What active player has had the best career? (1 Viewer)

[FUBAR]

Pretty simple concept although the voting may not be. Simply put, which player has had the best career through the end of 2009?

It's possible that I'm missing some that are worthy of consideration but I doubt any I'm missing any that would win the #1 poll.

Some of these choices won't get any consideration but I thought they were worth listing. These are either statistical leaders or have played an important role in winning games for their team(s).

There's nothing stopping you from voting for one from each category, but this is intended to be the #1 overall.

If I'm missing any that should be included soon let me know.

ETA: I know Warner retired, I think he's still part of this conversation.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

brady w 3 rings is hard to beat, plus he gets to nail giselle

 

[Donsmith753]

I voted brett favre on quantity x quality. Pretty good, forever.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I think this is just going to boil down into one giant argument with one camp saying that Super Bowl wins are what define success in the NFL since that is the end goal and another camp saying there is more to it than that.

 

[Todem]

Peyton

Ray Ray

Feagles

 

[Mr. Peterson]

PeytonRay RayFeagles

Same here.

 

[gandalas]

PeytonRay RayFeagles

Same here.

Me as well. I missed the part where you said #1 overall, so I picked my best from each category. Of the 3, I would go with Peyton #1 overall. In time, he should pass Brett Favre in all the relevant statistical categories, apart from possibly the consecutive games stat, as I don't see Peyton hanging on as long as Favre has.

 

[netnalp]

Gonzalez - His career numbers could end up as the best for a TE ever and so far definitely one of the best if not the best already.

Records

Kansas City Chiefs

[*]Career receptions (916 as of December 30, 2008)

[*]Career receiving yards (10,940 as of December 30, 2008)

[*]Career receiving touchdowns (76 as of December 30, 2008)

[*]Career yards from scrimmage (10,954 as of December 30, 2008)

[*]Consecutive games with a reception (130 as of December 30, 2008)

NFL

[*]Receptions in a single season for a tight end (102, 2004 season)

[*]Career receiving yards for a tight end (11,760 as of December 21, 2009)

[*]Career receptions for a tight end (994 as of December 21, 2009)

[*]Career receiving touchdowns for a tight end (82 as of December 21, 2009)

[*]Most seasons with 1,000+ receiving yards by a tight end (4)

[*]11,000 receiving yards

Ray Lewis - obvious choice for me.

Feagles- playing that long and having to beat someone out for the job if not every season, for the last 10 or so, gotta give props.

 

[videoguy505]

I voted brett favre on quantity x quality. Pretty good, forever.

What?

 

[Donsmith753]

I voted brett favre on quantity x quality. Pretty good, forever.

What?

what part of that do you disagree with?

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

I voted brett favre on quantity x quality. Pretty good, forever.

What?

what part of that do you disagree with?

Maybe he thinks you meant "forever" literally, which is obviously impossible.

 

[FUBAR]

I think this is just going to boil down into one giant argument with one camp saying that Super Bowl wins are what define success in the NFL since that is the end goal and another camp saying there is more to it than that.

Change "argument" into "debate" and that's certainly part of the conversation.I'll probably start another tomorrow and while I'm inclined to just go 1 at a time I like that some people are voting for each category.Is there anyone else worth including? Is anyone listed not worthy of being in the conversation?

 

[FUBAR]

FWIW I'm pleasantly surprised to see Ray-Ray leading this. IMO he's top 3 for sure along with Favre and Peyton, although I think Dawkins is close. I do wonder how many Peyton / Favre would have voted the other above Ray.

 

[ninerfanatic492000]

walter jones would make and lead set 3

 

[Slider]

Manning

Taylor

Feagles

Ray-Ray's had tough time with the crime thing and when he lost those 2 DT's and whined. Jason has spent his career in South Florida except when he left on his own to pad the bank account.

 

[Tau837]

1. Seems like most of these players could have been left off... there is no reasonable argument for most of them to have had the best career.

2. The "through the end of 2009" thing matters. I interpret the wording of the OP to mean we aren't supposed to project forward (e.g., project Manning to catch Favre in various statistical categories). If taken literally, that makes it much closer between Manning and Favre than it would be otherwise.

3. IMO judging careers comes down to the best combination of production/numbers, honors/awards, and winning/titles. Different people will judge that differently, but IMO I don't see how it can be anyone other than Manning or Brady, with the determining factor being numbers + honors/awards (Manning) vs. postseason success (Brady). Same old debate that we've had numerous times in the Shark Pool. Really, who else measures up to those two in terms of career?

 

[travdogg]

I'm taking this question to mean, that you would get each player from day 1 of their career and would get them all the way through 2009.

Under this logic, I don't see how the answer can't be Brett Favre. You have a top-5 QB for almost 20 years. That's pretty much 20 years of being a playoff contender. I do agree that by the time Manning gets done he'll likely pass many and perhaps most of Favre records(assuming Favre retires first) but since we are only talking through 2009, than Manning's remaining career doesn't matter.

In category 2, I can't see any reason for voting for anyone other than Ray Lewis. I'd actually like an explanation from anyone who voted differently on defense.

Category three I went with Kevin Mawae. I think he's the best center of the last 10-15 years. That means way more than any special teams player.

