Borderline HOF QBs Who Has Gone Criminally Underappreciated by the Public

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
NIT ALERT: With Tony Romo retired, Phil Rivers takes over the mantle as "borderline HOF QB who has gone criminally underappreciated by the public". I consider myself a pretty big Andrew Luck fan, but he's not as good as Philip Rivers as of yet.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,657
Maine
OK i can see the argument and i probably could have found a better example of a "toolsy QB" to contrast against.

But just to compare nits
Since 2010 Rivers is
9-7
8-8
7-9
9-7
9-7
4-12
5-11
51-61 over that 7 year span

We can quibble that "Win loss is a bad indicator" but is it really for a QB? (since 2010) Brady (ok unfair) Brees (63-48), Rodgers (73-30) Eli (58-54), Big Ben (63-34) Palmer (47-45), Stafford (49-50), A Smith (63-32).
Yes he puts up great numbers. For instance he is 8th all time in TDs with 314. However 4.5 of those ahead of him all played in the same era (Manning, Favre (the .5), Brees, Brady, Manning with Big Ben in 9th).
Or Yards. Rivers is 12th all time. with 5.5 contemporaries in front of him.
Passer Rating? Rivers is 8th with 6 contemporaries in front and Big Ben nipping at his heels.
He has ONE award (2013 Comeback Player of the year) but 6 Pro Bowls and 2 all pros (which is a little better then Big Ben) so that might be a plus.
His has NEVER thrown for more then 299 yards in the playoffs (high of 298 and averages 240) 11 TDs 9 Ints in 9 games in which he is 4-5

Seeing as you brought up Luck.
Luck since 2012 has 19078 yards in 70 games (272.5 per)
Rivers since 2012 has 21548 in 80 games (269.4 per)
Lucks Int % is 2.6
Rivers Int % is 2.7
Lucks TD % is 5
Rivers TD% is 5.2
Luck is 43-27
Rivers is 34-46
So Luck is as good as Rivers, just minus 8 additional years of counting stats and some seriously good durability.

I think Rivers (and many of Todays QBs) are a result of the era. (I know, quite a ledge i am on.)
He definitely belongs in the Hall of Very Good next to Bledsoe (and IMHO Romo).

All that said. You are totally right, he will make the hall cause the FBHOF is kinda a joke. But I am not sure he is "Criminally under appreciated"
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,901
Hingham, MA
Great post baka. I agree that Rivers is not HOF worthy (and as has been discussed, neither is Eli, but he will make it)
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
Yes, win/loss is a bad comp in this case. As is even the counting stats.

SD has done a criminally bad job of surrounding him with a competent team over the years, in a pretty tough division. And for counting stats, one needs to factor in rule changes over the course of Rivers' career against the environment Luck has played in. You also mention durability - as BB has told us, part of being valuable is being available. Rivers hasn't missed a single game since he became the starter eleven seasons ago. Luck has obviously had injury problems. Now, the Colts havent done the best job of constructing a roster around him either, but their division is pretty weak.

But Luck is not on par with Rivers (yet, at least) and Rivers is a much better qb than Bledsoe was (saying this as being one of the biggest Bledsoe fanboys you'll ever meet). Rivers perpetually has had one unit on his offense that sucks, be it offensive line or skills group.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
OK i can see the argument and i probably could have found a better example of a "toolsy QB" to contrast against.

But just to compare nits
Since 2010 Rivers is
9-7
8-8
7-9
9-7
9-7
4-12
5-11
51-61 over that 7 year span

We can quibble that "Win loss is a bad indicator" but is it really for a QB? (since 2010) Brady (ok unfair) Brees (63-48), Rodgers (73-30) Eli (58-54), Big Ben (63-34) Palmer (47-45), Stafford (49-50), A Smith (63-32).
Yes he puts up great numbers. For instance he is 8th all time in TDs with 314. However 4.5 of those ahead of him all played in the same era (Manning, Favre (the .5), Brees, Brady, Manning with Big Ben in 9th).
Or Yards. Rivers is 12th all time. with 5.5 contemporaries in front of him.
Passer Rating? Rivers is 8th with 6 contemporaries in front and Big Ben nipping at his heels.
He has ONE award (2013 Comeback Player of the year) but 6 Pro Bowls and 2 all pros (which is a little better then Big Ben) so that might be a plus.
His has NEVER thrown for more then 299 yards in the playoffs (high of 298 and averages 240) 11 TDs 9 Ints in 9 games in which he is 4-5

Seeing as you brought up Luck.
Luck since 2012 has 19078 yards in 70 games (272.5 per)
Rivers since 2012 has 21548 in 80 games (269.4 per)
Lucks Int % is 2.6
Rivers Int % is 2.7
Lucks TD % is 5
Rivers TD% is 5.2
Luck is 43-27
Rivers is 34-46
So Luck is as good as Rivers, just minus 8 additional years of counting stats and some seriously good durability.

