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

2 hours 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.

I would say Brady and Belichick are awesome together. and you can't have one without the other.  Would Belichick have been this successful without Brady? No. Would Brady have been this successful without Belichick? No. But things happen how they happen, and while it is fun to discuss hypotheticals, they really are nothing but pure speculation.  We can only judge the players on what they have actually done.  

1 hour ago, Niles Standish said:

Maybe, but the one thing Brady does a lot better than Manning is not turn the ball over. 

Very true. Brady's career INT percentage is 1.8%; Manning's is 2.7%. Oddly, guys like Sam Bradford, Colin Kaepernick and Neil O'Donnell are all in the top 10 all-time in INT percentage. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 764
  • Created
  • Last Reply
41 minutes ago, Ghost Rider said:

Very true. Brady's career INT percentage is 1.8%; Manning's is 2.7%. Oddly, guys like Sam Bradford, Colin Kaepernick and Neil O'Donnell are all in the top 10 all-time in INT percentage. 

PFFs article about Brady being the best player in 2016 touched on this. 

Adjusted completion percentage he lead with a historic percentage. Kaep and Bradfords are so high because they throw the ball 3 yards behind the line of scrimmage.

 

Quote

At the other end of the scale, Brady led the league in big-time throw percentage, at 6.7—a full percent higher than any other QB, and more than double the figure of the bottom half of the league. He was able to make big plays without endangering the football in a way we have never seen before.

Brady ended the season completing 67.4 percent of his passes, but when you adjust for drops, spikes, passes thrown away, etc. his adjusted completion percentage jumps to 79.5 percent, which is just narrowly behind Sam Bradford’s league-leading figure of 80.9 percent. Bradford, though, recorded the league’s lowest average depth of target figure to produce that historic accuracy, while Brady was putting the ball on average almost two full yards further downfield from the line of scrimmage.

The bottom line is that, over the last decade of grading, Pro Football Focus analysts have never seen a QB play with the efficiency and effectiveness that Tom Brady has displayed this season. His 99.3 PFF grade in the 2016 regular season tops the previous best season we have seen from a QB, which was Aaron Rodgers’ obscene 2011 campaign (98.4). In fact, only three previous players have surpasses the 95.0 barrier in the PFF era (since the 2006 season.

 

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

I would say Brady and Belichick are awesome together. and you can't have one without the other.  Would Belichick have been this successful without Brady? No. Would Brady have been this successful without Belichick? No. But things happen how they happen, and while it is fun to discuss hypotheticals, they really are nothing but pure speculation.  We can only judge the players on what they have actually done.  

Very true. Brady's career INT percentage is 1.8%; Manning's is 2.7%. Oddly, guys like Sam Bradford, Colin Kaepernick and Neil O'Donnell are all in the top 10 all-time in INT percentage. 

And the funny thing about those guys who most of us would say are below average QBs is they have a combined record of just 3 games under .500.  That's a lot better than they should be based on the eye test.

Those guys being Bradford/Kaepernick/O'Donnell.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm. Deion Sanders is alledging the Colts stole signals and the entire league knew. I personally don't care, but it does seem to further illustrate that teams are always looking for an advantage and to stretch what the rules allow. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, bostonfred said:

Brady has led the go ahead drive in the final minutes of 6 of his 7 Superbowls. 

This.

I'm convinced that those that think "Brady would be a nobody" without Belichick have amnesia.

He has done this time and time again.

Brady's greatness is easy to take for granted. I'm a nervous nelly when it comes to watching NE in big games, but when they won the coin toss, knowing what Brady has done in these clutch spots before, I knew it was over.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the only argument now is Brady or Montana. Brady won more. Montana was not only perfect in the SB, but never even threw a pick, much less a pick-six. He also took the Chiefs to the conference championship. No Rice, no Walsh, no 49ers system. He beat Steve Young on his old team and he beat Elway with the Chiefs. He somehow beat a fantastic Oilers team in the playoffs. And it wasn't quite the QB-friendly league it is today.

We don't know what Brady would have done outside New England. We do know that Matt Cassell went 11-5 in that system. The thing about the Brady-led Patriots is they could easily be 3-4 in Super Bowls...or they could be 7-0. They've given us a lot of entertaining games.

I want to say it's still Montana, but I don't feel as confident about it. I say they're tied. I can't pick one. If we need to give Dallas (and their coaching and system) a QB for one playoff run, I probably go Montana. But I think Belichick and Brady probably beat Walsh and Montana. 

I'm arguing both sides in my head. I'm glad I followed football in the eras where both did their best work. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Run It Up said:

PFFs article about Brady being the best player in 2016 touched on this. 

Adjusted completion percentage he lead with a historic percentage. Kaep and Bradfords are so high because they throw the ball 3 yards behind the line of scrimmage.

 

 

Interesting quantification.  Kind of jibes with my personal take:

My eyeball test tells me that these last 3 seasons have been Brady at his best.

What got lost in the hysteria of the comeback is that he did it without Gronk.  That's like Julio Jones on IR.  He did it without any long bombs completed against broken coverages (unlike Rice running free when Montana had easy pickings against the Broncos).  He did it against having to adjust to a cover 1 scheme Atlanta rarely showed during the season and caught the Pats off guard (and Gronk would have been the best antidote against cover 1).  He did it with Atlanta mimicking the Pats' style of bend-but-don't-break, forcing long sustained drives vs. large chunk plays, looking to increase the odds of forcing a turnover (worked twice) or tighten up in the red zone (worked on 2 of the first 3 scores by the Pats in the first 51 minutes of the game).

I don't think 2007 Brady with his 50 TDs completes that comeback.  I don't think 2003-2004 Brady does, either.  I absolutely don't think 2001 Brady does.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Neil Beaufort Zod said:

I think the only argument now is Brady or Montana. Brady won more. Montana was not only perfect in the SB, but never even threw a pick, much less a pick-six. He also took the Chiefs to the conference championship. No Rice, no Walsh, no 49ers system. He beat Steve Young on his old team and he beat Elway with the Chiefs. He somehow beat a fantastic Oilers team in the playoffs. And it wasn't quite the QB-friendly league it is today.

We don't know what Brady would have done outside New England. We do know that Matt Cassell went 11-5 in that system. The thing about the Brady-led Patriots is they could easily be 3-4 in Super Bowls...or they could be 7-0. They've given us a lot of entertaining games.

I want to say it's still Montana, but I don't feel as confident about it. I say they're tied. I can't pick one. If we need to give Dallas (and their coaching and system) a QB for one playoff run, I probably go Montana. But I think Belichick and Brady probably beat Walsh and Montana. 

I'm arguing both sides in my head. I'm glad I followed football in the eras where both did their best work. 

Good post man! You make a great point with Montana's play on the Cheifs but I'm still going Brady and not losing sleep over it. Walsh's system was so far ahead of anyone else that I think it's at least as big an advantage as those that attach everything Brady does to Belichick. And the number of HOF's and near HOF's Montana played with makes it an easy decision for me. I was stunned to find that only SEVEN--that's right--SEVEN players were on the team that beat Seattle. That's just tremendous to be this successful in the salary cap era.

Even more flabbergasting is that I'm actually defending NE when I've been an avowed hater for years since they beat my Eagles and Spygate.

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

Hmmm. Deion Sanders is alledging the Colts stole signals and the entire league knew. I personally don't care, but it does seem to further illustrate that teams are always looking for an advantage and to stretch what the rules allow. 

I don't know if that illustrates anything but a guy with a big mouth keeps talking.  That is unless you want to recognize the long list of alleged cheats that the Patriots did.  This is rhetorical, because you don't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hogan

Amendola

Mitchell

Edelman

Remember, these are the guys that Brady was throwing to. And of course, No Gronk.

Other names from the past: R. Caldwell, D. Givens, T. Brown.

Outside of the small window Moss era, Brady hasn't exactly had J. Rice to throw to.

You can argue that this is the Bill Belichick "system" but  I'd argue it's just as much if not more Brady making ordinary players that much better. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brady is now 5-2 in playoff games while attempting 50 or more passes. All other quarterbacks in history are 3-28.

Throw out his injury season and the most consecutive seasons Brady has played without going to the Super Bowl is 2.

Brady's career regular season record averages out  to 12.5 wins and 3.5 losses.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is no longer a debate...As great a qb as Manning was, Tom Brady is clearly the better of the two and quite frankly it’s not even close.

While we are on the subject, Tom Brady is the best qb of all time bar none.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On February 9, 2017 at 7:17 AM, kyoun1e said:

Hogan

Amendola

Mitchell

Edelman

Remember, these are the guys that Brady was throwing to. And of course, No Gronk.

Other names from the past: R. Caldwell, D. Givens, T. Brown.

Outside of the small window Moss era, Brady hasn't exactly had J. Rice to throw to.

You can argue that this is the Bill Belichick "system" but  I'd argue it's just as much if not more Brady making ordinary players that much better. 

None of those four WRs on his team this year were bums, which is always the implication. 

Edelman is always making tough catches. They don't win that Super Bowl two years against Seattle if he doesn't make that 3rd down catch where he got absolutely drilled (and likely concussed). 

Amendola showed flashes in St. Louis. Same for Hogan in Buffalo. It's not surprising that both got better after going from clueless teams from an offensive team to the best coached team in the league. 

Mitchell was only a rookie this year, but he looks like he could be really good. 

And what team had the best RBs this year from 1-3?  That would be New England. 

Yes, Brady makes them all better, but let's not act like he is surrounded by trash out there.  The Patriots, since '07, have done a great job of supplying him with plenty of talent at the skill positions.  Consider that SEVEN times since 2007, Brady has had a first team All-Pro at WR or TE. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

WR Wes Welker played with both Brady and Manning.  Of course he's been asked to compare the two and the first thing out of his mouth is utter shock at manning's accuracy.  He said its like a handoff downfield.  He'd never seen anything like it and he played with Brady for years.

 

I'd pick Manning over Brady.

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

None of those four WRs on his team this year were bums, which is always the implication. 

Edelman is always making tough catches. They don't win that Super Bowl two years against Seattle if he doesn't make that 3rd down catch where he got absolutely drilled (and likely concussed). 

Amendola showed flashes in St. Louis. Same for Hogan in Buffalo. It's not surprising that both got better after going from clueless teams from an offensive team to the best coached team in the league. 

Mitchell was only a rookie this year, but he looks like he could be really good. 

And what team had the best RBs this year from 1-3?  That would be New England. 

Yes, Brady makes them all better, but let's not act like he is surrounded by trash out there.  The Patriots, since '07, have done a great job of supplying him with plenty of talent at the skill positions.  Consider that SEVEN times since 2007, Brady has had a first team All-Pro at WR or TE. 

 

This part is a little misleading, Lewis was out for most of the year and New England puts their running backs into a position to succeed. They are talented, but not all world talents. I would trade several backfields with New England's in the league.

Atlanta, Pittsburgh, San Diego, Oakland, Kansas City, Tennessee, Dallas, and Arizona.

I also think there are several more teams that could switch backfields with New England and it would have the same success.

Detroit, Washington, Cincinnati, Tampa, New Orleans, Buffalo.

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

Consider that SEVEN times since 2007, Brady has had a first team All-Pro at WR or TE. 

To pick nits, technically it's FIVE times since 2007 Brady had a first-team All-Pro at WR or TE. Welker was a first-teamer in 2008 . . . the year Brady missed. The year before, Welker was a seconder-teamer.

Here's the full list of All-Pro players on offense for both guys . . . (First or second team All Pro)

2016	RT Marcus Cannon	2
2015	TE Rob Gronkowski	1
2014	TE Rob Gronkowski	1
2013	G Logan Mankins		2
2012	G Logan Mankins		2
2011	G Logan Mankins		2
2011	TE Rob Gronkowski	1
2011	WR Wes Welker		1
2010	RT Sebastian Vollmer	2
2010	G Logan Mankins		1
2009	G Logan Mankins		2
2007	C Dan Koppen		2
2007	G Logan Mankins		2
2007	T Matt Light		1
2007	WR Wes Welker		2
2007	WR Randy Moss		1
2001	WR Troy Brown		2
2014	WR Demaryius Thomas	2
2013	G Louis Vasquez		1
2013	WR Demaryius Thomas	2
2012	T Ryan Clady		1
2010	WR Reggie Wayne		1
2009	C Jeff Saturday		2
2009	TE Dallas Clark		1
2009	WR Reggie Wayne		2
2007	C Jeff Saturday		1
2007	WR Reggie Wayne		2
2006	C Jeff Saturday		2
2006	WR Marvin Harrison	1
2005	C Jeff Saturday		1
2005	WR Marvin Harrison	2
2005	RB Edgerrin James	1
2004	WR Marvin Harrison	2
2004	RB Edgerrin James	2
2003	WR Marvin Harrison	2
2002	WR Marvin Harrison	1
2001	WR Marvin Harrison	2
2000	WR Marvin Harrison	2
2000	RB Edgerrin James	2
1999	WR Marvin Harrison	1
1999	RB Edgerrin James	1
1998	RB Marshall Faulk	2

 

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

None of those four WRs on his team this year were bums, which is always the implication. 

Edelman is always making tough catches. They don't win that Super Bowl two years against Seattle if he doesn't make that 3rd down catch where he got absolutely drilled (and likely concussed). 

Amendola showed flashes in St. Louis. Same for Hogan in Buffalo. It's not surprising that both got better after going from clueless teams from an offensive team to the best coached team in the league. 

Mitchell was only a rookie this year, but he looks like he could be really good. 

And what team had the best RBs this year from 1-3?  That would be New England. 

Yes, Brady makes them all better, but let's not act like he is surrounded by trash out there.  The Patriots, since '07, have done a great job of supplying him with plenty of talent at the skill positions.  Consider that SEVEN times since 2007, Brady has had a first team All-Pro at WR or TE. 

 

It's not trash, but it's far from elite. And more often than not, that has been the case throughout his career.

Let's not even compare the skill that has surrounded Brady vs. that of Montana and Manning. It's not even comparable no matter how you play with the data.

Edelman was a late round pick...drafted as a QB. Good chance if he went to the wrong team he's out of the league by now. Hindsignt is 20/20 on Hogan...minus what he's done with Brady I'm not sure most would look back at his career at Buffalo and speak to a ton of "flashes." 

Amendola...watch the game replay and see where Brady put the ball on his key catches. WATCH. Amendola, when healthy this year, was having a difficult time cracking the lineup.

Brady makes them (and past WRs) better is a huge understatement. 

As I've said before, at this point everyone takes Brady for granted.

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

None of those four WRs on his team this year were bums, which is always the implication. 

Edelman is always making tough catches. They don't win that Super Bowl two years against Seattle if he doesn't make that 3rd down catch where he got absolutely drilled (and likely concussed). 

Amendola showed flashes in St. Louis. Same for Hogan in Buffalo. It's not surprising that both got better after going from clueless teams from an offensive team to the best coached team in the league. 

Mitchell was only a rookie this year, but he looks like he could be really good. 

And what team had the best RBs this year from 1-3?  That would be New England. 

Yes, Brady makes them all better, but let's not act like he is surrounded by trash out there.  The Patriots, since '07, have done a great job of supplying him with plenty of talent at the skill positions.  Consider that SEVEN times since 2007, Brady has had a first team All-Pro at WR or TE. 

 

 

2 hours ago, kyoun1e said:

It's not trash, but it's far from elite. And more often than not, that has been the case throughout his career.

Let's not even compare the skill that has surrounded Brady vs. that of Montana and Manning. It's not even comparable no matter how you play with the data.

Edelman was a late round pick...drafted as a QB. Good chance if he went to the wrong team he's out of the league by now. Hindsignt is 20/20 on Hogan...minus what he's done with Brady I'm not sure most would look back at his career at Buffalo and speak to a ton of "flashes." 

Amendola...watch the game replay and see where Brady put the ball on his key catches. WATCH. Amendola, when healthy this year, was having a difficult time cracking the lineup.

Brady makes them (and past WRs) better is a huge understatement. 

As I've said before, at this point everyone takes Brady for granted.

These guys are not "elite" like a Julio or AB, true.  I doubt that any of them would make the catch that Julio made in the SB over Eric Rowe.  There are a set of singular physical talents out there, and NE does not typically ( outside of Moss ) bring in those guys.

However, this years receiving corps was miles ahead of some past years, in quality and depth.  Any one of them could provide a big play or big game if the situation called for it.  Honestly, I think the NE WR group this year is severely underrated, primarily because they don't fit the description of a #1 WR in today's NFL.  Together ( with a healthy Gronk ), I don't know if I see a deeper, more complimentary group in the league, though each individually does not scare anybody.  

Brady is a perfect triggerman for this group, IMO.  He has built a career on finding the right matchup and open man, spreading the ball around to multiple receivers.  FF often drives our impression of players and their skill set, and NE WR ( outside Moss, welker -PPR and Edelman - PPR ) have not produced quality FF numbers from the WR position.  In the real world, this might well be Brady's best offensive cast, because there are so many options in the passing game that had Brady's trust.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, msudaisy26 said:

This part is a little misleading, Lewis was out for most of the year and New England puts their running backs into a position to succeed. They are talented, but not all world talents. I would trade several backfields with New England's in the league.

Atlanta, Pittsburgh, San Diego, Oakland, Kansas City, Tennessee, Dallas, and Arizona.

I also think there are several more teams that could switch backfields with New England and it would have the same success.

Detroit, Washington, Cincinnati, Tampa, New Orleans, Buffalo.

Name the number 3 RB on those teams.  None are as good as D Lewis. 

Blount had 1,100+ yards and 18 touchdowns.
White had 60 catches, over 700 yards (rushing and receiving) and five scores (and a monster Super Bowl).
D. Lewis didn't play a lot in the regular season, but was great in limited duty, then set records in their first playoff game. 

Name another team with three RBs that good. And that doesn't mean name a team like Arizona who had one awesome RB and then two others who did little. 

4 hours ago, Anarchy99 said:

To pick nits, technically it's FIVE times since 2007 Brady had a first-team All-Pro at WR or TE. Welker was a first-teamer in 2008 . . . the year Brady missed. The year before, Welker was a seconder-teamer.

Here's the full list of All-Pro players on offense for both guys . . . (First or second team All Pro)


2016	RT Marcus Cannon	2
2015	TE Rob Gronkowski	1
2014	TE Rob Gronkowski	1
2013	G Logan Mankins		2
2012	G Logan Mankins		2
2011	G Logan Mankins		2
2011	TE Rob Gronkowski	1
2011	WR Wes Welker		1
2010	RT Sebastian Vollmer	2
2010	G Logan Mankins		1
2009	G Logan Mankins		2
2007	C Dan Koppen		2
2007	G Logan Mankins		2
2007	T Matt Light		1
2007	WR Wes Welker		2
2007	WR Randy Moss		1
2001	WR Troy Brown		2

2014	WR Demaryius Thomas	2
2013	G Louis Vasquez		1
2013	WR Demaryius Thomas	2
2012	T Ryan Clady		1
2010	WR Reggie Wayne		1
2009	C Jeff Saturday		2
2009	TE Dallas Clark		1
2009	WR Reggie Wayne		2
2007	C Jeff Saturday		1
2007	WR Reggie Wayne		2
2006	C Jeff Saturday		2
2006	WR Marvin Harrison	1
2005	C Jeff Saturday		1
2005	WR Marvin Harrison	2
2005	RB Edgerrin James	1
2004	WR Marvin Harrison	2
2004	RB Edgerrin James	2
2003	WR Marvin Harrison	2
2002	WR Marvin Harrison	1
2001	WR Marvin Harrison	2
2000	WR Marvin Harrison	2
2000	RB Edgerrin James	2
1999	WR Marvin Harrison	1
1999	RB Edgerrin James	1
1998	RB Marshall Faulk	2

 

I was counting 2007.

Moss was first-team All-Pro in 2007.

Welker was first team All-Pro in 2009 and 2011.

Gronk has been first-team All-Pro four times. 

4 hours ago, kyoun1e said:



As I've said before, at this point everyone takes Brady for granted.

Get a grip. This week, most are calling him the GOAT amongst QBs, and many are now calling him the best football player ever.  And you think everyone takes him for granted? :lol: 

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

Name the number 3 RB on those teams.  None are as good as D Lewis. 

Blount had 1,100+ yards and 18 touchdowns.
White had 60 catches, over 700 yards (rushing and receiving) and five scores (and a monster Super Bowl).
D. Lewis didn't play a lot in the regular season, but was great in limited duty, then set records in their first playoff game. 

Name another team with three RBs that good. And that doesn't mean name a team like Arizona who had one awesome RB and then two others who did little. 

 

To the 1st part it doesn't really matter, some teams have 2 running backs that are so much better than Blount and White or Lewis(depends on who you put first) that the 3rd guy could be anyone, but I will play it your way

I think I would take Arizona's trio over New England. Johnson and Ellington both have shown great upside they just both got hurt this year, I would take Dallas's trio over New England's Zeke, McFadden, and Morris, I would for sure take Oakland's trio over New England.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, msudaisy26 said:

To the 1st part it doesn't really matter, some teams have 2 running backs that are so much better than Blount and White or Lewis(depends on who you put first) that the 3rd guy could be anyone, but I will play it your way

I think I would take Arizona's trio over New England. Johnson and Ellington both have shown great upside they just both got hurt this year, I would take Dallas's trio over New England's Zeke, McFadden, and Morris, I would for sure take Oakland's trio over New England.

It's true that NE's best RB doesn't touch the best RB from quite a few NFL teams, but that really wasn't the point, to quibble over which teams had the best 1-3 RBs. The point was that the NE offense had a lot of talent at the skill positions this year.  No one who is an All-Pro, but I am just saying, for as great as Brady is, people need to stop with the "he is winning with less" narrative, because it simply is not true anymore. 

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

It's true that NE's best RB doesn't touch the best RB from quite a few NFL teams, but that really wasn't the point, to quibble over which teams had the best 1-3 RBs. The point was that the NE offense had a lot of talent at the skill positions this year.  No one who is an All-Pro, but I am just saying, for as great as Brady is, people need to stop with the "he is winning with less" narrative, because it simply is not true anymore. 

We will just have to agree to disagree. Matt Ryan has better receivers, better running backs and a better line and Brady did more, the same can be said about Dallas, the same about Green Bay minus the running game, every year New England is a top offense and you look across the NFL and usually the top offenses have more/equal weapons than Brady.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, msudaisy26 said:

We will just have to agree to disagree. Matt Ryan has better receivers, better running backs and a better line and Brady did more, the same can be said about Dallas, the same about Green Bay minus the running game, every year New England is a top offense and you look across the NFL and usually the top offenses have more/equal weapons than Brady.

That has nothing to do with what I was talking about.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brady gets it. In an interview with PFT this morning, Brady said playing for the greatest coach afforded him the opportunity to achieve what he has achieved and "many players" if put in his situation would have accomplished the same thing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its funny to think that in the past four seasons Manning added yet another MVP award and then a second Super Bowl ring, but the thread question has been definitively answered in favor of Brady.  That's how staggering Brady's late career accomplishments have been. Personally I would have liked the answer to be Manning.  I preferred his style of play and find him the more interesting person.  But that's aesthetics.  Brady's resume speaks for itself and neither Manning nor anybody else can match it now.  I've always enjoyed a good Greatest QB of All-Time debate and it's actually kind of annoying that Brady has closed the door on it, maybe forever. People in this thread have made some very good arguments over the years for each side and there have been moments where it seemed like the scales were tipping Manning's way.  But it doesn't seem like there's anything left to argue about.

It would have been interesting if Brady's past two Super Bowl foes had gone with the percentages and chose to run instead of pass the ball at a few key moments (you know what I'm talking about).  Then there's a good chance Brady is 3-4 in Super Bowls with losses in four consecutive Super Bowl appearances.  Suddenly Manning proponents have an argument again while Brady supporters are screaming how their man was essentially defeated by one miracle catch in each of the four losses.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/11/2017 at 1:51 PM, Ghost Rider said:

It's true that NE's best RB doesn't touch the best RB from quite a few NFL teams, but that really wasn't the point, to quibble over which teams had the best 1-3 RBs. The point was that the NE offense had a lot of talent at the skill positions this year.  No one who is an All-Pro, but I am just saying, for as great as Brady is, people need to stop with the "he is winning with less" narrative, because it simply is not true anymore. 

Brady had a very solid WR corps this season.  I'd say probably top 10.  He had 4 good WRs.  His OL was good this year I wouldn't say top 10 because I think he masks some of their deficiency by getting rid of the ball quickly and moving well inside the pocket.  They were a mess last year and he hid it most of the time.  His TEs on paper were the best in the NFL.  In actuality Gronk barely played and Bennett was playing through injury.  Limited Bennett was still good.  So they weren't playing with JAGs.  I'm not sure how I'd rate them personally.  Probably top 15 at least.  The RBs... Dion never quite looked like the guy before the injury.  Blount looked good but his per carry numbers were just average.  White was a very good receiving back all year and special in the Superbowl.  I wouldn't say the RBs were great.  I'd say top 10 at best.

So overall I agree with you Brady had a lot of talent around him this year.  But (only because of TE injuries) I don't think he had any group that was close to the top of the league.  WRs IMO are the closest argument you can make.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no - people hate the success of Brady and the Patriots and so they rank Manning higher

go by the numbers (yards and TD's and years played) , the division titles, the regular season wins, the Super Bowl rings, MVP awards ..... Brady eclipses Manning in most and will eclipse them all in the next 2-3 years don't you think barring injury? 

I could say Aaron Brooks was the best QB ever ...... I couldn't provide a single piece of proof why though, which makes the belief silly doesn't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

no - people hate the success of Brady and the Patriots and so they rank Manning higher

go by the numbers (yards and TD's and years played) , the division titles, the regular season wins, the Super Bowl rings, MVP awards ..... Brady eclipses Manning in most and will eclipse them all in the next 2-3 years don't you think barring injury? 

I could say Aaron Brooks was the best QB ever ...... I couldn't provide a single piece of proof why though, which makes the belief silly doesn't it?

People are going to prefer who they prefer and,yes, that is loaded with bias.  My favorite is still Marino on a nostalgic level but when I look back at numbers and team achievements that is hard to defend.  One thing I've always considered in Brady v. Manning is the huge difference in their draft stock.  Peyton was anointed a QB at an early age while Brady had to work hard for it; both in college and the pros.  The mental toughness displayed in the SB is a great example and it is shocking Brady has come this far, especially if you've seen combine video of a scrawny kid.  This isn't to say Manning didn't work hard, but Brady was more of an underdog to me.

But, I agree with you,  It's all silly.  Manning played for and with who he played for...  Brady played for and with who he played for.  It is what it is.  Theoretical scenarios like "how would Brady have done with the Browns" or "how would Manning have done with Belichick" are really pointless.  They each were very prolific and successful in their own right but Brady's success far eclipses Manning and as some say "it isn't close".   To be honest, I don't see the need to pit them against each other now that they no longer play against each other.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Niles Standish said:

Brady had a very solid WR corps this season.  I'd say probably top 10.  He had 4 good WRs.  His OL was good this year I wouldn't say top 10 because I think he masks some of their deficiency by getting rid of the ball quickly and moving well inside the pocket.  They were a mess last year and he hid it most of the time.  His TEs on paper were the best in the NFL.  In actuality Gronk barely played and Bennett was playing through injury.  Limited Bennett was still good.  So they weren't playing with JAGs.  I'm not sure how I'd rate them personally.  Probably top 15 at least.  The RBs... Dion never quite looked like the guy before the injury.  Blount looked good but his per carry numbers were just average.  White was a very good receiving back all year and special in the Superbowl.  I wouldn't say the RBs were great.  I'd say top 10 at best.

So overall I agree with you Brady had a lot of talent around him this year.  But (only because of TE injuries) I don't think he had any group that was close to the top of the league.  WRs IMO are the closest argument you can make.

I'm just trying to understand how this is a top ten wide receiving corps or even pass catching group.

His wide receivers were 13th, 50th, 86th and 103rd in the NFL in receiving yards this year. And the one who was tops on that list plays the slot.  Hogan was second on the team with 680 yards and 4 touchdowns, both career bests. He's 28 and in 4 years had 1,639 receiving yards.  Malcolm Mitchell explored onto the scene with 32 catches for 401 yards and 4 touchdowns.  Danny Amendola's career bests are 689 yards and 3 touchdowns, both in St. Louis.

I know, but Gronk. He's obviously their real number one.  Not this year. He had 540 yards and 3 touchdowns.  After Gronk got hurt, Brady averaged over 315 yards a game with 23 touchdowns in ten Gronkless games 

Martellus Bennett contributed 701 yards. He's good - that was 9th in the league among tight ends - but hardly dominant.  Paired with Gronk? Best in the league. On his own and limping for most of the second half?  He's good. 

But would anyone expect a quarterback whose leading receivers were Julian Edelman and Martellus Bennett to come in second in MVP voting and throw for 1237 yards and 7 touchdowns in three playoff games? including 466 in the Superbowl?  

Did anyone consider Hogan good this year before he blew up against the Steelers?  Or Amendola before he made a couple clutch catches in the Superbowl?  Or Malcolm Mitchell outside of a brief 4 game stretch where he put up fantasy numbers because he caught almost 66 yards a game with 4 touchdowns?  Or James White, who averaged 35 yards a game? 

Top ten? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I always love the "Brady throws to dog crap" shtick that some Patriots fans cling to. Him having a lot of good weapons this past season doesn't take away from his greatness, FFS.

Yeah, James White only averaged 35 receiving yards a game...which was 3rd in the NFL among RBs in 2016.

Chris Hogan tied for 1st in 2016 in yards per catch. 

Malcolm Mitchell looks good, if you watch games and use the eye test, instead of just looking at his overall totals, which ignores the fact that he didn't really got targets until November (35 of his 48 targets came in November and December).

Amendola can't stay healthy, and is usually usurped by Edelman (who is the same kind of WR only better).  And neither is as good as Welker was (a guy I always thought wasn't as good as his numbers). 

The Patriots spread it around a ton, which is why individual players rarely put up big numbers, outside of a healthy Gronk (and Moss and Welker back when the Patriots didn't have a lot of depth at the skill positions), but they have a lot of talent out their on offense. That was on display in the playoffs.  And again, that doesn't take anything away from Brady's greatness. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2‎/‎14‎/‎2017 at 10:10 AM, Anarchy99 said:

Brady gets it. In an interview with PFT this morning, Brady said playing for the greatest coach afforded him the opportunity to achieve what he has achieved and "many players" if put in his situation would have accomplished the same thing. 

Good to hear him say that. Maybe it will shut up the ridiculousness surrounding Brady. What I've been saying all along. Put Manning or Brees or Rodgers in NE under that coaching and they are right there with Brady.

