Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

The Case for Peyton (vs. Brady)


Recommended Posts

We always hear about how Brady is better than Manning going head to head.  Well, I think that is all misguided.  Let's look at some facts:

 

(1) Head to head in playoffs: Manning 2, Brady 2

Home games for Manning: 2;  Home games for Brady: 2

 

(2) Head to head in AFC Championship Games: Manning 2, Brady 1

Home games for Manning:2;  Home games for Brady: 1

 

See the pattern - home team wins.  Now, let's see how that plays out overall.

(3) Head to head overall: Brady 10, Manning 5

 

In the 15 match-ups between Manning and Brady. Brady has played at home 9 times.  Since the home team always seems to have the edge, Brady should be 9-6 against Manning.  Brady is 1 game better than that at 10-5,

 

Now, the first 2 Manning-Brady matchups were in 2001.  The Colts were a bad team in 2001 (finished 6-10).  So, the real rivalry began when both teams were good, which was in 2003.  So, if you take out the 2001 season, Brady would hold an 8-5 record.  And, how about that.  Of those 13 games, Brady had 8 at home.

 

So, going from 2003 forward, Brady should be 8-5 against Manning and he is exactly that (no better, no worse).  

 

In effect, Manning and Brady are even.  

 

Now, if you want to throw in the fact that Brady had some incredible defenses back in the 2003 time frame, the argument could be made then that Manning comes out on top.

 

If you are wondering how many of those 13 games were won by the road team, here they are:

2003: At Ind: NE 38, Colts 34

2005: At NE: Colts 40, NE 21

2006: At NE: Colts 27, NE 20

2007: At Ind: NE 24, Colts 20

Link to post
Share on other sites

We always hear about how Brady is better than Manning going head to head.  Well, I think that is all misguided.  Let's look at some facts:

 

(1) Head to head in playoffs: Manning 2, Brady 2

Home games for Manning: 2;  Home games for Brady: 2

 

(2) Head to head in AFC Championship Games: Manning 2, Brady 1

Home games for Manning:2;  Home games for Brady: 1

 

See the pattern - home team wins.  Now, let's see how that plays out overall.

(3) Head to head overall: Brady 10, Manning 5

 

In the 15 match-ups between Manning and Brady. Brady has played at home 9 times.  Since the home team always seems to have the edge, Brady should be 9-6 against Manning.  Brady is 1 game better than that at 10-5,

 

Now, the first 2 Manning-Brady matchups were in 2001.  The Colts were a bad team in 2001 (finished 6-10).  So, the real rivalry began when both teams were good, which was in 2003.  So, if you take out the 2001 season, Brady would hold an 8-5 record.  And, how about that.  Of those 13 games, Brady had 8 at home.

 

So, going from 2003 forward, Brady should be 8-5 against Manning and he is exactly that (no better, no worse).  

 

In effect, Manning and Brady are even.  

 

Now, if you want to throw in the fact that Brady had some incredible defenses back in the 2003 time frame, the argument could be made then that Manning comes out on top.

 

If you are wondering how many of those 13 games were won by the road team, here they are:

2003: At Ind: NE 38, Colts 34

2005: At NE: Colts 40, NE 21

2006: At NE: Colts 27, NE 20

2007: At Ind: NE 24, Colts 20

 

 

11 posts and he rolls it out......

 

sigh

Link to post
Share on other sites

SIGH..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Wait, what's wrong with his post?

Link to post
Share on other sites

SIGH..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

 

 

Rookie., ...............

:thmup:  :facepalm:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Threads like this aren't even needed anymore. Peyton Manning is simply a better player than Tom Brady, and it's not that close. It doesn't matter where the Patriots and Colts accrued their wins in head to head matchups in which the two players weren't directly competing against each other. This isn't a 1 on 1 game of basketball.

