Manning #1 Brady #2. So says America.
by beckmania on Jul 9, 2009 10:09 AM EDT
Email
PrintSorry there's no link, but I saw it on the ticker this morning. ESPN's Sportsnation picked Manning #1 over Brady #2 on the all decade team. Marvin was in there at #5 too. I know it's not scientific or anything, but at least it's more representative of a larger group than 12 douches in a room in Bristol. I just find it funny that Manning wins these debates pretty much everywhere else. I guess ol' Boomer just couldn't push send fast enough to move Brady up in those rankings.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Stampede Blue's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Stampede Blue's writers or editors.
82 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'm happy that America hasn't been influenced by that crappy network called ESPN
We as a nation know that championships alone don’t equal greatness. If that were the case, then Robert Horry is greater than Jordan since he has 7 rings to MJ’s 6. I think Brady is a great QB, possibly an elite, but he isn’t better than Peyton Williams Manning.
"Peyton Manning flow, I just go no huddle."
- Lil' Wayne, Put Some Keys on That
Competing with Shake in your sig now?
Now a proud annoyance on Stampede Blue, 18to88, Indy Football Report, and Phil B's blog.
Man, I need a life...
Random fact of the week from the empty void that is my mind: Joseph Addai, otherwise one as The Great Irrationally Hated One, is the first and only running back to rush for 1,000 yards in a season without starting a game in that season.
Lil' Wayne has 7 albums with an 8th coming out next month
I think there are enough lyrics for everyone.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
You mean there are enough coasters for everyone, right?
Yeah, so I sold out, do something about it! Like read my site Colts Chatter.
by KingRichard on Jul 9, 2009 8:11 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
NO, YOUR TASTE IN MUSIC SUCKS!
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
Hey take it easy
I’m sure lil wayne can sample with the best of ‘em. I’m sure as talented as Weird Al maybe.
Defense if more important then breathing.
WTF trying to use the strike key, painful
I’m sure lil wayne can steel music sample with the best of them. I’m sure as talented as Weird Al.
Defense if more important then breathing.
Can’t we all just get along and agree that Weezy is the best rapper alive? If I were a woman and I had to pick one guy… oh. god. I’m going to stop there.
by Colts_and_Cavs_in_09! on Jul 10, 2009 2:53 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
when you have to resort to
an unscientific ESPN sportsnation ticker thingy to prove a point… hmmm…
Keep the faith!
Hmm..
And yet all of you Pats fans believe in the “all decade team” from ESPN…double standard, perhaps? ;-)
"I throw, you catch. It's NOT that hard!"
Peyton Manning, SNL, 2007
by peytonsthebest on Jul 10, 2009 4:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Not at all
Don’t get me wrong – I’ll like when my team is named the the best, but a) coming from ESPN and b) the fact that it’s the off-season makes me think it’s more pablum for the masses. Any Pats fan who points to that All Decade thing and says, “See, see! We ARE the best!” is smoking a bit too much lobstah. Yeah, I know, I posted a link when it came out, but I would never use it as evidence. BBS would choke to death on his coffee from laughing so much and I value his health more than that.
Blogger at SBNation's Patriots blog, Pats Pulpit
LOL
I haven’t heard that word in a very, very long time. ewww.
"I throw, you catch. It's NOT that hard!"
Peyton Manning, SNL, 2007
by peytonsthebest on Jul 10, 2009 4:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Impossible to compare the two fairly.
Manning plays most of his games in perfect dome conditions. Brady’s QB rating exceeds Manning’s both indoors and outdoors.
But with a small sample size.
Now a proud annoyance on Stampede Blue, 18to88, Indy Football Report, and Phil B's blog.
Man, I need a life...
Random fact of the week from the empty void that is my mind: Joseph Addai, otherwise one as The Great Irrationally Hated One, is the first and only running back to rush for 1,000 yards in a season without starting a game in that season.
and a more complete and balanced stat like ANY/A prefers Manning.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 10, 2009 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions
ANY/A
Indoors Brady 6.92 Peyton 6.99
Outdoors Brady 5.95 Peyton 5.99
Windy Brady 5.46 Peyton 5.49
Peyton is worth slightly more yards per dropback in every type of weather.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 10, 2009 9:20 PM EDT up reply actions
This assumes
yards per dropback is the optimum measurement. I disagree. I think the NFL QB rating formula is too weighted on YPA as it is.
In any case your ANY/A stats are extremely close. So close that things like rings could be the deciding factor.
Peyton was more efficent in over 2,000 more attempts
so he’s clearly done more for his team.
And if you aren’t sold on ANY/A being better than QB Rating compare the formulas. ANY/A includes more factors, has a formula that makes more sense and gives a result that actually has a meaning, instead of just an abstract rating.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions
Help me out here.
On Pat’s pulpit you posted these numbers.
Brady:
Outdoors: 6.06
Indoors: 7.07
Windy: 5.83
Peyton:
Outdoors 5.46
Indoors: 7.12
Windy: 5.62
So, which are the right numbers?
As far as the ANY/A; the influence of sack yards on the equation is somewhat spurious. There are many sacks that have nothing to do with a lack on the part of the QB.
The assignment of value for both TD passes and the effect of interceptions looks to be arbitrary.
IN ANY CASE, all your numbers for both QBs show significantly higher values for indoors than outdoors. Seeing that Brady plays so many more games outdoors I think my original point is valid. Manning has an advantage statistically by playing in a dome that must be considered when comparing stats between the two.
Even in comparing games played outdoors Brady is at a greater disadvantage playing outdoors in New York and Buffalo than Manning is playing in Tennessee and Jacksonville as the weather tends to be more QB friendly in the south than the northeast.
by BabeParilli on Jul 11, 2009 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions
did you not read the reply to that post?
I may have screwed up the calcs on at least one, and I definitely didn’t use the PFR standard formula for ANY/A (it’s 45 for INTs and I think they recently finished up some research that convinced them to use 20 for TDs)
It’s pretty obvious which set is right. The set I didn’t reply to saying I used the wrong formula and may of messed up the calcs.
Why would you even ask?
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions
If you want to talk about arbitrary look at the QB Rating formula
Sacks aren’t exclusively the QB but it does an excellent job of picking out the QBs who eat the ball for sacks instead of making throws that are at all risky, and QBs with terrible awareness (Cassel early in the year).
Even accounting for indoor/outdoor/windy (which likely picks up a lot of the difference between TEN/JAX and NYJ/BUF) Peyton was better across the board.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions
I just asked mgrex03 to add QB rating to his list of stats to try,
so we’ll finallly settle the argument of which is a better stat to use.
My money is on ANY/A.
Now a proud annoyance on Stampede Blue, 18to88, Indy Football Report, and Phil B's blog.
Man, I need a life...
Random fact of the week from the empty void that is my mind: Joseph Addai, otherwise one as The Great Irrationally Hated One, is the first and only running back to rush for 1,000 yards in a season without starting a game in that season.
His "Finding the Winning Factors" series.
Now a proud annoyance on Stampede Blue, 18to88, Indy Football Report, and Phil B's blog.
Man, I need a life...
Random fact of the week from the empty void that is my mind: Joseph Addai, otherwise one as The Great Irrationally Hated One, is the first and only running back to rush for 1,000 yards in a season without starting a game in that season.
I would say
both formulas are arbitrary. Both contain the inherent flaw that YPA is an overwhelming influence. It is extremely difficult to quantify a QBs performance statistically.
The object of a team is to move the ball downfield and score, preferably a TD. Along the way it is mostly necessary to get 1st downs to continue the drive. If QB (A) throws 3 times and completes one for 12 yards and a 1st down and QB (B) throws 2 times and completes both for 5 yards each and a 1st down, QB (B) has the much better rating based on either statistical formula, yet QB (A) has done more for his team.
Using a formula that benefits Manning because he has been sacked less than Brady per attempt is rather disingenuous to the discussion in my opinion.
Why don’t we create a formula that weighs heavily on interception percentage so Brady will have the big edge? Manning’s career interception percent is some 20% greater than Brady’s.
I’m comfortable using the official NFL QB rating scheme to make my point, lacking a formula that truly measures a QBs effectiveness.
And common sense just says if a QB plays most of his games indoors and another plays most of their games outdoors the one playing indoors has an advantage statistically.
And I don’t understand what you mean here;
"""Even accounting for indoor/outdoor/windy (which likely picks up a lot of the difference between TEN/JAX and NYJ/BUF) Peyton was better across the board.""""
My point was that the games Manning has played in Jax and Tenn outdoors are likely to have had better conditions than the games Brady has had to play in Buff and NY. I think that’s obvious.
So even many of Manning’s “outdoor” games are in better conditions than Brady’s “outdoor” games.
