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

[Warner2BruceTD]

Manning's normalized statistics are not only comparable but in most areas are better than Montana's, so you can toss the "pass happy era" stuff right out the window.

The "pass happy era" is valid when arguing against marginal QB's like Eli Manning who don't stack up to the other QB's in their own era, but it doesn't hold up with Peyton because Peyton is leaps and bounds ahead of his contemporaries and even when normalized for his era he has better numbers than Montana, too.

Also, 11-11 is not "the worst" postseason record. I don't even know what that means. The worst ever? Not even close. The worst active? Not even close. The worst what?

[Warner2BruceTD]

Also, the gap between Montana & Manning post season is closing.

Montana has a 95 QB rating to Manning's 91. Montana's highs were higher but his lows were much lower. Manning never had a stretch of shit in the postseason like Montana did between '85-'87 where Montana was flat out putrid in three straight one & done's. Montana also flat out shit the bed in the '93 AFC Championship, in another awful performance worse than anything Manning ever put up in the playoffs.

EDIT - actually, the 2003 AFC Championship was a pretty brutal performance for Manning. Easily his biggest blemish.

[KINGOFOOTBALL]

You've tried to marginalize the fact that Manning's numbers will dwarf those of Montana when all is said and done because he plays in a pass happy era.

I say fine.

Then I should be able to disqualify Montana's greater team accomplishments and playoff record because he played in an era more conducive to building and maintaining a super team.

Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Tapatalk

Since 2000
Pats have 3 wins 5 visits
Steelers 3 visits two wins
Baltimore 2 wins.
Giants 3 appearances 2 wins
Seattle on second visit
4 QBs with multiple SB wins (if Denver wins)


There's zero debate defenses were significantly tougher and today's stats are monumentally inflated.

Saying it's easier to build a super team goes against the the obvious that it's easier now to build a contender with the bar so low and much easier to rebuild and turnover an aging team. It's harder to maintain one but creating another contender is common which wasn't back then.

More below...

Also, the gap between Montana & Manning post season is closing.

Montana has a 95 QB rating to Manning's 91. Montana's highs were higher but his lows were much lower. Manning never had a stretch of shit in the postseason like Montana did between '85-'87 where Montana was flat out putrid in three straight one & done's. Montana also flat out shit the bed in the '93 AFC Championship, in another awful performance worse than anything Manning ever put up in the playoffs.

EDIT - actually, the 2003 AFC Championship was a pretty brutal performance for Manning. Easily his biggest blemish.

Montana won a ring when he really shouldn't have , won 3 when he should have , and took a second team to the bring of a SB appearance long after his prime was over and career was thought to be over.
Manning lost often with equal or better teams then his competition.
Did win one but wasn't exactly a star in that game either.

He's also on his second team , after his career was considered over but he's got them to a SB. That to me is a huge bonus. If he wins that's something Montana clearly did not do. The argument will be much stronger and the gap goes from miniscule to microscopic.
We'll see how it turns out. What a conundrum if he puts up a stellar day...and they lose.

[Glenbino]

Since 2000
Pats have 3 wins 5 visits
Steelers 3 visits two wins
Baltimore 2 wins.
Giants 3 appearances 2 wins
Seattle on second visit
4 QBs with multiple SB wins (if Denver wins)


There's zero debate defenses were significantly tougher and today's stats are monumentally inflated.

Saying it's easier to build a super team goes against the the obvious that it's easier now to build a contender with the bar so low and much easier to rebuild and turnover an aging team. It's harder to maintain one but creating another contender is common which wasn't back then.

So not only did Montana have an owner who was willing to shell out the resources to keep Walsh's super teams intact, but it was also harder for other teams to rise as a contender then than it is today?

Sounds like you just made another argument for me as to why Manning's consecutive playoff appearances in this day and age is even more impressive.





Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Tapatalk

[Maynard]

Manning's normalized statistics are not only comparable but in most areas are better than Montana's, so you can toss the "pass happy era" stuff right out the window.

ok...so they are comparable...we will give them each a point

Montana 1
Manning 1

Also, 11-11 is not "the worst" post season record. I don't even know what that means. The worst ever? Not even close. The worst active? Not even close. The worst what?

Manning 11-11
Montana 16-7
Point goes to Joe

Montana 2
Manning 1

Also, the gap between Montana & Manning post season is closing.

it is? see the records above and below

Manning 1 SB
Montana 4 SB
Point goes to Joe

Montana 3
Manning 1

Montana has a 95 QB rating to Manning's 91.

another point for Joe
Montana 4
Manning 1

Manning never had a stretch of shit in the postseason like Montana did between '85-'87 where Montana was flat out putrid in three straight one & done's.

putrid? 26/47 for 300 yards against that NYG defense in 1985
1986 Joe got smashed with a spinal injury and still came back to lead them to the playoffs. And win comeback player of the year
1987 he threw a career high 31 TD in just 13 games and yes, played terrible in that playoff game

Manning had 8 one and done seasons. Montana had 4...point goes to Montana

Montana 5
Manning 1

Manning - 40 fourth quarter comebacks, 51 game-winning drives
Montana - 31 fourth quarter comebacks, 33 game-winning drives

point goes to Manning

Montana 5
Manning 2

Based on the information you are going by Joesph, I think its pretty clear that Montana is better than Manning. Joe Montana is the goat

[ram29jackson]

ok...so they are comparable...we will give them each a point

Montana 1
Manning 1




Manning 11-11
Montana 16-7
Point goes to Joe

Montana 2
Manning 1





it is? see the records above and below

Manning 1 SB
Montana 4 SB
Point goes to Joe

Montana 3
Manning 1




another point for Joe
Montana 4
Manning 1



putrid? 26/47 for 300 yards against that NYG defense in 1985
1986 Joe got smashed with a spinal injury and still came back to lead them to the playoffs. And win comeback player of the year
1987 he threw a career high 31 TD in just 13 games and yes, played terrible in that playoff game

Manning had 8 one and done seasons. Montana had 4...point goes to Montana

Montana 5
Manning 1

Manning - 40 fourth quarter comebacks, 51 game-winning drives
Montana - 31 fourth quarter comebacks, 33 game-winning drives

point goes to Manning

Montana 5
Manning 2

Based on the information you are going by Joesph, I think its pretty clear that Montana is better than Manning. Joe Montana is the goat

um yeah, SF had all stars all over the field and the same squad at its core for years. That makes SF great as a team but doesn't make Joe that superior to Peyton.

...and regardless of you finding interesting stuff, get a freaking life dude LOL I aint wasting that much time on research for fun-time sports banter. But thanks for being the loser who went to all that effort, its appreciated.

[ram29jackson]

[Maynard]

...and regardless of you finding interesting stuff, get a freaking life dude LOL I aint wasting that much time on research for fun-time sports banter. But thanks for being the loser who went to all that effort, its appreciated.

i bet it took you longer to post those pics then it did for me to post a few stats

sidenote

 

[Tailback U]

Montana is a lot more like Tom Brady than Manning.

If there never was a "Joe Cool," I'm pretty there would have been a, "Tom Cool,"...though it doesn't quite have the same ring to it, huh?

The similarities between Brady and Montana are there.

Manning is better than both and it won't even be a debate once he hangs 'em up.

[BigBucs]

Ive been saying Peyton is the best QB ever when he was in Indy. SB rings never meant much to me yet that has always been my friends argument when it came down to Brady vs Manning.

[KINGOFOOTBALL]

So not only did Montana have an owner who was willing to shell out the resources to keep Walsh's super teams intact, but it was also harder for other teams to rise as a contender then than it is today?

Sounds like you just made another argument for me as to why Manning's consecutive playoff appearances in this day and age is even more impressive.





Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Tapatalk

Those dominant teams didn't appear until Joe had already a ring under his belt. It was basically a two man team. Lott was a beast on the other side and Hicks had a career year in the secondary. But there was nothing special about that team. He proved he can win a SB on his own. That 81 team had far less talent than any Manning team.

I think you need to reread what wrote.
Manning's always had a grade A roster on the offensive side. T.Glen Faulk Harrison Edge Clark were all with him since his NFL berth.Not to mention the yearly offensive first round picks.
I don't play the more with less card but since you seem to want to Montana has the upper hand.

Even the what if switcheroo card I hate. I think Montana wins more than 1 ring with those Colts , I don't think Manning gets past the Cowboys and Bengals to win SB in 81 with guys named Clark and Solomon.

I think you guys forget how special Montana. Especially playing this numbers game. Jim Brown had some insane stats but until you see footage of Jim and hear the stories you don't grasp how good he was. I think we all get how good Manning is but some of you are forgetting Montana's greatness.

[Glenbino]

Montana had Walsh... Brady has Belichik.

Peyton Manning had Jim Caldwell.

Case... Rested.

Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Tapatalk

[dave]

Montana had Walsh... Brady has Belichik.

Peyton Manning had Jim Caldwell.

Case... Rested.

Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Tapatalk

That argument is ridiculous.

I might buy that Montana had the genius offensive coach, but saying Manning's key coach was Caldwell is stupid. Saying Brady's coach was an offensive genius is also stupid.

[Glenbino]

That argument is ridiculous.

I might buy that Montana had the genius offensive coach, but saying Manning's key coach was Caldwell is stupid. Saying Brady's coach was an offensive genius is also stupid.

Oh yeah I forgot what a hot commodity Tom Moore was before Peyton showed up and how teams were beating down doors trying to hire him as a HC even as he was the OC for the top offense in the league...

Belichik isn't an offensive genius, but he was the steady hand that built the defense for all those SB winners, especially the first one.

[Aso]

Oh yeah I forgot what a hot commodity Tom Moore was before Peyton showed up and how teams were beating down doors trying to hire him as a HC even as he was the OC for the top offense in the league...

Belichik isn't an offensive genius, but he was the steady hand that built the defense for all those SB winners, especially the first one.

Even though he hasn't won another Superbowl Belichick saw the league was changing into a pass happy one and started to change with it in '07 when he acquired Moss and Welker and in '07 the Patriots used the shotgun more than any other team in NFL history had at the time. I put Belichick up there as one of the most genius coaches of all time.