Enough is enough. Peyton Manning is the greatest QB of all time.

[KoRnStARr]

IT IS THAT SIMPLE.

There's a difference between QB's who go out and win these big games when the game is HANGING IN THE BALANACE, and those who lose these close games.

It's their legacy, people. Jesus.

[KoRnStARr]

If you want to put the emphasis on posteason then Kurt Warner > Brady.

Warner's postseason stats 3368 yards, 28 total tds, 98.9 QB Rating
Brady's postseason stats 3894 yards, 28 total TDs, 93.3 QB Rating

And Warner did this despite playing in 6 less games, and on teams that ran for less and gave up more points on average. He's went to the SB 3/4 of the times he made the postseason. And even though he's 1-2 in the SB he a late drive to tie or give his team a lead in both of his losses...it just so happens his defense gave up points right after he did that.

Difference was, in close Superbowls, Brady made the plays to win the game when the game was hanging in the balance, Kurt did not.

Kurt had ample opportunites to win both SBs he lost.

[Warner2BruceTD]

Difference was, in close Superbowls, Brady made the plays to win the game when the game was hanging in the balance, Kurt did not.

Kurt had ample opportunites to win both SBs he lost.

WTF are you talking about?

"While the game was hanging in the balance", Warner took him team down the field vs. Pittsburgh, and got into the endzone. What else can he do from the sideline?

"With the game hanging in the balance", he put the Rams in the end zone vs. NE, and again, watched from the sideline as Lovie Smith curled up in a ball and played prevent.

Vinetieri misses a few kicks, and all of a sudden would you be saying Brady didnt make the plays to win the game?

Mitigating factors, but again, its easier for people's minds to just count up rings. It requires less analytical thinking.

[Warner2BruceTD]

Why on earth was JHight forced to explain that AGAIN ?

Did everyone else skip the 38003459840598 that already answered the "ring importance" question ?

I cant fathom why its so hard to understand.

Everybody gets it.

What the ring crowd dosent understand, and something I keep repeating over and over, is that if Manning didnt have a SB I wouldnt have started a thread. You gotta get at least one. And even though he only has one, he is so much better than everyone else at everything else, that that's enough for me.

Ranking these guys by rings, even as a "splitting hairs" measure, is a disservice to the players IMO. Too simplistic. The scope of the entire career needs to be evaluated.

[Warner2BruceTD]

You know, i'm watching Peyton Manning right now, and every throw he makes is exactly where it needs to be, and I can tell you, 90% of the QB's in the league wouldnt have completed some of them because the WR's were well covered. Manning completes passes to whoever he wants, even when they are covered.

The way he feels pressure is amazing. You cant sack the guy. Leonard Little is owning his man, and twice, he ended up not getting anywhere near Manning, who calmly zips he ball to someoen who's covered.

Of course, non of this counts. It's "just" a regular season game, against a bad team. No ring at stake.

I can tell you right now, the Colts are not up 14-3 with anyone else at QB in this game. Watch the guy play, and you can see what sets him apart from the other elite guys.

[Bear Pand]

Difference was, in close Superbowls, Brady made the plays to win the game when the game was hanging in the balance, Kurt did not.

Kurt had ample opportunites to win both SBs he lost.

How could you even pretend this is true?

I guess we can act like he didn't lead a 3 play 55 yard TD drive (all passes) to tie the Pats with 1:30 to go.

And I guess we can act like he didn't lead a 2 play 64 yard drive (all passes) to take the lead over the Steelers with like 2:30 to go.

It's not his fault and doesn't make him any less of a player just because his D didn't hold.

I guess we can also act like Warner doesn't have a better QB Rating, 1 less TD and more passing yards in the Superbowl despite only playing in 3 compared to Brady's 4.

You just subjectively assign praise and blame and don't use the same criteria for every player.

Everybody gets it.

What the ring crowd dosent understand, and something I keep repeating over and over, is that if Manning didnt have a SB I wouldnt have started a thread. You gotta get at least one. And even though he only has one, he is so much better than everyone else at everything else, that that's enough for me.

Ranking these guys by rings, even as a "splitting hairs" measure, is a disservice to the players IMO. Too simplistic. The scope of the entire career needs to be evaluated.

This

[Deviant]

Everybody gets it.

What the ring crowd dosent understand, and something I keep repeating over and over, is that if Manning didnt have a SB I wouldnt have started a thread. You gotta get at least one. And even though he only has one, he is so much better than everyone else at everything else, that that's enough for me.

Ranking these guys by rings, even as a "splitting hairs" measure, is a disservice to the players IMO. Too simplistic. The scope of the entire career needs to be evaluated.

