All time QBs

[albionmoonlight]

Probably worthy of its own thread in the wake of all of the discussion that happened after Brees broke the TD record.

My personal top 10 list

1. Brady
2. Brees
3. Manning
4. Montana
5. Unitas
6. Graham
7. Marino
8. Elway
9. Favre
10.Rogers

[QuikSand]

It's brutally hard to try to precisely place players I haven't seen. Otto Graham didn't retire as a superstar but he's a guy who is flattered by metrics. But, how do you adjust for era? I have no idea whether he's number 4 or 24 in a sterile, neutral setting. Sid Luckman? Sammy Baugh?

Separating out players from systems is equally vexing. Montana used to be the top answer for the #1 spot. But he was inarguably a system guy, as a meaningful component to his success. The top three guys in the history of ever all played in the last generation? That's quite a coincidence that they came along during the passing-game-eats-world phase, too, right?

Also totally unsure how much to weight team accomplishments. And key performances. And leadership, intangibles, mobility, playcalling.

Not trying to be unfair. Just observing the inherent difficulties.


My eyes tell me that Peyton Manning is the most complete QB I ever saw, and that Dan Marino was, for lack of a better term, just the "most" ever. I feel like if we stripped away all the effects of scheme and personnel and era, and whittled this conversation down to bare essentials... those two might be the top of my heap.

[Warhammer]

From the guys I have seen and the separation between them and their peers, I still put Montana in the top spot. A lot of people always throw in the caveat of Jerry Rice. Montana won two Super Bowls with Dwight Clark and Freddie Solomon as his top two wideouts. Who was his RB when they won Super Bowl XVI? Wendell Tyler was their top running back in '84.

I would probably place Marino next. As QS said, he was the top everything. I think he narrowly beats out Manning, who was the modern Marino.

I think Graham is not given enough credit. He had Brown towards the end of his career. Graham had won 3 NFL titles and 4 AAFC titles before Brown was even drafted.

The ones I struggle with are Unitas and Brady. The Patriots still won big when Brady was out, they may not have won the Super Bowl, but they made the playoffs. Without Manning, the Colts imploded. The Broncos have not been nearly as good since he retired.

I did not see any of Unitas in his day, outside of highlight films, so it is hard to compare him to his peers.

[spleen1015]

For someone to be considered an all time great, Brees has a lot more losing seasons than everyone else on that list.

QBs get too much responsibility for wins and loses, but some of these cases, there are glaring difference. Brees has had quite a few 7-9/8-8 seasons.

Manning & Brady have had quite a few 11/12/13 win seasons.

It has to mean something.

[Edward64]

Of the ones I've actually seen play, I will begrudgingly give it to Brady. We can question the Patriots greatness as a team because of the cheating but for QB, Brady is the guy.

The next series would be Montana, Brees, Manning & Bradshaw. Montana and Bradshaw for the SB wins and Brees & Manning for the records.

[ColtCrazy]

I agree with the QB wins thing as being an overrated metric. Long list of Super Bowl winning QBs that had solid defenses to support them. Every Brady, Montana, and Bradshaw Super Bowl win was backed by a top 10 scoring defense.

Eras. Teams. Etc. I think it's impossible to definitely say who was the best, so it comes down to preference. For me, I'd go:
1. Montana
2. Manning
3. Marino
4. Brees
5. Brady
6. Favre
7. Elway
8. Rogers
9. Stabler
10. Fouts
Would change if I was simply listing QBs I liked.

[jbergey22]

1. Dan Marino
2. Peyton Manning
3. Tom Brady
4. Joe Montana
5. John Elway
6. Aaron Rodgers
7. Drew Brees
8. Brett Favre
9. Dan Fouts
10.Johnny Unitas(could have made a case for Fran Tarkenton, Steve Young, or Troy Aikman here as well)

Never really saw any of Fouts or Unitas so that is based off reputation and stats.

I feel Dan Marino was so far ahead of his time when it came to passing. He was putting up video game numbers in a time where 3 yards and a cloud of dust was the main offense of most teams. I put zero stock in the fact he didnt win a super bowl. All other variables equal Dan is man.

Drew Brees gets a lower ranking because of the Saints and my dislike of that team(even more than the Packers).

[Arles]

As a GB fan, I don't think you can put Favre over Rodgers. Both have 1 SB, but Rodgers' numbers are significantly better:

AR - 12 seasons - 46,407 yards, 362 TDs (6.1%), 82 INT (1.4%), 7.8 ypa, 102.9
BF - 19 seasons - 71,838 yards, 508 TDs (5.0%), 336 INT (3.3%), 7.1 ypa, 86.0

Even if Rodgers slips in his final 4-5 seasons, I can't see him falling below Brett. Brett is a bit like Cal Ripken Jr: extremely durable and consistent, but a lot of his HoF status is due to his high totals due to durability. I also don't get Fouts over Moon. Moon had a high ypa, better TD % and INT %.

