Stats are not reality, they're just numbers tallied by statisticians to show people the odds in vegas
Winning is reality, and winning the super bowl is the ultimate reality which brees and the saints achieved decidedly.
And if it wasnt obvious before that final game, they should have yanked the mvp from manning after the SB and handed it to brees. but once again it matters little because as i said the real deal is who wins the big one.
All of that being said i would consider Manning a great QB, and at one time he might have been the best, but that time has come and gone.
Stats are reality. They might be twisted by people with their own agenda, but when used accurately and with enough information backing them up they are as pretty much more indicative of reality than anything else. Winning is reality and is the ultimate goal in sports, but it doesn't really tell anything beyond who won the game. No decent analysis can be done from it. It certainly doesn't reveal why one wins or who contributes most to winning. Winning a game is only a possible end results of other factors, factors that are put into much better light by other things. (like well done stats for instance) There are many factors that go into winning. When looking at just wins there is very little good information that can be gained beyond who won, and even worse is the fact it can not tell you why it happens. You are just conveniently ignoring things that don't fit your subjective perceived view of reality or what you would like to see. Who is better is not just who wins more, but more importantly who is better and who will cause a team, with all other factors being equal, to win more. It just so happens with sports in real life where there are things like random variance and complex match ups (let along the fact that the factors are never equal) the best team or person doesn't always win. In fact I would say in most sports where the level of competition is relatively equal throughout the league, like the NFL, the better person or team very often has a decent chance of losing most games they play even if it‘s more unlikely than not. I understand it, and except it's the nature of what it is. That's why wins and losses are almost never a good way to judge any individual in a team based sport. It's a near useless statistic for it.
Brees might be the second best quarterback the last two or three years behind Manning and a little ahead of Rivers and Brady, but to have his career be in the same neighborhood Manning‘s is, assuming Manning quit tomorrow, he would have to put up the numbers he did last year for another 5 or 6 years,...at least...and that's not going to happen. He's already falling off a little this year, and at the age he's at it's not going to happen. I would even put Brees behind Rivers this year.
