Bradshaw has finally passed the torch to Roethlisberger
RaynorShyne
Hall of Famer
*****

Posts: 873
Joined: Sep 2017
#1
04-10-2020, 06:45 AM

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/terry...s-history/

""They always have those contests, don't they? I would give it to Ben [Roethlisberger]. His numbers far exceed mine. I may have won more Super Bowls, but he is a much better quarterback. I wasn't bad in my era, but he's big, strong, accurate, puts up monstrous numbers, and he's won two Super Bowls. I pass that baton to him, gladly. I absolutely have no problem with that. He deserves it." 

No Terry - You've done nothing more than prove that, much like "who is the greatest Steelers linebacker ever" - that we have many years of heated-but-friendly debate.  This will only be settled when future QB "X" for the Steelers wins 5 him (or her) self
Reply
mcmillenandwife
Administrator
*******

Posts: 18,047
Joined: Jan 1970
#2
04-10-2020, 07:34 AM

(04-10-2020, 06:45 AM)RaynorShyne Wrote: https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/terry...s-history/

""They always have those contests, don't they? I would give it to Ben [Roethlisberger]. His numbers far exceed mine. I may have won more Super Bowls, but he is a much better quarterback. I wasn't bad in my era, but he's big, strong, accurate, puts up monstrous numbers, and he's won two Super Bowls. I pass that baton to him, gladly. I absolutely have no problem with that. He deserves it." 

No Terry - You've done nothing more than prove that, much like "who is the greatest Steelers linebacker ever" - that we have many years of heated-but-friendly debate.  This will only be settled when future QB "X" for the Steelers wins 5 him (or her) self


Bradshaw has always said this kind of stuff. You can pretty much ask him about any top-tier QB from any team... and Terry will say they are better than him. It's always been that way, with few exceptions. 

I don't believe Terry believes it. It's just words.

They're both great. They're both gunslingers. They both could play in any era.

I'd put Bradshaw up against any QB in history from '75 - '82. One of the best arms of all time. He could make throws few in NFL history could make. Amazing overall athlete, excellent speed, big, strong, and perhaps most of all, CLUTCH... something Terry strangely doesn't get enough credit for, IMO. Probably because he isn't known for a lot of comebacks. Comebacks or not, Terry has tons of absolutely HUGE moments. And in the biggest possible games. 

Ben isn't quite up to Bradshaw's standard in terms of sheer talent and ability. Still among the best in the game... but he's not the athletic freak of nature Bradshaw was. But Ben OWNS Bradshaw statistically, and he has been great for longer. From pretty much his first start, in fact. He was taking over games by his 3rd start. The "game manager" talk from early in his career was bullshit, and he's proven it repeatedly since then. The guy has been a gunslinger from day one, and he totally transformed the identity of the offense. 

Anyway... love 'em both. Bradshaw still tops my list, but it's a 1/1A scenario.  Thumbsup
Reply
sandfan
Hall of Famer
*****

Posts: 2,395
Joined: Apr 2017
#3
04-10-2020, 08:45 AM

Both great. Different eras make for better discussions re which is #1. Regardless of the outcome, Steeler fans have been fortunate to experience 2 of the best in the game.
Reply
dbsfgyd1
Hall of Famer
*****

Posts: 15,415
Joined: Apr 2017
#4
04-11-2020, 03:23 AM

No doubt both could play in either era. The question is, how long would you expect Bradshaw, a number one draft pick,   to last on a roster today after 4 years of Paxton Lynch type production? I’m not so sure he’d get the chance to “bloom”.

But if he did, and without his team force feeding a running game, well, they guy was pretty clutch when needed and I have no reservations of him puting up a great career in today’s game.

As for Ben, how long or how well would he hold up under the abuse QBs got before they got to ‘wear dresses, dealing with bump and run coverage,  when it was more important that a WR could block than run a complete route tree, and passing only 10-15 plays a game?

No doubt, transversing the eras interjecting players is grist for good conversation.
(This post was last modified: 04-11-2020, 03:26 AM by dbsfgyd1.)
Reply
mcmillenandwife
Administrator
*******

Posts: 18,047
Joined: Jan 1970
#5
04-11-2020, 08:03 AM

(04-11-2020, 03:23 AM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: No doubt both could play in either era. The question is, how long would you expect Bradshaw, a number one draft pick,   to last on a roster today after 4 years of Paxton Lynch type production? I’m not so sure he’d get the chance to “bloom”.

But if he did, and without his team force feeding a running game, well, they guy was pretty clutch when needed and I have no reservations of him puting up a great career in today’s game.


Well, consider that Terry came from a small school and had no offensive coordinator and no quarterbacks coach as a rookie (nor for most of his career).

The '70s were not QB-friendly. Today, not only would Terry have an OC and a QB coach... he would have them inside his helmet via headset for every snap.

There would be a small army of handlers for Terry. I think he would still be largely uncontrollable, but there's not a doubt in my mind that having that kind of modern support group around Terry would've helped him immensely early in his career. He would've "bloomed" just fine, IMO.

Bradshaw was a generational talent. No one else even came close from his era, including Staubach. I think Terry's star would shine even brighter, had he played in the modern era. He possessed EVERY TOOL a QB needs... and in great abundance. 


(04-11-2020, 03:23 AM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: As for Ben, how long or how well would he hold up under the abuse QBs got before they got to ‘wear dresses, dealing with bump and run coverage,  when it was more important that a WR could block than run a complete route tree, and passing only 10-15 plays a game?

No doubt, transversing the eras interjecting players is grist for good conversation.


To me, Ben is a football player first, a QB second. Big, tough, strong arm, accurate, great instincts, great improvisational skills and clutch. I think he would hold up fine in any era.
Reply
dbsfgyd1
Hall of Famer
*****

Posts: 15,415
Joined: Apr 2017
#6
04-11-2020, 09:35 AM

(04-11-2020, 08:03 AM)mcmillenandwife Wrote:
(04-11-2020, 03:23 AM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: No doubt both could play in either era. The question is, how long would you expect Bradshaw, a number one draft pick,   to last on a roster today after 4 years of Paxton Lynch type production? I’m not so sure he’d get the chance to “bloom”.

