What Up, Clevelaaaaaaaand!?
-
Just for the record, Patriot guy, I always liked Bill Belichick.
I think he got a raw deal here in Cleveland thanks to everybody's pal Art Modell.
When the Browns aren't in contention the Patriots are among a handful of teams I will root for.
I'd be happy as a pig in shit if we could help you out by slapping the donkeys around a little.
Best of luck to you guys as well
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
@boo-radley said:
Judge Judy, blaming Belichick for the Browns moving is weak. Modell moved because he wanted a new stadium.
Stop being a doosh.
I don't blame Belichick for the attempted move....but I do blame him for being a douche. (note the CORRECT spelling).
And yes, while here he was a poisonous presence to a great extent.
-
Just for the record, Patriot guy, I always liked Bill Belichick.
I think he got a raw deal here in Cleveland thanks to everybody's pal Art Modell.
When the Browns aren't in contention the Patriots are among a handful of teams I will root for.
I'd be happy as a pig in shit if we could help you out by slapping the donkeys around a little.
Best of luck to you guys as well
WSS
Just for the record, Patriot guy, I always liked Bill Belichick.
I think he got a raw deal here in Cleveland thanks to everybody's pal Art Modell.
When the Browns aren't in contention the Patriots are among a handful of teams I will root for.
I'd be happy as a pig in shit if we could help you out by slapping the donkeys around a little.
Best of luck to you guys as well
WSS
I know Steve, you have always wanted to fellate your boy Bill. The fact is, his record of failure here speaks for itself.
Nevertheless...yes, I would be pleased if the Browns beat the Broncos. But it has nothing to do with helping the Chowderheads.
If and when those two meet up in the playoffs they can both pound sand.
-
'Sup?
You probably don't remember but I posted here after watching A Football Life: Cleveland 95'. New England Patriot fans have nothing but love for the Cleveland Browns.
So here's the situation.
You may have seen it, but we lost an epic game against the 49'ers this last Sunday night. Yeah, huge bummer. Brady was breathing fire. Was epic.
And now the Donkey's have our #2 seed.
Now, I really don't respect the Broncos much. We basically man-rape them every time we play them. We can do it in Denver. We can do it in Gillette.
But here's the thing....
If we play them in Mile High, we'll only beat them by two scores or so.
If we play them here in Mass, we'll humiliate them. We'll bury them with like 50 points. We'll get to see poor Peyton's pouty face by half time.
This is what I want to happen because I hate Peyton Manning and his legacy is a massive fraud and Tom Brady owns his pouting, crying, cowardly, `goes to the AFC west to play nobodies instead of San Fran` Colt-Candy-Ass.
I know you guys won't be actually playing in the game, but could you do all the usual superstitious stuff maybe twice? Or harder? Or make sure you have your lucky Browns hoodies on? Or whatever you got going on? (only weird if it doesn't work, amirite?)
Would seriously appreciate a Cleveland win.
With love,
Your friends from New England.
P.S. You're on the rise! Keep the faith!
'Sup?
You probably don't remember but I posted here after watching A Football Life: Cleveland 95'. New England Patriot fans have nothing but love for the Cleveland Browns.
So here's the situation.
You may have seen it, but we lost an epic game against the 49'ers this last Sunday night. Yeah, huge bummer. Brady was breathing fire. Was epic.
And now the Donkey's have our #2 seed.
Now, I really don't respect the Broncos much. We basically man-rape them every time we play them. We can do it in Denver. We can do it in Gillette.
But here's the thing....
If we play them in Mile High, we'll only beat them by two scores or so.
If we play them here in Mass, we'll humiliate them. We'll bury them with like 50 points. We'll get to see poor Peyton's pouty face by half time.
This is what I want to happen because I hate Peyton Manning and his legacy is a massive fraud and Tom Brady owns his pouting, crying, cowardly, `goes to the AFC west to play nobodies instead of San Fran` Colt-Candy-Ass.
I know you guys won't be actually playing in the game, but could you do all the usual superstitious stuff maybe twice? Or harder? Or make sure you have your lucky Browns hoodies on? Or whatever you got going on? (only weird if it doesn't work, amirite?)
Would seriously appreciate a Cleveland win.
With love,
Your friends from New England.
P.S. You're on the rise! Keep the faith!
