Brady is the best according to NY Daily News

[PatsFanSince74]

-I think its an open and shut case that Rivers has been a better QB up to this point. (Again, the only way to disagree is to give Manning credit for the Champ and Rivers blame for not having one, and I disagree there)
I want to agree with you so badly on this point, because I really don't like the way the Mannings handled that draft and because Rivers is a warrior and because I really don't like Eli (hey, I live in Manhattan and have to put up with the Manningomania--do you have any idea how bad it was to have to listen to the street celebrations and the horns honking on the night of "that game"?), but I can't get past the ring and Rivers' mediocre post season performance AT THIS STAGE in their careers. I just can't get past that, as well as you and others have stated your case here today. Yes, at this stage, before we have the full body of work of either Rivers or Manning, the ring does matter. There, I said it.

-I agree that average is an excellent description of Manning.
No bout adoubt it.

-I strenuously disagree that they gave him 6 years and 98 mill as a thank you for the team winning a SB and it doesnt come with heavy expectations. I would bet that if you told the Giants they would not win another SB with Manning at QB they would not have offered that contract.
I was being sarcastic. Of course, they didn't intend to do that, just as the Knicks didn't intend to wreck their cap status for years by paying Jordan money to Patrick Ewing.

-I will say that it is not unreasonable that the Giants believe Manning can DEVELOP INTO a top tier QB. I will agree that if you feel that will happen you have to give this type of contract. (For the most part, the top 5 guys all will be at or near the highest paid at some point, then fall when the next guy gets extneded) If the argument is the contract is justified by the likelihood he will earn it, I say thats reasonable, although I dont believe he will earn it. If we say it is justified based on his career to date, I'd say not much could be further from the truth.
Agreed

Why is it unfair to say he is closer to Dilfer than Brady/Montana? I dont think its debatable.
That doesn't mean he has to end up that way, it means thats where he is now. I think its the opposite of what you said. Today he is Dilfer-like but has the chance to be Brady-like. You implied he is more Brady-like but in time could prove to be Dilfer-like. We arent writing his epitath, just judging where he is at so far.
Depends on who's in the spectrum from Joe to Trent. If it's all QB's who've played in the last 30 years, then no, he isn't closer to Trent--not way up towards the Joe/Tommy end of the spectrum, but past the midway point. If it's the premium names we've been tossing around in this discussion, then yes he is closer to Trent.

Please see above. Thanks.

 

[Ring 6]

OH MY GOD. WE NEVER WON SB XXXVIII

Deus Irae just proved it to me.
After we turned the ball over and Carolina scored to go ahead, we only have 6:52 left in the game, and momentum wasn't on our side. The game was over and EVERYONE new it.
Now I have to go burn all of my SB XXXVIII memorabia.
Delhomme for HOF!!!!!!!

 

[PatsFanSince74]

OH MY GOD. WE NEVER WON SB XXXVIII

Deus Irae just proved it to me.
After we turned the ball over and Carolina scored to go ahead, we only have 6:52 left in the game, and momentum wasn't on our side. The game was over and EVERYONE new it.
Now I have to go burn all of my SB XXXVIII memorabia.
Delhomme for HOF!!!!!!!

Now, now. Logically, from a false premise anything follows, so Deus would be right. You just gotta jump through the Looking Glass. (That's not a serious comment, I hasten to add...)

 

[Deus Irae]

Now, now. Logically, from a false premise anything follows, so Deus would be right. You just gotta jump through the Looking Glass. (That's not a serious comment, I hasten to add...)

If Brady doesn't throw that pick against the Colts/Broncos.... if Brady doesn't miss open receivers against the Giants (his admission). 3 straight years that Brady gas-piped it, if we just follow the logic of Andy's argument. That's what I mean by this becoming a Twilight Zone episode, and it's why I'm not going to debate the topic further.

It went from Manning's contract vis-a-vis Brady's skill level to Rivers not winning 'big games' despite his winning big games.

 

[Ring 6]

Please see above. Thanks.

My point is also based on the assumption that Manning was the RECIPIENT of a ring, not the reason for one.
I think the 07 Giants also would have won with Rivers, and none of the Charger teams would have won with Eli. But thinking it doesnt change the achievement.
I could argue both sides of this.

I was talking about among winners, not all QBs when I said Eli was closer to Dilfer.

