One Guy's Study Putting Manning At No 1

[dw49]

Well ... he didn't actually say he was No 1 . He says considering the defenses , his won lost record is the best ever. Hope this is OK in the Colt section as most of this was achieved as a Colt.

 

Anyway .. here's the link if interested.

 

 

 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=1808

[AllYouNeedIsLuck]

1. Montana

2. Manning

3. Elway

4. Marino

5. Brady

 

My opinion... Can't overlook Montana's winning ways 

[GoColts8818]

1. Montana

2. Manning

3. Elway

4. Marino

5. Brady

 

My opinion... Can't overlook Montana's winning ways 

Can't overlook that he was also maybe the QB of maybe the most stacked team in NFL history either. 

 

However, it's those kinds of things that make these kinds of debates fun and are why there will never really be an answer, it comes down to personal choice and what one person happens to value when rankings players. 

[dw49]

Can't overlook that he was also maybe the QB of maybe the most stacked team in NFL history either. 

 

However, it's those kinds of things that make these kinds of debates fun and are why there will never really be an answer, it comes down to personal choice and what one person happens to value when rankings players. 

 

 

 

I looked more closely at what this guy did and I think it's probably a bit too flawed. The teams with high powered offenses would tend to have defenses that might give up more points as a result of that. Not only for the obvious reasons like maybe more draft picks and money spent on the offensive side of the ball but maybe opposing teams might gamble more , knowing they will have to put more points up to win. It could also be that "prevent " defenses with big leads would add points to the defensive side of that team. 

 

Anything that has Bart Starr rated toward the bottom is probably at least questionable. Not that he was a top 10 QB but he should be at least upper half when rating QB's with a lot weighted toward wins. 

[the cardinal]

Can't overlook that he was also maybe the QB of maybe the most stacked team in NFL history either. 

 

However, it's those kinds of things that make these kinds of debates fun and are why there will never really be an answer, it comes down to personal choice and what one person happens to value when rankings players.

How were the '81 Niners were a stacked team? It was a team coming off a losing season with a bunch of young kids and a few vets. Classic underdogs on a magical ride. That team veeery similar to the Colts last season.

[BOTT]

1. Montana

2. Manning

3. Elway

4. Marino

5. Brady

 

My opinion... Can't overlook Montana's winning ways

You overlooked Bradshaw's "winning ways" pretty easily

[AllYouNeedIsLuck]

You overlooked Bradshaw's "winning ways" pretty easily

I never watched him play so I can't really say anything, but from what I've heard he had stacked teams and wasn't as talented as Montana. Just from what I've heard. I could be wrong. 

[BOTT]

I never watched him play so I can't really say anything, but from what I've heard he had stacked teams and wasn't as talented as Montana. Just from what I've heard. I could be wrong.

He was more talented than Montana....not that I would rank Bradshaw that high.

And Ol Joe played on some stacked teams himself

[Superman]

I looked more closely at what this guy did and I think it's probably a bit too flawed. The teams with high powered offenses would tend to have defenses that might give up more points as a result of that. Not only for the obvious reasons like maybe more draft picks and money spent on the offensive side of the ball but maybe opposing teams might gamble more , knowing they will have to put more points up to win. It could also be that "prevent " defenses with big leads would add points to the defensive side of that team. 

 

Anything that has Bart Starr rated toward the bottom is probably at least questionable. Not that he was a top 10 QB but he should be at least upper half when rating QB's with a lot weighted toward wins. 

 

I think it's meant to be a statistical analysis to consider the net impact a QB has on his team. Doesn't necessarily mean this is anyone's ranking of QBs. I don't think this guy would say Terry Bradshaw was a better QB than Drew Brees, or Marc Bulger was better than Eli Manning, or Daunte Culpepper was better than Troy Aikman. 

[ColtsBTM12]

I love Peyton and to me he already is the GOAT, but for that to be fact he has to win more championships. He is simply too great of a player to retire with only one ring.

[crazycolt1]

You overlooked Bradshaw's "winning ways" pretty easily

I agree. 4 super bowl wins with 2 super bowl MVPs and a HOFer. Kind of hard to overlook those numbers. Most thought the Steel Curtain were responsible for those super bowl wins but looking at the super bowl stats Terry played very well as their QB.

[crazycolt1]

I love Peyton and to me he already is the GOAT, but for that to be fact he has to win more championships. He is simply too great of a player to retire with only one ring.

