Originally Posted by Toad King (Post 8724544)

You continue to use shallow reasoning that ignores the differences in strength of schedule.

Originally Posted by Dave (Post 8724550)

The undefeated Packers certainly won't lose to the lowly Chiefs with their fat, old coach...

Originally Posted by Toad King (Post 8724554)

Using one game to imply last year's schedule was akin to this year's is also faulty reasoning.

Spock would destroy you in any argument.

Originally Posted by Toad King (Post 8724554)

Using one game to imply last year's schedule was akin to this year's is also faulty reasoning.

Spock would destroy you in any argument.

Originally Posted by Dylan (Post 8723662)

If you step out of the box, you have to actually learn something about what it takes to win in the postseason and what it takes to win a Super Bowl.

Now, for all of Peyton's incredible regular season games in recent years, he has failed to live up to expectations in the postseason. EVERY single year that he's been there except when he won the Super Bowl, Peyton has choked.

1999 Colts lose 23-17 in OT to the Dolphins
Result: The Colts generated 11 points off Fiedler's interceptions but put a total of just 17 on the board.

2000 Colts lose 19-16 to Tennessee.
Result: Manning chokes. Colts lose, 19-16.

2003 Colts lose 41-0 to the NY Jets
Result: (14 for 31, 137 yards, 0 TDs, 2 INTs and failed to put a single point on the board. Manning chokes. Colts lose, 41-0.

2004 Colts lose 24-14 to the New England Patriots
Result: AFC title game against New England. Manning threw four interceptions. Manning chokes. Colts lose, 24-14

2005 Colts lose 20-3 to the New England Patriots
Result: Peyton 27 of 42 passes for 238 yards with 0 TDs and 1 INT. Manning chokes. Colts lose, 20-3 .

2006 Super Bowl Colts win 29-17 to the Chicago Bears
Result: When the Colts switched to a two back set in 2006, the backs both had amazing postseasons.

2007 Colts 24-28 lose to the San Diego Chargers
Result: Peyton 33 of 48 passes for 402 yards with 3 TDs and 2 INT. Manning chokes. Colts lose 28-24

2008 Colts 17-23 lose (Wildcard) to the San Diego Chargers
Result: Peyton 25 of 42 passes for 310 yards 1 TD and 0 INT. Manning chokes. Colts lose 23-17

2009 Super Bowl Colts 17-31 lose to the New Orleans Saints
Result: Peyton 31 of 45 passes for 333 yards 1 TD and 1 INT. Manning chokes.
Colts lose 31-17

2010 Colts lose 17-16 (Wildcard) to the New York Jets
Result: Peyton 18 of 26 passes for 225 yards 1 TD 0 INT. Manning chokes.
J.C. if you lose to Mark Sanchez, you damn better know you choked BIG time.

That is all.

Source: http://www.pro-football-reference.co...r_by=game_date

Now, may I suggest you take this information back to the Denver Broncos' forum and let them digest this.

Yours truly,

A fan of Peyton's big brother, Eli Manning :D

Originally Posted by Toad King (Post 8724544)

You continue to use shallow reasoning that ignores the differences in strength of schedule.

Originally Posted by whoman69 (Post 8724599)

Spock wouldn't make any illogical arguments that stronger teams from last year are going to repeat that performance.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 8724638)

This is a better team than the '10 edition.

Originally Posted by JD10367 (Post 8724627)

As a Patriot fan, I've been saying this about Peyton for years. He's underachieved in the biggest games. He finally only won a SB when his defense and running game were good enough (and Peyton was probably the least of the factors in that SB; he went 25/38 for a whopping 247 yards, 1 TD, and 1 INT).

His little brother might not have the stats, but he plays best when he needs to and he gets the job done.

After watching him stick it up Belichick's and Brady's asses twice now in four seasons, I'd take Eli as a QB in a heartbeat.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 8724644)

I've been saying the same thing about Delivence for years, as well.

I used to take a lot of heat on here for my opinion, but people have come around to see the truth in the last couple of years.

Originally Posted by whoman69 (Post 8724599)

Spock wouldn't make any illogical arguments that stronger teams from last year are going to repeat that performance. Going into last year everyone believed we had a killer schedule in the middle where we probably wouldn't win a game. The Jets who beat us were not as advertised, and the Bears who didn't without Cutler were not either. Nobody thought we could beat the Packers. We are not playing the 2011 teams with the 2012 schedule. Drew Brees lost a lot of protection upfront, doesn't have his coach on the sidelines and lost some of their better players to suspension on the defense. If you think playing them this year equals playing the 13-3 2011 New Orleans Saints, you are making a fool's argument. That's just one team.

The Steelers have had to replace a lot of older parts. The Ravens lost Suggs for the entire year. The Bengals haven't put together good back to back seasons since the days of Ken Anderson. The Browns could be better. The NFC South is so schizophrenic that the last place club from the previous year often wins the division. Cam Newton could have a sophomore slump. Freeman might finally put it all together. Atlanta might start slow again.

Everyone knows we are starting with a disadvantage with Cassel under center. Who knows? Maybe the homers are right and he needed more weapons? This team has way too much talent to dismiss. Maybe Matt Cassel gets hurt in preseason.

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8724665)

Peyton's defenses were built to maintain a lead. That's why they had 2 undersized speed demons as 4-3 DEs and crappy undersized LBs and DTs. The expectation was that Peyton would quickly put his team in the lead so the defense was built to protect against the pass, (for Dave - typically teams that have fallen behind will use the pass to try to gain a larger amount of yards in a shorter amount of time).
This defensive tactic didn't work well against teams like NE and SD because their offenses were able to answer back with screens, dink and dunk passes and strong running games.
To put the blame entirely on Peyton's shoulders isn’t fair. It's my opinion that if a healthy Peyton was playing for those SB winning Giants teams he would have won handily and it wouldn’t have needed to involve last second heroics.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think Peyton should be rated higher than Eli right now because he has a broken neck.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 8724685)

Whether or not the defense was built to play with a lead, that has nothing to do with the fact that Peyton, when plays needed to be made in the biggest moments in the biggest games, late in those games, he has failed to deliver in every opportunity, but one.

You can talk about all the other bullshit you want, but at the end of the the day, Peyton Manning has been the worst QB of any "great" QB when it matters the most, when the game is on the line in the playoffs.

Originally Posted by Marcellus (Post 8724694)

His brother is like the polar opposite. Average during average times but great in the clutch the last few years.

2 SB rings > 1 SB ring.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 8724685)

Whether or not the defense was built to play with a lead, that has nothing to do with the fact that Peyton, when plays needed to be made in the biggest moments in the biggest games, late in those games, he has failed to deliver in every opportunity, but one.

You can talk about all the other bullshit you want, but at the end of the the day, Peyton Manning has been the worst QB of any "great" QB when it matters the most, when the game is on the line in the playoffs.

Originally Posted by Toad King (Post 8724641)

Sure he would. Those are the best teams in the league. They consistently win 10+ games.

Odds are those teams will be very good again.

Odds are low we end up facing Caleb Hanie, Curtis Painter and Kyle Boller again.

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8724716)

Well we're talking about things like "clutch plays" and "poise". Those types of things are a matter of inches.
I gleefully remember when Merriman caught Peyton by the shoe to end a potential game winning drive and I remember the Tyree play where it seemed like Eli's ass was grass twice before he chucked up the rainbow that landed on Tyree's head. Are you chalking up Eli's "poise" to talent as opposed to luck? Statistically, it’s not close. Peyton wins. I’m of the opinion that Eli has an enormous horse shoe lodged up his ass. Sometimes I wonder if you head is up yours.:D

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 8724731)

I get it.

You're butthurt that Eli spurned your Chargers.

But the fact is, and I've told your dumb ass this before, Eli made that Tyree play.

The only ****ing reason people remember Tyree is the fact that he caught that ball with the help of his helmut.

They don't remmember that Eli escaped a certain sack and was able to get his head downfield to see an open receiver then threw a great pass that should have been an easy catch if Tyree doesn't **** up and bobble to begin with.

JFC.

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8724716)

Well we're talking about things like "clutch plays" and "poise". Those types of things are a matter of inches.
I gleefully remember when Merriman caught Peyton by the shoe to end a potential game winning drive and I remember the Tyree play where it seemed like Eli's ass was grass twice before he chucked up the rainbow that landed on Tyree's head. Are you chalking up Eli's "poise" to talent as opposed to luck? Statistically, it’s not close. Peyton wins. I’m of the opinion that Eli has an enormous horse shoe lodged up his ass. Sometimes I wonder if you head is up yours.:D

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8724741)

I'll openly admit I didn't like what Eli did in that draft but I'm still a rational football fan.
I'd mentioned in my post that Eli escaped 2 certain sacks. The question was do you chalk that up to talent or luck?

JFC.

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO (Post 8724757)

What about the pass to manningham? As good a it gets, especially at crunch time
Posted via Mobile Device

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 8724754)

I chalk it up to toughness, desire, and the will to never give up.

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8724888)

Bottom line. Is Eli more talented than Peyton?

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8724888)

Bottom line. Is Eli more talented than Peyton?

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8724888)

Bottom line. Is Eli more talented than Peyton?

Originally Posted by Cassel>Manning (Post 8724937)

I don't think there is a GM out there that would choose a 22 year old Eli over a 22 year old Peyton.

Eli is clutch, great. But so is Paul Pierce and nobody would choose Paul Pierce over LeBron.

Originally Posted by Cassel>Manning (Post 8724937)

I don't think there is a GM out there that would choose a 22 year old Eli over a 22 year old Peyton.

Eli is clutch, great. But so is Paul Pierce and nobody would choose Paul Pierce over LeBron.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 8724947)

Do you have any idea how utterly stupid you are?

Or is ignorance really bliss?

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 8724904)

Of course not.

But if talent was all it took to win championships, then Jeff George would be considered by everyone as one of the greatest QB ever, while Johnny Unitas would be sitting on his couch at home talking about his semi-pro football glory days.

Originally Posted by Cassel>Manning (Post 8724958)

What was dumb about that post?

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8724973)

Alright, let's look at Steve Young vs. Stan Humphries.
'94 Super Bowl 49-26
Young was a failure in TB and ended up in SF as a backup to Montana and replaced him after the infamous Marshall hit.
He took over what was practically a Pro Bowl team. (They cheated the salary cap)
Humphries was brought in from Washington to replace Billy Joe Tolliver on an average team.
Humphries made "clutch" plays all season and the Chargers surprisingly made the Super Bowl.
If you were to switch QBs between the 2 teams do you think the 49ers would have won?
Yeah they'd win 28-26 with Humphries pulling a horseshoe out of his ass.
So, who's better in that situation? Humphries because he was "clutch" or Young even though he would have "choked"

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 8724984)

Alex Smith had what is probably his "one horseshoe moment".

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 8724984)

Alex Smith had what is probably his "one horseshoe moment".".

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8725012)

So, interpreting your logic, if Alex Smith has another "horseshoe moment" he should be moved into the top 10 because he will then be considered "clutch" which is defined by making plays that seem improbable in the post season?
I'm still trying to understand your views on QB rankings since it doesn't actually have anything to do with their talent. It has to do with being "clutch".

Originally Posted by Dave (Post 8725021)

LMAO He is trolling.

There is no other explanation.

NO ONE could be this obtuse.

Originally Posted by Dave (Post 8725021)

LMAO He is trolling.

There is no other explanation.

NO ONE could be this obtuse.

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8725012)

So, interpreting your logic, if Alex Smith has another "horseshoe moment" he should be moved into the top 10 because he will then be considered "clutch" which is defined by making plays that seem improbable in the post season?
I'm still trying to understand your views on QB rankings since it doesn't actually have anything to do with their talent. It has to do with being "clutch".

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8725032)

I'm not trolling. I would consider putting Cam in my top 10 based on talent.
The list should be based on the QBs with the most talent.

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8724741)

I'll openly admit I didn't like what Eli did in that draft but I'm still a rational football fan.
I'd mentioned in my post that Eli escaped 2 certain sacks. The question was do you chalk that up to talent or luck?
JFC.

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8724716)

Well we're talking about things like "clutch plays" and "poise". Those types of things are a matter of inches.
I gleefully remember when Merriman caught Peyton by the shoe to end a potential game winning drive and I remember the Tyree play where it seemed like Eli's ass was grass twice before he chucked up the rainbow that landed on Tyree's head. Are you chalking up Eli's "poise" to talent as opposed to luck? Statistically, it’s not close. Peyton wins. I’m of the opinion that Eli has an enormous horse shoe lodged up his ass. Sometimes I wonder if you head is up yours.:D

Originally Posted by Dave (Post 8725070)

And while Cam appears to be quite talented, his sample size is a bit small to be sure of anything at this point.

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8725106)

It would take an expert on “clutch” to decide who is ultimately the better NFL QB. We both know who that expert is…

Originally Posted by whoman69 (Post 8724599)

Spock wouldn't make any illogical arguments that stronger teams from last year are going to repeat that performance. Going into last year everyone believed we had a killer schedule in the middle where we probably wouldn't win a game. The Jets who beat us were not as advertised, and the Bears who didn't without Cutler were not either. Nobody thought we could beat the Packers. We are not playing the 2011 teams with the 2012 schedule. Drew Brees lost a lot of protection upfront, doesn't have his coach on the sidelines and lost some of their better players to suspension on the defense. If you think playing them this year equals playing the 13-3 2011 New Orleans Saints, you are making a fool's argument. That's just one team.

The Steelers have had to replace a lot of older parts. The Ravens lost Suggs for the entire year. The Bengals haven't put together good back to back seasons since the days of Ken Anderson. The Browns could be better. The NFC South is so schizophrenic that the last place club from the previous year often wins the division. Cam Newton could have a sophomore slump. Freeman might finally put it all together. Atlanta might start slow again.

Everyone knows we are starting with a disadvantage with Cassel under center. Who knows? Maybe the homers are right and he needed more weapons? This team has way too much talent to dismiss. Maybe Matt Cassel gets hurt in preseason.

Originally Posted by Dylan (Post 8725122)

Gadzooks:

Whether you're a football beginner, which I believe you are - or just want to learn the game of football, please let me know. There is a library full of videos on the Internet that will help you to understand the game.

Your posts don't make sense.

Best,

D.

Originally Posted by Dylan (Post 8725122)

Gadzooks:

Whether you're a football beginner, which I believe you are - or just want to learn the game of football, please let me know. There is a library full of videos on the Internet that will help you to understand the game.

Your posts don't make sense.

Best,

D.

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8725150)

You're not endearing me to your existence. The boys around here think you’re cute because you’re a girl who knows a couple of things about football.
I have no interest in you or your glib attitude. You seem to post links without explaining your ultimate point.
I have an abundance of knowledge of the game of football, both as a player and a coach. I'm sure there are many things I could teach you in this realm but I fear your lack of intellect might hold you back from learning anything since you can’t articulate a point on a Chiefs message board. - (BTW - you're too care free to know I'm not Knowmo - **** you)

Originally Posted by Dave (Post 8725159)

She would appear to know more than you.

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8725167)

That means nothing coming from the one sentence (barely) wonder.

Originally Posted by Dave (Post 8725174)

Whatever.

Dolt troll is bitter.

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8725150)

You're not endearing me to your existence. The boys around here think you’re cute because you’re a girl who knows a couple of things about football.
I have no interest in you or your glib attitude. You seem to post links without explaining your ultimate point.
I have an abundance of knowledge of the game of football, both as a player and a coach. I'm sure there are many things I could teach you in this realm but I fear your lack of intellect might hold you back from learning anything since you can’t articulate a point on a Chiefs message board. - (BTW - you're too care free to know I'm not Knowmo - **** you)

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8725179)

I wouldn't count either of those as full sentences.

Originally Posted by Dave (Post 8725174)

Whatever.

Dolt troll is bitter.

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8725032)

I'm not trolling. I would consider putting Cam in my top 10 based on talent.
The list should be based on the QBs with the most talent.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 8725183)

It seems to me she articulated her point rather well when she discussed why Deliverance is a choker.

And you really should excuse her for mistaking you for knowmo.
It almost appears you two are from the same gene pool, so it would be easy to get you confused.

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8725204)

I had higher hopes for you Milkman. I thought you'd realize that winning the SB is not be the be all and the end all in determining QB talent.
We've talked about the smurf WRs Marino’s had to deal with during his prime and you seemed to agree that it might have hindered his ability to reach the ultimate goal, yet you can't see that Eli is not worthy of a 4th overall ranking.
This is a sad day; I would have hoped you'd be the voice of reason. but ultimately, you've failed

Originally Posted by aturnis (Post 8725190)

So, because Eli is clutch, he gets no credit for the 4,900yd season he just put up?

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 8725214)

One again, you just don't get it.

It's not about winning championships.

It's about how you perform when the opportunity to win championships present themselves.

Kurt Warner lost to the Steelers in the SB, but he performed in the biggest moments in those playoffs, as he had done again and again in his previous playoffs.

And he came up big in that SB.

Ben Roethlisberger also came up big in that SB, but he simply had the fortune of having the last chance.

It's not about championships.

