Dan Marino question for those fans around at the time

[pittpitt]

I went to Pitt in the late-90's and didn't pay much attention to pro football until around 2000 when Marino was just about retiring. I "know" he's one of the greatest QB's ever, and fans say he's without question Pitt's best QB ever. Here's what I don't get: His college stats appear to be those of a guy who threw a lot but wasn't necessarily careful doing so. Comparing efficiency stats to other highly considered QB's of the same time period:

Marino: 79 TD's to 69 interceptions, 58% completions, 7.1 yards/attempt
Elway: 77 TD's to 39 interceptions, 62% completions, 7.5 yards/attempt
Young: 56 TD's to 33 interceptions, 65% completions, 8.5 yards/attempt
McMahon: 84 TD's to 34 interceptions, 62% completions, 9.0 yards/attempt
Eason: 37 TD's to 29 interceptions, 61% completions, 7.7 yards/attempt
Kelly: 33 TD's to 28 interceptions, 56% completions, 7.7 yards/attempt

Marino is considered nearly on-par with Elway all-time, and he's clearly slotted ahead of Young, yet his stats pale in comparison and are basically the same as Kelly's but with twice as many passes thrown. His numbers are really inefficient, and he was playing on Pitt teams loaded with talent so it's not like he was trying to win games by himself and was therefore forced to throw some questionable balls. His TD/Int ratio is trash compared to more recent Pitt QB's who are light years behind him perception-wise (Palko 66/25, Stull 32/18, Sunseri 49/23), and still nothing special compared to some Pitt QB's shortly before and after his time in Oakland (Congemi 42/32, Cavanaugh 31/16), although much better than Trocano (23/41). I get it he had an all-time cannon, but what did Marino do well that added value to Pitt other than just chuck it a lot? I have a hard time getting past that pedestrian completion % and yards/attempt ratio, and the interceptions are terrible.

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

I don't know about the stats, but no one had a faster release, throw and his poise was seen as a freshmen. His confidence even higher and I will always respect him.

I did know am Owner of a Beer Distributor where Dan bought the Beer for his Fraternity and over time, he started to buy the beer for all the Fraternities and Parties being held at Pitt. he then wanted his piece of the action and got it. Dan was always a smart Man!

Sorry, but Dan broke many NFL Records that were later broken by other great QBs. Joe Namath's Stats are horrible and not even near the NFL Record Books, but he is in the NFL Hall Of Fame and he helped create the National Football League & Super Bowl with his attitude, personality, and media following. sounds like a Hall of Famer to me!

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

I understand where you're coming from but you are looking at it through the wrong lens.

It sounds silly today but in those days passing efficiency was not really a consideration.

I am too lazy to do it today but if you look at the Pro Football Hall of Fame quarterbacks from that same era you will see that a lot of them had poor passing efficiency numbers both in college and the pros.

Also, while using statistics to compare quarterbacks can be a somewhat useful tool, it can also be a very tricky thing. That is still true today.

Young and McMahon played in what is basically the forerunner of the spread offense. The gaudie statistics did not begin and end with those two among BYU quarterbacks. Marc Wilson, who preceded McMahon, also put up enormous numbers. He was a solid NFL back up. Robbie Bosco, who came after them, led the Cougars to their only national championship. Ty Detmer won the Heisman Trophy also in that same offense.

Whoever plays quarterback for Baylor or Washington State or Texas A&M or West Virginia is also going to put up ridiculous numbers. That was my point in the Jason White/Larry Fitzgerald Heisman Trophy debate in 2003. It was clearly the offense, not the player. Unfortunately, too many sports writers are too stupid to understand that seemingly obvious point.

Eason at Illinois and Kelly at Miami were considered similar prospects. Eason went ahead of Marino in the draft. Neither player was as talented as Marino, who was without question absolutely the equal of John Elway.

As for your point about Pitt, unfortunately, in that era, Pitt did not have a strong tailback to complement Marino. Their best running back was a guy named Brian Thomas, who was more of a third-down back.

Also, at that time, aside from Lavell Edwards at BYU, most coaches did not understand the passing game like they do today. Everything was vertical and deep. There was no such thing as a ball control passing game. That concept had not yet been invented – at least not east of the Wasatch Mountains.

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

As far as Marino himself and what made him special, let me count the ways.

He had a rocket launcher of an arm, as you alluded to. He also had the quickest release I have ever seen from any quarterback. That is a huge advantage as it gives the quarterback in extra beat before he makes his throw.

He was also incredibly accurate and deceptively nimble inside the pocket.

Finally, he had GIGANTIC balls. I love the quality and a quarterback. He was never afraid to push the envelope and if he thought he could make a throw he would attend. He never played in fear.

The statistics may not show it but I think the difference between Dan Marino and Pitt's next best quarterback (my vote would be for Alex Van Pelt) is greater than the difference between Tony Dorsett and Pitt's next best running back (my vote would be for LeSean McCoy) or really any position player and the next best player at said position. He was a phenomenal player and anyone who saw him would agree with that.

 

[recruitsreadtheseboards]

Exactly what DVY said. Back then it was mostly throwing the ball downfield. I HATE QB efficiency ratings in many respects. For an example, it is 3rd and 8. QB A: Dumps ball off to TE 4 yards away with no chance of getting the 1st down. QB B: Throws the ball down the field 20 yards and is broken up. QB A gets rewarded for a play that had no chance of moving the chains, QB B gets penalized for trying to convert the first down.

