Proof that Teams Are Wasting Their Players Prime Years and Windows

[pbmax]

http://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2016/8/17/12527906/nfl-teams-are-wasting-all-of-their-top-players-primes

The list:

Rodgers, Brady, Manning, Big Ben, Joe Thomas, Matt Ryan, Drew Brees, Cam Newton, Phillip Rivers, Tony Romo, Eli Manning, Richard Sherman, Earl Thomas, OBJ, Andrew Luck, Russell Wilson, Derek Carr.

[run pMc]

They can't all be winners. ;)

[beveaux1]

I like this. A little tongue in cheek, but true for fans everywhere.

[smuggler]

I mean, this is actually true of Andre Johnson, Barry Sanders. Hah

[texaspackerbacker]

They can't all be winners. ;)

hahahahaha They aren't all Aaron Rodgers either. In fact, with the possible exception of Brady - whose prime years have been supported pretty well, none of the guys mentioned come close (well, I suppose Peyton does/did, but arguably he got a lot more talent around him too.

[pbmax]

hahahahaha They aren't all Aaron Rodgers either. In fact, with the possible exception of Brady - whose prime years have been supported pretty well, none of the guys mentioned come close (well, I suppose Peyton does/did, but arguably he got a lot more talent around him too.

Brady went more than a decade between Super Bowl wins, as the quotes in the article mercilessly complain about.

[Fritz]

They can't all be winners. ;)

Everyone's a winner, baby, that's no lie!

[Cheesehead Craig]

Everyone's a winner, baby, that's no lie!
http://i1124.photobucket.com/albums/l576/AtlantisDraft/Fritz.png

[Bretsky]

hahahahaha They aren't all Aaron Rodgers either. In fact, with the possible exception of Brady - whose prime years have been supported pretty well, none of the guys mentioned come close (well, I suppose Peyton does/did, but arguably he got a lot more talent around him too.

THIS

[Bretsky]

Brady went more than a decade between Super Bowl wins, as the quotes in the article mercilessly complain about.

and Eli has two wins and he's not near elite
Does that go back to the GM ?

[beveaux1]

and Eli has two wins and he's not near elite
Does that go back to the GM ?

Well, in both wins for Eli, they went through Green Bay in games the Packers were heavily favored. The Giants failed to do anything in the years following those wins. The personnel for the Packers did not appear to be the problem, as they reached the playoffs in 8 of the 9 years and won a super bowl. Sometimes it's just the team that has the hottest hand on a given day. Maybe we'll have the hottest hand this year.

[beveaux1]

Having top notch personnel will get you into the playoffs because the peculiar bounces of the oblong ball will be somewhat normalized over the course of a 16 game season. The playoffs are a one and done. A tipped ball interception or a fumble that we fail to recover or an injury to a key player can be the difference in a win or a loss.

I don't buy the argument that this team consists of Rodgers and that we have almost no talent anywhere else, any more than I buy the argument that with Rodgers playing, it doesn't matter who the coaches are, we would still get into the playoffs. A superstar quarterback doesn't guarantee a ticket to the playoffs. Favre had years he didn't make the playoffs. Brees has had years he didn't make the playoffs. Big Ben has had years he didn't make the playoffs. In all cases, either personnel was lacking due to injury, age, or GM failure, or coaching had a hand in their poor season.

It's remarkable that we have made the playoffs 8 consecutive years. In some of those years, we have been favored to get to the Super Bowl. In five of those years, we lost on the last play of the game to be eliminated. This has been an amazing run, and I, for one, am not wanting to see either GM or head coach replaced.

[Upnorth]

Having top notch personnel will get you into the playoffs because the peculiar bounces of the oblong ball will be somewhat normalized over the course of a 16 game season. The playoffs are a one and done. A tipped ball interception or a fumble that we fail to recover or an injury to a key player can be the difference in a win or a loss.

I don't buy the argument that this team consists of Rodgers and that we have almost no talent anywhere else, any more than I buy the argument that with Rodgers playing, it doesn't matter who the coaches are, we would still get into the playoffs. A superstar quarterback doesn't guarantee a ticket to the playoffs. Favre had years he didn't make the playoffs. Brees has had years he didn't make the playoffs. Big Ben has had years he didn't make the playoffs. In all cases, either personnel was lacking due to injury, age, or GM failure, or coaching had a hand in their poor season.

It's remarkable that we have made the playoffs 8 consecutive years. In some of those years, we have been favored to get to the Super Bowl. In five of those years, we lost on the last play of the game to be eliminated. This has been an amazing run, and I, for one, am not wanting to see either GM or head coach replaced.

Very well said. I firmly agree with most of this statement!

[pbmax]

and Eli has two wins and he's not near elite
Does that go back to the GM ?

Nope, goes back to a coach who has been snookered 4 times in the playoffs. I give him a pass on 2007 because his QB decided he was too cold.

[pbmax]

Anyone who thinks a superstar QB automatically gets you to the playoffs on a regular basis needs to reckon with Dan Fouts and Phillip Rivers.

[Fritz]

Well, in both wins for Eli, they went through Green Bay in games the Packers were heavily favored. The Giants failed to do anything in the years following those wins. The personnel for the Packers did not appear to be the problem, as they reached the playoffs in 8 of the 9 years and won a super bowl. Sometimes it's just the team that has the hottest hand on a given day. Maybe we'll have the hottest hand this year.

Good point. If Thompson is the one that failed the team, or Rodgers, or the fans, or whomever he's supposedly failed, then why were the Packers favored - by more than the usual three - in both games? Doesn't that suggest that the oddsmakers thought the Packers had more talent?

If anything, Mikey-Mike's record, which Collingsworth portrayed as heartbreaking, those five last-play losses in the playoffs, may indicate a problem with McCarthy's end-of-game coaching.

[pbmax]

Good point. If Thompson is the one that failed the team, or Rodgers, or the fans, or whomever he's supposedly failed, then why were the Packers favored - by more than the usual three - in both games? Doesn't that suggest that the oddsmakers thought the Packers had more talent?

If anything, Mikey-Mike's record, which Collingsworth portrayed as heartbreaking, those five last-play losses in the playoffs, may indicate a problem with McCarthy's end-of-game coaching.

They were heartbreaking and I am not being snide. Some nutty things have had to happen (I don't include the loss to the 49ers at home because the Packer offense was never really in that game). But McCarthy does a lot to LET those nutty things have a chance to happen.

[vince]

When you only consider the end-of-game playoff losses, it's easy to draw specific conclusions but that doesn't make them correct. It's called selection-set bias and it's rampant here.

Four of McCarthy's playoff wins were the result of late stops and/or controlling the clock to end games and seal victories.

2010 Philadelphia Eagles - Tramon Williams late interception in the end zone to seal the one-score (5 point) win.
2010 Chicago Bears - Sam Shields with late interception to seal the one-score (7 point) win.
2010 Pittsburgh Steelers - Tramon Williams with a late 4th down pass deflection to seal the one-score (6point) win.
2014 Dallas Cowboys - Packers run out the last 4 minutes to seal the 2nd half come-from-behind one-score (5 point) win.

So that's 4 late-game wins and 5 late-game losses with an 8-7 overall playoff record. Given such a miniscule data set, there aren't any reliable conclusions to draw here about finishing games in these mostly very competitive battles against the defacto highest echelon of the league - at least if you're willing to be objective about it.

[pbmax]

When you only consider the end-of-game playoff losses, it's easy to draw specific conclusions but that doesn't make them correct. It's called selection-set bias and it's rampant here.

Four of McCarthy's playoff wins were the result of late stops and/or controlling the clock to end games and seal victories.

2010 Philadelphia Eagles - Tramon Williams late interception in the end zone to seal the one-score (5 point) win.
2010 Chicago Bears - Sam Shields with late interception to seal the one-score (7 point) win.
2010 Pittsburgh Steelers - Tramon Williams with a late 4th down pass deflection to seal the one-score (6point) win.
2014 Dallas Cowboys - Packers run out the last 4 minutes to seal the 2nd half come-from-behind one-score (5 point) win.

So that's 4 late-game wins and 5 late-game losses with an 8-7 overall playoff record. Given such a miniscule data set, there aren't any reliable conclusions to draw here about finishing games in these mostly very competitive battles against the defacto highest echelon of the league - at least if you're willing to be objective about it.



