This is one of those things you might be thinking but generally don't express, as it carries with it an evident blasphemous component. It did not occur to me explicitly, but when it appeared in print from a reliably eloquent, consistently insightful correspondent, one Gordon Bloom, it looked an awful lot like the truth.
Ben Roethlisberger is a better quarterback than was Terry Bradshaw.
That was No. 6 among 10 random observations Bloom mailed me in the spring. He uses a manual typewriter, the U.S. Post Office, and an uncommon lucidity. Several times a year, he sends me a list of random sports and political observations, each its own literate jewel.
Obviously, as I'm in no position to edit Mr. Bloom, here is the entirety of No. 6.
"Ben Roethlisberger is the greatest quarterback in Steeler history -- better than Terry Bradshaw, better than Bobby Layne, even better than the great Jimmy Finks. Bradshaw was a great quarterback, but he was also surrounded by a greater number of outstanding players than Ben has around him. During the most productive years of Bradshaw's career, eight or so of his fellow teammates were future Hall of Famers, not to mention his head coach. I can't think of eight players on the present Steeler team who are likely candidates for Canton. Ben is getting it done with a very good team, but not a team so excellent that virtually everywhere you look there is a future Hall of Famer. Which is why I say that, in my opinion, Ben's overall football talent surpasses even that of the great number 12."
I spent part of this training camp week putting this argument to current and former Steelers coaches and officials and some journalists old enough to judge, not indicating whether I agreed or not. Ben's better than Brad either got minimal resistance or solid support, though not always for attribution.
Only Art Rooney Jr., who scouted Bradshaw and most of his Hall of Fame entourage, offered nominal caution, but nothing that achieved the level of flat disagreement.
"Ben is a work in progress," Rooney said. "Bradshaw was just an outstanding athlete. He was a champion javelin thrower, which takes a lot of coordination. In those days, guys took physicals on the treadmill. He was among our top four or five guys with his capacity on that. Toward the second half of his career, the rules in the league changed (to benefit the passing game) and he kind of blossomed into the new rules. I saw him on TV one time and they were asking him about his career and he just held up four fingers. 'That's all I have to say,' he said. I kind of liked that."
Bradshaw won four Super Bowls, which is his signature statistic, not only because it's the most important statistic, but also because the balance of Terry's numerological profile, though distinguished, is hardly sensational. He threw almost as many interceptions (210) as touchdown passes (212) in his 14 years with the Steelers. In his first five seasons, he threw 48 touchdown passes and 81 interceptions. In Roethlisberger's five years, the corresponding numbers are 101 and 69.
But it has to be more complicated than that, right? Is Ben better than Brad?
"He's on his way," said offensive coordinator Bruce Arians, who put more responsibility on Roethlisberger than ever before last year, with the result being Ben's second Super Bowl victory. "Terry's record stands for itself, and it's not like there aren't Hall of Famers on this team. Hines Ward is probably headed there. And Troy (Polamalu) too. James Harrison, if he has a couple more years like last year. Terry won four Super Bowls."
But there were likely more Hall of Famers in Bradshaw's huddle -- Lynn Swann, John Stallworth, Franco Harris, Mike Webster, and Terry Bradshaw -- than there might be on all the Steeler rosters of which Ben will part.
"I've thought for a long time that Ben was better, but I never wanted it attributed to me," said one former club executive whose career coincided with Bradshaw. "What Ben's done is amazing and he's done it from Day 1. Bradshaw, as a rookie, threw six touchdowns and 24 interceptions. Plus I think Ben is a better leader. He gets things done in all kinds of adverse situations. Terry was not that confident. He was fragile in his relationship with Chuck Noll. Rarely did he bring the Steelers from behind."
Statistical guidelines on what exactly constitutes a come-from-behind win are not always uniform, but it's instructive to note that the Steelers list 19 comebacks as authored by Roethlisberger in his five seasons, the 19th of which won Super Bowl XLIII, where most sources credit Bradshaw with 19 for his entire career.
