***THE 2011 NFL QUARTERBACK THREAD*** (QBRs through week 9 pg. 16)

[doublejs07]

Good +%$@, CP

If Tom gets another ring, it isn't inconceivable that he'll go down as arguably the GOAT.

Scary thing is, the dude has gotten BETTER. When you have an o-line that lets you stand in the pocket for 5 seconds at a time, that will prolong your career. He's so damn surgical out there. And that hurry-up

*Defense will be the achillies heel of that team tho.

 

[university of nike]

I don't feel like dissecting the !+*+ out of that post again, and it would be even sweeter with how Indy has played thus far, so I'll let it slide this time.

And Tom Brady has looked more like Peyton Manning than Peyton Manning in the playoffs the last three years...

OK, I'm done.

Maybe.

 

[CP1708]

Dissect it, don't hold back. Find the flaws.

 

[rolaholic]

Originally Posted by CP1708

You rang? 

CP1708 wrote:

---

Deuce, come on man, just stop already.  Peyton Manning was the son of a QB, went to Tennessee, played 4 years in the same system, could never win the big game (sound familiar?) then the very season he leaves for the NFL, Tennessee goes on to win the national championship. 
He joins the Colts with young Marvin Harrison already there, Marvin played pretty good his rookie year also, and had a decent college career, he was no bum off the streets. 
They add Edge James the next year giving Peyton a top tier running back for the next 7-8 years.  After that they add Reggie Wayne so that Marvin can no longer be doubled.  Add to that a WR in a TE possition in Dallas Clark.  All of this, with a solid offensive line, and the same offensive coordinator his ENTIRE career.  Alex Smith has had like 5 in 5 years has he not? 
Oh by the way, Peyton had a very solid Mike Vanderjact (best FG% while at Indy) until that dude melted down in Dallas. 

He could never win the big game, until the season in which the Colts finally had a healthy Freeny, Mathis, Bathea and Bob Sanders all at the same time.  That year?  Manning was simply "brilliant" with his 3 touchdowns and 7 interceptions in 4 games.  With QB ratings of 71.9, 39.6, 79.1, and 81.8.  Hardly GOAT status right there. 


Meanwhile, Brady is a 6th round pick, comes in mid season for an injured Drew Bledsoe (the franchise player at the time) and does so well, that when Drew is healthy, he loses his job.  Tom is the new QB for the Patriots, not for his arm, but for his brain.  He plays the way Bill wants, no mistakes, no forced passes, do what you can to move the offense.  An offense that had Troy Smith as it's best WR.  Or Givens.  Or Branch.  Bethel Johnson maybe?  Any elite Tight Ends that were better then Dallas Clark you can think of?  Me either.  How bout elite running backs to take the pressure off Tom?  Can't name one of those either?  Hmmmm.  But he did have a great Defense.  And a great coach.  And they did what they had to do to win the game.  They were not going to be the greatest show on Turf, because they did not have the personnel for that.  But 7 years later, when they had Randy Moss and Wes Welker, that offense moved along did it not?  They were simply one miracle play away from Tom throwing the winning TD pass to Moss.  Peyton's BROTHER, was the one that threw that miracle toss.  Even he has already matched his big brother in terms of Super Bowl success.  But let me back track, Brady (who, as you stated, rode the coattails of Adam Vinateri to super bowl greatness, produced games such as 86.2, 100.5, and 110.2 in 3 super bowls, all better then Mannings games in his super season.  Brady in those 3 bowls?  6 TD's, 1 INT.  As you said, he couldn't have done it without Adam. 

BTW, how did Adam do in that Super Bowl that Peyton won?  Didn't he kick 3 field goals i that game?   And Manning did what, throw one touchdown pass himself correct?  You don't find that ironic? 

So yes, both Peyton and Tom are great, but to dismiss what Tom has done to make Peyton look so superior is ridiculous and beyond lame.  Give Brady all those weapons and a full decade to play with them, and see what Tom coulda done numbers wise.  Yes, it's impressive to see Peyton call his own plays and all that, you can do that when you have the same offense for 10 years with no coaching movement or players in and out of the lineup.  That's what happens.  The bottom line is, Tom was a miracle play from having 4 rings, an undefeated season, the best winning percentage after 100 games Ever, and MVP, over 200 TD's, with fewer then 100 ints, and you're in here telling me he owes all of it to a kicker that got your boy his lone ring just the same.  Come on. 

New found respect for you CP

 

[DeadsetAce]

CP thanks for digging that up

and chester...i don't read that writeup as saying one is better than the other. i think it's more to give credit to brady where it's due....credit that certain montana and manning guys tend to just take away.

 

[coldcity]

damn CP

 

[josednk1068]

How many times must it be said, Tom Brady is the greatest quarterback that we will ever see.

 

[dmxfury]

Both great, both dominant, both top 5 of all time. Anything more than that is nit picking and preference


I'll still stick with Joe Cool for now for my #1. But that could change. Remember also he only had Rice for 2 of his Super Bowls. I think people forget that Joe played quite a few years (6) before Jerry came along. Also hard to compare stats of any QB vs this era due to rule changes and the emphasis on offense. Anyone can throw 300 yards a game nowadays (see first two weeks and the names who have)


But all a matter of preference and I wouldn't get upset if they say Brady is GOAT, Marino is GOAT, Peyton is, etc

 

[651akathepaul]

Good stuff CP.


Gabbert to start in week 3. Not surprised.

Originally Posted by 651akathePaul


Luke McCown – ............ I’d project his numbers for a full season, but this is a case where I’m absolutely certain he’s only a stop gap and won’t be starting very long.

 

[CP1708]

Ironically, all the arguing I have had to do over the years for Brady and to a lesser extent Ben in terms of their winning helping their case in terms of slotting best of the best, one of my first QB arguments on this board was years and years ago with Deuce back in 08.  And somehow, the NT search feature is working and helped me locate it. 

CP1708 wrote:

---

Deuce King wrote:

CP1708 wrote:

The group of hall of fame players that played with Joe helped out a lot.

Dan didn't have any hall of famers on his team except Shula and I think Stephonson (sp), a lineman, back in the day.

I hear ya CP, and I agree with you but that's shouldn't necessarily take away from Montana's greatness or the 49ers greatness in the past for that matter. Sports truly is a bottom-top approach from the people that are running the organization to the players they get to play for the team. You can have all the talent in the world on the field but you still have to go out and PRODUCE. Even with the thought process that Joe had Hall of Famers at his side, does that for example diminish the Steelers dynasty in any way, it shouldn't. I mean that team was stacked, from offense to defense. I wouldn't say because they had "X" number of hall of famers that we should take away from what they established in that era, cause as we all know any and every team was gunning for them back in the day. Same goes for the 49ers during their championship runs. Again, it's not just enough to get to the top, but to stay on top and for how long you stay on top, that's what seperates the very good from the greats IMO.
The Steelers are another good example, yes. When talking about teams we clearly see who is who with the rings.

But in this case, or this argument, Dan v Joe, it is a HUGE advantage of who got to play with who.

I said already, as a leader, I can't argue Dan v Joe. Can't be done. But if we were talking just the play of QB, Dan wins hands down.

Dan played his ENTIRE career with no running game. Every D knew he was going to throw it, the coaches knew it, the fans knew, everyone. And he still did it. Over and over and over even with everyone else knowing. Imagine if he could have had a running game to keep the D honest, what he coulda done. Now, I know it's not good to get into coulda woulda shoulda crap. But imagine if we switched them.

Put Dan in SF with Walsh, Rice, Graig, Jones, Rathman, Taylor, a solid line and a solid D. Do they win automatically? Of course not, we don't know if Dan could have led the team the same way or whatever. But would they have at least had a chance? Yes.


Put Joe in Miami with Shula, Clayton and Duper, no running game and no D. We'll give him a decent line because the Phins did have a decent lineman crew. Would Joe succeed like Dan did with every single D knowing Joe had to throw? Would he be as good with the outs and the deepballs Shula threw as opposed to the swing passes to Craig, or the slants to Rice that turned into huge gains? Those didn't get ran in Miami.

Be honest now.

That is why I aruge about Joe v Dan. Great leader, but he had a great cast of characters to help him too. Dan never had that.

Certainly I have spent my life not really being able to name Dan as the best to ever lace them because he didn't win squat.  Something that will bother me til the day I die.  But anyone who watched that man play before he turned into an elderly cripple tryin to sling it knows that this guy was so far ahead of his time.  If he played today, he would get 400 yards a game, for 16 games, without question.  From the numbers RyGuy posted earlier in either this thread or the NFL Discussion thread, he was putting up "today's" numbers, 25 years ago, when everyone else was doin 3,500 and 28-30 TD's as "elite" years.  Dan was getting 4K and 30+ year after year.  And he did it with every single defense he played keying in only on him, not having to worry a single bit about running backs.  I bet Dan never once in his whole career saw 8 men in the box like what Brett saw with AP in the backfield.  Or Warner saw with Marshall behind him.  There was simply no reason.  Hell, defenses could put 6 in the box and still stop the "run" game of Miami. 

