Sabertooth
Footballguy
Are you including Favre's Atlanta season?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
How good has Peyton Manning been? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter David Yudkin
- Start date
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
If that's directed to me and my modified VBD post, the answer is yes.
428143
Footballguy
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
Many also believe that Young is the 2nd best QB to ever play for the 49ers. Still others believe Young's the best QB to ever play for any team. I suspect a similar sentiment will follow Manning's career.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
The main difference is the real world of football and the fantasy universe. I understand that Marino's production was more valuable than Manning's for fantasy purposes, but there is a limit as to how much better a player can play. And is there really that much difference between the two realms? So maybe there are 2 or 3 more QBs in 2005 than there were in 1985 that could meet a certain scoring threshold--the difference in setting the bar as the QB12. I don't think that that should take much away from Manning's production even though for fantasy purposes it does. The raw numbers show that Manning has had the best 9 years to start a QB's career. The adjusted numbers show he's top 3.Put a different way, put Manning in Marino's shoes and vice versa and Marino's VBD score playing today would be lower than Manning's in either era--Manning starting in the 80s like Marino did or Manning starting in the 90s like he actually did.
Last edited by a moderator:
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
The evidence is crystal clear that it's easier for QBs to earn FPs now than it was 20 years ago. You don't think that should be recognized when comparing Marino to Manning?
Liquid Tension
Footballguy
The fact that Manning COULD hurt you if you didn't respect him plays a big role in how the game or games played out. Manning was pretty good (very sharp) against KC even though he had 3 picks, he was awful against Baltimore and was decent against NE and Chicago. The team played well, specifically the defense, and that is why they won. Imagine what Marino could have done if he had something else he could have relied on. He never had anyone who could run and take teams out of the dime he got played in all the time and he never had a good defense. The one year his defense was decent he got to the SB, only to see the defense allow 38 points.Playing in a dome helps Manning as does the talent around him on offense. His defense has hurt him in the pastFavre played in very tough weather, but had good weapons (some good defenses) and a solid running attack to keep teams from playing pass defenses all the time. His receivers were about as good as Marino's as Marino made his guys great. They were good receivers, maybe like a Coles?
BigRed
Footballguy
Well duh.
He was a great one though.But nobody who says this about him or Manning should ever be taken seriously on the topic.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Simply take a look at the rules now as opposed to then. A receiver gets every advantage now. And through association, so does the QB. Also you can't even hardly hit a QB any more, making it a heck of a lot safer out there.
Think about it, presently in the NFL you have the two longest consecutive start streaks off all time going simultaneous. Starting 16 games per season does wonders for your cumulative stats in a career.
Think about it, presently in the NFL you have the two longest consecutive start streaks off all time going simultaneous. Starting 16 games per season does wonders for your cumulative stats in a career.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
IMO, there's more middle tier production at QB and similar top tier production. In Marino's 17 year career (ignoring the strike season), the average fantasy points scored by the #1 fantasy QB was 372. Over Manning's career, it's been 375. That difference is marginal.That's what I meant before--that there are more decent now that can raise the bar for what the VBD baseline is for any given year. if there were only 10 guys that could get to 250 fantasy points in the 80s but 12 guys that can do it now, the scoring curve may only have changed by 2 or 3 players.And I'm not even sure there's THAT much difference. In 1984, there were 9 QB that scored 250 fantasy points. In 2006 there were also 9 QBs that did it. In 1994 there were 10 QB that had 250 points vs the banner year of 2004 when there were 14.I'd have to go home and look up some numbers on this one to have a clearer picture (I have a spreadsheet that tracks some of this).The evidence is crystal clear that it's easier for QBs to earn FPs now than it was 20 years ago. You don't think that should be recognized when comparing Marino to Manning?
Last edited by a moderator:
gump
Footballguy
How many other great QBs were 6'4" 245 pounds of pure muscle and worked out twice a day, and ALL OFFSEASON?A lot of things have changed.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Oh I agree, but all I am saying is don't underestimate the rules changes. Of course from a VBD standpoint one could conclude that the rules shouldn't matter as the player is being measured against his peers.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
Manning is 6'5", 230 lbs with a laser rocket arm . . . if you like players like that.
H.K.
