<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Packersfan)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (McChicken5)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Packersfan)</div><div class='quotemain'>Actually saying "Manning is hands down the greatest quarterback ever" is pretty obvious in how you judge other quarterbacks in comparison.......And VF I never called him ignorant, I only stated that calling Manning the "hands down greatest quarterback ever" was ignorant. There is no way anyone could come to the logical conclusion that one quarterback is the "hands down" best, as I said there are just too many elements to come to that conclusion. I'm not saying a person can't believe in his or her opinion that Manning is the best, but no one, coul honestly believe, that Manning is head and shoulders above the rest, unless they were ignorant to the fact that there have been so many other great quarterbacks (Dan Marino, John Elway, Brett Favre, Tom Brady, Steve Young, Terry Bradshaw, Joe Montana, etc.)</div> Like i said its how you feel, if you feel that one quaterback reigns supreme over another thats your opinion and you are the ignorant one for saying that ones own opinion is ignorant, or disrespectfull. What he thinks about manning is his opinion and it is no less or no more ignorant then someone elses opinion. Its not disrespecting other qbs if thats how you feel, he is not going to the persons face and telling them look your not as good as manning you suck, thats disrespect to them people, he is siumply stating that manning in his eyes is the best quaterback ever. Sure stats can lie and not all stats matter but when it comes down to it its your opinion who is the best espicially if you not going by stats.</div> An opinion can be ignorant, if you'd of read my earlier post which included the definition you'd know that ( ignorant - lacking knowledge or information). For example, someone could say " It's so quiet outside " but if in reality that person is standing in a soundproof room, they could be ignorant to the fact that there's construction going on outside. And if you'd of read my last post you would know that I'm not ignorant to the fact that someone can believe one quarter back is better then another. And it's not disrespectful if that's how you feel? really? Then right after that you say he's not going to their face and saying it, that would be disrespectful... So I'm not sure I get what you're trying to say, is it not disrespectful because it's how he feels, or because they don't know it's how he feels? And he's not "simply stating that manning in his eyes is the best quarterback ever." Again if you would actually read the posts... He said " Manning is hands down the greatest quarterback ever". "Hands down", correct me if I'm wrong but does this not mean no objection, which would mean there is no one on his level?</div> In his eyes manning is the best ever, and thats his opinion. Which is no more or no less ignorant then your statement of his statement being ignorant. What i am trying to say is that ignorance layes as much in his statement as there is in yours. You cant bash ones opinion and say that his is ignorant and say that yours isnt. And its not disrespectful because it is his opinion its what he belives, and we have something in this country and its called freedom of speech. And its your opinion that what he says is ignorant. Anyway this thread has become stupid because the topic is just dumb. Manning is a great quaterback and still has allot of years in him and i belive he might even win 1 to 2 more championships. And of course theres never going to be "The best qb ever" as much as theres never going to be "the best movie ever" but its still his opinion and you have no right to bash it if all your going to say is it has ignorance and disresppectful.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CanadianFavreFan)</div><div class='quotemain'>My only question is you can take one QB to start the SB can you honestly say you'd pick Manning. I'm not saying I'd take Brett but you can hardly give much credit to Manning for the SB MVP. It was a lock before the game ever started if the Colts win the media gives him the award. I mean how can you rave about the guy these playoffs when he has basically a 2-1 int-td ratio. Just cause Brett didn't get a SB MVP: doesn't mean much cause his #'s in both SB games crushed Peyton's. In the end though I don't think it's a question that will ever have a sure answer cause there's to many factors and as usual everyone goes with what they've seen and forgets the past. I'm sure in 10 years the next generation of fans will be raving about a new young stud as the greatest all time</div> Yeah, I would take manning, he hasnt lost a super bowl like farve did. Plus, farve is a cheater, so his numbers are dubious at best.