What about adding in his record versus playoff teams in the regular season? There is room for improvement.

I don't think selection set bias comes into play in this discussion. We are not arguing that McCarthy is a bad coach (at least I am not) that should be fired due to playoff or close game mismanagement.

I am arguing that his late, close game management can be improved. So could his comeback record, though I have fewer complaints about it.





Rk Tm From To W L T W-L% Count
1 New England Patriots 2006 2015 31 19 0 0.620 50 Ind. Games
2 Indianapolis Colts 2006 2015 29 27 0 0.518 56 Ind. Games
3 Pittsburgh Steelers 2006 2015 28 30 0 0.483 58 Ind. Games
4 Green Bay Packers 2006 2015 26 30 0 0.464 56 Ind. Games
5 New Orleans Saints 2006 2015 24 31 0 0.436 55 Ind. Games
6 Denver Broncos 2006 2015 27 35 0 0.435 62 Ind. Games
7 Seattle Seahawks 2006 2015 20 31 0 0.392 51 Ind. Games
8 Baltimore Ravens 2006 2015 23 37 0 0.383 60 Ind. Games
9 Carolina Panthers 2006 2015 22 40 1 0.357 63 Ind. Games
10 Dallas Cowboys 2006 2015 19 38 0 0.333 57 Ind. Games
11 Philadelphia Eagles 2006 2015 18 37 0 0.327 55 Ind. Games
12 San Diego Chargers 2006 2015 18 37 0 0.327 55 Ind. Games
13 Cincinnati Bengals 2006 2015 20 43 2 0.323 65 Ind. Games
14 Miami Dolphins 2006 2015 19 41 0 0.317 60 Ind. Games
15 Arizona Cardinals 2006 2015 18 39 0 0.316 57 Ind. Games
16 New York Jets 2006 2015 16 37 0 0.302 53 Ind. Games
17 San Francisco 49ers 2006 2015 18 42 0 0.300 60 Ind. Games
18 Minnesota Vikings 2006 2015 18 43 1 0.298 62 Ind. Games
19 Chicago Bears 2006 2015 20 48 0 0.294 68 Ind. Games
20 New York Giants 2006 2015 19 46 0 0.292 65 Ind. Games
21 Washington Redskins 2006 2015 16 39 0 0.291 55 Ind. Games
22 Atlanta Falcons 2006 2015 17 42 0 0.288 59 Ind. Games
23 Houston Texans 2006 2015 18 47 0 0.277 65 Ind. Games
24 Tennessee Titans 2006 2015 15 48 0 0.238 63 Ind. Games
25 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 2006 2015 15 50 0 0.231 65 Ind. Games
26 Jacksonville Jaguars 2006 2015 14 49 0 0.222 63 Ind. Games
27 Kansas City Chiefs 2006 2015 12 43 0 0.218 55 Ind. Games
28 Buffalo Bills 2006 2015 12 50 0 0.194 62 Ind. Games
29 St. Louis Rams 2006 2015 12 53 1 0.189 66 Ind. Games
30 Cleveland Browns 2006 2015 10 60 0 0.143 70 Ind. Games
31 Oakland Raiders 2006 2015 9 54 0 0.143 63 Ind. Games
32 Detroit Lions 2006 2015 8 58 0 0.121 66 Ind. Games
Total 2006 2015 591 1324 5 .309 1920


Provided by Pro-Football-Reference.com (http://www.sports-reference.com/sharing.html?utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool): View Original Table (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tgl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=career&year_min=2006&year_max=2016&game_type=R&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&week_num_min=0&week_num_max=99&temperature_gtlt=lt&team_conf_id=All+Conferences&team_div_id=All+Divisions&opp_conf_id=All+Conferences&opp_div_id=All+Divisions&team_off_scheme=Any+Scheme&team_def_align=Any+Alignment&opp_off_scheme=Any+Scheme&opp_def_align=Any+Alignment&opp_is_playoff=1&c1stat=choose&c1comp=gt&c2stat=choose&c2comp=gt&c3stat=choose&c3comp=gt&c4stat=choose&c4comp=gt&c5comp=choose&c5gtlt=lt&c6mult=1.0&c6comp=choose&order_by=pass_td&utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool#results)
Generated 1/4/2017.

[vince]

What about adding in his record versus playoff teams in the regular season?




Rk Tm From To W L T W-L% Count
1 Green Bay Packers 2006 2015 26 30 0 0.464 56 Ind. Games
Total 2006 2015 26 30 0 .464 56


Provided by Pro-Football-Reference.com (http://www.sports-reference.com/sharing.html?utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool): View Original Table (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tgl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=career&year_min=2006&year_max=2016&game_type=R&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&week_num_min=0&week_num_max=99&temperature_gtlt=lt&team_id=gnb&team_conf_id=All+Conferences&team_div_id=All+Divisions&opp_conf_id=All+Conferences&opp_div_id=All+Divisions&team_off_scheme=Any+Scheme&team_def_align=Any+Alignment&opp_off_scheme=Any+Scheme&opp_def_align=Any+Alignment&opp_is_playoff=1&c1stat=choose&c1comp=gt&c2stat=choose&c2comp=gt&c3stat=choose&c3comp=gt&c4stat=choose&c4comp=gt&c5comp=choose&c5gtlt=lt&c6mult=1.0&c6comp=choose&order_by=pass_td&utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool#results)
Generated 1/4/2017.
Inherently biased and leads to biased conclusions. It absolutely comes into play if you are intending to draw conclusions about a general question (McCarthy and finishing games) but are determined to use only the results that are most likely to justify a preconceived conclusion.

If you pre-select only the games you know are likely to suggest the poorest result (only consider the games against the self-defining best teams in the league each year), SHOCKER - you're like to get the worst result.

The opposite of that would be to argue that he's the best ever at finishing games - just look at 2010's playoff run.

The only way to objectively gauge McCarthy's success in finishing games is to consider the entire population of his results - not a pre-selected subset that can be reliably predicted to skew the results before you even look at them.

[Zool]

That data shows he has the 4th best win percentage against playoff teams in the last 10 seasons.

[vince]

If you want to focus in on finishing playoff games based on some presupposition that there's something inherently unique about those games, that's a legitimate question but the data set (15 games) is far, far too small to draw any reliable conclusion so that's an exercise in futility.

[pbmax]

Inherently biased and leads to biased conclusions.

If you pre-select only the games you know are likely to suggest the poorest result (only consider the games against the self-defining best teams in the league each year), SHOCKER - you're like to get the worst result.

The opposite of that would be to argue that he's the best ever at finishing games - just look at 2010's playoff run.

The only way to objectively gauge McCarthy's success in finishing games is to consider the entire population of his results - not a pre-selected subset that can be reliably predicted to skew the results before you even look at them.

I edited my post to include everyone's results so that comparison's across teams and situation are possible. McCarthy is good. There is room for improvement. I don't just want him to have a higher win percentage, I want to improve late game management regardless of opponent.

How about this table? There might not be as much room for improvement as I thought. His record in game that the team had a 4 point lead or greater entering the 4th Quarter.






Rk Tm From To W L T W-L% Count
1 New England Patriots 2006 2016 101 7 0 0.935 108 Ind. Games
2 Green Bay Packers 2006 2016 85 5 0 0.944 90 Ind. Games
3 Pittsburgh Steelers 2006 2016 81 8 0 0.910 89 Ind. Games
4 San Diego Chargers 2006 2016 73 13 0 0.849 86 Ind. Games
5 Baltimore Ravens 2006 2016 75 9 0 0.893 84 Ind. Games
6 New Orleans Saints 2006 2016 75 8 0 0.904 83 Ind. Games
7 Carolina Panthers 2006 2016 69 10 1 0.869 80 Ind. Games
8 New York Giants 2006 2016 67 11 0 0.859 78 Ind. Games
9 Indianapolis Colts 2006 2016 73 4 0 0.948 77 Ind. Games
10 Seattle Seahawks 2006 2016 68 9 0 0.883 77 Ind. Games



Provided by Pro-Football-Reference.com (http://www.sports-reference.com/sharing.html?utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool): View Original Table (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tgl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=career&year_min=2006&year_max=2016&game_type=R&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&week_num_min=0&week_num_max=99&temperature_gtlt=lt&team_conf_id=All+Conferences&team_div_id=All+Divisions&opp_conf_id=All+Conferences&opp_div_id=All+Divisions&team_off_scheme=Any+Scheme&team_def_align=Any+Alignment&opp_off_scheme=Any+Scheme&opp_def_align=Any+Alignment&c1stat=score_diff_thru_3&c1comp=gt&c1val=4&c2stat=choose&c2comp=gt&c3stat=choose&c3comp=gt&c4stat=choose&c4comp=gt&c5comp=choose&c5gtlt=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6comp=choose&order_by=game_date&utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool#results)
Generated 1/4/2017.

[pbmax]

That data shows he has the 4th best win percentage against playoff teams in the last 10 seasons.

Yes. I don't want him replaced. I want him to improve.

[texaspackerbacker]

Anyone who thinks a superstar QB automatically gets you to the playoffs on a regular basis needs to reckon with Dan Fouts and Phillip Rivers.

True, but it could be damn near automatic if you surround that superstar QB with good talent. Fouts and Rivers were/are very good, but I'd argue well below superstar level.

[3irty1]

That data shows he has the 4th best win percentage against playoff teams in the last 10 seasons.

First best in the NFC.

[bobblehead]

and Eli has two wins and he's not near elite
Does that go back to the GM ?

BUT...and I dread saying this because we play them sunday. In his two SB runs he was off the charts ridiculous making stoopid accurate throws with 2" margins 30 yards downfield where receivers had to fingertip (or helmet) catch fastballs....and it happened over and over.

[bobblehead]

Having top notch personnel will get you into the playoffs because the peculiar bounces of the oblong ball will be somewhat normalized over the course of a 16 game season. The playoffs are a one and done. A tipped ball interception or a fumble that we fail to recover or an injury to a key player can be the difference in a win or a loss.
.

Yep, I love Micah Hyde, but as a rookie Krapernick hit him right in the hands for the game ender and....doink!

[bobblehead]

Good point. If Thompson is the one that failed the team, or Rodgers, or the fans, or whomever he's supposedly failed, then why were the Packers favored - by more than the usual three - in both games? Doesn't that suggest that the oddsmakers thought the Packers had more talent?

If anything, Mikey-Mike's record, which Collingsworth portrayed as heartbreaking, those five last-play losses in the playoffs, may indicate a problem with McCarthy's end-of-game coaching.

He consistently allows teams he has beaten to have a chance at a fluke/great play win to beat us.

[bobblehead]

When you only consider the end-of-game playoff losses, it's easy to draw specific conclusions but that doesn't make them correct. It's called selection-set bias and it's rampant here.

Four of McCarthy's playoff wins were the result of late stops and/or controlling the clock to end games and seal victories.

2010 Philadelphia Eagles - Tramon Williams late interception in the end zone to seal the one-score (5 point) win.
2010 Chicago Bears - Sam Shields with late interception to seal the one-score (7 point) win.
2010 Pittsburgh Steelers - Tramon Williams with a late 4th down pass deflection to seal the one-score (6point) win.
2014 Dallas Cowboys - Packers run out the last 4 minutes to seal the 2nd half come-from-behind one-score (5 point) win.

So that's 4 late-game wins and 5 late-game losses with an 8-7 overall playoff record. Given such a miniscule data set, there aren't any reliable conclusions to draw here about finishing games in these mostly very competitive battles against the defacto highest echelon of the league - at least if you're willing to be objective about it.

But you sort of make the point for us. Often times he takes his foot off the gas on offense, puts the D into a shell (spreading the field which creates huge running lanes) and allows teams back into games they have effectively lost. Then at the end with said team in position to win he needs the D to make a stand. In 2010 we got to line up Shields and in his prime Tramon, with Collins and Woodson. They managed to make the stand......

BUT...when you put your D on its heels for a full Q and a half counting possessions and then say "all right boys tighten up again" its very hard on a player to get back the intesity. Same goes for an offense that has had 3 straight 3 and outs because you run/run/pass/punt and the D knows your going to do it because you have done the same thing for 12 straight years.

