Ranking the QB's

I would have picked Neil Lomax for the Cards, but then again, I didn't get a chance to see Hart play a lot.

If we're going to put Big Ben over Bradshaw, then I'd put Phil Simms over Eli Manning.

I'd still have to go with Dan Fouts over Rivers. I never feared a team led by Rivers.
 
You’re still stuck comparing the numbers of QBs 40+ years ago with todays QBs.

You are still missing.....Rivers had far more great seasons than Fouts had.......using any method ya want.
 
I would have picked Neil Lomax for the Cards, but then again, I didn't get a chance to see Hart play a lot.

If we're going to put Big Ben over Bradshaw, then I'd put Phil Simms over Eli Manning.

I'd still have to go with Dan Fouts over Rivers. I never feared a team led by Rivers.

Lomax only had an 8 year career, Hart played for 19. What Hart did for the Cards simply more important.

Big Ben is right there in the top 10 stat wise, Bradshaw was terrible. Gotta go with....the Steelers won despite Terry Bradshaw.

Eli Mannings career totally dwarfs that of Phil Simms, not even close.

Fouts to few great seasons, Rives over a decade of big numbers.
 
Terry Bradshaw had a career comp % of....51,9.....that is terrible in any era, he had a passer rating of 70.9 another,,,,,ouch! His TD/INT ratio,,,212/210

This really is one of sports strangest situation, a guy that bad in the Hall of Fame because he played on one of the greatest teams ever.

But.....here is the one this is simply mind boggling.

Joe Namath

comp%...50.1
passer rating....65.5
TD/INT ratio,....173/220.....yep, 173/220

And he is a Hall of Famer

Wow!!!!!!!!!!! That is worst than Lynn Swann in and the far superior Cliff Branch wasn't.

Floyd Little a Hall of Famer.....how???
 
Last edited:
You are still missing.....Rivers had far more great seasons than Fouts had.......using any method ya want.

That’s because the league has been a passing league for a majority of Philip Rivers career. Rivers had far better statistical seasons than a lot of Hall of Fame quarterbacks from the 70s and 80s. If you want to continue feel free but I’ve invested enough time on this topic.
 
Terry Bradshaw had a career comp % of....51,9.....that is terrible in any era, he had a passer rating of 70.9 another,,,,,ouch! His TD/INT ratio,,,212/210

This really is one of sports strangest situation, a guy that bad in the Hall of Fame because he played on one of the greatest teams ever.

Bradshaw played some great Super Bowls. He put up 4 TD passes against the Cowboys in their second Super Bowl meeting. All QB stats from the 70s aren’t very good. It’s a different game today.
 
That’s because the league has been a passing league for a majority of Philip Rivers career. Rivers had far better statistical seasons than a lot of Hall of Fame quarterbacks from the 70s and 80s. Does that make Rivers a better QB than them?

Did Rivers face far superior defenses, yes he did. Did Rivers have a better arm than the old times, yes he did. Trust me Rivers was one of the greatest passers we have seen.

Rivers couldn't run a lick so to put up te numbers he did really is amazing. No running around extending plays, not giving guys time to get open, Think about that.
 
Lomax only had an 8 year career, Hart played for 19. What Hart did for the Cards simply more important.

Big Ben is right there in the top 10 stat wise, Bradshaw was terrible. Gotta go with....the Steelers won despite Terry Bradshaw.

Eli Mannings career totally dwarfs that of Phil Simms, not even close.

Fouts to few great seasons, Rives over a decade of big numbers.

I do agree with you. But I think you're taking into account longevity more than I am. I'm just going by who I thought was better.
 
Stop with it's a different game today, yes I know, ok?

You don’t seem to be aware that most QBs stats in the 70s were crap. The rules were very different back then and how the game was played was very different but you don’t seem to get it. I’m sure you would take Philip Rivers over most QBs. I don’t think as highly of Rivers as you do.
 
You don’t seem to be aware that most QBs stats in the 70s were crap. The rules were very different back then and how the game was played was very different but you don’t seem to get that. I’m sure you would take Philip Rivers over most QBs.

Sure I do, that is how I get how bad Bradshaw was vs his peers.

Did you see Rivers in my top 10, ah....nope! Is he the best Charger QB, yep! Seen Tobin Rote, none any better than Philip Rivers.
 
Sure I do, that is how I get how bad Bradshaw was vs his peers.

Did you see Rivers in my top 10, ah....nope! Is he the best Charger QB, yep! Seen Tobin Rote, none any better than Philip Rivers.

Do you think Philip Rivers was better than Terry Bradshaw? By the way you should have Staubach ahead of Aikman but your opinion differs than most.
 
I do agree with you. But I think you're taking into account longevity more than I am. I'm just going by who I thought was better.

Longevity means everything for a QB, how many seasons could your team depend on you a biggie.
 
Pretty close! Cunningham was the better pure athlete while McNabb was the better passer.
I remember when the Eagles drafted McNabb with the #2 pick in the 1st round draft and Eagles fans booed him. They all had some sour look on their faces. Lmao!
 
That always astounds me, no franchise has been around longer than the Bears, they were there on day one 1920.
What’s even better is that there’s some on here that thinking finding a QB is easier than ever. Lol
 
Do you think Philip Rivers was better than Terry Bradshaw? By the way you should have Staubach ahead of Aikman but your opinion differs than most.

Philip Rivers was on a whole other level than Terry Bradshaw not close at all. Can't believe you said that.

You sure most people put Staubach ahead of Aikman?
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
474,271
Messages
14,526,815
Members
24,208
Latest member
CowboysQC
Back
Top