Skip to Next Poll »
20
Worst superbowl quarterback starter (Edited 05/03/08 03:44PM by Seth)
| Closed on 07/05/08 at 11:45PM
FanIQ Pts? No | NFL | Multiple Choice Opinion Poll
Team Breakout:
81 Fans 
1%a. Joe Kapp (iv Vikings)
2%b. Craig Morton (v Cowboys, xii Broncos)
0%c. Billy Kilmer (vii Redskins)
2%d. Vince Ferragamo (xiv Rams)
5%e. David Woodley (xvii Dolphins)
9%f. Tony Eason (xx Patriots)
2%g. Stan Humphries (xxix Chargers)
7%h. Neil O' Donnell (xxx Steelers)
4%i. Chris Chandler (xxxii Falcons)
16%j. Trent Dilfer (xxxv Ravens)
5%k. Kerry Collins (xxx Giants)
1%l. Rich Gannon (xxxvii Raiders)
40%m. Rex Grossman (xli Bears)
5%n. Other: (Please List)

 &nbp;
TOP COMMENT * * * * * * * * * * * *
#1 | 2205 days ago

I just picked the only girl on the list
Rex Grossman (xli Bears)  
  
53 Comments | Sorted by Most Recent First | Red = You Disagreed
Vote for your favorite comments. Fans decide the Top Comment (3+ votes) and also hide poor quality comments (4+ votes).
#1 | 2205 days ago

I just picked the only girl on the list
Rex Grossman (xli Bears)  
#2 | 2205 days ago

Yup...Eason was pretty awful. He wasn't even good OUT of the Super Bowl either.

I DID like seeing who got the #10 spot though...it's nice to see someone else acknowledge what I've been saying for years.
Other: (Please List)  
#3 | 2205 days ago

How come Roethlisberger was on ESPN's list, but you left him off of yours? That was pretty disappointing.
Other: (Please List)  
#4 | 2205 days ago

Pat wrote:
How come Roethlisberger was on ESPN's list, but you left him off of yours? That was pretty disappointing.
He hasn't had enough time to prove himself yet. Also he's a better general QB than most of the listed non-rememberable players.
Tony Eason (xx Patriots)  
#5 | 2205 days ago

Pat wrote:
How come Roethlisberger was on ESPN's list, but you left him off of yours? That was pretty disappointing.
Maybe that's because Ben didn't single-handedly throw away the game.
Neil O' Donnell (xxx Steelers)  
#6 | 2204 days ago
vindog (+)

forgot about Tony Eason; the only QB in NFL history to not complete at least 1 pass in a Superbowl game>>>>.

Trent Dilfer (xxxv Ravens)  
#7 | 2204 days ago

Had to put mr fumbleitis Morton in at number one. Craig was practically worthless for the Broncos in that game, against his former team, the Cowboys.

Of course, losing two super bowls for two different teams doesn't help, but considering he had no TDs and 4 picks in the second Super Bowl.

 

Craig Morton (v Cowboys, xii Broncos)  
#8 | 2204 days ago
JRE1969 (+)

David Woodley sucked, this should be a lay-up, come on people.
David Woodley (xvii Dolphins)  
#9 | 2204 days ago

grossman besides odonnel probably had tha best stats outta all of em(thats jus at tha top of my head didnt look at tha stats)
Rich Gannon (xxxvii Raiders)  
#10 | 2204 days ago

kramer wrote:
Maybe that's because Ben didn't single-handedly throw away the game.
But he damn sure tried, didn't he?
Other: (Please List)  
#11 | 2204 days ago

Pat wrote:
But he damn sure tried, didn't he?
Hmm, the guy I picked threw 3 interceptions, 2 directly to the same guy, which both led to TDs.  No, he really wasn't even close.
Neil O' Donnell (xxx Steelers)  
#12 | 2204 days ago

kramer wrote:
Hmm, the guy I picked threw 3 interceptions, 2 directly to the same guy, which both led to TDs.  No, he really wasn't even close.
For the record, the only reason Ben didn't actually cost them the game was the officiating...easily the worst in SB history.
Other: (Please List)  
#13 | 2204 days ago

Pat wrote:
For the record, the only reason Ben didn't actually cost them the game was the officiating...easily the worst in SB history.
For the record, Matt Hasselbeck and Mike Holmgren didn't help matters either...and neither did Josh Brown.  Last time I checked, they weren't the refs.
Neil O' Donnell (xxx Steelers)  
#14 | 2204 days ago

kramer wrote:
For the record, Matt Hasselbeck and Mike Holmgren didn't help matters either...and neither did Josh Brown.  Last time I checked, they weren't the refs.
I'm not saying they were stellar...only that the officiating was bad enough that it could have made the difference. I believe it's safe to say that neither team really DESERVED to walk away with a trophy after that game. Easily the most miserable Super Bowl game I've ever witnessed.
Other: (Please List)  
#15 | 2204 days ago

I know there were questionable calls on both sides of the ball, the problem is people fail to realize 2 things when it came to the Seahawks scoring.

1. Josh Brown missed 2 field goals in a dome, and distance wasn't his problem.

2. Hasselbeck called audibles to Holmgren at the end of both halves.

The Seahawks were marching right down the field at the end of the first half, and I believe they could've scored a TD pretty easily if they wouldn't have wasted time with the audibles.  That would be 17 points, add up the 6 points for the 2 FGs Josh Brown kicks through the uprights if he had any sense of accuracy, and that's 23 for the Seahawks.  The officiating wasn't the greatest, but the Seahawks couldn't cap off a drive because of their own mistakes which weren't called as penalties, although Holmgren & Hasselbeck should've been penalized for stupidity with those audibles.  I believe that cost Seattle 7 points at the end of the first half.

Neil O' Donnell (xxx Steelers)  
#16 | 2204 days ago

Man I wish I could say Jim Hart, but my Cards never even sniffed a super bowl
Tony Eason (xx Patriots)  
#17 | 2204 days ago

Im still not sure why Rex is in the NFL?
Rex Grossman (xli Bears)  
#18 | 2202 days ago

How 'bout these doozies:

 

- Earl Morrall, SB 3.     6 outta 17 for 71 yards, 0 TD, 3 int, passer rating of 9.3

- Kerry Collins, SB 35.     15 outta 39 for 112, 0 TD, 4 int, passer rating of 7.1

- Fran Tarkenton, SB 9.    11 outta 26 for 102, 0 TD, 3 int, passer rating of 14.1

- John Elway, SB 24.     10 outta 26 for 108, 0 TD, 2 int, passer rating of 19.4

(and the worst for last, in terms of lowest QB rating ever in a SB)

- Craig Morton, SB 12.     4 outta 15 for 39, 0 TD, 4 int, passer rating of 0.    Yup....zero !

 

For the record, Grossman was 19 outta 28 for 165, 1 TD, 2 ints, rating of 68.3.      Could've been better, but certainly not the worst. 

 

Woodley SB 17, 4 outta 14 for 97, 1 TD, 1 int, rating of 50

Roethlesberger (spell check...) SB 40, was 9 outta 21 for 123, 0 TD, 2 int, rating of 22.6.

Dilfer SB 35, 12 outta 25 for 153, 0 TD, 1 int, rating of 50.9

Kilmer SB 7, was 14 outta 28 for 104, 0 TD, 3 int, rating 19.6

Elway (again) SB 22, 14 outta 38 for 257, 1 TD, 3 int, rating 36.8

Eason SB20, was 0 outta 6, obviously 0 yards, rating 39.6 (0 ints saved his @ss).     (In fact, Eason holds the   record for most passes in a SB without a completion)

 

The defense rests..............         

 

 

David Woodley (xvii Dolphins)  
#19 | 2202 days ago

I never liked him as the tv show, "Hulk", either.
Vince Ferragamo (xiv Rams)  
#20 | 2202 days ago

I should have went O'Donnell, but he played awesome for the Cowboys!
Rex Grossman (xli Bears)  
#21 | 2202 days ago

derms33 wrote:
I should have went O'Donnell, but he played awesome for the Cowboys!
I wanted to PQ this so bad, but damnit I laughed.
Neil O' Donnell (xxx Steelers)  
#22 | 2201 days ago

I had to go w/ Collins.  Seriously, I think he got into a bad way w/ some worse people, and threw the game.  Twice it said he threw 4 ints, but I remember 5.  Of course, by the end of that night I was pretty well trashed.
Kerry Collins (xxx Giants)  
#23 | 2199 days ago

kwheels wrote:
grossman besides odonnel probably had tha best stats outta all of em(thats jus at tha top of my head didnt look at tha stats)
Rich Gannon? Really? How can you call him the worst to ever start a Super Bowl?
Rex Grossman (xli Bears)  
#24 | 2199 days ago

I don't really think there is a competition here. Grossman takes it hands down. How he is still an NFL QB is beyond me.
Rex Grossman (xli Bears)  
#25 | 2199 days ago

Keeter wrote:

How 'bout these doozies:

 

- Earl Morrall, SB 3.     6 outta 17 for 71 yards, 0 TD, 3 int, passer rating of 9.3

- Kerry Collins, SB 35.     15 outta 39 for 112, 0 TD, 4 int, passer rating of 7.1

- Fran Tarkenton, SB 9.    11 outta 26 for 102, 0 TD, 3 int, passer rating of 14.1

- John Elway, SB 24.     10 outta 26 for 108, 0 TD, 2 int, passer rating of 19.4

(and the worst for last, in terms of lowest QB rating ever in a SB)

- Craig Morton, SB 12.     4 outta 15 for 39, 0 TD, 4 int, passer rating of 0.    Yup....zero !

 

For the record, Grossman was 19 outta 28 for 165, 1 TD, 2 ints, rating of 68.3.      Could've been better, but certainly not the worst. 

 

Woodley SB 17, 4 outta 14 for 97, 1 TD, 1 int, rating of 50

Roethlesberger (spell check...) SB 40, was 9 outta 21 for 123, 0 TD, 2 int, rating of 22.6.

Dilfer SB 35, 12 outta 25 for 153, 0 TD, 1 int, rating of 50.9

Kilmer SB 7, was 14 outta 28 for 104, 0 TD, 3 int, rating 19.6

Elway (again) SB 22, 14 outta 38 for 257, 1 TD, 3 int, rating 36.8

Eason SB20, was 0 outta 6, obviously 0 yards, rating 39.6 (0 ints saved his @ss).     (In fact, Eason holds the   record for most passes in a SB without a completion)

 

The defense rests..............         

 

 

I took this post to be the worst QB overall to start a Super Bowl... not which QB had the worst game in a Super Bowl. And, as much as I wanted to vote Woodley or Dilfer ... overall, GRossman ended up with my vote.
Rex Grossman (xli Bears)  
#26 | 2199 days ago

Keeter wrote:

How 'bout these doozies:

 

- Earl Morrall, SB 3.     6 outta 17 for 71 yards, 0 TD, 3 int, passer rating of 9.3

- Kerry Collins, SB 35.     15 outta 39 for 112, 0 TD, 4 int, passer rating of 7.1

- Fran Tarkenton, SB 9.    11 outta 26 for 102, 0 TD, 3 int, passer rating of 14.1

- John Elway, SB 24.     10 outta 26 for 108, 0 TD, 2 int, passer rating of 19.4

(and the worst for last, in terms of lowest QB rating ever in a SB)

- Craig Morton, SB 12.     4 outta 15 for 39, 0 TD, 4 int, passer rating of 0.    Yup....zero !

 

For the record, Grossman was 19 outta 28 for 165, 1 TD, 2 ints, rating of 68.3.      Could've been better, but certainly not the worst. 

 

Woodley SB 17, 4 outta 14 for 97, 1 TD, 1 int, rating of 50

Roethlesberger (spell check...) SB 40, was 9 outta 21 for 123, 0 TD, 2 int, rating of 22.6.

Dilfer SB 35, 12 outta 25 for 153, 0 TD, 1 int, rating of 50.9

Kilmer SB 7, was 14 outta 28 for 104, 0 TD, 3 int, rating 19.6

Elway (again) SB 22, 14 outta 38 for 257, 1 TD, 3 int, rating 36.8

Eason SB20, was 0 outta 6, obviously 0 yards, rating 39.6 (0 ints saved his @ss).     (In fact, Eason holds the   record for most passes in a SB without a completion)

 

The defense rests..............         

 

 

I too didn't look at this as the worst Super Bowl stats by a QB. I don't think that is the question. I simply answered based on (just like majikmanseven) the worst overall QB to start a Super Bowl.
Rex Grossman (xli Bears)  
#27 | 2199 days ago

OK, good point - then I really like my Woodley pick....let's analyze (leading into their SB):

 

- Grossman:   54.3% completions, 27 TD/26 int, rating 71.7

- Woodley:   53.6% completions, 31 TD/38 int, rating 65.4

- Ferragamo:   47.6% completions, 7 TD/12 int, rating 53.8

- Eason:   57.1% completions, 35 TD/30 int, rating 79.4

- Dilfer:    56.9% completions, 82 TD/91 int, rating 72.0

- Collins:    53.7% completions, 81 TD/88 int, rating 70.9

 

Realistically, you could choose just about any one of these.     I would say, though, that Ferragamo & Woodley appear to be the worst, with the others close behind.     I'm not supporting Rex mind you - believe me, I've watched everyone of his games (I think), and he has (without a doubt) the biggest swings between good games & bad ones.      The main reason for that though, is that he rarely throws a pass less than 10 yards.    He really is more of a throw-back (no pun intended) to 30+ years ago, when there was no "West Coast Offense". 

 

Was Kenny Stabler a good QB ?     He threw 194 TD's, and also threw 222 int's.     How 'bout Terry Bradshaw ?    212 TD's, with 210 int's.    Ever hear of Joe Namath ?     173 TD's, with 220 int's.     Again, I'm not trying to defend Rex; heck, every game he makes a throw and I'm yelling "NO" while the ball is still in the air !      But, to say he's the worst, when looking at numbers and not how someone feels about him, I think is a stretch. 

 

But....to each his own !!       Great poll, great discussion !     

 

David Woodley (xvii Dolphins)  
#28 | 2199 days ago

Keeter wrote:

OK, good point - then I really like my Woodley pick....let's analyze (leading into their SB):

 

- Grossman:   54.3% completions, 27 TD/26 int, rating 71.7

- Woodley:   53.6% completions, 31 TD/38 int, rating 65.4

- Ferragamo:   47.6% completions, 7 TD/12 int, rating 53.8

- Eason:   57.1% completions, 35 TD/30 int, rating 79.4

- Dilfer:    56.9% completions, 82 TD/91 int, rating 72.0

- Collins:    53.7% completions, 81 TD/88 int, rating 70.9

 

Realistically, you could choose just about any one of these.     I would say, though, that Ferragamo & Woodley appear to be the worst, with the others close behind.     I'm not supporting Rex mind you - believe me, I've watched everyone of his games (I think), and he has (without a doubt) the biggest swings between good games & bad ones.      The main reason for that though, is that he rarely throws a pass less than 10 yards.    He really is more of a throw-back (no pun intended) to 30+ years ago, when there was no "West Coast Offense". 

 

Was Kenny Stabler a good QB ?     He threw 194 TD's, and also threw 222 int's.     How 'bout Terry Bradshaw ?    212 TD's, with 210 int's.    Ever hear of Joe Namath ?     173 TD's, with 220 int's.     Again, I'm not trying to defend Rex; heck, every game he makes a throw and I'm yelling "NO" while the ball is still in the air !      But, to say he's the worst, when looking at numbers and not how someone feels about him, I think is a stretch. 

 

But....to each his own !!       Great poll, great discussion !     

 

"Was Kenny Stabler a good QB ?     He threw 194 TD's, and also threw 222 int's.     How 'bout Terry Bradshaw ?    212 TD's, with 210 int's.    Ever hear of Joe Namath ?     173 TD's, with 220 int's."

No, those guys weren't that good. Not nearly as good as people try to make them sound.
Other: (Please List)  
#29 | 2199 days ago

Well......with 6 Super Bowl wins between them, I'd have to say that those 3 (Stabler, Bradshaw, Namath) WERE pretty good QB's.      Maybe not among the all-time best, but likely in the tier below.
David Woodley (xvii Dolphins)  
#30 | 2199 days ago

Keeter wrote:
Well......with 6 Super Bowl wins between them, I'd have to say that those 3 (Stabler, Bradshaw, Namath) WERE pretty good QB's.      Maybe not among the all-time best, but likely in the tier below.
But football's not an individual sport. So that's pretty irrelevant.
Other: (Please List)  
#31 | 2198 days ago

Pat wrote:
"Was Kenny Stabler a good QB ?     He threw 194 TD's, and also threw 222 int's.     How 'bout Terry Bradshaw ?    212 TD's, with 210 int's.    Ever hear of Joe Namath ?     173 TD's, with 220 int's."

No, those guys weren't that good. Not nearly as good as people try to make them sound.
I don't know if I'd say that... these qb's played long before the dawn of the west coast offense. Today, QB stats are padded with dump offs, screens, etc.... back then... with Stabler and bradshaw it was much more of a vertical passing game, higher risk...and thus the int's. I think Stabler should be in the HOF.... the guy was simply a winner and a very tough guy.
Rex Grossman (xli Bears)  
#32 | 2198 days ago

kramer wrote:
Hmm, the guy I picked threw 3 interceptions, 2 directly to the same guy, which both led to TDs.  No, he really wasn't even close.

Neil was being paid by Jerry Jones, I'm sure he's got a complementary Super Bowl ring for that one.

 

Neil O' Donnell (xxx Steelers)  
#33 | 2198 days ago

wachson wrote:

Neil was being paid by Jerry Jones, I'm sure he's got a complementary Super Bowl ring for that one.

 

No, he just choked...hence why my thoughts on Grossman were that he "pulled a Neil O'Donnell."
Neil O' Donnell (xxx Steelers)  
#34 | 2198 days ago

Whatever dude it was simply a comment in jest, be easy
Neil O' Donnell (xxx Steelers)  
#35 | 2198 days ago

wachson wrote:
Whatever dude it was simply a comment in jest, be easy

I knew you were joking around, but it still hurts after all these years.

Neil O' Donnell (xxx Steelers)  
#36 | 2198 days ago

majikmanseven wrote:
I don't know if I'd say that... these qb's played long before the dawn of the west coast offense. Today, QB stats are padded with dump offs, screens, etc.... back then... with Stabler and bradshaw it was much more of a vertical passing game, higher risk...and thus the int's. I think Stabler should be in the HOF.... the guy was simply a winner and a very tough guy.

Agree with the 'today QB stats are padded'.     I think the whole 'rating system' needs to be re-analyzed.     The system in place now places (IMO) too much emphasis on completion percentage.     A QB can go 3 for 3, for a total of 9 yards (their team has to punt), and that QB would have a higher rating than a QB who went 1 for 3 for 10 yards.    

 

A system is needed that rates/compares QB's to QB's of their time (year), for as the 'game has changed' (new philosophies, rule changes, etc.), comparing something like QB stats becomes much more subjective than objective......

David Woodley (xvii Dolphins)  
#37 | 2198 days ago

Keeter wrote:

Agree with the 'today QB stats are padded'.     I think the whole 'rating system' needs to be re-analyzed.     The system in place now places (IMO) too much emphasis on completion percentage.     A QB can go 3 for 3, for a total of 9 yards (their team has to punt), and that QB would have a higher rating than a QB who went 1 for 3 for 10 yards.    

 

A system is needed that rates/compares QB's to QB's of their time (year), for as the 'game has changed' (new philosophies, rule changes, etc.), comparing something like QB stats becomes much more subjective than objective......

I think that 3 for 3 and 9 yards is BETTER for the QB individually than 1 for 3 and 10 yards. I realize the net yardage (and the result of the plays) is better for the one with 10 yards, but in that case, it seems like the blame would lie on the receivers, more than the QB. I'd much rather take my chances with the guy who's more consistent.
Other: (Please List)  
#38 | 2198 days ago

(Edited by Keeter)

So, in your argument, the QB who did not get the first down is better than the one who did ??    

 

How consistent does one need to be when they're throwing the ball about as far as I can pee ?!     

 

I can throw a screen pass to the RB, or the trendy "WR Screen", and hope they break a tackle and get the now-infamous "yards-after-catch".     Now THERE'S a stat that really helps the QB - the QB throws the ball about 20 feet, and if the WR/RB can break some tackles and gain 20 yards, the QB's stats show (1-for-1, 20 yards).     Looks good in a box score, but in reality it's about the same as an extended hand off......

 

Last time I checked, it was better to get first downs than not.      Maybe I'll devise a new QB rating system; one that directly correlates to the # of punts your team makes !!!          

 

David Woodley (xvii Dolphins)  
#39 | 2198 days ago

Keeter wrote:

So, in your argument, the QB who did not get the first down is better than the one who did ??    

 

How consistent does one need to be when they're throwing the ball about as far as I can pee ?!     

 

I can throw a screen pass to the RB, or the trendy "WR Screen", and hope they break a tackle and get the now-infamous "yards-after-catch".     Now THERE'S a stat that really helps the QB - the QB throws the ball about 20 feet, and if the WR/RB can break some tackles and gain 20 yards, the QB's stats show (1-for-1, 20 yards).     Looks good in a box score, but in reality it's about the same as an extended hand off......

 

Last time I checked, it was better to get first downs than not.      Maybe I'll devise a new QB rating system; one that directly correlates to the # of punts your team makes !!!          

 

Like I said...in THAT example, obviously the one who makes the 10 yard play leaves his team in a better situation...THAT time. But overall, I think that completion percentage is a very important stat. Not THE most important, but still very important. The more often he is able to get the ball in his WR or RB's hands, the more likely it is that his team will do well.
Other: (Please List)  
#40 | 2197 days ago

Keeter wrote:

So, in your argument, the QB who did not get the first down is better than the one who did ??    

 

How consistent does one need to be when they're throwing the ball about as far as I can pee ?!     

 

I can throw a screen pass to the RB, or the trendy "WR Screen", and hope they break a tackle and get the now-infamous "yards-after-catch".     Now THERE'S a stat that really helps the QB - the QB throws the ball about 20 feet, and if the WR/RB can break some tackles and gain 20 yards, the QB's stats show (1-for-1, 20 yards).     Looks good in a box score, but in reality it's about the same as an extended hand off......

 

Last time I checked, it was better to get first downs than not.      Maybe I'll devise a new QB rating system; one that directly correlates to the # of punts your team makes !!!          

 

The QB isn't the only one involved in the play. Who's to say that the QB didn't complete a pass that could have been the for the first down, but the receiver fell?
Rex Grossman (xli Bears)  
#41 | 2197 days ago

OK.......then why not have ratings for whoever catches the ball too.    Like 'Reception %', that would measure drops versus catches, or bad routes, etc.     TO would be pretty low on that measurement !

 

All I'm saying is that the current rating system favors recent QB's, for the rating system in place today follows today's gameplans - high completions, shorter routes, hope for a broken tackle, etc.     In the past, QB's threw the ball downfield more, leading to longer plays and more interceptions.      That's why QB's like Stabler, Namath & others have more int's than TD's, but would you rather have someone like Stan Humphries (or anyone; insert your average QB from the 90's/2000s) than a Namath, Stabler, Hart, etc ?

 

It is making for good discussion though !!

David Woodley (xvii Dolphins)  
#42 | 2197 days ago
DABULL43 (+)

i think that their are mutiple answers here........
Tony Eason (xx Patriots)  
#43 | 2195 days ago

Gazzo wrote:
Rich Gannon? Really? How can you call him the worst to ever start a Super Bowl?
if were talking about before the game then not gannon.but at tha end of tha game gannon had like 20 ints
Rich Gannon (xxxvii Raiders)  
#44 | 2187 days ago

kwheels wrote:
if were talking about before the game then not gannon.but at tha end of tha game gannon had like 20 ints
Actually he threw 5, but I get your point. I wish the person who created this would clarify what they mean. I take it as meaning the worst overall QB to start a Super Bowl, no so much the worst Super Bowl performance.
Rex Grossman (xli Bears)  
#45 | 2187 days ago

Gazzo wrote:
Actually he threw 5, but I get your point. I wish the person who created this would clarify what they mean. I take it as meaning the worst overall QB to start a Super Bowl, no so much the worst Super Bowl performance.

Either way, more specifically their overall performance.

 

I voted Eason, because of his low stats in the game More sacks than Completed passes.

Tony Eason (xx Patriots)  
#46 | 2187 days ago

Kenne wrote:

Either way, more specifically their overall performance.

 

I voted Eason, because of his low stats in the game More sacks than Completed passes.

You just contradicted yourself. You said "more specifically their overall performance", then stated that you chose Eason because of what he did in the game. Which is it?
Rex Grossman (xli Bears)  
#47 | 2186 days ago

Gazzo wrote:
You just contradicted yourself. You said "more specifically their overall performance", then stated that you chose Eason because of what he did in the game. Which is it?
Maybe he meant overall performance in the Super Bowl.
Other: (Please List)  
#48 | 2186 days ago

Only pick one? How about I go with Tom Brady for the last Super Bowl, not for the stats but for his cockiness. "Plexico's only giving us 17? Give us some credit (chuckle)"
#49 | 2186 days ago

Pat wrote:
Maybe he meant overall performance in the Super Bowl.
Thats not what he said though. He said "either way" to my comment. Meaning that he believes its a little of both, but overall performance is more important.
Rex Grossman (xli Bears)  
#50 | 2186 days ago

primo wrote:
Only pick one? How about I go with Tom Brady for the last Super Bowl, not for the stats but for his cockiness. "Plexico's only giving us 17? Give us some credit (chuckle)"
Only die hard Giants fans (and guys looking to make some big bucks) would have agreed with you if you told them the Pats were only going to score 14.
Rex Grossman (xli Bears)  
#51 | 2186 days ago

Gazzo wrote:
Only die hard Giants fans (and guys looking to make some big bucks) would have agreed with you if you told them the Pats were only going to score 14.
He was buying into his own hype.
#52 | 2151 days ago

derms33 wrote:
I should have went O'Donnell, but he played awesome for the Cowboys!
Both funny and smart!!!!!! Although he had a receiver not run the correct pattern(didn't break off his route) on both of Larry Brown's ints, if I'm not mistaken.
Rex Grossman (xli Bears)  
#53 | 2113 days ago

Dilfer was about as irrelevant as a long snapper for that whole year, and in the Super Bowl the defense and special teams of the Ravens just DOMINATED. Its not that he had the worst performance, but almost like he wasnt even needed!

Trent Dilfer (xxxv Ravens)  

Post a Comment   Already a user? Sign in here
Join FanIQ - It's Free
FanIQ is the ultimate free community for sports fans.
Talk sports with fans from all over - 1,649,417+ Comments
Track your game picks - 38,670,182,382+ Sports Predictions
Prove you know sports - 116,275+ Trivia Questions
Find fans of your teams - 11,453,110+ New Friends
Who's the better running back?
Asked by collinbentley11 | NFL, MIN, TEN | 1 questions asked 08/09/13
24 opinions | 1 comment | Last by Psyduckisboss
In The 2000 Super Bowl (Titans vs Rams) Did The Titans Receiver ACTUALLY Cross the goalline?
Asked by collinbentley11 | NFL, TEN, STL | 1 questions asked 07/17/12
33 opinions | 9 comments | Last by ima246
If you had to start an NFL franchise and had your pick of any running back, rank your top 5 Choices.
Asked by jdoug | NFL | 5 questions asked 09/26/12
175 opinions | 6 comments | Last by ima246
Do you think a quarterback under 6'2" can survive in the NFL?
Asked by chevleclair | NFL | 1 questions asked 07/05/12
26 opinions | 9 comments | Last by NYMets7ss
Who is your #1 Arizona Cardinal QB of all time?
Asked by ChicagoMonkey28 | NFL | 5 questions asked 06/30/10
285 opinions | 14 comments | Last by NYMets7ss