If Manning wins Another Ring

[PanchoYoSancho]

LOL. I cant wait for the morning crowd posters to read that sentence.

There's nothing they can say to dispute it.

Folks have revisionist history cause of his career since then, but he was far from a great quarterback in 2001. He was barely above average.

Kurt Warner, Brett Favre, Rich Gannon, Peyton Maning, Jeff Garcia, Steve McNair, Donovan McNabb were all better Quarterbacks than Brady.

 

[Sym_]

So Moss is better than no upper level receiver? Cuz his career is winding down and he still has no ring. Barry Sanders is the worst of the great RB's because he has no rings? Explain to me why a superbowl isn't a team accomplishment. I'd be interested to see how many pro-bowlers were on Brady's superbowl teams vs how many were on the Colts at the time.

exactly

sanders and moss are top 3 players in their respective position of ALL TIME and they have ZERO rings

football is a team sport more than any other sport, the ring argument can MAYBE be brought in basketball since each player has a bigger impact

but in football?

no, the fucking quarterback is only on the field half the time, the only logical way to compare players is through stats

manning>>>brady

deal with it

 

[Maalik]

God yall are dumb...............now Rings dont matter because it's Peyton where discussing. Rings have ALWAYS mattered when discussing top level Quarterbacks. I hope yall try calling ESPN with that shit & Tell the NFL Analysts that Rings dont matter & see how long it takes before they cut you off the phone. Anything to discredit Brady. This one cat on here...........said Tom Brady was nothing more to the Patriots than Trent Dilfer was to The Ravens. ULTRA SMMFH!!!!!!! These niggas on here I tell ya.

 

[bow to royalty]

God yall are dumb...............now Rings dont matter because it's Peyton where discussing. Rings have ALWAYS mattered when discussing top level Quarterbacks. I hope yall try calling ESPN with that shit & Tell the NFL Analysts that Rings dont matter & see how long it takes before they cut you off the phone. Anything to discredit Brady. This one cat on here...........said Tom Brady was nothing more to the Patriots than Trent Dilfer was to The Ravens. ULTRA SMMFH!!!!!!! These niggas on here I tell ya.

Rings don't matter as much as individual stats when comparing players.

 

[smittysmith]

Rings don't matter as much as individual stats when comparing players.

Ok, Marino>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Any QB that ever played the game.

 

[bow to royalty]

Ok, Marino>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Any QB that ever played the game.

In what way? Manning has a better completion percentage, a better TD/Int ratio, gonna easily pass Marino in yards as long as he keeps playing.

 

[Rated R]

You have to look at the bigger picture, Peyton is a coach on the field. No matter what defenses tries to throw at him he knows how to adjust. He studies the game and it shows on the field. When his career is over and done he will hold every record there is at the quarterback position, minus the interception record.

 

[ghost!]

walks in...and gives props to maalik and ya boi g props...for setting these clowns str8*

but it doesn't matter these same katz will stay ignoring facts....

 

[vageneral08]

smh at the hate for peyton manning......this how I know he's that good niggas will not give him his props for doing what he does best

 

[ghost!]

smh at the hate for peyton manning......this how I know he's that good niggas will not give him his props for doing what he does best

u need to take that statement and put brady's name there cuz the same is said for him...he get's discredit as well......and u know it

and nobody is hating manning if they dont agree with your opinion or think he's not the goat...come on..that's sensitive crap..not everyone gotta think he's the best..plus everyone has given valid cricisms of him..

 

[vageneral08]

u need to take that statement and put brady's name there cuz the same is said for him...he get's discredit as well......and u know it

and nobody is hating manning if they dont agree with your opinion or think he's not the goat...come on..that's sensitive crap..not everyone gotta think he's the best..plus everyone has given valid cricisms of him..

lol you haven't been reading some of these silly posts.....I can care less about another persons opinion but when the stats shows who's better and they still want to deny it that's hate no matter how you look at it they just want to hate....it's crazy because it's the patriot fans who hate on manning the most smh....I give brady his props he's top 5 qb's in football history but manning has the better stats period can't nobody deny that

 

[ghost!]

lol you haven't been reading some of these silly posts.....I can care less about another persons opinion but when the stats shows who's better and they still want to deny it that's hate no matter how you look at it they just want to hate....it's crazy because it's the patriot fans who hate on manning the most smh....I give brady his props he's top 5 qb's in football history but manning has the better stats period can't nobody deny that

]u don't judge a player on stats alone..like someone has already said if so then Dan Marino is better and the goat...u ppl need to know how to judge a player it's stats, along with plays made, achievements and heroics, also wins and loses......not rings alone and not stats alone..and check the playoff stats for both players..who mind you for the 1,000o times are equal as both arent' even done with their career yet...

 

[bow to royalty]

]u don't judge a player on stats alone..like someone has already said if so then Dan Marino is better and the goat...u ppl need to know how to judge a player it's stats, along with plays made, achievements and heroics, also wins and loses......not rings alone and not stats alone..and check the playoff stats for both players..who mind you for the 1,000o times are equal as both arent' even done with their career yet...

Stats are the best way to judge a player IMO. But I agree achievements and heroics should be counted. I just don't see the superbowl as a very large factor because it's a team achievement. Crediting just a QB for that isn't fair. And even if you go based on stats Marino is not better than Manning. I posted that earlier. Manning has a better completion %, TD/INT ratio, QB rating, and will easily pass him for yards soon.

 

[PanchoYoSancho]

Stats are the best way to judge a player IMO. But I agree achievements and heroics should be counted. I just don't see the superbowl as a very large factor because it's a team achievement. Crediting just a QB for that isn't fair. And even if you go based on stats Marino is not better than Manning. I posted that earlier. Manning has a better completion %, TD/INT ratio, QB rating, and will easily pass him for yards soon.

The one thing I'll say in Marino's defense, his receivers didnt have the 5-yard rule Peyton's receivers do.

 

[ghost!]

Stats are the best way to judge a player IMO. But I agree achievements and heroics should be counted. I just don't see the superbowl as a very large factor because it's a team achievement. Crediting just a QB for that isn't fair. And even if you go based on stats Marino is not better than Manning. I posted that earlier. Manning has a better completion %, TD/INT ratio, QB rating, and will easily pass him for yards soon.

it's not the only way though..and any NFL player, analyst or coach will tell you that..if that's the case then all these college draft picks will be draft'd just off stats and combine numbers alone...maybe that's how the raiders draft but much other teams don't...that's not how the pros excess players..and again no player nor coach nor analyst ever leaves out rings...u know that..u turn on any t.v. and rings are part of the arguement, again it's not the whole agruement but it does weight in....u don't just win rings cuz you happen'd to be on the team..especially at the QB position..if that was the case the ravens wouldn't have gotten rid of Delfer after their SB...

and enough of you know Brady's ring accomplishments arent' the only reason he gets talked about....no 6 round pick achieve sthe kind of success he has...sh*t no first rounder does it at that pace either......and ppl need to kill cuz he had defense to win those rings..01 yes, def. but his defense wasn't the reason they won the last two superbowls..cuz they were that good..league good but not out of this world good....the last two pats SB wins...brady and deion branch won mvp..and if u watch'd them, then u know they were the main reasons why they won their last two rings...

 

[PanchoYoSancho]

it's not the only way though..and any NFL player, analyst or coach will tell you that..if that's the case then all these college draft picks will be draft'd just off stats and combine numbers alone...maybe that's how the raiders draft but much other teams don't...that's not how the pros excess players..and again no player nor coach nor analyst ever leaves out rings...u know that..u turn on any t.v. and rings are part of the arguement, again it's not the whole agruement but it does weight in....u don't just win rings cuz you happen'd to be on the team..especially at the QB position..if that was the case the ravens wouldn't have gotten rid of Delfer after their SB...

and enough of you know Brady's ring accomplishments arent' the only reason he gets talked about....no 6 round pick achieve sthe kind of success he has...sh*t no first rounder does it at that pace either......and ppl need to kill cuz he had defense to win those rings..01 yes, def. but his defense wasn't the reason they won the last two superbowls..cuz they were that good..league good but not out of this world good....the last two pats SB wins...brady and deion branch won mvp..and if u watch'd them, then u know they were the main reasons why they won their last two rings...

The only problem with that argument is you're focusing solely on the Super Bowl itself, not how they got there. The Pats had the #1 scoring Defense in '03 and the #2 scoring Defense in '04. They had one of the better Offenses in the league in '04, but they werent even ranked in the top 10 in '03. The Offense didnt do much in the playoffs until the Super Bowl itself. Obviously weather was a factor, but it was the D that shut down the Colts Offense in back-to-back years and made Peyton look mediocre, which made the Offense's job easier and let the Pats settle for FG's instead of TDs. And they came out forcing turnovers left and right against the Steelers in the '04 AFC Championship by picking off a rookie Roethlisberger 3 times and recovering a Bettis fumble. They followed that up by picking McNabb off 3 times in the Super Bowl and recovering another fumble. The Offense gets credit for turning those into points, but the opportunity wouldnt be there if the D didnt set it up.