I think Rivers (and many of Todays QBs) are a result of the era. (I know, quite a ledge i am on.)
He definitely belongs in the Hall of Very Good next to Bledsoe (and IMHO Romo).

All that said. You are totally right, he will make the hall cause the FBHOF is kinda a joke. But I am not sure he is "Criminally under appreciated"
Rivers career peak was 2008-2010, which is not a part of that analysis. There's an argument he was the best QB in the league over that three year span. He led the league in ANY/A+ twice and and NY/A+ all three years. By DVOA the passing offense was 1,1,2 for those three years. Luck hasnt had a season as good as any of those Rivers seasons, or Rivers '13 season for that matter. Rivers is ninth all time in ANY/A. Hard to compare eras, but most of the attempts at era adjusted QB rankings Ive seen have Rivers, at worst, comfortably within the top 20 of all time. Its more accurate to say that Luck is just as good as Rivers, if Luck plays 8 more years and is the very best quarterback in the league for three of them. SD has never had a below average passing offense by DVOA with Rivers at QB and has been in the top ten by DVOA in 8 or 9 of his seasons without what I would call a bevy of WR talent around him (obviously had LDT and Gates at the peak). Plays 16 games every year and played the AFCCG against the Patriots on a wrecked knee, he's a tough dude.

Ding him some for the W/L record if you want, but yeah, very underappreciated and borderline HOF.

Both Romo and Rivers are way better than Drew Bledsoe was, they sort of arent even comparable. I dont know exactly who Bledsoe's best comp would be today, maybe a slightly worse Matt Stafford? I loved Drew when he was here, but those sack rate numbers in particular, good lord.
 
Last edited:

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
23,320
Pittsburgh, PA
In what alternate reality is Philip Rivers not a first ballot Hall of Fame selection?
How much you want to bet? On talent, he could have been, but with his team and lack of accomplishments, he'll at least be made to wait his turn, if not fail to get in altogether. Just one first-team all-pro, and the one year he led the league in passer rating (2008), he finished 6th in MVP. He got 3rd (2 votes) in 2009, and other than that never received a single MVP vote.

The irony is that he ended up a better quarterback than Eli Manning, and had the swap with the Giants for him and Shawne Merriman not happened, I'd bet it's Rivers who wins two titles instead. But merely being a top-10 QB with excellent durability doesn't get you into the HOF, even with all the QB hero-worship. After reading all the articles about how the debates over Terrell Owens from the last HOF class, you can seemingly count on high school-esque gossip being weighted far more than "Yeah but were they a HOF talent?"
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,657
Maine
He reminds me of a modern day Fouts. Now I know Fouts is a HOF but when I think back I dont think "Oohhhhh Fouts!" He isnt the first guy I would pick to be my QB. He never won an AP MVP (but did win a PFW MVP in 82, Losing the AP to a Place Kicker!!!) Still a guy who has been discussed as the Best QB in the league during his time should have been better. Anyway before this becomes a Fouts tangent (who is imho is more worthy then Rivers for the HOF), he reminds me of Rivers. Good weapons, maybe let down by one side of the ball put up counting stats but was never the undeniable best QB in the league.

Rivers is similar in that he had the bad luck of playing during Mannings and Bradys hey day. So no one ever said "If you could have one QB who would it be?" and got the answer "Rivers". (at least Fouts had that) Hell Brees and Rodgers and Favre would be names before Rivers.
All great players, all HOFers. So dinging him for not being better then them is probably unfair on my part. But I do.
As far as weapons Rivers has had some nice ones. You mention Tomlinson (who is a HOFer), Gates (who is a HOFer) but also VJackson, MFloyd, Sproles, and Matthews. There are also numerous bit players who were decent.
Probably a better aggregate of offensive talent then many QBs have had.

