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

[FedEx227]

Doesn't Peyton have the record for largest deficit overcome in a conference championship game? Throwing a perfect passer rating doesn't count either? Is that not coming up huge in big games?

Also, I've looked at some of Peyton's loses in the playoffs and in four of them, he has put his team in a situation to win and there were faults by teammates that stopped him. For instance, in his playoff game against Miami in 2001(?), the Colts gave up a playoff-record 209 yards to Lamar Smith on the ground. A last second TD by the Dolphins tied the game (after Peyton had pushed the lead to a touchdown on the previous drive). After the defense halted the Dolphins in OT, Peyton set up Vanderjagt with a game-winning FG from 48 after they just missed a 3rd and 12 conversion by a yard. Vanderjagt shanks it (despite nailing a 52 yarded earlier) and the Dolphins win the game.

Two fumbles by Dominic Rhodes and Reggie Wayne while in Patriots territory for potential scores killed their chances to win in a 20-3 game. Is that fair to hang against Manning considering he didn't commit a turnover until the last seconds of the game in desperation?

Peyton came back from 21-3 to 21-18 in the Fourth against the Steelers and after a present from his defense, drove the team down the field and set up a field goal situation for Vanderjagt. Vanderjagt shanks again.

I think Peyton deserves a lot more credit in his games than just the W & L column.

Good stuff... nice post.

 

[KoRnStARr]

I did want to mention that; I'm not discrediting Brady here, and to be honest, this thread is nothing new to me. I've known for a long time that Peyton was going to be one of the best in history.

11-5, 99% of the time is going to get you the playoffs, so that's not on Cassell and the Patriots really [sure, they could have won some games, but for all intensive purposes, they were in a position to warrant a playoff spot].

The mere fact that Peyton has led a [significantly] weaker team [defensive for the most part] to 12 wins for x amount of years in a row is enough to bump him over Brady. I know Tom's a great QB, and I know the Patriots would not be the same without him...But honestly, they'd be close. The Colts success in the playoffs lies mostly on Peyton, whereas the Patriots had the talent to be there in most of the years, with Brady or without him.

Manning takes all the credit in the regular season, yet shoulders none of the blame for the most part when his team fails to put up points in the playoffs. It's my biggest gripe.

He has a 7-8 record in the playoffs, which is atrocious, especially when his team relies on him that much.

The "what if" game is something that can't really be argued or even truly speculated. All we know is Brady has 3 rings, the RECORD for most TD passes in a single season, led his team to an 18-0 record, led the most prolific offense of all time, and has a staggering amount of playoff success as well as regular season.

Peyton's holding himself back in history, IMO, because of his playoff failures. They're well-documented, hell -- he got bashed here last year in the Indianapolis Star because of his failure last year in the post-season, where his defense got him many stops, yet that offense only put up 17 points on the NFL's 32nd ranked pass D in the league. What gives?

 

[KoRnStARr]

Doesn't Peyton have the record for largest deficit overcome in a conference championship game? Throwing a perfect passer rating doesn't count either? Is that not coming up huge in big games?

Also, I've looked at some of Peyton's loses in the playoffs and in four of them, he has put his team in a situation to win and there were faults by teammates that stopped him. For instance, in his playoff game against Miami in 2001(?), the Colts gave up a playoff-record 209 yards to Lamar Smith on the ground. A last second TD by the Dolphins tied the game (after Peyton had pushed the lead to a touchdown on the previous drive). After the defense halted the Dolphins in OT, Peyton set up Vanderjagt with a game-winning FG from 48 after they just missed a 3rd and 12 conversion by a yard. Vanderjagt shanks it (despite nailing a 52 yarded earlier) and the Dolphins win the game.

Two fumbles by Dominic Rhodes and Reggie Wayne while in Patriots territory for potential scores killed their chances to win in a 20-3 game. Is that fair to hang against Manning considering he didn't commit a turnover until the last seconds of the game in desperation?

Peyton came back from 21-3 to 21-18 in the Fourth against the Steelers and after a present from his defense, drove the team down the field and set up a field goal situation for Vanderjagt. Vanderjagt shanks again.

I think Peyton deserves a lot more credit in his games than just the W & L column.

He's also the only "GREAT" QB to be shut out in an NFL playoff game against the Jets in 2001.

That Steelers/Colts game officially ended when he threw that INT to Polamalu while down 10 that the NFL had to APOLOGIZE for as a horrendous call as it was overturned. Add in the fact when he did get the ball back, at midfield, he kept trying to go deep in the endzone when he had guys wide open underneath. He wasn't composed, wasn't regular-season Peyton.

That 20-3 Patriots/Colts game, he threw a crucial INT against the Pats in the redzone to Harrison, and was off his game. Yes, fumbles stalled drives, but part of being great is overcoming adverse situations which every NFL team/QB is faced with in the playoffs at some point.

Or how about his 4 INT performance against the Patriots, his 3 INT performance against the Chiefs, his abysmal game last year against the Chargers (stats were good, play wasn't), etc etc?

He has a much longer list of playoff failures attached to his name rather than playoff success stories.

 

[Gonzo]

Manning takes all the credit in the regular season, yet shoulders none of the blame for the most part when his team fails to put up points in the playoffs. It's my biggest gripe.

He has a 7-8 record in the playoffs, which is atrocious, especially when his team relies on him that much.

The "what if" game is something that can't really be argued or even truly speculated. All we know is Brady has 3 rings, the RECORD for most TD passes in a single season, led his team to an 18-0 record, led the most prolific offense of all time, and has a staggering amount of playoff success as well as regular season.

Peyton's holding himself back in history, IMO, because of his playoff failures. They're well-documented, hell -- he got bashed here last year in the Indianapolis Star because of his failure last year in the post-season, where his defense got him many stops, yet that offense only put up 17 points on the NFL's 32nd ranked pass D in the league. What gives?

I would take that serious if it wasn't [most likely] Bob Kravitz making those remarks.

 

[steeljake]

He's also the only "GREAT" QB to be shut out in an NFL playoff game against the Jets in 2001.

That Steelers/Colts game officially ended when he threw that INT to Polamalu while down 10 that the NFL had to APOLOGIZE for as a horrendous call as it was overturned. Add in the fact when he did get the ball back, at midfield, he kept trying to go deep in the endzone when he had guys wide open underneath. He wasn't composed, wasn't regular-season Peyton.

That 20-3 Patriots/Colts game, he threw a crucial INT against the Pats in the redzone to Harrison, and was off his game. Yes, fumbles stalled drives, but part of being great is overcoming adverse situations which every NFL team/QB is faced with in the playoffs at some point.

Or how about his 4 INT performance against the Patriots, his 3 INT performance against the Chiefs, his abysmal game last year against the Chargers (stats were good, play wasn't), etc etc?

He has a much longer list of playoff failures attached to his name rather than playoff success stories.

so manning isnt the GOAT cuz he playoff record is bad... i wonder what dan marino's pst season record is...

 

[ram29jackson]

there is no such thing as greatest of all time. There is only greatest/ or one of the greats of every 10 to 20 years.

right now Manning and Brady are right up there. Favre is the most recent -greatest of all time- for a 15 to 20 year period because he owns all the stats.

Superbowl rings and appearances are a team accomplishment. Not an individual accomplishment. so , I dont believe they affect whether an individual QB is /should be considered that good or better than another.

Montana was a great QB in the right place at the right time. the 49ers were a freakin all star organization from top to bottom at the time. But , as an individual talent he was no better, no worse than Elway, Marino etc.-

a little repeat / redundant.

 

[JeremyHight]

so manning isnt the GOAT cuz he playoff record is bad... i wonder what dan marino's pst season record is...

And that is why many don't consider Marino the all time best QB. There is a reason why all of us keep saying Montana and not Marino. Montana's post season QB rating blows Manning's and Marino's out of the water.

 

[1ke]

And that is why many don't consider Marino the all time best QB. There is a reason why all of us keep saying Montana and not Marino. Montana's post season QB rating blows Manning's and Marino's out of the water.

Im wit you JH....Dont understand whats so hard to understand. Marino never comes up over Montana....Everyone knows.

 

[Gonzo]

And that is why many don't consider Marino the all time best QB. There is a reason why all of us keep saying Montana and not Marino. Montana's post season QB rating blows Manning's and Marino's out of the water.

Im wit you JH....Dont understand whats so hard to understand. Marino never comes up over Montana....Everyone knows.

For what its worth, Jake never said Marino > Montana.

I'd be very interested to see if you all still stood by this if the Colts had won the Super Bowl even ONCE more. Perhaps twice; god knows our regular season record in the past many years warrants another.

We're talking the greatest of all time. We're not stating facts here; obviously, this is heavily opinionated and impossible to figure out.

There is NOBODY in the history of the game that manipulates football as a whole like Peyton Manning. His mere presence on the field is enough to shake heavy veterans, and his calls from the line are unmatched.

You guys can hang on to your Playoff statistics and whatnot, but if you wanna get to the gist of this, Peyton Manning is simply the greatest quarterback [and generally speaking, football player altogether] to ever grace the field with his presence.

/end blowjay.

Just Sayin'.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Mike Vanderjagt missed a bunch of clutch kicks, and Adam Vinetieri made all of his.

For that, we "punish" Peyton Manning, and "reward" Tom Brady.

How different would each man's current legacy be, had Vandejagt made all of those kicks, and Vinetieri missed vs. the Raiders, or the Rams, or the Panthers...or all of the above?

Instead, some of you guys look at Mannings playoff record and say "He's only 7-8 RAWR no clutch", which is a load of bullshit, not only because of the above statements on the Colts kicking game, but the fact that he has a ring., which some of you will still knock by saying he didnt play very well in doing so. Well, what about the times he played lights out, and his "idiot kicker" choked it away? No brownie points from the hypocrites?

EDIT: If Manning had no rings, this thread never gets started. I'd be the first to say, stop blaming kickers, stop blaming defense, just get it done "Marino". However, he won his ring, and to me, a second or third ring would make it impossible to debate anyone aside from Montana, who I already think Peyton is a better player than anyway, from just watching both play.

 

[nflman2033]

Mike Vanderjagt missed a bunch of clutch kicks, and Adam Vinetieri made all of his.

For that, we "punish" Peyton Manning, and "reward" Tom Brady.

How different would each man's current legacy be, had Vandejagt made all of those kicks, and Vinetieri missed vs. the Raiders, or the Rams, or the Panthers...or all of the above?

Instead, some of you guys look at Mannings playoff record and say "He's only 7-8 RAWR no clutch", which is a load of bullshit, not only because of the above statements on the Colts kicking game, but the fact that he has a ring., which some of you will still knock by saying he didnt play very well in doing so. Well, what about the times he played lights out, and his "idiot kicker" choked it away? No brownie points from the hypocrites?

EDIT: If Manning had no rings, this thread never gets started. I'd be the first to say, stop blaming kickers, stop blaming defense, just get it done "Marino". However, he won his ring, and to me, a second or third ring would make it impossible to debate anyone aside from Montana, who I already think Peyton is a better player than anyway, from just watching both play.

nice post, i mean especially when it comes down to Who was Peyton's Kicker when he finally did win the Super Bowl and how many super bowls have the Pats won since Vinatieri went to Indy. In fact lets just start talking about Adam Vinatieri

 

[JeremyHight]

For what its worth, Jake never said Marino > Montana.

I'd be very interested to see if you all still stood by this if the Colts had won the Super Bowl even ONCE more. Perhaps twice; god knows our regular season record in the past many years warrants another.

We're talking the greatest of all time. We're not stating facts here; obviously, this is heavily opinionated and impossible to figure out.

There is NOBODY in the history of the game that manipulates football as a whole like Peyton Manning. His mere presence on the field is enough to shake heavy veterans, and his calls from the line are unmatched.

You guys can hang on to your Playoff statistics and whatnot, but if you wanna get to the gist of this, Peyton Manning is simply the greatest quarterback [and generally speaking, football player altogether] to ever grace the field with his presence.

/end blowjay.

Just Sayin'.

Mike Vanderjagt missed a bunch of clutch kicks, and Adam Vinetieri made all of his.

For that, we "punish" Peyton Manning, and "reward" Tom Brady.

How different would each man's current legacy be, had Vandejagt made all of those kicks, and Vinetieri missed vs. the Raiders, or the Rams, or the Panthers...or all of the above?

Instead, some of you guys look at Mannings playoff record and say "He's only 7-8 RAWR no clutch", which is a load of bullshit, not only because of the above statements on the Colts kicking game, but the fact that he has a ring., which some of you will still knock by saying he didnt play very well in doing so. Well, what about the times he played lights out, and his "idiot kicker" choked it away? No brownie points from the hypocrites?

EDIT: If Manning had no rings, this thread never gets started. I'd be the first to say, stop blaming kickers, stop blaming defense, just get it done "Marino". However, he won his ring, and to me, a second or third ring would make it impossible to debate anyone aside from Montana, who I already think Peyton is a better player than anyway, from just watching both play.

Can neither of you grasp that people aren't just saying Montana>>>Manning because of rings? I showed tons of stats proving that Montana was basically equal to Manning in a much less pass friendly era and that Montana's post season statistics (not just record) absolutely destroyed Manning's.

Get this through your skulls, how are you going to say a QB with an 85 QB Rating in the most important games of the year is the best of the best?

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Can neither of you grasp that people aren't just saying Montana>>>Manning because of rings? I showed tons of stats proving that Montana was basically equal to Manning in a much less pass friendly era and that Montana's post season statistics (not just record) absolutely destroyed Manning's.

I can post plenty of numbers that show Manning as far superior to Montana--from yards to TD's to completions.

As I stated earlier, some QB's have great "compiled" numbers. Yards, TD's, completions, starts, Wins. Favre & Marino are good examples.

Some guys have great "percentage" numbers...Comp%, QB rating, yards per attempt, INT%....this is where guys like Montana excel.

Manning is elite in both areas.

Get this through your skulls, how are you going to say a QB with an 85 QB Rating in the most important games of the year is the best of the best?

Get THIS through your skull. I already conceded Montana has the better post season track record. Nobody can reasonably state otherwise. Duh.

However, Manning has his ring, and his book isnt finished.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Can neither of you grasp that people aren't just saying Montana>>>Manning because of rings? I showed tons of stats proving that Montana was basically equal to Manning in a much less pass friendly era and that Montana's post season statistics (not just record) absolutely destroyed Manning's.

Get this through your skulls, how are you going to say a QB with an 85 QB Rating in the most important games of the year is the best of the best?

I'd like to address the bold on it's own.

Why do some of you keep saying this? It's total bullshit. You guys act as if the QB's in the 80's were getting hit with 2X4's and clubbed in the face with plaster casts.

Anything after 1978 is the "pass friendly era". Subtle rule changes since have made marginal differences.

Lest you forget, Montana (and the rest of the 80's crew) played in the heart of the infamous IN THE GRASP era, where plays were whistled dead BEFORE THE QB WAS TACKLED. So would you like to talk about pussified football?

Not only that, I can argue that the QB's of today are being hit by bigger, faster, stronger defensive players, and facing much more complex and creative blitzing schemes.

Montana did not play in a leather helmet, and he played in essentially the same damn "passer friendly era" as Manning. He isnt Otto Graham, just stop with that baseless argument.

 

[JeremyHight]

I cannot argue with W2B. I don't see how someone can say "Oh, those games in the playoffs, the ones that are the most important and pit you against teams who are equally talented, those don't count. Did you see what Manning did to the 0-5 Titans!!!11!!!one!! Manning is teh greatest!"

Montana went into those games and didn't just stay consistent, he actually IMPROVED his numbers from the regular season. His career statistics are almost identical to Manning's. I don't see how this is even an argument, just look at the stats.

As for today not being a pass friendly era... ya right. Nearly every offensive record has been broken in the last 10 years and QBs are protected more than ever. Ugh, this is like arguing with a five year old.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

I cannot argue with W2B. I don't see how someone can say "Oh, those games in the playoffs, the ones that are the most important and pit you against teams who are equally talented, those don't count. Did you see what Manning did to the 0-5 Titans!!!11!!!one!! Manning is teh greatest!"

Montana went into those games and didn't just stay consistent, he actually IMPROVED his numbers from the regular season. His career statistics are almost identical to Manning's. I don't see how this is even an argument, just look at the stats.

As for today not being a pass friendly era... ya right. Nearly every offensive record has been broken in the last 10 years and QBs are protected more than ever. Ugh, this is like arguing with a five year old.

In addition to "in the grasp", how about the CROWD NOISE rule, where the home team was penalized if the home crowd CHEERED TOO LOUD, making it hard for the opposing QB to call out his signals? Remember that one? That was the heart of Montana's playing days, btw.

Look, the point is, anything after 1978 is the "passer friendly era". Rule changes are part of the ebb & flow of the sport, but Montana & Manning are playing under essentially the same rules. It's a bad argument. This isnt Manning vs. YA Tittle.

