Its official: I hate the Broncos again

[hawksfansinceday1]

Van Brocklin? Tittle? Baugh?

I had no idea you we're Les's dad.

Can't be if he thinks Norman Van Brocklin was an elite QB. And no Terry Bradshaw? Probably the strongest flinger that ever threw a football.

And he can't be very old if he didn't mention Bart Starr who won 2 SBs, has the second best playoff completion percentage behind current Green Bay QB Aaron Rogers. As I recall when he retired way back in the early 70s he had the highest completion lifetime at near 60% which was unheard of in those days.

So yeah he seems more like an exspurt on QBs

:les:

I didn't mention Starr because although he was my favorite player as a kid, IMO he was not elite like Unitus or Tittle in his generation. He did have one amazing season where he threw three, yes that's right kids THREE interceptions all year (1966). And is very close to elite in my mind but if you put him on an average team he becomes closer to average IMO whereas Unitus and Tittle stay elite. His arm strength was mediocre though his field generalship was top flight. Like I said, he's close to being on my list of QBs I'd rather have than Mr. Ed.

As for Van Brocklin, he threw the hell out of the ball with the Lambs in the 50s in an offense that was at the time the Greatest Show on (Natural) Turf. He morphed into more of a Bart Starr type of QB in '60 with the Eagles when they won the championship. But after a check on his career stats, I have to agree with you Les. He did not belong on my list as his TD to Int ratio is not good. That's a huge stat for me.

As for Bradshaw, I think he also threw too may ints to be considered elite. He threw 212 career TDs and 210 career Ints and that's not the ratio I want to see. Of course my distaste for the Steelers may have something to do with my opinion and upon reflection he is more deserving than Van Brocklin. But he also played on and benefitted greatly from being the QB of one of the 3 greatest dynasties in the history of pro football (Packers of the 60s, Browns of the 50s being the other 2). Starr had that benefit as well though I see him as more deserving than either of the other two but as much as it pains me to say it, I think I go with Mr. Ed over Bart................maybe.................

Oh, and I think I'd take Tom Brady over Elway too.


BTW, these are personal opinions and a mock like "exspurt" is unecessary and I would've thought you above such a thing.

 

[The Radish]

Perhaps you're right about that comment, I apologize.

So I'm guessing since Bradshaw was not elite because he played for one of the best teams (1975 probably the best of all time), doesn't deserve to be called elite. So that means that Joe Montana who also played for one of the best doesn't deserve the elite banner either? And of course then neither would Steve Young.(which suits me fine anyway).

I have a problem with QBs being called elite/not elite based mostly on stats. As you probably know I don't like stats being used for such distinctions. Stats can prove or disprove anything anytime in my book.

Bart Starr handled a bunch of rough shod players just coming out of the "4 yards and a cloud of dust" era of football so to me deserves better.

Joe Namath who doesn't have great stats was indeed "elite" because he got the job done when it had to be done time and time again.

My elite QB is/was the guy who could get the job done with what ever was available.

Regardless of stats a QB who has been a part of the same team winning 4 super bowls is elite. Hence Bradshaw and Montana, I could care less about their stats since they won the big ones when they had the chance.

George Patton won lots of battles but was better at performing his best when he had too with what he had available. Was one of the key figures in us winning the war in Europe. But since in his stats he got a lot of people killed doing it I guess he wasn't so elite afterall?

About the only stats I think are important for QBs would be HOW MANY GAMES DID THEY WIN? For stat lovers that's way to simple I agree. For me a common fan I just want to know who won what.

:les:

btw I hate Mr. Ed for no other reason than he was a Bronco and looked like the tail end of a horse. Do I think he was a great QB? Yes sadly I must say so. Elite to me is a word used by stat people to justify them using stats. (so and so had great stats so he must be elite). All Bradshaw did was win 4 super bowls but since he had a great team around him he should be called average.

Sorry, to me that just sounds dumb.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

All subjective opinion based on personal opinion Les. I despise Bradshaw the guy and the team he played for so admittedly that likely colors my opinion. As for Starr, my favorite player as a kid and a helluva QB and I might take him over Horseface, and I might not. VERY tough call. Namath? No way for me. IMO, Steve Young was every bit the athlete and smarter with his decision making. And so on and so forth. Opinions man.
.
.
.
BTW, if your criteria for ranking QBs is winning then Otto Graham ought to be number one on your list. He played 10 seasons and was in the championship game ALL 10 years and won 7 titles. Now that's winning!!

 

[DTexHawk]

"And of course he'd use the F word which is not allowed on this forum no matter how its masked."

I think you missed one.

 

[The Radish]

"And of course he'd use the F word which is not allowed on this forum no matter how its masked."

I think you missed one.

Wait,,,,Dtex finding fault with someone?

Has that ever happened before?

:les:

 

[RolandDeschain]

Wait,,,,Dtex finding fault with someone?

Has that ever happened before?

To everyone except those that don't sign their entire paychecks over to businesses. Err, everyone.

 

[amill87]

I find it so funny that nationally the perception of the Chiefs are possible playoff team while the actual fanbase or locals like myself see 7-9 maybe 8-8.

Being in the craptastic AFC helps. I'm sure more than half that conference would finish last in every division in the NFC, it's crazy how fast it's fallen and how one sided the conferences are on overall good teams.

As far as the national perception, there is always "that team" that everyone just loves to say will make the playoffs this year. It's been the Cardinals forever. They said it like 4 straight years before Warner had a resurrection. Than it picked up again post Warner. Hell most people thought the Cards would compete with the Niners last year and finish second in the division.

Anyways, what I'm getting at is the media and fans love to pick a mediocre team and say "this team will be in the playoffs!". It's hedging your bets. You sure aren't gonna pick the Jets to make the playoffs and the Patriots are just too easy. So pick a mediocre team and keep saying they will make the playoffs so eventually when they get a couple bounces they do and you can thump your chest about how your dark horse made it.

Back on topic, yeah the Broncos are annoying and Peyton will forever be the choke artist in the playoffs and won't get another ring thankfully

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

You really could have just posted that last paragraph. Peyton.....choke artist in the playoffs and will never win another Superbowl.. I am relatively sure either Browner or Chancellor will be the reason he retires if Hali doesn't convince him sooner if KC actually puts it together and disabuses Denver as they deserve.

Like Indianapolis last year Kansas City is the best 2-14 team in history and shows why Romeo Crenell isn't in the NFL. Bad coach, really bad. Flores and Mora bad but worse trust me.

 

[DTexHawk]

Wait,,,,Dtex finding fault with someone?

Has that ever happened before?

To everyone except those that don't sign their entire paychecks over to businesses. Err, everyone.

Maybe the dumbest thing you have ever said.

If a business charges more than you want/cant afford, then fine, do without. But don't steal just because you can.

 

[DTexHawk]

"And of course he'd use the F word which is not allowed on this forum no matter how its masked."

I think you missed one.

Wait,,,,Dtex finding fault with someone?

Has that ever happened before?

:les:

You still haven't removed it, having problems finding it?