Will Peyton Manning's reputation suffer (1 Viewer)

[CalBear]

But you're right about the run game. Manning had a pair of first round picks running the ball, but Brady had the benefit of elite talents like Lawrence Maroney, BenJarvus Green-Ellis, and a couple games from a Favre-aged Fred Taylor.

Maroney and Taylor are both first-round picks, and in fact, both higher picks than Addai and Brown.

 

[shortbow]

...

As for your case that their postseason total numbers are similar, I responded to that above. Manning has had some fantastic postseason games, when he romped Denver twice to the tune of 49 points not once but twice. It's nice that he threw a bunch of TDs in a 49-10 blowout, but I'm sure he'd trade three of those TDs for just one in this last week's game. Manning's had a lot of those "stinkers" in the playoffs, and throwing for a garbage time TD in a blowout win doesn't magically even things out. I'd also much rather have a QB keep the game close, not throw picks, and score at the end, than a QB who would either be great or suck.

Brady's numbers have been steadier - fewer yards, fewer INTs. He rarely loses the game for his team. He keeps them in it, sometimes getting out to a big lead, other times making the big comeback at the end, but basically playing winning football. The numbers might not be as flashy, but the odds of winning are much better. About half of Manning's games have sucked, but half have been really good. And by sucked, I mean throwing multiple picks, or getting shut out, or throwing for under 200 yards. If Manning's going to suck in half his games, and be great in the other half, then the odds of him having three straight good games are about 1 in 8. Do you see why that is bad for his chances of winning a Superbowl? And, as I mentioned above, Manning had three of his worst games ever during the Superbowl run.

I stand by what I said. Manning has a meaningless TD or two in a blowout on his playoff resume. So does Brady. They each have a few stinkers, however you define it. I'm not gonna do some sophisticated statistical analysis to determine who deviates more from the mean, but spending a few minutes looking at the playoff careers of each, I don't see much difference. You could argue that Manning maybe has a couple more pure stinkers than Brady, but on the flip side, almost all of them came early in Manning's career (with one notable exception in a game that his team won despite his performance) while Brady has far more mediocre playoff games in the last five years. In the end, I think it all evens out. You obviously disagree, and short of running the sort of deviation analysis I mentioned before, there's really nothing I can do to convince you. And frankly, even that deviation analysis wouldn't mean much, because it wouldn't capture whether and how that deviation affected the team's result, i.e. whether the team would have won or lost without a great game or a stinker.

Win 3 superbowls in first 5 years, two best seasons ever in the last 5. Mediocre.

Sigh.I said more mediocre playoff games in the last five years- which is to some degree a matter of opinion, but I think it's pretty easy to demonstrate. How you translated that into me concluding that Brady was mediocre is beyond me. Especially after I stated clearly earlier in this very thread, maybe on this page, that I think Brady is easily one of the greatest of all time.

You don't do your fellow Patriots fans any favors with nonsensical posts like this.

Thats my point. Its not a reasonable comparison by any measurement. Beginning of Mannings career was typical (slow start, flashes of genius) and the beginning of Bradys career was far from typical (winning 3 superbowl with a very lackluster offense).But in the last 5 years Brady has: Went to the playoffs every year he played, had the best season ever in NFL history, completely tore his ACL, had his 2nd best personal season (not sure where it stands in comparison to the NFL)

So Manning started slow and then he won a superbowl and has since not been the same Manning.

But Brady started well and ahead of everyone else and has since not won a superbowl, but continued to be MORE successful then Manning.

 

[kyoun1e]

But you're right about the run game. Manning had a pair of first round picks running the ball, but Brady had the benefit of elite talents like Lawrence Maroney, BenJarvus Green-Ellis, and a couple games from a Favre-aged Fred Taylor.

Maroney and Taylor are both first-round picks, and in fact, both higher picks than Addai and Brown.

I think we can all agree that Maroney is arbuably one of NE's worst draft picks ever. Not first round talent. Taylor...yes...on first round talent, but old and retiring most likely.Can't think of many worse than Maroney. Maybe Kenneth Sims.KY

 

[shortbow]

But you're right about the run game. Manning had a pair of first round picks running the ball, but Brady had the benefit of elite talents like Lawrence Maroney, BenJarvus Green-Ellis, and a couple games from a Favre-aged Fred Taylor.

Maroney and Taylor are both first-round picks, and in fact, both higher picks than Addai and Brown.

But Marshall Faulk was drafted #2 overall, im sure thats who he was referring to.

 

[switz]

But you're right about the run game. Manning had a pair of first round picks running the ball, but Brady had the benefit of elite talents like Lawrence Maroney, BenJarvus Green-Ellis, and a couple games from a Favre-aged Fred Taylor.

Maroney and Taylor are both first-round picks, and in fact, both higher picks than Addai and Brown.

But Marshall Faulk was drafted #2 overall, im sure thats who he was referring to.

And Faulk and Manning played together how long? How Faulk is even in the picture when talking about Manning's career is beyond me... Faulk was a cancer on the Colts which is why they got rid of him.And if people want to use the draft position argument to say BJGE is less talented than Brown (who arguably is worse than Maroney) than they also need to say Brady is worse than Manning, since Brady was a 6th round pick. You can't have it both ways.

 

[TobiasFunke]

...

As for your case that their postseason total numbers are similar, I responded to that above. Manning has had some fantastic postseason games, when he romped Denver twice to the tune of 49 points not once but twice. It's nice that he threw a bunch of TDs in a 49-10 blowout, but I'm sure he'd trade three of those TDs for just one in this last week's game. Manning's had a lot of those "stinkers" in the playoffs, and throwing for a garbage time TD in a blowout win doesn't magically even things out. I'd also much rather have a QB keep the game close, not throw picks, and score at the end, than a QB who would either be great or suck.

Brady's numbers have been steadier - fewer yards, fewer INTs. He rarely loses the game for his team. He keeps them in it, sometimes getting out to a big lead, other times making the big comeback at the end, but basically playing winning football. The numbers might not be as flashy, but the odds of winning are much better. About half of Manning's games have sucked, but half have been really good. And by sucked, I mean throwing multiple picks, or getting shut out, or throwing for under 200 yards. If Manning's going to suck in half his games, and be great in the other half, then the odds of him having three straight good games are about 1 in 8. Do you see why that is bad for his chances of winning a Superbowl? And, as I mentioned above, Manning had three of his worst games ever during the Superbowl run.

I stand by what I said. Manning has a meaningless TD or two in a blowout on his playoff resume. So does Brady. They each have a few stinkers, however you define it. I'm not gonna do some sophisticated statistical analysis to determine who deviates more from the mean, but spending a few minutes looking at the playoff careers of each, I don't see much difference. You could argue that Manning maybe has a couple more pure stinkers than Brady, but on the flip side, almost all of them came early in Manning's career (with one notable exception in a game that his team won despite his performance) while Brady has far more mediocre playoff games in the last five years. In the end, I think it all evens out. You obviously disagree, and short of running the sort of deviation analysis I mentioned before, there's really nothing I can do to convince you. And frankly, even that deviation analysis wouldn't mean much, because it wouldn't capture whether and how that deviation affected the team's result, i.e. whether the team would have won or lost without a great game or a stinker.

Win 3 superbowls in first 5 years, two best seasons ever in the last 5. Mediocre.

Sigh.I said more mediocre playoff games in the last five years- which is to some degree a matter of opinion, but I think it's pretty easy to demonstrate. How you translated that into me concluding that Brady was mediocre is beyond me. Especially after I stated clearly earlier in this very thread, maybe on this page, that I think Brady is easily one of the greatest of all time.

You don't do your fellow Patriots fans any favors with nonsensical posts like this.

Thats my point. Its not a reasonable comparison by any measurement. Beginning of Mannings career was typical (slow start, flashes of genius) and the beginning of Bradys career was far from typical (winning 3 superbowl with a very lackluster offense).But in the last 5 years Brady has: Went to the playoffs every year he played, had the best season ever in NFL history, completely tore his ACL, had his 2nd best personal season (not sure where it stands in comparison to the NFL)

So Manning started slow and then he won a superbowl and has since not been the same Manning.

But Brady started well and ahead of everyone else and has since not won a superbowl, but continued to be MORE successful then Manning.

