Would you swap Eli for Luck right now?

Eli has earned his place in our ring of fame and I won't trade him for anyone while he can still play

But honestly yes... Kid is going to be a stud for a long time

I wouldn't even consider it. We know Eli comes up huge in championship moments. We don't know that about Luck.

No...In three years I would

TY Hilton?

Though if I did, I wouldn't want Gilbride as the OC and Coughlin would have to perhaps have his hands tied somewhat as well.

and I wouldn't trade my wife for any woman in this world. At a certain point a man has to stand by his choices or accept a life without a code.

I probably would. Luck signed a 4 year 22M contract. Eli makes 22M this year.

Luck is so much younger, and Eli is in his 10th season.

it's a hard decision, but one I think you make.

You can't wait 3 years for Eli to exit his prime and Luck to be the best QB in the league. It's a now or never transaction

and some on here would actually do it..awesome..

And I'll assume many will think I'm crazy but that's fine.

Right now, Eli is younger and much healthier than Peyton was when Jim Irsay was faced with this decision. I see 6-8 more productive-to-highly productive seasons from Eli.

What Eli provides you with is a rare ability to play his best in the biggest moments. It comes naturally and that is an intangible quality seperate from talent.

As he ages he might not be able to pull off another season like 2011 where he put the team on his back, but if the roster remains competitive enough to make the playoffs, Eli will always be capable of stealing games late.

Can't do it. I've seen Eli come up huge in 2 Super Bowls. I love Andrew Luck's ability and think he'll be a tremendous player.. but until he wins it all, I just don't know. Eli has already been there and done that and if he gets into the playoffs, you know he can do it again... Luck is still an unknown.

if we send Gilbride with him.

They aren't people--and this is fantasy football.

Man, this place drives me fucking nuts more often than not.

I love Eli Manning with all my heart, so no.

it was a near certainty that Sam Bradford would end up better than Eli.

I'm convinced that there are a large portion of Giants fans that don't appreciate how rare it is to have a QB like Eli. They don't hate him, but they don't grasp what they've got either. It will hit them when he retires.

..

But if I were starting a franchise from scratch I'd pick Luck before Eli.

just on one year.....

Newton looked real good his first year.....

It will be interesting to see how Luck, Wilson, RGIII and Kapernick do their second years....

Newton was very good last year, too. People just didn't notice because a) he plays for an irrelevant team and b) they dismissed his ok first half of the year and didn't notice how well he played down the stretch.

fuck you Eli thanks for yesterday now get the fuck out of here

But maybe in a couple of years.

I wouldn't have the guts to make this move. Luck is probably a better player factoring in annual salary, but he'll get a monster deal soon enough. Eli has come through countless times when it matters most and he's still young enough to play another 5-7 years.

The chances of manning winning a SB in the next four years are greater than Luck's. Luck looks like a winner and has his best oyears ahead of him if he reaches his potential etc., manning is a proven winner in his prime.

Eli is the best clutch Quarterback in the NFL right now. If the rest of the team can keep up, there is no reason why he can't bring home one or two more Lombardi's.

Speaking of Lombardi, Vince would never make that trade.

Luck is a young stud who will likely be the best QB of his generation. Eli is 30.

However, emotionally speaking this would be a trade that you could NOT make. It's like the proposed baseball trade from years back that had Joe D and Ted Williams switching teams. Even though it made sense you just shouldn't do it.

.

he wants to play 5,7,10 more years so his daughters have an opportunity to understand what he does . I hope it's 10 and I hope it is as a Giant

Would Indy do it? I doubt it.

I expect Eli to be great for another 5 or so years. He's going to turn 33 at the end of this season.

I happen to think Luck has the potential to be one of the best. There's too much we don't know about him(how he performs in the big game, will he be able to stay healthy, etc...), but I personally think Luck will be great for 15 years.

We all love and appreciate Eli, but in the world of make believe, when you can trade a 33 year old QB for a 24 year old star in the making, you better consider it. I don't think that takes anything away from Eli or what Eli has done for the Giants, that's strictly an emotionless decision that you probably have to make.

it would have to be Luck and at least three #1 picks before I even consider it. But yeah, I get where you're going with this. Teams that get a franchise QB high in the draft don't have to take a massive cap hit like in years past. It's a 2-3 year window of extra room.

with the guy that has gotten us 2 Super Bowls and is still in his prime.

but he still has a learning curve and maybe he turns into a Romo or a Rivers or a Ryan?

all stats and no hardware.

For youth & cost if nothing else. He'll be a stud for as long as he plays.

but because of the Dave Brown, Danny Kanell, Tommy Maddox, etc. era it makes me more likely to make this trade. thinking about life without eli is exactly why I do it.

The fear of getting to the end with Eli and having to "find" the next franchise QB would motivate me to do this now.

if you believe Luck is a franchise QB.

If you have doubts about Luck, you don't make the trade.

Can't have emotion in this game.

I was hanging out with a Redskins fan the other day(by far the most delusional of the fan bases that I have friends from) and a few of us were getting on RG3 and the Redskins. He asked if I would trade Eli for RG3 and I said hell no. Give me the sure thing for the next 5 years over a guy with 2 ACL's and a dangerous style of play.

Then he asked about Rodgers and Brees and I said no, but the only QB I'd consider is Andrew Luck.

and how funny would it be for both Mannings to get dumped by Luck?

Damn the salary cap...

where to start!

1. 6-8 more good years for Eli? He's 33, so you are expecting him to play at a high level when he's 39-41? Peyton Manning is 37 years old right now.

2. Andrew Luck didn't have a "decent" rookie season. He was amazing and I think he will be a superstar in this league. I am very confident saying that too.

3. It's the world of make believe where you don't actually have to make a decision like this, but it says nothing about my appreciation for Eli Manning. Nothing.

4. Do not compare Newton to Luck. First off, Newton has been ok. I see a lot of problems with him. He's a very talented QB, but he's nowhere near as polished as Luck and his style of play is not conducive to a long career.

5. Brett said it well. It would be tough to make this trade if you are the Giants because of emotion, appreciation and history, but if you are starting a franchise right now, you start it will Luck.

The goal is to win Super Bowls. We've seen Eli elevate his game and outplay other great, almost certainly HOF bound, QB's in the postseason. Are you certain that Andrew Luck can do the same?

Because if he doesn't, what do the Giants gain besides a few extra years of solid regular season records?

for the laugh.
I understand the point of trading for future successes and possible SB wins w/Luck, but with some talent and maybe w/luck, we get our own with 'our own'.
Makes for good discussion though.

.

but my head says ABSOLUTELY!

fan do you make this trade of Luck for Ben Roethlisberger?

He's got 2 SB wins and in one of them, he elevated his game. and he's helped lead his team to 3 SB's. granted the D there is/was awesome, but same concept.

I think as Giants fans it's obviously harder to answer this question when Eli is involved.

so consider how non-Giants fans would answer this, I'm pretty sure the majority and a high majority make the trade if you can get Luck.

leads me to believe that Eli would never get the same respect from bbi if he was on a different team.

Ben also raped like 5 girls while Eli is about as much of a class act as you can be, so...

Ben is an excellent QB though.

unturned", you have to crunch the numbers and explore the possibilities.

As a fan, I roll with Eli, for life. He's EARNED it. He's the greatest Giants QB ever.

ben because he's a rapist, but keep Eli because he's a class act? acknowledging they're both excellent QB's?

just asking.

it's just laundry.

Would you trade Tom Brady?

Eli has two championships. You know he can do it. Do you roll the dice on the potential 3rd championship on the unknown?

John Elway won two Superbowls at age 37 and 38. You sacrifice those if you trade him when he's 33 for a sensational rookie.

and I view it as a compliment to Eli that Luck is the only young quarterback that I would consider.

Their relative ages make the decision for me. According to the linked study, the decline phase for a QB kicks in at around 32, which is what Eli is now. I think Eli is an aberration like his brother and will be solid for several more years, but there is no denying that age will play a factor in Eli's future performances.

Eli is fantastic and he has shown to be great in big moments, but I think Andrew Luck is an incredible talent who led 7 game-winning comeback drives as a rookie and was phenomenal in the Rose Bowl his senior season, and so I am willing to use those outcomes as an indication that Luck is cool under pressure.

There's just something about the Giants offense where I feel that Eli's talents are not maximized on a consistent basis. I think Eli is fantastic and great in big moments, but I can't understand why the Giants offense could stall more frequently than the offense of every other great QB in the league. (I don't blame this on Eli).
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/articles/age.htm - ( New Window )

when we're talking about a two time SB MVP that twice took the field in the Super Bowl down with a couple minutes left and walkers off it a champion.

I'm not sure people here have Eli in the correct historical context...and not just within the context of the franchise.

walked off it...

I don't believe he is mid career. He is in the 10th season and probably has about 5 more left.

I'm just pointing out why Ben is easier to dislike. I didn't say anything about whether I'd trade or not trade him.

it's a compliment to Eli when I say Luck is the only QB I'd trade Eli for. Luck will be that good and is in year 2.

Dislike and disrespect are two completely different things and I was referring to Ben the football player, not person.

I couldn't as a NY Giants fan. Too loyal to Eli to seriously consider it. It makes sense on paper for sure but I could not do it.

.

Scroll down this list of all modern era Superbowl participant QB's and look at all of the names that were 33 or older when the appeared in or won a single (or multiple) Superbowls.

Link - ( New Window )

over the next 5 years compared to the rest of Lucks career?

of Eli winning a 3rd Super Bowl are probably less then Luck winning one.

if I had to guess.

You don't think Ben gets less respect because he's a rapist? I think that definitely plays into it. If Ben had the persona of Andrew Luck, I think he'd probably be much more respected.

Not saying it's fair. Just saying I think it's true.

He played better down the stretch but at that point their season was already in the cr*pper (2-8)...

Practical Ira says yes.

Big Ben gets disrespected as a football player.

I think it's unlikely Luck's next 5 years are as good as Eli's, or that his entire career is as good as Eli's.

differance and the Giants would be set at QB for atleast 10 years. That being said my answer is NO. Eli is the Giants now and that would be like getting a heart transplant when you did not need one but a younger heart was available.

We don't yet know how durable Luck is, and we don't yet know how he handles big-game crunch-time pressure.

I'm aware that you're referring to football.. people let their personal opinions bias their football opinions. Everyone knows that.

I read back what I wrote and I wonder how I got a college degree. What I meant.....

Who do you think has more success from this point on til the end of their careers. Luck will likely have 13-15 more seasons and Eli 5-6. From 2013 game 1 until the end of their respective careers?

I would take Eli because he's mastered the system he’s in. He’s a proven winner who has known one system, one OC and one HC as a pro. That combination and winning 2 SB makes him untradeable as long as he has productive years ahead of him. This question is different that asking who has the greater overall talent or potential: Luck or Eli. Most in the NFL would say Luck. This has to do with the best man for your system.

I would venture to say if Reece had the chance to trade Eli for: Brady or Brees or Rodgers he would not do it. Not because he thinks Eli is better than those QBs, but he’d have to bring one of them in along with their system and their coaches to have a chance to duplicate what he already has.

Basically, there are no guarantees. The Giants could stink this year if Eli has a bad year or if he has a good year but the talent around him proves to be insufficient or gets injured. Same could be said for Luck. But with solid talent and no key injuries, the chances are better for a championship with Eli, having a good year, in a system he has been in all his pro career than Luck or another QB being placed in that same system.

There are going to be other great QB's in the future. There may have been multiple others in the draft where Luck was taken. I don't think it's worth the risk to give up the bird in the hand.

Because we KNOW what Eli can be in a big spot, I have to go with the remainder of Eli's career. Until I see otherwise, I think Eli has a better chance of winning a Super Bowl in the next 5 years than Luck does in 13.

It's nothing against Luck. I'd take Eli over Peyton's career too. It's about the titles for me.

Eli has been in the league 10 years. We've got five more if we're lucky with him. Luck is in his sophomore year. This is a non starter. The greater good of the entire team is all I'm interested, and the longer the term the better IMHO.

It's not even close. The actual trade would be more like Eli + 3 1st rounders for Luck. And even then the Colts wouldn't do it.

Quote:

The odds pjcas18 : 12:44 pm of Eli winning a 3rd Super Bowl are probably less then Luck winning one. if I had to guess.

I don't know how you could quantify that.

but I disagree about Luck. If I was a gambling man, I'd take Luck. He's a very, very special talent. He's the only guy I'd do this for.

The Colts would have some interest since Eli is a Manning who won a Lombardi in Indy. They still wouldn't do it though. The owner would get sober before that trade went through.

Eli would likely go on to win 2 more championships with another team and Luck would end up with a broken neck on the Giants.

This is the type of move that will never happen in the NFL. Not in the next 500 years.

.

that are discussed often among football fans. We all have friends of other teams, is this not a topic that's come up a number of times?? This always comes up in my group of friends.

I already have a championship QB on the roster. No way would I trade him for someone else. It will take 5 years just for Luck to learn this offense.

I'll stick with Eli and take my chances with the draft in a few years or whatever other options become possible.

I think my point about the list of Superbowl winning and participating QB's ages is a pertinent one.

If you were a Denver fan in 1993 you probably would have considered it with Elway, too, but look what you would have missed out on.

to make it to the Super Bowl this year. The AFC doesn't seem so tough this year. Doubt he can win it though, this will be an NFC year to hoist the Lombardi.

I don't know, it's just my guess.

someone probably would find a way to quantify it if there were people willing to bet on it.

Eli Manning is wondering "what do I have to do to get some respect around here" :)

Aaron Rodgers?

that Eli is a terrible fit in this system. He's such a great talent that he has success and in the big spots when it's less about system and more about guts and instincts, Eli is at his best.

I can't dissect the X's and O's the way Dorgan or Anish could as to the reasons why, but I can't think of another QB in the league as good as Eli who has so many terrible results.

My guess is because the system gives the receivers too much poewr to make decisions and reads and leads to more opportunities to be on a different page than the QB. But that is just a hunch.

So, because I don't think we have a great QB-scheme fit (just a great QB), I'm not concerned with bringing along someone like Luck.

and we know they have. Luck, despite a great rookie season, is still an unknown.

I saw all I needed to see last year to believe that he's the goods. Obviously there is a risk there because there is more for him to do, but I think Luck is the real deal.

because you could argue both sides endlessly and there still won't be a right answer.

Kind of an exercise in futility if you ask me, but I understand it's just a discussion.

will be that good. He will be this generations Brady, Manning, Rodgers, Brees.

just one of those things fans discuss.

you "know" Eli is that good.

That's what we know right now. Eli's done it. Luck, at this point, has yet to.

winning Super Bowls is an overrated way to evaluate a QB. I would still take plenty of quarterbacks over Joe Flacco. QBs will have the most influence on a game, but it will always be a team result first.

I think Eli is great and I have a ton of respect for him. I don't know the entire Giants history back into the olden days to see YA Tittle or some of the other legends, but I'm comfortable saying he's the best QB they Giants have had in my lifetime.

That being said, when I feel he can be replaced or upgraded I'll make that decision.

I don't think it's disrespectful to Eli at all to feel like I could better my team for the long term by getting younger (and cheaper today) at the QB position.

He's smack dab in the middle of his prime. Tough to come off him, I think he has another one in him if we can put the defense together.

which is why Luck is the only QB in the NFL that I'd trade Eli for.

but I think it's a good measure when your QB is the last one to have the ball and you need to go the distance of the field in 2 minutes or so and score a TD.

There isn't much more pressure than that. Eli's done it, twice.

not done it. Some of you make it seem like Eli has never failed or looked poor in failing.

if that's your MO, what you "know". Luck has never missed the playoffs. See how silly that argument sounds.

Tom Brady had 3 SB wins by the time he was 28, he's 36 and still has 3 SB wins. There are no guarantees.

and no.

I'll happily take Manning for the next 5-6 years. Thanks.

?

The day you start managing like a fan is the day you become one? Something like that (I have no source for it).

I love Eli and I love that Eli represents the Giants. But I was a Giants fan before Eli and I will be one after Eli. Loyalty is an important trait, but it can also be the thing that blinds you or gets in the way of the greatest possible success in the future.

swap systems before I'd swap QBs.

odds.

like I said.

And I made up the odds and I admitted that.

It's an opinion question, so I don't mean to say anyone is wrong, just sometime people try and bring fact into an opinion question and it doesn't work that way.

that's the source of this whole discussion. There's no guarantee with either, that's why you go with the odds. To us, the odds are luck has more success than Eli for the rest of their careers, you feel the other way around. There's no right or wrong answer and it says nothing about respect or loyalty or fandom, it's just an opinion.

is that it never considers the vice versa possibility.

Would the Colts trade Luck for Eli?

That tells you the answer right there.

It could go in so many directions... spun up in so many ways.

Therefore...

...as in yes.

Who wouldn't.

First, there is a certain mystique Eli Manning, Drew Brees, and Tom Brady have with their tezms. Brees brought New Orleans their first championship in anything ever combined with the Katrina game and yaddah. Brady comes out of nowhere as what? A 6th rounder? And replaces a QB who, while revered, nobody thought would ever be able to get them over the hump. He then goes on a Super Bowl rampage and perpetuates one of the most dominant periods in any football division and is still going.

Eli's mystique is in how everybody questioned his demeanor, leadership abilities, and how much he cared for the game. The doofus expressions he makes. The serenity of his gameface that was misaken for indifference or confusion. He was being labeled as a first overall disappointment who couldn't even win over his own teammates (Tiki, Shockey). But then he produces two of the most magical Super Bowl and post season runs in history. Maybe the top two. At this point, while I am a Giants fan, I am rooting for them to win so that Eli gets a couple of more titles to hear everybody talk about him as being one of the greatest CHAMPIONS of all time. Right now I am slightly more of an Eli fan than a Giants fan. And since they are both one and the same right now, I can be both.

Eli has started a great career and story... sending him somewhere else in exchange for promise of another story before THIS masterpiece is complete would be a shame. I'll gladly put up with a few years of mediocrity or losing in exchange for Eli completing his era here with another ring or two. To see him win one with another team would be heart breaking to me.

And to those of you who think Luck has a better chance of winning his first before Eli gets his third, I think you're forgetting Eli would be in familiar territory in the Super Bowl. I think if Eli gets there again, it won't be close. I think he will be dominant.

because he comes up in "big spots" and has had 2 nice playoff runs and two spectacular SBs under his belt

Eli's best pro year to date is 2011. Id be stunned if Luck doesn't produce 4-5 seasons in the next decade that surpass that year (at least regular season). Higher ceiling and almost decade younger. Yea, no brainer. Call the Colts tomorrow and they never let you finish the sentence before they hang up.

Justin Tuck isn't to the team or franchise what Eli Manning is.

what a QB is.

But Luck will...

what Andrew Luck is to his. Thats not the point.

Higher ceiling, much younger far outweighs this overemphasis on perception of clutch

before they were considered great. Those were the days...

The difference in opinions basically come down to this. Some people form attachments to the guys under the helmets, others just look at the jersey and the statistics.

Not saying one is right and one is wrong. But I think most people derive their opinions on topics like these from one of those schools of thought.

(which also included playing the two worst pass defenses in nfl history). But on the whole? During the regular season, while excellent, he wasn't even arguably top 4-5 QB that year even, let alone top 4-5 ever. In one of the top 5 seasons ever he doesn't even go 2:1 in TDs to INT's and has a couple clunkers down the stretch in big games (skins, jets) we were fortunate 9 was enough. Now Eli was great that year and carried a team with no running game, but save me the top 4-5 season ever crap

THAT IT'S NEVER GOING TO BECOME A POSSIBILITY! Colts fans had to deal with it, but I doubt we will. That shit doesn't happen very often.

you'd have to make the trade. There's a reason why Luck was more hyped than any QB since Peyton. He's a beast of a player, and he had a great rookie year. The one question mark was if Luck's arm strength was overrated or not, he shut down those questions last year.

I love Eli. Eli's one of the most unique athletes I've ever seen. And if we're talking the next 3 years, I'd take Eli over Luck. If we're talking the next 5 years, I still might take Eli. But over the course of the next 10 or 15 years, how could you not take the younger option in Luck?

I can't think of a single season that Joe Montana, Brett Favre, Terry Bradshaw, Troy Aikman, John Unitas, Tom Brady, Steve Young, or several other greats carried a team with a lousy defense and running game to the title.

But Luck will do it 4 times.

.

to the playoffs, but I'm pretty sure the defense stepped up just a bit in those 4 playoff games, lol. No need for hyperbole.

over the course of that entire season including the playoffs he was absolutely a Top 5 QB. PFF actually graded him the 3rd best QB in the NFL that year, I believe that's far closer to the truth than Eli's good but not great stats. He was a killer that year.

Eli's ceiling is as high as anyone's ceiling. He's arguably the best QB in the league at throwing outside the hashmarks, something that a couple of NFL analysts have pointed out. He's a playmaker. The problem isn't his ceiling, it's that he has a lower floor than other Franchise QBs. He's a bit inconsistent but his talent is unquestionable.

The big bonus is the difference in salary cap. That's alot of money you can spread around to make your entire team better.

Eli has earned it...but make no mistake...the Giants have significantly less depth because of it.

team game not tennis speech has to be given, same as always. Why. Eli "carried" us on his back with no help, why mention in all 8 playoff wins no team scored above 20 points. Why mention our defense held Tom Brady offenses to 14 and 17 respectively in SBs (one of those offenses being the best ever)

Team sport. Not Golf

Eli is just a very unique QB in that when you talk about "stats don't tell the story" guys, he's exactly who you're referring to.

I usually lean towards being a numbers guy and I regularly use them to support my arguments when it comes to players.. but I think everyone here knows that there's an "it" factor when it comes to Eli Manning that there's no column for on the stat sheet. I guess the come from behind numbers or 4th quarter stuff is close but Eli just has a quality about him that a lot of guys who are outstanding players just don't have. And I think that's what people would be so hesitant to lose.

There are days where Eli looks like he's barely even average. But there are also times where you can't think of one QB in the history of the league outside of maybe Montana himself that you'd rather have under center. Eli is polarizing and I think he pretty much always will be.

there are probably a couple QBs better than Eli who i may not pull the trigger for just for that reason. But when you talk about a guy basically a generation younger (generation by nfl career standards) and has the ceiling of luck, come on now

If you were Giant fans you would laugh at the notion of Giants fans turning this down

Higher ceiling and youth might work for every other position but it isn't the same with a QB.

I'd take Flacco and Rodgers too.

Luck hasn't done anything. I'm not going to assume he'll win titles with Indy just because he's a good guy. It's more likely that Indy won't win a title with him than they do win one.

Yeah it's a team sport...which makes Eli's 2011 season all the more remarkable.

have Joe Flacco going forward than Andrew Luck? I have to disagree strongly with that.

This "It" you speak of. Where was it during tailspins at the end of seasons in big games where his play has generally fallen off a cliff as well as the team after hot starts. How many horrid performances in big late season games or playoff games do i have to list where he didn't use his magical "it" powers. Did he leave them at home that day?

Those seasons happen far more often than 2007 and 2011 do, and in even both those years there are big spots you can point to where he didn't play particularly well, or a bounce or break completely independent of him that leads to winning bias and the notion of this "it"

Eli has been a terrific QB for the Giants. You can point to tangibles, you don't need intangibles. He gets credit for stepping with two well timed playoff runs that helped us hoist trophies. But he doesn't have some magic clutch gene than he can just turn on and off. Its a little more random than that

and shown himself to be more than up to the task. He's a Lee Evans drop from having QB'd his team to the two Super Bowls. I don't think Flacco gets nearly the credit he deserves.

Luck is 8.5 years younger and will make less. Naturally, there is a chance he won't be as good or durable as Eli but the risk is well worth the reward.

People did the same thing when Peyton Manning was drafted. And after all that, Indy won one title with him in a decade and a half, and the argument can be made that his tenure in Indy will be remembered as much for the poor playoff performances as anything else.

Why do we assume that Luck's career in Indy will be incredible?

We are both huge Barry Sanders fans. As many topics as we disagree on, we are on the same page when it comes to him.

I think hes the greatest back Ive ever seen. Maybe AP can one day take that title from him. But Barry's playoff career was trash. I mean highly highly underwhelming in his 6 trips. How much can you really upgrade or downgrade someone on the randomness of 7-8 games with so many moving parts.

Joe, you're interpreting my post totally differently than it was intended.

Eli hasn't come up huge in every single moment we've ever needed him to.. it would be unrealistic to expect. My point is simply this: he's come through not once, but twice in Super Bowls against Patriot teams that were clearly better than us throughout those regular seasons. He was outstanding throughout the 2011 playoff run and time and time again, he's shown a knack for making a big play in a big spot.

That doesn't mean I think he has a "magic wand". That doesn't mean I think there's a switch. It just means that I think there are situations where I am taking him over any other guy in the league because he's proven that he isn't going to get caught up in a moment or shy away from the spotlight. Not every player is wired the same way. I happen to like that about him and think it's a special quality that not every guy has. Shoot me.

With my heart. I'm usually a jersey guy, but there are some-like Eli & Tuck to name two-who I have an emotional attachment to.

With my head, I'd take Luck solely on age.

regarding Rodgers. It was around the same time right before he absolutely broke out. You said you would take Eli over Rodgers because Rodgers hasn't done anything yet. Now he's arguably the best QB in football. Luck is that good and if you haven't watched him a ton, I would suggest you watch him and you will quickly realize why so many people are touting him already.

I think there is something to be said about 'it'. Eli definitely has 'it'.

If I'm down 4 points with 2 minutes left, I'm taking Eli over ANYONE in the league. He's proven time & again he excels in those situations.

from being a paid 2/3rds of his current contract.

QB is not the same as RB. It just isn't. Further, Eli indisputably made THE crucial, historic plays that in the final drives of Super Bowl victories. Call that random if you want, but it happened. And if that's random, so is Montana finding Clark in the endzone, Unitas winning the '58 title game in Yankee Stadium, and on and on.

there are definitely some-I forget his entire handle, but Pete in CT or something-who do not appreciate what we have in Eli & won't until he hangs it up. In all probablity, we won't fall into a Andrew Luck, but more like a Curtis Painter. I'm not looking forward to those days.

appreciates and fully understands what we have in Eli.

And Joe Montana is a dropped pick from not beating the Bengals. Tom Brady is a tuck rule from fumbling away a home playoff game. Brees is a dropped Garcon pass from beating the Colts.

You can go back to every great performance and find a moment that it could have gone the other way. But it didn't. Things happened the way they happened, and the players that made it happen deserve the credit.

Flacco had a shot, and he took it. He deserves credit for that.

grew large enough, it would mirror his regular season production. He's a very a good QB. We are fortunate that he played like a great QB during two playoff runs (especially '11). There have been other big spots/games where he has been terrible.

Clutch can be highly random. Im sure 9 years ago a lot of you would have taken Tom Brady over a lot of better QBs who didn't have the big spot success he did but were much more accomplished. Now we've seen Brady basically mold into that player you'd take him over.

and I love Eli.

But I am a GIANTS fan, for life. Not just a Giants fan for the next three years.

I would do it in a heartbeat. You're getting an extra 10 years of elite quarterbacking if you do the trade as well as an extra 4 years of 15MM more cap room.

It is an absolute no-brainer.

I think Flacco has a bit of Eli's cool in him, which makes me like him more than others, but to take Flacco over Luck?..... Really?

Luck is going to be an assassin for years to come. His ceiling is way higher than Flacco's. If you're grading out players at this moment for a complete league redraft, a shit ton more GM's are taking Luck before Flacco.

I find it hard to argue against that.

Terps, I think you are romanticizing a bit the fact a QB has to win something to be worth his salt. Generally it's true, but as you mentioned times are a changing, and there's more ways to analyze this holistically than boiling it down to a former SB win (i.e. the Trent Dilfer case)

I say when you've got it you've got it. Bradford... eh. I didn't think it was apparent at all with him. Luck? The guy JUMPS off the screen.

All things equal today, if you are betting big $ the next 15 years I would 100% bet on Luck.

Eli vs. Luck is a much more difficult debate since I think Eli is better than Flacco ever will be, and he's got two, which completely dispells the idiotic 'fluke' argument people mounted against Eli after the first SB.

Sure, so why do you cite the fact he was a dropped pass from two SBs as being to Flacco's credit? He didn't get there, too bad so sad. That's the only reason the counterpoint was made.

Eli is two dropped passes away from no rings. See how fair it is?

who takes 01-06 Tom Brady over 07-present Tom Brady if they need to choose one to QB their team for a 6-7 year span?

Its the same guy and hes had two completely different careers. He has been Troy Aikman and Dan Marino.

over the '07 to present day Pats. They were a better, more balanced team.

That said, they are two amazing drives away from winning an absurd 5 titles since '01.

Quote:

90% of bbi(just a guess) kmed : 2:34 pm appreciates and fully understands what we have in Eli.

People like to say that others don't 'appreciate Eli' to feel superior as fans, which distracts from an otherwise good discussion on both sides.

and if those passes were caught and the Pats have five rings and we have none and we're all sad, it means nothing for Eli Manning's on field ability.

Legacy? Sure. His talent? Means zero.

The loss just came at the wrong time.

Some things are what they are. And Eli is in the middle (maybe a little past) a career which includes being a 2-time SB winning MVP.

There are fans here who are trying to belittle that while at the same time giving Luck legendary status?

That's fucking precious.

That kinda makes my point. Its a team game. And stuff like clutch is often clouded by winning bias

I agree about '07; in hindsight, the best thing that could have happened to them was losing a game in the regular season, like that loss on MNF in Baltimore. I remember hearing all their players say, after it all ended, how the unbeaten record was a drag.

than he was in the first half of his career.

Eli is 32 now. If you did this same thing with Brady back in 2006 you'd have missed the best years of his career.

Why wouldn't you give Eli the same opportunity to mature?

?

behind making a move like this but that's not how you treat a person who's done what Eli's done for the team, especially considering Eli's career is far from over barring serious injury.

but if the Giants shit the bed and end up with a top 5 pick... You have to at least consider drafting his replacement... a la Teddy Bridgewater.

Fair point.

Eli's best season(s) may very well be ahead of him, Ive never meant to imply otherwise. My gut is he probably hasn't had his best season yet (regular season at least). But my feeling is the most favorable scenario for Eli is that he and Luck have a comparable next 5-6 years, and then Eli's gone when Luck is just hitting his prime. The gaping age difference is still huge, as is Luck's ceiling

Brady used to be much more of a game manager in the 1st half of his career, then all of a sudden he shatters the TD mark and is airing it out 600 times a season. I think Eli will improve with age, but not like Brady.

for a Championship season is the Lombardi Trophy, it amazes me just how many BBI'ers dismiss it when this current group has garnered two of them.

Any other QB with 2 SB's is considered a legend in the eyes of nearly any fan, but on BBI, it is diminished to the point where the franchise guy is being tossed away for a 2nd year player. You'd swear Eli is just a run of the mill guy.

Ask Phillip Rivers how those SB trophies feel.

he had one of the most bizarre career trajectories/paths I have ever seen in the history of pro sports. It is pretty much unprecedented at least in my lifetime.

Quote:

Any other QB with 2 SB's is considered a legend in the eyes of nearly any fan, but on BBI, it is diminished

Shame the way people here always shit on Big Ben

and much of that is due to salary. We'd be able to keep Nicks, resign JPP and Linval, and probably make a FA splash as well for a title run. No reason to think Luck doesn't have the goods to get a ring with a great team surrounding him.

If you take out the salary, i'd say no.

has accomplished?

I didn't even seen anything negative about Eli on the entire thread.

the decision people make on whether they'd do this or not is based on what they feel is in the best long-term interest of the team and a willing trade-off in the short-term.

And I haven't even heard anyone claim Luck is legendary. He's without a doubt a franchise QB though. We've seen it in the NFL, this isn't Teddy Bridgewater (which would be a different, but also interesting conversation).

except Brady has championships. Nash was always pretty good in Dallas, but his career took a huge step up in the later half of his career in Phoenix where he became a 2 time MVP out of nowhere.

Luck, while having an excellent rookie season, is still very much an unknown.

When you come into this league, it his so damn hard and rare to make it to, let alone win one.

It is a tall mountain for Luck, AND his team (just like Eli AND his team), to climb.

If we're talking odds, the safest odds are probably on neither of them getting there (for Eli, again), because it's just that hard to do.

.

anything Eli has done to feel like the team can win with another QB at the helm going forward?

Eli was miraculous. he was fantastic. The team can win with another QB. If it's Luck, they could even potentially keep winning longer, and not to mention re-sign Nicks, Linval and JPP, etc. since Luck makes 5M this year and 5M next year and 5M the following year, but Eli makes over 20M each of those seasons.

I always saw Nash as more of a Tiki Barber like comparison. Kind of a bust early. Then matured to an all star caliber guy mid career, then became an all world caliber guy later

But for Brady I don't see a comp. Good not great QB wins a shitload of titles early. Becomes substantially better and legitimately historically great, though not quite as good in the clutch and no hardware to show for it. Tons of black spots on the playoff resume' since 04

I'd take him over Luck too.

.

it's hard to give Brady a black spot FOR ME for SB XLII and SB XLVI.

Both times his team had a win with under 2 min left to play.

And during SB XLVI didn't he set the consecutive completion record with 16 in a row or something?

Tyree and Manningham make catches, Welker drops one.

In either case, it's easy to forget sometimes Brady came in to the league as a 6th round comp pick. I won't call him a project, but he was far less polished as guys like Eli or Luck.

And I don't want to take this conversation where it shouldn't be but notice when Brady took off statistically was when Moss and Welker were added to his team. Prior to that who were his best receivers? Troy Brown? David Patten? Deion Branch? Not really too hard to figure some of that out.

of Ben is odd, too. But Steeler fans don't hate him as the QB.

The most frustrating part is that in a vacuum across different threads, one can almost come to the conclusion that the team has won two SB's in spite of certain players or coaches. Almost as if they are just faceless, nameless stooges with an equal Madden rating as an alternate.

There are complaints that Gilbride's offense holds us back from winning more SB's, even though it was a key component to winning two. Same with TC's philosophy. Same with Tuck's indifferent play or the focus on Eli's mistakes.

We won two SB's from an extremely unlikely position and yet some look at the team as being disappointing because they don't have 5 straight SB's or because they have missed the playoffs. Probably some of those guys are the ones talking about missing the playoffs in week 13 to get a better draft pick when we have a shot to make it. Believe it or not, those threads existed in both 2007 and 2011, so don't act like it is a fairy tale.

I wouldn't trade Eli for anyone right now, and thankfully, I'll never have to trade in the memories he's already provided.

Those were arguably Brady's two best seasons and in the biggest game they were held to 14 and 17 respectively. He owns a piece of that.

The highest scoring offense in NFL history was held to 14 points in the biggest game they played, and he was crap in the AFC title game that year too. Pass protection was horrible in 42 but he was clearly flustered even when he had time. And the INT in 46 was huge, plus the Welker play wasn't all on Welker. But beyond just the Giant games.

He's got outplayed at home by Flacco twice (once he lucked out and won, thanks Lee Evans). He lost to a Sanchez led Jet team at home. He has a few 3 INT games in the postseason in recent years.

of it, but he was the MVP in 2001 and had worse stats. Just saying it's not like he was some magician or anything in those other super bowls and suddenly morphed into neil o'donnell.

In SB XLII Brady was knocked down over 30 times. 30 f-ing times. Ask a Pats fan about that Super Bowl. They have nightmares with Tuck, Strahan, and Osi all over them.

I blame brady for all of it, but more give the Giants D and Eli credit for the win.

Eli throws for TD's to win games, what happens to Brady's legacy if Vinatieri were Mike Vanderjagt instead?

