A debate: McManus vs. Calvillo

I'm been having a debate with someone I know who likes Montreal. Basically, the debate was whether you would rather have Anthony Calvillo or Danny McManus as your quarterback with both of them in form.

Personally, I think Calvillo had a higher quality team around him that gave him inflated stats. Montreal really should have won more championships too, but Calvillo doesn't have a great record in those games.

Of course, McManus threw a lot of interceptions in his career, and that is really his biggest weakness (even moreso than his lack of mobility).

Thoughts?

Flutie made Danny. Without Darren, McManus was nothing.

I take AC, although neither is my kind of QB

D-Mac hands down. Nobody put up better numbers consistently

By the same logic, Cahoon made Calvillo. Darren wasn't racking up all 5000 yds from McManus in his best seasons. Yes Darren, was the go to guy. Without a team, no player is anything. D-Mac was the man. His grey cup championships and yardage proves it. I'll never forget his '98 and '99 seasons. Incredible.

I watched him closely from day one when he first stepped onto the bombers practice field. A true football expert is not blinded by stats and numbers. Truth is, out of all the QBs in the league the last 2 decades, I wouldnt take either of these guys, but if forced to, I would have more confidence in AC on any given day.

lets see, AC struggled in Ham and DM helped win the last ticat cup. No biasm here.

I am at least a little more objective. I watched danny in winnpeg, games and practice, but did not cheer for him as a hated bomber. I cheered for him in BC. I could not cheer for edmonton in spite of darren. I cheered again for him in Ham. My opinion of him is neither biased nor prejudiced. Same with AC.

Ac Would not be the QB He is Today Without going to Montreal.
Tracey Ham and the Staff there Turn him around.
Why ? He Cause Sat and Learned.
There was no Pressure on him like Here.
Danny Was already a Starter and good one
They both Needed the change they are both Good QB
But one gave Us a Grey Cup Victory.

My Vote is For D-Mac.

The QB stirs the drink and the Als have been consistently very good for a good many years, largely due to having a high quality QB. Over his career, DM was good and occasionally great. AC was great more often than good.

On their best days, there wouldn't be much to choose between the two but AC had more of those days than DM.

An Argo-Cat fan

As somebody else said, AC has consistantly had better personnel around him. DM didn't have that opportunity. The Als didn't have the bankruptcy fire-sale the Cats did. AC has better mobility, but DM certainly was able to manage a game better. My vote is for DM.

maybe DM didnt have good personnel in ham and wpg, but he did in edm and bc. All those interceptions and low QB ratings had very little to do with team quality.

Both were fine quarterbacks. Both are certain Hall of Famers. Different styles and attributes, but both were leaders as well as athletes, and performed at a high level over the long haul. It's that consistent leadership that stands out to me in each of them.

I'm partial to Danny because I've always thought him a particularly fine human being, but you couldn't go wrong with either one of them on your team in top form.

At their respective peaks, they were different players IMO. McManus was a gunslinger, while Calvillo was a surgeon. McManus had the cannon arm and the fast release, while Calvillo was more cerebral, able to take what the defense gave him and still succeed.

Very hard to choose, especially considering that Calvillo is still active.

I think Toni is was more cerebral in his approach during regular season games and was a better regular season q.b, I just don't think Danny was as focused or up for every single game but I would take Danny over Toni any day in big games. Danny was a much better Grey Cup q.b, toni always seemed so tense.

I think Drexl has nailed it. Calvillo has always been amazing in the regular season, and disappointing in the post-season.

Is there anyone out there who can honestly say they've been watching the CFL for the past 15 years, and would rather see Calvillo behind centre in a Grey Cup game than McManus? (both at their prime)

It depends on whether you value stats or championships.

I would say it a draw both had great years in their prime. Way to many variables that could bring a debate back and forth. But both QB's were very good qb's.

Danny Mac was probably a better clutch QB, but that advantage was probably nullified by the fact that he hung on a couple of years too long.

I give the edge to AC providing he doesnt make the same mistake...

I would take Danny Mac no question I my mind.

The 1998-1999 model of Danny for me…AC is a future Hall of Famer too, but I prefer Danny for the simple fact that at his peak, he was one of the most efficient CFL QBs ever re his release, field generalship, and capacity to adjust his attack to what opportunities the defence presented him.

He also has multiple Grey Cup rings, which doesn’t hurt in this convo. LOL :wink:

It really isn’t a case of this comparison being one of two guys at different levels – it’s a question of taste.

Oski Wee Wee,

he was one of the most efficient CFL QBs ever
ok, one thing to regard him highly and prefere him, but this is just too far. He doesnt even make top 20 all time, in any sense.

You wouldnt be saying this if he had never been a ticat winner.

That is why I bolded the words "at his peak," which proceeded what you quoted from me. His peak was roughly 1997-2000 IMHO.

He was top twenty in many categories in various senses. Was he the best QB the Cats ever had? No, Tom Clements was in my view re ability and Bernie Faloney re leadership and results. I'm limiting my earlier comments to the Danny-AC debate only. :wink:

Oski Wee Wee,