Does Manning need to win the Bowl to shed his image? (1 Viewer)

[Jason Wood]

I've always been fascinated by the labels we put on our athletes, and obviously Peyton Manning has a huge albatross around his neck in a lot of people's eyes. With the AFC Championship win, beating his arch rival in the process with an enormous comeback...is that enough for any of you who have previously held strong to the "Manning can't win a big game" mantra?

If Manning loses the Super Bowl, is he back to being a guy that "can't win the big game" in many people's eyes?

 

[glvsav37]

he has made the SB...win or loose, he is finally there and that is good enough for me.

on a side note: Mike and Mike had a great bit where they played a clip of the 'monkey on peyton's back' being interviewed. He was bummed about not ridding peyton anymore and noted how he rode archie through his career and, well, the only other place to go is eli's back now.

funny stuff

 

[DPRugby]

I think beating the Pats, BB and Brady in the fashion he did will help remove the "can't win the big game" label. However, I still think he needs to win the SB in order to be looked at less like Marino and more like Elway.

 

[Widbil83]

He MUST win a Super Bowl before I take him off my chocker list.

 

[Bri]

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...howtopic=301708

He lost the label for this week but sadly it'll return if he doesn't win in the Supe

 

[redman]

I can't answer for others, but I'd have to say "yes". He's in McNabb's position circa 2 years ago. The Super Bowl is the last hurdle. Said another way, he's moved from being the modern Dan Fouts to the modern Dan Marino. We'll see if he can become the next Brett Favre (God help us).

 

[John Mamula]

He MUST win a Super Bowl before I take him off my chocker list.

 

[John Mamula]

We'll see if he can become the next Brett Favre (God help us).

Rex Grossman already has that title.

 

[redman]

We'll see if he can become the next Brett Favre (God help us).

Rex Grossman already has that title.

Obviously I'm not referring to quarterbacking style, just the sum total of one's career (and in Favre's case the incessant tributes that that has gotten him).

 

[John Mamula]

We'll see if he can become the next Brett Favre (God help us).

Rex Grossman already has that title.

Obviously I'm not referring to quarterbacking style, just the sum total of one's career (and in Favre's case the incessant tributes that that has gotten him).

 

[Jason Wood]

Continuing on with the conversation...

If he wins the SB, where does that put him in your estimation among the all-time greats?

 

[Hairy Snowman]

Winning the superbowl for Manning may kick off a series of championships ala Michael Jordan. We won't know for years but Manning has advanced farther than anyone in his family. A tremedous amount of pressure must be relieved, especially by beating the Patriots.

I like the way Jim Rome put it. He got the gorilla off his back, but he's still in the room.

Can you imagine if he loses to *gasp* Rex Grossman?!? OMG. The world will spin off its axis. Complete pandemonium. Dogs and cats, living together!

Seriously, in today's america, if he loses he is going to get lambasted for 6 months in the sports media about him choking in the big game AGAINST REX.

The sword cuts both ways. Its beautiful the way the media sets this up. Either way, the loser of this game gets branded. The reality is they both had a better postseasons than either has ever had.

But IMO if Peyton loses its out of the frying pan..............

 

[Slum Lord]

I've always been fascinated by the labels we put on our athletes, and obviously Peyton Manning has a huge albatross around his neck in a lot of people's eyes. With the AFC Championship win, beating his arch rival in the process with an enormous comeback...is that enough for any of you who have previously held strong to the "Manning can't win a big game" mantra?If Manning loses the Super Bowl, is he back to being a guy that "can't win the big game" in many people's eyes?

There is only one big game, and its being played this year on Feb 4th. So yes, he needs it.

 

[John Mamula]

Continuing on with the conversation...If he wins the SB, where does that put him in your estimation among the all-time greats?

leapfrogs young, marino, fouts but is still behind montana, bradshaw, brady, and vince young.

 

[msommer]

Continuing on with the conversation...

