Would the Patriots be undefeated with Peyton Manning at QB?

[TheKilo]

Inspired by the other thread. As good as Brady has been this season, and he has been tremendous, I posit the following question to TalkSox. Would the Pats be 17-0 with Peyton Manning at QB?

 

My heart tells me yes, but the more I think about it the more I am not so sure. I'm not sure if Manning would have the ability to fit in with this particular Pats team as well as Brady does. Brady, for all the s*** I give him, has thrown the deep ball better than any QB in this league this season. Brady has the ability to finish opponents off (last season's Colts game notwithstanding), where Manning has the tendency to come up short in the big games.

 

What say you, Talksox?

[redsoxrules]

well IMO despite brady's record 50 TD passes , I still think manning's 2004 season was the best . and I also beleive that the pats would be 17-0 with manning as well

[TheKilo]

well IMO despite brady's record 50 TD passes ' date=' I still think manning's 2004 season was the best .[/b'] and I also beleive that the pats would be 17-0 with manning as well

 

Explain this one to me please.

[redsoxrules]

Explain this one to me please.

 

sure il start with the 121 QB rating for manning VS 117 for brady... also manning had 80 less pass attemps than brady , manning sat out more time due to blowouts and bassicaly didnt play the last game except 1 quarter , brady was always on the field , manning had a better yards per pass attempt and also better TD %. if manning would of had the same attempts as brady he would have trown for over 5300 yards and 58 TD pass ...and that explains why manning had the 121 QB rating he was averaging more per attempts than brady was this year

[See Red]

Explain this one to me please.

 

They're equally impressive... but Peyton had 1 less TD in, like, 81 less passing attempts.

 

And the Colts were never accused of running the score up like the Patriots.

 

Don't forget their first game against the Dolphins where Brady was pulled from the game with, like a 42-14 lead and Matt Cassel threw an INT... they then put Brady back in and he threw for another TD. And the time they threw for a first down on fourth and, like, four with a, like, 5 TD lead.

[TheKilo]

[table]Player/Year|Attempts|Completions|Completion %|Yards|TDs|INTs|Rating|Wins

Brady '07|398|578|68.9|4806|50|8|117.2|17 and counting

Manning '04|336|497|67.6|4557|49|10|121.1|12[/table]

 

2 more picks in 80 less attempts, and as many as 5 less wins don't do much for that argument.

[See Red]

[table]Player/Year|Attempts|Completions|Completion %|Yards|TDs|INTs|Rating|Wins

Brady '07|398|578|68.9|4806|50|8|117.2|17 and counting

Manning '04|336|497|67.6|4557|49|10|121.1|12[/table]

 

2 more picks in 80 less attempts, and as many as 5 less wins don't do much for that argument.

 

Your using team success as a measure of individual accomplishment. Both players play less than half of any one game, even if they do take every snap. Additionally, there's 21 other starters on each team. The Colts defense was 29th best in the League in terms of yardage.

 

And again, there's a difference between getting your guys reps and running up the score... the Colts were never accused of doing the latter because they never did the latter. The Patriots, on the other hand, did... I gave you two examples.

[Sox Fan on Cape]

Your using team success as a measure of individual accomplishment. Both players play less than half of any one game, even if they do take every snap. Additionally, there's 21 other starters on each team. The Colts defense was 29th best in the League in terms of yardage.

 

And again, there's a difference between getting your guys reps and running up the score... the Colts were never accused of doing the latter because they never did the latter. The Patriots, on the other hand, did... I gave you two examples.

 

That's your perspective, and you're entitled to it, but it doesn't mean it's correct.

Oh, and by the way, want to compare play-off records for the Colts vs Pats for the last seven years ?

[YanksHater213]

The reason the Colts never could have been accused of running up the score was because their defense wasn't really a strong point so to speak.

[yeszir]

They'd certainly be featured in more commercials

[MANNYHOF24]

Would Manning have led the Pats back against the Colts, Ravens and Giants in the 4th quarter? I don't know, but those games Brady single handedly came through and got the Pats a win. I'm not saying Manning isn't great, but there is just something about Brady that is special when the game in on the line.

[ORS]

And again' date=' there's a difference between getting your guys reps and running up the score... the Colts were never accused of doing the latter because they never did the latter. The Patriots, on the other hand, did... I gave you two examples.[/quote']

So, what does that have to do with the discussion? Is Brady supposed to be penalized because the Colts D sucked that year making it more "legitimate" when Manning finished a game? It seems like you are willing to give Manning the benefit of having a bad D, in excusing the lower win total. Be consistent. The s***** Colts D should have no impact for either candidate.

 

The 80 or so extra attempts are all about the comparison of the quality of the teams. This year's Pats average 32 minutes and change of ball possession per game. That year's Colts averaged 28 and change. There's your extra attempts.

 

Where the question is answered is in the rates. Which is more preferable?

 

[table]QB|Att/TD|Att/INT|Yds/Att|Comp%

Manning|10.14|49.7|9.17|67.6

Brady|11.56|72.3|8.31|68.9[/table]

 

The score is two to two in the relevant stats. Now consider what each is being asked to do and the supporting cast on offense. Both had an unbelievable corps of receivers, very good tight ends, and and offensive line that gave them tons of time. The lone difference, and this impacts scheme a lot, is only one had a 1500+ yard back (Manning). This enables a team to stretch the field more, so it makes sense he scores higher in Yds/Att and Att/TD. Also, the Pats replace some of their running game with more screens and checkdowns than the Colts did, so it's no surprise Brady fares better in Comp% and Att/INT.

 

Bottom line, I think the differences are negligible and easily explained by differences in what each had in terms of help and scheme. These guys are the best two going, and the differences, to me, are so slight, that there's no wrong answer in who you'd take on the field. But that's on the field. For me, I'd take Brady because I think he's better off the field. I can't recall a time he rolled teammates under the bus like Manning did to his O-Line after the playoff loss to Pittsburg a couple of years ago. And I get the sense, from player comments in the media, that Brady commands more respect from his teammates. That may have something to do with how NE has seemingly always "found a way to win", while Indy, aside from one year, has managed to "just come up short".

[TheKilo]

Would Manning have led the Pats back against the Colts' date=' Ravens and Giants in the 4th quarter? I don't know, but those games Brady single handedly came through and got the Pats a win. I'm not saying Manning isn't great, but there is just something about Brady that is special when the game in on the line.[/quote']

 

I don't like using the phrase "single handedly" came back to seal the win. Football is and will always be a team sport, but I do feel Brady's teams come back more than Peyton's do for reasons ORS mentioned.

[mtbykr]

Brady and Manning are the best in the game now and both HOF bound. With that said look at what Brady did in previous years without a top WR corp. This year was the first year that Manning didn't have his normal stable of receivers and he struggled. I think both qb's can do great when they have a good situation (good WR's, time to throw, ect..) I think what makes Brady a little better is how he does when he's getting pressured, knocked down, end of game situations, ect... Brady is compared to 'joe cool' for a reason, it's because of his temperament and record when times are tough and the games on the line. Manning tends to break down a little when things aren't going well, while Brady keeps going.

 

Just my $.02

[See Red]

I say the defense was worse but that Colts team still destroyed some teams. 41-9 over Detroit on Thanksgiving where they shut it down after three quarters, 41-10 over Oakland, where they again shut it down early. 49-14 over Houston, 35-14 over Houston... none of these games did Peyton Manning throw a fourth quarter TD. Not to mention Peyton played only a single series in the season finale against Denver, Tom Brady played the entire game. The defense argument also was more or less made against the fact that Tom Brady has more wins this year than Manning did in 2004. Not Manning's fault. However, couldn't Manning's 2 extra INT's be because he made more high-pressure throws? You don't really have to force the ball when you're beating the Redskins by five TD's -- not so much the case when you're tied in the fourth quarter. Since when are garbage time TD's as impressive as close game TV's?

 

Interesting that you should ask which rates are more preferable because QB rating takes just those into affect. And Manning's 2004 rating was higher than Brady's this year. Given the 81 or whatever more attempts, he'd have shattered Brady's numbers.

 

I'd like to remind everyone that I'm on record as saying they're equally impressive, and I'd agree a difference is negligible.

 

And since I brought up the fact that Peyton Manning sat out week 17 against the Broncos... I'd like to remind everyone how Peyton Manning tends to do against my Broncos. He threw four TD's against them two weeks later.

 

I'd also remind everyone of how large a role Peyton Manning plays in playcalling.

[See Red]

Brady and Manning are the best in the game now and both HOF bound. With that said look at what Brady did in previous years without a top WR corp. This year was the first year that Manning didn't have his normal stable of receivers and he struggled. I think both qb's can do great when they have a good situation (good WR's, time to throw, ect..) I think what makes Brady a little better is how he does when he's getting pressured, knocked down, end of game situations, ect... Brady is compared to 'joe cool' for a reason, it's because of his temperament and record when times are tough and the games on the line. Manning tends to break down a little when things aren't going well, while Brady keeps going.

 

Just my $.02

 

Manning "struggled". Fascinating... let's take a look...

 

He threw 31 TD's, 14 INT's, and 4,040 yards. Interesting how Manning struggling is still better than Brady's 2002-06 averages, eh? Those are as follows...

 

25.8 TD 13.2 INT's 3743 YDS

 

And I'd remind you of two games in the playoffs in which Brady threw game ending INT's. On one of which he was saved by a Chargers fumble, and then drove for the win but typically you don't get two chances.

[ksushi]

Those Colts had a much softer schedule than the Pats this year. We played all the top tier teams. Out of the 3 other divisional playoffs, the pats played 4 of the 6 teams during the regular season, and obviously they won.

[ORS]

Interesting that you should ask which rates are more preferable because QB rating takes just those into affect. And Manning's 2004 rating was higher than Brady's this year.

Well, there's a reason I asked them independent of QB rating. QBr is a POS stat. I can't trust a stat that can't see the difference between 100% and 77.5%, 20 yd/att and 12.5 yd/att, etc.

 

Here are their component scores.

 

[table]Component|Manning|Brady

Comp%|1.880|1.945

Yardage|1.543|1.328

TD|1.972|1.730

INT|1.872|2.029[/table]

 

The weighting borders on ridiculous, IMO. Only 0.8 yds/att more almost carries the same weight as 20+ more attempts in between turnovers. Nonsense. Turnover margin is one of the most important things in football. Edit: I take that back, it carries MORE weight. Absurd.

 

Similar to the changes in baseball statistical approach that has occured over the last couple of decades, there is a group of people trying to apply the same methodology to football stats. QBr is on the way out. It's a bad stat.

[ORS]

Those Colts had a much softer schedule than the Pats this year. We played all the top tier teams. Out of the 3 other divisional playoffs' date=' the pats played 4 of the 6 teams during the regular season, and obviously they won.[/quote']

Not their fault, but the Pats div schedule was 6 cream puffs for a decent football team.

[See Red]

Not their fault' date=' but the Pats div schedule was 6 cream puffs for a decent football team.[/quote']

 

Meanwhile the Colts came from the best division in football... at the very least, tied with the NFC East.

 

Heh... QB rating is pretty bad, too. Like I said, I think they're both equal... if I had to give an edge, I'd go slightly towards Manning. One less game, team didn't run up the score...

 

But I think we can all agree that this argument will be moot when Jay Cutler throws 65 TD's in a season...

 

Or not. :dunno:

[Sox Fan on Cape]

There is another factor to consider. The effect that poor weather has on a QB's production. I would say that Manniny has an advantage playing at least 8 games in a dome. Where as, Brady must cope with the weather ( wind, rain, snow, etc ) in at least 11 games.

[TheKilo]

There is another factor to consider. The effect that poor weather has on a QB's production. I would say that Manniny has an advantage playing at least 8 games in a dome. Where as' date=' Brady must cope with the weather ( wind, rain, snow, etc ) in at least 11 games.[/quote']

 

Excellent, excellent point.

 

The only bad weather game I remember the Colts playing this season was in SD, with Manning's 6 picks. Brady had Baltimore and at home against the Jets, and maybe you could be generous with a few more.