Ding, ding, ding. Championships are a team accomplishment, not just the QB. Thus why players like Trent Dilfer can be called Super Bowl champions (and why the greatness of a QB shouldn't be in measurement of the rings on his finger). This isn't basketball where literally one player can take over a game in all aspects of the game (which is why MJ is labeled as one of/the greatest of all time). Last I checked, QBs don't play on defense.

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

If you want to put the emphasis on posteason then Kurt Warner > Brady.

Warner's postseason stats 3368 yards, 28 total tds, 98.9 QB Rating
Brady's postseason stats 3894 yards, 28 total TDs, 93.3 QB Rating

And Warner did this despite playing in 6 less games, and on teams that ran for less and gave up more points on average. He's gone to the SB 3/4 of the times he made the postseason. And even though he's 1-2 in the SB he led a late drive to tie or give his team a lead in both of his losses...it just so happens his defense gave up points right after he did that.

Kurt Warner is a Hall of Famer, too...

I wouldn't rank him ahead of Brady, because his body of work is a bit lopsided...but he is a HoF'r. One of the more exotic cases, but a HoF'r nonetheless.

[Esjay]

You know, i'm watching Peyton Manning right now, and every throw he makes is exactly where it needs to be, and I can tell you, 90% of the QB's in the league wouldnt have completed some of them because the WR's were well covered. Manning completes passes to whoever he wants, even when they are covered.

The way he feels pressure is amazing. You cant sack the guy. Leonard Little is owning his man, and twice, he ended up not getting anywhere near Manning, who calmly zips he ball to someoen who's covered.

Of course, non of this counts. It's "just" a regular season game, against a bad team. No ring at stake.

I can tell you right now, the Colts are not up 14-3 with anyone else at QB in this game. Watch the guy play, and you can see what sets him apart from the other elite guys.

Thank you.

[ram29jackson]

Difference was, in close Superbowls, Brady made the plays to win the game when the game was hanging in the balance, Kurt did not.

Kurt had ample opportunites to win both SBs he lost.

Is Brady a great Qb in this era? For the most part yes. But in a majority of their biggest games it wasnt Brady who won the game. it was Adam Nougatary's foot haha

[FirstTimer]

Is Brady a great Qb in this era? For the most part yes. But in a majority of their biggest games it wasnt Brady who won the game. it was Adam Nougatary's foot haha

Who got Adam in position to even be able to use his foot?

[ram29jackson]

Who got Adam in position to even be able to use his foot?

my point being, total dominance is the drive for a touchdown, not field goal range. Also, more proof that playoffs and Superbowls are more of a team win and not just the QB

[FirstTimer]

my point being, total dominance is the drive for a touchdown, not field goal range.

Who cares about total dominance? The point is to win the damn game. Brady put his team in positions to do so time after time and if it was about "total dominance" of scoring a TD The Pats would have been chucking hail mary's into the endzone to beat the Rams and Panthers not playing to win and kicking field goals.

You're an idiot.


*Super Bowl Post Game Press Conference*

Reporter: Tom Tom! Why did you throw the ball up for grabs with 4 seconds left rather than calling a time out and trying a game winning field goal?

Brady: Total domination FTW! RAAAWWRWEWEALKHJSDHS!!!!!!

[ram29jackson]

Who cares about total dominance? The point is to win the damn game. Brady put his team in positions to do so time after time and if it was about "total dominance" of scoring a TD The Pats would have been chucking hail mary's into the endzone to beat the Rams and Panthers not playing to win and kicking field goals.

You're an idiot.


*Super Bowl Post Game Press Conference*

Reporter: Tom Tom! Why did you throw the ball up for grabs with 4 seconds left rather than calling a time out and trying a game winning field goal?

Brady: Total domination FTW! RAAAWWRWEWEALKHJSDHS!!!!!!

I am not an idiot, you are an insulting internet fool. Who cares about total dominance/ thats basically what this is about. When your team wins by a field goal that means the QB did not dominate, which means he cant be considered greatest ever. And again, there is no such thing as greatest ever anyway. its all just conversation fodder.

[FirstTimer]

I am not an idiot

Yes you are.

You just insinuated that sound football strategy is less important than attempting to show "total dominance" and cementing your playing legacy.

If only Jim Kelly and the Bills would have attempted a Hail Mary against the Giants. Scott Norwood would have been saved!!

When your team wins by a field goal that means the QB did not dominate, which means he cant be considered greatest ever.

That's idiotic. Hypothetically a QB could throw for 500 yards 8TD's in every Super Bowl he plays in and win by 3 points each time but because his defense can't stop anyone and it's a shootout won by 3 that QB can't be called the greatest ever?

Honesty....you're going to stand behind this line of thinking?

Are you on drugs? Seriously?