- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 4,077
- Reaction score
- 5,712
- Points
- 113
But who are the other 9 that top Ben. You haven’t answered that.
Sent from my iPhone using Steeler Nation mobile app
Big Ben needs 238 passing yards to reach 50,000 for his career
- Thread starter In Ben We Trust
- Start date
But who are the other 9 that top Ben. You haven’t answered that.
Sent from my iPhone using Steeler Nation mobile app
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2015
- Messages
- 15,544
- Reaction score
- 3,801
- Points
- 113
I did, see post #20. Copy and pasted here again for you to read:
Fair enough. In no particular order since the AFL-NFL merger:
Elway
Montana
Young
P Manning
D Brees
Rodgers
Farve
Brady
Marino
That's 9
Ben to me is better than Aikman, Staubach, or Bradshaw.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 1,864
- Reaction score
- 3,267
- Points
- 113
Oooooh, that's tough.
As it stands right now, I can't see him in the top 10.
If he wins another one, I think it inches him closer to the discussion, maybe even entering the discussion.
I'm not sure if I agree or not, I'm just trying to be as unbiased as possible as a Steeler faithful.
But......
Montana
Graham
Unitas
Elway
Favre
Starr
Tarkenton
I think those 7 are unmovable and undisputed from the all time top ten QB list.
Then.....
P. Manning
Marino
Staubach
Bradshaw
Brady
Brees
Moon
Young
Aikman
Kelly
Fouts
Now, I believe as I type this right now, Ben belongs solidly and squarely in this second grouping.
But does he beat out all but two others from that group right this second? That I'm unsure about.
I'd love to hear the debate as it's all subjective.
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2015
- Messages
- 15,544
- Reaction score
- 3,801
- Points
- 113
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2014
- Messages
- 11,072
- Reaction score
- 13,225
- Points
- 113
That's precisely what I'm talking about Tom. The physicality of earlier eras and the rule changes would undo QBs like Br*dy, Rivers, Somebody like Flutie, who of course doesn't have the numbers overall but was an amazing QB. Guys who need quick releases from their receivers and / or rely on timing routes would have died playing the Steel Curtain in the 70s.
The Corners would have creamed their receivers and by the time they got back on their routes the defensive line would have been all over the QBs.
As for the list...
Montana ... He was great. A tremendous QB no doubt. Excellent vision and a true "gamer".
Graham... Kent? I keed, I keed...
Unitas... It's hard to quantify the legends. The game was so young and some players were simple "Men among boys". Unitas was special. But how would he stack up today? I don't know.
Elway... I hate Elway. I hate him because he was frickin' amazing.
Favre... The Energizer Bunny of football. Maybe not "outstanding" but man was he dependable and consistent.
Starr... Just before my time. I can't speak to him.
Tarkenton... The advent of the running passer. And he looked good. But again, how would Tarkenton stand up against other eras? What would Lawrence Taylor do to Tarkenton?
I think those 7 are unmovable and undisputed from the all time top ten QB list.
Then.....
P. Manning... Best "cerebral" QB ever to play the game in my opinion. Not a "big game" QB. Really his only downfall. I don't see him as a durable guy, although I know he played forever.
Marino... Best "pure passer" I've ever personally seen. Marino was F'n amazing. Unfortunately he just couldn't quite put it all together. But can you imagine Marino in his prime playing today?
Staubach... Great player, tough, steady, ice cold. Actually reminds me a bit of Ben in some ways. Not as dynamic or talented in my opinion at the end of the day. Just my opinion.
Bradshaw... The epitome of the "Big Game QB" Ben channels that quite often, but he's much more consistent. Bradshaw was a tough SOB too. You had to love him, but ultimately, he aint no Ben.
Brady... Get that weak **** out of here.
Brees... I think of Brees as something of a mix between Peyton and Marino. Smart as hell, and accurate too. If he were 4 inches taller he'd probably be a freaking God. As it is, he's not far off.
Moon... Vastly under-rated. Played in an era when receivers were about half mugged and you had to be tough. This is hard. He isn't Ben, but Warren Moon was great.
Young... I always thought of Young as a brash Irishman too dumb to know he couldn't do that, so he just went out and did it. He always performed beyond my expectations.
Aikman... Efficient, but a product of one of the best offensive lines in the history of the game. Really? Aikman?