And you clearly haven't paid much attention to anything i've posted, because i've conceded time and time again that Montana has a better post season resume. That dosent sway my opinion that Manning is the better player. I can't discount the fact that Manning has carried the Colts on his back for a decade, a team that likely would be a margnal playoff contender without him, and will probably retire owning almost every major record, and at minimum, one SB, with the book yet to be finished.

I'm not sure what the point is at debating you anymore, becsause you've slipped into name calling territory and we are repeating the same points.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Can neither of you grasp that people aren't just saying Montana>>>Manning because of rings? I showed tons of stats proving that Montana was basically equal to Manning in a much less pass friendly era and that Montana's post season statistics (not just record) absolutely destroyed Manning's.

Bullshit in bold.

If you discount rings, Manning beats Montana and it isnt even close.

More passing yards by a wide margain, something like 70 more TD's, a higher QB Rating, a higher completion percentage...across the board, Manning has better numbers.

Oh, and in less seasons.

Take away his rings, and you wouldnt even be arguing with me. Don't try to sell me that shit.

Get this through your skulls, how are you going to say a QB with an 85 QB Rating in the most important games of the year is the best of the best?

Wait, I thought this wasnt about postseason?

You contradicted yourself IN THE SAME POST, numbnuts.

You're better than that.

 

[JeremyHight]

Bullshit in bold.

If you discount rings, Manning beats Montana and it isnt even close.

More passing yards by a wide margain, something like 70 more TD's, a higher QB Rating, a higher completion percentage...across the board, Manning has better numbers.

Oh, and in less seasons.

Take away his rings, and you wouldnt even be arguing with me. Don't try to sell me that shit.



Wait, I thought this wasnt about postseason?

You contradicted yourself IN THE SAME POST, numbnuts.

You're better than that.

... no, I didn't. I said Montana's post season stats were far better than Manning's. No one would be shitting on Manning if he was even close to the same QB in the post season as he was in the regular season, but he isn't. His QB rating drops dramatically, his Interception Percentage increases, his TD percentage decreases, his completion percentage decreases, and etc. Those are POST SEASON STATS! If he was playing great, but didn't get wins, he would be fine and a definite argument for best QB ever, but he doesn't play great.

Again, read my posts, this has nothing to do with rings and everything to do with his dramatic drop off in the games that matter most.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Let me ask you this. He is in the midst of yet another MVP season, this time with WR's named Garcon and Collie, and a rookie RB.

If he wins another SB, this year or otherwise, where will you stand? It's not a loaded question. I'm not looking for an "I told you so".

You know where I stand. He's had postseason comebacks thwarted by a kicker on multiple occasions. He's had stinkers, just like Montana had stinkers (all of which I pointed out earlier in the thread). I'd take him over Montana if he retired right now, i've made that clear. Another ring and it's a slam dunk.

 

[Tailback U]

In addition to "in the grasp", how about the CROWD NOISE rule, where the home team was penalized if the home crowd CHEERED TOO LOUD, making it hard for the opposing QB to call out his signals? Remember that one? That was the heart of Montana's playing days, btw.

Look, the point is, anything after 1978 is the "passer friendly era". Rule changes are part of the ebb & flow of the sport, but Montana & Manning are playing under essentially the same rules. It's a bad argument. This isnt Manning vs. YA Tittle.

And you clearly haven't paid much attention to anything i've posted, because i've conceded time and time again that Montana has a better post season resume. That dosent sway my opinion that Manning is the better player. I can't discount the fact that Manning has carried the Colts on his back for a decade, a team that likely would be a margnal playoff contender without him, and will probably retire owning almost every major record, and at minimum, one SB, with the book yet to be finished.

I'm not sure what the point is at debating you anymore, because you've slipped into name calling territory and we are repeating the same points.

I understand what you are getting and I agree with pretty much everything you have said, but I can't get over the fact that the same reasons you use to defend Peyton Manning are the same reasons you use to bash Drew Brees.

I know that Drew Brees does not have the win/loss record that Manning does, but if you want to ignore Montana's playoff statistics and records when comparing him to Manning then why can't you do the same when comparing Manning and Brees?

I know that Manning is better than Brees, but I just find it funny that you love to bash Brees as often as you can when he and Manning have so many similarities statistically.