Depends on you definition of "blowing out of the water".
They have nearly identical completion percentages, and Montana's passer rating is 95 to Peyton's 85.
Montana has more rings, but Peyton's book isnt finished. He's still firmly entrenched in his prime.
Montana has better postseason numbers, but Manning has much better regular season numbers, plus his career is still going strong and he is adding to his overall legacy as we speak.
The best argument for Manning is that you can't imagine the Colts having a fraction of the success they have had without him. He has carried that team on his back on a level that can probably only be matched by 80's Elway. And unlike Elway, it's not because the Colts have lacked complimentary players, it's just that Manning is that damn good. The 49ers remained a powerhouse long after Montana left town.
Stats & facts aside, when I watch Peyton Manning play, there is no doubt in my mind he's a better player than Montana. And everyone else i've ever seen.
I apologize for trolling your thread, but some of these things are just plain incorrect.
1. What power house did Montana leave? They won 4 Super Bowls with him, won one without him. If they were such a powerhouse, why was Dallas winning 3 Super Bowls after Montana left? I don't hear any "Team of the 90's" arguments for the Niners.
2. Your argument is Manning has better regular season stats, and that cancels out Joe's post season stats. Brett Favre has better regular season stats than Manning. But Favre shouldn't be in the conversation? What are you saying here?
When Peyton has a winning record in the postseason and a couple of Super Bowls, than you at least have an argument. It could happen this year. Until then, it seems crazy to compare Manning and Montana.