I'd put Marino 1983-85 and Warner 1999-2001 as top 5 in 2025 if we are also including mediocre 2023-24 Patrick Mahomes' 2018-2022 numbers to consider top 5 for 2025

Rodgers 2020-21 also makes him top 5 by many years ago ratings. What's 1 extra year of delusion?

I get the counterpoint that Kittle pushed off and a punt hit a 49er in 2023 and the refs called a tug, Quez dropped a gift, and a bad DC left receivers uncovered on the same play twice in 2022. Wow, Mahomes made a couple high school throws to uncovered guys... eLeEtZ!

Mahomes is average for stats and he lost 3 playoff games on the field last year (refs can change outcomes but not performance)

Travis Kelce for top 5 TE too? He was also awesome in 2019-2022

We get it. You have all been so wrong about Hurts so often that you can't adjust to the reality of 2025. You need to pretend Tyreek Hill is on the Chiefs and Kelce is 32.

In the past Mahomes was the Marino stats guy who also won SBs. He is now the mediocre ref assist guy who needs 1 more SB to set interception and sacked records.

He's 1992-94 Jim Kelly now and you are pretending he's Montana 1988-1990

You Mahomes worship people are the worlds biggest Chiefs fans.

He could have a big bounce back year and Caleb Williams could throw 45 TDs. Neither is top 5 right now.

George Pickens 2022-2024 : 12 TDs

2001-2003 Stinkston 13 TDs and Trash 15 TDs

Dallas still sucks

The Inky has a nice article on Ty Robinson. Well worth the read. This X video is part of that article.

As is this X video

And this one

1 hour ago, mattwill said:

And this one

Certainly seems like something. Hard not to be optimistic.

This team is fun as hell right now!

8 hours ago, SkippyX said:

George Pickens 2022-2024 : 12 TDs

2001-2003 Stinkston 13 TDs and Trash 15 TDs

Dallas still sucks

Pickens is legit. I understand the urge to bash him because he's in Dallas now, but he's wayyy better than Thrash and Pinkston.

10 hours ago, Wentz_Era said:

He indeed is an NFL QB!

But is he still a rookie NFL QB?

7 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Pickens is legit. I understand the urge to bash him because he's in Dallas now, but he's wayyy better than Thrash and Pinkston.

And you can't take these stats in a vacuum. Reid's offense was pass happy. The Steelers? Here is how they ranked in past attempts those years:

2024: 29th

2023: 29th

2022: 17th

14 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

you'd need to be able to get into a gunslinging duel against another top QB and out duel him through the air. Hurts has never proven to be able to do that,

He did in LIV and would've in LIX had Mahomes not crapped the bed so spectacularly.

13 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I haven't sat and thought about where he falls on the list.

Once you do, you'll realize it's a pretty tough case to make to keep him out of the top-10. You'd basically have to project him having a career ending injury tomorrow to do it because on his current trajectory, he's easily top-5 let alone top-10.

13 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

He did in LIV and would've in LIX had Mahomes not crapped the bed so spectacularly.

Agreed 100%

12 hours ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Allen is better too. I don’t care about stats, Buffalo asks Allen to carry that team without a ton of help.

Yeah if you want to put Hurts in the same tier as Jackson, then whatever, I don't agree but it's not worth debating. Trying to say he's better than both Jackson AND Josh Allen? Yeah that's where you lose me. The dude is a really good QB despite all the "students of the game" calling him trash and scum all year, but he's still not top-3 as it stands now.

14 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Yes, even after that last performance. And no, none of the current crop are likely in the top 10 all-time, I never said they were. But some want to put Hurts on a pedestal and don't want to hear anything but effusive praise for him. He was very good in the Super Bowl. He was very good all year, at what they asked him to do. What they didn't ask him to do was to carry the offense on the strength of his arm. And that's fine. This team is built to bully their opponents. The Eagles are at their best offensively when they can do that, and Hurts helps them in that with his style as well.

