Manning or Brady

[.AirMcNair. 1,232]

I'm going to guess Montana is your #1, but I'm interested to know who the other 6-8 QB's are on your list that beat a 4-time MVP.

 

I've never made what I feel is a concrete top 10 list, the only two I've not wavered on in the past 3 or 4 years is Montana at 1 and Brady at 2.

 

After that you get some kind of order from Steve Young, Bart Starr, Drew Brees, Roger Staubach, Kurt Warner, then Peyton Manning gets thrown in there to compete with Elway, Favre and Aikman for placement on my top 10.

 

Just to throw it in to list form, not 100% concrete on placement outside of top 2:

 

1. Joe Montana

2. Tom Brady

3. Bart Starr

4. Steve Young

5. Drew Brees

6. Kurt Warner

7. Roger Staubach

8. Troy Aikman

9. John Elway

10. Peyton Manning

11. Brett Favre

 

I feel pretty good about Starr at 3(again, not 100%..but I'll go with it)

 

4-7 can be exchanged.

 

8-11 can be exchanged.

 

Wanted to keep it at just 10, but didn't want to leave out any of the final 4.

 

Brees has potential to move even higher depending on how long he lasts. I guess Manning has that chance too assuming he plays a few more years/improves his post season performance.

 

Unitas is not on my list because I've done little to no research on his play.

Edited July 8, 2013 by .AirMcNair.

[Dutch 874]

I've never made what I feel is a concrete top 10 list, the only two I've not wavered on in the past 3 or 4 years is Montana at 1 and Brady at 2.

 

After that you get some kind of order from Steve Young, Bart Starr, Drew Brees, Roger Staubach, Kurt Warner, then Peyton Manning gets thrown in there to compete with Elway, Favre and Aikman for placement on my top 10.

 

Just to throw it in to list form, not 100% concrete on placement outside of top 2:

 

1. Joe Montana

2. Tom Brady

3. Bart Starr

4. Steve Young

5. Drew Brees

6. Kurt Warner

7. Roger Staubach

8. Troy Aikman

9. John Elway

10. Peyton Manning

11. Brett Favre

 

I feel pretty good about Starr at 3(again, not 100%..but I'll go with it)

 

4-7 can be exchanged.

 

8-11 can be exchanged.

 

Wanted to keep it at just 10, but didn't want to leave out any of the final 4.

 

Brees has potential to move even higher depending on how long he lasts. I guess Manning has that chance too assuming he plays a few more years/improves his post season performance.

 

Unitas is not on my list because I've done little to no research on his play.

 

Kurt Warner over Peyton? Troy Aikman?

[Thanatos 2,847]

Saying the Pats went 11-5 without Brady and pointing to that as evidence of anything is just silly. Those 11-5 Pats beat up on weaker teams and got wooped by strong teams. They had one hell of an easy schedule.

[.AirMcNair. 1,232]

Kurt Warner over Peyton? Troy Aikman?

Like I said, 8-11 is interchangable for me.

 

Warner being over Peyton is due to his post season play.

 

The way I look at my QB rankings is:

 

Who would I feel most comfortable with going in to a playoff game?

 

Regular season success does factor in(noted by Aikman being as low as he is), but it's no where near as important to me as to how good you are in the post season. I don't even mean winning. I just mean how they performed. It's why Otto Graham isn't on my list..he won a lot of titles, and was in the title game like every year of his career if I remember right..but his team usually won in spite of his passing performances.

[BJORN 679]

So... What you're saying is that if we ignore all the ways Brady is better that he and Manning are pretty equal? Yeah, great logic.

 

Brady plays much better when it counts. He has an obscenely better playoff record. Not to mention 3 rings to Peyton's 1 ring that he wasn't even really responsible for winning. Manning played like ass that entire postseason. He was lucky to have a defense that was good enough to keep pulling his nuts out of the fire.

 

I really don't understand how this is even a discussion. Brady blows the overhyped schmuck that is Peyton Manning completely out of the water. Keep in mind that this is coming from someone who DESPISES Tom Brady and the Patriots in general. It's just that obvious.

