He's going to have a rough season and all of the antics and soundbites are going to get old quick. I am torn on the guy, as obviously he connects with the players, but I could never see a lot of franchises put up with this kind of crap from a Head Coach (who represents your entire team).
but it's going to help bring a lot more derision to the team when they do stumble. It really is a classless thing to do. The face of the NY Jets is out there giving people the hand signal for "F*ck you". Is that really the message you want your coach sending out in public?
I've liked watching Ryan this year. He's entertaining and its obvious that his players buy into his system and personality. This is just a bit too much though.
until he has a bad season or two. Then the same people who love his approach will be throwing this stuff back in his face. Heck, it almost happened this year until the Colts laid down and let the Jets into the playoffs.
....over how this is "good for the Jets" because Rex is bringing some "fuck you all!" attitude and the team needs it. This was stupid of him and he should be embarrassed. If our coach was doing shit like this, I'd be ashamed. It's just classless and something you don't do. Yeah.. I know.. big deal, it;s the middle finger and we all do it, have done it, whatever.. but when you're representing the Jets organization, that's not something you do.
Its pretty funny, Joe has not really posted since his blow up. Do you think he has finally switched and become the Jets fan we all knew he deep down wanted to be?
Just wait until things start to go wrong. Then we'll see how funny his act is. Everyone will want him to STFU because he's going to be a constant embarrassment.
How exactly is this fatass 'perfect' for this town? Â
Rewind to when they were 7-7 and suddenly his way doesn't seem to be working for them. The Jets deserve credit for some success in the playoffs, but they should also remember that they were only in the playoffs thanks to a lot of luck at the end of the year. If the Jets finish with the same 9-7 record but miss the playoffs, suddenly the media and fans are going to be hating Ryan instead of worshipping him.
Yeah, there was a time when they loved Mangenius Â
is a massive douche with a tiny dick. Only dudes with tiny dicks act the way this fuckstain does. When a grown man constantly acts like a 15 year old kid, it usually means he's compensating for something. That or he's a fucking retard.
This fat shit is 0-2 against Miami. He's too stupid to realize the phins own his ass.
I'd say fuck him, but the Dolphins already did that. Twice.
doesn't help them win, no. The other part of his schtick - the bravado and talk, seems to motivate his team at times. We'll see how long he's successful. His dad was a obscene green grinch we know that.
of some individuals who couldn't have made more of a fool of themselves when discussing Jets football this year (Exit172 specifically) now trying to paint me as a Jet fan for essentially being right about them from day 1.
Some of us actually watch other teams beside the Giants and kind of have an idea whats going on in the NFL outside of our one favorite team. Others are Exit 172
is going to do very well with the Jets. They are set up quite nicely for next year. Everything is caveated by injuries in the NFL. With a healthy Jets team next year, the only question-mark I see is Sanchez. If he takes strides in his play, they will be a force next year.
he gets a lot of shit for showing an objective POV around here. He has never said he likes the Jets, or Favre for that matter but people act like he does. I don't think the Jets have a ridiculously bright future, and maybe Joe's stance comes off a bit too complimentary, but it's pretty accurate to say that they will havea very good D and that the future looks pretty damm good. That's all he said. What's wrong with that?
And his take on Favre is on the money too. The masses on BBI may hate the guy and there is no doubt that he has had some brutal fuck ups in big games over the years but he's still a HOF QB and he was a huge factor in Minny's div win this year.
Prior to June 2008 I don't think I mentioned Brett Favres name 5 times on this site in my 5 years here before that. My defense for Favre sprung from the absurd knocks on a first ballot HOF QB who has had an absolutely amazing career. Even worse is when people who said he would suck this year and didn't even pick the Vikes to make the post season start taking bows after last week, as if they were somehow "right", when he was a top 5 QB this year at age 40, took his team to an NFC title game and probably makes the SB if not for a handful of Vike mistakes that had nothing to do with him
was it a guy like Go Terps, and many others like him, who simply hate the guy, and claim things like he didn't run on the last play because he is "soft" and wanted to "duck contact", didn't pick the vikes to go to the playoffs this year (assuming a downgrade from Frerrote and Jackson who took them in 08)
Or am I wrong simply because the Vikes did not win the SB after the guy had just about as good a year as a QB can possibly have
would be able to seperate their personal dislike for Favre from his onfield play. then again, BBI is where some said adults will act like they're toddlers.
If you start with the assumption that winning the SB matters and nothing else, some of Favre's decisions in big games have to knock him down a few pegs. Than again, it's play like his over the course of the regular season that has teams knocking on the door to the Superbowl in the first place.
Over the course of an entire season, Favre was unquestionably one of the elite players in the NFL this year. The Vikings may not have even made the playoffs without Favre. Is that all rendered moot because of one dumb play in crunch time? Maybe.
he did play in 2 SBs and played great in both, easily well enough to be a 2 time champion. Outplayed John elway badly in SB 32
Its not as if the resume' is lacking much of anything. For all the talk about some of his playoff mishaps, when you start 24 playoff games (which is the most in history) not all are going to go great. Thats a lot of games. And you don't start that many playoff games by exiting early each time you make it. You don't start that many playoff games either unless you are an absolutely stunningly good QB, because that involves a lot of years where you led your team to post season (hes only had one losing season in 18 seasons as a starter).
if we are now going to attach a label to Favre as some underperformer in post season play, then thats a label you better stick on about 90% of the QBs who have played this game because i don't have much trouble reeling off a double digit number of QBs in the HOF who simply could not hold Brett Favre's jockstrap in a big spot
Consider how many playoff games he won, consider how many times he advanced deep into postseason, consider the fact that he basically holds every playoff passing record much like he does in the regular season, and its just a foolish argument to make
with Tarvaris Jackson last year. Let's not act as if Favre came in and played the savior for a bad team, because he wasn't.
What he did do was kill their chances with galactic stupidity in the crucial moment. That is indisputable to anyone that watched that play with an unjaundiced eye.
Just like the throw to Dawkins, and the throw to Webster.
You did not think they would make the playoffs this season. I remember on the thread I started right before week 1 you saying that. They were not among your 6 selections in the NFC. In addition, things like losing Darren Sharper, Antoine Winfield for most of the year and the running game not being near as good, in addition to GB being better would have given them an uphill climb to go back this year without him
You basically had Favre pegged as finished, didn't think they would make the playoffs at all, Now you are going to take bows because they lost an NFC title game? Really? As if you were even 1% right about anything in this? For real?
I'm not taking bows on any predictions. I was wrong about the Vikings making the playoffs. But to act as though they were a shit team before Favre got there is disingenuous.
In the crucial spot, Favre fucked them with his stupidity. It's not the first time he's done that.
Favre acted like the Vikings are his vehicle to do what he pleases...just like he is now, jerking them around AGAIN about retirement. I can't say this any more clearly:
FAVRE DOESN'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT ANYONE BUT HIMSELF. HE THINKS THE TEAMS ARE TOOLS TO SERVE HIM AND HIS LEGACY.
His actions have proven that over and over again, making it hilarious every time that selfishness jumps up and bites him (and regrettably, his teammates) in the ass. But he could give a fuck.
I'm not taking bows. I'm not making anything up. Favre completely fucked his team in the crucial spot and that is beyond discussion. Anyone that tried to counter that simple fact would soon find themselves saying crazy things, like Eli fucking Manning was carried by his defense to a Super Bowl.
Sell that shit on a Vikings board. Or a Favre board. I'm sure they're out there.
Favre had a great season, basically was single handedly their offense in their first playoff game and was one of the few reasons they were even in the NFC title game late after they turned the ball over 3 times in the redzone (none of which had to do with him) and still put up 28 points
And the point about the defense carrying Eli through that postseason is pretty much true whether it fits into your desired revisionist history or not. As if 17 points would have been enough to beat that Pat team any more than 1 time if you played them 20 times. Im sure you thought 17 would be enough to win that game 24 hours earlier on Feb 2nd, or that we would have an earthly shot with 3 points on the board to start the 4th quarter
The defense carried us through that postseason. Not that Eli didn't play well, but they made some of those offensive efforts good enough to win when more times than not they wouldn't have been. Those are just facts
Favre is not the reason they lost that game. There were a lot of careless TO's by Minnesota in that game that caused a bunch of missed opportunities (not on Favre)
The more I watch that throw to Plax to win it, the more I think that that throw by Eli in such a clutch moment, was the most beautifully thrown pass I've ever seen him throw
They certainly did have a lot of bad turnovers that had nothing to do with Favre.
But regardless he had the game in his hands at the end. He had it...he had a Super Bowl berth in his hands...and he spit the bit. He gagged. He choked.
And why? Because he doesn't think he needs to throw to the first WR in his progression. He's Brett Favre and he can do what he wants. Just ask him.
He choked. Period. Using the rest of the game as an excuse is BS...particularly if Joe does it after he leveled criticism at the Giants offense after our SNF loss to Philly.
Favre had the game in his hands and he choked. That's all there is to it.
Care to guess how many teams in the last 35 years won a SB by scoring less than that in their playoff run?
I'll tell you. One. a whopping one.
Anyone who doesn't think the defense was FAR AND AWAY the biggest reason we won 42, I don't know what to tell you. And not only was 21.2 good enough to win a SB, it was good enough to beat 3 of the top 5 scoring teams in the NFL that year including the best offense in history
he absolutely was part of the reason. A bunch of other guys fumbled, but he also threw two horrible interceptions in scoring position.
With all that happened in the game, they still had the game right there for them and Favre threw it away. He wasn't the only reason, but he certainly played a large part just like guys like Peterson, Berrian, and Harvin
is laughable. Choking would have been not moving the ball down the field at all and giving the Saints possession back with time on the clock to mount a drive in the 4th. Choking wouldn't involve leading your offense down the field on 3 straight 4th quarter possessions and being effective enough to keep the Saints offense off the field for most of the game
He made a bad throw (on a play Sidney Rice could have helped him out by coming to the ball, damn straight if thats Eli that would be all Terps would be harping on). He played a damn good game and had a great season
The idea here that people who had him pegged as finished and not even a playoff team could even remotely act like they were right about something here is embarrassing
picks in the opponents' territory in a game that went to OT, you'd better believe he had a major part in the loss. Further, I don't know when throwing for 310 yards and 1 TD on 46 attempts became a great game, but I guess it is when Favre does it.
just to show how irrational your hatred is. You actually made the point that Favre did not run on the last play because he is soft and afraid of contact. Im sorry but thats simply one of the dumbest things ive ever read here, ever. How could you watch that game and come away with any thought that Favre is "soft"?
Only if you are Go Terps and the subject is Brett Favre could someone be driven to say that
What's embarrassing is the way you make excuses for this asshole. Rice could have helped him out? That excuses throwing the ball across the field in that spot instead of throwing to the wide open guy on the sidelines? The primary read?
I wouldn't be sticking up for Eli. I knocked Eli for his performance against Philly in the playoffs plenty when others were ripping Gilbride.
In my opinion Joe's point of view about favre is as far from objection as it can be. He fails to admit that favre had a hand in the vikes loss. The loss absolutely was not all on favre, he just happened to throw a crucial interception at a crucial time.
The only reason i even defend the guy is because of the absurd nonsense hurled his way here over the last 2 years, in the interest of bringing objectivity. Not because Im Favres #1 fan and have a #4 jersey tucked away in my closet
I did not give a shit about Favre prior to June 08. Not a shit. All my talk about Favre since then has been in the interest of fairness in the face of blatantly stupidity surrounding him here
I'll admit, I was one of Favre's biggest destractors prior to this yr Â
and I think any Viking fan would have more of an axe to grind with Childress mismanaging the clock than they do with Favre. He was taking brutal hits, and he also made a bad throw late in the game. Anyone should be able to figure out that without Favre they probably don't even make it past the WC and that's being generous.
You don't think that maybe the offense would have changed tactics if the Super Bowl or the games leading up to it became a higher scoring affair?
Facing three high-powered offenses in the last three games, the goal was to grind out the clock and keep those offenses off the field. That goal was accomplished admirably. When the team had to go into a hurry-up mode, such as the last 40 seconds of the first half of the Cowboys game or the final 2 minutes of the Patriots game, Eli kicked ass and took names. Against that same tough Patriots defense, his offense put up 35 points in the regular season. Does that make it better, even though it was a losing effort?
I can sort of see your need to defend Favre. I don't see your need to drag down Eli Manning in order to puff up another quarterback. If Favre is as great as you say he is, his career should speak for himself without comparisons to other quarterbacks.
If you could even find 5 mentions of Brett Favre from me in the 5 1/2 years between Jan 03 and June 08, that would be a lot. Never brought the guy up, never defended him whatsoever.
All of a sudden after he retired and unretired in the 08 offseason it became fashionable here to bash the guy by spouting some absolutely ridiculous nonsense. It was at that point I started to defend the guy because i felt a lot of the criticism was unfair
Trust me. You won't find a #4 hanging in my closet. You won't see a Favre poster on my wall. Im not even a huge Favre fan. Im merely defending a guy who is as slam dunk a first ballot HOFer as any player in the past quarter century
Just last week you said he "maybe" would want that throw back and basically said for a while that it wasn't a terrible decision or throw. You finally gave in on that point after a while.
And that throw was a complete choke job. There's no other way around it, no matter how he played until that point, and you're overrating how he played up to that point. He played pretty well, but he wasn't great. He had a killer INT earlier in the game as well.
He threw that ball with two hands around his throat at the end. It was a choke job at the end
In my view if you were objective about Favre you would be willing to admit he hurt his teams chances at the end by throwing that pick. The other viking players hurt their team's chances for their mistakes, and likely had those other mistakes had not happened favre would not have been in that situation to begin with, but those other mistakes did happen and favre was in that situaion. So as a player you can't think about what happened earlier in the game. You have to play IN THE NOW. Longwell had a very good record of over 50 yard field goals the last two years, so it was in reach.
who has won 13 playoff games, played in multiple SBs and played well in both, played in more playoff games than anyone ever, got "nervous" there and was overcome by the moment? That to me is what a choke is. He made a bad decision that possibly cost them a chance at a very very long FG.
The game should have never come to that if the Vikes didn't have the littany of mistakes they did earlier in the game
He made a bad decision that possibly cost them a chance at a very very Â
I think the crux of the problem is that you don't share the same definition of "choke" as the rest of us.
Game on the line- inside the OPP 40yd line, 3rd down.
Most people would say that if you throw an INT at that point, you choked.
Most people would say that if you threw and INT when there was room to run and you had open recievers on the sideline and you threw late across your body across the middle you choked- regardless of what you did during the rest of the game.
During the regular season and throughout the playoffs up until the 4th quarter of the NFC Championship, Favre had a fantastic, great season. Nobody is disputing that.
But, on a 3rd and 5, with 4 defenders on him, he didn't throw a miraculous pass that got the first down. Nor did he also throw the game winning TD pass by beating a blitz in which the opposition sent 7, with less than 1 minute left in the game.
I don't think anyone-besides GT maybe-is saying Favre isn't a HOF. I just think most people view him as an ultimate prima donna and just don't like and get a huge kick out of him throwing away a chance for MN to go to the Super Bowl.
He made a poor decision on that play and got greedy by trying to make it as makeable a FG as possible. I don't see that as a choke especially given how absolutely fantastic he was during that whole 4th quarter, in a game where he was battered brutally, and if he got the ball back in OT theres no doubt in my mind he leads them down the field again. You don't do that if you have choke in you. It was an aggressive decision on his part and it backfired, if you break the play down (and playbook did) you would see you could blame Rice for the pick just as much as you could blame Favre
Would it have been less or more of a choke if he didn't move the ball down the field at all, went 3 and out, and gave the Saints the ball back late in the 4th?
It was an aggressive decision to try and get as makeable a FG attempt as possible. You can sit there and act like Longwell is a lock to hit from 50+ on the road with SB on the line, but hes not. He made an aggressive throw, the same type of throw hes completed thousands of times in his career, and it didn't work out. It was an aggressive move that backfired, period.
If he gave the ball back to the Saints inside their 20? If they had punted?
We wouldn't even be talking about this....
We'd be talking about how the Vikes defense choked. Even if they had missed the FG, we'd be talking about how Childress should have never attempted it in the first place.
Not moving the ball at all and allowing the Saints another crack in regulation would be a bigger choke. At the very least, the Vikes were going to win in regulation or no one was
13-11 in the postseason is pretty damn solid. In addition his playoff passer rating is higher than Tom Brady who is basically the poster boy for clutchness
Really any argument that labels Favre as some post season choker does not pass the test on any level
And do you know how good you have to be to lose 11 playoff games? Â
Peyton is 9-4 after losing his first 4, which means he's gotten better..That's all, if you think I'm going to carry on a debate with you any further than this without you ever conceding a single, solitary thing you're crazy..The last word is gladly yours..Done here
They started that drive with nearly 3 minutes left in the game if memory serves, if they don't move the ball as they did there is a very good chance the Saints have more than enough time to mount a drive. 3rd and 9 to Berrian made it pretty much that the vikes were winning in regulation or no one was
So we won't count anything until Peytons 6th year, the first year he won a playoff game, but we will count Favre in years he played past the age 99% of QBs do? That makes sense how?
And Peyton is still one game away from completing his first good playoff run from start to finish because he was a dog for most of the 06 run. A dog.
Yes there was. If Favre doesn't complete the pass to Berrian the Saints have over a minute left and would have gotten the ball close to midfield given an average punt by Kluwe
and what do you make of that? Having the most yardage in playoff history, 2nd in TDs, 13 wins, took more teams into the post season than anyone ever, played very well in both SB trips, combined for 6 TDs passing/rushing vs just one turnover
How exactly does he get painted as someone who is a post season choker again?
And in the game against Denver he outplayed John elway so badly it wasn't even funny. Best QB on the field that day by a mile, but he was an awful run defender that day allowing TD to run all over his D
You were like 9 when that game was played right?
I was the one who brought Favre into this thread? Â
his team has been eliminated, his interceptions have been a huge part of it. He's not a choker as he's had some very good performances. But it's not hard to understand why his playoff record has a negative connotation about it.
did the worst thing he could on that play. If he throws an incompletion, they either attempt a long FG (possible, but risky), or they pin the Saints deep, with not enough time, most likely, for them to march down the field for their own FG attempt.
Instead, he tries to force a ball and throws an INT. On the surface, the INT was harmful in only 1 aspect; it eliminated the end of the game scoring chance. However, several bad things could have happened (what would have been the reaction had the player returned the ball further down the field, or scored?).
To truly figure out if he "choked" or not, you need to decide if they would have gone for the long FG, or if they would have decided to punt (I am leaving alone the open primary read). IMO, he choked. A great player, but not the way he wanted to end this season (on an INT).
I have a problem with how it's compiled statistically. I'm not going to bore everyone or overexert myself, I think there are better ratings that prove a QB's worth that don't rely on statistical inference, but paint a picture almost as well (when taken together).
TD/INT Ratio
YPA
Completion %
# of Games
INT/Pass Attempt Ratio
TD/Pass Attempt Ratio
Bad play by favre. Throwing across your body into the middle of the field, while close to field goal range IN A DOME, while having plenty of room in my opinion to run and get OOBs.
some guys raise their game, some guys don't play as well, and some guys play just about the same as they do during the season. Favre fits into the latter category, and given that his regular season career is as first ballot a slam dunk as anyone, thats not a knock, I see no rhyme or reason for the guy being painted by some as a playoff choker. It makes no sense on any level
Peyton is a guy who clearly does not play as well when post season comes around although hes changing that this season. Lets see if he can cap off his first ever good playoff run from start to finish as people already crown him the best QB ever
The infamous 8 points given up in 8.9 seconds is the posterboy for a classic choke job. Portland Trail Blazers giving up a double digit lead in the 4th in game 7 was a chokejob. It's not even like Favre threw a pick 6. He just made a dumb throw.
1/3 of Brett Favre's career playoff picks have come in just 2 of his 24 career playoff games.
10 of the 30 in 2 games. 20 in the other 22.
A couple of really bad games puts a dent into postseason numbers that are still very good even counting them (and im not saying don't count them, im saying 2 very poor performances out of 24 really skew the numbers)
That's why it's so hard to compare QB's; none of the stats measure things like intangibles or the players surrounding them, the level of talent, and conditions played in.
who plays in 24 playoff games, is going to have his share of down ones
Joe Montana was the best playoff QB bar none. But he had his bad days in the playoffs too. He also had 5 games with a rating of 65 or lower, he had back to back years in post season in 85 and 86 where he was sent home with just 3 points on offense
And this is the best in the post season of anyone who has ever done it
Play in enough of them, some of them won't go well
He is the best post season QB Ive ever seen and easily the best of the last 30 years
And even he had his down moments
Tom Brady was hailed as mr clutch, but whats happened as hes appeared in more playoff games? Hes bound to have some bad ones and has. He has 2 games with 3 INT in his last 3 playoff games
all coming more recently than his last SB win, he has thrown 14 TDs vs 12 INTs, has a rating in the 70s and is barely averaging 6 YPA.
He also has three games with 3 or more picks in those most recent 8, which is one more than Favre has in his entire playoff career and one game away from tying Jim Kelly and Bradshaw for the most career 3+ INT games in playoff history, and hes done this in just his last 4 post season trips.
Im not saying Favre has been a better playoff QB than Brady. What I am saying and have said is that if you play in enough playoff games some will go poorly, and the more we are seeing from Brady, a guy who was immaculate to start his postseason career, the more we are seeing it with him too
You can use the number of playoff games excuse all you want Â
It doesn't excluse concluding 3 of them like a choking dog, as well as having a 6 INT game, a horrible 3 turnover performance in a game where your team was a major favorite (the Atlanta loss), and a 4 INT game at home against a division opponent that included throwing a no-look underhand pass beyond the LOS down near the goalline.
Playing in that many playoff games, you're gonna lose some and you're gonna have bad games in there. But Favre's had 5 or 6 of the type of losses that would follow a player around forever. Romo in Seattle, McNabb puking in the SB-type shit. Multiple times.
But hey he's just having fun out there so it's ok. It's ok to jerk teams around about retirement after you've fucked their season at the crucial moment. It's cool. Because the team is just there to serve Favre.
And Joe, that you really started rooting for Favre once he became a Jet...and his titanic asshole personality was really evident...is not something to be proud of.
I don't give a damn about the overall numbers, or comparing his numbers to others...it's about one thing with him, the choking down the stretch and poor judgment. No way to defend the idiotic throws he has consistently made in playoff games.
a few down playoff games Terps, given that no QB or player in general is going to be perfect over a sample size of 20+ games
And we've pretty much seen that with everyone who has ever played, including the best post season performer of all time in Joe Montana.
Where your bias comes in is that you'll act like Favre is a post season choker and Peyton Manning, who has still yet to cap off a single consistent playoff run, isn't.
No one is going to convince anyone of anything they don't already believe at this point. It's been argued to death and it is apparent that no one is changing their mind here.
Whats worse, throwing a pick in a game late or completely no showing for 60 minutes of a playoff game and seeing your offense get pushed around in large part because you suck. Do I have to count the amount of times we have seen that with some other QBs who don't catch near the flack here Favre does?
Thats one thing you can't bash Favre for in post season. 24 playoff games, held under 17 points just twice
Meanwhile, Peyton, leader of the dominant offense of the decade, is AVERAGING 13 ppg in his 8 playoff losses.
Both bad, and I do agree that Peyton Manning's playoff career has been less than stellar...I just differentiate between having a tough game as a whole from not being clutch in the end and totally sucking. I do see your point, but I would rather Peyton Manning than Favre any day, because I know that if Manning is in a close situation, he isn't going to throw the game away with poor judgment. Favre will do that, and has proved it again and again.
See I kind of think Peyton getting shut out in a playoff game, scoring 3 points on a couple of other occassions, is kind of worse than Favre in 07 vs the Giants or last week, which gets mentioned 10 times more
Some QBs in the playoffs have multiple games where they never gave their team a chance
to give Peyton that ring yet, in order to get it hed have to do something hes never ever done in his life, and thats have a single good post season from start to finish
your criticism of Peyton WAS fair, but not anymore. The guy has one ring already and is about to get number two, he also had as perfect of a game as you can have in the AFC Champ game.
I don't get you're dislike of Peyton. I can see you criticizing his previous playoff performances, but I don't see why you root against him. I remember you saying prior to the playoffs that you would actively root against the Colts.
for all the talk about some bad picks Favre threw, he didn't have very many playoff games where his team never had a chance from jumpstreet simply because he played poorly for 60 minutes
His offenses showed up far more often than not. Sometimes they got outscored, some of those games he threw some key picks, but it just further shoots down the silly notion that hes some playoff choker
Want to say in post season play he doesn't measure up to Montana or Brady? Fine. But hes not, with any level of objectivity, some playoff underwhelmer in his career
Too bad Joe Montana didn't lose those playoff games by being an idiot and throwing retarded INTs.
No one is saying Favre isn't a great, great player who has had some statistical playoff success...but no way would I want him and his ego near my football team if I wanted to win a championship and have a disciplined, smart football team.
Peyton Manning last week would have run up the field for a 5 yard gain and let his kicker win the game with a makable 50 yard FG in a dome...he wouldn't have let his ego get in the way and throw a stupid pick. You also think Brett Favre was studying film of defenses from 8 years ago in anticipation of what he may see? No...not at all. Favre is as talented as they come, but he is a mental midget, and has proven it consistently now.
as a starter for a long time. Impressive. But neither does it limit the fact that he has hurt his team in key situations in some of the playoff games; and in his most recent playoff games, by my definition, he choked. He chose the absolute worst thing to do, when his team could have won it.
And for all of this talk about Favre's playoff success, and Peyton's lack thereof...it comes down to one thing for me: rings. Peyton is about to one-up Favre on rings.
I think getting sent home with 3 points on the board, or getting shut out, is far worse than what Favre did last week. I can't believe that this wouldn't be unanimous.
But he's been less than stellar since that Denver SB in the playoffs; that 6 INT game in St. Louis, that terrible INT in Philly, '07 NFC title game, last week.
making an ill advised throw late in a game where he was one of the few reasons they were even in the game, is just as bad as getting sent home because you got your ass handed to you for 60 minutes and didn't do squat from the opening kickoff to the gun?
No, the Big Ben thing is not true...you have to take the caliber of the player and what they have around them, and most specifically what they are asked to do for their team in mind.