Right after the game, there was a jackass on NFL network calling Brady the greatest athlete in the history of sports. A former player. What a moron. It was embarrassing to watch.

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

Good to hear him say that. Maybe it will shut up the ridiculousness surrounding Brady. What I've been saying all along. Put Manning or Brees or Rodgers in NE under that coaching and they are right there with Brady.

Right after the game, there was a jackass on NFL network calling Brady the greatest athlete in the history of sports. A former player. What a moron. It was embarrassing to watch.

I think some people confuse best athlete and best athlete at their job.  For example, I doubt Wayne Gretzky was the fastest skater or most skilled, but he was by far the best hockey player ever because of everything he brought to the table, which included the neck up.  In the case of Brady, I am sure if they did a skills competition for running and jumping, he wouldn't finish at the top, but who cares?  He plays QB, and for that position, he has done it about as well as anyone ever has.  I saw someone on TV making the argument that Deion Sanders was a better athlete because he could run faster. :lol:  There was another person confusing best athlete with best athlete at their job. 

Personally, I still put Jerry Rice comfortably at number 1 on my all-time NFL list, with Brady, Peyton, Lawrence Taylor and Montana rounding out the top 5. 

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

I always love the "Brady throws to dog crap" shtick that some Patriots fans cling to. Him having a lot of good weapons this past season doesn't take away from his greatness, FFS.

Yeah, James White only averaged 35 receiving yards a game...which was 3rd in the NFL among RBs in 2016.

Chris Hogan tied for 1st in 2016 in yards per catch. 

Malcolm Mitchell looks good, if you watch games and use the eye test, instead of just looking at his overall totals, which ignores the fact that he didn't really got targets until November (35 of his 48 targets came in November and December).

Amendola can't stay healthy, and is usually usurped by Edelman (who is the same kind of WR only better).  And neither is as good as Welker was (a guy I always thought wasn't as good as his numbers). 

The Patriots spread it around a ton, which is why individual players rarely put up big numbers, outside of a healthy Gronk (and Moss and Welker back when the Patriots didn't have a lot of depth at the skill positions), but they have a lot of talent out their on offense. That was on display in the playoffs.  And again, that doesn't take anything away from Brady's greatness. 

 

I know that's been your criticism for a while and I hesitated to post because I knew you'd be in here to say something about it, again.  

Let me take the other side of the argument for a minute.  

Forget that Hogan had 680 yards and 4 touchdowns. He was actually Elite because he had a really high yards per reception.  James White isn't just a good receiving back he was third in the NFL in rb receiving.  Don't worry that he had 158 yards rushing - he could have done more.  Mitchell "passes the eye test", and Amendola is so much better than his numbers.  

You would literally never accept that if it didn't support your argument.  If I told you this group was top ten in the nfl you'd laugh in my face and talk about how pats fans always overrate their own team.  Now you're taking the other side. It's remarkable, but not unexpected. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not a criticism.  It's simply a statement that I believe the Patriots have had better weapons around Brady than some think, like you, who often talks like Brady has spent a career throwing to scrubs, always referencing clowns like Reche Caldwell, Kenbrell Tompkins and Aaron Dobson, as if those guys were his main targets for years at a time.  It's pretty easy to talk about Tom Brady's greatness without repeatedly trashing the guys he throws to as if they are all scrubs.  When it comes to WRs, they are the one position where their production is completely dependent on another guy, and while the Patriots seem to suck at drafting WRs, Belichick is a genius at seeing WRs either underused or not being used properly on other teams and thinking, "We can plug that guy into our system and he will help us win."  Chris Hogan is a good example. 

Also, I do not believe it was me who said it was a top 10 receiving corps in the NFL, although that could be a fun debate.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not that they are better athletes. They are better WRs at running routes in this system. These guys would be worthless with Ryan Tannehill, Jay Cutler, Cam Newton or Brock O.

Criteria for being a WR in NE: 1. hands, 2. brains, 3. athleticism - least important. 1 & 2 may be interchangeable but they are ahead of 3.

Case in point Chad Johnson, who at 33 was faster than some of the guys Brady threw to during his career. Here's the problem. He was too dumb. He couldn't grasp the system. Said so himself. Understand? It's a system. Each WR goes to the line with multiple routes. He has to know which one he is running and so does Brady based on the defensive formation. If the CB is in zone and playing inside the WR, the route goes outside. Both the WR and Brady know it at the snap.

It's all right here: https://www.boston.com/sports/extra-points/2014/09/02/what_makes_the_patriots_offense_so_difficult

Other teams can't do this because they have either dumb coaches, dumb players or both. The WR runs whatever route he is told, period. That's why when you watch some teams WRs, they are never open. The D already knows the route. The QB is weak and simply looks at the guy the play called for - Brock Oswilder. It also takes time for the QB to master.  

They destroyed the PITT zone because this system easily beats a zone if you have weak pressure on Brady. You play man, you wear down as they slowly go down the field. Eventually the DL gets tired and the pass rush is gone.  It was never so evident than in the SB.

These WR are great simply because they can do this. When they leave, they go to a lower level of coaching so they are not as effective.

