What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Did Manning choke against the Patriots (1 Viewer)

Did he choke in the playoff game vs. the Pats?

  • Yes, he choked against the Patriots

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No, but he has choked in the past

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No, it's not choking, it's just getting beaten

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
Lots of Manning haters out there (most of them had Edge on their fantasy team). I think if you watched the game, you would have to admit that their wasn't alot that Manning could do. Dropped passes, untimely penalties, and a defense that didn't allow many opennings were the real culprits.If you think Manning choked, than you have to think that another QB in the league would have faired better for the Colts. I just don't think any QB in the league could have prevented that from happening.

 
He has in the past, but this game wasn't a choke by him. Maybe by the WRs and TEs. They were horrible. But they lost to a better team. I think the thing with Manning is that I am starting to doubt his ability to lift his team up and win when necessary. It's a trait that is hard for a QB because he so dependent on his receivers and blockers. But I think the mark of a great QB is the ability to do that. They don't always win in the end. I think Fran Tarkenton and Jim Kelly both had this trait and they never ended up winning the final game. But they won other games in the playoffs almost through their toughness and will alone. I've really never seen that from Manning and it goes back to the Gator games in college. He just doesn't have that "it" that makes Joe Montana a better QB even if Joe doesn't have the stats or arm that Manning does.

 
Manning didn't choke today. PM is not a leader. He can't take a team a carry it on his back. Sorry Dolt's fans you got 9 long months to make excuses for this. The TD record is nothing compared to the superbowl ring.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
My definition of choking:Failing to successfully perform under pressure in a situation where you normally perform well without pressure.Which would be why Doug Brien's a choker, and Peyton Manning is not. Pressure had nothing to do with Manning's performance today, IMO.

 
Sounds to me like there is a very sensitve Tennessee Volunteer fan in this thread. The BEST quarterback in the league should fare better than Peyton did today. The guy could not step up and lead his team to victory in the "big" game. Thats the story of his career. The guy needs to win something before being labeled the best QB in the league.

 
Just having read through this thread, I think the two sides aren't that far apart. I think Joe appears to be against people labeling Peyton Manning a "choker" because he sees it as implying that people think Peyton Manning is incapable of winning (or getting to) a Super Bowl.

Yet, I don't see the statement -- Peyton Manning choked today -- as being mutually exclusive from -- Peyton Manning can someday win a Super Bowl.

I'm sure there are plenty of people that simply will blindly say Manning has some mental block that will forever prevent him from winning the big game, and I couldn't disagree more (i.e., I'm with Joe here).

HOWEVER, if we're defining CHOKE as someone whose own performance falls short of their normal standards, then I have no problem saying that TODAY (and today only), Peyton Manning "choked."

That doesn't mean the entire offense didn't choke, but like Tom Jackson said today on ESPN Countdown "If not today, when." If Manning and the Colts, who were 1st in points this year couldn't beat a Patriots team without its top four defensive backs, then when will they get that monkey off their backs?

I mean, Manning played this Patriots team in Week 1...and he was 16 for 29 for 256 yards, 2 TDs and a pick. Not the HOF caliber numbers Manning put up for much of the season, but certainly better than what he delivered today.

This was the first game he failed to throw a TD all season (excluding Week 17 when he barely played)

Manning's 5.7 yards per pass was BY FAR the lowest of his season and one of the worst performances of his career in that regardThis is an offense that put up 20 or more points EVERY game Manning played this year, so I can't see how a 3 point goose egg doesn't reflect poorly on the players in some way.

As much credit as I give Belichick, Crennel and the Patriots players, I simply can't accept that Manning didn't perform significantly below his own standards in the most important game of the season...again.

That's a shame, I'm pulling for the guy and hope he'll avenge his demons someday. Give this guy a half decent defense so that he can actually play one of these games at the dome, and I think he'll get the monkey off his back. Until then, the label may not be "fair" but you can't really say it's inaccurate either.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
My definition of choking:Failing to successfully perform under pressure in a situation where you normally perform well without pressure.Which would be why Doug Brien's a choker, and Peyton Manning is not. Pressure had nothing to do with Manning's performance today, IMO.
It's hard to measure what Manning "would have" done without pressure, but a previous game the same season seems like a good measure. Manning played worse than he did in game one against the Patriots, despite the fact that the Patriots had Law and Poole in the first game but did not in the playoffs. The game wasn't nearly as close, and Manning's personal statistics weren't nearly as good. If it wasn't the pressure, what caused this huge discrepency?
 
Peyton Manning is as good as they come when he gets protection and has open receivers. But he is no Brett Favre when it comes to creating something out of nothing. He can take a good team over the top, but he can't take a team on his shoulders and carry the day (like Favre).
The year is 2005, not 1995. Live in the now.
 
I think people who judge QB play based purely on statistics really don't know much about football. I don't think that's what you're doing, and I won't go so far as to say that people who think Manning didn't choke don't know much about football.
I totally agree with this, as I"ve said before: The FF community way overvalues stats.But I don't think Manning choked. I simply think hes not as good as everyone thinkgs. As you said, everyone thinks hes so great because of his stats but they are only due to his dominance against poor teams. I'd much rather have a QB like Brady who can play well against all defenses than one like Manning who dominates poor defenses and struggles against better ones. Manning didn't choke, hes simply not as good as the Pats defense.
 
Just having read through this thread, I think the two sides aren't that far apart. I think Joe appears to be against people labeling Peyton Manning a "choker" because he sees it as implying that people think Peyton Manning is incapable of winning (or getting to) a Super Bowl.

Yet, I don't see the statement -- Peyton Manning choked today -- as being mutually exclusive from -- Peyton Manning can someday win a Super Bowl.

I'm sure there are plenty of people that simply will blindly say Manning has some mental block that will forever prevent him from winning the big game, and I couldn't disagree more (i.e., I'm with Joe here).

HOWEVER, if we're defining CHOKE as someone whose own performance falls short of their normal standards, then I have no problem saying that TODAY (and today only), Peyton Manning "choked."

That doesn't mean the entire offense didn't choke, but like Tom Jackson said today on ESPN Countdown "If not today, when." If Manning and the Colts, who were 1st in points this year couldn't beat a Patriots team without its top four defensive backs, then when will they get that monkey off their backs?

I mean, Manning played this Patriots team in Week 1...and he was 16 for 29 for 256 yards, 2 TDs and a pick. Not the HOF caliber numbers Manning put up for much of the season, but certainly better than what he delivered today.

This was the first game he failed to throw a TD all season (excluding Week 17 when he barely played)

Manning's 5.7 yards per pass was BY FAR the lowest of his season and one of the worst performances of his career in that regardThis is an offense that put up 20 or more points EVERY game Manning played this year, so I can't see how a 3 point goose egg doesn't reflect poorly on the players in some way.

As much credit as I give Belichick, Crennel and the Patriots players, I simply can't accept that Manning didn't perform significantly below his own standards in the most important game of the season...again.

That's a shame, I'm pulling for the guy and hope he'll avenge his demons someday. Give this guy a half decent defense so that he can actually play one of these games at the dome, and I think he'll get the monkey off his back. Until then, the label may not be "fair" but you can't really say it's inaccurate either.
Jason Great post. I think you're right on with most everything here.