You would be far from unanimous about that...they are equally bad as they both equal losses. What Favre did last week was inexcusable. No way can anyone defend him losing that game for the Vikings.
Well, it's funny, because no where have I mentioned my personal Â
feelings or rankings on the matter. It depends on whether or not blowing the game, when you have had a history of blowing a game, could be worse than shitting the bed for 1 game.
I find it just as "funny" that you are trying to assert your subjective opinion as the group objective fact.
Again, this is where the silliness comes through and the complete lack of objectivity
But im talking to someone who blasted Favre for calling a timeout and not knowing the rule there, and then looking like an idiot by not knowing the rule himself
It is a two-fold thing: he played very well that game and he was the reason they were in the position to win the game that they were in....now they are in the position to win the game and it is in his hands to close it out, and he LOST the game for them. Blew it. Totally fucking blew it, because he is an idiot.
By the way, you didn't know the rule either...and your defending his even calling the timeout still makes no sense whatsoever.
why do you always feel the need to bring up Eli when talking about Favre, as in belittling Eli-who BTW beat Favre on the road to the SB 25 months ago-to make your point about Favre?
I knew in a deadball situation that he couldn't be penalized for calling timeout and spent a good portion of that thread educating some of you on it, while you went off on another tangent about how it was example #500 of how much of an idiot he was. You actually also blamed him for the 12 men in the huddle like he is the guy who chooses what personnel comes on the field each play
These are the types of things you do when you have a bias
Im bringing up Eli because sometimes thats what you have to do to make your point to Giants fans
And i asked a simple question. Was what Favre did last week as bad as Eli in say 05 vs Carolina or 08 vs the Eagles? Its not an eli thing so much as it is does 1 bad throw equal as bad a game as getting your ass handed to you for 60 minutes?
We seem to have some here who think it is just as bad and i think they're clueless
instead of 15, but I didn't spend that whole thread talking about what an idiot he was and how he could have gotten a 15 yarder, you did
Whether the penalty was 5 yards, 15 yards, or 50 yards, it does not change the fact that he wasnt getting flagged for calling timeout in a deadball situation because there is nothing against the rules for doing so. You also spent that thread telling me how Eli would never do anything of the sort only to be linked to an article on that thread where he did
Let me restate this a different way. There will be differing opinions on how to rate playoff performances during losses. Some will have different criterion (PPG, TD/INT, Completion %, QBR, etc.).
To think that just because you say so, that Favre's playoff loss is not as bad as losing 17-3 is asinine.
its not asinine. By any real measure of rating playoff games or any games, its silly to compare Favres effort last week to a guy who got shut out, or couldn't lead his offense into the endzone one time all day. One is clearly worse than the other. With one guys performance, the team literally never had a chance
I just can't endorse the fact that you seem to think that your opinion on this subject should be a truth to everyone else, and those who don't subscribe to it are "silly".
is not an opinion. its a fact. You are really going to sit there and tell me Favre's performance was just as bad as say Eli in 05, or 08 (again, not picking on Eli, using him as an example). Peyton getting shut out in a playoff game or putting up 3 points in a loss, Kerry Collins in SB 35 etc
I mean, really? By what rating criteria or system are performances like last week from Favre even remotely similar?
I'm not going to engage myself further when you can't even discern the difference between subjective opinions and objective facts. It's the height of stubbornness.
But keep bringing Eli up into the conversation. That's a surefire way to get people to adopt to your "truth".
Re-read what I've said. I'm not here to proclaim any sort of ordinal ranking on which loss is worse. I'm here to say that some may disagree with your opinion, and that trumpeting your opinion here as fact is one of the bigger fallacies a person can make.
But it's not my argument, so I'm not going to waste my time trying to steer you clear from this.
again, this is not about Eli. I used him as an example
The topic is is what Favre did last week as bad as a performance as a QB who got his ass handed to him for 60 complete minutes and never gave his a team a chance? I say no. Others here say its the same thing
Do you think what Favre did last week was as bad as Kerry Collins in SB 35?
Like I said before, play in enough playoff games, you will have some clunkers. By and large, any argument that paints him as a poor big game QB, which is an argument you consistently make, is simply foolish
thats not going to register with you because you hate him more than any rational person could conceivably hate an athlete. You have gone as far as to convince yourself Favre is soft and did not run on the last play because hes a pussy who wanted no part of contact
First off, Joe is not a Jets fan...does anyone remember his Giant threads this year? He'd debate with other posters about whether he wanted the Giants to make the playoffs after the second Eagles game, there were actually posters who rooted AGAINST the Giants...I would question those posters more than Joe. Second, I recall Joe posting stats about Eli's continued progress into an elite QB after the WSH game (I recall him posting pre NE regular season game to post NE regular season game.) He also talked about Eli being an elite QB after the Minnestoa game. So for people to blatantly say he's a Jet fan or anti Eli is absurd.
He simply is making the point that a lot of people on BBI lose credibility when it comes to QB's because they consistently rip any QB not named Eli Manning.
And I have no problem with Terps either, he has always been consistent. He does not like 'me first' type of athletes.
every athlete is me first. Some guys do a better job of promoting a different image than others.
I hate to bring Eli into this again because apparently Im an Eli hater now, hes a guy who very few on this site would consider a "me first" guy, but look at his actions. The SD thing was "me first" personified. He also took this team to the cleaners for every cent imaginable in a contract negotiation, compare that to how Tom Brady approached his negotiation years ago. Heck compare that to how Favre played for below market value for years and never held out for more money when he could have and gotten it in 2 seconds
And im not knocking Eli, but hes like every other athlete, looking out for himself above all else.
Its one thing to dislike a player though and another to openly root for him to get injured weekly.
Favre's 1997 contract was pretty large for 1997. I'd call this milking if you call Eli's milking..."The two-time MVP signs a seven-year deal with the Green Bay Packers that is reportedly worth between $42 and $48 million. The pact includes a $12 million signing bonus." He then signed a ten year 100 million dollar contract in 2001. That is large money as well. So, i'd say he did some milking too. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but you seem to think favre didn't do any of that. Favre timeline - ( New Window )
he got paid in 01. The same way Tom Brady is going to get paid on his next contract. No one is going to go around accepting discounts for an entire career
he took less than he could have gotten in 1997 as well coming off 3 consecutive MVP awards and making less money than most rookie QBs around that time on their rookie deals who went high in the draft. He was making less annually on the 97 deal than Peyton or Leaf made in their 98 rookie deals. Guy who had won 3 straight MVPs vs a guy(s) who had never taken a snap
It would be like Peyton Manning accepting less money than Mark Sanchez
Favre had one very good year, it was the 94 season with 33 tds and 14 picks. 92 and 93 combined he had 37tds and 37 picks while playing all 16 games each year. So, IMO he still wasn't a super star yet. It turned out well, but he hadn't shown consistency yet.
again you can't compare rookie deals. They are always high even high than guys who are established. You have to compare favre's contract to what everyone else was making that year who had recent contract extensions. Players that were the leagues best at important positions on their teams.
accomplished prior to their deals, the point is were they one of the highest paid in the league? Did favre take a discount? He was one of the highest paid if not the highest excluding rookies. Favre didn't take a brady type discount, not that he should have. Favre was expensive, but he was worth the money for the success he had helped bring that franchise. My problem is that you were picking on Eli for his contract, when it's obvious that favre did the same thing. Again, not a bad thing, but don't bring down other players when favre did the same thing.
By 2000, in year 3 of that deal, Favre was not even the highest paid Packer player, that honor would go to dorsey Levens, and among QB he was paid less than Manning, Bledsoe, Brunnel, Kordell Stewart, McNair, Elvis Grbac, Rich Gannon, Jake Plummer, Aikman, Brad Johnson, Chris Chandler and Trent Green (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/nfl/salaries/splash.htm)
In year 1, Marino made more , Bledsoe made more . Aikman made more. The deal at the time essentially made him the 4th highest paid QB in the NFL at a time when he was the best. And those are just QBs, some defensive players like Deion and hugh Douglas were also making more money than Favre at that time (Salaries page, you can see NFC by changing the URL http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/sfn/afcsal.htm)
You certainly can compare rookie deals to an elite QB. The #1 pick in this years draft is going to be one of the higher paid players in the league immediately, but hes not going to get a bigger contract than Peyton's next extension which is coming up shortly
Joe, you never answered by comparison of Favre's performance to that of McNabb's in the Super Bowl. I think that is a better comparison then dragging Eli's name into this. I mean you are a stats guy, look at the number both QB's put up in those games...and both let their team down with the game on the line, which in the playoffs, is really all that matters.
as you know. From that link you displayed it looks like favre was already going into year three on his 97 deal. I'm not sure when the other players got their contracts. Two or three years after a deal is signed, it would more than likely already have been topped pretty easily. Joe, i'm saying that favre didn't do anything differently than eli manning when it came time to negotiate a contract. It's not a knock.
i think he could have gotten way more if he tested the market instead of signing that 97 deal. He was, at that time, the best player in the entire league no ifs ands or buts, and by a pretty hefty margin at a time when he was basically winning MVP every year
but its comparable as you would say. I agree that a rookie like stafford should not even have a contract that compares to eli's, being that eli has actually accomplished something. But, that is the way it is. Stafford's contract is too close to eli's. Rookies have been getting paid ridiculous amounts of money for a while now. They get paid a ton without having to prove anything, that is why they are not comparable in my opinion. Their first deal after their rookie deals tells the more clearer story.
And its a little different comparing Eli and this contract negotiation to Favre in 1997. Eli is not the best player in the NFL, as Favre was then. Some might argue hes on the fringe of being a top 10 QB
Peyton is going to sign his next deal shortly. Thats a better example. Let me see him settle for something similar to what Sam Bradford gets. I doubt it
you compared eli to favre first with money. i was simply saying favre didn't do a brady on his contract extensions. You said eli took his team to the cleaners, because he didn't give them a discount. Well, we don't know how much he would have got in the open market maybe it was a discount. Same with favre, point is they both signed deals that were at or near the top at the time. Neither one did a "brady" That's what i'm saying.
I don't expect him to, the colts have been fine cap wise. I could probably count on one hand the athletes that decided to sign for a lot less just to give their team a "savings". Favre, neither of the mannings are on their as most players. Because it isn't the norm.
on Favres 1997 deal. Signing for anything less than being the highest paid QB in the NFL by a significant margin for a guy who was 28, with a slew of MVP awards and a ring already is taking a discount
Its not like Tom Brady signed for 2 million a year either. He too took a discount but was still paid handsomely
because never at any point in that contract was he the highest paid QB in the NFL in any season. And by year 3 salaries were escalating to the point where he was not even among the top 10
When Favre signed that contract to pay him roughly 6-7mil annually, Kordell Stewart signed a contract one year later that paid him close to 6 himself. And thats Kordell Stewart
you kind of made your own bed in this favre stuff. I wouldn't have debated you here so long if you didn't pull eli manning's contract into this, claiming favre never hit his team up for a huge contract.
i said he could have certainly gotten more on the 97 deal when he was unquestionably the greatest player in the league, and i still believe that
Ive posted the numbers and data to back up how he was never at any point the highest paid QB in the NFL on that deal and as early as year 3 was not even in the top 10
what a deal he gave them....It only took two years to negotiate the contract, and then he only wanted to be the highest paid player in NFL history at the time.
That guy....not only is he just like a kid out there playing the game in the back yard, but he isn't in it for the money at all...
"" He also took this team to the cleaners for every cent imaginable in a contract negotiation, compare that to how Tom Brady approached his negotiation years ago. Heck compare that to how Favre played for below market value for years and never held out for more money when he could have and gotten it in 2 seconds
""
Sounds to me like you were saying favre saved his team a lot of money too, unlike eli.
Like I said before, play in enough playoff games, you will have some clunkers.
We are not talking about clunkers. We're talking about losses that would taint the careers of other players, such was the nature of the mistakes made. That's the point you either don't get or more likely have never wanted to.
Favre's had 5 LEGENDARY playoff fuckups that go in the Hall of Fame of playoff fuckups. It stopped merely being a factor of the number of appearances a long time ago.
None of you guys are changing eachothers minds. You believe what you believe and have your opinions and that's that. You could debate this for the next 5 years if you wanted to and I don't think anything would change.
Let's move on. Favre's team is no longer relevant to this football season. When Favre begins his annual retirement mulling, we can start to discuss him again. :)
you find a bad throw worse than wetting the bed completely for an entire game, which ive seen countless HOF QBs do more times than Favre ever has. Brett Favres pick in Philly after his defense gave up a 4th in 26 tarnishes a legacy but Peyton getting shut out in a playoff game doesn't, or wetting the bed countless other times. Hell Eli has already had more playoff games in his career where he failed to lead a team to an offensive TD than Favre
You pick and choose what you want to make someone look worse with because of your bias. You hate this player, you openly root for this player to get injured. You called him soft and afraid of contact for not running on the last play. anyone with a brain and 2 eyes who watched that game and isn't batshit crazy biased would never come to such an assertion like that. A soft player doesn't finish that game with the beating he took
to drive the point home about how absurd it is that you focus on some of these things with Favre and not with others
You are biased beyond belief and quite frankly cannot be taken seriously on this subject or any subject that Favre is involved in
I have athletes i dislike as well, but your obsession with hating him is downright unhealthy. Ive never hated an athlete so much that ive prayed he would suffer a career ending injury or get "carried off the field in a box" (direct quote from you)
Ive posted the numbers on nearly an annual basis earlier in the thread. In year 1 of his new deal he was the 4th highest QB in the NFL and a few non QBs were also making more.
By year 3 of that new contract he was not even among the top 10 highest paid QB
Marino made more , Bledsoe made more . Aikman made more. The deal at the time essentially made him the 4th highest paid QB in the NFL at a time when he was the best. And those are just QBs, some defensive players like Deion and hugh Douglas were also making more money than Favre at that time (Salaries page, you can see NFC by changing the URL http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/sfn/afcsal.htm)
I've never claimed to be objective on this player. Never pretended to be, as you have and continue to.
The last two seasons you've been chugging his cock at every opportunity, keeping us apprised of his accomplishments and such. When he fell flat on his face with the Jets, you made excuses. When he pulled the retirement facade in the offseason, you didn't have much to say (that I can recall). All this season with the Vikings you updated his stats for us like we gave a shit.
And then, when he spit the bit you made excuses. He's 40 and beat up...why should he run on that play? Why didn't Rice help him out (that's a doozie)? Favre carried them despite the turnovers (I guess Peterson's 122 yds and 3 TDs played no part).
Everything but the truth. Favre spit the bit.
For the last time...the play called for Favre to roll right and look at Berrian first. Berrian was wide open to set up about a 40-45 yard FG. Favre could have ran to set up about a 50 yard FG. He could have thrown the ball away. He did none of these things. Instead he went for the big play and it fucked his team's shot at a Super Bowl.
Why can't you admit that? Call me subjective all you want...I am. But is there anything in that last paragraph that is not a fact?
Favre had a routine throw to an open man to win the game. Instead he choked away a Super Bowl for the Vikings. That's it. Deal with it. Your boy choked.
When it comes to this player you are deranged. When you hate someone enough to root for them to get "carried off the field in a box" and openly root for them to get "high-lowed every week" I just can't take anything you say seriously. You actually believe the guy did not run because hes soft
I dislike Peyton Manning. I root against him. The difference is my dislike for him does not spill over into an unhealthy obsession. Brett Favre could die in a car accident today and it would make your week
i believe your link was for 1998 money. Mine was for 1997. Favre was the highest paid player in 1997, and he didn't give team any more of a discount than eli manning. You can say favre could have gotten more on the open market, that is YOUR OPINION. I can say, well maybe eli would have got more on the open market, therefor giving his team a discount. I don't want to drop this because numerous times on this thread you have said certain things that seemed to be fact, but were not. I think i have proven my case.
Ive linked both 1997 and 1998 money. He was not the highest paid in either year. In 1997 he was not even the highest paid player or QB in his own division. Trent Dilfer earned more in 1997, as did Barry Sanders, and Scott Mitchell was making a slight fraction less than Favre. I could go through the entire league and list all the players who made more but i really don't feel like doing that. He was not even the highest paid player in the NFC North in 1997 let alone the NFL
The article says "98 money" the article was published in 1999. If favre was the highest paid player in nfl history prior to starting the 97 season, how could he not be the highest paid qb in the league? He had to be at some point.
Even aside from being Eli's brother.. he plays for an AFC team that rarely has any effect on the Giants or anything a Giant fan would care about whatsoever and he's an incredible QB. He doesn't have a dislikable personality, IMO (he's a class act), and he's certainly nowhere near as selfish as Favre.
Rooting against Tony Romo or Donovan McNabb, etc.. that makes plenty of sense.. but Peyton Manning? Why? Because the majority of BBI roots FOR him?
You have an article that says he's not the highest paid, i have one that says he was. I'm all done. My opinion is that favre didn't give his team any real discount, and i feel that i have backed that up.
Ill paste to you exactly what i wrote earlier on this thread
I started posting here in Jan 03
JoeMP2003 : 2/1/2010 8:41 pm
If you could even find 5 mentions of Brett Favre from me in the 5 1/2 years between Jan 03 and June 08, that would be a lot. Never brought the guy up, never defended him whatsoever.
All of a sudden after he retired and unretired in the 08 offseason it became fashionable here to bash the guy by spouting some absolutely ridiculous nonsense. It was at that point I started to defend the guy because i felt a lot of the criticism was unfair. Every point ive made about Favre has been in the interest of fairness
Trust me. You won't find a #4 hanging in my closet. You won't see a Favre poster on my wall. Im not even a huge Favre fan. Im merely defending a guy who is as slam dunk a first ballot HOFer as any player in the past quarter century
Peyton Manning is an immensely hard worker that demands his teammates do the same.
What a dick.
He should be more like Favre and jerk his teammates around each offseason about whether or not he's going to retire. Then "make up his mind" after camp is over. Class act.
I saw this thread at 8pm on 1/31, it had 10 posts Â
Favre is super talented and blossomed under Holgrem and his great staff. But all those years of monumental success had an effect on Favre. He basically believed that he can carry the team on his back, and the legend of himself grew in his own mind. This lead to him becoming a poor decision maker under Ray Rhodes/Mike Sherman as he tried to overcompensate for lesser teams. Once McCarthy reigned him in, you saw what he was capable of when he didn't try to be Superman. But once crunchtime came, Favre now has it in his head that he has to "make the special play" regardless of risk. That seems to be his MO now. He played well under Childress, but when that penultimate moment came, he usurped the coaching and freelanced into a mistake. Such is the legend of Favre now.
we all have players who we like and dislike and I just don't like Peyton. I don't hate Peyton though, I don't openly root for the guy to get injured like some others here on other players, I wish him no misfortune personally, I just like to see him lose and not play well
This is all my doing? Who brought up Brett Favre on this thread? It wasn't me. I came into here to talk about the Jets. The subject of Favre and my defense of him was brought up, and it went from there. I replied to a couple of posters who brought it up, they then replied to me, and thats how a thread gets 300 posts
Excuse me for being respectful enough to grant someone a reply
Sorry but i don't pretend to know these guys like you do
By all accounts Peyton is a great guy? What about the account of a woman who named him in a sexual harrassment suit and then sued him for slander (and he settled with her)
Thats not the reason i dislike Peyton though. I don't pretend to know any of these guys personally
You knew the result of your actions, you went for it anyway. We are to believe this was mere chance, your following up the Favre comments and the inevitable devolution into another mind numbing argument?
At any point, at any time, in the past 2 years, you could have opted to walk away from any of these threads. Time and again, without fail, you not only never decline a Favre argument, you push and poke and prod to generate one.
You're quickly becoming a one-note, and you're generally too good of a football poster for that.
Fair enough. Just a strange choice, IMO. Peyton seems to work as hard if not harder than anyone and is widely respected as one of the greatest QB's of all time and he's still in his prime. There's really nothing he does that I could see as a reason to want him to lose. Favre possesses WAY more of those qualities.. regardless of his football talent, IMO.. but maybe that's the point. Maybe it's a matter of defending the guy whom most BBI'ers vilify and rooting against the one that most BBI'ers praise.
Again, I did not bring Brett Favre up on this thread, Brett Favre was brought up in regards to me and i replied to it. Those are facts. I did not come into this thread with the intention of getting involved in another long Brett Favre debate
24 playoff games, most in history, play in enough you will have some down ones. I can mention the down games of other HOF caliber QB in postseason, many of whom greatly outweigh Favres down moments, but then id get accused of deflecting when im merely bringing some perspective to the situation and how silly it is how you harp on some of Favre's down moments
You are a great poster, one of my favorite ever on this site. Im not just saying that. I mean that. But on this subject you say a lot of stupid shit because you hate the player. You actually stated he did not run on the last play because he is soft
I don't think im the only person who has ever disliked Peyton Manning. Using a Giants site as some sample size isn't exactly ideal either as he is the brother of our popular QB. Giants fans probably other than Colt fans by and large like Peyton more than any fan base. I don't really care for him though and i know that puts me in a minority among Giant fans
Ugh, I'm trying to be polite here and state things in a cordial manner Â
Again, Favre was not just brought up on this thread by someone else, he was brought up on this thread specifically in regards to me. I replied to it. They then replied back to me. Others joined in, and i replied to anyone who addressed me, thats how this thread got where it was at
Believe me i did not come here with the intention of getting involved in another Brett Favre debate for the 1 millionth time
these threads go round and round? Look no further than here:
Quote:
The Giants offense
JoeMP2003 : 2/1/2010 8:21 pm
during the SB run averaged 21.2 ppg
Care to guess how many teams in the last 35 years won a SB by scoring less than that in their playoff run?
I'll tell you. One. a whopping one.
Anyone who doesn't think the defense was FAR AND AWAY the biggest reason we won 42, I don't know what to tell you. And not only was 21.2 good enough to win a SB, it was good enough to beat 3 of the top 5 scoring teams in the NFL that year including the best offense in history
This is the standard post from Joe when discussing the giants SB run. He uses it to backhand Eli for some insane reason. It is also the reason his moniker as JoeyStats is growing.
He takes something that all of us have seen and he tries to tell us that what we saw didn't happen. He tries to tell us that eli didn't have a hand in winning the Super Bowl, but was simply along for a magical ride that the defense delivered. He looks at STATS and claims that our offensive output was poor BECAUSE OF OUR POINT AVERAGE!!! He won't even acknowledge that Eli is the only QB in history to throw two 4th quarter TD, and the only one to win a SB by throwing a TD pass under two minutes when it was needed to win. Instead, he says there was only one other team who scored less average points while winning a SB.
He constantly tells us things that are the opposite of what we see. He tells us that Favre didn't screw up at the end of the Saints game even though we all know he did. It doesn't make Favre a bad QB, but joe can't separate the two arguments.
He tells us that sanchez this year was just like eli in '07 despite the fact we all saw otherwise. He debates it to death as if he has insight the rest of the board is lacking.
This isn't about the Jets, Eli, Farve, and least of all about hat fat fuck Rex Ryan. It is about the tear Joe is on where his version of reality is completely detached from everyone else's. and he's proud of it.
I didn't say he was soft...what I said was more damning...I said he chickened out of contact just like he did in 2004 against the Vikings down by the goal line.
Again I am trying to word this politely as possible, but it is difficult
What part of "you can walk away and never do, you instead seek this out and revel in the discussion, it is your own damn fault" do you not comprehend?
You are the common denominator here. The antagonists may change, the instigators may change, the civil debaters on your side or the other side may change, but you are the constant.
The first comments about Favre were in connection to your massive meltdown last week. A meltdown that you're coming close to repeating right now.
No one is going to take you seriously in an argument about Favre or the Jets. You've argued way too passionately on the subject to have any veneer of objectivity, and people still remember your gems such as , "Eli Fucking Manning."
The more you talk on the subject, the more you go from being one of the better posters on the site to being a one-note joke. Maybe others baited you, but you're the one who keeps adding fuel to the fire here.
You've said at least twice now that you're "done" with this thread, but you keep coming back to bash your head against the wall some more. You're not going to change anyone's opinions here. Just walk away and ignore this crap. Please.
Because who his father was.
He talks too much and got 2 gifts to get in the playoffs.
Because the Jets played well in 2 playoff wins.
Claiming they're the show in town now.
His prediction they were the favorites to win the SB.
But usually there's a reason. People who don't like Peyton Manning are usually people who are fans of AFC teams or just people with irrational jealousy or some other ridiculous reason.
You ARE a Giant fan so I don't see what reason you'd have to hate Peyton Manning from a football perspective.. and he's obviously not a guy who has off-field issues that make him dislikable, either.
Given the entire situation of that particular play, I think it may be in the running for the worst play in the history of the sport. It's that confounding.
He takes something that all of us have seen and he tries to tell us that what we saw didn't happen. He tries to tell us that eli didn't have a hand in winning the Super Bowl
Um, no thats not what i said. I said the defense was leaps and bounds the key to that run and enabled us to win through a couple of offensive performances that the overwhelming majority of the time would have gotten us beat. This is true and is clearly evidenced by the fact that we won a SB scoring less in the postseason than all but one team in the last 35 years
Quote:
He won't even acknowledge that Eli is the only QB in history to throw two 4th quarter TD, and the only one to win a SB by throwing a TD pass under two minutes when it was needed to win. Instead, he says there was only one other team who scored less average points while winning a SB.
I do acknowledge that. Do you acknowledge that 17 points would be enough to beat the Pats maybe 1 out of every 20 times you played them, and we were fortunate that day was the one, in large part because our defense held the best offense in history to 14 points? Do you acknowledge the fact that Eli was very fortunate the defense allowed him a stage to do what he did in the 4th quarter as opposed to the game already being over most times when you have 3 points on the board to start the 4th quarter?
Quote:
This isn't about the Jets, Eli, Farve, and least of all about hat fat fuck Rex Ryan. It is about the tear Joe is on where his version of reality is completely detached from everyone else's. and he's proud of it.
Again, my version of reality is pretty damn on point with 90% of the people who watched that playoff run. This is a Giants site, which is the only reason im in the minority
Who doesn't have objectivity on Favre or the Jets again?
Before this year I felt Favre would play well and pretty much since the first time I saw that Jet defense in week 1 I knew they had a formidable squad this year
I was in the minority around here on both counts. Id say this year did nothing but prove me right on both Favre and the Jets
Yes, what Favre did against the Saints is worse than Eli's performance against Carolina in '05. Why, because its not the first time Favre choked in the playoffs and blew his teams chance for a win. That was Eli's first playoff game and quite frankly the whole offense sucked that day.
See, thats my opinion. It differs from yours and possibly others. And since it differs from yours, yours is not fact and makes it debatable.
This was the simple point kicker was trying to make last night.
My point is the only logical one that can be concluded there...he chickened out of getting hit. What else could it be when a guy throws a no look underhand pass 3 yard beyond the LOS down near the goalline when down 24-10 in a playoff game?
even in your reply to me, you belittle eli's play by saying he was fortunate.
And I'm sorry, but this is wrong:
Quote:
Again, my version of reality is pretty damn on point with 90% of the people who watched that playoff run. This is a Giants site, which is the only reason im in the minority
I guarantee you if you asked people who watched the SB why the giants won, you'd get responses ranging from Eli to Tyree to Plaxico. You wouldn't get many votes for the D. Did the D play excellently - yes. That doesn't mean eli didn't play well too.
You again can't seem to separate these topics. Either that or you refuse to for some insane reason.
That others are not objective doesn't mean that you are.
This is the second thread that has run up hundreds of posts because you can't just walk away. You know you're not going to change the opinions of Terps et al, but you keep hammering away at the same argument. And the result is that you're becoming a parody.
And again, you've already said twice that you were finished here. Why keep coming back to this thread if that's true?
a better version of Bobby Engram. I didn't call him Bobby Engram. And Bobby Engram had a pretty damn solid career. They have very similar skillsets. If Bobby Engram had a 151 target season hed have caught 100 balls too. He came close a couple of times himself
Ill just agree to disagree as much as humanly possible
Quote:
I guarantee you if you asked people who watched the SB why the giants won, you'd get responses ranging from Eli to Tyree to Plaxico. You wouldn't get many votes for the D.
Beat the greatest offense in NFL history by a final of 17-14 and hit Tom Brady 23 times. And it was more about Eli.
That was as dominant a performance by a defensive line the SB has ever seen
Liking Brett Favre more than Peyton Manning is totally bizarre to me. Peyton Manning is as hard a worker as there has ever been in the league, and has also never missed a game. I will concede that Favre is a warrior as well, although that has been overblown (I thought last week's game was actually quite amazing with the beating he was taking). The difference is that Peyton would rather not make the huge play in the end and wants his team to win, while Favre would rather try for the big play, than play it safe and win. This was evident last week, although there is of course the excellent argument that Favre is just a mental midget.
Who cares whether it is better to play like dogshit a whole playoff game and lose, rather than play well and then lose the game for your team because of a boneheded play? YOU LOSE BOTH WAYS!
Favre's stupidity has now cost his team's numerous playoff games, and for all of his great playoff success, only has one Super Bowl to show for it in his 18 years in the league.
I would rather have Peyton Manning and his occasional clunkers, than Favre and his idiotic end of game plays, because I know Peyton won't make those mistakes in a close game. In the aggregate, a Peyton-type player is then going to come out with more Super Bowl titles that way (as he is about to, and will probably win another one or two down the line).
And I'll say it again, as crazy as Joe thinks it is: Give me Eli Manning in a big playoff game over Brett Favre any day of the week. Folks outside of Giants land don't think that statement is as crazy as Joe thinks, especially if they were shown the evidence of what Favre has done numerous times in big spots vs, what Eli has done, and is capable of doing in the future. I also don't see why the statement is so crazy, because ELI BEAT FAVRE HEADS-UP ON BRETT"S TURF! If that isn't empirical evidence, I don't know what is.
Yea, including several years on Bears teams QB'd by Jim Miller
Bobby Engram had a heck of a career. You catch 650 balls for nearly 8,000 yards in the NFL, its foolish to thumb your nose at the player. I also, for the one millionth time, called Steve Smith a better version of Bobby Engram. In the dictionary, here is how the word "better" is described.
betâ‹…ter
1  /ˈbɛtər/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [bet-er]
–adjective, compar. of good with best as superl.
1. of superior quality or excellence
That also means Jake Delhomme and McNabb are CLEARLY superior to Eli in your opinion. After all, they beat him on his turf. If that isn't empirical evidence, I don't know what is. I guess.
trust me, stop now..Otherwise you'll be here until tomorrow..Do you think he will ever see one single point of yours? Come on, you should know better..:)
Ill give him his credit because while I do not like him I do not have a glaring bias when it comes to him.
Im still waiting for him to cap off the first ever post season in his career where he played consistently well from start to finish. Is that too much to ask? Just once?
in getting his team the one thing McNabb and Delhomme's teams don't have.
Hate on Eli all you want. He took the field down 4 points against a team playing for the title of Greatest Team Ever...and walked off that field a champion.
If Eli never plays another snap, everything was worth it for that drive alone.
Smith's season wasn't that special because he had 151 targets and that's the only reason he had 107 catches. He only ran 8 yard routes and never broke a tackle. Well how good is he that the defense knew he would stay in an 8 yard box and still couldn't stop him from catching 71% of the balls thrown at him which was 4th in football for guys playing significant time.
Joe, you must realize how you're debating two different things right? Two different type of situations. You see, I'm talking about in close, end of game situations...Delhomme torched us and the game was never close, and it was Eli's first career playoff game. In 2006, unlike Favre, Eli did nothing to lose us that game, and he actually marched us down the field with 4 minutes left to tie the game. McNabb then marched his team down the field as well and won the game for the Eagles (I think McNabb is a great QB, so there is no debate there). 2009, also, not a terribly close game.
it's all just stats. McNabb put up certain stats so he would have done that in any situation. How about this. If McNabb was in Eli's shoes, he would have literally choked away his lunch.....on the field.
Joe, the issue with you is that all of your stats cloud the qualitative aspects and differences of each game...it is hard to compare games on a basis like that. This isn't baseball.
By the way, as crappy as I think Delhomme has become...he played as well in that Super Bowl as any QB I have ever seen.
If McNabb was in Eli's shoes im thinking odds are we may not need that last drive because we probably have more than 10 points on the scoreboard with 2:42 left
Joe, YES!!! And I'm not alone at all! Your team loses both ways! I'd rather my QB throw up some clunkers in the playoffs, but play well in close games, because in the end that guy will come away with more wins than someone who plays well and then folds and chokes late a la Favre.
Regardless of the game and the situation, when you get shutout i don't want to hear its the same thing as what Favre did last week or even against the Giants in 2007. Its mindless
out why JoeyStats keeps harping on the point totals the D gave up and how it makes eli a lesser QB, then please let me know.
also, please let me know why he's even brough Delhomme and McNabb into the conversation by saying if their defenses did the job, they would have rings, too?
He continually, and let me stress, continually makes it sound like the only reason the giants beat the Pats was because of their D. And he claims 90% of football fans agree with him.
So the flow of the game means nothing, it's just stats? McNabb did this in this game so he would have done that in that game? That's just not how team sports works.
I'm done, we just have an extremely different philosophical perspective on how team sports works. It's way more than just numbers. You always seem to look at other guys with the glass half full and all your own guys with the glass half empty.
Peyton played very well in these playoffs so far. Lets see if he can cap off the first good post season run from start to finish in his career. And no, him sucking ass for the majority of his 06 run does not qualify as that, since he played about as poorly in that post season as just about any SB winning QB has
In one situation you never had a chance, primarily your QB sucked ass. In the other the QB at least kept you in the game, a game you could have won if several others did not have major gaffes themselves
I just cannot take hearing what one guy did last week is a choke and a guy getting shut out isn't
My bad, I sure have worded my statement better, I meant the Divisional round against Baltimore this year, but you answered it saying he has played well thus far in the playoffs.
IMO, I really don't think it matters if Peyton does not put up big numbers, as long as he wins the game, he has catapulted himself into the "greatest" of all time debate.
McNabb played well, with his 3 INTs, including one that ended the game when they could have mustered up a drive to win or tie (better situation than Eli was in), after losing his lunch on the field....but Eli didn't play that well in the Super Bowl and the D won the game. Am I getting that right?
anything, but in this shitshow of a thread, who cares. Check out this fucking quote from Favre after the Packers won the Super Bowl (back when I was a senior in high school)...
Quote:
After the game, Favre reflected on his long road to becoming a Super Bowl champion, which included the death of his friend Mark Harvy in a car accident during the season. "Through everything I really believed I'd be here today. Right here in this stairwell, talking about being world champions. My best friend's gone forever. Trouble never seems to be far away, and the future won't be all rosy, but they can't take this away from me. Thirty years from now, the kids will be getting ready for Super Bowl LXI, and NFL Films will drag out Steve Sabol -- he'll be around 102 then—and he'll talk about how Brett Favre fought through such adversity. And there will be other players and coaches. But I know this: We etched our place in history today."[3]
Seriously, how is this guy not a gigantic asshole? Link - ( New Window )
I'll take the way we lost to Carolina and Eli's play in a game we were never in over Favre choking away a chance for a win in a conference championship game (again).
If someone could please show me a good example of Favre coming up big in the fourth quarter of a big playoff game in the past 10 years, I would LOVE to see it. I really don't give a damn how well he played for three plus quarters, if you can't close it out then I don't want you near my team.
McNabbs 3rd INT came with about 20 seconds left from his own 4 yard line and no timeouts. Its silly to even count that, but you're going to label it as a pick that could have won the game for them?
in these last few threads, from memories of recent SB's, to the rule book and much more
This SB was played 5 years ago, not like it was in 1978. You basically bashed the guy for throwing a 3rd pick on a drive where he had a shot to win the game. It was essentially a hopeful lob over the middle of the field and a prayer for a miracle in a dire circumstance
than our offense did in our SB win. Our D didn't need a Manning-Tyree miracle. They whipped the Pats offense from start to finish as Tom Brady himself profusely acknowledged. Given the Giants' tradition on defense and the fans' pride about that tradition, I have no idea how or why this idea is the least bit controversial.
So what if the "fans" remember Manning? There are fans out there who think that dragging a stuffed eagle in a Westbrook jersey around a stadium parking lot affects the outcomes of football games. You probably don't want your average "fan" making critical decisions about your favorite football team yet you rely on them to opine on what truly determines success on the field?
you keep saying that Eli was carried by the D throughout the SB run.
I think debating McNabb's 3rd INT might be a wee bit less inconsequential, especially when you are asserting that McNabb could have a ring, too, if only his D played better.
I've been wrong twice, and you were wrong about the other one as well, big deal. You've been wrong about much, much more on these threads.
I guess McNabb's prior two INTs are still better than Eli's one?
I guess Eli coming up big and winning a Super Bowl on a last minute-drive is still not as good as continuing to throw INTs to lose your team the game?
We should all let Eli know that he needs to start throwing dumb-ass picks in the end of games to be a great QB as opposed to what he usually does in the end of close games: WIN.
the point is controversial because Joe's stance isn't that both the D AND Eli played well, it is that the D carried Eli to a win and carried him throughout the playoffs.
For some reason, two units apparently can't both play well in Joe's line of logic.
Our D was obviously phenomenal in that game, but let's not forget that they gave up a fourth quarter TD that should have lost us the game...it was up to Eli to lead us down the field and answer their score with a score: He did. Mission accomplished.
If they wanted to walk off the field as winners, anyway.
What's amusing is that Joe actually criticized our offense after we lost 45-38 on SNF to Philly this year. He said something to the extent of (and I'm sorry if I get this wrong, I don't remember the exact quote) playing the game the developed in front of you.
I guess that didn't apply in SB XLII. It's not enough to win...you have to be THE reason your team won.
17 points was enough to beat the best offense of all time because our defense came to play that day and put on a performance that was just about as good as any D has authored in a SB when you take into account the competition we faced, the best offense in the history of the league
21 was enough to beat Dallas because our defense abused them to a degree that they had not been abused with Owens in the lineup that year outside of maybe one off day all year. We stopped them 3 times in that 4th quarter on drives that started at near midfield because the offense could not do squat or move the ball at all when it came time to try and kill clock. The D bailed us out by getting stop after stop
The defense played great. A terrific performance. However, they wore out at the end of the game. If the game was only in the hands of the defense, the Giants would have lost 14-10.
No one is trying to take away anything from the defense. But to say that Manning didn't factor into that win in a huge way is just dense. And that's not to mention that the goal of the game was to make it a low-scoring affair. The Giants offense won the time of possession (albeit barely), which helped the defense immensely.
Comparatively, Joe's argument would be like saying that OJ Anderson and the offense deserve no credit for Super Bowl XXV because the defense held the mighty Bills to 19 points.
Also, this will be foreign to Joe as he doesn't understand the qualitative differences in how games are played...but, the fact that there were two touchdowns in that game at the end when both teams started throwing the ball more, shouldn't that sort of tell you how the game would have been different if we had a different game plan?
Our game plan in that game was to keep Brady off of the field...we did that by using the short passing game, and running the ball. If we had decided to open it up, then we would have scored a ton of more points, similar to the week 17 game where Eli lit up the Pats D for 35 points. The problem is that Coughlin, in some boneheaded decision to try to win the game as opposed to having Eli put up better numbers and have our offense score a ton of points, decided to use the keep Brady off the field game plan. I think it worked.
there's a statement, "60 for 60." That clearly means, that what separates the men from the boys, is how you react when push comes to shove..How you react when the chips or the game os on the line..That's why even though The Packers had a great D all those years in the 60s, it was Bart Starr who had the ball when the game was on the line..Same with Unitas..Brady...
Sure, what you do up to the moment of truth, makes it possible to have that moment of truth..But when you reach that moment of truth, it's how you do, more often than not at that point, that determines your legacy..Stats may get you into the HOF, but for the purists who follow the game, it's what you do when the gun is pointed at your head..
That said, as great as they were, our D choked when the chips were down, when that moment of truth arrived..Eli, didn't
A lot of the reason our D played so well and gave up so few points was because our offense executed the game plan so well and kept the ball out of Brady's hands.
that the game was low scoring by design, is the biggest heaping of bullshit Ive ever seen in my life
The offense still had 9 or 10 drives that day like they do in every game. They didn't come in intending to score 17 points thinking it would be enough to beat the highest scoring offense of all time
Joe, your last post proved you have no idea how football is played. I gave you the benefit of the doubt up until then because I have always liked you as a poster, but that last post is horrific.
The offense still had 9 or 10 drives that day like they do in every game. They didn't come in intending to score 17 points thinking it would be enough to beat the highest scoring offense of all time
While they might not have intentionally not scored every drive, they certainly intentionally tried to shorten the game, just like the giants did in '90 to beat the Bills.
Are you that dense that you won't concede a point by reverting to making shit up?
Not necessarily mutually exclusive. If Joe really claimed that Eli played poorly, I disagree with that. Eli played a pretty decent, mistake-free game as I recall.
However, he did not produce the type of world-beating effort that would have been necessary to beat a typical Pats performance that season. Not even close. We only scored 3 points through 3 quarters, which meant game over against that Pats team - unless the defense came up huge, which ours did.
I had no idea what about this thread could lead to so many posts... Â
here's the problem. The rest of us think the defense played great. I think they were fantastic all playoffs long. But I also think Eli was fantastic all playoffs long.
Joe doesn't think that the two can be that way. He keeps offering proof that Eli wasn't that good by pointing to how good the defense was.
also Go Terps - I agree with Joe sucking off the superstar athletes like he does in all of the sports he likes...championships dont matter..just the stats and the ME persona
Once again, they did not take the field on Feb 3rd 2008 with the intention of scoring 17 points, 3 entering the 4th, thinking it would be enough to beat the 2007 New England Patriots, the highest scoring offense of all time
Remember, if when we didn't score, we moved the ball well enough where we kept tilting the field-position battle in our favor. The Patriots starting field position was terrible most of the game.
Joe, obviously we would have liked to have a bit more, but as the game went along, we saw what was going on, and limited our high-risk plays...that led to a lot of punts from around midfield, giving the Pats crappy field position. A lot of the game plan was modified because of how badly we were beating the Pats upfront...but instead of changing the gameplan to take more chances, the coaching staff did the right thing, and decided to keep pushing the Pats back more and more.
Thats exactly what the Giants were trying to do. Not score to avoid a high scoring game. And hope the defense could hold the best offense in history to 14 points on their 9 drives
nearly as much as people here are making it out to be. They had a really nice long drive in the first quarter that ended in a FG, and from that point on we had trouble sustaining any drives at all
from that point on we had trouble sustaining any drives at all
Off the top of my head there were at least two other drives I could think of..The drive that ended with a deflection off Smith's hands for an INT and of course the final drive
We're not that far apart. I wouldn't call Eli fantastic. That's a word I reserve for Doug Williams/Marcus Allen type performances. I think Eli had a very steady, mistake-free, turnover-free string of playoff games with occasional flashes of brilliance and luck (let's face it, the Tyree play was a miracle).
The problem is that, while you say everyone thinks the D played very well, people still automatically have this ranking where it's Eli first, the defense second, which just isn't true, IMO.
In the end, it might not be as important as we're all making it out but I still don't think it's true.
the giants absolutely did attempt to shorten the game. Keep in mind, that there was actually another team facing them. It was glorious to beat a team that hadn't lost, but it wasn't easy. They played a game of field position as much as they could and they absolutely tried to avoid a shootout.
After that drive the Pats held the ball for roughly 30 of the final 50 minutes. Again the idea that we played hold the ball like SB 25 is such a load of bunk its ridiculous
Even with the longest drive in SB history on the first drive T.O.P. broke even in the game
Holy shit Joe, forget TOP, did you not notice how we kept moving the ball well enough to keep pushing the Pats back and tilt field position in our favor? It isn't just about TOP...we moved the ball to midfield and limited our high-risk stuff, and opted to punt and move the Pats back because of how well our DL was playing. Football is a total team sport. We executed our game plan perfectly and executed our adjustments very well. I think the initial game plan would have called for more high-risk stuff in the middle of the field, but we saw how well the DL was playing and how BB was actually playing into our hands, and adjusted a bit. We decided that punting from the plus 45 was better than trying risky stuff to score on each drive (doesn't mean we weren't TRYING to score, but the play calling was altered). We moved the ball very, very well in our own end of the field.
I guess my issue is that Joe feels the need to somehow crap on Eli when we discuss other QB's or other teams, as if the two subjects are intertwined.
Favre fucked up? so what, Joe has to show us the Eli fucks up too. Jets make a deep run this year. So what, Joe has to say that we should be happy because Sanchez and Eli had mirror-image performances and were carried by their D's.
Giants win a SB - Carolina and Philly don't. So what, eli only has a ring because of the D.
It all comes back to there being demerits against eli. Why? I sure the fuck don't know.
The stupid potshots at Joe have to stop. So you disagree with him. No need to make it petty and personal. Is this how you guys interact with people in real life?
I understand and agree with your other points, but strongly disagree with your exception to the word "fantastic." That Eli was instrumental(yes the D was too of course) in each and every playoff game when needed against teams (the last 3) that compiled a 45-6 record, makes his performance fantastic..Unless of course, stats per game arfe extremely important to you
I don't care if the Pats started on the 5 yard line every drive, and they didn't, you are overrating how we basically had them backed up on their own 15 to start every drive. In fact I think their worst field position all day came on a drive where they got a holding penalty on a kick return which had nothing to do with our offense playing field position
The fact is, you don't expect to hold the Patriots to 14 points, ever. You don't expect to win any game against that group with 17 on the board offensively
We did. Because our defense played about the best game any unit has played in a SB given their level of comp
with the intention to score every drive. But the key to winning is getting the most out of every drive possible while minimizing mistakes and gaining field position.
out in the last 2 minutes had nothing to do with it.
I never thought I'd see a Giant fan disparage what Eli and the offense did in that final drive. I still don't think I have, because I don't think we're dealing with a Giants fan here.
anyone know what the score was with 2:36 left to go in the game?
Was anyone riding the D's jock when Brady and Co. got the ball with 7 minutes remaining and methodically drove down the field to take the lead?
It's nice that Joe can pick and choose the details he remembers from the game. I bet he wouldn't be talking about the defense's great performance if we'd lost 14-10, you know, seeing that Brady and Welker and Moss basically walked the ball into the End Zone from 80 yards out on the Pat's last scoring drive...
They BOTH played a huge role...they did it equally and executed a total team game plan. Do you think our defense would have given up only 14 points had our offense not moved the ball well enough to punt from mid-field almost every time? Of course not, no matter how well the defense was playing. This was a team victory! I can tell you don't know much about that since you think Favre is a good QB for a team, but this shouldn't be too hard.
Youre right. Im an idiot for thinking Favre is a good QB for a team. Hes only won more games than any QB ever and has had one losing season in 18 years
What a horrid guy to have. all he does is win. Who wants that?
....and that everything about Favre is "good" and "great" and "HoF worthy".. but everything about Eli is "lucky" about "the D" or something negative. I just don't get it.
Desmond Howard doesnt have a great game in that Superbowl, Favre doesnt get the win, and he's basically in the same category as Marino. Except Marino didnt choke as much in big games, he just didnt have the team around him.
18 seasons in the playoffs, a HOF QB, so much success, but only one Super Bowl title (and only two appearances) and a lot of good teams (particularly great OLs). Why is that? Could it be that he made bad decisions to lose games?
Continue making a fool out of yourself by not knowing the rules, thinking a Tampa 2 D is designed to take away short stuff, not knowing the result of a SB played just 5 years ago
Continue making a fool out of yourself by not knowing the rules, thinking a Tampa 2 D is designed to take away short stuff, not knowing the result of a SB played just 5 years ago
To use your reasoning...would you rather have an offense that couldn't get out of its way for 3 quarters but then pulled out the win...or...would you rather have a guy play well for 4 quarters and then blow it in the final play?
At this point, I don't expect you to adhere to or even follow your own reasoning.
FMiC
JoeMP2003 : 12:58 pm
The only reason we "needed" that last drive to win is because the offense couldn't get out of their own damn way for much of that day before that
A completely bullshit point of view. Why couldn't our offense get out of their own damn way, but when the Pats failed to move the ball it was only because of a Hurculean defensive showing?
The holes in your logic would make the Swiss envious.
the biggest reason why Eli and the offense didn't put up more points was because the defense couldn't get the fuck off the field.
Eli bailed them out by scoring at the end of the half to tie it (a legendary drive, imo), and then Romo choked the game away late. Defense didn't even make a stop until the last minute of the 3rd Q.
In the last 35 years of professional football. One offense won a SB by scoring less in the post season than us. One. 1. Uno.
You can call that 'just stats' all you want. People have a habit of not liking stats when they don't fit into their agenda. Im just not gonna sit there and wax poetically about what a great job our offense did in the 2007 playoffs. Sorry. Little thing about facts getting in the way
Joe, how could you possibly discount the fact that we moved the ball very well the whole game, in order to get into beneficial field position scenarios for when we punt? How does this escape you?
If Favre were our QB, we may have scored more points, but we would not have put our defense in beneficial positions to succeed, and it would have been a higher scoring game, and likely a loss. And if the game played out as it did, Favre surely would have thrown a pick like he always does late in games. You think Favre makes that check down to Smith on 3rd and 11? Yeah, right...that would have been an insult to him...he would have gunned it between three defenders, and been picked off.
QB's in the history of the Super Bowl have thrown 2 TD passes while trailing in the 4th quarter of a game. Joe Montana and Eli Manning. But really what Eli did wasn't all that special. It was the defense. By far.
you should fucking leave knowing that ONE and only ONE QB has thrown two TD passes in the 4th quarter of a SB and only ONE has thrown a TD when he needed to win the game.
Suck on that big, fucking stat since you love them so much.
Don't worry, I already know you will conveniently ignore it because that stat doesn't fit your agenda.
"Continue making a fool out of yourself by not knowing the rules, thinking a Tampa 2 D is designed to take away short stuff, not knowing the result of a SB played just 5 years ago"
HAHAHAH, when the hell did I say that? I said quite the opposite actually. I praised Eli for taking what was given to him whereas Favre would have tried to force the ball into the teeth of the defense. You misconstrued that as us game planning for short passes because we were afraid of Eli. It was total bull shit.
Well, I guess Joe is gone now, so the fun is over. Amazing how one poster can have such a poor grasp of the differences between football games, and the qualitative aspects of the games. He is completely lost on the sport.
Who cares how many points an offense scores throughout the playoffs? Â
If they win, that's what matters. Football isn't a team sport. It's not about scoring a TD as quickly as possible on every single drive. A lot of teams rely on their defense, rely on a running game, the quality of opponents defenses are always different, etc.. there are WAY too many factors involved to just look at total points scored and use that statistic to slight Eli.
Anyone who watched that playoff run knows that Eli Manning was an integral part of the Giants winning the Super Bowl that season. If Brett Favre was the Giants QB that year, the Giants would NOT have won the title and I can say that with utmost certainty. Period.
Last night, that dumping your opinion into an argument and labelling it as
some sort of universal truth, is the height of arrogance. This has happened too much on this thread. Thanks to RinR for catching on.
Terps, Joe DOES think it is better to have a QB who plays well for three quarters and shits the bed in the fourth. Read back on the thread and you'll see.
I just love the fact that Eli Manning, who hadn't won a playoff game prior to 2007 and hasn't won one since, shit the bed entirely in his last playoff game, shit the bed entirely in the last 2 weeks this year with the playoffs potentially in our grasp, is now the standard for which we judge clutchness
FMiC- If you know how to add and subtract and read my post you wouldn't be mentioning the 72 phins
Yep...the 1972 Dolphins scored 20, 21, and 14 points in their postseason run, for an average of 18.3 points as opposed to the 2007 Giants' average of 21.5 points.
So at least this thread created some interesting trivia, if nothing else.
my mind that somebody could watch the SB win and claim that Eli was carried by the D and give as minimal amount of credit to him as possible.
He's on record to say that Samuel's dropped INT and the Tyree catch were the only reasons eli succeeded, as if hypotheticals should take away from the accomplishment. And then he makes the ridiculous claim that 90% of football fans know what he knows.
I just don't know why it is so hard to give both the defense and the offense credit? How does a Giants fan diminish one of the best wins in team history? Really?
there it is...the coup de grace...blaming the last two weeks on Eli, when the defense gave up points in (iirc) all but two drives in the last two games.
I didn't blame Eli for the last 2 games, but he did shit the bed. Par for the course in his entire career late in the regular season. Eli has a habit of doing that. His Career TD vs INT in Nov/Dec is barely 1:1 (but those are just stats, and stats don't mean a thing if they don't fit the mold of Eli hero status)
Now you're blaming the last 2 weeks of the season on Eli Manning? The Vikings game didn't even HAVE playoff implications. Yeah.. let's just ignore the penalty on the TD pass to Smith in the Panthers game.. ignore the Manningham fumble... we'll just chalk it up to Eli "shitting the bed"...