At the end of the day, in a discussion about individual players I prefer to look at INDIVIDUAL stats rather than team stats. Even with that said, I gave the edge to Brady!!!! If its Colts vs Patriots, I take the Patriots 10/10 times. Overall, I think Manning is the better QB.

[KempBolt 498]

I've never made what I feel is a concrete top 10 list, the only two I've not wavered on in the past 3 or 4 years is Montana at 1 and Brady at 2.

 

After that you get some kind of order from Steve Young, Bart Starr, Drew Brees, Roger Staubach, Kurt Warner, then Peyton Manning gets thrown in there to compete with Elway, Favre and Aikman for placement on my top 10.

 

Just to throw it in to list form, not 100% concrete on placement outside of top 2:

 

1. Joe Montana

2. Tom Brady

3. Bart Starr

4. Steve Young

5. Drew Brees

6. Kurt Warner

7. Roger Staubach

8. Troy Aikman

9. John Elway

10. Peyton Manning

11. Brett Favre

 

I feel pretty good about Starr at 3(again, not 100%..but I'll go with it)

 

4-7 can be exchanged.

 

8-11 can be exchanged.

 

Wanted to keep it at just 10, but didn't want to leave out any of the final 4.

 

Brees has potential to move even higher depending on how long he lasts. I guess Manning has that chance too assuming he plays a few more years/improves his post season performance.

 

Unitas is not on my list because I've done little to no research on his play.

 

Dan Marino seriously doesn't make your top 11?

 

He's #1 for me.

[.AirMcNair. 1,232]

Dan Marino seriously doesn't make your top 11?

 

He's #1 for me.

 

He would probably be somewhere around that 8-11 cluster as well. His resume is pretty similar to Peyton's.

 

I wasn't trying to list every single QB I thought was as good as Peyton, just the ones I thought was better then a couple I consider close to him just to complete the list.

[Glanvilles Grits 142]

You can mark me down for Brady. I've always hated the way that Brady sort of comes off both on and off the field, kind of like he believes he's better than everyone around him (Which I suppose he almost kind of is), but on the field he's an absolute stud and I've always been infatuated with him. I really don't think that you could place him on a team and see him do bad. If anything, compared to the early years of his careers, he would probably do better.

 

I hate the fact that people say Brady is a product of the Belicheck system ever since Matt Cassel had the solid year when Brady went down. I don't think that's the case. Cassel took over what was probably looking to be a Superbowl team that year and still only had a year that was par for the course.

 

I'm not knocking Peyton Manning. I think Manning is great. We have never really seen anyone control the line of scrimmage quite like Manning has during his career and we may never end up seeing it again.

[Jules 98]

Kurt Warner over Peyton? Troy Aikman?

 

I know....

 

 

 

Very interesting poll/comments. I knew it would slanted to Brady though before I even started it.

 

However, I think too many get blinded by what the Patriots teams did in the first half of the 2000's with top smart defenses and a capable Brady leading the offense without setting the league on fire by himself. Which kind of confuses me at times since this forum often preaches stat love with individual players but then at the same time cherry picks who gets credit for a team win/loss record in regards to the regular season or postseason IMO.

[Jules 98]

Wow am I the only one taking Peyton?

 

He has had a successful career when it comes to the postseason...one bad year and it was his third year in the league.

 

Postseason Stats

 

Dutch's first line says it all IMO. I also think Brady benefited from the Pats being a great team when they won their rings just like Peyton did when the Colts finally put it all together.

 

I took Peyton but in a way I feel as if I HAVE TO as well. But, having seen both Peyton and Brady play head to head in several games in their primes I always (homerism aside) was more impressed by the pure skills of Manning and the way he controls his offense. Not a knock on Brady either who I think is terrific. I think there is an argument for either one and I think both are closer then many like to realize. I always felt Brady had the edge in intangibles though.

 

I also do not think either is the best ever either in my book but I am not going to make a list since I often get torn on how to rank a few. How do I rank so many great QBs? It's difficult to me......I usually place Montana/Unitas in the top 2 though.

