Discussion in 'Sports and Fitness' started by Sela301, Sep 5, 2013.
I think you make my point which is, Peyton is simply not a quarterback who can be in the same conversation with the Montanas, Staubachs, Bradshaws, Farves, Manning's, Bradys, players who were able to make something out of nothing in their team's biggest game. Peyton is a very good quarterback, but needs much more help than those other guys. For Peyton, things have to be near perfect in order for him to perform at his best.
When his team needed him to live up to the hype surrounding him this season, he was not up to the task. No, the rest of the team didn't play well, but Peyton might have made his team more competitive, but instead he showed himself to be anything but that guy. Very good quarterback, just not special.
But even if no one else plays the sport, why not refer to your champion as "world" champion? Its not like there is any possibility that a better football team is lurking out there somewhere.
- 2nd in career passing yards
- 1st in career playoff passing yards
- 2nd in career touchdowns
- 4th in career playoff touchdowns
- 2nd in career passer rating
- 2nd in career sack percentage
And that's all-time, not just active quarterbacks. On what planet is that "very good, just not special?"
Apparently the difference between "very good" and "special" is the ability to single-handedly win games in spite of what the rest of the team might be doing.
For many people, sports will be about narrative, not numbers. That's why, like it or not, wins will always be a factor. That being said, he's got quite a few of those and a championship, so there's not much merit to the argument even there.
See that's the thing. "Single-handedly" always has to apply to the teams he has gotten to the plays and the Superbowls.
Look at pretty boy Brady. Alway a good defense and always a great O line. (when he won the superbowls).
Read that article posted previously in this thread.
I know- I was the one who posted the article and that was my point.
Yeah, I don't think you can pin this on Manning. He had a rough game, but that's Seattle's defense.
Add to it that Denver's defense couldn't tackle my grandma, and their special teams stunk, oh and they couldn't run the ball at all...that adds up to a long day.
Best summed up as "WTF?!"
As a Texans fan, after all those years of abuse from the hands of Manning, it was sweet watching him get his ass kicked.
Not to nitpick... BUT... it's Favre, not Farve.
If Peyton doesn't belong in that group, neither does Favre. They have the same amount of Super Bowl titles. Favre threw FAR more interceptions, and the only reason he doesn't have more playoff losses than Peyton is because Brett couldn't get the Packers/Jets/Vikings to the playoffs as often as Peyton has with the Colts/Broncos.
If neither of them belongs, does Peyton's brother Eli? He has one more Super Bowl title, and both WERE won in clutch situations, but he's far less consistent than any of those other names and has had far more BAD games than brother Peyton (like the nine that the Giants lost this season, for instance). How about Staubach? He lost just as many Super Bowls as Peyton did, both to Pittsburgh. Tom Brady has lost two as well, both to Eli's N.Y. Giants.
Peyton is no Joe Montana and has never had as complete an offense as Terry Bradshaw enjoyed, nor as brilliant a head coach as Tom Brady has been privileged with, but he's done enough in his career to be mentioned among the all-time greats.
Daily Mail article in which Richard Sherman says his defensive team cracked Peyton Manning's hand signals, so they knew what he was calling for on each play.
That's more of a basketball thing, when 4 other guys were stinking on a particular night, Jordan could still pull the game out with 40 or 50 points.
In football, what's a QB going to do, pass & catch, all the while avoiding the rushers and defenders?
"Earth", where stats don't equal Super Bowl wins.
My mistake, I though Farve had more than one SB win.
Eli has been in two Super Bowls and has won both and looked great doing it (not that that matters much).
Staubach won at least two Super Bowls. He was one of those quarterbacks who could put a team on his back and carry them to vicory at the highest levels and at the least most likely time. HE is the poster child for "special".
Yes, I put him up there with guys like Fran Tarkenton, Dad Archie, Dan Marino, stats hogs who lacked that special ingredient needed to take his team, inspire his team to become something better than they thought they were. Okay, a tick above those guys because Peyton was in 3 SB's and won one.
Don't get me wrong, I don't dislike Peyton and I was rooting FOR the Hawks, not AGAINST Manning. I kind of bought into the hype this season too, but I think Peyton showed that despite another great regular season, he essentially is the same guy we have seen for the last several years.
The odds of a football team (note the operative word here, team) making it to a Super Bowl, let alone winning one, are astronomical. Even if you have the greatest offense in history, like the Broncos did this season, you still need to be incredibly lucky and have a zillion things fall in your favor. Beyond that, while Peyton had a rough night (although a 70 percent completion percentage is rather impressive considering the defense had his number all night long), there were 51 other guys on that team who didn't do their jobs, either. Manning didn't cause the offensive line, the linebackers, the secondary and the special teams to completely shit the bed.
If we're judging a quarterback's value on rings, then that means Trent Dilfer was a better quarterback than Dan Marino, and that's a world I don't want to live in.
Dan Marino, not one of but THE greatest QB who never got to hoist a Vince Lombardi trophy. Not to mention the last Dolphins QB to even put the franchise in the position to win one.
Don't forget Johnny Unitas.
Dan Marino never won a Superbowl, and I don't see anybody downgrading his achievements.
Separate names with a comma.