Who are the best QBs in the league?

[Bahku]

Historically, if you put Manning on the Pats with Belichick and the Pats defense, and but Brady on the Colts with Dungy and the Colts defense, I think Manning wins at least as many Super Bowls as Brady does. 

I agree. Matt Cassel had 11 wins last year when Brady went down. Dare I say Brady might benefit from the system more than people think? I dont know but it's odd....

Here's a few things I dug up to go along with the discussion:

Manning chokes in the playoffs
Manning has made five playoff appearances in his career. Four times in those five years, he has played his very worst game of the season in the playoffs.
 
If it happened once, it’s a bad game. When it happens twice, it’s a coincidence. When it happens three times, it’s a trend. When it happens four times, it’s simply who you are.
 
And this is who Manning is: a guy who plays his worst games in the playoffs. Put most simply, it’s unreasonable to call a player the best quarterback in football when he reserves his worst games for the biggest moments. The single-worst statistical game of Manning’s career (a 31.2 passer rating) came in a 41-0 loss to a 9-7 Jets team in the 2002 postseason. The third-worst game of his career (35.5 rating) came in a 24-14 loss to 14-2 New England in the 2003 postseason.
 
Brady, meanwhile, elevates his game when it matters most. One year after another, he’s turned in his most impressive performances against the toughest teams when the stakes are highest. These performances include a 312-yard passing game in a blizzard in his playoff debut, two last-second Super Bowl-winning scoring drives, two Super Bowl MVP awards, several Super Bowl passing records and a 2004 AFC championship game in which he shredded the league’s top defense on the road, posting a season-high 130.5 passer rating in the process.
 
Brady has done more for New England than Manning has for Indy
Sure, the Colts were a second-rate organization before the arrival of Manning. He’s a great quarterback who has certainly done a lot to improve his franchise’s fortunes. He just hasn’t done as much as Brady.
 
The Colts had their best record, 13-3, in 1999, Manning’s second year in the league. They’ve plateaued since, failing to win more than 12 games in a season while appearing in just one AFC title game.
 
The Patriots were also a second-rate organization, one that had never won an NFL championship and boasted just eight playoff victories in its first 41 years of existence. Since Brady took the helm, New England has posted back-to-back 14-win seasons, added nine playoff victories and won three NFL titles.
 
Bill Belichick, meanwhile, had a career record of 42-58 before handing the reins to Brady. His record since is 61-17.
 
Brady always outplays Manning
When their two teams square off, Brady is 6-0 and he routinely outplays his fantasy football prodigy of a counterpart. Here are their respective stats in their six meetings:
 
* Brady: 121 for 180 (67.2%), 1,322 yards, 10 TDs, 4 INTs, 98.0 passer rating
 * Manning: 137 for 234 (58.5%), 1,542 yards, 9 TDs, 10 INTs, 73.3 passer rating
 
Sure, New England has had a better defense. But if you're argument is that Manning is the best quarterback in football, doesn't it stand to reason that he should be capable of lighting up a good defense?
 
Manning should have great numbers
The Colts have given Manning every imaginable resource needed to post eye-popping numbers. He’s handed the ball off to two Hall of Fame running backs, Marshall Faulk and Edgerrin James, and throws the ball to a collection of fleet-footed No. 1 draft pick receivers. Until this year, Indy management has routinely spurned its defense to spend money on offensive talent. Manning is supposed to have great numbers.
 
Brady has posted remarkably similar numbers throwing to a collection of low-round draft picks and NFL journeymen, on a team that has devoted much fewer resources to stacking its team with offensive talent.
 
The numbers are not that different
Most fans believe Manning posts spectacular numbers year after year while Brady merely muddles along with pedestrian statistics.
 
The truth is that Brady actually has better numbers at this point in his career (five-plus years in the league) than Manning had at the same point in his career. And even when we take into consideration Manning’s record-setting 2004 campaign, the two are very close on the all-time passer rating list. Manning is No. 4 (92.3 on the list. Brady is No. 7 (87.5).
 
The bottom line
No quarterback in football today – and arguably no quarterback in history – has pieced together a better combination of historically strong passing statistics and team success than Brady.

Manning puts up great numbers in the regular season. Brady puts up great numbers all the time, especially when the games count most, and has done it with less talent around him. He's also done more to alter his team’s fortunes and has been the undisputed leader on one of just three teams in NFL history to win three championships in a four-year span.
 
Brady, then, is the better quarterback.


Some more updated stuff, which shows that Manning more recently dominates the regular season, while the playoffs still belong to Tom ... in other words, Peyton chokes in the most important games.

Since the time that article was written (in 2005), Manning has won more Super Bowls than Brady, and he could very well add to that total this season.  In other words, it's a little outdated.