Just as always, the QB gets way too much credit for wins and entirely too much blame for losses as well. It's not a coincidence that PMs only super bowl win came when the defense and running game showed up. ( playing Rex Grossman in the rain also helped) 

[BOTT]

Just as always, the QB gets way too much credit for wins and entirely too much blame for losses as well. It's not a coincidence that PMs only super bowl win came when the defense and running game showed up. ( playing Rex Grossman in the rain also helped)

I don't think rain helped a dome team

[crazycolt1]

I don't think rain helped a dome team

If you look at the turnovers and the interceptions that the Bears had and not think that the rain had nothing to do with is really pretty narrow minded. Jeff Saturday and P. Manning practiced with cold wet footballs while making their preparations for the super bowl. The rain had everything to do with the Colts running the football. The Bears had a very good running game that season but the wet football proved to be their downfall. The Colts themselves had their share of turnovers but the Colts defense didn't give up the points due to those turnovers like the Bears did. If my memory serves me I think the wet football caused at least one back to back turnovers in that game. The rain did play a large part in that super bowl.

[Fx Stryker]

Just as always, the QB gets way too much credit for wins and entirely too much blame for losses as well. It's not a coincidence that PMs only super bowl win came when the defense and running game showed up. ( playing Rex Grossman in the rain also helped) 

 

 

 

Personally I think the defense stepping up is a little exaggerated, not to say they weren't big. The whole SB was a team effort just like the previous 40 SBs. It wasn't carried by the defense like most make it sound.

 

Like many point out well the defense stepped up big. However no one points out Peyton and the offense beat the league's top 3 defense in a row. Beat the #1 Ravens, the #2 Patriots, and the #3 Bears. How many QBs and their offense have done that?

 

However the defense only stopped Larry Johnson to be honest. Think about it. The Chiefs passing attack was dismal the entire season, and Larry Johnson was their only bright spot, and the worst run defense stopped him. Which was awesome. I just think this one performance is stretched over the entire playoffs. But this is a win by the defense.

 

The defense really wasn't a giant factor against the Ravens. The time of possession was nearly 40/20 in favor of the Colts. And the little time the Ravens offense did have the ball they we're being shut down. Jamaal Lewis was above his season ypc, but he only got to touch the ball a dozen times or so. I would call this a win by the offense. They dictated everything, and anything the entire game.

 

The Patriots game. Well that wasn't a shut down outing by the defense by any means. The offense was a much bigger factor for the win.

 

The Bears was another good outing by the defense, but the offense had a great outing also. So did special teams. We were a complete team, and better well prepared.

[MakeItWayne]

I love Peyton and to me he already is the GOAT, but for that to be fact he has to win more championships. He is simply too great of a player to retire with only one ring.

I agree 100%.  I've always thought that had he won that 2nd title in 2009, there's no more debate on who the GOAT is.  4 MVP's, 2 rings in a 4 year span, most likely 2 SB MVP's, tons of Pro Bowls and All NFL First Teams, plus all of the regular season records.  But with that loss he might have to win at least 2 more to really be considered the GOAT.  What also hurts him is his terrible playoff record.  A 9-11 record in the postseason is what everyone brings up when you're trying to make a case for Peyton. It's a shame that he could go on to break all the big regular season records and people will still say "yeaaa, but he only won one ring though."  Oh well, he's #1 in my book!

[crazycolt1]

I agree 100%.  I've always thought that had he won that 2nd title in 2009, there's no more debate on who the GOAT is.  4 MVP's, 2 rings in a 4 year span, most likely 2 SB MVP's, tons of Pro Bowls and All NFL First Teams, plus all of the regular season records.  But with that loss he might have to win at least 2 more to really be considered the GOAT.  What also hurts him is his terrible playoff record.  A 9-11 record in the postseason is what everyone brings up when you're trying to make a case for Peyton. It's a shame that he could go on to break all the big regular season records and people will still say "yeaaa, but he only won one ring though."  Oh well, he's #1 in my book!

I agree with you on Manning. Out of those 11 playoff loses how many of those games were results of poor special teams play and less than average defenses? Quite a few of those playoffs loses Manning had his team with the lead or in a position to win when very poor defenses gave it up. A couple of loses also came when the FG kicker couldn't hit makeable FGs. There were a couple of game lost due to the special teams giving up huge chunks of yardage on kickoffs and punt returns. In my opinion the Colts and Bill Polian jumped on Mannings back and road him for what it was worth. How many of those division titles came from playing in a very poor division? It showed up in the playoffs when the Colts faced teams that had more balance. 

