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

[Senser81]

Best Colts QBs ever:

1) Unitas
2) Bert Jones
3) Earl Morrall
4) Mike Pagel
5) Peyton Manning
6) Gary Hogeboom
7) Jack Trudeau
8) Marty Domres

[Woy]

Best Colts QBs ever:

1) Unitas
2) Bert Jones
3) Earl Morrall
4) Mike Pagel
5) Peyton Manning
6) Gary Hogeboom
7) Jack Trudeau
8) Marty Domres

I don't see Jim Harbaugh on that list.

[Senser81]

But, they DON'T mean anything. Or, at least, they mean very little. That is a completely valid and logically-explained point, especially when people use the notion of "DA, PEYTON DON'T HAVE NO RINGS IN DA POSTSEASON".

Whenever I read your postings, I picture your post being read by Uncle Pecos.




Weird, huh? Its probably because I think hillbilly people are retards, and whenever I read your postings, I picture a "smart" retard trying to talk down to the other retards.

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

Listen, Manning is a great QB...an all-timer at the position...he is one of the best...but you need to realize that when you are comparing Manning to his contemporaries and his peers (ie: other Hall of Fame QBs) you are going to be slicing the pie thinner and magnifying what they can do on the bigger stages. It is one thing to be Dan Fouts or Ken Anderson and another to be Warren Moon or Dan Marino...but its a whole other level when you are talking about Joe Montana and John Elway, which is the level we are talking about Manning.

Now, Manning is a bit ahead of a player like Marino, although, their careers are somewhat similar, in that, they are known as the best passers ever in the game, but have come up short "when the games counted"...Manning has surpassed Marino, IMO, by getting that ring, however, doesn't surpass him so much so, or eclipse players like Montana and Elway because we you break it down, Manning wasn't necessarily the reason for their Super Bowl Ring (like Montana was for the 49ers) and he never put a team of rag tags on his back and took them to Super Bowl (like Elway did with the early late 80's Bronco teams).

In "games that count" (ie: playoff games) he is a 59% passer, 22/16 TD:INT ratio, and has a minimal number of "big games" under his belt in the playoffs (two games versus the Broncos where he accumulated 9 of his career playoff touchdown passes) and a 7-8 playoff record. In comparison, Joe Montana is a 16-7 QB in the playoffs and Elway a 14-7 QB in the playoffs.

Manning, when comparing him to the greats, lacks in one area...big game credibility.

In comparison to one of his contemporaries...Tom Brady, Brady has a 14-3 playoff record and 0 "one-and-done" performances. A 63% playoff performer with 26:11 TD:INT ratio including clutch performances and MVP type accolades.

I think, it is safe to say, that RIGHT NOW, Manning isn't even the best big game quarterback of his era..again, which bumps him down a bit on the rankings. Not quite below Brady (however, Brady is probably the QB that falls right in line after Manning in the "rankings", especially after having the All-Time season record for touchdown passes) but below guys like Montana and Elway for certain.

Manning isn't the best right now, because he lacks the big game resume of guys like Elway and Montana.

[dave]

Listen, Manning is a great QB...an all-timer at the position...he is one of the best...but you need to realize that when you are comparing Manning to his contemporaries and his peers (ie: other Hall of Fame QBs) you are going to be slicing the pie thinner and magnifying what they can do on the bigger stages. It is one thing to be Dan Fouts or Ken Anderson and another to be Warren Moon or Dan Marino...but its a whole other level when you are talking about Joe Montana and John Elway, which is the level we are talking about Manning.

Now, Manning is a bit ahead of a player like Marino, although, their careers are somewhat similar, in that, they are known as the best passers ever in the game, but have come up short "when the games counted"...Manning has surpassed Marino, IMO, by getting that ring, however, doesn't surpass him so much so, or eclipse players like Montana and Elway because we you break it down, Manning wasn't necessarily the reason for their Super Bowl Ring (like Montana was for the 49ers) and he never put a team of rag tags on his back and took them to Super Bowl (like Elway did with the early late 80's Bronco teams).

In "games that count" (ie: playoff games) he is a 59% passer, 22/16 TD:INT ratio, and has a minimal number of "big games" under his belt in the playoffs (two games versus the Broncos where he accumulated 9 of his career playoff touchdown passes) and a 7-8 playoff record. In comparison, Joe Montana is a 16-7 QB in the playoffs and Elway a 14-7 QB in the playoffs.

Manning, when comparing him to the greats, lacks in one area...big game credibility.

In comparison to one of his contemporaries...Tom Brady, Brady has a 14-3 playoff record and 0 "one-and-done" performances. A 63% playoff performer with 26:11 TD:INT ratio including clutch performances and MVP type accolades.

I think, it is safe to say, that RIGHT NOW, Manning isn't even the best big game quarterback of his era..again, which bumps him down a bit on the rankings. Not quite below Brady (however, Brady is probably the QB that falls right in line after Manning in the "rankings", especially after having the All-Time season record for touchdown passes) but below guys like Montana and Elway for certain.

Manning isn't the best right now, because he lacks the big game resume of guys like Elway and Montana.

Ding, ding, ding!

We have a winner.

[killgod]

I'll try and tackle a couple stupid fucking points in here because clearly you can't read and I'm going to barf reading your shit.

"So let me get this straight: the entire underpinning of your argument of Peyton Manning not being the GOAT is that he has not performed well in 15 specific games out of the 181 games he has played as a whole?"

Did I not state, multiple fucking times, that the guys I place higher than Manning succeeded in BOTH THE REGULAR SEASON AND AT AN EVEN HIGHER LEVEL IN THE POSTSEASON?

SO WHY WOULD MANNING, WHO HAS PLAYED AT A LOWER LEVEL IN THE PLAYOFFS (COMPARED TO HIS REGULAR SEASON PLAY) BE RATED ABOVE THE OTHERS? THE OTHERS BEING GUYS WHO PERFORM ELITE IN BOTH THOSE "181 GAMES" AND THE OTHER "15 USELESS PLAYOFF GAMES".

If you catch what I mean, which you won't, cause you're a dumbass.


Do I need to say this in three different languages? Paint you a picture? Kick you in the fucking head?


You know what, fuck it.

You and your theory that "the AFC title game vs the Patriots holds no more weight than a regular season tilt in fucking September vs the Lions" is the most absurd shit I've ever heard.


You are a fucking tool and not worth debating with.

[FedEx227]

One of the good things about this debate is Peyton still has time to solidify his career in the eyes of the rings/championship crowd. I thought it would be over after his one Super Bowl win but I guess not. Hopefully, he wins another soon.

I think, it is safe to say, that RIGHT NOW, Manning isn't even the best big game quarterback of his era..again, which bumps him down a bit on the rankings. Not quite below Brady (however, Brady is probably the QB that falls right in line after Manning in the "rankings", especially after having the All-Time season record for touchdown passes) but below guys like Montana and Elway for certain.

Good post overall, just curious what the breakdown in "era" is. I don't know if I'd put Manning/Brady in the same era as Montana/Elway.

[Senser81]

WTF are you talking about? Don't personally attack me just because you can't wrap your brain around why the "rings" argument is stupid when applied to individual players.

I find it funny when, in a singular post, you can rip on someone for saying the regular season "means nothing", then turn around and say yourself that "rings mean nothing" when discussing the greatest QBs of all-time. Nice.

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

One of the good things about this debate is Peyton still has time to solidify his career in the eyes of the rings/championship crowd. I thought it would be over after his one Super Bowl win but I guess not. Hopefully, he wins another soon.



Good post overall, just curious what the breakdown in "era" is. I don't know if I'd put Manning/Brady in the same era as Montana/Elway.

Brady is in his era...however, if he isn't even the big game of his contemporary (Brady), how could he be a better big game QB then Montana or Elway, two of the GOATs (Brady is right there with them in that aforementioned regard).

