-
Smogon Premier League is here and the team collection is now available. Support your team!
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
The Everything NFL Thread - 2013-2014 Edition
- Thread starter Killah
- Start date
- Status
Palmer without question.
I'm just gonna say this right now, Matt Schaub is just terrible. Matt Schaub's passes are much more wobbly and unpredictable then RGIII. Also he proves a point with something that few QBs can do that Matt Schaub can't do. A good QB learns how to work with his rookie lineup team to score wins. Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, and even subpar QBs like Tony Romo and Brian Hoyer show that you can make a good team from a mediocre list of receivers and running backs. To Matt Schaub and the Texans, step your game up. You are on the verge of Jacksonville territory so please...Get a better QB.That isn't Castle, Farve, or anyone named Manning. >>;
As for Palmer; Palmer is a good upgrade to Arizona that they haven't seen in a long time. Despite losing against the 49's (And now the Seahawks), it's an upgrade over last year and I would pick him without question. However, he needs work on throwing out to the field. He's benn mostly throwing the football to areas that are double or even tripled covered. He may be a bit off, but he certainly does have potential to take the Cardinals on a win streak in the near future.
I'm just gonna say this right now, Matt Schaub is just terrible. Matt Schaub's passes are much more wobbly and unpredictable then RGIII. Also he proves a point with something that few QBs can do that Matt Schaub can't do. A good QB learns how to work with his rookie lineup team to score wins. Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, and even subpar QBs like Tony Romo and Brian Hoyer show that you can make a good team from a mediocre list of receivers and running backs. To Matt Schaub and the Texans, step your game up. You are on the verge of Jacksonville territory so please...Get a better QB.
As for Palmer; Palmer is a good upgrade to Arizona that they haven't seen in a long time. Despite losing against the 49's (And now the Seahawks), it's an upgrade over last year and I would pick him without question. However, he needs work on throwing out to the field. He's benn mostly throwing the football to areas that are double or even tripled covered. He may be a bit off, but he certainly does have potential to take the Cardinals on a win streak in the near future.
Lol. So Brian Hoyer and his 2 game sample size made Cleveland a good team apparently.
Schaub is terrible but Palmer is even worse.
So a good QB and he's subpar? Kind of impossible to be both.
Schaub is terrible but Palmer is even worse.
So a good QB and he's subpar? Kind of impossible to be both.
Last season the Cardinals had 11 TD and 21 INT at the QB position, an upgrade would be almost impossible not to achieve. Palmer is an upgrade only in the way that somebody who can stand up but weighs 700 pounds is more mobile than somebody paralyzed from the neck down - he has 8 TD and 13 INT, the NFL equivalent of a shot chucker or .230 power hitter with a bad glove. I hate that it has to be this way - I loved watching year 1 & year 2 Palmer so much, he was the NFL's "future", and for an injury to turn a career into this is sad...but the guy is fucking garbage as of right now.
I was not calling Romo amazing, I was commenting about how stupid (or how much of a troll) a person has to be to call a quarterback who puts up a career 2:1 TD/INT ratio subpar. You lack the knowledge or self-control as far as hyperbole to make a decent fucking observation.
I was not calling Romo amazing, I was commenting about how stupid (or how much of a troll) a person has to be to call a quarterback who puts up a career 2:1 TD/INT ratio subpar. You lack the knowledge or self-control as far as hyperbole to make a decent fucking observation.
I do have the information. It's just that I have a mixed view from the people who defend Tony Romo and the people who don't.
The reason why i'm calling him good is because when he doesn't have pressure he the best god damn QB for the Cowboys. His passes are perfect, turning his offense into something fierce. When Tony Romo is in the zone, literally almost nothing can topple him.
Of course with that comes his really faulty moments. He chokes a lot of the time, last Sunday, last year against the redskins, a few years ago against the Seahawks. I know. It's in the past and for a QB he makes a lot of good stats. But good stats does NOT make a good QB.
Look at Robert Griffin The III from last year. Look at Matt Schaub from last year. Hell, look at Eli Manning from last year. All of these guys have their faults and their strengths. It just seems as those Tony Romo has to battle a lot of the time getting the pressure off. But believe me, when he has nothing to fear, he puts the Cowboys to a win.
