Peyton Manning Voted No.1 By The Players

[ViriLudant]

Your basis is a friend of a friend then? No links. Just like Tomase who said a friend of a friend told him the Pats taped the Rams SB walk though forcing the Herald to write a public apology on its bag page to avoid Kraft suing them for defamation.

Uh.

I posted the link above.

[Dustin]

Sure it was injuries. That is why when he came back to NE, he said he should have never left and that Brady was the best QB he has ever played with. And yeah revived his career by taking him to another Super Bowl.

You realize he was traded right?

[ViriLudant]

In fact, it was confirmed by Bedard that the Patriots didn't contact Lloyd.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000243805/article/brandon-lloyd-never-received-call-from-patriots

And yes, Bedard would know. Funny how PFT is now believable here.

For you, Am.

[amfootball]

You realize he was traded right?

 

They only traded him because he wanted more money then what they were offering and he was going to hold out. He admitted when he came back that he should have taken the Pats offer and stayed. Of course the Hawks did give up the number one for him which was sweet.

[amfootball]

For you, Am.

Sorry, missed where you included the link. I still would have liked to have had him back last year given how green our outside WRs were and all the injuries.

[Superman]

They only traded him because he wanted more money then what they were offering and he was going to hold out. He admitted when he came back that he should have taken the Pats offer and stayed. Of course the Hawks did give up the number one for him which was sweet.

 

I've always thought they should have just paid him. 

[TAPLOOK]

Remember that time Peyton threw the ball an the receiver caught it...that was awesome.

[amfootball]

I've always thought they should have just paid him. 

Their offer was very good and right in line with his production. He ended up leaving for like a million more and I think an extra year. It really was not all that much of a difference. He was a 2 time champion and a SB MVP and had great chemistry with Brady. When he got back, he said he regretted ever leaving. I never blame a player for wanting to make more money but he really handled the whole thing terribly in a lot of ways for what ended up being just a little more compensation.

[ViriLudant]

Sorry, missed where you included the link. I still would have liked to have had him back last year given how green our outside WRs were and all the injuries.

Certainly fair, and there was a big thread on PP in mid September about bringing in a veteran WR.

[Shane Bond]

????  I just said Manning played a big part in molding the talent.

Which Pats couldnt is the point.

[Fx Stryker]

Sure it was injuries. That is why when he came back to NE, he said he should have never left and that Brady was the best QB he has ever played with. And yeah revived his career by taking him to another Super Bowl.

I don't get what you mean by "sure it was injuries." Are you saying his numbers didn't drop because of injuries? Like I said the averages stayed the same, but the volumes dropped because of lack of play.

Going to a Super Bowl isn't a career revival. Darius Butler is the example of a career revival. Failed in New England but is succeeding in Indy. Branches career didn't turn around after his second stint with Brady. And I bet Brady is the best quarterback he had played with. There is no doubt Brady is great. Doesn't change the fact he seems to fail to utilized #1 threats when trying to implement a vertical offense if they aren't named Moss, the catching of anything machine.

What happens when Dobson and Thompkins "fail to live up to potential" under Brady? What if they go to be deep threats for another team? I just find it strange most WRs career dies in New England. Don't think there has been a single unsuccessful WR in Indy the past decade.

[Superman]

Their offer was very good and right in line with his production. He ended up leaving for like a million more and I think an extra year. It really was not all that much of a difference. He was a 2 time champion and a SB MVP and had great chemistry with Brady. When he got back, he said he regretted ever leaving. I never blame a player for wanting to make more money but he really handled the whole thing terribly in a lot of ways for what ended up being just a little more compensation.

 

The Pats missed him, too. You say he should have taken a million less, how come they couldn't have just given him the extra million he wanted? That led to Brady throwing to Reche Caldwell and Jabar Gaffney in the 2006 AFCCG, something Pats fans have complained about for 8 years. The Pats have always prided themselves on not overpaying guys, being willing to part with a player rather than opening the vault, and a lot of times that's smart. In this case, I think it was a mistake. Like you said, he had great chemistry with Brady, he had a SB MVP, and was easily their best receiver. 

[amfootball]

I don't get what you mean by "sure it was injuries." Are you saying his numbers didn't drop because of injuries? Like I said the averages stayed the same, but the volumes dropped because of lack of play.

Going to a Super Bowl isn't a career revival. Darius Butler is the example of a career revival. Failed in New England but is succeeding in Indy. Branches career didn't turn around after his second stint with Brady. And I bet Brady is the best quarterback he had played with. There is no doubt Brady is great. Doesn't change the fact he seems to fail to utilized #1 threats when trying to implement a vertical offense if they aren't named Moss, the catching of anything machine.

What happens when Dobson and Thompkins "fail to live up to potential" under Brady? What if they go to be deep threats for another team? I just find it strange most WRs career die in New England. Don't think there has been a single unsuccessful WR in Indy the past decade.

If you watched Branch in Seattle when he did play, he wasn't the same impact player at all.

 

I don't know what you mean by vertical offense. The Pats have never been a deep bomb, air out team even with Moss save for 2007. They have always been a methodical offense that takes what the defense gives it. What separates Brady is his short to mid-field play where it is actually harder to make completions because you have LBs underneath the routes and SS's over the top. I would argue that Brady's finest season was his 2010 season and not his 2007 season where all he had to do was throw it up and let Moss go get it a lot of the time. In 2010, he had no Moss and two rookie TEs in Gronk and AH and he threw 36 TDs to just 4 picks and the 355 attempts without a pick. Maybe the finest season of any QB given the degree of difficulty and the talent he had to work with.

[amfootball]

The Pats missed him, too. You say he should have taken a million less, how come they couldn't have just given him the extra million he wanted? That led to Brady throwing to Reche Caldwell and Jabar Gaffney in the 2006 AFCCG, something Pats fans have complained about for 8 years. The Pats have always prided themselves on not overpaying guys, being willing to part with a player rather than opening the vault, and a lot of times that's smart. In this case, I think it was a mistake. Like you said, he had great chemistry with Brady, he had a SB MVP, and was easily their best receiver. 

I have always wished that they paid him but honestly as it was proven, he really was just a product of Brady and that system and like I said the offer was more than fair for his production. They did not low ball him. He just got greedy IMO. And I do think they did learn from that and Samuels who they never made an offer to when they signed Gronk and AH after their second year and also Mayo after his third year. Best not to let your top talent ever get to FA and lock them up early.

[Qwiz]

[Superman]

I have always wished that they paid him but honestly as it was proven, he really was just a product of Brady and that system and like I said the offer was more than fair for his production. They did not low ball him. He just got greedy IMO. And I do think they did learn from that and Samuels who they never made an offer to when they signed Gronk and AH after their second year and also Mayo after his third year. Best not to let your top talent ever get to FA and lock them up early.

 

If it was a difference of a million a year, I don't know if that's necessarily being greedy. Especially since he got it from another team. 

 

And even if he was just a product of Brady -- which I don't agree with -- he was probably the best product of Brady, up until that point. The Pats leading receiver in 2006 was Reche Caldwell, with his paltry 760 yards. Sometimes, you just pay the guy. They had the cap space. What's the sense in having a great QB on a team friendly contract if you're not going to give him anyone to throw to? You have a guy that he likes throwing to more than anyone else, so what difference does it make whether the guy is just a product of your QB? 

 

You're point about locking guys up early is a good one, but not applicable. Branch had one more year on his deal.

[Guest nflfan014]

I guess this is what happens when a team continuously beats you again and again  Relax Pats haven't won a SB though since 2005.  You'd think they'd won the last 3 consecutively with the amount of worrying about every single detail of Brady's career and the Pats team.

[Superman]

I guess this is what happens when a team continuously beats you again and again  Relax Pats haven't won a SB though since 2005.  You'd think they'd won the last 3 consecutively with the amount of worrying about every single detail of Brady's career and the Pats team.

