Roethlisberger...and Bradshaw. Who will end up being the best Steeler QB

[BlastFurnace]

For the Steelers, I used to have Bradshaw a lot higher than Ben a couple of years ago. Now, if given the choice between them...playing under today's rules...I'm not sure who I would choose now.

For all of the great things about Ben, I don't think the Steelers slump the way they did in 2006 and 2009 with Bradshaw. On the other hand, Ben wins with much less talent on offense than Bradshaw had from 1975 through 1982...especially when it comes to the protection from the offensive line. Not to mention, Ben's WR's for SB 40 were Hines, ARE, Wilson, and Washington. Not really comparable to Swann, Stallworth, and Smith.

I know there is still 2 more Super Bowls for Bradshaw, but I think the difference between the two is much closer than we realize. At the end of their careers, I wouldn't be surprised to see Ben as the all time Steelers QB than Bradshaw.

[SteelerEmpire]

Ben said he wants to win 5 SB's before he leaves the Steelers... 2 down, 3 to go. If he accomplishes that, he'll pass Bradshaw in that arguement with ease...

[stlrtruck]

Ben said he wants to win 5 SB's before he leaves the Steelers... 2 down, 3 to go. If he accomplishes that, he'll pass Bradshaw in that arguement with ease...

exactly because the bottom line will be, 'HOW MANY DID YOU WIN'

However, I think age may catch up to the Steelers and Ben before that happens.

[pepsyman1]

I"m a huge Bradshaw fan having grown up watching him win all those Superbowls and seeing his incredible arm strength and the amazing throws he used to make, so I've always considered myself a little biased. But the more I've watched Ben over the last few years, the more I've realized how similar they play. If you watch videos of Bradshaw, you see a lot of the same type of shrugging off defenders, moving back and forth across the backfield, continually looking downfield to find a receiver who's broken free. Watching Ben now, he protects the ball better. Bradshaw took more chances because of his arm strength. Ben completes more passes, Bradshaw tended to have bigger completions in terms of yardage. Ben takes sacks because he won't let a play end, Bradshaw threw more interceptions for the same reasons. I think they are both great, but I do think Ben has the advantage of playing with the current rules. If Bradshaw played today he'd probably try throwing a deep post to Wallace every other series! lol

[SteelerChick]

For the Steelers, I used to have Bradshaw a lot higher than Ben a couple of years ago. Now, if given the choice between them...playing under today's rules...I'm not sure who I would choose now.

For all of the great things about Ben, I don't think the Steelers slump the way they did in 2006 and 2009 with Bradshaw. On the other hand, Ben wins with much less talent on offense than Bradshaw had from 1975 through 1982...especially when it comes to the protection from the offensive line. Not to mention, Ben's WR's for SB 40 were Hines, ARE, Wilson, and Washington. Not really comparable to Swann, Stallworth, and Smith.

I know there is still 2 more Super Bowls for Bradshaw, but I think the difference between the two is much closer than we realize. At the end of their careers, I wouldn't be surprised to see Ben as the all time Steelers QB than Bradshaw.

Disagree with the "slump" comment. Terry also had a better defense back in the day. Ben is a warrior. He comes out on top.

[Dino 6 Rings]

4 > 2

End of discussion til it is 4 = 4 or...football gods willing 5 > 4

[Bluecoat96]

4 > 2

End of discussion til it is 4 = 4 or...football gods willing 5 > 4

Very true, however I think the debate is valid that in today's game, with free agency and players coming and going, winning 2 super bowls in 4 years could be up there with our 4 super bowls in the 70's with pretty much all homegrown talent.

[BlastFurnace]

Disagree with the "slump" comment. Terry also had a better defense back in the day. Ben is a warrior. He comes out on top.

The Steelers didn't fall apart after winning Super Bowls in the 70's though either. Only in 1980, when the team had clearly aged, did they have a bad season.

[BlastFurnace]

4 > 2

End of discussion til it is 4 = 4 or...football gods willing 5 > 4

I agree with you to a point. My only argument is that the discussion is much closer than we realize.

I have went back and watched some of the games I have taped from the 1970's Super Bowl teams. For all the criticism Ben gets from today's fans, Bradshaw would have driven them absolutely nuts.

[Count Steeler]

How can you love one child more than another? Ben and Terry will always be special to us Steelers fans. Some may prefer Ben, some may prefer Terry. All in all, we have 6. The line starts here. EVERYONE else is behind. Hehehe.

We as Steelers fans are very fortunate that we can even have this discussion. I grew up watching Terry and he was special. Ben is a winner as well. I'd love to see what Ben could do with a healthy team for a long stretch. I think I lean towards Ben right now.

[BlastFurnace]

How can you love one child more than another? Ben and Terry will always be special to us Steelers fans. Some may prefer Ben, some may prefer Terry. All in all, we have 6. The line starts here. EVERYONE else is behind. Hehehe.

We as Steelers fans are very fortunate that we can even have this discussion. I grew up watching Terry and he was special. Ben is a winner as well. I'd love to see what Ben could do with a healthy team for a long stretch. I think I lean towards Ben right now.

Very true. Living here in Dallas, they have the same discussions out here between Staubach and Aikman or Dorsett or Smith.

[pepsyman1]

We all also have to remember how different things are now. ALL the quarterbacks from that era have stats that pale in comparison to what we now consider merely "above average" quarterbacks. There weren't any QB's completely 65% of their passes regularly, even 60% was pretty rare. If you look at all the big names from the 70's, Staubach, Stabler, Bradshaw, Ken Anderson, Ron Jaworski, Bob Griese...they all have QB ratings between 70 to low 80's, and they completed below 60% of their passes for their career. Defenses were given much more free range...I think todays QB's would probably struggle a little bit with those conditions and defenses of the old days would struggle with the current rules. That's what makes it so hard to compare the different eras.

[steelerdude15]

I still say Terry for now, but by the time Ben is at the end of his career, it's going to be a different story...

[BuddhaBus]

I still say Terry for now, but by the time Ben is at the end of his career, it's going to be a different story...

OOOOHHHH OOOOOOHHHH!!!!!! Could you read that story to Wally and I?

[tube517]

Very true. Living here in Dallas, they have the same discussions out here between Staubach and Aikman or Dorsett or Smith.

Staubach > Aikman
Dorsett > Smith

End of discussion.

And I cannot stand the Cryboys but respected Staubach more than Aikman. Dorsett didn't have the all pro OL that Smith had.

[BlastFurnace]

We all also have to remember how different things are now. ALL the quarterbacks from that era have stats that pale in comparison to what we now consider merely "above average" quarterbacks. There weren't any QB's completely 65% of their passes regularly, even 60% was pretty rare. If you look at all the big names from the 70's, Staubach, Stabler, Bradshaw, Ken Anderson, Ron Jaworski, Bob Griese...they all have QB ratings between 70 to low 80's, and they completed below 60% of their passes for their career. Defenses were given much more free range...I think todays QB's would probably struggle a little bit with those conditions and defenses of the old days would struggle with the current rules. That's what makes it so hard to compare the different eras.

I know, but that's why I said that they both got to play under today's rules. I don't think that Bradshaw would be that much, if any, more successful than Ben.

[Steeldude]

hard to say if they are both playing under today's rules. bradshaw's stats/productivity went up after the 78 rule change, but didn't really get to take advantage of it due to his arm ending his career soon after.

[Dino 6 Rings]

Isn't it great being a Steelers fan? I mean, we can ask...

"Who is our Best QB? The one with 4 Super Bowl Rings, or is it the one with 2 Rings and counting?"

Man I love this Team!

[Dick723]

I say Ben because he never bit Terry in the ass. Terry takes every chance to bite Ben

[TroysBarber]

4 > 2

End of discussion til it is 4 = 4 or...football gods willing 5 > 4

Using that argument, you'd have to say Trent Difler > Dan Marino. Difler on a SB, while Marino didn't.

[HometownGal]

Both Terry and Ben had/have their own style which makes them great QB's. Also - the rules have changed significantly since Brad was a Steeler and I think on the toughness scale, Ben gets the nod. However, with all of the changes and the game being played in totally different eras, I think it may be unfair to anoint one or the other as the "best QB". They both played huge roles in their respective teams' successes. Just my two and a half cents.

[86WARD]

Bradshaw was a tough bugger as well. He was pretty much Favre before Favre came on the scene. He just didn't have Favre numbers but his style was very similar. He played in a run-era on a dominant run team. For now, he's the better QB. However, if "the rules" are I'm playing in today's game, I'm going to go with who I know can play today's game and I'll take Ben.

If that makes sense...

[tube517]

Both are big, tough strong QB's. Ben is more accurate but Terry has more rings...for now....Terry had 2 HOF WR's and Ben has one possible future HOF WR, Hines. Both made big throws in the Super Bowl and both were very competitive. It's still an open book on Ben so until he retires, you can't say who is better just yet, IMHO.

[ALLD]

Both are clutch QBs, however Ben makes less mistakes. Ben also has more succeess from the beginning. Brad has two more rings, but he also had a HOF team behind him. Ben would have been just as successful as Brad playing behind that great team of the 1970s, no doubt about it.

[Borski]

7 years into both of their careers they both had 2 SB's under their belt. Its unfair to compare a complete career to one still in progress.

[zulater]

I like 'em both, and refuse to disparage one to prop up the other. Honestly I don't know which is better?

[BigNastyDefense]

In the end, Ben will hold every single good Steelers quarterbacking records. He will end up throwing for the most yards, touchdowns, YPA, QB Rating, and anything else that they come up with or have.

But, there is still a very good chance that Bradshaw will own the most important stat of them all, Super Bowl victories. Bradshaw will never have more than four. However, he is just one of two (Montana) quarterbacks to have four Super Bowl victories. Not Staubach, not Aikman, not Elway, not Brady, and not Manning (though both Brad and Manning can each get to four, but I think Brady has the much better chance since he already has three himself).

Ben has two. That means he needs to get to and win two more just to tie Bradshaw. He's got to go against the Patriots (who seem to have our number) in our conference.

Not to mention that the Steelers have an aging defense and a mediocre offensive line at best. So that's going against Ben winning two more. Can the defense reload as guys get old and their play decreases? And will we fix the offensive line woes to get Ben the protection he needs to stay healthy enough to get to and win at least two more Super Bowls?

I think that he can win two or three more, but there's more to it than the play of Big Ben.

[The WH]

Bernie Kozar!!!!!!!!


edit: whoops wrong message board.