You know, this discussion of Peyton Manning reminds me of George Karl and the 1990’s Atlanta Braves. It is possible for a player, coach or team to be extraordinary in the regular season and extremely ordinary in the playoffs. If you value regular season stats then you think Manning is in the top 5 all-time. If you value rings then Manning is the same as Kurt Warner. Nothing this season changed either perception.
No, I take it back, one can’t really make the argument for GB. Even if you completely throw out everything after Week 7, the Packers were not elite. They were 5-2 in their first 7 games. They had an average DVOA in that span of +12.3% (0% is league average, it’s adjusted for schedule of difficulty), and they outscored their opponents by an average of 10.6 points. It was not a difficult early schedule, with games against Washington, Detroit, Baltimore, Cleveland, and Minnesota (in addition to San Fran and Cincinnati). Denver, meanwhile, over the whole season, had a DVOA of 32.8% and outscored their opponents by an average of 13 points.
The biggest problem for Green Bay here is their defense. With Rodgers healthy, their offense is actually comparable to Denver’s (demonstrably worse, but not by all that much). But their defense was one of the worst in the league (next to last by DVOA), while Denver’s was league-average.
How did the Colts and the Cards manage to beat this team?
The Colts game was very close at the end, and it was indoors, in Indy. Early on in a long season, on a “given Sunday”. The Houston game that the Hawks barely won was indoors, as was the Rams game that came down to the last play. The Hawks staggered a bit against Tennessee and Tampa Bay in Seattle, perhaps due to boredom. But Arizona had a West Coast Defense, they were chasing that last wildcard slot, and by that point, Seattle was not feeling much pressure (hey, we can handle St. Louis here next week if’n it comes to that).
When you look at the Seahawks’ regular season, it does not look all that good, like they were playing for optimal entertainment value for the fans and just enough to rack up the Ws. In that light, it would make Denver (and the whole AFC) look all the more pathetic, save for the fact that a lot of extra effort and planning goes into not-losing-the-superbowl.
Damn, you’ve got high standards. In the regular season, they were 13-3, and all three losses were close, and each was against a very good opponent. They had plenty of blowout wins, including a couple against excellent San Fran and New Orleans teams. They led the league in DVOA, and were 2nd in point differential (but led the league in pythagorean wins by a healthy margin). Their schedule was very respectable. Most years (including this one), a regular season like that will look like the best one in the league.
Depends on when in the season to some extent, but Carolina in the first case, Denver in the second.
Denver’s offense actually is that good and had a remarkably bad single game. I’m in an AFC town, so I keep up more with them and less on the NFC, so take that with a block of salt.
The Denver defense, on average over the season, is better than what they showed last night. Not that it was enough to change the final outcome, but the Denver defense was a big patchwork and it showed. Several key defenders out. You can cover that up to an extent in the playoffs. But with 2 weeks of prep, you’re going to get exposed. That said, they still did a good job bottling up Marshawn Lynch. Subtract special teams points, short fields, safety, and pick 6, and the Denver defense holds Seattle at worst to the low 20s. That’s not bad.
Denver against Philadelphia? Denver won in the regular season at home. But it wasn’t even a close game. So, probably lump Arizona in with them there.
Yes I do. Because, well, those close games stress me out.
Who do you suppose has the higher QB rating in postseason play, Tom Brady or Peyton Manning? How about Steve Young or Peyton Manning? How about 4 time champ Terry Bradshaw or Peyton Manning? Or John Elway or Peyton Manning?
Are you Joe Morgan, making a shift from baseball to football? Because i don’t even know what this sentence means.
They were playing to entertain, and to win the games. Yes, and your point is…? I was under the impression that—between the NFL, the individual teams, and the fans—entertainment and winning are pretty much the key things. And making money, of course.
Also, as VarlosZ notes, they had a pretty damn good season by just about any objective measure that you care to name.
QB rating is a ridiculous pointless statistic. Chad Pennington has the 12th best career QB rating, just 2 spots away from Joe Montana
I think you flush all of the statistics and ask the question this way:
If you had to win one game, the biggest game on the biggest stage, who would you pick to be your QB?
There are two answers to this.
Bradshaw
Montana
Both of these guys were 4-0 in Super Bowls.
That’s the biggest game on the biggest stage, and each guy came up on top when all was said and done.
I know each of these guys has his detractors (Bradshaw more than Montana), and they are still out there. However, you can’t deny the results.
But i don’t care what Montana’s or Bradshaw’s QBR was. I just know what they did when they were in the biggest game of the year. They always won.
I don’t think Manning would care if he had a QBR of 6.3 in the post-season if he was 3-0 in his Super Bowls.
Peyton strikes me as a guy who understands that yes, statistics are nice, and he has some of the most impressive stats ever for his position, but what most people remember about him is his very average playoff record, and his now 1-2 in Super Bowls.
The fact that Eli has two rings to Peyton’s one has to eat at Peyton more than anything. That would be so hard to accept, since he is far and away a better QB than Eli.
If I had to choose which Manning I’d pick, now that’s a hard one!
What do you suggest be a metric? Rings, so that Trent Dilfer is better than Dan Marino and Eli is better than Peyton? How do you, in your wisdom, judge a QB?
If you can’t decide whether to have Eli or Peyton, then I will forever know how much credence to give your opinion on things football.
Yeah, wow. Picking Eli Manning over Dan Marino. And Jim Kelly. And Dan Fouts. And possibly Brett Favre. And probably a a dozen other QBs I can’t remember off the top of my head. And in wins, he ties both Tom Brady and John Elway.
Better yet - picking Ben Roethlisberger over all those guys. Just sit a moment and let that percolate through your brain. Ben Roethlisberger as the QB you pick over all those other guys.
Yes, Super Bowl wins can be awe inspiring, but the point we’ve repeatedly been making in this thread is that judging a QB by a single stat like Super Bowl rings is … what’s the polite way of putting this? - really f’ing stupid.
Hell, look at last night’s game. Russell Wilson did a fine job. Few people are going to say you’d rather him than Marino or Kelly. And that’s not a knock on Wilson. But it is a knock on the idea that rings should decide jack squat.
I have no suggestion for a metric. But how is passer rating- so that Chad Pennington is better than Dan Marino - any better than using rings? Actually, while far from perfect, winning percentage is a lot better than either rings or Passer Rating.
I dunno- Manning set a Super Bowl record for completions, and D Thomas set a Super Bowl record for receptions. Offense records, even in this blowout. I don’t think those two deserve the blame. I think the Seahawks just applied far more raw power. Setting aside that stupid safety for a minute, what a performance by Seattle.
Dammit.
Agreed.
It was a joke.
Of course I’d take Eli.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
no. Seriously, i wouldn’t want to be remembered for that. I am wrong about a lot of things, but I could not take Eli over Peyton. I hope this announcement helps alleviate any concerns you all may have had. I thought i was pretty clear in my post that that was just a zinger, but I can’t have there be any confusion over this.
Brady has 3, not 2 rings. And to be honest, he would be my pick over any of his contemporaries.
But I would take Roethisberger high on my list of current QB’s after Brady. And I’m not kidding. I am a Steeler fan, so I admit some hometown bias, however, I believe he is a dynamic QB who could still win a ring or two before all is said and done. The one concern I have is how much of a pounding he has taken behind that average to below average o-line. Brady is my number one, maybe Brees two, then Ben.
I’m not saying I would pick Ben over Marino, Elway or a number of the other QB’s you mentioned. I’m just saying that since Ben came into the league, the only QB’s I’d take over him are Brady and Brees. Ben was my choice in the draft when the Steelers lucked into him. I knew Eli was going first, but Cowher wanted Rivers (at least that’s what was said at the time). Rivers played at NC State, and that’s where Cowher’s wife went to school (that’s how I think all coaches should pick their franchise QB’s! :rolleyes:) anyway, I think Ben could have put up some amazing numbers over the years if he played for say, the Colts, who protected the immobile Peyton all those years.
Brady is just special. He has taken the Patriots farther with less WR talent than I think anyone else could have possibly done. This year was just an incredible season for him. I never thought the Patriots were all that good, certainly not good enough to go to the Super Bowl, but they came damn close.
But I’m not aware of anyone in this tread judging a QB solely on his Super Bowls, otherwise Peyton Manning would be judged a poor to mediocre player.
But judging a QB solely on his regular season performance and ignoring his play on the biggest stage is also – really f’ing stupid.