Well, you're right about one thing...the Browns will be a serious contender in the not too distant future. Somehow I doubt Shurmur's motivational speech will include "alright boys let's go win one for the Patriots".
-
In the words of Battlestar Galactica: Frak off.
It is the height of stupidity that you would think that Browns fans would have some sympatico with Patriots fans because Belichick is now your coach.
Most of us hate fucking Belichick because he was a suck ass coach when he was here. Had he not had a poisonous relationship with his players, the media, and the fans, it may have been a lot harder for Modell to try to move the team....but since BB had done his damndest to turn off the fans in this town, Modell felt empowered to try to make his move.
And Belichick was a suck ass coach for most of his tenure here. He holds the Browns record for most losing seasons by a Browns HC. He was here 5 years and had losing seasons 4 of those years. If not for the presence of Tom Brady BB may well have been the same sucky coach there as he was here. He certainly was headed that way until Brady became your starter.
So, fuck Belichick, fuck the Patriots, and fuck you.
And fuck the Broncos as well. We would like to beat the Broncos for our own reasons...but it has nothing to do with your sorry asses.
Amen to that. Belichick is a miserable prick, never want to see him get near another Superbowl. And for the record, Manning is a stronger QB than Brady. Manning is able to move his game with teams, so it's not an Indy thing, it's the real deal. Would love to see if Brady could do that. New England's drop off the map, like Pittsburgh's, can't come soon enough.
Amen to that. Belichick is a miserable prick, never want to see him get near another Superbowl. And for the record, Manning is a stronger QB than Brady. Manning is able to move his game with teams, so it's not an Indy thing, it's the real deal. Would love to see if Brady could do that. New England's drop off the map, like Pittsburgh's, can't come soon enough.
When Brady missed a season, the Patriots still went 11-5. When Manning missed a season, the Colts went 2-14. Pretty obvious who the better quarterback and team leader is between the two.
The Patriot fan who posted this thread is a perfect representative for their entire sniveling fan base. They always need help to get it done. Either from the refs or by cheating with illegal video of their opponents.
I would like to see the Browns resume their position as a force in the AFC and I believe it will happen. I hope you keep Heckert as GM. Lombardi failed once and doesn't deserve another chance. I also hope you bring in anybody to coach the team besides John McDaniels. You deserve better than an arrogant punk like him.
-
No offense but the "when they missed the season" argument is probably the dumbest, most illogical, most delusional argument I've ever heard.
In 2010 the Colts went 10-7 (including play offs).
Without Manning they went 2-14, and it would be slightly silly to not take into consideration that Indy was intentionally sucking for Luck and once they had secured the #1 pick magically starting winning games again against divisional rivals to knock them out of the post season.
Brady went 18-1 (a helmet catch away from undefeated).
Without Brady the Patriots went 11-5, didn't beat a single winning team, a single post season team, despite a largely intact 2007 team.
That's pretty God awful in comparison to the offensive record shattering season of 2007 when the Patriots came one miraculous helmet catch from being regarded as the greatest team of all time.
8 less wins without Manning (with a motive)
7 less wins without Brady (and horrible wins at that)
Care to revise the logic of your argument?
Peyton Manning has been treated like football royalty his entire life and entered the NFL on a red carpet. His team then got moved to an expansion division where he could rack up impressive regular season stats against expansion teams and then he would throw up a giant egg once he got to the post season and actually had to play real competition (outside his little dome). Or are you not familiar with the whole thing about Peyton Manning being a huge big-game choker? The one year he won his one loney Superbowl ring his post season stats were 3 touchdowns and 7 interceptions.
Pretty pathetic.
Brady's legacy speaks for itself. The man is a beast. He's completely eclipsed pouty-face by miles in the eyes of any fair minded and rational football fan and he did it, breaking nearly every performance-based record in the books, against real football teams, in real football games, in real football weather.
This picture pretty much sums up the Brady v Manning battle for best quarterback of their generation:
I'm honestly surprised to hear fans of a midwest, cold winter, blue collar football city sympathize with an overly entitled football brat whose legacy is a product of ESPN and not actual football, instead of with the 6th round draft pick who reached the level he's attained through hard work and an unrivaled passion for the game.
