Roethlisberger in the Super Bowl (1 Viewer)

[BlueOnion]

The other discussion got merged, and probably for good reason. However, this thread needs to stay on topic and is strictly about Roethlisberger and his legacy in Championship Games.

 

[Stillers Jr.]

he's 23....so NO

 

[cowboyz]

no, but i think it's because the steelers are more of a team. so he's not given the credit for wins or loses.

 

[BlueOnion]

he's 23....so NO

Well I don't think we can define him or his career at age 23. But a track record has to start somewhere and I have seen far less incriminating cases be made against Quarterbacks. Heck, Marino actually went to the Super Bowl in his second year, however that was the starting point for his legacy of not being able to win the big one.

 

[Fumbleweed]

he's 23....so NO

Well I don't think we can define him or his career at age 23. But a track record has to start somewhere and I have seen far less incriminating cases be made against Quarterbacks. Heck, Marino actually went to the Super Bowl in his second year, however that was the starting point for his legacy of not being able to win the big one.

Too much individualism in all these threads. This is not golf. A QB is one of eleven players.....and only plays on one side of the ball, not to mention not playing on special teams.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Well, seeing as he's the first QB to ever make it to two conference title games in his first two seasons, if you're going to call him a choker if he loses this game, you'd have to also say he's the biggest winner at this point of any QB in NFL history. My point being, 2 games is likely not a good enough sample to make such a judgment either way. It's a team game, first of all, and second, if they do lose, he will have been the underdog in both games, playing against what could be considered great teams, especially if the Broncos then went on to win it all.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

guy wins as a 10 point road underdog against the best team in the NFL and you think he's a choke artist?

gllll selling that argument to anyone.

Come on Aaron, where did I say Roethlisberger is a choker? I am just asking the question up front that if a guy opens his career with two straight Conference Championship Game losses, does it start to define his career?

no.there's a huge difference that you're conveniently ignoring here.

Peyton Manning was the #1 overall pick in the draft. He plays on a team loaded with talent, has been the league MVP, and consistently plays terrible in the biggest games of the year. He's often talked about as the best QB in the league and one of the best players in the league. He's supposed to win in the postseason. Prior to this season, he had a convenient excuse of having to play against the Patriots (best team of the past few years) on the road. This year, he had no such excuse.

Meanwhile, Ben was a QB from the MAC who didn't even start at QB until his senior year of high school. He only played 3 years in college (compared to 4 from Peyton in the very tough SEC), yet helped his team to an unprecedented 15-1 season as a rookie and an appearance in the AFC Championship game. He backed that up with a solid second season in which they needed to win out down the stretch just to make the playoffs. He then went on to win 2 road playoff games to get back to the AFC Championship game for a 2nd straight season.

Ben was a rookie last year and played against a team that had won 2 of 3 Super Bowls with possibly the best defensive coach of all time, so his struggles were pretty understandable. This year, very few people gave them a realistic shot to beat the Colts yesterday and he played probably the best game of his career. He rose to the occasion while Peyton consistently flops in the biggest games (3 points against the Pats last year after throwing 49 TD passes?).

If you think this guy deserves to be mentioned as a big game loser like Peyton after going 3-1 in the playoffs and carrying a #6 seed into the conference championship game, then I'm not sure what else to tell you.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

since the NFL implemented the current playoff format, teams with a bye week playing at home had won something like 84% of the time.Ben just won a road game against a team that started 13-0 and many people thought had a chance to go undefeated. He's already proven to be more of a winner in big games than Peyton Manning and he's just in his 2nd year. These Steeler teams also don't have half the talent of the Colts, IMO.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

guy wins as a 10 point road underdog against the best team in the NFL and you think he's a choke artist?

gllll selling that argument to anyone.

Come on Aaron, where did I say Roethlisberger is a choker? I am just asking the question up front that if a guy opens his career with two straight Conference Championship Game losses, does it start to define his career?

no.there's a huge difference that you're conveniently ignoring here.

Peyton Manning was the #1 overall pick in the draft. He plays on a team loaded with talent, has been the league MVP, and consistently plays terrible in the biggest games of the year. He's often talked about as the best QB in the league and one of the best players in the league. He's supposed to win in the postseason. Prior to this season, he had a convenient excuse of having to play against the Patriots (best team of the past few years) on the road. This year, he had no such excuse.

