NFL 2009

[Cimmerian Nights]

Look, I like the "choker" bit as much as the next guy, be he has a Ring now, and no amount of calling it "flukey" or pointing out the Bears weren't that good is going to change that.

Nor does one ring absolve him of all his big game Fuckups up to that point, again going all the way back to Tennessee. Trent Dilfer got a ring, Hostetler got a ring, Brad Johnson got a ring. Big fucking deal.

This goes way beyond the Bears.
Manning has had some very, very shaky playoff performances, and that's an understatement.
How many times can you win 12, 13, 14 games in the regular season and lose in the first round without being called a choker?

Manning's playoff history is a litany of 1st game losses:

'99 One and done (13 regular season wins)
'00 One and done
'02 One and done (Shutout 41-0 by the freakin' J-E-T-S)
'03 Choked in AFCC game w/4INTs 3 to Ty Law
'04 Choked again - League's highest scoring team gets taken apart 20-3
'05 One and done (14 regular season wins)
'06 FLUKE - outduels Rex Grossman WOW!
'07 One and done (13 win regular season)
'08 One and done (12 win regular season)

Postseason success is an aberration, not the norm for Manning.

9 Playoff appearances and 6 times they got knocked out the first game, usually to lower ranked teams, and more often than not at home after a bye! Twice he waited until the AFCC game to meltdown (1-1 is hardly a robust playoff performance).
One time he won a ring, against a team that probably had the worst offense (certainly the worst QB ever) in SB history.

See a pattern here or am I just a biased?

This isn't some bush league team either, this is the winningest team of the decade, plenty of future HOFers. To not show up in the playoffs after all those victories year after year after year speaks for itself.
12, 13, 14 wins again and again with nothing to show for it is the mark of a choker.

Like I said earlier, pads his stats against weak opponents and loses the big game.
And I'm not even dragging up his Tennessee record which digs the hole even deeper for our golden friend.

The SB year is a fluke, what do you call it when weighed against the rest of his career?


Look around the league, nobody is really getting excited about the Colts being undefeated. Why? Because we've been down this road year after year and we know where it ends, one fluky aberration notwithstanding.


edit: I would go so far as to say he is the most prolific choker in NFL history. He's the DaVinci of choke artists.

Who would you say beats him out?

 

[Brother None]

'03 Choked in AFCC game w/4INTs 3 to Ty Law

I like how you avoid talking about his performance except for this game. He choked in '02 and '03, yeah. He's still 7-8 in the postseason (which doesn't compare badly to, say, Favre, who's 12-22 in the postseason), he has an 84.6 QBRat in the post-season. Heck, in '03 and '04 his post-season QBRat topped 100.

I agree the Colts team looks significantly better in the regular season than the post-season. But that's just the thing, the Colts team looks worse. And a big part of that is how much the team is constructed on the basis of a high-powered offense focusing on Manning's skill-set, and they don't know the hardnosed football often needed in the post-season (even in home games). Can you blame Manning for that? In a way, yes, his super-stats are tied directly to said team-structure as much as the playoff losses are. That's a franchise, organizational call though, it doesn't really make Manning a choker. A choker is someone who consistently loses the game through his own bad performance. Manning was pretty weak in '99, '00 and '02. He lit shit up in '03 and '04 until he choked in the Pats game. His last 3 1-and-outs are all games in which he got the yardage and scores, but the team lost by less than a TD every time, that's more flukey than terrible.

One time he won a ring, against a team that probably had the worst offense (certainly the worst QB ever) in SB history.

The SB itself was kind of weak, but why are you focusing on that rather than the pretty competent teams the Colts had to beat to get there? You make it sound as if all he had to do was beat the Bears, who weren't a great team but still good enough to be in the SB. Why?

12, 13, 14 wins again and again with nothing to show for it is the mark of a choker.

Yes. Except that they have a Super Bowl ring to show for it.

Look around the league, nobody is really getting excited about the Colts being undefeated. Why? Because we've been down this road year after year and we know where it ends, one flukey abberation notwithstanding.

Nobody's getting excited about the Saints either. That's because including those two teams we've seen 5 teams go 10-0 to start the season, compared to 7 doing it over the preceding 32 years. Like the huge offensive numbers and all the 100+ QBRat guys, it's a sign of the times, and doesn't make for better football, you'd agree.

 

[Sander]

edit: I would go so far as to say he is the most prolific choker in NFL history. He's the DaVinci of choke artists.

Who would you say beats him out?

Someone who hasn't won a ring. Like Fran Tarkenton.

 

[Brother None]

edit: I would go so far as to say he is the most prolific choker in NFL history. He's the DaVinci of choke artists.

Who would you say beats him out?

Someone who hasn't won a ring. Like Fran Tarkenton.

Or Dan Marino.

Seriously, Cimm, I never doubt you know what you're talking about, but you gotta admit your view of the Colts/Manning is...slightly skewed. Consider for a moment here that you're actually arguing that a guy with a Superbowl ring is the biggest choker of all time. How would that even be conceptually possible?

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

I like how you avoid talking about his performance except for this game.

Kind of like you avoiding the most relevant stat 6 times 'one and done' in 9 appearances.

