Brady vs. Manning (1 Viewer)

[timschochet]

I continue to hear this topic, old as it is, discussed everywhere more than any other football argument. Rather than just have people shouting for their man, I'd like to find out from those of you who know more than I do about this argument:

1. How do their QB ratings compare to each other? (Lifetime and this season?)

2. How has Brady's new WR's affected his QB rating, and what does that say about his legacy?

3. Who's done more with less to work with?

4. Who would you take over one season? Over one game? For a two minute drive with the game on the line? Over a career?

5.How would you compare them to the greatest QB's of all time? Or ARE these two the greatest of all time?

I'm sure there will be some joking around, but I'm hoping for a serious discussion...

 

[Ghost Rider]

1. How do their QB ratings compare to each other? (Lifetime and this season?)

Look up the numbers.

2. How has Brady's new WR's affected his QB rating, and what does that say about his legacy?

It demonstrates that, with similar offensive talent, Brady is just as capable as Manning of putting up astronomical numbers.

3.Who's done more with less to work with?

Brady. I think it is impossible to argue with this one.

4. Who would you take over one season? Over one game? For a two minute drive with the game on the line? Over a career?

In all cases, Brady.

5.How would you compare them to the greatest QB's of all time? Or ARE these two the greatest of all time?

Still too early to tell, in both cases, but both are on pace to be among the top 5 QBs ever.

 

[timschochet]

1. How do their QB ratings compare to each other? (Lifetime and this season?)

Look up the numbers.

2. How has Brady's new WR's affected his QB rating, and what does that say about his legacy?

It demonstrates that, with similar offensive talent, Brady is just as capable as Manning of putting up astronomical numbers.

3.Who's done more with less to work with?

Brady.

4. Who would you take over one season? Over one game? For a two minute drive with the game on the line? Over a career?

In all cases, Brady.

5.How would you compare them to the greatest QB's of all time? Or ARE these two the greatest of all time?

Still too early to tell, in both cases, but both are on pace to be among the top 5 QBs ever.

As I said, I know less about this subject, but having watched both of these guys plenty on TV, I'm pretty sure I would take Manning for the season and the game, Brady for the 2 minute drive. And I think it's at least arguable about who's done more with less. Brady has always had the advantage of a great defense, which might even be more valuable to him than great receivers...

 

[radballs]

Manning is hands down better. Brady's good but Manning's easily the winner here. The defense surrounding Brady completely offsets Manning's better weapons.

Let's not start this again. Please.

 

[twitch]

Manning's been throwing to 2 Pro Bowlers for several years now. Look at what Brady is doing this year with only 1. Give Brady someone like Reggie Wayne on the other side of Moss, and this wouldnt even be a discussion.

 

[radballs]

Well, the Pats have a motivated Randy Moss playing this year so we'll see what happens in the AFC Championship game.

There's a ton of threads on this debate. Please try a search.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Manning is hands down better. Brady's good but Manning's easily the winner here. The defense surrounding Brady completely offsets Manning's better weapons.

That is a terrible argument. If you want to say that Brady has had more team success because he has had better defenses, that is fine, but as far as numbers go, Manning has always had MUCH better talent around him on offense, except for this year. And look at how each of them are doing. Besides, in two of Brady's Super Bowl wins, he had to bail out the defense, which blew double digit leads in the SB wins against the Rams and the Panthers, and win the game at the end. Meanwhile, Manning won his Super Bowl last year mainly because the defense played so well in the playoffs, although Manning did come up big in the second half of the AFCCG.

 

[switz]

Manning's been throwing to 2 Pro Bowlers for several years now. Look at what Brady is doing this year with only 1. Give Brady someone like Reggie Wayne on the other side of Moss, and this wouldnt even be a discussion.

The question is - did Manning make Wayne, or did Wayne make Manning? I think the answer is clear, Manning has put up gaudy stats no matter who he was throwing to.And consider your implication re: Wayne versus Stallworth. Very similar pedigrees. Stallworth has played with far worse QBs, been on teams with ever-changing coaches and philosophies. Yet with McNabb and Brady, every bit as good if not better than Wayne.I would say Moss > Harrison, Wayne = Stallworth, Watson > Clark, Addai > Maroney. This year, Brady has more weapons than Manning.Nevertheless, every team woudl kill to have either of these guys. Brady is as clutch as they come, Manning is the most naturally talented QB in the league today. They aren't the same type of QB, but both are winners and they are the top-2 in the league.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Sorry, switz, but arguing that Stallworth is as good as Wayne is insanity.

 

[switz]

Manning is hands down better. Brady's good but Manning's easily the winner here. The defense surrounding Brady completely offsets Manning's better weapons.

That is a terrible argument. If you want to say that Brady has had more team success because he has had better defenses, that is fine, but as far as numbers go, Manning has always had MUCH better talent around him on offense, except for this year. And look at how each of them are doing. Besides, in two of Brady's Super Bowl wins, he had to bail out the defense, which blew double digit leads in the SB wins against the Rams and the Panthers, and win the game at the end. Meanwhile, Manning won his Super Bowl last year mainly because the defense played so well in the playoffs, although Manning did come up big in the second half of the AFCCG.