Kelly... Now THIS guy. The K-Gun was a frickin' force of nature. 4 straight SB appearances? Again, it's hard to rank him as clearly he's sort of a "system" guy but what a freakin' system.
Fouts... Dan was good, but C'mon. This is an all-time list. Why not dig up Jim Plunkett or Jeff George? Fouts was solid. He played well but one of the best all time? I can't get there.
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 4,077
- Reaction score
- 5,712
- Points
- 113
When you say ALL TIME it means all eras, not since AFL/NFL merger
Otto Graham won 10 consecutive championships.....you can’t explain yourself out of that.
Unitas as well. Clutch in his prime. 3 championships, plus one SB, MVP 3 Times...crazy to leave him out.
Bradshaw...defense bailed him out? 78-79 season rule changes allowed Pitt to open up the offense and Bradshaw had monster seasons at that time. He has 4 SB rings, 2 SB MVPs....you are crazy.
Starbach....loaded teams, top coaching. Lol, you obviously never watched him play. If it wasn’t for the Steelers he would have had 4 Rings like Brad. Played in 5 SBs.
How is Kelly any different than Marino? Other than stats. Kelly went to 4 SB, regardless of the outcomes.
Aikman has 3 Rings one MVP....
I’ll stop with Brees....Ben has already surpassed him, since Brees has only one SB ring.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 1,864
- Reaction score
- 3,267
- Points
- 113
You original comment did NOT give the caveat of BC/AD post NFL merger. It was "top ten all time.....another ring closer to Mt. Rushmore".
You/me/we can speculate all we want. This guy in this era and all that Peter Pan nonsense.
You can only judge a player against their peers in the same era. That's all we got. I'm not going down the rabbit hole on Fantasy Island with Mr. Rourke.
You make a TON of caveats on my list about loaded teams, offensive lines, this, that, and the other.
Again, it really boils down to play on the field with and against players of the same era.
Bradshaw played on a RETARDEDLY RIDICULOUSLY OVERLOADED teams on both sides of the ball with unreal coaching. That shouldn't enhance nor diminish his accomplishment of 4 rings.
Kelly TOO turnover prone?! His TD to INT is 237 - 175. Bradshaws? 212 - 210. 0-4 Jim......one of only 2 QBs to go to 4 straight title games in the history of pro football.
Obviously this is all subjective, but what's our measuring stick for this debate?
Rings? Stats? Depth of offense and defense of team surrounding QB? Play in regular season overshadowing play in playoffs and/or championship game?
When someone goes to the top 10 of anything, or Mt. Rushmore of anything, in my humble opinion, all factors should be considered. Not just parsing certain criteria here and there to fit my/your personal belief.
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2014
- Messages
- 11,072
- Reaction score
- 13,225
- Points
- 113
I agree with you fedderone that criteria can't be fluid because then the entire exercise is too subjective. But if you contend that a player must be judged solely based on his performance against his peers then you have to limit the number of entries you can take from each "era".
You can't have 5 "Top Tens" from the Legends era if the new era guys never had a chance to play against them. That's hardly fair. If they can't be compared to one another you have to limit yourself to taking an even number of candidates from each "era" and saying "Hey, in this era, these were the top 2 or 3 guys." And since we can't essentially compare them to one another since they played against different peers, you can't really "rate them" against each other on the scale very well either.
So for the "legends" era you may be left with
Otto Graham
Johnny Unitas
Then in the "Rough and Tumble" era you might choose
Staubach
Bradshaw
But that would leave Tarkenton out.
"Salary Cap" era gets tough... Pick 2
Peyton Manning?
John Elway?
Dan Marino?
Steve Young?
Joe Montana?
Jim Kelly?
"New Era"
Again, pick 2
Drew Brees?
Aaron Rogers?
Ben Roethlisberger?
Phillip Rivers?
See, when you're limited to just picking 2 or even 3 per era it gets tough...
(And for the record, I will go ahead and do the exercise...)
You can't have 5 "Top Tens" from the Legends era if the new era guys never had a chance to play against them. That's hardly fair. If they can't be compared to one another you have to limit yourself to taking an even number of candidates from each "era" and saying "Hey, in this era, these were the top 2 or 3 guys." And since we can't essentially compare them to one another since they played against different peers, you can't really "rate them" against each other on the scale very well either.
So for the "legends" era you may be left with
Otto Graham
Johnny Unitas
Then in the "Rough and Tumble" era you might choose
Staubach
Bradshaw
But that would leave Tarkenton out.
"Salary Cap" era gets tough... Pick 2
Peyton Manning?
John Elway?
Dan Marino?
Steve Young?
Joe Montana?
Jim Kelly?
"New Era"
Again, pick 2
Drew Brees?
Aaron Rogers?
Ben Roethlisberger?
Phillip Rivers?
See, when you're limited to just picking 2 or even 3 per era it gets tough...
(And for the record, I will go ahead and do the exercise...)
Last edited:
Yet Bradshaw has a ring on four of his fingers?
I know, the NFL is different these days.
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2015
- Messages
- 15,544
- Reaction score
- 3,801
- Points
- 113
Ike,
Do you think athletes today are much better than they were in the 1950's? In just about any sport I can think of the answer is heck yes, but I like to read you reply as it will spark a new debate or prove my point. Can you offer an honest reply to the question?
Greatest to me is someone who can be also be great in modern sense. This is why I said since the AFL-NFL merger. Are you telling me Ben would not rip those 1950 defenses a new one? Come on, watch the films, Sure he would.
This if not for so and so argument means what? If not for Rogers Ben has three rings, and if the NFL was serious about cheating, maybe the Patriots would be taken down a peg and we benefit. See how that goes?
Look who is in the top ten for passer ratings, all time yards, most TD passes thrown, and so on. Ben is in the top ten for most. This is a way say baseball would compare eras. Ben rates top ten here, so why not?
Otto Graham was special in his time, no doubt, but against who? 13 teams, some of whom were poorly run. I'd pick the any 2017 NFL team to do as well or better than the Otto Graham 1950's Browns, and I'm being serious.
Career NFL statistics for Graham:
1,464 for 2,626:
55.8 complete
TD–int: 174-135
Passing yards: 23,584
Passer rating: 86.6
NFL champion 3 times, but I say vs who.
^^^ Does not compare to Ben.
I will point out, I don't think any of the other QBs on any list could have won a superbowl behind that terrible 2008 offensive line. Plus Ben never threw them under the bus. He just worked his magic, extended plays, and got a ring for it!
Manning gets sacked once in the divisional round, and it's all his line's fault. QBs today are *******.
Manning gets sacked once in the divisional round, and it's all his line's fault. QBs today are *******.
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2015
- Messages
- 15,544
- Reaction score
- 3,801
- Points
- 113
Good point.
1 ) Look at it the way baseball compare era's. Ben will rate top 10 for yards, TD's, QB ratings, Winning percentage, etc.. This to me is primary.
Ben's stats:
Passing attempts:
6,328
Passing completions:
4,054
Percentage:
64.1
TD–INT:
321–172
Passing yards:
49,762
Passer rating:
93.8
2 ) If you want to count championships, few Qb's won more than 2, which Ben has. While championships has something to due with the team around him and the talent level in the league, 2 championships for any QB is excellent. Can you name 10 Qbs who won more than 2 championships? Not likely. The answer is only three QB's won more super bowls. Others like Griese and Eli Manning have also won two, but Ben is clearly better than them. Peyton won two, and I'll give him the nod over Ben for now.
3 ) Film. If you want to look at film, Ben also rates high, better than some legends for sure who would be picked off due to lack of velocity on their passes,
4 ) Durability and the total amount of seasons played? I'd say it matters a little. Ben is in his 14th season and under contract for a 15th. How many QB's played more seasons, with less time out from injury? Very few.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 4,077
- Reaction score
- 5,712
- Points
- 113
You are not listening. As Federrone and Wig explained, your attempt to lump all players into a categorical summation cannot be objective because the criteria is not the same for all eras. So, measurement among peers during the era is the closest summation to follow. How do you think the HOF does it? Think!
As Wig says, “since we can't essentially compare them to one another since they played against different peers, you can't really "rate them" against each other on the scale very well either.”
You have no point to prove. Because it’s only your opinion.
Do I think athletes are better now than they were in the 1950’s? Physically, yes. Obviously. They are better now physically than players 10-15 years ago. The issue is could a player now, say Ben, play the game back then. Of course he could, but would he be the same while under the rules and culture of that time period? The sport was much much more physical in the past. More so that I would say any player in the modern era would be knocked down a few notches due to hard play back then. Clothesliners, bendbacks were the expected result of play back then.
