Figured I'd come at it from a different angle. Granted, many of us have a bias, and believe he will be enshrined in the Hall of Fame.
But give me your best argument that shows specific reasons why Eli Manning would NOT ever receive induction at Canton.
That is it.
The guy is getting in. On his name alone. On his stats, on his rings, on his NFL Man of the Year.
All of it. He's getting in.
To me, Eli is a HOFer no doubt. But it's going to be close. A lot of people who aren't on this forum/Giant fans don't consider him to be one.
but even with that its a sh$t argument. statistically he is HOF, and he has 2 of the best SB runs of all time. so there isnt a great argument
Obviously assuming that he retires with a record less than .500. He's 116-114 now.
Quote:
having an overall losing record in his starts is pretty tough to ignore.
Obviously assuming that he retires with a record less than .500. He's 116-114 now.
116-114 regular season, 8-4 post-season
2011 season he was.
The first question I have always asked (regardless of sport) is simple: What has he (or she) accomplished that was SO VERY SPECIAL?
I do not need to answer that.
Quote:
2011 season he was.
That was probably his best year, but I think Rodgers, Brees and Brady had better seasons that year.
no one with as many losses as him as in the HOF.
His career winning percentage is now lower than QB's like Trent Dilfer, Alex Smith, Joe Flacco, Brad Johnson, Jake Delhomme, etc.
two great runs. Giants ring of honor. Just short of HOF.
Tiki Barber has a better case without a ring.
Favre has more losses and Brees likely will
Quote:
no one with as many losses as him as in the HOF.
Favre has more losses and Brees likely will
Favre was 186 - 112
Eli is 116 - 114
Brees is 155 - 108
Am I misreading something?
I love Eli, but this is the argument I would make if I was against him.
Again, I think you can't overlook the rings or understate the championships. So he likely gets in on that, but detractors will have their say.
no one with as many losses as him as in the HOF.
His career winning percentage is now lower than QB's like Trent Dilfer, Alex Smith, Joe Flacco, Brad Johnson, Jake Delhomme, etc.
two great runs. Giants ring of honor. Just short of HOF.
Tiki Barber has a better case without a ring.
OK. Now make your argument as to why Namath is in the HOF but Eli won't be.
Championship runs do matter. Especially when you have 2 of them and you do it against the greatest sports dynasty of all time (both times). Not to mention in 2011 he wasn't simply "along for the ride" like the QBs you mentioned (some of which didn't win any championships), Eli carried that team basically by himself along with Cruz and JPP assisting.
You can't just point to his W-L record and say "there's a blemish he's not getting in". All sorts of players in the HOF have blemishes. Eli is top 10 in just about every all-time passing category AND has the hardware (and SB MVPs) required to get in. Add on top of that the 200+ start streak and the Walter Payton Man of the Year award. He's getting in. Maybe not first ballot, but he's getting in.
Quote:
no one with as many losses as him as in the HOF.
Favre has more losses and Brees likely will
Not only did Joe Namath have more losses than wins, but he had more interceptions than touchdowns.
That really is an incredibly amazing feat over a 15+ year career, no matter how you slice it.
I love Eli, but this is the argument I would make if I was against him.
He was in 2011.
Eli is 116 - 114
Brees is 155 - 108
Am I misreading something?
Favre is 199-123
Brees is 163-115
Eli is 124-118
Never understood this argument. As if those aren't enough.
Quote:
In comment 14451016 Larry from WV said:
Quote:
2011 season he was.
That was probably his best year, but I think Rodgers, Brees and Brady had better seasons that year.
Statistically they did. But no one came anywhere close to being as good as Eli in the 4th quarter and in the clutch that year. He was the difference in almost literally every single game the Giants won in the regular season and then was an ace in all 4 playoff games and particularly in the 4th quarter when it mattered most. Not only in the regular season but into the playoffs. Go back to the first Dallas game, Chris Collinsworth makes this exact point and the Giants weren't even in the playoffs yet at that point. He won the damn SB MVP I would say that should be counted toward considering who had the better season that year.
Quote:
Favre was 186 - 112
Eli is 116 - 114
Brees is 155 - 108
Am I misreading something?
Favre is 199-123
Brees is 163-115
Eli is 124-118
You are including post-season. I don't think most do in W/L, but whatever - those guys made the post-season more times (12 for Favre, 8 for Brees, 6 for Eli) it's probably why it's not used in normal W/L communications, but basically if Eli loses 8 games this year (likely if he lasts that long) he'll clinch a tie at worst, 9 losses (again, likely if he lasts that long) he'll clinch the lead (forever vs Favre and likely Brees too).
It's unfortunate, because I don't think he's earned it. But we all know the HOF has become more political, than earned induction.
Yes, he beat the Patriots twice in SB & that will mostly be what gets him in.
But Eli was never feared. Your defense wasn't shaking in their boots because Eli stepped on the field. And that should be a huge barometer in who makes it & who doesn't at any position.
Add in a career losing record, along with his INT's in this modern era and it really is not that tough a choice, imo.
Imo, If Eli Manning makes the HOF, than you also have to induct Jim Plunkett, too.
Also a 2x winning SB winner. And that isn't gonna happen either with his career passing completion %.
But let's be honest here, the reason the Giants won those SB's was because of great defense helped with HOFer Michael Strahan who does belong. And some classic lucky catches, to name a few.
But we all know that Eli will make the HOF because it's now mostly a sham.
But the ONLY reason Eli makes the HOF, will be because his last name is Manning & nothing more.
If anything, the longer he plays? The more he's showing he doesn't belong. Had he retired 5 years ago? I'd be championing him to belong in the Hall.
But he's not just losing it, he's way past losing it & just sucks now.
Everytime he steps on the field, he gives the HOF committee reason to question if he he belongs in the HOF.
Even with carrying the Manning name on his back.
It will be even worse, when Eli gets yanked from a game because of poor play.
Only to bring in a guy everyone laughed at, when they selected him @#6 in Daniel Jones from Duke.
A guy who's College completion % rivals that of Ironically...Jim Plunkett.
So..
Does Eli Manning belong in the HOF?
No
Will he get in?
Yes
First Ballot?
Uh....no
I really believe Eli had a solid case for 2011 League MVP.
But Rodgers and his gaudy numbers took it.
But when you look at the two performances, the Packers were routinely blowing teams out and faced little adversity (until the playoffs).
Where as Manning led and NFL record tying 7 regular season 4th quarter comebacks and broke the longstanding 4th quarter TD record.
Manning and the Giants then obliterated Rodgers and the 15-1 Packers in Green Bay in the playoffs.
- Brady 2x and the undefeated Patriots.
- Favre
- Romo
- Ryan
- Garcia
His career is primarily defined by two games. From a legacy perspective he would have been better off retiring after the 2011 title...everything since has been disastrous. How much of that is his fault is up for debate, but there is no denying the results.
I love the guy, but facts are stubborn things.
Find me another QB who is winning either NFC title game Eli won on the road.
Just sayin'
Put him in.
Many NY Giant fans of the team think he was lucky and won those 2 SB on the strength of their defense.
~.500 Regular season record.
No MVPs
A top 5 QB only a couple of years.
Lots of ints
Many current and former players don't think highly of him, he is always high on the overrated lists when players are polled.
In a nutshell, the media, players are fans are divided on his greatness. Nowhere near a consensus and very polarizing. Some say he is great, some say he sucks. That is a tough road in friends.
In case it gets lost. The OP requests the negative case. I think ELi Manning should get in. I am very unsure if he will.
Eli playoff record
8-4, 2 SB wins
Both made it to the post season 6 times
i cant really see how this doesnt come into consideration at the end of it all.
Is more postseason success and 1 Super Bowl run better than that?
I've always felt that the 2 SB MVP's, and all of the passing yds & TD's would get him in, I'm just not so sure any more.
Is more postseason success and 1 Super Bowl run better than that?
It means for the people who believe that as the reason he won't be enshrined in Canton that two SB runs and otherwise mostly mediocrity or worse <> HOF
no clue what's confusing about it.
You mean like 2014 with 4400+ yards, 30 TDs, 14 INTs and a rating of 92 or 2015 with 4400+ yards, 35 TDs, 14 INTs and a 93 rating. Quite the disaster. Maybe it was 2016 when he lead them to the playoffs.
Quote:
postseason success beyond 2 Super Bowl runs?
Is more postseason success and 1 Super Bowl run better than that?
It means for the people who believe that as the reason he won't be enshrined in Canton that two SB runs and otherwise mostly mediocrity or worse <> HOF
no clue what's confusing about it.
No one said it was confusing - - just a bizarre take.
I also think the Manning name hurts, not helps Eli. It's not easy being younger brother to Peyton. Expectations for Eli have always been unfair to him as have the comparisons to his brother.
If the voters don't think he's elite, and many likely do not, it will be easy for them to justify keeping him out.
I think he deserves in btw. Just pointing out why he may not get in.
Quote:
You mean like 2014 with 4400+ yards, 30 TDs, 14 INTs and a rating of 92 or 2015 with 4400+ yards, 35 TDs, 14 INTs and a 93 rating. Quite the disaster. Maybe it was 2016 when he lead them to the playoffs.
Giants went 12-20 in those seasons.
Stats in a shit team season does nothing for me.
nearly mistake free in two SB runs
incredibly durable
statistically speaking, a good compiler
Reasons against:
was never a top 5 QB
ordinary physical skills
no outrageous years statistically
Quote:
In comment 14451159 Chris684 said:
Quote:
postseason success beyond 2 Super Bowl runs?
Is more postseason success and 1 Super Bowl run better than that?
It means for the people who believe that as the reason he won't be enshrined in Canton that two SB runs and otherwise mostly mediocrity or worse <> HOF
no clue what's confusing about it.
No one said it was confusing - - just a bizarre take.
Maybe. but those people are saying "it's not enough" what Eli has done to make the HOF.
Beez asked what is the reason he won't he be enshrined. It's up the person whose opinion it is.
and while I'd vote for him, I hate to break it to most of you, but outside of Giants nation, Eli is viewed very polarizing. Mostly negative. not as a HOFer. IMO at least from what I hear and read.