What i mean with this Brady stuff is that clutch can be highly random. Nothing more nothing less. He's better now but hasn't been as good in big spots. Im not trying to totally kill him for not winning a ring since 04. In fact kinda the opposite.

Its true he was nothing special in the 01 run and that team caught a million breaks, although when mentioning his 01 stats realize he played 3 games, one was a snow bowl and another vs pitt in the AFCC he missed some time due to injury and had to leave the game, only threw 18 passes.

winning and losing bias does perhaps inflate Brady's clutchness during their 3 SB runs, and detract from his play since then

by the way. That was a pretty bad team with a putrid running game he took to the playoffs. Pretty much every QB in the NFL that hasn't won a ring you can say "he still needs to prove it". But im convinced Luck is special, and will be incredibly durable. Zero question I swap QB's right now if the salaries also change hands.

Proves every single thing Deadspin mentioned about the Giants fan base.

Your talking about giving up on a proven 2 time SB winning QB for a kid who has not really proven too much yet. A QB who is pure clutch and money in the big game..lol, I mean how do you guys arguing for this think this actually may be a legit idea?

It's just so silly to realize that some would indeed think this was a good idea. This guy just can't win with so e of you and really it's somewhat embarresi to witness

people will look back at the resume' and it will basically be beyond reproach. He has the hardware, he has the historic statistics, multiple MVPs to boot. One hell of a career. Something for everyone. You like numbers? He's your guy. You like to ring count? He's your guy. But he was really never that guy all rolled into one at once. That is something that will be lost to time by many. These were two careers rolled into one.

the idea of "clutch" is largely overrated because players aren't clutch until they are, and then they are clutch until they aren't.

Just ask Arod, Lebron, Kobe, Brady, Peyton, Duncan, etc.

he problem is that Eli's greatest strength is that he has come through in some very big spots and so Giants fans love to romanticize the idea of clutch and overstate its value.

Is Eli any less clutch if Corey Webster doesn't knock Brady's 65 yard bullet to Randy Moss at the end of SB 42? Or what about if a healthy Gronk is two feet closer to the jump ball at the end of SB 46?

Winning the SB still requires only a four-game playoff run. People can elevate their games over four games, especially when it's a team game. I don't think much of Flacco as a quarterback at all. I think he has a big arm but isn't a great decision maker or precision passer. He went on a nice run and got some help along the way (like everyone does in some fashion). It doesn't elevate him to some mystical figure of guys who are able to win the big game.

Is it possible that there are some headcases, or guys who tighten up in pressure situations? Of course. But I think the number of people who "choke" are far lower than what people think. These guys are the best of the best and most of them have a lot of confidence in their abilities.

to romanticize 2 SB rings, the hell with a concept of clutch.

All I know is that Eli has won 2 SB rings. A feat that normally places you and keeps you in the Pantheon of all-time greats. The how, the what if's and the could've beens are all just smokescreens blurring the fact that it has already been accomplished.

For all we know, Luck turns out to be Drew Bledsoe.

I'll take the Devil I know over the one I don't when the crafty Devil has already won 2 titles.

but the clutch/anti clutch label is so often handed out erroneously because peoples perceptions are so ridiculously clouded by winning and losing bias. Before Lebron James ever won a ring, his career playoff numbers and career late/close numbers in the regular season and playoffs were historically good. I mean so far above and beyond anyone in the sport, only really Dirk Nowitzki was in his neighborhood (And Dirk was also a guy who was seen as not clutch until he won).

Manwhile a guy like Kobe has this clutch reputation that is really not backed up by any available data whatsoever other than ring counting (and there are more extenuating circumstances for that than I care to go in depth with on a football thread)

Have any idea who is one of the 3-4 best active QBs career wise in the 4th quarter with the scoring margin within one TD? None other than Tony Romo. 4th quarter score less than 7 points, guy has been incredible.

except:

1)Eli, Brady, Peyton, Brees will play into their 40s and most likely at a high level because they keep themselves in great shape and save for Peyton, none have had career threatening injuries..

QBs playing into their 40s will become the norm assuming they are not running QBs..

Eli has about 8-10 seasons left with good health..Luck's career can end as easily as Eli's as most of today's severe injuries know no age and are as career-threatening to the young as they are to the long term vet..We're not talking about the aches and pains the young recover quicker from..

2-Montana, Brady, Ben and Eli are the only QBs that have consistently gotten the job done with the SB on the line..Others will win it, but few will make it their own when the pressure is unbearable as these people can..Eli has taken it a step further..Twice..

Eli and it's not even close imv

done with the SB on the line when MoM has just told us he hasn't.

It can't be both ways.

And the problem with Romo and being great with the score close late is it wouldn't have been close if he didn't throw three first quarter picks. You dig a hole so big the defense lets up, your stats look better and you now get credit for it?

We can over/under emphasize clutch until we're blue in the face but let's not act like pressure situations don't exist and never come into play. Some players handle them better than others do. It's just part of being human. There are people in this world who can do their best work when the weight of the world is on their shoulders and others who fold and fail. It translates into the world of sports. It's not everything, but it exists.. regardless of all the what ifs or could have beens.

I'm not trying to over "romanticize" the idea of Eli Mannings clutch ability.. but the fact of the matter is that he's got a pretty nice resume in big situations (and there are numbers that back it up).

Some guys come through when their team needs them to.. some guys puke.

Im saying his poor performances in the playoffs in recent years were basically random. Sometimes you have bad games, sometimes they happen to be at the wrong time. It's not that he wasn't clutch. Ill take my chances with 07-present Brady in a big spot over 01-06 Brady even though it didn't quite play out that way in the limited real world sample we have to date

And with Romo im not just talking about last years game at Dallas. Im talking career. The guy has been incredible in the 4th quarter of his career in close games. Weird for a guy who is the least clutch QB ever

4th quarter, score within 8 points either way... Highest passer ratings (min 150 attempts)....

Rodgers 104.1
Tony Romo 98.4
Eli Manning 96.0
Peyton Manning 93.0
Drew Brees 92.2


Far right for more advanced numbers - ( New Window )

Do you realize how silly that statement is right there?

Honestly, I try to give you the benefit of the doubt in most cases, but your whole spin about Eli is really quite laughable

same deal was on the table for the Colts: only Peyton was older and coming off of neck surgery, and Luck was even more "unproven" by never having played a down at the NFL level. They made the swap, obviously... and they did it with the hands-down HOF Manning brother, not the "maybe HOF if he gets another ring or two" brother.

A real NFL GM, including our own JR, makes the deal in a nanosecond. Of course it's totally hypothetical, because the Colts don't make the deal unless at least 2 #1 draft picks come along with Eli for Luck.

Eli 2
Montana 1
Roethliesberger 1
Everyone else in NFL history: 0

Peyton's age is a much bigger factor when you're deciding between Peyton/Luck and Eli/Luck.

Rationally, any GM would take Luck right now over Eli right now going forward if they're building a team.. but it's at least worthy of a discussion. The Colts situation was a no brainer. Peyton only has a couple years left. You don't pass on Luck for that. And Peyton also has 1 title to Eli's 2 in 6 years more service time.

And when you have 10 and 15 points respectively when you take the field for those last drives, you also got a lot of help to still be in position to win with one score

to me isn't really quantifiable in a stat. And it's not a word I often use anyway.

But...Romo missing a wide open Austin to seal the Giants season and give his team the division is the definition of un-clutch.

If Kobe misses all his 4th quarter shots, but hits the one at the buzzer to win the game that's clutch IMO and the stats won't show it and I don't care.

And you know hoops far better than me, but in Boston at least, Lebron had a reputation for not being clutch because allegedly he didn't even want to (or wouldn't) take that last second shot to propel his team to win. he'd look to pass or they'd draw up some other option.

If that's not clutch, then it's what I mean if I ever use the word, which I rarely do.

but not when you analyze Brady's career?

I'll give you another number:

Historic, incredible play made in game winning Super Bowl final drive while trailing:

Eli: 2
Everyone else in NFL history: 0

In the biggest moment Eli has twice come through in improbable ways that are unprecedented in the history of the sport. That is indisputable and nothing can be said to marginalize it.

Quote:

And Peyton also has 1 title to Eli's 2 in 6 years more service time.

Seriously? Eli has been a better player than Peyton, or more instrumental to his team's overall success, or more valuable to his team, than Peyton? On what planet. Great that Eli has two SB MVPs... how many full season MVPs does he have? Vs Peyton's 3?

Eli also has a couple of one and dones in the POs, and vs Philly in '08 he stunk up the house.

made the decision to go after Luck when Manning was sidelined for an entire year and was getting TREATMENT IN EUROPE for his neck injury. At the time, the advice given to him was to retire.

That's a completely different scenario than saying we'd trade a player in his prime for a guy in year 2.

how little the Patriots scored in those two Super Bowls, why was Eli's Giants trailing during both of those final drives?

Quote:

And the problem with Romo and being great with the score close late is it wouldn't have been close if he didn't throw three first quarter picks. You dig a hole so big the defense lets up, your stats look better and you now get credit for it?

For as great of a QB Eli can be when all the chips are down, how is it that he finds himself in those situations so often? How is it that the Giants fail to make the playoffs consistently, start off 6-2 and tailspin every year, and play down to the level of their competition?

I love Eli and as I've stated, I think this system is holding him back. But there are a lot of very smart people in the Giants front office who have forgotten more X's and O's than I've ever learned-- but at some point, if the system isn't going to change, then we have to accept what we have.

Eli & This Systemi is like a high strikeout, low-average, big home run hitter. He's capable of hitting the big home runs and making the big plays, and with low frequency he will be the most important player of the day. But more times than other great hitters (or QBs) he will bust.

Going forward, I would rather have someone who is always good-to-great and has more big-moment opportunities and take my chances that they will pay off for me.

the last shot stuff was also a bunch of BS. He's played 7-8 fewer years than Kobe and has one fewer game winner in the playoffs on a much better shooting %. It all stemmed from a pass to Donyell Marshall a few years ago which was the right basketball play to make, Marshall just happened to miss an open 3. Jordan makes a pass to Kerr or Paxson and they make the shot and no one says anything. Kobe is an egotistical D-bag and will play hero ball regardless what the defense is doing, which is why even though he shoots like 28% in these situations he gets some sort of weird credit from people.

Who cares? Eli left the field ahead when it mattered...at the end.

I can't believe I have to make a case for Eli's performance in those two Super Bowls. Anyone that expects better than that is goijg to be disappointed, because better doesn't happen.

Peyton has 4 MVPs, and should have won it last year in my opinion as well. AD was great, but a great RB will never be more valuable than a great quarterback. Ever.

it matters because we are talking about a player's ability and about the things he can control.

directly comparable, so throw that out and go back to a point that's been made several times on this thread already. Would you trade Luck for Eli if you were the Colts' GM?

Hell no. Not for Eli plus a 1st round pick...

Anyone here who cannot acknowledge that is seeing through blue tinted lenses.

Lou.. why is it a tired argument? It's a fact. Eli has made plays that Peyton couldn't. I'm as big a Peyton fan as there is but if you're going to ask me who I am taking under center if I need one game winning drive, I am taking Eli. You can have Peyton.

Peyton had a chance to lead the Colts to victory against New Orleans and threw a back breaking pick 6 to Tracy Porter instead. It happened.

When Eli had the same chance, he led his team to a touchdown. Twice.

of 20% years with titles, as fans, we'd be crazy not to take that. Regardless of if the rest of the years are complete whiffs.

Look how much equity the Vikings, Bills and most recently, the Jets have from coming close but not getting the cigar.

Does anyone look at those franchises as winners? Did getting to Championship games or the SB make people think they were winners? Nope. They are looked at as some of the more colossal losers in the league.

Like I said before, some of the people that point to Eli missing the playoffs more often than elite QB's are ones who started looking forward to the next year's draft position during the 2007 and 2011 seasons, and still seem a bit unappreciative of the difficulty there is in winning two titles.

But to break aside from the point at hand entirely... I do know I was one of the vocal ones here in '03 though making that case in Fassell's last year. FMiC you hated the notion, and are now in love with the fruits of it. This is meant to say nothing other than the concept of rooting for a step back to take two forward isn't silly. Although i would not have agreed with those who felt it was appropriate in the two years you mentioned

us at a stalemate:

Quote:

FMiC , I know, you know, we all know the situations aren't so BlueLou : 4:50 pm directly comparable, so throw that out and go back to a point that's been made several times on this thread already. Would you trade Luck for Eli if you were the Colts' GM? Hell no. Not for Eli plus a 1st round pick... Anyone here who cannot acknowledge that is seeing through blue tinted lenses.

If I'm the Giants GM, I'm not trading Eli for Luck. Does that mean I'm looking through Colt Blue tinted lenses?

Argung the inverse of a situation and hypotheticals in what dissolves into a way to diminish two SB rings really is a waste of energy.

I would still hate the idea of losing to get a better draft pick. The '04 draft turned out that way because of the tenacity of Accorsi and the stupidity of the Chargers. Nobody saw that coming. Not Fassel. Not you. Not me.

Frankly, I was not an Accorsi fan, but his legacy is what left the Giants with Eli. For that alone, I have to cede that I was wrong.

to acknowledge that Peyton has had a better career, and is to date the better QB. It isn't even close.

Go look at the total career game winning drive chart sometime, it was linked here recently.

FMiC, hey I'm not relinquishing what Eli's already accomplished. I'm trading for future anticipated value, like swapping stocks.

you would simply be doing an awful job. You have a chance at propping your window of opportunity open for possibly another decade, you would owe it to the organization to explore it.

then thank the Big Electron that the Indy GM's DNA isn't in your gene pool.

Yes, and it was incredibly favorable in Eli's regard. So I'm not sure what your point is there.

I didn't say Peyton wasn't a better overall player. What I said was that if I can have one guy when all I get is one drive to win a game, I am taking Eli and I'm not thinking twice. And his ability in those situations are exactly why he has 2 rings on his finger while conversely, Peyton's are why he doesn't have more than 1. Hence.. my earlier comment.

I never said Eli was better than Peyton career-wise.

And I'm glad he's a Giant but the arguments being made here are worthy of Eagles fans quite frankly.

but i was sure we would be in a better position to make something bold happen if we were to lose a few meaningless games at the end of a bad year with a lame duck coach who was on his way out anyway. The worst thing that team could have done was go 7-9 instead of 4-12. And you could say the same for 1980. Win a meaningless game or two and LT may be a Jet, and the Parcells era is very different. Might have felt good for 3 hours to beat Washington or Oakland in meaningless games in the final two weeks of the 1980 season, but im happy those old enough to watch that season were robbed of short term gratification for the longer term payoff

Sometimes it is better to take a step back to make two forward. I think in 03 it was never more appropriate. 2007 and 2011 never rose to those situations though. Those teams were in playoff contention just about all year

I may rather have Eli over Peyton for one final drive, I would rather have Peyton for the game since the chances are far, far better that we aren't in the position where we need a 2-minute drill game-winning drive if Peyton quarterbacked the other 58 minutes. And I use the same logic for why I would rather have Peyton for a season, since we are far less likely to need to win one singular game where a 2 minute drill is needed for all the marbles.

has a time machine, "exploring" a situation like this isn't easy. You have to make the assumption that Luck is a great QB, will stay a great QB and will be durable, well past what one year has shown.

With Eli, you already have that data to look at.

It seems to me that in your mind, a GM who doesn't make the trade is doing a horrible job, because you already have a position of what you think a GM should do. I know what I'd do and that's good enough for me since the question asked in the OP is:

"Would you swap Eli for Luck right now"

each year wins the SB.

Of those odds 11 QB's in the history of the game have won 2 SB's.

Only 4 QB's have won 3. 2 have won 4.

Only 8 QB's have even appeared in 3 SB's
Only 5 QB's have even appeared in 4 SB's.

As much as I like Eli, the odds are against him winning a 3rd just based on probability forgetting about talent, luck (not the QB), or anything else.

If you can get younger, cheaper, and not sacrifice a lot (or anything - TBD) in quality you need to do it for your team.

And Eli being the team guy he is will support this.

you keep discussing odds. I have no idea why. Your initial introduction of odds was based on faulty logic and continues to be. Not to mention, odds don't factor into this argument at all.

You have no basis to say from an odds standpoint that the Colts are more likely to win a SB than the Giants. Why you keep going down that path is bewildering.

His post seasons kind of feel like he underperformed. The year he did win a Super Bowl, he was underwhelming compared to what he was posting up during the regular season.

would give the Giants that big a lead. Our defense might have something to say about that.

that Luck is going to have an incredible career. I swear I was reading the same things about Sam Bradford when he came out.

Did you happen to forget that Peyton was a few years older and coming off of a serious neck surgery?

Do you think those should be factored in?

the concept of probability. The odds of a QB winning 3 SB's isn't diminished in any single year due to probability. It doesn't happen that often because of a lack of longevity, injuries, coaching changes, and the turnover of the other members of the team. When the average career for a player is less than 5 years, that is a much bigger factor in what is probable or not over the long term than comparing any two players in a specific moment in time.

Sorry,.

Sorry,.

post thought that was obvious.

But odds are the reason you do this, not sure what's bewildering about it.

As a GM you have to consider what are the odds you win another championship with Eli. If you feel confident you will win today and the future of your team isn't leveraged to the point you would need a major rebuilding to stay competitive you don't do this trade.

But since the Colts GM proposed this trade to you, then you have to consider, now that you have Luck, you can free up some cash the next three season, improve your club, and does that increase your odds of winning the SB and more SB's and being competitive for a longer period of time. If it does you make the trade.

If you're not basing it on odds or probability or some other quantifiable metric you're probably not considering it the way most front offices would.

hypothetical. But if you have a shot at getting much younger, coupled with the luxury of swapping for a QB on a rookie deal, and also a kid who has been one of the most anticipated prospects since Peyton, it is a no brainer.

as much as anyone. He's bee one and done'd like 8 times, the majority of them at home and after a bye week. Most times his offense in those games (which was historic perennially) failed to crack 20 points in these ousters. In his one SB winning run, he didn't even play well in the postseason and was largely carried outside of the 2nd half of the AFC title game forward.

