Build your QB

[Sway29]

I think we have done these before, but build your perfect qb using attributes of other qb's in the league currently.

Arm Strength: Jamarcus Russel
Accuracy: Chad Pennington
Touch: Peyton Manning
Toughness: Phillip Rivers
Clutch: Tom Brady
Size: Big Ben
Awareness: Tom Brady
Intelligence: Peyton Manning
accolades: Tom Brady

[peytonsplA]

Accolades? Ha you forgot about girlfriend then as well. Should we go for Romo's or Brady's?

Seriously though, let's add:

Release: Peyton Manning
Scrambling: Michael Vick
Preparation: Peyton Manning
Velocity: Jay Cutler (versus distance for Russel)

[Sway29]

Accolades? Ha you forgot about girlfriend then as well. Should we go for Romo's or Brady's?

Seriously though, let's add:

Release: Peyton Manning
Scrambling: Michael Vick
Preparation: Peyton Manning
Velocity: Jay Cutler (versus distance for Russel)

i dont see why accolades is so funny? if i have 2 qb's who are fairly even im going to take the one who has accomplished more, won more games, won more championships... so i feel it is a fine thing to judge.

[Ball_Hawks]

Arm Strength: Kyle Boller - I like his arm strength.
Accuracy: Drew Brees - Always gets the ball in the right spot
Touch: Peyton Manning - Always has good touch. into tight spots
Toughness: Big Ben - the amount of hits he takes you have to be tough
Clutch: Jake Delhomme - Panthers didnt get the Cardiac cats nickname for no reason
Size: Big Ben - His size he can take a pounding
Awareness: Drew Brees - He has great awareness
Intelligence: Peyton Manning - Smartest QB Around
accolades: Tom Brady - What can you say he is good
confidence: Jay Cutler - He has to much confidence in him self.
Athletic ability: Seneca Wallace- His athletic ability is perfect for a real Qb.

[Texecutioner]

Just give me Tom Brady and call it a day.

But since we're doing this.

poise: BRady
Passing abillity: Palmer
Scrambling abilities: Vince Young
Preparation: Manning
Pocket Presence: Big Ben

[peytonsplA]

i dont see why accolades is so funny? if i have 2 qb's who are fairly even im going to take the one who has accomplished more, won more games, won more championships... so i feel it is a fine thing to judge.

Well if two quarterbacks are in fact even, then a big difference in accolades would be the product of a difference in the teams around them, no?

If you are serious about it though, then I suppose you would have to split accolades into individual and team ones. Brady has the rings, Manning has the MVP awards.

[peytonsplA]

Pocket Presence: Big Ben

I guess that depends greatly on what you consider pocket presence. For me, making defenders bounce off of you doesn't count, so I would say Big Ben's pocket presence in terms of being able to feel the pressure and get the ball away is not all that great, let alone the best in the league. If you are including his ability to turn defenders into pinballs though, then he is certainly a tough customer to deal with in the pocket. I guess that could be pocket presence while what I am thinking of would be pocket awareness?

[MrSlurpee]

Arm Strength: Jay Cutler
Accuracy: Drew Brees
Touch: Peyton Manning
Toughness: Phillip Rivers
Clutch: Ben Rothlisberger
Size: Ben Rothlisberger
Awareness: Tom Brady
Intelligence: Peyton Manning
Leadership: Philip Rivers

[Sway29]

Well if two quarterbacks are in fact even, then a big difference in accolades would be the product of a difference in the teams around them, no?

If you are serious about it though, then I suppose you would have to split accolades into individual and team ones. Brady has the rings, Manning has the MVP awards.

Brady also was an mvp, and has 2 superbowl mvp's. I am the first to admit i feel Manning is a better passer, but there is something about Brady that to some make him the better player.
If on accolades, team and individual i feel Brady wins this.

[peytonsplA]

Brady also was an mvp, and has 2 superbowl mvp's. I am the first to admit i feel Manning is a better passer, but there is something about Brady that to some make him the better player.
If on accolades, team and individual i feel Brady wins this.

You value a Super Bowl MVP over a Regular Season MVP? Seriously? You are talking about playing the best of any player on one team in one game versus playing the best of any player on any team over an entire season.

That's kind of like taking Santonio Holmes' Super Bowl MVP over Larry Fitzgerald's historic postseason, no?

[peytonsplA]

Not to mention, even if you counted Super Bowl MVPs and Regular Season MVPs the same--which I think is ridiculous--Manning would still have 4 to Brady's 3. The only way Brady would win that one is if you gave Super Bowl MVPs even more weight than Regular Season MVPs.

[BAKAJ]

Arm Strength: Jay Cutler
Accuracy: Tom Brady
Touch: Chad Pennington
Toughness: Phillip Rivers
Clutch: Tom Brady
Size: Danute Culpepper
Awareness: Tom Brady
Intelligence: Peyton Manning
Accolades: Tom Brady
Poise: Tom Brady
Passing abillity: Carson Palmer
Scrambling abilities: Donvan McNabb
Preparation: Peyton Manning
Pocket Presence: Tom Brady

[BAKAJ]

Not to mention, even if you counted Super Bowl MVPs and Regular Season MVPs the same--which I think is ridiculous--Manning would still have 4 to Brady's 3. The only way Brady would win that one is if you gave Super Bowl MVPs even more weight than Regular Season MVPs.

And how many of those regular season mvps did manning deserve...

[StevenSD]

Arm Strength: Peyton Manning
Accuracy: Drew Brees
Touch: Tom Brady
Toughness: Philip Rivers
Clutch: Big Ben
Size: Philip Rivers
Awareness: Peyton Manning
Intelligence: Philip Rivers
Accolades: Tom Brady
Poise: Peyton Manning
Passing abillity: Carson Palmer
Scrambling abilities: Donvan McNabb
Preparation: Tom Brady
Pocket Presence: Matt Ryan

[Dreamers]

Arm Strength: Brett Farve if he counts if not Jake Delhomme
Accuracy: Chad Pennington
Touch: Matt Hasselbeck
Toughness: Eli Manning
Clutch: Tom Brady
Size: Darrell Hackney yeah you heard me small guys can get it done too.
Awareness: Kerry Collins without the mental issues
Intelligence: Jeff Garcia
Leadership: Drew Brees
Scrambling: Donovan McNabb
Pocket Presence: Peyton Manning
Release: Carson Palmer

[BigBenCan7]

That's kind of like taking Santonio Holmes' Super Bowl MVP over Larry Fitzgerald's historic postseason, no?

I'll bet you Larry Fitzgerald would make that trade.

[l.a. no-teamers]

Arm Strength: Carson Palmer
Release: Peyton Manning
Touch: Tom Brady
Pocket Presence: Peyton Manning
Intelligence: Tom Brady
Clutch: Tom Brady
Size: Ben Roethlisberger

[william00777]

Arm Strength- Byron Leftwich
Accuracy- Drew Brees
Touch- Peyton Manning
Toughness- Jeff Garcia (I'm also counting mental toughness to be able to be bounced around constantly and still pick yourself up and play at a high level is impressive)
Clutch- That Brady guy I guess
Intelligence- Peyton Manning
Leadership- Phillip Rivers (I don't like him but his fire would drive me to play with him)
Scrambling- Vince Young (if my guy had all this other stuff you wouldn't see this much but when you did wow
Size- Vince Young
Pocket Presence- Big Ben (think he moves well and keeps looking down field when hit or brushed)
Awareness- Tom Brady
Release- Carson Palmer

[Sway29]

Not to mention, even if you counted Super Bowl MVPs and Regular Season MVPs the same--which I think is ridiculous--Manning would still have 4 to Brady's 3. The only way Brady would win that one is if you gave Super Bowl MVPs even more weight than Regular Season MVPs.

So showing up in the biggest game in this sport does not seem to matter much? Im glad manning was able to show up all regular season to fall apart in the big games. Again i will take Brady's MVP's and super bowls over Mannings any day you would like.

[peytonsplA]

So showing up in the biggest game in this sport does not seem to matter much? Im glad manning was able to show up all regular season to fall apart in the big games. Again i will take Brady's MVP's and super bowls over Mannings any day you would like.

I never said a Super Bowl MVP doesn't matter, but how can you compare it to being the league MVP, and even worse say it means more for the individual? Now you are just lumping championships back in because you know it's nonsense. If you want to say Tom Brady has the better overall accolades fine, but saying he has the better individual accolades just doesn't add up.

[peytonsplA]

I'll bet you Larry Fitzgerald would make that trade.

Big difference between what a player wants more (winning) than what is more indicative of being the better player (individual performance).

Are you telling me you would turn down a trade of Holmes for Fitzgerald?

[peytonsplA]

And how many of those regular season mvps did manning deserve...

Every single one of them. Who was more valuable to his team in 2007? Tom Brady or Randy Moss?

[Sway29]

I never said a Super Bowl MVP doesn't matter, but how can you compare it to being the league MVP, and even worse say it means more for the individual? Now you are just lumping championships back in because you know it's nonsense. If you want to say Tom Brady has the better overall accolades fine, but saying he has the better individual accolades just doesn't add up.

At the same time i feel Manning's MVP's are also team based. Manning may not win those mvps if he doesnt have the supporting cast that he has had for so long. How many first round picks have the colts put on that side of the ball? Untill his MVP year, Brady never had the targets Manning has had, he had the defense, but when they gave Brady targets equal to Manning he was just as good if not better. Again it is nothing against Manning, i would not take his stats away, but i do feel like his MVP's are also very team based.

So now we are Comparing Mannings 4 MVP's total and 1 Superbowl to Brady's 3 MVP's total and 3 superbowls....

Ill take Brady in this area.

[Sway29]

Every single one of them. Who was more valuable to his team in 2007? Tom Brady or Randy Moss?

Without a doubt Tom Brady. Granted he would not have put up the same numbers, but he takes that team alot further then Moss does. The way i see it, Moss needed Brady, Brady doesn't need Moss.