I'll take Brady and all his fire for the sport over Prince Peyton any day of the week and twice on Sunday Night Football.
-
Just for the record, Patriot guy, I always liked Bill Belichick.
I think he got a raw deal here in Cleveland thanks to everybody's pal Art Modell.
When the Browns aren't in contention the Patriots are among a handful of teams I will root for.
I'd be happy as a pig in shit if we could help you out by slapping the donkeys around a little.
Best of luck to you guys as well
WSS
I know Steve, you have always wanted to fellate your boy Bill. The fact is, his record of failure here speaks for itself.
Nevertheless...yes, I would be pleased if the Browns beat the Broncos. But it has nothing to do with helping the Chowderheads.
If and when those two meet up in the playoffs they can both pound sand.
I know Steve, you have always wanted to fellate your boy Bill. The fact is, his record of failure here speaks for itself.
Nevertheless...yes, I would be pleased if the Browns beat the Broncos. But it has nothing to do with helping the Chowderheads.
If and when those two meet up in the playoffs they can both pound sand.
Well you are certainly right in 1 case, the facts do speak for themselves.
Bill will probably wind up in the Hall of Fame.
This may be a paraphrase but like he said when you let the fans dictate how you run your team it isn't long before you're sitting up there in the stands with them.
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
@boo-radley said:
You imply that if only Belichick had been nice to the fans, media and players that Modell wouldnt havent moved his team. BULLLSHIT
No...I simply imply that there was a huge amount of distrust by the Browns fans of both that coach and the owner.
And I imply that if Belichick had performed here the way he performed in NE, the Browns no way would have been the subject of a move attempt. Do you really think if Belichick had the Browns in the Super Bowl in 2 of his years here that Modell would have tried to move the team? I don't. He surely would have had 2d and 3rd thoughts about it. But because they Browns were big losers under Belichick I think Modell felt no compunction about trying to move the team.
Do you disagree? Do you think if BB had the Browns in 2 or even 1 SB Modell would have tried to move?
Modell didnt give a xxxx about you or anybody else in Cleveland.
Yes, ultimately that was true....but it may not have been had BB had the Browns in the Super Bowl.
You should know.
Yes, I do know a douchebag when I see one
He had alot to learn and Cleveland isnt the place for that.
Actually, apparently, it seems it was the perfect place for that for him. His experience here allowed him to seemingly avoid a lot of his mistakes when he moved on.
-
Amen to that. Belichick is a miserable prick, never want to see him get near another Superbowl. And for the record, Manning is a stronger QB than Brady. Manning is able to move his game with teams, so it's not an Indy thing, it's the real deal. Would love to see if Brady could do that. New England's drop off the map, like Pittsburgh's, can't come soon enough.
When Brady missed a season, the Patriots still went 11-5. When Manning missed a season, the Colts went 2-14. Pretty obvious who the better quarterback and team leader is between the two.
The Patriot fan who posted this thread is a perfect representative for their entire sniveling fan base. They always need help to get it done. Either from the refs or by cheating with illegal video of their opponents.
I would like to see the Browns resume their position as a force in the AFC and I believe it will happen. I hope you keep Heckert as GM. Lombardi failed once and doesn't deserve another chance. I also hope you bring in anybody to coach the team besides John McDaniels. You deserve better than an arrogant punk like him.
When Brady missed a season, the Patriots still went 11-5. When Manning missed a season, the Colts went 2-14. Pretty obvious who the better quarterback and team leader is between the two.
The Patriot fan who posted this thread is a perfect representative for their entire sniveling fan base. They always need help to get it done. Either from the refs or by cheating with illegal video of their opponents.
I would like to see the Browns resume their position as a force in the AFC and I believe it will happen. I hope you keep Heckert as GM. Lombardi failed once and doesn't deserve another chance. I also hope you bring in anybody to coach the team besides John McDaniels. You deserve better than an arrogant punk like him.
What about Josh McDaniels? Don't know about John McDaniels.
-
I know Steve, you have always wanted to fellate your boy Bill. The fact is, his record of failure here speaks for itself.
Nevertheless...yes, I would be pleased if the Browns beat the Broncos. But it has nothing to do with helping the Chowderheads.
If and when those two meet up in the playoffs they can both pound sand.
Well you are certainly right in 1 case, the facts do speak for themselves.
