The Brady/Manning Narrative was always wrong

Luke Johnsen · Jan 28, 2016

I've been watching the Pats since the early 1980s. A lot of great QBs have come and gone since then. Montana, Elway, and Marino were the best when I was growing up watching the game. Since then, Favre, Manning, Brady, and Rodgers have been the best of this modern era. During the last 20 years, more and more credit has gone from the team to the star player for victories. They are seen as intrinsic "winners" for their teams accomplishments. But, sometimes that just doesn't stand up to scrutiny........

The postseason head to head matchups between Brady and Manning have almost been a mirror image. Brady is 3 times the QB now that he was during the first 3 SB wins. Manning was better at the time, but couldn't come close to beating Tom in New England. Today, Brady is 5 times the QB Manning is, but lost on Sunday - his 3rd straight loss against Manning in an AFC Championship game. (Brady has only lost 4 championship games, so that's a big deal) In my opinion, Tom has been a better QB then Manning for the past 10 years - but has lost every time he's played Manning in the championship game over that span.

If you fell into the media hype - you'd think Brady has become less clutch and Manning has suddenly become more Clutch. In reality - the home team won all 5 of their postseason matchups. In reality - Manning struggled in NE not because of Tom Brady, but because the Patriots had one of the all time great defenses during that stretch (Ty Law and Milloy/Harrison, those amazing linebackers, and Seymour on the line) and all those games were played in New England (which not only meant home field advantage, but suggested the Patriots were a better team that season.......) Likewise, Tom played one of the great defenses of recent years on Sunday, struggled, and his team lost.

Tom will always have the post-season accolades over Manning, just as Manning will likely have the edge in MVPs and All Pro Selections. But, at least in their head to head matchups - it seems like there wasn't quite as much of tom being an intrinsic "winner" and Manning being an intrinsic "choker" and that changing over time as it was the home team (and the better team) always winning. Am I wrong? Somehow, we wanted this storyline of "Joe Cool" against the "Choker" but it was more about "defense wins afc championships." (In fact, all the times Tom or Peyton had a record-setting offensive season - their teams fell short in the playoffs. Everytime Manning or Brady won the MVP (7 times in total) during the regular season, their teams fell short in the playoffs. Just some food for thought

In the last 20 years I've seen the media begin to give one player too much credit for their team's victories. Everyone said Jordan was the GOAT because the Bulls won 6 titles. But he took a year off an the bulls still won 50 games. I grew up a huge fan of Larry Legend - but he had 2 other HOFers on his front line. Magic was magical - but he played with 2 HOFers as well. Outside of Olajuwon and his first title, Notwizki in '09, or Rick Barry and the Warriors title from 40 years ago, I can't think of any team that was carried to a title on the back of just one star. (and for 3+ titles, every team had 3 or more HOFers)

Even in baseball - people talk about Jeter as "the Captain" and a "winner." In reality, he wasn't even a middle of the lineup guy, and by the time he became "the captain" (and Paul O'Neill and Bernie Williams were gone) he led the yankees to 1 title in the next 13 seasons, despite having the league's highest payroll that entire time. Should we pick him ahead of Ernie Banks on our all-time teams because his teams won?

Sorry for the rant, I guess I just don't like hearing about how Manning "outplayed" Brady when one got hit 4 times and the other 20 times by the opposing defense. At the same time, after nearly 15 years, I'll admit the roles were reversed many years ago and I did the same thing.

Anyone have a similar thought? In any case, I'm glad we have Tom and wouldn't trade him for Manning or Montana. He may or may not be the GOAT, but he is definitely our GOAT

Ice_Ice_Brady · Jan 28, 2016

Look back at all of the Patriots and Broncos/Colts postseason games, including the Super Bowls. When games are close with the season on the line, down to the last drive facing elimination, you'll see the difference between the two.

Marko · Jan 28, 2016

I was thinking the same thing. I truly believe there is an equilibrium point between giving the best player on the team the responsibility, and him having too much responsibility. Brady was at his best when he included everyone in the offensive game plan. During the regular season this will not lead to gaudy scores and stats but creates a much tougher team to defend in the playoffs. Since 2007 Brady has born way too much of the burden of creating offense on this team., so in the playoffs a good team with a good defensive coordinator only has to figure out ways to stop him, a tough task, but possible. With a more diverse attack, including a running game, and not ignoring 2/5 of your receivers, teams that did drop 7-8 into coverage would pay elsewhere.

AGCSBill · Jan 28, 2016

Luke Johnsen said:
I've been watching the Pats since the early 1980s.....

If you fell into the media hype - you'd think Brady has become less clutch and Manning has suddenly become more Clutch...... In reality - the home team won all 5 of their postseason matchups. In reality - Manning struggled in NE....

Anyone have a similar thought? In any case, I'm glad we have Tom and wouldn't trade him for Manning or Montana. He may or may not be the GOAT, but he is definitely our GOAT

What is in bold explains a lot!!! Brady lost on the road and so has Manning. What you fail to add are the number of times Manning has lost in games other than the AFCCG to the Patriots. Simply put, when Manning is at home, he wins and when Brady is at home he wins. Isn't that the overall trend in the NFL of good teams?

This last game says a lot about Brady. Considering all the hits he took, the lack of pass protection, he DID lead the team to a game ending TD and fell short of tying the game with the failed 2 point conversion. We can what if all the stuff before that last possession. Also, Manning couldn't lead the Denver offense to put away the Pats so Brady would not have had ANY opportunity to tie the game and send it into overtime. That says something, too. At the end the day, the play of the Denver defense trumped the Patriots offense. They played super good and one wonders if they can retain that level in the Super Bowl against Carolina. Who knows.

aluminum seats · Jan 28, 2016

Ice_Ice_Brady said:
When games are close with the season on the line, down to the last drive facing elimination, you'll see the difference between the two.

So true, and not an obvious stat to have at your fingertips. But exactly: at the end of the Super Bowls the Patriots lost, Brady led a scoring drive. Even this year...came down to 4th down against the Giants, he made the play. This week, two 4th downs, he made the play. It was only in having to make yet another play right away that he came up short.

heavyde050 · Jan 28, 2016

Luke Johnsen said:
I've been watching the Pats since the early 1980s. A lot of great QBs have come and gone since then. Montana, Elway, and Marino were the best when I was growing up watching the game. Since then, Favre, Manning, Brady, and Rodgers have been the best of this modern era. During the last 20 years, more and more credit has gone from the team to the star player for victories. They are seen as intrinsic "winners" for their teams accomplishments. But, sometimes that just doesn't stand up to scrutiny........

The postseason head to head matchups between Brady and Manning have almost been a mirror image. Brady is 3 times the QB now that he was during the first 3 SB wins. Manning was better at the time, but couldn't come close to beating Tom in New England. Today, Brady is 5 times the QB Manning is, but lost on Sunday - his 3rd straight loss against Manning in an AFC Championship game. (Brady has only lost 4 championship games, so that's a big deal) In my opinion, Tom has been a better QB then Manning for the past 10 years - but has lost every time he's played Manning in the championship game over that span.

If you fell into the media hype - you'd think Brady has become less clutch and Manning has suddenly become more Clutch. In reality - the home team won all 5 of their postseason matchups. In reality - Manning struggled in NE not because of Tom Brady, but because the Patriots had one of the all time great defenses during that stretch (Ty Law and Milloy/Harrison, those amazing linebackers, and Seymour on the line) and all those games were played in New England (which not only meant home field advantage, but suggested the Patriots were a better team that season.......) Likewise, Tom played one of the great defenses of recent years on Sunday, struggled, and his team lost.