 

[Bossman]

Brady - Can't argue with 4 AFC Championships, 3 SB rings, 2 SB MVP awards, and the record for most TD's in a season. (we'll talk about Manning when he gets 2 more rings)

Ray Lewis

Other - (I assume this is a non-offensive or defensive player) Adam Vinatiari, historical game tying and winning kicks in playoffs and SuperBowls. 4 SB Rings.

Non-Player - Bill Belichick - Love him or hate him... he's this era's Vince Lombarti. Already a lock for the Hall of Fame.

 

[bostonfred]

It's between Favre and Brady. Both led championship teams while throwing to guys like Brooks and Freeman, or Patten and Branch. Brady won three Superbowls with scrub receivers, while Favre went to one and attended another. Both were surrounded by castoffs at virtually every offensive skill position, and almost singlehandedly brought their offenses to a championship level.

If you want to bring Manning into the conversation, you're probably going to have to talk statistics. And it's hard to do that without mentioning two things - that Manning's had a better surrounding cast, and that Brady's best individual season broke the record Manning set during his best season. It's even more impressive when you note that Brady's only full season throwing to Moss and Welker with everyone healthy, was their first full season together, as opposed to Manning, who enjoyed his best season after throwing to guys like Harrison, Wayne, Clark, Edge, and others.

But if you believe that Manning's better than Brady, you'll probably talk about things like how he threw for more touchdown passes than Brady did back when he was making Troy Brown a 100 reception machine long before he'd go on to help Welker do the same.

But if that's the criteria you're using, we should be talking about Favre, not Manning, as the best QB of all time. While Manning's best season (49) is better than Favre's best season (39), Favre's second best season (38) was better than Manning's second best (33). If you want to set the cutoff at 30 TDs to make Brady's 28 TD seasons look worse, then it's worth noting that Favre has thrown for 39, 38, 35, 33, 33, 32, 32, 31, and 30 TD seasons. Manning's had 49, 33, 33, 31, and 31, with one of those 33 TD seasons being last year - when Favre also threw 33 TDs, while turning 40, and throwing less than half as many INTs (7) as Manning (16).

Favre has more career yards, TDs, and yes, INTs, than Manning. He has a longer iron man streak. He's done it with substantially worse receivers throughout his career. Favre has more regular season wins and more playoff appearances (24, 13-11) than Manning (18, 9-9). Of note, Brady has the same number of playoff appearances as Manning, in fewer years playing (18, with an incredible 14-4 record). And while Manning and Favre are both 1-1 in the Superbowl, Brady's 3-1 in the big game. And if you'd rather focus on Manning's impressive 131-61 regular season record, Brady's 97-30 regular season record absolutely shatters it.

You could probably make a case that Manning was better than Favre, and I've seen plenty of people try to make the case that Manning's better than Brady, but I'm shocked that anyone is voting for Manning when they have to put him higher than both. There's just no consistent logical argument for it.

 

[ADP]

ManningTaylorFeaglesRay-Ray's had tough time with the crime thing and when he lost those 2 DT's and whined. Jason has spent his career in South Florida except when he left on his own to pad the bank account.

The question wasn't who you liked personally better. The question was who do you think has had a better career. Your if you think Jason Taylor comes close to Ray Lewis in his career achievements.

 

[Tau837]

It's between Favre and Brady. Both led championship teams while throwing to guys like Brooks and Freeman, or Patten and Branch. Brady won three Superbowls with scrub receivers, while Favre went to one and attended another. Both were surrounded by castoffs at virtually every offensive skill position, and almost singlehandedly brought their offenses to a championship level.

If you want to bring Manning into the conversation, you're probably going to have to talk statistics. And it's hard to do that without mentioning two things - that Manning's had a better surrounding cast, and that Brady's best individual season broke the record Manning set during his best season. It's even more impressive when you note that Brady's only full season throwing to Moss and Welker with everyone healthy, was their first full season together, as opposed to Manning, who enjoyed his best season after throwing to guys like Harrison, Wayne, Clark, Edge, and others.

But if you believe that Manning's better than Brady, you'll probably talk about things like how he threw for more touchdown passes than Brady did back when he was making Troy Brown a 100 reception machine long before he'd go on to help Welker do the same.

But if that's the criteria you're using, we should be talking about Favre, not Manning, as the best QB of all time. While Manning's best season (49) is better than Favre's best season (39), Favre's second best season (38) was better than Manning's second best (33). If you want to set the cutoff at 30 TDs to make Brady's 28 TD seasons look worse, then it's worth noting that Favre has thrown for 39, 38, 35, 33, 33, 32, 32, 31, and 30 TD seasons. Manning's had 49, 33, 33, 31, and 31, with one of those 33 TD seasons being last year - when Favre also threw 33 TDs, while turning 40, and throwing less than half as many INTs (7) as Manning (16).

Favre has more career yards, TDs, and yes, INTs, than Manning. He has a longer iron man streak. He's done it with substantially worse receivers throughout his career. Favre has more regular season wins and more playoff appearances (24, 13-11) than Manning (18, 9-9). Of note, Brady has the same number of playoff appearances as Manning, in fewer years playing (18, with an incredible 14-4 record). And while Manning and Favre are both 1-1 in the Superbowl, Brady's 3-1 in the big game. And if you'd rather focus on Manning's impressive 131-61 regular season record, Brady's 97-30 regular season record absolutely shatters it.

