Who would you rather have in their prime? [Archive]

dmbhoosier21

11-12-2007, 12:34 AM

I have a feeling this will be a long debate.

But.......Manning. Both has the same SB wins.

Manning has better #s with less INTs (although Manning tried hard to catch up tonight). Also the amount of responsibilities Manning has at the line is unprecedented.

Manning is indeed a "gun slinger" type - but with less INTs.

The argument that Favre doesn't have the same type of talent....well true, Favre has never had a Marvin, but to simply assume that Favre would have had better #s than Manning is well.......exactly that; a baseless assumption that can no way be proven or denied - ever

skatcat

11-12-2007, 12:37 AM

Favre. He'll take a hit. Manning is a pussy.

JamesM

11-12-2007, 12:38 AM

Brett Favre is a comeback machine

Tiduwho

11-12-2007, 12:43 AM

Favre. He'll take a hit. Manning is a pussy.

Yet he's right behind Favre on the consecutive games started list. :rolleyes

I would take Favre, because of just how plain exciting he was. He was pretty much unstoppable in the mid-90s before he fell into his interception machine phase.

dmbhoosier21

11-12-2007, 12:44 AM

Favre. He'll take a hit. Manning is a pussy.

:lol Do you know how many games Manning has missed?

Manning has played with injuries throughout his career.

Manning has faked baseline Neuro test (taken before the season) just in case he gets a concussion during the reg. season - just so it'd be easier for him to pass the test and be able to play sooner.

Just b/c Madden doesn't sit there and talk about how manly and tough Manning is, doesn't make Manning a "pussy"

While I respect your opinion, your reasoning behind it is nothing short of stupid.

VanHorneDog

11-12-2007, 12:44 AM

i want LT back from his prime, he is old and overrated. i hope they trade him and keep turner. now that kid is gunna be a real star.

VanHorneDog

11-12-2007, 12:45 AM

Farve, he is mobile.

skatcat

11-12-2007, 12:48 AM

:lol Do you know how many games Manning has missed?

Manning has played with injuries throughout his career.

Manning has faked baseline Neuro test (taken before the season) just in case he gets a concussion during the reg. season - just so it'd be easier for him to pass the test and be able to play sooner.

Just b/c Madden doesn't sit there and talk about how manly and tough Manning is, doesn't make Manning a "pussy"

While I respect your opinion, your reasoning behind it is nothing short of stupid.

Madden doesn't have to talk about it. I've watched both for many years with my own eyes. Manning curls up like a girl when he's getting ready to get hit. No doubt 2 of the greats in the game, i just prefer Favre.

VanHorneDog

11-12-2007, 12:50 AM

dmbhoosier21

11-12-2007, 12:52 AM

Madden doesn't have to talk about it. I've watched both for many years with my own eyes. Manning curls up like a girl when he's getting ready to get hit. No doubt 2 of the greats in the game, i just prefer Favre.

:lol What do you prefer a QB to do when he knows he's about to get hit by a 250 pound linebacker or a 300 pound defensive lineman. Stand there and take the hit with a smile on his face with open arms.

And if you are referring to stepping into a pass to deliver the throw, Manning is one of the best - you don't get those types of #s from ....what is it again, "curling up like a girl" :lol. Which BTW are better than Favre's.

Again, I respect your opinion, but if you really think Manning is soft, you quite obviously have no clue what you're talking about :lol

dmbhoosier21

11-12-2007, 12:55 AM

I think everyone has completely forgotten what Manning did to defenses before the days of safeties dropping back 15-20 yards, then at the snap backpedalling as fast as they can preventing the big plays. :lol

But Favre really is a great great QB btw.

crashintonickdm

11-12-2007, 12:57 AM

brett

jaking1185

11-12-2007, 01:03 AM

OMG, is Favre becoming sports version of #41? :lol

He took out Brady and now he's going after Manning.

TwoStep2888

11-12-2007, 01:18 AM

Favre. He's the best to ever play the game.

TwoStep2888

11-12-2007, 01:19 AM

OMG, is Favre becoming sports version of #41? :lol

He took out Brady and now he's going after Manning.

I believe it's been established.

Ditka > Favre > #41

chr35919

11-12-2007, 01:26 AM

brady.

oh wait. favre.

jaking1185

11-12-2007, 01:28 AM

I believe it's been established.

Ditka > Favre > #41

With all respect to Bo, I'd have to say:

Favre > #41 > Ditka

TwoStep2888

11-12-2007, 01:30 AM

With all respect to Bo, I'd have to say:

Favre > #41 > Ditka

You're probably right. I'm just tired of fighting him on it.

groton

11-12-2007, 01:30 AM

Manning as much i hate to say it he never made Stupid Passes Farve may have the better Arm Power but Manning Brain is better

but I'm a fan of the Bill Walsh West Coast Offense which System Wise i think Manning would kill in it

zdaddy

11-12-2007, 01:48 AM

Favre

In his prime (95-97), he was the best ever.

BotheDMBFan

11-12-2007, 02:03 AM

With all respect to Bo, I'd have to say:

Favre > #41 > Ditka

Fucking die.

Ditka>Universe.

BotheDMBFan

11-12-2007, 02:03 AM

You're probably right. I'm just tired of fighting him on it.

You can fucking die too.

rickyh24

11-12-2007, 02:04 AM

Favre

In his prime (95-97), he was the best ever.

for now...

BotheDMBFan

11-12-2007, 02:06 AM

I'd take 1999 Kurt Warner by the way, just so every time I can say KUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRTT TTTTTTTTTTTT.

zdaddy

11-12-2007, 02:07 AM

for now...
what, Brady. I really REALLY hate to pull this card (because what Brady is doing is truly marvelous), but you stick those receivers with Favre in his prime, you are looking at far and away the most ridiculous 3 year span the NFL has ever seen, much better than what Brady is capable of.

zdaddy

11-12-2007, 02:07 AM

I'd take 1999 Kurt Warner by the way, just so every time I can say KUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRTT TTTTTTTTTTTT.
:lol :lol

BotheDMBFan

11-12-2007, 02:12 AM

:lol :lol

You can fucking die as well.

Ya'll ever heard that song "I Kill Children" by Dead Kennedys? My version is "I Kill Cheeseheads."

rickyh24

11-12-2007, 02:14 AM

what, Brady. I really REALLY hate to pull this card (because what Brady is doing is truly marvelous), but you stick those receivers with Favre in his prime, you are looking at far and away the most ridiculous 3 year span the NFL has ever seen, much better than what Brady is capable of.

yeah thats kinda hearsay though.

zdaddy

11-12-2007, 02:15 AM

You can fucking die as well.

Ya'll ever heard that song "I Kill Children" by Dead Kennedys? My version is "I Kill Cheeseheads."
you seem to forget that we "cheeseheads" happen to have a quite a large armement of lethal weapons:violent ;)

BotheDMBFan

11-12-2007, 02:15 AM

you seem to forget that we "cheeseheads" happen to have a quite a large armement of lethal weapons:violent ;)

I have the Biafra warble, I'm unstoppable.

zdaddy

11-12-2007, 02:16 AM

yeah thats kinda hearsay though.
like i said, I really hate to pull that card, but i know what ive seen, and i stick by what i say

zdaddy

11-12-2007, 02:16 AM

I have the Biafra warble, I'm unstoppable.
:lol WTF

BotheDMBFan

11-12-2007, 02:19 AM

:lol WTF

I take it you've never heard a Dead Kennedy's song.

Jello Biafra(Their lead singer) didn't really sing(pretty much the norm for punk singers), he kinda...warbled.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgpa7wEAz7I

rickyh24

11-12-2007, 02:19 AM

like i said, I really hate to pull that card, but i know what ive seen, and i stick by what i say

yeah i have seen the same thing...its not like Farve has been throwing to crap though. This is Brady's first year with great Receivers its not like he just started playing good.

zdaddy

11-12-2007, 02:19 AM

I take it you've never heard a Dead Kennedy's song.

Jello Biafra(Their lead singer) didn't really sing(pretty much the norm for punk singers), he kinda...warbled.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgpa7wEAz7I
haha yeah ive never listened to them, but now i understand a little better

BotheDMBFan

11-12-2007, 02:19 AM

yeah i have seen the same thing...its not like Farve has been throwing to crap though. This is Brady's first year with great Receivers its not like he just started playing good.

Eh....

BotheDMBFan

11-12-2007, 02:20 AM

haha yeah ive never listened to them, but now i understand a little better

Their debut album is easily the best electric punk album ever, and best electric album of the 80's.

rickyh24

11-12-2007, 02:21 AM

Eh....

ok hes had no Randy Moss but he has had Wes Walkers and Stallworths.

BotheDMBFan

11-12-2007, 02:23 AM

If you gave him the WR's that Manning has, he's closing in on 70,000 yds...

DMBZeppelin

11-12-2007, 02:28 AM

Favre

In his prime (95-97), he was the best ever.
Eh, it's not as clear cut as you might think. Since this thread is about Manning, I'll compare Favre's 95-97 to Manning's 04-06.