Frankly I don't have the memory to recount his failures, but this'll have to suffice (bolded by me for emphasis):

1999 – In Manning’s second year in the league he led the Colts to a 13-3 record and an AFC East title while averaging 26.4 PPG in the regular season. In Indy’s first playoff game the Colts hosted wildcard-game winner Tennessee. The Indy defense played well, surrendering just 19 points to a solid offense that averaged 24.5 points per game. But Manning, at home in the dome, put just 16 points on the board, the team’s third lowest output of the season, while completing just 19 of 43 passes for 227 yards and zero touchdowns. Manning’s 60.9 passer rating was his lowest of the entire season. Result: Manning chokes. Colts lose, 19-16.

2000 – The Colts went 10-6 behind Manning’s 33 touchdown passes and an offense that averaged 26.8 PPG in the regular season. Indy went to Miami in the wildcard round and its defense played very well, intercepting Jay Fiedler three times and surrendering just 23 points in a game decided in overtime. But Manning struggled against the Dolphins and, in a game that lasted more than 70 minutes, was a non-factor. He completed barely 50 percent of his passes (17 for 32) for just 194 yards and a touchdown. The Colts generated 11 points off Fiedler’s interceptions but put a total of just 17 on the board, 10 points fewer than their regular-season average. It was Indy’s second lowest scoring output of the season. Result: Manning chokes. Colts lose, 23-17, in overtime.

2002 – The Colts went 10-6 and drew a gimme in the wildcard round: a 9-7 Jets team with a paper-thin defense that surrendered 336 points that year (Indy boasted the better D, surrendering 313 points). Manning played the single worst statistical game of his entire career (14 for 31, 137 yards, 0 TDs, 2 INTs and a career-low 31.2 passer rating) and failed to put a single point on the board. Result: Manning chokes. Colts lose, 41-0.

2003 – The Colts went 12-4 in the regular season and scored 27.9 PPG. Manning kept it going in Indy’s first two playoff games and was spectacular leading 41-10 and 38-31 victories over Denver and Kansas City. But Manning, facing foul weather and a good defense, returned to his historic postseason form in the AFC title game against New England. Indy’s D again played well under postseason pressure, stifling the Patriots in the red zone and forcing them to settle for five field goals. But Manning tossed four interceptions and posted the third lowest passer rating of his entire career (35.5). Result: Manning chokes. Colts lose, 24-14.

2004 – The Colts again went 12-4 in the regular season, this time scoring 522 points (32.6 PPG) and entering the playoffs a seemingly unstoppable offensive juggernaut with the fifth-highest scoring offense in NFL history. Manning, of course, set numerous regular season records. Most notably, he tossed 49 touchdown passes while shattering the single-season passer rating record, with a mark of 121.1. It all took a familiar turn for the worse in the playoffs. In a divisional game at New England, the Colts mustered just 3 points – their lowest offensive output since the 2002 playoff loss to the Jets. Once again, Manning played his very worst game of the season in the playoffs, completing 27 of 42 passes for 238 yards with 0 TDs and 1 INT and a passer rating of 69.3, his lowest of the year. Result: Manning chokes. Colts lose, 20-3.

...

In five playoff losses during the Manning era, the Colts have scored just 10.0 PPG. It’s got even worse in recent years. In the past three seasons, the Colts offense went down in a whimpering heap of postseason futility, scoring a woeful and inexcusable 5.7 PPG in its last three playoff losses – that’s a net difference of negative 21.8 PPG when compared with Indy’s scoring average over those same three regular seasons. Think the problem in Indy is a Swiss-cheese defense? Think again. In the playoffs, the problem is a pathetic offense and pathetic play at quarterback.

granted I think this was written in '05 but they still stand, and it's not like his last 2 playoff appearances weren't '1 and done' too.

It's 2 years in a row now Philip Rivers has sent them packing with nary a playoff win. Chargers were barely .500 last year.

edit: For the completists:

2005: Again they are the favored team and again Peyton and the Colts lose at home; this time to the Pittsburgh Steelers.

2006: Finally Peyton wins a Super Bowl. However it should be noted that Peyton threw three touchdowns and seven interceptions in the teams playoff run and he never had a QB rating over 82 in any of those games. The Colts won with their defence coming together at the right time and a dominant running game led by Dominick Rhodes and Joseph Addai.

2007: For yet another year the Colts lose in their first playoff game at home against an inferior opponent (San Diego) who were without their star running back and lost their starting quarterback. Yet once again Peyton Manning was the losing quarterback on a team that vastly underachieved in the playoffs.

2008: Indianapolis may have been on the road but they were favoured to beat the mighty AFC West 8-8 Champion San Diego Chargers. But in their latest edition of playoff failures the Colts could only manage 17 points against one of the worst secondaries in the league. The only points Peyton Manning could produce in the second half came on a busted coverage play by the Chargers that led to a long touchdown pass to a wide open Reggie Wayne.

So, the one fluky time they did win it all, it was despite Manning. Sounds like his team carried him.
Some MVP.

He's still 7-8 in the postseason (which doesn't compare badly to, say, Favre, who's 12-22 in the postseason)

Not comparing him to Favre, comparing him to his regular season self. Which is a pretty stark contrast.
I can trot out the Brady/Manning regular and post season stat comparison if I wanted to go there. Pretty remarkable difference there.

