Who would have more SB wins if they swapped careers? Manning or Brady? | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Who would have more SB wins if they swapped careers? Manning or Brady?

Who would have more SB wins?


  • Total voters
    23

BahamaFinFan78

Active Roster
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
7,513
Reaction score
7,605
stop it. he's far and away the best of his generation and in the discussion for best of all time.

Obviously, Super Bowl wins carry a lot of weight with you when discussing the greatest players. If you had put Manning on those Pats teams and Brady on Manning's teams, who do you think would have the most rings?
 
Obviously, Super Bowl wins carry a lot of weight with you when discussing the greatest players. If you had put Manning on those Pats teams and Brady on Manning's teams, who do you think would have the most rings?

Brady- the Colts/Broncos teams had more talent than the pats teams. the difference was at QB.
 
Brady- the Colts/Broncos teams had more talent than the pats teams. the difference was at QB.

I gotta say, I am not so sure about that. If the Colts and Broncos had more talent around them like you say, then Manning should have more Super Bowl wins. All of New England's Super Bowl wins were NOT because of Tom Brady alone. Those defenses are what helped them win them. That and a coach that understands the game better than most. I think you put Manning on those Pats Super Bowl winning teams and they still win because they relied more of defense than offense. That is evident because of the two Super Bowl losses that relied more heavily on the offense than defense. I could be simplifying it but I have to say that Manning would have more Super Bowls with Belichick. I know you are gonna disagree because you are a Brady supporter, but I have a feeling a lot of people would agree with me.
 
I gotta say, I am not so sure about that. If the Colts and Broncos had more talent around them like you say, then Manning should have more Super Bowl wins. All of New England's Super Bowl wins were NOT because of Tom Brady alone. Those defenses are what helped them win them. That and a coach that understands the game better than most. I think you put Manning on those Pats Super Bowl winning teams and they still win because they relied more of defense than offense. That is evident because of the two Super Bowl losses that relied more heavily on the offense than defense. I could be simplifying it but I have to say that Manning would have more Super Bowls with Belichick. I know you are gonna disagree because you are a Brady supporter, but I have a feeling a lot of people would agree with me.

of course there aren't b/c of one player alone but the biggest reason why NE went from awful team to dynasty is b/c of Brady.

Those Pats Ds were vastly overrated, they played well the first SB run but then blew a 14 pt 4th qtr lead in the SB(becoming the first team to ever do that) before Brady rescued them, 2 years later they blew a double digit 4th qtr lead in the SB.

The difference in the first 2 SB wins and the 2 SB losses was that when the D blew late leads he had enough time in the first 2 and they won, the 2 losses he didn't have enough time and they lost.

Manning is universally liked and Brady universally hated so most will pick Manning but manning's Ds in Indy and Denver have allowed less PPg in postseason than the Brady Ds. Look at the playoff losses, most of them come down to a great reg season o not playing great in postseason and that is mostly on manning.

Brady's 2 SB losses he gave his D a late lead to protect, manning's 2 SB losses he threw a pick 6 to end one and was almost shut out in the other.

Brady led his O to 14 pts in the 4th qtr of the Seattle SB to come back from 10 pts down, a year earlier against same D manning led Den to 8 garbage time points.

In 3 SBs Peyton has 3 TD passes, he has almost as many pick 6's(2).

the lone Sb winning year everything broke perfect and the D led the charge to that SB win.


Peyton is still an all time great, I am not trying to say he isn't great but he's not tom Brady.

---------- Post added at 05:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:42 PM ----------

Difference is the ****ing coach. :bobdole:

/ of my debating here.

the same ****ing coach who was a complete failure pre-Brady. I guess he learned how to coach the moment Brady stepped on the field?:idk:
 
This debated started in another thread and I moved it here because I think it deserves its own thread. That is why there are other responses over this one.
 
'94 Browns HC Belichick went 11-5 with two QB's, Testeverde (31) and Rypien (32) along with Nick Saban and they also beat the Patriots in their first match-up of the playoffs, but lost to the Steelers in the next round. The significance of the Steelers loss? It was the third time they had lost to Pittsburgh that season.

Steelers OC was the famed Ron Ernhardt, who along with Ray Perkins, developed the Ernhardt-Perkins (E&P) offense which is one of three offenses that essentially all NFL offenses are based off of along with the WCO and Air Coryell. Steelers posed a threat offensively that year to all teams being that were balanced in their ability to run (#1) and throw especially from one back sets. Side note: the Steelers also had the #1 defense lead by DC Dom Capers, DAsst Bill Davis, LB coach Marvin Lewis, and DB coach Dick LeBeau.

Pittsburgh would run 4 streaks along with 2 streaks & 2 outs to defeat Cleveland's Cover 3. Because you can't play the Cover 3 vs those routes, later the Browns switched it up to a Cover 1. The problem then lied with the Steeler's offensive talent that exceeded that of Cleveland's by their ability to beat them one-on-one. Also the Cover 1 is ineffective vs the run when you can't play 8 in the box b/c of a legitimate passing game and your defenders are spread out vs single back sets.

Solution, to somehow play a blend of Cover 3 and Cover 1. Now comes the melding of two incredibly intelligent minds in Belichick and Saban and with a collaboration between the two, and the concept of pattern-match defense was born. Although this concept was not installed in Cleveland, as Saban left for Michigan St. and Belichick would soon be fired the following year before being hired in NE, it thrives to this day among the brighter defensive minds in football and is the defense that both, Belichick and Saban, have used on their multiple championship teams.

This pattern-matching adjustment, better known as Rip/Liz in the mid-90's, brought together the zone and man-to-man defense into one concept. Pattern-matching has zone defenders play man-to-man after receivers have shown their pass patterns, which the defenders typically pick up 5-7 yards downfield.

image005.jpg


The reasoning behind this is that when offenses - like the '94 Steelers - want to attack a 3-deep zone they'll run TE's or slot WR's down the seams and to defeat Cover 1 they'll run picks and crossing routes. To defend this, the S's and LB's read the movements of of the Slot and the TE. When they run vertical, the .05 defenders and LB's run vertical with them, but if those receivers break outside then the defenders react with a zone and drop into coverage. In addition, the defense can add an extra defender in the box for the run or to spy the QB, which has also become a crucial factor in defending today's mobile QB's, spread offense, and the read option.

This doesn't even touch on Belichick's genius in things such as playing a 3-4 on one side of the field and a 4-3 on the other (yes, at the same time), nor does it address the incredible things he is currently innovating. You see, Belichick not only employs a tactic known as BTF (blitz the formation) where the defense makes the call once the offense show it's formation, but he has expanded on this idea by having them trade assignments after the play begins. In short, Belichick frequently calls blitzes with potential rushers lined up to the offense’s left and right, with each reading the center’s movement. If the center slides toward the keyed defender, he drops into coverage, and if the center slides away from the keyed defender, he blitzes the quarterback. This tactic should be familiar to some as it resulted in a sack of Geno Smith in week 16 that knocked the Jets out of FG range, they missed a 52 yard FG and NE won 17-16.

And that's just the genius coaching of Belichick on one side of he ball. BB is also a master of the offense. I'll try and keep this short and sweet (at least for myself) by copy and pasting some of my posts from the "RT is #10 in PFF" thread", but I also don't want to take away from the knowledge and innovation here as it continues to prove that Belichick is an elite coach among the elites and IS the reason for NE's success.

Belichick also took the Ernhardt-Perkins offense and evolved it to be able to run a HUNH concept with the same personnel, same plays, but different formations and the ability to switch sides for the reads. Basically one side of the field is set up to attack zone and the other man. Sounds familiar to his defensive concepts, doesn't it?

Instead of a number system, Belichick (with the help of Weiss) revised the E&P to be run by concepts, instead of the Coryell route numbering or the lumbering language of the West Coast jargon that inhibits any ability for quick snaps. Instead, as previously mentioned, the concepts can be called from any formation or set, and more importantly it allows for more personnel flexibility that the Patriots see on a yearly basis.

Example: One side of the field will feature a vertical route, an intermediate outside breaking route, and a quick flat. The other will feature a double slant, each at different depths.

grant_ghost-tosser_sy_576.jpg


This way the play can be run repeatedly, from different formations and with different personnel, all while the QB reads stay effectively the same from 4-5 WR's sets or with 2 TE's and a RB's. The skill position players simply need to know the concept at which position they are lined up at.

That's just one example.

Belichick is in a class by himself and no one rivals his mastery and innovation in schemes, strategy and personnel. Brady wouldn't have a HOF career without Belichick and Manning is a 1st ballot regardless. The difference between the two QB's success is because of Belichick's genius. QB's don't win games, teams do. Teams with great coaches, that is.

You may now file this under: **** you won't learn on BSPN.

/thread

*Credit to Chris B. Brown.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
awesome job in 1994 to make the playoffs at 11-5 w/ Vinny Testaverde and mark rypien. How could anyone expect to ever win w/ those 2?

Vinny led the Jets to 12 wins in 1998(12-1 as a starter) and an AFC Championship Game app
Mark rypien led Washington to a SB title where he was named SB MVP

Great job Bill leading a team w/ those QBs to 1 WC playoff win at home then getting blown out by a team that wouldn't even make the SB!


so what happened in the other 4 years in Cleveland? 25-39 no playoff apps.


You can save the other fluff, BB is a football genius but being a HC is a different beast. he was a complete failure as a Hc until tom Brady rescued his sinking HC career where he was about to be fired AGAIN and would never get another shot to be a HC. Not many, if any, know this game better than BB but there's more to it than x's and o's or our resident wannabe "experts" would actually have jobs in football.



The great Bill Belichick with Tom Brady
2001-2014(minus 2 games in 2001 and 15 games in 2008)
160-47, 77% win %
12 division titles
12 playoff apps
11 div rd apps
9 title game apps
6 SB apps
4 SB wins


The great Bill Belichick WITHOUT Tom Brady
Cleveland 1991-1995
NE 2000, first 2 games of 2001 and 2008.
51-62, 45 % win %
ONE playoff app
ONE playoff win(WC win at home)
ZERO div rd wins
ZERO title game apps or wins
ZERO SBs
Just 2 winning seasons in 7 seasons


2000 NE they go 5-11, the 4th straight year they had won less games than the previous season. 2001 they start out 0-2 which included a loss to a bad Cincy team and a loss to a playoff bound Jet team where their O only scored 3 pts. Brady starts week 3, they go 11-3 the rest of the way. Pure coincidence.

2007 NE goes UNDEFEATED, next season Brady gets hurt and despite facing much weaker sched they MISS the playoffs(w/ a QB who, 2 years later, would lead KC to a div title)


why is it his amazing schemes didn't work w/o Brady? Interesting how that worked out, right?

BB is an all time great coach, there's no disputing that but if not for Brady he'd be a DC somewhere today.


The difference btw NE and Ind/Den is at the QB position. One plays big in big games and the other plays small.

Look at the Ind/Den playoff losses and tell me what you find.

It's funny, in 2003 Indy finally won their first playoff game w/ peyton(his 7th season in league) then won in the div rd to meet up w/ NE in the title game. Peyton throws 4 INts, NE wins 24-14. Indy whines to the league about Dbs mugging Indy WRs, league changes the rule then the next season they meet up in the div rd and big game peyton leads that high powered O to 3 points.


The genius of Belichick saw his Defense become the first EVER to blow a double digit 4th qtr lead in the 2001 SB w/ SL. Then w/ a little over a minute left Brady leads them on an incredible GW drive. if that gme gets to Ot and SL wisn the toss then they are winning the SB.

BB's genius was again on display 2 years later where they became just the SECOND team EVER to blow a double digit lead in the 4th qtr, again Brady leads them to the win to save them.

2007 SB vs. NYG, Brady leads 80 yd drive for TD to take a late 4 pt lead. the genius schemes allowed NYG to go right down the field and score, the difference this time was when the D and their schemes choked they didn't have Brady to rescue them b/c there wasn't enough time.

2011 SB, the O again leaves the field late w/ a lead, this time a 3 pt lead. the genius schemes allow NYG to go 88 yards and take a 4 pt lead. once again the choking D and their genius schemes didn't allow the O time to rescue them.

2014 SB, NE trails by 10 entering 4th qtr. Brady leads NE back to take a 4 pt lead late and once again the genius schemes allow an opponent to easily march downfield. his time they get lucky as Seattle throws the ball from the 1 or the genius and his schemes would have blown a 3rd SB late.


a little recap about Brady. In 6 SBs he led his O to late scores to win/take lead in 3 of them. he left the field late w/ a lead in all 6 of them.

Peyton vs. NO? trailing by 7 in No territory what does he do? throws a pick 6 to end the game. it must have been the schemes though, right?

Peyton vs. the same Seattle D Brady led to 14 pts in the FOURTH QUARTER of the next SB led his MUCH more talented O to 8 points all in garbage time.