Basically, he went over all of this, and at the end concluded that those two playoff runs were what it is ultimately all about and because of that, he will be voting for Eli to be enshrined his first year of eligibility and every year after until he gets in.
Gary Meyers is far from a Giants or Manning supporter.
Quote:
In comment 14451094 Go Terps said:
Quote:
You mean like 2014 with 4400+ yards, 30 TDs, 14 INTs and a rating of 92 or 2015 with 4400+ yards, 35 TDs, 14 INTs and a 93 rating. Quite the disaster. Maybe it was 2016 when he lead them to the playoffs.
Giants went 12-20 in those seasons.
Stats in a shit team season does nothing for me.
So when he was good but the team was bad that's his fault.
Quote:
But at no point in his career could you make an argument that he was in the top 3 at his position.
2011 season he was.
Not top 3. You can make a legitimate case that he wasn't even top 5 in 2011.
Eli has never been as bad as his detractors have made him out to be, but he's also never been as good (comparatively speaking) as some Giants fans seem to believe. Even in his best season, he wasn't really one of the 3-4 best QBs in the league. But he was exactly the QB the Giants needed that year and for most of his career, and that's really what matters.
Whether that genuinely makes him a HOFer or not is less clear, IMO.
Eli's had a very strange career arc. With the possible exception of 2011, he's never clearly been amongst the top 3 or 4 QBs in a given regular season. The defining moments of his career are the '07 and '11 postseasons. If you remove those 8 games he has zero candidacy for the HOF. So the question is, do you think two incredible postseason runs are enough to carry a 15 year career into the HOF? To me, given some of the guys that are already in the HOF, yes...Eli should be in. But I hate that rationale...that thinking waters down the HOF significantly.
Warren Moon and Jim Kelly are in the HOF...do those guys deserve to be in the same room as Joe Montana and John Unitas? I think that answer is self-evident.
Quote:
this is misleading:
Quote:
no one with as many losses as him as in the HOF.
Favre has more losses and Brees likely will
Not only did Joe Namath have more losses than wins, but he had more interceptions than touchdowns.
I'm not sure using a guy that many feel shouldn't be in the HOF is a particularly compelling argument for why Eli should. If the strongest case you can make for Eli's candidacy is that he's a better version of Namath, I think you're doing him a disservice.
Eli's HOF candidacy is interesting because of how volatile his career is - he's got some of the highest highs and some of the lowest lows. There are legitimate elements of his complete body of work that stand out as mediocre, yet his ironman streak, the two SB runs, his Payton awards, those are all really strong in his favor.
I honestly won't be shocked if he doesn't get in, or if he ends up waiting a few years to ultimately be enshrined, but that's not the same as me saying that I would feel he's undeserving if/when he does get in.
I love Eli, but this is the argument I would make if I was against him.
I'll push back on this a bit - I actually think there was a time when Eli was the BEST QB in the NFL, although it wasn't in one calendar season.
It's often overlooked, but Eli had a run between 12/24/11 (Jets) and 11/4/12 (at Dallas) when he was 12-2 threw for almost 4,000 yards (282 per game)and, I would argue that no QB was playing better. During that time, he beat the Pats in the Super Bowl, beat the Packers in Green Bay, beat the 49ers in SF twice and beat the Cowboys twice (among other wins). It sure did seem like the Giants would be a perennial playoff team. Little did we know what was to come...
Nevertheless, for that 14 game window in 2011-12, Eli Manning was the best QB in football, the Giants were by far the best team in the NFL and would have made a strong case for back-to-back championships....if Plaxico didn't shoot himself in that nightclub
His knack for coming from behind late in games throughout his career is not either?
There is so much more to Eli Manning than just 2011.
His knack for coming from behind late in games throughout his career is not either?
There is so much more to Eli Manning than just 2011.
As of 9/12/2018 Eli was tied in 4th quarter comebacks with Matthew Stafford and Matt Ryan. Just behind Vinny Testaverde.
If this was reasons why Eli will be enshrined (Beez's thread for tomorrow) you might have some points, but the point of the thread was why will Eli NOT be enshrined.
Eli's had some great moments, all-time NFL level. But he's also not-so-arguably the most famous of all New York Giants quarterbacks, for a variety of reasons, including the polarizing stuff and for all those even Giants fans who say openly "Eli sucks!" (I've got one buddy who says it non-stop, like it's a sport in and of itself).
Eli has certainly had some very solid seasons over the past few years, in spite of the team's ineptitude. Last year is a perfect example. I think Eli did enough to make the Giants at LEAST a borderline playoff team, and possibly a playoff team, if not for a couple very long, last-second FGs and the overall breakdown of the Giants defense later in games.
I'm interested, too, to read some arguments against from posters who I know love them some Eli (as I do).
I hope he's got enough juice to get inducted when it's said and done. If it happens, I know my son and I will celebrate, and we will absolutely make the road trip for - at this moment - the only Giants quarterback he has ever known.
Quote:
a top three QB in the league at any point in his career. Maybe not even a top 5.
I love Eli, but this is the argument I would make if I was against him.