Brett Favre -Numbers from 95-97
Average Season: 4,060 Yards, 7.5 YPA, 37 TD's and 14 INT's
Most Yards in a Season: 4,413
Fewest Yards in a Season: 3,867
Most TD's in a Season: 39
Fewest TD's in a Season: 35
Most INT's in a Season: 16
Fewest INT's in a Season: 13
Highest QB Rating in a Season: 99.5
Lowest QB Rating in a Season: 92.6
Highest CMP% in a Season: 63%
Lowest CMP% in a Season: 59.3%

Peyton Manning - Numbers from 04-06
Average Season: 4,234 Yards, 8.4 YPA, 36 TD's and 10 INT's
Most Yards in a Season: 4,557
Fewest Yards in a Season: 3,747
Most TD's in a Season: 49
Fewest TD's in a Season: 28
Most INT's in a Season: 10
Fewest INT's in a Season: 9
Highest QB Rating in a Season: 121.1
Lowest QB Rating in a Season: 101.1
Highest CMP% in a Season: 67.6%
Lowest CMP% in a Season: 65%

zdaddy

11-12-2007, 02:41 AM

yeah i have seen the same thing...its not like Farve has been throwing to crap though. This is Brady's first year with great Receivers its not like he just started playing good.
I totally agree, and thats another reason why i still hate to pull the card. The view i take is that the best recievers Favre ever had were Sterling Sharpe (retired before Favre got into his prime), Robert Brooks (constantly injured, gone more than half the super bowl year), Antonio Freeman (terrible when he went to Philly and McNabb), and Donald Driver (completely unknown until recently).

You can also make the argument for Brady with Troy Brown (ancient is all i can say), Deion Branch (junk in Seattle), David Givens (does he still play football?).

Heres some things i consider:

Favres best statistical year (95), he played with essentially 1 reciever (Brooks) and 1 Tight End (teenage girl raping Mark Chmura) with a running game averaging 3 yards per carry, essentially making a lot of literally nothing. Brady always has had 3+ solid recievers that he could count on and a decent running game.

Favres best year (96), he played a huge chunk of the season with Terry Mickens (thats right, Terry Mickens) and an ancient Keith Jackson as his top recievers and a starting running back who gained a mere 700 yards.

Favre is a Darius Holland away from 2 super bowl rings (not to take anything away from Elway or the Broncos, as they won completely fair and square and in fantastic fashion, but his disastrous performance allowed Terrell Davis to run wild while half knocked out).

Again, not to take anything away from Brady, but Favre literally made incredible things out of literally nothing, hence why I think the way i do

rickyh24

11-12-2007, 02:46 AM

I totally agree, and thats another reason why i still hate to pull the card. The view i take is that the best recievers Favre ever had were Sterling Sharpe (retired before Favre got into his prime), Robert Brooks (constantly injured, gone more than half the super bowl year), Antonio Freeman (terrible when he went to Philly and McNabb), and Donald Driver (completely unknown until recently).

You can also make the argument for Brady with Troy Brown (ancient is all i can say), Deion Branch (junk in Seattle), David Givens (does he still play football?).

Heres some things i consider:

Favres best statistical year (95), he played with essentially 1 reciever (Brooks) and 1 Tight End (teenage girl raping Mark Chmura) with a running game averaging 3 yards per carry, essentially making a lot of literally nothing. Brady always has had 3+ solid recievers that he could count on and a decent running game.

Favres best year (96), he played a huge chunk of the season with Terry Mickens (thats right, Terry Mickens) and an ancient Keith Jackson as his top recievers and a starting running back who gained a mere 700 yards.

Favre is a Darius Holland away from 2 super bowl rings (not to take anything away from Elway or the Broncos, as they won completely fair and square and in fantastic fashion, but his disastrous performance allowed Terrell Davis to run wild while half knocked out).

Again, not to take anything away from Brady, but Favre literally made incredible things out of literally nothing, hence why I think the way i do

you are right. i do feel however that all those receivers you mentioned for the packers were better than what Brady had to throw to up until this year. Up until this year I would say it is safe to say that Brady made do with almost nothing too, just as Farve did.

zdaddy

11-12-2007, 02:52 AM

you are right. i do feel however that all those receivers you mentioned for the packers were better than what Brady had to throw to up until this year. Up until this year I would say it is safe to say that Brady made do with almost nothing too, just as Farve did.
I would definetly say that Brooks was better than anything Brady had, Freeman im unsure about, but the rest were nothing. What Brady has always had is a solid run game, a great defense, and a great kicker.

Remember, they are a Tuck Rule away from no 3 super bowls, and even then, each super bowl was one by only 3 points. But i must admit, that 2001/02 is the greatest team effort i have ever seen and i was the most excited for a non GB team than i had ever been.

DMBZeppelin

11-12-2007, 03:03 AM

The view i take is that the best recievers Favre ever had were Sterling Sharpe (retired before Favre got into his prime), Robert Brooks (constantly injured, gone more than half the super bowl year), Antonio Freeman (terrible when he went to Philly and McNabb), and Donald Driver (completely unknown until recently).

You can also make the argument for Brady with Troy Brown (ancient is all i can say), Deion Branch (junk in Seattle), David Givens (does he still play football?).
I agree in that Manning has had the best recievers while the other two QB's you mentioned have had less to work with.

But Branch looked great while in New England. We don't know how Wayne, or Harrison would be without Manning.

zdaddy

11-12-2007, 03:05 AM

I agree in that Manning has had the best recievers while the other two QB's you mentioned have had less to work with.

But Branch looked great while in New England. We don't know how Wayne, or Harrison would be without Manning.
and we probably never will know either

KnightofShadows

11-12-2007, 09:04 AM

You can fucking die as well.

Ya'll ever heard that song "I Kill Children" by Dead Kennedys? My version is "I Kill Cheeseheads."

It's a holiday in Lambeau-dia

Oh, and I choose Favre.

swampdonkey

11-12-2007, 10:22 AM

Yet he's right behind Favre on the consecutive games started list. :rolleyes

I would take Favre, because of just how plain exciting he was. He was pretty much unstoppable in the mid-90s before he fell into his interception machine phase.

Exactly, I would suggest a lot of you (who took manning) go look at the Stats of Favre in his prime and then come back and take manning if you want to.

Favre...easily.

dmbhoosier21

11-12-2007, 10:36 AM

Exactly, I would suggest a lot of you (who took manning) go look at the Stats of Favre in his prime and then come back and take manning if you want to.

Favre...easily.

Manning's #s are better than Favre's - Manning is projected to break every single QB record assuming he stays healthy.

I respect the choice of Favre (as long as one doesn't spew out stupidity relating to Manning somehow being soft) b/c the two are so good that comparing the two is essentially moot.

But I don't see the choice being clear cut AT ALL especially if one bases their choice on stats alone. :freak

Brett Favre -Numbers from 95-97
Average Season: 4,060 Yards, 7.5 YPA, 37 TD's and 14 INT's
Most Yards in a Season: 4,413
Fewest Yards in a Season: 3,867
Most TD's in a Season: 39
Fewest TD's in a Season: 35
Most INT's in a Season: 16
Fewest INT's in a Season: 13
Highest QB Rating in a Season: 99.5
Lowest QB Rating in a Season: 92.6
Highest CMP% in a Season: 63%
Lowest CMP% in a Season: 59.3%

Peyton Manning - Numbers from 04-06
Average Season: 4,234 Yards, 8.4 YPA, 36 TD's and 10 INT's
Most Yards in a Season: 4,557
Fewest Yards in a Season: 3,747
Most TD's in a Season: 49
Fewest TD's in a Season: 28
Most INT's in a Season: 10
Fewest INT's in a Season: 9
Highest QB Rating in a Season: 121.1
Lowest QB Rating in a Season: 101.1
Highest CMP% in a Season: 67.6%
Lowest CMP% in a Season: 65%

^ stat courtesy of Mr. Zeppelin. I'm too lazy to look up stats.

TwoStep2888

11-12-2007, 12:31 PM

dmbhoosier21

11-12-2007, 12:45 PM

To me, the stats don't really mean anything, as the two players are in completely different situations. While Favre's only real legitimate superstar receiver has been Sterling Sharpe, Manning's had Harrison and Wayne during his best years. One could make the argument that if Favre had receivers like Harrison and Wayne throughout this career, his numbers would be as good or better than Manning.

Sure, one can make that argument but the argument is solely based on a baseless assumption that can never be proven or denied, thus making the point irrelevant in regards to tangible evidence.

Also, Harrison was not a star before Manning, the same can be said for Wayne. Manning and Harrison rose to stardom together so.........

Manning "made" Harrison as much Harrison "made" Manning.

Again, I just don't see the legitimacy of this argument.

While we're at it, why don't we compare the two players' offensive line, coaches, defense, RBs? ..... etc, etc, etc.

dmbhoosier21

11-12-2007, 01:03 PM

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/3514/career

-see Marvin's #s before Manning, then compare with Manning's second year in the league and beyond.

Manning was drafted in 98', is it merely coincidence that Marvin's #s skyrocketed in Manning's 2nd year?

The idea that Manning had a huge advantage over Brett, Brady or any QB b/c of an existing superstar WR is simply false.

Again, Manning and Marvin rose to stardom together.

How one can penalize Manning for that is beyond me :freak.

dmbhoosier21

11-12-2007, 01:14 PM

Marvin being the superstar and future hall of famer that he is - is a testament to Manning as opposed to a disadvantage in a debate about who is better than who.

Hat trick :D

dmb71687

11-12-2007, 01:31 PM

dowling25

11-12-2007, 01:31 PM

manning is money.

jaking1185

11-12-2007, 04:18 PM

Favre crushing another one. Bring on the next victim......:D

Tiduwho

11-12-2007, 04:45 PM

What are we defining as Favre's prime? Because as far as I'm concerned Brett might be playing better football today, at the age of 38, then he did in any of his 3 MVP seasons, I mean, he is on pace to throw for JUST under 5 THOUSAND yards this season. There is no doubt in my mind Brett is a better pure quarterback than Peyton, and that's not taking anything away from Manning, I've just never in my life seen someone do the things Brett has done. He really is simply amazing.

Gotta disagree completely with that wording. Peyton does it like it's natural, his throws are always crisp and his footwork is always spot on. Brett takes more risks, I just wouldn't call how he commands the field "pure".

What makes Favre great is your latter statement, that he made throws that no one else could period.

dmbhoosier21

11-12-2007, 04:57 PM

Gotta disagree completely with that wording. Peyton does it like it's natural, his throws are always crisp and his footwork is always spot on. Brett takes more risks, I just wouldn't call how he commands the field "pure".

