PDA

View Full Version : Peyton Manning is the greatest QB of this generation


TimeKiller
09-22-2009, 07:27 AM
1. Peyton Manning
2. Tom Brady
3. The biggest question since who was 1 or 1a.

No 1/1a bullhonky. 14:53 seconds of offense and he wins his 119th all time? Very respectful and humble in taking down a legend, one in his own organization even. Is there any wonder why this guy is so well liked? Aside from facing him twice a year I think he's probably the player I respect the most in the entire league.

Second Honeymoon
09-22-2009, 08:33 AM
Peyton is the best player in the league and has been for at least 5 years...probably more. He is the smartest and craftiest player, he is like a coach on the field, and he knows the rules and uses them to his advantage more than any other player I have ever seen.

In my eyes, he is the best quarterback to ever play the game. Montana won more but Manning is better. Elway had better arm and speed but Manning is better.

That being said, I hate the guy and hope he goes away soon. He has been kicking our Texans tails for too long and he needs to just go ahead and retire. I think he will still be around for another 5 years though.

HoustonFrog
09-22-2009, 08:39 AM
Peyton is the best player in the league and has been for at least 5 years...probably more. He is the smartest and craftiest player, he is like a coach on the field, and he knows the rules and uses them to his advantage more than any other player I have ever seen.

In my eyes, he is the best quarterback to ever play the game. Montana won more but Manning is better. Elway had better arm and speed but Manning is better.

That being said, I hate the guy and hope he goes away soon. He has been kicking our Texans tails for too long and he needs to just go ahead and retire. I think he will still be around for another 5 years though.

No. Montana was just as smart, crafty and efficient. He just won. Uncanny. Manning is up there, just not Montana in my book. I think Manning needs another SB to get near him. Also, if you read MMQB by Peter King this week he has his own list...don't agree with all but he has it. He says a similar thing about Manning and championships. People have to remember too that he was quite Romo-like or whomever you want to use in the playoffs at the start of his run. But he is incredible overall

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/09/20/mmqb/4.html

1. Otto Graham. Easy. Ten seasons, seven championships, seven passing titles.

2. Sammy Baugh. Had the best season of any player ever in 1943. Led the NFL in passing, punting and, as one of the best safeties in football, in interceptions.

3. Joe Montana. Made everyone copy Walsh's high-tech offense, and won four titles in a decade.

4. Johnny Unitas. First great modern quarterback, and great in the clutch. He'd be higher if he won more than one title in his last 14 seasons.

5. Brett Favre. Most durable, most productive quarterback of all time. Marred by only one title.

6. Peyton Manning. Could break every record if Favre ever retires. Needs another championship or two to climb the list.

7. John Elway. Two titles, though they came late, capped the career of a Unitas-type with legs.

8. Dan Marino. Prototype dropback quarterback who, arguably, was the model for the pocket quarterback of the last 40 years.

9. Roger Staubach. Might be the best player/athlete/leader of a quarterback ever, and he edges Steve Young in my book with a second title and three more title-game appearances.

10. Tom Brady. Three Super Bowl wins by age 27, and a fourth appearance at 30.

JDizzle
09-22-2009, 08:40 AM
That was unreal. Too bad for Chad Pennington that Ted Ginn can't catch a pass, Fins should have won that game.

But it's hard to disagree with the OP.

Dread-Head
09-22-2009, 08:45 AM
:lol:

Time Killer, baby this MB has a strict drug testing policy!NEITHER of these ladies can hold a candle to Mr. Ben Roethlissbuger! Big Ben can organize and move an offense. He has a cannon for an arm, can RUN up the middle as well as a full back and can deliver punishing blocks like a tightend. I'll Give Mr. Manning his due, I'll begrudingly admit that Brady has skills, but face it if either of these guys were playing circa 1970-80 something they would have been mediocre at best. Ben is a throwback to the tough QB's of the 70's and 80s. Those two other cats are noteworthy, but they can't polish Ben's second ring...YET!

Dread-Head
09-22-2009, 08:50 AM
No. Montana was just as smart, crafty and efficient. He just won. Uncanny. Mannign is up there, just not Montana in my book. I think Manning needs another SB to get near him. Also, if you read MMQB by Peter King this week he has his own list...don't agree with all but he has it. He says a similar thing about Manning and championships. People have to remember too that he was quite Romo-like or whomever you want to use in the playoffs at the start of his run. But he is incredible overall

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/09/20/mmqb/4.html

What about:

Norm "The Dutchman" VanBrockman?

Terry Bradshaw


Mr. Warren Moon

Bart Star?

I'll say Brady is good, but I'll be cold & dead in the ground before I EVER call him great. He and Beli-cheat are a huge pimple on the rectum of the sport of football who don't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as the REAL greats of the game.
That list left a LOT of talented people out.

Texan_Bill
09-22-2009, 09:06 AM
He and Beli-cheat are a huge pimple on the rectum of the sport of football

:spit: Way too early to read something like that.

HOU-TEX
09-22-2009, 09:39 AM
He still has a huge forehead. You could watch a movie off that sucker

WWJD
09-22-2009, 10:13 AM
Peyton is money. And I remember when he came out of Tennessee people were wondering if he was going to be any better than Ryan Leaf...wondering if the Colts made the right pick?

Guess they did.

mike moffat
09-22-2009, 11:25 AM
As an old guy growing up watching Bart Starr, Unitas and the rest, I'll put Peyton Manning up there with any of them. I agree with someone earlier, he's the best player in the NFL for the past 5 years. Unfortunately for us, we have to face him twice a year.

WWJD
09-22-2009, 11:29 AM
As an old guy growing up watching Bart Starr, Unitas and the rest, I'll put Peyton Manning up there with any of them. I agree with someone earlier, he's the best player in the NFL for the past 5 years. Unfortunately for us, we have to face him twice a year.

You're not that old..I can say that cause I'm right there with ya...:)

I do remember those old timers myself along with guys like Roman Gabriel and Ken Anderson...and do you remember Jim Hart with the Cards?

I think Peyton is better than all of them myself.

Double Barrel
09-22-2009, 11:54 AM
I'm partial to Brady, but it's tough to argue against Manning. The dude is the offensive coordinator on the field, which hearkens back to the old days of the NFL. He has an amazing mind for the game and obviously very talented in physical skills.

I know I will be able to tell my grandkids about seeing Manning in person quite a few times. He's a no brainer HoF player, and that says a lot when you can say that in the prime of his career.

I just wish he was an NFC QB!!! :D

Hooston Texan
09-22-2009, 12:08 PM
[An initial nitpick: the question was about Manning's generation, not all time. In my mind, the only guys up for discussion currently playing or who had substantial overlap with Manning's pro career are Brady and Roethlisberger.]

I look at it this way: where would their respective teams be without them?

The Patriots were 11-5 last year playing a QB who hadn't started a game since high school. Brady is a monster QB, but he's had the benefit of playing on an indisputably great team his entire career.

The Steeler defense would pull just about any offense into the playoff picture.

If an average QB started taking snaps in Indy, I doubt that team wins five games.

TimeKiller
09-22-2009, 12:45 PM
Maybe the rings don't match the talent (yet anyway) but Manning is unparalleled in skill IMO

El Tejano
09-22-2009, 12:59 PM
Miami just saw what we've been putting up with for 7 years now.

Blake
09-22-2009, 01:22 PM
Its funny how peoples opinions change with each game. For the past 2-3 years people would start threads, and the media would club us over the head with Brady being better than Manning because he was winning games and superbowls.

2 games into the 09 season Manning is the shit and Brady is shit. And here come the threads and media talking about Manning being the best.

When both Manning and Brady retire then we can decide who is best. Why do we need to pick a winner while they are both still in the prime of their careers...

The Pencil Neck
09-22-2009, 01:40 PM
When both Manning and Brady retire then we can decide who is best. Why do we need to pick a winner while they are both still in the prime of their careers...


What does it matter? It's really a meaningless discussion. They're both great QB's who've done great things. Saying this guy is better than that guy is just mental masturbation. Everyone is going to have an opinion and most of them are right* even if they're different.

* The ones that are wrong involve VY.

mancunian
09-22-2009, 01:43 PM
Still think Brady is the better QB.

Blake
09-22-2009, 01:48 PM
What does it matter? It's really a meaningless discussion. They're both great QB's who've done great things. Saying this guy is better than that guy is just mental masturbation. Everyone is going to have an opinion and most of them are right* even if they're different.

* The ones that are wrong involve VY.

Agreed. But for the people who like to list them, or label them, that would be the time to do it.

Carr Bombed
09-22-2009, 01:58 PM
Sorry, I'm still taking a healthy Tom Brady over Peyton........I've seen Manning play horribly in too many playoff games and that's where it matters. Also not only Brady in the Playoffs, it's getting to the point where I might even take Ben Roethlisberger over him if I needed to win a big playoff game.

Frankly the Colts should've had more than just 1 SB victory during their run....and it wasn't just the defense that stopped them, Peyton has laid multiple eggs.

SheTexan
09-22-2009, 02:36 PM
Sorry, I'm still taking a healthy Tom Brady over Peyton........I've seen Manning play horribly in too many playoff games and that's where it matters. Also not only Brady in the Playoffs, it's getting to the point where I might even take Ben Roethlisberger over him if I needed to win a big playoff game.

Frankly the Colts should've had more than just 1 SB victory during their run....and it wasn't just the defense that stopped them, Peyton has laid multiple eggs.

yep, agree, not that it matters.

:includeme:

TimeKiller
09-22-2009, 02:36 PM
Its funny how peoples opinions change with each game. For the past 2-3 years people would start threads, and the media would club us over the head with Brady being better than Manning because he was winning games and superbowls.

2 games into the 09 season Manning is the shit and Brady is shit. And here come the threads and media talking about Manning being the best.

When both Manning and Brady retire then we can decide who is best. Why do we need to pick a winner while they are both still in the prime of their careers...

Well since their careers are current and awesome it's not a stretch to find someone comparing the two. Comparing with lists of past greats is stupid.

Also my opinion has never changed. I've been a Manning > Brady guy for always. Really, for me, it's not even all that close. I don't mean this as a Brady-bashing...I mean hell, the only guy I see you below is a guy I believe will end up as the greatest QB to play in the modern NFL. Now and probably forever. The guy defines "most valuable player"

Double Barrel
09-22-2009, 02:46 PM
Sorry, I'm still taking a healthy Tom Brady over Peyton........I've seen Manning play horribly in too many playoff games and that's where it matters. Also not only Brady in the Playoffs, it's getting to the point where I might even take Ben Roethlisberger over him if I needed to win a big playoff game.

Frankly the Colts should've had more than just 1 SB victory during their run....and it wasn't just the defense that stopped them, Peyton has laid multiple eggs.

I feel the same way. The argument is always "Brady played on a better team", but name his WRs for the three Super Bowl wins! Manning had a HoF WR in Harrison up until the past season, had a great offensive line, and a good pass defense. It's not like the Colts have been bottom feeders. They have been a playoff team all along and usually lost to the Patriots in the playoffs.

All things compared, Manning was supposed to be good as a first round pick. Brady was a sixth rounder that rose to the occasion when he got his chance.

The only reason people even make the "great team" statement is because they won three rings in four seasons. Hmmmm, wonder what QB had a lot to do with that?

This is one of those debates that can be argued well from either perspective. It comes down to perception and opinion at the end of the day, the same way that people used to argue about Montana v. Elway v. Marino back in the '80's.

Texecutioner
09-22-2009, 03:29 PM
1. Peyton Manning
2. Tom Brady
3. The biggest question since who was 1 or 1a.

No 1/1a bullhonky. 14:53 seconds of offense and he wins his 119th all time? Very respectful and humble in taking down a legend, one in his own organization even. Is there any wonder why this guy is so well liked? Aside from facing him twice a year I think he's probably the player I respect the most in the entire league.

Tom Brady is the guy you were talking about. He's beaten Manning in bigger games and more playoff games. He has 3 SB's to Manning's one and one other SB appearance in which his offense was winning the game, and their defense failed to stop Eli Manning of all people to where he would have had 4 SB rings. Brady has also done this with multiple sets of WR's where none of them were really pro bowl material until Moss got there while throughout Manning's career he's had two HOF WR's in Wayne and Harrison. The first and only season that Brady had a real deal elite WR, Brady broke the TD record and led the best offense of all time where he had 50 TD's beating Manning's 48 and that same offense scored more than any other offense of all time.

Brady has also not only led not one but TWO game winning drives in the SB.

Tom Brady is easily this era's Joe Montana. He moves just like Joe. His passes have the same similar touch that Joe's passes did. He has that same exact poise that Joe had and again Brady has had to do all of this with multiple sets of WR's going in and out of there and Joe had Jerry freaking Rice for most of his career. Not saying that Brady was better than Joe, but he is easily this era's Joe Montana while Manning is more like this era's John Elway.

Second Honeymoon
09-22-2009, 03:48 PM
I like Brady a lot and he has more hardware than Manning, but I think Manning is better. Manning means more to the Colts than Brady to the Patriots, and that was proven last year with Cassell's production and the Patriots continued success at 11-5. I think that is where the difference lies.

Brady is prolific but Manning is just pro. The guy is an encyclopedia of football knowledge and reads defenses in his sleep. And if you want to talk about QBs struggling in big games, Brady has struggled in big games before. Don't fool yourself. His teams are just equipped to overcome and not rely on him as much as the Colts with Peyton. Once they put a halfway decent defense with the Colts they won a Super Bowl.

Manning gets the nod....

Texecutioner
09-22-2009, 03:55 PM
I like Brady a lot and he has more hardware than Manning, but I think Manning is better. Manning means more to the Colts than Brady to the Patriots, and that was proven last year with Cassell's production and the Patriots continued success at 11-5. I think that is where the difference lies.

That didn't prove anything. Cassel simply went in there and played well and their running game did a nice job last year. Plus, he had two great targets to throw to in Moss and Welker. And how the hell do you know that the same thing couldn't have possibly happened in Indy had Manning gone down? You don't know that.

Brady is prolific but Manning is just pro. The guy is an encyclopedia of football knowledge and reads defenses in his sleep. And if you want to talk about QBs struggling in big games, Brady has struggled in big games before.

Not as many as Manning has. Brady's 4 trips to the SB and running through the playoffs to Manning's one trip to the SB is evidence of that.

Don't fool yourself. His teams are just equipped to overcome and not rely on him as much as the Colts with Peyton. Once they put a halfway decent defense with the Colts they won a Super Bowl.

And again, you forget about the weapons that Manning had compared to the weapons Brady has had for most of their careers. The talent that Manning has had on offense far out weighs what Brady has had. The Patriots had some pretty good defenses but it's not like they were anywhere near as good as what the Steelers had last season or the Ravens and the Bucs when they won their SB's.

Manning gets the nod....

Right after Brady that is.

HJam72
09-22-2009, 04:01 PM
Tom Brady is the guy you were talking about. He's beaten Manning in bigger games and more playoff games. He has 3 SB's to Manning's one and one other SB appearance in which his offense was winning the game, and their defense failed to stop Eli Manning of all people to where he would have had 4 SB rings. Brady has also done this with multiple sets of WR's where none of them were really pro bowl material until Moss got there while throughout Manning's career he's had two HOF WR's in Wayne and Harrison. The first and only season that Brady had a real deal elite WR, Brady broke the TD record and led the best offense of all time where he had 50 TD's beating Manning's 48 and that same offense scored more than any other offense of all time.

Brady has also not only led not one but TWO game winning drives in the SB.

Tom Brady is easily this era's Joe Montana. He moves just like Joe. His passes have the same similar touch that Joe's passes did. He has that same exact poise that Joe had and again Brady has had to do all of this with multiple sets of WR's going in and out of there and Joe had Jerry freaking Rice for most of his career. Not saying that Brady was better than Joe, but he is easily this era's Joe Montana while Manning is more like this era's John Elway.

I know you probably mean just in overall talent, but I can't believe you said that, lol. Manning trying to scramble: :bender:

I think Peyton Manning is the SMARTEST QB I've ever seen (at least football-wise anyway). That's what's SO impressive about him. Brady, like all those other guys getting mentioned, is better than him in most other ways.

What about Matt Schaub, people. :) Sheez! :foottap: I mean he kinda looks like Manning anyway.

Texecutioner
09-22-2009, 04:07 PM
I know you probably mean just in overall talent, but I can't believe you said that, lol. Manning trying to scramble: :bender:

I think Peyton Manning is the SMARTEST QB I've ever seen (at least football-wise anyway). That's what's SO impressive about him. Brady, like all those other guys getting mentioned, is better than him in most other ways.

What about Matt Schaub, people. :) Sheez! :foottap: I mean he kinda looks like Manning anyway.

Brady just reminds me of Elway man. He just does. Kind of hard to explain it. Manning is a guy that has had so many great seasons but only one SB appearence. He'd easily have about 3 already, if it wasn't for Tom Brady being around when the Colts and the Pats would battle it out with the Pats winning more of those matches.

Most people rank Joe Montana as the greatest QB to ever play and well I've always thought so. However when it's all said and done if this injury that Brady got last season doesn't effect him much, then I think Brady will be the best even over Joe possibly. But as it stands now, Brady is a carbon copy of what Joe was. Brady doesn't have the best arm in the league, but he has one of the best. He's very accurate, and his passes have such a similar velocity to them that Montana's did. He moves just like Joe did, his poise is just like Joe's was and the way he won games in his first few SB's was very similar by simply trying to get it done and not worrying about huge passing stats. But once Brady got some real WR's he became worldly and like a god at the position stat wise right away.

HoustonFrog
09-22-2009, 04:32 PM
[An initial nitpick: the question was about Manning's generation, not all time. In my mind, the only guys up for discussion currently playing or who had substantial overlap with Manning's pro career are Brady and Roethlisberger.]

I look at it this way: where would their respective teams be without them?

The Patriots were 11-5 last year playing a QB who hadn't started a game since high school. Brady is a monster QB, but he's had the benefit of playing on an indisputably great team his entire career.

The Steeler defense would pull just about any offense into the playoff picture.

If an average QB started taking snaps in Indy, I doubt that team wins five games.

I like Brady a lot and he has more hardware than Manning, but I think Manning is better. Manning means more to the Colts than Brady to the Patriots, and that was proven last year with Cassell's production and the Patriots continued success at 11-5. I think that is where the difference lies.


Manning gets the nod....




I don't get this argument. Manning had a load of talent on the Colts...a HOF WR and top RBs. Along with a Top WR2. They also had a good D. Brady won SBs with scrub WRS until a couple of years back when they got Moss and Welker. They had guys like Antoine Smith playing RB from U of H and their WRs were Troy Brown, David Patton and Deion Branch. Guys who have done nothing since. Seriously, Brady had no one and basically won games on his own while Manning got his tail handed to him for about 3-4 years straight in the playoffs. Brady always did more with less talent and now last year is an example of how another QB could step in?

TimeKiller
09-22-2009, 04:46 PM
Tom Brady is the guy you were talking about. He's beaten Manning in bigger games and more playoff games. He has 3 SB's to Manning's one and one other SB appearance in which his offense was winning the game, and their defense failed to stop Eli Manning of all people to where he would have had 4 SB rings. Brady has also done this with multiple sets of WR's where none of them were really pro bowl material until Moss got there while throughout Manning's career he's had two HOF WR's in Wayne and Harrison. The first and only season that Brady had a real deal elite WR, Brady broke the TD record and led the best offense of all time where he had 50 TD's beating Manning's 48 and that same offense scored more than any other offense of all time.
This is still a team sport, if you're talking about the teams that were playing when the two were on the same field, yes, the Patriots are and have been the better team. You won't get any argument from me there. But I mean...you say Manning has always had great receivers but note that Brady didn't really accumulate the kind of numbers Manning did until he got one of them HOF receiver types. Who makes who?

Brady has also not only led not one but TWO game winning drives in the SB.

Manning has never been accused of cheating. I hate playing this card but there it is.

Tom Brady is easily this era's Joe Montana. He moves just like Joe. His passes have the same similar touch that Joe's passes did. He has that same exact poise that Joe had and again Brady has had to do all of this with multiple sets of WR's going in and out of there and Joe had Jerry freaking Rice for most of his career. Not saying that Brady was better than Joe, but he is easily this era's Joe Montana while Manning is more like this era's John Elway.
I guess I'd say Manning is this era's Dan Marino. Oddly enough, I've always thought Marino was a better QB than Montana. I'm not talking about teams now or with Colts/Pats. I'm talking about QBs. Brady has a mastermind behind him. Manning IS the mastermind. Montanady had a great team through and through, Marinning WAS/IS the team.

And how the hell do you know that the same thing couldn't have possibly happened in Indy had Manning gone down? You don't know that.
You seriously think Jim Sorgi runs the team the same as Peyton freaking Manning? I'll tell you how to figure that one out. Nobody has ever offered anything to trade for Jim Sorgi. If he could step in and be Peyton...he would have already....for a different team....like Matt Cassel.

Double Barrel
09-22-2009, 05:10 PM
If you look at stats for comparison:

Manning throws an INT for every 36 passes he throws. Brady is 1 INT for every 43 passes he's thrown. Winner: Brady

Manning has thrown a TD for every 18 passes, Brady a TD for every 18 passes. TIE

Passes thrown in a single season is 50 vs. 49. Brady (barely)

Let's not forget that a lot of Manning's numbers were against playing an expansion team twice a year. Anyone recall his audible to passes against the Texans in a fourth quarter blowout game so he could get the record that season?

They are almost tied in completion percentage (64.5% vs. 63%). Manning

Rings, 3 to 1. Brady

Super Bowl appearances, 4 to 1. Brady

Playoff records: Brady = 14-3 (.824) [the second best in NFL history behind Bart Starr 9-1, .900], Manning = 7-7 (.500). Brady

Entering 2009, Brady has thrown 2.29 times more touchdowns than interceptions. His touchdown-to-interception ratio is the best in NFL history among all players with 2,000 or more passing attempts. Steve Young ranks second in NFL history with a 2.17 touchdown-to-interception ratio.

Brady won 76 of his first 100 regular-season starts, tying Roger Staubach's mark for most victories by a quarterback in his first 100 starts during the Super Bowl Era (since 1966).

Brady enters 2009 as the NFL's all-time leader in overtime wins without a defeat, recording a perfect 7-0 mark in overtime in his career. Terry Bradshaw is the only other quarterback to be undefeated in at least five overtime games, posting a 5-0 record.

Brady has orchestrated 28 game-winning drives to break a tie or take the lead in the fourth quarter or overtime. Six of his game-winning efforts have come in the postseason, where he has played in 17 games.

Brady led a game-winning drive to break a tie or take the lead in the fourth quarter of each of the Patriots' three Super Bowl victories, becoming the only quarterback in NFL history to lead three such game-winning drives in the Super Bowl.

Brady owns the Super Bowl record for pass completions in a game, connecting on 32 passes in Super Bowl XXXVIII.

Brady completed the first 162 passes of his career without an interception. It was the longest streak to start a career in NFL history.

I'm not debating that Manning is a HoF QB and all, but I just find it ludicrous to dismiss what Brady is as a QB in this league.

mariowillshine15
09-22-2009, 05:34 PM
If Manning was better than Brady he would have more than 1 Super Bowl win and appearance.

I find it ridiculous that people think Manning is better than Brady. If Manning was better he would have proven it by now by winning more Super Bowls.

He not only lost to Brady in the playoffs a few times he also lost to the 6th seeded Steelers and the Billy Volek, Michael Turner led Chargers both at HOME.

I love to watch Peyton play he's a great player but if he was really better he would have proven it with more rings.

In my opinion he's overrated to an extent. A phenomenal regular season QB but always comes up short in the playoffs. He was lucky to get his one Super Bowl ring as Rex Grossman was the MVP of that game, the guy couldnt have played any worse.

Brady is better, there is no disputing it.

imatexan
09-22-2009, 05:47 PM
Didnt we just have a thread just like this?

mariowillshine15
09-22-2009, 05:52 PM
Didnt we just have a thread just like this?

I think we have a thread like this every year.

Double Barrel
09-22-2009, 06:09 PM
It's a forum tradition! :D

Kaiser Toro
09-22-2009, 06:25 PM
If I started a team tomorrow I would begin with Manning. His football intelligence and work ethic are unquestioned, and has found success with the weight of insane expectations since he was born with the last name.

I love Brady, but Manning is in another category for me. The Brady book ain't finished, and am intrigued to see how the rest of his career plays out post injury.

kastofsna
09-22-2009, 06:42 PM
If Manning was better than Brady he would have more than 1 Super Bowl win and appearance.

I find it ridiculous that people think Manning is better than Brady. If Manning was better he would have proven it by now by winning more Super Bowls.

He not only lost to Brady in the playoffs a few times he also lost to the 6th seeded Steelers and the Billy Volek, Michael Turner led Chargers both at HOME.

I love to watch Peyton play he's a great player but if he was really better he would have proven it with more rings.

In my opinion he's overrated to an extent. A phenomenal regular season QB but always comes up short in the playoffs. He was lucky to get his one Super Bowl ring as Rex Grossman was the MVP of that game, the guy couldnt have played any worse.

Brady is better, there is no disputing it.
except it's a team game

eriadoc
09-22-2009, 09:57 PM
You can't really compare individual players on team accomplishments. And football is not like baseball, where stats tell most of the story. I happen to believe Manning is the better of the two QBs. Brady has had more team success, obviously. Manning went to the SB with the worst run defense in the NFL. Brady's early teams had defenses that could keep them close so Vinatieri would win it.

I'm not taking anything away from Brady, though. The guy was a late round pick and he bucked up and improved his game to do the job. I get the feeling that his leadership is based in camaraderie, whereas with Peyton, it's more general-like. I guess you can choose which one you like better. Personally, I believe that if you placed Manning on those Pats teams, they still win 3 SBs, and if you place Brady on those Colts teams, they still win one SB.

For the record, I hate Peyton and wish he'd retire. I only dislike Brady, and wish his chin dimple would swallow up his face.

I like Brees, though, and he might be as good as either one of them.

mexican_texan
09-22-2009, 10:17 PM
I wouldn't give the nod to Peyton over Brady. I don't recall Brady playing in huge blowouts in the 4th quarter throwing bombs.

gg no re
09-22-2009, 10:21 PM
It's a forum tradition! :D

pretty much required for all NFL forums to have a brady vs manning thread

kastofsna
09-22-2009, 11:18 PM
i don't recall brady playing in huge blowouts in the 4th quarter throwing bombs.
2007

imatexan
09-23-2009, 12:22 AM
I think we have a thread like this every year.

I mean like a week or two ago about the best QBs in the past 10 years.

ObsiWan
09-23-2009, 12:32 AM
I like Drew Brees.
Brees won in S.D. back when they were playing Marty-Ball. He's the guy who put the Saints on the map when everyone was gah-gah over Rooty Poot ...err, Reggie Bush.

I'm not sure Manning or Brady would have flourished in either place as they have with their current teams.

If I'm starting a new team and you're making me choose between the three - say for some incomprehensible reason all three are available in the expansion draft - I could flip a coin and not go wrong. But I'd be more inclined to take Brees. He just seems more regular guy and less celebrity than the other two. Like Andre Johnson.

infantrycak
09-23-2009, 01:34 AM
Playoff records: Brady = 14-3 (.824) [the second best in NFL history behind Bart Starr 9-1, .900], Manning = 7-7 (.500). Brady

Excellent post and research.

One thing that has always stood out to me (and I would remind folks of my post up thread lauding Manning) is the playoff record. It is an odd QB and team related stat. A guy who some argued was pedestrian and didn't really deserve the Hall of Fame was Troy Aikman. Never put up numbers like Manning during the regular season. Aikman's game improved as the competition got better and in the playoffs was sick. Just there for contrast rather than to say Aikman was better overall. I think Aikman was a better leader and more accurate but Manning is the better analyzer and on the field coach.

Whatever though. I would pick Staubach in his prime over anyone else. In my opinion, Rodger "the dodger" "the comeback kid" Staubach was the perfect balance of brilliant in the pocket passer who could run if that was what was needed. But that was a different generation.

Blazing Arrow
09-23-2009, 01:45 AM
The thing Manning has against him is he always looks long ball. He never helps his D out by playing clock managment. You are not always going to get a bomb to work and if your D is on the field 3/4 of the game you set them up to get worn out and lose it for you are in the end. Scoring fast is good end game not bombing down the field in the 1st.

HJam72
09-23-2009, 07:48 AM
I still think Montelway would be better than Brady. :thinking:

This is serious stuff now.

TimeKiller
09-23-2009, 07:52 AM
1. Teams play games, not individuals.

2. Rings do not reflect a player's talent. They reflect a TEAM'S talent.

DB brought a few statistics to the table that are as individual as stats get in football and most of them favor Brady, I won't try to deny them. Tom Brady is a hell of a QB and any team would be lucky to have him as part of the franchise.

The thing Manning has against him is he always looks long ball. He never helps his D out by playing clock managment. You are not always going to get a bomb to work and if your D is on the field 3/4 of the game you set them up to get worn out and lose it for you are in the end. Scoring fast is good end game not bombing down the field in the 1st.
Wow.

I mean really...

Manning never helps his D out by playing clock management? Really? Must be nice to know on D that everytime you feel good and damn ready to make ONE stop you'll get 7 points on the board and even if you don't you're probably still gonna get 7. And even if you spend 3 quarters on the field there is still a good chance of you winning. And when that does happen, somebody somewhere is going to try to pick apart the 5th alltime winningest QB's CLOCK MANAGEMENT. Silly

jlam
09-23-2009, 08:21 AM
I like Drew Brees.
Brees won in S.D. back when they were playing Marty-Ball. He's the guy who put the Saints on the map when everyone was gah-gah over Rooty Poot ...err, Reggie Bush.

I'm not sure Manning or Brady would have flourished in either place as they have with their current teams.

If I'm starting a new team and you're making me choose between the three - say for some incomprehensible reason all three are available in the expansion draft - I could flip a coin and not go wrong. But I'd be more inclined to take Brees. He just seems more regular guy and less celebrity than the other two. Like Andre Johnson.

I think Drew's the youngest of the three as well, off the top of my head.

He definitely doesn't have the skins on the wall for his career to be mentioned with those other two guys yet, but hopefully we can change that. I'm with you, though, in that I think he's the best playing the game at the moment.

It was weird watching Peyton do his air traffic control routine on Monday night without the familar faces on the receiving end of the calls. No Marvin Harrison, no Anthony Gonzalez. Instead we had Austin Collie and Pierre Garçon. Weird.

Kaiser Toro
09-23-2009, 08:29 AM
Since the 16 game schedule was implemented how many 10 win seasons did the Colts have before Manning? Zero. Since Manning has been there they have won 10 games 9 of his 11 years. I would say the guy is a winner.

How many Super Bowls has Parcells won since Belichick has not been on his staff? Zero. Brady is terrific, but Belichick is the man. Kind of reminds me of Walsh and Montana, probably why we get so many compares.

Vinny
09-23-2009, 09:18 AM
Off the top of my head the best QB's I've ever personally seen are Marino, Elway, Manning, Brady, Montana. There is a group that is almost as good but the names are too numerous to mention but they range from Dan Fouts to Warren Moon with a lot of Steve Young mixed in.

Dread-Head
09-23-2009, 09:46 AM
I'm partial to Brady, but it's tough to argue against Manning. The dude is the offensive coordinator on the field, which hearkens back to the old days of the NFL. He has an amazing mind for the game and obviously very talented in physical skills.

I know I will be able to tell my grandkids about seeing Manning in person quite a few times. He's a no brainer HoF player, and that says a lot when you can say that in the prime of his career.

I just wish he was an NFC QB!!! :D

I agree. As much as I hate seeing the Texans lose to him, I will give the devil his due. The man will wind up in the HOF and rightfully so.

Dread-Head
09-23-2009, 09:56 AM
Still think Brady is the better QB.

I simply MUST get footage of he and Belicheat from the pannel discussion at the Cannes Film Festival. Belicheat's insight on:

A. depth of feild

B. apature adjustment in natural light

C. shooting under adverse weather conditions

&

D. Proper white balance techniques when shooting under florescent light

were simply incredible.

Brady + Belicheat = *

HoustonFrog
09-23-2009, 10:12 AM
Off the top of my head the best QB's I've ever personally seen are Marino, Elway, Manning, Brady, Montana. There is a group that is almost as good but the names are too numerous to mention but they range from Dan Fouts to Warren Moon with a lot of Steve Young mixed in.

If you asked me my top QBs from the time I watched as a kid..mid 70s.. until now it would randomly be.....Staubach, Bradshaw, Bert Jones, Fouts, Montana, Elway, Marino, Aikman, Steve Young, Favre, Manning and Brady. With, like you, guys with great seasons mixed in.

Texecutioner
09-23-2009, 01:43 PM
If you look at stats for comparison:

Manning throws an INT for every 36 passes he throws. Brady is 1 INT for every 43 passes he's thrown. Winner: Brady

Manning has thrown a TD for every 18 passes, Brady a TD for every 18 passes. TIE

Passes thrown in a single season is 50 vs. 49. Brady (barely)

Let's not forget that a lot of Manning's numbers were against playing an expansion team twice a year. Anyone recall his audible to passes against the Texans in a fourth quarter blowout game so he could get the record that season?

They are almost tied in completion percentage (64.5% vs. 63%). Manning

Rings, 3 to 1. Brady

Super Bowl appearances, 4 to 1. Brady

Playoff records: Brady = 14-3 (.824) [the second best in NFL history behind Bart Starr 9-1, .900], Manning = 7-7 (.500). Brady

Entering 2009, Brady has thrown 2.29 times more touchdowns than interceptions. His touchdown-to-interception ratio is the best in NFL history among all players with 2,000 or more passing attempts. Steve Young ranks second in NFL history with a 2.17 touchdown-to-interception ratio.

Brady won 76 of his first 100 regular-season starts, tying Roger Staubach's mark for most victories by a quarterback in his first 100 starts during the Super Bowl Era (since 1966).

Brady enters 2009 as the NFL's all-time leader in overtime wins without a defeat, recording a perfect 7-0 mark in overtime in his career. Terry Bradshaw is the only other quarterback to be undefeated in at least five overtime games, posting a 5-0 record.

Brady has orchestrated 28 game-winning drives to break a tie or take the lead in the fourth quarter or overtime. Six of his game-winning efforts have come in the postseason, where he has played in 17 games.

Brady led a game-winning drive to break a tie or take the lead in the fourth quarter of each of the Patriots' three Super Bowl victories, becoming the only quarterback in NFL history to lead three such game-winning drives in the Super Bowl.

Brady owns the Super Bowl record for pass completions in a game, connecting on 32 passes in Super Bowl XXXVIII.

Brady completed the first 162 passes of his career without an interception. It was the longest streak to start a career in NFL history.

I'm not debating that Manning is a HoF QB and all, but I just find it ludicrous to dismiss what Brady is as a QB in this league.


Did you research all of that yourself DB or did you find this somewhere?? If so, great analysis and research here.

I think this post pretty much sums it up.

Brady > All other QB's other than Montana.

Must spread the rep for this post, but I can't. Someone please rep this guy for me.

Double Barrel
09-23-2009, 02:29 PM
Did you research all of that yourself DB or did you find this somewhere?? If so, great analysis and research here.

I think this post pretty much sums it up.

Brady > All other QB's other than Montana.

Must spread the rep for this post, but I can't. Someone please rep this guy for me.

I just looked up the stats on NFL.com and did the calculations. Some of the last few points were from the Patriots website bio on Brady (I meant to link it). Thanks for the props, though.

In no way am I diminishing Manning, but some of the stats on Brady - both as a QB and as the team he's led - are stunning. His playoff record and OT record reveal a QB who can lead and make plays under pressure. People act like the Colts are a dog team, but the reality is that they've been a playoff team the whole time, as well. And just about any team that makes the playoffs has a legit shot, IMO. Brady just made the clutch plays when Manning did not for a long time.

I agree about Montana and then everyone else. But, to me, everyone else starts with Brady. JMO

Mr teX
09-23-2009, 02:39 PM
I wouldn't give the nod to Peyton over Brady. I don't recall Brady playing in huge blowouts in the 4th quarter throwing bombs.

I've always thought manning was better than Brady...

where were you in 2007 when Brady was playing in 2 meaningless games at the end of the season all so he and the team could make history?; & he still barely broke the record. In contrast Manning sat out good chunks of multiple 4th quarters in his 2004 campaign. If he'd done what brady did he might've thrown damn near 60!

Even with him destroying us regularly, I've always thought manning was that dude b/c he's always been nearly impossible to stop. Blitz him you're gonna get beat deep, sit back in a zone & he'll pick you apart.

He's the 1st qb i've ever heard of where teams felt the only way to stop him was to keep him & his offense off the field. Belichick used that to his advantage as every time they met in the playoffs, he featured the run more with Dillon to eat clock.

He's thrown at least 26 TD's every year since he's been in the league..

he's got umpteen 4000 yard seasons....

He's the complete package for a qb, (arm strength and accuracy, smarts, durability, toughness).

I've alway thought that Brady's greatness centered on him pretty much not getting touched in the pocket & Belichick's defensive game plan..........& Vinatieri. I think the 2007 superbowl & last year when he went down & cassell stepped in lends more credibility to that.

Texecutioner
09-23-2009, 03:10 PM
I just looked up the stats on NFL.com and did the calculations. Some of the last few points were from the Patriots website bio on Brady (I meant to link it). Thanks for the props, though.

In no way am I diminishing Manning, but some of the stats on Brady - both as a QB and as the team he's led - are stunning. His playoff record and OT record reveal a QB who can lead and make plays under pressure. People act like the Colts are a dog team, but the reality is that they've been a playoff team the whole time, as well. And just about any team that makes the playoffs has a legit shot, IMO. Brady just made the clutch plays when Manning did not for a long time.

I agree about Montana and then everyone else. But, to me, everyone else starts with Brady. JMO

Agree with just about everything here. For years the only knock on Brady amongst the best of the best QB's was that he didn't have the stats in certain seasons like Marino, Favre, Manning, and a few others but the moment he got an elite WR he had the best stats of all time, and his WR Moss also had by far his best season when he got a QB like Tom Brady and Welker went from being that quick fast white guy with potential to one of the best possession WR's in the league. They also did this without a great RB, like the Colts had for years with Edge and then Addai in his first two impressive seasons. Brady never needed to be a stat machine though, because he and his coach both realized that a balanced offense is what they needed any way, and efficiency will always be more important than anything.

I've got Montana at #1, but like I said Brady could easily be there even over Montana when he retires if this injury doesn't hurt him much. He's way to smart of a QB and not to get back on track.

disaacks3
09-23-2009, 03:24 PM
I wouldn't kick ANY of the names bandied about in here off my squad, but I still think Manning is the best I've ever seen. Nobody in NFL history ever ran their offense from the LoS (no huddle) all game long like he has. He is as great a student of the game as I've ever met.

My personal top 9 (career):

1. Manning
2. Elway
3. Montana
4. Brady
5. Marino
6. Staubach
7. Fouts
8. Young
9. Kelly

Double Barrel
09-23-2009, 04:16 PM
I wouldn't kick ANY of the names bandied about in here off my squad, but I still think Manning is the best I've ever seen. Nobody in NFL history ever ran their offense from the LoS (no huddle) all game long like he has. He is as great a student of the game as I've ever met.

My personal top 9 (career):

1. Manning
2. Elway
3. Montana
4. Brady
5. Marino
6. Staubach
7. Fouts
8. Young
9. Kelly

Actually, QBs in the '70's routinely ran their offenses on the field without getting calls from the sideline. Terry Bradshaw talked about this during one of the America's Game episodes about the Steelers, and he decided in the huddle if it would be a run or a pass and what specific play it would be from that point. He said that he was nothing special in that regard, though, because QBs used to always run the offenses back the day.

I'm not knocking Manning for doing it now - it is admirable - but he is hardly a pioneer or original in that regard. Today's offenses are micromanaged to death by a host of sideline and press box coaches/coordinators. Of course, modern offenses are more complex than before, so that has something to do with it, as well.

TimeKiller
09-23-2009, 05:03 PM
I've alway thought that Brady's greatness centered on him pretty much not getting touched in the pocket & Belichick's defensive game plan..........& Vinatieri.

Brady has got a complete package around him for sure. Allegations aside, Belichick is a mastermind at gameplanning and getting the most out of anybody on the field. Their D's have been disgusting for a while, certainly elite.

Peyton IS the mastermind for the Colts....like he's Brady's body with Belichick's head on top or some other conglomeration from hell.

disaacks3
09-23-2009, 05:04 PM
Actually, QBs in the '70's routinely ran their offenses on the field without getting calls from the sideline. Terry Bradshaw talked about this during one of the America's Game episodes about the Steelers, and he decided in the huddle if it would be a run or a pass and what specific play it would be from that point. He said that he was nothing special in that regard, though, because QBs used to always run the offenses back the day.

I'm not knocking Manning for doing it now - it is admirable - but he is hardly a pioneer or original in that regard. Today's offenses are micromanaged to death by a host of sideline and press box coaches/coordinators. Of course, modern offenses are more complex than before, so that has something to do with it, as well. They still called a huddle, that is NOT the same as running the offense in No-Huddle. Case-in-point - It affects the other team's ability to substitute DURING the series and Manning habitually gets a "free play" here and there by catching the Defense napping, having too many men on the field, etc.

Don't get me wrong - I know that plenty of QB's "called their own game" in the day and that was an evolutionary step forward, but I can't think of ANY other instance before the modern-day Colts where the Offense was essentially in hurry-up for an entire game.

Double Barrel
09-23-2009, 05:12 PM
They still called a huddle, that is NOT the same as running the offense in No-Huddle. Case-in-point - It affects the other team's ability to substitute DURING the series and Manning habitually gets a "free play" here and there by catching the Defense napping, having too many men on the field, etc.

Don't get me wrong - I know that plenty of QB's "called their own game" in the day and that was an evolutionary step forward, but I can't think of ANY other instance before the modern-day Colts where the Offense was essentially in hurry-up for an entire game.

The '90's Buffalo Bills under Jim Kelly ran the K-Gun offense that was a three WR set. Basically, it was a no huddle offense the entire game that Kelly called all of the plays. As an Oilers fan, I remember it all too well and how it burned us all too often.

WWJD
09-23-2009, 05:30 PM
Peyton does better commercials.

My vote is for him.

disaacks3
09-23-2009, 05:35 PM
The '90's Buffalo Bills under Jim Kelly ran the K-Gun offense that was a three WR set. Basically, it was a no huddle offense the entire game that Kelly called all of the plays. As an Oilers fan, I remember it all too well and how it burned us all too often. Hmm, I'd forgotten about the K-Gun (bad memories I suppose), though Wiki actually mentions the Bungles even earlier under Wyche.

Linky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurry-up_offense)

ObsiWan
09-23-2009, 07:16 PM
Did you research all of that yourself DB or did you find this somewhere?? If so, great analysis and research here.

I think this post pretty much sums it up.

Brady > All other QB's other than Montana.

Must spread the rep for this post, but I can't. Someone please rep this guy for me.


Done. Very thorough research.

Blazing Arrow
09-24-2009, 01:01 AM
Wow.

I mean really...

Manning never helps his D out by playing clock management? Really? Must be nice to know on D that everytime you feel good and damn ready to make ONE stop you'll get 7 points on the board and even if you don't you're probably still gonna get 7. And even if you spend 3 quarters on the field there is still a good chance of you winning. And when that does happen, somebody somewhere is going to try to pick apart the 5th alltime winningest QB's CLOCK MANAGEMENT. Silly

Yes because Manning scores on every drive. That is why they score 70+ points a game and just blow teams out.:rolleyes:

In '08 he puts up some quick points only able to put up 7 in the second half including OT and it was on a 72 yard bomb.

In '07 he takes a lead them sputters as his D can not stop the Chargers. Giving up 21 in the second half.

'05 Pitt holds him to several 3 and outs controls the clock and only in the 4th on a couple of bombs does he make the game close.

'04 NE holds the game to a 1/4 TOP and owns the Colts. Bad weather makes the bomb basically useless and Manning fails.

'03 again through clock management NE holds the Colts to little O. Manning throws 4 picks and basically is shut down. Most picks coming on long plays.

'02 before he starts to get that he can not win ever game he gets rocked in a 41-0 loss to the Jets.

The guy thinks he can do everything on his own. He calls the plays at the line and always calls streaks and deep posts. When the game gets bad all he does is look for that. His playoff history sucks because when he plays good secondaries he tries to win it in the air instead of forcing the D to cover on the check downs.

There is a reason he has not completely owned the Titans over the years even when we were rebuilding. He does not manage games. He just scores.

ObsiWan
09-24-2009, 01:50 AM
Peyton does better commercials.

My vote is for him.
Come to think of it, no other QB does commercials but him and his brother.
why is that?

WWJD
09-24-2009, 07:50 AM
Come to think of it, no other QB does commercials but him and his brother.
why is that?

Romo has at least one...McNabb has one with Larry Fitzgerald that's playing right now for some food place..Denny's or something.

but you're right about Peyton and Eli. They get all the good ones.

Good agent I suspect.

mike moffat
09-24-2009, 07:59 AM
You're not that old..I can say that cause I'm right there with ya...:)

I do remember those old timers myself along with guys like Roman Gabriel and Ken Anderson...and do you remember Jim Hart with the Cards?

I think Peyton is better than all of them myself.
Thanks for the kind words. I do remember Hart. But I agree, Peyton is better at a much more sophistocated time.

HoustonFrog
09-24-2009, 08:58 AM
Thanks for the kind words. I do remember Hart. But I agree, Peyton is better at a much more sophistocated time.

Hart of the Cards ..I hated him. In St. Louis they used to give the Cowboy fits when he would throw to Mel Gray...he and later Roy Green with Lomax..drove me nuts.

The Pencil Neck
09-24-2009, 10:10 AM
Come to think of it, no other QB does commercials but him and his brother.
why is that?

Well, I thought Favre's commercial about not being able to make up his mind was pretty funny. Favre also has a bunch of different commercials or has over the years.

Double Barrel
09-24-2009, 10:24 AM
Yes because Manning scores on every drive. That is why they score 70+ points a game and just blow teams out.:rolleyes:

In '08 he puts up some quick points only able to put up 7 in the second half including OT and it was on a 72 yard bomb.

In '07 he takes a lead them sputters as his D can not stop the Chargers. Giving up 21 in the second half.

'05 Pitt holds him to several 3 and outs controls the clock and only in the 4th on a couple of bombs does he make the game close.

'04 NE holds the game to a 1/4 TOP and owns the Colts. Bad weather makes the bomb basically useless and Manning fails.

'03 again through clock management NE holds the Colts to little O. Manning throws 4 picks and basically is shut down. Most picks coming on long plays.

'02 before he starts to get that he can not win ever game he gets rocked in a 41-0 loss to the Jets.

The guy thinks he can do everything on his own. He calls the plays at the line and always calls streaks and deep posts. When the game gets bad all he does is look for that. His playoff history sucks because when he plays good secondaries he tries to win it in the air instead of forcing the D to cover on the check downs.

There is a reason he has not completely owned the Titans over the years even when we were rebuilding. He does not manage games. He just scores.

Good post, man. And you've got a great point: when Manning's offense sputters and he's both calling the plays and running it from the huddle, it's nobody to blame but himself for poor management. He does tend to call big plays, too, which more often than not, have failed in the playoffs. I guess this is the downside of being the on-field OC, 'eh?

Mr teX
09-24-2009, 12:24 PM
Yes because Manning scores on every drive. That is why they score 70+ points a game and just blow teams out.:rolleyes:

In '08 he puts up some quick points only able to put up 7 in the second half including OT and it was on a 72 yard bomb.

In '07 he takes a lead them sputters as his D can not stop the Chargers. Giving up 21 in the second half.

'05 Pitt holds him to several 3 and outs controls the clock and only in the 4th on a couple of bombs does he make the game close.

'04 NE holds the game to a 1/4 TOP and owns the Colts. Bad weather makes the bomb basically useless and Manning fails.

'03 again through clock management NE holds the Colts to little O. Manning throws 4 picks and basically is shut down. Most picks coming on long plays.

'02 before he starts to get that he can not win ever game he gets rocked in a 41-0 loss to the Jets.

The guy thinks he can do everything on his own. He calls the plays at the line and always calls streaks and deep posts. When the game gets bad all he does is look for that. His playoff history sucks because when he plays good secondaries he tries to win it in the air instead of forcing the D to cover on the check downs.

There is a reason he has not completely owned the Titans over the years even when we were rebuilding. He does not manage games. He just scores.

Well...You guys have a "game manager" as your starting Qb, how'd that work out for ya in the playoffs last year? Unless i missed something about the game, i thought the purpose of an offense was to score points?

2nd, of those 6 years you listed there are 4 eventual superbowl champions he faced that featured fairly stout defenses that were very adept at slowing down prolific offenses. Those patriots defenses he faced had just come off of shutting down "the greatest show on turf", so being able to handle Peyton & those colts teams wasn't a tremendous leap. The pittsburgh defense he faced was essentially the same one that just won the superbowl over a pass happy offense in Arizona..You have to take this stuff into context. How'd brady look in 2008 when The giants were constantly in his grill? Good defense always trumps good offense.

3rd, how's it his fault his defense couldn't stop anyone when it mattered? That's how those teams worked...manning and the offense got so far ahead that it forced teams out of the run. Consequently Freeney & co. got to pin their ears back & make plays. You can't penalize him & the offense b/c his defenses got exposed once teams realized the best way to defend against him was to just keep him off the field. Credit the defensive playcaller for the opposition.

WWJD
09-24-2009, 12:26 PM
Hart of the Cards ..I hated him. In St. Louis they used to give the Cowboy fits when he would throw to Mel Gray...he and later Roy Green with Lomax..drove me nuts.

The Cards really were a very good team.

Conrad Dobler was the nastiest dirtiest player I've ever seen....

I do remember Mel Gray but they had an outstanding RB whose name escapes me right now...I think the guy had a son that played in the NFL as well.

Somebody help my very old memory..who was that?

WWJD
09-24-2009, 12:27 PM
Well, I thought Favre's commercial about not being able to make up his mind was pretty funny. Favre also has a bunch of different commercials or has over the years.

Ah I forgot! It is hysterical.

Blazing Arrow
09-24-2009, 12:27 PM
Come to think of it, no other QB does commercials but him and his brother.
why is that?

