Tom Brady is Overrated

Full story: Dr. U 10,033
Tom Brady of the New England Patriots is the most overrated quarterback in the NFL. Full Story
Janitor

Cypress, CA

#10353 Aug 14, 2013
AFC South wrote:
<quoted text> It figures somebody from Buffalo would say that. By the way, you're insane.
Either that or his brain is frozen, missing, injured.........
BarTender

Cypress, CA

#10354 Aug 14, 2013
Just a though
Manning has the extra benefit of playing at altitude
Manning has the extra benefit of playing with more experienced receivers
Manning has the extra benefit of playing with bigger, stronger, better receivers
Manning has the extra benefit of playing with familiar receivers
Manning has the extra benefit of playing with healthy players
Manning has the extra benefit of playing with Wes Welker who he got from NE
Manning has the extra benefit of playing with a defense that is top five
Brady has only one advantage and that is that he is Brady and not Manning
So what excuse will the media come up with this year when Brady is either on Mannings heels or actually performs better yet again.
And this year with Brady's supporting cast being so limited, it should be difficult for even the lemmings to overlook all the facts to say Manning is better.
Jerry West once won a playoff MVP Award despite losing, if they judge on a level playing field, those same judges would have to give serious consideration to Brady if he can be competitive given the inferior "groceries" he will have to "cook" with.
Unfortunately for Manning, the SB is his to lose with odds at 7/2. Meanwhile any kind of winning run Brady can put together will only show just how good he really is, even with rookies, newbies and a defense that needs work.
Gimmee your best shot, the facts await your best attempts to twist them.
BarTender

Cypress, CA

#10355 Aug 14, 2013
Correction wrote:
<quoted text>BVery subjective. Welker had the ability, but wasn't properly utilized before coming to NE. He also very good pass protection his entire career which buys him time to find open receivers. If a team can't protect the QB, the best receivers in football won't be of much help. The offensive line is every bit as important as the receivers for the passing game.
I concur that protection is vital, you got that one right, but you got your facts backward yet again, and again. Manning had the better protection and by a lot, over 50% better.
Do any of you Peyton lovers ever do your homework, or do you just make it up as you go?
Since all the high IQ guys can see the facts point to Brady, I can only assume that leaves slim Pickens in the brain department for Manning lovers.
Manning has been sacked 252 times in 14 years. That's 252/14=18 sacks er year.
Brady has been sacked 303 times in 11 years. That's 303/11=27.5 sacks per year.
Brady is sacked 52.78% more than Manning.
How in the world is that better protection?
Yet another Manning fan who doesn't know the facts,
And that's the only way you can lift Manning to Brady's level.
When you make the numbers up in your head and disregard the facts, yeah, Manning IS better.
And I'm just a bar tender. What's your excuse or puting your brain on hold?
Janitor

Cypress, CA

#10356 Aug 14, 2013
Hey, this is for the guy called "Correction"
Funny how everything you post has been proven wrong.
Think you might wanna change your handle to misdirection.:D
Or maybe just going where the truth leads you.
Hate cleaning up after you guys.
Janitor

Cypress, CA

#10357 Aug 14, 2013
BarTender wrote:
<quoted text>
I concur that protection is vital, you got that one right, but you got your facts backward yet again, and again. Manning had the better protection and by a lot, over 50% better.
Do any of you Peyton lovers ever do your homework, or do you just make it up as you go?
Since all the high IQ guys can see the facts point to Brady, I can only assume that leaves slim Pickens in the brain department for Manning lovers.
Manning has been sacked 252 times in 14 years. That's 252/14=18 sacks er year.
Brady has been sacked 303 times in 11 years. That's 303/11=27.5 sacks per year.
Brady is sacked 52.78% more than Manning.
How in the world is that better protection?
Yet another Manning fan who doesn't know the facts,
And that's the only way you can lift Manning to Brady's level.
When you make the numbers up in your head and disregard the facts, yeah, Manning IS better.
And I'm just a bar tender. What's your excuse or puting your brain on hold?
Wow!!! Didn't know that. So let me get his straight. Manning had
Better protection by a lot (52%).
Better receivers by a lot (pro bowlers and HoFers for 15 yrs).
And Manning still threw 32% more INTs than an "inferior" Brady.
Mannings argument for being better just took a tsuami-like hit.
Then add to that:
Manning played in places that gives him a stat advantage by a lot (Indy Dome & at altitude in Denver).
And still has an "inferior" QB like Brady matching him TD for TD (1.9 TDs per game).
Think Brady bashers should rethink their positions.

How could anyone keep up, let alone surpass a QB with all the added benefits Manning had?
Wow, if this Manning guy is as good as advertised what does that make Brady?
The answer is......dundundah.....BETTER!! ! And BETTER by a lot. Probably why he holds all the winning records. Even head to head, Brady beats Manning at better than a 2-1 clip.
BarTender

Cypress, CA

#10358 Aug 14, 2013
Janitor wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow!!! Didn't know that. So let me get his straight. Manning had
Better protection by a lot (52%).
Better receivers by a lot (pro bowlers and HoFers for 15 yrs).
And Manning still threw 32% more INTs than an "inferior" Brady.
Mannings argument for being better just took a tsuami-like hit.
Then add to that:
Manning played in places that gives him a stat advantage by a lot (Indy Dome & at altitude in Denver).
And still has an "inferior" QB like Brady matching him TD for TD (1.9 TDs per game).
Think Brady bashers should rethink their positions.
How could anyone keep up, let alone surpass a QB with all the added benefits Manning had?
Wow, if this Manning guy is as good as advertised what does that make Brady?
The answer is......dundundah.....BETTER!! ! And BETTER by a lot. Probably why he holds all the winning records. Even head to head, Brady beats Manning at better than a 2-1 clip.
And don't forget when it comes to paying against the good teams like in the playoffs, Brady is 17-7 .777% while Manning is 9-11 .450% and that's a losing record, not even mediocre. That means Manning makes his name beating up on the crappy teams during the regular season with all his advantages especially at home, but when he has to play equally good teams or on a level playing field, it's a different story.
Peyton is a pretender when compared to Brady. Really good and better than most but not in Brady's class. Not even in Montana's class.
Mensa3

Cypress, CA

#10359 Aug 14, 2013
Janitor wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow!!! Didn't know that. So let me get his straight. Manning had
Better protection by a lot (52%).
Better receivers by a lot (pro bowlers and HoFers for 15 yrs).
And Manning still threw 32% more INTs than an "inferior" Brady.
Mannings argument for being better just took a tsuami-like hit.
Then add to that:
Manning played in places that gives him a stat advantage by a lot (Indy Dome & at altitude in Denver).
And still has an "inferior" QB like Brady matching him TD for TD (1.9 TDs per game).
Think Brady bashers should rethink their positions.
How could anyone keep up, let alone surpass a QB with all the added benefits Manning had?
Wow, if this Manning guy is as good as advertised what does that make Brady?
The answer is......dundundah.....BETTER!! ! And BETTER by a lot. Probably why he holds all the winning records. Even head to head, Brady beats Manning at better than a 2-1 clip.
Concur with your intent yet you left the door open for these guys you call Brady bashers to say OK maybe Peyton is not better, but they are both on the same level, when they are not.
Instead of hilighting reasons why Peyton is not better than Brady, you should also insist that the facts clearly identify that Brady is far superior, at least to date (pun intended on the to date part, Gisele agrees). Others may come that surpass Brady but for now Brady is king of the hill, and Peyton isn't close.
Pastor

Cypress, CA

#10360 Aug 15, 2013
I have never heard Tom Brady say a negative word. But I also have never heard him give God the Glory for the talents he has received. If Tom wants to maximize his career, and avoid injury, he would do well to recognize publicly his gratefulness to where God has placed him.
peter

Springfield, MA

#10361 Aug 15, 2013
iberiano wrote:
i couldnt agree with you more,im a cardinals fan so im not biased against new england,they are a great franchise and i dont feel THEY are overrated,Tom Brady however is IMO without a shadow of a doubt the most overrated football pl.....i mean athelete i have ever seen in my life.With as much time as he has in the pocket and the way their offense is run(alot of short passes that rb's and wr's turn into big plays because of great blocking)many qb's could do what brady does and probably do it better,enough with the comparisons to montana already,tom brady is nowhere near montana........just my personal opinion though
stats don't lie
Without the Hype

Cypress, CA

#10362 Aug 16, 2013
Brady has more postseason wins than any NFL QB in history. This says a lot because he has not played as many years as many of the notable QBs yet still outdistances himself from them despite playing fewer years. Brady has more postseason wins that Favre, Montana, Bradshaw, Elway, Marino and Peyton to name a few.
What is striking, is that Brady has played in 4 more playoff games than Manning and has done so despite playing 3 less years. This means that he played deeper into the playoffs and against better teams, and still compiled a 17-7 reord (NFL Record Wins), while Manning has a 9-11 losing record despite playing an easier schedule (not as deep into the playoffs).
Add to this the following advantages Manning has had over not just Brady, but against the entire league, and you may be shocked.
Manning played in both the Indy Dome and at altitude which inflates his stats
Manning had better receivers (pro bowlers and HoFers) that Brady did not with the exception of one year with Moss.
Manning had better protection 252 sacks/14 yrs=18 per year
To Brady's 303 sacks/11yrs=27.5 per year (53% better)
Soooo.....better protection, with better receivers and in a dome and at altitude to inflate his stats (reason he went to Denver?), yet Brady matches him at 1.9 TDs per game and with all the advantages Manning had he still threw 209 INTs to Brady's 123 INTs. That's 32.7% more per game.
Seems clear Brady is far superior. Not sure how anyone can put them on the same
level. Unless you are talking about height, then it's Manning by an inch.
Prometheus

Cypress, CA

#10363 Aug 16, 2013
Peyon Manning is an exceptional QB, BUT he has had advantages that inflate his stats like no other QB in history. These advantages separate him from most other QBs yet not Tom Brady. With all these advantages he appears better than most yet still does not reach the pinnacle atop which Brady resides. And when factored out, he may be just a mid-pack QB. Consider...
Peyton inflated his stats by playing in the Indy Done then at altitude in Denver.
Peyton had probowl and HoFers receivers while Brady and many others do not.
Peyton had 252sacks/14 yrs=18 per yr to Brady's 303sacks/11yrs=27,5per yr (53%diff)
Sooo....better protection, better receivers and inflated stats yet still Brady matched him with an identical 1.9 TD per game rate. How did he do that? Awesome QB that's how.
Meanwhile with all those advantages Peyton still ended up throwing 209 INTs to Brady's 123INTs. That's 32.7% more INTs per game.
Now add in that Brady has played in 4 more playoff games in 3 less yrs and you realize that this is only possible because Brady takes his team deeper into the playoffs which means he plays tougher opponents, and yet Brady still posts a 17-7 record to Manning 9-11. That means Manning loses sooner to easier competition. Further analysis shows that Peyton beats up on teams during the season using his advantages above, but when it comes time to play the tougher competition his record is not even mediocre but a losing recrd at 9-11. It's clear that Manning is not on Brady's level unless you are talking height, then Manning is ahead by an inch.
Prometheus

Cypress, CA

#10364 Aug 16, 2013
Tony, sorry to duplicate your idea, but you said they would put it up for a few seconds and then take it down. Thought they might keep my attempt up due to past experiences. thanks for the thoughts. You know I wouldn't have posted unless I thought the concepts were good. Respectfully...
P.S. funny how yours wasn't there until I posted mine hmmm?

“I call it as I see it.”

Since: Jul 09

Retirement City

#10365 Aug 16, 2013
Cabbys son wrote:
When I do a good job at school the teacher gives me an A. Why is it so hard for everyone to give Tom Brady an A+ when he clearly has done the work. If you can't live without Peyton Manning getting an A too, just don't give him the +.
Wow, from the mouth of babes.
Not quite. Grading papers other than objective tests is always a very subjective thing, much like judging a beauty contest or a figure skating competition. There will rarely be any exact agreement with the judges. All I am saying is that there is no conclusive way of proving that one is clearlybetter than the other. At the rate Rodgers has been performing, he appears to be a candidate for the greatest. What is so horrible about the thought of the two of them being in a dead heat now that you bring up the A+ vs. A argument? Not everything that comes from the mouth of babes is logically sound.
Fallacy Alert

Inverness, FL

#10366 Aug 16, 2013
BarTender wrote:
Just a though
Manning has the extra benefit of playing at altitude
Manning has the extra benefit of playing with more experienced receivers
Manning has the extra benefit of playing with bigger, stronger, better receivers
Manning has the extra benefit of playing with familiar receivers
Manning has the extra benefit of playing with healthy players
Manning has the extra benefit of playing with Wes Welker who he got from NE
Manning has the extra benefit of playing with a defense that is top five
Brady has only one advantage and that is that he is Brady and not Manning
So what excuse will the media come up with this year when Brady is either on Mannings heels or actually performs better yet again.
And this year with Brady's supporting cast being so limited, it should be difficult for even the lemmings to overlook all the facts to say Manning is better.
Jerry West once won a playoff MVP Award despite losing, if they judge on a level playing field, those same judges would have to give serious consideration to Brady if he can be competitive given the inferior "groceries" he will have to "cook" with.
Unfortunately for Manning, the SB is his to lose with odds at 7/2. Meanwhile any kind of winning run Brady can put together will only show just how good he really is, even with rookies, newbies and a defense that needs work.
Gimmee your best shot, the facts await your best attempts to twist them.
You have presumed that I will twist the facts which puts the conclusion in the premise. You failed Logic 101. And as usual, you make subjective statements about Manning's supposed better situation without trying to present any credible proof of your statement which would not play well with the judges in a formal debate.
Fallacy Alert

Inverness, FL

#10367 Aug 16, 2013
Prometheus wrote:
Peyon Manning is an exceptional QB, BUT he has had advantages that inflate his stats like no other QB in history. These advantages separate him from most other QBs yet not Tom Brady. With all these advantages he appears better than most yet still does not reach the pinnacle atop which Brady resides. And when factored out, he may be just a mid-pack QB. Consider...
Peyton inflated his stats by playing in the Indy Done then at altitude in Denver.
Peyton had probowl and HoFers receivers while Brady and many others do not.
Peyton had 252sacks/14 yrs=18 per yr to Brady's 303sacks/11yrs=27,5per yr (53%diff)
Sooo....better protection, better receivers and inflated stats yet still Brady matched him with an identical 1.9 TD per game rate. How did he do that? Awesome QB that's how.
Meanwhile with all those advantages Peyton still ended up throwing 209 INTs to Brady's 123INTs. That's 32.7% more INTs per game.
Now add in that Brady has played in 4 more playoff games in 3 less yrs and you realize that this is only possible because Brady takes his team deeper into the playoffs which means he plays tougher opponents, and yet Brady still posts a 17-7 record to Manning 9-11. That means Manning loses sooner to easier competition. Further analysis shows that Peyton beats up on teams during the season using his advantages above, but when it comes time to play the tougher competition his record is not even mediocre but a losing recrd at 9-11. It's clear that Manning is not on Brady's level unless you are talking height, then Manning is ahead by an inch.
Manning lost to the same team this year where he led the offense to a 35 point production vs. Brady's 13. Brady had the misfortune of playing the Ravens earlier than Brady did and both threw two interceptions vs. Balt. Brady tends to hold on to the ball longer ( some experts say too long) than Manning waiting for receivers to get open which will increase both his completion pct. and his sacks. Back to square one. Insufficient hard data to declare one or the other the best. Are you a Tom Brady fan or a Patriots fan? Being that I am no fan of the Colts, Broncos, or Patriots, that puts me in a better position to be objective. Not all advantages can be accurately measured and many of your so-called Manning advantages may not be as clear cut as you would want me to believe. Don't forget Brady's failure in two straight Super Bowls vs. a team that was a substantial underdog. It also is not always the QBs fault for a loss as the QB is not responsible for missed tackles and blown coverages by his defensive teammates.
Fallacy Alert

Inverness, FL

#10368 Aug 16, 2013
BarTender wrote:
<quoted text>
I concur that protection is vital, you got that one right, but you got your facts backward yet again, and again. Manning had the better protection and by a lot, over 50% better.
Do any of you Peyton lovers ever do your homework, or do you just make it up as you go?
Since all the high IQ guys can see the facts point to Brady, I can only assume that leaves slim Pickens in the brain department for Manning lovers.
Manning has been sacked 252 times in 14 years. That's 252/14=18 sacks er year.
Brady has been sacked 303 times in 11 years. That's 303/11=27.5 sacks per year.
Brady is sacked 52.78% more than Manning.
How in the world is that better protection?
Yet another Manning fan who doesn't know the facts,
And that's the only way you can lift Manning to Brady's level.
When you make the numbers up in your head and disregard the facts, yeah, Manning IS better.
And I'm just a bar tender. What's your excuse or puting your brain on hold?
If Brady is sacked more, it is for two reasons. He is slow and plodding and he holds on to the ball longer than most QBs making him more prone to a sack. One won't throw interceptions while holding the ball while lying flat on one's back. A sack can also stall a drive and/or require a time out to be taken if the QB is attempting to bring the team from behind in the closing minutes. There is no objective way of proving who played his career behind the better offensive lines.
Fallacy Alert

