HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Other Sports > Football
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Football NFL, NCAA, CFL

Does Manning have the biggest drop off in the playoffs than any other all-time great?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-17-2013, 04:51 AM
  #26
silkyjohnson50
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 8,743
vCash: 500
First and foremost, how did I just now find "page 2"?!?!

I had no idea that these other sports forums were here in all of my time at HFBoards!

Regarding the Manning conversation, I don't see how anybody can deny it any longer. He's simply not the same QB in the postseason that we see in the regular season.

I hate it when the apologists pawn it off on the defense saying that "Peyton didn't play poorly."

When we're talking about an all time great, that's inexcusable talk IMO. The greats elevate their game and/or will their teams to win. The great ones are the biggest reason why they won, not "not the reason" why they didn't win.

silkyjohnson50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2013, 07:43 AM
  #27
EpochLink
Canucks and Jets fan
 
EpochLink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,102
vCash: 500
I've seen Eli perform in the post season, the ones where he sucked (2005, 2006 and 2008) was all on Eli..and some other circumstances ( I'm looking at you Plaxico )...

The ones where he delivered were beyond what Peyton has done, to be fair the 2006 Championship game against New England stands out for him but to what Eli has done ( Dallas 2007, Green Bay 2007/2011, New England 2007/2011, San Francisco 2011) where damn near better than what Peyton has done in the playoffs..

Sure you can say lucky breaks, the defense, the running game (or lack their of) can be a contribute but when the stakes are down and scores to be needed...Eli just has something that Peyton doesn't..

EpochLink is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2013, 07:48 AM
  #28
Hasbro
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Hasbro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: South Rectangle
Country: Sami
Posts: 30,139
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KH1 View Post
How can you say that game is "entirely on Peyton Manning?" If Rahim Moore makes a very basic defensive play on Baltimore's hail mary, then the Broncos win in regulation and nobody remembers Manning's tipped pick-six, or checkdown to Hester, or kneel to end the half.

By the way, I suggest you actually compare Manning and Brady's stats (postseason included) before you declare one to be "not even close" to the other.

I don't even like Manning, but this kind of unhinged criticism drives me crazy.
I'll take wins over stats.

Hasbro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2013, 09:23 AM
  #29
JordanStaal#1Fan
Registered User
 
JordanStaal#1Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Asbestos, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,114
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skoogs View Post
I refuse to acknowledge anything other than the fact that Reche Caldwell sucks.
Yeah, Caldwell does suck and that drop killed us. However, Manning did bring his team back. If he didn't, we wouldn't be talking about how Reche Caldwell suck and Tom Brady would probably already be a 4x Super Bowl champion, 3x Super Bowl MVP.

JordanStaal#1Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2013, 09:27 AM
  #30
KH1
Registered User
 
KH1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Under the cap floor
Country: United States
Posts: 16,018
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hasbro View Post
I'll take wins over stats.
Giving a QB all the credit for a team win (or all the blame for a team loss) is ridiculous.

How can you say that Manning should have been credited if Rahim Moore made an easy play to knock down Flacco's hail mary, but he should be blamed because Moore choked?

KH1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2013, 09:30 AM
  #31
JordanStaal#1Fan
Registered User
 
JordanStaal#1Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Asbestos, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,114
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KH1 View Post
Giving a QB all the credit for a team win (or all the blame for a team loss) is ridiculous.

How can you say that Manning should have been credited if Rahim Moore made an easy play to knock down Flacco's hail mary, but he should be blamed because Moore choked?
No, but you can't blame it all on Moore either. Manning made mistakes, the Broncos D didn't show up, Fox made terrible decisions.

Manning didn't step up his game and that's a fact, but I agree with you that too much credit/blame is given to QBs. When you team scores two TDs on punt/KO returns, you should win.

JordanStaal#1Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2013, 10:19 AM
  #32
KH1
Registered User
 
KH1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Under the cap floor
Country: United States
Posts: 16,018
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JordanStaal#1Fan View Post
No, but you can't blame it all on Moore either. Manning made mistakes, the Broncos D didn't show up, Fox made terrible decisions.

