Peyton Manning is the best QB of the decade

This is exactly why people who are uninformed think peyton is the best.

 

Of course it was Marvin harrison's fault, the OL's fault and everyone but peyton but I never see you credit anyone else when Indy wins- it's always b/c of peyton. If you think Peyton has been a good playoff performer I have to question what you have been watching. yes he has had some great moments like Sunday but overall he's been mediocre at best.

Brayd did nothing spectatcular on that Super Bowl winning drive in the last minute inside their 20 w/ no timeouts. :rofl:

The Defense kicked a FG and scored TWO TDs in SB XXXVI?

I saw that Pitt game, I know it wasn'tabout the OL. It was about the QB and despite getting multiple gifts he still failed.

I don't remmebr specifically what killed them in 1999 vs. ten but I give him a pass on that anyway since he was in his first playoff game.


No one thought Vanderjagt was making that kick.


So Brady doesn't get credit for them fumbling and recovering it for a TD but peyton does get credit for basically the same thing happening to them in the 2nd half? Just to clear things up- when it happened to Brady he was lucky but when it happened to peyton it was all skill?

You do realize that the QB doesn't have to make every play, right?


People are talking about peyton as the bets b/c they are caught up in the moment and they have short memories. When you rationally step back and look at what they have done in big games it's not that close yet. It gets alot closer if he plays well and they beat NO.


When have I said fantasy #s were a reason Brady was better? I think the point I have always made was that once Brady had comparable weapons he put up comparable fantasy #s and still led his team to a SB.

Brady still has been to 2 conf title games and a SB- I wouldn't call that struggling big time and Weis leaving was purely coincidental. You give Weis way too much credit for a guy who has never done anything w/o Brady.

Weis has zero SBs w/o Brady- that is a fact. he has zero SB apps as an OC w/o Brady- that is a fact too.

So how come NE was 5-11 w/ Brown and Faulk in 2000? W/ all that clutchness on 3rd downs you would think they would have at least been competitive.

ONE healthy year and led his team to an 18-1 record. This year he was coming off MAJOR surgery, he clearly wasn't healthy all year and he was w/o Welker for a few games and Moss obviously wasn't healthy down the stretch.

 

Again, you do realize the QB does more than just pass the ball, right? How did that stop Peyton from putting some first downs together, holding onto the ball a bit longer and putting up some points?

Imagine if Brady led his offense to 3 pts in a game what you would say. You criticize him for leading his O to 14 w/ 7 coming late to give his team a late lead in a SB so imagine if he was shutout or held to 3 like manning has been.

 

Tom Brady is the best QB of the last decade. He's actually won big games in bad weather. Peyton Manning turns into a ditherer when the weather gets bad.

 

If the Colts win it makes Manning 10-8 in the playoffs for his career.

The Patriots are 14-4 with Brady.

I know those are "team" things, and Manning is playing better now than he ever has before, but does one postseason erase Brady's past successes and Manning's past struggles? Manning is changing the perception of him in the playoffs, but if he pukes on his shoes a week from Sunday, then people will go right back to the "can't win the big game" mantra, fair or not.

I have a ton of respect for Manning and to be honest I couldn't tell you who will end up being better when all is said and done. Both guys have at least a few years left.

 

So he doesn't deserve any credit for leading the team b/c they weren't passing? The only affect a QB can have on a game is when they apss the ball? but then when they throw short passes they didn't do anything anyway- why haven't more Bs been ale to do nothing like Brady and win 3 SBs?

A week later the running game wasn't working and Brady carved up Pitt on the road. he could beat you in many ways, the great peyton just wants to accumulate #s so he is always changing plays to pass plays.

 

What Brady did was easy. Who couldn't lead their team to the Super Bowl winning drive w/ a minute left, no timeouts, inside your own 20 in your first ever postseason action and first seasona s a starter in the NFL. It was so simple that it took Peyton 6 seasons before he won his first playoff game(I know, I know it was the fault of the OL, the running game, the D, the coaches, the weather, the fields,...).


So what? turnovers are part of the game.


Brady was under more pressure in the '07 SB than Manning has ever been under yet he found a way in the final minutes to lead an 80 yd TD drive to give his team the lead.


Is a 46 yarder a chip shot? all the great peyton had to do was get another 1st down or 2 and he could have made it a chip shot but on 2nd and 3rd and 2 from the 28 he went for the EZ TWICE.

AGAIN, you do realize there's more to playing QB than just passing the ball, right?


That's great that a guy who throws more than anyone, plays AT LEAST half his games in domes will have all the QB records but unless he keeps playing like he did against us he will be remember as a choker in January.


B/c his D choked in the final minutes against an average offense.


It's all a coincidence, if not then where is Weis' success w/o him?


So why were the Pats 5-11? W/ those great players they should have at least been competitive, right? Most games in the NFL are decided by 6 pts or less.


Excuses are what you give when Brady plays well and when peyton does. If you think he had healthy weapons all year you are blind. Just pretend manning had to go through that, you'd be telling us what a warrior he was.

this was the FIRST one and done for Brady, Manning has done it an astounding SIX times!

 

Brady led the greatest offense in history to a total of 14 points. doesn't matter when they were scored, fact is it wasn't enough to win. if he could have identified open receivers quicker and gotten rid of the ball, he wouldn't have gotten sacked as much as he did or put on his back leading to errant throws. fact is, Brady only led his team to two scores, that is nobody's fault but his own. had he scored 30, that Giants drive at the end of the game would be meaningless.

oh, captain logic and his conveniently different standards for each QB.

 

Was I wrong when I said "he led them"? That doesn't mean he gets every shred of credit, no QB can do it by themselves. The best elevate the talent around them and that is what Brady has consistently done through his career, it is what Peyton has consistently done in the reg season but he's starting to gte in postseason.

It amazes me how you have no clue how difficult what Brady did on that drive was.


W/o Peyton turnovers his team would have had many more chances to win playoff games, what is your point?


One shot maybe but two was asinine and if you do take 2 shots you better hit on one and he didn't.

But you win games when you put up 3 points?


So where are all the great QBs and the great success w/ Weis as an OC w/o Brady?


You don't think a QB has anything to do w/ a D giving up 4 less PPG? They also went from 17 to 23 PPG scored, he probably didn't have anything to do w/ that either.


he didn't get the job done, he was won w/ less talent. he doesn't get a pass for playing so poorly vs. baltimore BUT you said he had 2 healthy years w/ those WRs and that's simply not true.


His poor play against the Giants would be a top 5-6 postseason game for Peyton.

It does matter when they scored, he led an 80 yd drive to give them the lead in the final minutes. He didn't lead his O to enough points but at least he did something.

I love that last line b/c you know it was ok for peyton and his great 2004 offense to score THREE in their playoff loss w/ no chance to win but Brady leads his team 80s yds to take the lead late and he's vilified for it. You guys really crack me up sometimes.

 

it only matters when you score if it holds up. when it doesn't, that second TD becomes as irrelevant as if it came in the 2nd quarter. what matters is his performance the entire game, and it wasn't very good and arguably the biggest choke job in the history of the NFL if you simply want to apply your logic, that is right, it is your logic I am using in this example, that the shortcomings of the entire team lay at the feet of the QB.

fact is, Manning has never had a comparable choke in the playoffs as that game if we apply the same logic and criteria to Brady as you do to Manning (which you do not, which is why you make poor arguments).

that's a relevant comparison because you can't blame Manning in 2004 that his D gave up more points than he could generate. judge their performances, and Brady performed far worse in the Super Bowl than Manning did in that game, and had his D played as well as the Pats D did in the Super Bowl Manning would have won that game. but you conveniently dump everyone else's short comings on Manning while absolving Brady of the same criteria. your ability to put together a logical analysis and conclusion is laughable.

 

Explain how when they averaged 37 PPG and scored 14 how that is the biggest choke job over when peyton and Indy averaged 33 a game and scored 3 in their playoff loss?

I make poor arguments?:rofl: Am I the one ignoring the great 2004 offense Peyton had where he led his high powered O to 3 points?


and Pitt '05 was as big of a choke, if not bigger, b/c they did it w/ the advantage of a 1st rd bye and they ahd a home game AND he was given multiple gifts to win that game and still couldn't do it.



Of course you can't blame Manning in 2004 but you can blame Brady 2007?
20 points was more than his O could generate? the O that averaged 33 a game couldn't be expected to score in the 20s. There is a lauaghable argument here and we know where it's comg from.

 

I don't have Mannings games memorized, I thought you were referring to 3 scores.

that being said, my arguments you are disputing are utilizing the logic you are using, so if there is a problem with them, you need to look in the mirror. news flash, I am mocking your arguments. but I wouldn't expect someone who doesn't realize how bad their arguments are to be able to identify that.

and no, a loss after a first round bye in no way is comparable to the greatest offense of all time and the "greatest team" ever only scoring two TD's and losing the Super Bowl. only you can make such a ridiculous statement. by your logic, the Chargers loss to the Jets this year was comparable if not greater than the undefeated Pats Super Bowl loss, since it is the exact same scenario as the Colts loss to the Steelers -- great offense, first round bye and loss.

your problem is the most basic flaw in logical analysis -- you come to your conclusion first and then only seek out evidence that supports it while ignoring the rest of the evidence that disputes it while the rest of the intelligent thinking world actually compiles all the evidence first and then draws a conclusion from that.

 

That team 2 years ago was undefeated but it was not the greatest team of all time and that offense was very simialr to the 2004 Indianaplois Colts who put up 3 points in their playoff loss so how was putting up 14 more of a choke?

The Chargers loss was not the exact same scenario as the Colts b/c the Colts were the 1 seed and they weren't given MULTIPLE gifts to win that game failing to do so. Did a clear INT get overturned in favor of SD? Did we fumble at their 1 going in for the clinhcing score in the last min and a half only to fumble and have it returned to midfield? Nope.

Keep reaching. Go to a different thread and let those of us that understand the game discuss this issue. go to one of the threads where you discuss bowel movements, that's more your speed.

 

so, let me get this straight. because there wasn't a bad call in the Super Bowl Brady is absolved of his piss poor performance, but Manning is judged differently because of a play he had nothing to do with. sorry, I am knee deep in defecation right here, because your posts are truly shit.

way to continue to only support my arguments against you. at any point where you actually want to attempt to dispute my arguments and not support them inadvertently I am here waiting. but as of this point, all you can do with your infinite knowledge and logic is contradict yourself and create hypocritical arguments by applying different standards to each QB to rationalize your preference.

for someone who claims to understand football, you sure haven't exhibited a logical understanding of it.