Eli Manning, Retired and the HoF Debate (1 Viewer)

[Hot Sauce Guy]

IMO this discussion should start and end with the fact that in 16 years he was never an All Pro, not once. The fact that he was never one of the two best players at his position for a single season means you weren't one of the best and shouldn't be in the hall of fame.

While I agree with this, he beat Brady twice during the Pats dynasty, including after their undefeated season, denying Randy Moss his ring.

I don’t love it, but I accept that it will likely happen. Added to that, he’s NFL royalty with his brother & father.

He’ll eventually get in. Namath got in on his 3rd try IIRC? Probably something like that.

 

[oldmanhawkins]

For those you that think Eli is a HOFer because of those Super Bowl wins…

Is Justin Tuck also a HOFer? He has a stronger case than Eli for his regular season numbers and awards, I think. He also played his best on the biggest stage. And, technically speaking, he had a larger impact in taking down Brady than Eli did. Tuck had 2 sacks in each game.

Personally I think Tuck also falls short of the standard. But…If you put one of them in, why not the other?

This is simply not true.

Tuck had 1 AP1, 1 AP2, and 2 Pro Bowls, all of which occurred in 2 seasons. Compared to 2 SBMVPs and 4 Pro Bowls for Eli, which occurred across 5 different seasons. If anything, I would give the edge to Eli here.

Eli's last season was 2019. Even 5 years later, he ranks #11 all time in completions, passing yards, passing TDs, and total offense; #12 in game winning drives; and #16 in comebacks. Tuck is #47 in tackles for loss; #73 in forced fumbles; and #123 in sacks (#185 in unofficial sacks). Huge edge to Eli here.

Eli is #29 all time in games started and started 234 games. Tuck started 107 games and played in 147. Huge edge to Eli here... he delivered much more value to his teams.

This is not even close.

At the very least, it’s debatable. Note that I said regular season stats and awards. All pros are lot more meaningful than pro bowls. Eli’s four pro bowls in 16 years are pretty underwhelming. Dak and Carr have each been to four, for comparison.
Tuck had 2 maybe 3 really good seasons where he was one of the best DEs in the game. His 2008 was exceptional. Eli never had a season where he was one of the best QBs in the game. Tuck didn’t maintain his excellence long enough but he did play his best on the biggest stage and he helped lead the defense that shut down the greatest QB of all time. This doesn’t make him a HOfer in my book, but for folks who think Eli is, it feels like the argument should carry over.
Eli played 16 years which explains his overall rankings. It’s another example of the redundancy in the argument of why Eli should be in. He won two Super Bowls AND has two Super Bowl MVPs. He played a long time and has compiled a lot of counting stats.

Yes, I know you said regular season awards, which is a convenient way to ignore compelling accomplishments for Eli. I don't agree it is meaningful to focus only on regular season for any comparison like this. Eli is going to make it, but he wouldn't without his postseason accomplishments, so it is a meaningless to discuss his candidacy without including them.

I totally get that accumulated stats through longevity are less compelling if not accompanied by great rate stats. That is a reason Rivers was clearly better than Eli.

But, for me, I can't diminish a player who ranks so highly in a lot of the most often cited statistics in football. Add to that, Eli was a key player in two underdog Super Bowl championship runs and made clutch plays in those runs... it's not like he was just along for the ride. He also made clutch plays in the regular season, hence his ranking in GWD and comebacks. And he had incredible durability, which is often overlooked but is valuable.

PFR's HOF Monitor metric has its issues, but it is an okay proxy for an initial/quick look at HOF worthiness. Average HOFer score is ~100. Eli's score is 86.01. Tuck's is 41.83.

Tuck may have had a very short but great peak, but his resume is not comparable to Eli's for the reasons I have outlined. For me, it's not close. It's not in the ballpark. I do not agree that it is debatable.

Happy to agree to disagree about it.

Focusing on the regular season awards wasn’t done to take away Eli’s best accomplishments, it was done because Tuck shared equally in those accomplishments.

I understand that QBs are given extra credit for wins comparable to their teammates which is why Eli gets to hold the SPMVPs, but QBs also are given extra blame for losses and Eli has a lot of those.

I think PFRs metric gets it approximately right on both players. Tuck is just above Osi and below JPP just using G-men for reference points. Eli falls appropriately between Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco (though I think they make Matt too high and Joe much too low).

Just reiterating that while all these players were fun to watch but none have HoF credentials in my opinion.

 

[pinkstapler]

For those you that think Eli is a HOFer because of those Super Bowl wins…

Is Justin Tuck also a HOFer? He has a stronger case than Eli for his regular season numbers and awards, I think. He also played his best on the biggest stage. And, technically speaking, he had a larger impact in taking down Brady than Eli did. Tuck had 2 sacks in each game.

Personally I think Tuck also falls short of the standard. But…If you put one of them in, why not the other?

Eli was the MVP in both Super Bowls, and QB's always get credit for wins/losses. DE's don't.

BTW, I'm not one of the people saying Eli should get in because of the two SB wins, but you do have to factor them into the conversation. I'm on the fence whether he should get in.

Not so sure about the bolded part. Chiefs fans, and even non-fans, are bending over backwards to blame just about anyone except Mahomes for this past Super Bowl loss. That is despite him playing what was definitely statistically the worst half of football ever in the history of the Super Bowl. And the only reason it was just a half and not the entire game was because of not only garbage time loose defense, but a team who pulled their starters and was playing 2nd/3rd stringers. I mean sure stats are stats, but when close to half of his production came after Gatorade was already dumped on the opposing teams coach... it's kinda pathetic some people are building their castle with that hill of sand.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

IMO this discussion should start and end with the fact that in 16 years he was never an All Pro, not once. The fact that he was never one of the two best players at his position for a single season means you weren't one of the best and shouldn't be in the hall of fame.

While I agree with this, he beat Brady twice during the Pats dynasty, including after their undefeated season, denying Randy Moss his ring.

I don’t love it, but I accept that it will likely happen. Added to that, he’s NFL royalty with his brother & father.

He’ll eventually get in. Namath got in on his 3rd try IIRC? Probably something like that.

I like this take. Agreed Mr. Sauce.

 

[TheDirtyWord]

Ex-Giants QB Eli Manning 'at peace' with Hall of Fame miss

I'm on the fence for this. guy won a couple superbowls. hard to imagine he wouldnt make the hall. but statistically he was rarely in the top 3 or 4 QB so I guess he was just a very good QB on a very good team that somehow won 2 superbowls. that sounds funny.... honestly it does.

Im not a huge fan of his and I'm not upset about this but the story about how they beat the undefeated pats is a story of legend. from that perspective, it may have been the greatest upset win in the history of the superbowl. so in terms of telling the story of the league, how do you not put him in the hall? and the fact he won the superbowl twice...... That's saying something. a lot of great QBs out there have never won a superbowl.

but yeah when I look at him. he was not always a QB who took over a game and put the team on his shoulders but he rarely got himself into a position where he had to.

so yeah, I have mixed feelings about this.

I'd also say this...and it might be an unpopular take.

But the fact that he is a Manning isn't a 'non-zero' factor in the evaluation here and IMO is actually a positive.

Brady was his big brothers kryptonite for the most part and yet, it was little bro that dealt the GOAT his most humbling and unsuspecting lows.

yeah, so true. but that alone likely doesnt warrant making the HOF. I put more weight on the 2 superbowls. though that legendary upset certainly does it for me. just because it was such a compelling story i'd have probably voted for him to go in. the HOF is a place for great stories, and that was one of the greatest. in the whole David and goliath context Eli was definitely David. his teams were not dominant but they did win

He's the David in the Manning family...like has there ever been a better representation of David in NFL history?

Yes...the SB's were the must haves for this conversation to even be taking place. But in those moments, he was dead-on with the slingshot while his brother looked on from the luxury suite wondering 'how?'

I'd imagine Peyton saw how and it was for the most part a defense in 2007 that held a Patriots team which averaged 37(!!!!) points a game in the regular season to only 14. And very similarly, a defense in 2011 that held a Patriots team that averaged 32 points a game to only 17. The Giants won those games by 3 points and 4 points respectively.

More people seemingly remember Tyree catching a ball against his helmet rather than a defense that kept one of the more prolific offenses I'd seen in my lifetime in complete check. That 2007 Pats offense scored 589 points, with 75 TDs, and a +315 point differential. Pretty sure they were all records at the time. Might still be. And 2011 with Welker, Gronk, and Hernandez wasn't anything to sneeze at either. Manning didn't cause the Giants to lose much more than was the reason they won IMHO.

I'm not trying to berate Eli. I said earlier in the thread he's one of the most clutch players ever. But to continually read how "he beat the Patriots twice" is maddening semantically. Strahan, Osi, AP, Tuck, JPP, Rolle, etc. stopped the Pats train from steam rolling to another 2 championships. Eli helped.

I wouldn't dispute that the QB gets an outsized portion of the credit/blame.

Just look how people are dancing all over Mahomes losing Sunday. But both of those games came down to epic final drives. If you don't deliver, you're Matt Ryan. Ask Falcons fans how things have been since then.

This wasn't Russell Wilson riding the coattails of the Legion of Boom.

 

[pinkstapler]

Ex-Giants QB Eli Manning 'at peace' with Hall of Fame miss

I'm on the fence for this. guy won a couple superbowls. hard to imagine he wouldnt make the hall. but statistically he was rarely in the top 3 or 4 QB so I guess he was just a very good QB on a very good team that somehow won 2 superbowls. that sounds funny.... honestly it does.

Im not a huge fan of his and I'm not upset about this but the story about how they beat the undefeated pats is a story of legend. from that perspective, it may have been the greatest upset win in the history of the superbowl. so in terms of telling the story of the league, how do you not put him in the hall? and the fact he won the superbowl twice...... That's saying something. a lot of great QBs out there have never won a superbowl.

but yeah when I look at him. he was not always a QB who took over a game and put the team on his shoulders but he rarely got himself into a position where he had to.

so yeah, I have mixed feelings about this.

I'd also say this...and it might be an unpopular take.

But the fact that he is a Manning isn't a 'non-zero' factor in the evaluation here and IMO is actually a positive.

Brady was his big brothers kryptonite for the most part and yet, it was little bro that dealt the GOAT his most humbling and unsuspecting lows.

yeah, so true. but that alone likely doesnt warrant making the HOF. I put more weight on the 2 superbowls. though that legendary upset certainly does it for me. just because it was such a compelling story i'd have probably voted for him to go in. the HOF is a place for great stories, and that was one of the greatest. in the whole David and goliath context Eli was definitely David. his teams were not dominant but they did win

He's the David in the Manning family...like has there ever been a better representation of David in NFL history?

Yes...the SB's were the must haves for this conversation to even be taking place. But in those moments, he was dead-on with the slingshot while his brother looked on from the luxury suite wondering 'how?'

I'd imagine Peyton saw how and it was for the most part a defense in 2007 that held a Patriots team which averaged 37(!!!!) points a game in the regular season to only 14. And very similarly, a defense in 2011 that held a Patriots team that averaged 32 points a game to only 17. The Giants won those games by 3 points and 4 points respectively.

More people seemingly remember Tyree catching a ball against his helmet rather than a defense that kept one of the more prolific offenses I'd seen in my lifetime in complete check. That 2007 Pats offense scored 589 points, with 75 TDs, and a +315 point differential. Pretty sure they were all records at the time. Might still be. And 2011 with Welker, Gronk, and Hernandez wasn't anything to sneeze at either. Manning didn't cause the Giants to lose much more than was the reason they won IMHO.

I'm not trying to berate Eli. I said earlier in the thread he's one of the most clutch players ever. But to continually read how "he beat the Patriots twice" is maddening semantically. Strahan, Osi, AP, Tuck, JPP, Rolle, etc. stopped the Pats train from steam rolling to another 2 championships. Eli helped.

I wouldn't dispute that the QB gets an outsized portion of the credit/blame.

Just look how people are dancing all over Mahomes losing Sunday. But both of those games came down to epic final drives. If you don't deliver, you're Matt Ryan. Ask Falcons fans how things have been since then.

This wasn't Russell Wilson riding the coattails of the Legion of Boom.

That's what I'm saying though, and obviously this is perspective based, but on these boards, podcasts I listen to, ESPN, etc. etc. almost no where have I heard much criticism at all of Mahomes for this Super Bowl loss. And he was horrid. Sure so was the o-line. We can say that about 6-7 teams every year.

Regardless, back to the main point, "the QB gets an outsized portion of the credit/blame". Especially when they fail to create anything on their own despite the surrounding circumstances. And that was 100% Mahomes in the Super Bowl. His worst half ever. The worst half of any QB in the SB ever. The only time he was able to create on his own was in garbage time against second stringers. And yet.... it's the o-line, it's Reid, if you ask DHop it's the refs (how ironic was that btw lol). So I'd strongly disagree; I haven't really seen/heard anyone but rightfully scorned Eagles fan's pointing out just how bad Mahomes was in the Super Bowl. And 0% of any one blaming the loss on him.

Correlating to Eli, up and down this thread and elsewhere, he's continually getting credited with two Super Bowl wins (which I already argued was much more on the defense), but regardless, sure give them to the QB due to the positions importance and integral part of the team. But this QB played for 16 seasons, only made the playoffs in 6 of them, and lost in the first round 4 of those 6. That surely has to be on him as well then right? It just feels credit and blame are not being applied consistently or equally weighted. The only time he even won a playoff game was in the two Super Bowl runs. Again, only two times in 16 years did he win playoff games. And failed to even make the playoffs in 10 of 16 years. He "won" two Super Bowls. But his coaching staff, line, front office, etc. lost practically every other meaningful game he played in a 16 year career? Cmon now....

This isn't just targeted at you. I don't expect a justification or even a reply. And I already acquiesced to the fact he will make the HoF because I acknowledge the way these things typically go. But IMO, he shouldn't. There are lots of things in Canton other than the busts and displays of HoF players; it covers much of the history of the league as well. And the Giants two wins against Tom Brady and the Pats deserve to be in there because it was a great story and really going against all odds. But that can be done without also putting an average at best QB, who's best traits were arguably his longevity and luck with injuries (which account for the few metrics where he ranks towards the top; aka accumulation stats) in there with other QBs who are way out of his league. Have they made mistakes like this before? Sure. I'm a Steelers fan but would be first to admit Swann largely rode to the Hall on the back of being part of a dynasty. To me, that's not a justification to make the same mistake again.

 

[TheDirtyWord]

Ex-Giants QB Eli Manning 'at peace' with Hall of Fame miss

I'm on the fence for this. guy won a couple superbowls. hard to imagine he wouldnt make the hall. but statistically he was rarely in the top 3 or 4 QB so I guess he was just a very good QB on a very good team that somehow won 2 superbowls. that sounds funny.... honestly it does.

Im not a huge fan of his and I'm not upset about this but the story about how they beat the undefeated pats is a story of legend. from that perspective, it may have been the greatest upset win in the history of the superbowl. so in terms of telling the story of the league, how do you not put him in the hall? and the fact he won the superbowl twice...... That's saying something. a lot of great QBs out there have never won a superbowl.

but yeah when I look at him. he was not always a QB who took over a game and put the team on his shoulders but he rarely got himself into a position where he had to.

so yeah, I have mixed feelings about this.

I'd also say this...and it might be an unpopular take.

But the fact that he is a Manning isn't a 'non-zero' factor in the evaluation here and IMO is actually a positive.

Brady was his big brothers kryptonite for the most part and yet, it was little bro that dealt the GOAT his most humbling and unsuspecting lows.

yeah, so true. but that alone likely doesnt warrant making the HOF. I put more weight on the 2 superbowls. though that legendary upset certainly does it for me. just because it was such a compelling story i'd have probably voted for him to go in. the HOF is a place for great stories, and that was one of the greatest. in the whole David and goliath context Eli was definitely David. his teams were not dominant but they did win

He's the David in the Manning family...like has there ever been a better representation of David in NFL history?

Yes...the SB's were the must haves for this conversation to even be taking place. But in those moments, he was dead-on with the slingshot while his brother looked on from the luxury suite wondering 'how?'

I'd imagine Peyton saw how and it was for the most part a defense in 2007 that held a Patriots team which averaged 37(!!!!) points a game in the regular season to only 14. And very similarly, a defense in 2011 that held a Patriots team that averaged 32 points a game to only 17. The Giants won those games by 3 points and 4 points respectively.

More people seemingly remember Tyree catching a ball against his helmet rather than a defense that kept one of the more prolific offenses I'd seen in my lifetime in complete check. That 2007 Pats offense scored 589 points, with 75 TDs, and a +315 point differential. Pretty sure they were all records at the time. Might still be. And 2011 with Welker, Gronk, and Hernandez wasn't anything to sneeze at either. Manning didn't cause the Giants to lose much more than was the reason they won IMHO.

I'm not trying to berate Eli. I said earlier in the thread he's one of the most clutch players ever. But to continually read how "he beat the Patriots twice" is maddening semantically. Strahan, Osi, AP, Tuck, JPP, Rolle, etc. stopped the Pats train from steam rolling to another 2 championships. Eli helped.

I wouldn't dispute that the QB gets an outsized portion of the credit/blame.

Just look how people are dancing all over Mahomes losing Sunday. But both of those games came down to epic final drives. If you don't deliver, you're Matt Ryan. Ask Falcons fans how things have been since then.

This wasn't Russell Wilson riding the coattails of the Legion of Boom.

That's what I'm saying though, and obviously this is perspective based, but on these boards, podcasts I listen to, ESPN, etc. etc. almost no where have I heard much criticism at all of Mahomes for this Super Bowl loss. And he was horrid. Sure so was the o-line. We can say that about 6-7 teams every year.

Regardless, back to the main point, "the QB gets an outsized portion of the credit/blame". Especially when they fail to create anything on their own despite the surrounding circumstances. And that was 100% Mahomes in the Super Bowl. His worst half ever. The worst half of any QB in the SB ever. The only time he was able to create on his own was in garbage time against second stringers. And yet.... it's the o-line, it's Reid, if you ask DHop it's the refs (how ironic was that btw lol). So I'd strongly disagree; I haven't really seen/heard anyone but rightfully scorned Eagles fan's pointing out just how bad Mahomes was in the Super Bowl. And 0% of any one blaming the loss on him.

Correlating to Eli, up and down this thread and elsewhere, he's continually getting credited with two Super Bowl wins (which I already argued was much more on the defense), but regardless, sure give them to the QB due to the positions importance and integral part of the team. But this QB played for 16 seasons, only made the playoffs in 6 of them, and lost in the first round 4 of those 6. That surely has to be on him as well then right? It just feels credit and blame are not being applied consistently or equally weighted. The only time he even won a playoff game was in the two Super Bowl runs. Again, only two times in 16 years did he win playoff games. And failed to even make the playoffs in 10 of 16 years. He "won" two Super Bowls. But his coaching staff, line, front office, etc. lost practically every other meaningful game he played in a 16 year career? Cmon now....

This isn't just targeted at you. I don't expect a justification or even a reply. And I already acquiesced to the fact he will make the HoF because I acknowledge the way these things typically go. But IMO, he shouldn't. There are lots of things in Canton other than the busts and displays of HoF players; it covers much of the history of the league as well. And the Giants two wins against Tom Brady and the Pats deserve to be in there because it was a great story and really going against all odds. But that can be done without also putting an average at best QB, who's best traits were arguably his longevity and luck with injuries (which account for the few metrics where he ranks towards the top; aka accumulation stats) in there with other QBs who are way out of his league. Have they made mistakes like this before? Sure. I'm a Steelers fan but would be first to admit Swann largely rode to the Hall on the back of being part of a dynasty. To me, that's not a justification to make the same mistake again.

I do understand your point. Really I do.

I used the Russell Wilson example. He won one Super Bowl. His career W/L record? 121-77-1. 9-8 in the playoffs. He has made 10 Pro Bowls. You can debate the veracity of that latter criteria but Eli only made 4. He garnered votes for OPOY in 4 seasons. But IMO, his HOF credentials will be debated just as fiercely...and here is why. And this is going to wax poetic a bit, but hear me out.

Over the last decade or so, I've become a huge CFB fan. Nothing beats College Football Saturdays. I'd rather watch football on Saturday than Sunday's now. Not that I don't watch both, but in college football, you can never predict Vanderbilt fans dumping their goalpost in the river after beating Bama. Or an App State beating Michigan. Or a 7 OT thriller. The regular season in college football is electric. But I find it's post-season limp. Perhaps it will find it's footing one day, but for me, the season ends in early December with the conference Championship Games. That just may be my POV, but the ratings would seem to concur.

In the NFL though, that's when the legends are made; in the post-season. The NFL is a legend making factory. It doesn't mean there aren't great games/moments during the regular season, but it's when legacies are on the line where the NFL shines and burrows it's way into the lexicon of how we relate to the sport.

Namath’s guarantee
Lynn Swann's catch
Joe Montana's 92 yard drive after seeing John Candy
Scott Norwood's missed FG
Dyson's missing yard
Desmond Howard's KO return
Santonio's toe tap
Butler's & Harrison's INT's
28-3
Philly Special

...the helmet catch and the Manning-ham grab.

Manning has two to his name that were the difference between a relatively good career and one that gets debated for the Hall. The reverse side of that coin is Matt Ryan. A SB win in Super Bowl LI likely stamps his ticket. He finishes as this generations Ken Anderson. Boomer Esiason.

Dan Marino finished his career the all-time passing leader in yards/TD's by a factor of 20% more than the next guy . But his greatness is two-dimensional...in the record books, but no true indelible moments that connect generations of fans. And to be fair to Manning's regular season exploits...at the time of his retirement, he was 7th all-time in yards/TD's. So he's no Jim Plunkett.

No doubt it was the defense that provided Manning the opportunity to go win the game. But that's exactly what he did. And when we look at the Lamar's, Allen's, Burrow's of this generation of QB's...we speak of their ability and quest to get over that one hump and no matter how they finish their careers, they will be defined in large part by whether they did or not.

