The Official Super Bowl Thread

capable_keL · Post by **capable_keL** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 1:11 pm

what a surreal season for the saints. it would have been cool if there were some saints fans who posted on

Positive A · Post by **Positive A** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 1:14 pm

keL wrote:what a surreal season for the saints. it would have been cool if there were some saints fans who posted on

Don't worry. There'll be a shitload come kickoff for the 2010 season.

an-also · Post by **an-also** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 1:15 pm

Positive A wrote:
keL wrote:what a surreal season for the saints. it would have been cool if there were some saints fans who posted on
Don't worry. There'll be a shitload come kickoff for the 2010 season.

capable_keL · Post by **capable_keL** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 1:18 pm

i mean known, long time, legit saints fans. not the faggots who suddenly appear after the super bowl.

i want a guy who has a bobby hebert jersey

if you cant recite rod harper & michael lewis' YAC upon request you aint a fuckin saints fan, youre a fraud/douche bag wanna be

Positive A · Post by **Positive A** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 1:34 pm

rofl^^

an-also · Post by **an-also** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 2:00 pm

an-also · Post by **an-also** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 2:20 pm

2009-2010 was Mannings best year as a pro. Agree?

naturalborn103 · Post by **naturalborn103** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 2:52 pm

eternalreflection · Post by **eternalreflection** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 3:00 pm

an-also wrote:I'm not going to call it a 'choke'. I'll just say he cost his team a chance to win the game with that INT. If people are going to rip apart Favre for his late game INT, I think its only fair that we rip Manning for his INT also. Essentially, it was the same situation and both qb's hurt their team with a costly INT. That interception shouldn't happen if you're the so called greatest of all time.

Favre's pick was 10times worse, its a different game when you need a TD than when you are tied and in GW fg range(albeit only maybe 25% to win on the spot), and Manning's pass wasn't nearly as retarded as the lob across your body to the middle of the field play, the defender was disguised and jumped the route it happens to every QB

whatever you guys don't actually like logic, just take results as absolute and adjust your opinions to them regardless of the circumstances

naturalborn103 · Post by **naturalborn103** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 3:06 pm

eternalreflection wrote:
an-also wrote:I'm not going to call it a 'choke'. I'll just say he cost his team a chance to win the game with that INT. If people are going to rip apart Favre for his late game INT, I think its only fair that we rip Manning for his INT also. Essentially, it was the same situation and both qb's hurt their team with a costly INT. That interception shouldn't happen if you're the so called greatest of all time.
Favre's pick was 10times worse, its a different game when you need a TD than when you are tied and in GW fg range(albeit only maybe 25% to win on the spot), and Manning's pass wasn't nearly as retarded as the lob across your body to the middle of the field play, the defender was disguised and jumped the route it happens to every QB

whatever you guys don't actually like logic, just take results as absolute and adjust your opinions to them regardless of the circumstances

No.. Everyone said all along Manning flaw was he was not good in the cluth when it mattered.. No opinions changed.

naturalborn103 wrote: Manning fans don't realize that some games and some drives mean more then others.. They are all the same in their eyes.

an-also · Post by **an-also** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 4:58 pm

eternalreflection wrote:
an-also wrote:I'm not going to call it a 'choke'. I'll just say he cost his team a chance to win the game with that INT. If people are going to rip apart Favre for his late game INT, I think its only fair that we rip Manning for his INT also. Essentially, it was the same situation and both qb's hurt their team with a costly INT. That interception shouldn't happen if you're the so called greatest of all time.
Favre's pick was 10times worse, its a different game when you need a TD than when you are tied and in GW fg range(albeit only maybe 25% to win on the spot), and Manning's pass wasn't nearly as retarded as the lob across your body to the middle of the field play, the defender was disguised and jumped the route it happens to every QB

whatever you guys don't actually like logic, just take results as absolute and adjust your opinions to them regardless of the circumstances

So what if the defender was disguised. Isnt it the qb's job to figure out who's doing what in the secondary. You'll use any stupid logic to try to defend Manning. Bottom line is both qb's threw a int which cost them a chance to win/tie the game. Bottom line. If any qb would have made the mistake manning made, he would have gotten criticized for doing so. Just because its Manning doesnt mean you have to be a fag and defend the dude to death.

an-also · Post by **an-also** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 5:15 pm

The Colts have to be the biggest underachievers in the playoffs the last decade.