Manning didn't step up his game and that's a fact, but I agree with you that too much credit/blame is given to QBs. When you team scores two TDs on punt/KO returns, you should win.
Agreed, I don't mean to single out Moore (although his play did swing the game far more than any other, including Manning's awful OT pick.)

QB's the most important position, but it's still a team game.

KH1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2013, 01:46 PM
  #33
kingsholygrail
Interference = Cup
 
kingsholygrail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Derpifornia
Country: United States
Posts: 44,357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JordanStaal#1Fan View Post
No, but you can't blame it all on Moore either. Manning made mistakes, the Broncos D didn't show up, Fox made terrible decisions.

Manning didn't step up his game and that's a fact, but I agree with you that too much credit/blame is given to QBs. When you team scores two TDs on punt/KO returns, you should win.
Large credit should be to the Ravens D which limited Manning to frustratingly short passes and when it came to the end, he forced one. He even admits that it got to him. That's a great defensive scheme by the Ravens.

Brady does the same crap when he can't play his game as a QB. It's not rocket science.

kingsholygrail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2013, 09:15 PM
  #34
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,071
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EpochLink View Post
I've seen Eli perform in the post season, the ones where he sucked (2005, 2006 and 2008) was all on Eli..and some other circumstances ( I'm looking at you Plaxico )...

The ones where he delivered were beyond what Peyton has done, to be fair the 2006 Championship game against New England stands out for him but to what Eli has done ( Dallas 2007, Green Bay 2007/2011, New England 2007/2011, San Francisco 2011) where damn near better than what Peyton has done in the playoffs..

Sure you can say lucky breaks, the defense, the running game (or lack their of) can be a contribute but when the stakes are down and scores to be needed...Eli just has something that Peyton doesn't..
I agree with you there, for some reason Eli has been able to take the Giants by the scruff of the neck and carry them to victory. Now, we can't get involved in the peanut gallery that was last year's Super Bowl when there was serious discussion among very respected analysts about whether or not Eli is now better than Peyton. It was ludicrous and it was such a heat of the moment discussion. Peyton had been injured all year and all of the sudden they seemed to forget all he had done but since his brother has now won more Super Bowls there became a serious discussion. Baloney. Eli is a very, very inconsistent QB and a lot of it is on him this year for failing to get the Giants into the postseason. He just has too many clunkers out there for games and then comes back the next game with a 4TD performance. We saw this in the last game of the year this season where he had 5(?) TD passes in the first half. It was too little to late though.

That being said, Eli does have more of those "Sportscenter" type playoff moments than his brother. Peyton has the AFC championship against the Patriots and that's about it. Eli has two incredibly clutch Super Bowl winning drives that both featured a hail mary of a pass that connected. You wish Peyton had more of these but he doesn't. Montana of course has his fair share of memorable playoff moments but it is just so strange that Peyton doesn't. Who the heck even remembers his Super Bowl win against the Bears? It was raining, honestly, that's what I remember the most.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2013, 09:38 PM
  #35
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,744
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
Alright, I was really hoping Peyton would have won another Super Bowl this year and kind of put the exclamation point on his career. However, he didn't and with his 9-11 postseason career it is getting harder and harder to ever think he can become the greatest QB ever. For the longest time I resisted the urge to put Brady ahead of him and while some on here would still do that I believe they are as close as they ever have been.

Granted, John Fox made some horrible calls in the game over the weekend. I can never understand for the life of me why a coach goes into halftime holding the ball with two timeouts left and does not attempt to make a play or two at least in field goal range. Fox did this at the end of the game too which didn't make a lick of sense and makes him look even worse considering Atlanta literally won their game in the same situation (30 seconds left, deep in their own zone, timeouts left). But either way, Manning has a less than stellar postseason record. It is almost coming to th point where he appears to be a different player in the postseason than the surgeon that he usually is in the regular season. He has his 1 Super Bowl and he reached another one only to lose to the Saints. So he has moderate success, but I am wondering if the discrepancy he has is bigger than any other all-time great - in any sport.
Among NFL QBs, Peyton Manning isn't anywhere close to "biggest drop-off".

The legitimate answer, far and away, is Bobby Layne. In four playoff games, he was 46/97 for 568 yards, 1 TD, and an almost unreal 12 INTs. Oddly enough, his playoff record was 3-1...the Lions won in spite of him.

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2013, 09:41 PM
  #36
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,744
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
That being said, Eli does have more of those "Sportscenter" type playoff moments than his brother. Peyton has the AFC championship against the Patriots and that's about it. Eli has two incredibly clutch Super Bowl winning drives that both featured a hail mary of a pass that connected. You wish Peyton had more of these but he doesn't. Montana of course has his fair share of memorable playoff moments but it is just so strange that Peyton doesn't. Who the heck even remembers his Super Bowl win against the Bears? It was raining, honestly, that's what I remember the most.
The only reason at all that Eli was in a position to do anything late was because the Giants defense played two absolutely unreal games. In 2007, the Patriots averaged 37 points a game; they scored 14 despite only turning the ball over once. And last year, the offense averaged 32 a game and managed 17 (again with one turnover, that being so far downfield it may as well have been a punt).

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2013, 10:19 PM
  #37
Hasbro
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Hasbro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: South Rectangle
Country: Sami
Posts: 30,139
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
Among NFL QBs, Peyton Manning isn't anywhere close to "biggest drop-off".

The legitimate answer, far and away, is Bobby Layne. In four playoff games, he was 46/97 for 568 yards, 1 TD, and an almost unreal 12 INTs. Oddly enough, his playoff record was 3-1...the Lions won in spite of him.
In fairness he was probably hammered.

Hasbro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2013, 10:57 PM
  #38
TheMoreYouKnow
Registered User
 
TheMoreYouKnow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Eire
Posts: 8,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
The only reason at all that Eli was in a position to do anything late was because the Giants defense played two absolutely unreal games. In 2007, the Patriots averaged 37 points a game; they scored 14 despite only turning the ball over once. And last year, the offense averaged 32 a game and managed 17 (again with one turnover, that being so far downfield it may as well have been a punt).
The QB-centric view on football is one of the dumber things in sports. You know how Skip Bayless harshed out on Lebron all those times and how he was mocked for it? That was more valid than the view that many people have on QBs being defined by wins or even worse "clutch wins".

TheMoreYouKnow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2013, 10:59 PM
  #39
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,744
vCash: 500
Here's a good list of guys whose playoff performances absolutely sucked.

Jim Kelly
Danny White
Jake Plummer
Jim Everett
Steve McNair
Fran Tarkenton
Richard Todd
George Blanda
Bobby Hebert
Craig Morton
Craig Morton
Stan Humphries
Drew Bledsoe
YA Tittle
Bobby Layne
Jack Kemp
Jeff Kemp (must run in the family)

List of those who outperformed the regular season dramatically
Tobin Rote
Bart Starr
Sid Luckman
Daryle Lamonica
Terry Bradshaw
Joe Montana

Nearly every other QB in NFL history is too close to their regular-season performance for it to be considered statistically significant. Basically, outside of these guys, it's arguing whether a series of above-average games is better than several exceptional ones tempered by several atrocious ones.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hasbro View Post
In fairness he was probably hammered.
He probably wasn't, and maybe that's what the problem was. It's like when Jack Dempsey fought Gene Tunney; Dempsey was having digestive problems, so he was given whiskey mixed with tea to calm him. He promptly started vomiting, prompting a writer to quip that, "His stomach held the whiskey and rejected the tea."

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2013, 11:03 PM
  #40
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,744
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMoreYouKnow View Post
The QB-centric view on football is one of the dumber things in sports. You know how Skip Bayless harshed out on Lebron all those times and how he was mocked for it? That was more valid than the view that many people have on QBs being defined by wins or even worse "clutch wins".
I had this very argument with a friend last night. To put it gently, he's a Tom Brady fanboy, and I am not.

So he texted me after the Broncos loss, which I didn't respond to. He did it again last night, so I asked him to name me the three greatest baseball players (non-pitchers) in history. After some discussion, he came up with Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb, and Ted Williams.

I asked if football was more or less of a team game than baseball; he said football was more of a team game. I pointed out that Williams and Cobb both never won a World Series despite long and very illustrious careers, and Ruth was thrown out stealing to end the 1926 World Series. The Yankees were down 3-2 in the bottom of the 9th of Game 7, with Bob Meusel at the plate, and for reasons that will forever remain unknown, Ruth (a poor stealer in his best days) took off for second. He was out by 10 feet, and the series ended.

So I asked him how exactly those three could be considered "great", with two complete failures to win "the big one" and one boneheaded play that dwarfs anything Brett Favre ever did. Needless to say, the discussion ended quickly.

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2013, 11:14 PM
  #41
TheMoreYouKnow
Registered User
 
TheMoreYouKnow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Eire
Posts: 8,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
I had this very argument with a friend last night. To put it gently, he's a Tom Brady fanboy, and I am not.

So he texted me after the Broncos loss, which I didn't respond to. He did it again last night, so I asked him to name me the three greatest baseball players (non-pitchers) in history. After some discussion, he came up with Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb, and Ted Williams.

I asked if football was more or less of a team game than baseball; he said football was more of a team game. I pointed out that Williams and Cobb both never won a World Series despite long and very illustrious careers, and Ruth was thrown out stealing to end the 1926 World Series. The Yankees were down 3-2 in the bottom of the 9th of Game 7, with Bob Meusel at the plate, and for reasons that will forever remain unknown, Ruth (a poor stealer in his best days) took off for second. He was out by 10 feet, and the series ended.

So I asked him how exactly those three could be considered "great", with two complete failures to win "the big one" and one boneheaded play that dwarfs anything Brett Favre ever did. Needless to say, the discussion ended quickly.
The view is so widespread, there's TV "analysts" out there who'd rather take the QB with 50% completions for 150 yards than the guy with 75% completions for 390 yards provided the first guy's team won the game 13-9 and the other guy lost it 37-41. There's not even an attempt to explain how the QB somehow influences his porous secondary or how he makes his team's zone blitzes devastating to the opposing offense or how he affects special teams coverage, missed and made field goals. The absurdity is obvious but it hasn't ever stopped the hacks on ESPN etc.

I mean, really it comes down to how the sports media has scripted sports but football in particular to be a Hollywood drama, a Western ideally. Great QBs have to be heroes and heroes come and save the day no matter what happens, no matter how dumb his team's safeties are, how inept his offensive line is, it's his job to *somehow* make a win happen. You have to overcome the adversity! Lance Armstrong did the impossible! oh wait..

TheMoreYouKnow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2013, 11:27 PM
  #42
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,744
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMoreYouKnow View Post
The view is so widespread, there's TV "analysts" out there who'd rather take the QB with 50% completions for 150 yards than the guy with 75% completions for 390 yards provided the first guy's team won the game 13-9 and the other guy lost it 37-41. There's not even an attempt to explain how the QB somehow influences his porous secondary or how he makes his team's zone blitzes devastating to the opposing offense or how he affects special teams coverage, missed and made field goals. The absurdity is obvious but it hasn't ever stopped the hacks on ESPN etc.

I mean, really it comes down to how the sports media has scripted sports but football in particular to be a Hollywood drama, a Western ideally. Great QBs have to be heroes and heroes come and save the day no matter what happens, no matter how dumb his team's safeties are, how inept his offensive line is, it's his job to *somehow* make a win happen. You have to overcome the adversity! Lance Armstrong did the impossible! oh wait..
I'll go a bit further, and use the ridiculous "the NFL's leading passer the last xx years has not won a Super Bowl" mentality to justify the complete dismissal of production.

The first part is simple. Stats reflect production. It may reflect production imperfectly, but it still reflects production. There are peripheral indicators that I use to help focus things.