I honestly have no idea what point you're trying to make, nor how your previous post helps you make it.

If when you say "it's not a reasonable comparison by any measurement" you mean Brady vs. Manning is not a reasonable comparison by any measurement ... well then you're just 100% wrong. I can offer plenty of measurements by which Manning is better than Brady, just as I can offer plenty by which Brady is better than Manning. Heck, I can probably offer measurements by which Rex Grossman is better than both of them if I look hard enough. So you're just demonstrably wrong there.

Frankly, while I don't really know what point you're trying to make, the fact that you say Manning has not been the same since winning a Super Bowl doesn't do much for your credibility. He's been just about as good every regular season since then (his 101 passer rating in his Super Bowl year was followed by ratings of 98, 95 and 100), and his playoff numbers have been far better.

 

[switz]

Thats my point. Its not a reasonable comparison by any measurement. Beginning of Mannings career was typical (slow start, flashes of genius) and the beginning of Bradys career was far from typical (winning 3 superbowl with a very lackluster offense).

But in the last 5 years Brady has: Went to the playoffs every year he played, had the best season ever in NFL history, completely tore his ACL, had his 2nd best personal season (not sure where it stands in comparison to the NFL)

So Manning started slow and then he won a superbowl and has since not been the same Manning.

But Brady started well and ahead of everyone else and has since not won a superbowl, but continued to be MORE successful then Manning.

Brady didn't really start well ahead of everyone else as far as QB performance goes... he just happened to be on that team at the right time.2001 he threw 18 TDs and 12 INTs, he was a game manager. The only reason his INTs were low is because his rarely threw it more than 10 yards down the field.

As far as Manning "not being the same Manning since"...

The last two seasons are tied for Manning's second best career TD pass totals

2009 was Manning's best season in completion %, and tied for the team's best W/L record during his career

This year he passed for the most yards in his career, last season the third most (second most at the time)

Last season Manning's passer rating was better than every season's of Brady's outside Brady's record TD pass year

Oddly you use Brady's past 5 years in the playoffs as some sort of positive, yet you would spin Manning's success rate in the same time period as a sign of him choking. Manning has led the Colts to the playoffs the last 9 years straight, with one SuperBowl win and one loss. In the past 5 years, they have the same number of SB wins and losses, and Brady has only won one more playoff game out of the same amount of games played.

 

[bostonfred]

And Faulk and Manning played together how long? How Faulk is even in the picture when talking about Manning's career is beyond me... Faulk was a cancer on the Colts which is why they got rid of him.

Faulk had turf toe for a couple years in a row on losing Colts teams. He wasn't a cancer. The Colts let him go because of his age, injuries, and their ability to grab Edgerrin (or Ricky Williams) in the draft. The reason people mention Faulk when discussing Manning's career is that it addresses the wunderkind argument for Manning. Yes, Manning had an outstanding rookie season. His interceptions were high, but he put up big numbers right out of the gate. But part of the reason was that he was throwing to Marshall Faulk and Marvin Harrison, both hall of famers. And in his sophomore season, he had Edgerrin and Harrison to throw to. Having multiple HoF targets makes a huge difference and is a big reason Manning has accumulated the stats he has so far. It's not the only reason, but it's got to be part of the conversation.

 

[bostonfred]

...As for your case that their postseason total numbers are similar, I responded to that above. Manning has had some fantastic postseason games, when he romped Denver twice to the tune of 49 points not once but twice. It's nice that he threw a bunch of TDs in a 49-10 blowout, but I'm sure he'd trade three of those TDs for just one in this last week's game. Manning's had a lot of those "stinkers" in the playoffs, and throwing for a garbage time TD in a blowout win doesn't magically even things out. I'd also much rather have a QB keep the game close, not throw picks, and score at the end, than a QB who would either be great or suck. Brady's numbers have been steadier - fewer yards, fewer INTs. He rarely loses the game for his team. He keeps them in it, sometimes getting out to a big lead, other times making the big comeback at the end, but basically playing winning football. The numbers might not be as flashy, but the odds of winning are much better. About half of Manning's games have sucked, but half have been really good. And by sucked, I mean throwing multiple picks, or getting shut out, or throwing for under 200 yards. If Manning's going to suck in half his games, and be great in the other half, then the odds of him having three straight good games are about 1 in 8. Do you see why that is bad for his chances of winning a Superbowl? And, as I mentioned above, Manning had three of his worst games ever during the Superbowl run.

I stand by what I said. Manning has a meaningless TD or two in a blowout on his playoff resume. So does Brady. They each have a few stinkers, however you define it. I'm not gonna do some sophisticated statistical analysis to determine who deviates more from the mean, but spending a few minutes looking at the playoff careers of each, I don't see much difference. You could argue that Manning maybe has a couple more pure stinkers than Brady, but on the flip side, almost all of them came early in Manning's career (with one notable exception in a game that his team won despite his performance) while Brady has far more mediocre playoff games in the last five years. In the end, I think it all evens out. You obviously disagree, and short of running the sort of deviation analysis I mentioned before, there's really nothing I can do to convince you. And frankly, even that deviation analysis wouldn't mean much, because it wouldn't capture whether and how that deviation affected the team's result, i.e. whether the team would have won or lost without a great game or a stinker.

Again, this is why I find your argument frustrating. To summarize your response:- "spending a few minutes", you came to a conclusion- research may or may not support your conclusion, but you're not going to do it- you concede my point that Manning "maybe" has "a couple more" stinkers - although you agree with my quantifiable points, for reasons you can't quantify, you feel like it all just magically evens out- there's nothing you can do to convince me because I'm so stupid and biasedI await the time when a pro-Manning argument didn't devolve into some form of this. I was kind of hoping you would be the one. Now I'm left with switz, who spends most of his time arguing things like Deion Branch being better than Harrison ever was.

 

[Devine Intervention]

New England WITHOUT Tom Brady---

10-5 | 63 comp % | 3700 yrd | 21 TDs | 11 Ints | 89 passer rating

Do you honestly think that a kid who hasnt started since highschool would have even come close to that if you put him on Indy ANY of the years Manning has been there??? How do you justify that then? Good coaching, good system. Id love for all the Brady fans to tell me how they think Cassell does in Indys offense that same year...

Manning MAKES his offense, Brady fits his system. Besides Wayne, Manning is doing this with Collie, Garcon, Tamme, White and NO run game and a below average defense. He has had how many different coaches? Tom Brady would not be Tom Brady with out Bellichec, cause then Matt Cassell would be ranked just as highly. Manning has his blow up games because the Colts have NO OTHER OPTION, if Brady does bad they run the ball and depend on defense. Manning doesnt have that option so he starts forcing plays.

 

[switz]

And Faulk and Manning played together how long? How Faulk is even in the picture when talking about Manning's career is beyond me... Faulk was a cancer on the Colts which is why they got rid of him.

Faulk had turf toe for a couple years in a row on losing Colts teams. He wasn't a cancer. The Colts let him go because of his age, injuries, and their ability to grab Edgerrin (or Ricky Williams) in the draft.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Faulk was a huge cancer, and even admitted it later on after he was on the Rams. The Colts didn't get rid of him due to age (he was 25), or injury (he had just completed his most productive season to date - and what ended up being his second best season of his career), or anything else. He was a horrible cancer in the locker room, and gave half-assed effort in certain aspects of the game.I was/am a huge Faulk fan... in fact when the Colts drafted him was when I started following the Colts.ETA - So let's face it - Manning played ONE season with Faulk, and it was Manning's ROOKIE season, and Faulk accounted for merely 4 of Manning's TD passes, yet still somehow managed to have the second best season of his career. Oh, and to make matter even better for Manning, Harrison missed 4 games that season. So yeah, you know, Mannign's rookie season was ALL ABOUT Faulk and Harrison - or maybe not.

 

[switz]

New England WITHOUT Tom Brady---

10-5 | 63 comp % | 3700 yrd | 21 TDs | 11 Ints | 89 passer rating

Do you honestly think that a kid who hasnt started since highschool would have even come close to that if you put him on Indy ANY of the years Manning has been there??? How do you justify that then? Good coaching, good system. Id love for all the Brady fans to tell me how they think Cassell does in Indys offense that same year...

