• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Opinions on my hour long twitter debate with John Steigerwald,

Coryea

Coryea

Nothing left to do but win the whole ******* thing
Member
Forefather
Joined
Apr 19, 2014
Messages
10,958
Reaction score
12,107
Points
113
Location
Western PA
He says Bradshaw is better than Ben and Archie Manning is better than Peyton Manning.
 
Said Ben does nothing better than Bradshaw.

Also, Stallworth, Swann, AB way better than Ward.
 
Steigerwald doesn’t debate, he just repeats his opinions. At the end of the season he tried to argue that 4-12 would’ve been better than 8-8, even after already trading the first-round pick. Basically said you should tank unless you win a playoff game.
 
SteelerFan448 said:
Steigerwald doesn’t debate, he just repeats his opinions. At the end of the season he tried to argue that 4-12 would’ve been better than 8-8, even after already trading the first-round pick. Basically said you should tank unless you win a playoff game.
Click to expand...

He'd probably be one of the first ones bitching when a team was losing on purpose too.
 
My main point was Bradshaw was a turnover machine, 210 INT's in 168 games, and was very inaccurate, even compared to other top QB's of the 70's(Staubach, Manning, Griese, Stabler), his response was he's more accurate than Ben.

As in most debates about players in different era's ( i look at if the players could play in the opposite era), I said Ben would excel in the 70's, Bradshaw would struggle with the complex offensive playbooks and the complex looks defenses throw at you right up until the snap of the ball, would also struggle with the quick timing patterns of today.
 
Coryea said:
My main point was Bradshaw was a turnover machine, 210 INT's in 168 games, and was very inaccurate, even compared to other top QB's of the 70's(Staubach, Manning, Griese, Stabler), his response was he's more accurate than Ben.

As in most debates about players in different era's ( i look at if the players could play in the opposite era), I said Ben would excel in the 70's, Bradshaw would struggle with the complex offensive playbooks and the complex looks defenses throw at you right up until the snap of the ball, would also struggle with the quick timing patterns of today.
Click to expand...

WTF is he thinking? More accurate than Ben?? Last time I checked 51.9 is a hell of a lot lower than 64.3 completion percentages. Like 3 standard deviations lower. Luckily Terry had a D and rushing attack to bail him out...
 
The only argument for Bradshaw was that he showed up bigger in big games. He was a big game QB. But if Ben would have played with the defense that won their SB's for the time that Bradshaw did, I think you would have seen more hardware. Plus, though I'm sure those Steelers teams of the 70's undoubtedly had plenty of competition they didn't have to deal with a team like the Pats. The combined passing percentage of Bradshaw and the backups in the first SB season would make Duck Hodges look like Joe Montana. but it was a different time. Passes were 50/50 ventures. But still Staubach and Tarkenton were more like 59% guys to Terry's 51%. Terry Breadshaw, was a great big game QB on probably top 3 Football Teams ever assembled. There is another thread about him being a First Ballot HOF or not. That is horse ****. The guy was the starting QB on a team that won for Championships. That gets him in regardless of the Stats. They are both great QB's and Ben is a better passer. Period.
 
Damn he must be bored, now he's saying Ben's throw to Holmes in 43 was a good pass, but but better catch, and it was no where near as good as Bradshaw's throw to Stallworth vs the Rams or the 63yard TD to Swann. All I said was Ben threw maybe the greatest Super Bowl winning TD ever.
 
Archie was a great QB on a lot of bad teams. It is really hard to say what he would have done with the weapons Peyton had

Ben is probably better than Terry was but as has been stated, Terry came up big in the big games. Terry did have two of the best ever to make his passes look better

It is hard to compare stats when the rules were so different in Terry's day and the way offenses attack is now so different with more quick passes

for the poster who said the Steelers didn't have a team like the pats to contend with. No they didn't, they had teams that would tear your head off and hand it back to you. You put the pats team back in the 70s with those rules and that team would not be successful.
 
Coryea said:
Damn he must be bored, now he's saying Ben's throw to Holmes in 43 was a good pass, but but better catch, and it was no where near as good as Bradshaw's throw to Stallworth vs the Rams or the 63yard TD to Swann. All I said was Ben threw maybe the greatest Super Bowl winning TD ever.
Click to expand...

that was a great pass and a great catch
 
By Steigerwald's logic, every QB in the 1970's was better than any that came after:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">When discussing QBs of different eras think of the expression MONDAY MORNING QUARTERBACKING. That was based on the fact that QBs were responsible for the game plan. They decided when to run, where to run, what routes the WR would run and whether to run or pass. Field generals.</p>— John Steigerwald (@Steigerworld) <a href="https://twitter.com/Steigerworld/status/1250424878726963200?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 15, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Looking at who had a better career vs. who is a better player are two different arguments. It's hard to overshadow 4 Super Bowl titles and I'm sure Ben would trade his passing numbers for four championships. However, his career is MUCH better than the national media gives him credit for. I couldn't find the exact numbers, but I believe the Steelers have the No. 2 winning percentage behind only the Patriots during his career. He currently ranks 8th All-Time in passing yards and 9th All-time in passing touchdowns. He's missed over two full seasons worth of games. If he plays those and matches his career average in passing, he would be No. 5 in passing yards and touchdowns ALL-TIME. He is No. 5 All-Time in playoff passing yards and tied for 9th with Bradshaw. Two Super Bowl titles in three appearances. Nevermind his career highlight film which has spectacular plays that few QBs during this era would pull off as well as possibly the greatest completion ever to win Super Bowl XLIII.

For the better player discussion, just ask yourself if you are starting a franchise and get to pick between Terry and Ben in the prime of their careers, who are you taking at QB? I'm taking Roethlisberger every time. His play transcends different eras. I agree with you, Coryea. Bradshaw was great, I just don't think he would be at Ben's level if he played today.
 
No sports for a month has made people real bored.
 
I hate comparing QBs from different eras. Yes, Bradshaw threw a lot of Ints. But he called his own plays. Also I wouldn't use the "defense carried him" argument. Ben would be 0-3 in SBs with out a great defense. Bradshaw won the SB against Dallas even though the defense gave up 31 points. In 79 the offense was ranked ahead of the defense. They were #1 in points and yards. Bradshaw would thrive in today's NFL where you can't touch WRs and you can't hit the QB. Ben is a great QB as well. I just don't see much merit in comparing them.
 
CoolieMan said:
Archie was a great QB on a lot of bad teams. It is really hard to say what he would have done with the weapons Peyton had

Ben is probably better than Terry was but as has been stated, Terry came up big in the big games. Terry did have two of the best ever to make his passes look better

It is hard to compare stats when the rules were so different in Terry's day and the way offenses attack is now so different with more quick passes

for the poster who said the Steelers didn't have a team like the pats to contend with. No they didn't, they had teams that would tear your head off and hand it back to you. You put the pats team back in the 70s with those rules and that team would not be successful.
Click to expand...

In all honesty, you put most teams from now back then, the team from now would physically dominate them. LB's today are bigger then OL and DL from then. There were no cheating dynasties then though, that got every possible break known to man kind.

It is hard to go across era's, but Bradshaw had a higher INT% than the other top QB's then, and a much lower completion % when compared to those QB's in the 70's.
 
The funny thing is, when the Ben bashers are out, they bash Ben for getting in the OC's way, but it's a plus for Terry that he called his own plays. Ben calls all the hurry up, fast tempo stuff.
Like I said, he obviously dislikes Ben, he takes it as if because you say Ben is better, that automatically means you think Bradshaw sucked.

One game to win, everything else being equal, I'll take Ben. I've seen him play the deep ball game, as well as the short quick hitting game, where I think Bradshaw would struggle.
 
The other thing is that Bradshaw was great in the playoffs. Staubach was a career 76.4 passer rating in the playoffs. Bradshaw was 83. Bradshaw was 14-5 in the playoff while Roger was 11-6. Bradshaw had a higher comp.%. 57.2 to 54.6. Roger was sacked 61 times to Bradshaw's 24. Bradshaw had an 8.4 YPA to 6.9 for Roger. The adjusted yards per pass was 7.16 to 5.96.

In the playoffs Bradshaw was not just on par with his peers he was better than almost all of them.
 
Coryea said:
My main point was Bradshaw was a turnover machine, 210 INT's in 168 games, and was very inaccurate, even compared to other top QB's of the 70's(Staubach, Manning, Griese, Stabler), his response was he's more accurate than Ben.

As in most debates about players in different era's ( i look at if the players could play in the opposite era), I said Ben would excel in the 70's, Bradshaw would struggle with the complex offensive playbooks and the complex looks defenses throw at you right up until the snap of the ball, would also struggle with the quick timing patterns of today.
Click to expand...

Some folks say Bradshaw would struggle spelling CAT even if you spotted him the C and T. ;-)

I love me some Terry. He probably still reigns as the best "big-game QB" ever, although, ironically little Eli Manning also happened to come up freaking huge in BIG GAMES. But, Eli had 2, Terri had 4. So... Advantage My Man!

All that said, Ben is the best QB the Steelers have ever had, going away. It's not close. Again, I love Terry, but you look at what Roethlisberger has done over his career statistically and just based on the eyeball test and clearly he is unquestionably the Steelers best QB and honestly a case can easily be made for him being in the top 25 all-time QBs.
 
I think the weeds of this argument really come down to Quarterback vs. Passer
Passer: mechanics, athleticism, velocity, balance, accuracy, size (many other traits)
Quarterback: Poise, leadership, reading defense, film study, (many other traits) and some definitely cross over.
And the weeds become much thicker when you cross eras. Ben has had access to all the state of the art teaching, coaching, analysis, physical training. Not to mention receivers that can routinely catch passes that you would never have dreamed of in the 70's. Bradshaw played in an era where it wasn't a given that the players didn't smoke and they got into shape at training camp.
The Reality is if you put Mike Tyson and Muhammad Ali somehow against each other in their total prime, Mike Tyson would destroy Ali. but if you gave a very young Ali access to all the things Tyson had, he would destroy Tyson. Its called evolution.
 
Archie Manning JR may end up better than his grandpa and 2 uncles asa 16 year old he looks very polished and has been putting up huge numbers, the debate is is he like grandpa and eli gonna to ole miss or perhaps which ever powerhouse offers a better deal and has a better coaches that woill help him whiten 2 years to be as good as the other Manning's
 
Coryea said:
My main point was Bradshaw was a turnover machine, 210 INT's in 168 games, and was very inaccurate, even compared to other top QB's of the 70's(Staubach, Manning, Griese, Stabler), his response was he's more accurate than Ben.

As in most debates about players in different era's ( i look at if the players could play in the opposite era), I said Ben would excel in the 70's, Bradshaw would struggle with the complex offensive playbooks and the complex looks defenses throw at you right up until the snap of the ball, would also struggle with the quick timing patterns of today.
Click to expand...



THIS !!!




I look at the two and this is the first thing I think off. Clearly Ben wins and also is my pick. LOVE E'm both dearly in our STEELERS regards but Ben is the top QB ever for the STEELERS.





Salute the nation
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top