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

[Hot Sauce Guy]

That ball was in a place neither DB could get to.  Go watch the video again - any other QB makes that throw and people would be creaming themselves over how perfectly placed it was.  But instead because it was Eli it was a bad throw because he "chose to throw it into double coverage?" C'mon man.  Credit where credit is due.  

Oh I give him credit for that pass. It was clutch. It was placed well.  It was also into double coverage. Kudos to Eli for making the throw. Kudos to Manningham for making the sideline grab. Kudos all around for beating the Pats & willing me $$$. 

But you can’t cherry pick that one throw in that one game and say it makes him HOF-worthy. 

He also threw a mind-bogglingly bad interception & fumbled the ball twice in that game. 

 

[Anarchy99]

He also chose to throw it into double coverage. If either DB got his head around it’s probably a 4th turnover & game over, Pats win. 

Agree about the Tyree play. He should have been called down, and when he wasn’t, it was a Hail Mary throw to a covered WR, and poorly thrown at that.  One of the most miraculous plays in NFL history for sure. That’s not the same as being a great play by Eli. But in a way, that play really does define him well if you go back to that coin flipping analogy made earlier. 

But that's what makes the game great. Crazy plays happen. Look at the Miami Miracle last year with NE. I have heard so much about that single play that the whole thing amazes me. That's the type of play that NE never allows because they are too well coached. Gronk being on the field was a total mistake. They didn't need someone to bat down a hail mary . . . no one on MIA could throw the ball that far in the air. They needed a speedy defender that is used to tackling people. And it cost them the game.

But it may have won them the season. That so played into BB's every play counts mantra. He even talked about it again this week. At the end of the MIA game, the offense could have put the game out of reach but they had to settle for a FG with seconds to play. The kicking team could have forced MIA to go 75 yards or more but didn't get a great kickoff. And the defense only needed to make one tackle to win the game. Who knows what would have happened had that play not worked for MIA, but it reunited the Patriots as a team and got them to buy into what BB was selling.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

He did not throw it into double coverage - the pass traveled so far in the air the safety got over there while it was in the air - and the defenders had ZERO chance to break it up because of the placement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cXqbqMgNoE

Ok, I accept that it was a good throw. He threw it where the 2 defenders couldn’t get it. Fine. 

Do you agree his overall performance that day was below average? 

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Ok, I accept that it was a good throw. He threw it where the 2 defenders couldn’t get it. Fine. 

Do you agree his overall performance that day was below average? 

Sure, although your acceptance is half-hearted, I can admit he was average that day and for a lot of his career. 

I don't think he was a great QB - but he's better than you want to give him credit for. Most NFL franchises would gladly take his career.

 

[monk]

According to whom? 

QBs get blamed when they choke. Had Tyree not made that ridiculous helmet catch, all anyone would have talked about the next day was Eli’s horrific ball security. 

And deservedly so. 

But Eli completed that drive, and yes - got some credit for the win. But it was a team effort & the giants defense got plenty of love for it. They were hardly forgotten in the post-game glow. 

And regardless of any of this, it was one game in a completely average career. And if you look past the 1 drive in that 1 game, Eli was pretty below average. 

Go back and look at the replay . The catch wasn't the best part of that play ...in fact it was probably the 3rd best part of the play.

1. The multiple escapes and scramble - you could argue no other QB would have made that particular play ...very few are even capable ... Brady very likely would not have. 
   
2. The throw - As good a throw as you will ever see in that circumstance ... you could make an argument that it could not have been placed any better
   
3. The catch - great catch but there are many receivers that could have made that catch and made it look easier than that. Plaxico for example with his height and reach  
   

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Sure, although your acceptance is half-hearted, I can admit he was average that day and for a lot of his career. 

Any compliment I ever give Eli will be half hearted. The rest of the world gives him way too much credit, so I’m just doing my part to balance it out. 

I don't think he was a great QB - but he's better than you want to give him credit for. Most NFL franchises would gladly take his career.

Meh. Only if you’re saying “2 rings”. 

Without the rings you’ve got durability, longevity & mediocrity. 

I guess teams like the Ravens & Bucs who won with Dilfer & Brad Johnson then struggled to find a good QB for a long time thereafter would gladly take his career, though I guess that depends how you feel about Flacco. 

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Any compliment I ever give Eli will be half hearted. The rest of the world gives him way too much credit, so I’m just doing my part to balance it out. 

Meh. Only if you’re saying “2 rings”. 

Without the rings you’ve got durability, longevity & mediocrity. 

I guess teams like the Ravens & Bucs who won with Dilfer & Brad Johnson then struggled to find a good QB for a long time thereafter would gladly take his career, though I guess that depends how you feel about Flacco. 

Your bias clouds your judgment here. Time to move on, for me at least.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Go back and look at the replay . The catch wasn't the best part of that play ...in fact it was probably the 3rd best part of the play.

1. The multiple escapes and scramble - you could argue no other QB would have made that particular play ...very few are even capable ... Brady very likely would not have. 
   

You could also argue he should have been ruled down, as “in the grasp”. 

2. The throw - As good a throw as you will ever see in that circumstance ... you could make an argument that it could not have been placed any better

5’ over Tyree’s head? Yeah, ok sure thing. C’mon. That’s ludicrous. It was a 3-flies up desperation heave & Tyree made a truly ridiculous fingertip catch with 3’+ of air beneath his feet. It was a terrible no good very bad dumb lucky throw under any circumstance. 

I’ll admit I was being a hater on the Manningham catch - I’m big enough to do that. But I assign zero internet points for the Tyree catch. 

The catch - great catch but there are many receivers that could have made that catch and made it look easier than that. Plaxico for example with his height and reach  

Doesn’t have anything to do with the point. 

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Your bias clouds your judgment here. Time to move on, for me at least.

No, Eli’s career stats illuminate my judgement here. I’m just capable of looking beyond 1 throw in the Super Bowl. 

 

[Anarchy99]

Ok, I accept that it was a good throw. He threw it where the 2 defenders couldn’t get it. Fine. 

Do you agree his overall performance that day was below average? 

Sure, overall Eli may not have had a great game in the second NE SB. But he had a throw for the ages and led the team to score the winning TD on their final drive. That's basically the narrative. I agree that there usually is more to any story. But look at NE and ATL. Everyone remembers the comeback down 28-3. But Brady threw a terrible pick six in the first half, whiffed on a potential TD saving tackle on the play, and NE looked lost offensively in the first half. But that part of the story gets left out because that''s how people tend to operate.

Go back to the 70's. PIT won their first SB with Bradshaw completing 9 passes of under 100 yards. The next one Terry Bradshaw again completed 9 passes with a 40-45% completion rate. But we've all seen the highlight reel completions to Lynn Swann. No one cares how you won, they just care that you won. To be fair to Bradshaw, he usually was a gunslinger type and would rather go for broke than go underneath.Clearly that strategy paid off, as a handful of big plays was enough for the Steelers to win.

Put another way, you will never see in any highlight film the negative components of what a QB did the rest of the game. The only commentary that may show up will be that the defense was fierce and the QB was under duress all day. They'll never cite the numbers and will make it out like the QB rose from the ashes to orchestrate a game winning drive against all odds . . . nursing an injury . . . with one arm tied behind his back.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Do you agree his overall performance that day was below average? 

Eli's QB rating in that Super Bowl was 103.7.  In how many of his Super Bowl wins did Brady have a higher QB rating than that?

 

[Anarchy99]

No, Eli’s career stats illuminate my judgement here. I’m just capable of looking beyond 1 throw in the Super Bowl. 

While you may be right, Joe Namath made the HOF based on guaranteeing a SB victory and then pulling it off. His only other claim to fame is he was the first QB to throw for 4,000 yards in a season (to go along with his 26 TD and 28 INT that season). IMO, there is nothing else remotely HOF worthy about Namath's on the field football legacy. But he was extremely popular, played in NY, appeared in a million ads and commercials, had a party reputation, and all of that got him into the HOF.

I've met him multiple times (I went to school and worked at the college that he ran a football camp) and he didn't wow me personality wise. Maybe I've always held that against him, but I don't see much more in the HOF credentialing category.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Sure, overall Eli may not have had a great game in the second NE SB. But he had a throw for the ages and led the team to score the winning TD on their final drive. That's basically the narrative. I agree that there usually is more to any story. But look at NE and ATL. Everyone remembers the comeback down 28-3. But Brady threw a terrible pick six in the first half, whiffed on a potential TD saving tackle on the play, and NE looked lost offensively in the first half. But that part of the story gets left out because that''s how people tend to operate.