Meanwhile, Ben was a QB from the MAC who didn't even start at QB until his senior year of high school. He only played 3 years in college (compared to 4 from Peyton in the very tough SEC), yet helped his team to an unprecedented 15-1 season as a rookie and an appearance in the AFC Championship game. He backed that up with a solid second season in which they needed to win out down the stretch just to make the playoffs. He then went on to win 2 road playoff games to get back to the AFC Championship game for a 2nd straight season.

Ben was a rookie last year and played against a team that had won 2 of 3 Super Bowls with possibly the best defensive coach of all time, so his struggles were pretty understandable. This year, very few people gave them a realistic shot to beat the Colts yesterday and he played probably the best game of his career. He rose to the occasion while Peyton consistently flops in the biggest games (3 points against the Pats last year after throwing 49 TD passes?).

If you think this guy deserves to be mentioned as a big game loser like Peyton after going 3-1 in the playoffs and carrying a #6 seed into the conference championship game, then I'm not sure what else to tell you.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

guy wins as a 10 point road underdog against the best team in the NFL and you think he's a choke artist?

gllll selling that argument to anyone.

Come on Aaron, where did I say Roethlisberger is a choker? I am just asking the question up front that if a guy opens his career with two straight Conference Championship Game losses, does it start to define his career?

no.there's a huge difference that you're conveniently ignoring here.

Peyton Manning was the #1 overall pick in the draft. He plays on a team loaded with talent, has been the league MVP, and consistently plays terrible in the biggest games of the year. He's often talked about as the best QB in the league and one of the best players in the league. He's supposed to win in the postseason. Prior to this season, he had a convenient excuse of having to play against the Patriots (best team of the past few years) on the road. This year, he had no such excuse.

Meanwhile, Ben was a QB from the MAC who didn't even start at QB until his senior year of high school. He only played 3 years in college (compared to 4 from Peyton in the very tough SEC), yet helped his team to an unprecedented 15-1 season as a rookie and an appearance in the AFC Championship game. He backed that up with a solid second season in which they needed to win out down the stretch just to make the playoffs. He then went on to win 2 road playoff games to get back to the AFC Championship game for a 2nd straight season.

Ben was a rookie last year and played against a team that had won 2 of 3 Super Bowls with possibly the best defensive coach of all time, so his struggles were pretty understandable. This year, very few people gave them a realistic shot to beat the Colts yesterday and he played probably the best game of his career. He rose to the occasion while Peyton consistently flops in the biggest games (3 points against the Pats last year after throwing 49 TD passes?).

If you think this guy deserves to be mentioned as a big game loser like Peyton after going 3-1 in the playoffs and carrying a #6 seed into the conference championship game, then I'm not sure what else to tell you.

 

[Capella]

The better question is why doesn't Cowher get a lot of the same choker talk that Dungy does.

 

[BlueOnion]

since the NFL implemented the current playoff format, teams with a bye week playing at home had won something like 84% of the time.

Ben just won a road game against a team that started 13-0 and many people thought had a chance to go undefeated. He's already proven to be more of a winner in big games than Peyton Manning and he's just in his 2nd year. These Steeler teams also don't have half the talent of the Colts, IMO.

Please do not try to highjack this thread by bringing up Manning and his amazing game against Kansas City two years ago... in Kansas City. We know the Chiefs were the #1 offense and were being touted as one of the greatest scoring teams in history. We know people were talking about the Chiefs going undefeated. We know they had this great home field advantage and a bye-week to boot. We are talking about Ben Roethlisberger and AFC Championship Games.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

The better question is why doesn't Cowher get a lot of the same choker talk that Dungy does.

I think he did (from a lot of people anyway). Guy has been around forever but just won his first 2 road playoff games this year and had a pretty bad record in conference championship games played at home.

 

[Bojang0301]

The better question is why doesn't Cowher get a lot of the same choker talk that Dungy does.

He's actually made it to a Super Bowl

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

since the NFL implemented the current playoff format, teams with a bye week playing at home had won something like 84% of the time.

Ben just won a road game against a team that started 13-0 and many people thought had a chance to go undefeated. He's already proven to be more of a winner in big games than Peyton Manning and he's just in his 2nd year. These Steeler teams also don't have half the talent of the Colts, IMO.

Please do not try to highjack this thread by bringing up Manning and his amazing game against Kansas City two years ago... in Kansas City. We know the Chiefs were the #1 offense and were being touted as one of the greatest scoring teams in history. We know people were talking about the Chiefs going undefeated. We know they had this great home field advantage and a bye-week to boot. We are talking about Ben Roethlisberger and AFC Championship Games.

what if he plays well and they still lose? will you still condemn him as a player who can't win the big game?

 

[apalmer]

The better question is why doesn't Cowher get a lot of the same choker talk that Dungy does.

New here? Cowher constantly gets ripped for exactly that. Steeler homers spend half their time defending him.

 

[BlueOnion]

If you think this guy deserves to be mentioned as a big game loser like Peyton after going 3-1 in the playoffs and carrying a #6 seed into the conference championship game, then I'm not sure what else to tell you.

Good lord there are some defensive people in this thread. I am not labeling Roethlisberger a choker, much like I never labeled Favre a choker, Young a choker or Elway a choker.However, I know people like to label individuals and they like to use 'track records' and 'big games' to defend their opinion.

So I am asking why is a quarterback opening 0-2 in the Conference Championship Games not a foundation to label someone?

 

[BlueOnion]

what if he plays well and they still lose? will you still condemn him as a player who can't win the big game?

I am not condemning him (I think we posted at the same time).

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

If you think this guy deserves to be mentioned as a big game loser like Peyton after going 3-1 in the playoffs and carrying a #6 seed into the conference championship game, then I'm not sure what else to tell you.

Good lord there are some defensive people in this thread. I am not labeling Roethlisberger a choker, much like I never labeled Favre a choker, Young a choker or Elway a choker.However, I know people like to label individuals and they like to use 'track records' and 'big games' to defend their opinion.

So I am asking why is a quarterback opening 0-2 in the Conference Championship Games not a foundation to label someone?

b/c they are an underdog and were a huge underdog just to get to this point. you should only get labeled as a choker when you are expected to win and don't.

 

[jetpack]

So, what I'm to take from this thread is that:If the Steelers lose this week's chapionship game thenRoth is possibly maybe on the road to having the moniker of the guy who can't "win the big one"is that it? This is an incredibly weak premise for either an argument or a thread. What's the point supposed to be? Whether or not the media will lable somebody a particular way? Whether or not 2 Championship game loses in two years constitutes some kind of definition of failure? Whether or not its a team game or an individual game? Enlighten me on where your going with this because so far I haven't seen you add anything to either thread that's anything more than fishing.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

The better question is why doesn't Cowher get a lot of the same choker talk that Dungy does.

You're kidding, right? I hear this non-stop.At this point, though, he has a 10-9 playoff record, as opposed to Dungy's (I think) 5-9 record. Seeing as Dungy has had Peyton Manning as his QB for many of those games, who is widely considered one of the best QBs of the past 10 years, while Cowher has gone to war with the likes of Kordell Stewart and Neil O'Donnell, I think Dungy's playoff record is considerably worse. Plus, Cowher went to a Super Bowl with O'Donnell, and a team FAR less talented (on offense at least) than the Colts of the past few years.

 

[Capella]

The better question is why doesn't Cowher get a lot of the same choker talk that Dungy does.

He's actually made it to a Super Bowl

So did Jim Fassel. Who cares?

 

[Kosar]

Considering he's 2-for-2 in making it to the title game, I'd say that's a BIG no. Ben's a force, and as a staunch Browns fan and anti-Steelers fan, I like him.

 

[Capella]

The better question is why doesn't Cowher get a lot of the same choker talk that Dungy does.

You're kidding, right? I hear this non-stop.At this point, though, he has a 10-9 playoff record, as opposed to Dungy's (I think) 5-9 record. Seeing as Dungy has had Peyton Manning as his QB for many of those games, who is widely considered one of the best QBs of the past 10 years, while Cowher has gone to war with the likes of Kordell Stewart and Neil O'Donnell, I think Dungy's playoff record is considerably worse. Plus, Cowher went to a Super Bowl with O'Donnell, and a team FAR less talented (on offense at least) than the Colts of the past few years.

He's lost 3 AFC title games at home. Go homer up somewhere else, the guy obviously has a problem winning the real big games.

 

[BlueOnion]

So, what I'm to take from this thread is that:

If the Steelers lose this week's chapionship game

then

Roth is possibly maybe on the road to having the moniker of the guy who can't "win the big one"

is that it?

Some people like to label players before their career is over. So I am just trying to understand how this 'labeling' thing works. I figured if a quarterback opens 0-2 in Championship Games, that would be a good opportunity for me to try and understand this label mentality.

 

[BlueOnion]

b/c they are an underdog and were a huge underdog just to get to this point. you should only get labeled as a choker when you are expected to win and don't.

That is why I think last year's AFC Championship Game is so prudent to this conversation. Roethlisberger was at home last year, against a team he already beat in the current year and lost.

 

[jetpack]

The better question is why doesn't Cowher get a lot of the same choker talk that Dungy does.

