But ultimately here is my problem. Anyone but drunk Giants fans and pot stirring sports fans are going to ever take Eli over Rodgers with the exception of the playoffs. Eli is basically a Hall of Famer just because of 2 games. You could make the argument that he was the 3rd best quarterback in the 2004 draft.Eli in the playoffs, Rogers at all other times.
Pretty simple answer - Tom Brady is the best.Pretty simple question. Very interested in seeing the responses.
Thats more or less my issue with this comparison. Without parameters set it seems to be “do Super Bowls matter when comparing quarterbacks” kinda question. Because Eli isn’t even in the discussion of being a HOF member without those two Super Bowls vs Brady. When there are not really any numbers separating him from Roethlisberger and Rivers, and no one is saying either are a sure fire 1st ballot HOFamers then why are we really asking the question “is Eli better than Aaron Rodgers” other than to say “Super Bowls do not equal being a great quarterback”. Super Bowls help but 2 vs 7 isn’t like arguing 4 vs 3 or 4 vs 4. I think Brady making it to 10 is something that will never be done again. Heck making it to 6 is a sign that it isn’t luck. But really Brady is more than Super Bowls. 14 Pro Bowls and 3 MVPs along with many passing records along with many hard to measure qualities to go along with it.Pretty simple answer - Tom Brady is the best.
Bill Belichick was 5-13, including 0-2 in 2001, at NE before Brady began starting in game 3 of CBB's 2nd year, averaging 10 pts per game in the first 2 losses of 2001 (I know, small sample size) - 25 per game thereafter. Brady took them to an 11-3 reg season and 14-3 SB winners overall. Many act like Brady was only a caretaker at QB - he was a Pro Bowl QB his very first season.
The numbers are different now because the game is different, but winning is the same and the thing that sets Brady's in-game performance apart, is that he is probably the greatest clutch performer in big moments in major US sports history. Even in his 3 SB losses he brought his team to the point of winning late but the other O came through or vs Phil 2 set the SB record with 500+ yards passing but was blindsided late.
And a difference between he and Eli is Eli did it twice, Brady 10 times has gotten his team there and won well you know...
I’m out of pocket for the next two days. My problem has more to do with “good and bad arguments.” I keep seeing Jan Stenerud’s name listed as undeserving.
Its funny you get some analysis from Selma, you offer none of your own, but you are mad that me and others haven’t given it. The problem is that there are over 300 names in the HOF, and many of them that you, and the sports writers have never seen or heard about. Asking Selma gets you more of an academic answer to a non hypothetical question quickly.You realize that it's possible to discuss hypothetical situations that require analysis without Selma, right?
Lighten up, Francis. I couldn't care less if anyone responds to the question, or not. I find it humorous that any time a question is posed on a topic more than 5 years old, everyone thinks Selma is the only one who could possibly answer.Its funny you get some analysis from Selma, you offer none of your own, but you are mad that me and others haven’t given it. The problem is that there are over 300 names in the HOF, and many of them that you, and the sports writers have never seen or heard about. Asking Selma gets you more of an academic answer to a non hypothetical question quickly.
But here is the problem with demanding an immediate answer from someone who doesn’t research this or constantly keep up up with the HOF. Most in the last 10 years have been legitimate. Baseball is more of a sport in which there are egregious selections. Football usually has border line guys that you can understand. Like take Lebeau for example. In no world does he go in as a player, but in every debate he goes in as a coach. But with the 5 year rule he will probably be dead before he gets in as a coach. So they voted him in solely on that line and it being a low year for nominees. But lebeau is hardly the most egregious using any parameters you could potentially make to sift out guys. I mean how the hell do we figure out the guys from the 30’s? How harshly do we judge guys that get invitations solely based on it being a down year for voting. I mean there was no change a guy was getting in this year with Peyton, Faneca, Charles Woodson,and Megatron coming out in the same year that didn’t deserve it. But you have guys like Polamalu and Edge who just happened to get in off being the best of the rest in a drought year. That’s a factor that many of these “experts” don’t take into account when ranking these HOFamers. Then you get into an era debate. From modern standards people like Namath and Stabler shouldn’t be in, but based on their era you could make a case. But it’s stuff like that.
But if you must have an answer then I will go with Namath and Lebeau (as player). But Namath was basically the Eli Manning story and Lebeau was more to make sure he didn’t die on the field without getting a HOF bust in a dry year. But you can make compelling arguments for and against either. So it’s more subjective than fact.
But what I do know is that in terms of potentially being a 1st or 2nd ballot guy, Eli would be undoubtedly the worst. Which is entirely a more contained argument, and one you don’t have to sift through over 300 people that played through 30’s and 40’s football. Because the first HOF class was in 63, and was mostly pre war era guys. Your first true first ballot guys (guys 5 years removed and getting in first chance) was in the 70’s. And it’s a very small group.
But if you really want an answer to that question that doesn’t necessarily involve just Selma then I suggest you make your own thread Instead of hide it in a thread in which only 5 people voted, and 5 people responded. Hypothetically speaking you probably would get more responses if you did.
Put the knife back in the box Miss Sharp and answer your own question, or stop whining about who answers it. Because you have two more than you originally had.. I find it humorous that any time a question is posed on a topic more than 5 years old, everyone thinks Selma is the only one who could possibly answer.