Brady vs. Manning (1 Viewer)

[switz]

Nice post. You haven't changed my mind, but it's a good post. Like I said, I'm done debating this.Out of curiosity, who do you give more credit to for the Pats' success, Brady or Belichick?

That's such a hard thing to answer. The way you asked the question, I think you have to say Belichick. Belichick helped pick the majority of the talent, he built a winning organization, he coaches both sides of the ball, and he has made or been involved with some very tough decisions (like releasing Glenn, trading Bledsoe to a division rival, refusing to overpay for Milloy when he was on the downside of his career, and so on) that have, by and large, been very successful. But if you asked who the team needs more to win a Superbowl in any given year, I might have to lean towards Brady. If Brady got hurt, and Matt Cassel or Joey Harrington stepped in to replace him, I don't think the Pats would have a chance of winning the Superbowl. But if Belichick retired, and they put some random coach on the field, I think Brady could still lead them to the Superbowl. So maybe the answer is, Belichick contributed more to their winning percentage, while Brady contributes more to their ability to win championships? Does that seem reasonable?

Spot on Boston. There are other very good coaches and good GMs around the league. San Diego comes to mind when they had Marty. Put Brady on that team, and theyre winning titles for years to come. Belichick is certainly great. Brady takes the team to an entirely different level. I dug up a stat on how in Brady's first year starting in '01, he didnt throw a pick in his first 162 attempts. Just think about that for a second. Thats his first 5 or 6 games as a starter with, as you mentioned, a previously 5-11 team. Who does that?

David Garrard ?

 

[twitch]

Nice post. You haven't changed my mind, but it's a good post. Like I said, I'm done debating this.Out of curiosity, who do you give more credit to for the Pats' success, Brady or Belichick?

That's such a hard thing to answer. The way you asked the question, I think you have to say Belichick. Belichick helped pick the majority of the talent, he built a winning organization, he coaches both sides of the ball, and he has made or been involved with some very tough decisions (like releasing Glenn, trading Bledsoe to a division rival, refusing to overpay for Milloy when he was on the downside of his career, and so on) that have, by and large, been very successful. But if you asked who the team needs more to win a Superbowl in any given year, I might have to lean towards Brady. If Brady got hurt, and Matt Cassel or Joey Harrington stepped in to replace him, I don't think the Pats would have a chance of winning the Superbowl. But if Belichick retired, and they put some random coach on the field, I think Brady could still lead them to the Superbowl. So maybe the answer is, Belichick contributed more to their winning percentage, while Brady contributes more to their ability to win championships? Does that seem reasonable?

Spot on Boston. There are other very good coaches and good GMs around the league. San Diego comes to mind when they had Marty. Put Brady on that team, and theyre winning titles for years to come. Belichick is certainly great. Brady takes the team to an entirely different level. I dug up a stat on how in Brady's first year starting in '01, he didnt throw a pick in his first 162 attempts. Just think about that for a second. Thats his first 5 or 6 games as a starter with, as you mentioned, a previously 5-11 team. Who does that?

David Garrard ?

first 5 or 6 games of his CAREER?

 

[switz]

Nice post. You haven't changed my mind, but it's a good post. Like I said, I'm done debating this.Out of curiosity, who do you give more credit to for the Pats' success, Brady or Belichick?

That's such a hard thing to answer. The way you asked the question, I think you have to say Belichick. Belichick helped pick the majority of the talent, he built a winning organization, he coaches both sides of the ball, and he has made or been involved with some very tough decisions (like releasing Glenn, trading Bledsoe to a division rival, refusing to overpay for Milloy when he was on the downside of his career, and so on) that have, by and large, been very successful. But if you asked who the team needs more to win a Superbowl in any given year, I might have to lean towards Brady. If Brady got hurt, and Matt Cassel or Joey Harrington stepped in to replace him, I don't think the Pats would have a chance of winning the Superbowl. But if Belichick retired, and they put some random coach on the field, I think Brady could still lead them to the Superbowl. So maybe the answer is, Belichick contributed more to their winning percentage, while Brady contributes more to their ability to win championships? Does that seem reasonable?

Spot on Boston. There are other very good coaches and good GMs around the league. San Diego comes to mind when they had Marty. Put Brady on that team, and theyre winning titles for years to come. Belichick is certainly great. Brady takes the team to an entirely different level. I dug up a stat on how in Brady's first year starting in '01, he didnt throw a pick in his first 162 attempts. Just think about that for a second. Thats his first 5 or 6 games as a starter with, as you mentioned, a previously 5-11 team. Who does that?

David Garrard ?

first 5 or 6 games of his CAREER?

I was just kidding because of how great everyone is saying Garrard is for not throwing a pick yet this year. Bottom line is, while not throwing a pick is a good thing, it's very much a product of circumstances, not just the QB. Ben Roth for instance was great his first season, but it's because the team put him in very safe situations. Not that he's a bad QB by any stretch, but just that his early success was all about circumstance. And honestly, the PAts scheme doesn't ask Brady to make tough throws either. This year the only risky throws I've seen him take are ones to Moss, which in that case aren't really risky LOL.Just pointing out that average QBs can look great in the INT department. Note: Not saying Brady is average, just that his no-INT start is pretty meaningless.P.S. Garrard threw only two in the first 6 games of his career.

 

[DrJ]

I'm going with Manning. Who cares about Superbowls - I don't think a Superbowl should count on your resume when you don't throw any TD's in your 2 playoff games and need an obscure rule to get there. And yeah, his 12/18 for 115 yard performance against Pittsburgh is the stuff of legends, that puts him over Manning in MY book. Overall, an entire 1 TD pass in the 01 playoffs INCLUDING the Superbowl. I think Trent Dilfer probably did more in his Superbowl run and no one is calling him a great QB because of it. And yeah, those 10 straight playoff wins are really impressive - too bad he only had one multi TD game in the first 7 of them and pretty much relied on his defense to carry him the entire time.

 

[Tanner9919]

I'm going with Manning. Who cares about Superbowls - I don't think a Superbowl should count on your resume when you don't throw any TD's in your 2 playoff games and need an obscure rule to get there. And yeah, his 12/18 for 115 yard performance against Pittsburgh is the stuff of legends, that puts him over Manning in MY book. Overall, an entire 1 TD pass in the 01 playoffs INCLUDING the Superbowl. I think Trent Dilfer probably did more in his Superbowl run and no one is calling him a great QB because of it. And yeah, those 10 straight playoff wins are really impressive - too bad he only had one multi TD game in the first 7 of them and pretty much relied on his defense to carry him the entire time.

that dude with 'Shady Brady and Bill Belli-cheat' in his sig, should be replying in 3.....2......1..

 

[Billy1x]

Manning. Brady looked like Culpepper last week throwing deliberately into double coverage.