 

It's why I look at everything as best I can when dealing with QB talk.  Stats are great, wins, playoff performance, supporting casts, what defenses had to deal with, eras, all of it needs to be accounted for.  I may not be some expert, or have a bunch of quantifiable stats to back me, but I don't simply talk out of my @#$ for fun, I try to put it all into perspective and go off of that when I look at how QB's slot into all time rankings. 

Is Brady #1?  I dunno.  Still work to be done.  I know that he was 1 single play away from 4 super bowls.  A single play.  I know he had a prime year of his career wiped out by injury.  A year that he would have had Randy and Wes and co still rollin from the previous year.  How good would his numbers look with that full year, and without that single play? 

  Are we then not talkin a helluva lot easier about his all time rank?  Add another 4K, 35 TD's or so, X amount of this and that stat, a total of 4 Bowls, and we don't know how 08 would have shaken out.  May not be fair to argue woulda coulda's, but I'm not exactly reaching too far in what I am asking you all. 

I'll say, #1 today?  No, not yet.  In 3 years, will he have the resume by then to lay claim to it?  I think he has a chance, yes.  So enjoy it.  Trust me, it is PAINFUL to watch the same position after one of the greats is gone.  Simply look at the list of QB's in Miami since 1999. 

 

[dland24]

Brady is top 5. Top 3 maybe.

Deadset you know how hard that was for me to type?

 

[DeadsetAce]

Originally Posted by dland24

Brady is top 5. Top 3 maybe.

Deadset you know how hard that was for me to type?

 

[university of nike]

Originally Posted by CP1708

Dissect it, don't hold back. Find the flaws.

Originally Posted by DeadsetAce

and chester...i don't read that writeup as saying one is better than the other. i think it's more to give credit to brady where it's due....credit that certain montana and manning guys tend to just take away.

Yet the subtle jabs still exist throughout the entire thing. Anyways, I've got a little time at work this morning, so here I go...

Let me first start with three disclaimers:
1) This is going to be a wall of text. Post a "Did Not Read" gif and you will die.
2) I firmly believe that football is the ultimate TEAM sport. There are so many moving parts - the offense, the defense, the coach - and because of this, I don't use Super Bowl wins/rings in many of my arguments (Super Bowl MVPs mean more to me than a QB winning a ring). Do they help the case? Of course. Are they the end-all of a discussion? Absolutely not. I also hate using the stat of 'quarterback wins' because, simply, many times it takes a defensive stop for a team to win. Or a player catching a football on the top of his helmet. It happens, and it's not on the QB.
3) Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are 1a and 1a in my mind - absolute equals. There are some guys who are moving up, but I will easily take these dudes bodies of work over an Aaron Rodgers. Don't call me a "Brady hater" because I'm not - I'm more of a "Peyton defender." I've watched the Colts more than 99% of the people on NT, and I've followed Peyton closely throughout his career.

First things first., I need to debunk this myth that Tom Brady is some postseason God and Peyton is a scrub that chokes. Do THE PATRIOTS have more postseason wins under Tom Brady than THE COLTS under Peyton Manning? Yeah, they do. However, let's look at some recent developments...

1) Tom Brady's QB rating against the Jets in last years playoffs was an 89, he threw a pick, and his team was 5-14 on third down. Against the same Jets, Peyton Manning had a 108.7 QB rating, completed nearly 70% of his passes, had zero turnovers, and was 6-13 on third down. I could bring up the fact that they were without Dallas Clark, Austin Collie, Anthony Gonzalez, Ryan Diem. I could bring up the fact that Reggie Wayne and Pierre Garcon were playing hot potato. But I won't - the Colts lost.
2) Stats? Peyton Manning's QB rating in the postseason is 88.4. Tom Brady's? 85.7. Wait, so Peyton Manning actually puts up better stats in the playoffs than Tom Brady?! Yes, yes he does.
3) Peyton Manning currently holds a record that many people don't know about, or simply ignore - career playoff losses in which a QB had a 90 or better QB rating - 4 times. He's played well enough on his side of the ball to win in the playoffs, but his defense, special teams, and coaching staff drop the ball.

So... could it be that the Patriots are just coached better, and built better, for playoff football than the Colts? Or is it all Tom and Peyton? Ultimate. Team. Sport.

People like to bring up the 2007 season with Tom, and I can't blame them - it was amazing. Tom, Randy, Wes... they all played lights out. 50 touchdowns is absurd. 16-0 is quite the feat. HOWEVER, people don't want to bring up the fact that the Colts *could have* gone 16-0 twice... had it not been for coaching/GM decisions. Hell, if it wasn't for a coaching decision, the damn Jets wouldn't have made the playoffs and their fans would still have level heads on their shoulders. As far as Tom's 2007 season... have y'all forgotten about Mr. Manning's 2004 season?

Tom in 2007 - 398 of 578 for 4,806 yards, 50 touchdowns, 8 picks, 117.2 rating.
Peyton in 2004 - 336 of 497 for 4,558 yards, 49 touchdowns, 10 picks, 121.1 rating.

Pretty similar, especially considering that Tom had Bill "run up the score!" Belichick and Peyton had Tony "Humble" Dungy.

All I want is for people to realize that as far as QBs go, there might not be more different, yet more equal quarterbacks, than Peyton Manning and Tom Brady.

/endrant

This next part is something that I'd like people to comment on, as well:
Have you guys noticed something about the Patriots that almost mirrors the Colts? Have you noticed that since their offense became better than their defense, they haven't won a Super Bowl? Elite QBs tend to win tons of regular season games, but can be stopped in the playoffs if they don't have defenses and running games. Isn't it weird that the best seasons of Tom Brady's career (MVPs, etc) are ending without rings, but when he was throwing for 20ish touchdowns to unnamed WRs they were winning Super Bowls?

Like I've been trying to tell people for years, back to when Dan Marino was playing, an elite QB cannot win a Super Bowl on his own. That's why guys like Big Ben, Troy Aikman, and Terry Bradshaw are all multiple time winners and Dan (zero), Peyton (one) and Favre (one) aren't as successful in the postseason.

 

[CP1708]

Very nicely done Ches. 

 

Don't think for a single second that I wasn't reaching for a did not read gif tho.  I just don't have one in the arsenal. 

 

 

[university of nike]

What happens if Tom continues on this absurd pace and throws for over 5k, gets another regular season MVP, and the Patriots lose in the playoffs? 

Will he get called a postseason choker much like the other elite QB that used to do the same thing? 

 

[DeadsetAce]

Originally Posted by University of Nike

What happens if Tom continues on this absurd pace and throws for over 5k, gets another regular season MVP, and the Patriots lose in the playoffs? 

Will he get called a postseason choker much like the other elite QB that used to do the same thing? 

depends how they lose. if he throws 4 INTs in a game or a pick 6 to seal the deal for the other team, then yes, he will be a choker. if he spends the game on his @+$ or with ngata's fist down his throat, then no, team loss as you put it. relax, i'm only kidding

you've got to admit, manning has had some bad playoff losses. games where you COULD hang the loss on manning. im not saying you should, but you could see how someone might do that. but of course, it goes back to what you said. it's a team sport, and manning didn't always have complete team and coaching, so he had to put the team on his back, and was forced to do too much. so stuff like that happens. brady's recent playoff losses were just complete meltdowns...from the coaching down to the water boy. and the SB loss against the giants cannot possibly be hung on tom. but i'm basically agreeing with your wall of text, it's a team game.

and it'll definitely be interesting. we HAVE to win a playoff game this year. it's a must. not only for brady, but for belichick. not to mention the fact that the recent jet and raven losses in january were at home

 

[rolaholic]

Originally Posted by DeadsetAce

Originally Posted by University of Nike

What happens if Tom continues on this absurd pace and throws for over 5k, gets another regular season MVP, and the Patriots lose in the playoffs? 

Will he get called a postseason choker much like the other elite QB that used to do the same thing? 

depends how they lose. if he throws 4 INTs in a game or a pick 6 to seal the deal for the other team, then yes, he will be a choker. if he spends the game on his @+$ or with ngata's fist down his throat, then no, team loss as you put it. relax, i'm only kidding

you've got to admit, manning has had some bad playoff losses. games where you COULD hang the loss on manning. im not saying you should, but you could see how someone might do that. but of course, it goes back to what you said. it's a team sport, and manning didn't always have complete team and coaching, so he had to put the team on his back, and was forced to do too much. so stuff like that happens. brady's recent playoff losses were just complete meltdowns...from the coaching down to the water boy. and the SB loss against the giants cannot possibly be hung on tom. but i'm basically agreeing with your wall of text, it's a team game.

and it'll definitely be interesting. we HAVE to win a playoff game this year. it's a must. not only for brady, but for belichick. not to mention the fact that the recent jet and raven losses in january were at home

Bolded for emphasis,can't take another one of those.Seeing the damn Jets talking trash and actually beating us at home

. Prolly gonna be Brady's most important season in regards to his legacy also. 

