Who's better, Manning or Brady? (1 Viewer)

[cobalt_27]

Seriously, folks - quit with the Dilfer comparisons with Brady. It isn't close - that's like comparing a Fort Escort to a BMW.

The Dilfer/Johnson/Hostetler/Rypien comparisons will persist so long as your evaluation of QB success is dependent solely on the basis of SB wins.

 

[valhallan]

Brady has had the advantage of being on a great defensive team, which helped him gain home field advantage. If Manning had better defense that could get him home field in the playoffs, he'd be a near lock to make it to the Superbowl.Here are the games Manning has lost in the playoffs:1999 - Divisional loss @Indy2000 - Wild card loss @Miami2002 - Wild card loss @NYJ2003 - Conference championship loss @NE2004 - Divisional loss @NE

Manning has never scored more than 17 points OR thrown for more than 1 TD and lost a playoff game.Translation: It's not the defense that's hurting him. He's not losing playoff games 35-34.

 

[bostonfred]

Trent Dilfer is no Tom Brady, but he played mistake free enough to earn a Super Bowl ring.

just so you know, the whole "trent dilfer" thing is getting pretty old. brady has won TWO sb's and has never lost a playoff game. please check dilfers stats and get back to me. tia.

Dilfer's Stats = 1 SB. That's all that matters, right? Super Bowl wins.Marino's Stats = 0 SBs. Dilfer's better under your criterion.

i dont remember mentioning marino in my post. please read my post again and get back to me.tia.

Nope, you didn't. But, using your logic, can you apply it consistently?I think prolly not.

Are you back to this straw man argument? Quarters are worth more than dollars. I can prove this because if I have ten quarters, that's worth more than two dollars. You can't prove to me that dollars are worth more than quarters unless they are ALWAYS better than quarters.

Your 22 starters were better than the Colts 22 starters. I'm not sure what's so confusing about this.

That's a different argument. Your Dilfer comparisons don't hold water, and you know it.

 

[bostonfred]

Seriously, folks - quit with the Dilfer comparisons with Brady. It isn't close - that's like comparing a Fort Escort to a BMW.

The Dilfer/Johnson/Hostetler/Rypien comparisons will persist so long as your evaluation of QB success is dependent solely on the basis of SB wins.

People will continue to question the intellectual seriousness of your argument until you find a single post in this thread whose sole method for evaluating QB success is SB wins.

 

[nerangers]

Trent Dilfer is no Tom Brady, but he played mistake free enough to earn a Super Bowl ring.

just so you know, the whole "trent dilfer" thing is getting pretty old. brady has won TWO sb's and has never lost a playoff game. please check dilfers stats and get back to me. tia.

Dilfer's Stats = 1 SB. That's all that matters, right? Super Bowl wins.Marino's Stats = 0 SBs. Dilfer's better under your criterion.

then based on what you are saying, Brady and Dilfer are better than Manning...Manning = 0 SBDilfer = 1 SBBrady = 2 SB (and heading for #3)

No, but that's what you seem to be saying.

I guess I am...and so is Manning. He himself said all his records means nothing if he does not win a SB.It seems like some like to belittle Brady because he does not put up the big numbers, and only give him credit for not making mistakes that could change the game. The end result is that he helps his team to win games. The Pats were 14-2 this season right? He had more wins then Manning did this season and is going farther into the playoffs then Manning. Mannings TD record did not help him today, now did it???The Super Bowl is what they play for. It is not the only factor, but getting there and winning it should count for something. Seems too many people want to overlook that in Brady's defense.

 

[cobalt_27]

Trent Dilfer is no Tom Brady, but he played mistake free enough to earn a Super Bowl ring.

just so you know, the whole "trent dilfer" thing is getting pretty old. brady has won TWO sb's and has never lost a playoff game. please check dilfers stats and get back to me. tia.

Dilfer's Stats = 1 SB. That's all that matters, right? Super Bowl wins.Marino's Stats = 0 SBs. Dilfer's better under your criterion.

i dont remember mentioning marino in my post. please read my post again and get back to me.tia.

Nope, you didn't. But, using your logic, can you apply it consistently?I think prolly not.

Are you back to this straw man argument? Quarters are worth more than dollars. I can prove this because if I have ten quarters, that's worth more than two dollars. You can't prove to me that dollars are worth more than quarters unless they are ALWAYS better than quarters.

Your 22 starters were better than the Colts 22 starters. I'm not sure what's so confusing about this.

That's a different argument. Your Dilfer comparisons don't hold water, and you know it.

They're ultimately YOUR Dilfer comparisons. I'm not judging QB greatness on SB wins. Of course it's a ridiculous comparison. That's the point you guys don't seem to understand (and, of course, never will, because you think the game is played 1-on-1 QB v. QB).

 

[harrycarey]

the great qbs make their teammates better. id bet the gms around the league would rather have the colts wrs over the pats wrs, but brady makes his average wrs great....

How does Brady make his average wr's great? If they were great then people wouldn't be complaining about Brady's lack of support. I think if you put any of the Pats wr's with Peyton, in place of his then they would be thought of like wayne and stokley.Great qb's make their teammates better.......I think Peyton's done a good job of making Wayne and Stokley into pro bowl players. (It doesn't matter that Wayne's a first rounder) many are picked high and stink or are picked low and are great.Has anyone noticed that in three of the 5 playoff losses for Manning his defense has allowed over 200 yards rushing.

