(11-14-2018, 03:44 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote:

(11-14-2018, 07:55 AM)SuperJville Wrote: Are you serious?  Go look at the 90s qb ratings. Being in the 80s was very good.  In fact I remember Brunel was ranked in the top 5 or 10 all time at a certain time in terms of qb rating and was a million times better than Bortles will ever be. End of discussion.

Absolutely.

I'm clear that it's easier to put up stats in today's NFL. I'm just not impressed with Brunell after his injury. He was strictly average despite amazing talent around him--even during the different era. 

(11-14-2018, 08:17 AM)iHaunting Raven Wrote: Not even close.

---

Taylor is #16 in yards and has not many TDs
Smith is #23 and not many TDs
Boselli maybe but he didn't play enough time.

Taylor missed 36 games and averaged 80 YPG. I'm not calling him the best because he missed too much time, but when he played, he dominated teams with his speed and power. He was routinely taken out of goal line situations. 

Smith was a starter for 10 seasons. The difference between #23 and #10 is about 2,200 yards. The average career for the top-10 receivers is 15 years. Jimmy was throwing up 1,000 yard season until cocaine forced him out. His average is 1,200 a year as a starter. The dude was amazing. 

Boselli absolutely was one of the best OL of all-time. 

I'm not arguing for Hall of Fame. I'm arguing for talent and performance given that Brunell is be lauded as some sort of good QB when he wasn't post 1997.

Fix the O-Line!