Top 5 all-time QBs (SIAP)

[Hacksaw]

Seriously the rings portion of my comment earlier was not directed at you, I remember your stance from before. But I have seen other posters say that.

No hard feelings here, that's for sure. It may sound like I'm annoyed from time to time, but it's really just my enthusiasm for a good debate. I'm not even expecting to change anyone's mind. It's an opinion and ultimately something that cannot be proven one way or the other. Montana, Brady and Manning are all-time greats, no matter how you rank them, IMO.

I just like to make a few points that might cause 1 or 2 folks to look at things from a perspective they might not have thought of before.

 

[Hacksaw]

In assessing the relative weight of supporting cast vs. the individual performances of quarterbacks in this discussion, especially as it pertains ultimately to post-season success, I believe that team rankings in scoring defense and rushing offense are particularly enlightening. This will be lengthy, so I will post in two separate communiqués, the first of which analyzes scoring defense. Beginning with 2001, when Brady became the starting quarterback for New England, we see the following:

2001: NE (6th), 272 points; INDY (31st), 486 points. NE wins Super Bowl. INDY finishes 6-10.
2002: NE (17th), 346 points; INDY (7th), 313 points. INDY finishes 10-6, NE 9-7.
2003: NE (1st), 238 points; INDY (20th), 336 points. NE wins Super Bowl. INDY finishes 12-4.
2004: NE (2nd), 260 points; INDY (19th), 351 points. NE wins Super Bowl, INDY finishes 12-4.
2005: NE (17th), 338 points; INDY (2nd), 247 points. INDY finishes 14-2, NE finishes 10-6.
2006: NE (2nd), 237 points; INDY (23rd), 360 points. Both teams finish 12-4. INDY wins Super Bowl.
2007: NE (4th), 274 points; INDY (1st), 262 points. NE finishes 16-0, INDY finishes 13-3.
2008: NE (8th), 309 points; INDY (7th), 298 points. NE finishes 11-5, INDY finishes 12-4. Brady was injured in opener and missed the rest of season.
2009: NE (5th), 285 points; INDY (8th), 307 points. NE finishes 10-6, INDY finishes 14-2.
2010: NE (8th), 313 points; INDY (23rd), 388 points. NE finishes 14-2, INDY finishes 10-6.
2011: NE (15th), 342 points; INDY (28th), 430 points. NE finishes 13-3, INDY finishes 2-14. Manning misses entire season.
2012: NE (9th), 331 points; Denver (4th), 289 points. NE finishes 12-4, Denver finishes 13-3.
2013: NE (10th), 338 points; Denver (22nd), 399 points. NE finishes 12-4 and Denver finishes 13-3.

What can we conclude from this data? New England’s three Super Bowl victories during the Brady era were supported by defenses that ranked 6th, 1st and 2nd, respectively. Peyton’s one Super Bowl ring, on the other hand, is a true statistical outlier; it was won despite a defense that ranked 23rd in scoring defense.

Brady has never played with a defense ranked lower than 17th in this category; he has enjoyed the support of ten top 10 defenses and 6 top six defenses. From 2001 until the present, the Patriots’ average defensive ranking in this category has been 7.9.

Defensive rankings of teams that Peyton has quarterbacked have been much more variable. Their average ranking throughout this period has been 15th, but this does not begin to tell the whole picture. Peyton has enjoyed the support of six top ten defenses and three top five defenses; he also has been saddled with six defenses, including the present one, which have ranked 20th or lower in scoring defense.

The 49ers during Montana’s era were even more consistently dominant on defense than the Patriots, with Brady at the helm:

1981 (Montana’s first full year as starter): 2nd (250 pts.). SF wins Super Bowl.
1982 (23rd in the strike-shortened nine-game season), 206 points. 3-6 record.
1983 (4th), 293 points. 10-6 record.
1984 (1st), 227 points. SF is 15-1, wins Super Bowl.
1985 (2nd to the other-worldly Chicago Bears defense), 263 points. 10-6 record.
1986 (3rd), 247 points. 10-5-1 (Montana played only eight games).
1987 (3rd), 253 points. 13-2 record (Montana started only 11 games).
1988 (8th), 294 points. 10-6 regular season, SF wins Super Bowl.
1989 (3rd), 253 points. 14-2 regular season, SF wins Super Bowl.

So, as phenomenally as Montana played in his Super Bowl appearances, he also had the 2nd, 1st, 8th and 3rd best scoring defenses, respectively, at his back.

All data were excerpted from Pro-Football-Reference.com - Pro Football Statistics and History.

All of this really makes you appreciate more fully what Peyton has accomplished as an NFL quarterback. He has been dealt a hand more comparable to that of Dan Marino than Tom Brady or Joe Montana, i.e. excellent skilled position players and, for the most part, mediocre defenses.