 

I have personally been disappointed in Brady's postseason play at times since the Pats defense has fallen off. And I was very disappointed in Brady vs. the Ravens the last few years and vs. the Giants in both Super Bowls.

 

Granted, Manning has had some shit awful playoff games and luck. I won't deny this. But, it's not all just his fault either.....

 

In a team sport such as football in a one game elimination in the postseason a lot can go wrong. A lucky bounce or two can be the difference between being a Super Bowl Champion or being one and done. It's not the NBA where often the better team wins the series.

 

But, yes the 9-11 playoff record for Manning looks awful and I have strong doubts he will ever cash in on another SB championship before he retires, same with Brady.

 

However, every playoff loss has a unique story to me as well. Some of it is on the QB at times and some of it isn't.

 

Besides, a lot of these high powered offenses in recent years that everyone drools over: Peyton on the Broncos/Colts, Patriots, Saints, Packers....can wrack up the regular season stats to make everyone go nuts but then in the playoffs can sometimes be stifled by the physical defensive minded squads with capable QBs leading the way.

 

 

JMO

[.AirMcNair. 1,232]

I know....

 

 

 

Very interesting poll/comments. I knew it would slanted to Brady though before I even started it.

 

However, I think too many get blinded by what the Patriots teams did in the first half of the 2000's with top smart defenses and a capable Brady leading the offense without setting the league on fire by himself. Which kind of confuses me at times since this forum often preaches stat love with individual players but then at the same time cherry picks who gets credit for a team win/loss record in regards to the regular season or postseason IMO.

 

It has nothing to do with wins in the playoffs. It's performance. Peyton has far too often choked in the playoffs. Same goes for people like Elway, Marino, Favre, etc. People like Montana, Brady, Staubach, Brees, Warner, etc were known for stepping up in the playoffs, not stepping down.

 

Manning's performance in the Colts playoff run in 06 was overall pathetic. If a game in the playoffs requires your QB to play very well, throughout the ENTIRE game, would you seriously pick Peyton Manning over Kurt Warner? Drew Brees? Tom Brady? Joe Montana? Bart Starr? Steve Young? Even though I have Aikman in the same group as Manning due to his regular season mediocrity, I would take him in the playoffs over Manning as well.

 

I don't see why anyone gives two shits about breaking regular season records when if you get to the playoffs with that QB you can't rely on them in a close game.

[Mike975 12]

Whichever guy you go for you'll end up with a great qb. But my vote goes to Peyton. Sure he could have won more super bowls, but if we are ranking qbs on super bowl wins alone Dan Marino would NEVER come into the discussion for the greatest QBs of all time. In fact, Terry Bradshaw a 4 time super bowl winning qb would be joint best with Joe Montana. So let's be fair here, success does come into the argument, but for some to dismiss Peyton so easily is both disrespectful for what he has done, and very naive as well.

 

We could disect their whole careers but I'll simply say that Peyton did not have the same level of support that Brady has had. Brady in his first four years at least had an elite defense to back him up, whereas the Colts defense was not as good. Both have had receiving cores to back them up. But arguably the biggest factor here is Bill Belichick being a superior head coach to those that Peyton has played under. Put Peyton in that Patriots team, in a division that has been weak for all of Brady's career, and Peyton could have won the same as Brady if not more; or put Belichick in Indy and I think the Colts may have done even better in the post season. That said, I'm not taking away Brady's achievements or greatness, I am simply implying that Brady has generally had a better supporting cast.

 

But let's look at last season. Peyton out performed Brady, despite possessing less options on offense. Brady had Welker, Gronk, Hernandez and Lloyd. Peyton had Thomas, Decker, Dreesen and Tamme. As you can see the Pats had far more quality in their receiving core. The Pats had the 7th best rushing attack, which helped them win some games; whereas the Broncos had the sixteenth best rushing attack and relied heavily on Peyton's arm. Here's another stat. Brady threw 54 more attempts than Peyton, and had only 1 more completion. Again Brady had a good year, but Peyton was better with a lesser offensive setup. Though granted Peyton had an elite defense last season, Brady did not.

 

Overall I'd take Peyton. He slightly edges Brady as a passer, and while he does not have Brady's postseason record, he is the guy I would build my team around. He's a great leader on the field, and he helped make the Indy Colts a top team, and without him they may have left by now. He put them on the map, and by all accounts he's a great guy off the field too. For me he's more likeable than Brady. Now sure 3 rings beat 1, so Brady is the better winner, but in terms of the better QB I feel that goes to Peyton.

 

My vote: Peyton Manning.

[NaTaS+ 958]

I've never made what I feel is a concrete top 10 list, the only two I've not wavered on in the past 3 or 4 years is Montana at 1 and Brady at 2.

 

After that you get some kind of order from Steve Young, Bart Starr, Drew Brees, Roger Staubach, Kurt Warner, then Peyton Manning gets thrown in there to compete with Elway, Favre and Aikman for placement on my top 10.

 

Just to throw it in to list form, not 100% concrete on placement outside of top 2:

 

1. Joe Montana

2. Tom Brady

3. Bart Starr

4. Steve Young

5. Drew Brees

6. Kurt Warner

7. Roger Staubach

8. Troy Aikman

9. John Elway

10. Peyton Manning

11. Brett Favre

 

I feel pretty good about Starr at 3(again, not 100%..but I'll go with it)

 

4-7 can be exchanged.

 

8-11 can be exchanged.

 

Wanted to keep it at just 10, but didn't want to leave out any of the final 4.

 

Brees has potential to move even higher depending on how long he lasts. I guess Manning has that chance too assuming he plays a few more years/improves his post season performance.

 

Unitas is not on my list because I've done little to no research on his play.

 

 

I think you've left off Dan Marino and Otto Graham . Otto took his teams to 10 Chamionship games of which they won 7. Browns' record with Graham as starting quarterback was 114–20–4.He's pretty high on my list, but I've not created one just yet. But going to through out some thoughts here.

 

2. Joe Montana
3. Otto Graham
4. Thomas Brady
5. Dan Marino
6. John Elway
7. Steve Young
8. Bert Favre
9. Peyton Manning
10. Johnny Unitas
11. Big Ben
12. Jim Kelly
13. Warren Moon
14. I'ii leave a spot down on the list for Terry Bradshaw. Dude played well form the what I can tell on the highlight reel. It seemed the soul crushing deffese had a lot to do with his success.

[Mike975 12]

It has nothing to do with wins in the playoffs. It's performance. Peyton has far too often choked in the playoffs. Same goes for people like Elway, Marino, Favre, etc. People like Montana, Brady, Staubach, Brees, Warner, etc were known for stepping up in the playoffs, not stepping down.

 

Manning's performance in the Colts playoff run in 06 was overall pathetic. If a game in the playoffs requires your QB to play very well, throughout the ENTIRE game, would you seriously pick Peyton Manning over Kurt Warner? Drew Brees? Tom Brady? Joe Montana? Bart Starr? Steve Young? Even though I have Aikman in the same group as Manning due to his regular season mediocrity, I would take him in the playoffs over Manning as well.

 

I don't see why anyone gives two shits about breaking regular season records when if you get to the playoffs with that QB you can't rely on them in a close game.

 

So would you take Terry Bradshaw over those guys as well considering he won 4 super bowls?

 

Also check your facts on John Elway. He's tied with Brady for FIVE super bowl appearances. Sure he's won two to Brady's three, but in terms of winning big games Elway did have a knack for it.

 

Brees has one super bowl appearance, and you do realize that his post season record is 9-9 to Peyton's 9-11, yet Peyton has two super bowl appearances to Brees' one?

 

You tip your hat to Kurt Warner, a QB that won one of this three super bowl appearances. Statistically he's one of the best super bowl qbs, but surely by your argument Elway would rank above him considering he has won 2 super bowls and appeared in 5 total?

 

Or better yet, why not argue that Eli Manning and Joe Flacco are better QBs...

 

The thing you miss with your argument is that you place the success of a team on the QB. You need to take into consideration those QBs supporting casts. QBs can lose games as well as win them, sure. But what about receivers dropping catches? Defenses leaking points for fun leading to the QB having to take more risks to keep his team in the game? Bad play calls from the coaches? Injuries to key players?

 

I could go on. By your argument you'd take Trent Dilfer over Dan Marino. Super bowl rings alone don't make a QB great, or better than another. Dilfer was nowhere near the QB Marino was. In an argument over best QB you need to consider all factors of the team, and then make your agument. Because as it stands, your argument is flawed and contradictory.

Edited July 8, 2013 by Mike975

[Luvnit2 1]

Take your pick. I am sick of talking about the young QBs tonight.

 

Manning or Brady.

 

 

Which one have you always preferred/think is better?

 

These debates have been endless on Colts forums for so many years!! I am curious to see what various fans of other teams have to say in it.

 

Either one is fine with me btw!

 

Two greats, but Brady has the better post season numbers. It would hard to argue against either one. I truly believe Peyton may be one of smartest to play the position.

[.AirMcNair. 1,232]

So would you take Terry Bradshaw over those guys as well considering he won 4 super bowls?

 

Also check your facts on John Elway. He's tied with Brady for FIVE super bowl appearances. Sure he's won two to Brady's three, but in terms of winning big games Elway did have a knack for it.

 

Brees has one super bowl appearance, and you do realize that his post season record is 9-9 to Peyton's 9-11, yet Peyton has two super bowl appearances to Brees' one?

 

You tip your hat to Kurt Warner, a QB that won one of this three super bowl appearances. Statistically he's one of the best super bowl qbs, but surely by your argument Elway would rank above him considering he has won 2 super bowls and appeared in 5 total?

 

Or better yet, why not argue that Eli Manning and Joe Flacco are better QBs...

 

The thing you miss with your argument is that you place the success of a team on the QB. You need to take into consideration those QBs supporting casts. QBs can lose games as well as win them, sure. But what about receivers dropping catches? Defenses leaking points for fun leading to the QB having to take more risks to keep his team in the game? Bad play calls from the coaches? Injuries to key players?

 

I could go on. By your argument you'd take Trent Dilfer over Dan Marino. Super bowl rings alone don't make a QB great, or better than another. Dilfer was nowhere near the QB Marino was. In an argument over best QB you need to consider all factors of the team, and then make your agument. Because as it stands, your argument is flawed and contradictory.

 

Someone obviously didn't even bother to read my post. I said nothing about wins.

[.AirMcNair. 1,232]

I think you've left off Dan Marino and Otto Graham . Otto took his teams to 10 Chamionship games of which they won 7. Browns' record with Graham as starting quarterback was 114–20–4.He's pretty high on my list, but I've not created one just yet. But going to through out some thoughts here.

 

2. Joe Montana
3. Otto Graham
4. Thomas Brady
5. Dan Marino
6. John Elway
7. Steve Young
8. Bert Favre
9. Peyton Manning
10. Johnny Unitas
11. Big Ben
12. Jim Kelly
13. Warren Moon
14. I'ii leave a spot down on the list for Terry Bradshaw. Dude played well form the what I can tell on the highlight reel. It seemed the soul crushing deffese had a lot to do with his success.

 

 

I commented on Otto already. His teams usually won in spite of him in their championship appearances. I don't remember his numbers off the top of my head, but outside of like 2 of the championships he was usually poor in the games.

 

That's not to discredit what he accomplished overall..but you have to be more consistent than that.

[Zack_of_Steel+ 3,014]

I created a separate thread with my spreadsheet and top 21 QBs. You can debate me there, if you wish. Here's the link and a preview of the list broken into their tiers:

 

http://www.thegridironpalace.com/forums/index.php?/topic/65901-zacks-top-21-qbs-of-all-time/

 

01. Joe Montana

02. Aaron Rodgers

03. Drew Brees

04. Tom Brady

05. Bart Starr

 

06. John Elway

07. Otto Graham

08. Ben Roethlisberger

09. Kurt Warner

10. Steve Young

 

11. Eli Manning

12. Roger Staubach

 

13. Brett Favre

14. Peyton Manning

15. Dan Marino

16. Warren Moon

17. Johnny Unitas

 

18. Jim Kelly

19. Terry Bradshaw

20. Fran Tarkenton

21. Ken Anderson

[Thanatos 2,847]

I like how that link is cut off and it says "bs-of-all-time."