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (McChicken5)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Packersfan)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (McChicken5)</div><div class='quotemain'> Like i said its how you feel, if you feel that one quaterback reigns supreme over another thats your opinion and you are the ignorant one for saying that ones own opinion is ignorant, or disrespectfull. What he thinks about manning is his opinion and it is no less or no more ignorant then someone elses opinion. Its not disrespecting other qbs if thats how you feel, he is not going to the persons face and telling them look your not as good as manning you suck, thats disrespect to them people, he is siumply stating that manning in his eyes is the best quaterback ever. Sure stats can lie and not all stats matter but when it comes down to it its your opinion who is the best espicially if you not going by stats.</div> An opinion can be ignorant, if you'd of read my earlier post which included the definition you'd know that ( ignorant - lacking knowledge or information). For example, someone could say " It's so quiet outside " but if in reality that person is standing in a soundproof room, they could be ignorant to the fact that there's construction going on outside. And if you'd of read my last post you would know that I'm not ignorant to the fact that someone can believe one quarter back is better then another. And it's not disrespectful if that's how you feel? really? Then right after that you say he's not going to their face and saying it, that would be disrespectful... So I'm not sure I get what you're trying to say, is it not disrespectful because it's how he feels, or because they don't know it's how he feels? And he's not "simply stating that manning in his eyes is the best quarterback ever." Again if you would actually read the posts... He said " Manning is hands down the greatest quarterback ever". "Hands down", correct me if I'm wrong but does this not mean no objection, which would mean there is no one on his level?</div> In his eyes manning is the best ever, and thats his opinion. Which is no more or no less ignorant then your statement of his statement being ignorant. What i am trying to say is that ignorance layes as much in his statement as there is in yours. You cant bash ones opinion and say that his is ignorant and say that yours isnt. And its not disrespectful because it is his opinion its what he belives, and we have something in this country and its called freedom of speech. And its your opinion that what he says is ignorant. Anyway this thread has become stupid because the topic is just dumb. Manning is a great quaterback and still has allot of years in him and i belive he might even win 1 to 2 more championships. And of course theres never going to be "The best qb ever" as much as theres never going to be "the best movie ever" but its still his opinion and you have no right to bash it if all your going to say is it has ignorance and disresppectful.</div> Wow, you are getting ridiculous.... Once again... he said "Manning is hands down the greatest quarterback ever"... And you say it isn't disrespectful because it's his opinion? that makes no sence... If I call someone an ass hole that's disrespectful even if though it's my opinion... And actually someone can call a statement ignorant when it's ignorant, that doesn't make their statement ignorant (lmao). The fact that there will never be a best ever is precisely why I say his saying "Manning is hands down the greatest quarterback" ignorant. He did not just say he thinks Manning is the best ever, he said that there's no reason for debate, that Manning is on another level.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BearsFan1)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Packersfan)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BearsFan1)</div><div class='quotemain'> A QBs "leadership" ability should show up in his stats. Better leader, better resuts. I cant see this week, so i cant go grab the stats. I have to sit 6" from screen to even post. Fact is, manning is going to be more consistently in the top on avgs than any other QB, as well as for totals and he has a ring, and a super bowl MVP. No other QB is going to stack up. Just that simple. He also hasnt missed but 1 play to injury, so he is toughest QB to ever play as well.Farve has missed most of a game due to injury so his record is a sham at this point. Manning missed one play due to a cheap shot by brommell. Plus, manning has way better #s than brett,m aand a super bowl MVP that farve doesnt have. Choose a qb you think stacks up i will show you how manning is better. FYI - non championship qbs need not apply.</div> Idk what stats you're talking about but as I just posted, career; qb rating, completion percentage, avg. gain, lowest percent of passes intercepted, all topped by other qb's. Also Manning is in the prime of his career, his avgs and percentages will all go south when he gets older, unless he retires early (which btw is one way stats are misleading, many qb's keep playing past their prime which dilutes their stats). But I think you were just emotional when you 1st made this thread, I mean honestly, you think Manning is on another level then Marino, Elway, and Montana?