You're kidding, right? I hear this non-stop.At this point, though, he has a 10-9 playoff record, as opposed to Dungy's (I think) 5-9 record. Seeing as Dungy has had Peyton Manning as his QB for many of those games, who is widely considered one of the best QBs of the past 10 years, while Cowher has gone to war with the likes of Kordell Stewart and Neil O'Donnell, I think Dungy's playoff record is considerably worse. Plus, Cowher went to a Super Bowl with O'Donnell, and a team FAR less talented (on offense at least) than the Colts of the past few years.

He's lost 3 AFC title games at home. Go homer up somewhere else, the guy obviously has a problem winning the real big games.

If defining a guy, whether a QB or coach, by the notion of choking is important to you then knock yourself out. I'm more impressed that the Steelers have now been to six AFC championship games in twelve years.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

b/c they are an underdog and were a huge underdog just to get to this point. you should only get labeled as a choker when you are expected to win and don't.

That is why I think last year's AFC Championship Game is so prudent to this conversation. Roethlisberger was at home last year, against a team he already beat in the current year and lost.

that's ridiculous, IMO. he was a rookie going up against the best team of the past 4 years. he did enough as a rookie (15-1 season, great QB rating) to earn a mulligan for that loss, and his performance in the postseason this year has proven that he can rise to the occasion. he would have to flop pretty badly next week for this argument to have any merit at all.I guess my main point is that it depends on how he plays, not just on whether the team wins or loses.

 

[Capella]

The better question is why doesn't Cowher get a lot of the same choker talk that Dungy does.

You're kidding, right? I hear this non-stop.At this point, though, he has a 10-9 playoff record, as opposed to Dungy's (I think) 5-9 record. Seeing as Dungy has had Peyton Manning as his QB for many of those games, who is widely considered one of the best QBs of the past 10 years, while Cowher has gone to war with the likes of Kordell Stewart and Neil O'Donnell, I think Dungy's playoff record is considerably worse. Plus, Cowher went to a Super Bowl with O'Donnell, and a team FAR less talented (on offense at least) than the Colts of the past few years.

He's lost 3 AFC title games at home. Go homer up somewhere else, the guy obviously has a problem winning the real big games.

If defining a guy, whether a QB or coach, by the notion of choking is important to you then knock yourself out. I'm more impressed that the Steelers have now been to six AFC championship games in twelve years.

I am too.But there's an awful lot of Colts bashing around here lately, and I don't see why it only cuts one way.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

The better question is why doesn't Cowher get a lot of the same choker talk that Dungy does.

You're kidding, right? I hear this non-stop.At this point, though, he has a 10-9 playoff record, as opposed to Dungy's (I think) 5-9 record. Seeing as Dungy has had Peyton Manning as his QB for many of those games, who is widely considered one of the best QBs of the past 10 years, while Cowher has gone to war with the likes of Kordell Stewart and Neil O'Donnell, I think Dungy's playoff record is considerably worse. Plus, Cowher went to a Super Bowl with O'Donnell, and a team FAR less talented (on offense at least) than the Colts of the past few years.

He's lost 3 AFC title games at home. Go homer up somewhere else, the guy obviously has a problem winning the real big games.

You're entitled to that opinion, the spirit of my post is in responding to your inquiry. Whether or not you think Cowher is a lousy playoff coach, you asked why he doesn't get a lot of the same choker talk that Dungy gets. The fact is : he absolutely does. All I did was state facts here, I'm not trying to make Cowher out to be the second coming fo Lombardi. However, if you think I'm "homering up" because I think Cowher has a better playoff resume than Dungy does, I have to wonder what numbers you're looking at. Unless the fact that Dungy used to coach the Bucs has something to do with that assertion....

 

[BlueOnion]

b/c they are an underdog and were a huge underdog just to get to this point. you should only get labeled as a choker when you are expected to win and don't.

That is why I think last year's AFC Championship Game is so prudent to this conversation. Roethlisberger was at home last year, against a team he already beat in the current year and lost.

that's ridiculous, IMO. he was a rookie going up against the best team of the past 4 years. he did enough as a rookie (15-1 season, great QB rating) to earn a mulligan for that loss, and his performance in the postseason this year has proven that he can rise to the occasion. he would have to flop pretty badly next week for this argument to have any merit at all.I guess my main point is that it depends on how he plays, not just on whether the team wins or loses.