But that's just the thing, the Colts team looks worse.

Classic Manning apology, hell, he's the first one to throw his o-line under the bus publicly when they lose.

He lit shit up in '03 and '04 until he choked in the Pats game.

I think you're making my point, he gets it done against mediocre teams, but not when it matters.

The SB itself was kind of weak, but why are you focusing on that rather than the pretty competent teams the Colts had to beat to get there? You make it sound as if all he had to do was beat the Bears, who weren't a great team but still good enough to be in the SB. Why?

OK, so they beat the Chiefs and the Ravens, some mean offensive powerhouses there. And care to remind me who was playing WR for the Pats that year? Hard to remember since none of them could make the cut in the NFL after that.
Cakewalk.

Or Dan Marino.

Come on man. Don't compare Dan Marino's weapons to Manning's. Marino carried the Dolphins on his back his whole career. Manning's been surrounded by HOFers and crumbles under pressure. You can't compare the two.

And Tarkenton?
You're not really trying to compare the '72 Dolphins, the 70s Steelers (best dynasty ever?) and Madden's Raiders of the 70s to a Chicago Bears team who's only scoring threat was a punt returner (Devin Hester)?
Tarkenton is before my time, so I frankly don't know how/if his play dropped off for the playoffs.

The Vikes legendary SB losses have faded a bit over time thanks to Buffalos SB failures (before you ask I'd attribute that to clear NFC dominance in the 90s, and of course Scott Norwood as one of the most infamous SB chokers of all time).
No small conincidence, that Buffalo's GM at the time was the infamous Bill Polian though.

 

[Sander]

Seriously? You're going to pretend that someone who went to 3 Superbowls and won none is less of a choker than Manning, who went to 1 and won it?

Sure, you can call Manning out for worse performances in the post-season than in the season itself (which is logical for several reasons), but to call him the worst choker of all time, worse than Tarkenton or Jim Kelly, that's just ridiculous.

Look at it from another perspective: 7-8 in the postseason against the best teams in the league is pretty decent when compared to his regular season record.

More significantly, they went 7-8 in the postseason, while they were the top seed in those matchups exactly 7 times. That doesn't seem like underachieving at all: that seems to be right on the money.

Most of those games were close games as well. If you want to compare him to Brady in that regard, the conclusion is that Brady had a better supporting cast. Really, how many times has the kicker won the game in the final seconds for the Pats now?

Calling Manning the biggest choker of all time is beyond ridiculous.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

Seriously? You're going to pretend that someone who went to 3 Superbowls and won none is less of a choker than Manning, who went to 1 and won it?

Like I said, I'm ambivalent about Tarkenton, if you can point to a significant drop in his playoff performance on par with Manning's I wouldn't dispute it. But he lost Superbowls to 3 of the best teams ever. Manning beat a lackluster Bears squad, who again, had probably the most comically impotent offense in SB history.

Sure, you can call Manning out for worse performances in the post-season than in the season itself (which is logical for several reasons), but to call him the worst choker of all time, worse than Tarkenton or Jim Kelly, that's just ridiculous.

I don't know that Kelly is a choker, you can't call someone a choker when they are unconscious, can you? Nor can you blame him when Scott Norwood chokes. Plus he lost to Parcell's Giants, Gibb's Redskins, and Cowboys dynasty's of the 90s. Again, all time great dynasties there. I could fill the rest of the page up listing the HOFers and Pro-bowlers on those teams.

Other than the Giants game, the Bills (and any other AFC team) had no chance to win those games. Huge disparity in conference stregth back then - remember this was pre-hard cap, pre-wide open free agency. From the 80s to 90s the SB was pretty much passed back and forth between Giants, '9ers, Skins and Cowboys. No shame in losing to them.

This is much different than Manning losing to lower seeded teams at home after a bye week. With consistency.

Look at it from another perspective: 7-8 in the postseason against the best teams in the league is pretty decent when compared to his regular season record.

Last year's Chargers were not one of the best teams in the league. When you win your division at .500 it's more of a loophole than anything.
And the point is, the Manning's teams were nearly always favored, and he nearly always underperformed.

More significantly, they went 7-8 in the postseason, while they were the top seed in those matchups exactly 7 times. That doesn't seem like underachieving at all: that seems to be right on the money.

How much of a dropoff from his regular season performance is the key here. A winning percentage close to .700 drops below .500. That's a poor showing.

Most of those games were close games as well. If you want to compare him to Brady in that regard, the conclusion is that Brady had a better supporting cast. Really, how many times has the kicker won the game in the final seconds for the Pats now?

And who put the kicker in the position to score?

Seriously, name me some of the weapons he had in his SB wins.
None of them could hold Marvin Harrison orReggie Wayne's jock.

Manning's had the same system and same coordinators and coaches his whole career. Brady's turnover at a 2 year average.

the article I previously cited from Cold Hard Football Facts gives a better breakdown than my lazy, turkey stuffed person could:

THE 'TALENT' ISSUE
Indianapolis might have a better shot at winning a Super Bowl should it put more emphasis on defense. But the organization has made a strategic decision to sacrifice defense in an effort to surround Manning with the greatest talent possible and to sell tickets to a fan base that desires high-scoring games. In fact, according to salary-cap gurus such as Peter King of Sports Illustrated, no team in the NFL has a greater imbalance between the money spent on offense and the money spent on defense. This imbalance was only furthered in recent years, as Manning was signed to a preposterous $98 million deal and wide receiver Marvin Harrison inked a $67 million contract extension. In the salary-cap era, every dollar given to one player on offense is one dollar taken out of the pocket of a player on defense.

It’s a strategy that seems to have Manning’s full support. In fact, in the 2001 draft, Manning lobbied the team to select wide receiver Reggie Wayne of Miami in the first round despite the fact that the Indy offense already featured a future Hall of Fame receiving talent in Harrison and despite the fact that the porous Indy defense surrendered 20.4 PPG in 2000. (The Indy offense averaged 26.8 PPG in 2000.)

Manning, himself a No. 1 draft pick, was surrounded by top-pick talent in 2004 at

* wide receiver (Wayne, Harrison)
* tight end (Dallas Clark)
* running back (Edgerrin James) and
* offensive tackle (Tarik Glenn).

That’s six of 11 offensive starters who are No. 1 draft picks. At least one, Harrison, is a lock for the Hall of Fame. James is a potential Hall of Famer. Manning had the luxury his first year in the league of handing the ball to future Hall of Fame running back Marshall Faulk, one of the most prolific offensive players in NFL history. Manning has also enjoyed the luxury of offensive Pro Bowlers ever year that he’s been in the league: Faulk (1998); James (1999, 2000, 2004); and Harrison (1999-2004).

In other words, the Colts have purposely built a team that gives its quarterback a chance to pad the stat book.

Brady has built his prolific career with a much different set of tools. Consider that he’s New England’s only offensive player to be named to the Pro Bowl since 2001 (New England running back Corey Dillon appeared in the 2004 Pro Bowl, but only as an injury replacement). Brady’s top receiver has been Troy Brown, an NFL journeyman who was drafted in the 8th round (198th pick) out of Marshall. Meanwhile, consider the pedigree of the players on the receiving end of Brady’s six Super Bowl touchdown passes:

* Deion Branch (a second-round draft pick from Louisville)
* David Givens (a seventh-round pick from Notre Dame)
* David Patten (an undrafted free agent from Western Carolina) and
* Mike Vrabel (a journeyman NFL linebacker).

New England’s offensive line in 2004 featured a second-round draft pick (Matt Light), two fifth rounders (Dan Koppen and Russ Hochstein), a seventh-round pick (Brandon Gorin) and three undrafted free agents (Stephen Neal, Joe Andruzzi and Tom Ashworth). In 2005, New England’s offensive line will finally future a first-round draft pick, guard Logan Mankins, who’s likely to fill the starting spot left by Andruzzi.

Most successful quarterbacks, meanwhile, depend upon a punishing ground game to open up the passing lanes for them. But

* the 2001 Patriots won the Super Bowl with the league’s 13th ranked ground attack.
* the 2003 Patriots had the 27th ranked ground attack, the lowest ranked rushing attack of any Super Bowl champion.
* the 2003 Patriots averaged just 3.4 yards per rushing attempt. Among all Super Bowl champions, only the 1970 Colts (3.3 yards per carry) had a more ineffective ground game.

Calling Manning the biggest choker of all time is beyond ridiculous.

Who's got more regular season wins, awards, MVPs, TDs, passing records, but 6 'one and dones', 2 Monumental AFCC choke jobs and one fluky SB run consisting of 3TDs and 7 INTs?

My mind fails me to come up with anybody with that much regular season juice who wilts in January.

BTW, he's not done either!
Seriously, the Colts will probably finish somewhere between 16-0 and 14-2. They'll start resting all the starters come Week 16 & 17 as always. Bye week rolls around. They'll be completely rested (and unaccustomed to game speed and contact). And some hot, battle tempered team who had to claw and scrape for a playoff spot (like SD the past 2 years) will come in and punch them in the mouth.

This is the Colt's modus operandi every year, and the annual results I cited above bear witness to their failure.

 

[Sander]

[
Like I said, I'm ambivalent about Tarkenton, if you can point to a significant drop in his playoff performance on par with Manning's I wouldn't dispute it. But he lost Superbowls to 3 of the best teams ever. Manning beat a lackluster Bears squad, who again, had probably the most comically impotent offense in SB history.
[...]
I don't know that Kelly is a choker, you can't call someone a choker when they are unconscious, can you? Nor can you blame him when Scott Norwood chokes. Plus he lost to Parcell's Giants, Gibb's Redskins, and Cowboys dynasty's of the 90s. Again, all time great dynasties there. I could fill the rest of the page up listing the HOFers and Pro-bowlers on those teams.

Other than the Giants game, the Bills (and any other AFC team) had no chance to win those games. Huge disparity in conference stregth back then - remember this was pre-hard cap, pre-wide open free agency. From the 80s to 90s the SB was pretty much passed back and forth between Giants, '9ers, Skins and Cowboys. No shame in losing to them.

This is much different than Manning losing to lower seeded teams at home after a bye week. With consistency.

