Manning breaks it to Simms: 'I don't watch your show' (1 Viewer)

[BigTex]

Manning breaks it to Simms: 'I don't watch your show'By Marc Sessler NFL.com http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d823bebe3/article/manning-breaks-it-to-simms-i-dont-watch-your-show

We're not entirely sure what Peyton Manning's been doing with all the free time, but one new hobby's emerged for the Colts' injured star passer: developing his inner trash-talker.Manning emerged from the wilderness to meet with reporters Wednesday, and his omnibus riff included shots fired back at Phil Simms.Simms claimed on Showtime's "Inside the NFL" last week that if Indy owns the No. 1 pick in April's draft, "there is no way" Manning would let them pick Stanford's Andrew Luck.Manning put that theory to bed."I don't talk to Phil," he said, via The Indianapolis Star. "Phil doesn't talk to me. He did text me after that, saying 'Hey, sorry to drag your name into this.'"I wrote back, 'Phil, I don't know what you're talking about.' He said, 'Well on my show, "Inside the NFL," I made this statement.' Manning, enjoying himself, went on: "I said, 'Phil, I hate to break it to you, but I don't watch your show, along with a lot of other people that I don't think watch that show.' (He was) giving himself a little more credit than probably was merited."Simms' brief-but-fiery text-message encounter with Indy's heart and soul ended there.We like this new Peyton Manning.

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

Oh no he di'nt!

 

[Neofight]

This I like.

 

[Dought Man]

Phil who?

 

[Apple Jack]

Should have called him Bill.

 

[Dr. Gobbler]

Should have called him Bill.

Manning: who's this? Billy Sims? Hey Billy!Simms: no, Phil Simms.Manning: Who?!?

 

[Smack Tripper]

At least Phil didn't need his defense to win him his ring.

Go back to being in every commercial, you big foreheaded gorilla.

 

[JuniorNB]

At least Phil didn't need his defense to win him his ring. Go back to being in every commercial, you big foreheaded gorilla.

Come on, it's funny when the best QB in NFL history puts the #347th best in his place.

 

[yellowdog]

That's funny right there, I don't care who you are.

 

[rizzler]

Would Simms be plugging his ears with his 2 superbowl rings, a la Patrick Roy and his stanley cup rings?

... just sayin'

 

[finito]

At least Phil didn't need his defense to win him his ring. Go back to being in every commercial, you big foreheaded gorilla.

Come on, it's funny when the best QB in NFL history puts the #347th best in his place.

It was pretty funny, but you're selling Phil Simms way short here. He's a top 63 QB easily.

 

[Breesisdaman]

Thats my home boy!!! You go Manning! Dad would be proud.

 

[sho nuff]

Would have been great if Peyton would have also made fun of his son not being able to hack it at Tennessee.

 

[GregR]

At least Phil didn't need his defense to win him his ring. Go back to being in every commercial, you big foreheaded gorilla.

Let's put that statement to the test. To win their ring, the Giants had to win not just a Super Bowl, but three playoff games.First game, Sims went 9 for 19 for a 47.4% completion percent, and 136 yards with 4 TDs and 0 INTs. He definitely did well in the TD-INT ratio, but the Giants offense that day was successful not so much because of Simms but primarily because of a running game that went 44 for 216 and 2 TDs. They rushed for 80 more yards than Simms passed for. Throw in that the defense held the Joe Montana-led 49ers to 3 points, knocked Montana out of the game, and added 7 points of their own on a Lawrence Taylor pick six, and Simms ranks 3rd behind the defense and running game for contribution to that victory.How about their win in the conference championship? Simms was again a game manager, not someone who carried the team. 7 for 14, 90 yards and 1 TD with no picks. The running game again carried the Giants offense, 46 carries for 117 yards and a TD. But the defense was the biggest reason overall for the victory as they shut out the Redskins. Simms ranks an even more distant third than in the first game.Simms had a fantastic Super Bowl, one of the best ever. But the only reason he got to play in that Super Bowl is because his defense and running game carried him to it.

 

[Ghost Rider]

At least Phil didn't need his defense to win him his ring.