But if he did, and without his team force feeding a running game, well, they guy was pretty clutch when needed and I have no reservations of him puting up a great career in today’s game.


Well, consider that Terry came from a small school and had no offensive coordinator and no quarterbacks coach as a rookie (nor for most of his career).

The '70s were not QB-friendly. Today, not only would Terry have an OC and a QB coach... he would have them inside his helmet via headset for every snap.

There would be a small army of handlers for Terry. I think he would still be largely uncontrollable, but there's not a doubt in my mind that having that kind of modern support group around Terry would've helped him immensely early in his career. He would've "bloomed" just fine, IMO.

Bradshaw was a generational talent. No one else even came close from his era, including Staubach. I think Terry's star would shine even brighter, had he played in the modern era. He possessed EVERY TOOL a QB needs... and in great abundance. 


(04-11-2020, 03:23 AM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: As for Ben, how long or how well would he hold up under the abuse QBs got before they got to ‘wear dresses, dealing with bump and run coverage,  when it was more important that a WR could block than run a complete route tree, and passing only 10-15 plays a game?

No doubt, transversing the eras interjecting players is grist for good conversation.


To me, Ben is a football player first, a QB second. Big, tough, strong arm, accurate, great instincts, great improvisational skills and clutch. I think he would hold up fine in any era.
Lionel Taylor was the QB coach and Dan Radkovitch was the OC for those first years ( reference About 3 Brick Shy of a Load a and Ruanaidh), As for for helmet phones, you don’t think he was getting input from the side lines? All that would have done  is give Bradshaw another suggestion to ignore. But to your point, from that aspect, Bradshaw was a better play caller than 90% of OCs employed today once he got the game down. 

I’ll still stand on what I wrote. He would have never got the time he was allotted to develop, and Paxton Lynch is a very good example of what happens today to a highly touted first rounder that loses a boatload of games in his first go at it. You are not getting 4 years to develop regardless of the coaching situation and forget about getting a second contract with the team that drafted you.

As for Ben, it was a different game back then. Ben barely survived BA and the Ravens. How would he hold up having to endure  the kind courteous treatment from the likes of Turkey Jones, Lyle Alzado, Gary Big Hand Johnson, Ernie Ladd, Deacon  Jones, crap how about the Raiders out for blood? 

Truth be told, there wen’t too many QBs that lasted 15 years back then. I’m not saying he wouldn’t play, it’s altogether another thing with survival. Guys like Joe Kapp and Roman Gabriel were not exactly 98lbs weaklings.
Reply
mcmillenandwife
Administrator
*******

Posts: 18,047
Joined: Jan 1970
#7
04-11-2020, 01:20 PM

(04-11-2020, 09:35 AM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: Lionel Taylor was the QB coach and Dan Radkovitch was the OC for those first years ( reference About 3 Brick Shy of a Load a and Ruanaidh), As for for helmet phones, you don’t think he was getting input from the side lines? All that would have done  is give Bradshaw another suggestion to ignore. But to your point, from that aspect, Bradshaw was a better play caller than 90% of OCs employed today once he got the game down. 

I’ll still stand on what I wrote. He would have never got the time he was allotted to develop, and Paxton Lynch is a very good example of what happens today to a highly touted first rounder that loses a boatload of games in his first go at it. You are not getting 4 years to develop regardless of the coaching situation and forget about getting a second contract with the team that drafted you.


Dave, you can stand by what you wrote... but you'll be wrong.  Wavehello

Noll didn't have an offensive coordinator from '69-'71, and Bradshaw had virtually no help during his first 2 years. They had a QB coach from '72-'74, and it was Babe Parilli, not Lionel Taylor. And then Parilli was gone, and Bradshaw didn't have a QB coach again.

So as I said... Bradshaw had no offensive coordinator and no quarterbacks coach as a rookie (nor for most of his career).

Bradshaw wasn't an idiot, and he didn't "ignore" instructions. That's exactly why he supplanted Joe Gilliam (after losing his job during the walkout in '74). I know you know this. Gilliam wouldn't stop throwing the ball. But Bradshaw would execute a game plan. He would run, run, run, run, run if that's what it took to win the game. He was in it to WIN it. 

Terry needed help with football fundamentals early in his career that he didn't get. All he did in college was improvise. He was so much better than everyone else on the field at that level that he could just run around and do his thing, and it was good enough to win. He wasn't ready for the structure of the pros, and he was emotionally immature as well. It's a wonder he survived those first few years in Pittsburgh. 

QB's were also MUCH slower to evolve back then. You of all people know this, Dave. Young QB's routinely rode the bench until their 3rd season before they were ready to start. By that standard, Bradshaw was only a year or two behind, and had he gotten proper help from the start, those early growing pains would been far less drastic. Instead, he was thrown to the wolves as a rookie in every conceivable way... on a terrible team with no support.

BTW, WTF is your fixation on Paxton Lynch? Laugh The guy was a late first-rounder (26th overall) with zero similarities to Bradshaw. Terry was hands down the most talented player in the 1970 draft. Lynch played in 3 games his rookie season and 2 games his sophomore season. Where's the "boatload" you mentioned? 

P.S. -- You're right, you don't get 4 years to develop as a QB now... but you did in the 1970's. 


(04-11-2020, 09:35 AM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: As for Ben, it was a different game back then. Ben barely survived BA and the Ravens. How would he hold up having to endure  the kind courteous treatment from the likes of Turkey Jones, Lyle Alzado, Gary Big Hand Johnson, Ernie Ladd, Deacon  Jones, crap how about the Raiders out for blood? 

Truth be told, there wen’t too many QBs that lasted 15 years back then. I’m not saying he wouldn’t play, it’s altogether another thing with survival. Guys like Joe Kapp and Roman Gabriel were not exactly 98lbs weaklings.


I agree with you. Ben wouldn't have lasted 15 years back then. Virtually no one did, and guys that made it 15 years were unicorns, and they only lasted that long if their early years (or late years) were spent riding the bench. 

But I don't understand why you talk like Ben is a fragile flower? The guy is a bad ass. Tough AF. He would've kicked ass and had one helluva career. A combination of his style play and offensive coordinators like Arians have subjected Ben to FAR more violence than the typical QB in this era faces. Yet, here we are... only one year removed from a 5000-yard season. The dude is a beast. 

A guy like Brady wouldn't survive in the '70s. But a guy like Ben would thrive

Just my two cents. Enjoying the conversation.
Reply
dbsfgyd1
Hall of Famer
*****

Posts: 15,415
Joined: Apr 2017
#8
04-12-2020, 10:22 AM

(04-11-2020, 01:20 PM)mcmillenandwife Wrote:
(04-11-2020, 09:35 AM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: Lionel Taylor was the QB coach and Dan Radkovitch was the OC for those first years ( reference About 3 Brick Shy of a Load a and Ruanaidh), As for for helmet phones, you don’t think he was getting input from the side lines? All that would have done  is give Bradshaw another suggestion to ignore. But to your point, from that aspect, Bradshaw was a better play caller than 90% of OCs employed today once he got the game down. 

I’ll still stand on what I wrote. He would have never got the time he was allotted to develop, and Paxton Lynch is a very good example of what happens today to a highly touted first rounder that loses a boatload of games in his first go at it. You are not getting 4 years to develop regardless of the coaching situation and forget about getting a second contract with the team that drafted you.


Dave, you can stand by what you wrote... but you'll be wrong.  Wavehello

Noll didn't have an offensive coordinator from '69-'71, and Bradshaw had virtually no help during his first 2 years. They had a QB coach from '72-'74, and it was Babe Parilli, not Lionel Taylor. And then Parilli was gone, and Bradshaw didn't have a QB coach again.

So as I said... Bradshaw had no offensive coordinator and no quarterbacks coach as a rookie (nor for most of his career).

Bradshaw wasn't an idiot, and he didn't "ignore" instructions. That's exactly why he supplanted Joe Gilliam (after losing his job during the walkout in '74). I know you know this. Gilliam wouldn't stop throwing the ball. But Bradshaw would execute a game plan. He would run, run, run, run, run if that's what it took to win the game. He was in it to WIN it. 

Terry needed help with football fundamentals early in his career that he didn't get. All he did in college was improvise. He was so much better than everyone else on the field at that level that he could just run around and do his thing, and it was good enough to win. He wasn't ready for the structure of the pros, and he was emotionally immature as well. It's a wonder he survived those first few years in Pittsburgh. 

QB's were also MUCH slower to evolve back then. You of all people know this, Dave. Young QB's routinely rode the bench until their 3rd season before they were ready to start. By that standard, Bradshaw was only a year or two behind, and had he gotten proper help from the start, those early growing pains would been far less drastic. Instead, he was thrown to the wolves as a rookie in every conceivable way... on a terrible team with no support.

BTW, WTF is your fixation on Paxton Lynch? Laugh The guy was a late first-rounder (26th overall) with zero similarities to Bradshaw. Terry was hands down the most talented player in the 1970 draft. Lynch played in 3 games his rookie season and 2 games his sophomore season. Where's the "boatload" you mentioned? 

P.S. -- You're right, you don't get 4 years to develop as a QB now... but you did in the 1970's. 


(04-11-2020, 09:35 AM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: As for Ben, it was a different game back then. Ben barely survived BA and the Ravens. How would he hold up having to endure  the kind courteous treatment from the likes of Turkey Jones, Lyle Alzado, Gary Big Hand Johnson, Ernie Ladd, Deacon  Jones, crap how about the Raiders out for blood? 

Truth be told, there wen’t too many QBs that lasted 15 years back then. I’m not saying he wouldn’t play, it’s altogether another thing with survival. Guys like Joe Kapp and Roman Gabriel were not exactly 98lbs weaklings.


I agree with you. Ben wouldn't have lasted 15 years back then. Virtually no one did, and guys that made it 15 years were unicorns, and they only lasted that long if their early years (or late years) were spent riding the bench. 

But I don't understand why you talk like Ben is a fragile flower? The guy is a bad ass. Tough AF. He would've kicked ass and had one helluva career. A combination of his style play and offensive coordinators like Arians have subjected Ben to FAR more violence than the typical QB in this era faces. Yet, here we are... only one year removed from a 5000-yard season. The dude is a beast. 

A guy like Brady wouldn't survive in the '70s. But a guy like Ben would thrive

Just my two cents. Enjoying the conversation.
If you remember my original comment, I stated both could play in either era, but with a few qualifiers that might prevent them  to equal their success in their respective eras. To your point about Ben being a fragile flower, it’s duly noted he is bigger than a lot of defensive linemen of the 70s... Have a good one.
Reply
mcmillenandwife
Administrator
*******

Posts: 18,047
Joined: Jan 1970
#9
04-12-2020, 11:48 AM

(04-12-2020, 10:22 AM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: If you remember my original comment, I stated both could play in either era, but with a few qualifiers that might prevent them  to equal their success in their respective eras. To your point about Ben being a fragile flower, it’s duly noted he is bigger than a lot of defensive linemen of the 70s... Have a good one.


My bad, Dave. I got it turned around in my head that you were kinda arguing against Ben. Thumbsup
Reply
necron99
Rookie
*

Posts: 4
Joined: Feb 2020
#10
04-13-2020, 04:26 AM

I think the number that sticks in the mind of his detractors is that he threw just 2 more TDs than INTs. It's a hard pill to swallow, certainly. You gotta remember the era, but still...it's a lot of INTs. Yeah yeah, Babe Ruth struck out a lot too. Just win, baby, as they say.
Reply
mcmillenandwife
Administrator
*******

Posts: 18,047
Joined: Jan 1970
#11
04-13-2020, 05:00 AM

(04-13-2020, 04:26 AM)necron99 Wrote: I think the number that sticks in the mind of his detractors is that he threw just 2 more TDs than INTs.  It's a hard pill to swallow, certainly.  You gotta remember the era, but still...it's a lot of INTs.  Yeah yeah, Babe Ruth struck out a lot too.  Just win, baby, as they say.


Well... 212 TDs, 210 Ints for Bradshaw. In those days, if you threw more TDs than Ints, you were doing it right, especially in the kind of "throw for threat" offense Pittsburgh ran for most of Terry's career. 

If you take out Terry's first two years, which were really tough in terms of Ints, his ratio is considerably better: 193 TDs to 164 Ints. By 1970's standards, that's a very solid ratio.

To put it in perspective, Ken Stabler -- another Hall of Famer -- finished his career with 194 TDs and 222 Ints. 

The 1970's were NOT a QB-friendly decade. Laugh

I love your Babe Ruth comment. Perfect comparison to Bradshaw. Thumbsup
Reply
dbsfgyd1
Hall of Famer
*****

Posts: 15,415
Joined: Apr 2017
#12
04-13-2020, 10:41 AM

(04-13-2020, 05:00 AM)mcmillenandwife Wrote:
(04-13-2020, 04:26 AM)necron99 Wrote: I think the number that sticks in the mind of his detractors is that he threw just 2 more TDs than INTs.  It's a hard pill to swallow, certainly.  You gotta remember the era, but still...it's a lot of INTs.  Yeah yeah, Babe Ruth struck out a lot too.  Just win, baby, as they say.


Well... 212 TDs, 210 Ints for Bradshaw. In those days, if you threw more TDs than Ints, you were doing it right, especially in the kind of "throw for threat" offense Pittsburgh ran for most of Terry's career. 

If you take out Terry's first two years, which were really tough in terms of Ints, his ratio is considerably better: 193 TDs to 164 Ints. By 1970's standards, that's a very solid ratio.

To put it in perspective, Ken Stabler -- another Hall of Famer -- finished his career with 194 TDs and 222 Ints. 

The 1970's were NOT a QB-friendly decade. Laugh

I love your Babe Ruth comment. Perfect comparison to Bradshaw. Thumbsup

With bump and run defensive play, there wasn’t much “College Open” in the 70’s. Not to mention the prime results  of blocking are fingers  pointing in all sorts of unnatural directions, of which is not an issue for offensive linemen. For receivers, that spend most of their playing time blocking, not so much.  I’m of a bent that explains the high percentages rates of interceptions and failed pass attempts of that era.
Reply
mcmillenandwife
Administrator
*******

Posts: 18,047
Joined: Jan 1970
#13
04-13-2020, 11:30 AM

(04-13-2020, 10:41 AM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: With bump and run defensive play, there wasn’t much “College Open” in the 70’s. Not to mention the prime results  of blocking are fingers  pointing in all sorts of unnatural directions, of which is not an issue for offensive linemen. For receivers, that spend most of their playing time blocking, not so much.  I’m of a bent that explains the high percentages rates of interceptions and failed pass attempts of that era.


For sure. Bump and run had a huge impact on INTs. So did the fact that receivers could actually be HIT by DBs in those days (Glen Edwards BLASTING Gilliam in Super Bowl IX resulting in Mel Blount's INT comes to mind). 

Turnovers in general were far more "acceptable" in those days. They were just part of the game.

Case in point: Jerome Bettis had 41 fumbles in his 13 year career; Franco Harris had 90 in his 13 years (despite 19 fewer games). Bettis had 1 season with 7 fumbles... Harris had 9 seasons with 7 or more fumbles (and 3 with more than 10 fumbles). 

It was just a different mindset.
Reply
dbsfgyd1
Hall of Famer
*****

Posts: 15,415
Joined: Apr 2017
#14
04-13-2020, 12:54 PM

(04-13-2020, 11:30 AM)mcmillenandwife Wrote:
(04-13-2020, 10:41 AM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: With bump and run defensive play, there wasn’t much “College Open” in the 70’s. Not to mention the prime results  of blocking are fingers  pointing in all sorts of unnatural directions, of which is not an issue for offensive linemen. For receivers, that spend most of their playing time blocking, not so much.  I’m of a bent that explains the high percentages rates of interceptions and failed pass attempts of that era.


For sure. Bump and run had a huge impact on INTs. So did the fact that receivers could actually be HIT by DBs in those days (Glen Edwards BLASTING Gilliam in Super Bowl IX resulting in Mel Blount's INT comes to mind). 

Turnovers in general were far more "acceptable" in those days. They were just part of the game.

Case in point: Jerome Bettis had 41 fumbles in his 13 year career; Franco Harris had 90 in his 13 years (despite 19 fewer games). Bettis had 1 season with 7 fumbles... Harris had 9 seasons with 7 or more fumbles (and 3 with more than 10 fumbles). 

It was just a different mindset.

The Super Bowl Championship team of 1979 was a turnover machine...
Reply
mcmillenandwife
Administrator
*******

Posts: 18,047
Joined: Jan 1970
#15
04-13-2020, 02:54 PM

(04-13-2020, 12:54 PM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: The Super Bowl Championship team of 1979 was a turnover machine...


They were like a Pez dispenser for turnovers. It was insane.  Laugh

And again, it shows how the game has changed.

#1 for most turnovers: Pittsburgh Steelers (52)
#2 for most turnovers: LA Rams (49)

Yet they faced one another in the Super Bowl. That would NEVER happen today. Pittsburgh was also the highest-scoring team in the NFL in '79, despite all those turnovers. Figure that one out? Maybe it's "risk/reward" coming into play? 

That '79 team is very underrated IMO. In some ways, I think they were better than the '78 and '76 teams (although it's hard to argue against the '78 Steelers in the postseason). They had one of the toughest schedules in NFL history in '79, thanks to more rule changes by Rozelle specifically designed to try to end Pittsburgh's dominance. Incredible depth and zero weaknesses on that team. 

Equally interesting regarding turnovers in '79, the Bengals tied for 2nd fewest turnovers in the NFL (29) and finished 4-12. The Redskins had the fewest (25) and missed the playoffs. 

It's like "Opposite World" vs. today.  Alien
Reply
Chucktownsteeler
Hall of Famer
*****

Posts: 19,165
Joined: Apr 2017
#16
04-14-2020, 12:52 AM

This is a great post, really enjoyed it. Hard to compare Brad to Ben but I don't think the NFL will ever see another QB come in like Ben in his rookie year and go 13-0. I don't think that's possible.

Different ERAs no doubt but both great in their own right. My personnel top QBs of all time are:

1.) Bradshaw
2.) Elway
3.) Marino
4.) Montana
5.) Ben

I'll take any of the above in their prime.


Rockon      Rockon


    Next - Minkah, #39!
  [Image: chucktown_sig_pic.jpg]
(This post was last modified: 04-16-2020, 03:36 AM by Chucktownsteeler.)
Reply
Barney
Hall of Famer
*****

Posts: 1,326
Joined: Jul 2017
#17
04-15-2020, 04:17 AM

(04-14-2020, 12:52 AM)Chucktownsteeler Wrote: This is a great post, really enjoyed it. Hard to compare Brad to ben but I don't think the NFL will ever see another QB come in like Ben in his rookie year and go 13-0. I don't think that's possible.

Different ERAs no doubt but both great in their own right. My personnel top QBs of all time are:

1.) Bradshaw
2.) Elway
3.) Marino
4.) Montana
5.) Ben

I'll take any of the above in their prime.


Rockon      Rockon

My Top 5 QB's of all Time:

1.) Ben - Still getting to see him play in new games gives him a slight edge in my enjoyment - Bradshaw may overtake him once both are retired. Seems odd to include that but that's the way my mind works.
1A.) Bradshaw

Big Gap

3.) Joe Montoya - Waterboy reference - The 80's were his.
4.) Bret Favre - He was a fun gunslinger to watch. I remember that game he played after his father passed.
5.) Peyton Manning - I think he might be Mr. Ed.

Big Gap

199.) Tom Brady - GOAT - sigh

Tom Brady Pokes Fun at Himself with Throwback Draft Photo 19 Years ...
(This post was last modified: 04-15-2020, 04:43 AM by Barney.)
Reply
mcmillenandwife
Administrator
*******

Posts: 18,047
Joined: Jan 1970
#18
04-15-2020, 03:54 PM

(04-15-2020, 04:17 AM)Barney Wrote: 199.) Tom Brady - GOAT - sigh




Laugh Laugh Laugh
Reply
mcmillenandwife
Administrator
*******

Posts: 18,047
Joined: Jan 1970
#19
04-15-2020, 04:02 PM

(04-14-2020, 12:52 AM)Chucktownsteeler Wrote: This is a great post, really enjoyed it. Hard to compare Brad to ben but I don't think the NFL will ever see another QB come in like Ben in his rookie year and go 13-0. I don't think that's possible.

Different ERAs no doubt but both great in their own right. My personnel top QBs of all time are:

1.) Bradshaw
2.) Elway
3.) Marino
4.) Montana
5.) Ben

I'll take any of the above in their prime.


Rockon      Rockon


Good list.

My All-Time favorites:
1) Bradshaw
1a) Roethlisberger
3) Elway
4) Favre
5) Staubach (yes, it's true)
 
Honorable Mention: Dan Pastorini
Reply
Chucktownsteeler
Hall of Famer
*****

Posts: 19,165
Joined: Apr 2017
#20
04-16-2020, 03:35 AM

(04-15-2020, 04:02 PM)mcmillenandwife Wrote:
(04-14-2020, 12:52 AM)Chucktownsteeler Wrote: This is a great post, really enjoyed it. Hard to compare Brad to ben but I don't think the NFL will ever see another QB come in like Ben in his rookie year and go 13-0. I don't think that's possible.

Different ERAs no doubt but both great in their own right. My personnel top QBs of all time are:

1.) Bradshaw
2.) Elway
3.) Marino
4.) Montana
5.) Ben

I'll take any of the above in their prime.


Rockon      Rockon


Good list.

My All-Time favorites:
1) Bradshaw
1a) Roethlisberger
3) Elway
4) Favre
5) Staubach (yes, it's true)
 
Honorable Mention: Dan Pastorini

This is funny but I think we discussed years gone past in here the Houston Oilers of the late 70's and early 80's. Maybe because they played the Steelers twice and were hard-nosed there was a certain admiration if not respect for them. I did also as well enjoy watching Dante Pastorini (I can still hear Dan Meredith call out his name) and  (maybe because he was dating Ann Margaret at the time) and also Earl Campbell's running style. They were a tough, lunch-box toting, blue-collar, working class team. If there were another team I wish had won a Lombardi it would have been them. I like "The Snake's" style as well. A lot of great QB's over the years.


    Next - Minkah, #39!
  [Image: chucktown_sig_pic.jpg]
Reply
Rollers
Hall of Famer
*****

Posts: 8,267
Joined: Apr 2017
#21
04-16-2020, 10:00 AM

Man I liked George Blanda! No one remember him? He also kicked on points and field goals I believe he played until he was 48 an amazing feat. He was a good QB and a good kicker. When he retired he held the scoring lead at that point all time. He played in 4 different decades. Four! It is a feat that will never be equaled. No he wasn't a great QB but he was darn good.
(This post was last modified: 04-16-2020, 10:05 AM by Rollers.)
Reply
Jbsptfn
Special Teamer
**

Posts: 39
Joined: Sep 2019
#22
04-17-2020, 06:36 PM

Quote:I’ll still stand on what I wrote. He would have never got the time he was allotted to develop, and Paxton Lynch is a very good example of what happens today to a highly touted first rounder that loses a boatload of games in his first go at it. You are not getting 4 years to develop regardless of the coaching situation and forget about getting a second contract with the team that drafted you.

Bronco fan here. Lynch really didn't lose a boatload of games. He wasn't a good pick (there was someone online that said that the team that picks Lynch will need a new QB in a few years), but he never really got a chance to develop because Gary Kubiak really didn't care about him. He wanted Prescott, not Lynch, and he had affection for Siemian because they both were late-round selections.


