This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
If you mean in the 4th quarter, no. He has not. But that can be a goofy stat, as after the Patriots blew that 4th quarter lead in the Super Bowl vs Carolina, Brady did lead them to a TD to give them a 29-22 lead (after trailing 22-21), but because the defense let Carolina tie it up, and the Patriots then won it on a FG at the end, he didn't technically lead them to a GW TD.
This thread is a year old. Some jackhole bumped it.
What a jerk, they could have bumped one of the four from this season.
Well it wasn't game winning but he did throw the go ahead TD against the Giants late in the 4th Q (with something like 3 min left). Obviously they lost that game.
Just seemed to be an unfair standard to hold Manning to, down by 1, to have to score a touchdown to be "Tom Brady good." All of Brady's famous playoff plays seem to be setting up FGs. Against Oak, STL, TEN, CAR, SDG, Brady led his team to FGs to win the game, not TDs. The Rams and Panthers were walk-offs, IIRC, but the Oak FG only forced OT, the Titans had a chance to win at the end, and the Chargers lined up for a game-tying FG right after the Pats one. So in those three circumstances, identical to what Manning had last night, Brady led his team to a FG and they won. (But I agree it's a goofy stat.)
In the 2001 playoffs, down 13-3 against the Raiders, Brady led them to a TD, which he ran in himself, then game tying and game winning field goal attempts. In the 2003 Superbowl, down 22-21 against the Panthers, Brady threw to go-ahead TD pass and threw the two point conversion to put them ahead 29-22 midway through the fourth quarter, then led them to a game winning field goal.
First of all, the standard isn't "Tom Brady good". It's "Peyton Manning great". That's the question in the thread - will his reputation suffer from another one and done in the playoffs. After all, he's supposedly one of the top ten NFL players of all time. Was yesterday's performance indicative of him being a top ten player in NFL history? Not to me it wasn't. Second of all, "Tom Brady good" would have been jumping out to a big lead. That's what Brady and the Patriots have done consistently in their years of postseason success. But if Manning couldn't do that, then when he's down in the red zone, down four points, and settles for a field goal, putting the onus on his defense to get the stop with five minuntes left, then gets that stop from the D, so he has a chance to lead them to a win, then when he needs just one more first down to put the game away and get a managable field goal distance, it would be swell if he could get it instead of leaving a minute on the clock and putting everything on Vinatieri to hit a 50 yard attempt and the defense to get another stop. Manning had plenty of opportunities throughout the game to be "great". Instead, he was "OK". And that's why they lost. It wasn't the defensive failures or the receivers dropping balls or Addai only getting 4.6 YPC. It was Manning's mediocre game. It might not seem fair to hold him to a standard of "great", but this was another game where he had a chance to improve his legacy as one of the "great" QBs in NFL history, and he didn't do it. In a vacuum, this one game isn't enough to say he's not great. But in thirteen seasons, we haven't seen much greatness from Manning in the postseason. He's had 19 chances and he's won less than half of them. Yesterday is just one game, but it's a game that falls on the "not so great" side of the debate.
Interesting point from before the end of the game.Go deep said:
To be fair, he led them to the go-ahead FG after we typed that. Not Peyton's fault the Colts allowed a 47-yard kickoff return following the FG.