I mean, really.. you can't make this shit up. And while we're at it, we'll just ignore the 144.4 QBR he posted in the Week 15 game against Washington when he threw for over 260 yards, 3 TDs and 0 picks.. but yeah, I guess we'll just conveniently leave that one out.
I'd love to have discussions about what statistical assumptions you made regarding the underlying data to estimate your inference from the stats. Also, how you get around the problems of comparing statistical apples to oranges.
FMiC- If you know how to add and subtract and read my post you wouldn't be mentioning the 72 phins
Should I continue to add and divide? As far as I know, you don't subtract when generating averages, and I've found two teams who scored less than the giants and another one who matched, and I'm only to 1970.
over the last 35 years one team has won a SB by scoring less than us in post season. Thats a fact. Take it for what it is. Lets also not act like 3 and a half fucking decades is not a sufficient sample size of time
Now you want to go back to 1970 and brag we may have been the 3rd or 4th lowest scoring offense ever to win a SB. As if that does nothing but strengthen the point that our offensive effort in the playoffs was one of the least productive of any SB winner ever
Eli threw 6 picks to 1 INT. He had a QB rating of 102.2. He completed over 60% of his passes. AND HE WON THE FREAKING SUPER BOWL! HE WAS NAMED MV FREAKING P! MY GOD!
I've been taking it for what it has been since the first time you mentioned it - utter horseshit.
If there has ever been a stat used solely for the purpose of furthering a shaky viewpoint, that is he posterchild for it.
There are sufficient details to show that both eli and the D played well in the SB run. There are also sufficient evidence to show that each unit had plays they did not make where the other unit had to come in and save the day.
The Offense picked up a defense that gave up a go ahead TD with two minutes to go. Yet, you never seem to give a shit about that.
if we didn't have the TB game wrapped up early, or if the defense could get off the field against Dallas or if it wasn't -3 degrees in Lambeau fucking field.
Stats don't tell the whole story Joe, but you just can't see that. You sit there and dish out stats and assume they support your argument, but you can't see the forest for the trees and are too stubborn to realize it.
Points scored in a 4 game stretch do not take into account the level of each defense, running games, gameplans, weather conditions, etc... those things all play a role. You can't just look at PPG in one playoff season and draw some sort of conclusion. Just because the Giants scored less points in the 2007/8 postseason than most other teams means that their QB's were all better than Eli Manning? Give me a break. And if you don't agree with that, then what are you saying?
well the defense plays certainly has an effect on how much the offense scores.
When you have the game in hand because the defense is playing "lights-out", you don't call long bombs. You run the ball, and throw short, safe passes.
If the defense is playing horribly, at some point you let it all out and start throwing it all over the field.
This is why stats just don't work in football like they do in baseball. There are too many variables...You can't just use one stat to determine how well a particular part of a team is playing.
Obviously, scoring points should be one of the most important stats, but it just does not tell the whole story. Did you ever think that maybe if the defense wasn't playing so hot that we would have scored more? I mean, we did in week 17 of 2007, didn't we? Against the same team that we scored only 17 against in the SB. What was the biggest difference in the 2 games?
Well, in the first one, the defense didn't have their best showing and gave up a bunch of points. Hmmmm...wonder if that had an effect on the offensive play calling?
In the second one, the defense was playing the game of their lives...I wonder if maybe that had an effect on the offensive playcalling?
Naw, I'm just being dense because the stats don't back up my argument.
I should stop kidding myself. Eli got carried because the offense only averaged 21pts a game in the playoffs, and because they only scored 17 in their SB win.
Precisely. Every game is different. The only way PPG would be a completely accurate assessment (and even still, it would be the offense as a whole more than just the QB) would be if every team faced the exact same defense in the exact same conditions and obviously that isn't how it works. There are a million variables involved.. way too many to just look at points scored and conclude the performance of the QB was either good or bad.
I think if anything people are questioning the stats being used.
To show that the offense averaged X amount of points and it was the 2nd lowest as being indicative that eli wasn't effective even though the results proved otherwise is foolish.
Anyway it is a strawman argument. You are dismissing the stat that eli was the only QB to throw for a TD in the final minute when his team needed it to win.
once again, you fit the stats you want to your argument and think the rest of them are bullshit, and yet have the gall (or stupidity) to question others who are doing the same thing.
whole thread but the Defense was definitely the #1 reason we won the Super Bowl. Eli played very very well during that Super Bowl run though. Our running game wasn't doing much so the passing game had to carry the offense. And Eli did lead the team to 3 Game Winning Drives against Dallas, Green Bay, and the 18-0 Pats. Eli wasn't "along for the ride", he was a main contributer. But the main reason we won was because of the way our D played.
I still don't understand why Eli's name keeps getting dragged into these arguments. At this point in time, both he and Favre have the same amount of SB championships.
I said it earlier in the thread, but Joe had also brought up Peytons name and that he would have play well in the SB to be considered in the "greatest" of all time argument. I disagree, if Peyton wins and has similar stats to what he put up three years ago, or plays poorly for that matter, but they still win. Peyton has to be considered one of the all time best. Him having to play well from the first playoff game through the Super Bowl (if they win), should not be a deciding factor given Joe's reasoning.
I never said Eli wasn't good in the 07 playoff run Â
Where this all started is a week or so back on the subject of Mark Sanchez and me saying the only reason his playoff run ceased to be on conference title game Sunday, while Eli's continued, is that Mark Sanchez's D gave up a 30 spot and ours never did
Of course Eli played better than Sanchez did (although not by a ton, Sanchez played a lot better than many here give him credit for). But my point is and has been that the offense in general during that playoff run was pretty damn average, and poor by SB winner standards
What I said is the defense allowed us to be victorious through some offensive efforts that get us beat 9 out of 10 times. The NE and Dal games specifically
that's not the argument. The argument is that the defense won the Super Bowl, eli was carried by them, and if samuel had picked off a pass or tyree not made the catch, then we wouldn't have won.
Simply put, this argument pops up because Joe somehow wants to rag on eli whenever Favre is brought up. all of eli's successes are excused away as him being carried by others, while all of favre's failures are excused away as him trying to make plays or the fact that his other successes trump his big game failures.
Apparently when one QB fucks up, it is everyone else's fault and when the other QB succeeds, it is also everyone else's fault. I have a headache trying to follow the logic. i also have a headache wondering why anyone would try to knock eli's performance in the SB for any reason.
Show me where i said Eli was not good during the playoff run. You are merely interpreting things that way. I don't think he was AS good as some here think he was, especially when you think its an insult to say Mark Sanchez played on a somewhat comparable level during this post season, but his team stopped playing because of his defense
in response to someone who was talking about Steve Smith dropping a pass leading to his lone INT. My point was he may have gotten unlucky on that play but he had a rabbits foot on that front that entire day
I said last week the best thing Eli did was not lose the game, and i believe that. Our defense carried us and to Eli's credit he did not make back breaking mistakes. But he wasn't exactly lighting anyone up, including the scoreboard
What has Eli done in big games again other than rely on his defense to not need him to do much of anything?
Marj Sanchez was damn near as good in these playoffs as Eli was in 07 and played nearly the same role. His defense gave up 30 in a playoff game though so he couldn't continue his little manage the game and score 20 points ride
Mark Sanchez 09 playoff run and Eli's 07 playoff run were very similar. If you don't agree with this I don't know what to tell you. The numbers back it up too.
isn't your off the wall perspective on the game. It isn't the way you interpret stats or your insane opinions. It's your inability to know the difference between facts and opinions.
And you are so pissed that Samuel didn't catch that ball Â
Suprised you haven't commented on this thread yet. You say stats don't lie, your boy Brett is a terrible "comeback" type of QB. Check it - ( New Window )
Do you want to break the whole game down to one drive? Why did we need a last drive to win the game after holding the best offense in NFL history to 14 points?
We were again, very fortunate to even be in that game when the 4th quarter started
2 years ago today, one day before SB 42, if i told you the Giants would have 3 points on the board to start the 4th and 17 for the game you and everyone else would have given us about a 3% chance of winning the game. But we did. Because the defense played balls out and allowed us to win with an offensive effort that gets us beat 90% of the time
Joe, they are your opinions. Your interpretation of how he played. Its bad enough that your stance on how Eli played in 2007 playoff run has you on the receiving end of some hostile responses. You dont need to compound it by trying to pass off your opinions as fact.
He played well throughout the playoffs, especially in terms of ball security. Was the only pick he threw the one that bounced of Smith's hands in the SB?
Eli was hardly along for the ride, but the defense held one of the greatest [offensive] teams in history to 14 points.
Joe has a problem saying that two separate parts played well in the SB. Apparently if the defense played well, it means that eli was carried by them.
Apparently, the offense should have scored 30 points or more to make the victory look better and since they didn't, Eli couldn't get out of his own way for most of the game (Joe's words).
You said earlier in this thread that more people think of Eli then they do the defense when looking at that team. I just find that to be beyond foolish
Stats are simply numbers. Stats cannot lie. They are facts.
People can twist stats, bend stats, overvalue stats, undervalue stats, cherry pick stats and generally manipulate stats to paint the picture they so desire.
The stats themselves are not inaccurate or dishonest, the person is.
I already showed "JoeyStats" here on the 1000 post monstrosity the litany of stats that demonstrate how wrong he was, and his response was "Yeah well, you are wrong! The stat I care about is how many points the defense gave up, and it fits my argument, so your evidence is nonsense".
No, I mean the game where they scored 20 points...14 of them in the 4th quarter.
They went through the first 3 quarters with 3 more points than we did, and were trailing 13-6 starting the 4th. The only TD they'd conceded at that point was on a kickoff return, so their defense was balls to the wall against the #1 offense in the league that year and the NFL's MVP in Esiason.
So would you say that the 49er defense carried Montana that day?
if you were to poll every fan who watched that game who the star of the game was, you would have he majority of them say eli, Plax or tyree.
Now, that is a function of the fact that most people who follow football gravitate to the players that made the winning plays or who won the MVP, but it refutes your opinion that 90% of people think the defense won the game.
I may know that the defense was great that day. You may think that. Joe Public probably only remembers eli.
That was the point.
I'm not using it to say the defense didn't play well. I'm using it to show how detached you really are from reality when it comes to what other fans think.
I really think that you have a case of the good 'ole Â
I know quite a few folks out here in the Midwest that can't stand the Mannings. I don't know what it is, and they can't really even qualify it, but they just do not want either of the Mannings to win.
You've admitted that you don't like Peyton, and don't want to see him win.
Could it be that you are just the opposite of most of us (who are biased because of our love of Eli and all things Giant), and are clouded by your dislike of our starting QB?
His defense certainly played a big part that day but Montana both that day and in that post season played absolutely leaps and bounds better than Eli did in 07
Montana's day in that SB and Eli's in his are very similar in that each team did little offensively and then scored 14 points in the final quarter (including a final drive to win it late)...and yet you can say Montana's performance in SB XXIII was leaps and bounds better than Eli's in SB XLII.
You sir are full of shit. You've embarrassed yourself since Favre shit the bed and instead of simply admitting that fact have chosen to go on a variety of tangents ranging from the Giant defense's role in the Super Bowl to Favre's salary in 1997.
Your boy choked. And I'll go a step further and say you're no fucking Giant fan. That's your prerogative, but don't piss on my head and tell me it's raining.
You want to hate the Mannings, go right ahead. But you've reached a point where you sound like you wish Samuel caught that ball just so your shitheap arguments here would sound less ridiculous.
Well, he didn't catch the ball. And two weeks before that he went to Green Bay and shoved it up your boy's ass while Favre looked like a bitch the entire night.
There isn't a Giant fan alive that that should bother. But it bothers you.
When he gets around to winning a playoff game again, which he didn't do prior to 07 and hasn't since, then talk
Hes one pass away from having just as many picks in his playoff career as he does TDs and already has 2 playoff games on the resume where he never led his team to an offensive TD
Im not the one full of shit here or blinded by hate for a player
I don't have a problem with Eli. I don't want him carried off the field in a box. I dont root for him to get high lowed every week. Yet you wish that on someone you never met
Ill go one step further and say you need professional help because thats just some wacked out morbid shit
Marty, huh? What are you talking about? I was telling you to read through the thread before making a comment that made no sense. I'd say America has a bigger problem with people who don't read through things enough.
Your boy choked. And I'll go a step further and say you're no fucking Giant fan. That's your prerogative, but don't piss on my head and tell me it's raining.
I just saw a tape of the Samuels missed INT. It's not clear that a) he would have come down in bounds; or b) that wouldn't have been an spectacular finger tip catch. To act like Eli simply lucked out is twisting things.
Dude, I am not going to read through 1000+ posts to Â
Already linked it on this thread to have him go there. Facts in that thread would not support his argument, don't expect any Joey Stats comments on that thread any time soon.
Figgy, I certainly don't expect it. Eli almost throwing a game-ending INT, but didn't and ending up winning a Super Bowl on a last-minute drive=bad....Favre throwing dumb picks to lose big playoff games=good, It's fucking bizarre.
after abandoning the Mets for the Yankees, and after repeatedly dissing Eli, I think people are justified in questioning your fandom. You are usually an excellent poster but you've gotten carried away with this Favre vs. Eli thing to the point where its hard to tell if you'd rather see Favre or the Giants do better.
Favre has always been overrated in my eyes, even Â
He is a gunslinger, and exciting to watch. He is a guy who took plenty of painkillers to help extend his career and maintain his consecutive game streak.
Ok, I feel guilty for bringing that up, but that does have some validity, no?
He would NOT have come down in bounds HAD he caught the ball. He only gets a finger-tip on the ball...if he had caught it, he would have had to go higher for the ball and it would have drifted him farther to the sideline...he then would have almost certainly floated too far to have stayed in bounds.
I never abandoned the Mets for the Yankees. I could not give 2 shits about baseball any longer. Im no Yankee fan, that was a joke on that thread back in Nov 07 and i stated as much in the very next post. I don't have a rooting interest in baseball and when i did i was a casual Met fan
If I was not a Giant fan any longer why the hell wouldn't i just come out and state that. Do I gain something by making people think Im a Giant fan when im really not?
JoeMP is starting to get me to agree that Eli is Â
After Campbell, the players with the largest negative differentials are two superstars with reputations for big mistakes in big moments: Donovan McNabb and Brett Favre. McNabb (0.94, 39th) and Favre (0.93, 40th) both have ACE ratings that confirm their below-average performance in clutch situations. The peak of Favre's career (1995-97) is cut off by the 1998 start date for the our data, but with by far the most comeback opportunities (187) of anyone on the list, there are no issues with data credibility for Favre (his personal credibility is a separate debate).
If you go to the thread, you can see how they calculated the "ACE" rating...
is not a good comeback player because the stats for a portion of his career (not his whole career) say so. Even though the recent study posted here which did look at his entire career ranked him 6th in the league in career comeback % (times your team won the game when trailing by 7 or less entering the 4th). He also has the 3rd most 4th quarter comebacks in NFL history
Yeah, let's just ignore the final 12 seasons of his career. I guess he should have retired then.
If you bother to look at the methodology in the article, it adjusts everything for situations...which I would say is much more fair then merely the nominal "comebacks".
Also, of course he has a ton of comebacks, he's played longer than anyone!
His comeback percentage, which doesnt give him any credit for longevity, was 6th or 7th best in the NFL during his career (percentage of times he led his team to victory when trailing by 7 or less entering the 4th)
Eli also ranked very high in that study. One that took the players entire career, rather than just a portion starting around his 30th birthday leaving out all his MVP winning years where he was undoubtedly the best player in the league
He catches that ball, his momemtum carries him back, no guarantee he comes down in bounds.
Nevermind the fact we don;t know, in the clip you showed, that his feet are even bounds then - we only have a view from the far side; his feet could have been touching the sideline as it was.
But keep deflecting. And digging yourself a bigger hole.
And, as others have said - I just LOVE the fact that 9 times out of 10 Samuel comes down with it, but Smith doesn't catch his ball 9 of 10?
but you're going to look at a study that leaves out a players best seasons including 3 League MVP years and think it gives us a true judgement on what type of player he was in his career with regards to comebacks? Seriously?
get over the statement that a guy who gets a mere fingertip on the ball would catch it 9 times out of 10.
Joe rolls this of the keyboard as if it is an indisputable fact.
Samuel couldn't even jump high enough to getmore than a tip on it once. How can anyone logically conclude that he would not only jump high enough, but easily grab the ball the next 9 times?
If something his ridiculous can't be conceded, what hope is there to get the stubborn fuck to back down on the really outrageous shit that's been said?
"I don't know if Eli was trying to throw it away or something, but it was a bad play on my part. I could have ended the game. It was one of the plays that we left on the field that is why they are the champions." Link - ( New Window )
The 4 years on top of that will not skew the numbers upwards by a large margin (it is only 25% as much data).
So, what can we conclude?
Is his true rank 40? Probably not. But are those 4 years going to magically cause him to leap up to the top 10? Or even 20? Hardly. I'd be shocked if it even moved him up 10 spots.
Nevermind the fact that if we are going to include 95-98, we need to inlude 92-94. 94 was a good year, but 92 was average and 93 was crappy, so the greatness of 95-98 will be mitigated by the years prior (especially 92 and 93)
All that means he's not the king of comebacks that the media tries to make him out to be.
It doesn't appear that it was Eli's fault and from the way he yelled at Tyree after the play, it's apparent that Tyree most likely ran the wrong route?
Or does that not even matter in this discussion? I haven't really followed it.
it only matters with Eli. Hes the only QB who's interceptions can be dissected every which way imaginable to the point where its not his fault. I believe every single pick he threw between 04 and 07 were because Shockey or Plax ran the wrong route
Donald Driver admitting to running an out when he wasn't supposed to doesn't stop this site from claiming Favre authored the choke of the century in the 07 title game
how you used to be a pro-Eli guy until you felt the need to use him to prop up Favre in these debates. You look sillier all the time. When everyone else says you are wrong, odds are its you and not them.
yeah but that is all about you just using him to further your Favre love. Everyone else sees this. And its not just 60-70 percent of the site jumping all over you. Its everyone, including the most respected and objective posters.
with people who actually sit there with a straight face and claim the defense in post season was no better than they were in the regular season in 2007. Don't give a shit if mindless fools like that care what i have to say or not
Nor do i worry about my credability with many on this thread who say with a straight face that Eli Manning is a better big game QB than Brett Favre over his career
this is where you're just fucking wrong, and stupid, too...
Quote:
As if this place is going to be objective regarding any discussion with Eli Manning
I'd say BBI has it's share of Eli fanboys, but not one of the people who's corrected you on this thread is a fanboy, and none of the reasons or data they presented to argue their case paint Eli as the greatest QB of all time, and not one single poster tried to do that.
You started this whole thing by spewing some really stupid shit about Eli. You can say what you want about him, career-wise. The book hasn't been completely written on Eli yet. But to say that he's not a massive reason we won XLII is really the pinnacle of an idiotic argument, and there's about 500 posts in this thread alone that support that. You ignore relevant data. You change your argument. You come off like a total joke, and for someone who claims to know his shit, you sure do have a funny way of showing it.
The bottom line, which you have chosen to ignore since this thread started, is that the score of XLII was Pats 14, Giants 10 with 2:36 remaining in the game. The defense that "carried Eli" (your words) had just allowed a backbreaking 80 yard TD drive where Tom Brady, Wes Welker and Randy Moss shredded them for the go-ahead touchdown. Eli walked out, marched his team down the field and fucking won the game for the team we (or at least I) root for. Not the defense. Not the FG kicker. Eli.
To take that accomplishment and try to spin it into some sort of lucky break (which is exactly what you've tried to do) is so stupid, arrogant and fucking brainless that I can't believe I spent more than one second arguing it.
You can't argue with stupid. You've at least proven that today. Congrats.
Because it needs to be said and would pretty much be noted as nothing but fact anywhere outside of the land of Giant fans
Eli Manning is not a seed in Brett Favre's feces after he eats watermelon. He is not a pimple on his ass, not even the blackhead before the pimple forms and becomes plump. Brett Favre at age 40 was a better QB than Eli ever has been, or figures to ever be. Even in the best year of his career, you could argue Eli was not even a top 10 QB in the league
The idea that we're gonna compare these guys, and you're gonna act like anyone outside of Giants land is taking Eli, shows me you are certifiably retarded
Joe, you should worry about your credibility when Â
I hadn't heard that and couldn't find the Driver interview where he says that. There is an Anatomy of the play on nfl.com, where they say its on Brett and Brett says Donald ran an out instead of a slip route, but he [Brett] says that was fine and he didn't throw it outside enough.
because I think Favre is leaps and bounds a better QB than Eli. Than so be it. The rest of the free world is laughing at a Giant fan who feels otherwise
not a feces in the watermelon he shits out is really credible discourse. Read over what you've written. You have no credibility at all when you use language like that.
Its incredible, to me, that someone so ignorant can think they're so superior.
How do people like Joe do it? Is there a filter that these people like Joe have, that I do not, that allows them to filter out honest self-evaluations?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHA...yeah Eli could NEVER outplay Favre! Never! HAHAHAHA
I don't want Eli to have a career that is anything like Favre's....I want my quarterback to win championships, and currently they are equal. So if Eli has Favre's career the rest of the way then he will have failed.
if you can't see that using that kind of description is way over the top. Not to mention the fact that Eli massively outplayed Favre in the only playoff matchup they've had. But you'll just find a way to rationalize that away.
I could have sworn Joe used to argue (and I mean argue, just not to Â
anywhere near as obsessive as this Favre weirdness) that after the first two games of the 2007 season, the defense that year played pretty elitely overall that regular season (game against the Pats aside) and that the real difference, between the regular season team and the posteason one, was that there was better -- or at least more consistent -- QB play. Which is pretty much what FO's stats support.
Now suddenly, for the sake of this "defense" of Favre, that stance has changed to being laughable?
an outright domination of numbers than in these discussions. It's 1500 to 1, not even the big Eli critics are getting involved. What does that tell you?
Aaron Brooks > Kurt Warner
Jay Fiedler > Peyton Manning
Chad Pennington > Peyton Manning
Jake Delhomme > Eli Manning
David Garrard > Ben
Mark Sanchez > Carson Palmer
I can go on and on
Eli Manning hasn't even blinked at his best days yet, Joe. Â
We just watched a 35 year old Peyton Manning, Eli's brother, have one of the BEST years of his career and Peyton's 2004 was better than any year Brett Favre ever had.
I'm admittedly not a big Eli Manning fan, and over two years here, that was the most polite it was put. "Basher", "hater", "douche", etc. Even I think this is absurd.
The defense did play well all season for the most part, but they got shred every time they played a real good offense, especially the 3 we had rematches with in the post season and proceeded to shut them down
Of course Eli raised his game in the playoffs from the regular season. He led the league in turnovers that year and was pretty damn awful for prolonged stretches.
just keeps finding ways of throwing away playoff games. You can rationalize all you want, but you just can't trust him anywhere in that huge spot. He's a top ten QB all time. There is no doubt about that. But he's not the pressure performer he once was and that is also a fact.
in the playoffs and has been pretty darn good from that postseason on. You used to post to that effect with all the stats that showed that until your Favre obsession began.
I agree re: this thread, but the problem is, he will simply move on to find another thread with Favre or other QBs mentioned and turn it into another 800 post shitshow.
Better to contain his willful ignorance of fact here, I fear it spreading.
and I think Joe really likes sexy QB's. QB's that have the most physical talents, but lack in the head area. They always throw the prettiest passes and they always throw such perfect spirals. Who cares if they throw em to the right team, it's a pretty pass. On the other hand he hates guys who might lack in the pretty department, but excel in the mental aspects of the game. Those guys aren't good.
In a ridiculous crusade to prove his pet arguments correct, he has gone down in now three hails of bullets from the guns of reason, logic, fact, sanity and reality.
Yea, its all about his physical talent. Not that hes won more games than anyone in league history, had one losing season in 19 years, won 13 playoff games including a SB and lost another SB where he badly outplayed a first ballot HOF QB. Its not that he basically owns every record there is to own by a mile and no one outside of Peyton has much of a chance of catching him for at least the next 20 years
Its all about his arm strength. He hasn't accomplished all that much
I can think of a bunch of Favre playoff games JB
JoeMP2003 : 6:28 pm
that didn't need very close finishes because he played so damn great that his offense hung up a 30 or 40 spot and the outcome was never in doubt
I can also name FIVE games his QB rating was BELOW 60. 60!
I can also name two where his rating was 70 or below.
probably has the best arm of any QB I have ever seen. I remember reading how he used to break his receivers fingers because he threw too hard. He relied on that too much, IMO.
10 games with a QB rating over 100
11 games with a rating of 82 or below (80 being average), including the aforementioned 7 games of 70 rating and below
How many have won 13 playoff games? Not many guys will lose 11 because not many guys are good enough to lead their teams to the playoffs 11 different times.
He's been the starter for 18 seasons right? So 13/18 is 72%...he has won .72 playoff games per season as a full-time starter. Eli is 4/5...or .8 playoff wins per full season as a starter.
David, I'm just pointing out a stat for Joe...he keeps citing all of these other stats that ignore the immense difference in sample size between Favre and Eli.
Actually, David, now that I think about it...sample size doesn't matter THAT much there since I'm pointing out a percentage...obviously the number will change in the future, Eli should be able to jump that up big time in the future.
Eli has been a starter for 5 full seasons.. Favre for 18. Dontcha think that 13 years from now, Eli Manning will probably have accomplished a bit more and will have reached more career milestones?
I mean, this comparison just gets more and more ridiculous by the minute. It is outright fucking stupid.
We have seen Brett Favre's absolute BEST in the NFL... Â
Who cares? If Favre just had one of his best years at age 40, why can't Eli? It's not like Favre's first few years demolish Eli's... Favre's 4th full season (1995) is when he really started putting together outstanding seasons. Eli just had a pretty damn good one in his 5th year. I think you're being a little biased.
And to say Eli has only won a playoff game in one of his seasons... Â
...is a stupid way of skewing words to make him seem as if he's accomplished less. He still won FOUR playoff games and each one of them were extremely difficult games to win. I don't know why you're going out of your way to slight him.
