Started By
Message
re: Peyton vs. Eli "in the clutch"
Posted on 2/3/14 at 12:43 pm to tween the hedges
Posted on 2/3/14 at 12:43 pm to tween the hedges
quote:
Brees and Rodgers have just as many titles. Is it really better to only have one big playoff run and win that super bowl than to go 3 times and lose 2?
Great point. Is going 1-0 in SBs over 12 years better than going 1-2 over 15 years?
Rodgers going 1-0 in six years is probably "better", but he also lost at home with a 15-1 team as a 2 TD favorite to a wildcard in 2011. Outside of the 2010 SB run, Rodgers is 1-3 in the playoffs.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 12:43 pm to genro
Stats don't tell the whole story, but they tell the only story any two random people will (barring psychotic irrationality) be forced to agree on. They can debate the moral of the story til the cows come home, of course, but as far as the details go, there's no debate short of allegations of impropriety in recording the stats.
"Intangibles" are a very real thing. I played football in high-school (3rd string, mind you, on a team that won 3 games in two years) and I certainly saw the intangibles at work. But here's the thing -- intangibles are entirely about perception. Stats aren't. I actually got put in at QB for a few series once after we'd given up 8 sacks in the first half. (At the time, I assumed it was because I was fast and could do a basic pitch or hand-off; now I realize it was probably because the coach didn't care if I got injured ) I had no intangibles to speak of. People liked me but I couldn't lead a team very well. I was fast but I didn't have the instincts to slip through the line. But my momma thought I did a wonderful job. She had no idea what 'intangibles' were, but had she known the term, she would have described me as having great intangibles despite having a stat sheet that showed I didn't fumble, didn't throw, and gained no yards. It's all about perception. You can rave about someone's intangibles all you want. The only thing required to mount an effective counterargument is one person going, "Nah...his intangibles suck."
"Intangibles" are a very real thing. I played football in high-school (3rd string, mind you, on a team that won 3 games in two years) and I certainly saw the intangibles at work. But here's the thing -- intangibles are entirely about perception. Stats aren't. I actually got put in at QB for a few series once after we'd given up 8 sacks in the first half. (At the time, I assumed it was because I was fast and could do a basic pitch or hand-off; now I realize it was probably because the coach didn't care if I got injured ) I had no intangibles to speak of. People liked me but I couldn't lead a team very well. I was fast but I didn't have the instincts to slip through the line. But my momma thought I did a wonderful job. She had no idea what 'intangibles' were, but had she known the term, she would have described me as having great intangibles despite having a stat sheet that showed I didn't fumble, didn't throw, and gained no yards. It's all about perception. You can rave about someone's intangibles all you want. The only thing required to mount an effective counterargument is one person going, "Nah...his intangibles suck."
Posted on 2/3/14 at 12:44 pm to Korin
quote:
Watch out guys, here comes facts
Well...your "facts" were wrong. Manning didn't start against Florida as a Freshman, Todd Helton did. So, his record is not 0-4 against them.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 12:44 pm to Korin
quote:
Eli 2-0 against Florida.
Peyton 0-4 against Florida.
Ron Zook vs Steve Spurrier
15-11 vs 34-4
Yawn
Posted on 2/3/14 at 12:45 pm to randomways
quote:
now I realize it was probably because the coach didn't care if I got injured
Posted on 2/3/14 at 12:46 pm to Roger Klarvin
We're not just talking Super Bowls. I'd like the see the % of mutliple-interception losses in the playoffs versus all playoff appearances. For Peyton, Eli, Brady, etc
I would bet dollars to donuts that Manning's is much higher, despite being the most technically skilled QB of all time.
Why?
I would bet dollars to donuts that Manning's is much higher, despite being the most technically skilled QB of all time.
Why?
Posted on 2/3/14 at 12:47 pm to randomways
The point about intangibles is they cant be defined and thus cant be honestly discussed. Who has more intangibles, AJ McCarron or Johnny Manziel? Manziel carried an awful defense to 19 wins in two years, but McCarron carried a minor league NFL team to 2 national titles. Does Manziel have more intangibles because he willed a pretty average team to 19 wins and two bowl victories, or does McCarron have more because he won two titles with great teams? If you choose to pick one, why?
It's just not something that can be honestly discussed because there are no defined parameters, metrics or numbers involved.
It's just not something that can be honestly discussed because there are no defined parameters, metrics or numbers involved.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 12:52 pm to genro
quote:
I'd like the see the % of mutliple-interception losses in the playoffs versus all playoff appearances. For Peyton, Eli, Brady, etc
quote:
I would bet dollars to donuts that Manning's is much higher, despite being the most technically skilled QB of all time.
It would also be interesting to see what the correlation is between multiple interceptions thrown and passing attempts, rushing yards and time of possession.
If you have to throw, and the defense knows it, then they are probably going to be focused on stopping the pass first.