Brady's always been clutch. His team has done better because he's had a better team. Pretty simple. Teams are not the sum of their components.Manning is a better QB from the "Combine" point of view. Brady is the better QB down by a FG with 0:30 left in the game. They are both great, and everyone should just enjoy that, because it won't last forever.

 

[bostonfred]

Manning is hands down better. Brady's good but Manning's easily the winner here. The defense surrounding Brady completely offsets Manning's better weapons. Let's not start this again. Please.

It's close, but Manning's just not as good as Brady. Brady 200774.1% completion percentage3.20 TDs/game276.6 yards/game8.8 yards/attemptManning 200467.6% completion percentage3.06 TDs/game284.8 yards/game9.2 yards/attemptIn Brady's first five games with receivers even remotely comparable to Harrison/Wayne/Clark/James, he's put up numbers that are equivalent to Manning's best year ever. And he still hasn't had enough time to get comfortable with them. And he's crushing Manning's stats this year in every category. Manning 200769.7% completion percentage263.8 yards/game8.0 yards/attempt2.0 TDs/gameOf course, the only reason Brady's putting up good passing numbers is because his defense is doing so well.

 

[switz]

Sorry, switz, but arguing that Stallworth is as good as Wayne is insanity.

Why? Look at their draft slots, look at their collegiate careers.Stallworth has had to play with Aaron Brooks, and who knows who else on the Saints. With a good QB he's been AMAZING, but injury prone. Wayne on the other hand has had Petyon Mannign throwing him the ball, same QB same offense HIS ENTIRE CAREER!Argue all you want about stats, but as far as TALENT goes, they are equals.

 

[bostonfred]

Sorry, switz, but arguing that Stallworth is as good as Wayne is insanity.

Why? Look at their draft slots, look at their collegiate careers.Stallworth has had to play with Aaron Brooks, and who knows who else on the Saints. With a good QB he's been AMAZING, but injury prone. Wayne on the other hand has had Petyon Mannign throwing him the ball, same QB same offense HIS ENTIRE CAREER!Argue all you want about stats, but as far as TALENT goes, they are equals.

Interesting. Are you predicting a jump in Brady's stats? Stallworth hasn't even been playing full time until last week.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Sorry, switz, but arguing that Stallworth is as good as Wayne is insanity.

Why? Look at their draft slots, look at their collegiate careers.

Oh, so can I then compare Ryan Leaf to Peyton Manning because they went 1-2 in the draft and had comparable collegiate careers? Get real, man. We are talking about how good they have been in the NFL. Wayne is an elite NFL WR. Stallworth is not. Enough said.

Sorry, switz, but arguing that Stallworth is as good as Wayne is insanity.

Stallworth has had to play with Aaron Brooks, and who knows who else on the Saints. With a good QB he's been AMAZING, but injury prone. Wayne on the other hand has had Petyon Mannign throwing him the ball, same QB same offense HIS ENTIRE CAREER!Argue all you want about stats, but as far as TALENT goes, they are equals.

Aaron Brooks has been bad as far as getting his teams to win, but he managed to turn Joe Horn into a top WR on an almost yearly basis. No, he hasn't had Manning, but Stallworth hasn't had it too bad, having Brooks, McNabb, and now Brady throwing him the ball. Talent only gets you so far in the NFL. Wayne's intangibles blow Stallworth's off the map.

 

[twitch]

Manning's been throwing to 2 Pro Bowlers for several years now. Look at what Brady is doing this year with only 1. Give Brady someone like Reggie Wayne on the other side of Moss, and this wouldnt even be a discussion.

The question is - did Manning make Wayne, or did Wayne make Manning? I think the answer is clear, Manning has put up gaudy stats no matter who he was throwing to.And consider your implication re: Wayne versus Stallworth. Very similar pedigrees. Stallworth has played with far worse QBs, been on teams with ever-changing coaches and philosophies. Yet with McNabb and Brady, every bit as good if not better than Wayne.I would say Moss > Harrison, Wayne = Stallworth, Watson > Clark, Addai > Maroney. This year, Brady has more weapons than Manning.Nevertheless, every team woudl kill to have either of these guys. Brady is as clutch as they come, Manning is the most naturally talented QB in the league today. They aren't the same type of QB, but both are winners and they are the top-2 in the league.

Im not beginning to compare Reggie Wayne to Stallworth. After 6 years in the NFL, you pretty much are what you are. He's never even had a 1000yd season. Stallworth has speed, but he's nothing of the receiver of the 2nd All Pro with the Colts. With Wayne and Harrison, the Colts basically have TWO guys worthy of consistent doubles. To leave either in single man is a huge edge for a QB. I agree with everything else youve said.

 

[radballs]

Manning is hands down better. Brady's good but Manning's easily the winner here. The defense surrounding Brady completely offsets Manning's better weapons. Let's not start this again. Please.

It's close, but Manning's just not as good as Brady. Brady 200774.1% completion percentage3.20 TDs/game276.6 yards/game8.8 yards/attemptManning 200467.6% completion percentage3.06 TDs/game284.8 yards/game9.2 yards/attemptIn Brady's first five games with receivers even remotely comparable to Harrison/Wayne/Clark/James, he's put up numbers that are equivalent to Manning's best year ever. And he still hasn't had enough time to get comfortable with them. And he's crushing Manning's stats this year in every category. Manning 200769.7% completion percentage263.8 yards/game8.0 yards/attempt2.0 TDs/gameOf course, the only reason Brady's putting up good passing numbers is because his defense is doing so well.

Come on Fred. You can do better than that. This discussion is so circular it makes me want another drink. Brady and Manning are studs. Tough to debate who is better. But, I'll take the guy running the reigning champs as well as the guy that has the intelligence and ability to actually run a complicated offense from the line of scrimmage. When's the last time Brady won a Super Bowl. It was a few years ago I think.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Brady and Manning are studs. Tough to debate who is better.

Then why, earlier in this thread, did you say that Manning is easily better, if it is tough to debate who is better?

 

[switz]

Manning is hands down better. Brady's good but Manning's easily the winner here. The defense surrounding Brady completely offsets Manning's better weapons. Let's not start this again. Please.

It's close, but Manning's just not as good as Brady. Brady 200774.1% completion percentage3.20 TDs/game276.6 yards/game8.8 yards/attemptManning 200467.6% completion percentage3.06 TDs/game284.8 yards/game9.2 yards/attemptIn Brady's first five games with receivers even remotely comparable to Harrison/Wayne/Clark/James, he's put up numbers that are equivalent to Manning's best year ever. And he still hasn't had enough time to get comfortable with them. And he's crushing Manning's stats this year in every category. Manning 200769.7% completion percentage263.8 yards/game8.0 yards/attempt2.0 TDs/gameOf course, the only reason Brady's putting up good passing numbers is because his defense is doing so well.

Since you are basing Tom's averages on 5 games, let's use a 5 game stretch for Peyton...Manning 2004 (weeks 8-12)69.1% completion percentage4.8 TDs/game301.4 yards/game9.5 yards/attemptthe only area Tom is better is in completion %.So - to use a 5 game stretch is disingenuous at best. Deliberately misleading at worst.

 

[bostonfred]

Manning is hands down better. Brady's good but Manning's easily the winner here. The defense surrounding Brady completely offsets Manning's better weapons. Let's not start this again. Please.

It's close, but Manning's just not as good as Brady. Brady 200774.1% completion percentage3.20 TDs/game276.6 yards/game8.8 yards/attemptManning 200467.6% completion percentage3.06 TDs/game284.8 yards/game9.2 yards/attemptIn Brady's first five games with receivers even remotely comparable to Harrison/Wayne/Clark/James, he's put up numbers that are equivalent to Manning's best year ever. And he still hasn't had enough time to get comfortable with them. And he's crushing Manning's stats this year in every category. Manning 200769.7% completion percentage263.8 yards/game8.0 yards/attempt2.0 TDs/gameOf course, the only reason Brady's putting up good passing numbers is because his defense is doing so well.

Come on Fred. You can do better than that. This discussion is so circular it makes me want another drink. Brady and Manning are studs. Tough to debate who is better. But, I'll take the guy running the reigning champs as well as the guy that has the intelligence and ability to actually run a complicated offense from the line of scrimmage. When's the last time Brady won a Super Bowl. It was a few years ago I think.

I've never made the argument that Brady was better because of the Superbowls.

 

[switz]

Sorry, switz, but arguing that Stallworth is as good as Wayne is insanity.

Why? Look at their draft slots, look at their collegiate careers.Stallworth has had to play with Aaron Brooks, and who knows who else on the Saints. With a good QB he's been AMAZING, but injury prone. Wayne on the other hand has had Petyon Mannign throwing him the ball, same QB same offense HIS ENTIRE CAREER!Argue all you want about stats, but as far as TALENT goes, they are equals.

Interesting. Are you predicting a jump in Brady's stats? Stallworth hasn't even been playing full time until last week.

Actually I expect Brady to have some even better games than he's had yes, but I also expect Stallworth to take away some catches from Moss.And for anyone who doesn't think Stallworth is every bit as good as Wayne has not watched much football. I'm a huge Colts fan, but Wayne is made by Manning. Stallworth is actually more talented IMO, but has had injury problems. Watch the games. Stallworth is an awesome WR.

 

[twitch]

I hope they both retire in the same year, so they can go in the Hall together. Then those 2 guys can debate it themselves.

 

[Ghost Rider]

And for anyone who doesn't think Stallworth is every bit as good as Wayne has not watched much football. I'm a huge Colts fan, but Wayne is made by Manning. Stallworth is actually more talented IMO, but has had injury problems. Watch the games. Stallworth is an awesome WR.

Stallworth is a dangerous deep threat, when healthy, but he is not the complete wide receiver that Reggie Wayne is. You can shrug off the numbers all you want, but they don't lie.

 

[twitch]

Sorry, switz, but arguing that Stallworth is as good as Wayne is insanity.

Why? Look at their draft slots, look at their collegiate careers.Stallworth has had to play with Aaron Brooks, and who knows who else on the Saints. With a good QB he's been AMAZING, but injury prone. Wayne on the other hand has had Petyon Mannign throwing him the ball, same QB same offense HIS ENTIRE CAREER!Argue all you want about stats, but as far as TALENT goes, they are equals.

Interesting. Are you predicting a jump in Brady's stats? Stallworth hasn't even been playing full time until last week.

Actually I expect Brady to have some even better games than he's had yes, but I also expect Stallworth to take away some catches from Moss.And for anyone who doesn't think Stallworth is every bit as good as Wayne has not watched much football. I'm a huge Colts fan, but Wayne is made by Manning. Stallworth is actually more talented IMO, but has had injury problems. Watch the games. Stallworth is an awesome WR.

The "watch the games" and "hasnt watched much football" schtick is amateurish, insulting and below anyone sharing thoughts here. Leave that weak stuff in the parking lot.

 

[Ghost Rider]

The "watch the games" and "hasnt watched much football" schtick is amateurish, insulting and below anyone sharing thoughts here. Leave that weak stuff in the parking lot.

 

[bostonfred]

So - to use a 5 game stretch is disingenuous at best. Deliberately misleading at worst.

No, disingenuous is saying that Stallworth is as good as Wayne.Delilberately misleading is saying that Kelley Washington is as good as Wayne.

 

[timschochet]

Joe Montana, Steve Young, and Troy Aikman all had hall of fame receivers. Meanwhile, Elway, Marino, and Farve never had great WR (unless you count Sharpe at the beginning of Farve's career.) Yet most people would put Montana at the top of this list. I don't think you can argue QB superiority simply based upon who has or doesn't have great WR...

 

[radballs]

Manning is hands down better. Brady's good but Manning's easily the winner here. The defense surrounding Brady completely offsets Manning's better weapons. Let's not start this again. Please.

It's close, but Manning's just not as good as Brady. Brady 200774.1% completion percentage3.20 TDs/game276.6 yards/game8.8 yards/attemptManning 200467.6% completion percentage3.06 TDs/game284.8 yards/game9.2 yards/attemptIn Brady's first five games with receivers even remotely comparable to Harrison/Wayne/Clark/James, he's put up numbers that are equivalent to Manning's best year ever. And he still hasn't had enough time to get comfortable with them. And he's crushing Manning's stats this year in every category. Manning 200769.7% completion percentage263.8 yards/game8.0 yards/attempt2.0 TDs/gameOf course, the only reason Brady's putting up good passing numbers is because his defense is doing so well.

Come on Fred. You can do better than that. This discussion is so circular it makes me want another drink. Brady and Manning are studs. Tough to debate who is better. But, I'll take the guy running the reigning champs as well as the guy that has the intelligence and ability to actually run a complicated offense from the line of scrimmage. When's the last time Brady won a Super Bowl. It was a few years ago I think.

I've never made the argument that Brady was better because of the Superbowls.

Why is he better other than playing for the team you root for?

 

[twitch]

Joe Montana, Steve Young, and Troy Aikman all had hall of fame receivers. Meanwhile, Elway, Marino, and Farve never had great WR (unless you count Sharpe at the beginning of Farve's career.) Yet most people would put Montana at the top of this list. I don't think you can argue QB superiority simply based upon who has or doesn't have great WR...

Montana's at the top of this list because he has 4 rings. And if one of these 2 QBs ever gets 4 rings, he'll go from being compared to the other QB in this discussion, to being compared to Montana.

 

[radballs]

Joe Montana, Steve Young, and Troy Aikman all had hall of fame receivers. Meanwhile, Elway, Marino, and Farve never had great WR (unless you count Sharpe at the beginning of Farve's career.) Yet most people would put Montana at the top of this list. I don't think you can argue QB superiority simply based upon who has or doesn't have great WR...

Montana's at the top of this list because he has 4 rings. And if one of these 2 QBs ever gets 4 rings, he'll go from being compared to the other QB in this discussion, to being compared to Montana.

So, a QB's ranking should be measured mostly by the number of his TEAM's Super Bowl wins? This thread has been done before. This is a team game as far as I remember.

 

[menobrown]

I was saying Brady after NE won their first SB and that opinion has only grown stronger. I still think Manning played very poorly in several Colt playoff elimination games and his postseason play last year did not make some of his playoff meltdowns go away. Manning has put up superior stats but while I'd argue that he's in the best position to do so since he's had one OC his entire career, plays most of his games in a weather controlled environment and has played with a consistent and superior offensive supporting cast the pro-Manning crowd could argue he did so with an often less than stellar defense and he's the one that made his supporting offensive cast superior. Meanwhile the pro-Brady crowd, which I'm a member off, could point to this season as the first time Brady had a strong weapons to work with and look at what he's doing. Regarding postseason success Brady has been far better but that can be argued it has more to do with the supporting cast. I don't buy into that myself based on the following reason. When the Colts were eliminated in the playoffs Manning did not usually have normal games or even slightly sub par games but usually had his worst game of the season. I just think at some point that has to come back on Manning. On the reverse. Look at this Patriot team versus the first Patriot team that won the SB. Look at how much has changed. The supporting cast around Brady is vastly different. Essentially the Pat's rebuilt or reloaded however you choose to label it but never sunk to the bottom and now arguably sit at the top. Is this because of Bellichick, Brady, or both as they are really the main constants of these teams? In this case I take Brady's side since he's done nothing but win while Bellichick was not a genius until Brady lined up at center.

Just for the record I'm a Steeler fan who hates both of these teams but I respect them both and I've come to respect no player in the NFL more than Brady.

 

[Tau837]

Manning's been throwing to 2 Pro Bowlers for several years now. Look at what Brady is doing this year with only 1. Give Brady someone like Reggie Wayne on the other side of Moss, and this wouldnt even be a discussion.

Based on your post, I assume you are referring to Harrison and Wayne. FYI, Wayne has been to one Pro Bowl, in 2006. Not sure I would say that merits saying "he has been throwing to 2 Pro Bowlers for several years". It is true that he has always had 1-2 teammates who play offensive skill positions and made the Pro Bowl. But I assume you weren't talking about Harrison and Dilger the one year, or Harrison and James at other times. I mean, I agree that Manning has had better surrounding offensive teammates, but there is no reason to exaggerate the extent of it.

 

[Tau837]

Manning is hands down better. Brady's good but Manning's easily the winner here. The defense surrounding Brady completely offsets Manning's better weapons. Let's not start this again. Please.

It's close, but Manning's just not as good as Brady. Brady 200774.1% completion percentage3.20 TDs/game276.6 yards/game8.8 yards/attemptManning 200467.6% completion percentage3.06 TDs/game284.8 yards/game9.2 yards/attemptIn Brady's first five games with receivers even remotely comparable to Harrison/Wayne/Clark/James, he's put up numbers that are equivalent to Manning's best year ever. And he still hasn't had enough time to get comfortable with them. And he's crushing Manning's stats this year in every category. Manning 200769.7% completion percentage263.8 yards/game8.0 yards/attempt2.0 TDs/gameOf course, the only reason Brady's putting up good passing numbers is because his defense is doing so well.

Are you confident that Brady will maintain those numbers for an entire season, as Manning did in 2004?ETA: I don't really think Brady can win this debate based on numbers - certainly he will need a much longer run of sustained statistical success to make that case. I'm sure you'll argue that he can if you put their numbers into context given supporting casts, but that is speculative at best. You said you don't think he is better due to the Super Bowl wins, which is interesting, since IMO that is the single reason why he stands to be a HOFer right now. I guess I'd like to hear your view of why he is better given your comment about the Super Bowls.

 

[bostonfred]

Why is he better other than playing for the team you root for?

Short list: He's got the best career winning percentage for a quarterback with 40 or more starts all time, leading a top 10 offense every year he has played but one, despite the fact that his best receiver was Troy Brown and his leading running backs have included Kevin Faulk and Antowain Smith. During this time, he has led the league in passing yardage and passing TDs. Setting aside their playoff success and winning percentage, which I'm sure you attribute to the defense, Brady singlehandedly carried this offense in almost each and every one of those championship runs, and has almost never cost his team the game - including the incredible 21 game winning streak that the team holds. While I agree that that is a team accomplishment, the reality is that it could never have happened if Brady were faltering along the way. In his first year with top quality receiving talent, he is on pace to break Manning's best season. But if I were going to mention a Superbowl, I'd mention a game where 3/4 of the Patriots' starting secondary was injured, where Brady outdueled Jake Delhomme and the Panthers' top rated defense to win Superbowl XXXVIII. Over the course of his career, he's 7-0 in overtime, 26-5 in games decided by less than a TD, and he has led 24 game winning drives in the fourth quarter or overtime, including six in the postseason, three of which were in Superbowls. He also holds the NFL record for most receivers with a TD, after throwing TD passes to 12 different receivers in 2005. All of those are pretty cool. Manning's had some fancy passing numbers, though. I'll give him that.

 

[twitch]

Joe Montana, Steve Young, and Troy Aikman all had hall of fame receivers. Meanwhile, Elway, Marino, and Farve never had great WR (unless you count Sharpe at the beginning of Farve's career.) Yet most people would put Montana at the top of this list. I don't think you can argue QB superiority simply based upon who has or doesn't have great WR...

Montana's at the top of this list because he has 4 rings. And if one of these 2 QBs ever gets 4 rings, he'll go from being compared to the other QB in this discussion, to being compared to Montana.

So, a QB's ranking should be measured mostly by the number of his TEAM's Super Bowl wins? This thread has been done before. This is a team game as far as I remember.

just saying, Montana's not revered because of his all-time, all-world #s. He's got solid #s. But they dont measure up to many other great QBs. would you consider him greater than Marino? if so why? why do you think Montana is largely considered the greatest QB of all time?

 

[bostonfred]

Manning is hands down better. Brady's good but Manning's easily the winner here. The defense surrounding Brady completely offsets Manning's better weapons. Let's not start this again. Please.

It's close, but Manning's just not as good as Brady. Brady 200774.1% completion percentage3.20 TDs/game276.6 yards/game8.8 yards/attemptManning 200467.6% completion percentage3.06 TDs/game284.8 yards/game9.2 yards/attemptIn Brady's first five games with receivers even remotely comparable to Harrison/Wayne/Clark/James, he's put up numbers that are equivalent to Manning's best year ever. And he still hasn't had enough time to get comfortable with them. And he's crushing Manning's stats this year in every category. Manning 200769.7% completion percentage263.8 yards/game8.0 yards/attempt2.0 TDs/gameOf course, the only reason Brady's putting up good passing numbers is because his defense is doing so well.

Are you confident that Brady will maintain those numbers for an entire season, as Manning did in 2004?

We have five games worth of data so far on Brady with good receivers. So far, the returns are pretty good. I think Brady has a real shot at 50, which is amazing considering that he's only had part of an offseason with these guys, during which all but one of them was injured. But even if Brady doesn't match Manning's best numbers of his career during Brady's first year with top receivers, he's already done quite a bit to quiet the naysayers who think Manning's better because he puts up better numbers.

 

[twitch]

Manning's been throwing to 2 Pro Bowlers for several years now. Look at what Brady is doing this year with only 1. Give Brady someone like Reggie Wayne on the other side of Moss, and this wouldnt even be a discussion.

Based on your post, I assume you are referring to Harrison and Wayne. FYI, Wayne has been to one Pro Bowl, in 2006. Not sure I would say that merits saying "he has been throwing to 2 Pro Bowlers for several years". It is true that he has always had 1-2 teammates who play offensive skill positions and made the Pro Bowl. But I assume you weren't talking about Harrison and Dilger the one year, or Harrison and James at other times. I mean, I agree that Manning has had better surrounding offensive teammates, but there is no reason to exaggerate the extent of it.

getting me on a technicality? Reggie Wayne is a Pro Bowler, and he hasnt missed a game since his rookie year in 2001. that's 6 plus years of Reggie Wayne lining up and catching passes every game without fail. Harrison's on the other side. that's 2 Pro Bowlers. look at it however you choose, but this is certainly no attempt at exaggerating how great of a WR Reggie Wayne is. I dont really think that's nessecary at this point.

 

[Blueb]

It's close, but Manning's just not as good as Brady. Brady 200774.1% completion percentage3.20 TDs/game276.6 yards/game8.8 yards/attemptManning 200467.6% completion percentage3.06 TDs/game284.8 yards/game9.2 yards/attemptIn Brady's first five games with receivers even remotely comparable to Harrison/Wayne/Clark/James, he's put up numbers that are equivalent to Manning's best year ever. And he still hasn't had enough time to get comfortable with them. And he's crushing Manning's stats this year in every category. Manning 200769.7% completion percentage263.8 yards/game8.0 yards/attempt2.0 TDs/game

This is ridiculous. Stop doing this. Stats are as much to do with a team's gameplan and mindset as individual ability. The Pats are playing with an F-You attitude to the league since the taping scandal. They are running up the score in garbage time the way they wouldnt have done in previous years. Offensive stats also depend on defenses and on opposing teams offense and the score of the games and a gazillion other things you can't compare. So stop trying.

They are both great, and everyone should just enjoy that, because it won't last forever.

The best post in this thread by a mile. They're both great. They both make the palyers around them better. They're both ridiculously competitive and put it all on the line to win. And, after last year's come from behind win, they have both proved they can manage drives when its all on the line with limited time to play. As a coach, manager and player you'd love to have either leading you. Lets just hope we get to see another Manning vs. Brady duel in the playoffs this year.

 

[Tau837]

While this is the umpteenth Manning-Brady debate, and I usually wish that I didn't enter them, I think Manning has a more compelling case as one of the all time QBs as of today.

Let me first say that I find all time QB to be a difficult list to define. I think it is extremely difficult to compare modern era and pre-modern era QBs. I'd say Montana is at the top and Unitas is top 5. As of today, I think other contenders for top 5 status include Elway, Favre, Baugh, and Graham, in no particular order. I personally rank all of them above Marino, and I don't really know enough about guys like Layne, Tittle, or Blanda to really compare them.

All that said, as of today, if he continues his pace, I think Manning probably surpasses Favre, who as I said is currently a contender for top 5 IMO. In fact, I think if he does not get injured or lose interest and retire early, Manning will end up with all statistical records. Because on top of those records, he already has quite a compelling array of awards and honors. The only way that he is likely to fall short in comparison to any other QB is in terms of Super Bowl wins.

Personally, I think Brady has more ground to make up relative to the other all time greats than Manning does. I know people will want to discuss his surrounding cast, but I think that is an endless and speculative line of thinking. That is, we will never know how any of these QBs would have fared with better or worse supporting casts. All we really know is what they did with what they had. So because I think Manning has less ground to make up to ultimately contend for one of the very few best QBs of all time, I have to also believe Manning has been better than Brady to this point in their careers.

I do think Brady will be a HOFer. At this point in time, that will be largely built on his three Super Bowl wins. But he does have plenty of time to add numbers and awards/honors. My point is, to be amongst the very elite, he does need to add more of those things.

More info on Manning here: Peyton Manning, Will he be the best ever?

 

[Tau837]

Manning's been throwing to 2 Pro Bowlers for several years now. Look at what Brady is doing this year with only 1. Give Brady someone like Reggie Wayne on the other side of Moss, and this wouldnt even be a discussion.

Based on your post, I assume you are referring to Harrison and Wayne. FYI, Wayne has been to one Pro Bowl, in 2006. Not sure I would say that merits saying "he has been throwing to 2 Pro Bowlers for several years". It is true that he has always had 1-2 teammates who play offensive skill positions and made the Pro Bowl. But I assume you weren't talking about Harrison and Dilger the one year, or Harrison and James at other times. I mean, I agree that Manning has had better surrounding offensive teammates, but there is no reason to exaggerate the extent of it.

getting me on a technicality? Reggie Wayne is a Pro Bowler, and he hasnt missed a game since his rookie year in 2001. that's 6 plus years of Reggie Wayne lining up and catching passes every game without fail. Harrison's on the other side. that's 2 Pro Bowlers. look at it however you choose, but this is certainly no attempt at exaggerating how great of a WR Reggie Wayne is. I dont really think that's nessecary at this point.

I wasn't "getting you on a technicality", I was simply pointing out that you can make your point, which I generally agree with, without misstating the facts.

 

[twitch]

Manning's been throwing to 2 Pro Bowlers for several years now. Look at what Brady is doing this year with only 1. Give Brady someone like Reggie Wayne on the other side of Moss, and this wouldnt even be a discussion.

Based on your post, I assume you are referring to Harrison and Wayne. FYI, Wayne has been to one Pro Bowl, in 2006. Not sure I would say that merits saying "he has been throwing to 2 Pro Bowlers for several years". It is true that he has always had 1-2 teammates who play offensive skill positions and made the Pro Bowl. But I assume you weren't talking about Harrison and Dilger the one year, or Harrison and James at other times. I mean, I agree that Manning has had better surrounding offensive teammates, but there is no reason to exaggerate the extent of it.

getting me on a technicality? Reggie Wayne is a Pro Bowler, and he hasnt missed a game since his rookie year in 2001. that's 6 plus years of Reggie Wayne lining up and catching passes every game without fail. Harrison's on the other side. that's 2 Pro Bowlers. look at it however you choose, but this is certainly no attempt at exaggerating how great of a WR Reggie Wayne is. I dont really think that's nessecary at this point.

I wasn't "getting you on a technicality", I was simply pointing out that you can make your point, which I generally agree with, without misstating the facts.

gotcha.

 

[PatsWillWin]

Manning has to prove he can win the big one.

 

[icehouse]

Brady has more stones and is just better overall in high pressure situations. Manning is great but I don't see how anyone can argue that they would count on Brady to make a critical error in a high pressure moment over Manning. With everything else being so close, give me the QB with "it".

 

[radiohead417]

The correct answer is Manning.

 

[bostonfred]

The only way that he is likely to fall short in comparison to any other QB is in terms of Super Bowl wins.

This is the other problem I have with this debate. We can discuss Manning's shortcomings without using the word "Superbowl". We can discuss Brady's successes without using the word "Superbowl". But people on the Manning side of the debate inevitably talk about how it's just the ho hum Superbowls that Brady won, and that's not a big deal, and by the way Manning has one now, too. The argument against Manning has been miscast as "he can't win the big one" or "he hasn't won a Superbowl" by Manning supporters, but that wasn't the argument I was making at the time, and it isn't the argument I'm making now. The thing that takes the shine off of Manning's apple is that he has been individually responsible for huge mistakes in his team's losses in the playoffs, and that even in his playoff wins, he had to get bailed out by his defense. Yes, he had awesome games in Denver and KC in the playoffs. But other than that, his performances have been bad, and some of them really, really bad. Not the team's performance. His performance. People talk about Favre the gunslinger and complain that he threw all those interceptions, especially in the playoffs. And it's true - he had 6 picks in a game against the Rams, where he had to play bombs away football to keep up with the greatest show on turf, and four more against Minny in 2004. Those two performances were really bad, and the 6 INT game was arguably worse than anything Manning did. But Favre threw 5 TDs against one INT in his Superbowl run, and 5 TDs against 3 INTs the following year, each in three games. Manning threw 3 TDs against 7 INTs in four games the year he finally won his. He had a 4 INT playoff game, was held to 3 points in 2004 when he set the TD record, got shut out against the Jets, lost the Steelers game three different ways. Manning has been held without a TD in the playoffs three times. Favre and Brady have only done that once. Manning supporters will claim that a playoff game is just another game, against a good opponent, and that he was just unlucky to have that bad a performance that often. But if we're talking about greatness, that's a poor excuse. Manning has done great things, but he's a flawed quarterback. Maybe he overcomes those flaws over the years, but the team accomplishment of winning a Superbowl doesn't excuse his individual failures in the past or his poor individual performances in multiple playoff games. And while Manning might be a general, he's not a leader. Turning the tables back around on you, though, the only thing missing on Brady's resume is the statistical accomplishments. He's done everything a quarterback is asked to do, but he doesn't have the gaudy, record setting numbers. And we're watching that knock dissolve this year as he finally has good receivers to work with, and is putting up numbers on pace to beat Manning's best statistical year. If that happens - and we're obviously a long way away - then I don't see how there's even a debate anymore. Brady has always been capable of putting up huge numbers, he just hasn't had the opportunitiy to do so. Brady has always been capable of winning, he has had the opportunitiy to do so, and he has done it. Manning has always been capable of putting up huge numbers, he has had the opportunity to do so, and he has done it. Manning has always been capable of winning, but when given the opportunity time and time again, he has individually failed. I'm happy for him that he finally won one last year, I was rooting for him in the Superbowl, and I think he has improved over the years, but that doesn't change the fact that the first half of his resume is littered with his own personal failures.

 

[H.K.]

The answer to this question depends on which QB has Adam Vinatieri kicking for his team.

Brady hasn't won a SB without him, neither has Manning. Coincidence? I think not.

 

[twitch]

The answer to this question depends on which QB has Adam Vinatieri kicking for his team.Brady hasn't won a SB without him, neither has Manning. Coincidence? I think not.

Vinatieri = secretly the greatest QB coach of all time???

 

[PsychoMan]

for the umpteenth time,

Manning!

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Manning is the better QB, Brady is the better football player. Both are gonna be top five ever and Manning will have the better career numbers, probably breaking any record that currently stands.

 

[Tau837]

The only way that he is likely to fall short in comparison to any other QB is in terms of Super Bowl wins.

This is the other problem I have with this debate. We can discuss Manning's shortcomings without using the word "Superbowl". We can discuss Brady's successes without using the word "Superbowl". But people on the Manning side of the debate inevitably talk about how it's just the ho hum Superbowls that Brady won, and that's not a big deal, and by the way Manning has one now, too. The argument against Manning has been miscast as "he can't win the big one" or "he hasn't won a Superbowl" by Manning supporters, but that wasn't the argument I was making at the time, and it isn't the argument I'm making now. The thing that takes the shine off of Manning's apple is that he has been individually responsible for huge mistakes in his team's losses in the playoffs, and that even in his playoff wins, he had to get bailed out by his defense. Yes, he had awesome games in Denver and KC in the playoffs. But other than that, his performances have been bad, and some of them really, really bad. Not the team's performance. His performance. People talk about Favre the gunslinger and complain that he threw all those interceptions, especially in the playoffs. And it's true - he had 6 picks in a game against the Rams, where he had to play bombs away football to keep up with the greatest show on turf, and four more against Minny in 2004. Those two performances were really bad, and the 6 INT game was arguably worse than anything Manning did. But Favre threw 5 TDs against one INT in his Superbowl run, and 5 TDs against 3 INTs the following year, each in three games. Manning threw 3 TDs against 7 INTs in four games the year he finally won his. He had a 4 INT playoff game, was held to 3 points in 2004 when he set the TD record, got shut out against the Jets, lost the Steelers game three different ways. Manning has been held without a TD in the playoffs three times. Favre and Brady have only done that once. Manning supporters will claim that a playoff game is just another game, against a good opponent, and that he was just unlucky to have that bad a performance that often. But if we're talking about greatness, that's a poor excuse. Manning has done great things, but he's a flawed quarterback. Maybe he overcomes those flaws over the years, but the team accomplishment of winning a Superbowl doesn't excuse his individual failures in the past or his poor individual performances in multiple playoff games. And while Manning might be a general, he's not a leader. Turning the tables back around on you, though, the only thing missing on Brady's resume is the statistical accomplishments. He's done everything a quarterback is asked to do, but he doesn't have the gaudy, record setting numbers. And we're watching that knock dissolve this year as he finally has good receivers to work with, and is putting up numbers on pace to beat Manning's best statistical year. If that happens - and we're obviously a long way away - then I don't see how there's even a debate anymore. Brady has always been capable of putting up huge numbers, he just hasn't had the opportunitiy to do so. Brady has always been capable of winning, he has had the opportunitiy to do so, and he has done it. Manning has always been capable of putting up huge numbers, he has had the opportunity to do so, and he has done it. Manning has always been capable of winning, but when given the opportunity time and time again, he has individually failed. I'm happy for him that he finally won one last year, I was rooting for him in the Superbowl, and I think he has improved over the years, but that doesn't change the fact that the first half of his resume is littered with his own personal failures.

Good post. I agree with a lot of what you say. Nevertheless, if Brady had not won three Super Bowls, he would not currently be expected to make the HOF, much less to be ultimately considered one of the few best QBs of all time. Manning is a lock for the HOF and is in that conversation. Maybe your view is that is because the rest of the masses of NFL fans, HOF voters, etc. just don't look deeply enough into their respective situations. Maybe there is something to that, but it doesn't change the situation.Do you really think anyone besides Patriots fans would think of Brady as one of the best QBs of all time had he not won 3 Super Bowls? Or even if he had won only one?

 

[Tau837]

By the way, for those backing Brady in this comparison, how can you justify the lack of awards and honors relative to Manning? Is that solely because of his previously poor WRs? Or were the voters wrong or biased?