Phil Simms is 24th, FWIW:
By this measure, the most clutch postseason QB of all time is Manning — Eli Manning. His New York Giants have often been underdogs in the postseason and projected to a record of 4-7 or perhaps 5-6 in his 11 games. Instead, Eli Manning’s teams have gone 8-3. According to the simulations, there’s just a 1 percent chance of achieving such a strong record based on chance alone.
This does not, incidentally, serve as evidence that Eli Manning or any other quarterback has some extra gear that kicks in during the postseason. Eli’s been awesome during the postseason, but with 180 QBs in the sample you’d expect to find a few fluky cases based on chance alone. This is also not to say that clutch quarterbacking doesn’t exist. As my colleague Benjamin Morris has repeatedly documented, some quarterbacks — including Peyton Manning — consistently manage the game better in clutch situations, such as during a fourth-quarter comeback drive. Indeed, clutchness is so intrinsic to quarterbacking that it’s hard to distinguish a clutch QB from a good QB. But that clutchness ought to show up in a QB’s regular-season stats and his team’s regular-season win-loss record and Elo rating. It’s not clear that some quarterbacks are clutch in the regular season but unclutch in the postseason. |
FiveThirtyEight Link - (
New Window )
For example I still would call Joe Montana more clutch than Eli. And for the haters, this is not an insult to Eli because Montana is GOAT.
Love 538, BTW
But I think it does suggest that he's underperformed in the regular season. Although he's been clutch at times, he's also had a bunch of "bad Eli" bonehead plays. Those seem to go away in the postseason. perhaps under McAdoo they'll be reduced in the regular season.
In 2011, he was great most of the season. The Giants were underdogs against Green Bay, San Francisco and New England for very simple reasons: they were facing teams with fewer evident weaknesses, in hostile or neutral sites. Those upsets weren't a function of Eli elevating his game; he didn't need to. Mostly, his teammates elevated theirs.
Generally speaking, this is not a club to tout belonging to.
He also operated in an era where realistically only about 2-3 teams had a chance to get to the SB per conference due to the lack of a salary cap.
Generally speaking, this is not a club to tout belonging to.
There are two lists in the article, and they even admit the first one is a bit ridiculous. The second list compares the QB's performance against the expected performance from a replacement level player, and Eli still comes out on top, along with Montana, Warner, Flacco, Elway and Brady rounding out the top 6. That's pretty good company.
Eli has won 2 SB's with a pretty weak supporting cast in relation to other championship QB's...
Including Brady..
In 1981, I agree that there weren't many solid NFC contenders entering the season. But the truth is, the 49ers weren't supposed to be one of them. They rode Montana and a surprisingly strong defense to a championship.
Although the 1984 49ers were a juggernaut, they had to beat the next two champions (the Bears and Giants) in the playoffs.
I take your point about the injuries. The Giants knocked Montana out of the playoffs three times - twice literally knocking him out. I'm not sure that makes him less clutch. To beat the little SoB in a big game, you basically had to kill him.
2007-08: 14, 17, 20, 14
20011-12: 2, 20, 17, 17
Eli was tremendous, but our defense was dominant.
2007-08: 14, 17, 20, 14
20011-12: 2, 20, 17, 17
Eli was tremendous, but our defense was dominant.
Part of that reason is because our offense kept opposing defenses off the field. Especially in 2011.
In the first two rounds, though, we lost time of possession in 3 of the 4 games. So, while I agree that Eli is clutch, I give the defense a lot of credit.
It would be interesting to look deeper at the stats and to determine how much of TC's run-the-ball philosophy contributed to our TOP margin. A good question for 538, but not for me...
In the first two rounds, though, we lost time of possession in 3 of the 4 games. So, while I agree that Eli is clutch, I give the defense a lot of credit.
It would be interesting to look deeper at the stats and to determine how much of TC's run-the-ball philosophy contributed to our TOP margin. A good question for 538, but not for me...
I usually respond to whether the defense or offense played a major role into the SBs the same way.... both contributed mightily and we dont win either if both dont come to play. No need to look into further stats. Just enjoy them!
I just wanted to point out that even the most "clutch" of players have had their struggles. People can point to Eli's three playoff losses. People can point to elway's early failures.
In 2011, he was great most of the season. The Giants were underdogs against Green Bay, San Francisco and New England for very simple reasons: they were facing teams with fewer evident weaknesses, in hostile or neutral sites. Those upsets weren't a function of Eli elevating his game; he didn't need to. Mostly, his teammates elevated theirs.
Good post
In 2011, he was great most of the season. The Giants were underdogs against Green Bay, San Francisco and New England for very simple reasons: they were facing teams with fewer evident weaknesses, in hostile or neutral sites. Those upsets weren't a function of Eli elevating his game; he didn't need to. Mostly, his teammates elevated theirs.
If you remember he seperated his shoulder the opening game and was supposed to miss most of the season in 07
Among fans who don't follow the team at all, there is also a widespread view that he elevated his game in the 2011 postseason as well. I think that impression is mistaken, and has more to do with the difference between 2010 and 2011 than between parts of 2011. "Bad Eli" did make a few appearances in 2011: the second Washington game, plus a few throws against the Jets, Seattle and Philly. For the most part, though, "Bad Eli" took the year off.
Generally speaking, this is not a club to tout belonging to.
In 1981, I agree that there weren't many solid NFC contenders entering the season. But the truth is, the 49ers weren't supposed to be one of them. They rode Montana and a surprisingly strong defense to a championship.
Although the 1984 49ers were a juggernaut, they had to beat the next two champions (the Bears and Giants) in the playoffs.
I take your point about the injuries. The Giants knocked Montana out of the playoffs three times - twice literally knocking him out. I'm not sure that makes him less clutch. To beat the little SoB in a big game, you basically had to kill him.
This.
The 49ers with Montana were damn near unstoppable. It seemed the only way to beat them was to knock Montana out of the game. People who didn't grow up back then just don't realize how dominant they were. I think they were a preseason SB favorite every year from the mid-80s to 90 for sure, and then from '92 - 95.
This is why Montana is GOAT to me. He was absolutely dominant in an era before the field was slanted in favor of the passing game. I think that was back when the rule on PI was "equal rights to the ball" between DB and WR.
I remember reading an article about Montana after the '90 season. It analyzed whether or not the qbs rating went up or down depending on whether it was a clutch situation. Think they might have just broken it down to "big" games v. others.
Montana's rating at that time in non-clutch games was 94.9. His rating in clutch games was 95. I think Simms also had a better rating in clutch games v. non-clutch too. While lower than Montana's, it was a more significant jump. For sure it was influenced by XXI, lol.
Don't get me wrong, I loathed the guy and every bandwagon 49er fan I met (I grew up an hour outside of Philly).
Eli has won 2 SB's with a pretty weak supporting cast in relation to other championship QB's...
Including Brady..
Agreed. Let's name the units on his two SB teams that had elite talent:
2007 - OL, DL, WR? - Toomer was tailing off by then, but Plax was elite. Shockey was an elite TE, but was injured late in the season. Speacial teams were solid, but I can't remember how they were ranked. Feagles was elite! Secondary was solid, but certainly not elite.
2011 - WR, DL, S - Rolle only.
I can't think of a qb that has done more with less.