Kurt Warner: No HOF For Eli Manning

[JBregz]

Not being salty at all. He brings up great points. He's had two good years in his career so far. Championships will help but they shouldn't be a factor.

 

[Deviant]

Statistically, Warner has a point, but here's a characteristic that is attached to Eli:

4th Quarter Comebacks.

If there's something he's exceptional at, it's finding a way to win when the team needs him in the fourth. It's when he plays his best football. His career statistics will improve in time and he will be a Hall of Famer unless he has an absolute meltdown for the rest of his career.

 

[dave]

I used to be an Eli Manning critic, but I take 58% or whatever it is and Super Bowl wins over 65% and no Super Bowls.

I love Donovan McNabb to death, but he didn't get the rings. Still love him ... but, again, no rings.

Eli Manning didn't win those rings himself ... obviously ... but he has them.

Every Philly Eagles fan would take that 58% or so completion percentage and the rings over everything else.

Two Super Bowls and Eli Manning just got it done. HOF should be auto. Yeah, stat geeks like W2BTD and FirstTimer can go nuts over all the other crap ... but at the end of the day, Eli Manning helped get it done (and then some) ... twice. I don't care if he has 2011-2012 warped passing stats throughout his career.

 

[CrimsonGhost56]

who cares if hes HOF material or not yet. hes got plenty of time left in his career

what i do know is that this mofo has gotten 2 SB's in 4 years.

eli is gonna be hated till the day hes done cause of his last name and the fact he plays in new york. it is what it is and people are gonna hate and nothings gonna stop them

but us giants fans dont give a fuck

 

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

If you leave Eli out, he's now the bonafide #1 guy out of the Hall of Fame, and is the new standard for Hall or no Hall...previously held by Ken Anderson and to a slightly lesser extent, John Brodie. Those guys were numbers, but no rings or any level of high end success. The only guy with Eli's success was Plunkett, but he doesn't have as strong of a resume or comparable to his peers like Eli.

In comparing his numbers to his peers, and trying to retroSABR his stats for era, why can't we just come to the conclusion that this era of football has a high end number of QBs that are Hall worthy?

Never finished in the Top 3...well, I mean when you are consistently behind fellow Hall of Fame QBs like Brady, brother Peyton, Drew Brees...getting into that Top 3 is not something I hold against someone.

Favre and Warner are two QBs that recently retired that I think are Hall worthy.

Brady, Peyton Manning, and Brees are shoe-ins still active.

Eli Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, and Aaron Rodgers are QBs with Super Bowls, Super Bowl MVPs (and for Rodgers, the best 20-ish game stretch of quarterbacking I've ever seen...ridiculous what he did to end 2010 and the entire 2011 regular season) and statistics that are projected to be among the all-time lists when its all said and done...I think those guys are Hall bound as well.

You're getting statistical output better than Anderson and Brodie, but with rings and high end accolades.

IMO, that's Hall of Fame worthy at the position.

If you don't think so...kick rocks.

 

[KINGOFOOTBALL]

I used to be an Eli Manning critic, but I take 58% or whatever it is and Super Bowl wins over 65% and no Super Bowls.

I love Donovan McNabb to death, but he didn't get the rings. Still love him ... but, again, no rings.

Eli Manning didn't win those rings himself ... obviously ... but he has them.

Every Philly Eagles fan would take that 58% or so completion percentage and the rings over everything else.

Two Super Bowls and Eli Manning just got it done. HOF should be auto. Yeah, stat geeks like W2BTD and FirstTimer can go nuts over all the other crap ... but at the end of the day, Eli Manning helped get it done (and then some) ... twice. I don't care if he has 2011-2012 warped passing stats throughout his career.

Did your account get hacked by Jim Plunkett ?

I dont know whats worse the random % mumbo jumbo or that FT/W2B are now considered stat geeks. Why not call Nuke and Rosetta the warm hearted sweethearts of VSN while youre at it.

Statistically, Warner has a point, but here's a characteristic that is attached to Eli:

4th Quarter Comebacks.

If there's something he's exceptional at, it's finding a way to win when the team needs him in the fourth. It's when he plays his best football. His career statistics will improve in time and he will be a Hall of Famer unless he has an absolute meltdown for the rest of his career.

I dont think you know the difference between accumulate and improve.

4th quarter comebacks in this age ?
Why not tell me how many 100 reception seasons Carl Pickens had.

More complex but there are more elite QBs playing at the same time than ever before because the position has gotten so specialized.

???
Theres only two shoe ins right now and thats Brady and Manning.

All the rest are bubble guys.

Was there ever an era that had 4-5 HOF QBs competing against each other at once before 1980?

There was only two "eras" before 1980..both had more HOF QBs playing.
I would suggest a cursory glance at the 60s early 70s because there was about 6-10 playing against each other any given year.

If you leave Eli out, he's now the bonafide #1 guy out of the Hall of Fame, and is the new standard for Hall or no Hall...previously held by Ken Anderson and to a slightly lesser extent, John Brodie. Those guys were numbers, but no rings or any level of high end success. The only guy with Eli's success was Plunkett, but he doesn't have as strong of a resume or comparable to his peers like Eli.

In comparing his numbers to his peers, and trying to retroSABR his stats for era, why can't we just come to the conclusion that this era of football has a high end number of QBs that are Hall worthy?

Never finished in the Top 3...well, I mean when you are consistently behind fellow Hall of Fame QBs like Brady, brother Peyton, Drew Brees...getting into that Top 3 is not something I hold against someone.

Favre and Warner are two QBs that recently retired that I think are Hall worthy.

Brady, Peyton Manning, and Brees are shoe-ins still active.

Eli Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, and Aaron Rodgers are QBs with Super Bowls, Super Bowl MVPs (and for Rodgers, the best 20-ish game stretch of quarterbacking I've ever seen...ridiculous what he did to end 2010 and the entire 2011 regular season) and statistics that are projected to be among the all-time lists when its all said and done...I think those guys are Hall bound as well.

You're getting statistical output better than Anderson and Brodie, but with rings and high end accolades.

IMO, that's Hall of Fame worthy at the position.

If you don't think so...kick rocks.

Im not saying whos not going to get in...but IF some of these guys get in the HOF voters are caving to popular pressure. There's simply no way you look at the context of this era and how these guys played year in year out and what they faced and put them in the HOF. Theres a big difference from some guys on NFL network being told to hype this up as some super era for the fans. But to actually put these guys in is just further watering down the HOF. Then again Mediocre Martin just got voted in so who knows.

 

[RosettaStoned]

Why not call Nuke and Rosetta the warm hearted sweethearts of VSN while youre at it.

Hey motherfucker, stop trolling or I'll ban hammer your asshole wide open.


















































:cano:

 

[shag773]

Im not saying whos not going to get in...but IF some of these guys get in the HOF voters are caving to popular pressure. There's simply no way you look at the context of this era and how these guys played year in year out and what they faced and put them in the HOF. Theres a big difference from some guys on NFL network being told to hype this up as some super era for the fans. But to actually put these guys in is just further watering down the HOF. Then again Mediocre Martin just got voted in so who knows.

Would Drew Brees water down the HOF if he never played another down and was inducted?

 

[KINGOFOOTBALL]

Hey motherfucker, stop trolling or I'll ban hammer your asshole wide open.

NFL forum = On topic.

Not your jurisdiction.

 

[KINGOFOOTBALL]

Would Drew Brees water down the HOF if he never played another down and was inducted?

Yes.

Above average in SD except for one season. Labeled a choker like every other QB this era until he won a SB. Very Warren Moonish. Taking a glance and seeing him sitting behind Kerry friggin Collins at 40k cements it.

Tony Romo has the 2nd highest QB rating of all time. If he wins a SB we have to throw him into the mix of HOFers as well.

Brees is the closest guy after Brady/Manning but as I likened to Moon very easily can argue his stat padding in a pass happy offense in pass happy system , in a pass happy dome.

Some of you guys are just comparing numbers to guys from the past. If you cant take into account the fact none of these guys are doing anything 2-3 other guys aren't also doing than you shouldn't be evaluating anybody. Sorry these aren't the most talented group of QBs ever. Even in other pass growth periods you didnt see rookies and 2nd year guys come in and tear apart the scoreboard with such regularity.
Matt Flynn future HOFer ???

What you're seeing today is tantamount to RBs facing 2 defensive lineman every down.

 

[RosettaStoned]

NFL forum = On topic.

Not your jurisdiction.

Every forum is my jurisiction fucker. <3

 

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

Im not saying whos not going to get in...but IF some of these guys get in the HOF voters are caving to popular pressure. There's simply no way you look at the context of this era and how these guys played year in year out and what they faced and put them in the HOF. Theres a big difference from some guys on NFL network being told to hype this up as some super era for the fans. But to actually put these guys in is just further watering down the HOF. Then again Mediocre Martin just got voted in so who knows.

This gets into the debate...does very good over a long period of time = great?

Sometimes I think no...sometimes I think yes.

lhoss:

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Would Drew Brees water down the HOF if he never played another down and was inducted?

Drew Brees is roughly a million times better than Eli Manning, and while I think he's probably a worthy HOF'er, I still had to stop and think about it for a second.

 

[shag773]

Yes.

Above average in SD except for one season. Labeled a choker like every other QB this era until he won a SB. Very Warren Moonish. Taking a glance and seeing him sitting behind Kerry friggin Collins at 40k cements it.

Tony Romo has the 2nd highest QB rating of all time. If he wins a SB we have to throw him into the mix of HOFers as well.

Brees is the closest guy after Brady/Manning but as I likened to Moon very easily can argue his stat padding in a pass happy offense in pass happy system , in a pass happy dome.

Some of you guys are just comparing numbers to guys from the past. If you cant take into account the fact none of these guys are doing anything 2-3 other guys aren't also doing than you shouldn't be evaluating anybody. Sorry these aren't the most talented group of QBs ever. Even in other pass growth periods you didnt see rookies and 2nd year guys come in and tear apart the scoreboard with such regularity.
Matt Flynn future HOFer ???

What you're seeing today is tantamount to RBs facing 2 defensive lineman every down.

I think you made some good points, most I agree with. But if Drew Brees waters down the hall of fame, what does that say about Namath? I saw you had no problem with him in the HOF.

While I agree Namath had 1 massive season and two really good seasons in regards to what QBs were doing in the 60's, but what about the the last 8 years of his career? They were bad to average, even in the standards that were set during that time.

I think a posting a statement like "What you're seeing today is tantamount to RBs facing 2 defensive lineman every down." is over stating things a little. Yes, there are rules set in place that protect them physically and give their WR more room to run. But they are also playing against some of the most freakishly athletic men on the planet.

Playing in the NFL was a second job to most of the players back then. They didn't work out or put the work into the craft that today's players do. It's a different game, that I agree with. But was it THAT much harder to play QB back then? Not sure if I would go as far as you would.

 

[NAHSTE]

Yeah, stat geeks like W2BTD and FirstTimer can go nuts over all the other crap

Hold up ... FT and w2b are "stat geeks"?

:lol:

 

[FirstTimer]

Hold up ... FT and w2b are "stat geeks"?

:lol:

Bill James

:fap:

:cano:


:jizz:

 

[Houston]

Even if he isn't HOF material now, I'd say he's on good pace:yep:

http://www.newsday.com/sports/footb...-vs-hall-of-fame-quarterbacks-at-30-1.3493231

 

[KINGOFOOTBALL]

I think you made some good points, most I agree with. But if Drew Brees waters down the hall of fame, what does that say about Namath? I saw you had no problem with him in the HOF.

While I agree Namath had 1 massive season and two really good seasons in regards to what QBs were doing in the 60's, but what about the the last 8 years of his career? They were bad to average, even in the standards that were set during that time.

I think a posting a statement like "What you're seeing today is tantamount to RBs facing 2 defensive lineman every down." is over stating things a little. Yes, there are rules set in place that protect them physically and give their WR more room to run. But they are also playing against some of the most freakishly athletic men on the planet.

Playing in the NFL was a second job to most of the players back then. They didn't work out or put the work into the craft that today's players do. It's a different game, that I agree with. But was it THAT much harder to play QB back then? Not sure if I would go as far as you would.

1. Because of history , the impact of that game , and comparison to his peers on the NFL side. When you are the first , unique , or do something that is storied through the ages of your sport you get put on a pedestal. Eli and Brees are just blips on the radar right now.


2. Id rather play against a bunch of genetic freaks who aren't allowed to even graze my helmet , or touch the guy Im throwing to then to face a bunch of hungry dudes happy, willing ,and allowed to hurt me and my target and throw us off our game in almost every way possible.
At its most basic level my goal as a WR was to get to a spot on the field. 5 steps turn BANG.
I cant highlight enough how difficult it is to get to that spot on time with some guy pushing , shoving , and grabbing me the first 5 yards. Then to position myself not only for the ball , to shield him from the ball , but to worry about either bracing for a hit , or looking up to head down field.

In todays game you dont worry about anything other than shielding the ball because the rules have taken care of the rest.

 

[KINGOFOOTBALL]

This gets into the debate...does very good over a long period of time = great?

Sometimes I think no...sometimes I think yes.

lhoss:

I almost always think no.

Vinny Testaverde
Curtis Martin
Darrell Green
Kerry Collins
Art Monk

All longevity players. Only one is a HOFer in my eyes because he was genuinely a great player in his prime.

 

[FedEx227]

Hold up ... FT and w2b are "stat geeks"?

:lol:

:joeybats: