The Vatican Hitsquad Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 So my hat's off to Manning. I honestly thought Addai was a much better choice for MVP (which pains me since I thought he was the most probable bust of the top 5 rookie RBs before the season started) because he did a lot more for the team when they took control of the game than Manning did, but of course the golden boy had to carry away the trophy. He did what he had to to win - keep his team in the game in the first half and be pedestrian while Grossman pissed away the game in the 2nd half. I think you're underestimating Manning's contribution in this win. He calls the plays, so after passing for almost 200 yards in the first half, it was HIS decision and play calling that kept dumping the pass off to Adai and handing it off to Rhodes. He outsmarted that Defense and drove the ball right down their throat, wearing them down. It was these long, exhausting drives combined with Grossman's innefective play that tired the Chicago Defense out, opening them up for those draw plays Manning kept calling. Combine Rhodes and Adai's numbers into one RB, then you have a good arguemnt. But seperately, it was Manning that commanded and directed that Offesne that game. He deservedly won that MVP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 Grossman's potential for a rock bottom failure performance in any given game is far greater than Manning's IMO. 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. pwn3d Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted February 5, 2007 Author Share Posted February 5, 2007 pwn3d Conceded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 I think you're underestimating Manning's contribution in this win. He calls the plays, so after passing for almost 200 yards in the first half, it was HIS decision and play calling that kept dumping the pass off to Adai and handing it off to Rhodes. He outsmarted that Defense and drove the ball right down their throat, wearing them down. It was these long, exhausting drives combined with Grossman's innefective play that tired the Chicago Defense out, opening them up for those draw plays Manning kept calling. Combine Rhodes and Adai's numbers into one RB, then you have a good arguemnt. But seperately, it was Manning that commanded and directed that Offesne that game. He deservedly won that MVP. As I understand it they give him several plays from the sideline. He can pick one of them or audible out and choose his own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Vatican Hitsquad Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 As I understand it they give him several plays from the sideline. He can pick one of them or audible out and choose his own. Right, he gets 3 plays every down called in to his helmet. He decides what to run, what to audible and what to fake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 huh. i really didn't think grossman was that bad, hundreds of monday morning posts here on the huddle notwishstanding. he had those two INTs where the ball seemed to slip out of his hand badly on the release (a little ironic that the weather ended up helping the colts)...but bottom line the bears lost not because of grossman, but because their defense simply couldn't get off the field, and the colts were decidedly better on both sides of the ball in the trenches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 huh. i really didn't think grossman was that bad, hundreds of monday morning posts here on the huddle notwishstanding. he had those two INTs where the ball seemed to slip out of his hand badly on the release (a little ironic that the weather ended up helping the colts)...but bottom line the bears lost not because of grossman, but because their defense simply couldn't get off the field, and the colts were decidedly better on both sides of the ball in the trenches. And on one of those INTs, the receiver just flat out did a bad job playing the ball. The D-Back knew where the ball was and put himself in the right spot, but the receiver had position and could have made the play. Another brilliant Phil Simms call that the receiver had 'no chance' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 Well, I'll be back Monday AM so we can see how idiotic I really am. I'll be interested to see if you show up if Manning craps the bed yet again. Idiotic, indeed! How's it going, Billy? Tell me, what was the last huge game Manning QBed his team to a win in? So the answer would be yes, all other things being equal, Grossman could have won as the Colts' QB in the past 3 games. But here's the thing about Grossman: He tends to crap his pants when he isn't playing with the lead. How many turnovers did he commit in the NE, MIA, ARI, and (second) GB game? Grossman with and without a lead are two completely different QBs. You don't say? Who would've gussed?! Grossman also could very well mange the game safely & let Manning do what he has done all of his career - lose the $$$ games with yet another bad outing. Game, set, match. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 And on one of those INTs, the receiver just flat out did a bad job playing the ball. The D-Back knew where the ball was and put himself in the right spot, but the receiver had position and could have made the play. Another brilliant Phil Simms call that the receiver had 'no chance' yeah, you gotta figure moose muhammad one-on-one can get a jump ball (or at least break it up) over a backup CB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 huh. i really didn't think grossman was that bad, hundreds of monday morning posts here on the huddle notwishstanding. he had those two INTs where the ball seemed to slip out of his hand badly on the release (a little ironic that the weather ended up helping the colts)...but bottom line the bears lost not because of grossman, but because their defense simply couldn't get off the field, and the colts were decidedly better on both sides of the ball in the trenches. Grossman fully deserves blame for those two INTs. He threw the first off of his back foot with a defender in his face. And he completely telegraphed his read on the second one. No doubt that the slippery ball was a factor, but those were examples of panic. Peyton's INT on their first drive was a bad decision as well. And speaking of panic, Ron Turner's play-calling wasn't very smart in the second half either. The Bears didn't need to go for the juggular in the 4h quarter while they were down by 5 with lots of time left on the clock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 I think you're underestimating Manning's contribution in this win. He calls the plays, so after passing for almost 200 yards in the first half, it was HIS decision and play calling that kept dumping the pass off to Adai and handing it off to Rhodes. He outsmarted that Defense and drove the ball right down their throat, wearing them down. It was these long, exhausting drives combined with Grossman's innefective play that tired the Chicago Defense out, opening them up for those draw plays Manning kept calling. Combine Rhodes and Adai's numbers into one RB, then you have a good arguemnt. But seperately, it was Manning that commanded and directed that Offesne that game. He deservedly won that MVP. Agreed completely. The problem with the MVP award in this game is that there was no real outstanding individual performance. The Colts O-line was outstanding. Addai and Rhodes were both outstanding. Indy's defensive backs played very well. Because of that, the QB who wore down the vaunted Bears defense, played relatively efficiently, and got his offense in the endzone twice and in position to kick four FGs gets the nod. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DemonKnight Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 To be honest, it would have been nice to see the IND O-line win the MVP. THEY desrved gigantic props for their work in both the rushing & passing game True. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tally Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 (edited) So my hat's off to Manning. I honestly thought Addai was a much better choice for MVP (which pains me since I thought he was the most probable bust of the top 5 rookie RBs before the season started) because he did a lot more for the team when they took control of the game than Manning did, but of course the golden boy had to carry away the trophy. He did what he had to to win - keep his team in the game in the first half and be pedestrian while Grossman pissed away the game in the 2nd half. I thought Rhodes was more deserving than either Manning or Addai. Addai did have about 20 more yards from scrimmage but Rhodes had the TD and even more than that it felt like his runs seemed to happen at more critical parts of the game. It felt like he stepped up in a few situations when the Colts need it the most. The 3rd and short run to the right when he broke a tackle by doing spin move right to get the first down plus a couple extra yards really stuck with me. Edited February 5, 2007 by Tally Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 (edited) Grossman fully deserves blame for those two INTs. He threw the first off of his back foot with a defender in his face. And he completely telegraphed his read on the second one. No doubt that the slippery ball was a factor, but those were examples of panic. Peyton's INT on their first drive was a bad decision as well. berrian was wide open on the second INT. he was behind both his man and the safety help. grossman had him for a 40+ yarder if the ball didn't slip and come up lame 15 yards short. And speaking of panic, Ron Turner's play-calling wasn't very smart in the second half either. The Bears didn't need to go for the juggular in the 4h quarter while they were down by 5 with lots of time left on the clock. agree completely, and panic is a good word to desribe it. the play-calling in the first half left a lot to be desired as well. Edited February 5, 2007 by Azazello1313 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 berrian was wide open on the second INT. grossman had him for a 40+ yarder if the ball didn't slip and come up lame 15 yards short. I could be wrong about this, but I didn't see any evidence of the ball slipping in Rex's hand on that throw. It seems odd that the ball would be thrown right to Moose unintentionally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 I could be wrong about this, but I didn't see any evidence of the ball slipping in Rex's hand on that throw. It seems odd that the ball would be thrown right to Moose unintentionally. am i confused on the order? there was the one INT where grossman had moose singled up against the backup CB (hayden?), he lobbed one up that looked to me (not 100% sure on that one) like it slipped out of his hand a bit, but was still a jump ball that i would think moose ought to find a way to either come down with, or knock down -- but instead he fell on his ass. you can maybe fault his throw there, but you can't fault his read -- moose singled up against hayden is a very desireable place to throw. the other INT (the one i was talking about) was when berrian was open deep, grossman threw it his way and the ball CLEARLY slipped out of his hand on the release and came up way short, and sanders came over for the pick. can't fault his read there either, berrian was open. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 berrian was wide open on the second INT. he was behind both his man and the safety help. grossman had him for a 40+ yarder if the ball didn't slip and come up lame 15 yards short. agree completely, and panic is a good word to desribe it. the play-calling in the first half left a lot to be desired as well. Naw - was a worse than awful throw by Rex, - Simms nailed it - he had Berrian open deep to the open side- to the right of safety help, and Rex thru it down the middle of the field- it was a horriblt throw and 100% on Rex- any good QB leads him to the open gap away from the safety. All of his INT's were terrible throws really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 Naw - was a worse than awful throw by Rex, - Simms nailed it - he had Berrian open deep to the open side- to the right of safety help, and Rex thru it down the middle of the field- it was a horriblt throw and 100% on Rex- any good QB leads him to the open gap away from the safety. All of his INT's were terrible throws really. That's how I saw it too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 am i confused on the order? there was the one INT where grossman had moose singled up against the backup CB (hayden?), he lobbed one up that looked to me (not 100% sure on that one) like it slipped out of his hand a bit, but was still a jump ball that i would think moose ought to find a way to either come down with, or knock down -- but instead he fell on his ass. you can maybe fault his throw there, but you can't fault his read -- moose singled up against hayden is a very desireable place to throw. Hayden also didn't bite at all on Moose's fake, which is a reflection on Turner's unimaginative play-calling. The pass was under-thrown and I suppose that Moose should take some blame for not knocking the ball down. And I suppose that you could blame the rain if the ball did indeed slip out of Rex's hand. Then again, there were A LOT of balls that slipped out of Rex's hand last night and very few that slipped out of Peyton's. the other INT (the one i was talking about) was when berrian was open deep, grossman threw it his way and the ball CLEARLY slipped out of his hand on the release and came up way short, and sanders came over for the pick. can't fault his read there either, berrian was open. "Way short"? IIRC, the ball was under-thrown by about a yard or two. It very well may have slipped, but Sanders was RIGHT THERE in front of Berrian and Jason David. I'm pretty sure that Rex didn't bother to look at Sanders, just as Peyton didn't bother to look for Chris Harrison on his INT in the first quarter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted February 5, 2007 Author Share Posted February 5, 2007 That's how I saw it too. Same here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 Same here. Yep. Another inaccurate throw in a season with way too many of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 Naw - was a worse than awful throw by Rex, - Simms nailed it - he had Berrian open deep to the open side- to the right of safety help, and Rex thru it down the middle of the field- it was a horriblt throw and 100% on Rex- any good QB leads him to the open gap away from the safety. right, exactly. and it was a terrible throw because it clearly slipped coming out of his hand. "Way short"? IIRC, the ball was under-thrown by about a yard or two. It very well may have slipped, but Sanders was RIGHT THERE in front of Berrian and Jason David. I'm pretty sure that Rex didn't bother to look at Sanders, just as Peyton didn't bother to look for Chris Harrison on his INT in the first quarter. well berrian really had to pull up, because it WAS way short, at least 10-15 yards from where it should have been. if the ball didn't die out of grossman's hand, berrian was behind the coverage and open for a big play. that is a throw grossman made all year long, but that time it came out a dead duck. you can blame grossman for not being able to control the wet ball, but you can't blame him for a bad read....he HAD berrian there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 right, exactly. and it was a terrible throw because it clearly slipped coming out of his hand. well berrian really had to pull up, because it WAS way short, at least 10-15 yards from where it should have been. if the ball didn't die out of grossman's hand, berrian was behind the coverage and open for a big play. that is a throw grossman made all year long, but that time it came out a dead duck.... but you can't blame him for a bad read....he HAD berrian there. I'd have to watch a replay with a full view of the field, as I don't really remember seeing Berrian pull up. Then again, I had drank about a six-pack by then, so perhaps my memory is incorrect. you can blame grossman for not being able to control the wet ball, For a minute, I thought that you were using this as an excuse, but I'm glad to see that isn't the case. Peyton sure as heck didn't have trouble controlling the wet ball last night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 For a minute, I thought that you were using this as an excuse, but I'm glad to see that isn't the case. Peyton sure as heck didn't have trouble controlling the wet ball last night. 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. come to think of it, seems like i remember reading somewhere a while back that grossman has smallish hands for a QB. 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 Combine Rhodes and Adai's numbers into one RB, then you have a good arguemnt. 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? 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.