Peyton Manning through the eyes of John Elway and Jim Mora

[Denver Native (Carol)]

With Peyton Manning on the verge of setting an NFL record for career touchdown passes, the Talk of Fame Network decide to devote a chunk of this weekend’s show to the quarterback of the Denver Broncos.

We visited with Jim Mora, Manning’s first NFL coach at Indianapolis, and Hall-of-Fame quarterback John Elway, now the Broncos’ general manager who made the sales pitch that brought Manning to Denver after his release by the Indianapolis Colts.

Manning needs three more touchdown passes to overtake Brett Favre on the all-time list with 509. A five-time NFL MVP, Manning will likely hold all the significant passing records by the time he’s through.

But it’s not his arm that sets him apart from other quarterbacks.

rest - http://www.talkoffamenetwork.com/peyton-manning-through-the-eyes-of-john-elway-and-jim-mora/

[Ravage!!!]

I'll be honest. All this talka bout Manning and his record is getting me a bit concerned for this Sunday night. Seems that whenever there is this much talk about a particular subject such as this... it doesn't happen. Seems this is the kind of game where Manning would normally throw 2-3 TDs...but with all the chatter, its' beginning to feel like a game where Manning will fall into that "too much hype" bubble that just swallows a guy's game. Not that Manning, himself, is falling into the hype....it's more like the football gods seem to come down and crash their power onto a game like this when there is so much chit-chat about records.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

In reference to Sunday night's game, I wanna say something a little off topic. There's going to be a very dominant D on the field Sunday, and it won't be the 49ers. :D

[Northman]

I'll be honest. All this talka bout Manning and his record is getting me a bit concerned for this Sunday night. Seems that whenever there is this much talk about a particular subject such as this... it doesn't happen. Seems this is the kind of game where Manning would normally throw 2-3 TDs...but with all the chatter, its' beginning to feel like a game where Manning will fall into that "too much hype" bubble that just swallows a guy's game. Not that Manning, himself, is falling into the hype....it's more like the football gods seem to come down and crash their power onto a game like this when there is so much chit-chat about records.

Yea, i dont mind him breaking records but i would much rather the team win the Championship this year.

[Joel]

Yea, i dont mind him breaking records but i would much rather the team win the Championship this year.
Records come and go, but championships are eternal: Just ask Tarkenton and Marino. As Manning begins his inevitable shattering of passing records Favre took from Marino after he took them from Tarkenton, I bet Favre's more grateful than ever for his lone SB Ring, which he can eventually be buried with if it suits him, or pass down to his great-great-grandkids: It's his forever, so his call.

[MOtorboat]

Manning does have a ring. He's not Tarkenton or Marino.

Manning is the second-greatest quarterback in my eyes. Elway is No. 1. Marino No. 3.

[Davii]

Manning does have a ring. He's not Tarkenton or Marino.

Manning is the second-greatest quarterback in my eyes. Elway is No. 1. Marino No. 3.

If Peyton delivers a ring here he might take over that conversation. Being the only qb to win with two teams would be pretty significant.

[Nomad]

Yea, i dont mind him breaking records but i would much rather the team win the Championship this year.

I'm not big on the record stuff or stats....the win is the only stat I care about.

[Joel]

Manning does have a ring. He's not Tarkenton or Marino.
No: He's Favre, or Namath—for now....


Manning is the second-greatest quarterback in my eyes. Elway is No. 1. Marino No. 3.
Thorpe will always be the best EVER, because he did everything POSSIBLE with a football, and all of it well: He was the foremost passing pioneer before even finishing college, a powerful breakaway rushing threat and part of his pregame warmup was standing at midfield to kick FGs over EACH upright in succession. And since players who left games couldn't return till the next quarter, he did all that while playing defense, too; even Sammy Baughs records for most TDs thrown and Ints caught in a game don't compare. Thorpe was a one-man team, and the biggest reason the NFL didn't go bankrupt within a decade.

Elway's the best since unlimited substitution radically changed the game, but nearly everyone without a dog in the fight puts him and Marino well behind Montana, and we all know the main reason. It's neither fair nor right,"just the way it is...." Mannings sense and knowledge of football history's as good as anyones, so he knows all that, too; he knows most nonpartisan fans rank Brady ahead of him for the same reason they rank Montana ahead of Elway and Marino. The perennial "best REGULAR season QB ever" question couldn't be better calculated to piss off Manning—but he knows there's only ONE way to silence it.

The fact Brady was nearly always surrounded by great teams and Manning almost never was doesn't change that for him any more than it did for Montana vs. Elway and Marino. Ain't fair, but it's so.


If Peyton delivers a ring here he might take over that conversation. Being the only qb to win with two teams would be pretty significant.
Totally agreed, and he's surely aware of that small but potentially critical piece of trivia, too.

[MOtorboat]

No: He's Favre, or Namath—for now....


Thorpe will always be the best EVER, because he did everything POSSIBLE with a football, and all of it well: He was the foremost passing pioneer before even finishing college, a powerful breakaway rushing threat and part of his pregame warmup was standing at midfield to kick FGs over EACH upright in succession. And since players who left games couldn't return till the next quarter, he did all that while playing defense, too; even Sammy Baughs records for most TDs thrown and Ints caught in a game don't compare. Thorpe was a one-man team, and the biggest reason the NFL didn't go bankrupt within a decade.

Elway's the best since unlimited substitution radically changed the game, but nearly everyone without a dog in the fight puts him and Marino well behind Montana, and we all know the main reason. It's neither fair nor right,"just the way it is...." Mannings sense and knowledge of football history's as good as anyones, so he knows all that, too; he knows most nonpartisan fans rank Brady ahead of him for the same reason they rank Montana ahead of Elway and Marino. The perennial "best REGULAR season QB ever" question couldn't be better calculated to piss off Manning—but he knows there's only ONE way to silence it.

The fact Brady was nearly always surrounded by great teams and Manning almost never was doesn't change that for him any more than it did for Montana vs. Elway and Marino. Ain't fair, but it's so.


Totally agreed, and he's surely aware of that small but potentially critical piece of trivia, too.

I use more than one thing to rate them. Manning is a far superior quarterback than Namath, who's not even remotely a Top 10 guy ever, maybe not even Top 20.

Favre is up in the Top 10, but he's not Top 3 like Manning is. I think it's absurd to say he's only Favre or Namath.

I expect nothing less from you, though. Disparage Manning at every turn so you can disparage the Broncos. You're miserable.

[7DnBrnc53]

Elway's the best since unlimited substitution radically changed the game, but nearly everyone without a dog in the fight puts him and Marino well behind Montana, and we all know the main reason. It's neither fair nor right,"just the way it is...." Mannings sense and knowledge of football history's as good as anyones, so he knows all that, too; he knows most nonpartisan fans rank Brady ahead of him for the same reason they rank Montana ahead of Elway and Marino. The perennial "best REGULAR season QB ever" question couldn't be better calculated to piss off Manning—but he knows there's only ONE way to silence it.

The fact Brady was nearly always surrounded by great teams and Manning almost never was doesn't change that for him any more than it did for Montana vs. Elway and Marino. Ain't fair, but it's so.

Brady wasn't surrounded by great teams (except for maybe 2007, but even that team was overrated somewhat. They played in the weakest division ever). He was surrounded by a solid defense that forced turnovers in big games, and supported by a cheating system that had Ernie Adams talk to him through an alternate frequency that kept on speaking to him after the 15-second cutoff.

Montana may be top-5 (although I don't have him ahead of Elway or Marino), but Brady isn't even top 20. You are right about how people perceive them, though. On this one forum I go on, they have Drew Brees ahead of Elway. They think that he is total overrated garbage because of his stats under Dan Reeves. I have re-iterated the same old arguments with no success. These people like to cling to the lies that the media feeds them.

[HORSEPOWER 56]

Too many people/analysts judge QBs based on Championships. Championships are a TEAM accomplishment. In No other professional sport is it as much this way. In basketball, hockey, and baseball one man can make or break a team. I'm not saying a great team isn't necessary, but in those sports one player can dominate a game.

