You can over rate ANY player by saying he's much better than he actually is - and that's what you and many others do with Brady.

The guy is a good game manager who has played on many talented teams and has had great coaching his entire career. Those things have made him appear great when he's merely good.

Brady is like Trent Dilfer from the 2000 Ravens SB season, but over a much longer time span. He's continually managed to do well enough not to screw up a team that would have won about the same number of games and Super Bowls with any decent NFL QB who didn't screw it up.

Brady doesn't make many plays that any decent NFL QB couldn't also make and I've never seen him make a single play a great like Peyton Manning couldn't also make.

Brady is OVER RATED precisely because he's played on talented teams with great coaching, and THAT is why he's a "winner".  It has very little to do with him. Again, this can't be stated enough: Any decent NFL QB who played for those teams would have probably won, too.

Bistiza

Give it up. If you did not put Brady in the same sentence as Dilfer, i'd say allright, that guy is going logically about it.

Listen to analysts, people who know football, they will all say the same stuff about Brady as we do here.

I Watch a lot of football, as you do also, and currently, except maybe Aaron Rodgers, I would not take any other QB to win a SB. And he is well past his prime.

Posted by bistiza on 1/29/2016 7:41:00 AM (view original):
You can over rate ANY player by saying he's much better than he actually is - and that's what you and many others do with Brady.

The guy is a good game manager who has played on many talented teams and has had great coaching his entire career. Those things have made him appear great when he's merely good.

Brady is like Trent Dilfer from the 2000 Ravens SB season, but over a much longer time span. He's continually managed to do well enough not to screw up a team that would have won about the same number of games and Super Bowls with any decent NFL QB who didn't screw it up.

Brady doesn't make many plays that any decent NFL QB couldn't also make and I've never seen him make a single play a great like Peyton Manning couldn't also make.

Brady is OVER RATED precisely because he's played on talented teams with great coaching, and THAT is why he's a "winner".  It has very little to do with him. Again, this can't be stated enough: Any decent NFL QB who played for those teams would have probably won, too.

LOL the funny thing about all this is that the EXPERTS compare MANNING to DILFER not Brady...you are a friggen bafoon at best....Brady makes the plays in big games that Peyton had never been able too...Peyton has arguably has more talent around him his whole career and has done less...youre just a joke honestly...you'll probably a Trump fanatic too

my rankings for the best quarterbacks in the NFL would be

P. Manning
Rodgers
Breese, Rivers, E. Manning, Brady, Big Ben, Palmer
Luck, Wilson, Newton
Romo
Cousins (as a redskins fan I had to include him, he had a good year this year as well)

There are tiers of QBs in my opinion, Peyton manning is #1 because of his football IQ and his work ethic. He has lost his arm strength so he might not actually be #1 at this moment but as of like 2-3 years ago he was. Rodgers is second because of his throwing mechanics, he has the quickest release in the NFL which wreaks havoc on opposing defenses because he gets rid of the ball before he can be touched, he makes up for a poor offensive line. After that there is a tie, I believe that these guys are about equal and how they perform better than the other is because of a better team. The next tier after that is the young up and coming QBs, these are guys that given a few more years to gain football IQ will be dominant, though you can argue they already are. Then there is Romo, I had to include him so you crybaby cowboys fans don't whine that he is not on the list, he has good games and he has really had games, he is really injury prone, and he gets a boost from the best offensive line in the NFL, Dex Bryant, Jason Witten, and some other solid recievers. Than Kirk Cousins, from what I saw of him this year I have to include him in this group, he has a great completion percentage and he is fantastic at home, I truly believe that in a few years he will be top 7 in the NFL. I probably forgot someone but those are who come to mind.

Posted by bistiza on 1/29/2016 7:41:00 AM (view original):
You can over rate ANY player by saying he's much better than he actually is - and that's what you and many others do with Brady.

The guy is a good game manager who has played on many talented teams and has had great coaching his entire career. Those things have made him appear great when he's merely good.

Brady is like Trent Dilfer from the 2000 Ravens SB season, but over a much longer time span. He's continually managed to do well enough not to screw up a team that would have won about the same number of games and Super Bowls with any decent NFL QB who didn't screw it up.

Brady doesn't make many plays that any decent NFL QB couldn't also make and I've never seen him make a single play a great like Peyton Manning couldn't also make.

Brady is OVER RATED precisely because he's played on talented teams with great coaching, and THAT is why he's a "winner".  It has very little to do with him. Again, this can't be stated enough: Any decent NFL QB who played for those teams would have probably won, too.

Are you serious. Brady has had no weapons to speak of.  What talent WR or RB has he had that would even sniff the Hall of Fame(excluding Moss).  His receivers are 3rd string on any other team at best. You put any other QB on those Patriot teams and they win 3-4 games at best. I hate Brady but he makes WR better than they are.

Posted by Coach_Nate on 1/29/2016 9:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bistiza on 1/29/2016 7:41:00 AM (view original):
You can over rate ANY player by saying he's much better than he actually is - and that's what you and many others do with Brady.

The guy is a good game manager who has played on many talented teams and has had great coaching his entire career. Those things have made him appear great when he's merely good.

Brady is like Trent Dilfer from the 2000 Ravens SB season, but over a much longer time span. He's continually managed to do well enough not to screw up a team that would have won about the same number of games and Super Bowls with any decent NFL QB who didn't screw it up.

Brady doesn't make many plays that any decent NFL QB couldn't also make and I've never seen him make a single play a great like Peyton Manning couldn't also make.

Brady is OVER RATED precisely because he's played on talented teams with great coaching, and THAT is why he's a "winner".  It has very little to do with him. Again, this can't be stated enough: Any decent NFL QB who played for those teams would have probably won, too.

LOL the funny thing about all this is that the EXPERTS compare MANNING to DILFER not Brady...you are a friggen bafoon at best....Brady makes the plays in big games that Peyton had never been able too...Peyton has arguably has more talent around him his whole career and has done less...youre just a joke honestly...you'll probably a Trump fanatic too

A few points...

First, I have never heard anyone who is considered an "expert" compare Manning to Dilfer. In fact, if someone did that, there is no way I'd consider them an expert and would probably think they were on drugs.

Second, I've provided you the reasons why the comparisons with Brady and Dilfer are accurate. Both had talented teams with good (or even great) coaching, and both managed not to screw it up on the way to Super Bowl wins. In Brady's case, he really should have an absolute minimum of six rings now, and possible even 8-10, considering the talent and coaching around him.

Third, I can say the same buffoon comment about you, so calling names doesn't do you any good.

Fourth, Brady doesn't make plays in big games. He gets credit for simply being the QB while others make great plays.

Look at last year's SB - he's on the sidelines when the other team's coach makes a bad call and a defensive player on his team gambles and comes up lucky, winning the SB for a team that should by all rights have lost. 

Yet afterward some people began to discuss how it cements Brady's legacy when Brady had NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with how they won that game. He managed not to screw things up so they had a weird chance at the end that they never should have gotten anyway. That's it.

Brady has had better talent and coaching in most season than Peyton has. Peyton has made his team mates better; Brady manages not to screw things up. HUGE difference.

Funny, I consider your comments to be a joke.

Posted by MonsterTurtl on 1/29/2016 10:14:00 AM (view original):
my rankings for the best quarterbacks in the NFL would be

P. Manning
Rodgers
Breese, Rivers, E. Manning, Brady, Big Ben, Palmer
Luck, Wilson, Newton
Romo
Cousins (as a redskins fan I had to include him, he had a good year this year as well)

There are tiers of QBs in my opinion, Peyton manning is #1 because of his football IQ and his work ethic. He has lost his arm strength so he might not actually be #1 at this moment but as of like 2-3 years ago he was. Rodgers is second because of his throwing mechanics, he has the quickest release in the NFL which wreaks havoc on opposing defenses because he gets rid of the ball before he can be touched, he makes up for a poor offensive line. After that there is a tie, I believe that these guys are about equal and how they perform better than the other is because of a better team. The next tier after that is the young up and coming QBs, these are guys that given a few more years to gain football IQ will be dominant, though you can argue they already are. Then there is Romo, I had to include him so you crybaby cowboys fans don't whine that he is not on the list, he has good games and he has really had games, he is really injury prone, and he gets a boost from the best offensive line in the NFL, Dex Bryant, Jason Witten, and some other solid recievers. Than Kirk Cousins, from what I saw of him this year I have to include him in this group, he has a great completion percentage and he is fantastic at home, I truly believe that in a few years he will be top 7 in the NFL. I probably forgot someone but those are who come to mind.

I agree with most of the above, except I'd put Luck, Wilson, and Newton above Brady.

Luck has the arm and the intangibles. Wilson and Newton both are more athletic than Brady, with Wilson with more intangibles and Newton even more mobility.

Posted by terps17321 on 1/29/2016 10:36:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bistiza on 1/29/2016 7:41:00 AM (view original):
You can over rate ANY player by saying he's much better than he actually is - and that's what you and many others do with Brady.

The guy is a good game manager who has played on many talented teams and has had great coaching his entire career. Those things have made him appear great when he's merely good.

Brady is like Trent Dilfer from the 2000 Ravens SB season, but over a much longer time span. He's continually managed to do well enough not to screw up a team that would have won about the same number of games and Super Bowls with any decent NFL QB who didn't screw it up.

Brady doesn't make many plays that any decent NFL QB couldn't also make and I've never seen him make a single play a great like Peyton Manning couldn't also make.

Brady is OVER RATED precisely because he's played on talented teams with great coaching, and THAT is why he's a "winner".  It has very little to do with him. Again, this can't be stated enough: Any decent NFL QB who played for those teams would have probably won, too.

Are you serious. Brady has had no weapons to speak of.  What talent WR or RB has he had that would even sniff the Hall of Fame(excluding Moss).  His receivers are 3rd string on any other team at best. You put any other QB on those Patriot teams and they win 3-4 games at best. I hate Brady but he makes WR better than they are.

Yes, I'm serious. Are you?

Receivers:

Brady not only had Randy Moss for several seasons and has had Rob Gronkowski for several recently (both the best in the game at their position at the time), he's also had great coaching which put in place other receivers who were molded to the NE system of throwing short passes and having talented runners get the yards - a system put in place because Brady lacks the skills to be anything more than a game manager. Wes Welker, Julian Edelman, Danny Amendola - all are prototypes of this kind of receiver.

Brady's receivers were not nearly as bad as you want to pretend they were, and certainly not "3rd string on any other team".

With any other decent NFL QB on the Patriots, nothing significant changes.

Brady doesn't make anyone better than they are - they make him look better than he is.

Running backs:

Steven Jackson is their back right now, and the guy is a beast with over 11,000 career yards.

Last year the team shrewdly picked up Legarratte Blount (after the Steelers got rid of him for drug issues) and he proved to be just what they needed.

Earlier in his career, Brady had significant help from Corey Dillon, who earned his fourth and final Pro Bowl bid during the Pats 2004 title season (he won the other three in Cincinnati, showing he was productive without Brady). I would argue Dillon was the reason the Pats won so many games that year and made it to and won the SB, as his runs forced defenses into the box and gave Brady one-on-one matchups much of the time.

Brady has had the help of a super utility running back named Kevin Faulk for most of his career (until 2011). The guy never ran for super yardage and won't sniff the HOF, but he got tough yardage when they needed it on the ground, and he caught significant passes out of the backfield. The guy has over 3,500 career rushing yards, but because he was used sparingly, never had a 100-yard rushing game - and that's a record for most yardage without one. He made Brady look better on many occasions, often picking up key third downs they wouldn't have gotten without him.

Brady and the Pats offense has pretty much existed on short passes for the majority of his career. 71.2% of his passes this past season went less than 10 yards down field. Even with Moss in '07 Brady was still at 67% of throws being less than 10 yards downfield.
On pass attempts over 20 yards Brady has completed 47 of 173 (27%) the past 3 years. Blame his receivers? Even back in the days of Moss it was about 34% completions.

Peyton Manning, with his reduced arm strength this year, had a number of 61.3% attempts being less than 10 yards. But he also was Brady bad on attempts 20 yards downfield, 10/39 for 26%.
To compare, back in 2004 Manning's 10 yard and less was 54.3% of his attempts. Not really known for his deep arm he completed 44% of his attempts more than 20 yards downfield.

Throw Aaron Rodgers into the conversation as a deep thrower, and during his two MVP seasons he completed 50% and 53% of attempts 20+ yards downfield.

Posted by bistiza on 1/29/2016 11:10:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MonsterTurtl on 1/29/2016 10:14:00 AM (view original):
my rankings for the best quarterbacks in the NFL would be

P. Manning
Rodgers
Breese, Rivers, E. Manning, Brady, Big Ben, Palmer
Luck, Wilson, Newton
Romo
Cousins (as a redskins fan I had to include him, he had a good year this year as well)

There are tiers of QBs in my opinion, Peyton manning is #1 because of his football IQ and his work ethic. He has lost his arm strength so he might not actually be #1 at this moment but as of like 2-3 years ago he was. Rodgers is second because of his throwing mechanics, he has the quickest release in the NFL which wreaks havoc on opposing defenses because he gets rid of the ball before he can be touched, he makes up for a poor offensive line. After that there is a tie, I believe that these guys are about equal and how they perform better than the other is because of a better team. The next tier after that is the young up and coming QBs, these are guys that given a few more years to gain football IQ will be dominant, though you can argue they already are. Then there is Romo, I had to include him so you crybaby cowboys fans don't whine that he is not on the list, he has good games and he has really had games, he is really injury prone, and he gets a boost from the best offensive line in the NFL, Dex Bryant, Jason Witten, and some other solid recievers. Than Kirk Cousins, from what I saw of him this year I have to include him in this group, he has a great completion percentage and he is fantastic at home, I truly believe that in a few years he will be top 7 in the NFL. I probably forgot someone but those are who come to mind.

I agree with most of the above, except I'd put Luck, Wilson, and Newton above Brady.

Luck has the arm and the intangibles. Wilson and Newton both are more athletic than Brady, with Wilson with more intangibles and Newton even more mobility.

It is hard to argue that Brady isn't in that first tier after Manning and Rodgers, he has good mechanics and a good football IQ. I have seen you insult Brady by saying that Brady is a game manager but your now saying that Wilson is better than Brady, but Wilson is the definition of a game manager, the reason the Seahawks won their super bowl and went to the next one which they should have won was that they had steller D, and Marshawn Lynch went beast mode, Russell Wilson just kept the game flow going. I do think that he can make plays when he needs to but it is not called upon him often to do so. Newton is Tim Tebow 2.0, he doesn't have a great passing game and he makes his living running the ball, but he wins just like Tim Tebow did (which is why I think Tim Tebow should have kept a spot in the league). I love how Newton plays with excitement and has fun with it but I don't think he is on par with the likes of Breese, Rivers and such just yet. Luck is the only one that I would consider moving up, he is a fantastic QB and I think is a second coming of P. Manning, fitting that he took over Manning's team. Luck has great mechanics and a great football IQ. But this year at least Luck struggled, he didn't make plays that won games, Hasselback showed him up somehow, even with his cane and arthritis in his legs. Luck did have a poor offense around him but it's hard to put him up with the best based on his performance this year. Brady deserves to be in that group and if you don't think so then you are just being ignorant, he is a great quarterback, not greatest of all time, not greatest of his time, but great, he can pick apart defenses and make clutch plays. Brady is overrated but he is a great QB. My rankings stand as I put them.

Posted by terps17321 on 1/29/2016 10:36:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bistiza on 1/29/2016 7:41:00 AM (view original):
You can over rate ANY player by saying he's much better than he actually is - and that's what you and many others do with Brady.

The guy is a good game manager who has played on many talented teams and has had great coaching his entire career. Those things have made him appear great when he's merely good.

Brady is like Trent Dilfer from the 2000 Ravens SB season, but over a much longer time span. He's continually managed to do well enough not to screw up a team that would have won about the same number of games and Super Bowls with any decent NFL QB who didn't screw it up.

Brady doesn't make many plays that any decent NFL QB couldn't also make and I've never seen him make a single play a great like Peyton Manning couldn't also make.

Brady is OVER RATED precisely because he's played on talented teams with great coaching, and THAT is why he's a "winner".  It has very little to do with him. Again, this can't be stated enough: Any decent NFL QB who played for those teams would have probably won, too.

Are you serious. Brady has had no weapons to speak of.  What talent WR or RB has he had that would even sniff the Hall of Fame(excluding Moss).  His receivers are 3rd string on any other team at best. You put any other QB on those Patriot teams and they win 3-4 games at best. I hate Brady but he makes WR better than they are.

The only problem with your statement is that the Patriots did, in fact, put any other QB on one of those teams (see:  Matt Cassell) and went 11-5 with him that year, barely missing the playoffs.

I think Bistiza is underrating Brady because of a personal bias and hatred towards him, but I think Brady has been fortunate to have some great teams around him, along with great coaches, and playing in a system that is perfect for his skill set.  Now one could argue that the system looks perfect for Brady because HE makes it look perfect and I think that might be a legitimate argument.  Fact is, Brady hasn't had anywhere near the offensive weapons that Peyton Manning has had throughout their respective careers (and in the interest of fairness, I'm a huge Colts fan and by proxy, a Peyton Manning fan still).

I personally feel like Aaron Rodgers is the best in the league right now but since the argument has been about where QB's rank all-time, I'd submit that if Brady can win one more ring, he'd have to move to the top of the list, ahead of even Joe Montana (who was a bit of a system QB himself for those who don't remember).  It seriously pains me to have to admit that, given my intense dislike for all things Tom Brady and the New England Patriots, but five rings combined with his career numbers (which "have" been inflated due to the era he's playing in as opposed to older QB's) would have to make him king of the mountain.

My two cents, or three, or whatever...

Posted by oldwarrior on 1/29/2016 11:59:00 AM (view original):
Brady and the Pats offense has pretty much existed on short passes for the majority of his career. 71.2% of his passes this past season went less than 10 yards down field. Even with Moss in '07 Brady was still at 67% of throws being less than 10 yards downfield.
On pass attempts over 20 yards Brady has completed 47 of 173 (27%) the past 3 years. Blame his receivers? Even back in the days of Moss it was about 34% completions.

Peyton Manning, with his reduced arm strength this year, had a number of 61.3% attempts being less than 10 yards. But he also was Brady bad on attempts 20 yards downfield, 10/39 for 26%.
To compare, back in 2004 Manning's 10 yard and less was 54.3% of his attempts. Not really known for his deep arm he completed 44% of his attempts more than 20 yards downfield.

Throw Aaron Rodgers into the conversation as a deep thrower, and during his two MVP seasons he completed 50% and 53% of attempts 20+ yards downfield.

The portion about Brady above is another way of saying what I've been saying all along - Brady is in a system which emphasizes short throws and running after the catch. The coaches have gotten receivers who are exceptional at that. The system is in place because Brady doesn't have much in the way of actual skills.

Manning may not have a deep ball arm either, but he's more accurate on all throws, has the highest football IQ ever, and is like having an extra offensive coordinator on the field and in the huddle. Those are absolutely unmatched intangibles in the entire history of the NFL.

If you throw Aaron Rodgers in, there are reasons he is also a great QB, and arm strength is certainly one of them.

Posted by MonsterTurtl on 1/29/2016 12:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bistiza on 1/29/2016 11:10:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MonsterTurtl on 1/29/2016 10:14:00 AM (view original):
my rankings for the best quarterbacks in the NFL would be

P. Manning
Rodgers
Breese, Rivers, E. Manning, Brady, Big Ben, Palmer
Luck, Wilson, Newton
Romo
Cousins (as a redskins fan I had to include him, he had a good year this year as well)

There are tiers of QBs in my opinion, Peyton manning is #1 because of his football IQ and his work ethic. He has lost his arm strength so he might not actually be #1 at this moment but as of like 2-3 years ago he was. Rodgers is second because of his throwing mechanics, he has the quickest release in the NFL which wreaks havoc on opposing defenses because he gets rid of the ball before he can be touched, he makes up for a poor offensive line. After that there is a tie, I believe that these guys are about equal and how they perform better than the other is because of a better team. The next tier after that is the young up and coming QBs, these are guys that given a few more years to gain football IQ will be dominant, though you can argue they already are. Then there is Romo, I had to include him so you crybaby cowboys fans don't whine that he is not on the list, he has good games and he has really had games, he is really injury prone, and he gets a boost from the best offensive line in the NFL, Dex Bryant, Jason Witten, and some other solid recievers. Than Kirk Cousins, from what I saw of him this year I have to include him in this group, he has a great completion percentage and he is fantastic at home, I truly believe that in a few years he will be top 7 in the NFL. I probably forgot someone but those are who come to mind.

I agree with most of the above, except I'd put Luck, Wilson, and Newton above Brady.

Luck has the arm and the intangibles. Wilson and Newton both are more athletic than Brady, with Wilson with more intangibles and Newton even more mobility.

It is hard to argue that Brady isn't in that first tier after Manning and Rodgers, he has good mechanics and a good football IQ. I have seen you insult Brady by saying that Brady is a game manager but your now saying that Wilson is better than Brady, but Wilson is the definition of a game manager, the reason the Seahawks won their super bowl and went to the next one which they should have won was that they had steller D, and Marshawn Lynch went beast mode, Russell Wilson just kept the game flow going. I do think that he can make plays when he needs to but it is not called upon him often to do so. Newton is Tim Tebow 2.0, he doesn't have a great passing game and he makes his living running the ball, but he wins just like Tim Tebow did (which is why I think Tim Tebow should have kept a spot in the league). I love how Newton plays with excitement and has fun with it but I don't think he is on par with the likes of Breese, Rivers and such just yet. Luck is the only one that I would consider moving up, he is a fantastic QB and I think is a second coming of P. Manning, fitting that he took over Manning's team. Luck has great mechanics and a great football IQ. But this year at least Luck struggled, he didn't make plays that won games, Hasselback showed him up somehow, even with his cane and arthritis in his legs. Luck did have a poor offense around him but it's hard to put him up with the best based on his performance this year. Brady deserves to be in that group and if you don't think so then you are just being ignorant, he is a great quarterback, not greatest of all time, not greatest of his time, but great, he can pick apart defenses and make clutch plays. Brady is overrated but he is a great QB. My rankings stand as I put them.

Brady has experience from playing for many years. Great. Any QB who manages to stay in the NFL and in particular on one team for that long has that - it doesn't show any special skill.

Wilson is not a game manager. He makes plays on a regular basis, particularly because he athletic and fleet of foot, including the ability to throw on the run. These are plays Brady cannot make, because Brady simply doesn't have those abilities. This is why Wilson is better and is not a game manager like Brady.

Newton is incredibly athletic, and the Tebow comparisons aren't accurate (and for the record, Tebow wasn't as bad a QB as many make him out to be - he had a lot of potential that never got shown).

You can keep your rankings as you put them. I'll just say you also over rate Brady - just not as much as many others do.

Posted by dcy0827 on 1/29/2016 12:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by terps17321 on 1/29/2016 10:36:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bistiza on 1/29/2016 7:41:00 AM (view original):
You can over rate ANY player by saying he's much better than he actually is - and that's what you and many others do with Brady.

The guy is a good game manager who has played on many talented teams and has had great coaching his entire career. Those things have made him appear great when he's merely good.

Brady is like Trent Dilfer from the 2000 Ravens SB season, but over a much longer time span. He's continually managed to do well enough not to screw up a team that would have won about the same number of games and Super Bowls with any decent NFL QB who didn't screw it up.

Brady doesn't make many plays that any decent NFL QB couldn't also make and I've never seen him make a single play a great like Peyton Manning couldn't also make.

Brady is OVER RATED precisely because he's played on talented teams with great coaching, and THAT is why he's a "winner".  It has very little to do with him. Again, this can't be stated enough: Any decent NFL QB who played for those teams would have probably won, too.

Are you serious. Brady has had no weapons to speak of.  What talent WR or RB has he had that would even sniff the Hall of Fame(excluding Moss).  His receivers are 3rd string on any other team at best. You put any other QB on those Patriot teams and they win 3-4 games at best. I hate Brady but he makes WR better than they are.

The only problem with your statement is that the Patriots did, in fact, put any other QB on one of those teams (see:  Matt Cassell) and went 11-5 with him that year, barely missing the playoffs.

I think Bistiza is underrating Brady because of a personal bias and hatred towards him, but I think Brady has been fortunate to have some great teams around him, along with great coaches, and playing in a system that is perfect for his skill set.  Now one could argue that the system looks perfect for Brady because HE makes it look perfect and I think that might be a legitimate argument.  Fact is, Brady hasn't had anywhere near the offensive weapons that Peyton Manning has had throughout their respective careers (and in the interest of fairness, I'm a huge Colts fan and by proxy, a Peyton Manning fan still).

I personally feel like Aaron Rodgers is the best in the league right now but since the argument has been about where QB's rank all-time, I'd submit that if Brady can win one more ring, he'd have to move to the top of the list, ahead of even Joe Montana (who was a bit of a system QB himself for those who don't remember).  It seriously pains me to have to admit that, given my intense dislike for all things Tom Brady and the New England Patriots, but five rings combined with his career numbers (which "have" been inflated due to the era he's playing in as opposed to older QB's) would have to make him king of the mountain.

My two cents, or three, or whatever...

I'm not going to argue with most of what you just said, except for this...

How many rings Brady has doesn't have anything to do with how good he is - they are all a function of the team around him and the coaching. You can literally replace Brady with any decent NFL QB and the results don't change much (maybe some here and there due to small differences in play style, but not much).

Joe Montana is also over rated for the same reason - he didn't win the titles himself. He had some skills, but he isn't the greatest of all time either.

A great QB is because they have skills others don't and use them to help the team win when they otherwise would not win. I don't rate a QB as any greater because his team won the SB unless he clearly made plays other QBs couldn't have made in the same spot to make sure that happened.

A QB can be incredible and never win a Super Bowl (see Dan Marino for one) or be a simple a game manager and not screw it up and win a Super Bowl (see Trent Dilfer, Joe Flacco, Brad Johnson, and multiple titles for Brady).

Bottom line - to me a QB is someone who makes the plays other QBs could not have made in the same exact situation.

bistiza, the 2006 patriots receivers were pretty garbage, yet brady still looked good, and lead his team to a very respectable season. if he is such garbage, how is that possible? what am i missing?