PDA

View Full Version : McNabb vs Elway


Neo
06-18-2007, 11:30 AM
Banned for nothing or not... McNabb's first 8 seasons are significantly better than Elways on just about every level. Has he lead talentless teams deep into the playoffs? Yes, Led his team without his #1 offensive weapon (#2 if you considered Westbrook #1) to the superbowl... yes... Significantly better #'s at every single area of the game... yes...

It is a fact that McNabb's first 8 years are better than Elways... deal with it

JK17
06-18-2007, 11:34 AM
Oh jesus...

for the record Elways early teams weren't that talented either, McNabb has had a #1 target in TO when he led his team to a superbowl, and Elways first eight years were at a differnet time and situation then McNabb's were in...

but I would reccomend this just gets locked before it starts..

AlexDown
06-18-2007, 11:34 AM
And boom goes the dynamite

Neo
06-18-2007, 11:35 AM
Oh jesus...

for the record Elways early teams weren't that talented either, McNabb has had a #1 target in TO when he led his team to a superbowl, and Elways first eight years were at a differnet time and situation then McNabb's were in...

but I would reccomend this just gets locked before it starts..

Wait McNabb had TO when he led his team to the superbowl... funny i dont remember it happening like that

Sorry you lose
Try again

Love Neo

JK17
06-18-2007, 11:39 AM
Wait McNabb had TO when he led his team to the superbowl... funny i dont remember it happening like that

Sorry you lose
Try again

Love Neo

Leave. You don't even know McNabb's supporting cast, and you are going to try and make an argument that his was worse?

Look it up, TO was with the Eagles when they made the Super Bowl. He was their leading receiver.

Neo
06-18-2007, 11:42 AM
Leave. You don't even know McNabb's supporting cast, and you are going to try and make an argument that his was worse?

Look it up, TO was with the Eagles when they made the Super Bowl. He was their leading receiver.

Funny thing is i watched the playoffs that year... i dont remember seeing him, up until the superbowl... if you remember he was injured so as i said YET again McNabb lead the eagles to the superbowl. He did not have TO and infact their offense wasnt any worse in the games without TO averaging slightly more Points per game.

You lose
try again

Love Neo

JK17
06-18-2007, 11:45 AM
Funny thing is i watched the playoffs that year... i dont remember seeing him, up until the superbowl... if you remember he was injured so as i said YET again McNabb lead the eagles to the superbowl. He did not have TO and infact their offense wasnt any worse in the games without TO averaging slightly more Points per game.

You lose
try again

Love Neo

What about the entire regular season? You don't think Terrell Owens helped McNabb get better numbers at all?

Not only that, but its already disproving your argument he's never had a #1 WR...Why is it you don't grasp simple concepts, like the different times theyve played in, the overall accomplishments of their careers, anything like that...

Just stop, go home, and leave, no one likes trolls.

EDIT: AND by the way, when you make such a big deal about teams winning games, not QBs, how do you even get off saying McNabb led his team to the Super Bowl, when Elway has done it more times and more succesfully, then McNabb did?

Sniper
06-18-2007, 11:49 AM
Funny thing is i watched the playoffs that year... i dont remember seeing him, up until the superbowl... if you remember he was injured so as i said YET again McNabb lead the eagles to the superbowl. He did not have TO and infact their offense wasnt any worse in the games without TO averaging slightly more Points per game.

You lose
try again

Love Neo

What are you? 7 years old? You lose, try again. Showing some serious maturity. Elway is better than McNabb (I'm an Eagles fan), this really isn't a debate. McNabb, unless he stays healthy for 4-5 more years, wins a ring and puts up huge numbers, isn't going to the HOF. I'm sorry. It's the truth.

Neo
06-18-2007, 11:50 AM
What about the entire regular season? You don't think Terrell Owens helped McNabb get better numbers at all?

Not only that, but its already disproving your argument he's never had a #1 WR...Why is it you don't grasp simple concepts, like the different times theyve played in, the overall accomplishments of their careers, anything like that...

Just stop, go home, and leave, no one likes trolls.

EDIT: AND by the way, when you make such a big deal about teams winning games, not QBs, how do you even get off saying McNabb led his team to the Super Bowl, when Elway has done it more times and more succesfully, then McNabb did?

Of course his #'s in 2004 were improved however he didnt have a #1 when he lead his team to the superbowl... am i correct, and considering the beginning of last season McNabb's #'s were better than they were in 2004 i think it is safe to say he doesnt need a #1 to succeed. He also led his team deep into the playoffs, with Torrence Small and Charles Johnson, and Todd Pinkston and James Thrash if i recall.

Oh i dont care about led his team crap i am just pointing out that you cannot make that argument to say Elway as better. If you want to bring up the #'s Elway gets slaughtered as well...

and by the way i am not trolling. Simply admit that McNabb's first 8 years have been a whole hell of alot better than Elways. Get off the fan boy stuff and admit to reality.

JF4
06-18-2007, 11:50 AM
Please don't say that McNabb led talentless teams. He has led some very good teams over the years.The Eagles have had a great defense almost every single year he has been there. They have always been able to run the ball pretty effectively with Levens or Westbrook. Just because he's never had another player like TO doesn't mean the other players aren't any good.

I can't say I know too much about Elways first 8 years and the teams he played for so I'll just leave it at that.

SenorGato
06-18-2007, 11:51 AM
Dude...TO was an Eagle when they went to the Super Bowl.

Anyway, it's going to be tough to convince anyone that McNabb is a better QB than Elway. Maybe if he stayed healthy, but a reputation in the NFL is FAR tougher to overcome than anything else.

Elway has a reputation as a great clutch QB who single handedly did everything for the Broncos.

Honestly, I kind of agree with you in a sense. Elway DID play with some weak offenses, but its shocking how he improves so dramatically under Shanahan. For a guy who was so great before that, he sure did improve alot. Got more accurate...threw less INTs...

I know what you're talking about...but you're going to hear alot of intangibles talk...and the louder voice usually "wins" these things.

I like Elway alot and consider him one of the all time greats...but the jump in his numbers once he got a great QB coach kinda says that all of the "Elway played with crap" talk is a little bit skewed.

The funniest/worst is when you'd swear the Broncos were some terrible team without Elway. They had one of the better defenses in the NFL all of Elways career. For all but like 4 years of his career the Broncos were usually within the top 15, most of those in the top 10.

Neo
06-18-2007, 11:51 AM
What are you? 7 years old? You lose, try again. Showing some serious maturity. Elway is better than McNabb (I'm an Eagles fan), this really isn't a debate. McNabb, unless he stays healthy for 4-5 more years, wins a ring and puts up huge numbers, isn't going to the HOF. I'm sorry. It's the truth.

Were Elway's first 8 years better than McNabb's that is the question at hand. I would like to see you come up with a logical argument that says "elway's first 8 years were better than McNabbs". Of course Elway had a better career and late in his career he put up some of his best work. However, if you had to choose a QB who had the more successful first 8 seasons the only logical pick would be McNabb... by a longshot

JK17
06-18-2007, 11:53 AM
Of course his #'s in 2004 were improved however he didnt have a #1 when he lead his team to the superbowl... am i correct, and considering the beginning of last season McNabb's #'s were better than they were in 2004 i think it is safe to say he doesnt need a #1 to succeed. He also led his team deep into the playoffs, with Torrence Small and Charles Johnson, and Todd Pinkston and James Thrash if i recall.

Where to begin, he had a #1 WR for 14 games, something you said he didn't have. So that was wrong, and TO certainly boosted his numbers, only an idiot would debate that he didnt. This season he had Donte Stallworth, who was another legitimate target, with Reggie Brown to throw to as well, in addition to Westbrook. Elway had success without a great core early on also, so that whole argument is void.

Oh i dont care about led his team crap i am just pointing out that you cannot make that argument to say Elway as better. If you want to bring up the #'s Elway gets slaughtered as well...
You made such a big deal about it before though... And of course I can make that argument to say Elway is better, if your talking about McNabb leading his team through the playoffs. Super Bowl MVPs, Super Bowl Rings...What are things John Elway has and McNabb doesnt?

and by the way i am not trolling. Simply admit that McNabb's first 8 years have been a whole hell of alot better than Elways. Get off the fan boy stuff and admit to reality.
They weren't and no one would agree wtih you. I'm hardly an Elway fan boy I'm a Charger fan for cryin out loud. Just ... leave.

Neo
06-18-2007, 11:55 AM
Dude...TO was an Eagle when they went to the Super Bowl.

Anyway, it's going to be tough to convince anyone that McNabb is a better QB than Elway. Maybe if he stayed healthy, but a reputation in the NFL is FAR tougher to overcome than anything else.

Elway has a reputation as a great clutch QB who single handedly did everything for the Broncos.

Honestly, I kind of agree with you in a sense. Elway DID play with some weak offenses, but its shocking how he improves so dramatically under Shanahan. For a guy who was so great before that, he sure did improve alot. Got more accurate...threw less INTs...

I know what you're talking about...but you're going to hear alot of intangibles talk...and the louder voice usually "wins" these things.

I like Elway alot and consider him one of the all time greats...but the jump in his numbers once he got a great QB coach kinda says that all of the "Elway played with crap" talk is a little bit skewed.

The funniest/worst is when you'd swear the Broncos were some terrible team without Elway. They had one of the better defenses in the NFL all of Elways career. For all but like 4 years of his career the Broncos were usually within the top 15, most of those in the top 10.

TO was injured during the playoffs the year they went to the superbowl and had absolutely nothing to do with them getting to the superbowl. Fact

His reputation? what as one of the more successful QB's in NFL history as far as being the QB on good ball clubs, making plays with his arm and feet and being a leader.

Did elway not have the intangables early in his career? was he considered a choke artist because his early career wasnt any more successful than McNabbs.

Again any logical non fan boy would have to say McNabb's first 8 years are better than Elways

eacantdraft
06-18-2007, 11:56 AM
Were Elway's first 8 years better than McNabb's that is the question at hand. I would like to see you come up with a logical argument that says "elway's first 8 years were better than McNabbs". Of course Elway had a better career and late in his career he put up some of his best work. However, if you had to choose a QB who had the more successful first 8 seasons the only logical pick would be McNabb... by a longshot

Put down the crackpipe. Elway took his team to the Super Bowl 3 times in his 8 years, McNabb 1. McNabb also had a better defense on his team than Elway.

Elway is in the Hall of Fame. McNabb had a nice career, but has a long way to go before he is in the Hall of Fame.

JK17
06-18-2007, 11:56 AM
Again any logical non fan boy would have to say McNabb's first 8 years are better than Elways

Find me one.

Neo
06-18-2007, 11:58 AM
Where to begin, he had a #1 WR for 14 games, something you said he didn't have. So that was wrong, and TO certainly boosted his numbers, only an idiot would debate that he didnt. This season he had Donte Stallworth, who was another legitimate target, with Reggie Brown to throw to as well, in addition to Westbrook. Elway had success without a great core early on also, so that whole argument is void.


You made such a big deal about it before though... And of course I can make that argument to say Elway is better, if your talking about McNabb leading his team through the playoffs. Super Bowl MVPs, Super Bowl Rings...What are things John Elway has and McNabb doesnt?


They weren't and no one would agree wtih you. I'm hardly an Elway fan boy I'm a Charger fan for cryin out loud. Just ... leave.

I didnt know Stallworth and Brown were apparently very good WR's. My argument is void? not really, my argument still stands Elway's first 8 years were worse than McNabb's that statement is still true.

Did he have them after 8 seasons. NOPE

Again you failed to show how Elway was better and you failed to admit McNabb's first 8 seasons were better.

You Lose
Try again

Love Neo

Neo
06-18-2007, 11:59 AM
Find me one.

How isnt he?

M.O.T.H.
06-18-2007, 11:59 AM
WTH is this?

JK17
06-18-2007, 12:01 PM
I didnt know Stallworth and Brown were apparently very good WR's. My argument is void? not really, my argument still stands Elway's first 8 years were worse than McNabb's that statement is still true.

Did he have them after 8 seasons. NOPE

Again you failed to show how Elway was better and you failed to admit McNabb's first 8 seasons were better.

You Lose
Try again

Love Neo

Jesus Christ grow up...

Stallworth and Brown are good receivers, better then a lot of teams have in the NFL...

Yes your argument is void, because offensively, Elway did not have those weapons either, which means it does not matter what kind of weapons McNabb did or did not have.

I could also just argue like you do....He led his team to more Super Bowls in his first eight years: FACT

No one will admit to McNabb being better then Elway, its not true, now stop acting like a three year old, and realize you might be wrong on this one.

Oh and...

How isnt he?

does not come close to finding me one person..in fact it doesn't even remotely answer my challenge in the first place.

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:04 PM
Put down the crackpipe. Elway took his team to the Super Bowl 3 times in his 8 years, McNabb 1. McNabb also had a better defense on his team than Elway.

Elway is in the Hall of Fame. McNabb had a nice career, but has a long way to go before he is in the Hall of Fame.

Elway was 6-5 in the playoffs thru 8 years.
McNabb 7-5 in the playoffs thru 8 years

Holy crap that will be a problem for you Elway lovers to overcome

Bring forth your best arguments

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:05 PM
Jesus Christ grow up...

Stallworth and Brown are good receivers, better then a lot of teams have in the NFL...

Yes your argument is void, because offensively, Elway did not have those weapons either, which means it does not matter what kind of weapons McNabb did or did not have.

I could also just argue like you do....He led his team to more Super Bowls in his first eight years: FACT

No one will admit to McNabb being better then Elway, its not true, now stop acting like a three year old, and realize you might be wrong on this one.

Oh and...



does not come close to finding me one person..in fact it doesn't even remotely answer my challenge in the first place.


Wow you people really like fighting logic and reason. I am not saying elway is a terrible QB i am just saying that McNabb's first 8 years have been significantly better. It is just how it is.

JF4
06-18-2007, 12:06 PM
Of course his #'s in 2004 were improved however he didnt have a #1 when he lead his team to the superbowl... am i correct, and considering the beginning of last season McNabb's #'s were better than they were in 2004 i think it is safe to say he doesnt need a #1 to succeed. He also led his team deep into the playoffs, with Torrence Small and Charles Johnson, and Todd Pinkston and James Thrash if i recall.

Oh i dont care about led his team crap i am just pointing out that you cannot make that argument to say Elway as better. If you want to bring up the #'s Elway gets slaughtered as well...

and by the way i am not trolling. Simply admit that McNabb's first 8 years have been a whole hell of alot better than Elways. Get off the fan boy stuff and admit to reality.

It is safe to say he doesn't need a #1 to succeed but it's also safe to say that about other QB's who've made the Super Bowl over the past few years. The Eagles had Westbrook who i'd consider a legitimate playmaker. Here's a few examples.

2007 Bears last year: Probably not the best example because there offense wasn't that good for most of the year but they made it without a #1.

2006 Steelers: Only legitimate option was Hines Ward.

2005, 2004, 2002 Patriots: Balanced attacks every year. No legitimate #1 playmakers IMO.

2003 Buccaneers: None.

You could keep going back and back and it shows that you don't need to have a #1 receiver to be a great offense or to lead your team to the super bowl. The Eagles have had receivers who've been able to get the job done when they've been called upon.

Again I couldn't really contribute to the Elway Mcnabb argment because I dont know enough about it but i'm just trying to make a point that a #1 isn't necessary to go to a SB.

It's all about balance my friends.

JK17
06-18-2007, 12:06 PM
Wow you people really like fighting logic and reason. I am not saying elway is a terrible QB i am just saying that McNabb's first 8 years have been significantly better. It is just how it is.

Whatever, this argument is getting stale, I'm done debating it, have someone else convice you your wrong.

yourfavestoner
06-18-2007, 12:09 PM
Seriously....what the ****.

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:11 PM
Whatever, this argument is getting stale, I'm done debating it, have someone else convice you your wrong.

Again run away.... just give me a reason or 2 that Elway's first 8 seasons were better than McNabbs. I understand this might be hard for you to do, to challange your beliefs and keep up your hatered for McNabb, while showing love for your boy elway. However, for me this is fun EVERY SINGLE FACT is on my side and you people's love for Elway hides you from the light. This is like Plato's allegory of the cave.

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:12 PM
Seriously....what the ****.

Answer the question... how is McNabb's first 8 seasons not better than Elways.

Best of luck

draftguru151
06-18-2007, 12:16 PM
Again run away.... just give me a reason or 2 that Elway's first 8 seasons were better than McNabbs. I understand this might be hard for you to do, to challange your beliefs and keep up your hatered for McNabb, while showing love for your boy elway. However, for me this is fun EVERY SINGLE FACT is on my side and you people's love for Elway hides you from the light. This is like Plato's allegory of the cave.

EVERY SINGLE FACT?????????? Please go get EVERY SINGLE FACT and show
how EVERY SINGLE FACT proves your side.

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:18 PM
EVERY SINGLE FACT?????????? Please go get EVERY SINGLE FACT and show
how EVERY SINGLE FACT proves your side.

Stats (rushing/passing), Playoff wins(equal amount of losses), leadership... just plain being better at football.

TitleTown088
06-18-2007, 12:18 PM
Elway is a stud, McNabb is a buttwipe with a horrendous chunky soup beard.

JK17
06-18-2007, 12:19 PM
Stats (rushing/passing), Playoff wins(equal amount of losses), leadership... just plain being better at football.

I'll come back in...
What about Super Bowls? McNabb loses that one doesn't he...
I didn't know "Just plain being better at football" was a fact also, sounds like opinion to me...

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:19 PM
Elway is a stud, McNabb is a buttwipe with a horrendous chunky soup beard.

Is that 5000 posts like this?

CT Bronco Fan
06-18-2007, 12:20 PM
Answer the question... how is McNabb's first 8 seasons not better than Elways.

Best of luck

3 superbowls > 1 superbowl

draftguru151
06-18-2007, 12:20 PM
Stats (rushing/passing), Playoff wins(equal amount of losses), leadership... just plain being better at football.

Wow, that's every single fact? And I'm sure those last two are CLEARLY in favor of McNabb, and not just your opinion.

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:20 PM
I'll come back in...
What about Super Bowls? McNabb loses that one doesn't he...

Neither won a superbowl after 8 seasons, elway does have more superbowl losses.

Elway 6-5 in the playoffs, unlike a winner like McNabb who is 7-5

draftguru151
06-18-2007, 12:21 PM
Elway has more SB losses because he was in more SB. Kinda hard to lose a game you aren't even in.

TitleTown088
06-18-2007, 12:22 PM
Is that 5000 posts like this?
Yeah, probably. Is that 275 posts of retardation?

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:23 PM
Wow, that's every single fact? And I'm sure those last two are CLEARLY in favor of McNabb, and not just your opinion.

The last 2 were kinda sarcastic, but the first 2 are accurate... the fact remains that McNabb after 8 seasons has to be viewed as the more successful QB by anybody who is logical. This is just simply a logic test for this board. This board shows that the Majority of the members are not logical. I am not the type to bring race into this... but it may be a factor on why dispite being significantly better at football (over the first 8 seasons)McNabb is viewed as he is and Elway is viewed how he is... just throwing that out there.

JK17
06-18-2007, 12:23 PM
Neither won a superbowl after 8 seasons, elway does have more superbowl losses.

Elway 6-5 in the playoffs, unlike a winner like McNabb who is 7-5

7-5...what a world of differnce from 6-5...wow your right...that one game really separates the winners from the losers..

Like DG151 said, Elway lost more because he got his team to more....not to mention your leadership argument is flawed...Elway was three times the leader McNabb will ever be...

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:25 PM
7-5...what a world of differnce from 6-5...wow your right...that one game really separates the winners from the losers..

Like DG151 said, Elway lost more because he got his team to more....not to mention your leadership argument is flawed...Elway was three times the leader McNabb will ever be...

"he lost more because he got his team to more" HUH 5=5..... i didnt know 5 losses is more than 5 losses... confusing. As for Elway being 3 times the leader McNabb is? for his first 8 years he wasnt. Sorry. Also i agree they are both winners... just McNabb is more of a winner

draftguru151
06-18-2007, 12:25 PM
That must be it, everyone on this board is clearly illogical and racist, it's definitely not that you're argument is terrible.

JK17
06-18-2007, 12:25 PM
The last 2 were kinda sarcastic, but the first 2 are accurate... the fact remains that McNabb after 8 seasons has to be viewed as the more successful QB by anybody who is logical. This is just simply a logic test for this board. This board shows that the Majority of the members are not logical. I am not the type to bring race into this... but it may be a factor on why dispite being significantly better at football (over the first 8 seasons)McNabb is viewed as he is and Elway is viewed how he is... just throwing that out there.

There's an excuse to lock it up.
I'm not gonna mention the "r" word, I don't want any more infractions, but thats uncalled for and certainly has no place in this conversation... considering I've had infractions for defending things like that before, your way off base.

draftguru151
06-18-2007, 12:26 PM
"he lost more because he got his team to more" HUH 5=5..... i didnt know 5 losses is more than 5 losses... confusing. As for Elway being 3 times the leader McNabb is? for his first 8 years he wasnt. Sorry. Also i agree they are both winners... just McNabb is more of a winner

3 is more than one genius.

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:26 PM
3 is more than one genius.

It doesnt matter where you lose in the playoffs its that you win or lose. McNabb's playoff record is better is it not?

JK17
06-18-2007, 12:27 PM
"he lost more because he got his team to more" HUH 5=5..... i didnt know 5 losses is more than 5 losses... confusing. As for Elway being 3 times the leader McNabb is? for his first 8 years he wasnt. Sorry. Also i agree they are both winners... just McNabb is more of a winner

Yeah, 5 does equal 5. We were talking about Super Bowls...remember, Elway went to more of those.

I don't understand where the McNabb leadership argument really comes from either. I like McNabb, but he sure didn't do a great job holding the team together during the TO drama.

princefielder28
06-18-2007, 12:27 PM
nananana nananana hey hey hey good bye!

JK17
06-18-2007, 12:28 PM
It doesnt matter where you lose in the playoffs its that you win or lose. McNabb's playoff record is better is it not?

So what does that mean, McNabb has been able to consistently not get his team to the Super Bowl, whereas Elway has been more sucessful in getting his team there?

Besides, you act like they are worlds apart...I'm trusting your stats here which I don't know if I should be...but its one damn game difference!

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:29 PM
There's an excuse to lock it up.
I'm not gonna mention the "r" word, I don't want any more infractions, but thats uncalled for and certainly has no place in this conversation... considering I've had infractions for defending things like that before, your way off base.

I am not looking for an infraction by implying race. But i do not know how that doesnt come into a converstation like this. As we all know African americans were long viewed that they could not be Leaders as far as being a QB is concerned and that is exactly the arguments we see here. We ignore every single fact that favors the african american QB, while praising the leadership skills dispite the lack of .... well prefomence. I will stay away from the race issue after this post because apparently people on this board are not mature enough to handle it.

McNabb's first 8 years are significantly better than Elways.

CT Bronco Fan
06-18-2007, 12:30 PM
What it all comes down to is superbowls. McNabb has 1, Elway has 3.

reese
06-18-2007, 12:31 PM
neo, what is the stats for them both thru 8 years? yds, tds, ints, wins as a starter?

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:31 PM
So what does that mean, McNabb has been able to consistently not get his team to the Super Bowl, whereas Elway has been more sucessful in getting his team there?

Besides, you act like they are worlds apart...I'm trusting your stats here which I don't know if I should be...but its one damn game difference!

So McNabb is more successful in the playoffs thank you. The stats passing, rushing, tds, ints, completion % and the like are all available as well if you feel like looking them up. McNabb is smashing on elway in every single one of them. *FACT

also of course you should trust my stats... i dont make mistakes

draftguru151
06-18-2007, 12:32 PM
In the 5 post season losses 3 of Elways were in the SB, 2 he was knocked out in the first round (first 2 years of his career). In McNabb's 5 losses 1 was the 2nd round, 3 in the NFC championship game, and one was the SB. Please explain why Elway getting to the SB every year he went to the playoffs other than his first two in the NFL, is better than McNabb's getting to the SB once and losing.

JK17
06-18-2007, 12:32 PM
I am not looking for an infraction by implying race. But i do not know how that doesnt come into a converstation like this. As we all know African americans were long viewed that they could not be Leaders as far as being a QB is concerned and that is exactly the arguments we see here. We ignore every single fact that favors the african american QB, while praising the leadership skills dispite the lack of .... well prefomence. I will stay away from the race issue after this post because apparently people on this board are not mature enough to handle it.

McNabb's first 8 years are significantly better than Elways.

...You do realize you are the one who brought it into the conversation, you are the one who brought up leadership, and you are the one who continues to make no sense in your argument.

Elway's leadership skills were greater then McNabb's, regardless of any other outside condition. You have ignored every fact in favor of Elway and have done nothing other then repeat your same ignorant "8 years" argument.

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:33 PM
Yeah, 5 does equal 5. We were talking about Super Bowls...remember, Elway went to more of those.

I don't understand where the McNabb leadership argument really comes from either. I like McNabb, but he sure didn't do a great job holding the team together during the TO drama.

He didnt? how so?

CT Bronco Fan
06-18-2007, 12:33 PM
McNabb's first 8 years are significantly better than Elways.

statistics maybe but Elway had more superbows, and didn't have anywhere near the supporting cast that McNabb had.
Elway's first 8 years

1959 3572 54.8 24721 135 128

Mcnabb's first 8 years

1898 3259 58.2 22080 152 72

JK17
06-18-2007, 12:34 PM
He didnt? how so?

Well their season went to hell, the locker room was torn apart, the media made a mess of the whole situation...

Not to mention several Eagles took Owens' side over McNabbs....

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:35 PM
...You do realize you are the one who brought it into the conversation, you are the one who brought up leadership, and you are the one who continues to make no sense in your argument.

Elway's leadership skills were greater then McNabb's, regardless of any other outside condition. You have ignored every fact in favor of Elway and have done nothing other then repeat your same ignorant "8 years" argument.

I am not saying McNabb's career is better than Elway, Elway was able to improve his last few years and put up some respectable #'s and get himself 2 superbowl Rings. However, there is no doubt that after 8 seasons McNabb is significantly better. If McNabb wins 2 superbowls will he be mentioned as better than Elway? most likely not... however for the first 8 seasons someone was better... that someone is McNabb.

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:36 PM
Well their season went to hell, the locker room was torn apart, the media made a mess of the whole situation...

Not to mention several Eagles took Owens' side over McNabbs....

Were they? they rebounded pretty quick didnt they? Honestly, McNabb was injured in 2005, McNabb is the undisputed leader of the team like he has always been. I dont know how he didnt handle it well.... honestly it doesnt make much sense at all.

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:38 PM
statistics maybe but Elway had more superbows, and didn't have anywhere near the supporting cast that McNabb had.
Elway's first 8 years

1959 3572 54.8 24721 135 128

Mcnabb's first 8 years

1898 3259 58.2 22080 152 72

Torrence Small and Charles Johnson were fantabulous, Todd Pinkston and James thrash... EVEN BETTER.... McNabb was carried on a boatful of talent...

wait thats laughable

try again.

BTW whats with Elways 128 INT's it will take McNabb another half decade to catch him in that area

reese
06-18-2007, 12:38 PM
statistics maybe but Elway had more superbows, and didn't have anywhere near the supporting cast that McNabb had.
Elway's first 8 years

1959 3572 54.8 24721 135 128

Mcnabb's first 8 years

1898 3259 58.2 22080 152 72


so mcnabb does not blow away elway in every stat...

JK17
06-18-2007, 12:39 PM
Were they? they rebounded pretty quick didnt they? Honestly, McNabb was injured in 2005, McNabb is the undisputed leader of the team like he has always been. I dont know how he didnt handle it well.... honestly it doesnt make much sense at all.

Regardless of how quickly they rebounded, which they still haven't as they are not near the level of success they had before the incident, there was dissension in the locker room that McNabb was unable to control...

I think McNabb is a leader, and I like McNabb, but to say it doesn't make sense is dumb, and to rule Elway out as a better leader is dumber.

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:40 PM
so mcnabb does not blow away elway in every stat...

He pretty much is, those stats across the board have to be pretty embarrassing for any Elway lover. I mean how do you throw the ball to the other team so much... AWFUL

JK17
06-18-2007, 12:42 PM
He pretty much is, those stats across the board have to be pretty embarrassing for any Elway lover. I mean how do you throw the ball to the other team so much... AWFUL

Except it directly refutes your point you said that McNabb has more passing yards then Elway, as well as McNabb blowing away Elway in ever category...

Since he didn't....I thought we should trust your stats too...tsk...

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:44 PM
Except it directly refutes your point you said that McNabb has more passing yards then Elway, as well as McNabb blowing away Elway in ever category...

Since he didn't....I thought we should trust your stats too...tsk...

Look at those stats again and tell me which QB you would take. Elway had more passing yards in more games... Very Kitna'ish in your stat picking. However as we both can see as far as being a GOOD QB... Elway is getting slaughtered in stats... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA 128 INT's absolutely terrible

draftguru151
06-18-2007, 12:45 PM
Torrence Small and Charles Johnson were fantabulous, Todd Pinkston and James thrash... EVEN BETTER.... McNabb was carried on a boatful of talent...

wait thats laughable

try again.

BTW whats with Elways 128 INT's it will take McNabb another half decade to catch him in that area

Yes, those are the ONLY 4 people to catch passes from McNabb over the last 8 years. Who did Elway have as receivers? What about the protection? Who was blocking for both? And what about the scheme they ran? Stats are useless by themselves unless the scenarios are the same, and obviously they aren't. Your argument is so narrow and close minded it's ridiculous.

JK17
06-18-2007, 12:45 PM
Look at those stats again and tell me which QB you would take. Elway had more passing yards in more games... Very Kitna'ish in your stat picking. However as we both can see as far as being a GOOD QB... Elway is getting slaughtered in stats... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA 128 INT's absolutely terrible

Right, because all games are played on paper, and stats are the end-all of every discussion....
Besides, it shows that you lie in your "points" and really have no credibility whatsoever, if that already couldn't be obtained by your lack of knowledge on the subject anyway.

reese
06-18-2007, 12:46 PM
i only pointed it out because u specifically said elway had less yards

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:49 PM
Yes, those are the ONLY 4 people to catch passes from McNabb over the last 8 years. Who did Elway have as receivers? What about the protection? Who was blocking for both? And what about the scheme they ran? Stats are useless by themselves unless the scenarios are the same, and obviously they aren't. Your argument is so narrow and close minded it's ridiculous.

So whats your argument that Elway is better. It surely cannot be playoff or team success. It surely cannot be statistics... oh maybe its because you are a fanboy of Mr. Elway and hate on Mr. McNabb

You lose
Try again.

Love Neo

JK17
06-18-2007, 12:51 PM
So whats your argument that Elway is better. It surely cannot be playoff or team success. It surely cannot be statistics... oh maybe its because you are a fanboy of Mr. Elway and hate on Mr. McNabb

You lose
Try again.

Love Neo

fanboy? childish behavior?
I didn't know eacantdraft had another username..

But it can certainly be playoff and team sucess, being as Elway led his team to the big game three times as compared to McNabb's one.

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:52 PM
Repeat after me.

I (insert name) acknowledge that McNabb's first 8 seasons of his NFL career are better than Elways first 8 seasons of his career. I am sorry that i have been ignorant of this fact for so long. I personally thank Neo for showing me the light.

draftguru151
06-18-2007, 12:53 PM
Yes I'm clearly a John Elway fan boy and hate McNabb. That has to be it, that is why everyone on here hates McNabb and loves John Elway, we might as well change the site name to <3Elway<3/McNabbSUX. Once again I lose and you win, like always, if only I had your amazing knowledge.

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:53 PM
fanboy? childish behavior?
I didn't know eacantdraft had another username..

But it can certainly be playoff and team sucess, being as Elway led his team to the big game three times as compared to McNabb's one.

McNabb has a better playoff record my son... a fact that we cannot ignore. Elway has zero superbowl wins so that argument is null and void. It is funny how McNabb losing in the playoffs and superbowl is choking... but it isnt for Elway... simply foolish

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:55 PM
Yes I'm clearly a John Elway fan boy and hate McNabb. That has to be it, that is why everyone on here hates McNabb and loves John Elway, we might as well change the site name to <3Elway<3/McNabbSUX. Once again I lose and you win, like always, if only I had your amazing knowledge.

Again my friend, bring your game to the table. How is elway's first 8 seasons better. I mean it really isnt admitting to much other than logic. You can still say Elway had a better career... he has... but you cannot say he had a better first 8 seasons that is just a bold lie.

JK17
06-18-2007, 12:55 PM
McNabb has a better playoff record my son... a fact that we cannot ignore. Elway has zero superbowl wins so that argument is null and void. It is funny how McNabb losing in the playoffs and superbowl is choking... but it isnt for Elway... simply foolish

No one said anything about choking...just that Elway got his team farther. Learn to read a little more carefully. A fact we cannot ignore? It's one more game, and one game that is not half as significant as the games Elway played in at that point in his career.

Repeat after me.

I (insert name) acknowledge that McNabb's first 8 seasons of his NFL career are better than Elways first 8 seasons of his career. I am sorry that i have been ignorant of this fact for so long. I personally thank Neo for showing me the light.

Ban this troll.

draftguru151
06-18-2007, 12:56 PM
WOOOW ONE MORE PLAYOFF WIN, GOOOO MCNABB, that's clearly better than 2 more SB appearances.

JK17
06-18-2007, 12:57 PM
Again my friend, bring your game to the table. How is elway's first 8 seasons better. I mean it really isnt admitting to much other than logic. You can still say Elway had a better career... he has... but you cannot say he had a better first 8 seasons that is just a bold lie.

Ben Roethlisbergers' first two seasons were better then Unitas', Manning's, Elway's, McNabb's, Montana's, Marino's....lets admit to that, it must mean he is on pace for a better career...

Ryan Leaf even had a good first two games...

Those are relatively small examples, but you could make arguments like this for tons of QBs and it wouldn't mean much, because a career isn't eight years, so who really cares...


Oh, and McNabb's were not better then Elways.

scottyboy
06-18-2007, 12:58 PM
we can all agree Jim Sorgi is clearly better than either of the 2; or any other QB for that matter

Neo
06-18-2007, 12:58 PM
No one said anything about choking...just that Elway got his team farther. Learn to read a little more carefully. A fact we cannot ignore? It's one more game, and one game that is not half as significant as the games Elway played in at that point in his career.



Ban this troll.

They both got to the same point losing the superbowl. McNabb however has never lost in the first round of the playoffs Like Elway has done. McNabb is more successful during his first 8 seasons in the playoffs... that is fact. 7-5 is believe it or not better than 6-5...

also why should i be banned that is pretty immature

Go_Eagles77
06-18-2007, 12:58 PM
I'm an eagles fan, and even I have to say this is pretty dumb. McNabb is great, but he's not on Elway's level yet. I think he could be one day if he stays healthy, which is gonna be hard, if he can have full seasons like the first half of last year, he will be a first ballot HOFer, winning a SB wouldn't hurt, too, but I doubt too many people will say that he is the GOAT, like some people say for Elway. BTW Neo, your whole "Try again" crap is getting rather obnoxious, especially when they make a valid argument.

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:00 PM
Ben Roethlisbergers' first two seasons were better then Unitas', Manning's, Elway's, McNabb's, Montana's, Marino's....lets admit to that, it must mean he is on pace for a better career...

Ryan Leaf even had a good first two games...

Those are relatively small examples, but you could make arguments like this for tons of QBs and it wouldn't mean much, because a career isn't eight years, so who really cares...


Oh, and McNabb's were not better then Elways.

On your first point... not really Roethlisberger did put up good #'s and win a superbowl but never threw for 3000, never threw for 20 tds ect.

Also notice how you pick 2 years and 2 games... we are talking 8 years thats a pretty long time my friend. If it doesnt mean so much then just admit to a fact. They were better sorry my friend.

JK17
06-18-2007, 01:00 PM
They both got to the same point losing the superbowl. McNabb however has never lost in the first round of the playoffs Like Elway has done. McNabb is more successful during his first 8 seasons in the playoffs... that is fact. 7-5 is believe it or not better than 6-5...

They both lost in the Super Bowl...Elway got there more times though, so you couldn't have missed the point more...

If I could trade 2 First round eliminations for 3 Super Bowl appearances, I'd hop all over that....especially compare to what McNabb had...7-5 and 6-5 is one games difference....I'll take 6-5 all day long if it means i ge to more super bowls...

also why should i be banned that is pretty immature

You have no right to talk about immature..."I win you lose" ... "Try Again"...etc.

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:01 PM
I'm an eagles fan, and even I have to say this is pretty dumb. McNabb is great, but he's not on Elway's level yet. I think he could be one day if he stays healthy, which is gonna be hard, if he can have full seasons like the first half of last year, he will be a first ballot HOFer, winning a SB wouldn't hurt, too, but I doubt too many people will say that he is the GOAT, like some people say for Elway. BTW Neo, your whole "Try again" crap is getting rather obnoxious, especially when they make a valid argument.


First read the post home-slice it is about McNabb's first 8 seasons vs Elways first 8 seasons. McNabb's first 8 are significantly better.

CT Bronco Fan
06-18-2007, 01:03 PM
First read the post home-slice it is about McNabb's first 8 seasons vs Elways first 8 seasons. McNabb's first 8 are significantly better.

3 Superbowls > 1 Superbowl

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:03 PM
They both lost in the Super Bowl...Elway got there more times though, so you couldn't have missed the point more...

If I could trade 2 First round eliminations for 3 Super Bowl appearances, I'd hop all over that....especially compare to what McNabb had...7-5 and 6-5 is one games difference....I'll take 6-5 all day long if it means i ge to more super bowls...



You have no right to talk about immature..."I win you lose" ... "Try Again"...etc.

I thought in the playoffs if you lose... then you dont get a ring. Neither have a ring, McNabb has more playoff success. You simply do not make much of a point to me. Since when do we start hyping losing in the superbowl. Jim Kelly is the man.

Also again with playoff success, team success, stat success all favoring McNabb you people fight logic your hardest to defend him... cute

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:04 PM
3 Superbowls > 1 Superbowl

You mean 0-0

who has a better record in the playoffs.

McNabb

Who is more of a winner?

McNabb

JK17
06-18-2007, 01:05 PM
I thought in the playoffs if you lose... then you dont get a ring. Neither have a ring, McNabb has more playoff success. You simply do not make much of a point to me. Since when do we start hyping losing in the superbowl. Jim Kelly is the man.

Also again with playoff success, team success, stat success all favoring McNabb you people fight logic your hardest to defend him... cute

Getting to the Super Bowl three times is a hell of a lot more successful then getting there once, and having one more postseason win...

Playoff Success (Elway), Team Success (Elway), Stats (Most McNabb)...
use your logic.

draftguru151
06-18-2007, 01:06 PM
I love how Elway's losses in the SB don't count for anything, but McNabb's losses in the NFC championship game make him better. Please explain how one more playoff win is better than 2 SB appearances?

Do you think there is a reason that NO ONE agrees with you, not even Eagles fans? Do you ever think your arguments make no sense? You keep saying the same things over and over no matter how much they aren't true.

scottyboy
06-18-2007, 01:07 PM
You mean 0-0

who has a better record in the playoffs.

McNabb

Who is more of a winner?

McNabb

I'm sorry but Elway cant hear you, his super bowl rings are making too much noise

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:07 PM
Getting to the Super Bowl three times is a hell of a lot more successful then getting there once, and having one more postseason win...

Playoff Success (Elway), Team Success (Elway), Stats (Most McNabb)...
use your logic.

The playoffs is the playoffs is the playoffs. McNabb has a better record in the playoffs sorry. Again... you are fighting logic... defend his 128 INT's compared to McNabb's 72...

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:08 PM
I'm sorry but Elway cant hear you, his super bowl rings are making too much noise

Not after 8 seasons they arent

JK17
06-18-2007, 01:09 PM
The playoffs is the playoffs is the playoffs. McNabb has a better record in the playoffs sorry. Again... you are fighting logic... defend his 128 INT's compared to McNabb's 72...

Playoff Success=Getting to the Super Bowl...not every game is the same, and Elway got there three times....
FIND ME ONE PERSON who would take one more win in the playoffs, but two less Super Bowl appearances...

Brett Favre throws a hell of a lot of interceptions too...Is McNabb better then him? Stats don't mean as much as your twisting them too...

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:09 PM
I love how Elway's losses in the SB don't count for anything, but McNabb's losses in the NFC championship game make him better. Please explain how one more playoff win is better than 2 SB appearances?

Do you think there is a reason that NO ONE agrees with you, not even Eagles fans? Do you ever think your arguments make no sense? You keep saying the same things over and over no matter how much they aren't true.

You dont even have an argument. Elway has Zero rings after 8 seasons, a worse record in the playoffs, significantly worse #'s in very important stats like INT's.

McNabb's first 8 seasons are better than elways i am sorry to have to inform you of that.

CT Bronco Fan
06-18-2007, 01:10 PM
Elway has Zero rings after 8 seasons,

Sir, you are incorrect, he has THREE AFC Championship rings. as apposed to just one NFC championship ring for McNabb

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:11 PM
Playoff Success=Getting to the Super Bowl...not every game is the same, and Elway got there three times....
FIND ME ONE PERSON who would take one more win in the playoffs, but two less Super Bowl appearances...

Brett Favre throws a hell of a lot of interceptions too...Is McNabb better then him? Stats don't mean as much as your twisting them too...

1) So he gets bonus points for losing in the superbowl... does McNabb get credit then for not losing in the first round?... i am just wondering... i am assuming going deep into the playoffs is valuable to you... because you value his superbowl losses so much.

2) Yes, but farve did have some ridiculous seasons for part of his career that McNabb hasnt toppedthus far (favre's first 8 were better than McNabbs)

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:13 PM
Sir, you are incorrect, he has THREE AFC Championship rings. as apposed to just one NFC championship ring for McNabb

So we are counting AFC championship rings now... Whats next divisional playoff hats? Silly

McNabb's first 8 are significantly better...

JK17
06-18-2007, 01:13 PM
1) So he gets bonus points for losing in the superbowl... does McNabb get credit then for not losing in the first round?... i am just wondering... i am assuming going deep into the playoffs is valuable to you... because you value his superbowl losses so much.

1) Yes you do. It means Elway won 3 AFC Championships, to McNabb's 1 NFC Championships. Going to the Super Bowl is important, McNabb gets credit for not losing in the first round, but not nearly as much as Elway for winning 3 AFC Championships.

2) Yes

2) So are there any other NFL Legends you want to spit on? Elway, Favre...is McNabb better then Montana as well?

Go_Eagles77
06-18-2007, 01:14 PM
First read the post home-slice it is about McNabb's first 8 seasons vs Elways first 8 seasons. McNabb's first 8 are significantly better.

The only thing I see better is the TD-INT ratio, but that's just stats, a lot of things factor in what makes someone a good football player, don't get me wrong, I am a huge McNabb supporter, but you have to stop drinking the green Kool-Aid.

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:16 PM
The only thing I see better is the TD-INT ratio, but that's just stats, a lot of things factor in what makes someone a good football player, don't get me wrong, I am a huge McNabb supporter, but you have to stop drinking the green Kool-Aid.

Over 50 less INT's with more TD passes and a higher completion %. PLUS rushing yards and rushing TD's. McNabb destroys Elway statistically. Now we go to playoffs where McNabb has also had more success posting a 7-5 playoff record compared to Elways 6-5 record in the playoffs.

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:17 PM
Incase you people missed it i was nice enough to make a simple layout for you to copy and paste

Repeat after me.

I (insert name) acknowledge that McNabb's first 8 seasons of his NFL career are better than Elways first 8 seasons of his career. I am sorry that i have been ignorant of this fact for so long. I personally thank Neo for showing me the light.

JK17
06-18-2007, 01:17 PM
Over 50 less INT's with more TD passes and a higher completion %. PLUS rushing yards and rushing TD's. McNabb destroys Elway statistically. Now we go to playoffs where McNabb has also had more success posting a 7-5 playoff record compared to Elways 6-5 record in the playoffs.

Destroys? He has 4% points better then Elway...Elway has more yards then him...how is this destroying him?

And no, the consensus will tell you Elway had more playoff success...its logic..

Shiver
06-18-2007, 01:19 PM
Stats are so different in today's era. Anyone with any knowledge of historical context would know this. That's like saying Donovan McNabb is a better player than Terry Bradshaw or Johnny Unitas. It is a stupid argument, through and through. By posting this you show that you are some immature, Eagles homer, who doesn't truly know the game of football.

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:20 PM
Destroys? He has 4% points better then Elway...Elway has more yards then him...how is this destroying him?

And no, the consensus will tell you Elway had more playoff success...its logic..

Yeah having a worse record is significantly more logical than a better record. With neither holding a championship ya gotta go with the best Record... thats logic.

128 INT's Elway (btw god awful)
72 INT's McNabb (btw one of the best in NFL history, in INT/PA)

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:21 PM
Stats are so different in today's era. Anyone with any knowledge of historical context would know this. That's like saying Donovan McNabb is a better player than Terry Bradshaw or Johnny Unitas. It is a stupid argument, through and through. By posting this you show that you are some immature, Eagles homer, who doesn't truly know the game of football.

Not really i dont care all that much about the eagles... i am just using FACTS to point out that McNabb's first 8 seasons are significantly better than Elways. In all parts of the game called football.

Also Terry Bradshaw wasnt that good.

CT Bronco Fan
06-18-2007, 01:21 PM
Yeah having a worse record is significantly more logical than a better record. With neither holding a championship ya gotta go with the best Record... thats logic.

128 INT's Elway (btw god awful)
72 INT's McNabb (btw one of the best in NFL history, in INT/PA)

The funniest part is you wouldn't of even known those numbers if I hadn't looked them up for you.

JK17
06-18-2007, 01:22 PM
Yeah having a worse record is significantly more logical than a better record. With neither holding a championship ya gotta go with the best Record... thats logic.

128 INT's Elway (btw god awful)
72 INT's McNabb (btw one of the best in NFL history, in INT/PA)

Elway has 3 AFC Championships...
McNabb has 1 NFC Championship...

No one is defending Elway's Interceptions, but your way too into these stats.

And please stop saying McNabb blows Elway away, its not true in stats.

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:22 PM
The funniest part is you wouldn't of even known those numbers if I hadn't looked them up for you.

Actually you can see i posted those #'s maybe a month ago on the eagles team board you can do a search if you like. It is in the main thread...

so yet again you are wrong
try again

love neo

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:25 PM
Elway has 3 AFC Championships...
McNabb has 1 NFC Championship...

No one is defending Elway's Interceptions, but your way too into these stats.

And please stop saying McNabb blows Elway away, its not true in stats.


So 17 more TD's and 56 less INT's isnt blowing him away. That is one of the biggest blow outs i have ever seen.

And again McNabb has a better playoff record

JK17
06-18-2007, 01:25 PM
So 17 more TD's and 56 less INT's isnt blowing him away. That is one of the biggest blow outs i have ever seen.

And again McNabb has a better playoff record

There are more stats then just that.

And keep telling yourself that 3 Championships to 1 Championship is less successful then a one game difference in playoff records...

broncs2bowl
06-18-2007, 01:26 PM
Yo Neo you obnoxiuos no football knowledge smarta**. I remember you lovefest for Johnny Unitas being the best QB to ever play the game. Well obviously Elway was better with his stats because he had more yards better PCT etc. Any OMG Unitas threw 131 picks!!! THAT IS JUST DREADFUL! No way we is a good QB.

Unitas comp att PCT Yd Y/A TD INT
1st 8yrs 1489 2726 54.6 21491 7.9 168 131

"Elway's first 8 years

1959 3572 54.8 24721 135 128

Mcnabb's first 8 years

1898 3259 58.2 22080 152 72" (previously posted by you)

Even though I showed you Elway has better stats that your homeboy Unitas you still have no doubt in your mind he is the best. Which is why stats dont say anything. McNabb is not anywhere near Elway just cause he threw 20 or so more TDS and less INT. (((ALSO this just popped to my head-- McNabb has better numbers than Unitas, he is obviously better than your "Best QB of all time" isnt he)))

try again

love broncs2bowl

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:27 PM
There are more stats then just that.

And keep telling yourself that 3 Championships to 1 Championship is less successful then a one game difference in playoff records...

So we are calling superbowl losses championships now... cute

you are really reaching arent you

also is 17 TD's more and 56.. yes 50 fn 6 less INT significantly better or is it not?

JK17
06-18-2007, 01:28 PM
So we are calling superbowl losses championships now... cute

you are really reaching arent you

also is 17 TD's more and 56.. yes 50 fn 6 less INT significantly better or is it not?

No, we're calling AFC Championship Game wins....Championship Game wins...

And as equally obnoxious as Broncs2Bowl's post was, assuming his information is correct, that should tell you something about the significance of stats.

CT Bronco Fan
06-18-2007, 01:29 PM
06-09-2007, 08:38 PM

First 8 Elway vs McNabb make a case for Elway... Seriously make your best attempt at a case... there really is none... REPEAT AFTER ME MCNABB's FIRST 8 SEASONS ARE BETTER THAN ELWAYS. (by far)

So you didn't get your point across then, and had an whole thread of people calling you wrong then, so you needed to start a new thread why?

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:29 PM
Yo Neo you obnoxiuos no football knowledge smarta**. I remember you lovefest for Johnny Unitas being the best QB to ever play the game. Well obviously Elway was better with his stats because he had more yards better PCT etc. Any OMG Unitas threw 131 picks!!! THAT IS JUST DREADFUL! No way we is a good QB.

Unitas comp att PCT Yd Y/A TD INT
1st 8yrs 1489 2726 54.6 21491 7.9 168 131

"Elway's first 8 years

1959 3572 54.8 24721 135 128

Mcnabb's first 8 years

1898 3259 58.2 22080 152 72" (previously posted by you)

Even though I showed you Elway has better stats that your homeboy Unitas you still have no doubt in your mind he is the best. Which is why stats dont say anything. McNabb is not anywhere near Elway just cause he threw 20 or so more TDS and less INT. (((ALSO this just popped to my head-- McNabb has better numbers than Unitas, he is obviously better than your "Best QB of all time" isnt he)))

try again

love broncs2bowl


Actually i was saying Peyton Manning is the greatest QB ever. LOL


Also McNabb's first 8 seasons are better than Elways... thanks for proving my point and the personal attack.

Love Neo

broncs2bowl
06-18-2007, 01:31 PM
Actually i was saying Peyton Manning is the greatest QB ever. LOL


Also McNabb's first 8 seasons are better than Elways... thanks for proving my point and the personal attack.

Love Neo

ok maybe you said Manning, but you said Unitas is definatly right after him and he is better than Elway which the stats dont prove.

try again

love b2b

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:33 PM
ok maybe you said Manning, but you said Unitas is definatly right after him and he is better than Elway which the stats dont prove.

try again

love b2b

You mean "Neo you are right you def did say Manning"... Actually i never said Unitas is definately right after him... Wrong again, i would never make such an illogical claim

try again

love neo

scottyboy
06-18-2007, 01:33 PM
until anyone here gives me proof as to why Jim Sorgi isnt better than either of the 2, i will stand my ground

neko4
06-18-2007, 01:34 PM
So we are calling superbowl losses championships now... cute

you are really reaching arent you

also is 17 TD's more and 56.. yes 50 fn 6 less INT significantly better or is it not?

Im sick and tired of you.
AFC/NFC Championships you genius

broncs2bowl
06-18-2007, 01:34 PM
You mean "Neo you are right you def did say Manning"... Actually i never said Unitas is definately right after him... Wrong again, i would never make such an illogical claim

try again

love neo

actually you did say Unitas is better than Elway because I had an argument with you

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:35 PM
Im sick and tired of you.
AFC/NFC Championships you genius

I didnt know they were important i thought in the playoffs your goal was to win the superbowl. Neither did thru 8 seasons. McNabb however did however walk off the field a winner in the playoffs more times during his first 8 seasons.

neko4
06-18-2007, 01:36 PM
You mean "Neo you are right you def did say Manning"... Actually i never said Unitas is definately right after him... Wrong again, i would never make such an illogical claim

try again

love neo

Dont even get me started again. Manning plays in warm weather, in a dome, with a great offensive line, a HOF WR, and a pro bowl WR and TE, and he once had a Pro bowl HB

Unitas had two good players, and besides that was 100000000 times tougher than Manning.

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:36 PM
actually you did say Unitas is better than Elway because I had an argument with you

Not really... i couldnt care less about Johnny U... I care about stone cold hard facts.

Like the following

McNabb's first 8 seasons are better than Elways first 8 seasons. Who is going to be the first to admit that they are wrong. You can go to pages 3 and 4 and find a simple copy and paste.

neko4
06-18-2007, 01:37 PM
I didnt know they were important i thought in the playoffs your goal was to win the superbowl. Neither did thru 8 seasons. McNabb however did however walk off the field a winner in the playoffs more times during his first 8 seasons.

Yes, but he only made the Super Bowl once, Elway 3 times

scottyboy
06-18-2007, 01:37 PM
http://www.denverbroncos.com/resources/custom/Ring%20of%20Fame%20Pix/elway.jpg


http://www.ontherac.com/images/trophycase.jpg
^ Donovan's trophy case

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:39 PM
Dont even get me started again. Manning plays in warm weather, in a dome, with a great offensive line, a HOF WR, and a pro bowl WR and TE, and he once had a Pro bowl HB

Unitas had two good players, and besides that was 100000000 times tougher than Manning.

1) Stick to the topic at hand
2) Manning has never missed a game... but in 1958 that punk unitas missed 2 games... i dont know why... but i do know that makes him a punk, unlike the warrior known as manning who would have played.


