NFL 100 All-Time Team Co-Hosted by Bill Belichick

sheamonu

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 11, 2004
1,342
Dublin, Ireland
This was a game of musical chairs with three extra players, two of whom could still knock someone out of their seat in two months time. If Brees or Rodgers win out Favre would be asked to stand up and give the man a seat. Starr is the victim of time and television - he wasn’t on it enough.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,026
Brady basically bragging about Manning sharing state secrets, and then using those secrets with Gronk against the Colts, was just fantastic.
I need to see this.

That said, I can’t figure out what video we’re taking about. Anyone have a link?
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,312
Bill kinda wanted to kill Favre during that SB TD story.

Dungy not coming up once in the Manning hagiography is awesome.
 
Last edited:

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,187
If Peyton Manning isn't a unanimous selection, someone needs their voting rights stripped. All of the others make sense.
If Brees isn’t on at all there’s no way Manning deserves to be unanimous—not clear he’s even more deserving of a slot.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
If Brees isn’t on at all there’s no way Manning deserves to be unanimous—not clear he’s even more deserving of a slot.
I'm not a Manning fan at all, but not deserving of a slot over Drew Brees or at all? I would need to hear the argument for that.

And as was pointed out on the show, the voting started in May, 2018. That means last season and this season, when Brees reached the records, were most likely not taken into account when they chose the team, making it even harder for current players to make the cut. At that point, Manning owned every single passing record, had 2 Super Bowl championships in 3 appearances, all of which required going through the Patriots. If I had to pick one guy to start one game for my team and the choice was Manning or Brees, I'm taking Manning.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,014
Oregon
I guess they screwed themselves by going with just 10 quarterbacks. Considering they went 12-deep for running backs, you'd think they'd have just as many QBs. Did the NFL 100 need 2 kickers, 2 punters and 2 kick returners? Did it need 12 linebackers?
 

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
46,767
Hartford, CT
I guess they screwed themselves by going with just 10 quarterbacks. Considering they went 12-deep for running backs, you'd think they'd have just as many QBs. Did the NFL 100 need 2 kickers, 2 punters and 2 kick returners? Did it need 12 linebackers?
Having more RB than WR or QB was a bizarre choice.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,014
Imaginationland
Points for Brees:
-Incredible statistics. It's pretty likely the he ends up number 1 overall in the passing triple crown (yards, TDs, completions).
-Incredible longevity. He's 3rd overall in career weighted AV.

Points against Brees:
-He has a significant statistical advantage due to where he played (San Diego, then in a dome). Compared to his contemporaries (Brady in NE, Rodgers in GB, Manning setting records in Denver), his numbers are rightfully given less credence. Considering his teammates, home-field and era, he's in the most passer friendly environment of all time.
-He's rarely if ever been more than the 3rd best active QB. This happens when you play at the same time as Brady, Manning and Rodgers, as well as a host of other very strong QBs (Roethlisberger, Rivers, Wilson). One all pro appearance in 18 years as a starter is rough.
-0 MVPs. The only other QB selected who didn't win an MVP (other than Baugh and Graham, who played before the award existed) was Staubach.
-Relatively little team success. Just 1 super bowl appearance, 1 super bowl win, 3 conference finals appearances. He missed the playoffs 6 times in his prime, terrible relative to his peers on this list (Brady/Manning have made the playoffs a combined 28 consecutive years, other than 2 missed injury years). He had a lousy defense? Yeah, so did Manning/Brady/Rodgers at times, and those guys still made the playoffs every single season.

Brees vs Manning is a joke. Only the most superficial glance (Brees passing Manning's career records) makes it interesting. 5-0 in terms of MVPs, 7-1 in terms of All-Pro selections. That's it. Brees has made a great career out of playing in a super friendly passing environment, being on teams good enough to win 7-11 games per year, and always being the guy who rounds out the "who are the top 5 QBs playing right now?" question. Manning changed the way the game is played. I'm not a Manning guy, but Brees doesn't belong in the same room.