Super Bowl loss reveals uncomfortable truth about Colts
By Vic Carucci | NFL.com
Senior Columnist

Posted about 13 hours ago
1075 Comments 50 Recommendations E-mail
Super Bowl loss reveals uncomfortable truth about Colts
Vic Carucci By Vic Carucci | NFL.com
Senior Columnist

MIAMI GARDENS, Fla. -- All of a sudden, you find yourself grappling with some questions about the Indianapolis Colts.

You have to respect their consistent ability to maintain elite status. You have to salute them for the way they've overcome coaching and roster changes to stay on top in the standings.
Super Bowl XLIV: Saints 31, Colts 17

But you can't help but wonder whether one of the NFL's top teams of the decade is truly built for only one thing: Regular-season success.

Let's face it, a single Super Bowl victory isn't much to show for a team that has gone seven consecutive years with 12 or more wins in the regular season.

And to get there only twice in that stretch and for the second time to end the way it did Sunday night is, well, more than a little disappointing. It makes all of that fury over the Colts concentrating on preserving starters rather than going for a 16-0 regular season, so that they'd have a shot to be a Super Bowl winner, seem so silly now.

"On behalf of the Colts and our team, we're very disappointed and we're sorry to our fans," Peyton Manning said after the Colts' 31-17 loss to the New Orleans Saints in Super Bowl XLIV. "I'm very sorry to our fans that we weren't able to get it done."

It was reasonable to expect that the Colts would hoist a second Lombardi Trophy in four seasons. They had Manning, the NFL's Most Valuable Player, at quarterback. They had performed better in the playoffs. The Saints were new to all of this; they were just supposed to be happy to have gotten this far.

However, it was the Colts who looked like the club that had never occupied the game's biggest stage Sunday night.

They were beaten physically. They were beaten strategically.

The Saints won this game with a surprise onside kick at the start of the second half that they recovered and then converted into a touchdown. And they won it with a successful two-point conversion pass that they were awarded after a wise challenge by their coach, Sean Payton. And they won it with a rookie kicker who became the first in Super Bowl history to boot three field goals from 40 yards and beyond.

"To get all the way here and then fall short, that is very frustrating," Colts defensive end Robert Mathis said. "But we can't hang our heads. We have got to keep our heads up."

That was easier said than done.

The Colts were a somber bunch. They clearly understood that so much more was expected of them. They clearly expected so much more of themselves. They knew, better than anyone, that this was a missed opportunity that would linger for a while.

"Guys were obviously upset," defensive tackle Dan Muir said. "This was not the outcome that we wanted in this football game. It is hard to take a loss, especially one of this magnitude."
Julie Jacobson / Associated Press
Peyton Manning's Colts had more victories than any other team in the 2000s, but only have one Super Bowl title to show for it.
Colts as team of decade? Not in playoffs
Year

W-L (division)

Playoffs
2009

14-2 (1st place)

2-1, lost in Super Bowl XLIV
2008

12-4 (2nd place)

0-1, lost in wild-card round
2007

13-3 (1st place)

0-1, lost in divisional round
2006

12-4 (1st place)

4-0, won Super Bowl XLI
2005

14-2 (1st place)

0-1, lost in divisional round
2004

12-4 (1st place)

1-1, lost in divisional round
2003

12-4 (1st place)

2-1, lost in AFC Championship
2002

10-6 (2nd place)

0-1, lost in wild-card round
2001

6-10 (4th place)

Missed playoffs
2000

10-6 (2nd place)

0-1, lost in wild-card round

For the Colts, the death blow came when cornerback Tracy Porter returned an interception of a Manning pass 74 yards for a touchdown to put the Saints ahead, 31-17, with 3:12 remaining. Manning, who dissects everything that happens on the field as well as any player or coach in the history of the game, didn't have a whole lot to say about that one beyond complimenting Porter for making a good break on the ball and "just a heck of a play."