Fair enough. But I think one of the biggest reason's Roethlisberger had a good day yesterday was when the Steelers went to the pass early, I am pretty sure the defense's reaction was, "OMFG, they are going to let him throw the ball." Not many quarterbacks are afforded this opportunity in a playoff game.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

b/c they are an underdog and were a huge underdog just to get to this point. you should only get labeled as a choker when you are expected to win and don't.

That is why I think last year's AFC Championship Game is so prudent to this conversation. Roethlisberger was at home last year, against a team he already beat in the current year and lost.

that's ridiculous, IMO. he was a rookie going up against the best team of the past 4 years. he did enough as a rookie (15-1 season, great QB rating) to earn a mulligan for that loss, and his performance in the postseason this year has proven that he can rise to the occasion. he would have to flop pretty badly next week for this argument to have any merit at all.I guess my main point is that it depends on how he plays, not just on whether the team wins or loses.

Fair enough. But I think one of the biggest reason's Roethlisberger had a good day yesterday was when the Steelers went to the pass early, I am pretty sure the defense's reaction was, "OMFG, they are going to let him throw the ball." Not many quarterbacks are afforded this opportunity in a playoff game.

although you don't really expect it from a QB, he also made the game saving tackle on Nick Harper. the Steelers have already gone a lot further this year than they should have and Ben deserves a ton of credit for that. I think it is unfair to expect him to win IN CINCY, IN INDY, and then IN DENVER just to avoid a label as a guy who can't win the big game. 0-2 in AFC Championship games would certainly not be a great thing to have on one's resume, but I think the fact that he made it there with this team in his first 2 years is much more impressive and noteworthy than how the team actually does on Sunday.

 

[TipTopSaidHe]

this sounds like sour grapes from a manning fan who's tired of hearing the labels thrown around about his qb (as are all the rest of us who would like to read something interesting about something else). since most of this bored will be overrun with steeler fans this week (nfl radio will be non-stop stiller gibberish), he's baiting you into answering why his qb should be labelled but yours shouldn't. i'm confident, as is he, a large number will chime.

 

[BlueOnion]

although you don't really expect it from a QB, he also made the game saving tackle on Nick Harper. the Steelers have already gone a lot further this year than they should have and Ben deserves a ton of credit for that. I think it is unfair to expect him to win IN CINCY, IN INDY, and then IN DENVER just to avoid a label as a guy who can't win the big game. 0-2 in AFC Championship games would certainly not be a great thing to have on one's resume, but I think the fact that he made it there with this team in his first 2 years is much more impressive and noteworthy than how the team actually does on Sunday.

Like I said, I am not interested in labeling Roethlisberger and more interested in trying to uncover how this labeling thing works. Though I am not a labeling guy, I think losing two straight AFC Championship Games would be grounds to label a guy, from what I have observed anyway.

 

[Capella]

The better question is why doesn't Cowher get a lot of the same choker talk that Dungy does.

You're kidding, right? I hear this non-stop.At this point, though, he has a 10-9 playoff record, as opposed to Dungy's (I think) 5-9 record. Seeing as Dungy has had Peyton Manning as his QB for many of those games, who is widely considered one of the best QBs of the past 10 years, while Cowher has gone to war with the likes of Kordell Stewart and Neil O'Donnell, I think Dungy's playoff record is considerably worse. Plus, Cowher went to a Super Bowl with O'Donnell, and a team FAR less talented (on offense at least) than the Colts of the past few years.

He's lost 3 AFC title games at home. Go homer up somewhere else, the guy obviously has a problem winning the real big games.

You're entitled to that opinion, the spirit of my post is in responding to your inquiry. Whether or not you think Cowher is a lousy playoff coach, you asked why he doesn't get a lot of the same choker talk that Dungy gets. The fact is : he absolutely does. All I did was state facts here, I'm not trying to make Cowher out to be the second coming fo Lombardi. However, if you think I'm "homering up" because I think Cowher has a better playoff resume than Dungy does, I have to wonder what numbers you're looking at. Unless the fact that Dungy used to coach the Bucs has something to do with that assertion....

You kidding? I knock Dungy all the time for his years here in Tampa -- that defense was good enough to win at least another Super Bowl, maybe two. That bothers me.Yes, Cowher has had a bit more success. Not a large amount more, imo, only because I don't consider making a conference title game that gigantic of a deal. It's all about the Super Bowl, and the fact is Cowher has only been there once, despite having many very good teams.

But it seems like we're mostly in agreement, so BTFU.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

although you don't really expect it from a QB, he also made the game saving tackle on Nick Harper. the Steelers have already gone a lot further this year than they should have and Ben deserves a ton of credit for that. I think it is unfair to expect him to win IN CINCY, IN INDY, and then IN DENVER just to avoid a label as a guy who can't win the big game. 0-2 in AFC Championship games would certainly not be a great thing to have on one's resume, but I think the fact that he made it there with this team in his first 2 years is much more impressive and noteworthy than how the team actually does on Sunday.

Like I said, I am not interested in labeling Roethlisberger and more interested in trying to uncover how this labeling thing works. Though I am not a labeling guy, I think losing two straight AFC Championship Games would be grounds to label a guy, from what I have observed anyway.

Manning's label is well deserved, dating back to his time in college. The Colts live and die with his performance in the playoffs, just like the Dolphins used to with Marino. Ben is much more of a system QB, however, and given that it's just his second year in the league, I really think anyone who tries to label him as a big game loser would find few people to agree with them.It's not like these labels are handed out easily. Peyton Manning has earned his with consistently poor performances in the biggest games over the past decade or so. It's far too early to make any conclusions about Ben's career, and I'd say the early returns are quite a bit more positive than negative at this point.

 

[BlueOnion]

Manning's label is well deserved, dating back to his time in college. The Colts live and die with his performance in the playoffs, just like the Dolphins used to with Marino. Ben is much more of a system QB, however, and given that it's just his second year in the league, I really think anyone who tries to label him as a big game loser would find few people to agree with them.

It's not like these labels are handed out easily. Peyton Manning has earned his with consistently poor performances in the biggest games over the past decade or so. It's far too early to make any conclusions about Ben's career, and I'd say the early returns are quite a bit more positive than negative at this point.

Could you explain the difference between the Steelers upset of the Colts and the Colts upset of the Chiefs two years ago? To me, the circumstances were about the same however one defines Roethlisberger as a winner while one is ignored because a road win in the divisional round against the #1 seed is not considered a big game?

 

[Evilgrin 72]

The better question is why doesn't Cowher get a lot of the same choker talk that Dungy does.

You're kidding, right? I hear this non-stop.At this point, though, he has a 10-9 playoff record, as opposed to Dungy's (I think) 5-9 record. Seeing as Dungy has had Peyton Manning as his QB for many of those games, who is widely considered one of the best QBs of the past 10 years, while Cowher has gone to war with the likes of Kordell Stewart and Neil O'Donnell, I think Dungy's playoff record is considerably worse. Plus, Cowher went to a Super Bowl with O'Donnell, and a team FAR less talented (on offense at least) than the Colts of the past few years.

He's lost 3 AFC title games at home. Go homer up somewhere else, the guy obviously has a problem winning the real big games.

You're entitled to that opinion, the spirit of my post is in responding to your inquiry. Whether or not you think Cowher is a lousy playoff coach, you asked why he doesn't get a lot of the same choker talk that Dungy gets. The fact is : he absolutely does. All I did was state facts here, I'm not trying to make Cowher out to be the second coming fo Lombardi. However, if you think I'm "homering up" because I think Cowher has a better playoff resume than Dungy does, I have to wonder what numbers you're looking at. Unless the fact that Dungy used to coach the Bucs has something to do with that assertion....

You kidding? I knock Dungy all the time for his years here in Tampa -- that defense was good enough to win at least another Super Bowl, maybe two. That bothers me.Yes, Cowher has had a bit more success. Not a large amount more, imo, only because I don't consider making a conference title game that gigantic of a deal. It's all about the Super Bowl, and the fact is Cowher has only been there once, despite having many very good teams.

But it seems like we're mostly in agreement, so BTFU.

I was just tweaking you for that "homer up" comment, when I was doing anything but (for a change.)I'm just saying it DOES cut both ways, and if it didn't, it's because Cowher has a better playoff resume. He is over .500 for his career, while Dungy is around .350 and Cowher has been to a Super Bowl, while Dungy has not. As a sidebar, Cowher has absolutely oVVned Dungy over the course of their careers, so I'm sure that influences people's perceptions as well.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

no, but i think it's because the steelers are more of a team. so he's not given the credit for wins or losses.

Ummm WHAT?!

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Manning's label is well deserved, dating back to his time in college. The Colts live and die with his performance in the playoffs, just like the Dolphins used to with Marino. Ben is much more of a system QB, however, and given that it's just his second year in the league, I really think anyone who tries to label him as a big game loser would find few people to agree with them.

It's not like these labels are handed out easily. Peyton Manning has earned his with consistently poor performances in the biggest games over the past decade or so. It's far too early to make any conclusions about Ben's career, and I'd say the early returns are quite a bit more positive than negative at this point.

