The Respective Greats

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Haha. Nice. But I dunno ... we'd have to look at Wilt's adjusted sex stats

It was much easier to score in the free love 1960s. Wilt's 20000 women would adjust to no more than 12000 in today's game.

 

[Big Phil]

Those 49ers teams had some dude named Ronnie Lott leading thier defense. I know we like to give all the credit to the qb, but football is a team game. The 49ers always had runningbacks to compliment thier passing game too. Unitas in my opinion had the best blend of regular season and playoffs, he was the more dominant player.

But it isn't as if Montana had the best receivers in the world before Rice got there. He coudl turn water into wine (figuratively speaking of course)

If you want to go strictly based on winning, then that would make Otto Graham sound alot better. The NFL existed before the superbowl and he was the ultimate winner.

Yeah, Graham was good, 7-3 in championship games. No doubt he was an all-time great. Can't discount Montana's 4-0 in Super Bowls either.

Bradshaw wasnt even important to his team's success. Thier iron curtain defense won the steelers those rings, any monkey could have played qb for those steelers teams. Ditto with troy aikman, they are the two worst qbs in the hall of fame.

Oh hey now Bradshaw had his moments. He won a league MVP himself. Plus he was MVP of the last two Steelers Super Bowls. Big Ben is an example of a guy who I think has been more of a "good" QB on a great team. Heck both superbowls he won he was outplayed by the other QB (Hasselbeck, Warner). Warner is pretty much an all-time great, but Hasselbeck.........

No way is Aikman the worst QB in the HOF. To be honest there really isn't a bad one in there. To be fair Kelly was "worse" than Aikman and he's in there.

Winning is overrated for football anyways, I always thought Barry Sanders was the superstar of the mid 90's. But since steve young had jerry rice, ricky watters, deion sanders and great blockers on his team, he was the media darling. We saw how steve did in his 2 years with the bucaneers and he sucked. The west coast offense made steve young, hes a product of his system.

Young won a pair of MVPs in his career. Led the Niners to their only Superbowl of his term. He had himself a nice career, no, a great career. He was a scrambler, kind of a lower case version of how we view Michael Vick that way. But he was a much richer passer. Last time I checked though, Barry Sanders does not get underrated by any means. We all know what he brought to the table.

So many nfl legends were not winners. Butkus, Sayers, OJ, Barry, and even walter payton struggled for most of his career to win. 1 man cant control the play of the other 21 people on the field.

It's a little different when you are not a QB. Even a running back can only do so much. But a QB can control the outcome of a game better than anyone which is why you can never give enough credit to Montana for that.

 

[shazariahl]

Those 49ers teams had some dude named Ronnie Lott leading thier defense. I know we like to give all the credit to the qb, but football is a team game. The 49ers always had runningbacks to compliment thier passing game too. Unitas in my opinion had the best blend of regular season and playoffs, he was the more dominant player.

If you want to go strictly based on winning, then that would make Otto Graham sound alot better. The NFL existed before the superbowl and he was the ultimate winner.

Bradshaw wasnt even important to his team's success. Thier iron curtain defense won the steelers those rings, any monkey could have played qb for those steelers teams. Ditto with troy aikman, they are the two worst qbs in the hall of fame.

Winning is overrated for football anyways, I always thought Barry Sanders was the superstar of the mid 90's. But since steve young had jerry rice, ricky watters, deion sanders and great blockers on his team, he was the media darling. We saw how steve did in his 2 years with the bucaneers and he sucked. The west coast offense made steve young, hes a product of his system.

So many nfl legends were not winners. Butkus, Sayers, OJ, Barry, and even walter payton struggled for most of his career to win. 1 man cant control the play of the other 21 people on the field.

Steve Young had Sanders for 1 season. Granted he won the superbowl that season, but I find it hard to believe that his career success was due to having Sanders for most of but not even all of 1 season. And Barry Sanders was a superstar regardless of being on a bad team. He was just brilliant, and people recognized him as such. Aikman, btw, is not "one of the two worst qbs in the hall of fame", he was an intelligent and accurate quarterback who controlled the pace of the game and the clock.

