FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning...

[BradysBunch12]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

Manning didn't lead the Colts to a SB victory, in fact he threw away the chances of one, didn't he? Brady ever do that in an SB?

Nope. In fact, in the so-called "Choke 18-1 game" I seem to remember him driving down the team for a TD pass to Moss with about 2 minutes to go, and the defense choked it away.

Manning single-handedly sealed the Colts fate in that SB. But to this day, fans like R Wayne 911 will blame Reggie Wayne for "running the wrong route."

 

[JJDChE]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

What is all this Manning and Brees talk?

Revis, Chris Johnson, Aaron Rodgers, Philip Rivers, Patrick Willis, Ray Rice and David Harris were all better then Manning in 2009.

Manning didn't lead the Colts to a SB victory, in fact he threw away the chances of one, didn't he? Brady ever do that in an SB?

Manning led the Colts to a 14-0 record in '09. That's why he won.

 

[bagwell368]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

You mean idiot Patriot fans ganging up on other Patriots fans who don't simply slob the knob of their star players?

(I have no idea what anybody else said - I haven't watched this thread since about page 4 or so)

So then, this isn't a statement, this is a question, as if we should present you with a list of highlights?

Ah, no.

 

[bagwell368]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

Manning led the Colts to a 14-0 record in '09. That's why he won.

Sorry, the voters are used to ego boy QB's that throw like crazy. They like it, but, Mannings cardinal flaw is his propensity to throw Int's. The voters don't seem to mind that for some reason, but they should, it prevents wins against top teams - like you find in the playoffs.

 

[JJDChE]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

Sorry, the voters are used to ego boy QB's that throw like crazy. They like it, but, Mannings cardinal flaw is his propensity to throw Int's. The voters don't seem to mind that for some reason, but they should, it prevents wins against top teams - like you find in the playoffs.

Propensity to throw INTs? Wow.

Joe Montana, 2.6% INT, 5.1% TD
Steve Young, 2.6% INT, 5.6% TD
Peyton Manning, 2.7% INT, 5.5% TD

Yeah, I always hear about Montana and Young's propensity to throw INTs.

How's the weather out there in left field?

 

[bagwell368]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

Propensity to throw INTs? Wow.

Joe Montana, 2.6% INT, 5.1% TD
Steve Young, 2.6% INT, 5.6% TD
Peyton Manning, 2.7% INT, 5.5% TD

Yeah, I always hear about Montana and Young's propensity to throw INTs.

How's the weather out there in left field?

Bogus comparisons, as you well know. 36 of the top 44 Int% of all time are QB's that are active or retired since 2004.

You can only bring in old timers if you look at them in their own time, or adjust for this era of ridiculously high QB stats.

Here you go genius:

Aaron Rodgers 2.0%
Tom Brady 2.1%
D. McNabb 2.2%
J. Garcia 2.3%
Brunell 2.3%
Matt Ryan 2.3%
Jason Campbell 2.3%
P. Rivers 2.4%
D Garrard 2.4%
Joe Flacco 2.4%
Matt Cassel 2.4%
Shaun Hill 2.5%
Kyle Orton 2.5%
Rich Gannon 2.5%
Pennington 2.6%
Schaub 2.6%
McNair 2.6%
Leftwich 2.6%
Brees 2.7%
Vick 2.7%
P. Manning 2.7%

Hah hah - Leftwich, Campbell, Orton, Hill, etc......

Yeah, next time you want to talk about how there are no facts here, remember this is yet again another clang on your part.

Left field? You need more quality control on your posts, Jack.

BTW, 691 posts since 2004 (10 years did you say?)? Good activity in 2006 & 2007, and then 4 years of silence and a pile of posts in this thread. Hmmm...

 

[JJDChE]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

Bogus comparisons, as you well know. 36 of the top 44 Int% of all time are QB's that are active or retired since 2004.

You can only bring in old timers if you look at them in their own time, or adjust for this era of ridiculously high QB stats.

