Peyton Manning or Tom Brady ?
Options
Comments
-
JUXcaptainHOOK wrote: »exactly.. what the ? does that tell you? u ? ?
Are you giving Cassell NO credit? LOL -
Manning IS the ? system. That's why he does the "garbage at the LOS" which, by the way, is called calling an audible. Cuz, you know, that's what good QBs do. They read defenses and audible in bad situations..JUXcaptainHOOK wrote: »Peyton Manning IS the offense...
ima just say what i said before, probably you havent read it. Do you really think Indy has a complicated offense? Let me give you the answer. No, no it doesn't. It's not really basic but it's not like this out of this world super complicated offense that only PM could master like so many fools believe. Just because he runs to the line and screams and yells and waives his hands around so waterheads all around the country can go ooohhh he's changing the play and stuff he must be smart. And ? he knows 3 plays at the LOS before every snap? In the town(camden I live in, we went to the playoffs and the HS QB ran the no huddle in the champ game and called all the plays for like the last 2 drives. Maybe he's the next Manning because he knows more than 1 play in his head.
Every QB can change plays, adjust routes, protections, just because they don't do all that exaggerated ? (which is just ? half the time) doesn't mean they aren't doing anything. Hell some teams have silent checks. Or where the WR makes the adjustment himself without someone yelling HOTEL HOTEL HOTEL BLACK TIGER BLACK TIGER HOTEL to him.
The media has all the sheeple convinced that only Peyton could run that magic ? and dunk offense. Yeah guess what it's not true. It's not that amazing. Manning's also notorious for leading his receivers to their death. He's a garbage teacher of the game to fellow teammates from what I can see. He's a whiny baby about anything that doesn't go his way. An awful lot like his apologist fans that blame the team around him every single time failing to mention that they didn't have a defense because of all the expensive pieces they stack around him on offense to give him those incredible (regular season) numbers. -
major pain wrote: »Are you giving Cassell NO credit? LOL
thats exactly what he doing, ? dont know ? -
JUXcaptainHOOK wrote: »exactly.. what the ? does that tell you? u ? ?
has manning offense been tested with backup QB ? idiot. Was Manning ever out for a whole year? answer that ? -
major pain wrote: »Are you giving Cassell NO credit? LOL
Kansas City aint doing ? ... so no... i give the Patriot coaching staff more credit than Cassel -
Jeezyfan4ever wrote: »has manning offense been tested with backup QB ? idiot. Was Manning ever out for a whole year? answer that ?
lol so your really gonna ignore the fact the patriots were a successful franchise before Brady? are u ever gonna acknowledge that? when u do.... this is convo is over. -
JUXcaptainHOOK wrote: »Kansas City aint doing ? ... so no... i give the Patriot coaching staff more credit than Cassel
KC won their division last year? They gotta win a SB in order for Cassell to be a decent QB to you? -
JUXcaptainHOOK wrote: »lol so your really gonna ignore the fact the patriots were a successful franchise before Brady? are u ever gonna acknowledge that? when u do.... this is convo is over.
You do realize the Patriots were either last or next to last in their division the 3 seasons before Brady took over for Bledsoe? -
major pain wrote: »KC won their division last year? They gotta win a SB in order for Cassell to be a decent QB to you?
he is decent i never said he's wack... but has he reached 11 wins again inna season? i dont think so... So yeah... the Patriots coaching staff had more to do with the 11 wins.... but im not saying cassell is wack... i like the homie actually... this is just a Peyton vs Brady debate so i'm stating the obvious -
major pain wrote: »You do realize the Patriots were either last or next to last in their division the 3 seasons before Brady took over for Bledsoe?
they still were in the SB years before that tho and lost.... where were the colts? -
? we've seen plenty of Sorgi games. He closed most of the colts 09 season. It isn't the same. Peyton Manning's offense is ONE OF A KIND in today's league. Brady, Brees, Rivers or Rodgers don't CALL PLAYS like Peyton does. He's pretty much one half of the offensive coordinator himself. Even the games where Sorgi was playing you ALWAYS see Peyton on the sideline with a headset and clipboard calling plays. The amount of time he puts into signal calling, game planning and practice dwarfs the modern QB. Peyton is the only modern QB that calls plays on his own consistently.Jeezyfan4ever wrote: »Failing to realize that Peyton Manning and his "system" haven't been tested with a replacement quarterback for a season.
We've seen games before Brady (Bledsoe) started and during Cassel's run. Both successful seasons regardless and puts less and less stock into the rings arguement. Had Bledsoe had never gotten hurt, Brady wouldn't have never started. Fact is we've never seen a Pats QB in the modern patriots system that HASN'T flourished. Bledsoe went on to another team and was ass, and Cassel went and was mediocre one year and awesome the next.
So when Brady is on the field all other offensive weapons suck and Brady made them.Also failing to realize what level of player Cassell actually is. Also failing to realize how great that offense was for Cassell that year. Also failing to realize that it isn't a crime for Bill to put his QB in a position to be successful.
Yet when Cassel is with the same assembly of players, NOW they and the coaches get credit? Haha, oh wow.
1. That was one game. Kyle Boller even had his one game flashes of brilliance.Just like when Matty Flynn played against the Pats this year. They toned down the playbook, shorter throws, screens, etc. And that gave them a chance to win. I didn't hear anyone screaming that Rodgers was overrated after that game or saying that if Flynn can almost beat a 14 win team then it's just the Mike McCarthy genius offensive system.
2. The Packers roster is deep as ? and filled with talent.
3. Brandon Jackson was helping the ? out of Flynn that game.
4. We've seen it in multiple seasons of the Pats though.
And to comment on how Gonzales, Collie, Garcon and Tamme are good players without manning, can I make the same argument for Brandon Tate and Aaron Hernandez then? Because they are. -
major pain wrote: »You do realize the Patriots were either last or next to last in their division the 3 seasons before Brady took over for Bledsoe?
Stop faking.
Belichick started coaching the Pats 2000. That first year under him was their ONLY losing season. Brady or not. -
I'm just jumpin in the debate my vote is for Peyton. I mean come on, Tom is NICE but he is in the Pat's system and I hink that's why he has at least half of his rings. Manning has his ring mostly becuase of himself.
-
JUXcaptainHOOK wrote: »he is decent i never said he's wack... but has he reached 11 wins again inna season? i dont think so... So yeah... the Patriots coaching staff had more to do with the 11 wins.... but im not saying cassell is wack... i like the homie actually... this is just a Peyton vs Brady debate so i'm stating the obvious
LOL this doesnt make sense. Cassell put up some very good numbers for coming in as a back up with no starts. Its a totally different team he is playing for now. KC did very well last year and Cassell put up good numbers again. Its very likely the Patriots did well that year and KC did well last year that Cassell is a good enough QB to win a few games.JUXcaptainHOOK wrote: »they still were in the SB years before that tho and lost.... where were the colts?
This doesnt mean anything. With Brady as a QB took a franchise that had been down for a decently long stretch and turned things around. It stands to reason that Bledsoe would not have had the same success. It also kinda nullifies your argument that the "system" is the main factor. -
Meet The Sniper wrote: »Stop faking.
Belichick started coaching the Pats 2000. That first year under him was their ONLY losing season. Brady or not.
That means what exactly? I never said anything about who was coaching. The fact remains the franchise was unsuccessful though. -
Jeezyfan4ever wrote: »ima just say what i said before, probably you havent read it. Do you really think Indy has a complicated offense? Let me give you the answer. No, no it doesn't. It's not really basic but it's not like this out of this world super complicated offense that only PM could master like so many fools believe. Just because he runs to the line and screams and yells and waives his hands around so waterheads all around the country can go ooohhh he's changing the play and stuff he must be smart. And ? he knows 3 plays at the LOS before every snap? In the town(camden I live in, we went to the playoffs and the HS QB ran the no huddle in the champ game and called all the plays for like the last 2 drives. Maybe he's the next Manning because he knows more than 1 play in his head.
Every QB can change plays, adjust routes, protections, just because they don't do all that exaggerated ? (which is just ? half the time) doesn't mean they aren't doing anything. Hell some teams have silent checks. Or where the WR makes the adjustment himself without someone yelling HOTEL HOTEL HOTEL BLACK TIGER BLACK TIGER HOTEL to him.
The media has all the sheeple convinced that only Peyton could run that magic ? and dunk offense. Yeah guess what it's not true. It's not that amazing. Manning's also notorious for leading his receivers to their death. He's a garbage teacher of the game to fellow teammates from what I can see. He's a whiny baby about anything that doesn't go his way. An awful lot like his apologist fans that blame the team around him every single time failing to mention that they didn't have a defense because of all the expensive pieces they stack around him on offense to give him those incredible (regular season) numbers.
Yeah, since HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL is comparable to professional, NFL football. If you are relatively athletic and/or smart you can be a superstar in HS. That same superstar in HS might do jack ? in college, let alone the NFL. FOH... where is the dude now?
Exactly...
Same sport, different game.
Bottom line is, neither I nor you know exactly how that offense is run or exactly how much Peyton does. However, "the media", the people that actually TALK to the staff there, and TALK to manning himself report on how much Peyton does for that offense. That's whose word we are going off of, which is way more credible than you or I sitting at home on our computers.
So quit with the media ? because yeah, they do have "media darlings" and favorites, but a lot of them are deserved. I'd even go as far as to say as a whole they like Brady MORE than Manning.
And WTF at the bolded. Please tell me how you deduced that. Lmao. -
major pain wrote: »That means what exactly? I never said anything about who was coaching. The fact remains the franchise was unsuccessful though.
Well if you're even remotely on topic that would mean you're trying to insinuate that the success of the Franschise could be attributed to Brady.