 

[Spartans Rule]

That's the point you guys don't seem to understand (and, of course, never will, because you think the game is played 1-on-1 QB v. QB).

If it was played that way I think Culpepper would always win.

 

[cobalt_27]

Trent Dilfer is no Tom Brady, but he played mistake free enough to earn a Super Bowl ring.

just so you know, the whole "trent dilfer" thing is getting pretty old. brady has won TWO sb's and has never lost a playoff game. please check dilfers stats and get back to me. tia.

Dilfer's Stats = 1 SB. That's all that matters, right? Super Bowl wins.Marino's Stats = 0 SBs.

Dilfer's better under your criterion.

then based on what you are saying, Brady and Dilfer are better than Manning...Manning = 0 SB

Dilfer = 1 SB

Brady = 2 SB (and heading for #3)

No, but that's what you seem to be saying.

I guess I am...and so is Manning. He himself said all his records means nothing if he does not win a SB.It seems like some like to belittle Brady because he does not put up the big numbers, and only give him credit for not making mistakes that could change the game. The end result is that he helps his team to win games. The Pats were 14-2 this season right? He had more wins then Manning did this season and is going farther into the playoffs then Manning. Mannings TD record did not help him today, now did it???

Thank you for illustrating my point--you Brady guys ignore everything except Super Bowl wins when evaluating a QB. You don't have an appreciation for well-coached teams; you ignore your own mastermind, Belichick.

 

[yetiknight]

Trent Dilfer is no Tom Brady, but he played mistake free enough to earn a Super Bowl ring.

just so you know, the whole "trent dilfer" thing is getting pretty old. brady has won TWO sb's and has never lost a playoff game. please check dilfers stats and get back to me. tia.

As long as I have watched football I have never seen a mediocre team with a great quarterback win a Super Bowl. They only seem to be good enough to make the playoffs most of the time. But a great team with a mediocre quarterback wins the Super Bowl from time to time.I would classify New England as a great team with a very good quarterback. Manning is a great quarterback on a mediocre team.

 

[Chase Stuart]

If an NFL GM knew they would have a great defense with great coaches they would certainly take Brady IF they had to.  But leave it to Pats fans to give Brady credit for every win when all he did today was not screw it up.  Trent Dilfer is no Tom Brady, but he played mistake free enough to earn a Super Bowl ring.

I don't like the Dilfer analogy at all. Brady has NEVER lost a playoff game - he's been money the last three out of four regular seasons. Two time SB MVP. This guy is on a trajectory right now to be one of the best ever. No idea where he'll end up, but you can't deny how special this guy is RIGHT NOW.Troy Aikman feels more appropriate an analogy at the moment, and if Brady wins another SB this year, I feel Montana comparisons will merit serious consideration.

I always think that's a misleading statistic. The Patriots missed the playoffs in 2002 because Brady got terribly outplayed by Chad Pennington in the second to last game of the season. If you ask me, that was a "playoff" game.

Here are the stats, week 16:Brady: 19/37, 133 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT

Pennington: 23/33, 285 yards, 3 TD, 0 INT

 

[cobalt_27]

Trent Dilfer is no Tom Brady, but he played mistake free enough to earn a Super Bowl ring.

just so you know, the whole "trent dilfer" thing is getting pretty old. brady has won TWO sb's and has never lost a playoff game. please check dilfers stats and get back to me. tia.

As long as I have watched football I have never seen a mediocre team with a great quarterback win a Super Bowl. They only seem to be good enough to make the playoffs most of the time. But a great team with a mediocre quarterback wins the Super Bowl from time to time.I would classify New England as a great team with a very good quarterback. Manning is a great quarterback on a mediocre team.

There we go. Someone who sees the forest through the trees.

 

[nerangers]

Trent Dilfer is no Tom Brady, but he played mistake free enough to earn a Super Bowl ring.

just so you know, the whole "trent dilfer" thing is getting pretty old. brady has won TWO sb's and has never lost a playoff game. please check dilfers stats and get back to me. tia.

Dilfer's Stats = 1 SB. That's all that matters, right? Super Bowl wins.Marino's Stats = 0 SBs.

Dilfer's better under your criterion.

then based on what you are saying, Brady and Dilfer are better than Manning...Manning = 0 SB

Dilfer = 1 SB

Brady = 2 SB (and heading for #3)

No, but that's what you seem to be saying.

I guess I am...and so is Manning. He himself said all his records means nothing if he does not win a SB.It seems like some like to belittle Brady because he does not put up the big numbers, and only give him credit for not making mistakes that could change the game. The end result is that he helps his team to win games. The Pats were 14-2 this season right? He had more wins then Manning did this season and is going farther into the playoffs then Manning. Mannings TD record did not help him today, now did it???

Thank you for illustrating my point--you Brady guys ignore everything except Super Bowl wins when evaluating a QB. You don't have an appreciation for well-coached teams; you ignore your own mastermind, Belichick.

and when the QB changes the play at the line of scrimage???? And yes, the SB is not the only factor...but to get there sure means something.I heard that Manning does most of his own play calling right? (sorry no link! lol) Maybe Manning just needs a coach to do the calling for him?

 

[Donnybrook]

I sometimes forget how good Brady is. I think he is better than Manning at reading defenses and checking down to second and third receiver. Those may not be the skills that will make the highlight film but they sure help win playoff games.

 

[cstu]

Brady has had the advantage of being on a great defensive team, which helped him gain home field advantage.  If Manning had better defense that could get him home field in the playoffs, he'd be a near lock to make it to the Superbowl.