Here you go genius:

Aaron Rodgers 2.0%
Tom Brady 2.1%
D. McNabb 2.2%
J. Garcia 2.3%
Brunell 2.3%
Matt Ryan 2.3%
Jason Campbell 2.3%
P. Rivers 2.4%
D Garrard 2.4%
Joe Flacco 2.4%
Matt Cassel 2.4%
Shaun Hill 2.5%
Kyle Orton 2.5%
Rich Gannon 2.5%
Pennington 2.6%
Schaub 2.6%
McNair 2.6%
Leftwich 2.6%
Brees 2.7%
Vick 2.7%
P. Manning 2.7%

Hah hah - Leftwich, Campbell, Orton, Hill, etc......

Yeah, next time you want to talk about how there are no facts here, remember this is yet again another clang on your part.

Left field? You need more quality control on your posts, Jack.

Yup, all of those guys definitively DON'T have a propensity for throwing INTs, as you so ridiculously suggested.

He's among the top 20-25 all-time in INT% and you're knocking him for that? Not to mention he's had a few bad INT seasons, most years he's been near the top of the league in INT %.


Left field. How is it?

 

[bagwell368]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

Yup, all of those guys definitively DON'T have a propensity for throwing INTs, as you so ridiculously suggested.

Excuse me? Are we speaking the same language? All those guys that are active or recently so have better Int%'s then Manning, in fact he's quite average in that regard, a big black eye for a guy claimed to be elite.

He's among the top 20-25 all-time in INT% and you're knocking him for that? Not to mention he's had a few bad INT seasons, most years he's been near the top of the league in INT %.

He's 28th all time, but since the majority of QB's on the list are active or recently active, it makes that placement really - meh - for an "elite" QB.

10 times Montana was in the top 7 in the NFL in Int% - Manning 4 times in the top 7. So, do you see now why its a ridiculous comparison? Or do I need more examples, charts, and the like?

Left field. How is it?

You get chopped to bits, and you want to claim victory? OMG...

 

[JJDChE]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

Excuse me? Are we speaking the same language? All those guys that are active or recently so have better Int%'s then Manning, in fact he's quite average in that regard, a big black eye for a guy claimed to be elite.

He's 28th all time, but since the majority of QB's on the list are active or recently active, it makes that placement really - meh - for an "elite" QB.

10 times Montana was in the top 7 in the NFL in Int% - Manning 4 times in the top 7. So, do you see now why its a ridiculous comparison? Or do I need more examples, charts, and the like?

Yeah, great, all of those guys have really good INT%. That's what get's average QBs a job in today's NFL. Teams trade of fewer mistakes for mediocre production.

If he ever did have a propensity for INTs, it was early in his career. He has a 2.2 INT% since '03. It's not even close to a 'problem'. Favre has an INT problem, Manning, nope.

You get chopped to bits, and you want to claim victory? OMG...

Right back at ya.

 

[Jetssuck]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

You were talking about his second year, when he was sacked 42 times, had a rating of 69.9 and DID NOT go to the probowl.

you specifically said

'Welker was not successful before Brady. Making things is not going to help your case.

Marvin Harrison's seasons without Peyton Manning were better than Troy Brown, Danny Woodhead, and Wes Welker's seasons without Brady.'

Well, Welker had 67 receptions the year before he came to the Pats. Harrison had 64 and 73 receptions.

Brown had 83 receptions the year before Brady took over.

Woodhead? C'mon. He was behind Shonn Greene, Thomas Jones and Leon Washington. If we had those guys Woodhead would still be riding pine.

Looks like YOU were the one making stuff up.

Let's not count stats that matter like yards and tds. Let's count only receptions to measure how good a player is. That would be like measuring how good a quarterback is by passing attempts. You're not half as clever as you think you are.

Yeah, and how many reception did Hernandez have? Not 67. And Hernandez is clearly more talented than Tamme.

Tamme has 73 recepts in 3 seasons. Hernandez has 47 recepts in one season.

Hernandez is better than Tamme. But if the same Aaron Hernandez was drafted by the Colts, you'd be telling us Peyton Manning is ************ for making a rookie 4th round draft pick into a 563 yard receiver

Yeah, Edge had 3900 yards from scrimmage and 23 TDs his last two years with Indy and 2800 yds and 13TDs in his two years with Arizona. His seasons with Arizona were his worst as a pro.

Key factor: No Manning.

Changing the argument I see. You said he did nothing after leaving the Colts. Now you're saying he didn't do as well as he did when he was in his prime with the Colts. If you're trying to claim that James only looked good because of Peyton Manning, please explain the 2001 season?