One real point still in Brees' favor is that he's not done. Neither is Brady but the book on him is basically written - nothing that happens going forward will really impact Brady's legacy one way or the other. It's easy to see Brees winning the SB this year and another SB MVP. If that had happened 12 months earlier does he make the team? Maybe.
 
Last edited:

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,667
I’d put Manning second all-time every time. He was incredible. And terrifying. I mean, I can’t speak to Baugh and Graham and Unitas but I wouldn’t hesitate picking him over the other guys on that list or Brees or Rodgers.


Yes it made no sense to stop at 10QBs. That list should have been 12-14 for sure.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
58,867
San Andreas Fault
I guess they screwed themselves by going with just 10 quarterbacks. Considering they went 12-deep for running backs, you'd think they'd have just as many QBs. Did the NFL 100 need 2 kickers, 2 punters and 2 kick returners? Did it need 12 linebackers?
For a lot of the history of the league, you had a quarterback, two halfbacks and a fullback in the backfield, so, 3/4 of the guys’ primary job was running the ball. A ratio of 12/10 RB to QB actually is disproportionate in favor of QBs if you look at it that way. Brees will get his due in some such hoo hah down the road too I’m sure.
 

Oppo

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2009
1,576
Brees overlapped too much with Brady and Manning, don’t need 3 QBs from the same time period. Same with Rodgers.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,667
Rodgers had a really good peak but for the last 4-5 seasons he has been a good but not great QB. It’s a secret about his career that doesn’t get brought up enough.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,187
Points for Brees:
-Incredible statistics. It's pretty likely the he ends up number 1 overall in the passing triple crown (yards, TDs, completions).
-Incredible longevity. He's 3rd overall in career weighted AV.

Points against Brees:
-He has a significant statistical advantage due to where he played (San Diego, then in a dome). Compared to his contemporaries (Brady in NE, Rodgers in GB, Manning setting records in Denver), his numbers are rightfully given less credence. Considering his teammates, home-field and era, he's in the most passer friendly environment of all time.
-He's rarely if ever been more than the 3rd best active QB. This happens when you play at the same time as Brady, Manning and Rodgers, as well as a host of other very strong QBs (Roethlisberger, Rivers, Wilson). One all pro appearance in 18 years as a starter is rough.
-0 MVPs. The only other QB selected who didn't win an MVP (other than Baugh and Graham, who played before the award existed) was Staubach.
-Relatively little team success. Just 1 super bowl appearance, 1 super bowl win, 3 conference finals appearances. He missed the playoffs 6 times in his prime, terrible relative to his peers on this list (Brady/Manning have made the playoffs a combined 28 consecutive years, other than 2 missed injury years). He had a lousy defense? Yeah, so did Manning/Brady/Rodgers at times, and those guys still made the playoffs every single season.

Brees vs Manning is a joke. Only the most superficial glance (Brees passing Manning's career records) makes it interesting. 5-0 in terms of MVPs, 7-1 in terms of All-Pro selections. That's it. Brees has made a great career out of playing in a super friendly passing environment, being on teams good enough to win 7-11 games per year, and always being the guy who rounds out the "who are the top 5 QBs playing right now?" question. Manning changed the way the game is played. I'm not a Manning guy, but Brees doesn't belong in the same room.

One real point still in Brees' favor is that he's not done. Neither is Brady but the book on him is basically written - nothing that happens going forward will really impact Brady's legacy one way or the other. It's easy to see Brees winning the SB this year and another SB MVP. If that had happened 12 months earlier does he make the team? Maybe.
Suggesting Brees' team/dome context is a negative relative to Peyton is just uninformed and silly.

Here's their actual stats, overall, per game, and playoff. Putting aside TV ads, hype, etc. if you think the comparison is a joke tell me the specific performance (not 'voting' by people interested in narratives) which make it so:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&player_id1_hint=Peyton+Manning&player_id1_select=Peyton+Manning&fromyear_1=1998&toyear_1=2015&player_id1=MannPe00&idx=players&player_id2_hint=Drew+Brees&player_id2_select=Drew+Brees&fromyear_2=2001&toyear_2=2019&player_id2=BreeDr00&idx=players

I think many people have not looked closely or thought hard about what Brees has done, and that's a shame. I do think wins/playoff record matters for a QB but I'm not sure that is as strong a case for manning as people think---his second SB was 0% about him, and his record vs a perpetually crappy division just isn't as impressive to me as it is to others. I give him credit there, but I don't see the vast gulf here that some do. This is not Brady vs either of them in terms of team success.

I hear the point that the sample for the show itself is a year and a half old, and that’s non-ridiculous as a reason for Manning. But as great as he was—-and at his peak he was the most terrifying opposing QB I have seen as a Pats fan—I just don’t think the case for him over the course of his full career relative to Brees is anywhere near as strong as people think.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,014
Imaginationland
Brees overlapped too much with Brady and Manning, don’t need 3 QBs from the same time period. Same with Rodgers.
It's a decent point, but Montana (1979-1994), Marino (1983-1999) and Elway (1983-1998) all played from the same period.

Rodgers had a really good peak but for the last 4-5 seasons he has been a good but not great QB. It’s a secret about his career that doesn’t get brought up enough.
Definitely. 2010-2014 Rodgers won 2 MVPs, a super bowl, and led a 15-1 team and was clearly the best player in the league. He's been riding that rep for 4-5 years now, he's good and can still make all the throws but his decision making has been lacking for some time now.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
19,861
St. Louis, MO
12 QB’s would get Brees and Tarkenton in for me and completes the list pretty well. Nitpick but the finalist list not having Kelly or Moon was tough.
 

azsoxpatsfan

Does not enjoy the go
SoSH Member
May 23, 2014
4,774
Suggesting Brees' team/dome context is a negative relative to Peyton is just uninformed and silly.

Here's their actual stats, overall, per game, and playoff. Putting aside TV ads, hype, etc. if you think the comparison is a joke tell me the specific performance (not 'voting' by people interested in narratives) which make it so:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&player_id1_hint=Peyton+Manning&player_id1_select=Peyton+Manning&fromyear_1=1998&toyear_1=2015&player_id1=MannPe00&idx=players&player_id2_hint=Drew+Brees&player_id2_select=Drew+Brees&fromyear_2=2001&toyear_2=2019&player_id2=BreeDr00&idx=players

I think many people have not looked closely or thought hard about what Brees has done, and that's a shame. I do think wins/playoff record matters for a QB but I'm not sure that is as strong a case for manning as people think---his second SB was 0% about him, and his record vs a perpetually crappy division just isn't as impressive to me as it is to others. I give him credit there, but I don't see the vast gulf here that some do. This is not Brady vs either of them in terms of team success.

I hear the point that the sample for the show itself is a year and a half old, and that’s non-ridiculous as a reason for Manning. But as great as he was—-and at his peak he was the most terrifying opposing QB I have seen as a Pats fan—I just don’t think the case for him over the course of his full career relative to Brees is anywhere near as strong as people think.
That comparison is interesting. Brees has the edge in completion%, td, yards, and int, both total and per game (tied in td and int per game). Also has higher completion%, way more yards per game, more td per game, and fewer int per game in playoffs. Higher rating than manning in regular season and playoffs. Manning basically just won more which obviously leads to more playoff games ( although Brees has higher playoff win%). Brees led the league in completion% more times, yards more times, tds same amount of times. Brees slightly better in dome, manning slightly better outside.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,187
I was surprised first time I saw it a couple weeks ago---i would have said Manning was clearly ahead. But that simply isn't the case.

I do think one can prefer Manning for a variety of reasons (one of which is that passing continues to become more and more dominant, and thus the numbers still go up), but I think you can also prefer Brees for longevity/consistency, for having overall weaker teams around him, and he is still going strong. Statistically, it is pretty much a dead heat right now and I think that surprises many people.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
This was posted mid-December as an argument for Manning over Brees. Some numbers have changed slightly but it’s a pretty compelling case for Manning.

