Peyton Manning, Greatest QB of all time?

[Thremp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why would Manning improve as an all-time QB between now and the end of his career?

[/ QUOTE ]

Greatness is about sustained success over many years. Manning has been sensational for several years now, but his complete body of work (career) is still behind guys like Marino, Montana, etc. because he hasn't played as long.

If he sustains this excellence for several more years, he will end up being #1.

[/ QUOTE ]

So if he dies tomorrow, his stature as a great declines because he can't compile stats?

[bottomset]

[ QUOTE ]
the fact they had no defense

[/ QUOTE ]

no defense hurts Peyton's numbers, they had the fewest offensive possession in the league, the gameplan is keep Peyton off the field, not try to outshootout them

if Indy had Baltimore's defense, and kept Peyton in the games(they would destroy teams) his numbers would see a solid increase

[PokerFink]

[ QUOTE ]
So if he dies tomorrow, his stature as a great declines because he can't compile stats?

[/ QUOTE ]

It wouldn't decline, his all-time rank would stay wherever it is right now. Depending on who you ask, that's somewhere in the top 10 and possibly top 5.

[Thremp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So if he dies tomorrow, his stature as a great declines because he can't compile stats?

[/ QUOTE ]

It wouldn't decline, his all-time rank would stay wherever it is right now. Depending on who you ask, that's somewhere in the top 10 and possibly top 5.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. I think its an interesting debate between exhibited the most talent and longevity. I think this happens is baseball more often that football, but is also a issue. Like with Sanders >> Smith

[CharlieDontSurf]

[ QUOTE ]
CDS,
Did Tom Brady just turn Reche Caldwell and Deion Branch into good WR's? Yes other factors came into play, but other factors made Reche Caldwell improve as well.

Assani,
If you put a poll in a HSNL hand and got all of 2p2 to vote on it and 80% of people said fold and Jman, KKF, Boosted, durrrr, etc. etc. all said call. Do you think that they should fold because 80% of the people said fold. Again your logic really suffers because you are assuming that a random Pat's fan's opinion is just as valuable as whomever the most knowledgeable football mind on the site is.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, the NE offensive system did. Brady is a factor in that but crappy recievers seem to thrive in NE's system.

[JupiterUWG]

[ QUOTE ]


No, the NE offensive system did. Brady is a factor in that but crappy recievers seem to thrive in NE's system.

[/ QUOTE ]


he's actually THE factor

[Kevin]

[ QUOTE ]
Like I've said before Peyton is a awesome QB but he lucked out in getting great coaches, great players, a great system, a solid GM, etc etc.

If he is drafted by a [censored] team or team with a crappy GM...he becomes just a good QB. So his greatness, which is thought of mainly because of his stats, isn't all on him...just like Brady's/Montana's rings aren't either.

[/ QUOTE ]

From 1984 to 1997, the Colts were 88-134.
From 1998 to 2006, the Colts were 92-52.


4 more wins in 5 less seasons.

I have been hearing this a lot lately, things like, "If Peyton played for the Lions or if Peyton played for the Az Cardinals... Truth is, he was drafted by the Lions/Cardinals who were putrid through the first 14 years (except for a scab enhanced division title in '87 and a luckbox 9-7 wildcard run to the AFCCG in '95. They were 3-13 the season prior.

Marvin didn't have a 1000 yard season his first two years (to be fair, WR's tend to reach maturity in season 3). The line, which was nearly exact between '97 & '98 went from 60ish sacks in '97 to less than 20 in '98.

As an aside, I have a question about the love that is bestowed upon Montana. I was 9 when he won his first SB, so, I admit that I while I followed his career (I was an admitted Marino guy), I did not follow him on a game by game basis.


The catch was nice - it was a great catch going way up by Clark to pull it out. Dallas was on the way to a game winning field goal when they fumbled it away. Montana had a couple of real stinkers in the playoffs - including the 49-3 drubbing to the Giants. Since it happened post '81/'84, he gets an eternal pass. If it happened before, it would compared to Manning's 41-0 yuck fest. The play before the Taylor TD in '89 was a pass that was in and out of the hands of a Cincy DB. Just like if Brady completes the 3rd and 4 to Brown, Manning is being lambasted today instead of praised.

The thing is, Young stunk it up for the most part in Tampa. Yet, he comes into Walsh's established system and puts up better numbers than Montana. I am not sure if a young Montana gets through the '92/'93/'95 Cowboys and Young could have very well won against the teams that Montana beat in the '80's.


So, if Young > Montana according to stats and Young was mediocre in Tampa, how is Montana GOAT?

Young in Tampa
1985 tam | 5 | 72 138 52.2 935 6.8 3 8 |
1986 tam | 14 | 195 363 53.7 2282 6.3 8 13 |

Montana in KC
1993 kan | 11 | 181 298 60.7 2144 7.2 13 7 |
| 1994 kan | 14 | 299 493 60.6 3283 6.7 16 9 |


I know that this will met with angst and hatred for questioning the greatness and Clutchiness of Montanalow, but I am not convinced that he was the best QB of the Walsh/Siefert/Niners era, let alone the GOAT.

[capone0]

Young was also a "rookie" on a horrible team. I'm betting they didn't run the WCO in Tampa when he was there. Like Garcia this year, Steve is a WCO QB. Then again I'm not going to argue, what surrounded him in SF is a million times better than what was in TB

[CharlieDontSurf]

Young>Montana...especially given his ability to run.

[JupiterUWG]

[ QUOTE ]
Young>Montana...especially given his ability to run.

[/ QUOTE ]


WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAATTTTTTTT!?