What makes Favre great is your latter statement, that he made throws that no one else could period.

Great point.

If we are talking about "pure" QB in terms of throwing mechanics, footwork, general knowledge of the game and being a student of the game - Manning is it.

Favre on other hand was successful throwing off his backfoot (sometimes), throwing passes that most QBs really shouldn't (which is probably the culprit for all his INTs), etc.

Above is not an argument as to which one is better, just an observation as to who is a "pure" QB and their contrasting styles. One can't get a more polished, pure and sound QB than Manning .....well maybe Brady.

jaking1185

11-12-2007, 05:27 PM

Great point.

If we are talking about "pure" QB in terms of throwing mechanics, footwork, general knowledge of the game and being a student of the game - Manning is it.

Favre on other hand was successful throwing off his backfoot (sometimes), throwing passes that most QBs really shouldn't (which is probably the culprit for all his INTs), etc.

Above is not an argument as to which one is better, just an observation as to who is a "pure" QB and their contrasting styles. One can't get a more polished, pure and sound QB than Manning .....well maybe Brady.

I completely agree. No coach should ever try to teach Favre's "technique" to a young QB. A lot of what he does is wrong, but it works for him. Brett would be the first to admit he is not a natural, but I for one would not want it any other way.

As far as "natural" QB's, for every Peyton Manning there are a Todd Marinovich or Ryan Leaf. You can't predict when you are going to hit gold.

dmb71687

11-12-2007, 05:56 PM

I completely agree. No coach should ever try to teach Favre's "technique" to a young QB. A lot of what he does is wrong, but it works for him. Brett would be the first to admit he is not a natural, but I for one would not want it any other way.

As far as "natural" QB's, for every Peyton Manning there are a Todd Marinovich or Ryan Leaf. You can't predict when you are going to hit gold.

So if he does everything against the norm, how is he so successful? Because he's a natural quarterback. The poster who said using the word pure to describe Brett is completely wrong was right. I should have used a different word. But Brett Favre is a NATURAL quarterback, more so than Peyton, and more so than Brady.

dmbhoosier21

11-12-2007, 05:58 PM

I completely agree. No coach should ever try to teach Favre's "technique" to a young QB. A lot of what he does is wrong, but it works for him. Brett would be the first to admit he is not a natural, but I for one would not want it any other way.

As far as "natural" QB's, for every Peyton Manning there are a Todd Marinovich or Ryan Leaf. You can't predict when you are going to hit gold.

True. Mechanics and fundamentals, while preferred, can only take you so far.

I was just making an observation about the two QBs, I wasn't using the fact that Manning is more of a "pure" QB as an argument as to why he's better than Favre.

My arguments as to why Manning is better is, i think, the first or second post on this thread.

dmbhoosier21

11-12-2007, 06:01 PM

So if he does everything against the norm, how is he so successful? Because he's a natural quarterback. The poster who said using the word pure to describe Brett is completely wrong was right. I should have used a different word. But Brett Favre is a NATURAL quarterback, more so than Peyton, and more so than Brady.

I think we have to define "natural"

I thought of it as "textbook" QB in relation to throwing mechanics, footwork, knowledge of the game, etc.....

If you mean 'natural' in terms of football instincts, I might be able to give that to Favre, not saying Manning doesn't have football instincts considering his background and success; but he is probably the most cerebral QB in the history of the NFL.

jaking1185

11-12-2007, 06:26 PM

swampdonkey

11-12-2007, 07:18 PM

Manning's #s are better than Favre's - Manning is projected to break every single QB record assuming he stays healthy.

I respect the choice of Favre (as long as one doesn't spew out stupidity relating to Manning somehow being soft) b/c the two are so good that comparing the two is essentially moot.

But I don't see the choice being clear cut AT ALL especially if one bases their choice on stats alone. :freak

^ stat courtesy of Mr. Zeppelin. I'm too lazy to look up stats.

Right...I didn't say quote two years worth of stats. I said GO LOOK UP THE STATS. Favre had 5 30+ TD seasons in his first 8 years and he has 8 overall. Manning has 3 30+ seasons in his first 10 years.

I'm not talking about a 49 TD season...I'm talking about sustained greatness.

dmbmuskie

11-12-2007, 07:22 PM

Manning and it's not even close.

dmb71687

11-12-2007, 07:56 PM

Manning and it's not even close.

How do you figure....

dmbmuskie

11-12-2007, 08:04 PM

How do you figure....

First, I'm not from Wisconsin.

Second, last night aside, Manning is a better decision maker.

DMBtheStoned

11-12-2007, 08:05 PM

favre

jaking1185

11-12-2007, 08:11 PM

First, I'm not from Wisconsin.

Second, last night aside, Manning is a better decision maker.

Then there must be 30 people from Wisconsin because he is killing Manning. Brady did better against him.

dmbmuskie

11-12-2007, 08:17 PM

Then there must be 30 people from Wisconsin because he is killing Manning. Brady did better against him.

I don't get it.

I think Favre is a little over rated. People love him, hell I love him, but I don't see how people can take him ahead of Manning or Brady.

jaking1185

11-12-2007, 08:20 PM

I don't get it.

I think Favre is a little over rated. People love him, hell I love him, but I don't see how people can take him ahead of Manning or Brady.

It has to do with people loving the old dog. When those two get older and the end is coming they will get sentimental love from the fans as well.

BUT...I think he is top 5 all time, although I am from Wisconsin. ;)

dmbmuskie

11-12-2007, 08:25 PM

It has to do with people loving the old dog. When those two get older and the end is coming they will get sentimental love from the fans as well.

BUT...I think he is top 5 all time, although I am from Wisconsin. ;)

I'd say top 10.

agree to disagree

jaking1185

11-12-2007, 08:29 PM

I'd say top 10.

agree to disagree

Sounds good.

dmb71687

11-12-2007, 09:20 PM

First, I'm not from Wisconsin.

Second, last night aside, Manning is a better decision maker.

:lol Touche.

TwoStep2888

11-12-2007, 09:25 PM

I think we have to define "natural"

I thought of it as "textbook" QB in relation to throwing mechanics, footwork, knowledge of the game, etc.....

If you mean 'natural' in terms of football instincts, I might be able to give that to Favre, not saying Manning doesn't have football instincts considering his background and success; but he is probably the most cerebral QB in the history of the NFL.

Exactly. What Favre does is so natural and instinctive. He doesn't abide by traditional mechanics and fundamentals of being a QB, but, despite that, has become the most successful QB in the history of the league. Manning, who I admit is an incredibly smart and skilled QB, is a product of the system, like Brady. Favre's an incredibly unique, naturally talented player, I wouldn't pick any other QB ever over him.

Tiduwho

11-12-2007, 09:31 PM

First, I'm not from Wisconsin.

Second, last night aside, Manning is a better decision maker.

Favre wasn't throwing picks like he's now known for in his prime. His TD to INT ratio was around 3 to 1. If he could make the throw, and won his team the game, then the "risk" of the decision is well worth it.

UNC41

11-12-2007, 09:38 PM

Favre wasn't throwing picks like he's now known for in his prime. His TD to INT ratio was around 3 to 1. If he could make the throw, and won his team the game, then the "risk" of the decision is well worth it.

Favre had one season where his exactly 3 to 1. He has never had one where it has been better than that.

dmbmuskie

11-12-2007, 10:03 PM

Exactly. What Favre does is so natural and instinctive. He doesn't abide by traditional mechanics and fundamentals of being a QB, but, despite that, has become the most successful QB in the history of the league. Manning, who I admit is an incredibly smart and skilled QB, is a product of the system, like Brady. Favre's an incredibly unique, naturally talented player, I wouldn't pick any other QB ever over him.

You could drop Manning or Brady onto any scheme with a good o-line and they'd be successful. They are system guys at all.

dmbhoosier21

11-12-2007, 10:28 PM

dmbhoosier21

11-12-2007, 10:29 PM

swampdonkey

11-12-2007, 10:56 PM

Overall?!?

:lol Manning is projected to break every QB record in the NFL :freak

So I have no clue what you're talking about.

If we are talking about statistics, Manning will win against any QB.

Ok...you're right...

dmbhoosier21

11-12-2007, 11:03 PM

Right...I didn't say quote two years worth of stats. I said GO LOOK UP THE STATS. Favre had 5 30+ TD seasons in his first 8 years and he has 8 overall. Manning has 3 30+ seasons in his first 10 years.

I'm not talking about a 49 TD season...I'm talking about sustained greatness.

You started it. I didn't wanna get into stats b/c for 1.) I'm not a big stats guy cus I have shit for memory and 2.) I don't think stats are everything, but let's just put this whole myth about Favre having better #s to rest.

http://www.sports-central.org/sports/2007/02/13/brett_favre_vs_peyton_manning.php

I have no clue how to post stats on this :BANG just read link.

And yes, I cheated again cus there's no way I was gonna look up and calculate all those stats - no time or patience.

swampdonkey

11-12-2007, 11:08 PM

Ah...wait...you changed your post...I'll read the link.

swampdonkey

11-12-2007, 11:15 PM

You started it. I didn't wanna get into stats b/c for 1.) I'm not a big stats guy cus I have shit for memory and 2.) I don't think stats are everything, but let's just put this whole myth about Favre having better #s to rest.

http://www.sports-central.org/sports/2007/02/13/brett_favre_vs_peyton_manning.php

I have no clue how to post stats on this :BANG just read link.

And yes, I cheated again cus there's no way I was gonna look up and calculate all those stats - no time or patience.