Imagine the head slaps from a Deacon Jones....think about it.
Sent from my iPhone using Steeler Nation mobile app
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2014
- Messages
- 1,529
- Reaction score
- 2,162
- Points
- 113
Apples and Oranges. The two eras are nothing alike. Winston topped 4000 yards his first two years in the league.
The biggest difference that separates Bradshaw from Ben is his post season success -- in particular the Super Bowl. Heard Mike Florio comparing Ben and Eli this morning and their 2 Super Bowls ("of course Ben only earned one of those") -- *******. Ben's 2005 post season prior to the Super Bowl was the QB postseason that kept us from reaching Super Bowls in 1984, 1989, 1992, 1994, 1996, 1997, 2001 and 2004 -- and Eli did not beat the Patriots "by himself" like that jackass said.
Ok - done with sidebar.
Ben still had a chance just by putting air under the ball to put the Steelers up 21-3 in Super Bowl XL and making it a blowout. He missed Mike Wallace in XLV wide open on a deep TD and completely choked on a chance for a 2 minute drive (missing wide open Heath Miller to get that pivotal initial first down to get momentum).
Bradshaw threw a TD pass in the 4th Quarter of every Super Bowl he was in. They were clutch, they were game clinching and game winning TDs.
In a Super Bowl, give me Bradshaw, for the long haul, give me Roethlisberger.
Ike, you can pump the brakes on the Coach vendetta on this thread. Of course this is a purely speculative, opinionated thread. That's what makes it a discussion 
I would love to see Ben play in the "more physical" era, where all of the players are 30-50lbs less than the players now, and all of them are slow as molasses. You might have a few players here and there that were freaks, but none of them were year round athletes, preparing their bodies and minds, daily, to excel on the football field. A lot of them still had offseason jobs.
Ben shakes off 350lb linemen, the 280lb DLs and 225lb LBs would have no chance putting him on the ground, let alone reaching up high enough to give him a forearm shiver. At 6'5" he's towering over that league.
And FSF, I do realize it was a running league when Bradshaw played. It's just mind blowing to think Ben can retire with twice the yardage of Bradshaw. I never would have thought anyone would have passed Bradshaw's numbers. The league has changed, and yards are easier to come by, but twice as many yards is still mind boggling to me!
I would love to see Ben play in the "more physical" era, where all of the players are 30-50lbs less than the players now, and all of them are slow as molasses. You might have a few players here and there that were freaks, but none of them were year round athletes, preparing their bodies and minds, daily, to excel on the football field. A lot of them still had offseason jobs.
Ben shakes off 350lb linemen, the 280lb DLs and 225lb LBs would have no chance putting him on the ground, let alone reaching up high enough to give him a forearm shiver. At 6'5" he's towering over that league.
And FSF, I do realize it was a running league when Bradshaw played. It's just mind blowing to think Ben can retire with twice the yardage of Bradshaw. I never would have thought anyone would have passed Bradshaw's numbers. The league has changed, and yards are easier to come by, but twice as many yards is still mind boggling to me!
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 1,864
- Reaction score
- 3,267
- Points
- 113
OK, Alice.....follow the Mad Hatter to your table, please.
Coach, by starting the argument with, "Do you think athletes today are much better than they were in the 1950s" opens up pandora's box.
If you could magically transport Ben back to the 1950s, he's :
1) Gonna be on the same inferior diet they were back then because they didn't know any better.
2) Gonna have access to the same inferior medical staff because the doctors and trainers back then won't know what the doctors and trainers know today.
3) Gonna be playing offensive or defensive line instead of QB because he's the height and weight of what they were back then.
4) Gonna be able to party WAY more the way he wanted to early in his career and get away with it because there was no internet/paparazzi/24-7 news/etc back then.
5) Also going to be playing in 3 yards and a cloud of dust football with emphasis on the run and hardly any passing.
6) Also going to only be playing against 13 other teams, thus automatically lumping him in with the other QBs from this era that you so easily dismiss, because he's playing against the same poorly run teams that you roll your eyes at.
See how that works? By transporting Ben the awesome athlete of the 2000s to 1950s land, you instantaneously make him Ben the 1950s player who couldn't carry Cam Newton's jock. See how that backfires quickly?
You can't start this debate with hypotheticals and imaginary dream scenarios.
