No real complaints, but my eyebrows did raise a little when I saw people like Stabler, Anderson and even Stafford on the list (the last has great numbers but also seems a product of his era?). It seems like Joe Theisman, Jim Plunkett and Boomer Esiason should be in the mix before them. Same thing for Joe Namath - I totally agree with the cultural argument you've made, but strip away the whole Broadway Joe persona and he's just Ron Jaworski, isn't he?
Must admit anything that includes QBs and ratings is uber compelling and this list is indeed compelling. If you are familiar with the extraordinary author, the list and explanations are almost predictable. My one question when this subject is raised like this -- 30 greatest quarterbacks of the Super Bowl era-- ..GREATEST AT WHAT??? Winning Super Bowls? Passing ability? Greatest despite team he played for? Most feared by defenses? and, this is one that fries minds -- Strongest arm? If the ultimate criterion is winning Super Bowls, the answer is a no-brainer, but is that the measure of the individual or the result of combined circumstances? How would the chosen GREATEST do if shackled to a bad team. Think Archie Manning. whose fate is relegated to being the GREATEST sire in the Super Bowl era. List is entertaining as always....but questions such as that lack a definitive component that would give more credibility to the response.
I know this is a subjective list, but Tyler, next time you create a list like this, do it before you plop in the gummies. Mahomes has lost two Super Bowls. Troy Aikman (so big of you to put him on the list at 28) and Terry Bradshaw won seven between them and didn't lose one. Is Mahomes so high because you're sucking up in hopes for a future interview? Seems like it. He'll never sniff another Super Bowl in his career. He was horrible against Philadelphia, and the primary reason the game was over at half time. Aaron Rodgers at 10? You must be out of your mind. Didn't take chances because it would threaten his passer rating. Aside from 2010, he lost playoff games every time he played in one after that, and he had teams to go all the way. Your boy, Josh Allen sits at 15. He hasn't won anything. Terry Bradshaw, who won 4 super bowls, belongs at 2 or 3, not sitting in front of a player who has yet to appear in a Super Bowl. Kurt Warner is on television, and he's on your list at 17? That's not a coincidence. Dan Marino at 4? What did he win in his career, except sympathy from sports media because he never won a Super Bowl? Well, neither have I and I've managed to survive. Marino is grossly overrated. Bart Starr is your 20th best QB in the Super Era. A guy who won five NFL championships in seven seasons. Here's truth: None of the QBs on your list, other than Bart Starr, could have taken a team 68 yards in the closing minutes in 16 below temperature, wind chill at minus 47. And that drive gave Starr's team three NFL titles in a row, a feat that's not been done since. This list is a credibility buster for you, Tyler. Delete and we'll all pretend we never saw it.
I'm just shaking my head over here. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not to their own facts.
Can you please explain how you ranked Brees over Rodgers as a football player? Because I genuinely can't figure it out. Rodgers was more efficient, had far greater arm talent, a much better TD/INT ratio (not to mention his precious passer rating), and was flat-out more dominant at his peak.
I know you don't need reminding, but he won a SB (and SB MVP), four MVPs, and played in far tougher weather than Brees. I mean, come on, man.
Besides, opening your defense of your ranking with "If stats are your thing, Rodgers is your quarterback" is such a loser statement by someone with a platform in the media. This whole ranking of Rodgers beneath Brees comes off like you're arguing in bad faith.
I know Rodgers is goofy/narcissistic as hell (and I've got major gripes with him off-the-field, much like you do), but I'd like it if you came off a little more objective here. Brees compiled piles of yardage, but Rodgers was just the better, more feared quarterback. (Not to mention 12 changed the way the position is played far more than Brees did. See Mahomes for further detail.)
I guess all of this is to say that I really don't think you can make a compelling, rational argument for why Brees was a better player than Rodgers. This whole list only serves to make you seem like a 12 hater.
Oh, and I'd appreciate it if you could authentically engage with my comment rather than laughing it off or snarkily replying with something like, "Is that all you've got?!"
I will elaborate my good man! Currently navigating a house with a newborn at the time of your comment. When all three children are snoozing tonight, I’ll #embrace the Rodgers v Brees #debate.
Actually, you know what? Don't bother. I've read enough of your stuff to know you won't be changing your mind and I know myself well enough to know I won't be changing mine.
I understand the merits of the Rodgers/Brees debate, and I won't make you waste your time replying. I just needed to get all of this off of my chest because (as a guy who grew up in northeast WI and has consumed your content since roughly 2011 when you were at the MJS) I've long felt you harbored thinly-veiled resentment for Rodgers (which I can understand, by the way, considering what I know about the guy).
I just think you've often dismissed Rodgers as a player (playoff warts and failures post-2010 included) and I find it asinine (and, frankly, somewhat insulting) that you would rank Brees over him. Oh well.
Enjoy your night and get some sleep, but I've said my piece and don't wish to really go back and forth further. I know what I'll be getting when I read your content, but I needed to say my piece.
We don’t need you to elaborate once your kids are sleeping later. We know where you stand. You have this personal vendetta against 12 and it really hurts your credibility as a journalist.
We all watched for 20 years Rodgers and Brees play the quarterback position and never would any GM in the league have traded Drew Brees for Aaron Rodgers. Rodgers was a far better athlete than Brees and what set him apart was his ability to deliver pin point throws on the run. Brees didn’t have that capability. Please stop lying to yourself. You’re doing yourself a real disservice.
You are wildly incorrect on all fronts. As noted, Aaron Rodgers is an all-time great. Would love to explain my reasoning here tonight. Just would rather play with my children than stare at a screen currently.
It’s a list, my friends. No need to get too emotional.
I’ve really developed a deep appreciation for Brees the more I learn via our resident longtime Saints scout Jim Monos, Jimmy Graham and others. It’s obviously a close call.
I've said my piece and don't wish to really go back and forth further. I'm just gunna finish with this: We understand it's a list, Tyler, and we're trying to give you facts and genuine perspective (built over years of consuming your content) in order to illustrate our commentary.
Like I said earlier, my main point is that you cannot in good faith argue Brees was better than Rodgers. (I think Alex said it best when he mentioned "never would any GM in the league have traded Drew Brees for Aaron Rodgers".)
As mentioned previously, I've long felt you harbored faintly-hidden resentment for Rodgers (and that's the conclusion I've come to after having read your work for 14+ years). You can deny it, you can disagree with it, and that's all well and good, but please don't dismiss us like we're some emotional loons (especially considering you told us in a previous comment that there's "no need to get too emotional"). Our argument has merit. You wanna rep for Brees, but (based on all of the history you have with Rodgers and what you've written for years) that's really an absurd take.
No real complaints, but my eyebrows did raise a little when I saw people like Stabler, Anderson and even Stafford on the list (the last has great numbers but also seems a product of his era?). It seems like Joe Theisman, Jim Plunkett and Boomer Esiason should be in the mix before them. Same thing for Joe Namath - I totally agree with the cultural argument you've made, but strip away the whole Broadway Joe persona and he's just Ron Jaworski, isn't he?
You forgot that great Bears QB...wait. Never mind. I'd add a couple to the honorary mention category:
* Bob Griese led the Dolphins to the top of the hill multiple times.
* Ditto Joe Theisman
* Brian Sipe was underrated in Cleveland as was Bert Jones in Baltimore.
Great stuff Tyler especially operating on such little sleep!
Thank you, Bob! It's been a whirlwind seven days. Hopefully writing on the joys of fatherhood soon.
Must admit anything that includes QBs and ratings is uber compelling and this list is indeed compelling. If you are familiar with the extraordinary author, the list and explanations are almost predictable. My one question when this subject is raised like this -- 30 greatest quarterbacks of the Super Bowl era-- ..GREATEST AT WHAT??? Winning Super Bowls? Passing ability? Greatest despite team he played for? Most feared by defenses? and, this is one that fries minds -- Strongest arm? If the ultimate criterion is winning Super Bowls, the answer is a no-brainer, but is that the measure of the individual or the result of combined circumstances? How would the chosen GREATEST do if shackled to a bad team. Think Archie Manning. whose fate is relegated to being the GREATEST sire in the Super Bowl era. List is entertaining as always....but questions such as that lack a definitive component that would give more credibility to the response.
Appreciate it, Frank. Great stuff. I love how passionate people get over lists.
I know this is a subjective list, but Tyler, next time you create a list like this, do it before you plop in the gummies. Mahomes has lost two Super Bowls. Troy Aikman (so big of you to put him on the list at 28) and Terry Bradshaw won seven between them and didn't lose one. Is Mahomes so high because you're sucking up in hopes for a future interview? Seems like it. He'll never sniff another Super Bowl in his career. He was horrible against Philadelphia, and the primary reason the game was over at half time. Aaron Rodgers at 10? You must be out of your mind. Didn't take chances because it would threaten his passer rating. Aside from 2010, he lost playoff games every time he played in one after that, and he had teams to go all the way. Your boy, Josh Allen sits at 15. He hasn't won anything. Terry Bradshaw, who won 4 super bowls, belongs at 2 or 3, not sitting in front of a player who has yet to appear in a Super Bowl. Kurt Warner is on television, and he's on your list at 17? That's not a coincidence. Dan Marino at 4? What did he win in his career, except sympathy from sports media because he never won a Super Bowl? Well, neither have I and I've managed to survive. Marino is grossly overrated. Bart Starr is your 20th best QB in the Super Era. A guy who won five NFL championships in seven seasons. Here's truth: None of the QBs on your list, other than Bart Starr, could have taken a team 68 yards in the closing minutes in 16 below temperature, wind chill at minus 47. And that drive gave Starr's team three NFL titles in a row, a feat that's not been done since. This list is a credibility buster for you, Tyler. Delete and we'll all pretend we never saw it.
C'mon Rog, that's all you got?
Too soon for Allen to be that high
Maybe so. Maybe so. Or... too low.
Drew Brees over Rodgers? Good grief, Charlie Brown... You're not doing yourself any favors with the "Ty-Dunne-has-it-out-for-Aaron-Rodgers" narrative.
I think my favorite part of this all is Roj saying I've got Rodgers too high and you saying I've got him too low. Must mean he's slotted just right!
I'm just shaking my head over here. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not to their own facts.
Can you please explain how you ranked Brees over Rodgers as a football player? Because I genuinely can't figure it out. Rodgers was more efficient, had far greater arm talent, a much better TD/INT ratio (not to mention his precious passer rating), and was flat-out more dominant at his peak.
I know you don't need reminding, but he won a SB (and SB MVP), four MVPs, and played in far tougher weather than Brees. I mean, come on, man.
Besides, opening your defense of your ranking with "If stats are your thing, Rodgers is your quarterback" is such a loser statement by someone with a platform in the media. This whole ranking of Rodgers beneath Brees comes off like you're arguing in bad faith.
I know Rodgers is goofy/narcissistic as hell (and I've got major gripes with him off-the-field, much like you do), but I'd like it if you came off a little more objective here. Brees compiled piles of yardage, but Rodgers was just the better, more feared quarterback. (Not to mention 12 changed the way the position is played far more than Brees did. See Mahomes for further detail.)
I guess all of this is to say that I really don't think you can make a compelling, rational argument for why Brees was a better player than Rodgers. This whole list only serves to make you seem like a 12 hater.
Oh, and I'd appreciate it if you could authentically engage with my comment rather than laughing it off or snarkily replying with something like, "Is that all you've got?!"
I will elaborate my good man! Currently navigating a house with a newborn at the time of your comment. When all three children are snoozing tonight, I’ll #embrace the Rodgers v Brees #debate.
Actually, you know what? Don't bother. I've read enough of your stuff to know you won't be changing your mind and I know myself well enough to know I won't be changing mine.
I understand the merits of the Rodgers/Brees debate, and I won't make you waste your time replying. I just needed to get all of this off of my chest because (as a guy who grew up in northeast WI and has consumed your content since roughly 2011 when you were at the MJS) I've long felt you harbored thinly-veiled resentment for Rodgers (which I can understand, by the way, considering what I know about the guy).
I just think you've often dismissed Rodgers as a player (playoff warts and failures post-2010 included) and I find it asinine (and, frankly, somewhat insulting) that you would rank Brees over him. Oh well.
Enjoy your night and get some sleep, but I've said my piece and don't wish to really go back and forth further. I know what I'll be getting when I read your content, but I needed to say my piece.
Yeah you can’t possibly in good faith make an argument that Brees was a better player than Rodgers
It’s not a close call, Tyler. 4x 1st-team all-pro to 1x 1st-team all-pro.
We don’t need you to elaborate once your kids are sleeping later. We know where you stand. You have this personal vendetta against 12 and it really hurts your credibility as a journalist.
We all watched for 20 years Rodgers and Brees play the quarterback position and never would any GM in the league have traded Drew Brees for Aaron Rodgers. Rodgers was a far better athlete than Brees and what set him apart was his ability to deliver pin point throws on the run. Brees didn’t have that capability. Please stop lying to yourself. You’re doing yourself a real disservice.
You are wildly incorrect on all fronts. As noted, Aaron Rodgers is an all-time great. Would love to explain my reasoning here tonight. Just would rather play with my children than stare at a screen currently.
It’s a list, my friends. No need to get too emotional.
I’ve really developed a deep appreciation for Brees the more I learn via our resident longtime Saints scout Jim Monos, Jimmy Graham and others. It’s obviously a close call.
More than happy to discuss!
I've said my piece and don't wish to really go back and forth further. I'm just gunna finish with this: We understand it's a list, Tyler, and we're trying to give you facts and genuine perspective (built over years of consuming your content) in order to illustrate our commentary.
Like I said earlier, my main point is that you cannot in good faith argue Brees was better than Rodgers. (I think Alex said it best when he mentioned "never would any GM in the league have traded Drew Brees for Aaron Rodgers".)
As mentioned previously, I've long felt you harbored faintly-hidden resentment for Rodgers (and that's the conclusion I've come to after having read your work for 14+ years). You can deny it, you can disagree with it, and that's all well and good, but please don't dismiss us like we're some emotional loons (especially considering you told us in a previous comment that there's "no need to get too emotional"). Our argument has merit. You wanna rep for Brees, but (based on all of the history you have with Rodgers and what you've written for years) that's really an absurd take.
But I get it…Brees never went out of his way to say this writer wrote a piece that was a smear attack aimed at furthering his career