Manning is more skilled than Brady? Please explain.

[TruthSeeker]

Manning, however, calls his own plays and does audibles...actually calls the shots a LOT more than Brady.

The question is whether or not Manning does it better than Brady, not whether or not he does it more. I hardly think that Manning either calls his plays or audibles better than Brady.

Also, Manning hasn't had the benefit of a decent defense for much or most of his time in Indy. That's why Manning has had to shoulder the burden of his whole team in his time in Indy more than Brady has...a lot more, I'd say.

Again, the question isn't whether he's had to shoulder more of the burden; the question is whether he is better at shouldering the burden than Brady. Based on their performances when they've actually had to shoulder the burden, I think Brady has clearly done the better job.

I figure Brady has had the benefit of a lot of things, including better coaching, something you shouldn't underestimate.

Again, the question isn't who has had what advantages; the question is who does the better job.

Manning has NINE season of over 4,000 yards. His other two seasons were pretty close to 4,000...both under 300 yards to that mark. This is an incredible feat, folks. Meanwhile, Tom has had only TWO seasons of over 4,000 yards.

Certainly a factor to consider. But, on the other hand, you also have to consider

- what Manning was asked to do in the Colts offense (score, baby, score)
- what Brady was asked to do in the Pats offense (in 2007: score, baby, score. In other years, play more conservatively in order to maximize the chances of winning the game)
- the weapons each had (consistently better for Manning up until 2007)
- the field they've played on (turf vs. natural grass)
- the weather conditions they've played in (dome vs. New England weather conditions)
- Brady's performance when he actually had great offensive weapons (record setting season)

Taking everything into account, I don't see much difference. I think you could make an argument either way. Brady's 2007 season - including all the games in less than ideal conditions - is a very powerful statement that he may well have performed as well or better than Manning given the same circumstances as Manning. However, it was only one season that far surpassed his other seasons. But it was the only season he truly had weapons on offense that came close to matching what Manning has had his entire career.

Brady fumbles the ball A LOT more than Manning...a lot more.

I'll take your word for it. Good point.

If you care about passer rating, Peyton's is higher than Tom's. His completion percentage is slightly higher.

As I mentioned in another thread, Manning has a lower rating on turf and a lower rating on grass. It is reasonable to conclude that he has a higher rating than Brady because he has played so much more on turf than grass. At any rate, I don't think QB rating significantly rates one over the other.

Manning is less than a year and a half older than Brady, and Manning has...

I'm sorry, age is supposed to matter? (as opposed to something like games played or passes attempted?) Your bias is showing...

Manning has just done more...a lot more.

I see you left out other relevant categories that don't favor Manning as much such as clutch play and playoff performances to name a couple. Also, to essentially ignore Championships in favor of offensive statistics (which are also produced by a team, not an individual) seems biased as well to me.

Manning is probably the best pure passer I've seen.

That would be Dan Marino for me.

 

[Gunnails]

It's a hell of compliment to both QBs to be compared to each other.

They are both Hall Of Fame bound, I say you could not go wrong with either in there prime.

 

[aurakilla]

we should do this by wins, and i think brady has more in less starts..........correct??

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

Manning is less than a year and a half older than Brady, and Manning has...

19,128 more yards
136 more touchdowns

Manning has just done more...a lot more. Manning is probably the best pure passer I've seen. Not to put Brady down; he's damn good as well.

You asked, I told.

Let's compare apples to apples. Manning has played 11 season to Brady's 7 when you don't count 2008 (lost season) and his rookie year when he sat behind Bledsoe.
Compare season averages and Brady (outside with the likes of Reche Caldwell and journeymen until 2007) 3766 total passing yards 28.1/12.28 TD/int average 1 Int per 42.4 attempts...
MAnning with pro bowlers mostly (and indoors mostly) 4148 seasonal average 30/15 and 1 int per 36.1 attempts.

First round playoff games Manning 3-6
First round playoff games Brady 6-0......