I'll push back on this a bit - I actually think there was a time when Eli was the BEST QB in the NFL, although it wasn't in one calendar season.
It's often overlooked, but Eli had a run between 12/24/11 (Jets) and 11/4/12 (at Dallas) when he was 12-2 threw for almost 4,000 yards (282 per game)and, I would argue that no QB was playing better. During that time, he beat the Pats in the Super Bowl, beat the Packers in Green Bay, beat the 49ers in SF twice and beat the Cowboys twice (among other wins). It sure did seem like the Giants would be a perennial playoff team. Little did we know what was to come...
Nevertheless, for that 14 game window in 2011-12, Eli Manning was the best QB in football, the Giants were by far the best team in the NFL and would have made a strong case for back-to-back championships....if Plaxico didn't shoot himself in that nightclub
plax shot himself in 08
are you talking about the end of 07 into the first 3/4 of 08?
People don't wonder how Rivers will get in the HoF missing the playoffs 7 out of 8 years in one stretch. People don't say that Brett Favre might have needed another ring to offset losses and INT's.
But that's always the song and dance done for eli. Often by the team's own supposed fans.
People don't wonder how Rivers will get in the HoF missing the playoffs 7 out of 8 years in one stretch. People don't say that Brett Favre might have needed another ring to offset losses and INT's.
But that's always the song and dance done for eli. Often by the team's own supposed fans.
This.
And I'm reading NYG fans not only lay out "reasons why" but also argue them as if they're legitimate.
If you came to BBI from outer space you would think Eli Manning is a scrub who got lucky a couple of times.
Absolutely not. He is a dragon slayer sort to speak and the first to do it.
People don't wonder how Rivers will get in the HoF missing the playoffs 7 out of 8 years in one stretch. People don't say that Brett Favre might have needed another ring to offset losses and INT's.
But that's always the song and dance done for eli. Often by the team's own supposed fans.
For me, I think he's a low-level lock, even after you wade through all the "arguments against."
I wanted to ask what all the "arguments against" are/have been, just to get them all laid out, after going back and forth with my cousin, who really couldn't come up with specific reasons ... just that the voters won't pull the lever for him, even after I'd given a laundry list of reasons I think he WILL be inducted.
I do wonder how big of a factor it is that I'm a fan of his and a Giants fan (like so many here) ... I mean, I realize it's a factor, but I don't consider myself a flat-out homer.
- His NFC championship vs 49ers was 1 of the greatest QB performances I’ve ever seen.
4th quarter comebacks, etc. ... I imagine his W/L record and INTs are the biggest negatives, on top of the fact he was never the “best” QB in the league during his career.
But he’s a HOFer, no question. First ballot may not be in the cards however.
Look, it’s possible to love and respect Eli while acknowledging Daniel Jones may actually get playing time sooner than some want to expect.
Even later on when I'd ask why he was in the HoF, I'd get the same response. And I'm fine with that.
when people complain about players in the HoF undeservedly, they either bitch about stat compilers or guys who only won rings. Eli covers both categories and still gets debated.
But what rings hollow to me are supposed Giants fans who use the argumentation that other team's fans don't appreciate him (probably because THEY, themselves don't). My brother-in-law is a Bills fan and he respects the hell out of Eli. I took Namath's "guarantee" at face value, yet some of our own fans don't take two SB rings at face value.
Quote:
meant to slam the question posed in the OP, but I've often wondered why with eli it is wondering what things will cause him to not be in the HoF instead of things that will get him in. Seems to me that's the way people have approached him for years.
People don't wonder how Rivers will get in the HoF missing the playoffs 7 out of 8 years in one stretch. People don't say that Brett Favre might have needed another ring to offset losses and INT's.
But that's always the song and dance done for eli. Often by the team's own supposed fans.
This.
And I'm reading NYG fans not only lay out "reasons why" but also argue them as if they're legitimate.
If you came to BBI from outer space you would think Eli Manning is a scrub who got lucky a couple of times.
It's gotten tougher for me, through this thread, to know where the actual true beliefs stop and the "making arguments against" (for the sake of the thread) begin.
Example ... one poster said he won two Super Bowls due to a couple lucky catches. Really? Yes, the Tyree helmet catch was insane, and not seen before, but that entire play leading to the helmet catch was all Eli. And the sideline throw where he dropped the football in a bucket along, second win over the Patriots? Show me a better throw in a Super Bowl in a more critical moment of the game? Sure, great catch, too. But as for my proposal? I don't think you can.
But they were a couple lucky catches. lol And again, as a different poster pointed out, it's as if the Giants magically appeared in those two Pats Super Bowls without any great performances from their quarterback. The Niners game alone should be on a loop the weekend of his induction - that game and his performance in it, hard as it is to fathom, gets forgotten very quickly. It's one of the grittiest performances I've seen y a quarterback since I've been watching football, and that's a long damn time.
I have no doubt in my mind that Nick Foles is held in higher regard in Philadelphia than Eli Manning is in New York.
Sad.
Even later on when I'd ask why he was in the HoF, I'd get the same response. And I'm fine with that.
when people complain about players in the HoF undeservedly, they either bitch about stat compilers or guys who only won rings. Eli covers both categories and still gets debated.
