California QB

[Rippers]

10 minutes ago, Exocet 98 said:

Not in over crowded ,  traffic conjested , crime ridden Santa Ana, Bellflower, Long Beach, Concord or Corona.

One of these things is not like the others,
One of these things just doesn't belong,
Can you tell which thing is not like the others
By the time I finish my song?

[Exocet 98]

27 minutes ago, Rippers said:

One of these things is not like the others,
One of these things just doesn't belong,
Can you tell which thing is not like the others
By the time I finish my song?

Your wife /sister/ mother , a zeba colored donkey and the dentist.

[ThunderRam]

11 hours ago, 1DayPGA said:

I say it because of all of Brady's accomplishments and his longevity to still be able to perform at a high level at his age.

11 hours ago, 1DayPGA said:

I say it because of all of Brady's accomplishments and his longevity to still be able to perform at a high level at his age. Combined Elway and Rodgers haven't done what Brady has done. Sure, football is a team sport but the man has 5 rings with one team. He's a 4 time SB MVP, 13 pro bowls, etc. etc.

Largely due to the fact that he's played with arguably the greatest HC of all time. A guy that has constantly found player after player that buys into the system and produces. A guy that has found ways to build offensive lines that are able to protect Brady and keep him from getting hurt. I could cite numerous examples of QB's that weren't near as fortunate and always had to run for their lives and/or kept getting injured due to all the continuous pressure and hits.

Brady had zero control over any of that. That's all on Bill Belichick and his staff.

11 hours ago, 1DayPGA said:

Except for Gronk. and Moss who you mentioned his rcvrs were/are avg. at best. Nor did he have a great RB around him like T. Davis.

You're missing my point. He didn't need those weapons. Defense and special teams generally win in the post season. Hence look at the 1st two titles the Pats won. Led by defense and special teams play. Not so oddly, the season NE had their best ever offensive talent and gaudy stats, they lost in the SB --- to a team that got after them with defense and a pedestrian offense.

Belichick has managed to consistently field teams with good special teams and opportunistic defenses, if not great.

IMO you're giving far too much credit to Brady for all those accomplishments. While he certainly contributed a lot, he's not able to be in position to contribute if his team's defenses and ST's sucked. That's what almost always let Elway, Marino and Rodgers down during the prime of their careers -- the supporting players and coaches. Brady's teammates have given him a ton of help. See Vintatieri. See the strip sack against Matt Ryan that enabled that comeback against ATL.

All of those HOF Finalists I listed were defensive players. Can't win SB's w/o good to great defense. That's precisely why NE lost last year. It didn't matter how great Brady was.

Lastly, Elway didn't have Terrell Davis (or a great defense) until he was on his last legs and far past his prime. For the bulk of his career (and Marino's) he was saddled with mediocre talent (by NFL standards) that he was able to elevate. But those teams didn't have enough talent or all around strength to beat truly good teams -- which is why they lost all those SB's and AFC Championship games.

11 hours ago, 1DayPGA said:

Truth be told I don't even like the Pats, and Montana is my all time favorite QB but I have to give credit where credit is due and that is to Tom Brady. 

And I give Tom Brady his fair share of credit. He is a great, clutch QB. I just believe he gets too much credit (same with Montana) because fans are infatuated with titles while downplaying how much of a team accomplishment it really is in the game of football. It ain't the NBA where 1 or 2 or even 3 guys can dictate team success and dominate.

I always found it odd how little acclaim Terry Bradshaw always got in comparison to Montana and now Brady. It's like people recognize how much the defense and supporting cast contributed to the Steelers 4 titles -- but they can't see the same with the 49ers and Patriots. Not so oddly, all three of those sustained dynasties were led by the greatest coaches in history -- all but proving that it's far more than the QB.

Having said all that, I'm respect your opinion and know I'm not going to convince you otherwise. I'm just explaining why I see it the way I do.

Thanks for sharing and explaining. I always find these types of discussion interesting.

 

[AztecPadre]

42 minutes ago, ThunderRam said:

Largely due to the fact that he's played with arguably the greatest HC of all time. A guy that has constantly found player after player that buys into the system and produces. A guy that has found ways to build offensive lines that are able to protect Brady and keep him from getting hurt. I could cite numerous examples of QB's that weren't near as fortunate and always had to run for their lives and/or kept getting injured due to all the continuous pressure and hits.

Brady had zero control over any of that. That's all on Bill Belichick and his staff.

You're missing my point. He didn't need those weapons. Defense and special teams generally win in the post season. Hence look at the 1st two titles the Pats won. Led by defense and special teams play. Not so oddly, the season NE had their best ever offensive talent and gaudy stats, they lost in the SB --- to a team that got after them with defense and a pedestrian offense.

Belichick has managed to consistently field teams with good special teams and opportunistic defenses, if not great.

IMO you're giving far too much credit to Brady for all those accomplishments. While he certainly contributed a lot, he's not able to be in position to contribute if his team's defenses and ST's sucked. That's what almost always let Elway, Marino and Rodgers down during the prime of their careers -- the supporting players and coaches. Brady's teammates have given him a ton of help. See Vintatieri. See the strip sack against Matt Ryan that enabled that comeback against ATL.