Footballguy
Why waste time comparing Manning to Marino? Seriously, as an NFL GM you can choose between two players, which player would you have wanted?
QB A
3 MVP's
2 SB appearances
1 SB Win with coach who never won one previously
Winning Post Season Record
8 seasons 30+ TD passes in 15 years
Most Completions Ever (needing fewer attempts to set record than previous record holder)
Soon to have most TD Passes Ever
QB B
1 MVP
1 SB Loss
0 SB wins with two of the greatest HC's of all time
Losing Post Season Record
4 seasons 30+ TD passes in 17 years
Temporarily holds TD pass, & yardage records
QBA is head and shoulders above QBB.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
You make this out to be like Favre>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Marino and it's not that much of a gap.The Dolphins went 145-94 (.607) in the years where Marino was the starter (not the year he got hurt and his final season when he also missed a lot of time). He was 8-10 in the post-season.
The Packers have gone 148-92 (.617) under Favre and 11-9 in the post season. Better, yes, but A LOT BETTER, not IMO.
GregR_2
Footballguy
I agree with David here. Given the increased number of college teams running pro style offenses over the last 20 years, you would expect there to be a larger number of QBs who are prepared for the NFL than in the past. This isn't going to change the seriously top level guys like a Marino or Manning, but it is going to mean that a QB12 now has a good shot at being better than a QB12 in previous years just because there are more guys who were prepared and able to compete for those spots.IMO, there's more middle tier production at QB and similar top tier production. In Marino's 17 year career (ignoring the strike season), the average fantasy points scored by the #1 fantasy QB was 372. Over Manning's career, it's been 375. That difference is marginal.That's what I meant before--that there are more decent now that can raise the bar for what the VBD baseline is for any given year. if there were only 10 guys that could get to 250 fantasy points in the 80s but 12 guys that can do it now, the scoring curve may only have changed by 2 or 3 players.And I'm not even sure there's THAT much difference. In 1984, there were 9 QB that scored 250 fantasy points. In 2006 there were also 9 QBs that did it. In 1994 there were 10 QB that had 250 points vs the banner year of 2004 when there were 14.I'd have to go home and look up some numbers on this one to have a clearer picture (I have a spreadsheet that tracks some of this).The evidence is crystal clear that it's easier for QBs to earn FPs now than it was 20 years ago. You don't think that should be recognized when comparing Marino to Manning?
Last edited by a moderator:
Dentist
***Official FBG Dentist***
Having this list without Brady is a joke.
Case Ace
Footballguy
Is it really bliss?
Case Ace
Footballguy
Who would you move him ahead of?
PsychoMan
Footballguy
I will never understand this. Why do some people assume Brady is an all-time top 5 QB just because his TEAM won three Super Bowls?Where does he rank statistically in comparison to these other guys? Jus curious ...
PsychoMan
Footballguy
H.K.
Footballguy
The only advantages over Marino that Favre does not hold will be taken care of this season.He's already got more completions, he'll pass him for TD's and he'll pass him in YFS yardage.He's got the ring, he's got more MVP's, he's put up better numbers for a longer period of time . most importantly he did it on a more consistent basis. None of these facts are debatable.Marino supporters love to claim that Favre had a better defense and better running game, Even it that were true, those are the very factors which helped Marino air it out to compile his numbers and kept Favre from being even more of a stat machine. Therefore, it makes Favre's accomplishments that much more impressive. It makes no sense to compare Manning to anyone other than Favre if you are talking in terms of GOAT.
bostonfred
Footballguy
Tom Brady is seven years into his career. His first year he had 6 yards passing. Montana had 96 yards passing in his first season, which clearly skews the statistics in Montana's favor, but if it's OK we'll ignore both for now. Comparing him to the others on this list after their first six years (and ignoring the , 12-2 playoff record, 4 AFCCG appearances, 3 Superbowls, 3 Superbowl wins, 2 Superbowl MVPs):Brady 21558 yards, 147 TDs, 78 INTsMontana 19166 yards, 132 TDs, 67 INTsThat's a pretty favorable comparison so far, although Montana did have the strike shortened season in 1982. Brady also started with a 14 game season while Montana's first season was 15 games and he split time with Steve DeBerg. It's hard to compare the two perfectly, but it looks like their numbers would be very close through the same portion of their careers. If you remove Montana's strike shortened and time-sharing first season and replace them with his next two seasons, Montana's numbers would be about 21800 yards, 155 TDs and 70 INTs - almost exactly the same as Brady's. Elway started out playing, but in only 11 games in his rookie season. To be fair, we'll scratch that season altogether. Through his first six seasons:Brady 21558 yards, 147 TDs, 78 INTsElway 19532 yards, 113 TDs, 100 INTsBrady compares extremely favorably with Elway at the same point in their careers. Of course, Elway missed six games in those six years, while Brady missed two, but even if we add in a quarter of a season worth of stats, Brady's numbers crush Elway's at this point in their careers.
