T1B

amazing!! you guys cant even follow simple logic. Once its playoff time, if a great quarterback has an average or poor defense, he aint winning shit. Bart starr and terry bradshaw benefitted greatly by being on teams with sick defenses and strong running attacks.

Dan Marino is so much better a quarterback than either terry or bart, its not even close. Anyone with a football brain will tell you this as well.

If terry bradshaw or bart starr had the defense that dan marino's dolphins had? Neither of them makes the playoffs even.
The only reason The miami dolphins make the playoffs and the super bowl is because of Dan marino's arm. Thats how bad their defense was.

Neither bart starr or terry bradshaw had the arm to lead a team with a shitty defense to the super bowl.
Same thing with Brett Favre, from 2000 to 2007, the reason the packers even make the playoffs is on the arm of favre.

If Favre doesnt have 3 td's in his super bowl win over new england, you might have a point. BUT, because he performed on the biggest stage, and came up with 3 td's, you have zero credibility in here.

AND, the rule in the NFL rings true, defense wins championships, barry sanders postseason record sucks compared with emmitt smith's YET, anyone with half a brain will tell you that emmitt isnt half the running back barry was.
same thing with favre, You dont put up sick numbers like favre without being a great quarterback.
BUT, to win multiple NFL titles? you gotta have the total team complete with defense as well.

That '96 Packer defense was ranked #1 in the NFL, you horrendous moron.

bradhusker wrote:

poptart wrote:

brad wrote:2006 indianapolis great defense

2009 new orleans great defense

Wrong and wrong.

In fact, both of those defenses were well below NFL average.

Indy was 21st in yds allowed and 23rd in pts allowed.
NO was 25th in yds allowed and 20th in pts allowed.


What both of those teams had was an outstanding QB who didn't piss down his leg in postseason.

Get it? :wink:

sorry poptart, you cherry picked a couple of categories, but a defense is much more than that, and new orleans led in defensive scoring, which is HUGE, and in takeaways, which again is HUGE.
hows that feel to be punked?

again, its the rule, have there been some exceptions to this rule? sure, BUT, the rule stands, and if im correct, that indy defense in 06 was ferocious at sacking the quarterback, and one of the fastest defenses in the NFL. AND, 09 new orleans? if im correct, they led the league for defensive scoring and takeaways, both of which are HUGE.

As for Favre? I stand by his performance on the biggest stage of all, 3 td's in the super bowl, which, if you take away his 3 td's, they lose the game, thats a FACT!
It doesnt get any more clutch than that.

bradhusker wrote:As for Favre? I stand by his performance on the biggest stage of all,

And all the other times he stepped on his dick and personally screwed his team right the fuck out of the playoffs?

I didn't cherry pick, 'tardhusker, but YOU did.

You went to the sack and turnover stats to try to backup your claim about the "GREAT" defenses NO and Indy had.

All I did was use the two most fundamental standards by which defenses are routinely evaluated to disprove your initial assertion.

Indy of '06 and NO of '09 were great because NO was #1 in the league in scoring in '09 and Indy was #2 in scoring in '06.
It sure as shit wasn't because of the GREAT defenses they fielded.

What you tried to sell to us was laffable and it's no wonder you're being laffed out of this thread and this forum.

Get your shit together if you want to come in here running your dickslurper like this place is Elvis.

poptart wrote:I didn't cherry pick, 'tardhusker, but YOU did.

You went to the sack and turnover stats to try to backup your claim about the "GREAT" defenses NO and Indy had.

All I did was use the two most fundamental standards by which defenses are routinely evaluated to disprove your initial assertion.

Indy of '06 and NO of '09 were great because NO was #1 in the league in scoring in '09 and Indy was #2 in scoring in '06.
It sure as shit wasn't because of the GREAT defenses they fielded.

What you tried to sell to us was laffable and it's no wonder you're being laffed out of this thread and this forum.

