Top 50 quarterbacks ever

[KCattheStripe]

Can someone explain to me how Favre beat 90% of Marino's records AND won a Super Bowl and is behind Dan 'The Man"?

Marino isn't the all time interception king, or the all time crucial-game-losing-4th-quarter-interception king

That's just my guess

Tats because Marino never got to the point where he was in a crucial game so he could lose it.

[Eja117]

He played a Super Bowl as a rookie. He was knocked out of the playoffs by the Pats in Bledsoe's rookie year. I'm not sure if that was the year he was hurt.

[Eja117]

So did Brett move up this list or down it this year? Down right?

Or maybe he stayed about where he was

[Donoghus]

On this particular list?  (Where I have some serious questions)

I'd probably keep him where he is.  He's still better than Aikman & Young.  I can't see him leaping in front of anyone either, though.

He had a pretty good season, to be honest with you.  He just made a huge, boneheaded mistake that, unfortunately, has become a trademark staple in the latter part of his career.

[Eja117]

On this particular list?  (Where I have some serious questions)

I'd probably keep him where he is.  He's still better than Aikman & Young.  I can't see him leaping in front of anyone either, though.

He had a pretty good season, to be honest with you.  He just made a huge, boneheaded mistake that, unfortunately, has become a trademark staple in the latter part of his career.

How anyone takes seriously an NFL QB who consistently makes mistakes that good Pop Warner QBs know not to make, and at the exact worst possible times is just beyond me. Also likes making himself bigger than the game or team.

I just do not get it.

Being able to deliver in the clutch is sort of a requirement of being a great QB right? So conversely losing the game at the worst possible moment, makes you a bad QB right?

When you say "the latter part of his career" I guess I agree. The thing is that his career has been so long that the latter part has been about a decade now. He's been a bonehead for a decade.

I'll give him this. If you cut his career in half the first half Brett is maybe a top 9 QB, but the second half is a bad QB. Certainly no better than a Drew Bledsoe or something.

[Donoghus]

On this particular list?  (Where I have some serious questions)

I'd probably keep him where he is.  He's still better than Aikman & Young.  I can't see him leaping in front of anyone either, though.

He had a pretty good season, to be honest with you.  He just made a huge, boneheaded mistake that, unfortunately, has become a trademark staple in the latter part of his career.

How anyone takes seriously an NFL QB who consistently makes mistakes that good Pop Warner QBs know not to make, and at the exact worst possible times is just beyond me. Also likes making himself bigger than the game or team.

I just do not get it.

Being able to deliver in the clutch is sort of a requirement of being a great QB right? So conversely losing the game at the worst possible moment, makes you a bad QB right?

When you say "the latter part of his career" I guess I agree. The thing is that his career has been so long that the latter part has been about a decade now. He's been a bonehead for a decade.

I'll give him this. If you cut his career in half the first half Brett is maybe a top 9 QB, but the second half is a bad QB. Certainly no better than a Drew Bledsoe or something.

Well, I think you kind've have to take a guy seriously when he holds numerous NFL records for quarterbacks.  He may make some questionable decisions at the worst of times but that doesn't neglect everything else he's achieved, either.

Yes, IMO, being able to deliver in the clutch is definitely the sign of a great quarterback.  However, its not mutually exclusive to determining the great quarterbacks from the bad, either.  No one ever said Marino was clutch but he's still considered one of the all-time greats.  Clutchness is only one attibute to use when grading these quarterbacks.  Some value it more than others but to say that he's a "bad quarterback for losing the game at the worst possible moment" is a pretty big overstatement when you evaluate the entire body of work.

I don't even like the guy but I have to respect his place in football history.

[PLamb]

I think this list has Elway, Bradshaw and Namath too high

Elway should be somewhere around 5-8

Bradshaw should be somewhere around 7-10

Namath, well I think there are at least 25-30 quarterbacks all time that are better than Namath, maybe more, heck, I would take Plunkett over Namath

Manning is a top 3 QB all-time

Brady top 6 and Favre top 8

1. Montana
2. Graham
3. Manning
4. Unitas
5. Brady
6. Starr
7. Favre
8. Elway
9. Bradshaw
10. Baugh(tie)
10. Marino(tie)

[Donoghus]

I think this list has Elway, Bradshaw and Namath too high

Elway should be somewhere around 5-8

Bradshaw should be somewhere around 7-10

Namath, well I think there are at least 25-30 quarterbacks all time that are better than Namath, maybe more, heck, I would take Plunkett over Namath

Manning is a top 3 QB all-time

Brady top 6 and Favre top 8

1. Montana
2. Graham
3. Manning
4. Unitas
5. Brady
6. Starr
7. Favre
8. Elway
9. Bradshaw
10. Baugh(tie)
10. Marino(tie)

That's a pretty solid list you have there although I still like Elway over Favre.  Bradshw might be a bit high too.  I hate to admit it but Manning has separated himself from Brady this season.  If he wins the Super Bowl, it'll be fairly evident even if Brady still has one more ring.

