Simplified Brady/Manning regular season statline comparison

Chevy said:

Just looking at the raw numbers - no extrapolation for "if they threw xxx" or anything else - total stats, average game. That's all ...

View attachment 11209

Look at the average game - these two are nearly identical. Twins. Can't tell them apart! The big difference is that Manning is probably the best pure passer the NFL has ever seen. Tom, on the other hand, is the best complete QB the NFL has ever seen. What he lacks (or lacked, maybe?) in pure physical talent he makes (made?) up for in vision, intelligence, leadership, and a host of other intangibles.

Here's the rub; the comments in "( )" were added because we are seeing a Tom Brady with both the intangible skills AND the physical. Over the years he has worked the kinks out of every aspect of his game. While he does not have Manning's pure physical talent, he is closing in on what Peyton used to be, with no drop off in intelligence, leadership, vision, etc.


PS: I left out yards because they are so misleading. YAC, busted plays, etc just skew the numbers.

Click to expand...

Manning is not the best "pure passer" in the history of the NFL. The guy throws ducks and hangs his receivers out to dry. He is, arguably, the best audible QB in the history of the game. He's been brilliant at looking at defenses and calling the routes and progressions at the line.

Taking into account the modern era where DBs can't breathe on receivers down the field, the best pure passers ahead of Manning in my mind are Johnny Unitas, Warren Moon, Dan Marino, John Elway, Dan Fouts, Jim Kelly, Tom Brady, and Roger Staubach.

While all these stats are intriguing, I'm still going with espn's QBR system for rating quarterbacks

And according to QBR, Todd Marinovich is the GOAT.

I.M. Fletcher said:

To be fair, you throw Aaron Rodgers in to the same statistical breakdown and he's the no brainer answer, and by a wide margin.

The manning/ Brady conversation has been going for so long, there are so many built in reactionary answers. As both have gotten older, Brady has aged like a Greek god and manning has fallen apart like a paper mâché doll. Still, in his prime manning was a beauty to watch, and truly the only player who has ever created any sort of fear within me.

It's the best modern day player rivalry, and I feel blessed that it's still going.

Click to expand...

This agrees so much with my thinking. I was always afraid of what Manning could do. NO game was over until it was over . . . except in the playoffs where he left the comfort of the dome to come to Gillette in January. That's a house of horror for him in January. Put you give Manning and those receivers perfect weather or that fast track, and it was always something to worry about.

The issue of who is better, Brady or Manning has been settled for a while now. Plus the gap will only grow wider as Manning ends his career on a down note, and Brady continues to somehow get better, I don't know why we even talk about it. The evidence is so clear, that it's like having a debate on who is the better left fielder Carl Yastremski of Hanley Ramerez.

If we want to engage in intellectual debates that actually have some substance, then we need to turn to issues like Brady vs Rodgers in who is the best QB now. Or Brady vs Montana in who is the GOAT, because right now these are the ONLY 2 in that race.

Deus Irae said:

Dan Marino is the greatest "pure passer" in the history of the NFL.

Click to expand...

Much as it pains me to agree on this, I do. But, as Danny Boy discovered, he'd have been a lot more successful if he'd expanded his game to quarterbacking instead of just purely passing.

oldrover said:

Much as it pains me to agree on this, I do. But, as Danny Boy discovered, he'd have been a lot more successful if he'd expanded his game to quarterbacking instead of just purely passing.

Click to expand...

It wasn't Marino's fault that he didn't win a Super Bowl. It was a management issue, and the lack of attention to detail when assembling complete teams that could defend, excel at special teams, and complement all that he could do on offense.

Marino played in one Super Bowl and lost in two other AFC championship games. Just three real shots at the ring in 17 years. Opponents of his era were more complete - the Jim Kelly/Bruce Smith Bills, the John Elway Broncos, the '96 Patriots, the Raiders in the early Marino years, etc. AFC Championship Game - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Given the interceptions they throw. Manning has 9 tackles. Brady has 11. Andrew luck already has 9 solo and 2 assist tackles.

nabwong said:

Given the interceptions they throw. Manning has 9 tackles. Brady has 11. Andrew luck already has 9 solo and 2 assist tackles.

Click to expand...

Manning is excellent at feigning interest in tackling the interceptor, then falling down at the first sign of an opposing player who may block him.

goheels22002 said:

Manning is not the best "pure passer" in the history of the NFL. The guy throws ducks and hangs his receivers out to dry. He is, arguably, the best audible QB in the history of the game. He's been brilliant at looking at defenses and calling the routes and progressions at the line.

Taking into account the modern era where DBs can't breathe on receivers down the field, the best pure passers ahead of Manning in my mind are Johnny Unitas, Warren Moon, Dan Marino, John Elway, Dan Fouts, Jim Kelly, Tom Brady, and Roger Staubach.

Click to expand...

A fine list of passers. From a pure standpoint of throwing footballs really proficiently, I think Kurt Warner deserves to be mentioned. When he had time, he would really throw some bullets that hit receivers right on time and in the chest. Troy Aikman was a very accurate, strong armed passer as well.

To me, Marino is the absolute standard. Such a quick release and an absolute cannon for an arm.

Can simplify it even further, do not want to minimize the excellent work on the statistics...but 25 years from now there is only one real stat that matters, number of Superbowl Wins.. as great as Peyton is he cannot compare to #12.. lots of numbers, but not a lot of trophies..

goheels22002 said:

It wasn't Marino's fault that he didn't win a Super Bowl. It was a management issue, and the lack of attention to detail when assembling complete teams that could defend, excel at special teams, and complement all that he could do on offense.

Marino played in one Super Bowl and lost in two other AFC championship games. Just three real shots at the ring in 17 years. Opponents of his era were more complete - the Jim Kelly/Bruce Smith Bills, the John Elway Broncos, the '96 Patriots, the Raiders in the early Marino years, etc. AFC Championship Game - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Click to expand...

In the late 1980s Shula absolutely dropped the ball. He is the reason Marino was only in one SB.

goheels22002 said:

Manning is not the best "pure passer" in the history of the NFL. The guy throws ducks and hangs his receivers out to dry. He is, arguably, the best audible QB in the history of the game. He's been brilliant at looking at defenses and calling the routes and progressions at the line.

Taking into account the modern era where DBs can't breathe on receivers down the field, the best pure passers ahead of Manning in my mind are Johnny Unitas, Warren Moon, Dan Marino, John Elway, Dan Fouts, Jim Kelly, Tom Brady, and Roger Staubach.

Click to expand...

Why is Brady not considered the best audible caller of all time?

If the statement of "Brady makes better decisions" is true, then that could be applied to audibles, protections, get out of a passing play and run the ball, etc.

Plus look who has coached him the last 15 years. Better coaching than PM has received by a landslide

My two cents..... the TD /INT differential statistic is given too much weight. A great QB that happens to run an offense with a top goal line running game gets punished. A great QB that has a crappy defense and has to force the ball down field late in games gets punished.
In 2004, Brady was a 28TD/14 INT with a running game that scored 15 TDs and a stifling defense. Based on the conclusion of this thread, the best NE team of all time (IMO) was generaled by a mediocre QB.
For me, Manning wins the Regular Season award and Brady wins both Post Season and Total Season awards. Considering all the MVP's Manning has stacked up for his regular season exploits.....and lack of Lombardis, I am very comfortable with my conclusions.

borg said:

My two cents..... the TD /INT differential statistic is given too much weight. A great QB that happens to run an offense with a top goal line running game gets punished. A great QB that has a crappy defense and has to force the ball down field late in games gets punished.
In 2004, Brady was a 28TD/14 INT with a running game that scored 15 TDs and a stifling defense. Based on the conclusion of this thread, the best NE team of all time (IMO) was generaled by a mediocre QB.
For me, Manning wins the Regular Season award and Brady wins both Post Season and Total Season awards. Considering all the MVP's Manning has stacked up for his regular season exploits.....and lack of Lombardis, I am very comfortable with my conclusions.

Click to expand...

I think when you look at the 2010-2012 seasons where Brady carried teams with horrific defenses to an average 13-3 record show that Brady is the better regular season QB too.

The most remarkable thing about Brady compared to Manning is that Brady has played so many more games in adverse weather conditions. Every single season Brady starts with 10 of his 16 games outdoors in Foxboro, Buffalo NY and the sewers of NJ.

robertweathers said:

Why is Brady not considered the best audible caller of all time?

If the statement of "Brady makes better decisions" is true, then that could be applied to audibles, protections, get out of a passing play and run the ball, etc.

Plus look who has coached him the last 15 years. Better coaching than PM has received by a landslide

Click to expand...

Charlie Weis, Bill O'Brien and Josh McDaniels have had way more to do with what plays get run in which situations than Tom Brady over the years. There is so much more planning that goes into a Patriots offensive scheme for the particular opponent than what we ever saw from Peyton Manning with the Colts and the Broncos.

Brady doesn't come out expecting to audible out of whatever the play call is. On the contrary, what's made this work so well is the trust between Brady and his offensive coordinators. On passing downs, he makes extraordinarily quick decisions about where to go with the ball, but he's not calling the plays at the line the way Manning does on almost every down.

Even in the hurry up, Brady takes the signal from his helmet speaker from Josh and puts the team in position as quickly as possible and runs the play. Brady does a lot more hard counts to use up the clock than changing whatever play was sent in.

Never have we heard about what a genius Tom Moore was as an offensive coordinator in Indy. They ran a couple of sets and Manning was free to pick what variations of those he wanted on just about every play. When the Broncos went to a more controlled, under-the-center offense earlier this season, Manning was awful until they took off the yoke and allowed him to freelance.

Check out this Grantland article: One-Trick Pony

goheels22002 said:

Charlie Weis, Bill O'Brien and Josh McDaniels have had way more to do with what plays get run in which situations than Tom Brady over the years. There is so much more planning that goes into a Patriots offensive scheme for the particular opponent than what we ever saw from Peyton Manning with the Colts and the Broncos.

Brady doesn't come out expecting to audible out of whatever the play call is. On the contrary, what's made this work so well is the trust between Brady and his offensive coordinators. On passing downs, he makes extraordinarily quick decisions about where to go with the ball, but he's not calling the plays at the line the way Manning does on almost every down.

Even in the hurry up, Brady takes the signal from his helmet speaker from Josh and puts the team in position as quickly as possible and runs the play. Brady does a lot more hard counts to use up the clock than changing whatever play was sent in.

Never have we heard about what a genius Tom Moore was as an offensive coordinator in Indy. They ran a couple of sets and Manning was free to pick what variations of those he wanted on just about every play. When the Broncos went to a more controlled, under-the-center offense earlier this season, Manning was awful until they took off the yoke and allowed him to freelance.

Check out this Grantland article: One-Trick Pony

Click to expand...

Good discussion.

I get all that.

BB has commented many times about how BB gets out of bad plays.

That's audibling.

There are three knocks against Brady in the Brady/Manning comparison left that have even vague plausibility. One is Greatest Coach Ever, and it has merit. But the other two are easy to debunk.

1. Brady has supposedly had better defenses (especially early in his career, which is when he won most of his Super Bowls).

Part of that is real -- more resources put into defense than into offense on his teams, at least in certain eras. Part is an illusion due to stadiums, weather and so on. BOTH parts of that suggest that equal stats for Brady and Manning equate to Brady actually performing better.

2. Brady has relied more on YAC, and supposedly this makes his results less impressive.

The simple form of that argument is total nonsense; a QB's main job is to make his receivers successful at receiving passes, however "success"plays out on the field.

The more sophisticated form says that Brady's receivers were so good at YAC that he in fact had better weapons than people realize. That indeed narrows the gap in weapon quality from what one might otherwise think. But it's not enough to flip and say Brady has had BETTER weapons, unless there's something I'm overlooking.