[Richard Tanner]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've argued this many times in the past. Even without the Super Bowls, Tom Brady is better than Peyton Manning.

That being said, there are still a few of the all time greats that are better than both.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure there's not one single statistic that would back this up.

Peyton - single season passing TD record, multi-time NFL MVP, multi-time Pro bowler.

Brady - Rings...oh wait, you just said "without" the rings.

Here's the other thing - Dan Marino never won a Super Bowl. Is Tom Brady better than him? Trent Dilfer? Ben Roethlisberger? Ludicrous, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

Careful Edge, I got lambasted in another thread for mentioning that a large argument for Brady isn't play, but rather rings.

Also I'm gonna quote Zurvan here because I agree with (and have said) exactly what he says many times before, and maybe if people keep reading it, it'll sink in.
[ QUOTE ]
All athletes in all sports are at the mercy of the team that drafts them. If they get picked up by a bad organization that can't develop them as they need to be developed, or put the appropriate team around them, they have no shot to be great.

To say that Manning is only as good as he is because the Colts built around him is foolish. Of course he depends on his team to develop him & build the offense around him. All players do.

Manning is a better QB in every way than Tom Brady, except in one: Brady has a better defense. THat's it. He's still a good QB, but doesn't have the skill of Manning.

Football is the "ultimate team game". To say Brady is a better QB because he has more rings is ridiculous. Brady doesn't play all 22 positions on the field. He plays one. And he doesn't play defense, which is what earned those rings.

Of course, I'd still say Manning/Brady are 1-2 for QB talent in the league, and nobody else is challenging, yet.


[/ QUOTE ]

Cody