Manning vs. Brady Debate

[ajzepp]

when the pat won against the Rams (the #1 offense) in 2001 they were the 23rd ranked defense.

 

You can blame Drew Bledsoe for that

[eball]

In my opinion there is no debate. If you have the option of selecting either QB, are you EVER not going to select Peyton? I'm not discounting Brady's HOF statistics, but he has had the better coach and better supporting cast throughout his career.

 

Manning is capable of leading a very mediocre team (with mediocre coaching) to within a whisker of a championship.

Edited June 9, 2011 by eball

[San Jose Bills Fan]

According to veteran receiver Derrick Mason, it's not even close.

 

"What player do I kick off a team and it changes that team dramatically? I only know one player and it’s Peyton Manning,” Mason said. “You take Tom Brady off New England they showed that they can go 11-5. Now you take Peyton Manning off the Colts I don’t know where that teams goes offensively.”

 

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/06/28/derrick-mason-peyton-manning-is-the-nfls-best-player-hands-down/

[hammie65]

Up until Brady went down with the knee injury I was neutral on this debate (and I'm a #18 and Colts fan) but after they went 11-5 with a QB who hadn't played since high school (as I've read), and when the Colts sucked eggs when they put Painter in when they didn't try to go for the perfect season, I'm convinced it shows that for Brady it is more the system and for Peyton it is more his skills. I truly believe #18 could be pretty successful on any team while #12 would fade into obscurity. I'm afraid the rings difference will always make it mute (even though Brady fans would still say he's better than Bradshaw in the same argument).

[eball]

Up until Brady went down with the knee injury I was neutral on this debate (and I'm a #18 and Colts fan) but after they went 11-5 with a QB who hadn't played since high school (as I've read), and when the Colts sucked eggs when they put Painter in when they didn't try to go for the perfect season, I'm convinced it shows that for Brady it is more the system and for Peyton it is more his skills. I truly believe #18 could be pretty successful on any team while #12 would fade into obscurity. I'm afraid the rings difference will always make it mute (even though Brady fans would still say he's better than Bradshaw in the same argument).

What? I can't hear you; you must be on moot.

[Alphadawg7]

Interesting comparison between Manning & Brady and reasons why Manning is number 1.

 

Throughout Brady's career he has had the advantage of playing with some pretty good defenses whearas Manning has been handicapped and therefore forced to compensate for a crap defense.

 

Brady Career Average

9 Seasons 2001-2007,2009-2010.

New England NFL Offensive Average Rank 6.3 in Points Scored, 10.4 in Yards For.

Points Scored Per Game 26.6

New England NFL Defense Average Rank 6.9 in Points Against 15.0 in Yards Against.

Points Against Per Game 17.8

Average Margin of Victory 8.8

23 4th Quarter Comebacks and 32 Game Winning Drives

 

Manning Career Average

13 Seasons 1998-2010

Indianapolis NFL Offensive Average Rank 6.1 in Points Scored, 5.7 in Yards For.

Points Scored Per Game 26.1

Indianapolis NFL Defensive Average Rank 15.5 in Points Against, 17.4 in Yards Against.

Points Against Per Game 21.4

Average Margin of Victory 4.7

35 4th Quarter Comebacks and 46 Game Winning Drives

 

Conclusion: Manning has had to move the ball much greater distances to score an equivalent number of points. Additionally Manning has been subject to closer games which has exposed him to more pressure situations and having to come from behind more often than Brady.

 

 

No offense, but your logic is greatly flawed. Here is why:

 

1. You down play Brady's success because of a better defensive cast, yet you make no account the substantially better offensive cast Manning has had, which just happens to be on the same side of the ball both players are on given they are QB's. Brady has 3 SB's with receivers, running backs, and TE's that would struggle to make the roster in INDY, let alone start. Yes, defense helps win games, no denying that. However, Manning had the much more talented offense for the bulk of his career and yet Brady puts up similar numbers and even averages more points per game, and considering your argument that Manning has to score more, that further strengthens Brady's case.

 

3. Which brings me to the next point...Brady averages a half point more per game, yet your argument is about how Manning had to produce more being his defense is weaker. So if Manning is having to pass and attack more, shouldn't his scoring average be higher, especially considering the substantially better offensive players Manning has had (Edge, Harrison, Wayne, Clark, etc.)? I mean, Harrison and Wayne are destined for the HOF, probably Clark too if he keeps producing like he has a few more years, and Edge is a candidate too. Brady didn't get any real talent on his offense until 2007, after he won 3 SB's.

 

4. Manning has for the bulk of his career been a guy who's play decreased in the playoffs and he has not been a stellar post season QB. Prior to the SB run, all the talk was about his personal post season struggles. Yes, he pulled it all together for the SB, but in most seasons he has not been at the same level in the post season as he was in the regular season. Brady's post season resume is better from a team stand point and an individual stand point and has proven to be a winner even when a large under dog.

 

5. You point out the more 4th qtr comebacks and more game winning drives for Manning, but fail to point out its only because Manning has played 13 full seasons to Bradys 9. If you average them out, the both essentially average 2.5 4th qtr comebacks a season and 3.5 game winning drives a season.

 

Some one else said this and was spot on...if you want to win a Fantasy Football game, Manning slightly edges out Brady. If you want to win the SB, Brady is the proven winner who just wins games. Brady has done more with less in his career, and for me, that's the difference.

Edited June 28, 2011 by Alphadawg7

[RyanC883]

The Brady water-slide video says it all.

[Alphadawg7]

According to veteran receiver Derrick Mason, it's not even close.

 

"What player do I kick off a team and it changes that team dramatically? I only know one player and it’s Peyton Manning,” Mason said. “You take Tom Brady off New England they showed that they can go 11-5. Now you take Peyton Manning off the Colts I don’t know where that teams goes offensively.”

 

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/06/28/derrick-mason-peyton-manning-is-the-nfls-best-player-hands-down/

 

 

1. You dont think people said the same thing about Brady before the he went down with a back up QB who had not started since HS? No one would have ever predicted 11-5 without Brady, so how can anyone say the colts who still are loaded with offensive talent couldnt pull something similar off?

 

2. This argument is a bit silly since Matt Cassel has proven to be a pretty good QB. Its not like some scrub took them to 11-5, it was a QB who was thought to be a scrub prior to stepping on the field, then proved he could handle the job they asked him to do.

 

So all this stuff about how Cassel led NE to 11-5 as evidence Manning is better is silly IMO. Brady has out played Manning in the post season with FAR lesser talent on the offense. Manning has had multiple future HOF offensive weapons his whole career, where Brady didnt get a real offensive weapon until 2007 after he already won 3 SB's.

[DreReed83]

1. You dont think people said the same thing about Brady before the he went down with a back up QB who had not started since HS? No one would have ever predicted 11-5 without Brady, so how can anyone say the colts who still are loaded with offensive talent couldnt pull something similar off?

 

2. This argument is a bit silly since Matt Cassel has proven to be a pretty good QB. Its not like some scrub took them to 11-5, it was a QB who was thought to be a scrub prior to stepping on the field, then proved he could handle the job they asked him to do.

 

So all this stuff about how Cassel led NE to 11-5 as evidence Manning is better is silly IMO. Brady has out played Manning in the post season with FAR lesser talent on the offense. Manning has had multiple future HOF offensive weapons his whole career, where Brady didnt get a real offensive weapon until 2007 after he already won 3 SB's.

 

You obviously never saw that Jets vs Colts regular season game where they benched Peyton Manning and started Curtis Painter.

 

1. You dont think people said the same thing about Brady before the he went down with a back up QB who had not started since HS? No one would have ever predicted 11-5 without Brady, so how can anyone say the colts who still are loaded with offensive talent couldnt pull something similar off?

 

2. This argument is a bit silly since Matt Cassel has proven to be a pretty good QB. Its not like some scrub took them to 11-5, it was a QB who was thought to be a scrub prior to stepping on the field, then proved he could handle the job they asked him to do.