Joe, that question has much more to do with longevity than anything...also amount of first-round byes. Eli needs 9 more wins in his career, and let's say he matches Favre and plays 13 more seasons in the league...he would need 9/13=69%, which is lower than his average thus far. I'd say his chances of matching Favre's career playoff wins is decent...60% or so.
Especially considering the fact that you are comparing Favre to one of the biggest post season chokers in recent memory. What even qualifies as a choke? IMO a true choke job would imply that you were up and have a lead to giveaway. Choke jobs would be Blazers giving up a double digit lead in the 4th quarter of game 7, not making a poor throw when you've been under duress all game.
JB
JoeMP2003 : 6:46 pm
What do you think the odds are of Eli either winning 13 playoff games in his career or being good enough to QB his team to 24 of them
Depends on what Jerry does to improve the defense - Eli had has best season by FAR, and didn't even sniff the playoffs.
Though I suppose in your view that is still Eli's fault
How is what Favre has done to his teams in the playoffs in recent memory not a choke? How the hell is last week's throw at the end of a game they were about to win not a choke?
big difference between choke job and simply making a bad throw at the end of the game. when you try to make something out of nothing that's what happens. just like it did against the eagles when he threw the pick to Dawkins, and just like he did ag ainst us in the NFC championship game. Not exactly giving up 8 points to Reggie Miller in less than 20 seconds.
David, I totally disagree and would say that it is still a choke...as most I think would also agree. That game last week was tied, and the Vikings were in range to settle for a very makable FG if Favre had just run a few yards...but he forced a throw for no reason and it was picked. They lost the game. He choked.
Anyone who claims that Favre is the only reason the Vikings lost would be wrong. But anyone who claims that he didn't hurt his team by making that throw would be equally wrong.
He may not be the reason they were in the position they were in, as he was playing great and they should have been blowing them out....but now that they are in that situation and he is trying to close out the game, he blew it. He didn't close it out and choked in the situation, so I think the comparison is apt.
Threw a pick in Lord favre's same exact spot last week everyone including the city of philly would be calling McNabb a choke artist...just because he won in 1997 does not mean he didn't choke in that spot
David, how did you come to that conclusion? Huh? If Favre could just make simple decisions they would have won the game...which would have been closing out the game.
you know, because without him they'd probably have been 9-7 and eventually bounced out in the WC game. if you ask 10 viking fans i can safely say more than half would take issue with Childress really mismanaging the clock late in the game than anything else.
Joe, although he has made some stupid arguments, NEVER said that Favre's last throw wasn't a mistake.
What his argument has been about that last throw has revolved around has been:
1- If his team hadn't fumbled 536 times during the game, they would have been up by 20.
2- Even though he made a mistake with the throw, it didn't cost them the game because if they punted the Saints would have scored and if they hd kicked, they would have missed and the Saints would have scored.
So, yeah.
i just want you to admit you're reaching on the Byung Hyun Kim analogy Â
Those two events have no relevance to each other. Just because he had a great year, does not mean he didn't choke away the season. Kim had a great year as well that season and was pretty important to the D-Backs being in that position. I can assure you he still choked, like Favre did last week.
David, not to absolve Favre for that horrible INT Â
I don't think the analogy is a reach at all...I think you're just not understanding it.
Favre, like the Yankees, has a ton of talent and it shows well for 85% of the game...but Favre does not close out the close games like Rivera does...he chokes in most of them and performs poorly....like Kim did in that World Series. You follow?
Cam, he may have backed off of it, but at first he was saying Favre made the right play. He kept saying that Favre shouldn't run because he's old (ignoring that he had just run perfectly fine for 25 yards on the roll out), and that the wide open Berrian on the sideline was not an option (he never gave a reason).
I know some Vikings fans who are absolutely saying Favre "choked" by the way....just as Packers fan I know say he choked against us, and against the Eagles a few years back when he threw up a punt to Dawkins in OT.
Yes, but Favre has also steered a team towards a championship before Â
What does that have to do with it? That would just make the analogy even better as you can say the Yankees were so good (like the Packers that playoffs who did not play in close games), that they didn't need a closer.
You can't compare some loser like Byung Hyun Kim to Brett Favre. So they blew out a lot of teams during their championship run in '96? Packers were hardly overwhelming favorites with a massive payroll like the Yankees, so you're reaching AGAIN with your analogy.
I'm equating Brett Favre to the Yankees....both great.
The next comparison is how they close out games...the Yanks have the best ever in Rivera. Favre is a choke artist in close games a la Kim. Understand now?
And how the hell did payrolls come up in this? You are REALLY not understanding. My analogy has absolutely nothing to do with payrolls or even the Packers.
Still a weak analogy whatever way you try to spin it Â
Im just going to say it JB
JoeMP2003 : 6:04 pm
Because it needs to be said and would pretty much be noted as nothing but fact anywhere outside of the land of Giant fans
Eli Manning is not a seed in Brett Favre's feces after he eats watermelon. He is not a pimple on his ass, not even the blackhead before the pimple forms and becomes plump. Brett Favre at age 40 was a better QB than Eli ever has been, or figures to ever be. Even in the best year of his career, you could argue Eli was not even a top 10 QB in the league
The idea that we're gonna compare these guys, and you're gonna act like anyone outside of Giants land is taking Eli, shows me you are certifiably retarded
I think you're gonna have most of the site upset with you.
I dismiss stats on this website because people don't know how to use them. You are using statistical inference to make a point.
If I asked you what kind of distributional assumptions you were making for each QB and how they related to each other, could you do this?
What is the correct sample size to assume that all QB's have distributions similar to each other, to allow for comparison?
What variables are you "using" in your regression?
What functional form?
Etc.
It's so easy to break down someone's argument when they use statistics, simply because people don't realize that:
1. Statistics are easily manipulated; hence, extreme caution is needed when using them.
2. Trying to pose simple models as a gospel is, 99.9% of the time, wrong.
3. Inference is the be-all of statistical analysis. The fact that you're able to arrive at "factual" conclusions so quick means that, most likely, you skipped steps.
Hell, stats in this case can back up an argument. But using them to prove something is like running an experiment once, seeing the results, and then generalizing them to the world as a whole. They may be right, but most of the time, they aren't.
Four wins, seven losses since the 1997 season ended. Favre's first thirteen playoff games he won an impressive 9. But, again since then he's almost gone the opposite. Of course football is a team sport, but since we are just talking about the surface it's relevant. Since the 97 season ended, favre has three playoff games with a rating below 60,, three in the seventies, one in the eighties, and actually four over 100. Of course all Four one hundred plus games were wins.
but he's gone too far here. Eli Manning is a Super Bowl QB for us and was excellent in that 4th quarter in SB XLII.
Joe, what do you expect, this is a GIANTS forum, we are all GIANTS fans. I'll admit it, I'm a bit of a homer when it comes to NYG football, & most Giant fans will have nothing but excellent things to say about Eli given he has helped contribute to a SB.
Eli can do nothing else in his career, & I'll still be a huge fan of his for what he did in 2007.
I've seen you defend McNabb for hours on this board, and now Favre...yet you are throwing Eli under the bus to show your support of Brett Favre. This isn't Giant fan like behavior.
I'd say most people you talked to going into the 2007 post season would agree that how eli plays will heavily determine the giants success. He was seen as a weak point during the regular season with the TO's. Manning had to do more than just ride a long for the giants to win. All four teams the giants faced came in those games focusing on the giants awesome ground attack. The rushing attack was held in check at 3.5 ypc for the four post season games. Manning had to play well, and he did. He had to do more than just hand the ball off, and throw a pass every now and again. The giants had to become somewhat of a passing team.
Joe is as die hard as anyone here, and his words right now I believe are the result of the mob mentality... Joe is being forced to speak in absolutes to make a point that the less knowledgeable and more bias fans around here aren't understanding.
That said, the absolutes that he is bringing to the table making him seem foolish. The Brett Favre love is really strange. It's as if no matter what facts are presented, he won't budge, because the slightest consolation will appear as defeat.
David, perhaps because you are not understanding the analogy at all.
The Yankees have great talent, and that talent shows in the first 8 innings of the game...that is like Brett Favre who has great talent and shows it for the first 50 minutes of games. Sometimes the Yankees blow teams out by so much that they don't need their closer...sometimes Favre has played so well that they didn't need him to "close" out a game well because the game was effectively over.
Sometimes the Yankees have only a one or two run lead, and do NEED that closer...and they have the best ever in Rivera. Sometimes Favre plays very well, but the game is close and Favre needs to play well to "close" the game and win.
Favre has proved again and again that he is in no way like Mariano Rivera in close games...he is terrible in close games, even if he has played great the whole game. So, he is more like Byung-Hyun Kim, bad at closing out big games (whether you want to call it a "choke" or not, it doesn't matter). Therefore, Brett Favre is like the Yankees if Kim was their closer, and not Rivera.
This HAS to make sense to you now.
If someone is forced to speak in absolutes about a situation Â
It makes sense to me (i.e., a perceived "great" with some problems closing). I thought it was a great analogy, IMO.
I can see where David is coming from, though, solely because analogies can have a myriad of ways of interpretation.
However, the way you stated it, I think David (no offense) is reading a little too far into it, but something I have been known to do, from time to time. This is especially harder reading something on an internet message board, with no non-verbal cues to back up your "intent".
And thank you for the line about respecting my opinion. Â
You should take mine with a grain of salt though; I'm only 24 (grin). Still have a lot to learn, and need to keep my foot in my mouth at times (quite often, in fact).
And I thoroughly enjoy reading your posts, not only on here (and financial matters, which is a weakness), but on other places as well.
He willfully chooses to antagonize the board. He willfully chooses to ignore arguments put against him. He argues in logical fallacies: straw men, false dilemma, you name it. He stubbornly pushes forward with his beliefs.
All of that by itself, even if Joe were correct in his various arguments, would make him an insufferable douche. The fact that he is actually wrong, backed up by a myriad of facts taken in countless different forms, from statistics to subjective analysis to expert opinion? And rather than 1) admitting error or 2) agreeing to disagree, he instead invents a new argument he declares himself correct in?
Thanks kicker, appreciate it. It's been nice that the "other place" has been getting a bit more attention recently...so much to learn over there. Some great stuff.
Honestly, I didn't even begin to think of payroll with your analogy. But when David brought it up, I could see where he was going. However, I still think your analogy is more than apt (impressive, in fact; cross-sports analogies are always needed (Grin)).
Yes, the other place is nice to have. Plenty of quality information, although I'm way too busy right now. It's hard to be able to input any meaningful analysis on anything here while I'm struggling currently.
Hope all is well with you as well. Entertaining and informative times that we are in, and at the risk of being left behind, busy.
I agree with your points, and I don't see the need to bring stats into many arguments here. They are, more often than not, at best highly circumspect by the inference people are making and, more often than not, are you really going to change someone's opinion?
In most instances, no, but merely because you cannot change an opinion does not mean you can actually prove an opinion wrong. If there's actually a mountain of facts that support X is right and Y is wrong, forging ahead with the notion that Y is right because "I believe it to be so" is nothing more than lunacy.
That is the part I cannot grasp. What possesses a person to ignore reality in pursuit of fantasy on something as insignificant as "Eli Manning did not play well in the 2007 playoffs"?
Maybe I am picking it apart too much, and I SORT OF see where you are going with it. I just feel Favre is getting too much shit around here (he deserves SOME shit but not all of it).
Sounds good David, we'll agree to disagree. I do definitely see where you are coming from as obviously cross-sports analogies can be open to a lot of critique.
I think he has been getting a bit too much crap as well, mostly since I do think his toughness is legitimate (he was a warrior in that game)...but I really feel that he is awful down the stretch. Whether you call it choking or not, he continues to make poor throws, poor decisions, etc. in big games. He is a HOFer, but he could have been really, really great, like Montana, Elway, Marino, Unitas, Peyton...but I think his brain held him back from that tier.
It's pretty fucked up to question somebody's fandom...
I just think he went overboard with the Favre argument and backed himself into a corner.
If he didn't go so overboard, folks wouldn't have a problem with his points that he's trying to make.
I for one think that Favre has had a better career than Eli has had so far.
I don't think that is a crazy opinion to have, and I think most rational folks would agree.
Do I think Eli can have a better career when it is all said and done? Sure I do. Do I think he's gonna have the better stats? He could, but I doubt it. Favre has played too long and has been on too many good teams to bet on Eli breaking any of his records, realistically at this point in time.
I think those were really what Joe was trying to say, he just went way overboard with his arguments and has been to hard headed to back off.
The one thing I absolutely don't agree with him on is that I would rather have Eli in the clutch than Favre.
But that's really minor considering the other arguments that he's made....
JB I feel I owe you an apology if I came off as hostile in any sort Â
been a rough day. on my way back from lunch there was construction being done by my office, i walked by and the damn concrete mixer got bits and pieces of concrete all over my blazer, pants, and shoes.
David, no worries at all, and I apologize if I came off the same way. No harm intended, I always enjoy your posts. Sorry to hear about that about your day...it sucks how things like that can ruin a day but I know where you're coming from. Recently, on a Monday morning, I was feeling good on my way to work, had a nice new shirt on, and BAM a woman on the subway spills her coffee all over me and my new shirt. My day: ruined...good mood to bad mood.
In your 7:24 you basically completely made shit up. I mean completely
What I said was saying he should have run would have been a complete second guess because I doubt it entered Favres mind or would enter most QBs minds, its not his game. You knocked this basically saying its retarded. Guess who said the same exact thing this past week? Phil Simms, sometime last week, said the same exact thing. Simms basically said he understands it because Favre, much like him and most QBs, is looking downfield to throw there, hes moving to throw, not to run, his eyes are locked downfield on whats unfolding. And say he runs for 4-5 yards hes still leaving Longwell with a 50+ yarder which is no lock at all in that spot on the road with SB on the line. He was looking to get as good a shot as possible for his kicker, made an aggressive throw, the same type of throw hes completed millions of times before, and it did not work out. If you watch it and saw the play broken down on playbook, you would have seen Sidney Rice not coming to meet the ball contributed to the pick as much if not more than the actual throw. Thats a completion if hes not waiting on it and stops in his tracks to await the throw
I also never said that Berrian was not an option, although when Favre looked to Berrian, his head was turned around and coverage was tight, which is what made Favre pull it down and go downfield to Rice. Berrian was not quite as open as he looked because if you knew a damn thing about football youd know his coverage was reacted to where Favre went with the ball. You can post as many still images as you want as Favre is winding up to make the throw to Rice and Berrians coverage drifts away from him, making him look far more open
Joe ever answer the question people have asked as to why Eli has to be crapped on in order to make Favre look better? Or why Eli was smeared to make Sanchez look better?
Doesn't he realize that two players can be good without one of them having to be the watermelon seed in an old man's shit?
Come to think of it, isn't Joe's whole problem that two things can't be good but instead one has to be bad and the other great?
Eli = shit, Giants Defense = best performance ever
Eli = not even seed in shit, Favre = Watermelon eating yahoo.
Peyton Manning = unproven, Favre = proven and fantastic
actually pumps that way, Berrian is not yet turned around, and the Saints, in a zone, are basically right on the play. When Favre pumps there that corner is just about ready to jump that route. The idea that he was wide open and Favre just never saw him, is foolish. Berrian was the first guy he looked to
I did not, and im not about to read all these posts from the 3 hours or so i was away and reply to them all, too much of the same shit, read the first few from immediately after I left and JBs just jumped out at me
Care to summarize
Sure, I'm tyring to help you out a bit...I think Â
I understand what you are trying to say, but don't agree with how you are going about it...
Quote:
I think Joe is a fan.
Cam in MO : 8:58 pm
It's pretty fucked up to question somebody's fandom...
I just think he went overboard with the Favre argument and backed himself into a corner.
If he didn't go so overboard, folks wouldn't have a problem with his points that he's trying to make.
I for one think that Favre has had a better career than Eli has had so far.
I don't think that is a crazy opinion to have, and I think most rational folks would agree.
Do I think Eli can have a better career when it is all said and done? Sure I do. Do I think he's gonna have the better stats? He could, but I doubt it. Favre has played too long and has been on too many good teams to bet on Eli breaking any of his records, realistically at this point in time.
I think those were really what Joe was trying to say, he just went way overboard with his arguments and has been to hard headed to back off.
The one thing I absolutely don't agree with him on is that I would rather have Eli in the clutch than Favre.
But that's really minor considering the other arguments that he's made....
I really do not know how i backed myself into a corner, as if i was somehow not right about Brett Favre this year or as if he did something to make an opinion I had of him look foolish
Did you see the level he played on this year as a 40 year old? As someone who expected him to play better than 99% of the people here did, many of the people who are arguing on this thread said the vikes would have been better off with Sage Rosenfels, he played better than even i could have ever imagined all year. I did not even expect them to make the conference title game this year before the year started, i did not even pick them to win their division (although i did pick them as a WC)
So his team didn't win the SB. Did he play some part in that? Well any time your team doesn't win, your most important player plays a part in it. But the guy got that team a bye, shredded the shit out of Dallas on divisional weekend, by and large played heroicly in the NFC title game in the face of getting his ass pounded all day and continued to get back up. He made an aggressive decision at the end of the game and it didn't work out. But this year did nothing but enhance his legacy and cement my opinion on him as a player as being right. Some guys here who didn't think he would do a damn thing this season are now taking bows that his team didn't win a SB.
He made an aggressive decision at the end of the game and it didn't work out.
Call it semantics or "spin" or whatever, but he just had a complete brain fart on that last play....
And I guess there is one other thing= I haven't seen anyone say that the Vikes would have been better with Sage Rosenfels or Gus Ferotte or whatever that fucking kid's name is.....fuck I can't even remember his name right now....
anyway- Yes, he is a first ballot HOF. The only thing in my mind that keeps him from being the G.O.A.T. is his somewhat erratic and boneheaded play in big situations....
I don't remember what you said before the season, but i can name names here if you want of some of the people here who did say before the season that bringing in Brett Favre was not a good move. Ill stick to just the most vocal ones on this thread. Go Terps for one, who thought they would not be a playoff team and made a horrid decision in getting him, has basically taken bows this week like he was proven right about something when he couldn't have been more wrong about the team and Favre all year. FMiC is another one who told me at this point in Brett Favre's career he was no better than Jackson or Rosenfels, and was basically like an old version of Vinny Testaverde from the Dallas days
if you would just admit that he fucked up on that play then these discussions and threads wouldnt be so long and ppl wouldnt attack you
i will remember to use 'agressive decision' when a qb throws a ball where he shouldnt have late in the game and costs his team a chance at kicking a FG to win it..and yes longwell has proved many times that he can kick 50+ yarders down the middle indoors
A FG in that spot from 50+ is a flip of the coin. No better. Longwell from his career is decent from 50+ (61% in his career but never made one in post season, ever). A kick on the road for a berth to the SB is also different than a kick in week 4 against detroit in the 2nd quarter, so its certainly a tougher kick
It was a coin flip really if hes lining up from 50
nobody is expanding the argument to favre's performance over the course of the season. nobody disputes that he had a good year or a great career. but if you can honestly look at that last play and not concede that Favre made a huge error, then you just don't know football. any way you try to justify it after that just makes you look silly.
those who do know football know that not every pick is on the QB 100%. I don't dispute it was an aggressive decision, but again was a likely completion if Sidney Rice does not stop in his tracks and await the pass. Its his job there to meet the ball and if he does thats a completion or at worst an incompletion. If you watch Playbook on NFL network you would have seen this gone over all last week
Yes there must have been some life altering thing happen to him that has made him automatic from 50+ now. He simply can never miss. Obviously those last 2 years are more representitive than his long career. He went 1 for 4 in 07.
I agree any chance is better than what they wound up with, but its a 50/50 proposition there
a guy who plays a lot of madden. certainly not a guy who played any substantial amount of organized football and certainly not a guy who ever took a snap from under center. anyone and everyone who knows football and who watched that play, immediately reached the same conclusion: never throw across your body in the 4th quarter of a playoff game when you have a chance to kick a field goal. never. under no circumstances. in fact, the coaches would be to blame as well, for failing to specifically instruct Favre not to attempt a pass like that.
but it's on Favre as well. primarily on him, simply because the ball was in his hand. in that situation, you have to be conservative. you never, EVER deprive your kicker of a chance to win the game in favor of a hail mary. never.
SB XXIII on NFL Network right now? Man, how horrifying it must have been to face Joe Montana in any close game. I forgot how effortlessly they drove to tie the game after the Bengals seemed to cease the momentum with a kick return TD... took Montana like 4 passes and 90 seconds to march down the field for the TD.
Not sure why I'm bringing this up other than to illustrate that Montana never had a Favre-esque moment in the playoffs. Not once.
that while it must have been horrifying as a fan of an opposing team when Montana had the ball in a close playoff game, it must have been equally horrifying for fans of Favre-led teams when he had the ball in close playoff games.
im not going to get into a pissing contest about your flag football career in junior high so you can continue to play this madden card that you like to do whenever you get into a disagreement, and wax all poetically Al Bundy style about your athletic prowess years ago, no one cares and it sounds pathetic. I played all organized sports basically expect for hockey growing up, Im not going to tout that as being some reason here why my opinion should be right
Its just a fact that he didn't come to meet the ball on that play. I have ex NFL players including a former pro bowl WR telling me this on playbook but i should listen to the Jake, who gets banned continually on internet message boards and begs his way back
here is the bottom line. Brett Favre is an all time great, but you also didn't have to drag Eli through mud to prove your point. You've defended McNabb also for hours on this site, never once criticizing McNabb nearly as much as you have Eli on this thread.
its time to go to igglephans on this thread to tell the eagle fans how great Brett is......giants fans arent the only ones who said he choked and comes up small in big games Link - ( New Window )
it was just Giants fans who bash Favre. Somewhere along the line, Brett Favre bashing became fashionable as some sort of rebellion against what people felt was ass kissing on the part of announcers toward him
Are we really gonna quote IgglePhans though? Lets ask them our opinion on our QB, and see if you would agree with their response
i know plenty of Cowboy fans, my best friend, my neighbor, 2 clients, and do glance during the season at other NFC East boards, especially the week before we play them just to see what they are saying. And I just have not seen this Eli love that you have. I would agree that perhaps they would rate him higher than say Eagles or Skins fans would, but he generally plays FAR better vs Dallas than he does those other 2
The complaint I most often hear is how they too often draw the "Good Eli", essentially painting him as a wildly streaky QB who admittedly plays well against them
9 out of 10 Cowboy fans are not dealing Romo for Eli, much in the same way 9 of 10 Giants fans would not. Thats not to say either is right or wrong, but thats basically the clear position
He is a 19 year NFL veteran being paid 12M a year, that made a rookie mistake at the worse possible time in a game that had
huge playoff implications. He did that without taking into account that his team was already in position of possibly winning the game, and that he had 2 other options to utilize that would have resulted in positive yards.
That's not choking, that's gagging on Ron Jeremy cock
has been used and abused. 9 out of 10 times, a guy who gets a sliver of a finger on a pass will catch it according to Joe.
Here's the problem with Joe's take. It is wildly inconsistent. Favre throwing a horrendous pick across his body that kills any hope for winning is an aggressive play, but Eli floating one over Samuel's head is an error that should have been intercepted.
Back to the INT that never happened - Joe is killing eli for it as if it should diminish the accomplishment of winning a SB. But meanwhile, he's absolving McNabb's 3 INT's because of some reason (maybe because the Eagles scored more than 21 points?)
Joe is pointing out numerous times that Eli has shit the bed in playoff games, but when shown that Favre has shit the bed a whole lot more, it is excused away.
I can appreciate debate. what is tough to appreciate is inconsistency within the main argument and each and every sub-argument, and all have one common denominator - Joe takes a pot shot at Eli.
I'm not an Eli lover - i think the guy has been inconsistent but in no rational discussion will I ever diminish his accomplishment in the playoff run of '07. That may be the pinnacle for us as Giant's fans, and if Joe doesn't appreciate that, you can draw your own conclusions as to what that means.
from 1964-1980, I lamented every almost INT(bu the Giants' D), fumble, lousy Official's call, etc., on horrible luck..Then on my few lucid and objective moments, I realized that this happens to every team, every game and is part of the game..You know, the "what ifs."
I'm sure, Bills fans are still talking about the what-ifs of Norwood's miss, or Niner fans about Craig's fumble..There are countless examples going all the way back to the '20s when this effectively all started..
So to say, Crayton's drop changed things, countered with Webster's pick 6 drop and Samuel's "almost" and so on is fruitless and just plain silly if you've followed the game for quite awhile..
To cherry pick "what-ifs" is total bullshit imo..It would not be if it didn't happen to every team, every game since football(and sports) was invented..The only possible difference, is that some are magnified and receive greater play than most others..Doesn't change reality one bit however.
He just won't do it. I had a small debate with him last year about the Eagles. He was adamant that the Eagles screwed their season by not going for it on 4th & long, deep in their own territory in the final seconds of OT against Cincy. Essentially, they played for a tie. Joe insisted that their season was over despite overwhelming and obvious evidence to the contrary (the tie kept them within a 1/2 game of the wildcard). Joe wouldn't even admit he was wrong after the Eagles made the playoffs and the tie ended up being the deciding factor.
Joe's staked out his position of idiocy and nothing will move him at this point. Brett Favre is a noble, blameless creature who can do no wrong. The end.
I hear you loud and clear..Joe knows I've enjoyed discussing stuff with him through the years, but in the last year, most of my posts to him have been, "can't you say just once, 'maybe you're right' or I could be wrong?'"
There's always an answer with more stats and/or more points..I have never, ever in all my years met ANYONE who hasn't at least once said, "maybe you have a point."
There's something really wrong with that and almost kind of "scary."
So, I try not to engage him, other than to give my POV and then leave for good as there's never any use to engage him further..
Francessa will be loving this...............
Actually, he reminds me of his dad......
Awesome.
However, that was not the case this year, simply because of Rex Ryan. He reminds me of his dad. A guy who talks more than is warrented.
This is just another example of why I am glad the Giants would never hire this clown.
Really?
This fat shit is 0-2 against Miami. He's too stupid to realize the phins own his ass.
I'd say fuck him, but the Dolphins already did that. Twice.
What an embarrassment Rex Ryan is.
Some of us actually watch other teams beside the Giants and kind of have an idea whats going on in the NFL outside of our one favorite team. Others are Exit 172
And his take on Favre is on the money too. The masses on BBI may hate the guy and there is no doubt that he has had some brutal fuck ups in big games over the years but he's still a HOF QB and he was a huge factor in Minny's div win this year.