McNabb's first 8 seasons are better than Elways... fact

reese
06-18-2007, 01:40 PM
mcnabb is probley my fav qb in the nfl...and has been for the last few years...but this argument could go on forever...it comes down to how a person views sucess...if ud rather have 1 conference championship and better stats and thats what u think is a better start to ur career then thats just what u think...now normal ppl would probley take lesser stats but 3 conference championships and say thats better and i would agree...now i think that the 2 are very close over there 1st 8 years...i think its alot closer then what some of the elway supporters think...i also think elway is the 2nd best qb to ever play the game so its not like i dont like elway...me personally id take elway over the 1st 8 years becuz every teams goal is to get to the superbowl...and of course elway did it more....but were not gonna change neo's view on what more sucessful is so we should just stop tryin

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:41 PM
Yes, but he only made the Super Bowl once, Elway 3 times

So losing in the superbowl makes you a better QB then a QB who has a better playoff record and absolutely dominating statistics. Thats silly where my Jim Kelly fans at... holla

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:43 PM
mcnabb is probley my fav qb in the nfl...and has been for the last few years...but this argument could go on forever...it comes down to how a person views sucess...if ud rather have 1 conference championship and better stats and thats what u think is a better start to ur career then thats just what u think...now normal ppl would probley take lesser stats but 3 conference championships and say thats better and i would agree...now i think that the 2 are very close over there 1st 8 years...i think its alot closer then what some of the elway supporters think...i also think elway is the 2nd best qb to ever play the game so its not like i dont like elway...me personally id take elway over the 1st 8 years becuz every teams goal is to get to the superbowl...and of course elway did it more....but were not gonna change neo's view on what more sucessful is so we should just stop tryin


They are not very close at ALL McNABB destroys Elway... i mean 128 INT's Awful somebody needs to tell him to throw to the right team now and then. The goal is to win the superbowl neither did that. Playoff Success (McNabb) Stats (MCNABB BY A LONGSHOT) Who is better (MCNABB)

scottyboy
06-18-2007, 01:43 PM
mcnabb is probley my fav qb in the nfl...and has been for the last few years...but this argument could go on forever...it comes down to how a person views sucess...if ud rather have 1 conference championship and better stats and thats what u think is a better start to ur career then thats just what u think...now normal ppl would probley take lesser stats but 3 conference championships and say thats better and i would agree...now i think that the 2 are very close over there 1st 8 years...i think its alot closer then what some of the elway supporters think...i also think elway is the 2nd best qb to ever play the game so its not like i dont like elway...me personally id take elway over the 1st 8 years becuz every teams goal is to get to the superbowl...and of course elway did it more....but were not gonna change neo's view on what more sucessful is so we should just stop tryin

how to define success? in the words of a former new york coach,
YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME. something Elway has, and Donovan hasnt, win the super bowl

reese
06-18-2007, 01:45 PM
They are not very close at ALL McNABB destroys Elway... i mean 128 INT's Awful somebody needs to tell him to throw to the right team now and then. The goal is to win the superbowl neither did that. Playoff Success (McNabb) Stats (MCNABB BY A LONGSHOT) Who is better (MCNABB)


no, the stats are close...the only one mcnabb blows him away in is ints....he doesnt blow him away in yards cuz elway has more...he doesnt blow him away in tds..its pretty close..the only stat he blows him away in is ints

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:45 PM
how to define success? in the words of a former new york coach,
YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME. something Elway has, and Donovan hasnt, win the super bowl

Hey smarty... we are talking about the first 8 seasons... To my knowledge Elway didnt win one during that period of time. Posted significantly worse #'s and a worse playoff record.

Go_Eagles77
06-18-2007, 01:45 PM
This argument is ridiculous, obviously no one is gonna convince neo that Elway was better, and neo's not gonna convince anyone that McNabb was better.

reese
06-18-2007, 01:46 PM
how to define success? in the words of a former new york coach,
YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME. something Elway has, and Donovan hasnt, win the super bowl

i agree..u play to win..but winning isnt always the end all be all in comparing 2 players..while neither is stats...i think its a happy medium between the 2 along with the situation that the 2 players were in....both the guys were talkin about were in similar situations...with similar numbers..but elway has more conference championships so thats why i go with him

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:46 PM
no stats are close...the only one mcnabb blows him away in is ints....he doesnt blow him away in yards cuz elway has more...he doesnt blow him away in tds..its pretty close..the only stat he blows him away in is ints

17 isnt all that close. And INT's is a very important stat. When a QB is throwing for 17 more TD's and 50 less INT's he is BLOWING the other QB away. McNabb wont catch Elway in INT's over the next 4/5 seasons.

neko4
06-18-2007, 01:47 PM
Plus...
When Unitas retired he held 22 records. Including most completions, attempts, yards, 300yd games, TD passes, and seasons leading the league in TD's. SO...Unitas was the Marino of his time, but since it was a different time period his stats dont look that great in comparison to the Marinos and Mannings. But how can you expect the man of the 50's and 60's to comare with the man of the 80's-00's. Its like asking the Roman's to build a tank. If they had the technology and knowledge they could, but man had yet to build a gun or car yet, so a tank was a long way off. Same thing with QB's. QB's had yet to throw for 40,000 until Unitas did, and since Unitas did it provided incentive for QB's to break his record allowing the position to progress stats wise.

cunningham06
06-18-2007, 01:47 PM
Neo do you honestly think that it's a coincidence that all of the Eagles fans on this board disagree with you? Logically if McNabb truly was the superior qb to John Elway, wouldn't Eagles fans be adamant about saying so?

All you have are stats. Athletically, Donovan could be considered superior, but he isn't the leader Elway was. Donovan is not a leader and never has been. I'd take Elway every time.

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:48 PM
This argument is ridiculous, obviously no one is gonna convince neo that Elway was better, and neo's not gonna convince anyone that McNabb was better.

The argument is only ridiculous when you look at the facts. McNabb's first 8 seasons were better than Elway's first 8 seasons... there is no really getting around those facts. I dont understand why people fight reality so hard. Its not saying McNabb's career is going to come out better than Elways career, it is just pointing out the simple fact that McNabb's first 8 seasons in Professional football have to be considered more successful than Elways first 8 seasons.

Repeat after me.

I (insert name) acknowledge that McNabb's first 8 seasons of his NFL career are better than Elways first 8 seasons of his career. I am sorry that i have been ignorant of this fact for so long. I personally thank Neo for showing me the light.

neko4
06-18-2007, 01:51 PM
1) Stick to the topic at hand
2) Manning has never missed a game... but in 1958 that punk unitas missed 2 games... i dont know why... but i do know that makes him a punk, unlike the warrior known as manning who would have played.


McNabb's first 8 seasons are better than Elways... fact

Hmm thats probably cuz Johnny U could run with the ball. All Manning does is sit in the cushioned pocket. This year was basically his first year where he rolled out and Favre has been doing that forever and hasnt missed a game.

So losing in the superbowl makes you a better QB then a QB who has a better playoff record and absolutely dominating statistics. Thats silly where my Jim Kelly fans at... holla

No reaching the Super Bowl makes you better. Plus the only one McNabb went to he lost, and threw up when the game was to hot for him to handle. I mean I like McNabb but I wouldnt even put him in my top 50

reese
06-18-2007, 01:51 PM
17 isnt all that close. And INT's is a very important stat. When a QB is throwing for 17 more TD's and 50 less INT's he is BLOWING the other QB away. McNabb wont catch Elway in INT's over the next 4/5 seasons.


well in that case elway BLOWS mcnabb away in yards....2,000 yds isnt close at all

draftguru151
06-18-2007, 01:51 PM
The argument is only ridiculous when you look at the facts. McNabb's first 8 seasons were better than Elway's first 8 seasons... there is no really getting around those facts. I dont understand why people fight reality so hard. Its not saying McNabb's career is going to come out better than Elways career, it is just pointing out the simple fact that McNabb's first 8 seasons in Professional football have to be considered more successful than Elways first 8 seasons.

Repeat after me.

I (insert name) acknowledge that McNabb's first 8 seasons of his NFL career are better than Elways first 8 seasons of his career. I am sorry that i have been ignorant of this fact for so long. I personally thank Neo for showing me the light.

Yes, when we look at your facts it does make the argument that much more ridiculous.

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:51 PM
Neo do you honestly think that it's a coincidence that all of the Eagles fans on this board disagree with you? Logically if McNabb truly was the superior qb to John Elway, wouldn't Eagles fans be adamant about saying so?

All you have are stats. Athletically, Donovan could be considered superior, but he isn't the leader Elway was. Donovan is not a leader and never has been. I'd take Elway every time.

How is donovan not a leader... i am pretty sure all his teammates and coaches consider he is a leader... and considering he has a better playoff record than your boy elway over 8 seasons it is safe to say he is atleast the leader elway was at that point.

As for the eagles fans... Most eagles fans are what Howard Eskin would call them "nitwits". Also historically speaking philadelphia has been one of the more racist cities in the nation.

Eagles own the NFC East
06-18-2007, 01:52 PM
I am an Eagles fan and think this is outrageous, comparing McNabb to Elway. Nothing against McNabb hes a top 8 QB in the NFL, but Elway is top 5 all time. You say that McNabb has better 8 seasons, thats not necessarily true and even if it was he sure wont have a better 2nd half career with all his injuries and Kevin Kolb waiting in the wings. Elway had a great last few years of his career to. McNabb has had too many injuries to be compared to Elway.

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:54 PM
well in that case elways BLOWS mcnabb away in yards....2,000 yds isnt close at all

Actually it is... 2000 yards is maybe 8 NFL games... 56 INTS now that will take a while...

Plus mcnabb played less games and all that other cute stuff we could get into

if you dont admit that McNabb has significantly better #'s you are just being silly.

neko4
06-18-2007, 01:55 PM
How is donovan not a leader... i am pretty sure all his teammates and coaches consider he is a leader... and considering he has a better playoff record than your boy elway over 8 seasons it is safe to say he is atleast the leader elway was at that point.

As for the eagles fans... Most eagles fans are what Howard Eskin would call them "nitwits". Also historically speaking philadelphia has been one of the more racist cities in the nation.

Yes but did McNabb drive the Eagles 98 yards to beat the Patriots. As a matter fact he probably wouldnt have had to go that far.

broncs2bowl
06-18-2007, 01:55 PM
Not really... i couldnt care less about Johnny U... I care about stone cold hard facts.

Like the following

McNabb's first 8 seasons are better than Elways first 8 seasons. Who is going to be the first to admit that they are wrong. You can go to pages 3 and 4 and find a simple copy and paste.

ok **** your right you dont give a ratsa** about Unitas. But Elway had more yards and completions than McNabb. He only had 20 more TDs which is not that impressive considering he has the best pass blocking/one of the best pass blocking lines in all of football. Also if McNabb is so great how come it took him 4 !!! NFC Champ games to get to the big dance. He never could put the team on his back when it counted the most. And that one where he made the SuperBowl had a lot to do with Vick sucking buttcrack in the NFC Champ do to the suffocating Defense of eagles that applied relentless pressure on Qbs and was a big part of a 14-2 season.

Plus other than his first two years where he was botted out of the first round due to inexperience. Elway led the Broncos to the Bowl every time he made the playoffs. McNabb led the eagles to the playoffs 6 times and only got to the bowl once!

So here are some numbers for Playoff appearences:SB ratio

Elway- 5:3 McNabb - 6:1
So basically Elway was more of a winner when it counted. Leading his team to the bowl 60% of the time he made it to the playoffs. McNabb only 16% of the time he made the playoffs.

Neo
06-18-2007, 01:57 PM
I am an Eagles fan and think this is outrageous, comparing McNabb to Elway. Nothing against McNabb hes a top 8 QB in the NFL, but Elway is top 5 all time. You say that McNabb has better 8 seasons, thats not necessarily true and even if it was he sure wont have a better 2nd half career with all his injuries and Kevin Kolb waiting in the wings. Elway had a great last few years of his career to. McNabb has had too many injuries to be compared to Elway.

"You say that McNabb has better 8 seasons,"

He has

"thats not necessarily true and even if it was he sure wont have a better 2nd half career"

It is true... sorry,
You seem really good at predicting his future... personally i dont believe in magical powers so i am going to hold out judgment as far as that is concerned but one thing is clear... McNabb has had a better first 8 seasons.

Go_Eagles77
06-18-2007, 01:57 PM
How is donovan not a leader... i am pretty sure all his teammates and coaches consider he is a leader... and considering he has a better playoff record than your boy elway over 8 seasons it is safe to say he is atleast the leader elway was at that point.

As for the eagles fans... Most eagles fans are what Howard Eskin would call them "nitwits". Also historically speaking philadelphia has been one of the more racist cities in the nation.

Wow, just wow, don't even bring up that crap, race has nothing to do with it. I love McNabb, he's one of my favorite players of all time, to say that I dislike him, let alone racist against him, is pretty infuriating.

reese
06-18-2007, 01:58 PM
Actually it is... 2000 yards is maybe 8 NFL games... 56 INTS now that will take a while...

Plus mcnabb played less games and all that other cute stuff we could get into

if you dont admit that McNabb has significantly better #'s you are just being silly.

no 2000 yds isnt close.....just like 56 ints isnt close...just admit u were wrong neo...u specifically stated that mcnabb had more passing yards then elway and u were WRONG....u said u never make mistakes...U WERE WRONG...so how can u insist ppl admit when they were wrong when u wont do it?

broncs2bowl
06-18-2007, 01:58 PM
Actually it is... 2000 yards is maybe 8 NFL games... 56 INTS now that will take a while...

Plus mcnabb played less games and all that other cute stuff we could get into

if you dont admit that McNabb has significantly better #'s you are just being silly.

stop using the INTS as an exuse....ur beloved Peyton Manning threw 130:eek: INTS in his first 8 seasons(more than Elway). Would you still consider Manning first 8 not as good as McNabbs first 8.(I didnt think so)

Thankyou..come again

cunningham06
06-18-2007, 02:01 PM
How is donovan not a leader... i am pretty sure all his teammates and coaches consider he is a leader... and considering he has a better playoff record than your boy elway over 8 seasons it is safe to say he is atleast the leader elway was at that point.

As for the eagles fans... Most eagles fans are what Howard Eskin would call them "nitwits". Also historically speaking philadelphia has been one of the more racist cities in the nation.

He isn't a leader, it's pretty obvious. Beginning of the season, McNabb's tearing it up right? But we didn't win as many games as we should have considering his level of play. The rest of the team got lazy and thought McNabb could win games by himself, which he couldn't. McNabb needed to light a fire under them, and he didn't. Also, remember the TO incident? Bad situation or not, Donovan let the team get away from him. He alienated some teammates by being so pro-management, which I like, but not all of his teammates do. He puked in the superbowl when the pressure was on him to lead us on a game winning drive. Donovan is my favorite qb, and I've never liked Elway, but you don't know what you're talking about.

As for calling the Eagles fans nitwits I think it's safe to say that you know nothing about the team except for what you can glean from stats. If you were away from your computer you probably would be incapable of having a semi-intelligent conversation about anything football related because you don't know the game, you just look up stats.

YAYareaRB
06-18-2007, 02:05 PM
The ring on Elway's finger is what separates Mcnabb and Elway

neko4
06-18-2007, 02:05 PM
If you agree with Neo please post "I agree with Neo" Now

broncs2bowl
06-18-2007, 02:07 PM
oh! Neo's unknowledgeable *** has been shut up

draftguru151
06-18-2007, 02:10 PM
He's actually been banned.

reese
06-18-2007, 02:11 PM
for good? or for a week again?

broncs2bowl
06-18-2007, 02:13 PM
He's actually been banned.

NOOOO! WHY HAS HE BEEN BANNED! I wanted to see his reaction to my previous
two posts

yourfavestoner
06-18-2007, 02:19 PM
I'm so happy I stayed away from this one...

niel89
06-18-2007, 04:19 PM
wow neo is just bad. ill admit McNabb had a great 1st 8 seasons, but Elway was better. If you simply look at numbers than you dont get the full picture. Sure McNabb had better #s in some stats and much better in INTs, but one number that neo was so easy to toss out was superbowl apperances. Elway had 3 and McNabb had 1. The real reason I would take Elway is for the sheer fact that he could carry his teams in games he didnt belong. Elway took those team to those superbowls.

Neo try again. Surrender Noted

Ewing
06-18-2007, 04:31 PM
DON'T FEED THE ****ING TROLLS

Ewing
06-18-2007, 04:32 PM
He's actually been banned.

Took you long enough but I'm glad you got rid of the idiot.

broncs2bowl
06-18-2007, 04:36 PM
currently troll feeding

Ewing
06-18-2007, 04:43 PM
currently troll feeding

How? He's banned.

CW99
06-18-2007, 04:56 PM
You know what Mcnabbs 1st 8 year were better than Elway and McNabb is definently a leader but the diffrence and end all say all is how many times Elway got to the Superbowl in his 1st 8 years vs how many McNabb has gotten it's 3 to 1 so It's not that far off the path.To me McNabb is an Elite QB behind only Brady and Manning

CW99
06-18-2007, 05:03 PM
You can't argue any other way though how could you compare Donovans 8 years to Elways 16 years you gotta find a common ground

Shiver
06-18-2007, 05:12 PM
what a bloody stupid thread. did ANYONE other than neo support mcnabb?

Nope, he was the only person who saw the truth I guess.

draftguru151
06-18-2007, 05:22 PM
Took you long enough but I'm glad you got rid of the idiot.

Eh, if I had the capabilities to ban him this would have been over much sooner.

And no, not one person agreed with anything he said the entire time.

TitleTown088
06-18-2007, 07:27 PM
John Elway makes better furniture.

umphrey
06-18-2007, 08:14 PM
I would consider McNabb about the 7th or 8th most valuable QB. If he's healthy I'd say he's #3 and really close to Manning and Brady when healthy but lately it doesn't seem like that is very often. It really deflates a team to lose their starting QB for the season, especially when he is their best player. Apparently the Eagles agree with me because they drafted Kolb (and I don't think Denver drafted a QB early when Elway was in his prime early like Philly did this year).

Go_Eagles77
06-18-2007, 08:21 PM
I would consider McNabb about the 7th or 8th most valuable QB. If he's healthy I'd say he's #3 and really close to Manning and Brady when healthy but lately it doesn't seem like that is very often. It really deflates a team to lose their starting QB for the season, especially when he is their best player. Apparently the Eagles agree with me because they drafted Kolb (and I don't think Denver drafted a QB early when Elway was in his prime early like Philly did this year).

Yeah, Denver drafted Tommy Maddox in the 1st round.

yourfavestoner
06-18-2007, 08:23 PM
I would consider McNabb about the 7th or 8th most valuable QB. If he's healthy I'd say he's #3 and really close to Manning and Brady when healthy but lately it doesn't seem like that is very often. It really deflates a team to lose their starting QB for the season, especially when he is their best player. Apparently the Eagles agree with me because they drafted Kolb (and I don't think Denver drafted a QB early when Elway was in his prime early like Philly did this year).

Tommy Maddox says hello. That had more to do with Dan Reeves idiocy than anything, though.

255979119
06-18-2007, 08:26 PM
What do you mean it was a stupid move? Tommy Maddox is the only QB that can be called XFL champion. [/sarcasm]

CT Bronco Fan
06-18-2007, 09:35 PM
*&%#*&Q %*&#*&&*( $@(^#@^$(*&@#% $*&(@$ ^)(!@(*)$^(*&!^@*$^!(*&@^%$*& @)@!*&$^!(@* *@!$^!@)*(&$&$(**&@!$^ &*^#$*&%^& @O(#@(#$^%^@# O)#@*&*#(@$ &$#*@(^ dan reeves. worst gm ever. worst coach ever. fricking tommy maddox over carl pickens?!? argh.

<pats njx on the back>

It'll be ok man. It'll be ok.

jag
06-18-2007, 10:52 PM
damnit, I missed this whole argument. I wanted to make a post just saying,

WEST COAST OFFENSE

elway777
06-18-2007, 11:11 PM
Atleast we were able to get Reeves back in the superbowl vs. Atlanta...

Modano
06-19-2007, 02:21 AM
You shouldn't have argued with him... Only he can do is picking numbers from the past and saying they're gonna repeat in the future. He came in this forum just to say the Eagles record against the other NFC East teams has been 27-10 in the last 6 years, so the Eagles are gonna dominate till the end of the world.
He just ignore everything other than that. Like the talent of the Eagles opposites in the past years or who they faced in the playoff going 7-5 under McNabb...

Addict
06-19-2007, 02:27 AM
I read through 8 pages of this discussion and I laughed all the way through.

Must say I'm mildly surprised and relieved no blind eagles homers (except thread starter) agreed with this statement.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-19-2007, 02:56 AM
let's keep up with the conversation here.

They aren't all that matter, but not a whole lot of people realize how underwhelming Elway's numbers were for the first 10 years of his career. I'm not trying to take away from the guy, but the storybook ending of his career tends to make people forget how much he rode the reputation of a #1 overall pick for more than the first half of his career, much like Troy Aikman did.

McNabb's numbers are better, and while I didn't read this thread in it's entirety, it seems that, with all reasons and considerations considered, Donovan performed better than Elway in their respective first eight years.

Does that make McNabb better? No. Does it say something about most of Elway's career? You bet.

Addict
06-19-2007, 03:20 AM
They aren't all that matter, but not a whole lot of people realize how underwhelming Elway's numbers were for the first 10 years of his career. I'm not trying to take away from the guy, but the storybook ending of his career tends to make people forget how much he rode the reputation of a #1 overall pick for more than the first half of his career, much like Troy Aikman did.

McNabb's numbers are better, and while I didn't read this thread in it's entirety, it seems that, with all reasons and considerations considered, Donovan performed better than Elway in their respective first eight years.

Does that make McNabb better? No. Does it say something about most of Elway's career? You bet.

Well that's the thing Neo saw the stats and concluded that the stats told him that McNabb was the better qb out of the two. It does say a lot about Elway's career, I agree.

duckseason
06-19-2007, 03:40 AM
but the storybook ending of his career tends to make people forget how much he rode the reputation of a #1 overall pick for more than the first half of his career, much like Troy Aikman did.

Troy Aikman was winning Super Bowls before he even reached the mid-point of his career, and was recognized as one of the league's most accurate passers from 1991 on.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-19-2007, 03:56 AM
Troy Aikman was winning Super Bowls before he even reached the mid-point of his career, and was recognized as one of the league's most accurate passers from 1991 on.

Outside of maybe 3 very accurate years (and only one amazing one), Aikman's career accuracy was pretty average when we're talking great quarterbacks (61.5% career). Beyond that, his numbers are in the lowest possible stratosphere for those quarterbacks we would consider elite.

If you don't think that hype that he entered the league with helped, then I don't know what to say.

LitoSheppard
06-19-2007, 03:59 AM
Was McNabbs first 8 seasons better then Elway?

duckseason
06-19-2007, 04:13 AM
Outside of maybe 3 very accurate years (and only one amazing one), Aikman's career accuracy was pretty average when we're talking great quarterbacks (61.5% career). Beyond that, his numbers are in the lowest possible stratosphere for those quarterbacks we would consider elite.

If you don't think that hype that he entered the league with helped, then I don't know what to say.
Dude, I've heard many NFL analysts say that Aikman was the most accurate QB of all-time. I'm not saying that, but it's an opinion shared by many. Surely, when you watched him play, you noticed how he rarely hit his target anywhere but in the chest, right? Seriously, there is no question that he was one of the most accurate QB's we've seen. It's not all about numbers, which you already know. Aikman didn't play in the WCO. The Cowboys were primarily a running team. He is not going to set the stat sheet on fire when he has the leagues all-time leading rusher on his team breaking TD records. All things considered, Aikman's numbers are quite impressive. When you're a great QB, hype isn't needed. Marino didn't have the hype. Neither did Montana. If you're no good, hype will not help you at all. Any boost he gained from pre-draft hype was certainly nullified by all the detractors who say that he played for the most talented team of his era, and that anybody could've been their QB. Funny how those same people claim Montana to be the greatest QB ever, and scoff at the suggestion that he played in perhaps the best situation a QB has ever been placed into.

duckseason
06-19-2007, 04:19 AM
Was McNabbs first 8 seasons better then Elway?

Depends on your criteria, and most of us don't vividly remember Elway's first 8 seasons anyway, and certainly weren't capable of properly evaluating his overall attributes as a QB. Also, the game changed quite a bit between '83 and '99. There is really no way I can compare the two.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-19-2007, 04:51 AM
Dude, I've heard many NFL analysts say that Aikman was the most accurate QB of all-time. I'm not saying that, but it's an opinion shared by many. Surely, when you watched him play, you noticed how he rarely hit his target anywhere but in the chest, right? Seriously, there is no question that he was one of the most accurate QB's we've seen. It's not all about numbers, which you already know. Aikman didn't play in the WCO. The Cowboys were primarily a running team. He is not going to set the stat sheet on fire when he has the leagues all-time leading rusher on his team breaking TD records. All things considered, Aikman's numbers are quite impressive. When you're a great QB, hype isn't needed. Marino didn't have the hype. Neither did Montana. If you're no good, hype will not help you at all. Any boost he gained from pre-draft hype was certainly nullified by all the detractors who say that he played for the most talented team of his era, and that anybody could've been their QB. Funny how those same people claim Montana to be the greatest QB ever, and scoff at the suggestion that he played in perhaps the best situation a QB has ever been placed into.

If Aikman was the most accurate quarterback ever, then he certainly wasn't the most careful with the ball. The man has only 23 less career INT's than TD's. That is medicore by definition.

I hate doing this because everyone is so defensive of quarterbacks generally accepted to be great. Over the first ten years of John Elway's career, he threw one more touchdown than interception. The next six he had were tremendous, and I don't want to take anything away from what he accomplished.

I could go off onto a very long rant about the media and fans and quarterbacks, but it would send this thread way off track.

I'll say this. McNabb's first 8 seasons were, at least, noticeably better than Elways.

McNabb - 152 TD/72 INT, 24 Rushing TD's, about 80 wins
Elway - 135 TD/128 INT, 13 Rushing TD's, about 89 wins

Elway's team won, alot. People saying he didn't have talent are greatly mistaken, and those attributing all those wins to Elway are giving him way too much credit (especially when you look at those numbers).

Elway is the better quarterback now. I very much doubt that McNabb will finish his career with anywhere near the flourish of production and storybook moments that Elway managed.

However, you want to ask me who I think was the better quarterback in their first 8 years? It was McNabb, and I have no reservations about that. Elway, in the first part of his career, was a Ben Roethlisberger type quarterback.

BlindSite
06-19-2007, 05:10 AM
Elway had that X factor that you can't teach, nor can you follow with stats that not many QBs have ever had.

Michael Vick and VY have flashed it, Tom Brady's got it in bucketloads, and so does Roethlisberger seemingly. Not many do though.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-19-2007, 05:22 AM
Elway had that X factor that you can't teach, nor can you follow with stats that not many QBs have ever had.

Michael Vick and VY have flashed it, Tom Brady's got it in bucketloads, and so does Roethlisberger seemingly. Not many do though.

Great, good for them. If Vick, Young, and Roethlisberger have flashed "it", I'd say that McNabb has as legitimate a claim to "it" as anyone currently in the NFL.

However, saying that a rather large statistical bridge is overcome by an unquantifiable attribute which didn't seem to yield more wins or points (kinda the point of playing the game) is silliness.

duckseason
06-19-2007, 05:29 AM
If Aikman was the most accurate quarterback ever, then he certainly wasn't the most careful with the ball. The man has only 23 less career INT's than TD's. That is medicore by definition.

I hate doing this because everyone is so defensive of quarterbacks generally accepted to be great. Over the first ten years of John Elway's career, he threw one more touchdown than interception. The next six he had were tremendous, and I don't want to take anything away from what he accomplished.

I could go off onto a very long rant about the media and fans and quarterbacks, but it would send this thread way off track.

I'll say this. McNabb's first 8 seasons were, at least, noticeably better than Elways.

McNabb - 152 TD/72 INT, 24 Rushing TD's, about 80 wins
Elway - 135 TD/128 INT, 13 Rushing TD's, about 89 wins

Elway's team won, alot. People saying he didn't have talent are greatly mistaken, and those attributing all those wins to Elway are giving him way too much credit (especially when you look at those numbers).

Elway is the better quarterback now. I very much doubt that McNabb will finish his career with anywhere near the flourish of production and storybook moments that Elway managed.

However, you want to ask me who I think was the better quarterback in their first 8 years? It was McNabb, and I have no reservations about that. Elway, in the first part of his career, was a Ben Roethlisberger type quarterback.

