ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
see i just don't agree with this type of discussion strategy...
Brady is clearly in the conversation for greatest ever.... no need to try and discredit Brady to prop Manning... Manning has plenty of terrific accomplishments you can illustrate to make a case for him...
no need to down Brady's career... he's been incredible as well...
...and there is not need to discredit Manning to prop up Brady. But this is what I don't understand about people who try and make the case that Manning has had a better career than Brady to this point. There just isn't any comparison. On 95% of the possible metrics Brady grades out better. What is the possible argument in Manning's favor?
Again no one is saying that Manning isn't great...Just not the greatEST. Besides the discussion shouldn't be about individuals. Football is the great TEAM sport. All the talk should be about the relative pros and cons about the TEAMS.....and really shouldn't begin for another 2 weeks (we hope)
Last edited by patfanken; 01-01-2013 at 11:23 PM..
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
Brady plays in the greatest system of all-time. He's a great quarterback, he throws the ball well, has poise and accuracy, and has had plenty of success.
Ultimately, he is somewhat a puppet of BB, plays consistantly with some of the best recievers in the game. Has AMAZING TE's to dump it off to if all else fails, yet does little to direct or lead his team. In his case, that's the coaches job. There is a reason Matt Cassell looked all pro on a stacked team and that is ANY competent QB can play like a hall of famer on that team.
Manning has played on 2 teams with what started out as unproven teammates, especially at the WR position, and MADE them into household names with HIS system. His offense has always been prolific despite major roster changes and changing teams and he would have been more successful in the past if it werent for some really bad Colts defenses.
Most of the knocks against Brady arent his fault, but certainly deminish the argument for him being in the GOAT conversation.
I mean, I'd be p.o.'d too if I were a Broncos fan, especially one that remembered the Elway era. He was always an afterthought behind Montana, then finally "backed up" over Marino when Terrell Davis showed up to save him from ringlessness.... then Ohhhhhhh, you get back to back super bowls, but that's one shy of anybody saying "dynasty" so you fall apart... then you get an asterisk role as the giant-killer that can beat the Pats but nobody else, under Shanny... Then you pick up this era's Elway, Peyton Manning -- the QB that woulda been the best of his era except that other guy.
I mean, it's a long proud history of also-ran almost-greatness.
You guy have been really good over the years, especially playing the Pats when Shanny was in charge. And you struck gold in the Manning sweepstakes. Also, he does way better commercials.
We may or may not see you in this tourney... and if so, we'll kick your butts in Denver. You know this, we know this.
I've been thinking about Elway a lot recently. You know why? Because the day's going to come when there's an argument that Brady's not presently the best QB in the game. Nobody's immortal. When that day comes, I'll thank the running backs and improving D for his last two rings, a la Elway's only ones.
So enjoy the website where there's a real dynasty in progress. Who knows? You may just be a footnote on the way to the next chapter.
Guys, this is starting to get tiresome. Lets agree on a couple of things and then move on to other discussions with Denver fans or better yet, wait until we know there is actually going to be a game between the 2 teams.
1. Peyton Manning is a great QB. He's a certain first ballot HOFer....and the 2nd best QB of his era.
2. The Universe doesn't exist where Tom Brady is EVER looking up at Peyton Manning. In virtually EVERY comparison mode Brady comes out better. From wins, playoff success, straight stats, comparing surrounding talent, and the fact Manning played in a dome, etc. There is simply NO comparison.
But so what - Both are great QB's and any game between them is an event the general public will enjoy.
3. The reality is that any game between the Broncos, and the Pats WON'T be about Manning and Brady. Football is still the ultimate team sport and the game will be won or lost for a lot of reasons that have NOTHING to do with Manning OR Brady.
So all servers that had to die to provide the bandwidth to create the thread, have died in vain. However entertaining, nothing that's been said in this discussion will have any meaning on the actual game (if it occurs) Not the comparative schedules, not the amount of points that were or weren't scored, whose defense is better or worse in the past. THAT game will be a distinctly individual moment between 2 very talented teams, and regardless of what has happened in the past, the team that plays the best, gets the bounces, and calls will win.
Its as simple as that.
Good luck in your quest to corral this episode of Trolls Gone Wild. By the number of remaining pages I'm guessing that it hasn't worked yet.
The title of this thread was asking for a bombardment of negative posts from Denver fans. Why act surprised when they come?
I'm disappointed in the number of responses to what are obviously disruptive posters.
I have to admit that I enjoyed the time off from the P6 rumpswabs last year. Too bad Denver is becoming Indy II with their insecurity over his legacy.
Before and after rule changes were pushed to help P6 and his passing game, and his team was moved to an all expansion division, his team has gone one and out seven times in the playoffs. That's seven in eleven playoffs, many times with the best regular season record that his fans thump their chests about now.
1999 he led his team to a 13-3 record and went out in the first playoff game.
2000 10-6 and one and out.
2002 10-6 and one and out.
2005 14-2 and one and out.
2007 13-3 and one and out.
2008 12-4 and one and out.
2010 10-6 and one and out.
In those seven seasons he led his team to a stunning regular season record of 82-30, but the playoff record was an even more stunning 0-7, with many of those games at home.
Unfortunately for those NFLers that wanted to see P6 dominate the NFL, Tom Brady showed up out of nowhere and has been the dominant QB instead. Sorry, but that's life.
How about 18 in a row? .8 ^ 7 worse. (Or 16 regular season games, .8 ^ 5 worse).
Then lose 1, and it's a punchline, Chris.
So nothing against an 11 game regular season win streak, but the operative words there are "regular season." It's a nice run. Now it's time to dance.
I'm solely addressing the "path to the #1 seed". What Denver did was impressive. Of course that means squat going forward, but as far as the subject line goes, what they did (past tense) gets a big thumbs up in my book.
Reminds me of the 12 in a row the Pats ran off to end the 2003 regular season. And those Pats needed all 12 of those to fetch the #1 seed. If the Pats lost to the Colts in that epic goalline stand game, the Pats, Chiefs and Colts would have all finished 13-3 and I believe the Chiefs would have won the #1 seed on tiebreakers.
I can't believe this thread is almost 500 posts strong (or weak, honestly).
Here are the only facts anyone needs, and that's all the thread needed from the start:
--The Broncos had a better regular season than the Pats. Why? Because they won 13 games and the Pats won 12. Disagree? Go for it...but there's a reason the NFL doesn't base seeding on a combination of strength of victory/SOS/road wins/wins when games are played in 18 degree weather with a 37% chance of snow. Wins are the easiest way to determine the top seed (also, the most logical).
--Winning 11 games in a row, against anyone, is difficult. Someone pulled up the odds here before, but regardless of who you play, 11 in a row is impressive. They could have played a tougher schedule, but they didn't. It's not college football; you don't have a choice in who you play. Winning their last 11 by 7+ points is about as good as they could have possibly done.
--The playoffs are a whole new ball game. They have just as good of a shot of losing in the first round as they do anything else. It's only fun to discuss for so long before it gets old. ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN. Yes, to the Pats fans who think they're a lock for the AFCCG or Super Bowl...you could also lose in the first round! It's possible! Let's let the games speak for themselves. Then whoever loses can argue about how they should've won and are better anyway, as it will inevitably happen.
The Broncos deserve the #1 seed. Winning games is all that matters. You don't chose you who play, when or where you play them.
That being said, anyone with a brain has to admit that they have not been challenged by any significant team in a very long time. Baltimore was at rock bottom. The Bengals are up and down. Everyone else flat-out sucked. That much was obvious a month ago, as the Patriots were preparing to face Houston and then San Francisco, and all of us agreed that to get the #1 seed the Patriots would have to run the table, given the Broncos lame closing schedule.
That schedule may hurt them in the playoffs- it's a fair argument to make. It could also help them if they have used the second halves of those non-competitive games to manage the injuries of key players while still remianing sharp. I haven't see enough of the Broncos blowouts to know. I had no desire to watch games with no expectation of it being a contest.