 

[Ring 6]

Now, now. Logically, from a false premise anything follows, so Deus would be right. You just gotta jump through the Looking Glass. (That's not a serious comment, I hasten to add...)

I think you missed my point. How could the game be over if Troy Brown doesnt strip the int, if there was, in fact, enough time left.

 

[Ring 6]

If Brady doesn't throw that pick against the Colts/Broncos.... if Brady doesn't miss open receivers against the Giants (his admission). 3 straight years that Brady gas-piped it, if we just follow the logic of Andy's argument. That's what I mean by this becoming a Twilight Zone episode, and it's why I'm not going to debate the topic further.

It went from Manning's contract vis-a-vis Brady's skill level to Rivers not winning 'big games' despite his winning big games.

No. Its about you saying if Troy Brown doesnt strip the int, the game is over. YOU actually are saying Brady choked and Troy Brown saved him.

Actually, its about you being wrong that the game was over without the strip and once again lacking the maturity to admit you are wrong.
You lose all credibility in every argument you ever make when you say 2+2=5 and when its caught refuse to admit you were wrong.
Your general arrogance is difficult enough to deal with, without adding the endearing quality of refusing to admit a blatantly false argument.

 

[Ring 6]

If Brady doesn't throw that pick against the Colts/Broncos.... if Brady doesn't miss open receivers against the Giants (his admission). 3 straight years that Brady gas-piped it, if we just follow the logic of Andy's argument. That's what I mean by this becoming a Twilight Zone episode, and it's why I'm not going to debate the topic further.

It went from Manning's contract vis-a-vis Brady's skill level to Rivers not winning 'big games' despite his winning big games.

Brady hasn't won the big one since 2004. So. Do you think admitting that fact diminshes him? 31 other QBs dont win the big one every year. Having won it 3 times is what makes Brady special, not pretending he will win it every time.
In 2005, I don't believe he had the best team. The autopsy of that loss, IMO, was the end of the first half, not the Int he threw. That didnt help, but I dont hold him to a standard of perfection.
In 2006, he had the opportunity, A to put more points on the board, and B to engineer the last gapsed drive. Was he part of the reason we lost? Of course. Was he the primary reason? No.
In 2007 he did not play his best in the biggest game. That certainly matters. That certainly makes him accountable for the loss, along with the rest of the team.

Yes, for 3 straight years Tom Brady fell short, and frankly, he is capable of having turned 2 of them into wins. So. We aren't talking about the shortcomings of a guy who never won, we are talking about the difference between winning more than anyone else and being perfect.

You used the term 'homer' about me, but you are refusing to discuss Rivers shortcomings solely because you think it reflects poorly on Brady?? Who is in the Twilight Zone?

 

[Ring 6]

Once again, respectfully disagree. There are plenty of examples of SB champions who had a "finesse" offenses (poor to complimenary running games) but had excellent defenses. Here are a few.

81 49ers
87 Skins
89 49ers
94 49ers
96 Pack
maybe 99 Rams but w/ MF rushing not sure..

I still contend that if you give the 'Fins a tough, solid D, they would have won a SB w/ Marino and not feel that he would need to make a 20 yd completion 15 times a game.

I look it up, and as almost always is the case, perception and reality differ.
In 15 years with Marino as their leading passer, the Dolphins on average ranked 15th in scoring defense, in other words, totally average overall.
In 2 of those years they were ranked #1, in 4 they were top 7, and in 7 of 15 top 12.

Really if Marino is the best QB of all time, how did he fail to win a championship because of his defense when it was #1 twice, and better than average almost half of his years?
Most revisionist thinking is that Marino had the worst defense in the NFL and was lucky to ever win a game, but thats not the case. By the way, BEFORE Marino (to show the impact of the philosophy change to throw so much) the Dolphins were top 10 in 12 of Shulas 13 years and top 5 in 9 of them.

 

[Ring 6]

By the way in those 15 years, the Dolphins averaged a ranking of 9.7th in scoring offense
Again, to say the best QB in the NFL didnt win a Championship because he had, on average the 10th best offense supported by only the 15th best defense doesnt seem right.

 

[Ring 6]

Continuing my Marino obsession, these are the stats from the last playoff game of each season he played, ie the game they were eliminated.
I recognize it is a high standard, but we are talking about a guy who many people think shold be absolved of any accountability to never winning a SB. Shouldnt there be some cases where he played very well, and lost, if thats the case? I see 1, the 5th down, but in that game his team was shut out in the 2nd half and lost 22-21.
When the Dolphins lost, typically, Marino was a big part of the reason.