You could probably make a case that Manning was better than Favre, and I've seen plenty of people try to make the case that Manning's better than Brady, but I'm shocked that anyone is voting for Manning when they have to put him higher than both. There's just no consistent logical argument for it.

As I said before, I'd take Manning over Favre. Comparing them for their entire careers through the 2009 season makes it closer, but it's still pretty substantially in favor of Manning IMO. Consider:Manning's honors/awards:

2003 NFL AP MVP

2003 NFL Newspaper Ent. Assoc. MVP

2003 NFL Bert Bell Award (Player of the Year)

2004 NFL AP MVP

2004 NFL PFWA MVP

2004 NFL Newspaper Ent. Assoc. MVP

2004 NFL Bert Bell Award (Player of the Year)

2004 NFL AP Offensive Player of the Year

2005 NFL Walter Payton Man of the Year

2006 NFL Super Bowl MVP

2008 NFL AP MVP

2008 NFL PFWA MVP

2009 NFL AP MVP

Total of 4 AP MVP awards

5 AP 1st team All Pro selections

3 AP 2nd team All Pro selections

10 Pro Bowls

Favre's honors/awards:

1995 NFL AP MVP

1995 NFL PFWA MVP

1995 NFL Newspaper Ent. Assoc. MVP

1995 NFL Bert Bell Award (Player of the Year)

1995 NFL AP Offensive Player of the Year

1996 NFL AP MVP

1996 NFL PFWA MVP

1996 NFL Newspaper Ent. Assoc. MVP

1996 NFL Bert Bell Award (Player of the Year)

1997 NFL AP MVP

Total of 3 AP MVP awards

3 AP 1st team All Pro selections

3 AP 2nd team All Pro selections

11 Pro Bowls

Much of the lists cancel out, leaving the bolded items as the differences. Honors/awards favors Manning even if you don't consider that Manning accumulated them in 12 seasons, compared to Favre's 19. If you do take that into consideration, it isn't as close.

In cumulative statistics, Favre has the edge, though Manning is no slouch, currently #4 in passing yards and #3 in passing TDs. And if you look at rate statistics, Manning is better across the board... he is better at QB rating, completion percentage, TD percentage, interception percentage, yards per attempt, yards per completion, sack rate, passing yards per game, and QB rating. Favre has rushed for more yards, but, perhaps surprisingly, Manning has rushed for more TDs. Manning also has the most seasons with 4000+ yards passing in NFL history, and the largest TD to interception differential in NFL history, among other records.

A huge issue in this comparison is negative plays. Favre has 317 interceptions, 159 fumbles, and 503 sacks in 285 career starts. Manning has 181 interceptions, 54 fumbles, and 215 sacks in 192 career starts. (All regular season totals, using fumbles rather than fumbles lost because that's what PFR has.) Manning gets a huge edge here.

So IMO numbers/statistics favors Manning.

As for winning, Manning's regular season winning percentage is considerably better (0.682 to 0.635). Manning is 9-9 in the postseason and 1-1 in the Super Bowl. Favre is 13-11 in the postseason and 1-1 in the Super Bowl. Overall, this category is an edge to Manning IMO.

So I have numbers/statistics, honors/awards, and winning all favoring Manning. What else is there?

As for durability, Favre obviously has a longer iron man streak, but the fact remains that Manning has never missed a game, so I see this as a push.

How about character/leadership? I don't see how Manning can be questioned in this area... he has had no off field issues, whereas Favre had the Vicodin problem and all the annoying retirement waffling. Manning is viewed as a strong leader both on the field and on the team. Favre seems like a strong leader on the field but perhaps not so much on the team... he has regularly skipped offseason workouts and training camp in recent years, and he was quoted as saying he didn't think it was his job to mentor other QBs when he was in Green Bay. I'm not saying these issues with Favre are major problems... but we're comparing two all-time greats, so it comes down to splitting hairs. And Manning also has a Walter Payton MOY award.

Comebacks and game-winning drives somewhat surprisingly favor Manning. According to PFR, both of them have 44 game winning drives, but Manning has 35 4th quarter comebacks to Favre's 30.

I agree that Manning generally had superior teammates, but I don't see that as being nearly enough to overcome all of the things cited above.

Like I said, it comes down to Manning (numbers/statistics and honors/awards) vs. Brady (postseason success). People will have different opinions on what matters more, but I don't see how any other player belongs in the discussion.

 

[SSOG]

It's between Favre and Brady. Both led championship teams while throwing to guys like Brooks and Freeman, or Patten and Branch. Brady won three Superbowls with scrub receivers, while Favre went to one and attended another. Both were surrounded by castoffs at virtually every offensive skill position, and almost singlehandedly brought their offenses to a championship level.

If you want to bring Manning into the conversation, you're probably going to have to talk statistics. And it's hard to do that without mentioning two things - that Manning's had a better surrounding cast, and that Brady's best individual season broke the record Manning set during his best season. It's even more impressive when you note that Brady's only full season throwing to Moss and Welker with everyone healthy, was their first full season together, as opposed to Manning, who enjoyed his best season after throwing to guys like Harrison, Wayne, Clark, Edge, and others.

But if you believe that Manning's better than Brady, you'll probably talk about things like how he threw for more touchdown passes than Brady did back when he was making Troy Brown a 100 reception machine long before he'd go on to help Welker do the same.

