EXPERT ANALYSIS Manning vs. Brady game thread

[wiscotitansfan]

The Pats won the coin toss in OT and took the wind and let Manning have the ball first, that says it all. Manning in his prime is never given the ball in OT, the other team would be terrified they would never see the ball again. And it worked out for the Pats.

 

I said the exact same thing to my friend last night. When the patriots went for it on 4th and 2 years ago BB did it because he knew he couldn't stop Manning. This time, BB gave Manning the ball and opted to win it on a FG because he knew he could stop him.

[MadMax]

We're all glad scine isn't a Manning fan.

[scine09]

We're all glad scine isn't a Manning fan.

I'm not.

 

Promise.

[scine09]

You still didn't answer my question.  If SBs are meaningless, then what is important?  What should we judge QBs by?

I answered it in a different post.

 

Statistics.

 

Generally the best QB's put up the best statistics. There is a reason why Manning's QB rating is at or near the top every single year. And, as I said twice already today, his rating is better than Brady's in the playoffs.

 

You can't control how well your defense and special teams play.

[ctm]

I answered it in a different post.

 

Statistics.

 

Generally the best QB's put up the best statistics. There is a reason why Manning's QB rating is at or near the top every single year. And, as I said twice already today, his rating is better than Brady's in the playoffs.

 

You can't control how well your defense and special teams play.

 

 

So the Qb rating is more important and relevent than their head to head record of 4-10.  That's a decent sample size and Brady wins 71% of the time.

[MadMax]

Yes you are.  You constantly defend him in any of these threads.  If you weren't a fan, you'd state your opinion once or twice and go about your business.  It takes a fan boy to continually be so insistent. 

[scine09]

Yes you are.  You constantly defend him in any of these threads.  If you weren't a fan, you'd state your opinion once or twice and go about your business.  It takes a fan boy to continually be so insistent. 

I'm quite sure I would know whether I'm a fan of something or not. And if you haven't noticed I am not shy about telling people my opinion on something and don't care what people think of it. If I was a fan of Manning's I would say it. I don't dislike him as much as I used to as I think he's grown up and isn't the same asshole that used to rip into the Titans any chance he got. But I'm not a fan and don't want to see him win the SB (although I'd rather see Denver win over a few other teams). If the Titans don't get in I am rooting for New Orleans to win. If I was a Manning fan I'd be rooting for the Broncos.

 

I defend him because I think the opinion of Brady being better than or equal to Manning is ridiculous. That's all.

[scine09]

So the Qb rating is more important and relevent than their head to head record of 4-10.  That's a decent sample size and Brady wins 71% of the time.

14 is a decent sample size? You must not know a thing about statistics.

 

And as has been brought up a few times in this thread, you can't measure h2h without discussing appropriate variables. I mean there were two times that Manning beat Brady when the Colts easily could have lost. There was also a time that Brady beat Manning when Brady's defense stopped the Colts on a goalline stand. I didn't see Brady out there playing defense. Even the other night how did the Patriots get into position to win? Did Brady cause the special teams fumble? Football is a team game and w/l records are a terrible and meaningless barometer to measure any QB.

[IowaOiler]

I very rarely talk about Manning. I'm not even a Manning fan.

 

I think and have thought for a long time that Brady is overrated and that the media is obsessed with him. Look at his #'s this season. Very pedestrian. Yet he wins a game and people act like he's the best QB in the game today, which is ridiculous.

 

There was a poll on ESPN last week about whose career would you rather have, Manning or Brady. 60% voted Manning so thankfully the majority of people aren't fooled.

 

Brady has had a great career. But I don't consider him an all-time great on the level of Manning, Elway, Marino, Montana, Young or some of the greats that came before I was around.

 

Whoever voted for Manning are retards.  Taking QB rating over Super Bowl rings is retarded....and I bet if you asked Marino, he would say the exact same thing.

 

Brady would be just an above average QB if he didn't play for Belichick.

 

Belichick has played without Brady, and we know how he did.  So how is it that Brady's greatness is dependent on him? 

 

 

 

You want to talk about context, we can look at the various skill players the two have had, the various offenses the two have played in, and the overall success of both in regular season and playoffs. 

 

The fact is, Manning has had far superior talent around him, has remained in essentially the same offense his entire career, and has a Jeff FIsher-esque playoff record. 

 

Brady has turned scrubs into Pro Bowlers, started as a 'game-manager' QB (your words), moved into possible the most prolific offense ever in the NFL, then into a west-coast/TE heavy scheme, and has 3 rings with 5 trips to the Super Bowl. 

 

And only a Manning fan-boy or Patriot hater thinks this game wasn't big for Manning, just like the Colts game.  It is impressive to rack up statistics like Manning's against any NFL team, but when everything is said and done, it's about winning.  QB want to win football games and Super Bowl...the only people that give a fuck about QB rating are those that lost. 

[scine09]

Well @IowaOiler the majority of us must be retards judgins by the recent ESPN poll:

 

Who will be considered the greater quarterback when all is said and done?

•  
  41%
  Tom Brady
•  
  59%
  Peyton Manning

 

(Total votes: 117,485)

[scine09]

As far as your other point, @IowaOiler, whose career will go down as being better if Manning stopped playing today? Eli Manning or Dan Marino? If you say Eli Manning then I don't know what to tell you.

 

And Belichick did play 2008 without Brady. He finished with a better in 2008 with Matt Cassel than in 2009 with Brady. If you want to read the book about Spygate you'll learn a little bit as to why that is. How has Matt Cassel fared since leaving NE by the way?

 

I've watched more Tom Brady games than probably you, CTM and MadMax combined. And he's just not on Peyton Manning's level. Outside of 2007 and maybe 2010 he never has been. And let's discuss Brady's play in the playoffs since he became the man in the Patriots offense. Since 2005 when the offense was handed over to him both guys have been to two Super Bowls (Brady hasn't won one), Manning has a better win/loss % and statistics. Brady does not have 1 game-winning drive in the playoffs in the final two minutes in that time. He does have 3 failed late-game drives, however. Not that I put win/loss as any kind of a barometer but it flies in the face of the Brady supporters who are going on something that happened basically a decade ago to make their argument when their careers did not end in 2004. And this "captain clutch" thing is such nonsense and is built on something that happened in 2003.

 

I'm not trying to disrespect you, IowaOiler. I think in general you are very knowledgeable. But just looking at wins and losses and making a judgement without ever looking at context, which is what you and the other 41% do when they say that Brady has been a better QB than Manning, does not fly.

[OILERMAN]

Scine is way too hard on Brady for sure but he's also overall correct

 

You can't just judge these QBs in a vacuum. Brady has a much better coaching staff than Manning has ever had. When Brady won the SBs he was mainly a game manager type, once the Pats put the team on his back and went to an all out passing offense the Pats are ringless. Manning has choked in the playoffs but hell so has Brady since their last SB.

 

If I was starting an expansion team and could have a 24 yr old Manning or Brady I'd take Manning and so would any other NFL exec.

 

Having said all of that I pray Manning chokes again this year

[IowaOiler]

Well, @scine09, I brought up context in my last post, and you conveniently ignored it.  An ESPN poll is hardly proof, and (not disrespecting you), but I hardly judge your opinion regarding anything Patriots as fair.

 

As I mentioned before, do you think Dan Marino is happy with all the accolades or would prefer to be wearing a Super Bowl ring...or three?

 

The only way Manning even won is one ring was because he had a defense that went on a four game terror, and then an NFL that hands out awards and enforces lopsided penalties to protect it's poster boys (Brady included).

 

Manning may be the best regular season QB ever, but his lack of big-game victories (regular and post season) are a testament to how much better Brady is.  Oh, and how did Belichick do in Cleveland?  Why didn't he just mold Testaverde into a multi-SB winner?

[scine09]

Well, @scine09, I brought up context in my last post, and you conveniently ignored it.  An ESPN poll is hardly proof, and (not disrespecting you), but I hardly judge your opinion regarding anything Patriots as fair.

 

As I mentioned before, do you think Dan Marino is happy with all the accolades or would prefer to be wearing a Super Bowl ring...or three?

 

The only way Manning even won is one ring was because he had a defense that went on a four game terror, and then an NFL that hands out awards and enforces lopsided penalties to protect it's poster boys (Brady included).

 

Manning may be the best regular season QB ever, but his lack of big-game victories (regular and post season) are a testament to how much better Brady is.  Oh, and how did Belichick do in Cleveland?  Why didn't he just mold Testaverde into a multi-SB winner?

I'm sure that Marino would love a Super Bowl ring. My whole point is that winning a SB does not make a QB a better player. I asked a few posts ago whether Jim Kelly would have been a better player if Scott Norwood had made the kick? I threw out about 5 or 6 of them in that post you can go read it again if you really care which I doubt you do.

 

When I brought up context I am talking about in-game scenarios. Who has had the better players is up for debate but has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Why was Brady winning these games? Was it because of Brady? Why was Manning not winning? Was it because of Manning?

 

And you mention Manning's one ring. Fine. Brady won his 3 with better defenses than the Colts ever had in Indy, including 2006. Look at his playoff #'s in his career. Again, they are not as good as Manning. Brady just hasn't had to do as much as Manning because he runs a different offense. And, as I said, and Oilerman also said, since Brady has been the key to the offense the Patriots have not won the Super Bowl.

 

The answer about Belichick in Cleveland is that he hadn't yet perfected his "spygate" system. In fact he didn't even begin using it until 2000. It's laid out pretty well in the book.

 

Where do you come up with Manning having a lack of big regular season victories? He's made the playoffs every year but 1 as a starter and won 12 or more games every year from 2003 until 2009. He also won 13 in 1999 and 13 a year ago. He's well on his way to another 12+ win season and a #1 seed in the playoffs. He's had a bye in the playoffs in 5 of his 14 seasons (he's well on his way to a 6th) as a starter and won his division in 9 of those 14 seasons and obviously is well on his way to a 10th in 15 seasons. You don't get those numbers without "big regular seasons wins."

 

ESPN is not proof of it but what it does show is that the majority of people that voted (over 100,000 is a big sample size) feel that Manning had the better career. 59% is a significant number when you're dealing with that amount of people. And if you click on the map 44 states would take Manning over Brady. I wonder which states chose Brady?

[scine09]

Scine is way too hard on Brady for sure but he's also overall correct

 

You can't just judge these QBs in a vacuum. Brady has a much better coaching staff than Manning has ever had. When Brady won the SBs he was mainly a game manager type, once the Pats put the team on his back and went to an all out passing offense the Pats are ringless. Manning has choked in the playoffs but hell so has Brady since their last SB.

 

If I was starting an expansion team and could have a 24 yr old Manning or Brady I'd take Manning and so would any other NFL exec.

 

Having said all of that I pray Manning chokes again this year

I know you love QB ratings. In their entire careers Manning actually has a better rating in the playoffs than Brady. That includes Brady's "stellar" 2001-2004.