Points att comp yds td int ypa Comp % rating
7 11 25 95 1 2 3.8 44 34.6
3 26 37 243 0 2 6.6 70.3 65.5
3 17 43 141 0 2 3.3 39.5 29.3
22 33 64 422 2 3 6.6 51.6 63.4
21 24 38 262 3 0 6.9 63.2 109.8
10 22 45 268 1 2 6 48.9 56.5
34 23 49 323 3 2 6.6 46.9 72.1
14 20 48 248 2 2 5.2 41.7 54.9
16 29 50 318 1 2 6.4 58 66.9
20 15 25 193 2 2 7.7 60 77.6
150 220 424 2513 15 19 5.93 51.9

 

[RobertWeathers]

Of course it is, in fact, it pretty much happened. AFTER we scored we stopped them and got the ball back and drove 72 yards for a FG.
If your argument is that the Chargers didnt try to make first downs when the game was tied, and would have with an 8 point lead, its a pretty weak argument.

Of course that is not my arguement. My arguement is the possibilites and they way the SD O was racking up 1st downs liek no tomorrow..

Lets say SD punts after making a 1 and 2 1st downs respectively.

w/ 4:00, 3 TOs @ Pats 30, can Brady drive down- of course
w/ 2:00, 2 TOs @ Pats 20, can brady drive down - of course
w/ 1:00 1 TO @ Pats 20, can Brady drive down- iffy to doubtful.

Look, I watched the game (almost went actually) never gave up home, but up until Troy's FF, it wasnt looking all that chipper.

I think my arguement is different that the other guy's Hes saying NWIH. I'm saying the Pats chances of pulling that game out w/o Troys FF takes a major hit and adds a lot of doubt.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I'm simply saying it is a piece of the puzzle not the whole story.
I would assume almost every starting NFL QB has taken enough of a beating and still played that he has earned his teammates respect with toughness. I just dont think Rivers is different because the extent of what he was playing through was public. (ie Brady and the sportshernia for example)

I think we've killed this one. It's a piece but playing hurt is not the deciding factor.

 

[RobertWeathers]

None of those offenses really equate to the Dolphins though. The 9ers were not averse to running the ball, and their passing game was a controlled short passing attack.
The 80s were a different era that the mid-late 90s.
The teams you are listing were never built to throw at the expense of anything else. The Dolphins were. And in that era, throwing that much and that aggressively put additional pressure on the defense, (see Chargers). More pertinent to the discussion though, is that the SUCCESS of the Dolphins pass happy offense created success for the opposing offenses, thereby diminishing the STATISTICAL rating of the Miami defense.
In other words, the Dolphin defenses didnt suck, their style of offense made their stats look worse.

See its the opposite, IMO. The team was built around Marino NEEDING to throw like he did the team was built around them WANTING him to do that, and everyone else had to adjust to it.

Both offenses were still built to throw, Andy. Yes, the slants, buttonhooks, screens, and crossing routes were more in the 90s as opposed to the out-routes and were more time of possesion-friendly, etc that Miami ran but at the end of the day, they were still passing offenses that chose to pass before run. We can look at offensive ToP, ave ypp for pass & run but if you look at the 'Fins d ave yds per play, its in the bottom 1/2 of league almost every year.

 

[Ring 6]

Both offenses were still built to throw, Andy. Yes, the slants, buttonhooks, screens, and crossing routes were more in the 90s as opposed to the out-routes and were more time of possesion-friendly, etc that Miami ran but at the end of the day, they were still passing offenses that chose to pass before run. We can look at offensive ToP, ave ypp for pass & run but if you look at the 'Fins d ave yds per play, its in the bottom 1/2 of league almost every year.

But the Dolphin offense made life tougher for the D by spending less time on the field. The WCO used the pass for ball control, to set up the run, and for long drives, not quick strikes.
I think however the hairs are split, I have never seen anything so awful about those Miami teams that the best QB ever couldn't have won a Championship. When push came to shove it was often Marinos play that caused them to lose.
Look at it this way. Take the best 5-6 defenses of the Marino era. Wouldn't the best QB ever be able to find a ring with 5-6 defenses that were good?

 

[Ring 6]

Of course that is not my arguement. My arguement is the possibilites and they way the SD O was racking up 1st downs liek no tomorrow..