All of those HOF Finalists I listed were defensive players. Can't win SB's w/o good to great defense. That's precisely why NE lost last year. It didn't matter how great Brady was.

Lastly, Elway didn't have Terrell Davis (or a great defense) until he was on his last legs and far past his prime. For the bulk of his career (and Marino's) he was saddled with mediocre talent (by NFL standards) that he was able to elevate. But those teams didn't have enough talent or all around strength to beat truly good teams -- which is why they lost all those SB's and AFC Championship games.

And I give Tom Brady his fair share of credit. He is a great, clutch QB. I just believe he gets too much credit (same with Montana) because fans are infatuated with titles while downplaying how much of a team accomplishment it really is in the game of football. It ain't the NBA where 1 or 2 or even 3 guys can dictate team success and dominate.

I always found it odd how little acclaim Terry Bradshaw always got in comparison to Montana and now Brady. It's like people recognize how much the defense and supporting cast contributed to the Steelers 4 titles -- but they can't see the same with the 49ers and Patriots. Not so oddly, all three of those sustained dynasties were led by the greatest coaches in history -- all but proving that it's far more than the QB.

Having said all that, I'm respect your opinion and know I'm not going to convince you otherwise. I'm just explaining why I see it the way I do.

Thanks for sharing and explaining. I always find these types of discussion interesting.

 

What you say about the greatest HC is true. No matter what QB started, they did just as well as Brady. There's something to that.

[THEOC89]

19 hours ago, ThunderRam said:

You can add a 4th.

Troy Taylor. Graduated from Cordova HS in Rancho Cordova. Graduated from CAL.

He played in 7 games for the JETS and threw 2 TD's.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy_Taylor_(American_football)

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TaylTr00.htm

 

He's still missing guys. See my response to Pops above. Taylor began at Bella Vista HS in Fair Oaks, CA and transferred to Cordova HS in Rancho Cordova, CA from which he graduated in 1986.

Tennis' research is getting lazy --- unless this list is only including QB's that started a game rather than just played in one. I didn't see that qualification prefaced anywhere.

If you are going to add Troy Taylor then how about Mike Pawlawski from Cal who went to Troy High School in the OC! He led Cal to a 10-2 Record and a Bowl game win and #8 ranking which was their highest ranking in years!... I think he played for Tampa Bay for a a year or so....🙂

[Rippers]

6 hours ago, Exocet 98 said:

Your wife /sister/ mother , a zeba colored donkey and the dentist.

Let me steal something you said earlier somewhere:

"dumbass"

[ThunderRam]

19 hours ago, Ararar said:

Notes: This is not a list of every quarterback from a California high school who has been a back-up or has been on an NFL roster. This is a list of those who have started at least one game during one season.

 

As my last sentence indicated, that criteria wasn't outlined anywhere. That's why several others have chimed in with omissions too.

But thanks for specifying it now.

[ThunderRam]

2 hours ago, AztecPadre said:

What you say about the greatest HC is true. No matter what QB started, they did just as well as Brady. There's something to that.

Right. Matt Cassel led the Patriots to an 11-5 record in 2008 when Brady was out for the season. They lost a tiebreaker for the division to MIAMI, but they still were among the top teams.

In 2016, the team went 3–1 during Brady's suspension with Jimmy Garoppolo and Jacoby Brissett under center.

Surely they would have been better with Brady, but it just goes to show how well the rest of the team plays w/o him. It's because there's a system in place. The system > than any one player.

The 49ers used to have the same type of success when Montana or Young would miss time. Elvis Grbac. Steve Bono. Jeff Garcia. They all played well and the team generally continued to win.

[bigrobstercraws]

19 hours ago, Exocet 98 said:

Boy are you one dumb Son of a Bitch. Taking a cheap shot at the Mission Viejo FFA. The on campus farm program is primarily about bovine and equine educational curriculum. The Rancho Mission Viejo Company is a 23,000 acre working ranch, with the highest professional rodeo payout yearly. Most students enrolled have horses stabled at RMV. Name another school that provides this type of program. Not in over crowded ,  traffic conjested , crime ridden Santa Ana, Bellflower, Long Beach, Concord or Corona.

I'm glad the best football players from South OC regardless of zip code can take advantage of that working ranch

[1DayPGA]

13 hours ago, ThunderRam said:

Largely due to the fact that he's played with arguably the greatest HC of all time. A guy that has constantly found player after player that buys into the system and produces. A guy that has found ways to build offensive lines that are able to protect Brady and keep him from getting hurt. I could cite numerous examples of QB's that weren't near as fortunate and always had to run for their lives and/or kept getting injured due to all the continuous pressure and hits.

Brady had zero control over any of that. That's all on Bill Belichick and his staff.

You're missing my point. He didn't need those weapons. Defense and special teams generally win in the post season. Hence look at the 1st two titles the Pats won. Led by defense and special teams play. Not so oddly, the season NE had their best ever offensive talent and gaudy stats, they lost in the SB --- to a team that got after them with defense and a pedestrian offense.

