For Drew Brees To Be Considered One Of The Best NFL QB Of All Time (1 Viewer)

[SaintsFanInLA]

If Drew continued to put up the numbers he's had for the next 4-5 years, is he automatically in the discussion of the greatest of all time?

Or does he have to win more championships regardless of the numbers? If so, how many does he have to win in order to be legitimately in this discussion?

I don't really know how I feel about this. Because, to me Drew was the best QB in the league a few years ago even when our defense was substandard. And since he was given a defense and we won a Championship, now the pundits are giving him some serious credibility.

I don't actually think it's fair to judge athletes solely on championship rings won but I do understand it. I think Robert Horry has 7 or 8 NBA Championships but in NO WAY would I ever consider him a better or greater player than Charles Barkley or Karl Malone who both have NO rings. (Just so you understand where I am coming from.) But I do think winning a championship as a percentage of evaluating the greatness of a player has merit.

Right now, Montana and Brady are considered the creme de la creme with Peyton Manning knocking on the door of that. In fact, had the Colts won this past Super Bowl, I think many were already trying to crown him as the best QB of all time.

If Brees wins 2-4 more Super Bowl Championships, I don't think that there is any question that he would be in the Montana/Brady discussion but in your opinion what exactly would he have to do to be legitimately in that discussion?

 

[champ76]

If Drew continued to put up the numbers he's had for the next 4-5 years, is he automatically in the discussion of the greatest of all time?

Or does he have to win more championships regardless of the numbers? If so, how many does he have to win in order to be legitimately in this discussion?

Honestly, I think he needs to do both. As offenses get more pass oriented, there are going to be more and more quarterbacks putting up big numbers on occasion. So to be in the elite, you will have to put up those numbers consistently(which Drew did even in his SD days) and win championships(plural).

 

[SaintArchieManning]

Right now, Montana and Brady are considered the creme de la creme with Peyton Manning knocking on the door of that. In fact, had the Colts won this past Super Bowl, I think many were already trying to crown him as the best QB of all time.

EXCUSE ME??????

NOBODY is saying Brady is the "creme de la creme" of all-time qb's.

And Peyton is "knocking on the door"??????????????

Peyton is WAY ahead of those two.

Right now, the best 2 qb's of all-time are Favre and Manning, and when theyve both retired, it'll be Peyton by far.

This made me laugh out loud.

 

[Whodatarian9]

There are ppl who still dont consider drew brees the best QB of all time?

People are stupid.

 

[Sniper Wolf]

There are ppl who still dont consider drew brees the best QB of all time?

People are stupid.

Correct. People are stupid and Drew is earning his place in the best QB ever debates. All he has to do is continue to keep doing what he's doing. He'll probably bring home another ring or three, break a few passing records, and continue to be the all around alsome guy he is.

 

[dat dam dog]

I'll give this a shot:

Or does he have to win more championships regardless of the numbers? If so, how many does he have to win in order to be legitimately in this discussion?


I don't actually think it's fair to judge athletes solely on championship rings won but I do understand it.


Right now, Montana and Brady are considered the creme de la creme with Peyton Manning knocking on the door of that. In fact, had the Colts won this past Super Bowl, I think many were already trying to crown him as the best QB of all time.

If Brees wins 2-4 more Super Bowl Championships, I don't think that there is any question that he would be in the Montana/Brady discussion but in your opinion what exactly would he have to do to be legitimately in that discussion?

I cut down your question to only a few.


"Or does he have to win more championships regardless of the numbers?"

He has to win at least one more.


"I don't actually think it's fair to judge athletes solely on championship rings won but I do understand it. "

Its not fair I guess, but we all understand and accept it.


"In fact, had the Colts won this past Super Bowl, I think many were already trying to crown him as the best QB of all time."

Amen, and he appeared upset with the loss. So far he only has one SB win, so the mortal lock on HOF isn't a done deal yet.

To the last Q, if Drew wins "2-4" SBs, he has the mortal lock on the Hall himself himself.


ddd

 

[You]

"Greatest of all time" is a tough category. I think Championships matter to be in that category. He needs about 4 more stellar years AND at least one more championship win to cement it. If he just gets back to the Super Bowl AND has the great numbers... I say he's honorable mention at least.

Without the championships though, there's trouble getting noticed.

 

[Taurus]

If Dan Marino is in the conversation (and he is), then Drew needs to be in it, as well.

 

[SaintsFanInLA]

If Dan Marino is in the conversation (and he is), then Drew needs to be in it, as well.

Marino IS in the discussion and I was gonna mention him. Of course, the knock on him is that he never won a Championship in the NFL but he HAS the numbers.

But since Drew has the championship and will apparently have the numbers at what point does Drew HAVE to be considered in the conversation?

 

[dat dam dog]

Marino IS in the discussion and I was gonna mention him. Of course, the knock on him is that he never won a Championship in the NFL but he HAS the numbers.

But since Drew has the championship and will apparently have the numbers at what point does Drew HAVE to be considered in the conversation?

Just for the record, Marino is in the HOF.

He never won a SB, but holds a lot of passing records.

I still think both Manning and Brees need to win another SB, but I could be wrong.

Back to the OP's question: "If Drew continued to put up the numbers he's had for the next 4-5 years, is he automatically in the discussion of the greatest of all time? "

No, and neither is Marino.


ddd

 

[Slidell Mike]

I think attaching the "greatest of all time" tag to any player is really difficult. The era when a particular player was playing makes a huge difference. Brees is already in the conversation as one of the greatest QBs in his generation. And, that is pretty stiff competition when you consider Manning, Brady, and Favre. The comparisons become much more cloudy when you try to make comparisons with Marino, Elway, Montana, Bradshaw, Unitas, etc. for an "all time greatest". It is just too complex a question when you consider factors like rule changes throughout the years, complexity of defenses, overall athletic level of play, etc.

With another championship or two and 5-7 more years of similiar stats, Brees could easily be considered the greatest of his generation. But there were just too many other great quarterbacks playing in different eras to really say "all time greatest". He will definitely be an "all time great".

 

[SaintSeb]

Just for the record, Marino is in the HOF.

He never won a SB, but holds a lot of passing records.

I still think both Manning and Brees need to win another SB, but I could be wrong.

Back to the OP's question: "If Drew continued to put up the numbers he's had for the next 4-5 years, is he automatically in the discussion of the greatest of all time? "

No, and neither is Marino.


ddd

IMO, Manning doesnt need to do anything. He could retire tomorrow and be in the HoF as a first-ballot. Same applies to Brady.

 

[whodataholic]

Honestly, I think he needs to do both. As offenses get more pass oriented, there are going to be more and more quarterbacks putting up big numbers on occasion. So to be in the elite, you will have to put up those numbers consistently(which Drew did even in his SD days) and win championships(plural).

well peyton manning has great QB numbers and only has one super bowl win.. so does this mean hes not a HOF QB??

 

[dat dam dog]

Sorry folks, my fault here.

At least some of these responses are my fault. I kept mentioning "HOF", when the original question was "greatest of all time".

Then it got off topic. I think "greatest of all time" is the monkey-wrench here.

Very subjective, and all active QBs need to keep at it, none are there yet. Sorry for the mislead.


ddd

 

[CaliSaint4Life]

If Marino had a ring, he would probably be considered the best QB of all time.