Bill will probably wind up in the Hall of Fame.
This may be a paraphrase but like he said when you let the fans dictate how you run your team it isn't long before you're sitting up there in the stands with them.
WSS
Well you are certainly right in 1 case, the facts do speak for themselves.
Bill will probably wind up in the Hall of Fame.
This may be a paraphrase but like he said when you let the fans dictate how you run your team it isn't long before you're sitting up there in the stands with them.
WSS
Well, I think the jury is still out on how great BB would be without TB at QB.
-
No offense but the "when they missed the season" argument is probably the dumbest, most illogical, most delusional argument I've ever heard.
In 2010 the Colts went 10-7 (including play offs).
Without Manning they went 2-14, and it would be slightly silly to not take into consideration that Indy was intentionally sucking for Luck and once they had secured the #1 pick magically starting winning games again against divisional rivals to knock them out of the post season.
Brady went 18-1 (a helmet catch away from undefeated).
Without Brady the Patriots went 11-5, didn't beat a single winning team, a single post season team, despite a largely intact 2007 team.
That's pretty God awful in comparison to the offensive record shattering season of 2007 when the Patriots came one miraculous helmet catch from being regarded as the greatest team of all time.
8 less wins without Manning (with a motive)
7 less wins without Brady (and horrible wins at that)
Care to revise the logic of your argument?
Peyton Manning has been treated like football royalty his entire life and entered the NFL on a red carpet. His team then got moved to an expansion division where he could rack up impressive regular season stats against expansion teams and then he would throw up a giant egg once he got to the post season and actually had to play real competition (outside his little dome). Or are you not familiar with the whole thing about Peyton Manning being a huge big-game choker? The one year he won his one loney Superbowl ring his post season stats were 3 touchdowns and 7 interceptions.
Pretty pathetic.
Brady's legacy speaks for itself. The man is a beast. He's completely eclipsed pouty-face by miles in the eyes of any fair minded and rational football fan and he did it, breaking nearly every performance-based record in the books, against real football teams, in real football games, in real football weather.
This picture pretty much sums up the Brady v Manning battle for best quarterback of their generation:
I'm honestly surprised to hear fans of a midwest, cold winter, blue collar football city sympathize with an overly entitled football brat whose legacy is a product of ESPN and not actual football, instead of with the 6th round draft pick who reached the level he's attained through hard work and an unrivaled passion for the game.
I'll take Brady and all his fire for the sport over Prince Peyton any day of the week and twice on Sunday Night Football.
No offense but the "when they missed the season" argument is probably the dumbest, most illogical, most delusional argument I've ever heard.
In 2010 the Colts went 10-7 (including play offs).
Without Manning they went 2-14, and it would be slightly silly to not take into consideration that Indy was intentionally sucking for Luck and once they had secured the #1 pick magically starting winning games again against divisional rivals to knock them out of the post season.
Brady went 18-1 (a helmet catch away from undefeated).
Without Brady the Patriots went 11-5, didn't beat a single winning team, a single post season team, despite a largely intact 2007 team.
That's pretty God awful in comparison to the offensive record shattering season of 2007 when the Patriots came one miraculous helmet catch from being regarded as the greatest team of all time.
8 less wins without Manning (with a motive)
7 less wins without Brady (and horrible wins at that)
Care to revise the logic of your argument?
Peyton Manning has been treated like football royalty his entire life and entered the NFL on a red carpet. His team then got moved to an expansion division where he could rack up impressive regular season stats against expansion teams and then he would throw up a giant egg once he got to the post season and actually had to play real competition (outside his little dome). Or are you not familiar with the whole thing about Peyton Manning being a huge big-game choker? The one year he won his one loney Superbowl ring his post season stats were 3 touchdowns and 7 interceptions.
Pretty pathetic.
Brady's legacy speaks for itself. The man is a beast. He's completely eclipsed pouty-face by miles in the eyes of any fair minded and rational football fan and he did it, breaking nearly every performance-based record in the books, against real football teams, in real football games, in real football weather.
This picture pretty much sums up the Brady v Manning battle for best quarterback of their generation:
I'm honestly surprised to hear fans of a midwest, cold winter, blue collar football city sympathize with an overly entitled football brat whose legacy is a product of ESPN and not actual football, instead of with the 6th round draft pick who reached the level he's attained through hard work and an unrivaled passion for the game.
