He brought them to a SB 2 years later and while WRs were comparable in that SB(SF had a huge edge in the backfield) it wasn't the rest of their careers. Marino had average WRs, usually poor defenses, no running game throughout his career. He did not have talent anywhere near championship level at any point of his career. I agree I'd take Walsh over Shula. shula was great but not being able to win w/ Dan and only having 2 SBs in 30+ years of coaching is a check against him. I have Montana ahead of Marino, you don't have to sell me on Montana. I think they are close but I also think marino had very little help throughout his career.
I don't think that SF had a huge edge in the backfield in SB XIX. Nathan was a great weapon running the ball and catching it out of the backfield. The Nat Moore was as valuable as the 3rd receiving option as Craig was to the 49ers. Clayton and Duper were great receivers. After they left they did have a dropoff, but it wasn't that much of a drop off. They brought in guys like Irving Fryar and Mark Ingram. Were they Jerry Rice and John Taylor?? No, of course not, but they are comparable to Dwight Clark and Freddie Solomon. They didn't rebuild the defense until the 90's and never really gave him reliable running backs. I totally agree with that. Shula also had some of the worst playoff losses (1964 NFL Championship & SB III for example).
Nathan was ok, he wasn't Wendell Tyler running it or Roger Craig catching it. Clayton & Duper were good players, nothing more. They were comparable to Clark & Solomon but nowhere near Rice & Taylor. I think Irving Fryar was better than Clayton & Duper but he wasted his prime years and caught up w/ Marino towards the end of dan's career. I had this argument about Shula at finheaven. Obviously they feel he is top 5 and even #1 b/c of the wins record but while he was a great coach I don't have him in my top 5 b/c of his failures in postseason. Still an all-time great just not up there w/ the Lombardi's, Walsh's, Brown's, etc... he's on a level w/ Landry.
Joe Montana is underrated? You are the king of absurd statements junc. He's 1 or 2 on everyone's GOAT list. Sent from ... FU KOZ
You are the one who underrated him in this thread trying to take credit away from him b/c he had talent around him and Walsh was his HC. Underrated doesn't mean people think he sucked but as usual you guys will take a statement, interpret it and run w/ it. I say he's underrated b/c of statements like yours where you are giving credit to others rather than Joe. Many people have him at or near the top but I read far too often about how he had Jerry Rice, Bill Walsh, etc... which is said or posted to take credit away from Joe. Who is FU Koz? Is that the chick that is running the scavenger hunt?
Sanchez has had the best offensive line in Football for two years. A great defense and probably at this point the best defensive Coach in football. This year he had two number one receivers and a T/E that is a beast if they get him the ball. Sanchez play in the playoffs is way better than the regular season but a whole lot of other QB's could win the whole thing with that going for them. I think the Jets would have won the Sb with at least ten other Qb's with that going for them.
I agree regarding Dilfer and hopefully we can get that from Sanchez. The problem will arise for us when we need a Qb to light it up and put points on the board in the playoffs.
I don't think SF had a huge edge. I do believe that both Nathan and Tyler were both better than Nathan though. Clayton & Duper were better receivers than the duo of Solomon and Clark. Almost to the point that I will say it's not even close. I agree with you about Shula.
Shocking! It takes a good OL, good players and a great defense to win football games!! You know, you just might be on to something there. I'd love to know what 10 QBs you would rather have than Sanchez. Right now I can only think of 4 maybe 5. Brees, Manning, Roethlisberger, Rodgers, Brady and maybe Rivers. Sanchez has won more playoff games than any other QB in Jets history in only 2 years and still that's not enough. Do you remember the last time the Jets went to an AFC Championship Game before Sanchez?
Always good to know that seeing junc and murrell's names in the recent posts means that the thread is now a debate about something irrelevant to the actual thread.
Threads tend to skew off track a bit sometimes, I think it's better to have 2 knowledgebale posters going back and forth on a related topic than to have others waste time whining about the posts.
You guys are derailing this thread worse than that by wasting our time w/ these silly replies. You can only discuss the original topic for so long before little side debates will happen. Insetad of whining just start posting about the original topic to bring everyone back on the same page.
See how many posts are being wasted and how the thread has turly been derailed? At least we were discussing football and QBs. Maybe we should open up a whining forum?
honestly, the banter between them was informative and overall they were in agreement. its not like this was some epic argument over who's the best QB in the league. while i tend to think junc's posts arguing with anyone and everyone are annoying, i actually agree with junc in this thread... sure his point about montana being overrated are a bit too literal, you can't argue that people do take away from his credentials. its just that sort of thing happens to everyone... not many call it overrating though. posting about how a thread goes off topic, however, is juvenile and really just egging him on. good luck with that. personally speaking, the posts between murrell and junc did more to this thread than the bitching about them going off topic.
I agreed with Junc on pretty much all points here. But the discussion should not be taking place in the Jets forum. Murrell and Junc should just have their own section of the forum, so people that actually care about their nonsense can read at their leisure.
