View Single Post
Old 04-10-2013, 04:49 AM   #10
The Iron Price
Jackass18's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Carcosa
Posts: 10,626
Default Re: my top 15 QBs that have no ring

Originally Posted by -p.tiddy-
Randell probably had a better prime than Vinny, but he has like half the stats...

it would be different if he was just close, but he isn't

Vinny's stats aren't really close to being twice as good as his, not to mention that Cunningham has a better QB rating, and has more pro bowls in far less starts. Also, you put Cunningham ahead of Bledsoe while Bledsoe's stats are similar to Testaverde's. Shit just doesn't make sense. And, well, Cunningham wasn't quite the same after his injury, but he was a better QB.

longevity should be rewarded, you don't play as long as he did if you're Jamarcus Russell

Testaverde was just mediocre enough to be a starting QB for years and years. Longevity is all good and all, but you put too much stock into it. Actually, I'm going to take this further because I like trying to decipher some people's logic. You say Vinny has the better stats, so the only areas this is true are as follows:

Testaverde: 3787-6701, 46223 yards and 275 TDs
Cunningham: 2429-4289, 29979 yards and 207 TDs
Difference of: 1358-2412, 16244 yards and 68 TDs
(the yards and TD numbers are closer if you take into account their rushing numbers)

With that, there's no way you could put Montana ahead of Favre:

Favre: 6300-10169, 71838 yards and 508 TDs
Montana: 3409-5391, 40551 yards and 273 TDs
Difference of: 2891-4778, 31287 yards and 235 TDs

There's a far, far bigger gap between Favre and Montana than Testaverde and Cunningham. Montana's 'stats' are fairly close to being only half of Favre's.
Jackass18 is offline   Reply With Quote