You couldn't be more wrong.Yesterday, the Jets scored 17 points. If someone is trying to declare Manning as the Greatest of All Time, than he is going to be held to an UNBELIEVABLY high standard. Sorry, this isn't backyard football where your dad tries to make you feel good for giving it your best effort. This is the NFL and Manning consistently FAILS in the playoffs.You can try to spin it any way you can, but Manning only had to put 18 on the board and he failed. His defense played PLENTY good enough to win the game. Plenty. He failed. Is it all his fault? Of course not. But he didn't put the field goal on the board either, Vinatieri did. Manning failed to get Vinatieri any closer than 50 yards.Then lets go back and look at his other playoff losses:In the super bowl, he threw an INT to give the Saints the win. He also only put 17 points on the board. Not what you'd expect from the Greatest of All Time.2 years ago, he didn't throw a pick....but again, he only put up 17 points in a 23-17 loss. Manning can put up stats, but in these playoff losses, he just isn't able to get it done. 3 years ago, he did throw for 400 yards, but he also threw 2 tough picks and lost a game by 4 points.If you want the title of Greatest of All Time, you have to do unbelievable things under pressure and win championships. That's just how the sporting world is. Manning has not played great in his playoff losses. It's not as if he is throwing up 35 points but has a defense that can't stop anyone. In his last THREE playoff losses, he has only scored 17 points. That's terrible and it's on him.Now this doesn't mean he's a bad QB and it doesn't mean he isn't a great QB.But he consistently fails in the playoffs, and so he cannot be considered the greatest of all time....unless he can put it together towards the end of his career and get him a few more rings.Lebron James might be the most physically talented player in NBA history, but he will NEVER approach Michael Jordan territory unless he wins championships.If you want to be GOAT, you better make it happen in the playoffs.Give me a break. Unsurprisingly, the Patriots 3 super bowl wins came in their 3 best defensive seasons. Statistically, there is a near 100% positive correlation between the play of the defense and the New England Super Bowl victories. There is a near 0 correlation between the play of Tom Brady and the New England Super Bowl Victories. I believe someone ran the numbers before that the NE super bowl wins came in their 1st, 3rd, and 4th best seasons defensively during Brady's career. Meanwhile they came in Brady's 3rd, 7th, and 8th best seasons.When the defense plays poorly, the Patriots don't even make the playoffs at all.I think that Tom Brady is a great quarterback. He has the best vision of any QB I've ever seen. But let's be honest here, it takes more than a QB to win Super Bowls and the Patriots *only* win Super Bowls when they have a great defense, as is true with most teams. That is a luxury Manning has never had.
I notice that you neglected to mention how many Brady put up the first time they played. Why is that?
'cuz that was an away game.
seems you need to dig deep to find such posts. ive only seen his posts denigrate manning and elevate brady.
This Manning-bashing is beyond stupid. Pick a quarterback, any quarterback, and I can cherry-pick certain games or playoff runs from their career and make them look bad. Let's start with your man Tom Brady. Care to look at Brady's four-turnover performance at home in the playoffs last season? Maybe his mediocre 260 yard, one TD performance (including a failed last-minute drive in which he didn't complete a single pass) in losing the biggest game of his life? How about his choking dog second half vs. the Colts in 2006, when he allowed the Colts to come from behind 21-3 and twice failed to put the ball in the end zone from the red zone in the 4th quarter? Or the game immediately before that one, when he threw three picks and had a 57.6 passer rating and almost let a clearly inferior San Diego team steal the game?Manning is a great quarterback. His regular numbers take a slight dip in the postseason because of the increased level of competition, but that's not unusual, and they're still pretty good. You're better than this, bostonfred.bostonfred said:I agree with this, but it's a bit oversimplified. If Manning had put up huge games but been let down by his defense in those games, it would be wrong to blame Manning for his playoff record. But getting shut out against the Jets, throwing four picks vs New England, scoring three points against New England after his 49 TD season, throwing a game ending pick six in the Superbowl, throwing three TDs vs seven INTs in his one Superbowl season, repeatedly choking against Pittsburgh, and another mediocre game tonight - this is no longer a case of him playing well but being let down by his team. Looking at his playoff record in a vacuum, you might conclude that Manning had been let down by the Colts. But the opposite is true. The Colts have repeatedly been let down by Manning. He deserves credit for getting them to the playoffs again and again, but that's what he is - a dominant regular season QB.I just meant that Marino is still thrown out there as some as the best ever, or one of the best, but many will never give him that moniker because of his playoff failings. I personally would rank Manning ahead of Marino and Fouts, but remember this is an era of the passer where we're also going to have to slot Brady and Favre into that conversation. Brady is 14-4 (and counting) with 3 rings in 4 tries, Favre is 13-11 with 1 ring in 2 tries. It matters.How could you possibly put him in the Marino/Fouts camp when Peyton won a Super Bowl?
Greatest myth in football right there.Brady has never had "less" than Manning... just different areas of strength and weakness on the teams.Brady has for the most part of their careers, been on far better "teams" - but Manning is the better QB if you put both side by side in a vacuum.Oh stop it. Brady has done far more with far less, and it's not even close.With everything else being equal, Manning easily. Now if i get that players team/coach, you may have a point.Yeah, I'll take Brady.No matter what happens here, there isnt another QB i would rather have in this situation.We're gonna see what he's made of in the last ten minutes here.
Actually, yesterday Manning led the team to the lead with little time left in the 4th, all the Colts defense had to do was hold the Jets out of FG range , and they failed. The Colts were missing nearly all their starting DBs, and the commentators mentioned time and again how they could only run vanilla defenses against the Jets due to the inexperience in the Colts defensive backfield.If anything, the refs decided the game when they gave that ridiculous first down to the Jets on that great "acting job" by the punter.Blaming the loss on Peyton is about as ridiculous as it gets.You couldn't be more wrong.Yesterday, the Jets scored 17 points. If someone is trying to declare Manning as the Greatest of All Time, than he is going to be held to an UNBELIEVABLY high standard. Sorry, this isn't backyard football where your dad tries to make you feel good for giving it your best effort. This is the NFL and Manning consistently FAILS in the playoffs.Give me a break. Unsurprisingly, the Patriots 3 super bowl wins came in their 3 best defensive seasons. Statistically, there is a near 100% positive correlation between the play of the defense and the New England Super Bowl victories. There is a near 0 correlation between the play of Tom Brady and the New England Super Bowl Victories. I believe someone ran the numbers before that the NE super bowl wins came in their 1st, 3rd, and 4th best seasons defensively during Brady's career. Meanwhile they came in Brady's 3rd, 7th, and 8th best seasons.When the defense plays poorly, the Patriots don't even make the playoffs at all.I think that Tom Brady is a great quarterback. He has the best vision of any QB I've ever seen. But let's be honest here, it takes more than a QB to win Super Bowls and the Patriots *only* win Super Bowls when they have a great defense, as is true with most teams. That is a luxury Manning has never had.
Settle down with the "beyond stupid", "you're better than this", and accusations of cherry picking. You've disagreed with me on this topic before, so you're not really breaking new ground by voicing your disagreement more strenuously or personally. I've never claimed that Brady is infallible, or that he's perfectly clutch. I've never claimed that Manning is a total failure, either. We're looking at 19 postseason games of history for Manning, and 18 and counting for Brady. It's perfectly understandable for there to be some fluctuation in those games - there will be highs and lows.There's no cherry picking needed to see that the Colts have a 9-10 record with Manning at the helm, and that Manning's had some terrible games in the postseason. Those are facts. Manning has lost 10 of those games. In those ten losses, he's had bad performances like getting shut out, throwing four picks, leading the 49 TD passing offense to three points, losing the Steelers game on three consecutive drives, including the huge gift from Bettis fumbling on the goal line, andd more. He's also had poor individual performances in wins - like three INTs against the Chiefs and two more against the Ravens when the defense held them to 8 and 6 points, respectively - and he's had some decent performances in losses. He's had some mediocre numbers, like his 225 yard, 1 TD performance where he had several chances at the end of the game to win it. Has Brady been perfect in every postseason game he's played? Of course not. He's helped the Pats jump out to some big leads, and win in poor conditions, and he's led some substantial comebacks or game winning drives. You've pointed out a couple games that Brady won despite throwing picks - that's true. And even in the wins, Brady hasn't put up huge numbers, although he's generally playing outdoors in January, as opposed to Manning playing a lot of games in a dome. But this isn't just about the stats. At one point, both of these guys appeared to have legitimate claims to being the greatest quarterback of all times. Manning set the TD record and won the MVPs, but "couldn't win the big one". Brady won three Superbowls in his first four years as a starter, but some said he was a "game manager" who would never put up the big numbers. Then Manning won a Superbowl, and went to another, while Brady broke Manning's touchdown record and set the interception record and won a couple MVPs. This is one of the most intriguing races of our times. It's natural to compare the two. And the scales have tipped in Brady's favor over the last four years. Brady's put up better regular season numbers over the last few years, winning a pair of MVPs, setting passing records, and leading the league in TDs. Those are outstanding accomplishments - he's out Manninging Manning. And he's doing it despite losing a season to an ACL injury and then losing one of his top receivers to an ACL the following year. Where's Manning's outstanding accomplishment in the same span? He's gone to the playoffs four times in the last four years - and led his team to three first round losses and a Superbowl where he threw a game ending pick six. Some QBs would kill for those numbers. But if we're talking about Manning as one of the all time greats, we hold him to a higher standard. Brady's set the standard for this generation of QBs in the postseason. But he's also setting the standard for this generation of QBs with his regular season numbers. If it seems like I'm holding Manning to an absurdly high standard by blaming him for not getting that last first down, to give Vinatieri a shorter field goal and keep the ball out of Sanchez' hands, or for failing to convert in the red zone on the drive before it, or for a generally mediocre 225 yard, 1 TD performance, then that should be flattering to Manning - it means we're talking about him like someone who has a chance to be considered an all time great. It's a shame he's been wasting those chances recently.
Bash Brady till week 12 be part of the majority, Bash Manning ever and your part of the minority.This Manning-bashing is beyond stupid. Pick a quarterback, any quarterback, and I can cherry-pick certain games or playoff runs from their career and make them look bad. Let's start with your man Tom Brady. Care to look at Brady's four-turnover performance at home in the playoffs last season? Maybe his mediocre 260 yard, one TD performance (including a failed last-minute drive in which he didn't complete a single pass) in losing the biggest game of his life? How about his choking dog second half vs. the Colts in 2006, when he allowed the Colts to come from behind 21-3 and twice failed to put the ball in the end zone from the red zone in the 4th quarter? Or the game immediately before that one, when he threw three picks and had a 57.6 passer rating and almost let a clearly inferior San Diego team steal the game?Manning is a great quarterback. His regular numbers take a slight dip in the postseason because of the increased level of competition, but that's not unusual, and they're still pretty good. You're better than this, bostonfred.bostonfred said:I agree with this, but it's a bit oversimplified. If Manning had put up huge games but been let down by his defense in those games, it would be wrong to blame Manning for his playoff record. But getting shut out against the Jets, throwing four picks vs New England, scoring three points against New England after his 49 TD season, throwing a game ending pick six in the Superbowl, throwing three TDs vs seven INTs in his one Superbowl season, repeatedly choking against Pittsburgh, and another mediocre game tonight - this is no longer a case of him playing well but being let down by his team. Looking at his playoff record in a vacuum, you might conclude that Manning had been let down by the Colts. But the opposite is true. The Colts have repeatedly been let down by Manning. He deserves credit for getting them to the playoffs again and again, but that's what he is - a dominant regular season QB.I just meant that Marino is still thrown out there as some as the best ever, or one of the best, but many will never give him that moniker because of his playoff failings. I personally would rank Manning ahead of Marino and Fouts, but remember this is an era of the passer where we're also going to have to slot Brady and Favre into that conversation. Brady is 14-4 (and counting) with 3 rings in 4 tries, Favre is 13-11 with 1 ring in 2 tries. It matters.How could you possibly put him in the Marino/Fouts camp when Peyton won a Super Bowl?
This is what I mean when I say you go too far with the biased homer talk. Lost one of this top WRs to an ACL the following year? Yeah, he lost Welker in week 17.
If I'm going "too far with the biased homer talk", then tell me which part you take exception with. Is it the fact that Welker went out with an ACL?This is what I mean when I say you go too far with the biased homer talk. Lost one of this top WRs to an ACL the following year? Yeah, he lost Welker in week 17.
It's no. Pro Football Reference credits Brady with 32 game-winning drives, six of them occurring in playoff games. All six were field goal drives. Manning has 46 game-winning drives, only one of which came during a playoff game. It was for a touchdown.massraider said:
You do realize the Colts have won and been to more Super Bowls than the Patriots within the last 5 years, right? Manning has a ring... HTH
But they have both been in the league for 10 years.
This is just more cherry-picking. First you look at career-long lists of achievements in evaluating playoff performance, then you look at only "the last few years" to evaluate the regular season production. Not surprisingly, if you flip this and compare playoff performance over the last few years and their entire careers' worth of regular season accomplishments, Manning comes out well ahead on both counts. When you cherry-pick like that you invalidate your arguments completely. Just stop cherry-picking and compare data fairly and you'll see that they're very similar quarterbacks with very similar levels of production both in the regular season and in the postseason. And that they're easily two of the best ever, not merely people who "have the chance to be considered an all time great." Anything other than that- about what Brady would have done on the Colts, or what Manning would have done on the Patriots, or whether one's clutch drives are clutchier than the others, or one's postseason chokes are chokier than the others- is pure conjecture.
I think you and ghost rider are both reading things into what I say. Of course I compared their whole careers. Mannings has 4 MVPs and a Superbowl MVP. He has the second best passing season ever. He's got a Superbowl ring. He's been incredible in the regular season, but not in the playoffs. Brady, with two MVPs, two Superbowl MVPs, the best passing season ever, and three rings is pretty outstanding, too. Manning is 9-10 in the playoffs. Brady is 14-4 and counting. But Manning will likely set numerous career passing records. The reason I point out the last few years is that we're looking at the numbers of a guy who prepared from day one to be the starter vs. a guy who started week three. A guy who has played 13 years vs a guy who has eight seasons starting. A guy who has played with hall of famers on offense vs. a guy who has played with less offensive talent but better coaching. The narrative for Brady's first four years was the game manager who got three rings, and that was where a lot of these arguments started.But what gets lost in that is that in the second half of his career so far, he has put up numbers that are actually better than Manning's. That's exceptional. When I point out that Brady led the league in TDs this year - for the third time in his career - while setting the interception record, that's not just to say that he's good this year, it's to say that Brady has taken that step forward that proves he is capable of doing the kinds of things Manning has done. Manning, on the other hand, has not proven that he can do what Brady has done. That's a very relevant point in comparing these two.
When is the last time the Patriots had more post season success than the Colts "over the last four years."
You are delusional if you really believe all of this....Brady has NOT put up better regular season numbers over the last few years. Manning has more yards every season except one, better completion percentage in all but one season, they've split the TD passes, Manning better in 2, Brady better in 2, in fact in 2009 Manning was better in nearly every category... I'm sure you'll excuse Brady due to him recovering from knee surgery, but when Manning has recovered from knee surgery it hasn't seemed to hurt him at all.I also love the fact you cut it off at 4 years, is that because the Colt won the SB 5 years ago?
How do you figure? He's proven himself capable of winning a Super Bowl. He's proven himself capable of coming back from large deficits in the playoffs (something Brady actually hasn't done to my knowledge). He's proven himself capable of late 4th quarter drives to tie or take the lead. He's proven himself capable of posting huge numbers. What exactly has Brady done that Manning has not, other than be fortunate enough to be on a team that has had more postseason success despite their playing the position at a virtually identical level during the playoffs? I assume you can acknowledge that there are many things outside of the QB's control that affect an outcome, and that these things have favored the Pats more than the Colts in the last decade, but if you need proof, look no further than two days ago and Caldwell's idiotic TO that gave the Jets a chance to turn a long GW field goal into a short one.
You keep saying this but it's wrong... Brady has the most passing TDs in a season, but not the best passing season.Best passer rating season belongs to Manning, Brady is #2.
I love the fact that you claim Manning had more TD passes in two of the last four years. That must have been difficult the year Brady missed.And is Manning has better numbers this year, then why isn't he in the conversation for MVP? This is the kind of naked bias that you're talking about, Ghost Rider/Tobias. This isn't what I'm doing.
Ummm... I didn't say Manning had better numbers this year, did I?And I love how you think Brady missing a season due to injury should just be shrugged off... one of the great things about Manning (and Favre) is that he's an iron man who rarely, if ever, misses time due to injury.
Yes, that 14-2 Charger team with their 4th ranked offense and 10th ranked defense and league MVP were "clearly inferior" to the 12-4 Pats with their 11 ranked offense and 6th ranked defense. The Chargers were only 8-0 at home up to that point.
It kind of is, though. See for example cherry-picking the last four years of regular season results but their entire careers' worth of postseason results. Pick one set of data or the other, or both, but don't pick one set for your regular season stat comparison and the other for your postseason success comparison.
How many would Brady have had if he played half of his games indoors during his record breaking year? It's likely he would have added 2 or 3 more TD's over those 8 games.
