P. Manning Playoff Record -- A Mediocre .500 - Hilarious Video Added - Check it Out!!
Connecticoin
Posts: 12,868 ✭✭✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
Before y'all "Crown his Ass" as the best QB ever, he has some catching up to do:
Montana, playoffs: 16-7, 4 SB
Brady, playoffs: 14-4, 3 SB
Elway, playoffs: 14-8, 2 SB
Favre, playoffs: 13-11, 1 SB
Aikman, playoffs 11-4, 3 SB
Staubach, playoffs 11-6, 2 SB
Warner, playoffs: 9-4, 1 SB
Manning, playoffs: 9-9, 1 SB
Roethlisberger, playoffs: 8-2, 2 SB
Montana, playoffs: 16-7, 4 SB
Brady, playoffs: 14-4, 3 SB
Elway, playoffs: 14-8, 2 SB
Favre, playoffs: 13-11, 1 SB
Aikman, playoffs 11-4, 3 SB
Staubach, playoffs 11-6, 2 SB
Warner, playoffs: 9-4, 1 SB
Manning, playoffs: 9-9, 1 SB
Roethlisberger, playoffs: 8-2, 2 SB
0
Comments
Bart starr and Terry Bradshaw also have super playoff records.
Bradshaw - 14-5 4 SB
Starr - 9-1 2 SB
Otto Graham, QB on the all time NFL 75th anniversary team,
played ten seasons of professional football, his record in world championship games is 7-3.
Troy Aikman 11-4, 3 SB
These things can get fuzzy however when you start looking into them.
Roethlisberger for instance. He did everything he possibly could to lose SB40, so it's had to say he really has 2 SB "wins".
<< <i>I'll take Manning anyday ! He is the best ever , regardless of the playoff record IMO. >>
Joe Montana would have led his team to victory against the Saints. Montana was the best ever.
He's in danger of developing a Farve reputation.
He and Jamal Lewis also got blown out by Nebraska 42-17 in their final bowl game.
<< <i>For those who don't remember, Manning lost to Florida all four years while at Tennessee too.
He and Jamal Lewis also got blown out by Nebraska 42-17 in their final bowl game. >>
Yes, and Tennessee won the National Championship AFTER Manning graduated!
<< <i>Roger Staubach 11-6, 2 SB
Troy Aikman 11-4, 3 SB
Added. Aikman should get a bonus win for the year Barry Switzer was coach.
I think the SB loss hinders the opportunity to crown him "greatest ever" but he has a few years left if he stays healthy. In the midst of all of the discussion about the best ever I have adopted the philosophy that it is next to impossible to label a single QB the greatest ever. There are way too many factors to consider (era, position players, defense, etc.). I am at the point that if you are even considered part of the discussion it is quite an honor.
Ripken in the Minors * Ripken in the Minors Facebook Page
<< <i>I agree it's hard not to notice Manning's less than stellar playoff record.
These things can get fuzzy however when you start looking into them.
Roethlisberger for instance. He did everything he possibly could to lose SB40, so it's had to say he really has 2 SB "wins". >>
He had an off day but he still scored a TD.
Ripken in the Minors * Ripken in the Minors Facebook Page
<< <i>If my math is right Manning and the Colts have been to the playoffs 10 times in Peyton's 12 years as QB for Indy for 83%. Rather than piling on the guy for the losses is it time to give him credit for helping lead a team to the playoffs so much? >>
No. And that's coming from a Colts fan. I like Peyton and think he's one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time, but your analogy would be like taking your date to a nice restaurant, sitting down at the table, then treating her to a nice glass of water. Repeat 9 more times. See if she gives you credit for taking her out.
Bottom line, great quarterbacks get the job done in the Superbowl. Peyton fell short.
<< <i>
<< <i>If my math is right Manning and the Colts have been to the playoffs 10 times in Peyton's 12 years as QB for Indy for 83%. Rather than piling on the guy for the losses is it time to give him credit for helping lead a team to the playoffs so much? >>
No. And that's coming from a Colts fan. I like Peyton and think he's one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time, but your analogy would be like taking your date to a nice restaurant, sitting down at the table, then treating her to a nice glass of water. Repeat 9 more times. See if she gives you credit for taking her out.
Bottom line, great quarterbacks get the job done in the Superbowl. Peyton fell short. >>
The point I am making is that Peyton was good enough to consistently get teams to the playoffs whether it ended with a SB or not. Using the W/L analogy alone excuses quarterbacks that may have gone years without leading a team to the playoffs. Using the W/L + SB titles alone is a flawed stat. You could say "Player X only went to the playoffs twice in a 10 year span, went 7-0 in the playoffs, won 2 Super Bowls, thus they are one of the greatest of all time" while excusing the fact that 80% of their tenure ended without a playoff appearance. Great players shouldn't be punished for losing in the playoffs in seasons no other QB would've been able to get said team to the playoffs period.