Get your shit together if you want to come in here running your dickslurper like this place is Elvis.

ok, just hold on one minute there sparky, I did say its the RULE, but there have been exceptions.
I know you heard me say that buddy. SO, you then listed a couple exceptions to that rule? correct?
BUT, its STILL the rule, DEFENSE wins championships, SO, who is stepping on his dick now? huh buddy?

oh, and your two exceptions are pretty shaky, considering New orleans was a terror in 09, wreaking havvoc with their defense and leading in takeaways.
and, Indy had a ferocious pass rush and one of the fastest defenses in the NFL.
SO, this takes us back to the original debate on FAVRE. I am not alone when I say that FAVRE is one of the BEST quarterbacks that the NFL or any fuckin football league has ever, or will ever see again in their lifetimes!
Brett FAVRE was destined for greatness the moment he first put on a male supporter. THERE is no doubt that he is among just a handful of QUARTERBACKS who are considered the best of all time!
NOW, if you dis-agree with what I have just said, THEN its YOU who will be laughed the fuck right out of this forum!

are we on the same page here scooter? Cause this isnt rocket science here. Ive been following big time NFL football for decades now, and ive seen them all. and, ive compiled a list here to show you who the BEST EVER are. and guess what? It has nothing to do with super bowl rings, Just who the best fuckin QB's of all time are, so sit back and bend over, cause here it is, these are the BIG COCKS!
in no particular order.

steve young
peyton manning
johnny unitas
dan marino
brett favre
joe montanna
warren moon
john elway
tom brady

now, are there others? maybe, why isnt terry bradshaw on the list? cause he was mediocre at best.
and if you dis-agree with that then you are one dumb retard.
why isnt bart starr on that list or fran tarkenton or joe willie namath? Because the guys I chose fuckin destroy them, thats why.
what about ken the snake stabler, or joe theisman? or how about jim kelly? or maybe Y A title or otto graham? we can debate all night.
Bottom line? for all his faults, Brett Favre kicks your pussy ass, he is a GIANT in the sport, having eclipsed all Dan's major career marks. AND, anyone who can play 20 years in the modern era with the size strength and speed of defenses? and not miss a single game?
That is the very definition of cock and balls TOUGHNESS! choke on that for a while.

turdhusker wrote:ok, just hold on one minute there sparky, I did say its the RULE, but there have been exceptions.
I know you heard me say that buddy. SO, you then listed a couple exceptions to that rule? correct?
BUT, its STILL the rule, DEFENSE wins championships, SO, who is stepping on his dick now? huh buddy?

I didn't post exceptions to the rule.
I posted in response to what YOU said, numbnut.

I didn't make you spout this nonsense...

YOU dont win super bowls with an average defense, or hadnt you got that memo?

examples,
2000, baltimore ravens, sick ass defense,
2001 new england patriots, great defense
2002, tampa bay,,, sick ass defense
2003 new england, great defense
2004 new england great defense
2005 pittsburgh great defense
2006 indianapolis great defense
2007 NY giants, great defense
2008 pittsburgh great defense
2009 new orleans great defense
2010 green bay great defense

to be clear, these super bowl champs shared one thing in common, their defenses ranked at the top each year.

Shove that up your @ss sideways, idiot.

We're done here.

poptart wrote:

turdhusker wrote:ok, just hold on one minute there sparky, I did say its the RULE, but there have been exceptions.
I know you heard me say that buddy. SO, you then listed a couple exceptions to that rule? correct?
BUT, its STILL the rule, DEFENSE wins championships, SO, who is stepping on his dick now? huh buddy?

I didn't post exceptions to the rule.
I posted in response to what YOU said, numbnut.

I didn't make you spout this nonsense...

YOU dont win super bowls with an average defense, or hadnt you got that memo?

examples,
2000, baltimore ravens, sick ass defense,
2001 new england patriots, great defense
2002, tampa bay,,, sick ass defense
2003 new england, great defense
2004 new england great defense
2005 pittsburgh great defense
2006 indianapolis great defense
2007 NY giants, great defense
2008 pittsburgh great defense
2009 new orleans great defense
2010 green bay great defense

to be clear, these super bowl champs shared one thing in common, their defenses ranked at the top each year.