But what rings hollow to me are supposed Giants fans who use the argumentation that other team's fans don't appreciate him (probably because THEY, themselves don't). My brother-in-law is a Bills fan and he respects the hell out of Eli. I took Namath's "guarantee" at face value, yet some of our own fans don't take two SB rings at face value.
You proved one of my points.
You cannot tell the history of the NFL without "Joe Namath" along with "The Guarantee" and I am fine with that as well.
I get what you're saying, but I hear those things a bit differently. A lot of non-Giants fans belittle Eli for varieties of reasons, and because of that, I guess I see a point in translating it, with a small bit of concern, to the HoF voters. Some will be like your Bills fan brother-in-law and see the big picture, while others will be like my buddy, in his 40s, who's seen both Eli Super Bowls, and STILL rails on the guy. It's somewhat maddening. But it's real.
Eli's had a very strange career arc. With the possible exception of 2011, he's never clearly been amongst the top 3 or 4 QBs in a given regular season. The defining moments of his career are the '07 and '11 postseasons. If you remove those 8 games he has zero candidacy for the HOF. So the question is, do you think two incredible postseason runs are enough to carry a 15 year career into the HOF? To me, given some of the guys that are already in the HOF, yes...Eli should be in. But I hate that rationale...that thinking waters down the HOF significantly.
Warren Moon and Jim Kelly are in the HOF...do those guys deserve to be in the same room as Joe Montana and John Unitas? I think that answer is self-evident.
I get that Terps but like you said "given some of the guys that are already in the HOF, yes...Eli should be in. " That's the bottom line. It's their standards not ours. Also, top 10 in both passing yards and passing TDs. Not insignificant.
Most regular seasons he has been closer to the middle of the pack. Some years worse. Doesn't change anything. He goes in. And this comes from someone who would prefer we move on from him.
Flacco was an excellent QB before his injury.
My buddy who is a Broncos fan never rags on Eli - and really has no cause to. I hang with a couple of Pats fans who said they would have two more rings if it wasn't for Eli.
The only guy who really says anything about him is a Redskins fan.
My buddy who is a Broncos fan never rags on Eli - and really has no cause to. I hang with a couple of Pats fans who said they would have two more rings if it wasn't for Eli.
The only guy who really says anything about him is a Redskins fan.
This really is true.
Father-in-law is Cowboys fan and shakes his head in disbelief when NYG fans bitch about Eli.
It's unfortunate, because I don't think he's earned it. But we all know the HOF has become more political, than earned induction.
Yes, he beat the Patriots twice in SB & that will mostly be what gets him in.
But Eli was never feared. Your defense wasn't shaking in their boots because Eli stepped on the field. And that should be a huge barometer in who makes it & who doesn't at any position.
Add in a career losing record, along with his INT's in this modern era and it really is not that tough a choice, imo.
Imo, If Eli Manning makes the HOF, than you also have to induct Jim Plunkett, too.
Also a 2x winning SB winner. And that isn't gonna happen either with his career passing completion %.
But let's be honest here, the reason the Giants won those SB's was because of great defense helped with HOFer Michael Strahan who does belong. And some classic lucky catches, to name a few.
But we all know that Eli will make the HOF because it's now mostly a sham.
But the ONLY reason Eli makes the HOF, will be because his last name is Manning & nothing more.
If anything, the longer he plays? The more he's showing he doesn't belong. Had he retired 5 years ago? I'd be championing him to belong in the Hall.
But he's not just losing it, he's way past losing it & just sucks now.
Everytime he steps on the field, he gives the HOF committee reason to question if he he belongs in the HOF.
Even with carrying the Manning name on his back.
It will be even worse, when Eli gets yanked from a game because of poor play.
Only to bring in a guy everyone laughed at, when they selected him @#6 in Daniel Jones from Duke.
A guy who's College completion % rivals that of Ironically...Jim Plunkett.
So..
Does Eli Manning belong in the HOF?
No
Will he get in?
Yes
First Ballot?
Uh....no
Fuck you Redskins fan. Grab your shinebox.
People who have given shit about Eli have done it based on his demeanor. Just like I'd rag on my Broncos fan about Elway's horse teeth. Heck, I can't think of many conversations where we actually get into the details. Usually it is relegated to Cam's dabbing or ridiculous outfits or his knack of celebrating down 20+ points and shit like that.
The way this often gets posed is that you'll actually have people say comments like "Eli sucks" get said frequently.
It's this^ In baseball, they would call him a compiler.
When he was in his prime, he was a no brainer if he kept it up that top 5 guy production. But that was a short stretch. Since then he has been at best a top 10 for the last 7 years.
HOF voters don't care if Reese screwed him with his line. But not for Warner's renaissance in AZ, I don't think he gets in. Eli hasn't had that [yet?] so it's still up for debate.
That said, I believe his post season, toughness and character get him in.
Quote:
We're talking about the highest individual honor a player can receive. Were the poor 2014 and 2015 seasons Eli's fault? No, but are those HOF level years from him? I don't know...I definitely don't feel strongly that they are.
Eli's had a very strange career arc. With the possible exception of 2011, he's never clearly been amongst the top 3 or 4 QBs in a given regular season. The defining moments of his career are the '07 and '11 postseasons. If you remove those 8 games he has zero candidacy for the HOF. So the question is, do you think two incredible postseason runs are enough to carry a 15 year career into the HOF? To me, given some of the guys that are already in the HOF, yes...Eli should be in. But I hate that rationale...that thinking waters down the HOF significantly.
Warren Moon and Jim Kelly are in the HOF...do those guys deserve to be in the same room as Joe Montana and John Unitas? I think that answer is self-evident.
I get that Terps but like you said "given some of the guys that are already in the HOF, yes...Eli should be in. " That's the bottom line. It's their standards not ours. Also, top 10 in both passing yards and passing TDs. Not insignificant.
Look, I hope he gets in. If I were a Bears or Chiefs fan would I think he should be in? Probably not. But I'm a harder marker than the people actually making the decisions. To me the HOF should be reserved for only those players who have a legit argument for being among the all time elite players at their positions. The HOF, as it is, doesn't hold all that much weight for me.
People who have given shit about Eli have done it based on his demeanor. Just like I'd rag on my Broncos fan about Elway's horse teeth. Heck, I can't think of many conversations where we actually get into the details. Usually it is relegated to Cam's dabbing or ridiculous outfits or his knack of celebrating down 20+ points and shit like that.
The way this often gets posed is that you'll actually have people say comments like "Eli sucks" get said frequently.
Weekly, my buddy makes some random comment about Eli "sucking." Most of the time I ignore him. Sometimes I recite all the reasons he doesn't "suck." Usually depends on how busy I am lol.
Today it was spurred by my cousin posting the "mirror image" of Eli and Jones on FB and tagging me, to which I said something about being hopeful we get a mirror image career from the rookie. At which point he said something like "you can't spell eliminated without Eli." And so it went.
Every single WR or TE Eli has played with here in ny has never gone and produced better stats elsewhere. Beckham won’t either.
2014-2015 Eli led the giants offense to 400 plus points (i could be slightly under in 2014 but it is close) despite NO OL, no RBs, no TEs and only one viable WR and NO defense.
The guy produced here. He also won two super bowl mvps.
People will over analyze and at the same time miss the low hanging fruit of Eli’s career. I just described it to a T.
However, I do think some of that weight is reduced by a Foles beating the Pats as a back-up. But perhaps that is somewhat offset by Eli piloting the W over the Pats undefeated team in '08.
And it's going to be a big deal that the Giants did prevent the Pats from going undefeated.
Personally, I'm just not sure those six weeks in '08 and '11 are enough to offset a 15 regular season career that is somewhere between Andy Dalton and Tony Romo.
Not ONCE in Eli's career could you say he was the best QB in the league. The second best. The third best.
Fourth best? Maybe...but a stretch.
Quote:
In comment 14451196 Go Terps said:
Look, I hope he gets in. If I were a Bears or Chiefs fan would I think he should be in? Probably not. But I'm a harder marker than the people actually making the decisions. To me the HOF should be reserved for only those players who have a legit argument for being among the all time elite players at their positions. The HOF, as it is, doesn't hold all that much weight for me.
I don't disagree but if this is what it is, then Eli belongs.
Quote:
In comment 14451055 Don in DC said:
Quote:
a top three QB in the league at any point in his career. Maybe not even a top 5.
I love Eli, but this is the argument I would make if I was against him.
I'll push back on this a bit - I actually think there was a time when Eli was the BEST QB in the NFL, although it wasn't in one calendar season.
It's often overlooked, but Eli had a run between 12/24/11 (Jets) and 11/4/12 (at Dallas) when he was 12-2 threw for almost 4,000 yards (282 per game)and, I would argue that no QB was playing better. During that time, he beat the Pats in the Super Bowl, beat the Packers in Green Bay, beat the 49ers in SF twice and beat the Cowboys twice (among other wins). It sure did seem like the Giants would be a perennial playoff team. Little did we know what was to come...
Nevertheless, for that 14 game window in 2011-12, Eli Manning was the best QB in football, the Giants were by far the best team in the NFL and would have made a strong case for back-to-back championships....if Plaxico didn't shoot himself in that nightclub
plax shot himself in 08
are you talking about the end of 07 into the first 3/4 of 08?
You are so right and I am so wrong about confusing the two time periods. Actually besides that 12-2 run during the 2011-12 season, Eli had a run between 2007-2008 (more specifically between 12/29/07 and 11/1/08) where he went on a 15-1 run, THEN Plaxico shot himself in the leg...
So, really, there were two different periods (both non calendar years) when Eli had a strong argument for being the best QB in the NFL...
for Eli - the whole is more than the sum of his parts; and his two super bowl runs; essential role in each and deserved mvp's are the story for the HOF
Eli dosen't make it only based on one factor: he bucked the draft to stop going to the Chargers. The Chargers GM said trading Eli under those circumstances was the best moment of his career. I believe there are deep resentments towards Eli out there and it may come to roost in the HOF vote.
