What Career would you guys take as a QB?

[Q_the_man]

A- Marino type career, HOF, all time great stats, records and ZERO Super Bowls

or

B- Decent Career similar to Trent Dilfer, no HOF, no great stats, 12 year starter, couple pro bowls, no records, but win 2 Super Bowls as starting QB

I would love A but would go with B, any thoughts :laugh1:

 

[Super_Kazuya]

A- Marino type career, HOF, all time great stats, records and ZERO Super Bowls

or

B- Decent Career similar to Trent Dilfer, no HOF, no great stats, 12 year starter, couple pro bowls, no records, but win 2 Super Bowls as starting QB

I would love A but would go with B, any thoughts :laugh1:

I guess it depends... back in Marino's day I probably would have gone with A because at the end of the day when you are retired the money you could have earned is probably the most important thing. Especially considering the paltry sums they played for (relatively), the unsafe conditions and the difference between what a Marino would make and the Dilfer is probably pretty significant. It's easy for someone like Brady to say he just wants to win when he's earned more than 100 million already. Marino certainly isn't poor, but I imagine the gap between him and the Dilfers of his day is significant.

Of course now, it's pretty much a no-brainer to pick B, since the modern obsession with the quarterback being the only player worth a damn on the whole roster combined with dumb concepts like QB "wins" has a modern day Trent Dilfer as the highest paid player in the league.

 

[Ring Leader]

A- Marino type career, HOF, all time great stats, records and ZERO Super Bowls

or

B- Decent Career similar to Trent Dilfer, no HOF, no great stats, 12 year starter, couple pro bowls, no records, but win 2 Super Bowls as starting QB

I would love A but would go with B, any thoughts :laugh1:

Is this a trick question? When did Dilfer win the additional ring?

 

[tecolote]

I'd take the 6 years 120 million career.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

Is this a trick question? When did Dilfer win the additional ring?

I think he's just saying those numbers as an example, not for exactly what Dilfer did.

Basically he wants to know if you'd rather be a QB like Dilfer and win a couple rings or be an all time great like Marino but win nothing.


I'd take B every single time and smile. I wouldn't give a crap about what fans or message board folks thought about me being an average QB, or getting a ring or two cause of my defense, or whatever.

The fact of the matter would simply be that I'd have the rings and that's all that would matter to me.

 

[Lonestar94]

B, Because a team is more than just the QB.

 

[Frozen700]

For the cowboys? me watching? B...I don't care if Romo puts up bad numbers, I'd want a ring though.


Now if you're asking about myself? I'd take A....because that would mean I would be swimming in millions....

 

[DFWJC]

Play at the highest level possible

So A.

Being a jag at your career and getting carried by others is fine. But you cannot say you reached the highest level you could on a personal lebel. What is in your control--which is your level of play.

Ideally you play like A and your team gets titles.

History says that more often than not, the players playing at Marino's level usually win the rings. The Dilfers are the exception.

 

[SkinsandTerps]

Is this yet another Romo vs. Eli thread ?

Most players want the rings.

Fans will brag about stats and such because they are silly that way.

Players rarely brag about stats. Not the great ones anyway.

 

[JBS]

lmao.

Yeah, id rather be Dilfer than Marino...




NOT

 

[Fizziksman]

A

much more money to be earned being a Type A QB.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

I'd rather be Marino than Dilfer. Championships are overrated lol........No one even remember Dilfer as a quarterback....Marino will probably be remembered as long as football exists.

 

[ryanbabs]

I'd take the Type C career: HOF member, great stats and records, one of the most accurate passers ever, 3-time Super Bowl Champ, Super Bowl MVP....and future successful broadcaster.

 

[bounce]

It's good message board fodder to talk about how we'd be all about the team than personal accomplishments, but I'd much rather have the HOF career and no ring. I'd rather be Barry Sanders than Timmy Smith.

 

[muck4doo]

B. Definitely B. I don't need any Ray Finkle's after me the rest of my life.

 

[burmafrd]

Really speaks to the type of person you are.

A is for someone that looks at the entirety of his career and is proud of that.

B is for someone that likes the bling. Rings are bling.

Now as a 3rd party fan to the team give me B since sadly I WANT THE RINGS.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Marino. Would you really rather be known as a JAG who was carried by your defense to one title, or as a record-setting all-time great?

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

A- Marino type career, HOF, all time great stats, records and ZERO Super Bowls

or

B- Decent Career similar to Trent Dilfer, no HOF, no great stats, 12 year starter, couple pro bowls, no records, but win 2 Super Bowls as starting QB

I would love A but would go with B, any thoughts :laugh1:

I want a third choice: Tony Romo. 1 playoff, great personal stats, numerous chokes and $16 million a year for all that.
Is this a great country or whut?

 

[xwalker]

I'd take the Type C career: HOF member, great stats and records, one of the most accurate passers ever, 3-time Super Bowl Champ, Super Bowl MVP....and future successful broadcaster.

This.^

Aikman does not the same accolades for being an all-time great like Marino, but I'd take his career over most Marino's any day.

Plus Aikman >>> Marino on TV.

 

[percyhoward]

A

Unless I'm Ken Anderson, who won four passing titles and didn't get into the HOF anyway.