I've always been critical of QB rating and favored ANY/A and FO's stats
So you can’t really call me applying them here disingenuous. I didn’t cook up a formula to give the results I wanted I applied the formula I’ve previously argued is better.
And common sense just says if a QB plays most of his games indoors and another plays most of their games outdoors the one playing indoors has an advantage statistically.
Just because something isn’t perfect doesn’t mean you shouldn’t use something better. If you held out for perfect instead of adopting improvements then you’d never move at all.
You’re moving the goalposts. The indoor/outdoor difference didn’t hold up like you wanted it to, so now you are defining the condition differences even more tightly to keep up the “Brady had worse conditions so he’s better” claim.
Yahoo has temperature data right next to the indoor/outdoor, show a difference in their performances in difference conditions, instead of saying that “of course two games a year in a more northern city skews the stats in a way that isn’t picked up by the outdoor/windy games”.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions
No way shake.
I don’t agree the ANY/A is better. It’s worse in my view. But that’s another debate.
As far as moving any goalposts that is just not so.
My original statement was: " Impossible to compare the two fairly. Manning plays most of his games in perfect dome conditions. Brady’s QB rating exceeds Manning’s both indoors and outdoors."
My contention remains exactly what it was; it is impossible to compare the two fairly. My statement is 100% true as well. Brady’s “QB Rating” exceeds Manning’s both indoors and outdoors.
YOU chose to bring in another type of stat which is certainly not as accepted as QB rating to illustrate Manning was actually better in both venues. I reject that stat as better or even that good. We can debate that another time if you like. Additionally, your stat helped prove my point that playing indoors is an advantage to playing outdoors as both players were better indoors.
I have not said Brady was a better QB. I have said it is impossible to fairly judge that because of the differences. Obviously even more comes into play when you add in the talent they have around them and the coaching.
As far as weather, temperature, precipitation and wind all factor in and affect each other outdoors. It isn’t nearly as likely to snow in Tenn as in NY. That is also an advantage Manning has. It’s that simple.
noone said that indoor/outdoor doesn't effect the stats
but go ahead and beat your chest for being right there, kick that strawman’s ass.
Actually run the stats instead of just throwing out things you think make enough sense to be true.
ANY/A has a very strong relationship to winning
http://www.stampedeblue.com/2009/2/18/762411/finding-the-winning-factor
Explain why QB Rating is better. ANY/A is more complete, gives a tangible result, and has a formula that makes more sense.
QB Rating is basically comp% with 20 yards=1 Comp, TD=2 Comp INT=-2.5 Comp
it stops giving credit for Comp% above 77.5% and below 30%,
stops giving credit for yards/att at over 12.5 and under 3,
no credit for TD% over 11.875%
no penalty for INT% over 9.5%
That is less arbitrary than ANY/A?
45 yards for an INT and 10 for a TD are from research from here it’s cited by FO, PFR, Advanced NFL stats, just about everyone that does stats work on football.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions
That's good enough for me.
We agree Manning has a statistical advantage playing indoors much more than Brady. Pardon me if that was obvious in your posts and I didn’t see that until now.
I don’t see any formula with a strong sack plugin as being optimal to the goal of comparing the relative performance of quarterbacks. That seems more a reflection of the performance of the offensive line than the quarterback. Sacks are not a passing stat. They are more a protection stat. Of course there is a strong correlation with sacks and winning because sacks tend to be drive killers. So are holding penalties. Should we plug them in as a passing stat because a QB might hold the ball too long and force a hold? Ahhh, no.
From my view neither formula emphasizes interceptions enough. They are not only drive killers but also create a situation where either it sets up the other team for a score, ends a very high probability chance of the team throwing the interception of scoring or gives the other team excellent field position. I’m sure an extremely strong correlation can be made about interceptions and losing.
In the meantime I’ll stand by QB Rating until I see something better as the best statistical measure. Obviously there are many other significant factors that must be considered when assessing then relative performance of quarterbacks. What is the quality of their protection? Is their running game strong enough to make the defense respect the run? What is the caliber of the receiving corps? What is their winning percentage? Do they have jewelry? Have they been to pro bowls? What is their record in the playoffs? etc.
So, Manning slightly edges out Brady using ANY/A for the different conditions because his sack percentage is lower. And Brady is higher in QB rating than Manning for indoor, outdoor and windy. I got it.