Go back to the 70's. PIT won their first SB with Bradshaw completing 9 passes of under 100 yards. The next one Terry Bradshaw again completed 9 passes with a 40-45% completion rate. But we've all seen the highlight reel completions to Lynn Swann. No one cares how you won, they just care that you won. To be fair to Bradshaw, he usually was a gunslinger type and would rather go for broke than go underneath.Clearly that strategy paid off, as a handful of big plays was enough for the Steelers to win.

Put another way, you will never see in any highlight film the negative components of what a QB did the rest of the game. The only commentary that may show up will be that the defense was fierce and the QB was under duress all day. They'll never cite the numbers and will make it out like the QB rose from the ashes to orchestrate a game winning drive against all odds . . . nursing an injury . . . with one arm tied behind his back.

Of course - and I’ve mentioned things like this several times. 

But in the context of this discussion - whether anyone “believes” in Eli Manning, or if he’s HOF-worthy, we can consider the negative, regardless of what “the world” chooses to remember or not. 

It’s fair to say that Eli had more negative than positive in his Super Bowl wins. 

Naturally, all anyone will remember is the positive. 

For HOF purposes, all anyone will remember is that his last name is Manning. 

 

[monk]

Oh I give him credit for that pass. It was clutch. It was placed well.  It was also into double coverage. Kudos to Eli for making the throw. Kudos to Manningham for making the sideline grab. Kudos all around for beating the Pats & willing me $$$. 

But you can’t cherry pick that one throw in that one game and say it makes him HOF-worthy. 

He also threw a mind-bogglingly bad interception & fumbled the ball twice in that game. 

He got them to the Super Bowl, Beat the only 18-0 team ever, as the underdog, made that play, and had a higher qb rating than Brady ... And he did it again a couple of years later.

At one point was the only QB to beat the Brady Pats in the Superbowl and he did it twice

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Sure, overall Eli may not have had a great game in the second NE SB.

It’s fair to say that Eli had more negative than positive in his Super Bowl wins. 

I don't even understand this line of criticism.  I'm looking at the game log of the 2nd SB right now and Eli was 30/40 for 296 and 1 TD,  0 INTs, 0 Fumbles.  Went 5/6 driving them down the field for a game-winning TD in the final minutes of the 4th quarter.  In what way did he have a bad game?

 

[Dr. Octopus]

The very previous play, Eli threw it right to Asante Samuel to lose the game, only for the ball to inexplicably pass through his hands. Nowhere near one of his own guys, right to the defense to lose the game.

I believe that was the previous Super Bowl.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Eli's QB rating in that Super Bowl was 103.7.  In how many of his Super Bowl wins did Brady have a higher QB rating than that?

QB rating is a terrible stat, and doesn’t account for his 2 fumbles because it’s only passing. It’s one of the least accurate measures of QB talent. I recall reading that (at the time the article was written) Tom Brady was 5th behind Ryan Fitzpatrick. 

Eli threw 2 TD & 1 Int in that game with a 65% completion rate (5% better than his career average). Ok, sure - but he was also directly responsible for 3 turnovers, which aren’t factored in. 

Heres an example of why QB rating sucks:

Attempts Completions Yards TDs INTs
QB A 40 40 100 0 0
QB B 40 20 325 0 0

QBA Is rated a couple points higher, so pardon me if I’m not a huge fan of this measure. 

 

[Anarchy99]

I don't even understand this line of criticism.  I'm looking at the game log of the 2nd SB right now and Eli was 30/40 for 296 and 1 TD,  0 INTs, 0 Fumbles.  Went 5/6 driving them down the field for a game-winning TD in the final minutes of the 4th quarter.  In what way did he have a bad game?

I am confusing my SB's and what happened. Eli fumbled twice in the first NE game . . . but they didn't lose possession on either one. An INT and 2 lost fumbles would have been a big deal. An INT and two almost lost fumbles is a completely different story. Carry on.

 

[Anarchy99]

QB rating is a terrible stat, and doesn’t account for his 2 fumbles because it’s only passing. It’s one of the least accurate measures of QB talent. I recall reading that (at the time the article was written) Tom Brady was 5th behind Ryan Fitzpatrick. 

Eli threw 2 TD & 1 Int in that game with a 65% completion rate (5% better than his career average). Ok, sure - but he was also directly responsible for 3 turnovers, which aren’t factored in. 

Heres an example of why QB rating sucks:

Attempts Completions Yards TDs INTs
QB A 40 40 100 0 0
QB B 40 20 325 0 0

QBA Is rated a couple points higher, so pardon me if I’m not a huge fan of this measure. 

Eli had two fumbles and lost neither in the first NE SB. He didn't have any fumbles in the rematch.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

He got them to the Super Bowl, Beat the only 18-0 team ever, as the underdog, made that play, and had a higher qb rating than Brady ... And he did it again a couple of years later.

At one point was the only QB to beat the Brady Pats in the Superbowl and he did it twice

No. The Giants as a team did that. 

And specifically, the Giants defense did that.

therein lies the fallacy of saying “Eli” beat the pats, or “Eli” got them there. 

And the only reason that miracle drive was even relevant was because the Giants defense stifled Brady to one of the worst games he’d played to that point, holding him to 1 TD. 

Utter poppycock. 

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

The very previous play, Eli threw it right to Asante Samuel to lose the game, only for the ball to inexplicably pass through his hands. Nowhere near one of his own guys, right to the defense to lose the game.

It was obviously near one of his own guys, otherwise why was Samuel even in the vicinity?  It looked at the time like the WR ran the wrong route - is that Eli's fault?  The reality is that it wasn't an INT and the rest is history, just like all the things that could've-gone-wrong-but-didn't in Tom Brady's career have long been forgotten, too.  

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Eli had two fumbles and lost neither in the first NE SB. He didn't have any fumbles in the rematch.

Facts only get in the way.

 

[rockaction]

I'll say this: You guys sure love you some arguin'.

Heh.

 

[Anarchy99]

No. The Giants as a team did that. 

And specifically, the Giants defense did that.

therein lies the fallacy of saying “Eli” beat the pats, or “Eli” got them there. 

Utter poppycock. 

Football is a team sport. Only a team can win and only a team can lose. But that doesn't usually apply when it comes to QB's. But we have been dancing around this concept for two pages.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

No. The Giants as a team did that. 

therein lies the fallacy of saying “Eli” beat the pats, or “Eli” got them there. 

Yet somehow Tom Brady is basically the consensus GOAT because "he" won 6 Super Bowls.  It is what it is.   

 

[Anarchy99]

I'll say this: You guys sure love you some arguin'.

Heh.

We'd go duke things out like in Anchorman but we are geographically too spaced out to take things outside.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I don't even understand this line of criticism.  I'm looking at the game log of the 2nd SB right now and Eli was 30/40 for 296 and 1 TD,  0 INTs, 0 Fumbles.  Went 5/6 driving them down the field for a game-winning TD in the final minutes of the 4th quarter.  In what way did he have a bad game?

You’re looking at the wrong game. In 2008 he threw a pick and lost 2 fumbles. 

He was 19/36 for 255, with 2 TD & 1 Int & a QB rating of 87.5

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Football is a team sport. Only a team can win and only a team can lose. But that doesn't usually apply when it comes to QB's. But we have been dancing around this concept for two pages.

True. It’s funny that the same people who claim Manning didn’t win those 2 Super Bowls because football is a team game are the same people that bring up his .500 record as a starting QB for the Giants (a team that has had a horrendous o-line and defense for the last five years) as a negative.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Yet somehow Tom Brady is basically the consensus GOAT because "he" won 6 Super Bowls.  It is what it is.   

That’s a straw man. 

Please do quote where I said Brady is the GOAT, and/or for that reason. I’ll wait. 

 

[Anarchy99]

You’re looking at the wrong game. In 2008 he threw a pick and lost 2 fumbles. 

He was 19/36 for 255, with 2 TD & 1 Int & a QB rating of 87.5

He didn't lose any fumbles. He had two fumbles but the Giants recovered them.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

True. It’s funny that the same people who claim Manning didn’t win those 2 Super Bowls because football is a team game are the same people that bring up his .500 record as a starting QB for the Giants (a team that has had a horrendous o-line and defense for the last five years) as a negative.

Eli did win those 2 Super Bowls. He has the rings to prove it.

but there’s a difference between saying he won 2 Super Bowls and asserting that he alone was responsible for it, as many have done in here. 

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

He didn't lose any fumbles. He had two fumbles but the Giants recovered them.

Oh, ok - my bad. I thought he had 2 lost fumbles. 

I stand corrected. He still didn’t have a 297 yard game with a 100+ QB rating. 

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Eli did win those 2 Super Bowls. He has the rings to prove it.

but there’s a difference between saying he won 2 Super Bowls and asserting that he alone was responsible for it, as many have done in here. 

No one has done that. That would be silly. Justin Tuck should have been the MVP of the first Super Bowl.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

No one has done that. That would be silly. Justin Tuck should have been the MVP of the first Super Bowl.

Several have absolutely done that. 

They said Eli beat the undefeated pats. And Eli beat Tom Brady twice.

they didn’t say “the Giants beat the Pats”

they didn’t mention the Giants defense or Brady’s struggles.

there’s at least 3 instances in the last 2 pages alone. 

ETA: 100% agree about Tuck. 

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

You’re looking at the wrong game. In 2008 he threw a pick and lost 2 fumbles. 

He was 19/36 for 255, with 2 TD & 1 Int & a QB rating of 87.5

A) You were talking about the Manningham catch.  That was 2012, not 2008. 

B) He didn't lose 2 fumbles in 2008.

C) Eli's QB rating in 2008 was 87.5.  Brady's in that game was 82.5.   

 

[Anarchy99]

True. It’s funny that the same people who claim Manning didn’t win those 2 Super Bowls because football is a team game are the same people that bring up his .500 record as a starting QB for the Giants (a team that has had a horrendous o-line and defense for the last five years) as a negative.

While I am one of the ones beating the drum that Eli has historically been mediocre including citing his .500 regular season record as a reason, looking at the other great QB's they almost all had winning records (if not very good winning percentages). That's what makes Eli a bit of an outlier.

A lot of this becomes tied together . . . the Giants paid Eli as one of the highest paid QBs in the league . . . his performance probably did not bear that out . . . which left less money to apply to other positions like OL and defense. Not entirely Eli's fault, and salary cap and roster management play a big part in today's game, but we are talking a 15 year period. 

It cuts both ways . . . the last few years the Giants defense has been suspect . . . but the years they won the SB the defense carried the team.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

but there’s a difference between saying he won 2 Super Bowls and asserting that he alone was responsible for it, as many have done in here. 

Literally no one did this.  Talking about straw men.   

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

A) You were talking about the Manningham catch.  That was 2012, not 2008. 

B) He didn't lose 2 fumbles in 2008.

C) Eli's QB rating in 2008 was 87.5.  Brady's in that game was 82.5.   

So many years. so much mediocrity by Eli. It all just runs together sometimes.  

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Literally no one did this.  Talking about straw men.   

I can quote it. It’s not a straw man - it’s literally what you and others have said. 

Shall I go pull the quotes?  

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Several have absolutely done that. 

They said Eli beat the undefeated pats. And Eli beat Tom Brady twice.

they didn’t say “the Giants beat the Pats”

they didn’t mention the Giants defense or Brady’s struggles.

there’s at least 3 instances in the last 2 pages alone. 

ETA: 100% agree about Tuck. 

For the purposes of HOF discussion he did win two Super Bowls. That does not equate to him single handily winning those games - and that applies to what you said above as well. You’re relying on semantics now.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

"Mr Gambini (Hot Sauce Guy), that is a lucid, well thought out, intelligent objection. OVERRULED!!"

No matter good an argument you make (and I think you make a good one), the Hall of Fame is still going to overrule you and put Manning in.

That I agree with.

because his last name is manning. 

 

[Dr. Octopus]

That I agree with.

because his last name is manning. 

Is Cooper getting in?

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

For the purposes of HOF discussion he did win two Super Bowls. That does not equate to him single handily winning those games - and that applies to what you said above as well. You’re relying on semantics now.

Ugh. Ok, I’m out. I’ll see y’all in here in 5 years when he hits the ballot to beat this dead horse some more. 



Or will it be 6?  

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Is Cooper getting in?

lol - maybe. 

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

I can quote it. It’s not a straw man - it’s literally what you and others have said. 

Shall I go pull the quotes?  

If you want to demonstrate a lack of reading comprehension, go for it.  I'm sure you can find direct quotes like "Eli beat Brady" which is obviously not meant literally, and is shorthand for "Eli was the QB of the team that beat the team quarterbacked by Tom Brady."  If you're down to making up stats and pedantry, you should just bow out.  The reality is, as I said at the start, QBs get a disproportionate amount of credit for their team's success, and Eli Manning quarterbacked his team to two last minute victories against the greatest team and QB of the last two decades.  Everyone knows what that means unless they're intentionally pretending not to. 

 

[Anarchy99]

A) You were talking about the Manningham catch.  That was 2012, not 2008. 

B) He didn't lose 2 fumbles in 2008.

C) Eli's QB rating in 2008 was 87.5.  Brady's in that game was 82.5.   

I have since learned that QB rating is a made up stat that doesn't tell the true picture of a QB's performance. It's become a standard statistic that we all use to evaluate how a QB performed but it has limitations. Not included in such a statistic:

- Passes intentionally thrown away because no one was open.
- QB's that held onto the ball too long and took sacks (and maybe took their team out of FG range).
- QB fumbles.
- QB rushing yardage.
- QB's that audible and switch to a running play because that would work better (and may scored TD's via run and not a pass instead).
- The timing of the play in question . . . (which is why they came up with QBR as another category).
- Game conditions (up by 30 points is different than down by 30).
- No accounting for injuries.
- No accounting for officiating.
- No accounting for weather . . . or playing in a dome.
- Etc., etc., etc.

Not getting on you . . . just pointing out the obvious limitations of some stats as a point of analysis. Again, carry on.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

If you want to demonstrate a lack of reading comprehension, go for it.

It’s what I do best.  

  I'm sure you can find direct quotes like "Eli beat Brady" which is obviously not meant literally, and is shorthand for "Eli was the QB of the team that beat the team quarterbacked by Tom Brady."  If you're down to making up stats and pedantry, you should just bow out.  The reality is, as I said at the start, QBs get a disproportionate amount of credit for their team's success, and Eli Manning quarterbacked his team to two last minute victories against the greatest team and QB of the last two decades.  Everyone knows what that means unless they're intentionally pretending not to. 

It was said that “Eli beat Brady twice” as literal justification in defense of HOF worthiness. 

That’s not interpretation, it’s not semantics, it’s not pedantry, nor is it a lack of comprehension.

It was a direct, literal defense of Eli’s HOF-worthiness, and I even spelled out the fallacy.

but sure, if you want to disregard reality, you have a solid point.  

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I have since learned that QB rating is a made up stat that doesn't tell the true picture of a QB's performance. It's become a standard statistic that we all use to evaluate how a QB performed but it has limitations. Not included in such a statistic:

- Passes intentionally thrown away because no one was open.
- QB's that held onto the ball too long and took sacks (and maybe took their team out of FG range).
- QB fumbles.
- QB rushing yardage.
- QB's that audible and switch to a running play because that would work better (and may scored TD's via run and not a pass instead).
- The timing of the play in question . . . (which is why they came up with QBR as another category).
- Game conditions (up by 30 points is different than down by 30).
- No accounting for injuries.
- No accounting for officiating.
- No accounting for weather . . . or playing in a dome.
- Etc., etc., etc.

Not getting on you . . . just pointing out the obvious limitations of some stats as a point of analysis. Again, carry on.

I pointed that out a few posts back. It’s a ridiculous nonsensical made-up very bad terrible way to measure performance that has more weight placed on completion % than necessary. 

 

[monk]

No. The Giants as a team did that. 

And specifically, the Giants defense did that.

therein lies the fallacy of saying “Eli” beat the pats, or “Eli” got them there. 

And the only reason that miracle drive was even relevant was because the Giants defense stifled Brady to one of the worst games he’d played to that point, holding him to 1 TD. 

Utter poppycock. 

Sorry ... Giants defense was ranked 17th in the NFL Patriots  4th ...

Why didn't the Pats stifle Eli ? 

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Again: done. See y’all in 5 (or 6) years & we can do this all over again when it really counts. 



i look forward to the hours of airtime everyone spends fellating Eli verbally in defense of a pouting, slouching slack jawed yokel who’s career ended with as much of a wet fart as it began.