Here are the games Manning has lost in the playoffs:

1999 - Divisional loss @Indy

2000 - Wild card loss @Miami

2002 - Wild card loss @NYJ

2003 - Conference championship loss @NE

2004 - Divisional loss @NE

Manning has never scored more than 17 points OR thrown for more than 1 TD and lost a playoff game.Translation: It's not the defense that's hurting him. He's not losing playoff games 35-34.

He's not getting home field either. Look at the games Brady has played in the playoffs:2004

AFC Divisional Playoff: won 20 - 3 vs. Indianapolis Colts

2003

AFC Divisional Playoff: won 17 - 14 vs. Tennessee Titans

AFC Championship Game: won 24 - 14 vs. Indianapolis Colts

Super Bowl: won 32 - 29 vs. Carolina Panthers

2001

AFC Divisional Playoff: won 16 - 13 vs. Oakland Raiders

AFC Championship Game: won 24 - 17 at Pittsburgh Steelers Won by Bledsoe

Super Bowl: won 20 - 17 at St. Louis Rams

ONE Patriots playoff game was won on the road (2001 at the Steelers). Brady wasn't even the QB for most of the game and it was Bledsoe who came in during the 2nd quarter and won the game (people tend to forget this). Without Bledsoe, who knows if the Patriots would have won the game and enabled Brady to become such a "great" QB

 

[nerangers]

Trent Dilfer is no Tom Brady, but he played mistake free enough to earn a Super Bowl ring.

just so you know, the whole "trent dilfer" thing is getting pretty old. brady has won TWO sb's and has never lost a playoff game. please check dilfers stats and get back to me. tia.

As long as I have watched football I have never seen a mediocre team with a great quarterback win a Super Bowl. They only seem to be good enough to make the playoffs most of the time. But a great team with a mediocre quarterback wins the Super Bowl from time to time.I would classify New England as a great team with a very good quarterback. Manning is a great quarterback on a mediocre team.

There we go. Someone who sees the forest through the trees.

Maybe this should be clarified.The Colts offense - mediocre never comes to mind. We are talking Manning here and he is part of the offense. What that offense did this year was not mediocre. There Defense could use some work.We are talking Manning and Brady. So lets look at the Offense. Do you really think the Colts Offense is more mediocre then the Patriots Offense?No one is saying Manning is not a great player...but no one (but patriot fans) want to think that what Brady does makes him a great QB. Leadership should count for something.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Way too different teams to really make a good comparison.If I were starting a team from scratch, I'd much rather have Manning. And I'm a big Tom Brady fan.J

 

[bostonfred]

Trent Dilfer is no Tom Brady, but he played mistake free enough to earn a Super Bowl ring.

just so you know, the whole "trent dilfer" thing is getting pretty old. brady has won TWO sb's and has never lost a playoff game. please check dilfers stats and get back to me. tia.

Dilfer's Stats = 1 SB. That's all that matters, right? Super Bowl wins.Marino's Stats = 0 SBs. Dilfer's better under your criterion.

i dont remember mentioning marino in my post. please read my post again and get back to me.tia.

Nope, you didn't. But, using your logic, can you apply it consistently?I think prolly not.

Are you back to this straw man argument? Quarters are worth more than dollars. I can prove this because if I have ten quarters, that's worth more than two dollars. You can't prove to me that dollars are worth more than quarters unless they are ALWAYS better than quarters.

Your 22 starters were better than the Colts 22 starters. I'm not sure what's so confusing about this.

That's a different argument. Your Dilfer comparisons don't hold water, and you know it.

They're ultimately YOUR Dilfer comparisons. I'm not judging QB greatness on SB wins. Of course it's a ridiculous comparison. That's the point you guys don't seem to understand (and, of course, never will, because you think the game is played 1-on-1 QB v. QB).

People will continue to question the intellectual seriousness of your argument until you find a single post in this thread whose sole method for evaluating QB success is SB wins.

 

[Joe Bryant]

No one is saying Manning is not a great player...but no one (but patriot fans) want to think that what Brady does makes him a great QB. Leadership should count for something.

Hi NE,I'm not sure I understand. I don't know anyone who doesn't think Brady's a great QB.J

 

[Spartans Rule]

Thank you for illustrating my point--you Brady guys ignore everything except Super Bowl wins when evaluating a QB. You don't have an appreciation for well-coached teams; you ignore your own mastermind, Belichick.

That's what gets me - the Brady argument always centers around Patriots fans ignoring what a masterpiece their team is as a whole. So many excellent players and yet the whole is still far greater than the sum of its parts.The beauty of team sports is watching all the pieces come together. As a Detroit Pistons fan I know this well. I really don't even think we had a player who was in the top 5 at their position individually last year, but it was a thing of beauty to watch the way they fed off each other and made each other better.Football's even more of a team game than basketball, so it gets real silly when we start marking Ws and Ls next to individuals.

 

[cobalt_27]

No one is saying Manning is not a great player...but no one (but patriot fans) want to think that what Brady does makes him a great QB. Leadership should count for something.

Hi NE,I'm not sure I understand. I don't know anyone who doesn't think Brady's a great QB.J

He's a terrific QB. I'm not sure anyone is disputing that here.

