All-time Top 12 seasons by a QB

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by VOL JACK

For one Super Bowl...who would you want for one game??

1985 Dan Marino.
1987 John Elway
1989 Joe Montana
1992 Steve Young
1995 Troy Aikman
1999 Steve McNair
2000 Brett Favre
2004 Peyton Manning
2007 Tom Brady

Against...lets say the 1985 Chicago Bears Defense.

I'd say either 89 MOntana, 92 Steve Young or 07 Tom Brady

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I'd say either 89 MOntana, 92 Steve Young or 07 Tom Brady

And all three had one common denominator, the best WR in football. That is the problem with rating QBs, there are so many other factors and too much credit is given to the QB. All three of those guys are great QBs but you'll never convince me that if you plugged Peyton Manning in for them that he wouldn't have been better.

Take a guy like Troy Aikman, he's not in the top 100 QBs to ever live but when you have one of the greatest O-Lines in football history, Emmit Smith in the backfield, and Michael Irvin, Alvin Harper, and Jay Novacek to throw to you become a Hall of Famer. Hell, Mark Rypien won a Super Bowl for one of the most dominant single season teams I have ever seen strictly cause they had the most amazing line in NFL history.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

And all three had one common denominator, the best WR in football. That is the problem with rating QBs, there are so many other factors and too much credit is given to the QB. All three of those guys are great QBs but you'll never convince me that if you plugged Peyton Manning in for them that he wouldn't have been better.

Take a guy like Troy Aikman, he's not in the top 100 QBs to ever live but when you have one of the greatest O-Lines in football history, Emmit Smith in the backfield, and Michael Irvin, Alvin Harper, and Jay Novacek to throw to you become a Hall of Famer. Hell, Mark Rypien won a Super Bowl for one of the most dominant single season teams I have ever seen strictly cause they had the most amazing line in NFL history.

The three I mentioned, while watching them play, have performed better in big games than Peyton, or McNabb, or a lot of QB's. Clutch is a huge thing that doesnt have a stat to measure it. Its been a fact that Peyton hasnt played as well in Clutch situations as Brady. Peyton is a better QB IMO but I'll take Brady in a Clutch situation over pretty much anyone. Clutchness is as important as any other factor in my opinion.

This poll was about which QB would you want in the Superbowl, which is the most Clutch situation in football. I'd take Brady, Montana, or Young over anyone. And Brady may actually be my first pick.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

The three I mentioned, while watching them play, have performed better in big games than Peyton, or McNabb, or a lot of QB's. Clutch is a huge thing that doesnt have a stat to measure it. Its been a fact that Peyton hasnt played as well in Clutch situations as Brady. Peyton is a better QB IMO but I'll take Brady in a Clutch situation over pretty much anyone. Clutchness is as important as any other factor in my opinion.

This poll was about which QB would you want in the Superbowl, which is the most Clutch situation in football. I'd take Brady, Montana, or Young over anyone. And Brady may actually be my first pick.

And I'm sure Brady beating Manning in those clutch situations had nothing to do with Manning having to face the Patriots defense while Brady got to face the Colts defense. The fact is Brady is a Vinatieri 48 yard field goal and a Vinatieri 46 yard field goal from being 1 for 4 in the Super Bowl and don't tell me that Brady somehow caused Vinatieri to make his field goals while Jim Kelly caused Norwood to miss him. He is also 1 for 4 against the spread in Super Bowls which means his team has underperformed against expectations. And the one that he actually covered the spread was completely due to the New England defense shutting down what was thought to be an unstoppable Ram offense. Brady threw for 145 yards in that game.

Vinatieri was clutch, there is nothing remarkable about Brady in clutch situations, that is largely a myth cause he's a popular celebrity, similar to people regarding Jeter as a great clutch hitter when he's just solid in the clutch.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

And I'm sure Brady beating Manning in those clutch situations had nothing to do with Manning having to face the Patriots defense while Brady got to face the Colts defense. The fact is Brady is a Vinatieri 48 yard field goal and a Vinatieri 46 yard field goal from being 1 for 4 in the Super Bowl and don't tell me that Brady somehow caused Vinatieri to make his field goals while Jim Kelly caused Norwood to miss him. He is also 1 for 4 against the spread in Super Bowls which means his team has underperformed against expectations. And the one that he actually covered the spread was completely due to the New England defense shutting down what was thought to be an unstoppable Ram offense. Brady threw for 145 yards in that game.

Vinatieri was clutch, there is nothing remarkable about Brady in clutch situations, that is largely a myth cause he's a popular celebrity, similar to people regarding Jeter as a great clutch hitter when he's just solid in the clutch.

How can you watch Manning and his jittery feet in those situations and no realize that there's more to it than just the stats? Brady has a presence and brings a calmness to the team that is reassuring and he exudes confidence. Hell, I've even seen it in Eli Manning more than I've seen it in Peyton. You want to talk about underperforming against expectations? How many times in a row have the Colts won at least 10 games and they have one title to show for it. They are like the Braves of the NFL. When the breaks don't go your way once or twice, chalk that up to bad luck. When they continually go against you, while they continually went Brady's way, that's not luck. Then take it back to Peyton's troubles in college and you see a pattern. I think Peyton is a better passer. Better at reading a defense and making the tougher throws. Better at leading a team for 45 minutes a game. But when it's on the line, give me Brady every time and while you come up with your reasons why Brady won and Manning lost, be it the defense they face or the idiot kicker making or missing, etc, I'll be celebrating the championship. I'll always take wins over excuses.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

How can you watch Manning and his jittery feet in those situations and no realize that there's more to it than just the stats? Brady has a presence and brings a calmness to the team that is reassuring and he exudes confidence. Hell, I've even seen it in Eli Manning more than I've seen it in Peyton. You want to talk about underperforming against expectations? How many times in a row have the Colts won at least 10 games and they have one title to show for it. They are like the Braves of the NFL. When the breaks don't go your way once or twice, chalk that up to bad luck. When they continually go against you, while they continually went Brady's way, that's not luck. Then take it back to Peyton's troubles in college and you see a pattern. I think Peyton is a better passer. Better at reading a defense and making the tougher throws. Better at leading a team for 45 minutes a game. But when it's on the line, give me Brady every time and while you come up with your reasons why Brady won and Manning lost, be it the defense they face or the idiot kicker making or missing, etc, I'll be celebrating the championship. I'll always take wins over excuses.

what he said

[horseofcourse]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

How can you watch Manning and his jittery feet in those situations and no realize that there's more to it than just the stats? Brady has a presence and brings a calmness to the team that is reassuring and he exudes confidence. Hell, I've even seen it in Eli Manning more than I've seen it in Peyton. You want to talk about underperforming against expectations? How many times in a row have the Colts won at least 10 games and they have one title to show for it. They are like the Braves of the NFL. When the breaks don't go your way once or twice, chalk that up to bad luck. When they continually go against you, while they continually went Brady's way, that's not luck. Then take it back to Peyton's troubles in college and you see a pattern. I think Peyton is a better passer. Better at reading a defense and making the tougher throws. Better at leading a team for 45 minutes a game. But when it's on the line, give me Brady every time and while you come up with your reasons why Brady won and Manning lost, be it the defense they face or the idiot kicker making or missing, etc, I'll be celebrating the championship. I'll always take wins over excuses.

There's your answer right there. How many titles does Brady have without Vinatieri?? Zero. How many has Manning won without Vinatieri?? Zero. He is the magic elixer for both fellows. If Tom Brady had Scott Norwood and Jim Kelly had Adam Vinatieri, they'd have the same number of championships.

Brady often needed that idiot kicker.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

And I'm sure Brady beating Manning in those clutch situations had nothing to do with Manning having to face the Patriots defense while Brady got to face the Colts defense. The fact is Brady is a Vinatieri 48 yard field goal and a Vinatieri 46 yard field goal from being 1 for 4 in the Super Bowl and don't tell me that Brady somehow caused Vinatieri to make his field goals while Jim Kelly caused Norwood to miss him. He is also 1 for 4 against the spread in Super Bowls which means his team has underperformed against expectations. And the one that he actually covered the spread was completely due to the New England defense shutting down what was thought to be an unstoppable Ram offense. Brady threw for 145 yards in that game.

Vinatieri was clutch, there is nothing remarkable about Brady in clutch situations, that is largely a myth cause he's a popular celebrity, similar to people regarding Jeter as a great clutch hitter when he's just solid in the clutch.

Also, how did Brady become a popular celebrity except by winning titles? Winning is what led to the celebrity, which is no doubt grown to mythical proportions over the years and he's not the God some would want to make him out to be. But he's damn good. And he's clutch.

[SniperSB23]

It has everything to do with defense why the Patriots win more games. Look at the almost perfect correlation between the Patriots defensive rank and their record since Brady took over in 2001:

4th - 16-0
6th - 12-4
7th - 14-2
9th - 14-2
10th - 11-5 (injured)
23rd - 9-7
24th - 11-5
26th - 10-6

On the other hand Peyton Manning has had exactly one defense better than 11th since 2003 and that happened to correspond with the year the Patriots went 16-0. Yet he's still managed these records:

12-4
12-4
14-2
12-4
13-3
12-4

Of course in the playoffs that lack of defense has hurt them but very few of the playoff losses have been Manning's fault. And guess what, the only time Manning got to go head to head with Brady in the playoffs at home, he won.

[King Glorious]

Putting it all on the defense as the reason why Brady wins and Manning loses is not right. Let's check out some numbers. I looked at their complete records as starting quarterbacks in the NFL, including the playoffs and not including this season's numbers. Here's what I found.

During the regular season:
Games-Manning 176, Brady 111
Winning %- Brady .784, Manning .665
TD-Manning 333, Brady 197
Int-Manning 165, Brady 86
TD %-Manning 5.6, Brady 5.4
Int %-Manning 2.8, Brady 2.3
Yards-Manning 45628, Brady 26394
YPG-Manning 259.3, Brady 237.8
Completion %-Manning 64.4, Brady 63.0
QB rating-Manning 94.8, Brady 93.0

From the numbers here, Brady wins at a much higher percentage but that has a lot to do with team play. Looking at the TD% is shows that they are pretty much equal there but Brady is better at not throwing as many interceptions. Manning throws for more yards obviously but their accuracy is pretty much the same and their quarterback ratings are very close.

Playoffs
Games-Manning 15, Brady 17
Winning %-Brady .824, Manning .467
TD-Brady 26, Manning 22
Int-Brady 12, Manning 17
TD %-Brady 4.3, Manning 4.0
Int %-Brady 2.0, Manning 3.0
Yards-Manning 4208, Brady 3954
YPG-Manning 280.5, Brady 232.6
Completion %-Brady 62.5, Manning 61.7
QB rating-Brady 88.0, Manning 85.0

It's no contest here. Manning doesn't even have a winning record (7-8) while Brady is 14-3. Brady is more accurate by completion %, has a better td% and is again better with keeping the interceptions down. Manning's td to int ratio is horrible. Brady's is more than 2-1. The only thing that Manning has an advantage in is more yards.

Conference championships and Super Bowls
Games-Brady 9, Manning 3
Winning %-Brady .778, Manning .667
TD-Brady 13, Manning 3
Int-Brady 6, Manning 6
TD %-Brady 4.3, Manning 2.3
Int %-Brady 2.0, Manning 4.5
Yards-Brady 2001, Manning 833
YPG-Manning 277.7, Brady 222.3
Completion %-Brady 63.9, Manning 56.8
QB rating-Brady 89.3, Manning 64.4

You've got to be kidding me to compare the two. Obviously, Brady with six more games is going to have more touchdowns and more yards and as usual Manning passes for many more yards per game. Manning has as many interceptions in three games as Brady has in nine. Brady's td-int ratio is still better than 2-1 while Manning's is 2-1.....in the wrong direction. Brady is much more accurate and the rating is not even in the same area code.

Interesting to see how as the stakes go up, Brady either holds steady with his numbers or increases them while Manning drops considerably in every area except for passing yards and the only reason he keeps that up is because he's usually losing and they are throwing the ball to get back into the games. Brady is right on the same level with Manning in the regular season and completely destroys him in the playoffs and in the championship games. You can blame the Indy defense all you want but I don't see how the same defense that gets you 12 wins a year every year becomes so horrible in the playoffs and how that bad defense means that Manning has to become a much less accurate and effective quarterback.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

And all three had one common denominator, the best WR in football. That is the problem with rating QBs, there are so many other factors and too much credit is given to the QB. All three of those guys are great QBs but you'll never convince me that if you plugged Peyton Manning in for them that he wouldn't have been better.

Take a guy like Troy Aikman, he's not in the top 100 QBs to ever live but when you have one of the greatest O-Lines in football history, Emmit Smith in the backfield, and Michael Irvin, Alvin Harper, and Jay Novacek to throw to you become a Hall of Famer. Hell, Mark Rypien won a Super Bowl for one of the most dominant single season teams I have ever seen strictly cause they had the most amazing line in NFL history.

Actually, Aikman was, if anything, underrated. They didn't pass very much in that offense. They could easily have been a much more prolific offense.

The real beneficiary of all those stud offensive players was Emmit Smith. Grossly overrated in my estimation. I can only imagine Barry Sanders on that team, that would have been sick.

