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

[Deviant]

lol. I wasn't sure about Manning - especially with the ever-present Manning-Brady comparisons - because he had Reggie Wayne and Marvin Harrison. He's done a lot already with this new crop of dudes I can't even name. . . He does still have Reggie and Anthony Gonzalez, though. . . But would Gonzalez even be looked-at as good if he hadn't been playing with Peyton? Like Ted Ginn is seen as situational being in Miami, what might he do in Indy?

Anywho, I'd take Montana over Peyton because of mobility issues. . . it's just that Peyton is generally in such a position between his receivers and his own decision-making that he doesn't need mobility. As aforementioned, though, he impressed me last year with showing that even he will come out of the pocket to make something happen. (Interestingly enough, that's one of the years he's had his least rushing attempts. lol. Guess I wasn't paying attention.)

I'd say Montana is better as long as he has four rings and Peyton has one. When Peyton gets three I'll say they're even. Or if he gets two and his stats are head and shoulders ahead. Here's their respective numbers (up to this week in the season for Peyton) so y'all will have a point-of-reference for future comparison:

Montana: 1979-1994 (1979-1992 SF 49ers, 1993-1994), 192 G, 164 GS, 117-47 WIN-LOSS, 3409/5391 CMP/ATT, 63.2%, 40551 Yds, 273 TD, 139 INT, 7.5 Y/A, SACKED 313

457 ATT, 1676 YDS, 20 TD, 3.7 Y/A

8 PRO BOWLS, 3 ALL-PRO, 2 MVP, 4 SUPER BOWL VICTORY, 3 SUPER BOWL MVP

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MontJo01.htm

---

Peyton: 1998-2009* (1998-2009 still going IND Colts), 181 G, 176 GS, 117-59 WIN-LOSS, 3972/6141 CMP/ATT, 64.1 %, 47273 YDS, 345 TD, 169 INT, 7.7 Y/A, SACKED 207

316 ATT, 714 YDS, 17 TD, 2.3 Y/A

9 PRO BOWLS, 4 ALL-PRO, 3 MVP, 1 SUPER BOWL VICTORY, 1 SUPER BOWL MVP

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MannPe00.htm

---

Unitas (Since I think he's the best): 1956-1973 (1956-1972 BAL Colts, 1973 SDG Chargers), 211 G, 186 GS, 118-64-4, 2830/5186 CMP/ATT, 54.6 %, 40239 YDS, 290 TD, 253 INT, 7.8 Y/A, SACKED 590

450 ATT, 1777 YDS, 13 TD, 3.9 Y/A

10 PRO BOWLS, 5 ALL-PRO, 3 MVP, 2 NFL CHAMPS, 1 SUPER BOWL VICTORY

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/U/UnitJo00.htm

---

Unitas's stats aren't as nice, but - as y'all have said, this was before the 'passer-friendly' NFL.

Hope I was helpful, or somethin'. . .

Unitas is the best QB in your opinion and you're holding championship totals against Peyton? Unitas didn't even play through all of Super Bowl V. He didn't show up big in that game either. 3/9, 88 yards, 1 TD, 2 INT. And 75 of those yards are coming off of one play. When Unitas left the game, the score was 6-6, Dallas. Dallas then later went up 13-6. Yet, he's credited with the win?

Also, Earl Morrall won an MVP with the Colts when Unitas was injured in '68. Shouldn't that, if anything, discredit him if another QB can come in an win an MVP at the same position on the same team?

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Didn't you make this thread after Manning played the SAME TEAM?

lol @ this guy

This thread had nothing to do with the game.

lol @ your haircut.

 

[Archer]

But would Gonzalez even be looked-at as good if he hadn't been playing with Peyton?

Gonzo has played about 10 snaps this year lol

Tom Brady just took a shit on this thread btw.

You beat on a team with no heart . If they can't get up for playing there biggest rivals at home in the division on sunday night football you know the season is over .

I think Favre did better than Brady yesterday .... but that's just me

 

[Deviant]

When Brady is hitting receivers who literally have no one near them within 10 yards, that says something about the secondary, not the QB. I didn't see Brady doing this against Denver.

 

[killgod]

Gonzo has played about 10 snaps this year lol



You beat on a team with no heart . If they can't get up for playing there biggest rivals at home in the division on sunday night football you know the season is over .

I think Favre did better than Brady yesterday .... but that's just me

Favre through a bunch of slant passes. He was nothing special, but because he's brett Favre having fun he was the QB of the century yesterday.


Joe Flacco played better than them both. He was eating shit all game long yet still completed a ton of passes and kept his team alive despite a pourous defensive and lack of rushing until the 4th.

 

[Archer]

Favre through a bunch of slant passes. He was nothing special, but because he's brett Favre having fun he was the QB of the century yesterday.


Joe Flacco played better than them both. He was eating shit all game long yet still completed a ton of passes and kept his team alive despite a pourous defensive and lack of rushing until the 4th.

You take what the D gives you . Favre beat up on a good defense (or so I think . It's hard to tell anymore)

But I agree , Flacco looked great

 

[KoRnStARr]

This thread had nothing to do with the game.

lol @ your haircut.

Really?

Because you posted it right after.

What's it for? His regular season accomplishments this year against sub-par teams at best?

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Really?

Because you posted it right after.

What's it for? His regular season accomplishments this year against sub-par teams at best?

Yes. I based this entire thread on 5 games from the 2009 season...

Serously though, the timing of the thread had nothing to do with the Titans game. This is so retarded, I shouldnt even have to address it. You guys are ridiculous.

 

[JeremyHight]

I'm doing some research just to show you guys how special you have to be to actually get better in the post-season as a QB, so looking purely at QB Rating, lets find out how some of the top QBs of all time stack up...

Format:
QB
Regular Season QB Rating >>> Post Season QB Rating (Change)

Manning
95.3 >>> 85.0 (-10.3)

Brady
93.3 >>> 88.0 (-5.3)

Staubach
83.4 >>> 76.0 (-7.4)

Roethlisberger
90.9 >>> 87.2 (-3.7)

Bradshaw
70.9 >>> 83.0 (+12.1)

Marino
86.4 >>> 77.1 (-9.3)

Moon
80.9 >>> 84.9 (+4.0)

Warner
93.7 >>> 98.9 (+5.2)

Montana
92.3 >>> 95.6 (+3.3)

Young
96.8 >>> 85.8 (-11.0)

Elway
79.9 >>> 79.7 (-0.2)

Unitas
78.2 >>> 68.9 (-9.3)

Aikman
81.6 >>> 88.3 (+6.7)

Favre
85.9 >>> 85.2 (-0.7)

Quite a lot of QBs from all different eras and note that Manning has the second largest dropoff in the post season as any one of them, even while people in his own era (Warner) were able to increase their performance by over five points.

Again, Manning is a great QB, but putting him in the best ever talk is a joke when he plays his worst football when it matters the most.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Again, Manning is a great QB, but putting him in the best ever talk is a joke when he plays his worst football when it matters the most.

You act as if he's Jamarcus Russell come playoff time.

His QB Rating (i'm not sure why you are so fixated on QB Rating being the "be all, end all" anyway, but i'll play along) is essentially the same as Brady's, but because Brady had a K who didnt fail him, under your criteria, Brady would be the better player via his 3 rings and higher playoff QB rating. I don't buy that.

Manning already won a SB, and he's still in his prime. His numbers are off the charts, and he will likely break every record in the books. Disregarding him because something like his QB Rating goes from elite to respectable come playoff time seems silly to me (especially since he has a SB title), but hey, to each his own.

 

[longhornfan]

You act as if he's Jamarcus Russell come playoff time.

His QB Rating (i'm not sure why you are so fixated on QB Rating being the "be all, end all" anyway, but i'll play along)

I agree with that. I'd love for someone to actually tell me what exactly goes into QB rating without googling it.

 

[JeremyHight]

You act as if he's Jamarcus Russell come playoff time.

His QB Rating (i'm not sure why you are so fixated on QB Rating being the "be all, end all" anyway, but i'll play along) is essentially the same as Brady's, but because Brady had a K who didnt fail him, under your criteria, Brady would be the better player via his 3 rings and higher playoff QB rating. I don't buy that.

Again, you are just putting words in people's mouths. I never once said that Brady was better or that having more rings makes you a better QB. All I have done this entire thread is show QB statistics like passer rating, completion percentage, TD percentage, interception percentage, and Y/A, never once did I say "Oh, he needs another ring" or "[insert QB here] has more Super Bowls, so he is better."

If you want to focus on rings, ok, it is a slam dunk that Manning isn't the best QB. If you want to focus on stats in the games that matter most, again it isn't Manning who is the greatest of all time. THE ONLY POSSIBLE WAY TO SAY MANNING IS THE BEST OF ALL TIME IS TO DISREGARD HIS PLAY WHEN THE GAMES MATTER THE MOST. Not his team's play, not the WR's play, not the defense's play, BUT HIS INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE.

If you are comfortable saying that the best QB of all time becomes above average against great competition while others out there actually stay consistently great or actually improve, you are really reaching. Great QBs put up great numbers, and Manning definitely does that, but the greatest QBs do it against the best competition, which Manning cannot claim to have done.

 

[JeremyHight]

I agree with that. I'd love for someone to actually tell me what exactly goes into QB rating without googling it.

Completions, Attempts, Yards, Interceptions, and Touchdowns... not exactly strange numbers to use, but the formula is definitely complex, especially the NFL one.

 

[Bear Pand]

I'm doing some research just to show you guys how special you have to be to actually get better in the post-season as a QB, so looking purely at QB Rating, lets find out how some of the top QBs of all time stack up...