Wow. Dude I usually agree with most everything you say, but I think that is complete BS. NFL statistics can be very deceiving. I know you know this. Don't you think Aikman may have thrown for more TD's if Emmitt weren't breaking records left and right? Seriously. I don't give a crap what those numbers say. They were both GREAT QB's. There was certainly legitimate cause for all the hype when these 2 came out of college. Coaches salivated over both of them. The numbers that end up on a QB's stat sheet are a result of countless factors. This is not baseball, and you know this. You think Steve Young would've been completing 70% of his passes in any other offense in the league at the time? I mean, I hate discussions like this as well, because it requires such subjective thought, and people always rely far too heavily on stats without looking beneath them. There is nothing concrete other than what you see with your own eyes. I trust my eyes, and I trust the opinions of professional coaches and league insiders. Not the media. Did you seriously compare Elway to Roethlisberger? You compare McNabb to Elway by posting stats? And then say that you pick McNabb, despite the fact that you were just a kid when Elway was playing his first 8 years? C'mon dude. I don't know who was the better QB during their first 8 years. There is really no basis for a quality comparison available to me. Those stat sheets are nearly worthless. Far too many variables. Especially considering they are separated by 15 years, and McNabb has played in the WCO while going to the air for an extraordinarily high percentage of the Eagles' overall plays. Guys who throw so often to their RB will always post a very high completion percentage. Like Montana and Young. It's almost like giving Aikman credit for a completion on a hand off to Smith. That's just common sense. That doesn't mean they aren't accurate QB's, it's just something that people must be aware of while deciphering stats. Likewise, guys who play within the confines of a more vertically oriented offense will obviously complete a lower percentage of their passes. And they will certainly throw a higher percentage of INT's. This is all just common sense, and really should never be ignored when comparing not just QB's, but all football players.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-19-2007, 05:55 AM
Wow. Dude I usually agree with most everything you say, but I think that is complete BS. NFL statistics can be very deceiving. I know you know this. Don't you think Aikman may have thrown for more TD's if Emmitt weren't breaking records left and right? Seriously. I don't give a crap what those numbers say. They were both GREAT QB's. There was certainly legitimate cause for all the hype when these 2 came out of college. Coaches salivated over both of them. The numbers that end up on a QB's stat sheet are a result of countless factors. This is not baseball, and you know this. You think Steve Young would've been completing 70% of his passes in any other offense in the league at the time? I mean, I hate discussions like this as well, because it requires such subjective thought, and people always rely far too heavily on stats without looking beneath them. There is nothing concrete other than what you see with your own eyes. I trust my eyes, and I trust the opinions of professional coaches and league insiders. Not the media. Did you seriously compare Elway to Roethlisberger? You compare McNabb to Elway by posting stats? And then say that you pick McNabb, despite the fact that you were just a kid when Elway was playing his first 8 years? C'mon dude. I don't know who was the better QB during their first 8 years. There is really no basis for a quality comparison available to me. Those stat sheets are nearly worthless. Far too many variables. Especially considering they are separated by 15 years, and McNabb has played in the WCO while going to the air for an extraordinarily high percentage of the Eagles' overall plays. Guys who throw so often to their RB will always post a very high completion percentage. Like Montana and Young. It's almost like giving Aikman credit for a completion on a hand off to Smith. That's just common sense. That doesn't mean they aren't accurate QB's, it's just something that people must be aware of while deciphering stats. Likewise, guys who play within the confines of a more vertically oriented offense will obviously complete a lower percentage of their passes. And they will certainly throw a higher percentage of INT's. This is all just common sense, and really should never be ignored when comparing not just QB's, but all football players.

I am not and never have been a fan of blind stat reading, even when it comes to baseball.

However, I think this comparison lends itself incredibly useful. How many on this site started watching football around the time Elway was tearing up defenses and winning Superbowls? I was the one of them. Before I was a Raider fan and hated the Broncos, before I was a Cal fan and hated Stanford. Before any of that, I remember Elway was awesome.

Elway retires on the perfect note. Hall of Fame spot locked up for one of the most clutch performers at the position. However, sports in general are watched and talked about by those with short memories. Why remember all those years back when Elway wasn't winning Superbowls?

So this question forces people to go back. It forces them to look at the numbers, which, however you feel about them, are a lot more reliable than some lifetime NFL'er warbling about what a good locker presence Elway was. There are tons of mitigating factors, as there are with all football stats. Some great quarterbacks put up middling stats, some less than great quarterbacks put up deceivingly great numbers. However, I am a firm believing that at the end of the day, the final count is what matters.

Elway was very prone to throwing interceptions for much of his career. This isn't a huge issue, many very good quarterbacks have had the same problem. However, he didn't really produce a whole lot of touchdowns to counteract this point. McNabb's and Elway's offenses were actually pretty similar. Elway played in an offense which is best described as a WCO and he threw the ball even more often than McNabb did.

Subjectivity is useful, but too many people get lost in it. Quarterbacks always get more credit than they deserve and they always take more blame than they should. A quarterback's job isn't easy, but I believe that when it comes to evaluating what kind of career they had, you really have to look at what they did on the field. Not what some player kept them from doing, not what would have happened if just one thing had been different, but what they did.

Elway and the Broncos won games. A whole heap of them. Elways also didn't score a whole lot and was careless with the ball. Elway didn't complete a very high percentage of his passes.

Aikman won a whole lot of games, was part of a fantastic offense, and won three superbowls at his peak. He was a great game leader and was a huge part of that offense. He also produced a surprising small amount on the field.

I don't see a single real argument for saying that Elway early career was better than McNabb's has been to date. Am I an expert? No. But I am a fairly objective party in this, and, in a world where production is everything, McNabb's first 8 years were more productive than Elway's.

That's it.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-19-2007, 07:00 AM
if i'm greatly mistaken, we must've been watching completely different teams in the 80's and early 90's. care to tell me what talent i'm "greatly mistaken" about? care to tell me which games, hell, let's limit it to the playoffs, we would've won without elway?

This is an argument you know better than to challenge anyone to. I'm speaking generally. Do quarterbacks play huge parts in the success of their team? Yes. Do fans and the media seek to attribute success to that position more than any other. Yes.

I'm not have a circumstantial re-writing of history argument with you.

i'm also curious if, in the course of this discussion, you can describe the offense john elway played in.

I can only describe it through my knowledge of Dan Reeves' (and I suppose Shanahan's) offense. I know that it is run-based and relied heavily on play-action, but the offensive Elway ran early in his career were a whole lot less run oriented than you would assume. He had 605 attempts in his third year and didn't throw less than 450 times in any full season he played. That offense of Reeves' uses a lot of the same routes as a West Coast, and when a team passes that much the offense begins to resemble one.

It isn't perfect, but I think that Andy Reid's WCO and Reeve's pass-heavy offense are similar enough that bringing that up as a balancing argument for the production difference is misguided.

duckseason
06-19-2007, 07:25 AM
I am not and never have been a fan of blind stat reading, even when it comes to baseball.
Blurry isn't much better than blind. You're still ignoring some of the points I made about why a guy like Elway may have struggled statistically, and a guy like Montana may have thrived. I think you're greatly minimizing some very key factors.

However, I think this comparison lends itself incredibly useful. How many on this site started watching football around the time Elway was tearing up defenses and winning Superbowls? I was the one of them. Before I was a Raider fan and hated the Broncos, before I was a Cal fan and hated Stanford. Before any of that, I remember Elway was awesome.
Ok, well I actually watched him much earlier than that. I remember watching him in the Super Bowl in '87, '88 and '90. But I was just a kid, so I didn't yet fully understand the game.

Elway retires on the perfect note. Hall of Fame spot locked up for one of the most clutch performers at the position. However, sports in general are watched and talked about by those with short memories. Why remember all those years back when Elway wasn't winning Superbowls?
You mean the years when he was winning AFC championships while solidifying his reputation as the strongest arm in the league, and one of the best QB's in the game?

So this question forces people to go back. It forces them to look at the numbers, which, however you feel about them, are a lot more reliable than some lifetime NFL'er warbling about what a good locker presence Elway was. There are tons of mitigating factors, as there are with all football stats. Some great quarterbacks put up middling stats, some less than great quarterbacks put up deceivingly great numbers. However, I am a firm believing that at the end of the day, the final count is what matters.
No. I already showed you why the numbers are utterly worthless for a comparison like this. '83 and '99 are SIXTEEN years apart. The landscape of the league changed quite a bit during that time span. That is but one of many reasons why that is not a legitimate basis for comparison. I remember back in the '80s, a 1,000 rusher was a big deal. Now you're considered a part-time back, or injury prone if you don't surpass that plateau.

Elway was very prone to throwing interceptions for much of his career. This isn't a huge issue, many very good quarterbacks have had the same problem. However, he didn't really produce a whole lot of touchdowns to counteract this point. McNabb's and Elway's offenses were actually pretty similar. Elway played in an offense which is best described as a WCO and he threw the ball even more often than McNabb did.
Did you not read my post? And btw, how in the heck were their offenses similar at all? Did Elway have a Brian Westbrook? A Terrell Owens? Did he throw the ball on 63% of the broncos total plays? No. Even in Elway's most pass happy year of '85, when he threw the ball 605 times, the broncos ran the ball 497. So he threw the ball 55% of the time. So please explain how that is more often than Mcnabb. Just because Mike Shanahan was his QB coach and then OC doesn't mean they ran an offense that even remotely resembles that of today's Eagles.


Subjectivity is useful, but too many people get lost in it. Quarterbacks always get more credit than they deserve and they always take more blame than they should. A quarterback's job isn't easy, but I believe that when it comes to evaluating what kind of career they had, you really have to look at what they did on the field. Not what some player kept them from doing, not what would have happened if just one thing had been different, but what they did.
That is my point. Look at what Elway did on the field. McNabb has been great these past 8 seasons, and he has certainly proved it on the field. And so did Jeff Garcia last year. But you never even witnessed Elway's first 8 seasons, so how can you fairly judge him? Do you think Jeff Garcia was a better QB last year than Elway was in '89? Because that is effectively what you're saying with this whole stat comparison. After all, Elway did indeed throw 18 INT's to just 18 TD's that year. Oh, and he led his team to the Super Bowl. With Bobby Humphrey as his RB.

Elway and the Broncos won games. A whole heap of them. Elways also didn't score a whole lot and was careless with the ball. Elway didn't complete a very high percentage of his passes.Yeah, we've established that. And I tried to help shed light on why such a great QB might struggle with the stat sheet.

Aikman won a whole lot of games, was part of a fantastic offense, and won three superbowls at his peak. He was a great game leader and was a huge part of that offense. He also produced a surprising small amount on the field.
Huh? He didn't produce? Please explain. Do you think his lack of TD's has more to do with his inadequacies as a QB, or the fact that he was busy handing the ball off to a record breaking RB? If you were the OC, would you have felt the need to throw the ball down by the goal line? Troy Aikman did everything asked of him, and then some. Like I said, he is widely regarded as one of the most accurate passers in NFL history. Not many flaws in his game at all. People who watched him play, already know this.

I don't see a single real argument for saying that Elway early career was better than McNabb's has been to date. Am I an expert? No. But I am a fairly objective party in this, and, in a world where production is everything, McNabb's first 8 years were more productive than Elway's.

Right. Me either. All I have is the opinion of professional coaches and their ilk who actually watched the guy play. Live and in color. On the sideline. Guys who had to game plan against him. Guys who label him the greatest QB prospect to ever enter the draft. So, like I said, I have no idea who the better QB was over the course of their first 8 years. And neither do you. Following the logic you're using here, Mark Brunell had a better first 8 seasons as well.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-19-2007, 07:36 AM
I don't think the stats of comparison are as worthless as you're making them out to be. The landscape of the league is always changing.

If you want to say an accurate comparison is impossible fine. I'm made one with the least circumstantial and most cut and dry tools I (or anyone) had on hand. I do know that phrases like "many considered" are to be avoided at all possible costs when developing an opinion about a player. What many consider is typically a mess of homers, haters, and media agenda. In the same vein, constantly citing NFL personnel can be tricky as well, since they are by no means free of agenda and often aren't removed enough from the situation to fully analyze it.

Honestly, the only reason I got involved in this thread in the first place is that I've always found Elway's career statistical arc to be fascinating, especially considering the football-wide common perception of the guy. McNabb is a fairly similar quarterback (and one of the better comparisons you could draw from the league today), and while all statistics must be carefully interpreted, I think a great deal can be learned by simply looking at them.

duckseason
06-19-2007, 08:08 AM
I don't think the stats of comparison are as worthless as you're making them out to be. The landscape of the league is always changing.
Dude, even when comparing QB's in the same season, stats are terribly misleading. To attempt a qualitative analysis based on the stats of two QB's who began their careers 16 years apart is a futile endeavor that will yield nothing more than confusion. You said it yourself, the landscape of the league is always changing.

If you want to say an accurate comparison is impossible fine. I'm made one with the least circumstantial and most cut and dry tools I (or anyone) had on hand. I do know that phrases like "many considered" are to be avoided at all possible costs when developing an opinion about a player. What many consider is typically a mess of homers, haters, and media agenda. In the same vein, constantly citing NFL personnel can be tricky as well, since they are by no means free of agenda and often aren't removed enough from the situation to fully analyze it.
I think the opinions of league insiders hold a whole hell of a lot more weight than the opinion of somebody with nothing but a stat sheet. Don't forget that those guys know the stats just as well as you do. And bias? Well, I think the fact that you've actually witnessed McNabb's first 8 seasons might be a natural breeding ground for bias. Whether you're aware of it or not. And why would so many people who have no ties to Elway, and no apparent reason to boost his reputation, speak so highly of him? I'm not talking about the media, or haters or anything like that. I'm talking about the authorities on the subject. Highly respected NFL personnel.

Honestly, the only reason I got involved in this thread in the first place is that I've always found Elway's career statistical arc to be fascinating, especially considering the football-wide common perception of the guy. McNabb is a fairly similar quarterback (and one of the better comparisons you could draw from the league today), and while all statistics must be carefully interpreted, I think a great deal can be learned by simply looking at them.
I agree. Stats can be fascinating indeed. You look at a guy like Unitas, and you wonder "wtf? why is everybody all on this guys nuts?" And then you look deeper and see the bigger picture. You look at the differences in completion % between a guy who plays in a dink and dunk offense, and a guy who throws down field a ton. You wonder what some guys would have looked like had they just been drafted one slot later than they were. Imagine Marino playing in '80s frisco. Could he have made the throws that Montana did? Would he have cracked in situations that Montana excelled? Would he have a better completion percentage? Perhaps less total yards? What if so and so hadn't been drafted by Detroit? I wonder whether or not so and so coaching staff really utilized x player correctly. That's the kind of stuff I think about when I look at stats. Some stats are more meaningful than others. But most are very misleading. Especially in the NFL.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-19-2007, 08:15 AM
I don't really have much of an issue with Aikman's lack of touchdowns or Elway's lack of fantastic seasons. However, whenever I see a quarterback who, according to the stats, didn't take very good care of the ball and didn't make up for it with great offensive production, it sets off alarms.