Pro-bowls: Manning 14, Brees 12
All-pro: Manning 7, Brees 1
MVP: Manning 5, Brees 0
SB titles: Manning 2, Brees 1
Conference titles: Manning 3, Brees 1
W-L record: Manning 186-79 (.702), Brees 161-111 (.592)
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
61,996
New York City
Elway on there is a stretch, but putting Roger Staubach on the list makes the entire exercise a joke. He played 8 seasons of 10 games or more. Compared to Staubach, Brees is fucking Tom Brady. Whatever.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,312
This was posted mid-December as an argument for Manning over Brees. Some numbers have changed slightly but it’s a pretty compelling case for Manning.
I don’t understand why popularity contests like MVPs and Pro Bowls should be considered when we have head to head numbers.

If Brees has better overall career numbers with generally worse skill players, doesn’t that mean Manning was just more hyped or popular or on more successful teams?

And giving Manning credit for that second SB is kind of funny. Nevermind that Brees beat him heads up.
 

azsoxpatsfan

Does not enjoy the go
SoSH Member
May 23, 2014
4,774
I don’t understand why popularity contests like MVPs and Pro Bowls should be considered when we have head to head numbers.

If Brees has better overall career numbers with generally worse skill players, doesn’t that mean Manning was just more hyped or popular or on more successful teams?

And giving Manning credit for that second SB is kind of funny. Nevermind that Brees beat him heads up.
Brees also lead in important categories more frequently. Lead in completion% 6 times compared to twice for manning, yards 7 to 2, tds both 4. Manning lead in rating 3 compared to twice for Brees, but Brees is second this season behind tannehill and could end up leading. The mvp, all pros, and pro bowls had more to do with popularity and team success (as you said) than actually having better seasons
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
Brees also lead in important categories more frequently. Lead in completion% 6 times compared to twice for manning, yards 7 to 2, tds both 4. Manning lead in rating 3 compared to twice for Brees, but Brees is second this season behind tannehill and could end up leading. The mvp, all pros, and pro bowls had more to do with popularity and team success (as you said) than actually having better seasons
Manning played on "slow" teams for most of his career that did not have a lot of drives per game / per season. He was incredibly efficient on a per-pass and pre-drive basis. (The exception is his 2013 Broncos season, where Denver played really "fast" and he set basically every record even though it was not really much more impressive than some of his best Colts seasons.) He also often got much of the last week or two off. Brees led in these categories more because he threw more. It's fair to say Brees is being underrated here and should have been in the top 10 (and I do believe that), but he is justifiably seen as the third-best QB of his era behind Brady and Manning.

The other factor here that's hard to put weight on is how much of Brees' success is aided by Sean Payton. You hear similar arguments about Brady, but no one was calling Belichick an *offensive* genius before TB12, and the track records of Weis / McDaniels / O'Brien are up-and-down outside of NE. Probably the most renowned offensive mind Manning played for was Gary Kubiak, and that was at the tail end. Brees has gotten to play for one of the best offensive minds of his generation.
 

azsoxpatsfan

Does not enjoy the go
SoSH Member
May 23, 2014
4,774
Manning played on "slow" teams for most of his career that did not have a lot of drives per game / per season. He was incredibly efficient on a per-pass and pre-drive basis. (The exception is his 2013 Broncos season, where Denver played really "fast" and he set basically every record even though it was not really much more impressive than some of his best Colts seasons.) He also often got much of the last week or two off. Brees led in these categories more because he threw more. It's fair to say Brees is being underrated here and should have been in the top 10 (and I do believe that), but he is justifiably seen as the third-best QB of his era behind Brady and Manning.