 

 

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause

[Guest nflfan014]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause

 

Throw whatever message board logic at me that you want, you probably spend a lot more time on them than I do so I can't win there.  I just find the Brady/Pats excessive concern interesting.  Aaron Rodgers is the present anyway.  Brady/Manning is so 2004.

[Dustin]

Throw whatever message board logic at me that you want, you probably spend a lot more time on them than I do so I can't win there. I just find the Brady/Pats excessive concern interesting. Aaron Rodgers is the present anyway. Brady/Manning is so 2004.

Are you a Patriots fan?

[Superman]

Throw whatever message board logic at me that you want, you probably spend a lot more time on them than I do so I can't win there.  I just find the Brady/Pats excessive concern interesting.  Aaron Rodgers is the present anyway.  Brady/Manning is so 2004.

 

Today I learned... a discussion equals "excessive concern." Also, "message board logic" is different from "logic," somehow.

 

If the discussion doesn't interest you, then feel free not to spend time on it. I don't understand why you'd jump in a thread where people are having a discussion just to tell them you don't think their discussion is relevant. It's like walking past a room where people are having a conversation, poking your head in and saying "your conversation sucks," then continuing to walk past. It's even worse when you completely misrepresent the thoughts in the conversation.

[jvan1973]

Throw whatever message board logic at me that you want, you probably spend a lot more time on them than I do so I can't win there. I just find the Brady/Pats excessive concern interesting. Aaron Rodgers is the present anyway. Brady/Manning is so 2004.

Really, Didn't the packers lose in the first round of the playoffs while Manning went to the superbowl and Brady went to the AFCCG?

[Guest nflfan014]

I just find the Peyton stuff interesting.  I was talking to a friend from Indy and somehow the SB got brought up and he said "Peyton's teammates let him down again."  Peyton wasn't the whole reason they lost.  You put Joe Montana in his prime on that Broncos team, and they probably still lose to that Seahawks defense.  But he was A reason and didn't play a clean game.

 

Everyone is fans of a team and/or a player (Yes I'm a Pats fan, lived in Mass all my life and now in Oregon) but I don't need to nitpick Peyton's career to justify Brady's.  Their careers both stand out on their own.  I also have criticized Brady many times, for example the last SB, Welker could have technically caught that pass and usually makes that catch, but Brady didn't throw him right in the numbers either.

 

So I just find the free pass by Colts fans, Broncos fans and the media interesting as well as the deep seeded hatred for all things Pats.  Belichick is a *, but Brady and the players are all class.  Easy for me to say that being a Pats fan and not being on the outside, but to me there's nothing to hate other than Belichick's personality.

 

Edit, out of posts for now: I prefer Rodgers over Brady, Peyton or Brees.  He's got the arm and can run and is also younger.

[21isSuperman]

This is so relevant

[Superman]

I just find the Peyton stuff interesting.  I was talking to a friend from Indy and somehow the SB got brought up and he said "Peyton's teammates let him down again."  Peyton wasn't the whole reason they lost.  You put Joe Montana in his prime on that Broncos team, and they probably still lose to that Seahawks defense.  But he was A reason and didn't play a clean game.

 

Everyone is fans of a team and/or a player (Yes I'm a Pats fan, lived in Mass all my life and now in Oregon) but I don't need to nitpick Peyton's career to justify Brady's.  Their careers both stand out on their own.  I also have criticized Brady many times, for example the last SB, Welker could have technically caught that pass and usually makes that catch, but Brady didn't throw him right in the numbers either.

 

So I just find the free pass by Colts fans, Broncos fans and the media interesting as well as the deep seeded hatred for all things Pats.  Belichick is a *, but Brady and the players are all class.  Easy for me to say that being a Pats fan and not being on the outside, but to me there's nothing to hate other than Belichick's personality.

 

Edit, out of posts for now: I prefer Rodgers over Brady, Peyton or Brees.  He's got the arm and can run and is also younger.

 

The bolded is what I take issue with. Again, you're misrepresenting the comments of the vast majority of posters in this thread.

[amfootball]

If it was a difference of a million a year, I don't know if that's necessarily being greedy. Especially since he got it from another team. 

 

And even if he was just a product of Brady -- which I don't agree with -- he was probably the best product of Brady, up until that point. The Pats leading receiver in 2006 was Reche Caldwell, with his paltry 760 yards. Sometimes, you just pay the guy. They had the cap space. What's the sense in having a great QB on a team friendly contract if you're not going to give him anyone to throw to? You have a guy that he likes throwing to more than anyone else, so what difference does it make whether the guy is just a product of your QB? 

 

You're point about locking guys up early is a good one, but not applicable. Branch had one more year on his deal.

I am not sure if the Pats paid him the extra million if it would have mattered. Similar to Welker, things got personal. The Pats made an offer that was spot on for his production and he refused it. After that things soured on his end and he said he wanted out and that he would hold out. It was very ugly, similar to Welker.

 

I don't subscribe to the thought that you just pay a player what he wants just because he is a good player or works for you especially when you have a cap. I think you make an offer that you feel is fair and if the player wants more than you have to hold your ground. I think the Pats have been very good over the years in determining the worth of players and like I said, I think they have become smarter and started extending players before they hit FA. Branch did have one year left but at that point he was a SB MVP so they were not going to make him play the 5th year of his rookie deal. I think if they had to do it over, they would have extended after his third year.

 

I never looked at 2006 and thought they lost to the Colts because they didn't have Branch. The O put 34 points which should have been enough but the D tired at the end especially at the LB position which led to Manning's game winning drive. Both Caldwell and Gaffney and Brown played really well that season and the O ranked seventh in points scored so it is hard to quibble and of course the following year they got Welker and Moss. I think they missed Samuels way more over the years than Branch. He is the guy I wished they kept as they never got a CB to replace him.

[amfootball]

Are you a Patriots fan?

GB fan I think.

[jvan1973]

GB fan I think.

he is a pats fan

[amfootball]

he is a pats fan

Yeah but he appears to like Rodgers though more than Brady.

[Superman]

I am not sure if the Pats paid him the extra million if it would have mattered. Similar to Welker, things got personal. The Pats made an offer that was spot on for his production and he refused it. After that things soured on his end and he said he wanted out and that he would hold out. It was very ugly, similar to Welker.

 

I don't subscribe to the thought that you just pay a player what he wants just because he is a good player or works for you especially when you have a cap. I think you make an offer that you feel is fair and if the player wants more than you have to hold your ground. I think the Pats have been very good over the years in determining the worth of players and like I said, I think they have become smarter and started extending players before they hit FA. Branch did have one year left but at that point he was a SB MVP so they were not going to make him play the 5th year of his rookie deal. I think if they had to do it over, they would have extended after his third year.

 

I never looked at 2006 and thought they lost to the Colts because they didn't have Branch. The O put 34 points which should have been enough but the D tired at the end especially at the LB position which led to Manning's game winning drive. Both Caldwell and Gaffney and Brown played really well that season and the O ranked seventh in points scored so it is hard to quibble and of course the following year they got Welker and Moss. I think they missed Samuels way more over the years than Branch. He is the guy I wished they kept as they never got a CB to replace him.

 

I'm not saying you just pay the guy whatever he wants. I'm saying that you're putting the responsibility on Branch because he wouldn't take a million less, and really the Pats held their ground over the same million. And both sides suffered.

 

He wasn't asking to be the highest paid receiver in the league. As a matter of fact, I looked up the numbers earlier, and it wasn't even a million a year, assuming those numbers were correct. They offered him $18.45m over three years, and the Seahawks gave him $39m over six years, a difference of $300k/year, basically. I don't know how the structure would have been different, but the actual money per year wasn't ultimately that far off. Maybe he asked for more from the Pats than he got from the Seahawks. I'm only saying that I don't think his demands were out of whack with the market.

 

What I do take issue with, big picture, is the "determining the worth of players" part. I don't think they've been bad at it, but not really any better than most teams. It's situations like the Branch deal that really gives the Pats that reputation, and as you can tell, I don't think they played that situation as well as they could have. Throw in Lawyer Milloy, and the Pats had a pattern back then of penny pinching in a way that wasn't player friendly (they cut Milloy in September). Sometimes it worked out better than others. I think the Branch deal is one that didn't work out so well.