Manning seems to call most of his own plays and Brady follows a script. I think the greatest QBs improvise like Favre, Marino, Tarkington, etc. I'm not a real fan of robot QBs.

 

[Green and Gold]

All I know is, either one of them would start for every other team in the league. It's a pick-em at this point.

 

[twitch]

Manning. Brady looked like Culpepper last week throwing deliberately into double coverage.Manning seems to call most of his own plays and Brady follows a script. I think the greatest QBs improvise like Favre, Marino, Tarkington, etc. I'm not a real fan of robot QBs.

And Griese. he likes to call his own plays, too. Let's throw him in the mix.

 

[bostonfred]

I'm going with Manning. Who cares about Superbowls - I don't think a Superbowl should count on your resume when you don't throw any TD's in your 2 playoff games and need an obscure rule to get there. And yeah, his 12/18 for 115 yard performance against Pittsburgh is the stuff of legends, that puts him over Manning in MY book. Overall, an entire 1 TD pass in the 01 playoffs INCLUDING the Superbowl. I think Trent Dilfer probably did more in his Superbowl run and no one is calling him a great QB because of it. And yeah, those 10 straight playoff wins are really impressive - too bad he only had one multi TD game in the first 7 of them and pretty much relied on his defense to carry him the entire time.

He had a memorable rushing TD in the snow in Oakland. Neither team was able to throw the ball deep that day, and both teams had trouble moving the ball well. He also led them on back to back field goal drives at the end of the game, although more credit goes to Adam Vinatieri for making two incredible kicks to win the game. He was 12/18 in about 20 minutes of the Pittsburgh game before being injured and replaced by Bledsoe. He passed for one TD in the Superbowl, and got Antowain Smith in place for another. He also had a fairly memorable drive at the end of the game. I think you did a good job of looking his statistics up and using that to formulate an argument, but I'm not convinced you were a football fan in 2001.

 

[bostonfred]

Manning. Brady looked like Culpepper last week throwing deliberately into double coverage.Manning seems to call most of his own plays and Brady follows a script. I think the greatest QBs improvise like Favre, Marino, Tarkington, etc. I'm not a real fan of robot QBs.

Manning doesn't call his own plays. Most of the time he's at the line of scrimmage, they go with the original play. He just uses fake audibles a lot. Brady does the same thing, but less is made out of it. Also, Brady doesn't have the advantage of having worked with the same primary offensive players for so many consecutive years. Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Donte Stallworth, Kyle Brady, and Sammy Morris, all starters at key offensive positions, are all new this year, and yet Brady has led them on arguably the best seven game stretch of any quarterback in history so far this season.

 

[twitch]

I'm going with Manning. Who cares about Superbowls - I don't think a Superbowl should count on your resume when you don't throw any TD's in your 2 playoff games and need an obscure rule to get there. And yeah, his 12/18 for 115 yard performance against Pittsburgh is the stuff of legends, that puts him over Manning in MY book. Overall, an entire 1 TD pass in the 01 playoffs INCLUDING the Superbowl. I think Trent Dilfer probably did more in his Superbowl run and no one is calling him a great QB because of it. And yeah, those 10 straight playoff wins are really impressive - too bad he only had one multi TD game in the first 7 of them and pretty much relied on his defense to carry him the entire time.

The guy's clearly overrated. How he ever got drafted is beyond me. Id like him alot more if he'd lose a couple of those playoff games where he's forced to throw it more than 50 times. It would make the conspiracy so much more believable. I mean, who dates a Supermodel and wins 3 Superbowls? Honestly? Three Supermodels and one Superbowl, maybe. And now this all-time QB records thing. Somebody shoot me!

 

[DrJ]

Manning. Brady looked like Culpepper last week throwing deliberately into double coverage.Manning seems to call most of his own plays and Brady follows a script. I think the greatest QBs improvise like Favre, Marino, Tarkington, etc. I'm not a real fan of robot QBs.

Manning doesn't call his own plays. Most of the time he's at the line of scrimmage, they go with the original play. He just uses fake audibles a lot. Brady does the same thing, but less is made out of it. Also, Brady doesn't have the advantage of having worked with the same primary offensive players for so many consecutive years. Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Donte Stallworth, Kyle Brady, and Sammy Morris, all starters at key offensive positions, are all new this year, and yet Brady has led them on arguably the best seven game stretch of any quarterback in history so far this season.

Ah, I did forget about the injury. The fact remains, it's exhibit A to show that it's a team sport. Brady wasn't winning football games, he merely wasn't losing them. Even in the 03 run, he wasn't winning any games until the Superbowl itself - his 6th playoff start. Brady's game 1: 32/52 for 312 yards, 0 TD's, 1 Int, and yes the rushing TD. Not a very good performance, the team scored 16 points, and the Pats won.Manning's game 1: 19/43 for 227, 0 TD's, 0 Int, and yes a rushing TD. Not a good performance, the Colts scored 16 points as well. The Colts lost.Brady's game 2: he got hurt as you noted and only threw 18 times and no TD's. The Pats scored 24 won. Manning game 2: he was 17 of 32 for 194, 1 TD, 0 Int's. Not a spectacular performance again, but very Bradyesque. The Colts score 17, the same amount the Pats held Pitt to, and they lost. Let's look at what Brady did after that heading into these - 3rd game, he's 16 for 27 with 145 yards with 1 TD against a team not known for its defense. The Pats score 20, 7 of which is a Ty law TD return, and win.- 4th game, he's 21 for 41 for 201 yards 1 TD, and 0 Int. Team scores 17 but still wins.- 5th game - 22 for 37 for for 237 yards, 1 TD, and 1 Int. That was a great defensive performance where they got 4 Int's out of Manning.See the theme here? At that point Brady has 5 consecutive playoff wins. On the back of 1010 passing yards, 4 passing TD's, and 1 rushing TD. And some marverlous defensive performances. Yes, Manning had some clunkers. Especially against the Pats. But it was basically because the Pats team was much better than his team and not because Tom Brady was such a terrific QB in comparison. Manning's teams were just built around his talents far more, and he wasn't afforded the luxury of putting up Brady type numbers and winning.

 

[kingmalaki]

Manning. Brady looked like Culpepper last week throwing deliberately into double coverage.Manning seems to call most of his own plays and Brady follows a script. I think the greatest QBs improvise like Favre, Marino, Tarkington, etc. I'm not a real fan of robot QBs.

Manning doesn't call his own plays. Most of the time he's at the line of scrimmage, they go with the original play. He just uses fake audibles a lot. Brady does the same thing, but less is made out of it. Also, Brady doesn't have the advantage of having worked with the same primary offensive players for so many consecutive years. Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Donte Stallworth, Kyle Brady, and Sammy Morris, all starters at key offensive positions, are all new this year, and yet Brady has led them on arguably the best seven game stretch of any quarterback in history so far this season.

