|
Post by jg78 on Feb 9, 2017 9:43:14 GMT -6
If you were the newly hired GM of an NFL team and could start fresh with a rookie Tom Brady or rookie Peyton Manning to QB your team for the next 15+ years, who would you pick and why?
|
|
|
Post by Inthesticks on Feb 9, 2017 9:46:08 GMT -6
Brady, no doubt. A consistent winner and leader, plain and simple.
|
|
|
Post by eaglemountie on Feb 9, 2017 9:58:46 GMT -6
Manning was probably more NFL ready at the start of his career but Brady has won more championships...
Tough call but there isn't a wrong answer...
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Feb 9, 2017 10:01:25 GMT -6
Manning, I'm not going to act like I follow the NFL closely enough to cite all their specific skill sets, but Manning seems more complete of a player and can do more things well. I coached with a guy who played with Manning and he had nothing but positives to say about him. Those two things put him ahead in my book (although I might take Marino over both, but I am old).
I always laugh when people bring up winning rings as to why Brady is better; this is football, he is just one of many players on a team. He doesn't play D, STs, catch passes, run the ball (much), or block, yet somehow he gets the credit for the win. What few people realize is that since the merger Tom Brady benefitted from playing alongside more top 10 defenses than any other QB; conversely Manning played with numerous defenses that fell outside the top 20.
If we are judging the individual, and what they bring (and not how good their team was) I'll take Manning.
|
|
|
Post by newt21 on Feb 9, 2017 10:04:05 GMT -6
Manning, never had a great defense to play with until he played in Denver. Brady has had some pretty dang good defenses to back him up (especially early on).
As stated earlier, no wrong answer here.
|
|
|
Post by mnike23 on Feb 9, 2017 10:04:31 GMT -6
difficult debate for sure. i do believe brady is all that you want in a qb, leader, comsumate pro, etc... the system in NE is designed for him to be very very good. you can see that any backups that have played (when he tore ACL, this season for 4 weeks) they too have had a great amount of success running the system.
nfl qbs are system qbs. regardless of the things people will fight on this topic, but they are...you see guys leave new england and they do not play anywhere near the same. and that is everywhere. some nfl qbs play in an offense that is designed around them. they get free agent money and leave that system and go to a new 1 and do not have the same success(not always, but alot).
manning was an incredible passer of the ball. a seeier of things that happen before they happen. almost like a 6th sense. he could read a defense and decipher the play better than anyone that has ever played. not the most gifted, but worked at his craft as a passer to be the guy. an ultimate leader and a pros pro. work ethic never an issue.
could you flip those 2 and they still have the same success? would brady have thrived in the colts offense? would manning spin the ball in NE the same way he did in Indy?
when mvp is discussed, we have the round table beer talks about it in every sport. my answer is always, take this guy off the team and what happens to them? if you took another guy in the mvp race in their spot, then what happens? do they win the same?
in this case, both win in the others franchise. no doubt.
|
|
|
Post by mnike23 on Feb 9, 2017 10:12:38 GMT -6
brady came into a winning deal right away. bledsoe was a stud, they had been to the super bowl recently and was winning games, etc... defense was king, they ran the ball, brady didnt have to do much other than learn on the fly, manage, etc. i dont think 6th round tom had much pressure other than keeping bledsoe from getting the job back,
manning situation was different. harbaugh had been there, they went to afc title game, 1 play from super bowl. had marshall faulk and was winning. he came in to replace captain comeback and be the man. the first year he threw pick after pick. indy people wanted harbaugh back. when faulk left they went bonkers mad. blamed manning for it. not until they started winning again did indy people love him.
tough call. personally,montana is my guy. brady is so much like joe cool its scary. im not a manning fan. but respect what he has done for the game. would love to see those 83 draft qbs play in todays passer friendly league. montana, elway, kelly, marino. those dudes were great in a bump league, imagine what they could do in a cant touch wr/qb league. that was montana downfall, injuries. he would be great in todays nfl. drew brees type qb. accurate, great downfield passer but not a fantastic arm. gets most out of his skill set. great conversation here.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Feb 9, 2017 10:21:33 GMT -6
brady came into a winning deal right away.
Not really. Pats were 5-11 in Belichick's first year, started 1-3 the second when Brady took over.
|
|
|
Post by mnike23 on Feb 9, 2017 10:23:37 GMT -6
brady came into a winning deal right away.
Not really. Pats were 5-11 in Belichick's first year, started 1-3 the second when Brady took over.
meaning that they had been in a winning culture. the players on those teams were parcells guys(carroll was a joke there) and had been to the superbowl just a couple years earlier.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Feb 9, 2017 10:24:01 GMT -6
If you were the newly hired GM of an NFL team and could start fresh with a rookie Tom Brady or rookie Peyton Manning to QB your team for the next 15+ years, who would you pick and why?
Knowing what we know now, or going by what they did in college before they played an NFL game?
|
|
|
Post by agap on Feb 9, 2017 10:31:13 GMT -6
Knowing what we know now, I would pick Brady. He has won more titles than Manning, and at the end of the day, that's all that matters. College coaches talk all the time about liking players who won in high school, so I look at it the same way for this.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Feb 9, 2017 10:34:36 GMT -6
Not really. Pats were 5-11 in Belichick's first year, started 1-3 the second when Brady took over.
meaning that they had been in a winning culture. the players on those teams were parcells guys(carroll was a joke there) and had been to the superbowl just a couple years earlier.
Parcells took Pats to the Super Bowl in 1996, Brady joined team in 2001. That's a long time in NFL. Not many of Parcells' guys still around then (two coaches later).
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Feb 9, 2017 10:36:56 GMT -6
I would take Manning. Both have great football minds and IQs, but I feel Manning has the edge. He is an OC on the field comanding the troops. He also had the stronger arm pre neck surgery. Manning with Belichick has 5 rings also.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Feb 9, 2017 10:42:31 GMT -6
If you were the newly hired GM of an NFL team and could start fresh with a rookie Tom Brady or rookie Peyton Manning to QB your team for the next 15+ years, who would you pick and why?
Knowing what we know now, or going by what they did in college before they played an NFL game?
Knowing what we know now.
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Feb 9, 2017 10:45:44 GMT -6
Knowing what we know now, I would pick Brady. He has won more titles than Manning, and at the end of the day, that's all that matters. College coaches talk all the time about liking players who won in high school, so I look at it the same way for this. Yeah, but how much of that winning was him and how much was his team? I mean Jim McMahon has more rings than Dan Marino...
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Feb 9, 2017 10:51:59 GMT -6
Brady unquestionably.
Nothing to do with rings or stats, either. The guy is simply the best leader and "force multiplier" I've ever seen in any sport. He elevates the ability, mental toughness and dedication of everyone around him, and always has. THAT's what you want on your team. Not just "a great player," but a guy who makes everyone else great. He is also a big part of why everyone "buys in"...sure a lot of that is Belichick, but having that player in the locker room who is in lock-step and tells everyone, "stick with it, because we f-ing win" is SO critical.
Also- I always find it kind of funny when people say "yeah but Brady had a better defense / cast around him." Seriously? The defense has always been a bunch of over-achieving no names (obviously there are individual exceptions) and the offense has not had a superstar caliber player in the entire run (with the exception of Moss).
He makes guys better.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Feb 9, 2017 10:53:47 GMT -6
Knowing what we know now, I would pick Brady. He has won more titles than Manning, and at the end of the day, that's all that matters. College coaches talk all the time about liking players who won in high school, so I look at it the same way for this. Yeah, but how much of that winning was him and how much was his team? I mean Jim McMahon has more rings than Dan Marino... Why would you want to draft a player who is an individual talent vs. someone who has proven through a career that they are the most adept person in sports at making your entire roster better? Remember, the debate here isn't "who is a better QB at their position based on individual capability"...it's "who would you want QB'ing your team?" Big difference....BIG difference.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Feb 9, 2017 11:00:54 GMT -6
FWIW have heard it said couple times by NFL TV "experts" that Manning turned off some teammates with his style of perfectionism.
Have never heard anything similar about Brady.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 9, 2017 11:04:14 GMT -6
considering no NFL team passed on Manning and EVERY NFL team passed on Brady....I think the choice is obvious.
Hindsight is crystal clear.
What NFL franchises want is a sure-thing franchise player they can give the keys to and sit back and collect merchandising money.
Peyton was the son of an NFL star quarterback, that was a high school stud, that was hyped for the Heisman once he committed to a school. He is the epitome of pedigree. My only contention is that he has been handed all this since he was born. Sure, he IS good and IS a great quarterback, but clawing his way to a starting position is something he never had to want for.
I'd take Brady knowing what we know now, though.
|
|
|
Post by coachphillip on Feb 9, 2017 11:12:20 GMT -6
The system QB thing drives me crazy. Some coaches are better at adapting what they do to what their talent is adept at. Some guys do well in one system and then move onto a franchise that does something else and it doesn't translate. Every QB plays in a system, so they're all "system QBs". Unless you're saying that some guys don't do well outside of their preferred system, but isn't that more on the coaches for not taking advantage of a player's skill set? I don't know. That argument just never made sense to me.
