Tom "Iceman" Brady

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I'd agree with your assesment that Brady is the biggest reason for the Patriots improvement, but a lot of the reasoning for such a sudden improvement was as much about Drew Bledsoe NOT being the Quarterback as it was about Tom Brady becoming the Quarterback.

Then how did Bledsoe get them to a Superbowl under Parcells and Bledsoe get nominated to so many Probowls? I'll admit Bledsoe was PART of the problem in 2000 and 2001. However look at the WR and RB's Brady had to work with in 2001, when he stepped in as a 6th round draft pick, never started an NFL game before. There are no hall of fame players there. Brady has done it with less big name talent than anybody else.
I'm sorry but you cannot fairly say Brady is overrated.
Yes the media has their knee pads on and blowing Brady and the Pats every night on TV.
But you can say that and even more for Manning and Urlacher. These two guys are the poster childs of the media and NFL and they have won nothing, THAT BY DEFINITION IS OVERRATED. Not Brady who has won three SB's.

[The Huddle]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Again, I'm saying if Peyton proves that he can beat Brady under pressure, then an already weak arguement that Brady is a better playoff QB loses it's basis. Manning is no better for beating the Patriots, it's a team game.

Ultimately, someone needs to prove that something changes in Manning brain come playoff time that affects his performance. Because right now, I look at the 2 time league MVP, see the same guy on the field on Sunday, and know that he could have a huge day. Remember, 3 times (2 vs Denver, 1 vs KC), Manning has gone insane in the playoffs. This further weakens the arguement that he cant get it done in the playoffs, because he HAS.

Do you honestly believe that a different person throws on the Colts 18 uniform in the playoffs, a person of considerably less skill? It's BS IMO, that Brady's game elevates in the playoffs, it doesn't. He's the same guy, a top 3 QB in the league. Manning has struggled in some games in the playoffs, but hes also had 3 games in which his team punted a total of 3 times. He can get it done.

Actually it sounds like you're saying that if the Colts win, the case for Brady is weakened and/or destroyed...but if the Pats win, the case for Manning is as strong as ever. I can't see how that makes any sense.

Look, Manning has a good team around him and an excellent coach. I have been impressed with their defensive effort the last couple of weeks, especially consdiering Manning has been somewhat off. We should resume this argument after he wins a championship.

[Hail2theskins]

Look people Im not arguing against brady, ive never said he wasnt good, but IMO hes not at the same level as the greats yet, i think its a little premature to be putting him up with all time greats because he has simply not had the longevity of them. I said earlier when he comes out and does it for his whole career then yes he will be up there with the greats, but until then im not going to put him on the same level as marino and montana. And defensewins, id think with a name like that youd understand the concept of a team winning, not just one man, yes hes a great leader and shows good poise, but strictly when it comes to playing your posistion im not ready to throw him up there with the ranks of the NFL all time elite. People constantly say that steve young was one of the best leaders in the NFL of all time, Ill put Brady's leadership abilities up there with youngs but strictly as a player Im not sitting him up there with the big dogs yet.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

Then how did Bledsoe get them to a Superbowl under Parcells and Bledsoe get nominated to so many Probowls? I'll admit Bledsoe was part of the problem in 2000 and 2001. However look at the WR and Rb's in 2001. There are no hall of fame players there. Brady has done it with less big name talent thatn anybody else.

I'm going to admit up front that I wasn't much of an NFL afficinado in 1996. I was 8. The only game I remember is the Superbowl.

I'm guessing that since we are taking about a time before the college QB revolution that began with Plummer in 97 and Manning/Leaf in 98. Bledsoe was a QB who went first overall, a rarity for the age, was probably an above average QB for the day. I mean you had guys like Neil O'Donnell leading his team to the superbowl, so how hard could it have been. You had Favre, Marino, Elway, Aikman....and like Jeff Hostetler or something as the leagues top QBs.

Also the probowl is a poor way to evaluate talent, IMO.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

You're definately coming off like a Brady fanboy.

The only sentence I take large issue with in this post is this one: "If NE goes to INDY and wins next week anyone who still says Manning is better than Brady is a fool."

That's too general. What if they go into Indy and win in the same fashion they beat San Diego. What have they proved? That they can get lucky at key times and win despite getting outplayed? Brady 4 Prezident!!!!

The only arguement that could possibly hold any water is one that says the playoffs and regular season are two seperate seasons, and that the complexity of the playoffs is so different from the regular season that its practically not even football. In which case, Brady's performance over 13 games is better than Peytons over 10. But why? Why would it be any different? The pressure is always really, really high during an NFL game. Any game. Peyton Manning obviously isn't bothered by pressure. Cold weather maybe, but not pressure.

The last two times these teams have played, Manning killed them. Torched them. Both times on the road. Where were you for those games?

There obviously is one QB who is more poised with better leadership than Brady, and thats Manning. His production is unbe-freakin-leavable. He wins 75% of his games with little to no help. He is better that Brady in every facet of the game.

I think we will see that this week.

Whats wrong if someone is a Brady fanboy. It sure sounds better than a Manning I can't score a TD or win a playoff fanboy.LOL

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by The Huddle

Actually it sounds like you're saying that if the Colts win, the case for Brady is weakened and/or destroyed...but if the Pats win, the case for Manning is as strong as ever. I can't see how that makes any sense.

Look, Manning has a good team around him and an excellent coach. I have been impressed with their defensive effort the last couple of weeks, especially consdiering Manning has been somewhat off. We should resume this argument after he wins a championship.

Manning may never win a championship, but if there is really something special to Brady, he can win 3 more easy, right?

The pro Brady arguement is based on two things

1) Tossing out any and all of Manning regular season accomplishments-basically assuming either regular season equality, or insignificance.
2) Proof that Manning's cognitive clarity is affected by playoff style pressure.

It's difficult, for any QB, to win on the road in inclimate weather in the playoffs, against the leagues best D's. Manning has yet to be successful (in 3 tries since 2002), Brady failed in Denver anyway. I'm not sure I'd attribute this phenomenon to playoff pressure as much as it just seems like a situation that the QB is going to struggle in. Manning has, Brady has.

[dmek25]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I'm going to admit up front that I wasn't much of an NFL afficinado in 1996. I was 8. The only game I remember is the Superbowl.

I'm guessing that since we are taking about a time before the college QB revolution that began with Plummer in 97 and Manning/Leaf in 98. Bledsoe was a QB who went first overall, a rarity for the age, was probably an above average QB for the day. I mean you had guys like Neil O'Donnell leading his team to the superbowl, so how hard could it have been. You had Favre, Marino, Elway, Aikman....and like Jeff Hostetler or something as the leagues top QBs.

ah, to be young again. what about the likes of montana, kelly , and even steve young? it wasnt the talent level, it was what was ask of the qback, and how he fit into a system. now the coaches build the system to fit the player. it wasnt always like that

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I'm going to admit up front that I wasn't much of an NFL afficinado in 1996. I was 8. The only game I remember is the Superbowl.

I'm guessing that since we are taking about a time before the college QB revolution that began with Plummer in 97 and Manning/Leaf in 98. Bledsoe was a QB who went first overall, a rarity for the age, was probably an above average QB for the day. I mean you had guys like Neil O'Donnell leading his team to the superbowl, so how hard could it have been. You had Favre, Marino, Elway, Aikman....and like Jeff Hostetler or something as the leagues top QBs.

Also the probowl is a poor way to evaluate talent, IMO.

I'm sorry, i did not know you were 8 in 96.
Back in the olden days (before 1997 or so LOL) the players and coaches voted the players into the probowl. This was a big deal to the players because you were elected by your peers. The guys you played against every week gave you the honor. Now the fans are involved and have ruined the process and reward. A fan does not know what OG or DT the opposing players least want to play against.
Fans only know one thing, glory stats: TD's, rushing yards, Rec yds, int. and sacks. That has dummied the game.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Manning may never win a championship, but if there is really something special to Brady, he can win 3 more easy, right?

The pro Brady arguement is based on two things

1) Tossing out any and all of Manning regular season accomplishments-basically assuming either regular season equality, or insignificance.
2) Proof that Manning's cognitive clarity is affected by playoff style pressure.

It's difficult, for any QB, to win on the road in inclimate weather in the playoffs, against the leagues best D's. Manning has yet to be successful (in 3 tries since 2002), Brady failed in Denver anyway. I'm not sure I'd attribute this phenomenon to playoff pressure as much as it just seems like a situation that the QB is going to struggle in. Manning has, Brady has.

If Manning had performed better in the regular season he wouldn't have had to win on the road in the playoffs. So the argument about his regular season performance doesn't really matter, because it hasn't helped him out at all yet.

[wolfeskins]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Manning may never win a championship, but if there is really something special to Brady, he can win 3 more easy, right?

The pro Brady arguement is based on two things

1) Tossing out any and all of Manning regular season accomplishments-basically assuming either regular season equality, or insignificance.
2) Proof that Manning's cognitive clarity is affected by playoff style pressure.

It's difficult, for any QB, to win on the road in inclimate weather in the playoffs, against the leagues best D's. Manning has yet to be successful (in 3 tries since 2002), Brady failed in Denver anyway. I'm not sure I'd attribute this phenomenon to playoff pressure as much as it just seems like a situation that the QB is going to struggle in. Manning has, Brady has.

just because a person is pro-brady does not mean that they are anti-manning. i'm a huge fan of both of them but when push comes to shove i'd take brady over manning in the big game.

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by Hail2theskins

Look people Im not arguing against brady, ive never said he wasnt good, but IMO hes not at the same level as the greats yet, i think its a little premature to be putting him up with all time greats because he has simply not had the longevity of them. I said earlier when he comes out and does it for his whole career then yes he will be up there with the greats, but until then im not going to put him on the same level as marino and montana. And defensewins, id think with a name like that youd understand the concept of a team winning, not just one man, yes hes a great leader and shows good poise, but strictly when it comes to playing your posistion im not ready to throw him up there with the ranks of the NFL all time elite. People constantly say that steve young was one of the best leaders in the NFL of all time, Ill put Brady's leadership abilities up there with youngs but strictly as a player Im not sitting him up there with the big dogs yet.

I picked the name defensewins BECAUSE of today's media and fans that only care about offense, scoring and stats. The ones that say a game is ugly if it a low scoring game.
I was floored by Dan Marino's post game comment after the Pats win when he said ' that was an ugly game by both teams". NO Dan, it was agreat game by two great defenses. Great defenses make offenses look bad on occasion. Dan wouldn;t know that because he never played on a team with a good defense. Those were the two best defenses facing each other yet in these playoffs. It was awesome game, not ugly. Dan Marino is a moron.
Today's media and fans have lost the art of a fine defense. It bothers me when the NFL changes rules to give advantages to offenses because it will improve ratings to the Attenition defeciet Disoder fans of today that know very little about football. You know the ones that only cheer when there is a TD because they do not understand the rest of the game.

Which brings me to a very important fact for you big stats guys. Manning is setting all of these records with rules limiting the defenses play like the five yards no constact rule and the lame roughing the passer rule. As little as 15 years ago defenses held up receivers and Qb's got pounded. Montana and Marino played in a much tougher NFL. Todays offensive records need to have a big * next to them.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by Hail2theskins

that wasnt directed towards you 12thman, i was late to put my quote in.

sorry..

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

Which brings me to a very important fact for you big stats guys. Manning is setting all of these records with rules limiting the defenses play like the five yards no constact rule and the lame roughing the passer rule. As little as 15 years ago defenses held up receivers and Qb's got pounded. Montana and Marino played in a much tougher NFL. Todays offensive records need to have a big * next to them.

Not that I disagree with you, but the game has changed as years have gone by anyway. That would kind of discredit people like Monk from getting in the Hall of Fame.

[The Huddle]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Manning may never win a championship, but if there is really something special to Brady, he can win 3 more easy, right?

The pro Brady arguement is based on two things

1) Tossing out any and all of Manning regular season accomplishments-basically assuming either regular season equality, or insignificance.
2) Proof that Manning's cognitive clarity is affected by playoff style pressure.

It's difficult, for any QB, to win on the road in inclimate weather in the playoffs, against the leagues best D's. Manning has yet to be successful (in 3 tries since 2002), Brady failed in Denver anyway. I'm not sure I'd attribute this phenomenon to playoff pressure as much as it just seems like a situation that the QB is going to struggle in. Manning has, Brady has.

He may have a fourth here in a few weeks.

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Not that I disagree with you, but the game has changed as years have gone by anyway. That would kind of discredit people like Monk from getting in the Hall of Fame.

No I think it would help Monk. It was much tougher to be a WR in the NFL in the 80's and early 90's than it is today. in the mid to late 90's the NFL changed the rules to help offense pass the ball more, so now the league has turned into amore of a passing league.
Now with these lame roughing the passer rules it really is giving them an advantage.