</div> He is definately better. Manning beating bears has nothing to do with it. You are crazy to even post such a suggestion. I have been a manning fan since i started posting here. Look u pthe threads. Mcnabb vs manning, etc. Marino has no ring. Manning has almost as many yards as elway already, and should pass him in TD passes next season. Just cuz he isnt the top 3 at certain things, doesnt mean he isnt the best. Yeah otto graham may be better in ypa, but he gets killed in other 3 categories. No one can stack up across the board. Manning is the best. your argument that to be the best ever you have to be the best at everything ever is flawed. I win, you lose.</div> I didn't ask if you thought he was better, I asked if you truly believe the first statement you posted in this thread, which was something like, "Manning is hands down the greatst quarterback ever" which would mean no one is even close. Actually out of all the stats I posted Manning is only in the top 3 in 1, career quarterback rating in which he is number 3, and as I said unless he retires while he is in his prime, will drop. Again I ask how is Manning the best? You said stats, well I showed stats and Manning isn't. Also for your statement of Manning's "hands down" dominance I would expect to see some pretty obviously dominating stats.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Packersfan)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BearsFan1)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Packersfan)</div><div class='quotemain'> Idk what stats you're talking about but as I just posted, career; qb rating, completion percentage, avg. gain, lowest percent of passes intercepted, all topped by other qb's. Also Manning is in the prime of his career, his avgs and percentages will all go south when he gets older, unless he retires early (which btw is one way stats are misleading, many qb's keep playing past their prime which dilutes their stats). But I think you were just emotional when you 1st made this thread, I mean honestly, you think Manning is on another level then Marino, Elway, and Montana?</div> He is definately better. Manning beating bears has nothing to do with it. You are crazy to even post such a suggestion. I have been a manning fan since i started posting here. Look u pthe threads. Mcnabb vs manning, etc. Marino has no ring. Manning has almost as many yards as elway already, and should pass him in TD passes next season. Just cuz he isnt the top 3 at certain things, doesnt mean he isnt the best. Yeah otto graham may be better in ypa, but he gets killed in other 3 categories. No one can stack up across the board. Manning is the best. your argument that to be the best ever you have to be the best at everything ever is flawed. I win, you lose.</div> I didn't ask if you thought he was better, I asked if you truly believe the first statement you posted in this thread, which was something like, "Manning is hands down the greatst quarterback ever" which would mean no one is even close. Actually out of all the stats I posted Manning is only in the top 3 in 1, career quarterback rating in which he is number 3, and as I said unless he retires while he is in his prime, will drop. Again I ask how is Manning the best? You said stats, well I showed stats and Manning isn't. Also for your statement of Manning's "hands down" dominance I would expect to see some pretty obviously dominating stats.</div> Whatever helps you sleep at night. I am right, you know it, you cant name one QB that can stack up across the boazrd. That is why you wne to ridiculous standard of having to be top at each individual things.
Manning is great not because of him alone, but because of who is around him too. How do you guys think Manning would have done if he had Caldwell and Gaffney instead of Harrison and Wayne? The obvious answer would be "not as well" because Wayne and Harrison are elite receivers that have a ton of chemistry with Manning. Brady threw for 4,110 yards in 2005 when he had Branch and Givens. I know that Manning's passing yards blow Brady's out of the water but you also need to realize that Harrison and Manning have been playing together since Manning came into the league. Wayne has been there since 2001 so he has been with Manning a long time too. Anyway, my point is that Manning gets to keep his receivers for a very long time and Brady has different receivers almost every season so it is really like comparing apples to oranges. Brady was getting close to Manning in 2005 when he had some significant time with Branch and Givens. Brady in '05 - 4,110 yards Manning in '05 - 3,747 yards Oops, Brady had more yards than Manning in '05.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pats_Fan420)</div><div class='quotemain'>Manning is great not because of him alone, but because of who is around him too. How do you guys think Manning would have done if he had Caldwell and Gaffney instead of Harrison and Wayne? The obvious answer would be "not as well" because Wayne and Harrison are elite receivers that have a ton of chemistry with Manning. Brady threw for 4,110 yards in 2005 when he had Branch and Givens. I know that Manning's passing yards blow Brady's out of the water but you also need to realize that Harrison and Manning have been playing together since Manning came into the league. Wayne has been there since 2001 so he has been with Manning a long time too. Anyway, my point is that Manning gets to keep his receivers for a very long time and Brady has different receivers almost every season so it is really like comparing apples to oranges. Brady was getting close to Manning in 2005 when he had some significant time with Branch and Givens. Brady in '05 - 4,110 yards Manning in '05 - 3,747 yards Oops, Brady had more yards than Manning in '05.</div> And the Colts still beat them TWICE. Oops.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BearsFan1)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Packersfan)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BearsFan1)</div><div class='quotemain'> He is definately better. Manning beating bears has nothing to do with it. You are crazy to even post such a suggestion. I have been a manning fan since i started posting here. Look u pthe threads. Mcnabb vs manning, etc. Marino has no ring. Manning has almost as many yards as elway already, and should pass him in TD passes next season. Just cuz he isnt the top 3 at certain things, doesnt mean he isnt the best. Yeah otto graham may be better in ypa, but he gets killed in other 3 categories. No one can stack up across the board. Manning is the best. your argument that to be the best ever you have to be the best at everything ever is flawed. I win, you lose.</div> I didn't ask if you thought he was better, I asked if you truly believe the first statement you posted in this thread, which was something like, "Manning is hands down the greatst quarterback ever" which would mean no one is even close. Actually out of all the stats I posted Manning is only in the top 3 in 1, career quarterback rating in which he is number 3, and as I said unless he retires while he is in his prime, will drop. Again I ask how is Manning the best? You said stats, well I showed stats and Manning isn't. Also for your statement of Manning's "hands down" dominance I would expect to see some pretty obviously dominating stats.</div> Whatever helps you sleep at night. I am right, you know it, you cant name one QB that can stack up across the boazrd. That is why you wne to ridiculous standard of having to be top at each individual things.</div> Ok, 1st I have no problem sleeping at night, lmao, so that's completely irrelevent... 2nd, I listed stats that were avgs for a qb's career, Manning wasn't at the top of any. Idk what stats you're talking about because I've yet to see any that Manning's even at the top of... And everytime I say it you just say, "Manning blows everyone away" I show stats you say they're irrelevent, well then what stats are relevent?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Packersfan)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BearsFan1)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Packersfan)</div><div class='quotemain'> I didn't ask if you thought he was better, I asked if you truly believe the first statement you posted in this thread, which was something like, "Manning is hands down the greatst quarterback ever" which would mean no one is even close. Actually out of all the stats I posted Manning is only in the top 3 in 1, career quarterback rating in which he is number 3, and as I said unless he retires while he is in his prime, will drop. Again I ask how is Manning the best? You said stats, well I showed stats and Manning isn't. Also for your statement of Manning's "hands down" dominance I would expect to see some pretty obviously dominating stats.</div> Whatever helps you sleep at night. I am right, you know it, you cant name one QB that can stack up across the boazrd. That is why you wne to ridiculous standard of having to be top at each individual things.</div> Ok, 1st I have no problem sleeping at night, lmao, so that's completely irrelevent... 2nd, I listed stats that were avgs for a qb's career, Manning wasn't at the top of any. Idk what stats you're talking about because I've yet to see any that Manning's even at the top of... And everytime I say it you just say, "Manning blows everyone away" I show stats you say they're irrelevent, well then what stats are relevent?</div> You arent even resoinding to my argumernt of the fallacy of your "stats" which are actually lists of players, not actuall stats. When you respond to that, i wil continue thread.
My point was to show that Manning wasn't on the top of any of those lists, but here is a list of every passing stat on nfl.com's stat page, http://www.nfl.com/history/randf/records/indiv/passing The ones I referred to were; qb rating; 96.8 Steve Young, Tampa Bay, 1985-86; San Francisco, 1987-1999 94.1 Kurt Warner, St. Louis, 1998-2003; N.Y. Giants, 2004; Arizona, 2005 93.5 Peyton Manning, Indianapolis, 1998-2005 completion percentage; 65.68 Kurt Warner, St. Louis, 1998-2003; N.Y. Giants, 2004; Arizona, 2005 (2,340-1,537) 65.02 Marc Bulger, St. Louis, 2002-05 (1,518-987) 64.37 Daunte Culpepper, Minnesota, 1999-2005 (2,607-1,678) Average gain; 8.63 Otto Graham, Cleveland, 1950-55 (1,565-13,499) 8.42 Sid Luckman, Chi. Bears, 1939-1950 (1,744-14,686) 8.21 Kurt Warner, St. Louis, 1998-2003; N.Y. Giants, 2004; Arizona, 2005 (2,340-19,214) lowest percent of passes intercepted; 2.11 Neil O'Donnell, Pittsburgh, 1991-95; N.Y. Jets, 1996-97; Cincinnati, 1998; Tennessee, 1999-2003 (3,229-68) 2.24 Donovan McNabb, Philadelphia, 1999-2005 (2,943-66) 2.35 Mark Brunell, Green Bay, 1994; Jacksonville, 1995-2003; Washington, 2004-05 (4,334-102) The reason I chose the stats were b/c they are avgs/percentages, which I feel makes them most fair, I could have put most TD's, most Completions, Most yards gained, but since Manning and other QB's are still playing I feel that these stats are the most telling. Then again, you are the one who believes "stats tell the whole story" and everything else is irrelevent so I leave it up to you to decide.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Packersfan)</div><div class='quotemain'>My point was to show that Manning wasn't on the top of any of those lists, but here is a list of every passing stat on nfl.com's stat page, http://www.nfl.com/history/randf/records/indiv/passing The ones I referred to were; qb rating; 96.8 Steve Young, Tampa Bay, 1985-86; San Francisco, 1987-1999 94.1 Kurt Warner, St. Louis, 1998-2003; N.Y. Giants, 2004; Arizona, 2005 93.5 Peyton Manning, Indianapolis, 1998-2005 completion percentage; 65.68 Kurt Warner, St. Louis, 1998-2003; N.Y. Giants, 2004; Arizona, 2005 (2,340-1,537) 65.02 Marc Bulger, St. Louis, 2002-05 (1,518-987) 64.37 Daunte Culpepper, Minnesota, 1999-2005 (2,607-1,678) Average gain; 8.63 Otto Graham, Cleveland, 1950-55 (1,565-13,499) 8.42 Sid Luckman, Chi. Bears, 1939-1950 (1,744-14,686) 8.21 Kurt Warner, St. Louis, 1998-2003; N.Y. Giants, 2004; Arizona, 2005 (2,340-19,214) lowest percent of passes intercepted; 2.11 Neil O'Donnell, Pittsburgh, 1991-95; N.Y. Jets, 1996-97; Cincinnati, 1998; Tennessee, 1999-2003 (3,229-68) 2.24 Donovan McNabb, Philadelphia, 1999-2005 (2,943-66) 2.35 Mark Brunell, Green Bay, 1994; Jacksonville, 1995-2003; Washington, 2004-05 (4,334-102) The reason I chose the stats were b/c they are avgs/percentages, which I feel makes them most fair, I could have put most TD's, most Completions, Most yards gained, but since Manning and other QB's are still playing I feel that these stats are the most telling. Then again, you are the one who believes "stats tell the whole story" and everything else is irrelevent so I leave it up to you to decide.</div> Your still missing it. Go re read posts again. I explained why this was flawed logic.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BearsFan1)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Packersfan)</div><div class='quotemain'>My point was to show that Manning wasn't on the top of any of those lists, but here is a list of every passing stat on nfl.com's stat page, http://www.nfl.com/history/randf/records/indiv/passing The ones I referred to were; qb rating; 96.8 Steve Young, Tampa Bay, 1985-86; San Francisco, 1987-1999 94.1 Kurt Warner, St. Louis, 1998-2003; N.Y. Giants, 2004; Arizona, 2005 93.5 Peyton Manning, Indianapolis, 1998-2005 completion percentage; 65.68 Kurt Warner, St. Louis, 1998-2003; N.Y. Giants, 2004; Arizona, 2005 (2,340-1,537) 65.02 Marc Bulger, St. Louis, 2002-05 (1,518-987) 64.37 Daunte Culpepper, Minnesota, 1999-2005 (2,607-1,678) Average gain; 8.63 Otto Graham, Cleveland, 1950-55 (1,565-13,499) 8.42 Sid Luckman, Chi. Bears, 1939-1950 (1,744-14,686) 8.21 Kurt Warner, St. Louis, 1998-2003; N.Y. Giants, 2004; Arizona, 2005 (2,340-19,214) lowest percent of passes intercepted; 2.11 Neil O'Donnell, Pittsburgh, 1991-95; N.Y. Jets, 1996-97; Cincinnati, 1998; Tennessee, 1999-2003 (3,229-68) 2.24 Donovan McNabb, Philadelphia, 1999-2005 (2,943-66) 2.35 Mark Brunell, Green Bay, 1994; Jacksonville, 1995-2003; Washington, 2004-05 (4,334-102) The reason I chose the stats were b/c they are avgs/percentages, which I feel makes them most fair, I could have put most TD's, most Completions, Most yards gained, but since Manning and other QB's are still playing I feel that these stats are the most telling. Then again, you are the one who believes "stats tell the whole story" and everything else is irrelevent so I leave it up to you to decide.</div> Your still missing it. Go re read posts again. I explained why this was flawed logic.</div> You can deny it all you want, but you said, "Manning is hands down the greatest quarterback ever" then you said "stats tell all". Well I'm asking you, where and what stats say Manning is the "hands down greatest ever"?
Manning does hold the record, however, for television commercials by an overrated QB. He recently surpassed Donovan McNabb in that category.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Packersfan)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BearsFan1)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Packersfan)</div><div class='quotemain'>My point was to show that Manning wasn't on the top of any of those lists, but here is a list of every passing stat on nfl.com's stat page, http://www.nfl.com/history/randf/records/indiv/passing The ones I referred to were; qb rating; 96.8 Steve Young, Tampa Bay, 1985-86; San Francisco, 1987-1999 94.1 Kurt Warner, St. Louis, 1998-2003; N.Y. Giants, 2004; Arizona, 2005 93.5 Peyton Manning, Indianapolis, 1998-2005 completion percentage; 65.68 Kurt Warner, St. Louis, 1998-2003; N.Y. Giants, 2004; Arizona, 2005 (2,340-1,537) 65.02 Marc Bulger, St. Louis, 2002-05 (1,518-987) 64.37 Daunte Culpepper, Minnesota, 1999-2005 (2,607-1,678) Average gain; 8.63 Otto Graham, Cleveland, 1950-55 (1,565-13,499) 8.42 Sid Luckman, Chi. Bears, 1939-1950 (1,744-14,686) 8.21 Kurt Warner, St. Louis, 1998-2003; N.Y. Giants, 2004; Arizona, 2005 (2,340-19,214) lowest percent of passes intercepted; 2.11 Neil O'Donnell, Pittsburgh, 1991-95; N.Y. Jets, 1996-97; Cincinnati, 1998; Tennessee, 1999-2003 (3,229-68) 2.24 Donovan McNabb, Philadelphia, 1999-2005 (2,943-66) 2.35 Mark Brunell, Green Bay, 1994; Jacksonville, 1995-2003; Washington, 2004-05 (4,334-102) The reason I chose the stats were b/c they are avgs/percentages, which I feel makes them most fair, I could have put most TD's, most Completions, Most yards gained, but since Manning and other QB's are still playing I feel that these stats are the most telling. Then again, you are the one who believes "stats tell the whole story" and everything else is irrelevent so I leave it up to you to decide.</div> Your still missing it. Go re read posts again. I explained why this was flawed logic.</div> You can deny it all you want, but you said, "Manning is hands down the greatest quarterback ever" then you said "stats tell all". Well I'm asking you, where and what stats say Manning is the "hands down greatest ever"?</div> My point, last time you are getting it. Otto graham may be better in YPA, but since he is vastly inferior in all other categories, he isnt better.. So, if you looked at any QB on a individual basis, and compared his work to mannings, manning would win. I dont know why listing of the top at certain thing proves anything, other than you wasted a lot of time trying to make a point with flawed logic. I am sorry i destroyed you in this argument and that you will be crying all day.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pack Attack)</div><div class='quotemain'>Manning does hold the record, however, for television commercials by an overrated QB. He recently surpassed Donovan McNabb in that category.</div> Ohhh, it's all clear now, that was the stat that's been being referred to, I'll be damned, how could I overlook that? BF1 was right there's no way I could argue against such a telling stat... lmao
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BearsFan1)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Packersfan)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BearsFan1)</div><div class='quotemain'> Your still missing it. Go re read posts again. I explained why this was flawed logic.</div> You can deny it all you want, but you said, "Manning is hands down the greatest quarterback ever" then you said "stats tell all". Well I'm asking you, where and what stats say Manning is the "hands down greatest ever"?</div> My point, last time you are getting it. Otto graham may be better in YPA, but since he is vastly inferior in all other categories, he isnt better.. So, if you looked at any QB on a individual basis, and compared his work to mannings, manning would win. I dont know why listing of the top at certain thing proves anything, other than you wasted a lot of time trying to make a point with flawed logic. I am sorry i destroyed you in this argument and that you will be crying all day.</div> Wow... are you kidding me? Can post without writing a stupid remark that makes you look like a complete idiot? Anyway, I don't remember posting that Otto Grahm was better than Manning, nor anyone else, what I did post was stats that Manning could theoretically lead in, which are avgs and percentages. I wouldn't expect him to lead in most Td's or completions, since he hasn't played as long as many qb's. But since Manning leads in not one of those categories I find it ridiculous that you call him the "hands down greatest qb ever".
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Packersfan)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BearsFan1)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Packersfan)</div><div class='quotemain'> You can deny it all you want, but you said, "Manning is hands down the greatest quarterback ever" then you said "stats tell all". Well I'm asking you, where and what stats say Manning is the "hands down greatest ever"?</div> My point, last time you are getting it. Otto graham may be better in YPA, but since he is vastly inferior in all other categories, he isnt better.. So, if you looked at any QB on a individual basis, and compared his work to mannings, manning would win. I dont know why listing of the top at certain thing proves anything, other than you wasted a lot of time trying to make a point with flawed logic. I am sorry i destroyed you in this argument and that you will be crying all day.</div> Wow... are you kidding me? Can post without writing a stupid remark that makes you look like a complete idiot? Anyway, I don't remember posting that Otto Grahm was better than Manning, nor anyone else, what I did post was stats that Manning could theoretically lead in, which are avgs and percentages. I wouldn't expect him to lead in most Td's or completions, since he hasn't played as long as many qb's. But since Manning leads in not one of those categories I find it ridiculous that you call him the "hands down greatest qb ever".</div> It is impossible to be the best and lead in those categories The person leading in INT % never made a ricky throw in his life. The guy leading in YPA chucked it deep all the time, and killed his comp %. Those poeple at the top are anomalous to a system. I am talking about comparing him to other QBs, not a list of anomolous stats. Name a qb, i will prove manning is better. That is simple, and INDISPUTABLE. If you can find one that he cant stack up with, then i will admit I am wrong. Til then, he is the greatest. Here is a tissue for your tears.
Manning: Comp 3131 comp pct. 64.0 yds. 37586 ypa. 7.69 TD 275 INT 139 QBRtg. 94.4 Marino: Comp 4967 comp pct. 59.4 yds. 61361 ypa. 7.3 TD 420 INT 252 QBRtg. 86 Favre: Comp 5021 comp pct. 61.1 yds. 57500 ypa. 6.99 TD414 INT 273 QBRtg. 85.1 And I point out again Manning's stats will go south if he plays past his prime, as Marino did and Favre is.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Packersfan)</div><div class='quotemain'>Manning: Comp 3131 comp pct. 64.0 yds. 37586 ypa. 7.69 TD 275 INT 139 QBRtg. 94.4 Marino: Comp 4967 comp pct. 59.4 yds. 61361 ypa. 7.3 TD 420 INT 252 QBRtg. 86 Favre: Comp 5021 comp pct. 61.1 yds. 57500 ypa. 6.99 TD414 INT 273 QBRtg. 85.1 And I point out again Manning's stats will go south if he plays past his prime, as Marino did and Favre is.</div> So compare him to those 2? Marino is out right off the bat. No titles. Illl be fair and compare first 9 years of farve to first 9 of manning.
If titles mean that much... Well then I guess we should be debating between Terry Bradshaw and Joe Montana because they each have 4 Super Bowl Rings, dont they?