Could you explain the difference between the Steelers upset of the Colts and the Colts upset of the Chiefs two years ago? To me, the circumstances were about the same however one defines Roethlisberger as a winner while one is ignored because a road win in the divisional round against the #1 seed is not considered a big game?

I'll try to keep this one simple.Postseason records

Peyton Manning: 3-6

Ben Roethlisberger: 3-1

Disregarding all the differences between these two players that I have already laid out in this thread, I don't see how you can ignore the blatant difference in their records. When you factor in the difference that exists in their respective age and experience levels, Peyton gets completely destroyed in this comparison.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

To put it into perspective Ben Roethlisberger at 23 has won as many playoff games as Peyton Manning at 30.

 

[BlueOnion]

I'll try to keep this one simple.

Postseason records

Peyton Manning: 3-6

Ben Roethlisberger: 3-1

Disregarding all the differences between these two players that I have already laid out in this thread, I don't see how you can ignore the blatant difference in their records. When you factor in the difference that exists in their respective age and experience levels, Peyton gets completely destroyed in this comparison.

True, but I am talking about records in big games, like the AFC Championship Game and\or Superbowls?They are both 0-1 and Roethlisberger could go 0-2 this weekend, unless he is a 'winner'; whatever that means.

 

[BlueOnion]

To put it into perspective Ben Roethlisberger at 23 has won as many playoff games as Peyton Manning at 30.

Yes, and Roethlisberger also has a worse AFC Championship Game record when their respective teams play at home.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

I'll try to keep this one simple.

Postseason records

Peyton Manning: 3-6

Ben Roethlisberger: 3-1

Disregarding all the differences between these two players that I have already laid out in this thread, I don't see how you can ignore the blatant difference in their records. When you factor in the difference that exists in their respective age and experience levels, Peyton gets completely destroyed in this comparison.

True, but I am talking about records in big games, like the AFC Championship Game and\or Superbowls?They are both 0-1 and Roethlisberger could go 0-2 this weekend, unless he is a 'winner'; whatever that means.

People are focusing WAY too much on this "big" game definition. For argument's sake, let's say two QBs, A and B, both go 10-6 in the regular season every year for a decade. They both make the playoffs as a wild-card every year. QB A loses his first round playoff game for each of the first 9 years. The last year, he wins the wild card game, divisional game, and conference championship game, but loses the Super Bowl. QB B wins the wild-card game and the divisional game every year (including 9 head to head wins over QB A) but goes 4-6 in the conference title game and 1-3 in the Super Bowl.QB A has a 3-10 playoff record but a 1-1 "big game record"

QB B has a 23-9 playoff record but a 5-9 "big game record"

Is QB A a better QB because he has a .500 "big game" record, as opposed to .358 for QB B?

 

[BlueOnion]

I'll try to keep this one simple.

Postseason records

Peyton Manning: 3-6

Ben Roethlisberger: 3-1

Disregarding all the differences between these two players that I have already laid out in this thread, I don't see how you can ignore the blatant difference in their records. When you factor in the difference that exists in their respective age and experience levels, Peyton gets completely destroyed in this comparison.

True, but I am talking about records in big games, like the AFC Championship Game and\or Superbowls?They are both 0-1 and Roethlisberger could go 0-2 this weekend, unless he is a 'winner'; whatever that means.

People are focusing WAY too much on this "big" game definition. For argument's sake, let's say two QBs, A and B, both go 10-6 in the regular season every year for a decade. They both make the playoffs as a wild-card every year. QB A loses his first round playoff game for each of the first 9 years. The last year, he wins the wild card game, divisional game, and conference championship game, but loses the Super Bowl. QB B wins the wild-card game and the divisional game every year (including 9 head to head wins over QB A) but goes 4-6 in the conference title game and 1-3 in the Super Bowl.QB A has a 3-10 playoff record but a 1-1 "big game record"

QB B has a 23-9 playoff record but a 5-9 "big game record"

Is QB A a better QB because he has a .500 "big game" record, as opposed to .358 for QB B?

Sadly enough, neither of them are big game quarterbacks. Tell me more about this Quarterback C. Did he win 10 straight Superbowls?

 

[Fumbleweed]

I'll try to keep this one simple.

Postseason records

Peyton Manning: 3-6

Ben Roethlisberger: 3-1

Disregarding all the differences between these two players that I have already laid out in this thread, I don't see how you can ignore the blatant difference in their records. When you factor in the difference that exists in their respective age and experience levels, Peyton gets completely destroyed in this comparison.

True, but I am talking about records in big games, like the AFC Championship Game and\or Superbowls?They are both 0-1 and Roethlisberger could go 0-2 this weekend, unless he is a 'winner'; whatever that means.

People are focusing WAY too much on this "big" game definition. For argument's sake, let's say two QBs, A and B, both go 10-6 in the regular season every year for a decade. They both make the playoffs as a wild-card every year. QB A loses his first round playoff game for each of the first 9 years. The last year, he wins the wild card game, divisional game, and conference championship game, but loses the Super Bowl. QB B wins the wild-card game and the divisional game every year (including 9 head to head wins over QB A) but goes 4-6 in the conference title game and 1-3 in the Super Bowl.QB A has a 3-10 playoff record but a 1-1 "big game record"

QB B has a 23-9 playoff record but a 5-9 "big game record"

Is QB A a better QB because he has a .500 "big game" record, as opposed to .358 for QB B?

Sadly enough, neither of them are big game quarterbacks. Tell me more about this Quarterback C. Did he win 10 straight Superbowls?

Ummmm....in my book, a guy whose team wins 23 playoff games isn't just a big game quarterback....he's darn near immortal.

 

[Koya]

Until yesterday, I really gave the Steelers a lot of the credit for Ben's success. Mind you, that is still an important factor, but the guy earned a lot of respect yesterday - he was a weapon. He was a weapon in college for sure, so I am not surprised that he would be now.Now, if he takes a step back this week, maybe this past week means less - but right now, you have to say he is a very young QB that totally gets it (granted,on the right team), at a very early stage. Regardless what happens this week, he has earned himself a good deal of respect imo, unless he plays to the contrary not only this week, but next year as well.

 

[jetpack]

To put it into perspective Ben Roethlisberger at 23 has won as many playoff games as Peyton Manning at 30.

Yes, and Roethlisberger also has a worse AFC Championship Game record when their respective teams play at home.

Your sample size is too small for this stat, or really any argument presented here about Roth as a choker or not, to have any merit far as I can see. You've limited discussion to two Championship games (really just one) pulled out from any other context and want to define an entire career out of it before it even happens. Congratuations, Blue Onion, therein lies the answer you were seeking. You wanted to know how lables like choker emerge? Now you know. It's tedious threads like this one. Consider youself schooled.

 

[BlueOnion]

Your sample size is too small for this stat, or really any argument presented here about Roth as a choker or not, to have any merit far as I can see.  You've limited discussion to two Championship games (really just one) pulled out from any other context and want to define an entire career out of it before it even happens.  Congratuations, Blue Onion, therein lies the answer you were seeking.  You wanted to know how lables like choker emerge?  Now you know.  It's tedious threads like this one.  Consider youself schooled.

Way to go there Mr. Sensitive. I have not called Roethlisberger a choker and even acknowledged if he was to lose the AFC Championship Game for a second year in a row the sample size is to small. My question, which you are missing is, when can we start labeling a guy? Would 2 straight AFC Championship losses be to early to label someone a choker? Would it be to early to start speculating?

 

[Evilgrin 72]

I'll try to keep this one simple.

Postseason records

Peyton Manning: 3-6

Ben Roethlisberger: 3-1

Disregarding all the differences between these two players that I have already laid out in this thread, I don't see how you can ignore the blatant difference in their records. When you factor in the difference that exists in their respective age and experience levels, Peyton gets completely destroyed in this comparison.

True, but I am talking about records in big games, like the AFC Championship Game and\or Superbowls?They are both 0-1 and Roethlisberger could go 0-2 this weekend, unless he is a 'winner'; whatever that means.

People are focusing WAY too much on this "big" game definition. For argument's sake, let's say two QBs, A and B, both go 10-6 in the regular season every year for a decade. They both make the playoffs as a wild-card every year. QB A loses his first round playoff game for each of the first 9 years. The last year, he wins the wild card game, divisional game, and conference championship game, but loses the Super Bowl. QB B wins the wild-card game and the divisional game every year (including 9 head to head wins over QB A) but goes 4-6 in the conference title game and 1-3 in the Super Bowl.QB A has a 3-10 playoff record but a 1-1 "big game record"

QB B has a 23-9 playoff record but a 5-9 "big game record"

Is QB A a better QB because he has a .500 "big game" record, as opposed to .358 for QB B?

Sadly enough, neither of them are big game quarterbacks. Tell me more about this Quarterback C. Did he win 10 straight Superbowls?

So, in your mind, the two are equal when it comes to performance when it counts most?