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

[Bear Pand]

Then why do we give accolades for regular season wins, or for good numbers? No QB alone has complete control over that.

Who gives accolades to QBs for regular season wins? And a QB has a much greater influence on his own stats than he does on the overall outcome of the game. It isn't even close.

Face it, WINS for HOF QBs in the post-season is what seperates one from another, and adds up to their legacy.

According to who? Bradhsaws wins in the postseason do not separate him from Marino.

 

[KoRnStARr]

Who gives accolades to QBs for regular season wins? And a QB has a much greater influence on his own stats than he does on the overall outcome of the game. It isn't even close.



According to who?

Based on that merit, what seperates Brees from Manning/Brady/Montana/Favre/Young/Aikman/Roethlisberger/Starr/etc etc?

And I'm completely done if you really don't think playoff wins for a QB matter at all on their legacy, get me out of here, you're a fucking dope.

 

[Archer]

WHAT WE KNOW:

Brady has 3 rings, NFL record most TD passes in a single season, multiple SB MVPs, NFL MVP, numerous 4th quarter come backs and clutch plays. We also know that, when given weapons, he can put up similar or BETTER numbers then Manning DESPITE playing some bad-weather games, and not in a dome. We also KNOW that Manning has the better CAREER #'s because of a bad D for most of his career that gave up ton of points, talent surrounded him his WHOLE CAREER, and played in a dome.

With all these things known, how prolific of a passer Brady is with weapons, when you add up his rings, his playoff performances, his records -- there's no real true argument on why anyone can say, Manning > Brady. He's not as good of a playoff QB, only thing he has is better career numbers, which CAN BE EXPLAINED..

He is better because the D is bad? How so? It gives him more chances is one way of viewing it . Teams didn't get into alot of shootouts with Indy ..... they would bleed us for 6-7 YPC and milk the shit outta the clock then Manning would come out in score in a few minutes resulting to more attempted clock milking .

And the weapons talk can be seen many different ways ..... is Manning better becuase of it? maybe ... or is he making the talent better than it is? (outside of Wayne , Clark) . He is playing better right now than ever argubly and he is doing it with guys named Collie and Garcon .... hardly studs . He turned multiple guys into top stats performers and as soon as they left Indy they turned to shit (Marcus Pollard is a good example) .

I will give you the dome ... that does help

 

[Bear Pand]

Based on that merit, what seperates Brees from Manning/Brady/Montana/Favre/Young/Aikman/Roethlisberger/Starr/etc etc?

Brees is better than Roethlisberger. (It's close though)

I will give you the dome ... that does help

True but he doesn't have the dome any more and is posting one of the best seasons of his career.

 

[JeremyHight]

You guys can argue about Manning vs Brady, but neither are in the argument for greatest QB of all time.

 

[Bear Pand]

You guys can argue about Manning vs Brady, but neither are in the argument for greatest QB of all time.

How could this even be true? You could make a legit argument for both.

 

[KoRnStARr]

From the Indianapolis Star Sunday Morning after Colts playoff loss to Chargers.

COLTS ARE UNDERACHIEVERS

SAN DIEGO -- Another 12-victory season . . . and nothing.

Another Peyton Manning MVP season . . . and nothing.


Another Tony Dungy playoff appearance, his record 10th straight . . . and nothing.

Another glorious chance to advance to a Super Bowl, their second in three years, with the New England Patriots out of the way and the AFC unfettered by the existence of a dominant team . . . and nothing.

Let's just say it how it is: The Colts are the ultimate paper tigers. And if you don't like the Atlanta Braves comparison -- multiple postseason appearances, one championship -- feel free to come up with your own. But how can a franchise be so routinely dominant year after year, and yet be found so routinely lacking when the brightest lights are shining?

Saturday night's 23-17 overtime loss to the short-handed San Diego Chargers was all too typical of the Colts' recent postseason history.

It happens year after year after frustrating and infuriating year. And it's always something. The weather in New England. The officiating in New England. The long layoff before Pittsburgh. The Dwight Freeney injury against San Diego.

It's always something.

And yet teams like last year's Giants march on despite losing Jeremy Shockey, or the Chargers win this game without their top running back.

If it happens once, it's an anomaly. But this happens time and time again. It's a trend, and it's something Jim Irsay and Bill Polian have got to address. The nagging problem this year was that running game, the one Polian kept insisting was just fine, despite ample statistical evidence to the contrary.

It wasn't fine.

It was never fine.

And now the Colts are going on vacation way before a team with this talent, this pedigree, ought to be hitting the links.

These were not just the 8-8 San Diego Chargers. These were the 8-8 Chargers without a reasonable facsimile of LaDainian Tomlinson, who didn't even play in the second half because of a serious groin injury. These were the 8-8 Chargers with Antonio Gates struggling with a high ankle sprain. And yet, there was Gates, maybe the toughest guy on the field, riding Antoine Bethea downfield for a monster first down on San Diego's game-winning drive in overtime.

Last year, the Chargers beat the Colts with backup quarterback Billy Volek, or as we came to call him, Billy Freaking Volek. This year, the Chargers beat the Colts with Mike Scifres, a punter, and a magical elf named Darren Sproles, who merely filled in for Tomlinson and produced 328 all-purpose yards.

And, oh yes, there was the San Diego defense, which held the Colts' underperforming offense in check, as is often the case in the playoffs. For all of Manning's greatness, for all the weapons the Colts have on that side of the football, the fact is, Manning is sub-.500 in the playoffs, along with his head coach. The running game was a cipher. Marvin Harrison was invisible, as he usually is during the playoffs. Still think Harrison is coming back next season?

Predictably, the Colts defense will get pounded this morning and for the rest of the week, and those three defensive penalties on the game-winning drive don't speak well of their discipline down the stretch, but they did force two San Diego turnovers in the end zone on potential game-tying or go-ahead drives.

They played well enough to win.

Bottom line is, when the Colts needed a third-and-short conversion, they couldn't get it. You can't win in the playoffs if you can't run the football.

It's pretty elemental stuff. The Colts couldn't run it. Couldn't run it all season, couldn't run it all night, couldn't run it when one conversion on third-and-2 with 2:30 left in regulation and San Diego out of timeouts could have put this game away.

One and done.

Or, should we say, one and Dungy.

If (when) Tony Dungy decides to retire sometime next week, will there be a great hue and cry for him to come back and give it another shot? As much as this town loves and reveres him and appreciates him for everything he's done on and off the field, isn't it time for a new face, a new voice, something different?

At this point, it's going to be tough selling fans on Jim Caldwell who, at least from a distance, promises to bring more of the same.

Overtime?

Of course it went overtime.

Because they're the Colts and the Chargers. Because they don't know how to play football games that don't end on the final drive, the final play, the final gasp. Because they've developed as good of a rivalry as you will ever see between two teams who aren't in the same division.

It took more than 60 minutes to decide, but the deserving team won.

There's no nice way of saying what has to be said:

Paper tigers.

Folding again.

-- Bob Kravitz

 

[KoRnStARr]

THE DAY BEFORE CHARGERS/COLTS:

Article a day before the game on Colts, Manning...and legacies...lmao..Indianapolis Star Bob Kravitz

What's on the line? Legacies for Colts, Manning, Dungy

Jan 2nd, 2009

We were talking on the radio, and I got to wondering:

What if the Colts somehow lose on Saturday? How will history treat them? How will we treat them?


After six straight seasons of 12 victories or more, but just one Super Bowl appearance/victory, what will their legacy be?

Now, before the multitudes attack, let me quickly add that I believe the Colts will win Saturday's game in San Diego. The Chargers are hot, but the Colts are hotter. The Chargers are playing better than earlier this season, but they're 0-5 against playoff teams. They dropped 52 on Denver, but as Broncos quarterback Jay Cutler said, "We can't stop anybody.'' San Diego is dangerous, especially if the Colts let Darren Sproles hurt them on special teams, but the bottom line is, they're wretched against the pass, meaning Peyton Manning should have a monster day.

(Oh, and a quick aside: I've been informed that in the first known example of bulletin-board material being provided by a vanquished team, the Chargers are using Cutler's San Diego loss observation as their rallying cry for this week. So we can't blame this one on Mike Vanderjagt. At least not without trying real hard.)

OK, then.

But let's play "what if . . .''

What if they lose?

What will be the ugly fallout?

I've written this before and I said it on the radio the other day and I'll write it again: They will cast themselves as the Atlanta Braves of the NFL. One great regular season after another, one postseason appearance after another, and just one championship to show for it.

Look at history. The only teams that have done what the Colts have done, stringing together all these double-digit-victory seasons, are the dynastic San Francisco 49ers and Dallas Cowboys. Those teams won multiple Super Bowls. The Colts need to win multiple Super Bowls to fully validate and bring into focus the scope of this run of excellence.

And there's no excuse this time. No New England lying in wait. No dominant AFC team preparing to pounce on the unsuspecting Colts. No major Colts injuries, except for Gary Brackett's fractured fibula. No extended rest periods, providing the excuse that maybe they got rusty during the time off.

They will have to travel the hard road -- probably three road games unless Baltimore springs some surprises -- but this team has shown it can win on the road. Heaven knows, it hasn't handled home-field prosperity in the past.

In my addled mind, anything short of an appearance in the AFC Championship Game is a disappointing season. Ordinarily, I would say anything short of a Super Bowl would be a disappointment, but given how and where they started, how far they've come back and how hard it's going to be to reach the conference final, I'm willing to lower the bar just a bit.

But they've got to beat San Diego, at the very least.

And if they don't?

What will history say about Manning, at least at this point in his career? He will leave the game someday owning every statistical record, and for all we know, he might win a couple of more Super Bowls, but at this point, a loss would make him 7-8 in the postseason with some very ordinary numbers. That's not the record of a legendary quarterback. Call me crazy, but even at this point in his career, I'm not completely sure I trust Manning in the playoffs. Some games he's extraordinary; others he's very average.

What will history say about Tony Dungy? First, a loss would probably be his last game as the Colts coach. But his postseason record would move to 9-10. Clearly, Dungy is one of the all-time great coaches and his regular-season record with two franchises is beyond compare. Nobody, not a quarterback nor a coach, should be judged solely by his postseason accomplishments.

But how do you ignore 9-10 in the postseason? How do you ignore the one-and-dones in Tampa, the one-and-dones here against the Jets, Pittsburgh, San Diego and, perhaps again, San Diego?

The Colts now are playing for more than a chance to reach the Super Bowl; they're playing for their place in history. There may be more 12-win seasons, more postseason chances, but these kinds of runs don't last forever. So the question is what they do with this opportunity, as good an opportunity as they've ever had.

If they can run the football, even a little bit, even as a mere threat to keep the linebackers and safeties honest, they can go to Tampa. The record doesn't lie: Playoff teams that don't run don't go deep into the postseason. But, then, the record said teams with lousy run defenses don't win Super Bowls, so in 2006, the Colts' porous run defenders turned into the Monsters of the Midway.

San Diego beckons. And history awaits

------------

Thought this was a good read...

 

[KoRnStARr]

And before you shoot the author, which would be dumb anyway, focus on the message and what's said -- he's right.

 

[Bear Pand]

And before you shoot the author, which would be dumb anyway, focus on the message and what's said -- he's right.

Sorry stopped reading at Bob Kravitz. Despite writing for an Indy paper, dude always plays the contrarian and finds a way to tear down the Colts.

 

[Deviant]

Why do people bring up that Nick Harper play? The game was OVER when Peyton threw that pick to Polamalu in all actuality. The NFL tried to bail Peyton out and still couldn't do it, because instead of Manning try to move his team closer and closer to a touchdown or better FG range he kept throwing bombs into the endzone to Wayne and not go underneath to James and Stokley who were consistently wide open. Jeezus. And yes, they were down "3", although never should have gotten to that point.

If you're going to mention the Polamalu pick, don't talk about Brady and how great he is. Tuck rule. That's a game Brady doesn't deserve to win. Funny how you don't mention that.

I just don't see how anyone could ever say Manning > Brady...

When Brady has owned the head to head playoff games, has the rings, has an MVP of his own, has the TD record in a single season taking it AWAY FROM PEYTON, has most TDs in a single quarter, has put up good numbers his whole career with less then ideal weapons, multiple SB rings, and is a guy who is always getting his team to the post-season and being a clutch king. Makes no sense. Manning has career numbers on him, mainly being the beneficiary of better weapons his entire career, and a DOME to play in.

I immediately considered Brady the best QB in the league after he hung up 42 on the Steelers #1 ranked 2005 D, and went on to win his 2nd SB in a shoot-out. He's the man.

He got his TD record throwing deep bombs to Randy Moss and screen passes to Wes Welker and running up the score unnecessarily. Also, Peyton broke Marino's record in 15 games. Peyton took only one possession in their last game. Brady needed all 16 games, every single possession that he took, to break that record. Peyton actually gets pulled out of games that are blowouts. Also, Peyton's 49 was much more impressive. 1,000 yards and 10 TDs to three different receivers (something that has never been done in NFL history).

How can you do head-to-head match-ups? This ISN'T basketball. Does Peyton play defense on Brady? No. So, how can you talk about QB match-ups in playoff games?

Wow... he has the most TDs in a quarter against an injured secondary that was leaving receivers 20 yards open. I'm impressed.

Also, Tom Brady consistently has the/one of the best defenses in the league in his championship runs. Remember, "defense wins championships"? If Brady were really the best QB in the league and the most clutch QB, he sure knew how to blow it in what should have been the biggest victory in NFL history to go 18-1.

Beneficiary of his weapons? Now, you're making excuses. If anyone was a beneficiary of his weapons, it was Brady in 2007. He hasn't had Reggie Wayne, Brandon Stokley, Anthony Gonzalez, and Dallas Clark his entire career. Remember when Marcus Pollard was one of the biggest pass-catching TEs in the league? Funny how he disappeared off the face of the earth when he went to Detroit and they expected huge things out of him. In fact, Peyton's putting up BETTER numbers than ever before working with two new guys: Pierre Garcon and Austin Collie. They're quickly becoming huge names.

When you're Tom Brady and have the best defense in the league, you don't need to put up monster numbers or have great weapons. In fact, I dare say that Tom Brady "Trent Dilfer'd" his first Super Bowl run. At no moment did Tom Brady ever have to be great and he benefited from the "Tuck Rule", Drew Bledsoe (who had as many TDs as Brady did in the playoffs that year), and that tenacious defense. No one ever talks about that though and instead talks about how great Brady was to take this team to their first of three Super Bowls.

 

[JeremyHight]

How could this even be true? You could make a legit argument for both.

Can you make an argument for both? Sure, but Montana beats both handedly and it isn't even close. Montana is a better post-season QB than both of them and Montana's career per game numbers in all games are on par with Manning's and better than Brady's.

 

[Bear Pand]

Can you make an argument for both? Sure, but Montana beats both handedly and it isn't even close. Montana is a better post-season QB than both of them and Montana's career per game numbers in all games are on par with Manning's and better than Brady's.

All games including playoffs

Montana:

63.12%
5.19 TD%
7.56 Y/A
2.61 INT%
231 yards / game
92.7 QB Rating

Manning:

64.45%
5.49 TD%
7.67 Y/A
2.76 INT%
263 yards / game
94.6 QB Rating

Brady:

63.10%
5.26 TD%
7.17 Y/A
2.26 INT %
237 yards/game
92.7 QB Rating

I bolded the best number in each category. You can't say his per game numbers are on par with Manning and better than Brady. His numbers are closer to Brady's. I'm not trying to say that any of these QBs are better or worse than another based on this, just Brady and Manning are def. in the conversation.

 

[celtsxpatsxsox]

He got his TD record throwing deep bombs to Randy Moss and screen passes to Wes Welker and running up the score unnecessarily.

So Brady's is less impressive cause he got to throw to Moss and Welker but Manning's is more even though he got to throw to Harrison and Wayne? Also lol at mentioning the running up the score. Those defensive player are getting payed a lot of money and it is the job to stop them.

Also, Peyton broke Marino's record in 15 games. Peyton took only one possession in their last game. Brady needed all 16 games, every single possession that he took, to break that record.

Brady also threw less interceptions in more games and more attempts than Manning did so the imo makes Brady's season more impressive.

Wow... he has the most TDs in a quarter against an injured secondary that was leaving receivers 20 yards open. I'm impressed.

So can we disregard Manning's stats in the two games that he gets to play the Titans?

Also, Tom Brady consistently has the/one of the best defenses in the league in his championship runs. Remember, "defense wins championships"?

I have always hated that saying. Defense doesn't put points on the board (sometimes). Thats the offenses job. IMO Defenses can keep you in games or they can lose games but they dont go out and "win" games.

If Brady were really the best QB in the league and the most clutch QB, he sure knew how to blow it in what should have been the biggest victory in NFL history to go 18-1.

Brady did not blow the superbowl. He put the Patriots in a situation to win and it was the defenses inability to make plays on the final drive which ended up costing us the game.

Beneficiary of his weapons? Now, you're making excuses. If anyone was a beneficiary of his weapons, it was Brady in 2007. He hasn't had Reggie Wayne, Brandon Stokley, Anthony Gonzalez, and Dallas Clark his entire career. Remember when Marcus Pollard was one of the biggest pass-catching TEs in the league? Funny how he disappeared off the face of the earth when he went to Detroit and they expected huge things out of him. In fact, Peyton's putting up BETTER numbers than ever before working with two new guys: Pierre Garcon and Austin Collie. They're quickly becoming huge names.

What if (what ifs are dumb but this whole thread is full of em so) Brady had hall of fame receiver or a consistent receiving core his whole career instead of having David Givens, David Patten, Deion Branch, and lets not forget that horrible receiving core in 2006 in which he almost took to the superbowl. He finally got a HOF caliber receiver in 07 and he proved what he can do.

As for Marcus Pollard. He had his third best season in Detroit yards wise so you can't say he didn't do shit after he left Indy.

When you're Tom Brady and have the best defense in the league, you don't need to put up monster numbers or have great weapons. In fact, I dare say that Tom Brady "Trent Dilfer'd" his first Super Bowl run. At no moment did Tom Brady ever have to be great and he benefited from the "Tuck Rule", Drew Bledsoe (who had as many TDs as Brady did in the playoffs that year), and that tenacious defense. No one ever talks about that though and instead talks about how great Brady was to take this team to their first of three Super Bowls.

I will be the first to say Tom Brady Trent Dilfer'd it in his first playoff run up until his game winning drive.

I also don't why you mentioned Drew Bledsoe unless you are just another one of the people that says if Bledsoe didn't get injured then Brady wouldn't of started even though Belichick admitted that Brady was going to eventually be the starter that year because he didn't think he could win with Bledsoe.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

It took 25 pages, but here we are, in yet another thrilling installment of Manning vs. Brady.

Close the thread. Everyone made their points (multiple times). Nothing new can be added, and nobody needs Brady vs. Manning.

 

[KoRnStARr]

lol @ not reading the message because it's Bob Kravitz. Pathetic. He makes legit points and isn't a homer.

The Colts are the Atlanta Braves of the NFL. All regular season glory, hardly anything to ever show for it.

Deviant, you can't compare the tuck rule and the Polamalu pick for multiple reasons. One, they got the Brady call right by definition of rule. Two, they got the Polamalu call by definition of wrong and the NFL had to apologize for it. Three, Brady actually won the game. Four, Peyton still didn't win the game.

 

[Esjay]

lol @ not reading the message because it's Bob Kravitz. Pathetic. He makes legit points and isn't a homer.

The Colts are the Atlanta Braves of the NFL. All regular season glory, hardly anything to ever show for it.

Deviant, you can't compare the tuck rule and the Polamalu pick for multiple reasons. One, they got the Brady call right by definition of rule. Two, they got the Polamalu call by definition of wrong and the NFL had to apologize for it. Three, Brady actually won the game. Four, Peyton still didn't win the game.

You're a moron. Brady didn't win shit, and Peyton didn't lose shit. The Patriots won and the Colts lost. Get that through your thick fucking skull.

Mannings numbers aren't as good in the playoffs as they are in the regular season. We get it. He's still the best I've ever seen and nothing Kornstar of all people says is going to change that. Same dude who tried to tell me Hines Ward was a better WR than Marvin Harrison .. definitely somebody you go to when looking for NFL knowledge. LOL

 

[Bear Pand]

lol @ not reading the message because it's Bob Kravitz. Pathetic. He makes legit points and isn't a homer.

The Colts are the Atlanta Braves of the NFL. All regular season glory, hardly anything to ever show for it.

lol @ you writing a disclaimer when you posted those articles cause you already know what the deal is with Kravitz.

He knows it pays more to write negative articles about the Colts since everyone else has mostly positive things to say.

 

[FirstTimer]

this is about QBs alone.

Ok, so if it's about QB's alone then why does margin of win play into the equation since the QB's own defense has just as much to say about that as the QB and the offense?

Brady is not one of the greats because he got bloated stats in a weak parity ,free agency period in football.

So did Favre but you are all over his nuts.....

They will be forgotten 10 and 20 years from now for whomever the new breed QBs will be

Maybe by dolts like you but plenty f people remember guys like Starr, Graham, Unitas, etc.


Until you have a clue please don't post here.

 

[ram29jackson]

Ok, so if it's about QB's alone then why does margin of win play into the equation since the QB's own defense has just as much to say about that as the QB and the offense?





So did Favre but you are all over his nuts.....


Maybe by dolts like you but plenty f people remember guys like Starr, Graham, Unitas, etc.


Until you have a clue please don't post here.

You are ignorant in your remarks. Favre did play a majority of time when things still had more balance and better competition unlike Brady etc whos careers are during the worst matchups in history.


no, they only remember them by name. No , one here ever saw them play nor cares about their numbers. its just a statement in fact. I remember them from history too but they dont matter in the now. Like I said , there is no such thing as best ever, only best for now.

your statements are childish fodder, clueless in every way.