Brady-60 Million for 6 years. Avergae-10 million a year

Manning-99 million for 7 years. Average-14 million a year

Vick -130 million for 10 years. Average-13 Million a year



Brady-3 Super Bowls

Manning- 0 Super Bowls

Vick-0 Super Bowls.


I wonder who is the best value.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-patriots-brady&prov=ap&type=lgns

However, if Manning had the Pats D, he would have those 3 SBs. Manning is a much better QB than Brady IMO. They Pats O isn't anything amazing like the Colts, they're just a better all around team. Still, Brady is a better deal. Leading your team to 3 SBs should require a nice contract.

Mexico, err Vick...overhyped.

Brady's contract is proof positive that he is a team player, and Mannings contract is proof that he is not. That's why Brady has three SB rings and Manning is unlikely to have any. How much damage did Manning's salary demands do to the Colts team? It caused the Colts to release quality starters and created a big problem for them to get the players they needed to build an effective defense. The reason the Colts will make the playoffs is Peyton Manning. The reason they'll never get to the Super Bowl in the near future is Peyton Manning.

I agree that Manning is the better quarterback, but he is definitely not the better team player. Same thing goes for Vick.

I would still rather have Brady. I agree that Manning is phenominal(sp), but he has 3 of the top ten AFC wide recievers, one of the top running backs. There is something intanginable about Brady.

Vick, overrated, overhyped, overpaid.

Bill Belichick is the best value.

Good point. We'll see how he does with two new coords.

Vick is the best value...

He brings so much more to the table when it comes to marketability than any other athlete out there. The impact he has on the community, sales, image, etc. outdoes whatever Brady and Manning do.

His team is a 5-11 team without him.

I thought that Bellicheck was just going to take over the offensive coordinator duties.

As QB's go I agree with you 100% re: Vick.

However, I really think the that Belichick is being overlooked here.

Winning superbowls is by far more marketable and has a bigger impact on the community than any one player and Belichick knows how to win them. He's at the peek of his career right now and the best head coach in the NFL. It has all come together for him. He win's superbowls without a team filled with enormously high-priced superstars; a philosophy he brought to the table. He's got the X's & O's, leadership, scouting and coaching staff - all of which he built.

He could win with practically anyone at QB.

Nothing is more marketable than 3 Super Bowls in 4 years, IMO. Without Brady, what happens to New England?

For that matter, without Manning what happens to the Colts?

Vick may help put butts in seats, but I hardly think his presence in Atlanta is as far reaching as that of Brady and Manning in their respective communities. Indy and New England are perennial playoff teams. Atlanta got into the post-season last year on the merits of its defense, not its offense.

Detroit shut Vick down. Manning destroyed Detroit. I vote for Manning (as the best QB)...he doesn't have "off" days.

What was the score in Manning's last game last season.

Well...his last game of the regular season, he went 1/2 for 6 yards. So you must be referring to the divisional playoffs where the Pats whooped the Colts' asses? Lol. Yeah...

Manning didn't play well that game; he looked like JH! His passes were both underthrown and overthrown. His receivers dropped five passes and fumbled two others after making catches. Also, Stokley played very little until the end of the first half. 27 for 42 isn't a bad completion rate. You throw in those 5 dropped passes that would normally have been completions and Manning would have had a 76% completion rate. It doesn't matter if you don't put up points though!

One of the things to remember is the question who was the best bargain. This was all based on their contract numbers. Each player is signed to a contract by their team, not by the NFL. Therefore, since a player is signed to a contract to perform on the field above and beyond anything else, the question goes directly to the players performance numbers and results versus their contract numbers. With that as our guideline, Brady is BY FAR the best bargain.

Vick may be more of a media darling, but that is not particular to the Falcons as much as it is for the NFL and it's marketing strategies. When it comes down to the individual teams they are interested in winning and getting to the Super Bowl.

I'm talking about quarterbacks, and what each of them does respectively for their team.

When it comes to QBs, how they fit in to how much a team generates revenue, I think it's a landslide on how much Vick wins.

Brady doesn't have nearly the impact in New England as Vick does in Atlanta, how he turned that city around from a ghost town at games to a hot ticket.

Vick has the hottest jersey in the NFL next to Ben Roethlisberger.

Brady is a good QB. But there will always be one question with his career. Was he a product of Belicheck's system? He doesn't go downfield with lots of his throws. He did moreso this year, but he is on a great team and is a piece to their puzzle.

Without Brady, New England is still a great team. But we haven't been able to see how they would fare without him. I think that Atlanta would suffer more without Michael Vick, than New England would without Tom Brady.