Manning MAKES his offense, Brady fits his system. Besides Wayne, Manning is doing this with Collie, Garcon, Tamme, White and NO run game and a below average defense. He has had how many different coaches? Tom Brady would not be Tom Brady with out Bellichec, cause then Matt Cassell would be ranked just as highly. Manning has his blow up games because the Colts have NO OTHER OPTION, if Brady does bad they run the ball and depend on defense. Manning doesnt have that option so he starts forcing plays.

Interestingly, the next season with Brady back10-6-0 | 65.9 % | 4540 yrd | 28 TDs | 13 Ints | 95.6 passer rating

So Brady was good for 1 more win, 840 yards, 7 more TDs and 2 more INTs... compared to a guy who hadn't started since high school...

 

[TobiasFunke]

Again, this is why I find your argument frustrating. To summarize your response:- "spending a few minutes", you came to a conclusion- research may or may not support your conclusion, but you're not going to do it- you concede my point that Manning "maybe" has "a couple more" stinkers - although you agree with my quantifiable points, for reasons you can't quantify, you feel like it all just magically evens out- there's nothing you can do to convince me because I'm so stupid and biasedI await the time when a pro-Manning argument didn't devolve into some form of this. I was kind of hoping you would be the one. Now I'm left with switz, who spends most of his time arguing things like Deion Branch being better than Harrison ever was.

1. A few minutes is all it takes to review statistics for 37 games.2. I did do all the research, i.e. I looked at every game. What I didn't do was a full analysis, because frankly I don't have the statistics background to do an analysis of the variance in their performances, let alone how it may have impacted the team's results.3. Yes, I did., although I said "maybe." It depends how you define "stinkers" of course, but if we say it's a game where passer rating was below 60, Manning has three and Brady has two. Make it 70 and Manning has five while Brady has three. Make it 75, and Manning and Brady both have six. Hardly a significant difference in my opinion, but if you want to argue that a stinker is below 70, you could do it.'4. You made no quantifiable points regarding overall performance that I'm aware of. You pointed to the fact that Manning has more INTs (19-15) while ignoring that Manning has almost 100 more attempts and 1200 more yards (suggesting that he's throwing more deep balls, which are more likely to be picked). It's hard to evaluate the cost-benefit of these things accurately- the best measurement I know of is passer rating, so I've used that. If your point is that Brady takes less risks because he has had better teams that don't rely on him as much to win the game, and therefore had fewer terrible games from an INT/yards standpoint, well there I might agree (although the statistics don't back you up- more on that in a second), but I don't know that it makes one better than the other. You made similar points about games under 200 yards and "getting shut out" along with the INTs, but as it turns out, they both have the same number of games in which they've thrown for under 200 yards and/or multiple INTs (there's only one shutout and it falls into one of the other categories, so it's irrelevant). That total is 7 by my count (I'll grant you Brady was hurt for part of one of them, but that keeps INT numbers down along with yardage numbers). So you basically proved my point in attempting to prove yours.5. I don't think you're stupid at all. I'm a fan. Biased, yeah.

 

[Devine Intervention]

The thing that drives me crazy is that Manning drove his team down the field and put them in a position to win with 50 seconds left. Do you think a Bill Bellichek team would ever allow the Jets and Mark Sanchez to drive the length of the field in 50 seconds and win the game?? Never. If that was NE, and Brady played the EXACT same game, but his defense holds the Jets and NE wins, Brady is clutch. There's just too much to consider when judging this. Manning did what he had to do to win the game and was let down by a bad defense and terrible coaching. With a better coach in that game we are probably talking about how clutch it was of Manning to drive on that Jets defense with a couple min to go and get a game winning FG.

 

[Devine Intervention]

New England WITHOUT Tom Brady---

10-5 | 63 comp % | 3700 yrd | 21 TDs | 11 Ints | 89 passer rating

Do you honestly think that a kid who hasnt started since highschool would have even come close to that if you put him on Indy ANY of the years Manning has been there??? How do you justify that then? Good coaching, good system. Id love for all the Brady fans to tell me how they think Cassell does in Indys offense that same year...

Manning MAKES his offense, Brady fits his system. Besides Wayne, Manning is doing this with Collie, Garcon, Tamme, White and NO run game and a below average defense. He has had how many different coaches? Tom Brady would not be Tom Brady with out Bellichec, cause then Matt Cassell would be ranked just as highly. Manning has his blow up games because the Colts have NO OTHER OPTION, if Brady does bad they run the ball and depend on defense. Manning doesnt have that option so he starts forcing plays.

Interestingly, the next season with Brady back10-6-0 | 65.9 % | 4540 yrd | 28 TDs | 13 Ints | 95.6 passer rating

So Brady was good for 1 more win, 840 yards, 7 more TDs and 2 more INTs... compared to a guy who hadn't started since high school...

actually Brady was good for one more loss. Cassell was 10-5 as a starter

 

[TobiasFunke]

The thing that drives me crazy is that Manning drove his team down the field and put them in a position to win with 50 seconds left. Do you think a Bill Bellichek team would ever allow the Jets and Mark Sanchez to drive the length of the field in 50 seconds and win the game?? Never. If that was NE, and Brady played the EXACT same game, but his defense holds the Jets and NE wins, Brady is clutch. There's just too much to consider when judging this. Manning did what he had to do to win the game and was let down by a bad defense and terrible coaching. With a better coach in that game we are probably talking about how clutch it was of Manning to drive on that Jets defense with a couple min to go and get a game winning FG.

Defense? Heck, you can look at the perplexing decision of Caldwell to call time out with 28 seconds left and give the Jets a free play and a chance to make a 50 yard field goal much shorter. The point is the same, of course. A QB can only do so much.

 

[switz]

4. You made no quantifiable points regarding overall performance that I'm aware of. You pointed to the fact that Manning has more INTs (19-15) while ignoring that Manning has almost 100 more attempts and 1200 more yards (suggesting that he's throwing more deep balls, which are more likely to be picked). It's hard to evaluate the cost-benefit of these things accurately- the best measurement I know of is passer rating, so I've used that. If your point is that Brady takes less risks because he has had better teams that don't rely on him as much to win the game, well there I might agree (although the statistics don't back you up- more on that in a second), but I don't know that it makes one better than the other. You made similar points about games under 200 yards and "getting shut out" along with the INTs, but as it turns out, they both have the same number of games in which they've thrown for under 200 yards and/or multiple INTs (there's only one shutout and it falls into one of the other categories, so it's irrelevant). That total is 7 by my count (I'll grant you Brady was hurt for part of one of them, but that keeps INT numbers down along with yardage numbers). So you basically proved my point in attempting to prove yours.

Nevermind the fact that Brady's team has been helped by 7 D/ST touchdowns in the playoffs, while Manning's teams has only 1. Nor that Manning has had 4 "winnable" performances that ended up as losses, while Brady has no "winnable" performances the team didn't hold onto for him. In other words, if the outcome were 100% dependent on QB performance, Manning would have 4 more playoff wins.Also, nevermind that last season Indy beat the Ravens in the playoffs, after the Ravens knocked NE out, with Brady putting up a terrible performance.

 

[Warsteinner]

The thing that drives me crazy is that Manning drove his team down the field and put them in a position to win with 50 seconds left. Do you think a Bill Bellichek team would ever allow the Jets and Mark Sanchez to drive the length of the field in 50 seconds and win the game?? Never. If that was NE, and Brady played the EXACT same game, but his defense holds the Jets and NE wins, Brady is clutch. There's just too much to consider when judging this. Manning did what he had to do to win the game and was let down by a bad defense and terrible coaching. With a better coach in that game we are probably talking about how clutch it was of Manning to drive on that Jets defense with a couple min to go and get a game winning FG.

That bad defense held the Jets to 17 points. Should they have pitched a shutout?

 

[Devine Intervention]

4. You made no quantifiable points regarding overall performance that I'm aware of. You pointed to the fact that Manning has more INTs (19-15) while ignoring that Manning has almost 100 more attempts and 1200 more yards (suggesting that he's throwing more deep balls, which are more likely to be picked). It's hard to evaluate the cost-benefit of these things accurately- the best measurement I know of is passer rating, so I've used that. If your point is that Brady takes less risks because he has had better teams that don't rely on him as much to win the game, well there I might agree (although the statistics don't back you up- more on that in a second), but I don't know that it makes one better than the other. You made similar points about games under 200 yards and "getting shut out" along with the INTs, but as it turns out, they both have the same number of games in which they've thrown for under 200 yards and/or multiple INTs (there's only one shutout and it falls into one of the other categories, so it's irrelevant). That total is 7 by my count (I'll grant you Brady was hurt for part of one of them, but that keeps INT numbers down along with yardage numbers). So you basically proved my point in attempting to prove yours.

Nevermind the fact that Brady's team has been helped by 7 D/ST touchdowns in the playoffs, while Manning's teams has only 1. Nor that Manning has had 4 "winnable" performances that ended up as losses, while Brady has no "winnable" performances the team didn't hold onto for him. In other words, if the outcome were 100% dependent on QB performance, Manning would have 4 more playoff wins.Also, nevermind that last season Indy beat the Ravens in the playoffs, after the Ravens knocked NE out, with Brady putting up a terrible performance.

Great point. Brady vs Ravens and Manning vs Ravens, SAME Ravens defense, in the PLAYOFFS.BRADY 42 att 154 yrds 2 TDs 3 Ints 54 comp% 49 RatingMANNING 44 att 246 yrds 2 TDs 1 Int 68 comp% 88 Rating

 

[switz]

The thing that drives me crazy is that Manning drove his team down the field and put them in a position to win with 50 seconds left. Do you think a Bill Bellichek team would ever allow the Jets and Mark Sanchez to drive the length of the field in 50 seconds and win the game?? Never. If that was NE, and Brady played the EXACT same game, but his defense holds the Jets and NE wins, Brady is clutch. There's just too much to consider when judging this. Manning did what he had to do to win the game and was let down by a bad defense and terrible coaching. With a better coach in that game we are probably talking about how clutch it was of Manning to drive on that Jets defense with a couple min to go and get a game winning FG.

That bad defense held the Jets to 17 points. Should they have pitched a shutout?

No, but they could have held them out of FG range within the last 40 seconds or so Manning did enough to win... had the stupid coach not called a TO, and the D held for a few seconds, the Colts would have won. The loss cannot be pinned on Manning, unless you are unreasonably trying to find fault with him.

 

[Devine Intervention]

The thing that drives me crazy is that Manning drove his team down the field and put them in a position to win with 50 seconds left. Do you think a Bill Bellichek team would ever allow the Jets and Mark Sanchez to drive the length of the field in 50 seconds and win the game?? Never. If that was NE, and Brady played the EXACT same game, but his defense holds the Jets and NE wins, Brady is clutch. There's just too much to consider when judging this. Manning did what he had to do to win the game and was let down by a bad defense and terrible coaching. With a better coach in that game we are probably talking about how clutch it was of Manning to drive on that Jets defense with a couple min to go and get a game winning FG.

That bad defense held the Jets to 17 points. Should they have pitched a shutout?

They only averaged 22 a game and they played the Bills twice. Its not like they were playing SD and Rivers, it was Sanchez and the Jets

 

[CalBear]

But you're right about the run game. Manning had a pair of first round picks running the ball, but Brady had the benefit of elite talents like Lawrence Maroney, BenJarvus Green-Ellis, and a couple games from a Favre-aged Fred Taylor.

Maroney and Taylor are both first-round picks, and in fact, both higher picks than Addai and Brown.

I think we can all agree that Maroney is arbuably one of NE's worst draft picks ever. Not first round talent. Taylor...yes...on first round talent, but old and retiring most likely.Can't think of many worse than Maroney. Maybe Kenneth Sims.

And Donald Brown is a great draft pick? Do you think Indy could get any more than a sixth-round pick for Brown if they wanted to trade him?

 

[Road Warriors]

New England WITHOUT Tom Brady---

10-5 | 63 comp % | 3700 yrd | 21 TDs | 11 Ints | 89 passer rating

Do you honestly think that a kid who hasnt started since highschool would have even come close to that if you put him on Indy ANY of the years Manning has been there??? How do you justify that then? Good coaching, good system. Id love for all the Brady fans to tell me how they think Cassell does in Indys offense that same year...

Manning MAKES his offense, Brady fits his system. Besides Wayne, Manning is doing this with Collie, Garcon, Tamme, White and NO run game and a below average defense. He has had how many different coaches? Tom Brady would not be Tom Brady with out Bellichec, cause then Matt Cassell would be ranked just as highly. Manning has his blow up games because the Colts have NO OTHER OPTION, if Brady does bad they run the ball and depend on defense. Manning doesnt have that option so he starts forcing plays.

Interestingly, the next season with Brady back10-6-0 | 65.9 % | 4540 yrd | 28 TDs | 13 Ints | 95.6 passer rating

So Brady was good for 1 more win, 840 yards, 7 more TDs and 2 more INTs... compared to a guy who hadn't started since high school...

OR a guy that led his new team to the playoffs 2 years later. Lets not try to force our arguments that Cassel was some fresh faced rookie who can't play. He's a legit middle of the pack NFL starting QB, and had been in the Patriots system for 4 years. For all the nonsense that goes into these threads, can anyone tell me what particular skills Manning has that Brady does not. Which throws does Manning make that Brady can't, assuming the same skill players ( route running, hands, seperation).

I've watched a whole lot more Brady than Manning, but there is very little doubt in my mind that either QB would have been extremely successful in the others shoes. Manning did very well this year ( aside from his INT streak in the middle ) with a set of skill players that looked a whole lot more like the eclectic mix of players Brady has had most years, showing ability to continue to find open receivers even when they aren't future HOF players. Brady has had a couple of years now where he has lit up the league statistically given skill players that grade out above average. Both are smart, extremely well prepared, accurate, and competitive. Both demand production from their teams, both show poise and leadership on the field.

So, explain why Manning is the only one capable of what he's done, but Brady is solely a product of the system ( which I contest is truly a system in the true sense of the word ) and could never have produced given Manning's situation.

 

[Road Warriors]

The thing that drives me crazy is that Manning drove his team down the field and put them in a position to win with 50 seconds left. Do you think a Bill Bellichek team would ever allow the Jets and Mark Sanchez to drive the length of the field in 50 seconds and win the game?? Never. If that was NE, and Brady played the EXACT same game, but his defense holds the Jets and NE wins, Brady is clutch. There's just too much to consider when judging this. Manning did what he had to do to win the game and was let down by a bad defense and terrible coaching. With a better coach in that game we are probably talking about how clutch it was of Manning to drive on that Jets defense with a couple min to go and get a game winning FG.

That bad defense held the Jets to 17 points. Should they have pitched a shutout?

No, but they could have held them out of FG range within the last 40 seconds or so Manning did enough to win... had the stupid coach not called a TO, and the D held for a few seconds, the Colts would have won. The loss cannot be pinned on Manning, unless you are unreasonably trying to find fault with him.

So, in your mind, the GOAT QB Manning, leads his team to 16 points, about 10 points fewer than their season average, but thats an example of he did enough to win? It's not just the end of the game that counts... Its disappointing that the D couldn't hold the Jets out of FG range in the final 40 seconds, but Manning & Co. did have 59 minutes prior to put up more than a very pedestrian 16 points. I wouldn't call this a great effort by Manning squandered by the Defense.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I've watched a whole lot more Brady than Manning, but there is very little doubt in my mind that either QB would have been extremely successful in the others shoes. Manning did very well this year ( aside from his INT streak in the middle ) with a set of skill players that looked a whole lot more like the eclectic mix of players Brady has had most years, showing ability to continue to find open receivers even when they aren't future HOF players. Brady has had a couple of years now where he has lit up the league statistically given skill players that grade out above average. Both are smart, extremely well prepared, accurate, and competitive. Both demand production from their teams, both show poise and leadership on the field. So, explain why Manning is the only one capable of what he's done, but Brady is solely a product of the system ( which I contest is truly a system in the true sense of the word ) and could never have produced given Manning's situation.

