You're starting an NFL franchise...

[pudley4]

Who is your first pick? Two scenarios:

1 - Madden-style redraft. All NFL teams lose everyone off their rosters and have to redraft. You get the first pick, then the 64th pick, 65th, 128th, etc. Your team will obviously be competitive immediately.

2 - Expansion-style. All NFL teams are allowed to protect 35 players. Your team will be made up of leftovers and draft picks. However, you are allowed to pick one protected player. Your team may take a few years to be competitive.

[PhatTBoll]

Here we go again...

Scenario 1: Peyton

Scenario 2: Tomlinson

[Rick Diesel]

It would be very tough for me to pass up a 100% healthy Jonathan Ogden.

Rick Diesel

[stabn]

Manning
Tomlinson

If i'm competitive a solid QB is my #1 choice, and no one is better than Payton right now. Otherwise, it's Tomlinson. He's younger and i'm really going to need him beating it down through the middle to open it up enough for my young QB to learn.

[Non_Comformist]

Vick & Vick,

I believe in this guy, just scratching the surface but has already figured out how to win.

[tolbiny]

If i am starting a new franchise in a city that has never had a football team before then vick is the easy choice. The immediate fan base and huge crowds would be worth any dropoff in talent between him and another QB(not that there is any).

Starting a new franchise with the intent to win i would choose either the best offensive lineman in the game or the player with the most trade equity, then trade him in a manner to build a strong o-line.

[hoyaboy1]

Finding a good RB is easy. Drafting one 1st is extremely foolish in either scenario.

[ThaSaltCracka]

1. Manning
2. Ray Lewis

[Rick Diesel]

Ray Lewis is the most overrated player in the history of the NFL, and is not even the first or second best player on the Ravens. He does talk a good game though.

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
Ray Lewis is the most overrated player in the history of the NFL

[/ QUOTE ]

Replace that with Warren Sapp and I'll believe you.

[Non_Comformist]

[ QUOTE ]
If i am starting a new franchise in a city that has never had a football team before then vick is the easy choice. The immediate fan base and huge crowds would be worth any dropoff in talent between him and another QB(not that there is any).

Starting a new franchise with the intent to win i would choose either the best offensive lineman in the game or the player with the most trade equity, then trade him in a manner to build a strong o-line.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are 100% correct about the importance of an O-line.

[Toro]

To everyone who picked Manning. This is not fantasy football. No brainer pick: Brady

[texaspimp]

I'm not a huge fan of his, but Michael Vick would be my pick. To me, you're getting a good (could be great) QB and a decent "RB". If he has decent O-line (as a couple of posters have said, this is HUGE) and just a few other options, he can be one of the best ever.

Would be hard to pass up LT and Peyton, though.

[Rick Diesel]

[ QUOTE ]
To everyone who picked Manning. This is not fantasy football. No brainer pick: Brady

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, somebody must be a Patriots fan. Don't get me wrong, I think Brady is very good and love to see a Michigan alum doing well, but he is not, and never will be anywhere close to Manning.

Rick Diesel

[PhatTBoll]

[ QUOTE ]
Finding a good RB is easy. Drafting one 1st is extremely foolish in either scenario.

[/ QUOTE ]

We're not talking fantasy here. Finding a RB who will get you 1,000 yards may not be so hard. Finding a young, proven RB, who has shown he can produce with a suspect O-line, and who has not missed much time to injury, is not so easy.

[Edge34]

[ QUOTE ]
To everyone who picked Manning. This is not fantasy football. No brainer pick: Brady

[/ QUOTE ]

To Pats fans. This is not a fantasy world. The answer is Peyton and its not even close. He's got 10x the football ability and field vision of Tom Brady. Brady's good, but not as good as Manning.

-Edge

[the42]

1 manning
2 LT

and then trade them both for Bill Bellichiek.

and manning isn't better than brady. people who don't watch the pats regularly don't realize the huge benefit of a QB who never makes mistakes. also manning been in the league what 6-7 years starting all of them. manning will be the drew bledsoe of his generation. the game will pass him by. brady obviously we'll be the joe montana. 3 outta 4 baby

[tolbiny]

Now that i think about it more, there is no way that i would ever use the first pick in either draft. There is always someone who is willing to give up to much to obtain one player (ditka for ricky, davis for winslow, the herschal walker trade all come to mind). I would much rather get 2-3 top level football players than one hall of famer.
Ohh, and i would trade any one pick to have Bill Belicheck as my head coach.

[Edge34]

Tom Brady never makes mistakes? Let's look at this season alone...

Manning: 3196 yards, 41 TDs, 7 INTs, 126.6 passer rating

Brady: 2614 yards, 18 TDs, 8 INTs, 91.3 passer rating

Sure, you can say all you want about the two titles he's got, but without such a killer defense, New England isn't anywhere NEAR as good a team. Peyton's the clear call here.

Oh yeah, and Brady STILL fumbled in that game vs. Oakland. One different call, Pats don't even GO to the Super Bowl that year...remember that.

EDIT TO ADD: 12 of 30 QBs listed on NFL.com's stats page have fewer INTs than Brady this year, including Daunte Culpepper, Donovan McNabb, and Josh McCown. Chad Pennington only has 3. Mistakes?

-Edge

[PhatTBoll]

[ QUOTE ]
people who don't watch the pats regularly don't realize the huge benefit of a QB who never makes mistakes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have watched many Pats games, and they have made me realize the huge benefit of having the best defense in the league behind you, and the best offensive line in the league in front of you.

Also, I love how classy you are about Drew Bledsoe. The guy helped you win a super bowl, for god's sake.

[Toro]

He did? With a clip board? from the sidelines?

[sublime]

but he is not, and never will be anywhere close to Manning.

thank god. i enjoy winning the "big ones" /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[sublime]

Vick & Vick,

god no

[PhatTBoll]

Do you not even remember the AFC title game against the Steelers?

[Edge34]

Sublime,

You're looking on the wrong side of the ball for the sole reason your Pats have 2 Super Bowl titles.

[deacsoft]

Manning
Manning

[the42]

hey i love bledsoe ( actually was agianst brady in 2001 ) but fact is fact. your right he did help us win the SB by throwing the onlt TD vs Pitt in the AFC champ game.

Those #'s are silly. Like 3 of those picks were at the end of a half. fact is manning is putting up unbeliveable #'s against weak teams. hey I would have been with you 4 years ago like i said i loved Drew but the big arm gets you into big trouble. We'll talk agin after the AFC champ game when peyton throws another 4 picks like last year

[Toro]

Yes I remember it well and Bledsoe almost blew it as he did a few years prior against the same Steelers when he threw a pass right to a Steeler linebacker that had clear sailing to the endzone but dropped the gimme pick.

But I respect Bledsoe as I respect Parcells and Bob Kraft all of whom share pretty equally in saving the franchise.

[Victor]

Vick and its not even close.

Seriously all you Peyton worshippers make me sick. Put Peyton on the Falcons and they dont even make the playoffs. The maybe win 8 games if they rely totally on Dunn.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
Ray Lewis is the most overrated player in the history of the NFL, and is not even the first or second best player on the Ravens. He does talk a good game though.

[/ QUOTE ] /images/graemlins/confused.gif are you being serious?

[sublime]

jeff-

if i had to make this decision it would be to go with LT in both situations. i would prefer to trade this hypothetical pick and get some quality OL/DL depth.

[sublime]

You're looking on the wrong side of the ball for the sole reason your Pats have 2 Super Bowl titles.

ummm, you do remember the final two minutes of each of those games, right? i do /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Edge34]

I do too...Defense kept the other team from blowing the Pats out. Brady grinds out a few yards and both SB titles are on the leg of Adam Vinatieri, who gets precisely ZERO respect, as Brady "earns" both MVP awards.

As I said before, not saying Brady sucks, but he's anything BUT the next Montana. The Pats do what the Pistons did last year - they win as a team, with killer defense and adequate offense.

[fnord_too]

I'm a VT alum, and have nothing but respect for Vick. However, I don't think he has ever gone a season (college or pro) where he wasn't injured. His style is such that he is very likely to be injured in any given season. He certainly knows how to win, and I saw him win many games on his own in college, but I don't think you want to build your team solely around him because he most likely won't be putting in 16 (+) games a year.