[crazycolt1]

Personally I think the defense stepping up is a little exaggerated, not to say they weren't big. The whole SB was a team effort just like the previous 40 SBs. It wasn't carried by the defense like most make it sound.

 

Like many point out well the defense stepped up big. However no one points out Peyton and the offense beat the league's top 3 defense in a row. Beat the #1 Ravens, the #2 Patriots, and the #3 Bears. How many QBs and their offense have done that?

 

However the defense only stopped Larry Johnson to be honest. Think about it. The Chiefs passing attack was dismal the entire season, and Larry Johnson was their only bright spot, and the worst run defense stopped him. Which was awesome. I just think this one performance is stretched over the entire playoffs. But this is a win by the defense.

 

The defense really wasn't a giant factor against the Ravens. The time of possession was nearly 40/20 in favor of the Colts. And the little time the Ravens offense did have the ball they we're being shut down. Jamaal Lewis was above his season ypc, but he only got to touch the ball a dozen times or so. I would call this a win by the offense. They dictated everything, and anything the entire game.

 

The Patriots game. Well that wasn't a shut down outing by the defense by any means. The offense was a much bigger factor for the win.

 

The Bears was another good outing by the defense, but the offense had a great outing also. So did special teams. We were a complete team, and better well prepared.

I agree with most of your comment. To say the Colts defense was a good outing is kind of understated. Holding the Bears to 265 total years was very good. Having 5 turnovers was also very good. But having 2 interceptions one with an TD was more than very good. 

[bayone]

Can't overlook that he was also maybe the QB of maybe the most stacked team in NFL history either. 

 

However, it's those kinds of things that make these kinds of debates fun and are why there will never really be an answer, it comes down to personal choice and what one person happens to value when rankings players. 

 

TRUE, hard to get perfect objective ratings when playing on a TEAM CONCEPT

[BOTT]

If you look at the turnovers and the interceptions that the Bears had and not think that the rain had nothing to do with is really pretty narrow minded. Jeff Saturday and P. Manning practiced with cold wet footballs while making their preparations for the super bowl. The rain had everything to do with the Colts running the football. The Bears had a very good running game that season but the wet football proved to be their downfall. The Colts themselves had their share of turnovers but the Colts defense didn't give up the points due to those turnovers like the Bears did. If my memory serves me I think the wet football caused at least one back to back turnovers in that game. The rain did play a large part in that super bowl.

You're nuts

[bayone]

  If my memory serves me I think the wet football caused at least one back to back turnovers in that game. The rain did play a large part in that super bowl.

 

dont knoiw about rest of post with rain , Peyton even though practiced with wet ball was not supposed to be able to play anyway in wet conditions

 

HOWEVER there was a back to back turnover , addai giving ball right back after Colts getting it in good field position but i cant say if just 1 of those things or if rain had something to do with it, 

 

On a raining wet field Hayden's footwork to stay in bounds on IT catch and then run for td was amazing , so if rain  much a factor i still cant believe he was able to catch ball and keep heel raised so as not to be out of bounds on IT catch  , that's hard on dry surface

[crazycolt1]

You're nuts

I am nuts? Were you watching the same super bowl as me? That was super bowl played on Feb 4, 1997? The wet football contributed to 6 fumbles with 5 being turnovers. Next thing you will tell me that the Colts running for 191 yards and Manning only passing for 239 yards had nothing to do with the rain. I guess the Colts running 8 consecutive running plays had nothing to do with the weather? Now when in the History of Manning did the Colts run 8 in a row?  Maybe you should go back and re watch that game.

[BOTT]

I am nuts? Were you watching the same super bowl as me? That was super bowl played on Feb 4, 1997? The wet football contributed to 6 fumbles with 5 being turnovers. Next thing you will tell me that the Colts running for 191 yards and Manning only passing for 239 yards had nothing to do with the rain. I guess the Colts running 8 consecutive running plays had nothing to do with the weather? Now when in the History of Manning did the Colts run 8 in a row?  Maybe you should go back and re watch that game.

It obviously affected the Colts game plan, but to say it helped a dome team like the Colts more than the Bears is ridiculous.

[Superman]

If you look at the turnovers and the interceptions that the Bears had and not think that the rain had nothing to do with is really pretty narrow minded. Jeff Saturday and P. Manning practiced with cold wet footballs while making their preparations for the super bowl. The rain had everything to do with the Colts running the football. The Bears had a very good running game that season but the wet football proved to be their downfall. The Colts themselves had their share of turnovers but the Colts defense didn't give up the points due to those turnovers like the Bears did. If my memory serves me I think the wet football caused at least one back to back turnovers in that game. The rain did play a large part in that super bowl.

 

It wasn't just the rain. It was the fact that the run was working, and well. I'd like to think that we would have kept running the football in any game, so long as it was working (remember Rhodes shaking Urlacher in the hole???)

 

Also, something people forget, the Bears kept checking to Cover 2 every time Manning started doing his presnap thing. And as soon as Urlacher gave his arm pump and stepped back off the line, Manning called out "Orange 12," and we ran the ball. And it wasn't just the usually stretch play, we were running dives up the middle, off tackle strongside, etc. And the Bears simply couldn't stop it.

 

The offense was probably a little more conservative in that game because of the rain. And we checked into some third down run plays when we were already in field goal range, something that maybe we wouldn't have done in better weather. But there's no denying that the rain played a huge role in that game.

[Superman]

I am nuts? Were you watching the same super bowl as me? That was super bowl played on Feb 4, 1997? The wet football contributed to 6 fumbles with 5 being turnovers. Next thing you will tell me that the Colts running for 191 yards and Manning only passing for 239 yards had nothing to do with the rain. I guess the Colts running 8 consecutive running plays had nothing to do with the weather? Now when in the History of Manning did the Colts run 8 in a row?  Maybe you should go back and re watch that game.

 

Feb 4, 2007. 

 

[bayone]

I love Peyton and to me he already is the GOAT, but for that to be fact he has to win more championships. He is simply too great of a player to retire with only one ring.

 

know its an excuse, but did Polian every really give him a balanced team, maybe just to much pressure placed on him, he led alot at tail end of a playoff game and then D with little time left often let us Colt fans down, 

 

also only year we got healthy at end was year we won

 

somehow I think if Polian built a balanced  monster like Chuck is we'd / hed of won more, of course thats speculation

[trueblueblood]

Peyton= GOAT

[jvan1973]

they should put this stuff on footballs

http://girlsjustwannahaveguns.com/2013/07/someone-invented-magic-and-it-is-freaking-us-out/

I agree with you on Manning. Out of those 11 playoff loses how many of those games were results of poor special teams play and less than average defenses? Quite a few of those playoffs loses Manning had his team with the lead or in a position to win when very poor defenses gave it up. A couple of loses also came when the FG kicker couldn't hit makeable FGs. There were a couple of game lost due to the special teams giving up huge chunks of yardage on kickoffs and punt returns. In my opinion the Colts and Bill Polian jumped on Mannings back and road him for what it was worth. How many of those division titles came from playing in a very poor division? It showed up in the playoffs when the Colts faced teams that had more balance.

[dw49]

know its an excuse, but did Polian every really give him a balanced team, maybe just to much pressure placed on him, he led alot at tail end of a playoff game and then D with little time left often let us Colt fans down, 

 

also only year we got healthy at end was year we won

 

somehow I think if Polian built a balanced  monster like Chuck is we'd / hed of won more, of course thats speculation

 

 

Just too many "record contracts" for those Polian teams to be balanced. The result was not only a sometimes "iffy" defense but no depth and horrendous special teams. Just hard to avoid when you needed so many league minimum players to stay under the cap.I think the Pats did a way better job in determining which and how many star players they could afford to keep. 

[dgambill]

There are soo many "Great" qbs it's hard to say but its hard for me not to rank them in this order.

 

#1 Dan Marino

#2 John Unitas

#3 John Elway

#4 Joe Montana

#5 Peyton Manning

 

After that I think its Brady, Neimeith, Bradshaw and an elite few others. I don't think you can discount how much some of those guys did with less talent and supporting cast and how much those guys improved their teams. If there was a wins above replacement like for baseball I think its pretty evident that Dan Marino would be on top. The eras that some of these guys played in is so different too...where you could mug a receiver and get away with it compared to today's game.

[superrep1967]

1. Montana

2. Manning

3. Elway

4. Marino

5. Brady

 

My opinion... Can't overlook Montana's winning ways 

Montana never even throw 4000 yards in a season. The most touchdowns in a season was 31 and most seasons he was well below even that number. He just got a lot of hype because the 49er's were so good at the time. 

[superrep1967]

know its an excuse, but did Polian every really give him a balanced team, maybe just to much pressure placed on him, he led alot at tail end of a playoff game and then D with little time left often let us Colt fans down, 

 

also only year we got healthy at end was year we won

 

somehow I think if Polian built a balanced  monster like Chuck is we'd / hed of won more, of course thats speculation

Yeah Peyton and Bob won our only Super Bowl. 

[bayone]

Just too many "record contracts" for those Polian teams to be balanced. The result was not only a sometimes "iffy" defense but no depth and horrendous special teams. Just hard to avoid when you needed so many league minimum players to stay under the cap.I think the Pats did a way better job in determining which and how many star players they could afford to keep. 

 

agree on Pats handling better

 

I forgot about special teams, Like the 50 yard  return we allowed & famous timeout  Vs Jets in playoffs when we had lead & kicked off with maybe a minute left

 

Special teams gave me a special pain in the neck

[bayone]

Yeah Peyton and Bob won our only Super Bowl. 

 

I imagine by now Irsay has seen and Grig / Chuck realize past mistakes and  handle things better going forward, we should win more super bowls  

[bayone]

There are soo many "Great" qbs it's hard to say but its hard for me not to rank them in this order.

 

#1 Dan Marino

#2 John Unitas

#3 John Elway

#4 Joe Montana

#5 Peyton Manning

 

After that I think its Brady, Neimeith, Bradshaw and an elite few others. I don't think you can discount how much some of those guys did with less talent and supporting cast and how much those guys improved their teams. If there was a wins above replacement like for baseball I think its pretty evident that Dan Marino would be on top. The eras that some of these guys played in is so different too...where you could mug a receiver and get away with it compared to today's game.

 

Growing up in the 1950's  and following football all those years Unitas for me will always be the best, will take alot more to overcome him , Peyton might of had a chance if won more super bowls, but for me Unitas is the standard 

[dw49]

Growing up in the 1950's  and following football all those years Unitas for me will always be the best, will take alot more to overcome him , Peyton might of had a chance if won more super bowls, but for me Unitas is the standard 

 

 

I'm of the same generation... born in 49. I have to agree , there was only one John Unitas. The only thing I don't understand looking back is how could that team lose with all those super stars .Unitas,  Moore , Mackey , Berry , Parker , Marchetti and the rest. How about Big Daddy Liscome ? I really don't remember him all that well as I didn't become an avid fan until about 1961. But just google that guy and you'll find people that think he may have been the most dominant guy ever to play that position.What an amazing story that man was. I was in total awe reading accounts of his off filed stuff as well as descriptions of his talent. Just crazy good reading.

 

 Must be that some teams just had better balance than us .. we sure did bury them all with "star power."

[BobbyMorris94]

Manning is one of the best, that's all you can ever say. I had to give a speech once on why Brady was better. We had to give the opposite viewpoint of what we believed on an emotionally charged issue. So while everyone gave their speech on serious and sometimes even depressing matters, I took the chance to make people laugh. I mean you can have a preference, but what I learned is no one can really say who is better, and that is just in this generation. It will always be debatable.

 

But I still look back at the Super Bowl run as miraculous. It was like the one true glimpse of what we tried to always be as a team over the years but failed to do. Sure Manning helped a mediocre team at times look phenomenal. But they did win one for him regardless of what anyone says.

 

My name is BobbyMorris94 on here because me and my friend always loved Rob Morris on video games and in real life and gave him the nickname. Getting Booger and starting him over that scrub Gardner that got ran over all year and getting Bob Sanders back gave this team new life.

 

Just have to love the defense that year. They seemed to actually stunt and play the run with Mathis and Freeney and it was lights out with the rest of the squad clicking better than they ever did. I feel guys really put it all on the line, and Rob Morris was a big part of that and led by example. But Bob Sanders was the best safety I ever saw to take the field when was healthy. I don’t care what anyone says. He impacted the game more than any defender I can remember.

 

Our defense won us that Super Bowl, and lost us the next one we made it to along with the special teams, but that was a much different unit.

 

The best team wins the Super Bowl, not the best quarterback. Sometimes the best team goes 10-6 in the regular season and catches fire. Sometimes they have arguably the best quarterback, but the Colts were the best team that year because we fixed our horrid defense miraculously when it mattered. And that's why it was so sweet. That level of redemption after all those years getting run over by teams and stomped by the Pats in the playoffs will be hard to overcome as a fan. That was the best championship ever in football for me and will be almost impossible to top even if we win it all again. Ok well Luck getting one his second year would be sweet considering where we were just 2 years ago to this day. But man, that run still gives me the butterflies. Our defense was one of the best I ever saw take the field for those four games.

 

So if we ever can establish a solid all-around team and defense, and Luck does progress to elite like all signs indicate, we should become a dynasty. We have some curveballs coming for teams this year, should be interesting to see how much this team grows from year one to year two...

