Brady or Manning

[TomBradyWoot]

Of course I use STATS. Do you know why stats are used? Because they are objective and don't allow a person's man-crush on a certain player to come into play when discussing the GOAT.

Brady is the greatest QB in your LIFETIME?!? That explains a lot. You're 3 yrs old and your first year of watching football was Brady's 2007 season and you missed his choke against the Giants. That's the ONLY reason Brady would be considered the greatest QB in anybody's lifetime. :sidelol:

It's so easy to forget that Brady actually led a 4th quarter comeback by throwing a go ahead touchdown with 2:40 left in the game.

 

[MarinePhinFan]

It's so easy to forget that Brady actually led a 4th quarter comeback by throwing a go ahead touchdown with 2:40 left in the game.

I was being facetious.


You see, when Manning plays well in the post season, as he has done the same or more times than Brady (If you read my second post in this thread you would see that), but the Colts lose, Brady-lovers blame it on Manning. However, when Brady loses in the post-season it's because of his team.

Read my long post in this thread and come back when you learn a little something. :up:

 

[MarinePhinFan]

As to your quote, "On the Patriots videoptaping, Parcells said: "I think it was overblown. If the competition is victimized by someone spying on you — if that happened — it's your fault because you could take precautions to keep that from happening if you're smart enough."

"


I guess anybody who is killed, raped or beaten should blame themselves? I mean, they could have taken precautions.

The faulty with this thinking is that MOST people are descent, moral and play fair. Glad to see another Patriot fan who isn't.

And for BP, he's just doing what others in the "media" business do...flaming the fire and getting people to tune in. If asked in private, I'm sure his "quote" would have been different. And if not, he's no better than you and those who would overlook cheating at anything.

 

[TakeOne]

Face it NE fans the ride is over, pay homage to your new masters the Miami Dolphins

 

[SpaceMountain16]

A healthy Brady is EASILY better than Manning.

 

[nyjunc]

First, Brady has had to play with a defense ranked lower than 5th only twice his entire career. Both times the patriots failed to win more than 10 games. Manning WON the Super Bowl with a 23rd ranked defense.

That 23rd ranked defense gave up 14 pts total through their first 2 playoff games and wound up shutting down Brady in the 2nd half of the title game to allow Peyton to FINALLY do something in a meaningful spot. In the SB the D scored a TD and held Chi's O to 10 points.

In 4 playoff games in 2006 the Colts D gave up an AVERAGE of 12.75 PPG while the great peyton Manning threw 3 TDs and 7 INTs.

In Brady's 4 SB years their D allowed:

2001: 15.66 PPG
2003: 19 PPG
2004: 17 PPG
2007: 16. 3 PPG

Here is a nice article baout the "great" Belichick D's in NE:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/football/nfl/07/25/chff.belichick/1.html

How many times has tom brady thrown for 290 or more yards in the post season with a 90 or better qb rating in the same game?

Who cares? Manning had alot of yards and a good rating against SD but he couldn't lead them to a win and did nothing all 2nd half besides one busted play by SD. #s lie sometimes. he did the same thing against SD last year BUT key INTs, the inabilty to get big points late cost Indy.

It happened against Pitt in '05 too and manning got a bunch of gifts that game including that awful call on the Polamalu INT that the refs overtruned or else the game would have been over but not only did he get that but after a failure of a drive down 3 w/ the ball he gave Pitt eh ball inside the Indy 5 and the D forced a TO and got the ball near midfield and he still couldn't lead Indy to the tying pts.

If you look at all of the Patriots playoff games since Brady arrived you would see that they find ways to win games even when brady has an off day, the colts manage to lose even when manning plays well. it happened again last saturday.

The Colts found a way to win a SB when Manning had a bad postseason.

Brady had an OK game during his first SB win however, did he really deserve that first super bowl mvp award?

I agree Brady did not deserve that SB MVP but he deserved it a hell of alot more than Peyton 2 years ago. Brady did lead his team to the winning FG starting a drive at the NE 17 w/ no timeouts and just 1:21 to play. What exactly did peyton do in his SB to earnt he MVP award? hand off to Addai and Rhodes? watch his D shut down Chi?

in his 3 games against belichick defenses, joe montana had 3, 3, and 13 points and qb ratings of 34.2, 65.6, and 103. damned if those don't look like manning's numbers of 35.5, 69.3, and 79.1 (especially considering in the 79.1 manning passed for 349 yards and the offense scored 38 points, while in montana's 103 he passed for 190 yards and the offense scored 13 points). was the egg that manning laid in foxborough during their playoff game a failure of manning's or just another example of belichcik's brilliance? certainly it is a bit of both, but given the history here, i'd say it's more about belichick's brilliance. even truly great qb's have struggled against belichick defenses in the playoffs. how hard do we beat up manning for doing so?

What did Joe Montana do against a ted Cottrell defense? Manning led his team to ZERO pts and a 31.2 rating. Joe Montana won FOUR Super Bowls and led KC to an AFC title game and KC hasn't won a playoff game since. Manning has only faced NE 3 times in postseason, he's played for 11 years. What about the other 8 years? Joe won 4 SBs in his other years.

would it help to know how manning and the colts have done in the playoffs given the number of points they produce? the colts are 0-3 when they score 14 points or less...... 1-3 when they score 15 to 17 points....0-1 when they score 18 to 21 points....1-1 when they score 22 to 24 points...and 5-0 when they score 29 or more points. Now, would you think that 17 points should be enough to win in the playoffs? you would think so, but not for the colts, who are 1-6 in any playoff game where they score less than 18 points.

It's hard to win playoff games when you can't score. In 8 playoff losses Manning has led his O's to 13.6 PPG. NE's "great" defenses allowed 16.2 points per game in playoff wins meaning if they played like that w/ Indy's O averaging 13 PPG that Peyton would have lost alot of games that Brady won.

By the way, In Brady's 3 playoff losses he has led his O's to 18 PPG and in last year's SB w/ about 2 mins left he led his O to the go ahead TD. When has Peyton EVER done that?

The notion that having great wr's takes all of the pressure off of a qb when facing a good defense/weak offense is provably wrong. did having moss and welker take the pressure off of brady in last year's super bowl?

They had 1 fluke loss, the team was 18-1. He got them to a SB while for the first time in his career having comparable weapons to what Peyton had. Peyton only has 1 SB app.

Teams can win with the ball control/no mistake approach, if that team has a good defense, as have ALL of the Patriots Super Bowl winning teams. The Patriots have not won ONE Super Bowl with a defense ranked lower than 5th. When the defense is below average in terms of points allowed, that approach rarely produces a super bowl champion, and never has for brady and the pats. In the history of the nfl, only 3 teams have won championships inspite of playing with defenses that were below average in terms of points scored: unitas with the 1959 colts, p manning with the 2006 colts, and e manning with the 2007 giants. You give way too much credit to the qb when you don't factor in the quality of the defense and just look at wins and losses when evaluating qb play. It also helps to have a good running game to win with that method. The pats are 2-2 in playoff games where the offense has rushed the ball for less than 3.5 yards a carry. The ball control/no mistake approach can be very good at producing wins in the post season, but it really helps to have a good defense and a solid running game to win with that method.

Throw rankings out the window and see how they perfrom in postseason when it matters. Indy's D was great in 2006 and won Indy that SB, Brady's D's haven't been great- read that article I posted the link to.

A qb can put up good stats against good defense/good offense teams in the playoffs and still lose. It has happened in each of p manning's last 3 playoff losses. But you have to look at more than wins and losses to know that.

Good stats but he didn't lead his O's to enough pts against SD twice and Pitt once when he had opportunitis to win every one of those games inclduing 2 at home. needed just a first down vs. SD 2 weeks ago, threw an INT at the GL against SD last year, blew multiple opps against Pitt 3 years ago.

The gap is incredibly huge and those that just don't pay attention to fantasy #s realize this. NE was a sinking ship when Brady took over, they were on a downward trend since 1996 culminating w/ 5 wins in 200 then starting out 0-2 in 2001 until miraculously they started winning when Brady stepped on the field. It wasn't a coincidence, it's not a coincidence Belichick has never done anything w/o him. It's not a coincidence that w/ top teams every year peyton only has 1 Super Bowl. Put Bready on Indy and Manning on NE and Indy has 2-3 SB titles while NE has about 1.

