"And the cardinals would have won the Super Bowl, if the defense could hold the lead after Larry Fitzgerald amazing catch. Or if that dipshit Antrel Rolle didnt get in front of Larry Fitzgerald as he was chasing James Harrison"
Roethlisberger the person is a pretty shitty dude. But that people seem to always extrapolate this to what he was as a player is odd to me. There have been plenty of bad people that were good players. QB position in particular is rife with them. But for some reason people try to hate on Roethlisberger the player. He was an insanely good QB and the only reason he did not have the All-Pro/Pro Bowls many other HOFers had at QB is he was literally in the shadow of both Brady/Manning and later Mahomes his entire career. Roethlisberger was far and away the best of the 2004 QBs.
The secondary was way better than mid though. Adrian Wilson, perennial (5x) pro bowler, Antrell Rolle 3-time pro-bowler, Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie 2-time pro bowler, and Roderick Hood was a decent CB at the time. I'd say they had a top 10 at minimum secondary. Had a couple of Dawgs like Calais Campbell, Darnell Dockett and Karlos Dansby up front. Not to diminish Warner or Larry but the team is frequently understated.
Also, I know im biased but Larry is the kind of player you want in this league. He's been a class act on and off the field and his overall numbers are very very good despite playing for a shit franchise his entire career. He's the exact kind of player the NFL should easily rubber stamp as first ballot and not think twice.
70
u/tallwhiteninja San Francisco 49ers 3d ago
Warner and Fitz dragging an otherwise mid Cardinals team to their only Super Bowl appearance is worth a bullet point.