He pumped faked and pulled it back then got sacked because the TE completely missed his block. I’ll ask this again, would YOU want him to force a throw there possibly getting in picked off? He made the right choice but did not have any time to find a second receiver. The defense gave up 17 points (their season average). If the offense did their part during the other 58 minutes then they would have won. The offense did NOT do their part and they lost. If you’re going to put every Colts playoff loss on Manning (which you do) then this loss goes squarely on Brady’s shoulders. But you as a Brady fellater will not see that. He did play well. He didn’t play great, and he didn’t play bad. He threw three TDs one bad INT and one INT that should have been caught by the back coming out of the backfield in the 2007 game. In the 2008 game his average starting field position was at their own 15 yard line. After Scifres punts their average starting field position was their own 8. You claim that you watch the games and have a great understanding of football, but seem to miss the boat here on this game with actual game situations. It is very difficult to get anything going on offense when you are consistently backed up like the Colts were in the 2008 game. You just want to blame everything on Manning that you miss most of the surrounding factors that decide wins and losses. Or do you actually believe starting field position has no bearing on the outcome of the game (this would contradict something you said earlier in this thread regarding Desmond Howard) Manning played well in 2007 and well in the 2008 game. It’s a good system. They probably should. It would be a benefit if they had a Welker to go to or a Faulk out of the backfield. Or JR Redmond, or Troy Brown. Of course, however doing it Brady's way would mean you are settling for a lot of FG tries. Brees has not played better than Favre this year. Brees had a 3 to 4 game stretch where he did not play well. Favre has been great all year long. Says the guy that doesn’t understand why you don’t throw the ball recklessly from inside your 5 while getting pressure from your blind side with a little over two minutes left in the game and a 3 point lead…..
Marino had a higher ceiling than probably any QB who ever played. Problem is, he didn't sustain the real high level of play for as long as Favre and Manning have. Dan is below those two in the all time rankings.
I think that's more with how they protect the QB and advances in medical knowledge and surgical procedures. Dan has said this himself, if they had all these rules in place when he was retiring he would've played another 5 years.
Oh I'm not talking the length of his career. I doubt Dan could have lasted another few years anyways. He was pretty much done by then regardless what the rules were. Those rules didn't come into play until what.....2003 or 2004 when Peyton cried because the Pats kept assaulting his WRs and they couldn't seem to get open for him in the postseason. The point I was making with Marino is that had 4 tremendous years when he first broke into the league. From that point on he was quite so sensational. He had some good seasons but where were the MVP caliber seasons? They just weren't there. And he didn't do much in the postseason either. Great QB, but not nearly as great as some suggest. Like I said.....if he could have sustained his peak level for a few more years I'd think differently of him.
The Colts have a 128-59 regular season record, 8 playoff appearances, 5 division titles, 2 AFC Championship appearances and a superbowl win since Manning became the starter in '98. Please stop with the holding them back BS. That's absurd.
I don't know guys like Addai, Edge, Harrison, Clark, Dilger, Pollard, a great OL, Freeney, Sanders, etc... The Colts have had SB caliber teams for about a decade. put Brady on those teams and they make at least 3-4 SBs. Find a way to make a play. They only needed 2 yards to win the game. Find a way. AGAIN, all the D had to do was not allow the Giants to score a TD and they couldn't do it. They were given the lead in the final mins. Much like the Ram SB, they played great for 3 qtrs but fell apart in crunch time- this time Brady wasn't given enough time to rescue them unlike '01 and '03. You can't play well and give up those 2 costly turnovers. Those TOs cost them the game, if he doesn't turn it over they get 3 on each possession at least(maybe 7) and they lost by 4. It doesn't matter where his avg. starting FP was, he needed ONE 1st down to end the game. He couldn't do it. 2nd half possessions: started at: Ind 26 Ind 9(drive where they caught SD napping) Ind 20 Ind 21 Ind 1 you can use averages all you want but 3 of their 5 legit possessions(they got one after SD tied it but didn't have time to do anything) they started at the 20 or better. Not great FP but hardly awful and the only scoring drive of the 2nd half they scored when they started at the 9. Next excuse. Refresh my memory- when did Brady ever have Welker to win a SB? You mentioned a bunch of other names too- that's b/c it doesn't matter who Brady is throwing to. he once made a title game w/ Jabar gaffney and reche Caldwell as his top 2 receivers. It's close but Brees has his team undefeated and he doesn't have an Adrian Peterson to rely on. He didn't need to be reckless, he needed to get the 1st down. He's gets so much praise for calling plays but when they don't work he doesn't get criticized? Manning has a case but favre? Please stop embarrssing yourself. Favre had a great run in the 90s and became an average QB most of this decade. That is mroe proof he has held them back. You see all the great reg season #s such as the wins, div titles, top seeds, etc... and then you see Indy year after year fall on their face. Peyton has led Indy to a one and done SIX times. How many times has Brady done that? NONE! Peyton and the Colts have had a bye week in postseason 3 times. They are 0-3 in those games! You don't think he and the colts have underachieved in postseason?
Those are the guys that make the Colts a SB caliber team that Peyton Manning is "holding back?" I have a better idea; why don't you remove Manning from the Colts and tell me what QB (OTHER than Brady) would be more successful during the past 10 years and lead them to/win numerous SBs? Manning has orchestrated five Fourth Quarter comeback victories this season itself. But yeah, he's nothing more than a guy who puts up good Fantasy stats.
With the two seconds he was given he’s supposed to find a way to make a play? Watch the highlights again and tell us what he SHOULD have done. You can say it again all the times you want. Brady and the offense failed in that Super Bowl. He played well by throwing 3 TDs and getting them another FG. He didn’t play great because he threw 2 INTs one of which was not his fault. Field position absolutely does matter. They weren’t able to get their offense going. Their only TD in the second half happened on what you keep calling a fluke play. What’s your point? Refresh my memory, didn’t you say if dinking and dunking guarantees playoff wins? Why did you now mention SB wins? You always change the topic. Yes, it is close. I didn’t say it wasn’t, but Favre has been a bit more consistent. Favre has thrown 24 TDs to only 3 INTs. He may have a great RB to hand the ball off to, but he’s not relying on him to get the job done for Minnesota. Everyone understands that he needed to get the first down, but during the course of events on the 3rd and 2 play it was impossible for him to get the first down. See you blame EVERYTHING on Manning, but it was impossible for him to get a throw off in that situation that was safe.
They won a SB in the past decade on top of all the other success. The dynasty Pats won two more SBs than that. Does that mean the Pats - with all their success - have underachieved the years they didn't win the SB?
The Colts have been Superbowl contenders pretty much since the 2nd season Peyton landed there. It's because of him, not in spite of him. Have they underachieved in the playoffs, probably, but I wonder if he had the NE defense and kicker if he and the Colts wouldn't be the ones with 3 rings instead of Brady and the Pats. You'd be hard pressed to find another person that follows the NFL that would agree that Peyton Manning is holding his team back. I'm not sure what your agenda is here, but it seems clear you have some axe to grind. You're being ridiculous. Again, you'll defend Pennington to the death, but then chop down a guy like Peyton Manning who is one of the best QB's any of us will ever watch. What gives?
According to Junc, Pennington is just as accomplished because he had less talent around him and had a DYNASTY in his Division. Playoff appearances and titles are achievements reached by Pennington, whereas they're failures by Peyton Manning. Makes a lot of sense.
Well said, and this is exactly what I don't understand either. Junc just likes to argue, I think we all know that. He is entitled to his opinion.
Yeah, how can any QB be expected to win w/ a great OL, good D, great skill position players. poor Peyton:rofl: That's great that he has 5 4th qtr victories, he's a great REGULAR SEASON QB. Those comebacks don't happen in January. When he wins consistently in january he'll move up, he doesn't need to win the SB every year but SIX one and done's? come on. There's plenty of other QBs who would have won w/ that talent- Brady, ben, Warner just to name a few. Make a play. The great ones find a way. They gave the Pats the lead in the final minutes. Name me ONE playoff loss where Manning led his o to go ahead(or even tying) pts in the final minutes only to watch the D or STs lose the game? of course the Tds were all peyton but the INts were not his fault. Typical excuses for the Manning backers. FP matters but they had the ball at least the 20 for 3 of their 5 possessions. you made it seem like they were at the 2 every possession. What am I changing? He has TWO playoff wins w/ Welker. he has 14 overall, it's an asinine example. The difference btw 1 SB and 3 is huge. Only 2 teams have ever won more than 3 in a decade. Peyton doesn't need 3-4 rings but he should have 3-4 AFC Titles at minimum w/ at least 2 SB titles. Yep and how many times did those contenders reach the SB? how many times did those contedners get to an AFC Title Game? He's obviously a main reason they are great in the reg season every year but he's also a main reason they don't advance in the postseason. My agenda is for the truth. I don't bow down to the meaningless fantasy #s that the average fan falls for. I dig deeper. Ask yourself this: It's a playoff game in January and you are a DC, which QB would you rather face late in a close game? Peyton or Brady. I'm glad you think Chad is a HOF QB. In love how you have absolutely no points so you resort to comparing Manning to a good QB who has no shot at the Hall. Wouldn't you agree there are different standards for different players?
So essentially what yer saying is that if you were a Colts fan, you would be disappointed every single year because of the lack of AFC Titles and SB appearances? Yet yer perfectly content with Pennington and the Jets squeaking into the Playoffs and losing in the first/second round? No points? We're comparing QBs and their success. Not everything is based on statistical points. The standards should be the same across the board when comparing players who play in the same league during the same years. After 10 years - which is a sufficient sample size - it's obvious Peyton Manning is one of the best (if not the best) QBs. And he earns that description based on...wait for it...being compared to other QBs. Therefore, we can say Manning is better than Pennington and about 30 other QBs in the NFL. I'm looking at stats right now of QBs in the league; Tom Brady and Peyton Manning are on the same list as Mark Sanchez and JaMarcus Russell. According to your logic, this stat-sheet is bogus because the former two QBs have higher standards then the latter two Qbs. In actuality, all four are playing in the NFL right now - this 2009/10 season - so they can be compared. You don't alter the standards, you don't lower them for one guy and then raise them for another guy. Comparing all QBs under the same umbrella is how you distinguish the best from the others. And clearly, Peyton is/has been one of the best. Peyton Manning is the reason Indy is as good as they are and have been -- perennial contenders. Take away Manning, and how good are the Colts? I guess all of those 'SB caliber players' like Addai, Clark, Freeney et al would have much more success without Manning holding them back.
Of course they can. Certain players are not big game players and peyton is one of them. he had a GREAT 2nd half against NE in 2006 but that should be more the norm than the exception and it's not. Peyton's poor play in January has cost Indy a chance to get to more SBs. Steve Young was the same way as was Warren Moon and other HOF QBs. No question, I'd be sick and tired of making it and losing to lesser teams every year. Name me the playoff year where we lost to a lesser team w/ Chad? you can't b/c it never happened. Again, how can you compare a good NFL QB to a HOFer? is that fair? The standards are different. If you can't see that I can't help you. If you are putting sanchez and Russell in the same category as Brady and manning you are clueless. You just dn't get it. Using your flawed logic the lions should be as disappointed not making the SB as Indy or NE will be if they don't. Peyton Manning is definitely a major reason why Indy is great every year in the REGULAR SEASON. He's also a major reason why they disappoint nearly every year in postseason. He's a top 5 all-time reg season QB, what drags him down is his play in big games.
When you reach the Playoffs, there aren't really "lesser" teams. Sure, there are Offensive juggernauts and elite Defenses and 1-6 seeds, but it's a tournament in which every team that's in it has earned and is good enough to be there. That explains why Wild Card teams have won the SB. You missed the point here. All players at a specific position are comparable. Otherwise, the only comparison made every year would be among Brady, Manning, and Ben and that's it because they are perennial contenders and expected to go deep into the Playoffs -- no reason to even keep stats on any of the other players because their standards are lower. So aside from Brady and Ben, what QBs have consistently risen above everyone else in the Playoffs. If Manning is such a post-season disappointment, who has excelled every single year?
So NE 2004 and Miami 2008 were equal? of course there are lesser teams. 1999 Indy 13-3, lost to Ten 13-3 2002: Indy 10-6, lost to NYJ 9-7 2005: Indy 14-2, lost to Pitt 11-5 2007: Indy 13-3, lost to SD 11-5 2008: Indy 12-4, lost to SD 8-8 half of Indy's playoff losses w/ Peyton have come against teams w/ worse records than Indy. Manning and Brady are on a different level from every QB. They are judged to higher standards, in postseason Brady has elevated himself above everyone while Manning is one of a pack of QBs behind the likes of Brady, Ben, Warner, McNabb(been to 5 NFC title games and 1 SB).