It's about performance.

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8725223)

So, for Kurt Warner, you appretiated his effort in a losing cause?
Would you consider him for the HOF?
I'm going somewhere with this...

Originally Posted by Dave (Post 8725235)

Not 1st ballot, but yes.

Career 93 passer rating.

3 SB appearances, 1 win.

If Young is in, Warner deserves it. Their numbers are similar.

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8725240)

I didn't ask you Dave, but you're helping me with my ammo.

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 8725223)

So, for Kurt Warner, you appretiated his effort in a losing cause?
Would you consider him for the HOF?
I'm going somewhere with this...

Originally Posted by Toad King (Post 8724641)

Sure he would. Those are the best teams in the league. They consistently win 10+ games.

Odds are those teams will be very good again.

Odds are low we end up facing Caleb Hanie, Curtis Painter and Kyle Boller again.

Originally Posted by Dylan (Post 8725122)

Gadzooks:

Whether you're a football beginner, which I believe you are - or just want to learn the game of football, please let me know. There is a library full of videos on the Internet that will help you to understand the game.

Your posts don't make sense.

Best,

D.

Originally Posted by Dave (Post 8725235)

If Young is in, Warner deserves it. Their numbers are similar.

Originally Posted by Backwards Masking (Post 8725415)

Warners #'s are better, he went to more SB's, with multiple teams, and his team wasn't fined and reprimanded for cheating the salary cap the year he got his ring. He also wasn't throwing to the greatest WR of all time.

IMO Kurt is far more deserving of the hall than Young ever was, and if Young was First Ballot, Kurt should be to. But I don't expect much from the people that snubbed the greatest LT of All Time (Roaf) in favor of the 12th best RB of all time (Faulk). Still makes me wanna puke.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 8725343)

Yes, Kurt Warner is a HoFer, and I have a pretty fair idea where you are going with this, but go ahead, make a fool of yourself.

It's entertaining.

But as long as we're going somewhere, tell me, who, in your opinion, is the greatest QB ever?

Originally Posted by KC Tattoo (Post 8725451)

You would consider him even with his stint in NY? That didn't end well there even tho he made a hell of a comback for the Cards. Maybe that's what will put him in?

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 8725465)

There's this perception that Warner didn't play all that well for the Giants.

That's a myth.

He was a bad fit for thier system, and the Giant fans were antsy to see Eli play, but Warner started 9 or 10 games and put up numbers in those games comparable to what he put up for the Cardinals.

He belongs in the HoF because he was a dynamic playmaker that was a difference maker for two franchises that were woeful before his arrival, and since his departure.

Originally Posted by KC Tattoo (Post 8725498)

I tell you what Milk Man, I agree he belongs in the HOF. However I have a prejudice bias against the guy and it has nothing to do with his accomplishments. I hate it that he wasn't drafted for his teams for say a high rounder with opportunity given to him. The reason is that for Chiefs True Fans to hang on the notion that we don't have to draft a high round QB to get our guy. This maybe all pretentious on my part but it's how I feel.

I do admire Kurt Warner for all he has done & he earned every bit of his success. I just don't like retread QBs that's what we get and we fail time and time again year after year with them. It sickens my stomach that we don't go out of our way in the draft to snag the best prospect possible and if by chance we do draft albeit later rounds, a prospect he sits and waits his turn holding a clipboard. It's just so rair we get the opportunity to watch a player at QB grow with the team and aspire for Super Bowl glory.

Kind of wanted to vent a rant there. I don't believe we will ever see another Super Bowl (past 40 years ago) as long as we don't develop our own untainted QB.

Originally Posted by Dave (Post 8725526)

While we're on HOF QBs, can someone explain to me why Joe Namath is in.

His numbers are atrocious.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 8725437)

I was not, nor have I ever been a fan of Steve Young.

However, too many people place too much emphasis on numbers and not enough emphasis on the player's impact, regardless of numbers.

It took Steve Young 3 or 4 years after replacing Montana to learn that you win SBs from the pocket, but for the entirety of his career as the QB for the 9ers, he was a dynamic playmaker, and that's why he's in the Hall.

Kurt Warner was also a dynamic playmaker, which is why he belongs in the Hall.

Marshall faulk was a dynamic playmaker, as well, which is why he's in the Hall.

Willie Roaf was an impact player at a position which is more difficult for people to really measure his impact, which is why he had to wait a year longer than he should have.