So this team can be athletically inferior to the other team and still beat them. They have beat 3 SB teams who were vastly superior in talent in STL, SEA and ATL. Barely and they should not have but the other team had weak coaching. It was a coaching and team effort. It wasn't Brady. Manning would have done the same, so would have Rodgers and Brees. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

After rewatching the second halves of their two most recent victories, Brady's passing was phenomenal. Pass after pass he connected with guys with a margin for error of 3-6 inches. Go watch the slow motion close up replays. The ball is an inch or two from outstretched arms on almost every single play. 

Sure, the Pats got lucky with the Edelman catch and the play calling by ATL and SEA, but in the greatest of pressure moments he brought his A+++ game to close out the scoring in those two games by a total of 45-0. 

It's hard to believe but Brady is playing better now than ever ( to which some will say he must be using some artificial ways to boost his performance). 

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

After rewatching the second halves of their two most recent victories, Brady's passing was phenomenal. Pass after pass he connected with guys with a margin for error of 3-6 inches. Go watch the slow motion close up replays. The ball is an inch or two from outstretched arms on almost every single play. 

Sure, the Pats got lucky with the Edelman catch and the play calling by ATL and SEA, but in the greatest of pressure moments he brought his A+++ game to close out the scoring in those two games by a total of 45-0. 

It's hard to believe but Brady is playing better now than ever ( to which some will say he must be using some artificial ways to boost his performance). 

No denying he's great and accurate. He wouldn't be around this long if he wasn't accurate. The difference between the 1st and 2nd halves is the Pats O wore down the ATL D. He was awful in the 1st half BECAUSE the DL was getting to him. He was missing guys left and right. In the 2nd half, he had the time to make those throws.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Iod001, you left out one more thing that is needed out of WRs in New England: unselfishness.  You go there knowing that some weeks you might get 8 targets and then maybe none the following week; it all depends on the game plan and winning, not jacking up any one player's stats.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/11/2017 at 9:44 AM, kyoun1e said:

It's not trash, but it's far from elite. And more often than not, that has been the case throughout his career.

Let's not even compare the skill that has surrounded Brady vs. that of Montana and Manning. It's not even comparable no matter how you play with the data.

Edelman was a late round pick...drafted as a QB. Good chance if he went to the wrong team he's out of the league by now. Hindsignt is 20/20 on Hogan...minus what he's done with Brady I'm not sure most would look back at his career at Buffalo and speak to a ton of "flashes." 

Amendola...watch the game replay and see where Brady put the ball on his key catches. WATCH. Amendola, when healthy this year, was having a difficult time cracking the lineup.

Brady makes them (and past WRs) better is a huge understatement. 

As I've said before, at this point everyone takes Brady for granted.

:lol: at the "takes Brady for granted" 

If team A has "more skill", higher drafted players, and QB A; while team B has lower drafted players, QB B and Belichick, there is zero doubt in my mind that QB B is in a better position to succeed.  He still has to get it done, but any discussion about supporting cast is "trumped" by the coach. Dungy wasn't bad, but he isn't among the truly elite.  BB is arguably the GOAT.  

 

On 2/14/2017 at 9:10 AM, Anarchy99 said:

Brady gets it. In an interview with PFT this morning, Brady said playing for the greatest coach afforded him the opportunity to achieve what he has achieved and "many players" if put in his situation would have accomplished the same thing. 

Tom's a smart guy.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to see someone now argue against Belichick being the GOAT.  To me, it's not close.  Five Super Bowl titles in 17 seasons in New England, two other Super Bowl appearances, and four other appearances in the CCG.  And what Hall of Famers has he had on his title-winning teams ?  Brady, probably Vinatieri, and that's probably it.  Contrast that to the Dallas team of the early 90s and the 49er and Steeler dynasties, all of whom had more Hall of Famers that you could shake a stick at. 

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

I'd love to see someone now argue against Belichick being the GOAT.  To me, it's not close.  Five Super Bowl titles in 17 seasons in New England, two other Super Bowl appearances, and four other appearances in the CCG.  And what Hall of Famers has he had on his title-winning teams ?  Brady, probably Vinatieri, and that's probably it.  Contrast that to the Dallas team of the early 90s and the 49er and Steeler dynasties, all of whom had more Hall of Famers that you could shake a stick at. 

3rd most games over. 500, 7th best playoff record. Best in the recent era.  The only current coaches I think have a legit chance of getting near him are Tomlin, McCarthy and Carroll.  But they have a ways to go.  Not coincidentally, they all have great QBs they kind of lucked into. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, FUBAR said:

3rd most games over. 500, 7th best playoff record. Best in the recent era.  The only current coaches I think have a legit chance of getting near him are Tomlin, McCarthy and Carroll.  But they have a ways to go.  Not coincidentally, they all have great QBs they kind of lucked into. 

Carroll has no shot of getting close to him, and the only reason either of the other two is that they have so many more years to coach that it can't be viewed as impossible. But the odds of either doing so are virtually nil.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Just Win Baby said:

Carroll has no shot of getting close to him, and the only reason either of the other two is that they have so many more years to coach that it can't be viewed as impossible. But the odds of either doing so are virtually nil.

Yeah, laughing...Carroll is actually a year older than Belichick so I don't think that's happening.  Plus, if you are going to call Belichick a cheater, let's talk about Carroll's reign at USC.  He left them in shambles. 

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...