 

[Anarchy99]

This wasn't Russell Wilson riding the coattails of the Legion of Boom.

I find this one interesting. Wilson has generally been very good in the playoffs, He's had 10 games with passer ratings of 100+ including 5 games over 110. His career post season QB rating is 96.8 (5th all time). He had one poor game against GB (44 rating) in the NFCCG . . . which SEA still won on a Wilson pass in OT. The Seahawks were down 12 points with 2 minutes to go, and SEA scored 15 more points in regulation. Somehow, the Packers managed to kick a game tying FG before the Seahawks won in OT.

Eli had 5 career playoff games with a passer rating over 100 (4 over 110). Manning's career post season QB rating is 84.1 . . . ranking him 66th all time in the playoffs.

In the Giants first SB run, the defense only allowed 16 ppg in the playoffs while the offense averaged 21. In their second SB run, the defense only allowed 14 ppg while the team averaged 26 points scored. In the Seahawks SB winning season, the defense allowed 13 ppg, while the offense averaged 30 ppg. In the year they lost to NE, the defense allowed 22 ppg and the team averaged 28 ppg.

Averaging those out, the Giants defense allowed 15 ppg while the team averaged in the 23-24 point range. The Seahawks allowed an average of 17-18 ppg while scoring 29 ppg. The point being, the Giants defense performed better than the Seahawks did, while the Seahawks offense performed nearly a TD better than Eli's Giants did. Based on that, how was Wilson riding the coattails of the defense? If the Giants defense allowed 28 points to NE like the Seahawks did, it's very likely the Giants would not have won either SB against the Pats.

I would suggest the opposite . . . that Eli rode the coattails of the defense to win two SB. NE scored 23 points under their average the first time and 15 points under their average in the rematch. IMO, that had very little to do with Eli. The Giants scored 6 points below their average scoring total against NE the first time and 4 points beneath their average scoring total the second time.

Not specifically knocking Manning, as he played well, came up clutch in the end, and left the field victorious both times. It's not like Eli lead the Giants to scoring drive after scoring drive. The offense wasn't great. None of that really matters, as the Giants won both SBs, but they did it with the offense under performing.

 

[TheDirtyWord]

This wasn't Russell Wilson riding the coattails of the Legion of Boom.

I find this one interesting. Wilson has generally been very good in the playoffs, He's had 10 games with passer ratings of 100+ including 5 games over 110. His career post season QB rating is 96.8 (5th all time). He had one poor game against GB (44 rating) in the NFCCG . . . which SEA still won on a Wilson pass in OT. The Seahawks were down 12 points with 2 minutes to go, and SEA scored 15 more points in regulation. Somehow, the Packers managed to kick a game tying FG before the Seahawks won in OT.

Eli had 5 career playoff games with a passer rating over 100 (4 over 110). Manning's career post season QB rating is 84.1 . . . ranking him 66th all time in the playoffs.

In the Giants first SB run, the defense only allowed 16 ppg in the playoffs while the offense averaged 21. In their second SB run, the defense only allowed 14 ppg while the team averaged 26 points scored. In the Seahawks SB winning season, the defense allowed 13 ppg, while the offense averaged 30 ppg. In the year they lost to NE, the defense allowed 22 ppg and the team averaged 28 ppg.

Averaging those out, the Giants defense allowed 15 ppg while the team averaged in the 23-24 point range. The Seahawks allowed an average of 17-18 ppg while scoring 29 ppg. The point being, the Giants defense performed better than the Seahawks did, while the Seahawks offense performed nearly a TD better than Eli's Giants did. Based on that, how was Wilson riding the coattails of the defense? If the Giants defense allowed 28 points to NE like the Seahawks did, it's very likely the Giants would not have won either SB against the Pats.

I would suggest the opposite . . . that Eli rode the coattails of the defense to win two SB. NE scored 23 points under their average the first time and 15 points under their average in the rematch. IMO, that had very little to do with Eli. The Giants scored 6 points below their average scoring total against NE the first time and 4 points beneath their average scoring total the second time.

Not specifically knocking Manning, as he played well, came up clutch in the end, and left the field victorious both times. It's not like Eli lead the Giants to scoring drive after scoring drive. The offense wasn't great. None of that really matters, as the Giants won both SBs, but they did it with the offense under performing.

Let's say Carroll calls a run play, instead of a pass down by the goal line. Marshawn runs it in...Seahawks win B2B SB's.

Does that affect Wilson's legacy? in any way as it relates to his Hall chances?

 

[Anarchy99]

To further add legend and mythos to Eli, after his helmet catch, David Tyree never had another reception in his NFL career. After the game winning drive in the second NYG / NE SB, Mario Manningham never caught another pass from Eli (he moved on to SFO). He lasted two season with the Niners, with 42 receptions the first year and only 9 the second. Both of those receivers made great plays at opportune times, but they both had very low expected completion chances.

Compare that to the second SB, when NE was up 2 points with 4 minutes left, Wes Welker was wide open and didn't come down with a catch for what would have given NE a first down inside the 20. Instead, NE had to punt, and the next play Manningham had his sliding catch to get the Giants out from their own end zone. Those two plays nearly back to back had a huge impact on the outcome. If Welker hauls in that pass, the Giants most likely lose. If Manningham didn't make that catch, the Giants would have had a lower chance of winning.

 

[Anarchy99]

Let's say Carroll calls a run play, instead of a pass down by the goal line. Marshawn runs it in...Seahawks win B2B SB's.

Does that affect Wilson's legacy? in any way as it relates to his Hall chances?

We only know what actually happened and have no way of knowing what could have happened. You suggest Lynch would have scored a TD if they ran the ball instead. Others could suggest they could have botched the hand off and lost anyway. Or Brady could have gotten NE into FG range (they had 2 timeouts left) and sent the game to OT,

Would WIlson's HOF probability have gone up with 2 rings instead of 1? Yup. Would Eli's HOF probability have fallen with 1 ring or 0 rings if those receivers not made those circus catches and they lost those games? Absolutely yes.

But in reality based on the actual results, Wilson has a higher HOF score than Eli does. Russ ranks 18th at 93.65 (and will continue to go up with him still playing). Eli ranks 22nd at 86.01. If you want to disagree with those rankings, feel free, but that's what their scores reflect.

 

[TheDirtyWord]

Let's say Carroll calls a run play, instead of a pass down by the goal line. Marshawn runs it in...Seahawks win B2B SB's.

Does that affect Wilson's legacy? in any way as it relates to his Hall chances?

We only know what actually happened and have no way of knowing what could have happened. You suggest Lynch would have scored a TD if they ran the ball instead. Others could suggest they could have botched the hand off and lost anyway. Or Brady could have gotten NE into FG range (they had 2 timeouts left) and sent the game to OT,

Would WIlson's HOF probability have gone up with 2 rings instead of 1? Yup. Would Eli's HOF probability have fallen with 1 ring or 0 rings if those receivers not made those circus catches and they lost those games? Absolutely yes.

But in reality based on the actual results, Wilson has a higher HOF score than Eli does. Russ ranks 18th at 93.65 (and will continue to go up with him still playing). Eli ranks 22nd at 86.01. If you want to disagree with those rankings, feel free, but that's what their scores reflect.

I guess my point was those ultimate moments matter...not whether it was the right play call. It seems like in the 2nd statement, we're agreed.

 

[pinkstapler]

That's what I'm saying though, and obviously this is perspective based, but on these boards, podcasts I listen to, ESPN, etc. etc. almost no where have I heard much criticism at all of Mahomes for this Super Bowl loss. And he was horrid. Sure so was the o-line. We can say that about 6-7 teams every year.

Regardless, back to the main point, "the QB gets an outsized portion of the credit/blame". Especially when they fail to create anything on their own despite the surrounding circumstances. And that was 100% Mahomes in the Super Bowl. His worst half ever. The worst half of any QB in the SB ever. The only time he was able to create on his own was in garbage time against second stringers. And yet.... it's the o-line, it's Reid, if you ask DHop it's the refs (how ironic was that btw lol). So I'd strongly disagree; I haven't really seen/heard anyone but rightfully scorned Eagles fan's pointing out just how bad Mahomes was in the Super Bowl. And 0% of any one blaming the loss on him.

Correlating to Eli, up and down this thread and elsewhere, he's continually getting credited with two Super Bowl wins (which I already argued was much more on the defense), but regardless, sure give them to the QB due to the positions importance and integral part of the team. But this QB played for 16 seasons, only made the playoffs in 6 of them, and lost in the first round 4 of those 6. That surely has to be on him as well then right? It just feels credit and blame are not being applied consistently or equally weighted. The only time he even won a playoff game was in the two Super Bowl runs. Again, only two times in 16 years did he win playoff games. And failed to even make the playoffs in 10 of 16 years. He "won" two Super Bowls. But his coaching staff, line, front office, etc. lost practically every other meaningful game he played in a 16 year career? Cmon now....