Tough As Nails
Glave Master
bostonfred
Footballguy
Marino's numbers, on the other hand, crush Brady's. Even counting his 11 game, 2210 yard rookie performance, Marino's first six years were a whopping 23,856 yards. That includes missing nine games during that timeframe (five his rookie season, and four more in 1987. Replace his rookie season with his seventh season the way I did for Montana and Elway, and his numbers through six full years jump to 25,643 yards, 200 TDs, and 119 INTs.
Of course, Marino's numbers are more comparable with Manning's, which, through six years, were 24885, 167 TDs, and 110 INTs. And if we afford Manning the courtesy of throwing out his (16 game) rookie season and replacing it with his record setting year 7, those numbers jump up to 25,700 yards, 190 TDs, and just 92 INTs.
Which is one of the reasons why people correctly compare Brady to players like Montana, and compare Manning to Marino.
I won't make a comparison to Unitas' numbers, because there's really nothing to compare. Unitas only broke 3000 yards in a season three times in his career, but the seasons were shorter, the rules were different, and the game was played much differently.
Which means that, realistically, gferrel, if we ranked the players you inquired about based on statistics alone through their first five seasons, Brady would be in third place on that list, after Marino/Manning, tied with or slightly ahead of Montana, and ahead of Elway.
So if that's enough, please retire the argument that people are overrating Brady "just because his TEAM won three Superbowls".
Of course, Marino's numbers are more comparable with Manning's, which, through six years, were 24885, 167 TDs, and 110 INTs. And if we afford Manning the courtesy of throwing out his (16 game) rookie season and replacing it with his record setting year 7, those numbers jump up to 25,700 yards, 190 TDs, and just 92 INTs.
Which is one of the reasons why people correctly compare Brady to players like Montana, and compare Manning to Marino.
I won't make a comparison to Unitas' numbers, because there's really nothing to compare. Unitas only broke 3000 yards in a season three times in his career, but the seasons were shorter, the rules were different, and the game was played much differently.
Which means that, realistically, gferrel, if we ranked the players you inquired about based on statistics alone through their first five seasons, Brady would be in third place on that list, after Marino/Manning, tied with or slightly ahead of Montana, and ahead of Elway.
So if that's enough, please retire the argument that people are overrating Brady "just because his TEAM won three Superbowls".
Sidewinder16
Footballguy
Really?How far outside, IYO. And not just positionally (i.e. 5th v. 8th place), but relatively, what's the difference between the #5 All-Time Greatest QB on your list and, say, the #10?
Manning and Favre are both outside of the top 5.
Case Ace
Footballguy
Yes, Brady compares favorably to Elway through their 1st 6 seasons. However, Elway played 10 more seasons that were probably the most productive 10 seasons of his career. If Brady has 10 similar seasons, I'd say he's top 5. To this point, however, he's probably only top 10 or 12.
switz
Footballguy
Because it's your opinion? I would say it's pretty arguable that Young was the best QB to ever play, and that by the end of Manning's career, there could be a solid argument for that as well.Well duh.He was a great one though.But nobody who says this about him or Manning should ever be taken seriously on the topic.
bostonfred
Footballguy
No disagreement here. Right now he's on pace to be one of the best at all time, and at this point he's already in the elite tier. Same goes with Manning, although Manning's numbers are far enough ahead at this point that he's probably further up the stats people's lists, and Brady's accomplishments are far enough ahead that he's probably further up the championships people's lists. I look at the receivers as the tiebreaker, and say that Manning's numbers have been aided so much by the offense around him that it's hard to give him top 5 or 10 credit, either.
switz
Footballguy
I'm so tired of that argument.