Also, some disclosure on the battle on Brian Hoyer. Compared Brian Hoyer to Brandon Weeden.
....It's not pretty isn't it?
The reason why i'm calling him good is because when he doesn't have pressure he the best god damn QB for the Cowboys. His passes are perfect, turning his offense into something fierce. When Tony Romo is in the zone, literally almost nothing can topple him.
Of course with that comes his really faulty moments. He chokes a lot of the time, last Sunday, last year against the redskins, a few years ago against the Seahawks. I know. It's in the past and for a QB he makes a lot of good stats. But good stats does NOT make a good QB.
Look at Robert Griffin The III from last year. Look at Matt Schaub from last year. Hell, look at Eli Manning from last year. All of these guys have their faults and their strengths. It just seems as those Tony Romo has to battle a lot of the time getting the pressure off. But believe me, when he has nothing to fear, he puts the Cowboys to a win.
Also, some disclosure on the battle on Brian Hoyer. Compared Brian Hoyer to Brandon Weeden.
....It's not pretty isn't it?
So to sum up your post you call Romo a good QB but his good stats doesnt make him a good QB??? I feel like Alice. Is the rabbit hole around here?
Your point? Andy Dalton looks like a franchise QB when you compare him to Weeden.
He's both!
Because think about this for a second. Are you gonna use stats as a reliability? Humans are unpredictable. How are you gonna predict bad passes, interceptions, or chokes? Are you just gonna assume that someone that has a 2:1 TD/INT ratio is not gonna choke and be consistent all the way around?
Every. Single. God Damn Quarterback. Has this problem. Tom Brady did in his game vs the Bengals. Payton Manning did in 2012 in the playoffs. RGIII did it on the playoff wild card game last year. Roethlisberger last year against the Browns. Matt Ryan against the Jets this year. And Tony Romo each year has done something out of line that doesn't make him the best that he is but at the same time he is a beast of a quarterback.
It's all into experience. Don't look at stats, don't look at what NFL says, look at what's ON the screen. When you see that one person that makes good pick, get his receivers open and gets everyone into a possession to run. You know, that he is gonna turn heads in the NFL. Tony Romo is a beast that has problems. Forget the stats about him, just look at the games you saw him play to judge your own opinion. When he is in trouble, he cannot do it for the Cowboys. Leave him open, and you will wish that you hadn't done that.
[Sorry if I sound like an outsider giving my opinion but I don't like how we should use stats to determine who is top champ. If we were using stats for every game, upsets would never exist and quite frankily. The Ravens would have never won the Super Bowl last year.]
Because think about this for a second. Are you gonna use stats as a reliability? Humans are unpredictable. How are you gonna predict bad passes, interceptions, or chokes? Are you just gonna assume that someone that has a 2:1 TD/INT ratio is not gonna choke and be consistent all the way around?
Every. Single. God Damn Quarterback. Has this problem. Tom Brady did in his game vs the Bengals. Payton Manning did in 2012 in the playoffs. RGIII did it on the playoff wild card game last year. Roethlisberger last year against the Browns. Matt Ryan against the Jets this year. And Tony Romo each year has done something out of line that doesn't make him the best that he is but at the same time he is a beast of a quarterback.
It's all into experience. Don't look at stats, don't look at what NFL says, look at what's ON the screen. When you see that one person that makes good pick, get his receivers open and gets everyone into a possession to run. You know, that he is gonna turn heads in the NFL. Tony Romo is a beast that has problems. Forget the stats about him, just look at the games you saw him play to judge your own opinion. When he is in trouble, he cannot do it for the Cowboys. Leave him open, and you will wish that you hadn't done that.
[Sorry if I sound like an outsider giving my opinion but I don't like how we should use stats to determine who is top champ. If we were using stats for every game, upsets would never exist and quite frankily. The Ravens would have never won the Super Bowl last year.]