When such a quarterback is considered to be a great, I feel it needs to be pointed out. I take more issue with the interceptions Elway threw than the lack of touchdowns, and I take more issue with the low completion % of Aikman than the low touchdown numbers.

duckseason
06-19-2007, 08:36 AM
I don't really have much of an issue with Aikman's lack of touchdowns or Elway's lack of fantastic seasons. However, whenever I see a quarterback who, according to the stats, didn't take very good care of the ball and didn't make up for it with great offensive production, it sets off alarms.

When such a quarterback is considered to be a great, I feel it needs to be pointed out. I take more issue with the interceptions Elway threw than the lack of touchdowns, and I take more issue with the low completion % of Aikman than the low touchdown numbers.
Yeah. Completing 69% of your passes in a season is terrible. Like I've repeated numerous times, the simple fact that some QB's dump the ball off to the flats far more than others is something to consider when evaluating completion percentage. There are many factors to consider. The fact that a single QB can have such varying percentages from year to year says a lot as well. Play calling, drops, strength of opposing defense, injuries, on and on and on. If you watch the damn tape, you'll see that Aikman was incredibly accurate. Completion percentage is a team statistic. Even the center has an impact in the grand scheme. Yes, the QB is the one throwing the ball. But, did he have a guy in his face every other play? Did the receiver run his route correctly? Was the safety playing the game of his life? Did the coach have a good game plan? Did the opposing team have a good game plan? Was it raining? So, all you can do is watch the guy throw. See if one guy can make the same throws as consistently as the next guy. How do you know that Elway was careless with the ball just by looking at his INT #'s? How many times have you seen a QB do everything right, yet the ball somehow ends up in the opponents hand? Interception thrown directly to the defender are in the minority. Many times, we as outsiders have no idea who is truly to blame for a particular INT. I mean, sometimes the WR corps for a particular team deserves the blame for more of the INT's than the QB is. I've seen it. But I didn't see Elway in '83, so I wouldn't know how those stats were accumulated.

Geo
06-19-2007, 11:29 AM
http://images.encarta.msn.com/xrefmedia/sharemed/targets/images/pho/t043/T043554A.jpg

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
06-19-2007, 11:43 AM
Hey Neo, I guess you agree with the fact that Cutler>Brady, right? His career rating is higher. The fact that in just five games, Cutler has a better rating goes to show you how much better he is. Those 3 rings were won by the Patriots, not Brady.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
06-19-2007, 11:59 AM
Do you count MVPs by chance? Because Elway had one. Seriously, your posts are the most idiotic of anyone's in the entire forum.

BlindSite
06-19-2007, 04:14 PM
Great, good for them. If Vick, Young, and Roethlisberger have flashed "it", I'd say that McNabb has as legitimate a claim to "it" as anyone currently in the NFL.

However, saying that a rather large statistical bridge is overcome by an unquantifiable attribute which didn't seem to yield more wins or points (kinda the point of playing the game) is silliness.

I'm not, I'm merely pointing out that while not all QBs light it up statistically they're always going to be more important to a team if they win when it counts. This is the revers of my and NJX's argument in the other thread, but the point still remains the name...

McNabb, while good, while excellent, and a good leader, at times has failed many, many times when leading the fourth quarter comeback, he's succeeded a bunch but like in the SB he's flopped a lot of times as well.

Phrost
06-19-2007, 04:42 PM
Seriously, your posts are the most idiotic of anyone's in the entire forum.

Hey Neo, I guess you agree with the fact that Cutler>Brady, right? His career rating is higher. The fact that in just five games, Cutler has a better rating goes to show you how much better he is. Those 3 rings were won by the Patriots, not Brady.I know you were kidding.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-19-2007, 05:18 PM
Yeah. Completing 69% of your passes in a season is terrible. Like I've repeated numerous times, the simple fact that some QB's dump the ball off to the flats far more than others is something to consider when evaluating completion percentage. There are many factors to consider. The fact that a single QB can have such varying percentages from year to year says a lot as well. Play calling, drops, strength of opposing defense, injuries, on and on and on. If you watch the damn tape, you'll see that Aikman was incredibly accurate. Completion percentage is a team statistic. Even the center has an impact in the grand scheme. Yes, the QB is the one throwing the ball. But, did he have a guy in his face every other play? Did the receiver run his route correctly? Was the safety playing the game of his life? Did the coach have a good game plan? Did the opposing team have a good game plan? Was it raining? So, all you can do is watch the guy throw. See if one guy can make the same throws as consistently as the next guy. How do you know that Elway was careless with the ball just by looking at his INT #'s? How many times have you seen a QB do everything right, yet the ball somehow ends up in the opponents hand? Interception thrown directly to the defender are in the minority. Many times, we as outsiders have no idea who is truly to blame for a particular INT. I mean, sometimes the WR corps for a particular team deserves the blame for more of the INT's than the QB is. I've seen it. But I didn't see Elway in '83, so I wouldn't know how those stats were accumulated.

I agree with everything you said, but we aren't completely in the dark. We know Aikman had one of the greatest offensive lines in NFL history. We know he had reliable receivers. I'm not trying to knock the guy, but I see a point where conventional and accepted belief of a player doesn't exactly match up with his career numbers.

As for Elway, I don't know a single quarterback who had numbers like that and took great care of the ball. That's just me though.

PoopSandwich
06-19-2007, 05:25 PM
Tim Couch is by far better than Elway or McNabb now lock this.

duckseason
06-19-2007, 05:32 PM
I agree with everything you said, but we aren't completely in the dark. We know Aikman had one of the greatest offensive lines in NFL history. We know he had reliable receivers. I'm not trying to knock the guy, but I see a point where conventional and accepted belief of a player doesn't exactly match up with his career numbers.

As for Elway, I don't know a single quarterback who had numbers like that and took great care of the ball. That's just me though.

Yeah, I hear that. I think the argument that Aikman had such tremendous talent around him holds weight. I don't think he is the greatest QB ever. I just know that I haven't seen many guys with a better arm. Who knows if he could've won any Super Bowls with another team, and who knows whether Dallas would've won 3 without him. I just think that things like his accuracy should be evaluated based on what we saw him do with the football, rather than what the numbers say. If a guys numbers are bad, then I think that's telling. But Aikman had good numbers, and we've already been over all the things that affect those numbers and might keep certain guys from reaching certain plateaus.

As for Elway, I dunno. I think some guys are encouraged to go out there and just sling it. Especially back then. The game wasn't as refined as it is today. You can tell the passing games weren't quite as precise as they are now, just by watching old highlights. I mean, that's just one thought to consider. Because when you watch the guy play, he was obviously very accurate, and I don't think anybody threw with more velocity than he did. Hey, for all I know you could be right. I'm just saying that I don't think either of us know, and his stats don't reveal nearly enough information for us to make an informed evaluation.

Fun little argument though. You're still one of my favorite posters despite the disagreement.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-19-2007, 05:42 PM
I do suspect that you're right on the Elway situation. I think that he was encouraged to take risks, I'm just surprised that such risk taking didn't result in more touchdowns as well. For a guy who is spoken of so well, he spent 10 years throwing an interception for every touchdown. At the very least, I think that is something people need to realize.

As for Aikman, I suspect that his 1993 season permanently colored a lot of people's perspective of him. He completed 69% of his passes, which I'm sure was even more impressive in that day and age. He led his team to the Superbowl and took home the MVP. I don't want to say he wasn't accurate, because he obviously was, but I think a great deal of that talk was generated from 1993 alone.

It's kinda like how Phil Simms is widely considered one of the most accurate quarterbacks due to the amazing efficiency he delivered the ball with the Superbowl. Simms only had one season in which he completed 60% of his throws, and it was his last one.

Shiver
06-19-2007, 05:46 PM
I do suspect that you're right on the Elway situation. I think that he was encouraged to take risks, I'm just surprised that such risk taking didn't result in more touchdowns as well. For a guy who is spoken of so well, he spent 10 years throwing an interception for every touchdown. At the very least, I think that is something people need to realize.

Or maybe because it took him ten years to get a decent supporting cast and coaching.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-19-2007, 05:51 PM
Or maybe because it took him ten years to get a decent supporting cast and coaching.

I would accept that if the Broncos didn't win so many games. They averaged 11 wins over that 10 year span, and while that is certainly an argument in favor of Elway, I have to assume that he had some talent on both sides of the ball to win that often.

As for the coaching, Shanahan was his quarterback coach for most of his early career, and Reeves is generally highly thought of.

Shiver
06-19-2007, 06:08 PM
He had a good defense. That doesn't mean that he had adequate weapons, ones that he had later in his career when put up very good statistics.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-19-2007, 06:25 PM
He had a good defense. That doesn't mean that he had adequate weapons, ones that he had later in his career when put up very good statistics.

This is very true, but I find it a bit suspect nontheless. Averaging 10 wins is no small feat, and considering the yardage Elway threw for, one would think that some more touchdowns would accompany that.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-19-2007, 06:55 PM
he had zero offensive talent until 1989, when he finally got humphrey. why would you assume he had good offensive talent? simply because they won games? that's terrible. i could use the same logic and make the logical assumption that the raiders have zero talent on either side of the ball, by virtue of their recent 1st overall pick. i'm sure you'd take issue with that assumption, so why make a similar leap here?

Because someone was catching all those throws that lead to the yardage he accumulated. If I'm making the wrong assumptions about the kind of talent that offense had, I apologize, but it seems to me that winning with that kind of consistency takes more than a good defense.

cunningham06
06-20-2007, 12:29 AM
Alright don't everyone start hating on McNabb like with what happened with Terrence Newman. That's just Neo being stupid and none of the Eagles fans agree with it.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
06-20-2007, 08:44 AM
I know you were kidding.


Seriously? If that's not a joke, you might be the only person who didn't understand what I was doing there.

keylime_5
06-20-2007, 10:46 AM
A LOT of QBs had better years statistically than Elway, but McNabb has only been to one superbowl, and on the pace he's going, McNabb will not get close to Elway's (soon to be Favre's) career passing TD record. I wish he would though, I hate Mr.Ed's Guts.

draftguru151
06-20-2007, 10:51 AM
A LOT of QBs had better years statistically than Elway, but McNabb has only been to one superbowl, and on the pace he's going, McNabb will not get close to Elway's (soon to be Favre's) career passing TD record. I wish he would though, I hate Mr.Ed's Guts.

Um, you mean Marino's 420 TDs? Elway had 300.

HEISMANHERSCHEL
06-20-2007, 12:28 PM
What about the fact that Elway is blonde? I think that clearly makes him better. And that, Mister, is a fact!

McNabb cant even trim his beard!!!!!!!!!

Seriously, Elway is not better than Mcnabb. He is far superior in every facet of the game than Mcnabb.

Anyone that can say they would rather have McNabb leading their team in his eighth year over Elway going into his eighth year needs to seriously consider the question and answer it truthfully.

BlindSite
06-20-2007, 07:16 PM
Because someone was catching all those throws that lead to the yardage he accumulated. If I'm making the wrong assumptions about the kind of talent that offense had, I apologize, but it seems to me that winning with that kind of consistency takes more than a good defense.

Indeed it does, good Quarterbacking... Elway didn't have his masterful weapons the team needed to get over the line until much later, we can all agree on that.

However, he didn't light up the statistics early because he had a lack of top tier offensive talent around him, have a look at a team like the chiefs. After Gonzalez I really find it hard to name three receivers. I can name the first three receivers on probably 28 teams. KC is one of the ones I never can, why? Because they're no body's but look at what Trent Green has been able to do with that, throw for 4000 yards almost yearly.

Trent Green, also couldn't manage to win games.

Elway, instead of having the great runningback's Green's always had, had the great defense, that was his horse to ride, and he supported it well enough to win games. In effect, he did everything he had to do and everything he could do to win games. The team around him simply wasn't good enough for many years to get them to the superbowl, when it was, He took them there, and he won.

Raiderz4Life
06-20-2007, 11:49 PM
First of all, i gotta say i love McNabb, he's my favorite all time player...dont ask me why idk but i just like him a ton. I have his 3 jerseys the dark green almost black one, the green one and the white one.

Now, no way D.Mc is better than Elway. Elway did much more with what was probably less talented teams than McNabb did. Elway was a lot more clutch than McNabb is. Now Donovan is a good player and might have been elite in his prime but comparing him to Elway is rather pointless since we all know who was the better QB.

HEISMANHERSCHEL
06-21-2007, 03:30 AM
raiders4life-
Your sig is sweet! That was a great pick by your team.

johbur
06-22-2007, 12:14 AM
McNabb got sick with a tummy ache in the big game and quit in the last two minutes. Elway went to Five and won two SBs. Deal with that.

SenorGato
06-22-2007, 02:16 AM
TO was injured during the playoffs the year they went to the superbowl and had absolutely nothing to do with them getting to the superbowl. Fact

His reputation? what as one of the more successful QB's in NFL history as far as being the QB on good ball clubs, making plays with his arm and feet and being a leader.

Did elway not have the intangables early in his career? was he considered a choke artist because his early career wasnt any more successful than McNabbs.

Again any logical non fan boy would have to say McNabb's first 8 years are better than Elways

Dude...take the time to re-read my post.

I came the closest in this thread to AGREEING with you.

I think many past NFL QBs, just like many athletes in other sports, have their reputations absolutely EXPLODE once they retire (usually positively). Many people will downgrade current players in favor of players from the past simply because past players have been gone long enough to have their flaws forgotten and their strengths praised. Bill James used to say this, and I don't think a truer statement has been said about athletes of yesteryear.

Look at Peyton Manning...in 50 years I'll bet that he'll be considered the greatest pure passer of all time...but right now you won't find many people from past generations who will agree. It's just a human tendency to cling to and romanticize the past.

Not only that...but football fans put a TON of value in Super Bowl wins. It may be slightly flawed, but not like...a ton.