Yeah. the Giants 2nd ranked defense had nothing to do with that Super Bowl championship.

 

[Smack Tripper]

At least Phil didn't need his defense to win him his ring. Go back to being in every commercial, you big foreheaded gorilla.

Let's put that statement to the test. To win their ring, the Giants had to win not just a Super Bowl, but three playoff games.First game, Sims went 9 for 19 for a 47.4% completion percent, and 136 yards with 4 TDs and 0 INTs. He definitely did well in the TD-INT ratio, but the Giants offense that day was successful not so much because of Simms but primarily because of a running game that went 44 for 216 and 2 TDs. They rushed for 80 more yards than Simms passed for. Throw in that the defense held the Joe Montana-led 49ers to 3 points, knocked Montana out of the game, and added 7 points of their own on a Lawrence Taylor pick six, and Simms ranks 3rd behind the defense and running game for contribution to that victory.How about their win in the conference championship? Simms was again a game manager, not someone who carried the team. 7 for 14, 90 yards and 1 TD with no picks. The running game again carried the Giants offense, 46 carries for 117 yards and a TD. But the defense was the biggest reason overall for the victory as they shut out the Redskins. Simms ranks an even more distant third than in the first game.Simms had a fantastic Super Bowl, one of the best ever. But the only reason he got to play in that Super Bowl is because his defense and running game carried him to it.

I was slightly tongue and cheek, but so long as we're going into history back, that NFC title game was played with temps in the teens and a 30mph wind. I remember hearing a Parcells quote that Simms throwing that TD through that wind was one of the more impressive things he'd seen on a field. Phil didn't just chuck in a dome all day. Manning was a game manager in the SUPER BOWL.

 

[Smack Tripper]

At least Phil didn't need his defense to win him his ring.

Go back to being in every commercial, you big foreheaded gorilla.

Come on, it's funny when the best QB in NFL history puts the #347th best in his place.

Now THATS funny.

 

[Sweet Love]

At least Phil didn't need his defense to win him his ring. Go back to being in every commercial, you big foreheaded gorilla.

Yes, good thing he only had Carl Banks, Lawrence Taylor, Leonard Marshall, Pepper Johnson, Mark Collins, Harry Carson, Terry Kinard, Jim Burt and Gary Reasons backing him up on defense (that's 9 well-known guys out of 11). I am also surprised Simms does not get more credit for his passing acumen that year; a 21 TD to 22 INT ratio is nothing to sneeze at.

 

[CentralPA]

At least Phil didn't need his defense to win him his ring. Go back to being in every commercial, you big foreheaded gorilla.

Let's put that statement to the test. To win their ring, the Giants had to win not just a Super Bowl, but three playoff games.First game, Sims went 9 for 19 for a 47.4% completion percent, and 136 yards with 4 TDs and 0 INTs. He definitely did well in the TD-INT ratio, but the Giants offense that day was successful not so much because of Simms but primarily because of a running game that went 44 for 216 and 2 TDs. They rushed for 80 more yards than Simms passed for. Throw in that the defense held the Joe Montana-led 49ers to 3 points, knocked Montana out of the game, and added 7 points of their own on a Lawrence Taylor pick six, and Simms ranks 3rd behind the defense and running game for contribution to that victory.How about their win in the conference championship? Simms was again a game manager, not someone who carried the team. 7 for 14, 90 yards and 1 TD with no picks. The running game again carried the Giants offense, 46 carries for 117 yards and a TD. But the defense was the biggest reason overall for the victory as they shut out the Redskins. Simms ranks an even more distant third than in the first game.Simms had a fantastic Super Bowl, one of the best ever. But the only reason he got to play in that Super Bowl is because his defense and running game carried him to it.

I was slightly tongue and cheek, but so long as we're going into history back, that NFC title game was played with temps in the teens and a 30mph wind. I remember hearing a Parcells quote that Simms throwing that TD through that wind was one of the more impressive things he'd seen on a field. Phil didn't just chuck in a dome all day. Manning was a game manager in the SUPER BOWL.

Peyton won it during a rainy downpour of a Super Bowl and horrible field conditions. Sorry dude but you are not winning any points here with anybody with these silly arguments.