Belichick has managed to consistently field teams with good special teams and opportunistic defenses, if not great.

IMO you're giving far too much credit to Brady for all those accomplishments. While he certainly contributed a lot, he's not able to be in position to contribute if his team's defenses and ST's sucked. That's what almost always let Elway, Marino and Rodgers down during the prime of their careers -- the supporting players and coaches. Brady's teammates have given him a ton of help. See Vintatieri. See the strip sack against Matt Ryan that enabled that comeback against ATL.

All of those HOF Finalists I listed were defensive players. Can't win SB's w/o good to great defense. That's precisely why NE lost last year. It didn't matter how great Brady was.

Lastly, Elway didn't have Terrell Davis (or a great defense) until he was on his last legs and far past his prime. For the bulk of his career (and Marino's) he was saddled with mediocre talent (by NFL standards) that he was able to elevate. But those teams didn't have enough talent or all around strength to beat truly good teams -- which is why they lost all those SB's and AFC Championship games.

And I give Tom Brady his fair share of credit. He is a great, clutch QB. I just believe he gets too much credit (same with Montana) because fans are infatuated with titles while downplaying how much of a team accomplishment it really is in the game of football. It ain't the NBA where 1 or 2 or even 3 guys can dictate team success and dominate.

I always found it odd how little acclaim Terry Bradshaw always got in comparison to Montana and now Brady. It's like people recognize how much the defense and supporting cast contributed to the Steelers 4 titles -- but they can't see the same with the 49ers and Patriots. Not so oddly, all three of those sustained dynasties were led by the greatest coaches in history -- all but proving that it's far more than the QB.

Having said all that, I'm respect your opinion and know I'm not going to convince you otherwise. I'm just explaining why I see it the way I do.

Thanks for sharing and explaining. I always find these types of discussion interesting.

 

I agree, you need great players around you and great coaching.  So the question is did Belichick and company make Brady a great QB or did Brady make Belichick look like a great coach? Prob. a little bit of both. But ,I will throw in Belichick's first go around as HC was not very successful with the Cleveland Browns. as a matter of fact he had a losing record during his tenure. Granted the Browns have been awful for forever. You make a good argument about some QB's not having a good cast around them or a good coaching staff. Except I disagree about Marino not having a good coach. Shula was one of the best coaches around. They never had that great D. but was that Shula's fault the DC 's fault or GM? That's a discussion for another day.    

As far as Bradshaw not sure why he doesn't get the love the others do. Maybe because of the times. The 70's were long ago? And Brady is still playing and there is so much more pub. with the internet. I think Montana gets a lot of love because we are in the Bay Area. I would guess some East Coast guys may not think of Montana being one of the best ever and may give more love to Bradshaw. I also think because the Steeler's D. had a cast of characters with Lambert, Ham, Greene, etc. it made them stand out more. 

[ThunderRam]

3 hours ago, 1DayPGA said:

But ,I will throw in Belichick's first go around as HC was not very successful with the Cleveland Browns. as a matter of fact he had a losing record during his tenure. Granted the Browns have been awful for forever.

The Browns were 31-33 during his 4 years there. They also went 11-5 in 1994 and made the playoffs. Not exactly a horrible tenure.

During that tenure is when Belichick and Nick Saban both developed the complex 'Red 2' defense that befuddled offenses in the red zone. They held teams to 205 points that 1994 season. Variations of that defense are still used today by pretty much every team.

I think it's safe to say that both Belichick and Saban developed the skills and styles in Cleveland that they eventually brought to their current teams.

Funny tidbit to all this is that most people wrongly believe the current Browns organization fired Bill Belichick. They didn't. The current Browns weren't born until 1999. It was when Art Modell moved the then Browns to Baltimore to become the Ravens that Belichick was fired in favor of Ted Marchibroda.

So it's too bad for the Baltimore Ravens and New York Jets (remember, he was their coach for 1 day) for the mistakes they made in not being able to retain arguably the GOAT.

 

3 hours ago, 1DayPGA said:

Except I disagree about Marino not having a good coach. Shula was one of the best coaches around. They never had that great D. but was that Shula's fault the DC 's fault or GM? That's a discussion for another day.   

Fully agree that Shula was a great coach. He's still the all-time wins leader and is in the HOF which says it all.

IMO Shula's greatest attribute was the ability to adapt to his talent. Most coaches do it one way only and their players have to adjust to that system. However, Shula would adapt his system to fit the strengths of whatever players were drafted for him. He won with run heavy teams in 60's and 70's, but also won with pass heavy QB's in Johnny Unitas and Danny Marino.

The problems Shula had during Marino's tenure were sticking with poor coordinators for too long, drafting too many busts to compliment the team, and not being able to develop a rush attack. The latter goes hand in hand with drafting too many busts. Those Miami teams just never had the all-around talent his previous teams in the 70's had. Too little defense, no run blocking and poor special teams play. But they had one of the greatest QB's in history to mask a lot of those deficiencies.

 

 

 

[sausmann9]

I didn't spend the time checking this but someone may have; anyone know how many of these quarterbacks are in the NFL HOF???  tx.