Prior to June 2008 I don't think I mentioned Brett Favres name 5 times on this site in my 5 years here before that. My defense for Favre sprung from the absurd knocks on a first ballot HOF QB who has had an absolutely amazing career. Even worse is when people who said he would suck this year and didn't even pick the Vikes to make the post season start taking bows after last week, as if they were somehow "right", when he was a top 5 QB this year at age 40, took his team to an NFC title game and probably makes the SB if not for a handful of Vike mistakes that had nothing to do with him
Or am I wrong simply because the Vikes did not win the SB after the guy had just about as good a year as a QB can possibly have
Over the course of an entire season, Favre was unquestionably one of the elite players in the NFL this year. The Vikings may not have even made the playoffs without Favre. Is that all rendered moot because of one dumb play in crunch time? Maybe.
Its not as if the resume' is lacking much of anything. For all the talk about some of his playoff mishaps, when you start 24 playoff games (which is the most in history) not all are going to go great. Thats a lot of games. And you don't start that many playoff games by exiting early each time you make it. You don't start that many playoff games either unless you are an absolutely stunningly good QB, because that involves a lot of years where you led your team to post season (hes only had one losing season in 18 seasons as a starter).
Consider how many playoff games he won, consider how many times he advanced deep into postseason, consider the fact that he basically holds every playoff passing record much like he does in the regular season, and its just a foolish argument to make
What he did do was kill their chances with galactic stupidity in the crucial moment. That is indisputable to anyone that watched that play with an unjaundiced eye.
Just like the throw to Dawkins, and the throw to Webster.
You basically had Favre pegged as finished, didn't think they would make the playoffs at all, Now you are going to take bows because they lost an NFC title game? Really? As if you were even 1% right about anything in this? For real?
In the crucial spot, Favre fucked them with his stupidity. It's not the first time he's done that.
Favre acted like the Vikings are his vehicle to do what he pleases...just like he is now, jerking them around AGAIN about retirement. I can't say this any more clearly:
FAVRE DOESN'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT ANYONE BUT HIMSELF. HE THINKS THE TEAMS ARE TOOLS TO SERVE HIM AND HIS LEGACY.
His actions have proven that over and over again, making it hilarious every time that selfishness jumps up and bites him (and regrettably, his teammates) in the ass. But he could give a fuck.
I'm not taking bows. I'm not making anything up. Favre completely fucked his team in the crucial spot and that is beyond discussion. Anyone that tried to counter that simple fact would soon find themselves saying crazy things, like Eli fucking Manning was carried by his defense to a Super Bowl.
Sell that shit on a Vikings board. Or a Favre board. I'm sure they're out there.
And the point about the defense carrying Eli through that postseason is pretty much true whether it fits into your desired revisionist history or not. As if 17 points would have been enough to beat that Pat team any more than 1 time if you played them 20 times. Im sure you thought 17 would be enough to win that game 24 hours earlier on Feb 2nd, or that we would have an earthly shot with 3 points on the board to start the 4th quarter
The defense carried us through that postseason. Not that Eli didn't play well, but they made some of those offensive efforts good enough to win when more times than not they wouldn't have been. Those are just facts
It's not the first or even second time that's happened. Why you'd be surprised or even try to counter it is beyond me.
You want to say Eli did just enough to win? Fine. By that logic, Favre does just enough to lose. One of those classic chokes, to our own Eli Manning.
Just enough to lose.
Manning.
Sorry Joe, but you're never gonna live that one down...
Drama
Go Eli!
But regardless he had the game in his hands at the end. He had it...he had a Super Bowl berth in his hands...and he spit the bit. He gagged. He choked.
And why? Because he doesn't think he needs to throw to the first WR in his progression. He's Brett Favre and he can do what he wants. Just ask him.
He choked. Period. Using the rest of the game as an excuse is BS...particularly if Joe does it after he leveled criticism at the Giants offense after our SNF loss to Philly.
Favre had the game in his hands and he choked. That's all there is to it.
Care to guess how many teams in the last 35 years won a SB by scoring less than that in their playoff run?
I'll tell you. One. a whopping one.
Anyone who doesn't think the defense was FAR AND AWAY the biggest reason we won 42, I don't know what to tell you. And not only was 21.2 good enough to win a SB, it was good enough to beat 3 of the top 5 scoring teams in the NFL that year including the best offense in history
With all that happened in the game, they still had the game right there for them and Favre threw it away. He wasn't the only reason, but he certainly played a large part just like guys like Peterson, Berrian, and Harvin
He made a bad throw (on a play Sidney Rice could have helped him out by coming to the ball, damn straight if thats Eli that would be all Terps would be harping on). He played a damn good game and had a great season
The idea here that people who had him pegged as finished and not even a playoff team could even remotely act like they were right about something here is embarrassing
Only if you are Go Terps and the subject is Brett Favre could someone be driven to say that
I wouldn't be sticking up for Eli. I knocked Eli for his performance against Philly in the playoffs plenty when others were ripping Gilbride.
I did not give a shit about Favre prior to June 08. Not a shit. All my talk about Favre since then has been in the interest of fairness in the face of blatantly stupidity surrounding him here
Facing three high-powered offenses in the last three games, the goal was to grind out the clock and keep those offenses off the field. That goal was accomplished admirably. When the team had to go into a hurry-up mode, such as the last 40 seconds of the first half of the Cowboys game or the final 2 minutes of the Patriots game, Eli kicked ass and took names. Against that same tough Patriots defense, his offense put up 35 points in the regular season. Does that make it better, even though it was a losing effort?
I can sort of see your need to defend Favre. I don't see your need to drag down Eli Manning in order to puff up another quarterback. If Favre is as great as you say he is, his career should speak for himself without comparisons to other quarterbacks.
All of a sudden after he retired and unretired in the 08 offseason it became fashionable here to bash the guy by spouting some absolutely ridiculous nonsense. It was at that point I started to defend the guy because i felt a lot of the criticism was unfair
Trust me. You won't find a #4 hanging in my closet. You won't see a Favre poster on my wall. Im not even a huge Favre fan. Im merely defending a guy who is as slam dunk a first ballot HOFer as any player in the past quarter century
Just last week you said he "maybe" would want that throw back and basically said for a while that it wasn't a terrible decision or throw. You finally gave in on that point after a while.
And that throw was a complete choke job. There's no other way around it, no matter how he played until that point, and you're overrating how he played up to that point. He played pretty well, but he wasn't great. He had a killer INT earlier in the game as well.
He threw that ball with two hands around his throat at the end. It was a choke job at the end
The game should have never come to that if the Vikes didn't have the littany of mistakes they did earlier in the game
Game on the line- inside the OPP 40yd line, 3rd down.
Most people would say that if you throw an INT at that point, you choked.
Most people would say that if you threw and INT when there was room to run and you had open recievers on the sideline and you threw late across your body across the middle you choked- regardless of what you did during the rest of the game.
During the regular season and throughout the playoffs up until the 4th quarter of the NFC Championship, Favre had a fantastic, great season. Nobody is disputing that.
But, on a 3rd and 5, with 4 defenders on him, he didn't throw a miraculous pass that got the first down. Nor did he also throw the game winning TD pass by beating a blitz in which the opposition sent 7, with less than 1 minute left in the game.
He choked ON THAT PLAY.
That's it.
He made one of the biggest bonehead throws in playoff history that cost his team the game.
And he didn't just cost them a chance at a real long field goal (hilarious that you said last week they only had a shot at a hail mary).
He could have gotten at least 5 yards by throwing it to Berrian or running himself, at the very minimum. And that's a fact
Would it have been less or more of a choke if he didn't move the ball down the field at all, went 3 and out, and gave the Saints the ball back late in the 4th?
We wouldn't even be talking about this....
We'd be talking about how the Vikes defense choked. Even if they had missed the FG, we'd be talking about how Childress should have never attempted it in the first place.
Peyton Manning is 9-8
13-11 in the postseason is pretty damn solid. In addition his playoff passer rating is higher than Tom Brady who is basically the poster boy for clutchness
Really any argument that labels Favre as some post season choker does not pass the test on any level
How many QBs in NFL history can say that again
One losing season in 18 years will do that
After a good return on the INT they couldn't get in FG range, do you think an incompletion was gonna magically add a minute to the clock?
And Peyton is still one game away from completing his first good playoff run from start to finish because he was a dog for most of the 06 run. A dog.
If either of those had happened, was there realistically time on the clock for the Saints to have gotten the go ahead FG?
I think not.
That is the disconnect.
I've been waiting for it to resurface
gms com att prct yds td in rtg ypa
24 481 791 60.8% 5855 44 30 86.3 7.40
How exactly does he get painted as someone who is a post season choker again?
well the whole 6 degrees of kevin bacon thing or whatever
either way, glad to see it's been revived, though I like the looney illuminati thread guy better
And in the game against Denver he outplayed John elway so badly it wasn't even funny. Best QB on the field that day by a mile, but he was an awful run defender that day allowing TD to run all over his D
You were like 9 when that game was played right?
lately, he hasn't been so clutch in the end
Instead, he tries to force a ball and throws an INT. On the surface, the INT was harmful in only 1 aspect; it eliminated the end of the game scoring chance. However, several bad things could have happened (what would have been the reaction had the player returned the ball further down the field, or scored?).
To truly figure out if he "choked" or not, you need to decide if they would have gone for the long FG, or if they would have decided to punt (I am leaving alone the open primary read). IMO, he choked. A great player, but not the way he wanted to end this season (on an INT).
Ten of favre's playoff games ended with a 100 plus qb rating
Three of those had a rating over 130.
He also has five playoff games where his rating was below 60, but never fell below 50.
Four games in the 80's rating
Two games in the 90's
Three games in the 70's
This wasn't meant to prove anything. Just interesting stats.
gms comp att prct yds td in rtg ypa
23 460 734 62.7% 5772 45 21 95.6 7.86
what was his rating on that last play?
I think most folks would agree that he choked on THE LAST PLAY....
I'm not arguing that he's a first ballot HOF'er. I'm just saying that he choked on the last play of that particular game....
TD/INT Ratio
YPA
Completion %
# of Games
INT/Pass Attempt Ratio
TD/Pass Attempt Ratio
Peyton is a guy who clearly does not play as well when post season comes around although hes changing that this season. Lets see if he can cap off his first ever good playoff run from start to finish as people already crown him the best QB ever
gms comp att pctg yds td int rtg ypa
17 404 647 62.4% 4831 27 18 87.5 7.47
Not as bad as i had thought.
Montana:
TD/Attempt Ratio: 6.13% of passes attempted TD's
INT/Attempt Ratio: 2.86% of passes attempted INT's
TD/INT Ratio: 2.14
Favre:
TD/Attempt Ratio: 5.56%
INT Attempt: 3.79%
TD/INT Ratio: 1.467
So, IMO, Montana, without looking at results, and without normalizing for players around them, was better statistically (which QBR does support).
10 of the 30 in 2 games. 20 in the other 22.
A couple of really bad games puts a dent into postseason numbers that are still very good even counting them (and im not saying don't count them, im saying 2 very poor performances out of 24 really skew the numbers)
Everyone is going to fall short in comparison
Here is the best pro football site ever. Thats where i usually get my stats.
Pro football reference - ( New Window )
Joe Montana was the best playoff QB bar none. But he had his bad days in the playoffs too. He also had 5 games with a rating of 65 or lower, he had back to back years in post season in 85 and 86 where he was sent home with just 3 points on offense
And this is the best in the post season of anyone who has ever done it
Play in enough of them, some of them won't go well
And even he had his down moments
Tom Brady was hailed as mr clutch, but whats happened as hes appeared in more playoff games? Hes bound to have some bad ones and has. He has 2 games with 3 INT in his last 3 playoff games
Not sure how that happened.
But what I and many other posters have been talking about is not Favre's body of work, but that one play...
I wouldn't call him a choke artist over his career...not at all, but he did choke on the last offensive play that the Vikings ran this season.
The Vikes would have never gotten there without him, IMO...but he did choke on that last play.
He also has three games with 3 or more picks in those most recent 8, which is one more than Favre has in his entire playoff career and one game away from tying Jim Kelly and Bradshaw for the most career 3+ INT games in playoff history, and hes done this in just his last 4 post season trips.
Im not saying Favre has been a better playoff QB than Brady. What I am saying and have said is that if you play in enough playoff games some will go poorly, and the more we are seeing from Brady, a guy who was immaculate to start his postseason career, the more we are seeing it with him too
Playing in that many playoff games, you're gonna lose some and you're gonna have bad games in there. But Favre's had 5 or 6 of the type of losses that would follow a player around forever. Romo in Seattle, McNabb puking in the SB-type shit. Multiple times.
But hey he's just having fun out there so it's ok. It's ok to jerk teams around about retirement after you've fucked their season at the crucial moment. It's cool. Because the team is just there to serve Favre.
And Joe, that you really started rooting for Favre once he became a Jet...and his titanic asshole personality was really evident...is not something to be proud of.
And we've pretty much seen that with everyone who has ever played, including the best post season performer of all time in Joe Montana.
Where your bias comes in is that you'll act like Favre is a post season choker and Peyton Manning, who has still yet to cap off a single consistent playoff run, isn't.
Thats one thing you can't bash Favre for in post season. 24 playoff games, held under 17 points just twice
Meanwhile, Peyton, leader of the dominant offense of the decade, is AVERAGING 13 ppg in his 8 playoff losses.
Since you throw all of his starts and only Manning's losses, I don't think that's too fair, eh?
Some QBs in the playoffs have multiple games where they never gave their team a chance
Id venture to guess that is substantially higher than most QBs
I don't get you're dislike of Peyton. I can see you criticizing his previous playoff performances, but I don't see why you root against him. I remember you saying prior to the playoffs that you would actively root against the Colts.
He hasn't done that and i don't believe he will
Didn't lose many playoff games but when he did he lost them primarily because he and his offense played poorly
His offenses showed up far more often than not. Sometimes they got outscored, some of those games he threw some key picks, but it just further shoots down the silly notion that hes some playoff choker
Want to say in post season play he doesn't measure up to Montana or Brady? Fine. But hes not, with any level of objectivity, some playoff underwhelmer in his career
No one is saying Favre isn't a great, great player who has had some statistical playoff success...but no way would I want him and his ego near my football team if I wanted to win a championship and have a disciplined, smart football team.
Peyton Manning last week would have run up the field for a 5 yard gain and let his kicker win the game with a makable 50 yard FG in a dome...he wouldn't have let his ego get in the way and throw a stupid pick. You also think Brett Favre was studying film of defenses from 8 years ago in anticipation of what he may see? No...not at all. Favre is as talented as they come, but he is a mental midget, and has proven it consistently now.
I Disagree highly and don't think this is even up for a debate
I think getting sent home with 3 points on the board, or getting shut out, is far worse than what Favre did last week. I can't believe that this wouldn't be unanimous.
You want to boil it just down to rings, then i assume thats what you feel
I guess Favre is a lesser QB for losing a SB in which he badly outplayed Elway
So yes, it will be up for debate. Unless you are trying to assert as a fact what the ordinal rankings are for "horrible" performances.
I just find that unfathomably silly
You would be far from unanimous about that...they are equally bad as they both equal losses. What Favre did last week was inexcusable. No way can anyone defend him losing that game for the Vikings.
I find it just as "funny" that you are trying to assert your subjective opinion as the group objective fact.
So, again, far from an objective fact. Face it, your opinion carries no more weight than mine. That's no problem; I've come to accept that.
But im talking to someone who blasted Favre for calling a timeout and not knowing the rule there, and then looking like an idiot by not knowing the rule himself
It is a two-fold thing: he played very well that game and he was the reason they were in the position to win the game that they were in....now they are in the position to win the game and it is in his hands to close it out, and he LOST the game for them. Blew it. Totally fucking blew it, because he is an idiot.
By the way, you didn't know the rule either...and your defending his even calling the timeout still makes no sense whatsoever.
These are the types of things you do when you have a bias
And i asked a simple question. Was what Favre did last week as bad as Eli in say 05 vs Carolina or 08 vs the Eagles? Its not an eli thing so much as it is does 1 bad throw equal as bad a game as getting your ass handed to you for 60 minutes?
We seem to have some here who think it is just as bad and i think they're clueless
I'm talking about the 5 vs. 15 yard, which is the part I didn't know, and you didn't know either.
Whether the penalty was 5 yards, 15 yards, or 50 yards, it does not change the fact that he wasnt getting flagged for calling timeout in a deadball situation because there is nothing against the rules for doing so. You also spent that thread telling me how Eli would never do anything of the sort only to be linked to an article on that thread where he did
To think that just because you say so, that Favre's playoff loss is not as bad as losing 17-3 is asinine.
It's a problem with human nature; opinions that you have, based on nothing other than personal preferences, somehow turn into a global truth.
I just can't endorse the fact that you seem to think that your opinion on this subject should be a truth to everyone else, and those who don't subscribe to it are "silly".
I mean, really? By what rating criteria or system are performances like last week from Favre even remotely similar?
But keep bringing Eli up into the conversation. That's a surefire way to get people to adopt to your "truth".
But it's not my argument, so I'm not going to waste my time trying to steer you clear from this.
JOE we know eli played bad his first playoff game vs carolina.....
why cant you admit that favre choked at the end in giving a shot for the vikings to be in super bowl 44
The topic is is what Favre did last week as bad as a performance as a QB who got his ass handed to him for 60 complete minutes and never gave his a team a chance? I say no. Others here say its the same thing
Do you think what Favre did last week was as bad as Kerry Collins in SB 35?
It isn't about Favre being bad in the playoffs...it is about choking that one play...
You are the one that brings up the past stats....others just follow along....
He fucking choked on the last play of the last game he played...that's it....
He's a first ballot HOF, and one of the best ever to play the position.....
But that doesn't erase the fact that he fucking choked on that last play.
Gah!!
McNabb threw for 350 yards in that game, had 3 INT's and could not come through when his team needed him the most with the game on the line.
Favre choked. Again. Period. Eli and Montana and Collins have nothing to do with it.
Like I said before, play in enough playoff games, you will have some clunkers. By and large, any argument that paints him as a poor big game QB, which is an argument you consistently make, is simply foolish
He simply is making the point that a lot of people on BBI lose credibility when it comes to QB's because they consistently rip any QB not named Eli Manning.
And I have no problem with Terps either, he has always been consistent. He does not like 'me first' type of athletes.
I hate to bring Eli into this again because apparently Im an Eli hater now, hes a guy who very few on this site would consider a "me first" guy, but look at his actions. The SD thing was "me first" personified. He also took this team to the cleaners for every cent imaginable in a contract negotiation, compare that to how Tom Brady approached his negotiation years ago. Heck compare that to how Favre played for below market value for years and never held out for more money when he could have and gotten it in 2 seconds
And im not knocking Eli, but hes like every other athlete, looking out for himself above all else.
Its one thing to dislike a player though and another to openly root for him to get injured weekly.
Favre timeline - ( New Window )
Consider that the CAP that year was $41.45 million, compared to 110+million when Eli signed his deal.
So, yeah.
That '94 contract has no business in any discussions...
he took less than he could have gotten in 1997 as well coming off 3 consecutive MVP awards and making less money than most rookie QBs around that time on their rookie deals who went high in the draft. He was making less annually on the 97 deal than Peyton or Leaf made in their 98 rookie deals. Guy who had won 3 straight MVPs vs a guy(s) who had never taken a snap
It would be like Peyton Manning accepting less money than Mark Sanchez
He no doubt could have made more money on that contract
JoeMP2003 : 9:19 am
i agree
Then I realized it was agreeing about going to another thread..Whew..I thought your streak had ended..:o)
So again, don't use that contract as an argument for how Saint-like Favre is when it comes to getting paid.
In year 1, Marino made more , Bledsoe made more . Aikman made more. The deal at the time essentially made him the 4th highest paid QB in the NFL at a time when he was the best. And those are just QBs, some defensive players like Deion and hugh Douglas were also making more money than Favre at that time (Salaries page, you can see NFC by changing the URL http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/sfn/afcsal.htm)
He has less guaranteed, but that doesn't mean anything unless you think the Giants are going to cut Eli and they certainly aren't.
He certainly cashed in in 01
And its a little different comparing Eli and this contract negotiation to Favre in 1997. Eli is not the best player in the NFL, as Favre was then. Some might argue hes on the fringe of being a top 10 QB
Its not like Tom Brady signed for 2 million a year either. He too took a discount but was still paid handsomely
Still paid him like a top 5-6 QB, but he could have gotten much more if he pushed the issue
Its actually highly similar to what Favre did in 1997.
By year 3 of his contract he was not even among the top 10 paid QBs in football.
highest paid player in nfl history - ( New Window )
When Favre signed that contract to pay him roughly 6-7mil annually, Kordell Stewart signed a contract one year later that paid him close to 6 himself. And thats Kordell Stewart
Ive posted the numbers and data to back up how he was never at any point the highest paid QB in the NFL on that deal and as early as year 3 was not even in the top 10
That guy....not only is he just like a kid out there playing the game in the back yard, but he isn't in it for the money at all...
""
Sounds to me like you were saying favre saved his team a lot of money too, unlike eli.
We are not talking about clunkers. We're talking about losses that would taint the careers of other players, such was the nature of the mistakes made. That's the point you either don't get or more likely have never wanted to.
Favre's had 5 LEGENDARY playoff fuckups that go in the Hall of Fame of playoff fuckups. It stopped merely being a factor of the number of appearances a long time ago.
Brett Favre was the best QB in the NFL for a good period of time but was never at any time the highest paid QB in the NFL
What I said is he certainly could have held out for more money and I believe that 1000%
Let's move on. Favre's team is no longer relevant to this football season. When Favre begins his annual retirement mulling, we can start to discuss him again. :)
You pick and choose what you want to make someone look worse with because of your bias. You hate this player, you openly root for this player to get injured. You called him soft and afraid of contact for not running on the last play. anyone with a brain and 2 eyes who watched that game and isn't batshit crazy biased would never come to such an assertion like that. A soft player doesn't finish that game with the beating he took
Favre had the game in his hands, and blew it. Indisputable.
You are biased beyond belief and quite frankly cannot be taken seriously on this subject or any subject that Favre is involved in
I have athletes i dislike as well, but your obsession with hating him is downright unhealthy. Ive never hated an athlete so much that ive prayed he would suffer a career ending injury or get "carried off the field in a box" (direct quote from you)
Favre highest paid player in nfl - ( New Window )
Lets drop this
Link - ( New Window )
By year 3 of that new contract he was not even among the top 10 highest paid QB
Marino made more , Bledsoe made more . Aikman made more. The deal at the time essentially made him the 4th highest paid QB in the NFL at a time when he was the best. And those are just QBs, some defensive players like Deion and hugh Douglas were also making more money than Favre at that time (Salaries page, you can see NFC by changing the URL http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/sfn/afcsal.htm)
The last two seasons you've been chugging his cock at every opportunity, keeping us apprised of his accomplishments and such. When he fell flat on his face with the Jets, you made excuses. When he pulled the retirement facade in the offseason, you didn't have much to say (that I can recall). All this season with the Vikings you updated his stats for us like we gave a shit.
And then, when he spit the bit you made excuses. He's 40 and beat up...why should he run on that play? Why didn't Rice help him out (that's a doozie)? Favre carried them despite the turnovers (I guess Peterson's 122 yds and 3 TDs played no part).
Everything but the truth. Favre spit the bit.
For the last time...the play called for Favre to roll right and look at Berrian first. Berrian was wide open to set up about a 40-45 yard FG. Favre could have ran to set up about a 50 yard FG. He could have thrown the ball away. He did none of these things. Instead he went for the big play and it fucked his team's shot at a Super Bowl.
Why can't you admit that? Call me subjective all you want...I am. But is there anything in that last paragraph that is not a fact?
Favre had a routine throw to an open man to win the game. Instead he choked away a Super Bowl for the Vikings. That's it. Deal with it. Your boy choked.
When it comes to this player you are deranged. When you hate someone enough to root for them to get "carried off the field in a box" and openly root for them to get "high-lowed every week" I just can't take anything you say seriously. You actually believe the guy did not run because hes soft
I dislike Peyton Manning. I root against him. The difference is my dislike for him does not spill over into an unhealthy obsession. Brett Favre could die in a car accident today and it would make your week
Yea, torn biceps tendon in your throwing arm that requires surgery and is instant IR for many players is no big deal.
Link - ( New Window )
Rooting against Tony Romo or Donovan McNabb, etc.. that makes plenty of sense.. but Peyton Manning? Why? Because the majority of BBI roots FOR him?
JoeMP2003 : 10:51 am
I;m just not going to continue this with you
When it comes to this player you are deranged.
I started posting here in Jan 03
JoeMP2003 : 2/1/2010 8:41 pm
If you could even find 5 mentions of Brett Favre from me in the 5 1/2 years between Jan 03 and June 08, that would be a lot. Never brought the guy up, never defended him whatsoever.
All of a sudden after he retired and unretired in the 08 offseason it became fashionable here to bash the guy by spouting some absolutely ridiculous nonsense. It was at that point I started to defend the guy because i felt a lot of the criticism was unfair. Every point ive made about Favre has been in the interest of fairness
Trust me. You won't find a #4 hanging in my closet. You won't see a Favre poster on my wall. Im not even a huge Favre fan. Im merely defending a guy who is as slam dunk a first ballot HOFer as any player in the past quarter century
What a dick.
He should be more like Favre and jerk his teammates around each offseason about whether or not he's going to retire. Then "make up his mind" after camp is over. Class act.
It is all your doing.
You have become obsessed with Brett Favre.
How do you maintain the cognitive dissonance necessary to call Go Terps deranged in regards to Favre?
Excuse me for being respectful enough to grant someone a reply
By all accounts Peyton is a great guy? What about the account of a woman who named him in a sexual harrassment suit and then sued him for slander (and he settled with her)
Thats not the reason i dislike Peyton though. I don't pretend to know any of these guys personally
You responded. Cool.
You then dragged Go Terps's name into the mix.
You knew the result of your actions, you went for it anyway. We are to believe this was mere chance, your following up the Favre comments and the inevitable devolution into another mind numbing argument?
At any point, at any time, in the past 2 years, you could have opted to walk away from any of these threads. Time and again, without fail, you not only never decline a Favre argument, you push and poke and prod to generate one.
You're quickly becoming a one-note, and you're generally too good of a football poster for that.
I don't want to see Peyton Manning get injured. I don't want him carried off the field in a box. I merely want to see his team lose
It doesn't make Favre's performance in New Orleans, or in Philly, or at home against us and the awful Eli Manning any less of a choke.
You are a great poster, one of my favorite ever on this site. Im not just saying that. I mean that. But on this subject you say a lot of stupid shit because you hate the player. You actually stated he did not run on the last play because he is soft
I said that you responded to Favre comments and mustered a 300 page debate out of them, not that you invoked this player's name first.
"I didn't start it, they did!" is not an argument you want to make. Exit may have started it, but you have been finishing "it" for over 250 posts now.
The common denominator in all of these hundreds plus threads regarding Brett Favre, the New York Jets etc is you.
Believe me i did not come here with the intention of getting involved in another Brett Favre debate for the 1 millionth time
JoeMP2003 : 2/1/2010 8:21 pm
during the SB run averaged 21.2 ppg
Care to guess how many teams in the last 35 years won a SB by scoring less than that in their playoff run?
I'll tell you. One. a whopping one.
Anyone who doesn't think the defense was FAR AND AWAY the biggest reason we won 42, I don't know what to tell you. And not only was 21.2 good enough to win a SB, it was good enough to beat 3 of the top 5 scoring teams in the NFL that year including the best offense in history
This is the standard post from Joe when discussing the giants SB run. He uses it to backhand Eli for some insane reason. It is also the reason his moniker as JoeyStats is growing.
He takes something that all of us have seen and he tries to tell us that what we saw didn't happen. He tries to tell us that eli didn't have a hand in winning the Super Bowl, but was simply along for a magical ride that the defense delivered. He looks at STATS and claims that our offensive output was poor BECAUSE OF OUR POINT AVERAGE!!! He won't even acknowledge that Eli is the only QB in history to throw two 4th quarter TD, and the only one to win a SB by throwing a TD pass under two minutes when it was needed to win. Instead, he says there was only one other team who scored less average points while winning a SB.
He constantly tells us things that are the opposite of what we see. He tells us that Favre didn't screw up at the end of the Saints game even though we all know he did. It doesn't make Favre a bad QB, but joe can't separate the two arguments.
He tells us that sanchez this year was just like eli in '07 despite the fact we all saw otherwise. He debates it to death as if he has insight the rest of the board is lacking.
This isn't about the Jets, Eli, Farve, and least of all about hat fat fuck Rex Ryan. It is about the tear Joe is on where his version of reality is completely detached from everyone else's. and he's proud of it.
What part of "you can walk away and never do, you instead seek this out and revel in the discussion, it is your own damn fault" do you not comprehend?
You are the common denominator here. The antagonists may change, the instigators may change, the civil debaters on your side or the other side may change, but you are the constant.
The first comments about Favre were in connection to your massive meltdown last week. A meltdown that you're coming close to repeating right now.
No one is going to take you seriously in an argument about Favre or the Jets. You've argued way too passionately on the subject to have any veneer of objectivity, and people still remember your gems such as , "Eli Fucking Manning."
The more you talk on the subject, the more you go from being one of the better posters on the site to being a one-note joke. Maybe others baited you, but you're the one who keeps adding fuel to the fire here.
You've said at least twice now that you're "done" with this thread, but you keep coming back to bash your head against the wall some more. You're not going to change anyone's opinions here. Just walk away and ignore this crap. Please.
Link - ( New Window )
He talks too much and got 2 gifts to get in the playoffs.
Because the Jets played well in 2 playoff wins.
Claiming they're the show in town now.
His prediction they were the favorites to win the SB.
What am I forgetting?
You ARE a Giant fan so I don't see what reason you'd have to hate Peyton Manning from a football perspective.. and he's obviously not a guy who has off-field issues that make him dislikable, either.
He takes something that all of us have seen and he tries to tell us that what we saw didn't happen. He tries to tell us that eli didn't have a hand in winning the Super Bowl
Um, no thats not what i said. I said the defense was leaps and bounds the key to that run and enabled us to win through a couple of offensive performances that the overwhelming majority of the time would have gotten us beat. This is true and is clearly evidenced by the fact that we won a SB scoring less in the postseason than all but one team in the last 35 years
I do acknowledge that. Do you acknowledge that 17 points would be enough to beat the Pats maybe 1 out of every 20 times you played them, and we were fortunate that day was the one, in large part because our defense held the best offense in history to 14 points? Do you acknowledge the fact that Eli was very fortunate the defense allowed him a stage to do what he did in the 4th quarter as opposed to the game already being over most times when you have 3 points on the board to start the 4th quarter?
This isn't about the Jets, Eli, Farve, and least of all about hat fat fuck Rex Ryan. It is about the tear Joe is on where his version of reality is completely detached from everyone else's. and he's proud of it.
Again, my version of reality is pretty damn on point with 90% of the people who watched that playoff run. This is a Giants site, which is the only reason im in the minority
Before this year I felt Favre would play well and pretty much since the first time I saw that Jet defense in week 1 I knew they had a formidable squad this year
I was in the minority around here on both counts. Id say this year did nothing but prove me right on both Favre and the Jets
You should also do some research on the career Bobby Engram had before you go thumbing your nose at him
See, thats my opinion. It differs from yours and possibly others. And since it differs from yours, yours is not fact and makes it debatable.
This was the simple point kicker was trying to make last night.
And I'm sorry, but this is wrong:
I guarantee you if you asked people who watched the SB why the giants won, you'd get responses ranging from Eli to Tyree to Plaxico. You wouldn't get many votes for the D. Did the D play excellently - yes. That doesn't mean eli didn't play well too.
You again can't seem to separate these topics. Either that or you refuse to for some insane reason.
This is the second thread that has run up hundreds of posts because you can't just walk away. You know you're not going to change the opinions of Terps et al, but you keep hammering away at the same argument. And the result is that you're becoming a parody.
And again, you've already said twice that you were finished here. Why keep coming back to this thread if that's true?
I guarantee you if you asked people who watched the SB why the giants won, you'd get responses ranging from Eli to Tyree to Plaxico. You wouldn't get many votes for the D.
Beat the greatest offense in NFL history by a final of 17-14 and hit Tom Brady 23 times. And it was more about Eli.
That was as dominant a performance by a defensive line the SB has ever seen
Who cares whether it is better to play like dogshit a whole playoff game and lose, rather than play well and then lose the game for your team because of a boneheded play? YOU LOSE BOTH WAYS!
Favre's stupidity has now cost his team's numerous playoff games, and for all of his great playoff success, only has one Super Bowl to show for it in his 18 years in the league.
I would rather have Peyton Manning and his occasional clunkers, than Favre and his idiotic end of game plays, because I know Peyton won't make those mistakes in a close game. In the aggregate, a Peyton-type player is then going to come out with more Super Bowl titles that way (as he is about to, and will probably win another one or two down the line).
And I'll say it again, as crazy as Joe thinks it is: Give me Eli Manning in a big playoff game over Brett Favre any day of the week. Folks outside of Giants land don't think that statement is as crazy as Joe thinks, especially if they were shown the evidence of what Favre has done numerous times in big spots vs, what Eli has done, and is capable of doing in the future. I also don't see why the statement is so crazy, because ELI BEAT FAVRE HEADS-UP ON BRETT"S TURF! If that isn't empirical evidence, I don't know what is.
Bobby Engram had a heck of a career. You catch 650 balls for nearly 8,000 yards in the NFL, its foolish to thumb your nose at the player. I also, for the one millionth time, called Steve Smith a better version of Bobby Engram. In the dictionary, here is how the word "better" is described.
betâ‹…ter
1  /ˈbɛtər/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [bet-er]
–adjective, compar. of good with best as superl.
1. of superior quality or excellence
does that clear it up for you now?
Do many fans remember the Giants defensive performance in '86? No. they remember Simms going 22-25 and then going to Disney World.
I don't think you have your hand on the pulse of football fans as much as you think you do.
Im still waiting for him to cap off the first ever post season in his career where he played consistently well from start to finish. Is that too much to ask? Just once?
Hate on Eli all you want. He took the field down 4 points against a team playing for the title of Greatest Team Ever...and walked off that field a champion.
If Eli never plays another snap, everything was worth it for that drive alone.
Unfortunately for those guys their defenses did not fair nearly as well as ours did, and football is a team game
Regardless of anything else, that is special
Eli then does it again to win the biggest game of the year. How does he not get credit for that?
And yet you root for Favre. Interesting.
By the way, as crappy as I think Delhomme has become...he played as well in that Super Bowl as any QB I have ever seen.
also, please let me know why he's even brough Delhomme and McNabb into the conversation by saying if their defenses did the job, they would have rings, too?
He continually, and let me stress, continually makes it sound like the only reason the giants beat the Pats was because of their D. And he claims 90% of football fans agree with him.
I'm done, we just have an extremely different philosophical perspective on how team sports works. It's way more than just numbers. You always seem to look at other guys with the glass half full and all your own guys with the glass half empty.
I just cannot take hearing what one guy did last week is a choke and a guy getting shut out isn't
IMO, I really don't think it matters if Peyton does not put up big numbers, as long as he wins the game, he has catapulted himself into the "greatest" of all time debate.
Ok, now I'm done.
Seriously, how is this guy not a gigantic asshole?
Link - ( New Window )
No matter though...he threw a wounded duck to Samuel on the next play.
Great performance! Much better than Eli's!
This SB was played 5 years ago, not like it was in 1978. You basically bashed the guy for throwing a 3rd pick on a drive where he had a shot to win the game. It was essentially a hopeful lob over the middle of the field and a prayer for a miracle in a dire circumstance
So what if the "fans" remember Manning? There are fans out there who think that dragging a stuffed eagle in a Westbrook jersey around a stadium parking lot affects the outcomes of football games. You probably don't want your average "fan" making critical decisions about your favorite football team yet you rely on them to opine on what truly determines success on the field?
I think debating McNabb's 3rd INT might be a wee bit less inconsequential, especially when you are asserting that McNabb could have a ring, too, if only his D played better.
I guess McNabb's prior two INTs are still better than Eli's one?
I guess Eli coming up big and winning a Super Bowl on a last minute-drive is still not as good as continuing to throw INTs to lose your team the game?
We should all let Eli know that he needs to start throwing dumb-ass picks in the end of games to be a great QB as opposed to what he usually does in the end of close games: WIN.
For some reason, two units apparently can't both play well in Joe's line of logic.
What's amusing is that Joe actually criticized our offense after we lost 45-38 on SNF to Philly this year. He said something to the extent of (and I'm sorry if I get this wrong, I don't remember the exact quote) playing the game the developed in front of you.
I guess that didn't apply in SB XLII. It's not enough to win...you have to be THE reason your team won.
Now I can see why Joe likes Favre so much.
17 points was enough to beat the best offense of all time because our defense came to play that day and put on a performance that was just about as good as any D has authored in a SB when you take into account the competition we faced, the best offense in the history of the league
21 was enough to beat Dallas because our defense abused them to a degree that they had not been abused with Owens in the lineup that year outside of maybe one off day all year. We stopped them 3 times in that 4th quarter on drives that started at near midfield because the offense could not do squat or move the ball at all when it came time to try and kill clock. The D bailed us out by getting stop after stop
No one is trying to take away anything from the defense. But to say that Manning didn't factor into that win in a huge way is just dense. And that's not to mention that the goal of the game was to make it a low-scoring affair. The Giants offense won the time of possession (albeit barely), which helped the defense immensely.
Comparatively, Joe's argument would be like saying that OJ Anderson and the offense deserve no credit for Super Bowl XXV because the defense held the mighty Bills to 19 points.
Didn't we win the fucking game because we scored 14 4th quarter points?
This is just the stupidest, most nonsensical shit I've ever heard.
Our game plan in that game was to keep Brady off of the field...we did that by using the short passing game, and running the ball. If we had decided to open it up, then we would have scored a ton of more points, similar to the week 17 game where Eli lit up the Pats D for 35 points. The problem is that Coughlin, in some boneheaded decision to try to win the game as opposed to having Eli put up better numbers and have our offense score a ton of points, decided to use the keep Brady off the field game plan. I think it worked.
Sure, what you do up to the moment of truth, makes it possible to have that moment of truth..But when you reach that moment of truth, it's how you do, more often than not at that point, that determines your legacy..Stats may get you into the HOF, but for the purists who follow the game, it's what you do when the gun is pointed at your head..
That said, as great as they were, our D choked when the chips were down, when that moment of truth arrived..Eli, didn't
YIKES!
The offense still had 9 or 10 drives that day like they do in every game. They didn't come in intending to score 17 points thinking it would be enough to beat the highest scoring offense of all time
Style over substance. It's not whether or not you win...it's how you look doing it. It's his prerogative, I guess.
While they might not have intentionally not scored every drive, they certainly intentionally tried to shorten the game, just like the giants did in '90 to beat the Bills.
Are you that dense that you won't concede a point by reverting to making shit up?
However, he did not produce the type of world-beating effort that would have been necessary to beat a typical Pats performance that season. Not even close. We only scored 3 points through 3 quarters, which meant game over against that Pats team - unless the defense came up huge, which ours did.
Another epic beating, Terps and Fatman putting on a clinic.
Joe doesn't think that the two can be that way. He keeps offering proof that Eli wasn't that good by pointing to how good the defense was.
also Go Terps - I agree with Joe sucking off the superstar athletes like he does in all of the sports he likes...championships dont matter..just the stats and the ME persona
Off the top of my head there were at least two other drives I could think of..The drive that ended with a deflection off Smith's hands for an INT and of course the final drive
The problem is that, while you say everyone thinks the D played very well, people still automatically have this ranking where it's Eli first, the defense second, which just isn't true, IMO.
In the end, it might not be as important as we're all making it out but I still don't think it's true.
To say otherwise shows a great deal of ignorance.
DC - you get the credit my man!
Even with the longest drive in SB history on the first drive T.O.P. broke even in the game
Favre fucked up? so what, Joe has to show us the Eli fucks up too. Jets make a deep run this year. So what, Joe has to say that we should be happy because Sanchez and Eli had mirror-image performances and were carried by their D's.
Giants win a SB - Carolina and Philly don't. So what, eli only has a ring because of the D.
It all comes back to there being demerits against eli. Why? I sure the fuck don't know.
SB 25 this was not. Both teams had 9-10 drives in the game, both teams came in with intentions of scoring more points than they did
The fact is, you don't expect to hold the Patriots to 14 points, ever. You don't expect to win any game against that group with 17 on the board offensively
We did. Because our defense played about the best game any unit has played in a SB given their level of comp
I never thought I'd see a Giant fan disparage what Eli and the offense did in that final drive. I still don't think I have, because I don't think we're dealing with a Giants fan here.
Remember one more thing, our OL was not exactly doing a great job in pass-pro for much of the game. Eli often had a fair amount of pressure.
Its stating facts
Not that that even fucking matters.
Was anyone riding the D's jock when Brady and Co. got the ball with 7 minutes remaining and methodically drove down the field to take the lead?
It's nice that Joe can pick and choose the details he remembers from the game. I bet he wouldn't be talking about the defense's great performance if we'd lost 14-10, you know, seeing that Brady and Welker and Moss basically walked the ball into the End Zone from 80 yards out on the Pat's last scoring drive...
What a horrid guy to have. all he does is win. Who wants that?
JoeMP2003 : 12:52 pm
disparaging Eli to claim the defense played a bigger role in our SB run than him, by far
Its stating facts
When the QB leads a team on 2 4th quarter drives, including one in the final minute of play, there is no "by far" about it.
As good as the D was, if Eli doesn't complete a historic drive, we don't win the game. How does this point keep escaping you?
Is it too much to give Eli AND the D credit? One doesn't have to be great and the other shitty, you know?
Yeah, that's what I want!
Favre accounted for 3 scores that day and didn't turn the ball over. Threw the longest TD pass in super bowl history and led his offense to 28 points
Just silly
All of a sudden, Eli only won the game because of not one, but THREE fuckups by the Pats D.
You can't make this shit up. What a fucking moron!
And yes, I've resorted to personal insults because it is just too fucking over the top in the level of shitty logic.
Its amusing
Its amusing
At this point, I don't expect you to adhere to or even follow your own reasoning.
JoeMP2003 : 12:58 pm
The only reason we "needed" that last drive to win is because the offense couldn't get out of their own damn way for much of that day before that
A completely bullshit point of view. Why couldn't our offense get out of their own damn way, but when the Pats failed to move the ball it was only because of a Hurculean defensive showing?
The holes in your logic would make the Swiss envious.
Who's silly Joe?
Eli bailed them out by scoring at the end of the half to tie it (a legendary drive, imo), and then Romo choked the game away late. Defense didn't even make a stop until the last minute of the 3rd Q.
You can call that 'just stats' all you want. People have a habit of not liking stats when they don't fit into their agenda. Im just not gonna sit there and wax poetically about what a great job our offense did in the 2007 playoffs. Sorry. Little thing about facts getting in the way
After all, they'd just given up a 20 play drive and had Barber walk over them.
If Favre were our QB, we may have scored more points, but we would not have put our defense in beneficial positions to succeed, and it would have been a higher scoring game, and likely a loss. And if the game played out as it did, Favre surely would have thrown a pick like he always does late in games. You think Favre makes that check down to Smith on 3rd and 11? Yeah, right...that would have been an insult to him...he would have gunned it between three defenders, and been picked off.
That's rich, Joe...I mean, you can't make up these levels of self awareness...
No...and why? Because Favre was their QB.
Suck on that big, fucking stat since you love them so much.
Don't worry, I already know you will conveniently ignore it because that stat doesn't fit your agenda.
Have you seen the black kettle anywhere?
HAHAHAH, when the hell did I say that? I said quite the opposite actually. I praised Eli for taking what was given to him whereas Favre would have tried to force the ball into the teeth of the defense. You misconstrued that as us game planning for short passes because we were afraid of Eli. It was total bull shit.
Anyone who watched that playoff run knows that Eli Manning was an integral part of the Giants winning the Super Bowl that season. If Brett Favre was the Giants QB that year, the Giants would NOT have won the title and I can say that with utmost certainty. Period.
some sort of universal truth, is the height of arrogance. This has happened too much on this thread. Thanks to RinR for catching on.
I just love the fact that Eli Manning, who hadn't won a playoff game prior to 2007 and hasn't won one since, shit the bed entirely in his last playoff game, shit the bed entirely in the last 2 weeks this year with the playoffs potentially in our grasp, is now the standard for which we judge clutchness
FMiC- If you know how to add and subtract and read my post you wouldn't be mentioning the 72 phins
So at least this thread created some interesting trivia, if nothing else.
He's on record to say that Samuel's dropped INT and the Tyree catch were the only reasons eli succeeded, as if hypotheticals should take away from the accomplishment. And then he makes the ridiculous claim that 90% of football fans know what he knows.
I just don't know why it is so hard to give both the defense and the offense credit? How does a Giants fan diminish one of the best wins in team history? Really?
Consider the shark jumped, statsy.
"When the game is on the line, you give me Eli over anyone else."
Link - ( New Window )
I mean, really.. you can't make this shit up. And while we're at it, we'll just ignore the 144.4 QBR he posted in the Week 15 game against Washington when he threw for over 260 yards, 3 TDs and 0 picks.. but yeah, I guess we'll just conveniently leave that one out.
In '69, the Chiefs scored 23, 13 and 17 for an average of 17.6
Should I continue to add and divide? As far as I know, you don't subtract when generating averages, and I've found two teams who scored less than the giants and another one who matched, and I'm only to 1970.
1972, 1969, aren't within those 35 years. Maybe if you want to check them all our offensive output may have been the 3rd or 4th lowest ever.
Should we attach more qualifiers? How about the last two years? We were dead last in scoring average.
I'm so fucking glad I didn't take a sip of soda before reading your disclaimer, or I'd have ruined a fucking keyboard.
Now you want to go back to 1970 and brag we may have been the 3rd or 4th lowest scoring offense ever to win a SB. As if that does nothing but strengthen the point that our offensive effort in the playoffs was one of the least productive of any SB winner ever
If there has ever been a stat used solely for the purpose of furthering a shaky viewpoint, that is he posterchild for it.
There are sufficient details to show that both eli and the D played well in the SB run. There are also sufficient evidence to show that each unit had plays they did not make where the other unit had to come in and save the day.
The Offense picked up a defense that gave up a go ahead TD with two minutes to go. Yet, you never seem to give a shit about that.
I'll ask for the umpteenth time - why?
Cannot make this shit up
Im really done here now, i promise. Because this is a no win situation amongst absurd homerism
Stats don't tell the whole story Joe, but you just can't see that. You sit there and dish out stats and assume they support your argument, but you can't see the forest for the trees and are too stubborn to realize it.
That's how fucking dense it is to use that correlation.
When you have the game in hand because the defense is playing "lights-out", you don't call long bombs. You run the ball, and throw short, safe passes.
If the defense is playing horribly, at some point you let it all out and start throwing it all over the field.
This is why stats just don't work in football like they do in baseball. There are too many variables...You can't just use one stat to determine how well a particular part of a team is playing.
Obviously, scoring points should be one of the most important stats, but it just does not tell the whole story. Did you ever think that maybe if the defense wasn't playing so hot that we would have scored more? I mean, we did in week 17 of 2007, didn't we? Against the same team that we scored only 17 against in the SB. What was the biggest difference in the 2 games?
Well, in the first one, the defense didn't have their best showing and gave up a bunch of points. Hmmmm...wonder if that had an effect on the offensive play calling?
In the second one, the defense was playing the game of their lives...I wonder if maybe that had an effect on the offensive playcalling?
Naw, I'm just being dense because the stats don't back up my argument.
I should stop kidding myself. Eli got carried because the offense only averaged 21pts a game in the playoffs, and because they only scored 17 in their SB win.
Glad to see this broken record revived though
Generally people don't like stats when they don't back up an argument they want to make
I think if anything people are questioning the stats being used.
To show that the offense averaged X amount of points and it was the 2nd lowest as being indicative that eli wasn't effective even though the results proved otherwise is foolish.
Anyway it is a strawman argument. You are dismissing the stat that eli was the only QB to throw for a TD in the final minute when his team needed it to win.
once again, you fit the stats you want to your argument and think the rest of them are bullshit, and yet have the gall (or stupidity) to question others who are doing the same thing.
While I dont dispute this, you have to admit the inverse is true especially in your case which is:
"Generally people use stats to back up an argument they want to make"
I said it earlier in the thread, but Joe had also brought up Peytons name and that he would have play well in the SB to be considered in the "greatest" of all time argument. I disagree, if Peyton wins and has similar stats to what he put up three years ago, or plays poorly for that matter, but they still win. Peyton has to be considered one of the all time best. Him having to play well from the first playoff game through the Super Bowl (if they win), should not be a deciding factor given Joe's reasoning.
Of course Eli played better than Sanchez did (although not by a ton, Sanchez played a lot better than many here give him credit for). But my point is and has been that the offense in general during that playoff run was pretty damn average, and poor by SB winner standards
Simply put, this argument pops up because Joe somehow wants to rag on eli whenever Favre is brought up. all of eli's successes are excused away as him being carried by others, while all of favre's failures are excused away as him trying to make plays or the fact that his other successes trump his big game failures.
Apparently when one QB fucks up, it is everyone else's fault and when the other QB succeeds, it is also everyone else's fault. I have a headache trying to follow the logic. i also have a headache wondering why anyone would try to knock eli's performance in the SB for any reason.
You don't actually say that Eli wasn't good, but I think it's exactly what you meant.
Why are there numerous posts about the defense carrying eli.
Why are there numerous posts talking about how pitiful the offensive output was.
Why are there numerous posts saying that if eli had played better he wouldn't have had to throw the TD pass at the end?
Why?
What has Eli done in big games again other than rely on his defense to not need him to do much of anything?
Marj Sanchez was damn near as good in these playoffs as Eli was in 07 and played nearly the same role. His defense gave up 30 in a playoff game though so he couldn't continue his little manage the game and score 20 points ride
Mark Sanchez 09 playoff run and Eli's 07 playoff run were very similar. If you don't agree with this I don't know what to tell you. The numbers back it up too.
Not do much of anything? Eli Manning drove the giants to a game-winning TD. If he did not do that "little" thing, they would have lost.
That is the fact. And throwing a game winning TD certainly is more than "much of anything". How you can stand by that statement is laughable.
Pride just makes you look like a fucking idiot.
Check it - ( New Window )
How is that a catch he "has to make"? And why do you seem so eager to want him to make it?
We were again, very fortunate to even be in that game when the 4th quarter started
2 years ago today, one day before SB 42, if i told you the Giants would have 3 points on the board to start the 4th and 17 for the game you and everyone else would have given us about a 3% chance of winning the game. But we did. Because the defense played balls out and allowed us to win with an offensive effort that gets us beat 90% of the time
Do you hold that performance to the same standard as Eli's?
If anyone says anything other than the defense, they're wrong.
It is that simple.
Joe, they are your opinions. Your interpretation of how he played. Its bad enough that your stance on how Eli played in 2007 playoff run has you on the receiving end of some hostile responses. You dont need to compound it by trying to pass off your opinions as fact.
Eli was hardly along for the ride, but the defense held one of the greatest [offensive] teams in history to 14 points.
Apparently, the offense should have scored 30 points or more to make the victory look better and since they didn't, Eli couldn't get out of his own way for most of the game (Joe's words).
Opinion:
Eggs taste good.
JoeMP2003 : 4:32 pm
those 88 49ers, over 27 ppg during that post season
I never said he played poorly. Ever
Stats are simply numbers. Stats cannot lie. They are facts.
People can twist stats, bend stats, overvalue stats, undervalue stats, cherry pick stats and generally manipulate stats to paint the picture they so desire.
The stats themselves are not inaccurate or dishonest, the person is.
I already showed "JoeyStats" here on the 1000 post monstrosity the litany of stats that demonstrate how wrong he was, and his response was "Yeah well, you are wrong! The stat I care about is how many points the defense gave up, and it fits my argument, so your evidence is nonsense".
He actually said this.
Stats are not wrong, people using them are.
They went through the first 3 quarters with 3 more points than we did, and were trailing 13-6 starting the 4th. The only TD they'd conceded at that point was on a kickoff return, so their defense was balls to the wall against the #1 offense in the league that year and the NFL's MVP in Esiason.
So would you say that the 49er defense carried Montana that day?
Now, that is a function of the fact that most people who follow football gravitate to the players that made the winning plays or who won the MVP, but it refutes your opinion that 90% of people think the defense won the game.
I may know that the defense was great that day. You may think that. Joe Public probably only remembers eli.
That was the point.
I'm not using it to say the defense didn't play well. I'm using it to show how detached you really are from reality when it comes to what other fans think.
I know quite a few folks out here in the Midwest that can't stand the Mannings. I don't know what it is, and they can't really even qualify it, but they just do not want either of the Mannings to win.
You've admitted that you don't like Peyton, and don't want to see him win.
Could it be that you are just the opposite of most of us (who are biased because of our love of Eli and all things Giant), and are clouded by your dislike of our starting QB?
JoeMP2003 : 5:14 pm
Here is my factual evidence
4 playoff games, no team scored 21 points on us. And I don't even need several links
Are you arguing otherwise?
You know, the defense that gave up 45 and 31 to Dallas during the season but gave up 17 in the playoff game
The defense that gave up 35 to GB but gave up 20 in the playoff game
The defense that gave up 38 to NE but gave up 14 in the playoff game
You know, the defense that according to all your footballoutsider links was really no better in the playoffs than they were during the season
Can we not agree on that and end this?
*exit JBGiants*
Bravo!
I mean, who cares? I used to strongly dislike the Jets, but I love Rex Ryan.
You sir are full of shit. You've embarrassed yourself since Favre shit the bed and instead of simply admitting that fact have chosen to go on a variety of tangents ranging from the Giant defense's role in the Super Bowl to Favre's salary in 1997.
Your boy choked. And I'll go a step further and say you're no fucking Giant fan. That's your prerogative, but don't piss on my head and tell me it's raining.
You want to hate the Mannings, go right ahead. But you've reached a point where you sound like you wish Samuel caught that ball just so your shitheap arguments here would sound less ridiculous.
Well, he didn't catch the ball. And two weeks before that he went to Green Bay and shoved it up your boy's ass while Favre looked like a bitch the entire night.
There isn't a Giant fan alive that that should bother. But it bothers you.
Hes one pass away from having just as many picks in his playoff career as he does TDs and already has 2 playoff games on the resume where he never led his team to an offensive TD
Some of you guys are Exhibit As in "people that represent why America has become so friggin' sensitive case"
I don't have a problem with Eli. I don't want him carried off the field in a box. I dont root for him to get high lowed every week. Yet you wish that on someone you never met
Ill go one step further and say you need professional help because thats just some wacked out morbid shit
I openly admitted to not reading the thread.
But I do think you were being overly sensitive, and still do.
I do think some of you, Terps especially, are bigger Eli Manning fans than Giants fans
Link - ( New Window )
He is a gunslinger, and exciting to watch. He is a guy who took plenty of painkillers to help extend his career and maintain his consecutive game streak.
Ok, I feel guilty for bringing that up, but that does have some validity, no?
If I was not a Giant fan any longer why the hell wouldn't i just come out and state that. Do I gain something by making people think Im a Giant fan when im really not?
So, I gotta go.
What if Steve Smith catches that ball, instead of it being turned into a pick. We were driving, maybe we get a TD or at least settle for a FG.
If that happens, maybe Eli doesn't throw that pass Samuel's way on that play...and so on.
If you go to the thread, you can see how they calculated the "ACE" rating...
If you bother to look at the methodology in the article, it adjusts everything for situations...which I would say is much more fair then merely the nominal "comebacks".
Also, of course he has a ton of comebacks, he's played longer than anyone!
Eli also ranked very high in that study. One that took the players entire career, rather than just a portion starting around his 30th birthday leaving out all his MVP winning years where he was undoubtedly the best player in the league
Nah, that study is not unfair to him at all
Pathetic.
Nevermind the fact we don;t know, in the clip you showed, that his feet are even bounds then - we only have a view from the far side; his feet could have been touching the sideline as it was.
But keep deflecting. And digging yourself a bigger hole.
And, as others have said - I just LOVE the fact that 9 times out of 10 Samuel comes down with it, but Smith doesn't catch his ball 9 of 10?
LMAO
He was great from 95-98. No arguments. But you want to ignore data from the last 12 years???
Much of this site has a very odd obsession with hating Favre
Joe rolls this of the keyboard as if it is an indisputable fact.
Samuel couldn't even jump high enough to getmore than a tip on it once. How can anyone logically conclude that he would not only jump high enough, but easily grab the ball the next 9 times?
If something his ridiculous can't be conceded, what hope is there to get the stubborn fuck to back down on the really outrageous shit that's been said?
He said himself in the post game thats a play he should have made.
Link - ( New Window )
So, what can we conclude?
Is his true rank 40? Probably not. But are those 4 years going to magically cause him to leap up to the top 10? Or even 20? Hardly. I'd be shocked if it even moved him up 10 spots.
Nevermind the fact that if we are going to include 95-98, we need to inlude 92-94. 94 was a good year, but 92 was average and 93 was crappy, so the greatness of 95-98 will be mitigated by the years prior (especially 92 and 93)
All that means he's not the king of comebacks that the media tries to make him out to be.
I, for one, don't hate the guy as much as hate the media slobbering all over his dick.
But clearly you have an obsession of blindly supporting him, even when presented with a mountain of evidence showing otherwise.
Or does that not even matter in this discussion? I haven't really followed it.
Probably, conservatively, 60 Favre threads in the last 10 days, of which ive posted on 2
Donald Driver admitting to running an out when he wasn't supposed to doesn't stop this site from claiming Favre authored the choke of the century in the 07 title game
One of them is a Madden thread.
One of them is a thread on highest paid players.
A couple of them are related to the Pro Bowl.
Several of them are about the Giants SB runs (2007 might involve Favre's name being uttered).
The majority of them are in regards to retiring QBs and QB vacancies (you think this might relate to Favre?).
Several of them have throwaway quotes bashing you.
Do you even give a shit about context or analysis, or do you think sitting there reciting Number X will actually win you an argument?
As if this place is going to be objective regarding any discussion with Eli Manning
The one in 07 was a bad pass - the one two weeks ago was a bad decision. A MONTUMENTALLY bad decision.
He is discussed more on this site than 85% of the players on our roster.
You're a stubborn fool with an inability to reason, listen or comprehend the remote possibility you are wrong.
Enjoy having no credibility for the rest of your tenure here.
Two. Fucking two!
Hardly "tens of threads" dedicated to him.
But carry on.
Nor do i worry about my credability with many on this thread who say with a straight face that Eli Manning is a better big game QB than Brett Favre over his career
I'd say BBI has it's share of Eli fanboys, but not one of the people who's corrected you on this thread is a fanboy, and none of the reasons or data they presented to argue their case paint Eli as the greatest QB of all time, and not one single poster tried to do that.
You started this whole thing by spewing some really stupid shit about Eli. You can say what you want about him, career-wise. The book hasn't been completely written on Eli yet. But to say that he's not a massive reason we won XLII is really the pinnacle of an idiotic argument, and there's about 500 posts in this thread alone that support that. You ignore relevant data. You change your argument. You come off like a total joke, and for someone who claims to know his shit, you sure do have a funny way of showing it.
The bottom line, which you have chosen to ignore since this thread started, is that the score of XLII was Pats 14, Giants 10 with 2:36 remaining in the game. The defense that "carried Eli" (your words) had just allowed a backbreaking 80 yard TD drive where Tom Brady, Wes Welker and Randy Moss shredded them for the go-ahead touchdown. Eli walked out, marched his team down the field and fucking won the game for the team we (or at least I) root for. Not the defense. Not the FG kicker. Eli.
To take that accomplishment and try to spin it into some sort of lucky break (which is exactly what you've tried to do) is so stupid, arrogant and fucking brainless that I can't believe I spent more than one second arguing it.
You can't argue with stupid. You've at least proven that today. Congrats.
Eli Manning is not a seed in Brett Favre's feces after he eats watermelon. He is not a pimple on his ass, not even the blackhead before the pimple forms and becomes plump. Brett Favre at age 40 was a better QB than Eli ever has been, or figures to ever be. Even in the best year of his career, you could argue Eli was not even a top 10 QB in the league
The idea that we're gonna compare these guys, and you're gonna act like anyone outside of Giants land is taking Eli, shows me you are certifiably retarded
Regardless, why am I talking about Favre?
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-playoffs/09000d5d80638d16/Anatomy-of-a-Play-Favre-s-OT-interception - ( New Window )
Eli Manning is 29 fucking years old, and he has NO chance "ever" be the QB favre is at 40. Riiiiiight...
I'd love to know how Joe knows Eli is not comparable to Favre over the next 10 years.
Not a seed in his feces after eating watermelon is putting it lightly
How do people like Joe do it? Is there a filter that these people like Joe have, that I do not, that allows them to filter out honest self-evaluations?
Please, tell me.
I don't want Eli to have a career that is anything like Favre's....I want my quarterback to win championships, and currently they are equal. So if Eli has Favre's career the rest of the way then he will have failed.
Now suddenly, for the sake of this "defense" of Favre, that stance has changed to being laughable?
That means Eli > Favre
Lets play this game
Aaron Brooks > Kurt Warner
Jay Fiedler > Peyton Manning
Chad Pennington > Peyton Manning
Jake Delhomme > Eli Manning
David Garrard > Ben
Mark Sanchez > Carson Palmer
I can go on and on
We just watched a 35 year old Peyton Manning, Eli's brother, have one of the BEST years of his career and Peyton's 2004 was better than any year Brett Favre ever had.
What measure shall we use? QB rating?
Of course Eli raised his game in the playoffs from the regular season. He led the league in turnovers that year and was pretty damn awful for prolonged stretches.
Better to contain his willful ignorance of fact here, I fear it spreading.
But Joe likes to ignore that.
Shame.
Its all about his arm strength. He hasn't accomplished all that much
Still waiting for our stud who is better than him in a big game to do that. Once.
And even then, his line was:
20 of 35, 292, 2/2 TD/INT, rating of 79.7
Dan Marino Hosts Hour-Long HBO Special Celebrating Favre's Interceptions - ( New Window )
JoeMP2003 : 6:28 pm
that didn't need very close finishes because he played so damn great that his offense hung up a 30 or 40 spot and the outcome was never in doubt
I can also name FIVE games his QB rating was BELOW 60. 60!
I can also name two where his rating was 70 or below.
Hes played in the most playoff games in history as a QB because he
A) Won 13 when he got there and
B) Only had one losing season in 19 years so he got there a lot
10 games with a QB rating over 100
11 games with a rating of 82 or below (80 being average), including the aforementioned 7 games of 70 rating and below
Love how you conveniently forget he also lost 11 times.
13-11 is decidedly average, Joe, no matter how many ways you try to slice it...
How many have won 13 playoff games? Not many guys will lose 11 because not many guys are good enough to lead their teams to the playoffs 11 different times.
Nor is 1 title in 12 trips to the playoffs.
But I suppose in your world, he gets credit for the 1 title, but the defense (special teams, punter, kicker, etc) are to blame for losing.
3%? 5%?
I mean, this comparison just gets more and more ridiculous by the minute. It is outright fucking stupid.
Eli has a ton of work to do
But we are supposed to believe 07 was not the exception to the rule and hes going to up this in the coming years
Have fun propping up eli to put him on a level with a first ballot HOF
The rest of the world is laughing
JoeMP2003 : 6:46 pm
What do you think the odds are of Eli either winning 13 playoff games in his career or being good enough to QB his team to 24 of them
Depends on what Jerry does to improve the defense - Eli had has best season by FAR, and didn't even sniff the playoffs.
Though I suppose in your view that is still Eli's fault
Don't bother - he will just point out all the crappy games Peyton has had, and ignore the good ones.
Problem is, Peyton is 1 win away from having MORE titles than his boy earned in his entire career.
But again - in Joe's world, Peyton didn't really earn the title he has, whereas Favre gets a second one becuase he played well in the SB they lost.
One dumb decision by Favre. One. That was the tipping point that turned him from one of the better posters around here to a punchline.
Fucking delusional.
Extrapolating over 10 years, that would get him 8 more wins, give or take, for a total of 12
However, I don't care if he gets only 3 more wins (in one post-season) and gets another ring, he will be LIGHT YEARS ahead of Favre.
It's ALL about the rings...
What his argument has been about that last throw has revolved around has been:
1- If his team hadn't fumbled 536 times during the game, they would have been up by 20.
2- Even though he made a mistake with the throw, it didn't cost them the game because if they punted the Saints would have scored and if they hd kicked, they would have missed and the Saints would have scored.
So, yeah.
Lots of blame to go around for that loss (Favre included)
Favre, like the Yankees, has a ton of talent and it shows well for 85% of the game...but Favre does not close out the close games like Rivera does...he chokes in most of them and performs poorly....like Kim did in that World Series. You follow?
This is just a side comment and not all that germane
Sheesh! Keep up. The arguments keep changing...
But yeah, I guess he did argue that it wasn't a mistake last week....forgot about that.
I'm equating Brett Favre to the Yankees....both great.
The next comparison is how they close out games...the Yanks have the best ever in Rivera. Favre is a choke artist in close games a la Kim. Understand now?
JoeMP2003 : 6:04 pm
Because it needs to be said and would pretty much be noted as nothing but fact anywhere outside of the land of Giant fans
Eli Manning is not a seed in Brett Favre's feces after he eats watermelon. He is not a pimple on his ass, not even the blackhead before the pimple forms and becomes plump. Brett Favre at age 40 was a better QB than Eli ever has been, or figures to ever be. Even in the best year of his career, you could argue Eli was not even a top 10 QB in the league
The idea that we're gonna compare these guys, and you're gonna act like anyone outside of Giants land is taking Eli, shows me you are certifiably retarded
I think you're gonna have most of the site upset with you.
Take a gander at this: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ramblings/2010/guest-column-adjusted-comeback-efficiency
If I asked you what kind of distributional assumptions you were making for each QB and how they related to each other, could you do this?
What is the correct sample size to assume that all QB's have distributions similar to each other, to allow for comparison?
What variables are you "using" in your regression?
What functional form?
Etc.
It's so easy to break down someone's argument when they use statistics, simply because people don't realize that:
1. Statistics are easily manipulated; hence, extreme caution is needed when using them.
2. Trying to pose simple models as a gospel is, 99.9% of the time, wrong.
3. Inference is the be-all of statistical analysis. The fact that you're able to arrive at "factual" conclusions so quick means that, most likely, you skipped steps.
Hell, stats in this case can back up an argument. But using them to prove something is like running an experiment once, seeing the results, and then generalizing them to the world as a whole. They may be right, but most of the time, they aren't.
Anywhoha...back to Brett Fucking Favre talk....
Link - ( New Window )
Joe, what do you expect, this is a GIANTS forum, we are all GIANTS fans. I'll admit it, I'm a bit of a homer when it comes to NYG football, & most Giant fans will have nothing but excellent things to say about Eli given he has helped contribute to a SB.
Eli can do nothing else in his career, & I'll still be a huge fan of his for what he did in 2007.
I've seen you defend McNabb for hours on this board, and now Favre...yet you are throwing Eli under the bus to show your support of Brett Favre. This isn't Giant fan like behavior.
That said, the absolutes that he is bringing to the table making him seem foolish. The Brett Favre love is really strange. It's as if no matter what facts are presented, he won't budge, because the slightest consolation will appear as defeat.
The Yankees have great talent, and that talent shows in the first 8 innings of the game...that is like Brett Favre who has great talent and shows it for the first 50 minutes of games. Sometimes the Yankees blow teams out by so much that they don't need their closer...sometimes Favre has played so well that they didn't need him to "close" out a game well because the game was effectively over.
Sometimes the Yankees have only a one or two run lead, and do NEED that closer...and they have the best ever in Rivera. Sometimes Favre plays very well, but the game is close and Favre needs to play well to "close" the game and win.
Favre has proved again and again that he is in no way like Mariano Rivera in close games...he is terrible in close games, even if he has played great the whole game. So, he is more like Byung-Hyun Kim, bad at closing out big games (whether you want to call it a "choke" or not, it doesn't matter). Therefore, Brett Favre is like the Yankees if Kim was their closer, and not Rivera.
This HAS to make sense to you now.
He lost everyone when he proclaimed that his opinions were objective, therefore factual.
I think I posted that info in the wrong thread...
I can see where David is coming from, though, solely because analogies can have a myriad of ways of interpretation.
However, the way you stated it, I think David (no offense) is reading a little too far into it, but something I have been known to do, from time to time. This is especially harder reading something on an internet message board, with no non-verbal cues to back up your "intent".
And I thoroughly enjoy reading your posts, not only on here (and financial matters, which is a weakness), but on other places as well.
Anyway, I hope you have been well.
He willfully chooses to antagonize the board. He willfully chooses to ignore arguments put against him. He argues in logical fallacies: straw men, false dilemma, you name it. He stubbornly pushes forward with his beliefs.
All of that by itself, even if Joe were correct in his various arguments, would make him an insufferable douche. The fact that he is actually wrong, backed up by a myriad of facts taken in countless different forms, from statistics to subjective analysis to expert opinion? And rather than 1) admitting error or 2) agreeing to disagree, he instead invents a new argument he declares himself correct in?
To hell with him. He's a joke.
Yes, the other place is nice to have. Plenty of quality information, although I'm way too busy right now. It's hard to be able to input any meaningful analysis on anything here while I'm struggling currently.
Hope all is well with you as well. Entertaining and informative times that we are in, and at the risk of being left behind, busy.
That is the part I cannot grasp. What possesses a person to ignore reality in pursuit of fantasy on something as insignificant as "Eli Manning did not play well in the 2007 playoffs"?
IP awaits.
He was just arguing that Eli was basically just a game manager that was carried by our defense.
His proof of that was our average PPG of 21.5...
Now, you can interperet that any way you want, but he never actually typed that Eli didn't play well.
I'm really not trying to defend the guy, but it does bother me when folks put words in his mouth.
I think he has been getting a bit too much crap as well, mostly since I do think his toughness is legitimate (he was a warrior in that game)...but I really feel that he is awful down the stretch. Whether you call it choking or not, he continues to make poor throws, poor decisions, etc. in big games. He is a HOFer, but he could have been really, really great, like Montana, Elway, Marino, Unitas, Peyton...but I think his brain held him back from that tier.
I just think he went overboard with the Favre argument and backed himself into a corner.
If he didn't go so overboard, folks wouldn't have a problem with his points that he's trying to make.
I for one think that Favre has had a better career than Eli has had so far.
I don't think that is a crazy opinion to have, and I think most rational folks would agree.
Do I think Eli can have a better career when it is all said and done? Sure I do. Do I think he's gonna have the better stats? He could, but I doubt it. Favre has played too long and has been on too many good teams to bet on Eli breaking any of his records, realistically at this point in time.
I think those were really what Joe was trying to say, he just went way overboard with his arguments and has been to hard headed to back off.
The one thing I absolutely don't agree with him on is that I would rather have Eli in the clutch than Favre.
But that's really minor considering the other arguments that he's made....
What I said was saying he should have run would have been a complete second guess because I doubt it entered Favres mind or would enter most QBs minds, its not his game. You knocked this basically saying its retarded. Guess who said the same exact thing this past week? Phil Simms, sometime last week, said the same exact thing. Simms basically said he understands it because Favre, much like him and most QBs, is looking downfield to throw there, hes moving to throw, not to run, his eyes are locked downfield on whats unfolding. And say he runs for 4-5 yards hes still leaving Longwell with a 50+ yarder which is no lock at all in that spot on the road with SB on the line. He was looking to get as good a shot as possible for his kicker, made an aggressive throw, the same type of throw hes completed millions of times before, and it did not work out. If you watch it and saw the play broken down on playbook, you would have seen Sidney Rice not coming to meet the ball contributed to the pick as much if not more than the actual throw. Thats a completion if hes not waiting on it and stops in his tracks to await the throw
I also never said that Berrian was not an option, although when Favre looked to Berrian, his head was turned around and coverage was tight, which is what made Favre pull it down and go downfield to Rice. Berrian was not quite as open as he looked because if you knew a damn thing about football youd know his coverage was reacted to where Favre went with the ball. You can post as many still images as you want as Favre is winding up to make the throw to Rice and Berrians coverage drifts away from him, making him look far more open
It was an aggressive move that did not work out
Doesn't he realize that two players can be good without one of them having to be the watermelon seed in an old man's shit?
Come to think of it, isn't Joe's whole problem that two things can't be good but instead one has to be bad and the other great?
Eli = shit, Giants Defense = best performance ever
Eli = not even seed in shit, Favre = Watermelon eating yahoo.
Peyton Manning = unproven, Favre = proven and fantastic
Everything is black and white to this guy.
Awesome.
My second to last one in particular?
Care to summarize
Cam in MO : 8:58 pm
It's pretty fucked up to question somebody's fandom...
I just think he went overboard with the Favre argument and backed himself into a corner.
If he didn't go so overboard, folks wouldn't have a problem with his points that he's trying to make.
I for one think that Favre has had a better career than Eli has had so far.
I don't think that is a crazy opinion to have, and I think most rational folks would agree.
Do I think Eli can have a better career when it is all said and done? Sure I do. Do I think he's gonna have the better stats? He could, but I doubt it. Favre has played too long and has been on too many good teams to bet on Eli breaking any of his records, realistically at this point in time.
I think those were really what Joe was trying to say, he just went way overboard with his arguments and has been to hard headed to back off.
The one thing I absolutely don't agree with him on is that I would rather have Eli in the clutch than Favre.
But that's really minor considering the other arguments that he's made....
Did you see the level he played on this year as a 40 year old? As someone who expected him to play better than 99% of the people here did, many of the people who are arguing on this thread said the vikes would have been better off with Sage Rosenfels, he played better than even i could have ever imagined all year. I did not even expect them to make the conference title game this year before the year started, i did not even pick them to win their division (although i did pick them as a WC)
So his team didn't win the SB. Did he play some part in that? Well any time your team doesn't win, your most important player plays a part in it. But the guy got that team a bye, shredded the shit out of Dallas on divisional weekend, by and large played heroicly in the NFC title game in the face of getting his ass pounded all day and continued to get back up. He made an aggressive decision at the end of the game and it didn't work out. But this year did nothing but enhance his legacy and cement my opinion on him as a player as being right. Some guys here who didn't think he would do a damn thing this season are now taking bows that his team didn't win a SB.
Call it semantics or "spin" or whatever, but he just had a complete brain fart on that last play....
And I guess there is one other thing= I haven't seen anyone say that the Vikes would have been better with Sage Rosenfels or Gus Ferotte or whatever that fucking kid's name is.....fuck I can't even remember his name right now....
anyway- Yes, he is a first ballot HOF. The only thing in my mind that keeps him from being the G.O.A.T. is his somewhat erratic and boneheaded play in big situations....
if you would just admit that he fucked up on that play then these discussions and threads wouldnt be so long and ppl wouldnt attack you
i will remember to use 'agressive decision' when a qb throws a ball where he shouldnt have late in the game and costs his team a chance at kicking a FG to win it..and yes longwell has proved many times that he can kick 50+ yarders down the middle indoors
It was a coin flip really if hes lining up from 50
I agree any chance is better than what they wound up with, but its a 50/50 proposition there
he made his last 8 which spanned over 2 years.......and he is known for being an excellent kicker
but it's on Favre as well. primarily on him, simply because the ball was in his hand. in that situation, you have to be conservative. you never, EVER deprive your kicker of a chance to win the game in favor of a hail mary. never.
Not sure why I'm bringing this up other than to illustrate that Montana never had a Favre-esque moment in the playoffs. Not once.
Its just a fact that he didn't come to meet the ball on that play. I have ex NFL players including a former pro bowl WR telling me this on playbook but i should listen to the Jake, who gets banned continually on internet message boards and begs his way back
- Brett Favre
Link - ( New Window )
Link - ( New Window )
Are we really gonna quote IgglePhans though? Lets ask them our opinion on our QB, and see if you would agree with their response
anyways..im out
With Eagles fans, why don't you ask them their opinion of their own QB? That is always interesting.
The complaint I most often hear is how they too often draw the "Good Eli", essentially painting him as a wildly streaky QB who admittedly plays well against them
huge playoff implications. He did that without taking into account that his team was already in position of possibly winning the game, and that he had 2 other options to utilize that would have resulted in positive yards.
That's not choking, that's gagging on Ron Jeremy cock
i like how he determines that longwell in this stage of his career has a no better than 50% chance to hit a 50yarder indoors
Here's the problem with Joe's take. It is wildly inconsistent. Favre throwing a horrendous pick across his body that kills any hope for winning is an aggressive play, but Eli floating one over Samuel's head is an error that should have been intercepted.
Back to the INT that never happened - Joe is killing eli for it as if it should diminish the accomplishment of winning a SB. But meanwhile, he's absolving McNabb's 3 INT's because of some reason (maybe because the Eagles scored more than 21 points?)
Joe is pointing out numerous times that Eli has shit the bed in playoff games, but when shown that Favre has shit the bed a whole lot more, it is excused away.
I can appreciate debate. what is tough to appreciate is inconsistency within the main argument and each and every sub-argument, and all have one common denominator - Joe takes a pot shot at Eli.
I'm not an Eli lover - i think the guy has been inconsistent but in no rational discussion will I ever diminish his accomplishment in the playoff run of '07. That may be the pinnacle for us as Giant's fans, and if Joe doesn't appreciate that, you can draw your own conclusions as to what that means.
I'm sure, Bills fans are still talking about the what-ifs of Norwood's miss, or Niner fans about Craig's fumble..There are countless examples going all the way back to the '20s when this effectively all started..
So to say, Crayton's drop changed things, countered with Webster's pick 6 drop and Samuel's "almost" and so on is fruitless and just plain silly if you've followed the game for quite awhile..
To cherry pick "what-ifs" is total bullshit imo..It would not be if it didn't happen to every team, every game since football(and sports) was invented..The only possible difference, is that some are magnified and receive greater play than most others..Doesn't change reality one bit however.
Why not bring the argument into the Comeback/Clutch Analysis thread, oh yeah thats right, the stats in there wouldn't support Joe's argument.
Carry on...
There's always an answer with more stats and/or more points..I have never, ever in all my years met ANYONE who hasn't at least once said, "maybe you have a point."
There's something really wrong with that and almost kind of "scary."
So, I try not to engage him, other than to give my POV and then leave for good as there's never any use to engage him further..
C'est la vie