I think Manning throws a slightly better deep ball, but Brady's certainly no slouch in that category. For what it's worth, I don't think anyone truly believes that Manning is far better than Brady. I don't even claim that he's any better. I see them as about the same. I think some of the over the top points being made by the anti-Brady contingent are just counterpoints to the over-the-top points made by Pats fans trying to make Manning look bad or Brady look like an unstoppable superhero. It's a product of the fact that very few if any fans that I know of would say Manning is clearly the superior QB by a good amount, but plenty of fans, most of them Pats fans, say that Brady is superior by a good amount. That kind of attitude is gonna provoke plenty of jabs on a message board.

 

[CalBear]

So, in your mind, the GOAT QB Manning, leads his team to 16 points, about 10 points fewer than their season average, but thats an example of he did enough to win?

He went 18/26 for 225 yards and a TD with no INTs, against the #3 defense in the league. He also led his team to a go-ahead field goal with less than a minute left in the game.And 16 points is two more than Brady put up in his last two post-season games (both losses).

 

[Devine Intervention]

New England WITHOUT Tom Brady---

10-5 | 63 comp % | 3700 yrd | 21 TDs | 11 Ints | 89 passer rating

Do you honestly think that a kid who hasnt started since highschool would have even come close to that if you put him on Indy ANY of the years Manning has been there??? How do you justify that then? Good coaching, good system. Id love for all the Brady fans to tell me how they think Cassell does in Indys offense that same year...

Manning MAKES his offense, Brady fits his system. Besides Wayne, Manning is doing this with Collie, Garcon, Tamme, White and NO run game and a below average defense. He has had how many different coaches? Tom Brady would not be Tom Brady with out Bellichec, cause then Matt Cassell would be ranked just as highly. Manning has his blow up games because the Colts have NO OTHER OPTION, if Brady does bad they run the ball and depend on defense. Manning doesnt have that option so he starts forcing plays.

Interestingly, the next season with Brady back10-6-0 | 65.9 % | 4540 yrd | 28 TDs | 13 Ints | 95.6 passer rating

So Brady was good for 1 more win, 840 yards, 7 more TDs and 2 more INTs... compared to a guy who hadn't started since high school...

OR a guy that led his new team to the playoffs 2 years later. Lets not try to force our arguments that Cassel was some fresh faced rookie who can't play. He's a legit middle of the pack NFL starting QB, and had been in the Patriots system for 4 years. For all the nonsense that goes into these threads, can anyone tell me what particular skills Manning has that Brady does not. Which throws does Manning make that Brady can't, assuming the same skill players ( route running, hands, seperation).

I've watched a whole lot more Brady than Manning, but there is very little doubt in my mind that either QB would have been extremely successful in the others shoes. Manning did very well this year ( aside from his INT streak in the middle ) with a set of skill players that looked a whole lot more like the eclectic mix of players Brady has had most years, showing ability to continue to find open receivers even when they aren't future HOF players. Brady has had a couple of years now where he has lit up the league statistically given skill players that grade out above average. Both are smart, extremely well prepared, accurate, and competitive. Both demand production from their teams, both show poise and leadership on the field.

So, explain why Manning is the only one capable of what he's done, but Brady is solely a product of the system ( which I contest is truly a system in the true sense of the word ) and could never have produced given Manning's situation.

In my opinion he doesnt have the accuracy under pressure that a Manning or even Brees have. When he is accurate its behind a cozy line protecting him. Alot of his plays seem to be gimmicky, like underneath routes to quick WRs and they run after the catch. And I think they play calling come from the coach and Brady follows orders, where as I think Manning runs his offense and makes audibles that no other QB in the game is making.

 

[Road Warriors]

So, in your mind, the GOAT QB Manning, leads his team to 16 points, about 10 points fewer than their season average, but thats an example of he did enough to win?

He went 18/26 for 225 yards and a TD with no INTs, against the #3 defense in the league. He also led his team to a go-ahead field goal with less than a minute left in the game.And 16 points is two more than Brady put up in his last two post-season games (both losses).

It was a mediocre performance from Manning, but he did leave his team with a chance to win. How many plays did he leave out there earlier in the game that would have made the Jets FG at the end a non-issue. Too much focus on the end of the game, not enough on the whole picture. The Colts offense underperformed in this game, based on what they've been doing all year.

 

[Devine Intervention]

New England WITHOUT Tom Brady---

10-5 | 63 comp % | 3700 yrd | 21 TDs | 11 Ints | 89 passer rating

Do you honestly think that a kid who hasnt started since highschool would have even come close to that if you put him on Indy ANY of the years Manning has been there??? How do you justify that then? Good coaching, good system. Id love for all the Brady fans to tell me how they think Cassell does in Indys offense that same year...

Manning MAKES his offense, Brady fits his system. Besides Wayne, Manning is doing this with Collie, Garcon, Tamme, White and NO run game and a below average defense. He has had how many different coaches? Tom Brady would not be Tom Brady with out Bellichec, cause then Matt Cassell would be ranked just as highly. Manning has his blow up games because the Colts have NO OTHER OPTION, if Brady does bad they run the ball and depend on defense. Manning doesnt have that option so he starts forcing plays.

Interestingly, the next season with Brady back10-6-0 | 65.9 % | 4540 yrd | 28 TDs | 13 Ints | 95.6 passer rating

So Brady was good for 1 more win, 840 yards, 7 more TDs and 2 more INTs... compared to a guy who hadn't started since high school...

OR a guy that led his new team to the playoffs 2 years later. Lets not try to force our arguments that Cassel was some fresh faced rookie who can't play. He's a legit middle of the pack NFL starting QB, and had been in the Patriots system for 4 years. For all the nonsense that goes into these threads, can anyone tell me what particular skills Manning has that Brady does not. Which throws does Manning make that Brady can't, assuming the same skill players ( route running, hands, seperation).

I've watched a whole lot more Brady than Manning, but there is very little doubt in my mind that either QB would have been extremely successful in the others shoes. Manning did very well this year ( aside from his INT streak in the middle ) with a set of skill players that looked a whole lot more like the eclectic mix of players Brady has had most years, showing ability to continue to find open receivers even when they aren't future HOF players. Brady has had a couple of years now where he has lit up the league statistically given skill players that grade out above average. Both are smart, extremely well prepared, accurate, and competitive. Both demand production from their teams, both show poise and leadership on the field.

So, explain why Manning is the only one capable of what he's done, but Brady is solely a product of the system ( which I contest is truly a system in the true sense of the word ) and could never have produced given Manning's situation.

so you think that same year, Cassell plays in Indy and goes anywhere near 10-5? Im guessing thats what your saying?

 

[switz]

I've watched a whole lot more Brady than Manning, but there is very little doubt in my mind that either QB would have been extremely successful in the others shoes. Manning did very well this year ( aside from his INT streak in the middle ) with a set of skill players that looked a whole lot more like the eclectic mix of players Brady has had most years, showing ability to continue to find open receivers even when they aren't future HOF players. Brady has had a couple of years now where he has lit up the league statistically given skill players that grade out far above average. Both are smart, extremely well prepared, accurate, and competitive. Both demand production from their teams, both show poise and leadership on the field.

So, explain why Manning is the only one capable of what he's done, but Brady is solely a product of the system ( which I contest is truly a system in the true sense of the word ) and could never have produced given Manning's situation.

Manning is far more accurate on deep throws than Brady. Brady benefits from a short passing system, which often gives him easy, high percentage throws. When he throws deep, he is not as accurate as Manning, as was widely made evident by the weekly film clips of Moss making circus catches during Brady's TD record breaking year. Brady is also supported by a much better running game, which allows him to face more balanced defenses than Manning who, a the Jets demonstrated, teams often play pure pass defenses daring the Colts to run, and making it hard for Manning to complete a pass (which he still does with great accuracy).Manning is also better at making third down conversions than Brady. Note, I didn't say the Colts were better, because the Pats are far more successful overall due to their success converting short yardage on third down by running.But passing on third downs, Manning is more successful (here's a link)

Manning is better at avoiding sacks and not losing much yardage when he does get sacked. (another link)

Manning also prepares harded than Tom Brady, at least per Rex Ryan

Brady consistently starts with better field position, consistently gets more points from his defense, consistently has better coaching. We've already seen the effect of Brady's coaching on Matt Cassel and Kyle Orton so it can't be disregarded or even only lightly regarded.

