Peyton Manning, Madison Avenue poster boy

I hear those kinds of arguments all the time, and they almost never ring true.

Usually it's about baseball.

"Gee, what would Kevin Mitchell do if he played in the Kingdome (or Wrigley, or Fenway)?" I heard in the mid-80s.

Well, he DID get to play in the Kingdome. And played like crap.

"Gee, what would Roger Clemens do if he got to pitch in some place other than Fenway?"

Well, he DID pitch in a lot of other places. And his effectiveness was about the same in every place he pitched.

I will argue that Marino's numbers would have been WORSE had he played for the 49ers. To me it's simple.

--- First of all, Rice and Taylor weren't a quantum leap better than Clayton and Duper. Better? Yes. But not to the degree that it would have made an iota of difference in Marino's stats.

--- The 49ers could run the ball. Which means fewer passes.

--- The 49ers rarely had to stage second-half rallies. Marino had to all the time. Was good at it . . . but playing from behind and without a running game forced him to put up numbers that he never would have had to on a different team.

 

Agree that the numbers would have been worse. That said, the tradeoff would have been a Super Bowl ring or two.

 

Absolutely. Because he would have been on the best team.

That's usually how it works.

 

Brett Favre now and Archie Manning back in the day -- examples of how you might be the best QB in the game, but if you don't have the supporting cast to match, you won't win that ring. Marino (no ground game) and Peyton Manning (weak defense) are in another class above that, where the supporting cast is good enough to get so far in the playoffs, but not all the way.

 

Colts' defense, while better last year, was still mainly smoke and mirrors.

It took about 5 minutes of watching the Steelers mow through them on their first two drives to realize that nothing has really changed.

Doesn't matter. Montana was a third-round draft pick. Who the fuck cares?

When Marino threw the ball to Clayton, Clayton caught it. Period. Had Marino thrown the ball to Rice, Rice would have caught it, too.

Doesn't mean Marino's stats would have been any better. And as we have pointed out, he would have only been throwing 20-25 times a game (instead of 40). So his stats would have been worse.

When Wilt Chamberlain finally played on a championship-caliber team (1967), his stats were much worse than they had been early in his career.

Because he wasn't asked to carry the team. Duh.

Same thing would have happened to Marino had he been on the 49ers.

 

Your QB rating will be better.

But that doesn't translate to across-the-board cumulative numbers (yards and TDs) being better.

Let's say Montana increases his average per pass by 1.5 yards.

After 20 passes, he has a whopping 30 more yards.

But if he throws just three fewer passes . . . his total yards are about the same. And I'm pretty sure Marino would have thrown 10+ fewer passes per game had he been a 49er.

And finally . . . Marino had a ton of touchdown passes simply because the Dolphins could not punch it in by running. Doubt he would have had that problem in San Francisco.

 

Joe Montana forever! [/Fat Joe]

 

Of course, if that's what he's saying, it would immediately make the short list of Stupidest SportsJournalists.com Posts Ever.

 

I don't think he was saying Elway wasn't "really anything" until then. It was just, I think, saying Elway got way too much credit for Super Bowl titles that TD basically won.

 

That's pretty much what I thought he was getting at. And, as big an Elway fan as I am, I won't argue with it. Elway said many times that once Davis started going nuts that his (Elway's) only job was to pick up 3rd downs. That's downplaying his role, a little, but it also shows how great Davis was.

 

mustardbased, based on the eight offensive words that make up one clause in your post, I have to say I can never speak to you again.

Thank you for your understanding.