It completely negates any intelligent debate because it's based in what-ifs.
We have iron clad solid evidence. What QB X did against all the other teams that QBs Y, Z, A, B, C, played against each year QB X played.
Certain athletes ARE special because they standout amongst their peers. They're easily identifiable.
Jim Brown, Gayle Sayers, Walter Payton, Tony Dorsett, Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith, Jerome Bettis, Marshall Faulk, LaDainian Tomlinson.
These chaps stood out amongst the other players with the title RB. They come to mind VERY easily and for good reason.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 4,077
- Reaction score
- 5,712
- Points
- 113
Ike, you can pump the brakes on the Coach vendetta on this thread. Of course this is a purely speculative, opinionated thread. That's what makes it a discussion
I would love to see Ben play in the "more physical" era, where all of the players are 30-50lbs less than the players now, and all of them are slow as molasses. You might have a few players here and there that were freaks, but none of them were year round athletes, preparing their bodies and minds, daily, to excel on the football field. A lot of them still had offseason jobs.
Ben shakes off 350lb linemen, the 280lb DLs and 225lb LBs would have no chance putting him on the ground, let alone reaching up high enough to give him a forearm shiver. At 6'5" he's towering over that league.
And FSF, I do realize it was a running league when Bradshaw played. It's just mind blowing to think Ben can retire with twice the yardage of Bradshaw. I never would have thought anyone would have passed Bradshaw's numbers. The league has changed, and yards are easier to come by, but twice as many yards is still mind boggling to me!
Lol Cope, I don't have a vendetta against Coach....but when someone says "I am right", or "this proves my point" on purely speculative topics but claims it's based upon irrefutable data, I have to call BS on it. As do others. Coach does on occasion provide some thought provoking subject matter, but there are times when proving an (or his) agenda is more like a claim of superior understanding of the said subject itself.
Sent from my iPad using Steeler Nation mobile app
I was thinking the exact same thing earlier. Also why does it seem like Ben never gets much credit or recognition for that last drive? He was running for his life that drive, Elway has the drive, you don't hear anything about that drive other than Elways name, or Montana in the Super Bowl vs Cincy, it's always Montana orchestrated the last minute drive. Hell outside of Pittsburgh and Arizona I bet hardly anyone remembers or knows about that drive. If that were Manning, Brady, or Rodgers it would be talked about all the time and they'd have gotten the MVP, Holmes gets more praise for that drive
Sent from my XT1585 using Steeler Nation mobile app
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2015
- Messages
- 15,544
- Reaction score
- 3,801
- Points
- 113
Otto Graham as far as I know did not grow up poor. He's 6'1 under 200 pounds, and would not be much larger today. Have you watched any of those black and white films? The defenses are not very good. He was a good passer for his time, but does not compare to Ben.
agree certain athletes are special! Jimmy Brown was a freak, he could be a star today. Ben is also a freak, and he'd still be much bigger / stronger / faster even if you somehow want to make him smaller because he was born in the 1920's.
Comparing stats the way Baseball does, Ben is better
Comparing the completion level from the 1950's which had 13 teams to today, Ben is better
And finally using the eyes test by seeing them play, Ben is better.
3-0 in favor of Ben.
Want a kicker? The population and popularity of the game is much greater during Ben's time. By numbers alone, this means the modern pool of athletes is much greater than it was for those born in the 1920's. So when you have millions more playing football, you're going to get better players. Make sense?
But keep going down the rabbit hole and chasing the fantasy that Otto Graham was a better Quarterback.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2015
- Messages
- 15,544
- Reaction score
- 3,801
- Points
- 113
Which is why I posted the data. And it agrees with me.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 1,864
- Reaction score
- 3,267
- Points
- 113
But only when standing next to Tattoo.
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2014
- Messages
- 11,072
- Reaction score
- 13,225
- Points
- 113
FSF, I think you're trying to have your cake and eat it.
I would argue that Ben was GREAT in the playoffs that year. True he was not great for most of the SB. In fact he even played poorly for most of it. But throughout the playoffs he played VERY WELL. Therefore Ben did more than his share to GET the team to the SB. It is after all, a team effort, yes?