Best player twice? Well, Eli received the MVP award - true - but that award is way too biased towards the QB. I can make better cases for several of the Dlinemen over Eli in each SB.
Eli didn't hold the Pats to 14 points in '08, the D did. That's why we won.
Name one time in Eli's career when he was the best player in the league at QB? In the NFC? How about the second best for the league or conference?
Quote:
I'm sorry but there's not. The .500 season average is a team stat. He doesn't just have 2 SB wins, he has the MVPs to go with it meaning he was the best player on the biggest stage, TWICE. Eli Manning's stats support the HoF vote even if the team's stats don't.
Best player twice? Well, Eli received the MVP award - true - but that award is way too biased towards the QB. I can make better cases for several of the Dlinemen over Eli in each SB.
Eli didn't hold the Pats to 14 points in '08, the D did. That's why we won.
Name one time in Eli's career when he was the best player in the league at QB? In the NFC? How about the second best for the league or conference?
BW - see my post above - Eli had 12-2 run during the 2011-12 season and between 2007-2008 (more specifically between 12/29/07 and 11/1/08) he went on a 15-1 run. Although not calendar years, one could argue that he was the best QB in the NFL during both of those time periods.
It isn't skewed just to QB's. Sometimes it goes to reputation. Ray Lewis was MVP against us. Sometimes it goes to a highlight play. Larry Brown and Desmond Howard were MVP's.
But let's not be disingenuous like Eli just sat back as the D did the work. He led game winning drives in both games. He was fully deserving.
I mean for fucks sake, we can't even have supposed Giants fans recognize that Eli is deserving
Sometimes the essence of a great sports career can be boiled down to a few moments, or even a single moment rather than many years of accomplishment. To me, what Eli did in those 2 games outweighs what he did in the other 240 in terms of importance and in terms of assessing the value of his career. Those 2 games...shit, those 2 drives...are why we traded for him in the first place.
I'll listen to any argument about whether or not he should be in, but those two games CAN NOT be undervalued in even the slightest way.
Quote:
I'm sorry but there's not. The .500 season average is a team stat. He doesn't just have 2 SB wins, he has the MVPs to go with it meaning he was the best player on the biggest stage, TWICE. Eli Manning's stats support the HoF vote even if the team's stats don't.
Best player twice? Well, Eli received the MVP award - true - but that award is way too biased towards the QB. I can make better cases for several of the Dlinemen over Eli in each SB.
Eli didn't hold the Pats to 14 points in '08, the D did. That's why we won.
Name one time in Eli's career when he was the best player in the league at QB? In the NFC? How about the second best for the league or conference?
Are you forgetting the improbable 4th quarter comebacks and memorable throws to Tyree, Burress, and Manningham?
That's why he won the MVP.
He's the only QB ever to do that twice in the 4th Quarter of a Super Bowl.
Quote:
I'm sorry but there's not. The .500 season average is a team stat. He doesn't just have 2 SB wins, he has the MVPs to go with it meaning he was the best player on the biggest stage, TWICE. Eli Manning's stats support the HoF vote even if the team's stats don't.
Best player twice? Well, Eli received the MVP award - true - but that award is way too biased towards the QB. I can make better cases for several of the Dlinemen over Eli in each SB.
Eli didn't hold the Pats to 14 points in '08, the D did. That's why we won.
Name one time in Eli's career when he was the best player in the league at QB? In the NFC? How about the second best for the league or conference?
Eli was in contention for the MVP in 2011. If not for Brady's "almost" perfect season, I think Eli would have had it. Without Eli Manning, the Giants don't make the post-season much less the playoffs that year. 6th worst ranked defense and the absolute worst rush offense in the league that year. Eli dragged that team into the playoffs by setting a record high 4th quarter comeback wins on the season. The defense had NOTHING to do with that.
The Rams held the Patriots to 13 points just last year. How did that work out for them? Eli Manning led the game-winning drive which he had to do because the defense let the Patriots take the lead on the previous drive. Eli Manning threw the final TD and left only 35 seconds on the clock not risking the defense having to make another stop.
SB MVP is biased towards the QB? Ask Ben Roethlisberger about that. Ask big brother Peyton about that for his 2nd ring. Ask Tom Brady about it just this last SB. Ask Hostetler, Flacco, Dilfer, Etc if it's too biased for the QB. Five PLAYERS in the history of the league with multiple SB MVPs. Three are in the HoF, Tom Brady, and Eli Manning.
Tom Brady - THE GOAT
Tom Brady - winner of 6, six, VI, Super Bowls
Tom Brady - overwhelming favorite in 2 others
Tom Brady - couldn’t beat Eli.
I wonder what Tom’s argument would be as to Eli’s enshrinement?
Maybe someone should ask him.
Quote:
In comment 14451320 USAF NYG Fan said:
Quote:
I'm sorry but there's not. The .500 season average is a team stat. He doesn't just have 2 SB wins, he has the MVPs to go with it meaning he was the best player on the biggest stage, TWICE. Eli Manning's stats support the HoF vote even if the team's stats don't.
Best player twice? Well, Eli received the MVP award - true - but that award is way too biased towards the QB. I can make better cases for several of the Dlinemen over Eli in each SB.