[Eja117]

On this particular list?  (Where I have some serious questions)

I'd probably keep him where he is.  He's still better than Aikman & Young.  I can't see him leaping in front of anyone either, though.

He had a pretty good season, to be honest with you.  He just made a huge, boneheaded mistake that, unfortunately, has become a trademark staple in the latter part of his career.

How anyone takes seriously an NFL QB who consistently makes mistakes that good Pop Warner QBs know not to make, and at the exact worst possible times is just beyond me. Also likes making himself bigger than the game or team.

I just do not get it.

Being able to deliver in the clutch is sort of a requirement of being a great QB right? So conversely losing the game at the worst possible moment, makes you a bad QB right?

When you say "the latter part of his career" I guess I agree. The thing is that his career has been so long that the latter part has been about a decade now. He's been a bonehead for a decade.

I'll give him this. If you cut his career in half the first half Brett is maybe a top 9 QB, but the second half is a bad QB. Certainly no better than a Drew Bledsoe or something.

Well, I think you kind've have to take a guy seriously when he holds numerous NFL records for quarterbacks.  He may make some questionable decisions at the worst of times but that doesn't neglect everything else he's achieved, either.

Yes, IMO, being able to deliver in the clutch is definitely the sign of a great quarterback.  However, its not mutually exclusive to determining the great quarterbacks from the bad, either.  No one ever said Marino was clutch but he's still considered one of the all-time greats.  Clutchness is only one attibute to use when grading these quarterbacks.  Some value it more than others but to say that he's a "bad quarterback for losing the game at the worst possible moment" is a pretty big overstatement when you evaluate the entire body of work.

I don't even like the guy but I have to respect his place in football history.

Let's say a guy plays a great great game for 3 and a half quarters. Then in the last 5 minutes of the game he throws multiple interceptions and loses the game and he does that routinely. That pretty much negates all the other good stuff he did, right? So that means the other QB on the field is better. Every time.

If you take Bill Buckner's play that he is known for and you extend that over a decade of a guy's career...you have Brett Farve.  Yeah. I know Bill Buckner did a lot of other good stuff. I like the guy. He showed a lot of guts and toughness. He was a really good guy.

That said. Brett Farve is the Bill Buckner of NFL QBs.  Plus one ring.

If you never leave the game eventually you'll have records. This week he broke Montana's post season yadda yadda record. The thing is it took him twice the time to do it.  I don't see how that's good.

[Donoghus]

On this particular list?  (Where I have some serious questions)

I'd probably keep him where he is.  He's still better than Aikman & Young.  I can't see him leaping in front of anyone either, though.

He had a pretty good season, to be honest with you.  He just made a huge, boneheaded mistake that, unfortunately, has become a trademark staple in the latter part of his career.

How anyone takes seriously an NFL QB who consistently makes mistakes that good Pop Warner QBs know not to make, and at the exact worst possible times is just beyond me. Also likes making himself bigger than the game or team.

I just do not get it.

Being able to deliver in the clutch is sort of a requirement of being a great QB right? So conversely losing the game at the worst possible moment, makes you a bad QB right?

When you say "the latter part of his career" I guess I agree. The thing is that his career has been so long that the latter part has been about a decade now. He's been a bonehead for a decade.

I'll give him this. If you cut his career in half the first half Brett is maybe a top 9 QB, but the second half is a bad QB. Certainly no better than a Drew Bledsoe or something.

Well, I think you kind've have to take a guy seriously when he holds numerous NFL records for quarterbacks.  He may make some questionable decisions at the worst of times but that doesn't neglect everything else he's achieved, either.

