Once upon a time there was a gun slinger

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by verb1der:

Originally posted by HessianDud:

"Most Valuable Player" has always favored offense, it has nothing to do with the "evolution of the game."

Perhaps MVPs aren't the prime indicator of the evolution, but Peyton, Eli, Drew Brees, Brady, and Rodgers were unquestionable MVPs. I just had to make a point about the list above.

But my main point is "gun slingers" have been the biggest impact on championship teams in the last decade.

I think "gunslinger" is being really improperly used in this thread. Brett Favre is a "gunslinger." Tom Brady is not. Neither was Dan Marino. And neither is Peyton, Brees, or Eli. Rodgers, maybe, because of his willingness to chuck it anywhere and his improvisational style, but I wonder if he'd do that without the best WR corps in the league?

Great quarterbacks have always been MVPs and associated with being the major reason for a championship teams success. But just about every championship team has a good to great defense. Rodgers, the greatest QB who ever graced the Earth with his heavenly presence, had a defense that returned an interception for a touchdown in 3 of 4 games in the postseason--and in two of those games they won by less than a TD. Also, Packers D last year was #2 in PPG.

nothing has changed in the relationship between QB's, great defenses, and championships.

bro you are a beast!

Originally posted by verb1der:
bro you are a beast!

is my wife blogging again?

Montana was never a gunslinger...he was an assasin

A prerequisite of a true gunslinger is that he must have a great freak'n arm throwing the ball accurately. Dan Marino, John Elway, Bret Favre, Jeff George (this dude should have his own category and I didn't say I would list only the successful ones)

Then there are a bunch of pretenders who only has a good arm, are accurate for the most part, but plays like they are gunslingers. Again some of them may be successful, some not so much, and then some are just full retards.

Successful: Drew Brees, Aaron Rogers (this year), Rothlesberger

Semi-succesful: Eli Manning, Phillip Rivers, Matt Ryan

Full retards: There no one here just yet, but Romo, Cutler, and Rivers may be real close to this cat

Originally posted by TRUCKRATHMAN:
Montana was never a gunslinger...he was an assasin

Ice water in the veins. Cold blooded

Defense wins Championships. The Packers had the pash rush and the pressure to do it in the playoffs last year, we'll be that team this year.

Originally posted by Chico:

Very true but i think our so called "experts" still haven't learned anything! All they see is that a QB threw for 400 yards plus and 5 TDs...yet they rarely talk about how he threw 3 interceptions and CHOKED when the game was on the line!!!

i think they are more concerned with yards than with the wins & losses!

Its funny how you say that....when Montana was bailed out in "the catch" game and won almost in spite of his performance( 3 ints)



Montana and Young had some the best defenses in the history of the nfl

Please tell me this is not a thread trying to compare Alex Smith to Joe Montana. I might loose it if that's what you're saying...

Originally posted by qnnhan7:

Originally posted by TRUCKRATHMAN:

Montana was never a



gunslinger...he was an assasin

Ice water in the veins. Cold blooded

Originally posted by qnnhan7:

Ice water in the veins. Cold blooded

Originally posted by King49er:

Defense wins Championships. The Packers had the pash rush and the pressure to do it in the playoffs last year, we'll be that team this year.

Glad someone else noticed...big reason why I said smith is a better qb than young..he has that cool hand in a gunfight in the old spegetti westerns...like joe..when it counted!

Originally posted by SealTeam6:
named Dan Marino and his numbers were as follows
Comp362 attempts 564 % 64.2 yrds5,084 avg9.0 TD48 int17 108.9


And there was another guy named Joe who liked to manage games and his numbers were as follows
comp279 attempts 432 % 64.6 yrds 3,630 avg 8.4 TD 28 int 10 102.9;

in the end, Dan and the the experts learned big stats dont win Super Bowls

True reminder. Some of these current quarterbacks may take significant risks and that can eventually cost a team. It appears that they often neglect the run and throw into tight coverage, a lot like what Eli Manning attempted. Great defenses may have the capacity to hold such a quarterback accountable. Mistake free low turnover football, efficiency and being clutch seemed to be constants with Joe. It was probably frustrating for those great defenses that they could not coax him into many errors. The philosophy was to throw short yardage, high efficiency passes that were less likely to be intercepted and allow the receiver to make a play. This was accompanied by a very dynamic running game featuring Wendell Tyler, Roger Craig or eventually Ricky Waters. Passing yards gained were generally as indicative of the caliber of YAC capable receivers as the efficiency of the quarterback.

