-
Sample size - Three games isn’t enough to judge much of anything
-
When you’re playing in the Super Bowl, you’re probably playing against a very good defense. The 2006 Bears were a top 5 defense, the 2009 Saints were average, and the 2013 Seahawks were one of the top 10 defenses of all time.
At which time ESPN Radio will switch to talking about nothing but basketball, and will become The LeBron James Network.
Joe Montana is defined by his 4-0 record in the Super Bowl, and his incredible 11 TDs and ZERO interceptions. Never mind that he played in the pre-cap era and had terrific personnel alongside him, or that he had arguably the best coach of all time in Bill Walsh. If Montana had Manning’s post-season record, he’d be the struggling to get into the discussion of the top 10 all time QBs.
Manning has a great regular season legacy… probably the best of all time. But he will NEVER overtake Montana and that’s due exclusively to the postseason. So anyone arguing that Manning’s legacy was NOT tarnished by laying too many turds in the postseason is not dealing with the reality of the situation.
You know what would have been cool? Watching that Seattle defense up against a decent offense.
Yeah, yeah, you can argue that that was all just Seattle’s defense being just that great. And that maybe accounts for the interceptions, and the panic throws, and the sacks. But any team that misses the snap for a safety on the first play of the game is not a “great offense”-- Seattle had nothing to do with that.
One other thing that occurred to me-- There really weren’t any questionable ref calls (or lack-of-calls) this game. Every single one of them was blatantly obvious, on the instant replay if not on the original viewing. I think this is the first time I’ve ever seen that happen.
I’m not a Denver fan, but I’ve seen some games this year where they looked very, very good on offense. I was a bit worried about this game until Seattle had a 29 point lead.
I am not understanding why everyone is jumping up and down on Peyton Manning’s head. It was not his fault that they lost the game. Manning did not lose the superbowl, the Broncos lost the superbowl. It is a team sport, after all, and the Seahawks were a team, not just a bunch of players.
I’ll just note that if you need to bring up Joe Montana as a basis for comparison at all to support your argument that the other guy isn’t all that great, you’re already losing.
Peyton Manning is a great quarterback. Period.
I would have preferred a more competitive game, but so it is. (I cheered for the Seahawks, by the way.) The Superbowl is a big stage, and yes Manning’s work has been mixed on that stage. But he led his teams there in great style, and that’s what people will remember most.
If it was strictly a team sport, the Broncos wouldn’t have paid Peyton Manning $15 million, which is 12% of the NFL salary cap for all 53 players combined.
Thanks for the heads up I wasn’t aware of all your rules for sports arguments. Congratulations on your victory. I’ll also alert the 30 million or so casual fans to keep their opinions to themselves.
Ok. Wow. I don’t know where to begin.
In the episode, Homer’s dream was to own the Dallas Cowboys. At the end, a super-villain sends Homer a thank-you note that reads: "“Project Arcturus couldn’t have succeeded without you. This will get you a little closer to that dream of yours. It’s not the Dallas Cowboys, but it’s a start.”
Then, this happens.
So, your quote was a little off. But what I really want to talk about is…
Average episode??? This is from “You Only Move Twice”! It’s arguably the greatest *Simpsons *episode. (It’s my favorite, most importantly.) Albert Brooks has the best guest star turn in the series’ history as Hank Scorpio. It routinely winds up on lists of the best Simpsons episodes. It’s just … Average? … Gah!
No need. Like I said before, if they’re actually casual, they don’t care about things like “legacy”.
You still seem to want it both ways with “casual” fans. That they care enough their opinion will make a difference in coming decades but they don’t care enough to judge beyond a single game.
So what do I care if they spout their opinions for the next week or so? In 10 years, they won’t care, and Manning will still be a HOFer. Or if they do care, they’ll be judging on more than a single game.
Ok, you’re going to have to explain this further. Because it makes absolutely no sense to me. Manning is one of 53 players. He doesn’t get all the money. And it’s not a team sport?
What is your definition of “strictly a team sport”? Because from where I’m sitting, it’s something that involves a team but antipathy towards a single player trumps the other players.
Offense sells tickets, defense wins games. Manning was paid what he was paid because they figured he could fill Mile-High and sell gear. It was a bottom-line decision to hire him for that much.
It’s tough to separate out the performance of the QB from that of his teammates and the opposing defense, but I thought Manning actually played *pretty *well last night. It wasn’t his best game, of course. He missed a few throws, and that first interception was particularly brutal. But that defense was amazing; they were fucking everywhere. And Denver actually moved the ball pretty well much of the time (at least for a team that only put up 8 points). Turnovers and failed conversions meant that that didn’t translate into points, but the offense did a lot of good things (in between all the horrible things) against the toughest competition imaginable. Not counting the first play (the snap into the end zone) or the final drive (when the clock ran out), Denver gained 33.1 yards per drive , which would have been good for 10th best average stretched out over the seasons, against the best defense in the league.
And Manning had a *great *postseason until the Super Bowl. He beat Tom Brady in the AFC Championship with a flawless game, of course, which doesn’t jibe with the whole “Manning is a choker” idea, and before that he pretty much single-handedly held off the Chargers in a game that that rest of his team seemed to be actively trying to lose.
All that said, I do think that a lot of not-so-bright commentators in the decades to come will boil everything down to: “1-2 in Super Bowls, I don’t know, not that good…”
Eh, whatcha gonna do?
I argued against none of these facts.
My question is: How many NFC teams are better than then Broncos? IN retrospect, the Broncos did not have a very tough schedule. They played two other division winners and lost both those games. I would say that the Seahawks, Niners, Saints and Panthers are better than Denver. I would also say the Cardinals might be better, the Packers and Eagles are as good
Somewhere between one and three (49ers, Panthers). Probably one. It’s easy to overreact after a blowout, but those other teams had faults and losses of their own, though it’s easy to forget that because they were eliminated weeks ago.
Well then it’s weird that they didn’t play like it during the season.
ETA: Eh, Rodgers was out for so long I guess you could make the argument for GB, though without having looked at it too closely as yet I really doubt it.
I don’t know why you dismiss ‘casual’ fans in determining a players’ legacy? Joe Namath was not a great NFL quarterback, but he has a great legacy, because of the ‘casual’ fans who make up half of the NFL fan base. Namath was pretty much hobbled when he came to the NFL, but he was the first marketing tool to expand the NFL’s fan base, and happened to be the winning QB in SB III. Ask any ‘casual’ fan in their 50’s to name 5 top QBs from the past, and Namath will be in the list. Casual fans made the NFL the #1 spectator sport. They also determine ‘legacies.’
So what do I care if they spout their opinions for the next week or so? In 10 years, they won’t care, and Manning will still be a HOFer. Or if they do care, they’ll be judging on more than a single game.
If you don’t think that the position of NFL QB is, by far, the most important in football, then maybe you’re one of those ‘casual’ fans we’ve been talking about. In the modern NFL, with the rules changed to promote the passing game, everyone of the other offensive starters are there to support the QB. Even the running game is used to keep the defense honest. That’s why Manning gets paid 25% of all the offensive players combined.
Meanwhile, on WFAN today, Mike Francesa, who has been a Manning apologist for years, is hammering him for his ‘terrible’ play. (And yes, Francesa is a fat pantload, but he has a ton of listeners.)
Seems about right.
In the regular season, the Colts beat both the Seahawks and the Broncos but blown out by Arizona and were eliminated by the Pats. The Broncos beat the Pats in the AFC title game. I love the NFL transitive win game. Any given Sunday and all that.
Play Seattle vs Denver 10 times, and it won’t be a blowout each time. Nor will it be a Seattle win all 10 times (though they do get a majority of them).
Who would you take on a neutral field between Carolina and Denver? I’d take Carolina. Who would you take on a neutral field between Denver and New Orleans? I’d take New Orleans. I know it was just one game, but I really have not been overly impressed by them in the playoffs.