An interesting article. It was more interesting that in the stats across their 9 best seasons (which you erased) Favre had the better TD to INT ratio if I'm not mistaken. That is including Manning's freak year of course which terribly skews the statistics in his favor. Considering Favre had posted back to back to back to back to back 30+ td seasons (that's 5 in a row) and peyton has never accomplished this feat one time I still give the edge to favre.

dmbhoosier21

11-12-2007, 11:18 PM

An interesting article. It was more interesting that in the stats across their 9 best seasons (which you erased) Favre had the better TD to INT ratio if I'm not mistaken. That is including Mannings freak year of course which terrible skews the statistics. Considering Favre had posted back to back to back to back to back 30+ td seasons (that's 5 in a row) and peyton has never accomplished this feat one time I still give the edge to favre.

Sure anyone can pick out one or two #s that would support Favre statiscally, of course.

But you and I were talking about sustained (overall) greatness regarding statistics and hands down Manning wins. :D

But I reiterate, stats isn't everything.

BotheDMBFan

11-12-2007, 11:22 PM

BotheDMBFan

11-12-2007, 11:23 PM

By the way, out of these two douchebags, I'd go Farve easy.

2 minutes left in a big game, you're down 4, you have the ball; tell me you wouldn't go Farve over Manning.

jaking1185

11-12-2007, 11:23 PM

Nor is grammar.

:lol Bo....

BotheDMBFan

11-12-2007, 11:25 PM

:lol Bo....

You can still go fucking die.

dmbhoosier21

11-12-2007, 11:25 PM

Nor is grammar.

:lol Especially on an internet message board. :D

zdaddy

11-12-2007, 11:27 PM

You can still go fucking die.
:lol

I dont know whats been up with you and death. You turnin a little emo there?;)

swampdonkey

11-12-2007, 11:28 PM

Sure anyone can pick out one or two #s that would support Favre statiscally, of course.

But you and I were talking about sustained (overall) greatness regarding statistics and hands down Manning wins. :D

But I reiterate, stats isn't everything.

...that is still what I'm talking about.

Favre: 5 30+ TD seasons in a row and 8 overall. Sustained greatness.

Manning: 0 30+ TD seasons in a row and 3 overall. Still great, but no as great.

Agreed that when picking and choosing stats any player can made to look better than another within reason. I still think that in his prime, favre's stats own because of the TDs to INTs ratio. Manning owns in terms of Yardage, but taking away his freak year, Favre owns in terms of TDs.

Your points are well taken though....

BotheDMBFan

11-12-2007, 11:29 PM

:lol

I dont know whats been up with you and death. You turnin a little emo there?;)

It's more like what's up with you and death. NO ONE goes against the great Ditka and lives. It may not be today when he kills you, or even this year, but Ditka never forgets. Ever.

jaking1185

11-12-2007, 11:29 PM

You can still go fucking die.

Favre > Ditka :D

zdaddy

11-12-2007, 11:30 PM

It's more like what's up with you and death. NO ONE goes against the great Ditka and lives. It may not be today when he kills you, or even this year, but Ditka never forgets. Ever.
:lol

I dont know what youre talking about with me going against Ditka. Its basic logic that Ditka > universe. Heck they even teach that in Philosophy 101s these days. Plus he respects Favre, which gives him the maximum amount of bonus points anyone could ever have

BotheDMBFan

11-12-2007, 11:30 PM

Favre > Ditka :D

That's it bitch...MORTAL KOMBAT!

BotheDMBFan

11-12-2007, 11:32 PM

:lol

I dont know what youre talking about with me going against Ditka. Its basic logic that Ditka > universe. Heck they even teach that in Philosophy 101s these days. Plus he respects Favre, which gives him the maximum amount of bonus points anyone could ever have

So many people were hating on Ditka last night, you Packer assholes in particular, that I just came to reasoning of, "Packer fan= Has to die, because they hate Ditka."

jaking1185

11-12-2007, 11:34 PM

That's it bitch...MORTAL KOMBAT!

Would Ami Jo Johnson > Favre make you feel better?

BotheDMBFan

11-12-2007, 11:35 PM

Would Ami Jo Johnson > Favre make you feel better?

No it wouldn't, because I have no idea who "Ami Jo Johnson" is.

TwoStep2888

11-12-2007, 11:35 PM

How do you define a 'system QB'?

An orthodox, 'good' QB. One who abides by what a QB is supposed to do, in other words, a game managment QB as opposed to a gunslinger.

Sure, Manning might take a few risks sometimes, but, for the most part, he abides by the system he plays in. He does what a professional QB is supposed to do.

Brett Favre doesn't, with his bombs off his back foot, improvised shovel passes, and persistently stupid daredevil blocking and rushing techniques. He does much of the opposite of what an NFL QB is supposed to do, but he makes it work. That's what sets him apart. He plays with a freewheeling, gunslinging style, and still has the natural talent to pull off some of the most unbelievable passes anyone's ever seen.

Now, I'm in no way saying being a system QB is a bad thing. In fact, it's a very good thing, preferred in most cases. Manning just happens to be a very 'inside the box' QB, while Favre is more of an 'outside the box' player. It's what makes the two different.

jaking1185

11-12-2007, 11:37 PM

No it wouldn't, because I have no idea who "Ami Jo Johnson" is.

She's this little hottie who.............never mind. I won't mess with Ditka anymore because I don't want to draw the wrath of Bo.

zdaddy

11-12-2007, 11:40 PM

So many people were hating on Ditka last night, you Packer assholes in particular, that I just came to reasoning of, "Packer fan= Has to die, because they hate Ditka."
well i must have missed out on th fun, because i cannot recall anything of the sort

jaking1185

11-12-2007, 11:42 PM

well i must have missed out on th fun, because i cannot recall anything of the sort

It was me and Twostep2888. :evil

dmbhoosier21

11-12-2007, 11:51 PM

An orthodox, 'good' QB. One who abides by what a QB is supposed to do, in other words, a game managment QB as opposed to a gunslinger.

Sure, Manning might take a few risks sometimes, but, for the most part, he abides by the system he plays in. He does what a professional QB is supposed to do.

Brett Favre doesn't, with his bombs off his back foot, improvised shovel passes, and persistently stupid daredevil blocking and rushing techniques. He does much of the opposite of what an NFL QB is supposed to do, but he makes it work. That's what sets him apart. He plays with a freewheeling, gunslinging style, and still has the natural talent to pull off some of the most unbelievable passes anyone's ever seen.

Now, I'm in no way saying being a system QB is a bad thing. In fact, it's a very good thing, preferred in most cases. Manning just happens to be a very 'inside the box' QB, while Favre is more of an 'outside the box' player. It's what makes the two different.

I pretty much agree with everything except ....

Manning threw down the field as much as anyone till' defenses started to scheme their gameplans all around preventing big plays (playing nickel - dime and playing their secondaries as far back as possible and not biting on the play-action)

Manning is far from a game "manager". I will admit though Favre epitomizes a gun-slinger QB.

TwoStep2888

11-12-2007, 11:54 PM

I pretty much agree with everything except ....

Manning threw down the field as much as anyone till' defenses started to scheme their gameplans all around preventing big plays (playing nickel - dime and playing their secondaries as far back as possible and not biting on the play-action)

Manning is far from a game "manager". I will admit though Favre epitomizes a gun-slinger QB.

Yeah, that's fair. Manning's a bit of a mix between the ideal prototype QB and a vertical gunslinger type QB, as I see it, and defenses do play him like that.

Brady, on the other hand, is 100% system QB.

zdaddy

11-12-2007, 11:57 PM

It was me and Twostep2888. :evil
im kind of depressed i missed it:(

BotheDMBFan

11-13-2007, 12:49 AM

She's this little hottie who.............never mind. I won't mess with Ditka anymore because I don't want to draw the wrath of Bo.

(It's spelled Amy)

chr35919

11-13-2007, 01:21 AM

ditka = overrated :eek

DMBZeppelin

11-13-2007, 02:04 AM

Right...I didn't say quote two years worth of stats. I said GO LOOK UP THE STATS. Favre had 5 30+ TD seasons in his first 8 years and he has 8 overall. Manning has 3 30+ seasons in his first 10 years.

I'm not talking about a 49 TD season...I'm talking about sustained greatness.
You also realize Manning has never thrown under 26 TD's in a season right? 9 straight seasons of 26+ TD's. Favre in 15 seasons as a starter also has 9 (non-consecutive) seasons of 26+ TD's. So what's more impressive? The guy who does it every year? Or the guy who did 9 times out of 15?

You also say in Manning's first 10 years, but he already has 16 TD's this year and the season isn't over. Favre could also wind up with 30, but I don't know why you'd count this year in their TD total after it's only half over.

Since you want to look at TD's.
Favre after 10 seasons: 255 Touchdowns
Manning after 9 seasons: 275 Touchdowns

DMBZeppelin

11-13-2007, 02:29 AM

Just to add on to my last post:

INT's
Favre after 9 seasons (as a starter): 155 Interceptions
Manning after first 9 seasons: 139 Interceptions

Someone also brought up Favre being more mobile. So I'll also post:

Rushing Stats
Favre after 9 seasons (as a starter): 1,503 Yards, 11 TD's, 3.8 AVG
Manning after first 9 seasons: 701 Yards, 13 TD's, 2.6 AVG

zdaddy

11-13-2007, 02:37 AM

I think the only way to really determine these things for a fact is to visually witness these acts in progress. Ill use the example of Michael Jordan versus other great NBA players. Michael Jordan had some great statistical seasons, but in many cases, others have surpassed his accomplishments, and there are many records that he never possessed. That being said, anyone who watched Michael Jordan should be able to say without doubt that he is the best basketball player to ever play. He just did things that no one could ever do, and may never be able to do.

I will apply this to this situation. I have been lucky enough to watch some of the greatest QBs do their greatest magic (these include: later Joe Montana, Steve Young, John Elway, Warren Moon, Dan Marino, Brett Favre, Peyton Manning, and Tom Brady), so i have seen many different styles of quarterbacks, from scramblers to crazy gunslingers to ridiculously efficient system qbs.

