What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Jim Irsay's recent comment about Peyton should make us think ... (1 Viewer)

Is Irsay correct to question Peyton's performance under pressure?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 23 22.5%

  • No.

    Votes: 79 77.5%
  • Total voters
    102
Dancing Bear

Dancing Bear

Footballguy
Peyton Manning has a stellar statistical regular season career with many records to honor his performance ...

But,

Review shows that Manning has a 2.09 TD to INT ratio in the regular season and a woeful 1.52 TD to INT ratio in the Playoffs.

His completion percentage drops from 65.2% to 63.1%.

His QB rating reflects this with a 95.8 mark in the regular season and a 88.2 mark in the Playoffs.

He is 9-11 in the Playoffs with only a 0.45 winning percentage.

He is 154-70 in the regular season with a 0.69 winning percentage.

The Colts won the Super Bowl in 2006 with DEFENSE. Look it up. Peyton was HORRIBLE getting there.

The Colts lost the Super Bowl in 2009 with a HUGE error in judgement by Peyton - pick six ...

Historically in the regular season, Manning's team-mates have allowed 21.2 points per game. Those same team-mates have allowed just 21.8 points per game in the Playoffs. That's pretty steady if you ask me. Only a 0.6 point increase.

On the other hand. Manning and the offense have historically scored 26.3 points per game in the regular season. During the Playoffs this has dropped significantly to only 23.0 points per game. A 3.3 point decrease.

You cannot blame this on the Defense. They held their side of the deal CONSISTENTLY!

Don't misunderstand me, I don't want to give the impression that I don't esteem Peyton's career or his place in NFL history. I just don't think he should be mentioned with those who consistently rose to the occasion when it counted [Otto Graham, Bart Starr, Joe Montana to name a few ...]

P.S. I feel sorry for Fox and the Broncos fans as the odds are not in your favor for holding up the Lombardi Trophy any time soon.

 
I don't know if it's pressure exactly.

But I think the most interesting examples are Super Bowl 44, the 2006 AFCC, and the 2012 AFCC.

 
Regarding the statistics you posted, couldn't the slight dip in numbers across the board also be attributed to the fact that he's playing against playoff caliber teams in the playoffs and not every game in the regular season?

Not sure if it's possible or if anybody even cares enough to look into it, but a more accurate comparison would be how he performed in the regular season to teams who made it to the playoffs vs how he did in the playoffs.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Irsay is a moron. Peyton brought Indy from complete stinktitude and desolation to consistent contender and best offense in the league for many years. He brought a SB to Indy and filled the stands with fans and lined Irsay's pockets for over a decade. He is easily in the conversation for the best QB that has EVER played the game. Irsay should be ashamed of himself for making any comments about Peyton other than thankful ones for having him on his team.

 
Replace the QB of every Superbowl Championship team with Peyton Manning - how many lose the game due to the swap?

"Clutch" is nothing but the placement of increased value to a decreased sample size. John Elway wasn't clutch...until he was. LeBron James wasn't clutch...until he was. Kobe Bryant is clutch....until you look at the stats. It's silly.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dancing Bear said:
P.S. I feel sorry for Fox and the Broncos fans as the odds are not in your favor for holding up the Lombardi Trophy any time soon.
Click to expand...
The statistical break down was legit even if I don't really agree with the premise.

This, however, is just SILLY.

 
in today's OL rankings update I downgraded the Broncos. With Orlando Franklin out the line continues to get worse. Peyton is taking alot of hits and last week there were 2 snaps fumbled in the exchange with Manny Ramirez (who never actually played center before this season).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Questioning Manning's playoff performances is perfectly reasonable, he's certainly given reason to to scrutinize them. That doesn't excuse Irsay from taking a classless shot at the guy who brought his franchise back to relevance. Let the talking heads in the studios, the fans, etc.. debate Peyton's place in history in regards to playoff performance. Irsay should just thank Manning for the boon he was to that franchise and move on.

 
Concept Coop said:
Leroy Hoard said:
Odds are against every QB, there is no such thing as an odds on favorite in the NFL.
Click to expand...
You don't have to be favored over the field to be the odds on favorite. There is always an odds on favorite; how often they ending up winning is another conversation.
Click to expand...
I don't think you know what odds on means. It means that you are favored over the field, like Tiger Woods was when he was at his very peak.

4-5 is odds on, not 5-2

http://www.vegasinsider.com/nfl/odds/futures/

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Several points here.

1) Peyton's playoff stats are affected greatly by his terrible playoff performances in his early years. Yes, he had some horrid playoff games early on his career. Since then, he has been pretty good and I think his playoff numbers would fall much closer to his regular season numbers. There was a great article about this, and how players' "clutchness" is written early in their careers. Since about 2004, Peyton has been pretty good in the playoffs and Brady has been pretty bad (finished up with near historically bad 4th quarters in both last year's AFC championship game and Super Bowl). But that ticket was already written circa 2004, so what they've done in the last 8 years appears to have little bearing on people's perception of them. Tony Romo could lead four 2 minute game winning drives in the playoffs this year on the way to the Super Bowl, but he will always be seen as a choker. Ben Roethlisberger could exit the playoffs for the next 5 years on the back of a last minute interception and he would still be perceived as clutch.

2) The quality of teams is much higher in the playoffs. That will generally cause stats to decrease some.

3) The big variation you see in playoff stats from player to player is often just a result of small sample sizes. Peyton's total career playoff starts equate to just over one season of regular season football. Using a similar sample size, can we determine that Peyton was a choker in the 2007 regular season where he had a TD/INT ration below 2 with a YPA of 6.9? What about 2001 where his TD/INT ration was almost an even 1? Was he a choker during those regular season years or was it just normal statistical variance mixed in with a more difficult schedule? If we can assume QBs year to year fluctuations are normal variance over a 16 game schedule, why can't we do the same in the playoffs with a similarly sized schedule?

 
Leroy Hoard said:
Concept Coop said:
Leroy Hoard said:
Odds are against every QB, there is no such thing as an odds on favorite in the NFL.
Click to expand...
You don't have to be favored over the field to be the odds on favorite. There is always an odds on favorite; how often they ending up winning is another conversation.
Click to expand...
I don't think you know what odds on means. It means that you are favored over the field, like Tiger Woods was when he was at his very peak.

4-5 is odds on, not 5-2
Click to expand...
This is the firt entry, but none of the 3 I looked up mention anything about being favored over the field:

[SIZE=10pt]adj.[/SIZE][SIZE=10pt] Informal [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]More likely than others to win; having a good chance of success: [/SIZE][SIZE=10pt]"I was the odds-on favorite to become the next president of the Ford Motor Company"[/SIZE] [SIZE=10pt](Lee Iacocca).[/SIZE]

 
I'm going by the gambling/horse racing version. What you describe is merely being the favorite. And regular favorites lose more often than they win.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Concept Coop said:
Dancing Bear said:
P.S. I feel sorry for Fox and the Broncos fans as the odds are not in your favor for holding up the Lombardi Trophy any time soon.
Click to expand...
I'll take Vegas' word over yours.
Click to expand...
Vegas lines/odds have nothing to do with the oddsmakers opinions on what will happen. It has everything to do with what they feel the bets will be. As the Broncos roll through all of their opponents, most gamblers see them as the favorite to win the Super Bowl, and as such, that is how the odds are set.

If a team has 10-1 odds for instance, it isn't because Vegas feels they have a one in ten chance of winning, it's that they feel 1 in 10 gamblers will place their money on that line.

 
solorca said:
Concept Coop said:
Dancing Bear said:
P.S. I feel sorry for Fox and the Broncos fans as the odds are not in your favor for holding up the Lombardi Trophy any time soon.
Click to expand...
I'll take Vegas' word over yours.
Click to expand...
Vegas lines/odds have nothing to do with the oddsmakers opinions on what will happen. It has everything to do with what they feel the bets will be. As the Broncos roll through all of their opponents, most gamblers see them as the favorite to win the Super Bowl, and as such, that is how the odds are set.

