Re: Madden NFL 12 Has Rated Four Players at 99, Overrated? Who Missed the Cut?
Manning has won almost as many games as Brady with far below average defenses. It balances out the 'mediocre WR' argument. Brady usually has a far stronger running game. I don't use rings as a measure of individual greatness, otherwise someone could make the argument that Terry Bradshaw was as good a QB as Joe Montana because they both have 4 rings. Or someone could say the Rothelisberger is better than Marino was. C'mon now.
Also, without Brady, Bill Belichik can get 11-5 out of whats his name with his coaching and team he has built. Also, if Vinateri has a couple of bad kicks, Brady is a "choke artist". (Not to mention he needed a kicker to win his Superbowls) Oh and the Tuck Rule in 2001.
The Colts can't even win 2 games without Manning. (Dungy and Irsay are forever douchebags in my book for that boneheaded move.)
And honestly, even Brady has said Manning is the better QB. And before you say "oh he is just being gracious", he could have said nothing on the issue or just said thank you to the people that said he was the best and no one would have said anything bad about him.
I will give that Brady has been really efficient, but he has had better overall teams and far better coaching than Manning has. Really, the only place Brady hasn't consistently had an advantage over Manning is the receiver position, except the year Moss decided to actually play.
All that said, it's like comparing a 10.1k diamond to a 10.2k diamond. The argument for Brady being the best is certainly there and I only dispute it as far as I would personally choose Manning as my QB over Brady.
As I originally said, they both deserve the 99 (it doesn't mean they have the exact same strengths and weaknesses by the way) for the game as they are both absolutely the best at their positions as or right now and are head and shoulders above any other QB playing.
Manning has won almost as many games as Brady with far below average defenses. It balances out the 'mediocre WR' argument. Brady usually has a far stronger running game. I don't use rings as a measure of individual greatness, otherwise someone could make the argument that Terry Bradshaw was as good a QB as Joe Montana because they both have 4 rings. Or someone could say the Rothelisberger is better than Marino was. C'mon now.
Also, without Brady, Bill Belichik can get 11-5 out of whats his name with his coaching and team he has built. Also, if Vinateri has a couple of bad kicks, Brady is a "choke artist". (Not to mention he needed a kicker to win his Superbowls) Oh and the Tuck Rule in 2001.
The Colts can't even win 2 games without Manning. (Dungy and Irsay are forever douchebags in my book for that boneheaded move.)
And honestly, even Brady has said Manning is the better QB. And before you say "oh he is just being gracious", he could have said nothing on the issue or just said thank you to the people that said he was the best and no one would have said anything bad about him.
I will give that Brady has been really efficient, but he has had better overall teams and far better coaching than Manning has. Really, the only place Brady hasn't consistently had an advantage over Manning is the receiver position, except the year Moss decided to actually play.
All that said, it's like comparing a 10.1k diamond to a 10.2k diamond. The argument for Brady being the best is certainly there and I only dispute it as far as I would personally choose Manning as my QB over Brady.
As I originally said, they both deserve the 99 (it doesn't mean they have the exact same strengths and weaknesses by the way) for the game as they are both absolutely the best at their positions as or right now and are head and shoulders above any other QB playing.
Comment