Shove that up your @ss sideways, idiot.

We're done here.

to be CLEAR here, I did say there are exceptions to the rule, BEFORE you put up Indy and NO, SO, in effect, when you listed the two exceptions, it made me look really GOOD. And, in hindsight, makes you look all the more a complete fucktard.

I know football, so before you picked out Indy and NO, I already knew your move, before you did, Its fuckin amazing that you FAIL to see that! Youve been taken out to the woodshed by me, and as a result, you take your marbles and run home crying like you have a full load of shit in your pants.
Dont come back until you can run with the BIG DOGS. Go back with the sisssies where u belong!!

Why do y'all insist upon feeding this shit troll?

I agree.

Go Coogs' wrote:Why do y'all insist upon feeding this shit troll?

shit troll? a shit troll is someone who doesnt know what the fuck they're talking about. I am the opposite of that, I do know what the hell I am talking about.
are you too dumb to realize the difference?

Shit troll is a shit troll.

bradhusker wrote:

Go Coogs' wrote:Why do y'all insist upon feeding this shit troll?

shit troll? a shit troll is someone who doesnt know what the fuck they're talking about. I am the opposite of that, I do know what the hell I am talking about.
are you too dumb to realize the difference?

...exactly...shit troll

shit troll or not, wrong or right, at least some discussion has been churned up.

Hey brad, where do you rank Lenny "The Cool" Dawson?

War Wagon wrote:shit troll or not, wrong or right, at least some discussion has been churned up.

Hey brad, where do you rank Lenny "The Cool" Dawson?

ya know what? Len Dawson was great for the chiefs, However I did leave a lot of Qb's out, If I had to say?? Top 20, also, I left out Kurt warner, who is also great. Sonny jurgenson, Y A title, Staubach, Dan Fouts!! Obviously my list is subjective, but, I am proud of it.
To me there are "system" Quarterbacks, and there are "lone wolf" quarterbacks. The lone wolfs would do well no matter where they landed, system types thrive in and under a coaches system, for some reason, I think that Bart Starr needed to be under Lombardi's care and guidance, whereas, Favre could be dropped in the middle of a bloody suny vs. al Queda pick up game, with road side bombs all around, and the "IRON MAN " would've thrived. thrown 4 td's and been MVP of those filthy terrorist maggotts. His wranglers might have gotten torn up, but he would have walked away just fine.

OK, fine, label me a fuckin troll, but remember, Im a troll who knows what he's fuckin talkin about.
well, at least 90 percent of the time anyway, thats not too bad a track record, is it?

Dawson was a legitimately great QB.

Led the AFL in TD passes 4 times and led the AFL in passer rating 6 times.
He was a smart player in an era when QBs actually had to call their own game from the field.
He did a good job in the playoffs and even went the distance to win a Super Bowl.
His playoff resume would look even better if he hadn't had to endure the fucking up Oakland gave him in the playoffs in '68, though.
0 TDs and 4 INTs.

haha - had to get that in there.

Interesting about Dawson, and similarly of some others of that era - is that he was a #5 overall draft pick ---> and then basically sat on the bench for 5 whole seasons, gettin' his learnin'.

Ain't the way it works in this day and age.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:That '96 Packer defense was ranked #1 in the NFL, you horrendous moron.

NO KIDDING moron!! BUT, after that? year by year it was all downhill buddy boy, the packers got back to the playoffs year after year on the golden arm of Favre.

some years, the packers gave up over 300 plus points!!!

Bradshaw and Starr benefitted greatly from sick defenses for a decade. in fact, we are talking legendary ALL TIME defenses.

ITS not even close, in the decade of the 2000's, the packers main source for making the playoffs was quite simply, FAVRE.

As you saw this past week, brad, Brent Favre is a selfish little bitch. Steven A. Smith called him the most selfish player in the NFL the past 10 years. Favre said he was surprised that Rodgers didn’t win a Super Bowl sooner. Well, Brent, he might have if you had the sense to retire a bit sooner. Of course, Rodgers took the high road and said it was all about the team.