If a team has 10-1 odds for instance, it isn't because Vegas feels they have a one in ten chance of winning, it's that they feel 1 in 10 gamblers will place their money on that line.
Click to expand...
But Vegas is still right more often than any other single source. It's because they still have to put their money where their mouths are.

 
solorca said:
Vegas lines/odds have nothing to do with the oddsmakers opinions on what will happen. It has everything to do with what they feel the bets will be. As the Broncos roll through all of their opponents, most gamblers see them as the favorite to win the Super Bowl, and as such, that is how the odds are set.

If a team has 10-1 odds for instance, it isn't because Vegas feels they have a one in ten chance of winning, it's that they feel 1 in 10 gamblers will place their money on that line.
Click to expand...
Very true - and I don't think I suggested otherwise. Call it Vegas, or the collection of betters Vegas is setting the odds for.

 
Maybe Manning was the reason why irsay was addicted to painkillers.....

I honestly want to believe Irsay was "trying" to be complimentary......but I can see where he trips over himself countless times.

 
Dancing Bear said:
Peyton Manning has a stellar statistical regular season career with many records to honor his performance ...

But,

Review shows that Manning has a 2.09 TD to INT ratio in the regular season and a woeful 1.52 TD to INT ratio in the Playoffs.

His completion percentage drops from 65.2% to 63.1%.

His QB rating reflects this with a 95.8 mark in the regular season and a 88.2 mark in the Playoffs.

He is 9-11 in the Playoffs with only a 0.45 winning percentage.

He is 154-70 in the regular season with a 0.69 winning percentage.

The Colts won the Super Bowl in 2006 with DEFENSE. Look it up. Peyton was HORRIBLE getting there.

The Colts lost the Super Bowl in 2009 with a HUGE error in judgement by Peyton - pick six ...

Historically in the regular season, Manning's team-mates have allowed 21.2 points per game. Those same team-mates have allowed just 21.8 points per game in the Playoffs. That's pretty steady if you ask me. Only a 0.6 point increase.

On the other hand. Manning and the offense have historically scored 26.3 points per game in the regular season. During the Playoffs this has dropped significantly to only 23.0 points per game. A 3.3 point decrease.

You cannot blame this on the Defense. They held their side of the deal CONSISTENTLY!

Don't misunderstand me, I don't want to give the impression that I don't esteem Peyton's career or his place in NFL history. I just don't think he should be mentioned with those who consistently rose to the occasion when it counted [Otto Graham, Bart Starr, Joe Montana to name a few ...]

P.S. I feel sorry for Fox and the Broncos fans as the odds are not in your favor for holding up the Lombardi Trophy any time soon.
Click to expand...
During the playoffs you play playoff caliber teams with playoff caliber defenses ... The winning % of those playoff teams is much much higher than the winning % of the teams they beat during the regular season. So theoretically you should expect all of those numbers to be worse.

 
JAMES! said:
I thought Irsay was just clumsily saying they didn't build great teams around Manning.
Click to expand...
Agreed, I thought it was a dig at Polian.

Media's spinning it to be about Manning in an attempt to manufacture a narrative for this week's game.

 
Manning's playoff QB rating is higher than Brady's, Favre's, Young's, Elway's and a whole lot more. (He comes in at 10th all time)

Starr and Montana rate above Manning for playoff completion percentage. Brady does by the slimmest of margins. Favre, Young, Marino, Elway? Nope.

All of these numbers are totally without context as well. I imagine that the vast majority of QBs see their numbers dip in the playoffs due to the quality of teams they face. What's the average decline for QBs in all those stat categories?

Then you need to factor in things like average starting position in the playoffs versus regular season, not just how many points the defense gives up but WHEN they give them up, etc.

Irsay is a fool. His franchise would be worth half of what it is without Manning. He certainly wouldn't have that beautiful new stadium.

