Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 01-13-2020, 06:24 PM
FoieGrasIsEvil's Avatar
FoieGrasIsEvil is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Land of Cheese Coneys
Posts: 18,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamlet View Post
But you're not saying wins matter, you're saying wins, in certain circumstances, matter.
To me, it's that they matter more because of the pressure of needing to win to keep playing.
__________________
Posting From Above The Browns
  #102  
Old 01-13-2020, 08:01 PM
Hamlet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atamasama View Post
His teams did well in the regular season and yet in the playoffs seemed to hit a brick wall. He has a reputation for not doing well in big games (like Kirk Cousins). It’s a prevalent opinion, just Google “Tony Romo choke” (which fortunately doesn’t come up with as many NSFW results as you’d expect).
I'm not a huge fan of "reputation", especially when it's based on a muffed hold on a field goal. He certainly has sucked in the playoffs, like the losses to the Giants and the Vikings. But so has Eli, who threw 3 picks against the Panthers, 2 more against the Eagles, and one against the Pack, all of which were one and done playoff runs. What Eli has is two rings (thanks Asante Samuel and David Tyree!) and a "reputation".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atamasama
He also has his defenders, like Rob Tornoe at Forbes, who cites his numerous 4th quarter comeback as evidence of his ability to be clutch.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/cartoon.../#1de4fd6d1828
When I mentioned Romo I was sure to add the caveat that he’s still relatively very successful for the Dallas franchise over the last 2 1/2 decades, so I admitted it might not be fair or accurate to include him as “bad” in the playoffs. Still, that seems to be his reputation.
I'd throw in Romo's stats in the 4th quarter and his 100+ passer rating when leading by less than 7 points as evidence against his "reputation".

But I'm less interested in debating Tony Romo as a quarterback than I am in emphasizing, once again, that wins and losses are a bad way to judge QB play.

Last edited by Hamlet; 01-13-2020 at 08:03 PM.
  #103  
Old 01-14-2020, 11:40 AM
Ellis Dee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 14,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamlet View Post
I'm not a huge fan of "reputation", especially when it's based on a muffed hold on a field goal. He certainly has sucked in the playoffs, like the losses to the Giants and the Vikings. But so has Eli, who threw 3 picks against the Panthers, 2 more against the Eagles, and one against the Pack, all of which were one and done playoff runs. What Eli has is two rings (thanks Asante Samuel and David Tyree!) and a "reputation".
It doesn't matter the context; any time I see a reference to Eli and the Packers it brings a smile to my face. Two glorious playoff victories in Lambeau Field, against both recent Packer HoF QBs, is a core bedrock of Eli's reputation.

(Don't forget, that second win was a Rodgers one-and-done where Rodgers threw a pick, so maybe Eli's loss to the Pack isn't all that big of a black mark to carry. The two wins over the Pack might just barely offset that one loss, possibly.)

Quote:
I'd throw in Romo's stats in the 4th quarter and his 100+ passer rating when leading by less than 7 points as evidence against his "reputation".
But isn't that just rewarding mediocre play in the first 3 quarters, really?

Last edited by Ellis Dee; 01-14-2020 at 11:43 AM.
  #104  
Old 01-14-2020, 02:44 PM
Hamlet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Dee View Post
It doesn't matter the context; any time I see a reference to Eli and the Packers it brings a smile to my face. Two glorious playoff victories in Lambeau Field, against both recent Packer HoF QBs, is a core bedrock of Eli's reputation.
Absolutely. His "reputation" isn't about how he actually performed at all. It's about ... biased? ... fans thinking a win is a great way to judge a QB. Who cares if Eli had a 72.0 passer rating, barely completed more than 50% of his passes, didn't throw a single touchdown, and that the defense got two interceptions from Favre? They won, so Eli was great!

At least you're a ton more consistent than Eli.

Last edited by Hamlet; 01-14-2020 at 02:46 PM.
  #105  
Old 01-14-2020, 05:58 PM
Ellis Dee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 14,658
Dude, seriously, you may be the only person on the entire planet who thinks Eli didn't play well in the ice bowl in Green Bay in 2007. He and Plaxico lit that stadium (and Al Harris) up.
  #106  
Old 01-14-2020, 06:18 PM
Hamlet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Dee View Post
Dude, seriously, you may be the only person on the entire planet who thinks Eli didn't play well in the ice bowl in Green Bay in 2007. He and Plaxico lit that stadium (and Al Harris) up.
This is exactly my point. Sure the defense got two interceptions, including the one that won the game for them in overtime. Sure, a Manning interception got taken away on a penalty call. Sure, he barely completed 50% of his passes. Sure, a roughing the passer penalty saved him on third down that led to a touchdown. None of that really matters. Eli Manning is great because the Giants won.

Eli didn't suck in that game like he has in so many other games, he was just fine. But to try and pretend he was the reason the won or that he "lit up" the Packers is just silly.

But, again, we're just beating the same dead horse over and over. Enjoy that.
  #107  
Old 01-14-2020, 06:24 PM
Ellis Dee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 14,658
What color is the sky in your world?

Tell me, in your opinion, how did Plaxico do that game?
  #108  
Old 01-14-2020, 06:49 PM
Hamlet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Dee View Post
What color is the sky in your world?
Ad hominem. What a shocker.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Dee
Tell me, in your opinion, how did Plaxico do that game?
Great. He played pretty darn well.

What's weird is I would think he'd had played well even if Favre didn't throw the interception that led to the Giants win. Because, if the Packers had won the game, it wouldn't have made a bit of difference on how Plaxico played in the game. Just like, if the Packers had won, it wouldn't have changed how Eli played. Because wins are an incredibly stupid way of deciding how well one player played.

Last edited by Hamlet; 01-14-2020 at 06:52 PM.
  #109  
Old 01-14-2020, 06:56 PM
Ellis Dee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 14,658
And who was it that threw him the ball?
  #110  
Old 01-14-2020, 07:25 PM
Hamlet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Dee View Post
And who was it that threw him the ball?
Really? That's your coup de gras? Ignore my point about wins being a stupid way to judge a player's performance and instead decide that if a WR had a good game, then the QB had to have a good game?


Tiki Barber had 8 receptions for 111 yards and played very well against the Vikings in 2005. Eli had a passer rating of 39.5 and threw 4 interceptions.
Jeremy Shockey had 10 catches, 107 yards and played great against the Eagles. Eli had a passer rating of 63.8 and threw 3 interceptions.
Plaxico Burress had 7 catches, 93 yards and a touchdown and played very well against the Vikings in 2007. Eli had a passer rating of 33.8 and threw 3 interceptions.
Mario Manningham had 4 catches for 132 yards and a touchdown and played great against the Packers in 2010. Eli had a passer rating of 63.6 and threw 4 interceptions.

Do I need to continue to point out the independence of QB play and WR play. Maybe point out that Larry Fitzgerald, one of the best WR's ever, played amazing with the likes of Josh McKown, John Skelton, Kevin Kolb, and Blaine Gabbert. Or that Jimmy Smith had almost 300 yards and 3 touchdowns with Mark Brunell?

You do make me smile though.
  #111  
Old 01-14-2020, 07:34 PM
Ellis Dee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 14,658
I think that nobody but you came away from that game thinking Eli played badly.
  #112  
Old 01-14-2020, 07:42 PM
Hamlet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Dee View Post
I think that nobody but you came away from that game thinking Eli played badly.
Maybe, when you find yourself having to " misstate" what I said (hint: I never said he played badly), it might be time to step away for a bit.

And wins remain a stupid way to judge an individual's performance in the NFL.
  #113  
Old 01-15-2020, 09:12 AM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,986
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamlet View Post
Maybe, when you find yourself having to " misstate" what I said (hint: I never said he played badly), it might be time to step away for a bit.

And wins remain a stupid way to judge an individual's performance in the NFL.
To be clear you said he was fine, but not great, correct?
  #114  
Old 01-15-2020, 12:54 PM
Ellis Dee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 14,658
As far as I can tell, he's comparing Eli's stats in that game with the rest of the league in general, as if playing in -23 weather (with windchill) has no effect on passing numbers. HoF QB Brett Favre had worse numbers than Eli that game but that's not evidence of Eli playing well, it just shows that the win was handed to Eli on a silver platter.

In Hamlet's world, Eli has never had agency. He never accomplishes anything, but rather Eli just does what any replacement level player would have done. If the Giants win, it's always because the other team gave it away, never that the Giants (or especially Eli) took it. Just look at his posts in this thread. Any time Hamlet mentions an Eli accomplishment, it's immediately followed by a parenthetical detailing how the other team fucking up is the real reason for Eli's success.

I never put it together why Hamlet has always been so irrational when evaluating Eli, but it's so obvious now that it's just bitter resentment about Eli knocking the Packers out of the playoffs twice. Eli Manning beat us? That scrub? We must have been drunk!

The fact that he dismisses Eli's performance in that ice game as pedestrian or replacement level or whatever explains it all. We've reached Dio levels of unabashed homerism.

Last edited by Ellis Dee; 01-15-2020 at 12:58 PM.
  #115  
Old 01-15-2020, 03:48 PM
Hamlet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Dee View Post
As far as I can tell, he's comparing Eli's stats in that game with the rest of the league in general, as if playing in -23 weather (with windchill) has no effect on passing numbers. HoF QB Brett Favre had worse numbers than Eli that game but that's not evidence of Eli playing well, it just shows that the win was handed to Eli on a silver platter.

In Hamlet's world, Eli has never had agency. He never accomplishes anything, but rather Eli just does what any replacement level player would have done. If the Giants win, it's always because the other team gave it away, never that the Giants (or especially Eli) took it. Just look at his posts in this thread. Any time Hamlet mentions an Eli accomplishment, it's immediately followed by a parenthetical detailing how the other team fucking up is the real reason for Eli's success.
Seems we're right back where we always are when discussing Eli Manning. Me providing stats, examples, and comparisions to prove my point, and you making shit up about what I said. Happens every time. No matter how many stats I trot out, how many times I say Eli is a fine NFL QB, or how many example I give to prove my points, you simply dismiss it all, point to his two rings, and repeatedly lie about what I say. We can't talk rationally about his performance, we can't discuss whether wins is a valid measure of QB performance, and we certainly can't come to some kind of agree to disagree because YOU LIE CONSTANTLY ABOUT WHAT I SAY and create strawmen. I see no purpose, other than to make you look more like an ass than you are, to continue.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:40 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017