I think Brent is worried about his legacy in Green Bay, and well he should be. Rodgers will have a street named for him before Brent ever will. Aaron Rodgers has class, and that’s something Brent Favre will never have.

Goober McTuber wrote:As you saw this past week, brad, Brent Favre is a selfish little bitch. Steven A. Smith called him the most selfish player in the NFL the past 10 years. Favre said he was surprised that Rodgers didn’t win a Super Bowl sooner. Well, Brent, he might have if you had the sense to retire a bit sooner. Of course, Rodgers took the high road and said it was all about the team.

I think Brent is worried about his legacy in Green Bay, and well he should be. Rodgers will have a street named for him before Brent ever will. Aaron Rodgers has class, and that’s something Brent Favre will never have.

Nice try goober, Rodgers has had 2 concussions already, 1 more, and he is done. He is a frail lil girl, who wont last much longer, MARK it down, and take it to the bank, the guy will get his bell rung, HARD, and when that happens, he wont get a street named for him, he will get a feeding tube and napkins to stop the dribble.

FACE IT buddy boy, this guy isnt tough enough to take another blow to the noggin, and that blow is comin soon gooby tooby.

As for Favre? He is all swagger and bad ass, he is the KING! Holds all the career passing records, and was a tough son o bitch for 20 years. A champion with attitude! And when Rodgers gets his teeth knocked down his throat, which will be sooner than you realize, I will open a "cold one", and celebrate it.

Rodgers is not tough like Favre, Rodgers is like a precious lil girl, and he wont last much longer. Wait and see budddy, you'll see that I am usually correct on things about the NFL.

I see into the future, and its not too good for your rodgers boy.

Yes, we all saw your prognostication skills during the run up to Nebraska-Wisconsin. Brent Favre. Third best quarterback in Green Bay history, just ahead of Arnie Herber.

Goober McTuber wrote:Yes, we all saw your prognostication skills during the run up to Nebraska-Wisconsin. Brent Favre. Third best quarterback in Green Bay history, just ahead of Arnie Herber.

again, when you post about Favre, people are laughing at your stark stupidity, you are a laughingstock,
AND, what I said about Rodgers being like a soft girl is ringing true, he wont last, he's already faced concussions "head on", no pun intended, and, his next one will spell the end of his run, NO WHERE near Favre's legendary 20 year run without a missed game.

RIGHT NOW, in minnesota, we are witnessing just how GREAT Favre was, in the "noodle girly " arm of McNabb. The guy isnt even as old as Favre, and his arm is like a lil' girls. McNabb is only 35? SHIT, at the ripe old age of 40, The legendary Brett Favre was leading the NFL in passer rating, Throwing guided lasers up and down the field, almost making it to the super bowl, and would have if Childress didnt let there be 12 men on the field with seconds remaining and already in FG range.

Favre at 40 was fully displaying a rifle arm, while Mcnabb at just 35, throws like a cute lil girl.

As for your "man crush" on aaron rodgers? One more hit, and he is done.

...enough of the "lil girl" fetish Bradley...gheesh, you've already painted yourself a blithering imbecile in this thread, for God's sake spare us anything of your juvenile cravings.

ChargerMike wrote:...enough of the "lil girl" fetish Bradley...gheesh, you've already painted yourself a blithering imbecile in this thread, for God's sake spare us anything of your juvenile cravings.

sorry mike, after that idiot goober posts that Favre sucks? and you dont think thats an example of a blithering idiot?
That tells me you agree with the stupidity of a goober, and, frankly paints you as the same as him.
I use descriptive words like lil girl, to show goober what an idiot he is for thinking that Favre sucks.

then, instead of calling goober out for his total stupidity, you call me the idiot?
fuck off, dumb arse

bradhusker wrote:

ChargerMike wrote:...enough of the "lil girl" fetish Bradley...gheesh, you've already painted yourself a blithering imbecile in this thread, for God's sake spare us anything of your juvenile cravings.

