Reputation fumbles: A tale of two quarterbacks

Then there's Peyton Manning, playing in what many feel might be the last year of his golden career. Like Brady, he's also won every award, bowl and accolade and considered one of the top quarterbacks of his generation. He's likable, folksy and the NFL's most marketable player according to Forbes (Brady came in 7^th on the 2015 list).

Manning's name came under fire when the almost-defunct Al-Jazeera America network reported that he, along with other notable athletes, had received performance enhancing drugs. Manning flatly denied it and said he was "disgusted" and "sickened" by the allegations. Though the media covered the story initially, most felt that Manning was being falsely accused, especially since the so- called informer recanted his story immediately and said he had lied on purpose to the Al-Jazeera source. NFL broadcasters followed suit and refused to even reference the allegations on-air in the next game that Manning played, calling it a "non-story" – despite the fact that other athletes facing similar accusations were always a "story" until proven otherwise.

These observations are not meant to instigate a Brady vs. Manning/fan battle as they both have had impeccable careers; instead, it is intriguing to objectively look at the dueling scenarios and ask, why the two standards? How much do perception and reputation impact whether you are given the benefit of the doubt? If the rumors start, how will you be initially viewed by your peers and community?  

Based on the above, it's anybody's game.