Manning vs. Brady

I normally wouldn't touch this topic. Not because I'm worried that somebody might not agree with my opinion on the subject, but because you simply can't compare these two guys. ESPN is running an opinion segment on their website right now where a bunch of experts are weighing in and all of them are saying that Manning is the better quarterback of the two. This makes me laugh because last year I bet every one of these guys would have said that Brady was the better quarterback. Of course, the only difference between last year and now is that Manning has now won a Super Bowl. So, does winning a Super Bowl automatically make you a better player?

Give me a break. You can't compare these two guys because they are two completely different players who play in two completely different systems in two completely different situations on teams with two completely different philosophies.

Peyton Manning plays for a team that believes you win with overpowering offensive strength. As a result, the Colts have spent a fortune on the offensive side of the ball. They have great offensive continuity because they have been able to keep most of their offensive players around for an extended period of time. Practice makes perfect, and when you have the same guys in the offensive huddle year after year you don't make too many mistakes on game day. The Colts offense is super aggressive and they take a lot of chances downfield. They score a lot of points because they have to. Peyton Manning puts up ridiculous numbers because he has to in order to win and he has the offensive talent around him to support him in his effort. He also has the ball a lot because the Colts defense gives up a lot of easy points every year. The Colts don't have much continuity on defense because they spend all their money on offense. While this makes the offense strong, it makes the defense weak. The Colts always rank near the bottom of team defense in the NFL every year. They rank at the bottom because they always have to replace too many starters on defense every year because they refuse to pay their defensive players and then they lose them to free agency. See Nick Harper, Cato June, David Thornton, Walt Harris, Marcus Washington, Mike Peterson, Mike Doss, Montae Reagor, etc. I'm sure I'm leaving out somebody, but you get the idea. Peyton needs to score at least 28 points a game in order to win.
Tom Brady plays on a team that believes "defense wins championships." I'm not saying that the Patriots spend all their money on the defensive side of the ball, but the Patriots have managed to keep a core group of defenders over an extended period of time. The Pats seem to have a knack for finding the right defensive player to fit into their overall scheme. They will pay the money to the right guy, but they also never seem to overpay anybody. They spend the money where they have to and this usually means that Tom Brady has a different set of receivers every year. This would kill a lot of quarterbacks in a lot of systems, but it doesn't really seem to affect Tom Brady. You see, Brady doesn't have to score 28 points a game in order to win. The Pats know this, and so does Tom. If the Patriots score 17 to 21 points a game they are probably going to win because their defense is usually pretty good. They play a conservative scheme on offense that takes what the defense gives them. Tom never puts up the kind of ridiculous numbers that Manning does because he usually doesn't have to in order to win. Tom sees the field and hits the open receiver. Usually the open guy is underneath and Tom picks apart the opposing defense 10 yards at a time. That doesn't mean that Tom can't be aggressive and go deep. He can and he does when he has to. But, Tom's game is different than Peyton's.

You just simply can't compare these two guys. I've often wondered what each of them would have achieved if their situations were reversed. What if Peyton played for New England and Tom played for Indy? Of course we have no way of knowing, but I have a sneaky feeling that both guys would be successful in the other team's system. In fact, I have a feeling that both guys would probably excel. That's not surprising to me because I honestly think they are the two best quarterbacks who have ever played the game. I think both of them would probably be great no matter where they played. Well, maybe not if they played for the Texans, Raiders, Lions, or Browns. But, you get the idea. There is no answer to the debate. One side will never convince the other. Give it up. It really doesn't matter.

For the record, though, I firmly believe that defense wins championships. The Colts won the Super Bowl this year because their defense caught fire and played over their heads throughout the playoffs. Peyton Manning played OK in the playoffs but he didn't carry the team. The defense carried the Colts and nobody should forget that.