sorry mike, after that idiot goober posts that Favre sucks? and you dont think thats an example of a blithering idiot?
That tells me you agree with the stupidity of a goober, and, frankly paints you as the same as him.
I use descriptive words like lil girl, to show goober what an idiot he is for thinking that Favre sucks.

then, instead of calling goober out for his total stupidity, you call me the idiot?
fuck off, dumb arse

...Bradley..goobs and the rest of the crew plungered you about two pages ago, since then it's simply turned into a major pile-on...you knew that right?

bradhusker wrote:NO KIDDING moron!! BUT, after that? year by year it was all downhill buddy boy, the packers got back to the playoffs year after year on the golden arm of Favre.

some years, the packers gave up over 300 plus points!!!

Brad, Favre was the starting QB for the Pack from '92 - '07, and in that time, GB was in the top 10 in defense 6 times.
And in fact, the Packer defense during that time was only ranked 20th or worse 3 times.
Over that period of years, the Packer defense averaged out to 11th in the league.
Brent was generally supported pretty well by his defense.

From '99 to '04, he WAS hindered by some subpar defensive support - and the team got over a lot of times just on HIS ability.
You're right about that.

Hey, he is a legendary player and a clear-cut 1st ballot HOFamer.
Tremendous durability and he won a shitload of games.

He also happened to cr@p the bed a few times in the playoffs.

It is what it is.

Brad, Favre was the starting QB for the Pack from '92 - '07, and in that time, GB was in the top 10 in defense 6 times.
And in fact, the Packer defense during that time was only ranked 20th or worse 3 times.
Over that period of years, the Packer defense averaged out to 11th in the league.
Brent was generally supported pretty well by his defense.

Yes, and the year the Packers DID win with Favre? The defense was ranked #1 in the league.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Brad, Favre was the starting QB for the Pack from '92 - '07, and in that time, GB was in the top 10 in defense 6 times.
And in fact, the Packer defense during that time was only ranked 20th or worse 3 times.
Over that period of years, the Packer defense averaged out to 11th in the league.
Brent was generally supported pretty well by his defense.

Yes, and the year the Packers DID win with Favre? The defense was ranked #1 in the league.

And the MVP of that game was a guy on special teams...

Shoalzie wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Brad, Favre was the starting QB for the Pack from '92 - '07, and in that time, GB was in the top 10 in defense 6 times.
And in fact, the Packer defense during that time was only ranked 20th or worse 3 times.
Over that period of years, the Packer defense averaged out to 11th in the league.
Brent was generally supported pretty well by his defense.

Yes, and the year the Packers DID win with Favre? The defense was ranked #1 in the league.

And the MVP of that game was a guy on special teams...

ok, BY YOUR OWN POST, you wear your stupidity on your sleeve. Favre had 3 td's in the super bowl.
WHICH MEANS, that if you take away Favre's 3 td's, THEY LOSE THE GAME, you dumb fuck tard.
If you take away Howard's return for a td??? THEY STILL WIN MORON!!! SO, in answer to who was more valuable? FAVRE WAS. Based soley on the facts, take away his 3 td's, they lose.

Now, is your brain too stupid to understand that ????

What is so miraculous about throwing 3 tds in a football game? :?

Favre is on a very long list of guys that could've done that.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:What is so miraculous about throwing 3 tds in a football game? :?

Favre is on a very long list of guys that could've done that.

no, dont misunderstand me here, there is nothing miraculous about his 3 td's, (1 run 2 pass)
My point was that without his td's, green bay loses the game, pretty factual.
Howard has a miraculous return for a td, BUT, green bay still wins the game without it.
SO, which is more valuable? I go with Favre's 3 td's. seeing as without Favre's 3 td's. they LOSE the super bowl.

Isnt that the meaning of the word valuable?

Favre's stat line from that Super Bowl:

14-27-246-2-0
Sacked 5 times.

It's a decent day, but not that great, honestly.


Howard had 244 return yards in that game - on 10 touches.
And he gave NE the backbreaker with the 99 yd kickoff return TD in the 3rd quarter.