Solely focusing on the interceptions puts a bias on the statistical model.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 12:53 pm to madmaxvol
1. No pass = no catch, Eli kept it alive.
2. The pass to manningham was one of the most perfectly placed passes ever seen
3. You're a dumb frick
2. The pass to manningham was one of the most perfectly placed passes ever seen
3. You're a dumb frick
Posted on 2/3/14 at 12:54 pm to madmaxvol
Why not apply this same logic to Bradshaw? Obviously they were an incredible running team. Generally he was only asked to throw on 3rd and long. Wouldn't this negatively skew his stats?
We're getting back to my earlier point. There is no apples to apples. But people only point out the circumstantial difference when it benefits their argument.
We're getting back to my earlier point. There is no apples to apples. But people only point out the circumstantial difference when it benefits their argument.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 12:55 pm to madmaxvol
quote:
Well...your "facts" were wrong. Manning didn't start against Florida as a Freshman, Todd Helton did. So, his record is not 0-4 against them.
I never said he started in 94. You're the one moving the posts.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 12:55 pm to genro
quote:
I'd like the see the % of mutliple-interception losses in the playoffs versus all playoff appearances.
This site has career playoff stats in a good format
Posted on 2/3/14 at 12:56 pm to genro
quote:
We're not just talking Super Bowls. I'd like the see the % of mutliple-interception losses in the playoffs versus all playoff appearances. For Peyton, Eli, Brady, etc
I would bet dollars to donuts that Manning's is much higher, despite being the most technically skilled QB of all time.
Why?
In his 23 career postseason starts, Manning has 5 multiple INT losses (21%). In 6 of his losses, he had 0 or 1.
In Eli Manning's 11 career postseason starts, Eli has 2 multiple INT losses (18%). He had 1 INT in his other loss.
As a percentage of total losses, Eli's multiple INT games constitute 66.6% and Peyton's 45.4%.
The most glaring difference obviously is that Peyton actually makes the postseason EVERY SINGLE YEAR, whereas Eli has missed the postseason 5 times in his 10 years as a starter. That is a huge fact you are ignoring.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 12:58 pm to Roger Klarvin
The only solution to that aspect is to try to hammer out some things we can all agree on. Most, for instance, would agree that 'leadership' is an intangible. A significant percentage would probably also agree that 'intimidation' is an intangible. And so forth.
Of course, that still leaves us with the problem of how to measure said intangibles in any objective, or even semi-objective, fashion. We can probably agree that both McCarron and Manziel were great team leaders. We'll never be able to cement that agreement in solid enough terms to decide which one was a better leader. Even in your analysis, your choice of words skews perception toward Manziel, and a Bama fan could counter with the question, "Does Manziel have more intangibles because he was a better scrambler or does McCarron have more intangibles because he led his team to two consecutive national titles?" As long as it's all about language, there's no real recourse to this dilemma.
Of course, that still leaves us with the problem of how to measure said intangibles in any objective, or even semi-objective, fashion. We can probably agree that both McCarron and Manziel were great team leaders. We'll never be able to cement that agreement in solid enough terms to decide which one was a better leader. Even in your analysis, your choice of words skews perception toward Manziel, and a Bama fan could counter with the question, "Does Manziel have more intangibles because he was a better scrambler or does McCarron have more intangibles because he led his team to two consecutive national titles?" As long as it's all about language, there's no real recourse to this dilemma.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 1:00 pm to madmaxvol
quote:
It would also be interesting to see what the correlation is between multiple interceptions thrown and passing attempts, rushing yards and time of possession.
If you have to throw, and the defense knows it, then they are probably going to be focused on stopping the pass first.
Peyton consistently had awful defense in Indy, Eli has made the playoffs just once with a defense outside the top half of the league. That is another factor people ignore.
This post was edited on 2/3/14 at 1:01 pm
Posted on 2/3/14 at 1:07 pm to Rebelfan1985
quote:
1. No pass = no catch, Eli kept it alive.
2. The pass to manningham was one of the most perfectly placed passes ever seen
3. You're a dumb frick
1. It took the play by the receiver to make the catch. My point...it takes both the QB and receive to make the play.
2. According to Manningham, if his shoe was 1/2 size bigger, he would have been out of bounds. Eli gets credit for a great throw...but the receiver gets credit for the situational awareness to stay inbounds. Again...Manningham made a great play...to solely lay the play on "Eli's Intangibles" is myopic.
3. Maybe so...but I'm smarter than you.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 1:09 pm to madmaxvol
Eli 2x SB mvp
Peyton 1x SB mvp
Peyton 1x SB mvp
Posted on 2/3/14 at 1:11 pm to Korin
quote:
I never said he started in 94. You're the one moving the posts.
Manning played for the Vols from '94-'97. He did not start against Florida as a Freshman, Todd Helton did. The starter is the player who gets credit for the loss.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 1:19 pm to madmaxvol
Too bad he was on the team and played in the game. 0-4 overall. Fact.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 1:20 pm to Korin
quote:
Eli 2x SB mvp
Peyton 1x SB mvp
I didn't realize how good Eli is...but this convinced me. By this measure, he is better than:
Roger Staubach
Steve Young
Aaron Rodgers
John Elway
Drew Brees
Troy Aikman
Jim Kelly
Dan Marino
Warren Moon
Dan Fouts
Boomer Esiason
Fran Tarkenton
Brett Favre
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News