How close is Allen to Mahomes if all things were equal?

[HappyDays]

18 minutes ago, 90sBills said:

Exactly. For the regular season.

 

If your argument requires you to concede that Brock Purdy was a better QB than Mahomes and Allen (and many others) for any period of time, you should probably just re-evaluate your argument.

[FireChans]

4 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

No thanks I'm good just having a blast watching you stan for Sean McDermott and Alex Smith by dumping on Andy Reid and Josh Allen

If McDermott has 1 million fans, then I’m one of them.

 

If McDermott has 1 fan, then I’m THAT ONE.

 

If McDermott has no fans, that means I’m dead.

[HappyDays]

20 minutes ago, FireChans said:

YES YES YES. Finally. 
 

My heart is full.

 

I don't really understand why that's controversial. Brady himself finally got saddled with a terrible roster to finish his career in NE. His career was apparently over, or so the casual football fans believed. Instead he transferred to the best roster in football and immediately won another Super Bowl.

 

Stop and think about what you're arguing. You're trying to say that QB performance is literally worth more than the performance of rest of the team and coaching staff combined. That very clearly is not true. QBs represent a plurality of their team's success, not a majority.

 

Edited Wednesday at 06:14 PM by HappyDays

[90sBills]

11 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

If your argument requires you to concede that Brock Purdy was a better QB than Mahomes and Allen (and many others) for any period of time, you should probably just re-evaluate your argument.

I was going along with your joke bud. As I highly doubt you really thought Purdy and Lamar were 1 and 2 last year. 

[FireChans]

4 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I don't really understand why that's controversial. Brady himself finally got saddled with a terrible roster to finish his career in NE. His career was apparently over, or so the casual football fans believed. Instead he transferred to the best roster in football and immediately won another Super Bowl.

 

Stop and think about what you're arguing. You're trying to say that QB performance is literally worth more than the performance of rest of the team and coaching staff combined. That very clearly is not true. QBs represent a plurality of their team's success, not a majority.

 

I think there’s an argument that Brady would have been less successful and Peyton more successful than the way their careers shook out. Something like 4 rings to 3 in favor of Brady.

 

I think that there’s ZERO chance that Peyton ends with 7 rings and Brady ends with 2.

 

Zero point zero zero.

 

that’s controversial as HELL lol.

[SaulGoodman]

1 hour ago, Success said:

After reading through the thread, it seems to shake out this way:

 

If you believe football to be a sport of individual achievement - say, tennis, golf, maybe the high jump - you think Mahomes is clearly better, because of what KC has accomplished.

 

If, however, you see football as a team game, where coaches, key contributions from other players, and injuries can have an impact - you might think Allen is as good, or even better.

 

I'd conclude w/ the following:  I can name a few players on KC's defense who had impact/game-changing plays in this past year's playoff match-up, including the pressure from Chris Jones at the end, which I believe changed the outcome.  

 

Can anyone name one such play from a Bills defender?  I'd count the goal-line fumble as a bit flukey, and balanced by the terrible coaching decision to fake the punt.  I can't think of another single play anyone on the Bills defense made that game.

First of all, who cares if Hardman’s goal-line fumble was allegedly flukey? It happened, and it was a big, big help to your hero. If that ball crosses the goal line, game over. Biggest play of the game by either team. 
 

And yes, Allen’s receivers dropped a catchable pass or two. It happens. It’s football. If Mahomes’ receivers hadn’t led the league in drops, that game wouldn’t have even taken place in Buffalo.

[HappyDays]

23 minutes ago, FireChans said:

I think there’s an argument that Brady would have been less successful and Peyton more successful than the way their careers shook out. Something like 4 rings to 3 in favor of Brady.

 

I think that there’s ZERO chance that Peyton ends with 7 rings and Brady ends with 2.

 

Zero point zero zero.

 

that’s controversial as HELL lol.

 

It's impossible to know for sure. That's why these debates will never end. But Brady had the best coaching staff of all time to go along with an extremely deep and talented roster. One of Manning's two Super Bowl rings came in the worst season of his career, which kind of makes the point for me.

 

FWIW I've been dying on this hill for years, it pre-dates Allen by a lot. I've tried working out in my head what percentage of the team's success a QB is responsible for. Roughly I would say in the modern NFL offense is 45%, defense 35%, special teams 5%, coaching 15%. Even being generous and saying the QB is worth 75% of the offense's success that still puts them as only worth 33.75% of the team's success. Basically 1/3 at most and that's if you're really generous. Obviously that is insanely high value for a single player, but still the way these conversations go you would think QBs are worth 60% of their team's success. Logically (and mathematically) that makes no sense at all.

 

And yes if you couldn't tell I've thought way too hard about this and probably should be diagnosed with a mental disorder.

 

Edited Wednesday at 06:44 PM by HappyDays

[Success]

1 hour ago, SaulGoodman said:

First of all, who cares if Hardman’s goal-line fumble was allegedly flukey? It happened, and it was a big, big help to your hero. If that ball crosses the goal line, game over. Biggest play of the game by either team. 
 

And yes, Allen’s receivers dropped a catchable pass or two. It happens. It’s football. If Mahomes’ receivers hadn’t led the league in drops, that game wouldn’t have even taken place in Buffalo.

 

Okay.

 

I'd still take Allen over Mahomes.  Not that Mahomes is a bad QB or anything.

 

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, HappyDays said:

Roughly I would say in the modern NFL offense is 45%, defense 35%, special teams 5%, coaching 15%. Even being generous and saying the QB is worth 75% of the offense's success that still puts them as only worth 33.75% of the team's success. Basically 1/3 at most and that's if you're really generous.

 

FWIW I have done a similar exercise on these board previously and come up with a very similar summation in terms of %s. I think that is an argument for keeping the Head Coach not firing him.

 

 

EDIT: but I agree with @FireChans on Manning v Brady. To think otherwise focuses too much on what QBs do positively and not enough on what they don't do negatively. Manning's highs were higher than Brady's. But he always made waaaaaaay more mistakes. Brady was the guy whose performance range im 95% of his games was between 75% and 85%. That consistency was part of what made him special. Manning had more games in the 90s. But a lot more games in the 50s and 60s too. 

Edited Wednesday at 07:49 PM by GunnerBill

[Success]

1 hour ago, FireChans said:

I think there’s an argument that Brady would have been less successful and Peyton more successful than the way their careers shook out. Something like 4 rings to 3 in favor of Brady.

 

I think that there’s ZERO chance that Peyton ends with 7 rings and Brady ends with 2.

 

Zero point zero zero.

 

that’s controversial as HELL lol.

 

Brady still favored?

 

Gotta disagree there.  That means the greatest coach in the game ends up with 3 rings, with a QB who was pretty close to top of the league in terms of talent.

 

[Orlando Buffalo]

If you swap Mahomes and Allen over the past 5 season each team is basically same W-L record. Reid is currently best coach in NFL, and McDermott is top 10 but Reid matters most in big games. 

[Success]

Patriots fans used to move the goalposts all the time in the Manning/Brady debate.  For a long time, it was the head-to-head - as though they were playing each other in tennis.  Then, Manning ended up w/ the better record over Brady in the AFCCG.  But, by then, Brady had won so many that it was a moot point.

 

Now, Pats fans hype Manning up bigtime, after calling him a one & done choker for 2 decades - because it helps Brady's legacy if he had to get past another all-time great to get his titles.

 

I happen to agree w/ consensus on that one - that Brady is a better overall QB than Manning.  Titles do have something to do w/ that; at a certain point, it reaches a critical mass.  But Brady DID have the best coach of all time, while Manning played for 5 different coaches, only one of whom I would consider near the top tier.  That's a pretty big differentiator.  If you look at title-winning teams, there are generally great coaches hoisting those trophies w/ the top players. It's much more rare that average coaches are carried to titles by great stars (it happens, but not much).

 

[Alphadawg7]

1 hour ago, FireChans said:

I think there’s an argument that Brady would have been less successful and Peyton more successful than the way their careers shook out. Something like 4 rings to 3 in favor of Brady.

 

I think that there’s ZERO chance that Peyton ends with 7 rings and Brady ends with 2.

 

Zero point zero zero.

 

that’s controversial as HELL lol.

Right before Brady went up to close the show on the Roast of Tom Brady, Peyton Manning came out and stated BB was the greatest coach in NFL history.  You don't think Manning knows had he been in Brady's shoes he would have more rings too?  

 

Manning and the Colts went one and done an NFL record 9 times in Indy, and the biggest reason was defensive issue.  When he finally had a defense, they won the SB.  

 

Put Manning in NE with the greatest defensive mind in NFL history and Manning gets several more rings.  I think that is a pretty safe bet.  I dont know that Brady wins more than 1 ring in Indy like Manning if he played there though.  

[FireChans]

15 minutes ago, Success said:

 

Brady still favored?

 

Gotta disagree there.  That means the greatest coach in the game ends up with 3 rings, with a QB who was pretty close to top of the league in terms of talent.

 

Yep. Brady would still be the GOAT. He has proven this. He won immediately without the GOAT coach in his 40s.

 

Any argument against Brady being the GOAT is dead.

4 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Right before Brady went up to close the show on the Roast of Tom Brady, Peyton Manning came out and stated BB was the greatest coach in NFL history.  You don't think Manning knows had he been in Brady's shoes he would have more rings too?  

 

Manning and the Colts went one and done an NFL record 9 times in Indy, and the biggest reason was defensive issue.  When he finally had a defense, they won the SB.  

 

Put Manning in NE with the greatest defensive mind in NFL history and Manning gets several more rings.  I think that is a pretty safe bet.  I dont know that Brady wins more than 1 ring in Indy like Manning if he played there though.  

So is Brady the GOAT?

[Success]

2 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Yep. Brady would still be the GOAT. He has proven this. He won immediately without the GOAT coach in his 40s.

 

Any argument against Brady being the GOAT is dead.

So is Brady the GOAT?

 

I think Brady IS the GOAT.  But I don't think he'd have more titles than Manning if they switched places.

 

I agree w/ you that Manning wouldn't have 7 - but I'd put his total at around 5 if he had Brady's circumstances.

 

[FireChans]

Just now, Success said:

 

I think Brady IS the GOAT.  But I don't think he'd have more titles than Manning if they switched places.

 

I agree w/ you that Manning wouldn't have 7 - but I'd put his total at around 5 if he had Brady's circumstances.

 

I think he’d have been the GOAT regardless. As evidenced by his ability to change those circumstances and win anyways.

[Alphadawg7]

17 minutes ago, FireChans said:

So is Brady the GOAT?

 

Without question Brady is the GOAT because hypotheticals don't exist.  All that exists is reality and its history.  Brady is the one with 7 rings, he is the GOAT, there is no debate.

 

Can I say for sure that he was the most talented and gifted QB to ever play...No.  

Do I think other QB's could have accomplished 7 rings if they had played in his place with his longevity...Yes.  

Do I think another QB could have won more than 7 rings if they had played in his place with his longevity....Possibly.

 

Brady though is the GOAT, what he did and accomplished both in Rings and Longevity makes it indisputable.  But am I certain he is a better QB overall than some of the other guys with top 5 and top 10 resumes...no I am not.  

 

The guys who was previously considered the GOAT was Montana...can you or anyone say for sure he was a better QB than Montana?  I can't for sure say that.  Montana played in an era where QB's took a beating and his body eventually failed him early.  But at the time Montana retired he had 4 rings and was 4-0 in Super Bowls where Brady also had 4 SB rings, but had also lost 2.  If Montana got to play in the era Brady did where you couldn't touch the QB, rules were rigged to help the passing game and receivers, and got the same special treatment from the refs that Brady got then maybe he could have played longer and his body wouldn't have broken down.  And if you put Brady back in the Montana era where he gets hit and the CB's can still be physical with receivers, does he still play past 40, does he still get 7 rings?

 

Since we can never know those answers, Brady is legitimately the GOAT based on his accomplishments.  But I can't say for sure that he was the actual best QB to ever step on a field. 

Edited Wednesday at 08:23 PM by Alphadawg7

[Lionel Hutz]

17 hours ago, SaulGoodman said:

Based on?

 

The Bills were a playoff team with Tyrod Taylor and a far worse roster. Why couldn’t McD do it with this team?

KC doesn’t make the playoffs last year without Mahomes. Hell, they flirted with missing the postseason with him. If they had Tyrod Taylor, they’d have missed the postseason and definitely wouldn’t have sniffed a Super Bowl. 

 

McDoofus is supposed to be a defensive genius and yet the reason his teams have failed in the playoffs the last few seasons is the defense.

 

KC was the only team in their division that didn't finish below .500. Crazy to think they wouldn't have won that division even without Mahomes.

[DCofNC]

At the end of the day, Josh Allen is the most EXCITING QB in the league.  Mahomes makes better decisions with the ball and is the superior QB.   Only the delulu’s in Buffalo think JA is the better QB.  He’s great, but Mahomes has been flat out better.

[Buffalo_Stampede]

14 minutes ago, DCofNC said:

At the end of the day, Josh Allen is the most EXCITING QB in the league.  Mahomes makes better decisions with the ball and is the superior QB.   Only the delulu’s in Buffalo think JA is the better QB.  He’s great, but Mahomes has been flat out better.

It’s the small things. I’m sure we can argue all day about the go ahead TD attempt to Shakir on 2nd down instead of an easy throw to Diggs to run the clock and get the 1st. 

 

If I’m Josh in that moment I definitely don’t want Mahomes and Reid to have any time left. But that’s not how Josh thinks.