The second part is based on the poor interpretation of said numbers, which bears out exactly what you said. If a team gets behind early, especially by a lot, the defense backs off. They'll go from a cover-2 to a cover-3, and maybe stop blitzing and go with their linebackers dropping into zone as well. It's easy as hell to shred those defenses, but good luck actually getting into the end zone...it's trading off yards for clock.

So a QB on a poor team is going to have an inflated number of actual passing yards. This will be seen in the yards/TD ratio, which I use and seemingly no one else does despite it being simple math. Less than 120 passing yards per TD is MVP-caliber, and more than 175/TD is someone who plays on a really crappy team. Matthew Stafford this year, by the way, was 248:1 and Cam Newton 204:1.

But we live in a world where the media strawmans anyone who looks at a spreadsheet, by making it sound as if we regard Andrew Luck (4,374 yards, 23 TDs and 18 INTs) as more valuable than Aaron Rodgers (4,295 yards, 39 TDs and 8 INTs). Or we get to hear ESPN endlessly pat themselves on the back for "Total QB Rating", which is a bunch of garbage.

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2013, 11:43 PM
  #43
Kershaw
 
Kershaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country:
Posts: 25,519
vCash: 500
No, he isn't that bad. Unlike Thornton and Malone, he doesn't seem to the star players around him.

Kershaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2013, 12:04 AM
  #44
TheMoreYouKnow
Registered User
 
TheMoreYouKnow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Eire
Posts: 8,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
I'll go a bit further, and use the ridiculous "the NFL's leading passer the last xx years has not won a Super Bowl" mentality to justify the complete dismissal of production.

The first part is simple. Stats reflect production. It may reflect production imperfectly, but it still reflects production. There are peripheral indicators that I use to help focus things.

The second part is based on the poor interpretation of said numbers, which bears out exactly what you said. If a team gets behind early, especially by a lot, the defense backs off. They'll go from a cover-2 to a cover-3, and maybe stop blitzing and go with their linebackers dropping into zone as well. It's easy as hell to shred those defenses, but good luck actually getting into the end zone...it's trading off yards for clock.

So a QB on a poor team is going to have an inflated number of actual passing yards. This will be seen in the yards/TD ratio, which I use and seemingly no one else does despite it being simple math. Less than 120 passing yards per TD is MVP-caliber, and more than 175/TD is someone who plays on a really crappy team. Matthew Stafford this year, by the way, was 248:1 and Cam Newton 204:1.

But we live in a world where the media strawmans anyone who looks at a spreadsheet, by making it sound as if we regard Andrew Luck (4,374 yards, 23 TDs and 18 INTs) as more valuable than Aaron Rodgers (4,295 yards, 39 TDs and 8 INTs). Or we get to hear ESPN endlessly pat themselves on the back for "Total QB Rating", which is a bunch of garbage.
Advanced stats in football are extremely complicated because of the many movable pieces on the chessboard. For example, your stat would put guys at an advantage who have a strong running game at their disposal which can move the ball down the field and disadvantage guys who don't have that and are stuck moving the ball mostly with their arms. As an illustration, Chris Ponder has a very good value in this stat better than guys like Rivers, Eli or Ryan. Meanwhile Stafford had next to no running game and you're going to pile up a lot of wasted yards if you get the ball at the 20 and you need to move the ball 50 yards just for a long FG attempt with your arm being the only decent option to get there.

TheMoreYouKnow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2013, 01:01 AM
  #45
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,442
vCash: 500
Manning has been average in the playoffs including a 1st round exit that year they gave up the undefeated season. What's worse, he has been horrible outdoors and 0-4 in cold weather.

He should be sending Rex gifts on an annual basis. I don't see him getting back to the SB.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tortorella View Post
No, he isn't that bad. Unlike Thornton and Malone, he doesn't seem to the star players around him.
Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne, E James, D Clark (in his prime)...... not to mention one of the best offensive lines with Indy for a chunk of time. You could say Brady has had less talent around him.

HawksFan74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2013, 07:25 AM
  #46
KH1
Registered User
 
KH1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Under the cap floor
Country: United States
Posts: 16,018
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMoreYouKnow View Post
The view is so widespread, there's TV "analysts" out there who'd rather take the QB with 50% completions for 150 yards than the guy with 75% completions for 390 yards provided the first guy's team won the game 13-9 and the other guy lost it 37-41. There's not even an attempt to explain how the QB somehow influences his porous secondary or how he makes his team's zone blitzes devastating to the opposing offense or how he affects special teams coverage, missed and made field goals. The absurdity is obvious but it hasn't ever stopped the hacks on ESPN etc.

I mean, really it comes down to how the sports media has scripted sports but football in particular to be a Hollywood drama, a Western ideally. Great QBs have to be heroes and heroes come and save the day no matter what happens, no matter how dumb his team's safeties are, how inept his offensive line is, it's his job to *somehow* make a win happen. You have to overcome the adversity! Lance Armstrong did the impossible! oh wait..
A good example of this is Mark Sanchez, who held the "winner" label for three years for winning four road playoff games -- despite the fact that his defense was the key to all four (and they wouldn't have been on the road in the first place if Sanchez was better in the regular season.)

Ironically, the two best playoff games in Sanchez's career were the two AFC championship game losses.

KH1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2013, 07:48 AM
  #47
Epsilon
#TeamHolland
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 36,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ComrieFanatic View Post
The thing with Manning in the playoffs is he has never been able to raise his game to another level, something that all-time greats are able to do. I don't doubt that he is a better talent than Eli, but we've seen Eli raise his game to a whole new level on two occasions now, something Peyton has never done.
The problem with this sort of analysis is that Peyton's game is at such a higher level to begin with than Eli's that it's a lot less likely he can "raise his game" in the playoffs in a way that would be noticeable.

Epsilon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2013, 09:26 AM
  #48
Gibsons Finest
Beast
 
Gibsons Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Saskatoon/Brandon
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HawksFan74 View Post
Manning has been average in the playoffs including a 1st round exit that year they gave up the undefeated season. What's worse, he has been horrible outdoors and 0-4 in cold weather.

He should be sending Rex gifts on an annual basis. I don't see him getting back to the SB.



Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne, E James, D Clark (in his prime)...... not to mention one of the best offensive lines with Indy for a chunk of time. You could say Brady has had less talent around him.
Uh, they made the Super Bowl the year they sat guys and didn't go for the perfect season. The game where Manning played good, the defense fell apart but all anyone remembers is the pick six.

As far as that talent goes, Marv was absolutely terrible in the playoffs. If you want to talk about a star dropping come playoff time, there's your guy. Wayne and Clark also tended to have quite a few bad drops come January.

Gibsons Finest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2013, 09:50 AM
  #49
Double-Shift Lassť
Moderator
Just post better
 
Double-Shift Lassť's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Superurban Cbus
Country: United States
Posts: 17,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
Here's a good list of guys whose playoff performances absolutely sucked.

Jim Kelly
Danny White
Jake Plummer
Jim Everett
Steve McNair
Fran Tarkenton
Richard Todd
George Blanda
Bobby Hebert
Craig Morton
Craig Morton

Stan Humphries
Drew Bledsoe
YA Tittle
Bobby Layne
Jack Kemp
Jeff Kemp (must run in the family)
Harsh.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hasbro View Post
In fairness he was probably hammered.
I don't think Layne ever played against Fred Williamson.
(Turns out they may have played together.)

__________________
"Every game, every point is a necessity." -- Ty Conklin, January 2007
"I'll have a chance to compete for the post of first issue. This is the most important thing." -- Sergei Bobrovsky, June 2012
Double-Shift Lassť is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2013, 10:24 AM
  #50
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,597
vCash: 500
Peyton mannings the best qb of all time. Would we be having this conversation if his defense didn't allow a game tying td in the last minute of that ravens game?

If peyton had a defense half as good as Brady had in New England or Eli has in New York peyton would have at least 4 super bowls.

markrander87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:18 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.