 

[NFL Sunday Ticket]

If an NFL GM knew they would have a great defense with great coaches they would certainly take Brady IF they had to.  But leave it to Pats fans to give Brady credit for every win when all he did today was not screw it up.  Trent Dilfer is no Tom Brady, but he played mistake free enough to earn a Super Bowl ring.

I don't like the Dilfer analogy at all. Brady has NEVER lost a playoff game - he's been money the last three out of four regular seasons. Two time SB MVP. This guy is on a trajectory right now to be one of the best ever. No idea where he'll end up, but you can't deny how special this guy is RIGHT NOW.Troy Aikman feels more appropriate an analogy at the moment, and if Brady wins another SB this year, I feel Montana comparisons will merit serious consideration.

I always think that's a misleading statistic. The Patriots missed the playoffs in 2002 because Brady got terribly outplayed by Chad Pennington in the second to last game of the season. If you ask me, that was a "playoff" game.

Here are the stats, week 16:Brady: 19/37, 133 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT

Pennington: 23/33, 285 yards, 3 TD, 0 INT

congrats on finding the stats from chads last great game.....

 

[Joe Bryant]

No one is saying Manning is not a great player...but no one (but patriot fans) want to think that what Brady does makes him a great QB.  Leadership should count for something.

Hi NE,I'm not sure I understand. I don't know anyone who doesn't think Brady's a great QB.J

He's a terrific QB. I'm not sure anyone is disputing that here.

That's what I think too, Cobalt.NE rangers said no one wants to think what Brady does makes him a great QB. I think everyone thinks he's a great qb. J

 

[cobalt_27]

Trent Dilfer is no Tom Brady, but he played mistake free enough to earn a Super Bowl ring.

just so you know, the whole "trent dilfer" thing is getting pretty old. brady has won TWO sb's and has never lost a playoff game. please check dilfers stats and get back to me. tia.

As long as I have watched football I have never seen a mediocre team with a great quarterback win a Super Bowl. They only seem to be good enough to make the playoffs most of the time. But a great team with a mediocre quarterback wins the Super Bowl from time to time.I would classify New England as a great team with a very good quarterback. Manning is a great quarterback on a mediocre team.

There we go. Someone who sees the forest through the trees.

Maybe this should be clarified.The Colts offense - mediocre never comes to mind. We are talking Manning here and he is part of the offense. What that offense did this year was not mediocre. There Defense could use some work.We are talking Manning and Brady. So lets look at the Offense. Do you really think the Colts Offense is more mediocre then the Patriots Offense?No one is saying Manning is not a great player...but no one (but patriot fans) want to think that what Brady does makes him a great QB. Leadership should count for something.

It does, and he is. You guys seem to think that just because Manning, as a QB is evaluated higher than Brady by most, that somehow that's saying Brady's not what he is: a terrific QB who plays solidly in pressure situations.He is all that.

 

[Chase Stuart]

If an NFL GM knew they would have a great defense with great coaches they would certainly take Brady IF they had to.  But leave it to Pats fans to give Brady credit for every win when all he did today was not screw it up.  Trent Dilfer is no Tom Brady, but he played mistake free enough to earn a Super Bowl ring.

I don't like the Dilfer analogy at all. Brady has NEVER lost a playoff game - he's been money the last three out of four regular seasons. Two time SB MVP. This guy is on a trajectory right now to be one of the best ever. No idea where he'll end up, but you can't deny how special this guy is RIGHT NOW.Troy Aikman feels more appropriate an analogy at the moment, and if Brady wins another SB this year, I feel Montana comparisons will merit serious consideration.

I always think that's a misleading statistic. The Patriots missed the playoffs in 2002 because Brady got terribly outplayed by Chad Pennington in the second to last game of the season. If you ask me, that was a "playoff" game.

Here are the stats, week 16:Brady: 19/37, 133 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT

Pennington: 23/33, 285 yards, 3 TD, 0 INT

congrats on finding the stats from chads last great game.....

Do you disagree that Brady played terribly in a "playoff-type" game? If Brady had some unbelievable ability to win in the playoffs, I would assume he would win in the game that would send his team either to the playoffs or home for the year.Funny you didn't have a problem when I ripped Manning in the post before

 

[murzman]

I would have to say both QB's are very good players. Peyton is easily the best passing QB in the league and he has all the stats to prove that. Brady is also a great QB whose stats are alright but miniscule in comparison to Manning. If you want to compare stats how can anyone argue that Brady is better than Manning. Yes, Brady has the 2 SB's however if you were a GM and you had a chance to start a franchise and the option was to have Manning being your starting QB or Brady who would you pick???........ I think the answer is easy. I am not saying that Brady isin't a great QB but you would be dumb to not take Peyton Manning. There is no fair way to decide who is better but if anyone believes that if you swap Peyton and Brady teams and Peyton could not have done what Brady has done and won those SB's you are clearly mistaken. Is Karl Malone not known as one of the greatest PF's to play the game of basketball because he has not won a championship??? I think the answer is no. Everyone seems to be viewing Brady as Michael Jordan esque while he simply benefitts from playing on a great team. Brady is great don't get me wrong but I take Peyton as my QB.

 

[yetiknight]

I will go on the record saying that Brady will go down as one of the all-time greats. I think he will take his team to another Super Bowl win this year. He will be a shoe-in for the HOF. This arguement will be alive and kicking when that happens as Manning will have his bust sitting within 10 feet or so of Brady's. If you are a fan of either team you should be very happy to be on one side or the other.