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Feb 9, 2017 12:25:57 GMT -6
Yeah, but how much of that winning was him and how much was his team? I mean Jim McMahon has more rings than Dan Marino... Why would you want to draft a player who is an individual talent vs. someone who has proven through a career that they are the most adept person in sports at making your entire roster better? Remember, the debate here isn't "who is a better QB at their position based on individual capability"...it's "who would you want QB'ing your team?" Big difference....BIG difference. I think the 'making the team better' aspect (particularly in the NFL) is mostly nonsense. What did Tom Brady do to make his defenses better than the Colt's defenses? He was lucky enough to play with 12 top 10 defenses in his career, he didn't make them into top 10 defenses. Its an argument that people like to use to justify the premise that the QB who wins the superbowl is the best QB, but it holds no validity. Don't get me wrong, he is clearly an all time great QB, but the idea that he somehow made the defense any better just seems ridiculous to me.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Feb 9, 2017 12:55:57 GMT -6
If you were the newly hired GM of an NFL team and could start fresh with a rookie Tom Brady or rookie Peyton Manning to QB your team for the next 15+ years, who would you pick and why? I'd see if the team picking after me feels strongly enough about one of them that they'll give me some draft choices to swap picks with them. Hell, for the right offer I'd move down a few slots and take Rodgers, Brees, or Rivers.
|
|
|
Post by joelee on Feb 9, 2017 14:02:24 GMT -6
Can I take Elway?
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Feb 9, 2017 15:32:35 GMT -6
Why would you want to draft a player who is an individual talent vs. someone who has proven through a career that they are the most adept person in sports at making your entire roster better? Remember, the debate here isn't "who is a better QB at their position based on individual capability"...it's "who would you want QB'ing your team?" Big difference....BIG difference. I think the 'making the team better' aspect (particularly in the NFL) is mostly nonsense. What did Tom Brady do to make his defenses better than the Colt's defenses? He was lucky enough to play with 12 top 10 defenses in his career, he didn't make them into top 10 defenses. Its an argument that people like to use to justify the premise that the QB who wins the superbowl is the best QB, but it holds no validity. Don't get me wrong, he is clearly an all time great QB, but the idea that he somehow made the defense any better just seems ridiculous to me. If it seems ridiculous to you, you don't know enough about how the Patriots have built their unprecedented success and sustained it over the last 15 years. Brady's leadership and work ethic has been a massive factor in setting the tone for accountability and behavior in that entire locker room year after year. Not to take anything away from Belichick, but every coach needs that one point man in the locker room who can sell the players on things and has the street cred to back it up. The guys in New England worship at the alter of Brady. He commands TREMENDOUS respect. and he's a force multiplier because he teaches and mentors the other leaders (like Hightower and McCourty) in the "Patriot Way." Sure, the defenses are great, but there's a direct and undeniable connection to Brady there. Brady does that better than anyone in the history of the sport. That's why you take Brady. Not because he calls a better Omaha audible at the line or because he can scramble like Mike Vick. He embodies effective leadership at the professional level.
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Feb 9, 2017 15:36:29 GMT -6
Heard it said the past couple of weeks - when your best player is also your hardest worker, you just might have something there...
|
|
|
Post by td4tc on Feb 9, 2017 16:36:38 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Feb 9, 2017 17:15:54 GMT -6
Heard it said the past couple of weeks - when your best player is also your hardest worker, you just might have something there... Been there. Done that. Got the ring and a lot of cool championship t-shirts.
|
|
|
Post by Stangs13065 on Feb 9, 2017 20:11:55 GMT -6
Yes, rings are what matters. But rings have more to do with the culture/system than one guy. Not to say that Peyton didn't play in some winning cultures. He wouldn't have made 4 SBs, and won 2 if he didn't, but Belichick is in a class of his own. Brady is still great w/o BB, but he doesn't have five rings. Belichick went 11-5 with Matt Cassel. He went 3-1 with Jimmy Garoppolo and Jacoby Brissett. The Colts went 2-14 without Peyton. Peyton succeeded no matter the coach, the defense, etc. He was basically a coach on the field. If I'm starting a franchise, I'm choosing Peyton over any QB in history. His success wasn't tied to a coach's culture. He was the culture.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Feb 10, 2017 7:06:04 GMT -6
Pre NFL career I would take Manning. Now, crystal ball vision? Hands down Brady not even close.
But....in a parallel universe, would love to see Brady play Montana in the super bowl with equal talent on the field. Both are stone cold killers in crunch time.
JMO.
|
|
|
Post by agap on Feb 10, 2017 17:44:24 GMT -6
Knowing what we know now, I would pick Brady. He has won more titles than Manning, and at the end of the day, that's all that matters. College coaches talk all the time about liking players who won in high school, so I look at it the same way for this. Yeah, but how much of that winning was him and how much was his team? I mean Jim McMahon has more rings than Dan Marino... fivethirtyeight.com/features/brady-vs-belichick-whos-to-blame-for-the-patriots-insufferable-success/I just read this article.
|
|