 

[dmxfury]

Could it be? Continuous QB talk that doesn't get out of hand?! This is now my favorite thread. Maybe later I'll get into my Terry Bradshaw is not overrated discussion

 

[CP1708]

Joe Montana lost 3 of the last 5 playoff games he played, nobody will ever bother to remember that about him.  His legacy was set, he was a winner. 

I suspect Tom will go on much the same way.  He hasn't won as much as he should have the last 4 years, but his legacy was set once he won 3 rings, he can only enhance it, I don't think he can diminish it.  Unless he just starts handing off to D-Lineman every other play or something in the coming years. 

Look at 07, he was inches away from title 4, totally enhancing his legacy.  He didn't get those inches, he lost, but his legacy didn't take any sort of hit for it. 


Peyton, like Favre has his 1.  He won't ever have to hear stuff like what Dan does.  They will have to hear "he coulda/shoulda had more" but they at least have their 1 in their pocket, all the bad playoff loses they do have will still be overshadowed by that one title. 

Ben has 2, he didn't take a hit for not winning #3 last year.  Warner only has 1, he doesn't get dinged for his 2 Super Bowl losses. 

So Brady can lose from here on out (and let's hope he does

) but it won't matter in terms of his resume.  Like I said, it can only be enhanced, not re-written. 

 

[fraij da 5 11]

Pats aren't built for January football... Its the same story its been the last 2-3 years. I have a feeling if they're playing at home or in NY they'll get bounced early again.

 

[dland24]

Ahhh my two favorite things to debate......

Originally Posted by University of Nike

As far as Tom's 2007 season... have y'all forgotten about Mr. Manning's 2004 season?

Tom in 2007 - 398 of 578 for 4,806 yards, 50 touchdowns, 8 picks, 117.2 rating.
Peyton in 2004 - 336 of 497 for 4,558 yards, 49 touchdowns, 10 picks, 121.1 rating.

Pretty similar, especially considering that Tom had Bill "run up the score!" Belichick and Peyton had Tony "Humble" Dungy.

Agree wholeheartedly with you Ches.  Peytons 04 year > Bradys 07 year

Originally Posted by CP1708

Ben has 2, he didn't take a hit for not winning #3 last year.

Ben shouldnt have a legacy to have take a hit in the first place.   An above average Quarterback who has ridden his team's coattails to a status he doesnt deserve to have.

 

[CP1708]

Said QB outdueled one of the greats (Kurt Warner) and drove the length of the field to win a SB.  That ain't ridin a damn thing. 

He may not reach Tom/Peyton status but had he gone on to win that third, and still had a good solid 7-8 years to play, he would have moved up many charts.  You're lucky that he took that loss to slow that move down a bit.  It's rarified air in 3 ring country.  He's Aikman level as of now, but he was in range of really making a lot of people mad. 

 

[dland24]

Ben is at Aikman level now?

Give me a break.

1 Probowl, 0 All-Pro, 0 MVPs, 0 SB MVPs put him in the same level as 6 Probowls, 3 All-Pro, 1 MVP, 1 SB MVP?

Ok CP.

 

[Clyde Frog]

Originally Posted by University of Nike

What happens if Tom continues on this absurd pace and throws for over 5k, gets another regular season MVP, and the Patriots lose in the playoffs? 

Will he get called a postseason choker much like the other elite QB that used to do the same thing? 

You had a good rebuttal in Mannings favor.
Even though Brady has been out after one game the past 2 years in the playoffs, it will take a few more playoff losses to ever consider him a choker. He's 14-5 in his career in the playoffs which is very good. Not to mention Bradys legacy in the beginning started for the sole fact that he was clutch in big games when it mattered most. He took down the greatest show on turf his first year ever starting, and then 2 years later had repeat SB wins. It will take alot to ignore that.

 

[airmaxpenny1]

Ben is built for postseason football.  When the weather gets cold, and you are going up against the best defenses out, the game is a different animal.  Ben is a huge guy that can take punishment, scramble and make plays.  There is a reason why he's had more postseason success than some other more accomplish regular season QB's. He doesn't ever get frazzled, he has an underrated arm and command of an offense.  Is he one of the 10 best ever? No, certainly not but to call him overrated is stupid.