Milroe v Marino - The Football Gods are Unkind

[selmaborntidefan]

Not as reckless as someone like Favre.

Marino’s TD:INT ratio was 1.67 when PI and Holding weren’t called like they are now.

He’s Top 50 in that Category… not too far behind Montana from the same era.

I’m not a Marino fan per se but he carried the Dolphins his entire career and it wasn’t necessarily his lone fault they didn’t win a SB.

Favre did win a SB and was also GB’s best player for years but he absolutely cost them games with brain dead INT’s and Pick 6’s.

If I had to pick between those two alone I’d say Marino was the better QB and less likely to get you beat.

Ask yourself this question:

Who was the better QUARTERBACK, John Elway or Dan Marino?

Most folks would say Elway.

Why?
1) "because he won two Thuper Bowlth!"
2) they remember his miraculous comebacks like "The Drive"

But guess what?
Marino only played SIX more career games than Elway did but had SEVEN MORE (47-40) game-winning drives than Elway did. He had more comeback wins (33) than Elway did, too (31).

Marino's stats are FAR better than Elway:
- he won ONE LESS GAME playing for lesser teams (remember - Elway's teams went 35-8 his last three years and he still only had one win more than Marino, whose teams went 24-19 his last three)
- he threw for more than 10,000 yards than Elway did
- had 844 more completions
- he was 2.5% better at completing passes
- yes, Marino did have 26 more INT; he also had 120 more TD passes
- Elway's INT percentage is a tad higher than Marino despite 1108 fewer attempts
- reminder: Marino only played SIX MORE GAMES than Elway did.

And......Marino was 2-1 all-time against Elway, although John won their only post-season matchup when Marino's lousy defensive play gave up 38 points.

Why would anyone think - when you look at the actual numbers - that Elway was better than Marino?

Simple: "but he won two Thuper Bowlth!"

Do you remember how badly he played in that first one his team won? His most famous play was the helicopter tackle.

Yeah, he did fantastic in his last career game...his FIFTH Super Bowl.

 

[tusks_n_raider]

Ask yourself this question:

Who was the better QUARTERBACK, John Elway or Dan Marino?

Most folks would say Elway.

Why?
1) "because he won two Thuper Bowlth!"
2) they remember his miraculous comebacks like "The Drive"

But guess what?
Marino only played SIX more career games than Elway did but had SEVEN MORE (47-40) game-winning drives than Elway did. He had more comeback wins (33) than Elway did, too (31).

Marino's stats are FAR better than Elway:
- he won ONE LESS GAME playing for lesser teams (remember - Elway's teams went 35-8 his last three years and he still only had one win more than Marino, whose teams went 24-19 his last three)
- he threw for more than 10,000 yards than Elway did
- had 844 more completions
- he was 2.5% better at completing passes
- yes, Marino did have 26 more INT; he also had 120 more TD passes
- Elway's INT percentage is a tad higher than Marino despite 1108 fewer attempts
- reminder: Marino only played SIX MORE GAMES than Elway did.

And......Marino was 2-1 all-time against Elway, although John won their only post-season matchup when Marino's lousy defensive play gave up 38 points.

Why would anyone think - when you look at the actual numbers - that Elway was better than Marino?

Simple: "but he won two Thuper Bowlth!"

Do you remember how badly he played in that first one his team won? His most famous play was the helicopter tackle.

Yeah, he did fantastic in his last career game...his FIFTH Super Bowl.

Everything you said is true.

But I’m a Broncos fan and Elway was my favorite player growing up so I’ve always said he’s better than Marino…lol

To go a step further with how ‘impartial’ I am wrt to Elway I always thought he was better than Montana too!!

But seriously Marino was a Great QB. Put him on the Bills or 49’ers or Broncos or Cowboys etc in that era and he surely wins at least One SB.

 

[saturdaysarebet]

Not as reckless as someone like Favre.

Marino’s TD:INT ratio was 1.67 when PI and Holding weren’t called like they are now.

He’s Top 50 in that Category… not too far behind Montana from the same era.