But if that's the criteria you're using, we should be talking about Favre, not Manning, as the best QB of all time. While Manning's best season (49) is better than Favre's best season (39), Favre's second best season (38) was better than Manning's second best (33). If you want to set the cutoff at 30 TDs to make Brady's 28 TD seasons look worse, then it's worth noting that Favre has thrown for 39, 38, 35, 33, 33, 32, 32, 31, and 30 TD seasons. Manning's had 49, 33, 33, 31, and 31, with one of those 33 TD seasons being last year - when Favre also threw 33 TDs, while turning 40, and throwing less than half as many INTs (7) as Manning (16).

Favre has more career yards, TDs, and yes, INTs, than Manning. He has a longer iron man streak. He's done it with substantially worse receivers throughout his career. Favre has more regular season wins and more playoff appearances (24, 13-11) than Manning (18, 9-9). Of note, Brady has the same number of playoff appearances as Manning, in fewer years playing (18, with an incredible 14-4 record). And while Manning and Favre are both 1-1 in the Superbowl, Brady's 3-1 in the big game. And if you'd rather focus on Manning's impressive 131-61 regular season record, Brady's 97-30 regular season record absolutely shatters it.

You could probably make a case that Manning was better than Favre, and I've seen plenty of people try to make the case that Manning's better than Brady, but I'm shocked that anyone is voting for Manning when they have to put him higher than both. There's just no consistent logical argument for it.

Wow, that's an awfully long time spent crafting an argument that can be refuted in five simple words:Four Time Most Valuable Player.

 

[bostonfred]

Wow, that's an awfully long time spent crafting an argument that can be refuted in five simple words:Four Time Most Valuable Player.

First, we'll need to start with you choosing a subjective award as your primary barometer of individual success. Because if it easily "refutes" all the stuff I wrote out, you're claiming that you believe that the regular season award is a more important barometer of individual success than statistics, win-loss records, Superbowl titles, or other metrics. I'm confused at your methodology for choosing which subjective award to use. First, how did you decide to use regular season MVP? Why not Superbowl MVP? Brady outstrips Manning in Superbowl MVPs, for example, and while that award is every bit as subjective, at least it doesn't get decided before the postseason finishes. The "MVP" award has a natural bias towards players who do well in the regular season regardless of playoff success. Do you feel that playoff success is unnecessary for the player with the "best career"? Take a look, for example, at 2003, when Manning shared the MVP award with Steve McNair (and I question the legitimacy of the award as an argument if they can just say, oh well, you both win it). If this is the premier accomplishment of a quarterback in the league, and your barometer for determining who had the best career, then you seem to be saying that Manning and McNair had the best seasons in the league that year - and not Brady, who beat both of them in the playoffs en route to a Superbowl victory and the Superbowl MVP title. But that should be no surprise, since you probably know that Manning never won a Superbowl in a year in which he was named MVP. Those four playoff exits included a game with four INTs, a game where he led his team to three total points, their loss to the Chargers, and their Superbowl loss this past year. But if you want to use the MVP award as a barometer of career success, then you must believe that all of that stuff is irrelevant. If we're talking about the player who has had the best career, then all you need to do is show me where a player has said that their goal for this season is to win the MVP award. Or, if you can't do that, just show me the interview after the award where they said that this was their goal. It should be fairly straightforward for you to show somebody - maybe not Manning because he's all bashful - but really anybody at all ever saying in the history of ever that the goal of the season is to win that award. For you to make the MVP award your definition of career success, surely you can point out that it's the measurement that the players use to define their success, or that it is in any way their obective to win one.

 

[ravnzfan]

tou-f'n-che`

nicely done fred

I voted Ray as 1)I'm a homer, 2)the QB's were too tightly bunched and 3)I couldn't find 1 guy in set 3 deserving of top 10, let alone #1 overall

consider:

Cassell went like 11-5 w/Brady out

Indy might not have fared as well as NE the yr Brady sat, but they are @ or over .500 w/the rest of that offense, IMO

but the Ravens never see .500 for the decade, let alone win a SB in the decade if it weren't for Lewis leading that Defense

it's the age old "numbers vs worth to the team" arguement....I'm not sure any 1 player was more valuable to his team than Ray Lewis has been

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Whoops, I didn't notice we were supposed to be voting for the #1 overall until after I had voted. I'd imagine many others made the same mistake.

In the end, I think the results for #1 overall are going to be super tainted simply because there's much less competition to divide up the votes in the defense category.

 

[Mainevent]

If we were voting for #1 overall, why not just have one poll... and therefore no misunderstanding would have occured.

 

[cheese]

tou-f'n-che`

nicely done fred

I voted Ray as 1)I'm a homer, 2)the QB's were too tightly bunched and 3)I couldn't find 1 guy in set 3 deserving of top 10, let alone #1 overall

consider:

Cassell went like 11-5 w/Brady out

Indy might not have fared as well as NE the yr Brady sat, but they are @ or over .500 w/the rest of that offense, IMO

but the Ravens never see .500 for the decade, let alone win a SB in the decade if it weren't for Lewis leading that Defense

it's the age old "numbers vs worth to the team" arguement....I'm not sure any 1 player was more valuable to his team than Ray Lewis has been

Lewis is up there, but Peyton Manning. The Colts have no business being a consistent powerhouse except for him. Honestly, they're probably below average across the board for an entire decade without him. Instead, they were 1 of the 2 most successful teams in the NFL.