Given all of that, I think they are clearly the top two QBs in the NFL today, but I can't see Brady having as much success with the Colts as Manning has had. On the other hand, I could see Manning having more success with New England than Brady has had.

It's not a HUGE margin.... but it's enough for me to determine in my opinion that Manning is the better QB.

 

[Bull Dozier]

New England WITHOUT Tom Brady---

10-5 | 63 comp % | 3700 yrd | 21 TDs | 11 Ints | 89 passer rating

Do you honestly think that a kid who hasnt started since highschool would have even come close to that if you put him on Indy ANY of the years Manning has been there??? How do you justify that then? Good coaching, good system. Id love for all the Brady fans to tell me how they think Cassell does in Indys offense that same year...

Manning MAKES his offense, Brady fits his system. Besides Wayne, Manning is doing this with Collie, Garcon, Tamme, White and NO run game and a below average defense. He has had how many different coaches? Tom Brady would not be Tom Brady with out Bellichec, cause then Matt Cassell would be ranked just as highly. Manning has his blow up games because the Colts have NO OTHER OPTION, if Brady does bad they run the ball and depend on defense. Manning doesnt have that option so he starts forcing plays.

Interestingly, the next season with Brady back10-6-0 | 65.9 % | 4540 yrd | 28 TDs | 13 Ints | 95.6 passer rating

So Brady was good for 1 more win, 840 yards, 7 more TDs and 2 more INTs... compared to a guy who hadn't started since high school...

Is the more valid comparison the following year, where you have Brady who is coming back from a major knee injury, or the previous year that gave you:16-0 | 68.7 % | 4731 | 50 TDs | 9 Ints | 116 passer rating

 

[switz]

So, in your mind, the GOAT QB Manning, leads his team to 16 points, about 10 points fewer than their season average, but thats an example of he did enough to win?

He went 18/26 for 225 yards and a TD with no INTs, against the #3 defense in the league. He also led his team to a go-ahead field goal with less than a minute left in the game.

And 16 points is two more than Brady put up in his last two post-season games (both losses).

It was a mediocre performance from Manning, but he did leave his team with a chance to win. How many plays did he leave out there earlier in the game that would have made the Jets FG at the end a non-issue. Too much focus on the end of the game, not enough on the whole picture. The Colts offense underperformed in this game, based on what they've been doing all year.

Actually, Manning had a very good performance...He threw it about half as much as he did during the regular season, taking the smart play and running the ball more often, since it's what the Jets defense allowed.

Yet on 26 attempts, he still put up 226 yards (about 9 YPA), threw an TD, and 0 INTs. He had a 108 passer rating... clearly very very good. This was against a defense specifically built and designed to stop him.

You want to focus on the whole game? The Colts defense allowed the Jets to rush for 169 yards, at 4.5 YPC. AWFUL run defense. They couldn't keep NY off the field. Yeah, the defense let the team down... anyone but a Manning-hater can see that.

 

[switz]

New England WITHOUT Tom Brady---

10-5 | 63 comp % | 3700 yrd | 21 TDs | 11 Ints | 89 passer rating

Do you honestly think that a kid who hasnt started since highschool would have even come close to that if you put him on Indy ANY of the years Manning has been there??? How do you justify that then? Good coaching, good system. Id love for all the Brady fans to tell me how they think Cassell does in Indys offense that same year...

Manning MAKES his offense, Brady fits his system. Besides Wayne, Manning is doing this with Collie, Garcon, Tamme, White and NO run game and a below average defense. He has had how many different coaches? Tom Brady would not be Tom Brady with out Bellichec, cause then Matt Cassell would be ranked just as highly. Manning has his blow up games because the Colts have NO OTHER OPTION, if Brady does bad they run the ball and depend on defense. Manning doesnt have that option so he starts forcing plays.

Interestingly, the next season with Brady back10-6-0 | 65.9 % | 4540 yrd | 28 TDs | 13 Ints | 95.6 passer rating

So Brady was good for 1 more win, 840 yards, 7 more TDs and 2 more INTs... compared to a guy who hadn't started since high school...

Is the more valid comparison the following year, where you have Brady who is coming back from a major knee injury, or the previous year that gave you:16-0 | 68.7 % | 4731 | 50 TDs | 9 Ints | 116 passer rating

Give that the following year is much closer the Brady's average season, and the TD record breaking season an aberration, I'm inclined to use the following season. Also, who is to say whether Cassel could have put up even better numbers given time to prepare and a few years to play in that system.Brady coming back the year after is much more like Cassell walking on after not playing for 6 or 7 years, thus a more accurate comparison (which still favors Brady to perform much better).

 

[bostonfred]

And Faulk and Manning played together how long? How Faulk is even in the picture when talking about Manning's career is beyond me... Faulk was a cancer on the Colts which is why they got rid of him.

Faulk had turf toe for a couple years in a row on losing Colts teams. He wasn't a cancer. The Colts let him go because of his age, injuries, and their ability to grab Edgerrin (or Ricky Williams) in the draft.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Faulk was a huge cancer, and even admitted it later on after he was on the Rams. The Colts didn't get rid of him due to age (he was 25), or injury (he had just completed his most productive season to date - and what ended up being his second best season of his career), or anything else. He was a horrible cancer in the locker room, and gave half-assed effort in certain aspects of the game.I was/am a huge Faulk fan... in fact when the Colts drafted him was when I started following the Colts.ETA - So let's face it - Manning played ONE season with Faulk, and it was Manning's ROOKIE season, and Faulk accounted for merely 4 of Manning's TD passes, yet still somehow managed to have the second best season of his career. Oh, and to make matter even better for Manning, Harrison missed 4 games that season. So yeah, you know, Mannign's rookie season was ALL ABOUT Faulk and Harrison - or maybe not.

Harrison was on pace for 80 catches, 1000 yards and 10 TDs, which was consistent with his career progression after back to back years of over 800 yards. In the four games Harrison missed, in one, Faulk was the leading receiver, in two more, Faulk was the second leading receiver, and in the other, Faulk ran for 115 yards and 2 TDs against the Bengals in a battle of 2-11 teams with huge implications for the draft order. Even with Harrison missing time, Faulk and Harrison were 1st and 2nd on the team in receptions, with Faulk putting up 86/908/4 (part of his cancerous 2227 yard, 10 TD performance, I guess) and Harrison getting 59/776/7 in 12 games. Their 145 catches were almost half of Manning's 326 completions, their 1684 yards were almost half of his 3739 yards, and their 11 recieving TDs were almost half of Manning's 26 TDs as a rookie. Manning had great rookie numbers - even with his 28 INTs - but it's silly for you to claim that Faulk and Harrison didn't have a huge impact.

 

[Bull Dozier]

New England WITHOUT Tom Brady---

10-5 | 63 comp % | 3700 yrd | 21 TDs | 11 Ints | 89 passer rating

Do you honestly think that a kid who hasnt started since highschool would have even come close to that if you put him on Indy ANY of the years Manning has been there??? How do you justify that then? Good coaching, good system. Id love for all the Brady fans to tell me how they think Cassell does in Indys offense that same year...

Manning MAKES his offense, Brady fits his system. Besides Wayne, Manning is doing this with Collie, Garcon, Tamme, White and NO run game and a below average defense. He has had how many different coaches? Tom Brady would not be Tom Brady with out Bellichec, cause then Matt Cassell would be ranked just as highly. Manning has his blow up games because the Colts have NO OTHER OPTION, if Brady does bad they run the ball and depend on defense. Manning doesnt have that option so he starts forcing plays.

Interestingly, the next season with Brady back10-6-0 | 65.9 % | 4540 yrd | 28 TDs | 13 Ints | 95.6 passer rating

So Brady was good for 1 more win, 840 yards, 7 more TDs and 2 more INTs... compared to a guy who hadn't started since high school...

Is the more valid comparison the following year, where you have Brady who is coming back from a major knee injury, or the previous year that gave you:16-0 | 68.7 % | 4731 | 50 TDs | 9 Ints | 116 passer rating

Give that the following year is much closer the Brady's average season, and the TD record breaking season an aberration, I'm inclined to use the following season. Also, who is to say whether Cassel could have put up even better numbers given time to prepare and a few years to play in that system.Brady coming back the year after is much more like Cassell walking on after not playing for 6 or 7 years, thus a more accurate comparison (which still favors Brady to perform much better).