Same with Montana and Young. They had strong running games as well, that's true, but you seem to be saying that they didn't have the strong passing stats of other QBs, then say they were overrated because of their strong running games. The reason they didn't have to throw the ball as much, and the reason they had few pass attempts, completions, TDs, and INTs, is because they had those strong running games. You are basically double penalizing them for the same thing - claiming their wins were because of a balanced attack, then claiming they were overrated because of fewer passes, which statistically are a result of a more balanced attack.

The fact is Montana had his best games when it mattered most. Manning, on the other hand, has his worst games in the post season. Montana also won 2 championships before Rice was in the league, so you can't say it was just because of that. The man just found ways to win, took care of the football, and managed the clock well. Anyone who does that is a good QB, and if you win 4 superbowls doing that you're a great QB. Period.

 

[canucks4ever]

But it isn't as if Montana had the best receivers in the world before Rice got there. He coudl turn water into wine (figuratively speaking of course)



Yeah, Graham was good, 7-3 in championship games. No doubt he was an all-time great. Can't discount Montana's 4-0 in Super Bowls either.



Oh hey now Bradshaw had his moments. He won a league MVP himself. Plus he was MVP of the last two Steelers Super Bowls. Big Ben is an example of a guy who I think has been more of a "good" QB on a great team. Heck both superbowls he won he was outplayed by the other QB (Hasselbeck, Warner). Warner is pretty much an all-time great, but Hasselbeck.........

No way is Aikman the worst QB in the HOF. To be honest there really isn't a bad one in there. To be fair Kelly was "worse" than Aikman and he's in there.



Young won a pair of MVPs in his career. Led the Niners to their only Superbowl of his term. He had himself a nice career, no, a great career. He was a scrambler, kind of a lower case version of how we view Michael Vick that way. But he was a much richer passer. Last time I checked though, Barry Sanders does not get underrated by any means. We all know what he brought to the table.



It's a little different when you are not a QB. Even a running back can only do so much. But a QB can control the outcome of a game better than anyone which is why you can never give enough credit to Montana for that.

The nfl mvp is a qb award, i dont put much stock into it. Unless if you think kurt warner and rich gannon are better players than brian urlacher, ray lewis and randy moss. The NFL top 100 placed steve young at 81, barry sanders will most likely make thier top 15. MVP is simply based on who gets to win the most games on a great team. In 1994 barry sanders dominated runningbacks to such a ridiculous degree, everyone knew he was the best player in the league.

Those steelers teams had 5 hall of famers on thier defense and franco harris as the runningback, bradshaw was just an average qb.

Most superbowl dynasties are actually known more for thier defense by the way. The Steelers, Redkskins and Giants are great examples of that. The Cowboys of the 1990's were known more for thier great offensive line. However a lineman will never get a superbowl mvp even though he is doing all the dirty work. Same thing with the buffalo bills that went to 4 superbows, it was the defensive leadership of bruce smith and the great o-line that got them there. Thurman Thomas and Kelly were the choke artists

I also noticed that Don Hutson's name has not been mentioned yet. The way he dominated his era was pretty mind boggling, i would say he's the greatest packer.

 

[Crosbyfan]

It was much easier to score in the free love 1960s. Wilt's 20000 women would adjust to no more than 12000 in today's game.

Granted, you have a point, but with today's shorter shifts and despite less restrictions on changing on the fly... you still see a lot of too many men calls...it's probably closer than you suggest.

 

[Merya]

Err...Ron Jeremy?

 

[Derick*]

It was much easier to score in the free love 1960s. Wilt's 20000 women would adjust to no more than 12000 in today's game.

Hahahaha

That's hilarious because you actually found a real reason the adjustment would be needed.

 

[Derick*]

Granted, you have a point, but with today's shorter shifts and despite less restrictions on changing on the fly... you still see a lot of too many men calls...it's probably closer than you suggest.

That should make it easier to pad your number of partners. But perhaps harder to keep them

 

[Crosbyfan]

That should make it easier to pad your number of partners. But perhaps harder to keep them

In the context of the thread...can you afford to keep them?

Unless of course you're Genghis Khan. 1 in every 200 of us alive today is a direct descendant.

Beat that Wilt!

(spare the "beat that" jokes please, and I don't want to know who's #1...probably some blind guy)

 

[KasperTheGrittyGhost]

UFC = George St. Pierre?

Never heard of Royce Gracie eh? or Anderson Silva or Matt Hughes? All three are much higher on the all time list. I didnt even mention the "Iceman" Chuck Liddel, probably the most popular fighter of all time.