Compared to today's offensive line, yes, Brooks had a better one. Compared to O-lines Drew had during a 3 or 4 year run, beginning in '08, when he had Jahri Evans, Carl Nicks, Jonathan Goodwin and Jon Stinchcomb; Drew's line was at least as good, if not better than what Brooks had. Not as strong at tackle, but good enough, and the interior line Drew had was ridiculously good.

But this isn't a comparison of Drew to Aaron Brooks. Clearly Drew is far better, and it isn't a discussion. But you mentioned Drew would have won back to back to back Super Bowls if he had Aaron's O-line and defense... Obviously in order for a team to have a chance without really good QB play, they must have a strong O-line and defense, and that's the point. Heck, we've seen just how good this team is WITH an elite QB, but no defense, haven't we? In order to stay at least competitive without your starter, you MUST have a good defense and a backup QB who is competent enough. But a lot of people would have you believe that without Drew there is no hope, period. People are so used to having Drew that they forgot that not every winning team has had an elite QB.

Though I am not comparing Drew to Aaron, as I said before, I would still like to point this out: If Drew would have won three Super Bowls in a row (as you said) with what Brooks had, then why didn't we win it in 2010, when we had a top ten defense and still had that strong offensive line? That team was better than any of Aaron's teams. It wasn't as good as the '09 or '11 teams, for sure, due to some injuries, but it still stacked up better than what Brooks had. I don't miss Aaron as our starter, but let's cool the hyperbole just a bit.