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 This theme may be out of date.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 IND loses the SB


Bronco Billy
 Share

Recommended Posts

yep, and that was ultimately a huge difference in the game. like i said above, it's ironic that the weather really seemed to end up working in the colts favor.

 

Part of that likely had to do with the fact that Peyton had 50-some balls broken in by the Colts staff and personally inspected each of them. Something tells me that Rex didn't. And something tells me that having over 50 DRY, broken-in balls at their disposal during the game helped big-time.

 

but like i said before, the bears didn't lose because of grossman, they lost because by and large the colts dominated the line of scrimmage on both offense and defense. that really surprised me.

 

 

Grossman was definitely a factor, but the way that the Colts O-line dominated CHI's Fron 7 was the major factor. That power running game was absent in their playoff losses over the past few years.

Edited by Bill Swerski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 169
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Peyton sure as heck didn't have trouble controlling the wet ball last night.

 

I read an article this morning about the "Wet Bucket" drill. Apparently Manning gets bored in training sometimes so he goes off to the locker room and fetches a bucket of water. Then he makes Jeff Saturday practice snaps with him, soaking the ball in the bucket to simulate wet weather. Saturday hates it.....but it is a testament to the preparation of Manning.

 

Yesterday it all paid off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good argument?

 

40 carries, 190 yards, 1TD

11 recs 74 yards

 

You really think Manning would have won the MVP if Addai or Rhodes had those numbers?

 

Uhhh... not sure what your point is cuz that's what I w s saying. Combine those stats into 1 player, then the argument is valid.

 

But it wasn't 1 player.

 

Manning was an adequate QB yesterday. He did what he had to do, dinking and dunking the ball and handing it off. The Chicago secondary was playing deep, and Chicago couldn't stop the run. If you think Manning was brilliant for recognizing what everybody in the stadium knew, well I guess that we're all brilliant.

 

He called the plays, he picked apart the Defense. If it were that easy to do, just play to the obvious, every single QB could do what he did. But they didn't. I wonder if Drew Brees thoguht their Defense was so simple to jsut call the plays against?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uhhh... not sure what your point is cuz that's what I w s saying. Combine those stats into 1 player, then the argument is valid.

 

Valid argument? Its a total no-brainer. There is no argument.

 

But it wasn't 1 player.

He called the plays, he picked apart the Defense. If it were that easy to do, just play to the obvious, every single QB could do what he did. But they didn't. I wonder if Drew Brees thoguht their Defense was so simple to jsut call the plays against?

 

 

I guess I wasn't watching the same game. I didn't see anybody get "picked apart." I didn't see any type of precision downfield passing that I would associate with that phrase.

 

Manning took what the defense gave him. He did a fine, workmanlike job of leading his team to victory. But to say that we he did was brilliant, or anywhere close to brilliant, is a tremendous reach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Valid argument? Its a total no-brainer. There is no argument.

 

Of course it is since this player is some mystical guy who doesn't exist. Might as well say if Barry Sanders was in the Colts backfield and had 200 yrds rushing and another 200 receiving, he would have won MVP.

 

I guess I wasn't watching the same game.

 

Guess you weren't

 

I didn't see anybody get "picked apart." I didn't see any type of precision downfield passing that I would associate with that phrase.

 

Manning took what the defense gave him. He did a fine, workmanlike job of leading his team to victory. But to say that we he did was brilliant, or anywhere close to brilliant, is a tremendous reach.

 

He picked them apart. Playing deep on the pass? Take the middle. Playing the Middle? I'll take the short. A deep precision pass isn't anybody's idea of picking apart except maybe you. 400 yrds of offense against that Defense certainly is picking them apart. Again, if it is so easy to just take what the Chicago Defense gives you, why wasn't New Orleans playing in that game? Or Seattle?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He picked them apart. Playing deep on the pass? Take the middle. Playing the Middle? I'll take the short. A deep precision pass isn't anybody's idea of picking apart except maybe you. 400 yrds of offense against that Defense certainly is picking them apart. Again, if it is so easy to just take what the Chicago Defense gives you, why wasn't New Orleans playing in that game? Or Seattle?

 

 

Manning wasn't phenominal, but he certainly did pick them apart. He beat them with not only his arm, but his play-calling (at the line) as well.

Edited by Bill Swerski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it is since this player is some mystical guy who doesn't exist. Might as well say if Barry Sanders was in the Colts backfield and had 200 yrds rushing and another 200 receiving, he would have won MVP.

 

 

I think you are missing the point. It is the "argument" part that is being criticized.

 

You said that there would be a good argument for a player with those stats winning the MVP.

 

The point is that there would be no argument - the dude would have won it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He picked them apart. Playing deep on the pass? Take the middle. Playing the Middle? I'll take the short. A deep precision pass isn't anybody's idea of picking apart except maybe you. 400 yrds of offense against that Defense certainly is picking them apart. Again, if it is so easy to just take what the Chicago Defense gives you, why wasn't New Orleans playing in that game? Or Seattle?

 

 

 

I guess that some people are more easily impressed than others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, considering that Peyton was playing with a bad thumb in the rain against the top defense in the NFC, you expected 400 yds and 4 TDs?

 

 

 

Yeah. That's it. :D

 

I said that he had a fine game. If you (and others) think that Manning was all magical and sh*t, rock on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you are missing the point. It is the "argument" part that is being criticized.

 

You said that there would be a good argument for a player with those stats winning the MVP.

 

The point is that there would be no argument - the dude would have won it.

 

Gotcha, but my point is he would have as well. I'm the guy who said it for cripes sake!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22/36 271 yds TD/INT ratio of 1.21, 1.42 TD/game 1.17 INT/game

 

Peyton Manning's average numbers in 12 career playoff games. Then you look at Manning's career record in big games dating back to college, when he couldn't beat Florida in his career. He has not thrown multiple TDs in a playoff game since 2004 and has thrown twice as many INTs as TDs since that time. The guy simply does not step up to the plate when the money is on the line.

 

The biggest difference being cited between IND & CHI by the pundits is the difference between Manning & Grossman. Grossman can match or exceed the numbers listed above, and if he can perform at a similar level to Manning, CHI wins the game. CHI's D can match IND's and their special teams are better.

 

Look for the upset by CHI and another addition to Manning's growing legend as a choker in big games.

 

 

Sure is strange how statistics can be used to make a case even if it has as many holes as swiss cheese.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grossman has outperformed Manning in QB rating in 9 of 18 games this season, including playoffs. Manning is the one who took a 39.6 rating dump in a playoff game this year while Grossman has been in the 70s both playoff games. Manning hasn't exceeded a QB rating of 80 in the 3 playoff games this year.

 

Grossman has at least an even chance of putting up a better game than Manning.

 

 

 

:D

 

- you caught the limit I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure is strange how statistics can be used to make a case even if it has as many holes as swiss cheese.

 

 

 

That's what happens when you make decisions before hand and make the stats fit them.

 

Plummer came from behind in the 4th quarter too but he also put the team behind. :D

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