Bradshaw Admits to Steroid Use.

[birtikidis]

you CAN use super bowls as a perimeter for how good a qb is. that IS a part of the game. it's the BIGGEST part of the game. was marino a better qb then the three you mentioned? sure was. BUT only because of the body of work he put together. it took him 16 years to be considered that great.
.

No it didn't. Marino was considered great after he threw 48 TD passes in like his 2nd season.

You can't use SB wins to judge one player from the next. Its the worst argument that anyone ever tried to make. You can't tell me that Marino is better then the 3 QBs I mentioned , even though they all have Rings. But on the other hand tell me that Bradshaw is better because of his rings. You can't have it both ways.

I guess Bill Cartwright was waaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy better then Patrick Ewing. After all he has THREE RINGS and Ewing has NONE. Silly argument.

MSM in that same 2nd season, Dan marino got blown out in the biggest game of the year by a GREAT qb in the Super Bowl. what good were those 48 touchdowns then?

[RuthlessBurgher]

I probably injected 15-20 joints last week with kenalog which is a steroid.

This guy injected steroids into 15-20 joints per week too.

[AngryAsian]

Its really hard to throw QB comparisons with players from different eras that span several decades. Peyton Manning will far and away will have the augmented statistics because the way the NFL has geared its rules over the past couple of seasons, it has reshaped the game to a pass-happy way of life... plus a major majority of QBs defer to OC's play calling. Bradshaw was our on-field OC and called his plays. The throwback players like Bradshaw and Staubach called their own plays which, IMO, has to garnish some consideration towards the measurement of his accomplishment at the position.

[rpmpit]

Yeah, Terry was all geared up back in the day. If not for the 'roids and his massive physique, we probably wouldn't have won a single Lombardi



BTW, I was looking for pics of a young TB and found this...

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SeS1c8NtNy8&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SeS1c8Nt ... re=related[/url]

[Mr Smartmonies]

you CAN use super bowls as a perimeter for how good a qb is. that IS a part of the game. it's the BIGGEST part of the game. was marino a better qb then the three you mentioned? sure was. BUT only because of the body of work he put together. it took him 16 years to be considered that great.
.

No it didn't. Marino was considered great after he threw 48 TD passes in like his 2nd season.

You can't use SB wins to judge one player from the next. Its the worst argument that anyone ever tried to make. You can't tell me that Marino is better then the 3 QBs I mentioned , even though they all have Rings. But on the other hand tell me that Bradshaw is better because of his rings. You can't have it both ways.

I guess Bill Cartwright was waaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy better then Patrick Ewing. After all he has THREE RINGS and Ewing has NONE. Silly argument.

MSM in that same 2nd season, Dan marino got blown out in the biggest game of the year by a GREAT qb in the Super Bowl. what good were those 48 touchdowns then?

You just have a Flawed argument. Your trying to use a couple games to make your point.
YOu mentioned you were born In 1979. I was able to see the latter part of Bradshaws career and the beginning of Marino's. Marino was the Best QB to ever come into the NFL. He carried weak teams year in and year out to the playoffs. He never had a defense. He never had a running game. Geez, Bradshaw had franco, stall worth and swann and all the time in the world to throw the football. Steelers of the 70's were a machine. You trying to make a case that one player is better than another based on their TEAMS accomplishments. Teams win Championships. A one dimensional offense will not win you a SB. ultimately it doesn't matter how good the QB is , he will eventually lose in the playoffs to the beter team. That might not happen until the SB. But it will happen at some point. And you might look back and see that the QB threw 2 or 3 picks and blame the loss squarely on him. But its often faulty. The best team generally wins. One man can't win a SB. Please stop using SB wins or SB performances to justify your argument. otherwise you have to use Doug Williams on Marino. And your not prepared to go there.
Ben is better than Bradshaw. He's more talented. He's a one man gang. Surround Ben with that incredible offensive lien they had in the 70's, give him Franco , stallworh and Swann and you can begin to check off the rings won on your checklist.

oh an by the way, you can listen to more of me at smartmoniesclub.com , just put your speakers on.

[birtikidis]

but if i listen to your radio show how can i debate with you!?!
i wouldn't put ben in the hall yet. he may BECOME the greatest qb in steelers history, but he's far from it now. though, i think he's the second best that we've had in the modern era he still has a ways to go.

[JUST-PLAIN-NASTY]

Is this really such a surprise? Like many people said from experience, prescriptions are given for steroids for many injuries. If steroids of any form were not against the rules today they still would be prescribed. It has been rumored FOREVER that many football players in that era took steroids for a competitive advantage including the Steelers. We would all be surprised how many players and their names took steroids to heal more rapidly. At that time, it was nothing more than therapy in those situations. No big surprise...Just look at Terry! He wasn't "Juicin" for a competitive advantage! The biggest factor is it wasn't against the rules. You can't shake your finger at one person because decades later it is deemed dangerous and cheating! Shame on one...Shame on all!!! If Terry Bradshaw tells me he took prescribed steroids to heal injuries so he could continue to play in the 1970's...I would just say, "Those were the days!"

"4-TIME" TERRY STEELER NATION!