 

[CentralPA]

At least Phil didn't need his defense to win him his ring.

Go back to being in every commercial, you big foreheaded gorilla.

Come on, it's funny when the best QB in NFL history puts the #347th best in his place.

Now THATS funny.

It's funny that you think it's funny.

 

[Walton Goggins]

honda

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=621521

 

[Dought Man]

Would have been great if Peyton would have also made fun of his son not being able to hack it at Tennessee.

"My brother with the spinal disorder throws a better ball than Chris ever did. Go back to your hole Phil"

 

[Smack Tripper]

At least Phil didn't need his defense to win him his ring. Go back to being in every commercial, you big foreheaded gorilla.

Let's put that statement to the test. To win their ring, the Giants had to win not just a Super Bowl, but three playoff games.First game, Sims went 9 for 19 for a 47.4% completion percent, and 136 yards with 4 TDs and 0 INTs. He definitely did well in the TD-INT ratio, but the Giants offense that day was successful not so much because of Simms but primarily because of a running game that went 44 for 216 and 2 TDs. They rushed for 80 more yards than Simms passed for. Throw in that the defense held the Joe Montana-led 49ers to 3 points, knocked Montana out of the game, and added 7 points of their own on a Lawrence Taylor pick six, and Simms ranks 3rd behind the defense and running game for contribution to that victory.How about their win in the conference championship? Simms was again a game manager, not someone who carried the team. 7 for 14, 90 yards and 1 TD with no picks. The running game again carried the Giants offense, 46 carries for 117 yards and a TD. But the defense was the biggest reason overall for the victory as they shut out the Redskins. Simms ranks an even more distant third than in the first game.Simms had a fantastic Super Bowl, one of the best ever. But the only reason he got to play in that Super Bowl is because his defense and running game carried him to it.

I was slightly tongue and cheek, but so long as we're going into history back, that NFC title game was played with temps in the teens and a 30mph wind. I remember hearing a Parcells quote that Simms throwing that TD through that wind was one of the more impressive things he'd seen on a field. Phil didn't just chuck in a dome all day. Manning was a game manager in the SUPER BOWL.

Peyton won it during a rainy downpour of a Super Bowl and horrible field conditions. Sorry dude but you are not winning any points here with anybody with these silly arguments.

The modern NFL has shown its quite different playing in rain vs. wind. Face it, Peyton, outside of the second half that year against the Pats, has stunk in the playoffs, and is Dr. Choke

 

[Neo]

Long time Giants fan...Simms is really becoming annoying to me. His segment on the show "Sick and Tired" is god awful.

 

[CentralPA]

At least Phil didn't need his defense to win him his ring. Go back to being in every commercial, you big foreheaded gorilla.

Let's put that statement to the test. To win their ring, the Giants had to win not just a Super Bowl, but three playoff games.First game, Sims went 9 for 19 for a 47.4% completion percent, and 136 yards with 4 TDs and 0 INTs. He definitely did well in the TD-INT ratio, but the Giants offense that day was successful not so much because of Simms but primarily because of a running game that went 44 for 216 and 2 TDs. They rushed for 80 more yards than Simms passed for. Throw in that the defense held the Joe Montana-led 49ers to 3 points, knocked Montana out of the game, and added 7 points of their own on a Lawrence Taylor pick six, and Simms ranks 3rd behind the defense and running game for contribution to that victory.How about their win in the conference championship? Simms was again a game manager, not someone who carried the team. 7 for 14, 90 yards and 1 TD with no picks. The running game again carried the Giants offense, 46 carries for 117 yards and a TD. But the defense was the biggest reason overall for the victory as they shut out the Redskins. Simms ranks an even more distant third than in the first game.Simms had a fantastic Super Bowl, one of the best ever. But the only reason he got to play in that Super Bowl is because his defense and running game carried him to it.

I was slightly tongue and cheek, but so long as we're going into history back, that NFC title game was played with temps in the teens and a 30mph wind. I remember hearing a Parcells quote that Simms throwing that TD through that wind was one of the more impressive things he'd seen on a field. Phil didn't just chuck in a dome all day. Manning was a game manager in the SUPER BOWL.

Peyton won it during a rainy downpour of a Super Bowl and horrible field conditions. Sorry dude but you are not winning any points here with anybody with these silly arguments.

The modern NFL has shown its quite different playing in rain vs. wind. Face it, Peyton, outside of the second half that year against the Pats, has stunk in the playoffs, and is Dr. Choke

 

[SmoovySmoov]

At least Phil didn't need his defense Rex Grossman to win him his ring.

Go back to being in every commercial, you big foreheaded gorilla.

Fixed that for ya.

 

[JuniorNB]

At least Phil didn't need his defense to win him his ring.

Go back to being in every commercial, you big foreheaded gorilla.

Come on, it's funny when the best QB in NFL history puts the #347th best in his place.

Now THATS funny.

I was always on the fence between him, Montana, Unitas, Elway, or Brady. But after seeing how the perennial power Colts can't even get a single win without him, I no longer have a shade of doubt. There has never been a better QB that Manning. Brady missed the 2008 season and the Pats still won ten games.

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

Do you guys think Peyton really inflicted some kind of great burn on Simms? Simms probably thought Peyton would have heard about it from another source if he didn't watch the show. I know I heard about it on ESPN and then later on NFLN.

Frankly, I thought the point of the first post was about how lame Manning is.

 

[rizzler]

Phil Simms is a legend.

And you will all treat him as such!

Wonder how many of you are fat, bald men, simply jealous of that magnificent coiffe.

 

[Apple Jack]

Do you guys think Peyton really inflicted some kind of great burn on Simms? Simms probably thought Peyton would have heard about it from another source if he didn't watch the show. I know I heard about it on ESPN and then later on NFLN. Frankly, I thought the point of the first post was about how lame Manning is.

Exactly. He played it wrong. The whole point of Simms getting in touch was that the comment was being talked about on SportsCenter and in newspaper columns. Which is why I think he'd have been better off calling him Bill.

 

[squistion]

Do you guys think Peyton really inflicted some kind of great burn on Simms? Simms probably thought Peyton would have heard about it from another source if he didn't watch the show. I know I heard about it on ESPN and then later on NFLN.

Frankly, I thought the point of the first post was about how lame Manning is.

Yeah, I kind of viewed this as Simms giving Peyton a heads-up figuring the comment would get to back to him.

 

[Vision6]

At least Phil didn't need his defense to win him his ring. Go back to being in every commercial, you big foreheaded gorilla.

Let's put that statement to the test. To win their ring, the Giants had to win not just a Super Bowl, but three playoff games.First game, Sims went 9 for 19 for a 47.4% completion percent, and 136 yards with 4 TDs and 0 INTs. He definitely did well in the TD-INT ratio, but the Giants offense that day was successful not so much because of Simms but primarily because of a running game that went 44 for 216 and 2 TDs. They rushed for 80 more yards than Simms passed for. Throw in that the defense held the Joe Montana-led 49ers to 3 points, knocked Montana out of the game, and added 7 points of their own on a Lawrence Taylor pick six, and Simms ranks 3rd behind the defense and running game for contribution to that victory.How about their win in the conference championship? Simms was again a game manager, not someone who carried the team. 7 for 14, 90 yards and 1 TD with no picks. The running game again carried the Giants offense, 46 carries for 117 yards and a TD. But the defense was the biggest reason overall for the victory as they shut out the Redskins. Simms ranks an even more distant third than in the first game.Simms had a fantastic Super Bowl, one of the best ever. But the only reason he got to play in that Super Bowl is because his defense and running game carried him to it.

I was slightly tongue and cheek, but so long as we're going into history back, that NFC title game was played with temps in the teens and a 30mph wind. I remember hearing a Parcells quote that Simms throwing that TD through that wind was one of the more impressive things he'd seen on a field. Phil didn't just chuck in a dome all day. Manning was a game manager in the SUPER BOWL.

Peyton won it during a rainy downpour of a Super Bowl and horrible field conditions. Sorry dude but you are not winning any points here with anybody with these silly arguments.

The modern NFL has shown its quite different playing in rain vs. wind. Face it, Peyton, outside of the second half that year against the Pats, has stunk in the playoffs, and is Dr. Choke

Tom "1 & Done" Brady took that title with his post season performances the past two years. I think people need to realize it's hard for any QB to win in January with a crap defense.

 

[Avery]

Do you guys think Peyton really inflicted some kind of great burn on Simms? Simms probably thought Peyton would have heard about it from another source if he didn't watch the show. I know I heard about it on ESPN and then later on NFLN. Frankly, I thought the point of the first post was about how lame Manning is.

I agree.The few times I've heard Manning "talk trash", this and the "drunk, idiot kicker" thing, it sounds forced and not all that witty.Good QB. Crappy trash talker.

 

[GregR]

At least Phil didn't need his defense to win him his ring.

Go back to being in every commercial, you big foreheaded gorilla.

Come on, it's funny when the best QB in NFL history puts the #347th best in his place.

Now THATS funny.

I was always on the fence between him, Montana, Unitas, Elway, or Brady. But after seeing how the perennial power Colts can't even get a single win without him, I no longer have a shade of doubt. There has never been a better QB that Manning. Brady missed the 2008 season and the Pats still won ten games.

Eh.I mostly agree with that list of QBs, but not with the conclusion you got from the Colts this year.

Yes, the drop off the Colts shows what the team is without Peyton. But there are other factors that go into that. The Colts built their roster specifically around protecting a passer, taking a lead, and having a defense that can rush the opponent when they have to pass to catch up. They run an offensive system which depends on the decision making and ability to control tempo that Peyton has.

The other QBs in your list didn't have surrounding casts built so specifically to where if they lost their starting QB, their personnel would be ill-suited for the time of games they would find themselves in. The Montana 49ers, the Brady Patriots, etc, have generally had all around solid defenses rather than being as one-dimensional as the Colts were intentionally built to be. They had NFL-starter worthy back up QBs.

Timing is an issue too. The Colts are losing some of their long-time contributors due to age and don't have the replacements in place now. Let's take a look at the Patriots the year they lost Brady, and a hypothetical comparison to this year's Patriots if they lost him. The year they lost Brady, the Pats still had a lot of the core of their defense. They had a backup QB who proved to be at least a mediocre NFL starter. What if they had lost Brady this year?

The 2011 Pats defense is bad. How bad? The 2010 Texans were on pace to shatter the worst passing defense in NFL history mark, though they improved by the end of the year and fell short. The Patriots pass defense is currently on pace to not only shatter the mark, but they are shattering the pace the Texans were at this same point last year. If Brady was gone, the Pats offense would likely drop off quite a bit unless their backups turn out to be quite a bit better than we have any reason to think they are at this point in their careers. For our hypothetical, assume they get the same QBs the Colts have had to use. The Brady-less Pats would find themselves having to throw like mad as teams shred their defense and run up the lead on them. We could easily see the 2011 Patriots team also suffer a humongous drop off without Brady. It probably wouldn't be as big, but then they didn't build their team to only be able to play with a Brady-won lead, and they have quite an edge in head coach.

I don't have a problem with anyone thinking any of those QBs in your list is the best of all time (though I personally would go with Marino before Elway would get in the list). And I do think the Colts drop off does say something about just how good Peyton is and how rare some of his attributes are. But I think there's a fair amount of the drop off that is due to the risky way the Colts built their roster and have drafted poorly of late, enough that I can't see that drop off being enough to clearly propel Manning past the rest as any kind of slam dunk.

 

[Tackling Dummies]

Do you guys think Peyton really inflicted some kind of great burn on Simms? Simms probably thought Peyton would have heard about it from another source if he didn't watch the show. I know I heard about it on ESPN and then later on NFLN.

Frankly, I thought the point of the first post was about how lame Manning is.

Yeah, I kind of viewed this as Simms giving Peyton a heads-up figuring the comment would get to back to him.

Agree, but as Shaq would say, "keep my name out of your mouth". From Manning, it seems like there has been no history of a close relationship w/ Simms, so he's assuming a stance/point of view from Manning.