You don't think QBs effect their sack rates?
Kurt Warner was benched by the Giants in 2004 despite a QB rating of 86.5 (almost identical to Tom Brady’s in 2001-2006) because he was taking sacks on 12.3% of his dropbacks.
The Giants sack% was immediately halved with Eli Manning taking the snaps (6.2%)
Sacks matter. A QB with a quick release and good awareness is valuable and deserves credit for being able to avoid drive killers like sacks.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 10:04 PM EDT up reply actions
There is an
effect on sack stats depending on the QB, but I would say the quality of the blocking is a much more significant factor.
I do not think the QB’s effect on sacks is significant enough to have it as a permanent plugin for a QB rating formula in any case. The quality of the receivers is probably at least as much an influence on sacks as the QB as well. They have to create separation or it is foolish for the QB to throw. A sack is better than an INT.
Unfortunately, because of flawed stat formula some QBs might be thinking twice about throwing the ball away when their receivers are well covered.
by BabeParilli on Jul 11, 2009 10:33 PM EDT up reply actions
but a risky throw isn't always worse than a sack
a QB who will try to fit one in, instead of eating the ball for a sack can be more valuable if his arm and judgment are good enough.
Peyton was one of the least sacked (but most hit at midseason) QBs in the league behind the injury riddled line. The low sack totals weren’t because the line was good.
OL play already effects QB stats, QBs who make a risky throw instead of taking a sack are penalized, with more INTs and incompletions. Including sacks doesn’t muddy the waters with OL play, it gives balance. Eating the ball for a sack factors into QB eval too, instead of just throwing it away for into tight coverage.
QB rating favors the QBs who respond to pressure by curling up, by not counting the loss of yards and not counting the play as an attempt. QBs who respond to pressure by throwing the ball away or by trying to squeeze one into coverage, are saddled with the results of a bad situation.
ANY/A doesn’t add OL play into the eval it just covers all 3 ways QBs respond to pressure instead of just 2.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 10:50 PM EDT up reply actions
I will agree that
IN SOME CASES what you say pertains. But I cannot agree that it is significant enough to include that stat into the formula.
There are so many instances of a defender blitzing or just plain beating a lineman that the sack stat cannot be included in a fair evaluation of a QB’s performance.
by BabeParilli on Jul 11, 2009 10:59 PM EDT up reply actions
WRs drop passes
defenders get out of position, badly thrown balls get caught. All kinds of things outside of the QBs control can effect a QBs stats. It’s less about including more things and more about including things evenly.
Not including sacks is like not including incompletes because sometimes they are drops. Just because sometimes they are skewed doesn’t mean you shouldn’t include the results of all types of plays.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 11:04 PM EDT up reply actions
ok so
QB A is under pressure and always eats it for a sack,
no effect on his QB rating
QB B is under pressure and always tries to salvage some yards for the team. Sometimes he gets some yards, a lot of the time get just avoids a loss, a few times it ends badly. Since he’s a good QB he helps his team more than he hurts in the “under pressure” situations, but because the situation is so tough he isn’t as good as usual, so
his QB rating falls
QB Rating has a serious demonstrable bias.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 11:11 PM EDT up reply actions
I would use the word imperfect
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 11:33 PM EDT up reply actions
You are
much more forgiving than I.
Football is a tough nut to crack statistically. Everything is so dependent upon what others do that affects your results.
by BabeParilli on Jul 11, 2009 11:37 PM EDT up reply actions
inadequate implies useless to me
I think football stats, while far from perfect are very useful tools.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 11:39 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree
they are useful. I use inadequate in the sense they are not definitive.
by BabeParilli on Jul 11, 2009 11:42 PM EDT up reply actions
also all these have been using career numbers which introduce another difference between the two
their rookie years. Peyton was thrown into the starting job on what had been the worse team in football, where he put up a QB Rating 13 points below his next worst season and 23.5 points below his career ave. Brady rode the bench accumulating no stats to add into his career rate stats while he adjusted to the league.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 10:15 PM EDT up reply actions
To be fair
Brady was thrown on the field for a team that was 5-11 the previous year. How much of the improvement was due to him? How much of Manning’s poor play was Manning being a rookie?