But you got the idea it wasn't going to be the Colts' night after the first quarter, when Manning was doing more watching than playing. You also knew this wasn't going to be their night when the best of what Manning did during his limited time on the field ("precious" was the word he used to describe the Colts' possessions) was be more of a game-manager than play-maker.

Rather than attack with his passing arm, Manning was seeing holes in the Saints defense that allowed Joseph Addai, the starting running back on the NFL's bottom-ranked rushing team, to have some big gains. But the Colts weren't going to win this game pounding the ball on the ground.

Eventually, Manning did end up piling up some yards, but he never really was a match for his counterpart and Super Bowl MVP, Drew Brees. The fact the Colts only scored a touchdown in the second half while the Saints offense came up with 18 points in the final two quarters said it all about the way that Brees, who had finished a distant second in the league MVP voting, outdueled Manning.

Perhaps the most telling drive of the game was the Colts' first, which saw them march to the Saints' 20 but only settle for a field goal.

Saints defensive coordinator Gregg Williams clearly got the better of him with his aggressive pass rush. Although Manning wasn't sacked, defenders hit him often after he released the ball and began making him feel uncomfortable in the pocket, which began to show as the game progressed.

"We felt like we played well this postseason," Manning said. "At times, we made some plays against the Saints, but obviously didn't make enough plays and just didn't play well enough to win."

In a nutshell, that describes what the Colts have mostly done after impressive regular seasons.

Can anyone remember another team thats been so good in the regular season for a decade that only managed to win one championship? I'm trying to look back. Raiders in the 70?

naturalborn103 · Post by **naturalborn103** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 5:32 pm

an-also wrote: Year

W-L (division)

Playoffs
2009

14-2 (1st place)

2-1, lost in Super Bowl XLIV
2008

12-4 (2nd place)

0-1, lost in wild-card round
2007

13-3 (1st place)

0-1, lost in divisional round
2006

12-4 (1st place)

4-0, won Super Bowl XLI
2005

14-2 (1st place)

0-1, lost in divisional round
2004

12-4 (1st place)

1-1, lost in divisional round
2003

12-4 (1st place)

2-1, lost in AFC Championship
2002

10-6 (2nd place)

0-1, lost in wild-card round
2001

6-10 (4th place)

Missed playoffs
2000

10-6 (2nd place)

0-1, lost in wild-card round

Just look at the sig.. It says it all.

And the one time they did win it all.. Manning played horribly all playoffs.

What can eternal say about why they only have one ring? If they have the best qb ever and been one of the best teams in the league for over 10 years.. Why only one ring??? Just bad luck?? And add to that Brady has 3 rings and close miss for a undefeated season and a 4th ring. Brady is just lucky??

an-also · Post by **an-also** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 5:41 pm

The whole colts team have pretty much been disappointing in the playoffs the last decade. Its not like they have been underdogs. They have usually been favored to win most of the time.

Positive A · Post by **Positive A** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 5:53 pm

Just wanted to grab this from Simmons' piece today and post it here:

Montana, playoffs: 16-7
Brady, playoffs: 14-4
Elway, playoffs: 14-8
Favre, playoffs: 13-11
Warner, playoffs: 9-4
Manning, playoffs: 9-9
Roethlisberger, playoffs: 8-2

eternalreflection · Post by **eternalreflection** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 6:17 pm

Brady won 2rings before he was even an elite QB for fuck sake, has far and away the best coach in the league

they were 65% to win the superbowl(a line grossly inflated by casual money on the colts), you guys just act like NO was the Rams or some shit

the best team is maybe 25% to win the superbowl in any given year, the top4 teams run close together, and that was certainly the case this year, anyone that thinks the Colts were head and shoulders above NO, MN or SD is an idiot

you guys are so unrealistic about teams winning titles

The whole colts team have pretty much been disappointing in the playoffs the last decade. Its not like they have been underdogs. They have usually been favored to win most of the time.

last year they were whopping 1point favorites, but that obviously means they should win 80% of the time right? I'll try to find the rest but I'm pretty sure you are wrong here and they've been underdogs/very slight favorites quite often

its more people think they are better than they are, this team this year wasn't anywhere near the 07Pats yet could have easily been 18-0 as well going into the game

right now its just idiots talking shit because he threw an INT when going for a game tying drive, he's played similar to Brady in the playoffs but has to play better than Brady does to win games

eternalreflection · Post by **eternalreflection** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 6:34 pm