[Piggly Wiggly 960]

It's not a landslide by any means in my opinion. Peyton is the best and smartest on field offensive conductor the game has ever seen. He changed the game with his on field audibles changing to plays and picked defenses apart. Also his fake gimmicking audible calls to throw the defense off their game. Phins brought up a great point about Peyton. Peyton was successful with the Colts and easily transitioned to the Broncos. Could Brady do the same? Who knows. Take Peyton away from the Colts, they crumble. Take Brady away from the Patriots, they went 11-5. That goes to show how good their roster/system was. When you think about Peyton's legacy, it will always be just Peyton (and play off losses). But when people look back at Brady's legacy, it will always be connected with Bill Belichick and his genius. No one will ever know how much that attributed to his success. Even with that said though, I'd still have to take Brady. He played better in the play offs more when Peyton had some bad games there.

 

You're acting as if Peyton went to a team that was 2-14 the previous season and had no pieces in place. Not to mention they already won a playoff game under Tim fucking Tebow. You transition Brady to the 2012 Broncos and they'd fucking thrive just as well if not more. And bringing up the 11-5 2008 Patriots? El oh fucking el. That team had the easiest schedule of all time. They got hate fucked by good teams ( a la 20+ point blowout losses to SD and Pittsburgh). That Matt Cassel-led offense was cringe worthy throughout most of the year. He did have his moments, but trust me, it sure as fuck wasn't in the same neighborhood as watching an offense led by Brady. Also, the '08 Pats defense was fairly competent (top 10, statistically speaking)... the '11 Colts defense on the other hand was utter dog shit. That kind of matters, too.

[Jules 98]

21-3 so far in favor of Brady.

 

WOW

 

I did think it would be closer though. I fully admit Peyton has had some playoff struggles and sometimes I can't even figure out why either. Bad shit just sometimes happens to him and his teams in the playoffs and it happened in Denver again.

 

Of course I consider him an odd rival now in a way being in the AFC and a rival to the Colts in standings if we should make the playoffs again, so I don't take it to heart if he loses now but if he is not standing in the Colts way I would not mind seeing him make a playoff run again either.

Edited July 9, 2013 by Jules

[FartWaffles 1,857]

At the end of the day, in a discussion about individual players I prefer to look at INDIVIDUAL stats rather than team stats. Even with that said, I gave the edge to Brady!!!! If its Colts vs Patriots, I take the Patriots 10/10 times. Overall, I think Manning is the better QB.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this topic, but when it comes down to the games that truly matter in the postseason you can have Manning. Smart money would be on Brady.

[Phins4life 271]

Never say never...

 

Let me rephrase...it's highly unlikely. Definitely seems like it's being set up for Tom to retire around the same time Bill calls it quits.

[oochymp 2,393]

Saying the Pats went 11-5 without Brady and pointing to that as evidence of anything is just silly. Those 11-5 Pats beat up on weaker teams and got wooped by strong teams. They had one hell of an easy schedule.

and let's not forget that they did miss the playoffs

 

Whichever guy you go for you'll end up with a great qb. But my vote goes to Peyton. Sure he could have won more super bowls, but if we are ranking qbs on super bowl wins alone Dan Marino would NEVER come into the discussion for the greatest QBs of all time. In fact, Terry Bradshaw a 4 time super bowl winning qb would be joint best with Joe Montana. So let's be fair here, success does come into the argument, but for some to dismiss Peyton so easily is both disrespectful for what he has done, and very naive as well.

I disagree with a lot of your post, but can't disagree with the opening paragraph at all

 

 

We could disect their whole careers but I'll simply say that Peyton did not have the same level of support that Brady has had. Brady in his first four years at least had an elite defense to back him up, whereas the Colts defense was not as good. Both have had receiving cores to back them up. But arguably the biggest factor here is Bill Belichick being a superior head coach to those that Peyton has played under. Put Peyton in that Patriots team, in a division that has been weak for all of Brady's career, and Peyton could have won the same as Brady if not more; or put Belichick in Indy and I think the Colts may have done even better in the post season. That said, I'm not taking away Brady's achievements or greatness, I am simply implying that Brady has generally had a better supporting cast.

the Patriots have definitely had a better defense, but I will point out that the Colts' defense carried Manning to his one Super Bowl win, as far as coaching Manning had a very good HC in Tony Dungy and a great OC in Tom Moore, who doesn't get nearly the credit he should (somebody else has explained this better than I could so I'll stop there)

 

But let's look at last season. Peyton out performed Brady, despite possessing less options on offense. Brady had Welker, Gronk, Hernandez and Lloyd. Peyton had Thomas, Decker, Dreesen and Tamme. As you can see the Pats had far more quality in their receiving core. The Pats had the 7th best rushing attack, which helped them win some games; whereas the Broncos had the sixteenth best rushing attack and relied heavily on Peyton's arm. Here's another stat. Brady threw 54 more attempts than Peyton, and had only 1 more completion. Again Brady had a good year, but Peyton was better with a lesser offensive setup. Though granted Peyton had an elite defense last season, Brady did not.

First of all, when you're talking about offensive weapons Manning's had, you've gotta point out that Brady's only had one great receiver, and that was Randy Moss who Brady got for only a few years late in his career, Manning had Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne, who are both likely HOFers, for most of their careers, and even last season I think you're underselling Peyton's supporting cast, I'd take Thomas and Decker over Lloyd and Welker and Dreesen and Tamme are definitely better than serviceable TEs, and let's not forget Stokely who rounds out a very good group of five pass catchers

 

Overall I'd take Peyton. He slightly edges Brady as a passer, and while he does not have Brady's postseason record, he is the guy I would build my team around. He's a great leader on the field, and he helped make the Indy Colts a top team, and without him they may have left by now. He put them on the map, and by all accounts he's a great guy off the field too. For me he's more likeable than Brady. Now sure 3 rings beat 1, so Brady is the better winner, but in terms of the better QB I feel that goes to Peyton.

I'm not sure what you mean by the Colts might have left by now without Manning, so I'm going to leave that alone, but I will say that likeability is not the highest priority in selecting your QB, nor should it be

[GA_Eagle 595]

So would you take Terry Bradshaw over those guys as well considering he won 4 super bowls?

 

Also check your facts on John Elway. He's tied with Brady for FIVE super bowl appearances. Sure he's won two to Brady's three, but in terms of winning big games Elway did have a knack for it.

 

Brees has one super bowl appearance, and you do realize that his post season record is 9-9 to Peyton's 9-11, yet Peyton has two super bowl appearances to Brees' one?

 

You tip your hat to Kurt Warner, a QB that won one of this three super bowl appearances. Statistically he's one of the best super bowl qbs, but surely by your argument Elway would rank above him considering he has won 2 super bowls and appeared in 5 total?

 

Or better yet, why not argue that Eli Manning and Joe Flacco are better QBs...

 

The thing you miss with your argument is that you place the success of a team on the QB. You need to take into consideration those QBs supporting casts. QBs can lose games as well as win them, sure. But what about receivers dropping catches? Defenses leaking points for fun leading to the QB having to take more risks to keep his team in the game? Bad play calls from the coaches? Injuries to key players?

 

I could go on. By your argument you'd take Trent Dilfer over Dan Marino. Super bowl rings alone don't make a QB great, or better than another. Dilfer was nowhere near the QB Marino was. In an argument over best QB you need to consider all factors of the team, and then make your agument. Because as it stands, your argument is flawed and contradictory.

 

You guys aren't paying attention to him, really. Just skimming. He's talking about play off PERFORMANCE not wins and losses. He also has factored into his own personal list regular season stuff. I think winning and playing a big part of team wins are a big part of being high on a best ever list. and I know Alex does too. However guys like dilfer aren't on the list because its not the only thing that matters. I wish people would quit bringing him up when people are making logical arguments combining a multitude of factors, not JUST wins and not JUSt stats.