It's probably cherry picking however you look at it (and I know I'm doing the same).Brady's passing numbers have gotten better as his career has gone on. Of his last three full seasons, the one you chose to use as a comparison is his worst of the three.

Also, if you look at his career numbers, 10-6 is actually not an average season for Brady. That was only one of his three seasons where he's won 10 games or less (out of 9).

Just saying that picking that season isn't much of a "gocha" as it looks like (to me at least).

 

[Eastwood]

so much arguing. Can't we all just agree Doug Williams is a better SB QB than Tom or Peyton?

 

[Road Warriors]

Manning is also better at making third down conversions than Brady. Note, I didn't say the Colts were better, because the Pats are far more successful overall due to their success converting short yardage on third down by running.But passing on third downs, Manning is more successful (here's a link)

I was looking over the site you quoted here, and I found this interesting.Your link, 3rd down QB rating ( by Y/A, effectively )

My link, 3rd down & 8+ QB rating ( by the same Y/A measure )

I haven't fully digested the QB rating system being used on this site, but it appears to be heavily weighted to Y/A, and removes TDs as a calculated component. What I found interesting was that Brady ranked 3rd overall, 5 spots ahead of Manning on 3rd & long, running counter to the conventional wisdom. I still contend that Brady's short passing is by design and surrounding skillset as opposed to a fundamental inability to throw downfield.

Y/A is an interesting stat, and frequently correlates to a QBs overall production. However, Ihe primary function of the offense is to score points, not to accumulate yards. Low Y/A very rarely is a formula to efficient scoring offenses. The Patriots have generally bucked that trend. They've been extremely efficient scoring while maintaining a high percentage passing attack. Low risk, high reward.

 

[Road Warriors]

New England WITHOUT Tom Brady---

10-5 | 63 comp % | 3700 yrd | 21 TDs | 11 Ints | 89 passer rating

Do you honestly think that a kid who hasnt started since highschool would have even come close to that if you put him on Indy ANY of the years Manning has been there??? How do you justify that then? Good coaching, good system. Id love for all the Brady fans to tell me how they think Cassell does in Indys offense that same year...

Manning MAKES his offense, Brady fits his system. Besides Wayne, Manning is doing this with Collie, Garcon, Tamme, White and NO run game and a below average defense. He has had how many different coaches? Tom Brady would not be Tom Brady with out Bellichec, cause then Matt Cassell would be ranked just as highly. Manning has his blow up games because the Colts have NO OTHER OPTION, if Brady does bad they run the ball and depend on defense. Manning doesnt have that option so he starts forcing plays.

Interestingly, the next season with Brady back10-6-0 | 65.9 % | 4540 yrd | 28 TDs | 13 Ints | 95.6 passer rating

So Brady was good for 1 more win, 840 yards, 7 more TDs and 2 more INTs... compared to a guy who hadn't started since high school...

Is the more valid comparison the following year, where you have Brady who is coming back from a major knee injury, or the previous year that gave you:16-0 | 68.7 % | 4731 | 50 TDs | 9 Ints | 116 passer rating

Give that the following year is much closer the Brady's average season, and the TD record breaking season an aberration, I'm inclined to use the following season. Also, who is to say whether Cassel could have put up even better numbers given time to prepare and a few years to play in that system.Brady coming back the year after is much more like Cassell walking on after not playing for 6 or 7 years, thus a more accurate comparison (which still favors Brady to perform much better).

It's probably cherry picking however you look at it (and I know I'm doing the same).Brady's passing numbers have gotten better as his career has gone on. Of his last three full seasons, the one you chose to use as a comparison is his worst of the three.

Also, if you look at his career numbers, 10-6 is actually not an average season for Brady. That was only one of his three seasons where he's won 10 games or less (out of 9).

Just saying that picking that season isn't much of a "gocha" as it looks like (to me at least).

Even if you use that season, rather than the 2007 season, you're still talking about a 25% increase in yards, 33% increase in TDs. For a QB coming back from a season long injury, thats a pretty solid uptick from the previous season that was run by a guy that is still a starter in the league.

 

[Road Warriors]

New England WITHOUT Tom Brady---

10-5 | 63 comp % | 3700 yrd | 21 TDs | 11 Ints | 89 passer rating

Do you honestly think that a kid who hasnt started since highschool would have even come close to that if you put him on Indy ANY of the years Manning has been there??? How do you justify that then? Good coaching, good system. Id love for all the Brady fans to tell me how they think Cassell does in Indys offense that same year...

Manning MAKES his offense, Brady fits his system. Besides Wayne, Manning is doing this with Collie, Garcon, Tamme, White and NO run game and a below average defense. He has had how many different coaches? Tom Brady would not be Tom Brady with out Bellichec, cause then Matt Cassell would be ranked just as highly. Manning has his blow up games because the Colts have NO OTHER OPTION, if Brady does bad they run the ball and depend on defense. Manning doesnt have that option so he starts forcing plays.

Interestingly, the next season with Brady back10-6-0 | 65.9 % | 4540 yrd | 28 TDs | 13 Ints | 95.6 passer rating

So Brady was good for 1 more win, 840 yards, 7 more TDs and 2 more INTs... compared to a guy who hadn't started since high school...

OR a guy that led his new team to the playoffs 2 years later. Lets not try to force our arguments that Cassel was some fresh faced rookie who can't play. He's a legit middle of the pack NFL starting QB, and had been in the Patriots system for 4 years. For all the nonsense that goes into these threads, can anyone tell me what particular skills Manning has that Brady does not. Which throws does Manning make that Brady can't, assuming the same skill players ( route running, hands, seperation).

I've watched a whole lot more Brady than Manning, but there is very little doubt in my mind that either QB would have been extremely successful in the others shoes. Manning did very well this year ( aside from his INT streak in the middle ) with a set of skill players that looked a whole lot more like the eclectic mix of players Brady has had most years, showing ability to continue to find open receivers even when they aren't future HOF players. Brady has had a couple of years now where he has lit up the league statistically given skill players that grade out above average. Both are smart, extremely well prepared, accurate, and competitive. Both demand production from their teams, both show poise and leadership on the field.

So, explain why Manning is the only one capable of what he's done, but Brady is solely a product of the system ( which I contest is truly a system in the true sense of the word ) and could never have produced given Manning's situation.

so you think that same year, Cassell plays in Indy and goes anywhere near 10-5? Im guessing thats what your saying?

No, given that Cassell wasn't in IND for the previous 4 years nor would he have played the relatively soft schedule he had in NE that year. What I'm saying is that Cassell was an NFL caliber QB, but unproven at the time. He has since shown that he is a middle of the pack NFL starter, and using his 2008 season numbers as a show of how Brady isn't really all that good because " a guy that hasn't started since HS " did well is a misrepresentation of the reality that was the 2008 season. But I'm guessing you knew that already.What would Cassell have done with IND if he was the backup there for 4 years prior and Manning went down? I have no idea... One of the reasons he did well in NE was that the coaching staff did a good job of having him ready to play, and he was a good student of the game and learned under Brady. He was a legit NFL caliber QB when the call came.

Would Indy have done the same level of prep work as NE did to prepare the backup QB behind an ironman? Can't say, I don't know how Indy handles their backups. I will say that what I've seen from Painter ( very little ) that Indy would be in a world of hurt if Manning went down now. I don't know if that's due to Painter's ability or preparation.

 

[shortbow]

We were talking about post-season in the first post and second post, thats what I was talking about.

Directly, you cant cherrypick (even though its a large sample) the last 5 years and ignore the first 5 years they were both in the league.

Thats my point. Its not a reasonable comparison by any measurement. Beginning of Mannings career was typical (slow start, flashes of genius) and the beginning of Bradys career was far from typical (winning 3 superbowl with a very lackluster offense).

But in the last 5 years Brady has: Went to the playoffs every year he played, had the best season ever in NFL history, completely tore his ACL, had his 2nd best personal season (not sure where it stands in comparison to the NFL)

So Manning started slow and then he won a superbowl and has since not been the same Manning.