I want to talk about this part: "I'm sure there are plenty of people that simply will blindly say Manning has some mental block that will forever prevent him from winning the big game". I think you're right - I don't think Manning has a mental block per se. I think the problem is he hasn't adjusted to playing against top defenses yet. Maybe he will later. Maybe he won't. But I think there's a real reason this keeps happening.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think people who judge QB play based purely on statistics really don't know much about football. I don't think that's what you're doing, and I won't go so far as to say that people who think Manning didn't choke don't know much about football.
I totally agree with this, as I"ve said before: The FF community way overvalues stats.But I don't think Manning choked. I simply think hes not as good as everyone thinkgs. As you said, everyone thinks hes so great because of his stats but they are only due to his dominance against poor teams. I'd much rather have a QB like Brady who can play well against all defenses than one like Manning who dominates poor defenses and struggles against better ones. Manning didn't choke, hes simply not as good as the Pats defense.
:thumbup: That's probably a better way of describing it. This is exactly what I've been getting at.
 
Hi fred,I'll stick strongly to what I said above. If one thinks Manning choked in this game they have a way different definition of choking than most do. New England just soundly beat this team. There will be people that hate Manning for whatever reason that take glee in calling a "choke" but I don't think anyone that knows a lot about the game would say that. Just my .02J
Joe,Thanks for responding. I have to say I'm a little offended by the implication though. I think Manning choked. I also think I know a thing or two about football. A quarter of the people who have responded to this poll so far agree. I think it's possible to see Manning "choking" without necessarily taking glee in it. I do think that Manning is a paper tiger and a regular season champion. I think he's a true artist with the skills he has. But I also think that his skills make him good at beating bad teams, and bad at beating good teams. His brand of football - changing his play at the line of scrimmage based on the defense - is only as good as his ability to read the opposing defense, and that's why he struggles against top defenses. It's certainly what stopped him today. I think people who judge QB play based purely on statistics really don't know much about football. I don't think that's what you're doing, and I won't go so far as to say that people who think Manning didn't choke don't know much about football. I'm a huge fan of yours and I know you're an excellent communicator, which is why I read meaning into the words you chose here, and the fact you're sticking strongly to them after I made my post. Am I correct in thinking that you're saying I don't know anything about football? And what's your counterargument that Manning didn't choke? ThanksFred
Come to think of it, I'm offended also. Joe, you're saying that anyone who disagrees with you doesn't know what they're talking about.Shannon Sharpe said Manning looked awful - using you're logic this future HOF does not know much about the sport because he disagrees with your opinion. I think that's not only dead wrong, but also incredibly egotistical.I think Manning did choke to an extent, though the rest of his team let him down even more. Using you're logic I'm not only wrong but also ignorant of the sport of football. I see your viewpoint, respect it, but choose to disagree. I'd like to believe that you respect people the same way, but it does not appear so when you make such a statement.APOLOGIZE NOW!!!!! :boxing:
Sharpe said Manning looked awful. That is true.But Sharpe didn't say Manning choked. Losing to a clearly better team(I think its time we admit that the Pats D is just a lot better than Manning- they've provent it time and time again) is not choking.
 
My definition of choking:Failing to successfully perform under pressure in a situation where you normally perform well without pressure.Which would be why Doug Brien's a choker, and Peyton Manning is not. Pressure had nothing to do with Manning's performance today, IMO.
It's hard to measure what Manning "would have" done without pressure, but a previous game the same season seems like a good measure. Manning played worse than he did in game one against the Patriots, despite the fact that the Patriots had Law and Poole in the first game but did not in the playoffs. The game wasn't nearly as close, and Manning's personal statistics weren't nearly as good. If it wasn't the pressure, what caused this huge discrepency?
Hey BostonFred,Congrats on the win :thumbup: .You make a great point, and I don't have much to refute it. Basically, my gut tells me Manning didn't play poorly because of pressure. He did because the Pats had two weeks to prepare, because his teammates played poorly or he just had an off game. But I don't have a whole lot of facts behind that.
 
Saying Manning choked today takes away from what the Patriots did today. What team would have beaten them today?
:goodposting: Manning(and the Colts) are simply not in the Pats league. Manning is overrated due to his piling up of stats against poor teams. I can't believe how much we as a FF community still overvalue stats- the fact that so many picked Indy to win this game shows that.
 
My definition of choking:Failing to successfully perform under pressure in a situation where you normally perform well without pressure.Which would be why Doug Brien's a choker, and Peyton Manning is not. Pressure had nothing to do with Manning's performance today, IMO.
It's hard to measure what Manning "would have" done without pressure, but a previous game the same season seems like a good measure. Manning played worse than he did in game one against the Patriots, despite the fact that the Patriots had Law and Poole in the first game but did not in the playoffs. The game wasn't nearly as close, and Manning's personal statistics weren't nearly as good. If it wasn't the pressure, what caused this huge discrepency?
Hey BostonFred,Congrats on the win :thumbup: .You make a great point, and I don't have much to refute it. Basically, my gut tells me Manning didn't play poorly because of pressure. He did because the Pats had two weeks to prepare, because his teammates played poorly or he just had an off game. But I don't have a whole lot of facts behind that.
I agree with this...but that's the rub with the entire concept of choking. We can't really get into someone's head, so all we can do is ask ourselves one thing: Did the person in question perform below the standard they've already established for himself?And I believe Manning would be the first to acknowledge that he didn't play at a level commensurate with what he's capable of and expects of himself.It's just a matter of whether that's within your own personal definition of "choke" or not.
 
My definition of choking:Failing to successfully perform under pressure in a situation where you normally perform well without pressure.Which would be why Doug Brien's a choker, and Peyton Manning is not. Pressure had nothing to do with Manning's performance today, IMO.
It's hard to measure what Manning "would have" done without pressure, but a previous game the same season seems like a good measure. Manning played worse than he did in game one against the Patriots, despite the fact that the Patriots had Law and Poole in the first game but did not in the playoffs. The game wasn't nearly as close, and Manning's personal statistics weren't nearly as good. If it wasn't the pressure, what caused this huge discrepency?
Hey BostonFred,Congrats on the win :thumbup: .You make a great point, and I don't have much to refute it. Basically, my gut tells me Manning didn't play poorly because of pressure. He did because the Pats had two weeks to prepare, because his teammates played poorly or he just had an off game. But I don't have a whole lot of facts behind that.
I agree with this...but that's the rub with the entire concept of choking. We can't really get into someone's head, so all we can do is ask ourselves one thing: Did the person in question perform below the standard they've already established for himself?And I believe Manning would be the first to acknowledge that he didn't play at a level commensurate with what he's capable of and expects of himself.It's just a matter of whether that's within your own personal definition of "choke" or not.
Right J.I think Manning didn't play well against the Pats because the Pats rule. Not because there was pressure on Manning.In that case, it doesn't qualify as a choke for me.
 
Hi fred,I'll stick strongly to what I said above. If one thinks Manning choked in this game they have a way different definition of choking than most do. New England just soundly beat this team. There will be people that hate Manning for whatever reason that take glee in calling a "choke" but I don't think anyone that knows a lot about the game would say that. Just my .02J
For me the definition of choking is not being able to win the big game when you are supposedly the best QB in the league. The posisition that is supposed to be able to take teams to the next level. It really makes me laugh with all the Manning supporters out there saying he didn't choke, yet he has never been able to beat his archrival teams. Not Florida at UofT and not the Pats in the AFC. If he is as great as everyone says then why can he not beat the Pats? Because he folds under pressure IMO. He is supposed to be the best prepared, the best audibler, the best at reading Ds in the NFL, yet can't take the Pats out. To me that's the choke job, when it's time for him to take it to the next level, and running the best O in the league and one of the best in the historoy of the NFL, he can't do it. The Pats aren't even the best D in the league, they have big injuries in their secondary (no Ty Law) yet Manning can't take advantage of it? That's not a choke job?
"If he is as great as everyone says then why can he not beat the Pats?"BECAUSE THE PATS ARE BETTER THAN HIM AND HIS TEAM. They are clearly and definitely better. Its not choking; Its losing to a vastly superior team. Now if you want to say hes 'overrated' thats fine, but he didn't choke.
 
Sharpe said Manning looked awful. That is true.But Sharpe didn't say Manning choked. Losing to a clearly better team(I think its time we admit that the Pats D is just a lot better than Manning- they've provent it time and time again) is not choking.
I guess we just disagree, and it's probably a semantic thing instead of a real disagreement. I don't think Manning needed to win the game to not choke, but he (and his teammates) needed to do SOMETHING on offense -- they're the best offensive team in the league with incredible weapons, yet they had, by far, their worst game of the season -- much worse than their previous games against the Pats.This was the worst drubbing I've seen them go through in a long time, and while most of the blame can be placed on the defense, coaches, WRs etc., to say that Manning is completely blameless seems ludicrous to me. They all choked, the whole team, and while NE deserves all the credit in the world for putting the clamps on Manning & Co., I don't know ANYONE who would tell you the Colts would be unable to score one offensive TD during the game. Some of this has to be attributed to the QB -- even though WRs dropped balls and Edge had no room, I saw some errant passes, some mental errors, and he almost never went downfield when I've seen him time and time again heave the rock to a well covered WR, putting the ball exactly where it had to be so only his boy could come down with it. That wasn't there today, though the weather was tough. They looked completely shellshocked. Every player on that team is guilty of choking IMO, some more than others. But Manning shouldn't be held immune.
 
Hi fred,I'll stick strongly to what I said above. If one thinks Manning choked in this game they have a way different definition of choking than most do. New England just soundly beat this team. There will be people that hate Manning for whatever reason that take glee in calling a "choke" but I don't think anyone that knows a lot about the game would say that. Just my .02J
For me the definition of choking is not being able to win the big game when you are supposedly the best QB in the league. The posisition that is supposed to be able to take teams to the next level. It really makes me laugh with all the Manning supporters out there saying he didn't choke, yet he has never been able to beat his archrival teams. Not Florida at UofT and not the Pats in the AFC. If he is as great as everyone says then why can he not beat the Pats? Because he folds under pressure IMO. He is supposed to be the best prepared, the best audibler, the best at reading Ds in the NFL, yet can't take the Pats out. To me that's the choke job, when it's time for him to take it to the next level, and running the best O in the league and one of the best in the historoy of the NFL, he can't do it. The Pats aren't even the best D in the league, they have big injuries in their secondary (no Ty Law) yet Manning can't take advantage of it? That's not a choke job?
"If he is as great as everyone says then why can he not beat the Pats?"BECAUSE THE PATS ARE BETTER THAN HIM AND HIS TEAM. They are clearly and definitely better. Its not choking; Its losing to a vastly superior team. Now if you want to say hes 'overrated' thats fine, but he didn't choke.
Why are the Pats vastly superior?People act like Manning's supporting cast is horrible. It happens to be very good.
 
More fuel for thought:The Colts didn't go a single game without a passing TD all season. They had less than 2 TDs in just one other game - their only other game against a top 10 pass defense - when Manning had just one TD vs. Baltimore. While I agree that the Patriots had an outstanding gameplan, Manning's play was shockingly far from the norm.

 
More fuel for thought:The Colts didn't go a single game without a passing TD all season. They had less than 2 TDs in just one other game - their only other game against a top 10 pass defense - when Manning had just one TD vs. Baltimore. While I agree that the Patriots had an outstanding gameplan, Manning's play was shockingly far from the norm.

 
Hi fred,

I'll stick strongly to what I said above. If one thinks Manning choked in this game they have a way different definition of choking than most do. New England just soundly beat this team. There will be people that hate Manning for whatever reason that take glee in calling a "choke" but I don't think anyone that knows a lot about the game would say that. Just my .02

J
Joe,Thanks for responding. I have to say I'm a little offended by the implication though. I think Manning choked. I also think I know a thing or two about football. A quarter of the people who have responded to this poll so far agree.

I think it's possible to see Manning "choking" without necessarily taking glee in it. I do think that Manning is a paper tiger and a regular season champion. I think he's a true artist with the skills he has. But I also think that his skills make him good at beating bad teams, and bad at beating good teams. His brand of football - changing his play at the line of scrimmage based on the defense - is only as good as his ability to read the opposing defense, and that's why he struggles against top defenses. It's certainly what stopped him today.

I think people who judge QB play based purely on statistics really don't know much about football. I don't think that's what you're doing, and I won't go so far as to say that people who think Manning didn't choke don't know much about football.

I'm a huge fan of yours and I know you're an excellent communicator, which is why I read meaning into the words you chose here, and the fact you're sticking strongly to them after I made my post. Am I correct in thinking that you're saying I don't know anything about football? And what's your counterargument that Manning didn't choke?

Thanks

Fred
Hi Fred,Sorry, don't mean to offend anyone. I just don't see how anyone watching the game I watched would label this as a choke. I guess that's what I mean on the "knowing football" thing. There is a huge but subtle difference between choking and being beaten by a superior team. I think the latter happened today. Just my .02

I actually find it really interesting why folks, even Pats fans seem so intent on :rotflmao: at Manning like he choked when in reality, they should realize it was the fantastic Patriot defense that caused most of it.

J
That same 8th ranked Pats D? The one that is ranked 17th against the pass? The one that has an injured secondary without Ty Law starting a WR at CB? That fantastic D? Manning should have been able to shred that D. He shredded the Denver secondary and that was a much much better secondary than the one the Pats put on the field.

Manning has never been able to win the big games....he always falls on his face. Look at his college career performance against Florida.
Again, this is a perfect example of FFers overvaluing stats. Playing the NE defense in Foxboro in a playoff game is one of the hardest defenses to face OF ALL TIME. I don't care what the stats say- watch the games and you'll see this.
 
The first drive ended when Manning threw a 2 yard pass to Pollard on third and four.  The second drive ended on a Manning incompletion.  The third drive ended on consecutive incompletions to Stokley, who was covered by Troy Brown at the time.  He clearly misdiagnosed that as a mismatch.
Hi Fred,This is exactly what I'm talking about. An incompletion to Pollard is a choke? Troy Brown making a great play to break up a pass to Stokely is a choke? A great play by the defense causing a fumble that Saturday recovers is a choke? Bruschi's fantastic strip of Rhodes is a choke?Those are exactly what I'm talking about. The Patriots played fantastic. It really seems odd that folks aren't focusing on that.J
Did they? Or was it Manning choking. His career stats against smart Ds is not good. Why was it that he could never get the Gators off his back? The same with the Pats. The oVVn him, plain and simple. He folds under the pressure IMO.
Exactly! MANNING IS JUST NOT GOOD AGAINST SMART DEFENSES.Its not that he chokes. Choking is losing to someone that you would usually beat. Manning would definitely not usually beat a good defense.
 
