Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Finwad32, post: 3603416, member: 651"]
I feel like your post is making the point that Simms was second best almost by default. The game was different, it's very difficult to compare. But the fact that there were so many sub-par quarterbacks and teams is an argument against Phil imo.

Phil's winning percentage is better, but, he also played in 70 less games. This brings up another point, Manning was one of the most durable players in the history of the league.

Manning statistically was better in every category, but, you have to take it with a grain of salt because in the 2000's the ball was thrown way more and the game had changed schematically.

Manning also holds every Giants passing record that's meaningful.

Statistically, I don't think you can compare, just different eras.

But for my money, I certainly don't think Simms was hands down the better QB, and both of these guys played during the years where I was most intently watching/involved.

I personally like Manning better, and he'll be in the HOF. Simms never will.

The game had changed, but they were both very accomplished. It's a shame Eli was saddled with such poor teams his last 4-5 years because it took alot of the shine off of his value.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?