Manning makes that offense successful... just look at Harrison before he got there. Honestly, swap receivers, and Manning woudl still be better. Look what he did with Stokely.Brady has had talented WRs. The offense requires none of them stand out. It doesn't mean they suck. 
David Yudkin
Footballguy
Maybe if Brady had more talented receivers they could call different plays instead of trying like heck to get their average receivers open.I suspect that the opposite of what you are saying may be true. IMO, the Pats have had mediocre receivers that have faired better with Brady then they would have otherwise. In future years, I suspect we will see Branch and Givens have so-so years. Caldwell didn't do as well in SD as he did in NE (granted, he was hurt so that's tough to evaluate). David Patten really didn't do much with NYG, CLE, or WAS and did pretty well for the Pats. Troy Brown certainly picked it up after Brady took over (although that was short lived).I don't think the Pats receiving corps has been horrendous, I happen to think they were average. The COlts and Pats also invested their money differently, and it looks on paper that the Pats invested more in their defense than the Colts did, leaving less to spend on offense.From a cost perspective, the Colts certainly invested a lot more money in Harrison/Wayne/Edge than the Pats did in their receivers and ASmith, KFaulk (pre-Dillon).I'm so tired of that argument.
H.K.
Footballguy
It's obviously an "opinion" based ranking, devoid of any actual performance factors.Elway never even threw for 30 TD's in a season. In fact, he had ten seasons when he didn't even throw 20. He's statistically behind Favre in TD's, attempts, completions and yardage.
PsychoMan
Footballguy
You're right, I guess I didn't mean "just because his team won 3 superbowls". I suppose I'm too used to arguing with people that claim Brady > any QB who hasn't won a SB. Maybe thank H.K. for that one.bostonfred said:
So your research through 6 yrs is enlightening, but as someone else stated, the other players on the list played much longer at an elite level. An approximation of full seasons played in comparison to Brady's 6:marino: 15favre: 15unitas: 15montana: 12elway: 16manning: 9What I disagree with is that it is a "joke" to not include Brady on an all-time top 5 QB list. I wouldn't put him above any of the above 6 QBs and possibly more until he's played at least a few more seasons. IMO, he needs to keep this pace up before he should be considered above these guys and I don't see why that's unfair. It's certainly not a "joke". Comparing the first 6 seasons when other QBs have played more than double that just isn't telling the whole story.
bostonfred
Footballguy
No, the fact that none of them are required to stand out doesn't mean they suck. But do me a favor and list the quarterback in the NFL who have had worse receivers to work with over the course of their careers? 1. Alex Smith2. ?Also, I'm sure Manning makes this offense successful. I don't think anyone's questioning that. It's just a question of how much his numbers are helped by the receivers he's had to work with. And it's not just their talent level, it's the fact that they've stayed constant throughout Manning's career. Go ahead, throw Caldwell and Gabriel into the Colts offense and see how well either one runs "the tree". Give him a rookie WR who doesn't know all of the audibles and doesn't know what to do when the corner looks like he might blitz and the safety's cheating in his direction. There's no question Manning's stats have been helped by the talent and continuity of the offense around him. Denying this is disingenuous, period.switz said:I'm so tired of that argument.bostonfred said:Manning makes that offense successful... just look at Harrison before he got there. Honestly, swap receivers, and Manning woudl still be better. Look what he did with Stokely.Brady has had talented WRs. The offense requires none of them stand out. It doesn't mean they suck.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
What happens if Brady's regular numbers drop a fair amount but the Pats go on to win 2 more SB? Maybe some years with 3000-330 passing yards and 20 TD.You're right, I guess I didn't mean "just because his team won 3 superbowls". I suppose I'm too used to arguing with people that claim Brady > any QB who hasn't won a SB. Maybe thank H.K. for that one.bostonfred said:So your research through 6 yrs is enlightening, but as someone else stated, the other players on the list played much longer at an elite level. An approximation of full seasons played in comparison to Brady's 6:marino: 15favre: 15unitas: 15montana: 12elway: 16manning: 9What I disagree with is that it is a "joke" to not include Brady on an all-time top 5 QB list. I wouldn't put him above any of the above 6 QBs and possibly more until he's played at least a few more seasons. IMO, he needs to keep this pace up before he should be considered above these guys and I don't see why that's unfair. It's certainly not a "joke". Comparing the first 6 seasons when other QBs have played more than double that just isn't telling the whole story.