McNabb and chunky soup? Those have run for years.

Actually ...

Steve Young for Toyota, Brady had that wierd thing with the goat, Farve has the hans commercial I think they are. Marino had the isotoners.

Texecutioner
09-24-2009, 12:38 PM
Well...You guys have a "game manager" as your starting Qb, how'd that work out for ya in the playoffs last year? Unless i missed something about the game, i thought the purpose of an offense was to score points?

Pretty lame rebuttel Mr. Tex. What the heck does Kerry Collins have to do with this? He's not even part of this discussion man.

2nd, of those 6 years you listed there are 4 eventual superbowl champions he faced that featured fairly stout defenses that were very adept at slowing down prolific offenses. Those patriots defenses he faced had just come off of shutting down "the greatest show on turf", so being able to handle Peyton & those colts teams wasn't a tremendous leap. The pittsburgh defense he faced was essentially the same one that just won the superbowl over a pass happy offense in Arizona..You have to take this stuff into context. How'd brady look in 2008 when The giants were constantly in his grill? Good defense always trumps good offense.

What a bunch of excuses here. Manning played against some tough defenses, so he gets a pass??? Sorry, to bust your bubble, but Brady beat those tough Steelers defenses TWICE in AFC championship games and was also able to beat the Chargers both years they went deep in the post season and one of those seasons the Chargers had a great defense. Brady was able to move past those teams better than Manning was and made more clutch throws. And hell, the Colts just lost to the Chargers last year in the playoffs who went 8-8. Manning has not been near the post season wizard that Tom Brady has.

HoustonFrog
09-24-2009, 01:05 PM
The Cards really were a very good team.

Conrad Dobler was the nastiest dirtiest player I've ever seen....

I do remember Mel Gray but they had an outstanding RB whose name escapes me right now...I think the guy had a son that played in the NFL as well.

Somebody help my very old memory..who was that?

Terry Metcalf...son played at UT and then with the Browns

WWJD
09-24-2009, 01:48 PM
Terry Metcalf...son played at UT and then with the Browns

Thanks Frog..I couldn't remember his name but I remembered him.

kastofsna
09-24-2009, 08:38 PM
He just scores.

i'll take that QB, please

Blazing Arrow
09-24-2009, 08:56 PM
i'll take that QB, please

You had him in Marino .... how did that work out for you?

kastofsna
09-24-2009, 08:58 PM
had one of the best QB's of all time. took a team with no running game and no defense to the playoffs many years, mostly on his shoulders. worked out quite swell!

Blazing Arrow
09-24-2009, 09:28 PM
had one of the best QB's of all time. took a team with no running game and no defense to the playoffs many years, mostly on his shoulders. worked out quite swell!

Trophies?

kastofsna
09-24-2009, 10:22 PM
well ya got me there

point is he did as good a job as he could've done in his ridiculous career

Mr teX
09-25-2009, 09:21 AM
Pretty lame rebuttel Mr. Tex. What the heck does Kerry Collins have to do with this? He's not even part of this discussion man.



What a bunch of excuses here. Manning played against some tough defenses, so he gets a pass??? Sorry, to bust your bubble, but Brady beat those tough Steelers defenses TWICE in AFC championship games and was also able to beat the Chargers both years they went deep in the post season and one of those seasons the Chargers had a great defense. Brady was able to move past those teams better than Manning was and made more clutch throws. And hell, the Colts just lost to the Chargers last year in the playoffs who went 8-8. Manning has not been near the post season wizard that Tom Brady has.


Dude, it goes to his point about a qb who "manages" a game. If given the choice between a guy who does that really well & a guy who takes his offense down the field and scores "too fast" it's pretty much a no brainer who's gonna be taken. I'd venture to say that every coach in the NFL wants the scorer over the manager...

& yeah b/c it was all brady & belichick's defenses & Vinatieri's leg had nothing to do with those patriot teams winning those games :rolleyes:

since you brought it up...

Brady's stats against those teams in those games... hardly spectacular

Cmp Att Yds TD Int Lng Y/A Cmp% Rate
2002: 12 18 115 0 0 28 6.4 66.7 84.3
2005: 14 21 207 2 0 60 9.9 66.7 130.5
2007: 27 51 280 2 3 49 5.5 52.9 57.6
2008: 22 33 209 2 3 18 6.3 66.7 66.4

Now as you can see, the 2 recent playoff games he had against SD in 2007 & 2008, brady actually looked more hapless than Manning did against them. They won not b/c of "clutch" throws by Brady but b/c NE's defense kept them in the game as they had to over-come 3 TO's from Brady in each game & they got 2 & 4 of their own respectively from SD.

In the 2002 Pittsburgh game, If i remember correctly, brady was knocked out & it was Bledsoe who ran the show for most of that game & looked damn good doing it too, so brady doesn't get credit for that win. So in actuality, 2005 was the only game he was a major factor in & even then he still had a great defense behind him as Harrison had and 87 yd int in the 2005 game that pretty much clinched it.

In addition, to all of this, those patriots teams were known as defensive teams. The one time they got away from trying to be that & those players started getting older/released....in 2007, they got to the superbowl & lost.....to another defensive team. The reason they've had trouble thus far in the season is because their defense can't stop the run.

He's not the greatest qb of this generation largely for the same reasons Terry Bradshaw & Troy Aikman aren't immediately thought of as a top 5 qbs ever. They're great in their own rights, but not the true reason those teams were able to win. By contrast, you subtract Manning from those colts teams & they very well might be picking top 5 in the draft every year. He is the Colts & everyone knows it.

Just because the way Brady plays the game reminds of you of the way montana played, doesn't mean that he can be considered in the same breath..

Dread-Head
09-25-2009, 09:35 AM
Most people rank Joe Montana as the greatest QB to ever play and well I've always thought so. However when it's all said and done if this injury that Brady got last season doesn't effect him much, then I think Brady will be the best even over Joe possibly. But as it stands now, Brady is a carbon copy of what Joe was.

:lol: SERIOUSLY? Joe Montana and his coaches didn't rely on cicanary(sp) and no one disputes the superbowls they won or the means by which they won them.


Brady doesn't have the best arm in the league, but he has one of the best. He's very accurate, and his passes have such a similar velocity to them that Montana's did. He moves just like Joe did, his poise is just like Joe's was and the way he won games in his first few SB's was very similar by simply trying to get it done and not worrying about huge passing stats. But once Brady got some real WR's he became worldly and like a god at the position stat wise right away.

Brady's good...but he can't be mentioned in the same BREATH as Montana. Not yet.

Dread-Head
09-25-2009, 09:40 AM
Manning

Rings, 3 to 1. Brady

Super Bowl appearances, 4 to 1. Brady


Playoff records: Brady = 14-3 (.824) [the second best in NFL history behind Bart Starr 9-1, .900], Manning = 7-7 (.500). Brady

gue.

:thinking:
Okay, so by YOUR Logic Antoine Smith was a MUCH better running back than EARL CAMPBELL...because he has three Superbowl rings and Earl never played in one?

Old School
09-25-2009, 10:11 AM
:thinking:
Okay, so by YOUR Logic Antoine Smith was a MUCH better running back than EARL CAMPBELL...because he has three Superbowl rings and Earl never played in one?
Don't forget Horry's collection of rings. That makes him an instant HOFer. (I know, not the same sport but the logic is)

ChampionTexan
09-25-2009, 10:16 AM
edit

Double Barrel
09-25-2009, 10:17 AM
:thinking:
Okay, so by YOUR Logic Antoine Smith was a MUCH better running back than EARL CAMPBELL...because he has three Superbowl rings and Earl never played in one?

What? :um:

I never said that. It is your assumption of logic that I never put forth.

If you look at my ENTIRE post, you would (or should) clearly see that the stats you posted above are part of many impressive stats for an entire body of work.

I posted QB stats, as well, and Brady is right up there with Manning, even surpassing him in many areas. And if you bother to read my previous posts, I've CLEARLY stated that a solid case can be made for either QB.

Defending myself for a point I never made against hack and slash assumptions is lame.

Double Barrel
09-25-2009, 10:21 AM
Those two other cats are noteworthy, but they can't polish Ben's second ring...YET!

This is YOUR logic, not mine. :ok:

Dread-Head
09-25-2009, 11:25 AM
What? :um:

I never said that. It is your assumption of logic that I never put forth.

If you look at my ENTIRE post, you would (or should) clearly see that the stats you posted above are part of many impressive stats for an entire body of work.

I posted QB stats, as well, and Brady is right up there with Manning, even surpassing him in many areas. And if you bother to read my previous posts, I've CLEARLY stated that a solid case can be made for either QB.

Defending myself for a point I never made against hack and slash assumptions is lame.


Part of your argument is that Brady is the superior QB because he has more superbowl rings. You also assert that Brady is in the same league as Mr. Joe Montana. I'll withhold judgment until the end of his career but at present I'll respectfully disagree. But the HUGE asterisk that he and Belichick will have following them for the remainder of their careers prevents a Montana comparison.

Dread-Head
09-25-2009, 11:32 AM
This is YOUR logic, not mine. :ok:

Not logic. Simply one man's opinion. If I intercepted a pass from EITHER of these three QBs, Big Ben is the ONE guy whom I run directly AT with the football as I know he would flatten my @ss. In MY OPINON (which is by no means an expert opinion) Roethlissburger revitalized the Steelers. He went from BACK UP to leading them to two titles. Where were the Steelers BEFORE Ben? The Cellar. He plays hard and the rest of the team follows his lead and that in MY OPINION makes him the superior all around athlete. Disagree as it's your right, but I'm merely stating my opinion.

Double Barrel
09-25-2009, 11:49 AM
Part of your argument is that Brady is the superior QB because he has more superbowl rings. You also assert that Brady is in the same league as Mr. Joe Montana. I'll withhold judgment until the end of his career but at present I'll respectfully disagree. But the HUGE asterisk that he and Belichick will have following them for the remainder of their careers prevents a Montana comparison.

It's just part of an overall body of work, in the same way that EVERYONE points to the fact that Montana has four rings. For the record, I never said that Brady was in the same league. I specifically pointed out that "the greatest" starts with Montana, and then it's everyone else. We are all free to pick who we thinks leads the pack of everyone else.

If that was the only case I made (about rings), I could see you quoting me as being a valid argument. But your hack and slash of my post is completely out of context, simply because rings are maybe 1/25th of my perspective, but you quoted me like it was the bulk of it.

Brady's QB-related numbers are just as good as Manning's, and that is the main point I was making with that post.

Not logic. Simply one man's opinion. If I intercepted a pass from EITHER of these three QBs, Big Ben is the ONE guy whom I run directly AT with the football as I know he would flatten my @ss. In MY OPINON (which is by no means an expert opinion) Roethlissburger revitalized the Steelers. He went from BACK UP to leading them to two titles. Where were the Steelers BEFORE Ben? The Cellar. He plays hard and the rest of the team follows his lead and that in MY OPINION makes him the superior all around athlete. Disagree as it's your right, but I'm merely stating my opinion.

If you look in the the other QB thread, I said that Big Ben is no. 3 of current QBs in the league (behind Brady and Manning), so you've got no argument with me that he's achieving greatness.

I'm just pointing out that you are using the number of Super Bowl rings as a qualifier earlier in this thread and then [erroneously] trying to argue away from that logic with my post. It appears to be a double-standard on your part. JMO

Obviously - as I have stated before - ALL of this debate comes down to perception and opinion. I respect your opinions, but you clearly hate Brady and have a mancrush on Manning, so perhaps your emotions are clouding your objectivity. :shades:

HoustonFrog
09-25-2009, 12:03 PM
Not logic. Simply one man's opinion. If I intercepted a pass from EITHER of these three QBs, Big Ben is the ONE guy whom I run directly AT with the football as I know he would flatten my @ss. In MY OPINON (which is by no means an expert opinion) Roethlissburger revitalized the Steelers. He went from BACK UP to leading them to two titles. Where were the Steelers BEFORE Ben? The Cellar. He plays hard and the rest of the team follows his lead and that in MY OPINION makes him the superior all around athlete. Disagree as it's your right, but I'm merely stating my opinion.

First of all, don't pencil whip facts too much...seems to be your theme lately. He was drafted as a franchise QB. Cowher admitted that. He had already moved to #2 because of injury by the time his rookie season started and was playing in Game 2. He started 14 games and was AFC Offensive Rookie of the Year. If you might remember Brady was a 6th rounder who was a backup for his rookie year and then came in the next year when Bledsoe went down. But overall in my book this group easily goes Brady, Manning, Ben just because if what Brady had to play with on offense and what he did with it...including the stats quoted by DB.

Texecutioner
09-25-2009, 12:15 PM
:lol: SERIOUSLY? Joe Montana and his coaches didn't rely on cicanary(sp) and no one disputes the superbowls they won or the means by which they won them.

Is this a joke? The only people that try shitting on the Patriots SB's are people that hate the team. There is absolutely nothing there to try and disqualify their SB's. Coaches and teams have been doing what BB allegedly was doing going back to the early 90's. Hell, Jimmy Johnson bragged about it, and said that all sorts of teams did that. You're just trying to come up with some sort of flaw on Tom Brady's resume, and this is clearly not one.

And even if you wanted to go there, it still has nothing on Tom Brady. He wasn't the one doing it, and he has no control over what his HC, OC, or anyone else does for that matter. He's just the QB that goes in there and executes plays. And one of the biggest flaws in people that simply like to bash the Patriots and try to use that Spy Gate thing was at the beginning of the the year in pre season that the controversy of that came out which was two years ago, when the Pats had the best offense of all time. So, that right there proves that they were a great team with or without any spygate methods. They were being watched like a hawk all season by league officials, and Brady throws 50 TD's, Moss catches 23 TD's, Welker has a break out season, Gaffney looks like he actually belongs in the NFL, and that team goes a missed INT away from a perfect season. So that right there showed that the Spygate nonsense was a bunch of crap.



Brady's good...but he can't be mentioned in the same BREATH as Montana. Not yet.

How do you claim this? They've both been to the SB 4 times in their careers with Brady losing one and the one he lost his team had the lead and their defense let Manning come down the field and score with hardly any time left. That wasn't exactly on Brady in that loss. Other than that, he's already got 3 SB rings and led a dynasty team throughout this entire decade. He didn't have Jerry Rice and John Taylor to throw to either for his first 3 SB's. He had a trio of WR's that were changing every year with Troy Brown being his clutch guy. Montana had a great defense in San Francisco as well. And hell, Montana never had any statistical season like Brady's 50 TD season. The most TD's that Joe Montana ever threw were 31 and he had Jerry Rice for most of his career who is the best WR of all time, while Brady has only played one season with an elite WR, who most people thought was washed up until he started playing with Brady.

Tom Brady and Joe Montana are a lot closer than you think. Both of them have led their teams to multiple SB's and dynasty teams and watching them play they both have a very similar style with their release on their throws, their mobility, and style of winning games. Brady is basically the 2nd coming of Joe Montana.

Texan_Bill
09-25-2009, 12:23 PM
How do you claim this?

Talk to me in 6 more seasons and 13,000 more yards.

Mr teX
09-25-2009, 12:29 PM
Brady is essentially 1 obscure rule & 3 wide right or left kicks away from being Jim Kelly...

Second Honeymoon
09-25-2009, 12:31 PM
Ben was never a backup and the Steelers were a good football team before he got there. Stewart and Maddox both enjoyed success and made the playoffs.

Ben has helped take them to another level though. They were just good before they had a real franchise QB, now that they have a franchise QB they are great.

Texecutioner
09-25-2009, 12:35 PM
Talk to me in 6 more seasons and 13,000 more yards.

So are you indicating that passing yards is your ice breaker here Bill? I hope not. If Brady can stay healthy he can eclipse that in 4 more seasons as far as yards goes. But just like Joe, Brady has never been a big time stat QB in his career, because that hasn't ever been the way their team has tried to win games other than two years ago when they finally brought in real weapons.

How about talking to you right now with a 50 TD season in the only year that Brady ever has had an elite WR which was after already winning 3 SB's.


Whether people want to admit it or not, Brady is already right there in Montana's league easily.

And another thing to add is that the Niners team was so good that they were able to win another SB when Joe wasn't even there, that's how good that team was that Joe was getting to play with using Jerry Rice, John Taylor, Tom Rathman, and Roger Craig on offense. Tom Brady never had anything even remotely close to that as far as weaponry until the last season he played.

I'm not saying that Brady is better than Montana was, but he's right there, and plays just like Joe played in a lot of aspects.

Second Honeymoon
09-25-2009, 12:40 PM
Manning was around before Brady and he just may be around after Brady.

If Manning played for the Patriots and Belicheat, he would probably have 4 or 5 rings already.

Manning > Brady but both are 1st Ballot HOF and its not like there isn't a case to be made for Brady > Manning

personal preference

Texecutioner
09-25-2009, 12:41 PM
Brady is essentially 1 obscure rule & 3 wide right or left kicks away from being Jim Kelly...