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

So... How many others voted for someone in each "set?"

There's no way Ray beats Manning/Favre/Brady in a head to head poll.

 

[Mello]

Lewis is up there, but Peyton Manning. The Colts have no business being a consistent powerhouse except for him. Honestly, they're probably below average across the board for an entire decade without him. Instead, they were 1 of the 2 most successful teams in the NFL.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Favre had a full 2 decade career. Favre will end up with over 70,000 yds and 500 Tds this season, probably by week 2. Played in 5 NFC Championships, 2 Super Bowls, his career is lengthy. He will go down as arguably the best QB ever.

Ray Lewis was a no brainer formt he 2nd group. Went Mawae for the final group listed.

 

[Tau837]

Favre had a full 2 decade career. Favre will end up with over 70,000 yds and 500 Tds this season, probably by week 2. Played in 5 NFC Championships, 2 Super Bowls, his career is lengthy. He will go down as arguably the best QB ever.

No he won't. He won't even the best or second best from his own generation... Peyton Manning and Brady will be remembered as having been better. Nor will Favre be remembered as having been better than Unitas or Montana. At best, he might end up as 5th best, but some will still prefer Starr, Baugh, Elway, Marino, Young, et al.And I am a huge Favre fan.

See my previous post for why Manning's career has been better through 2009.

 

[wdh76]

Wow, that's an awfully long time spent crafting an argument that can be refuted in five simple words:

Four Time Most Valuable Player.

First, we'll need to start with you choosing a subjective award as your primary barometer of individual success. Because if it easily "refutes" all the stuff I wrote out, you're claiming that you believe that the regular season award is a more important barometer of individual success than statistics, win-loss records, Superbowl titles, or other metrics. I'm confused at your methodology for choosing which subjective award to use. First, how did you decide to use regular season MVP? Why not Superbowl MVP? Brady outstrips Manning in Superbowl MVPs, for example, and while that award is every bit as subjective, at least it doesn't get decided before the postseason finishes. The "MVP" award has a natural bias towards players who do well in the regular season regardless of playoff success. Do you feel that playoff success is unnecessary for the player with the "best career"?

Take a look, for example, at 2003, when Manning shared the MVP award with Steve McNair (and I question the legitimacy of the award as an argument if they can just say, oh well, you both win it). If this is the premier accomplishment of a quarterback in the league, and your barometer for determining who had the best career, then you seem to be saying that Manning and McNair had the best seasons in the league that year - and not Brady, who beat both of them in the playoffs en route to a Superbowl victory and the Superbowl MVP title.

But that should be no surprise, since you probably know that Manning never won a Superbowl in a year in which he was named MVP. Those four playoff exits included a game with four INTs, a game where he led his team to three total points, their loss to the Chargers, and their Superbowl loss this past year.

But if you want to use the MVP award as a barometer of career success, then you must believe that all of that stuff is irrelevant. If we're talking about the player who has had the best career, then all you need to do is show me where a player has said that their goal for this season is to win the MVP award. Or, if you can't do that, just show me the interview after the award where they said that this was their goal. It should be fairly straightforward for you to show somebody - maybe not Manning because he's all bashful - but really anybody at all ever saying in the history of ever that the goal of the season is to win that award. For you to make the MVP award your definition of career success, surely you can point out that it's the measurement that the players use to define their success, or that it is in any way their obective to win one.

Well I guess you think that Shockey was the best TE in the league last year since he is the only starting TE that met his goal for the season last year? OR that Bradshaw to date had a better career than Brady...come on now Brady only has three rings

 

[FUBAR]

If we were voting for #1 overall, why not just have one poll... and therefore no misunderstanding would have occured.

mostly because there were more than 14 I wanted to list.

 

[FUBAR]

So... How many others voted for someone in each "set?"There's no way Ray beats Manning/Favre/Brady in a head to head poll.

In all reality I'm guessing the votes were split between Brady/Peyton/Favre while Ray stood heads above his defensive peers.IMO, that shows Ray has had a better career, when he's made that much more of a difference than his peers relative to the QBs. Others may disagree of course.

 

[Tau837]

There are plenty of people who think that Peyton Manning will ultimately be judged as the best QB of all time and thus arguably the best player of all time. I don't think anyone thinks Ray Lewis will ultimately be judged as the best LB of all time, much less the best player of all time. And I think most everyone would agree that QB is a more important position to a team than LB.

No way Ray Lewis has had a better career than Manning. Or Brady. Or Favre.

 

[Jason Wood]

I had a difficult time choosing between Favre, Manning and Brady, but went with Brady. Being truthful, had Manning won the last Super Bowl, I probably would've given him the edge.

I went with Ray Ray out of the list provided on defense.

As to the other? It seemed really random, I'm guessing by design.

 

[Chase Stuart]

There are plenty of people who think that Peyton Manning will ultimately be judged as the best QB of all time and thus arguably the best player of all time. I don't think anyone thinks Ray Lewis will ultimately be judged as the best LB of all time, much less the best player of all time. And I think most everyone would agree that QB is a more important position to a team than LB.No way Ray Lewis has had a better career than Manning. Or Brady. Or Favre.