I’m not a Marino fan per se but he carried the Dolphins his entire career and it wasn’t necessarily his lone fault they didn’t win a SB.

Favre did win a SB and was also GB’s best player for years but he absolutely cost them games with brain dead INT’s and Pick 6’s.

If I had to pick between those two alone I’d say Marino was the better QB and less likely to get you beat.

Marino threw 64 interceptions in college in the late '70s and early '80s when passing wasn't in vogue like it is today. His 64 interceptions still ranks in the top 10 of most interceptions thrown in college football history. Imagine where that stood (top 3 perhaps) when he graduated.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Everything you said is true.

But I’m a Broncos fan and Elway was my favorite player growing up so I’ve always said he’s better than Marino…lol

To go a step further with how ‘impartial’ I am wrt to Elway I always thought he was better than Montana too!!

But seriously Marino was a Great QB. Put him on the Bills or 49’ers or Broncos or Cowboys etc in that era and he surely wins at least One SB.

And here's the thing:

I can 100% understand why someone who was NOT A BRONCOS fan would pick Elway over Marino. In fact, I'd probably do it myself. Granted, I'm partial to Joe Montana over everyone else (and I'm a Falcons fan, so trust me, he lit us up more than I care to admit).

When you look at the QBs of the decade of 1983-92, I see it (MY OPINION) as:
1) Montana
2) Elway
3) Marino or Kelly, you can justify either one
5) probably Warren Moon

Steve Young was not yet a star, Boomer was a flash in the pan, McMahon couldn't stay healthy, and poor Bernie Kosar's luck.

And you

 

[81usaf92]

Ask yourself this question:

Who was the better QUARTERBACK, John Elway or Dan Marino?

Most folks would say Elway.

Why?
1) "because he won two Thuper Bowlth!"
2) they remember his miraculous comebacks like "The Drive"

But guess what?
Marino only played SIX more career games than Elway did but had SEVEN MORE (47-40) game-winning drives than Elway did. He had more comeback wins (33) than Elway did, too (31).

Marino's stats are FAR better than Elway:
- he won ONE LESS GAME playing for lesser teams (remember - Elway's teams went 35-8 his last three years and he still only had one win more than Marino, whose teams went 24-19 his last three)
- he threw for more than 10,000 yards than Elway did
- had 844 more completions
- he was 2.5% better at completing passes
- yes, Marino did have 26 more INT; he also had 120 more TD passes
- Elway's INT percentage is a tad higher than Marino despite 1108 fewer attempts
- reminder: Marino only played SIX MORE GAMES than Elway did.

And......Marino was 2-1 all-time against Elway, although John won their only post-season matchup when Marino's lousy defensive play gave up 38 points.

Why would anyone think - when you look at the actual numbers - that Elway was better than Marino?

Simple: "but he won two Thuper Bowlth!"

Do you remember how badly he played in that first one his team won? His most famous play was the helicopter tackle.

Yeah, he did fantastic in his last career game...his FIFTH Super Bowl.

Well it’s like the Aikman argument. Is Aikman really in a HOF discussion or does 3 SBs and being a Cowboy elevate him.

Personally I’ve always thought the 90’s qb that gets lost in most discussions is Steve Young.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Well it’s like the Aikman argument. Is Aikman really in a HOF discussion or does 3 SBs and being a Cowboy elevate him.

Personally I’ve always thought the 90’s qb that gets lost in most discussions is Steve Young.

Aikman is probably not in the Hall without the 3 rings.
In fact, he's probably eliminated on the first ballot.

Go look at his similarity scores. Subtract the 3 rings and he's Ryan Tannehill, Mark Brunell, Andy Dalton, or Jim Everett. Don't get me wrong - those guys were GOOD QBs, but they weren't HOFers.

Aikman never won a passing title, only finished higher than (are you ready for this?) EIGHTH in the league ONE TIME (1992) and was the highest percentage completion passer in 1993. ONLY ONCE was he higher than TENTH in TD passes.

Aikman - to me - is sorta like Belichick. His peak years were stellar but OVERALL he's maybe a tad above average. I don't think "won the Super Bowl" is a clinching argument...a guy can win one by being lucky and two by having a super year - but winning three?