 

[feldspar]

Meanwhile, here is Tom Brady's post-season history:

2001: threw one TD through three entire games along with 1 INT. Good completion percentage at 61.9%, but 2 of the three games saw him passing for under 150 yards. 77.3 passer rating. Not very impressive numbers, but it was his first year starting, and it got the job done, enough to flush out Bledsoe and his unprecedented $100 million contract.

2002 - didn't make the playoffs.

2003 - just OK in the first two games. Passer rating in the mid-seventies, 2 TDs, one pick, percentage of completions in the mid-fifties somewher... In the Super Bowl, he did very well, though...

2004 - Did very well statistically, although averaged less than 200 yards per game. He didn't throw a single pick through the three games, and had 5 TDs. Passer rating of 109.4. Very good, and nothing to complain about here.

2005 - did enough to win the first game...55.6% completions with 3 TDs and 0 INTs with a passer rating of 116.4, although he fumbled the ball twice with 0 lost. The second game, he gained 341 yards, but threw 2 picks as opposed to one TD for a passer rating of 74.

2006 - Brady was pretty mediocre in the post-season, all things considered. He was lucky to get past San Diego the way he was playing...the whole team got lucky there. 58.4% completions, 5 TDs to 4 INTs, and a 76.5 passer rating. Not bad for the playoffs, but not good enough.

2007 - Excellent first game, pretty bad second game, and mediocre third game. The point I want to make here is that, if any Pats fan thinks that Manning has ever "choked" in the playoffs, I can't see how they could ever say that Brady didn't "choke" in this playoff run. You simply can't have it both ways. This year, the Patriots had probably the best offense in league history, and they'd dominated teams like I'd never seen throughout the season. If you want to talk choke, look no further. Yeah, I know, I'm a "hater." But really, I'm making a valid point here if you can get past your emotions.

2008 - doesn't apply.

 

[Dirk3601215]

What, like in 2000, when he posted a 121.4 QB rating, completing 72.7% of his passes for two TDs and 0 INTs in Indy's only playoff game? Do you figure that it's his fault the Colts lost that game?

2002, not so good.

2003, excellent in 2 of 3 games. Absolutely mind-blowing excellent...until he faced New England. First game, 158.3 rating...I'm not sure, but I don't think you can do better than that...5 TDs, 0 INTs, 84.6% completions, 377 yards. Second game, 138.8 rating, 73.3% completions for 304 yards, 3 TDs and 0 INTs. Then it all fell to sh*t in New England.

2004 - One game...excellent again statistically, although I don't know why he only attempted 10 passes. According to nfl.com, he completed 6 of those 10 passes though, and HALF of them were for touchdowns. 3 TDs and 0 INTs for a passer rating of 143.8. The Colts lost that game. Was it Manning's fault?

2005 - had one bad game in the playoffs. Pretty bad, actually.

2006 - didn't have the best postseason, but the Colts win the Super Bowl anyway. They came in as a Wild Card and benefited from their defense stepping up. Are you going to give him credit for winning this Super Bowl. Well, you should, if you are going to give Brady credit for winning three.

2007 - had a pretty good game, but his team lost. 118.5 QB rating.

2008 - good game. Manning completed 59.5% of his passes for 310 yards, a TD, and no INTs.


There you have Manning's postseason history. It's not the choke-job people make it out to be. And without Adam Vinatieri, Brady might not be labeled Mr. Perfect, or whatever the hell...

Epic failures.

2002-AT NYJ. Not in his warm, comfy little RCA dome. 0 TD's, 2 INT's, 31.2 QB rating. Not so good? More like terrrible.

2003-The first game he played was in the RCA dome. He plays good in the RCA dome because the weather is nice. The 2nd game was in KC, he played the 19th ranked defense in the NFL. 19th. That's not very good. Still, got to give credit to Peyton here. He played very good. Too bad he can't do it more often. The next game: epic failure. 1 TD. 4 INT's. QB rating under 50. Did I mention he had the 2nd best offense in the NFL during the regular season? Did I mention that it was snowing this game? Peyton can't play in bad weather.

2004-You're talking about his pro bowl that year...