Lets say SD punts after making a 1 and 2 1st downs respectively.

w/ 4:00, 3 TOs @ Pats 30, can Brady drive down- of course
w/ 2:00, 2 TOs @ Pats 20, can brady drive down - of course
w/ 1:00 1 TO @ Pats 20, can Brady drive down- iffy to doubtful.

Look, I watched the game (almost went actually) never gave up home, but up until Troy's FF, it wasnt looking all that chipper.

I think my arguement is different that the other guy's Hes saying NWIH. I'm saying the Pats chances of pulling that game out w/o Troys FF takes a major hit and adds a lot of doubt.

I'm not saying it would be easy. I'm saying there was plenty of time and opportunity left.
As it turned out we not only completed that drive, but drove 72 more yards.
I don't know why you give the Chargers the likelihood of moving the ball ahead 8 when we knew they would run when they couldnt move it tied, when they had a run/pass option.

To say the D wouldn't have stopped them is making a huge jump to a conclusion.
In any event,being down a score on defense with 6:25 left is hardly a situation where you have no chance to win, which is what I am arguing, that the game wasn't over without the strip.
I understand your point, but anyone arguing the game was over if he didn't strip it is foolish. A TON of games have teams come back from one score down on defense with 6:25 left

 

[Ring 6]

I think we've killed this one. It's a piece but playing hurt is not the deciding factor.

agreed ten characters

 

[RobertWeathers]

I look it up, and as almost always is the case, perception and reality differ.
In 15 years with Marino as their leading passer, the Dolphins on average ranked 15th in scoring defense, in other words, totally average overall.
In 2 of those years they were ranked #1, in 4 they were top 7, and in 7 of 15 top 12.

Really if Marino is the best QB of all time, how did he fail to win a championship because of his defense when it was #1 twice, and better than average almost half of his years?
Most revisionist thinking is that Marino had the worst defense in the NFL and was lucky to ever win a game, but thats not the case. By the way, BEFORE Marino (to show the impact of the philosophy change to throw so much) the Dolphins were top 10 in 12 of Shulas 13 years and top 5 in 9 of them.

Never said he was the best of all-time, Andy. I said he was a great Qb.

I look at ave YPP and from 1984 to 1997. It sucks..

17, 23, 26, 17, 24, 22, 4 (1990), 24, 11, 26, 18, 17, 26, 26 . After that, JJ takes over, D is awesome and DM is 37 and on the 18th hole.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Continuing my Marino obsession, these are the stats from the last playoff game of each season he played, ie the game they were eliminated.
I recognize it is a high standard, but we are talking about a guy who many people think shold be absolved of any accountability to never winning a SB. Shouldnt there be some cases where he played very well, and lost, if thats the case? I see 1, the 5th down, but in that game his team was shut out in the 2nd half and lost 22-21.
When the Dolphins lost, typically, Marino was a big part of the reason.


Points att comp yds td int ypa Comp % rating
7 11 25 95 1 2 3.8 44 34.6
3 26 37 243 0 2 6.6 70.3 65.5
3 17 43 141 0 2 3.3 39.5 29.3
22 33 64 422 2 3 6.6 51.6 63.4
21 24 38 262 3 0 6.9 63.2 109.8
10 22 45 268 1 2 6 48.9 56.5
34 23 49 323 3 2 6.6 46.9 72.1
14 20 48 248 2 2 5.2 41.7 54.9
16 29 50 318 1 2 6.4 58 66.9
20 15 25 193 2 2 7.7 60 77.6
150 220 424 2513 15 19 5.93 51.9

Playing from behind vs better teams. O became one dimentional. Hes sucked.

 

[RobertWeathers]

But the Dolphin offense made life tougher for the D by spending less time on the field. The WCO used the pass for ball control, to set up the run, and for long drives, not quick strikes.
I think however the hairs are split, I have never seen anything so awful about those Miami teams that the best QB ever couldn't have won a Championship. When push came to shove it was often Marinos play that caused them to lose.
Look at it this way. Take the best 5-6 defenses of the Marino era. Wouldn't the best QB ever be able to find a ring with 5-6 defenses that were good?

I firmly believe that if you told Dan Marino that he'd have the 1985 Bears D, he wouldn't try to force the issue as much. After Jimmy came in and those Fins defenses rocked, it was too late. he was 37-