 

[NFL Sunday Ticket]

If an NFL GM knew they would have a great defense with great coaches they would certainly take Brady IF they had to.  But leave it to Pats fans to give Brady credit for every win when all he did today was not screw it up.  Trent Dilfer is no Tom Brady, but he played mistake free enough to earn a Super Bowl ring.

I don't like the Dilfer analogy at all. Brady has NEVER lost a playoff game - he's been money the last three out of four regular seasons. Two time SB MVP. This guy is on a trajectory right now to be one of the best ever. No idea where he'll end up, but you can't deny how special this guy is RIGHT NOW.Troy Aikman feels more appropriate an analogy at the moment, and if Brady wins another SB this year, I feel Montana comparisons will merit serious consideration.

I always think that's a misleading statistic. The Patriots missed the playoffs in 2002 because Brady got terribly outplayed by Chad Pennington in the second to last game of the season. If you ask me, that was a "playoff" game.

Here are the stats, week 16:Brady: 19/37, 133 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT

Pennington: 23/33, 285 yards, 3 TD, 0 INT

congrats on finding the stats from chads last great game.....

Do you disagree that Brady played terribly in a "playoff-type" game? If Brady had some unbelievable ability to win in the playoffs, I would assume he would win in the game that would send his team either to the playoffs or home for the year.Funny you didn't have a problem when I ripped Manning in the post before

man, you are up there with tommygunz with twisting info. we were talking PLAYOFF WINS. not what chase stuart decides is a "playoff-type" game. brady is undefeated in the playoffs. PERIOD.

 

[Spartans Rule]

If an NFL GM knew they would have a great defense with great coaches they would certainly take Brady IF they had to.  But leave it to Pats fans to give Brady credit for every win when all he did today was not screw it up.  Trent Dilfer is no Tom Brady, but he played mistake free enough to earn a Super Bowl ring.

I don't like the Dilfer analogy at all. Brady has NEVER lost a playoff game - he's been money the last three out of four regular seasons. Two time SB MVP. This guy is on a trajectory right now to be one of the best ever. No idea where he'll end up, but you can't deny how special this guy is RIGHT NOW.Troy Aikman feels more appropriate an analogy at the moment, and if Brady wins another SB this year, I feel Montana comparisons will merit serious consideration.

I always think that's a misleading statistic. The Patriots missed the playoffs in 2002 because Brady got terribly outplayed by Chad Pennington in the second to last game of the season. If you ask me, that was a "playoff" game.

Here are the stats, week 16:Brady: 19/37, 133 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT

Pennington: 23/33, 285 yards, 3 TD, 0 INT

congrats on finding the stats from chads last great game.....

Do you disagree that Brady played terribly in a "playoff-type" game? If Brady had some unbelievable ability to win in the playoffs, I would assume he would win in the game that would send his team either to the playoffs or home for the year.Funny you didn't have a problem when I ripped Manning in the post before

man, you are up there with tommygunz with twisting info. we were talking PLAYOFF WINS. not what chase stuart decides is a "playoff-type" game. brady is undefeated in the playoffs. PERIOD.

His point is completely valid.Tom Brady's team missed the playoffs because he played poorly in a big game. That's every bit as bad... no, worse actually... than losing a playoff game.

I mean, if missing the playoffs excuses you, I guess I might as well point out that Joey Harrington is undefeated in the playoffs. PERIOD.

 

[Rainbow Randolph]

Trent Dilfer is no Tom Brady, but he played mistake free enough to earn a Super Bowl ring.

just so you know, the whole "trent dilfer" thing is getting pretty old. brady has won TWO sb's and has never lost a playoff game. please check dilfers stats and get back to me. tia.

Dilfer's Stats = 1 SB. That's all that matters, right? Super Bowl wins.Marino's Stats = 0 SBs. Dilfer's better under your criterion.

That's so far fetched. Dilfer played with one of the 2 or 3 greatest defenses EVER. Not to mention a healthy Jamaal Lewis. Dan Marino was a great QB, sure. But much like Manning, they share the flaw of not being able to make things happen when the game falls apart. Brady and Montana, while not swift of foot, are at their best when the pocket collapses, when they need to buy time, when there is 2 minutes left, etc. They have all the intangibles. No one can make those arguments about Marino or Manning, because those guys collapse as soon as they can't get rid of the ball in less than 3 seconds. This means they can dominate by passing out of the pocket week-after-week, but when they get in the playoffs where the real defenses are, they can't get it done. There is no proof otherwise by either player. So while I acknowledge they are great pocket passers, they are not top 2 or 3 all time NFL QB's.

 

[BassNBrew]

Who's the better quarterback? Peyton Manning [ 19 ]   [39.58%] Tom Brady [ 28 ]   [58.33%]

This means one of two things...a) The Pats homers are out in force.b) The football knowledge around here is so weak that's I'll continue to dominate the competition for years.Parting shot Brady fans, if the Steelers win next week does that mean Big Ben is the best QB since he's never lost an NFL game? Hmmm...Rivers is 1-0 in games he's appear in.

 

[humans_being]

Week #16 in 2002 does not = the playoffs. How can you even argue that point?

 

[bostonfred]

No one is saying Manning is not a great player...but no one (but patriot fans) want to think that what Brady does makes him a great QB.  Leadership should count for something.

Hi NE,I'm not sure I understand. I don't know anyone who doesn't think Brady's a great QB.

J

He's a terrific QB. I'm not sure anyone is disputing that here.