His coaching has probably sucked, as has his ownership. But No worse then Luck (who you mentioned) or about 20 other teams. A Great (IE HOF) QB should transcend that. Brees did. Rodgers did/does. Brady has. Peyton did (at least in the regular season).

I'll own that I am being hard on Rivers. I just think that you should be hard and have high standards for the HOF. (the writers who actually choose seemingly disagree with me at times.)

Finally pts scored. Fairly or not QBs are associated with wins (which we have already discussed) and Pts. (Check out Fouts Chargers team Pts Scored).

Since 2010 (which I will admit is an arbitrary cut off but used for comparison to other QB will less longevity and to account for the current offensive climate). SDs was the following in Pts scored.
#2
#5
#20
#12
#17
#26
#9
An average of 13th. A HOF Qb should not give you a middle of the league offense. Especially considering that he has had weapons.

I will concede that Rivers had a very nice 3 year middle of his career (2008-2010) And his teams pts scored rankings were elite 2005-2010. But that corresponds with Tomlinsons and Gates hey day. So they should have been elite.

Maybe I am just dinging Rivers for having a kinda shitty late career, wins and pts wise.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Once again affirming the SOSH consensus all time QB rating list

1) Tom Brady
2) Who cares everyone else sucks
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,901
Hingham, MA
Really stitch? That's your takeaway?

Baka is putting a lot of time, thought, and effort into his posts, and I agree with much of what he has written. While Rivers has mostly been in the top 6-7 QBs in the league during his career, he has rarely been in the top 3. Being in the top 20% doesn't make you a hall of famer. As baka stated, when he had Gates and Tomlinson, his offenses put up great numbers. Rivers doesn't have super elite counting or rate stats, he doesn't have team success, he doesn't have individual awards... he may make the hall, but it is going to take a while given all of the other QBs who are likely to go in from this era - Peyton, Brees, Ben, Brady, and likely Eli.

Edit: I should add that I like Rivers. I didn't like him for the first half of his career - thought he talked too much, etc. - but I have really come to respect his toughness and leadership. Dude is a gamer.

Double edit: since this is a Jimmy G thread, I'll tie it back by saying this - we'd all be THRILLED if Jimmy is as good as Rivers. Or even close to it.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,657
Maine
Yea I dont think thats fair Stitch. I conceeded that imho (and its just that) Rivers is very good. Very good is , well very good. He just hasnt been "As elite" as about 4 or 5 guys who played during his career window. Thats weird to me. Instead we say he didnt have ownership, or the right coaching or enough weapons.

Dude is tough and if JG becomes something close to Rivers I would be thrilled and happy to have the Patriots in his hands for the next 10 years.

So do we think that this has been a golden age of QBs and Rivers is top 10-15 all time but only top 6 during his era?

Brady
Manning
Montana
Marino
Elway
Rodgers
Favre
Brees
Young
Moon
Kelly
Warner
Aikman

I am probably forgetting some "modern" QBs.

Where would Rivers rank in this list in your opinion?
 

SeoulSoxFan

I Want to Hit the World with Rocket Punch
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
22,229
A Scud Away from Hell
NIT ALERT: With Tony Romo retired, Phil Rivers takes over the mantle as "borderline HOF QB who has gone criminally underappreciated by the public". I consider myself a pretty big Andrew Luck fan, but he's not as good as Philip Rivers as of yet.
Love this topic & breaking it out.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
25,295
where I was last at
I found Rivers to be an acquired taste, and appreciated the more I watched him. I hate the way he throws the ball, like a short-arm push, but its effective. And Rivers is a great competitor, a tough SOB, and simpy fun to watch.

IMO and just off the top of my head among his recent contemporaries, Rivers ranks below these guys

Brady
Peyton
Rodgers
Brees
Benny

and would be in the 2nd half of a top 10 that would include (ranked by my HoF probability criteria)

Eli
Luck
Matty Ice
Rivers
Russell Wilson.

the top 5 are HoF locks
the next 5, if Luck is healthy but too early to call
Matty and Wilson depends on future post-season success
Eli probably gets in off of his SB wins, but IMO he is the most over-rated QB of the current crop

Given his lack of play-off success it may be easy to overlook what Rivers did in the regular seasons.

Edit: I forgot Romo-which is probably telling. And he's probably in between the top 5 and the 6-10.
But he like Rivers was fun to watch, and probably like Rivers may fall short of the HoF.
 

