Enough is enough. Peyton Manning is the greatest QB of all time.

[ram29jackson]

Yes you are.

You just insinuated that sound football strategy is less important than attempting to show "total dominance" and cementing your playing legacy.

If only Jim Kelly and the Bills would have attempted a Hail Mary against the Giants. Scott Norwood would have been saved!!


That's idiotic. Hypothetically a QB could throw for 500 yards 8TD's in every Super Bowl he plays in and win by 3 points each time but because his defense can't stop anyone and it's a shootout won by 3 that QB can't be called the greatest ever?

Honesty....you're going to stand behind this line of thinking?
Are you on drugs? Seriously?

you are incredibly immature, you make no sense at all.

this is about QBs alone. not team wins, not kickers feet. and also i am looking at the whole picture. Brady is not one of the greats because he got bloated stats in a weak parity ,free agency period in football. And as good as Brady and the Pats have looked the last few years, they won their Super bowls by small margins, not dominating wins. But , again, there is no such thing as greatest ever anyway. They will be forgotten 10 and 20 years from now for whomever the new breed QBs will be

[Fox1994]

^That was incredibly immature, but the thing about a shootout won by a field goal is sort of a good point.

[Deviant]

Who cares about total dominance? The point is to win the damn game. Brady put his team in positions to do so time after time and if it was about "total dominance" of scoring a TD The Pats would have been chucking hail mary's into the endzone to beat the Rams and Panthers not playing to win and kicking field goals.

Peyton has put his team in a positions to win and his kickers failed him. Yet, we look down on Manning because of it.

[JeremyHight]

Peyton has put his team in a positions to win and his kickers failed him. Yet, we look down on Manning because of it.

Go look at his playoff gamelog and then say "It's his kicker's fault" for all of those loses.

Again, the people who aren't saying he is the best isn't because of the lack of rings on his fingers, it is because of his poor performances in the playoffs that has caused those fingers to be bare.

[Senser81]

And as good as Brady and the Pats have looked the last few years, they won their Super bowls by small margins, not dominating wins.

Thats nice. Do they count for less? Does Jim McMahon earn 2 Super Bowl victories because the Bears were dominant in SB XX, and Tom Brady only given credit for 1.5 Super Bowl victories because of the Patriots "small margins"?

[Deviant]

Go look at his playoff gamelog and then say "It's his kicker's fault" for all of those loses.

Again, the people who aren't saying he is the best isn't because of the lack of rings on his fingers, it is because of his poor performances in the playoffs that has caused those fingers to be bare.

I've looked through four specific losses of his where he put his team in the position to win/tie and his kicker failed him. There is also a loss against the Patriots where he did not commit a turnover, but Reggie Wayne and Edgerrin James committed two turnovers by fumbling the ball in Patriots' territory. His postseason career doesn't look pretty in the beginning, but since his first win, he's 7-5 and has a rating of 91.5. Ironically, his poorest performances was in the year he won his Super Bowl and him at his greatest didn't. So... I really don't see you point, whatsoever.

[JeremyHight]

I've looked through four specific losses of his where he put his team in the position to win/tie and his kicker failed him. There is also a loss against the Patriots where he did not commit a turnover, but Reggie Wayne and Edgerrin James committed two turnovers by fumbling the ball in Patriots' territory. His postseason career doesn't look pretty in the beginning, but since his first win, he's 7-5 and has a rating of 91.5. Ironically, his poorest performances was in the year he won his Super Bowl and him at his greatest didn't. So... I really don't see you point, whatsoever.

... I think you are looking at the wrong stats. In every game he's played in the playoffs against the Patriots, he's had at least 1 Interception.

As for his record since winning a playoff game, 2 of his 3 worst games have been since winning a game in the postseason.

Look at the defensive/offensive averages of his team and then compare that to the losses. Most of the time, the losses aren't because the defense did worse, in a lot of cases, the defense actually beat out their regular season performance and stepped up their game. The offense is the one that regressed. If you are going to give him the credit for running such a great offense, he should also get the blame in all those cases where the offense completely underperformed in the post-season.

[Senser81]

Look at the defensive/offensive averages of his team and then compare that to the losses. Most of the time, the losses aren't because the defense did worse, in a lot of cases, the defense actually beat out their regular season performance and stepped up their game. The offense is the one that regressed. If you are going to give him the credit for running such a great offense, he should also get the blame in all those cases where the offense completely underperformed in the post-season.

That doesn't really solve anything, because you don't know how bad the Colts defense was in the regular season (or how good the Colts offense was in the regular season). I would say that its not all that surprising to see a defense "do better" in the postseason because of bad weather and more conservative offensive gameplans. Its also not surprising that offenses in general "underperform" in the postseason for these same reasons.

And again, if the Colts are winning games in the regular season 31-24, then they lose in the postseason 23-17 while giving up 200+ yards to Lamar Smith...I don't think the appropriate conclusion is that the defense "overperformed" while the offense cost the team the game by "underperforming".

[Bear Pand]

A big problem with Manning is the Colts started off slow in the playoffs and he gained a "choker" reputation. So now to some extent everyone expects him to choke, and looks for ways to validate that belief (ex: people saying he Trent Dilfered his way to a SB, even though he lead won of the biggest playoff comebacks of all time, and one an SB MVP during that run) I remember after Manning torched Denver twice, people still said he sucked in big games and refused to count those two as big games.

You compare that to a guy like Brady who's team started off hot in the playoffs and he gets the reputation of being this clutch unstoppable force, even though recently that hasn't been the case at all. (ex Denver game, Giants game, last game vs Colts)

It'd be interesting to go back and see what people were saying about guys like Elway before he got his two rings. His playoff numbers are significantly worse than Mannings and he didn't win his 2 until late in his career.

[Deviant]

... I think you are looking at the wrong stats. In every game he's played in the playoffs against the Patriots, he's had at least 1 Interception.

As for his record since winning a playoff game, 2 of his 3 worst games have been since winning a game in the postseason.

Look at the defensive/offensive averages of his team and then compare that to the losses. Most of the time, the losses aren't because the defense did worse, in a lot of cases, the defense actually beat out their regular season performance and stepped up their game. The offense is the one that regressed. If you are going to give him the credit for running such a great offense, he should also get the blame in all those cases where the offense completely underperformed in the post-season.

In the 20-3 loss I'm talking about, he threw an interception in desperation with 10 seconds to go in the game. Are you really going to count that?

Also, you can't blame Peyton for offensive woes when someone else fumbles the football. That's why the stat counts against Wayne and James, not Peyton.

[Bear Pand]

Look at the defensive/offensive averages of his team and then compare that to the losses. Most of the time, the losses aren't because the defense did worse, in a lot of cases, the defense actually beat out their regular season performance and stepped up their game. The offense is the one that regressed.

Bizzaro.

Man I remember you bringing out this bogus stat at MM. The one time the D actually did step up their game consistently in the playoffs the Colts won a SuperBowl.

In the 20-3 loss I'm talking about, he threw an interception in desperation with 10 seconds to go in the game. Are you really going to count that?

Also, you can't blame Peyton for offensive woes when someone else fumbles the football. That's why the stat counts against Wayne and James, not Peyton.

Pats ran for over 200 yards and held the ball for 37 mins in that game. Somehow it's all about Manning though.

[SethMode]

I've looked through four specific losses of his where he put his team in the position to win/tie and his kicker failed him.

I'm curious what 4 you're talking about. I hope you aren't referring to the Colts/Steelers game...which is one that comes to mind for me. I mean, don't get me wrong, Vanderjagt totally blew that game, but if anything the Bus put the Colts in a position for Vanderjagt to win it.

[Deviant]

I'm curious what 4 you're talking about. I hope you aren't referring to the Colts/Steelers game...which is one that comes to mind for me. I mean, don't get me wrong, Vanderjagt totally blew that game, but if anything the Bus put the Colts in a position for Vanderjagt to win it.

They were down 21-3 in the Fourth. Yes, the fumble helped and gave them a chance, but Peyton put them in position. They still had to drive down the field and Nick Harper's dumbass went running straight at Roethlisberger instead of running down the sideline.

Doesn't Peyton have the record for largest deficit overcome in a conference championship game? Throwing a perfect passer rating doesn't count either? Is that not coming up huge in big games?

Also, I've looked at some of Peyton's loses in the playoffs and in four of them, he has put his team in a situation to win and there were faults by teammates that stopped him. For instance, in his playoff game against Miami in 2001(?), the Colts gave up a playoff-record 209 yards to Lamar Smith on the ground. A last second TD by the Dolphins tied the game (after Peyton had pushed the lead to a touchdown on the previous drive). After the defense halted the Dolphins in OT, Peyton set up Vanderjagt with a game-winning FG from 48 after they just missed a 3rd and 12 conversion by a yard. Vanderjagt shanks it (despite nailing a 52 yarded earlier) and the Dolphins win the game.

Two fumbles by Dominic Rhodes and Reggie Wayne while in Patriots territory for potential scores killed their chances to win in a 20-3 game. Is that fair to hang against Manning considering he didn't commit a turnover until the last seconds of the game in desperation?

Peyton came back from 21-3 to 21-18 in the Fourth against the Steelers and after a present from his defense, drove the team down the field and set up a field goal situation for Vanderjagt. Vanderjagt shanks again.

I think Peyton deserves a lot more credit in his games than just the W & L column.

Also, the Chargers/Colts game last year. Peyton has an excellent game, run game is terrible and the defense let Darren Sproles run all over them on offense and special teams. It goes into overtime on a last minute field goal by the Chargers and the Chargers won the toss and the game on the following possession.

[SethMode]

They were down 21-3 in the Fourth. Yes, the fumble helped and gave them a chance, but Peyton put them in position. They still had to drive down the field and Nick Harper's dumbass went running straight at Roethlisberger instead of running down the sideline.

Eh, I don't know if I agree with this. I'm a Peyton fan but that play was so fluky. Arguably should have been 27-18, if Bettis had done what he had done millions of times before from that close. And to beat up on Harper...it stinks he was tackled by Ben, but come on, hard to kill a guy on a play like that.

As far as Peyton's performance in general, it was okay, but I'm not sure I'd claim that he put them in a position to win anymore than Bettis or Harper did. He only threw 1 TD and let's not forget the fact that he technically threw a pick in that game that was overturned in one of the worst reviews in recent memory.

I'm not trying to talk semantics here, I just think if you want to make an argument for Manning, I wouldn't point to that game.

[Senser81]

Eh, I don't know if I agree with this. I'm a Peyton fan but that play was so fluky. Arguably should have been 27-18, if Bettis had done what he had done millions of times before from that close. And to beat up on Harper...it stinks he was tackled by Ben, but come on, hard to kill a guy on a play like that.

As far as Peyton's performance in general, it was okay, but I'm not sure I'd claim that he put them in a position to win anymore than Bettis or Harper did. He only threw 1 TD and let's not forget the fact that he technically threw a pick in that game that was overturned in one of the worst reviews in recent memory.

I'm not trying to talk semantics here, I just think if you want to make an argument for Manning, I wouldn't point to that game.

Yeah. Peyton put the Colts in position to win about as well as Jim Kelly put the Bills in position to win in Super Bowl XXV. And IIRC, the FG would have only tied the game for the Colts, not given them the win.