 
Irsay comes off as extremely petty and unprofessional with his comments, even if there is some merit to what he said about Peyton's performance in pressure situations. You simply don't put those statements out there, period.

The fact is, he was lucky to have Peyton in his building all those years. He put butts in the seats and brought excitement to that city. He had them in the playoffs almost every year, won 4 MVPs and he won them a Super Bowl. You're going to complain he didn't win you a second one?! The guy is a lock first ballot HoF QB and probably as iconic to the Colts as Jim Brown to the Browns or Lombardi to the Packers. Have some freaking sense of history and appreciation for what the man brought to your team. I thought John Fox's response was spot on.

 
Players have worse stats in the playoffs because they are playing better teams. It's selection bias. I think a safer way to investigate this is to compare all QBs reg season with playoff stats, and maybe QBs with 10 or more playoff games with a reg season/playoff comparison if you want to look at just QBs with regular playoff exposure. Otherwise, I don't think these stats mean anything at all. You made a poor point.

Also, there*

I am not disagreeing with your conclusions, but I wish you would show them better.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What an ###. I'm sure Andrew Luck appreciates the loyalty Irsay is showing one of the greatest QBs in the history of the NFL.

 
GordonGekko said:
Contrary to popular belief, Manning is not a high Football IQ QB. Consider football IQ is not the same as common sense or street smarts or book smarts. High sports IQ deals with how you process information in a compressed time format under heavy duress.
Click to expand...
Stongly disagree with both of these points. You're creating your own definition of FBIQ. Manning isn't mobile - maybe that's what you mean. If that's the case, sure - I'd take Luck and Brees over him.

 
FreeBaGeL said:
Several points here.

1) Peyton's playoff stats are affected greatly by his terrible playoff performances in his early years. Yes, he had some horrid playoff games early on his career. Since then, he has been pretty good and I think his playoff numbers would fall much closer to his regular season numbers. There was a great article about this, and how players' "clutchness" is written early in their careers. Since about 2004, Peyton has been pretty good in the playoffs and Brady has been pretty bad (finished up with near historically bad 4th quarters in both last year's AFC championship game and Super Bowl). But that ticket was already written circa 2004, so what they've done in the last 8 years appears to have little bearing on people's perception of them. Tony Romo could lead four 2 minute game winning drives in the playoffs this year on the way to the Super Bowl, but he will always be seen as a choker. Ben Roethlisberger could exit the playoffs for the next 5 years on the back of a last minute interception and he would still be perceived as clutch.

2) The quality of teams is much higher in the playoffs. That will generally cause stats to decrease some.

3) The big variation you see in playoff stats from player to player is often just a result of small sample sizes. Peyton's total career playoff starts equate to just over one season of regular season football. Using a similar sample size, can we determine that Peyton was a choker in the 2007 regular season where he had a TD/INT ration below 2 with a YPA of 6.9? What about 2001 where his TD/INT ration was almost an even 1? Was he a choker during those regular season years or was it just normal statistical variance mixed in with a more difficult schedule? If we can assume QBs year to year fluctuations are normal variance over a 16 game schedule, why can't we do the same in the playoffs with a similarly sized schedule?
Click to expand...
nailed it.

 
GordonGekko said:
Need to look at Tom Moore's offense from both a systematic perspective and then also from a resource management perspective.

The offense runs only a small number of set plays but with different variables with high rates of success, assuming you can identify a consistent mismatch and exploit a consistent weak link in the defensive personnel. This is why Manning is looking at game photos and film on the sideline all the time, he's looking for patterns he can exploit during his presnap reads. Contrary to popular belief, Manning is not a high Football IQ QB. Consider football IQ is not the same as common sense or street smarts or book smarts. High sports IQ deals with how you process information in a compressed time format under heavy duress. Drew Brees has high football IQ. He takes the snap, makes his reads, identifies what the defense is doing, identifies it against what he processed a second earlier presnap, to cull out the intentional presnap confusion set up by the defensive coordinator, then assesses his options and then makes his throw. While each step is deliberate, Brees can process this in a second or two, so that from the snap, the entire process looks like a reaction. QBs who can't process that quickly get happy feet, lose their mechanics and start to panic, because the game cannot slow down for them in their head.
Click to expand...
You are strengthening Manning's case for MVP here.

 
Leroy Hoard said:
VaTerp said:
Dancing Bear said:
P.S. I feel sorry for Fox and the Broncos fans as the odds are not in your favor for holding up the Lombardi Trophy any time soon.
Click to expand...
The statistical break down was legit even if I don't really agree with the premise.

This, however, is just SILLY.
Click to expand...
Odds are against every QB, there is no such thing as an odds on favorite in the NFL.
Click to expand...
I could be wrong, but I think the 2007 Pats might have been odd-on at some point in the season.

 
moleculo said:
FreeBaGeL said:
Several points here.

1) Peyton's playoff stats are affected greatly by his terrible playoff performances in his early years. Yes, he had some horrid playoff games early on his career. Since then, he has been pretty good and I think his playoff numbers would fall much closer to his regular season numbers. There was a great article about this, and how players' "clutchness" is written early in their careers. Since about 2004, Peyton has been pretty good in the playoffs and Brady has been pretty bad (finished up with near historically bad 4th quarters in both last year's AFC championship game and Super Bowl). But that ticket was already written circa 2004, so what they've done in the last 8 years appears to have little bearing on people's perception of them. Tony Romo could lead four 2 minute game winning drives in the playoffs this year on the way to the Super Bowl, but he will always be seen as a choker. Ben Roethlisberger could exit the playoffs for the next 5 years on the back of a last minute interception and he would still be perceived as clutch.

2) The quality of teams is much higher in the playoffs. That will generally cause stats to decrease some.

3) The big variation you see in playoff stats from player to player is often just a result of small sample sizes. Peyton's total career playoff starts equate to just over one season of regular season football. Using a similar sample size, can we determine that Peyton was a choker in the 2007 regular season where he had a TD/INT ration below 2 with a YPA of 6.9? What about 2001 where his TD/INT ration was almost an even 1? Was he a choker during those regular season years or was it just normal statistical variance mixed in with a more difficult schedule? If we can assume QBs year to year fluctuations are normal variance over a 16 game schedule, why can't we do the same in the playoffs with a similarly sized schedule?
Click to expand...
nailed it.
Click to expand...
Agreed. This ends the thread imo.

 
Just like Elway's first 12 or so years, Manning brought mediocre teams to the playoffs. Then, he wasn't able to single handedly beat the superior competition. I'm not going to blame Manning for the Colt's failure to build a superior team around him.

 
Using www.pro-football-reference.com as a reference for statistics, you'll find the following data for QB's who have played in the NFL Playoffs. This comprehensive list only includes QB's where GameLogs were present. So guys like Otto Graham and Sid Luckman were left out just because of the nature of compiling their stats manually.

I surveyed a total of 58 QB's who started at least 3 games in the Playoffs. In alphabetical order you'll see a listing below with a summary of how they performed in the Playoffs compared with the regular season. Simply put a B is Better, an E is Even, and a W is Worse. I compared Completion %, Quarterback Rating, Y/A, Y/C and TD/INT ratio

27 out of 58 QB's did worse

18 out of 58 QB's did the same

13 out 58 QB's did better

Troy Aikman - B
Ken Anderson - B
Drew Bledsoe - W
Terry Bradshaw - B
Drew Brees - B
John Brodie - W
Mark Brunell - W
Kerry Collins - E
Randall Cunningham - W
Jay Cutler - E
Len Dawson - W
Jake Delhomme - E
Trent Dilfer - E
John Elway - E
Boomer Esiason - W
Brett Favre - E
Joe Ferguson - W
Vince Ferragamo - W
Joe Flacco - E
Dan Fouts - W
Rich Gannon - E
Bob Griese - W
Rex Grossman - E
Matt Hasselbeck - E
Ron Jaworski - W
Brad Johnson - W
Colin Kaepernick - B
Jim Kelly - W
Billy Kilmer - E
Daryle Larmonica - E
Eli Manning - B
Peyton Manning - W
Dan Marino - W
Jim McMahon - E
Donovan McNabb - W
Steve McNair - W
Joe Montana - E
Joe Namath - W
Dan Pastorini - B
Jake Plummer - E
Jim Plunkett - B
Philip Rivers - W
Aaron Rodgers - E
Tony Romo - W
Matt Ryan - W
Mark Rypien - W
Mark Sanchez - B
Phil Simms - E
Ken Stabler - B
Bart Starr - B
Roger Staubach - W
Fran Tarkenton - W
Joe Theismann - B
Johnny Unitas - W
Michael Vick - E
Kurt Warner - B
Doug Williams - W
Steve Young - W

As I said earlier, I am not trying to discounting Peyton's contribution to either the NFL, or his team [or any other HofF listed above ...] There is no denying the fact that most guys do not perform as well in the Playoffs [78% did the same or worse than their regular season performance]. This supports several of the arguments above. This also supports the fact that some actually do perform better, and they do deserve acknowledgement over their peers. Congratulations to the minority who rose to the occasion when the pressure was on!

 
steveski said:
Regarding the statistics you posted, couldn't the slight dip in numbers across the board also be attributed to the fact that he's playing against playoff caliber teams in the playoffs and not every game in the regular season?

Not sure if it's possible or if anybody even cares enough to look into it, but a more accurate comparison would be how he performed in the regular season to teams who made it to the playoffs vs how he did in the playoffs.
Click to expand...
:goodposting: This. Comparing regular season to post-season statistics is problematic for a lot of reasons. This is particularly true in a case like Peyton Manning, because many of his playoff teams were really not all that good, and would have never been remotely close without him. It's a heck of a lot easier to carry an average team on your back against a bad team than it is against a good team.

 
renesauz said:
steveski said:
Regarding the statistics you posted, couldn't the slight dip in numbers across the board also be attributed to the fact that he's playing against playoff caliber teams in the playoffs and not every game in the regular season?

Not sure if it's possible or if anybody even cares enough to look into it, but a more accurate comparison would be how he performed in the regular season to teams who made it to the playoffs vs how he did in the playoffs.
Click to expand...
:goodposting: This. Comparing regular season to post-season statistics is problematic for a lot of reasons. This is particularly true in a case like Peyton Manning, because many of his playoff teams were really not all that good, and would have never been remotely close without him. It's a heck of a lot easier to carry an average team on your back against a bad team than it is against a good team.
Click to expand...
Yeah that's another good point that can be backed up with proof. 2011 Colts.

 
steveski said:
Regarding the statistics you posted, couldn't the slight dip in numbers across the board also be attributed to the fact that he's playing against playoff caliber teams in the playoffs and not every game in the regular season?

Not sure if it's possible or if anybody even cares enough to look into it, but a more accurate comparison would be how he performed in the regular season to teams who made it to the playoffs vs how he did in the playoffs.
Click to expand...
:goodposting: Not to mention that the statistics against him become exacerbated by the fact that Manning, by virtue of his excellent play, was getting Colts teams into the playoffs that really had no business being there. Think of Michael Jordan in his early years, dragging a bunch of Bulls teams virtually barren of NBA talent save for his into the playoffs (although the comparison falls apart here, as Jordan's stats aren't as dependent on teammates' play as Manning's is.)

 
FreeBaGeL said:
2) The quality of teams is much higher in the playoffs. That will generally cause stats to decrease some.
Click to expand...
steveski said:
Regarding the statistics you posted, couldn't the slight dip in numbers across the board also be attributed to the fact that he's playing against playoff caliber teams in the playoffs and not every game in the regular season?
Click to expand...
In baseball, the pitching is generally pretty damn good in the playoffs. Doesn't mean the hitters performance in the regular season is an aberation.

In football, the teams that make the playoffs tend to have really good D's

 
Irsay is a moron.

Other than that.....Peyton Manning is one of the all time greats.

Come on now.

He is right there with Montana, Marino, Elway, Kelly, Brady, Favre......right in the same conversation as one of the greatest to play his position ever.

No question!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
1. Playoffs have tougher opponents, and those numbers are not that much of a drop

2. His coaches in Indy sucked and that may have impacted the W #'s

 
Manning is a stud and without question earns his money but has he ever given a home team discount?

If he was really all about championships he would have taken less cash in Indy to free up cash to build a better team around him. But it seems like he is really about cashing in as much as possible (how much does he make in endorsements?) and putting up his pinball numbers so he gets into the record books and hoping that he falls ### backwards into a season that allows his team to win the Super Bowl.

He's one of the best of all time on the field but I'm not sure how much of a championship guy he really is.

 
Dancing Bear said:
Using www.pro-football-reference.com as a reference for statistics, you'll find the following data for QB's who have played in the NFL Playoffs. This comprehensive list only includes QB's where GameLogs were present. So guys like Otto Graham and Sid Luckman were left out just because of the nature of compiling their stats manually.

I surveyed a total of 58 QB's who started at least 3 games in the Playoffs. In alphabetical order you'll see a listing below with a summary of how they performed in the Playoffs compared with the regular season. Simply put a B is Better, an E is Even, and a W is Worse. I compared Completion %, Quarterback Rating, Y/A, Y/C and TD/INT ratio

27 out of 58 QB's did worse

18 out of 58 QB's did the same

13 out 58 QB's did better

Troy Aikman - B

Ken Anderson - B

Drew Bledsoe - W

Terry Bradshaw - B

Drew Brees - B

John Brodie - W

Mark Brunell - W

Kerry Collins - E

Randall Cunningham - W

Jay Cutler - E

Len Dawson - W

Jake Delhomme - E

Trent Dilfer - E

John Elway - E

Boomer Esiason - W

Brett Favre - E

Joe Ferguson - W

Vince Ferragamo - W

Joe Flacco - E

Dan Fouts - W

Rich Gannon - E

Bob Griese - W

Rex Grossman - E

Matt Hasselbeck - E

Ron Jaworski - W

Brad Johnson - W

Colin Kaepernick - B

Jim Kelly - W

Billy Kilmer - E

Daryle Larmonica - E

Eli Manning - B

Peyton Manning - W

Dan Marino - W

Jim McMahon - E

Donovan McNabb - W

Steve McNair - W

Joe Montana - E

Joe Namath - W

Dan Pastorini - B

Jake Plummer - E

Jim Plunkett - B

Philip Rivers - W

Aaron Rodgers - E

Tony Romo - W

Matt Ryan - W

Mark Rypien - W

Mark Sanchez - B

Phil Simms - E

Ken Stabler - B

Bart Starr - B

Roger Staubach - W

Fran Tarkenton - W

Joe Theismann - B

Johnny Unitas - W

Michael Vick - E

Kurt Warner - B

Doug Williams - W

Steve Young - W

As I said earlier, I am not trying to discounting Peyton's contribution to either the NFL, or his team [or any other HofF listed above ...] There is no denying the fact that most guys do not perform as well in the Playoffs [78% did the same or worse than their regular season performance]. This supports several of the arguments above. This also supports the fact that some actually do perform better, and they do deserve acknowledgement over their peers. Congratulations to the minority who rose to the occasion when the pressure was on!
Click to expand...
3 games is kind of small sample size

If you change the minmum to 6, do the reults change?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Zareh Kantzabedian
Why I Think Adonai Mitchell is a WR2 in 2024 - Plus Talk On Going Against ADP
2
Replies
55
Views
2K
osubuckeyeman
osubuckeyeman
Scoresman
Playoff League/Contest Strategy - Assessing NFL Team Playoff Success
Replies
28
Views
966
Gally
G
G
  • Poll
Playoffs or No playoffs? That is the question.....
Replies
43
Views
1K
Mitchie
M

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top