Peyton Manning or Tom Brady ?
Options
Comments
-
lol. Number of rings can be a factor in the argument, but not the sole reason of determining a better qb. At all.
Yeah the whole offense is dictated by the qb, but the defense ain't. The special teams ain't. So only 1/3 of the team's play is dictated by the qb.
You can have an average to below average qb win rings if the defense and/or special teams is that good.
If that's the case, the qb doesn't even have to be good, he just has to not ? up and turn the ball over.
Hello 2000 ravens. Hello 2002 bucs.
? trent dilfer was the only qb to win a super bowl and be cut by his team directly afterwards. Clearly you can be a sb-winning qb and not be good.
So how bout a qb going 9/21, 123 yards 0 td and 2 int in a super bowl game. Do you think that's making enough plays and executing?
Hope you said yes cuz that's exactly what happened with big ben against the seahawks. Defense and special teams won the game for them.
Getting rings is totally circumstantial.
ethered.... -
LOL. Number of rings can be a factor in the argument, but not the sole reason of determining a better QB. AT ALL.
Yeah the whole offense is dictated by the QB, but the defense ain't. The special teams ain't. So only 1/3 of the team's play is dictated by the QB.
You can have an average to below average QB win rings if the defense and/or special teams is THAT good.
If that's the case, the QB doesn't even have to be good, he just has to not ? up and turn the ball over.
Hello 2000 Ravens. Hello 2002 Bucs.
? Trent Dilfer was the only QB to win a Super Bowl and be cut by his team directly afterwards. Clearly you can be a SB-winning QB and NOT BE GOOD.
So how bout a QB going 9/21, 123 yards 0 TD and 2 int in a Super Bowl game. Do you think that's making enough plays and executing?
Hope you said yes cuz that's exactly what happened with Big Ben against the Seahawks. DEFENSE and SPECIAL TEAMS won the game for them.
Getting rings is totally circumstantial.
Yeah he forgot that it takes a WHOLE TEAM to win a championship not just one person smh -
lol u know whats crazy... even if u added Bradys 07 season the "perfect season" ... still was 2nd ranked in QBR on ESPN yesterday and Manning was first.... he's ranked 5th going into this year just cuz of speculation on his injury but he'll be fine
-
Coo Coo Cal's Beanie wrote: »The rings argument is valid because the whole offense is dictated by the play of the QB. QB doesnt execute or make enough plays, the team cant win. FOH wit that logic
Do you know who Joe Theisman is? Or the 2000 Ravens QBs Trent Dilfer, Chris Redman and Tony Banks? Were you aware that Rex Grossman went to the ? superbowl? There are 10 other guys on the offense. 21 other guys on the starting team not counting special teams. Are you seriously trying to say they have no factor in the team's victory? You FOH. Hell, the Colts missed a Super Bowl by way of a KICKER.
The 2000 Ravens and 06 Bears are proof that the bolded is absoulute ? . There is a reason why the phrase is "Defense Wins Championships" And it's not irony that the Patriots teams that won Brady's rings had great defense, yet the greatest Patriots offense Brady ever had came up short to a BETTER defense. Those 11 guys on defense mean something.plus manning played on stacked teams offensively compared to the people marino played with. Throwing picks in playoff games lowers your rank. Manning is known to do that.
Every QB throws picks, Brady included, even in playoff games. Just like every Runningback fumbles sometime. thats why you have defense to get the ball back in your hand. Unfortunately that's something neither Manning nor Marino had but Brady did.
Having a good team beats having a good player everytime. -
Meet The Sniper wrote: »Do you know who Joe Theisman is? Or the 2000 Ravens QBs Trent Dilfer, Chris Redman and Tony Banks? Were you aware that Rex Grossman went to the ? superbowl? There are 10 other guys on the offense. 21 other guys on the starting team not counting special teams. Are you seriously trying to say they have no factor in the team's victory? You FOH. Hell, the Colts missed a Super Bowl by way of a KICKER.
The 2000 Ravens and 06 Bears are proof that the bolded is absoulute ? . There is a reason why the phrase is "Defense Wins Championships" And it's not irony that the Patriots teams that won Brady's rings had great defense, yet the greatest Patriots offense Brady ever had came up short to a BETTER defense. Those 11 guys on defense mean something.
Every QB throws picks, Brady included, even in playoff games. Just like every Runningback fumbles sometime. thats why you have defense to get the ball back in your hand. Unfortunately that's something neither Manning nor Marino had but Brady did.
Having a good team beats having a good player everytime.
Ethered again.. damn how many L's u gonna take CoCo Bagel? -
LOL. Number of rings can be a factor in the argument, but not the sole reason of determining a better QB. AT ALL.
Yeah the whole offense is dictated by the QB, but the defense ain't. The special teams ain't. So only 1/3 of the team's play is dictated by the QB.
You can have an average to below average QB win rings if the defense and/or special teams is THAT good.
If that's the case, the QB doesn't even have to be good, he just has to not ? up and turn the ball over.
Hello 2000 Ravens. Hello 2002 Bucs.
? Trent Dilfer was the only QB to win a Super Bowl and be cut by his team directly afterwards. Clearly you can be a SB-winning QB and NOT BE GOOD.
So how bout a QB going 9/21, 123 yards 0 TD and 2 int in a Super Bowl game. Do you think that's making enough plays and executing?
Hope you said yes cuz that's exactly what happened with Big Ben against the Seahawks. DEFENSE and SPECIAL TEAMS won the game for them.
Getting rings is totally circumstantial.
The one ring manning has he played against a team that had, at best, an average QB. Manning had a good defense. The year they beat the pats in the AFC championship was the year the defense was good. Only reason he has a ring is because rex grossman played horribly turning the ball over in the Superbowl. If you're comparing the GOAT QBs then the rings argument is valid. Yall mentioned how many MVPs he has which is 5, brady has 4, but 2 more rings. Brady is better. Peyton choked in the SB vs the Saints.Meet The Sniper wrote: »Do you know who Joe Theisman is? Or the 2000 Ravens QBs Trent Dilfer, Chris Redman and Tony Banks? Were you aware that Rex Grossman went to the ? superbowl? There are 10 other guys on the offense. 21 other guys on the starting team not counting special teams. Are you seriously trying to say they have no factor in the team's victory? You FOH. Hell, the Colts missed a Super Bowl by way of a KICKER.
The 2000 Ravens and 06 Bears are proof that the bolded is absoulute ? . There is a reason why the phrase is "Defense Wins Championships" And it's not irony that the Patriots teams that won Brady's rings had great defense, yet the greatest Patriots offense Brady ever had came up short to a BETTER defense. Those 11 guys on defense mean something.
Every QB throws picks, Brady included, even in playoff games. Just like every Runningback fumbles sometime. thats why you have defense to get the ball back in your hand. Unfortunately that's something neither Manning nor Marino had but Brady did.
Having a good team beats having a good player everytime. -
brady>>>>>manning
CLOSE THREAD -
yes, but Peyton still had around 250 yards, one TD and one Pick. It's gotta count for something.Coo Coo Cal's Beanie wrote: »The one ring manning has he played against a team that had, at best, an average QB.[?QUOTE]
And at worst, a great defense.
Lmao what? Freeney and Mathis are the only good things about that D since Bob Sander's bones would turn to dust midway to the season. Colts have always been offense first and their Super Bowl record proves.Manning had a good defense.
Pretty sure that "good defense" gave up 100+ rushing yards and damn near 200 passing yards to the bears. Turnovers won that gameThe year they beat the pats in the AFC championship was the year the defense was good.
Only reason he has a ring is because rex grossman played horribly turning the ball over in the Superbowl.If you're comparing the GOAT QBs then the rings argument is valid.No.
We all know who really deserved last year's MVP award.Yall mentioned how many MVPs he has which is 5, brady has 4, but 2 more rings.
Ends with Vick.
And defense won that Super Bowl against the Rams and you know it. Brady was a game manager that game.Brady is better.Peyton choked in the SB vs the Saints.
Lmao, wow. He threw ONE pick. Otherwise he had a good game. But that's the problem, only HE had a good game. The D gave up 24 points after all. -
-
vageneral08 wrote: »you know who the goat is cj
yea joe montana -
Meet The Sniper wrote: »yes, but Peyton still had around 250 yards, one TD and one Pick. It's gotta count for something.If you're comparing the GOAT QBs then the rings argument is valid.
LOL @ Brady being a "game manager" when he is the one that put together the comeback drive to win the game for the Pats.No.
We all know who really deserved last year's MVP award.
Ends with Vick.
And defense won that Super Bowl against the Rams and you know it. Brady was a game manager that game.
Lmao, wow. He threw ONE pick. Otherwise he had a good game. But that's the problem, only HE had a good game. The D gave up 24 points after all.
Vick didnt have a better season than Brady so IDK how you figure he deserved an award. In fact, Aaron Rodgers had better stats 2 years ago than vick did last year and he didnt get MVP either. And yes, GOAT is determined by stats and rings. Manning isnt ahead of brady in the discussion. Now you want to blame the defense on why the Colts lost when Peyton Mannings spectacular offensive display in the superbowl only put up 17 points. Then on top of that he was the reason the loss was sealed by throwing a pick 6 in the clutch.
Brady >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Manning -
JUXcaptainHOOK wrote: »i agree .....
just like homeruns are overated as well -
vageneral08 wrote: »wrong again....because manning's numbers ? on marino....who was first to break the marino td record? my point exactly
maarino never had a offense like manning idiot, give marino the same offense and manning wouldnt even be close to marino, and marino still better then manning even if he doesnt have a ring -
Manning didnt even win that ring, that superbowl he threw 247 yards and a touchdown, with one interception. wow he really carried the team. reason he got mvp cause the media and team ? rides him.
oo he was facing rex grossman, and the only offense the bears had was hester kick returning TD -
As far as im concerned Brady one SB Ring & MVP away from challengin Montana as the GOAT QB
-
Give me a random team and give me the choice between the two for a season? I'm taking Manning.
