- Joined
- Oct 20, 2007
- Messages
- 29,794
- Reaction score
- 20,459
Just wrote this Brady vs. Manning post on Reddit, figured you guys might like it too:
It probably goes without saying that Brady has been the superior statistical quarterback when playing outdoors. He does it far more often, so he's more practiced at it. Even though the outdoor games that Manning played with the Colts were mostly in Tennessee, Florida, or Texas, this mild-weather advantage would be cancelled out by the fact that, when he did play games in bad conditions, he was far out of his element. That's probably why you see the following:
OUTDOORS
Brady: 163 games, 96.1 rating, 63.5% completion percentage, 252.7 YPG, 1.87 TD/G, 0.67 INT/G, 7.5 Y/A
Manning: 112 games, 93.3 rating, 64.9% completion percentage, >271.0 Y/G, 1.83 TD/G, 0.96 INT/G, 7.5 Y/A
...wow, look at that- they're almost identical. Manning actually comes out slightly ahead in yardage and completion percentage, while Brady comes out far ahead in taking care of the ball. The end result is that Brady has a sizable advantage in QB rating, while yards per attempt and TDs per game are virtually identical.
To be honest, when I first ran those numbers some time ago, I expected Manning to look worse by comparison. It's a testament to him that he's done so well in outdoor games in his career. Even if most of them were warm-weather historically, he showed this past year in Denver that he can get it done in tougher climates as well.
Here's the crazy part, though: check out these splits:
INDOORS
Brady: 14 games, 103.1 rating (!), 67.2% completion, 258.7 Y/G, 2.07 TD/G, 0.93 INT/G, 8.4 Y/A
Manning: 112 games, 98.4 rating, 65.5% completion, 260.2 Y/G, 2.06 TD/G, 0.91 INT/G, 7.8 Y/A
That's where it gets really crazy. Makes sense that they're both better indoor quarterbacks than outdoor quarterbacks - that's probably true for just about everyone. What's weird, though, is that Brady is a significantly better indoor quarterback than Manning is. Unfortunately, he only has 14 career indoor games, so he gets to enjoy the statistical advantage that's inherent in playing in a dome only a fraction as much as Peyton does.
The following is what their career stats would be, based on these averages, if Peyton had Brady's career indoor/outdoor game split (163/14), and if Brady had Peyton's career indoor/outdoor split (113/113):
Brady: 99.6 rating, 65.4%, 255.7 Y/G, 1.96 TD/G, 0.81 INT/G, 7.9 Y/A
Manning: 93.7 rating, 65.2%, 265.4 Y/G, 1.95 TD/G, 0.93 INT/G, 7.7 Y/A
If that were the case, we wouldn't even be having a debate. Brady would be identical or better in every stat except yards per game, in most cases by a significant margin. But that wouldn't be fair either.
Instead, let's look at Brady's career career totals if he had played 112 games indoors and 112 games outdoors:
Brady: 224 games, 99.6 rating, 65.4% completion, 57,277 yards, 441 touchdowns, 179 interceptions, 7.95 Y/A
Compared to Manning (using my computed stats instead of his real stats so that he'll get the same rounding error benefit that Brady may have received with QB rating -- the rest of his stats are basically identical, as they should be)
Manning: 224 games, 95.8 rating, 65.2% completion, 59,494 yards, 436 touchdowns, 209 interceptions, 7.65 Y/A
When you compare those numbers, Brady is the superior quarterback by every possible measure except for yards, where Manning has a 4% advantage (which is not insignificant). That is easily countered, however, by Brady's large advantage in QB rating, yards per attempt, and interceptions, as well as slight advantage in touchdowns and completion percentage.
In short, anyone who cites statistical superiority as the reason for taking Manning over Brady is quite literally saying "Manning is better because he plays in a dome more often and has played more games". that's it. Once you control for either of these factors, let alone both, it becomes clear that Brady is statistically superior.