Tom will always have the post-season accolades over Manning, just as Manning will likely have the edge in MVPs and All Pro Selections. But, at least in their head to head matchups - it seems like there wasn't quite as much of tom being an intrinsic "winner" and Manning being an intrinsic "choker" and that changing over time as it was the home team (and the better team) always winning. Am I wrong? Somehow, we wanted this storyline of "Joe Cool" against the "Choker" but it was more about "defense wins afc championships." (In fact, all the times Tom or Peyton had a record-setting offensive season - their teams fell short in the playoffs. Everytime Manning or Brady won the MVP (7 times in total) during the regular season, their teams fell short in the playoffs. Just some food for thought

In the last 20 years I've seen the media begin to give one player too much credit for their team's victories. Everyone said Jordan was the GOAT because the Bulls won 6 titles. But he took a year off an the bulls still won 50 games. I grew up a huge fan of Larry Legend - but he had 2 other HOFers on his front line. Magic was magical - but he played with 2 HOFers as well. Outside of Olajuwon and his first title, Notwizki in '09, or Rick Barry and the Warriors title from 40 years ago, I can't think of any team that was carried to a title on the back of just one star. (and for 3+ titles, every team had 3 or more HOFers)

Even in baseball - people talk about Jeter as "the Captain" and a "winner." In reality, he wasn't even a middle of the lineup guy, and by the time he became "the captain" (and Paul O'Neill and Bernie Williams were gone) he led the yankees to 1 title in the next 13 seasons, despite having the league's highest payroll that entire time. Should we pick him ahead of Ernie Banks on our all-time teams because his teams won?

Sorry for the rant, I guess I just don't like hearing about how Manning "outplayed" Brady when one got hit 4 times and the other 20 times by the opposing defense. At the same time, after nearly 15 years, I'll admit the roles were reversed many years ago and I did the same thing.

Anyone have a similar thought? In any case, I'm glad we have Tom and wouldn't trade him for Manning or Montana. He may or may not be the GOAT, but he is definitely our GOAT

I think another big difference is that even though Brady played against an all-time defense on the road this past Sunday, he was only a missed XP away from tying the game (I don't even want to spend any time on the FG's or lack thereof). In the past, Manning really played poorly against some of those Pats teams, the only really exception was the comeback in 2006, but the reason his team was down was Manning's poor play.
Brady did not have his best game on Sunday but still willed the offense to a chance at the end. I truly believe if the sides were reversed, Brady and Denver's Defense would have beaten a Manning led Patriots team by two touchdowns.
Manning is one of the greatest ever, but he had very little impact on the game on Sunday. He only made 2 or 3 good throws all day (the rest were great plays by his receivers). To be fair, two of them went for touchdowns, but those were wide open throws. He also missed at least two other easy TD's.
The narrative should be that Brady and Manning are both great, but that in the recent past, Brady has not been able to win mostly close games on the road. In some of those games Brady had a larger role in the defeat but in some years (2013) the Pats just didn't have the defense.
Lastly, I would like to bring up the fact that many of Peyton's teams weren't even good enough to make the final 4 to go against some great Brady Pats teams. For example, the 2014 Broncos would have been beaten pretty badly (much like the Colts were).

Palm Beach Pats Fan · Jan 28, 2016

Manning is 3-4 vs. Brady in the playoffs when he had the better defense behind him.
Brady is 7-3 vs. Manning in the playoffs when he had the better defense behind him.

True, much of the differences in both sets of data arose from HFA. Brady moreso than Manning was likely to be a higher seed when backed by the better defense. So it is the residue of Brady's greater regular season clutchness /winning ability that impacted the postseason playing venue in his favor.

Deus Irae · Jan 28, 2016

Brady > Manning

Remember that correct narrative, and the false narratives and excuse making won't matter.

Off The Grid · Jan 28, 2016

Luke Johnsen said:
I've been watching the Pats since the early 1980s. A lot of great QBs have come and gone since then. Montana, Elway, and Marino were the best when I was growing up watching the game. Since then, Favre, Manning, Brady, and Rodgers have been the best of this modern era. During the last 20 years, more and more credit has gone from the team to the star player for victories. They are seen as intrinsic "winners" for their teams accomplishments. But, sometimes that just doesn't stand up to scrutiny........

The postseason head to head matchups between Brady and Manning have almost been a mirror image. Brady is 3 times the QB now that he was during the first 3 SB wins. Manning was better at the time, but couldn't come close to beating Tom in New England. Today, Brady is 5 times the QB Manning is, but lost on Sunday - his 3rd straight loss against Manning in an AFC Championship game. (Brady has only lost 4 championship games, so that's a big deal) In my opinion, Tom has been a better QB then Manning for the past 10 years - but has lost every time he's played Manning in the championship game over that span.

If you fell into the media hype - you'd think Brady has become less clutch and Manning has suddenly become more Clutch. In reality - the home team won all 5 of their postseason matchups. In reality - Manning struggled in NE not because of Tom Brady, but because the Patriots had one of the all time great defenses during that stretch (Ty Law and Milloy/Harrison, those amazing linebackers, and Seymour on the line) and all those games were played in New England (which not only meant home field advantage, but suggested the Patriots were a better team that season.......) Likewise, Tom played one of the great defenses of recent years on Sunday, struggled, and his team lost.

Tom will always have the post-season accolades over Manning, just as Manning will likely have the edge in MVPs and All Pro Selections. But, at least in their head to head matchups - it seems like there wasn't quite as much of tom being an intrinsic "winner" and Manning being an intrinsic "choker" and that changing over time as it was the home team (and the better team) always winning. Am I wrong? Somehow, we wanted this storyline of "Joe Cool" against the "Choker" but it was more about "defense wins afc championships." (In fact, all the times Tom or Peyton had a record-setting offensive season - their teams fell short in the playoffs. Everytime Manning or Brady won the MVP (7 times in total) during the regular season, their teams fell short in the playoffs. Just some food for thought

In the last 20 years I've seen the media begin to give one player too much credit for their team's victories. Everyone said Jordan was the GOAT because the Bulls won 6 titles. But he took a year off an the bulls still won 50 games. I grew up a huge fan of Larry Legend - but he had 2 other HOFers on his front line. Magic was magical - but he played with 2 HOFers as well. Outside of Olajuwon and his first title, Notwizki in '09, or Rick Barry and the Warriors title from 40 years ago, I can't think of any team that was carried to a title on the back of just one star. (and for 3+ titles, every team had 3 or more HOFers)

Even in baseball - people talk about Jeter as "the Captain" and a "winner." In reality, he wasn't even a middle of the lineup guy, and by the time he became "the captain" (and Paul O'Neill and Bernie Williams were gone) he led the yankees to 1 title in the next 13 seasons, despite having the league's highest payroll that entire time. Should we pick him ahead of Ernie Banks on our all-time teams because his teams won?

Sorry for the rant, I guess I just don't like hearing about how Manning "outplayed" Brady when one got hit 4 times and the other 20 times by the opposing defense. At the same time, after nearly 15 years, I'll admit the roles were reversed many years ago and I did the same thing.

Anyone have a similar thought? In any case, I'm glad we have Tom and wouldn't trade him for Manning or Montana. He may or may not be the GOAT, but he is definitely our GOAT

Thoughtful Post, Bro, and I am pretty much entirely in Agreement.

01 ~ Defense Wins Championships. Yes, of course I'm oversimplifying, hence I'm not 1oo% literally serious with that Statement. It is of course more complex than that: All 53 Players matter. But the ludicrous notion that I've seen tossed about all over the place for the last several Years ~ that QB's are the dominant Factor in determining Championships and that Defenses are incidental ~ is HogWash. I've always loudly proclaimed that to be so, and the last few Years should've made that clear to even the most myopic.

02 ~ And I agree 100% that it isn't Brady's Rings that champion his Cause: It's the way he performs in the PlayOffs, especially versus the way that Manning plays in the PlayOffs. That cannot be easily quantified, but the difference between the two, for anyone who's watched'm play....is gigantic.

Ice_Ice_Brady · Jan 28, 2016

Why is everyone, including the analysts, overlooking the obvious? Home and Away is almost always the deciding factor in who wins. No one seems to know what a "good defense" is in the NFL anymore. It seems like a good defense is the team that wins, while a bad defense is the team that loses, regardless of the point total.

Brady is better than Manning, not just for his heroics when the chips are down facing elimination, but for reasons I've already detailed if you look closely at their statistics.