The problem is...at some point the QB does have to get some credit. Granted, if Dallas could have only protected one player in a 1996 expansion draft, they protect Emmitt Smith and Troy gets picked up by another team.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Marino threw 64 interceptions in college in the late '70s and early '80s when passing wasn't in vogue like it is today.

It's so funny to watch you pivot from blaming Marino for his PROFESSIONAL TEAMS giving up 36.8 ppg on defense to "oh, he was to blame for everything in college, too!"

You're correct - passing wasn't "in vogue" in 1979-82, meaning it was also not as refined and developed as it was in the early 21st century, either. Marino's INT total is higher than most, some of which are his fault and some of which are not. After all, he led the nation in INTs in 1981 - but he also led the entire nation in passing TDs as well. And his overall total of 64 includes 22 in his senior season.

It has LONG BEEN RUMORED that Marino was partying hard his senior year at Pitt, something only he and maybe a few select close friends would know.

But it should also be noted Marino was one of the first QBs to play for a pass happy offense and (virtually) start FOUR YEARS worth of games, which increases all of your stats, both good and bad. His INT percentage was high but Jackie Sherrill apparently thought his defense was good enough to withstand whatever errors Marino (and his pass dropping/tipping receivers) might make.

His 64 interceptions still ranks in the top 10 of most interceptions thrown in college football history. Imagine where that stood (top 3 perhaps) when he graduated.

He was 7th when he graduated.

Fewer QBs today play four years' worth of games as the starter, and a starter today with his INT% would be benched and hitting the transfer portal pretty quickly.

Saying he wasn't perfect and made some boo-boos is fine.
Blaming him entirely for not winning a championship is insane.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

It's funny to watch our society try to individualize someone's value or "greatness" in team sports where other players dictated or had heavy influence on the person's performances.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

It's funny to watch our society try to individualize someone's value or "greatness" in team sports where other players dictated or had heavy influence on the person's performances.

Michael Jordan was a fantastic basketball player.

He also never won a damn thing until Scottie Pippen showed up.

The general consensus is that Mike Schmidt is the greatest third baseman of all-time.
He won ONE World Series ring.
The same number as Hank Aaron got.

Barry Bonds was a great player.
So was Elgin Baylor.
And Gale Sayers.
Ty Cobb.
No rings for any of them.

 

[DzynKingRTR]

Michael Jordan was a fantastic basketball player.

He also never won a damn thing until Scottie Pippen showed up.

The general consensus is that Mike Schmidt is the greatest third baseman of all-time.
He won ONE World Series ring.
The same number as Hank Aaron got.

Barry Bonds was a great player.
So was Elgin Baylor.
And Gale Sayers.
Ty Cobb.
No rings for any of them.

Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson both have rings. Is there anyone other that the Marino hater that thinks these 2 chuckleheads are better?

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson both have rings. Is there anyone other that the Marino hater that thinks these 2 chuckleheads are better?

I think they need to come up with a new statistic like "Irrelevant INTs" as well as "Tipped INTs".

Why should the QUARTERBACK get the entire blame when he hits a guy in the hands but it results in an interception? Or who "really" cares about a last play before halftime bomb to the end zone when you're ahead by 14 points?

 

[DzynKingRTR]

I think they need to come up with a new statistic like "Irrelevant INTs" as well as "Tipped INTs".

Why should the QUARTERBACK get the entire blame when he hits a guy in the hands but it results in an interception? Or who "really" cares about a last play before halftime bomb to the end zone when you're ahead by 14 points?

Peyton Manning has suggested this a few times during the Manningcast on MNF. He is serious and not joking.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

Michael Jordan was a fantastic basketball player.

He also never won a damn thing until Scottie Pippen showed up.

The general consensus is that Mike Schmidt is the greatest third baseman of all-time.
He won ONE World Series ring.
The same number as Hank Aaron got.

Barry Bonds was a great player.
So was Elgin Baylor.
And Gale Sayers.
Ty Cobb.
No rings for any of them.

