Eli, Rivers, or Big Ben

[Number 10]

You said Eli Manning and late game heroics in the same paragraph. That's funny.

I hope that was a joke, for your sake.

[Windy]

I give Eli an A- for late game heroics. He does that snap well i see. His package isnt as around in him

[Basileus777]

It seems now that the running game is being contained, Ben is not even sniffing the success he had the past couple years.

Yeah, like that playoff game at Indie or that AFC Championship game at Denver, the running game was really tearing it up then....err wait. I guess I must have imagined Ben winning two playoff games at hostile environments without a running game. And it isn't like Ben dinked and dunked his way to such efficient passing numbers, he led the entire NFL in ypa last year.

[Smooth Criminal]

In the end it is winning that matters and not stats. We'll see what QB leads his team to the most success.

As of now, I'll take the guy witha 5-1 playoff record and a ring over a guy that hasn't ever won , or scored a point in, a playoff game.

[Number 10]

In the end it is winning that matters and not stats. We'll see what QB leads his team to the most success.

As of now, I'll take the guy witha 5-1 playoff record and a ring over a guy that hasn't ever won , or scored a point in, a playoff game.

When evaluating QBs at the end of their careers, yes you can do that. But Eli is in his second year as a starter and Ben is in his 3rd. You can't use wins as the basis of your evaluation yet because you don't know what as a fluke and what wasn't.

[ricky bobby]

In the end it is winning that matters and not stats. We'll see what QB leads his team to the most success.

As of now, I'll take the guy witha 5-1 playoff record and a ring over a guy that hasn't ever won , or scored a point in, a playoff game.

The steelers would have won that super bowl without ben. Don't bother arguing against that one.

[AlexDown]

In the end it is winning that matters and not stats. We'll see what QB leads his team to the most success.

As of now, I'll take the guy witha 5-1 playoff record and a ring over a guy that hasn't ever won , or scored a point in, a playoff game.

The steelers would have won that super bowl without ben. Don't bother arguing against that one.

They woulden't even have gotten to the postseason last year without him. They were one game away from not making it, and when Ben was out last year pretty sure they went something like 0-3. Don't even bother arguing against that one? Did you evne watch any steeler games last year?

[Basileus777]

In the end it is winning that matters and not stats. We'll see what QB leads his team to the most success.

As of now, I'll take the guy witha 5-1 playoff record and a ring over a guy that hasn't ever won , or scored a point in, a playoff game.

The steelers might have had a losing record without ben. Don't bother arguing against that one.

Fixed your post.

[ricky bobby]

In the end it is winning that matters and not stats. We'll see what QB leads his team to the most success.

As of now, I'll take the guy witha 5-1 playoff record and a ring over a guy that hasn't ever won , or scored a point in, a playoff game.

The steelers might have had a losing record without ben. Don't bother arguing against that one.

Fixed your post.

Hey, who has more TDs this season, ben or his backup?
Answer: his backup.

[Basileus777]

In the end it is winning that matters and not stats. We'll see what QB leads his team to the most success.

As of now, I'll take the guy witha 5-1 playoff record and a ring over a guy that hasn't ever won , or scored a point in, a playoff game.

The steelers might have had a losing record without ben. Don't bother arguing against that one.

Fixed your post.

Hey, who has more TDs this season, ben or his backup?
Answer: his backup.

Hey, what year did the Steelers win the Superbowl? Oh wait, that was last year, before Ben got hurt and started playing like crap. Wasn't that the same year that they struggled when Ben was injured and were a completely different team with him? Didn't their running game also struggle in two road playoff games and Ben had to shoulder the offense for them to win?

[ricky bobby]

Hey, what year did the Steelers win the Superbowl? Oh wait, that was last year, before Ben got hurt and started playing like crap. Wasn't that the same year that they struggled when Ben was injured and were a completely different team with him?

hey, welcome to 2006. 2005 was last year. Why don't we look at the most relevant statistics, this years.

[Basileus777]

Hey, what year did the Steelers win the Superbowl? Oh wait, that was last year, before Ben got hurt and started playing like crap. Wasn't that the same year that they struggled when Ben was injured and were a completely different team with him?

hey, welcome to 2006. 2005 was last year. Why don't we look at the most relevant statistics, this years.

When one is talking about whether the Steelers would have won the Superbowl last year without Ben, last years stats are relevant. Sorry.

[Jughead10]

I'll take Ben. Sure its me being a homer but look at the way he led us through the playoffs last season. He did alot more than just "manage" games in the playoffs. He single handedly took us to the superbowl. I'll take a superbowl win over a stat record any day.

Two things.

1-Be honest with yourself. Do you really believe that Ben single handeldly took you to the Super Bowl?

2-Would you take Trent Dilfer, Kurt Warner, Phil Simms, Jeff Hostetler, Brad Johnson...etc over Dan Marino because of a ring?

Yes. I completely believe that Ben made th is team what it was last year. He played great games in the playoffs. Against Denver and Indy he was great putting points on the board early. I don't think Rivers or Manning would have been able to do what Ben did last post season.

And to your question, No I would take Marino. But to be fair, Ben is better than all of those guys and Manning and Rivers will never be as good as Marino.

Ben has not done anything yet to prove he will be a better player than Warner and Simms were.

Going to the AFC Championship in his first two seasons is nothing then right. How bout ROTY. Fact is Ben has now played two very good seasons and has a great career ahead on him.

The thought of him being a fluke was acceptable after one good year but after playing good his first two seasons its pretty obivous he will be a great QB for along time. Sure he is in s lump right now but you can't expect him to stay there with the way he has played his first two years.

The thought of him being a fluke is perfectly acceptable after watching what happens when the Steelers open up the offense for him and he is forced to pass the ball the same amount of times as normal QBs. Difference so far is Ben was drafted onto an already great team. Where most young QBs don't have that luxury, they are forced to take lumps while their team improves.

Ben and Simms are almost polar opposites to me. Simms had probably the greatest single Super Bowl performance for a winning QB, while Ben had the worst.

I love how everyone thinks Ben was put ona superbowl calibur team. The Steelers were 6-10 the year they drafted Ben and they didn't make any huge improvements other than drafting Ben. Once they added Ben they went to 15-1. He wasn't just put on a great team. He is what made the team good.

It is actually pretty pathetic that I know your team better than you! Their was a huge move made that offseason. Getting rid of Tim Lewis and bringing in Dick LeBeau. That was far bigger than bringing in Ben. Once Dick got there that defense became one of the best in the league. Team that with a running game that was always there, and you can just add in an adequate QB to not lose games for you.

[Windy]

Hey, what year did the Steelers win the Superbowl? Oh wait, that was last year, before Ben got hurt and started playing like crap. Wasn't that the same year that they struggled when Ben was injured and were a completely different team with him?

hey, welcome to 2006. 2005 was last year. Why don't we look at the most relevant statistics, this years.

When one is talking about whether the Steelers would have won the Superbowl last year without Ben, last years stats are relevant. Sorry.

last years stats do matter. you cant just base everything on the few games he has played this year.

[Jughead10]

Hey, what year did the Steelers win the Superbowl? Oh wait, that was last year, before Ben got hurt and started playing like crap. Wasn't that the same year that they struggled when Ben was injured and were a completely different team with him?

hey, welcome to 2006. 2005 was last year. Why don't we look at the most relevant statistics, this years.

When one is talking about whether the Steelers would have won the Superbowl last year without Ben, last years stats are relevant. Sorry.

last years stats do matter. you cant just base everything on the few games he has played this year.

You can in a way because this season the Steelers "opened up" the offense more for him and are just now allowing him to do more things that most NFL QBs do. For starters throwing more than 18 times a game. He has consistently shown in his career that when he has to throw the ball the amount of times most QBs have to, he is not very succesful.