I love this new "BSPN" thing, a channel I barely watch except to see occasional highlights. "BSPN" fluffs Manning more than Brady so if that were the case i'd be like most people wowed w/ reg season #s and tell you Peyton was better.


By the way, Tony Dungy is going to be a first ballot HOFer as a HC. he was a man who led a franchise w/o Peyton to a conf title game(and maybe a SB if not for a blown call) which is something the great BB a nd his schemes never did. By the way, BB coached 7 seasons w/o Brady, Dungy coached 6 w/o Peyton so in fewer chances he led his teams to much more success.


Dungy w/o Peyton(taking over by far the worst franchise in the sport by the way)
54-42, 56%
4 playoff apps in 6 seasons(he took over in 1996, Tb made playoffs in 1997 for first time since strike shortened 1982 season)
1 div title(in div that had the great GB and Minny teams)
2 div rd apps
1 title game app

that's a little better than BB w/o Brady, right?
 
I wondered where my post went. I have no doubt that Manning with Belichik would have destroyed the rest of the football world. Can you imagine those two football minds together? We know what Belichik did without Brady-playoffs with Bledsoe and 11-5 with Cassel. We don't know what Brady can do without Bill. A follow up to this: If Montana and Marino switched careers, who wins the most Super Bowls?
 
I wondered where my post went. I have no doubt that Manning with Belichik would have destroyed the rest of the football world. Can you imagine those two football minds together? We know what Belichik did without Brady-playoffs with Bledsoe and 11-5 with Cassel. We don't know what Brady can do without Bill. A follow up to this: If Montana and Marino switched careers, who wins the most Super Bowls?

People always bring up going 10-5 w/ Cassell as the starter, do we forget the team was 16-0 the year before w/ Brady/ 6 less wins. If Miami wins 6 less games this coming season they will win 2 games. 6 games is an incredible difference. Not to mention they faced a much easier schedule and cassell 2 years later would lead KC to a division title.

Marino had far fewer talent around him, Manning had MORE talent around him. there's the difference and Peyton's main HC actually had success w/o him. Brady's HC was a total failure w/o Brady.
 
“Nobody works harder or prepares better than Tom does.” — Belichick on Tom Brady, 10/26/14

“Nobody works harder than Ted. Nobody’s more diligent. Nobody trains harder.” — on Ted Johnson, 8/30/2000

“I do feel bad for Rodney. Nobody has worked harder than he has. He’s had a couple of significant injuries and a couple in I don’t know how many months it’s been (but) nobody works harder than he does, and nobody works harder for the team in every area.” — on Rodney Harrison, 1/3/07

“He’s been used in a lot of different roles, but nobody works harder than Kevin.” — on Kevin Faulk, 1/23/08

“Nobody works harder than Wes.” — on Wes Welker, 8/20/10

“Nobody works harder, prepares harder than Devin does.” — on Devin McCourty, 11/10/13

“Nobody works harder than Tim.” — on Tim Wright, 10/9/14

“Nobody works harder than Danny does.” — on Danny Amendola, 10/17/14

“Nate is a great guy to have on the football team. Nobody works harder.” — on Nate Solder, 10/29/14

“Nobody works harder, nobody is more unselfish and more dependable than he is.” —on Jerod Mayo, 10/14/14

et cetera, et cetera, et cetera
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would take Brady with any team over Manning with the Patriots. He makes nobodies into great football players and doesn't shrink in big games.
 
Meet the System QB's system:

What truly separates the Patriots’ system is the extensive combination of receiver route adjustments, based on the defense or a defender’s positioning, that all pass catchers—even running backs—have to know. Most offenses include at least a sprinkling of option routes designed, essentially, to use a defense against itself. But New England’s offense is built on them.

“At times there are four decisions that a receiver needs to make after the snap,” Chad O’Shea, New England’s receivers coach since 2009, explained in the lead-up to Super Bowl XLVI, a loss to the Giants. “That’s one advantage of our offense: We give players the flexibility to take what the defense gives.”

On most plays, every eligible receiver is expected to be able to adjust his route—and this after Brady may have alerted to an alternate play—depending on the defense. Here’s a rundown of the different types of route modifications New England runs:

ROUTE CONVERSION: If a play is designed for, say, a comeback route (or a hitch) and the defender is playing in press man instead of the anticipated zone coverage, a receiver might convert his route to a fade down the sideline.

SIGHT ADJUSTMENT: If a receiver recognizes that his defender—usually a safety—is coming on a blitz, he’ll adjust his route. (Simply put: Conversions are based on coverage type, adjustments react to blitzing DBs.) A vertical route, for example, might adjust to a slant, getting the receiver open more quickly in the void the safety just created. This is different from a hot route, which most teams use to thwart front-seven blitzes and which are usually executed by tight ends or backs.

CHOICE ROUTE: Referred to by some teams as a “two-way go,” this usually occurs with a tight end or an outside receiver. In essence, if the defender plays you inside, the receiver breaks outside. If there are two split safeties in the middle of the field (termed “middle of field open”), a receiver may split them; against one safety (“middle closed”), the receiver would stay in the seam.

OPTION ROUTE: This almost always involves the slot receiver playing off the defense. Against a zone, for example, he’ll sit down for a short pass. Against man coverage, he could break right, left or go deep depending on the positioning and the skills of the man in coverage. To see what these concepts might look like in execution, let's examine a play design from an old Weis playbook:

1 OUT SLOT—51 HITCH/OPEQ, which is almost certainly still in the Pats’ arsenal. It starts in a three-receiver set, one to the left and two to the right; the quarterback under center, with a single back behind him; and the tight end on the left side of the line. The left-aligned receiver runs a six-yard hitch, but that route converts to a fade if he sees press coverage or if the safeties roll coverage down to his side. The tight end blocks but then releases into the left flat if the play breaks down and extends. The running back picks up the middle linebacker if he blitzes; if he doesn’t, the back runs a middle check-down and then can release in the opposite direction of the tight end. On the right, the slot receiver runs a six-yard option route that can be a comeback, curl, dig or out, depending on the coverage. The outside receiver to the right runs a 14-yard comeback that converts to a post-corner if the safeties roll coverage.

Got it? Now imagine that you’re a wideout, and the coach tells you that instead of being the Z receiver, as you were the previous two weeks, you’re going to be the X on this play this week. “It’s very hard [to learn] because we’re constantly putting people in different spots, so you have to know multiple positions,” says Hoyer of the Texans’ version of the system. “You have to make adjustments on the fly relating to coverage. It can be a lot, especially if you’ve played five years in a system where your route is predetermined.

The magic of the system boils down to receivers interpreting a defense the exact same way—and as quickly—as the quarterback, putting themselves exactly where the QB expects.


. . .

And now onto this past Sunday's AFC Championship game:

Tom Brady ‘Had No Clue In The First Half’ Vs. Broncos

The Patriots’ loss in Denver on Sunday afternoon left many Patriots fans stunned. Rarely does a team as well-coached as the Patriots, with a quarterback like Tom Brady, struggle so mightily on such a grand stage.

While the reasons for the loss might be numerous, Sports Illustrated’s Greg Bedard believes much of the credit belong to Wade Phillips.

The Broncos’ defensive coordinator completely changed his tendencies, and the Patriots’ offense took far too long to figure out a response. In the process, the defensive scheme made Brady look rather ordinary.

Bedard explained Tuesday on Felger & Mazz:

I thought that Brady struggled a lot in the first half. I did not think he was very good in the first half at all. He was much better in the second half.

When you go into a game like this, both sides of the ball are looking at the past film, tendencies, things like that.

Let’s just start with the Patriots taking the ball. I thought that was a sign that they were seeing the ball exactly how I was seeing it, Mr. Terribly Wrong 42-17. Because you only take the ball if you think your chances are really good for going down and scoring, or at least getting field position. And that’s what I thought — if the Patriots come out, get their shotgun five wide, the way the Broncos had defended those sets, like the week before against thee Steelers, then the Patriots should have matchup advantages all over the field, and Brady should be able to pick ’em out.

Well, the X factor in all of this is that Wade completely changed up how he does things, and in a certain way, you could say this game was a failure of imagination on the Patriots’ offensive part and Josh McDaniels. Look, all these coaches do it the same way; they base it off film, they base it off tendencies, so they set a game-plan saying, ‘All right, we think we’re gonna get these coverages, this is how we’re going to attack it.’ I think nobody ever thought, ‘Well what if Wade does this? What if they defend us this way? What if they defend us like the Jets? What is our plan? Are we expecting that?’

Because from jump street, through at least the first half, Brady did not see this game well at all. He did not know — when you watch Tom Brady on film, time after time, 95 percent of the time he knows exactly where he’s going with the ball before the ball’s snapped, and he manipulates the defense, motion this way, open this up. He had no clue in the first half. None.