[bobblehead]

The only way to objectively gauge McCarthy's success in finishing games is to consider the entire population of his results - not a pre-selected subset that can be reliably predicted to skew the results before you even look at them.

Correct. and you you look at it objectively he consistently blows 3 score leads in the middle of the 3rd quarter by counting down the clock that early. More often he wins because...well, he has a 3 score lead. Too often he loses games he never should because it gets the other team back in position to "get lucky".

[bobblehead]

Yes. I don't want him replaced. I want him to improve.

You mean like...learn from his mistakes? They don't call him stubby for nothing. (maybe tex is MM)

[vince]

McCarthy's teams consistently get leads - and even more consistently win those games when they are ahead in the 2nd half. If you want to judge him by whether he increases leads in the second half AFTER establishing the lead - be my guest but they count up game wins, not second half wins.

[vince]

Correct. and you you look at it objectively he consistently blows 3 score leads in the middle of the 3rd quarter by counting down the clock that early. More often he wins because...well, he has a 3 score lead. Too often he loses games he never should because it gets the other team back in position to "get lucky".
That happens less to McCarthy than just about any other coach in the league. Those are the facts.

[ThunderDan]

BUT...and I dread saying this because we play them sunday. In his two SB runs he was off the charts ridiculous making stoopid accurate throws with 2" margins 30 yards downfield where receivers had to fingertip (or helmet) catch fastballs....and it happened over and over.

No he wasn't. In 2007 he was horrible and only a lucky helmet catch saved his team. In 2011 he played like an MVP.

Here is 2007:
20/27 185 yards 2 TDs 0 INTs
12/18 163 yards 2 0
21/40 251 0 0
19/34 255 2 1

Here is 2011:
23/32 277 3 0
21/33 330 3 1
32/58 316 2 0
30/40 296 1 0

[Fritz]

You mean like...learn from his mistakes? They don't call him stubby for nothing. (maybe tex is MM)


Wait . . . I thought that was a penis joke.

[pbmax]

BUT...and I dread saying this because we play them sunday. In his two SB runs he was off the charts ridiculous making stoopid accurate throws with 2" margins 30 yards downfield where receivers had to fingertip (or helmet) catch fastballs....and it happened over and over.

Happened more in 2011 than 2007, but the helmet catch versus NE was otherworldly. Both the throw and the catch.

[pbmax]

Correct. and you you look at it objectively he consistently blows 3 score leads in the middle of the 3rd quarter by counting down the clock that early. More often he wins because...well, he has a 3 score lead. Too often he loses games he never should because it gets the other team back in position to "get lucky".

I am a little leery of walking the complaint back to the third quarter because at some point you have to credit the opposition for starting to make plays.

To make a case for McCarthy and Capers calling off the dogs that early, we would need to look at a lot of tape and pass rusher info.

[pbmax]

First best in the NFC.

Its a fair point.

[pbmax]

McCarthy's teams consistently get leads - and even more consistently win those games when they are ahead in the 2nd half. If you want to judge him by whether he increases leads in the second half AFTER establishing the lead - be my guest but they count up game wins, not second half wins.

This is his greatest asset. Despite all the moaning about the Packers coming out flat.

[pbmax]

True, but it could be damn near automatic if you surround that superstar QB with good talent. Fouts and Rivers were/are very good, but I'd argue well below superstar level.

Fouts was Marino before Marino.

[texaspackerbacker]

Fouts was Marino before Marino.

Marino passed for about 20,000 more yards in 16 years than Fouts did in 15. Marino threw 420 TDs/252 picks to 254/242 for Fouts.

I've always thought of Marino right up there with Starr,Unitas, Elway, Peyton, Favre, Rodgers, and Brady as true superstars. The name of Fouts somehow never occurred to me with that group.

[Bretsky]

Anyone who thinks a superstar QB automatically gets you to the playoffs on a regular basis needs to reckon with Dan Fouts and Phillip Rivers.


I don't get this

Are you saying Rivers is a super star QB ? He is not. Good but I would never say he is great


And Dan Fouts....played in a different era that today's NFL

[hoosier]

Fouts had about 5 years of being Marino-like, from 1979-83 or so. During those years he was the best QB in the NFL, but he also got the Chargers to the playoffs in most if not all of them.

[Cheesehead Craig]

But Fouts is still the best game day color announcer.

[Fritz]

Fouts had about 5 years of being Marino-like, from 1979-83 or so. During those years he was the best QB in the NFL, but he also got the Chargers to the playoffs in most if not all of them.

So, since the Chargers never did get to a SB during that time, the question remains as to whether somehow his GM "failed" him or the team or the fans.

I recall watching Fouts on TV; the guy really did have a rocket arm but was not mobile. What stands out more to me is how damn, damn good Kellen Winslow was. That guy was the prototype for today's TE/receiver types, like Jimmy Graham and all, except that if I recall correctly, Winslow could block, too.

[vince]

I don't get this

Are you saying Rivers is a super star QB ? He is not. Good but I would never say he is great


And Dan Fouts....played in a different era that today's NFL
You didn't read the article did you? This is an old, overused, oversimplified and tired argument.


You see, the problem is that NFL teams are wasting primes. Not just some of them. All of them. All of the teams are wasting all of the primes.
...
Additional research revealed that the Patriots have also wasted Tom Brady’s prime:
...
NFL front offices started freely admitting they’ve wasted the primes of first ballot Hall of Famers Here’s Jim Irsay on the Peyton Manning Colts:
...
Even though Steeler QB Ben Roethlisberger has two rings, his prime is anything but safe:
...
Andrew Luck has not even entered his prime, and already, his prime has been dashed by an NFL that just isn’t trying hard enough.
...
And the disease has spread to other positions, as hometown hero and left tackle Joe Thomas has seen his prime destroyed:
...
The stories kept on coming. Drew Brees’ prime fared no better than Brady’s:
...
Cam Newton, fresh off a Super Bowl appearance, isn’t safe:
...
It’s not a huge shock that some of the second tier of quarterbacks like the Falcons’ Matty “Ice” Ryan, have had their primes wasted.
...
And Philip Rivers of the San Diego Chargers’ prime has certainly taken a beating.
...
Perhaps no one’s prime has been wasted as carelessly as Dallas Cowboy quarterback Tony Romo’s. Jerry Jones’ constant meddling and porous defenses have squandered more prime years than almost any other front office.
...
The Dan Marinos and Jim Kellys of the world would have been perfectly happy with a single ring, but prime inflation has been consistent, and even mediocre talents with two Super Bowl victories cannot escape the prime-wasting epidemic.
...
The primes of several big name quarterbacks are not being realized, and the lack of Big Moves to provide the support that they need is appalling.
...
The 2011 NFL playoffs featured 12 teams. Four of those teams were quarterbacked by certain hall of famers (the Patriots, Steelers, Packers, and Saints). Several other teams were led by good quarterbacks or borderline Hall of Famers (the Giants and Falcons). Yet, despite the appearance of 6 quarterbacks with excellent primes, only Eli Manning’s prime was not wasted. When five of six primes are being wasted every season, your league has a huge problem.
...
Solving this issue is no easy task. NFL teams could sign more good players, but whether it is due to the high injury rate or the concussion epidemic, good players are in short supply. For example, the Seattle Seahawks employ tackle J’Marcus Webb, the Vikings still have Trae Waynes on the roster, and the Chicago Bears actually start Jay Cutler at quarterback. Without additional good players in the league, more and more primes will go to waste, and the league may have to look to adding additional Super Bowls to preserve the primes they do have.

If all it took was a QB it'd be easy but that's why Dilfer has a title and Marino doesn't. Each team has the same limited financial resources to spread as efficiently as possible to acquire as much depth of talent to overcome injuries and make runs at titles. A lot has to come together to consistently make runs. Even more has to come together at the right time to win it. I'd say Ted's done better at putting the team in position more consistently than all but one.

[Pugger]

and Eli has two wins and he's not near elite
Does that go back to the GM ?

Perhaps rings shouldn't be used to measure a player's greatness. Marino never won a ring and he is considered one of the best ever.