 

So all this stuff about how Cassel led NE to 11-5 as evidence Manning is better is silly IMO. Brady has out played Manning in the post season with FAR lesser talent on the offense. Manning has had multiple future HOF offensive weapons his whole career, where Brady didnt get a real offensive weapon until 2007 after he already won 3 SB's.

 

You obviously never saw that Jets vs Colts regular season game where they benched Peyton Manning and started Curtis Painter.

 

Tom Brady Playoff stats - 637 attempts, 4108 yds, 28 TDs, 15 INT, 6.5 y/a, 62% completion, 85.5 rating

Peyton Manning Playoff stats - 692 attempts, 5164 yds, 28 TDs, 19 INT, 7.5 y/a, 62.9%, 87.6 rating.

 

Did Brady REALLY outplay Manning? REALLY?

[Alphadawg7]

Tom Brady Playoff stats - 637 attempts, 4108 yds, 28 TDs, 15 INT, 6.5 y/a, 62% completion, 85.5 rating

Peyton Manning Playoff stats - 692 attempts, 5164 yds, 28 TDs, 19 INT, 7.5 y/a, 62.9%, 87.6 rating.

 

Did Brady REALLY outplay Manning? REALLY?

 

Lets see, 3 Superbowl's with far lesser offensive talent to one for Manning. Manning has not had the kind of playoff consistency Brady has had. Totals are for people who want to hide the truth. He is still Peyton Manning, his totals will always look good. Every game was not bad, his issue is (and this is common knowledge, not an assumption) that too many times he and the Colts dominated the regular season only to see them exit early from the playoffs after an un-Manning like performance. Brady and his squads more often won the games they were supposed to win, but also won the games they were not supposed to win like the three SB games. In almost every instance of the Colts being eliminated in the playoffs, it was a game they were supposed to win and did not, and in multiple of those games Manning played below the standards he had been playing at all year.

 

Honestly, I would even take Kurt Warner over Manning if I needed to win a game in the playoffs. Dont get me wrong, Manning is an amazing QB and I would drool for a week if we got him on our team. But we are comparing two 100% first ballot HOF QB's and for me Brady has been the edge as he has proven to win more and win with less talent.

[ajzepp]

Lets see, 3 Superbowl's with far lesser offensive talent to one for Manning. Manning has not had the kind of playoff consistency Brady has had. Totals are for people who want to hide the truth. He is still Peyton Manning, his totals will always look good. Every game was not bad, his issue is (and this is common knowledge, not an assumption) that too many times he and the Colts dominated the regular season only to see them exit early from the playoffs after an un-Manning like performance. Brady and his squads more often won the games they were supposed to win, but also won the games they were not supposed to win like the three SB games. In almost every instance of the Colts being eliminated in the playoffs, it was a game they were supposed to win and did not, and in multiple of those games Manning played below the standards he had been playing at all year.

 

Honestly, I would even take Kurt Warner over Manning if I needed to win a game in the playoffs. Dont get me wrong, Manning is an amazing QB and I would drool for a week if we got him on our team. But we are comparing two 100% first ballot HOF QB's and for me Brady has been the edge as he has proven to win more and win with less talent.

 

Do you consider Brady a better QB than Marino was?

[Alphadawg7]

Do you consider Brady a better QB than Marino was?

 

Yes, I do think Brady is better than Marino. Marino is a product of longevity and a fast start. Yes, he is an all time great QB, and he came out of the gate on fire as a young QB. However, the bulk of Marino's career did not mirror the prolific passer he is known for. It's not like he was known as a champion...his legend is centered around being a prolific passer, however his best years all came in his first 5 seasons. After that, his seasons were mostly good, not great. Not to mention, Marinos playoff stats are well below his regular season stats. His career playoff passer rating is 77.1 with a career playoff completion % of 56% with obviously no Superbowls.

 

Marino is an all time great, but to me he was always over rated and wasn't strong in the playoffs. I would take Brady over Marino every day of the week. Manning is often compared to Marino, but for me Manning is better than Marino and I would take Manning any day of the week over Marino too.

[C.Biscuit97]

Brady is a better qb. The colts have been loaded with 1st rounders at every skill position ( Edge, Addai, Brown, Wayne, Harrison, Clark, Gonzalez). Brady played with scrub most his career ( Brown, Givens, Patten, A. Smith). The 1st year Brady had comparable talent to Manning, he set NFL records & was the MVP.

 

And save the Cassel point. Cassel has proven he is a decent NFL qb in his own right & his job was not to lose games. And they didn't make the playoffs! Plus, Randy Moss in his prime makes every QB better.

 

Bottom-line, Manning laid a lot of duds in the playoffs while Brady was one of the most clutch qbs ever. Belichick was Dick Jauron before he lucked into Brady. Brady has become a whiney douche but he is IMO a top 5 qb ever.

[DreReed83]

Lets see, 3 Superbowl's with far lesser offensive talent to one for Manning. Manning has not had the kind of playoff consistency Brady has had. Totals are for people who want to hide the truth. He is still Peyton Manning, his totals will always look good. Every game was not bad, his issue is (and this is common knowledge, not an assumption) that too many times he and the Colts dominated the regular season only to see them exit early from the playoffs after an un-Manning like performance. Brady and his squads more often won the games they were supposed to win, but also won the games they were not supposed to win like the three SB games. In almost every instance of the Colts being eliminated in the playoffs, it was a game they were supposed to win and did not, and in multiple of those games Manning played below the standards he had been playing at all year.

 

Honestly, I would even take Kurt Warner over Manning if I needed to win a game in the playoffs. Dont get me wrong, Manning is an amazing QB and I would drool for a week if we got him on our team. But we are comparing two 100% first ballot HOF QB's and for me Brady has been the edge as he has proven to win more and win with less talent.

 

Far "LESSER?" First of all, Tom Brady had an all pro offensive line and better coaching. Sure Manning had Wayne and Harrison, but that's pretty much all he had on offense. I'd rather take an all-pro offensive line and good WRs than a below average offensive line and an all pro WR duo any day.

 

Stop bullshtting me. Brady with far less talent? Give me a break.

Edited June 29, 2011 by DreReed83

[DreReed83]

Brady is a better qb. The colts have been loaded with 1st rounders at every skill position ( Edge, Addai, Brown, Wayne, Harrison, Clark, Gonzalez). Brady played with scrub most his career ( Brown, Givens, Patten, A. Smith). The 1st year Brady had comparable talent to Manning, he set NFL records & was the MVP.

 

And save the Cassel point. Cassel has proven he is a decent NFL qb in his own right & his job was not to lose games. And they didn't make the playoffs! Plus, Randy Moss in his prime makes every QB better.

 

Bottom-line, Manning laid a lot of duds in the playoffs while Brady was one of the most clutch qbs ever. Belichick was Dick Jauron before he lucked into Brady. Brady has become a whiney douche but he is IMO a top 5 qb ever.

 

Take Brown, Addai, and Gonzalez off that list. They haven't accomplished jacksht.

 

Brady played with scrubs? You forgot to mention to godly protection that he's had over the years and not to mention playing with the best kicker possibly in NFL history. I'm not even going to bring up the FLUKE "tuck" bullsht that was called against Oakland. They didn't even deserve to play against the Rams that year. He choked and fumbled that game away and should've lost that game.

 

Their numbers are similar throughout the playoffs. Brady just played with a better overall team.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I think some of the arguments being made here are a bit skewed.

 

Yes Brady (like Donovan McNabb) had lousy receivers for most of the early part of his career but more lately he's had the opportunity to play with Randy Moss and Wes Welker.

 

And I totally agree with Dre that the Patsies* have had a much better offensive line than the Colts during the decade where Manning and Brady's careers have overlapped. New England has been a very effective power running football team where the Colts have been very ineffective rushing the ball in recent years.

 

I agree that the Patriots have also had the better defense although the Colts have certainly been a better pass rushing team as far as defense is concerned.

 

To the point that Cassel led the Chiefs to 11 wins last year… he led them to 4 wins the year before.

 

It's probably pretty close between the two. I'd take Manning for my team.

[Jim in Anchorage]

Far "LESSER?" First of all, Tom Brady had an all pro offensive line and better coaching. Sure Manning had Wayne and Harrison, but that's pretty much all he had on offense. I'd rather take an all-pro offensive line and good WRs than a below average offensive line and an all pro WR duo any day.

 

Stop bullshtting me. Brady with far less talent? Give me a break.

Works for the Steelers. With the right QB. [woups wrong debate].

Edited June 29, 2011 by Jim in Anchorage

[Bufcomments]

Put me down for Brady.

 

Coming out of College you knew Manning was going to be a great QB. Look what he did at at Tennessee.

 

Did you honestly think Brady was going to do what he did coming out of Michigan. Really ??

 

Brady has completely earned his. Not say Manning hasn't but he was born to be a pro QB..my God his Father played in the Pros.

 

Brady did have a great line in front of him but he has done more with less at the RB and WR positions.

Brady stats would be even better if he didn't get hurt and lost a full year.

 

Super Bowls do count have when you ask who is better. Almost led team to first 17-0 season. Throws 50 TD's in one season. Makes Wes Welker a serious weapon when other teams did not. I could go on .

 

Put it to you like this, If choosing a QB for one Super Bowl game of the Bills 4 trips it would be Brady.

 

He seems more of a leader than Manning.

 

And he doesn't need to makes all these calls at the line and multiple motions to beat ya. Brady just lines up, spreads ya out and beats the shyt out of you if you let him.

 

Manning may have more pure breed talent but I respect Brady way more.

[eball]

He seems more of a leader than Manning.

 

And he doesn't need to makes all these calls at the line and multiple motions to beat ya. Brady just lines up, spreads ya out and beats the shyt out of you if you let him.

Wow, this is ignorant. I know it's just your opinion, but it's a horrible one. Go ahead and say Brady is a great leader and nobody will argue with you. But to say he's "more of a leader" than the quintessential leader at the QB position of the last decade is just absurd. Another arrow in Peyton's quiver? Exactly what you just criticized -- his ability to read the defense and put his guys in the right position pre-snap.

[Alphadawg7]

Far "LESSER?" First of all, Tom Brady had an all pro offensive line and better coaching. Sure Manning had Wayne and Harrison, but that's pretty much all he had on offense. I'd rather take an all-pro offensive line and good WRs than a below average offensive line and an all pro WR duo any day.

 

Stop bullshtting me. Brady with far less talent? Give me a break.

 

This post is hilarious...one, because you for some reason got your panties in a wad as if you were off your meds, and two, the way you down play Harrison and Wayne as if they are just all pro receivers and the only weapons he has had.

 

Harrison is a future first ballot HOF'er and Wayne is on his way to a similar career and eventual HOF if he keeps this up a few more years. D. Clark is also an elite TE who could see his bust in the HOF if he recovers from his injury and keeps playing the way he had been. Not to mention, Edge has HOF credentials as well. Manning has had elite weapons every year he has been in the league while Brady won 3 SB's with scrubs who's WR's, TE's, and RB's would have been no better than back ups in Indy. NE has been made up of cast offs from other teams, undersized players, and lesser talented people at the skill positions up until 2007 when Brady already had 3 SB trophies on his resume.

 

Second, the fabled NE offensive line is made to look great by Brady. When Cassel was QB, the Pats gave up the most sacks in the NFL. The year before and the year after Brady was hardly touched behind the same line. Brady is literally one of the best QBs in the league (if not the best) in pocket mobility and buying himself time against the rush by using his elite footwork to maneuver inside the pocket in order to complete the play. Even without his pro bowl LT he still made the OL look good.

 

Third, Indy's OL isn't as bad as you want to make it out to be over Mannings career and many would argue his has been better than NE's considering how many fewer sacks Indy gives up...plus the perennial pro bowl weapons and future HOF weapons he has had. What a joke that is...talk about BS'ing

Edited June 29, 2011 by Alphadawg7