There were four times in the first four possessions and five overall in the first half where Julian Edelman was wide open. Wide open. And Brady wasn’t even looking in that direction. Normally, he’ll look to one side, he’ll like the matchups. Edelman was extremely frustrated in this game. There were several times after passes where he’s wide open, his arms are up.

One of the big plays that stood out for me and how Brady did not see the game was the play before the interception. Brady got pressured, play-action, [Rob] Gronkowski is wide open on a slant — or, coming wide open. It’s a little cloudy. But all Brady has to do is get it over the linebacker and it’s a 40, 50-yard gain. And Brady didn’t pull the trigger. And then the next play, the interception, he just didn’t see it. And that was a huge swing in the game.

There were countless times in the first half where those things were happening, where guys were open or going to come open, and Brady a lot of the times was looking at the wrong side of the field. Normally, he is right on the money, knows exactly what he’s doing, and lets go of it.

You’ve got to give a lot of credit to the Broncos, but also, it seemed like the Patriots just weren’t prepared [for that defense]. And who would be? Because Wade Phillips throughout his career, cover 1, bring 70 percent of pressure on third-and-short, all this stuff, brought 17 percent pressure on this game. And it threw the Patriots for a loop and they really didn’t have an answer. They still almost won the game, but overall, the bottom line is you got beat in all three phases.


When the system failed, so did Brady. Why is that? He is a system QB. Joe Montana re-incarnate. Now both Montana and Brady are elite QB's with the exceptional ability to quickly decipher defenses, but none the less they are system QB's.

In contrast, QB's like Manning and Marino are the system.
 
Meet the QB who is a System

Cutting into a conversation with former OC Tom Moore:


When the chips are down, and you absolutely have to get a first down, what plays do you call? Moore’s response was unexpected, in that he said there was only one choice. “He told me the play was so simple that I would not believe it,” said Fedora. “He said it was Peyton Manning’s favorite play.”

The play Moore described — known in Moore-Manning terminology as “Dig” — was so simple that Fedora didn’t believe it. But that play, along with a handful of others, helped the combination of Manning and Moore lead one of the most unprecedented runs in modern football history.

When Manning signed with the Broncos, the early wave of headlines like “Broncos’ playbook will be new to Peyton Manning, not coaches” seemed designed to convince us that the Manning offense was gone for good.

As they gained exposure to their new quarterback, though, the stance of Denver’s coaches grew more flexible. Offensive coordinator Mike McCoy noted that he’d “be an idiot” not to listen to Manning, and that the goal was to find a “happy medium” between the approach of Denver head coach John Fox and what Manning had previously done.

After watching Denver this season, I’m not convinced “happy medium” is accurate. While the terminology Denver uses might be its own, both structurally and in its specifics, the offense is strikingly similar to what Manning did for years in Indianapolis. Despite some early protestations, that opinion has spread throughout the league. When asked how similar Manning’s current offense is to what he ran in Indianapolis, New England coach Bill Belichick was typically candid. “It’s identical. It looks the same to me.”

“I can give [you] the playbook,” said former Manning backup quarterback Jim Sorgi in 2010, Manning’s last full season in Indianapolis. “There is not that many teams they’re going to play who don’t know what they’re going to do. It’s all about execution. Their coaches are like, ‘We’ll tell the other team what we’re doing. They got to stop us.’ That’s what they do. That’s what they’re all about. And not many teams have been able to stop them yet.”

It’s difficult to overstate how often Manning ran this with the Colts and how often he still runs it with the Broncos. Ten times a game in various forms and from different formations is not uncommon; if games in which he’s throwing a lot, 15 or 20 wouldn’t be unheard of. Dig is Manning’s Lombardi sweep: You know it’s coming, but try to stop it.

None of this is groundbreaking, but that’s the point. “No matter how many hours you study opponent films,” Sid Gillman, legendary NFL coach, used to repeat, “there’s only going to be eleven players on the other side of the line of scrimmage.” It’s a simple game in which strategic beauty comes not from being surprised by some new clever trick, but from the sublime, routine brilliance of a master in his element


Manning's favorite plays:

- Dig (aka Levels):

grant_h_dig1_sl_64011.jpeg


- Dag (aka Smash or China)

grant_h_dag1_cr_64011.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom