Eli stands alone (1 Viewer)

[Koya]

BTW, just because many of us feel that Eli showed tremendous poise, ability and a knack for the big play at the right time (aka - winning) does not mean we feel he is a top 5 QB.

Yes, he is inconsistent. No, I dont think he will ever have great stats. But I'd take Eli over a lot of guys who will be "ranked" ahead of him as they pile up the stats, the regular season TDs, with better talent surrounding them in some cases, and then bow out in the first round of the playoffs... perhaps to Eli and his ####ty play (well, ####ty except for winning when it counts, something he has demonstrated WITH consistency in his young career) himself.

 

[Despyzer]

But I'd take Eli over a lot of guys who will be "ranked" ahead of him as they pile up the stats, the regular season TDs, with better talent surrounding them in some cases, and then bow out in the first round of the playoffs.

Personally, I would think Giants fans would rather have a QB who could help them win rather than a QB they have to overcome to win, but I guess I'm just funny like that.

 

[Chairshot]

But I'd take Eli over a lot of guys who will be "ranked" ahead of him as they pile up the stats, the regular season TDs, with better talent surrounding them in some cases, and then bow out in the first round of the playoffs.

Personally, I would think Giants fans would rather have a QB who could help them win rather than a QB they have to overcome to win, but I guess I'm just funny like that.

 

[Liquid Tension]

I remember when winning a championship used to be considered a great accomplishment.

You're only as good of a player/coach/whatever the morning after you win a championship as you were the morning before.

Are you serious?If so tell that to John Elway.Or Brett Favre, or Steve Young, or Peyton Manning.Then ask Dan Marino.

SSOG may be wrong about Eli, but he is correct on his take here. I do not think a player is all of a sudden a huge leap forward because he has a ring. Football is a team event, the ultimate team sport, and if Roethlisberger could win a SB with one of the worst performance one could imagine, why is he all of as sudden better? Eli played well, but he would have had no chance to win if the defense didn't do a good job. He wouldn;t have won if te -players on special teams and offense didn't get the job done. Marino was an amazing player that anyone knows would have won if he were on this Giants team or the NE teams of the past or almost every team that has ever won. I think Elway was a little less a QB than Marino but getting a #1 rushing attack was instrumental in him getting his rings, but he didn't become great when he won a SB, he was great before that.

 

[Despyzer]

But I'd take Eli over a lot of guys who will be "ranked" ahead of him as they pile up the stats, the regular season TDs, with better talent surrounding them in some cases, and then bow out in the first round of the playoffs.

Personally, I would think Giants fans would rather have a QB who could help them win rather than a QB they have to overcome to win, but I guess I'm just funny like that.

You make a very compelling argument. I've completely changed my mind on this whole issue.

 

[Koya]

But I'd take Eli over a lot of guys who will be "ranked" ahead of him as they pile up the stats, the regular season TDs, with better talent surrounding them in some cases, and then bow out in the first round of the playoffs.

Personally, I would think Giants fans would rather have a QB who could help them win rather than a QB they have to overcome to win, but I guess I'm just funny like that.

Are you another who did not watch last years Super Bowl run? What another great example of the anti Eli mentality.He was THE single player most responsible not for one win, but for the whole run. The guy ALREADY has proven that while he may have some bad games, even bad streaks, he HAS the ability not just to be on a Super Bowl winning team, but be one of if not the biggest reason for that Super Bowl win.

 

[Koya]

I remember when winning a championship used to be considered a great accomplishment.

You're only as good of a player/coach/whatever the morning after you win a championship as you were the morning before.

Are you serious?If so tell that to John Elway.Or Brett Favre, or Steve Young, or Peyton Manning.Then ask Dan Marino.

SSOG may be wrong about Eli, but he is correct on his take here. I do not think a player is all of a sudden a huge leap forward because he has a ring. Football is a team event, the ultimate team sport, and if Roethlisberger could win a SB with one of the worst performance one could imagine, why is he all of as sudden better? Eli played well, but he would have had no chance to win if the defense didn't do a good job. He wouldn;t have won if te -players on special teams and offense didn't get the job done. Marino was an amazing player that anyone knows would have won if he were on this Giants team or the NE teams of the past or almost every team that has ever won. I think Elway was a little less a QB than Marino but getting a #1 rushing attack was instrumental in him getting his rings, but he didn't become great when he won a SB, he was great before that.

Wow, tough crowd (or a crowd that didnt watch, not sure which).Eli was the player most singly responsible for that Super Bowl run... for the win in the Super Bowl and the other games. Of course he wouldnt have won it if the D didnt step up. Duh. Neither would most Super Bowl winning QBs

 

[Despyzer]

He was THE single player most responsible not for one win, but for the whole run.

Eli was the player most singly responsible for that Super Bowl run.

Are you trying to convince us or yourself? Either way, saying it over and over doesn't make it true.

 

[Avery]

He was THE single player most responsible not for one win, but for the whole run.

Eli was the player most singly responsible for that Super Bowl run.

Are you trying to convince us or yourself? Either way, saying it over and over doesn't make it true.

I finally found the perfect use for this emoticon:

 

[Despyzer]

I finally found the perfect use for this emoticon:

It feels good, doesn't it? I've found the perfect use for this one:

 

[Avery]

I finally found the perfect use for this emoticon:

It feels good, doesn't it? I've found the perfect use for this one:

To quote a very astute poster:

You make a very compelling argument. I've completely changed my mind on this whole issue.

 

[Koya]

He was THE single player most responsible not for one win, but for the whole run.

Eli was the player most singly responsible for that Super Bowl run.

Are you trying to convince us or yourself? Either way, saying it over and over doesn't make it true.

name one single player on the giants that, throughout all four playoff games, contributed more than Eli.go ahead... and give reasons. Now, the DE UNIT might have been the strongest unit, but I dont see how someone can legitamately say another single player was more integral to the Giants Super run.

 

[Despyzer]

He was THE single player most responsible not for one win, but for the whole run.

Eli was the player most singly responsible for that Super Bowl run.

Are you trying to convince us or yourself? Either way, saying it over and over doesn't make it true.

name one single player on the giants that, throughout all four playoff games, contributed more than Eli.go ahead... and give reasons. Now, the DE UNIT might have been the strongest unit, but I dont see how someone can legitamately say another single player was more integral to the Giants Super run.

I'll throw out Strahan, who may not have consistently chalked up a lot of statistics, but did consistently make his presence known and (unlike Eli) didn't really do anything to hurt his team. I think the same thing can be said about Pierce.

 

[Koya]

He was THE single player most responsible not for one win, but for the whole run.

Eli was the player most singly responsible for that Super Bowl run.

Are you trying to convince us or yourself? Either way, saying it over and over doesn't make it true.

name one single player on the giants that, throughout all four playoff games, contributed more than Eli.go ahead... and give reasons.

Now, the DE UNIT might have been the strongest unit, but I dont see how someone can legitamately say another single player was more integral to the Giants Super run.

I'll throw out Strahan, who may not have consistently chalked up a lot of statistics, but did consistently make his presence known and (unlike Eli) didn't really do anything to hurt his team. I think the same thing can be said about Pierce.

If there were any argguement, I'd say Pierce - and you can perhaps say something for Strahan's leadership... but please. That's looking for reasons to not pick the obvious guy. Of course Strahan commanded attention and caused disruption - but he was the second best DE the Giants had most of the playoffs. Pierce was glue for that D but he didnt surpass what the QB did.And you say unlike Eli? I must say, that really screams out there considering the guy played games without an INT and had only one I believe all post season. He made all the key throws. He stopped the fumbles that KILLED the Giants in the regular season and directed the team time and time again to victories, often with key pivotal plays late in games.

But I guess he was just a guy along for the ride who hurt his team.

 

[Despyzer]

But I guess he was just a guy along for the ride who hurt his team.

Finally, you get it. Only one ball may have been picked off, but there were several others that should have been (not to mention all the balls that were off target). And the guy had 2 fumbles in just the SB alone! If that's not hurting your team, it sure isn't helping it.

 

[Chairshot]

But I'd take Eli over a lot of guys who will be "ranked" ahead of him as they pile up the stats, the regular season TDs, with better talent surrounding them in some cases, and then bow out in the first round of the playoffs.

Personally, I would think Giants fans would rather have a QB who could help them win rather than a QB they have to overcome to win, but I guess I'm just funny like that.

You make a very compelling argument. I've completely changed my mind on this whole issue.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything, since your mind is set and nothing will convince you of anything.Personally, I think you are fishing right now. Most of your recent posts contain very little, if any, actual arguments. The few that are there have been gone over more then once.At the end of the day, the QB and the head coach are the two people that will get most of the blame when the team loses - and they are going to get most of the credit when the team wins.Eli played well down the stretch in the regular season and he played well in the post-season. You really don't want to believe that, so that's cool. The fact that he played well may or may not be indicative of him playing well in the upcoming season. No one knows, but what the supporters are saying is that there are solid reasons to believe that he might be a different QB going forward.Talking about how many INTs he SHOULD have thrown is just ridiculous. Every QB has bad throws and gets some luck on possible INTs. But like I said before, if you want to do a comparison on that, fine. I'll leave it to you to go back and watch all the tape and count the SHI totals for every QB. Maybe Eli leads the league in that wonderful new stat, I don't know. But I don't see how we can have the argument without knowing where he stands in relation to the rest of the league.Besides which, you act like Eli is the one imperfect player on a field where every other player was perfect. Every player makes mistakes and no player is perfect. Corey Webster fell down on the NE go ahead TD. There was a horrible missed block on the ensuing kick return and Hixon only returned the ball for 14 yards. Virtually every snap to Eli on the last drive was on the ground. Before his big catch David Tyree ran the wrong route and it almost led to an INT. The Pats leave Plaxico one on one with Ellis Hobbs down near the endzone. Jay Alford blew up the middle of the line one on one for a big sack on the final drive. Tom Brady under throws Randy Moss on a sure TD on the final drive. And that's all just in the last 2 minutes or so of the game.My point isn't that Eli didn't make mistakes. My point is that if we start looking at it like that, then we have to look at it that way for everyone. What we know is that he threw 1 INT all post-season and was 9 for 14 for 152 yards and 2 TDs in the 4th quarter of the biggest game of his life.

 

[Tom Servo]

Any one of them have more SB rings than all the haters on the board combined.

Is that supposed to be an accomplishment? If this is really the best thing that you can say about Eli, then maybe your reverence of him is misplaced.

There's not really reverence here; I was rooting for him to beat NE. As a fan I think Ben is better. However, he has a ring; you and I don't. He must therefore:

1) have more football talent than either you and I and

2) guided a team to a title.

That's all. So, I guess the answer to your question is "yes".

 

[chitlins3]

But I guess he was just a guy along for the ride who hurt his team.

Finally, you get it. Only one ball may have been picked off, but there were several others that should have been (not to mention all the balls that were off target). And the guy had 2 fumbles in just the SB alone! If that's not hurting your team, it sure isn't helping it.

Is this a H.K. alias? Your arguments against Eli in this thread are reaching that level (and this is coming from a Jets fan). Using Bradshaw's fumble in the SB against Eli? Really?

 

[56]

This thread reminds me of the movie Conan The Barbarian. Specifically when all the warrior slave traders are gathered around the campfire, and one of them asks, "Conan. What is best in life?"

Conan responds, "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of the anti-Eli lemmings who are forced to come up with new ways to hate, because Eli winning the Super Bowl MVP has made their past predictions look foolish".

 

[SSOG]

He's certainly going to go down as the worst QB to accomplish the feat, that's for sure.

Kinda hard to accept that considering Eli's level of play during, and what that play meant to his football team for the entire postseason.If it were just this one game, fine - but it was four in a row. Not sure how people are so willing to dismiss that run and Eli's level of play during that run. The guy was the playoff MVP for one of the great all time Super Bowl runs.

If I based my judgement of QBs off of 4-game stretches, then Rex Grossman would be an all-pro after his torrid start to 2006.Eli's hot streak came at exactly the right time for the Giants organization and their fans, but that doesn't change the fact that it was nothing more than that- a hot streak. Just like Reggie Bush running well in the last four games of 2006 wasn't this miraculous sign that he'd figured out the NFL game. As Drinen is so fond of saying... splits happen.

The quickness people call a playoff run just a hot streak surprises me. I believe that reputation preceeds Eli in this case, and so many have such an ingrained notion of what he is, can be, "should" be that they do not recognize the immense accomplishment at hand.Seriously, you are here comparing a stretch of games at the beginning of the regular season to beating, on the road, tremendous favorites including the 1 and 2 seeds and the "greatest team to over play the game"That is ridiculous imo.That is not to say that Eli will be a consistently good-great regular season QB. We have to see if he can gain that consistency that he has lacked.But to think he "got lucky" on the way to that Super Bowl is not something that would be said if you appreciate playoff football, the intensity, the competition - in general... not to mention in this case going the road the Giants had to take to get their ring.

I never said he got lucky, I said he got hot. There's a big difference- Eli's been hot and cold so often that it's not at all "lucky" when he catches fire. It was lucky for the Giants that that hot streak coincided with the playoffs, but Eli's hot-streak was the honest byproduct of an inconsistent QB with all of the physical tools.The quickness that people call that hot streak a sign that he's "turned a corner" is what surprises me. Look at the 5 games before his hot streak. They were BRUTALLY bad- REX GROSSMAN bad. When a QB puts up one of the worst 5 game stretches of his career, and follows it immediately with one of the best 5 game stretches of his career, that's not a sign of the QB turning the corner. One of two things happened- either some lurking variable is out there to account for the split (I've yet to see a good theory proposed), or else it's just a split. As Drinen is fond of saying, sometimes, splits happen.

I remember when winning a championship used to be considered a great accomplishment.

You're only as good of a player/coach/whatever the morning after you win a championship as you were the morning before.

Are you serious?If so tell that to John Elway.Or Brett Favre, or Steve Young, or Peyton Manning.Then ask Dan Marino.

I am wholly and absolutely serious. John Elway wasn't a better QB because Terrell Davis won him a superbowl in his old age. He was PERCEIVED as better by the ignorant masses, but what made Elway as good of a QB as he was was the amazing Atlas act he pulled in the late '80s and early '90s, not the SB rings he won in the twilight of his career. Similarly, if Dan Marino had hung around long enough and won a ring, too, he wouldn't be any better of a QB. He wouldn't throw his passes with any more touch or accuracy. His release wouldn't magically become any quicker. He wouldn't make better decisions or quicker reads. In short, he wouldn't be any more likely to beat you afterwards than he was before. There's no magic of a superbowl ring that makes a player better or worse than he was without it.I said the same thing about Bill Cowher before he won his superbowl ring. I said the same thing about Tony Dungy, too, and I've also said the same thing about Marty Schottenheimer. Winning a superbowl didn't make the first two better coaches- they were already world-class coaches without it. If Schotty hadn't been victimized by Elway in the '80s, and if he had a superbowl ring on his finger right now, he wouldn't be any better of a coach, he'd just be seen as a better coach by fans. If Norv Turner won a SB ring last year, he'd still be a terrible coach. The ring does not grant any superhuman powers that the player or coach didn't already possess.

Whether you are an Eli fan or not, give the guy some credit for doing all of us a favor.If not for that play, we'd be hearing "19-0!!! Greatest team EVAH!!!" for the rest of our lives.

I'm very grateful for that, but for the record, last year's Patriots still were arguably the greatest team ever. Just like how a championship doesn't make a single player any better or worse than he was the day before, a championship doesn't make a team any better or worse than it was the day before. Every team has a chance to lose every game- perhaps a vanishingly small chance, but a chance nonetheless. Just because the chance came true doesn't mean it was any less vanishingly small. I refuse to believe the difference between the Patriots being the greatest team ever and the Patriots NOT being the greatest team ever is one of the biggest fluke plays in NFL history. If someone tries to tell me that, if Tyree didn't press a ball against his helmet (a bizarre and incredibly lucky feat that no New England player had any influence over), New England would be the greatest team of all time... then I'm going to respond by saying that even if he did, New England must still be the greatest team of all time then.

But I guess he was just a guy along for the ride who hurt his team.

Finally, you get it. Only one ball may have been picked off, but there were several others that should have been (not to mention all the balls that were off target). And the guy had 2 fumbles in just the SB alone! If that's not hurting your team, it sure isn't helping it.

Just for the record, before you go lumping all "Eli haters" together, I'm going to make it clear right now that I think Despyzer is every bit as insane as those on the other end of the spectrum who think that Eli is now a stud essentially because of one fluke play (thankfully, but extremes have been very sparse so far in this thread, which has been a haven for tempered, moderate, level-headed discussion). Eli definitely did not hurt his team in the playoffs. Eli played awesome in the playoffs. It might not have been the best 5-game run any QB has ever had in history, but it was definitely an awesome 5-game run and one of the best 5-game stretches put up by any QB at any point last year. His SB play by itself wasn't that great, but he more than made up for it in the other 4 games.

 

[SSOG]

He was THE single player most responsible not for one win, but for the whole run.

Eli was the player most singly responsible for that Super Bowl run.

Are you trying to convince us or yourself? Either way, saying it over and over doesn't make it true.

name one single player on the giants that, throughout all four playoff games, contributed more than Eli.go ahead... and give reasons. Now, the DE UNIT might have been the strongest unit, but I dont see how someone can legitamately say another single player was more integral to the Giants Super run.

For the record, I think this is a ludicrous argument, too. This is the reason why QBs are so overrated- because they're such an integral part of the team. A DE could play at an All Pro level, and a QB could play at a Pro Bowl alternate level, and the QB would still be more integral to the team's success. A DE could be one of the top 2 players out of the 64+ starting DEs (1:32 ratio), while a QB could be the 4th best QB out of the 32+ starting QBs (1:8 ratio), and despite that the DE is in a radically higher percentile, fans are going to point to the QB and say "but look, he was more important". Just because Eli contributed the most to the SB run doesn't mean he was the best player on the Giants during the superbowl run, it just means he played QB and he played well.This was the same logic that gave Tom Brady two of his three SB MVP awards. I mean, he passed for under 150 yards in his first SB and got the MVP because he led his team on a 30-yard drive. You really mean to tell me that, in the entire superbowl, that was the best performance? Please. Manning's MVP award wasn't quite that much of a joke, but it was still a joke. The system is set up to reward a QB that plays alright long before it rewards a DL (or, in this case, THREE DIFFERENT DLs) that plays lights-out.

 

[Koya]

But I guess he was just a guy along for the ride who hurt his team.

Finally, you get it. Only one ball may have been picked off, but there were several others that should have been (not to mention all the balls that were off target). And the guy had 2 fumbles in just the SB alone! If that's not hurting your team, it sure isn't helping it.

Again, it seems like you didnt actually watch the Super Bowl run. I dont see how someone conversant in football could come to your utterly ridiculous conclusion.

 

[Koya]

He was THE single player most responsible not for one win, but for the whole run.

Eli was the player most singly responsible for that Super Bowl run.

Are you trying to convince us or yourself? Either way, saying it over and over doesn't make it true.

name one single player on the giants that, throughout all four playoff games, contributed more than Eli.go ahead... and give reasons. Now, the DE UNIT might have been the strongest unit, but I dont see how someone can legitamately say another single player was more integral to the Giants Super run.

For the record, I think this is a ludicrous argument, too. This is the reason why QBs are so overrated- because they're such an integral part of the team. A DE could play at an All Pro level, and a QB could play at a Pro Bowl alternate level, and the QB would still be more integral to the team's success. A DE could be one of the top 2 players out of the 64+ starting DEs (1:32 ratio), while a QB could be the 4th best QB out of the 32+ starting QBs (1:8 ratio), and despite that the DE is in a radically higher percentile, fans are going to point to the QB and say "but look, he was more important". Just because Eli contributed the most to the SB run doesn't mean he was the best player on the Giants during the superbowl run, it just means he played QB and he played well.This was the same logic that gave Tom Brady two of his three SB MVP awards. I mean, he passed for under 150 yards in his first SB and got the MVP because he led his team on a 30-yard drive. You really mean to tell me that, in the entire superbowl, that was the best performance? Please. Manning's MVP award wasn't quite that much of a joke, but it was still a joke. The system is set up to reward a QB that plays alright long before it rewards a DL (or, in this case, THREE DIFFERENT DLs) that plays lights-out.

A DE who has a subpar game will not likely cause their team to lose. A QB in post season play who has a subpar game is FAR more likely to cause a loss.Manning joined ONE other QB to EVER have 2 come from behind go ahead TD drives in the 4th quarter. The other was Joe Montana. Mannings happened to BOTH be 80+ yard drives.I dont know what game yall were watching.

 

[Construction Man Jim]

So Eli plays well when his OL is good and his WRs are good. He plays poorly when his OL is bad and his WRs are bad.That sounds like an average QB to me.

Who are the QBs that put up Hall of Fame numbers and won Super Bowls by themselves? It seems to me QBs that don't get any help have careers that look like Archie Manning's. Or worse, David Carr.

 

[Despyzer]

But I guess he was just a guy along for the ride who hurt his team.

Finally, you get it. Only one ball may have been picked off, but there were several others that should have been (not to mention all the balls that were off target). And the guy had 2 fumbles in just the SB alone! If that's not hurting your team, it sure isn't helping it.

Again, it seems like you didnt actually watch the Super Bowl run. I dont see how someone conversant in football could come to your utterly ridiculous conclusion.

I've offered examples from the games themselves in defense of my opinion. All you have done is spout "you must not have watched the games." Of course, you don't have nearly as much ammunition on your side to support your point, so this is understandable.

 

[Despyzer]

Eli definitely did not hurt his team in the playoffs.

You've made constant reference to his poorly-thrown and overthrown balls. The fumbles are a matter of record (although I don't hold him primarily responsible for Bradshaw's mishandling). Are you sure these things don't hurt a team in the playoffs?

 

[Construction Man Jim]

If I based my judgement of QBs off of 4-game stretches, then Rex Grossman would be an all-pro after his torrid start to 2006.Eli's hot streak came at exactly the right time for the Giants organization and their fans, but that doesn't change the fact that it was nothing more than that- a hot streak. Just like Reggie Bush running well in the last four games of 2006 wasn't this miraculous sign that he'd figured out the NFL game. As Drinen is so fond of saying... splits happen.

I agree, Eli didn't suddenly turn the proverbial corner in week 17.

I never said he got lucky, I said he got hot. There's a big difference- Eli's been hot and cold so often that it's not at all "lucky" when he catches fire. It was lucky for the Giants that that hot streak coincided with the playoffs, but Eli's hot-streak was the honest byproduct of an inconsistent QB with all of the physical tools.The quickness that people call that hot streak a sign that he's "turned a corner" is what surprises me. Look at the 5 games before his hot streak. They were BRUTALLY bad- REX GROSSMAN bad. When a QB puts up one of the worst 5 game stretches of his career, and follows it immediately with one of the best 5 game stretches of his career, that's not a sign of the QB turning the corner. One of two things happened- either some lurking variable is out there to account for the split (I've yet to see a good theory proposed), or else it's just a split. As Drinen is fond of saying, sometimes, splits happen.

Let's look at that 5 weeks prior stretch: 12. MIN This game was a real anomoly. Eli's one truly bad performance of the season.13. CHI On the road, in the rain and the cold Eli played three bad quarters but managed to redeem himself and save the season (and possibly his and Tom Coughlin's careers in NY) with a 4th quarter come back victory.14. PHI Not a huge statistical game but he played fine and the Giants won.15. WAS Wind was a MAJOR factor. Gilbride had no business calling 52 passes. 16. BUF Weather was also a HUGE factor in this one. 50+ mph winds and torrential freezing rain, sleet, hail, snow. It was no coincidence all the points were scored going in one direction.What else changed? Steve Smith came back from injury so he finally had a reliable 3rd receiver who could get open.So those were probably the two biggest variables, extreme weather and Steve Smith, to explain the split. Eli didn't change all of a sudden. It hasn't always been reflected in his stats but he's been progressing pretty steadily over the past 4 seasons.

 

[Captain_Apocalypse]

Tyree should have been MVP IMO. Using the MVP award as an arguement is like using the Pro Bowl. Eli won MVP because he is a Manning. Thats just my opinion. It was a great game though and I am super happy the Giants won. The fact that there is so much debate about Eli with strong opinions on both sides tells me he is not average or elite (yet). The game would have been over for them if Tyree didn't make that catch. The #1 most important play (for the giants) of the game. Sure Eli escaped the D, but he was not the star of that play.

 

[Phurfur]

Tyree should have been MVP IMO. Using the MVP award as an arguement is like using the Pro Bowl. Eli won MVP because he is a Manning. Thats just my opinion. It was a great game though and I am super happy the Giants won. The fact that there is so much debate about Eli with strong opinions on both sides tells me he is not average or elite (yet). The game would have been over for them if Tyree didn't make that catch. The #1 most important play (for the giants) of the game. Sure Eli escaped the D, but he was not the star of that play.

David Tyree 3 Rec, 43 Yds, 1 TD, 32 Yds Longest. One play does not win a Super Bowl or an MVP.This is how off base this thread is getting. Does anyone really care if someone else thinks Eli is great or if they think he sucks?

 

[SSOG]

So Eli plays well when his OL is good and his WRs are good. He plays poorly when his OL is bad and his WRs are bad.That sounds like an average QB to me.

Who are the QBs that put up Hall of Fame numbers and won Super Bowls by themselves? It seems to me QBs that don't get any help have careers that look like Archie Manning's. Or worse, David Carr.

John Elway. He didn't win any SBs by himself, but he did make three of them, which has to count for something. If his career ended before the 1995 season, he would have been a first-ballot HoFer despite the fact that he never played a down throughout his entire 12-year career with a pro-bowl WR.

Eli definitely did not hurt his team in the playoffs.

You've made constant reference to his poorly-thrown and overthrown balls. The fumbles are a matter of record (although I don't hold him primarily responsible for Bradshaw's mishandling). Are you sure these things don't hurt a team in the playoffs?

They would have hurt a team in the playoffs, if he was doing them in the playoffs. He was hot, and his overthrows and mistakes were way down. I'm not saying they were gone entirely, but a QB can make a couple of mistakes and still have his team win BECAUSE OF him instead of IN SPITE OF him (see Favre, Brett in his three MVP seasons).As for the SB MVP, I think almost everyone can agree that that award would have been far better off split three ways between Strahan, Tuck, and Osi than it would have been going to Eli.

 

[Chairshot]

John Elway. He didn't win any SBs by himself, but he did make three of them, which has to count for something. If his career ended before the 1995 season, he would have been a first-ballot HoFer despite the fact that he never played a down throughout his entire 12-year career with a pro-bowl WR.

I'm not sure he would have been a first ballot HOFer if his career ended in 1994. If you take away those last years, he's basically in Boomer Esiason/Dave Krieg territory with a few more Pro Bowls and Superbowls and an MVP. He would have had about the same career passing yards and about 50 less career TDs then they have. He would be outside the top 10 in passing yards and barely in the top 25 in TDs. And since his career completion % and QB rating were never eye-popping to begin with, I don't know that he would be a lock at all. You take away 11,000 passing yards, 100 TDs, 2 rings and and things do look a lot different.Now, he DID play those final years so his career speaks for itself, I take nothing away from him. But no player wins in football by himself. Better players can do more with less, but Elway was on a bunch of really bad teams and he wasn't able to make them contenders on his own. Every year he made it to the Superbowl in his first 12 years Denver had one of the best defenses in the league and/or he had Bobby Humphrey, who looked to be on his way to regular Pro Bowl visits until multiple knee injuries and some horrible personal decisions brought his career to an end.I don't say that to attempt to diminish what he accomplished, more to just say that he wasn't exactly out there by himself.

 

[Liquid Tension]

If I based my judgement of QBs off of 4-game stretches, then Rex Grossman would be an all-pro after his torrid start to 2006.Eli's hot streak came at exactly the right time for the Giants organization and their fans, but that doesn't change the fact that it was nothing more than that- a hot streak. Just like Reggie Bush running well in the last four games of 2006 wasn't this miraculous sign that he'd figured out the NFL game. As Drinen is so fond of saying... splits happen.

I agree, Eli didn't suddenly turn the proverbial corner in week 17.

I never said he got lucky, I said he got hot. There's a big difference- Eli's been hot and cold so often that it's not at all "lucky" when he catches fire. It was lucky for the Giants that that hot streak coincided with the playoffs, but Eli's hot-streak was the honest byproduct of an inconsistent QB with all of the physical tools.The quickness that people call that hot streak a sign that he's "turned a corner" is what surprises me. Look at the 5 games before his hot streak. They were BRUTALLY bad- REX GROSSMAN bad. When a QB puts up one of the worst 5 game stretches of his career, and follows it immediately with one of the best 5 game stretches of his career, that's not a sign of the QB turning the corner. One of two things happened- either some lurking variable is out there to account for the split (I've yet to see a good theory proposed), or else it's just a split. As Drinen is fond of saying, sometimes, splits happen.

Let's look at that 5 weeks prior stretch: 12. MIN This game was a real anomoly. Eli's one truly bad performance of the season.13. CHI On the road, in the rain and the cold Eli played three bad quarters but managed to redeem himself and save the season (and possibly his and Tom Coughlin's careers in NY) with a 4th quarter come back victory.14. PHI Not a huge statistical game but he played fine and the Giants won.15. WAS Wind was a MAJOR factor. Gilbride had no business calling 52 passes. 16. BUF Weather was also a HUGE factor in this one. 50+ mph winds and torrential freezing rain, sleet, hail, snow. It was no coincidence all the points were scored going in one direction.What else changed? Steve Smith came back from injury so he finally had a reliable 3rd receiver who could get open.So those were probably the two biggest variables, extreme weather and Steve Smith, to explain the split. Eli didn't change all of a sudden. It hasn't always been reflected in his stats but he's been progressing pretty steadily over the past 4 seasons.

Steve Smith was an enormous factor as he clearly is the 2nd best WR on the Giants. Plax's ankle also got better the last week of the year. The other KEY factor was how much better the Giant OL protected Eli. Watch the games again (I have), the protection was FAR better in the postseason. the weather was a factor, especially in the Buffalo game as you astutely pointed out that all points were scored in one direction.SSOG those were big factors. Also, a 4 game stretch in the playoffs MUST be taken more into account than a 4 game stretch in the regular season. Again, I said he was an above average QB before the playoffs and I stay the same, but if Eli played just a little "poorer" than the Giants would not have won the SB or a few of the other playoff games either as the games were all close. Yes, you can say the same about other players as well, but we all know the QB is the most important player on the field even if people overrate or underrate the starting QB's on winning and losing teams. My sig gives my breakdown of value.

 

[Phurfur]

But I'd take Eli over a lot of guys who will be "ranked" ahead of him as they pile up the stats, the regular season TDs, with better talent surrounding them in some cases, and then bow out in the first round of the playoffs.

Personally, I would think Giants fans would rather have a QB who could help them win rather than a QB they have to overcome to win, but I guess I'm just funny like that.

:( And I am not laughing with you!

 

[Despyzer]

But I'd take Eli over a lot of guys who will be "ranked" ahead of him as they pile up the stats, the regular season TDs, with better talent surrounding them in some cases, and then bow out in the first round of the playoffs.

Personally, I would think Giants fans would rather have a QB who could help them win rather than a QB they have to overcome to win, but I guess I'm just funny like that.

And I am not laughing with you!

Excellent analysis as always.

 

[Koya]

But I'd take Eli over a lot of guys who will be "ranked" ahead of him as they pile up the stats, the regular season TDs, with better talent surrounding them in some cases, and then bow out in the first round of the playoffs.

Personally, I would think Giants fans would rather have a QB who could help them win rather than a QB they have to overcome to win, but I guess I'm just funny like that.

And I am not laughing with you!

Excellent analysis as always.

Desp, in all seriousness, while those types of posts dont exactly move the conversation forward, I do believe there is some legitimacy in this case. Your stance that Eli got in the way of the Giants Super Bowl run last year simply does not jive at all with what happened on the field. To many of us, its an outright ridiculous stance. Many believe that the only way someone could conclude that Eli was a hindrence during that run is through outright bias, which leads to reactions like Phur's. Unless it's just on your part, which you never do know on here.

 

[Despyzer]

Desp, in all seriousness, while those types of posts dont exactly move the conversation forward, I do believe there is some legitimacy in this case. Your stance that Eli got in the way of the Giants Super Bowl run last year simply does not jive at all with what happened on the field. To many of us, its an outright ridiculous stance. Many believe that the only way someone could conclude that Eli was a hindrence during that run is through outright bias, which leads to reactions like Phur's. Unless it's just on your part, which you never do know on here.

If you look back at the post to which I was referring to, you'll notice that it is only making tangential reference to Eli. The idea that a team would prefer a mediocre QB who happens to ride along for a championship rather than an elite one that can be counted on to lead his team to wins (although not always to a championship) seems like backwards thinking when looking at the position in isolation. I'm not sure how that can be construed as laughable or fishing.

 

[SSOG]

John Elway. He didn't win any SBs by himself, but he did make three of them, which has to count for something. If his career ended before the 1995 season, he would have been a first-ballot HoFer despite the fact that he never played a down throughout his entire 12-year career with a pro-bowl WR.

I'm not sure he would have been a first ballot HOFer if his career ended in 1994. If you take away those last years, he's basically in Boomer Esiason/Dave Krieg territory with a few more Pro Bowls and Superbowls and an MVP. He would have had about the same career passing yards and about 50 less career TDs then they have. He would be outside the top 10 in passing yards and barely in the top 25 in TDs. And since his career completion % and QB rating were never eye-popping to begin with, I don't know that he would be a lock at all. You take away 11,000 passing yards, 100 TDs, 2 rings and and things do look a lot different.Now, he DID play those final years so his career speaks for itself, I take nothing away from him. But no player wins in football by himself. Better players can do more with less, but Elway was on a bunch of really bad teams and he wasn't able to make them contenders on his own. Every year he made it to the Superbowl in his first 12 years Denver had one of the best defenses in the league and/or he had Bobby Humphrey, who looked to be on his way to regular Pro Bowl visits until multiple knee injuries and some horrible personal decisions brought his career to an end.I don't say that to attempt to diminish what he accomplished, more to just say that he wasn't exactly out there by himself.

In 1986, Denver's defense ranked 15th in points allowed (out of 28 teams). Elway's leading rusher was Sammy Winder, who had 789 yards @ 3.3 yards per carry (for comparison purposes, Ron "tub of goo" Dayne has a career ypc of 3.8). The leading receiver in terms of receptions was a fullback who averaged 8.3 yards per grab. The leading receiver in terms of yardage only had 38 catches on the year. No WR or TE on the team had more than 3 TD receptions. In the playoffs, Elway led Denver on "the Drive" and got them to the Superbowl. If not for the presence of Elway himself, that would probably be the worst team in the history of the NFL to ever play in the championship game (with all due respect to the 1979 St. Louis Rams).In 1987, Elway had a good defense, but not anywhere near a great one (7th in points allowed, 9th in yards allowed). In 1989 he had Bobby Humphrey, but that was before Humphrey looked all that great (3.9 yards per carry that season- that's a whole heaping pile of nothing special). He did have an awesome defense in 1989, though. Still, he had NOTHING in 1986, and almost nothing in 1987. Either team, if not for the presence of Elway, would be widely considered among the worst SB teams of all time. Heck, the 1986 team is probably one of the worst SB teams of all time even WITH Elway.

 

[Pickle Rody]

Tyree should have been MVP IMO. Using the MVP award as an arguement is like using the Pro Bowl. Eli won MVP because he is a Manning. Thats just my opinion. It was a great game though and I am super happy the Giants won. The fact that there is so much debate about Eli with strong opinions on both sides tells me he is not average or elite (yet). The game would have been over for them if Tyree didn't make that catch. The #1 most important play (for the giants) of the game. Sure Eli escaped the D, but he was not the star of that play.

David Tyree 3 Rec, 43 Yds, 1 TD, 32 Yds Longest. One play does not win a Super Bowl or an MVP.This is how off base this thread is getting. Does anyone really care if someone else thinks Eli is great or if they think he sucks?

I am not saying Tyree should have been named the MVP, but I know of a player that won the MVP in a Super Bowl for TWO plays. Some D-back on the Cowboys had 2 Int's against O'Donnell of the Steelers and he won the MVP that year. Two plays.Again, I have no problem with Eli being named the MVP of the Super Bowl. And, like I stated before, he deserves as much credit for the Super Bowl victory as anyone else on the Giants. Yes, this thread has gotten off base from what the OP lead off with. Eli has done something no other SB QB has done. Congrats to him!

 

[Chairshot]

In 1986, Denver's defense ranked 15th in points allowed (out of 28 teams). Elway's leading rusher was Sammy Winder, who had 789 yards @ 3.3 yards per carry (for comparison purposes, Ron "tub of goo" Dayne has a career ypc of 3.8). The leading receiver in terms of receptions was a fullback who averaged 8.3 yards per grab. The leading receiver in terms of yardage only had 38 catches on the year. No WR or TE on the team had more than 3 TD receptions. In the playoffs, Elway led Denver on "the Drive" and got them to the Superbowl. If not for the presence of Elway himself, that would probably be the worst team in the history of the NFL to ever play in the championship game (with all due respect to the 1979 St. Louis Rams).In 1987, Elway had a good defense, but not anywhere near a great one (7th in points allowed, 9th in yards allowed). In 1989 he had Bobby Humphrey, but that was before Humphrey looked all that great (3.9 yards per carry that season- that's a whole heaping pile of nothing special). He did have an awesome defense in 1989, though. Still, he had NOTHING in 1986, and almost nothing in 1987. Either team, if not for the presence of Elway, would be widely considered among the worst SB teams of all time. Heck, the 1986 team is probably one of the worst SB teams of all time even WITH Elway.

My point was really about whether Elway was a first ballot type guy without those last years.I get what you are saying about the 86 team, but at the same time, they did have 6 guys go the Pro Bowl that year, including Winder - probably due to the fact that he was among the league leaders in TDs. Pro Bowls certainly aren't everything and there often are players that go to the Pro Bowl that don't truly deserve it, but it's not too often that really bad players end up there. Winder wasn't some amazing player, but he did go to two Pro Bowls, so he probably wasn't nearly as bad as people think. The 86 team also seemed like it was a little lucky to win as many games as they did.Like I said before, I really don't take anything away from Elway. He was a great player (though I think a bit over rated, but that's must my personal opinion). But without those final years, the stats he put up, the rings, the Superbowl MVP, etc, I think we would all look at this career much differently. And while I do agree that the QB is the player that most impacts winning and losing, I don't think it makes sense to say that any player is winning by themselves.

 

[Phurfur]

Tyree should have been MVP IMO. Using the MVP award as an arguement is like using the Pro Bowl. Eli won MVP because he is a Manning. Thats just my opinion. It was a great game though and I am super happy the Giants won. The fact that there is so much debate about Eli with strong opinions on both sides tells me he is not average or elite (yet). The game would have been over for them if Tyree didn't make that catch. The #1 most important play (for the giants) of the game. Sure Eli escaped the D, but he was not the star of that play.

David Tyree 3 Rec, 43 Yds, 1 TD, 32 Yds Longest. One play does not win a Super Bowl or an MVP.This is how off base this thread is getting. Does anyone really care if someone else thinks Eli is great or if they think he sucks?

I am not saying Tyree should have been named the MVP, but I know of a player that won the MVP in a Super Bowl for TWO plays. Some D-back on the Cowboys had 2 Int's against O'Donnell of the Steelers and he won the MVP that year. Two plays.Again, I have no problem with Eli being named the MVP of the Super Bowl. And, like I stated before, he deserves as much credit for the Super Bowl victory as anyone else on the Giants. Yes, this thread has gotten off base from what the OP lead off with. Eli has done something no other SB QB has done. Congrats to him!

Do you mean he had zero tackles, zero put downs, zero assists, zero ?????

 

[Jason Wood]

Guys, not sure if this thread has a purpose any longer. It's clear no one is going to convince the other side on this, so I'm not sure why everyone continues to try. We all got our two cents in, but at this point it's starting to read like:

 

[Liquid Tension]

John Elway. He didn't win any SBs by himself, but he did make three of them, which has to count for something. If his career ended before the 1995 season, he would have been a first-ballot HoFer despite the fact that he never played a down throughout his entire 12-year career with a pro-bowl WR.

I'm not sure he would have been a first ballot HOFer if his career ended in 1994. If you take away those last years, he's basically in Boomer Esiason/Dave Krieg territory with a few more Pro Bowls and Superbowls and an MVP. He would have had about the same career passing yards and about 50 less career TDs then they have. He would be outside the top 10 in passing yards and barely in the top 25 in TDs. And since his career completion % and QB rating were never eye-popping to begin with, I don't know that he would be a lock at all. You take away 11,000 passing yards, 100 TDs, 2 rings and and things do look a lot different.Now, he DID play those final years so his career speaks for itself, I take nothing away from him. But no player wins in football by himself. Better players can do more with less, but Elway was on a bunch of really bad teams and he wasn't able to make them contenders on his own. Every year he made it to the Superbowl in his first 12 years Denver had one of the best defenses in the league and/or he had Bobby Humphrey, who looked to be on his way to regular Pro Bowl visits until multiple knee injuries and some horrible personal decisions brought his career to an end.I don't say that to attempt to diminish what he accomplished, more to just say that he wasn't exactly out there by himself.

In 1986, Denver's defense ranked 15th in points allowed (out of 28 teams). Elway's leading rusher was Sammy Winder, who had 789 yards @ 3.3 yards per carry (for comparison purposes, Ron "tub of goo" Dayne has a career ypc of 3.8). The leading receiver in terms of receptions was a fullback who averaged 8.3 yards per grab. The leading receiver in terms of yardage only had 38 catches on the year. No WR or TE on the team had more than 3 TD receptions. In the playoffs, Elway led Denver on "the Drive" and got them to the Superbowl. If not for the presence of Elway himself, that would probably be the worst team in the history of the NFL to ever play in the championship game (with all due respect to the 1979 St. Louis Rams).In 1987, Elway had a good defense, but not anywhere near a great one (7th in points allowed, 9th in yards allowed). In 1989 he had Bobby Humphrey, but that was before Humphrey looked all that great (3.9 yards per carry that season- that's a whole heaping pile of nothing special). He did have an awesome defense in 1989, though. Still, he had NOTHING in 1986, and almost nothing in 1987. Either team, if not for the presence of Elway, would be widely considered among the worst SB teams of all time. Heck, the 1986 team is probably one of the worst SB teams of all time even WITH Elway.

and what about this Giant team?