The seven myths as to why Dan Marino never won a Super Bowl

[gtb1943]

In 1966, Jim Taylor rushed for 705 yards and averaged 3.5 yards per carry. Elijah Pitts rushed for 393 yards and averaged 3.4 yards per carry. Paul Hornung rushed for 200 yards and averaged 2.6 yards per carry. You impressed by that???? Not even a rusher with 750 yards and no one close to 4 yards per carry.

Marino had much better than that MANY years at Miami. THANK YOU FOR PROVING MY POINT and blowing the myth that you need a great running attack or great running back to win a Super Bowl. THANK YOU!

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/gnb/1966.htm#all_team_stats

this post just showed how little you know about football history.
Comparing mid 80's to mid 60's football
by the way, Jim Taylor and Paul Hornung were way past their primes by that time
and guess what, that was 14 game schedule which I am sure you did not know

 

[gtb1943]

I pointed out there was only one game Marino had good stats in a post-season loss. Oh yes, you can have good stats and lose. All the other games he was putrid.

your posts are putrid

 

[tunahelper]

Marino had one thousand yard rusher his entire career, and two midgets at WR. And no D.

How do people come up w/ the crapp?

Put a young Marino on the 90's SB teams and it would be all time glory. I am an Aikman fan but please Marino was Michael Jordan of QB's. I mean the guy talks stats and he put 5000 and 48tds in the 80's!!!!!

 

[saturdaysarebetter]

Put a young Marino on the 90's SB teams and it would be all time glory. I am an Aikman fan but please Marino was Michael Jordan of QB's. I mean the guy talks stats and he put 5000 and 48tds in the 80's!!!!!

I've heard it said stats are for losers. Stats are nice. Wins are the best ones. Big game wins even better.

 

[gtb1943]

I've heard it said stats are for losers. Stats are nice. Wins are the best ones. Big game wins even better.

and you are the one glorifying stats over everything else; proving that stats truly are for those without knowledge of the game

 

[Flamma]

I've heard it said stats are for losers. Stats are nice. Wins are the best ones. Big game wins even better.

You're acting as if QBs are like pitchers in MLB. They're not. A QBs success is largely determined by his supporting cast. Marino excelled despite not being on a legit contender. Marino's teams past 1984 just weren't that good. Look at Montana's stats in the 1986 playoff game against the Giants. They were terrible. Was it because Montana laid an egg? Or the Giants, as a team, were that much better.

 

[saturdaysarebetter]

You're acting as if QBs are like pitchers in MLB. They're not. A QBs success is largely determined by his supporting cast. Marino excelled despite not being on a legit contender. Marino's teams past 1984 just weren't that good. Look at Montana's stats in the 1986 playoff game against the Giants. They were terrible. Was it because Montana laid an egg? Or the Giants, as a team, were that much better.

No quarterback can succeed without help this is true, but he can certainly lose a game all by himself. Making poor decisions, throwing into double coverage, throwing interceptions, throwing pick sixes, etc.