Week 2 Thoughts & Observations

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Mon Sep 19, 2011 3:04 pm

Glenn, it's not a question of whether Manning has had superior talent. I agree he has. What I've said is I disagree with the notion Brady hasn't also had quality talent to work with. He has. In fact, of all the WRs Manning and Brady have had, in my opinion Moss is easily the most talented.

Now if you want to say Brady made a guy like Givens, I won't disagree. Just as Manning has made guys like Garcon, Collie and Stokely. Both have gotten the most out of non-superstar talents. That's what makes both of them great.

But I still stand by my initial point that what we're seeing so far this season provides strong evidence that Manning is more valuable than Brady. Again, the Patriots won 11 games without Brady. The Colts are absolutely putrid without Manning.

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Mon Sep 19, 2011 3:16 pm

Originally posted by Coltsfan:

The one thing that is certain here. The Pats are a much better team without Brady than the Colts are without Manning. That is undeniable.

Wayne No question. In fact, it's possible Peyton Manning may be the first MVP in league history who didn't play a single game that season. I'm only half joking about that. Nobody has proven to be more valuable to their team so far this season, that's for sure.

rkulaski · Post by **rkulaski** » Mon Sep 19, 2011 4:12 pm

Originally posted by Stealth SNAKE:
quote:Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:
quote:Originally posted by Hells Satans:
What Brady has had is the most innovative and brilliant head coach of his era. Moving to a two TE approach where it is the TEs that stretch the field, removes the linebackers and safeties from the middle of the playing field, and allows Welker and Woodhead to work underneath with less traffic is brilliant. Yeah, they've done an impressive job of replacing what Moss provided with what the two TEs provide. In both cases, the underneath receivers are able to operate without defenses clamping down on them. It's a great system the Patriots have and that's likely a key reason why Cassel did so well there too. Of course, having stud talents like Moss and Welker don't hurt either. [/QUOTE]Welker "STUD TALENT"?!?

...the kat was NADA before Handsome Tommy started spiraling the pigskin in his direction, man...and how does his talent match up with, er, let's say Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne, Dallas Clark, Edgerrin James, etc. in their primes, eh?...c'mon man, Welker has the SAME talent level as Brandon Stokley did in his prime when he played for the Colts...TK, again, with all due respect, the comparison in talent level is not even CLOSE imho

... [/QUOTE]I think you underestimate Welker....

The Brady-Manning debate will always be that. They are both that good.

Manning's WRs more talented? I think so but there have been games where the Colts were on the field for maybe 20 min because of their defense. There have been games where Manning has won for Indy by having to score on EVERY possession. So many things to take into account on Manning vs Brady and I'm just throwing one more out there. Brady better coach and game plan with Belichek... Manning pretty much runs his offense, call his own plays. Does that count for anything? Brady has beaten Manning in the playoffs but I do believe at this point in time, Manning had the last laugh.

KenGill · Post by **KenGill** » Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:34 pm

For what it's worth, I'll rank Manning a little ahead of Brady. Both great players, both Hall Of Famers. Manning the more valuable to his team.

matthickok · Post by **matthickok** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 1:06 am

Consider that prior to 2007, the talent level of their supporting cast was not even comparable between Manning and Brady. Manning to Harrison holds nearly every QB to WR record there is to hold including career yardage, touchdowns, and receptions as well as reception and yardage individual season records. Marvin Harrison is one of the all-time greatest WR to ever play the game. Brady won 3 super bowls (in 3 attempts) with Deion Branch or worse as his #1 (Branch wasn't around for the first victory). Branch is a very good receiver but one who still has never managed 80 receptions in a season or ever crossed the 1,000 yard barrier even ONCE. His results in Seattle tell you all you need to know as he was practically invisible. Branch was nowhere near the top 30 WR in Seattle and fell off a cliff his last two seasons there. Back with Brady, he's instantly respectable again.

In 2007 when Brady finally had a HOF caliber receiver, what does he do? He goes 16-0 and sets the single season record for TDs in a season with <gasp> 50! Both Moss and Welker had the best seasons of their pro careers up to that point. That should have been super bowl #4 for Brady but those pesky Giants proved once again that on any given Sunday...

The fact that New England won 11 games in 2008 suggests Brady had a very good chance at AGAIN returning to the big game in 2008 had he not been injured. After being humiliated by NYG the year before, I really like the odds of them winning that year with the way Moss and Welker were playing.

But enough with the "who had more talent" debate which isn't that close in my mind. Fast forward to 2010. Brady loses his HOFer Moss a couple of games into the season. How does he respond? By setting more NFL records including 358 straight passes without an INT, a 36-4 TD to INT ratio, and an NFL best 14-2 record. He lost his #1 WR and actually got BETTER.

It's fair to suggest Brady has had the better coaches, but how many offensive coordinators has he had over the years? BB has been the only constant, and while he may also be the best the NFL has ever seen, Tony Dungy was a pretty good coach as well.

Bottom line comes down to the almighty W, and Brady's success is far greater than Manning's. Manning actually has a losing record in the playoffs at 9-10 to Brady's 14-5. Think their overall team strength including defense is the difference? In games when their defense allows 21 points or less in the playoffs, Manning is 6-6 while Brady is 12-1. This is significant as Manning has had the better offensive weapons. Brady's career winning percentage is over 100 points higher than Manning's, 779 to 678. They have faced off 12 times in their careers. Brady has dominated him going 8-4. And then there are the Super Bowl victories, advantage Brady 3-1.

All of these obligatory "Joe Montana is the best ever" remarks can stop. Montana had the indisputble greatest WR of all-time in Jerry Rice for the majority of his career as a 49er. If Brady had an in-his-prime Jerry Rice, the Patriots would go 16-0 every season, much like they did when Moss arrived in 2007, and Moss is no Jerry Rice.

That 49er dynasty was still VERY good WITHOUT Montana winning Super Bowl XXIX and going to 7 straight postseasons with Young as their leader. This again is a testament to how significant Jerry Rice was (nothing against Steve Young).

The Colts current state is not a slam dunk "look at what Manning means to that team because he's the best." I see it as more of a "putting all of your eggs in one basket is a big mistake" from an organizational standpoint. The Colts' style and entire playbook is designed specifically for Peyton Manning which makes it very difficult for anyone to come in and find instant success, let alone someone like Kerry Collins. This isn't necessarily a testament to Manning's versatility. In a way, couldn't this suggest Manning is one-dimensional and that his success hinges on catering to a specific style of play? If you took away Marvin Harrison or Reggie Wayne, could Manning do what Brady did before Welker and Moss? The results are already in. Manning hasn't been able to do that even WITH Harrison and Wayne. Yes, Manning is invaluable to the Colts, but put Manning on a completely different team and would we even be having this debate? I personally believe you could put Brady on Carolina or Kansas City and with a full offseason/preseason of preparation, they'd be a playoff contender. True of Manning as well? I'm not as sure. Brady has shown greatness with an ever-changing cast of teammates and personnel. Manning and Montana are/were both otherworldly talents deserving of best ever discussions but at the end of the day, this is Tom Brady's distinction.

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 2:07 am

Good post Tom Terrific although I'd say this season's Colts not only are an example of management not preparing adequately for the possibility of Manning being hurt but also clear proof of how valuable he is. I'd also say the 49ers' continuing their dynasty after Montana retired is a direct reflection of their ability to go from one HOF QB to another. The Packers are looking at something similar with their transition from Favre to Rodgers.

As far as what Brady did last season, he did lose Moss but he still had Welker (a terrific wide receiver), a rejuvenated Branch (no slouch by any stretch) and two highly-gifted tight ends in Hernandez and Gronkowski. That's my primary disagreement here - the idea that Brady has lacked talent to work with over the years. Maybe in the early championship days with Patten and Givens and the like but I don't think that's been the case since Moss and Welker arrived and it's definitely not the case now. The Patriots have a wealth of talent in the passing game and Brady is taking full advantage.

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 2:09 am

Originally posted by rkulaski:
I think you underestimate Welker....

Yeah, Welker's not getting near enough respect in this thread. He is flat-out one of the best WRs in the game today and has been for years. He's not a product of Brady or the Patriots' system in my opinion.