- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Pretty tough to argue against Manning being the GOAT at this point
Posted on 9/24/13 at 9:50 am to RollTide1987
Posted on 9/24/13 at 9:50 am to RollTide1987
Yes, because "that's how we always did it" is the best line of reasoning.
Journalists and pundits for a long time said a lot of wrong things.

Journalists and pundits for a long time said a lot of wrong things.
Posted on 9/24/13 at 9:56 am to Sophandros
All of this arguing is silly. Everyone knows that Drew Brees is the best QB of all-time.
Posted on 9/24/13 at 9:57 am to LSU Piston
I have also learned that Matt Ryan is the 17th best QB to take a snap since 1975.
Posted on 9/24/13 at 9:59 am to RollTide1987
quote:
The above is what intellectually challenged people argue when they have nothing else to argue with. Forget the fact that, since journalists started covering modern football, the record of a QB and the team he plays for has always gone hand in hand. Forget the fact that every expert who does this for a living uses W-L record to factor in their opinion on every QB who has ever played the game.
Josh336 is smarter than all of them as well as the journalists and pundits who have come before them.
Sounds like you get all your analysis from ESPN

Posted on 9/24/13 at 10:11 am to craigbiggio
quote:
Sounds like you get all your analysis from ESPN
They've been doing it since before ESPN. The position of QB has always been regarded as the most important position in all of football. Everyone knows this. Every time a team wins or loses a football game, that win/loss goes to the team, the coach, and the QB. Once again...everyone knows this. It isn't recent news. It's no different than a pitcher getting the win or loss in a baseball game.
This post was edited on 9/24/13 at 10:12 am
Posted on 9/24/13 at 10:12 am to RollTide1987
quote:
Brady has a 17-7 playoff record while Manning has a 9-11 record.
I'm so tired of seeing such painfully stupid nonsense. It's almost depressing
Posted on 9/24/13 at 10:12 am to Sophandros
quote:
Yes, because "that's how we always did it" is the best line of reasoning.
It's better than some random internet message board poster saying it isn't the best line of reasoning simply because he says it isn't.
At least I have precedent on my side.
This post was edited on 9/24/13 at 10:13 am
Posted on 9/24/13 at 10:13 am to RollTide1987
quote:
It's no different than a pitcher getting the win or loss in a baseball game.
And intelligent fans know that pitcher's win/loss, like qb's win/loss is perhaps the most useless metric out there.
Posted on 9/24/13 at 10:15 am to RollTide1987
quote:
It's no different than a pitcher getting the win or loss in a baseball game.
Yeah...and that stat has really been devauled with advanced metrics.
W/Ls give you insight into team performance. Metrics can give you a better indicator of individual performance.
Posted on 9/24/13 at 10:15 am to RollTide1987
quote:
It's better than some random internet message board poster saying it isn't the best line of reasoning simply because he says it isn't.
I provided you with several bits of quantifiable data that focuses specifically on a qb's play and you completely disregarded it because it doesn't fit your simplistic, trite, and cliched narrative.
Posted on 9/24/13 at 10:22 am to Sophandros
quote:
I provided you with several bits of quantifiable data that focuses specifically on a qb's play and you completely disregarded it because it doesn't fit your simplistic, trite, and cliched narrative.
You hit me with stats. That's all that matters to you is stats. While those are important they aren't the end-all, be-all measures of a QB - especially in this era of the game. Trent Dilfer could probably put up decent numbers the way the rules are today. The numbers QBs put up in the regular season don't matter as much anymore because it's far easier to put up gaudy numbers in 2013 than it was in 1983. That's why Dan Marino's 1984 season and Joe Namath's 1967 season should be looked upon and marveled. They put up 5,000 yards and 4,000 yards respectively (the first QBs ever to do so) in an era where the rules favored the defense.
It would be 12 years before another QB threw for over 4,000 yards after Namath did it and it would be 24 years before another QB threw for over 5,000 yards after Marino did it. Keep in mind there were some damn fine QBs playing during this era. Some of the best who have ever played the game. So you can't say the passers got better. The rules just got more strict to allow offenses to put up bigger and better stats.
Posted on 9/24/13 at 10:35 am to RollTide1987
Your comment has nothing to do with what I posted.
You're either trolling or a complete idiot.
You're either trolling or a complete idiot.
Posted on 9/24/13 at 10:40 am to Sophandros
You gave me regular season and post-season QB rating, you gave me yards per attempt, and you gave me interception percentage.
Nothing but stats. To say I am obsessed with wins and losses as well as championships won, while ignoring the fact that you are obsessed with production, makes you the bigger troll my friend.
Nothing but stats. To say I am obsessed with wins and losses as well as championships won, while ignoring the fact that you are obsessed with production, makes you the bigger troll my friend.
Posted on 9/24/13 at 10:55 am to RollTide1987
No, you fool.
Your narrative is: more wins = better qb.
Mine is: better qb play = better qb
I provided evidence to support my claim while refuting your other claim that Manning plays well in the regular season and collapses in the playoffs by providing evidence that it is Brady, not Manning, who actually performs worse in the playoffs.
Your narrative is: more wins = better qb.
Mine is: better qb play = better qb
I provided evidence to support my claim while refuting your other claim that Manning plays well in the regular season and collapses in the playoffs by providing evidence that it is Brady, not Manning, who actually performs worse in the playoffs.
Posted on 9/24/13 at 11:07 am to Sophandros
quote:
I provided evidence to support my claim while refuting your other claim that Manning plays well in the regular season and collapses in the playoffs by providing evidence that it is Brady, not Manning, who actually performs worse in the playoffs.
And I provided evidence as to why that was so. Brady has played in 4 additional playoff games and, as has been noted before, has had inferior talent to throw the ball to for much of his career. Manning, however, has always had talented receivers to get the ball to. Not only that, he's had a superior running game for much of his career.
Posted on 9/24/13 at 11:10 am to RollTide1987
Since you seem to like factors that are totally out of their control (personnel), why don't you compare the defenses each of those guys played with the majority of their careers?
Posted on 9/24/13 at 11:15 am to RollTide1987
quote:Aside from Edgerrin James, who stopped playing for the Colts in 2005, Peyton Manning hasn't had much to work with at the running back position, bro. Joseph Addai, Kenton Keith, Dominic Rhoades, Donald Brown, Mike Hart, Willis McGahee, Montee Ball, Ronnie Hillman, and Knowshon Moreno? Come on, superior running game?
Manning, however, has always had talented receivers to get the ball to. Not only that, he's had a superior running game for much of his career.
Posted on 9/24/13 at 11:15 am to craigbiggio
quote:I would also like to see the comparisons.
Since you seem to like factors that are totally out of their control (personnel), why don't you compare the defenses each of those guys played with the majority of their careers?
Posted on 9/24/13 at 11:18 am to craigbiggio
quote:
Since you seem to like factors that are totally out of their control (personnel), why don't you compare the defenses each of those guys played with the majority of their careers?
Meaningless stats as both QBs played on teams that consistently won 12+ games every season. If the Colts were consistently a 9-7 or 10-6 team you might have something there.....but they weren't.
Posted on 9/24/13 at 11:19 am to benhamin5555
The Braves were the best baseball team in the 90's also.
Popular
Back to top