It may only be among younger fans and those without a great sense of the history of the NFL, but I think there's a large group of people who will think Lewis is the greatest linebacker ever.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

So... How many others voted for someone in each "set?"There's no way Ray beats Manning/Favre/Brady in a head to head poll.

In all reality I'm guessing the votes were split between Brady/Peyton/Favre while Ray stood heads above his defensive peers.IMO, that shows Ray has had a better career, when he's made that much more of a difference than his peers relative to the QBs. Others may disagree of course.

I think it has more to do with there not being a second option on defense nearly as good as Brady/Favre provide on offense. Ed Reed and Junior Seau are second and third place there and neither of them hold near the historical impact of Brady/Favre. Who has Ed Reed or Junior Seau among their top 5 defensive players of all time? Top 10? Top 20?If you stuck Ray Ray and Peyton into a poll head to head I'd think it would be a landslide. Or Ray Ray and Brady. Or Ray Ray and Favre. Not to mention Reed vs. Brady or Seau vs. Favre.

 

[Godsbrother]

There are plenty of people who think that Peyton Manning will ultimately be judged as the best QB of all time and thus arguably the best player of all time. I don't think anyone thinks Ray Lewis will ultimately be judged as the best LB of all time, much less the best player of all time. And I think most everyone would agree that QB is a more important position to a team than LB.No way Ray Lewis has had a better career than Manning. Or Brady. Or Favre.

It may only be among younger fans and those without a great sense of the history of the NFL, but I think there's a large group of people who will think Lewis is the greatest linebacker ever.

He was/is a great linebacker but no man has received more credit for phantom tackles than Ray Lewis.

 

[jurb26]

I voted for Brady and R. Lewis. Brady's SB rings trump the other guys on the list (a very strong list). It's kind of a strange way of rationalizing things though. I mean Lewis is running away with his pole because the options are so much weaker than the 1st group. Place Lewis in with that group and he probably only gets about 10 or 15 votes. I'd place all of Brady, Manning and Favre ahead of him for sure. I'd even think of placing Moss and LT ahead of him.

 

[Tau837]

There are plenty of people who think that Peyton Manning will ultimately be judged as the best QB of all time and thus arguably the best player of all time. I don't think anyone thinks Ray Lewis will ultimately be judged as the best LB of all time, much less the best player of all time. And I think most everyone would agree that QB is a more important position to a team than LB.No way Ray Lewis has had a better career than Manning. Or Brady. Or Favre.

It may only be among younger fans and those without a great sense of the history of the NFL, but I think there's a large group of people who will think Lewis is the greatest linebacker ever.

Well, it's possible those who think Manning will be the best will be right, or at least have a very strong argument. I don't think the same can be said of Lewis. Without looking into it in detail, I don't see a good rationale for ranking Lewis above (in no particular order) Lawrence Taylor, Mike Singletary, **** Butkus, or Jack Lambert.

 

[SSOG]

First, we'll need to start with you choosing a subjective award as your primary barometer of individual success. Because if it easily "refutes" all the stuff I wrote out, you're claiming that you believe that the regular season award is a more important barometer of individual success than statistics, win-loss records, Superbowl titles, or other metrics. I'm confused at your methodology for choosing which subjective award to use. First, how did you decide to use regular season MVP? Why not Superbowl MVP? Brady outstrips Manning in Superbowl MVPs, for example, and while that award is every bit as subjective, at least it doesn't get decided before the postseason finishes. The "MVP" award has a natural bias towards players who do well in the regular season regardless of playoff success. Do you feel that playoff success is unnecessary for the player with the "best career"? Take a look, for example, at 2003, when Manning shared the MVP award with Steve McNair (and I question the legitimacy of the award as an argument if they can just say, oh well, you both win it). If this is the premier accomplishment of a quarterback in the league, and your barometer for determining who had the best career, then you seem to be saying that Manning and McNair had the best seasons in the league that year - and not Brady, who beat both of them in the playoffs en route to a Superbowl victory and the Superbowl MVP title. But that should be no surprise, since you probably know that Manning never won a Superbowl in a year in which he was named MVP. Those four playoff exits included a game with four INTs, a game where he led his team to three total points, their loss to the Chargers, and their Superbowl loss this past year. But if you want to use the MVP award as a barometer of career success, then you must believe that all of that stuff is irrelevant. If we're talking about the player who has had the best career, then all you need to do is show me where a player has said that their goal for this season is to win the MVP award. Or, if you can't do that, just show me the interview after the award where they said that this was their goal. It should be fairly straightforward for you to show somebody - maybe not Manning because he's all bashful - but really anybody at all ever saying in the history of ever that the goal of the season is to win that award. For you to make the MVP award your definition of career success, surely you can point out that it's the measurement that the players use to define their success, or that it is in any way their obective to win one.