Dude, seriously? Every single postseason loss there is because the teams were awesome, and every single Manning loss is because he plays terrible teams? Don't be ridiculous.

Your total hatred for Manning is showing. It's ridiculous.

Last year's Chargers were not one of the best teams in the league. When you win your division at .500 it's more of a loophole than anything.
And the point is, the Manning's teams were nearly always favored, and he nearly always underperformed.

More significantly, they went 7-8 in the postseason, while they were the top seed in those matchups exactly 7 times. That doesn't seem like underachieving at all: that seems to be right on the money.

Does not compute.


Let me restate this: they went 7-8, and were the top seed 7 times vs 8 times the bottom seed. That isn't underperforming when compared to your regular season results by any stretch of the imagination, ever. It is performing exactly how you would expect them to perform.

How much of a dropoff from his regular season performance is the key here. A winning percentage close to .700 drops below .500. That's a poor showing.

It would be, if opponent strength were the same between
Here's a hint: playoff teams are stronger than average regular season opponents. Hence a dropoff is to be expected and is not out of the ordinary. So stop pretending it isn't, and stop ignoring this very fundamental and easy to understand fact.

And who put the kicker in the position to score?

2005 Divisional Playoff game, Vanderjagt misses game-tying field goal.

snip nonsense about Brady being awesome

I'm not disputing Brady's greatness here.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

Dude, seriously? Every single postseason loss there is because the teams were awesome, and every single Manning loss is because he plays terrible teams? Don't be ridiculous.

I'm talking strictly Super Bowls. The Big Game.
Which would make it ridiculous to compare Rex Grossman's Bears that Manning faced Vs. the perfect 17-0 '72 Dolpins, Madden's Raiders, 70s Steelers, Gibb's Redskins, Parcell's Giants and '90s Cowboys that Tarkenton and Kelly lost to. They lost to 6 (cowboys x2) of the top 10 teams ever. FWIW I'd round it out with '60s Packers, 80s 49ers, '85 Bears and early '00s Patriots). I think you'd have a hard time arguing against that.

On the other side Manning won his by outdueling Rex Grossman, who is kind of like if Chaplin played QB in the NFL.

You cannot possibly equate those two groups.

Your total hatred for Manning is showing. It's ridiculous.

If he's not a choke artist then what is he?
All the regular season wins, all the trophies, all the scoring records, all the MVPs, the passing records, all the weapons and he's done what in the playoffsa?
-6 'one and dones'
-2 AFCC chokejobs
-one fluky SB run where he threw 3TDs and 7INTs
That's pathetic for a a guy with more regular season juice than probably any player ever.

On the scale of choke where would you put him?
10 Being Scott Norwood and 1 being Joe Montana.



He's just 6 of 9 'one and dones' in his playoff career.
I could just repeat this over and over again to make my point.

I did like his United Way commercial on SNL though. I don't have anything against him personally. He's just 6 of 9 'one and dones' in his playoff career.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDfVmfzX_sY[/youtube]

It would be, if opponent strength were the same between
Here's a hint: playoff teams are stronger than average regular season opponents. Hence a dropoff is to be expected and is not out of the ordinary. So stop pretending it isn't, and stop ignoring this very fundamental and easy to understand fact.

Oh, which is why guys like Montana and Brady, all their stats actually increased in the playoffs right? While Manning's fall across the board in the postseason. From win PCT, TD to INT ratio, QB rating, across the board Manning tanks in the playoffs where this is not the norm league wide.

Some guys step up in the playoffs.
Some don't.

Manning doesn't.

 

[Sander]

On the other side Manning won his by outdueling Rex Grossman, who is kind of like if Chaplin played QB in the NFL.

You cannot possibly equate those two groups.

I don't need to. Because Manning won one. This means only one thing: his team was the best team in the league at that point in time.
Say what you want, that year they beat everyone to get there. Winning is not choking.

Oh, which is why guys like Montana and Brady, all their stats actually increased in the playoffs right? While Manning's fall across the board in the postseason. From win PCT, TD to INT ratio, QB rating, across the board Manning tanks in the playoffs where this is not the norm league wide.

You mean the Norm leaguewide where the players who win the most in the postseason have better stats in the postseason?
Well duh. But that isn't the norm at all when you look at everyone who enters the postseason.

What this means is that people like Brady either belong to the lucky segment who have their best games in the postseason, or manage to handle the pressure much better than other players. What this would mean is that Brady and the like are better than their counterparts, not that Manning is worse.

 

[Brother None]

I think the argument would work if you tone it down, Cimmie. I don't think anyone disagrees that the Colts have a disappointing post-season performance this decade compared to their regular season performance, and that while Manning's stats over the post-season are pretty decent and better than many other QBs, they don't compare well to his regular-season blowouts either.

There's two points I'd have to highlight where I think you're showing a bit of bias:
1. "Biggest choke artist ever." That's like calling a tennis player with only one Grand Slam and 7 Grand Slam finals losses the biggest choke artist ever. The reason you're highlighting said player is because his overall performance looks better than his prize cabinet. But what you're doing is ignoring that in the end he still has the biggest prize of all, and many others who were also good to excellent do not (what about Warren Moon, to pick out someone else you hate?), and he is per definition less of a choke artist than them.