Just as Eli didn't beat the P*ts by himself, Ben was never required to beat the Seahawks by himself. He played poorly for much of the game, but he DID connect with Hines Ward on a critical 3rd down play which Ben extended to move the ball to the goal line. Ben later got a TD, (which admittedly was questionable but hey, put that on the refs, not Ben.) He didn't play a good game, but he made a couple critical plays all the same and the truth is, if he doesn't make one or two HUGE plays on the way to the SB, the Steelers never even get there. You'll also remember that Bradshaw had the luxury of calling his own plays, plays that he was comfortable with. Ben did NOT get to call his own plays in that SB. (He did however call his own plays on the SB winning drive against the Cardinals. Consider THAT.)
Look, I'm not going to argue that Bradshaw wasn't the greatest Big Game QB of all time. I've already said that in this thread. But let's remember who he was playing with and how those games went.
SB IX, Harris rushed for 168 yards, while the Vikings only managed 16. True the game was still tight, but to suggest that the Steelers didn't' dominate that game offensively would be misleading. Bradshaw hit Larry Brown for a 30 yard pass on their final scoring drive in the 4th and later Brown would score a receiving TD. But there was no "passing dominance" in this game. It was a defensive interception and the offense sitting on the ball that would ultimately finish the game. And as you undoubtedly know, Franco was the MVP.
SB X did feature more passing, but again it was the defense that dominated the game. This of course was the famous "Lambert Slam" Game. Dallas scored, Bradshaw answered. Swann, concussed the week before was amazing and made some highlight reels and earned an MVP with his acrobatic catches and toe-taps in bounds. And Bradshaw DID launch a late 68 yard pass to Swann that scored a go ahead TD. But Bradshaw actually ended up leaving the game and Terry Hanratty finished the final drive. This was the game that Gerela the kicker had a cracked rib and pulled so many kicks. He was "patted on the head" by a Dallas defender after one and Lambert dumped the guy on his *** and the defense pretty much destroyed Dallas after that. In fact Dallas only had one scoring play after the incident. On the final play, Staubach threw into the end-zone and Mike "forever underrated" Wagner batted the ball away and it was intercepted. Swann was the MVP.
SB XIII, now that one was a Hella Game. Bradshaw was barely over 50% but the throws he made counted. He threw 4 TDS and ultimately outgunned the Cowboys. I'm not even going to argue this one. I mean statistically fans today would be freaking out about the 17 for 30 passing, but THIS game is where the Bradshaw Big Game QB legend really got going. The Steelers finally started throwing the ball and using Swann and Stallworth together. And they needed to against the Cowboys who were hitting on all cylinders. Heck of a game. Bradshaw deservedly was the MVP.
SB XIV Ultimately was a game that one can coin "The Sound and the Fury". From the score it looks amazing. But in reality, Bradshaw made 2 big plays, one to Stallworth and one to Swann. Fortunately for the Steelers both were in the 4th. But Franco patiently plugged away and ground in 2 TDs on a pedestrian 68 or so yards. Rocky pounded in another 25. The defense dug in and tried to compensate for Bradshaw's 3 interceptions on the day and it paid of with Lambert's late interception of Vince Ferragamo that put the game away. Bradshaw was named MVP and maybe he deserved it, but after 3 interceptions he may have been fortunate not to be pulled.
Again, I'm not going to bag on Bradshaw. He did make those throws. But when you look at the actual context of the 4 SBs, you see that the defense was so much more instrumental in the greater scheme of things than people truly understand. Bradshaw was willing and able to step up in huge moments and take that risk. And as we see it paid off. But Ben Roethlisberger is one Rashard Mendenhall fumble away from being 3 - 0 in SBs himself. And he plays in an era where it is MUCH harder to GET to the SB.
Which is why I think you final statement is ironic...
You don't GET to the SB without Roethlisberger. That's just the way it is.
I would argue that Ben was GREAT in the playoffs that year. True he was not great for most of the SB. In fact he even played poorly for most of it. But throughout the playoffs he played VERY WELL. Therefore Ben did more than his share to GET the team to the SB. It is after all, a team effort, yes?
Just as Eli didn't beat the P*ts by himself, Ben was never required to beat the Seahawks by himself. He played poorly for much of the game, but he DID connect with Hines Ward on a critical 3rd down play which Ben extended to move the ball to the goal line. Ben later got a TD, (which admittedly was questionable but hey, put that on the refs, not Ben.) He didn't play a good game, but he made a couple critical plays all the same and the truth is, if he doesn't make one or two HUGE plays on the way to the SB, the Steelers never even get there. You'll also remember that Bradshaw had the luxury of calling his own plays, plays that he was comfortable with. Ben did NOT get to call his own plays in that SB. (He did however call his own plays on the SB winning drive against the Cardinals. Consider THAT.)