If he wins the SB, where does that put him in your estimation among the all-time greats?

leapfrogs young, marino, fouts but is still behind montana, bradshaw, brady, and vince young.

 

[Bri]

Continuing on with the conversation...If he wins the SB, where does that put him in your estimation among the all-time greats?

He'll need to win another IMO.Stat-wise among the all time greats he's there IMO or very much on his way. I'm understanding this as the best ever.

 

[CalBear]

Continuing on with the conversation...If he wins the SB, where does that put him in your estimation among the all-time greats?

I think if Manning wins, he gets my #2 spot behind Joe Montana, just ahead of Dan Marino. He'd be Dan Marino with a title.

 

[Liquid Tension]

I think beating the Pats, BB and Brady in the fashion he did will help remove the "can't win the big game" label. However, I still think he needs to win the SB in order to be looked at less like Marino and more like Elway.

This is the exact reason why these discussions can get silly. Marino was a better QB than Elway! I don't care how many rings or what the reasons. You give them the same teams and Marino would win more games than Elway. The Rings are a team effort not just a QB effort. There is a reason why Elway never won a ring until he had the best RB in the league on his TEAM.The people who judge rankings based on rings don't get it. Bradshaw couldn't wear the jockstraps of 50 QB's without a ring, but he must have been "clutch." If you want to use rings as a tie breaker, feel free. If I were a QB I would much rather be talked about like Marino than Elway if you were saying how good I was. If you want to say you would rather win a title than be as good as Marino than that is an OK preference to have.There I feel better

 

[Despyzer]

Continuing on with the conversation...If he wins the SB, where does that put him in your estimation among the all-time greats?

I'd put him even with Brady amongst current QBs. He moves into the ultra-elite (top 3 with strong consideration as all-time best) with multiple championships.

 

[Liquid Tension]

Continuing on with the conversation...If he wins the SB, where does that put him in your estimation among the all-time greats?

I think if Manning wins, he gets my #2 spot behind Joe Montana, just ahead of Dan Marino. He'd be Dan Marino with a title.

He still needs to do it for longer IMO, but I would agree that he is in that area if he can keep it up for awhile. My one thing holding back Manning at that level is that he has played in perfect conditions for half his games. This has a huge benefit for him. He also has had much better weapons than Marino with Edge, Wayne and Harrison. This year Addai may be better than anything Marino had in his backfield as well.

 

[redman]

Continuing on with the conversation...If he wins the SB, where does that put him in your estimation among the all-time greats?

I think if Manning wins, he gets my #2 spot behind Joe Montana, just ahead of Dan Marino. He'd be Dan Marino with a title.

The name for that is "Brett Farve".

 

[Despyzer]

I think beating the Pats, BB and Brady in the fashion he did will help remove the "can't win the big game" label. However, I still think he needs to win the SB in order to be looked at less like Marino and more like Elway.

This is the exact reason why these discussions can get silly. Marino was a better QB than Elway! I don't care how many rings or what the reasons. You give them the same teams and Marino would win more games than Elway. The Rings are a team effort not just a QB effort. There is a reason why Elway never won a ring until he had the best RB in the league on his TEAM.The people who judge rankings based on rings don't get it. Bradshaw couldn't wear the jockstraps of 50 QB's without a ring, but he must have been "clutch." If you want to use rings as a tie breaker, feel free. If I were a QB I would much rather be talked about like Marino than Elway if you were saying how good I was. If you want to say you would rather win a title than be as good as Marino than that is an OK preference to have.There I feel better

And you are right on every point. Except that you left off that Elway also needed his team to violate the salary cap, in addition to having the best RB in the league.

 

[TwinTurbo]

I've been a consistent Manning hater, but he made the Superbowl and that's good enough for me. He showed a lot of skill in the second half of that game and made some throws that only elite QB's can make.

I didn't like how he had his head down and was unable to watch the game at the end. I would have liked to see him stand up and take it like a man and cheer his Defense on. But he showed that he belongs in the Superbowl, and the monkey is off his back now. I'm guessing the game will probably not be decided by Manning, but by several other factors outside of his control. The Bears D is also very very good. He would not be any less of a QB in my book if he failed to have a great game against that D.

 

[BGP]

I've always been fascinated by the labels we put on our athletes, and obviously Peyton Manning has a huge albatross around his neck in a lot of people's eyes. With the AFC Championship win, beating his arch rival in the process with an enormous comeback...is that enough for any of you who have previously held strong to the "Manning can't win a big game" mantra?If Manning loses the Super Bowl, is he back to being a guy that "can't win the big game" in many people's eyes?

Yes he must win. Elway was labelled as a guy who couldn't win the big game with all of his meltdowns in the Super Bowl until the Broncos won it in 98. The 1988 game vs the Redskins was particularly bad because conventional wisdom was that the Broncos were a better team but Elway threw 1 TD and 3 interceptions in the loss. This game seems to be shaping up like that Broncos-Redskins game. Like Elway, Manning and his team are the favorites.

 

[Jason Wood]

Continuing on with the conversation...If he wins the SB, where does that put him in your estimation among the all-time greats?

I think if Manning wins, he gets my #2 spot behind Joe Montana, just ahead of Dan Marino. He'd be Dan Marino with a title.

What about Brett Favre?Only 3-time NFL MVPWon a Super BowlWent to anotherWill own most, if not all, of the big-time career passing records (having overtaken Marino for most of them)

 

[Sea Bass]

To fans and media: yes. To Sea Bass: no.

 

[redman]

I've always been fascinated by the labels we put on our athletes, and obviously Peyton Manning has a huge albatross around his neck in a lot of people's eyes. With the AFC Championship win, beating his arch rival in the process with an enormous comeback...is that enough for any of you who have previously held strong to the "Manning can't win a big game" mantra?If Manning loses the Super Bowl, is he back to being a guy that "can't win the big game" in many people's eyes?

Yes he must win. Elway was labelled as a guy who couldn't win the big game with all of his meltdowns in the Super Bowl until the Broncos won it in 98. The 1988 game vs the Redskins was particularly bad because conventional wisdom was that the Broncos were a better team but Elway threw 1 TD and 3 interceptions in the loss. This game seems to be shaping up like that Broncos-Redskins game. Like Elway, Manning and his team are the favorites.

That's an interesting comparison on the Bears/Redskins side of things, but I think Manning's Colts are a better team than Elway's 1987 Broncos. The skill positions outside of the QB's aren't even comparable. Check it out:1987 Broncos

Quarterbacks+----------------------+----+-------------------------------+-------------+| Name				 |  G | CMP ATT   PCT YARD  Y/A TD IN | RSH YARD TD |+----------------------+----+-------------------------------+-------------+| John Elway		   | 12 | 224 410  54.6 3198  7.8 19 12 |  66  304  4 || Ken Karcher		  |  3 |  56 102  54.9  628  6.2  5  4 |   9	3  0 || Gary Kubiak		  | 12 |   3   7  42.9   25  3.6  0  2 |   1	3  0 |+----------------------+----+-------------------------------+-------------+Running Backs+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+| Name				 |  G |  RSH  YARD   AVG  TD  |  REC  YARD   AVG  TD |+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+| Ken Bell			 | 12 |   13	43   3.3   0  |	1	 8   8.0   0 || Gene Lang			| 12 |   89   303   3.4   2  |   17   130   7.6   2 || Nathan Poole		 |  2 |   28   126   4.5   1  |	1	 9   9.0   0 || Steve Sewell		 |  7 |   19	83   4.4   2  |   13   209  16.1   1 || Gerald Willhite	  |  3 |   26   141   5.4   0  |	9	25   2.8   0 || Sammy Winder		 | 12 |  196   741   3.8   6  |   14	74   5.3   1 |+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+Wide Receivers+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+| Name				 |  G |  RSH  YARD   AVG  TD  |  REC  YARD   AVG  TD |+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+| Sam Graddy		   |  1 |	0	 0   0.0   0  |	0	 0   0.0   0 || Mark Jackson		 | 12 |	0	 0   0.0   0  |   26   436  16.8   2 || Vance Johnson		| 11 |	1	-8  -8.0   0  |   42   684  16.3   7 || Ricky Nattiel		| 12 |	2	13   6.5   0  |   31   630  20.3   2 || Steve Watson		 |  5 |	0	 0   0.0   0  |   11   167  15.2   1 |+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+Tight Ends+----------------------+----+----------------------+| Name				 |  G |  REC  YARD   AVG  TD |+----------------------+----+----------------------+| Clarence Kay		 | 12 |   31   440  14.2   0 || Bobby Micho		  | 15 |   25   242   9.7   2 || Orson Mobley		 | 10 |   16   228  14.2   1 |+----------------------+----+----------------------+