Par means average (it could also mean something like the expectable starting point for qualified whatever), and 2:1 TD/INT ratio guys are so far above par that I had to actually call you out over your ridiculous trolling bullshit. It is not about some complicated statistical argument, par is something like a guy who cannot get you past 25 TDs in a season (if someone really wanted to be stingy, 27-28 would be a stricter starting point, if one wanted to be fairer 22-23 a starting point). Turnovers have a larger luck element, so while low turnovers are obviously nice, you have to allow for a lot of variance with those and there would be no good number to go with.
I like that you judge your false view of what actually happens in football games based on "what you see", but were too blind to see that Flacco, never anything close to more than a game manager at any point in his career, had the luckiest postseason run in league history and was still not better than something like the 15th best QB coming into this season. "What you see" (imagine in your case) apparently trumps the best interpretation of reality just because of which team wins or loses specific games.
I like that you judge your false view of what actually happens in football games based on "what you see", but were too blind to see that Flacco, never anything close to more than a game manager at any point in his career, had the luckiest postseason run in league history and was still not better than something like the 15th best QB coming into this season. "What you see" (imagine in your case) apparently trumps the best interpretation of reality just because of which team wins or loses specific games.
Knee injury messed him up a bit, but an elbow injury (which he simply rested and didn't get tommy john surgery for or anything) is probably more to blame.
It's also likely that his decision-making has simply gone down the shitter for some reason or another. I don't see enough of Palmer to really be able to tell :/
A couple things, CKs mobility comparison is too dark for this thread.
Romo doesnt have bad/average receivers. Hes always had good receivers and one of the most reliable TEs ever. He also had Terrel FUCKING Owens. Enough said.
Romos stats are very similar to peyton manning early in his career. Thats crazy. He probably wont throw for 49 TDs ever or win five NFL MVP awards but Romo is actually not that off from Peyton. Closer than brady and brees at least. Tbh brees and brady are completely different in terms of style so thats why i may be seeing it that way. But yeah romo is a younger peyton right now. A poor mans peyton with chances of hitting that level of play once in his career.
Romo doesnt have bad/average receivers. Hes always had good receivers and one of the most reliable TEs ever. He also had Terrel FUCKING Owens. Enough said.
Romos stats are very similar to peyton manning early in his career. Thats crazy. He probably wont throw for 49 TDs ever or win five NFL MVP awards but Romo is actually not that off from Peyton. Closer than brady and brees at least. Tbh brees and brady are completely different in terms of style so thats why i may be seeing it that way. But yeah romo is a younger peyton right now. A poor mans peyton with chances of hitting that level of play once in his career.
uh...Romo is closer to Peyton this season, through 6 games, who cares? Brees' accomplishments are far and away better than Peyton's every other year of the last 6 years (which is nbd, Peyton is old and Brees throws more...although it is a big deal in the postseason where Brees is 3x better)
WaterBomb, an injury does not always ruin you right away. Palmer put up a 32/12 in his second year in a year where no one else scored as much (P. Manning, Brady, and Brees were 2/3/4). He was #2 the next year...it was after the injury, but I do not see how a player that good randomly falls apart for life without the injury doing it.
WaterBomb, an injury does not always ruin you right away. Palmer put up a 32/12 in his second year in a year where no one else scored as much (P. Manning, Brady, and Brees were 2/3/4). He was #2 the next year...it was after the injury, but I do not see how a player that good randomly falls apart for life without the injury doing it.
What did you just say...? Oh no you didn't.
Brees GOAT Peyton
422/670(63%) 5177 43/19(leads NFL) 96 400/583(68%) 4659 37/11 105
448/658(68%) 4620 33/22(2nd in NFL) 90 450/679(66%) 4700 33/17 91
363/514(70%) 4388 34/11 109 393/571(68%) 4500 33/16 99
413/635(65%) 5069 34/17 96 371/555(66%) 4002 27/12 95
440/652(67%) 4423 28/18 89 337/515(65%) 4040 31/14 98
356/554(64%) 4418 26/11 96 362/557(65%) 4397 31/9 101
The last six years excluding 2011... That was a weird year when defenses decided not to play. Brady and Stafford had crazy years. Peyton would have had one as well. Probably better than Brees'. We can't say so I just leave that year out.
Peyton clearly wins 2012, 2010, 2007 and 2006. In the last 6 years that they both played Peyton has been better 4 times. Only twice has brees played statistically better than Peyton during that time. And hell even 2009 is arguable. So really Brees has only had one better year than Peyton. And I didn't even bring up the ridiculous 49/9 season. So all I can say is NEXT. Brees can't fucking compare to Peyton. Who you got next? Who you want to put up against the greatest of all time?
With that asinine argument out of the way, lets marvel at how stupid these stats are.
Romo is closer to what? It's just six games dude. Romo didn't just have the greatest 6 games to start the season ever. Hes not close at all to this years Peyton. Once the year is done Romos season will look similar to one of the above.... But that's just 1 season. And he wouldn't even be a top 5 qb this year anyway(im assuming he has bad games). Actually I really don't know what your point here is. Are you trying to compare Romo to the GOAT? Are you saying Romo through six games has similar stats to old peyton? I'd agree there for now, but I really would wait on that. The NFL is streaky that way. Once the year is over you can say Romo has had a peyton-like season. And even then we have to consider that the game is a lot different than even 2007. So just like we use a curve to compare QBs from different eras we would probably have to use a curve to compare this years Romo to say 2008 Peyton. Dominance is a better way to compare them. Peyton through out his career has been the most dominant qb. Romo has yet to be that even for 1 year. So yes, 2013 Romo will have better stats than 2008 Peyton, but that doesn't mean he had a better season or was better.
Brees GOAT Peyton
422/670(63%) 5177 43/19(leads NFL) 96 400/583(68%) 4659 37/11 105
448/658(68%) 4620 33/22(2nd in NFL) 90 450/679(66%) 4700 33/17 91
363/514(70%) 4388 34/11 109 393/571(68%) 4500 33/16 99
413/635(65%) 5069 34/17 96 371/555(66%) 4002 27/12 95
440/652(67%) 4423 28/18 89 337/515(65%) 4040 31/14 98
356/554(64%) 4418 26/11 96 362/557(65%) 4397 31/9 101
The last six years excluding 2011... That was a weird year when defenses decided not to play. Brady and Stafford had crazy years. Peyton would have had one as well. Probably better than Brees'. We can't say so I just leave that year out.
Peyton clearly wins 2012, 2010, 2007 and 2006. In the last 6 years that they both played Peyton has been better 4 times. Only twice has brees played statistically better than Peyton during that time. And hell even 2009 is arguable. So really Brees has only had one better year than Peyton. And I didn't even bring up the ridiculous 49/9 season. So all I can say is NEXT. Brees can't fucking compare to Peyton. Who you got next? Who you want to put up against the greatest of all time?
With that asinine argument out of the way, lets marvel at how stupid these stats are.
Romo is closer to what? It's just six games dude. Romo didn't just have the greatest 6 games to start the season ever. Hes not close at all to this years Peyton. Once the year is done Romos season will look similar to one of the above.... But that's just 1 season. And he wouldn't even be a top 5 qb this year anyway(im assuming he has bad games). Actually I really don't know what your point here is. Are you trying to compare Romo to the GOAT? Are you saying Romo through six games has similar stats to old peyton? I'd agree there for now, but I really would wait on that. The NFL is streaky that way. Once the year is over you can say Romo has had a peyton-like season. And even then we have to consider that the game is a lot different than even 2007. So just like we use a curve to compare QBs from different eras we would probably have to use a curve to compare this years Romo to say 2008 Peyton. Dominance is a better way to compare them. Peyton through out his career has been the most dominant qb. Romo has yet to be that even for 1 year. So yes, 2013 Romo will have better stats than 2008 Peyton, but that doesn't mean he had a better season or was better.
Last edited:
Peyton is ahead of everyone else in the present and almost all, if not all, that have played the game.
Brees beat Peyton Manning every recent year from 2008-last except 2010. You can spam all you want to make yourself feel better or whatever? Brees is just the most consistent guy in the world at getting you 2-3 TD and 0-1 turnovers in a game when he needs to do it. You also blatantly disregarded Brees 46/14 season, because I guess the only thing you can see with your blind, gouged out eyes is completion %, literally the only factor you seem to consider.
I do not know why you flew off the handle over a non-issue, or why anybody else likes that you inaccurately flew off the handle. You are obviously incredibly, improbably bad at statistical comparison, but this comparison was irrelevant - of course Brees' numbers are better, the guy was younger. The same thing will likely happen down the road for Brees playoff statistics v Rodgers playoff statistics - right now Brees is slightly ahead in god tier completion %, slightly behind in god tier y/a, a bit more ahead in TD/INT with a ridiculous 22/4 to trump Rodgers' ridiculous 18/5, but it will probably change down the road since Rodgers (presumably/hopefully!) has more time left in his career.
(and that you call P. Manning the goat over and over is just to deflect over how bad Eli Manning is, to have something to hype, etc...Brees and Rodgers are ridiculously superior players to P. Manning, but I would not be upset whichever way someone wanted to go on Brady v Manning, the fact even that is unclear just shows how bloated his statistics are though, and how badly he crumbles each time a game actually matters)
I would be totally down for Packers/Broncos or Saints/Broncos as a Super Bowl, I am extremely convinced the wrong team would be the underdog and that I would get to put my money where my mouth is, like I always do :)
The last part of your rant was just plainly stupid, what in the everloving fuck are you even on about? You claimed Romo was closer to Peyton than Brees or Brady. It was just inaccurate, insanely accurate no matter what possible angle you were coming from, especially if the only angle was "2013 Peyton v 2013 Brees v 2013 Romo" through a whopping 6 games of the season. 6 games is not an adequate sample size for much anything except conjecture about what should hopefully keep coming. I pointed out it was inaccurate in like 10 fucking words, and you come back with whatever this (AGAIN INACCURATE) rant was. No other part of Romo's career is similar to any decent part of P. Manning's career, since Romo has been up and down and never really churned out identical statistics for multiple seasons in a row.
I do not know why you flew off the handle over a non-issue, or why anybody else likes that you inaccurately flew off the handle. You are obviously incredibly, improbably bad at statistical comparison, but this comparison was irrelevant - of course Brees' numbers are better, the guy was younger. The same thing will likely happen down the road for Brees playoff statistics v Rodgers playoff statistics - right now Brees is slightly ahead in god tier completion %, slightly behind in god tier y/a, a bit more ahead in TD/INT with a ridiculous 22/4 to trump Rodgers' ridiculous 18/5, but it will probably change down the road since Rodgers (presumably/hopefully!) has more time left in his career.
(and that you call P. Manning the goat over and over is just to deflect over how bad Eli Manning is, to have something to hype, etc...Brees and Rodgers are ridiculously superior players to P. Manning, but I would not be upset whichever way someone wanted to go on Brady v Manning, the fact even that is unclear just shows how bloated his statistics are though, and how badly he crumbles each time a game actually matters)
I would be totally down for Packers/Broncos or Saints/Broncos as a Super Bowl, I am extremely convinced the wrong team would be the underdog and that I would get to put my money where my mouth is, like I always do :)
The last part of your rant was just plainly stupid, what in the everloving fuck are you even on about? You claimed Romo was closer to Peyton than Brees or Brady. It was just inaccurate, insanely accurate no matter what possible angle you were coming from, especially if the only angle was "2013 Peyton v 2013 Brees v 2013 Romo" through a whopping 6 games of the season. 6 games is not an adequate sample size for much anything except conjecture about what should hopefully keep coming. I pointed out it was inaccurate in like 10 fucking words, and you come back with whatever this (AGAIN INACCURATE) rant was. No other part of Romo's career is similar to any decent part of P. Manning's career, since Romo has been up and down and never really churned out identical statistics for multiple seasons in a row.
Last edited:
What?
2012: Peyton had less yards on less attempts and a couple less TDs. He also put up 8 less INTs, higher passer rating and completion %. Advantage Peyton.
2010: Same TDs, Brees less yds on less attempts. Again, way more INTs and second in the NFL. Advantage Peyton.
2009: Slight advantage brees with less attempts, higher % and 1 more TD. Advantage Brees.
2008: Slight advantage brees again with way more TDs which isn't compensated by Peytons fewer INTs. Advantage Brees.
2007: Peyton with less yds but fewer attempts, way less INTs and more TDs. Advantage Peyton.
2006: Not even a comparison. Advantage Peyton.
So you must live in fantasy land where Peyton puts better numbers the last six years they played in the league together yet somehow has worse stats.. that doesn't even make any sense. 2 years. Only two years did brees do better than Peyton. And did you not read? Peyton missed 2011. What do you want me to compare Brees season to? I'll just bring up 49/9 to match the mediocre 46/14. Turnover machine much? Hehe 46/14, is that supposed to be impressive? *cough*49-9*cough*
Did you miss the part where Peyton had a 49/9 season and most seasons he has either more TDs or a couple less than brees with fewer INTs. Peyton is better at scoring 3 TDs and no INT ever in league history and has been doing it longer.
His numbers aren't better wtf. Only two years, the rest is just more yds on more attempts. I guess 2 years equals every year in your book.
lol bring in the playoffs. Every Manning hater always brings in the playoffs. He puts up the best stats in the game every year that can't be beat by anyone alone so you have to resort to a couple of games. Where there is such a small sample size for everybody not named Peyton Manning. I guess Flacco is better than Peyton right?
Stats say otherwise. So all the proof you have of Brees being better than Peyton is your opinion(as stats don't back you up at all)? than why didn't you just say so. I don't care if you think that. Opinion is opinion. Peyton has been the most dominant QB in the league since his sophomore year. This is backed up by the numbers, and his 4 MVP Awards. Which are really a very good way to see dominance over a period of time. During his legendary career Peyton was the best qb 4 times. Brees has been the best qb in the league exactly 0 times. Always being beaten by Rodgers, Brady or Peyton.
And again, quit bringing the playoffs man. You sound just like every moron who claimed Flacco is a top 10 qb because of those couple of games. With the greatest sample size, Peyton has put up the best numbers, has been the most dominant player at any position ever during his career and just makes you look silly bringing up a couple of games.
I said it myself, I have no idea what you meant. I just meant that if you looked at Romos career stats and compared them to Peytons they'd be similar. Romo is in what? his 8 year starting? Through 8 years he has very similar stats to peytons 8 years(or however long Romo has been a starter). I used to think Romo was a poor mans Rodgers but realized hes more like Peyton.
specific proof of why I am right and you are wrong btw http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2003/how-many-points-turnover-worth (the answer is somewhere around 4 points..., but probably slightly less in reality and not a strictly numbers world)
2008: 34/17 > 27/12, especially with an extra 1000 yards
2009: 34/11 beats the fucking shit out of 33/16, especially when you set the all time completion % record and beat the other guy blood in a Super Bowl
2010: 33/17 beats 33/22 (Peyton's only clear cut win), the yards were close enough to be irrelevant based on the amount of attempts each had, the better completion % for Brees negated by the extra turnovers
2011: Peyton does not play, and you pretend like 46/14 is not a great season with 5476 yards is irrelevant because idk trolling
2012: 43/19 beats 37/11, he had one 0/5 game and I really do not give a shit - the way that has won Super Bowls the last 6 years is with a killer D or with a QB who can get you the highest rewards, not the one who plays the safest (and the 0/5 game did not really affect a playoff bid, losing their coach and losing the first month of the season & their defense did...gave up the 2nd most points in the NFL lol)
I really think you do not understand that Peyton Manning has the worst Super Bowl winning run of all time besides Johnny Unitas, that he is nothing but a dink and dunker (maybe the best of all time, but it is all he is), and that a touchdown is worth way more (by expected value etc) than an interception. You can feel free to rule the seasons however you want, and you can feel free to ignore that the cumulative weight of what Brees did being massively superior by picking at the individual seasons (I do not care if you ignore it because again younger Brees beating older Manning is really, really not a big deal...the reason Brees is a massively superior QB lies in other factors, only Joe Montana and Aaron Rodgers really compare to Brees all time). I really think you do not understand why your own team won Super Bowls, why Brees toasted Manning in the Super Bowl, or what is specifically wrong with P. Manning's playstyle (and that his success this season is due almost wholly to adding a free Wes Welker to that playstyle). Joe Flacco is a mediocre quarterback, but he honestly might be better than B. Manning in the postseason because B. Manning only has 7 fucking games with more than 1 TD in 20 times. That is not a small sample size, it tells us everything we need to know about the man, especially with his incredibly fucking bad Super Bowl winning run. Yes, Joe Flacco winning a Super Bowl was bullshit - so was Peyton Manning! Look it up, I bet you have absolutely no idea how bad it was.