Inverness, FL

#10369 Aug 16, 2013
TNS wrote:
<quoted text>
I am sorry to inform you that...Your comment Manning narrowed the gap last year is INCORRECT. The stats you get from TV may say that but Brady was #1 in the league in EVERY advanced analytic, DVOA, DYAR, Valueable Yards etc, the first time in NFL history any QB has led in every stat area, yet overlooked by the media. Had Manning won the MVP award all hell would have broken loose because stat guys were preparing to come out of the woodwork to show the manipulations by the networks. Hopefully not the reason they gave the award to Peterson. He was a worthy candidate. However, nobody fights over who comes in second.
Thanks for adding, in your opinion, it means a lot towards accuracys end.
Big Picture difference between Brady and Manning is that Manning throws over 30% more Interceptions. It is his Achilles heal and single stat that keeps him from being elevated to where Brady lives, a stat that has Brady well above the field, and why Aaron Rodgers is the sole NFL QB in history to be on pace to eclipse Brady should he stay on pace.
Perhaps the higher interception total is due to his willingness to take chances when his team is behind late in the game. And many of those stats you quoted are no more valid than Sabermetrics are for Baseball. Sabermetrics dogmatically state that a player needs two stolen bases for every caught stealing to break even in run scoring. That relationship totally falls apart when there are two out and a runner on first as a successsful steal of second would require one single instead of two singles or an extra base hit to score the runner in most instances and makes a stolen base attempt at that point a better gamble than with less than two outs. I suspect the same can be said about some of these fancy football stats. All that aside, I went to Pro Footbal reference .com and looked at advanced passing rating and it seemed like Manning Topped Brady in all but one stat. Here is another interesting stat. Manning has a considerably better QB rating in the 2nd half of games as he generally played better in the 2nd half than the 1st which was the opposite of Brady. On passes thrown after a players 30th pass in a game, Manning was about 15 points higher in passer ratings. That sounds like a better clutch player to me. There are all different ways to examine statistics and try to come up with an answer For every advantage Brady has over Manning, it seems like there seems to be an almost equal number of advantages that Manning has which means that I will wait until both are retired before trying to draw conclusions as to who was the better of the two and even then, I may still find it too close to call. The more we debate, the more that it seems like a near dead heat between the two.
Fallacy Alert

Inverness, FL

#10370 Aug 16, 2013
The stats for first and 2nd halves of games was for 2012, BTW. Brady played better in the 1st half in general while Manning had better 2nd half stats.
Fallacy Alert

Inverness, FL

#10371 Aug 16, 2013
The Patriots without Beady generally fared much better than the Colts without Manning. Last year, both Bronco top receivers gained more yards in one season than they did the previous two combined. Looks like Manning greatly improves his wideouts, don't ya think? With Welker in the slot this year, the sky's the limit.
Very interesting

Inverness, FL

#10372 Aug 16, 2013
Actually, the top three Bronco wide receivers caught more passes last year than in their previous two seasons and their TE nearly tripled his number of catches from the previous season. Looks more like Manning made the receivers better rather than the other way around.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

NCAA Sports Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 3 hr BRUINS FOR TRUTH 28,481
College football roundup: Ohio State starts the... (Sep '13) Thu Go Blue Forever 1,492
5 reasons Wisconsin football will beat the Ohio... Dec 24 Rager 3
Rashard Kelly's last-second putback gives No. 1... Dec 24 dogman67156 1
Alternatives to ESPiN? Dec 22 Pete 1
Trojans in the NFL: Reggie Bush contributes in ... Dec 22 Patriots Club Chub 2
Crossfire going to Nicaragua (Jan '08) Dec 22 arnoldodeigo 5
More from around the web