Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Who's better, Manning or Brady?


bostonfred

Who's the better quarterback?  

520 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, menobrown said:

Early in Brady's career when he was thought to be more of a game manager than in conversation for GOAT I was arguing passionately with friends of mine that Brady was better. This was in SEC country and they acted like I was crazy, little did we know this would end up as one of biggest sports debates of next 10-15 years.  I just felt even early on that Brady's composure in the pocket was rare, that was the trait of his that stood out early to me.

To me the Brady vs Peyton debate is over and Brady won.

The debate for GOAT will always be a debate however. It's hard enough to compare era's but people can't even agree who is the best QB today, which for me is Rodgers.

 

There is no clear winner in any of this (well, unless we aqre discussing WR's). It will come down to individual preferences. Brady won more titles. Manning had better regular season numbers. Personally, I think Peyton was a better passer, Brady a better leader, with Rodgers probably the best all around QB.

And, no, we can't play the "what if" game of moving players, defenses, domes, and coaches around to hypothetically guess what would have happened in games that were never played. All there really is to debate is what actually happened on the field.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 764
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 hours ago, Anarchy99 said:

They left out the part about all the cheating. It says so in all the records and the titles all have asterisks next to them.

Cheating with .001 PSI out of the ball or video taping in an undesignated area?  Which all team were allowed to do..

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather have Manning in his prime than Brady in his prime - based on what they give you as individuals. 

There's no doubt that both are/were fantastic players. Brady's record is amazing but record isn't everything otherwise we'd be talking about Bradshaw as one of the greatest... (not trying to disrespect Terry but he's not generally talked about in the same way as Montana etc.). If you take away everything else, I'd prefer Payton's skill set but it's not like I'd be unhappy to have Brady...

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, dansav said:

Did Belichick carve up the legion of boom is the 2nd Half of Super Bowl 49? Cmon man BB is great but not throwing the ball.

Nope. But I'm sure he called the play that won the game.

Give me Belichick/Brady or Belichick/Manning, same results.

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, dansav said:

Cheating with .001 PSI out of the ball or video taping in an undesignated area?  Which all team were allowed to do..

Hey dansav, you are just a fan of the game of football.  You don't have a dog in this fight, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dedfin said:

Hey dansav, you are just a fan of the game of football.  You don't have a dog in this fight, right?

Correct..  and I would the first post in here if Rodgers or Manning or Young were better.   However the chips don't really stack in their favor 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
50 minutes ago, Neil Beaufort Zod said:

Maybe I'll feel differently once the Super Bowl is a bit farther behind us, but this sure looks like a silly argument now. 

No, you won't feel differently.  Manning isn't top-3 all time, and Brady is clearly the GOAT.   I've been a Montana supporter my whole life, but it is Brady now, no doubt.  Manning is an afterthought.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brady is the best ever.  And I don't like saying that.  Although I'd like to see a Manning career if he played for Belichick vs Brady playing for the Colts.  But if 'ifs' and 'buts' were candy and nuts...  

Brady wins the title of GOAT.  At least for now.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Alex P Keaton said:

No, you won't feel differently.  Manning isn't top-3 all time, and Brady is clearly the GOAT.   I've been a Montana supporter my whole life, but it is Brady now, no doubt.  Manning is an afterthought.  

Yeah, a 7-time First Team All-Pro, 5-time MVP and 2-time Super Bowl winner is an afterthought. :lol: 

To me, Montana is 3rd behind Brady and Manning.  I had them neck and neck before, but after last night, with that kind of comeback in the Super Bowl, I will put Brady at number 1 alone now.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Ghost Rider said:

Yeah, a 7-time First Team All-Pro, 5-time MVP and 2-time Super Bowl winner is an afterthought. :lol: 

To me, Montana is 3rd behind Brady and Manning.  I had them neck and neck before, but after last night, with that kind of comeback in the Super Bowl, I will put Brady at number 1 alone now.  

Most definitely an afterthought in a GOAT discussion.  Too many quick exits from the postseason.  And he was a just shadow of himself for the second SB on a dominant defensive team...  I think its Brady and Montana on their own tier.  So many big performances on the biggest stage.  Then you can argue for a lot of guys - Manning, Elway, Favre, Rodgers, Brees, Marino, Starr, Unitas, Staubach, Bradshaw, etc

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/22/2017 at 3:40 PM, metoo said:

Give me Belichick/Brady or Belichick/Manning, same results.

Give me BB/Brady > BB/Manning.