SumnerH

Malt Liquor Picker
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
32,354
Asheville, NC
Once again affirming the SOSH consensus all time QB rating list

1) Tom Brady
2) Who cares everyone else sucks
Ehh, it's more that the HOF should be a lot smaller than it is; when you expand it to include Romo/Rivers-types, it becomes a lot less meaningful.

If you have Brady, P. Manning, Rodgers, Favre, E. Manning, Brees, Roethlisberger, Romo, Rivers, Warner in, then you're, what, a good argument for McNabb, Pennington, or Garcia away from saying that basically 1/3 of starting QBs in the league in 2008 were HOFers? At what point do you realize it's become a joke?

IMO you should have to roughly be one of the best/most famous couple of players at your position over the course of a 10 year span or so (these spans can overlap, so it's more than an average of 2 simultaneous players). You can maybe stretch that a little if you think there are 3-4 players who are historically great simultaneously, or if someone has a ridiculous shorter peak (especially as a RB or something with less longevity).

Brady, P. Manning, Favre, yeah, probably Rodgers,but even by the time you get to Brees, Roethlisberger, Warner etc (let alone Romo or Rivers) I'd have them on the outside barring an argument I haven't heard yet.
 
Last edited:

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,717
Philadelphia
Boomer Esiason is a pretty good Rivers comp - a guy who had a few truly great years relatively early in his career which aren't fully appreciated because he was overshadowed by more famous QBs and because none of those years ended in a Super Bowl victory and who then subsequently settled into a later career pattern of being good but not great.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
16,175
NIT ALERT: With Tony Romo retired, Phil Rivers takes over the mantle as "borderline HOF QB who has gone criminally underappreciated by the public". I consider myself a pretty big Andrew Luck fan, but he's not as good as Philip Rivers as of yet.
Andrew Luck, of course, is not "underappreciated by the public." Before last season I saw some lists of top quarterbacks and Luck was generally at #2 (behind Rodgers). So far I would take Manning's post-Colt career over Luck's Colt career but I'm sure that will change, eventually. But I will say that even though I compare Luck to Bledsoe ( he, too, was once once #2 in the eyes of many) a lot, I know there is a possibility Luck ends up in a different stratoshphere than Drew.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Really stitch? That's your takeaway?

Baka is putting a lot of time, thought, and effort into his posts, and I agree with much of what he has written. While Rivers has mostly been in the top 6-7 QBs in the league during his career, he has rarely been in the top 3. Being in the top 20% doesn't make you a hall of famer. As baka stated, when he had Gates and Tomlinson, his offenses put up great numbers. Rivers doesn't have super elite counting or rate stats, he doesn't have team success, he doesn't have individual awards... he may make the hall, but it is going to take a while given all of the other QBs who are likely to go in from this era - Peyton, Brees, Ben, Brady, and likely Eli.

Edit: I should add that I like Rivers. I didn't like him for the first half of his career - thought he talked too much, etc. - but I have really come to respect his toughness and leadership. Dude is a gamer.

Double edit: since this is a Jimmy G thread, I'll tie it back by saying this - we'd all be THRILLED if Jimmy is as good as Rivers. Or even close to it.
Its tongue in cheek, but yeah, Id say our view of QBs is pretty jaded we say things like "well he's only been in the top 6 or 7 QBs in the league except for that three year stretch where he led the league's best offense"
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
10,387
San Francisco
The awards argument strikes me as especially dumb. You are going to punish him for playing in the same era as the two greatest QB's / players of all time?
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Yea I dont think thats fair Stitch. I conceeded that imho (and its just that) Rivers is very good. Very good is , well very good. He just hasnt been "As elite" as about 4 or 5 guys who played during his career window. Thats weird to me. Instead we say he didnt have ownership, or the right coaching or enough weapons.

Dude is tough and if JG becomes something close to Rivers I would be thrilled and happy to have the Patriots in his hands for the next 10 years.

So do we think that this has been a golden age of QBs and Rivers is top 10-15 all time but only top 6 during his era?

Brady
Manning
Montana
Marino
Elway
Rodgers
Favre
Brees
Young
Moon
Kelly
Warner
Aikman

I am probably forgetting some "modern" QBs.

Where would Rivers rank in this list in your opinion?
Id have him above Kelly, Aikman, and Moon (based on NFL play). Elway is one Id have to think about, they're strengths and weaknesses are so different. Warner probably based on longevity when the full career is in the books.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,901
Hingham, MA
Its tongue in cheek, but yeah, Id say our view of QBs is pretty jaded we say things like "well he's only been in the top 6 or 7 QBs in the league except for that three year stretch where he led the league's best offense"
There is a term called "Hall of Very Good" for a reason.

Also I love the Esiason comp
 

bradmahn

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
591
Am I reading that correctly, SumnerH? You haven't heard a good argument for Drew Brees to be in the HOF?

He's the most accurate QB ever, has been 1st team All-Pro, won a Super Bowl (and its MVP), has thrown for the third most TDs and yards ever, been named to 10 Pro Bowls, and is probable to finish in the top 10 in games played by the end of his career. What else does he have to do?
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
23,320
Pittsburgh, PA
The awards argument strikes me as especially dumb. You are going to punish him for playing in the same era as the two greatest QB's / players of all time?
I can guarantee you that will be a major factor in the HOF voters' minds, at least when you're talking about QBs. With great hero-worship comes great responsibility to actually take the team somewhere.

If we're posting here and evaluating Rivers' VORQ or whatever, no, I think we'll take a more nuanced view. But there were plenty of years where he was a top-half but not top-5 QB in the league. If he has neither overwhelming career value, peak value, or signature accomplishments, where does his HOF case really rest?
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
16,175
Yeah, If I had a vote I'd regard Roethlisberger and Brees as no-discussion.automatic entrants. I would have voted for Warner after discussion. When Eli's name came up I'd take a long bathroom break, because I'd need it.

Edit: Rivers/Romo not quite.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Canton is to me irrelevant. HOF voting in this sport is so politicized and agenda driven that it's not going to give you a good read on a player's career. The voters are, in the main, score settling angry old men.

Rivers, like a lot of guys and especially QBs, is a victim of circumstance. In retrospect, the Mannings were right. Chargers had no business firing Schottenheimer after a 14-2 season. And the year after they did, Rivers shows up in Fox and damn near beats an undefeated team playing on a torn ACL. Bottom line - he's immensely talented but not well served.

Other guys, of course, have had it equally bad or worse. But that does not mean that Rivers is not vastly underestimated.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,901
Hingham, MA
I keep seeing comments that he is underrated / undervalued / underestimated / whatever. Maybe from a public perspective. But I think within the confines of this thread there seems to be general agreement that he has been in that range just outside the top 5 QBs aside from a few elite years. We all realize he has been a top 6-7 QB in the league. It's not like anyone here is saying he's middle of the pack.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Ehh, it's more that the HOF should be a lot smaller than it is; when you expand it to include Romo/Rivers-types, it becomes a lot less meaningful.

If you have Brady, P. Manning, Rodgers, Favre, E. Manning, Brees, Roethlisberger, Romo, Rivers, Warner in, then you're, what, a good argument for McNabb, Pennington, or Garcia away from saying that basically 1/3 of starting QBs in the league in 2008 were HOFers? At what point do you realize it's become a joke?

IMO you should have to roughly be one of the best/most famous couple of players at your position over the course of a 10 year span or so (these spans can overlap, so it's more than an average of 2 simultaneous players). You can maybe stretch that a little if you think there are 3-4 players who are historically great simultaneously, or if someone has a ridiculous shorter peak (especially as a RB or something with less longevity).

Brady, P. Manning, Favre, yeah, probably Rodgers,but even by the time you get to Brees, Roethlisberger, Warner etc (let alone Romo or Rivers) I'd have them on the outside barring an argument I haven't heard yet.
Rivers for me is about the fulcrum pick. Id add Brady, Manning, Rodgers, Romo, Brees, Roethlisberger. Eli will make it but shouldnt. This looks only slightly heavier QB wise than HOF's from previous ERA's which, given this was the age of the QB and the passing game (might not all be the rules, the next generation of QBs isnt off to as strong of a start), doesnt strike me as crazy.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
I keep seeing comments that he is underrated / undervalued / underestimated / whatever. Maybe from a public perspective. But I think within the confines of this thread there seems to be general agreement that he has been in that range just outside the top 5 QBs aside from a few elite years. We all realize he has been a top 6-7 QB in the league. It's not like anyone here is saying he's middle of the pack.
He was compared to Drew Bledsoe ITT and I still think you are underrating "just outside the top 5 outside of the 3 year stretch where he was the most effective QB in the league", but JMHO

The Boomer comp was a decent one in terms of career arch, but Boomer's best wasnt as good as Rivers.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
23,320
Pittsburgh, PA
I agree with you, dc, but that line of posts started from quint's dismissive, snarky one-liner:
In what alternate reality is Philip Rivers not a first ballot Hall of Fame selection?
Since the rest of us seem to agree that Rivers fits the "borderline-HOF" tag, the question of how under-appreciated he is is far more interesting. And certainly, his lack of glamourous popularity-contest qualifications adds to the evidence of Rivers being underappreciated.