You said there was "no consistent, logical argument for taking Manning over both Favre and Brady". In just five words, I demonstrated that there was, in fact, a "consistent, logical argument" for taking Manning over both Favre and Brady. I'm not saying that's the ONLY argument (I can come up with multiple other measures that clearly favor Manning over the other two), but when you say "there's no argument", then I don't need to present 30 different arguments to prove you wrong. One is all it takes.As for why someone would use "regular season MVP" instead of "superbowl MVP"... are you being serious, or at this point are you just throwing out whatever argument you can just to argue? The reason "regular season MVP" carries more weight than "superbowl MVP" is because there are 32 QBs competing for regular season MVP and only 2 competing for SBMVP. In addition, RSMVP is based on a 16-game sample and SBMVP is based on a one game sample. So... let's see... what logical reason could there be for giving preference to an award that 32 QBs compete for over 16 games over an award that 2 QBs compete over for 1 game? Hmm... that's a real toughie. And it's especially funny that you're questioning Manning's MVPs but not questioning the time that Tom Brady won SBMVP without even topping 150 yards of offense. You want to talk about fishy awards, the conversation starts and ends there.Look, it really seems like your argument boils down to "well, before every season every player SAYS they just want to win the championship, so therefore the guy with the most rings had the best career". That's fine, I completely understand that point, and I don't fault anyone who picks Brady over Manning for that reason. Then again, I never said that there was "no consistent, logical argument" for picking Brady over Manning, either. Of course, I could just as easily say that there's no "consistent, logical argument" for voting Tom Brady (3 rings) over Adam Vinatieri (4 rings). I also question any metric that says that Charles Haley had a better career than, say, Joe Montana.At the end of the day, I see the Brady/Manning/Favre debate boiling down to a question of whether you prefer rings, raw stats, or dominance. Brady has the most rings, as well as the postseason awards. Favre has the NFL records for wins, passing yards, passing TDs (and yes, Interceptions). Peyton Manning dominates them both in career Comp%, YPA, QBRating, NYPA, ANYA, YPG, First Team AP All-Pros, and League MVPs. Manning has ranked in the top 3 in completions, yards, or TDs 25 times (2 more than Favre and 17 more than Brady). Manning has as many league MVPs and *MORE* first team AP All Pros than the other two QBs... combined. Also, Manning's 2004 was the greatest QB season of all time. With all due respect to Brady's 2007, Manning averaged essentially a FULL YARD MORE in YPA, NYPA, and ANYA, posted a QB rating 4 points higher, and posted essentially the same number of TDs on 80 fewer attempts. Manning had two more INTs than Brady, but Brady had 2 more fumbles lost than Manning.Personally, I come down on the "dominance" side of the argument, so I would prefer Peyton Manning's career (for many consistent, logical reasons). I can't fault anyone who comes down on the side of Favre or Brady, though. Lots of consistent, logical reasons to choose either of those out of the trio (although, like I said, there are no consistent, logical reasons to choose Brady over Adam Vinatieri. ).

There are plenty of people who think that Peyton Manning will ultimately be judged as the best QB of all time and thus arguably the best player of all time. I don't think anyone thinks Ray Lewis will ultimately be judged as the best LB of all time, much less the best player of all time. And I think most everyone would agree that QB is a more important position to a team than LB.

I don't think Lewis was the best LB of his generation. I'd take Derrick Brooks over Ray Lewis, and Junior Seau wouldn't be far behind. By the time Lewis is eligible for the hall, it's possible Demarcus Ware will have surpassed him, too.

 

[ADP]

There are plenty of people who think that Peyton Manning will ultimately be judged as the best QB of all time and thus arguably the best player of all time. I don't think anyone thinks Ray Lewis will ultimately be judged as the best LB of all time, much less the best player of all time. And I think most everyone would agree that QB is a more important position to a team than LB.No way Ray Lewis has had a better career than Manning. Or Brady. Or Favre.

It may only be among younger fans and those without a great sense of the history of the NFL, but I think there's a large group of people who will think Lewis is the greatest linebacker ever.

Well, it's possible those who think Manning will be the best will be right, or at least have a very strong argument. I don't think the same can be said of Lewis. Without looking into it in detail, I don't see a good rationale for ranking Lewis above (in no particular order) Lawrence Taylor, Mike Singletary, **** Butkus, or Jack Lambert.

Ray Lewis is every bit as good if not better than some of those guys. I would rank his career achievements over all those guys with exception of Lawrence Taylor. I could however see an argument of Lambert over Lewis based on SB winds (4-1). Depends on how you define career achievements for an individual. Personally I think the SB wins were more because of the team Lambert played on rather than him specifically. Although don't get me wrong, he was huge part of that defense. But with countless HOFers on that defense, its tough for me to put too much stock in those wins in this specific subject. I ask myself, would the Steelers have won those super bowls without Lambert? Maybe, Maybe not. But I tend to think they would have before the Ravens, Giants, and Bears would have without their respective stars. Many players have won super bowls that were that were not great while great players have not won. That to me does not mean their career achievements are greater than the other though. For example, does a guy like T. Bruschi belong on the list with guys listed above? Probably not, but he does have 3 super bowl rings.Honestly if I was ranking my all time top 5 linebackers, it would be something like this...LTRay LewisDick ButkusJack LambertRay Nitschkewith Mike Singletary probably slotted 6th here.I know this is not a best LB debate, but to me it shows that Ray Lewis should be in this specific conversation with Manning, Brady, and Favre. Offensive players and especially QBs get a lot of love when people talk about best overall players all time. But just because the guy played LB does not make his career achievements less valuable.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I consider 3-4 OLBs like Taylor to be linebackers in name only. Taylor, Ted Hendricks, Rickey Jackson, Derrick Thomas, Patrick Swilling, Kevin Greene, Clay Matthews, Greg Lloyd, Andre Tippett, Robert Brazile and Joey Porter were more like defensive ends than they were like Ray Lewis.