OtherCoach/Manning > OtherCoach/Brady

It's an interesting debate though. But overall, Brady was a perfect fit for the BB offense. Manning seems like he could have adapted to any offense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TwinTurbo said:

Give me BB/Brady > BB/Manning.

OtherCoach/Manning > OtherCoach/Brady

It's an interesting debate though. But overall, Brady was a perfect fit for the BB offense. Manning seems like he could have adapted to any offense.

He certainly didn't adapt well to the Kubiak offense.  They clashed and ended up running a hybrid that Manning liked.  Seems more accurate to suggest that Manning could have adapted any offense to himself, than the other way 'round.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ghost Rider said:

Yeah, a 7-time First Team All-Pro, 5-time MVP and 2-time Super Bowl winner is an afterthought. :lol: 

To me, Montana is 3rd behind Brady and Manning.  I had them neck and neck before, but after last night, with that kind of comeback in the Super Bowl, I will put Brady at number 1 alone now.  

I think I'd go Montana, Brady, and Manning.  I just can't leapfrog Montana who was perfect in the SB. He never threw a pick-6 to have his team getting blown out, big comeback or not. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill Russell was an all-time great player, on a great team, with a great coach, who won many titles.

Wilt Chamberlain was an even better player, with little help on most of his teams, who only won 2 titles.

History remembers Russell as the better player.  Wilt, in reality, was the better player.

Brady is Russell.

Peyton is Wilt.    

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Andrew74 said:

I think I'd go Montana, Brady, and Manning.  I just can't leapfrog Montana who was perfect in the SB. He never threw a pick-6 to have his team getting blown out, big comeback or not. 

People can pick whomever they want, but citing Montana as being better due to a 4-0 record in the Super Bowl is actually rewarding him for losing earlier in the post season or not making the playoffs some years at all.

Montana started for 13 years and made it to 7 conference championship games (54% of the time . . . 7 of the 13 years), advanced to 4 SB's (31% of the time), and won 4 titles (31% of the time). So even though Montana went 4-0 in the big game, he didn't win titles in 69% of his time in the league.

Brady has started in 15 seasons and made it to 11 conference championship games (73% of the time . . . 11 of the 15 years), advanced to 7 SB's (47% of the time), and won 5 titles (33% of the time). So even though Brady has lost twice in the big game, his percentage of winning a title is greater than Montana's (33% vs. 31%).

Lots of folks point to Montana being 4-0 in the Super Bowl and his performance in those games. But he played in 211 other games . . . meaning people are ignoring 98% of his career.

There is no question Brady has advanced further in the playoffs taken overall than Montana did. Granted, the NFC had some heavy hitters for opponents back in the day which probably made it more difficult to advance in the playoffs.

And I am sure there will be people saying winning or losing or advancing in the season is a team stat, not an individual or QB stat.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, spider321 said:

Bill Russell was an all-time great player, on a great team, with a great coach, who won many titles.

Wilt Chamberlain was an even better player, with little help on most of his teams, who only won 2 titles.

History remembers Russell as the better player.  Wilt, in reality, was the better player.

Brady is Russell.

Peyton is Wilt.    

I disagree that "history remembers Russell as the better player." 

And I vote Brady as the GOAT.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, spider321 said:

Bill Russell was an all-time great player, on a great team, with a great coach, who won many titles.

Wilt Chamberlain was an even better player, with little help on most of his teams, who only won 2 titles.

History remembers Russell as the better player.  Wilt, in reality, was the better player.

Brady is Russell.

Peyton is Wilt.    

Part of the reason many people think Russell was a better player is that he shut down Chamberlain on his way to winning 11 titles. Wilt won two titles. When you beat the other guy head to head on the way to the title, that has to be worth something, no? The NBA literally renamed the Finals MVP Award the Bill Russell NBA Finals MVP Award.

I personally don't think Russell was a better player, but lots of people in discussions like these like the player that won more titles.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

Part of the reason many people think Russell was a better player is that he shut down Chamberlain on his way to winning 11 titles. Wilt won two titles. When you beat the other guy head to head on the way to the title, that has to be worth something, no? The NBA literally renamed the Finals MVP Award the Bill Russell NBA Finals MVP Award.

I personally don't think Russell was a better player, but lots of people in discussions like these like the player that won more titles.

Thank you for proving my point about the way history misremembers.

Russell never "shut down" Wilt.  Russell was on a better team.

There was a Sports Century on Wilt a few years ago.  I do not recall the head-to-head playoff numbers(Wilt dominated Russell there too), but for their careers Wilt AVERAGED 29 points and 28 rebounds against Russell.

Yes, I know the topic is Brady and Manning but in the same way, history will misremember Brady as the better QB because he was on a better team.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The passage of time will always distort the narrative of who did what and the results of things.

Everyone remembers Joe Montana playing lights out and winning 4 Super Bowls. No one remembers three years in a row, in hos prime, where the Niners lost their first post season game each year by a collective score of 102-30. Joe Cool had no TD passes and threw 4 picks with passer ratings of 65, 34, and 42. One game he threw for only 98 yards and he had 109 in another. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, spider321 said:

Yes, I know the original topic is Brady and Manning, but history will "misremember" Brady as the better QB because he has more titles.

It depends what each person values more. If people value winning championships, then it is hard to argue Brady is the best of all time. This debate and this battle has been waged FOR YEARS in the Shark Pool and it will never go away. Brady probably should get props for being the best leader and having the best team accomplishments. There are too many moving parts and things to compare and contrast to decide what makes up the best QB (which is why these debates never go away).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless people think Belichick is responsible for 80% of Bradys success i dont see how this is a discussion.

Peyton was great, one of the best, not even in the discussion for the best however. Similar but different to how Rodgers or Marino are considered by many to be the best based on ability. 

Your physical abilities dont dictate your skill as a player. If anyone suggest another QB does more at the line than Tom Brady they are blind.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, spider321 said:

Thank you for proving my point about the way history misremembers.

Russell never "shut down" Wilt.  Russell was on a better team.

There was a Sports Century on Wilt a few years ago.  I do not recall the head-to-head playoff numbers(Wilt dominated Russell there too), but for their careers Wilt AVERAGED 29 points and 28 rebounds against Russell.

Yes, I know the topic is Brady and Manning but in the same way, history will misremember Brady as the better QB because he was on a better team.

Wilt beat Russell once in the playoffs.  66-67.  Not sure who had a better team.  Cousy, Heinsohn were gone.  Russell did have Havlicek and an older Sam Jones.  Wilt had Greer.  Russell might have had a better team but not significantly better.

Russell then beat Wilt with a clearly inferior team around him for his 11th ring.  He had about the same as 66-67 an older Sam Jones and an in his prime Havlicek.  Wilt had West and Baylor both in their primes.

That was the year where the Lakers made a comeback when they benched Wilt and almost won the finals.

Comparing skills they were both good passers/rebounders and I'd rate them equally on both (Wilt's league leading assist season aside Russell averaged more assists per minute over his career).  Wilt was a better scorer, Russell was a better defender.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Niles Standish said:

Wilt beat Russell once in the playoffs.  66-67.  Not sure who had a better team.  Cousy, Heinsohn were gone.  Russell did have Havlicek and an older Sam Jones.  Wilt had Greer.  Russell might have had a better team but not significantly better.

Russell then beat Wilt with a clearly inferior team around him for his 11th ring.  He had about the same as 66-67 an older Sam Jones and an in his prime Havlicek.  Wilt had West and Baylor both in their primes.

That was the year where the Lakers made a comeback when they benched Wilt and almost won the finals.

Comparing skills they were both good passers/rebounders and I'd rate them equally on both (Wilt's league leading assist season aside Russell averaged more assists per minute over his career).  Wilt was a better scorer, Russell was a better defender.

Wilt played in the NBA for 9 years before he went to the Lakers.

As I said, Wilt had little help on MOST of his teams

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, spider321 said:

Wilt played in the NBA for 9 years before he went to the Lakers.

As I said, Wilt had little help on MOST of his teams

I'm with you.  I'm just saying Wilt beat Russell once and that year they had pretty comparable teams IMO although you could make the argument Russell's was slightly better around him.  Greer wasn't that different from Havlicek career-wise.  And Russell beat Wilt once with a team that was clearly worse than Wilt's.  Wilt's other title was after Russell had retired and Russell's other 11 seasons (than the ones mentioned) ended with 10 championships and 1 injury to Russell where Boston didn't win the title but you can't blame him too much for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Anarchy99 said:

People can pick whomever they want, but citing Montana as being better due to a 4-0 record in the Super Bowl is actually rewarding him for losing earlier in the post season or not making the playoffs some years at all.

Montana started for 13 years and made it to 7 conference championship games (54% of the time . . . 7 of the 13 years), advanced to 4 SB's (31% of the time), and won 4 titles (31% of the time). So even though Montana went 4-0 in the big game, he didn't win titles in 69% of his time in the league.

Brady has started in 15 seasons and made it to 11 conference championship games (73% of the time . . . 11 of the 15 years), advanced to 7 SB's (47% of the time), and won 5 titles (33% of the time). So even though Brady has lost twice in the big game, his percentage of winning a title is greater than Montana's (33% vs. 31%).

Lots of folks point to Montana being 4-0 in the Super Bowl and his performance in those games. But he played in 211 other games . . . meaning people are ignoring 98% of his career.

There is no question Brady has advanced further in the playoffs taken overall than Montana did. Granted, the NFC had some heavy hitters for opponents back in the day which probably made it more difficult to advance in the playoffs.

And I am sure there will be people saying winning or losing or advancing in the season is a team stat, not an individual or QB stat.

 

Very good points. I think this is an interesting debate with great points in both sides. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anyone see the article in Yahoo Business yesterday? "Tom Brady ties Peyton Manning as the most decorated quarterback in NFL history."  They make the laughable assumption that combining MVPs and Supper Bowl Championship equals best QB.  Be sure to read the comments - no one accepted this premise.

 http://finance.yahoo.com/news/tom-brady-ties-peyton-manning-190600735.html?.tsrc=daily_mail&uh_test=1_10

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Anarchy99 said:

People can pick whomever they want, but citing Montana as being better due to a 4-0 record in the Super Bowl is actually rewarding him for losing earlier in the post season or not making the playoffs some years at all.

Montana started for 13 years and made it to 7 conference championship games (54% of the time . . . 7 of the 13 years), advanced to 4 SB's (31% of the time), and won 4 titles (31% of the time). So even though Montana went 4-0 in the big game, he didn't win titles in 69% of his time in the league.

Brady has started in 15 seasons and made it to 11 conference championship games (73% of the time . . . 11 of the 15 years), advanced to 7 SB's (47% of the time), and won 5 titles (33% of the time). So even though Brady has lost twice in the big game, his percentage of winning a title is greater than Montana's (33% vs. 31%).

Lots of folks point to Montana being 4-0 in the Super Bowl and his performance in those games. But he played in 211 other games . . . meaning people are ignoring 98% of his career.

There is no question Brady has advanced further in the playoffs taken overall than Montana did. Granted, the NFC had some heavy hitters for opponents back in the day which probably made it more difficult to advance in the playoffs.

And I am sure there will be people saying winning or losing or advancing in the season is a team stat, not an individual or QB stat.

This is a good post, and I generally agree with your points. But IMO it is worth pointing out that when Montana played, the defense had much more freedom to hit the QB than in Brady's career. Similarly, the defense had more freedom in defending and hitting receivers. Yet another reason why comparing QBs across eras must consider context.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Just Win Baby said:

This is a good post, and I generally agree with your points. But IMO it is worth pointing out that when Montana played, the defense had much more freedom to hit the QB than in Brady's career. Similarly, the defense had more freedom in defending and hitting receivers. Yet another reason why comparing QBs across eras must consider context.

Certainly I am in the camp that comparing teams, coaches, and players from different eras with different rules and playing is usually a recipe for disaster.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Anarchy99 said:

People can pick whomever they want, but citing Montana as being better due to a 4-0 record in the Super Bowl is actually rewarding him for losing earlier in the post season or not making the playoffs some years at all.

Montana started for 13 years and made it to 7 conference championship games (54% of the time . . . 7 of the 13 years), advanced to 4 SB's (31% of the time), and won 4 titles (31% of the time). So even though Montana went 4-0 in the big game, he didn't win titles in 69% of his time in the league.

Brady has started in 15 seasons and made it to 11 conference championship games (73% of the time . . . 11 of the 15 years), advanced to 7 SB's (47% of the time), and won 5 titles (33% of the time). So even though Brady has lost twice in the big game, his percentage of winning a title is greater than Montana's (33% vs. 31%).

Lots of folks point to Montana being 4-0 in the Super Bowl and his performance in those games. But he played in 211 other games . . . meaning people are ignoring 98% of his career.

There is no question Brady has advanced further in the playoffs taken overall than Montana did. Granted, the NFC had some heavy hitters for opponents back in the day which probably made it more difficult to advance in the playoffs.

And I am sure there will be people saying winning or losing or advancing in the season is a team stat, not an individual or QB stat.

 

People who think going 4-0 in a super bowl is better than going 4-2 are silly. As far as comparing Montana's and Brady's championship pedigree, I like to look at a super bowl loss as a silver medal and a championship game loss as bronze medal. Comparing Brady and Montana you get:

Brady: 5 Gold 2 Silver 4 Bronze

Montana: 4 Gold 0 Silver 3 Bronze 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Put Manning with Belicheck for 18 years and it's a whole different discussion. Same with Rogers or Brees among others. Brady would also not be discussed as greatest ever if he was paired with someone else. He's not the architect of this dynasty. It's Belicheck.

It's the greatest coach/QB combo ever.

Bravo, Michael Robinson, NFL Network, basically saying same thing. It's the coaching and philosophy. Put Brady on the Browns, he's a nobody.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, lod001 said:

Put Manning with Belicheck for 18 years and it's a whole different discussion. Same with Rogers or Brees among others. Brady would also not be discussed as greatest ever if he was paired with someone else. He's not the architect of this dynasty. It's Belicheck.

It's the greatest coach/QB combo ever.

Did Montana benefit from the innovations of Bill Walsh?  Certainly, although I've never heard anyone discredit his accomplishments in that regard.  Weird how people discredit Brady because of BB (and vice versa).

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DropKick said:

Did Montana benefit from the innovations of Bill Walsh?  Certainly, although I've never heard anyone discredit his accomplishments in that regard.  Weird how people discredit Brady because of BB (and vice versa).

Sure he did. Montana isn't the greatest either. Both are great but the greatest QB is Manning...and I don't even like the guy. I say you put Manning in their place and the team is better.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, lod001 said:

Sure he did. Montana isn't the greatest either. Both are great but the greatest QB is Manning...and I don't even like the guy. I say you put Manning in their place and the team is better.

I think Manning lacks mental toughness in comparison to Brady.  Maybe we the same "one and dones".

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, lod001 said:

Sure he did. Montana isn't the greatest either. Both are great but the greatest QB is Manning...and I don't even like the guy. I say you put Manning in their place and the team is better.

Maybe, but the one thing Brady does a lot better than Manning is not turn the ball over.  As a guy from Maine who has gotten to watch Brady's career I've always thought the fact that he's good at taking care of the football is one of his best talents.  Avoids costly sacks too.  And I tend to think it's one of the reasons he wins.  I'm not sure Peyton could be coached to play that way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lod001 said:

Put Manning with Belicheck for 18 years and it's a whole different discussion. Same with Rogers or Brees among others. Brady would also not be discussed as greatest ever if he was paired with someone else. He's not the architect of this dynasty. It's Belicheck.

It's the greatest coach/QB combo ever.

Bravo, Michael Robinson, NFL Network, basically saying same thing. It's the coaching and philosophy. Put Brady on the Browns, he's a nobody.

We literally saw belichick on the browns.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Kwai Chang Caine said:

This ####### argument is still going on?!? Good lord. Come on now people. This was a wrap years ago. And enough of the "IF" argument. If manning had blah blah blah....if your aunt had balls she'd be your uncle.

Lol.

This is put to bed to the point where the media isn't asking who is the GOAT at QB but is Brady the greatest athlete of all time.

Manning isn't even on page 2 of this list.

Enough please.

Bill would bench Manning after he pooped his pants anyways in one of his round 1 and out clunkers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My two cents, there's not another qb in nfl history you would rather have had down 28-3 with 22 minutes to play. Brady has led the go ahead drive in the final minutes of 6 of his 7 Superbowls. 

Superbowl 36 - the rams tied the game with 1:30 left in the game. Brady led the go ahead field goal drive for his first mvp.

Superbowl 38 - trailing 22-21, brady led a touchdown drive capped by a mike vrabel touchdown and 2 point conversion with 6:53 remaining. With 1:08 left, the panthers tied the game, and brady led the go ahead field goal drive for his second mvp. 

Superbowl 39 - tied at 14-14 going into the 4th quarter, brady led the go ahead touchdown drive and another field goal drive. The defense would give up a touchdown, but they ultimately held on for the win.

Superbowl 42 - with 11:05 to play, the Giants scored the go ahead touchdown, 10-7. With 2:42 left in the game, Brady threw a touchdown pass for the lead, 14-10. They went on to lose the game, as everyone knows.

Superbowl 49 - entering the 4th quarter, the patriots trailed by 10 points. Brady threw two 4th quarter touchdown passes to go ahead by the final score of 28- 24.

Superbowl 51 - with 8:31 in the third quarter, the falcons scored their fourth touchdown to take a 25 point, four score lead. Brady then led a touchdown drive, a field goal drive, a touchdown, a two point conversion, a touchdown with less than a minute left in the 4th quarter, another two point conversion, and yet another touchdown drive in overtime to win 34-28. 

When people talk about the greatest of all time, they say things like if i could have one quarterback to win one game, or if i had one guy to make one drive to win the superbowl, i would want so and so. I don't know who else you would want, but I know who the Patriots had, and he has come through in the clutch more than anyone in history. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...