There is no question that Montana and Brady were/are extraordinary quarterbacks. However, it can be argued that there is also a certain "McCarron effect" here as well. When you have a consistently strong defense at your back, you can afford to be highly efficient and resist the temptation to make risky, gunslinger-like throws a la Marino or Favre. Because of the hit-or-miss nature of defenses he has played with, Peyton has had to directly shoulder more of the responsibility for the success of his teams than Brady or Montana has over the course of their careers. You can nitpick as to who individually is the better clutch performer over various portions of their respective careers, but you can also find supporting evidence here for the oldest fundamental truth in football. Even when you are talking about QBs as great as these three, defense wins championships.

I like The McCarron Effect. You should trademark that. Nice data. I think I tend to agree with you.

 

[thebjd]

That gets ignored a lot for some reason. Not saying current guys are not great by any means, but stats are a little inflated due to today's pass happy league. That should be taken into consideration. IMO

Rice said he would catch 150-160 balls a season in today's league. I believe he might.

 

[thebjd]

Montana didn't have Rice for his first 2 Super Bowls. He had Dwight Clark and Freddie Solomon. Roger Craig was a second year player in 1984. Peyton Manning has also had wayyy better offensive lines than just about anybody. As a matter of fact, he is the third least sacked QB of all time, first among active QB's.

Also the rules are much stricter now on the defense. Back when Montana played the defense could actually hit the QB without fear. Now a days a defensive player has a very small strikezone in which to hit with. Its a lot easier to put up monster stats and be a great QB when you know you're protected and that the defense is restricted.

Montana had a better offensive line and that isn't close. Steve Wallace, Guy McIntyre, Randy Cross, Harris Barton and Jesse Sapolu were all excellent. The teams in the league were better. There were fewer teams so the talent was less diluted and the teams stayed together. The top of the NFC was crazy good in the 80's and 90's. There were better and more pass rushers and QB's couldn't just throw the ball out of bounds if under pressure. This is a two horse race in my opinion between Montana and Manning.

 

[BadJerry20]

Volosaurus Rex. I respect all the data you bring. One thing you have to take in consideration though. Say you could somehow switch Brady and Montana with Manning and Marino. Brady and Montana would probably have the stats as they would be asked to do more but probably have less rings. Conversely Manning and Marino would be asked to do less and probably have less stats but more rings. It works for and against both arguments. Which is what makes this an impossible win for both sides. But makes for great debates. As I've said it all depends on what you view the criteria fot the GOAT. Teams win championships, but you need good teammates to accumulate great stats as well. Well unless you are Barry Sanders. The era jumping is the tricky part in this equation. IMO

 

[BadJerry20]

No hard feelings here, that's for sure. It may sound like I'm annoyed from time to time, but it's really just my enthusiasm for a good debate. I'm not even expecting to change anyone's mind. It's an opinion and ultimately something that cannot be proven one way or the other. Montana, Brady and Manning are all-time greats, no matter how you rank them, IMO.

I just like to make a few points that might cause 1 or 2 folks to look at things from a perspective they might not have thought of before.

Here either man. I enjoy a good debate and try to respect all sides. They are all 3 definitely on the MT Rushmore of QBs.

 

[BadJerry20]

Rice said he would catch 150-160 balls a season in today's league. I believe he might.

I think Rice's numbers would be even more crazy in today's game than they already are. And that is a scary thought.

 

[Volosaurus rex]

With respect to rushing offense. Peyton had the advantage of playing with Marshall Faulk and Edgerrin James at the peak of their respective careers in Indianapolis. The Patriots, however, have often utilized a running back-by-committee approach during this period and a much different picture emerges when you compare team rushing totals, one that more often than not favored New England:

2001: NE 1793 yds. INDY 1966 yds. NE wins Super Bowl.
2002: NE 1508 yds. INDY 1561 yds.
2003: NE 1607 yds. INDY 1695 yds. NE wins Super Bowl.
2004: NE 2134 yds. INDY 1852 yds. NE wins Super Bowl.
2005: NE 1512 yds. INDY 1703 yds.
2006: NE 1969 yds. INDY 1762 yds. INDY wins Super Bowl.
2007: NE 1849 yds. INDY 1706 yds.
2008: NE 2278 yds. INDY 1274 yds. Brady misses almost entire season.
2009: NE 1921 yds. INDY 1294 yds.
2010: NE 1973 yds. INDY 1483 yds.
2011: NE 1764 yds. INDY 1594 yds. Manning misses entire season.
2012: NE 2184 yds. DENV 1832 yds.
2013: NE 2065 yds. DENV 1873 yds.

Please note that New England has outrushed teams led by Peyton for the last EIGHT consecutive years. Turning to the 49ers during Montana’s era, we find the following:

1981 (Montana’s first full year as starter): 19th (1941 yds). SF wins Super Bowl.
1982 (strike-shortened nine-game season): 28th (740 yds).
1983: 8th (2257 yds).
1984: 3rd (2465 yds). SF wins Super Bowl.
1985: 10th (2232 yds).
1986: 10th (1986 yds).
1987: 1st (2237 yds).
1988: 2nd (2523 yds). SF wins Super Bowl.
1989: 10th (1966 yds). SF wins Super Bowl.
1990: 18th (1718 yds.).

Obviously, Montana played in an era when the running game was more heavily emphasized than it is today. For that reason, I have also indicated parenthetically the 49ers’ team ranking in that category. This data illustrates that, from 1983-1989, Montana enjoyed an even more consistently strong running game than Brady had at his disposal. As great as Montana was, I doubt if many people remember that the 49ers led the league in rushing in 1987. In two of their Super Bowl-winning seasons (1984 and 1988), they also finished 3rd and 2nd , respectively, in that category. Coupled with data presented previously, does this information suggest a formula for success with which long-time SEC fans are quite familiar? Yes, a strong running game and stout defense is the most reliable foundation for the pursuit of championships. When you also have a quarterback the caliber of Montana, Brady or Manning, then you have the potential for a DYNASTY.

 

[BOP]

You lost me at Favre.



I hope this is sarcasm. Dan Marino is one of the best QBs I've ever seen. Does this apply to other positions as well. I'm pretty sure Barry Sanders never won a SB. Would most people not give him a look? If so, most people are morons.

He wasn't better than Favre. I agree, I would put him 4. Favre 2. Favre was a contemporary with Marino, Elway, Aikman, Young, and was CLEARLY the best QB in the game. Maybe the mid 00s cloud peoples judgement. But favre was incredible.

1. Manning
2. Favre
3. Montana
4. Marino
5. Elway

 

[lexkyvol]

Give me all day and twice on Sundays

Peyton Manning
Joe Montana
Tom Brady
John Elway
Dan Marino

 

[Volosaurus rex]

If Marino and Montana were placed in a time warp and I was forced to choose between them as rookies, based solely on talent and potential, I still do not know who I would pick. The gulf between them, in terms of supporting cast, was almost as deep as the Grand Canyon. I know that if I had drafted Marino, I would have made a more concerted effort to draft higher caliber defensive personnel and running backs than Miami did.

 

[roddo518]

If Marino and Montana were placed in a time warp and I was forced to choose between them as rookies, based solely on talent and potential, I still do not know who I would pick. The gulf between them, in terms of supporting cast, was almost as deep as the Grand Canyon. I know that if I had drafted Marino, I would have made a more concerted effort to draft higher caliber defensive personnel and running backs than Miami did.

That would have been an easy choice. You would have been fired as a general manager if you picked Montana over Marino. Montana was a skinny kid and Marino was stocky and had the strongest arm. Easy choice: don't know which would have turned out better. I bet Montana would have had a shortened career had he played on some of those Miami teams.

 

[BadJerry20]

If Marino and Montana were placed in a time warp and I was forced to choose between them as rookies, based solely on talent and potential, I still do not know who I would pick. The gulf between them, in terms of supporting cast, was almost as deep as the Grand Canyon. I know that if I had drafted Marino, I would have made a more concerted effort to draft higher caliber defensive personnel and running backs than Miami did.

I agree with the Miami part 100%, they did very very little in trying to help Marino. He had the least amount of help, of any of the all time greats.

Being 100% honest and objective. If I knew nothing about them and brought them in for a work out to decide who I was going to pick...it would be Marino his arm talent is undeniable, and he is the best pure passer I have ever seen. Not saying that would be the correct decision but if I'm going off talent it's Marino. Of course Randall would be in my top 3 off of pure talent evaluation, without seeing them play.

 

[Volosaurus rex]

I wonder when and where the disconnect occurred with the Dolphins, whether Shula simply became mesmerized with the offensive possibilities associated with the cannon that Marino had or if he was being overruled by the general manager in terms of draft day decisions. It isn't as though Shula wasn't familiar with having strong, well-balanced teams with both the Colts and, then, the Dolphins in the early 1970s. One would think that the experience of having that undefeated 1972 Dolphins team would have reinforced the message: "strong ground game + stout defense = a team that is perennially in the hunt for championships." Had there been a strategic effort to surround Marino with the right surrounding cast, the potential would have been there for a DYNASTY.

 

[BadJerry20]

I heard some talking head the other day that said Marino almost all but refused to call a run play. I know thats hyperbole, but it could shed a little light into their lack of a running game. Wouldn't explain the lack of building a strong defense. I would like to see a list of their draft picks during Dans time there, just to see how many busts and what positions they drafted for the first couple rounds at least.

 

[Volosaurus rex]

I heard some talking head the other day that said Marino almost all but refused to call a run play. I know thats hyperbole, but it could shed a little light into their lack of a running game. Wouldn't explain the lack of building a strong defense. I would like to see a list of their draft picks during Dans time there, just to see how many busts and what positions they drafted for the first couple rounds at least.