2. Your obsession with trying to keep the "choke choke" legend alive by belittling the Bears. I realize it was shocking for you smug Pats fans to see this cliché on Manning crumble, but when it's done, it's done dude. Yeah, the Bears weren't very good, but they did reach the Super Bowl on the best defense and (very important thing people miss) special teams play in the league. The Colts beat them, and are thus the best team that year. That put the old "what has Peyton ever accomplished?" right down the toilet, he has a ring now. That's the whole point of the Super Bowl, and if you want to bring subjective guessing games into that, you might as well flush out the concept of "champion".

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

OK guys, so where on the Scale of Postseason Chokage do you put his entire postseason career then?

10 is Scott Norwood
1 is Joe Montana

Who is a bigger choker than Manning?
Who has all that pedigree and so little postseason results when it matters?

Can you name me anyone?

I don't need to. Because Manning won one. This means only one thing: his team was the best team in the league at that point in time.
Say what you want, that year they beat everyone to get there. Winning is not choking.

The strength of opponent is only significant in your comparison of him to Tarkenton and Kelly's failures. You still haven't laid out the case for how you think they are chokers (again unconsciousness is a fair exemption).

But regardless Manning winning is the exception, not the rule. And even that one fluky year bookended by eight choke jobs amounted to 3TDs and 7INTs, hardly an MVP like performance, would you say? Even his one victorious campaign was an underperformed.

Look, it's not like we're talking about Eli Manning or some average Joe here. We're talking about Payton Manning - 9X Pro Bowler, 4X All-Pro, 3× NFL MVP, likely to retire with every passing record ever conceived.

He's quite simply the best regular season QB ever.

6 'one and dones'.
What would they be saying in Philly if McNabb did that? What if Roethlisberger did that? Romo?
And these are QBs that will never approach Manning's regular season excellence.

That's shaky if it were Jay Cutler, but we're not talking about Cutler, but the greatest, most celebrated QB ever. :Queue the NFL Films Symphony:

You mean the Norm leaguewide where the players who win the most in the postseason have better stats in the postseason?
Well duh. But that isn't the norm at all when you look at everyone who enters the postseason.

What this means is that people like Brady either belong to the lucky segment who have their best games in the postseason, or manage to handle the pressure much better than other players. What this would mean is that Brady and the like are better than their counterparts, not that Manning is worse.

If you're going to continue down this line you need to establish some kind of baseline or average playoff performance. There's not Group A - Brady and Montana and Group B Manning and everyone else.

Manning is in an under-performing class of his own relative to his regular season excellence. Nobody comes close.

1. "Biggest choke artist ever." That's like calling a tennis player with only one Grand Slam and 7 Grand Slam finals losses the biggest choke artist ever.

Yeah, Greg Norman would agree with you wholeheartedly. At least him, Jim Kelly and Fran Tarkenton finished 2nd all the time though.
It's the persistent 'one and dones' that damn Manning in my book.

See these guys (McNabb to a degree) got there year after year.
6 out of 9 times Manning goes home 0-fer.

The reason you're highlighting said player is because his overall performance looks better than his prize cabinet. But what you're doing is ignoring that in the end he still has the biggest prize of all, and many others who were also good to excellent do not (what about Warren Moon, to pick out someone else you hate?), and he is per definition less of a choke artist than them.

Not ignoring it, I brought it up, and when viewed against his entire playoff history it can't be seen as anything other than a fluke, an aberration.

It's not like the one and dones ended after he got the ring, he's on a 2 year streak getting sent home by Phillip Rivers (0 MVPs, 0 passing records, 1 Pro Bowl).

And I wouldn't lump Warren Moon in there because he wasn't nearly as good in the regular season as Manning, he never got 3 MVPs. Nobody's as good as Manning in the regular season.

2. Your obsession with trying to keep the "choke choke" legend alive by belittling the Bears. I realize it was shocking for you smug Pats fans to see this cliché on Manning crumble, but when it's done, it's done dude. Yeah, the Bears weren't very good, but they did reach the Super Bowl on the best defense and (very important thing people miss) special teams play in the league. The Colts beat them, and are thus the best team that year. That put the old "what has Peyton ever accomplished?" right down the toilet, he has a ring now. That's the whole point of the Super Bowl, and if you want to bring subjective guessing games into that, you might as well flush out the concept of "champion".

Just curious, can you name a worse SB team?
And again, this is only relative to Tarkenton & Kellys losses to 6 of the best teams in the history of the league. '72 Dolphins, 70s Steelers and Raiders, are you kidding me?

1 ring, in a campaign where he threw 3TDs and 7INTs. 1 Ring surrounded by 6 'one and dones' and 2 AFCC meltdowns.
I can't say this enough, it tells the whole story.



Anyway, how awesome is three days off, only to be followed by an NFL football Sunday? I love Thanksgiving.

 

[Sander]

Can you name me anyone?

We've named three so far:
Tarkenton, Kelly, Warren Moon. Still not enough?

But regardless Manning winning is the exception, not the rule.

No, Manning winning the Super Bowl is an established fact. He won the goddamn Superbowl. You cannot be a choker when you win the biggest prize there is. That is not choking. Choking would be nearly getting there and then *not winning it*.
Hell, Manning now has a 100% winning record in the Superbowl.

If you're going to continue down this line you need to establish some kind of baseline or average playoff performance. There's not Group A - Brady and Montana and Group B Manning and everyone else.

Manning is in an under-performing class of his own relative to his regular season excellence. Nobody comes close.

Yes, you need to establish a scale of performances. I don't have access to a database to run this through, and I'm not about to do this manually.

In any case, no one is disputing here that Manning has a disappointing postseason performance compared to his regular season record. Worst choke artist of all time? No-one who wins
ANd really, 6 one and dones? Bullshit. His win-loss record is the relevant issue, *not* how far he got every team. WIn-loss record: 7-8. Disappointing, yes. Worst choke-artist ever? No.
And just so you know this: their top seed/bottom seed record is also 7-8.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

I'll ask this for the 3rd time.
On a scale from 1 to 10.
1 Being Joe Montana, and 10 being Scott Norwood.
Where do you put Payton Manning's entire playoff career in light of how spectacular his regular season stats and win PCT is?

We've named three so far:
Tarkenton, Kelly, Warren Moon. Still not enough?

You threw three names out, and Marino, without any kind of rationale or support whatsoever (as if Marino is synonymous with choking, you'll have to clue me in on this one). You want to sit back and poke holes in my case, but make no case for an alternative.

-Moon you might have a case when it comes to single biggest playoff choke. But I don't know that that defines his career.
-Kelly's kicker blew one, he was rendered unconscious for at least one, maybe 2 games Vs. Dallas. Besides which, who from the AFC would've beaten any of those teams the Bills met in the SB as sacrificial AFC lambs? The Bills were by far the best an inferior AFC had to offer. Besides, at least Kelly got there 4 times in a row, that's unheard of, that's a lot different than getting 3 MVPs and losing one and done in onee year, 3INTs to kill one run and a 3pt game to kill another - what an MVP! Kelly had 0 MVPs (not counting the USFL).
-Tarkenton is way before my time, I know he lost 3 SBs, but is that the whole case against him? And his career was a pretty unlikely one to begin with.

But regardless Manning winning is the exception, not the rule.

No, Manning winning the Super Bowl is an established fact. He won the goddamn Superbowl. You cannot be a choker when you win the biggest prize there is. That is not choking. Choking would be nearly getting there and then *not winning it*.
Hell, Manning now has a 100% winning record in the Superbowl.

Ehh, not really. Roethlisberger's 1st ring was won despite him (QB rating in the 20s). And if Manning's SB run consisted of 3TDs to 7INTs sounds like his team did most of the heavy lifting.

100% win PCT? Nice sample size you're drawing from there.

And he won once amidst 8 choke jobs. That a 89% choke pct.

ANd really, 6 one and dones? Bullshit. His win-loss record is the relevant issue, *not* how far he got every team.

Ok then 0-1 6 of 9 times. That's an established pattern of failure.
His playoff record is sub .500
Roethlisberger has as many playoff wins and twice as many SBs in half the time without the HOF receivers.

 

[Sander]

I'm just going to get to the core of this and ignore the marginal stuff for which I don't have enough historical NFl knowledge:

Ok then 0-1 6 of 9 times. That's an established pattern of failure.

Totally. Except he went 7-8, not 3-6 as your way of hiding the relevant stat would seem to suggest.

Back to football that's played now: Fuck fuck fuckety fuck fucking fuckers fuck. God mother fucking dammit, yet again we lose because our D doesn't hold in the last part of the game. We were looking great and actually dominating the Falcons defensively throughout much of the game. And then at the very end of the game with 1:20 to go and no timeouts we give them *8 consecutive red-zone plays* where they need a TD to win. They finally get it on 4th& goal from the 5.

Good points: Freeman looked good again, D looked much better than in previous games, still in the running for the #1 draft pick!

 

[UniversalWolf]

Whether or not Manning's a choker, he's definitely had unbelievable luck throughout his career in terms of being in the perfect situation for racking up huge stats. He was the full-time starter from day one, he's had two HOF receivers to throw to (and possibly a HOF TE), and he's been on a team that's been consistently good for years. Montana's the only one I can think of off the top of my head who had anything similar.

I would not call Jim Kelly a choker. If I remember right, they were competative with the Giants the first time they lost the SB, and the next three times they got killed by Dallas. I distinctly remember those games, and it was the whole team that laid the egg, not just Kelly. After the first two losses they were psychologically defeated before the games started.

I think a whole game is too much scope to determine the choker label. In my mind choking comes down to individual plays when everything is on the line. If a guy repeatedly fails or screws up on 4th and 10 with 0:40 left in the fourth quarter, he's a choker (whether or not he had a big game up to that piont). It's different from not performing well in big games generally.

Cutler's been a big choker this year.

There's a separate award for NFL MVP and NFL offensive/defensive player of the year.

You're correct, obviously. On the other hand, what I said makes more sense.

BTW, I notice the Favre-monster is on the rampage again this week...

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

No shit, he actually throws the ball away instead of heaving it up for grabs too, shocking for Favre. 3 INTs on the year for Favre is amazing, hell, for anyone that's amazing. He looks very good, although to be fair, those receivers can compensate for a lot.