[Ball_Hawks]

Without a doubt Tom Brady. Granted he would not have put up the same numbers, but he takes that team alot further then Moss does. The way i see it, Moss needed Brady, Brady doesn't need Moss.
Yes but Brady NEVER puts up them numbers in 2007 to get the MVP without Moss. So Brady needed Moss to win that MVP.

[Sway29]

Yes but Brady NEVER puts up them numbers in 2007 to get the MVP without Moss. So Brady needed Moss to win that MVP.

The same as manning needed Wayne and Harrison

[peytonsplA]

At the same time i feel Manning's MVP's are also team based. Manning may not win those mvps if he doesnt have the supporting cast that he has had for so long. How many first round picks have the colts put on that side of the ball? Untill his MVP year, Brady never had the targets Manning has had, he had the defense, but when they gave Brady targets equal to Manning he was just as good if not better. Again it is nothing against Manning, i would not take his stats away, but i do feel like his MVP's are also very team based.

So now we are Comparing Mannings 4 MVP's total and 1 Superbowl to Brady's 3 MVP's total and 3 superbowls....

Ill take Brady in this area.

I can accept Brady winning the accolades if you lump individual and team together if you can accept that Manning wins the individual accolades category.

The argument that individual honors are team honors too does not jive though. Everything depends on teammates but clearly the degree is drastically different when talking about MVP awards and championships.

[peytonsplA]

Without a doubt Tom Brady. Granted he would not have put up the same numbers, but he takes that team alot further then Moss does. The way i see it, Moss needed Brady, Brady doesn't need Moss.

Well considering that Moss has already been on the highest scoring offense in NFL history and part of the single season touchdown race with an over-the-hill Randal Cunningham and Daunte Culpepper...

[peytonsplA]

The same as manning needed Wayne and Harrison

The same?

Is that why Manning won his MVP award in 2008 with Harrison being a shell of his former self?

Is that why Manning's numbers in 2007 were actually better with the rookie Anthony Gonzalez replacing Harrison than when Harrison was healthy early in the season?

With Harrison out of the picture, Wayne and Clark simply had career years.

As good as Manning's numbers have been in 2007 and 2008 without the real Marvin Harrison, consider how much better those numbers would have been if not for stretches of extreme injuries to his offensive line in each season and his own knee surgeries before the start of 2008.

Every player needs others to play at a certain level around them to do well, but the Manning and Harrison relationship is nothing like the Brady and Moss relationship.

Probably the easiest and simplest way to consider that question is to simply look at the TD distrubutions in those big touchdown seasons. Moss took the lion's share of the touchdowns because it was his size and uncanny knack for plucking balls out of the sky that made it work. Harrison, Wayne, and Stokley all had a fairly even split because the passing offense as a whole driven by Manning was bigger than any one receiver.

Another way would be to look at how Harrison and Moss each performed with other quarterbacks in their career. Moss has had more receptions and more yards before and was productive right out of the gate, catching 17 touchdowns even as a rookie. Harrison on the other hand took longer than any other contemporary multiple pro bowl wide receiver to become a 1,000 yard receiver--and his production literally doubled in Manning's second season compared to before Manning came along.

I don't want to turn this into a Manning and Brady debate, since the whole point of thread like this is to look at individual characteristics and forget about entire packages, but I can't let an analogy like that slide.

[BAKAJ]

Every single one of them. Who was more valuable to his team in 2007? Tom Brady or Randy Moss?

Depends who you ask because without Moss the team would not put up those huge numbers on offense, and wes welker would still be a avg. WR...

So last season Manning was the best player in the nfl on offense?...

[StevenSD]

The same?

Is that why Manning won his MVP award in 2008 with Harrison being a shell of his former self?

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Manning won the MVP because of his publicity.

Michael Turner was the real MVP in 2008, any REAL football fan knows that

[BAKAJ]

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Manning won the MVP because of his publicity.

Michael Turner was the real MVP in 2008, any REAL football fan knows that

Well to me it was btw the 3 Rbs... Williams / Turner / AP in that order but none of them got it...

[StevenSD]

Well to me it was btw the 3 Rbs... Williams / Turner / AP in that order but none of them got it...

If Turner was not on the Falcons last year, no way do they make it to the playoffs, much less have the success that they did...

to me, that's the most VALUABLE player

[Ball_Hawks]

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Manning won the MVP because of his publicity.

Michael Turner was the real MVP in 2008, any REAL football fan knows that
A real football fan knows that the MVP was a defensive player last year. Their was many choices better then what was on offense.

[StevenSD]

A real football fan knows that the MVP was a defensive player last year. Their was many choices better then what was on offense.

Haynesworth? Seriously?

How good was Tenn when Haynesworth was suspended for digging his cleats into an offensive linemens eye?

[Ball_Hawks]

Haynesworth? Seriously?

How good was Tenn when Haynesworth was suspended for digging his cleats into an offensive linemens eye?
He didn't get suspended last year. That was years before. So that was stupid to bring that.

Haynesworth was dominate last year. So was Harrison, Ware, Reed. I mean how is it every year that its a offensive players when you see guys like them have them kinda seasons. Might as well throw the MVP thing out of the books. Cause the other side of the ball in defense has no shot. Just have a offensive & defensive player of the year. Untail a defensive player gets a real shot, MVP means jack S---

[peytonsplA]

If Turner was not on the Falcons last year, no way do they make it to the playoffs, much less have the success that they did...

to me, that's the most VALUABLE player

And you don't think that was the case with Manning and the Colts???

The way Manning and the Colts struggled early while he was finding his way back from injury before getting hot to finish off the season may have very well actually helped his MVP candidacy more than it hurt.

It wasn't the greatest MVP season ever obviously, but in a season full of question marks, he was the clearest answer. Call him the winner by default if you want, but he won it because he was the most deserving (at least in the quarterback and offense centric state of the MVP race).

You say any fan knows it was Michael Turner, but I must have heard at least half a dozen other names mentioned from various people as the real MVP. What does that tell you?

[peytonsplA]

He didn't get suspended last year. That was years before. So that was stupid to bring that.

Haynesworth was dominate last year. So was Harrison, Ware, Reed. I mean how is it every year that its a offensive players when you see guys like them have them kinda seasons. Might as well throw the MVP thing out of the books. Cause the other side of the ball in defense has no shot. Just have a offensive & defensive player of the year. Untail a defensive player gets a real shot, MVP means jack S---

I have to agree with you there. Early in the year, I was really rooting for Haynesworth to win the award, though I knew it wasn't going to happen. There were a lot of really strong defenders that year, which I suppose might have actually hurt each of their chances. Too many good defenders to choose just one as the guy considering how rare it is for a defender to win it I suppose.

Of course some of the quarterback/running back bias in the MVP race has to be there because those are the more valuable positions in the game. Being the best defensive back/defensive linemen/linebacker by a bigger margin than the best quarterback or running back isn't really enough to warrant the nod. They have to dominate so much in order to overcome the fact that they are just one defender and can dictate when the ball comes to him the way it is on offense.

Unfortunately, I think the only way a defensive player is going to have a shot is if they first and foremost wipe out the competition for the DPOY award. Many of the key guys this year didn't even dominate their position. Both Ed Reed and Troy Polamalu had great seasons. Both DeMarcus Ware and Harrison had great seasons. Hayneworth was probably the only defensive linemen in that group of elite defenders this year, but I think you get the idea.

[peytonsplA]

Depends who you ask because without Moss the team would not put up those huge numbers on offense, and wes welker would still be a avg. WR...

So last season Manning was the best player in the nfl on offense?...

So it looks like you got my point about Moss then. In 2003, 2004, and 2008 there was no question for the Colts.

The NFL offensive player of the year award is for the "best" offensive player. The MVP award is for the most valuable player. Manning didn't have the biggest/best numbers if that's what you mean, but I certainly think he meant more to his team than any other single player. Look at the Colts with Manning at less than 100%. Imagine them with no Manning at all. Would they go 11-5 like the Patriots did? I think not.

[StevenSD]

And you don't think that was the case with Manning and the Colts???

The way Manning and the Colts struggled early while he was finding his way back from injury before getting hot to finish off the season may have very well actually helped his MVP candidacy more than it hurt.

It wasn't the greatest MVP season ever obviously, but in a season full of question marks, he was the clearest answer. Call him the winner by default if you want, but he won it because he was the most deserving (at least in the quarterback and offense centric state of the MVP race).

You say any fan knows it was Michael Turner, but I must have heard at least half a dozen other names mentioned from various people as the real MVP. What does that tell you?

i only have time to reply to your first paragraph...

excuse me if i didnt find manning coming back from his injury that heroic while watching philip rivers coming back from a torn ACL and STILL play at a high level during that time peroid

[Sway29]

The same?

Is that why Manning won his MVP award in 2008 with Harrison being a shell of his former self?

Is that why Manning's numbers in 2007 were actually better with the rookie Anthony Gonzalez replacing Harrison than when Harrison was healthy early in the season?

With Harrison out of the picture, Wayne and Clark simply had career years.

As good as Manning's numbers have been in 2007 and 2008 without the real Marvin Harrison, consider how much better those numbers would have been if not for stretches of extreme injuries to his offensive line in each season and his own knee surgeries before the start of 2008.

Every player needs others to play at a certain level around them to do well, but the Manning and Harrison relationship is nothing like the Brady and Moss relationship.

Probably the easiest and simplest way to consider that question is to simply look at the TD distrubutions in those big touchdown seasons. Moss took the lion's share of the touchdowns because it was his size and uncanny knack for plucking balls out of the sky that made it work. Harrison, Wayne, and Stokley all had a fairly even split because the passing offense as a whole driven by Manning was bigger than any one receiver.

Another way would be to look at how Harrison and Moss each performed with other quarterbacks in their career. Moss has had more receptions and more yards before and was productive right out of the gate, catching 17 touchdowns even as a rookie. Harrison on the other hand took longer than any other contemporary multiple pro bowl wide receiver to become a 1,000 yard receiver--and his production literally doubled in Manning's second season compared to before Manning came along.

I don't want to turn this into a Manning and Brady debate, since the whole point of thread like this is to look at individual characteristics and forget about entire packages, but I can't let an analogy like that slide.

Im not saying Harrison has been as great in the past few seasons. But for alot of Mannings MVP's he was throwing the ball to Harrison, Clark and Wayne, and with a great run game from Edge and Addai. That sure beats what Brady has had to throw to untill recent. So do i feel if given the exact same offense, player for player, Brady would out preform Manning, Possibly.

[Ball_Hawks]

So it looks like you got my point about Moss then. In 2003, 2004, and 2008 there was no question for the Colts.

The NFL offensive player of the year award is for the "best" offensive player. The MVP award is for the most valuable player. Manning didn't have the biggest/best numbers if that's what you mean, but I certainly think he meant more to his team than any other single player. Look at the Colts with Manning at less than 100%. Imagine them with no Manning at all. Would they go 11-5 like the Patriots did? I think not.

MVP is still flawed. You said its the MOST VALUABLE PLAYER.. Not every player is the most valuable at QB & RB. Everything starts up front on the OL. Why have we never seen a OLman win it. Walter Jones had some of the best seasons ever for a LT going 2 1/2 years without giving up a sack. Without him Alexander isnt that good & Hasselbeck never gets the time to throw.

What about last year. You think without Haynesworth the titans have the best record in football? Not even close cause the Titans won games on DEFENSE!! MVP is worthless cause it hardly ever goes to the MOST VALUABLE PLAYER.

Colts wouldn't go 11-5 if Manning wasn't QB. Why cause they have crappy talent for backups. They have yet to show the ability to develop a QB behind Manning. Patriots have good talent at QB and have the ability to develop them. O'Connell i think is more talented the Cassell. So the Colts problem if Manning is gone is their problem for not having a backup plan.

[peytonsplA]

i only have time to reply to your first paragraph...

excuse me if i didnt find manning coming back from his injury that heroic while watching philip rivers coming back from a torn ACL and STILL play at a high level during that time peroid

It's not about being heroic, it's about providing a very practical example of the "what if the team was without player A" question that the MVP award is trying to answer. When Manning wasn't himself, the Colts were a very bad team, needing some fortunate and huge comebacks even to hold a 3-4 record. As Manning started to regain his form, the Colts suddenly looked quite different and started winning like we are used to seeing.

I didn't have any questions about whether or not the Colts are deperately dependant upon Peyton Manning, but for anyone who did, they got their answers.

[peytonsplA]

Im not saying Harrison has been as great in the past few seasons. But for alot of Mannings MVP's he was throwing the ball to Harrison, Clark and Wayne, and with a great run game from Edge and Addai. That sure beats what Brady has had to throw to untill recent. So do i feel if given the exact same offense, player for player, Brady would out preform Manning, Possibly.

Clark wasn't even a very big factor in the Colts offense in Manning's first two MVP seasons, so I don't know why you would even mention him honestly. The great running game you speak of has been basically average in league rankings year in and year out. Brady's actually had a higher ranking running game in his career than Manning has, with the Colts best ranking coming in 2001, which was in reality by far the weakest running game the Colts have had after Edge was lost for the season.

Possibly? Anything is possible. Likely? No. Brady had clearly the better situation in 2007 and at best he matched Manning's 2004 season. Take away Randy Moss' ability to pluck balls out of the sky, and I have to wonder what the numbers would have looked like. Would Brady be able to consistently hit little Marvin Harrison in stride down the field from a collapsing pocket? I don't think so. Would Manning have benefited from being able to throw passes up for grabs at times, particularly near the end zone? One would certainly think so.

At any rate, comparisons such as these are best left until after we have more data of Brady with his upgraded receivers. I know Manning has proven himself to be consistent and successful even as key Colts fell by the way side (Edge, Tarik Glenn, Marvin Harrison). Let's see what Brady does if Moss isn't the same Moss anymore (hard to say if he's lost something or was just mentally out of the picture last year), and let's see how Brady handles having a huge bullseye on his back like Manning has had for the good part of his career.

[peytonsplA]

MVP is still flawed. You said its the MOST VALUABLE PLAYER.. Not every player is the most valuable at QB & RB. Everything starts up front on the OL. Why have we never seen a OLman win it. Walter Jones had some of the best seasons ever for a LT going 2 1/2 years without giving up a sack. Without him Alexander isnt that good & Hasselbeck never gets the time to throw.

What about last year. You think without Haynesworth the titans have the best record in football? Not even close cause the Titans won games on DEFENSE!! MVP is worthless cause it hardly ever goes to the MOST VALUABLE PLAYER.

Colts wouldn't go 11-5 if Manning wasn't QB. Why cause they have crappy talent for backups. They have yet to show the ability to develop a QB behind Manning. Patriots have good talent at QB and have the ability to develop them. O'Connell i think is more talented the Cassell. So the Colts problem if Manning is gone is their problem for not having a backup plan.

I know the MVP race is still flawed. Sometimes it does just wind up mirroring the offensive player of the year award. I agree that the offensive line can wind up being more important than either the quarterback or running back in many cases, but it's tough to make a case for a single individual offensive lineman since you can't give the award to the unit as a whole.

As great as Walter Jones has been, what about Steve Hutchinson? One absolute stud isn't going to be enough as Jonathan Ogden has proved over and over again as a Raven. Brian Waters certainly found himself in that situation after the Chiefs amazing line started falling apart around him.

The best quarterback in the league is always going to be more valuable than the best offensive lineman on a individual player basis.

As for Haynesworth, you must have missed my earlier response to you, because I mentioned that I was rooting for Haynesworth to win the MVP award earlier in the season after realizing that there wasn't really a clear cut offensive winner, hoping that this would be the year for defense. I think the Titans record with and without Haynesworth in the past few seasons speaks volumes as to his value to his team.

Even Tony Dungy himself said he was in favor of James Harrison winning the MVP for most of the season up until he switched his "vote" for Peyton Manning after his brilliant game against the Jaguars to clinch a playoff birth and the #5 seed in the AFC. That's kind of how I was except I was rooting for Haynesworth.

Anyway, I agree that the QB and RB centric mentality of the MVP race has become ridiculous, but you have to acknowledge the reasoning and "good intentions" behind that. The best QB is going to be more valuable than the best defensive lineman or best linebacker the vast majority of the time. It's only when the quarterbacks and running backs aren't having a particularly good season and a single defender stands out so much that you have a real case for that to happen.

[Sway29]

Clark wasn't even a very big factor in the Colts offense in Manning's first two MVP seasons, so I don't know why you would even mention him honestly. The great running game you speak of has been basically average in league rankings year in and year out. Brady's actually had a higher ranking running game in his career than Manning has, with the Colts best ranking coming in 2001, which was in reality by far the weakest running game the Colts have had after Edge was lost for the season.

Possibly? Anything is possible. Likely? No. Brady had clearly the better situation in 2007 and at best he matched Manning's 2004 season. Take away Randy Moss' ability to pluck balls out of the sky, and I have to wonder what the numbers would have looked like. Would Brady be able to consistently hit little Marvin Harrison in stride down the field from a collapsing pocket? I don't think so. Would Manning have benefited from being able to throw passes up for grabs at times, particularly near the end zone? One would certainly think so.

At any rate, comparisons such as these are best left until after we have more data of Brady with his upgraded receivers. I know Manning has proven himself to be consistent and successful even as key Colts fell by the way side (Edge, Tarik Glenn, Marvin Harrison). Let's see what Brady does if Moss isn't the same Moss anymore (hard to say if he's lost something or was just mentally out of the picture last year), and let's see how Brady handles having a huge bullseye on his back like Manning has had for the good part of his career.

Brady has proven enough with low level wr he has had his whole career. And to say Manning has had more of a bullseye is crazy. For the last 3 or 4 years it has always been Brady or Maning who is better.

Out of all the running backs the 2 qb's have had, Manning has had one and two, manning also gets to play atleast 8 games in a dome, compared to new england in December.

You make it sound like Manning is hands down the better choice at QB when i feel it can be heavily debated and go both ways.

[Blackmallard]

You make it sound like Manning is hands down the better choice at QB when i feel it can be heavily debated and go both ways.

If we are still talking about who has more accolades it is clearly Manning. It doesn't have to be a complicated debate about who played with who, we can just look at the awards each has received and it is clear who is more decorated. Manning has three MVP's, nine pro bowls, and four first team all-pro selections.

You can argue that Brady is a better player, and many have, but generally they are making the argument that despite receiving fewer accolades he is better not that he has received more or more prestigious awards than Manning.

Brady has two Superbowl MVP's, one more than Manning. Balancing that Manning has two more MVP's (which is the most prestigious award in football), three more all-pro selections, and five more pro-bowls. I think both have a somewhat redundant offensive player of the year award as well from one of their MVP seasons and both have picked up some other things like sportsman of the year.

To conclude that Brady has better awards you would have to decide that Superbowl MVP's were all that mattered and that everything else was only significant in a tie.

[peytonsplA]

To conclude that Brady has better awards you would have to decide that Superbowl MVP's were all that mattered and that everything else was only significant in a tie.

Which was the orginal point I was making and how we got into this debate in the first place. I wasn't even trying to debate who is the better player but simply that Manning clearly wins the individual accolades department. Maybe it will sound better coming from you.

[peytonsplA]

Brady has proven enough with low level wr he has had his whole career. And to say Manning has had more of a bullseye is crazy. For the last 3 or 4 years it has always been Brady or Maning who is better.

Out of all the running backs the 2 qb's have had, Manning has had one and two, manning also gets to play atleast 8 games in a dome, compared to new england in December.

You make it sound like Manning is hands down the better choice at QB when i feel it can be heavily debated and go both ways.