It may not have been as much of an exaggeration as it appears at first glance. A quick look at Dolphins rushing stats for Marino's career reveals not only a progressive decline in team rushing yardage (I didn't bother to check on attempts per year) but the fact that the only truly strong running team that he played on was, not surprisingly, his rookie year (1983), when they ran for 2150 yards on 568 attempts and finished 13th in that category. By 1988, they were first in passing (4516 yards on 621 attempts) and 28th, or dead last, in rushing (1205 yards on 335 attempts).

 

[BadJerry20]

It may not have been as much of an exaggeration as it appears at first glance. A quick look at Dolphins rushing stats for Marino's career reveals not only a progressive decline in team rushing yardage (I didn't bother to check on attempts per year) but the fact that the only truly strong running team that he played on was, not surprisingly, his rookie year (1983), when they ran for 2150 yards on 568 attempts and finished 13th in that category. By 1988, they were first in passing (4516 yards on 621 attempts) and 28th, or dead last, in rushing (1205 yards on 335 attempts).

Interesting, if it was because of Dan that would definitely be a strike against him. IMO I kind of find it hard to believe Shula would just let him have free reign like that. If he did, well strike against him too.

A 235 attempt and 900 yard dip in 5 years, holy ****.

 

[Volosaurus rex]

Actually, the "Great Offensive Imbalance" was already apparent by 1986. Again, they were 1st in passing (4779 yards on 645 attempts) and 25th in rushing (1545 yards on 349 attempts). Regardless of who was responsible, that kind of imbalance is not conducive to winning championships.

Although it represents an extremely small snapshot of Marino's career, it is also interesting to note that, for those two years, the Dolphins finished 26th (405 pts.) and 24th (380 pts.) in scoring defense in 1986 and 1988, respectively. That is what I would call placing the entire fortunes of the franchise squarely on the right shoulder and arm of Dan Marino.

Strangely enough, the defense was falling into disrepair concurrently with the transition to all-out aerial bombardment. In 1984, the one year that Marino played in a Super Bowl, the Dolphins were 7th in scoring defense, yielding only 298 points.

 

[MikeVol44]

In assessing the relative weight of supporting cast vs. the individual performances of quarterbacks in this discussion, especially as it pertains ultimately to post-season success, I believe that team rankings in scoring defense and rushing offense are particularly enlightening. This will be lengthy, so I will post in two separate communiqués, the first of which analyzes scoring defense. Beginning with 2001, when Brady became the starting quarterback for New England, we see the following:

2001: NE (6th), 272 points; INDY (31st), 486 points. NE wins Super Bowl. INDY finishes 6-10.
2002: NE (17th), 346 points; INDY (7th), 313 points. INDY finishes 10-6, NE 9-7.
2003: NE (1st), 238 points; INDY (20th), 336 points. NE wins Super Bowl. INDY finishes 12-4.
2004: NE (2nd), 260 points; INDY (19th), 351 points. NE wins Super Bowl, INDY finishes 12-4.
2005: NE (17th), 338 points; INDY (2nd), 247 points. INDY finishes 14-2, NE finishes 10-6.
2006: NE (2nd), 237 points; INDY (23rd), 360 points. Both teams finish 12-4. INDY wins Super Bowl.
2007: NE (4th), 274 points; INDY (1st), 262 points. NE finishes 16-0, INDY finishes 13-3.
2008: NE (8th), 309 points; INDY (7th), 298 points. NE finishes 11-5, INDY finishes 12-4. Brady was injured in opener and missed the rest of season.
2009: NE (5th), 285 points; INDY (8th), 307 points. NE finishes 10-6, INDY finishes 14-2.
2010: NE (8th), 313 points; INDY (23rd), 388 points. NE finishes 14-2, INDY finishes 10-6.
2011: NE (15th), 342 points; INDY (28th), 430 points. NE finishes 13-3, INDY finishes 2-14. Manning misses entire season.
2012: NE (9th), 331 points; Denver (4th), 289 points. NE finishes 12-4, Denver finishes 13-3.
2013: NE (10th), 338 points; Denver (22nd), 399 points. NE finishes 12-4 and Denver finishes 13-3.

What can we conclude from this data? New England’s three Super Bowl victories during the Brady era were supported by defenses that ranked 6th, 1st and 2nd, respectively. Peyton’s one Super Bowl ring, on the other hand, is a true statistical outlier; it was won despite a defense that ranked 23rd in scoring defense.

Brady has never played with a defense ranked lower than 17th in this category; he has enjoyed the support of ten top 10 defenses and 6 top six defenses. From 2001 until the present, the Patriots’ average defensive ranking in this category has been 7.9.

Defensive rankings of teams that Peyton has quarterbacked have been much more variable. Their average ranking throughout this period has been 15th, but this does not begin to tell the whole picture. Peyton has enjoyed the support of six top ten defenses and three top five defenses; he also has been saddled with six defenses, including the present one, which have ranked 20th or lower in scoring defense.