Interesting stat from Joe Scmuck - Favre has 36 career 3+ INT games. This is all for naught if he has one of those stinkers in the playoffs.

Hmm.. Prince has a luxury box? I knew he was a proud Minnesotan, now I get the purple fetish.

Jared Allen looking like a lock for Def player of the year.

Interesting implications in the Pats/Saints game tomorrow, Pats could gift the Vikes the one seed with a W.
I'm liking the Pats/Favre SB rematch.

the next three times they got killed by Dallas

Dallas, twice. The other was the Redskins juggernaut at it's peak.
NFC East was at it's sickest then when Joe Gibbs, Parcells, Buddy Ryan and Jimmy Johnson were all there calling the shots. That was some nasty, smashmouth football. If not for the '9ers they'd practically own the 80s and 90s.

I've said before, but nobody benefited more from realignment than AZ when they got moved out of the NFC east.

I distinctly remember those games, and it was the whole team that laid the egg, not just Kelly

All except Don Beebee:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VE1G-Dn7nUs[/youtube]
Damn, Leon Lett was football stupid.

 

[Sander]

You are the coach of the Jacksonville Jaguars. You are down 17 to the San Francisco 49ers in the 4th quarter. You have the ball on your opponents 3 yard line, on 2nd&goal. You have the third best running back in the league who's been eating up the defense, and your quarterback is not of top quality. What do you do?

[spoiler:529a36b424]Here's what Jack Del Rio did:
- Incomplete pass
- Line up with MoJo in the slot, call a timeout
- Incomplete pass
- Field goal (missed)
What the fuck?
[/spoiler:529a36b424]

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

-Who knew Vince Young could take a 0-6 team and win 5 straight. He leads a time expiring, 90 yard, game winning drive. It was Rose Bowl-esque (sending Leinart packing under the same circumstances again!)! And he does it from the pocket, career high 387 yds! A little early to tell, but he may finally have his head screwed on right. See, stay in school kids, or else you might turn out like Mark Sanchez.
Chris Johnson says they'll run the table and make the playoffs...tall order, but that motherfucker can back it up.

-Kubiak has taken the Texans as far as he can. The team is ready to explode out of the mediocrity of .500 but they do not know how to win games to save their life. They're as competitive as anyone, except for the last 10 minutes, they
Sign Shanahan now, keep Kubiak as OC, he's great (hmm was Kubiak ever OC under Shanahan at Denver or did .

On the other side you have Indy, who continues their tradition of taking the first 3qtrs off and playing only the last 15 minutes. Recipe for disaster. Spot Phillip Rivers 17 points in the playoffs and let's watch you come back.

-Jake Delhomme is the best thing that ever happens to slumping defenses.
Confidence down?
Can't force turnovers?
INTs hard to come by?
Call your good pal Jake and he'll turn any defense into the '85 Bears.
Shakey Jakey, ya poor cajun bastard.

-Nice OT game from Pitt/Ravens. What is it with AFC North football - lots of defense, lots of inside rushing, lots of FGs, lots of punts. I have a love/hate relationship with AFC north football. I love the defense and the hitting. But goddamn can somebody break a fucking play already? There's no such thing as a broken tackle in an AFC north game.
Vince would be proud:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocV5bGHdYag&feature=PlayList&p=0B7452D6996C0D80&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=30[/youtube]

That kid Dixon played a helluva game for a green pea. Tough to lose it on one of the most athletic INTs around. Collinsworth said it best "they don't run defenses like that in the PAC-10"

-Looking forward to Pats/Saints tonight. Saints will probably torch them, but Pats have a nice div lead, they need a team to come in and spank them once in a while to bring them down to earth and keep them hungry :pre-emptive positive rationalization for losing:
Interesting to see if the Saints can bring it against a solid playoff type team, time for them to prove they can play at that next level.

Got to love the Belichik Defense Vs. Payton's Offense matchup. These two are both going to pull out some ballsy shit nobody's ever seen before.
I don't know how you contain NOs offense, they have such great balance. Pat's pass rush really sucks too much for them to be able to run some complicated, stacked schemes.
All 3 games the Pats have lost they had leads at the half. Defense needs to step the fuck up.
This game will be like the Indy game, last team to score wins.

Also can the Pats have Charlie Weis and Romeo Crennel back now? To teams trying to copy the Pats : it's not the assistants that make the team win, it's the HC, dummies. This just in, the Browns have stolen away the valet parking guy at Gilette.

 

[Sander]

Got to love the Belichik Defense Vs. Payton's Offense matchup. These two are both going to pull out some ballsy shit nobody's ever seen before.

Yeah, the Pats pulled some real ballsy shit. Like just not covering Devery Henderson, that's so ballsy, I haven't seen that all year anywhere.

Seriously, that Henderson TD was the most busted coverage I've seen all year, and I've been watching Bucs games.
And both of those picks were really, really ugly. The first one was Brady just attempting to find Moss in triple coverage on an angle where two Saints players could easily get it. The second pick was just going absolutely nowhere, it was almost Jamarcus-esque.

Brees had his second best game of the year. His best game of the year came on opening day, against the Lions. He was carving up the Pats secondary like it wasn't even there.