Winning a super bowl has nothing to do when comparing 2 quarterbacks based upon pure talent, abilities, and numbers they put up. Winning a super bowl does factor in when comparing 2 TEAMS. IMHO having a quarterback who does put up impressive numbers on a average or sub-average teams is more of a credit to him. Think about if Jerry Rice would have been drafted to another team, would we be talking so much about Joe Montana as much? Vice versa? Kansas City has the best O-line in football and one of the best blocking fullbacks in the game. I am a HUGE KC fan, and I don't want to discredit Priest Holmes a bit, but the fact of the o-line, the blocking fullback, and the passing threat of the overall team factors in heavily into the records he has. Put him (healthy) on the 49ers right now and they will BOTH go nowhere.
It is too easy to be an armchair quarterback and discredit Marino, Kelly, and others who did not win the super bowl. Who would you rather have on your team, Dilfer or Marino-Kelly ( in their prime)
Winning a super bowl usually is a factor of a great quarterback, but too many other options factor in.