Quote:This is funny but I think we discussed years gone past in here the Houston Oilers of the late 70's and early 80's. Maybe because they played the Steelers twice and were hard-nosed there was a certain admiration if not respect for them. I did also as well enjoy watching Dante Pastorini (I can still hear Dan Meredith call out his name) and  (maybe because he was dating Ann Margaret at the time) and also Earl Campbell's running style. They were a tough, lunch-box toting, blue-collar, working class team. If there were another team I wish had won a Lombardi it would have been them. I like "The Snake's" style as well. A lot of great QB's over the years.

I agree with you. Pastorini wasn't a great QB, but he did a solid job for that Oiler team. It's too bad that they traded him, but he wanted out (according to the book The Super 70's. Tom Danyluk interviewed Bum, and Phillips said that Dan wanted a trade). It's also too bad that they fired Phillips, but the GM was nagging the owner about how Bum needed an offensive coordinator. Bum refused to hire one, so they fired him. Those were some of the most beloved teams in NFL history. If you would have put a little of their heart in the early-90's Oilers, they would have been dangerous.
Reply
dbsfgyd1
Hall of Famer
*****

Posts: 15,415
Joined: Apr 2017
#23
04-20-2020, 12:55 AM

(04-17-2020, 06:36 PM)Jbsptfn Wrote:
Quote:I’ll still stand on what I wrote. He would have never got the time he was allotted to develop, and Paxton Lynch is a very good example of what happens today to a highly touted first rounder that loses a boatload of games in his first go at it. You are not getting 4 years to develop regardless of the coaching situation and forget about getting a second contract with the team that drafted you.

Bronco fan here. Lynch really didn't lose a boatload of games. He wasn't a good pick (there was someone online that said that the team that picks Lynch will need a new QB in a few years), but he never really got a chance to develop because Gary Kubiak really didn't care about him. He wanted Prescott, not Lynch, and he had affection for Siemian because they both were late-round selections.


Quote:This is funny but I think we discussed years gone past in here the Houston Oilers of the late 70's and early 80's. Maybe because they played the Steelers twice and were hard-nosed there was a certain admiration if not respect for them. I did also as well enjoy watching Dante Pastorini (I can still hear Dan Meredith call out his name) and  (maybe because he was dating Ann Margaret at the time) and also Earl Campbell's running style. They were a tough, lunch-box toting, blue-collar, working class team. If there were another team I wish had won a Lombardi it would have been them. I like "The Snake's" style as well. A lot of great QB's over the years.

I agree with you. Pastorini wasn't a great QB, but he did a solid job for that Oiler team. It's too bad that they traded him, but he wanted out (according to the book The Super 70's. Tom Danyluk interviewed Bum, and Phillips said that Dan wanted a trade). It's also too bad that they fired Phillips, but the GM was nagging the owner about how Bum needed an offensive coordinator. Bum refused to hire one, so they fired him. Those were some of the most beloved teams in NFL history. If you would have put a little of their heart in the early-90's Oilers, they would have been dangerous.

For three years Bradshaw was not a good QB AND lost a boatload of games. No # 1 draft pick overall today is going to get 3+
 Years to develop unless injured and on IR missing most of a season. Kyler Murray the QB from the Cards has a 5 year contract for  $35 MILLION. 

While I can appreciate your appraisal of Lynch, what you quoted was taken somewhat out of context. The truth of the matter is the bronco team management made a value judgement that it would take too long for Lynch to develop for what they would have to pay him. 

Probably if you dig a little deeper at the bronco’s cap situation, hypothetically speaking here, but maybe they liked paying Von Miller more than Lynch, or needed Lynch’s salary for cap relief. There is only so much juice in an orange when it comes to cap space, and sometimes the the juice isn’t worth the squeeze. 

For  your reference (Forbes) on first round draft pick salaries, here is the compensation for the 2019 draft picks.

PICK
TEAM
PLAYER
TOTAL CONTRACT
SIGNING BONUS1
Cardinals
 Kyler Murray
 $35.2 million
 $23.6 million
2
49ers
 Nick Bosa
 $33.6 million
 $22.4 million
3
Jets
 Quinnen Williams
 $32.6 million
 $21.5 million
4
Raiders
 Clelin Ferrell
 $31.4 million
 $20.6 million
5
Buccaneers
 Devin White
 $29.3 million
 $19.1 million
6
Giants
 Daniel Jones
 $25.7 million
 $16.6 million
7
Jaguars
 Josh Allen
 $22.8 million
 $14.6 million
8
Lions
 T.J. Hockenson
 $19.9 million
 $12.7 million
9
Bills
 Ed Oliver
 $19.7 million
 $12.5 million
10
Steelers
 Devin Bush
 $18.9 million
 $11.9 million
11
Bengals
 Jonah Williams
 $17.7 million
 $11 million
12
Packers
 Rashan Gary
 $15.9 million
 $9.9 million
13
Dolphins
 Christian Wilkins
 $15.5 million
 $9.5 million
14
Falcons
 Chris Lindstrom
 $14.7 million
 $9 million
15
Redskins
 Dwayne Haskins
 $14.5 million
 $8.8 million
16
Panthers
 Brian Burns
 $13.6 million
 $8.2 million
17
Giants
 Dexter Lawrence
 $13.3 million
 $7.9 million
18
Vikings
 Garrett Bradbury
 $12.9 million
 $7.7 million
19
Titans
 Jeffery Simmons
 $12.7 million
 $7.5 million
20
Broncos
 Noah Fant
 $12.6 million
 $7.4 million
21
Packers
 Darnell Savage
 $12.5 million
 $7.3 million
22
Eagles
 Andre Dillard
 $12.4 million
 $7.1 million
23
Texans
 Tytus Howard
 $12.3 million
 $7 million
24
Raiders
 Josh Jacobs
 $12 million
 $6.8 million
25
Ravens
 Marquise Brown
 $11.8 million
 $6.6 million
26
Redskins
 Montez Sweat
 $11.7 million
 $6.5 million
27
Raiders
 Johnathan Abram
 $11.5 million
 $6.4 million
28
Chargers
 Jerry Tillery
 $11.4 million
 $6.3 million
29
Seahawks
 L.J. Collier
 $10.9 million
 $5.9 million
30
Giants
 Deandre Baker
 $10.5 million
 $5.7 million
31
Falcons
 Kaleb McGary
 $10.3 million
 $5.5 million
32
Patriots
 N'Keal Harry
 $10.1 million
 $5.4 million


 
Reply
mcmillenandwife
Administrator
*******

Posts: 18,047
Joined: Jan 1970
#24
04-20-2020, 05:36 AM

(04-20-2020, 12:55 AM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: For three years Bradshaw was not a good QB AND lost a boatload of games. No # 1 draft pick overall today is going to get 3+ Years to develop unless injured and on IR missing most of a season. Kyler Murray the QB from the Cards has a 5 year contract for  $35 MILLION. 

Even today, 3 years to develop isn't excessive for an NFL QB.

Bradshaw improved exponentially from year 1 to year 2, and again from year 2 to year 3. By 1972, the Steelers had among the lowest INT percentages in the league, and Terry was developing into a solid play caller. 

Terry gets much of his bad rap because of the horrific rookie season in which he was unfairly (and unrealistically) expected to be "the Savior" right out of the gate. Ultimately, he was the savior. But I think a lot of people in Pittsburgh never got over that awful rookie campaign. 

Terry didn't lose a boatload of games. He was drafted by a 1-13 team. The Steelers immediately improved to 5-9 his rookie year. 6-8 in year 2 was probably a bit disappointing, but by his 3rd season, they were 11-3 and didn't miss the playoffs again for the rest of the decade.
Reply
dbsfgyd1
Hall of Famer
*****

Posts: 15,415
Joined: Apr 2017
#25
04-20-2020, 06:20 AM

(04-20-2020, 05:36 AM)mcmillenandwife Wrote:
(04-20-2020, 12:55 AM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: For three years Bradshaw was not a good QB AND lost a boatload of games. No # 1 draft pick overall today is going to get 3+ Years to develop unless injured and on IR missing most of a season. Kyler Murray the QB from the Cards has a 5 year contract for  $35 MILLION. 

Even today, 3 years to develop isn't excessive for an NFL QB.

Bradshaw improved exponentially from year 1 to year 2, and again from year 2 to year 3. By 1972, the Steelers had among the lowest INT percentages in the league, and Terry was developing into a solid play caller. 

Terry gets much of his bad rap because of the horrific rookie season in which he was unfairly (and unrealistically) expected to be "the Savior" right out of the gate. Ultimately, he was the savior. But I think a lot of people in Pittsburgh never got over that awful rookie campaign. 

Terry didn't lose a boatload of games. He was drafted by a 1-13 team. The Steelers immediately improved to 5-9 his rookie year. 6-8 in year 2 was probably a bit disappointing, but by his 3rd season, they were 11-3 and didn't miss the playoffs again for the rest of the decade.

Tim, We’ve probably said more on this subject than we needed to, but let me ask a question to ponder, then you can have the last word. 

Do you know of any draft pick that got a 5 year contract worth $35 million, with $23 million of that paid as a sign on bonus to be a multi year developmental project?
Reply
mcmillenandwife
Administrator
*******

Posts: 18,047
Joined: Jan 1970
#26
04-20-2020, 08:21 AM

(04-20-2020, 06:20 AM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: Tim, We’ve probably said more on this subject than we needed to, but let me ask a question to ponder, then you can have the last word. 

Do you know of any draft pick that got a 5 year contract worth $35 million, with $23 million of that paid as a sign on bonus to be a multi year developmental project?


Save us some time and tell me where you're goin' with this.
Reply
dbsfgyd1
Hall of Famer
*****

Posts: 15,415
Joined: Apr 2017
#27
04-20-2020, 11:12 AM

(04-20-2020, 08:21 AM)mcmillenandwife Wrote:
(04-20-2020, 06:20 AM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: Tim, We’ve probably said more on this subject than we needed to, but let me ask a question to ponder, then you can have the last word. 

Do you know of any draft pick that got a 5 year contract worth $35 million, with $23 million of that paid as a sign on bonus to be a multi year developmental project?


Save us some time and tell me where you're goin' with this.

LOL...you really want me to respond? My point is this was the deal last years #1 draft pick that happens to be a QB and what the current market price is. Do you think that he got this contract as a developmental player? This contract is a significant hit on the sal cap, and I’ll lay a wager  the intent was Murray would be day one plug and play starter which he was and is.

My point is and has been that regardless of the upside potential that Bradshaw had, IMO in today’s economy, the market rate for a #1 draft pick QB today is such a cap hit, that unless that QB is playing lights out, he is going to end up a cap cut. 

I was as big of a Bradshaw fan as the next guy and it was obvious there was a lot of potential from day 1, but jeepers, he didn’t win the starting job out of his 4th training camp. I assure you this would never fly in today’s economy.

Hope this helps.
Reply
mcmillenandwife
Administrator
*******

Posts: 18,047
Joined: Jan 1970
#28
04-20-2020, 12:05 PM

(04-20-2020, 11:12 AM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: I was as big of a Bradshaw fan as the next guy and it was obvious there was a lot of potential from day 1, but jeepers, he didn’t win the starting job out of his 4th training camp. 


4th training camp = 1973. Did I miss something where Bradshaw didn't start week 1 of 1973? Official stats show he went 15 of 23 for 154 yds, 2 TD, 1 Int in a 24-10 win over Detroit in week 1. 

Now, if you're talking about 1974, Terry barely had a training camp because -- unlike Joe Gilliam -- he refused to cross the picket line during the preseason players strike. 



(04-20-2020, 11:12 AM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: My point is and has been that regardless of the upside potential that Bradshaw had, IMO in today’s economy, the market rate for a #1 draft pick QB today is such a cap hit, that unless that QB is playing lights out, he is going to end up a cap cut. 


I don't disagree with your premise. 