But Brady started well and ahead of everyone else and has since not won a superbowl, but continued to be MORE successful then Manning.

Brady didn't really start well ahead of everyone else as far as QB performance goes... he just happened to be on that team at the right time.2001 he threw 18 TDs and 12 INTs, he was a game manager. The only reason his INTs were low is because his rarely threw it more than 10 yards down the field.

As far as Manning "not being the same Manning since"...

The last two seasons are tied for Manning's second best career TD pass totals

2009 was Manning's best season in completion %, and tied for the team's best W/L record during his career

This year he passed for the most yards in his career, last season the third most (second most at the time)

Last season Manning's passer rating was better than every season's of Brady's outside Brady's record TD pass year

Oddly you use Brady's past 5 years in the playoffs as some sort of positive, yet you would spin Manning's success rate in the same time period as a sign of him choking. Manning has led the Colts to the playoffs the last 9 years straight, with one SuperBowl win and one loss. In the past 5 years, they have the same number of SB wins and losses, and Brady has only won one more playoff game out of the same amount of games played.

Was referring to post season.Would you have just not typed the entire bolded part if i had said "Every year he played he made the playoffs (so did the colts)"? because the point I was making was after Peyton Manning won his ring, in the post season he has had less success then Tom Brady, I realized I worded it differently but thats because I didnt expect Id have to explain it to you.

 

[kyoun1e]

New England WITHOUT Tom Brady---

10-5 | 63 comp % | 3700 yrd | 21 TDs | 11 Ints | 89 passer rating

Do you honestly think that a kid who hasnt started since highschool would have even come close to that if you put him on Indy ANY of the years Manning has been there??? How do you justify that then? Good coaching, good system. Id love for all the Brady fans to tell me how they think Cassell does in Indys offense that same year...

Manning MAKES his offense, Brady fits his system. Besides Wayne, Manning is doing this with Collie, Garcon, Tamme, White and NO run game and a below average defense. He has had how many different coaches? Tom Brady would not be Tom Brady with out Bellichec, cause then Matt Cassell would be ranked just as highly. Manning has his blow up games because the Colts have NO OTHER OPTION, if Brady does bad they run the ball and depend on defense. Manning doesnt have that option so he starts forcing plays.

Interestingly, the next season with Brady back10-6-0 | 65.9 % | 4540 yrd | 28 TDs | 13 Ints | 95.6 passer rating

So Brady was good for 1 more win, 840 yards, 7 more TDs and 2 more INTs... compared to a guy who hadn't started since high school...

OR a guy that led his new team to the playoffs 2 years later. Lets not try to force our arguments that Cassel was some fresh faced rookie who can't play. He's a legit middle of the pack NFL starting QB, and had been in the Patriots system for 4 years. For all the nonsense that goes into these threads, can anyone tell me what particular skills Manning has that Brady does not. Which throws does Manning make that Brady can't, assuming the same skill players ( route running, hands, seperation).

I've watched a whole lot more Brady than Manning, but there is very little doubt in my mind that either QB would have been extremely successful in the others shoes. Manning did very well this year ( aside from his INT streak in the middle ) with a set of skill players that looked a whole lot more like the eclectic mix of players Brady has had most years, showing ability to continue to find open receivers even when they aren't future HOF players. Brady has had a couple of years now where he has lit up the league statistically given skill players that grade out above average. Both are smart, extremely well prepared, accurate, and competitive. Both demand production from their teams, both show poise and leadership on the field.

So, explain why Manning is the only one capable of what he's done, but Brady is solely a product of the system ( which I contest is truly a system in the true sense of the word ) and could never have produced given Manning's situation.

In my opinion he doesnt have the accuracy under pressure that a Manning or even Brees have. When he is accurate its behind a cozy line protecting him. Alot of his plays seem to be gimmicky, like underneath routes to quick WRs and they run after the catch. And I think they play calling come from the coach and Brady follows orders, where as I think Manning runs his offense and makes audibles that no other QB in the game is making.

You really should stop posting.KY

 

[kyoun1e]

New England WITHOUT Tom Brady---

10-5 | 63 comp % | 3700 yrd | 21 TDs | 11 Ints | 89 passer rating

Do you honestly think that a kid who hasnt started since highschool would have even come close to that if you put him on Indy ANY of the years Manning has been there??? How do you justify that then? Good coaching, good system. Id love for all the Brady fans to tell me how they think Cassell does in Indys offense that same year...

Manning MAKES his offense, Brady fits his system. Besides Wayne, Manning is doing this with Collie, Garcon, Tamme, White and NO run game and a below average defense. He has had how many different coaches? Tom Brady would not be Tom Brady with out Bellichec, cause then Matt Cassell would be ranked just as highly. Manning has his blow up games because the Colts have NO OTHER OPTION, if Brady does bad they run the ball and depend on defense. Manning doesnt have that option so he starts forcing plays.

Interestingly, the next season with Brady back10-6-0 | 65.9 % | 4540 yrd | 28 TDs | 13 Ints | 95.6 passer rating

So Brady was good for 1 more win, 840 yards, 7 more TDs and 2 more INTs... compared to a guy who hadn't started since high school...

Is the more valid comparison the following year, where you have Brady who is coming back from a major knee injury, or the previous year that gave you:16-0 | 68.7 % | 4731 | 50 TDs | 9 Ints | 116 passer rating

Give that the following year is much closer the Brady's average season, and the TD record breaking season an aberration, I'm inclined to use the following season. Also, who is to say whether Cassel could have put up even better numbers given time to prepare and a few years to play in that system.Brady coming back the year after is much more like Cassell walking on after not playing for 6 or 7 years, thus a more accurate comparison (which still favors Brady to perform much better).

This whole Cassel tangent is laughable and pretty much undermines anything from the switz / devine camp. You must be really back on your heals to really think at this point, after looking at Brady's whole career, and this season, that he's a "system quarterback." Is this what you say to yourself so you can sleep at night?

This isn't about Cassel or even Brady.

It's about Manning's reputation taking a hit or not.

And it is.

9-10 playoff record. He's officially sub .500.

Inexplicable laying of eggs or stinkers in the playoffs during those nine losses despite coming off historic regular season performance and the defense doing its job during these games.

Pile up all the yards and TDs you want in the regular season, but until Manning a) gets over .500 in the playoffs, and b) wins at least one more super bowl, his reputation will be far lower than you'd like.

KY

 

[kyoun1e]

But you're right about the run game. Manning had a pair of first round picks running the ball, but Brady had the benefit of elite talents like Lawrence Maroney, BenJarvus Green-Ellis, and a couple games from a Favre-aged Fred Taylor.

Maroney and Taylor are both first-round picks, and in fact, both higher picks than Addai and Brown.

I think we can all agree that Maroney is arbuably one of NE's worst draft picks ever. Not first round talent. Taylor...yes...on first round talent, but old and retiring most likely.Can't think of many worse than Maroney. Maybe Kenneth Sims.

And Donald Brown is a great draft pick? Do you think Indy could get any more than a sixth-round pick for Brown if they wanted to trade him?

Donald Brown and Maroney both blow. Who cares.I don't remember why these horrible excuses for RBs were actually brought up in this thread.It's irrelevant to the OP's question.KY

 

[wilked]

Looks like we will still be wondering this one...

 

[Raider Nation]

This is the most fun time of the year to be a serial thread bumper.

 

[Furious Styles]

Tebow won a playoff game last year with pretty much the same Denver team

 

[bostonfred]

Not really a fair bump. Manning played pretty well except for the interception and the fumble and the game ending interception that everybody was joking about as soon as the game went to overtime. I'd go so far as to say that this was one of his best performances in a one and done postseason.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Not really a fair bump. Manning played pretty well except for the interception and the fumble and the game ending interception that everybody was joking about as soon as the game went to overtime. I'd go so far as to say that this was one of his best performances in a one and done postseason.

Yeah, other than the 4 turnovers, he played a great game.

 

[Raider Nation]

Peyton Manning has been to the playoffs 12 times. His team was one and done in 8 of the 12.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Peyton Manning has been to the playoffs 12 times. His team was one and done in 8 of the 12.

Exactly. The greatest QB of all-time doesn't have that happen.