In this post season, Peyton played 2 playoff games. 1 in his dome and 1 on the road. He played great at home, like always. He sucked on the road though, it was snowing. BTW, he had the 5th best offense of all-time and set an NFL record with 49 TD's during the regular season. But who cares? He couldn't get it done on the road, in the snow, when it mattered.

Was this when he threw his Oline under the bus after the game, or the year before it? I can't remember.

2005-against the Steelers. He was bad. He threw an INT to Polamalu that the refs completely missed (reviewed it) which almost lost the Steelers the game. Anyone remember that? One of the biggest blown calls in recent playoff history IMO. That would have all but ended the game and season for Indy. But the refs bailed Peyton out... again. This game was at home too. And he still didn't play well. Weird.

2006-Had 3 TD's and 7 INT's in 4 games. His team won despite him.

2007-Probably the only game he's played where it wasn't his fault they lost. He still had a chance to win it in the end though and he couldn't get it done.

2008-I remember that game. Manning should have been picked off like 3 times if it were not for SD having stone fingers. Peyton also had a chance to put the game on ice at the end of the 4th quarter. But he couldn't. He ended up losing in OT. What else is new?

You can have Peyton if you like. I'll take Mr. Brady instead.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

we should do this by wins, and i think brady has more in less starts..........correct??

Percentage, not absolute.

Regular season:
Brady: 87 wins in 111 starts (.784)
Manning: 117 wins in 176 starts (.664)

Post-season:
Brady: 14 wins in 17 starts (.823)
Manning: 7 wins in 15 starts (.467)

Overall:
Brady: 101 wins in 128 starts (.789)
Manning: 124 wins in 191 starts (.649)

To put this in perspective, for Manning to have the same win %age as Brady, he'd have to win 33 consecutive starts.

 

[feldspar]

Let's compare apples to apples. Manning has played 11 season to Brady's 7 when you don't count 2008 (lost season) and his rookie year when he sat behind Bledsoe.

OK, let's do that.

Over 11 seasons, Manning has had 52 fumbles with 17 lost

Over 7 seasons, Brady has had 65 fumbles with 29 lost.

Also, believe it or not, Manning has had 17 rushing TDs as opposed to Brady's 5.

Super Bowl wins aside, Manning is a much more accomplished QB than Brady. Take away Vin

 

[feldspar]

Epic failures.

2002-AT NYJ. Not in his warm, comfy little RCA dome. 0 TD's, 2 INT's, 31.2 QB rating. Not so good? More like terrrible.

2003-The first game he played was in the RCA dome. He plays good in the RCA dome because the weather is nice. The 2nd game was in KC, he played the 19th ranked defense in the NFL. 19th. That's not very good. Still, got to give credit to Peyton here. He played very good. Too bad he can't do it more often. The next game: epic failure. 1 TD. 4 INT's. QB rating under 50. Did I mention he had the 2nd best offense in the NFL during the regular season? Did I mention that it was snowing this game? Peyton can't play in bad weather.

2004-You're talking about his pro bowl that year...

In this post season, Peyton played 2 playoff games. 1 in his dome and 1 on the road. He played great at home, like always. He sucked on the road though, it was snowing. BTW, he had the 5th best offense of all-time and set an NFL record with 49 TD's during the regular season. But who cares? He couldn't get it done on the road, in the snow, when it mattered.

Was this when he threw his Oline under the bus after the game, or the year before it? I can't remember.

2005-against the Steelers. He was bad. He threw an INT to Polamalu that the refs completely missed (reviewed it) which almost lost the Steelers the game. Anyone remember that? One of the biggest blown calls in recent playoff history IMO. That would have all but ended the game and season for Indy. But the refs bailed Peyton out... again. This game was at home too. And he still didn't play well. Weird.

2006-Had 3 TD's and 7 INT's in 4 games. His team won despite him.

2007-Probably the only game he's played where it wasn't his fault they lost. He still had a chance to win it in the end though and he couldn't get it done.

2008-I remember that game. Manning should have been picked off like 3 times if it were not for SD having stone fingers. Peyton also had a chance to put the game on ice at the end of the 4th quarter. But he couldn't. He ended up losing in OT. What else is new?

You can have Peyton if you like. I'll take Mr. Brady instead.

If you are going to twist it to look like Manning can't do anything outside of a dome or has never had a downright perfect playoff game, you are going to lose all of your credibility.

 

[eagle eye]

Tom Brady------------14-3 - 372-595, 3954 yards, 26 TD, 12 INT; 88.0 PR
Peyton Manning--------7-8 - 348-564 4208 yards, 26 TD 17 INT; 85.0 PR

 

[Dirk3601215]

If you are going to twist it to look like Manning can't do anything outside of a dome or has never had a downright perfect playoff game, you are going to lose all of your credibility.

I'm not twisting anything. Just pointing out that Peyton sucks when he faces adversity in the postseason.

He has thrown 6 TD's and 9 INT's in all of his road playoff games in his career.

Overall, he's thrown 22 TD's and 17 INT's in the playoffs. Brady has thrown 26 TD's and 12 INT's in the playoffs.

I'm not doing anything but pointing out the facts.

And yeah, I'm really concerned about my credibility on the internet...

 

[Wildo7]

If you are going to twist it to look like Manning can't do anything outside of a dome or has never had a downright perfect playoff game, you are going to lose all of your credibility.

So what, exactly, do you think is the effect of playing your entire career inside a dome v. outside in New England weather? I'm assuming you think it's a small difference, but I'm curious how small you think that difference is and how you justify it.

You have pretty much glossed over the colossal difference in weapons between the two over their careers so we can leave that aside for now...

 

[Deus Irae]

If you are going to twist it to look like Manning can't do anything outside of a dome or has never had a downright perfect playoff game, you are going to lose all of your credibility.

Pointing to a raw number when you're ignoring the discrepancies for turf/indoors v. outdoors is sloppy work, and you've been guilty of that on this thread. You shouldn't be denigrating someone else's credibility on this issue until you shore up your own.

Besides, number of touchdowns is not a skill set. Again, my question was about a skill set. It's not meant to bash anyone, including Manning. Your posts here have done nothing to answer my question.

 

[feldspar]

The question is whether or not Manning does it better than Brady, not whether or not he does it more. I hardly think that Manning either calls his plays or audibles better than Brady.

What in the world would make you think that? Manning calls his plays every time, and he audibles more than anyone else I've ever seen in the history of the world. That's HIS offense, for better or worse. You'll have to prove to me that Brady does it better somehow, because, you got nothing here.

Again, the question isn't whether he's had to shoulder more of the burden; the question is whether he is better at shouldering the burden than Brady. Based on their performances when they've actually had to shoulder the burden, I think Brady has clearly done the better job.

Adam Vinatieri has shouldered all the Super Bowl wins in the final whistle, so don't bring up the Lombardi trophy. If you disagree with that, then don't bring up the trophy anyway, because this is a team sport. Manning has had some incredibly terrible defenses to deal with over the years...some of the worst, and I can't see how you can argue with that. How were the Pats' defenses by contrast?

Again, the question isn't who has had what advantages; the question is who does the better job.

Again with the again. Who did a better job with the no-huddle offense, Jim Kelly or Dan Marino? Jim Kelly was defined by it, while Dan Marino did it sporadically.

Certainly a factor to consider. But, on the other hand, you also have to consider

- what Manning was asked to do in the Colts offense (score, baby, score)
- what Brady was asked to do in the Pats offense (in 2007: score, baby, score. In other years, play more conservatively in order to maximize the chances of winning the game)
- the weapons each had (consistently better for Manning up until 2007)
- the field they've played on (turf vs. natural grass)
- the weather conditions they've played in (dome vs. New England weather conditions)
- Brady's performance when he actually had great offensive weapons (record setting season)

I think you left out a bunch of factors.

Taking everything into account, I don't see much difference. I think you could make an argument either way. Brady's 2007 season - including all the games in less than ideal conditions - is a very powerful statement that he may well have performed as well or better than Manning given the same circumstances as Manning. However, it was only one season that far surpassed his other seasons. But it was the only season he truly had weapons on offense that came close to matching what Manning has had his entire career.

You can make an argument for just about anybody. There are still people in Buffalo giving excuses for JP Losman, if you can believe that. Manning is a monster QB, and the only thing you can hope for is to keep up with him, not to top him...that's something you can never do, even if you are Tom Brady. Brady is the only guy that comes close, but I have Manning pegged higher, as much as you Pats fans hate him. You hate him for a reason, and that's because he's good, the same reason I hear Pats fans putting down other people for hating THEM.

As I mentioned in another thread, Manning has a lower rating on turf and a lower rating on grass. It is reasonable to conclude that he has a higher rating than Brady because he has played so much more on turf than grass.

OK, now you are REALLY stretching it. And I mean really.

I'm sorry, age is supposed to matter? (as opposed to something like games played or passes attempted?) Your bias is showing...

I brought that up to show just how far ahead Manning is with his stats...and weather, year's played, grass vs. turf doesn't explain the huge difference in stats. Brady can never hope to come close to Manning's numbers. That's a valid point, although not the main point.

I see you left out other relevant categories that don't favor Manning as much such as clutch play and playoff performances to name a couple. Also, to essentially ignore Championships in favor of offensive statistics (which are also produced by a team, not an individual) seems biased as well to me.

I talked about playoffs. Or, as Manning's former coach would have put it...Playoffs? Playoffs? etc. I truly don't believe that Manning is less clutch as Brady. I've seen Manning pull countless wins right out of his rectum. I do know that Pats fans hate Manning because he has probably been their biggest threat, though. Just be glad he is no longer in our division.

That would be Dan Marino for me.

Used to be. No longer, IMO.

 

[ausbacker]

OK, let's do that.

Over 11 seasons, Manning has had 52 fumbles with 17 lost

Over 7 seasons, Brady has had 65 fumbles with 29 lost.

Also, believe it or not, Manning has had 17 rushing TDs as opposed to Brady's 5.

Super Bowl wins aside, Manning is a much more accomplished QB than Brady. Take away Vin

This thread has gone beyond pointless. Ask the average Joe on the street which QB you would rather leading your team in the playoffs, let alone the Superbowl and I am sure most people would answer Tom Brady. Why you ask? Because the regular season counts for nothing. January and February are where legacies are made.

Regular season success is nice. Post-season success is the ultimate.

A typical feldspar posting. Hide behind the statistics you want to support your argument, conveniently gloss over the ones that don't.

 

[eagle eye]

This thread has gone beyond pointless. Ask the average Joe on the street which QB you would rather leading your team in the playoffs, let alone the Superbowl and I am sure most people would answer Tom Brady. Why you ask? Because the regular season counts for nothing. January and February are where legacies are made.

Regular season success is nice. Post-season success is the ultimate.

A typical feldspar posting. Hide behind the statistics you want to support your argument, conveniently gloss over the ones that don't.

Totally agree, he even put up QB ratings for some of Mannings postseasons but didn't for the ones that weren't that good.

Feldspar just a note. I don't think there are too many(if any) here who hate Peyton Manning. I certainly don't even dislike the guy, but I do think that Tom Brady is the better QB and the simple reason is clutch time. There is nobody better.

 

[feldspar]

This thread has gone beyond pointless. Ask the average Joe on the street which QB you would rather leading your team in the playoffs, let alone the Superbowl and I am sure most people would answer Tom Brady. Why you ask? Because the regular season counts for nothing. January and February are where legacies are made.

Regular season success is nice. Post-season success is the ultimate.

A typical feldspar posting. Hide behind the statistics you want to support your argument, conveniently gloss over the ones that don't.

Dude, I'd insult you anywhere else. Read what I said about stats in the AFC East running backs thread. Stats are facts, but they don't tell the whole story, and that's not something you can rely on.

Don't tell me what's typical of me after 200 posts, please. You are way off base.

I've talked way more extensively than anyone else about Manning vs. Brady playoff performances than anyone else. You just want to say that Brady is better than Manning period, but that's no kind of argument at all. You can't just say, well, my team won, so the QB must have been better. That's like blaming T.O. for no playoff wins in Dallas, even though Romo was the one that screwed up the hold on an extra point that would have won the game. Yeah, T.O. never won a playoff game in Dallas, so what good is he?

And 19,128 yards and 136 more TDs is nothing to scoff at, the argument about stats aside.

"Brady is better than Manning in the clutch." Yeah, just go ahead and try and prove that. Better yet, try and prove that without using stats.

If you asked the regular football fan which QB was better, I'm sure that it would be fairly split down the line, and I'm also sure that at least half the people wouldn't know what they were talking about, as per usual.

 

[aurakilla]

Percentage, not absolute.

Regular season:
Brady: 87 wins in 111 starts (.784)
Manning: 117 wins in 176 starts (.664)

Post-season:
Brady: 14 wins in 17 starts (.823)
Manning: 7 wins in 15 starts (.467)

Overall:
Brady: 101 wins in 128 starts (.789)
Manning: 124 wins in 191 starts (.649)

To put this in perspective, for Manning to have the same win %age as Brady, he'd have to win 33 consecutive starts.

excellent work.............lol idk where ude even find that


regardless how many tds u throw is irrelevant as long as ur team wins and ide much rather have those 14 wins in the post-season then mannings 7

 

[eagle eye]

Dude, I'd insult you anywhere else. Read what I said about stats in the AFC East running backs thread. Stats are facts, but they don't tell the whole story, and that's not something you can rely on.

Don't tell me what's typical of me after 200 posts, please. You are way off base.

I've talked way more extensively than anyone else about Manning vs. Brady playoff performances than anyone else. You just want to say that Brady is better than Manning period, but that's no kind of argument at all. You can't just say, well, my team won, so the QB must have been better. That's like blaming T.O. for no playoff wins in Dallas, even though Romo was the one that screwed up the hold on an extra point that would have won the game. Yeah, T.O. never won a playoff game in Dallas, so what good is he?

And 19,128 yards and 136 more TDs is nothing to scoff at, the argument about stats aside.

"Brady is better than Manning in the clutch." Yeah, just go ahead and try and prove that. Better yet, try and prove that without using stats.

If you asked the regular football fan which QB was better, I'm sure that it would be fairly split down the line, and I'm also sure that at least half the people wouldn't know what they were talking about, as per usual.

Dude, just give it up already.

We knew from the very start that you were not going to change your mind but a good argument is fun when both sides engage and tackle the questions directed their way. Unfortunately you just won't tackle anything that is unfavourable to Peyton Manning like his play outside the dome and how it compares to Brady outside a dome, his playoff stats and how they compare to Brady, the fact that superbowls do count but you want to give the credit for them to a kicker(who just happens to be a Colt now).

I mean come on, we know you are biased but you just don't get it. And you are telling people here that they will lose their cred. Well you have lost your cred here long ago.

 

[feldspar]

Totally agree, he even put up QB ratings for some of Mannings postseasons but didn't for the ones that weren't that good.

I did the same short-hand for Brady. Do some research yourself instead of making vague generalities based on personal bias. If you knew what happened in the first place, you wouldn't need me to tell you what the QB ratings were.

Did the way I went about it make you completely dismiss the totally fantastic playoff games that I showed Manning had, some of which his team lost? Did you dismiss the one where he had a perfect passer rating and 5 TDs and 0 INTs. If so, shame on you. My point was to show his great-to-good playoff games. yeah, they do exist. Probably outweigh his playoff failures by quite a bit, I'd say. Brady had some bad playoff performances where his team won, too, which gave him another chance at "coming through in the clutch."

Feldspar just a note. I don't think there are too many(if any) here who hate Peyton Manning. I certainly don't even dislike the guy, but I do think that Tom Brady is the better QB and the simple reason is clutch time. There is nobody better.

Oh, I beg to differ. I'd say there are plenty of Patriot fans that downright hate Peyton Manning from a football perspective. And I certainly believe that there is a bias out there when comparing the two in Patriot-land, wherever the hell that is.

I'd just respect the opinion more if more people said that it's a close call rather than saying Brady is the hands-down winner. That's not the case by any standard.