2006
-7 vs KC
+4.5 vs @Balt
-3.5 vs NE
-6.5 vs Chi

2007
-11 vs SD(this one is bad obv)

2008
-2 vs @SD

2009
-6.5 vs Balt
-8 vs NYJ
-4.5 vs NO

losses -2, -4.5, -11 so only the -11 loss is bad(NE was -12.5 vs NYG) and 1win as small underdog, 6-3 vs that string of games is about average(as is winning 1title)

looking for <05 still

naturalborn103 · Post by **naturalborn103** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 6:45 pm

eternalreflection wrote: right now its just idiots talking shit because he threw an INT when going for a game tying drive, he's played similar to Brady in the playoffs but has to play better than Brady does to win games

WHAT??? When he won the superbowl he played horrible that whole playoffs.. Brady could never of any of his 3 SB playing horrible, Manning won his single one doing that.. Tom Brady is 4/4 in potential SB winning drives, how do you do better then him??? Throwing a game losing INT is pretty important, you keep acting like that INT is the same as any other INT..

dat piff · Post by **dat piff** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 7:04 pm

http://www.manningface.com/

eternalreflection · Post by **eternalreflection** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 7:08 pm

naturalborn103 wrote:
eternalreflection wrote: right now its just idiots talking shit because he threw an INT when going for a game tying drive, he's played similar to Brady in the playoffs but has to play better than Brady does to win games
WHAT??? When he won the superbowl he played horrible that whole playoffs.. Brady could never of any of his 3 SB playing horrible, Manning won his single one doing that.. Tom Brady is 4/4 in potential SB winning drives, how do you do better then him??? Throwing a game losing INT is pretty important, you keep acting like that INT is the same as any other INT..

and you act like its the only thing that matters in the entire game, of course it was a huge drive and a crippling turnover, those happen, it wasn't like it was a tie game, he had to lead a 80yd td drive just to tie the game but that's the same as a 30yd fg drive right?

Brady has played great in 2 superbowls, meh in StLouis, and pretty good vs NYG, Manning played pretty good vs both Chicago and NO both were easily better than Brady's monster game vs StL

its the other 14games where he's been far less dominant than you make him out to be, its something everyone does on here, try to look at 3games out of 150 and pretend the other 147 don't matter at all

how can you blast Manning for the bad games vs KC/Balt in his superbowl run, but not blast a 27/51 280 2/3, 12/18 115, or 22/33 209 2/3 performances in wins

point blank · Post by **point blank** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 7:11 pm

keL wrote:i mean known, long time, legit saints fans. not the faggots who suddenly appear after the super bowl.

i want a guy who has a bobby hebert jersey

if you cant recite rod harper & michael lewis' YAC upon request you aint a fuckin saints fan, youre a fraud/douche bag wanna be

What about a guy with a Swilling jersey?

the brow is a longtime Saint too, I remember talking to him awhile back re: the 2006 draft.

ric · Post by **ric** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 7:54 pm

eternals got some good stuff there

first an-also wrote:
ric wrote: but then again maybe i dont know anything about sports. because you naturalborn have such a wealth of knowledge on the subject. enlighten us please. those of us who played sports for half our lives just dont understand and i guess we need your help.
Dude, Deon Sanders used the 'choke' word last night to describe that Manning INT. But i guess he doesn't understand sports as well right?

an-also then wrote:I'm not going to call it a 'choke'.....

what?

im not saying anybody doesnt understand sports. i just dont think it was a choke and neither do you. if youre gonna harp on somebody at least understand what theyre saying. naturalborn has no idea what hes talking about, shit i dont even understand what shit like this means....

It is funny how mannings fans just ignore stuff into's like this and act like it means the same as any other into in any other game

what is a "stuff into" and how do i ignore it? and what does that have to do with choking?

fyi peytons not my favorite player

That interception shouldn't happen if you're the so called greatest of all time.

i dont know about this. i disagree. it was an awful and costly mistake, this is true. but its not like other greats like jim kelly didnt make these kind of crucial mistakes.

im not sure how i feel about saying it was 'just another game' but that drive and that INT didnt have 'superbowl choke' written anywhere near it

Offensive Passer rating
Passing YPA
Defensive YPA
Defensive Passer rating
YPA differential
Pass Rating Differential
Scoreability (amount of yards it takes a team to score a point)
Margin of Victory
Forcing negative passing plays
Better 3rd down defense
Turnovers
Producing turnovers
TD/TO ratio

some of these are quality and relevant stats, some arent. but thanks. explain scoreability. ive never even heard of that before.

If any qb would have made the mistake manning made, he would have gotten criticized for doing so

if it was the same circumstances and the same stuff was going on and it was a similar INT, it wouldnt be me who wouldve criticized them. an INT that could be criticized is when theres time left on the clock and the pressure is coming and instead of just throwing it away the QB, who goes untouched, throws it into a cluster of 4 defenders and 0 recievers. that sounds more like a terrible pass to me

naturalborn103 · Post by **naturalborn103** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 8:15 pm

eternalreflection wrote: right now its just idiots talking shit because he threw an INT when going for a game tying drive, he's played similar to Brady in the playoffs but has to play better than Brady does to win games

Manning qb ratings in his ONLY superbowl winning playoffs

vs. KC 71
vs. Balt 39
vs. NE 79
vs. Chi 81

ric wrote:naturalborn has no idea what hes talking about, shit i dont even understand what shit like this means....

You are the joke of the sports bar and everyone pretty much agrees you are a idiot when it comes to football.

eternalreflection wrote:
naturalborn103 wrote:
eternalreflection wrote: right now its just idiots talking shit because he threw an INT when going for a game tying drive, he's played similar to Brady in the playoffs but has to play better than Brady does to win games
WHAT??? When he won the superbowl he played horrible that whole playoffs.. Brady could never of any of his 3 SB playing horrible, Manning won his single one doing that.. Tom Brady is 4/4 in potential SB winning drives, how do you do better then him??? Throwing a game losing INT is pretty important, you keep acting like that INT is the same as any other INT..
and you act like its the only thing that matters in the entire game, of course it was a huge drive and a crippling turnover, those happen, it wasn't like it was a tie game, he had to lead a 80yd td drive just to tie the game but that's the same as a 30yd fg drive right?

Brady has played great in 2 superbowls, meh in StLouis, and pretty good vs NYG, Manning played pretty good vs both Chicago and NO both were easily better than Brady's monster game vs StL

its the other 14games where he's been far less dominant than you make him out to be, its something everyone does on here, try to look at 3games out of 150 and pretend the other 147 don't matter at all

how can you blast Manning for the bad games vs KC/Balt in his superbowl run, but not blast a 27/51 280 2/3, 12/18 115, or 22/33 209 2/3 performances in wins

Because some games matter more then others and because some drives more then others.. Something you are still failing to grasp. THOSE 3 GAMES ARE MORE IMPORTANT THEN THE OTHER 150.

ric wrote:
It is funny how mannings fans just ignore stuff into's like this and act like it means the same as any other into in any other game
what is a "stuff into" and how do i ignore it? and what does that have to do with choking?

you know what I meant.. into, as in INT. You act like that INT is the same as any other INT. If you are the greatest QB ever you do not throw that pass at that time. First quarter, or in another game maybe... Final minutes of the superbowl.. NO.

ric wrote:fyi peytons not my favorite player

Nobody cares.

ric wrote:
That interception shouldn't happen if you're the so called greatest of all time.
i dont know about this. i disagree. it was an awful and costly mistake, this is true. but its not like other greats like jim kelly didnt make these kind of crucial mistakes.

Jim Kelly??? Good job picking the guy who could never finish and not win the big game.. And since is Kelly considered even close to the best ever?

The Rapping Coffin · Post by **The Rapping Coffin** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 8:20 pm

eternalreflection wrote:
naturalborn103 wrote:
eternalreflection wrote: right now its just idiots talking shit because he threw an INT when going for a game tying drive, he's played similar to Brady in the playoffs but has to play better than Brady does to win games
WHAT??? When he won the superbowl he played horrible that whole playoffs.. Brady could never of any of his 3 SB playing horrible, Manning won his single one doing that.. Tom Brady is 4/4 in potential SB winning drives, how do you do better then him??? Throwing a game losing INT is pretty important, you keep acting like that INT is the same as any other INT..
and you act like its the only thing that matters in the entire game, of course it was a huge drive and a crippling turnover, those happen, it wasn't like it was a tie game, he had to lead a 80yd td drive just to tie the game but that's the same as a 30yd fg drive right?

