Brady vs. Manning 2k8

Let the battles begin. The arguments will be even more heated now than they were before Brady broke Manning's TD record.

Why Peyton is better

1) Physical stature - Peyton has the stronger arm, and the (slightly) larger frame.

2) Accuracy - Both are crazy accurate, but Peyton's accuracy is still tops in the NFL. The types of throws he can complete are mind-blowing sometimes.

3) Stats - Even with that monster season from Brady, his career passer rating is lower than Peyton, and that was his first season with a passer rating better than 100. Despite his 50 TD's, Peyton's 2004 season he was the higher rated passer.

4) Longevity/Consistency - Peyton has been doing it better for longer. Brady's statistical success has only been for 1 year, or sporadically in its nature. Peyton consistently posts 4,000 and 30. Brady's career averages are closer to 3,500 and 25 (although a spike in TD's now would definitely help).

5) #1 Overall status - Peyton had to take over UNQESTIONABLY the worst team in football when he started. They were the worst because they had the worst record and the #1 pick. Within 1 season, he had them winning 13 games (with help of course) and they've been playoff/superbowl contenders ever since.

6) League MVP's - Peyton leads Tom 2-1 in this category. Considering both of them have broken the hallowed passing TD record (which guarantees an MVP), Manning has a 1-0 lead if you throw out both of their "career years".

Why Tom is better

1) Super Bowl success - He's been to the big dance 4 times to Peyton's 1, and has 2 SB MVP's and 3 rings to show for it. Although his success (and the success of any team in the SB) is a group achievement, his role on the NFL's most modern dynasty cannot be denied (even by the haters).

2) More with Less - It was presumed earlier in his career that Brady had less talent to work with, but still produced. Though we will never truly know if receivers make the QB great or if QB's make the WR's great, the point can be made that with more talented receivers (like he had this year) his stats would have been higher, and they could have won more SB's.

3) 6th Round Status - Just as Peyton had pressure turning around the worst team in the NFL, Tom had pressure just to make it to the NFL. He was drafted 199th, meaning every team passed on him. His odds to make the team were long, but through his determination and work ethic, he not only made it, but impressed the coaches enough to promote him to backup after his rookie year, and then his magical run started. There's something to be said for the hard work to make it when nobody else thinks you can.

If anyone can come up with additional reasons for either player, you're welcome to.

Let the debate continue to rage on forever. I will side with Peyton as always. Just from watching him play, it is evident for anybody who watches how much better he is than anybody else. Peyton is the 2nd coming of Dan Marino (my favorite QB ever) with his cannon arm, quick release, and that fire he has to be the best. I give Tom his props, although I gotta admit I kinda hate on him still. There's nothing wrong with being #2.

Brady will probably retire with around 40-45,000 yards passing and 300 TD's (HOF numbers no doubt) but Manning will re-write history. He's already on pace to destroy Brett Favre's records, and he hasn't missed a start for his entire career. I am priveledged to say that I saw not only the greatest QB of all time, but I was able to watch all 5 of the greatest QB's in the Top 5. (Montana, Marino, Manning, Favre and Brady)

Bump Tom Brady

Bump Peyton Manning

If anyone can come up with additional reasons for either player, you're welcome to.

One thing you forgot- Tom Brady said Peyton was the better QB.

He said Peyton was smarter, bigger, and had a better arm.

That sums it up! No one can argue that................

The only real debate in my mind is who will have the better individual 2008 season.  As for who is the bettter player, I think 2007 gave us quite a bit to go on.

Patriots fans will take 2007 as evidence that Brady could have easily put up Manning numbers throughout his career had he had a Manning offense around him.  They will look at Manning's San Diego and Kansas City games during the regular season and see proof that Manning can't accomplish half of what Brady has without a WR like Marvin Harrison.

What these same fans fail to realize however is that Peyton Manning had a more impressive 2004 than Brady had in 2007 with less talent around him on offense, defense, and special teams. So if we want to go back to the "more with less argument" the winner would have to be Peyton Manning actually.  Manning's yards per attempt was well above Brady's, he had more TDs per attempt, he had a better TD to turnover ratio, and he had a significantly higher QB rating--and that was without the obvious desire just to break records that Tom Brady and the Patriots had. 

As for the talent around him, defense and special teams go a long way towards giving the offense more opportunities to score and a shorter field to the goal line.  As for the offense, it's no coincidence that Randy Moss was on both the #1 and #2 scoring offenses of all time.  Throw in guys like Wes Welker and Kevin Faulk, who provided Brady with great short pattern outlets that Manning severely lacked and an unbelievable amount of time to throw, and you can see how Brady had it easier.  As for the running game, which Pats fans continue to believe was a huge advantage for Manning, the yards and ypc of both offenses were actually strikingly similar.  The difference was that the Colts loaded everything on one guys back while the Pats spread it out nicely.  The other difference of course was that the Pats running game was much better around the goal line, which provided the Pats more of a legitimate double threat--whereas Manning started his touchdown spree because the Colts had trouble running it in.

What these Pats fans also fail to realize is that despite not having Marvin Harrison for most of the season, Manning still managed another 4,000+ yards and 30+ TD season with a very nice 98 QB rating.  Somehow Anthony Gonzalez, a rookie who didn't start in college, was able to step in and replace Marvin Harrison.  Manning's numbers looked very good without Harrison so long as half his supporting cast on offense wasn't out injured.  Manning's numbers were actually better this season with Gonzalez replacing Harrison than with Harrison healthy this season.  In the last six games of the season, starting with Gonzalez's return from injury, Manning not only had a better QB rating than Tom Brady down the stretch, but a better QB rating than Tom Brady's overall season--all without Harrison.

This along with a comparison of the early careers of Harrison and Wayne in comparison to other first round WRs from their draft classes and other regular pro bowl WRs in the past half a decade indicates that Manning has had quite a bit to do with the success of his pair of elite WRs.  What honestly is truly doing more with less--making average receivers look average, or making good receivers look great?  And when you take a step back and realize that Manning has had more of his passes dropped (as well as more passes dropped per attempt and per completion) than Tom Brady, you have to wonder. 

Maybe Tom Brady's lackluster receiving cast was really just a deep receiving cast that shared the responsibilities more like with the Pats running game in 2007 vs. the Colts running game in 2004.  Consider that the Colts have struggled to put three WRs on the field at the same time while Tom Brady has regularly had 4 and 5 WRs on the field at a time to spread out blitzing 3-4 defenses.  Sure Peyton Manning had two first round WRs in 2004 and has for a good part of his career, but keep in mind that Tom Brady's fourth WR on the depth chart in 2007 was a high second round draft pick.  Though drafted in a different year, Br