Irsay pays off the refs. Polian is the only reason the Colts have succeeded. Peyton is just a clone of Archie with better players and an elite defense.

I really can't wait for him to come here and legitimately argue the rings. I know it's coming but it will still be just as entertaining as if I didn't.

I disagree that he's in the conversation right now but maybe he will be when he's done. He's clearly great. But we're not talking about when he's done and Untouchable was talking about the present time and him being already considered the greatest is in fact crazy talk.

Needle

I didn't say he's compiled more stupid historical bulk stats than any QB of all-time, I said he's the best QB of all-time. If he retired right now it wouldn't change my mind. It's not like he's going to get any better. The Peyton that we've seen is the best. He doesn't need to do anything else.

3 MVPs and might get another. Probably deserves more MVPs as well. On pace to shatter most NFL records as long as he stays healthy. Career #1 in Pass Yds/ Game. Career #3 in passing TDs #1 in career passer rating. #3 all time in adj yds / pass attempt. #3 all time in passes % completed. #5 all time in sack%. Obviously he's still near his peak and hasn't really gone down hill yet, but I'm not sure how he's not in the conversation. He's been great for 12 seasons now. That's longer than most greats' careers.

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.

Also Goodie,

Nice backtrack on the Brady>Manning thing once three other people told you you're being a ******.

My argument is this:

Brady won rings when he didn't have great weapons and the knock on him was the he never put up the numbers that Peyton did. However, when Brady did get the weapons (2007), he put up better numbers than Peyton ever did and quarterbacked one of the best if not THE best offenses of all time. Before 07 it was a debate, 07 made it clear, Brady is better, although clearly not by much.

And the rings do matter. Ask Marino about that one.

When did I backtrack? I do believe that Brady is better than Manning, both of them.

sweet

Peyton: 7-8
Brady: 14-3
Roethlisberger: 8-2
Montana: 16-7
Bradshaw: 13-5
Trent Dilfer: 5-1

Playoff records. LOL Peyton.

STFU.

As I said before Rings don't mean **** especially when you play with 52+ other players. We all knew you were going to bring up rings. Brady's Ds were also epically good at times. And when he did put up the #s, you love rings right, he didn't win the ring......

Key to beating Peyton in the playoffs...........Coach Belicheck or a good 3-4, or both.

no. he threw one more td, two fewer ints, but his any/a was still about a yard lower. there is an argument that brady is better but you don't want to start citing too many stats as part of it

Did you people even read my post? This is what you got out of it? I clearly stated that the knock on Brady was all he had was rings. Then 2007 happened and he showed he can do the Peyton Manning thing better than Manning can i.e. put up great numbers and not win a ring.

Was this really that unclear the first time I said it?

And how is this not better?

Back to rings argument, Terry Bradshaw has 4..........and he's mighty awesome. Bradshaw is 14-5 in the playoffs. Obviously, Bradshaw >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Peyton too and Bradshaw >>> Brady. 4 vs 3.

qbs also try to accumulate yards and stuff and i said that his any/a was a yard lower-- that's a large disparity

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

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.

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

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

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.