Yes, a great QB can really give a team an edge toward winning a Championship, but QBs don't play defense or STs. They don't block for themselves and they don't catch passes. I'm of the opinion that QBs must be judged on their individual accomplishments. Manning is in the discussion of the GOAT, not just because of numbers, but the fact that he's done it consistently his whole career with two different teams and a plethora of different players. Manning simply makes the guys around him better, like Elway and yes even Brady. That's what makes them great. Conversely, Guys like Terry Bradshaw had a team around them to make them better.

[Joel]

I use more than one thing to rate them. Manning is a far superior quarterback than Namath, who's not even remotely a Top 10 guy ever, maybe not even Top 20.

Favre is up in the Top 10, but he's not Top 3 like Manning is. I think it's absurd to say he's only Favre or Namath.
Maybe the Colts' OTHER first-ballot HoF QB is the best comparison: Unitas was the perennial dominant passer of his era, a 10-time Pro Bowler and 5-time All Pro, the last of his many records wasn't broken until 2 years ago and he won back-to-back championships (including The Greatest Game Ever Played, which put pro football on the map)tball on the map—but his SB starters record is 1-0, and he only got that one because Morrall did a far better job relieving him than he did for Morrall in SB III.

As time passes and records fall, Unitas will more and more be remembered wrongly but commonly as the guy who lost the SB to Namath (even though even that's not really true.)


I expect nothing less from you, though. Disparage Manning at every turn so you can disparage the Broncos. You're miserable.
I didn't say I AGREE with the popular oversimplification (that's not exactly my trademark, is it?) just stated what it IS, however you, I or anyone else "feels" about it. The Lowest Common Denominator wants everything caveman-simple, and it doesn't get much simpler than "count the Rings." There were and are people who insist Bradshaw was better than Staubach because he won both their SB meetings to finish 4-0 in championships while Staubach was a mere 2-2 (2-3 if we count backing up Morton in SB V.) Manning doesn't keep playing just to disprove something you falsely imagine I said.

[Joel]

Brady wasn't surrounded by great teams (except for maybe 2007, but even that team was overrated somewhat. They played in the weakest division ever). He was surrounded by a solid defense that forced turnovers in big games, and supported by a cheating system that had Ernie Adams talk to him through an alternate frequency that kept on speaking to him after the 15-second cutoff.
Oh, I'm the first to agree Belicheats "system" boils down to being dirty as homemade sin, in the worst traditions of the Raiders, and surpassed only by Carrolls Seahawks. In terms of on-field results though, Bradys had a ton of great WRs to go with many great defenses, not just in 2007, but MOST of his career. Manning had the receivers, but little else, and Dungy punishes players for CUSSING: How do you think he feels about persistent CHEATING? ;)


Montana may be top-5 (although I don't have him ahead of Elway or Marino), but Brady isn't even top 20. You are right about how people perceive them, though. On this one forum I go on, they have Drew Brees ahead of Elway. They think that he is total overrated garbage because of his stats under Dan Reeves. I have re-iterated the same old arguments with no success. These people like to cling to the lies that the media feeds them.
I frankly think Montana and Steve Young are both vastly overrated, because they're practically the DEFINITION of "system QB." Don't get me wrong, Montana was good, but take him out of the WCO that couldn't do a better job of manufacturing high passer ratings if it was DESIGNED to and he's JUST good, not great, and certainly not among the top five or even top ten EVER. Virgil Carter led the NFL in completion percentage the year Walsh designed the WCO for him, but no one's talking about sending HIM to Canton (though there's a good argument he belongs there more than Joe Cool.)

That's not the general perception though, because the Lowest Common Denominator really does want things caveman-simple, so they count the Rings and check the Passer Rating most of them couldn't CALCULATE if SHOWN how (which really is a shame, because looking at its formula very quickly reveals it's nothing more nor less than a WCO Rating System; small wonder the dink-and-dunk guys have the best ratings, because dink-and-dunk is the all-important core of the PRS; yards, TDs and Ints are just an afterthought.)

[MOtorboat]

Cliff notes. Joel thinks Manning is like Favre and Namath, but doesn't necessarily agree with his opinion.

[Joel]

Cliff notes. Joel thinks Manning is like Favre and Namath, but doesn't necessarily agree with his opinion.
I think MOST PEOPLE will unfairly view him like Favre if he retires without another Ring, because most people want things simple enough they can just count the Rings or check the Rating to rank the all-time best QBs. THAT'S the Cliffs Notes version of QBs, and a fine example of what's wrong with Cliffs Notes on Anything. He'll be seen like Favre or MAYBE Unitas (if he's lucky) and in a decade no one outside GB will say Favre was a great QB. Most people wouldn't rank Unitas in the top ten now, even though that's probably where he belongs: Thanks to Namath he "only" won one SB, so he's "just good."

[NightTerror218]

Manning will probably break the TD record in first quarter so he can stop hearing about it.

[MOtorboat]

I think MOST PEOPLE will unfairly view him like Favre if he retires without another Ring, because most people want things simple enough they can just count the Rings or check the Rating to rank the all-time best QBs. THAT'S the Cliffs Notes version of QBs, and a fine example of what's wrong with Cliffs Notes on Anything. He'll be seen like Favre or MAYBE Unitas (if he's lucky) and in a decade no one outside GB will say Favre was a great QB. Most people wouldn't rank Unitas in the top ten now, even though that's probably where he belongs: Thanks to Namath he "only" won one SB, so he's "just good."

Lol. You're delusional.

[Simple Jaded]

So we're basing this discussion off of what Joel thinks other people will think if Manning retires with just one ring? He's the one that insists all Broncos fans will disown them because the Broncos have wasted the last 3 seasons of Joels life.

[Slick]

So we're basing this discussion off of what Joel thinks other people will think if Manning retires with just one ring? He's the one that insists all Broncos fans will disown them because the Broncos have wasted the last 3 seasons of Joels life.

I can only speak for myself here but I think it will be pretty soul crushing as a Bronco fan if they don't get at least 1 trophy with Manning.

[Simple Jaded]

I can only speak for myself here but I think it will be pretty soul crushing as a Bronco fan if they don't get at least 1 trophy with Manning.

Me too, but that's not what Joel insists will happen.

[MOtorboat]

I can only speak for myself here but I think it will be pretty soul crushing as a Bronco fan if they don't get at least 1 trophy with Manning.

People won't forget about Manning in 10 years if they don't win one though. That's what he's suggesting.

[Bronco9798]

Manning throws 4 TD's to Julius Thomas. He doesn't block a lick and everybody will continue to bash him for not blocking. Who cares. Just score TD's dude!!! :-)

[7DnBrnc53]

Oh, I'm the first to agree Belicheats "system" boils down to being dirty as homemade sin, in the worst traditions of the Raiders, and surpassed only by Carrolls Seahawks. In terms of on-field results though, Bradys had a ton of great WRs to go with many great defenses, not just in 2007, but MOST of his career. Manning had the receivers, but little else, and Dungy punishes players for CUSSING: How do you think he feels about persistent CHEATING? ;)

I frankly think Montana and Steve Young are both vastly overrated, because they're practically the DEFINITION of "system QB." Don't get me wrong, Montana was good, but take him out of the WCO that couldn't do a better job of manufacturing high passer ratings if it was DESIGNED to and he's JUST good, not great, and certainly not among the top five or even top ten EVER. Virgil Carter led the NFL in completion percentage the year Walsh designed the WCO for him, but no one's talking about sending HIM to Canton (though there's a good argument he belongs there more than Joe Cool.)

That's not the general perception though, because the Lowest Common Denominator really does want things caveman-simple, so they count the Rings and check the Passer Rating most of them couldn't CALCULATE if SHOWN how (which really is a shame, because looking at its formula very quickly reveals it's nothing more nor less than a WCO Rating System; small wonder the dink-and-dunk guys have the best ratings, because dink-and-dunk is the all-important core of the PRS; yards, TDs and Ints are just an afterthought.)

Yeah, Carroll cheats, but I can live with the Hawks being champs. They were more talented than those Pat teams. NE didn't have any business winning a darn thing, let alone three SB titles. They were like the 00-02 Laker teams that just had Shaq, Kobe, and a bunch of stiffs.

As for Montana and Young, I will agree with you that Young was vastly overrated. What would he have been if he didn't go to SF? His only ring came because the 49ers were ravaging the salary cap (Now, if people say that Denver did the same thing, they didn't. What they did was a collective bargaining agreement violation, not a salary cap violation). I don't think that he belongs in the Hall. Now, I don't think that Montana is vastly overrated, but I do agree with you that Walsh's system made him to a certain degree. If he didn't play for SF, he would have been another Brian Sipe or Joe Ferguson (he was compared to Ferguson by writer Glenn Dickey in a 1980 issue of Football Digest before he was exalted to demigod status for throwing dink and dunk passes).

You are right about Walsh and Virgil Carter and having to throw short passes because of Greg Cook's injury. According to Fran Tarkenton, though, his team started doing that in 1967 with the Giants.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeIYdifUf3M

Also, Bud Grant said that he was doing the same things with Fran and Chuck Foreman in Minnesota. Here's a quote from Bud Grant about it:

"You talk about the West Coast Offense," Grant said, "When we had Tarkenton here, that's exactly what we were doing -- short passing, dumping the ball to Foreman in the flat. Jerry Burns was doing that before Bill Walsh ever got in the business of doing it. Bill Walsh knew the value of having a PR department to put out his stuff. So your question is, does that bother me? No, it doesn't. It would bother me if it represented dollars or something. But it doesn't -- it represents ego. I could live with more dollars, but I can't live with more ego."

[MOtorboat]

There's some serious delusion going on here...

The Lakers had two of the best 10 players ever, I don't how they POSSIBLY could have won three championships...derp.

The Patriots had no business winning three championships? Based on what?

Steve Young, who was one of the mos efficient passers ever and won a championship, is vastly overrated solely because he played for a specific team?

Good grief. Sounds more like sour grapes than anything else.

[Valar Morghulis]

My top 5 all time

Manning
Elway (controversial i know)
Montana
Marino
Brady

I just dont have the knowledge to comment on any qbs from before 85 - until the early 2000s it was pretty hard to watch any NFL in this country, let alone archive footage!

[MOtorboat]

My top 5 all time

Manning
Elway (controversial i know)
Montana
Marino
Brady

I just dont have the knowledge to comment on any qbs from before 85 - until the early 2000s it was pretty hard to watch any NFL in this country, let alone archive footage!

That's a perfectly rational top 5.

[7DnBrnc53]

There's some serious delusion going on here...

The Lakers had two of the best 10 players ever, I don't how they POSSIBLY could have won three championships...derp.

The Patriots had no business winning three championships? Based on what?

Steve Young, who was one of the mos efficient passers ever and won a championship, is vastly overrated solely because he played for a specific team?

Good grief. Sounds more like sour grapes than anything else.

The Lakers only won those titles because the Blazers and Kings choked (and the officials gave it to them), and they played Eastern Conference cans of dog food. Also, who did that team have outside of Shaq and Kobe? Nobody. Just a bunch of three point shooters. Maybe they should have won one title. But three in a row? No way.

When the Spurs got their act together in 03, and when the Lakers played the D in 04, they got their butt kicked. Also, it's too bad that Tim Duncan didn't join Tracy McGrady in Orlando instead of Grant Hill in the Summer of 2000. That run would have ended at one.

The Pats were a very limited team talent-wise. Who do they have off of those three SB-winning teams that is going to the Hall besides Brady (and even he doesn't deserve to if he was Ernie Adams' puppet)?

Also, what did Steve Young do before he got to SF? Nothing. Playing for SF made him. Even then, though, he really didn't play long enough as a starter to be in the Hall.

No sour grapes. Just truth.

[Valar Morghulis]

TEven then, though, he really didn't play long enough as a starter to be in the Hall.

No sour grapes. Just truth.

By this logic do you not support TD going to Canton?

[Runamok]

That's a perfectly rational top 5.

No way. Possibly, if you inverted your list, subtracted Marino and tweaked it a bit.

Look, rating the best of all time is purely subjective. But you have to first agree on the criteria. Manning is, or will be, the all-time statistical leader, but no way is he the best to ever play. No one who has so directly contributed to his team's big game losses deserves to have his name mentioned in that conversation. How many times, with his team in position to win, did he shoot himself in the foot? It is debatable whether he or his receivers deserve more credit for his records, IMO. Hell, if he and Brady had switched receiver groups in the 2006 AFC championship game, NE wins that game 62-3, and Manning has zero rings. That's not even debatable.

Elway has standing, again my opinion, in the discussion because he was a "winner", with or without those 2 titles.

Marino, naw. Only if you believe stats are everything, and, as in Manning's case, discount the talent they had at their disposal.

I loved Montana, but as Joel said, he is perhaps a little overrated, especially if you look carefully at his stats. But he was a "winner" for sure, so if that's the criteria, I can see him as #1 all-time.

I don't know if Brady deserves the nod, but there's no denying he has been phenomenal when you look at what he has had to work with, for the most part. And his winning record is very impressive.

[Valar Morghulis]

No way. Possibly, if you inverted your list, subtracted Marino and tweaked it a bit.
.

Does that mean you agree with 4 out of my 5 - but you would put them in a different order?

[MOtorboat]

No way. Possibly, if you inverted your list, subtracted Marino and tweaked it a bit.

Look, rating the best of all time is purely subjective. But you have to first agree on the criteria. Manning is, or will be, the all-time statistical leader, but no way is he the best to ever play. No one who has so directly contributed to his team's big game losses deserves to have his name mentioned in that conversation. How many times, with his team in position to win, did he shoot himself in the foot? It is debatable whether he or his receivers deserve more credit for his records, IMO. Hell, if he and Brady had switched receiver groups in the 2006 AFC championship game, NE wins that game 62-3, and Manning has zero rings. That's not even debatable.

Elway has standing, again my opinion, in the discussion because he was a "winner", with or without those 2 titles.

Marino, naw. Only if you believe stats are everything, and, as in Manning's case, discount the talent they had at their disposal.

I loved Montana, but as Joel said, he is perhaps a little overrated, especially if you look carefully at his stats. But he was a "winner" for sure, so if that's the criteria, I can see him as #1 all-time.

I don't know if Brady deserves the nod, but there's no denying he has been phenomenal when you look at what he has had to work with, for the most part. And his winning record is very impressive.

What is your logic for leaving Marino out?

Patriot sour grapes? Because that's what this entire post wreaks of.

[7DnBrnc53]

By this logic do you not support TD going to Canton?

Young did make it to seven consecutive Pro Bowls, but his selection in 95 was questionable, and in 96 and 97 (years he missed several games), there weren't too many great QB's in the NFC. That's when guys like Ty Detmer, Bobby Hoying, Scott Mitchell, Tony Banks, and Danny Kanell were starting for teams.

I wouldn't question TD's election in the Hall at all. If Dwight Stephenson (ex-center from the Miami Dolphins) made it, then TD should. Stephenson played seven years, but was only a starter for about four and a half of those.


I loved Montana, but as Joel said, he is perhaps a little overrated, especially if you look carefully at his stats. But he was a "winner" for sure, so if that's the criteria, I can see him as #1 all-time.

I don't know if Brady deserves the nod, but there's no denying he has been phenomenal when you look at what he has had to work with, for the most part. And his winning record is very impressive.

So you are saying that Montana is overrated, and Brady isn't? I would take Montana over Brady. They both are system QB's, but Brady is also a game manager as well. He has been more of a cog in the system than the person who drives it. Heck, in 2008, a guy that hadn't started since High School (Matt Cassel) came in and had better stats than Brady did in his first year as a starter.

[tripp]

Peyton Manning is literally the last player in the NFL I would worry about being distracted about breaking a record. This guy is all team first.