Tom Brady vs Peyton Manning

[peytonsforehead]

Flashy offense doesn't win championships, just ask Pats fans. I don't care if Brady finishes the year with a 20 qb rating, 40 percent completed passes, and 2,500 yards if he steps it up in the postseason and we continue our balanced attack. Our passing game is off at the moment, but this is the best defense we've had since 2005. Even with Mayo out, as long as Talib is healthy and ready in a few weeks (and he's been practicing) we finally have a defense that can shut down opponents. We lost to the Bengals but they only put up 13 points and Dalton just threw 5 TDs last week.

We also have a great running game that will only get better when Vereen gets back.

A lot of Broncos fans, like Colts fans, turn it into some Brady vs. Manning thing because they feel threatened that Brady is an all time great and feel it brings down Peyton's legacy. The reason Peyton Manning teams usually lose in the playoffs is because he plays for poorly coached, undiscliplined, all offense, no defense teams that are easy to shut down in the playoffs when facing a better opponent. Add in him buckling under the pressure and not stepping up his game and untimely turnovers by him, and it makes for a loss.

I wasn't even that big a fan of the 2007 team. I wanted them to go 19-0 once they got that far, but I like a team like the 2004 pats when Brady had a good but not great statistical year (90 something qb rating, 28 TDs) and was clutch in the playoffs and we had Corey Dillon, and a hungry defense like this one that won games with Ty Law gone for the year and their heart exceeded talent. I can see why you Bronco fans would be caught up in the offensive fireworks...we experienced it in 2007 and to a lesser degree in 2009-2012...but fancy stats don't win championships.

I expect Kansas City, win or lose, to keep you guys in the teens or early 20s and cause problems for Manning and the receivers.

[Joshecalpoly]

Flashy offense doesn't win championships, just ask Pats fans. I don't care if Brady finishes the year with a 20 qb rating, 40 percent completed passes, and 2,500 yards if he steps it up in the postseason and we continue our balanced attack. Our passing game is off, but this is the best defense we've had since 2005. Even with Mayo out, as long as Talib is healthy and ready in a few weeks (and he's been practicing) we finally have a defense that can shut down opponents. We lost to the Bengals but they only put up 13 points and Dalton just threw 5 TDs last week.

We also have a great running game that will only get better when Vereen gets back.

A lot of Broncos fans, like Colts fans, turn it into some Brady vs. Manning thing because they feel threatened that Brady is an all time great and feel it brings down Peyton's legacy. The reason Peyton Manning teams usually lose in the playoffs is because he plays for poorly coached, undiscliplined, all offense, no defense teams that are easy to shut down in the playoffs when facing a better opponent. Add in him buckling under the pressure and not stepping up his game and untimely turnovers by him, and it makes for a loss.

I wasn't even that big a fan of the 2007 team. I wanted them to go 19-0 once they got that far, but I like a team like the 2004 pats when Brady had a good but not great statistical year (90 something qb rating, 28 TDs) we had Corey Dillon, and a hungry defense like this one that won games with Ty Law gone for the year and heart exceeded talent. I can see why you Bronco fans would be caught up in the offensive fireworks...we experienced it in 2007 and to a lesser degree in 2009-2012...but fancy stats don't win championships.

I expect Kansas City, win or lose, to keep you guys in the teens or early 20s and cause problems for Manning and the receivers.

Agreed the main reason the Pats won was because of their D. Yet it was a Pats fan who started this thread and youve done a lot to turn this into Brady vs Manning. Our D has not been as bad as some have made them out to be Woodyard and Ayers were the heart the leaders of our squad and both were out for 3 games and Miller is still shaking off some rust. During the 3 games our D which is built to play a man coverage scheme was forced to play zone which had disastrous results. People have yet to see our D at the peak yet.

As ive said repeatedly and has been denied by you and Random your team had more stars on D a better overall D and a better running game. Even your O-line has been better then what Manning has had, the only difference is Manning generally spends less time in the pocket. Still the game has changed and this is the best team Manning has been surrounded by so its not to say we dont have a chance.

Our Run D is forces teams to be one dimensional and our passing D when healthy can limit what teams can do our scheme forces long passes and once our pass rush can improve with Miller to limit the ability to sit in the pocket (though thats more hope). Our team does get 1 less QB Hits+Sacks per game then KC and our secondary may not always turn the poorly thrown balls into turnovers but the opportunities do come. Before Woodyard and Ayers got hurt we did have one of the lowest passer ratings allowed per game and our only weakness was the long pass which not all teams can do and can actually change if a pass rush gets going

[peytonsforehead]

Manning's had a great O-line his whole career. He had one of the best centers in recent memory in Jeff Saturday.

This is what I mean...you're turning it into a "Poor Peyton...Brady's had all the breaks."

Defense and clutch offense wins championships (sometimes you can win a SB without the clutch offense like the 2000 ravens or the 2006 colts.) Pats D was great as a unit but all the talk was "They're boring, they have no superstars." You can't have it both ways. Other than Richard Seymour and Ty Law (who was out for the year in 2004) no one made the pro bowl on those teams. Bruschi/McGinest etc were solid players and I think the only reason Bruschi made one pro bowl is because Ray Lewis opted out and he was a replacement. They just were a great, disciplined unit and Brady, though his stats are better post 2007, was in my opinion better then. He didn't have the individual talent he has now, but he had more heart and a knack for making the right play at the right time.

It seems as if Broncos/Colts fans want Peyton to go on this rampage that he's not capable of in the playoffs and have these 8 TD games against playoff teams. He's not Joe Montana or anything close. If your team is to win it, it would take a MAJOR overhaul on defense, and for Manning to stop looking like he has a stick up his you know what when the pressure's on, and until proven otherwise, fans of other teams have the right to talk trash because the only year Peyton won, he threw 3 TD and 7 INT in his playoff run, the Colts defense randomly stepped up their game, and also faced Lovie Smith and Rex Grossman in the SB. Breaks like that happen maybe once, but not more than once.

If your team is to go to the SB this year, let alone win it, your defense has to dramatically improve and Peyton needs to see a sports shrink about his anxiety in big games.

[Joshecalpoly]

Manning's had a great O-line his whole career. He had one of the best centers in recent memory in Jeff Saturday.

This is what I mean...you're turning it into a "Poor Peyton...Brady's had all the breaks."

Defense and clutch offense wins championships (sometimes you can win a SB without the clutch offense like the 2000 ravens or the 2006 colts.) Pats D was great as a unit but all the talk was "They're boring, they have no superstars." You can't have it both ways. Other than Richard Seymour and Ty Law (who was out for the year in 2004) no one made the pro bowl on those teams. Bruschi/McGinest etc were solid players and I think the only reason Bruschi made one pro bowl is because Ray Lewis opted out and he was a replacement. They just were a great, disciplined unit and Brady, though his stats are better post 2007, was in my opinion better then. He didn't have the individual talent he has now, but he had more heart and a knack for making the right play at the right time.

It seems as if Broncos/Colts fans want Peyton to go on this rampage that he's not capable of in the playoffs and have these 8 TD games against playoff teams. He's not Joe Montana or anything close. If your team is to win it, it would take a MAJOR overhaul on defense, and for Manning to stop looking like he has a stick up his you know what when the pressure's on, and until proven otherwise, fans of other teams have the right to talk trash because the only year Peyton won, he threw 3 TD and 7 INT in his playoff run, the Colts defense randomly stepped up their game, and also faced Lovie Smith and Rex Grossman in the SB. Breaks like that happen maybe once, but not more than once.

If your team is to go to the SB this year, let alone win it, your defense has to dramatically improve and Peyton needs to see a sports shrink about his anxiety in big games.

The Colts SB road did have to go through the Pats. Our D was one of the best in the league last year but we relied to much on the pass rush and once that was taken away by the Ravens our D had problems, its hard for any D to win without there play caller in the backfield and Lenon is a cheap scrub and Woodyards absence forced us to change our scheme to be simple. People talk about how our D did against the Jags but without the turnover our D would have been just as good against them as Seattle. We went into Indy without our leading pass rusher and play caller on D and an injured Manning our team lost a lot of momentum in that game and despite the one sided whistles and the many punts we stayed with it. Its almost impossible to go into a game without either starting tackle and win in fact according to ESPN its near impossible (franklin played against the skins but not healthy)

Not every QB can throw it deep that consistently or have a receiver that can consistently make deep catches. Not every O-line is going to be able to prevent our team from getting to the QB once they get going. This D can actually be dangerous if Miller gets back to form and our other players remain healthy (including Ihenacho who is currently not predicted to play SD)

[peytonsforehead]

Those 03-04 Pats championship teams were very special all the way around...the defense, Brady, special teams, coaching, balanced offense that wasn't flashy but performed at the right time. The 2001 team was fun to watch but very unexpected. I expected the Pats to win the SB in 03 and 04 (especially 04) because of the complete team, including Brady and the defense and all the other units.

All we heard back then (and I'm not talking about you or Broncos fans, but from the media and Colts fans) is "They're boring to watch. They win ugly games." And all we heard about was how Peyton was going to destroy us in the playoffs (this was before Peyton figured out the Pats a little and had some success.) Then when we won, the Colts just complained to the league to get defensive rules changed. Then we beat them again the next year with the rules changed and it was "The Pats are lucky."

That's why a lot of Pats fans have a chip on their shoulder regarding Peyton. We acknowledge he's great (most of us anyway) but those teams were once in a lifetime, and all we heard about was Peyton and the Colts offense.

Then the Colts beat us that year in the playoffs, Belichick got butthurt and completely changed his philosophy and basically turned into a better version of the Colts.

I think the reason Belichick got rid of Welker is because he saw the offense was going nowhere in the playoffs and was willing to do an overhaul on offense (he also didn't suspect that Hernandez had a secret life as a gangster and was counting on the two TE set.) Also, Welker spoke to the local media recently I guess and there was a lot of bad blood between him and Belichick and Kraft.

Patriots offense isn't going to be like it was in 2007-2012...but I expect it to get a little better by the end of the season and into the playoffs. Our running attack this year is very underrated. Brady's passer rating and completion percentage is awful, but a lot of the reason he only has 9 TDs is because they pretty much run it in every time they're in the red zone. He could easily have 13/14 TDs now. But that doesn't excuse his bad throws and the dropped passes when he makes good throws.

One thing I worry about as a Pats fan is Thompkins/Dobson et al pulling a Welker in the playoffs under the bright lights.

[58Miller]

He's not better than a 100 percent Gronk.

Game should be close. I don't see either team winning by more than 10. But I like our chances giving how well we do against John Fox/Jack Del Rio defenses. I think the Belichick coaching advantage is a huge one in this case.

I think Peyton is the real leader of the Broncos, not Fox. He's just a figurehead and plays it conservative in big games...like when he knelt the ball with 30 seconds left in the playoffs last year only needing a field goal.

I'm sorry Welker is better than any wide receiver on your team.
I agree Fox is too conservative. He's driving a Corvette 60 mph in the fast lane. When Denver gets behind a couple scores he'll let loose.
New Englands best shot is staying close and winning in the late 4th.
They jump out to a two score lead Fox will let the dogs loose and Denver will run the pats off the field.
Fox doesn't understand the firepower he's got.
For the first time in a long time Denver has more weapons/ playmakers on both sides of the ball.

[SixStringMadnes]

I find it interesting that in a debate like this, it seems the only way to validate one's team/QB, is to express how terrible the other is, and to point out all their flaws. At what point does one realize that if the other is so bad in a debate where the two sides are so close, than your team/QB must not be all that great either.

Brady has easily the best coach on his sideline, and has consistently for his pro career. Belichick is the guy that can not only beat you with his guys, but could also beat his guys with yours. Brady has easily had the better defense's backing him up, and more than likely a better GM sitting in the box. Not sure what the Pats spent offense/defense wise from a GM standpoint, but the Colts went all out offense. Sold lots of tickets, built a new stadium, a few future HOF players, and a whiney ungrateful owner. However, I do know the Pats invested in some video equipment along the way..... So I guess that has to be figured in there somewhere too.....

BTW, who threw a pick at the end of the 2006 AFC championship game?

Bottom line, the Patriots as and organization just did it better. I mean come on, Robert Kraft vs Jim Irsay....

Either guy, put on a great team, would win multiple SB's, MVPs, etc.... Of the two, I think Manning makes a poor to mediocre team a better team than Brady does. Seen when, one year without Manning hand delivered the number one draft pick to the Colts. A year without Brady gave a QB who never started a college football game a franchise tag, and starting job on a new team a year later.

The Colts were built around Manning, including a defense predicated on playing with a lead. Not necessarily the best formula for playing 3 to 4 playoff battles in a row. Last time I checked, Manning took to the field with several other dudes in those playoff games. Just look at how the AFC South built their teams, and how close the Colts divisional games were compared to the Pats. The Pats just had a better overall formula, from the top down, beyond the guys on the field and sidelines.

I've been a Manning fan since his college days, so I'm always going to pick Manning over Brady, I've seen much more of his career than Brady's. A Pats fan will always pick Brady, they've seen more of Brady's career. If all things are equal, in a utopian universe, both would be playing each other in every super bowl for the past decade, and they would be epic overtime battles, where the last one to score wins.

[martz11]

I find it interesting that in a debate like this, it seems the only way to validate one's team/QB, is to express how terrible the other is, and to point out all their flaws. At what point does one realize that if the other is so bad in a debate where the two sides are so close, than your team/QB must not be all that great either.

Brady has easily the best coach on his sideline, and has consistently for his pro career. Belichick is the guy that can not only beat you with his guys, but could also beat his guys with yours. Brady has easily had the better defense's backing him up, and more than likely a better GM sitting in the box. Not sure what the Pats spent offense/defense wise from a GM standpoint, but the Colts went all out offense. Sold lots of tickets, built a new stadium, a few future HOF players, and a whiney ungrateful owner. However, I do know the Pats invested in some video equipment along the way..... So I guess that has to be figured in there somewhere too.....

BTW, who threw a pick at the end of the 2006 AFC championship game?

Bottom line, the Patriots as and organization just did it better. I mean come on, Robert Kraft vs Jim Irsay....

Either guy, put on a great team, would win multiple SB's, MVPs, etc.... Of the two, I think Manning makes a poor to mediocre team a better team than Brady does. Seen when, one year without Manning hand delivered the number one draft pick to the Colts. A year without Brady gave a QB who never started a college football game a franchise tag, and starting job on a new team a year later.

The Colts were built around Manning, including a defense predicated on playing with a lead. Not necessarily the best formula for playing 3 to 4 playoff battles in a row. Last time I checked, Manning took to the field with several other dudes in those playoff games. Just look at how the AFC South built their teams, and how close the Colts divisional games were compared to the Pats. The Pats just had a better overall formula, from the top down, beyond the guys on the field and sidelines.

I've been a Manning fan since his college days, so I'm always going to pick Manning over Brady, I've seen much more of his career than Brady's. A Pats fan will always pick Brady, they've seen more of Brady's career. If all things are equal, in a utopian universe, both would be playing each other in every super bowl for the past decade, and they would be epic overtime battles, where the last one to score wins.

This post has way too many inteligent comments for this section. What's wrong with you? Neg!!!!

[Joshecalpoly]

Those 03-04 Pats championship teams were very special all the way around...the defense, Brady, special teams, coaching, balanced offense that wasn't flashy but performed at the right time. The 2001 team was fun to watch but very unexpected. I expected the Pats to win the SB in 03 and 04 (especially 04) because of the complete team, including Brady and the defense and all the other units.

All we heard back then (and I'm not talking about you or Broncos fans, but from the media and Colts fans) is "They're boring to watch. They win ugly games." And all we heard about was how Peyton was going to destroy us in the playoffs (this was before Peyton figured out the Pats a little and had some success.) Then when we won, the Colts just complained to the league to get defensive rules changed. Then we beat them again the next year with the rules changed and it was "The Pats are lucky."

That's why a lot of Pats fans have a chip on their shoulder regarding Peyton. We acknowledge he's great (most of us anyway) but those teams were once in a lifetime, and all we heard about was Peyton and the Colts offense.

Then the Colts beat us that year in the playoffs, Belichick got butthurt and completely changed his philosophy and basically turned into a better version of the Colts.

I think the reason Belichick got rid of Welker is because he saw the offense was going nowhere in the playoffs and was willing to do an overhaul on offense (he also didn't suspect that Hernandez had a secret life as a gangster and was counting on the two TE set.) Also, Welker spoke to the local media recently I guess and there was a lot of bad blood between him and Belichick and Kraft.

Patriots offense isn't going to be like it was in 2007-2012...but I expect it to get a little better by the end of the season and into the playoffs. Our running attack this year is very underrated. Brady's passer rating and completion percentage is awful, but a lot of the reason he only has 9 TDs is because they pretty much run it in every time they're in the red zone. He could easily have 13/14 TDs now. But that doesn't excuse his bad throws and the dropped passes when he makes good throws.

One thing I worry about as a Pats fan is Thompkins/Dobson et al pulling a Welker in the playoffs under the bright lights.

Our running game is underrated as well though most Bronco fans are weary we can sustain it

Our Special Teams are dangerous and have forced some teams to game plan around whether it be keeping the ball out of Hollidays hand our putting in starters up the middle to keep us from blocking kicks.

Our Run D is top notch and forces most teams to be one dimensional

Our passing D needs work but they are getting there stuff together

For the most part we have not played in very many close games or low scoring games

Our biggest problems are controlling the clock, we score fast and teams tend to force our D to stay on the field longer then they should which wears them down, we dont force a lot of fumbles, and this has led to enough first downs to hurt our team. Before we played Dallas and lost the hear of our D we were near the top of the NFL in passer rating allowed, if Woodyard stays healthy dont expect our D to be push overs

[Joshecalpoly]

I find it interesting that in a debate like this, it seems the only way to validate one's team/QB, is to express how terrible the other is, and to point out all their flaws. At what point does one realize that if the other is so bad in a debate where the two sides are so close, than your team/QB must not be all that great either.

Brady has easily the best coach on his sideline, and has consistently for his pro career. Belichick is the guy that can not only beat you with his guys, but could also beat his guys with yours. Brady has easily had the better defense's backing him up, and more than likely a better GM sitting in the box. Not sure what the Pats spent offense/defense wise from a GM standpoint, but the Colts went all out offense. Sold lots of tickets, built a new stadium, a few future HOF players, and a whiney ungrateful owner. However, I do know the Pats invested in some video equipment along the way..... So I guess that has to be figured in there somewhere too.....

BTW, who threw a pick at the end of the 2006 AFC championship game?

Bottom line, the Patriots as and organization just did it better. I mean come on, Robert Kraft vs Jim Irsay....

Either guy, put on a great team, would win multiple SB's, MVPs, etc.... Of the two, I think Manning makes a poor to mediocre team a better team than Brady does. Seen when, one year without Manning hand delivered the number one draft pick to the Colts. A year without Brady gave a QB who never started a college football game a franchise tag, and starting job on a new team a year later.

The Colts were built around Manning, including a defense predicated on playing with a lead. Not necessarily the best formula for playing 3 to 4 playoff battles in a row. Last time I checked, Manning took to the field with several other dudes in those playoff games. Just look at how the AFC South built their teams, and how close the Colts divisional games were compared to the Pats. The Pats just had a better overall formula, from the top down, beyond the guys on the field and sidelines.

I've been a Manning fan since his college days, so I'm always going to pick Manning over Brady, I've seen much more of his career than Brady's. A Pats fan will always pick Brady, they've seen more of Brady's career. If all things are equal, in a utopian universe, both would be playing each other in every super bowl for the past decade, and they would be epic overtime battles, where the last one to score wins.

Brady is essentially the Lou Gehrig of football, if the guy in front of him (Wally Pipp) had never gotten sick then we may never had heard of him. Yes he will go down as an all time great and he has done amazing things but he had a great team around him (that and despite having a reputation for being a jerk by some he will not be remembered as that).

If Championships were all we were counting then guys like Bradshaw would be considered a GOAT and Big Ben Rapistberger would be up their as well. Yes its true Mannings teams are very unbalanced but a lot of that has to do with the organizations. Perhaps if he had went with SF he might have won a SB with their D (though last year our D was just as good and we also had a better offense built around him).

Lets be honest the Ravens D was not a top notch D last year but they turned it on at the right time (granted the game against us was a bit suspect). The Giants D in 2011 was not very good till near the end. Defense still wins championships and yes I do believe when healthy and designed properly we can take this team to the SB

PFH mentioned how his team has played against the John Fox run teams but his team did only win by 3 against Jake Delhomme in the SB

[peytonsforehead]

58Miller...I'm not even being a Pats homer...most people would take a 100 percent healthy Gronk over Welker. Welker now? Welker obviously. But Gronk 2011? The guy is a beast and not one dimensional like Welker. He was built in a lab to play football and doesn't go down easy and makes catches when healthy that Welker can only dream of. Regardless, your receiving corps is better than ours, which is a lot of the reason for Peyton's success this year.

As for "blowing us out" not going to happen. We have a great defense this year...and pretty much shut down all of the Saints weapons and held them to under 30 points and Brees led teams usually blow us out. If you guys are to beat us, it will be a close game.

The Delhomme thing...he had the game of his life and was on fire that night. I've seen his performance, along with Brady's in the game, in top 10 lists for best performances in the Super Bowl by a QB. We just happened to get the ball last, and Fox made a few dumb decisions as usual (like going for 2 twice when it was unnecessary) otherwise maybe the Panthers win that game.

All that matters is the win though. Giants beat us on a miracle pass and catch and another time on a drop by a receiver you have now and another last second drive, but they beat us, and "barely" doesn't count. They have those two rings, we don't.

[Joshecalpoly]

58Miller...I'm not even being a Pats homer...most people would take a 100 percent healthy Gronk over Welker. Welker now? Welker obviously. But Gronk 2011? The guy is a beast and not one dimensional like Welker. He was built in a lab to play football and doesn't go down easy and makes catches when healthy that Welker can only dream of. Regardless, your receiving corps is better than ours, which is a lot of the reason for Peyton's success this year.

As for "blowing us out" not going to happen. We have a great defense this year...and pretty much shut down all of the Saints weapons and held them to under 30 points and Brees led teams usually blow us out. If you guys are to beat us, it will be a close game.

The Delhomme thing...he had the game of his life and was on fire that night. I've seen his performance, along with Brady's in the game, in top 10 lists for best performances in the Super Bowl by a QB. We just happened to get the ball last, and Fox made a few dumb decisions as usual (like going for 2 twice when it was unnecessary) otherwise maybe the Panthers win that game.

All that matters is the win though. Giants beat us on a miracle pass and catch and another time on a drop by a receiver you have now and another last second drive, but they beat us, and "barely" doesn't count. They have those two rings, we don't.

Ill take that but right now Edleman is the only dependable receiver your team seems to have, and everyone knew Gronk was hurt before they let Welker walk so that point is moot

As for the saints their best WR Colston doesnt even compare to our 3rd best receiver Decker. Yes Graham is better then any receiver we have right now but if we get Thomas back 100% your team wont be able to focus on just stopping 1 or 2 guys and we may not use the screen pass as much but we are just as dangerous as they can be, in fact Moreno has been very shifty after the catch.

Not to mention you lost your NT at the end of that game

[peytonsforehead]

If I were Fox I'd take a look at the Miami game tape from the first half and try to duplicate what they did...running the ball and passing only when necessary and having long drives to keep the Pats off the field. Miami is just an incompetent team and didn't have the players to keep it up - along with that big missed FG that would have made it a 3 score lead.

Pats pass D this year is nasty...not just Talib...but McCourty and Dennard too. So if Peyton comes out trying to get quick passing scores he'll end up with stalled drives and handing the ball over to Brady. I'd just exploit the lack of Mayo and run up the gut with Moreno and have long drives.

[PunchDrunk]

Manning's had a great O-line his whole career. He had one of the best centers in recent memory in Jeff Saturday.

This is what I mean...you're turning it into a "Poor Peyton...Brady's had all the breaks."

Defense and clutch offense wins championships (sometimes you can win a SB without the clutch offense like the 2000 ravens or the 2006 colts.) Pats D was great as a unit but all the talk was "They're boring, they have no superstars." You can't have it both ways. Other than Richard Seymour and Ty Law (who was out for the year in 2004) no one made the pro bowl on those teams. Bruschi/McGinest etc were solid players and I think the only reason Bruschi made one pro bowl is because Ray Lewis opted out and he was a replacement. They just were a great, disciplined unit and Brady, though his stats are better post 2007, was in my opinion better then. He didn't have the individual talent he has now, but he had more heart and a knack for making the right play at the right time.

It seems as if Broncos/Colts fans want Peyton to go on this rampage that he's not capable of in the playoffs and have these 8 TD games against playoff teams. He's not Joe Montana or anything close. If your team is to win it, it would take a MAJOR overhaul on defense, and for Manning to stop looking like he has a stick up his you know what when the pressure's on, and until proven otherwise, fans of other teams have the right to talk trash because the only year Peyton won, he threw 3 TD and 7 INT in his playoff run, the Colts defense randomly stepped up their game, and also faced Lovie Smith and Rex Grossman in the SB. Breaks like that happen maybe once, but not more than once.

If your team is to go to the SB this year, let alone win it, your defense has to dramatically improve and Peyton needs to see a sports shrink about his anxiety in big games.

The Broncos' defense did get a major overhaul this season. Von Miller was gone. Von Miller is now back. He is a top 5 defensive player and, with him, the Broncos pass defense is totally different.

The Redskins were 4th on offense coming into last week and they walked out with 266 yards. 95 of which came on one incredible drive to close the second half. During the other 13 drives combined, they had 171 yards.

[redneckrocker]

If the Patsies keep it up Brady won't even make playoffs this year!!
Can't win a Championship without taping opposition's practice!

When Manning gets another ring he WILL be universally considered g.o.a.t. !!