He had made some progress in San Diego but had injury problems. His performance wasn't surprising considering his past and the numbers of opportunities he got with the Patriots.

His past of only having one 300 yard season with Drew Brees? He was the 7th leading receiver for the Redskins in 2007 and out of football in 2008. Lol

 

[bagwell368]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

Right back at ya.

hahhhaaa, that's inspired.

so are you going to explain your 4 year hiatus from the site to come back as a pro Manning scold? Is there any other other Patriots issue that matters to you, or do you like being an shill for a QB that doesn't play for "your" team?

 

[JJDChE]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

Seasons of Top 10 in TD%/INT %

Manning 6
Brady 5
Rivers 2
Rodgers 2
Brees 2

Seasons if Top 5 in TD%/INT%

Manning 3
Brady 2
Rivers 1
Rodgers 1
Brees 1

 

[JJDChE]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

Let's not count stats that matter like yards and tds. Let's count only receptions to measure how good a player is. That would be like measuring how good a quarterback is by passing attempts. You're not half as clever as you think you are.

Tamme has 73 recepts in 3 seasons. Hernandez has 47 recepts in one season.

Hernandez is better than Tamme. But if the same Aaron Hernandez was drafted by the Colts, you'd be telling us Peyton Manning is ************ for making a rookie 4th round draft pick into a 563 yard receiver

Changing the argument I see. You said he did nothing after leaving the Colts. Now you're saying he didn't do as well as he did when he was in his prime with the Colts. If you're trying to claim that James only looked good because of Peyton Manning, please explain the 2001 season?

His past of only having one 300 yard season with Drew Brees? He was the 7th leading receiver for the Redskins in 2007 and out of football in 2008. Lol

You make me laugh.

67 receptions is 'unsuccessful' for a slot receiver. Nice one!

 

[Jetssuck]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

Seasons of Top 10 in TD%/INT %

Manning 6
Brady 5
Rivers 2
Rodgers 2
Brees 2

Seasons if Top 5 in TD%/INT%

Manning 3
Brady 2
Rivers 1
Rodgers 1
Brees 1

Number of seasons that Manning has played 13

Number of seasons that Brady has played 9

 

[JJDChE]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

hahhhaaa, that's inspired.

so are you going to explain your 4 year hiatus from the site to come back as a pro Manning scold? Is there any other other Patriots issue that matters to you, or do you like being an shill for a QB that doesn't play for "your" team?

That's the messed up thing. I'm not even pro-Manning, but you yahoos are so biased you can't even accept that I'm just trying to argue that there's a discussion and it's not a slam dunk for Brady.

That's why I stopped posting here. It's too full of idiotic yahoos. The quality posters are drowned out by morons.

 

[JJDChE]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

Number of seasons that Manning has played 13

Number of seasons that Brady has played 9

Yeah, no kidding. Insightful.

 

[Jetssuck]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

You make me laugh.

67 receptions is 'unsuccessful' for a slot receiver. Nice one!

Since you consider rushing for 1229 yards nothing. 67 recepts should be a total failure to you.

 

[ausbacker]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

I have absolutely zero inclination towards the Colts or Manning. I only acknowledge that Manning is a great player. I can't imagine there's anyone that doesn't.

Most people do recognise Peyton Manning's greatness. He's a remarkable player. The point is Tom Brady is a better QB and you don't need to see total statistics to recognise that.

Harp on about objectivity all you like. It is a slam dunk at this point in their careers. Perhaps that makes me a "yahoo" or a "moron" in your world. Good for you.

 

[Off The Grid]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

That's why I stopped posting here.

It's too full of idiotic yahoos.

The quality posters are drowned out by morons.

Oh NO, I think he's gonna CRY!!

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: FINALLY someone national brings up playing conditions regarding Brady and Manning

We saw the same data, you just interpreted it with your red, white and blue tinted glasses on.

No, I pointed out the nonsense in your argument with the Whitlock addition, and I showed that the very first place I looked had Sayers in the top 5. Either we didn't see the same data, or you are knowingly making bad arguments buttressed by lousy 'evidence'.

I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and saying that you're not bothering to look at the data.