I would go:

1. Tom Brady
2. Dan Marino
3. Peyton Manning
4. Joe Montana
5. Drew Brees
6. Aaron Rodgers
7. John Elway
8. Johnny Unitas
9. Brett Favre
10. Warren Moon

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Arles

As a GB fan, I don't think you can put Favre over Rodgers. Both have 1 SB, but Rodgers' numbers are significantly better:

AR - 12 seasons - 46,407 yards, 362 TDs (6.1%), 82 INT (1.4%), 7.8 ypa, 102.9
BF - 19 seasons - 71,838 yards, 508 TDs (5.0%), 336 INT (3.3%), 7.1 ypa, 86.0

Even if Rodgers slips in his final 4-5 seasons, I can't see him falling below Brett. Brett is a bit like Cal Ripken Jr: extremely durable and consistent, but a lot of his HoF status is due to his high totals due to durability. I also don't get Fouts over Moon. Moon had a high ypa, better TD % and INT %.

I would go:

1. Tom Brady
2. Dan Marino
3. Peyton Manning
4. Joe Montana
5. Drew Brees
6. Aaron Rodgers
7. John Elway
8. Johnny Unitas
9. Brett Favre
10. Warren Moon

Forgot about Warren Moon. That dude slipped through the cracks of history a bit b/c he had to spend that time in Canada

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

The ones I struggle with are Unitas and Brady. The Patriots still won big when Brady was out, they may not have won the Super Bowl, but they made the playoffs. Without Manning, the Colts imploded. The Broncos have not been nearly as good since he retired.

Incorrect. In the past 17 seasons (including this year), the Patriots have only failed to win their division and make the playoffs once. That was in 2008 when Brady was injured and Cassel was the starter.

Now, they did go 11-5 that year, including 10-5 in games that Cassel started. But I will point out that there is a significant difference between Matt Cassel and Curtis Painter/Dan Orlovsky/39-year-old Kerry Collins. I mean, Cassel also managed to go 10-5 as a starter two years later in Kansas City with Todd Haley as a head coach!! I think Matt Cassel would have had a winning record in Indy just like Curtis Painter would have also been awful in New England.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

It's brutally hard to try to precisely place players I haven't seen. Otto Graham didn't retire as a superstar (the superstar was Jim Brown) but he's a guy who is flattered by metrics. But, he did have Jim Brown. I have no idea whether he's number 4 or 24 in a sterile, neutral setting. Sid Luckman? Sammy Baugh?

Separating out players from systems is equally vexing. Montana used to be the top answer for the #1 spot. But he was inarguably a system guy, as a meaningful component to his success. The top three guys in the history of ever all played in the last generation? That's quite a coincidence that they came along during the passing-game-eats-world phase, too, right?

Also totally unsure how much to weight team accomplishments. And key performances. And leadership, intangibles, mobility, playcalling.

Not trying to be unfair. Just observing the inherent difficulties.


My eyes tell me that Peyton Manning is the most complete QB I ever saw, and that Dan Marino was, for lack of a better term, just the "most" ever. I feel like if we stripped away all the effects of scheme and personnel and era, and whittled this conversation down to bare essentials... those two might be the top of my heap.

I agree and to add to it simply comparing QBs that played a few years apart can be difficult. Manning and Marino are probably the best in what they brought to the table, but reading through this thread one player that hasn't been mentioned is Steve Young. I'd argue Young was a better QB than Montana, but who the hell knows.

We can all compile a list of the best quarterbacks to play, but actually ranking them is something with a degree of difficulty we don't see in other sports.

Favre and Rodgers - Despite one coming along right after the other Rodgers has played in a more QB friendly league.

Marino - those didn't watch him play can point out that he failed to complete 60% of his passes and threw more than 250 picks. 10 years from now how are you going to convince anyone that he was better than Ben Roethilsberger or Phillip Rivers?

Elway - Similar to Marino (56% completions and 300/226 TD/INT ratio)

Most rank Unitas in the top 5, but I've never seen him play and his numbers don't exactly jump out because I don't have any context to really put them in.

In no particular order:
Marino
Manning
Brady
Brees
Young
Rodgers
Elway
Favre
Warner

I liked Moon, but I just think the guys I listed were better QBs. I think both the Bengals QBs (Ken Anderson and Boomer) are underrated.

Montana is the obvious guy missing there, but I honestly believe Montana benefited more from situation and timing than any QB in NFL history. Rice is arguably the best player to ever put on pads, but Bill Walsh changed the way football is played and Montana sat above the curve for a good portion of his career. If we look at players as "system neutral" I'd take every player on my list above over Montana. I'm not saying Montana wasn't a great QB, but I do wonder if there really was much, if anything, separating him from a Jim Kelly or Warren Moon other than opportunity.

Warner is probably the most controversial of the choices, but what he did from age 36-38 with Arizona showed that what he was able to do with Martz wasn't a fluke.

[cuervo72]

Am...I reading PFR wrong? I see no overlap of Graham ('46-'55) and Brown ('57-'65).

[pbot]

Of the ones I saw play I've separated into tiers and listed in somewhat of an order within the tiers.

Quarterbacks/thinkers:
Brady
Manning
Montana

Throwers:
Marino
Fouts

Marino had a gun and probably the fastest release I can remember seeing. Fouts in the early 80's ran a juggernaut offense that would just outscore everyone. I haven't looked at his stats, so compared to today's players they probably look unimpressive, but for the era he was a stud.

Athletes:
Young
Rodgers
Elway

Elway may be the best athlete I can recall at the position, but he loses points for refusing to play for the Colts and basically sealing their fate in Baltimore. Not that I wouldn't have done the same thing if I were him, but if he wasn't traded I wonder if maybe the Colts would've stayed in Baltimore.

[EagleFan]

1. Foles
2. Foles
3. Foles
4. Foles
5. Foles
6. Foles
7. Foles
8. Foles
9. Foles
10. Foles

[MizzouRah]

Peyton Manning is #1 for me, but Drew Lock is a close 2nd.

[Edward64]

(Let's do RB next)

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Edward64

(Let's do RB next)

Walter Payton or GTFO

[Silver Owl]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Am...I reading PFR wrong? I see no overlap of Graham ('46-'55) and Brown ('57-'65).

You are correct Jim Browns QB's were Milt Plum and Frank Ryan with Tommy O'Connell his first season ... no Otto Graham

[CU Tiger]

I think the most interesting 'Does he belong' candidate is Aikman.

On one hand 3 Superbowls is a pretty elite class.

On the other he had Emmitt, but the argument has long been posited that Emmitt wasnt an all time great he just had a great line and was on a great team. So if he wasnt an ATG RB how much does that discount Aikman.

While was Irvin was a top 5-10 WR at the time he was never the most dominant WR in the league and they rarely had a real #2 other than the TE.

It seems the argument is always circular that none of the 90s Cowboys were that great, they were just dominant because they were on a great team. But someone had to be the straw that stirred, right?

[LastWhiteSoxFanStanding]

Jimmy Johnson?

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by LastWhiteSoxFanStanding

Jimmy Johnson?

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

Won one with Switzer and Jimmy Johnson was so awesome at Miami..

[revrew]

1. Brady
2. Montana
3. Graham
4. Manning
5. Brees
6. Unitas
7. Elway
8. Marino
9. Moon
10. Rogers

Honorable Mention: Starr, Staubach, Young, Bradshaw, Aikman

So, to me, a QB who drives his team to wins is worth more than one who merely puts up points. Hence, Philip Rivers isn't even on my radar, while Staubach ranks much higher than his stats would merit. I don't buy the "system" QB argument much at all.

So Brady is the GOAT, without argument, for me. Montana and Graham also rank high. Marino ranks lower than Elway to me, not because Elway was the superior passer (he definitely wasn't), but because Elway took bad teams to the SuperBowl on his back, and Marino couldn't, even with Shula as coach.

At the same time, I can't deny the skill of Manning and Brees, of Moon and Rogers, who also make my list more on talent than success.

But I gotta throw out props to the less heralded Bart Starr, who it just pained me not to put on this list. Starr has the highest postseason passer rating (104.8) of any quarterback in NFL history and a postseason record of 9–1. I think he may be criminally underrated by this forum.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

But someone had to be the straw that stirred, right?

I mean that offensive line was just beast. But I think Aikman was Stafford if he played on the Lions. Emmitt was LaVeon Bell in todays NFL with maybe a bit more toughness. Micheal Irvin probably someone like Keenan Allen. All of them very good to great players but with them playing all together with that line it just made them all excellent.

Nothing against Aikman, because he did great at what he was suppose to do, but he would have his fullback and tight end seemingly wide open on every play action pass.