The other factor here that's hard to put weight on is how much of Brees' success is aided by Sean Payton. You hear similar arguments about Brady, but no one was calling Belichick an *offensive* genius before TB12, and the track records of Weis / McDaniels / O'Brien are up-and-down outside of NE. Probably the most renowned offensive mind Manning played for was Gary Kubiak, and that was at the tail end. Brees has gotten to play for one of the best offensive minds of his generation.
Fair points. Manning has slightly better yards per attempt and yards per completion and a higher td% (also slightly higher int%). They’re actually remarkably similar in all of those stats. The Sean Payton effect is impossible to quantify, and there are other things such as surrounding talent level and playing conditions that are hard to really attach a value to. I think manning was the better qb, although I think it’s extremely close. That said, I don’t think things like mvps and all pro seasons should have that much bearing
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
Fair points. Manning has slightly better yards per attempt and yards per completion and a higher td% (also slightly higher int%). They’re actually remarkably similar in all of those stats. The Sean Payton effect is impossible to quantify, and there are other things such as surrounding talent level and playing conditions that are hard to really attach a value to. I think manning was the better qb, although I think it’s extremely close. That said, I don’t think things like mvps and all pro seasons should have that much bearing
Pro Bowl nominations for QBs can be pretty safely ignored, but MVP and All Pro votes, while flawed, offer just as much as raw statistics do. We're dealing with a 16-game sample size, uneven scheduling, uneven weather conditions, varied receiving corps, varied coaching staffs, different strategies near the goal line, etc. We probably shouldn't read too much into it that Manning won the MVP over Brees in 2006 and 2009 when it could easily have been the other way around, but we definitely shouldn't take differences of a couple points of completion percentage or a handful of touchdowns or interceptions too seriously either.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,312
Manning played on "slow" teams for most of his career that did not have a lot of drives per game / per season. He was incredibly efficient on a per-pass and pre-drive basis. (The exception is his 2013 Broncos season, where Denver played really "fast" and he set basically every record even though it was not really much more impressive than some of his best Colts seasons.) He also often got much of the last week or two off. Brees led in these categories more because he threw more. It's fair to say Brees is being underrated here and should have been in the top 10 (and I do believe that), but he is justifiably seen as the third-best QB of his era behind Brady and Manning.

The other factor here that's hard to put weight on is how much of Brees' success is aided by Sean Payton. You hear similar arguments about Brady, but no one was calling Belichick an *offensive* genius before TB12, and the track records of Weis / McDaniels / O'Brien are up-and-down outside of NE. Probably the most renowned offensive mind Manning played for was Gary Kubiak, and that was at the tail end. Brees has gotten to play for one of the best offensive minds of his generation.
I was told Manning was his own coach and the greatest football mind ever.
 

Ale Xander

Hamilton
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
72,428
I guess they screwed themselves by going with just 10 quarterbacks. Considering they went 12-deep for running backs, you'd think they'd have just as many QBs. Did the NFL 100 need 2 kickers, 2 punters and 2 kick returners? Did it need 12 linebackers?
Did it need 10 head coaches?

This was like an NFL 90
 

Ale Xander

Hamilton
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
72,428
Pro Bowl nominations for QBs can be pretty safely ignored, but MVP and All Pro votes, while flawed, offer just as much as raw statistics do. We're dealing with a 16-game sample size, uneven scheduling, uneven weather conditions, varied receiving corps, varied coaching staffs, different strategies near the goal line, etc. We probably shouldn't read too much into it that Manning won the MVP over Brees in 2006 and 2009 when it could easily have been the other way around, but we definitely shouldn't take differences of a couple points of completion percentage or a handful of touchdowns or interceptions too seriously either.
Brees won a Super Bowl over Manning
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
Pro Bowl nominations for QBs can be pretty safely ignored, but MVP and All Pro votes, while flawed, offer just as much as raw statistics do. We're dealing with a 16-game sample size, uneven scheduling, uneven weather conditions, varied receiving corps, varied coaching staffs, different strategies near the goal line, etc. We probably shouldn't read too much into it that Manning won the MVP over Brees in 2006 and 2009 when it could easily have been the other way around, but we definitely shouldn't take differences of a couple points of completion percentage or a handful of touchdowns or interceptions too seriously either.
And we aren’t talking about a difference of one or two MVPs or all pros. There’s a chasm there.
 

singaporesoxfan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2004
11,882
Washington, DC
Suggesting Brees' team/dome context is a negative relative to Peyton is just uninformed and silly.

Here's their actual stats, overall, per game, and playoff. Putting aside TV ads, hype, etc. if you think the comparison is a joke tell me the specific performance (not 'voting' by people interested in narratives) which make it so:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&player_id1_hint=Peyton+Manning&player_id1_select=Peyton+Manning&fromyear_1=1998&toyear_1=2015&player_id1=MannPe00&idx=players&player_id2_hint=Drew+Brees&player_id2_select=Drew+Brees&fromyear_2=2001&toyear_2=2019&player_id2=BreeDr00&idx=players

I think many people have not looked closely or thought hard about what Brees has done, and that's a shame. I do think wins/playoff record matters for a QB but I'm not sure that is as strong a case for manning as people think---his second SB was 0% about him, and his record vs a perpetually crappy division just isn't as impressive to me as it is to others. I give him credit there, but I don't see the vast gulf here that some do. This is not Brady vs either of them in terms of team success.

I hear the point that the sample for the show itself is a year and a half old, and that’s non-ridiculous as a reason for Manning. But as great as he was—-and at his peak he was the most terrifying opposing QB I have seen as a Pats fan—I just don’t think the case for him over the course of his full career relative to Brees is anywhere near as strong as people think.
That comparison doesn’t take into account just how much Brees has played in domes even compared to Manning. It’s easy to say Manning played a lot of his career in a dome too but when you look at the numbers, Brees played 49% of his games in a dome and 47% of his games outdoors, including quite a few in the balmy weather of San Diego. By contrast, Manning played 35% of his games in a dome and 51% of his games outdoors, including a lot in Denver. (The remainders are retroof stadia.)

As a nice illustration of just how much Brees’ stats were helped by the dome (and also an illustration of Simpson’s Paradox):
Tom Brady has a better passer rating than Drew Brees in domes (109 to 104.9). Brady also has a better passer rating than Brees outdoors (96.4 to 91.6). Yet in aggregate Brees has a better passer rating (Brady 97, 98.3), simply because Brees has played a ton of games in domes.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
24,651
where I was last at
Perhaps part of the breeze in Drew's face re a spot on the 100 is the # of losing/mediocre seasons his teams have had. Great QBs get their teams to the play-offs.
 
Last edited:

McBride11

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
22,109
Durham, NC
Manning probably has more SB wins if not for the greatest QB of all time opposing him.

Brees has been too up and down (yes there is a team component, but when did healthy Manning or Brady have subpar records / seasons).

If the Pats were in a big game and the opposing QB was either Brees , Manning, or Rodgers... I would be most worried about Manning.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,187
Manning played on "slow" teams for most of his career that did not have a lot of drives per game / per season. He was incredibly efficient on a per-pass and pre-drive basis. (The exception is his 2013 Broncos season, where Denver played really "fast" and he set basically every record even though it was not really much more impressive than some of his best Colts seasons.) He also often got much of the last week or two off. Brees led in these categories more because he threw more. It's fair to say Brees is being underrated here and should have been in the top 10 (and I do believe that), but he is justifiably seen as the third-best QB of his era behind Brady and Manning.

The other factor here that's hard to put weight on is how much of Brees' success is aided by Sean Payton. You hear similar arguments about Brady, but no one was calling Belichick an *offensive* genius before TB12, and the track records of Weis / McDaniels / O'Brien are up-and-down outside of NE. Probably the most renowned offensive mind Manning played for was Gary Kubiak, and that was at the tail end. Brees has gotten to play for one of the best offensive minds of his generation.
Perhaps, but you need to pick a side of the issue on the value of assistant coaches and stick to it—-you argued that we can’t give BB any credit for the Giants success under Parcells, and if that is true we shouldn’t be looking at coordinators (or their reps) here either. Either the play caller matters or they don’t.

I think the number of drives argument is interesting—-but is there data on that?
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,487
Santa Monica, CA
Manning probably has more SB wins if not for the greatest QB of all time opposing him.

Brees has been too up and down (yes there is a team component, but when did healthy Manning or Brady have subpar records / seasons).

If the Pats were in a big game and the opposing QB was either Brees , Manning, or Rodgers... I would be most worried about Manning.
Brees would be a distant third for me. He has every possible advantage in compiling stats - tremendous weapons, an era of no contact in the secondary, and an entire career without weather.

He's a perfectly reasonable exclusion.
 

Seels

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
4,948
NH
I feel like Manning is over Brees to the degree Brees is over a guy like Rivers. There is a huge gap between the two. Manning has a legitimate argument for #1 ever. I don't support it, but he has one.

I also kind of hate the bad defenses argument. This is the nature of the beast with the NFC South -- none of those teams have consistently fielded defenses (at least after 2005 or so Buccs), and they all have very favorable conditions for passing. You can't both give Brees credit for his inflated passing stats while also trying to use the bad defense argument to support him. The fact is - if you are one of the best quarterbacks ever, you're going to be a sure bet for the playoffs every year. Could you imagine a year of Manning or Brady or Montana's careers that they weren't one of the 2-3 favorites of their conference every year? Could you imagine any of them playing in the post realignment NFC South, and defense be damned, ever struggling in getting a playoff spot?

I know the commonly expected counter is that more goes into games than a QB. Sure. But over a sample size as large as 150-200 games -- these things are going to even out a bit.

It's also not a coincidence that once he and the Saints in general stopped turning the ball over they started winning. They had 25-30 turnovers a year for a while. The Pats have been between 10-15 in the last decade.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,667
Brees would be a distant third for me. He has every possible advantage in compiling stats - tremendous weapons, an era of no contact in the secondary, and an entire career without weather.

He's a perfectly reasonable exclusion.
Brees has had by far the worst weapons of the three. His second best receiver is Marques Colston and his third is probably like, Robert Meachem or Lance Moore.
 

azsoxpatsfan

Does not enjoy the go
SoSH Member
May 23, 2014
4,774
I feel like Manning is over Brees to the degree Brees is over a guy like Rivers. There is a huge gap between the two. Manning has a legitimate argument for #1 ever. I don't support it, but he has one.

I also kind of hate the bad defenses argument. This is the nature of the beast with the NFC South -- none of those teams have consistently fielded defenses (at least after 2005 or so Buccs), and they all have very favorable conditions for passing. You can't both give Brees credit for his inflated passing stats while also trying to use the bad defense argument to support him. The fact is - if you are one of the best quarterbacks ever, you're going to be a sure bet for the playoffs every year. Could you imagine a year of Manning or Brady or Montana's careers that they weren't one of the 2-3 favorites of their conference every year? Could you imagine any of them playing in the post realignment NFC South, and defense be damned, ever struggling in getting a playoff spot?

I know the commonly expected counter is that more goes into games than a QB. Sure. But over a sample size as large as 150-200 games -- these things are going to even out a bit.

It's also not a coincidence that once he and the Saints in general stopped turning the ball over they started winning. They had 25-30 turnovers a year for a while. The Pats have been between 10-15 in the last decade.
I don’t disagree with this other than the statement that manning “has a legitimate argument for #1.” Some people may try to argue that but it’s not a legitimate argument
 

Oppo

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2009
1,576
Brees has had by far the worst weapons of the three. His second best receiver is Marques Colston and his third is probably like, Robert Meachem or Lance Moore.
Almost 10k career receiving yards (and 72 TD) from your second best WR is pretty damn good.
Don’t forget Jimmy Graham- Just under 5k yards and 51 TDs in 5 years. There were legitimate Graham/Gronk debates at the time.
He’s also had 2 very good years from Brandin Cooks
Throw in a solid stable of RB- Deuce, Ingram and high receiving guys like Bush, Thomas, and Kamara

Wouldn’t consider that by far worse than the others
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,487
Santa Monica, CA
Almost 10k career receiving yards (and 72 TD) from your second best WR is pretty damn good.
Don’t forget Jimmy Graham- Just under 5k yards and 51 TDs in 5 years. There were legitimate Graham/Gronk debates at the time.
He’s also had 2 very good years from Brandin Cooks
Throw in a solid stable of RB- Deuce, Ingram and high receiving guys like Bush, Thomas, and Kamara

Wouldn’t consider that by far worse than the others
Compare that to what Rodgers had over the years. It truly isn't close.