-
Jeezyfan4ever wrote: »Manning didnt even win that ring, that superbowl he threw 247 yards and a touchdown, with one interception. wow he really carried the team. reason he got mvp cause the media and team ? rides him.
As opposed to who? Who out preformed Manning that game? I'm dying to know.
Except Thomas Jones rushed for 100+ yards on the Colts weak ass run D and Grossman also had a TD.oo he was facing rex grossman, and the only offense the bears had was hester kick returning TD
Rex is weak as ? , I agree but yall going above and beyond the call of duty to try and take credit from Manning.Coo Coo Cal's Beanie wrote: »[ LOL @ Brady being a "game manager" when he is the one that put together the comeback drive to win the game for the Pats.
After getting turnover after turnoverand scoring only once. The ? put up Trent Dilfer numbers.
Context ? context.Vick didnt have a better season than Brady so IDK how you figure he deserved an award.
Vick didn't start at the beginning of the season AND got injured and still came within shouting distance of Brady's numbers throwing weak ass screen passes to Welker all year.
Vick....wasn't playing 2 years ago....In fact, Aaron Rodgers had better stats 2 years ago than vick did last year and he didnt get MVP either.And yes, GOAT is determined by stats and rings.
Grasp at as many straws as you like. Rings are a team acheivement and award. That's why everyone, even the benchwarmers get one.
Hyuck hyuck.Manning isnt ahead of brady in the discussion.
Spectacular? No. But it for damn sure wasn't bad by any stretch of the imagination.Now you want to blame the defense on why the Colts lost when Peyton Mannings spectacular offensive display in the superbowl only put up 17 points.Then on top of that he was the reason the loss was sealed by throwing a pick 6 in the clutch.
He threw the game sealing pick, okay. But he was also the one who put them up 10-0 at the end of the first quarter. Then brought then downfield only for the kicker to miss the kick. The point is, he wouldn't have to have to play catchup if the D didn't let Brees rip them to shreds. He's the QB yeah, but his preformance wasn't bad. There are QBs who won the superbowl with less, Brady was one of them. -
Give me a random team and give me the choice between the two for a season? I'm taking Manning.
Why???????????????? -
Meet The Sniper wrote: »As opposed to who? Who out preformed Manning that game? I'm dying to know.
Except Thomas Jones rushed for 100+ yards on the Colts weak ass run D and Grossman also had a TD.
Rex is weak as ? , I agree but yall going above and beyond the call of duty to try and take credit from Manning.
Rhodes / Addai were the CO-MVP's of the Superbowl win in my mind. The Playoff MVP In my mind was Bob Sanders. -
Im going with Peyton. He's basically been running the Colts offense for the majority of his career, plus I think he would be successful anywhere. He has been competitive with any WR's he has had to play with. Something tells me you take Brady out of New England and he wont be as successful as he has been.
-
Jeezyfan4ever wrote: »maarino never had a offense like manning idiot, give marino the same offense and manning wouldnt even be close to marino, and marino still better then manning even if he doesnt have a ring
really? lol another ? arguement....if he didnt have nobody then why were they having winning seasons? ? outta here brady lover -
name his HOF playmakers. He didnt play with anyone on the level of marvin, reggie, or edgerrin.vageneral08 wrote: »really? lol another ? arguement....if he didnt have nobody then why were they having winning seasons? ? outta here brady lover -
Randy Moss.Coo Coo Cal's Beanie wrote: »name his HOF playmakers. He didnt play with anyone on the level of marvin, reggie, or edgerrin.
Welp.
Besides the "? MANNING'S WEAPONS" argument is really overrated. Not to try and ? on/devalue Wayne and Harrison but neither one were SUPER TALENTED PHYSICAL FREAK recievers. Wayne and Harrison are great route runners with good hands. Those traits just happen to fit someone like Peyton Manning in the way he directs the offense. Otherwise it's not like Harrison and Wayne were game breaking recievers. Neither one was the type to go up in the air and grab a ball in tight coverage like Fitzgerald. Nor overpower a corner like Brandon Marshall (Harrison was notorious for avoiding contact). Nor ? an oppenent with their speed quickly like Moss or Desean Jackson.
And if people wanna give Brady (but not the coaching staff ironically) credit for making those recievers look good, can we give Manning credit for Anthony Gonzales, Garcon, Tamme and Collie?Jeezyfan4ever wrote: »Rhodes / Addai were the CO-MVP's of the Superbowl win in my mind. The Playoff MVP In my mind was Bob Sanders.
So two ? put together should win the MVP over Manning.
Just stop. -
Coo Coo Cal's Beanie wrote: »name his HOF playmakers. He didnt play with anyone on the level of marvin, reggie, or edgerrin.
lol please explain what does hall of fame has to do with anything? trash ass players has made it to the hall of fame so try again....oh and marino had a better defense than manning -
lol@ playoff mvp....? will try anything
