How much longer do you think S.Young could've played?

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:
Steve Young was the highest rated QB of all time when he retired. For the most part he did not play well in the playoffs. That is the definition of over rated and that is all I said.

I don't follow this logic at all.

Against the other elite teams in the league he was not as good as his passer rating suggested.

That would be one conclusion to reach from those two assumptions. There are others, too.

Here are his career postseason passing stats, BTW - http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/Y/YounSt00/gamelog/post/

Thanks I don't need to see post season stats. I lived through the post season heartbreaks. Does anyone besides me agree that if Steve Young was truly a great QB he would have taken the 49ers to the promise land more than the time they went all in on free agency? He came into a team full of superstars, fully coached and ready to win.

Well then, since your view is subjective by your own admission, I see no point in continuing the dialogue. We'll agree to disagree.

Who's view is not subjective? The entire discussion was my subjective view that Steve Young is an overrated QB, I said in the very beginning that the stats are not telling the tale of the tape. If you don't see a point to continuing to respond on the grounds that my view is subjective you never should have joined the conversation in the first place.

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:
Steve Young was the highest rated QB of all time when he retired. For the most part he did not play well in the playoffs. That is the definition of over rated and that is all I said.

I don't follow this logic at all.

Against the other elite teams in the league he was not as good as his passer rating suggested.

That would be one conclusion to reach from those two assumptions. There are others, too.

Here are his career postseason passing stats, BTW - http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/Y/YounSt00/gamelog/post/

Thanks I don't need to see post season stats. I lived through the post season heartbreaks. Does anyone besides me agree that if Steve Young was truly a great QB he would have taken the 49ers to the promise land more than the time they went all in on free agency? He came into a team full of superstars, fully coached and ready to win.

Well then, since your view is subjective by your own admission, I see no point in continuing the dialogue. We'll agree to disagree.

Who's view is not subjective? The entire discussion was my subjective view that Steve Young is an overrated QB, I said in the very beginning that the stats are not telling the tale of the tape. If you don't see a point to continuing to respond on the grounds that my view is subjective you never should have joined the conversation in the first place.

Perhaps I naively expected that truth, logic and reality might cause your opinion to change. That was foolish of me.

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:
Steve Young was the highest rated QB of all time when he retired. For the most part he did not play well in the playoffs. That is the definition of over rated and that is all I said.

I don't follow this logic at all.

Against the other elite teams in the league he was not as good as his passer rating suggested.

That would be one conclusion to reach from those two assumptions. There are others, too.

Here are his career postseason passing stats, BTW - http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/Y/YounSt00/gamelog/post/

Thanks I don't need to see post season stats. I lived through the post season heartbreaks. Does anyone besides me agree that if Steve Young was truly a great QB he would have taken the 49ers to the promise land more than the time they went all in on free agency? He came into a team full of superstars, fully coached and ready to win.

Well then, since your view is subjective by your own admission, I see no point in continuing the dialogue. We'll agree to disagree.

Who's view is not subjective? The entire discussion was my subjective view that Steve Young is an overrated QB, I said in the very beginning that the stats are not telling the tale of the tape. If you don't see a point to continuing to respond on the grounds that my view is subjective you never should have joined the conversation in the first place.

Perhaps I naively expected that truth, logic and reality might cause your opinion to change. That was foolish of me.

Condescending is a sign of weakness, I would steer clear of that tactic if you are trying to come off like you know what you are talking about.

What truth are you referring to? The stats? How about a first hand memory of a great playoff moment aside from 94 to counter my first hand memories of many season ending poor playoff performances?

Just because I'm not a vet or mod doesn't mean I am less intelligent or knowledgeable about football than you are.

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:
Steve Young was the highest rated QB of all time when he retired. For the most part he did not play well in the playoffs. That is the definition of over rated and that is all I said.

I don't follow this logic at all.

Against the other elite teams in the league he was not as good as his passer rating suggested.

That would be one conclusion to reach from those two assumptions. There are others, too.

Here are his career postseason passing stats, BTW - http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/Y/YounSt00/gamelog/post/

Thanks I don't need to see post season stats. I lived through the post season heartbreaks. Does anyone besides me agree that if Steve Young was truly a great QB he would have taken the 49ers to the promise land more than the time they went all in on free agency? He came into a team full of superstars, fully coached and ready to win.

Well then, since your view is subjective by your own admission, I see no point in continuing the dialogue. We'll agree to disagree.

Who's view is not subjective? The entire discussion was my subjective view that Steve Young is an overrated QB, I said in the very beginning that the stats are not telling the tale of the tape. If you don't see a point to continuing to respond on the grounds that my view is subjective you never should have joined the conversation in the first place.

Perhaps I naively expected that truth, logic and reality might cause your opinion to change. That was foolish of me.

Condescending is a sign of weakness.

What truth are you talking about? Your stats? How about a first hand memory of a great playoff moment aside from 94 to counter my first hand memories of many season ending poor playoff performances?

Just because I'm not a mod doesn't mean I am less intelligent or knowledgeable about football than you are.