Which obviously isn't true. -
Meet The Sniper wrote: »Well if you're even remotely on topic that would mean you're trying to insinuate that the success of the Franschise could be attributed to Brady.
Which obviously isn't true.
LMAO.. so Cassell had a SINGLE good season stepping in for Brady completely nullifies Brady's play? WOW... -
major pain wrote: »LMAO.. so Cassell had a SINGLE good season stepping in for Brady completely nullifies Brady's play? WOW...
Nullifies? No, nobody is saying Brady is bad, stop exxagerating.
But that season proves they have a offensive system that ? can obviously step in and flourish in. Whether or not Brady is a system QB can't be proved until he plays on another team.
It just puts the ring arguement to more and more shame. Then looking at the fact that Manning's numbers are superior to Bradys just ? on it further. -
Meet The Sniper wrote: »Nullifies? No, nobody is saying Brady is bad, stop exxagerating.
But that season proves they have a offensive system that ? can obviously step in and flourish in. Whether or not Brady is a system QB can't be proved until he plays on another team.
How do you say stop exaggerating, and but just said this?Meet The Sniper wrote: »Well if you're even remotely on topic that would mean you're trying to insinuate that the success of the Franschise could be attributed to Brady.
Which obviously isn't true.
3 QBs have played under Belichick.
1 of them is a multi-MVP winner, multi-SB winner, has 50 TD in a single season, along with a ton of other accolades.
Another was pretty good at one point, but injuries and age got the best of him eventually.
The last only played one season and is on another team, but the jury is still out on him.
All things considered, only the first one will probably go down as one of the GOATs and for someone to say its more of the coaching system than anything is ridiculous at worst. I cant wait for Brady to retire so people can see how good he actually is/was. In this era ONLY Peyton can rival his accomplishments. And both are compared to the all-time greats. Thats not just a "system" if you ask me. Thats a damn good player. -
JUXcaptainHOOK wrote: »Kansas City aint doing ? ... so no... i give the Patriot coaching staff more credit than Cassel
Matt Cassel had a better QB rating than Peyton Manning this past season.
Cassell threw 10 less INT's than Manning last season. His QB rating was higher than Peyton's too.
Maybe Cassell isn't such a joke eh? Not to mention he took over the best offensive team ever and had success. Go fuckiing figure. -
JUXcaptainHOOK wrote: »lol so your really gonna ignore the fact the patriots were a successful franchise before Brady? are u ever gonna acknowledge that? when u do.... this is convo is over.
? so was the 49ers idiot montana and young, that statement is dumb, -
JUXcaptainHOOK wrote: »he is decent i never said he's wack... but has he reached 11 wins again inna season? i dont think so... So yeah... the Patriots coaching staff had more to do with the 11 wins.... but im not saying cassell is wack... i like the homie actually... this is just a Peyton vs Brady debate so i'm stating the obvious
by one ? win, really? he had a 10 wins -
major pain wrote: »LMAO.. so Cassell had a SINGLE good season stepping in for Brady completely nullifies Brady's play? WOW...
Thats exactly what they saying -
Jeezyfan4ever wrote: »Matt Cassel had a better QB rating than Peyton Manning this past season.
Cassell threw 10 less INT's than Manning last season. His QB rating was higher than Peyton's too.
Manning had a decidedly bad year though. That offense in general struggled as the running game was terrible too.Maybe Cassell isn't such a joke eh?
I could contextualize Cassel's success but you wouldn't want that.Not to mention he took over the best offensive team ever and had success. Go fuckiing figure.
A few posts ago you were running around bragging about how Brady had nothing around him.
Go ? figure.major pain wrote: »How do you say stop exaggerating, and but just said this?
3 QBs have played under Belichick.
1 of them is a multi-MVP winner, multi-SB winner, has 50 TD in a single season, along with a ton of other accolades.
Another was pretty good at one point, but injuries and age got the best of him eventually.
The last only played one season and is on another team, but the jury is still out on him.
All things considered, only the first one will probably go down as one of the GOATs and for someone to say its more of the coaching system than anything is ridiculous at worst.
Woah dere.
Nobody said Brady's success is BECAUSE of the coaching system. But Cassel and Bledsoe just HAVE to make you consider the strength of the system as a INSTRUMENT in Brady's success, as much as you Brady supporters want to run away from that fact palms up screaming.
The main idea of using the Rings as a method to put Brady over Manning has to imply that pretty much the sole reason they got those rings was because of Brady. Otherwise the 2000 Ravens neatly disprove that theory every time. But the coaching under Belicheck has given them winning seasons, even without Brady, and improved the team in EVERY aspect. Unless Brady is secretly BB and every man on that roster those years, you can't hold that over Manning. It doesn't prove Brady was better than Manning, it proves the Pats were better than the Colts.
After that all you have is the dreaded stats, which we all know Manning is clearly superior, even though the Patriots are notorious for running up the score in decided contests.
There, I just proved Manning > Brady with logic.