Tangentially, while this is not the same argument as I made above, I'd also point out that I'm a little old-school in that I like a quarterback who can perform in bad weather. The guys who get it done in freezing temperatures, with wind and/or precipitation, are my favorites. They look at that, see the added degree of difficulty, and pretty much just shrug. This is why I think the "Best QB alive" debate fundamentally comes down to Brady/Rodgers, rather than Brady/Manning.
Surprisingly, Manning is a really good cold-weather quarterback. He does better in the 20-40 degree temperature range than 40-60 degrees. Yet another interesting quirk about him that actually makes me like him more. He does almost as well as Brady. Same breakdown that you're used to seeing: Manning has better completion% and more yards and Y/A, TD/G are virtually the same, Brady has better passer rating and far fewer interceptions.
Look at this, though:
PRECIPITATION
Brady: 15 games, 93.1 rating, 61.7%, 269.3 Y/G, 1.40 TD/G, 0.47 INT/G, 7.6 Y/A
Manning: 8 games, 83.8 rating, 64.8%, 256.1 Y/G, 1.38 TD/G, 1.25 INT/G, 7.1 Y/A
Manning is more accurate, Brady has more yards per attempt and a third as many interceptions per game. Brady is handily better.
WINDY
Brady: 63 games, 98.4 rating, 63.2%, 246.4 Y/G, 1.95 TD/G, 0.57 INT/G, 7.5 Y/A
Manning: 31 games, 83.5 rating, 62.3%, 244.7 Y/G, 1.42 TD/G, 1.03 INT/G, 6.8 Y/A
Well damn. Manning isn't a bad quarterback in windy conditions. In the 31 games (2 full seasons worth of data) he's been pretty good. But Brady's been significantly better in every measured category, for the simple reason that he somehow performs better than his career averages when it's windy out. Anecdotally, I can attest to this. I've lost count of the number of games that the Patriots have won seemingly because the opposing QB struggled to place his throws in the wind, while Brady appeared to be basically unaffected by it. It's truly uncanny.
And for this, above all, give me Brady any day. He's simply better in almost every way.
It probably goes without saying that Brady has been the superior statistical quarterback when playing outdoors. He does it far more often, so he's more practiced at it. Even though the outdoor games that Manning played with the Colts were mostly in Tennessee, Florida, or Texas, this mild-weather advantage would be cancelled out by the fact that, when he did play games in bad conditions, he was far out of his element. That's probably why you see the following:
OUTDOORS
Brady: 163 games, 96.1 rating, 63.5% completion percentage, 252.7 YPG, 1.87 TD/G, 0.67 INT/G, 7.5 Y/A
Manning: 112 games, 93.3 rating, 64.9% completion percentage, >271.0 Y/G, 1.83 TD/G, 0.96 INT/G, 7.5 Y/A
...wow, look at that- they're almost identical. Manning actually comes out slightly ahead in yardage and completion percentage, while Brady comes out far ahead in taking care of the ball. The end result is that Brady has a sizable advantage in QB rating, while yards per attempt and TDs per game are virtually identical.
To be honest, when I first ran those numbers some time ago, I expected Manning to look worse by comparison. It's a testament to him that he's done so well in outdoor games in his career. Even if most of them were warm-weather historically, he showed this past year in Denver that he can get it done in tougher climates as well.
Here's the crazy part, though: check out these splits:
INDOORS
Brady: 14 games, 103.1 rating (!), 67.2% completion, 258.7 Y/G, 2.07 TD/G, 0.93 INT/G, 8.4 Y/A
Manning: 112 games, 98.4 rating, 65.5% completion, 260.2 Y/G, 2.06 TD/G, 0.91 INT/G, 7.8 Y/A
That's where it gets really crazy. Makes sense that they're both better indoor quarterbacks than outdoor quarterbacks - that's probably true for just about everyone. What's weird, though, is that Brady is a significantly better indoor quarterback than Manning is. Unfortunately, he only has 14 career indoor games, so he gets to enjoy the statistical advantage that's inherent in playing in a dome only a fraction as much as Peyton does.