But, as good as he was in that one game, I would still put Hurts outside the current top 3, all things being equal. The question was asked, if you were starting over, who would you want at QB... and I wouldn't put Hurts at the top of that list. I'd want a QB that I could lean on more to carry the team. Fortunately, this team doesn't need that and has a team that the QB can lean on... and this team rode that recipe all the way to a Super Bowl victory.

Well, if we're being as objective as possible, Mahomes hasn't really carried the Chiefs over the past 2 seasons. It has been mostly the Chiefs defense that's lead to much of their success. He didn't have particularly great, or stand out regular seasons in 2023/2024, but when the playoffs came he took it to another level in order to advance. I don't see how that's any different than what Hurts did this past season.

I don't think many want to see Hurts on a pedestal, I think they just want fair criticism/praise. Lastly, Mahomes has never really had a dominant performance in any of the Super Bowls he's played in, and I also think it's also fair to say that he was outplayed in both SB's by Hurts. Anyway, I think the starting a franchise hypothetical is silly, because we all know success is determined a lot by where you go. That doesn't mean you can't be a really good, or great QB with a bad organization, but there's no way Mahomes is in any goat conversation if he had been drafted to the Bears. The same argument goes for Burrow, Allen, Jackson, Hurts, etc.

Which one of you assclowns started this latest Hurts debate?

From Tommy Lawlor’s article today when talking about Calcaterra. His point was that Calcaterra and Jackson are similar size and speed.

17 hours ago, Mike030270 said:

He gets a lot of hate but it's silly to see people saying Hurts is better than Mahomes

Didn’t say that, just said that I am not sure any top 10 QB of all time is playing right now. Is Mahommes that good or is it a combination of prime Kelce, a while with Hill, AR as coach on offense but that D has been damn good. Let’s take the Super Bowl win over the Eagles. Ultimately won, not by Mahommes but by the difference of a Hurts pick six and awful coverage on a kick. Otherwise, "Hurts” (read that as Eagles because it is a team game) has his second Super Bowl. Yes, Mahommes is good but all time greats are not measured by Super Bowl wins but rather by their own play. Is Mahommes a Brady? Not even close. Really good at improvisation (see Tarkenton below) and has a great understanding of how Kelce gets open. But not a top ten of all time at this point.

Hell, let’s say Hurts had won the first one and gets another one. Three Super Bowl wins. Does that make him an all time great? Then I guess out of Tarkenton (three losses), Kelly (four losses) or Aikman (three wins), Aikman is the top ten QB? Nonsense. Kelly was the better QB of the three. Staubach (2 wins) was a better QB than Aikman.

Now, I am older than the AFL, watched football for over sixty years, and even then I have only seen a small fraction of the games played over the years so I am not prepared to anoint any QB playing now as a top 10 All Time, even with how Roger has f’d with the game rules to make it so easy on QBs these days. (I mean, how ridiculous is it that the only player that can’t have body weight on them on a tackle is the QB. Saves the owners money I guess with the investment in QBs but that is a stupid rule).

18 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Yeah if you want to put Hurts in the same tier as Jackson, then whatever, I don't agree but it's not worth debating. Trying to say he's better than both Jackson AND Josh Allen? Yeah that's where you lose me. The dude is a really good QB despite all the "students of the game" calling him trash and scum all year, but he's still not top-3 as it stands now.

I'd argue they're all in the same tier, but I'm OK with them being rated higher than Hurts. I can see why someone would say he's better than Jackson due to Lamar always choking in the postseason, but shrugs

17 hours ago, mattwill said:

It wouldn't surprise me at all if we go with only 2 TEs on the 53 man roster. With the 2 IR designated to return spots the 53 is effectively 55, as long as there are injuries. I can see the two TEs being Goedert and either Bryant or Granson (with the other of those two going to the Practice Squad), and Calcaterra moving over to WR displacing Johnny Wilson. He has shown the ability to actually catch the balls thrown his way and Wilson has not done so so far. In additiopn Calcaterra has developed some chemistry/rapport with Hurts.

I don’t see Calcaterra as a WR but Wilson needs to fix his drops. I think the third TE is quite possibly a TE/FB, which was kind of my point. I think that is a three way battle between Granson (favorite to win), BVS and Bryant. After Stoll left, there were several 12 plays where Uzomah lined up in FB/H-back alignments. I could be wrong, but Lurie’s comment and those plays lead me to that conclusion. Only way a "FB” is on the roster and active is that level of multiplicity. Reason Granson is my favorite to win that position is BVS is a bit light.

Good Lord, Mahommes is a 2x MVP, 3x First Team All-Pro, 3x SB winner and MVP, averaging just shy of 300 yds/gm, over a 3:1 TD/INT ratio, and a career passer rating of 102. Oh and he's still only 29 years old. He's an all-time top-10 QB, guys, I know it's the offseason so we have to pass the time somehow but this one is bordering on the ridiculous.

3 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

I don’t see Calcaterra as a WR but Wilson needs to fix his drops.

What is it about Calcaterra that you don’t see as a receiver?

When i read about the 2 TEs we signed it sounded like one was a little shorter, more of the H-Back type.

I have a feeling he has a better chance of sticking as the TE3 if he can show some versatility as a backup FB.

The other guy... maybe he beats Calculator if the Eagles figure he will be a cheaper long term option to extend compared to Calc.

15 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Hurts is top 5 to me, but outside top 3. He's either 4 or 5. That seems to rile up some folks that have to have him at the pinnacle of every discussion. I am sorry to those folks. As a football player, his value rises higher than as a QB, for me. To me, to get to the very top of the QB discussion, you'd need to be able to get into a gunslinging duel against another top QB and out duel him through the air. Hurts has never proven to be able to do that, and he hasn't had that many opportunities, given the way this team plays. Maybe someday he will, but he hasn't yet. And the really fortunate thing is, the Eagles generally don't require that to get a win either. So, he's likely the perfect fit for this offense.

It definitely makes them mad when you don't rank them high enough. It's not an insult. Some players are just better than others. You can be great and still have another player above you

10 hours ago, DaEagles4Life said:

Mahomes

Burrow

Allen

Hurts

Lamar

Hurts is an elite QB and one of the best in the NFL but I would take the other three over him. I personally think Burrow is the best pure QB in the league

I think if Herbert was on another team then they'd be winning more. I'd rank him higher too

30 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Didn’t say that, just said that I am not sure any top 10 QB of all time is playing right now. Is Mahommes that good or is it a combination of prime Kelce, a while with Hill, AR as coach on offense but that D has been damn good. Let’s take the Super Bowl win over the Eagles. Ultimately won, not by Mahommes but by the difference of a Hurts pick six and awful coverage on a kick. Otherwise, "Hurts” (read that as Eagles because it is a team game) has his second Super Bowl. Yes, Mahommes is good but all time greats are not measured by Super Bowl wins but rather by their own play. Is Mahommes a Brady? Not even close. Really good at improvisation (see Tarkenton below) and has a great understanding of how Kelce gets open. But not a top ten of all time at this point.

Hell, let’s say Hurts had won the first one and gets another one. Three Super Bowl wins. Does that make him an all time great? Then I guess out of Tarkenton (three losses), Kelly (four losses) or Aikman (three wins), Aikman is the top ten QB? Nonsense. Kelly was the better QB of the three. Staubach (2 wins) was a better QB than Aikman.

Now, I am older than the AFL, watched football for over sixty years, and even then I have only seen a small fraction of the games played over the years so I am not prepared to anoint any QB playing now as a top 10 All Time, even with how Roger has f’d with the game rules to make it so easy on QBs these days. (I mean, how ridiculous is it that the only player that can’t have body weight on them on a tackle is the QB. Saves the owners money I guess with the investment in QBs but that is a stupid rule).

I didn't quote you because I wasn't talking about you

Not sure why you brought up SB measurements as an argument. I'd look towards his actual stats which do rank him way above Hurts