 

I'm a Patriots fan, and I'm tired of hearing people trying to make this an argument. The Superbowl in 2007 clearly left Brady shellshocked. His deep ball has been terrible since then, and he's been living off of a very limited set of skills (short dink and dunk passes) ever since. He's been horrific in the playoffs except in a few games where we were the heavy favorites. Manning has been excellent since 2007 or so. At this point I'm genuinely shocked when Tom plays well in the postseason, and that's pretty sad. He's done in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We always hear about how Brady is better than Manning going head to head.  Well, I think that is all misguided.  Let's look at some facts:

 

(1) Head to head in playoffs: Manning 2, Brady 2

Home games for Manning: 2;  Home games for Brady: 2

 

(2) Head to head in AFC Championship Games: Manning 2, Brady 1

Home games for Manning:2;  Home games for Brady: 1

 

See the pattern - home team wins.  Now, let's see how that plays out overall.

(3) Head to head overall: Brady 10, Manning 5

 

In the 15 match-ups between Manning and Brady. Brady has played at home 9 times.  Since the home team always seems to have the edge, Brady should be 9-6 against Manning.  Brady is 1 game better than that at 10-5,

 

Now, the first 2 Manning-Brady matchups were in 2001.  The Colts were a bad team in 2001 (finished 6-10).  So, the real rivalry began when both teams were good, which was in 2003.  So, if you take out the 2001 season, Brady would hold an 8-5 record.  And, how about that.  Of those 13 games, Brady had 8 at home.

 

So, going from 2003 forward, Brady should be 8-5 against Manning and he is exactly that (no better, no worse).  

 

In effect, Manning and Brady are even.  

 

Now, if you want to throw in the fact that Brady had some incredible defenses back in the 2003 time frame, the argument could be made then that Manning comes out on top.

 

If you are wondering how many of those 13 games were won by the road team, here they are:

2003: At Ind: NE 38, Colts 34

2005: At NE: Colts 40, NE 21

2006: At NE: Colts 27, NE 20

2007: At Ind: NE 24, Colts 20

 

well well well well . . . what do we have here . . . hmm . . . 

 

I see where you are coming from but teams are what they are . . . and understand and like that you qualified the 2001 season . . . I would only point that team was 5-13 till Brady showed up and also when the colts lost they lost by 4 scores and 3 scores respectively in 2001, true we did have one big loss 2005  . . . however the Pats were not always the 2003-2004 Pats . . . Manning almost lost to Matt Cassel for Christ sake . . . not many people fear the Pats offense in 2006 and the 2005 version lost well over half its starters on defense throw IR and FA, not to mention the 2009 team was not exacting inspiring and justifiably got smoked in the first round and not to mention Brady year back from ACL surgery  . . . and this year our top WR is a 7th rounder, college QB that no one wanted in FA . . . despite all of these we did not get smoked like Indy in 2001 and in a few of the case won the game . . .

 

So yes Indy was 6-10, but at the same time the 52 players outside of the QB have been good and have been bad for both players . . . and sometimes things even out . . . two of Peyton's wins '05 and '09 where when we were 10-6 . . . and remaining three (two more in '06 and this year) where when we did not have exactly the best of WR, in fact it was Brady's weakest help on the outside 2006 and 2013 . . .

 

so true Tom has two wins when the colts were 6-10, but all of manning wins were when we were either 10-6 or had our weakest WR core . . . so it works both ways once one looks at details . . .    

 

Good that Peyton won and won a playoff game and is 2-2 in the playoff and has plenty of time to add a few more wins . . . but if you step back and look at the teams and when the wins and losses came, each QB and team were helped by a good cast and not so good cast and things are not as even as you might think head to head . . .

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yehoodi - in my analysis, I didn't analyze the defense other than mention that the Patriots had an extremely good defense back when NE really started the rivalry (2003 and 2004).  My guess would be that the Patriots had a better defense than the Colts in MOST seasons dating back to 2001.  I suppose though that you would counter that by saying the Colts had the better offense though.  

 

In the end, my post was to make the point that Brady's 10-5 is not all it's cracked up to be.  That home field advantage is huge, as I think is evidenced by the facts in the post.  15 games head to head, and only 5 won by the visiting team.  

 

In the end, they are both great QBs, and this rivalry has been pretty unbelievable.  Both Colts and Patriots fans have been rewarded with an amazing amount of joy (and heartbreak).    

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yehoodi - in my analysis, I didn't analyze the defense other than mention that the Patriots had an extremely good defense back when NE really started the rivalry (2003 and 2004).  My guess would be that the Patriots had a better defense than the Colts in MOST seasons dating back to 2001.  I suppose though that you would counter that by saying the Colts had the better offense though.  

 

In the end, my post was to make the point that Brady's 10-5 is not all it's cracked up to be.  That home field advantage is huge, as I think is evidenced by the facts in the post.  15 games head to head, and only 5 won by the visiting team.  

 

In the end, they are both great QBs, and this rivalry has been pretty unbelievable.  Both Colts and Patriots fans have been rewarded with an amazing amount of joy (and heartbreak).    

 

yes the Pats have benefit from more home games . . . and like what you did and it is always fun to look at stats and see if things are more skewed than one might think and really liked what you did, and 10-5 seems big . . . and to qualify it can help . . . I just wanted to point out that when our team was not as strong the scores were a lot closer . . . we did not lose by a lot . ..

 

and yes both franchises have been bless with two great QBs and near the same age and were able to play each other each year, so its have been a great ride for sure . . . we will see how the next few years will go . . .

Link to post
Share on other sites

We always hear about how Brady is better than Manning going head to head.  Well, I think that is all misguided.  Let's look at some facts:

 

(1) Head to head in playoffs: Manning 2, Brady 2

Home games for Manning: 2;  Home games for Brady: 2

 

(2) Head to head in AFC Championship Games: Manning 2, Brady 1

Home games for Manning:2;  Home games for Brady: 1

 

See the pattern - home team wins.  Now, let's see how that plays out overall.

(3) Head to head overall: Brady 10, Manning 5

 

In the 15 match-ups between Manning and Brady. Brady has played at home 9 times.  Since the home team always seems to have the edge, Brady should be 9-6 against Manning.  Brady is 1 game better than that at 10-5,

 

Now, the first 2 Manning-Brady matchups were in 2001.  The Colts were a bad team in 2001 (finished 6-10).  So, the real rivalry began when both teams were good, which was in 2003.  So, if you take out the 2001 season, Brady would hold an 8-5 record.  And, how about that.  Of those 13 games, Brady had 8 at home.

 

So, going from 2003 forward, Brady should be 8-5 against Manning and he is exactly that (no better, no worse).  

 

In effect, Manning and Brady are even.  

 

Now, if you want to throw in the fact that Brady had some incredible defenses back in the 2003 time frame, the argument could be made then that Manning comes out on top.

 

If you are wondering how many of those 13 games were won by the road team, here they are:

2003: At Ind: NE 38, Colts 34

2005: At NE: Colts 40, NE 21

2006: At NE: Colts 27, NE 20

2007: At Ind: NE 24, Colts 20

Are you really Adam Schefter?

Link to post
Share on other sites

As nit picky as this thread is it is peculiar how NE was the home team 9 out of those 15. How many were in the post season n how many regular season.

 

That's something the media never seems to point out, that Brady has simply had the home field advantage far more often then Manning.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kenny,

   11 of the 15 games were in regular season (7 at NE, 4 at Ind).  4 were in playoffs (2 at NE, 2 at Ind).

 

I don't know how the schedule makers decide who gets the home game when they play each other.

 

Denver will play NE next year again since they both won their divisions this year.  I'm not sure there is a way to know where that game will be prior to the schedule coming out.  It's easy to know which 16 games will be on any team's schedule next year, but I've never figured out how to know which games will be at home and which games will be away.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kenny,

   11 of the 15 games were in regular season (7 at NE, 4 at Ind).  4 were in playoffs (2 at NE, 2 at Ind).

 

I don't know how the schedule makers decide who gets the home game when they play each other.

 

Denver will play NE next year again since they both won their divisions this year.  I'm not sure there is a way to know where that game will be prior to the schedule coming out.  It's easy to know which 16 games will be on any team's schedule next year, but I've never figured out how to know which games will be at home and which games will be away.

 

I am not exactly sure how it works exactly but sometimes it goes in runs of three when teams meet head to head in the same conference . . . so three at NE, then three at indy, then three at NE and so one . . . which is how things go I think . . .  now it may be sequentially (that is you will play three times not many how many years it takes and then go to the opponents) and it may be by years regardless if you play or not in any given year. . .

 

Sequentially being you play regardless of the year and so if colts play pats in 2003, 2006, 2008 those three are at one venue then they go to the next venue for the next three whenever they are . . . say 2010, 2014, and 2022.

