F Dan Patrick, and Peter King | Page 2 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

F Dan Patrick, and Peter King

Originally posted by Samphin
Circling, no way did Marino have more talent as a whole than this Patriots team. The entire time Marino was with Miami, they virtually had no D and running backs who broke 1000 ONCE in his career. The only position (other that qb) that Miami had more talent than New England at was at wide reciever with Duper and Clayton.

There is no way New England goes anywhere if you transfer their current team with any of Miami's teams during the Marino era. By your logic, Trent Dilfer is better than Marino, Vick, Kelly, and a whole bunch others. Please, the ring doesn't mean everything.
Click to expand...
This Pats team has a leading rusher with a grand total of 642 yards...and a leading receiver who barely broke 800 yards. btw, the #2 receiver ended up with 500 something. And the New England defense is good, but they arent dominant like the 2000 ravens or 2002 Bucs. Using the "he had no talent excuse" is a cop out. Dan had plenty of opportunities...especially when the Dolphins HOSTED the 1992 AFC Championship
 
That 1992 Buffalo team dominated the Phins D, no excuses.
 
Originally posted by Noland



That is probably true they chose the dolphins to win the SB or go to the playoffs and they always under achieve.:lol:
Click to expand...

90% of national Sports media is NY based, pair that up with the location of our 3 division rivals and bada bing bada boom!! We get dumped on, you get used to it though......

:cry:
 
I am not saying that Dan was void of talent throughout his career. He just never got it all at the same time. New England's D is plenty dominant, maybe not in the traditional sense but the disrupt plays, cause turnovers and generally put the opposing offense through hell.

I even stated that Marino had better recievers. However, your running bakc thoery doesn't hold water. We had players like Mark Higgs and Bernie Parmalee. Players who would otherwise not be in the league, bottom of the barrell types. Marino made people into players and players into names. Brady is good but no way is he better than Marino, even if he ends up with two Super Bowl rings. Again, that would, going by your theory, put him higher on the list than a bunch of quarterbacks that he has no business even being mentioned with.
 
Originally posted by Samphin
I am not saying that Dan was void of talent throughout his career. He just never got it all at the same time. New England's D is plenty dominant, maybe not in the traditional sense but the disrupt plays, cause turnovers and generally put the opposing offense through hell.

I even stated that Marino had better recievers. However, your running bakc thoery doesn't hold water. We had players like Mark Higgs and Bernie Parmalee. Players who would otherwise not be in the league, bottom of the barrell types. Marino made people into players and players into names. Brady is good but no way is he better than Marino, even if he ends up with two Super Bowl rings. Again, that would, going by your theory, put him higher on the list than a bunch of quarterbacks that he has no business even being mentioned with.
Click to expand...
my theory?...lmao..no. You made that up yourself when I held Montana in higher regard than Marino.
Yes, Marino is one of the best to ever play the game, in some circles THE best. The ring is what you play for...AND IT'S HOW YOU'RE REMEMBERED...when people say Jim Kelly, what immediately comes to mind? Great Qb, but lost 4 superbowls, NO RING. What comes to mind when they say Marino?...great qb, has all the records, but NO RING. Does this mean Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Brady, etc. are better?...no, but I would definitely put Montana ahead of him. Can't argue with success
 
Peter King is nowhere near the best sportwriter at his paper. ;)
 
Originally posted by CirclingWagons

Montana: 4-0 in Superbowls...in those games he's thrown 11tds, and 0 picks.

Enough of the crying about the "lack of talent" Marino had around him. Marino had a whole hell of alot more talent than Brady had on his 2001 team
Click to expand...

You're right. Miami's defense consistently looked as good or better than New England's in 2001. They shutdown teams like the 2001 Rams regularly. Lord knows San Francisco only managed 38 points in SB XIX. And Dan consistently had 1200 yard rushers.

You're ok man. But you're way off on this one. Way off.
 
Circling, I didn't make that thoery either. You stated in another post, that is ALL about the ring. Well, I disagree. Sure everyone wants to be known as the champs but just because you don't win it all in a TEAM game, doesn't mean individually you can't be considered on of the greatest.

I never said Montana isn't one of the greatest. In fact, I defended him being in the class of greatest qb's of all time. However, I don't see how you cna argue Miami's overall teams under Marino as being better then these Patriot teams. Clearly there is a difference in talent other than QB.
 
I've learned enough in my life to know arguements like this are pointless, because there is never a winner. Dolphins fans, Broncos fans and Niners fans will always back their boy, and what more could you really ask. Dan Marino isn't loved by the fans of all the other teams in the league or the media across this country. Dan's greatness is supported by those who loved him, thats all he can ask for, and thats all thats expected from Fins fans. To get noticabely upset over someone not thinking Dan was the greatest is absurd. Danny's single handed dominance in the NFL is untouchable, and more then enough to allow him to feel comfortable about his place in history.

This isn't the NBA here folks, where the mere mention of the initials M.J. will hault any discussion pertaining to individual greatness.

When your talking about the 4 or 5 greatest QB's to ever play in this league, there is no need to diminish one's accomplishments in order to make someone elses look better. Everyone of those guys mentioned is great in his own right. Thats enough for me.

P.S....4 years from now we'll be adding Peyton to this arguement.
 
Originally posted by Muck


You're right. Miami's defense consistently looked as good or better than New England's in 2001. They shutdown teams like the 2001 Rams regularly. Lord knows San Francisco only managed 38 points in SB XIX. And Dan consistently had 1200 yard rushers.

You're ok man. But you're way off on this one. Way off.
Click to expand...
2001 New England Patriots:

Antowain Smith: 1157 yds rushing, 12 tds

Brown: 1199 yds, 5tds
Patten: 749 yds, 4 tds

Patriots finished 6th in Points Defense(much worse in total d)


1984 Miami Dolphins:

Woody Bennett, Joe Carter, and Tony Nathan combined to rushfor over 1500 yards(an effective way to run the ball--see Philly).

Clayton: 1389 yds 18 TDS!!!
Duper: 1306, 8tds
Moore: 513, 6tds

Dolphins finished 7th in points allowed that year.

and both the Dolphins and Patriots faced the greatest offenses of their times in those superbowls
 
Originally posted by CirclingWagons
This Pats team has a leading rusher with a grand total of 642 yards...and a leading receiver who barely broke 800 yards. btw, the #2 receiver ended up with 500 something. And the New England defense is good, but they arent dominant like the 2000 ravens or 2002 Bucs. Using the "he had no talent excuse" is a cop out. Dan had plenty of opportunities...especially when the Dolphins HOSTED the 1992 AFC Championship
Click to expand...
Don't bring that one up AGAIN please...:barf:

One of the darkest days in Dolfan history. :cry:
 
Originally posted by CirclingWagons

or this year's as well
Click to expand...

Those teams definitely aren't playing the 84 49ers either
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom