Montana and Bradshaw Safe At The Top

What a stupid thread.  How can anyone think Bradshaw is a great QB?  Len Dawson could have won those Super Bowls with that defense.  Hell, Ken Anderson, Dan Pastorini, and Jim Hart would've won Super Bowls with that defense.  Joe Montana took the Chiefs to the playoffs, but if Bradshaw played with any other team, no one would ever remember his name.

Jim Kelly can say that he lost 4 consecutive Super Bowls.

which is an amazing statement no other team as gone to 4 straight SB Those Bills dont get near enough respect for the sucess they had only to lose to the NFC east beasts. As far as Bradshaw goes the Steelers sucked until the blonde bomber started streching the field the Steelers had all out wars in the playoffs against the Oilers and Raiders he won 2 super bowl mvps so he must of been a terrible leader and worse QB. All he did was QB 4 Super Bowl wins and Montana had a pretty good D also.

What a stupid thread.  How can anyone think Bradshaw is a great QB?  Len Dawson could have won those Super Bowls with that defense.  Hell, Ken Anderson, Dan Pastorini, and Jim Hart would've won Super Bowls with that defense.  Joe Montana took the Chiefs to the playoffs, but if Bradshaw played with any other team, no one would ever remember his name.

Don't get in the conversation with the big kids, Corky. Go back to eating your Crayolas.

Don't get in the conversation with the big kids, Corky. Go back to eating your Crayolas.  

Get your finger outta your nose, Spanky, and tell me who had better QB numbers throughout their careers.  Bradshaw or Len Dawson.  Both played 14 years.  Len Dawson played when the passing game was an afterthought. 
Who had more yards passing
Who had a better completion percentage
Who had a better TD-INT ratio
Who had a better yards per attempt average     
Who had a better QB rating

Now lets do the same thing using Kenny Anderson, one of Bradshaw's contemporaries.

So, now that you've had your mommy read to you how much better their QB numbers were compared to that idiot Bradshaw's, try to make a convincing argument as to why either of those QBs couldn't have done a much better job than Bradshaw.  Bradshaw was lucky enough to have one of the best defenses ever win a lot of games for him and bail him out of all those INTs he threw.  Football is a team sport and those Super Bowls were won by the team.  Bradshaw is no where near the top of the QB mountain.  Based on his pedestrian career numbers, if he were on any other team, no one would ever remember his name.

You obviously didn't read much, if any, of this thread.

This was about multiple SB winning QBs. If we are just talking career numbers then Dan Fouts would be up there with these guys.

And you're delusional if you think there was a significant difference between the careers of Dawson and Bradshaw as far as eras go. The 70s were a terrible decade for QBs, and probably the best for NFL defenses.

The great divide in QB eras comes in 1978, and 80% of Bradshaw's career was played before that, in an era just as difficult as Dawson's.

Don't come at me with that type of crap. You're arguing in a completely different topic.

You failed. Proof of your failure? Dawson played 19 years. When you can't even get the basic information down, you can't be taken seriously.

20+ players won 4 super bowl rings with the Steelers in the 70s.  Four players won 4 super bowls with the 49ers.  Four players won 4 super bowl rings with multiple teams.  Charles Haley won 5 super bowl rings.  So what's the point of singling out the QBs as if they're the only players that matter?  If you simply want to point out the fact 2 QBs ech have 4 super bowl rings, then so what?  It seems to me that Charles Haley is safe at the top.  It's just one more reason why this is a stupid and meaningless thread.

20+ players won 4 super bowl rings with the Steelers in the 70s.  Four players won 4 super bowls with the 49ers.  Four players won 4 super bowl rings with multiple teams.  Charles Haley won 5 super bowl rings.  So what's the point of singling out the QBs as if they're the only players that matter?  If you simply want to point out the fact 2 QBs ech have 4 super bowl rings, then so what?  It seems to me that Charles Haley is safe at the top.  It's just one more reason why this is a stupid and meaningless thread.

Again, you haven't read a thing, are way off the topic, and ultimately are clueless.

Fine.

You want to wrap your lips around a QB, wrap them around Otto Graham.  He won 7 championships.  He played in pro football's championship game every year of his 10 year career.  Wrap them around Bart Starr.  He won 5 championships.  It seems to me both Montana and the overrated Bradshaw are looking up at Graham and Starr, who are truly safe at the top. 

You're nasty.

Graham and Starr are fantastic...

In their era.

I guess that means since wins are all that matters to guys like Sol and wildcats, that makes Tim Tebow a better quarterback then Ben Roethlisberger since in their careers head to head Tebow leads.  See how ridiculous this argument sounds.  Keep in mind Sol is also the won the claims Elway isn't one of the greatest and top 5 qb's to ever play the game of football. 

Top 10 All-time (not in order)

Marino, Montana, Elway, Brady, Manning, Kelly, Unitas, Graham, Moon, Aikman

I'd put Warner in here over Moon and maybe Young over Kelly, but here are Colts & Patriots fans agreeing in priciple on this list.  Oh yeah, I'd maybe put Staubach in for Graham, just because I separate the QBs that played exclusively before 1978.  The game was totally different and I was a bit young to properly evaluate QBs.  We need an old-timer & modern list.......I'll let others rank oldl-timers.