Manning is more skilled than Brady? Please explain.

[ausbacker]

Let me get this straight: I'm a mental deficient attention-seeking troll from Barfalo that knows nothing about football because I think Manning is a more skilled QB than Brady?

...just checking. Anyone got a razor-blade?

No you're a "mentally deficient attention-seeking troll from Barfalo that knows nothing about football" because you

1. offer an unbalanced opinion,
2. gloss over necessary and prudent points continually,
3. cannot or choose not to realise you are doing the above 2 points,
4. are intent on creating "controversy" as an attention seeking mechanism, &
5. hide behind and utilise what if theories continually.

I don't advocate the use of the ignore function, but you're coming pretty close.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Like I said twice already, one of those INTs happened when the Colts chose to go for it on 4th and 13 on New England’s 30…that was a huge mistake IMO. That one doesn't count because it's equal to an incompletion, really. That leaves only two...and I can't remember the specifics of either.

I already discounted that one, to get from 4 down to 3. You're trying to double-count it.

If Manning hit a receiver in the hands and the ball was deflected or something or that nature, that would leave only one, which isn't all that terrible. Did that happen or something where it wasn’t Manning’s fault? I don’t know, that was a long time ago. Do you remember, or are we making arguments in the dark?

So you don't even remember? Then why are you still harping on this? You're trying to rationalize away INTs that you don't even remember.

However you want to make the spin is up to you. I didn't create the idea that one game can somehow cancel out a different one or two. Relatively bad QBs have won Super Bowls. Rex Grossman brought his team to one. The indicator of ability is not Super Bowl wins.

There are 12 QBs that have won multiple Super Bowls:
Bart Starr
Bob Griese
Terry Bradshaw
Roger Staubach
Joe Montana
Phil Simms (was sitting on the bench for one of them though)
Troy Aikman
John Elway
Tom Brady
Ben Roethlisberger
Jim Plunkett

Not exclusive enough for you? Here's the QBs who have won 3 or more:
Terry Bradshaw
Joe Montana
Troy Aikman
Tom Brady

I'd say that's a pretty good qualifier of talent.

It's not both. Again, the Pats defense won the game, two players in particular. Not making a boatload of mistake does not equal having a good game.

Brady had extremely little to do with the win. He was saved by the defense. How many times can Manning claim the same thing?

4 times in 2006 alone. Go back and check the stats. The defense carried the offense that postseason. In four games, Manning more for over 300 yards once, and had 3 TDs vs. 7 interceptions. He was legitimately bad throughout those playoffs, but the rest of the team stepped up and compensated, and they won the SB.

The Pats may not have lost a postseason game because of Brady, and I give him credit for that, but they managed to win several games despite him where he was nothing more than a game-manager.

And the Colts, in the playoffs, have won in spite of Manning as often as because of him. Those are just facts. There's nothing wrong with being a game manager in the playoffs. Roethlisberger is one too, and he and Brady have 5 SBs between them. Game managers win games.

 

[feldspar]

Here's the QBs who have won 3 or more:
Terry Bradshaw
Joe Montana
Troy Aikman
Tom Brady

I'd say that's a pretty good qualifier of talent.

here are some QBs that haven't won a single Super Bowl:

Dan Marino
Jim Kelly
Dan Fouts
Fran Tarkenton

These guys don't suck because their teams didn't win the Super Bowl do they? They are in the Hall of Fame, right?

4 times in 2006 alone. Go back and check the stats. The defense carried the offense that year. In four games, Manning more for over 300 yards once, and had 3 TDs vs. 7 interceptions. He was legitimately bad throughout those playoffs, but the rest of the team stepped up and compensated, and they won the SB.

During the 2006 regular season, the Colts defense sucked balls. Manning brought that team to the playoffs in the first place. I concede your point, though. The Colts D stepped up in the playoffs that year, and that's why the Colts won the Super Bowl. Brady has had the benefit of that happening a lot more than Manning, and that's a huge difference maker. Not having to constantly play from behind...not having to do everything for your team yourself, having someone else make up for your mistakes, etc.

And the Colts, in the playoffs, have won in spite of Manning as often as because of him. Those are just facts. There's nothing wrong with being a game manager in the playoffs. Roethlisberger is one too, and he and Brady have 5 SBs between them. Game managers win games.

