NFL executives rank Brady as third best QB behind Aaron Rodgers and Andrew Luck

Deus Irae said:

Yes, I know, although the 'era' thing is being overblown. Brady's in a much easier passing era than was Montana yet, for some reason, that doesn't seem to be given as much weight around here when Montana v. Brady comparisons are made.

The truth is that Luck's story for his first 3 years in the league matches up quite well against Manning's most recent 3 seasons, nevermind Manning's first 3, and that's even though Manning has an MVP tossed in there. Since people harped on Luck and his supposed INT problem, I'll toss that in as the spot to focus, and I'll toss out the reminder that Manning's played on teams that have been significantly better overall during that stretch, as well:

INTs- Luck 18/9/16
INTs - Manning 11/10/15

INT% - Luck 2.9/1.6/2.6
INT% - Manning 1.9/1.5/2.5

Wins - Luck 33
Wins - Manning 38

Playoff wins - Luck 0/1/2 total 3
Playoff wins - Manning 0/2/0 total 3

If you take out Luck's rookie season, it's even better for Luck.

Click to expand...

But this sort of proves the point IMO. Though we heard about Manning being the best QB in the NFL for 15 years the way his career has gone proves that those who didn't buy into it were right.

Manning was criticized for too many interceptions but people dismissed it.

Manning's career was a disappointment, he never lived up to the hype, much like Favre and it looks like his career will end with one SB. His playoff losses are remembered for bad interceptions, even his SB losses.

I don't think Manning was the best QB in the NFL, not the last 3 years or many others. So Luck's similarities to Manning just prove... That he's similar to Manning.

Maybe he will be one day, but so far he isn't in the top 3 IMO.

patsfan13 said:

You show little understanding about what is important playing football.

Click to expand...

That's not what's going on here. What's going on here is a bunch of people are bashing a player based upon incredibly stupid arguments. You are one of those people. You don't like the fact that you're getting your ass handed to you, so you're now going to go personal.

That's fine. It's S.O.P. around here.

Bobsyouruncle said:

But this sort of proves the point IMO.

Click to expand...

Except that it does no such thing. Manning has been the second best QB of his era.

XLIX said:

We're not talking about Montana in this thread.

Click to expand...

No, people are tossing out the difference of the "early" years as if it's some unclimbable wall, because all their other arguments really suck. My point in noting the Montana era issue is to point out that such similar treatment is not given to Brady during the Brady/Montana discussions.

You ignoring that doesn't change its existence.

robertweathers said:

When compared to Brady and Rodgers at their level, no he doesn't.

You said he lacks both qualities so I took that as you saying he doesn't have them.

Click to expand...

My bad. As much as I bash Luck he's still a top 10 QB. The consensus top 3 QB stuff from the media just blows my mind.

Could luck have come back from 10 down against seattle and won the super bowl? Probably not. Actually the colts wouldve been blown out.

Andrew luck and the colts are the prototypical fantasy football easy pick. They will feast on the poor but when they face a decent team they will get blown out.

Im not sure what luck has done yet to be considered the #2 qb in the league. There are many other qbs who have accomplished more i would take over him

Deus Irae said:

That's not what's going on here. What's going on here is a bunch of people are bashing a player based upon incredibly stupid arguments. You are one of those people. You don't like the fact that you're getting your ass handed to you, so you're now going to go personal.

That's fine. It's S.O.P. around here.

Click to expand...

Luck has talent he isn't an accomplished QB, rating him above Brady for this year is childish. His decision making is lacking, when playing good teams.

The conversation is almost insulting.

Deus Irae said:

No, people are tossing out the difference of the "early" years as if it's some unclimbable wall, because all their other arguments really suck. My point in noting the Montana era issue is to point out that such similar treatment is not given to Brady during the Brady/Montana discussions.

You ignoring that doesn't change its existence.

Click to expand...

You brought up a stat comparing Luck to Brady, Manning and Favre. When I pointed out the fundamental flaw in your statistic, for some reason, you tried to introduce Joe Montana into the equation.

It was your stat. You were the one who introduced it into this thread to support your thesis. And it had nothing to do with Joe Montana.

It depends on how you define the best. If "the best" means best stats & numbers, then maybe these guys are better than Brady. If you define "the best" as able to adjust and pull out a win time and again for your team, no matter what else is going on in the game, then nobody comes close to Brady. He's been to 6 Super Bowls and won 4. I think he's played in 9 AFC Championship games. Heck, he's been one of the AFC QBs in the AFC Championship Game for the last 4 years straight. Who else comes close to that? That's why BB is so right when he says stats are for losers.

I wonder what would happen if you put Brady on GB or Indy and vice versa. I'd say Brady would be just as great, if not better, with some awesome weapons. Not so sure about the other guys, although Gronk and Edelman these days would probably make the other guys pretty good too. When one of these guys wins his 4th Super Bowl ring, then we can discuss whether he is better than Brady. I bet neither of them ever gets that many rings.

patsfan13 said:

Luck has talent he isn't an accomplished QB, rating him above Brady for this year is childish. His decision making is lacking, when playing good teams.

The conversation is almost insulting.

Click to expand...

1. You didn't bother reading the article, did you? It's about where the QBs will finish the year, not where they are now.
   
2. I disagreed with the actual rankings in the article. I didn't lost my mind and stop making asinine claims about Luck in order to get there. That's been the difference.

Yes, the conversation is almost insulting, but that's because of your end of it.

XLIX said:

You brought up a stat comparing Luck to Brady, Manning and Favre. When I pointed out the fundamental flaw in your statistic, for some reason, you tried to introduce Joe Montana into the equation.

It was your stat. You were the one who introduced it into this thread to support your thesis. And it had nothing to do with Joe Montana.

Click to expand...

Ok, serious question:

Are you deliberately ignoring what I posted, or do you just not grasp the point?

Deus Irae said:

1. You didn't bother reading the article, did you? It's about where the QBs will finish the year, not where they are now.
   
2. I disagreed with the actual rankings in the article. I didn't lost my mind and stop making asinine claims about Luck in order to get there. That's been the difference.

Yes, the conversation is almost insulting, but that's because of your end of it.

Click to expand...

By the end of the year Brady barring a season ending injury will still be head and shoulders above Luck.

If you have a QB walking into the huddle needing a score to win a game you want Brady every time. QB ratings don't capture leadership, what you will never understand. It is why Chamberlin had the stats an Russel always won in the playoffs.

Something you don't understand.

patsfan13 said:

By the end of the year Brady barring a season ending injury will still be head and shoulders above Luck.

If you have a QB walking into the huddle needing a score to win a game you want Brady every time. QB ratings don't capture leadership, what you will never understand. It is why Chamberlin had the stats an Russel always won in the playoffs.

Something you don't understand.

Click to expand...

The problem isn't that I don't understand. The problem is that I do understand what you're saying, and I recognize if for the nonsense that it is. You're not saying anything I haven't said a million times when it comes to winning and Brady (Feel free to research how long I've been championing Brady over Manning and Brady over Montana) and Chamberlain v. Russell. You're just making lousy arguments about Luck, and then trying to flip the script.

Go try that crap on someone else.


FYI, since you must have missed it, my first post on this in the thread:

Deus Irae said:

I don't think Luck passes Brady this year, and I'm not sure I'd have him above Roethlisberger, either, but Luck is definitely still on the come, and the players above him are all on the back 9 of their careers.

Click to expand...

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...rodgers-and-andrew-luck.1123476/#post-4331370

Interestingly Luck tied for the league lead in Fumbles (13, tied with Wilson) in 2014, His 6 Fumbles lost tied him with Jay Cutler and Demarco Murray for 2nd, 1 behind league leader Cam Newton. By contrast Brady had 6 Fumbles and lost 3.

That means Luck had 22 TO's last year, while Tom had 12. Rodgers had 8 (5 picks, 3 FL).

He's a great QB but he turns it over to much to be ranked ahead of Brady IMO.

Deus Irae said:

Ok, serious question:

Are you deliberately ignoring what I posted, or do you just not grasp the point?

Click to expand...

OK, serious answer:

I grasp exactly what you're doing. You brought up a statistic which compared Luck to Brady, Favre and Manning. I blew your stat out of the water by saying that even though it doesn't seem that long ago, those 3 QBs came of age in a different era than Luck.

You responded by totally changing the subject and saying that that's what people in here do when comparing Brady to Montana. Well, your stat (which you wrote) wasn't comparing Brady to Montana. It was comparing Luck to Brady, Manning and Favre.

Absolutely nobody was talking about Montana in this thread until you mentioned him in post #49. You essentially hijacked your own statistic (which you wrote) after I destroyed it.

Guys this debate is useless. Brady will never be considered the best QB. Never. No matter what he accomplishes, he will never be considered the best. I'm just thankful that he's our QB and we are going to miss him when he's gone. Lets enjoy it while it lasts.

patsinthesnow said:

I don't care Buffalo is in our division. I don't hate Rex. I respect playing defense and running the ball.

I hope the Bills defense destroys Luck/Colts tomorrow. Most overrated player in the NFL. Remove his AFC south stats and he isn't anything special statistically.

Peyton Manning 2.0 media hype wise, but alteast Manning was an elite QB. Luck wouldn't have made half the throws Big Ben made Thursday.

Click to expand...

The point I've been trying to make for 2 years. Buffalo will likely lose because they don't have a QB to take advantage of Luck's turnovers.

RIpats88 said:

Could luck have come back from 10 down against seattle and won the super bowl? Probably not. Actually the colts wouldve been blown out.

Andrew luck and the colts are the prototypical fantasy football easy pick. They will feast on the poor but when they face a decent team they will get blown out.

Im not sure what luck has done yet to be considered the #2 qb in the league. There are many other qbs who have accomplished more i would take over him

Click to expand...

Another point I've been trying to make. Put Luck in Miami and he's no better than Tannehill, put Brady or Rodgers, who is only more physically talented than Brady, not better, and they are a winning team. I'm sure even Tannehill can pad his stats vs the AFC South, throwing 50+ times a game, 6 times per year. Luck like Wilson are NFL's chosen and made stars and they are going to do what they can to market them as the new Brady and Manning, when in truth those jokes are not even close to them.

Deus Irae said:

That's not what's going on here. What's going on here is a bunch of people are bashing a player based upon incredibly stupid arguments. You are one of those people. You don't like the fact that you're getting your ass handed to you, so you're now going to go personal.

That's fine. It's S.O.P. around here.

Click to expand...

I'm bashing him based on his hype vs his play. I've seen more than enough of his games to know he sucks vs good teams. You see a guy beating on wildcards(the lesser teams) in the playoffs and then when he advance to the real rounds where the real teams are, he's getting smoked. Same thing happens to him in the regular season where he stat pad vs the garbage and get embarrassed against the good teams. He suck as hard as his D. He's only a top 10 QB, like Eli, because there is no-one else. You might as well make an argument for Andy Dalton being great.

I can see the argument, dont agree but I can see it. Most talking heads will say anytime Luck throws a pick it was just like a punt and then I saw someone who ranked luck at 7th overall, who really knows/cares

XLIX said:

OK, serious answer:

I grasp exactly what you're doing. You brought up a statistic which compared Luck to Brady, Favre and Manning. I blew your stat out of the water by saying that even though it doesn't seem that long ago, those 3 QBs came of age in a different era than Luck.

You responded by totally changing the subject and saying that that's what people in here do when comparing Brady to Montana. Well, your stat (which you wrote) wasn't comparing Brady to Montana. It was comparing Luck to Brady, Manning and Favre.

Absolutely nobody was talking about Montana in this thread until you mentioned him in post #49. You essentially hijacked your own statistic (which you wrote) after I destroyed it.

Click to expand...

1.) You didn't destroy the statistic.
2.) You seem to have ignored my responding post from earlier, despite quoting it. Why do I say that? Because the first part of it read:

Yes, I know, although the 'era' thing is being overblown.

Click to expand...

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...s-and-andrew-luck.1123476/page-3#post-4331606

Note that I acknowledged your general point, and only then did I point to that era issue being overblown, only after which is when I pointed to the same concept (era issue) with regards to Brady v. Montana, and also when I pointed to Luck v. Manning's last 3 years. And that was before you made the post that you erroneously claim destroyed my statistic.

LivinLovin&Breathin_Brady said:

I'm bashing him based on his hype vs his play. I've seen more than enough of his games to know he sucks vs good teams. You see a guy beating on wildcards(the lesser teams) in the playoffs and then when he advance to the real rounds where the real teams are, he's getting smoked. Same thing happens to him in the regular season where he stat pad vs the garbage and get embarrassed against the good teams. He suck as hard as his D. He's only a top 10 QB, like Eli, because there is no-one else. You might as well make an argument for Andy Dalton being great.

Click to expand...

This post of yours proves my point about your arguments, so..... Thanks.


Dalton as a comp? You're out of your freakin' mind.