Some of you dudes are all over the place too. Some of yall using MVPs as a barometer, Brees never won one and is widely considered Top 6 with an argument as a Rushmore GOAT...
Some of yall acting like Russ need multiple rings but Marino still in most people Top 6 with ZERO...
Some of yall using All-Pros but have Aikman regular ass in your Top 15, but Russ having "only" one All-Pro isn't enough...
Bottom line, historical evaluation of QBs is based on more than one thing, it's a cumulative analysis. He doesn't have the strongest arm and he can go off-script too often but he makes winning plays way more often than not, is calm under pressure, and is an efficient passer...
The only 2010s QBs you're gonna put over Russ are guys guys widely viewed as Top 8 GOATs period--->Brady, Manning, Brees, Rodgers are better than all or most if the QBs to ever play PERIOD. Yall undervalue how fortunate we are to have seen football in this era, 2005+ is the most stacked generation(s) of elite quarterback play ever, saying he's "maybe only" the 5th best QB of his era isn't a demerit considering his career overlapped with historical heavyweights...
Drew Brees has a SuperBowl MVP. Dan Marino has a regular season MVP as well. It matters in the topic of viewing someone’s entire body of work. People are full of shyt if they sit here and act like they shouldn’t matter.
Nikkas on here have no problem using rings and MVP to justify why Jordan is better than Bron and comparing NBA greats, but it’s an issue when you use it in football as a barometer to Wilson legacy. Cats even always talk about how Steph Curry doesn’t have a Finals MVP, so it’s disingenuous to act like it shouldn’t be used in other sports.
You could make the valid argument that he is better Aikman, but again he has a Super Bowl MVP. Russ was rather mehhh those two SuperBowl performance wise and that fact doesn’t change.