Jeff Garcia question

[sayheykid1]

First off, Garcia was a scam, the product of Terrell owens ability, and I would never even think to rate him ahead of a baller like Steve Young.

Steve>Montana is much more realistic, and IMO true. Steve got stuck with poor running games after Watters left, and Montana always had better defenses. Young was a much more polished passer, a more gifted athlete, and more prolific passer in terms of statistics. IMO a much more productive player.

It's the "rings" argument. I see that you are a Giants fan, so would you really say Cody Ross>Barry Bonds because Ross has a ring? Of course not.

First of all, I never mentioned rings. Second, I find few things to be more ridiculous than baseball and football comparisons. It isn't as bad as the comparison between passing yards and RBI that someone dropped on me here a few weeks ago but it is still ridiculous.

Steve Young and Joe Montana are a heck of a lot closer than Garcia and Young. :charlie: DUH!

I am a huge Steve Young fan but I am just fine with him being rated a bit behind Montana.

 

[h-hour]

First off, Garcia was a scam, the product of Terrell owens ability, and I would never even think to rate him ahead of a baller like Steve Young.

Steve>Montana is much more realistic, and IMO true. Steve got stuck with poor running games after Watters left, and Montana always had better defenses. Young was a much more polished passer, a more gifted athlete, and more prolific passer in terms of statistics. IMO a much more productive player.

It's the "rings" argument. I see that you are a Giants fan, so would you really say Cody Ross>Barry Bonds because Ross has a ring? Of course not.

For the two years after Watters left he had no running game. After that though, he had Hearst. Montana had no running game to work with in '81 or in '90 either. Yet he still won a title in 81 and had us in the championship game in 90..until it went to shit and he got injured. Young more productive? Yes. Better QB? NO

 

[AdjustingRoutes]

First of all, I never mentioned rings. Second, I find few things to be more ridiculous than baseball and football comparisons. It isn't as bad as the comparison between passing yards and RBI that someone dropped on me here a few weeks ago but it is still ridiculous.

Steve Young and Joe Montana are a heck of a lot closer than Garcia and Young. :charlie: DUH!

I am a huge Steve Young fan but I am just fine with him being rated a bit behind Montana.

The only argument to be made for Montana over Young is the rings argument, because Steve blows him out of the water in every other category.

And also, comparing passing yards to RBI is NOT even in the same district as comparing rings from baseball to football. WTF? The rings argument holds true in every sport. It's a silly argument when it's a team game, just like it's silly to say Barry bonds was overrated because he never won a ring. Why? BECAUSE IT'S A TEAM GAME.

 

[sayheykid1]

The only argument to be made for Montana over Young is the rings argument, because Steve blows him out of the water in every other category.

And also, comparing passing yards to RBI is NOT even in the same district as comparing rings from baseball to football. WTF? The rings argument holds true in every sport. It's a silly argument when it's a team game, just like it's silly to say Barry bonds was overrated because he never won a ring. Why? BECAUSE IT'S A TEAM GAME.

I never used the rings argument.

 

[Flyingiguana]

For the two years after Watters left he had no running game. After that though, he had Hearst. Montana had no running game to work with in '81 or in '90 either. Yet he still won a title in 81 and had us in the championship game in 90..until it went to shit and he got injured. Young more productive? Yes. Better QB? NO

no running game in 90? huh

 

[tallglassofwater007]

From Garcia > Young to Young > Montana in less than three pages...

I was gonna put my stuff in another thread but figured I would leave it in this one since the discussion had already started.

 

[AdjustingRoutes]

I never used the rings argument.

Then why would you laugh at me for saying Young is better than montana? Besides rings, what made Montana better?

 

[h-hour]

no running game in 90? huh

If Dexter Carter being the teams leading rusher with 460 yards is your idea of a good running game then thats fine with me.

 

[tallglassofwater007]

Here is a better argument.... Is Young better than Peyton Manning??

 

[Flyingiguana]

If Dexter Carter being the teams leading rusher with 460 yards is your idea of a good running game then thats fine with me.

uhm lol.

 

[sayheykid1]

Then why would you laugh at me for saying Young is better than montana? Besides rings, what made Montana better?

I wasn't really laughing at you.

 

[sayheykid1]

Here is a better argument.... Is Young better than Peyton Manning??

I think so.
Montana and Young are both on the elite level with a few others IMO and Manning is on the tier below them.

 

[Ray_Dogg]

For the two years after Watters left he had no running game. After that though, he had Hearst. Montana had no running game to work with in '81 or in '90 either. Yet he still won a title in 81 and had us in the championship game in 90..until it went to shit and he got injured. Young more productive? Yes. Better QB? NO

He had Hearst for two years with the 2nd year ending in injury then "it went to shit."

 

[Ray_Dogg]

Originally Posted by h-hour View Post
If Dexter Carter being the teams leading rusher with 460 yards is your idea of a good running game then thats fine with me.

Look at combined yardage that year instead of cherry picking. Craig also had 430. Rathman had 318. Sydney had 166. Add that to the 460 for Carter and it's not too shabby. It failed in the playoffs like Young would find out during his career.

 

[threelittleturds]

He had Hearst for two years with the 2nd year ending in injury then "it went to shit."

I'd say both years went to shit with a Hearst injury. Hearst missed the the last 3 games of the 1997 regular season, the first playoff game, and came back for that Packers game. Sure, Hearst was healthy for the last game, but a month away with no practice time definitely isn't a positive for a running game.

 

[Flyingiguana]

Originally Posted by h-hour View Post
If Dexter Carter being the teams leading rusher with 460 yards is your idea of a good running game then thats fine with me.

Look at combined yardage that year instead of cherry picking. Craig also had 430. Rathman had 318. Sydney had 166. Add that to the 460 for Carter and it's not too shabby. It failed in the playoffs like Young would find out during his career.

montana had roger craig for all but the 1st championship. montana had 3 years of 1 and done in the playoffs. young had a powerful team that had it's talent stripped away at key positions.

look at brady, he's been better than ever since he last one a championship. the talent of the team around him isn't as good overal. without the injuries, i think young would have beaten atlanta and ended up with his 2nd super bowl, but we'll never know what could have been.

 

[tallglassofwater007]

I think so.
Montana and Young are both on the elite level with a few others IMO and Manning is on the tier below them.

I think so too. Brady will make that list... so will Rodgers if he keeps it up.

 

[MW49ers5]

I think so too. Brady will make that list... so will Rodgers if he keeps it up.

What about Roethlisberger?

 

[Flyingiguana]

What about Roethlisberger?

steelers win with their d. he makes some big plays, but he's down a few rungs from the elite qb's

 

[NinerSickness]

First off, Garcia was a scam, the product of Terrell owens ability

Garcia was no HOFer like Young, but he wasn't a "scam."