It also works both ways. Manning has 4 more years of accumulated stats than Brady. Makes the totals more impressive to say the least.
by BabeParilli on Jul 11, 2009 10:24 PM EDT up reply actions
But Manning was thrown onto a team that was 3-13 the previous year. It took him one year to adjust, and then he lead his team to a 13-3 record.
by Colts_and_Cavs_in_09! on Jul 11, 2009 10:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Okay,
he took over an even suckier team than Brady. But those are the breaks. Brady missed a whole year because of the knee. These things can be taken into consideration, but it doesn’t change the stat somebody will be looking at in 20 years.
As I say. It is a futile debate. These two are first year eligible Hall of Famers. They just don’t come any better than this. Our great great great grandchildren will be debating this (assuming something drastic doesn’t change things).
by BabeParilli on Jul 11, 2009 10:38 PM EDT up reply actions
this whole discussion as been about rate stats
no one has said Peyton is better because his totals are better because Peyton has played for longer. Everyone here understands that totals aren’t useful for careers that didn’t either, start at the same time, or are both completed.
That doesn’t work the opposite way, that’s irrelevant to Peyton being thrown in and struggling as a rookie.
I would have run the numbers for them excluding their rookie years, but Yahoo’s breakdowns of conditions only go back to 2000.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 10:42 PM EDT up reply actions
As I said,
Brady was thrown in on what by any measure would be called a poor team. He took over an 0-2 team and went on to go 11-3 and win the Super Bowl.
Subtracting Manning’s rookie year might make the numbers a little better. Certainly subtracting the 28 interceptions would help.
But again that gets into woulda shoulda coulda. That can go on forever. What would Brady have done with a future Hall of Fame WR to throw to for 8 years?
by BabeParilli on Jul 11, 2009 11:07 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm pointing out that if you want an apples to apples comparison of career rate stats
it’s more accurate to go 2nd year and beyond to 2nd year and beyond. Not playing woulda coulda shoulda here.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 11:15 PM EDT up reply actions
What I have
consistently tried to say is that you can’t ever really get apples to apples. There are too many factors that contaminate the formula, whatever it may be.
by BabeParilli on Jul 11, 2009 11:26 PM EDT up reply actions
you can get closer
just because perfect is out of reach, doesn’t mean you should pass up better.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 11:28 PM EDT up reply actions
"it's not perfect"
isn’t a valid argument against “It’s better”
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 11:31 PM EDT up reply actions
I would say
it is far from perfect. I consider QB rating the better measure because I don’t think sacks are to be blamed on the QB enough to be put into the equation.
by BabeParilli on Jul 11, 2009 11:34 PM EDT up reply actions
OL play is already part of QB rating
players with better OLs will have better QB Ratings. ANY/A just eliminates the bias in including OL play. Not to mention INT, TD and completion bonus’ that make much more sense and have research behind them.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 11:38 PM EDT up reply actions
I will
concede that ANY/Y is a decent measure of TEAM passing stats. As a team’s “passing game” is much more than just the QB.
by BabeParilli on Jul 11, 2009 11:40 PM EDT up reply actions
just decent or better than QB rating
for team passing game?
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 11:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Better
at quantifying the team’s passing game.
by BabeParilli on Jul 11, 2009 11:43 PM EDT up reply actions
so you would argee with the statement
The Colts passing game under Manning has been more efficient than the Pats passing game under Brady under indoor, outdoor and windy conditions?
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions
I would.
I think over the time span we are considering the Colts have enjoyed a clearly better receiving corps and a bit better offensive line.
by BabeParilli on Jul 11, 2009 11:50 PM EDT up reply actions
that's the best I could ever hope to get from a Pats fan
Peyton Manning has led an objectively better pass O, elevating Tom Brady above him has to be done in subjective adjustments for teammates and team success.
I’m happy with it ending there.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 11:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Good enough.
Unlike some, I consider Manning a great QB, one of the very best ever. Denying this is foolish.
In my view, and a suspect you will disagree, what separates the two and puts Brady over the top is that he has ice water in his veins. He actually plays the same if it is a regular season game against a 4-8 team or the last minute of the Super Bowl. I am NOT implying Manning chokes, because I think he has taken way too much blame for playoff losses when he did play well. He is just a great QB who happens to be human. Brady is an alien ;).
by BabeParilli on Jul 11, 2009 11:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah,
Manning has mostly had better weapons at his disposal than Brady. I think that is common knowledge.
by BabeParilli on Jul 12, 2009 12:01 AM EDT up reply actions
Man.
Shake debunked this in the comments a while ago, but I can’t seem to find it. Maybe someone else can…
Now a proud annoyance on Stampede Blue, 18to88, Indy Football Report, and Phil B's blog.