 

[bow to royalty]

it's not the only way though..and any NFL player, analyst or coach will tell you that..if that's the case then all these college draft picks will be draft'd just off stats and combine numbers alone...maybe that's how the raiders draft but much other teams don't...that's not how the pros excess players..and again no player nor coach nor analyst ever leaves out rings...u know that..u turn on any t.v. and rings are part of the arguement, again it's not the whole agruement but it does weight in....u don't just win rings cuz you happen'd to be on the team..especially at the QB position..if that was the case the ravens wouldn't have gotten rid of Delfer after their SB...

and enough of you know Brady's ring accomplishments arent' the only reason he gets talked about....no 6 round pick achieve sthe kind of success he has...sh*t no first rounder does it at that pace either......and ppl need to kill cuz he had defense to win those rings..01 yes, def. but his defense wasn't the reason they won the last two superbowls..cuz they were that good..league good but not out of this world good....the last two pats SB wins...brady and deion branch won mvp..and if u watch'd them, then u know they were the main reasons why they won their last two rings...

I agreed stats weren't the only way, and that achievements and heroics should be counted too. But on TV when analysts say Brady is better it's based purely on Superbowls. They say Manning is a 4 time MVP, offensive genius, is like a general on the field. Then they say but Brady has won 3 superbowls.

Here's why I think superbowls are a team effort, and tell me if you disagree with this logic. The Pats won superbowls with late FG's. Now if on the FG attempt the defense blocked it, and returned it for a TD, the Pats would have lost. Now would that make Brady any worse of a quarterback? Or the other QB any better? They both would have played the exact same game, but with a different outcome.

 

[vageneral08]

]u don't judge a player on stats alone..like someone has already said if so then Dan Marino is better and the goat...u ppl need to know how to judge a player it's stats, along with plays made, achievements and heroics, also wins and loses......not rings alone and not stats alone..and check the playoff stats for both players..who mind you for the 1,000o times are equal as both arent' even done with their career yet...

No because manning has the better stats between him and marino and manning made good plays which lead to great comebacks and have you seen how many achievements manning has recieved????? dating back to his high school days he's been breaking records and hold personal titles not saying brady doesn't have any but when it's all and said and done both qb's will be honored when they retired

 

[ghost!]

The only problem with that argument is you're focusing solely on the Super Bowl itself, not how they got there. The Pats had the #1 scoring Defense in '03 and the #2 scoring Defense in '04. They had one of the better Offenses in the league in '04, but they werent even ranked in the top 10 in '03. The Offense didnt do much in the playoffs until the Super Bowl itself. Obviously weather was a factor, but it was the D that shut down the Colts Offense in back-to-back years and made Peyton look mediocre, which made the Offense's job easier and let the Pats settle for FG's instead of TDs. And they came out forcing turnovers left and right against the Steelers in the '04 AFC Championship by picking off a rookie Roethlisberger 3 times and recovering a Bettis fumble. They followed that up by picking McNabb off 3 times in the Super Bowl and recovering another fumble. The Offense gets credit for turning those into points, but the opportunity wouldnt be there if the D didnt set it up.

Just cause i'm talking about the teams peformance in the SB doesn't mean i'm ignoring the fact they had a pretty good defense in their SB run, not out of this world but pretty good, i have never deny that-but dont sit there and act like the QB play was a factor in their run...and regradless of the journy...they still have to peform dont they not...defense wins championships but offenses do put up the points right...u can't win if u cant' out score ur opp. and colts winnng the SB in 06 was more on the defense then peyton right? and this year we can't deny the colts defense being pretty good right..so peyton shouldn't be looked at as the goat then if we are going off the whole "defense" wins championships arguement...

and lets not forget the panthers and eagles also had a good defense their respectable SB runs as well...the pats werent' facing the New York jets of those years in the SB now..

 

[ghost!]

I agreed stats weren't the only way, and that achievements and heroics should be counted too. But on TV when analysts say Brady is better it's based purely on Superbowls. They say Manning is a 4 time MVP, offensive genius, is like a general on the field. Then they say but Brady has won 3 superbowls.

Here's why I think superbowls are a team effort, and tell me if you disagree with this logic. The Pats won superbowls with late FG's. Now if on the FG attempt the defense blocked it, and returned it for a TD, the Pats would have lost. Now would that make Brady any worse of a quarterback? Or the other QB any better? They both would have played the exact same game, but with a different outcome.

first off...we can't have a debate on what if's...and u have never heard me say or anyone on t.v. even base everything off SB wins..do u not hear the analyst talk about the few QBs u can't blitz, reads the defense well..makes certain throws...the coach has total trust in blah blah...manning, brady, brees being a few in that group....

and u basing fg wins or discredting his wins for that is b.s. when field goals are a part of the game, and the reason the colts pick'd up Adam Vinatari as well...or the supply fact that a field goal kicker can't kick a field goal if his offense doesn't put him in position....so if manning wins the superbowl this year off the leg of his kicker then we can't give him full crdit cuz they won by a field goal..in fact we should now take away drew brees trip to the superbowl cuz they won by a field goal......that is just down right stupid in logic...