2006 Colts

Quarterbacks+----------------------+----+-------------------------------+-------------+| Name				 |  G | CMP ATT   PCT YARD  Y/A TD IN | RSH YARD TD |+----------------------+----+-------------------------------+-------------+| Peyton Manning	   | 16 | 362 557  65.0 4397  7.9 31  9 |  23   36  4 || Jim Sorgi			|  2 |   0   0   0.0	0  0.0  0  0 |   0	0  0 |+----------------------+----+-------------------------------+-------------+Running Backs+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+| Name				 |  G |  RSH  YARD   AVG  TD  |  REC  YARD   AVG  TD |+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+| Joseph Addai		 | 16 |  226  1081   4.8   7  |   40   325   8.1   1 || Ran Carthon		  |  3 |	3	 4   1.3   1  |	0	 0   0.0   0 || DeDe Dorsey		  | 13 |	0	 0   0.0   0  |	0	 0   0.0   0 || Dominic Rhodes	   | 16 |  187   641   3.4   5  |   36   251   7.0   0 |+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+Wide Receivers+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+| Name				 |  G |  RSH  YARD   AVG  TD  |  REC  YARD   AVG  TD |+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+| Marvin Harrison	  | 16 |	0	 0   0.0   0  |   95  1366  14.4  12 || Aaron Moorehead	  | 12 |	0	 0   0.0   0  |	8	82  10.2   1 || Ricky Proehl		 |  2 |	0	 0   0.0   0  |	3	30  10.0   0 || Brandon Stokley	  |  4 |	0	 0   0.0   0  |	8	85  10.6   1 || Reggie Wayne		 | 16 |	0	 0   0.0   0  |   86  1310  15.2   9 || Terrence Wilkins	 | 15 |	0	 0   0.0   0  |	0	 0   0.0   0 |+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+Tight Ends+----------------------+----+----------------------+| Name				 |  G |  REC  YARD   AVG  TD |+----------------------+----+----------------------+| Dallas Clark		 | 12 |   30   367  12.2   4 || Bryan Fletcher	   | 14 |   18   202  11.2   2 || Justin Snow		  | 16 |	0	 0   0.0   0 || Ben Utecht		   | 14 |   37   377  10.2   0 |+----------------------+----+----------------------+

Said another way, the AFC was considered to be the inferior conference in the 1980's when that Redskins-Broncos game was played, while it's now the superior conference. The Colts certainly have to bring their A-game to win this Super Bowl, but I don't see them as the paper tiger built on the skills of one guy the way that Elway's Broncos were in the mid-to-late 80's.

 

[Chase Stuart]

As you know J, for me Manning never had a choker image or can't win the big game image. It was more "Manning never went to the SB, but he easily could have." The farthest I would go was "Manning can't win the big one right up until the point when he wins the big one", which obviously isn't very telling.

That said, where does he rank all-time if he wins? For me, he probably won't change places depending on how he does in one game.

If he never plays another down, he's behind Young, Tarkenton, Unitas, Marino and Montana, in no order. I don't know what best ever means, so depending on your definition he could be behind Staubach too.

With one more "Manning" year next year....basically meeting whatever his projections are...I'd have him ranked just behind Young and Tarkenton in terms of "value added", which is admittedly just a start. I've got no doubt that Manning will at some point pass Tarkenton for most value added ever as a passer, although he might later in his career regress.

Will he be the best QB of all time? He'll have a pretty spotless resume. The only downside I see is his statistics will arguably be inflated by his supporting talent, scheme and dome play. But I think he'll most likely end his career as the top statistical passer of all time. And in many minds, he'll be the GQTEPBVY.

(Greatest Quarterback That Ever Played Before Vince Young).

 

[MarshallRob]

Assuming Manning wins the Super Bowl, does that make up for all previous subpar playoff performances? Nobody seems to hold it against Favre that he helped cost Green Bay the 1995 NFC Championship game with a horrible 4th quarter INT or that he turned it over twice and couldn't engineer a late game-winning drive in Super Bowl XXXII.

 

[BGP]

As you know J, for me Manning never had a choker image or can't win the big game image. It was more "Manning never went to the SB, but he easily could have." The farthest I would go was "Manning can't win the big one right up until the point when he wins the big one", which obviously isn't very telling.

That said, where does he rank all-time if he wins? For me, he probably won't change places depending on how he does in one game.

If he never plays another down, he's behind Young, Tarkenton, Unitas, Marino and Montana, in no order. I don't know what best ever means, so depending on your definition he could be behind Staubach too.

With one more "Manning" year next year....basically meeting whatever his projections are...I'd have him ranked just behind Young and Tarkenton in terms of "value added", which is admittedly just a start. I've got no doubt that Manning will at some point pass Tarkenton for most value added ever as a passer, although he might later in his career regress.

Will he be the best QB of all time? He'll have a pretty spotless resume. The only downside I see is his statistics will arguably be inflated by his supporting talent, scheme and dome play. But I think he'll most likely end his career as the top statistical passer of all time. And in many minds, he'll be the GQTEPBVY.

(Greatest Quarterback That Ever Played Before Vince Young).

In my mind, Joe Montana is the greatest QB of all time. Maybe not the best athlete, but the greatest QB. Just look at his TD/INT ratio in the postseason:http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/MontJo01.htm

45 TDs to 21 INTs. At the highest of high levels of play - the NFL postseason. And the sample size is huge with 23 games played.

The only QB rivalling that sort of awesome production at that level is Tom Brady.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/BradTo00.htm

20 TDs to 9 INTs.

The way I grade it out, Joe Montana is light years better than any other QB in NFL history. Its not even close.

Peyton Manning:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/MannPe00.htm

17 TDs to 14 INTs. That ok. Average for a playoff QB. But not great.

 

[BGP]

How about this for Joe Montana's legacy.

In 1989, he faced the #1 defense in the NFL in the super bowl. The Broncos had the best. Result? 5 TDs and 0 INTs.

Amazing. You'd think the best defense could slow him down a little.

 

[freeannyong]

Continuing on with the conversation...

If he wins the SB, where does that put him in your estimation among the all-time greats?

I think if Manning wins, he gets my #2 spot behind Joe Montana, just ahead of Dan Marino. He'd be Dan Marino with a title.

What about Brett Favre?Only 3-time NFL MVP

Won a Super Bowl

Went to another

Will own be second to Manning in most, if not all, of the big-time career passing records (having overtaken Marino for most of them)

 

[x260bm]

I think he has to win two or three before people stop saying he is a choker. The anti-manning crowd is pretty entrenched by now. Even if he wins this Super Bowl it is only going to be 3 months before the “Manning is overrated” talk begins again.

 

[smcindoe]

You can never again say that Manning can't win a big game.

However, he of course still hasn't won the big game, which is the Super Bow.

 

[CalBear]

Continuing on with the conversation...If he wins the SB, where does that put him in your estimation among the all-time greats?

I think if Manning wins, he gets my #2 spot behind Joe Montana, just ahead of Dan Marino. He'd be Dan Marino with a title.

What about Brett Favre?Only 3-time NFL MVPWon a Super BowlWent to anotherWill own most, if not all, of the big-time career passing records (having overtaken Marino for most of them)

I think Favre is up there, also; I would probably have Favre just below Marino. If Favre retires today, Marino will have played just one more regular-season game than Brett, and still is ahead in TDs and significantly ahead in yardage and yards per attempt. But I can see the argument for Favre over Marino, especially if he comes back and makes the playoffs. Right now, I'd probably have, for post-merger QBs:Montana---------Marino---------FavreBrady Manning---------YoungElwayRight now, Manning is as high as he is based on pretty ridiculous stats (7.7 yards per attempt, 261 yards per game, 1.9 TDs per game, 64% completions are all insanely high), and he's as low as he is based on his so far relatively poor playoff performances. With a Super Bowl win, he would shake off the latter label, and his gaudy stats and consistent performance will put him right up near the top. If he's able to follow that up with a couple more Super Bowl wins, he could become the first legitimate challenger to Montana as the best ever.If he never wins a Super Bowl, he still is likely to eclipse Marino as "best stat-producing QB ever," but he can't catch Montana without a Super Bowl.

 

[H.K.]

If Manning loses the Super Bowl, is he back to being a guy that "can't win the big game" in many people's eyes?

Yes. The NFL plays the season each year to determine a champion, not to see who has the best passing numbers. Until they hand the Lombardi trophy to the QB with the best stats after week 17, regular season passing stats take a back seat to playoff performance.This is a fantasy site, so many get tripped up in the numbers without realizing there are so many different elements that a QB needs to possess that are not stat related in order to be successful on the field. Playing at a higher level against tougher opposition is why playoff performances are given such strong consideration when evaluating QB's and their careers. Historically, Manning has not played his best in the playoffs. He has had some good games, but played less than his best in most contests. Last week he played a great second half...it earned him the chance to play in a Super Bowl. He should win the game. He has the better team. Failing to do so should, and obviously will, be held against him. However, winning elevates him to legend status because he has conquered all, both personal and team success at the ultimate levels. Right now the only mark against Manning is he lacks a title. If he gets it, he's teflon.

 

[Liquid Tension]

I think beating the Pats, BB and Brady in the fashion he did will help remove the "can't win the big game" label. However, I still think he needs to win the SB in order to be looked at less like Marino and more like Elway.

This is the exact reason why these discussions can get silly. Marino was a better QB than Elway! I don't care how many rings or what the reasons. You give them the same teams and Marino would win more games than Elway. The Rings are a team effort not just a QB effort. There is a reason why Elway never won a ring until he had the best RB in the league on his TEAM.The people who judge rankings based on rings don't get it. Bradshaw couldn't wear the jockstraps of 50 QB's without a ring, but he must have been "clutch." If you want to use rings as a tie breaker, feel free. If I were a QB I would much rather be talked about like Marino than Elway if you were saying how good I was. If you want to say you would rather win a title than be as good as Marino than that is an OK preference to have.There I feel better

And you are right on every point. Except that you left off that Elway also needed his team to violate the salary cap, in addition to having the best RB in the league.

LOL...SF had to do that as well remember. Does that negate some of the Montana or Young luster? Those guys were great players on great teams.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Manning just won the big game in dramatic fashion.

So that label is dead. D-E-A-D, dead.

Now can he win a championship? Can he "win it all"?

It takes more then one man, but the QB is the most influentiual.

 

[Widbil83]

Manning just won the big game in dramatic fashion.

So that label is dead. D-E-A-D, dead.

Now can he win a championship? Can he "win it all"?

It takes more then one man, but the QB is the most influentiual.

So your telling me that if he loses the Super Bowl he won't be know as a choker?

 

[Liquid Tension]

As you know J, for me Manning never had a choker image or can't win the big game image. It was more "Manning never went to the SB, but he easily could have." The farthest I would go was "Manning can't win the big one right up until the point when he wins the big one", which obviously isn't very telling.

That said, where does he rank all-time if he wins? For me, he probably won't change places depending on how he does in one game.

If he never plays another down, he's behind Young, Tarkenton, Unitas, Marino and Montana, in no order. I don't know what best ever means, so depending on your definition he could be behind Staubach too.

With one more "Manning" year next year....basically meeting whatever his projections are...I'd have him ranked just behind Young and Tarkenton in terms of "value added", which is admittedly just a start. I've got no doubt that Manning will at some point pass Tarkenton for most value added ever as a passer, although he might later in his career regress.

Will he be the best QB of all time? He'll have a pretty spotless resume. The only downside I see is his statistics will arguably be inflated by his supporting talent, scheme and dome play. But I think he'll most likely end his career as the top statistical passer of all time. And in many minds, he'll be the GQTEPBVY.

(Greatest Quarterback That Ever Played Before Vince Young).

Chase, that is an interesting article about the value, but I find it hard to believe that Trent Green added more value than Favre? What could have caused that?

 

[Despyzer]

This is the exact reason why these discussions can get silly. Marino was a better QB than Elway! I don't care how many rings or what the reasons. You give them the same teams and Marino would win more games than Elway. The Rings are a team effort not just a QB effort. There is a reason why Elway never won a ring until he had the best RB in the league on his TEAM.

And you are right on every point. Except that you left off that Elway also needed his team to violate the salary cap, in addition to having the best RB in the league.

LOL...SF had to do that as well remember. Does that negate some of the Montana or Young luster? Those guys were great players on great teams.

If this did happen to the Niners, I don't remember them being penalized $$$ and draft picks. The league seemed to think that the Broncos infraction was significant enough to drop the hammer on them for it.

 

[H.K.]

Montana---------Marino ---------FavreBrady Manning---------YoungElway

Marino - Best passer? Arguably. Best QB? Absolutely not.301 carries 87 yards. There is more to being a QB than just passing. Even Manning has the ability to run if he has to. Any defense that does not have to worry even the slightest bit about a QB taking off and beating them with his legs has a big advantage. Every Super Bowl winning QB on that list has been multi-dimensional when the situation called for it, some with more frequency than others. Marino stands out like a sore thumb when his entire skill set is evaluated in this regard. When evaluating QB's, there is much more than passing stats to consider.

 

[massraider]

Manning just won the big game in dramatic fashion.

So that label is dead. D-E-A-D, dead.

Now can he win a championship? Can he "win it all"?

It takes more then one man, but the QB is the most influentiual.

So your telling me that if he loses the Super Bowl he won't be know as a choker?

There's the problem. He's a choker if they lose? Is that all it takes? Even if he plays well?

 

[Liquid Tension]

This is the exact reason why these discussions can get silly. Marino was a better QB than Elway! I don't care how many rings or what the reasons. You give them the same teams and Marino would win more games than Elway. The Rings are a team effort not just a QB effort. There is a reason why Elway never won a ring until he had the best RB in the league on his TEAM.

And you are right on every point. Except that you left off that Elway also needed his team to violate the salary cap, in addition to having the best RB in the league.

LOL...SF had to do that as well remember. Does that negate some of the Montana or Young luster? Those guys were great players on great teams.

If this did happen to the Niners, I don't remember them being penalized $$$ and draft picks. The league seemed to think that the Broncos infraction was significant enough to drop the hammer on them for it.

Maybe someone can help with this but SF was penalized, but I think it was just a fine. I believe it was Debartolo, but I am not positive.

 

[Gr00vus]

Manning just won the big game in dramatic fashion.

So that label is dead. D-E-A-D, dead.

Now can he win a championship? Can he "win it all"?

It takes more then one man, but the QB is the most influentiual.

So your telling me that if he loses the Super Bowl he won't be know as a choker?

That depends on how he plays doesn't it? For instance, if he goes for 400 yards 5 tds, no turnovers and his team ends up ahead in time of possession but the Colts still lose, could you really call him a choker? I'd have a hard time hangning that label on him in that case.This question is unanswerable without knowing how Peyton actually performs in the SB.

 

[H.K.]

That depends on how he plays doesn't it? For instance, if he goes for 400 yards 5 tds, no turnovers and his team ends up ahead in time of possession but the Colts still lose, could you really call him a choker?

If Manning does this, I really think the Colts will end up winning....call it a hunch.

 

[massraider]

Manning just won the big game in dramatic fashion.

So that label is dead. D-E-A-D, dead.

Now can he win a championship? Can he "win it all"?

It takes more then one man, but the QB is the most influentiual.

So your telling me that if he loses the Super Bowl he won't be know as a choker?

This question is unanswerable without knowing how Peyton actually performs in the SB.

Unfortunately, I think that's not the case for a lot of people. If they lose, he's a choker.

 

[Gr00vus]

That depends on how he plays doesn't it? For instance, if he goes for 400 yards 5 tds, no turnovers and his team ends up ahead in time of possession but the Colts still lose, could you really call him a choker?

If Manning does this, I really think the Colts will end up winning....call it a hunch.

I'm exaggerating to illustrate a point - it would take many Hester returns for TDs to work out for the Bears in that case indeed.GB you for calling me out on it though, it's nice to know I can't get away with anything around here EVER!!!!

 

[Liquid Tension]

Montana---------Marino ---------FavreBrady Manning---------YoungElway

Marino - Best passer? Arguably. Best QB? Absolutely not.301 carries 87 yards. There is more to being a QB than just passing. Even Manning has the ability to run if he has to. Any defense that does not have to worry even the slightest bit about a QB taking off and beating them with his legs has a big advantage. Every Super Bowl winning QB on that list has been multi-dimensional when the situation called for it, some with more frequency than others. Marino stands out like a sore thumb when his entire skill set is evaluated in this regard. When evaluating QB's, there is much more than passing stats to consider.

Multi dimensional? I agree, Such as:Having great pocket presence. Being able to read defensesHaving the ability to be a great leader and motivatorHaving a strong armHaving an accurate arm (long and short)Being smart with the ball and the situation (not taking sacks, throwing the ball away, etc...)Knowing where your players are at all timesHaving a quick release (to avoid sacks and complete passes)Going through your progressionsQuickness within the pocket to buy timeUnderstanding all aspects of the game of offenseDurabilityRunning ability if all breaks downScrambling behind the LOS to buy time.So Marino has 12 of these attributes and misses the last 2. how many QB's have more than 10?Marino was slow, but he was very quick in his movements in the pocket. he had a sense to hop forward a few feet that gave him just enough time to get off passes that NO QB ever could. His quick release was legendary. He avoided sacks that other QB's would have fumbled because he got rid of the ball before he got hit. The great players of his time used to constantly say how he was the hardest guy to sack because he would get rid of the ball at the last second. I remember a quote from a player (might have been Bruce Smith) and he said I thought I had 15 more sacks in my career but Marino got rid of the ball...something like that.If Marino ever had a defense and a RB ...wow. BTW, if he would have had Venitieri instead of UWE Von Schaman who missed 2 or 3 FG's in that SD game he would have advanced farther there as well. Montana gets my vote as the greatest ever because he impressed me later in his career with a KC team that was not that special and he drove them down to win a playoff game (or was it to get in?). That cemented it for me. Outside of that there was never a better all around QB as Marino. People say he was the greatest passer but that doesn't do justice for what the QB position means. Running is a tiny % of all those other items that I listed. Just ask Michael Vick who does have a canon, but nothing else on that list besides running.

 

[Gr00vus]

Unfortunately, I think that's not the case for a lot of people. If they lose, he's a choker.

Pinning him with that label without taking his actual performance into context seems irrational to me - but this topic does get irrational at times.