Tough As Nails
Glave Master
Yes, really.Not far outside of the top 5 at all. Favre would be 6 or 7, Manning is 8 or 9. I think Manning will end up in the top 5...The difference between #5 and #10 is not that much. The difference between #1 and #5 is a bigger difference. Joe Montana has 4 rings and about 8 'career defining' moments in the playoffs. Favre and Manning each have 1 ring and about 2 combined 'career defining' moments in the playoffs. And yes...I hold QBs to a much higher 'win the big one' standard than the other positions on the field. All that is irrelevant to my point. Some ya-hoo said that Manning and Favre are the only guys to compare when talking about the Greatest of All-Time. That's absurd. They both can enter the discussion and Marino can too. None of them are every going to WIN that argument...but at least you can throw their names around.Sidewinder16 said:Really?How far outside, IYO. And not just positionally (i.e. 5th v. 8th place), but relatively, what's the difference between the #5 All-Time Greatest QB on your list and, say, the #10?Tough As Nails said:
PsychoMan
Footballguy
3000 yards and 20 TDs is still a pretty good season. If he "regresses" statistically to those numbers, but continues posting those numbers for another 6 years and wins a couple more super bowls, there's no doubt that he should be included with the other greats on the list.What happens if Brady's regular numbers drop a fair amount but the Pats go on to win 2 more SB? Maybe some years with 3000-330 passing yards and 20 TD.You're right, I guess I didn't mean "just because his team won 3 superbowls". I suppose I'm too used to arguing with people that claim Brady > any QB who hasn't won a SB. Maybe thank H.K. for that one.bostonfred said:
Last edited by a moderator:
bostonfred
Footballguy
And who could forget Charles Rogers, Mike Williams, Roy Williams, Kevin Jones, Joey Harrington and Marcus Pollard?
The point, of course, is not just that the players were drafted with first round picks, but that they've lived up to those picks. And to be sure, a quarterback has a lot to do with a receiver's ability to live up to his potential. But while I wouldn't expect just any quarterback to be able to put up 4000+ yards just because he's throwing to, say, Roy Williams, I also wouldn't expect a quarterback who threw for 4000 yards to Harrison, Wayne, Clark, Edge/Addai/Rhodes, and Stokley while behind a top offensive line whose key pieces have stuck together over the year to be able to put up the same numbers elsewhere. And since Manning has an embarrassment of riches on offense that is arguably the best of any of the elite quarterbacks in history, I think you do have to temper your enthusiasm on his statistics.
The point, of course, is not just that the players were drafted with first round picks, but that they've lived up to those picks. And to be sure, a quarterback has a lot to do with a receiver's ability to live up to his potential. But while I wouldn't expect just any quarterback to be able to put up 4000+ yards just because he's throwing to, say, Roy Williams, I also wouldn't expect a quarterback who threw for 4000 yards to Harrison, Wayne, Clark, Edge/Addai/Rhodes, and Stokley while behind a top offensive line whose key pieces have stuck together over the year to be able to put up the same numbers elsewhere. And since Manning has an embarrassment of riches on offense that is arguably the best of any of the elite quarterbacks in history, I think you do have to temper your enthusiasm on his statistics.
PsychoMan
Footballguy
i think you have a point, but couldn't the same be said about Brady in terms that he's had the luxury of playing on a team more focused on having a great defense, and perhaps one of the best coaches in the history of the game? should that make me temper my enthusiasm on his ability to win and his "clutchness"?i'm kind of tired of the manning/brady comparisons, so i'm seriously just asking as devils advocate here ... in Manning's defense, i think that the argument you have above could probably be used against any QB on the list in one way or another.
H.K.