Also, I'm not sure how any QB who has won a Super Bowl can be said to "choke in important games".  Manning didn't seem to choke the last two times he's led huge comebacks over the Patriots, did he?

That's why I provided more updated links at the bottom. Brady has still proven himself in more Super Bowls and more "BIG" games than Manning, and under greater stress. Has anything Peyton has done compare to a complete un-tested, third-string, low-in-the-draft player like Tom taking over in the middle of a game and then leading that team to a Super Bowl victory and two subsequent Championships? The odds of that happening are very rare, and Peyton was as groomed for success in the NFL as anyone ever has been. Sorry, but it just doesn't compare, and outdated or not, Manning's accomplishments do NOT equal Brady's, and I doubt if they ever will. It's great to summize and conjecture, but until Payton wins two more Supr Bowls, the comparisons will always come out in favor of Tom Brady ... he's proven himself more successful in the post-season, even though there were far less expectations of him doing so.

[Fafnir]

Peyton came into the league and immediately started on one of the worst teams in the NFL. That's an exteremly difficult situation, one that most QBs utterly fail at.

Saying Peyton was "groomed" and has had a better situation than Brady doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Brady's played on just as talented teams. Much more talented on the defensive end by a large margin.

[Bahku]

Historically, if you put Manning on the Pats with Belichick and the Pats defense, and but Brady on the Colts with Dungy and the Colts defense, I think Manning wins at least as many Super Bowls as Brady does. Let's have this discussion after Manning gets his third ring.

I agree. Matt Cassel had 11 wins last year when Brady went down. Dare I say Brady might benefit from the system more than people think? I dont know but it's odd....

Conjecture ... he hasn't done it, Brady has ... and under more stressful situations than Manning can duplicate, as he was not even expected to play and a third-stringer when he led the team to his first Super Bowl win, (The "system"? I don't think so). People can hypothesize all they want, but until Manning proves himself equal, it's all just opinion ... and opinion I strongly disagree with.

I don't understand this argument.  Why is there more pressure on a backup QB than there is on the #1 pick in the draft?  Wouldn't the #1 pick be the guy with all of the expectations and pressure?  If anything, Brady came into the perfect situation.  When he took over for an injured Bledsoe, there were absolutely no expectations.  He then went out and blew everyone away.  As for Manning, despite putting up probably the best numbers in NFL history through this stage of his career, he's seen by some as a disappointment, because they have some twisted understanding of what a #1 pick should accomplish.

There's no doubt that Manning has had greater statistical success, but less success at winning playoff games, than Brady.  I think, though, that if their roles were reversed, Brady wouldn't be seen as the ultimate winner, as his defense and coaching staff would have been outplayed.

How do you know? It's still conjecture ... Tom has proven himself more in the playoffs than Manning, and until the time Peyton wins more championships, the theory won't hold water. It's like saying the Lakers are the greatest team ever, just because they have (arguably) the greatest player in Kobe, despite the fact that the Celtics have won more championships. I'll go with the proven and the tried.

[Roy Hobbs]

Has anything Peyton has done compare to a complete un-tested, third-string, low-in-the-draft player like Tom taking over in the middle of a game and then leading that team to a Super Bowl victory and two subsequent Championships?

I would say being the #1 overall pick, starting 16 games as a rookie, and being universally hailed as your franchise's savior, all while playing in the shadow of your Hall of Fame father, is inherently more stressful than taking over as the backup QB in Week 3 while relying on your defense to win you games.  Brady's first Super Bowl appearance was more about the defense than it was about him and his 145 yards passing.  Put Manning, or any other competent QB, on that team, and they win that game.  That was a huge team effort.  In subsequent years, of course, Brady has turned into a legitimate superstar, but he wasn't the reason they won their first SB.

I'm curious:  Do you think that Trent Dilfer is better than Dan Marino?  Do you think that Terry Bradshaw is either the first or second best QB of all-time?  I think championships are a factor, but they're far from the only one that should be used to evaluate a QB.

[Greenbean]

Same but shuffled.

1. Manning (Last night again are you kidding me?!)
2. Brees
3. Brady
4. Favre
5. Rivers

Honorable Mention
Rogers (48 sacks?!?!?), Vince Young (Extrpolated over a full season hes having a breakout. It's tough to overlook how well this guy is playing. Hope he's not too hurt, Kurt Warner (always forgotten until his ancient arm is burning your team)

I cant see who you have in the 4 slot. Does that say mvp?

HaHa! TP. I just couldnt put him over Brady. My mind would not allow me to type that.