 

Not trying to be critical of the Pats way of doing business. They know how to manage a roster. No one gets them all right, but the Pats do a good job. Branch is the main one I think they got wrong.

[Superman]

This is so relevant

 

 

I like this one, too:

 

[amfootball]

I'm not saying you just pay the guy whatever he wants. I'm saying that you're putting the responsibility on Branch because he wouldn't take a million less, and really the Pats held their ground over the same million. And both sides suffered.

 

He wasn't asking to be the highest paid receiver in the league. As a matter of fact, I looked up the numbers earlier, and it wasn't even a million a year, assuming those numbers were correct. They offered him $18.45m over three years, and the Seahawks gave him $39m over six years, a difference of $300k/year, basically. I don't know how the structure would have been different, but the actual money per year wasn't ultimately that far off. Maybe he asked for more from the Pats than he got from the Seahawks. I'm only saying that I don't think his demands were out of whack with the market.

 

What I do take issue with, big picture, is the "determining the worth of players" part. I don't think they've been bad at it, but not really any better than most teams. It's situations like the Branch deal that really gives the Pats that reputation, and as you can tell, I don't think they played that situation as well as they could have. Throw in Lawyer Milloy, and the Pats had a pattern back then of penny pinching in a way that wasn't player friendly (they cut Milloy in September). Sometimes it worked out better than others. I think the Branch deal is one that didn't work out so well.

 

Not trying to be critical of the Pats way of doing business. They know how to manage a roster. No one gets them all right, but the Pats do a good job. Branch is the main one I think they got wrong.

Yeah, I knew it was a small amount. And like I said, by the time the Hawks came to the table, Branch wanted out so I doubt even if the Pats had matched he would have stayed. And don't forget the Pats also got a number one for him so it was also a shrewd deal on their end as he only had one year left and they got the #1.

 

Milloy was a whole different story. They wanted him to restructure and he did not want to and then they replaced him with Rodney who was a better player and helped them win 2 more rings.

 

I think one of the main reasons the Pats have been so successful for 13 years is their business dealings. They are very good at knowing a player's worth and also moving on from aging players. Of course they don't always get it right but more often than not they do and in this era of FA/cap it is paramount that you are getting maximum worth out of your players that matches their production. I don't think Bill gets enough credit for that to be honest. He is really good at evaluating players and determining how they can help him and what their value is worth.

[Superman]

Yeah, I knew it was a small amount. And like I said, by the time the Hawks came to the table, Branch wanted out so I doubt even if the Pats had matched he would have stayed. And don't forget the Pats also got a number one for him so it was also a shrewd deal on their end as he only had one year left and they got the #1.

 

Milloy was a whole different story. They wanted him to restructure and he did not want to and then they replaced him with Rodney who was a better player and helped them win 2 more rings.

 

I think one of the main reasons the Pats have been so successful for 13 years is their business dealings. They are very good at knowing a player's worth and also moving on from aging players. Of course they don't always get it right but more often than not they do and in this era of FA/cap it is paramount that you are getting maximum worth out of your players that matches their production. I don't think Bill gets enough credit for that to be honest. He is really good at evaluating players and determining how they can help him and what their value is worth.

 

On Milloy/Harrison, they signed Harrison to replace Tebucky Jones. He was supposed to pair with Milloy. They released Milloy months later, and Eugene Wilson and Harrison paired up. They did win 14 games, and back to back SBs, so big deal. It just wasn't a player friendly way of releasing a player. Belichick said they were trying to rework his deal from April; it shouldn't take five months to determine that you want to let a guy go, and you don't then release him a few days before the season starts. I mean, you can; it's up to you, but it's not going to be well received. Even Ty Law had a few things to say about that.