As an aside, I was at the 1999 sugar bowl, and Vick's was the most amazing performance I have seen.

[PhatTBoll]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm a VT alum, and have nothing but respect for Vick. However, I don't think he has ever gone a season (college or pro) where he wasn't injured. His style is such that he is very likely to be injured in any given season. He certainly knows how to win, and I saw him win many games on his own in college, but I don't think you want to build your team solely around him because he most likely won't be putting in 16 (+) games a year.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is precisely why I didn't choose Vick for Scenario 2. Choose him first, and you are perpetually one blindside hit away from watching your franchise get flushed down the toilet.

[tolbiny]

All players can get potentially injured, some more than others. This is one of the reasons i would trade said pick and build my team off several top level players, not 1.

[Rick Diesel]

Have you watched him at all this year? When was the last time he made a big play? Everytime the Ravens defense needs a big play, it is Ed Reed that makes it.

And Jonathan Ogden is clearly the best player on the Ravens, there is not an argument that you could make that would make me believe otherwise.

Although I do admit that i got carried away with the "History of the NFL" comment, I still stick to my statement that he is highly overrated.

[lowroller]

I didn't read all the replies to this thread, but I will say that I am shocked (well, no, not really) that Manning was an overwhelming choice in BOTH (let alone, one) categories!

This guy has won NOTHING at this level, and has a rep of a choke-artist (although that may change). Brady has won 2 championships AND MVPs!!

Who can blame the public for their herd-mentality? Manning is getting all the 'pub' this year (deservedly), so all the minions echo the media's chant of "Manning...Manning".

[morello]

I picked Manning/Vick. The QB is by far the most important position in the NFL.

[ThaSaltCracka]

How horrible was Marino, or what abiout Elway, until he finally won a ring? Your logic is completely stupid and flawed.

Manning was the MVP last year, he will be it this year, he is easily the best QB in the league, hands down, so you have to take him #1 in a fantasy style draft. To not do that would be stupid.

[B Dids]

Championships and Games are won by TEAMS not individual players.

Brady has been on better TEAMS.

Manning is, without question, the better player.

[tolbiny]

It ultimately depends on your intentions.
If you want your team to draw well immediately taking a player like Vick would fill the stands even if the rest of your team sucks. Lots of merchandise sales, and prime time games.
If you want to win the superbowl taking Manning is a risk because he has had problems in big games, but also because his salary will cripple your team and make it difficult to build an appropriate offense around him and build a good enough defense to win the super bowl. If your goal is to win as many regular sason games as possible manning is the clear choice.
Taking Brady with the #1 would be dumb as you could most likely get him with the 10th pick or maybe lower. Trading down for Brady is the +SBV move out there in my opinion.

[Number4]

I like winning playoff games, so Manning was not at the top of either scenario. I really like LT in both of them.

[tolbiny]

LT has won fewer playoff games than Manning.

[ThaSaltCracka]

fair enough, Tolbiny.

[lowroller]

The thread states we are starting an NFL Franchise, not a fairy-tale fantasy team. If I'm starting a real franchise that needs to win games, I am going with someone who has won games/championships and can lead a team (and also is a year younger than Manning).

Sorry to hurt your feelings, Salt. I should have realized that you would be a Manning "honk" after witnessing your Barry Bonds cheerleading act earlier this year.

[bugstud]

[ QUOTE ]
Vick and its not even close.

Seriously all you Peyton worshippers make me sick. Put Peyton on the Falcons and they dont even make the playoffs. The maybe win 8 games if they rely totally on Dunn.

[/ QUOTE ]

In the NFC, the Falcons with Manning win a minimum of 12 games, if not more.

As far as this Brady/Manning BS goes, if Manning was on the Pats he'd be hailed as the greatest QB ever. Since Brady is on the team, he is considered by everyone in New England as such. It's like saying the Johnny Damon isn't any good either...even if you happen to be right, they're not going to listen.

[ThaSaltCracka]

The thread states if you could take any player #1, which would you take. You in your infinite wisdom would take a above average quaterback(that makes very few mistakes) as your #1 pick because he has won championships(while playing on awesome teams). Clearly you are all over Brady's nuts.

[ QUOTE ]
and also is a year younger than Manning

[/ QUOTE ] And this is relevant how?

