Best QB's by Decade

[dante828]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs07/columns/story?columnist=chadiha_jeff&id=3199634

I thought the column was interesting and he made some interesting points, but he also said this about this decade:

"Manning cemented his status as the best quarterback of his era when Indianapolis beat Chicago in last year's Super Bowl."

Ummmm....the decade isn't even over yet and Brady is going for his fourth Super Bowl after going 18-0 and defeating most of Manning single season numbers...and Manning has cemented the position already?!?!

Sorry, I don't care what side of the debate your on, but its not over yet and may not be for years after both players have finished.

 

[chrisfx811]

Brady should close the gap stat wise before the decade is over considering the weapons he should have. Hardware wise, I don't see Peyton catching him, but who knows.

I don't know one NE fan who would swap Brady for Manning that's for sure.

 

[PonyExpress]

No sane football man would contend that Manning is better than Brady. The debate is over. Chadiha needs to put his friendship and admiration for Dungy aside and face reality, like the rest of the football world.

 

[Patriot_in_NY]

Whoopie, A hit peice against Brady by a Manning Ball-washer sad that Peyton has once again confirmed that he's a choker with the game/season on the line. Gee, real original there

 

[makewayhomer]

No sane football man would contend that Manning is better than Brady. The debate is over. .

no sane man here would.

no sane man in Indy would do the opposite.

plenty of people everywhere else are still debating the question

 

[Lansdowne]

All it took was one Super Bowl title for Manning to trump Brady's 3 (soon to be 4). Outstanding, Chadiha! You twat.

 

[PonyExpress]

no sane man here would.

no sane man in Indy would do the opposite.

plenty of people everywhere else are still debating the question

No objective football fan can debate that topic. The debate is over. If you have some personal hangup that prevents you from dealing with reality, see a psychiatrist.

 

[Fixit]

The debate was over a while ago, but now it's laughable.

 

[Wildo7]

I think the debate itself is stupid.

But if they both retired next Monday, Brady would be remembered to Peyton as Montana is to Marino.

If Peyton went on to win 2 more superbowls, then you can't exactly say the debate is over.

Personally I think that some people worship stats, saying SB wins is a bad way to evaluate a QB because it takes a team to do it. Well this is also true for stats. Individual stats rely upon a receiver core, the OL etc. just as much as SB wins do.

I think the best way to evaluate QBs is to look at postseason stats and crunch time performances. In this area Brady is king.

 

[Fixit]

I think the best way to evaluate QBs is to look at postseason stats and crunch time performances. In this area Brady is king.

And Manning's average, at best.

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

I think the debate itself is stupid.

But if they both retired next Monday, Brady would be remembered to Peyton as Montana is to Marino.

If Peyton went on to win 2 more superbowls, then you can't exactly say the debate is over.

Personally I think that some people worship stats, saying SB wins is a bad way to evaluate a QB because it takes a team to do it. Well this is also true for stats. Individual stats rely upon a receiver core, the OL etc. just as much as SB wins do.

I think the best way to evaluate QBs is to look at postseason stats and crunch time performances. In this area Brady is king.

I agree with the sentiment that titles alone don't win the argument and neither do stats. Picking between Brady and Manning could be an absolute pain for this reason.

Thankfully it isn't due to playoff/pressure performance. Brady so clearly excels while Manning comes up small in big games. If the contrast weren't so stark we might have a discussion. As things stand there really isn't one.

 

[Pat the Pats Fan]

Interesting that the author tended to go more on stats than on other data.

Unitas over Starr in the 60s is just like picking Manning over Brady in the 00s.

Unitas never won a title in the 60s and always came up short against Starr and the Packers. He was really good, but not good enough to lift his team to victory. He made it to two games, one a NFL title game and was shut out by a great Cleveland defense in 64 and played in SB 3 loss to the Jets. But one can't say that Unitas got the Colts to the game, as he was hurt most of the year. The MVP of the NFL that year was Earl Morrall, the Colts QB that replaced the injured Unitas.

Football is a team sport, and I'll take the QB that gives my team the best chance of winning the hardware. Stats be damned. Oh and by the way, most of the QBs mentioned are in Canton, so what's the big deal about who is better. Depends on the measuring stick used, and I use a different stick than the author.

Opinions are like you know whats, everybody has one.

 

[primetime]

Chadiha has something against the Patriots, and he's not a particularly good writer in general.

Steve Young wasn't as good as Elway, Favre, or Aikman in the 90's, that's a terrible choice.