2008: 34/17 > 27/12, especially with an extra 1000 yards
2009: 34/11 beats the fucking shit out of 33/16, especially when you set the all time completion % record and beat the other guy blood in a Super Bowl
2010: 33/17 beats 33/22 (Peyton's only clear cut win), the yards were close enough to be irrelevant based on the amount of attempts each had, the better completion % for Brees negated by the extra turnovers
2011: Peyton does not play, and you pretend like 46/14 is not a great season with 5476 yards is irrelevant because idk trolling
2012: 43/19 beats 37/11, he had one 0/5 game and I really do not give a shit - the way that has won Super Bowls the last 6 years is with a killer D or with a QB who can get you the highest rewards, not the one who plays the safest (and the 0/5 game did not really affect a playoff bid, losing their coach and losing the first month of the season & their defense did...gave up the 2nd most points in the NFL lol)
I really think you do not understand that Peyton Manning has the worst Super Bowl winning run of all time besides Johnny Unitas, that he is nothing but a dink and dunker (maybe the best of all time, but it is all he is), and that a touchdown is worth way more (by expected value etc) than an interception. You can feel free to rule the seasons however you want, and you can feel free to ignore that the cumulative weight of what Brees did being massively superior by picking at the individual seasons (I do not care if you ignore it because again younger Brees beating older Manning is really, really not a big deal...the reason Brees is a massively superior QB lies in other factors, only Joe Montana and Aaron Rodgers really compare to Brees all time). I really think you do not understand why your own team won Super Bowls, why Brees toasted Manning in the Super Bowl, or what is specifically wrong with P. Manning's playstyle (and that his success this season is due almost wholly to adding a free Wes Welker to that playstyle). Joe Flacco is a mediocre quarterback, but he honestly might be better than B. Manning in the postseason because B. Manning only has 7 fucking games with more than 1 TD in 20 times. That is not a small sample size, it tells us everything we need to know about the man, especially with his incredibly fucking bad Super Bowl winning run. Yes, Joe Flacco winning a Super Bowl was bullshit - so was Peyton Manning! Look it up, I bet you have absolutely no idea how bad it was.
Last edited:
Again, why the hell does the playoffs even matter? It isn't like hes was putting up good numbers, showed potential but never could win a sb(because of the team mostly). No, this guy is the best the position has ever seen since his rookie year and the most dominant player at any position ever. Even if Peyton had lost against the bears he'd be the greatest ever.
Drew Turnover machine Brees hasn't been better the past six years. Hasn't put up better numbers, has literally not even been a top 3 QB during that span.
So i'll just end it with the MVPs. How many times has Dree Brees won it? How many times has been the best player at any position for a year during his career? 0? Is that right? Say that again? 0? Why are we even arguing anymore? Peyton has like 3 right? Oh wat? He has 4??? No way! Thats dumb. No player can have 4 of those. So yeah, bring this up when Brees has two minimum or has been the best qb in the league for at least 1 year.
Drew Turnover machine Brees hasn't been better the past six years. Hasn't put up better numbers, has literally not even been a top 3 QB during that span.
