How do you rank Manning now?

[Cowchips]

i would have peyton at 5 right now - brady #1 for me though followed by either montana or aikmen

You would put Brady above Montana and Aikman? :laugh2:

I think Manning is top 5 and barring injury will be considered the best QB in history before he's done. He has brought his team close to a perfect season several times and has 2 league MVP titles, will own the best stats in a few short years and has at least one Superbowl now.

Not sure what else you want from the guy.

 

[YosemiteSam]

You would put Brady above Montana and Aikman? :laugh2:

I think Manning is top 5 and barring injury will be considered the best QB in history before he's done. He has brought his team close to a perfect season several times and has 2 league MVP titles, will own the best stats in a few short years and has at least one Superbowl now.

Not sure what else you want from the guy.

I think Brady and Aikman are carbon copies almost. The only reason I would give Aikman the edge is Brady has a great arm, but Aikman had a canon for an arm.

 

[burmafrd]

Aikman was a machine with his accuracy- Brady is not that good. On the other hand, I think Brady is better at the two minute drill. But they are pretty close.
Otto Graham was an incredible QB; he was one who could have stepped right into the modern era and done great; I do not think any old time QB could do the same- even Baugh, who was pretty good. I still think that Montana and Staubach are the two best modern QBs; but put them in with Otto and its a pickem.

 

[AmericasTeam31]

Perhaps you should go back and re-watch that game. Particularly the last 2 minutes. He did much more then just complete two passes.

You are intitled to your own opinion but in the end, so am I. My opinion is that anybody who says Brady is nothing more then a system QB and is not very good has not been paying very much attention. Again I say, I'd be willing to bet my life that most probably would agree with that Tom Brady is a very good QB.

That is all I said. He is a very good quarterback, but not a great one.....

 

[THUMPER]

Aikman was a machine with his accuracy- Brady is not that good. On the other hand, I think Brady is better at the two minute drill. But they are pretty close.
Otto Graham was an incredible QB; he was one who could have stepped right into the modern era and done great; I do not think any old time QB could do the same- even Baugh, who was pretty good. I still think that Montana and Staubach are the two best modern QBs; but put them in with Otto and its a pickem.

Brady reminds me more of Staubach than Aikman. Brady's strength is his leadership and ability to lift his team when needed, in that he is very similar to Staubach who was the best ever at it IMO. Brady doesn't have anywhere near the arm or accuracy that Aikman had, in fact I can't think of a QB who was as accurate as Troy. Ken Anderson comes close but not quite.

Unitas in his prime was better than any QB I've ever seen but my dad says that Graham was even better (Otto retired a couple of years before I was born). I've done a lot of research on Graham and seen lots of film on him in the past and everyone who played with or against him says he was the best ever without a doubt. Looking at the results shows that they are right.

I agree with you, he could have played in any era and done well. He was incredibly smart, tough, and talented. He wasn't a runner but the only QB with more rushing TDs than Graham is Steve Young.

Baugh was not as good a QB as Graham was but he had the added dimension of being a great DB and punter as well as playing in an even less pass-friendly era.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

That is all I said. He is a very good quarterback, but not a great one.....

Very well, I'd bet my life on the fact that most would still disagree with your statement.

 

[mschmidt64]

Goat.

For some reason it won't let me capitalize the rest of the letters.

 

[zrinkill]

Payton finally won the big one ...... give the kid some credit.

 

[Maikeru-sama]

Pay attention. Read the whole thread then get back to me.

You told me huh .

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

You told me huh .

Yet amazingly enough, you still don't get it. Read the thread. I never said Montana was not a great QB for these reasons. I asked if because you can say the same things about Montana, does that mean that he too is not a great QB?

 

[Pats Fan]

First off, the problem today is what have you done for me lately.

Can you remember Big Ben from last year -- the next coming of what??? I am not sure.

Manning has been in this league for how long???? Quite a while. He had some great talent around him, but only this year he has won. So it took him how long to finally get it right??? Oh, so knock me that I don't feel like spending the time to figure out how old he is and how long he has been in the league.

The best QB ever, you have got to be joking. This guy has choked most of the big games he has played, now he is the best ever. Better than Montana??? I don't think so. Colts -- win the bowl the next few years, and maybe I would hear that.

Montana was the best ever in my mind. Ever.

Next year is next year, everything starts again. Last year people were saying Big Ben was going to be the best ever. I don't think anyone thinks that now. But what the heck, it worked last year.

Manning is a great QB. Nothing more to say. In the past when the chips were down, he was not. This year he played against an OK team and won. That does not, does not elevate him to the best ever. PLEASE already. Please.

But it has taken so long -- great talent around him -- so long.

Let's see who wins the Bowl next year,,,, oh, gee the QB will be the best ever.

Well, there is one thing I am certain of, if the Bears win the Bowl next year, I really, really do not think anyone in their right mind would call him the best ever. Well, there will be a few. Yep, there will be a few.

 

[Pats Fan]

I meant if the Bears win the Bowl next year, is Grossman the best QB that ever played the game.

Can Americans just get over "What have you done for me lately" and look at something more.

Whew.

 

[THUMPER]

I meant if the Bears win the Bowl next year, is Grossman the best QB that ever played the game.

Can Americans just get over "What have you done for me lately" and look at something more.

Whew.

The title of the thread is: How do you rank Manning now? Meaning, do you still rank him the same now that he's won a SB?

I don't recall anyone in this thread suggesting that Manning is the best to ever play the game. Only one person said that if he continues and wins a few more SBs then he COULD be but that is down the road.

See, you got all worked up for nothing.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

You mean something that a nickel defense would help? Cause you wouldn't want to play the nickel vs the power running game would you?



In 1983 the Dolphins had 2,100 yards rushing, 1984 they had 1,900 yards, 1985 they had 1,700 yards, 1986 they had 1,500 yards, 1987 they had 1,600, 1988 1,200, 1998 1,300, 1990 1,500, etc...

Marino had good rushing yards to start his career but has you can see that trailed off. Yet he still bilstered defenses with his passing.

To give you a comparable. The Cowboys: (1991 - 1,700 yards), (1992 - 2,100 yards), (1993 2,100 yards), (1994 - 1,950 yards), (1995 - 2,200 yards)

Notice how much better the Cowboys got in 1992 once they had a running game?

How much did that effect Troy Aikman you ask? Lets see.

Troy Aikman 1991: CMPs: 237 ATT: 363 C.P.: 65.3% YDS: 2754 AVG: 7.6 TDs: 11 INTs: 10
Troy Aikman 1992: CMPs: 302 ATT: 473 C.P.: 63.8% YDS: 3445 AVG: 7.3 TDs: 23 INTs: 14

The entire time the Cowboys had a good rushing game Aikman's number were always good except 1998 when he was injured.

The problem here is that you can't look at the offense Troy ran and apply it to Marino. Dan Marino didn't want to run the football which is why you see the rushing totals decline the older he got.

If you take the rushing totals and the receiving totals of the Dallas Cowboys of 92, 93 and 95 (championship years) and compare them to the combined rushing and receiving totals of the Miami backs in those same years (years in which Miami lost in the AFC championship game 92, finished 2nd in AFC East 93 and 3rd in AFC east 95) you will find that the combined totals of each teams RBs favor Miami in 2 of the 3 years. Only in 92 do we out gain them. In fact, the difference in totals is less then 100 yards.

The point I'm getting at is that everybody says that Marino didn't have anybody in his offense. That's just not true. Offensively, lots of talent in his years at Miami and he got as good or better production from them then did most teams.

 

[Pats Fan]

Thumper, sorry some people are in fact saying that. Maybe not on this site, but it is being said.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Thumper, sorry some people are in fact saying that. Maybe not on this site, but it is being said.

So I guess the question would be, why are you not busy telling them as opposed to trying to tell us?