I agree. But we are not talking about the toughest QB of all time. My point is winning SB doesn't make you the greatest QB of all time.
the only explanation is fantasy football. People like #s and his reg season #s have been mind boggling but how many times w/ that same elite talent around him in postseason have we seen him come up short? it's not like he's doing all he can, if he was losing postseason games 30-27 or something like that I'd give him a pass but he doesn't show up most of the time.
There's way too many variables going on in each of these comparisons. Dungy never even made it to a SB w/o Manning, but Manning went to the SB with three different Head Coaches. So what makes you think he would have won a SB w/o Manning? The Colts don't win the SB w/o Manning. He may not have put up huge numbers, but he was HUGE in the Ravens game, and was outstanding in the AFCCG comeback. Belichick inherited an aging team in Cleveland which he had to gut. He built them back up and brought them to the 94 playoffs. The entire 95 season collapsed with the rumors and eventual announcement that they would be moving to Baltimore. If he had stayed they would have continued to progress with him. Instead Modell decided to move on from Belichick and hire former Baltimore Colt coach Ted Marchibroda. He wasn't as good of a coach as he is now, but he was much better than you make him out to be. Furthermore his early years in New England was much the same. He had to gut the team. Brady was a much better QB than Bledsoe was at that time (especially for that team). Everything fell perfectly in place once Brady started. The Defense played much better, the running game was very efficient and the QB wasn't taking unnecessary sacks and was distributing the ball much better than Bledsoe was who in recent years up to that point took a tremendous amount of punishment, lost his main weapon (Ben Coates) and was no longer the QB who took them to SB XXXI. Delhomme's was a really good QB from 2003 to 2008. He really gets a bad rap for his piss poor Playoffs performance. Don't forget they had an extremely stout defense. Fox overall though has not gotten the job done in the postseason. He's a really good coach though, but not in the postseason.
Great post. The problem on this thread is the response you are going to get back is the equivalent of "4 rings... LOL... PWNED".
I mean it really isn't splitting hairs. Manning shit the bed in the biggest moment of the SB against the Saints. And had no answer at all against the Seahawks. We could go through all these guys playoff games and see the trend
QUESTION: Why was Manning playing in the SB against New Orleans (2010) and Seattle (2014) and not Brady? Your analysis suggests Brady didn't even have to wait until the Super Bowl to "shit-the-bed" or "have no answers at all" those years. Well ... either that or ... football is a team game and there are other factors in play (who has the best coaching staff, who has the best defense, who has the best running game, injuries, weather conditions, officiating, propensity to cheat, etc) deciding who wins a football game other than simply which team has the best quarterback.
Peyton made a bad mistake against the Saints in a big spot, no doubt. Unfortunately, his D and coach really put him in a terrible position in that game, to which point he had played fantastic. There is no doubting that Payton coached circles around Caldwell, the surprise onsides was only part of the story. The fact is that Brady has made big mistakes in SBs too, he made one in this past game. However, when the game was being decided he had a teammate on D step up and make a big play. You cannot say the same about any Colt defender in that SB against the Saints. A lot went wrong for the Broncos last year, starting with their being overmatched personnel-wise. In a game like that, it is hard to just assign blame to one guy. There is no question Peyton could have played better in a number of his playoff losses. However, you could say the same about Brady in the Pats losses and a decent number of their wins (which he always gets 100% credit for, even playoff victories where he threw 3 INTs and was carried). Football is a team sport. A great QB can consistently get his team to the playoffs, but to win in the playoffs you need great coaching and a great effort from the whole team. There is no doubt that Brady has consistently gotten the better coaching and better supporting cast performances throughout his career in the playoffs as compared to Peyton. To me that is unquestionable. If Brady were the clearly better player, that trend would have played out more in the regular season, which is the bulk of a player's career.
Dungy never made a SB but he at least made a conf title game and he turned around the biggest laughingstocks in the league into contenders. Fox made a SB w/ Jake Delhomme and faced a better team in the SB w/ a less talented team that he was coaching and lost by 3 while w/ Manning his team didn't even compete. BB did inherit an aging team in Cle but so what? BP inherited much worse in NE 2 years later and had them in the playoffs year 2 and SB year 4. In 5 seasons BB had Cle in one postseason. The 1995 season was done anyway, they were already playing awful football. don't give me the announcement excuse when they were done pre announcement. He inherited a ton of talent in NE, the difference was at QB- not w/ the guy he gave a $100 mil extension to after his first season but w/ the guy that rescued his career and that franchise. Delhomme was mediocre, a decent QB you could win some games with. He wasn't Peyton Manning. Fox has nopt gotten the job done in postseason but Peyton Manning has? w/ his 1 SB win where he threw 3 TDs and 7 INTs in his 4 postseason games- Brady just threw 4 TD passes in the SB which was more than Peyton in that 4 game SB run in 2006 and more than the 3 total Manning has thrown in his 3 SB apps. All with far inferior talent. Like 95% of their careers Manning had the much more talent team but despite that Manning stil came up small in all his SB apps. ohhh so his D and coach caused him to throw the SB away. I guess they also caused him to lead his high powered O to 7 pts total from the 2nd qtr on. Brady has made mistakes, he's never thrown a game ending INT EVER in postseason or an INT that led to game losing FG or TD like Peyton has multiple times. Brady has been great in the reg season, he doesn't put up the fantasy #s Peyton does but he puts up great #s and wins. Brady reg season win %: 77% Brady postseason win %: 72% Manning reg season win %: 70% Manning postseason win %: 46% Manning's difference in #s looks like Belichick's difference w/ and w/o Brady.
Wow Manning over Brady??? You guys are nuts... Brady and Montana are the two greatest ever... You can take your pick at who you want at #1... If we are ranking QB's in terms of regular season stats, then yea take Manning all you want... But if we are talking about winners, Brady and Montana by a land slide.
I'd take Brady over Manning in a heartbeat, esp. in a playoff game. And as top-of-the-list great as Brady is, I'd also take Joe Montana over Brady as well. Manning didn't win the big one while at Tennessee. Florida had Tennessee and Manning's number throughout his college career. Furthermore, Tennessee didn't win the national championship until the year after Peyton left, behind Tee Martin at QB. There might be other QB that could be put in the 'greatest' conversation (Johnny U., Otto Graham, etc.) but Peyton Manning is not one of them. While there were games Manning couldn't win, there are games that Brady probably couldn't have won that Montana did: at Philadelphia, 1989. Sacked 8 times that game by Reggie White & co. he still led the 49'ers to a win going 11-12 for 200+ yards and 28 points in the 4th quarter. Brady's an all-time great, but you harrass him, you can beat him. The Jets under Rex proved that on occassion as did the Giants. Brady had a big comeback win in college vs. 'Bama in the Orange Bowl but that 'win' came courtesy of a blown 'wide right' PAT by 'Bama. Montana's sick-as-a-dog bowl game comeback in the icy Cotton Bowl was and is legend. One other thing: the Mel Blount rule.
When your team is down 24-17 already (having nothing to do with you since you played great to that point) and you make a mistake, you haven't "thrown" anything away. His coach and teammates gave him no margin for error with their awful decisions and play to that point. There is no doubting it was a terrible mistake by Peyton in that spot but it's no worse than Brady's first INT in this past SB. An equally bad decision/throw. And the whole notion of pointing to one game or throw here and there as "proof" that one guy is better than the other is just silly anyway. Look at the entire body of work. Peyton plays consistently slightly better than Brady does throughout their careers, and he's never had the greatest coach of all-time to bail him out in big spots. Winning percentage is not a QB statistic, never has been, never will be. It's a team stat. You need an entire team to win or lose a game, it doesn't fall on one player. All I know that is that the regular season is 90% of Peyton and Brady's careers, and Peyton plays the position slightly better than Brady during that 90%. Almost anyone would agree. I guess you could argue that Brady is slightly better than Peyton in the playoffs (although their individual stats don't convincingly bear that out), but again, that's a very small portion of the games they have played. The people that feel Brady has convincingly outplayed Peyton in the playoffs are only judging by team results. Two of Brady's SB appearances came when he threw 3 INTs in the conference championship games. Why didn't he turn on his clutch magic in those games? Or was he simply carried to the win by his coach and team? Clutch is a fiction used to support generalized narratives about a player. The numbers rarely back it up. Over a large enough sample, players revert to what they are. I still don't understand the "fantasy #s" argument. When you throw TDs, which are points for your team, that's a bad thing? When you throw for a lot of yards, which lead to points for your team, that's a bad thing? Brady has great numbers too, although just like Peyton he is a noticeably worse player by the numbers in the postseason.
so he gets no blame for leading his high powered ) to 7 pts from qtr #2 through qtr #4? it was all on the D? He had the ball in his hands deep in NO territory w/ a chance to tie the game in the 4th qtr, he threw an INT for a TD and threw away any chances his team had. In 2 of the last 3 SBs Brady has played in he has given his team a late lead w/ a TD drive- one his D blew and one they held on. Manning didn't give his team that chance. it wasn't worse than a 1st qtr INT in a SB Brady won by brining his team from 10 down in the 4th and leading to 28 pts? seriously? The greatest coach of all time was a complete failure w/o Tom Brady just so you know unlike the coaches Manning has had who all have had success w/o Peyton. Indy had SB caliber talent his entire career, Den has it now. If he was QB of the 1976 Bucs I'd agree but he had great talent to work with and managed to win a lot w/ them in the reg season them when the games were biggest he failed to show. Not all INTs are created equally and only one time did he throw 3 INTs in a title game. Peyton's only SB winning run he threw 3 TDs and 7 INTs, show me a run like that for Brady where his team won it? Brady's 4 TDs this SB are more than Manning in his 3 SBs COMBINED unless of course you count the 2 other TDs he threw to the other teams #s are nice but it's about how you accumulate #s rather than the total. Throwing 5 TDs against the Texans or Raiders in October doesn't impress me, leading your team to critical points in January does. it's something Peyton has always struggled with and Brady has in recent years too until this postseason when he was great again.
It's easy to throw out TD:INT ratio of that postseason without context. He didn't play badly overall by any stretch. He was up and down against the Chiefs but the team was good enough. Then he ran into a very stingy Ravens D in the next round. His team gave him a lot of support in that game (something Brady is quite used to getting during his SB runs). After that Peyton played very well. He outgunned Brady in the AFC CG, and brought his team back from a big deficit in that game. The SB was played in poor weather conditions and the Colts took advantage of being able to run it down the Bears throats. Plus Grossman was no threat on the other side. That was never going to be a game where they needed Peyton to throw for 350 yards and 4 TDs. He played well within the context of the weather and gameplan. I could show you Brady's very meager numbers from the Pats first SB run. He didn't even play the 2nd half of the AFC CG. Of course you would somehow find a way to credit Brady for holding an all-time great Rams offense to a pathetic 17 points. All Brady, right? If the Rams had their typical offensive output that game and the Pats got waxed like 35-17, is Brady then not the greatest of all-time? According to your dumb argument, I guess he wouldn't be......