Listen, if you are going to try to tell me Brady is a better QB , and by QB I mean controlling the offense/reading D's/calling audibles, then I am done talking to you.

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry to hurt your feelings, Salt. I should have realized that you would be a Manning "honk" after witnessing your Barry Bonds cheerleading act earlier this year.

[/ QUOTE ] Blah Blah Blah, truth be told, I hate Manning, I think he comes across as a aragont hick with marbles in his mouth, but to deny his talent is absurd. Much like denying Barrys. I am sure you dove to your knees three years ago when Brady and the Pats won, and I am sure your mouth has a vice grip on his cock and balls. Because that is the only explanation for your obsession with the Golden Boy Brady.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
As far as this Brady/Manning BS goes, if Manning was on the Pats he'd be hailed as the greatest QB ever. Since Brady is on the team, he is considered by everyone in New England as such. It's like saying the Johnny Damon isn't any good either...even if you happen to be right, they're not going to listen.

[/ QUOTE ] Precisely.

[lowroller]

Dids, I agree that Brady's success is attributed to the strength of his team. However, he had a part in defining that strength.

I am a firm believer in putting the right players into the right "system" that will cause a "synergistic" effect.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
Dids, I agree that Brady's success is attributed to the strength of his team. However, he had a part in defining that strength.

[/ QUOTE ] Of course he did, and part of what helps the Pats is that Brady isn't so good that he can demand a huge paycheck, so they can spread some of that money around. I don't think that can be overlooked, but I think any above average QB on that team would do just as well. One can only imagine how good they would be with a guy like Manning though, seriously, think about it.

[lowroller]

For the record, I am neither a Brady or a Pats fan. I simply think he is the better choice to build an NFL franchise around right now. Manning is having a great year, but I won't let that sway my opinion (unlike so many others).

Obsession?!

I suggest you go back and read your own posts in this thread and the Bonds one, and honestly ask yourself who is obsessed.

[ QUOTE ]
Your logic is completely stupid and flawed

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I am sure you dove to your knees three years ago when Brady and the Pats won, and I am sure your mouth has a vice grip on his cock and balls.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Clearly you are all over Brady's nuts.

[/ QUOTE ]

I ask you, who's obsessed? I simply questioned the majority opinion of the poll and you come over the top with this?!

All of these accusations by you of "hero worship"...

Hit a little too close to home, Salt?! /images/graemlins/blush.gif

"Methinks he doth protest too loudly!"

[PhatTBoll]

Lowroller, the logic behind your posts is particularly irksome.

When people say that they would rather have Manning, it must be because they are practicing "hero-worship" spoonfed to them by the media, and aren't thinking for themselves.

When people say they would rather have Brady, it must be because they are intelligent individuals who do the research and watch games objectively.

Do you really think it's impossible for an intelligent person to watch games objectively and come to the conclusion that Manning is the more desirable player?
That would be pretty pompous of you.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
I simply think he is the better choice to build an NFL franchise around right now.

[/ QUOTE ] Thats is if you think that, but it is wrong.

[ QUOTE ]
Manning is having a great year, but I won't let that sway my opinion (unlike so many others).

[/ QUOTE ] Do you forget last year? Mannings ascension to the top of the QB ranks in the NFL has been a few years in the making. The only thing holding some people back from admiting this is his lack of a ring. But I think that is BS, is Ted Williams one of the greatest hitters ever? He never won a ring, simply put, you don't need to win to be consider one of the best, because sports are team games.

[ QUOTE ]
I suggest you go back and read your own posts in this thread and the Bonds one, and honestly ask yourself who is obsessed.

[/ QUOTE ] I know what I said, and I tried to objectively defend Bonds.

[ QUOTE ]
"Methinks he doth protest too loudly!"

[/ QUOTE ]Me thinks you don't know what you are talking about.

[lowroller]

I think you have my posts confused with another's.

I don't feel I am the one who is coming off as demeaning and insulting, but I can point you to a couple that I feel do. They are not mine.

If you feel that I am being pompous, I apologize. That was not my intent.

Sarcastic, yes. Pompous, no.