I'll take Brady and all his fire for the sport over Prince Peyton any day of the week and twice on Sunday Night Football.
There are many ways to judge players: stats, win... I'd take Brady over manning any day. Brady has shown he wins during the important ones.
-
Matt Cassel managed to win 11 games with the same team as Brady.
That's really all that needs to be said.
-
Matt Cassel managed to win 11 games with the same team as Brady.
That's really all that needs to be said.
Matt Cassel managed to win 11 games with the same team as Brady.
That's really all that needs to be said.
Yeah, I already refuted that but don't let that stop you lol.
-
No offense but the "when they missed the season" argument is probably the dumbest, most illogical, most delusional argument I've ever heard.
In 2010 the Colts went 10-7 (including play offs).
Without Manning they went 2-14, and it would be slightly silly to not take into consideration that Indy was intentionally sucking for Luck and once they had secured the #1 pick magically starting winning games again against divisional rivals to knock them out of the post season.
Brady went 18-1 (a helmet catch away from undefeated).
Without Brady the Patriots went 11-5, didn't beat a single winning team, a single post season team, despite a largely intact 2007 team.
That's pretty God awful in comparison to the offensive record shattering season of 2007 when the Patriots came one miraculous helmet catch from being regarded as the greatest team of all time.
8 less wins without Manning (with a motive)
7 less wins without Brady (and horrible wins at that)
Care to revise the logic of your argument?
Peyton Manning has been treated like football royalty his entire life and entered the NFL on a red carpet. His team then got moved to an expansion division where he could rack up impressive regular season stats against expansion teams and then he would throw up a giant egg once he got to the post season and actually had to play real competition (outside his little dome). Or are you not familiar with the whole thing about Peyton Manning being a huge big-game choker? The one year he won his one loney Superbowl ring his post season stats were 3 touchdowns and 7 interceptions.
Pretty pathetic.
Brady's legacy speaks for itself. The man is a beast. He's completely eclipsed pouty-face by miles in the eyes of any fair minded and rational football fan and he did it, breaking nearly every performance-based record in the books, against real football teams, in real football games, in real football weather.
This picture pretty much sums up the Brady v Manning battle for best quarterback of their generation:
I'm honestly surprised to hear fans of a midwest, cold winter, blue collar football city sympathize with an overly entitled football brat whose legacy is a product of ESPN and not actual football, instead of with the 6th round draft pick who reached the level he's attained through hard work and an unrivaled passion for the game.
I'll take Brady and all his fire for the sport over Prince Peyton any day of the week and twice on Sunday Night Football.
There are many ways to judge players: stats, win... I'd take Brady over manning any day. Brady has shown he wins during the important ones.
-
Matt Cassel managed to win 11 games with the same team as Brady.
That's really all that needs to be said.
Yeah, I already refuted that but don't let that stop you lol.
Yeah, I already refuted that but don't let that stop you lol.
Show me where it was refuted and I'll gladly take back what I said.
What you said was that the Colts obviously tanked the season in order to get Andrew Luck and that the Patriots went from the best team ever to only a good team.
At no point did you refute the fact that Matt Cassel won 10 games as a starting QB for the New England Patriots, passing for 3,700 yards and 21 TD's and 11 INT's.
You did erroneously claim that the Matt Cassel-led Patriots didn't beat a single winning team that season, yet they beat the Miami Dolphins (11-4) by 20 points. And you then went on to say that he didn't beat a playoff-bound team either, yet the Patriots beat the NFC Championship winning Arizona Cardinals by 40 points. Those were off the top of my head, but judging by your complete lack of accuracy in your posts thus far, I'm inclined to believe that there are a couple more victories of teams above .500.
So, I'll wait...
-
Yeah, I already refuted that but don't let that stop you lol.
Show me where it was refuted and I'll gladly take back what I said.
What you said was that the Colts obviously tanked the season in order to get Andrew Luck and that the Patriots went from the best team ever to only a good team.
At no point did you refute the fact that Matt Cassel won 10 games as a starting QB for the New England Patriots, passing for 3,700 yards and 21 TD's and 11 INT's.
You did erroneously claim that the Matt Cassel-led Patriots didn't beat a single winning team that season, yet they beat the Miami Dolphins (11-4) by 20 points. And you then went on to say that he didn't beat a playoff-bound team either, yet the Patriots beat the NFC Championship winning Arizona Cardinals by 40 points. Those were off the top of my head, but judging by your complete lack of accuracy in your posts thus far, I'm inclined to believe that there are a couple more victories of teams above .500.
So, I'll wait...
Show me where it was refuted and I'll gladly take back what I said.
What you said was that the Colts obviously tanked the season in order to get Andrew Luck and that the Patriots went from the best team ever to only a good team.
At no point did you refute the fact that Matt Cassel won 10 games as a starting QB for the New England Patriots, passing for 3,700 yards and 21 TD's and 11 INT's.
You did erroneously claim that the Matt Cassel-led Patriots didn't beat a single winning team that season, yet they beat the Miami Dolphins (11-4) by 20 points. And you then went on to say that he didn't beat a playoff-bound team either, yet the Patriots beat the NFC Championship winning Arizona Cardinals by 40 points. Those were off the top of my head, but judging by your complete lack of accuracy in your posts thus far, I'm inclined to believe that there are a couple more victories of teams above .500.
So, I'll wait...
No, I said (pointed out) the difference in wins for each team without Manning and without Brady were virtually identical.
The Patriots might not have dropped to 2 wins, because, well, the 2010 Colts WITH Manning weren't that great (one and done as usual), and so they dropped from 10 wins to 2, a difference of 8. Without Brady, the Patriots went from 18 wins to 11, a difference of 7 (see? almost identical?), but the difference is, w/ Brady the Patriots beat everyone, Superbowl contenders, play off contenders, winning football teams, the team that later became the WORLD CHAMPIONS, etc, and without him, the 2008 Patriots didn't beat a SINGLE team with a winning record and didn't even make the post season.
I don't know.... I'd say going from being one flukey helmet catch away from being known as the greatest football team of all time, to not beating a single winning team and not making the play offs... is a pretty big difference in team performance... duncha'think?
And, beyond all that, there's always the fact that measuring someone's ability by what a new team, with new personnel, looks like when he isn't even around, isn't really that.... logical?
Wouldn't it make more sense to compare them by the years they were both playing or am I in the bizarro universe?
Either way, Brady wins.
-
Show me where it was refuted and I'll gladly take back what I said.
What you said was that the Colts obviously tanked the season in order to get Andrew Luck and that the Patriots went from the best team ever to only a good team.
At no point did you refute the fact that Matt Cassel won 10 games as a starting QB for the New England Patriots, passing for 3,700 yards and 21 TD's and 11 INT's.
You did erroneously claim that the Matt Cassel-led Patriots didn't beat a single winning team that season, yet they beat the Miami Dolphins (11-4) by 20 points. And you then went on to say that he didn't beat a playoff-bound team either, yet the Patriots beat the NFC Championship winning Arizona Cardinals by 40 points. Those were off the top of my head, but judging by your complete lack of accuracy in your posts thus far, I'm inclined to believe that there are a couple more victories of teams above .500.
So, I'll wait...
No, I said (pointed out) the difference in wins for each team without Manning and without Brady were virtually identical.
The Patriots might not have dropped to 2 wins, because, well, the 2010 Colts WITH Manning weren't that great (one and done as usual), and so they dropped from 10 wins to 2, a difference of 8. Without Brady, the Patriots went from 18 wins to 11, a difference of 7 (see? almost identical?), but the difference is, w/ Brady the Patriots beat everyone, Superbowl contenders, play off contenders, winning football teams, the team that later became the WORLD CHAMPIONS, etc, and without him, the 2008 Patriots didn't beat a SINGLE team with a winning record and didn't even make the post season.
I don't know.... I'd say going from being one flukey helmet catch away from being known as the greatest football team of all time, to not beating a single winning team and not making the play offs... is a pretty big difference in team performance... duncha'think?
And, beyond all that, there's always the fact that measuring someone's ability by what a new team, with new personnel, looks like when he isn't even around, isn't really that.... logical?
Wouldn't it make more sense to compare them by the years they were both playing or am I in the bizarro universe?
Either way, Brady wins.
No, I said (pointed out) the difference in wins for each team without Manning and without Brady were virtually identical.