JoeThanks for the clarification. I guess I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. I think the Patriots D played a great game, and I think they got in his head. I was surprised that Manning wasn't aggressive even when the game was out of hand. He's the league MVP, and he's surrounded with great weapons, so I expect more out of him. I think he threw the ball for three when he needed four too often. I think the Colts receivers dropped some balls, but I was surprised when Manning zipped short distance fastballs at his receivers in the snow a couple times, too. I think the Patriots got a great combination of pressure and coverage, but was surprised when Manning threw the ball away when he wasn't pressured. I'm also trying to focus on what Manning did. I think Manning's a paper tiger, and has been for years. I have been saying the same thing all season, and have heard back that Manning's turned the corner. Today Manning showed he hasn't turned the corner, at least not to the point of being able to beat the Patriots. It's not a question of ":rotflmao: at Manning", so much as an ongoing discussion of Manning's credentials as an almost certain future hall of famer. To me, Manning's benefitted from having a great set of players around him on offense and from bouncing around a couple of weak divisions. I think he's great at what he does, but that he's not a winner, and to me, that takes a lot away from his credentials. But to your point that there is a huge but subtle difference between choking and being beaten by a superior team, it sounds like what you're saying is that this is the fifth time he's run into a superior team in the playoffs. Does that mean Manning just can't pass against superior teams? Doesn't that take the shine off his gaudy numbers against weaker teams?
I agree with you: Manning is not good against good teams. But that doesn't mean he choked; That means hes just not that good!
 
You can't even fathom why some think Manning didn't play as well as he could have to keep them in this game?
Hi gman,Oh for sure. Manning could have clearly played better. There were several incompletions that were his fault. I didn't see any glaring mistakes that were costly but I'd bet he'll be the first to say he could have played better. But that's a far cry from a choke I think. J
I guess the difference is, I think that if the MVP of the league plays a bad game in the playoffs, that's a choke. What do you think constitutes a choke?
When you go up against an opponent that history tells us that you should beat and theres a lot of pressure on you and you play terrible and lose.
 
Sounds to me like there is a very sensitve Tennessee Volunteer fan in this thread. The BEST quarterback in the league should fare better than Peyton did today. The guy could not step up and lead his team to victory in the "big" game. Thats the story of his career. The guy needs to win something before being labeled the best QB in the league.
Yes, Tom Brady did just that.
 
Hi fred,I'll stick strongly to what I said above. If one thinks Manning choked in this game they have a way different definition of choking than most do. New England just soundly beat this team. There will be people that hate Manning for whatever reason that take glee in calling a "choke" but I don't think anyone that knows a lot about the game would say that. Just my .02J
:thumbup: I was at the game and I agree with Joe on this. Peyton couldn't get into the rhythm that he and the offense thrive on. Choking is a bit harsh, and I am in no way a Peyton Manning fan. He just got beat tonight. Now for you Colt fans.....SHUT UP!!! :yes: :yes: :yes:
 
My definition of choking:Failing to successfully perform under pressure in a situation where you normally perform well without pressure.Which would be why Doug Brien's a choker, and Peyton Manning is not. Pressure had nothing to do with Manning's performance today, IMO.
It's hard to measure what Manning "would have" done without pressure, but a previous game the same season seems like a good measure. Manning played worse than he did in game one against the Patriots, despite the fact that the Patriots had Law and Poole in the first game but did not in the playoffs. The game wasn't nearly as close, and Manning's personal statistics weren't nearly as good. If it wasn't the pressure, what caused this huge discrepency?
the weather.
 
Hi fred,I'll stick strongly to what I said above. If one thinks Manning choked in this game they have a way different definition of choking than most do. New England just soundly beat this team. There will be people that hate Manning for whatever reason that take glee in calling a "choke" but I don't think anyone that knows a lot about the game would say that. Just my .02J
For me the definition of choking is not being able to win the big game when you are supposedly the best QB in the league. The posisition that is supposed to be able to take teams to the next level. It really makes me laugh with all the Manning supporters out there saying he didn't choke, yet he has never been able to beat his archrival teams. Not Florida at UofT and not the Pats in the AFC. If he is as great as everyone says then why can he not beat the Pats? Because he folds under pressure IMO. He is supposed to be the best prepared, the best audibler, the best at reading Ds in the NFL, yet can't take the Pats out. To me that's the choke job, when it's time for him to take it to the next level, and running the best O in the league and one of the best in the historoy of the NFL, he can't do it. The Pats aren't even the best D in the league, they have big injuries in their secondary (no Ty Law) yet Manning can't take advantage of it? That's not a choke job?
"If he is as great as everyone says then why can he not beat the Pats?"BECAUSE THE PATS ARE BETTER THAN HIM AND HIS TEAM. They are clearly and definitely better. Its not choking; Its losing to a vastly superior team. Now if you want to say hes 'overrated' thats fine, but he didn't choke.
Why are the Pats vastly superior?People act like Manning's supporting cast is horrible. It happens to be very good.
Are you really asking me why the Pats are vastly superior to the Colts?I think the 2(possibly 3 soon) super bowl rings and the fact that they've beaten them EVERY TIME THEY'VE PLAYED in recent history has something to do with it.
 
My definition of choking:Failing to successfully perform under pressure in a situation where you normally perform well without pressure.Which would be why Doug Brien's a choker, and Peyton Manning is not. Pressure had nothing to do with Manning's performance today, IMO.
It's hard to measure what Manning "would have" done without pressure, but a previous game the same season seems like a good measure. Manning played worse than he did in game one against the Patriots, despite the fact that the Patriots had Law and Poole in the first game but did not in the playoffs. The game wasn't nearly as close, and Manning's personal statistics weren't nearly as good. If it wasn't the pressure, what caused this huge discrepency?
the weather.
This may be true. Brady's Patriots are now 3-0 in snow games in the playoffs, and 8-0 in all snow games, and are now 6-0 in the playoffs. Manning's traditionally struggled outdoors, in the cold, and in the snow.
 
Sounds to me like there is a very sensitve Tennessee Volunteer fan in this thread. The BEST quarterback in the league should fare better than Peyton did today. The guy could not step up and lead his team to victory in the "big" game. Thats the story of his career. The guy needs to win something before being labeled the best QB in the league.
Yes, Tom Brady did just that.
I guess by that token, you'd have to say that Troy Aikmen was one of the best ever also.
 
Sounds to me like there is a very sensitve Tennessee Volunteer fan in this thread.  The BEST quarterback in the league should fare better than Peyton did today.  The guy could not step up and lead his team to victory in the "big" game.  Thats the story of his career.  The guy needs to win something before being labeled the best QB in the league.
Yes, Tom Brady did just that.
I guess by that token, you'd have to say that Troy Aikmen was one of the best ever also.
That's true. Aikman's a hall of famer. But Brady may be better than Aikman. Aikman had a D that was on par with these Patriots Ds, and both Brady and Aikman played for what appeared to be a coaching genius. But while Brady is throwing to scrap heap receivers and winning Superbowls with Antowain Smith as his running back, Aikman had Irvin, Emmitt and co. Aikman seems to be a valid comparison, and Brady seems to shine in that comparison.
 
Sounds to me like there is a very sensitve Tennessee Volunteer fan in this thread.  The BEST quarterback in the league should fare better than Peyton did today.  The guy could not step up and lead his team to victory in the "big" game.  Thats the story of his career.  The guy needs to win something before being labeled the best QB in the league.
Yes, Tom Brady did just that.
I guess by that token, you'd have to say that Troy Aikmen was one of the best ever also.
That's true. Aikman's a hall of famer. But Brady may be better than Aikman. Aikman had a D that was on par with these Patriots Ds, and both Brady and Aikman played for what appeared to be a coaching genius. But while Brady is throwing to scrap heap receivers and winning Superbowls with Antowain Smith as his running back, Aikman had Irvin, Emmitt and co. Aikman seems to be a valid comparison, and Brady seems to shine in that comparison.
This is where I disagree. I think both Aikmen and Brady were/are good QB's on great teams. I honestly believe that you could substitute atleast 5 Qb's into the New England offense and they would do as well, or better, then what they do with Brady.Look at what Brady did in a home game against the 20th (I think they were ranked 20th) ranked defense today. He didn't score a TD until there was 1:30 left in the 3rd quarter. The game was up for grabs until that point. That's despite Indy only scoring 3 points and despite his team rushing for over 200 yards.With that smothering defense, Indy should have been out of this game by halftime. But Brady's inability to exploit a weak defense kept them in it.
 
Hi fred,I'll stick strongly to what I said above. If one thinks Manning choked in this game they have a way different definition of choking than most do. New England just soundly beat this team. There will be people that hate Manning for whatever reason that take glee in calling a "choke" but I don't think anyone that knows a lot about the game would say that. Just my .02J
For me the definition of choking is not being able to win the big game when you are supposedly the best QB in the league. The posisition that is supposed to be able to take teams to the next level. It really makes me laugh with all the Manning supporters out there saying he didn't choke, yet he has never been able to beat his archrival teams. Not Florida at UofT and not the Pats in the AFC. If he is as great as everyone says then why can he not beat the Pats? Because he folds under pressure IMO. He is supposed to be the best prepared, the best audibler, the best at reading Ds in the NFL, yet can't take the Pats out. To me that's the choke job, when it's time for him to take it to the next level, and running the best O in the league and one of the best in the historoy of the NFL, he can't do it. The Pats aren't even the best D in the league, they have big injuries in their secondary (no Ty Law) yet Manning can't take advantage of it? That's not a choke job?
"If he is as great as everyone says then why can he not beat the Pats?"BECAUSE THE PATS ARE BETTER THAN HIM AND HIS TEAM. They are clearly and definitely better. Its not choking; Its losing to a vastly superior team. Now if you want to say hes 'overrated' thats fine, but he didn't choke.
Why are the Pats vastly superior?People act like Manning's supporting cast is horrible. It happens to be very good.
Are you really asking me why the Pats are vastly superior to the Colts?I think the 2(possibly 3 soon) super bowl rings and the fact that they've beaten them EVERY TIME THEY'VE PLAYED in recent history has something to do with it.
But why have they always won? Maybe it's because Brady is better than Manning (I don't think that's it, but it's possible).If you look at the talent level of the two teams, it's pretty close. It's not like Manning is the greatest player ever and is taking a poor team to play the Patriots. Manning's got a pretty good supporting cast, so he has to take some heat if he never beats the Pats.
 
Sounds to me like there is a very sensitve Tennessee Volunteer fan in this thread.  The BEST quarterback in the league should fare better than Peyton did today.  The guy could not step up and lead his team to victory in the "big" game.  Thats the story of his career.  The guy needs to win something before being labeled the best QB in the league.
Yes, Tom Brady did just that.
I guess by that token, you'd have to say that Troy Aikmen was one of the best ever also.
Troy was a HOF QB, so yes. But I do think Brady will go down as a much better QB than Aikman. Brady has no "Michael Irvin" and until this year didn't have anything close to an "Emmitt Smith." Aikman has never had the clutch moments of Brady either even though Brady has only played for a few years.
 
Sounds to me like there is a very sensitve Tennessee Volunteer fan in this thread.  The BEST quarterback in the league should fare better than Peyton did today.  The guy could not step up and lead his team to victory in the "big" game.  Thats the story of his career.  The guy needs to win something before being labeled the best QB in the league.
Yes, Tom Brady did just that.
I guess by that token, you'd have to say that Troy Aikmen was one of the best ever also.
That's true. Aikman's a hall of famer. But Brady may be better than Aikman. Aikman had a D that was on par with these Patriots Ds, and both Brady and Aikman played for what appeared to be a coaching genius. But while Brady is throwing to scrap heap receivers and winning Superbowls with Antowain Smith as his running back, Aikman had Irvin, Emmitt and co. Aikman seems to be a valid comparison, and Brady seems to shine in that comparison.
This is where I disagree. I think both Aikmen and Brady were/are good QB's on great teams. I honestly believe that you could substitute atleast 5 Qb's into the New England offense and they would do as well, or better, then what they do with Brady.Look at what Brady did in a home game against the 20th (I think they were ranked 20th) ranked defense today. He didn't score a TD until there was 1:30 left in the 3rd quarter. The game was up for grabs until that point. That's despite Indy only scoring 3 points and despite his team rushing for over 200 yards.With that smothering defense, Indy should have been out of this game by halftime. But Brady's inability to exploit a weak defense kept them in it.
I couldn't disagree more.In this thread I posted this:
I posted this in the other 'best QB' thread, but I really think that this deserves its own thread becuase of the enormous myth that most people believe.Most people believe this myth that the Patriots have such a great defense and head coach and thats why they win games. Well, I think its all Brady. In that thread, someone asked me, "What do you think we'd be saying about Brady if he was drafted by the Cardinals?" Well that the thing...HE WAS DRAFTED BY A TEAM JUST LIKE THE CARDINALS!!! The Pats were horrible. They were 5-11 in 2000. In 2001, nobody thought they'd be any better. Check out this from ESPN. Not one out of 20 'experts' even predicted that they'd make the playoffs.Or how about this from Sports Illustrated which predicted that they would be DEAD LAST in the AFC East that year.They started out 0-2 that year. Then they were set to play the Colts in NE. Despite being at home, they were a double digit underdog! Think about that! How many teams are double digit underdogs at home?? Here is a link to the points spreads for that week in case you don't believe me.What follows is this: Brady took over and led them to an 14-3 record the rest of the way in his first year in the league. In his 2nd year in the league, he led the NFL in TD passes despite having no great WRs and barely missed out on the playoffs. In his 3rd year they won the SB again. Now they just won their 21st in a row.So please stop telling me how great their coach and defense are. That same coach and defense were 5-13 in their previous 18 games and a double digit home dog before Brady rescued them and made them one of the greatest teams of all time.I'm no Brady or NE fan...but the evidence is overwhelming. Brady is the best QB in the NFL today.
Another key point:After Sunday, he's now 7-0 in his career in OT. Check out his Overtime stats: 28-32 for 341 yards and 1 TD since 2001. I also saw a stat yesterday that Brady has led TEN 4th quarter comebacks in the regular season. Hell, he's only played in 41 regular season games! 29-12 regular season record, 3-0 in playoffs, 1 super bowl ring. In just under 3 seasons...You're telling me theres 5 other QBs in the league who would be 28-32 in clutch situations like that???
 
Sounds to me like there is a very sensitve Tennessee Volunteer fan in this thread.  The BEST quarterback in the league should fare better than Peyton did today.  The guy could not step up and lead his team to victory in the "big" game.  Thats the story of his career.  The guy needs to win something before being labeled the best QB in the league.
Yes, Tom Brady did just that.
I guess by that token, you'd have to say that Troy Aikmen was one of the best ever also.
That's true. Aikman's a hall of famer. But Brady may be better than Aikman. Aikman had a D that was on par with these Patriots Ds, and both Brady and Aikman played for what appeared to be a coaching genius. But while Brady is throwing to scrap heap receivers and winning Superbowls with Antowain Smith as his running back, Aikman had Irvin, Emmitt and co. Aikman seems to be a valid comparison, and Brady seems to shine in that comparison.
This is where I disagree. I think both Aikmen and Brady were/are good QB's on great teams. I honestly believe that you could substitute atleast 5 Qb's into the New England offense and they would do as well, or better, then what they do with Brady.Look at what Brady did in a home game against the 20th (I think they were ranked 20th) ranked defense today. He didn't score a TD until there was 1:30 left in the 3rd quarter. The game was up for grabs until that point. That's despite Indy only scoring 3 points and despite his team rushing for over 200 yards.With that smothering defense, Indy should have been out of this game by halftime. But Brady's inability to exploit a weak defense kept them in it.
I couldn't disagree more.In this thread I posted this:
I posted this in the other 'best QB' thread, but I really think that this deserves its own thread becuase of the enormous myth that most people believe.Most people believe this myth that the Patriots have such a great defense and head coach and thats why they win games. Well, I think its all Brady. In that thread, someone asked me, "What do you think we'd be saying about Brady if he was drafted by the Cardinals?" Well that the thing...HE WAS DRAFTED BY A TEAM JUST LIKE THE CARDINALS!!! The Pats were horrible. They were 5-11 in 2000. In 2001, nobody thought they'd be any better. Check out this from ESPN. Not one out of 20 'experts' even predicted that they'd make the playoffs.Or how about this from Sports Illustrated which predicted that they would be DEAD LAST in the AFC East that year.They started out 0-2 that year. Then they were set to play the Colts in NE. Despite being at home, they were a double digit underdog! Think about that! How many teams are double digit underdogs at home?? Here is a link to the points spreads for that week in case you don't believe me.What follows is this: Brady took over and led them to an 14-3 record the rest of the way in his first year in the league. In his 2nd year in the league, he led the NFL in TD passes despite having no great WRs and barely missed out on the playoffs. In his 3rd year they won the SB again. Now they just won their 21st in a row.So please stop telling me how great their coach and defense are. That same coach and defense were 5-13 in their previous 18 games and a double digit home dog before Brady rescued them and made them one of the greatest teams of all time.I'm no Brady or NE fan...but the evidence is overwhelming. Brady is the best QB in the NFL today.
Another key point:After Sunday, he's now 7-0 in his career in OT. Check out his Overtime stats: 28-32 for 341 yards and 1 TD since 2001. I also saw a stat yesterday that Brady has led TEN 4th quarter comebacks in the regular season. Hell, he's only played in 41 regular season games! 29-12 regular season record, 3-0 in playoffs, 1 super bowl ring. In just under 3 seasons...You're telling me theres 5 other QBs in the league who would be 28-32 in clutch situations like that???
How do you think Brady would fair on teams like Seattle, Green Bay, Minnesota, NY Jets, St Louis, or even Indy. I don't believe the teams would be much better with Brady in there instead of there current QB, and in some cases they would most-likely be worse.Brady and Aikmen benefitted from great teams. I believe that there would be no way that Aikmen would be a HOF'er if he was on an average team.
 
Sounds to me like there is a very sensitve Tennessee Volunteer fan in this thread.  The BEST quarterback in the league should fare better than Peyton did today.  The guy could not step up and lead his team to victory in the "big" game.  Thats the story of his career.  The guy needs to win something before being labeled the best QB in the league.
Yes, Tom Brady did just that.
I guess by that token, you'd have to say that Troy Aikmen was one of the best ever also.
That's true. Aikman's a hall of famer. But Brady may be better than Aikman. Aikman had a D that was on par with these Patriots Ds, and both Brady and Aikman played for what appeared to be a coaching genius. But while Brady is throwing to scrap heap receivers and winning Superbowls with Antowain Smith as his running back, Aikman had Irvin, Emmitt and co. Aikman seems to be a valid comparison, and Brady seems to shine in that comparison.
This is where I disagree. I think both Aikmen and Brady were/are good QB's on great teams. I honestly believe that you could substitute atleast 5 Qb's into the New England offense and they would do as well, or better, then what they do with Brady.Look at what Brady did in a home game against the 20th (I think they were ranked 20th) ranked defense today. He didn't score a TD until there was 1:30 left in the 3rd quarter. The game was up for grabs until that point. That's despite Indy only scoring 3 points and despite his team rushing for over 200 yards.With that smothering defense, Indy should have been out of this game by halftime. But Brady's inability to exploit a weak defense kept them in it.
I couldn't disagree more.In this thread I posted this:
I posted this in the other 'best QB' thread, but I really think that this deserves its own thread becuase of the enormous myth that most people believe.Most people believe this myth that the Patriots have such a great defense and head coach and thats why they win games. Well, I think its all Brady. In that thread, someone asked me, "What do you think we'd be saying about Brady if he was drafted by the Cardinals?" Well that the thing...HE WAS DRAFTED BY A TEAM JUST LIKE THE CARDINALS!!! The Pats were horrible. They were 5-11 in 2000. In 2001, nobody thought they'd be any better. Check out this from ESPN. Not one out of 20 'experts' even predicted that they'd make the playoffs.Or how about this from Sports Illustrated which predicted that they would be DEAD LAST in the AFC East that year.They started out 0-2 that year. Then they were set to play the Colts in NE. Despite being at home, they were a double digit underdog! Think about that! How many teams are double digit underdogs at home?? Here is a link to the points spreads for that week in case you don't believe me.What follows is this: Brady took over and led them to an 14-3 record the rest of the way in his first year in the league. In his 2nd year in the league, he led the NFL in TD passes despite having no great WRs and barely missed out on the playoffs. In his 3rd year they won the SB again. Now they just won their 21st in a row.So please stop telling me how great their coach and defense are. That same coach and defense were 5-13 in their previous 18 games and a double digit home dog before Brady rescued them and made them one of the greatest teams of all time.I'm no Brady or NE fan...but the evidence is overwhelming. Brady is the best QB in the NFL today.
Another key point:After Sunday, he's now 7-0 in his career in OT. Check out his Overtime stats: 28-32 for 341 yards and 1 TD since 2001. I also saw a stat yesterday that Brady has led TEN 4th quarter comebacks in the regular season. Hell, he's only played in 41 regular season games! 29-12 regular season record, 3-0 in playoffs, 1 super bowl ring. In just under 3 seasons...You're telling me theres 5 other QBs in the league who would be 28-32 in clutch situations like that???
How do you think Brady would fair on teams like Seattle, Green Bay, Minnesota, NY Jets, St Louis, or even Indy. I don't believe the teams would be much better with Brady in there instead of there current QB, and in some cases they would most-likely be worse.Brady and Aikmen benefitted from great teams. I believe that there would be no way that Aikmen would be a HOF'er if he was on an average team.
Did you see my post? Brady pretty much came to THE WORST TEAM IN THE LEAGUE and made them into a dynasty. All of those teams you mentioned are pretty good teams- much better than those horrible Pats who were 0-2 and DOUBLE DIGIT HOME UNDERDOGS when Brady took over.Edited to add: And if those teams had Brady, then they'd win every close game. To use one of your examples, Seattle would've beaten St Louis if they had Brady. 28 for 32 in overtime!! Thats a ridiculously good stat! Other than Montana, I don't think we've ever seen a clutch performer like Brady.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would venture to say that Manning gave a Bradyish performance today. Played decent and didn't do anything that would put his team in trouble. However, unlike Brady, Manning didn't have a great Defense and the support of 200 yards from his RB's to bail him out.