 

or it my be year that is IF they play it will be 2004, 2005, 2006 NE, 2007, 2008, 2009 indy 2010, 2011, 2012 NE, 2013, 2014, 2015 Indy and so one . . . and then back to NE in 2016,. so if we do not play in 2015 indy will missed out on the third home game and it will be back to NE if there is a 2016 game . . .  

 

given that we played every year it tough to know which one is the option, but something tells me it is the second option and that you are on a three year rotation regardless if you played them for all three years or not . . .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kenny,

   11 of the 15 games were in regular season (7 at NE, 4 at Ind).  4 were in playoffs (2 at NE, 2 at Ind).

 

I don't know how the schedule makers decide who gets the home game when they play each other.

 

Denver will play NE next year again since they both won their divisions this year.  I'm not sure there is a way to know where that game will be prior to the schedule coming out.  It's easy to know which 16 games will be on any team's schedule next year, but I've never figured out how to know which games will be at home and which games will be away.

the reason the more home games at NE was the 2 game divisional winner standing outside of the 14 games that are set and WHEN they happened.

 

The AFC divisions play each other every 3 years and rotate away/home.

 

The division winners (ranking the same- ie 1st plays 1st, 2nd plays 2nd etc) rotate unless it's your turn to play that division that rotates every 3 years as above.  They also rotate home/away.

 

There was however a quirk where the AFCS and AFCE only rotated the home/away every other time. That's is to say away two times in a row and home two times in a row.   

 

The pieces just happened to fall where they did mostly because colts/pats were no 1 in their division.

Ultimately the schedule was always set (not picked by the NFL) and just happened to fall where it did.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Because I’ve been a Colts fan for a long time and Jim Irsay has never had an issue spending money.  Ballard has also said over and over again he was saving his money to pay his own.  This isn’t breaking news.  So rather buy into some idea that he was fine with spending money under Tobin, Polian, and Grigson but is no longer fine with spending money under Ballard just doesn’t add up when you look at his history and what Ballard said.  It’s much more logical to assume that’s he’s spending what Ballard wants like he has with his previous GMs especially when the GM tells you he doesn’t believe in splash free agents and is saving his money to sign his own.   Irsay doesn’t negotiate the contracts.  Ballard does so contract structuring is done by Ballard and Ballard has done it in away to give him cap flexibility that is going to allow him to keep guys like Nelson, Leonard, Smith and others over the next couple of years.    Also Jim Irsay is worth 3 billion dollars he’s not hurting for money.   You want to see an organization that doesn’t want to spend money look across town where Simon won’t even let the Pacers look at the luxury tax.  That’s an owner who doesn’t want to spend.
    • I’m not sure why you find it hard to accept that the Colts may have cash flow problems?  Not that they can’t manage them, but still….   Irsay is one of the few owners who doesn’t have any other source of big income.   No high tech company.  No real estate development.   No oil and gas.   His wealth is owning the Colts.   That’s it.    Sure he may he may spend money, but these last five years he now uses a pay-go system that lends itself to managing money.  We used to give bigger SB’s under Grigson.   Now,  we give either small or no signing bonuses.   Very few teams do that.  And we’re a very small market franchise.   You weren’t the least bit surprised to see DeForest Buckner accept a ZERO signing bonus?   I sure was.     Point of clarification:  none of what I’ve written is proof of anything.   But I think it’s at least worth considering, and you seem completely unwilling to even do that.  I confess find that surprising. 
    • Just because they had money left over doesn’t mean Irsay had a problem spending it had Ballard wanted too.  It doesn’t take that hard of a look back at Irsay’s history of owner to see he has zero problem spending what his GM wants to spend.  
    • That's not exactly true if you consider cap space left over. IIRC, we had the most unspent or near most unspent over a 3-4 year period just recently (IIRC, 16, 17, 18, 19). Pretty sure we had 40+M unspent two years in a row.   IIRC, we carried over the most in the league again this year at around 30M.   It was also speculated that we 1) didn't ask Luck for money back, AND 2) gave JB such a big raise, was because we would have been too far under the 89% rule had we not done both 1 and 2.     
    • Regardless Irsay has never been shy about spending to make the Colts better.  So either way the first point that started all this is irrelevant.  
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...