Brady vs Manning Debate - The Final Nail in the Coffin - Page 3 - New England Patriots Forums

ATippett56 · 11-04-2006, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by workhorse

Now you are comparing apples and oranges. I was pointing out the quality of teams when each QB began playing for them, not how the have done since then or head to head. Those are totally different things.

The Indianapolis Colts qualified for the playoffs during the 1999 and 2000 NFL seasons. Prior to the 2001 NFL season, the New England Patriots last qualified for the playoffs during the 1998 NFL season. Your argument holds no water when comparing the quality of teams. Of course, only a delusional Colts fan would argue the quality of teams prior to the 2001 NFL season when the FACTS STATE OTHERWISE!

workhorse · 11-04-2006, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ATippett56

Let's compare the quality of offenses in 2001:

Marvin Harrison, WR - 1996 first round draft pick
Tarik Glenn, OT - 1997 first round draft pick
Peyton Manning, QB - 1998 first round draft pick
Edgerrin James, RB - 1999 first round draft pick
Reggie Wayne, WR - 2001 first round draft pick

How many first round draft picks were playing for the New England Patriots offense in 2001?

Why are you looking at 2001, when 1998 is Peyton's first year? As for the Pats....

1996 Terry Glenn 1st
1998 Robert Edwards 1st
1999 Damian Woody 1st
2000 no first - Adrian Klemm was Pats' first draft pick in the 2nd
2002 Daniel Graham 1st

workhorse · 11-04-2006, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ATippett56

The Indianapolis Colts qualified for the playoffs during the 1999 and 2000 NFL seasons. Prior to the 2001 NFL season, the New England Patriots last qualified for the playoffs during the 1998 NFL season. Your argument holds no water when comparing the quality of teams. Of course, only a delusional Colts fan would argue the quality of teams prior to the 2001 NFL season when the FACTS STATE OTHERWISE!

Peyton came to the Colts in 1998. The Colts were 3-13 the season prior to drafting Peyton and 3-13 in his first season. They reached the playoffs in his second season. The Pats were 8-8 the season prior to drafting Brady and went 5-13 his first season, under Bledsoe. They went to the Super Bowl in Brady's second season, his first as QB. It would be fair to compare both 2001 teams if both QBs came out in the same draft, but they didn't.

ATippett56 · 11-04-2006, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by workhorse

Why are you looking at 2001, when 1998 is Peyton's first year? As for the Pats....

1996 Terry Glenn 1st
1998 Robert Edwards 1st
1999 Damian Woody 1st
2000 no first - Adrian Klemm was Pats' first draft pick in the 2nd
2002 Daniel Graham 1st

Did Terry Glenn and Robert Edwards play in Tom Brady's first start against none other but the Indianapolis Colts? (The answer is neither played for the New England Patriots in the aforementioned game.) Please explain the Peyton Manning meltdown in Tom Brady's first start as a professional when the Colts in their first two games of the 2001 NFL season rolled up 87 points? Did Peyton Manning wilt under pressure against an unknown commodity at quarterback for the New England Patriots?

Please explain the major difference between a 3-13 Indianapolis Colts for Peyton Manning versus a 5-13 New England Patriots for Tom Brady?

workhorse · 11-04-2006, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ATippett56

Did Terry Glenn and Robert Edwards play in Tom Brady's first start against none other but the Indianapolis Colts? (The answer is neither played for the New England Patriots in the aforementioned game.) Please explain the Peyton Manning meltdown in Tom Brady's first start as a professional when the Colts in their first two games of the 2001 NFL season rolled up 87 points? Did Peyton Manning wilt under pressure against an unknown commodity at quarterback for the New England Patriots?

Please explain the major difference between a 3-13 Indianapolis Colts for Peyton Manning versus a 5-13 New England Patriots for Tom Brady?

Why do you have Brady at 5-13 and Peyton at 3-13? If you are going to include more than one season, do it for both of them. Since Brady wasn't playing on defense that game, I really doubt his 168 yards caused pressure on Manning.

ATippett56 · 11-04-2006, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by workhorse

Why do you have Brady at 5-13 and Peyton at 3-13?.

The New England Patriots were 5-11 during the 2000 NFL season and started the 2001 NFL season 0-2. Tom Brady did not start until the third game of the 2001 NFL season.

The New England Patriots offense caught fire during the 2001 NFL season with Tom Brady at quarterback since the New England Patriots quarterback "statue" was removed from service due a Mo Lewis hit.

5 Rings for Brady!! · 11-04-2006, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by workhorse

The arguement from Cold Hard Football Facts (a New England favored site) points out only that the two QBs are very close and they say the QB rating edge goes to Brady. You can only say that Brady stats would be better if a majority of his games were in a dome if football were a sterile, scientific game. But since they play the games with players and not with scientific formulas, you would just be guessing. It's odd though that many around here say that it's the Colts' fans that are caught up in stats. CHFF had to break the stats up like that to get Brady ahead on Manning in QB ratings since overall Manning has a career QB rating of 94.3 and Brady is at 88.8.

What a total idiot. Did you forget that Brady has a better indoor passer rating with a constantly changing group of non-pro-bowlers? Often lacking a stand out WR, and always lacking a run game except 2004. You know nothing at all about stats if you want to compare Manning's climate controlled offense loaded with pro-bowlers to Brady's team of gypsies. You just don't get it. Manning would have done FAR LESS with Brady's offense than Brady has done. Brady has turned piss into wine with what he has done with underwhelming offensive talent year after year. Meanwhile, Manning has had the creme de la creme of offensive weapons at his beckoning call and has turned wine into whine.

Try winning a single game of significance before you come on here and try to set us straight, because maybe then you wouldn't sound so stupid.

Bella*chick · 11-04-2006, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 5 Rings for Brady!!

Manning would have done FAR LESS with Brady's offense than Brady has done. Brady has turned piss into wine with what he has done with underwhelming offensive talent year after year. Meanwhile, Manning has had the creme de la creme of offensive weapons at his beckoning call and has turned wine into whine.

You have hit the nail on the head of the argument that is most obnoxious to me. I've seen it on other boards...."Manning would have won three or more SBs if he was on the Pats!" Yes, because that poor guy is surrounded by absolutely NO ONE while Brady is surrounded by an arsenal of weapons. Give me a FREAKIN' BREAK. Our defense is obviously an improvement over theirs but Manning on this offense? Especially the 2001/2003 offense where we had NO running game whatsoever? DREAM. ON.

I also often consider Belichick's quote, "There is simply no quarterback I would rather have than Tom Brady." Um, I think I'll take his word for it. I truly believe the Brady/Belichick sum is greater than the parts. In other words, you just don't throw a Manning on this team and guarantee success....that's like saying the Redskins pricey free agents should have at least been in a Superbowl by now. There is such thing called chemistry and right time/right place.

PYPER · 11-04-2006, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by workhorse

I was just pointing out that the team was in decent shape already when he was drafted. Sure he gets some of the credit, but I think he was more of a piece in the puzzle at that point than a star like he is today.

You're missing this point though.

The '99 team that went 8-8 actually lost six of their last eight games after starting out 6-2. So Brady essentially took over a team that had gone a woeful 7-19 in its previous 26 games and led them to a 14-3 record (including postseason) in his first season as an NFL starter.

So before Brady came along, it only took the Patriots 26 games to reach 19 losses.

After Brady came along, it took the Patriots 82 games to reach 19 losses.

In other words.

Before Brady...7-19
After Brady....63-19

And let's also not forget that prior to Brady emerging in 2001, the Patriots were considered the very worst team in the league by more than a few prominant sports writers.

In fact, in 2001 Joel Buchsbaum labeled them the NFL team LEAST LIKELY to make the playoffs or go to the Super Bowl within the next five years (Worst prediction of All-Time, BTW).

http://archive.profootballweekly.com...pin_022001.asp

There's really no way for a Colts fan to spin this. Why can't they just accept that Brady is the premier quarterback in the league. It's really not even debatable anymore.

5 Rings for Brady!! · 11-04-2006, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bella*chick

You have hit the nail on the head of the argument that is most obnoxious to me. I've seen it on other boards...."Manning would have won three or more SBs if he was on the Pats!" Yes, because that poor guy is surrounded by absolutely NO ONE while Brady is surrounded by an arsenal of weapons. Give me a FREAKIN' BREAK. Our defense is obviously an improvement over theirs but Manning on this offense? Especially the 2001/2003 offense where we had NO running game whatsoever? DREAM. ON.

I also often consider Belichick's quote, "There is simply no quarterback I would rather have than Tom Brady." Um, I think I'll take his word for it. I truly believe the Brady/Belichick sum is greater than the parts. In other words, you just don't throw a Manning on this team and guarantee success....that's like saying the Redskins pricey free agents should have at least been in a Superbowl by now. There is such thing called chemistry and right time/right place.

And you have hit the nail on the head as well! Could you see Manning Chokeboy trying to complete passes to David Patten in 2001? Getting blitz protection from Antwain Smith? And of course, Colts fans say that Manning would have won FIVE superbowls with the Pats defense, which was like dead last in 2002 and 2005, when Brady lead Manning and the rest of the league in touchdowns and then yards. With a bunch of rookies on offense in 2002 and NO RUN GAME both years.

Manning can't win a game with all the weapons in the world.

Yeah, the trolls get old......