 
I would venture to say that Manning gave a Bradyish performance today. Played decent and didn't do anything that would put his team in trouble. However, unlike Brady, Manning didn't have a great Defense and the support of 200 yards from his RB's to bail him out.
Manning has two of the top 10 WRs in football, one of the best #3 WRs in football, and one of the best RBs in football. Brady has had Troy Brown and Antowain Smith in his super bowl runs....keep that in mind when talking about numbers. If Brady had Manning's offense his numbers would be very impressive(probably not as much because Brady wouldn't run up the score as much, but still very impressive). Don't forget that Brady led the league in TD passes in his second year starting -and just think of the crap he had at WR that year.
 
Sounds to me like there is a very sensitve Tennessee Volunteer fan in this thread.  The BEST quarterback in the league should fare better than Peyton did today.  The guy could not step up and lead his team to victory in the "big" game.  Thats the story of his career.  The guy needs to win something before being labeled the best QB in the league.
Yes, Tom Brady did just that.
I guess by that token, you'd have to say that Troy Aikmen was one of the best ever also.
That's true. Aikman's a hall of famer. But Brady may be better than Aikman. Aikman had a D that was on par with these Patriots Ds, and both Brady and Aikman played for what appeared to be a coaching genius. But while Brady is throwing to scrap heap receivers and winning Superbowls with Antowain Smith as his running back, Aikman had Irvin, Emmitt and co. Aikman seems to be a valid comparison, and Brady seems to shine in that comparison.
This is where I disagree. I think both Aikmen and Brady were/are good QB's on great teams. I honestly believe that you could substitute atleast 5 Qb's into the New England offense and they would do as well, or better, then what they do with Brady.Look at what Brady did in a home game against the 20th (I think they were ranked 20th) ranked defense today. He didn't score a TD until there was 1:30 left in the 3rd quarter. The game was up for grabs until that point. That's despite Indy only scoring 3 points and despite his team rushing for over 200 yards.With that smothering defense, Indy should have been out of this game by halftime. But Brady's inability to exploit a weak defense kept them in it.
I couldn't disagree more.In this thread I posted this:
I posted this in the other 'best QB' thread, but I really think that this deserves its own thread becuase of the enormous myth that most people believe.Most people believe this myth that the Patriots have such a great defense and head coach and thats why they win games. Well, I think its all Brady. In that thread, someone asked me, "What do you think we'd be saying about Brady if he was drafted by the Cardinals?" Well that the thing...HE WAS DRAFTED BY A TEAM JUST LIKE THE CARDINALS!!! The Pats were horrible. They were 5-11 in 2000. In 2001, nobody thought they'd be any better. Check out this from ESPN. Not one out of 20 'experts' even predicted that they'd make the playoffs.Or how about this from Sports Illustrated which predicted that they would be DEAD LAST in the AFC East that year.They started out 0-2 that year. Then they were set to play the Colts in NE. Despite being at home, they were a double digit underdog! Think about that! How many teams are double digit underdogs at home?? Here is a link to the points spreads for that week in case you don't believe me.What follows is this: Brady took over and led them to an 14-3 record the rest of the way in his first year in the league. In his 2nd year in the league, he led the NFL in TD passes despite having no great WRs and barely missed out on the playoffs. In his 3rd year they won the SB again. Now they just won their 21st in a row.So please stop telling me how great their coach and defense are. That same coach and defense were 5-13 in their previous 18 games and a double digit home dog before Brady rescued them and made them one of the greatest teams of all time.I'm no Brady or NE fan...but the evidence is overwhelming. Brady is the best QB in the NFL today.
Another key point:After Sunday, he's now 7-0 in his career in OT. Check out his Overtime stats: 28-32 for 341 yards and 1 TD since 2001. I also saw a stat yesterday that Brady has led TEN 4th quarter comebacks in the regular season. Hell, he's only played in 41 regular season games! 29-12 regular season record, 3-0 in playoffs, 1 super bowl ring. In just under 3 seasons...You're telling me theres 5 other QBs in the league who would be 28-32 in clutch situations like that???
How do you think Brady would fair on teams like Seattle, Green Bay, Minnesota, NY Jets, St Louis, or even Indy. I don't believe the teams would be much better with Brady in there instead of there current QB, and in some cases they would most-likely be worse.Brady and Aikmen benefitted from great teams. I believe that there would be no way that Aikmen would be a HOF'er if he was on an average team.
Did you see my post? Brady pretty much came to THE WORST TEAM IN THE LEAGUE and made them into a dynasty. All of those teams you mentioned are pretty good teams- much better than those horrible Pats who were 0-2 and DOUBLE DIGIT HOME UNDERDOGS when Brady took over.
So you're saying that if Brady was on any of those teams instead of their current QB's they'd be sure Superbowl champs.You give way to much credit to the QB position.
 
Someone needs to contact the Pro Football Hall of Fame and alert them that they have a number of undeserving players enshrined in their hall...Fran Tarkington, Dan Fouts, Jim Kelly, Dan Marino... all these "chokers" never did manage to win a "big game" that actually counted. I can't believe this oversight has been allowed to go on this long.John Elway must be breathing a huge sigh of relief now. It only took four "chokes" on his part before he finally got it right. Good thing two Super Bowl wins in a row makes people forget all about the losses.Seriously...If anyone thinks that the Colts losses in the Playoffs in any way diminish the career of Peyton Manning, then I have to side with Joe B. on this one... you don't know much about football. Who remembers that the last couple times the Colts lost to the Pats it was because Edgerrin James couldn't hold onto the ball on the goal line? Or because a normally "money" kicker sent a kick wide right after hitting 40-some in an row?Fact is - Manning still has MANY years left in his career. And I'm betting that before it's over he will win a big game. Maybe the biggest - the Super Bowl. But even if he never does, to try to label him as anything other than an amazing quarterback is silly.Is he as good as Brady? Or Culpepper or McNabb or Vick...? Who cares? Does someone have to be the "best" to be any good at all? Ridiculous. Did Manning play his best today against the Pats? No, probably not. Does that make him a "choker"... not in the least. Last time I checked football was a team sport - and the Colts as a TEAM lost today. They got outplayed by a better TEAM.Come on - the people on this board are supposed to be some of the most educated football minds. Quit buying into all the media crap that tries to tell you today's game was Manning vs. Brady... that's :bs: ... It was the Colts vs. the Pats. Pats win.

 
Someone needs to contact the Pro Football Hall of Fame and alert them that they have a number of undeserving players enshrined in their hall...Fran Tarkington, Dan Fouts, Jim Kelly, Dan Marino... all these "chokers" never did manage to win a "big game" that actually counted. I can't believe this oversight has been allowed to go on this long.John Elway must be breathing a huge sigh of relief now. It only took four "chokes" on his part before he finally got it right. Good thing two Super Bowl wins in a row makes people forget all about the losses.Seriously...If anyone thinks that the Colts losses in the Playoffs in any way diminish the career of Peyton Manning, then I have to side with Joe B. on this one... you don't know much about football. Who remembers that the last couple times the Colts lost to the Pats it was because Edgerrin James couldn't hold onto the ball on the goal line? Or because a normally "money" kicker sent a kick wide right after hitting 40-some in an row?Fact is - Manning still has MANY years left in his career. And I'm betting that before it's over he will win a big game. Maybe the biggest - the Super Bowl. But even if he never does, to try to label him as anything other than an amazing quarterback is silly.Is he as good as Brady? Or Culpepper or McNabb or Vick...? Who cares? Does someone have to be the "best" to be any good at all? Ridiculous. Did Manning play his best today against the Pats? No, probably not. Does that make him a "choker"... not in the least. Last time I checked football was a team sport - and the Colts as a TEAM lost today. They got outplayed by a better TEAM.Come on - the people on this board are supposed to be some of the most educated football minds. Quit buying into all the media crap that tries to tell you today's game was Manning vs. Brady... that's :bs: ... It was the Colts vs. the Pats. Pats win.
Its not just that he doesn't win in the playoffs...its that he builds up stats against poor teams and is actually a very average QB against good teams.
 