[PhatTBoll]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you have my posts confused with another's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not unless somebody else used your computer to post this:


[ QUOTE ]
Who can blame the public for their herd-mentality? Manning is getting all the 'pub' this year (deservedly), so all the minions echo the media's chant of "Manning...Manning".

[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
If you feel that I am being pompous, I apologize. That was not my intent.

[/ QUOTE ]

No need for an apology. We're all entitled to our opinions. But you should really accept that intelligent, well-informed people can have opinions that differ from yours, as seems to be the case with Manning vs. Brady.

[lowroller]

Oops, my mistake.

I thought you were referring to the other posts in this thread that contain specific insults directed at someone with an opinion different than the author's.

Carry on.

[daryn]

the best part about all these arguments, manning vs. brady:

i don't care! i don't mind if manning is recognized as the best in the NFL. i would rather have brady on my patriots, and nobody around here would disagree.

i don't need my guy to be the best. just gimme those rings biotch!

[PhatTBoll]

Are you talking about me? I don't think I've insulted anybody.

If you're referring to TSC, well...he's salty. That's his thing. You might as well get pissed at the sun for being yellow.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you talking about me? I don't think I've insulted anybody.

If you're referring to TSC, well...he's salty. That's his thing. You might as well get pissed at the sun for being yellow.

[/ QUOTE ]
I take that as an insult, now go smoke a phatboll

[Drac]

[ QUOTE ]
i would rather have brady on my patriots, and nobody around here would disagree.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do people really think this? Str8 up trade, Brady for Manning and you're telling me Pats fans wouldn't want Manning instead of Brady? Don't give me salary cap influenced answers please. I can understand why Pats fans love Brady but talent wise do they really think Brady is a better NFL QB?

[Toro]

Yes and I'll tell you why. I watch a Colts game and I see Manning stand back there with tons of time and hitting recievers who are wide open who then usually get signifcant YAC.

Brady on the other hand is under constant duress, barely getting his passes off and constantly taking big hits after he releases the ball and then hits recievers that are closely guarded.

So what I'm saying is this. Manning has a much better offense behind him. That Thanksgiving Day game against Detroit was ridiculous. I've never seen receivers so wide open. But when the going gets tough, as in the playoffs, when the defenses are much better, you really see the difference between the two. Brady wins and Manning doesn't.

[the42]

Its funny how quickly people forget. 20 years people were having the exact same argument about Montana/ Marino / Elway.
Oh Montana's on a great team. He's a medicore QB. Its the system. But in hindsight would anyone really pick Elway or Marino over Montana. I wouldn't. The overall consenus of fans is that a QB has to throw for a ton of yards and a ton of TD's. Game magmt is key. For the guy who said Manning is a way better field vison and Mgmt of the game he is crazy. No one is cooler under pressure and manages a game better than brady. the guys Zen like. As Johnny Mac would say "YOU CANNOT BE SERIOUS"

[Edge34]

So you're implying Manning can't hit closely guarded receivers? On the contrary, its just so much easier when your receivers are that much better than a crap secondary like that in Detroit.

Either that or you're just admitting its the defense that lets the Pats win. As I've said before - no disrespect to the Patriots as a team, whether I like them or not (in this case, not), they win ballgames. But they win as a team, and you can't tell me an excellent QB (Manning) with that D wouldn't do as well, and probably better than an average QB (Brady) with that same D.

Or give the Colts that defense to back them up and they'd never lose a game. Ever.

Take that defense away from the Patriots and they're getting top 5 draft picks. Brady can't win games on his own (or hasn't had to) - Peyton's had to sometimes.

-Edge

[Toro]

You missed my point completely. What I'm saying is that if you replaced Brady with Manning on the Patriots with same players that Brady has to work with, I don't think Manning does as well. I'm not saying he'll suck, but I don't think he wins 25 of the last 26 games and 2 Super Bowls out of the last three years with the same cast of characters.

[ThaSaltCracka]

Manning might not do as well as he is now, but I bet he would do better than Brady if he was on the Pats, especially if they had the same players and coaches currently there.

[Toro]

[ QUOTE ]
Manning might not do as well as he is now, but I bet he would do better than Brady if he was on the Pats, especially if they had the same players and coaches currently there.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you think Manning as a Patriot wins 25 out of 26 and 2 Super Bowls? But wait, you say he's better than Brady. So he wins all 26, right?

