Like the Hatfields and McCoys, Brady vs. Manning debate continues

by MaPatsFan on Jun 24, 2009 9:14 PM EDT in Opinion Comment 6 comments

When ESPN.com created its All-decade Offense and picked Tom Brady over Peyton Manning, I knew what would happen. Colts fans went absolutely NUCLEAR that someone didn't kneel at the altar of Peyton. The war of stats and words began. Back and forth, playoff wins vs. 4,000 yard seasons, system quarterback vs. true star. Whatever. It was all rather amusing, how lathered up people get over this stuff. There were a few interesting points that I want to address, a sort of Patriots fan perspective on the whole thing, so here goes:

Brady is a system QB - Brady is not a true superstar, but a product of the system. All his success was more the team around him than himself. While I agree the Patriots system is a major part of their success, it's sophomoric and a bit pedestrian to imply the team could garner all of its success without a great leader at the helm. There is a derth of examples where teams or groups have lacked a strong leader, but have been successful. It doesn't happen. So to claim Brady is a mediocre QB in a great system is a little silly. Put a great car in the hands of an average driver and he'll be average. Put a great car in the hands of a great driver and sparks will fly.
Cassel did fine, so it's the system - You're right, Cassel DID do fine. He also had three years to prepare AND, I hate to admit this, one of the easiest schedules in the NFL. I shudder to think what Brady would've done with 2008.
Brady choked the 2006 AFCCG and SB XLII - This one is ESPECIALLY easy to debunk: how can Brady be a system QB yet be solely responsible for these losses? Either Brady gets the accolades when they win and the jeers when the lose, or the team gets the win and the team is responsible for the loss. Which is it, sports fans? And for the record, Brady led his offense to 34 points in the 2006 AFCCG and wasn't on the field when the defense allowed the Colts to march down the field in the final minutes. As for SB XLII, blaming the loss on Brady means you weren't watching the game. It was two things: a) failure on McDaniels' part to adjust in the second half and b) and offensive line breakdown. It's hard to throw passes when your O line can't keep you from eating fertilizer.
Rings - In the face of all else, Colts fans will work hard to marginalize this fact: Brady simply has more rings than Manning. Whether or not one is better than the other is immaterial. The simple fact is Brady is more SUCCESSFUL than Manning. That is undisputed.
Spygate - When all else fails to convince people that Brady is more successful than Manning, the ace-in-the-hole, the trump card IS...TAH DAH! spygate. Unfortunately, spygate has been largely proven to have had little or no bearing on the Patriots success. Too many football insiders have proclaimed this a non-issue to make it of any value in a real, intelligent discussion. It's largely a fan "weapon" (and a weak one at that). If this is your trump card, I feel sorry for you. It's a bit like watching William Hung sing She Bang - sad and pathetic.

Are we done yet?

0 recs | Comment 6 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Well said.

Let’s see….. a team with Marvin Harrison, Edgerrin James, Dallas Clark and Reggie Wayne in their prime seems a pretty damned good system for Manning to have been in to me. Perhaps Manning is the system QB and Brady is the star. After all, Brady has had his greatest success with pretty mediocre tools. Then, they gave him top weapons and he rewrote the record books. With the same weapons Cassel didn’t. Cassel had most of his success from yards after the catch.

The only playoff game anybody can fault Brady in was the Denver debacle. Other than that Tom has been money in the bank at playoff time. There’s not even an argument regarding this it is so chiseled in stone.

And spygate is the biggest to-do about nothing in the history of the NFL. “Goody two shoes” Goodell said no competitive advantage was gained. That’s good enough for me. If people want to gripe about something, gripe about the calls the Stealers got in their Super Bowls or the Colts piping in sound and turning up the thermostat.

Hey, Colts fans will prop Manning. We will prop Tom. It’s understandable. The difference is, most everybody else without a vested interest picks Brady. That should tell Colt fans something. But it won’t.

by BabeParilli on Jun 25, 2009 12:23 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Very well said yourself.

The Truth: It is what it is.

Keep the faith!

by Marima on Jun 25, 2009 7:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I hate the SYSTEM quarterback argument

Brady is a cog in the Patriots system – true. Cassel did well enough it that it shows the Patriots system is sound.

How important a cog is Brady? Would he have been able to win against the Colts, Steelers, and Dolphins last year? Those were the hardest challenges, and Cassel didn’t stand up to them.

Manning is a cog in the Colts system. How do I know? It’s a TEAM sport, one man can’t win it. Does Peyton throw, catch and block all on the same play?

How important a cog is Manning? If he were to go down for a season, would the Colts be 11-5?

I think saying Brady is a system QB and Manning isn’t, is the same as saying the Patriots system is better than the Colts system. The Patriots can win without Brady, the Colts can’t without Manning. That DOESN’T imply Manning is the better QB, it just means the Colts are screwed without him.

by SlotMachinePlayer on Jun 25, 2009 3:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The system

That DOESN’T imply Manning is the better QB, it just means the Colts are screwed without him.

I think this is a good point. It’s dangerous to rely too heavily on one player, even a quarterback. I’m wouldn’t go so far as to suggest Brady is easily replaceable, but when it’s time for him to retire, I think the Patriots will be in much better shape than Indy.

Blogger at SBNation's Patriots blog, Pats Pulpit

by MaPatsFan on Jun 25, 2009 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I wasn't meaning to imply that Brady is easily replaced.

What Belichick does is play to a player’s strengths. Tom is a terrific QB, but when he was thrust into starting, they relied more on the run. Bill didn’t make Brady be Bledsoe. The offense complexity has increased since. Tom worked on increasing his arm strength and deep ball accuracy, and that became a larger part of the offense – an offense that is geared to his strengths.

Cassel had trouble under center, so they did more shotgun to give him better visibility. (Kansas City did the same thing for Thigpen). They relied more heavily on the run to start the season, and they limited the long ball unless Moss was clearly open. They also allowed him to use his feet more. They didn’t make Cassel be Brady.

If Brady got hurt and O’Connell were to start, you’d probably see alot of the same things you had with Cassel.

The Colts offense is also geared around Manning, but I don’t think they could retool it as easily for another QB.

by SlotMachinePlayer on Jun 25, 2009 6:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Poorly worded on my part

“I’m wouldn’t go so far as to suggest Brady is easily replaceable” wasn’t directed at you, but a conversation I was having in my on head. Happens when you get old. ;-)

Blogger at SBNation's Patriots blog, Pats Pulpit

by MaPatsFan on Jun 25, 2009 6:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs