bottom line is it was field processing that Belichick saw as Tom's advantage.

How I hope Tony has it too...and that same germ of recognition is festering inside the Big Tuna's gut, even if it's just a suspicion. Only that element could sway the balance this year....Drew's arm, and experience will always trump Tony's 'mobility'..it's got to be something more 'important' than the ability to evade a blitz, imo, for Bill to make a switch.

Very good post. I personally would like to see Romo play, but mobility alone won't be enough for him to get the chance. Bledsoe's decision making is the key, and Bledsoe will play until Parcells feels he isn't giving us a measurable advantage in that regard.

That time could come soon - the next several weeks will be telling.

As for now, the Houston game put a roadblock in front of the Romo supporters, not because Bledsoe played that well, but because he did what he had to do to win and didn't compromise the game with mistakes. That's all a starter has to do to retain his job.

But the leash is definitly shorter than at the first of the season, and several comments Parcells has made attest to that. Comments like "I don't think that's the answer yet" when responding to a question about switching to Romo. Comments like "Bledsoe is going to have to be more than a bus driver in tougher games". Comments like "Taking care of the ball has to be the priority" in the days following the Eagles game.

I have to believe the possiblity of playing Romo is at least in the back of Parcells mind.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Of course I would take Elway - hands down.

You still can't get a grasp on the idea that Michael Winicki was only putting QB's into categories, not saying everyone in that category is equal.

Hell, I've repeated that over and over and over and over and over again ......

I could say Michael Vick, Bobby Douglas and Fran Tarkenton were all QB's that relied heavily on mobility, but that doesn't mean I think they are equal QB's. Tarkenton blows the other 2 away.

I've made it VERY clear that I think Elway is better than those guys, and I've made it especially clear that I think Elway became a much better QB late in his career when he matured and became a smarter more efficient passer.

Yet you continue to try and force a bogus point that no one is arguing.

WE ALL AGREE ELWAY WAS BETTER THAN BRADSHAW AND BLEDSOE.

Get it now? It's JUST a category - it was NEVER meant to say all three were equal - we NEVER said all 3 were equal.

And what you can't seem to get is I don't think he fits in that category.

Get it now?

I think Elway belongs in the first category.

Not sure why you don't get it.

Sure we all went around in circles spouting this point and that point and saying things over and over but if you want to boil it down to the finest point.

I just don't agree that he belongs in that category.