Ah, I did forget about the injury. The fact remains, it's exhibit A to show that it's a team sport. Brady wasn't winning football games, he merely wasn't losing them. Even in the 03 run, he wasn't winning any games until the Superbowl itself - his 6th playoff start. Brady's game 1: 32/52 for 312 yards, 0 TD's, 1 Int, and yes the rushing TD. Not a very good performance, the team scored 16 points, and the Pats won.Manning's game 1: 19/43 for 227, 0 TD's, 0 Int, and yes a rushing TD. Not a good performance, the Colts scored 16 points as well. The Colts lost.Brady's game 2: he got hurt as you noted and only threw 18 times and no TD's. The Pats scored 24 won. Manning game 2: he was 17 of 32 for 194, 1 TD, 0 Int's. Not a spectacular performance again, but very Bradyesque. The Colts score 17, the same amount the Pats held Pitt to, and they lost. Let's look at what Brady did after that heading into these - 3rd game, he's 16 for 27 with 145 yards with 1 TD against a team not known for its defense. The Pats score 20, 7 of which is a Ty law TD return, and win.- 4th game, he's 21 for 41 for 201 yards 1 TD, and 0 Int. Team scores 17 but still wins.- 5th game - 22 for 37 for for 237 yards, 1 TD, and 1 Int. That was a great defensive performance where they got 4 Int's out of Manning.See the theme here? At that point Brady has 5 consecutive playoff wins. On the back of 1010 passing yards, 4 passing TD's, and 1 rushing TD. And some marverlous defensive performances. Yes, Manning had some clunkers. Especially against the Pats. But it was basically because the Pats team was much better than his team and not because Tom Brady was such a terrific QB in comparison. Manning's teams were just built around his talents far more, and he wasn't afforded the luxury of putting up Brady type numbers and winning.

What does that have to do with the mistakes that Manning has made in the postseason? Brady's numbers weren't off the charts but he made few mistakes, something Manning hasn't really shown that he can do in the postseason (even when they won it all).You lost to a better team...fine...but you don't have to play like garbage in the loss. Having the entire team built around you (i.e. the offense) only brings more attention to your poor play when you fail. Manning has no excuse for morphing into a worse QB come the postseason (his individual play and ability to handle pressure)....

 

[DrJ]

Manning. Brady looked like Culpepper last week throwing deliberately into double coverage.

Manning seems to call most of his own plays and Brady follows a script. I think the greatest QBs improvise like Favre, Marino, Tarkington, etc. I'm not a real fan of robot QBs.

Manning doesn't call his own plays. Most of the time he's at the line of scrimmage, they go with the original play. He just uses fake audibles a lot. Brady does the same thing, but less is made out of it. Also, Brady doesn't have the advantage of having worked with the same primary offensive players for so many consecutive years. Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Donte Stallworth, Kyle Brady, and Sammy Morris, all starters at key offensive positions, are all new this year, and yet Brady has led them on arguably the best seven game stretch of any quarterback in history so far this season.

Ah, I did forget about the injury. The fact remains, it's exhibit A to show that it's a team sport. Brady wasn't winning football games, he merely wasn't losing them. Even in the 03 run, he wasn't winning any games until the Superbowl itself - his 6th playoff start. Brady's game 1: 32/52 for 312 yards, 0 TD's, 1 Int, and yes the rushing TD. Not a very good performance, the team scored 16 points, and the Pats won.

Manning's game 1: 19/43 for 227, 0 TD's, 0 Int, and yes a rushing TD. Not a good performance, the Colts scored 16 points as well. The Colts lost.

Brady's game 2: he got hurt as you noted and only threw 18 times and no TD's. The Pats scored 24 won.

Manning game 2: he was 17 of 32 for 194, 1 TD, 0 Int's. Not a spectacular performance again, but very Bradyesque. The Colts score 17, the same amount the Pats held Pitt to, and they lost.

Let's look at what Brady did after that heading into these

- 3rd game, he's 16 for 27 with 145 yards with 1 TD against a team not known for its defense. The Pats score 20, 7 of which is a Ty law TD return, and win.

- 4th game, he's 21 for 41 for 201 yards 1 TD, and 0 Int. Team scores 17 but still wins.

- 5th game - 22 for 37 for for 237 yards, 1 TD, and 1 Int. That was a great defensive performance where they got 4 Int's out of Manning.

See the theme here? At that point Brady has 5 consecutive playoff wins. On the back of 1010 passing yards, 4 passing TD's, and 1 rushing TD. And some marverlous defensive performances.

Yes, Manning had some clunkers. Especially against the Pats. But it was basically because the Pats team was much better than his team and not because Tom Brady was such a terrific QB in comparison. Manning's teams were just built around his talents far more, and he wasn't afforded the luxury of putting up Brady type numbers and winning.

What does that have to do with the mistakes that Manning has made in the postseason? Brady's numbers weren't off the charts but he made few mistakes, something Manning hasn't really shown that he can do in the postseason (even when they won it all).You lost to a better team...fine...but you don't have to play like garbage in the loss. Having the entire team built around you (i.e. the offense) only brings more attention to your poor play when you fail. Manning has no excuse for morphing into a worse QB come the postseason (his individual play and ability to handle pressure)....

Brady didn't play mistake free in that Superbowl run - he threw 0 TD's and a pick against the Raiders. And he dropped the ball on the carpet and was saved by an obscure rule interpretation. Yet his team won. It's a team sport, and Brady doesn't deserve special credit for being a part of a really good team. For having the luxury of playing average and still winning. You can say that Manning's game against the Jets was a "meltdown", but he didn't throw any interceptions until late in the 3rd. When the Colts were down 31 points. Did Tom Brady's defense ever allow this ridiculous amount of points, putting the game entirely on his shoulders, early in his career? No, it's obvious that they didn't. Saying "Brady didn't make mistakes and Manning choked" is a complete oversimplication of what their respective situations and roles were in those games.

 

[switz]

Manning. Brady looked like Culpepper last week throwing deliberately into double coverage.Manning seems to call most of his own plays and Brady follows a script. I think the greatest QBs improvise like Favre, Marino, Tarkington, etc. I'm not a real fan of robot QBs.

Manning doesn't call his own plays. Most of the time he's at the line of scrimmage, they go with the original play. He just uses fake audibles a lot. Brady does the same thing, but less is made out of it. Also, Brady doesn't have the advantage of having worked with the same primary offensive players for so many consecutive years. Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Donte Stallworth, Kyle Brady, and Sammy Morris, all starters at key offensive positions, are all new this year, and yet Brady has led them on arguably the best seven game stretch of any quarterback in history so far this season.

Manning is given two or three plays by Tom Moore. After reading the defense he selects which play to run. While that may not be technically "calling his own plays" it's alot different than "using fake audibles."Manning does have the benefit of consistency at the skill positions for the most part. However, Brady has been running the same offensive system since he came in, Manning has not (he has for all but two years) and I believe the system is more important than the players. QBs look for spots based on the play called, so if the WR and the QB are in the same system, then it doesn't matter who the QB is.I've never really seen Tom make a tough throw - usually his guys are wide open. The only throws where they haven't been wide open have been to Moss.

 

[encaitar]

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.

BF, how about you do this comparison when it is apples-to-apples. Do it AFTER the season. To compare a 5 game stretch to a full season is silly.

I'm not saying that this is some statistically valid, smoking gun evidence that Brady will match up favorably to the best statistical season of all time. But right now, we have five games of data for how Brady will do with good receivers. That's 1/3 of a season, which is a decent, but still invalid, sample size. And right now, with the small sample size we have, he's on pace for better numbers than Manning put up in his best season ever. That's extremely relevant to a conversation where people have traditionally said, "Brady could have put up those numbers if he had Manning's weapons". Besides, if I wait until the end of the season, the new mantra will be, sure, Brady had a career year, but Manning does it every year. And if he does it twice, or three times, it will be, sure, Brady has had big numbers, but Manning still has better career numbers. Are you saying you won't do that?

BF, for the record, I think Brady is a terrific QB. I think Brady is a wonderful leader. I have no reason to doubt Brady could do just as well if the roles are reversed. OTOH, I have no reason to doubt that Manning would have 3 rings if the roles were reversed either!Quit defending Brady, he has earned the respect of this Colts fan who has seen these two in action several times in person.Honestly, I grow tired of Pats and Brady apologists just like I grew tired of apologizing for the Colts and Manning.Rise above it man!

I don't think so because Manning has shown more times than not when the pressure rises he will make a mistake. Maybe I am just putting too much emphasis on the ability to get better in crucial games, but that's what I expect out of the best. Can you honestly think of any other athlete in the GOAT convo in any sport that had a history of getting worse when it mattered the most? Not rising to the occassion....

Sorry if it's been mentioned, but I saw this and had to say it. I can think of an even better example of this than Manning in a different sport.Alex Rodriguez anyone? At this point of his career he is on pace to shatter records for hits, HRs, and RBIs and will(if he continues at this pace) be remembered as one of if not THE best slugger baseball has seen, but yet he seems to disappear in clutch moments(this year he didn't, but in the past).I personally think Peyton has been put in different situations than Brady and this reflects on his numbers, especially in the playoffs. When your team is down by 2+ touchdowns in a must win game, you're gonna take more chances. Plus, Brady hasn't always shown up in pressure situations. If he was so clutch, they would've gotten that first down last year. If he was so clutch, he wouldn't have fumbled away the game against the Raiders in his first year in the playoffs... oh wait tuck rule, I forgot. Hey, they are both great QBs and I would take either for my team, but given the choice, I would select Manning.

 

[AussieOyOyOy]

Manning. Brady looked like Culpepper last week throwing deliberately into double coverage.Manning seems to call most of his own plays and Brady follows a script. I think the greatest QBs improvise like Favre, Marino, Tarkington, etc. I'm not a real fan of robot QBs.

Manning doesn't call his own plays. Most of the time he's at the line of scrimmage, they go with the original play. He just uses fake audibles a lot. Brady does the same thing, but less is made out of it. Also, Brady doesn't have the advantage of having worked with the same primary offensive players for so many consecutive years. Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Donte Stallworth, Kyle Brady, and Sammy Morris, all starters at key offensive positions, are all new this year, and yet Brady has led them on arguably the best seven game stretch of any quarterback in history so far this season.

Manning is given two or three plays by Tom Moore. After reading the defense he selects which play to run. While that may not be technically "calling his own plays" it's alot different than "using fake audibles."Manning does have the benefit of consistency at the skill positions for the most part. However, Brady has been running the same offensive system since he came in, Manning has not (he has for all but two years) and I believe the system is more important than the players. QBs look for spots based on the play called, so if the WR and the QB are in the same system, then it doesn't matter who the QB is.I've never really seen Tom make a tough throw - usually his guys are wide open. The only throws where they haven't been wide open have been to Moss.

From what I've heard the talking heads say, Manning is given three plays which include specific calls of the following: run strong-side, run weak-side and play-action pass. That's very far removed from your intonation behind "technically" not calling his own plays. It's making a simple decision between diverse options. Defense is shading left, right, deep or short.As far as the "tough throw" comment is concerned, that should be construed as a compliment to Brady. There are open receivers on virtually every football play at every level. Many are not realistic targets for most QBs, considering their pecking order in the progressions. But if you only see Brady throwing to open guys, I can't think of a better compliment to give the guy. He sees things more quickly than anyone else.

 

[switz]

Manning. Brady looked like Culpepper last week throwing deliberately into double coverage.Manning seems to call most of his own plays and Brady follows a script. I think the greatest QBs improvise like Favre, Marino, Tarkington, etc. I'm not a real fan of robot QBs.

Manning doesn't call his own plays. Most of the time he's at the line of scrimmage, they go with the original play. He just uses fake audibles a lot. Brady does the same thing, but less is made out of it. Also, Brady doesn't have the advantage of having worked with the same primary offensive players for so many consecutive years. Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Donte Stallworth, Kyle Brady, and Sammy Morris, all starters at key offensive positions, are all new this year, and yet Brady has led them on arguably the best seven game stretch of any quarterback in history so far this season.

Manning is given two or three plays by Tom Moore. After reading the defense he selects which play to run. While that may not be technically "calling his own plays" it's alot different than "using fake audibles."Manning does have the benefit of consistency at the skill positions for the most part. However, Brady has been running the same offensive system since he came in, Manning has not (he has for all but two years) and I believe the system is more important than the players. QBs look for spots based on the play called, so if the WR and the QB are in the same system, then it doesn't matter who the QB is.I've never really seen Tom make a tough throw - usually his guys are wide open. The only throws where they haven't been wide open have been to Moss.

From what I've heard the talking heads say, Manning is given three plays which include specific calls of the following: run strong-side, run weak-side and play-action pass. That's very far removed from your intonation behind "technically" not calling his own plays. It's making a simple decision between diverse options. Defense is shading left, right, deep or short.

Huh? Isn't that what I said? He's given two or three plays and then picks which one suits the defense best? Even if to you it's a "simple decision" (which I'd love to see you try to make) it's still far different than the "fake audibles" the OP I replied to was intonating.

As far as the "tough throw" comment is concerned, that should be construed as a compliment to Brady.

No, it's a complement to Belichek and the system. The system is what gets those WRs that open, not Brady.

There are open receivers on virtually every football play at every level.

Actually, no that's not true. You haven't been watching football much, have you? Ever hear of a coverage sack? nickel D? Dime D? Cover-2? Cover-2 Deep? Cover-2 Man?It is very rare that a WR is as open as Brady's WRs seem to be, especially in year's prior to this, when he hasn't had - as the media claims - legitimate WRs.