[nickagneta]

I love me some Tom Brady but he's still the second best QB in the league. Manning calls his own plays, has made a slew of receivers look like All-Pros, and won without the benefit of an outstanding defense.

Given the choice in a complete vacuum, "Who would you want to QB your team for one game to win a championship?" I would probably have to take Manning, though the choice is very, very close and difficult.

I still say though, that asked that question out of the vacuum in reference to how they are playing this year, I still take Brady second after Manning over some of the QBs having career years  in the league. You just can't replace great experience

[Bahku]

Peyton came into the league and immediately started on one of the worst teams in the NFL. That's an exteremly difficult situation, one that most QBs utterly fail at.

Saying Peyton was "groomed" and has had a better situation than Brady doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Brady's played on just as talented teams. Much more talented on the defensive end by a large margin.

You're kidding ... so you're saying that being a complete unknown and untried QB, with no readiness to play, taking over in the middle of a game and leading your team to a Super Bowl is the same as being prepared and trained and expected to play long before the season even starts? Sorry, but that makes far LESS sense to me. To say the situations are the same and with the same amount of pressures is just not correct. What Brady did was amazing, and very few other players have ever had to duplicate it, or even COULD, given the opportunity. Manning was prepped for super-stardom from high-school, in the family he came from. Not comparable at all, IMHO.

[Bahku]

I love me some Tom Brady but he's still the second best QB in the league. Manning calls his own plays, has made a slew of receivers look like All-Pros, and won without the benefit of an outstanding defense.

Given the choice in a complete vacuum, "Who would you want to QB your team for one game to win a championship?" I would probably have to take Manning, though the choice is very, very close and difficult.

I still say though, that asked that question out of the vacuum in reference to how they are playing this year, I still take Brady second after Manning over some of the QBs having career years  in the league. You just can't replace great experience

Manning may be the best this year, but over-all, he still only has one ring, so the argument doesn't hold up, until he proves otherwise.

[Roy Hobbs]

I mean, if you go only by Super Bowls, here's the list of the best QBs of all time:

1. Joe Montana (4 SBs)
1. Terry Bradshaw (4)
3. Troy Aikman (3)
3. Tom Brady (3)
5. Bart Starr (2)
5. Roger Staubach (2)
5. Bob Griese (2)
5. Jim Plunkett (2)
5. John Elway (2)
5. Ben Roethlisberger (2)
11. Joe Namath (1)
11. Len Dawson (1)
11. Johnny Unitas (1)
11. Ken Stabler (1)
11. Joe Theismann (1)
11. Jim McMahon (1)
11. Phil Simms (1)
11. Doug Williams (1)
11. Jeff Hostetler (1)
11. Mark Rypien (1)
11. Steve Young (1)
11. Brett Favre (1)
11. Kurt Warner (1)
11. Trent Dilfer (1)
11. Brad Johnson (1)
11. Peyton Manning (1)
11. Eli Manning (1)

[Roy Hobbs]

Peyton came into the league and immediately started on one of the worst teams in the NFL. That's an exteremly difficult situation, one that most QBs utterly fail at.

Saying Peyton was "groomed" and has had a better situation than Brady doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Brady's played on just as talented teams. Much more talented on the defensive end by a large margin.

You're kidding ... so you're saying that being a complete unknown and untried QB, with no readiness to play, taking over in the middle of a game and leading your team to a Super Bowl is the same as being prepared and trained and expected to play long before the season even starts? Sorry, but that makes far LESS sense to me. To say the situations are the same and with the same amount of pressures is just not correct. What Brady did was amazing, and very few other players have ever had to duplicate it, or even COULD, given the opportunity. Manning was prepped for super-stardom from high-school, in the family he came from. Not comparable at all, IMHO.

What Brady did was amazing.  However, there's no way he was facing more pressure than the weight of Manning's expectations.  That's like saying that Big Baby faced more pressure than Tim Duncan.

[Bahku]

Has anything Peyton has done compare to a complete un-tested, third-string, low-in-the-draft player like Tom taking over in the middle of a game and then leading that team to a Super Bowl victory and two subsequent Championships?

I would say being the #1 overall pick, starting 16 games as a rookie, and being universally hailed as your franchise's savior, all while playing in the shadow of your Hall of Fame father, is inherently more stressful than taking over as the backup QB in Week 3 while relying on your defense to win you games.  Brady's first Super Bowl appearance was more about the defense than it was about him and his 145 yards passing.  Put Manning, or any other competent QB, on that team, and they win that game.  That was a huge team effort.  In subsequent years, of course, Brady has turned into a legitimate superstar, but he wasn't the reason they won their first SB.

I'm curious:  Do you think that Trent Dilfer is better than Dan Marino?  Do you think that Terry Bradshaw is either the first or second best QB of all-time?  I think championships are a factor, but they're far from the only one that should be used to evaluate a QB.