Footballguy
I post facts, you post opinions.Elway won one MVP and never threw for 30 TD's in a season.Favre won 3 MVP's and threw for 30+ TD's 8 Times.You rank Elway ahead of Favre based on a purely subjective category, which lacks any defensible position other than your own personal thought.My point about comparing Manning to Marino for all time records was that it is a flawed comparison. Favre will break Marino's records, therefore if you want to compare statisitics with the best ever, it should be Favre, not Marino.No one has come close to Favre in terms of sustained excellence throughout his career. In comparison, Manning has three seasons of 30+ TD passes and two MVPs. We'll see how he compares to Favre after he retires.
bostonfred
Footballguy
I think for sure you have to discount Brady's career winning percentage based on the coach and team around him. No question. Winning three Superbowls in four years and 21 straight games doesn't happen if you don't have a pretty good QB, but I'm under no illusions that Brady is the only reason they won, which is why I don't generally talk about his accomplishments so much as his statistics and the team he's had to work with. Which, if people can ever set aside their preconceived notions of the pro-Brady argument, are extremely impressive. And yes, you could make the same argument to a varying degree for almost all of the elite quarterbacks. Young had Rice. Montana had Walsh and the WCO. Elway had Shanahan and Terrell Davis and Rod Smith when he finally won one, and a whole slew of players around him. Which is why I have so much more respect for Favre. Who has he had? Sharpe and Walker, for sure, but he didn't have either in his best seasons. Freeman? Please. Driver? Favre made Driver, not the other way around. Favre has played with so many different receivers, and he hasn't just made them look good, he's made them an instant top ten fantasy WR. He's one of the top QBs, if not #1, in my book.
H.K.
Footballguy
In 2005, the Patriots had a bad defense. Brady had his best statisitical season, going for over 4000 yards for the only time in his career.It only makes sense that a QB with a bad defense will be forced to throw more and accumulate stats.
Stating a QB has a good defense and it helps them win makes sense, but it also helps QB's put up the numbers they do if they have bad defenses. It's a double edged sword. You can't say Brady doesn't have stats like Manning, and then criticize Manning's team for him not getting rings, because his team puts him situations to put up stats when Brady is running out the clock.
Last edited by a moderator:
switz
Footballguy
Drew Brees, Philip Rivers, John Elway, Matt Hasselbeck, Brett Favre - maybe not worse, but certainly on par with the Pats receivers the past few years...And before you go naysaying... the list below is the players that were starting WRs for that list fo QBs across their careers... (I left off Brees 2006 season)Reche Caldwell - Rnd 2Vincent Jackson - Rnd 2Keenan McCardell - Rnd 12Kassim Osgood - undraftedEric Parker - undraftedTim Dwight - Rnd 4Justin Armour - Rnd 4Ed McCaffrey - Rnd 3Rod Smith - undraftedAnthony Miller - Rnd 1 (at end of his career)Mark Jackson - Rnd 6Vance Johnson - Rnd 2Derek Russell - Rnd 4Steve Watson - undraftedButch Johnson - Rnd 3Darrell Jackson - Rnd 3Koren Robinson - Rnd 1 (by all accounts a BUST)Bobby Engram - Rnd 2Alex Bannister - Rnd 5D.J. Hackett - Rnd 5Deion Branch - Rnd 2Nate Burleson - Rnd 3Sterling Sharpe - Rnd 1 (short career)Robert Brooks - Rnd 3Sanjay Beach - undraftedMark Clayton - Rnd 8 (1 year end of career)Anthony Morgan - Rnd 5Terry Mickens - Rnd 5Antonio Freeman - Rnd 3Derrick Mayes - Rnd 2Corey Bradford - Rnd 5Donald Driver - Rnd 7Bill Schroeder - Rnd 6Javon Walker - Rnd 1Robert Ferguson - Rnd 2Troy Brown - Rnd 8Jabar Gaffney - Rnd 2David Givens - Rnd 7Bethel Johnson - Rnd 2Terry Glenn - Rnd 1Charles Johnson - Rnd 1The only standouts really are Javon Walker, who briefly played with Favre, and Terry Glenn who briefly played with Brady.Yet, Elway, Hasselbeck and Favre consistently turned "lesser talented" WRs into Pro Bowl calibre WRs. Brady doesn't.It's easily arguable that Gaffney was better with Carr than Brady, and that Caldwell when healthy performed better with Brees than Brady. And while it was Brady's rookie year that he played with Glenn, it was clearly Glenn's WORST season as a pro.