[CCass]

TSC and I must have the same thought process. I said Manning in scenario 1, and Peppers in scenario 2.

I chose Peppers because he is younger than Lewis.

[NoPeak]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Vick and its not even close.

Seriously all you Peyton worshippers make me sick. Put Peyton on the Falcons and they dont even make the playoffs. The maybe win 8 games if they rely totally on Dunn.

[/ QUOTE ]

In the NFC, the Falcons with Manning win a minimum of 12 games, if not more.

As far as this Brady/Manning BS goes, if Manning was on the Pats he'd be hailed as the greatest QB ever. Since Brady is on the team, he is considered by everyone in New England as such. It's like saying the Johnny Damon isn't any good either...even if you happen to be right, they're not going to listen.

[/ QUOTE ]

Absouletly correct.

I go with Peyton on both.

[ThaSaltCracka]

Maybe they win all 26, and maybe they crush every team in all 26. I suppose if the end result is the same, then the whole argument is pointless, right?

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
TSC and I must have the same thought process. I said Manning in scenario 1, and Peppers in scenario 2.

I chose Peppers because he is younger than Lewis.

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmm, you might be right with the Peppers choice.

[tolbiny]

Easy pick with Montana over marino... but Elway verses Montana becomes a real argument now. As will payton verses Brady if payton wins a super bowl.
What's really going to be great is the arguments at the end of Brady's career if Rothesburger is better or not. That kid is something special. God Damn i hate the Steelers.

[tolbiny]

Don't tell me that peyton has had wo "win games on his own". The entire Indy team is built around him. They have a very solid O-line, Their running back is a good reciver, and their recievers/tight ends are also very good (with one hall of famer). Payton doen's do it alone- the only player i have ever seen do it alone was Barry Sanders, and even he couldn't turn a losing team into a winning one. And that guy was unreal.

[bugstud]

Walter Payton had to do it alone most of his career as well...it's damn near impossible.

As far as this junk about Manning on the Pats, it's all hypothetical. I honestly believe that the Pats might have been a better team with him and lost more games. I could see the Pats being ahead instead of behind and losing like that instead of the situations where they would be coming from behind.

[Toro]

[ QUOTE ]
Walter Payton had to do it alone most of his career as well...it's damn near impossible.

As far as this junk about Manning on the Pats, it's all hypothetical. I honestly believe that the Pats might have been a better team with him and lost more games. I could see the Pats being ahead instead of behind and losing like that instead of the situations where they would be coming from behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Talk about convuluted thinking. They would be a better team with Manning but would lose more games? Ok you Manning lovers win. I concede. Manning's better but the Pats wouldn't win as much as they do with Brady. So, I guess I still take Brady.

I guess it's like Arod being the perennial MVP but none of his teams can win. Real valuable, huh?

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
Talk about convuluted thinking. They would be a better team with Manning but would lose more games? Ok you Manning lovers win. I concede. Manning's better but the Pats wouldn't win as much as they do with Brady. So, I guess I still take Brady.


[/ QUOTE ] I never said this, but I think what he said makes some sense, but it is also somewhat weird too. How can they be better, but lose more games?

[Toro]

The answer is consistency. Under Brady, the team does whatever necessary to win each week. They don't get a lot of style points and make the ESPN highlights like Indy does but they win and win and win week after week after week.

It's a big intangible you're all overlooking.

[ThaSaltCracka]

no, that makes sense, but I think you place to much emphasis on Brady and not the team overall. Basically Bellicheck asks Brady to make the simple plays every week, which he does, as does the rest of the team, on that team, no one player is bigger than the team. That is really the most amazing thing about the Pats, they actually play a team sport. Some times with Peyton, it is basically him and his 3 or 4 receivers that are playing with everyone else just watching(seems to me that way sometimes).

[Nick B.]

[ QUOTE ]

The answer is consistency. Under Brady, the team does whatever necessary to win each week. They don't get a lot of style points and make the ESPN highlights like Indy does but they win and win and win week after week after week.

It's a big intangible you're all overlooking.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are probably a red sox fan who would argue that intangibles don't matter when a Yankees fan says that Jeter is a great shortstop. Brady was handed with a team and has made the most of it. If you think he is a great quarterback that you could build a team around you are wearing rose colored glasses. How did he do the year between the super bowl wins??? He "tucked" his team away that year.

