Not all of them are. Just the ones who happen to be Cardinals fans also, lol
ing Jets.
We better stop them at home. Can't believe that game got out of hand... and their was some crappy playcalling. I understand trying to get the running game going, but by the fourth, should've realized it was going nowhere. Of course, airing it out didn't work much either; don't know if they were smothering Welker or not but the Pats were all out-of-sync.
Also, Butler played like yesterday. BB better get on his ass.
I somewhat agree. He's still a compe or, but I think he's not as competetive as he used to be.
Also, I disagree about the running game. Thought it was going nowhere, so might as well air it out.
God dammit mono. You follow the goods with this?
the ing stupid thing is when pat fans and brady knobslobbers sit and say brady is better because he won 3 rings throwing to deion branch and average guys like that. especially when the pats lost a sb and havent done with a far better offensive supporting cast than Peyton ever had with guys like moss and welker.
further proof that it takes a TEAM to win a ring, from players to coaches to playcallers. the patiots won those superbowls because they had complete teams, something manning has NEVER had, yet still has his team contending for a le on a yearly basis, winning one, as well as setting records and racking up mvps, and even taking paycuts so the dumbasses in indys management can get him a better team. there is only so much he can do, and for what hes been given, hes done more than perhaps any player has in NFL history for such an extended period of time.
tbh peyton manning won the super bowl by more points than all 3 patriots super bowls combined so clearly he is better than brady. for life. i think its obvious to the world that guys like tom brady, ben roethlisberger and trent dilfer only have rings because they rode the nuts of a swole defense.
The 2006 Colts were a complete team in the playoffs. It's not like Peyton needed to score 40 points in each playoff game for his team to win a superbowl. Both QBs are the same in the sense that they both needed the clutchest kicker in NFL history and big plays from their defense at key times to win superbowls. I'm not saying Manning < Brady, but the revisionist history about how good the Colts D was at key times in 2006 is bull . When Peyton couldn't do against the Ravens in 2006 he needed his defense and Vinateri to come through. Yeah Brady has yet to take a team with a bad defense and holes at major positions to a superbowl win, and the same thing goes for Peyton.
And if you're gonna give Peyton rave reviews about taking a paycut, lets not forget all the paycuts Brady has taken over the years just so Robert Kraft can cheap out on key players that Brady took a paycut so the Patriots could resign.
If the 01, 03 or 04 Patriots ever played Rex Grossman in the superbowl the game would be over at halftime.
lol "omission"
How is it that every winning QB on earth has always had the most dominant defense on earth and the greatest supporting cast in NFL history except for Peyton Manning?
way to answer your own question
Peyton has had some good players around him, obviously, which is why they are constantly in contention, but in terms of being a complete team, that is something that the colts have NEVER been, unlike the Patriots, who had a very complete and well rounded team when winning championships.
the Colts have consistently lacked defense, and often lacked either a good ground game, good o-line, or both.
I've always given Brady props for taking paycuts too. That wasn't a slight against Brady, the way you Pat fans tend to take everything. Point was, Peyton can't keep doing it by himself.
Replace Brady with Manning during the Patriots SB run, and they still win at least 3 rings, no question about it.
not in 2006 they didn't.
And this here exactly proves my point that it takes a team to win championships, and why it's silly for people to say Brady > Manning because he has 3 rings. Manning can only do so much, just like Brady has only been able to do so much.
Both guys have proven they can lead a team to a championship, and can consistently have their team among the league's elite. At this point, I don't think winning should be part of the debate, but rather accomplishments and capabilities. Peyton clearly has more accomplishments, and IMO is a more deadly passer. I don't think there has ever been a QB that makes tough passes look easy, the way Manning does, as he completes them on a regular basis, and that is a big reason why even the most mediocre receivers can go play with Peyton Manning and get 1000 yards. he doesnt need his guys to get much separation to complete passes.
IMO, Manning and Brady are the two best QBs of all time. But Mannings ability to consistently complete tough passes, is what puts him over Brady. While Brady can complete tough passes, he definitely cannot complete them as consistently as Manning does.
You can count on one hand the amount of truly ty games Brady has had in the playoffs, with fingers to spare. The only two that really come to mind are Denver in 05 and last season against Baltimore.
With Manning it's probably in double digits.
Give me Brady every ing time.
#1 is Manning and #2 is Brady?
mmm....no...I'm not seeing it.
#1 is Joe Montana and you're re ed if you think otherwise.
After that's it's debatable.
someone is still desperately waiting to have their troll approved
tbh same thing with me and my "Nate Dogg" troll
and one final note, according to stretch, if Dan Marino ever had the blind luck of facing off against Steve Pelluer in the Super Bowl, then his 1 ring would automatically make him GOAT.
Brady's worst playoff game other than Super Bowl 42 is prob that game he lost to the Colts. He wasn't doing jack anyway (3 scores before halftime were Corey Dillon running it in, Mankins recovering the fumble in the end zone and Samuel pick-sixing Manning), got chode bloaded into a 3 and out after the Colts scored, got easy field position after the Colts tied and bailed out by video replay and the old forceout rule on a touchdown, could only get his team FGs the rest of the way, nearly picked by Bob Sanders, cost his team the game by throwing to Reche Caldwell in crunch time, and threw a game losing pick.
That game was the death of Brady dominance in big games tbh.
All he needs is a matchup with Rex Grossman to revive it.
Both have played 18 playoff games
Manning Career Playoff QB Rating - 87.6
Brady Career Playoff QB Rating - 85.5
Manning Stats - 62.9%, 5164 Yards, 28 TD, 19 INT, 7.46 YPA
Brady Stats - 62%, 4108 Yards, 28 TD, 15 INT, 6.45 YPA
Games of QB rating being under 80
Manning - 7
Brady - 8
looks to me that Brady has had more ty playoff games than Manning. fortunately, he often had a defense that could help him out and prevent the team from losing the game, such as in the two wins against the Chargers, as well as some others, such as against the ans, and a game against the Colts.
Peyton only had that luxury one time, and coincedentally, it was the year they won the Super Bowl. Further proof that a load of SB wins are not a good way to determine a player's greatness.
Marino - 0 rings
Bradshaw - 4 rings
Marino >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bradshaw (possibly the most overrated player in NFL history)
Manning > Marino with multiple rings
Brady > Marino with multiple rings
Marino's stats are great, but not as good as some people think. A lot of his stats are the result of his longevity, and definitely aren't as good as Mannings. He completed under 60% more often than over. And was consistently mediocre in the playoffs, with minimal great or memorable performances.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