Most great players get rings not because of them but because of the other players around them. I don't know one team sport where one player can honestly be responsible for the entire success of a team. There have been a lot of great players who didn't win rings because of the lack of other good players around them. That is why championships shouldn't be the foundational factor for anyone getting into or being left out of a HOF.

 

[tusks_n_raider]

Most great players get rings not because of them but because of the other players around them. I don't know one team sport where one player can honestly be responsible for the entire success of a team. There have been a lot of great players who didn't win rings because of the lack of other good players around them. That is why championships shouldn't be the foundational factor for anyone getting into or being left out of a HOF.

True.

The best two players I can think of individually are Gretzky in the NHL and Jordan in the NBA.

Gretzky won 4 Stanley Cups in the 80’s but he had at least 4 other HOF teammates too.

Coffey, Messier, Kurri, and Fuhr

Jordan won 6 NBA Titles but Pippen is also considered a Top 50 All Time NBA player.

The teams that won the 2nd 3-peat had Rodman who is a HOF’r and considered Top 50-75 All-Time.

Even the best of the best can’t do it completely alone.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Most great players get rings not because of them but because of the other players around them. I don't know one team sport where one player can honestly be responsible for the entire success of a team. There have been a lot of great players who didn't win rings because of the lack of other good players around them. That is why championships shouldn't be the foundational factor for anyone getting into or being left out of a HOF.

I don't think they're foundational, and that's my problem with the Eli Manning argument. Take away the "but two Super Bowls" argument, and not one person would be advocating for his induction. It's an argument born of laziness and symptom of casual fan-ness at best.

At the same time, we also have to be careful to not adopt the "championships mean nothing" regarding how good somebody is, particularly if their own performance is the undisputed difference between a championship or not. I think "won the championship" can be a solid CLOSING argument if a candidate is close to admission, but I concur we shouldn't automatically assume greatness is related to the number of championships a person won. It's much harder to win multiple championships now in sports than it has ever been between expansion diluting talent, free agency, and salary caps.

Curt Schilling is a borderline Hall of Fame case. Of the ten most similar players to Schilling, Scherzer is the only surefire inductee, although I think Greinke will get some support. Schilling never won a Cy Young, and he only placed four times in a 16-year career. He is NOT in the Greg Maddux-Pedro-Big Unit-Clemens echelon of the 1990s, and I'd rate him a cut below Tom Glavine. But Schilling's case - at least in my opinion - is one of those rare cases where what a guy did in the postseason CLINCHES the argument, but it doesn't MAKE the entirety of it.

Schilling won 3 rings and his postseason pitching numbers are 11-2 with a 2.23 ERA. That doesn’t include Mitch Williams blowing a 3-0 ninth inning lead in Game 5 of the 93 NLCS.

So he’s the rare case but let’s also note he played with guys out of the phone book in Philly. He had HOF teammates in Arizona and Boston.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

True.

The best two players I can think of individually are Gretzky in the NHL and Jordan in the NBA.

Gretzky won 4 Stanley Cups in the 80’s but he had at least 4 other HOF teammates too.

Coffey, Messier, Kurri, and Fuhr

Jordan won 6 NBA Titles but Pippen is also considered a Top 50 All Time NBA player.

The teams that won the 2nd 3-peat had Rodman who is a HOF’r and considered Top 50-75 All-Time.

Even the best of the best can’t do it completely alone.

Wilt Chamberlain’s rep was harmed because Boston’s TEAM was better than he but he was still an all-time great.

 

[jashleyren2]

True.

The best two players I can think of individually are Gretzky in the NHL and Jordan in the NBA.

Gretzky won 4 Stanley Cups in the 80’s but he had at least 4 other HOF teammates too.

Coffey, Messier, Kurri, and Fuhr

Jordan won 6 NBA Titles but Pippen is also considered a Top 50 All Time NBA player.

The teams that won the 2nd 3-peat had Rodman who is a HOF’r and considered Top 50-75 All-Time.

Even the best of the best can’t do it completely alone.

This discussion started out sarcastically, nearly went off the tracks with heated discussion, and now is very civil and making fantastic conversation for me to read! Bravo, folks!

