Manning Simply Doesn't Get It Done

[Grits and Shins]

Tell you what ... you can have your choice of McCown, Boller, Bledsoe, Delhomme, Palmer, Garcia, Testaverde, Plummer, Harrington, Favre, Carr, Leftwich, Green, Fielder, Feely, Brooks, Eli Manning, Pennington, Collins, Bulger, Rattay, Hasslebeck, Griese, McNair and Ramsey ... and I'll take Manning.

[alexgaddis]

can I pick them all and play them all against Manning?

[WaterMan]

Is this a Fantasy Football draft or a Playoff draft?

[Herdmaster]

Look, Favre got his head kicked in by Dallas for three years before breaking through, Elway had his big game losses, as did Steve Young and numerous other QB's. Manning's got a hang up with New England, maybe he overcomes it next year..maybe a new team steps in the way, but if the Colts get home field, or some defensive help and do win it all next year, then everyone will say "Manning couldn't get it done on his own" and your right....nobody can! Brady has a great D and an awesome coach, Elway had a great offensive line and a world class RB, not to mention, history was erased after Elway's two SB wins. I don't believe the bashing of Manning is fair, he didn't make his receivers drop those passes or fumble did he?? And the last time I checked, he did not play one down on defense. Archie Manning played his entire career for a loser, but was a great QB, Barry Sanders won 1 Playoff Game, but many regard him as the best RB ever because he had "No Blocking, and worthless QB's" so why doesn't that work for Manning?? because when they win...he get's too much credit...but apparently when they lose...it's all his fault....pathetic.

[broncosn05]

It was all his WRs

[broncosn05]

too many dropped passes

[broncosn05]

too many missed oppurtunities

[broncosn05]

Tell you what ... you can have your choice of McCown, Boller, Bledsoe, Delhomme, Palmer, Garcia, Testaverde, Plummer, Harrington, Favre, Carr, Leftwich, Green, Fielder, Feely, Brooks, Eli Manning, Pennington, Collins, Bulger, Rattay, Hasslebeck, Griese, McNair and Ramsey ... and I'll take Manning.

658342[/snapback]

Missing from this list is my man Vick, Brady, Rothlisberger, and McNabb.

[WaterMan]

Archie Manning played his entire career for a loser, but was a great QB, Barry Sanders won 1 Playoff Game, but many regard him as the best RB ever because he had "No Blocking, and worthless QB's" so why doesn't that work for Manning?? because when they win...he get's too much credit...but apparently when they lose...it's all his fault....pathetic.

 

658733[/snapback]

 

 

 

All this week it was about Peyton "exorcising the demons", so to not give the loss to him would be funny. I never saw a QB so scared in my life. How many times did he throw the ball at his own feet?

Edited January 18, 2005 by WaterMan

[Jrick35]

It truly amazes me. Manning doesn't get it done in big spots time and time again yet people NEVER want to call him on it. Again this is not about just yesterday and he did NOT cost his team the game yesterday, but he did NOT do ANYTHING to win it. And they dropped 3 passes and had 2 fumbles so give me a break lets not act like they had 600 TO 's and dropped 10 passes. The Colts are bullies and when someone calls them on it they back down time and time again.

 

658129[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Your post is ridiculous.

 

You minimize the effect that dropped passes and turnovers have on the outcome of a game simply to push blame onto Manning.

 

Manning didn't play great but he didn't play poorly either.

 

Manning was 27 of 42 for 238 yds and 1 INT. Yes his Passer Rating was only around 69 but the Passer Rating is very TD heavy. That's why Manning's was so high for the season. If he had thrown even just 1 TD against NE with all of his other stats the same his rating would have jumped at least 10 points. Look at the Baltimore game, Manning went 20 - 33 for 249 and 1 TD and his rating was over 94. He completed only 60% of his passes for about the same yardage and only 1 TD against no INT's and look how much higher his rating was. That's not an excuse just an explanation for why his rating wasn't higher against NE.

 

Simply put, Manning completed 65% of his passes and that was with at least 4 dropped passes. If those 4 passes had been caught his completion % would have been 74%. And don't pretend that dropped passes don't hurt. They end drives, my friend.

 

And altogether NE won the Turnover battle 3-0. Please don't pretend that Turnovers don't influence the outcome of a game. Winning the Turnover battle is the main reason that NE is so effective against the Colts. In games past it has been Manning and multiple INT's but this time Manning only threw 1 INT and while that's not good, it's not horrible either. Especially when you see when he threw it, very late in the game when it didn't matter.

