FanNation - The Republic of Sport

Brian Urlacher said 09/30, 06:00 PM
I will choose Mark Brunell. Brunell has more completions, yards, and more passing touchdowns. Brunell could also run the ball to. If he got in trouble and was about to get sacked he could get away. Brunell has 2433 rushing yards with 15 touchdowns. Warner has 263 with 2 tds. Brunell has 2738 comp. Warner has 1660. Brunell has 31826 yards. Warner has 20849. Brunell has 182 passing tds. Warner 127. Mark Brunell was a 3 time pro bowler also. Kurt Warner also had better teams around him and for that put him in the spot light more often to get those 2 mvp awards. Mark Brunell has been a better qb than Kurt Warner. Now when you say Kurt Warner and Mark Brunell you think Kurt was the better qb but Brunell has the better numbers. Brunell was the better all around qb.

Brian Urlacher said 09/30, 07:03 PM
Ok if you say that he didn???t have as long as career as Brunell we will look at the averages. Brunell averages 211 completions a year. While Warner averaged 166 a year. Brunell averages 2448 passing yards a year. While Warner averaged 2084. Brunell averaged 14 tds a year. While Warner averaged 12. While Brunell???s completions % isn???t quite as high doesn???t mean Warner was much more accurate than Brunell. Brunell averages 8.1 interceptions a year. Warner averages 8.3 a year. So if you would add those averages to the same amount of time Brunell played. Brunell still has the better numbers. While Brunell did get sacked all those times means his line was not very good. So that means he had to get out of the pocket and earn those yards he gained. That also says his team wasn???t as good as Warner???s teams were. I didn???t say that Brunell???s teams weren???t good teams I am saying that Warner???s teams were better making his stats better. Also Bunell only has been in the league for 13 years.

Brian Urlacher said 10/01, 07:55 PM
How does making averages favor the player that plays longer it definitely doesn???t. It favors the player that plays shorter. It is simple math. 130 divided by 13 is 10 while 130 divided by 2 is 65. This means that you have to be consistent longer and that means that you are better. That doesn???t mean that because a player plays longer that his averages automatically are going to go up you have to play good to have good numbers. Here are some qbs that never won a super bowl and are better than Warner. Jim Kelly, Dan Marino, Fran Tarketon, Warren Moon, Dan Fouts. Here is a qbs that have won mvp awards and haven???t won a super bowl. Steve McNair, Rich Gannon, and Y.A. Tittle. Also there was another player on the team that won an mvp award also, Marshall Faulk. The only one team to have three straight mvps by 2 different players. Hinting that Warner did have the better teams. Also how is comparing teams like apples to oranges people compare teams all the time. That is one of the stupidest things I have ever heard of. How do you think choose who is going to win or lose oh wait they compare them or how do people choose who is the best team ever oh wait they compare them.