The 49ers during Montana’s era were even more consistently dominant on defense than the Patriots, with Brady at the helm:

1981 (Montana’s first full year as starter): 2nd (250 pts.). SF wins Super Bowl.
1982 (23rd in the strike-shortened nine-game season), 206 points. 3-6 record.
1983 (4th), 293 points. 10-6 record.
1984 (1st), 227 points. SF is 15-1, wins Super Bowl.
1985 (2nd to the other-worldly Chicago Bears defense), 263 points. 10-6 record.
1986 (3rd), 247 points. 10-5-1 (Montana played only eight games).
1987 (3rd), 253 points. 13-2 record (Montana started only 11 games).
1988 (8th), 294 points. 10-6 regular season, SF wins Super Bowl.
1989 (3rd), 253 points. 14-2 regular season, SF wins Super Bowl.
1990 (2nd), 239 points. 14-2 regular season.

So, as phenomenally as Montana played in his Super Bowl appearances, he also had the 2nd, 1st, 8th and 3rd best scoring defenses, respectively, at his back.

All data were excerpted from Pro-Football-Reference.com - Pro Football Statistics and History.

All of this really makes you appreciate more fully what Peyton has accomplished as an NFL quarterback. He has been dealt a hand more comparable to that of Dan Marino than Tom Brady or Joe Montana, i.e. excellent skilled position players and, for the most part, mediocre defenses.

There is no question that Montana and Brady were/are extraordinary quarterbacks. However, it can be argued that there is also a certain "McCarron effect" here as well. When you have a consistently strong defense at your back, you can afford to be highly efficient and resist the temptation to make risky, gunslinger-like throws a la Marino or Favre. Because of the hit-or-miss nature of defenses he has played with, Peyton has had to directly shoulder more of the responsibility for the success of his teams than Brady or Montana has over the course of their careers. You can nitpick as to who individually is the better clutch performer over various portions of their respective careers, but you can also find supporting evidence here for the oldest fundamental truth in football. Even when you are talking about QBs as great as these three, defense wins championships.

Great post...Having a great defense definitely impacts the W-L record. And I've already declared that I have not based my conclusions on the W-L records in the playoffs, nor have I based it solely on # of SB rings. I definitely agree with you about the contribution of DEFENSE to those two results.

However, you simply cannot use the strength of a team's defense to evaluate which QB is the greatest of all time. The defense NEVER throws a TD or interception.

Neither Manning's, Montana's, nor Brady's defense contributed to their TD/INT ratio or passer rating. Those are objective measures of performance.

Clearly--Manning has one of the highest career passer ratings of any QB to have ever played the game.

However, his TD/INT ratio and Passer rating drop drastically when he gets into the playoffs against the elite competition in the NFL.

Montana's TD/INT ratio and Passer rating RISE when he faces the elite competition in the NFL.

It's really very simple.

Something I haven't researched is the Defensive strength when comparing the NFC vs. the AFC. It does appear that NFC teams have won 25 of the 47 SBs, which is definitely not an overwhelming majority.

However, year in and year out--which division produces the best defenses--the point being, which league produces better competition?

The Broncos lost 3 games this year--1 to the Colts (13th in passing defense), 1 to the Chargers (29th), and 1 to the Patriots (18th).

They have wins over the Texans (3rd), Giants (10th), and Ravens (12th). None of these last 3 teams had even avg. play from their QBs. Eli stunk it up, Flacco was over-whelmed, and I don't even know who played QB for the Texans against the Broncos.

Denver's defense was ranked 27th in passing yardage given up per game, and 19th in total yardage per game (22nd in pts/game).

stats from 2013 NFL Team Total Stats - National Football League - ESPN

I guess in the end it really is fun for me to discuss and debate this issue because I LOVE THE SPORT! It's the greatest game on earth, and it's definitely one in which all 11 on the field must work as a TEAM in order to win championships.

As much as I love Manning--I simply would take Montana as my QB when I absolutely had to have a win--everything else being equal. eace2:

 

[MikeVol44]

Interesting, if it was because of Dan that would definitely be a strike against him. IMO I kind of find it hard to believe Shula would just let him have free reign like that. If he did, well strike against him too.

A 235 attempt and 900 yard dip in 5 years, holy ****.

And one thing to remember--other than '83, the Dolphins' defense was terrible. They got behind early and often--and Marino was all that they had, and he was throwing to midgets. lol:

 

[1972 Grad]

And one thing to remember--other than '83, the Dolphins' defense was terrible. They got behind early and often--and Marino was all that they had, and he was throwing to midgets. lol:

I would think that being a quarterback on a team with a bad defense would help to pad your stats for yards and completions. If you are always behind, you have to throw because you always have to play catch up. As a qb you are forced to try to score to stay in the game. See Tyler Bray at U.T.