 

This time it was the INT coupled with 2 lost fumbles, 1 well into NE territory, stealing a potential scoring chance from Indy and the other well into Indy territory. The 2 fumbles were deadly.

 

NE's defense was excellent. Bruschi & Harrison in particular were spectacular. The fact that they were able to overcome the loss of so many defensive starters is simply amazing. And Bruschi was all over the field.

 

But then again I think the Indy Defense even played well when it counted the most. NE had the ball for more than 37 minutes and the Colts defense held them to 325 net yards and only 20 points.

 

A few days ago I posted a prediction for a high scoring game which was obviously wrong, but then again so was the weather report. When I checked the weather it was supposed to be sunshine & mid 30's. So the weather kept the scoring down.

 

The other part of my prediction was the Turnover issue. I expected a great game to be won by the team that won the turnover battle. I was just sure that the Colts would win that battle, they did not.

 

The Patriots executed their gameplan flawlessly, ball control and no turnovers and that's what won the game, the great play of the Patriots not the poor play of the Colts.

 

I feel that overall the Colts defense played very well. They did give up a lot of rushing yards but overall not bad. Holding NE to 20 points or less is all you could ask for from them. that gave the offense the chance to win.

 

Had the offense held onto the ball they may have.

 

So I say "hats off" to Belichick and the Patriots for designing and executing a great game plan and for being able to make the turnovers needed to stymie the Colts offense.

Edited January 18, 2005 by Jrick35

[WaterMan]

Simply put, Manning completed 65% of his passes and that was with at least 4 dropped passes. If those 4 passes had been caught his completion % would have been 74%. And don't pretend that dropped passes don't hurt. They end drives, my friend.

 

Some of his passes were to his own feet. If he had found a receiver for those balls and if the receivers have caught some of the dropped balls, I wouldn't be surprised if it was 80%.

[giantsfan]

Your post is ridiculous.

 

You minimize the effect that dropped passes and turnovers have on the outcome of a game simply to push blame onto Manning.

 

Manning didn't play great but he didn't play poorly either.

 

Manning was 27 of 42 for 238 yds and 1 INT. Yes his Passer Rating was only around 69 but the Passer Rating is very TD heavy. That's why Manning's was so high for the season. If he had thrown even just 1 TD against NE with all of his other stats the same his rating would have jumped at least 10 points. Look at the Baltimore game, Manning went 20 - 33 for 249 and 1 TD and his rating was over 94. He completed only 60% of his passes for about the same yardage and only 1 TD against no INT's and look how much higher his rating was. That's not an excuse just an explanation for why his rating wasn't higher against NE.

 

Simply put, Manning completed 65% of his passes and that was with at least 4 dropped passes. If those 4 passes had been caught his completion % would have been 74%. And don't pretend that dropped passes don't hurt. They end drives, my friend.

 

And altogether NE won the Turnover battle 3-0. Please don't pretend that Turnovers don't influence the outcome of a game. Winning the Turnover battle is the main reason that NE is so effective against the Colts. In games past it has been Manning and multiple INT's but this time Manning only threw 1 INT and while that's not good, it's not horrible either. Especially when you see when he threw it, very late in the game when it didn't matter.

 

This time it was the INT coupled with 2 lost fumbles, 1 well into NE territory, stealing a potential scoring chance from Indy and the other well into Indy territory. The 2 fumbles were deadly.

 

NE's defense was excellent. Bruschi & Harrison in particular were spectacular. The fact that they were able to overcome the loss of so many defensive starters is simply amazing. And Bruschi was all over the field.

 

But then again I think the Indy Defense even played well when it counted the most. NE had the ball for more than 37 minutes and the Colts defense held them to 325 net yards and only 20 points.

 

A few days ago I posted a prediction for a high scoring game which was obviously wrong, but then again so was the weather report. When I checked the weather it was supposed to be sunshine & mid 30's. So the weather kept the scoring down.

 

The other part of my prediction was the Turnover issue. I expected a great game to be won by the team that won the turnover battle. I was just sure that the Colts would win that battle, they did not.

 

The Patriots executed their gameplan flawlessly, ball control and no turnovers and that's what won the game, the great play of the Patriots not the poor play of the Colts.

 

I feel that overall the Colts defense played very well. They did give up a lot of rushing yards but overall not bad. Holding NE to 20 points or less is all you could ask for from them. that gave the offense the chance to win.

 

Had the offense held onto the ball they may have.

 

So I say "hats off" to Belichick and the Patriots for designing and executing a great game plan and for being able to make the turnovers needed to stymie the Colts offense.

 

659427[/snapback]

 

 

 

Okay I'll say it again and SLOWLY because some people don't get it I guess. Manning DID NOT DID NOT DID NOT cost his team the game, but he DID NOTHING to help his team win it either, and isn't the MVP, best player in the league, playing the position better than ANY QB ever right now supposed to do SOMETHING to help his team win. Your arguement is RIDICULOUS because he SET a TD record and had ZERO Sunday, and he set a QB rating record and was under 70 Sunday. So what you are saying is ridiculous because you're saying hey Manning wasn't awful and didn't cost his team the game, so lay off. Well if it was Dilfer at QB you'd be right, but when Manning after his year plays that way he deserves to be questioned.

[Jrick35]

Okay I'll say it again and SLOWLY because some people don't get it I guess. Manning DID NOT DID NOT DID NOT cost his team the game, but he DID NOTHING to help his team win it either, and isn't the MVP, best player in the league, playing the position better than ANY QB ever right now supposed to do SOMETHING to help his team win. Your arguement is RIDICULOUS because he SET a TD record and had ZERO Sunday, and he set a QB rating record and was under 70 Sunday. So what you are saying is ridiculous because you're saying hey Manning wasn't awful and didn't cost his team the game, so lay off. Well if it was Dilfer at QB you'd be right, but when Manning after his year plays that way he deserves to be questioned.

 

659464[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

Maybe you are the one who needs things repeated to him more slowly.

 

I said your post was ridiculous because you were minimizing the effect of dropped passes and turnovers simply so you can blame Manning.

 

And before you make another semantics related post, saying that Manning didn't do anything to help his team win is the same as blaming him for the loss.

 

And yes he did set a TD record this year, no doubt about it, but in the game against NE he threw 42 passes, completing over 65% of them and only threw 1 INT. Those are not bad numbers.

 

The problem that Indy had was not manning it was NE. NE executed their gameplan flawlessly and they took Indy completely out of their gameplan.

 

As great a year as Manning had he only threw as many as 40 passes in a game three times this year prior to Sunday's game. The truth is the Colts don't normally throw the ball that many times a game. But NE stoppped the running game forcing Indy to throw more and Manning still completed 65% of his passes, how is that not playing well? He didn't play badly, the Patriots simply played better. The Patriots got the turnovers. The Patriots won the game.

[Bill Swerski]

Maybe you are the one who needs things repeated to him more slowly.

 

I said your post was ridiculous because you were minimizing the effect of dropped passes and turnovers simply so you can blame Manning.

 

659507[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Yep.

 

Along with the blowhard "sports journalists" on the East Coast, giantsfan doesn't realize that it takes more than one person to win a football game. Manning didn't drop those 6 or 7 catchable passes, turn the ball over twice on fumbles, or allow the Pats to rush for 210 yds. And the one turnover that he WAS responsible for was an INT on a desperation pass at the very end of the game.

 

Did Manning have a great game? No. But only a moron would FAULT him for that loss.

[Patsfan04]

Manning was 27 of 42 for 238 yds and 1 INT. Yes his Passer Rating was only around 69 but the Passer Rating is very TD heavy. That's why Manning's was so high for the season. If he had thrown even just 1 TD against NE with all of his other stats the same his rating would have jumped at least 10 points.

 

I love how on one hand (Jrick) has no problem adding the yardage from the last, meaningless drive (about 50 yds). And, had the Colts scored a garbage touchdown, it would have made his point above for passer rating, and he would have no problem saying "see, it wasn't Peyton's fault".

 

However, "the one turnover he WAS responsible for was an INT on a desparation pass", so Bill says discard that, but you would be the first to use that pass in any pro-Peyton arguement if it ended up being a TD.

 

And by the way, the Patriots 40 yard line does not constitute being "well in Patriots territory".

 

I think Manning had 2 passes into the endzone, the first should have been picked off before the Colts settled for the field goal, the second was picked off on the desparation play.

 

And to take a line from Bruschi, the Colts didn't turn it over, the Patriots took it away.

Edited January 18, 2005 by Patsfan04

[giantsfan]

I think this is the bottom line. MANY times in big games whether it's in college or the pros Manning and his team have not gotten the job done. If you want to all worship Manning and say that's not true, or it's all coincidence, or we're Manning haters go right ahead, but I for one will hold Manning accountable. He IS a GREAT QB that I don't question. All I question is his mental toughness to get the job done in big spots in not ideal conditions against good teams. If you Manning lovers can't see how someone can question his mental toughness based on some of his bad games or non wins in big spots then maybe you need to stop kissing Manning's butt and realize that is NOT a crazy thing to say, and does NOT mean I'm a Manning hater.

