If you want to not back down from saying something that is factually untrue, have at it. The facts show that over the course of his career Philip Rivers has been a winning QB.
Playoff record? Super Bowls?
I'll save you the Google: 4-5 in the post season, 84.5 QB rating. Under 60% completion PCT., and 11/9 TD/INT ratio. These are not elite QB numbers with the game/season on the line. I fully understand that "team" is important, but you can't tell me that they haven't had more talent than guys like David Tyree and yet, Eli has two (LaDanian Tomlinson, for one, Antonio Gates for another).
Look, we don't have to argue: I simply think that the measure of a QB is what happens when the game/season is on the line. Some guys come through with what is necessary to win the game - Brady, Manning(s), Brees (on occasion), Rodgers, Flacco, Roethlisberger - and some guys don't - Romo, and I put Rivers here. If you think he's a good QB that's fine. I would probably take him on my fantasy team if I had no shot at the big number guys, and I'd probably do okay.
First off, the David Tyree comment was pointless, since it implies that Eli has spent his career throwing to scrubs like Tyree, when that is not true at all; Eli has almost always had at least one stud WR. I am not sure Rivers has ever had a stud WR, although he did have a beastly Tomlinson for a while and Gates for all of his career. Also, Eli had Coughlin, a likely HoF coach for most of his career, while Rivers had Schottenheimer for one and then mediocre/bad head coaches for the rest.
Second, Eli is not as good as Rivers. Never has been, never will be. Eli having two Super Bowls is like the flukiest thing ever, especially when you consider he has missed the playoffs in almost every other season he has been in the NFL. He is not a QB who is good enough to get his team to the playoffs on a regular basis. Eli needs a Buress, Nicks (in his prime), Cruz (pre-injury) or Beckham to be really good or great. Rivers, on the other hand, this year is playing great despite missing his number 1 WR, his great pass catching RB and his future HoF TE. Oh, but his defense keeps blowing leads, so that means he's not good, right?
I actually agree with Stadler in that Rivers is not really a "winner". Sure he wins games and sure he puts up good stats, but I don't believe he has "it". I'd choose him on my team over most QBs, but I would not put him in the top tier of QB category.
I wouldn't either. My argument has been that Rivers is not the horrible QB Stadler claimed he was.
At this point, I would say Rivers is in that 7-12 range of QBs. He was almost in the same tier as Manning, Brady and Brees back in the late 00s (before Rodgers had elevated into that top tier), when he led the NFL in YPA three seasons in a row, a phenomenal achievement (since YPA is usually one of the best indicators of how good a QB is).
I'm not saying Phillip Rivers is Joe Montana by any stretch, but if Joe Montana had to work with what Rivers has had to work with, I don't believe for a second that he would be the same Joe Montana that he was in San Francisco.
Exactly. I am not saying that Rivers is an all-time great who is in the same tier as the best of the best, but he has been a very good QB, and at times great, QB for pretty much all of his NFL career.