PatriotsPimp136 · Jan 28, 2016

The 3-1 in afc championships bothers me.
Tommy's record in denver has been iffy. I don't understand why they couldn't close the deal with HFA. I don't think denver hits him a record 23 times in foxboro. Ughhh

SammyBlueCat · Jan 28, 2016

If someone has time, compare and contrast the running backs and lineman that each quarterback has has to help him. I suspect Brady has done more with less.

PatsFan92 · Jan 28, 2016

Every QB, even the greatest one's in NFL history have a place on the road where they seem to always struggle. TB12 is Denver and Miami. Peyton Manning's was Foxboro and now presently Gillette. Peyton was once 0-7 when playing at Foxboro/Gillette.

libra957 · Jan 28, 2016

Win 2 rings Manning squeezes himself in the top 5 , Brady will still have the edge. 4 Super Bowls wins is on a whole other level compare to two. Until Tom wins a 5th, he'll have to keep wrestling Montana for the top spot.

stinkypete · Jan 28, 2016

PatsFan92 said:
Every QB, even the greatest one's in NFL history have a place on the road where they seem to always struggle. TB12 is Denver and Miami. Peyton Manning's was Foxboro and now presently Gillette. Peyton was once 0-7 when playing at Foxboro/Gillette.

To add to the narrative of GOAT QBs, Joe Montana couldn't win at the Meadowlands.

Jackson 2 · Jan 28, 2016

Luke Johnsen said:
I've been watching the Pats since the early 1980s. A lot of great QBs have come and gone since then. Montana, Elway, and Marino were the best when I was growing up watching the game. Since then, Favre, Manning, Brady, and Rodgers have been the best of this modern era. During the last 20 years, more and more credit has gone from the team to the star player for victories. They are seen as intrinsic "winners" for their teams accomplishments. But, sometimes that just doesn't stand up to scrutiny........

The postseason head to head matchups between Brady and Manning have almost been a mirror image. Brady is 3 times the QB now that he was during the first 3 SB wins. Manning was better at the time, but couldn't come close to beating Tom in New England. Today, Brady is 5 times the QB Manning is, but lost on Sunday - his 3rd straight loss against Manning in an AFC Championship game. (Brady has only lost 4 championship games, so that's a big deal) In my opinion, Tom has been a better QB then Manning for the past 10 years - but has lost every time he's played Manning in the championship game over that span.

If you fell into the media hype - you'd think Brady has become less clutch and Manning has suddenly become more Clutch. In reality - the home team won all 5 of their postseason matchups. In reality - Manning struggled in NE not because of Tom Brady, but because the Patriots had one of the all time great defenses during that stretch (Ty Law and Milloy/Harrison, those amazing linebackers, and Seymour on the line) and all those games were played in New England (which not only meant home field advantage, but suggested the Patriots were a better team that season.......) Likewise, Tom played one of the great defenses of recent years on Sunday, struggled, and his team lost.

Tom will always have the post-season accolades over Manning, just as Manning will likely have the edge in MVPs and All Pro Selections. But, at least in their head to head matchups - it seems like there wasn't quite as much of tom being an intrinsic "winner" and Manning being an intrinsic "choker" and that changing over time as it was the home team (and the better team) always winning. Am I wrong? Somehow, we wanted this storyline of "Joe Cool" against the "Choker" but it was more about "defense wins afc championships." (In fact, all the times Tom or Peyton had a record-setting offensive season - their teams fell short in the playoffs. Everytime Manning or Brady won the MVP (7 times in total) during the regular season, their teams fell short in the playoffs. Just some food for thought

In the last 20 years I've seen the media begin to give one player too much credit for their team's victories. Everyone said Jordan was the GOAT because the Bulls won 6 titles. But he took a year off an the bulls still won 50 games. I grew up a huge fan of Larry Legend - but he had 2 other HOFers on his front line. Magic was magical - but he played with 2 HOFers as well. Outside of Olajuwon and his first title, Notwizki in '09, or Rick Barry and the Warriors title from 40 years ago, I can't think of any team that was carried to a title on the back of just one star. (and for 3+ titles, every team had 3 or more HOFers)

Even in baseball - people talk about Jeter as "the Captain" and a "winner." In reality, he wasn't even a middle of the lineup guy, and by the time he became "the captain" (and Paul O'Neill and Bernie Williams were gone) he led the yankees to 1 title in the next 13 seasons, despite having the league's highest payroll that entire time. Should we pick him ahead of Ernie Banks on our all-time teams because his teams won?

Sorry for the rant, I guess I just don't like hearing about how Manning "outplayed" Brady when one got hit 4 times and the other 20 times by the opposing defense. At the same time, after nearly 15 years, I'll admit the roles were reversed many years ago and I did the same thing.

Anyone have a similar thought? In any case, I'm glad we have Tom and wouldn't trade him for Manning or Montana. He may or may not be the GOAT, but he is definitely our GOAT

That is one impressive post. Nice start!

Luke Johnsen · Jan 28, 2016

Without a doubt, throughout his career, Brady has been a MUCH better QB under adversity than Manning has been. Whether its on the road, or whether it's against a a dominant defensive line.

I think in the last 10 years Aaron Rodgers has actually been the best QB of all when under adversity. I believe he once made the pro-bowl while leading the league in times being sacked. When Peyton Manning had his MVP years he was usually the least sacked QB. (And of course, I remember there was a time TB was never touched and people compared him to a royal prince)

The best Patriots team I think was the 2004 Team. On Offense they had Corey Dillon average over 100 yards rushing PER GAME. Brady only threw 28 TDs that year, and no WR had more than 56 catches.

Who did they have on defense?

Wilfork, Seymour, Warren, and Traylor on the line
Bruschi, Johnson, Vrabel, and McGinest as the linebackers
Samuel, Law, Harrison, and Wilson in the secondary

Now, the Patriots offense is so one dimensional it is vulnerable to any good pass rush (as long as it can be accomplished without having to abuse the blitz, of course) Remember the Rams and the greatest show on Turf? They always struggled against the Strahan era Giants. Likewise, the Patriots had their share of difficulties against the Giants in the Strahan and later Tuck eras.

But, this is the greatness of Tom. Last year if you tuned into the superbowl in the 3rd quarter you'd find Tom Brady struggling, having thrown 2 INTs already, and the seahawks up by 2 scores and with a chance to go up by 3 scores. By the time the dust settled, Brady was the MVP and had his 4th SB trophy. (Seattle should have run, but I'm glad they chose not) Manning was never that type of a QB.

I lived on the west coast for a while and saw a lot of 49ers games. There was one huge difference between Young and Montana - how they dealt with adversity. Steve Young would be up 21-0 on a team after 1 quarter or he would struggle the whole game. He had fewer comeback victories then almost any QB. Montana, on the other hand, was always a threat to turn it on in the 4th quarter once he'd figured out what you were doing defensively and were starting to tire out. TB reminds me a lot of Montana in that sense - you always think if he just has one more chance, he can make something happen.

Its something that took me a long time to understand. Peyton Manning is 10 times the QB his brother Eli is. But Eli has that magic in the postseason that Peyton never had. I remember an NFC championship game against SF where Eli was battered, beaten, etc. the entire game - but never threw a pick, and led the giants to the victory despite being manhandled. His brother could never do that. I asked a pro about it once and he said it's like boxing - you might be the most talented guy with the best game plan, but everything changes when you take a couple of good punches. Peyton never could handle the physical beating, Eli could.

The Brady/Manning Narrative was always wrong

Luke Johnsen

Rookie

Ice_Ice_Brady

I heard 10,000 whispering and nobody listening

Marko

Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

AGCSBill

Practice Squad Player

aluminum seats

Pro Bowl Player

heavyde050

In the Starting Line-Up

Palm Beach Pats Fan

Pro Bowl Player

Deus Irae

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

Off The Grid

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

Ice_Ice_Brady

I heard 10,000 whispering and nobody listening

PatriotsPimp136

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

SammyBlueCat

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFan92

On the Game Day Roster

libra957

2nd Team Getting Their First Start

stinkypete

In the Starting Line-Up

Jackson 2

PatsFans.com Supporter

Luke Johnsen

Rookie

Similar threads