[bayone]

I'm of the same generation... born in 49. I have to agree , there was only one John Unitas. The only thing I don't understand looking back is how could that team lose with all those super stars .Unitas,  Moore , Mackey , Berry , Parker , Marchetti and the rest. How about Big Daddy Liscome ? I really don't remember him all that well as I didn't become an avid fan until about 1961. But just google that guy and you'll find people that think he may have been the most dominant guy ever to play that position.What an amazing story that man was. I was in total awe reading accounts of his off filed stuff as well as descriptions of his talent. Just crazy good reading.

 

 Must be that some teams just had better balance than us .. we sure did bury them all with "star power."

 Johnny Unitas to be the best ever to play the game. He holds three NFL championships, one of them the Super Bowl. Additionally, when he retired, he had many records, such as most pass completions, most touchdowns, and most consecutive games throwing touchdown passes., & REVOLUTIONIZED GAME

 

DO NOT GET ME STARTED WISH I NEW WHERE TO GO ON LONG THING I WROTE ON HIM < BUT NOT GOING TO POST IT A 4th time thopugh has been awhile

 

all will say when asked by a flock of reporters why in world would u risk throwing to  mutcheller ( sp ) in next to last play of OT win in 58 just before Ameche run, esp as if picked off was a sideline pass and would of been returned for a winning td for Giants , 

 

HE SAID WHEN U KNOW WHAT U R DOING ITS NOT A RISK

 

when asked why did u just not take the field goal a few plays back

 

He said thats not how I wanted to win this game

 

HE WAS THE BOSS MORE THAN PEYTON

 

 

were some shocking losses, Unitas came in late and played hurt in SB 3, hurt all year, would of won if Earl Morral on a Flea Flicker only saw a wide open WR with no one near him for easy TD but thats wasnt in the cards I guess

 

Jim Brown ran nuts and Browns beat Us once like by massive score to 0, not sure if was for NFL championship or for who plays in Superbowl, think nfl championship but really not sure

 

Packers of the 60's had Lombardi, Bart Star played 56 to 71  and a backfield of paul hurning and Jim Taylor, best 1- 2 punch possibly in NFL history , Taylor had been the Pack's all-time leading rusher for over fifty years before Ahman Green came along, but he still holds the records for single season and career touchdowns , over 80 , and 5 straight probowls 

with those guys packers won from 57 through 66 4 nfl titles and first SB, &   Taylor played 58 to 66 so missed 57 win, in 67 still won SB 2 Vs oakland, with star & lombardi , still had star ,  still had  ray nitche, hern atterly other greats & LOMBARDI

 

so were some great teams back then , great times , less teams, 14 games , man an offseason from that would hurt today 

but competition was good among best teams

 

Have a great weekend,  I'm shuting this computer down for night, rest a bit , eat some good food etc

 

will he on & off over weekend

[luvdacolts67]

know its an excuse, but did Polian every really give him a balanced team, maybe just to much pressure placed on him, he led alot at tail end of a playoff game and then D with little time left often let us Colt fans down, 

 

also only year we got healthy at end was year we won

 

somehow I think if Polian built a balanced  monster like Chuck is we'd / hed of won more, of course thats speculation

You have hit the nail on the head,  I believe that the Colts wasted the GOAT with the way they built the team.  Too small and always injured.   I love what Pagano and Grigson are doing.  I think Luck will win more SB's and will be a great QB but never as good as Peyton.  The Colts are finally going in the right direction IMO. 

[GoColts8818]

How were the '81 Niners were a stacked team? It was a team coming off a losing season with a bunch of young kids and a few vets. Classic underdogs on a magical ride. That team veeery similar to the Colts last season.

The 81 49ers were not one of the most stacked team in NFL history but I have a feeling if that was the only Super Bowl won by Montana he wouldn't be on this list.  His last two wins though came on two of the most stacked teams in NFL history and you can't just ignore that. 

 

With that said I don't have an issue with Montana being on this list if people want to put them up there.  I just have more of an issue if people want to put him on the list only because he just wins without factoring other factors.  I've gone on the record many times saying team accomplishments are not a good way to measure individual players.  Look at Jerry Rice when was the last time someone said he was the best WR to ever play the game just because he was on four Super Bowl Championship teams?  Most people point to his solo accomplishments to make that case for him. 

 

Like I said in my first post, what makes these arguments so much fun and never ending is that different things matter to different people on different levels when making decisions on who is the "best of all time".