This isn't just targeted at you. I don't expect a justification or even a reply. And I already acquiesced to the fact he will make the HoF because I acknowledge the way these things typically go. But IMO, he shouldn't. There are lots of things in Canton other than the busts and displays of HoF players; it covers much of the history of the league as well. And the Giants two wins against Tom Brady and the Pats deserve to be in there because it was a great story and really going against all odds. But that can be done without also putting an average at best QB, who's best traits were arguably his longevity and luck with injuries (which account for the few metrics where he ranks towards the top; aka accumulation stats) in there with other QBs who are way out of his league. Have they made mistakes like this before? Sure. I'm a Steelers fan but would be first to admit Swann largely rode to the Hall on the back of being part of a dynasty. To me, that's not a justification to make the same mistake again.

I do understand your point. Really I do.

I used the Russell Wilson example. He won one Super Bowl. His career W/L record? 121-77-1. 9-8 in the playoffs. He has made 10 Pro Bowls. You can debate the veracity of that latter criteria but Eli only made 4. He garnered votes for OPOY in 4 seasons. But IMO, his HOF credentials will be debated just as fiercely...and here is why. And this is going to wax poetic a bit, but hear me out.

Over the last decade or so, I've become a huge CFB fan. Nothing beats College Football Saturdays. I'd rather watch football on Saturday than Sunday's now. Not that I don't watch both, but in college football, you can never predict Vanderbilt fans dumping their goalpost in the river after beating Bama. Or an App State beating Michigan. Or a 7 OT thriller. The regular season in college football is electric. But I find it's post-season limp. Perhaps it will find it's footing one day, but for me, the season ends in early December with the conference Championship Games. That just may be my POV, but the ratings would seem to concur.

In the NFL though, that's when the legends are made; in the post-season. The NFL is a legend making factory. It doesn't mean there aren't great games/moments during the regular season, but it's when legacies are on the line where the NFL shines and burrows it's way into the lexicon of how we relate to the sport.

Namath’s guarantee
Lynn Swann's catch
Joe Montana's 92 yard drive after seeing John Candy
Scott Norwood's missed FG
Dyson's missing yard
Desmond Howard's KO return
Santonio's toe tap
Butler's & Harrison's INT's
28-3
Philly Special

...the helmet catch and the Manning-ham grab.

Manning has two to his name that were the difference between a relatively good career and one that gets debated for the Hall. The reverse side of that coin is Matt Ryan. A SB win in Super Bowl LI likely stamps his ticket. He finishes as this generations Ken Anderson. Boomer Esiason.

Dan Marino finished his career the all-time passing leader in yards/TD's by a factor of 20% more than the next guy . But his greatness is two-dimensional...in the record books, but no true indelible moments that connect generations of fans. And to be fair to Manning's regular season exploits...at the time of his retirement, he was 7th all-time in yards/TD's. So he's no Jim Plunkett.

No doubt it was the defense that provided Manning the opportunity to go win the game. But that's exactly what he did. And when we look at the Lamar's, Allen's, Burrow's of this generation of QB's...we speak of their ability and quest to get over that one hump and no matter how they finish their careers, they will be defined in large part by whether they did or not.

Sir..... I will listen to you wax poetic anytime haha. I had no expectations of a reply, but I got a great one. And can't really argue with any of it, especially the bolded. Though I'll still begrudge Eli's inevitable gold jacket haha.

To be fair and fully transparent I have to also say being surrounded by 80% Giants fans growing up has also colored my opinion of the team as a whole. I wouldn't say I go as far as actively rooting against them, but I certainly would never be rooting for them either. And I've been having the "Eli isn't great" argument pretty much since he got drafted. So the SB wins were always a sore spot as they were obviously used against me/my argument quite liberally after they happened. Of course this had my younger self just digging in my heels even more on the point. Think part of that came back when the HoF discussion around him started heating up last year.

 

[Ray_T]

Chiefs fans, and even non-fans, are bending over backwards to blame just about anyone except Mahomes for this past Super Bowl loss.

I'd definitely say Mahomes laid an egg. but so did the whole team. Thats probably why people are not going overboard in their criticism of Mahomes. and the line was dominated so he had someone in his face on almost every pass play.

 

[BassNBrew]

Fwiw, Eli almost certainly won’t make it next year with Brees, rivers, Fitz, witten, Geno Atkins and Maurkice Pouncey eligible.

Kuechly should have made it. Eli should buy a ticket like the rest of us.

 

[ChiefD]

Chiefs fans are blaming Mahomes plenty, believe me.