 

[TakeOne]

That's funny hes using Chicago's offense to glorify INDY's defense. Jason Talyor whored Grossman when Miami hosted Chicago that year, and got Taylor a Pro-Bowl nod. And we went 6-10. The '06 Bears weren't known for thier offensive prowess. Thier defense got them to the Super Bowl, along with Hester's superman return abilities.

 

[MarinePhinFan]

That's funny hes using Chicago's offense to glorify INDY's defense. Jason Talyor whored Grossman when Miami hosted Chicago that year, and got Taylor a Pro-Bowl nod. And we went 6-10. The '06 Bears weren't known for thier offensive prowess. Thier defense got them to the Super Bowl, along with Hester's superman return abilities.

That is funny! However, you know what's even funnier about his long, but poorly thought out post? His entire post can be debunked by this:

"would it help to know how manning and the colts have done in the playoffs given the number of points they produce? the colts are 0-3 when they score 14 points or less...... 1-3 when they score 15 to 17 points....0-1 when they score 18 to 21 points....1-1 when they score 22 to 24 points...and 5-0 when they score 29 or more points. Now, would you think that 17 points should be enough to win in the playoffs? you would think so, but not for the colts, who are 1-6 in any playoff game where they score less than 18 points.

now look at how the pats have done: 0-2 when they score 14 or less points....2-0 at 15 to 17....3-0 at 18 to 21.....4-0 at 22 to 24...1-0 at 25 to 28...and 4-1 at 29 or more points. like the colts, the pats have lost all of their playoff games where they score 14 points or less. but the pats are 14-1 in the games where the offense scores 15 or more points. the colts have to get above 28 points to approach that success rate, and do not even pick up their second playoff win without scoring more than 21 points."


Did you see how he addressed the first part of this in order to try and make Manning look bad? Even though it clearly shows that Manning's defense has consistently failed the Colts. And he completely ignored the second part? That's because everything he wrote can be proven wrong with that little paragraph. :up:


Damn I love proving Jets fans wrong! :beer1:

 

[TakeOne]

Yea that pretty much shows you were Manning and the cannons need to wake up to win the games. N.E. is a system in which Brady flourishes, and doesnt need to score as much. Peyton gets the credit for most of his team's success.

 

[nyjunc]

That's funny hes using Chicago's offense to glorify INDY's defense. Jason Talyor whored Grossman when Miami hosted Chicago that year, and got Taylor a Pro-Bowl nod. And we went 6-10. The '06 Bears weren't known for thier offensive prowess. Thier defense got them to the Super Bowl, along with Hester's superman return abilities.

Again in 4 games the Colts D held opponents to 12.75 PPG, that includes just 10 in the SB and their D also scored a TD in the SB. No Chi wasn't known for their O but their O averaged 32 PPG in their 2 playoffs wins while their D averaged giving up 19 PPG. The Colts D heled Chi 22 points below what they were avegaing that postseason.

That is funny! However, you know what's even funnier about his long, but poorly thought out post?

:sidelol:

Your response is an embarrassment not worth me responding.

When you post an intelligent response let me know and I'll make you look as foolish as I di w/ your first post.

W/L #s will look alot better when your QB leads the team to a 14-3 postseason record vs. a QB who has a losing record in postseason. Not every game is black and white, it's not all "if you score this amount you'll win". In 2001 Brady needed to lead his team to 20 pts and did so, in '03 he needed 32 and did it. Even last year he did lead his team to the go ahead TD w/ about 2 mins to play, AGAIN when has Manning ever done that?

You point to silly QB rating stats, it didn't matter to you that Peyton led Indy to 1 TD in the 2nd half a few weeks ago and it was on a busted play, it didn't matter that all he needed to do was lead his team to a 1st down and Indy wins, it didn't matter to you that he threw an INT at the SD GL last year and Indy lost by 4, it's also funny how you point out #s when he loses trying to blame the D but nothing is mentioned about his 3 TDs and 7 INTs in their 4 game SB run in 2006, how come? This game is about more than #s especially more than meaningless fantasy #s. Those that understand the game get, you don't.

Yea that pretty much shows you were Manning and the cannons need to wake up to win the games. N.E. is a system in which Brady flourishes, and doesnt need to score as much. Peyton gets the credit for most of his team's success.

How was that system doing before Belichick had Brady? Brady took over a sinking ship and turned it around immediately and turned it into a dynasty. W/o Brady NE doesn't have a SB and Belichick is a DC somewhere.

 

[MarinePhinFan]

Again in 4 games the Colts D held opponents to 12.75 PPG, that includes just 10 in the SB and their D also scored a TD in the SB. No Chi wasn't known for their O but their O averaged 32 PPG in their 2 playoffs wins while their D averaged giving up 19 PPG. The Colts D heled Chi 22 points below what they were avegaing that postseason.



:sidelol:

Your response is an embarrassment not worth me responding.

When you post an intelligent response let me know and I'll make you look as foolish as I di w/ your first post.

W/L #s will look alot better when your QB leads the team to a 14-3 postseason record vs. a QB who has a losing record in postseason. Not every game is black and white, it's not all "if you score this amount you'll win". In 2001 Brady needed to lead his team to 20 pts and did so, in '03 he needed 32 and did it. Even last year he did lead his team to the go ahead TD w/ about 2 mins to play, AGAIN when has Manning ever done that?

You point to silly QB rating stats, it didn't matter to you that Peyton led Indy to 1 TD in the 2nd half a few weeks ago and it was on a busted play, it didn't matter that all he needed to do was lead his team to a 1st down and Indy wins, it didn't matter to you that he threw an INT at the SD GL last year and Indy lost by 4, it's also funny how you point out #s when he loses trying to blame the D but nothing is mentioned about his 3 TDs and 7 INTs in their 4 game SB run in 2006, how come? This game is about more than #s especially more than meaningless fantasy #s. Those that understand the game get, you don't.



How was that system doing before Belichick had Brady? Brady took over a sinking ship and turned it around immediately and turned it into a dynasty. W/o Brady NE doesn't have a SB and Belichick is a DC somewhere.

Still avoiding this, huh:


"would it help to know how manning and the colts have done in the playoffs given the number of points they produce? the colts are 0-3 when they score 14 points or less...... 1-3 when they score 15 to 17 points....0-1 when they score 18 to 21 points....1-1 when they score 22 to 24 points...and 5-0 when they score 29 or more points. Now, would you think that 17 points should be enough to win in the playoffs? you would think so, but not for the colts, who are 1-6 in any playoff game where they score less than 18 points.

now look at how the pats have done: 0-2 when they score 14 or less points....2-0 at 15 to 17....3-0 at 18 to 21.....4-0 at 22 to 24...1-0 at 25 to 28...and 4-1 at 29 or more points. like the colts, the pats have lost all of their playoff games where they score 14 points or less. but the pats are 14-1 in the games where the offense scores 15 or more points. the colts have to get above 28 points to approach that success rate, and do not even pick up their second playoff win without scoring more than 21 points."

 

[nyjunc]

Still avoiding this, huh:


"would it help to know how manning and the colts have done in the playoffs given the number of points they produce? the colts are 0-3 when they score 14 points or less...... 1-3 when they score 15 to 17 points....0-1 when they score 18 to 21 points....1-1 when they score 22 to 24 points...and 5-0 when they score 29 or more points. Now, would you think that 17 points should be enough to win in the playoffs? you would think so, but not for the colts, who are 1-6 in any playoff game where they score less than 18 points.

now look at how the pats have done: 0-2 when they score 14 or less points....2-0 at 15 to 17....3-0 at 18 to 21.....4-0 at 22 to 24...1-0 at 25 to 28...and 4-1 at 29 or more points. like the colts, the pats have lost all of their playoff games where they score 14 points or less. but the pats are 14-1 in the games where the offense scores 15 or more points. the colts have to get above 28 points to approach that success rate, and do not even pick up their second playoff win without scoring more than 21 points."

Keep avoiding the facts and posting the same nonsense.

 

[Bumpus]

Well, since we're in pretend-land...

Marino.

 

[MarinePhinFan]

Keep avoiding the facts and posting the same nonsense.

Those ARE the facts!

That you completely ignored and still are ignoring because you have NO answer. :boohoo: