NFL Top 5 RB'S

[WC Iz Active]

1. LT
2. Gore
3. Shaun Alexander
4. Larry Johnson
5. Tiki Barber

["THE" MoSav]

1. LT
2. Gore
3. Shaun Alexander
4. Larry Johnson
5. Tiki Barber

 
Alexander over LJ?? and TIKI over STEVEN JACKSON? Why? Just wondering? Not attacking Opinions...Alexander has missed half the year. Tiki has 1 td. Steven Jackson has like 1600 Total yards and 7 td's...Larry Has 1500 total yds and 16 td's..

[WC Iz Active]

^^Yeah I see what you are saying, Alexander every other year is as good as anyone but this year he has been hurt so he shouldnt be that high

["THE" MoSav]

^^Yeah I see what you are saying, Alexander every other year is as good as anyone but this year he has been hurt so he shouldnt be that high

any other year i agree hes newhere from 2-5....
NO Steven Jackson tho? 42% of the rams offense....

[Don Jacob]

right now i don't think you can include alexander in the top 5 when you have LT, LJ, Gore, Jackson, Parker, i'll even throw in barber III (not being bias) and tiki as well over alexander , RIGHT now. However, if he was healthy there's no doubt him and LT would be battling for that no. 1 spot

[Shallow]

man, WTF happend to Edgerin this year? 

Arizona has no O Line.

The O Line isn't all that bad. The difference is the rest of the offense. If Arizona had Peyton and 4 pass options the defense would spread out and James would have room to run. James has 230 carries with just over 600 yards. Addai has 150 carries and nearly 800 yards. Add Rhodes's 500 yards and Indy has nearly 1300 yards rushing this season thus far, add to that the combo of receiving yards which is 400 thus far from each RB and you got 1700 all purpose yards with 5 games to go. In his last year with the Colts James had 1800 all purpose yards. Add in last years numbers by Rhodes and you'll even out at about 2000 AP yards. Addai and Rhodes are on pace to beat that this year. James is a great RB but any great RB looks like a top 5 RB when they have a pass game like Indy to take the pressure off and open up the field.

[/b]

I think you can say that to a point, because NOBODY has a pass game like Indy.  Arizona has the 2nd best Wr Tandem in the NFL, so they should be able to run the ball due to the fact they can pass well. But the O-Line really isnt that good. Watch there games the holes just arent there. Plain and simple. Plus The Colts and Edge mastered that stretch play, but of course the Cards offense is light years away from the Colts, but you CAN run the ball with 8 in the box if you have a great o-line and a great Rb. Look at the 49ers....

Saturday is a strong centre but most of the Indy Oline breaks down when it counts. It's not like they're the '94 Cowboys Oline.

They break down when it counts due to the Colts way of calling plays..And it doesnt help that Peyton cant move at all...

What does the playcalling have to do with two seconds in the pocket? Mike Vick on his best day couldn't do anything with a consistent 2 seconds in the pocket. The Colts only had to problems last year, the Oline and the DBs. If they had those fixed they'd be Superbowl champs right now. Peyton doesn't have to move. Give him over 3 seconds and he'll get his job done. He's not a mobile QB but neither was Marino or Favre and either one them in their prime would would take control in today's NFL.

["THE" MoSav]

man, WTF happend to Edgerin this year? 

Arizona has no O Line.

The O Line isn't all that bad. The difference is the rest of the offense. If Arizona had Peyton and 4 pass options the defense would spread out and James would have room to run. James has 230 carries with just over 600 yards. Addai has 150 carries and nearly 800 yards. Add Rhodes's 500 yards and Indy has nearly 1300 yards rushing this season thus far, add to that the combo of receiving yards which is 400 thus far from each RB and you got 1700 all purpose yards with 5 games to go. In his last year with the Colts James had 1800 all purpose yards. Add in last years numbers by Rhodes and you'll even out at about 2000 AP yards. Addai and Rhodes are on pace to beat that this year. James is a great RB but any great RB looks like a top 5 RB when they have a pass game like Indy to take the pressure off and open up the field.

[/b]

I think you can say that to a point, because NOBODY has a pass game like Indy.  Arizona has the 2nd best Wr Tandem in the NFL, so they should be able to run the ball due to the fact they can pass well. But the O-Line really isnt that good. Watch there games the holes just arent there. Plain and simple. Plus The Colts and Edge mastered that stretch play, but of course the Cards offense is light years away from the Colts, but you CAN run the ball with 8 in the box if you have a great o-line and a great Rb. Look at the 49ers....

Saturday is a strong centre but most of the Indy Oline breaks down when it counts. It's not like they're the '94 Cowboys Oline.

They break down when it counts due to the Colts way of calling plays..And it doesnt help that Peyton cant move at all...

What does the playcalling have to do with two seconds in the pocket? Mike Vick on his best day couldn't do anything with a consistent 2 seconds in the pocket. The Colts only had to problems last year, the Oline and the DBs. If they had those fixed they'd be Superbowl champs right now. Peyton doesn't have to move. Give him over 3 seconds and he'll get his job done. He's not a mobile QB but neither was Marino or Favre and either one them in their prime would would take control in today's NFL.

Because when you keep switiching plays on the line of scrimmage the play clock is winding down which means there is a chance that a few lineman dont have to time to pick up the correct blocks needed for the play called, not always but it does happen. When Peyton got time to throw against Pitt in the playoffs he played well youre right, but there was plenty of times when he held onto the ball to long, and being able to move DOES Matter, if he could move he could buy himself some extra time, his O-line was good enough. Im sick of people making excuses for Peyton..He threw int's and he lost just like he always does...About the Db's, they play a COVER 2 they are being covered up so it doesnt take great cover Db's to play a zone, and there rush defense is last in the nfl where as there pass defense is 3rd overall!! And there defense is 16th overall so the DB point is irrellevant....

[Shallow]

man, WTF happend to Edgerin this year? 

Arizona has no O Line.

The O Line isn't all that bad. The difference is the rest of the offense. If Arizona had Peyton and 4 pass options the defense would spread out and James would have room to run. James has 230 carries with just over 600 yards. Addai has 150 carries and nearly 800 yards. Add Rhodes's 500 yards and Indy has nearly 1300 yards rushing this season thus far, add to that the combo of receiving yards which is 400 thus far from each RB and you got 1700 all purpose yards with 5 games to go. In his last year with the Colts James had 1800 all purpose yards. Add in last years numbers by Rhodes and you'll even out at about 2000 AP yards. Addai and Rhodes are on pace to beat that this year. James is a great RB but any great RB looks like a top 5 RB when they have a pass game like Indy to take the pressure off and open up the field.

[/b]

I think you can say that to a point, because NOBODY has a pass game like Indy.  Arizona has the 2nd best Wr Tandem in the NFL, so they should be able to run the ball due to the fact they can pass well. But the O-Line really isnt that good. Watch there games the holes just arent there. Plain and simple. Plus The Colts and Edge mastered that stretch play, but of course the Cards offense is light years away from the Colts, but you CAN run the ball with 8 in the box if you have a great o-line and a great Rb. Look at the 49ers....

Saturday is a strong centre but most of the Indy Oline breaks down when it counts. It's not like they're the '94 Cowboys Oline.

They break down when it counts due to the Colts way of calling plays..And it doesnt help that Peyton cant move at all...

What does the playcalling have to do with two seconds in the pocket? Mike Vick on his best day couldn't do anything with a consistent 2 seconds in the pocket. The Colts only had to problems last year, the Oline and the DBs. If they had those fixed they'd be Superbowl champs right now. Peyton doesn't have to move. Give him over 3 seconds and he'll get his job done. He's not a mobile QB but neither was Marino or Favre and either one them in their prime would would take control in today's NFL.

Because when you keep switiching plays on the line of scrimmage the play clock is winding down which means there is a chance that a few lineman dont have to time to pick up the correct blocks needed for the play called, not always but it does happen. When Peyton got time to throw against Pitt in the playoffs he played well youre right, but there was plenty of times when he held onto the ball to long, and being able to move DOES Matter, if he could move he could buy himself some extra time, his O-line was good enough. Im sick of people making excuses for Peyton..He threw int's and he lost just like he always does...About the Db's, they play a COVER 2 they are being covered up so it doesnt take great cover Db's to play a zone, and there rush defense is last in the nfl where as there pass defense is 3rd overall!! And there defense is 16th overall so the DB point is irrellevant....

Whose making excuses. He wasn't amazing, but it wasn't Payton that lost that game. That being said, it's not always Payton that wins the game either. The first two TD drives were horrible defense, and Pit did the eaxct same thing SD did in the season. They just threw the ball to long inside slant routes and the DBs were doing nothing to stop it. The DB point is not irrelevant when 14 of hteir 21 points came in the first couple drives and came primarily because of a bad backfield.

 It's easy to look good on D when the offense controls the tempo like they did in the 4th quarter. Payton's not perfect, he'll throw and interception or two against amazing defensive players. But holding onto the ball too long was not the problem in that game. Watch it again. I did a few times and I counted with my stop watch. He was rushed to 2.2 to 2.5 seconds and they were coming from all sides. I don't care if the audibles come or not. They are called because Payton sees the defense change and re-acts to that change. The lineman still have to hold back the linebackers and they don't when the pressure's on. Not even Mike Vick would do too well against that. You put Payton on a team with an Oline like the '94 Cowboys, or '04 Pats and you'll never see him break down. Indy's loss came down to one decision and one decision only, and the man that made that decision stated he couldn't sleep for a month after he made it, and I really feel for the guy; if Nick Harper just went back to little league football rules and ran to the outside he would have scored a TD and that would have been the ball game. And you can bring up the Polamalu INT if you like, and not even I now how they justified the call they made, but Pit went on to win a Superbowl thanks to the refs screwing over Seattle 4 times so I don't feel too bad about that one call.

["THE" MoSav]

man, WTF happend to Edgerin this year? 

Arizona has no O Line.

The O Line isn't all that bad. The difference is the rest of the offense. If Arizona had Peyton and 4 pass options the defense would spread out and James would have room to run. James has 230 carries with just over 600 yards. Addai has 150 carries and nearly 800 yards. Add Rhodes's 500 yards and Indy has nearly 1300 yards rushing this season thus far, add to that the combo of receiving yards which is 400 thus far from each RB and you got 1700 all purpose yards with 5 games to go. In his last year with the Colts James had 1800 all purpose yards. Add in last years numbers by Rhodes and you'll even out at about 2000 AP yards. Addai and Rhodes are on pace to beat that this year. James is a great RB but any great RB looks like a top 5 RB when they have a pass game like Indy to take the pressure off and open up the field.

[/b]

I think you can say that to a point, because NOBODY has a pass game like Indy.  Arizona has the 2nd best Wr Tandem in the NFL, so they should be able to run the ball due to the fact they can pass well. But the O-Line really isnt that good. Watch there games the holes just arent there. Plain and simple. Plus The Colts and Edge mastered that stretch play, but of course the Cards offense is light years away from the Colts, but you CAN run the ball with 8 in the box if you have a great o-line and a great Rb. Look at the 49ers....

Saturday is a strong centre but most of the Indy Oline breaks down when it counts. It's not like they're the '94 Cowboys Oline.

They break down when it counts due to the Colts way of calling plays..And it doesnt help that Peyton cant move at all...

What does the playcalling have to do with two seconds in the pocket? Mike Vick on his best day couldn't do anything with a consistent 2 seconds in the pocket. The Colts only had to problems last year, the Oline and the DBs. If they had those fixed they'd be Superbowl champs right now. Peyton doesn't have to move. Give him over 3 seconds and he'll get his job done. He's not a mobile QB but neither was Marino or Favre and either one them in their prime would would take control in today's NFL.

Because when you keep switiching plays on the line of scrimmage the play clock is winding down which means there is a chance that a few lineman dont have to time to pick up the correct blocks needed for the play called, not always but it does happen. When Peyton got time to throw against Pitt in the playoffs he played well youre right, but there was plenty of times when he held onto the ball to long, and being able to move DOES Matter, if he could move he could buy himself some extra time, his O-line was good enough. Im sick of people making excuses for Peyton..He threw int's and he lost just like he always does...About the Db's, they play a COVER 2 they are being covered up so it doesnt take great cover Db's to play a zone, and there rush defense is last in the nfl where as there pass defense is 3rd overall!! And there defense is 16th overall so the DB point is irrellevant....

Whose making excuses. He wasn't amazing, but it wasn't Payton that lost that game. That being said, it's not always Payton that wins the game either. The first two TD drives were horrible defense, and Pit did the eaxct same thing SD did in the season. They just threw the ball to long inside slant routes and the DBs were doing nothing to stop it. The DB point is not irrelevant when 14 of hteir 21 points came in the first couple drives and came primarily because of a bad backfield.

 It's easy to look good on D when the offense controls the tempo like they did in the 4th quarter. Payton's not perfect, he'll throw and interception or two against amazing defensive players. But holding onto the ball too long was not the problem in that game. Watch it again. I did a few times and I counted with my stop watch. He was rushed to 2.2 to 2.5 seconds and they were coming from all sides. I don't care if the audibles come or not. They are called because Payton sees the defense change and re-acts to that change. The lineman still have to hold back the linebackers and they don't when the pressure's on. Not even Mike Vick would do too well against that. You put Payton on a team with an Oline like the '94 Cowboys, or '04 Pats and you'll never see him break down. Indy's loss came down to one decision and one decision only, and the man that made that decision stated he couldn't sleep for a month after he made it, and I really feel for the guy; if Nick Harper just went back to little league football rules and ran to the outside he would have scored a TD and that would have been the ball game. And you can bring up the Polamalu INT if you like, and not even I now how they justified the call they made, but Pit went on to win a Superbowl thanks to the refs screwing over Seattle 4 times so I don't feel too bad about that one call.

you made some legit points, but bottom line is Peyton has talent and still doesnt get it done...You cant deny that fact. NOBODY has had as much talent on offense as him the last few years besides the 99-01 Rams..Guys like Trent Dilfer, and Jeff Hostetler can get it done in big games, why cant Peyton? And why the fuck does he always have to throw his hands in the air everytime the pass isnt completed..Hes not clutch just like at Tennesee he lost 4 years in a row to FLA and never won SHIT.....Never has been clutch and may never be

[Shallow]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


See this is typical NFL fan behaviour; a team wins, it must be the QB. It has nothing to do with Baltimore having the greatest field position in the history of Superbowls, or having 2 TDs come from intercpetions and punt returns. Nothing to do with Baltimore's D causing 4 interceptions. Yeah, I 'm sure it was the 150 yards and 1 throwing TD that Dilfer had that won that game. Manning never could have done that. And Hostetler's Superbowl ring and appearance have nothing to do with LT causing a fumble at the end of the NFC championship when it was a routine run out of the clock (a game that was all FGs for NY), or the fact that NY's D held Buffalo to 18 offensive points when they just came off scoring 51 points on the number 7 defense in the NFL as far as points allowed go. It's funny how the two QBs you mentioned each had the number 1 defenses in the league when they won, and a middle of the road offense. You think if Marino was on the Giants that year they would have lost? You think if Patyon was on Baltimore that year they would have lost? Let me guess, if Rex Grossman gets a ring this year because the Bears D score 3 out of the 4 TDs he'll be better than both Manning and Marino, right? No one calls Barry Sanders a hack or a choke when he couldn't win because he's just an RB. Why everyone puts all this presure on a QB is beyond me. If Tom Brady had ended up in Buffalo or Detroit 2001 we'd all be wondering who he is, but hends up on the best put together team in the league and people praise him. A QB is just one position who needs a lot of other people to play their position well if you want to win a Superbowl. I'll take Manning at QB over anyone else in the league right now, because no one was going to take Indy to the Superbowl these past few years. Put Manning on Chicago right or New England a couple years back and everyone would be calling him the best ever, when in reality he would be no better than he is now, but the teams around him and the players on the defense would somehow make people give more credit to him. Credit that isn't deserved. All Manning has to do is throw the ball, and right now he does that better than anybody.

["THE" MoSav]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


See this is typical NFL fan behaviour; a team wins, it must be the QB. It has nothing to do with Baltimore having the greatest field position in the history of Superbowls, or having 2 TDs come from intercpetions and punt returns. Nothing to do with Baltimore's D causing 4 interceptions. Yeah, I 'm sure it was the 150 yards and 1 throwing TD that Dilfer had that won that game. Manning never could have done that. And Hostetler's Superbowl ring and appearance have nothing to do with LT causing a fumble at the end of the NFC championship when it was a routine run out of the clock (a game that was all FGs for NY), or the fact that NY's D held Buffalo to 18 offensive points when they just came off scoring 51 points on the number 7 defense in the NFL as far as points allowed go. It's funny how the two QBs you mentioned each had the number 1 defenses in the league when they won, and a middle of the road offense. You think if Marino was on the Giants that year they would have lost? You think if Patyon was on Baltimore that year they would have lost? Let me guess, if Rex Grossman gets a ring this year because the Bears D score 3 out of the 4 TDs he'll be better than both Manning and Marino, right? No one calls Barry Sanders a hack or a choke when he couldn't win because he's just an RB. Why everyone puts all this presure on a QB is beyond me. If Tom Brady had ended up in Buffalo or Detroit 2001 we'd all be wondering who he is, but hends up on the best put together team in the league and people praise him. A QB is just one position who needs a lot of other people to play their position well if you want to win a Superbowl. I'll take Manning at QB over anyone else in the league right now, because no one was going to take Indy to the Superbowl these past few years. Put Manning on Chicago right or New England a couple years back and everyone would be calling him the best ever, when in reality he would be no better than he is now, but the teams around him and the players on the defense would somehow make people give more credit to him. Credit that isn't deserved. All Manning has to do is throw the ball, and right now he does that better than anybody.

yeah right man, all the shit you say is true but its like that for every team of course it takes THE Whole team to win...But That doesnt change the fac that Tomy Brady plays great in big games, whether his defense does or not...you keep avoiding shit. We know Peyton is great but he hasnt WON shit, sad but true...And i never said Brady would take Indy to the Superbowl i just said he was a winner and thats the truth, just like he won a NATL title at Michigan...And yes there defense was great and Charles Woodson made all kinds of plays, so Brady doesnt deserve any credit...The Colts dont lose just because of Manning in big games, but he doesnt help the situation when he throws interceptions, thats all i was trying too say...

[Shallow]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


See this is typical NFL fan behaviour; a team wins, it must be the QB. It has nothing to do with Baltimore having the greatest field position in the history of Superbowls, or having 2 TDs come from intercpetions and punt returns. Nothing to do with Baltimore's D causing 4 interceptions. Yeah, I 'm sure it was the 150 yards and 1 throwing TD that Dilfer had that won that game. Manning never could have done that. And Hostetler's Superbowl ring and appearance have nothing to do with LT causing a fumble at the end of the NFC championship when it was a routine run out of the clock (a game that was all FGs for NY), or the fact that NY's D held Buffalo to 18 offensive points when they just came off scoring 51 points on the number 7 defense in the NFL as far as points allowed go. It's funny how the two QBs you mentioned each had the number 1 defenses in the league when they won, and a middle of the road offense. You think if Marino was on the Giants that year they would have lost? You think if Patyon was on Baltimore that year they would have lost? Let me guess, if Rex Grossman gets a ring this year because the Bears D score 3 out of the 4 TDs he'll be better than both Manning and Marino, right? No one calls Barry Sanders a hack or a choke when he couldn't win because he's just an RB. Why everyone puts all this presure on a QB is beyond me. If Tom Brady had ended up in Buffalo or Detroit 2001 we'd all be wondering who he is, but hends up on the best put together team in the league and people praise him. A QB is just one position who needs a lot of other people to play their position well if you want to win a Superbowl. I'll take Manning at QB over anyone else in the league right now, because no one was going to take Indy to the Superbowl these past few years. Put Manning on Chicago right or New England a couple years back and everyone would be calling him the best ever, when in reality he would be no better than he is now, but the teams around him and the players on the defense would somehow make people give more credit to him. Credit that isn't deserved. All Manning has to do is throw the ball, and right now he does that better than anybody.

yeah right man, all the shit you say is true but its like that for every team of course it takes THE Whole team to win...But That doesnt change the fac that Tomy Brady plays great in big games, whether his defense does or not...you keep avoiding shit. We know Peyton is great but he hasnt WON shit, sad but true...And i never said Brady would take Indy to the Superbowl i just said he was a winner and thats the truth, just like he won a NATL title at Michigan...And yes there defense was great and Charles Woodson made all kinds of plays, so Brady doesnt deserve any credit...The Colts dont lose just because of Manning in big games, but he doesnt help the situation when he throws interceptions, thats all i was trying too say...

1. Charles Woodson lead Michigan to the Rose Bowl title. Brady wasn't even playing.

2. Two years later Brady had an exceptional Orange Bowl Game but that was not for the National Championship. There is a reason Manning was pifcked first overall and Brady went in the 6th round.

The first Superbowl win Brady only completed 16 passes for under 150 yards. The second Superbowl Brady did a lot better. More passes, and way more yards, but if you look closely you'll notice there were a few long screen plays which have little to do with the QB. But anyway, he played great that game, 1 interception or not, Carolina had a good D. In the third Superbowl. He had another decent game in the 3rd Superbowl. But if you look at Manning's numbers in many of the big games he has been in they aren't all that bad, and in many cases they are great numbers. My point is simple; in my opinion if Payton Manning was on the New England Patriots his whole career with the Bill Belichick defensive system that has won him a total of 5 Superbowls, and that amazing NE O-line that knows how to keep a pocket, he would have atleast 3 Superbowls right now. Mannijng is a pure pocket passer, no one is disupting that. At 6'5'', with his arm and touch, for Indy to not have created the perfect O-line in the past 9 years they've had to do it is just down right inexcusible. I never saw Aikman's line breakdown when it counted. And his team was one bad 1st quarter away from 4 straight Superbowls. Yet no one calls him the best ever. Maybe Hollywood Brady has the right agents.

["THE" MoSav]

how you gonna say if Manning was on the Pats they would have won the superbowl, then go and say well if Brady is the best the Aikman should be too...If Brady is great because of the people around him and the coaching like you are saying if thats why he is winning superbowls then you can say that MORE About Aikman..he probably had like the best supporting cast of all time for a good 4 years (Besides the 94 NINERS  ) or one of the best ever...Aikman should be considered one of the greatest i agree, he has the best passer rating ever in the playoffs..But Aikman had a WAYYYY better supporting cast then Brady and his defense was just as good. The BOYS WERE LOADED

[Shallow]

how you gonna say if Manning was on the Pats they would have won the superbowl, then go and say well if Brady is the best the Aikman should be too...If Brady is great because of the people around him and the coaching like you are saying if thats why he is winning superbowls then you can say that MORE About Aikman..he probably had like the best supporting cast of all time for a good 4 years (Besides the 94 NINERS  ) or one of the best ever...Aikman should be considered one of the greatest i agree, he has the best passer rating ever in the playoffs..But Aikman had a WAYYYY better supporting cast then Brady and his defense was just as good. The BOYS WERE LOADED

What does the idea that Manning would have Superbowls with the Pats have to do with Aikman being acknowleged. The mid 90s Cowboys weren't too different than the early 2000s Pats as far as overall quality. What Dallas lost in system they made up for in individual players. NE had a better system and game plan, but Dallas had more stars, and that showed in their wins. While NE squeezed through tight games to win theie playoff runs and Superbowl, Dallas walked through teams, never winning by less than a 10 point lead. All three Superbowls NE won were by FGs and quite a few playoff games were decided like that as well.


Anyway, my point was that both teams won because of a lot more than a single QB effort and while Brady gets so much praise for his playing Aikman never got that same praise. I was just wondering why. Brady never had any 350 yard Superbowl games and each game came down to amazing defense by the Pats. I just think that if Manning was on Buffalo all this time and BRady was on Detroit neither would have any championships but Manning would still be Perfect Touch Payton while I don't think Brady would be looked at like the star he is. I can't prove, I could be wrong, but nothing about his numbers or watching him play make me think he could win with a mediocre team and mediocre system.

["THE" MoSav]

how you gonna say if Manning was on the Pats they would have won the superbowl, then go and say well if Brady is the best the Aikman should be too...If Brady is great because of the people around him and the coaching like you are saying if thats why he is winning superbowls then you can say that MORE About Aikman..he probably had like the best supporting cast of all time for a good 4 years (Besides the 94 NINERS  ) or one of the best ever...Aikman should be considered one of the greatest i agree, he has the best passer rating ever in the playoffs..But Aikman had a WAYYYY better supporting cast then Brady and his defense was just as good. The BOYS WERE LOADED

What does the idea that Manning would have Superbowls with the Pats have to do with Aikman being acknowleged. The mid 90s Cowboys weren't too different than the early 2000s Pats as far as overall quality. What Dallas lost in system they made up for in individual players. NE had a better system and game plan, but Dallas had more stars, and that showed in their wins. While NE squeezed through tight games to win theie playoff runs and Superbowl, Dallas walked through teams, never winning by less than a 10 point lead. All three Superbowls NE won were by FGs and quite a few playoff games were decided like that as well.


Anyway, my point was that both teams won because of a lot more than a single QB effort and while Brady gets so much praise for his playing Aikman never got that same praise. I was just wondering why. Brady never had any 350 yard Superbowl games and each game came down to amazing defense by the Pats. I just think that if Manning was on Buffalo all this time and BRady was on Detroit neither would have any championships but Manning would still be Perfect Touch Payton while I don't think Brady would be looked at like the star he is. I can't prove, I could be wrong, but nothing about his numbers or watching him play make me think he could win with a mediocre team and mediocre system.

good points, i agree with alot of that. we both made good points. no point arguing for days. +1 for good football conv 8)ersation!