So i'll just end it with the MVPs. How many times has Dree Brees won it? How many times has been the best player at any position for a year during his career? 0? Is that right? Say that again? 0? Why are we even arguing anymore? Peyton has like 3 right? Oh wat? He has 4??? No way! Thats dumb. No player can have 4 of those. So yeah, bring this up when Brees has two minimum or has been the best qb in the league for at least 1 year.
Last edited:
steve mcnair and rich gannon both have mvps move over drew brees
i actually have a personal philosophy atm that people are entitled to opinions but im actually really close to just saying please leave this thread. if you want to say you think manning is better based on the eye test then that's pretty much what you have to do because i defend manning vs ck all the time but do you realize how ludicrous your argument is?
1.) why do playoffs matter? is this a joke? playoffs reveal so much about qbs because they're going to consistently be vs the better competition there and because this league is all about winning games and championships. and drew brees consistently is a winning qb who puts up ridiculous postseason numbers compared to that 7/20 stat from manning. if you have to ask why do playoffs matter then you've lost sight of football completely
2.) drew brees throws the ball more, all that matters is that hes getting significantly more tds than ints which he clearly is. bringing up he is a turnover machine is just illogical at this point
3.) if you're pretending mvps prove anything then you need to get your head examined. what kind of shitty argument is that? its absurd, you dont get to impose your own ridiculous lines of what constitutes a "great qb" during that span, especially with an award as meaningless as mvp. it'd be like telling rodgers he needs to throw 50 tds for 2 seasons or he'll never be comparable to the greats its just a line you've drawn for inexplicable reasons to try and make a point.
4.) wait who are the 3 qbs better than brees in the last 6 years? huhwhat
imo manning > brees but thats because im incredibly biased and just think manning is just an unrealistic player probably because ive watched him in person multiple times. there's also something to be said for brees getting to run with a winner like payton for years while mannings been stuck with a cast of screwball head coaches who have ruined good thing after good thing. idk if thats enough to technically bridge the gap between how much better brees is when it comes to the postseason outside of the "manning had shit luck with his poor defenses" argument (then again payton went down with broken leg and a bountyhunt scandal, rough times for coaching im sure and even rougher on brees, also we've seen that defense when something falls apart, the crumple).
i actually have a personal philosophy atm that people are entitled to opinions but im actually really close to just saying please leave this thread. if you want to say you think manning is better based on the eye test then that's pretty much what you have to do because i defend manning vs ck all the time but do you realize how ludicrous your argument is?
1.) why do playoffs matter? is this a joke? playoffs reveal so much about qbs because they're going to consistently be vs the better competition there and because this league is all about winning games and championships. and drew brees consistently is a winning qb who puts up ridiculous postseason numbers compared to that 7/20 stat from manning. if you have to ask why do playoffs matter then you've lost sight of football completely
2.) drew brees throws the ball more, all that matters is that hes getting significantly more tds than ints which he clearly is. bringing up he is a turnover machine is just illogical at this point
3.) if you're pretending mvps prove anything then you need to get your head examined. what kind of shitty argument is that? its absurd, you dont get to impose your own ridiculous lines of what constitutes a "great qb" during that span, especially with an award as meaningless as mvp. it'd be like telling rodgers he needs to throw 50 tds for 2 seasons or he'll never be comparable to the greats its just a line you've drawn for inexplicable reasons to try and make a point.
4.) wait who are the 3 qbs better than brees in the last 6 years? huhwhat
imo manning > brees but thats because im incredibly biased and just think manning is just an unrealistic player probably because ive watched him in person multiple times. there's also something to be said for brees getting to run with a winner like payton for years while mannings been stuck with a cast of screwball head coaches who have ruined good thing after good thing. idk if thats enough to technically bridge the gap between how much better brees is when it comes to the postseason outside of the "manning had shit luck with his poor defenses" argument (then again payton went down with broken leg and a bountyhunt scandal, rough times for coaching im sure and even rougher on brees, also we've seen that defense when something falls apart, the crumple).
I think something should be said of Manning's leadership qualities, which isn't necessarily reflective of his on-field prowess (which is still really fucking good even if not GOAT) but the fact he is basically an entire offensive coaching staff in himself is pretty impressive.
- Status