WOW Steve Young #81 on 100 All Time best Players

I was thinking #81 would be appropriate around #81........this is a slap in the face to Young though

81??? thats a f**kin joke. people are saying its because he didnt start for that long but look at what he did while he was the starter. he was the best QB in the game as far as accuracy and set all kinds of records and won a superbowl. your telling me bradshaw was better than young? aikman? come on now...

I think Young's ranking is right about where it should be. There have been thousands of players in the NFL over the years and, according to this list, only 80 to play the game were better than Young. Not bad for the only starting QB to follow a hall of famer and make the hall of fame ...

People that think Young should be rated higher than Elway, Marino, or even Aikman are a little biased I'm afraid. Elway took 3 teams to the SB without nearly the same supporting cast as Young had and is the only QB to start in 5 SBs. Marino was the most prolific passer in NFL history when he retired and not one single offensive player that he played with during the prime of his career will make the HOF. Aikman played at the same time as Young and got the better of him 3 to 1 in rings. Young failed to win with a loaded team in '91, '92 and '93. And failed to beat Green Bay from '95 through '97. He had the greatest NFL receiver in history to throw to during his entire career and his career QB rating reflects that.

I loved watching Young play and he'll always be one of my favorites but I hate to look back on those teams in the 90s and think we only came out of it with one SB. Around the country his career is perceived for what it really was - a great one, but with less accomplishments than his talent and the talent around him should have achieved. So if he gets dinged a bit for that and is placed behind other QBs that had better statistics with less talent or that achieved more than he did, then so be it.

Young was great and I won't debate how many are greater but I think he will always get dinged for 3 losses in the NFL Championship games to Dallas as well as losing to Green Bay. Some say Brady only won Superbowls because of Viniteri. Some say Young only Got to the Superbowl because of Deion Sanders. I think they are mostly correct on that count.

Trying not to be a homer and be objective. Young's first 6 years in the league were nothing spectacular, you must look at the whole body of work. Elway, Marino and Montana all showed greatness from the start, Steve took a while, all things considered 81st is an insult. I would put him somewhere in the 25-50th range.

Originally posted by midrdan:
I think Young's ranking is right about where it should be. There have been thousands of players in the NFL over the years and, according to this list, only 80 to play the game were better than Young. Not bad for the only starting QB to follow a hall of famer and make the hall of fame ...

People that think Young should be rated higher than Elway, Marino, or even Aikman are a little biased I'm afraid. Elway took 3 teams to the SB without nearly the same supporting cast as Young had and is the only QB to start in 5 SBs. Marino was the most prolific passer in NFL history when he retired and not one single offensive player that he played with during the prime of his career will make the HOF. Aikman played at the same time as Young and got the better of him 3 to 1 in rings. Young failed to win with a loaded team in '91, '92 and '93. And failed to beat Green Bay from '95 through '97. He had the greatest NFL receiver in history to throw to during his entire career and his career QB rating reflects that.

I loved watching Young play and he'll always be one of my favorites but I hate to look back on those teams in the 90s and think we only came out of it with one SB. Around the country his career is perceived for what it really was - a great one, but with less accomplishments than his talent and the talent around him should have achieved. So if he gets dinged a bit for that and is placed behind other QBs that had better statistics with less talent or that achieved more than he did, then so be it.

You have an argument with Elway and Marino, but it's not even close with Aikman.

Originally posted by BigRon:
Young was great and I won't debate how many are greater but I think he will always get dinged for 3 losses in the NFL Championship games to Dallas as well as losing to Green Bay. Some say Brady only won Superbowls because of Viniteri. Some say Young only Got to the Superbowl because of Deion Sanders. I think they are mostly correct on that count.

Brady won his because of the whole team, not just the kicker. Especially the first two, where he basically just managed the game.

As for Young only winning his because of Dion. They blew teams away that year. Most wins cam by well over a TD. I can't imagine one defensive player was worth 7 points (or 6, whatever) a game, even Dion Sanders. In the playoffs/SB the offense scored 44, 38, and 49 points. No one was going to stop the 49ers offense, Dion or no Dion (even if Dion was on the Cowboys).

Wow is right. With one Superbowl and a great surrounding cast, he shouldn't be top 100. I dont give a crap what his passer rating was...133.?

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
Wow is right. With one Superbowl and a great surrounding cast, he shouldn't be top 100. I dont give a crap what his passer rating was...133.?

So Dan Marino shouldn't even be in the top 200 then, right?

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
Wow is right. With one Superbowl and a great surrounding cast, he shouldn't be top 100. I dont give a crap what his passer rating was...133.?

126 career

Montana 123

P Manning 119

T Brady 117

Originally posted by Gavintech:

Originally posted by midrdan:
I think Young's ranking is right about where it should be. There have been thousands of players in the NFL over the years and, according to this list, only 80 to play the game were better than Young. Not bad for the only starting QB to follow a hall of famer and make the hall of fame ...

People that think Young should be rated higher than Elway, Marino, or even Aikman are a little biased I'm afraid. Elway took 3 teams to the SB without nearly the same supporting cast as Young had and is the only QB to start in 5 SBs. Marino was the most prolific passer in NFL history when he retired and not one single offensive player that he played with during the prime of his career will make the HOF. Aikman played at the same time as Young and got the better of him 3 to 1 in rings. Young failed to win with a loaded team in '91, '92 and '93. And failed to beat Green Bay from '95 through '97. He had the greatest NFL receiver in history to throw to during his entire career and his career QB rating reflects that.

I loved watching Young play and he'll always be one of my favorites but I hate to look back on those teams in the 90s and think we only came out of it with one SB. Around the country his career is perceived for what it really was - a great one, but with less accomplishments than his talent and the talent around him should have achieved. So if he gets dinged a bit for that and is placed behind other QBs that had better statistics with less talent or that achieved more than he did, then so be it.

You have an argument with Elway and Marino, but it's not even close with Aikman.

IMO Young was better than Aikman talent wise but they played against each other when it counted most for half a decade and Aikman's team got the better of Young's team on most of those occasions. Young's numbers are better than Aikmans, Aikman played behind a far superior line, and had HOFers all over the field. But perception is reality and I it's difficult for some voters to put Young ahead of the starting QB on a team that many people think is one of the top 5 all-time greatest teams. Perhaps Aikman won't be on the list but I doubt it. I think he falls somewhere in the 60s.

Personally I think passer rating can be overrated. Quite frankly, with the Niners system and WRS like Rice and Taylor Young's passer rating SHOULD have been off the charts.

Steve was very talented but to think he should be ahead of guys like Brady, Manning, or John Elway is .. well its called being a Niner homer. Outside of a Niner website I doubt you would find many people that would ever make that argument. He was a great 49er but not a top 10 QB all time in the NFL in my opinion.

Young definitely belongs higher on the list, but lets face facts. Father time is his biggest enemy. He only played 8 good seasons as a fulltime QB, and didnt play out the entire season for most of those. By default, he cant be top 10-20.........however he should have definitely cracked top 30 because he accomplished so much in so little time.

why is this in niner talk?

Originally posted by Axl49:
The biggest travesty is that Bradshaw is gonna be ahead of Young I HATE the NFL and their East coast bias along with ESPN west coast gets no love from anybody.

Its not the East coast bias, it the the "QB greatness is measured by the # of rings" mentality. But Montana has benefited from that some as well.