Yes, IMO, being able to deliver in the clutch is definitely the sign of a great quarterback.  However, its not mutually exclusive to determining the great quarterbacks from the bad, either.  No one ever said Marino was clutch but he's still considered one of the all-time greats.  Clutchness is only one attibute to use when grading these quarterbacks.  Some value it more than others but to say that he's a "bad quarterback for losing the game at the worst possible moment" is a pretty big overstatement when you evaluate the entire body of work.

I don't even like the guy but I have to respect his place in football history.

Let's say a guy plays a great great game for 3 and a half quarters. Then in the last 5 minutes of the game he throws multiple interceptions and loses the game and he does that routinely. That pretty much negates all the other good stuff he did, right? So that means the other QB on the field is better. Every time.

If you take Bill Buckner's play that he is known for and you extend that over a decade of a guy's career...you have Brett Farve.  Yeah. I know Bill Buckner did a lot of other good stuff. I like the guy. He showed a lot of guts and toughness. He was a really good guy.

That said. Brett Farve is the Bill Buckner of NFL QBs.  Plus one ring.

If you never leave the game eventually you'll have records. This week he broke Montana's post season yadda yadda recrod. The thing is it took him twice the time to do it.  I don't see how that's good.

The guy has won more games at QB position than anyone in the history of the game.  You can't simply neglect that.  There are a lot of games where he may have been outplayed by the other quarterback and still won.  Yes, clutchness is one factor to consider but you can't just glimpse over what the guy did in a lot of those games.  Obviously, he's had some huge losses on the biggest stage.  That doesn't just simply negate anything he has done.

Sure, longevity has helped Favre get a lot of these records but so has consistency.  Trying playing quarterback for 20 years in the NFL and maintain a starter position.  Its nearly impossible so that has to show for something.  The fact that he's making NFC Championship Games in his late 30s and at 40 says something.  To me, Montana is better than Favre and there's no debate.  But you still have to respect what Favre has done.

You're being awfully general in your assessment and your bias against Favre is pretty apparent.  If you're not going to look at the whole picture, there is really no further reason to debate here. Like I said, I hate the guy but here I am backing him up.

[PLamb]

How anyone takes seriously an NFL QB who consistently makes mistakes that good Pop Warner QBs know not to make, and at the exact worst possible times is just beyond me.

Any person who at age 40 can put up 33 TDs throw for 4200+ yds, complete 68% of his passes while only throwing 7 interceptions can lead his team to the NFC Championship game and continue to play play after play after play while getting nearly killed from hits that would render normal people near cripples, I take seriously as an NFL QB

Your hatred of this man aside if Berrian doesn't fumble on the 10 preventing a score, if Peterson doesn't fumble on the 10 preventing a score, if Harvin doesn't fumble on his own 20 leading to a 7 yard New orleans TD drive, and if some idiot didn't run out to the huddle to put 12 men on the field, Favre has no need to be throwing that pass

Favre had an unbelievable MVP type season at 40 years old

Only Blanda has ever been that good that late in his career

A little objectivity here please

I personally don't like the guy either or his antics with his retirements

He is definitely a tool

But there is no denying he is an unreal NFL QB

[MBz]

I think Young is a victim of not playing long enough.  I think he is 100% the better QB when in comparison to Aikman or Favre, but he was stuck behind Montana and had concussion issues and really only started for 8 years, but in 6 of those years, he had the best passer rating.  He was an extremely efficient QB and really shouldn be a little higher on this list.

[Fafnir]

I think Young is a victim of not playing long enough.  I think he is 100% the better QB when in comparison to Aikman or Favre, but he was stuck behind Montana and had concussion issues and really only started for 8 years, but in 6 of those years, he had the best passer rating.  He was an extremely efficient QB and really shouldn be a little higher on this list.

The counter-argument to this is that his lack of longevity meant we didn't see his struggles to start his career and also didn't see his natural decline because he had to retire early.

[Donoghus]

I think Young is a victim of not playing long enough.  I think he is 100% the better QB when in comparison to Aikman or Favre, but he was stuck behind Montana and had concussion issues and really only started for 8 years, but in 6 of those years, he had the best passer rating.  He was an extremely efficient QB and really shouldn be a little higher on this list.

The counter-argument to this is that his lack of longevity meant we didn't see his struggles to start his career and also didn't see his natural decline because he had to retire early.

He had some pretty big struggles in the USFL and with the Buccaneers to begin his career. 

[Brickowski]

Charlie Conerly was better than half those guys.