Nfl Players Think Brady Is The Man To Build A Team Around

[ViriLudant]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/09/22/nfl-players-think-brady-is-the-man-to-build-a-team-around/

Unsurpising, really. He was chosen as the best NFL player last year by his fellow NFL players, and coaches back in '08 chose him as the best QB to build a team around.

[patsallday]

no surprise here.

[Moose Of Woe]

For now it's Brady pretty easily.

Beyond the next 4-5 years or so in the far future I'd say Rodgers.

That is, unless, Luck takes the NFL by storm. Luck has a great rushing attack and line so until we see him drafted to some sorry team (possibly the Colts) the jury is out on that one.

[GoPats]

The comments section looks like every Brady vs. Manning thread I've ever seen. It's pretty funny.

[DILLIGAFER]

Only a Brady fan would post something so stupid and rediculous.. on a COLTS forum. Pot sturrer.

[gspdx]

Hey-I think I'll run to a Pats message board and start a thread about all of Peyton's MVP awards. Or not.

Why waste my time?

[shakedownstreet]

tough crowd

[WSO]

seems fair

if Manning has a great season next season then the articles will revolve around Manning, same goes for Rodgers, Brees etc. it's all about whos hot at the moment and Bradys on fire

[shakedownstreet]

Only a Brady fan would post something so stupid and rediculous.. on a COLTS forum. Pot sturrer.

Hey-I think I'll run to a Pats message board and start a thread about all of Peyton's MVP awards. Or not.

Why waste my time?

it's a current article in the nfl section. you guys sounds like you're either jealous, or about ten years old

[Moose Of Woe]

seems fair

if Manning has a great season next season then the articles will revolve around Manning

Not with building a franchise around him as a QB, though. Not anymore - especially given his neck and the fact he's got 0-5 seasons to go.

At one time, say 3-4+ years ago, he would have been perfect to build a franchise around. Unfortunately the Colts fell far short of building a quality team around him as is painfully obvious. (Especially now with him out)

[number28]

NE can win games without Brady. They proved that.

Indy however, nope, can't find a way to win games without Peyton.

Peyton stats are better in every category.

Brady has more rings because of the superiority of his team.

Brady is great, but PM is greatEST.

[NYColt]

Please love my Brady

[MAC]

Not with building a franchise around him as a QB, though. Not anymore - especially given his neck and the fact he's got 0-5 seasons to go.

At one time, say 3-4+ years ago, he would have been perfect to build a franchise around. Unfortunately the Colts fell far short of building a quality team around him as is painfully obvious. (Especially now with him out)

Brady is less than a year and a half younger than Manning. His career isn't exactly heading up the escalator either - regardless of the recent success.

Rodgers appears to be the best QB that is still in his prime. But if someone were truly talking about building a franchise, someone like Stafford or Bradford would be a far more logical choice. There's a few possibilities out there, and it's a much more interesting debate.

[cmgww]

Brady is great when he has 10 seconds to throw...but the Jets proved last playoffs, get in his face and he becomes as mortal as anyone and looked hurried and pressured the whole game. Manning had to deal with that ALL season in 2010 and still put up one of his best statistical seasons. He had about 2 seconds to throw and still made plays to backups...Yes he had a high number of INTs last year, but that was due to injuties to the TE/WR core more than anything, and he admittedly forced things when he shouldn't have....just some food for thought. And as this season is playing out, is there any question as to who to build a team around? The Colts are a garbage fire without Manning. Brady could go down and the Pats would still have a playoff shot with Mallett/the other backup

[12>18]

Okay CMGWW, so you're logic about who to build a team around is based off of what Indy can't do without Peyton? So what you're saying is, Tom Brady wouldn't win games with Indy's current team? Or is it that the better the QB is for building a team around, the crappier a team you need to build? Seriously man, the people who play the game are saying these things, not some random and biased Patriots fans. Pick another team to root for this year and leave the message boards alone.

Oh, and every QB is fantastic with time to throw, and not so fantastic with someone in their face trying to destroy them. That isn't football IQ you're displaying, that is common freaking sense.

[everythingchanges]

Brady could go down and the Pats would still have a playoff shot with Mallett/the other backup

That has nothing to do with Brady vs. Manning but the Colts front office and decision makers not grooming a serviceable backup.

Mallet/Hoyer have been properly trained (by Brady and the coaching staff.) Colts front office gambled on Manning always being healthy and didn't take the future into consideration.

I think it's funny really how SOME (not all) Colts fans have to badmouth Brady to feel better about Peyton. I think it bugs them that there is a guy at Peyton's level out there...almost like a hot girl at a club that can't deal with the other hot competition. I'm a Pats fan and have no problem admitting that Manning is great, at Brady's level.

The only people that think Brady is a "System QB" are bitter Colts fans.

[MAC]

the people who play the game are saying these things, not some random and biased Patriots fans. Pick another team to root for this year and leave the message boards alone.

Without voicing any opinion what-so-ever on the Manning/Brady debate - a pointless perpetual motion machine that could solve the worlds energy crisis if harnessed - I have to point out the irony of the above comment.

It's the height of absurdity to come here with a Patriots handle, lose your temper about somebody defending Manning, and tell HIM to get off the board. It may have been "the people who play the game saying these things", but you apparently ARE a "random and biased Patriot fan", and this is the Colts forum!

[12>18]

Yes because only Tom Brady wears the number 12, you *. Word blanked out contains the letters d, o, l, and t.

[12>18]

And I want to know exactly what he was defending Manning from........Obviously not neck injuries. Nobody was attacking PM, which is kind of my point. Every Pats post turns into this eventually on here. If fans don't want to read about Brady being a good Qb, then maybe they should stick to the part of the forum that only discusses Colts football, and stay away from the part which discusses subjects about football, but not about the Colts.

Oh, and I didn't tell him to get off the boards, I told him to "leave them alone." It's gonna be a long season if every Colts fan starts getting worked up about people speaking about other QBs.

[ViriLudant]

NE can win games without Brady. They proved that.

Indy however, nope, can't find a way to win games without Peyton.

Peyton stats are better in every category.

Brady has more rings because of the superiority of his team.

Brady is great, but PM is greatEST.

Brady has better stats with comparable offenses.

If the Colts win 3 games, they will have the same differential that the Patriots had when they lost Brady.

'07 Patriots: 18-1.

'08 Patriots: 11-5.

7 game difference.

'10 Colts: 10-6

A 7 game differential: 3-13.

[chad72]

Brady has better stats with comparable offenses.

If the Colts win 3 games, they will have the same differential that the Patriots had when they lost Brady.

'07 Patriots: 18-1.

'08 Patriots: 11-5.

7 game difference.

'10 Colts: 10-6

A 7 game differential: 3-13.

Hey smarty pants, the records you posted are comparing apples to oranges, no postseason records to be tagged on since the Pats did not make the playoffs in 2008, you tried to sneak a couple of wins in there from 2007 to make the difference bigger, didn't ya, you sneaky one (should have expected that from a Pats fan, lol).

2007 Patriots went 16-0 in the regular season, 2008 Patriots went 11-5, thus a 5 game difference

So, the 2010 Colts went 10-6, the 2011 Colts should go 5-11 to make an argument that the Colts without Peyton are the same as the Pats without Brady.

[chad72]

Brady has better stats with comparable offenses.

If the Colts win 3 games, they will have the same differential that the Patriots had when they lost Brady.

'07 Patriots: 18-1.

'08 Patriots: 11-5.

7 game difference.

'10 Colts: 10-6

A 7 game differential: 3-13.

Hey smarty pants, the records you posted are comparing apples to oranges, no postseason records to be tagged on since the Pats did not make the playoffs in 2008, you tried to sneak a couple of wins in there from 2007 to make the difference bigger, didn't ya, you sneaky one (should have expected that from a Pats fan, lol).

2007 Patriots went 16-0 in the regular season, 2008 Patriots went 11-5, thus a 5 game difference

So, the 2010 Colts went 10-6, the 2011 Colts should go 5-11 to make an argument that the Colts without Peyton are the same as the Pats without Brady.

I am sure it just kills Pats fans that Manning may come out as a better addition by subtraction, whatever helps them sleep better at night, I guess .

[everythingchanges]

I just don't understand Colts fans obsession with Manning. (He's great, and though I think Brady is better, I think people when they remember this time will remember them both, not just one or the other, which Colts fans have a problem with for some reason.) But what has he done for you? 1 championship against Rex Grossman? He's also not exactly a great guy (throwing teammates under the bus, whining to the league to get rule changes.) What's the man crush? If you're going to have a man crush, find someone better looking or less of a loser.

I'm glad that at least one Colts fan admitted that it's a insecurity and competition thing where if Brady's name even gets mentioned, they feel the need to denigrate him or bring up Manning.

Also if you look at statistics, not bulk statistics (since Manning has played 4 more full years than Brady) Brady actually has the better regular season stats too...similar passing rating (and Brady plays outdoors), better TD to INT ratio etc. Also 3 MVPs after this year...that he actually deserved. (Everyone who isn't a Colts fan knows that Manning shouldn't have been MVP in 08 and 09 and got the award over better candidates based on name recognition.)

So brady wins the regular season and postseason, better record, everything.

Colts fans just can't face it that there is ANOTHER qb. It would be like if they were dating a hot girl and their friend was dating Selma Hayek. Even though there's no hatred between the two girls, the bf with the non Hayek gf always has to say "mine's better."

[ViriLudant]

Hey smarty pants, the records you posted are comparing apples to oranges, no postseason records to be tagged on since the Pats did not make the playoffs in 2008, you tried to sneak a couple of wins in there from 2007 to make the difference bigger, didn't ya, you sneaky one (should have expected that from a Pats fan, lol).

2007 Patriots went 16-0 in the regular season, 2008 Patriots went 11-5, thus a 5 game difference

So, the 2010 Colts went 10-6, the 2011 Colts should go 5-11 to make an argument that the Colts without Peyton are the same as the Pats without Brady.

I am sure it just kills Pats fans that Manning may come out as a better addition by subtraction, whatever helps them sleep better at night, I guess .

lol

Are you kidding me? It's Colt fans that are screaming that they suck more without Peyton than anyone else. I'm just bringing some realistic stats to the conversation.

But hey, keep crying about it. My stats are factual. The Patriots HAD to win those additional 2 games, so it's still applicable.

[shakedownstreet]

I just don't understand Colts fans obsession with Manning.

... edited for length ...

Colts fans just can't face it that there is ANOTHER qb. It would be like if they were dating a hot girl and their friend was dating Selma Hayek. Even though there's no hatred between the two girls, the bf with the non Hayek gf always has to say "mine's better."

you make a few good points, but then ruin it with a over generalizations & bias against manning

[SilentHill]

NE can win games without Brady. They proved that.

Indy however, nope, can't find a way to win games without Peyton.

Peyton stats are better in every category.

Brady has more rings because of the superiority of his team.

Brady is great, but PM is greatEST.

One season the pats won without Brady, because Brady for a LONG time was under-paid. He took pay-cuts to sign players and he made it happen. Now, Brady has a huge contract. If Brady goes down, don't expect the pats to be good.

Also his rings mean nothing to me, they should come with an asterisk like Barry Bonds home-run record. Spy-gate killed Brady's chances of being the best ever.

[chad72]

But hey, keep crying about it. My stats are factual. The Patriots HAD to win those additional 2 games, so it's still applicable.

REALLY, how is it that it is an apples to apples comparison? If Matt Cassel made the playoffs and had a game to go with it, we can compare it. Till then, it has to be a regular season comparison. No, it is flat out not applicable to me, just have to agree to disagree there.

Besides, I know the make up of my Colts team, and I don't need a Pats fan's approval to evaluate my team without Manning. But numbers are just that, numbers.

Each QB is a great one and is invaluable to their team. Each QB has certain qualities that the team is built around, and I find it hard to believe that any team with an elite QB does not have the other 2 phases of the team (D & ST) somewhat feeding off what the offense and the QB does on the field. Coaching, probably it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out where Belichick stands w.r.t Dungy or Caldwell. Do I make myself clear now? I have no intention to turn this into a ticking contest.

[chad72]

But hey, keep crying about it. My stats are factual. The Patriots HAD to win those additional 2 games, so it's still applicable.

REALLY, how is it that it is an apples to apples comparison? If Matt Cassel made the playoffs and had a game to go with it, we can compare it. Till then, it has to be a regular season comparison. No, it is flat out not applicable to me, just have to agree to disagree there.

Besides, I know the make up of my Colts team, and I don't need a Pats fan's approval to evaluate my team without Manning. But numbers are just that, numbers.

Each QB is a great one and is invaluable to their team. Each QB has certain qualities that the team is built around, and I find it hard to believe that any team with an elite QB does not have the other 2 phases of the team (D & ST) somewhat feeding off what the offense and the QB does on the field. Coaching, probably it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out where Belichick stands w.r.t Dungy or Caldwell. Do I make myself clear now? I have no intention to turn this into a ticking contest.

[everythingchanges]

One season the pats won without Brady, because Brady for a LONG time was under-paid. He took pay-cuts to sign players and he made it happen. Now, Brady has a huge contract. If Brady goes down, don't expect the pats to be good.

Also his rings mean nothing to me, they should come with an asterisk like Barry Bonds home-run record. Spy-gate killed Brady's chances of being the best ever.

Silent Hill, the spygate thing is a copout. Everyone (including your team probably as well) was doing it, the Pats just didn't stop when Goodell told them and the rest of the league to. You'd be naive to think the Pats were the only team ever that did. Jimmy Johnson openly admitted that he did during the Cowboys SB years.