Trent Dilfer is no Tom Brady, but he played mistake free enough to earn a Super Bowl ring.

just so you know, the whole "trent dilfer" thing is getting pretty old. brady has won TWO sb's and has never lost a playoff game. please check dilfers stats and get back to me. tia.

As long as I have watched football I have never seen a mediocre team with a great quarterback win a Super Bowl. They only seem to be good enough to make the playoffs most of the time. But a great team with a mediocre quarterback wins the Super Bowl from time to time.I would classify New England as a great team with a very good quarterback. Manning is a great quarterback on a mediocre team.

There we go. Someone who sees the forest through the trees.

One post where Manning is called a great QB, while Brady is called a very good QB, you call it a good posting. Now Joe says nobody's saying Brady's not a great QB, and you agree. What changed your mind?

 

[Chase Stuart]

Week #16 in 2002 does not = the playoffs. How can you even argue that point?

Because Brady played so poorly that he cost his team the playoffs--not unlike the way many feel Manning played today.the Patriots may win the super bowl three out of four years--but they MISSED the playoffs entirely in one year. The reason? With the season on the line (week 16) against the eventual AFC East Champions, on national TV, Brady played terribly.Does this make Brady a bad QB? Of course not. Does it make him any less good than he really is? Not one bit. But what it should do is make the people who think Brady can't lose a big game reconsider.

 

[LongDuckDong]

I always think that's a misleading statistic. The Patriots missed the playoffs in 2002 because Brady got terribly outplayed by Chad Pennington in the second to last game of the season. If you ask me, that was a "playoff" game.  Here are the stats, week 16:Brady: 19/37, 133 yards, 1 TD, 1 INTPennington: 23/33, 285 yards, 3 TD, 0 INT

You cherry-pick one game where Brady has a separated shoulder (this has been documented several places including Patriot Reign by Michael Holley) that was played three years ago, ignoring Brady then leading his team to victory the next week down 10 points to Miami with 3 minutes left which at the time kept the Pats alive in the playoff hunt (though Pennington playing another great game against GB ended NE's hope that year). You ignore Manning then being #####-slapped in Rd 1 of those same playoffs in an actual playoff game, I believe 41-0 by those same Jets, playing one of his worst games as a pro.And by the way, the Patriots missed the playoffs because their defense decided to stop tackling during that season - now, I know the same story can be told about Manning and this isn't really about Manning, but pinning the 2002 Patriots failures at the feet of Brady is outrageous given his regular season and postseason record throughout his career - which if you're confused at all, is a record of 55-14 including playoffs. That is total foolishness and a total and complete abortion of the facts. Seriously, thats Shannon Sharpe-esque and I don't say that lightly. Since you want to cherrypick stats, they also lost the week before aginst TEN in week 15 on MNF when the whole team decided not to show up to play. Obviously that means Brady isn't a big game QB as well. The issue with Peyton Manning is that two years in a row his defense has given him a chance to win games in the playoffs and he hasn't done it.

If Brady had some unbelievable ability to win in the playoffs, I would assume he would win in the game that would send his team either to the playoffs or home for the year.

Well, he's 7-0 in the playoffs with 2 Super Bowl rings. If thats not some ability to win in the playoffs, Im not sure what is. Much more convenient to pick one game played years ago.I have no way of evaluating Manning against Brady because Brady isn't asked to carry a team like Manning is and Im uncertain of what would happen if he was. Brady is asked not to lose games, Manning is asked to win them. When Brady was needed to win the STL Super Bowl and the CAR Super Bowl, he did so. Manning had the ball last year down one score against NE in the AFC Championship game and didn't do it - in some ways maybe that makes me think Brady, like Bradshaw and Montana and many others before him have some sort of innate ability to perform when even the great players around them (Marino or Manning, for 2) have difficulties in similar circumstances. Again, I don't know because I can't just substitute them into different teams like its a game of Madden and re-sim them. I just think any attack against either side is outrageous. I think Brady and the IND offense playing against Belichick and the NE defense would probably struggle as much or more as Indy has in these playoff games, but in no way does that mean that Brady isn't a stud, nor does it mean that Manning isnt one because of Indy's struggles. However, to the "Start a Team" question, I'd draft Bill Belichick in the first round and worry about QB later -anyone who beats that offense with Gay, Samuel, and Troy Brown as the corners is playing a game with which I am not familiar.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Week #16 in 2002 does not = the playoffs. How can you even argue that point?

Because Brady played so poorly that he cost his team the playoffs--not unlike the way many feel Manning played today.the Patriots may win the super bowl three out of four years--but they MISSED the playoffs entirely in one year. The reason? With the season on the line (week 16) against the eventual AFC East Champions, on national TV, Brady played terribly.Does this make Brady a bad QB? Of course not. Does it make him any less good than he really is? Not one bit. But what it should do is make the people who think Brady can't lose a big game reconsider.