That's not the only stat that Peyton loses in ... you think he's the best, as do many here, but I've yet to be shown the evidence that convinces me he is, and until he proves himself in the ways Tom has, he will remain lower on the list.

[angryguy77]

I mean, if you go only by Super Bowls, here's the list of the best QBs of all time:

1. Joe Montana (4 SBs)
1. Terry Bradshaw (4)
3. Troy Aikman (3)
3. Tom Brady (3)
5. Bart Starr (2)
5. Roger Staubach (2)
5. Bob Griese (2)
5. Jim Plunkett (2)
5. John Elway (2)
5. Ben Roethlisberger (2)
11. Joe Namath (1)
11. Len Dawson (1)
11. Johnny Unitas (1)
11. Ken Stabler (1)
11. Joe Theismann (1)
11. Jim McMahon (1)
11. Phil Simms (1)
11. Doug Williams (1)
11. Jeff Hostetler (1)
11. Mark Rypien (1)
11. Steve Young (1)
11. Brett Favre (1)
11. Kurt Warner (1)
11. Trent Dilfer (1)
11. Brad Johnson (1)
11. Peyton Manning (1)
11. Eli Manning (1)

I knew always knew Johnson and Dilfer could be interchangable with Favre

[Bahku]

Peyton came into the league and immediately started on one of the worst teams in the NFL. That's an exteremly difficult situation, one that most QBs utterly fail at.

Saying Peyton was "groomed" and has had a better situation than Brady doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Brady's played on just as talented teams. Much more talented on the defensive end by a large margin.

You're kidding ... so you're saying that being a complete unknown and untried QB, with no readiness to play, taking over in the middle of a game and leading your team to a Super Bowl is the same as being prepared and trained and expected to play long before the season even starts? Sorry, but that makes far LESS sense to me. To say the situations are the same and with the same amount of pressures is just not correct. What Brady did was amazing, and very few other players have ever had to duplicate it, or even COULD, given the opportunity. Manning was prepped for super-stardom from high-school, in the family he came from. Not comparable at all, IMHO.

What Brady did was amazing.  However, there's no way he was facing more pressure than the weight of Manning's expectations.  That's like saying that Big Baby faced more pressure than Tim Duncan.

Not the same at all ... Big Baby has not been expected to lead his team to three championships, cold off the bench. Participate in games, yes, but be the leader for the number one team? Not remotely the same. The only one who's come close to the same thing is Rondo ... and what he did in '07 - '08 was similar.

[Greenbean]

Hmmm...Brady vs. Manning. I like this.

If you were to swap players and teams, Manning would certainly be successful on the Pats teams from the early 00's, but I am not sure he would have won as many Superbowls. Manning was not a killer in big games like Brady has always been. Even when Brady was not relied upon too much to win games by himself, he also never lost games and always came up big when it mattered. Manning on the other hand early in his career could be counted on for big interceptions in big games that always cost his team the game.


Of course voer the years, Manning has become an assasin with the ball late in the game. I hate to say it but I would have gone for it on 4th and 50 in the game earlier this year. That's how ungodly Peyton has been in orchestrating big drives in short amounts of time.

It's a fun debate though and it's one that can change every year. This year I give it to Manning because he is playing at a surreal level. I'm hoping Brady gets next year!

Then again you really never know what could happen in the playoffs. The Pats could go on a run and TAKE this year from Peyton.

[Bahku]

I mean, if you go only by Super Bowls, here's the list of the best QBs of all time:

1. Joe Montana (4 SBs)
1. Terry Bradshaw (4)
3. Troy Aikman (3)
3. Tom Brady (3)
5. Bart Starr (2)
5. Roger Staubach (2)
5. Bob Griese (2)
5. Jim Plunkett (2)
5. John Elway (2)
5. Ben Roethlisberger (2)
11. Joe Namath (1)
11. Len Dawson (1)
11. Johnny Unitas (1)
11. Ken Stabler (1)
11. Joe Theismann (1)
11. Jim McMahon (1)
11. Phil Simms (1)
11. Doug Williams (1)
11. Jeff Hostetler (1)
11. Mark Rypien (1)
11. Steve Young (1)
11. Brett Favre (1)
11. Kurt Warner (1)
11. Trent Dilfer (1)
11. Brad Johnson (1)
11. Peyton Manning (1)
11. Eli Manning (1)

I knew always knew Johnson and Dilfer could be interchangable with Favre

Ah ... when did I say it was ONLY about Super Bowls? You assumed that, but you assumed wrong. Almost all of Brady's post-season stats are superior, and many regular-season ones. Try again.