'Mt Rushmore' All-Time QBs

[Bryan]

No comment on any of the choices, but I hate the whole concept of a "Mount Rushmore" of anything except for the four statues in South Dakota.... I had hoped that the fad of "Mount Rushmore of _____" lists had gone the same way as spinning hubcap attachments.

Do you want to weigh in on my Mount Fuji of Japanese Baseball Players list? So far I have Sadaharu Oh, Randy Bass, and Bob Horner.

As for the Mt Rushmore thing, I think Graham and Starr were great QBs and both are underrated in the grand scheme of things, but its hard for me to put a QB who had 10 good years over a guy like Brady or Manning who will probably end up with 15-17 good years. Yeah, different eras and all, but at the very least I think the consistent excellence of Brady and Manning is kind of unprecedented. I guess Favre is like the Merlin Olsen of QBs...all those pro bowls and hardly ever a mention in the best ever discussion.

[Veeshik_ya]

I guess Favre is like the Merlin Olsen of QBs...all those pro bowls and hardly ever a mention in the best ever discussion.

His second to last year (first with the Vikings) was statistically one of his best ever, and he came within one play of the Super Bowl. He had the sh*t beat out of him that game, and kept getting up. One of the most courageous performances I've ever seen. Later, when the ugly stuff about the Saints' program came out, he refused to blame them. That's a man.

Then he came back for one more year and destroyed his legacy, due to his play on the field (or lack thereof)...and (ahem) off.

[Hail Casares]

No comment on any of the choices, but I hate the whole concept of a "Mount Rushmore" of anything except for the four statues in South Dakota.... I had hoped that the fad of "Mount Rushmore of _____" lists had gone the same way as spinning hubcap attachments.

Do you want to weigh in on my Mount Fuji of Japanese Baseball Players list? So far I have Sadaharu Oh, Randy Bass, and Bob Horner.

As for the Mt Rushmore thing, I think Graham and Starr were great QBs and both are underrated in the grand scheme of things, but its hard for me to put a QB who had 10 good years over a guy like Brady or Manning who will probably end up with 15-17 good years. Yeah, different eras and all, but at the very least I think the consistent excellence of Brady and Manning is kind of unprecedented. I guess Favre is like the Merlin Olsen of QBs...all those pro bowls and hardly ever a mention in the best ever discussion.

The crazy thing about Brady in all this is that until really 2007 his stats as a starter weren't over the top. 2007 on he's had some incredibly great year: '07, '10-'12, '14. His '01-'06 was pretty non-descript numbers wise.

Favre's biggest issue with not being in the GOAT talk is Manning. Manning' is breaking his records, doing it more efficiently, has won more MVP's won the same number of Super Bowl's and been to another one. FWIW I'd take Marino over Favre

A guy who I think gets overlooked in the GOAT discussion or at least on lists like this is Fran Tarkenton who just kind of bludgeoned you with efficient and good play for nearly 20 seasons. Not a lot of "black ink" but really good for a really long time.

[JeffreyMiller]

The Colts were almost always good with Unitas, but his inclusion on a Mt Rushmore type monument has as much to do with his image and what it meant for the NFL between 1958 and 1970. Unitas was in essence the face of the league during that period, arguably the its most famous player until the likes of Joe Namath came along. Plus that crew cut and jawline make for a perfect statue figure ...

And the fact that statistically he was the greatest passer ever until the 1980's came along. You're talking about Unitas here like he was simply the crew cut QB of the best team in football and along for the ride rather than a guy who was routinely leading the NFL in passing yardage and TD's and putting up passer ratings 25% above the league average. Unitas from 1957-1967 was ridiculous.

No doubt ... I was just trying to say that he is not a candidate simply because of titles or stats ... Unitas transcends the game, much the way Babe Ruth or Gordie Howe did in their sports.

[James]

Graham, Baugh, Unitas, Montana for me.

[Bob Gill]

Frankly, I have my doubts about Baugh being on this list, mainly because he had most of his best seasons when he was still a single wing tailback. He spent the first seven seasons of his career as a tailback and he was named first- or second-team All-Pro in six of those seasons. He spent the last nine years as a quarterback and was named first or second team All-Pro in only three of those seasons ... in fact, three of the first four. During his last five seasons, he received no All-Pro mentions and, in fact, during his last four seasons, he basically QB duties with Harry Gilmer.

Whether Baugh showed up on any all-pro teams in 1949 or not, didn't he lead the NFL in passing that year? At least he used to be listed as the leader in several books I had as a kid. (They carried those lists of annual leaders in rushing, passing, receiving and so on, but some of the stats might've been changed over the years.)

I get your point about the change from tailback to quarterback, and in that sense you're right, but to me the distinction isn't crucial. Before 1944 he was calling the plays, throwing the passes, never running the ball except in his rookie year. From 1944 on he was calling the plays, throwing the passes, never running the ball. Yes, he started taking the snap directly from the center, and his footwork changed and the ballhandling changed, but it seems to me that the essence of what Baugh was doing didn't change a whole lot. So I'm inclined to include his whole career in the equation, and in that case it seems to me that he's definitely among the very best, without even taking into account his punting and that one year he led in interceptions.

[Reaser]

I had hoped that the fad of "Mount Rushmore of _____" lists had gone the same way as spinning hubcap attachments.

Yup. I think I said similar a few years ago but it's cheap and easy content tied to Presidents Day every year, and pretty much every football related site does it or has done it. Harmless enough but a ranking of the top 100 QB's would probably be more interesting.

Can't remember if it was a year or two years ago, but a comment I found funny on another site was something along the lines of: "Wouldn't having Manning and Brady on the QB Mount Rushmore be like putting Clinton and Bush on the real Mount Rushmore?"

[Byron]

As more QBs get added to the list of players, this gets rougher and rougher.

I'd go with Baugh, Graham, Unitas and Montana.

That list embodies all the greatest qualities of the position, across eras.

[JohnH19]

I guess Favre is like the Merlin Olsen of QBs...all those pro bowls and hardly ever a mention in the best ever discussion.

His second to last year (first with the Vikings) was statistically one of his best ever, and he came within one play of the Super Bowl. He had the sh*t beat out of him that game, and kept getting up. One of the most courageous performances I've ever seen. Later, when the ugly stuff about the Saints' program came out, he refused to blame them. That's a man.

Then he came back for one more year and destroyed his legacy, due to his play on the field (or lack thereof)...and (ahem) off.

The off the field stuff - true or not - occurred while he was with the Jets in 2008 and has been forgotten by most...at least it should be. I don`t think his poor 2010 season did any more to harm Brett`s legacy than Y.A. Tittle`s 1964 season did to harm his.

[BernardB]

[quote="oldecapecod 11"]
your opinion, my opinion, everyone's opinion
is nothing more than that - the opinion of ONE in a world fast approaching 7-1/2 BILLION opinions.
That's 1/7,500,000,000th -
how's that for a meaningless statistic? .0000000001333 - that's less than John Madden's vertical leap. [quote]


All opinions are not created equal. Everything depends on the argument standing behind them. Every once in awhile someone comes along with a well-reasoned argument that cuts through all kinds of subjective biases.