[Bill Swerski]

then maybe you need to stop kissing Manning's butt and realize that is NOT a crazy thing to say, and does NOT mean I'm a Manning hater.

 

659609[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Yeah, your argument is very convincing.

[giantsfan]

Yeah, your argument is very convincing. 

 

659614[/snapback]

 

 

 

And true Bill.

[Bill Swerski]

And true Bill.

 

659617[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Being a Giants fan, your time would be better spent worrying about Eli rather than Peyton.

[WaterMan]

Manning Simply Doesn't Get It Done, EVER in big games.

 

Can someone show me proof of when Manning came through in a big game and won it? If not, then get over it.

[Patsfan04]

I thought I made my point a few posts above, and no response.

Also, in the response to the following post, I said yesterday "it is great to show us stats from the wins, how about the losses?", but nothing.

 

You're dead wrong...

 

January, 2004 vs. DEN:  22/26, 377 yds, 5 TDs, 0 INTs (Colts win 41-10)

January, 2004 @ KC: 22/30, 304 yds, 3 TDs, 0 INTs (Colts win 38-31)

January, 2005 vs. DEN: 27/33, 457 yds, 4 TDs, 1 INT, 1 rushing TD (Colts win 49-24)

 

It is correct to say that Manning has not played well in Foxboro in January.  Outside of that, Manning certainly HAS done VERY WELL in "big spots."

 

Career playoff numbers...

 

171/284 (60%), 2171 yds, 14 TDs, 8 INTs, 32 rushing yds, 2 rushing TDs  

 

658156[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Luckily, the coldhardfootballfacts.com put the info together:

 

From coldhardfootballfacts.com:

The best quarterback in football does not produce a dud every single year that he’s in the playoffs. But Manning has. He’s 3-5 in the playoffs after Sunday’s 20-3 loss to New England. Four times in five years, Manning has played his single worst game of the season in the playoffs. In Indy’s victories he’s been stupendous. In Indy’s losses he’s been stupefied.

 

In those fives losses, Manning has completed 100 of 195 passes (51.3 percent) for 1,033 yards, 2 TDs and 7 INTs. His cumulative passer rating in the five losses is 55.4. That is not yahooism. That is Cold, Hard Football Fact.

 

Consider this: Sunday’s performance against New England was Manning’s worst of the season (69.3 passer rating, 0 TD passes, 1 INT). But it was his second best statistical performance in a postseason loss. It doesn’t get any uglier than that.

 

But the biggest indictment is that Indy’s high-powered regular-season offenses over the years have averaged just 10 points per game in five playoffs losses. Manning’s proponents can finger the Indy defense all they want. But it’s hard to beat champion-caliber teams when you put just 10 points on the board.

Edited January 18, 2005 by Patsfan04

[WaterMan]

They averaged 10 points per game in their 5 losses? Holy crap.

[giantsfan]

Being a Giants fan, your time would be better spent worrying about Eli rather than Peyton. 

 

659618[/snapback]

 

 

 

I hear that. Eli has a LONG way to go. And if he turns out to be 75% of Peyton game in and game out I'll be happy. Not in big games, but over the course of the year if he's 75% of Peyton I'll be a happy Giants fan. LOL

[GWPFFL BrianW]

Im just sick of hearing how bad the Colts d played. TWENTY points folks. Peyton Manning and the great Indianapolis offense, couldn't score 20 points. Weather? It's football, and they are professionals. And the excuse, well new englands d is just too good. So... Montana never had to beat a good defense? Marino didn't? Bradshaw didn't? Elway didn't? Favre didn't?

 

Why didn't Manning get the job done at the end of the half, when the offense was finally starting to click. A td would have put them up 7-6 going into halftime. But I suppose momentum doesn't have anything to do with it. No, Manning blew it. And btw, good luck finding a defense, when you've already invested a ton into your great offense. Somewhere the Colts need to find a balance.

 

Peyton wasn't the only reason the Colts lost, but as the MVP of the league, and the leader of that football team, he didn't do enough to win. And if you're gonna whine about weather in the N F L, go find a new line of work.

Edited January 18, 2005 by GWPFFL BrianW

[Menudo]

 

Cut that meat, cut that meat !!!!