And while im no big believer in clutch, I do think there is something to be said for positive and negative reinforcement from past experience in these spots contributing to future play. Plain as day backed up with hardcore data Eli has performed better in late/close spots than he does in all other situations. Inarguable. His confidence has probably snowballed in these spots

But if i had to pick one guy to play one season for us in his prime id have to go with big bro

Quote:

If you're not basing it on odds or probability or some other quantifiable metric you're probably not considering it the way most front offices would.

Like a quantifiable metric of already having won 2 SB's?

that makes sense. We won two super bowls in the past, that means we're going to win another one?

Are you serious?

we'd have zero titles in this era, and likely a different head coach.

No thanks. I've got the Super Bowl newspapers framed in my house. I've got little use for passer ratings and regular season MVPs.

is probably one of the safer assumptions you can make in the NFL.

might be how you buy stocks too, right?

prior results are no guarantee of future performance

I would also take 1 year of Peyton in his prime over 1 year of Eli in his.

But I'd be a lot more nervous once the playoffs rolled around with Peyton under center than I would be if it were Eli. And that's not to say Eli hasn't had his stinkers. He absolutely, 100% has.. but there's a far longer track record of subpar play under #18's name in playoff games.

The reason I'd take Peyton would be because I'd be more confident in him GETTING us to the playoffs. And I'd rather take my chances that way.

This is all hypothetical stuff anyway.

spells without a big time QB. Tark to Simms, Simms to Eli. I've seen too many Pisarciks, Kanells, and Browns. With a good QB you're always in contention, without one, you're dead in the water. If I can get a top QB for 15 years rather than 5 years , I'll take it.

But in this scenario, people realize we wouldn't be trading for the past, just the future, right? We still get to remember 2007 and 2011.

extends your team's "window" for potential titles by 10 years. Assuming all else is equal which of course it isn't...

FMiC your point about Eli's proven durability vs Luck's unknown durability is the best point for not making the deal, IMO. I have no idea if Luck could remain standing (for example) under the brutal beating Eli took from the 9ers in the NFC championship game.

But Luck is supposedly a very, very big workout guy with some very serious athletic tools (like speed) that Eli can't touch. Doesn't address durability though exactly, and I think Eli's durability isn't luck, it's an ability.

Isn;t something to knock a guy for. Being the most valuable player in the entire sport over a span of 4 months is a more impressive accomplishment to me than a hot 3-4 game run. As a fan of the team I'd take the SB runs every time over my guy winning an MVP. But when strictly evaluating the position and the player himself, give the 4 months worth of dominance every time over a flash of brilliance well timed

Was not choosing Luck over Payton, but it was not getting ANYTHING for Payton. That's a lot of draft choices/players they missed(and don't tell me about salary cap/roster bonus' etc. Ways around that).

c'mon, winning two SBs (by making two great drives or any other way) isn't a fooking metric.

That's a little fact you should know.

If I could, the career wouldn't be incredible.

I'm not knocking Peyton for the MVPs...I'm just saying I get nothing out of them as a fan. I wouldn't be looking back 20 years from now reminiscing on a guy winning MVP. I'd rather have what Flacco did last year.

But if you ask me who had the more impressive performance on the season as a whole, give me about 6-7 Peyton years over what Flacco just did. Flacco was great in playoffs. Not much earlier than that the team fired the offensive coordinator because of an under performing offense that Flacco led. Guys can get hot, he did last year and he has company. Sustain that over the span of 4 months and thats telling me something, its also a lot more rare when you are talking about guys who have done it as often as Peyton has

QB is the most important position. Even if Eli turns out to be slightly better, the chances of landing a slightly worse QB immediately after Eli retires are pretty slim.

I'll take 15 years of slightly worse than Eli over 7 more years of Eli.

And that's assuming Luck doesn't surpass Eli, which is a big assumption.

...imo he's the best QB to come into the league in a while. I love Eli but I'd have to make the move based on age and expected performance over the next decade.

... if each guy keeps his current receiving corps? And if he has the other team's receiving corps? Under both scenarios, who do you think would have the better results? That's one way of equaling the playing field for this question.

You don't trade the the only quarterback in history to lead a last-minute, SB-winning touchdown drive...twice. Yes, it looks like the Colts have managed to get back to back MVP caliber QBs. If he progresses, and there is no reason to think he won't, Luck will be that level of player. But we still don't know what he looks like in the truly huge moments. I just ain't gonna trade the most unflappable QB in the history of the game who has hand delivered not one but two of the most improbable Super Bowl wins in the history of football.

I'll ride with Eli until he's ready to hang 'em up.

no.

the Super Bowl may be the most important game of the season, every playoff game has a similar pressure because it's win or go home.

And the games in the regular season that are "must-win" games carry plenty of pressure as well because it carries the weight of the season being over.

Performance in all "must-win" games reflect on a person's flappability, clutch-ness or ability to handle pressure.

and put in Peyton Manning on those 2 Giants Super Bowl teams... Tom Brady wins BOTH times..

Think about that

Bledsoe(had a nice career, 1 Sb appearance) and Rick Mirer come to mind..People were quite enamored with both..There are others..No guarantees...

being debated. Luck hasn't proven squat yet. Eli has 6-7 years left. Only a moron would make an argument for Luck after 1 season.

But football/life is about more than practicality. If I were actually given the opportunity to make this maneuver, I'd turn it down 100 times out of 100. It's just the wrong thing to do, even though from a football standpoint, it is definitely the right thing to do.

We went down the stats of how few repeat, win three, win four etc... How many NFL QB's play QB over the last 50 years and how many won a SB?

think about what? A random claim that you just made up?

THe Patriots scored 14 points and 17 points in the two Super Bowls. Why is it such a given that Peyton couldn't have outscored either of those?

G2: Your comment that anyone who would trade Eli for Luck is a moron shows your inability to be objective. I would bet that more smart football front-office decision-makers would pick the rest of Luck's career over the rest of Eli's career.

And for the next few years, Eli averages a $20 million cap hit per year, whereas Luck's is around $6 million. Essentially, in this hypothetical, If the Giants could find an extra $2 million, they could have Luck and Revis over the next three years for what they pay Eli.

Joe Thomas has an $11 million cap hit over the next three years. I'd sure love to have him plus another $3 million for other players.

Not only are you getting Luck who is 8.5 years younger, but the salary difference is massive over the next three seasons.

that the Giants wouldn't have won two SBs with Peyton is not something that can be said with such certainty. I'm not going to discount that opinion because who truly ever knows how things unfold in that alternate universe, which would also have other dominos fall differently than we currently know them.

But here is some things i do know. It's highly unlikely that the team misses the postseason in 3 of the last 4 years with a guy like Peyton every week under center. I feel pretty damn confident in stating that. Not that Eli is at fault for this or anything, but Peyton Manning can carry a team with more warts than these recent Giant teams in his sleep. We'd have more cracks in the tourney. And if the Giants defense held opposing offenses to 20 or fewer in 80+% of his playoff games here, and never more than 23 points in 11 games as they have for Eli, Peyton's playoff record might be a bit different than it is in Indy

actually have very similar post-season stats. Their QBRs are nearly identical. If you prorate for a 16 game season, Peyton has way more yards and interceptions and a few more TDs. Peyton's teams average 23 points per game, while Eli's average 20.

Peyton definitely regresses from his regular season form in the playoffs. Eli is slightly better than his regular season form, mainly by throwing fewer picks (11.6 prorated).

earlier in July. He takes into account age, salary, performance, everything.

Eli was ranked 13th overall but 10th among QBs
Luck was ranked 3rd overall and 3rd among QBs

Eli is a very good player but his contract and age bring his value down compared to Luck/RG3/Wilson/Kaepernick/Cam and young QBs like that. I would take Eli over all 5 of those guys for the next 3 years in terms of on field performance. But those guys are cheaper for the next 3 years than Eli and figure to last a lot longer than Eli.

This thread should be pinned for awhile. There are a lot of voices, a lot of opinions, and a lot of good points going back and forth.... and from a lot of strong willed people.

However, you dont see any confrontations, insulting, bad temper, or ill willed towards one another. Somewhere, Eric is shedding a tear.

To answer the question and reading everything through and through, I would have to say a reluctant no. Luck is going to be awesome and will be the best of the last years draft class. IMO, Eli will gives us a better chance to win more SBs in the next 6-7 years than I believe Luck will in the next 12-15 years. I have no proof of this, and I cant support it.

But this is just my opinion, and I wouldnt trade Eli for any single player in the league.