Man, I need a life...
Random fact of the week from the empty void that is my mind: Joseph Addai, otherwise one as The Great Irrationally Hated One, is the first and only running back to rush for 1,000 yards in a season without starting a game in that season.
Nope.
It’s true. Brady is better in windy conditions too.
But it only stands to reason that a QB will do better indoors than outdoors over time.
Who said anything about wind?
Now a proud annoyance on Stampede Blue, 18to88, Indy Football Report, and Phil B's blog.
Man, I need a life...
Random fact of the week from the empty void that is my mind: Joseph Addai, otherwise one as The Great Irrationally Hated One, is the first and only running back to rush for 1,000 yards in a season without starting a game in that season.
Opinions differ.
That’s what happens when you are discussing two of the greatest to ever play the game. I’ll take Brady of course, and so do this majority…. (54% to 46%)
http://sports.yahoo.com/fantasy/blog/roto_arcade?keyword=Spin+Doctors
Hurry in, you might tip the almost 20K sample, it’s still open.
you might want to note that the poll is for fantasy football this upcoming season
that’s somewhat important to mention, since it isn’t the question we are dealing with here.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 10, 2009 9:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah,
I figured anybody who looked at the link would see that it was about who better to have on your fantasy team. I think it’s pertinent when discussing who football fans think is the better QB right now. It isn’t the end-all, but it is probably as good as the poll this thread is about that’s not linked.
A fantasy football poll!?!?
Dude, you’re gonna have to come with some better stuff than a stupid fantasy football poll.
"Peyton Manning flow, I just go no huddle."
- Lil' Wayne, Put Some Keys on That
My two cents...
Well you can’t really say that Brady is better because he has had to play in worse conditions. Brady was drafted by a team that plays in bad weather, Manning was drafted by a dome team. That isn’t his fault. We have no idea how things would work out had it gone the other way around, by now Brady and Manning have grown accustomed to their respective climates. Perhaps Brady WOULD have been better than Manning had he been drafted by, say, the Giants or Steelers, but he wasn’t. We will never know what Manning would be like if he played in cold weather more often than not.
by Colts_and_Cavs_in_09! on Jul 11, 2009 7:08 PM EDT reply actions
Well we sorta do know.
They have both played under both conditions. Their relative performances can be compared under similar conditions.
If I run a race with no burden and my time is better than yours with no burden, and if I run a race with a 20 pound burden and my time is better than yours when you run the same race with a 20 pound burden, who is the better racer?
There is a lot to consider when determining who is better, Brady or Manning. Statistics are not the end-all anyway; but they are the most significant factor.
I think Brady is better. But that is splitting hairs. They both possess greatness. If I were a Colt’s fan I would probably think Manning was better ;).
One thing I am 100% sure of; Rothlisburger doesn’t even belong in the conversation with these two guys.
by BabeParilli on Jul 11, 2009 10:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Big Ben fell off the path when his rate stats plumetted as his attempts went from 20 a game to 30 per.
First two seasons looked very good,
last 3, no so much
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 10:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes,
he had a running game to insulate him then.
by BabeParilli on Jul 11, 2009 11:13 PM EDT up reply actions
your analogy ignores that we have two methods of timing
which are giving opposite results (and mine is clearly superior).
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 10:57 PM EDT up reply actions
True.
But I was just illustrating the point that the two things CAN be compared as the poster was claiming they couldn’t.
But you must concede that either method of timing we use still shows both runners are faster without the 20 pound weight. And in comparing the runners times in all their races attempting to determine who the better runner was we would need to consider that one of them ran with the 20 pound weight a lot more often than the other.
by BabeParilli on Jul 11, 2009 11:12 PM EDT up reply actions
man
really giving it to that straw man.
NO ONE SAID THAT PLAYING INDOORS DOESN’T HELP A QBs STATS. The argument is about how to appropriately measure QB performance so we know which QB was more efficient across all conditions.
That's big talk for a little guy,
but I'm walkin' without reply.
-Lil Wayne "Mr. Postman"
by shake n bake on Jul 11, 2009 11:17 PM EDT up reply actions
I can show you everything with stats... except the truth
I am going to stick with that and say “I’m a colts fan, Manning is better, nothing will change my mind.”
by Colts_and_Cavs_in_09! on Jul 12, 2009 11:36 AM EDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
