The G.O.A.T.
-
Zombo said:
You can just use per/game stats.
Here's a couple more "volume" stats though
Game winning drives: Manning #1 with 52, Brady #4 with 45
Comebacks: Manning #1 with 41, Brady #4 with 34
With 3 more years under his belt Manning would have that advantage.....but I predict Brady would surpass those numbers with 16 full starter years....as Manning has had. (Brady at only 13)
and one more key "prorated" stat:
Career sacked %: Manning #1 with 3.07%, Brady #14 with 4.83
I also propound that Brady has not had nearly the kind of talent at WR that Manning has had over the years. Harrison/Wayne.
Only for a brief time did Brady have Moss.
And the guys that Denver has had overall have been much better than NEs WRs over the last couple of years.
I propound that you want to give Brady credit for seasons he hasn't played yet, could get his arm ripped off in the Super Bowl.
I also propound that it is not Manning's fault that Brady didn't start as a rookie.
Manning started and got beat up, his worst statistical year by far ... but he still wins almost every per/game and per/start stat.
Using your Phipps/Bradshaw thing ... what if Manning played his entire career with Belichick ... I think he'd have at least three rings ... but we'll never know.
Zombo
Zombo said:
I propound that you want to give Brady credit for seasons he hasn't played yet, could get his arm ripped off in the Super Bowl.
I am saying that if they play the same number of seasons...their stats/production would end up being close to the same. (I also "warned" that Rodgers could surpass them both). Yes, it is a projection.
I also propound that it is not Manning's fault that Brady didn't start as a rookie.
Who is assigning fault? Peyton was the #1 overall pick in the draft and was handed the keys to the mint. Brady was #199 overall and had to wrest the starting position away from another #1 overall pick (Bledsoe).
Manning started and got beat up, his worst statistical year by far ... but he still wins almost every per/game and per/start stat.
He doesn't win the winning pct. stat.
Using your Phipps/Bradshaw thing ... what if Manning played his entire career with Belichick ... I think he'd have at least three rings ... but we'll never know.
No, but you know my view......BBs winning is a factor of having Brady, not vise versa.
Zombo
-
Your right. No one would have otto on that list. Four of his "championships" was in the AAFC, that had eight teams two of which were called the Yankees and the Dodgers! LOL. As far as I'm concerned the Super bowl era is where the Championships should be considered worthwhile, not that ancient history bullshit where lineman weighed 220 lbs. Of course if your a "Homer" those "championships" 70 years ago make you pround, go for it!
You are an idiot.
The game say, in the 70s was a lot more like the game played in the 40s/50s than it is to today's game. Ergo, since the game was so different....we MUST discount any titles won in the 70s....per your theory.
You are an idiot.
The game say, in the 70s was a lot more like the game played in the 40s/50s than it is to today's game. Ergo, since the game was so different....we MUST discount any titles won in the 70s....per your theory.
Hi. Basically starting in the super bowl era players were beginning to be bigger, faster and stronger than the previous decades. If thinking those so called "champinships" from 70 years ago make you feel better about the ineptness of our franchise for the last thirty years go for it, no need to get mad. Tell Ergo I said hi!
-
Brady's Ball Sack said:
Modern stats?
I don't think the modern QB, protected in the bubble and comfort of todays league rules can be compared fairly.
When comparing the HITS that Montana, Aikman, and Elway et.al had endure, half of these guys playing today would have been out of the league years ago.
Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Tony Romo, Rodgers, Rivers never dealt with the constant and legal hits after the ball was thrown. Manning would have been in a wheel chair..
Its impossible to say that these guys couldn't take the same hits. I venture that they could just like physically ungifted Bernie kosar did
-
You are an idiot.
The game say, in the 70s was a lot more like the game played in the 40s/50s than it is to today's game. Ergo, since the game was so different....we MUST discount any titles won in the 70s....per your theory.