Howard consistently gave GB field position.

poptart wrote:Favre's stat line from that Super Bowl:

14-27-246-2-0
Sacked 5 times.

It's a decent day, but not that great, honestly.


Howard had 244 return yards in that game - on 10 touches.
And he gave NE the backbreaker with the 99 yd kickoff return TD in the 3rd quarter.

Howard consistently gave GB field position.

AGAIN, you lost the arguement, without howards td, green bay still wins the game!!
Without Favre's 3 td's (2 pass 1 run) THEY LOSE THE GAME!!
Is your brain too stupid to understand that?
VALUABLE means that your TD's caused you to ultimately WIN THE GAME! Favre had 3, Howard had 1.

I guess your brain is too tiny to follow that.
VALUABLE, Favre 3 scores ultimately wins the game for green bay.
howard 1 score.

without Favre's 3 scores, green bay LOSES THE GAME.
without Howards 1 score, green bay STILL WINS the game.

wow, ur stupid.

Brad, it's not really sensible to place the TDs alone inside a bubble - and separate them from the rest of the game - like you are trying to do.

But whatever...

I couldn't care less who was MVP of that game.

bradhusker wrote:Rodgers is like a precious lil girl, and he wont last much longer.

Meanwhile, he continues to shred NFL defenses and is no doubt the best QB in the league by a wide margin. He didn't look much like a girl when he was throwing for 4 TD's and rushing for 2 more in that demolition of the Doinks last week.

Go fuck yourself, bradley.

poptart wrote:Brad, it's not really sensible to place the TDs alone inside a bubble - and separate them from the rest of the game - like you are trying to do.

But whatever...

I couldn't care less who was MVP of that game.

dont get me wrong pop, Howard was freakin amazing that game, Its just that I am a Favre Fan, and a wrangler guy as well, HECK, I was wearin wranglers long before I turned pro on this board.

War Wagon wrote:

bradhusker wrote:Rodgers is like a precious lil girl, and he wont last much longer.

Meanwhile, he continues to shred NFL defenses and is no doubt the best QB in the league by a wide margin. He didn't look much like a girl when he was throwing for 4 TD's and rushing for 2 more in that demolition of the Doinks last week.

Go fuck yourself, bradley.

dont get me wrong war, rodgers is fuckin amazing, However, he's already had a couple concussions, so, ALL im sayin is that he's on borrowed time. ONLY a tough guy IRON MAN like Brett Favre can go 20 years without missing a single game. Ya follow? Catch my drift? OR, am I being obtuse?

Rodgers has already matched Favre with the one title in only 3 years as a starter versus Favre's 6th year and at a younger age overall. He's not played long enough to win 3 MVPs, 8 division titles, go to 5 NFC titles games and get to 2 Super Bowls but Favre never got back to the Super Bowl after the age of 28. What good is an iron man streak if you don't win in the final dozen years of your career?

Shoalzie wrote:Rodgers has already matched Favre with the one title in only 3 years as a starter versus Favre's 6th year and at a younger age overall. He's not played long enough to win 3 MVPs, 8 division titles, go to 5 NFC titles games and get to 2 Super Bowls but Favre never got back to the Super Bowl after the age of 28. What good is an iron man streak if you don't win in the final dozen years of your career?

What good is it shoalzie? You really have to ask that question? OK, I'll explain it to you. It seems that there is this frenzy about winning multiple titles, which I think is brought on by the loser NBA.
WELL GUESS WHAT? That may be important in the loser sport of professional basketball, BUT, in the supreme sport of football in the NFL? not so much.

Terry Bradshaw won 4 titles, YET, for anyone who actually knows football? Next to Dan Marino, he is a shitty quarterback. Dan Marino has zero titles, BUT, when looking at who I would draft as a head coach?
Its a no-brainer, ANY head coach worth his salt would draft Dan Marino over terry bradshaw every day of the week, and twice on sundays, and not give a seconds thought about it afterward.

Same thing with Favre, sure he won 1 title, but again, he is light years a better quarterback than terry bradshaw with 4 titles, AGAIN, Stop for a moment, and realize that winning super bowls is a product of the team you were blessed to be on.

From my vantage point, The only reason Brett doesnt take the vikings to the super bowl is because that piece of shit Brad childress allows 12 men on the field when they were ALREADY in FG range with seconds remaining.

NOW, as to your point about the IRON MAN STREAK? ALL those great legendary quarterbacks to ever play in the NFL?? Unitas, Montanna, Manning, Staubach, Brady, Fouts, Warner, Graham, Title, Jourgenson, Brees, Moon, Kelly, etc...They ALL got hurt and missed games, cry me a river.
Its the most dangerous job, you are a target, you have a giant bullseye on your back. The mere fact that Favre made it 20 fuckin years is miraculous in and of itself. For all the hundreds or thousands of QB's to have ever suited up, and only one can go 20 years without missing a single game? In the most violent of all sports?
Sounds pretty fuckin amazing to me.
See, you need to get out of this NBA mentality which says you need titles to be great. I know that barry sanders is the best fuckin running back that ive ever seen in my entire life, and he has zero titles.

Back to Bradshaw, take him off those great steelers teams? He'd never be remembered for a single thing, just an average qb AT BEST, Favre, on the other hand? He would've been a great QB no matter which team he landed on. Because he had the skills, the rifle arm, the gunslinger mentality, the wranglers, HELL, he had the TOTAL PACKAGE for gods sake.

Does that clear things up a little?

The streak didn't last 20 years...if you're gonna wash his balls, at least get the numbers right. The streak went 17 full seasons and parts of two others...why the need to exaggerate an unbreakable record?

The Bradshaw defense is such a tired argument...there are several forgettable QBs that have rings...while guys like Marino or Fouts don't have one. It doesn't make them bad QBs but it's a big hole in the resume.

Don't bring up the NBA...a league where two franchises have won more than half of the championships and 42% of the finals appearances since 1950. The Lakers have nearly as many runner-up years (15) as the next 4 teams with the most titles behind the Celtics and Lakers have championships (16).

Shoalzie wrote:The streak didn't last 20 years...if you're gonna wash his balls, at least get the numbers right. The streak went 17 full seasons and parts of two others...why the need to exaggerate an unbreakable record?

The Bradshaw defense is such a tired argument...there are several forgettable QBs that have rings...while guys like Marino or Fouts don't have one. It doesn't make them bad QBs but it's a big hole in the resume.

Don't bring up the NBA...a league where two franchises have won more than half of the championships and 42% of the finals appearances since 1950. The Lakers have nearly as many runner-up years (15) as the next 4 teams with the most titles behind the Celtics and Lakers have championships (16).

Shoalzie, NOW its YOU who are talking out of your ass, so to speak. you said, "A BIG hole in their resume"???
BULLSHIT! And thank you for bringing up Dan Fouts, He is also light years better than terry bradshaw.
OH, and dont call it a "tired argument", Bullshit once again.
If I can be accused of exxaggeration, then you can be accused of spewing BULLSHIT all over the place.

I dont have to wash Brett Favre's balls, Maybe in your eyes I do, BUT, to the football establishment, the guy is remarkable and legendary. Owns all the career records, superbowl champion, and, most surely, one of the top 5 QB's ever to play the game.

I have a short list here, and people who know football agree with me here, (in no particular order).
Montanna
Marino
Elway
Favre
Manning
Brady
NOW, what about Unitas, Graham, Title, Jurgenson, and a bunch of others?
Who gives a fuck?
The game when Favre played, is without a doubt the most violent, the fastest, and defenses are physically bigger and stronger than at anytime in history.
Favre not only had to play against these defenses for 20 years, BUT, he didnt miss a single game against these superior athletes of today, THATS ASTONISHING.
You can live in denial, but the defenses that Unitas and staubach and bradshaw and tarkenton and all those QB's from yesteryear faced? slow, small, and weak compared to what Favre had to face.

How you gonna argue against that? I'd love to see you try.