Last edited by a moderator:
switz
Footballguy
While his supporting crew definitely HELPS his statistics, it's disingenuous to claim that Brady's supporting crew hurts his statistics. The fact that other QBs have put up better statistics with similar supporting casts paints a better context to measure his stats against.
radballs
Footballguy
There's never going to be a way to normalize QB statistics given the varying levels of other surrounding players as well as differences in offensive play calling and coaching. Manning's a stud and it's really hard to make the argument that his receivers make him the player he is versus the other way around. Brady's done an incredible job of being calm, cool, and collective in the most stressful situations.
But, you can't make the comment that Brady is better because he's statistically exceeded what Manning has accomplished given less talent. The fact is that Brady's passing figures haven't surpassed Manning's and never will. They're both winners but I disagree with the premise that Brady > Manning given that Brady's surrounding talent is <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Manning's. We'll never know without actually switching them both out, but Manning has shown to be the better quarterback when accounting for all games played.
But, you can't make the comment that Brady is better because he's statistically exceeded what Manning has accomplished given less talent. The fact is that Brady's passing figures haven't surpassed Manning's and never will. They're both winners but I disagree with the premise that Brady > Manning given that Brady's surrounding talent is <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Manning's. We'll never know without actually switching them both out, but Manning has shown to be the better quarterback when accounting for all games played.
Last edited by a moderator:
GroveDiesel
Footballguy
It doesn't really fit with the thread a ton, but I just wanted to point out that Manning restructered his contract today and saved his team about $8M in cap room this offseason. Something tells me we'll still hear about how greedy he is though and how his contract just hurts the team and Brady is such a saint to be playing for the league minimum or some such drivel.
bostonfred
Footballguy
Wow. I generally agree with your posts, but you're way off here. 1) I agree that Brady and Elway had similar receivers early in their careers. Elway had Steve Watson and a list of nobodies. And at this point in their careers, Brady has better stats than Elway did. Of course, I'm pretty sure that Elway had a tight end later in his career that you kind of forgot to mention, too. And saying that Rod Smith isn't a standout is absurd. 2) Disagree that Brady played with Terry Glenn. Glenn played three games in 2001, Brady's first year as QB. It's silly to say that Terry Glenn was the only standout on that list when Brady only got to play with him three times, and not even in consecutive games. You're trying to make your argument sound stronger than it is.3) Disagree that Caldwell played better with Brees than Brady. In 45 career games in San Diego, Caldwell had 76 receptions for 950 yards and 7 TDs. In 19 games in New England, Caldwell had 77 receptions for 936 yards and 5 TDs. Not even a close comparison. 4) Disagree that Koren was "by all accounts a bust". Robinson started out strong, with 39 receptions for 536 yards under Dilfer, and had some great games with both Dilfer and Hasselbeck in 2002 as he led the team in receiving. His problem was the alcoholism, not that he was a bust. 5) Gaffney was better with Carr than Brady? Gaffney didn't join the team until midseason and wasn't consistently in the lineup until the end of the season. Then he put up 21 catches for 244 yards and 2 TDs in three playoff games. Jabar Gaffney had one 100 yard game in his entire career prior to New England. He had two in the playoffs for New England. I don't see any way that he looked better with Carr than with Brady, except to say that he played more games with Carr. 6) Amazing that you'd say that Rivers hasn't had anyone to throw to. Keenan McCardell is in the top 10 of all time receivers in receptions, Tomlinson was the league MVP and was second on the team in receptions to Gates, who holds the touchdown record for tight ends and led all tight ends in receptions. Poor Phillip Rivers. 7) Drew Brees had McCardell, Tomlinson and Gates in San Diego, and Horn, Reggie Bush and Colston in New Orleans. He hasn't exactly been throwing to chopped liver, either. 8) If you had Darrell Jackson and Bobby Engram, would you trade them straight up for Caldwell, 2006 Troy Brown playing part time on defense, and Gaffney? I'm pretty sure you wouldn't. 9) Would you trade McCardell and Gates for Caldwell and Watson? I'm 100% sure the Chargers wouldn't, since they think Gates is the best in the league and they let Caldwell go. 10) Would you trade Reggie Bush, Deuce McAllister, Marques Colston and Joe Horn for Dillon, Kevin Faulk, Maroney, Caldwell and Troy Brown? I doubt that, too. 11) Would you trade even one of Shannon Sharpe, Terrell Davis, or Rod Smith for the entire 2006 Patriots offense except Brady? Doubtful.
Similar threads