Hi. Basically starting in the super bowl era players were beginning to be bigger, faster and stronger than the previous decades. If thinking those so called "champinships" from 70 years ago make you feel better about the ineptness of our franchise for the last thirty years go for it, no need to get mad. Tell Ergo I said hi!
in the 70s 1/8th of the current league didn't exist. The 70s have the same significance as the 60's 50's 40's and beforeHi. Basically starting in the super bowl era players were beginning to be bigger, faster and stronger than the previous decades. If thinking those so called "champinships" from 70 years ago make you feel better about the ineptness of our franchise for the last thirty years go for it, no need to get mad. Tell Ergo I said hi!
-
in the 70s 1/8th of the current league didn't exist. The 70s have the same significance as the 60's 50's 40's and beforeHi. Basically starting in the super bowl era players were beginning to be bigger, faster and stronger than the previous decades. If thinking those so called "champinships" from 70 years ago make you feel better about the ineptness of our franchise for the last thirty years go for it, no need to get mad. Tell Ergo I said hi!
in the 70s 1/8th of the current league didn't exist. The 70s have the same significance as the 60's 50's 40's and before
unless you are a stoolers fan, and then it's when the NFL started
-
You are an idiot.
The game say, in the 70s was a lot more like the game played in the 40s/50s than it is to today's game. Ergo, since the game was so different....we MUST discount any titles won in the 70s....per your theory.
Hi. Basically starting in the super bowl era players were beginning to be bigger, faster and stronger than the previous decades. If thinking those so called "champinships" from 70 years ago make you feel better about the ineptness of our franchise for the last thirty years go for it, no need to get mad. Tell Ergo I said hi!
Hi. Basically starting in the super bowl era players were beginning to be bigger, faster and stronger than the previous decades. If thinking those so called "champinships" from 70 years ago make you feel better about the ineptness of our franchise for the last thirty years go for it, no need to get mad. Tell Ergo I said hi!
Well, you are wrong. You apparently were not alive when all that went down.
As I said, players in the 70s were much, much closer to the size, strength speed of the players in the 50s than they are to today's players. That is an uncontroverted fact. Players, especially linemen did not to get like 300 pounds until the mid 80s.
Also, the nature of the game changed far far in favor of the offense. There was no 5 yard rule, no can't hit the QB rule etc. etc.
Otto Graham and Joe Montana were about the same height/weight.
The Browns last champion qb, Frank Ryan was 6'3". Pretty average for today's QBs.
-
Brady's Ball Sack said:
The physically ungifted Kosar couldn't take the hits either. He fell of the face of the earth faster than any QB I can remember, it just looked worse on him. His arm lost whatever strength it had to begin with, and his mobility became even more of a joke. That kid got belted around something fierce, and if he were playing under today's rules, his career would have been extended.
If we were playing under old rules, the neck fused Manning wouldn't be playing the last two years.
Possibly true about Manning. Kosar got hammered after the Browns OL fell apart, first with the retirement of Cody Risien and then other OL losses. The Browns did nothing much really to get quality OL to replace the lost ones....and BK suffered for it.
-
In 2007 Patriots went 12-4 with Brady. In 2008 they went 11-5 with Matt Cassell
In 2010 Colts went 10-6 with Manning. In 2011 then went 2-14 without him.
Brady not fit to lace Manning's boots.
-
The 2011 colts fully tanked to get luck.
-
The 2011 colts fully tanked to get luck.
The 2011 colts fully tanked to get luck.
50+ NFL players all tanked to draft a rookie QB? I dont buy that
-
The only "can't miss" prospect since manning. Nobody was polarized on luck.
-
You don't need fifty guys to tank. You just need to install shit at a few key positions.
-
The Manning brothers and Andrew Luck are so good because of genes. Archie was a great QB who played on really crappy teams in New Orleans.Oliver was a good QB who also played on pitiful teams in Houston.
Brady's fought for everything he got. State champion in California, became the starter because of injury. 1 college offer, Michigan where he was 3rd string. Promoted because of injury. This was the case every year in Ann Arbor. Drafter low, not a starter injury gave him a chance again. He wins at every level but he had to work for it. I hate him but I respect him. He works hard.
-
The 2011 colts fully tanked to get luck.
50+ NFL players all tanked to draft a rookie QB? I dont buy that
50+ NFL players all tanked to draft a rookie QB? I dont buy that
You only needed the Coach/owner to tank.....and they did.
-
Brady is 3-0 when he gets away with cheating 0-2 after the cheat tactic is exposed... I don't care about either of these teams but it wouldn't surprise me in the least to see this Seahawks D make Brady's asshole hurt.
-
Hi. Basically starting in the super bowl era players were beginning to be bigger, faster and stronger than the previous decades. If thinking those so called "champinships" from 70 years ago make you feel better about the ineptness of our franchise for the last thirty years go for it, no need to get mad. Tell Ergo I said hi!
Well, you are wrong. You apparently were not alive when all that went down.
As I said, players in the 70s were much, much closer to the size, strength speed of the players in the 50s than they are to today's players. That is an uncontroverted fact. Players, especially linemen did not to get like 300 pounds until the mid 80s.
Also, the nature of the game changed far far in favor of the offense. There was no 5 yard rule, no can't hit the QB rule etc. etc.
Otto Graham and Joe Montana were about the same height/weight.
The Browns last champion qb, Frank Ryan was 6'3". Pretty average for today's QBs.
Well, you are wrong. You apparently were not alive when all that went down.
As I said, players in the 70s were much, much closer to the size, strength speed of the players in the 50s than they are to today's players. That is an uncontroverted fact. Players, especially linemen did not to get like 300 pounds until the mid 80s.
Also, the nature of the game changed far far in favor of the offense. There was no 5 yard rule, no can't hit the QB rule etc. etc.
Otto Graham and Joe Montana were about the same height/weight.
The Browns last champion qb, Frank Ryan was 6'3". Pretty average for today's QBs.
Oh I was around back then. I just don't know what I'm talking about. LOL
-
Brady may have just secured it.
-
Brady had a great comeback but it was won on a browns - like bungle.
-
Brady may have just secured it.
Brady may have just secured it.
Because an undrafted CB from West Alabama made a great play?
That's why I don't play the ring game.
If Lynch punches it in like everyone expected, then Brady hasn't won a SB in 11 years and only has one more ring than Russell Wilson.
Pete Carroll allows his offensive coordinator to call an insipid play and Brady is now the Greatest ever.
He was, of course, on the sideline when this was all happening to him.
Zombo
--I wanted Seattle to win to just not to have hear how great the Patriots are from all the Patriots fans here. There are no Seahawk fans in Florida.
-
Brady may have just secured it.
Because an undrafted CB from West Alabama made a great play?
That's why I don't play the ring game.
If Lynch punches it in like everyone expected, then Brady hasn't won a SB in 11 years and only has one more ring than Russell Wilson.
Pete Carroll allows his offensive coordinator to call an insipid play and Brady is now the Greatest ever.
He was, of course, on the sideline when this was all happening to him.
Zombo
--I wanted Seattle to win to just not to have hear how great the Patriots are from all the Patriots fans here. There are no Seahawk fans in Florida.
Zombo said:
Because an undrafted CB from West Alabama made a great play?
That's why I don't play the ring game.
If Lynch punches it in like everyone expected, then Brady hasn't won a SB in 11 years and only has one more ring than Russell Wilson.
Pete Carroll allows his offensive coordinator to call an insipid play and Brady is now the Greatest ever.
He was, of course, on the sideline when this was all happening to him.
Zombo
--I wanted Seattle to win to just not to have hear how great the Patriots are from all the Patriots fans here. There are no Seahawk fans in Florida.
I think it would be a lot less pleasant listening to Richard Seymour and Marshawn Lynch running their fat punk mouths for a year...
WSS
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