Brady has proven that he can produce consistently at a good level without great talent, but that is not the same thing as proving that he can produce consistently at an elite level. You don't prove that until you do it pure and simple.

All of the talk about Brady being Manning's equal of superior has been based on the hypothesis that he would produce as much or more with Manning's offensive teammates, not him actually producting at Manning's level. The upcoming seasons will be the test of that hypothesis, with 2007 being just the beginning.

Manning has clearly had more of a bullseye on his back. 2007 was the first time that defenses started paying such an inordinate amount of attention to Brady and doing the sort of things they have long done to Manning in terms of skewing their game plans to give so much attention to the passing game. I don't think it's a coincidence that as soon as Brady had his Manning-like regular season, he also had a Manning-like postseason. Nor was it a coincidence that as soon as Manning had his Brady-like postseason defense, he also had his Brady-like championship.

The general consensus is that these two are very close, with the current edge seeming to be given to Brady thanks to his 2007 season and a decline in the Colts offense caused by numerous injuries in the past two seasons. I personally don't agree with that because I think Manning is clearly the superior quarterback and would outperform Brady both in stats and wins if both were in identical situations, but that's just my opinion. I think there is a lot of evidence to support my opinion, but it's up to you to decide for yourself if any evidence I present is sensible or not. I only ask that you base your decisons on real evidence and not just perceptions.

As for running backs, Brady's running game has actually ranked higher on average than Manning's in each quarterback's respective career and clearly has been more reliable in the postseason. I don't care who the feature backs are, you measure running games by team rushing stats, not feature backs. Having more depth is an asset, not a liability.

[Texecutioner]

Sorry, but Brady has been better than Manning and it's not even close.

BRady has been to 4 SB's to Manning's 1 while Brady BEAT Manning in like 3 of those SB appearances just to get there. If it wasn't 3 it was at least 2.

Manning's always had better offensive weapons at WR and at RB than Brady ever has and it's not even close. Manning had one HOF WR and arguably another HOF WR in Wayne for years and Edge as a RB, while Brady had an older version of Troy Brown and a hand full of average guys around that and at RB an older version of Corey Dillion and a utility back in Faulk and Antwaun Smith. Brady finally got Moss and Welker which were weapons similar to what Manning has always had and broke the TD passing record and the best offensive team record of all time.

Brady has beaten Manning more times when it counted the most. Manning has made more critical mistakes in their match ups when it counted the most. Sorry, but Manning will never quite measure up to Tom Brady.

[peytonsplA]

Sorry, but Brady has been better than Manning and it's not even close.

BRady has been to 4 SB's to Manning's 1 while Brady BEAT Manning in like 3 of those SB appearances just to get there. If it wasn't 3 it was at least 2.

Manning's always had better offensive weapons at WR and at RB than Brady ever has and it's not even close. Manning had one HOF WR and arguably another HOF WR in Wayne for years and Edge as a RB, while Brady had an older version of Troy Brown and a hand full of average guys around that and at RB an older version of Corey Dillion and a utility back in Faulk and Antwaun Smith. Brady finally got Moss and Welker which were weapons similar to what Manning has always had and broke the TD passing record and the best offensive team record of all time.

Brady has beaten Manning more times when it counted the most. Manning has made more critical mistakes in their match ups when it counted the most. Sorry, but Manning will never quite measure up to Tom Brady.

See this is the exact sort of thing I don't want to hear.

I don't want to hear about your perceptions regarding the Colts wide receivers versus those of the Patriots without looking at how those receivers played with and without the respective quarterbacks.

I don't want to hear about running backs without actually looking at the relative value of each team's running game.

I don't want to hear about offensive support while completing ignoring offensive lines, blocking tight ends, the screen game, and depth.

I don't want to hear about winning championships while completely ignoring defense, special teams, and coaching strategy.

Give me something concrete and we can have a conversation.

[Texecutioner]

See this is the exact sort of thing I don't want to hear.

So you don't want to hear about it, because it doesn't fit into your point of view and fanship of Manning? Okay I get it.


I don't want to hear about your perceptions regarding the Colts wide receivers versus those of the Patriots without looking at how those receivers played with and without the respective quarterbacks.

Well sorry, but it's an important factor and for the majority of both of their careers Manning has had much better weapons to work with than Brady and most other QB's in history. Not to mention having Pollard for a number of years and Clark to use in the passing game as well.


I don't want to hear about running backs without actually looking at the relative value of each team's running game.

Well not only did the Colts have a great RB in Edge who might arguably go to the HOF as well, but just about every season in Manning's career other than his first two, he's had one of the best O lines in the entire league. Manning isn't mobile at all, and each season he practically has 6 months to throw the ball to an open WR.


I don't want to hear about offensive support while completing ignoring offensive lines, blocking tight ends, the screen game, and depth.

Like I mentioned before Manning's O line has been fantastic just about every year of his career.


I don't want to hear about winning championships while completely ignoring defense, special teams, and coaching strategy.

Okay so the Pats have had some stronger defenses. I'll give you that, but it's not like the Pats have had defenses like the Ravens of 01 or the Bucs of 03. They've been pretty good, and all, but not these world class defenses of all time now. When the Colts were finally able to actually beat the Pats in the post season and won their SB, their defense played at a very very high level for that post season run. When Sanders came back to that defense that year, it looked completely different and wasn't far from the defenses the Pats had when they won their SB's.


Give me something concrete and we can have a conversation.

I gave plenty of stuff that was concrete with my earlier post, but you just wanted more. Well you got more. Again, when it has counted the most BRady has had more poise in the post season than Manning has had and made the smarter plays under pressure not only against the Colts but a ton of other teams that had great defenses like the Steelers twice who they beat in the AFC championship in two SB runs. Manning has made a lot more critical mistakes in the post season all around than Brady ever has and it's not even close. Those INT's against the Steelers that year, against the Chargers in two straight seasons, and against the Pats as well. Brady has come up bigger in crucial moments in the post season and not made the BIG mistakes that Manning has.

[Vikes4life]

NFL Most Valuable Players - NFL MVP Player of the Year (http://football.about.com/od/nflhistory/l/bl_awardsmvp.htm)

The list of MVP from the beginning.
Only 5 Defensive players and 2 OL since 1938

[peytonsplA]

I gave plenty of stuff that was concrete with my earlier post, but you just wanted more. Well you got more.

You call any of that concrete? Give me NUMBERS.

Show me that Brady's receivers did better with Brady than anyone else. Show me that Manning's receivers did not do better with him than anyone else. Show me that Manning hasn't remained consistent despite losing Marvin Harrison.

Show me that Manning hasn't remained one of the least sacked quarterbacks in the league even after his offensive line completely fell apart with retirments, free agent losses, and injuries.

Show me how the Colts running game has been better than the Patriots running game with NUMBERS.

[Texecutioner]

You call any of that concrete? Give me NUMBERS.

Show me that Brady's receivers did better with Brady than anyone else. Show me that Manning's receivers did not do better with him than anyone else. Show me that Manning hasn't remained consistent despite losing Marvin Harrison.

Show me that Manning hasn't remained one of the least sacked quarterbacks in the league even after his offensive line completely fell apart with retirments, free agent losses, and injuries.

Show me how the Colts running game has been better than the Patriots running game with NUMBERS.

Now I get it, you want to play the "cherry pick your stats" argument.

I gave you a few stats already, and a lot of the stuff that you're asking you should already know if you're an avid fan in the NFL.

I already mentioned Brady's 4 SB appearances and 3 rings to Mannings one appearance and one ring while Brady beat Manning when it counted 3 different times and gave you quite a few "concrete" examples where Manning had poor performances and critical mistakes in the post season when it counted the most. But you want to turn this into a "who threw for more TD's" argument or "who threw for more yards" argument.

[peytonsplA]

When the Colts were finally able to actually beat the Pats in the post season and won their SB, their defense played at a very very high level for that post season run. When Sanders came back to that defense that year, it looked completely different and wasn't far from the defenses the Pats had when they won their SB's.

So the one time the Colts defense played well in the postseason, Manning won a championship. Hmmmm...I can't imagine how having a defense like that all long could have helped. The one year Brady had his offensive supporting cast like Manning...well he had an awful game against the Chargers in the AFCCG the Patriots only won because the Chargers injury-riddled offense was shut down and they lost to the Giants with their offense looking anything but historic in a game that was only close because the Giants offense was unable to score more than 3 points for the first three quarters of the game. What a striking coincidence.



Those INT's against the Steelers that year, against the Chargers in two straight seasons, and against the Pats as well. Brady has come up bigger in crucial moments in the post season and not made the BIG mistakes that Manning has.

He didn't have any interceptions against the Steelers. He only had two interceptions against the Chargers in the two combined games (both of which were balls tipped by his receivers). On the other hand, Brady has had what 6 interceptions in two playoff games against the Chargers? Oh but because the would be game ending interception was fumbled on the return in one year, and because the Chargers offense was too injured to find the end zone in another year, Brady somehow played better against the Chargers than Manning did?

What I find utterly remarkeable is how close Manning and Brady's numbers are (based on passer rating) in the postseason--only a 3 point difference--despite the fact that Brady has had the luxury of managing games with strong defensive support for the most part while Manning has found himself playing catch up from huge deficits a lot of the time (which we all know makes efficiency go down).

I also find it quite interesting that Brady's playoff numbers have gone down in recent years as he has improved as an individual but his defensive support in the postseason grew weaker. Very interesting.

[peytonsplA]

Now I get it, you want to play the "cherry pick your stats" argument.

I gave you a few stats already, and a lot of the stuff that you're asking you should already know if you're an avid fan in the NFL.

I already mentioned Brady's 4 SB appearances and 3 rings to Mannings one appearance and one ring while Brady beat Manning when it counted 3 different times and gave you quite a few "concrete" examples where Manning had poor performances and critical mistakes in the post season when it counted the most. But you want to turn this into a "who threw for more TD's" argument or "who threw for more yards" argument.

Did you even read what I said?? Look at Randy Moss with Dante Culpepper and Randall Cunningham. Look at Wes Welker with Matt Cassel. Look at Marvin Harrison without Manning. Look at Tom Brady before Randy Moss and Wes Welker. Look at Manning without Marvin Harrison. Look at Brandon Stokely without Manning. Look at Donte Stallworth without Brady. Get the picture?

And please explain to me how saying "Manning's running backs and offensive line were better" equates to showing me the awesome superiority of the Colts running game? Didn't I already mention that the Patriots running game has outranked the Colts running game on average during each quarterback's career? THAT is concrete.

[Blackmallard]

I already mentioned Brady's 4 SB appearances and 3 rings to Mannings one appearance and one ring while Brady beat Manning when it counted 3 different times and gave you quite a few "concrete" examples where Manning had poor performances and critical mistakes in the post season when it counted the most.

Manning and Brady have met in the playoffs three times so far and the Colts won one of those. The home team has won every game. They aren't as far apart as you think, all it really takes is another good playoff run by the Colts and Manning will be right in the same ballpark, particularly in that if they ever meet in the playoffs the Colts can even the score there 2-2.

Also, your "concrete" examples of Manning making mistakes were sort of misremembered since you were referencing INT's that did not happen, but certainly Brady has won more in the playoffs and won multiple titles so it doesn't really matter in the end to quibble over what happened in the Charger/Steeler games.

I definitely want to set the record straight on the playoff meetings though, Brady is up 2-1 not 3-1. Like was discussed in the NBA playoffs thread there's no coming back down 1-3.;)

[Texecutioner]

Manning and Brady have met in the playoffs three times so far and the Colts won one of those. The home team has won every game. They aren't as far apart as you think, all it really takes is another good playoff run by the Colts and Manning will be right in the same ballpark, particularly in that if they ever meet in the playoffs the Colts can even the score there 2-2.

Also, your "concrete" examples of Manning making mistakes were sort of misremembered since you were referencing INT's that did not happen, but certainly Brady has won more in the playoffs and won multiple titles so it doesn't really matter in the end to quibble over what happened in the Charger/Steeler games.

I definitely want to set the record straight on the playoff meetings though, Brady is up 2-1 not 3-1. Like was discussed in the NBA playoffs thread there's no coming back down 1-3.;)

Well I said before that "I thought" it was 3 and it might have been two for the record. I wasn't completely sure. And what INT's did I make up?

[BigBenCan7]

Those INT's against the Steelers that year, against the Chargers in two straight seasons

He didn't even throw one interception in two of the three games you just referenced.

[Texecutioner]

He didn't even throw one interception in two of the three games you just referenced.

He threw a BIG INT to Troy Polumolu that ended the game pretty much. They ended up calling it an incomplete pass and until this day was the worst call I've ever seen in any NFL game especially when the official got to review it. Polumolu caught the pass and fell to the ground and rolled around and right as he was getting up dropped it. I remember there being a ton of controversy after the game, because that non call by the official could have easily cost Pitt the game. It was a total INT though. Just another moment where Manning made a costly INT.

[peytonsplA]

He threw a BIG INT to Troy Polumolu that ended the game pretty much. They ended up calling it an incomplete pass and until this day was the worst call I've ever seen in any NFL game especially when the official got to review it. Polumolu caught the pass and fell to the ground and rolled around and right as he was getting up dropped it. I remember there being a ton of controversy after the game, because that non call by the official could have easily cost Pitt the game. It was a total INT though. Just another moment where Manning made a costly INT.

Except it wasn't counted as an interception and Polamalu could have just as easily missed the play.

But I guess Brady's 6 interceptions in two playoff games against the Chargers were not costly. Nor was his goal line interception against the Broncos that was returned the length of the field. Nor was his game ending interception against the Colts in the 2006 AFCCG that went nicely along with his game ending interception against the Colts during the regular season to put that game in the RCA Dome in the first place.

I guess it's worth mentioning that Brady has a multiple-interception playoff game in his last three consecutive postseasons. Now that's consistency even Peyton Manning cannot match.

[StevenSD]

Except it wasn't counted as an interception and Polamalu could have just as easily missed the play.

But I guess Brady's 6 interceptions in two playoff games against the Chargers were not costly. Nor was his goal line interception against the Broncos that was returned the length of the field. Nor was his game ending interception against the Colts in the 2006 AFCCG that went nicely along with his game ending interception against the Colts during the regular season to put that game in the RCA Dome in the first place.

I guess it's worth mentioning that Brady has a multiple-interception playoff game in his last three consecutive postseasons. Now that's consistency even Peyton Manning cannot match.

:lol2: i was waiting for someone to bring that up

[Texecutioner]

Except it wasn't counted as an interception and Polamalu could have just as easily missed the play.

But I guess Brady's 6 interceptions in two playoff games against the Chargers were not costly. Nor was his goal line interception against the Broncos that was returned the length of the field. Nor was his game ending interception against the Colts in the 2006 AFCCG that went nicely along with his game ending interception against the Colts during the regular season to put that game in the RCA Dome in the first place.

I guess it's worth mentioning that Brady has a multiple-interception playoff game in his last three consecutive postseasons. Now that's consistency even Peyton Manning cannot match.

Sorry, but 4 SB appearances and 3 rings to Manning's 1 is pretty telling.

[BigBenCan7]

They ended up calling it an incomplete pass

So what you're saying is that he didn't throw an interception?

[peytonsplA]

Sorry, but 4 SB appearances and 3 rings to Manning's 1 is pretty telling.

Yeah, pretty telling that defense wins championships, not offense, and that great coaching strategy and lines trump having the most talented skill players.

Funny how Brady hasn't won a championship since 2004 despite developing into a far superior quarterback compared to earlier in his career, isn't it? The thing of it is, his playoff stats have declined since then too. What a coincidence.

[Texecutioner]

Yeah, pretty telling that defense wins championships, not offense, and that great coaching strategy and lines trump having the most talented skill players.

Funny how Brady hasn't won a championship since 2004 despite developing into a far superior quarterback compared to earlier in his career, isn't it? The thing of it is, his playoff stats have declined since then too. What a coincidence.

You keep bringing up defense, but Manning had the better O line, and far superior weapons on offense. he had Marvin Harrison and Regie Wayne for god sakes, which were the best duofor years in the NFL and will probably both go down as HOF WR's. Edge just might have enough yards and TD's on his resume to make the HOF as well and some really good TE's to throw to. Don't try acting like the defense was the big thing that seperated the two.

If you really want to put it that way, I'd say that coaching was a much bigger difference in Brady having BB and Manning having Dungy. BB is the ultimate game planner, and no matter how many coordinators he's lost his team still looks no different. Brady makes the right efficient throws at the right times in that system. This is no knock on Dungy by any means either, but Dungy is no BB.

[Texecutioner]

So what you're saying is that he didn't throw an interception?

No I said the opposite. It was easily an INT no question. The refs simply tried to hand that game over to the Colts. It's one thing to miss a call in game playing action, but when you review it and still make the wrong call that was that obvious, then that ref has something up his sleeve, because when a player catches a ball and then falls down and rolls around a few times and drops the ball as he is getting up, it's a catch. As a Steelers fan, you should remember all of the controversy after that game behind that play, and how the refs name was all over the news for that as well. Cowher complained about it pretty bad actually. But of course your hatred for the Patriots would never let you admit to that in this discussion since it involves Tom Brady in what we're discussing.

[BigBenCan7]

No I said the opposite. It was easily an INT no question. The refs simply tried to hand that game over to the Colts. It's one thing to miss a call in game playing action, but when you review it and still make the wrong call that was that obvious, then that ref has something up his sleeve, because when a player catches a ball and then falls down and rolls around a few times and drops the ball as he is getting up, it's a catch. As a Steelers fan, you should remember all of the controversy after that game behind that play, and how the refs name was all over the news for that as well. Cowher complained about it pretty bad actually. But of course your hatred for the Patriots would never let you admit to that in this discussion since it involves Tom Brady in what we're discussing.

You're making yourself look ridiculous. If you go back and read my posts on Tom Brady (which I'm sure you won't, because you hate doing any sort of research on what you're talking about), you'll notice that I've supported him just about every time, including debates between he and Manning. I've been saying for a while that Brady is the best quarterback in the NFL, and maybe ever.

And as for the actual topic at hand, the pass was an incompletion, go look at his stat line. No one claims that the Kings are the 2002 Western Conference Champions, because they didn't win it, just like Manning didn't throw an interception in the Steelers game, or in one of the Chargers games you referred to.

And it was Joey Porter who complained about the call, not Bill Cowher. Seriously Tex, you're slipping, there wasn't one valid point in that entire wall of text.

[Texecutioner]

You're making yourself look ridiculous. If you go back and read my posts on Tom Brady (which I'm sure you won't, because you hate doing any sort of research on what you're talking about), you'll notice that I've supported him just about every time, including debates between he and Manning. I've been saying for a while that Brady is the best quarterback in the NFL, and maybe ever.

And as for the actual topic at hand, the pass was an incompletion, go look at his stat line. No one claims that the Kings are the 2002 Western Conference Champions, because they didn't win it, just like Manning didn't throw an interception in the Steelers game, or in one of the Chargers games you referred to.

And it was Joey Porter who complained about the call, not Bill Cowher. Seriously Tex, you're slipping, there wasn't one valid point in that entire wall of text.

Just because the refs bailed him and the COlts out and called it an incompletion doesn't change the fact that he threw what "was" an INT. Like I said, it was one of the worst calls I had ever seen. I almost turned the game off after that. There was a ton of controversy after that game and the official's first and last name was all over the places that same week. Just because the officials cheated the Steelers on that call doesn't change the fact that Manning threw a ball that Polumolu took out of the air that set the Steelers up to close the game. It happened, and every Steeler and coach that complained about how the officials changed that call was completely correct, and Cohwer did complain. Just because you don't remember or never hear him complain doesn't mean that it didn't happen.

As far as the Chargers game, I could have sworn that he threw an INT in at least one of those games. If I'm wrong I'm wrong and maybe my memory was incorrect. If so, that is fine.

And if you've supported Brady like you say, I clearly don't recall that. Maybe you have, but all I remember for the most part was you calling them cheaters and bashing them for the most part.

And don't try saying that I don't look things up when I do it all of the time. For example remember last week when you said that you've never whined and cried about the Patriots cheating, and I cited like a dozen quotes where you did, where you completely started posturing after that and tried changing the subject? If you want to talk about someone slipping, I'd say that you've been on ice skates for a while dude.

[BigBenCan7]

Just because the refs bailed him and the COlts out and called it an incompletion doesn't change the fact that he threw what "was" an INT. Like I said, it was one of the worst calls I had ever seen. I almost turned the game off after that. There was a ton of controversy after that game and the official's first and last name was all over the places that same week. Just because the officials cheated the Steelers on that call doesn't change the fact that Manning threw a ball that Polumolu took out of the air that set the Steelers up to close the game. It happened, and every Steeler and coach that complained about how the officials changed that call was completely correct, and Cohwer did complain. Just because you don't remember or never hear him complain doesn't mean that it didn't happen.

Sorry, Tex, but you're wrong. You are trying to crucify Manning for throwing interceptions in clutch moments, and you're trying to overturn calls to make your point. What happened happened, and it was ruled an incompletion, therefor, Manning did not throw an interception in the Steelers game.

And Cowher did not complain about the call, except for maybe during the review on the field, in fact, he voiced an opinion similar to what I'm saying about the play.

I don’t know. If that’s the ruling then we have to live with it.
Official site of the Pittsburgh Steelers - Article (http://news.steelers.com/article/61285/)


As far as the Chargers game, I could have sworn that he threw an INT in at least one of those games. If I'm wrong I'm wrong and maybe my memory was incorrect. If so, that is fine.

Yes, in one he threw an interception. You said he did it in two straight years against the Chargers. He didn't throw an interception this year and posted a rating of 90.5 in a loss. Doesn't exactly help your claim that he had more help than Brady, especially when you consider the ratio of their win percentage to passer rating. When Tom Brady's passer rating drops below 80 in the playoffs, the Patriots have a 71% winning percentage. When Manning's passer rating drops below 100, the Colts have a 33% win percentage.

But at the same time, the only four wins he has when his rating is below 100 came in his 4 game run to the Super Bowl Championship in which he posted a playoff passer rating of 70.5. So it's not like his success didn't come without help.


And if you've supported Brady like you say, I clearly don't recall that. Maybe you have, but all I remember for the most part was you calling them cheaters and bashing them for the most part.

I'm a big fan of Tom Brady's.


And don't try saying that I don't look things up when I do it all of the time. For example remember last week when you said that you've never whined and cried about the Patriots cheating, and I cited like a dozen quotes where you did, where you completely started posturing after that and tried changing the subject? If you want to talk about someone slipping, I'd say that you've been on ice skates for a while dude. [/B]

Either you have a loose definition of whining and crying, or you need some serious help in reading comprehension. Either way, there's no point in discussing that any further with you, because you're not budging from it. People will see what they want to.

[peytonsplA]

You keep bringing up defense, but Manning had the better O line, and far superior weapons on offense. he had Marvin Harrison and Regie Wayne for god sakes, which were the best duofor years in the NFL and will probably both go down as HOF WR's. Edge just might have enough yards and TD's on his resume to make the HOF as well and some really good TE's to throw to. Don't try acting like the defense was the big thing that seperated the two.

If you really want to put it that way, I'd say that coaching was a much bigger difference in Brady having BB and Manning having Dungy. BB is the ultimate game planner, and no matter how many coordinators he's lost his team still looks no different. Brady makes the right efficient throws at the right times in that system. This is no knock on Dungy by any means either, but Dungy is no BB.

And yet it's defense than wins championships and not wide receivers, so...defense doesn't seem relevant to the question of championshps?

Once again, I'd like to point out that you keep forgetting how much of the Colts receiving yards and low sack totals can be attributed to Manning. You just take it for granted that Manning's offensive line gives up fewer sacks because they are so much better than Brady's, and you take it for granted that Manning's receivers pick up more yards because they are so much better than Brady's.

So why do receivers see their production and efficiency increase so much with Manning while receivers see their production and/or efficency remain relatively the same with Brady?

Why did Manning and Brady take the same number of sacks in 2007 when Brady had an unbelievable amount of time in the pocket and three offensive linemen make the pro bowl, while Manning on the other hand had a rookie starting at left tackle after the unexpected retirement of Tarik Glenn and saw his offensive line and receivers ravaged by injury midway through the season?

Once again, I have to ask why do you only focus on starting wide receivers and completely ignore the receivers behind them? Why do you only focus on the pass catching aspects of being a tight end, and completely ignore the blocking side of it? Why do you completely ignore all the running backs besides the starting running back? Why do you insist on looking at feature backs instead of actual running games?

But mostly, I've still wondering how on earth you could bring up playoff games against the Chargers in favor of Brady. Manning had ratings of 90.4 and 97.7 in those two games, averaging 7.4 and 8.4 YPA, with a combined interception rate of 2.2%.

Brady on the other hand had ratings of 57.6 and 66.7 in his two games, averaging 5.5 and 6.3 YPA, with a combined interception rate of 7.1%.

Yes, three times as many picks and more than three times the interception rate...but you want to talk about Manning's interceptions against the Chargers.

[Sascha]

And yet it's defense than wins championships and not wide receivers, so...defense doesn't seem relevant to the question of championshps?


Never was that more evident than during the last 2 Super Bowls Manning and Brady have played. Manning's Colts always had the offense to match the 2007 Patriots, and never won a Championship because the defense didn't measure up. Then comes the championship year, and what to we remember about that team's playoff run? The defense.

The one year Brady and his offense set records, the defense and offensive line happened to play below the level of their previous championship years, and they lose in the title game, and should have lost to the Chargers prior to that.

But anyway, what happened to building your QB? :D

Arm Strength: Jay Cutler
Accuracy: Peyton Manning (consistently over 65%)
Touch: Kurt Warner (as of late, not the Giant years) or Drew Brees
Toughness: Tough one, either Roethlisberger or Rivers
Clutch: Roethlisberger
Size: Roethlisberger
Awareness: Peyton Manning
Intelligence: Drew Brees
Accolades: Peyton Manning

[Texecutioner]

And yet it's defense than wins championships and not wide receivers, so...defense doesn't seem relevant to the question of championshps?

I'm so sick of hearing people trying to simply use the defense as a cop out in this discussion. I'm also so sick of hearing that stupid statement of DEFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS. That statement is so freaking over blown, I swear. What wins championships is a BALANCED team with a winning formula and yeah, defense will typically play a big role in that. One thing I always noticed about those Pats teams was when their defense didn't show up, their offense did. They used to win games all of the time, when their defense didn't show up.

It's pretty funny how a few of you guys just point to the Pats defense and act like that was the big difference, but refuse to act like the weapons Manning had on offense to work with under a better O line, didn't have anything to do with what a potent offense the Colts had which made them a much stronger team. Every team plays to their strengths and weaknesses and used their formula for winning and game planned with the clock and with possessions to win games. Tom BRady has been the ultimate clock manager, and clutch player when you need him to control a drive down the field. For years Brady never tried to be this gunslinger or highlight reel player, he just did what it took to win and did it better than anybody.

And people forget about how many interchangable WR's ran through NE for years while they've been winning SB's and almost getting there. ANd through it all Brady has still had great chemistry with all of them, and what has any of the guys done that left NE with other QB's? And the minute that Brady finally got some real talent back there at WR, he put together the best offense of all time and the best season for any QB in history. Manning has had those same two WR's plus Stokley for a few seasons to constantly work that same chemistry year after year and didn't have to work through any major changes.

And hell Brady made his first SB run in his first year of playing where he was just thrown in there and had to make a bunch of clutch drives that entire season and in the post season and the SB. That was remarkable for a guy that was basically like a rookie being thrown in there.

By the time Brady retires he'll most likely go down as the best QB of all time as long as he comes back from injury and goes back to his former self.

[peytonsplA]

I'm so sick of hearing people trying to simply use the defense as a cop out in this discussion. I'm also so sick of hearing that stupid statement of DEFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS. That statement is so freaking over blown, I swear. What wins championships is a BALANCED team with a winning formula and yeah, defense will typically play a big role in that.


Not typically, always. You can't be a balanced team with a winning formula without quality defensive play. You certainly cannot be a dynasty without quality defensive play.



It's pretty funny how a few of you guys just point to the Pats defense and act like that was the big difference, but refuse to act like the weapons Manning had on offense to work with under a better O line, didn't have anything to do with what a potent offense the Colts had which made them a much stronger team.


If we are talking about the potency of each respective offense, then it makes perfect sense to focus on wide receivers and such. You however were talking about championships, so the focus clearly should be on defense and coaching strategy.



And people forget about how many interchangable WR's ran through NE for years while they've been winning SB's and almost getting there. ANd through it all Brady has still had great chemistry with all of them, and what has any of the guys done that left NE with other QB's?


If you are talking about winning championships, then not much; but if you are talking about indidual production and/or efficiency, then pretty much the same thing they were doing with Brady. Look closely at the numbers of these guys you presume Brady "made" and you will notice that either their total production, their efficiency (production per pass thrown to them), or both was as good or better with other quarterbacks.

Do you not realize that there have been plenty of other quarterbacks to put up good but not great numbers without the wide receivers? McNabb, Hasselback, and Green all come to mind. Clearly there is a lot more to the passing game than wide receivers, and the mindset that Brady hasn't had a particularly good offensive line simply doesn't wash.



And hell Brady made his first SB run in his first year of playing where he was just thrown in there and had to make a bunch of clutch drives that entire season and in the post season and the SB. That was remarkable for a guy that was basically like a rookie being thrown in there.


Bringing that up just goes further to invalidate your whole championships argument. Do you think Brady was a better quarterback in his first year as a starter back in 2001 than he was from 2005-2007 when he earned an MVP and first and second all-pro team selections?

And no, first year starters with a year or more in the league under their belt are not basically rookies. That's two completey different situations.

[peytonsplA]

But anyway, what happened to building your QB? :D


Well in light of the recent debate, how about the following?

Pass Protection: Donovan McNabb
Run Blocking: Eli Manning
Screen Blocking: Tom Brady

Outside Wide Receivers: Kurt Warner
Slot Receivers: Tom Brady
Tight End Receivers: Kerry Collins
Backfield Receivers: Donovan McNabb

Defense: Ben Roethlsiberger
Special Teams: Trent Edwards

[Sascha]

I'm so sick of hearing people trying to simply use the defense as a cop out in this discussion. I'm also so sick of hearing that stupid statement of DEFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS. That statement is so freaking over blown, I swear. What wins championships is a BALANCED team with a winning formula and yeah, defense will typically play a big role in that.

To be fair, I haven't researched the stat since 2002, so this is just from what happened up to and including that Super Bowl. That game had a lot of hype because it was the first time the NFL's top offense (Raiders) met the NFL's top defense (Bucs), but it was the 10th time in Super Bowl history that a top three offense faced a top three defense. The record? 9-0 defense, and obviously the Bucs improved on that record. That's a pretty indicative statement that defense indeed does win championships.

You want to tell me the 2000 Ravens were a balanced team? They went 4 games without an offensive TD and won the Super Bowl.


It's pretty funny how a few of you guys just point to the Pats defense and act like that was the big difference, but refuse to act like the weapons Manning had on offense to work with under a better O line, didn't have anything to do with what a potent offense the Colts had which made them a much stronger team.

I see one flaw in this statement. Yes, the Pats of the early 00's certainly had the better defense, and the Colts certainly had the better skill players. Anyone who wants to argue that needs to stop watching football altogether. But your consistent stating that the Colts' O'line was better than the Patriots', is suspect at best. New England was renowned for their offensive line, which really didn't crack until 2007, and even then it was only overwhelmed by the best of the best defensive lines.

By the time Brady retires he'll most likely go down as the best QB of all time as long as he comes back from injury and goes back to his former self.

Hell, there are plenty of people who already think that, and I can accept their feelings. Personally, I don't think Aikman was a bett QB than Young, Elway, Marino or Favre despite having more rings, and I don't think Brady was a better QB than Manning, despite the difference in championships.

[Texecutioner]

To be fair, I haven't researched the stat since 2002, so this is just from what happened up to and including that Super Bowl. That game had a lot of hype because it was the first time the NFL's top offense (Raiders) met the NFL's top defense (Bucs), but it was the 10th time in Super Bowl history that a top three offense faced a top three defense. The record? 9-0 defense, and obviously the Bucs improved on that record. That's a pretty indicative statement that defense indeed does win championships.

You want to tell me the 2000 Ravens were a balanced team? They went 4 games without an offensive TD and won the Super Bowl.

These are two ridiculous examples Rudi. These are two teams in history that won with all defense. It was remarkable none the less, but all of the other teams have pretty much been balanced teams.

The statement that defense wins chamionships has only happened with the Bucs and the Ravens, and look at how many great defenses the Ravens have had since then? Where have they gone? They've been cut short year after year when they made the post season because they had no offense.

You've got to have both and be balanced. The Rams had that great offense that got them a SB win, the Niners were destroying teams with their offense for years. They had a pretty good D and all, but it was a lot more on their offense as to why they were so successful. I could use plenty of other teams as examples that offense wins championships, but in the end a balanced team wins championships.




[B] I see one flaw in this statement. Yes, the Pats of the early 00's certainly had the better defense, and the Colts certainly had the better skill players. Anyone who wants to argue that needs to stop watching football altogether. But your consistent stating that the Colts' O'line was better than the Patriots', is suspect at best. New England was renowned for their offensive line, which really didn't crack until 2007, and even then it was only overwhelmed by the best of the best defensive lines.

The Colts have had pretty much the best pass protection of any team I can think in this entire decade. Why do you think Manning has been so injury free. Manning has barely gotten touched in this decade. Their O line has had Edge as a RB for years where he was getting practically 1,400 yards every season and a lot in the passing game as well. Then when he leaves Addai starts lighting it up.

The NE O line didn't get great really until they had that perfect season where they lost in the SB. At that point their O line was up there as the best or one of the best.



[B] Hell, there are plenty of people who already think that, and I can accept their feelings. Personally, I don't think Aikman was a bett QB than Young, Elway, Marino or Favre despite having more rings, and I don't think Brady was a better QB than Manning, despite the difference in championships.

I think Aikman is another bad example. No one out there other than some wacko Cowboys fans would consider Aikman better than Marino or Elway. You might want to consider using Montana as an example here. He had 4 SB rings and was probably the best of all time until Brady retires and becomes that, but some consider Elway and Marino better even though they don't have the rings that Montana did.

Manning has always been more of a gun slinger type while Brady has been more poised and efficient. Look at their best seasons where Manning through for 49 TD's and Brady threw for 50. Brady still topped him there when he finally for the first time in his career had the play making WR's that Manning has had. From the moment that Brady got talent like that he automatically busted out 50 TD's to only 8 INT's and led his team to a perfect season other than that SB loss that Samuel totally screwed up. Manning had 6 more TO's than Brady in his 49 TD season with his 5 fumbles to Brady's one fumble. The last season Brady played was the best season of any QB of all time.

[peytonsplA]

Hell, there are plenty of people who already think that, and I can accept their feelings. Personally, I don't think Aikman was a bett QB than Young, Elway, Marino or Favre despite having more rings, and I don't think Brady was a better QB than Manning, despite the difference in championships.

And let's not forget about the Blonde Bomber, Terry Bradshaw.

The thing is, the common passing stat that correlates best with winning is YPA. If you rank the following group of quarterbacks by career postseason YPA, you will notice a very interesting trend.

Bradshaw, Roethlsiberger, Montana, Aikman, Elway, Manning, Favre, Young, Brady, and Marino.

There is almost a perfect trend there of higher career postseason YPA resulting in more championships, with Tom Brady being the one major hiccup. He's career postseason YPA ties him with Dan Marino, but his championships put him with Aikman just below only Bradshaw and Montana.

The only other excpetion to the rule is Ben Roethlsiberger, whose career postseason YPA will have to fall as his career continues or else he might just have to win himself two more championships like that other Steeler.

Not only does defense lead to championships, but I'd say defense makes passing in the postseason easier too since you are managing leads instead of clawing back from big deficits. So why does Tom Brady have three championships but the career postseason YPA of the NFL postseason's red-headed step child, Dan Marino?

[peytonsplA]

You've got to have both and be balanced. The Rams had that great offense that got them a SB win, the Niners were destroying teams with their offense for years. They had a pretty good D and all, but it was a lot more on their offense as to why they were so successful. I could use plenty of other teams as examples that offense wins championships, but in the end a balanced team wins championships.


The Rams also had quality defenses in 1999 and 2001 when they won and lost Super Bowls. In 2000, when their defense sucked, they barely made the playoffs and were quickly sent home packing.

Kurt Warner was the same quarterback the entire time though.

The 49ers under Joe Montana consistently fielded quality defenses as well. Their play in the postseason was particulary good when they were winning their multiple championships.

Guess how Joe Montana did in the postseason when the Giants put up a bunch of points on his team though?

You are right that balance is ultimatley the key, but you have to have quality defense to be balanced and when all things are equal, defense does win out over offense in the postseason. It's generally much easier to game plan against a great offense and neutralize its strengths than to do the same against a great defense.

Defense wins championships, not quarterbacks. Quarterbacks win regular season games.



The Colts have had pretty much the best pass protection of any team I can think in this entire decade. Why do you think Manning has been so injury free. Manning has barely gotten touched in this decade. Their O line has had Edge as a RB for years where he was getting practically 1,400 yards every season and a lot in the passing game as well. Then when he leaves Addai starts lighting it up.

The NE O line didn't get great really until they had that perfect season where they lost in the SB. At that point their O line was up there as the best or one of the best.


The Patritos offensive line was widely regarded as one of the league's very best in 2003 and 2004 when they won back to back championships. They were also very good in 2006, which is big part of the reason why Brady was able to produce with Reche Caldwell and Jabar Gaffney in the first place. Any wide receiver can get open eventually if given enough time.

Your assumption about the Colts pass protection is clearly based on Manning's low sack totals year after year rather than actual time and space afforded to him in the pocket. It's hard to sack a quarterback if he throws the ball before you can get there.

Why do you think Manning and Brady were both sacked the same number of times in 2007 even though Brady had three pro bowl offensive line giving him an unbelievable amount of time and Peyton Manning's offensive line was at times without both of its starting offensive tackles and one or both of their primary backups, all of which was on top of already losing their long time LT Tarik Glenn unexpectedly to reitrement before training camp opened, which forced a rookie who was not intended to start into the starting lineup at its most difficult position?

Why do you think the Colts had the lowest adjusted sack rate in 2008 (a stat by the Football Outsiders that considers down and distance to give a better picture of sacks) even though they were without both starting guards from prior years (Lilja to injury and Scott to free agency) and were playing at times without three and even four of the intended starters for the season? Even though they matched up at least one backup linemen (typically a late round rookie) directly against a pro bowl defensive linemen in their first four games of the regular season? And in one game against the Vikings four backup linemen against three pro bowl defensive linemen?

[Sascha]

These are two ridiculous examples Rudi. These are two teams in history that won with all defense. It was remarkable none the less, but all of the other teams have pretty much been balanced teams.

I wasn't really referring to those two teams as examples. The example I used that was somehow glossed over was that a top three defense going up against a top three offense in the Super Bowl was 10-0 after 2002. That's teh example, not the Bucs or Ravens. In fact, I'm pretty sure the Ravens aren't even a part of that list because the Giants weren't a top three offense in 2000, but I could be wrong.




The statement that defense wins chamionships has only happened with the Bucs and the Ravens, and look at how many great defenses the Ravens have had since then? Where have they gone?

It doesn't matter where they've gone, that was never the question. The point is, when a team gets to a championship game, it's a pretty safe bet to go with the more defensive team.


The Rams had that great offense that got them a SB win, the Niners were destroying teams with their offense for years.

Sure, the '99 Rams are an exception to the group, but then again, look what happened in the Super Bowl, when faced with a fairly decent defense. The won the game by a yard, and they only beat the Bucs in the NFCCG on the strength of their own defense. The only other Rams team that ever even contended was the one where Lovie Smith had the defense running on all cylinders. The rest of the Rams teams never really contended in the playoffs.

The 49ers are one of those balanced teams you've been talking about. They've always had a defense to match the offense.


I could use plenty of other teams as examples that offense wins championships, but in the end a balanced team wins championships.

Again, I am merely referring to the occasions were a top offense met a top defense, not a top offense against an average defense.


The Colts have had pretty much the best pass protection of any team I can think in this entire decade. Why do you think Manning has been so injury free. Manning has barely gotten touched in this decade.

I'm not arguing that the Colts' line has been great, just stating that the Pats have been their match. Also, Peyton is responsible for a lot of why he doesn't get touched often. By the way, Brady was right there with PEyton in not missing games and not getting touched.


The NE O line didn't get great really until they had that perfect season where they lost in the SB. At that point their O line was up there as the best or one of the best.

Actually, I would argue that point. I think that was the season, and especially the post-season, the PAts o-line for the first time showed some cracks and it didn't improve much last year.


You might want to consider using Montana as an example here.

I was using Aikman and the others as an example becasue they were closer to the same era. Montana was slightly ahead of them, even though you could certainly place Marion and Elway in with Montana. Montana, in my opinion, was a QB of the highest caliber who won a bunch of rings. I don't think that Brady, Aikman, or Bradshaw are quite of the same caliber as Montana, but I do believe that Marino, Elway, and Manning are.



Manning has always been more of a gun slinger type while Brady has been more poised and efficient. Look at their best seasons where Manning through for 49 TD's and Brady threw for 50. Brady still topped him there when he finally for the first time in his career had the play making WR's that Manning has had. From the moment that Brady got talent like that he automatically busted out 50 TD's to only 8 INT's and led his team to a perfect season other than that SB loss that Samuel totally screwed up.

Now who's cherry-picking stats? Peyton has consistently thrown at a better completion percentage, earned a higher QB rating and thrown about the same amount of INT's per season. Seems pretty poised and efficient to me. In fact, I may even go as far as saying Manning is the most efficient QB of the Bowl era.


Manning had 6 more TO's than Brady in his 49 TD season with his 5 fumbles to Brady's one fumble. The last season Brady played was the best season of any QB of all time.

Could you clear that one up a bit more for me? Brady had 8 INT's in '07, and Manning had 10 INT's in '04. Brady had 4 lost fumbles in '07 and Manning had 1 lost fumble in '04. That makes the tally Brady - 12 TO's to Manning's 11 TO's.

Considering that Manning had more than 80 fewer attempts in '04 and threw for only about 250 less yards and had a HIGHER QB rating (121-118), I'd say the best season by a QB of all time is very much debatable. Of course, as far as that debate goes, I still think Marino deserves that title. The stats he put up in his first full season were unreal.

[Blackmallard]

Manning has always been more of a gun slinger type while Brady has been more poised and efficient. Look at their best seasons where Manning through for 49 TD's and Brady threw for 50. Brady still topped him there when he finally for the first time in his career had the play making WR's that Manning has had. From the moment that Brady got talent like that he automatically busted out 50 TD's to only 8 INT's and led his team to a perfect season other than that SB loss that Samuel totally screwed up. Manning had 6 more TO's than Brady in his 49 TD season with his 5 fumbles to Brady's one fumble. The last season Brady played was the best season of any QB of all time.

Your numbers are all screwy. Manning had greater efficiency than Brady on a per attempt and per game basis in every efficiency category that there is, including committing fewer total turnovers. The only reason Brady ended up with more touchdowns and yards was that Manning only played 15 games.

[peytonsplA]

Manning has always been more of a gun slinger type while Brady has been more poised and efficient.

You can't really categorize Manning like that. Favre and Elway were gun slingers. Manning racks up the numbers and is efficient while doing it.



Brady still topped him there when he finally for the first time in his career had the play making WR's that Manning has had.

I can't help but laugh when you imply that Brady's situation in 2007 was merely on par or comparable to Manning's situation all these years. Manning never had three offesive linemen make the pro bowl. Manning never had a freak of nature like Randy Moss who could simply blow by safety help and outjump his coverage for the ball, including on badly underthrown balls. Manning never had short yardage guys like Welker and Faulk who could consistently pick up first downs after the catch to move the chains when defenses played everyone back. Manning never had a wide receiver like Jabar Gaffney as a FOURTH wide receiver.

Additionally, Manning didn't spend his career with strong support from his defense and special teams, which got Brady back out on the field quicker and in better field position and kept the pressure off by not allowing too many points.

Both Cunningham and Culpepper already had moster years with Randy Moss. It's ridiculous to argue that Brady simply needed "play making" WRs like Manning has always had.

As for the idea that Brady's season was better than Manning's, Manning had Brady beat in virtually every area besides the fact that he didn't play as much because his team wasn't hell bent on breaking records and demoralizing opponents for the entire season. All you have to do is use Manning's first playoff game against the Broncos in place of his final regular season game against the same Broncos and voila.

I can only image the numbers Manning would have produced if he was gunning for the record all season long, as opposed to trying to overcome some very bad defense and a running game that had trouble around the goal line just to make the playoffs.

[BAKAJ]

The argument that Brady played the whole game is a weak one, you play the game for 4 quaters not 2 or 3... Also pats offense put up monster numbers in 1st half and 2nd half they just played more balance offense in 2007...

Pats offense was better then the 2004 colts so no need to compare Brady and Manning... we all know who was the general of the 2007 pats offense!

[peytonsplA]

The argument that Brady played the whole game is a weak one, you play the game for 4 quaters not 2 or 3... Also pats offense put up monster numbers in 1st half and 2nd half they just played more balance offense in 2007...

Pats offense was better then the 2004 colts so no need to compare Brady and Manning... we all know who was the general of the 2007 pats offense!

I'm sorry, but whether one team was going for it on fourth down just to put more points on the board late in games that were already well decided is completely relevant. How many points did the Patriots beat the Vikings by?

[Sway29]

I'm sorry, but whether one team was going for it on fourth down just to put more points on the board late in games that were already well decided is completely relevant. How many points did the Patriots beat the Vikings by?

0... they never played the vikings that year??? now they did beat the bills by 46 and the skins by 45 which might be a bit much...

[BAKAJ]

Yea Im sorry by if its 4 and 1 or inches why not go for it and waste more time of the clock... Thats what BB did many times... and most of those tds were running by scrubs rbs...

[BigBenCan7]

0... they never played the vikings that year??? now they did beat the bills by 46 and the skins by 45 which might be a bit much...

He was talking about how many more points the 2007 Patriots scored than the 1998 Vikings, and the Patriots scored about 2.1 more points per game.

[peytonsplA]

He was talking about how many more points the 2007 Patriots scored than the 1998 Vikings, and the Patriots scored about 2.1 more points per game.

Yeah, that's what I meant. I should have been more clear. I got off my lazy arse and looked it up. It was 33 points (or 2.0625 points per game to be precise).

So the question becomes, could the Vikings have scored five more touchdowns over the course of the season had they gone for it on fourth down and otherwise pressed for scores when other teams would have been just running out the clock in those kinds of situations or would the Patriots have scored five fewer touchdowns over the course of the season had they not.

Both offenses scored a ton of points either way, but the point is things like that will tip the scales just like Brady's 2.5 games worth of additional pass attempts tipped the scales for him in the single season touchdown record.

That's why I don't put a whole lot of emphasis on records of that nature. If Brady had his season first in 2004 and Manning had his in 2007, Manning probably would have found a way to one up him by a touchdown and it wouldn't really make a difference either way. Both threw a ton of touchdowns and both were helped by unnaturally big seasons for passing league wide.

For single seasons, I'll still give Marino his props for his 5,000 yards and 48 touchdowns back well before anyone even came close.

And unlike Manning and Brady, he came pretty close to matching the feat again two seasons later. Those two still have time, but I'm not betting on either doing that.

[peytonsplA]

Yea Im sorry by if its 4 and 1 or inches why not go for it and waste more time of the clock... Thats what BB did many times... and most of those tds were running by scrubs rbs...

That's not a fair characterization. In the second game against the Dolphins, Brady tried to pass on 4th and 8 from the Miami 26 yard line up 28-7 in the 4th quarter. Why not just take the field goal? If there was any legitimate fear of a Dolphins comeback, that would have been the sensible move anyway.

In that case however, Brady was sacked and fumbled to turn the ball over to the Dolphins.

It's pretty obvious that the Patriots spent that season going out of their way to run up scores and break records. Right or wrong doesn't even really matter, it's simply a matter of whether or not they did it and what affect that has on their final season tallies.

[l.a. no-teamers]

Brady is a better playoff QB, Manning is a better regular season QB. I realize that isn't mind blowing analysis on my part, but sometimes things need to be broken down simpler

[peytonsplA]

Brady is a better playoff QB, Manning is a better regular season QB. I realize that isn't mind blowing analysis on my part, but sometimes things need to be broken down simpler

I think you are on the right track but the answer might be even simpler: the Colts are traditionally built for the regular season and the Patriots are traditionally built for the playoffs. That looks to be changing though, so it will be interesting to see how that plays out.