I didnt read the whole thread, but this was not a choke by Manning.

"We tried to go after them," Dungy contended. "It's not like we said, 'Oh, OK, we're not going to try to go get them.' They did a good job and outplayed us with the guys that played."

Dungy understood the difference between the teams. "We came up here with very high expectations and ran into a better team today," he said. "They outplayed us, and they've beaten us four times in a row now [since Dungy became coach in 2002], all kind of different games."

Said Colts defensive end Raheem Brock: "We played good enough to lose. All they do is execute. That's it."

It comes down to how well the Patriots do what they're told to do. It's personnel as much as it a person(s) devising schemes. Henceforth, now, and forever, let it never be said again that they are a team devoid of stars. Prima donnas, yes, but they have star players. And better players than Indianapolis has.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Someone needs to contact the Pro Football Hall of Fame and alert them that they have a number of undeserving players enshrined in their hall...Fran Tarkington, Dan Fouts, Jim Kelly, Dan Marino... all these "chokers" never did manage to win a "big game" that actually counted. I can't believe this oversight has been allowed to go on this long.John Elway must be breathing a huge sigh of relief now. It only took four "chokes" on his part before he finally got it right. Good thing two Super Bowl wins in a row makes people forget all about the losses.Seriously...If anyone thinks that the Colts losses in the Playoffs in any way diminish the career of Peyton Manning, then I have to side with Joe B. on this one... you don't know much about football. Who remembers that the last couple times the Colts lost to the Pats it was because Edgerrin James couldn't hold onto the ball on the goal line? Or because a normally "money" kicker sent a kick wide right after hitting 40-some in an row?Fact is - Manning still has MANY years left in his career. And I'm betting that before it's over he will win a big game. Maybe the biggest - the Super Bowl. But even if he never does, to try to label him as anything other than an amazing quarterback is silly.Is he as good as Brady? Or Culpepper or McNabb or Vick...? Who cares? Does someone have to be the "best" to be any good at all? Ridiculous. Did Manning play his best today against the Pats? No, probably not. Does that make him a "choker"... not in the least. Last time I checked football was a team sport - and the Colts as a TEAM lost today. They got outplayed by a better TEAM.Come on - the people on this board are supposed to be some of the most educated football minds. Quit buying into all the media crap that tries to tell you today's game was Manning vs. Brady... that's :bs: ... It was the Colts vs. the Pats. Pats win.
Its not just that he doesn't win in the playoffs...its that he builds up stats against poor teams and is actually a very average QB against good teams.
I really don't understand this comment. Don't all QB's generally do better against poor defenses and do less well against good defenses. This is like saying that Tony Gwynn was not a great hitter because he only hit .250 against 20-game winners and .375 against the rest.
 
Someone needs to contact the Pro Football Hall of Fame and alert them that they have a number of undeserving players enshrined in their hall...Fran Tarkington, Dan Fouts, Jim Kelly, Dan Marino... all these "chokers" never did manage to win a "big game" that actually counted.  I can't believe this oversight has been allowed to go on this long.John Elway must be breathing a huge sigh of relief now.  It only took four "chokes" on his part before he finally got it right.  Good thing two Super Bowl wins in a row makes people forget all about the losses.Seriously...If anyone thinks that the Colts losses in the Playoffs in any way diminish the career of Peyton Manning, then I have to side with Joe B. on this one... you don't know much about football.  Who remembers that the last couple times the Colts lost to the Pats it was because Edgerrin James couldn't hold onto the ball on the goal line?  Or because a normally "money" kicker sent a kick wide right after hitting 40-some in an row?Fact is - Manning still has MANY years left in his career.  And I'm betting that before it's over he will win a big game.  Maybe the biggest - the Super Bowl.  But even if he never does, to try to label him as anything other than an amazing quarterback is silly.Is he as good as Brady?  Or Culpepper or McNabb or Vick...?  Who cares?  Does someone have to be the "best" to be any good at all?  Ridiculous.  Did Manning play his best today against the Pats?  No, probably not.  Does that make him a "choker"... not in the least.  Last time I checked football was a team sport - and the Colts as a TEAM lost today.  They got outplayed by a better TEAM.Come on - the people on this board are supposed to be some of the most educated football minds.  Quit buying into all the media crap that tries to tell you today's game was Manning vs. Brady... that's  :bs: ... It was the Colts vs. the Pats.  Pats win.
Its not just that he doesn't win in the playoffs...its that he builds up stats against poor teams and is actually a very average QB against good teams.
I really don't understand this comment. Don't all QB's generally do better against poor defenses and do less well against good defenses. This is like saying that Tony Gwynn was not a great hitter because he only hit .250 against 20-game winners and .375 against the rest.
Yes, but Manning takes it to the extreme because he piles on stats against poor defenses and loses to good team. Tom Brady is a great example of a QB who does well no matter who hes playing.
 
Its not just that he doesn't win in the playoffs...its that he builds up stats against poor teams and is actually a very average QB against good teams.
I thought it wasn't supposed to be about the stats? Stats are overrated, right? So leading your team to a 12-4 season and making the playoffs consistently year in and year out means nothing? Again, lets remember, Manning's career is still very early. He has plenty of time left to "win the big game". But until then, he's just a "choker". As are the other 31 quarterbacks in the league who won't win "the big game" this year.Oh, and let's not forget Tony Dungy. He's never won a game that counted in the playoffs either. Maybe it's not Manning's fault at all. It's probably just Tony Dungy - he's a big "choker" too.Man - how did the Colts even make it this far with these two guys?!? It's really got to be a testament to how great the rest of the team is that they can overcome two guys like Manning and Dungy to get as far as they did this year. :bag:
 
He has plenty of time left to "win the big game". But until then, he's just a "choker". As are the other 31 quarterbacks in the league who won't win "the big game" this year.
NO!You don't understand the meaning of 'choker.' Choking is when you're supposed to win and you don't. Losing to a better team isn't choking. Are you seriously suggesting that Tim Rattay and the SF 49ers choked this year by not winning the super bowl?
 
If the Colts had lost 30-27 or so, you could make the case that they were beaten by a better team. When they only put up 3 points the entire game, they were beaten by a better team and Peyton Manning choked.

 
Maybe this was said already, but I think the Colts need to concentrate MORE on RUNNING THE BALL. Sure, pretty passing and TD's records are great, but running the ball was the better option yesterday with the weather conditions. I understand Edge had a great year running the ball. But I believe the Colts could work a little more on developing a solid, consistent running game and then sticking to it.Pretty doesn't win championships.Edit: I do believe Manning and Moore both choked. How can a beaten up Pats secondary hold the Colts to 3 points?!? Moore did not adjust, Manning did not read the defense correctly, etc. Sure the Colts were beaten by a better team, but what did they do to overcome that? Nothing.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top