Format:
QB
Regular Season QB Rating >>> Post Season QB Rating (Change)

Manning
95.3 >>> 85.0 (-10.3)

Brady
93.3 >>> 88.0 (-5.3)

Staubach
83.4 >>> 76.0 (-7.4)

Roethlisberger
90.9 >>> 87.2 (-3.7)

Bradshaw
70.9 >>> 83.0 (+12.1)

Marino
86.4 >>> 77.1 (-9.3)

Moon
80.9 >>> 84.9 (+4.0)

Warner
93.7 >>> 98.9 (+5.2)

Montana
92.3 >>> 95.6 (+3.3)

Young
96.8 >>> 85.8 (-11.0)

Elway
79.9 >>> 79.7 (-0.2)

Unitas
78.2 >>> 68.9 (-9.3)

Aikman
81.6 >>> 88.3 (+6.7)

Favre
85.9 >>> 85.2 (-0.7)

Quite a lot of QBs from all different eras and note that Manning has the second largest dropoff in the post season as any one of them, even while people in his own era (Warner) were able to increase their performance by over five points.

Again, Manning is a great QB, but putting him in the best ever talk is a joke when he plays his worst football when it matters the most.

This is misleading.

Look at Terry Bradshaw (the QB with the biggest jump), he posted a 108 QB Rating in the Superbowl against the Vikings. He also threw 14 times for just 96 yards, while his defense held the opposing team to 6 points and Franco Harris ran 35 times for 160 yards. I mean congrats on raising your QB rating in the postseason Bradshaw but who cares.

Manning has never thrown for less than 26 times in a playoff game. Bradshaw did this 12 times. It's not even fair to compare the two, especially when you consider the overall teams.

I wasn't even alive for any of the Steelers' playoff games but I'm guessing his role in the offense wasn't the same as Mannings and with his defense wasn't out there chucking up passes down a few scores in the 4th.

 

[JeremyHight]

This is misleading.

Look at Terry Bradshaw, he posted a 108 QB Rating in the Superbowl against the Vikings. He also threw 14 times for just 96 yards, while his defense held the opposing team to 6 points and Franco Harris ran 35 times for 160 yards. I mean congrats on raising your QB rating in the postseason Bradshaw but who cares.

Manning has never thrown for less than 26 times in a playoff game. Bradshaw did this 12 times. It's not even fair to compare the two, especially when you consider the overall teams.

And that is why I've posted multiple different stats through out the course of this thread. You can look at a wide variety and guys like Montana keep coming out better and better when you put them against Manning's stats.

 

[longhornfan]

This is misleading.

Look at Terry Bradshaw (the QB with the biggest jump), he posted a 108 QB Rating in the Superbowl against the Vikings. He also threw 14 times for just 96 yards, while his defense held the opposing team to 6 points and Franco Harris ran 35 times for 160 yards. I mean congrats on raising your QB rating in the postseason Bradshaw but who cares.

Manning has never thrown for less than 26 times in a playoff game. Bradshaw did this 12 times. It's not even fair to compare the two, especially when you consider the overall teams.

I wasn't even alive for any of the Steelers' playoff games but I'm guessing his role in the offense wasn't the same as Mannings and with his defense wasn't out there chucking up passes down a few scores in the 4th.

That's why using QB rating can be misleading. Like W2B was saying.

Like any other stat, it can be skewed and manipulated to mean different things.

 

[Bear Pand]

And that is why I've posted multiple different stats through out the course of this thread. You can look at a wide variety and guys like Montana keep coming out better and better when you put them against Manning's stats.

good for you but that doesn't address why it's silly to look at a QB's rating in the regular season, then his QB rating in the postseason and try to pass any kind of judgment based on that.

 

[ralaw]

Stats only tell so much, as they're so influenced by other factors such as matchups, teammates, schemes, coaching, etc and in hindsight they can be manipulated to fit almost any argument. This is why I've always been a fan of the eyeball test and for me Peyton Manning is certainly among the best I've seen and given his responsibilities and consistency will more than likely go down as the greatest.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

And that is why I've posted multiple different stats through out the course of this thread. You can look at a wide variety and guys like Montana keep coming out better and better when you put them against Manning's stats.

I don't know how you can come to this conclusion, when Manning has more yards, TD's, completions, a higher completion percentage, etc than Montana, in roughly the same amount of games (in fact, I think Manning has played less games).

What this comes down to, is i'm looking at the entire scope of Manning's career, and you choose to penalize him for his postseason QB rating (which really isnt even a bad number).

That's fine, I just disagree.

 

[Bear Pand]

Another thing to note is Manning has posted a QB Rating of 97.7 in a playoff loss, his career regular season rating is 95.3. Congrats on posting a high QB Rating in a playoff game Manning, too bad your kicker shanks a kick and Nick Harper doesn't run towards the sideline.

Meanwhile Bradshaw Mr. career QB rating raiser in the playoffs has 7 wins where he posted a lower rating than that 97.7.

Stats only tell so much, as they're so influenced by other factors such as matchups, teammates, schemes, coaching, etc and in hindsight they can be manipulated to fit almost any argument. This is why I've always been a fan of the eyeball test and for me Peyton Manning is certainly among the best I've seen and given his responsibilities and consistency will more than likely go down as the greatest.

agreed with the bold.