 

On Branch, I just think they should have kept him. Getting a first for anyone eases the pain, but in hindsight, they should have kept him. (He might have helped them win one more game in 2006, leading to another AFCCG in New England instead of Indy.) JMO. Just kind of hard to look at him and say "he wished he would have stayed," without acknowledging that the Pats would have been better off keeping him. End of the day, that year probably led to the Randy Moss and Wes Welker acquisitions, which wound up being huge for the Pats. So it's not all bad. In a vacuum, though, I think they should have paid him.

 

Also, again, don't get the impression that I'm saying the Pats aren't well run. They obviously are. I just think sometimes their so-called "shrewdness" has translated more into "overly conservative," and it's hurt them in certain ways. Sometimes, you just suck it up and pay your best players. Especially when it's your #1 receiver, and you just re-signed your Pro Bowl QB to a team friendly deal. 

[ViriLudant]

I don't get what you mean by "sure it was injuries." Are you saying his numbers didn't drop because of injuries? Like I said the averages stayed the same, but the volumes dropped because of lack of play.

Going to a Super Bowl isn't a career revival. Darius Butler is the example of a career revival. Failed in New England but is succeeding in Indy. Branches career didn't turn around after his second stint with Brady. And I bet Brady is the best quarterback he had played with. There is no doubt Brady is great. Doesn't change the fact he seems to fail to utilized #1 threats when trying to implement a vertical offense if they aren't named Moss, the catching of anything machine.

What happens when Dobson and Thompkins "fail to live up to potential" under Brady? What if they go to be deep threats for another team? I just find it strange most WRs career dies in New England. Don't think there has been a single unsuccessful WR in Indy the past decade.

The only deep threats that Brady has had who weren't at the end of their careers were:

Moss

Gronk

Hernandez

Most of his other players have been middle to short range WRs.

IMO.

[amfootball]

On Milloy/Harrison, they signed Harrison to replace Tebucky Jones. He was supposed to pair with Milloy. They released Milloy months later, and Eugene Wilson and Harrison paired up. They did win 14 games, and back to back SBs, so big deal. It just wasn't a player friendly way of releasing a player. Belichick said they were trying to rework his deal from April; it shouldn't take five months to determine that you want to let a guy go, and you don't then release him a few days before the season starts. I mean, you can; it's up to you, but it's not going to be well received. Even Ty Law had a few things to say about that.

 

On Branch, I just think they should have kept him. Getting a first for anyone eases the pain, but in hindsight, they should have kept him. (He might have helped them win one more game in 2006, leading to another AFCCG in New England instead of Indy.) JMO. Just kind of hard to look at him and say "he wished he would have stayed," without acknowledging that the Pats would have been better off keeping him. End of the day, that year probably led to the Randy Moss and Wes Welker acquisitions, which wound up being huge for the Pats. So it's not all bad. In a vacuum, though, I think they should have paid him.

 

Also, again, don't get the impression that I'm saying the Pats aren't well run. They obviously are. I just think sometimes their so-called "shrewdness" has translated more into "overly conservative," and it's hurt them in certain ways. Sometimes, you just suck it up and pay your best players. Especially when it's your #1 receiver, and you just re-signed your Pro Bowl QB to a team friendly deal. 

I know you are not taking shots at the Pats and I appreciate the discussion from a non-Pats fan. It is good to hear outside perspectives.

 

I think the Milloy releasing was the bell whistle if you will to start the Belichick era. He did talk to Milloy for months and the restructure never happened. The timing of the release was a head scratcher as it was right before the season. Again, I think that was Bill asserting himself and the new Patriot Way of building a team. Even though technically Harrison was replacing Jones, he filled the leadership void left by Milloy and became the heart and soul of the secondary. It was a definite upgrade and one that paid dividends immediately with two rings.

 

The Branch saga is hard to figure. I think the Pats really did want to keep him which is why they were doing his deal a year early, something they very rarely did back then but at the same time they had just won 3 rings in 4 years so no player was above a system that was yielding championships. I think they would have been better off perhaps in 2006 with him but they should have beat Indy if the defense didn't tucker out and I believe they would have handled the Bears as well and like you said his leaving had them sign Welker and Moss so hard to cry too much over it.