[King Glorious]

Kurt Warner

Games..........101 (57-44.564)..........11 (8-3.727).........6 (4-2.667)
Comp.............2260.........................261. ....................152
Att................3442.........................40 3......................236
Comp%............65.7........................64.8. ....................64.4
Yds...............27704.......................3368 ......................1905
TD.................178..........................26 ........................12
TD%................5.2..........................6. 5.......................5.1
Int..................113.......................... 13........................6
Int%...............3.3...........................3 .2.......................2.5
YPG.................274.3......................306 .2.....................317.5
Rating..............93.9.........................9 8.9.....................95.7

Warner is an interesting guy by the numbers. There's considerable debate about whether or not he's a hall of famer. I say yes. His career numbers aren't all that great but he's won a couple of MVP awards and been to three Super Bowls with two different teams. He's performed better in the playoffs and in the really big games than he has in the regular season and that's something I love. His passer rating is very high and his yards per game is extremely impressive. So is his accuracy and his 2/1 td to int ratio in the playoffs. When it comes to playoff performers, he's ahead of Brady, Aikman, and Montana in yards per game, completion %, td %, and passer rating. And that's just of the ones I've done so far.

[King Glorious]

Brett Favre

Games.........269 (169-100.628)...........22 (12-10.545)...........6 (3-3.500)
Comp............5690............................43 8.........................114
Att...............9223............................ 721..........................199
Comp%.........61.7..............................60 .7.......................57.3
Yds...............64765..........................5 311.......................1559
TD...............462.............................. ..39........................13
TD%.............5.0............................... .5.4.........................6.5
Int...............307............................. ..28...........................6
Int%.............3.3.............................. ..3.9........................3.0
YPG.............240.8............................2 41.4......................259.8
Rating...........85.6............................. ..85.3......................91.7

Favre's numbers kind of suprised me a little as well. I always thought of him as kind of reckless with the ball and his td to int ratio during the regular season and playoffs kind of support that thinking. But in the big games, he's better than 2/1, which suprised me. I also like how his quarterback rating stays consistent even in the playoffs and actually rises during the big games. He does lose a little accuracy as the games get bigger but overall, I think he's pretty consistent no matter the stakes. I don't like that his winning percentage goes down with each level though.

[herkhorse]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

The real beneficiary of all those stud offensive players was Emmit Smith. Grossly overrated in my estimation. I can only imagine Barry Sanders on that team, that would have been sick.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Actually, Aikman was, if anything, underrated. They didn't pass very much in that offense. They could easily have been a much more prolific offense.

The real beneficiary of all those stud offensive players was Emmit Smith. Grossly overrated in my estimation. I can only imagine Barry Sanders on that team, that would have been sick.

I went to a ton of Eagles/Cowboys games growing up. During those golden years for the Cowgirls, you could drive 18 wheelers through the holes the offensive line created. Anyone on this site could have rushed for 1000 yards per season on that team

also, Good stats King.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I went to a ton of Eagles/Cowboys games growing up. During those golden years for the Cowgirls, you could drive 18 wheelers through the holes the offensive line created. Anyone on this site could have rushed for 1000 yards per season on that team

also, Good stats King.

Exactly my point. It was a near miracle of Smith was ever hit before the line of scrimmage, and it seemed pretty rare for him to be hit before gaining three yards.

I loved the way, as his career progressed, he'd get hit that once or twice a game and he'd go down and stay down for a minute. All of a sudden, he'd spring back up and everyone in Dallas would let out their collective breaths.

He was very theatrical.

Barry Sanders, or Eric Dickerson in his prime, with that line, would easily have gone for 2k a year.

[Antitrust32]

Some of my greatest childhood (and adult) memories are Eagles/Cowboys games.

First one I went to, I was 6. Its when the cowgirls sucked but had there good players so they were about to be good. It had snowed and everyone was chucking snowballs at the cowgirls huddle. That was great... Think want you want about Philly fans but Cowgirls always deserve to be pelted with snowballs.

and then there was "ITS 4TH AND 1 AND THEY STOP HIM AGAIN!! ITS GROUNDHOG DAY!" one of the greatest Eagles plays, stopping Emmit twice on 4th and 1.. the first time didnt count cause the clock hit the 2 min warning before the snap.. but we stuffed them twice.

Last year's 44-6 game to get into the playoffs was a great experience. My bro and I drank so much beer to stay warm! What an atmosphere though, its always great blowing out the Cowgirls!