Couldn't the same be said of someone adhering to a position that it not well-founded?

I witnesses him playing, too, and disagree with your conclusion and the premises behind it.

I never claimed that you were not intelligent or knowledgeable. I simply offered you data that I believe refutes your subjective position. You refused to view it and stuck with your views which I believe to be incorrect. That's fine - we'll agree to disagree.

Hmmm, this guy says one more game.

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by goodthings19:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NinerBuff:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by RonMexico:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:
Sorry guys but he couldn't get back to the show with consistently stacked teams. Hearst Rice and Owens on the field together for several years of his career. Bad plays in big moments. A great QB but also one of the most overrated of all time.

Don't get me wrong I am a Steve Young fan. But if I am going to call Peyton Manning over-rated (which I do) then I have to call Steve Young over-rated as well.

Homer-denial is funny. Steve Young retired as the highest rated passer of all time. Obviously he wasn't the best QB of all time. That is the definition of over-rated. Regular season stat machine and 1 superbowl to show for it on stacked offensive teams.

He was stupid for handing that ball to Roger Craig.

He had many more opportunities to lead the 49ers to the superbowl after the 1990 season

I could have added the FO decisions to let Ricky Watters go, hang onto a bunch of expensive over-the-hill players and some more but it probably wouldn't matter so I'll just leave it there.

Your smugness is pretty obvious if you are trying to be coy, which is also obvious.

You could mention every roster move made during his career if you want to. It doesn't change the fact that he had more than enough coaching, skills, smarts and talent around him to get to another superbowl. He didn't. As I said before, some of his worst play came in the biggest moments. Kurt Warner took the cards to a superbowl with literally nothing but him throwing to Fitzgerald

History is not on your side with the Cardinals. The fact is, once Edgerin James got healthy along with the OL and they began running with authority, it opened up the passing game and Arizona began their roll. Yes, Warner played exceptionally well but he was by no means the sole reason they won the Super Bowl. Boldin made many huge plays when Fitzgerald was covered. Breaston made some key catches and the defense played well.

Steve Young legitimately belongs among the Top 10 QBs of all time. I don't really care where you fit him in there but his overall ability to pass as well as run and run the team earns him that spot.

Are you kidding? James may have been healthy and running effectively but that was all set up by an unstoppable passing combination of Fitz and Warner. I am not saying Steve Young isn't a top ten QB of all time, I said he is over-rated. As good as he was, besides '94 his post season play was far below his regular season play.

What is this argument? You both agree he is top 10 qb of all time. But you say he is overrated. So that means you think he is oh the 9th or 10th qb ever, and others are saying he is better? Sheesh!

Look, there are several reasons for his only having one SB ring. Main ones are Dallas and Green Bay. They were just better than us at that time. And the team had some weaknesses that could not be fixed.

Steve was a fine qb. We were incredibly lucky to have him. Can't we just leave it like that? I don't agree that he is overrated round here. I think that most supporters who lived through both Montana and Young have a fairly clear perception of his strengths and so forth.

I am not going to just say we were lucky to have him and leave it at that because it has nothing to do with what I said. Steve Young was the highest rated QB of all time when he retired. For the most part he did not play well in the playoffs. That is the definition of over rated and that is all I said. We had teams as talented as Green Bay and Dallas for the majority of the 90's, Young always got outplayed by Farve and Aikman.

I believe that if any other of the elite guys from the that era (Farve, Elway, Marino) were throwing to Rice and Owens we would have won multiple superbowls in the 90's

I strongly disagree. Farve, Elway and Marino had stronger arms than Young but Steve was more mobile, accurate and had better footwork. And that is what matters in the west coast offense, just ask Jim Harbaugh.

If he had everything he needed this wouldnt be a discussion. How many superbowls would Montana have won if he had Rice for his entire career and Owens for the entire second half of it?

And Derek Loville. And ...

Originally posted by Joecool:
Hmmm, this guy says one more game.

Originally posted by Joecool:
Hmmm, this guy says one more game.

Boo, sir. Boo.

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:
Steve Young was the highest rated QB of all time when he retired. For the most part he did not play well in the playoffs. That is the definition of over rated and that is all I said.

I don't follow this logic at all.

Against the other elite teams in the league he was not as good as his passer rating suggested.

That would be one conclusion to reach from those two assumptions. There are others, too.

Here are his career postseason passing stats, BTW - http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/Y/YounSt00/gamelog/post/

Thanks I don't need to see post season stats. I lived through the post season heartbreaks. Does anyone besides me agree that if Steve Young was truly a great QB he would have taken the 49ers to the promise land more than the time they went all in on free agency? He came into a team full of superstars, fully coached and ready to win.

Well then, since your view is subjective by your own admission, I see no point in continuing the dialogue. We'll agree to disagree.

Who's view is not subjective? The entire discussion was my subjective view that Steve Young is an overrated QB, I said in the very beginning that the stats are not telling the tale of the tape. If you don't see a point to continuing to respond on the grounds that my view is subjective you never should have joined the conversation in the first place.

Perhaps I naively expected that truth, logic and reality might cause your opinion to change. That was foolish of me.

Condescending is a sign of weakness.

What truth are you talking about? Your stats? How about a first hand memory of a great playoff moment aside from 94 to counter my first hand memories of many season ending poor playoff performances?

Just because I'm not a mod doesn't mean I am less intelligent or knowledgeable about football than you are.

Couldn't the same be said of someone adhering to a position that it not well-founded?

I witnesses him playing, too, and disagree with your conclusion and the premises behind it.

I never claimed that you were not intelligent or knowledgeable. I simply offered you data that I believe refutes your subjective position. You refused to view it and stuck with your views which I believe to be incorrect. That's fine - we'll agree to disagree.

You may not have called me unintelligent but your verbiage is extremely telling. We'll agree that you can't accept that any views but your own are even conceivable.

Originally posted by RichmondPete:
You may not have called me unintelligent but your verbiage is extremely telling. We'll agree that you can't accept that any views but your own are even conceivable.

No we will not.

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:
You may not have called me unintelligent but your verbiage is extremely telling. We'll agree that you can't accept that any views but your own are even conceivable.

No we will not.

"Perhaps I naively expected that truth, logic and reality might cause your opinion to change. That was foolish of me"

Child please.

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:
You may not have called me unintelligent but your verbiage is extremely telling. We'll agree that you can't accept that any views but your own are even conceivable.

No we will not.

"Perhaps I naively expected that truth, logic and reality might cause your opinion to change. That was foolish of me"

Child please.

Pot, meet kettle.

I learn new things every day. I accept that others hold many views that are not my own and that they do so for valid reasons. On this issue however, nothing that you have stated (which, in sum, is an opinion that "Steve Young is overrated") causes me to change my opinion...an opinion that I have not fleshed out in this thread. Instead, I challenged you to review the statistics and, perhaps, concede that there was more than one conclusion to be reached than yours. You declined and stuck to your guns. That's that.

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:
You may not have called me unintelligent but your verbiage is extremely telling. We'll agree that you can't accept that any views but your own are even conceivable.

No we will not.

"Perhaps I naively expected that truth, logic and reality might cause your opinion to change. That was foolish of me"

Child please.

Pot, meet kettle.

I learn new things every day. I accept that others hold many views that are not my own and that they do so for valid reasons. On this issue however, nothing that you have stated (which, in sum, is an opinion that "Steve Young is overrated") causes me to change my opinion...an opinion that I have not fleshed out in this thread. Instead, I challenged you to review the statistics and, perhaps, concede that there was more than one conclusion to be reached than yours. You declined and stuck to your guns. That's that.

Ugh. Couldn't this whole thing b/w you guys have been done over PM? Did it address the OP's topic, or bring any more people's thoughts to the thread? This little "who's junk is longer" ordeal killed a fairly enjoyable thread at a time when there is not much to talk about.

Originally posted by WRATHman44:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:
You may not have called me unintelligent but your verbiage is extremely telling. We'll agree that you can't accept that any views but your own are even conceivable.

No we will not.

"Perhaps I naively expected that truth, logic and reality might cause your opinion to change. That was foolish of me"

Child please.

Pot, meet kettle.

I learn new things every day. I accept that others hold many views that are not my own and that they do so for valid reasons. On this issue however, nothing that you have stated (which, in sum, is an opinion that "Steve Young is overrated") causes me to change my opinion...an opinion that I have not fleshed out in this thread. Instead, I challenged you to review the statistics and, perhaps, concede that there was more than one conclusion to be reached than yours. You declined and stuck to your guns. That's that.

Ugh. Couldn't this whole thing b/w you guys have been done over PM? Did it address the OP's topic, or bring any more people's thoughts to the thread? This little "who's junk is longer" ordeal killed a fairly enjoyable thread at a time when there is not much to talk about.

Thanks for the input.

I think that Steve could have played at least 3 more years. What do you think?

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by WRATHman44:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:
You may not have called me unintelligent but your verbiage is extremely telling. We'll agree that you can't accept that any views but your own are even conceivable.

No we will not.

"Perhaps I naively expected that truth, logic and reality might cause your opinion to change. That was foolish of me"

Child please.

Pot, meet kettle.

I learn new things every day. I accept that others hold many views that are not my own and that they do so for valid reasons. On this issue however, nothing that you have stated (which, in sum, is an opinion that "Steve Young is overrated") causes me to change my opinion...an opinion that I have not fleshed out in this thread. Instead, I challenged you to review the statistics and, perhaps, concede that there was more than one conclusion to be reached than yours. You declined and stuck to your guns. That's that.

Ugh. Couldn't this whole thing b/w you guys have been done over PM? Did it address the OP's topic, or bring any more people's thoughts to the thread? This little "who's junk is longer" ordeal killed a fairly enjoyable thread at a time when there is not much to talk about.

Thanks for the input.

I think that Steve could have played at least 3 more years. What do you think?

As I said before, I think he would have retired in 2000, after the FO let the GOAT cross the bay.