Not to mention in that era, you had two WR, a TE and a FB and a RB. There weren't 27 different WR's and formations and spread offenses designed to quickly get rid of the ball and get it to guys in one on one situations. It was a different game.

Hardly ANY QB of that era has stats like they do now. Now, ALL offensive stats are completely blown up by this focus on offense unlike before when it was a more defensive game.

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

The game has changed so much in the last 30 years that it's impossible to compare players from various eras.

However, from my perspective, the two best NFL quarterbacks I have ever seen are not Manning and Brady, they were Elway and Marino. If you put those two players in this era where no one could touch their receivers or them, their statistics would've been absurd.

I am sure those older than me feel the same way about guys like Roger Staubach, Terry Bradshaw, Joe Namath, Johnny Unitas, Bart Starr, etc.

I am a huge believer that a great player in one era would be a great player in any era. I say that because it is not physical tools alone that separate the great players from the merely good players. It is something mental and emotional about them. They have a drive to succeed that most normal human beings simply do not possess.

That is why I believe that if Joe Greene played today he would be the dominant defensive tackle in the NFL. If Bronco Nagurski played today he would be one of the dominant players too. If you took Jim Brown, Barry Sanders, and Walter Payton, they would be the best running back's in the NFL. Similarly, if you took guys like Aaron Rodgers, Adrian Peterson and JJ Watt, and placed them in the 60s, they would've been dominant in that era as well.

I don't hold any beliefs as they relate to sports as close to my heart as I do that one. I have no doubt that it's true.

 

[pittpitt]

1) It was mentioned in the responses that efficiency wasn't as important back then so TD/Int rates were worse for everybody. But I included the college stats of the other top QB's who were in college at the exact same time as Marino, and they all had better TD/Int rates, they all had better yards/attempt, and only one had a lower completion %. If you add Randall Cunningham to the list, he also surpassed Marino in all three areas (61-30, 58%, 7.8).

2) Are people honestly saying that coaches and fans did not think interceptions were a big deal in the 80's? No intelligent football thinkers ever said, "We were really moving the ball and could have scored points until the QB made that bad pass, and now the other team is instantly in a much better position to score than had we ended up kicking off or punting to them"?

2b) No one was upset, or affected in how they viewed Marino's ability, by him throwing 46 interceptions in 24 games as a junior and senior? I know it's a different time, but fans absolutely lost it a few weeks ago when Peterman threw 2 interceptions in the Iowa game, his first college start, against a great D (that CB King who had both picks is a future NFL player who is 2nd in the nation with 5 interceptions right now). Are fans now geniuses who recognize how bad 2 interceptions are compared to fans 30 years ago when a QB could average 2 picks/game for 2 straight seasons and people thought they were the greatest because they could bomb it out occasionally?

 

[Pittx9]

I think it's simple. Danny had tremendous talent and was on some great Pitt teams. Had a pretty bad senior year, but the talent was still there. He was the QB of some great teams here, but to say he is one of the best college QBs of all time is just flat out not true.

 

[pittdan77]

The other side of this is, Pitt's defense was downright scary back then. As a coach, I would not have been afraid to turn the ball over.

 

[JSSTartan]

I completely agree with DvY.

 

[pittmeister]

Watch the 1982 Sugar Bowl on YouTube. It will tell you all you need to know about Marino.



He had great freshman and junior seasons. He was hurt during his sophomore season and gave way to Trocano. His senior year was not good for many reasons. But was still very good when he needed to be.

 

[ncyajleel]

Absolutely right. Most QBs were gunslingers and threw the ball downfield, WAY downfield. That was the Raider's motto. Terry Bradshaw was the same. It is more of a gamble to do that than the QBs and offensive schemes of today with precision passing, so hence the low QB ratings.
So you saw how Marino's passing complemented Shula's game.

 

[phxpanther]

Doc is right about passer rating and ints were just considered part of the passing game, they weren't avoided like the plague, the way they are now.

But Marino was not good his sr. year. People can make excuses but fact is he wasn't good that one year

 

[pitt-girl]

Just as an aside - Marino was featured in an article of SI as a junior...... in high school. He was a special talent.

 

[steel1975]

As a senior Marino had absolutely ZERO talent in the WR/TE department

I remember so many passes being dropped because the receiver couldn't handle his velocity

He was a man playing with boys

In today's world he would've gone pro after junior year

He needed pro receivers to catch his passes and that's exactly what happened when he went to Miami - an immediate success

 

[ChooChoo Panther]

Doc is right about passer rating and ints were just considered part of the passing game, they weren't avoided like the plague, the way they are now.

But Marino was not good his sr. year. People can make excuses but fact is he wasn't good that one year

Yeah, his junior year was awesome when he threw 37 touchdown passes which was more TD's thrown by any QB, college or pro, at the time. His senior year dropped off big to 17 TD's. I am guessing that his career Pitt stats, including interceptions, are skewed by that senior year.

ChooChoo

 

[cbpitt2]

Marino had the arm to throw it downfield. The defense was good enough to make up for turnovers so there was no fear of throwing it downfield rather than tink passing. Wasn't Collins one of his WRs? He could fly too.

 

[steel1975]

Collins could run but couldn't catch

Like Justin Weah