Fantasy Noob 10 Posted February 10, 2012 I guess it depends on your definition of elite. We really should define elite before we have this arguement, hell John Clayton's definition has almost 15 QB's listed as elite. If elite means top 3 QB's in the league well then no. I would go Rodgers, Brees, Brady for current active players. If elite means he can single handedly win the game for you or give you the chance to win, well yes. But by that definition we have to make Tebow, Newton, Vick and Rothelsburger elite along with Eli. Now all of a sudden we have 8 elite QB's on 32 teams if we count out Peyton. I am not sure being top 25% is elite. I guess I would prefer my elite to be the top 10% or top 3 QB's in the league but that does not give writers or talk radio much grist for the mill. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joey Gladstone 33 Posted February 11, 2012 Sure...I think my laughing was at calling him sheli...saying he is not elite. Then saying 5 more years he goes from not being an elite QB in the league right now...to an all time elite QB in the HOF. If you don't consider him elite for the game today...then saying 5 years is all it will take to make him not just elite in today's game, but as an all-time guy is ridiculous. I see where you're coming from. Is he elite? I don't know. Anytime you want to consider him so he lets you down. He'll probably get into the HOF though. Is it justified? I don't know. Something for people to argue about for the next 50 years I guess. He's a very good QB that you can obviously win it all with. In a ridiculous building-a-franchise fantasy hypothetical situation I'd still take his brother, Brady, Brees, and Rodgers over him 10 out of 10 times. With Rivers and Roethlisberger I'd have to think long and hard. I'd PROBABLY take both of them over him too (as long as I could be 100% sure one of them wasn't a raging sociopath) . He'd definitely get the nod over Romo, Vick and Cutler. I might feel ballsy and gamble on Newton over him too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IndyFan 2 Posted February 13, 2012 This whole conversation is a function of what you consider "elite". Is it big Fantasy Football stats or is it having the winning gene or the "it" factor as Skip Bayless says. I feel it is a combination of the two. With that in mind, the question raised is where do you draw the line. Marino, Moon, Kelly and Fouts did enough in the regular season to be considered HOF because the stats were huge. Staubach, Jurgensen, Aikman and even Namath are in without big regular season stats but all had the "it" factor and were winners. Eli has good to very good regular season stats (would be very good without so many int) and unquestionably has the winning gene. He performs better under pressure and has made some unbelievable plays late in Super Bowls and has an outstanding playoff record (particularly on the road). I would say Eli will be HOF with 4 or 5 more decent regular seasons even if he doesn't do much more in the playoffs and he has earned the ELIte tag. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dfin13 0 Posted February 13, 2012 I think it's extraordinary that he, by his own words, placed himself in the elite category before the season started, then came out in the 2011 season and backed it up: 4933 yards passing, 29 TDs, 92 QB rating, and then marched his team to 4 straight postseason wins, ending with a Super Bowl title. It's almost as if he willed himself to back up his claim. You can point to 9-7 and say he's just ordinary, but as an individual performer, he was pretty damn elite this season. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