Brady has played great in 2 superbowls, meh in StLouis, and pretty good vs NYG, Manning played pretty good vs both Chicago and NO both were easily better than Brady's monster game vs StL

its the other 14games where he's been far less dominant than you make him out to be, its something everyone does on here, try to look at 3games out of 150 and pretend the other 147 don't matter at all

how can you blast Manning for the bad games vs KC/Balt in his superbowl run, but not blast a 27/51 280 2/3, 12/18 115, or 22/33 209 2/3 performances in wins

Gosh, there are few things worse than naturalborn and ER arguing about this shit.

Anyway, I agree with most of what you write about baseball, but you are really a black hole of suck when it comes to writing about football and basketball. There are no sabermetrics for QBs. You keep throwing out stats with no context and football is all about context. When you post a QBs stats you also need to post the weather, the defense they played against*, and the surrounding talent (key injuires too). Brady played in shit weather during his SB runs because most of the games were at home. Manning played inside a dome during his SB runs...so it's a really bad look if Manning has comparable numbers to a guy who played in conditions that hit as low as -15 (Titans-Pats '03).

You said Brady played "meh" against the Rams. I see a first year QB with minimal talent (RBs: Antowain Smith, JR Redmond. WRs: David Patten, Troy Brown, Marc Edwards. TE: Jermaine Wiggens) executing the game plan to perfection. I see a first year QB beginning his ascent to greatness. Comparing Brady vs Rams to Manning vs Saints is retarded. A better comparison would be against Manning in the late 90s.

The goal of a QB is to execute the game plan...I repeat: the goal of a QB is to execute the game plan. If the weather is shitty than you are going to run the ball. If the defense is poor against the run than you are going to run the ball. If the defense is good at pressuring the QB than you are going to dink N dunk. These are factors that contribute to the stats. The goal isn't to pass for a lot of yards. It's to execute the game plan that gives you the best chance to win. Period.

Finally, nobody is saying Manning isn't a great QB. At worst people are making the argument he was the 2nd best QB of the last decade. You sound like somebody slapped your girlfriend when you react to his criticisms.

Brady vs Manning is as tired as Jay vs Nas at this point. Please stop.

*Passing stats have been inflated post-05 because of Bill Polian initiated rule changes.

ThaJim2 · Post by **ThaJim2** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 8:44 pm

ric wrote:Offensive Passer rating
Passing YPA
Defensive YPA
Defensive Passer rating
YPA differential
Pass Rating Differential
Scoreability (amount of yards it takes a team to score a point)
Margin of Victory
Forcing negative passing plays
Better 3rd down defense
Turnovers
Producing turnovers
TD/TO ratio

some of these are quality and relevant stats, some arent. but thanks. explain scoreability. ive never even heard of that before.

[/quote]

If you want to say some of these stats are redundant fine but each and every one of these stats is relevant as they all have high correlations to winning (.5 or above).

Scorablity is exactly what I said it was. Its the number of yards to score a point. This is one of the most popular stats for the Smart Money in Vegas. It indirectly measures many aspects of the game that good teams do well, such as score TDs instead of FG's, return the ball well on special teams, and stop teams deep in there own territory and force 3 and outs.

capable_keL · Post by **capable_keL** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 8:53 pm

point blank wrote:
What about a guy with a Swilling jersey?

swilling?

impressive.

an-also · Post by **an-also** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:54 pm

The Rapping Coffin wrote:
eternalreflection wrote:
naturalborn103 wrote:
eternalreflection wrote: right now its just idiots talking shit because he threw an INT when going for a game tying drive, he's played similar to Brady in the playoffs but has to play better than Brady does to win games
WHAT??? When he won the superbowl he played horrible that whole playoffs.. Brady could never of any of his 3 SB playing horrible, Manning won his single one doing that.. Tom Brady is 4/4 in potential SB winning drives, how do you do better then him??? Throwing a game losing INT is pretty important, you keep acting like that INT is the same as any other INT..
and you act like its the only thing that matters in the entire game, of course it was a huge drive and a crippling turnover, those happen, it wasn't like it was a tie game, he had to lead a 80yd td drive just to tie the game but that's the same as a 30yd fg drive right?