Ripken in the Minors * Ripken in the Minors Facebook Page
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>If my math is right Manning and the Colts have been to the playoffs 10 times in Peyton's 12 years as QB for Indy for 83%. Rather than piling on the guy for the losses is it time to give him credit for helping lead a team to the playoffs so much? >>
No. And that's coming from a Colts fan. I like Peyton and think he's one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time, but your analogy would be like taking your date to a nice restaurant, sitting down at the table, then treating her to a nice glass of water. Repeat 9 more times. See if she gives you credit for taking her out.
Bottom line, great quarterbacks get the job done in the Superbowl. Peyton fell short. >>
The point I am making is that Peyton was good enough to consistently get teams to the playoffs whether it ended with a SB or not. Using the W/L analogy alone excuses quarterbacks that may have gone years without leading a team to the playoffs. Using the W/L + SB titles alone is a flawed stat. You could say "Player X only went to the playoffs twice in a 10 year span, went 7-0 in the playoffs, won 2 Super Bowls, thus they are one of the greatest of all time" while excusing the fact that 80% of their tenure ended without a playoff appearance. Great players shouldn't be punished for losing in the playoffs in seasons no other QB would've been able to get said team to the playoffs period. >>
Even though Brees outplayed Manning, lets not forget Manning still played pretty well despite giving up the 6-pick. Manning has already proven in the past that he can step up in the big game being he is a super bowl MVP.
These things can get fuzzy however when you start looking into them.
Roethlisberger for instance. He did everything he possibly could to lose SB40, so it's had to say he really has 2 SB "wins". >>
He had an off day but he still scored a TD.
An off day? He made Trent Dilfer look like Joe Montana. And that TD they credited him with was bogus, too, and should have been reversed, as the ball never crossed the goal line.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
The hilarious thing is this...
Some amateurs have proclaimed Bradshaw a top five QB of all time, and some have said he was the best deep passer of all time. Ask yourself this, if both of those were true, don't you think he would at least make an honest showing in the following measurements, regardless of who his receivers were?
Terry Bradshaw had FIVE seasons as a starter before Swann and Stallworth became starters. How many times did the so called best deep passer in the history of the NFL crack the league's top ten in yards per pass attempt?
From 1970-1974 Terry Bradshaw did not have a single season in the top ten in the league in yards per attempt
From 1970-1974 Terry Bradshaw did not have a single season in the top ten in the league in passer rating.
Enter Swann and Stallworth...
Yards per attempt rank in league, and passer rating rank
1975 ranked 7th & 4th
1977 ranked 1st & 7th
1978 ranked 1st & 2nd
Hmmmm.
Five years in the leauge is plenty long enough to grow and establish oneself. In fact, most elite QB's have established themselves as elite by their second year...and by their fifth year they are already in HOF discussion as an all-time great. But Bradshaw was simply not good enough to do that. It took the merits of other players on his team to vault him into that type of discussion. The credit should be going to his receivers and line, NOT HIM. He was good at throwing jump balls.
Had he truly been a great deep passer, or a great passer in general, don't you think he would have at least showed up ONCE in the top ten in the league in both of those important measures of a QB? Repeat, FIVE YEARS with no top ten finishes, FIVE!
Oh, one might ask what happened in 1976 when he had Swann/Stallworth. Well, Bradshaw was bad in 1976 and his yards per attempt slipped to 6.1. His team went 4-4 with him as a starter with the best weapons in the history of the league. What is startling is that the backup scrub went 6-0 and had a yards per attempt of 8.9!!!
Now it is no wonder that Swann absolutely owned the second Super Bowl, and that Swann and Stallworth both owned the next two. The question always is, which came first, the chicke or the egg?? Based on the above, Bradshaw laid an egg wihtout those two...and those two absolutley carried the passing game, as can be measured by objective analysis like above, and by simply watching them make catches on a consistent basis that only a rare receiver could make.
Terry Bradshaw did everyting in his power to lose a playoff game in each of their first two Super Bowl years.
1974 at Oakland, Bradhsaw was 8 of 17 for 95 yards, 1 INT, and 1 TD. Only to be saved by his defense giving up 13 points, and Franco Harris and Rocky Bleier just carrying the offense.
1975 vs Oakland, Bradshaw was 15 0f 25 for 200 yards, 3 INT, and 1 TD. Only to be saved by the defense giving up only 10 points
Their next two Super Bowls their team was in full gear defensively, and looking at the post I made above this, it shows how Swann/Stallworth were the true carriers of the passing game, not Bradshaw. Bradshaw was simply a good benefactor.
These are the types of games that some truly elite QB's have had in the post season, only they have not had the luck of being saved by an incredible cast of teammates. What happens then is that they lose, and then they get this label placed upon them by ignorant fairy tale believing fans. Just dumb.
<< <i>Imo stats like this are for people that do not watch or understand the games. Too much goes into an NFL game, the QB is a HUGE part of it no doubt, however to say that Manning isnt one of the best ever is freaking ridiculous. Favre as well. >>
I don't disagree that Manning and Favre are among the best ever. But to say Manning is the ONE best of all time is far fetched at this point. As Bill Simmons said, the "Manning Face" has returned!
And, I would LOVE to see Favre return again and win a SB for the Vikings -- unless New England makes it, of course.
Saying a a player has won 4 rings is also a stat
Common sense prevails, and common sense knows that the teammates are such a huge factor that to judge an individual player based on how well the team does, is basicaly nonsense.
If you read all the Terry Bradshaw stuff, it outlines it pretty clear.
As for the myths of pro players being capale of having a trait where they can excel or refuse to fail in a big game, this is also a myth. It has been shown time and time again in all the baseball analysis...and highlighted very clearly this year with Arod and Howard(did he just strike out again?).
If you still don't believe in that, then you must believe those players you hail as gamers, are STUPID. Why? Because if they really did own that trait where they can raise their game, or refuse to fail, then why on earth wouldn't they do that in EVERY game they play????
They can't, because luck, chance, circurmstance, and randomness is what controls those things you believe as real.
<< <i>
If you still don't believe in that, then you must believe those players you hail as gamers, are STUPID. Why? Because if they really did own that trait where they can raise their game, or refuse to fail, then why on earth wouldn't they do that in EVERY game they play????
They can't, because luck, chance, circurmstance, and randomness is what controls those things you believe as real. >>
You act if players are robots.
So with your analogy, a player like tarkenton, or Bernie Kosar are just as good as Joe Montana because its all about luck that the other two failed in big games
The difference between Montana and Bradshaw is that Montana was always among the best, and he clearly was the 'main' reason why his team's won titles.
Bradshaw was average for FIVE years until his HOF teammates made him look better, and then the TEAMMATES were the main reason why they won. Bradshwas was good, and a nice compliment to them, but clearly not the reason...as outlined in the other threads quite clearly.
I sure hope you grasp your addition and subtraction better than you do this stuff. Finsih your homework
<< <i>They are not as good as Montana because we witness each of them play well over 100 games...plenty enough information to gather the merits of each player.
The difference between Montana and Bradshaw is that Montana was always among the best, and he clearly was the 'main' reason why his team's won titles.
>>
No way. Even though i rank Montana ahead of Bradshaw, like Bradshaw, Montana played on one of the best teams ever. Some say the best ever. I pointed out some stats when the 49'ers had years with less than stellar defenses, they didnt win. Montana played in a different era and were a pass-first offense. Montana did not call his own plays. How many super bowls did Montana win with the chiefs?
Some amateurs have proclaimed Bradshaw a top five QB of all time, and some have said he was the best deep passer of all time. Ask yourself this, if both of those were true, don't you think he would at least make an honest showing in the following measurements, regardless of who his receivers were?
Terry Bradshaw had FIVE seasons as a starter before Swann and Stallworth became starters. How many times did the so called best deep passer in the history of the NFL crack the league's top ten in yards per pass attempt?
From 1970-1974 Terry Bradshaw did not have a single season in the top ten in the league in yards per attempt
From 1970-1974 Terry Bradshaw did not have a single season in the top ten in the league in passer rating.
Enter Swann and Stallworth...
Yards per attempt rank in league, and passer rating rank
1975 ranked 7th & 4th
1977 ranked 1st & 7th
1978 ranked 1st & 2nd
Hmmmm.
Five years in the leauge is plenty long enough to grow and establish oneself. In fact, most elite QB's have established themselves as elite by their second year...and by their fifth year they are already in HOF discussion as an all-time great. But Bradshaw was simply not good enough to do that. It took the merits of other players on his team to vault him into that type of discussion. The credit should be going to his receivers and line, NOT HIM. He was good at throwing jump balls.
Had he truly been a great deep passer, or a great passer in general, don't you think he would have at least showed up ONCE in the top ten in the league in both of those important measures of a QB? Repeat, FIVE YEARS with no top ten finishes, FIVE!
Oh, one might ask what happened in 1976 when he had Swann/Stallworth. Well, Bradshaw was bad in 1976 and his yards per attempt slipped to 6.1. His team went 4-4 with him as a starter with the best weapons in the history of the league. What is startling is that the backup scrub went 6-0 and had a yards per attempt of 8.9!!!
Now it is no wonder that Swann absolutely owned the second Super Bowl, and that Swann and Stallworth both owned the next two. The question always is, which came first, the chicke or the egg?? Based on the above, Bradshaw laid an egg wihtout those two...and those two absolutley carried the passing game, as can be measured by objective analysis like above, and by simply watching them make catches on a consistent basis that only a rare receiver could make.
Immortalized
HAHA!
<< <i>No doubt Manning has finally made it now!
Immortalized
HAHA! >>
LOL! That's as bad as the end of Game 6 of the 86 WS on RBI Baseball