Ben's won more games (51) in his first five years than any NFL quarterback ever, and the club records for touchdown passes in a season (32), passer rating in a season (104.1), career completion percentage (62.4) all belong to him. But while the top three seasonal passer ratings in Steeler history all belong to Ben as well, there are a myriad of additional stats that appear to favor Ben when they probably really don't.
It's not terribly relevant, for example, that Ben has seven 300-yard performances in his career while Bradshaw had only four, because the nature of offensive football has evolved so dramatically toward the passing game in 35 years. Remember as well that Bradshaw called his own plays, was the MVP of two Super Bowls (two more than Ben) and was the league's MVP in 1978 (once more than Ben).
All that said, and staring blasphemy in the face, I think I agree with Mr. Bloom.
(Contact Gene Collier at gcollier@post-gazette.com.)
(Distributed by Scripps Howard News Service, www.scrippsnews.com.)
column
Must credit Pittsburgh Post-Gazette


Roethlisberger or Bradshaw ??
First, it's really not fair to compare total touchdowns, interceptions, and yards. Bradshaw played shorter seasons, so his window of opportunity for building passing stats was shorter. Therefore you must really compare averages per game.
So using the numbers provided in the article, Bradshaw averaged, per game (out of 78 total), .83 touchdowns, 1.15 interceptions, and 122.81 yards.
Roethlisberger has averaged (through 80 games, only 2 more than Bradshaw) - 1.25 touchdowns, .86 interceptions, and 187.18 yards.
Statistically, through nearly the same number of games, Roethlisberger has better averages than Bradshaw. But, as already stated, Bradshaw had a more consistent running game he could rely on; Roethlisberger's first several seasons had dominating running games, but it has dropped off the last few.
Both QBs are big game players - they know how to win on the big stage and under the lights. And (in my own opinion with no quantitative backing whatsoever) similarly, both are hot or cold - they are either on fire any given week, or completely stink any given week.
Disimilary, however, QBs from Bradshaw's era called their own plays. Roethlisberger needn't determine the inital call, but audible only.
One is a Hall of Famer. The other is well on his way to Canton (seriously, discounting Favre, Reothlisberger is 1 of 4 starting QBs with a SB Ring, and 1 of 2 active QBs with multiple Rings!)
Given that Bradshaw and Roethlisberger are very similar QBs, who both know how to win (very close winning percentages). So I guess who's better at this point is really a personal decision of style - Roethlisberger's stats or Bradshaw's career-proving legitimacy.
I think you CAN compare the
I think you CAN compare the quarterbacks from different eras; you just have to be smart about it.
First, it's really not fair to compare total touchdowns, interceptions, and yards. Bradshaw played shorter seasons, so his window of opportunity for building passing stats was shorter. Therefore you must really compare averages per game.
So using the numbers provided in the article, Bradshaw averaged, per game (out of 78 total), .83 touchdowns, 1.15 interceptions, and 122.81 yards.
Roethlisberger has averaged (through 80 games, only 2 more than Bradshaw) - 1.25 touchdowns, .86 interceptions, and 187.18 yards.
Statistically, through nearly the same number of games, Roethlisberger has better averages than Bradshaw. But, as already stated, Bradshaw had a more consistent tunning game he could rely on; Roethlisberger's first several seasons had dominating running games, but it has dropped off the last few.
Both QBs are big game players - they know how to win on the big stage and under the lights. And (in my own opinion with no quantitative backing whatsoever) similarly, both are hot or cold - they are either on fire any given week, or completely stink any given week.
Disimilary, however, QBs from Bradshaw's era called their own plays. Roethlisberger needn't determine the inital call, but audible only.
One is a Hall of Famer. The other is well on his way to Canton (seriously, Reothlisberger is 1 of 5 starting QBs with a SB Ring, and 1 of 2 active QBs with multiple Rings!)
Given that Bradshaw and Roethlisberger are very similar QBs, who both know how to win (very close winning percentages). So I guess who's better at this point is really a personal decision of style - Roethlisberger's stats or Bradshaw's career-proving legitimacy.
Post new comment