And that was the point overall...Manning can't be the GOAT because he isn't better than Montana or Elway (and maybe another player or two, as I'm not attempting to list my "Top 5")...when you are comparing similar players of value, you need to break it down further, and when it comes down to it, the best and most important evaluation of an elite QB is what they do in games that matter...in this case, playoff games...

Manning isn't on par with a player in his generation, Brady in this regard, and he isn't on par with Montana or Elway...so, how can he be considered the GOAT?

I don't think he can...not yet.

Right now, he gets the moniker of "best passer ever" as he snatched that away from Dan Marino. However, when it comes to being a "quarterback" he has some work to do on the resume to catch up.

In regards to your first point...just because he has himself a ring, doesn't mean he immediately shoots to the top.

His ring takes him out of the same grouping as Dan Marino...however, now, you want to compare him to the creme de la creme and that takes a bit more of a hefty resume when it comes to big games.

[dave]

I'll try and tackle a couple stupid fucking points in here because clearly you can't read and I'm going to barf reading your shit.

"So let me get this straight: the entire underpinning of your argument of Peyton Manning not being the GOAT is that he has not performed well in 15 specific games out of the 181 games he has played as a whole?"

I'm not speaking for anyone but myself here ... but YES.

Those 15 games are way more important than the other 166.

A player's career is defined by how he performs when it really matters.

No one cared how Joe Montana or Jerry Rice played against the old Tampa Bay Buccaneers. They remember their playoff performances.

I am not for a second saying Peyton Manning isn't a great QB or in the top 5 - he obviously is - but he needs more playoff moments.

You could blame the teams Manning's brought to the playoffs, but Manning himself has rarely elevated his game in the playoffs and an argument could be made that his playoff performances generally are a drop off.

I'm sorry, but the playoffs count.

[Senser81]

Well, was my assertion about your point not correct? You have yet to answer my question

Obviously your point was not correct, because it was completely illogical. I'm not even taking a side in this Peyton Manning debate, but it makes no sense to lump-in postseason games with regular season games and treat them as equals. They aren't.

If that is going to be the crux of your "argument" in this thread, then you should just leave. You aren't adding anything to the mix.

[Senser81]

Wow, I have never ever seen an apples-to-oranges comparison along with a straw-man in a single sentence. A tip of the hat to you, sir.

What was the apples-to-oranges comparison? What was the straw-man? I thought I was just quoting you, not making a comparison or formulating an argument.

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

Obviously your point was not correct, because it was completely illogical. I'm not even taking a side in this Peyton Manning debate, but it makes no sense to lump-in postseason games with regular season games and treat them as equals. They aren't.

If that is going to be the crux of your "argument" in this thread, then you should just leave. You aren't adding anything to the mix.

Take one...or die.

Your choice.

[Senser81]

Take one...or die.

Your choice.

I am weighing my options...if I choose death, then I wouldn't have to read Lefty34's postings any more.

[Senser81]

I'm not so big on "big game performance", especially when the sample size for QB's is usually so small (and even THAT fact isn't usually their fault). But to your point on bringing up Manning not being "on-par" with Montana and Elway I don't necessarily agree.

Thats nice. Just because the sample size is small doesn't mean it is less important. I still have no idea what you are arguing. In one instance, you are saying that rings don't mean anything. In the next posting, you are saying that you cannot ascertain anything about a QB from his postseason performances because the sample size is too small. Well, which is it? Is the postseason meaningless, or is it "too small" to form an opinion?

I would say both of your arguments are ridiculous...the postseason OBVIOUSLY isn't meaningless, and we use it to form our opinions as to who the best team was that year, so we obviously can glean some information from it.

As for Peyton Manning, his career isn't over so we can't really judge him against guys who have already retired. I would say he and Brady are clearly #1 and #2 of their era. If they both retired today, I would think that Brady would be regarded as the greater QB of the two, because he accomplished more. That said, IMO Manning is the better QB. If I were a GM, I'd rather have Manning than Brady. It would be like saying Emmitt Smith was a greater RB than Earl Campbell because Smith accomplished more, but Campbell was the better RB. Hope that made sense.