if phil simms wouldnt have been hurt alot in his career would he have had the stats and records to be one of the greatest in NFL history. REASONS PLEASE!
2007-05-14 06:35:02 · 14 answers · asked by Nicholas S 2 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
Anyone who, does'nt think Phil Simms was one of the greatest, need only replay Super Bowl XXI.
2007-05-14 14:31:25 · answer #1 · answered by ny21tb 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
no, Bill Parcells offense was focused on the running game, and ball control offense. Phil would never have been known as an elite quarterback. Notice his back up - Jeff Hostetler - comes right in when Simms gets hurt, wins the remaining games, and the Super Bowl in 1990
The seasons the Giants won the Super Bowl, they had the 17th ranked pass offense (1986) and the 23rd ranked pass offense (1990)
Even moreso, look at Simms lines from the other playoff games the year that he won the Super Bowl
vs. Sf - 9 comp 19 att 136 yds
vs. Was - 7 comp 14 att 90 yds
Simms only made two Pro Bowls in his career,
2007-05-14 06:43:14 · answer #2 · answered by d b 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A great game does not make for a great career. He was good and he did win a Super Bowl but he was blessed with having one of the greatest defenses in recent times. Frank Reich engineered one of the greatest comebacks in history but his overall numbers dont add up, neither do Simms. By the way I am not being biased, I am a huge Giants fan and grew up a couple of miles from the stadium but I have to say, he's a better commentator than quarterback.
2007-05-14 06:53:25 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
One of the greatest GAMES ever, and in a Superbowl at that, but as a QB I don't think he would have. Really with the injuries it is too hard to say. Also those injuries weren't from car accidents or something, they were from Football. So yeah that was HIS BODY in the game. So to take out the injuries would mean we have to make a new person or put Simms on a different team. I think that you can't really say how a player would be without the injuries though because to a degree they influence how the guy plays.
2007-05-14 06:46:45 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
A definite NOT. He was an average QB on a team with a stellar D. Injured or not he never had to produce much on O because of a great D. Similar to the Raven team that won the SB. Phil Simms wouldn't even make the Top 50 of best QBs ever.
2007-05-14 07:23:10 · answer #5 · answered by ndmagicman 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
How many rings does Tarkenton have? None, so he's out. Between Simms and Manning, I'd pick Eli because he's always clutch.
2016-05-17 23:28:02 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Simms isn't even the best QB of the Giants all-time. How could he possibly be the best in the NFL all-time?
2007-05-14 15:08:08 · answer #7 · answered by ronald g 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Phil Simms had great command of the Giants system and was one of several players that complimented the system and each other. I do not believe he had the overwhelming skill set of Marino or Elway, therefore his numbers had to come from the system. Systems do not endure like superstar talent.
2007-05-14 06:51:03 · answer #8 · answered by John M 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Phil was always getting hurt sorta like archie manning...only diff is archie would play hurt..phil wouldnt..I think phil went to the superbowl with the giants once. I dont recall him having any spectacular stats or anythnag like that.I think he played for the bengals too.
2007-05-14 06:45:00 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
he was decent but Steve Young, Joe Montana, John Elway, Dan Marino, Troy Aikman, Peyton Manning, Bret Farve are all way better and i can still name some who are better than simms.
2007-05-14 07:38:08 · answer #10 · answered by sunsfan#13# 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