Although you do see decline. His playoff narrative is such dogshit though in every sense of the word and that hurts the perception. Perhaps a lot of it is just losing bias, but there is so much to point to. It took him until year 6 to win a playoff game, everyone was giving Matt Ryan shit until he finally won one, and he won his sooner than Peyton. All the ones and dones (I think 8, maybe 7), more than anyone in history, mostly after a bye week and at home. Think of what happened to the 2008 Giants or 2007 Cowboys happening like 6 times in the same era, that is basically what has happened to Peyton. Also not very good at all in the season he did win his SB

If Luck is going to be as good as some of you are alluding, is cap number is not going to stay where it is now.

a lot of that I think was on Dungy for constantly resting his players in the final week or weeks of the season so that the Colts effectively had three weeks off before a playoff game. That has to throw off a team's rhythm.

I agree a lot with what Terps said. Fucking 2 Super Bowls in some of the most dramatic/clutch fashion and people on this thread would get rid of him in the blink of an eye. Eli is in his prime and probably has a good 5-6 years left and has already taken this franchise to the promise land TWICE.

for atleast the next 2 years, so yes, it would. You'd then extend him at top dollar but you'd be able to have a ton of extra cap to sign/extend players before that.

I'd 100% do it if the cap came with each player. So would the Steelers, so would the Ravens, IMO.

Right only two years and the rest of your post is all hypotheticals. This is a trade forever, not for two years.

is super cheap for the next two years is just icing on the cake for me.

again, I'm talking about 2 years of a ton of cap room then 10+ years of big money which we'd be paying a top tier QB anyway. Luck has had a lightening fast learning curve on a bad team and has shown me he's a winner. His isnt bashing Eli, this is wanting to lock in the most important position for another decade+. There was a time Eli looked like he had no chance at a SB, so that fact that Luck hasn't had much experience or success in the NFL is irrelevant.

I think you'd be a gigantic homer to not even see the appeal of what that would do for this franchise plus the bonus of front loading JPP and whoever else to lock in as well with the 2 low wage years.

I just disagree.

that wouldn't do that trade effective right now moving forward with contracts swapping would be he Packers. You be crazy not to want 3 years at that low of a salary and still lock in a stud QB for a decade+ anytime during that span.

We just spent two picks including a 4th to get Nassib. what the heck? He'll never see the field behind Luck.

J/K

This is actually a pretty solid BBI debate. I don't know where I would come out, but you have to factor out the past in some way to make it. It doesn't bear on future results. But I've seen Luck play, he is the real deal and Luck strikes me as the personality that would thrive in Blue here as well, a good fit. As a GM, I think you have to make that trade, it takes nothing away from what Eli has accomplished. It is simply a calculated decision.

Giants manage for the present and the future, with constant attention to the cap.

Its a very sound move...

let's assume the Giants make the trade.

With the extra $14 million in cap space over the next three years, what would you do with the money? Also assume that every NFL player is a free agent right now.

Because of the age difference alone.

It's a no-brainer.

Is it a patience issue? Are some of you so concerned with tomorrow that you can't stop and smell the roses today?

20 years from now we will be looking back on this time remembering how good we had it. Why worry about tomorrow, when it's only half way through today?

.

this is like saying a Laker fan wouldn't swap Kobe right now for a shot at Andrew Wiggins.

that a. people would be thinking about this while we have a franchise QB in his prime, and b. that people would put this much energy into a debate of something that is fundamentally impossible.

.

that are interesting to dispute: proven winner
of championships vs incredible young talent, now vs future returns, etc. etc.


The people getting heated seem to be more the ones who interpret a "yes, Id' do it" as some type of disrespect to what Eli has accomplished...

Maybe it is a type of disrespect, or a "what have you done for me lately" but I think it's mostly a reasonable strong belief in the future of Andrew Luck who, as s rookie in the NFL, looked a hell of a lot better than Eli Manning did.

as much as I view it as shortsighted to not want to see the rest of this amazing ride we've been on play out, understand?

To me, it's not about what Eli's done, it's about what he can still do.

I think he's earned the right to finish writing his story with us, and I'm eager to watch it unfold. We have a shot at having one of the all time greats here if he wins another one.

do you take the money and walk or do you keep playing at a chance of the ultimate goal?

than Andrew Luck is to getting three, that is indisputable.

Eli's already in rare air with a good amount of time on the clock.

Quote:

I view it as shortsighted to not want to see the rest of this amazing ride we've been on play out, understand? To me, it's not about what Eli's done, it's about what he can still do. I think he's earned the right to finish writing his story with us, and I'm eager to watch it unfold. We have a shot at having one of the all time greats here if he wins another one.

Very well stated indeed.

where do you think the smart money goes if the bet is "who is more likely to win three Superbowls, Eli or Luck?"

Eli is knocking on the door of all time greatness, it would be an absolute travesty to not let that play out when we're already playing with house money.

I mean, what if you asked that same question after each's rookie season? What would have been your answer in that scenario?

The question is being asked of the two right now... Which is also odd because you're comparing a one season career to a ten season, two time SB MVP career, which makes this thread even harder to comprehend in regards to wanting to do the trade.

Although, to your question, we did do a lot of "would you trade Eli for Ben/Rivers" talk. Good thing we let that play out, eh?

Most are sorta pointless and dumb, but it's what we do. I can give you 15000 examples.

In regards to your last point about odds, I think you are sort of missing the point. The odds shouldn't be who wins 3 first, it's who is going to win more for the rest of their respective careers. The first 2 wins are over, we already got those.

it's not often that you have an opportunity to become a three time or four time winner, placing you among the all time great legends of the game regardless of team.

Andrew Luck winning one, which is hard, will put him among some distinguished company. Eli winning one from here on out puts him right next to Tom Brady and Joe Cool. That's a different time zone.

He always looked goofy with that side-arm of his, but he used to get the job done... Did he fall off a cliff last year or what?

I think it's a combination of things.

1. Management.
2. His biggest weapon(s) leaving and or getting hurt.
3. The NFL is catching up to his noodle arm.

of having the WR's and RB"s we do as a collective group.

unless it was in response to somebody else.

WR's have been woefully underrated for the better part of the 2000's and beyond. The common theory was that Manning made his WR's look better than they were. Yet, Reggie Wayne had another good year under Luck. TY Hilton is no sloutch either.

I wouldn't say Indy has beter WR's than us, but it isn't like it is a slam dunk ours are tremendously better, especially when it comes to depth.

Love Eli and what he's accomplished...but man Andrew Luck is going to be really good for a really long time!

it's a fact, no? All this talk about how close Eli is to accomplishing another Super Bowl doesn't mean Luck is miles away. Early returns so far are great considering Luck shattered rookie passing marks with very little help outside of Wayne. I think we'll probably see some regression this year for the Colts, but I still would think about rolling the dice if that means keeping your window open for another decade.

but several posters here will be the first to point out that Eli makes his WR's that much better. It goes both ways.

I'm not sure what relevance a back up cast has to do with one's legacy.

Is Joe Montana thought of any less because he had Jerry Rice? Or Aikman because he had Irvin?

had over 100 receptions and Hilton had 7 TD's! Donnie Avery had 60 receptions.

The Giants leading receiver had 83 catches and nobody else broke 60.

Yet we have the better receivers for certain?

I'm not even going to mention that Nicks was at less than full health all season. All bullshit aside, would you honestly trade our skill position guys for theirs? I don't disagree that their guys may be underrated as well.

true this is at all:

Quote:

Gotcha, so we can't quite say Luck makes his receivers look better David in LA : 1:53 pm but several posters here will be the first to point out that Eli makes his WR's that much better. It goes both ways.

A lot of people here think Cruz and Nicks are studs. How much moaning happened when we lost Manningham and the guy did bupkiss with SF? How many people think Randle is the next breakout star here?

I half think our WR's get overrated here moreso than the opposite.

When you think of all-time great WR's, how often does Harrison or Wayne come into the conversation? If you have people around you like I do, it doesn't happen all that often, and if they do come up, somebody talks about Peyton making them great. I don't buy that.

I'd trade our guys for theirs. But I'm also not the one saying taht the Colts have little talent at the position, which is exactly what you inferred earlier.

Since the days I first came to this board in 1999, every year we have the best WR's. Yet, until Cruz in 2011, no one put up any numbers to back that up. We have some good WR's, but consistantly we over rate our talent.

this? If he is indeed the next breakout WR, it is because Reuben is working his ass off to get on the same page as Eli. The credit doesn't seem to get dispersed enough around here (not saying you are doing that, just thought about a few posts I've seen over the past few years).

as an example of how we overrate our talent consistently on BBI. It goes beyond the WR's, but it is pertinent to this discussion when it is said that the view is Eli makes our guys better. I really don't see that said very often.

I mean this is off tangent, but you have UDFA's gushed about each year here as if each is going to end up being Cruz, and it isn't just reserved for the WR's. How many people took highlights of Herman pushing around the equivalent of a HS frosh team and extrapolated that into thinking he would be a Day 1 starter and a white Anthony Munoz?

"elevates" his WRs' production? All I'd say on that note is it's tough not to want to see Eli go the next 5 years with the trio of Nicks, Cruz, and Randle all intact... along with Robinson and Wilson playing up to their full physical potential.

Not that there's any guarantee it will shake out that way.

= now.

and Randal was a 2nd pick that was highly touted out of college. I think he's rated right where he should be.

I'd do it.

If the question were, 'Who would you start a franchise with?'.

I'd take Luck hands down.