But back to my earlier comments. Had Bradshaw been drafted today, he would've had HELP. He wouldn't have been thrown to the wolves like he was in 1970. He would've had a QB coach, an Offensive Coordinator and a small army of handlers helping him every step of the way. He had NONE of those things when the Steelers drafted him. 

Can you even fathom the notion of a modern NFL QB not having a QB coach and an Offensive Coordinator? Of course not. It not possible now.

Well... maybe it's possible in Cleveland. Pi_bigsmile  

Again, in my view, Terry's early struggles were largely due to a lack of adequate coaching and help. Once he learned the pro game, ostensibly on his own, the guy overachieved like a boss. 

I'm kinda losing track of what we're debating here. You seem to be saying that an NFL QB drafted #1 overall that came out and struggled hard for 3-5 years might not make it in today's NFL. Okay, I'll agree with that.

But my point has been about Bradshaw. It relates specifically to Bradshaw an no one else. If Bradshaw had been drafted in 2017, he'd have a TON of support around him. Unquestionably, it would've accelerated his progress. And we all know he ultimately proved to be worth every bit of that #1 overall pick. 

So maybe he'd be playing for Super Bowl #2 in year 5 instead of Super Bowl #1? The guy doesn't get the credit he deserves, which is really odd for a QB.
Reply
dbsfgyd1
Hall of Famer
*****

Posts: 15,415
Joined: Apr 2017
#29
04-20-2020, 10:29 PM

(04-20-2020, 12:05 PM)mcmillenandwife Wrote:
(04-20-2020, 11:12 AM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: I was as big of a Bradshaw fan as the next guy and it was obvious there was a lot of potential from day 1, but jeepers, he didn’t win the starting job out of his 4th training camp. 


4th training camp = 1973. Did I miss something where Bradshaw didn't start week 1 of 1973? Official stats show he went 15 of 23 for 154 yds, 2 TD, 1 Int in a 24-10 win over Detroit in week 1. 

Now, if you're talking about 1974, Terry barely had a training camp because -- unlike Joe Gilliam -- he refused to cross the picket line during the preseason players strike. 



(04-20-2020, 11:12 AM)dbsfgyd1 Wrote: My point is and has been that regardless of the upside potential that Bradshaw had, IMO in today’s economy, the market rate for a #1 draft pick QB today is such a cap hit, that unless that QB is playing lights out, he is going to end up a cap cut. 


I don't disagree with your premise. 

But back to my earlier comments. Had Bradshaw been drafted today, he would've had HELP. He wouldn't have been thrown to the wolves like he was in 1970. He would've had a QB coach, an Offensive Coordinator and a small army of handlers helping him every step of the way. He had NONE of those things when the Steelers drafted him. 

Can you even fathom the notion of a modern NFL QB not having a QB coach and an Offensive Coordinator? Of course not. It not possible now.

Well... maybe it's possible in Cleveland. Pi_bigsmile  

Again, in my view, Terry's early struggles were largely due to a lack of adequate coaching and help. Once he learned the pro game, ostensibly on his own, the guy overachieved like a boss. 

I'm kinda losing track of what we're debating here. You seem to be saying that an NFL QB drafted #1 overall that came out and struggled hard for 3-5 years might not make it in today's NFL. Okay, I'll agree with that.

But my point has been about Bradshaw. It relates specifically to Bradshaw an no one else. If Bradshaw had been drafted in 2017, he'd have a TON of support around him. Unquestionably, it would've accelerated his progress. And we all know he ultimately proved to be worth every bit of that #1 overall pick. 

So maybe he'd be playing for Super Bowl #2 in year 5 instead of Super Bowl #1? The guy doesn't get the credit he deserves, which is really odd for a QB.

Tim thanks for the dialog on this thread. I think I’m  going over a side bar here a little personal insight about those early Bradshaw years.

I’m not exactly sure why you said Bradshaw had no help in his early years. He had help from the coaching staff. He also suffers from learning disabilities (Adult Attention Disorder with Hyper Activity).

 The help that he didn’t get was was the same help I didn’t get for the same condition as they didn’t know how to treat it then. We were treated as being slow, stupid, lazy, or unmotivated, which pretty much describes the media coverage of Bradshaw’s early and the same way I was treated in school. I was the kid with a well above IQ, tons of capability with the D+ average. 

To comprehend the magnitude of going from a small college offense to running a very complicated NFL team had to have been mind blowing for Terry. When your point of focus is bouncing around like lotto balls in a tumbler, learning new things is a challenge. Let me tell you, it’s fatiguing and emotionally draining, and it takes time to master new things, a lot more time than normal.

In college all Terry did was chuck the ball to a college open WR, or hand the ball off on a student right, student left. With the Steelers, he now had to master how all those trap plays work, analyzing defenses, and calling plays. Noll, dealing with disabilities of his own, was raised in a strict German household where he wasn’t coddled, and by golly, he was going rein in this kid the same way he was raised. He considered himself a teacher, and he was going to teach his team to greatness if it killed them all.

Well, I can identify with Terry not feeling the love from coach Noll, as that was my experience in school. Looking back at it, those were some highly gifted, highly regarded educators I was blessed with growing up, and it had to have frustrated them to no end at my lack of progress. For Bradshaw I’m sure it was like taking a sip from a firehose, and in this case, there is only some much you can  take in at one time before..well your brain shuts down on overload. Trust me, you can be sitting one on one with the greatest teacher in the world, but there is only so much you can take in at a time.

I am in no way surprised it took Terry as long  as it did to find his way to greatness. One thing about AADH, while in academia is a real struggle but once that is over,  using that stored information is many  times faster than normal allowing for instant analyzation of a lot of extraneous information complete with a plan of execution. 

Usually your sense of intuition is heightened. I was watching the America’s Game on Super Bowl 13, and Harris’s 4th quarter TD run. Dallas Safety Cliff Harris explained that they put up a double false read on that play specifically to confuse Bradshaw. Well, I’m not sure if an audible was called, but whatever it still worked.

Anyway, long way around your point of Bradshaw not getting help early on and you are correct, but football help wasn’t what he needed.
(This post was last modified: 04-21-2020, 12:11 AM by dbsfgyd1.)
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)