Brady has played great in 2 superbowls, meh in StLouis, and pretty good vs NYG, Manning played pretty good vs both Chicago and NO both were easily better than Brady's monster game vs StL

its the other 14games where he's been far less dominant than you make him out to be, its something everyone does on here, try to look at 3games out of 150 and pretend the other 147 don't matter at all

how can you blast Manning for the bad games vs KC/Balt in his superbowl run, but not blast a 27/51 280 2/3, 12/18 115, or 22/33 209 2/3 performances in wins
Gosh, there are few things worse than naturalborn and ER arguing about this shit.

Anyway, I agree with most of what you write about baseball, but you are really a black hole of suck when it comes to writing about football and basketball. There are no sabermetrics for QBs. You keep throwing out stats with no context and football is all about context. When you post a QBs stats you also need to post the weather, the defense they played against*, and the surrounding talent (key injuires too). Brady played in shit weather during his SB runs because most of the games were at home. Manning played inside a dome during his SB runs...so it's a really bad look if Manning has comparable numbers to a guy who played in conditions that hit as low as -15 (Titans-Pats '03).

You said Brady played "meh" against the Rams. I see a first year QB with minimal talent (RBs: Antowain Smith, JR Redmond. WRs: David Patten, Troy Brown, Marc Edwards. TE: Jermaine Wiggens) executing the game plan to perfection. I see a first year QB beginning his ascent to greatness. Comparing Brady vs Rams to Manning vs Saints is retarded. A better comparison would be against Manning in the late 90s.

The goal of a QB is to execute the game plan...I repeat: the goal of a QB is to execute the game plan. If the weather is shitty than you are going to run the ball. If the defense is poor against the run than you are going to run the ball. If the defense is good at pressuring the QB than you are going to dink N dunk. These are factors that contribute to the stats. The goal isn't to pass for a lot of yards. It's to execute the game plan that gives you the best chance to win. Period.

Finally, nobody is saying Manning isn't a great QB. At worst people are making the argument he was the 2nd best QB of the last decade. You sound like somebody slapped your girlfriend when you react to his criticisms.

Brady vs Manning is as tired as Jay vs Nas at this point. Please stop.

*Passing stats have been inflated post-05 because of Bill Polian initiated rule changes.

Thank you. I was hoping i wasn't the only one who was looking at playing outdoors in January vs Playing in a warm dome. ER always brings up Bradys stats in the Oakland game. Dude, the guy played in a fucking snowstorm for gods sake and he still passed for 300+ yards. A lot of people fail to look at where the game is played sometimes.

Also I'm done with the Brady vs Manning shit till their careers are over or near over.

Reason · Post by **Reason** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 11:55 pm

The Rapping Coffin wrote:
eternalreflection wrote:
naturalborn103 wrote:
eternalreflection wrote: right now its just idiots talking shit because he threw an INT when going for a game tying drive, he's played similar to Brady in the playoffs but has to play better than Brady does to win games
WHAT??? When he won the superbowl he played horrible that whole playoffs.. Brady could never of any of his 3 SB playing horrible, Manning won his single one doing that.. Tom Brady is 4/4 in potential SB winning drives, how do you do better then him??? Throwing a game losing INT is pretty important, you keep acting like that INT is the same as any other INT..
and you act like its the only thing that matters in the entire game, of course it was a huge drive and a crippling turnover, those happen, it wasn't like it was a tie game, he had to lead a 80yd td drive just to tie the game but that's the same as a 30yd fg drive right?

Brady has played great in 2 superbowls, meh in StLouis, and pretty good vs NYG, Manning played pretty good vs both Chicago and NO both were easily better than Brady's monster game vs StL

its the other 14games where he's been far less dominant than you make him out to be, its something everyone does on here, try to look at 3games out of 150 and pretend the other 147 don't matter at all

how can you blast Manning for the bad games vs KC/Balt in his superbowl run, but not blast a 27/51 280 2/3, 12/18 115, or 22/33 209 2/3 performances in wins
Gosh, there are few things worse than naturalborn and ER arguing about this shit.