Ok, let me interject here, as a long time sports fan. Example of TEAM being better than Individuals: Celtics, 1980's. Lakers, 1980's. Pistons, 90's before the Bulls went on a tear. Those teams all had such wonderful starting 5 combinations, and some bench as well, and coaching....Oh, how great the coaching was.

My earliest memories consist of me and my old man watching those Lakers-Celtics NBA title series. Daddy was a Kentucky man, which meant he was a basketball man. We lived in Alabama my whole life, but couldn't take the Bluegrass out of him. Anyway, Magic, Worthy, Jabbar, ...versus Bird, McHale, Parish (Big Chief). This applies in all sports, all levels.

 

[Slowpoke Catracho]

Wow!

 

[selmaborntidefan]

This discussion started out sarcastically, nearly went off the tracks with heated discussion, and now is very civil and making fantastic conversation for me to read! Bravo, folks!

Ok, let me interject here, as a long time sports fan. Example of TEAM being better than Individuals: Celtics, 1980's. Lakers, 1980's. Pistons, 90's before the Bulls went on a tear. Those teams all had such wonderful starting 5 combinations, and some bench as well, and coaching....Oh, how great the coaching was.

My earliest memories consist of me and my old man watching those Lakers-Celtics NBA title series. Daddy was a Kentucky man, which meant he was a basketball man. We lived in Alabama my whole life, but couldn't take the Bluegrass out of him. Anyway, Magic, Worthy, Jabbar, ...versus Bird, McHale, Parish (Big Chief). This applies in all sports, all levels.

That reminds me of where this all started for me about 10-12 years ago.

It went like this:


"Michael Jordan, greatest of all-time. 6-0 in the NBA Finals!"

Me:
So wouldn't that make Bill Russell the greatest player of all-time?
Even in Chicago, 11 >>>>>> 6, except maybe in a stolen primary.

Them:
"Oh, dry up, there were only 8 or 10 teams when Russell was playing!"

Me:
But that's not the argument. You BEGAN the argument by asserting the reason Jordan is the greatest is he has the most rings. But he doesn't. So you want rings to count only under certain circumstances. But since you went here, okay, Robert Horry is the greatest modern player, better than Jordan, right? He led three different teams to the championship iand won more rings, so he's better, right?


It ended at that point. And it's a stupid argument. NOBODY INCLUDING HORRY would argue he's a better player than Michael Jordan.


But if your argument is "he won X rings," he absolutely is.

 

[tusks_n_raider]

That reminds me of where this all started for me about 10-12 years ago.

It went like this:


"Michael Jordan, greatest of all-time. 6-0 in the NBA Finals!"

Me:
So wouldn't that make Bill Russell the greatest player of all-time?
Even in Chicago, 11 >>>>>> 6, except maybe in a stolen primary.

Them:
"Oh, dry up, there were only 8 or 10 teams when Russell was playing!"

Me:
But that's not the argument. You BEGAN the argument by asserting the reason Jordan is the greatest is he has the most rings. But he doesn't. So you want rings to count only under certain circumstances. But since you went here, okay, Robert Horry is the greatest modern player, better than Jordan, right? He led three different teams to the championship iand won more rings, so he's better, right?


It ended at that point. And it's a stupid argument. NOBODY INCLUDING HORRY would argue he's a better player than Michael Jordan.


But if your argument is "he won X rings," he absolutely is.

I’m biased to Jordan but I still think the GOAT tag is between him and Wilt.

They are the Top 2 PPG leaders in NBA history 1) MJ and 2) Wilt

They are both also considered Top 10-15 All-Time Defenders

Wilt is the #1 Rebounder All-Time

MJ is #4 in Total Steals and #2 in Steals per game and that’s a stat dominated by PG’s and not SG’s

So to me those two are best two Complete Players on both ends of the floor.

Dominate Scorers and Elite Defenders where Rebounds and especially Steals are kind of like INT’s and Pick 6s in FB because they lead to fast breaks and point swings and momentum changes.

The MVPs and NBA Titles are more or less Cherries on Top.