Schein: Ross is clueless and Miami has the worst quarterback corps in the league | Page 13 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Schein: Ross is clueless and Miami has the worst quarterback corps in the league

Pastornini didn't suck, he wasn't great but didn't suck. I think people think you have to be a HOFer to have success in this league. You can't compare #s of QBs of the 70s to QBs of today but they won w/ him and got the closoest that franchise(while in Houston) ever got to a SB w/ him. Of course it helped to have Earl Campbell which Sanchez never had

Why bring up Plunkett then in the discussion about being elite? You're telling me the 70s were so much different than 1980-83?
 
Pastornini didn't suck, he wasn't great but didn't suck. I think people think you have to be a HOFer to have success in this league. You can't compare #s of QBs of the 70s to QBs of today but they won w/ him and got the closoest that franchise(while in Houston) ever got to a SB w/ him. Of course it helped to have Earl Campbell which Sanchez never had

103 TDs and 161 INTs doesn't suck?
 
103 TDs and 161 INTs doesn't suck?

It was a different era, if the guy sucked would he have been starting for 9 years in Houston? You can't apply 2012 standards to the 1970s.

You don't have to be a great QB to win in this league, all that matters are wins and losses not individual #s and he was clearly helping his team win.
 
It was a different era, if the guy sucked would he have been starting for 9 years in Houston? You can't apply 2012 standards to the 1970s.

I don't know why he started so long for Houston. He didn't have a single season where he threw for more TDs than INTs. The two back to back AFCCGs you mention he threw 30 TDs and 35 INTs with a completion % around 52. That's complete ****.

You don't have to be a great QB to win in this league, all that matters are wins and losses not individual #s and he was clearly helping his team win.

I agree that you can't compare the 70s era to now. Just the same as you bringing up Jim Plunkett in comparison to Eli Manning.

---------- Post added at 12:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:36 PM ----------

It was a different era, if the guy sucked would he have been starting for 9 years in Houston?.

BTW, 103 TDs and 161 INTs sucks in every era from pee-wee football to ghosts playing in heaven. Unless we're living in Bizarro World, those numbers are putrid.
 
I don't know why he started so long for Houston. He didn't have a single season where he threw for more TDs than INTs. The two back to back AFCCGs you mention he threw 30 TDs and 35 INTs with a completion % around 52. That's complete ****.



I agree that you can't compare the 70s era to now. Just the same as you bringing up Jim Plunkett in comparison to Eli Manning.

---------- Post added at 12:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:36 PM ----------



BTW, 103 TDs and 161 INTs sucks in every era from pee-wee football to ghosts playing in heaven. Unless we're living in Bizarro World, those numbers are putrid.

again, totally different era. in '79 Bradshaw threw 1 more TD than INTs, Pat Haden led LA to the '78 NFC title game and threw 13 Tds and 19 INTs, in the '79 NFC title game it was Doug Williams(18 Tds, 24 INts) vs. Vince Ferragamo(5 Tds, 10 INTs).
 
again, totally different era. in '79 Bradshaw threw 1 more TD than INTs, Pat Haden led LA to the '78 NFC title game and threw 13 Tds and 19 INTs, in the '79 NFC title game it was Doug Williams(18 Tds, 24 INts) vs. Vince Ferragamo(5 Tds, 10 INTs).

What? Pastorini didn't have a season, A = ONE, where he threw more TDs then INTs in his entire career. The stats you just provided are for one year for each QB.

Do you not get it?
 
What? Pastorini didn't have a season, A = ONE, where he threw more TDs then INTs in his entire career. The stats you just provided are for one year for each QB.

Do you not get it?

he did have two seasons where his TDs equalled his INTs, Haden had zero full seasons, Ferragamo one. It was a completely different era, you don't start for 9 years if you stink, you don't help 2 teams to title games if you stink.

Williams had 2 full seasons where he had more Tds than INts
 
he did have two seasons where his TDs equalled his INTs, Haden had zero full seasons, Ferragamo one. It was a completely different era, you don't start for 9 years if you stink, you don't help 2 teams to title games if you stink.

Williams had 2 full seasons where he had more Tds than INts

Right. An NFL QB finishing the season with the same amounts of TDs and INTs. A remarkable achievement.

I don't even know who the hell Pat Haden is TBH. But his first two years he had 8 TDs, 4 INTs and then 11 TDs and 6 INTs the next year. The guy only had a 6 year career where somehow he went 35-19 despite a 53.6 completion % and 52 TDs 60 INTs in his total career.
 
It was a completely different era, you don't start for 9 years if you stink, you don't help 2 teams to title games if you stink.

A QB whose Houston career numbers were a record of 53-54, a 51.5 completion %, 96 TDs and 131 INTs and you're saying he didn't suck? I have no idea why Houston kept the guy so long but again most of this happened before I was even alive so I don't have any idea what their mindset was.

I mean c'mon, the guy never finished a season with a completion % above 56.7. 70s era or not, you're still supposed to complete your ****ing passes.
 
IT WAS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ERA, do you get this? why would you bring up comp %? again, the guy started for NINE seasons, helped his team to TWO title games. Not every successful QB has to be considered a great one. You cannot compare QBs of the 60s & 70s to those of today.

Johnny Unitas' career comp % was 54.6, he must have really sucked.
 
IT WAS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ERA, do you get this? why would you bring up comp %? again, the guy started for NINE seasons, helped his team to TWO title games. Not every successful QB has to be considered a great one. You cannot compare QBs of the 60s & 70s to those of today.

Johnny Unitas' career comp % was 54.6, he must have really sucked.[/QUOo
Losing 2 title games is not a big achievement in case you were not aware.
 
IT WAS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ERA, do you get this? why would you bring up comp %? again, the guy started for NINE seasons, helped his team to TWO title games. Not every successful QB has to be considered a great one. You cannot compare QBs of the 60s & 70s to those of today.

Johnny Unitas' career comp % was 54.6, he must have really sucked.

You were the one who brought up these QBs anyway, don't give me **** for your examples. You started this all by talking about Jim Plunkett. Then you bring up Pastorini, D. Williams, and whoever else you mentioned.

It's funny you have the audacity to tell me that they are different eras when it was your deflection in the first place about Eli Manning being elite.
 
Johnny Unitas' career comp % was 54.6, he must have really sucked.

Last I checked, Unitas played for 17 years and threw 37 more TDs than INTs which is more that can be said about every single QB you've mentioned in this thread from Plunkett on up.
 
LOL FOX. The entire network has become a way for out of touch morons to spread sensationalist nonsense so that other morons can view, get angry, and increase their ratings. I don't care if you're talking about sports, news, or any of the other garbage they put out, the network is a JOKE.
 
Back
Top Bottom