Same. Assuming the defense holds the Pats to 14 and 17 points each Super Bowl, of course.
I’m pretty sure I’ve made it clear that I think championships (as well as wins) is a bad way to judge QB play. Because NFL football is a team game.
I apologize, I thought my point was self-evident, but I’ll spell it out: Passer rating is affected by system, so comparing passer ratings between different systems isn’t a great method of comparison. The Giants didn’t change their offensive system in the playoffs, so it’s comparing like to like.
I just offered you one: Passer rating differential between regular season and playoffs.
No idea, he (and his era) was before my time.
So then the fact that he was grossly overpaid was irrelevant, yes? Your whole point about overpaying mediocre QBs is that it hamstrings the franchise, preventing them from winning championships, right? That’s why you’ve been rooting for Dak Prescott to get a huge contract, so the Cowboys continue not winning championships, right?
In fact, Eli is an example of your theory not working, since you yourself don’t think his massively inflated salary hurt the team’s championship potential in any way.
And, as I pointed out, that rewards a QB for being mediocre in the regular season and his team not getting to the playoffs. We discussed this (tangentially) when talking about Peyton v. Eli, and how Peyton was successful in carrying crappy team after team after team to the playoffs while Eli didn’t have to.
Plus, the question I’m asking is about judging QB’s. Not simply judging their “clutchness”. .
He has two rings. His passer rating in the playoffs was 67.5, but in the playoffs it was 81.9 for an increase in 14.4.
Overpaying a QB isn’t a guarantee of losing anymore than paying a QB is a guarantee of winning.
The Giants have been out of the playoffs for 6 out of the last 7 years (with one wild card in which Eli barely got above 50% completion percentage, threw a pick, and had a passer rating of 72.1). That’s when the cost of overpaying came due, not when they won the Superbowls. With an upgraded roster that money could have bought, I’d say yes, they would have made more playoffs in those 7 years.
Is making the playoffs your measure of success? That’s certainly a reasonable one. My measure is championships. Well, actually, I consider any season where your last game is meaningful to be a successful season, but that’s not what really sticks with me. I don’t look back fondly at the 2002, 2005, 2006, 2012, or 2017 seasons with nostalgia. It’s the 1990, 2007 and 2011 seasons that give me that warm and cozy feeling, such that the rest don’t matter. (1986 was before my time.) Those other seasons actually tend to bum me out when I think about them because they ended so badly.
As for your moved goalposts, so you’re saying that overpaying a mediocre QB means you only get a couple championships in the first 8 years, but then you have 8 down years. I think most football fans would sign up for that in a heartbeat, unless their team is already winning rings (singular counts). Only a handful of those, though, what with the Patriots hogging seemingly half of all championships.
That’s one of the games I was thinking of when I mentioned that he sometimes looked like a guy that Los Gigantes picked up off the street to play QB for them ('course, the Legion of Boom made his brother look pretty bad in S.B. XLVIII, too).
Try this on for size.
Any H.o.F. should be reserved for only the very best so I hope this doesn’t happen. If it does I’ll consider the selection committee to have “gone soft.”
Well put.
Just looking at Plunkett’s career stats on profootballreference, he’s an interesting case study. He played his first 7 seasons on bad teams in New England and San Francisco and appears to have averaged a low-60s passer rating with no playoff appearances. He joined the Raiders in his 8th year but didn’t start any games. Then he took over the starting job in his 9th season, where his passer rating jumped 10 to 15 points pretty much for the rest of his career. That’s when he started making the playoffs.
I can only assume he was running different systems before he joined the Raiders, and it appears his playoff passer rating – all while with the Raiders – was roughly the same as his passer rating during the regular season with the Raiders.
That’s a whole lotta numbers. My guess is Hamlet will dismiss it because it factors in rings, and he doesn’t think rings matter at all when evaluating QBs.
Eli’s rank of 30th seems reasonable at a glance, in the pack with Wilson and Rivers, but I didn’t even read the details of their formula.
I think Eli is borderline at best, sort of on par with Curtis Martin. So he’ll probably get in, but it will take a few years of eligibility.
I think it’s worth the read if you can cope with some “football nerd” stuff. 
I know. You’ve said it over and over. And repeatedly misstated my view as if I think championships don’t matter at all. Always fun. So I’ll say, yet again: “How you win, salary cap concerns, whether one player is better than another, long term effects. None of that matters or is even worth debating. As long as a team wins a championship, everything they did before and after is all good because they won that championship. Winning a championship automatically makes every decision the team made or will make, absolutely correct.”
We’re simply talking past each other now. I try to pin down what possible objective measures you have for rating QB play and I cite a variety of statistics. You simply say “championships” over and over, as if that justifies every decision made. That’s fine, if that’s your viewpoint. Have at it. But if you come up with something new to add, or some kind of objective measure of worth of a QB that isn’t simply pointing at rings, let me know.
Joe Namath is in the Hall of Fame. It’s already 'gone soft".
You mean other than the objective measure I just offered?
I also love how you start by assuring me that I’m misunderstanding you, that you do think championships matter, and then go on to say I can’t point to rings. Nice consistency in your inconsistency. You’re like the Eli of debating!
One thing Eli has going for him is that he absolutely elevated the receivers he played with. To a man, they all had their best years with Eli. I mean, come on, Steve Smith 2 caught over 100 passes one year! None of his receivers ever left the Giants to go to another team and then did better on that other team. OBJ might, but it’s not looking great so far.
That’s actually a pretty big turn-around. Chris Berman used to quip “former Giant, now good” when doing highlights with guys like Joe Jurevicius. It was almost universally true that the Giants never got full potential out of receivers (thus the Berman quip). Then Eli showed up and that all changed.
Correct, yes. I mean, seriously, how you win? You can’t possibly be real with that. Name me a way the Packers can win a Superbowl that would disappoint you.
As long as a team wins a championship, they have accomplished the only goal that really matters. Don’t tell me about the pain, show me the baby.
The one that dealt only with the “clutch” part, and not the measurement of QB play. Yes, other than that one.
Championships are A measure, not THE measure. I’d be shocked to think you have that much difficulty understanding simple points if we haven’t done this so many times before.
Making a fan happy and being an elite QB or making good decisions for a franchise are different things. If you can’t come up with something beyond results orientated thinking, I fear we’re done.
I’ve re-read this thread (and the other ones where we’ve discussed Eli Manning), and I feel bad. I’m sometimes way too hostile and judgmental, and my opinion into the relative merits of one NFL player should not cause this much animosity and snark.
I’m sorry, Ellis. I should not be such a dick in these kinds of threads. We should be able to disagree about the merits of one player without getting so agitated and without me being such a prick. While I think that Eli is easily in the top 5 of most overrated players ever in the NFL, I also need to realize people can disagree and not have it be a thing.
My bad. Go Giants! Beat the Cowboys!!
If you’re the Bengals, yes. Wait…no. Well, maybe.