You can make statistics show anything you want. 58% of all people know that....

here's a fun fact for you stat freaks, and to piggyback on Pang's point:

No team in the NFL has a winning record against Tom Brady

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BradTo00/splits/

Against Peyton: Denver is .500 against him, and Brady is 8-3 vs colts

Here's a fun fact from one of the stat freaks:

Highest scoring offense of all time. Championship on the line. 14 points.

Also, for stats people....

Post season records:
Brady: 18-8
Peyton: 11-12

I'm not really even arguing FOR Brady, just poking holes in the generic "Peyton is better because I'm told his stats are better." arguments. People love to talk about Peyton's stats but seem to forget to look at it in the post season (when you can't just beat up on the 2-3 perennially crap teams in your division anymore -- something both QBs have enjoyed). When it comes down to winning against good teams when it counts, under pressure, I'd still rather have Brady as my quarterback.

Also, re: spygate again -> even Chuck Mangini (the whistle blower) has said that the obvious success of the pats since then (#1 record in football + 2 SB appearances) showed that it wasn't why they were winning. It's a tired narrative at this point... but they still should have just used a guy with binoculars in a box like everyone else.

well if this is peyton vs brady comparison, i think bringing up chokes is going to be a tough battle to win for the peyton people!

Brady started his career 10-0 in the playoffs with 3 rings on very good football teams. Since he is 8-8 with 0 rings. Is he a better player in the last 10 years than his first 3 seasons? Sure. It's a team sport though.

Peyton started his career 3-6 in the playoffs with 0 rings, and since is 8-6 with 1 ring. Since both became focal points of a high powered offense, Peyton's teams have outperformed Brady's in the playoffs.





In 2012 the Patriots got shut out in the 2nd half in Foxboro by the Ravens. In 2013 the Patriots got demolished by the Broncos in Denver. I don't see recent grounds for Brady supporters to be citing postseason dominance. The Patriots won on Sunday, but they won't win in January when the game's in Denver

I've always put more stock in playoff games than regular season games, no disagreement there. Also, its a team sport, but if your QB sucks, your team is going to suck.

It really comes down to this for me:

If I want to win my fantasy football league, I choose Manning over Brady

Since fantasy football is lame and doesn't count for anything, I would choose Brady over manning 10 times out of 10, especially in playoff games, because he wins more often when it counts.

People don't understand team sports apparently.

Trent differ has more rings than Dan Marino. Trent Diller is a better QB!

Brady has has far better teams, and has had one of the best offensive lines amd coaches his entire carear. Manning is the better QB and understands the game on a different level than any other QB out there. It is that simple.

Would anyone here say Eli is better than Peyton because he has more rings? I sure as fluff wouldnt. Eli beat Brady in the big game twice. Is he better than Brady?

Team sport man, figure it out and argue from there.

It isn't that simple, because people will always have different metrics which they use to define how 'good' a player is, this is why this conversation is silly.

No, it is that simple. Measuring the individual manning is better. Measuring the team Brady is better.

So I guess we agree on some level, although I think there are intangibles that aren't being considered.

I want Peyton on my pointless fantasy team.

I want Brady to win championships.

And even though Manning is better statistically (and I won't get into the DOME), I would still want Brady as the QB when the game counted.

Keep the teams the same except for Manning on the Pats and Brady on the Broncos in a superbowl game. I would pick Broncos.

It is silly to argue "it is a team sport" and try to leave it at that.

Even in team sports there are positions with varying degrees of importance to the team.

For example in Hockey the goalie can steal or cost a game single handed.

Same goes for the pitcher in baseball.

Can a QB in football? not to the same degree as the 2 positions I listed above, but yes (since he is central to all offensive plays).

Not if he has a garbage offensive line and no recivers. The QB depends on a lot of other players to make him look good.

Put Tom Brady on the Jaguars and see if he is worth a fluff. He is still the same QB.

This ain't basketball where a player can solo take the game over and win it. I agree some positions are more important than others, but there isn't really a game out there that relies on rapid teamwork like football. Neither manning or Brady will look good on the NY jets right now.

THAT logic can be applied to the stability Brady has had with his team and coach, and a quality team behind him. Didn't they make the playoffs without him that one year? If not they were close. How did the Colts do without manning?

But earlier this year the patriots DID have a garbage line and no receivers, Edleman was the only guy who could catch a pass.

I'm done on this thread!



My closing argument!

And in those games people were talking about Brady being washed up. He got his line back and he looks good again. Weird

Sure but at the end of the day if your QB is having a bad game, it isn't likely to be a good game for your team. The same can't be said about a single offensive lineman or single safety etc.

It will make the game harder, but teams can adjust for game conditions (like if they know they are being beat on the one side, they can try to adjust their plays to account for that).

I agree QB's aren't as important to the football team as the goalie is for a hockey team or the pitcher for a baseball team etc., and I think that is mostly due to the separation of the offensive and defensive sides of the game. The QB is still the most important player on most teams though.

I don't even think you are arguing the same point I am dude.

I'm saying that a QB can't win a game on his own

You are saying he can lose a game on his own

This debate is about elite QBs. Not mark sanchez

Coaching is everything too. The best QB on the planet can lose a game because of a ppor.gameplan, bad adjustments, or just bad overall playcalling.

Diminishing a QB's individual skill down to his win loss record is ineffective. That is my point. You need to watch them play, not armchair statistic battle. Peyton is better than anyone to of played the game as a pure field general QB. He is virtually playing madden out there after reading defenses.

He's a great field general who you wouldn't want commanding the invasion of Normandy. In that case, you'd want Brady. Because you want to win the battle, not just rack up opposing casualties and then get beat by the Seahawks.

You guys can argue this till the end of the world, bottom line is Peyton goes to bed at night knowing he's better than Brady, and guess what Brady knows Peyton is better than him. Brady is on record to have said that Manning is the greatest quarterback ever. Hell, Belichick knows it too. So go on and keep arguing.

And Brady goes to bed with Giselle while Peyton masturbates to stat sheets :)

yeah, because brady won the last 2 he was in....... remember that perfect season?

once again, it is a team game.

Unless Eli and the Giants happen to be occupying France at the time. Peyton doesn't lose to his younger brother. And the Patriots got beat by that Seahawks team before it was cool.. to think they would have had a chance last year is laughable

I always pegged Eli as a traitor!

I think I was arguing a different angle on the same point (as that side is easier to express)

They have game making and game breaking abilities.

If the QB is having a great game and one of his receivers is having problems catching perfectly placed passed, there are other options for people to throw to. In the end the QB's great game should translate into a great game for the team.

The same can't necessarily be said about other positions on a football team.

Peyton has a higher career postseason passer rating than Brady. You guys didn't even read my article did you? Sheesh, I didn't even use fancystats like dvoa or any/a.

In seriousness, of course you can't use the rings argument as the sole determining factor... But you can't dismiss it either. All else being equal, or nearly so, rings/postseason performance/clutch does matter and should be counted. Differ might not be better than Marino, but Elway is. Similarly, I cannot give serious weight to arguments that ARod is better than Jeter. Better stats, but every time ARod left a team they got better. That matters. Jeter's championship winning plays matter.

That said, I have already expressed that Brady is overrated. Great, but still overrated.