The Patriots might not have dropped to 2 wins, because, well, the 2010 Colts WITH Manning weren't that great (one and done as usual), and so they dropped from 10 wins to 2, a difference of 8. Without Brady, the Patriots went from 18 wins to 11, a difference of 7 (see? almost identical?), but the difference is, w/ Brady the Patriots beat everyone, Superbowl contenders, play off contenders, winning football teams, the team that later became the WORLD CHAMPIONS, etc, and without him, the 2008 Patriots didn't beat a SINGLE team with a winning record and didn't even make the post season.
I don't know.... I'd say going from being one flukey helmet catch away from being known as the greatest football team of all time, to not beating a single winning team and not making the play offs... is a pretty big difference in team performance... duncha'think?
And, beyond all that, there's always the fact that measuring someone's ability by what a new team, with new personnel, looks like when he isn't even around, isn't really that.... logical?
Wouldn't it make more sense to compare them by the years they were both playing or am I in the bizarro universe?
Either way, Brady wins.
This argument is stupid because both quarterbacks can win their team a Super Bowl and that is all that matters.
That said, you are using playoff games to try and make your point which is extremely biased. Bottom line, the Patriots had a great year in 2007. But you are smoking crack if you think a healthy Brady would have led the Patriots to another 16-0 regular season. It never happens. So you can't realistically take 18 wins (or even 16) and compare it to 11 the next year. Did Brady win 16 games in 2009? Didn't think so..
But again, you can't give QBs all the credit for wins and losses so like I initially stated, these arguments are pointless..
-
No, he didn't win 16 games, because he was recovering from a potentially career ending injury and not attending practices. The next season he went 14-2.
I think Peyton Manning gets way too much love, usually from people with a vendetta against the Patriots. It just seems as if he's their little act of vengeance and simply dishonestly claim he's a superior quarterback for sheer spite.
You say both quarterbacks can lead their teams to Superbowls.
Manning threw 2 two touchdown passes and 6 interceptions on his way to his Superbowl, and then went 1/1 once there. Not exactly leading anything.
More like getting carried.
Peyton's career is unimpressive if you want to interject him into a conversation of the greatest of all time.
Brady's only rival is Montana.
Eli could make a strong case for being superior to Peyton.
-
No, he didn't win 16 games, because he was recovering from a potentially career ending injury and not attending practices. The next season he went 14-2.
I think Peyton Manning gets way too much love, usually from people with a vendetta against the Patriots. It just seems as if he's their little act of vengeance and simply dishonestly claim he's a superior quarterback for sheer spite.
You say both quarterbacks can lead their teams to Superbowls.
Manning threw 2 two touchdown passes and 6 interceptions on his way to his Superbowl, and then went 1/1 once there. Not exactly leading anything.
More like getting carried.
Peyton's career is unimpressive if you want to interject him into a conversation of the greatest of all time.
Brady's only rival is Montana.
Eli could make a strong case for being superior to Peyton.
No, he didn't win 16 games, because he was recovering from a potentially career ending injury and not attending practices. The next season he went 14-2.
I think Peyton Manning gets way too much love, usually from people with a vendetta against the Patriots. It just seems as if he's their little act of vengeance and simply dishonestly claim he's a superior quarterback for sheer spite.
You say both quarterbacks can lead their teams to Superbowls.
Manning threw 2 two touchdown passes and 6 interceptions on his way to his Superbowl, and then went 1/1 once there. Not exactly leading anything.
More like getting carried.
Peyton's career is unimpressive if you want to interject him into a conversation of the greatest of all time.
Brady's only rival is Montana.
Eli could make a strong case for being superior to Peyton.
The Patriots went 10-6 the year Tom Brady came back from injury. Not sure where your are getting 14..
And you should take a second look at Tom Brady's postseason stats. He has consistently played well in the first round of the playoffs, but since 2004 he has been anything but special in the later rounds. He doesn't have many more TDs than INTs in the games that matter the most. He benefited from a great defense in the early 2000s that put him in great field position.
I have nothing against Brady, I'm just trying to point out that you are extremely biased towards Brady when comparing him to Manning. Manning finally has a good defense with the Broncos (I would say better than the Pats) so it will be interesting to see how it all plays out.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login