The following is what their career stats would be, based on these averages, if Peyton had Brady's career indoor/outdoor game split (163/14), and if Brady had Peyton's career indoor/outdoor split (113/113):
Brady: 99.6 rating, 65.4%, 255.7 Y/G, 1.96 TD/G, 0.81 INT/G, 7.9 Y/A
Manning: 93.7 rating, 65.2%, 265.4 Y/G, 1.95 TD/G, 0.93 INT/G, 7.7 Y/A
If that were the case, we wouldn't even be having a debate. Brady would be identical or better in every stat except yards per game, in most cases by a significant margin. But that wouldn't be fair either.
Instead, let's look at Brady's career career totals if he had played 112 games indoors and 112 games outdoors:
Brady: 224 games, 99.6 rating, 65.4% completion, 57,277 yards, 441 touchdowns, 179 interceptions, 7.95 Y/A
Compared to Manning (using my computed stats instead of his real stats so that he'll get the same rounding error benefit that Brady may have received with QB rating -- the rest of his stats are basically identical, as they should be)
Manning: 224 games, 95.8 rating, 65.2% completion, 59,494 yards, 436 touchdowns, 209 interceptions, 7.65 Y/A
When you compare those numbers, Brady is the superior quarterback by every possible measure except for yards, where Manning has a 4% advantage (which is not insignificant). That is easily countered, however, by Brady's large advantage in QB rating, yards per attempt, and interceptions, as well as slight advantage in touchdowns and completion percentage.
In short, anyone who cites statistical superiority as the reason for taking Manning over Brady is quite literally saying "Manning is better because he plays in a dome more often and has played more games". that's it. Once you control for either of these factors, let alone both, it becomes clear that Brady is statistically superior.
Tangentially, while this is not the same argument as I made above, I'd also point out that I'm a little old-school in that I like a quarterback who can perform in bad weather. The guys who get it done in freezing temperatures, with wind and/or precipitation, are my favorites. They look at that, see the added degree of difficulty, and pretty much just shrug. This is why I think the "Best QB alive" debate fundamentally comes down to Brady/Rodgers, rather than Brady/Manning.
Surprisingly, Manning is a really good cold-weather quarterback. He does better in the 20-40 degree temperature range than 40-60 degrees. Yet another interesting quirk about him that actually makes me like him more. He does almost as well as Brady. Same breakdown that you're used to seeing: Manning has better completion% and more yards and Y/A, TD/G are virtually the same, Brady has better passer rating and far fewer interceptions.
Look at this, though:
PRECIPITATION
Brady: 15 games, 93.1 rating, 61.7%, 269.3 Y/G, 1.40 TD/G, 0.47 INT/G, 7.6 Y/A
Manning: 8 games, 83.8 rating, 64.8%, 256.1 Y/G, 1.38 TD/G, 1.25 INT/G, 7.1 Y/A
Manning is more accurate, Brady has more yards per attempt and a third as many interceptions per game. Brady is handily better.
WINDY
Brady: 63 games, 98.4 rating, 63.2%, 246.4 Y/G, 1.95 TD/G, 0.57 INT/G, 7.5 Y/A
Manning: 31 games, 83.5 rating, 62.3%, 244.7 Y/G, 1.42 TD/G, 1.03 INT/G, 6.8 Y/A
Well damn. Manning isn't a bad quarterback in windy conditions. In the 31 games (2 full seasons worth of data) he's been pretty good. But Brady's been significantly better in every measured category, for the simple reason that he somehow performs better than his career averages when it's windy out. Anecdotally, I can attest to this. I've lost count of the number of games that the Patriots have won seemingly because the opposing QB struggled to place his throws in the wind, while Brady appeared to be basically unaffected by it. It's truly uncanny.
And for this, above all, give me Brady any day. He's simply better in almost every way.
Last edited:
