NFLN: Brady/Manning Debate

[TealSox]

NFL Videos: Manning vs. Brady

Derrick Mason, from a radio interview on 105.7 The Fan, strongly believes that Peyton Manning is more valuable to his team than Brady is the New England Patriots.

Will 2008 always hang over Tom Brady's career as a testament of his value to the New England Patriots, who went 11-5?

 

[andrewgarrr]

NFL Videos: Manning vs. Brady

Derrick Mason, from a radio interview on 105.7 The Fan, strongly believes that Peyton Manning is more valuable to his team than Brady is the New England Patriots.

Will 2008 always hang over Tom Brady's career as a testament of his value to the New England Patriots, who went 11-5?

That season is a testament to Matt Cassel's ability as a QB, and the strength of the New England Patroits' franchise from the owner to the equipment manager's intern.

Maybe Peyton is more valuable to the Colts than Brady is to the Patriots, but that doesn't make Peyton a better player than Brady. I've got homer-goggles on whenever anyone talks about this debate so I can't take part in an objective conversation about this, but I strongly believe that this is a weak and irrelevant conjecture to the argument.

 

[sbpatfan]

It's probably true, but that's not Brady's fault. It more has to do with how good Belichick is. Or how bad Dungy / Caldwell are. However you want to see it. We look down on 11-5, do you know what that means for some teams?

 

[ctpatsfan77]

NFL Videos: Manning vs. Brady

Derrick Mason, from a radio interview on 105.7 The Fan, strongly believes that Peyton Manning is more valuable to his team than Brady is the New England Patriots.

Will 2008 always hang over Tom Brady's career as a testament of his value to the New England Patriots, who went 11-5?

And to the fact that the Colts have had $#@@#$^ at backup QB for a very long time.

 

[Snake Eyes]

NFL Videos: Manning vs. Brady

Will 2008 always hang over Tom Brady's career as a testament of his value to the New England Patriots, who went 11-5?

1) Value to the Patriots and Brady's QB skill are 2 different things.

2) Does Joe Montana suddenly stink because Steve Young came in and had success on the same team? Maybe they're both very good QBs and that's why we went 11-5 with Cassell. Also, when judging Cassell since he left it's important to note that in his first season with the Chiefs they installed a new OC and playbook a few weeks before the season started, a magnificent way to screw over your QB. Last year he seemed like he was finally hitting his stride, even with a psychotic coach, but he'll have a new OC yet again this year since Weiss left.

Circumstance will result in Cassell not getting his due, which in turn means TFB won't get his.

 

[Deus Irae]

NFL Videos: Manning vs. Brady

Derrick Mason, from a radio interview on 105.7 The Fan, strongly believes that Peyton Manning is more valuable to his team than Brady is the New England Patriots.

Will 2008 always hang over Tom Brady's career as a testament of his value to the New England Patriots, who went 11-5?

Unless Cassel goes on to do something impressive in the postseason, the answer is probably yes.

MPAI

 

[ausbacker]

Being more valuable to a team isn't an indicator of being the better player.

 

[HomerSchooled]

People act like the Patriots didn't lose a step from 2007 when losing Brady in 2008. In what world is 7 fewer wins (5 regular season, 2 post season), 29 fewer td passes, 3 more interceptions, and a passer rating almost 30 points lower not a steep decline? To say with any conviction that Manning's back ups would have any worse a drop off has no basis in reality. Jim Sorgi, Manning's most prominent back-up, always played well in spot duty, and to this day even has way a higher career passer rating than Cassel.

Just because the Patriots (and Brady too, it should be noted) care enough to cultivate a back-up doesn't make Brady any less of a QB. It's just the Patriot way. Cassel has since proven himself a pro bowl QB in KC, and this year played significantly better there than he ever did here. If our system can succeed with anyone, than why would he improve when liberated from it?

Haters gonna hate. It is what it is.

 

[upstater1]

There're so many ways you can cut this argument. An 11-5 record and missing the playoffs means nothing. You can find better 9-7 teams than that 11-5 team. A year later the Patriots had a tougher schedule and a worse record WITH Brady. So what?

Beyond that, someone could make the argument that Brady is worth more to the Patriots. Without Brady the Patriots don't win 3 Super Bowls. Noe THAT is value.

Do the Patriots win 3 Super Bowls without Brady?

 

[randomk1]

People act like the Patriots didn't lose a step from 2007 when losing Brady in 2008. In what world is 7 fewer wins (5 regular season, 2 post season), 29 fewer td passes, 3 more interceptions, and a passer rating almost 30 points lower not a steep decline? To say with any conviction that Manning's back ups would have any worse a drop off has no basis in reality. Jim Sorgi, Manning's most prominent back-up, always played well in spot duty, and to this day even has way a higher career passer rating than Cassel.

Just because the Patriots (and Brady too, it should be noted) care enough to cultivate a back-up doesn't make Brady any less of a QB. It's just the Patriot way. Cassel has since proven himself a pro bowl QB in KC, and this year played significantly better there than he ever did here. If our system can succeed with anyone, than why would he improve when liberated from it?

Haters gonna hate. It is what it is.

I've had this discussion with a bunch of idiots i don't know how many times.
They keep comparing the 08 Patriots vs the 09 Patriots as a basis for their argument for some reason.

I keep saying that you should be comparing to the 07 Patriots because the roster is pretty similar to 08. 09 was a team that lost many of it's leaders and the fact that Brady was coming back from a season ending injury.

People love to hate winners.

 

[patsfan-1982]

NFL Videos: Manning vs. Brady

Derrick Mason, from a radio interview on 105.7 The Fan, strongly believes that Peyton Manning is more valuable to his team than Brady is the New England Patriots.

Will 2008 always hang over Tom Brady's career as a testament of his value to the New England Patriots, who went 11-5?

the pats have BB who will do everything in he's power to put players in the right situation were they can secede even with out Brady the pats will still have a shot at the playoffs because of BB, the colts dont have tony dungy any more so after Peyton Manning the biggest leader in that franchise is Bill Polian so with out Manning that team gets 5 wins at best.

 

[randomk1]

the pats have BB who will do everything in he's power to put players in the right situation were they can secede even with out Brady the pats will still have a shot at the playoffs because of BB, the colts dont have tony dungy any more so after Peyton Manning the biggest leader in that franchise is Bill Polian so with out Manning that team gets 5 wins at best.

Put Brady on the Colts for his entire career and let's see his numbers in a dome with Dallas Clark,Harrison,Wayne,Collie,James and etc. He might not have 4 superbowl trips but he will have 1 or 2 MVP's more,and extra pro bowl appearences. The Colts invest heavily into their O and make sure that Manning is always in the best position to succeed.

And i ******* hate the double standard with Manning. When the Colts win in the regular season it's all about Manning but when they lose in the playoffs it's just that their team just isn't quite good enough,don't blame Manning. This so called best QB eva loses more playoff games than he wins. Nuff said.

EDIT: And the fact that the NFL even is having a discussion whether Brady or Manning should be no. 1 in a list of top 100 of 2011 is ******* BS. Manning wasn't even a top 5 QB last season. He lost quite a few games for his team because of bad decision making,not injuries.

 

[supafly]

In regards to D.Mason comparing Manning to Brady etc---that argument is irrelevant in my opinion.

The same could easily be said for guys like Drew Brees, Rivers, etc...it doesn't matter in the least, and shows Mason's ignorance in being able to determine what is relevant in a debate, and what is NOT relevant in a debate.

He should have left it at SB wins/postseason performances, overall wins, MVP's, stats, the WR's that they both had/have to work with, mechanics etc.

It's more than obvious that Manning is a great QB, but Brady is more consistent, and just an overall better QB in my eyes.

He deserves the "#1" ranking from this stupid little NFL Network thing. Manning is either a 2 or a 3.

 

[patsfan-1982]

Put Brady on the Colts for his entire career and let's see his numbers in a dome with Dallas Clark,Harrison,Wayne,Collie,James and etc. He might not have 4 superbowl trips but he will have 1 or 2 MVP's more,and extra pro bowl appearences. The Colts invest heavily into their O and make sure that Manning is always in the best position to succeed.

And i ******* hate the double standard with Manning. When the Colts win in the regular season it's all about Manning but when they lose in the playoffs it's just that their team just isn't quite good enough,don't blame Manning. This so called best QB eva loses more playoff games than he wins. Nuff said.

EDIT: And the fact that the NFL even is having a discussion whether Brady or Manning should be no. 1 in a list of top 100 of 2011 is ******* BS. Manning wasn't even a top 5 QB last season. He lost quite a few games for his team because of bad decision making,not injuries.

give Manning the pats defense from 2001 through 2005 and he may have 3 rings as will... they are both amazing QB's that would still be hall of fame QB's in any system

 

[JoeSixPat]

As of this immediate past season there is literally no debate.

Who was the first and only unanimous MOST VALUABLE PLAYER in the league?

Hint: It wasn't Peyton Manning.

Aside from that I've got no problem if someone wants to assert that the Patriots ability to play together as a team is better than that of the Jets.

Position by position, outside of QB, the Colts might be more talented - but as far as a coach's ability to get players to play together to be more than the sum of their totals, Belichick and the Patriots clearly are better than the Colts - and the year without Brady proved that.

So I can live with the fact that Brady is the better QB and the Patriots play better together as a team overall.

 

[everlong]

If you look at Cassel's numbers in both 2008 and 2010 there's a common theme. He got to play the NFC and AFC West and got most of his numbers vs those teams. If you look at what he did against good defenses in both seasons, and 2009 for that matter, you see he's never lit up a good defense. Now even Brady and Manning struggle against good defense at times but they also light them up from time to time. Cassel is going to face a much tougher schedule this year and even though his supporting cast will be better his numbers won't be. In games where he doesn't have good run support or his team falls behind and he has to pass he's simply not able to carry the load.

11-5 was a scheduling illusion and people forget that's five less wins, something like 1300 less yards and not even half the TDs with an offensive cast that was pretty elite. They play divisions other than the west that year and they probably go 8-8.

 

[dhamz]

Will 2008 always hang over Tom Brady's career as a testament of his value to the New England Patriots, who went 11-5?

No. It is fodder for message board foolishness but in time it won't be remembered.

Do you often hear about the 1991 49ers and how it is a blackmark against both Joe Montana and Steve Young that when they were out with injuries Steve Bono led them to 5 wins in his 6 starts and an overall 10-6 record?

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Put Brady on the Colts for his entire career and let's see his numbers in a dome with Dallas Clark,Harrison,Wayne,Collie,James and etc. He might not have 4 superbowl trips but he will have 1 or 2 MVP's more,and extra pro bowl appearences. The Colts invest heavily into their O and make sure that Manning is always in the best position to succeed.

FWIW, an interesting fact, when you look at passer rating:

Outdoors: Brady > Manning
Indoors: Brady > Manning

The only reason that Manning's QB rating was higher (right now Brady's is) is that he plays so many more games indoors, and almost everyone's QB rating indoors is higher than it is outdoors. [e.g., you can get a higher average if you have lots of 110s and fewer 80s than if you have a few 120s and lots of 90s.]

 

[Jetssuck]

The Colts are not just Peyton Manning and they never have been. Manning, unlike Brady, has had skilled first round draft picks to play with his whole career and it shows when he's lost them. He fell of the face of the earth after Dallas Clark was lost last season. He did even worse in 2001 when Edgerrin James went down. The Colts maybe 3-13 or 6-10 without Manning, but so what, they were 3-13 at one time and 6-10 at another time with Manning.

If Brady is not that good because the Patriots went 11-5 without him, what say those about the almost universally proclaimed greatest basketball player of all-time, Michael Jordan? The Bulls with Michael Jordan in 1992-1993 went 57-25. In 1993-1994 without Michael Jordan they went 55-27. Following the same logic as the Brady-Manning debate, the Jazz without Karl Malone would never had been as successful as the Bulls without Jordan, so Karl Malone is better than Michael Jordan.

 

[upstater1]

the pats have BB who will do everything in he's power to put players in the right situation were they can secede even with out Brady the pats will still have a shot at the playoffs because of BB, the colts dont have tony dungy any more so after Peyton Manning the biggest leader in that franchise is Bill Polian so with out Manning that team gets 5 wins at best.

You're only looking at losses. Yes I agree the Colts have more losses without Manning. But you also have to look at wins. The Patriots have fewer playoff wins and Super Bowls without Brady.

The measure of the QB is only half-complete if you're looking at how much worse off his team would be without him.

You also have to look at how much success the team has had BECAUSE of him.

That's the flip side of the coin.

Anyone who focuses on the potential losses the Colts would suffer needs to also take into account the big WINS Brady brought to his team, and it's because of those wins that Brady surpasses Manning in value to his team.