Furthering the point...Jeff Hostetler was undefeated in playoff football. Until 1993, when he took a pretty mediocre Raiders team into the playoffs and lost. Had Brady not lost to the Jets, he would have taken a relatively average Pats team into the playoffs and lost.I don't know why some people think Tom Brady is not human.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I always think that's a misleading statistic. The Patriots missed the playoffs in 2002 because Brady got terribly outplayed by Chad Pennington in the second to last game of the season. If you ask me, that was a "playoff" game.  Here are the stats, week 16:Brady: 19/37, 133 yards, 1 TD, 1 INTPennington: 23/33, 285 yards, 3 TD, 0 INT

You cherry-pick one game where Brady has a separated shoulder (this has been documented several places including Patriot Reign by Michael Holley) that was played three years ago, ignoring Brady then leading his team to victory the next week down 10 points to Miami with 3 minutes left which at the time kept the Pats alive in the playoff hunt (though Pennington playing another great game against GB ended NE's hope that year). You ignore Manning then being #####-slapped in Rd 1 of those same playoffs in an actual playoff game, I believe 41-0 by those same Jets, playing one of his worst games as a pro.And by the way, the Patriots missed the playoffs because their defense decided to stop tackling during that season - now, I know the same story can be told about Manning and this isn't really about Manning, but pinning the 2002 Patriots failures at the feet of Brady is outrageous given his regular season and postseason record throughout his career - which if you're confused at all, is a record of 55-14 including playoffs.

If Brady had some unbelievable ability to win in the playoffs, I would assume he would win in the game that would send his team either to the playoffs or home for the year.

Well, he's 7-0 in the playoffs with 2 Super Bowl rings. If thats not some ability to win in the playoffs, Im not sure what is. Much more convenient to pick one game played years ago.I have no way of evaluating Manning against Brady because Brady isn't asked to carry a team like Manning is and Im uncertain of what would happen if he was. Brady is asked not to lose games, Manning is asked to win them. When Brady was needed to win the STL Super Bowl and the CAR Super Bowl, he did so. Manning had the ball last year down one score against NE in the AFC Championship game and didn't do it - in some ways maybe that makes me think Brady, like Bradshaw and Montana and many others before him have some sort of innate ability to perform when even the great players around them (Marino or Manning, for 2) have difficulties in similar circumstances. Again, I don't know because I can't just substitute them into different teams like its a game of Madden and re-sim them. I just think any attack against either side is outrageous. I think Brady and the IND offense playing against Belichick and the NE defense would probably struggle as much or more as Indy has in these playoff games, but in no way does that mean that Brady isn't a stud, nor does it mean that Manning isnt one because of Indy's struggles. However, to the "Start a Team" question, I'd draft Bill Belichick in the first round and worry about QB later -anyone who beats that offense with Gay, Samuel, and Troy Brown as the corners is playing a game with which I am not familiar.

Hey LongDuckDong,I'm not bashing Brady. For starters, I opened with TWO posts knocking Manning.Additionally, I never said Brady stunk or Brady wasn't great. I simply said I think it's a bit misleading to say Brady never lost a playoff game. While that's technically true, the statement implies that Brady always wins the big games. To be fair, that's not entirely true. He's lost one.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

Does anyone here think if Brady was on Indy and Manning on NE that Indy would have won the game?? I didn't think so.I think NE is a better TEAM, in fact I know it, they proved it again today. They played better D, and they ran the ball more effectively.Peyton Manning is a great, great player. Tom Brady is a very good player that plays his best games in big games, which is a credit to him.But if I were a captain back in middle school and lunchtime and I was picking players to be on my team, I'd pick Peyton Manning before I'd pick Brady. It just so happens that Brady plays on a team that's a little better than Peytons.

 

[LongDuckDong]

Chase - I edited my statement to be even harsher than previously so I just wanted to be fair since you responded before seeing my edits. My sole issue is with your analysis of week 16, 2002 and nothing else.

I simply said I think it's a bit misleading to say Brady never lost a playoff game. While that's technically true, the statement implies that Brady always wins the big games. To be fair, that's not entirely true. He's lost one.

Ummm, NO. He is 8-0 in do or die games as an NFL starter, including week 17, 2002. I cannot evaluate anything else because to do so would be to manipulate data to meet my needs rather than evaluate it objectively.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Chase - I edited my statement to be even harsher than previously so I just wanted to be fair since you responded before seeing my edits. My sole issue is with your analysis of week 16, 2002 and nothing else.

I simply said I think it's a bit misleading to say Brady never lost a playoff game. While that's technically true, the statement implies that Brady always wins the big games. To be fair, that's not entirely true. He's lost one.

Ummm, NO. He is 8-0 in do or die games as an NFL starter, including week 17, 2002. I cannot evaluate anything else because to do so would be to manipulate data to meet my needs rather than evaluate it objectively.

LDD,I'm not sure that you're really reading what I said. I never said Brady wasn't a good big game QB. I said he doesn't have some supernatural ability to win at will when the games matter most. There's a whole lot of gray in there.Of course, even if he was undefeated in big games (or all games) it wouldn't mean he had some supernatural ability. You only need to look across the field next weekend to see that.

 

[bostonfred]

Does anyone here think if Brady was on Indy and Manning on NE that Indy would have won the game?? I didn't think so.

I think Indy would have done better in this game if Brady were their QB instead of Manning. I don't know if they would have won.

 

[cstu]

Brady is a good QB, but here's the luck he has had in his playoff games:

2004

AFC Divisional Playoff: won 20 - 3 vs. Indianapolis Colts Pats rush for over 200 yards, hold Colts to 3 points

2003

AFC Divisional Playoff: won 17 - 14 vs. Tennessee Titans Vinitieri 46 YD FG to win

AFC Championship Game: won 24 - 14 vs. Indianapolis Colts 5 Colts turnovers

Super Bowl: won 32 - 29 vs. Carolina Panthers Vinitieri 41 YD FG to win

2001

AFC Divisional Playoff: won 16 - 13 vs. Oakland Raiders The "Tuck" game

AFC Championship Game: won 24 - 17 at Pittsburgh Steelers Won by Bledsoe

Super Bowl: won 20 - 17 at St. Louis Rams Vinitieri 48 YD FG to win

Also, his playoff stats are nothing spectacular:

Year Opp Result | CMP ATT PYD PTD INT | RSH YD TD

---------------------+--------------------------+-----------------

2001 oak .W,16-13 | 32 52 312 0 1 | 5 16 1

2001 pit ...W,24-17 | 12 18 115 0 0 | 2 3 0

*2001 ram W,20-17 | 16 27 145 1 0 | 1 3 0

2003 ten ..W,17-14 | 21 41 201 1 0 | 5 5 0

2003 ind ..W,24-14 | 22 37 237 1 1 | 5 1 0

*2003 car .W,32-29 | 32 48 354 3 1 | 2 12 0

2004 ind ...W,20-3 | 18 27 144 1 0 | 4 6 1

---------------------+--------------------------+-----------------

TOTAL ....... | 153 250 1508 7 3 | 24 46 2

 

[Hunterbeer]

I think Peyton Manning is a GREAT QB. That said, I voted for Brady because I think he has that "it" that makes a player special. I am not sure what exactly "it" is, or how it is defined, but I know it when I see it. Brady is simply a Big game player who does a masterful job of running his team.

Manning, thus far in his life, has lacked "it". How many National Titles did he win in college? Okay that is harsh, how many times did he beat arch-rival Florida? Zero. Then had to watch as Tee Martin came in the year after he left and did both with virtually the same cast of players.

I am not saying big games are ALL that define a QB, but you have to win a few of them don't you. At least Marino got his team to the Super Bowl.

 

[Chaz McNulty]

A similar question could be asked, "Was Aikmen better than Marino." I personally think Marino was way better than aikmen.

 

[scorchy]

Manning, thus far in his life, has lacked "it". How many National Titles did he win in college? Okay that is harsh, how many times did he beat arch-rival Florida? Zero. Then had to watch as Tee Martin came in the year after he left and did both with virtually the same cast of players.

I was going to say the same thing. And not only did Tee Martin beat Florida, he led Tennessee to an undefeated season and the national championship. In at least a couple of Manning's losses to UF, I'm not really sure you could say UF had a better team (like you can say with Colts/Pats). Manning just seemed to play tight. I mean, Manning obviously had much better skills than Danny Wuerrful, but I know who I would want QBing my college team, and isn't the guy with the NFL TD record. Sometimes players just know how to win, and I'd rather build a team around that.When I saw the sign at the NE game that read "0 for 6 at Foxboro," it reminded me of one at the swamp in Peyton's senior season (when he stated one of the reasons he didn't declare for the draft was that he wanted to beat the Gators): "You came back for this, Peyton?"

 

[jwvdcw]

No one will convince me that if Peyton was on the Patriots he wouldn't be as successful as Brady. Peyton is the better quarterback, Brady is on one of the greatest teams of the last twenty years.Capice?

"one of the greatest teams of the last twenty years" was 5-11 IIRC the year before Brady took over and they were 0-2 and a doulbe digit underdog AT HOME in week 3 when Brady took over...then they became a dynasty with Brady.

 

[Barry]

If the league collapsed, and all the teams decided to start from scratch, Manning would be the first QB picked.GM's should be judged by championships, not QB's.

 

[Gargoylez]

Its no wonder minus the Superbowl wins, Brady hasn't really won anything on his own.Raiders should of went to the Bowl the first year on a crap-### call.Teh Patriots breezed through the playoffs last year pretty much... whether or not they had Brady...Don;t get me wrong, Brady is an excellent quarterback. But take away the team and look at JUSt the QB's. Marino... oh I mean Manning is by far the better all around QB.Until Manning can go on Defense and stop people or Brady actually is on a team with a poor defense, no one can tell me one is better then the other over-all.I would take Manning 100 times, just because he can win despite the team around him. Brady is somewhat a product of the system. You could plug in a good 4-5 QB's and get the same results IMO.

 

[djcolts]

Does anyone here think if Brady was on Indy and Manning on NE that Indy would have won the game?? I didn't think so.

I think Indy would have done better in this game if Brady were their QB instead of Manning. I don't know if they would have won.

So, Brady would have been sooooo good that the Colts receivers would not have dropped so many passes, Edge would have ran for more than 40 yards, and the Colts LBs would have played in the same ballpark as the Pats' LBs? Plus, the Colts D would have actually held the Pats to less than 100 yards rushing instead of the 200+ they got? Really?

 

[Gargoylez]

No one will convince me that if Peyton was on the Patriots he wouldn't be as successful as Brady. Peyton is the better quarterback, Brady is on one of the greatest teams of the last twenty years.Capice?

"one of the greatest teams of the last twenty years" was 5-11 IIRC the year before Brady took over and they were 0-2 and a doulbe digit underdog AT HOME in week 3 when Brady took over...then they became a dynasty with Brady.

Panthers were 4-12 the year before...Ravens were 7-9 year before they won...Patriots also went 8-8 or 9-7 inbetween superbowl years... but I bet that wasn't Brady's fault THEN huh?Bottom Line.Brady is a great QB. But he has a much better team around him as a whole then Manning does, not to mention maybe the best strategic coach(s) to ever be in the NFL.They became a Dynasty because of Belicheck... not any one player. Definately not Brady.