I don't see a reason to separate out 3-4 ILBs like Sam Mills, Karl Mecklenburg, Randy Gradishar, Harry Carson from 4-3 MLBs; Ray Lewis and Bill Bergey were two of the few 'tweeners, but they show that the positions aren't that much different.

I think it's probably best to leave the 4-3 OLBs out, too, although they're certainly more like a MLB than a 3-4 OLB is. Derrick Brooks, Chuck Bendarik, Junior Seau, Jack Hamm, Chris Hanburger, Isiah Robertson, Chuck Howley, Bobby Bell and Maxie Baughan were great linebackers. I go back and forth on whether it's worthwhile to include them in a GLBOAT discussion or whether it's better to have two separate discussions; best ILBOAT and best OLBOAT. There are a few guys who played both, but not many. Ken Norton, Donnie Edwards and Mike Curtis were the best guys, I think, to spend significant time both inside (3-4 or 4-3) and outside (3-4).

As far as inside backers go, I do think Lewis is in the discussion. But it's a long discussion, and it includes guys like Bill George, Mike Singletary, Joe Schmidt, Jack Lambert, Sam Huff, Nick Buoniconti, Ray Nitschke, **** Butkus, and Randy Gradishar. Lewis is no doubt better than some of those guys on the list, and I'd probably say he was better than most of them. But all of them? I think that's too tough to say.

Ultimately, I don't see any more usefulness that comes out of comparing Lewis to Taylor than comparing Lewis to Reggie White. Lewis to guys like Brooks and Seau are interesting because they overlapped, but it's sort of like comparing Wes Welker to Randy Moss. I'd just compare Lewis to the inside linebackers in the paragraph above.

 

[oukurt]

Shocked to see Manning with more votes than Brady. Would love some explanations to why. I hate the Colts and Patriots but think Brady's resume is far more impressive.

 

[SSOG]

I consider 3-4 OLBs like Taylor to be linebackers in name only. Taylor, Ted Hendricks, Rickey Jackson, Derrick Thomas, Patrick Swilling, Kevin Greene, Clay Matthews, Greg Lloyd, Andre Tippett, Robert Brazile and Joey Porter were more like defensive ends than they were like Ray Lewis.I don't see a reason to separate out 3-4 ILBs like Sam Mills, Karl Mecklenburg, Randy Gradishar, Harry Carson from 4-3 MLBs; Ray Lewis and Bill Bergey were two of the few 'tweeners, but they show that the positions aren't that much different. I think it's probably best to leave the 4-3 OLBs out, too, although they're certainly more like a MLB than a 3-4 OLB is. Derrick Brooks, Chuck Bendarik, Junior Seau, Jack Hamm, Chris Hanburger, Isiah Robertson, Chuck Howley, Bobby Bell and Maxie Baughan were great linebackers. I go back and forth on whether it's worthwhile to include them in a GLBOAT discussion or whether it's better to have two separate discussions; best ILBOAT and best OLBOAT. There are a few guys who played both, but not many. Ken Norton, Donnie Edwards and Mike Curtis were the best guys, I think, to spend significant time both inside (3-4 or 4-3) and outside (3-4). As far as inside backers go, I do think Lewis is in the discussion. But it's a long discussion, and it includes guys like Bill George, Mike Singletary, Joe Schmidt, Jack Lambert, Sam Huff, Nick Buoniconti, Ray Nitschke, **** Butkus, and Randy Gradishar. Lewis is no doubt better than some of those guys on the list, and I'd probably say he was better than most of them. But all of them? I think that's too tough to say.Ultimately, I don't see any more usefulness that comes out of comparing Lewis to Taylor than comparing Lewis to Reggie White. Lewis to guys like Brooks and Seau are interesting because they overlapped, but it's sort of like comparing Wes Welker to Randy Moss. I'd just compare Lewis to the inside linebackers in the paragraph above.

I'm all for refining the comparisons, although obviously the smaller the data set you use, the less impressive it is if someone's the best. For instance, "the best linebacker" is a much more impressive claim than "the best 4-3 middle linebacker". That's why I included 4-3 OLBs in the comparison. I think their responsibilities are similar enough to a 4-3 MLB or a 3-4 ILB for the comparison to be a pretty solid one. For instance, I think the way Tampa treated Brooks was very similar to the way the Ravens treat Lewis (i.e. eat up blockers, then leave the star LB free to make plays from sideline to sideline).Then again, I have no problem comparing Wes Welker to Randy Moss, either. It's really not that different from comparing a Bill Walsh WCO QB to a Sid Gillman downfield passing QB, something nobody thinks twice about.

 

[Tau837]

Shocked to see Manning with more votes than Brady. Would love some explanations to why. I hate the Colts and Patriots but think Brady's resume is far more impressive.

It's pretty simple. Manning has more impressive production/numbers and honors/awards and hasn't missed a game in his career. Brady has more impressive regular season winning percentage and postseason success. Just depends on what people think is more important.

 

[Bri]

Tomlinson's per game TD numbers (which may be inflated, like a legend, in my mind) make him hard to pass over here. I'd go with Brady but...

 

[Arch Stanton]

Walter Jones

 

[Arch Stanton]

What would be an extremely interesting poll to me is who the guys on list 1 and 2 would choose from list 3. I'd bet that guys like Walter Jones, Mawae and Lorenzo Neal would get a lot more love.