 

[Volosaurus rex]

Great post...Having a great defense definitely impacts the W-L record. And I've already declared that I have not based my conclusions on the W-L records in the playoffs, nor have I based it solely on # of SB rings. I definitely agree with you about the contribution of DEFENSE to those two results.

However, you simply cannot use the strength of a team's defense to evaluate which QB is the greatest of all time. The defense NEVER throws a TD or interception.

Neither Manning's, Montana's, nor Brady's defense contributed to their TD/INT ratio or passer rating. Those are objective measures of performance.

Clearly--Manning has one of the highest career passer ratings of any QB to have ever played the game.

However, his TD/INT ratio and Passer rating drop drastically when he gets into the playoffs against the elite competition in the NFL.

Montana's TD/INT ratio and Passer rating RISE when he faces the elite competition in the NFL.

It's really very simple.

Something I haven't researched is the Defensive strength when comparing the NFC vs. the AFC. It does appear that NFC teams have won 25 of the 47 SBs, which is definitely not an overwhelming majority.

However, year in and year out--which division produces the best defenses--the point being, which league produces better competition?

The Broncos lost 3 games this year--1 to the Colts (13th in passing defense), 1 to the Chargers (29th), and 1 to the Patriots (18th).

They have wins over the Texans (3rd), Giants (10th), and Ravens (12th). None of these last 3 teams had even avg. play from their QBs. Eli stunk it up, Flacco was over-whelmed, and I don't even know who played QB for the Texans against the Broncos.

Denver's defense was ranked 27th in passing yardage given up per game, and 19th in total yardage per game (22nd in pts/game).

stats from 2013 NFL Team Total Stats - National Football League - ESPN

I guess in the end it really is fun for me to discuss and debate this issue because I LOVE THE SPORT! It's the greatest game on earth, and it's definitely one in which all 11 on the field must work as a TEAM in order to win championships.

As much as I love Manning--I simply would take Montana as my QB when I absolutely had to have a win--everything else being equal. eace2:

I have not attempted to "use the strength of a team's defense to evaluate which QB is the greatest of all time." I have used data on team rankings in scoring defense and rushing offense to: (1) comparatively contextualize the supporting cast for prospective candidates to the mythical title of "Greatest Quarterback of all Time"; and (2) to illustrate that there are better predictors of post-season success in the NFL than greatness at the quarterback position.

With respect to the relative level of competition between the NFC and AFC, I would suggest that it is a cyclic phenomenon, just as superiority in major league baseball has oscillated back and forth between the two leagues. However, let's see if we can find a common denominator in scoring defense among Super Bowl-winning teams, irrespective of quarterback play:

1966 Green Bay 1st (163 pts., 14-game regular season until 1978)
1967 Green Bay 3rd (209 pts.)
1968 New York Jets (280 pts; would have been 10th if the 26 teams in the NFL and AFL had been merged that year).

1969 Kansas City 1st (in AFL with 177 pts.; would have been 2nd if the 26 teams in the NFL and AFL had been merged that year)

1970 Baltimore Colts 7th (234 pts.)
1971 Dallas 7th (222 pts.)
1972 Miami 1st (171 pts.)
1973 Miami 1st (150 pts.)
1974 Pittsburgh 2nd (189 pts.)
1975 Pittsburgh 2nd (162 pts.)
1976 Oakland 12th (237 pts. In 28-team NFL)
1977 Dallas 8th (212 pts.)
1978 Pittsburgh 1st (195 pts. Regular season is lengthened to 16 games)
1979 Pittsburgh 7th (262 pts.)

1980 Oakland 10th (306 pts.)
1981 San Francisco 2nd (250 pts.)
1982 Washington 1st (128 pts. in a strike-shortened, nine-game season)
1983 Los Angeles Raiders 13th (338 pts.)
1984 San Francisco 1st (227 pts.)
1985 Chicago 1st (198 pts.)
1986 New York Giants 2nd (236 pts.)
1987 Washington 6th (285 points)
1988 San Francisco 8th (294 pts.)
1989 San Francisco 3rd (253 pts.)

1990 New York Giants 1st (211 pts.)
1991 Washington 2nd (224 pts.)
1992 Dallas 5th (243 pts.)
1993 Dallas 2nd (229 pts.)
1994 San Francisco 6th (296 points)
1995 Dallas 3rd (291 pts. NFL expands to 30 teams)
1996 Green Bay 1st (210 pts.)
1997 Denver 7th (287 pts.)
1998 Denver 9th (309 pts.)
1999 St. Louis 4th (242 pts.)

2000 Baltimore Ravens 1st (165 pts.)
2001 New England 6th (272 pts.)
2002 Tampa Bay 1st (196 pts. NFL expands to 32 teams)
2003 New England 1st (238 pts.)
2004 New England 2nd (260 pts.)
2005 Pittsburgh 4th (258 pts.)
2006 Indianapolis 23rd (360 pts.)
2007 New York Giants 17th (351 pts.)
2008 Pittsburgh 1st (223 pts.)
2009 New Orleans 20th (341 pts.)
2010 Green Bay 2nd (240 pts.)
2011 New York Giants 25th (400 pts.)
2012 Baltimore Ravens 12th (344 pts.)

If I count correctly, 32 out of 47 SB winners finished in the top quartile in that category; 29 of them were ranked in the top five and 24, just over half, finished in the top three. You may correctly ask, "what does scoring defense have to do with greatness at the quarterback position?" In and of itself, nothing, that is, if you want to presuppose that the playing field, in terms of supporting cast and coaching, was even for the preeminent candidates to this title: Montana, Manning, Brady and Marino. I categorically reject the latter premise.

I believe, however, that we both would agree that the post-season careers of Brady and Montana conform closely to this equation, which, with minor modification, was proven to be quite effective by our own beloved General Neyland:

Great coaching + Great Defense + Strong Running Game (+ Great Quarterback) = Potential DYNASTY

On the other hand, Marino's career and, to a lesser degree, Peyton's career conform more closely to this equation:

Good but not great coaching (One can question, based upon personnel decisions, whether Shula was still a Hall-of-Fame caliber coach during Marino's tenure) + Great Quarterback Play + Mediocre (or downright bad) Defense + Average Ground Game (or one relegated to afterthought status) = a team that may make an occasional run at the Super Bowl, perhaps even win one, but is no threat to become a dominating dynasty.

That is why I suggested that it can be argued that there was/is a certain "McCarron effect" here as well with respect to Montana and Brady. Both were/are much more than "game managers," but when you have a consistently strong defense at your back, you can afford to be highly efficient and resist the temptation to make risky, gunslinger-like throws a la Marino or Favre. Because of the hit-or-miss nature of defenses he has played with, Peyton has had to directly shoulder more of the responsibility for the success of his teams than Brady or Montana has over the course of their careers. You can nitpick as to who individually is the better clutch performer over various portions of their respective careers, but you can also find supporting evidence here for the oldest fundamental truth in football. Even when you are talking about QBs as great as these four, defense wins championships.

In conclusion, I am not trying to diminish the accomplishments of Joe Montana and the 49ers. However, let me pose this hypothetical question: If Montana had been drafted by the Dolphins and saddled with the organizational handicaps which burdened that franchise, where would you be inclined to rank him in this debate?

 

[oregonvol]

However, you simply cannot use the strength of a team's defense to evaluate which QB is the greatest of all time. The defense NEVER throws a TD or interception.

Neither Manning's, Montana's, nor Brady's defense contributed to their TD/INT ratio or passer rating. Those are objective measures of performance.

Actually, defense can have a significant effect on passers. If your team is behind more, you often have to throw more. When you are in a situation where you are behind and the other team's defense knows you have to pass to catch up, they don't have to respect the run and they can drop more into coverage. All of this would greatly enhance the chances of throwing interceptions.

The same goes for having a strong run game. If the defense doesn't have to worry about your team beating them on the ground, they can also put more into coverage.

There is no objective measure in these instances. All games and teams and game plans are different for everyone.

 

[thebjd]

He wasn't better than Favre. I agree, I would put him 4. Favre 2. Favre was a contemporary with Marino, Elway, Aikman, Young, and was CLEARLY the best QB in the game. Maybe the mid 00s cloud peoples judgement. But favre was incredible.

1. Manning
2. Favre
3. Montana
4. Marino
5. Elway

Favre was an absolute phenom at his peak. He could put the ball in such tight windows with velocity that I have never seen. Favre should be in any top five in my opinion. Marino was on his decline when Favre was on his ascent. The mid to late 90's were Favre's dominant years where Marino was dominant in the mid to late 80's. Marino never had a supporting cast as good as any on the list. The Marx brothers tandem of Clayton and Duper he had were really not that special. I don't know who assembled talent for that team but I always felt a little sorry for Marino. Elway would probably not make my top five but that draft class of QB's is the best ever.

 

[thebjd]

I have not attempted to "use the strength of a team's defense to evaluate which QB is the greatest of all time." I have used data on team rankings in scoring defense and rushing offense to: (1) comparatively contextualize the supporting cast for prospective candidates to the mythical title of "Greatest Quarterback of all Time"; and (2) to illustrate that there are better predictors of post-season success in the NFL than greatness at the quarterback position.

With respect to the relative level of competition between the NFC and AFC, I would suggest that it is a cyclic phenomenon, just as superiority in major league baseball has oscillated back and forth between the two leagues. However, let's see if we can find a common denominator in scoring defense among Super Bowl-winning teams, irrespective of quarterback play:

1966 Green Bay 1st (163 pts., 14-game regular season until 1978)
1967 Green Bay 3rd (209 pts.)
1968 New York Jets (280 pts; would have been 10th if the 26 teams in the NFL and AFL had been merged that year).

1969 Kansas City 1st (in AFL with 177 pts.; would have been 2nd if the 26 teams in the NFL and AFL had been merged that year)

1970 Baltimore Colts 7th (234 pts.)
1971 Dallas 7th (222 pts.)
1972 Miami 1st (171 pts.)
1973 Miami 1st (150 pts.)
1974 Pittsburgh 2nd (189 pts.)
1975 Pittsburgh 2nd (162 pts.)
1976 Oakland 12th (237 pts. In 28-team NFL)
1977 Dallas 8th (212 pts.)
1978 Pittsburgh 1st (195 pts. Regular season is lengthened to 16 games)
1979 Pittsburgh 7th (262 pts.)

1980 Oakland 10th (306 pts.)
1981 San Francisco 2nd (250 pts.)
1982 Washington 1st (128 pts. in a strike-shortened, nine-game season)
1983 Los Angeles Raiders 13th (338 pts.)
1984 San Francisco 1st (227 pts.)
1985 Chicago 1st (198 pts.)
1986 New York Giants 2nd (236 pts.)
1987 Washington 6th (285 points)
1988 San Francisco 8th (294 pts.)
1989 San Francisco 3rd (253 pts.)

1990 New York Giants 1st (211 pts.)
1991 Washington 2nd (224 pts.)
1992 Dallas 5th (243 pts.)
1993 Dallas 2nd (229 pts.)
1994 San Francisco 6th (296 points)
1995 Dallas 3rd (291 pts. NFL expands to 30 teams)
1996 Green Bay 1st (210 pts.)
1997 Denver 7th (287 pts.)
1998 Denver 9th (309 pts.)
1999 St. Louis 4th (242 pts.)

2000 Baltimore Ravens 1st (165 pts.)
2001 New England 6th (272 pts.)
2002 Tampa Bay 1st (196 pts. NFL expands to 32 teams)
2003 New England 1st (238 pts.)
2004 New England 2nd (260 pts.)
2005 Pittsburgh 4th (258 pts.)
2006 Indianapolis 23rd (360 pts.)
2007 New York Giants 17th (351 pts.)
2008 Pittsburgh 1st (223 pts.)
2009 New Orleans 20th (341 pts.)
2010 Green Bay 2nd (240 pts.)
2011 New York Giants 25th (400 pts.)
2012 Baltimore Ravens 12th (344 pts.)

If I count correctly, 32 out of 47 SB winners finished in the top quartile in that category; 29 of them were ranked in the top five and 24, just over half, finished in the top three. You may correctly ask, "what does scoring defense have to do with greatness at the quarterback position?" In and of itself, nothing, that is, if you want to presuppose that the playing field, in terms of supporting cast and coaching, was even for the preeminent candidates to this title: Montana, Manning, Brady and Marino. I categorically reject the latter premise.

I believe, however, that we both would agree that the post-season careers of Brady and Montana conform closely to this equation, which, with minor modification, was proven to be quite effective by our own beloved General Neyland:

Great coaching + Great Defense + Strong Running Game (+ Great Quarterback) = Potential DYNASTY

On the other hand, Marino's career and, to a lesser degree, Peyton's career conform more closely to this equation:

Good but not great coaching (One can question, based upon personnel decisions, whether Shula was still a Hall-of-Fame caliber coach during Marino's tenure) + Great Quarterback Play + Mediocre (or downright bad) Defense + Average Ground Game (or one relegated to afterthought status) = a team that may make an occasional run at the Super Bowl, perhaps even win one, but is no threat to become a dominating dynasty.

That is why I suggested that it can be argued that there was/is a certain "McCarron effect" here as well with respect to Montana and Brady. Both were/are much more than "game managers," but when you have a consistently strong defense at your back, you can afford to be highly efficient and resist the temptation to make risky, gunslinger-like throws a la Marino or Favre. Because of the hit-or-miss nature of defenses he has played with, Peyton has had to directly shoulder more of the responsibility for the success of his teams than Brady or Montana has over the course of their careers. You can nitpick as to who individually is the better clutch performer over various portions of their respective careers, but you can also find supporting evidence here for the oldest fundamental truth in football. Even when you are talking about QBs as great as these four, defense wins championships.

In conclusion, I am not trying to diminish the accomplishments of Joe Montana and the 49ers. However, let me pose this hypothetical question: If Montana had been drafted by the Dolphins and saddled with the organizational handicaps which burdened that franchise, where would you be inclined to rank him in this debate?

There is no McCarron effect with Montana and there is no doubt he was perfect for Walsh's system and benefitted by being in San Fransisco. Watch the Chiefs vs 49ers game or the Chiefs vs Broncos game after he left San Fransisco. He was a legit badass and stone cold winner at QB. The greatest performance in a Superbowl was probably his dismantling of Elway's Broncos. Listen to Coach Wyche of Cincinatti when Montana had the ball in his hands at the end of the 1988 Superbowl. He knew it was over.