Many are not realistic targets for most QBs, considering their pecking order in the progressions. But if you only see Brady throwing to open guys, I can't think of a better compliment to give the guy. He sees things more quickly than anyone else.

Again, you are showing football ignorance. Brady rarely goes through his progressions. Most of the time the primary option is open. That is due to an awesome scheme. Just watch him on the plays - there is usually one primary and then a check down. Two options, that's it. Plus, Tom has extraordinary amount of time to throw.Then watch Peyton, watch how quickly he scans the field, sometimes even coming back to one of the options he originally bypassed, but it's the best option after going through the reads. And he does that without as good of blocking as Tom gets.I know you're a Pats fan and all, so it shouldn't be a big deal to give credit where it's due. The Patriots great scheme.

 

[Keith Lewis]

 

[tommybrady]

Brady is better. Yes, I'm a Patriots fan and I have a biest opinion. In my oppinion I would rather have the rings than all the records. Records mean nothing unless you have SB rings. Tom has 3 and Manning has 1. If Manning were to be on our team and Brady were to be on Peyton's I still think Tom would have more. Tom is more looked upon to get the win then Peyton. Since of right now we don't have the D, but out Offence is what makes us win a lot of games. The last three seasons its been the D that lets in the points. Then for the last three seasons they expect Tom to get the drive. well not every day can a QB be at his best. All players have a down day. Some don't play as well as they normally do. Peyton just doesn't have that good of luck in the playoffs. Tom on the other hand has had great sucess. To me it doesn't matter about records, yeah their nice, but getting that ring is what your supposed to do not have the records. Dan Marino has a lot of records it means something, but not as much since he didn't get a ring. Yeah, Peyton has one and Tom has 3 I would take three rings over one any day. So what if Peyton gets all the records, he's just going to be known as the QB that has the records, but could hardly win the most important games.

 

[DropKick]

Brady is better. Yes, I'm a Patriots fan and I have a biest opinion. In my oppinion I would rather have the rings than all the records. Records mean nothing unless you have SB rings. Tom has 3 and Manning has 1. If Manning were to be on our team and Brady were to be on Peyton's I still think Tom would have more. Tom is more looked upon to get the win then Peyton. Since of right now we don't have the D, but out Offence is what makes us win a lot of games. The last three seasons its been the D that lets in the points. Then for the last three seasons they expect Tom to get the drive. well not every day can a QB be at his best. All players have a down day. Some don't play as well as they normally do. Peyton just doesn't have that good of luck in the playoffs. Tom on the other hand has had great sucess. To me it doesn't matter about records, yeah their nice, but getting that ring is what your supposed to do not have the records. Dan Marino has a lot of records it means something, but not as much since he didn't get a ring. Yeah, Peyton has one and Tom has 3 I would take three rings over one any day. So what if Peyton gets all the records, he's just going to be known as the QB that has the records, but could hardly win the most important games.

Shouldn't you be doing home work instead of surfing the web? You can't underestimate the importance of "passing" to the 3rd grade.

 

[JohnnyU]

Brady is better. Yes, I'm a Patriots fan and I have a biest opinion. In my oppinion I would rather have the rings than all the records. Records mean nothing unless you have SB rings. Tom has 3 and Manning has 1. If Manning were to be on our team and Brady were to be on Peyton's I still think Tom would have more. Tom is more looked upon to get the win then Peyton. Since of right now we don't have the D, but out Offence is what makes us win a lot of games. The last three seasons its been the D that lets in the points. Then for the last three seasons they expect Tom to get the drive. well not every day can a QB be at his best. All players have a down day. Some don't play as well as they normally do. Peyton just doesn't have that good of luck in the playoffs. Tom on the other hand has had great sucess. To me it doesn't matter about records, yeah their nice, but getting that ring is what your supposed to do not have the records. Dan Marino has a lot of records it means something, but not as much since he didn't get a ring. Yeah, Peyton has one and Tom has 3 I would take three rings over one any day. So what if Peyton gets all the records, he's just going to be known as the QB that has the records, but could hardly win the most important games.

Good lord ....

 

[Maroney=Speed]

Brady is better. Yes, I'm a Patriots fan and I have a biest opinion. In my oppinion I would rather have the rings than all the records. Records mean nothing unless you have SB rings. Tom has 3 and Manning has 1. If Manning were to be on our team and Brady were to be on Peyton's I still think Tom would have more. Tom is more looked upon to get the win then Peyton. Since of right now we don't have the D, but out Offence is what makes us win a lot of games. The last three seasons its been the D that lets in the points. Then for the last three seasons they expect Tom to get the drive. well not every day can a QB be at his best. All players have a down day. Some don't play as well as they normally do. Peyton just doesn't have that good of luck in the playoffs. Tom on the other hand has had great sucess. To me it doesn't matter about records, yeah their nice, but getting that ring is what your supposed to do not have the records. Dan Marino has a lot of records it means something, but not as much since he didn't get a ring. Yeah, Peyton has one and Tom has 3 I would take three rings over one any day. So what if Peyton gets all the records, he's just going to be known as the QB that has the records, but could hardly win the most important games.

Well said. Brady is #1, who's number 2? Because we know it's not Peyton.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

Joined: Today, 06:55 AM

Member No.: 31766

Let's see...

Big Daddy Kane?

Syrus?

Come on...fess up.

 

[tommybrady]

Manning is already concidered Dan Marino JR. While they concider Brady to be like Joe Montana. Brady himself doesn't think he's as good as him. He won't admit or rub it in your face, because he knows what its like not to be considered the best. I mean come on Peyton was out to do great things. With him he can get records and win in the regular season, but when it comes to playoffs he doesn't play well. He had two chances against the Chargers, but he kept throwing picks. When it matters most Tom throws a touch down or lets his kicker win it while as Peyton throws interceptions.

 

[azgroover]

Manning is already concidered Dan Marino JR.

I think we're to a point where we can safely consider Manning better than Marino.

While they concider Brady to be like Joe Montana. Brady himself doesn't think he's as good as him.

I agree with Brady. Montana was better.

 

[tommybrady]

My uncle who's a Patriots fan even says Montana is better. I never got to see Montana play so I don't know. Well we have to remember that was his idol growing up. He said himself I have a long ways to go before I'm as good. It's fun to watch Brady play and whenever I watch Manning play I want to turn it off I get soo bored.

 

[Pickle Rody]

I've watched both Manning and Brady play for their entire NFL careers up to this point. In my eyes, Manning is better than Brady. Comparisons about SB rings is irrelevant. Without the "tuck-rule" incident and a few nicely placed FG's by Vinatieri, Brady would have none. Comparisons to Marino and Montana are also irrelevant. The comparison is between Manning and Brady. I'll take Manning as my field general any given Sunday. If I had my choice who I'd like to see in Eagles green, it would be Manning. No doubts.

