Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Why Warner is a better QB than P. Manning


Furd
 Share

Recommended Posts

Again, you're comparing QBs on completely different teams, who play in difference conferences and have had to play differing levels of talent in the playoffs. Judging the two by simply looking at the box scores is an overly-simplistic analysis.

 

I agree that Warner is an outstanding QB who has statistically played well in the playoffs. But here's another "stat" for you: he's thrown two pick-sixes in his last two Super Bowls that have cost his team a championship in each case. Be careful of what you wish for.

 

true...but the one of Harrison's variety was a fluke play...I mean, they had 100 yards to know him out of bounds or tackle the guy....that was not a normal play....if he gets tackled...then Zona wins....just saying. However, to say that the AFC is better than the NFC is also a weak argument...cause last I looked, Indy had a really tough division....NO? LOL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm a HUGE Warner fan but cmon .... this argument is ridiculous. As much as love Kurt, I'd take Peyton every single time to lead my team. Good grief this argument is laughable.

 

Well then laugh!!!!

 

The question posed was for a playoff game....not in the regular season. And based upon a historical analysis provided by deathpig....I go with Warner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well then laugh!!!!

 

The question posed was for a playoff game....not in the regular season. And based upon a historical analysis provided by deathpig....I go with Warner.

 

hmmmm...well since i didn't read the initial question, I hereby invoke my right to change my decision. How ya like dem apples!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

true...but the one of Harrison's variety was a fluke play...I mean, they had 100 yards to know him out of bounds or tackle the guy....that was not a normal play....if he gets tackled...then Zona wins....just saying.

 

:wacko:

 

It was a completely bone-headed throw right into coverage. He telegraphed the read as well. When down by 3 near the end of the first half, you play conservatively and go for the tie. You don't force the ball into coverage. That swung the game by a minimum of 10 points.

 

However, to say that the AFC is better than the NFC is also a weak an accurate argument.

 

Fixed

Edited by Bill Swerski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a completely bone-headed throw right into coverage. He telegraphed the read as well. When down by 3 near the end of the first half, you play conservatively and go for the tie. You don't force the ball into coverage. That swung the game by a minimum of 10 points.

 

Actually it was more of a perfectly dusguised coverage than it was a boneheaded throw.

 

And the type of play it was, a quick slant that needs to be thrown in 1-2 seconds really doesn;t allow much time to look off the wr. If Lebeau doesn't call that defense then it's a TD.

 

I will agree that it was probably not a good call, but more than being a bone headed throw, it was actually executed quite well but Labeau had the perfect defense called

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually it was more of a perfectly dusguised coverage than it was a boneheaded throw.

 

And the type of play it was, a quick slant that needs to be thrown in 1-2 seconds really doesn;t allow much time to look off the wr. If Lebeau doesn't call that defense then it's a TD.

 

I will agree that it was probably not a good call, but more than being a bone headed throw, it was actually executed quite well but Labeau had the perfect defense called

 

Well, of course LeBeau didn't call the blitz. Who in the heck blitzes on 1st and goal from the one when facing a multiple-WR set? That seemed like a particularly bad time to bite on the disguised coverage. If nobody was open, Warner could've tried to run it in. Even if he didn't make it, there would've been enough time to spike the ball and bring on the FG unit. There's also the option of throwing the ball away if the blitz DID come (everybody's bunched together in the endzone, so grounding wouldn't have been an issue).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, of course LeBeau didn't call the blitz. Who in the heck blitzes on 1st and goal from the one when facing a multiple-WR set? That seemed like a particularly bad time to bite on the disguised coverage. If nobody was open, Warner could've tried to run it in. Even if he didn't make it, there would've been enough time to spike the ball and bring on the FG unit. There's also the option of throwing the ball away if the blitz DID come (everybody's bunched together in the endzone, so grounding wouldn't have been an issue).

 

It wasn't just that he didn't call the blitz, the defensive scheme on that play was for Harrison to 'show' blitz and then at the last second drop back into coverage. It was a very well disguised coverage scheme, that a lot of QB's would have missed. Harrison's timing on that play is a big indication of why he was the defensive player of the year.

 

If you watch the replay he timed it perfectly, in this typ eof coverage if the LB drops back even a second to soon the QB will spot it, but Harrison timed it perfectly, he stayed up on the line until the second the call was snapped, and then he dropped back into coverage, he even moved a little towards the middle of the field and then made a perfect break on the ball.

 

Now I have already conceded it was not the best call but it was excellent execution by Harrison on a great call by Labeau. Nothing can make the offense look worse than running a play against a defense that is perfectly set up for the play they are running.

 

The common reaction to a negaitve play is to blame the team running the play but sometimes it is just he result of the other team making a great play. Harrisons INT was a great play.

 

Just like the Holmes TD that won the game, that was not bad coverage by Arizona it was just a great play by Pittsburgh, Holmes was so well covered that even Roethlisberger though he had thrown an INT as soon as he let go of the ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't just that he didn't call the blitz, the defensive scheme on that play was for Harrison to 'show' blitz and then at the last second drop back into coverage. It was a very well disguised coverage scheme, that a lot of QB's would have missed.

 

Thanks for completely missing my point. :wacko:

 

Yeah, a lot of teams "show" blitz and then drop back into coverage. Warner saw plenty of this in SB 36. But very few teams are actually GOING to blitz on first and goal from the one... even if they "show" it. OBVIOUSLY, a blitzing LB isn't going to get to the QB in the time that it takes a WR to move one or two yards into the endzone. Warner never should've bitten on the blitz in the first place.

Edited by Bill Swerski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information