[bugstud]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Talk about convuluted thinking. They would be a better team with Manning but would lose more games? Ok you Manning lovers win. I concede. Manning's better but the Pats wouldn't win as much as they do with Brady. So, I guess I still take Brady.


[/ QUOTE ] I never said this, but I think what he said makes some sense, but it is also somewhat weird too. How can they be better, but lose more games?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's more of a commentary on prevent defense than of relative merit. It's pretty easy in the NFL with a good offense to drive down the field late in the game and pull it out. I figure with Manning there would be more up by 6 or less situations where the ground game would not run the clock out and the other team would be able to pull off a last second victory, instead of the Pats getting the ball last.

Not real solid reasoning, I know, but then again you tell me these guys win that many games in a row and I don't believe you then, either.

[Rick Diesel]

[ QUOTE ]
We'll talk agin after the AFC champ game when peyton throws another 4 picks like last year

[/ QUOTE ]

So you think that the Colts will beat the Patriots in the second round before losing to the Steelers in the AFC Championship Game? That is a bold prediction. Personally I think that the Patriots will be the team losing to the Steelers.

Rick Diesel

[Toro]

[ QUOTE ]
You are probably a red sox fan who would argue that intangibles don't matter when a Yankees fan says that Jeter is a great shortstop. Brady was handed with a team and has made the most of it. If you think he is a great quarterback that you could build a team around you are wearing rose colored glasses. How did he do the year between the super bowl wins??? He "tucked" his team away that year.

[/ QUOTE ]

Au Contrare. Players like Jeter and Brady are the ones I want on my team, they're winners.

[hoyaboy1]

Is Jeter a winner or a good player who has been on great teams?

[Toro]

All of the above.

[kdog]

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We'll talk agin after the AFC champ game when peyton throws another 4 picks like last year


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



So you think that the Colts will beat the Patriots in the second round before losing to the Steelers in the AFC Championship Game? That is a bold prediction. Personally I think that the Patriots will be the team losing to the Steelers.

Rick Diesel

[/ QUOTE ]
Assuming these two do make it to the conference championship game I think home field is huge. In Pittsburgh the Steelers have a pretty good chance of winning. But I don't think they beat the Patriots in Foxboro.

[z32fanatic]

I would rather have Brady because he wins. Also, INTs is a misleading statistic. If Brady throws a bomb and it is picked off at the opponent's 10 yard line, that's not as bad as throwing an INT at your own 10. Brady doesn't make as many "mistakes" as Manning although he has thrown an equal amount of INTs. Teams also seem to do better when they don't have that one dominant player, i.e. Texas Rangers without Arod; Seattle Mariners of the late '90s minus Randy, Griffey and Arod; Even Tennessee without Manning (year later they win the NC). There are fewer examples of the most dominant player in the game winning the title (Jordan is all I can think of). I don't know why this happens, but it does so I will stick with it.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
I would rather have Brady because he wins.

[/ QUOTE ] his team wins
[ QUOTE ]
Also, INTs is a misleading statistic. If Brady throws a bomb and it is picked off at the opponent's 10 yard line, that's not as bad as throwing an INT at your own 10

[/ QUOTE ] Brady usually doesn't bomb the ball, I think your example probably fits Manning more, imo.

[ QUOTE ]
Teams also seem to do better when they don't have that one dominant player. There are fewer examples of the most dominant player in the game winning the title (Jordan is all I can think of).

[/ QUOTE ] You will probably only find examples in Basketball, because it is really the only sport in which one player can carry a whole team (A.I. is an example, the year Philly lost to L.A. 4-1). Football teams never win because of one player, nor do baseball teams. For how good a player Bonds is, or Ted Williams was, they simply did not play on good enough teams to win it(Bonds almost won though). Montana was on good teams, Elway(later in his career) was on good teams, Favre was on good teams, Marino was not on good teams. The closest example I can think of a one player carrying a team is RJ in 2001 with Arizona, except he also had Curt, so I suppose I could say that they both carried that team.

[Drac]

As there are no stats to support Brady (at least not this year or last) in this discussion his supporters turn to the "winner" element. I guess this means Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer are better QB's than Manning. As for Manning having to carry the load with Indy they had nothing but Harrison and a gimpy Faulk when Manning was drafted. The line was awful as was the defense. He's been the main guy since he was drafted and the load CLEARLY falls on his shoulders. That defense is still awful. Manning knows if he makes any mistakes they lose the game. Brady has a heck of a lot more room to work with in NE. Brady is the right guy at the right time for the Pats. Manning is a far superior football player.

As for ARod, are you prepared to eat those words when he wins 4 or 5 titles before he retires? The Rangers did a nice job getting Soriano but they are still a long way from a top team. Randy left Seattle and was a WS MVP. I don't recall the Mariners winning a WS since then. Football and baseball are much less likely to have one star carry the team to a title as you need at a minimum 25 bodies in football and 17 plus in baseball to suceed. ARod will win in NY because they have good players around him. Johnson won in Arizona because he had another great pitcher and a solid team to back him up.

[Nick B.]

[ QUOTE ]
I would rather have Brady because he wins. Also, INTs is a misleading statistic. If Brady throws a bomb and it is picked off at the opponent's 10 yard line, that's not as bad as throwing an INT at your own 10. Brady doesn't make as many "mistakes" as Manning although he has thrown an equal amount of INTs. [ QUOTE ]


Right, so throwing that interception in the red zone in the super bowl last year, really wasn't a mistake. I got it.

[Drac]

So if Brady really is a better QB if you put him in Indy they'd win more games then with Manning, right?

[z32fanatic]

The year after Seattle lost Arod, having lost 3 of the best players in the game the previous 3 years, they set the record for the most games won in a season. Its something about having a team with no superstars that promotes team goals over individual ones and leads to more victories. Also, I didn't say the Rangers were a top team, they just won many more games with Soriano (not a media star) than with Arod and practically the same team otherwise.
There are just QBs who seem to just win. Trent Dilfer and Krenzel come to mind. Did either one of them have incredible statistics? No, but both put together long winning streaks at their respective levels because they would find a way to win games however they had to.

[tolbiny]

"You will probably only find examples in Basketball, because it is really the only sport in which one player can carry a whole team"

I don't know how to do the whole accents thing- But
Pele. Damn that guy was sick.

As far as Farve- sometimes i look at some of his recievers (antonio freeman comes to mind) and wonder if they are even above average.
Javon walker is a stud though.

[thatpfunk]

Manning is, and always will be, a choke artist. Numbers don't mean a thing. He will not win a Super Bowl.

Scenario 1: Vick. Thats easy. You are building a team from the ground up. Every pick will be made afterwards to cater to his strengths.

Scenario 2: Tough, but Tomlinson seems to be a safe, reliable pick who will provide offense for a crap team until they can get other players.

[ThaSaltCracka]

your logic is flawed. The reason the M's and Rangers improved is because they had more money to spend on above average role players, especially the M's. The Mariners team of 2001 had plenty of egos,as well as plenty of really good individual players, even with A-Rod gone.

[Drac]

[ QUOTE ]
The year after Seattle lost Arod, having lost 3 of the best players in the game the previous 3 years, they set the record for the most games won in a season. Its something about having a team with no superstars that promotes team goals over individual ones and leads to more victories. Also, I didn't say the Rangers were a top team, they just won many more games with Soriano (not a media star) than with Arod and practically the same team otherwise.
There are just QBs who seem to just win. Trent Dilfer and Krenzel come to mind. Did either one of them have incredible statistics? No, but both put together long winning streaks at their respective levels because they would find a way to win games however they had to.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seattle didn't win a World Series. Winning the title seems to be the requirement for the pro Brady crowd to be consideered a "winner". If Manning isn't a winner than regular season success means nothing. No title, no good. The Rangers had Blalock last year playing at a much higher level than before, Young had a career year, and their pitching was 10 times better than the previous years. The pitching was the reason they were so much better, not ARod leaving. How can you possibly use Krenzel as a positive example?

Manning sure choked on the road against KC in the playoffs last year, didn't he? Yep, he had a bad game against NE in the AFC championship. How the hell does that make him a choker? Was Dan Marino a choker?