I think folks thought you meant they weren't worth taking by any team, at any draft pick. Love & Hurts obviously belong where they landed. Herbert too, for that matter.
? They scored 55 points against the Commanders. Hurts had 1 TD only. Not sure what you're looking up: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/202501260phi.htm Also, that team rushed for 229 yards! What do you think the main reason was. Sorry, there's no comparing Hurts and Burrow in terms of the adversity they've had to overcome. Tua and Herbert have only choked in their limited playoff appearances. Herbert especially with 4 INTs when he had the #1 defense to work with. Brees and Peyton had some very good playoff games in their first 6 years. You're factually wrong about Manning. In the 2003 season he had 158.3 and 138.7 ratings in the playoffs. Few of the teams Brees and Manning played with early in their careers were as solid as Philly. Both had really bad defenses for example. And why are you looking at win% when you yourself said one shouldn't look at that? Burrow is a great QB. He had one of the most impressive post-season runs you'll find when he took the Bengals to the SB behind about as porous an OL as you could imagine. Yeah, I was talking about "worth taking" for the Dolphins. And Burrow is the only one that was worth taking for us. The only QB who has played at a consistently high level and overcome serious adversity in the regular season and playoffs (far more than Hurts/Love or whoever else from 2020).
Again, the adversity thing is silly. What adversity did Brady overcome when he was winning all his Super Bowls? Or Montana? Or Aikman? Etc. Tua had one playoff appearance in the coldest weather in history against the defending and eventual SB champs. Not many QBs would put up big numbers in such a situation. Mahomes certainly didn't, even through he was playing against an injury-ravaged defenses with edge rushers plucked a few days earlier from Aisle 3 at Home Depot. Yes, my bad on Manning as he did finally play something other than poorly at the end of his 6th NFL season. Prior to that he was A$$ in the playoffs including that 31.3 rating in a 41-0 buttkicking at the end of the 2002 season. Again, however, there is no magic to the 6th season -- it is not some kind of definitive cutoff. But if your position is that it is than your position just got even more ridiclous. Indy has the 7th defense in pts allowed in 2002. Chargers were 11th in 2004. Both Brees and Manning lost playoff games with good defenses. Not sure what you are talking about re: me looking at win%. The fact remains that none of Brady, Brees, Manning, Montana, Marino, etc. ever won much of anything with seriously flawed teams. It really wasn't that impressive. The defense carried that team to the Super Bowl. In 4 games, Burrow led that team to all of 4 TDs. As I indicated before, the only time he was ever able to beat an opponent in the playoffs that scored more than 19 pts was when he was gifted an INT and possession near mid-field in OT. In the SB with a 20-13 lead with 10+ mins left in the 3rd quarter he was shut out the rest of the way. Burrow was not "worth taking" for the Dolphins because he wasn't available. It is actually required to have a QB, so every team has to "take" one somewhere, whether in the draft, FA or otherwise. To keep this in the realm of reality, who is the QB that has been available to the Dolphins since 2020 that you think was "worth taking".
First of all, the "adversity thing" is not silly, it's essential. It's absolutely necessary to have a QB that can overcome adversity in the regular season and playoffs. Brady? He played some great playoff football even in his first 6 years. That SB with 3 TDs and game winning drive was pretty good. Not Burrow-like, but he showed himself to be a good playoff QB. And Montana has the highest era-adjusted playoff rating in history. Even from the outset, in 1981 where the average passer rating was 72.9, he posted 104.8, 81.4 and 100.0 in the playoffs. That's as good as it gets. Mahomes had many amazing playoff games. Tua is 0 for 1 and he generally performed poorly in do-or-die games in the regular season. Cherry picking. Indy had the 29th, 17th, 15th, 31st, 7th, and 20th best defense for Manning's first 6 years. Really bad defense. In the previous post you said one shouldn't hold losing a game against a QB if they played well, so why are you suddenly using that argument against these QBs? It was absolutely impressive. He won a game against top seeded Tennessee getting sacked 9 times!! lol.. amazing demonstration of overcoming adversity, which is essential in a franchise QB. In hindsight, and only in hindsight, we should not have taken a QB that year.
I would have been fine with us taking Herbert or Love in 2020, even in hindsight. Herbert has had the worst recieving core and one of the worst offensive lines over the last five years compared to Burrow, Tua , and Hurts. Love has also had to play with mediocre recievers.
Yes, as I said, EVERY QB has to deal with adversity. You seemed to be talking about some kind of injury or off-field adversity and guys like Brady and Montana had none of that early in their careers. Did that make them not "worth taking" to that point? Of course not. Who exactly is the QB who never faced adversity in the form of great opponents, great defenses, injuries to teammates, etc.? Yeah, Brady's 3 TD SB was good. Certainly no better than Hurts' 4 TD Sb or his his 3 TD SB, but good nonetheless. And yes, Montana had a very good playoff run in 1981. But he also had some absolute stinkers, like his 34.2, 39.2, 42.0, 60.0 and 65.6 rating playoff games. Those performances were truly awful for any era and well below the league everage ratings for their time. Of course, as noted before, he's not alone, as Manning had that 31.3 rating game I mentioned earlier, as well as 35.5, 39.6, 56.6 and 62.7 rating playoff games. All truly awful performances for any era. And yet, he still clearly was "worth picking" in the draft, just as Montana was. And, of course, they aren't alone as Marino had playoff games with ratings of 29.3, 34.6, 54.9, 56.5 and 65.5. again, truly awful performances but that doesn't change the fact that Marino was well "worth taking" in the draft despite those repeated and numerous poor playoff performances. Etc. Yes, Mahomes is better than Tua. The Dolphins definitely should have taken Mahomes in the 2020 draft. If he was available. But he wasn't. Only one team gets to have Mahomes. Uhm, 7th, 15th, 17th and 20th are not "really bad." By any standard. 7th and 15th are above average. 17th and 20th are pretty close to average. A really bad defenses is a 30th ranked defense like Hurts had in 2023. Or a 29th ranked defense like Herbert had in 2021. Or the 24th ranked defenses like Tua had in 2022 and 2025. I'm not. I'm saying sinning or losing games is about the whole team and not just the QB. I'm not holding it against those QBs for enever winning championships with seriously flawed teams. I'm saying even the very best ever have NEVER done it. Nobody. Ever. No, his team won the game, largely because the Bengals defense held the Titans to 16 pts and got 3 INTs. Burrow led his offense to just 1 TD the entire game. They won because one of the INTs was at with 28 second left and gave the Bengals the ball around midfield and the kicker than made a 52 yd FG. I disagree, but again what QB do you contend they should have drafted in the years since? There was nobody even remotely worth taking with the Dolphins pick in 2021. In 2022, no QB even went in the first 2 rounds. And please don't claim now that you were banging the table for Purdy that year. Nobody worth taking in 2023. There were a lot of good QB prospects in the 2024 but all were long gone by the Dolphins' pick. In 2025 Jaxson Dart was available, but he certainly hasn't consistently overcome adversity in the playoffs so with hindsight he clearly wouldn't have been worth taking. so I can only presume that if you were the Dolphins GM for the past 5 drafts you would have passed on QB every single year because there was nobody "worth taking" by your standard. And that, of course, is absurd.
Herbert has now choked 3 years in a row. He doesn't have it. He was the primary reason they lost last year in the playoffs, and this year he didn't help at all. Even the announcers were pointing out it wasn't just an OL issue, but that the passing was suspect.
Look.. there's no question Burrow has shown way more than Hurts or Love in his ability to overcome adversity. You can't equate those guys. And as far as these historical QBs are concerned, you're looking at way above average performances in both regular season and the playoffs once you get past some developmental years. You can't just say everyone has to overcome adversity and dismiss the adversity argument. Even the worst QB in league history would fit that definition. Point is: Burrow > Hurts and Love. Again, Tua and Herbert never overcame their defenses to play well or win in the playoffs. Herbert especially had the #1 defense last year and just choked like crazy. Sorry, Burrow deserves the lions share of the credit for that win. That was unbelievable what he did. Almost no QB would have pulled that off. I've already said I'd take a QB every year in mid/low rounds until you hit on one. So you never know if you end up with Purdy or not, but at least you'll be trying instead of just staying pat.
Huh? They all have to overcome adversity, which is why the whole adversity issue is nonsense. Yes, the worst QB in league history does fit that definition. If your argument has simply morphed into your opinion that Burrow is better than Love or Hurts, I guess that's fine. But if your argument is still that Love and Hurts weren't "worth taking" than your argument remains as ridiculous as it has been all along. They are smaller sample sizes in large BECAUSE of the adversity you are talking about. Their teams missed the playoffs several times because of bad defenses, poor OLs, etc. Sorry, but that's dumb. No QB deserves the lion's share of credit for a game in which his offense scores one TD and the defense holds the opponent to 16 pts. I mean, OK, but the vast, vast majority of those guys you are talking about will never consistently overcome adversity in the playoffs and, therefore, aren't "worth taking" by your standard.
The degree of adversity they had to overcome is clearly different, and that is the reason Burrow > Hurts and Love. My argument has been the same from the outset, no morphing. Nah. We saw the QB choking in the regular season and playoffs. The QB was a key reason for the failure. It's only dumb if you don't remember that game. The amount of credit you'd theoretically give someone is proportional to how unlikely it is someone can do something, so no it's not "dumb" to suggest one person could get the lions share of the credit for something.
He was the most hit QB this season, and his receivers don't get any separation, terrible receivers and terrible oline.
Use the same standard as for Tua: can he or can he not overcome adversity and get his team a playoff win? Clearly he's failed thus far. It's 6 years dude. There are no excuses. The goal is to win a SB and they don't even have 1 playoff win. There's nothing suggesting Herbert is the guy to get you there when not everything else is working right.
