JichaelDick wrote: CourtesyFlush wrote:
TVF wannabe wrote:Brady has had much better coaching imo and for the most part a better line. I like Manning better
Even with the better coaching I still like this math:
3 > 1
And if not for Bob Sanders returning at the end of the 2006 season the Colts don't even make the Super Bowl.
So...Trent Dilfer's a better QB than Dan Marino?
Obviously there's more to it than just total # of rings, but if you say their stats are similar (passer rating in this case) then the tiebreaker would be rings. But given the talent Brady has had to work with versus what Manning's had around him (3 future Hall of Famers in Clark, Harrison, and Wayne) I'll take Brady in a crucial game over Manning. Both will end up being in the top 10 of all time NFL players, but Brady's my choice given his big game experience.
Dthefritz wrote:Not to mention the absurd bit of misdirection with Bob Sanders. What does the injury status of a safety have to do with Manning's ability? Aren't there a million hypothetical injury scenarios which could have de-railed the Pats 3 titles?
I'm going with Manning. He's basically been coaching that offense for 6 years and he continues to get it done with zero running game, and an ever-diminishing o-line and receiving corps.
It was apparent Sanders was the difference to their defense while he was out that season. Without him their run defense was putrid (and still suffers to an extent). The Colts defense is best when they can get pressure from Freeney and Mathis up front and allow Sanders to freelance.
Gregs Kite - Sat Nov 12, 2011 11:24 pm: I don't know, my Wolfpack can be sneaky good in these games
JichaelDick - Tue Oct 25, 2016 8:47 am: Fulsh, you truly are the best North Carolinian ever. Sorry, Andy Griffith.