Thanks for the correction. Do you think the Patriots win that game if Brady has even a mediocre day against that tenth-ranked defense? I don't. I think if 51 pass attempts produce less than 300 yards and three INTs along with two short TDs (neither longer than six yards), the responsibility for the loss falls primarily to the passing game. Not that even that matters- the broader point is that both players have had some great, some bad and some OK playoff games, and that their career playoff numbers are virtually identical. The fact that Brady's team has a better record in those games is due mostly to factors outside of the two QB's control.Yes, that 14-2 Charger team with their 4th ranked offense and 10th ranked defense and league MVP were "clearly inferior" to the 12-4 Pats with their 11 ranked offense and 6th ranked defense. The Chargers were only 8-0 at home up to that point.
Not sure it would have, given his dome games that season weren't any better than his "outside" games.I'm pretty sure not playing is quite different than playing inside versus outside. Nice try though.
No, you said "Brady has NOT put up better regular season numbers over the last few years. Manning has more yards every season except one, better completion percentage in all but one season, they've split the TD passes, Manning better in 2, Brady better in 2, in fact in 2009 Manning was better in nearly every category... I'm sure you'll excuse Brady due to him recovering from knee surgery, but when Manning has recovered from knee surgery it hasn't seemed to hurt him at all."So if you're saying that Brady had the better numbers this year and in 2007, then saying that Brady has not put up better regular season numbers over the last few years is false or as juvenile as you claiming that Manning had more TD passes in two of the last four years, counting the one Brady was out. Brady has 114 TDs the last four years despite missing a full season. Manning has 124 in four full seasons. Brady led the league in TDs twice in that span - and it wasn't like he was just throwing the ball on the stripe, as the Pats were the highest scoring team in the NFL both of those times. And he did this while throwing fewer INTs and did all of this while playing his home games outdoors in a cold weather city. And since you mentioned QB rating, it's worth mentioning that for his career, Brady has a better QB rating outdoors than Manning does. Of course, Brady also has a better QB rating indoors than Manning. The only reason Manning is even close in career QB rating is that he plays his home games indoors. So the crux of your point seems to be that Brady got hurt once. That's a fair point, but you don't have to hide it by trying to fluff about Manning's numbers. As for the reason I picked the last four years, there are a couple reasons. First, in 2006, Brady was throwing to a receiving corps led by Reche Caldwell. The improvement in talent at WR to something closer to the level Manning has enjoyed throughout his career led to a notable and predictable increase in Brady's numbers. And despite your past protestations, we now know that it wasn't just Moss, because we saw Brady put up MVP caliber numbers without him, or Welker, because this was Welker's worst year as a Patriot. Second, it's not cherry picking to show a span of Brady's career in which he outperformed Manning. I think eveyone, including me, gives Manning credit for putting up big regular season numbers for an extended period of time. The question in comparing the two was whether Brady was capable of putting up the same kind of numbers. And he's answered that question by doing it repeatedly. A reasonable response to this would be "That's fine, but a long span of statistical dominance is impressive, too". Or maybe, "True, but Manning has an ironman streak". An unreasonable response would be "Manning has thrown more TDs in two of the last four seasons", or "Manning threw for more yards in 2008". If you have a strong argument, you don't need to try to make these kinds of points.
I don't understand the question, Brady had a poor day, conceded, and they won. So yes, I think if he had upgraded to a mediocre day they would have won. As far as the lengths of his TD pases, Brady hit Reche Caldwell for a 49 yard gain on 3 and 10 from his own 34 with about 2:30 left in the game. It was a hugely clutch play given the scenario. It wasn't a 65 yard touchdown only because Caldwell couldn't keep his balance running all alone down the sideline after the defender had vainly lunged for the 40 yard strike from Brady. His eyes must have sloshed to one side of his head and drug him out of bounds. They had to settle for a figgie.Thanks for the correction. Do you think the Patriots win that game if Brady has even a mediocre day against that tenth-ranked defense? I don't. I think if 51 pass attempts produce less than 300 yards and three INTs along with two short TDs (neither longer than six yards), the responsibility for the loss falls primarily to the passing game.Yes, that 14-2 Charger team with their 4th ranked offense and 10th ranked defense and league MVP were "clearly inferior" to the 12-4 Pats with their 11 ranked offense and 6th ranked defense. The Chargers were only 8-0 at home up to that point.
I'm okay with this.