The poster child for this designation, as stitch led off by saying, was Tony Romo. Today it might more be Matt Ryan (who had a career passer rating of 91 in his 8 years before this past one when he won the MVP), if he reverts to his career norms rather than repeating his annus mirabilis.

My nominees would be Colin Kaepernick (viewed today as worthless, but as a top-5 QB as recently as 2 years ago and still having his legs and knees fully functional), or Carson Palmer (doomed to Marvin Lewis-led mediocrity despite being a top-10 talent as illustrated by his age-36 season in 2015).
 

Chuck Schilling

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 5, 2001
3,670
the belly of the clam
His coaching has probably sucked, as has his ownership. But No worse then Luck (who you mentioned) or about 20 other teams. A Great (IE HOF) QB should transcend that. Brees did. Rodgers did/does. Brady has. Peyton did (at least in the regular season).
How on earth can you argue that Brady/Rodgers/Brees overcame bad coaching and/or ownership? I'd agree that Manning had to, to an extent.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,901
Hingham, MA
Ben, Eli, and Rivers are obviously tied together in that they were all drafted in 2004. Thought it would be fun / useful to compare, both rate and counting stats.

Eli
48,218 yards (239.9 YPG)
59.7% completions
320 TD (4.7%)
215 INT (3.2%)
108-91 regular season (.543)
8-4 playoffs (.667)
60.5%, 4.5% TD, 2.3% INT, 2 titles

Rivers
45,833 yards (254.6 YPG)
64.4% completions
314 TD (5.3%)
156 INT (2.6%)
97-79 regular season (.551)
4-5 playoffs (.444)
60.3%, 4.0% TD, 3.3% INT, 1 championship game appearance

Ben
46,814 yards (253.0 YPG)
64.1% completions
301 TD (5.1%)
160 INT (2.7%)
123-60 regular season (.672)
13-7 playoffs (.650)
62.3%, 4.0% TD, 3.7% INT, 2 titles, 1 Super Bowl loss

Just from these stats, the are all somewhat even. Eli has by far the worst regular season stats from a rate perspective - worst TD %, INT %, completion %, YPG, and even record. But of course the two rings.

RIvers is almost a mirror image to Ben in terms of regular season stats. Ben also, of course, has the two rings, but he did not play nearly as well in the playoffs as Eli did during his runs.

Based on this it would be hard to put Eli in but exclude Rivers. Of course if it were up to me, I think only Ben would be in the HoF of the three, but if Eli is in, I think Rivers has to go too.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,657
Maine
How on earth can you argue that Brady/Rodgers/Brees overcame bad coaching and/or ownership? I'd agree that Manning had to, to an extent.
Could have sworn I had said something about "being let down by one unit on his team." But obviously I didnt.

What I had intended was:
His coaching has probably sucked, as has his ownership. But No worse then Luck (who you mentioned) or about 20 other teams. He had also been let down by portions of his team (his Defense on occasion). A Great (IE HOF) QB should transcend that. Brees did. Rodgers did/does. Brady has. Peyton did (at least in the regular season).

Thats why the whole "(At least in the regular season)" part. Peytons D had been usually bad to mediocre, except for his first SB run.

Brady suffered from that on occasion as did Brees and Rodgers. All had ok to crappy defenses (or WR corps, or RBs or something) at one time or another, yet overcame them to a large degree.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,657
Maine
Based on this it would be hard to put Eli in but exclude Rivers. Of course if it were up to me, I think only Ben would be in the HoF of the three, but if Eli is in, I think Rivers has to go too.
I wont argue that Eli WONT be in. But SHOULD he?

If you say yes then its because of his 2 rings.

Yet Rivers has no comparable post season pedigree.

So does Rivers modest regular season advantage equal Elis post season resume? I dont think so.

So even using the "Eli needs to be in" argument its for a totally different strength the what Rivers has.

Ben (while a rapist dink) has the same Regular season success (ie modestly better then Eli and the same as Rivers) AND 2 SBs.

So yea out of those three
1.Ben
2. Eli
3. Rivers

Also to be fair has Eli had (not counting recent OBJ) anyone close to the talent of Tomlinson and Gates? I cant think of anyone.
Ben has had some decent weapons.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Rivers at least had Norv as his coach during his peak. Lol Norv and everything, but that is not a bad head coach for a QB to have.

Rivers looks to have more than a modest advantage in regular season performance by my eye.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,901
Hingham, MA
Yeah, should vs. will are totally different questions. Ben should and will. Eli IMO shouldn't but will. Rivers IMO shouldn't and won't.

@Stitch01 I agree Rivers has a huge regular season advantage over Eli. In fairness as baka mentioned Rivers had much better weapons for the majority of his career.
 

DanoooME

above replacement level
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2008
20,063
Henderson, NV
I don't see when you compare the numbers like tims4wins did how you can leave out Rivers and put in Eli and Rapist. The difference is ringz? Really? We've mocked Yankees fans for years for that stupid argument.

To me, Eli has the weakest case of the three (excluding ringz of course). But if Rapist is a lock for the HOF, Rivers HAS to be in. He may not get in right away, but he's as deserving to be there. It's not his fault he had shittier teammates and a worse FO to work for.

Edit: Oh, and a juggernaut to face in his conference.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,717
Philadelphia
He was compared to Drew Bledsoe ITT and I still think you are underrating "just outside the top 5 outside of the 3 year stretch where he was the most effective QB in the league", but JMHO

The Boomer comp was a decent one in terms of career arch, but Boomer's best wasnt as good as Rivers.
Era adjusted, Boomer's 85-89 run was really good, with ANY/A+ of 125, 128, 107, 136, and 120. He is surprisingly close to both Marino and Montana during that specific five year stretch and overall I'd say it compares pretty well with Rivers 2006-10. Rivers has been better when tailing off late career though. Boomer had a couple real stinkers in 1992 and 1995, which Rivers has never had.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Yeah their peaks are probably closer than I thought, I have a hard time finding comprehensive ANY/A+ stats for some reason.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,901
Hingham, MA
Yeah their peaks are probably closer than I thought, I have a hard time finding comprehensive ANY/A+ stats for some reason.
Rivers: 6.84 career
Ben: 6.67
Eli: 5.96
Flacco: 5.75
Boomer: 5.82
Brady: 7.09
Peyton: 7.17
Rodgers: 7.48
Brees: 6.91
Marino: 6.55
Montana: 6.60
Young: 6.85
Favre: 5.93
Elway: 5.60
Aikman: 5.66
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
I can find career leaders for ANY/A+, just not season by season stats, Im sure Im just blind to it on the website for some reason.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,901
Hingham, MA

Rudy's Curve

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2006
2,359
Ken Anderson deserves consideration as his generation's Rivers. From 1972-83, his ANY/A+'s were 110, 121, 124, 129 (led league), 112, 110, 90, 105, 85, 136 (led league), 121 and 108 playing in a cold-weather division with the Steel Curtain. There's a bad three-year period in there but he was a very good player for a 12-year stretch and he at least went to a Super Bowl. The fact that he's out and Warren Moon, who has inferior numbers playing his entire career in a dome and didn't win a thing is in is an absolute joke. He was also considerably better than Ken Stabler but didn't have the luxury of playing with a bunch of HOFers, as the only one he played with in their prime was Munoz.
 
Last edited:

Bergs

funky and cold
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2005
22,053
Ken Anderson deserves consideration as his generation's Rivers. From 1972-83, his ANY/A+'s were 110, 121, 124, 129 (led league), 112, 110, 90, 105, 85, 136 (led league), 121 and 108 playing in a cold-weather division with the Steel Curtain. There's a bad three-year period in there but he was a very good player for a 12-year stretch and he at least went to a Super Bowl. The fact that he's out and Warren Moon, who has inferior numbers playing his entire career in a dome and didn't win a thing is in is an absolute joke. He was also considerably better than Ken Stabler but didn't have the luxury of playing with a bunch of HOFers, as the only one he played with in their prime was Munoz.
Great post.