Taking into effect everything that should be considered(stats, talent, leadership, success, magic, supporting cast, coaching), every one of these guys is/was on an awesome level.

That aside, the true Michael Jordanesque QB in their Prime here in my completely honest, football intellectually unbiased view, is Brett Favre. He did things in his prime that may never ever be repeated. Yes his stats have been surpassed, and will be surpassed in the near future, and yes there have been QBs that have had better single seasons, but the world has never seen something as amazing as Favre in his true prime, and even with my huge respect for the two great stars of today, neither Manning nor Brady are as good as he was those 3-4 years.

DMBZeppelin

11-13-2007, 04:44 AM

I think the only way to really determine these things for a fact is to visually witness these acts in progress. Ill use the example of Michael Jordan versus other great NBA players. Michael Jordan had some great statistical seasons, but in many cases, others have surpassed his accomplishments, and there are many records that he never possessed. That being said, anyone who watched Michael Jordan should be able to say without doubt that he is the best basketball player to ever play. He just did things that no one could ever do, and may never be able to do.
Michael Jordan retired in his prime. That's the reason the Bulls didn't win 8 straight championships, and why Michael doesn't own more records.
That aside, the true Michael Jordanesque QB in their Prime here in my completely honest, football intellectually unbiased view, is Brett Favre. He did things in his prime that may never ever be repeated.
Judging by your location, you're a Packers fan and in that regard you almost have to bias. You've seen one of the greatest QB's of all time, and you've seen him more then you've seen any other QB. You get to see all the Packers game, but if Manning does something amazing not on a Prime Time game. It might not show up in the stats, so you won't see it.

You might be totally unbias though, I dunno just asking. Myself I haven't decided which one I think is better. I've posted facts and stats, but that's it. I do think it's a close call though. I also know that since 1998, Peyton Manning leads the NFL in come from behind victories. Tied with Jake the Snake, If that counts for anything.

UNC41

11-13-2007, 09:23 AM

Yeah, that's fair. Manning's a bit of a mix between the ideal prototype QB and a vertical gunslinger type QB, as I see it, and defenses do play him like that.

Brady, on the other hand, is 100% system QB.

A system quarterback is a guy who can only excel in a particular type of offense, ie the West Coast offense. I have no idea why you think Manning or Brady fall into this category.

swampdonkey

11-13-2007, 09:24 AM

You also realize Manning has never thrown under 26 TD's in a season right? 9 straight seasons of 26+ TD's. Favre in 15 seasons as a starter also has 9 (non-consecutive) seasons of 26+ TD's. So what's more impressive? The guy who does it every year? Or the guy who did 9 times out of 15?

You also say in Manning's first 10 years, but he already has 16 TD's this year and the season isn't over. Favre could also wind up with 30, but I don't know why you'd count this year in their TD total after it's only half over.

Since you want to look at TD's.
Favre after 10 seasons: 255 Touchdowns
Manning after 9 seasons: 275 Touchdowns

Good points. As for which is more impressive...5 consecutive 30+ TD seasons is more impressive.

UNC41

11-13-2007, 09:35 AM

Good points. As for which is more impressive...5 consecutive 30+ TD seasons is more impressive.

If we're going strictly by numbers a four season average of 34.25 touchdowns and 9.75 interceptions is more impressive than anything Favre has done.

swampdonkey

11-13-2007, 09:44 AM

If we're going strictly by numbers a four season average of 34.25 touchdowns and 9.75 interceptions is more impressive than anything Favre has done.

Admitedly, Manning has had ONE huge season in terms of touchdowns. But if we're comparing 4 year runs.

Favres Best four year average.

36.25 TDs 14 INTs

OMG what a shock...Favre threw TDs at a higher rate even counting Peytons Freak season in this case. Quite astounding huh?

UNC41

11-13-2007, 10:10 AM

Admitedly, Manning has had ONE huge season in terms of touchdowns. But if we're comparing 4 year runs.

Favres Best four year average.

36.25 TDs 14 INTs

OMG what a shock...Favre threw TDs at a higher rate even counting Peytons Freak season in this case. Quite astounding huh?

Yes, but Manning had four consecutive seasons where he threw no more than 10 interceptions. Favre has never done that in his career.

cbotnyse

11-13-2007, 10:34 AM

I'd say Farve. Manning has been blessed with Harrison and Wayne, but thats not to say Manning isnt great. Both are first ballot HOFs.

swampdonkey

11-13-2007, 11:29 AM

Yes, but Manning had four consecutive seasons where he threw no more than 10 interceptions. Favre has never done that in his career.

True. A very impressive accomplishment for Peyton. I still believe that from a statistical standpoint favre was more dominant in his prime than peyton has been with the exception of his incredible 49 td season.

Seeing what favre did considering he had no edgerin james (although Ahman was good in his prime), no marvin harrison and no duo nearly as dynamic as harrison/wayne is absolutely amazing.

proudestmnky

11-13-2007, 11:48 AM

dmbhoosier21

11-13-2007, 11:54 AM

Harrison was not a star before Manning, the same can be said for Wayne. Manning and Harrison rose to stardom together so.........

Manning "made" Harrison as much Harrison "made" Manning.

Again, I just don't see the legitimacy of this argument.

While we're at it, why don't we compare the two players' offensive line, coaches, defense, RBs? ..... etc, etc, etc.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/3514/career

-see Marvin's #s before Manning, then compare with Manning's second year in the league and beyond.

Manning was drafted in 98', is it merely coincidence that Marvin's #s skyrocketed in Manning's 2nd year?

The idea that Manning had a huge advantage over Brett, Brady or any QB b/c of an existing superstar WR is simply false.

Again, Manning and Marvin rose to stardom together.

How one can penalize Manning for that is beyond me :freak.

Marvin being the superstar and future hall of famer that he is - is a testament to Manning as opposed to a disadvantage in a debate about who is better than who.

As if Manning came into a situation with a star WR. Manning "made" Harrison and vice versa

SatelliteEyes

11-13-2007, 11:55 AM

I feel as thought people are forgetting about Edgerrin James and what he brought to the Indy offense. In Favre's hey day all he had were Edgar Bennett and Dorsey Levens. Not exactly top notch RBs.

dmbhoosier21

11-13-2007, 11:59 AM

this is a pretty interesting argument. the stats are really more similar than not and imo can't be the basis for picking one or the other. peyton is great at managing the game before the snap, while favre is great at improvising and making things happen after the snap. both are extremely valuable, just different. i know a lot of people don't like talking about "leadership" or any intangible qualities, but favre, imo, kills peyton in this respect. i'm not a manning hater, but peyton and eli both seem like whiney bitches sometimes (throwing their hands up in the air and shaking their head, etc.)

:lol Manning has been a leader of the team since day 1. Manning has more responsibilities than any other on-field player by far. Your obvious "compelling" argument is a tad off.

:lol Showing frustration or as you so referred to it as "whiney bitches" does not equate a lack of leadership; where you got this idea, I will never know :freak

Again, I will never fault anyone for picking Favre, he is a legend and one of the best ever, but at least give some sort of intelligible and lucid argument.

dmbhoosier21

11-13-2007, 12:01 PM

I feel as thought people are forgetting about Edgerrin James and what he brought to the Indy offense. In Favre's hey day all he had were Edgar Bennett and Dorsey Levens. Not exactly top notch RBs.

The Pack may not have had a superstar RB but they had a more than capable running game to compliment Favre.

A team does not need a perceived superstar RB (there aren't many of those) to have an effective running game.

UNC41

11-13-2007, 12:08 PM

I feel as thought people are forgetting about Edgerrin James and what he brought to the Indy offense. In Favre's hey day all he had were Edgar Bennett and Dorsey Levens. Not exactly top notch RBs.

Indy's running game has been vastly overrated during the four years (not including this year) that people have been discussing as Manning's prime. The Colts averaged more than 4 yards per carry just once during that time and were in the bottom half of the league in ypc three out the four years. They one year they weren't they finished 11th.

dmbhoosier21

11-13-2007, 12:15 PM

Indy's running game has been vastly overrated during the four years (not including this year) that people have been discussing as Manning's prime. The Colts averaged more than 4 yards per carry just once during that time and were in the bottom half of the league in ypc three out the four years. They one year they weren't they finished 11th.

Considering Manning's ability to read defenses, with an effective running game and Manning's ability to pull of the play-action pass was the "ingredients" to all those big long passing plays a couple of years ago.

Now just about ever team plays back and the safeties just don't bite on those play-action plays anymore, an obvious result of the success of the Colts' offense.

But yeah, the running game was not as dominating as people perceived, but it was effective enough.

swampdonkey

11-13-2007, 12:16 PM

:lol Manning has been a leader of the team since day 1. Manning has more responsibilities than any other on-field player by far. Your obvious "compelling" argument is a tad off.

:lol Showing frustration or as you so referred to it as "whiney bitches" does not equate a lack of leadership; where you got this idea, I will never know :freak

Again, I will never fault anyone for picking Favre, he is a legend and one of the best ever, but at least give some sort of intelligible and lucid argument.

I actually think he has a valid point (the person you quoted). It may be overstated, but it is valid none the less.

Peyton does bitch at his teammates, blame his offensive line in the press conference and act childish on the field. Favre, does those things occasionaly as well (except blame his o-line), but he seems to be a better leader of men to me. I can only base this on what I see on the field, but it's my observation.

In terms of pre-snap responsibility Peyton's is the same as any qb. If you're in a bad situation play calling wise, get out of it and get into a play that will work. He does it incredibly well. Peyton is a master at calling plays at the line and has no equal in this regard.

Favre too, will change the play several times a game. However, I get the feeling his mindset is, "I really don't give a shit what the defense is doing". This guy didn't know what a nickle defense was until his second year as a starter in Green Bay. His attitude is "I don't care what defense you run, I'm going to beat you..". Although, this may not be as true today, he was known for this attitude early in his career. That's one of the things that made him so fun to watch.

dmbhoosier21

11-13-2007, 12:23 PM

I actually think he has a valid point (the person you quoted). It may be overstated, but it is valid none the less.

Peyton does bitch at his teammates, blame his offensive line in the press conference and act childish on the field. Favre, does those things occasionaly as well (except blame his o-line), but he seems to be a better leader of men to me. I can only base this on what I see on the field, but it's my observation.

In terms of pre-snap responsibility Peyton's is the same as any qb. If you're in a bad situation play calling wise, get out of it and get into a play that will work. He does it incredibly well. Peyton is a master at calling plays at the line and has no equal in this regard.

Favre too, will change the play several times a game. However, I get the feeling his mindset is, "I really don't give a shit what the defense is doing". This guy didn't know what a nickle defense was until his second year as a starter in Green Bay. His attitude is "I don't care what defense you run, I'm going to beat you..". Although, this may not be as true today, he was known for this attitude early in his career. That's one of the things that made him so fun to watch.

:lol Us fans think way too highly of ourselves - actually believing we know what's going on in terms of team chemistry and dynamics. The funniest part is that we actually try to talk about "leadership" and intangibles in regards to team dynamics when all we see is the time they spend on the field. To actually believe that fans can judge team dynamics and chemisry is nothing short of delusional. Unless you're on the team - one has no idea.

Do you have any idea how the Colts offense works? :lol The idea that any other QB has as much responsibilities as Manning is laughable. Sundays game was the first time in 5 years that the Colts consistently huddled up on offense. Moore (Indy's Offensive coordinatoor) sends in multiple plays (4-5) and it's Manning's job to pick out a play at the line. Do you know any other QB that does this?

:BANG Manning is a "whiny" bitch - yeah that's a valid argument. :freak

- Cus us fans are really know what's going on :lol Please, let's all not get carried away.

dmbhoosier21

11-13-2007, 12:32 PM

Favre and every other QB in the league obviously has a set of audibles to get out of a bad play.

But the entire Indy offense is predicated on Manning reading the defense and consequently being able to pick out the right play.

The two are not even comparable. :lol

Tiduwho

11-13-2007, 12:35 PM

Oh yeah? Well EMOTICONS!!!

dmbhoosier21

11-13-2007, 12:37 PM

Oh yeah? Well EMOTICONS!!!

Admittedly, I have a tendency to overuse those things :thumbsup

Points are still valid though.

swampdonkey

11-13-2007, 12:43 PM

Us fans think way too highly of ourselves - actually believing we know what's going on in terms of team chemistry and dynamics. The funniest part is that we actually try to talk about "leadership" and intangibles in regards to team dynamics when all we see is the time they spend on the field. To actually believe that fans can judge team dynamics and chemisry is nothing short of delusional. Unless you're on the team - one has no idea.

Do you have any idea how the Colts offense works? The idea that any other QB has as much responsibilities as Manning is laughable. Sundays game was the first time in 5 years that the Colts consistently huddled up on offense. Moore (Indy's Offensive coordinatoor) sends in multiple plays (4-5) and it's Manning's job to pick out a play at the line. Do you know any other QB that does this?

Manning is a "whiny" bitch - yeah that's a valid argument.

- Cus us fans are really know what's going on Please, let's all not get carried away.

First paragraph response...
You are making the same argument in reverse :lol:lol:lol:lol:thumbsdow. Speaking as if you know what is happening in the colts offense. In addition, it is very easy to observe the behaviors of players on the field, so I don't think its far fetched at all to comment on their behavior.

Second paragraph response...
Peyton typically does choose from between 2-4 plays at the line. Again, his responsibility is the same as any qb in the nfl that is worth a damn. He may be better at it, but the responsibilty is the same. Get your team out of bad plays and into good ones. That includes the indication of routes, blocking changes etc. All good Qbs have the freedom to do this. Peyton has more liberties from a playcalling standpoint, but I wouldn't go so far as to say his "responsibilities" are any different. :BANG:ugh

:cool

swampdonkey

11-13-2007, 12:44 PM

Oh yeah? Well EMOTICONS!!!

Exactly my point in the above post...you made it much more effectively.

dmbhoosier21

11-13-2007, 12:52 PM

First paragraph response...
You are making the same argument in reverse :lol:lol:thumbsdow. Speaking as if you know what is happening in the colts offense. In addition, it is very easy to observe the behaviors of players on the field, so I don't think its far fetched at all to comment on their behavior.

:cool

Here it comes.......:ugh

I made a judgement on how the Colts offense works in terms of no-huddle and Manning the one picking out th plays based on extensive articles and the players actually explaining how the offense works. (plus I've been watching the team my whole life) :lol SO what the hell are you talking about?!?!?

Tom moore and Manning has explained numerous times that a set of plays are sent in and Manning proceeds to read the defense and call the play.

How is that similar to ....... implying that Manning is not a leader and that he is a whiny bitch.

Am I missing something? You do understand the difference don't you.

I talked about how the Colts offense works which is quite apparent after watching a decade of it and reading countless articles on how the offense works, including players themselves explaining the process Manning goes through with the offense - personally, I think the media is guilty of overkill regarding this matter.

What you guys are doing is judging team dynamics and chemistry - and even the media can't fully be aware of this matter. The only people privy to this information are the players that are on the team.

You seriously don't see the difference? And for good measure ...... :lol

swampdonkey

11-13-2007, 12:58 PM

Here it comes.......

I made a judgement on how the Colts offense works in terms of no-huddle and extensive articles and the players actually explaining how the offense works. :lol SO what the hell are you talking about?!?!?

Tom moore and Manning has explained numerous times that a set of plays are sent in and Manning proceeds to read the defense and call the play.

How is that similar to ....... implying that Manning is not a leader and that he is a whiny bitch.

Am I missing something? You do understand the difference don't you.

I talked about how the Colts offense works which is quite apparent after watching a decade of it and reading countless articles on how the offense works, including players themselves explaining the process Manning goes through with the offense - personally, I think the media is guilty of overkill regarding this matter.

What you guys are doing is judging team dynamics and chemistry - and even the media can't fully be aware of this matter. The only people privy to this information are the players that are on the team.

You seriously don't see the difference? And for good measure ...... :lol

:rolleyes
None of the bold information is being disputed. Do you not understand that?:lol:ugh

I'm not talking about chemestry. I'm talking about how a player acts on the field which is quite easy to observe. Peyton does behave like Al gore in a presidential debate. Favre appears much more capable as a leader. As I said, I can only base this on my observation from watching them play. :BANG:thumbsdow:twak

swampdonkey

11-13-2007, 01:07 PM

dmbhoosier21

11-13-2007, 01:10 PM

:rolleyes
None of the bold information is being disputed. Do you not understand that

I'm not talking about chemestry. I'm talking about how a player acts on the field which is quite easy to observe. Peyton does behave like Al gore in a presidential debate. Favre appears much more capable as a leader. As I said, I can only base this on my observation from watching them play. :thumbsdow:twak

The bolded statement is a retort to this post .....

First paragraph response...
You are making the same argument in reverse :lol:thumbsdow. Speaking as if you know what is happening in the colts offense. In addition, it is very easy to observe the behaviors of players on the field, so I don't think its far fetched at all to comment on their behavior.
:cool

which I clearly explained as being completely and utterly wrong.

This whole argument started from this post.

i know a lot of people don't like talking about "leadership" or any intangible qualities, but favre, imo, kills peyton in this respect. i'm not a manning hater, but peyton and eli both seem like whiney bitches sometimes (throwing their hands up in the air and shaking their head, etc.)

Which you proceeded to claim as being valid.

Seems pretty clear to me that you are trying to compare two great players who appear to be undisputed leaders on their team .....and what I'm saying is that it is simply delusional thinking to really think we can judge a player's "leadership" skill and consequently team chemistry (b/c leadership is an important variable in team chemistry) b/c unless you're on the Colts or GB, one has no earthly idea. NONE

It is really rather a very very simple concept. :ugh

dmbhoosier21

11-13-2007, 01:16 PM

Ok ok...it's obvious that I'm giving you a hard time becuase of the use of the emoticons right? :lol

I think I see the underlying arguements here.

"You can't assume Peyton is a whiny bitch, just because you see him act that way on the field and during the press conference."

and

"You can't assume Favre is a better leader because he appears to be on the field and takes responsibility during the press conference"

VS

The inverse.

I do not think it's fair to eliminate easily observable tendencies of the players because they are not a hard-and-fast statistic.

Where did you get the idea that being "whiny" equates to being a poor leader. In fact, there was an article after the SB about Manning over-ruling the coaches regarding the hotel situation. Manning basically kicked out each and every players' families from the floor the players were staying in. (I brought this story to your attention to show that there are hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of things that happens within a team that the fans and yes even the media will never know about)

But, really I do want to know about the apparent connection between showing frustration in a "whiny" manner and one's leadership skills. Jordan was the biggest whiner I'd ever seen but I never questioned his leadership position on the Bulls.

Again, to believe that we can actually judge "leadership" within an NFL team, which btw is related to team chemistry and dynamics, is delusional.

swampdonkey

11-13-2007, 01:17 PM

Which you proceeded to claim as being valid.

Seems pretty clear to me that you are trying to compare two great players who appear to be undisputed leaders on their team .....and what I'm saying is that it is simply delusional thinking to really think we can judge a player's "leadership" skill and consequently team chemistry (b/c leadership is an important variable in team chemistry) b/c unless you're on the Colts or GB, one has no earthly idea. NONE

It is really rather a very very simple concept. :ugh

I realize you may have written this before my last post. Anyways, we have a fundamental difference of opinion in that I think leadship ability is something you can easily observe and compare and contrast. Despite the fact that it isn't measurable it is still there along with indications of a players attitude. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

jimibadfish

11-13-2007, 01:23 PM

Where did you get the idea that being "whiny" equates to being a poor leader.

Being whiney is not a trait of a good leader.

UNC41

11-13-2007, 01:26 PM

I realize you may have written this before my last post. Anyways, we have a fundamental difference of opinion in that I think leadship ability is something you can easily observe and compare and contrast. Despite the fact that it isn't measurable it is still there along with indications of a players attitude. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

Let's go back to your Gore analogy from before. Bush appeared to be a better leader from debates. Well, 7 years later the guy who came off poorly has a Nobel Peace Prize while the guy who came off better has very low approval ratings. Seems to be the exact opposite of the point you were trying to make.

As for Favre, yes he appears to be a confident leader on the field, but it was just on Sunday I heard (can't remember where) a member of the media talking about how Greg Jennings said he felt alienated by Favre for the majority of his rookie year.

dmbhoosier21

11-13-2007, 01:26 PM

I realize you may have written this before my last post. Anyways, we have a fundamental difference of opinion in that I think leadship ability is something you can easily observe and compare and contrast. Despite the fact that it isn't measurable it is still there along with indications of a players attitude. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

Exactly my point.

I'll even agree with you about getting an indication of a player's leadership based on what we see on the field once a week, but it is a very very very tiny, even microscopic indication of what is reality regarding team dynamics. We, the fans, are just not privy to enough information to accurately judge and compare such a subjective and immeasurable concept of "leadership"

While you believe that somehow, the general fan has enough information to accurately judge and compare team chemistry/dynamics; I do not. And yes, we are going to have to agree to disagree on that matter.

dmbhoosier21

11-13-2007, 01:30 PM

Let's go back to your Gore analogy from before. Bush appeared to be a better leader from debates. Well, 7 years later the guy who came off poorly has a Nobel Peace Prize while the guy who came off better has very low approval ratings. Seems to be the exact opposite of the point you were trying to make.

:lol Politics, let's not get started on that. There is a reason that I avoid the poly-sci forum on this site.

As for Favre, yes he appears to be a confident leader on the field, but it was just on Sunday I heard (can't remember where) a member of the media talking about how Greg Jennings said he felt alienated by Favre for the majority of his rookie year.

Point being - perceiving one as being "whiny" and a post-conf. incident blown up by the media is not enough to judge a player's leadership skills.

jiggajm18

11-13-2007, 01:34 PM

i'm taking favre. yea, manning's accomplishments are impressive. especially for his age.

but favre has some pretty nasty accomplishments too.......and the majority of the time they were made in lambeau, while manning's were in a dome. that puts favre over manning IMO

dmb71687

11-13-2007, 01:40 PM

If I see one more LOL face on this page my head might seriously explode....Do people realize how hard it is to read posts with that face in every sentence???

dmb71687

11-13-2007, 01:41 PM

dmbhoosier21

11-13-2007, 01:43 PM

I realize you may have written this before my last post. Anyways, we have a fundamental difference of opinion in that I think leadship ability is something you can easily observe and compare and contrast. Despite the fact that it isn't measurable it is still there along with indications of a players attitude. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

BTW, we do not disagree on the bolded claim above.

While "leadership" is subjective, I've been on enough sports teams to be able to say confidently, that it is very much possible and even easy to observe leadership traits.

I just believe that one actually has to be on the team to be able to accurately judge leadership - and like you said - agree to disagree.

UNC41

11-13-2007, 01:50 PM

:lol Politics, let's not get started on that. There is a reason that I avoid the poly-sci forum on this site.

Point being - perceiving one as being "whiny" and a post-conf. incident blown up by the media is not enough to judge a player's leadership skills.

Agreed on the politics. Rather than add an emoticon to that I'll just use this sentence as a textual laughing emoticon. I had no intentions of bringing political opinions into the discussion, so just used facts. Just responding to a previous analogy.

I also agree that what we see and personal feelings does not always equate to leadership ability. I've read numerous times that many of Michael Jordan's teammates did not like him, but six championships is a pretty telling sign they went out there and gave it all for a team lead by Jordan.

jiggajm18

11-13-2007, 01:54 PM

Agreed on the politics. Rather than add an emoticon to that I'll just use this sentence as a textual laughing emoticon. I had no intentions of bringing political opinions into the discussion, so just used facts. Just responding to a previous analogy.

I also agree that what we see and personal feelings does not always equate to leadership ability. I've read numerous times that many of Michael Jordan's teammates did not like him, but six championships is a pretty telling sign they went out there and gave it all for a team lead by Jordan.

MJ himself said that they weren't the biggest fans of his. primarily because of the work ethic (that he had) and how he basically forced the rest of the team to posess also.

and like you said, i'm sure the guys that stuck around are thanking MJ everyday.

dmbhoosier21

11-13-2007, 01:57 PM

Agreed on the politics. Rather than add an emoticon to that I'll just use this sentence as a textual laughing emoticon. I had no intentions of bringing political opinions into the discussion, so just used facts. Just responding to a previous analogy.

Discussing politics on this site is like dealing with NE fans on both sides. Equally homerific and equally unwilling to be open-minded about the other's point of view - myself included.

I also agree that what we see and personal feelings does not always equate to leadership ability. I've read numerous times that many of Michael Jordan's teammates did not like him, but six championships is a pretty telling sign they went out there and gave it all for a team lead by Jordan.

I think it was a book that I read - but it talked about how big of an ass MJ was to everyone except for Bill Cartwright (the only one who apparently didnt' take any of MJ's shit) during his days in Chi. It also talked about how poorly MJ treated Kwame Brown when he played for Wash.

There's still no doubting MJs greatness and leadership position on the Bulls - obviously.

UNC41

11-13-2007, 02:14 PM

Discussing politics on this site is like dealing with NE fans on both sides. Equally homerific and equally unwilling to be open-minded about the other's point of view - myself included.

I think it was a book that I read - but it talked about how big of an ass MJ was to everyone except for Bill Cartwright (the only one who apparently didnt' take any of MJ's shit) during his days in Chi. It also talked about how poorly MJ treated Kwame Brown when he played for Wash.

There's still no doubting MJs greatness and leadership position on the Bulls - obviously.

That's exactly why I didn't give my opinion on politics and just stated facts. Either way, let's drop it all together.

That's the point I was trying to make about MJ. Treating your teammates poorly isn't a common trait of a leader, but MJ did it and you'd be laughed at if you questioned his leadership ability. So much goes on behind the scenes that unless we are told by players or people within the organization, leadership is a tough thing to measure.

DMBZeppelin

11-13-2007, 02:40 PM

Good points. As for which is more impressive...5 consecutive 30+ TD seasons is more impressive.
I do know Manning's streak is an NFL record. I'm not sure if Favre's streak is. Still, Manning has 16 TD's right now and is likely to get somewhere in the 25-30 range.

Which would make 10 consecutive seasons of at least 25 TD's. It's not like Favre getting 31 or 32 TD's is a lot more impressive then Manning getting 28 or 29.
Admitedly, Manning has had ONE huge season in terms of touchdowns. But if we're comparing 4 year runs.

Favres Best four year average.

36.25 TDs 14 INTs

OMG what a shock...Favre threw TDs at a higher rate even counting Peytons Freak season in this case. Quite astounding huh?
36.25 TD's and 14 INT's
34.25 TD's and 9.75 INT's

Looks very close to me. It tells me if Manning was less careful with the ball, and took more chances he'd probably make up at least those 2 TD's a year.

Also why you do always try to point out Manning's best year? Should we discredit Brett for having a freak 38 and 39 TD seasons? He's never done anything like that since. Because if we took away Favre's best years and Manning's best years. Manning would look a lot better then Favre.

zdaddy

11-13-2007, 02:51 PM

dmbhoosier21

11-13-2007, 03:09 PM

thats why there is that word "Prime" in the title

Two less TD passes with 5 less INTs.

#s during their "prime" are very comparable and not at all clear cut as some have implied.

Overall #s - Manning hands down

During their prime #s - it's a toss up as Zep so eloquently explained and displayed.

TwoStep2888

11-13-2007, 03:34 PM

Eh, I really don't care too much about #'s. There are way too many variables that could have affected them. It's best to look at overall attitude and playing style, rather than statistics, imo.

clayj41

11-13-2007, 04:28 PM

dmbhoosier21

11-13-2007, 05:05 PM

Eh, I really don't care too much about #'s. There are way too many variables that could have affected them. It's best to look at overall attitude and playing style, rather than statistics, imo.

:thumbsup And like many others have said, there's not a big enough gap in the numbers to make one of them an overwhelming favorite. Personally, I think they're two of the most exciting quarterbacks to watch in NFL history. Manning with his play calling abilities and audible work, and Favre with his gunslinger mentality and youthful exuberance.

I agree with both of you guys.

The only reason I brought up statistics is b/c someone claimed that based on #s alone Favre has a clear cut advantage, which is obviously not the case.

But yeah, statistics is only a variable in the overall debate.

BotheDMBFan

11-13-2007, 06:03 PM

ditka = overrated :eek

Go suck a railroad spike.

swampdonkey

11-14-2007, 01:17 PM

I do know Manning's streak is an NFL record. I'm not sure if Favre's streak is. Still, Manning has 16 TD's right now and is likely to get somewhere in the 25-30 range.

Which would make 10 consecutive seasons of at least 25 TD's. It's not like Favre getting 31 or 32 TD's is a lot more impressive then Manning getting 28 or 29.

36.25 TD's and 14 INT's
34.25 TD's and 9.75 INT's

Looks very close to me. It tells me if Manning was less careful with the ball, and took more chances he'd probably make up at least those 2 TD's a year.

Also why you do always try to point out Manning's best year? Should we discredit Brett for having a freak 38 and 39 TD seasons? He's never done anything like that since. Because if we took away Favre's best years and Manning's best years. Manning would look a lot better then Favre.

I'll agree with everyone else that the stats are close enough to not e the difference maker.

Yes favres consecutive 30 TD seasons streak is a record (as is his total number of 30+ TD seasons). The reason I'm mentioning Peytons freak season is because he has not duplicated it. Favre has thrown for 30+ TDs 8 times. 39,38,34,35.... If you take away manning's best year and favres best year and compare favre will be statistically better in terms of throwing TDs and probably TDs to INTs..although I can't say that for sure. Manning would be better in terms of yardage though I believe.

Anyway, you make some good points about if Peyton had not been so careful he could have thrown more TDs.

Really, I'm through with the debate on stats. Personally, looking at the stats I think Favre is the winner based on what he did early in his career, but you can make a strong arguement for peyton as well.

proudestmnky

11-15-2007, 12:35 PM

Manning has been a leader of the team since day 1. Manning has more responsibilities than any other on-field player by far. Your obvious "compelling" argument is a tad off.

Showing frustration or as you so referred to it as "whiney bitches" does not equate a lack of leadership; where you got this idea, I will never know

Again, I will never fault anyone for picking Favre, he is a legend and one of the best ever, but at least give some sort of intelligible and lucid argument.

well its good to know that you aren't bias or anything, but keep up the double and triple posts defending your boy.

what i meant about peyton seeming whiney is that if something bad happens, he seems to throw up his hands as if exasperated. favre, in a similar situation, seems to have the attitude of "let's go, we're better than this" and he looks like he is pissed off (not at a certain player, just pissed off at the situation and ready to overcome it). again, i don't watch either qb nearly enough to pretend like i quantify their leadership qualities (if that is even possible); i'm telling you my opinion in the matter based on the games i have seen.

dmbhoosier21

11-15-2007, 01:01 PM

well its good to know that you aren't bias or anything, but keep up the double and triple posts defending your boy.

I apologize for having logical points to support my opinion - you should think about trying it.

Plus everyone is biased. GB fans are biased towards Favre, NE fans are biased towards Brady, Indy fans are biased towards Manning ....so what's your point?

what i meant about peyton seeming whiney is that if something bad happens, he seems to throw up his hands as if exasperated. favre, in a similar situation, seems to have the attitude of "let's go, we're better than this" and he looks like he is pissed off (not at a certain player, just pissed off at the situation and ready to overcome it). again, i don't watch either qb nearly enough to pretend like i quantify their leadership qualities (if that is even possible); i'm telling you my opinion in the matter based on the games i have seen.

Really?

i know a lot of people don't like talking about "leadership" or any intangible qualities, but favre, imo, kills peyton in this respect. i'm not a manning hater, but peyton and eli both seem like whiney bitches sometimes (throwing their hands up in the air and shaking their head, etc.)

huh, you sure did fool swampdonkey and I

i'm telling you my opinion in the matter based on the games i have seen.

A common misconception in our society is the absurd idea that all opinions are equal.

UNC41

11-15-2007, 01:04 PM

Everytime I see this thread title I think of ...

Frank: Who would you rather bone, Meg Ryan or Jack Nicholson?
Billy Madison: Jack Nicholson now, or 1974?
Frank: '74.
Billy Madison: Meg Ryan.

DMBand520

11-15-2007, 01:46 PM

Madden doesn't have to talk about it. I've watched both for many years with my own eyes. Manning curls up like a girl when he's getting ready to get hit. No doubt 2 of the greats in the game, i just prefer Favre.

At least Manning takes the hit and doesn't just fall down and give up the sack for free like Favre...

http://espn-i.starwave.com/media/nfl/2002/0106/photo/s_strahan_vt.jpg

:rolleyes

dmbhoosier21

11-15-2007, 03:48 PM

At least Manning takes the hit and doesn't just fall down and give up the sack for free like Favre...

http://espn-i.starwave.com/media/nfl/2002/0106/photo/s_strahan_vt.jpg

:rolleyes

:lol Forgot about that.

proudestmnky

11-15-2007, 04:40 PM

Plus everyone is biased. GB fans are biased towards Favre, NE fans are biased towards Brady, Indy fans are biased towards Manning ....so what's your point?

A common misconception in our society is the absurd idea that all opinions are equal.

First of all, i'm confused as to what you mean when you said "you sure did fool swampdonkey and i." I'm not exactly sure how i fooled the 2 of you.

The point i was making about bias was that i'm neither a GB nor an Indy fan, so i'm not bias toward either qb. you, obviously, are (as i'm sure a GB fan is towards favre). What "logical points" do you want me to give? Their stats are very similar, as other people have pointed out. I told you what i think of their respective leadership qualities. Have i been a teammate of either qb? Of course not. I'm giving you my opinion about 2 qbs that i have watched as a casual NFL fan, not as an authoritative voice on the subject.

You don't like it? Ok, fine. I'm not calling you out telling you that you're wrong, i'm giving my opinion (which apparantly isn't as good as yours) on the topic brought up by the OP.

dmbhoosier21

11-15-2007, 05:50 PM

First of all, i'm confused as to what you mean when you said "you sure did fool swampdonkey and i." I'm not exactly sure how i fooled the 2 of you.

Well you said this .......

i don't watch either qb nearly enough to pretend like i quantify their leadership qualities (if that is even possible);

The above is a quite clearly a contradiction to your initial post .....

i know a lot of people don't like talking about "leadership" or any intangible qualities, but favre, imo, kills peyton in this respect.

You "fooled" Mr. Swampdonkey and I with your above post. I disagreed with it and Swampdonkey did the opposite.

How can you initially judge Favre as a better leader than Manning then proceed to admit that you can't "quantify" either of the QB's leadership skill :freak

The point i was making about bias was that i'm neither a GB nor an Indy fan, so i'm not bias toward either qb. you, obviously, are (as i'm sure a GB fan is towards favre). What "logical points" do you want me to give? Their stats are very similar, as other people have pointed out. I told you what i think of their respective leadership qualities. Have i been a teammate of either qb? Of course not. I'm giving you my opinion about 2 qbs thatihave watched as a casual NFL fan, not as an authoritative voice on the subject.

Are you a politician? You keep flip-flopping on whether or not it's possible for you or anyone to judge or "quantify" a player's "leadership" qualities.

First you judge and compare said players' "leadership" qualites, then you admit that you are in no position to "quantify" each player's "leadership" qualities, then again you go back to comparing each player's leadership skills by restating your opinion on the matter. Make up your mind.

You don't like it? Ok, fine. I'm not calling you out telling you that you're wrong, i'm giving my opinion (which apparantly isn't as good as yours) on the topic brought up by the OP.

I have no problem with people picking Favre. I was just pointing out how your opinion doesn't make sense. Not only does it make no sense, but you also keep contradicting yourself.

Again, it is a common misconception to think that all opinions are equal. If you disagree with me, by all means - give me some reasons as to why you think I may be wrong.

Favre sucks vs. Favre is great

both are opinions, but one is clearly more legitimate than the other.

proudestmnky

11-15-2007, 07:08 PM

Are you a politician? You keep flip-flopping on whether or not it's possible for you or anyone to judge or "quantify" a player's "leadership" qualities.

First you judge and compare said players' "leadership" qualites, then you admit that you are in no position to "quantify" each player's "leadership" qualities, then again you go back to comparing each player's leadership skills by restating your opinion on the matter. Make up your mind.

The reason i used the word "quantify" while describing leadership qualities is because i admit that there is no concrete way to measure who is/isn't a good leader. For example, there is no measure by which to record how many times manning does something that makes him seem like a whiney bitch. However, leadership is still something that i personally factor in while debating "who i would rather have." Therefore, going by my experiences watching the two play, i have come to the conclusion that manning acts like a bitch sometimes and favre does not. It is only MY personal opinion, and i hope we can both agree that this is not a matter that is as clear cut as your example of "favre sucks vs. favre is great." The bottom line is that from watching both players, i think that favre is a better leader of his football team than peyton manning is of his. I'm not sure how else to explain this to you, since you keep saying my opinion makes no sense.

dmbhoosier21

11-15-2007, 07:44 PM

The reason i used the word "quantify" while describing leadership qualities is because i admit that there is no concrete way to measure who is/isn't a good leader. For example, there is no measure by which to record how many times manning does something that makes him seem like a whiney bitch. However, leadership is still something that i personally factor in while debating "who i would rather have." Therefore, going by my experiences watching the two play, i have come to the conclusion that manning acts like a bitch sometimes and favre does not. It is only MY personal opinion, and i hope we can both agree that this is not a matter that is as clear cut as your example of "favre sucks vs. favre is great." The bottom line is that from watching both players, i think that favre is a better leader of his football team than peyton manning is of his. I'm not sure how else to explain this to you, since you keep saying my opinion makes no sense.

We'll just agree on this - there is no possible way a "casual" or even a "hardcore" fan can really know a player's leadership skills b/c one is not on the team.

There are literally, hundreds and hundreds upon hundreds of things that happen within the team (during practice, in the locker room, etc.) that no fan ever get to see.

i.e. it was reported after the Superbowl - that Manning over-ruled the coaches regarding the players' families. The coaches were OK with family staying with the players in their rooms - Manning had that changed.

that is only one example - we see maybe 1% of what goes on within a team.

Just b/c you perceive a player to be "whiny" when his teamates don't do well does not prove he isn't as good a leader as Favre. Jordan was apparently an ass to his teammates and I don't think anyone can dispute his leadership.

Again, we are just fans - it's plain delusion to think we actually know what's going on within a team - it's a fantasy. In the psych world it would be referred to as "delusions of grandeur"