NFL Old and Ongoing Bicker about Manning vs. Brady Thread - Page 9 - Sporting Events and Fantasy Sports

natediggity · 10-12-2009, 10:28 AM

hey do you guys remember when the Pats ran the score up every single week and set all those records and then LOST the super bowl?? that was awesome.

**Needle77** · 10-12-2009, 10:29 AM

Code:

         Peyton    Brady
comp%   64.6       62.9
y/a     7.7         7.2
any/a   7.1         6.5
int%    2.8         2.3
sack%   3.3         5.1
att     6097        3827

Carrer #s ldo. Put attempts to show how much longer Peyton has been doing it as well.

bowens · 10-12-2009, 10:29 AM

I think Goodie is a homer. Just a wild guess here.

capone0 · 10-12-2009, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goodie

Yes, this proves your point. Good work. Would you care to make a real argument?

Would you other than Rings and other than 1 outlier season where they purposefully ran up scores and passing TDs all season. Peyton has been significantly more consistant than Brady for a longer period of time. Your only argument is rings but that's simple to dispell, because rings are a function of the entire team more than just the QB. Let's say you had a team with Joe Smoe off the street but his team had 30+ NFL HOFers. For some reason they let him be QB and he won 10 SBs in a row, all he did was throw 5 yard dinks and hand off the ball. Would Joe Smoe be the great QB of all time? Obviously NO. Obviously Brady's better but you are factoring in SB victories way too much into his career legacy.

TheUntouchable · 10-12-2009, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goodie

Yes, this proves your point. Good work. Would you care to make a real argument?

natediggity · 10-12-2009, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by capone0

Would you other than Rings and other than 1 outlier season where they purposefully ran up scores and passing TDs all season. Peyton has been significantly more consistant than Brady for a longer period of time. Your only argument is rings but that's simple to dispell, because rings are a function of the entire team more than just the QB. Let's say you had a team with Joe Smoe off the street but his team had 30+ NFL HOFers. For some reason they let him be QB and he won 10 SBs in a row, all he did was throw 5 yard dinks and hand off the ball. Would Joe Smoe be the great QB of all time?

it depends. in said scenario is Joe Smoe a Patriot?

LuckyLloyd · 10-12-2009, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheUntouchable

I don't even want to hear about Unitas. Montana and Marino are close, but even they weren't playing against the superhuman freaks that currently play NFL defense.

Not saying you're wrong overall, but I feel like this isn't a good point.

**Needle77** · 10-12-2009, 10:36 AM

Actually I want to add Joe Montana and Marino to this as well:

Code:

         Peyton    Brady           Montana       Marino
comp%   64.6       62.9             63.2          59.4
y/a     7.7         7.2             7.5            7.3
any/a   7.1         6.5             6.6            6.5
int%    2.8         2.3             2.6            3.0
sack%   3.3         5.1             5.5            3.1
att     6097        3827            5391           8358

Edit: This isn't to argue who is better out of the current vs Older as the game is different today than even a decade ago. Just to compare. In Marino's defense he likely had the worst supporting cast in offensive skill talent. He had a good OL for a long time though.

GuyIncognito · 10-12-2009, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by capone0

Manning > Brady e/c for 1 season.

I agree that Manning's overall body of work and peak form are stronger than Brady's, but Brady had better seasons in '01 and '02 as well as '07.

Goodie · 10-12-2009, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bowens

I think Goodie is a homer. Just a wild guess here.

Of course I'm a Pats fan. But people have still yet to prove me wrong. And the guy that pointed to ANY/A is just trying to grasp SOMETHING that Brady didn't do better than Manning that year.

Goodie · 10-12-2009, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by natediggity

hey do you guys remember when the Pats ran the score up every single week and set all those records and then LOST the super bowl?? that was awesome.

Yes, I remember that. It was not awesome.

TheUntouchable · 10-12-2009, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goodie

Yes, I remember that. It was not awesome.

Spoiler:

yes it was

bowens · 10-12-2009, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goodie

Of course I'm a Pats fan. But people have still yet to prove me wrong. And the guy that pointed to ANY/A is just trying to grasp SOMETHING that Brady didn't do better than Manning that year.

No, they have. You simply refuse to admit it. Take a good, long look at the stat boxes Needle has posted. Stop using one year as your ONLY argument. Try to look at an entire body of work.

tarheeljks · 10-12-2009, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GuyIncognito

I agree that Manning's overall body of work and peak form are stronger than Brady's, but Brady had better seasons in '01 and '02 as well as '07.

brady played on better teams in '01 and '02, whether he had better seasons is up for debate. his #'s were not really all that impressive compared to now but neither were manning's.

also, do you see how unreasonable it is to say that his '07 season was better on the basis of 1 td? he also attempted also 100 more passes and ended up w/2 fewer ints, but only threw for 300 more yards and also had a worse sack rate. that extra info matters too

edit: like i already said there is a case for brady here, but it's not comparing peak statistical performance

Goodie · 10-12-2009, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by capone0

Would you other than Rings and other than 1 outlier season where they purposefully ran up scores and passing TDs all season. Peyton has been significantly more consistant than Brady for a longer period of time. Your only argument is rings but that's simple to dispell, because rings are a function of the entire team more than just the QB. Let's say you had a team with Joe Smoe off the street but his team had 30+ NFL HOFers. For some reason they let him be QB and he won 10 SBs in a row, all he did was throw 5 yard dinks and hand off the ball. Would Joe Smoe be the great QB of all time? Obviously NO. Obviously Brady's better but you are factoring in SB victories way too much into his career legacy.

I mean you know the argument I'm going to make here, right? I'll make it anyways. Clearly Brady was a huge factor in the Pats winning three superbowls. His play with lesser weapons was extraordinary. He did not have even close to 30+ HOFers and maybe didn't have any on offense to work with. Yet he still won super bowls and put up excellent numbers. Then when he was given the weapons, he had the greatest season a QB has ever had.

Manning is a great QB, no doubt, and the argument is close and before 07 it was even closer still. I believe that 07 changed all that.