Anyway, I agree with most of what you write about baseball, but you are really a black hole of suck when it comes to writing about football and basketball. There are no sabermetrics for QBs. You keep throwing out stats with no context and football is all about context. When you post a QBs stats you also need to post the weather, the defense they played against*, and the surrounding talent (key injuires too). Brady played in shit weather during his SB runs because most of the games were at home. Manning played inside a dome during his SB runs...so it's a really bad look if Manning has comparable numbers to a guy who played in conditions that hit as low as -15 (Titans-Pats '03).

You said Brady played "meh" against the Rams. I see a first year QB with minimal talent (RBs: Antowain Smith, JR Redmond. WRs: David Patten, Troy Brown, Marc Edwards. TE: Jermaine Wiggens) executing the game plan to perfection. I see a first year QB beginning his ascent to greatness. Comparing Brady vs Rams to Manning vs Saints is retarded. A better comparison would be against Manning in the late 90s.

The goal of a QB is to execute the game plan...I repeat: the goal of a QB is to execute the game plan. If the weather is shitty than you are going to run the ball. If the defense is poor against the run than you are going to run the ball. If the defense is good at pressuring the QB than you are going to dink N dunk. These are factors that contribute to the stats. The goal isn't to pass for a lot of yards. It's to execute the game plan that gives you the best chance to win. Period.

Finally, nobody is saying Manning isn't a great QB. At worst people are making the argument he was the 2nd best QB of the last decade. You sound like somebody slapped your girlfriend when you react to his criticisms.

Brady vs Manning is as tired as Jay vs Nas at this point. Please stop.

*Passing stats have been inflated post-05 because of Bill Polian initiated rule changes.

ric · Post by **ric** » Tue Feb 09, 2010 3:23 am

ThaJim2 wrote:
ric wrote:Offensive Passer rating
Passing YPA
Defensive YPA
Defensive Passer rating
YPA differential
Pass Rating Differential
Scoreability (amount of yards it takes a team to score a point)
Margin of Victory
Forcing negative passing plays
Better 3rd down defense
Turnovers
Producing turnovers
TD/TO ratio
some of these are quality and relevant stats, some arent. but thanks. explain scoreability. ive never even heard of that before.

If you want to say some of these stats are redundant fine but each and every one of these stats is relevant as they all have high correlations to winning (.5 or above).

Scorablity is exactly what I said it was. Its the number of yards to score a point.

yes redundant. td/to ratio just seems to be a package of what we already know

so....score ability is the avg number of yards a team drives when scoring?

eternalreflection · Post by **eternalreflection** » Tue Feb 09, 2010 4:17 am

The goal of a QB is to execute the game plan...I repeat: the goal of a QB is to execute the game plan. If the weather is shitty than you are going to run the ball. If the defense is poor against the run than you are going to run the ball. If the defense is good at pressuring the QB than you are going to dink N dunk. These are factors that contribute to the stats. The goal isn't to pass for a lot of yards. It's to execute the game plan that gives you the best chance to win. Period.

the gameplan is make 4yd passes and don't turn it over you shouldn't get a ton of credit for a 3point win, its certainly massively easier than the gameplan Manning has to execute to win

*Passing stats have been inflated post-05 because of Bill Polian initiated rule changes.

no it was actually calling the penalties that was the change, Bellichek realized they didn't call penalties in the playoffs and exploited it, NE raped Indy's WR in 03/04 it was like the 60s again with what they got away with those games

Manning's best regular season was 04, and his stats from 05-09 have been very consistent and better than his 03 year

having the best coach of the era certainly helps your chances of winning a title, something you've all ignored over and over again, do you guys honestly think that if you switched Manning and Brady from 01-04 that the Colts would have 3titles and the Pats 0? Manning was clearly a stronger QB during that timeframe you guys are just blinded by rings and not using logic

from 01-04 Manning was clearly better, from 05-09 its been very close they've been basically equal Brady with the best year, Manning with slight edges in the other years, the reason Manning is better is he's been elite longer