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!

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

imo, just making it to the superbowl shed that image.

He didn't have to beat the pats. Doesn't have to win it. He just had to make it there.

Now I'll root for him to win it(usually root against him in the playoffs) just so announcers will shut up about it, after a while of course.

 
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? :o
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.
This is supposed to be the shark pool, I would hope people swimming here are able to have perspective. :angry:
 
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. :boxing:
:lmao: 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!!!! :D
Of course you used hyperbole to prove the point, but sometimes you need to do that so that others can see the light...I don't understand why a win changes things dramatically in people's minds. That a win moves a player along that imaginary sliding scale some, OK, but a dramatic move? :lmao:

The entire idea is to look at a body of work and make your conclusions. If Manning sucks in the SB and they win, why does that put the finishing touches on his career ranking? If a players is surrounded with the best defense in the league and he wins a title why does that impact a QB's standing in your rankings?

For the same reason Brady was overrated for his titles (when he dominate in the games) he surely should not be lessened because he threw a pick in his "big" drive this year. He is a top notch QB on a top notch TEAM; that is a recipe for success.

 
Yes he needs to win.

He is a 7.5 favorite going into the Superbowl.

It wasn't a "Can't beat the Patriots" monkey on his back.

It was a "Can't win 'The Big One'" monkey on his back.

If he loses to the Bears it will be percieved as a Choke. A big one. And he'll still be this generation's Dan Marino.

Great Quarterback who could never git-r-dun.

 
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?
Good question. Fortunately, any of these 'why is X ahead of Y' questions are very easy for me to answer.I'm pretty sure Favre is still behind Green, but I haven't run the 2006 numbers. So remember this is all from before this year.

Favre was incredible in 1995, and excellent in 1996, 1997 and 2001. This comports with popular perception, as well. Favre was above average to very good in 1992, 1994, 1998 and 2004. In 2003 he was a bit above average, and in 1999, 2000 and 2002 he was average. Now my system makes him a bit below average in 1991, when he was 0/5 with 2 INTs. I might be penalizing him too much there, but even if you eliminate that year he's still behind Green. The big problems are 1993 and 2005 -- he was well, well, well below average, especially in 2005. Basically, him 1993, 2005 and 1999 basically zero out his 1996 and 2001. All in all, he had a very good statistical career, but '93 and '05 killed him.

Green was a bit below average in 2001, but above average every other year. In 2003 and 2005 his numbers were incredible, better than Favre's numbers in any year but '95. 8000 yards against 22 INTs over two years is unbelievable. In 2000, 2002 and 2004 Green was excellent. In 1998 he was good.

If you exclude Favre's '93 and '05, he moves ahead of Green. If you read that whole link, I titled a section "Eliminating the negatives" where I do just that, and it shows Favre ahead of Green.

You can argue about Green's talent, and his supporting cast, but the numbers he put up from 2002-2005 were an absolutely incredible four year stretch. 16,334 yards and just 52 INTs is something very few QBs have every done. In Favre's best four years (nonconsecutive), he had 16,100 and 57 INTs.

My system puts a large emphasis on avoiding INTs and does not give credit for compiling stats via longevity. Considering Favre is second all-time in INTs and second all time in pass attempts, it's not surprising that he's not elevated via my system. Green has also ranked in the top six in AY/A five times, while Favre has only done it four times. If you were to combine each season of each player's career, here is what the numbers say (ignoring everything but the numbers) are the top ten years (in order):

1995 Brett Favre

2003 Trent Green

2005 Trent Green

2004 Trent Green

1996 Brett Favre

2001 Brett Favre

2002 Trent Green

2000 Trent Green

1997 Brett Favre

2004 Brett Favre

 
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.
Don't forget Bart Starr. 9 games. 15 TDs to 3 INTs.
 
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.
Whose to say every other QB didn't also play in perfect conditions for half of their games? I mean NE has good weather until January most years. Same with NY, Miami, Pittsburg, Cincy, etc.That is a biased argument unless you get the statistics for weather conditions on game day over the last 50 years!
 
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?
Good question. Fortunately, any of these 'why is X ahead of Y' questions are very easy for me to answer.I'm pretty sure Favre is still behind Green, but I haven't run the 2006 numbers. So remember this is all from before this year.

Favre was incredible in 1995, and excellent in 1996, 1997 and 2001. This comports with popular perception, as well. Favre was above average to very good in 1992, 1994, 1998 and 2004. In 2003 he was a bit above average, and in 1999, 2000 and 2002 he was average. Now my system makes him a bit below average in 1991, when he was 0/5 with 2 INTs. I might be penalizing him too much there, but even if you eliminate that year he's still behind Green. The big problems are 1993 and 2005 -- he was well, well, well below average, especially in 2005. Basically, him 1993, 2005 and 1999 basically zero out his 1996 and 2001. All in all, he had a very good statistical career, but '93 and '05 killed him.

Green was a bit below average in 2001, but above average every other year. In 2003 and 2005 his numbers were incredible, better than Favre's numbers in any year but '95. 8000 yards against 22 INTs over two years is unbelievable. In 2000, 2002 and 2004 Green was excellent. In 1998 he was good.

If you exclude Favre's '93 and '05, he moves ahead of Green. If you read that whole link, I titled a section "Eliminating the negatives" where I do just that, and it shows Favre ahead of Green.

You can argue about Green's talent, and his supporting cast, but the numbers he put up from 2002-2005 were an absolutely incredible four year stretch. 16,334 yards and just 52 INTs is something very few QBs have every done. In Favre's best four years (nonconsecutive), he had 16,100 and 57 INTs.

My system puts a large emphasis on avoiding INTs and does not give credit for compiling stats via longevity. Considering Favre is second all-time in INTs and second all time in pass attempts, it's not surprising that he's not elevated via my system. Green has also ranked in the top six in AY/A five times, while Favre has only done it four times. If you were to combine each season of each player's career, here is what the numbers say (ignoring everything but the numbers) are the top ten years (in order):

1995 Brett Favre

2003 Trent Green

2005 Trent Green

2004 Trent Green

1996 Brett Favre

2001 Brett Favre

2002 Trent Green

2000 Trent Green

1997 Brett Favre

2004 Brett Favre
Good answer! The logic string you put together is very sound. I will need to look deeper into it but it makes sense. I also like that longevity only helps your value if you added value to the team. The old argument of whether player x hurts his HOF chances because he hung around and played below average for a few years...It is surprising how good Trent Green has been. Most people overrate Favre because of the talent around him getting him rings (something I am always fighting with people on this board about), but if you look more about how they performed with a bonus for winning (that does not mean just postseason as a mediocre team could be guided to the playoffs with a top tier QB but when they get to the playoffs they will be handed their lunch) that is more logical to me.

 
Yes he needs to win. He is a 7.5 favorite going into the Superbowl. It wasn't a "Can't beat the Patriots" monkey on his back.It was a "Can't win 'The Big One'" monkey on his back. If he loses to the Bears it will be percieved as a Choke. A big one. And he'll still be this generation's Dan Marino. Great Quarterback who could never git-r-dun.
The spread is 7 points not 7.5 and that is the Colts as a team are favored not just Manning.
 
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.
Whose to say every other QB didn't also play in perfect conditions for half of their games? I mean NE has good weather until January most years. Same with NY, Miami, Pittsburg, Cincy, etc.That is a biased argument unless you get the statistics for weather conditions on game day over the last 50 years!
First, I have been arguing the positives of Manning. Second, Manning plays in a DOME, how can you argue that all the teams you just mentioned might have just as good weather? Wind is a major factor. Didn't you see what the elements did to Brees? One of the major reasons Manning has struggled in the postseason is that he has had to go on the road to NE and play. Just look at what a dome does for his stats compared to outside. Look at what a dome does for many QB stats.
 
It is surprising how good Trent Green has been. Most people overrate Favre because of the talent around him getting him rings (something I am always fighting with people on this board about), but if you look more about how they performed with a bonus for winning (that does not mean just postseason as a mediocre team could be guided to the playoffs with a top tier QB but when they get to the playoffs they will be handed their lunch) that is more logical to me.
I don't know what to think of Green. From 1970-2005, he's got the 42nd, 49th, 68th, 92nd and 108th best passing seasons. Now obviously this will be favorable to Green since we're picking an arbitrary cut-off, but over that time only four QBs have five unique seasons in the top 108: Steve Young has six, and Peyton Manning, Roger Staubach and Trent Green have five. (I'm sure Manning's 2006 would put him in the top 108 from 1970-2006, but I haven't officially run the numbers). Anyway, it's pretty clear that one of those names doesn't belong on that list. You could make a decent argument that Young, Manning and Staubach are the three best QBs of all time, and there's no argument that they are three of the best QBs of all time.Now Green doesn't bring much to the table besides his passing, but he's been one incredible passer. Only two other QBs have four seasons in the top 108, Boomer Esiason and Fran Tarkenton. But Green had a pretty darn good year in 1998 with the Skins (14th best in the league), and an incredible year in St. Louis in 2000 (7th best in the league despite an incredibly small number of passes....he was actually slightly better than Warner on a per attempt basis that year, and Warner ranked 2nd despite just 347 attempts). To have success with three teams is pretty unique, so I don't know if Green's success can all be dismissed by saying he's just a system QB. If Green had been the QB for the Rams in 1999, there's a decent chance he'd have taken them to the Super Bowl. Had he won that SB, I think we'd have viewed him much differently than we currently do. But in KC he never had very good WRs (but had great offensive lineman, running backs and wide receivers), but still put up incredible numbers.FWIW, Green's four year stretch from 2002-2005 ranks as the 13th best four year stretch from 1970-2005. The others, the the year being the last year of the stretch:1994 Steve Young1995 Steve Young2005 Peyton Manning2001 Kurt Warner1979 Roger Staubach1983 Dan Fouts1996 Steve Young2002 Kurt Warner1986 Dan Marino2004 Peyton Manning1993 Steve Young1982 Dan Fouts2005 Trent GreenNote: There are only seven unique QBs on that list. And Warner isn't a misprint, his 1999-2001 were so good as to rank 4th on the list despite obviously not doing anything in 1998.
 
Next year, if and when the Colts make the playoffs, would anyone seriously discount them because Manning "can't win the big game"? No way. Not after the AFC Championship. 1 TD and 5 INTs in the playoffs this year. 1 TD and 5 INTs in two previous playoff games against the Pats. All out the window with that win.

If he has a terrible game in the Superbowl - and by terrible, I mean he singlehandedly loses it - I still think you have to respect him in the playoffs now. To me, that label is gone unless he starts a new era of bad postseason play.

As for where to rank him all time, I'll wait until Harrison retires. I won't put him ahead of Montana or Favre, but those are two of my all time favorites. I'm sure there's a guy from Denver I'm forgetting, but his name escapes me. If he wins a Superbowl, I think he moves neck and neck with Marino, and has the ability to pass him later in his career. Marino's still the benchmark for the Manning style of QB, and he didn't have the same level of receivers that Manning has. And I don't think I'm alone when I say I'd still rather have Brady than Manning right now. They're both exceptional quarterbacks, but Brady has done so much with so much less that I can't take away anything because of how much more Manning has done with so much more. I don't think this debate will be over by the end of their careers, either.

 
Gonna have to answer "yes" on this. Right or wrong, Manning needs the SB ring to silence most of his critics. Of course die-hard Manning haters will always raise the bar. "Elway won 2"... "Brady won 3"...

Frankly, for some no matter what Manning accomplishes will be enough. Let's start at winning one Superbowl and go from there.

 
Gonna have to answer "yes" on this. Right or wrong, Manning needs the SB ring to silence most of his critics. Of course die-hard Manning haters will always raise the bar. "Elway won 2"... "Brady won 3"...Frankly, for some no matter what Manning accomplishes will be enough. Let's start at winning one Superbowl and go from there.
What image are you talking about?
 
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
I bet Dan Marino wishes he had your eyes. "Just being there is good enough" is an interesting position to take.Remember when Steve Young made that motion to get the monkey off his back in the Super Bowl? That was when is team WON 49-26. I doubt Peyton would be satisfied being "the QB with a lot of records who never won a Super Bowl." Especially since there's already someone in that role.Bottom line is that while he distanced himself from the "choker" label, a Super Bowl win is the only thing that really counts. Not three, or two. Just one in his career. Favre is seen very differently because he has one ring. If Manning can't win this one, he's still the guy without the ring. Then beating the Patriots was just...beating the Patriots. Are the Bills chokers? Are they known for the incredible accomplishment of reaching four straight Super Bowls...or the fact that they lost them all? If they had just won one of them, they'd be seen very differently.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Since popular opinion is that Rex Grossman is worst QB ever in a Super Bowl and the conventional wisdom for weeks has been whoever came out of the NFC would be the whipping boy of the AFC, of course Manning he needs to win.

I'm pretty sure at this point Manning could go undefeated back-to-back seasons with a 100% completion percentage, then go back in time and QB a victory over the '72 Dolphins, and would still be lucky to exceed Bush's approval rating in a poll on this board.

 
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.
Whose to say every other QB didn't also play in perfect conditions for half of their games? I mean NE has good weather until January most years. Same with NY, Miami, Pittsburg, Cincy, etc.That is a biased argument unless you get the statistics for weather conditions on game day over the last 50 years!
First, I have been arguing the positives of Manning. Second, Manning plays in a DOME, how can you argue that all the teams you just mentioned might have just as good weather? Wind is a major factor. Didn't you see what the elements did to Brees? One of the major reasons Manning has struggled in the postseason is that he has had to go on the road to NE and play. Just look at what a dome does for his stats compared to outside. Look at what a dome does for many QB stats.
Again, my point is that for the most part, weather really only comes into play in January. Sure Brees was affected, but it was in January. Therefore, Sept. in most cities, the weather is nice. same for Oct., Nov., and half of December.I thought you were discussing Manning's value being discounted in your opinion because he plays half of his regular season games in a dome. Well, dome or not, if the weather is nice, what is the difference? What say you about playing outdoors in Arizona, San Diego, Dallas, Miami, Tampa Bay etc.?
 
Great Quarterback who could never git-r-dun.
Did you miss the AFC Championship game yesterday?
"Dun" through the annuls of time has been dictated by the SuperBowl. If he loses in 2 weeks, yesterday means nothing in the long run.Yesterday wasn't the "Big One", it was simply the "Biggest One" so far.
:lmao:
The original question is "Does Manning need to win the Bowl to shed his image?" Do you think if he loses in 2 weeks and eventually never wins a Super Bowl he won't for ever be labeled a disappointment?I'm not saying I agree with it. I'm not saying he isn't one of the best quarterbacks of all time. But I do believe that the overall perspective of him from a career standpoint will be one of "Great QB who could never win the big game", IF that's what happens. If he goes into Miami a 7 point favorite and loses the SB to a team they should in my mind clearly beat, thats a bigger choke that losing to New England would've been and thererfore it'll be magnified.Hey, I think he's gonna win and it'll all be meaningless in 12 days anyways. But if he doesn't.....the talking heads will never shut up about it, and the amount of coverage it'll get over the next 12 months will be nauseating.
 
He's now for the first time played well in an extremely important playoff game. He led the team on 2 80 yard 4th qtr TD drives.

The QB can't do it all. I've always judged them on how well they play in big games, recognizing that there is a less than 100% correlation between "QB playing well in big games" and "Team winning big games". If Brady somehow hits Caldwell in the last 30 seconds and 2 Colt defenders trip and fall and the Pats score a winning TD, it doesn't change anything in that Manning still played a great game in a great spot.

Elway, even before the SB wins, had had numerous quality playoff wins in which he led the team to come from behind victories. His play against the Browns in an AFC playoff game was more telling than one of his SB wins.

 
Next year, if and when the Colts make the playoffs, would anyone seriously discount them because Manning "can't win the big game"? No way. Not after the AFC Championship. 1 TD and 5 INTs in the playoffs this year. 1 TD and 5 INTs in two previous playoff games against the Pats. All out the window with that win. If he has a terrible game in the Superbowl - and by terrible, I mean he singlehandedly loses it - I still think you have to respect him in the playoffs now. To me, that label is gone unless he starts a new era of bad postseason play. As for where to rank him all time, I'll wait until Harrison retires. I won't put him ahead of Montana or Favre, but those are two of my all time favorites. I'm sure there's a guy from Denver I'm forgetting, but his name escapes me. If he wins a Superbowl, I think he moves neck and neck with Marino, and has the ability to pass him later in his career. Marino's still the benchmark for the Manning style of QB, and he didn't have the same level of receivers that Manning has. And I don't think I'm alone when I say I'd still rather have Brady than Manning right now. They're both exceptional quarterbacks, but Brady has done so much with so much less that I can't take away anything because of how much more Manning has done with so much more. I don't think this debate will be over by the end of their careers, either.
BF, be careful not to look just at offense as yes Brady has less talent around on him on offense than Manning, but Brady also has not done "more" than Manning with that weaker group with the exception of win and that can fall on the rest of the team helping Brady win such as a great defense and special teams. Point is that Brady has won more, but Brady has won more with more than Manning.
 
Does Manning need to win the Bowl to shed his image?
Yes, or else all his critics will still parrot their comparisons to Dan Marino.
the comparisons to Marino would be valid. Marino is not thought of as a choker and Manning shouldn't be either. Inconsistent - yes, choker - he proved again, no.
Marino was definitely not a choker. The one year he had a reasonable defense he went to the SB where he ran into perhaps the greatest team off all time. Subpar defenses and never a real threat at the RB position really hurt Miami's chance to win it all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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.
Whose to say every other QB didn't also play in perfect conditions for half of their games? I mean NE has good weather until January most years. Same with NY, Miami, Pittsburg, Cincy, etc.That is a biased argument unless you get the statistics for weather conditions on game day over the last 50 years!
First, I have been arguing the positives of Manning. Second, Manning plays in a DOME, how can you argue that all the teams you just mentioned might have just as good weather? Wind is a major factor. Didn't you see what the elements did to Brees? One of the major reasons Manning has struggled in the postseason is that he has had to go on the road to NE and play. Just look at what a dome does for his stats compared to outside. Look at what a dome does for many QB stats.
Again, my point is that for the most part, weather really only comes into play in January. Sure Brees was affected, but it was in January. Therefore, Sept. in most cities, the weather is nice. same for Oct., Nov., and half of December.I thought you were discussing Manning's value being discounted in your opinion because he plays half of his regular season games in a dome. Well, dome or not, if the weather is nice, what is the difference? What say you about playing outdoors in Arizona, San Diego, Dallas, Miami, Tampa Bay etc.?
There is still wind and rain that could be factors out doors. In a dome the conditions are perfect. Yes, it is possible that a nice 70 degree day with no wind could happen, but even in Arizona you could get some wind. Manning's accomplishments should be discounted a little bit for playing in a dome half the time.
 
Great Quarterback who could never git-r-dun.
Did you miss the AFC Championship game yesterday?
"Dun" through the annuls of time has been dictated by the SuperBowl. If he loses in 2 weeks, yesterday means nothing in the long run.Yesterday wasn't the "Big One", it was simply the "Biggest One" so far.
:thumbup:
The original question is "Does Manning need to win the Bowl to shed his image?" Do you think if he loses in 2 weeks and eventually never wins a Super Bowl he won't for ever be labeled a disappointment?I'm not saying I agree with it. I'm not saying he isn't one of the best quarterbacks of all time. But I do believe that the overall perspective of him from a career standpoint will be one of "Great QB who could never win the big game", IF that's what happens. If he goes into Miami a 7 point favorite and loses the SB to a team they should in my mind clearly beat, thats a bigger choke that losing to New England would've been and thererfore it'll be magnified.Hey, I think he's gonna win and it'll all be meaningless in 12 days anyways. But if he doesn't.....the talking heads will never shut up about it, and the amount of coverage it'll get over the next 12 months will be nauseating.
This is a great chance for Manning to win a SB because HIS TEAM is the better TEAM. Now if Manning loses the game himself than I think he does deserve to lose a notch on his belt, but I do not think that the ring itself is what defines a player. You can look at how he has played in the game or the key games as a factor, but what if Manning is 28-35 for 3 TD's and no picks but Chicago returns two fumbles and two kick back for TD's and Indy loses 35-21? Yeah, he doesn't have ruing, but what does that have to do with whether he was great or not? This is my whole point, people overrate rings when looking at QB's.
 
He's now for the first time played well in an extremely important playoff game. He led the team on 2 80 yard 4th qtr TD drives.The QB can't do it all. I've always judged them on how well they play in big games, recognizing that there is a less than 100% correlation between "QB playing well in big games" and "Team winning big games". If Brady somehow hits Caldwell in the last 30 seconds and 2 Colt defenders trip and fall and the Pats score a winning TD, it doesn't change anything in that Manning still played a great game in a great spot.Elway, even before the SB wins, had had numerous quality playoff wins in which he led the team to come from behind victories. His play against the Browns in an AFC playoff game was more telling than one of his SB wins.
:thumbup:
 
Manning finally shows he can win a big one

By Vic Carucci

National Editor, NFL.com

INDIANAPOLIS (Jan. 21, 2007) -- Peyton Manning, it is time to exhale.

You have done what a growing number of critics had questioned you would ever be able to do. You have won the big one.

OK, maybe it is more accurate to say that you have won a big one. There still is a bigger one that you must win in order for the weight of so much regular-season success, followed by so much playoff frustration, to fully disappear.

But this was a large step toward vindication. A very large step.

Colts quarterback Peyton Manning has taken an important first step.

In beating the New England Patriots 38-34, the Indianapolis Colts did much more than earn the right to play in the Super Bowl. They exorcised the most menacing demon from all of Manning's January nightmares accumulated during a 6-6 postseason record since 1999.

And although he had quite a bit of help from his teammates, Manning did most of the heavy lifting himself. He rallied the Colts from an 18-point deficit in the first half with the poise and clutch throws that have long been his trademark. We've seen those qualities on display in countless games. We just hadn't seen them when it counted the most, such as in the AFC Championship Game.

Now Manning has a chance to end the he-always-chokes-in-the-postseason discussion once and for all. That will come on Feb. 4, when the Colts face the Chicago Bears in Super Bowl XLI.

There is plenty of time to ponder that challenge. What happened in the AFC title game is worth savoring for a while.

After two poor playoff performances that raised those familiar doubts about Manning, he put together a game for the ages. It wasn't perfect, but it ranked as a classic effort nonetheless: 27 of 47 for 349 yards with a touchdown pass and a 1-yard touchdown run. Sure, he had an interception returned for six points, but the Colts would not be denied. It was as if every player on the team was determined to get his quarterback to the place that he had never been.

In what will stand as one of the all-time great championship games, the Colts stumbled at the start and fell into a 21-3 hole from which they seemed unlikely to escape. Then they proceeded to stage the biggest comeback in AFC or NFC conference championship game history.

Along the way, Manning's legacy hung in the balance.

If this had been a loss, the ramifications for him were almost unthinkable. Manning would have been judged as a player who entered the NFL as the top overall pick of the draft ... who generated a lot of nice statistics ... who was paid a handsome salary ... who popped up in endless television commercials ... and who folded like a beach chair when it came to delivering in the biggest pressure situations of all.

It wouldn't have mattered if he put up nice numbers in a loss. It was win or face another long offseason of ridicule. It was win or hear talk that maybe Manning would never have the chance to play in the Super Bowl. How much longer would the Colts be able to keep together a very expensive roster to compete for the ultimate crown? The clock was ticking louder than ever.

But before the alarm sounded, Manning found himself getting ready to play on the largest stage of all for the first time in his nine NFL seasons.

Of course, he refused to acknowledge that there was, or is, anything for him to prove, or any ugly history to shed. Manning wanted nothing to do with any talk about whether he felt vindicated.

"I just don't get into that," he said. "I don't play that card. I thought this game was about two really good football teams and certainly the history we've had with this team. I can remember the disappointment three years ago when we lost up there in New England for the AFC championship.

"I know how hard I've worked this season. I know how hard I worked this week to get ready for these guys, and it's always nice when you can take the hard work and put it to use and come away with a win."

Several Patriots players -- including Tedy Bruschi, Kevin Faulk and Tom Brady -- certainly knew how special a moment it was for Manning. They made a point of congratulating him on the field after the game, during a wild mob scene on the field with the crowd roaring and blue and white confetti filling the air. They had their Super Bowl rings. They knew what it meant for Manning and the Colts to have their first opportunity to get theirs.

However, from the beginning, this did not seem as if it would be Manning's or the Colts' night. The Patriots' first touchdown, on their second possession, came when a fumbled exchange between Brady and Laurence Maroney somehow squirted under a pile of Colts defenders and into the end zone, where offensive guard Logan Mankins recovered.

Early in the second quarter, the Patriots then made a statement that showed the ultimate disrespect for a defense that had struggled all season but had been dominant in two playoff games. On fourth-and-6, they kept their offense on the field, and Brady threw a 27-yard pass to Troy Brown to the Colts' 7-yard line. One play later, Corey Dillon ran for a touchdown.

Two plays later, Manning threw a pass that Asante Samuel, the Patriots' remarkably opportunistic cornerback, returned an interception 39 yards for a touchdown. Samuel's second such play of the postseason gave the Patriots a 21-3 lead and had the look and feel of a knockout punch.

But Manning never buckled. His teammates never buckled. Coach Tony Dungy never buckled.

The Colts demonstrated as much by marching deep into New England territory just before halftime. Although they settled for a field goal, Dungy said he could feel a sense of "energy" within the team at halftime. He stressed to his players that, down 21-6, they were not out of anything.

Colts head coach Tony Dungy knows Manning's success is no accident.

Sure enough, the Colts caused a major momentum shift. It started when they took the second-half kickoff and drove for a touchdown, which came on Manning's keeper. It continued when they stopped Maroney at the New England 18 with a big hit on the kickoff return. It continued when the Colts forced the Patriots to go three-and-out. And it reached a crescendo when the ensuing drive ended with Manning's one-yard scoring throw to defensive tackle Dan Klecko, followed by a two-point conversion pass to Marvin Harrison to knot the game at 21-21.

From that point on, it was a new game, one that Manning was more than capable of winning.

With 2:17 left and New England clinging to a 34-31 lead, the Colts got the ball back at their 20 and the stage was set for Manning to be the biggest of heroes. Dungy insisted that no one on the Colts' sideline even considered the alternative.

"There is no doubt in anybody's mind that we were going to take that ball down and score," Dungy said. "Once our defense stopped them, I think we all felt good that Peyton was going to drive us in."

Which was exactly what he did. Despite playing with a sore throwing thumb resulting from a collision with a helmet, Manning threw an 11-yard pass to Reggie Wayne. Two plays later, he connected with tight end Bryan Fletcher for 32 yards. Then he hooked up with Wayne again for 14 yards, and with the help of a roughing-the-passer penalty, the Colts had the ball at the Patriots 11. Although the perfect scenario would have been Manning throwing for a touchdown, Joseph Addai ended up running for one from three yards to make it 38-34.

Marlin Jackson's interception with 24 seconds left sealed the outcome and knocked at least part of a massive albatross off of Manning's shoulders.

"I just think it's great for him to get to the Super Bowl with a drive like that," Dungy said. "It probably won't shut anybody up until we win one. It'll still be, 'Well, can you win the Super Bowl?'

"But Peyton Manning's a great player and anybody that doesn't know that doesn't know much about football."
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top