Outside of 2006, this isn't true. His other wins in other years were all stellar performances. I'm telling you that the Colts never really had a good defense, and the 2006 season shows you what a good defense can do for your reputation. Now you can say "Manning won the Super Bowl," even though the defense played a huge role in it.

Yeah, there is nothing wrong with being a game manager. I agree with that, but when the rest of the team isn't picking up the slack, you have to be more than a game-manager at the QB position if you expect to win. In other words, the rest of your team has to be good if you are going to win with a game-manager. Otherwise, the QB has to take a lot more risks, which can lead to bigger mistakes. I'm not labeling Brady as a "game manager" per se here, only saying the Patriots won playoff games when that's exactly what he was and the defense won it for them, sometimes when he managed the game relatively poorly. Then people turn around and say "Brady won," which isn't entirely accurate. It's not untrue, but it's not entirely accurate. Winning a game doesn't mean you are skilled...it doesn't hurt, but that's not what that means.

I'm not saying that Brady isn't clutch either. I think it's obvious he is, but that's not what I'm talking about in this post. That's another story.

 

[feldspar]

No you're a "mentally deficient attention-seeking troll from Barfalo that knows nothing about football" because you

1. offer an unbalanced opinion,
2. gloss over necessary and prudent points continually,
3. cannot or choose not to realise you are doing the above 2 points,
4. are intent on creating "controversy" as an attention seeking mechanism, &
5. hide behind and utilise what if theories continually.

I don't advocate the use of the ignore function, but you're coming pretty close.

You try to argue against 50 Patriots homers simultaneously about their most prized possession, then come back to me on this.

See if you seem "balanced" in the process and see how many things you "gloss over." I'm not creating "controversy" either. I'm only offering my opinion...saying that somebody is worse than Peyton Manning is not an insult. That's the main thing to consider. I really haven't seen too many people around here give Manning any credit whatsoever, only put-downs, which is kind of odd, no? What, does Manning suck or something? You can't give him any credit?

Both Brady and Manning are excellent first-ballot Hall of Famers. Comparing the two isn't a no-brainer. That's why this argument exists in the first place. You have to start from there. Give credit where credit is due, though. I've given Brady plenty of credit, but I don't see very many Patriots fans giving Manning any credit in this thread. I know the game is to make the other QB look bad to prove you are right, but not to give either of these guys a world of credit makes any argument less credible.

 

[maverick4]

What's funny is the same Pats homers saying Brady is better than Manning by ignoring stats and talking about rings and intangibles, are the same stats-obsessed fans loving all the offense-related Patriot stats over the past three years thinking Josh McDaniels is one of the best OC ever when he clearly isn't.

 

[Patjew]

You try to argue against 50 Patriots homers simultaneously about their most prized possession, then come back to me on this.

See if you seem "balanced" in the process and see how many things you "gloss over." I'm not creating "controversy" either. I'm only offering my opinion...saying that somebody is worse than Peyton Manning is not an insult. That's the main thing to consider. I really haven't seen too many people around here give Manning any credit whatsoever, only put-downs, which is kind of odd, no? What, does Manning suck or something? You can't give him any credit?

Both Brady and Manning are excellent first-ballot Hall of Famers. Comparing the two isn't a no-brainer. That's why this argument exists in the first place. You have to start from there. Give credit where credit is due, though. I've given Brady plenty of credit, but I don't see very many Patriots fans giving Manning any credit in this thread. I know the game is to make the other QB look bad to prove you are right, but not to give either of these guys a world of credit makes any argument less credible.

Maybe you should take this discussion to a general NFL board if you don't want or expect these kinds of reactions.

 

[feldspar]

Maybe you should take this discussion to a general NFL board if you don't want or expect these kinds of reactions.

I'm enjoying myself here.

Is that wrong?

 

[Patjew]

I'm enjoying myself here.

Is that wrong?

Not that there's anything wrong with that, of course.

 

[feldspar]

Not that there's anything wrong with that, of course.

Thank you.

I wish people here would keep in mind that my intent isn't to put down Tom Brady. That would be hard to do. Any disparaging things I've said about him is only in relation to Peyton Manning, who is no slouch.

 

[ausbacker]

You try to argue against 50 Patriots homers simultaneously about their most prized possession, then come back to me on this.

See if you seem "balanced" in the process and see how many things you "gloss over." I'm not creating "controversy" either. I'm only offering my opinion...saying that somebody is worse than Peyton Manning is not an insult. That's the main thing to consider. I really haven't seen too many people around here give Manning any credit whatsoever, only put-downs, which is kind of odd, no? What, does Manning suck or something? You can't give him any credit?

Both Brady and Manning are excellent first-ballot Hall of Famers. Comparing the two isn't a no-brainer. That's why this argument exists in the first place. You have to start from there. Give credit where credit is due, though. I've given Brady plenty of credit, but I don't see very many Patriots fans giving Manning any credit in this thread. I know the game is to make the other QB look bad to prove you are right, but not to give either of these guys a world of credit makes any argument less credible.

Historically Manning has sucked when it matters most, that's probably why you are running into the Brady stonewall.

In reality, this thread was about the technical expertise of both players both mentally and physically on the field.

Few seem able to actually grasp that concept.

 

[feldspar]

Historically Manning has sucked when it matters most, that's probably why you are running into the Brady stonewall.

In reality, this thread was about the technical expertise of both players both mentally and physically on the field.

Few seem able to actually grasp that concept.

Obviously, you choose to adopt a certain stereotype about Manning.

If you want to talk about technical expertise, look no further than the fact that Manning is God on the field in the sense that he dictates what happens totally... more than Brady does for sure. So, mentally, he has more to deal with. Who has somebody knowledgeable whispering into his helmet about which defense to look out for? Physically, it's a different story. Both of these guys aren't scramblers, and both of these guys are accurate passers that can make all the throws. I don't think that the physical aspect is a question.

 

[feldspar]

And now, for my latest trick, I'll ask you all this "what if" question:

IF Manning was on the Patriots team, how many Super Bowl rings would he have on his fingers?

 

[capetide]

And now, for my latest trick, I'll ask you all this "what if" question:

IF Manning was on the Patriots team, how many Super Bowl rings would he have on his fingers?

None, if he played like he did in the playoffs the year the Colts won the SB. Watch the games - don't just look at the stat sheets (which were bad enough). Too many bad decisions for someone who allegedly studies the game more than anyone (BTW How does anyone know that to be true?). Peyton's postseason performance is not a myth. Big time players come up big time in the biggest games,, not just against the Texans in October.

Bottom line - Haven't bet on the Colts in the postseason for 5 years and I'll NEVER again bet on the Colts in the postseason no matter who they are playing and what the line is.

 

[feldspar]

Watch the games - don't just look at the stat sheets

I've watched every playoff game for the past 30 years.

 

[Joker]

Who has somebody knowledgeable whispering into his helmet about which defense to look out for?

This is a pure fabrication. A lie. YOU are nothing more than a common liar.You obviously know zero about what Brady does at the line of scrimmage.

 

[Joker]

Lets go right to the START of Brady's amazing career to completely REFUTE your common lies...

1. Super Bowl XXXVI vs. St. Louis Rams

This is the all-time Tom Brady clutch moment—perhaps the all-time Super Bowl clutch moment.

The Patriots held a 17-3 lead in the fourth quarter, but two quick scores by the NFL’s most prolific offense that season (and possibly ever) tied the score at 17 apiece with just 1:30 left in the game.

With no timeouts left, it was generally assumed that New England would down the ball to run out the clock and head to overtime.

At this point, Drew Bledsoe famously told New England’s new starting quarterback, “F*** it, just go out there and wing it.”

And Brady did just that.

From their own 17 yard line, the Patriots began their drive with a four-yard completion to JR Redmond. After another check-down pass to Redmond went for nine yards, the Patriots had a fresh set of downs at their own 30. Redmond hauled in a third consecutive pass, this one for eleven yards, and scurried out-of-bounds, just barely making it to the sideline before being brought down.

After an incomplete pass, Brady found Troy Brown on a cross route with 29 seconds on the clock, and the prolific New England wideout took the ball out-of-bounds at the 37.

One more completion by Brady, this one to tight end Jermaine Wiggins, went for six yards, and was enough to put kicker Adam Vinatieri in range to make history.

Brady spiked the ball, Vinatieri came on the field, and the rest was history as he drained the winning field goal as time expired.

Brady went an amazing five for six for 53 yards on the drive, where every play was a pass.

Conclusion

Brady's history as a clutch player stems not only from his most memorable moments in big-time Super Bowls, but also from playoff matches and regular season games as well.

Brady will forever be remembered for these and many other clutch moments in his career, and with more time left in the tank, who knows what the future holds.

Your complete lack of knowledge concerning the Patriots offense is startling. You see the Patriots twice a year and you've been watching football 30 years and yet you believe Brady gets his plays from the sideline and runs them like an automaton? You've wasted thirty years. You obvviously know very little about NFL offensive football and particularly Patriot offensive football. If you are somehow implying that the farce known as "spygate" somehow helped Brady during games,and that plays were sent in after Belichick's KGB masterspies decoded the film, you are unbelievably naive and gullible.

You say "from the sideline!!!!!"....Bledsoe said..

At this point, Drew Bledsoe famously told New England’s new starting quarterback, “F*** it, just go out there and wing it.”

And Brady did just that.

one more time since you seem to have an unbelievably hard time understanding common KNOWN fact

At this point, Drew Bledsoe famously told New England’s new starting quarterback, “F*** it, just go out there and wing it.”

And Brady did just that.

 

[Ring 6]

Let me get this straight: I'm a mental deficient attention-seeking troll from Barfalo that knows nothing about football because I think Manning is a more skilled QB than Brady?

...just checking. Anyone got a razor-blade?

No. You are all of that because of the ignorant way you are communicating.

 

[Ring 6]

Thank you.

I wish people here would keep in mind that my intent isn't to put down Tom Brady. That would be hard to do. Any disparaging things I've said about him is only in relation to Peyton Manning, who is no slouch.

If your intention is not to put Tom Brady down, why are you posting that the Patriots won despite him, and saying that he does not get any more credit for being 15-3 in the playoffs than the guy who is 7-8????
Can you serioulsy tell me that you think Brady is not a LARGE part of that 15-3 record. If you try to then you are absolutley trying to put him donw.

 

[Ring 6]

And now, for my latest trick, I'll ask you all this "what if" question:

IF Manning was on the Patriots team, how many Super Bowl rings would he have on his fingers?

Definitely less than 3, there is no quesiton about that. I'd say 1,possibly 2.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Obviously, you choose to adopt a certain stereotype about Manning.

If you want to talk about technical expertise, look no further than the fact that Manning is God on the field in the sense that he dictates what happens totally... more than Brady does for sure. So, mentally, he has more to deal with. Who has somebody knowledgeable whispering into his helmet about which defense to look out for? Physically, it's a different story. Both of these guys aren't scramblers, and both of these guys are accurate passers that can make all the throws. I don't think that the physical aspect is a question.

I see that you're still at it...and adopting your own stereotype about Brady, who btw doesn't have anybody "whispering into his helmet about which defense to look out for" any more than Manning does. Coach to QB communication cuts out 15 seconds before the snap. So actually since Manning doesn't huddle and goes to the line to do his melodramatic gyrations while he supposedly diagnoses the defense that is being presented, maybe he's the guy with someone cueing him...maybe someone who was long considered an all pro at defensive signal stealing, like Howard Mudd. And if Manning were really a God on the field it would stand to reason his team would have had more success beating good defenses...like the ones QB's face in the playoffs.

Sorry feldspar, you're just a run of the mill troll despite your delusions regarding your unbiased and superior football expertise. And you don't come here to talk football, you come here to teach us homer blinded fans of success that there is more to this than winning championships. Probably because coming from Buffalo you have to believe that.

And at this point I hope those of you who have felt compelled to engage this fellow in reasoned debate, not to mention those who chose to defend this visitors right to spew opinions he is unable to back up, are ready to concede he is what he is and he came here looking for opportunities to present himself as something else.

His musings on this topic are as worthless as some of the commentary he's elicited from resident knuckleheads like maverick. Engaging them is an exercise in futility, best handled in the visitors locker room or the practice squad forums Ian created for just such mindless, timekilling endeavors