 

[DropKick]

I've watched both Manning and Brady play for their entire NFL careers up to this point. In my eyes, Manning is better than Brady. Comparisons about SB rings is irrelevant. Without the "tuck-rule" incident and a few nicely placed FG's by Vinatieri, Brady would have none. Comparisons to Marino and Montana are also irrelevant. The comparison is between Manning and Brady. I'll take Manning as my field general any given Sunday. If I had my choice who I'd like to see in Eagles green, it would be Manning. No doubts.

You have my vote for the "oddest rational of the year" award.So, let me try it.. if not for this, that and a little luck... Montana would have NO (zero) Superbowls. In fact he would trail Trent Dilfer, with one career SB ring. That Montana... he's no Dilfer!Cool.

 

[Pickle Rody]

I've watched both Manning and Brady play for their entire NFL careers up to this point. In my eyes, Manning is better than Brady. Comparisons about SB rings is irrelevant. Without the "tuck-rule" incident and a few nicely placed FG's by Vinatieri, Brady would have none. Comparisons to Marino and Montana are also irrelevant. The comparison is between Manning and Brady. I'll take Manning as my field general any given Sunday. If I had my choice who I'd like to see in Eagles green, it would be Manning. No doubts.

You have my vote for the "oddest rational of the year" award.So, let me try it.. if not for this, that and a little luck... Montana would have NO (zero) Superbowls. In fact he would trail Trent Dilfer, with one career SB ring. That Montana... he's no Dilfer!Cool.

My point was that I was comparing Manning and Brady (only against each other, not against Marino or Montana, et al) and I WAS NOT using SB rings as a measuring stick. SB's are won as a team. QB's don't win SB's. You proved that point by bringing up Dilfer.

 

[DropKick]

I've watched both Manning and Brady play for their entire NFL careers up to this point. In my eyes, Manning is better than Brady. Comparisons about SB rings is irrelevant. Without the "tuck-rule" incident and a few nicely placed FG's by Vinatieri, Brady would have none. Comparisons to Marino and Montana are also irrelevant. The comparison is between Manning and Brady. I'll take Manning as my field general any given Sunday. If I had my choice who I'd like to see in Eagles green, it would be Manning. No doubts.

You have my vote for the "oddest rational of the year" award.So, let me try it.. if not for this, that and a little luck... Montana would have NO (zero) Superbowls. In fact he would trail Trent Dilfer, with one career SB ring. That Montana... he's no Dilfer!Cool.

My point was that I was comparing Manning and Brady (only against each other, not against Marino or Montana, et al) and I WAS NOT using SB rings as a measuring stick. SB's are won as a team. QB's don't win SB's. You proved that point by bringing up Dilfer.

What you did was argue Brady's achievements out of the equation to suit your own needs. And you really didn't compare them... Your post boils down to "I like Manning better". You have the right to your opinion. Obviously both QBs are elite players. But how much does you bias as an Eagles fan factor into your preference?

 

[Liquid Tension]

Brady is better. Yes, I'm a Patriots fan and I have a biest opinion. In my oppinion I would rather have the rings than all the records. Records mean nothing unless you have SB rings. Tom has 3 and Manning has 1. If Manning were to be on our team and Brady were to be on Peyton's I still think Tom would have more. Tom is more looked upon to get the win then Peyton. Since of right now we don't have the D, but out Offence is what makes us win a lot of games. The last three seasons its been the D that lets in the points. Then for the last three seasons they expect Tom to get the drive. well not every day can a QB be at his best. All players have a down day. Some don't play as well as they normally do. Peyton just doesn't have that good of luck in the playoffs. Tom on the other hand has had great sucess. To me it doesn't matter about records, yeah their nice, but getting that ring is what your supposed to do not have the records. Dan Marino has a lot of records it means something, but not as much since he didn't get a ring. Yeah, Peyton has one and Tom has 3 I would take three rings over one any day. So what if Peyton gets all the records, he's just going to be known as the QB that has the records, but could hardly win the most important games.

Well said. Brady is #1, who's number 2? Because we know it's not Peyton.

 

[Liquid Tension]

Manning is already concidered Dan Marino JR.

I think we're to a point where we can safely consider Manning better than Marino.

While they concider Brady to be like Joe Montana. Brady himself doesn't think he's as good as him.

I agree with Brady. Montana was better.

No we're not

 

[Pickle Rody]

What you did was argue Brady's achievements out of the equation to suit your own needs.

Yes, because I don't believe SB rings are Brady's achievements alone. They are the teams achievements. If the Eagles had won that SB, I wouldn't be here saying McNabb won a SB ring, I would be saying the Eagles as a team won a SB.

And you really didn't compare them... Your post boils down to "I like Manning better".

Correct. Based on my observation as to which one I feel is a better field general.

You have the right to your opinion. Obviously both QBs are elite players. But how much does you bias as an Eagles fan factor into your preference?

None. Vinatieri kicked the FG that beat the Eagles. The Eagles D did nothing to stop the Patriots from moving down the field at the end of the game. Had the Colts been the AFC representative in that game, Manning would have gotten Vanderjagdt (sp?) there also. The Eagles would have been beaten by a successful FG either way.And yes, these are my opinions. That was what the OP asked for. I don't expect everyone to feel the same way I do. I did not fault others for their opinions, I just offerred up my own.

Rody

 

[FreeBaGeL]

It's close, but Manning's just not as good as Brady.

Brady 2007

74.1% completion percentage

3.20 TDs/game

276.6 yards/game

8.8 yards/attempt

Manning 2004

67.6% completion percentage

3.06 TDs/game

284.8 yards/game

9.2 yards/attempt

Good try, but you're leaving out much of the important stuff when comparing their record breaking seasons. Namely that Brady threw nearly 100 more passes than Manning did in his record breaking year while throwing only 1 additional touchdown (good try just throwing it in there as TDs/game though) and that he essentially played in an additional game as Manning played only the first drive of his week 17 game (but again, nice work dividing Manning's TDs/game by 16 in spite of that).It's also worth noting that while both had great WRs, Manning never had anyone like Moss that he could just chuck it up to in double coverage and let him go up and get it. How many times did Brady just chuck up a ball to Moss who was standing still in double coverage 50 yards downfield for him to go up and make the play all on his own (there were at least 3 or 4 against the Dolphins alone..)?

Lastly, it's further worth noting that this year's pass blocking unit in New England was the best I can recall seeing in the last 20 years by an enormous margin. I would wager that the AVERAGE time Brady stood in the pocket on any given play was longer than the MAXIMUM amount of time most other QBs got to stand in the pocket on any one play of a game. Though I will admit, it was always worth a good laugh to see Brady get in an offensive lineman's face when he was sacked after holding the ball in the pocket for 5 seconds and getting touched for the first time all game at the 8 minute mark in the 4th quarter.

 

[tommybrady]

Well this debate could go on forever, but its pointless, because everyone has different oppinions. The way this debate will end is when both retire and whoever is ranked hire is the better QB.

 

[switz]

It's close, but Manning's just not as good as Brady.

Brady 2007

74.1% completion percentage

3.20 TDs/game

276.6 yards/game

8.8 yards/attempt

Manning 2004

67.6% completion percentage

3.06 TDs/game

284.8 yards/game

9.2 yards/attempt

Good try, but you're leaving out much of the important stuff when comparing their record breaking seasons. Namely that Brady threw nearly 100 more passes than Manning did in his record breaking year while throwing only 1 additional touchdown (good try just throwing it in there as TDs/game though) and that he essentially played in an additional game as Manning played only the first drive of his week 17 game (but again, nice work dividing Manning's TDs/game by 16 in spite of that).It's also worth noting that while both had great WRs, Manning never had anyone like Moss that he could just chuck it up to in double coverage and let him go up and get it. How many times did Brady just chuck up a ball to Moss who was standing still in double coverage 50 yards downfield for him to go up and make the play all on his own (there were at least 3 or 4 against the Dolphins alone..)?

Lastly, it's further worth noting that this year's pass blocking unit in New England was the best I can recall seeing in the last 20 years by an enormous margin. I would wager that the AVERAGE time Brady stood in the pocket on any given play was longer than the MAXIMUM amount of time most other QBs got to stand in the pocket on any one play of a game. Though I will admit, it was always worth a good laugh to see Brady get in an offensive lineman's face when he was sacked after holding the ball in the pocket for 5 seconds and getting touched for the first time all game at the 8 minute mark in the 4th quarter.

Hmmm... Manning was better in 50% of the categories than Bady, but the OP thinks this clearly shows Brady is better?

 

[jurb26]

It's close, but Manning's just not as good as Brady.

Brady 2007

74.1% completion percentage

3.20 TDs/game

276.6 yards/game

8.8 yards/attempt

Manning 2004

67.6% completion percentage

3.06 TDs/game

284.8 yards/game

9.2 yards/attempt

Good try, but you're leaving out much of the important stuff when comparing their record breaking seasons. Namely that Brady threw nearly 100 more passes than Manning did in his record breaking year while throwing only 1 additional touchdown (good try just throwing it in there as TDs/game though) and that he essentially played in an additional game as Manning played only the first drive of his week 17 game (but again, nice work dividing Manning's TDs/game by 16 in spite of that).It's also worth noting that while both had great WRs, Manning never had anyone like Moss that he could just chuck it up to in double coverage and let him go up and get it. How many times did Brady just chuck up a ball to Moss who was standing still in double coverage 50 yards downfield for him to go up and make the play all on his own (there were at least 3 or 4 against the Dolphins alone..)?

Lastly, it's further worth noting that this year's pass blocking unit in New England was the best I can recall seeing in the last 20 years by an enormous margin. I would wager that the AVERAGE time Brady stood in the pocket on any given play was longer than the MAXIMUM amount of time most other QBs got to stand in the pocket on any one play of a game. Though I will admit, it was always worth a good laugh to see Brady get in an offensive lineman's face when he was sacked after holding the ball in the pocket for 5 seconds and getting touched for the first time all game at the 8 minute mark in the 4th quarter.

He also left out what I think is one of the more important stats when talking about QBs... INTs. Manning threw 100 less passes, yet 2 MORE INTs. Brady had a TD/INT ratio of 6.25, Manning 4.9. Manning threw a pick once every 49.7 pass attempts. Brady threw an INT once every 72.25 attempts. I think thats rather important to note and actually a pretty large disparity.

 

[switz]

He also left out what I think is one of the more important stats when talking about QBs... INTs. Manning threw 100 less passes, yet 2 MORE INTs. Brady had a TD/INT ratio of 6.25, Manning 4.9. Manning threw a pick once every 49.7 pass attempts. Brady threw an INT once every 72.25 attempts. I think thats rather important to note and actually a pretty large disparity.

Except that those numbers are totally out of context. Brady faces the Bills, Dolphins, and Jets 6 times a year, none of which have elite cornerbacks on their rosters. In addition, the offensive schemes call for Manning to throw more risky passes, so it would be expected he would be intercepted more.The problem with arguing stats, is that out of context, you can twist a stat to fit whatever you want to believe in many cases. Reality is that Manning is a far more talented QB than Brady, in terms of natural ability.

 

[jurb26]

He also left out what I think is one of the more important stats when talking about QBs... INTs. Manning threw 100 less passes, yet 2 MORE INTs. Brady had a TD/INT ratio of 6.25, Manning 4.9. Manning threw a pick once every 49.7 pass attempts. Brady threw an INT once every 72.25 attempts. I think thats rather important to note and actually a pretty large disparity.

Except that those numbers are totally out of context. Brady faces the Bills, Dolphins, and Jets 6 times a year, none of which have elite cornerbacks on their rosters. In addition, the offensive schemes call for Manning to throw more risky passes, so it would be expected he would be intercepted more.The problem with arguing stats, is that out of context, you can twist a stat to fit whatever you want to believe in many cases. Reality is that Manning is a far more talented QB than Brady, in terms of natural ability.

Right, but I'm twisting numbers.I'm simply giving them to you the way they are. You're the one trying to twist the argument with stuff like "Manning's scheme calls for more risky passes." Come on.Again, the numbers don't really help you out here. In 2004 Jack, Hou and Tenn averaged a ranking of 22 in total pass D and 20 in passing TDs. In 2007 Buf, Mia and NYJ averaged a ranking of 14 for total pass D and 14 for passing TDs.

 

[H.K.]

Manning is already concidered Dan Marino JR.

I think we're to a point where we can safely consider Manning better than Marino.

While they concider Brady to be like Joe Montana. Brady himself doesn't think he's as good as him.

I agree with Brady. Montana was better.

No we're not

Yes, we are.

 

[Liquid Tension]

Brady is better. Yes, I'm a Patriots fan and I have a biest opinion. In my oppinion I would rather have the rings than all the records. Records mean nothing unless you have SB rings. Tom has 3 and Manning has 1. If Manning were to be on our team and Brady were to be on Peyton's I still think Tom would have more. Tom is more looked upon to get the win then Peyton. Since of right now we don't have the D, but out Offence is what makes us win a lot of games. The last three seasons its been the D that lets in the points. Then for the last three seasons they expect Tom to get the drive. well not every day can a QB be at his best. All players have a down day. Some don't play as well as they normally do. Peyton just doesn't have that good of luck in the playoffs. Tom on the other hand has had great sucess. To me it doesn't matter about records, yeah their nice, but getting that ring is what your supposed to do not have the records. Dan Marino has a lot of records it means something, but not as much since he didn't get a ring. Yeah, Peyton has one and Tom has 3 I would take three rings over one any day. So what if Peyton gets all the records, he's just going to be known as the QB that has the records, but could hardly win the most important games.

Good lord ....

LOL...Rings are a team win and when people give credit to one player because of rings, it really shows a lack of understanding of the team nature of the game (and they are only using it to try and prove their point)That being said, I have to say that Brady gets the nod for me though because when given great talent around him he put up an amazing year. He also plays outdoors in a tough environment rather than a perfectly controlled situation in the dome. Manning is on my fantasy team and I have been arguing the value in drafting manning after the first bunch of RB's go (in the middle of the 1st round), but if I had to pick a QB to be on my pro team I would take Brady before Manning...but it is close.

 

[H.K.]

Manning is already concidered Dan Marino JR.

I think we're to a point where we can safely consider Manning better than Marino.

Marino and Manning were linked due to the stark contrast between their regular season success and playoff failures.....but you are correct in saying that Manning is better than Marino. Note the similarity between Regular season passer rating vs. Post season, Manning's numbers are superior in both cases but both QB's fall about 10 points when the games are more important:Manning's 94.7 rating dropped to 84.4 in the playoffs

Marino's 86.4 rating dropped to 77.7 in the playoffs

However, Brady's 92.9 only dips to 88.0 in the post-season, not nearly the drop off as the other two.

Now let's take it a step further to look at how the QB's did in the playoffs with respect to playing below average:

Playoff games with a QB rating less than 70

Tom Brady: Only 2 times in 17 playoff games (One game every 8 or nine proves he's human)

Peyton Manning: 5 times in 14 games (About one third of his games, defintely not dependable)

Dan Marino: A whopping 8 times in 18 games (Roughly half of his playoff efforts...oof)

Obviously a team avoiding bad QB play in the post season has a much better chance to win titles. It's evident why Brady has three rings, Manning just one, and Marino zero.

Marino clearly is at the bottom of the barrel in this discussion, he was not a good playoff QB and his team suffered because of it. He is not worthy of being compared to either of the champions this thread is debating.

Manning struggled early in his career but his post season play is no longer Marino awful.

At this point in time, Brady's playoff performances separate him from Manning.

 

[switz]

He also left out what I think is one of the more important stats when talking about QBs... INTs. Manning threw 100 less passes, yet 2 MORE INTs. Brady had a TD/INT ratio of 6.25, Manning 4.9. Manning threw a pick once every 49.7 pass attempts. Brady threw an INT once every 72.25 attempts. I think thats rather important to note and actually a pretty large disparity.

Except that those numbers are totally out of context. Brady faces the Bills, Dolphins, and Jets 6 times a year, none of which have elite cornerbacks on their rosters. In addition, the offensive schemes call for Manning to throw more risky passes, so it would be expected he would be intercepted more.The problem with arguing stats, is that out of context, you can twist a stat to fit whatever you want to believe in many cases.

Reality is that Manning is a far more talented QB than Brady, in terms of natural ability.

Right, but I'm twisting numbers.

I'm simply giving them to you the way they are. You're the one trying to twist the argument with stuff like "Manning's scheme calls for more risky passes." Come on.

Again, the numbers don't really help you out here. In 2004 Jack, Hou and Tenn averaged a ranking of 22 in total pass D and 20 in passing TDs. In 2007 Buf, Mia and NYJ averaged a ranking of 14 for total pass D and 14 for passing TDs.

That's not twisting the argument. It's reality. The Colts do far more downfield passing than the Patriots. I'm not sure how that can be construed as twisting... I hate when people try to take things out of context... which is what's done often by you.

And you may want to rethink your stand on the 2007 defensive rankings, or at least consider that maybe NYJ, MIA, and BUF had somewhat decent defensive statistics because 25% of their games were against each other.

 

[jurb26]

He also left out what I think is one of the more important stats when talking about QBs... INTs. Manning threw 100 less passes, yet 2 MORE INTs. Brady had a TD/INT ratio of 6.25, Manning 4.9. Manning threw a pick once every 49.7 pass attempts. Brady threw an INT once every 72.25 attempts. I think thats rather important to note and actually a pretty large disparity.

Except that those numbers are totally out of context. Brady faces the Bills, Dolphins, and Jets 6 times a year, none of which have elite cornerbacks on their rosters. In addition, the offensive schemes call for Manning to throw more risky passes, so it would be expected he would be intercepted more.The problem with arguing stats, is that out of context, you can twist a stat to fit whatever you want to believe in many cases.

Reality is that Manning is a far more talented QB than Brady, in terms of natural ability.

Right, but I'm twisting numbers.

I'm simply giving them to you the way they are. You're the one trying to twist the argument with stuff like "Manning's scheme calls for more risky passes." Come on.

Again, the numbers don't really help you out here. In 2004 Jack, Hou and Tenn averaged a ranking of 22 in total pass D and 20 in passing TDs. In 2007 Buf, Mia and NYJ averaged a ranking of 14 for total pass D and 14 for passing TDs.

That's not twisting the argument. It's reality. The Colts do far more downfield passing than the Patriots. I'm not sure how that can be construed as twisting... I hate when people try to take things out of context... which is what's done often by you.

And you may want to rethink your stand on the 2007 defensive rankings, or at least consider that maybe NYJ, MIA, and BUF had somewhat decent defensive statistics because 25% of their games were against each other.

Exactly what evidence do you have that shows Manning passes down field more often? Additionally, what evidence do you have that suggests that Manning is forced to throw down field more often? Just because a play is called to go down field does not mean a QB is supposed to me a mind numb robot and execute that no matter what. All NFL passing plays have options and check downs at different levels of the field. Maybe Brady is just better at recognizing those. I'm sure that is something you will never concede...Sure, maybe just maybe NYJ, Mia and Buf all just had better stats than they guys Manning had to face because they had to face each other. That is possible. Or maybe the numbers where better simply because, um they were better than the guys Manning faced. I'm sure that is something you will never concede...

 

[tommybrady]

manning used to be in the patriots division. for his first few seasons and couldn't beat the jets, phins, or bills much.

 

[switz]

manning used to be in the patriots division. for his first few seasons and couldn't beat the jets, phins, or bills much.

You do realize since Manning's been there they've only had two season with less than 10 wins?His rookie season (which every rookie QB struggles) and 2001 when they had the #31st ranked defense.I'll make this easy for you, in the years when IND was in the AFC East: (Colts-Opp)1999: Bills 1-1, Pats 1-1, Jets 2-0, Mia 1-1 (5-3 overall)2000: Bills 2-0, Pats 1-1, Jets 1-1, Mia 1-1 (5-3 overall)2001: Bills 2-0, Pats 0-2, Jets 1-1, Mia 0-2 (3-5 overall, this was the year with the #31 ranked D)