01-13-2022, 03:13 PM
The best analogy I've seen for the debate between Burrow and Herbert is that they are similar to Joe Montana and Dan Marino.
They played in the same general time (80s to mid 90s), they were both considered among the best in the game at the time and they were both wildly successful.
Dan Marino had a better arm, was considered more "physically gifted" and put up, generally, more touchdowns and yards than Montana did. But Montana was more accurate and more clutch. They called him Joe Cool for a reason. In the face of pressure, he was able to succeed, which is what we've seen from Joe Burrow early on in his career.
Joe had the "intangibles" that Marino seemingly lacked. Despite being extremely gifted, Marino struggled to find much post season success (relatively speaking). He played in 18 career playoff games and went 8-10, never won a super bowl, only making it to one where he lost to Montana.
Montana, on the other hand, played in 23 career playoff games and went 16-7 with an eye popping 4 super bowl wins.
Coming into the NFL, Marino was a first round pick while Montana was a third round guy. That doesn't exactly translate to the Burrow-Herbert discussion because Burrow was drafted before Herbert and they were both top picks, but I think that's a reflection of how Marino's "tangibles" were valued more than Montana's "intangibles."
So, in a battle of "intangibles" versus "tangibles," Marino was definitely the more physically gifted player, but lacked the "it" factor, similar to Justin Herbert, whereas Joe Burrow does not have the physical gifts that Herbert has, but he has the killer instinct and accuracy to succeed.
Even today, some may consider taking Marino over Montana simply because of his physical gifts, despite Montana clearly having a better ability to win and lead. And the truth is, it may not even be a bad choice. Maybe if Marino had Montana's team, he'd have succeeded as well. We'll never know.
I'm not guaranteeing this by any means but, at the end of their careers, I wouldn't be surprised if Burrow wins multiple Super Bowls while Herbert puts up the superior stats, but falls short more often when it matters most.
They played in the same general time (80s to mid 90s), they were both considered among the best in the game at the time and they were both wildly successful.
Dan Marino had a better arm, was considered more "physically gifted" and put up, generally, more touchdowns and yards than Montana did. But Montana was more accurate and more clutch. They called him Joe Cool for a reason. In the face of pressure, he was able to succeed, which is what we've seen from Joe Burrow early on in his career.
Joe had the "intangibles" that Marino seemingly lacked. Despite being extremely gifted, Marino struggled to find much post season success (relatively speaking). He played in 18 career playoff games and went 8-10, never won a super bowl, only making it to one where he lost to Montana.
Montana, on the other hand, played in 23 career playoff games and went 16-7 with an eye popping 4 super bowl wins.
Coming into the NFL, Marino was a first round pick while Montana was a third round guy. That doesn't exactly translate to the Burrow-Herbert discussion because Burrow was drafted before Herbert and they were both top picks, but I think that's a reflection of how Marino's "tangibles" were valued more than Montana's "intangibles."
So, in a battle of "intangibles" versus "tangibles," Marino was definitely the more physically gifted player, but lacked the "it" factor, similar to Justin Herbert, whereas Joe Burrow does not have the physical gifts that Herbert has, but he has the killer instinct and accuracy to succeed.
Even today, some may consider taking Marino over Montana simply because of his physical gifts, despite Montana clearly having a better ability to win and lead. And the truth is, it may not even be a bad choice. Maybe if Marino had Montana's team, he'd have succeeded as well. We'll never know.
I'm not guaranteeing this by any means but, at the end of their careers, I wouldn't be surprised if Burrow wins multiple Super Bowls while Herbert puts up the superior stats, but falls short more often when it matters most.
![[Image: oN5QAdY.png]](https://i.imgur.com/oN5QAdY.png)