Also it isn't like steroids where steroids make the player stronger and more capable of putting the ball out of the yard.

heck, I don't put an asterisk next to Peyton's SB because him and Polian had to whine to the league to get a rule change and in effect pussify the defenses he couldn't beat.

[patsallday]

brady is playing at the hightest level of any QB in the NFL right now.

there's no arguing that.

[patsallday]

heck, I don't put an asterisk next to Peyton's SB because him and Polian had to whine to the league to get a rule change and in effect pussify the defenses he couldn't beat.

you put an asterisk next to it because he beat rex grossman lol lol

[everythingchanges]

you put an asterisk next to it because he beat rex grossman lol lol

True lol.

[chad72]

you put an asterisk next to it because he beat rex grossman lol lol

But apparently, Rex and the Bears were good enough to beat Brees and the Saints in convincing fashion in the NFCCG . Besides, the Colts that year beat the #1, #2, and #3 D in the Bears, Ravens and Pats, if I remember the order right. That alone should warrant some respect there. Plus, we led the playoffs in rushing D and rushing O. Too many things were going right in that playoff run that we probably would have overcome any QB, just saying .

[patsallday]

But apparently, Rex and the Bears were good enough to beat Brees and the Saints in convincing fashion in the NFCCG

yep.

in the snow and cold of chicago.

dome teams are soft in the cold weather, we all know this lol

[Andy]

Let's not turn this into a Manning-Brady conversation...

But I think if you build a team around 1 person, it's Peyton Manning. Why? Because that's what the Colts been doing for the last 10 years, and they've won a SB. The Patriots DO NOT build their team around Brady, because they build their team around nothing. They stock up with young talent, and Belicheck turns some of them into stars like Mayo, or Hernandez, or Gronkowski, or Meriweather (not any more), or McCourty. They're asking to build a team around 1 person, and the Colts do that right now, and they succeed. The Patriots clearly don't build around Brady becuase they went 11-5 without him. Belicheck is the guy they "build around" So I'm being honest and I say Manning, not because I'm a Colts fan, because the Colts build their team around Manning and they succeed. However, building your team around one person is not the smartest thing... look at us now...

[shakedownstreet]

Let's not turn this into a Manning-Brady conversation...

huh?

[everythingchanges]

How do you define success? 1 SB in 13 years?

The Colts are capable of winning without Manning. Brady, Brees, Rodgers et al could all lead the team deep into the playoffs...and if Polian had drafted better and they had taken the preseason more seriously in years past, they'd have a back up quarterback that could do a serviceable job.

It isn't the fact that "Manning is the team" it's the fact that you guys never bothered to groom a back-up.

[patsallday]

huh?

lol

[Yehoodi]

Let's not turn this into a Manning-Brady conversation...

But I think if you build a team around 1 person, it's Peyton Manning. Why? Because that's what the Colts been doing for the last 10 years, and they've won a SB. The Patriots DO NOT build their team around Brady, because they build their team around nothing. They stock up with young talent, and Belicheck turns some of them into stars like Mayo, or Hernandez, or Gronkowski, or Meriweather (not any more), or McCourty. They're asking to build a team around 1 person, and the Colts do that right now, and they succeed. The Patriots clearly don't build around Brady becuase they went 11-5 without him. Belicheck is the guy they "build around" So I'm being honest and I say Manning, not because I'm a Colts fan, because the Colts build their team around Manning and they succeed. However, building your team around one person is not the smartest thing... look at us now...

I have heard this point alot "they build the team around Manning" and I am not sure what that actually means??? . . . well specifically what it means in terms of one team doing more building around one player than another team . . .

I know we can't really get an answer from the media and they just like to talk, look "smart" and talk in cliches . . .

But honestly, from any of you colts fans, I like to hear an assesment of how/what the colts do differently that makes them build around a player more than another franchise . . . cause i don't see them any different than any other franchises . . . i would please like to hear specific examples and not generalizations as i can get from the NFL network . . . thanks . . .

[SilentHill]

Silent Hill, the spygate thing is a copout. Everyone (including your team probably as well) was doing it, the Pats just didn't stop when Goodell told them and the rest of the league to. You'd be naive to think the Pats were the only team ever that did. Jimmy Johnson openly admitted that he did during the Cowboys SB years.

Also it isn't like steroids where steroids make the player stronger and more capable of putting the ball out of the yard.

heck, I don't put an asterisk next to Peyton's SB because him and Polian had to whine to the league to get a rule change and in effect pussify the defenses he couldn't beat.

Typical patriot fan response.

Call it what you want, Pats got CAUGHT cheating. Asterisk.

Colts at least beat the Bears fair and square.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EU1O-hGxgg