:spit: If that's all you're bringing to the discussion, you might as well stop now.


And Joe Montana was a few drops away from being the same thing had Dwight Clark or John Taylor not caught those epic TD throws from Montana.

Talk about a moot point that doesn't mean anything. I could say that about hundreds of football players and their careers and achievements.

Texan_Bill
09-25-2009, 12:43 PM
So are you indicating that passing yards is your ice breaker here Bill? I hope not. If Brady can stay healthy he can eclipse that in 4 more seasons as far as yards goes. But just like Joe, Brady has never been a big time stat QB in his career, because that hasn't ever been the way their team has tried to win games other than two years ago when they finally brought in real weapons.

How about talking to you right now with a 50 TD season in the only year that Brady ever has had an elite WR which was after already winning 3 SB's.


Whether people want to admit it or not, Brady is already right there in Montana's league easily.

And another thing to add is that the Niners team was so good that they were able to win another SB when Joe wasn't even there, that's how good that team was that Joe was getting to play with using Jerry Rice, John Taylor, Tom Rathman, and Roger Craig on offense. Tom Brady never had anything even remotely close to that as far as weaponry until the last season he played.

I'm not saying that Brady is better than Montana was, but he's right there, and plays just like Joe played in a lot of aspects.

No, it's not just about yards. It's about the entire body of work. IF Brady plays another six seasons, throws another 75 TD's, and has 5 more playoff appearances, then he would be mentioned in the same breath as Montana.



If you want to start splitting hairs, I want to through this out there: Montana played in era when defenders could rape wide recievers making completions and TD's much more difficult to come by. Today, if a DB looks funny at a wide reciever, it's called.

Texecutioner
09-25-2009, 12:53 PM
No, it's not just about yards. It's about the entire body of work. IF Brady plays another six seasons, throws another 75 TD's, and has 5 more playoff appearances, then he would be mentioned in the same breath as Montana.

Mentioned in the same breath as Montana? He's already been mentioned in the same breath as Montana for years now. That road was crossed a while back.



If you want to start splitting hairs, I want to through this out there: Montana played in era when defenders could rape wide recievers making completions and TD's much more difficult to come by. Today, if a DB looks funny at a wide reciever, it's called.

You're reaching now Bill. If you're going to use that logic, then you're basically saying that we can't even put any QB's of this decade up there with QB's of the past then and that simply isn't a valid argument to use against QB's of this decade or ones for the future. WR's were putting up great numbers back then the same way they are now. It's not like there was a huge difference in stats by WR's to where they weren't able to produce back then. And Montana had a WR that no one in NFL history could guard.

HoustonFrog
09-25-2009, 01:08 PM
Brady is essentially 1 obscure rule & 3 wide right or left kicks away from being Jim Kelly...

Well so is Joe Montana with a Taylor drop, etc. Anyone could say that about any great game. That makes no sense. 1 time maybe, 3 times is a trend of getting your team there. Please stop these.

:spit: If that's all you're bringing to the discussion, you might as well stop now.


And Joe Montana was a few drops away from being the same thing had Dwight Clark or John Taylor not caught those epic TD throws from Montana.

Talk about a moot point that doesn't mean anything. I could say that about hundreds of football players and their careers and achievements.

Seriously, didn't see or read this Tex...right!

Some of you need to read Simmons today. Did you know that if the Pats have a winning record this year they would be the first post cap team to have 9 straight winning seasons. Says something for the guy at the helm alot of that time.

Overall I still can't put Brady or Manning near Montana because watching that guy was like watching the others rolled up in one.

SB Trophies-Check
Runs Team in 2 Minute Drill--Check, Double Check
Calm Under Presssure/Clutch--Check
Faced Top Competition--Cowboys, Giants, AFC..Check

Ckw
09-25-2009, 01:28 PM
Seriously, didn't see or read this Tex...right!

Some of you need to read Simmons today. Did you know that if the Pats have a winning record this year they would be the first post cap team to have 9 straight winning seasons. Says something for the guy at the helm alot of that time.

Overall I still can't put Brady or Manning near Montana because watching that guy was like watching the others rolled up in one.

SB Trophies-Check
Runs Team in 2 Minute Drill--Check, Double Check
Calm Under Presssure/Clutch--Check
Faced Top Competition--Cowboys, Giants, AFC..Check

I will have to check out the Simmons article sometime today.

By the way, everyone of the points in that list you just gave could apply to Tom Brady. No doubt, a lot is riding on this season. If Brady continues to play like he has, I might start to agree with those of you that believe Manning > Brady but as of right now, I am going to have to go with Brady.

The fact that gets lost on so many of you it seems is Manning has been throwing to two HOF WRs and a potential HOF TE. Before Moss got there, could any of his receivers have ever even dreamed of sniffing the HOF? Not a chance but when Brady finally did get a HOF WR, he seemingly broke every single major single season passing record. The guy is legit and anyone who says otherwise is just jealous.

Regardless, the debate is rather pointless just as for many, the Fitzgerald/AJ argument is pointless. When talking about the best QB today, you are talking about 1A and 1B. They are both incredible QBs and are both guaranteed hall of famers. But as for me, I'd give Brady the edge.

disaacks3
09-25-2009, 01:30 PM
You're reaching now Bill. If you're going to use that logic, then you're basically saying that we can't even put any QB's of this decade up there with QB's of the past then and that simply isn't a valid argument to use against QB's of this decade or ones for the future. WR's were putting up great numbers back then the same way they are now. It's not like there was a huge difference in stats by WR's to where they weren't able to produce back then. And Montana had a WR that no one in NFL history could guard. Not so fast - The reason those rules for DBs have largely been changed is due to the Patriots defenders getting away with MURDER prior to their introduction.

Yep, those are the same Patriots that Brady played for and got at least ONE of those SB rings with before the introduction of the "new rules". Don't even get me started on the "tuck rule" game. Brady shouldn't even have GONE to that SB.

Like I said before, there are MANY of those guys that I'd happily build a franchise around and Brady is one of them, but in the current generation, I'll still give the nod to Manning.

disaacks3
09-25-2009, 01:34 PM
I will have to check out the Simmons article sometime today.

By the way, everyone of the points in that list you just gave could apply to Tom Brady. No doubt, a lot is riding on this season. If Brady continues to play like he has, I might start to agree with those of you that believe Manning > Brady but as of right now, I am going to have to go with Brady.

The fact that gets lost on so many of you it seems is Manning has been throwing to two HOF WRs and a potential HOF TE. Before Moss got there, could any of his receivers have ever even dreamed of sniffing the HOF? Not a chance but when Brady finally did get a HOF WR, he seemingly broke every single major single season passing record. The guy is legit and anyone who says otherwise is just jealous.

Regardless, the debate is rather pointless just as for many, the Fitzgerald/AJ argument is pointless. When talking about the best QB today, you are talking about 1A and 1B. They are both incredible QBs and are both guaranteed hall of famers. But as for me, I'd give Brady the edge. The question then becomes, are they potential HOF'ers BECAUSE of Manning?

Moss is another "beast" altogether - in my mind, he may never be the greatest WR of all-time (that, for now is still Rice), but I believe he can be classified as the most physically gifted WR I've ever seen.

Texan_Bill
09-25-2009, 01:34 PM
Mentioned in the same breath as Montana? He's already been mentioned in the same breath as Montana for years now. That road was crossed a while back.


You're reaching now Bill. If you're going to use that logic, then you're basically saying that we can't even put any QB's of this decade up there with QB's of the past then and that simply isn't a valid argument to use against QB's of this decade or ones for the future. WR's were putting up great numbers back then the same way they are now. It's not like there was a huge difference in stats by WR's to where they weren't able to produce back then. And Montana had a WR that no one in NFL history could guard.

By you, not me. A lot of people agree with me (and it's not just born out of hatred of the Patriots). Just because some ananlyst makes the comparison doesn't mean you have to agree with it.

Why am I reaching? When someone states an opinion, it is just that an opinion. You are no one to say whether it's right or wrong.

In a lot of ways that's what I'm saying. Look at receivers numbers today compared to yester-year. Lynn Swann's numbers look fairly pedestrian to numbers put up today. Was he a pedestrian wide reciever?? Hardly. I understand that the Steelers ran the ball quite a bit, but so what. The Titans do to, and Justin Gage already has half the yards in his career that Swann had his entire career.

Look at Roger Staubach. Brady has thrown for 5,000 more yards than Roger in his HOF career. I don't mention Brady in the same breath as Staubach (and my hate for the 'Gurls is widely known).

I can go on and on and on and on, but I'm tired and bored with it.

HoustonFrog
09-25-2009, 01:35 PM
I will have to check out the Simmons article sometime today.

By the way, everyone of the points in that list you just gave could apply to Tom Brady. No doubt, a lot is riding on this season. If Brady continues to play like he has, I might start to agree with those of you that believe Manning > Brady but as of right now, I am going to have to go with Brady.

The fact that gets lost on so many of you it seems is Manning has been throwing to two HOF WRs and a potential HOF TE. Before Moss got there, could any of his receivers have ever even dreamed of sniffing the HOF? Not a chance but when Brady finally did get a HOF WR, he seemingly broke every single major single season passing record. The guy is legit and anyone who says otherwise is just jealous.

Regardless, the debate is rather pointless just as for many, the Fitzgerald/AJ argument is pointless. When talking about the best QB today, you are talking about 1A and 1B. They are both incredible QBs and are both guaranteed hall of famers. But as for me, I'd give Brady the edge.

I know when I made the list I thought that but many say that Manning has the 2 minute or hurry up mastered and Joe was as good as any..and I'm a Cowboy fan.

I also agree and stated earlier in this thread..page 2... about the talent surrounding guys. It is why, besides many of the things pointed out, that I have Brady higher. People are foolishly saying that Manning would have won on the Pats yet Manning had Harrison, Edge James at RB and then got Wayne and Clark in those time periods. Brady won those SBs with Troy Brown, David Patton, and Deion Branch. The RB was Antwain Smith. Even ex-Texan Gaffney got better there. All of those guys have fallen off since then. Branch was supposed to be a stud and has floundered with stats and injuries in Seattle. The others....gone. Gaffney does decent still. The colts surround Manning with talent in my book and still try to with who they bring in. The Pats, until Moss and Welker just had parts with Brady leading.

But to be clear, as DB said, all of these guy are great and HOFers

Texan_Bill
09-25-2009, 01:38 PM
By you, not me. A lot of people agree with me (and it's not just born out of hatred of the Patriots). Just because some ananlyst makes the comparison doesn't mean you have to agree with it.

Why am I reaching? When someone states an opinion, it is just that an opinion. You are no one to say whether it's right or wrong.

In a lot of ways that's what I'm saying. Look at receivers numbers today compared to yester-year. Lynn Swann's numbers look fairly pedestrian to numbers put up today. Was he a pedestrian wide reciever?? Hardly. I understand that the Steelers ran the ball quite a bit, but so what. The Titans do to, and Justin Gage already has half the yards in his career that Swann had his entire career.

Look at Roger Staubach. Brady has thrown for 5,000 more yards than Roger in his HOF career. I don't mention Brady in the same breath as Staubach (and my hate for the 'Gurls is widely known).

I can go on and on and on and on, but I'm tired and bored with it.

Oh, and back to my other point: the way DB's are allowed to play today does affect the passing game. Think Lester Hayes could get away with his antics today??

WWJD
09-25-2009, 01:46 PM
All these stats make my brain hurt...

I had the simplest formula..who has the best commercials?

PEYTON WINS!

Texan_Bill
09-25-2009, 01:49 PM
All these stats make my brain hurt...

I had the simplest formula..who has the best commercials?

PEYTON WINS!

"Cut that meat" was really bad though.. :splits:

The Pencil Neck
09-25-2009, 01:52 PM
Ben was never a backup and the Steelers were a good football team before he got there. Stewart and Maddox both enjoyed success and made the playoffs.

Ben has helped take them to another level though. They were just good before they had a real franchise QB, now that they have a franchise QB they are great.

You're wrong.

Ben was the 2nd string at the beginning of his first year. Maddux got injured in the second game. They lost that game with Big Ben coming off the bench. Roethlisburger was the starter from that point on.

HoustonFrog
09-25-2009, 02:04 PM
You're wrong.

Ben was the 2nd string at the beginning of his first year. Maddux got injured in the second game. They lost that game with Big Ben coming off the bench. Roethlisburger was the starter from that point on.

But as I said in an earlier post, he was drafted to be a franchise QB, not a backup and his backup stint lasted less than 2 games. Also, Maddox was banged up but there were already rumblings because of ineffective play. He wasn't this kid that came from backup obscurity. That kind of twists the facts. He ended up AFC Offensive Rookie of the Year.

Texan_Bill
09-25-2009, 02:05 PM
You're wrong.

Ben was the 2nd string at the beginning of his first year. Maddux got injured in the second game. They lost that game with Big Ben coming off the bench. Roethlisburger was the starter from that point on.

Yes. His rookie year he played in 14 games and started 13.

Ckw
09-25-2009, 02:05 PM
The question then becomes, are they potential HOF'ers BECAUSE of Manning?

Moss is another "beast" altogether - in my mind, he may never be the greatest WR of all-time (that, for now is still Rice), but I believe he can be classified as the most physically gifted WR I've ever seen.

This is definitely the right question to ask. In my opinion, I think all three of them would be Pro Bowlers without Manning. They might not all be hall of famers but certainly pro bowlers.

Definitely agree with you about Moss. The guy is an incredible player.

I know when I made the list I thought that but many say that Manning has the 2 minute or hurry up mastered and Joe was as good as any..and I'm a Cowboy fan.

That is the thing for me. No one seems to even come close to Brady in his ability to engineer game winning drives. The guy is almost as good, and maybe as good IMO, as Montana. He simply wills his team to victory and shows up when it counts. It is also hard to argue against a 14-3 playoff record as a starter.

I also agree and stated earlier in this thread..page 2... about the talent surrounding guys. It is why, besides many of the things pointed out, that I have Brady higher. People are foolishly saying that Manning would have won on the Pats yet Manning had Harrison, Edge James at RB and then got Wayne and Clark in those time periods. Brady won those SBs with Troy Brown, David Patton, and Deion Branch. The RB was Antwain Smith. Even ex-Texan Gaffney got better there. All of those guys have fallen off since then. Branch was supposed to be a stud and has floundered with stats and injuries in Seattle. The others....gone. Gaffney does decent still. The colts surround Manning with talent in my book and still try to with who they bring in. The Pats, until Moss and Welker just had parts with Brady leading.

But to be clear, as DB said, all of these guy are great and HOFers

Great post. It really is mind blowing just how pathetic Brady's surrounding cast has been for most of his career, yet somehow he wins with those guys and turns them into decent football players. The best way I would sum it up is Manning is probably the most physically as well as mentally gifted pocket passer the NFL has ever seen. He compares very favorably, IMO, to Marino. The thing with Brady is he just seems to have "it" much like Montana had "it". Brady just knows how to win.

Here (http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d811407b1&template=without-video-with-comments&confirm=true) is a good article from NFL.com that talks about the best QBs in the game today.

All these stats make my brain hurt...

I had the simplest formula..who has the best commercials?

PEYTON WINS!

Great formula and I definitely can't argue with that. Rep your way.

The Pencil Neck
09-25-2009, 02:14 PM
But as I said in an earlier post, he was drafted to be a franchise QB, not a backup and his backup stint lasted less than 2 games. Also, Maddox was banged up but there were already rumblings because of ineffective play. He wasn't this kid that came from backup obscurity. That kind of twists the facts. He ended up AFC Offensive Rookie of the Year.

I haven't been reading this thread. I just saw something written that was incorrect.

He was a backup to start his career. He was only a backup for a short time but that's not really the issue. He was backing someone up. He was the second stringer. Therefore, he was the backup.

Sure, he was drafted in the first round and expected to be the franchise QB at some point but they appeared to be grooming him for the spot instead of throwing him out there. They didn't intend on throwing him out there that early.

Mr teX
09-25-2009, 03:32 PM
:spit: If that's all you're bringing to the discussion, you might as well stop now.


And Joe Montana was a few drops away from being the same thing had Dwight Clark or John Taylor not caught those epic TD throws from Montana.

Talk about a moot point that doesn't mean anything. I could say that about hundreds of football players and their careers and achievements.

The difference is that Joe had to take his team all the way down the field into the end zone to win with little to no time left.....significantly harder. All brady had to do was move them into FG range. When Brady had to do just this in the AFC championship game against the colts in peyton's superbowl year & against the giants in the superbowl, what happened?

& I've already addressed what you had to say; you just chose not to respond & i'll take that you really can't refute any of it. No team has ever depended (offense & defense) on their Qb as much and for as long as the colts have on Manning. Everything brady is and has accomplished thus far is wrapped up in what those teams accomplished as a whole.

Last year showed what the patriots machinery could accomplish without Brady. The colts without manning fall flat on their face & to deny that is just being thick-headed.

& for all the talk about what peyton has had on offense to throw to, what about what brady has had on defense? Seymour, Samuels, Wilfork, Harrison were all at least top 3 at their positions when they made their run. & when you mix in heady players like Bruschi, Mcginest & Vrabel & a HOF defensive mind, you've got a very stout defense. You guys can't match up Brady & Manning on pure statistics b/c Brady loses so you try & gloss over the fact that Brady has always had a stout defense to lean on. that hasn't been the case for manning.

This debate is similar to joe & dan back in the day, the only difference here is that Manning (dan) has a ring which is the main reason no really puts dan above montana.

BY1401
09-29-2009, 09:19 AM
Great googly moogly.

Texans fans having a Brady v. Manning debate?

You just think you've seen it all.

kastofsna
09-29-2009, 08:21 PM
Last year showed what the patriots machinery could accomplish without Brady. The colts without manning fall flat on their face & to deny that is just being thick-headed.

i don't think this is a good argument because A) there's no proof at all of the Colts playing without Manning for any stretch of time in his whole career, and B) the Patriots are a great team, just because Brady goes down doesn't mean they can't keep going.

i think the Colts WOULD be good without Manning. again, they're consistently a good team, year in and year out. good TEAM. they wouldn't be as good without one of the best quarterbacks of all time, granted, but they'd still win games and sniff the playoffs. just like when Brady went down.

Kaiser Toro
09-29-2009, 08:40 PM
i don't think this is a good argument because A) there's no proof at all of the Colts playing without Manning for any stretch of time in his whole career, and B) the Patriots are a great team, just because Brady goes down doesn't mean they can't keep going.

i think the Colts WOULD be good without Manning. again, they're consistently a good team, year in and year out. good TEAM. they wouldn't be as good without one of the best quarterbacks of all time, granted, but they'd still win games and sniff the playoffs. just like when Brady went down.

The Colts had zero, ten win seasons since the league went to a 16 game format prior to Manning arriving.

kastofsna
09-29-2009, 08:46 PM
well duh.

the point is that it's a TEAM game, and they're not winning 12 games a year just because of one guy. the game is too complicated, too deep, and the coaches and players around the league are too good for that. good management, good coaching, lots of good players, and oh, having a hall of fame QB doesn't hurt, either, but don't pretend he's the only reason they're winning. it's that mentality that people thought Vince Young would be great because "he's a winner." blah blah

Kaiser Toro
09-29-2009, 09:02 PM
well duh.

the point is that it's a TEAM game, and they're not winning 12 games a year just because of one guy. the game is too complicated, too deep, and the coaches and players around the league are too good for that. good management, good coaching, lots of good players, and oh, having a hall of fame QB doesn't hurt, either, but don't pretend he's the only reason they're winning. it's that mentality that people thought Vince Young would be great because "he's a winner." blah blah

Your definition of a consistently good team is set at a nine win season? You would fit in well with our sunshine club.

kastofsna
09-29-2009, 09:27 PM
i'm not sure what you're referring to

Grams
09-30-2009, 06:05 AM
i don't think this is a good argument because A) there's no proof at all of the Colts playing without Manning for any stretch of time in his whole career, and B) the Patriots are a great team, just because Brady goes down doesn't mean they can't keep going.

i think the Colts WOULD be good without Manning. again, they're consistently a good team, year in and year out. good TEAM. they wouldn't be as good without one of the best quarterbacks of all time, granted, but they'd still win games and sniff the playoffs. just like when Brady went down.

There is no proof they could win without Manning as he plays in all the games.

Without Manning the Colts would loose the large majority of their games. Without Freeney and Sanders their defense is just ok, without Manning - they have no offense.

kastofsna
09-30-2009, 07:05 AM
there's no proof they couldn't win without him.

Grams
09-30-2009, 09:05 AM
Nope - there is no proof either way.

But I would not place any $$ on them to win without Manning playing QB.

Mr teX
09-30-2009, 09:34 AM
there's no proof they couldn't win without him.

Do you honestly think that Jim Sorgi could do what manning does, CONSISTENTLY?

HOU-TEX
09-30-2009, 09:50 AM
Personally, I'd take Brady, but Manning would definitely not be far behind.

I don't think they can really compare to Montana. Manning and Brady have been successful with team's they've been with their entire careers. Would they be successful playing for a different team, or scheme? I don't know, but we all know Montana could.

Texan_Bill
09-30-2009, 10:24 AM
Personally, I'd take Brady, but Manning would definitely not be far behind.

I don't think they can really compare to Montana. Manning and Brady have been successful with team's they've been with their entire careers. Would they be successful playing for a different team, or scheme? I don't know, but we all know Montana could.

And did.. 28-20 :foottap:

BY1401
09-30-2009, 10:29 AM
There is no proof they could win without Manning as he plays in all the games.

Without Manning the Colts would loose the large majority of their games. Without Freeney and Sanders their defense is just ok, without Manning - they have no offense.

there's no proof they couldn't win without him.

Do you honestly think that Jim Sorgi could do what manning does, CONSISTENTLY?

2004
The season that Manning broke Marino's TD record.
Week 17 game at Denver: Manning starts, but the game is all on Sorgi. Sorgi throws 2 TDs to set a new team record for TD passes (which still stands), but the Colts lose 14-33.

Colts under Sorgi: 0-1

2005
After San Diego snaps the Colts undefeated streak and home field advantage is already secured throughout the playoffs, Manning gets the starts in the last two games, but they're in Sorgi's hands once again.
Week 16 game at Seattle: Colts lose 13-28.
Week 17 game against Arizona: Colts win 17-13. Keep in mind that the Cardinals were a 5-10 squad coming into the game against a 13-2 team, that it was in the RCA Dome, and that they held off a late-game surge by Arizona.

Colts under Sorgi: 1-2

2007
With a first-round bye locked-up and New England already having secured home field advantage, it's Sorgi time again.
Week 17 game against Tennessee: Colts lose 10-16.

Colts under Sorgi: 1-3

infantrycak
09-30-2009, 10:32 AM
Colts under Sorgi: 1-3

Which while good research means nothing for "ordinary" games as the reason Sorgi was getting playing time was the games were meaningless and the Colts were coasting. Freeney, Harrison, Sanders, etc. also missed time in those games.

HOU-TEX
09-30-2009, 10:35 AM
And did.. 28-20 :foottap:

Do you remember the huge knot Montana had on his elbow? It looked like a baseball under the skin.

BY1401
09-30-2009, 11:10 AM
Which while good research means nothing for "ordinary" games as the reason Sorgi was getting playing time was the games were meaningless and the Colts were coasting. Freeney, Harrison, Sanders, etc. also missed time in those games.

True, but while watching the games, Sorgi doesn't display nearly the same command of the game that Manning has. There's so much more that Manning can do that Sorgi can't.

If Sorgi were to take over, I'd put the Colts at a middle-of-the-pack team at best.

Mr teX
09-30-2009, 11:16 AM
And did.. 28-20 :foottap:

exactly..everyone here remembers how montana did us in the playoffs that one year. He didn't have rice & was at the tail end of his career & still nearly got back to the bowl.

Though i think Montana is the greatest by a smidge over Dan, I could easily see manning putting up close to the same numbers & winning the same if he played on another decent team. I'm not so sure Brady could win at the same clip if he didn't have belichick and a great defense to lean on.

infantrycak
09-30-2009, 11:16 AM
True, but while watching the games, Sorgi doesn't display nearly the same command of the game that Manning has. There's so much more that Manning can do that Sorgi can't.

If Sorgi were to take over, I'd put the Colts at a middle-of-the-pack team at best.

I should have been more clear. I wasn't defending Sorgi, just pointing out he wasn't the only difference in those games. Take AJ, Mario and DeMeco out and let's see how the backup fares.

I wouldn't expect the Colts to go above .500 without Manning.

BY1401
09-30-2009, 11:37 AM
I should have been more clear. I wasn't defending Sorgi, just pointing out he wasn't the only difference in those games. Take AJ, Mario and DeMeco out and let's see how the backup fares.

I wouldn't expect the Colts to go above .500 without Manning.

Gotcha.

And yes, I expect to see the post-Manning Colts slide back into the realm of suck. And when that day comes, I'd rather not see the Titans or the Jags take control of the division. So y'all better get your act together in the next five or six years.

kastofsna
10-01-2009, 07:12 AM
Do you honestly think that Jim Sorgi could do what manning does, CONSISTENTLY?

nope. again, the colts CONSISTENTLY have a lot of talent at many positions, and i think they'd win CONSISTENTLY without him. the offense wouldn't be nearly the same.

CoastalTexan
10-01-2009, 07:36 AM
I would say Manning is the best QB around, I hate watching him cause he calls the plays at the line and it takes forever to call them out, but for the coach to have that much confidence in him is telling. I wish we would do the same...

Grams
10-01-2009, 08:53 AM
It use to be that all QB'S called their own game.

I will take Joe Montana over anyone else.

Brady and Manning and Marino are very, very good, but there was just something about Montana. With 2 min left in the game and down by a score, when he came on the field you just knew the 49er's were going to win the game.

infantrycak
10-01-2009, 09:31 AM
I would say Manning is the best QB around, I hate watching him cause he calls the plays at the line and it takes forever to call them out, but for the coach to have that much confidence in him is telling. I wish we would do the same...

It use to be that all QB'S called their own game.

Used to be as in 40+ years ago.

In any event, Manning does not call plays in that sense. He doesn't just walk up and call any play he wants. He is given three plays, either 2 pass and 1 run or 1 run and 2 pass and then he picks one based on the D formation and has a number of audible options. At least that has been how it was under the old OC who was not just an inert lump on the sideline with no play calling responsibility.

Texecutioner
10-01-2009, 11:27 AM
It use to be that all QB'S called their own game.

I will take Joe Montana over anyone else.

Brady and Manning and Marino are very, very good, but there was just something about Montana. With 2 min left in the game and down by a score, when he came on the field you just knew the 49er's were going to win the game.

Yeah, but it's been the exact same way with Tom Brady. He's done the exact type of thing that Montana used to do throughout his entire career as well.

Double Barrel
10-01-2009, 11:36 AM
Used to be as in 40+ years ago.

In any event, Manning does not call plays in that sense. He doesn't just walk up and call any play he wants. He is given three plays, either 2 pass and 1 run or 1 run and 2 pass and then he picks one based on the D formation and has a number of audible options. At least that has been how it was under the old OC who was not just an inert lump on the sideline with no play calling responsibility.

Thanks for the clarification in this thread. Dungy talked about this exact subject prior to the MNF game. Manning IS NOT the OC on the field, folks. He's fantastic at reading defenses and picking one out of three plays sent to him, but he's not a one man coaching/coordinating/quarterbacking/sandwich-making machine out there.

HOU-TEX
10-01-2009, 11:48 AM
Thanks for the clarification in this thread. Dungy talked about this exact subject prior to the MNF game. Manning IS NOT the OC on the field, folks. He's fantastic at reading defenses and picking one out of three plays sent to him, but he's not a one man coaching/coordinating/quarterbacking/sandwich-making machine out there.

Yep, he can definitely "pick his b---h", that's for sure. He can read where the weakness in the defense is on dang near every stinkin play. It'd be nice to have a QB that's allowed to make audibles on the fly like that.

Hookem Horns
10-11-2009, 09:09 PM
Manning making a case for himself again tonight. That last drive was awesome.

WWJD
10-11-2009, 09:34 PM
I think it was Collingsworth earlier who said that in his entire football career that Peyton has only had 3 systems he's had to work with...that builds the consistency alot of QB's lack coaching wise and it doesn't hurt that Peyton is a very smart guy.

The Colts are just very well coached and their players play smart football. Well except for the blocker running into the punt returner tonight....

Double Barrel
10-12-2009, 03:48 PM
Manning making a case for himself again tonight. That last drive was awesome.

He's been amazing this entire season. Put a couple more rings on him and there would be a case to be made that he's potentially the best of all time.

(I'm not making that case, but just saying that it could be made.)

El Tejano
10-12-2009, 03:58 PM
He's been amazing this entire season. Put a couple more rings on him and there would be a case to be made that he's potentially the best of all time.

(I'm not making that case, but just saying that it could be made.)

Well according to The NFL and ESPN who, when he plays on Monday night, turns the initials MNF to mean Masterbation Night Football - if you have one ring like Brett Favre, you are the best ever.

Peyton is already better than alot of the guys that came before him.

Dan B.
10-12-2009, 03:59 PM
I think it was Collingsworth earlier who said that in his entire football career that Peyton has only had 3 systems he's had to work with...that builds the consistency alot of QB's lack coaching wise and it doesn't hurt that Peyton is a very smart guy.

The Colts are just very well coached and their players play smart football. Well except for the blocker running into the punt returner tonight....

I'm curious how many systems Brady, Montana, or Marino worked under. I wonder if Collinsworth mentioned that.

Double Barrel
10-12-2009, 03:59 PM
Well according to The NFL and ESPN who, when he plays on Monday night, turns the initials MNF to mean Masterbation Night Football - if you have one ring like Brett Favre, you are the best ever.

Peyton is already better than alot of the guys that came before him.

lol! Good point. Manning is already the second longest active streak behind Favre, so give it time. We might be talking about Peyton the way we talk about Brett a decade from now!

Can you even begin to imagine the hype around Favre if he actually wins a ring this year? G.O.A.T.!!!

Double Barrel
01-26-2010, 06:34 PM
Well, I'm dredging it up, because Manning is one game away from clearly being up there with the greats. He already is in reality, but we all know what rings mean in the big picture of things.

And while I've been a fan of Brady, this season has been one that has slowly swayed me over to the Manning camp in this debate.

I don't root for the guy, but dern if I don't have the utmost respect for him. Put another ring on his hand and with many years ahead of him, and we are looking at one of the G.O.A.T.s of the NFL.

I guess I should feel "honored" that I've seen him in person so many times...but I keep thinking...

Why does he have to be in our division?!!! :brickwall:

DBCooper
01-26-2010, 07:36 PM
Thanks for the clarification in this thread. Dungy talked about this exact subject prior to the MNF game. Manning IS NOT the OC on the field, folks. He's fantastic at reading defenses and picking one out of three plays sent to him, but he's not a one man coaching/coordinating/quarterbacking/sandwich-making machine out there.

I'd bet big money Peyton can make a mean sandwich!

TheRealJoker
01-26-2010, 07:38 PM
Part of me wants the Colts to win the SB solely due to my desperate hope that another ring will convince Seyton Manning to retire a few years sooner rather than pull a Favre and haunt us forever :(

The Pencil Neck
01-26-2010, 08:59 PM
I guess I should feel "honored" that I've seen him in person so many times...but I keep thinking...

Why does he have to be in our division?!!! :brickwall:

Just like the Steelers from the Bradshaw era Steelers and the Bum Phillips era Oilers.

Wolf
02-06-2010, 02:26 PM
Peyton Manning’s Case for Being the Best Ever

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — The Indianapolis Colts were trailing Houston, 17-0, when the Texans rookie linebacker Brian Cushing glanced up to see Colts quarterback Peyton Manning looking in the direction of the defense’s huddle. In those few seconds of quiet before the chaos at the line of scrimmage, Cushing saw Manning nodding his head. Up and down. Up and down.

Uh-oh.

“He was sizing us up,” Cushing said. “I had that feeling right then that he was locked in and that might be it.”

It was. Manning threw a 20-yard completion to start that drive and a touchdown pass to finish it, igniting a comeback that resulted in another Indianapolis victory.

Others might not have noticed the precise moment that Manning dissected their defenses and took over a game, the way Cushing did in November, but almost every other opponent in the N.F.L. has known the feeling.



http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/07/sports/football/07manning.html?partner=TOPIXNEWS&ei=5099

Double Barrel
02-08-2010, 11:31 AM
I'm back with Brady at 1(a) and Manning 1(b). Brady has never thrown a pick 6 when the Super Bowl was on the line. That was a huge black eye to Peyton's legacy, IMO. Still a great QB, but he'll have to do a LOT more to be considered G.O.A.T., simpy because he'll always have that choke play on his resume now.

disaacks3
02-08-2010, 11:35 AM
I'm back with Brady at 1(a) and Manning 1(b). Brady has never thrown a pick 6 when the Super Bowl was on the line. That was a huge black eye to Peyton's legacy, IMO. Still a great QB, but he'll have to do a LOT more to be considered G.O.A.T., simpy because he'll always have that choke play on his resume now.

Normally, I'd agree with this, but that pick happened due to the WR not coming back to the ball. The ball itself was on-target. I'm still trying to figure out why the Colts went conservative at the end of the 1st half (after the goal-line stand).

Oh well, at least the football world can stop "feeling sorry" for the Sants once-and-for-all. :fingergun:

El Tejano
02-08-2010, 11:57 AM
Normally, I'd agree with this, but that pick happened due to the WR not coming back to the ball. I'm still trying to figure out why the Colts went conservative at the end of the 1st half (after the goal-line stand).
Because the football Gods got upset when they didn't try to go undefeated. They took back their covenant with The Colts. Yipeeee!!!!!
Oh well, at least the football world can stop "feeling sorry" for the Sants once-and-for-all. :fingergun:

On to feeling sorry for Detroit, Cleveland, Jville (they can wait for them), and Houston.

Wolf
02-08-2010, 12:14 PM
Manning does lick a mean oreo.

Texecutioner
02-08-2010, 01:14 PM
I'm back with Brady at 1(a) and Manning 1(b). Brady has never thrown a pick 6 when the Super Bowl was on the line. That was a huge black eye to Peyton's legacy, IMO. Still a great QB, but he'll have to do a LOT more to be considered G.O.A.T., simpy because he'll always have that choke play on his resume now.

I don't see how he ever could have been considered GOAT when this is only his 2nd SB appearance. He's had a lot of post season choke games as well. He might go down as the best "regular season" QB of all time, but Peyton is nowhere near being above Joe Montana at this point in my opinion when Joe was 4 for 4 in the SB and Tom Brady is 3 for 4 where he did enough to get a win for the Pats in his last SB. I don't think I've ever seen any QB get the kind of protection that Manning has had throughout his career either and that's a pretty important factor when discussing this. Manning barely got touched this season, and like you say he threw one major pick just now in that game that sealed it for the Saints and I thought it was a beautiful thing to watch.

infantrycak
02-08-2010, 01:19 PM
I don't see how he ever could have been considered GOAT when this is only his 2nd SB appearance. He's had a lot of post season choke games as well. He might go down as the best "regular season" QB of all time, but Peyton is nowhere near being above Joe Montana at this point in my opinion when Joe was 4 for 4 in the SB and Tom Brady is 3 for 4 where he did enough to get a win for the Pats in his last SB. I don't think I've ever seen any QB get the kind of protection that Manning has had throughout his career either and that's a pretty important factor when discussing this. Manning barely got touched this season, and like you say he threw one major pick just now in that game that sealed it for the Saints and I thought it was a beautiful thing to watch.

There is something anti-Aikman about Manning. Aikman never put up big numbers during the regular season but was nails in the play-offs.

Texecutioner
02-08-2010, 01:51 PM
There is something anti-Aikman about Manning. Aikman never put up big numbers during the regular season but was nails in the play-offs.

Agreed. Personally I'd go with Elway over Manning easily at this point. Manning still has much more to deliver, but Elway went to 3 SB's as a pretty young QB throwing to some cans at WR. Maybe not cans, but Sammy Winder was one of his best weapons back then and that's not much at all. Elway got slautered in those 3 early ones, but the guy was the come back kid just like Montana was back then. I hated Elway so bad in those Oilers years. I wanted him dead. (Not literally:)) Then years later he was still damn good and knew how to let his running game carry the offense more and he could do the rest and got two SB's for himself and went out on top. That's 5 SB appearances over all for the man. His numbers weren't ever eye gouging every season, but Elway was one of the greatest. I haven't seen enough from Manning to put him above Elway.

Double Barrel
02-08-2010, 03:00 PM
Normally, I'd agree with this, but that pick happened due to the WR not coming back to the ball. The ball itself was on-target. I'm still trying to figure out why the Colts went conservative at the end of the 1st half (after the goal-line stand).

Oh well, at least the football world can stop "feeling sorry" for the Sants once-and-for-all. :fingergun:

It sounds like an excuse to me. Manning threw the ball. He chose where to throw it. He was the last Colt to touch the ball before the pick 6.

While there certainly could have been reason(s) behind his decision making, the simple fact is that he's the field general and the Saints D burned him with that play.

And is that an official story by Manning - that his WR failed - is that just speculation?

I don't see how he ever could have been considered GOAT when this is only his 2nd SB appearance. He's had a lot of post season choke games as well. He might go down as the best "regular season" QB of all time, but Peyton is nowhere near being above Joe Montana at this point in my opinion when Joe was 4 for 4 in the SB and Tom Brady is 3 for 4 where he did enough to get a win for the Pats in his last SB. I don't think I've ever seen any QB get the kind of protection that Manning has had throughout his career either and that's a pretty important factor when discussing this. Manning barely got touched this season, and like you say he threw one major pick just now in that game that sealed it for the Saints and I thought it was a beautiful thing to watch.

yeah, I agree. I was merely saying that if Manning won two rings, then he could be worthy of consideration for GOAT (not saying that I would argue for it, but rather his body of work could be construed for such a perspective).

Montana is my choice for GOAT, and nobody has really comes close. Brady, maybe, but he's got to do it again, and the fact is that Montana never lost a SB.

I used Aikman as an example yesterday. Folks were talking about great QBs and I mentioned Aikman's career. Somebody balked until they looked up his numbers. It did help, though, that he had one of the greatest RBs ever to play the game behind him.

infantrycak
02-08-2010, 03:16 PM
Montana is my choice for GOAT, and nobody has really comes close. Brady, maybe, but he's got to do it again, and the fact is that Montana never lost a SB.

My GOAT is Staubach. Football is a team sport and things happen to get you rings you individually don't deserve (Bradshaw) or to keep you from getting a ring you might. I am not sure Brady would make my top 5.

Double Barrel
02-08-2010, 03:36 PM
My GOAT is Staubach. Football is a team sport and things happen to get you rings you individually don't deserve (Bradshaw) or to keep you from getting a ring you might. I am not sure Brady would make my top 5.

Staubach is always under-appreciated, IMO. But dude was clutch and had some of the greatest scrambling abilities next to Tarkenton. Folks like to ramble on about "running QBs" these days, but the difference is that the old guys would scramble behind the LOS until they found an open receiver. These current "running QBs" don't seem to have the patience or eye for it, or they are just selfish and start running before a receiver gets loose. IIRC, didn't Staubach win two out of four SBs? Only stopped by one of the greatest teams of all time (which we know all about).

Brady not in top 5, 'eh? Wow. Look earlier in this thread for some of his accomplishments. I would easily put him up there with Elway, Staubach, Aikman, or any other multiple SB winners not named Montana.

infantrycak
02-08-2010, 03:45 PM
Staubach is always under-appreciated, IMO. But dude was clutch and had some of the greatest scrambling abilities next to Tarkenton. Folks like to ramble on about "running QBs" these days, but the difference is that the old guys would scramble behind the LOS until they found an open receiver. These current "running QBs" don't seem to have the patience or eye for it, or they are just selfish and start running before a receiver gets loose. IIRC, didn't Staubach win two out of four SBs? Only stopped by one of the greatest teams of all time (which we know all about).

Yup and didn't start playing until 27 years old because of his Navy commitment. I know the Cowboys aren't popular around here but they were robbed in SB V - I mean c'mon a Cowboy jumps on the fumbled ball, no scrum stands up with it and the ref runs up and signals Indy ball while the Cowboy is holding it. But anyway.

Brady not in top 5, 'eh? Wow. Look earlier in this thread for some of his accomplishments. I would easily put him up there with Elway, Staubach, Aikman, or any other multiple SB winners not named Montana.

Well I would have Staubach, Montana, Elway, Marino and Manning before him and possibly some others not having thought of it extensively. If rings become the discussion then you have to consider guys like Aikman and Bradshaw. I think Brady is much better than Bradshaw, Aikman not so sure. Aikman wasn't a stat geek but damn he could throw a pretty and accurate ball and it seemed like the better the competition the more he upped his game. Do you think Marino in his prime could have done as well with those Patriot games or vice versa?

Texecutioner
02-08-2010, 03:55 PM
Yup and didn't start playing until 27 years old because of his Navy commitment. I know the Cowboys aren't popular around here but they were robbed in SB V - I mean c'mon a Cowboy jumps on the fumbled ball, no scrum stands up with it and the ref runs up and signals Indy ball while the Cowboy is holding it. But anyway.



Well I would have Staubach, Montana, Elway, Marino and Manning before him and possibly some others not having thought of it extensively. If rings become the discussion then you have to consider guys like Aikman and Bradshaw. I think Brady is much better than Bradshaw, Aikman not so sure. Aikman wasn't a stat geek but damn he could throw a pretty and accurate ball and it seemed like the better the competition the more he upped his game. Do you think Marino in his prime could have done as well with those Patriot games or vice versa?

I just don't see how Brady isn't up there in that top 5 for you especially after reading those stats that DB posted early on in this thread about Brady's post season numbers. We don't have to go simply off of SB's, but post season in general and to me if Brady retired right now, he'd be up there with all of those guys. He's got some pretty damn good stats to now and that was the thing before with him, and then he broke the record the minute he got some real WR's. Look at how many times Brady has taken his team down the field to win games as well. He's been as clutch as any of them and he's never had some great RB's to help him out a lot. Dillion was old when he got there. He was pretty good, but nothing spectacular at that point.

And no I don't think Marino would have been as great with those Patriots teams? That question used to get asked about Marino if he were on those 49er teams instead of Joe and I thought the same thing then. Marino was probably the best over all passer of all time, but as a QB and a leader I don't think he was as good as guys like Montana, Elway, and Brady.

Double Barrel
02-08-2010, 04:32 PM
Well I would have Staubach, Montana, Elway, Marino and Manning before him and possibly some others not having thought of it extensively. If rings become the discussion then you have to consider guys like Aikman and Bradshaw. I think Brady is much better than Bradshaw, Aikman not so sure. Aikman wasn't a stat geek but damn he could throw a pretty and accurate ball and it seemed like the better the competition the more he upped his game. Do you think Marino in his prime could have done as well with those Patriot games or vice versa?

Lots of folks put Marino up there because of his gawdy numbers, but that's sort of simplistic just like looking solely at rings.

To me it's about a complete body of work: stats, rings, come-from-behind-victories, and overall clutch performances.

I tend to see Marino in the same light as Warren Moon. Both are extremely gifted QBs, without a doubt, and perhaps two of the most beautiful "passers" that the league has ever seen. But, they did not have that intangible "it" factor that these other QBs had. I think a QB like Elway or even Jim Kelly (among others of that era) would have taken those Oilers teams to the SB at least once.

It's a good food-for-though discussion, though, and nobody is right/wrong simply because of the nature of these things.

I just don't see how Brady isn't up there in that top 5 for you especially after reading those stats that DB posted early on in this thread about Brady's post season numbers. We don't have to go simply off of SB's, but post season in general and to me if Brady retired right now, he'd be up there with all of those guys. He's got some pretty damn good stats to now and that was the thing before with him, and then he broke the record the minute he got some real WR's. Look at how many times Brady has taken his team down the field to win games as well. He's been as clutch as any of them and he's never had some great RB's to help him out a lot. Dillion was old when he got there. He was pretty good, but nothing spectacular at that point.

This is where I am at with Brady, as well. I've always been a fan, but when I really studied his body of work and compared it to other great QBs, his stands on it's own. It's beyond rings (although they should be included), but his overall stats and 'clutch factor' is up there with the greats, IMO.

Hervoyel
02-08-2010, 04:49 PM
Manning laughs at those who suggest he walks on water. He walks on his hands on water people. Get it straight.

Thorn
02-08-2010, 05:11 PM
Well, one things for sure, without Manning the Dolts aren't worth a crap. You have to give him that even if you don't think he one of the greatest of all time. His absolute value to that organization is just everything.

I'll sure as hell be happy when he retires. LOL

Texan_Bill
02-08-2010, 05:29 PM
Well, one things for sure, without Manning the Dolts aren't worth a crap. You have to give him that even if you don't think he one of the greatest of all time. His absolute value to that organization is just everything.

I'll sure as hell be happy when he retires. LOL

He's 33 y/o but with the amount of times he's been hit (or not hit as it were), he could last in the league until
he's 45, or right about the time you can finally retire. :turtle:

Double Barrel
02-08-2010, 05:32 PM
Well, one things for sure, without Manning the Dolts aren't worth a crap. You have to give him that even if you don't think he one of the greatest of all time. His absolute value to that organization is just everything.

I'll sure as hell be happy when he retires. LIL

No argument from me on either point. I'm looking forward to the latter, whenever that could possibly be.

WWJD
02-08-2010, 05:33 PM
Yep..his body hasn't had the hits other QB's have taken and other than those knee infections or whatever he had surgery for last year he's been injury free.

ObsiWan
02-08-2010, 05:37 PM
Greatest of ALL TIME
1. Otto Graham - How can he not be the greatest. He led his team to the NFL Championship game all six seasons he QB'd the Browns.
2. Sammy Baugh - Basically invented the passing game.
3. Johnny Unitas - Invented the timing pass and the two-minute drill.
4. Joe Montana - Won every Super Bowl he played in and even took the Chiefs to the playoffs.
5. Terry Bradshaw - I struggled with this one due to my anti-Steeler bias left over from my Oiler years; but if Brady is in the conversation with three rings then Bradshaw has to make the list with four. Oh and did I mention that Brady lost a S/B game. Bradshaw won all of his.

Greatest of THIS GEN.
1. Tom Brady. Four S/Bs, three rings. 'Nuff said.
2. Drew Brees. Anyone who can make hell freeze over (i.e. the Saints won the S/B) is on this list. If he takes the Saints back to the S/B he moves up to #1.
3. Peyton Manning. Passing records out the wahzoo. But he was out-dueled by that guy San Diego said wasn't good enough. Wonder what the SD fans think about that move now...?
4. Troy Aikman - A generation is defined as a 20-yr period. Ergo, I get to go all the way back to guys who played in the 90s. And of the QBs that played in the 90s, Aikman won the most championships.
5. Dan Marino - Best pure passer of the 90s. I was tempted to put Steve Young or Brett Favre here since they won S/Bs and Marino didn't. But I think Marino was the best pure QB of the three. Just MHO.

Texecutioner
02-08-2010, 11:02 PM
He's 33 y/o but with the amount of times he's been hit (or not hit as it were), he could last in the league until
he's 45, or right about the time you can finally retire. :turtle:

manning is by far the most protected QB I've ever seen in the NFL. I've never seen anyone get anywhere near the protection that Manning has gotten over the years.

Texecutioner
02-08-2010, 11:11 PM
I think a QB like Elway or even Jim Kelly (among others of that era) would have taken those Oilers teams to the SB at least once.


Interesting idea to propose there. Jim Kelly is very very underrated in the grand scheme of things. All time great for sure.

Now if John Elway would have been the QB for the Oilers instead of Moon, well there is no doubt in my mind that we'd be looking at a few SB appearances and he'd have gotten at least one ring in those match ups. You want to talk about the "IT" factor, well he had it. No disrespect to Moon, because he was one of the best pure passers of all time, but he made epic picks at the wrong time way to often while Elway would put fans in tears when he'd create his typical come from behind victories. I could only have imagined what Elway could have done with those weapons the Oilers had in the Run And Shoot offense.

infantrycak
02-09-2010, 09:02 AM
I just don't see how Brady isn't up there in that top 5 for you especially after reading those stats that DB posted early on in this thread about Brady's post season numbers.

Lots of folks put Marino up there because of his gawdy numbers, but that's sort of simplistic just like looking solely at rings.

To me it's about a complete body of work: stats, rings, come-from-behind-victories, and overall clutch performances.

I understand the argument for Brady and don't really disagree with it. It comes down to removing somebody from the list. I guess y'all agree to take Marino off and put Brady on. I just have this gut impression that Marino elevated his team and Brady has more ridden his team. I think there were a lot of teams that just missed the SB or failed to win it and you could have stuck Marino on and they would have succeeded. Not sure how many teams you could say the same thing about Brady.

Ckw
02-09-2010, 10:28 AM
Greatest of ALL TIME
1. Otto Graham - How can he not be the greatest. He led his team to the NFL Championship game all six seasons he QB'd the Browns.
2. Sammy Baugh - Basically invented the passing game.
3. Johnny Unitas - Invented the timing pass and the two-minute drill.
4. Joe Montana - Won every Super Bowl he played in and even took the Chiefs to the playoffs.
5. Terry Bradshaw - I struggled with this one due to my anti-Steeler bias left over from my Oiler years; but if Brady is in the conversation with three rings then Bradshaw has to make the list with four. Oh and did I mention that Brady lost a S/B game. Bradshaw won all of his.

Nice list, but my problem with guys like Graham and Baugh is they played in a COMPLETELY different generation of football. Guys were nowhere near as big or as fast (relative to their size), and so I just don't think you can really put them on a list like this. They were great for sure and perhaps deserve their own list, but the GOAT discussion should really involve football in the modern (1970s or so and on) era. It's unfair because I can only imagine what someone like Brady or Manning (with their size, arm strength, and accuracy) would have done on those Cleveland teams. Just my opinion but I doubt they would do much, if any, less than Otto Graham.

Greatest of THIS GEN.
1. Tom Brady. Four S/Bs, three rings. 'Nuff said.
2. Drew Brees. Anyone who can make hell freeze over (i.e. the Saints won the S/B) is on this list. If he takes the Saints back to the S/B he moves up to #1.
3. Peyton Manning. Passing records out the wahzoo. But he was out-dueled by that guy San Diego said wasn't good enough. Wonder what the SD fans think about that move now...?
4. Troy Aikman - A generation is defined as a 20-yr period. Ergo, I get to go all the way back to guys who played in the 90s. And of the QBs that played in the 90s, Aikman won the most championships.
5. Dan Marino - Best pure passer of the 90s. I was tempted to put Steve Young or Brett Favre here since they won S/Bs and Marino didn't. But I think Marino was the best pure QB of the three. Just MHO.

I think this is a great list, but I am confused why you consider Marino apart of THIS GEN but not Montana. Also, where is Elway?!?!

I understand the argument for Brady and don't really disagree with it. It comes down to removing somebody from the list. I guess y'all agree to take Marino off and put Brady on. I just have this gut impression that Marino elevated his team and Brady has more ridden his team. I think there were a lot of teams that just missed the SB or failed to win it and you could have stuck Marino on and they would have succeeded. Not sure how many teams you could say the same thing about Brady.

Wow! Man, this is just an argument I really can't understand. Sure he had some great defenses for those first two Super Bowls, but he also was basically playing by himself on offense. He had NOBODY. What happened to his best receiver at the time (Deion Branch) when he left? David Givens? Troy Brown? The guy was throwing to basically nobodies and still put up decent numbers. When he finally got a good WR like Manning has had for his entire career, he was shattering records. I can only imagine what Brady would do with AJ.

I think my list would look something like this:

1. Montana: epitomized the "IT" factor.
2. Elway: everything you could ask for in a QB: lazer arm, great scrambler, and great leader.
3. Brady: all the reasons I gave above.
4. Marino: probably the best pure passer in NFL history, but the lack of a Super Bowl win could make me remove him for someone else
5. Favre: only won 1 Super Bowl but he is a true leader, has a great arm, and is the ultimate iron man.

I could probably be swayed to take off either Marino or Favre for one of these guys that barely missed the list: Staubach, Aikman, Manning, Bradshaw, Steve Young (people forget just how good and accurate he was), and maybe a few others I am forgetting to mention.

Good conversation guys. Very fun topic.

TimeKiller
02-09-2010, 10:44 AM
Still got Manning as the best QB of the modern era. As far as I can tell he made 1 mistake this year. 1.

WWJD
02-09-2010, 10:52 AM
I'll still take Peyton.

HoustonFrog
02-09-2010, 11:06 AM
Staubach is always under-appreciated, IMO. But dude was clutch and had some of the greatest scrambling abilities next to Tarkenton. Folks like to ramble on about "running QBs" these days, but the difference is that the old guys would scramble behind the LOS until they found an open receiver. These current "running QBs" don't seem to have the patience or eye for it, or they are just selfish and start running before a receiver gets loose. IIRC, didn't Staubach win two out of four SBs? Only stopped by one of the greatest teams of all time (which we know all about).

Brady not in top 5, 'eh? Wow. Look earlier in this thread for some of his accomplishments. I would easily put him up there with Elway, Staubach, Aikman, or any other multiple SB winners not named Montana.

Love Staubach, of course, and one of the things about those lost SBs..they were still great games vs great teams. I mean SB XIII, the Jackie Smith game, is still one of my favorite SBs of all time and my team lost..lol


Well I would have Staubach, Montana, Elway, Marino and Manning before him and possibly some others not having thought of it extensively. If rings become the discussion then you have to consider guys like Aikman and Bradshaw. I think Brady is much better than Bradshaw, Aikman not so sure. Aikman wasn't a stat geek but damn he could throw a pretty and accurate ball and it seemed like the better the competition the more he upped his game. Do you think Marino in his prime could have done as well with those Patriot games or vice versa?

That is one thing I tell people all the time that dump on Aikman. At one point he had the highest completion percentage for total playoffs. I think he may be tied for 3rd now. With a line and RB you still have to deliver a ball and he basically put it in guys hands all game.

CloakNNNdagger
02-09-2010, 11:23 AM
Sort of a surprising finding.......As great as he may have performed during regular season games, where it really counts, Manning has managed a less than stellar .500 record in the playoffs.

Playoff Record as Starting QB:
1999 (0-1)
2000 (0-1)
2002 (0-1)
2003 (2-1)
2004 (1-1)
2005 (0-1)
2006 (4-0)
2007 (0-1)
2008 (0-1)
2009 (2-1)

Double Barrel
02-09-2010, 12:00 PM
Still got Manning as the best QB of the modern era. As far as I can tell he made 1 mistake this year. 1.

I'll still take Peyton.

:thinking: hmmmm...interesting....and then there's this:

Sort of a surprising finding.......As great as he may have performed during regular season games, where it really counts, Manning has managed a less than stellar .500 record in the playoffs.

Playoff Record as Starting QB:
1999 (0-1)
2000 (0-1)
2002 (0-1)
2003 (2-1)
2004 (1-1)
2005 (0-1)
2006 (4-0)
2007 (0-1)
2008 (0-1)
2009 (2-1)

Manning may have made one mistake this season (debatable), but it was one of the most EPIC mistakes that a HoF QB could ever make. Game on the line, behind by 7, driving to put a TD on the scoreboard for a tie, INTERCEPTION, RUN BACK, TOUCHDOWN! His team is now down by 14.

And let's not forget that Manning could not punch it in with 4 attempts within the 5 yard line at the end of the game. That's just not clutch, which is clearly one of the attributes of the many great QBs mentioned above.

If Manning is going to get all the credit for being the offensive coordinator on the field, then he's got to accept responsibility for the pick 6 and failure to score in in the red zone when his team needed it the most. He can't have it both ways.

infantrycak
02-09-2010, 12:03 PM
If Manning is going to get all the credit for being the offensive coordinator on the field, then he's got to accept responsibility for the pick 6 and failure to score in in the red zone when his team needed it the most. He can't have it both ways.

Very true.

It's funny. There were a lot of folks who didn't think Aikman even deserved to get into the hall of fame and certainly he is rarely in these GOAT discussions. He started his playoff career with a 10-1 record.

Double Barrel
02-09-2010, 12:07 PM
Very true.

It's funny. There were a lot of folks who didn't think Aikman even deserved to get into the hall of fame and certainly he is rarely in these GOAT discussions. He started his playoff career with a 10-1 record.

If someone can objectively look at Aikman's career and all that it encompasses, he can easily be in the top 5 contenders for GOAT. Dude was a leader, was clutch, and never lost an NFL championship game.

It's crazy to think that folks would even try to argue against inducting him into the HoF. I've always thought it was a no-brainer.

I always respected him, even when I rooted against him. Sort of like Manning these days.

Texecutioner
02-09-2010, 12:13 PM
If someone can objectively look at Aikman's career and all that it encompasses, he can easily be in the top 5 contenders for GOAT. Dude was a leader, was clutch, and never lost an NFL championship game.

It's crazy to think that folks would even try to argue against inducting him into the HoF. I've always thought it was a no-brainer.

I always respected him, even when I rooted against him. Sort of like Manning these days.

Sorry, but I can't put Aikman in the discussion of top 5. No way. Not over the competition in the top 5. Top 10 is fine though, and I'd probably have him in there somewhere, but a top 5 in no particular order to me should consist of

Brady
Montana
Manning
Favre
Elway
Marino
Unitites

I think you could switch these guys around in number of ways, but I couldn't put Aikman over any of these guys.

Ckw
02-09-2010, 12:20 PM
Sorry, but I can't put Aikman in the discussion of top 5. No way. Not over the competition in the top 5. Top 10 is fine though, and I'd probably have him in there somewhere, but a top 5 in no particular order to me should consist of

Brady
Montana
Manning
Favre
Elway
Marino
Unitites

I think you could switch these guys around in number of ways, but I couldn't put Aikman over any of these guys.

Agreed. I don't think I would put Aikman in the top 5 but he is certainly worthy of top 10.

Maybe this was discussed earlier, but I think in any discussion like this you have to have some parameters. How far back do you go for the discussion? What is a fair comparison? Should guys like Otto Graham or Sammy Baugh enter the discussion? If not, what is the fair cutoff? It is only at that point that we can even begin outlining who the greatest QB is of this generation.

If someone can objectively look at Aikman's career and all that it encompasses, he can easily be in the top 5 contenders for GOAT. Dude was a leader, was clutch, and never lost an NFL championship game.

It's crazy to think that folks would even try to argue against inducting him into the HoF. I've always thought it was a no-brainer.

I always respected him, even when I rooted against him. Sort of like Manning these days.

You'd have to be just a blind Cowboy hater to think that Aikman was not HOF worthy. Hell, people are talking about Kurt Warner being a HOF QB (and I tend to agree) but as good as Warner has been in the playoffs, Aikman was even better.

JPPT1974
02-09-2010, 01:20 PM
Well he is and he did win one Super Bowl look at it this way!

HOU-TEX
02-09-2010, 01:20 PM
Sorry, but I can't put Aikman in the discussion of top 5. No way. Not over the competition in the top 5. Top 10 is fine though, and I'd probably have him in there somewhere, but a top 5 in no particular order to me should consist of

Brady
Montana
Manning
Favre
Elway
Marino
Unitites

I think you could switch these guys around in number of ways, but I couldn't put Aikman over any of these guys.

Are unitites similar to unitards? Har har

eriadoc
02-09-2010, 01:31 PM
.... but the GOAT discussion should really involve football in the modern (1970s or so and on) era.

Wouldn't that just be GOME (Greatest Of Modern Era) then? You can't assign a GOAT because of the reasons you cite, but you also can't call something "All-Time" if you're only including the Super Bowl era.

By the way, IIRC, Otto Graham was over 6' and about 200 lbs. So yeah, maybe not as big as today's QBs, but probably as big as many QBs in the Super Bowl era. I don't believe Sammy Baugh was a small guy, either. As for your comment about taking Manning or Brady back to those days, make sure you feed them the same stuff those players ate, take away all the high tech supplements, and give them the same fitness regimens.

Ckw
02-10-2010, 12:00 PM
Wouldn't that just be GOME (Greatest Of Modern Era) then? You can't assign a GOAT because of the reasons you cite, but you also can't call something "All-Time" if you're only including the Super Bowl era.

By the way, IIRC, Otto Graham was over 6' and about 200 lbs. So yeah, maybe not as big as today's QBs, but probably as big as many QBs in the Super Bowl era. I don't believe Sammy Baugh was a small guy, either. As for your comment about taking Manning or Brady back to those days, make sure you feed them the same stuff those players ate, take away all the high tech supplements, and give them the same fitness regimens.

Decent points but in my opinion, the game is so different now than it was then that it simply is ridiculous to even make comparisons. I almost look at it like two entirely different games. We don't make comparisons of college and pro athletics or the NFL and Arena Football, and I am of the opinion that we shouldn't make comparisons of modern football and "pre-Super Bowl" football.

Just the simple lack of black athletes in "pre-Super Bowl" football makes it a ridiculous comparison. Sure there were some, but nowhere near the percentage we have today. I only bring this up because most of the most dominant athletes in football in the modern era have been black athletes, and guys like Otto Graham and Sammy Baugh really didn't have to compete with them much if at all.

Dutchrudder
02-10-2010, 01:11 PM
Here's an article discussing each decade's best QB's, which may help shed some more light on the subject:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs07/columns/story?columnist=chadiha_jeff&id=3199634

The writer has Peyton as the best of the 2000's decade, and Brady is #2. Then Favre, McNabb and McNair.

Personally, I would take Brady over Manning in a head-to-head matchup, but I'd be happy with either one on my team.

Ckw
02-10-2010, 01:56 PM
Here's an article discussing each decade's best QB's, which may help shed some more light on the subject:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs07/columns/story?columnist=chadiha_jeff&id=3199634

The writer has Peyton as the best of the 2000's decade, and Brady is #2. Then Favre, McNabb and McNair.

Personally, I would take Brady over Manning in a head-to-head matchup, but I'd be happy with either one on my team.

Nice article. Rep your way. I like the way he broke it up by decade and if you read the intro to each decade, the author describes how how much things changed for the NFL in the 70s. There were so many factors that pro football was essentially an entirely different game than it had been in years past.

eriadoc
02-10-2010, 09:09 PM
Decent points but in my opinion, the game is so different now than it was then that it simply is ridiculous to even make comparisons. I almost look at it like two entirely different games.

I actually agree with you for the most part, but I think you're overstating it a bit. My only point was that it's not possible to call someone the "Greatest Of All Time" if you're excluding All Times Before XYZ.

infantrycak
02-10-2010, 09:48 PM
I actually agree with you for the most part, but I think you're overstating it a bit. My only point was that it's not possible to call someone the "Greatest Of All Time" if you're excluding All Times Before XYZ.

Totally logical point. Maybe that is why I tend to lean to transition players like Staubach and Montana. I think they could have been great in any era. I'm not sure Manning excels with Deacon Jones head slapping his OL and DBs bumping his WRs all down the field. Maybe.

GP
02-10-2010, 09:56 PM
Peyton Manning is the greatest anus of all time.

I know that's childish, but he's easily becoming Jim Kelly in my book. I just want his wobbly-knee'd, Houston-killing butt to go away.

But I thank Jim Kelly for his service to the Houston Gamblers. :tiphat:

HOU-TEX
02-11-2010, 09:33 AM
Totally logical point. Maybe that is why I tend to lean to transition players like Staubach and Montana. I think they could have been great in any era. I'm not sure Manning excels with Deacon Jones head slapping his OL and DBs bumping his WRs all down the field. Maybe.

That would be sweet. Manning would be yanking the referee's pants down by begging for flags after every play.

I wonder what Peyton's reaction would be to Ronnie Lott going all 'Ronnie Lott' on Clark and Wayne's asses.

Ckw
02-11-2010, 10:16 AM
I actually agree with you for the most part, but I think you're overstating it a bit. My only point was that it's not possible to call someone the "Greatest Of All Time" if you're excluding All Times Before XYZ.

Totally logical point. Maybe that is why I tend to lean to transition players like Staubach and Montana. I think they could have been great in any era. I'm not sure Manning excels with Deacon Jones head slapping his OL and DBs bumping his WRs all down the field. Maybe.

Good points, but cak's post is why I consider the two eras to essentially be two entirely different games. The rules were different and what was required out of the position was different. There are just so many differing factors that I am of the opinion it is pointless to even compare them.

Double Barrel
02-11-2010, 12:36 PM
Totally logical point. Maybe that is why I tend to lean to transition players like Staubach and Montana. I think they could have been great in any era. I'm not sure Manning excels with Deacon Jones head slapping his OL and DBs bumping his WRs all down the field. Maybe.

By the same token, I wonder how effective Deacon Jones would be in today's NFL without his patented head slap and against offensive linemen whose average weight is 300+ lbs. In the 1960s the average NFL lineman weighed slightly over 243 pounds.

My own take is that he'd still be a player, just like Manning if he were in the 1950s, but how good is a matter of speculation.

Good points, but cak's post is why I consider the two eras to essentially be two entirely different games. The rules were different and what was required out of the position was different. There are just so many differing factors that I am of the opinion it is pointless to even compare them.

I tend to agree with your point. The simple fact that blacks were not allowed to play for many years, and even after that, it was a very small quota that was allowed to play. Obviously, the best of the best could not be qualified when a segment of the population was prevented from even trying to play.

I don't think yesterday's QBs (those up to the 1960s) can really compare to what QBs do today. I've watched a lot of old game film, and those QBs just didn't have the finesse of today's QBs, much less the variety of defenses and speed that has increased tremendously among defensive players. I think some would translate - the greats like Otto Graham and Sammy Baugh - but to what extent is speculative.

I do think running backs translate, though. Jim Brown would be a badass today just like he was in the late 50's/early 60's.

infantrycak
02-11-2010, 07:45 PM
By the same token, I wonder how effective Deacon Jones would be in today's NFL without his patented head slap and against offensive linemen whose average weight is 300+ lbs. In the 1960s the average NFL lineman weighed slightly over 243 pounds.

Then translate it. Imagine if Mario was allowed to use the moves Deacon Jones used. Imagine if Bernard Pollard could bump like Cliff Harris. You're right the game and players have changed so the great mystery is how players would have adapted. I think Staubach for example could adapt. I remain skeptical Manning could if the rules were not so protective but as they are he is great.

GNR87
02-11-2010, 09:10 PM
I love having Peyton Manning as my team's QB. The guy has pulled off unbelievable victories in his career. Before his arrival in Indy (1998) the Indy Colts history had a winning percentage of 35%. Since then they've won 67% of their games. Something you have to take into account is that up until 2005ish the Colts defense was pretty bad. Manning had to literally score on every drive to win games. Playoff time you run into very good defenses. Do I think we should have at least one more Super Bowl....yes I do. But shit happens in sports. I watched this past Super Bowl with my diehard Saints brother-in-law. It was great at first....but sucked after the first quarter. I don't know why they gave up on the run. Addai was running very well. Manning says he won't play into his 40's. He is 34 now....so I'm going to enjoy it while he is still here.