Look, I'm not going to argue that Bradshaw wasn't the greatest Big Game QB of all time. I've already said that in this thread. But let's remember who he was playing with and how those games went.
SB IX, Harris rushed for 168 yards, while the Vikings only managed 16. True the game was still tight, but to suggest that the Steelers didn't' dominate that game offensively would be misleading. Bradshaw hit Larry Brown for a 30 yard pass on their final scoring drive in the 4th and later Brown would score a receiving TD. But there was no "passing dominance" in this game. It was a defensive interception and the offense sitting on the ball that would ultimately finish the game. And as you undoubtedly know, Franco was the MVP.
SB X did feature more passing, but again it was the defense that dominated the game. This of course was the famous "Lambert Slam" Game. Dallas scored, Bradshaw answered. Swann, concussed the week before was amazing and made some highlight reels and earned an MVP with his acrobatic catches and toe-taps in bounds. And Bradshaw DID launch a late 68 yard pass to Swann that scored a go ahead TD. But Bradshaw actually ended up leaving the game and Terry Hanratty finished the final drive. This was the game that Gerela the kicker had a cracked rib and pulled so many kicks. He was "patted on the head" by a Dallas defender after one and Lambert dumped the guy on his *** and the defense pretty much destroyed Dallas after that. In fact Dallas only had one scoring play after the incident. On the final play, Staubach threw into the end-zone and Mike "forever underrated" Wagner batted the ball away and it was intercepted. Swann was the MVP.
SB XIII, now that one was a Hella Game. Bradshaw was barely over 50% but the throws he made counted. He threw 4 TDS and ultimately outgunned the Cowboys. I'm not even going to argue this one. I mean statistically fans today would be freaking out about the 17 for 30 passing, but THIS game is where the Bradshaw Big Game QB legend really got going. The Steelers finally started throwing the ball and using Swann and Stallworth together. And they needed to against the Cowboys who were hitting on all cylinders. Heck of a game. Bradshaw deservedly was the MVP.
SB XIV Ultimately was a game that one can coin "The Sound and the Fury". From the score it looks amazing. But in reality, Bradshaw made 2 big plays, one to Stallworth and one to Swann. Fortunately for the Steelers both were in the 4th. But Franco patiently plugged away and ground in 2 TDs on a pedestrian 68 or so yards. Rocky pounded in another 25. The defense dug in and tried to compensate for Bradshaw's 3 interceptions on the day and it paid of with Lambert's late interception of Vince Ferragamo that put the game away. Bradshaw was named MVP and maybe he deserved it, but after 3 interceptions he may have been fortunate not to be pulled.
Again, I'm not going to bag on Bradshaw. He did make those throws. But when you look at the actual context of the 4 SBs, you see that the defense was so much more instrumental in the greater scheme of things than people truly understand. Bradshaw was willing and able to step up in huge moments and take that risk. And as we see it paid off. But Ben Roethlisberger is one Rashard Mendenhall fumble away from being 3 - 0 in SBs himself. And he plays in an era where it is MUCH harder to GET to the SB.
Which is why I think you final statement is ironic...
You don't GET to the SB without Roethlisberger. That's just the way it is.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 11,331
- Reaction score
- 10,034
- Points
- 113
Anyone who thinks Troy Aikman is an all-time great is huffing ether
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 35,861
- Reaction score
- 40,677
- Points
- 113
- Location
- between $2 short & ten buck two
Never tried ether,.....................NOW either is another story...................!!!!!
Troy Aikman had an all star cast who took a lot of drugs..............least ways one of them did....................
Ben Rothlesberger has been the absolute tough / accurate / small life slip & now clean / football player who has totally reversed from his youth. He gets so overlooked by many and that is mostly because they are jealous of him. Most fans of other teams will totally dis him on the rapelesberger thing but in the same breath will (if they are honest) admit they'd take him in a heart beat. I'm just glad that as a LIFETIME STEELERS fan I have had the pleasure of having the greatest all time STEELERS QB on my team. I appreciated Terry Bradshaw and still do but BEN has passed him hands down with no contest.
Salute the nation