Montana also had a much better team backing him. A better D, O Line, Special teams. The better team won. Miami was a high powered QB, good WR's and not much else.

Originally posted by SealTeam6:
named Dan Marino and his numbers were as follows
Comp362 attempts 564 % 64.2 yrds5,084 avg9.0 TD48 int17 108.9


And there was another guy named Joe who liked to manage games and his numbers were as follows
comp279 attempts 432 % 64.6 yrds 3,630 avg 8.4 TD 28 int 10 102.9;

in the end, Dan and the the experts learned big stats dont win Super Bowls

First Montanas stats were great especially for the times, not game manager and it is an insult to his legacy. If you are trying to compare Alex to Montana, this is perposterous. You also forget Montana could have padded his stats by Walsh throwing more, but didn't because we had Tyler and Craig.

Yes you need more than one person to win the big game. But to say stats don't win superbowls is wrong, look at the majority of SB winners, they didn't get there on weak stats. Brees, Rodgers and Brady have had great stats and won. Even the Ravens, but their great stat was the D. Tell you what give me Marino and his stats with our D and ST along with Gore. You can have your game manager QB.

Every team out there wouldn't mind having a Marino and his stats on his team. I would bet if Walsh didn't have Montana-he would love to have him too.

It would be more appropriate to say it takes more than a QB with great stats to win a SB than to say great stats don't win SB.

Originally posted by Dshearn:

Originally posted by Chico:

Very true but i think our so called "experts" still haven't learned anything! All they see is that a QB threw for 400 yards plus and 5 TDs...yet they rarely talk about how he threw 3 interceptions and CHOKED when the game was on the line!!!

i think they are more concerned with yards than with the wins & losses!

Its funny how you say that....when Montana was bailed out in "the catch" game and won almost in spite of his performance( 3 ints)



Montana and Young had some the best defenses in the history of the nfl

Funny how even some longtime fans can forget this. The Niners have had great defenses on every one of their championship teams.

Originally posted by Memphis9er:

Originally posted by Dshearn:

Originally posted by Chico:
Very true but i think our so called "experts" still haven't learned anything! All they see is that a QB threw for 400 yards plus and 5 TDs...yet they rarely talk about how he threw 3 interceptions and CHOKED when the game was on the line!!!

i think they are more concerned with yards than with the wins & losses!

Its funny how you say that....when Montana was bailed out in "the catch" game and won almost in spite of his performance( 3 ints)



Montana and Young had some the best defenses in the history of the nfl

Funny how even some longtime fans can forget this. The Niners have had great defenses on every one of their championship teams.

They think only Alex Smith has a good defense. Those guys had great defense. They would not have won Super Bowls if they didn't. It takes a full team and certainly a great defense although the QB always gets all the credit.

Originally posted by WildBill:

First Montanas stats were great especially for the times, not game manager and it is an insult to his legacy. If you are trying to compare Alex to Montana, this is perposterous. You also forget Montana could have padded his stats by Walsh throwing more, but didn't because we had Tyler and Craig.

Yes you need more than one person to win the big game. But to say stats don't win superbowls is wrong, look at the majority of SB winners, they didn't get there on weak stats. Brees, Rodgers and Brady have had great stats and won. Even the Ravens, but their great stat was the D. Tell you what give me Marino and his stats with our D and ST along with Gore. You can have your game manager QB.

Every team out there wouldn't mind having a Marino and his stats on his team. I would bet if Walsh didn't have Montana-he would love to have him too.

It would be more appropriate to say it takes more than a QB with great stats to win a SB than to say great stats don't win SB.

Bill, go look at Joe's stats from his first Superbowl year, they are very Smith like. Joe was a game manager, that is what every good qb does...manages the game. I don't understand why everyone gets their panties in a twist when that term gets tossed out there. Any qb that doesn't manage the game isn't doing his job. Joe is Joe not because he was some idiot gunslinger type, he is Joe Cool because he was clutch.