 

My biggest complaint these past few years has been the fact that they went away from the stud WR toward the two TE offense. I am not sure why Bill thought not replacing Moss was a good idea given how well the team performed with a stud WR and a solid slot WR. Frankly, I think he may have wasted Brady's best years and I realize that is a bit hypocritical as they have had a top 3 offense the last few years but in the post-season, you need the threat on the outside. The Giants and Ravens just ate up the middle of the field and left the O futile in the post-season. This is where Brady has gotten criticized both fairly and unfairly IMO. He just had no one open in those post-season games as the defense did not have to defend the outside at all. All of this goes to your point about getting weapons for your star QB. In this regard, I do think they have failed Brady and may have cost themselves a couple of rings.

[Fx Stryker]

The only deep threats that Brady has had who weren't at the end of their careers were:

Moss

Gronk

Hernandez

Most of his other players have been middle to short range WRs.

IMO.

How convenient the only guys that worked. Surprising......

[Guest nflfan014]

I think some Colts fans are stuck in 2004, when Brady was more of a Russell WIlson type QB that came through in the clutch but didn't put up great stats, had a great team around him and wasn't as accomplished of a passer.

 

50,000 yards, almost 400 TDs, 2 League MVPs, etc. later, I don't get what's so hard about saying "I prefer Peyton because I rooted for him - maybe still root for him - but Brady is on his level."  I don't root for Peyton, never will, but I have no problem putting him at elite status and don't have to nitpick his accomplishments to say he somehow isn't at that upper tier.  I dislike Lebron James the way a lot of people here seem to dislike Brady, but I have no problem saying "He's the best player in the game."

 

To answer the Brandon Lloyd, Chad Jackson thing, Brandon Lloyd's season with the Pats was exactly on par with his previous season - 70 catches/900 yards, and Chad Jackson wasn't smart enough to be a part of the Pats offense.  He himself tweeted after opening night that year that he was "awed" by the offense.  Didn't the Pats also go to the Super Bowl that year without a great defense and had their best passing yardage season ever?  So I don't think Chad not "getting it" mattered much.

 

Who really cares about fancy passing stats anyway unless you're into fantasy football?  The only thing I remember about the 2007 season was that we lost the last game.  I'm sure Broncos fans would say the same thing about last year, and Peyton would say the same thing himself.

 

Peyton isn't great just because of his numbers, same with Brady, Brees, and Rodgers.  You just have to watch all 4 and you know - if you're being objective anyway - that they're head and shoulders above every other QB.

 

Edit: "Brady vs Manning, you guys ever get bored of this?"

 

I think people on both sides, but especially on the Colts/Broncos side of things, want to be able to say their participant is the best.  They feel insecure that there is someone else out there.  Both sides are guilty of this, but it seems a lot of Peyton fans can't just admit that there's another all-time great (and IMO two other all-time greats in Rodgers and Brees) out there.

[Synthetic]

Brady vs Manning, you guys ever get bored of this?

 

I swear, if I didn't know any better, I'd say some of you live just for the sake of that argument. I feel like I'm in my 70's when I read this crap, probably cause I've heard it a million times before. People walking in circles arguing about the same thing over and over until they are the tiniest little difference in similarity. Just go ahead and say they are great players, you like one, you hate the other cause, well screw it, I don't even care at this point.

 

 

Are you guys going to still be arguing this 20 years down the road when they're both senior citizens?

This would make a great sitcom!

[ViriLudant]

How convenient the only guys that worked. Surprising......

ROFL

Wow, did you ever miss my point.

Who else should have worked out as a deep threat?

The washed up Stallwith or chad Johnson? Two who both washed out of the league soon after.

What other legit deep threat players, not possession or mid range WRs, did Brady have?

[Guest nflfan014]

ROFL

Wow, did you ever miss my point.

Who else should have worked out as a deep threat?

The washed up Stallwith or chad Johnson? Two who both washed out of the league soon after.

What other legit deep threat players, not possession or mid range WRs, did Brady have?

 

Be careful, he might roll out Doug Gabriel on you.