Eli didn't hold the Pats to 14 points in '08, the D did. That's why we won.
Name one time in Eli's career when he was the best player in the league at QB? In the NFC? How about the second best for the league or conference?
Eli was in contention for the MVP in 2011. If not for Brady's "almost" perfect season, I think Eli would have had it. Without Eli Manning, the Giants don't make the post-season much less the playoffs that year. 6th worst ranked defense and the absolute worst rush offense in the league that year. Eli dragged that team into the playoffs by setting a record high 4th quarter comeback wins on the season. The defense had NOTHING to do with that.
The Rams held the Patriots to 13 points just last year. How did that work out for them? Eli Manning led the game-winning drive which he had to do because the defense let the Patriots take the lead on the previous drive. Eli Manning threw the final TD and left only 35 seconds on the clock not risking the defense having to make another stop.
SB MVP is biased towards the QB? Ask Ben Roethlisberger about that. Ask big brother Peyton about that for his 2nd ring. Ask Tom Brady about it just this last SB. Ask Hostetler, Flacco, Dilfer, Etc if it's too biased for the QB. Five PLAYERS in the history of the league with multiple SB MVPs. Three are in the HoF, Tom Brady, and Eli Manning.
Aaron Rodgers won the MVP, not Brady and Rodgers got 48 out of 50 first places votes with Brees getting the other 2.
Eli and Brady the other two finalists, but it doesn't sound like Eli was particularly close.
The thread is simple. It asks people's opinions if Eli does't get elected to the HOF, why do you think he doesn't get in?
So for you, it's simple, Eli gets in. Others (and IMO especially outside of Giants nation) people disagree - for many of the reasons mentioned.
They may have a problem that he’s overrated but that’s it. Nobody has a problem with Eli especially voters. Why would they?
The case against? Simply not a great player. Never top 5. Almost always out of the top 10. Above average QB but not close to elite. Lot of TOs and a lot of losing. 500 QB, TO machine, & inconsistent player. He shouldn’t get in.
Aaron Rodgers won the MVP, not Brady and Rodgers got 48 out of 50 first places votes with Brees getting the other 2.
Eli and Brady the other two finalists, but it doesn't sound like Eli was particularly close.
The thread is simple. It asks people's opinions if Eli does't get elected to the HOF, why do you think he doesn't get in?
So for you, it's simple, Eli gets in. Others (and IMO especially outside of Giants nation) people disagree - for many of the reasons mentioned.
Good catch on 2011. I remembered that wrong. However, I know what the thread is about and since it's an opinion forum, I gave my opinion. My opinion was questioned and I rebutted.
Are you suggesting that only the people that have an opinion as to why he shouldn't or wouldn't get in can post?
It isn't skewed just to QB's. Sometimes it goes to reputation. Ray Lewis was MVP against us. Sometimes it goes to a highlight play. Larry Brown and Desmond Howard were MVP's.
But let's not be disingenuous like Eli just sat back as the D did the work. He led game winning drives in both games. He was fully deserving.
I mean for fucks sake, we can't even have supposed Giants fans recognize that Eli is deserving
Out of the 53 SBs, the QB received the MVP 29X, or 55%.
The last 25 years? 15 out of 25 winners have been QBs. So 60%.
Basically, every 5 SBs a QB wins the award 3X. In my eyes, that's skewed.
Listen, I get the QB position is the most important position on the field. It draws the biggest spotlight.
But when you hold one of the most prolific offenses in NFL history to 14 points on a neutral field, the D needs to be recognized. No one saw that coming, not even Strahan.
Tuck was marvelous in both SB wins. But he had a much better case in '08 for the MVP. He was clearly the best player on the field that day. That DL knocked the living piss out of Brady all day, and Tuck was an absolute monster. Unblockable.
I'll listen to a case for Eli in 2012, but the football gods saved Eli twice in 2008 - the Samuel INT miss and, more critically, the miraculous catch by Tyree of Eli's wounded duck.
Quote:
Aaron Rodgers won the MVP, not Brady and Rodgers got 48 out of 50 first places votes with Brees getting the other 2.
Eli and Brady the other two finalists, but it doesn't sound like Eli was particularly close.
The thread is simple. It asks people's opinions if Eli does't get elected to the HOF, why do you think he doesn't get in?
So for you, it's simple, Eli gets in. Others (and IMO especially outside of Giants nation) people disagree - for many of the reasons mentioned.
Good catch on 2011. I remembered that wrong. However, I know what the thread is about and since it's an opinion forum, I gave my opinion. My opinion was questioned and I rebutted.
Are you suggesting that only the people that have an opinion as to why he shouldn't or wouldn't get in can post?
No, of course not, my apologies, I didn't read the entire exchange, so i wasn't sure you read the OP. It appears you did, so I will retract my patronizing comment.
Quote:
Best player twice? Well, Eli received the MVP award - true - but that award is way too biased towards the QB. I can make better cases for several of the Dlinemen over Eli in each SB.
It isn't skewed just to QB's. Sometimes it goes to reputation. Ray Lewis was MVP against us. Sometimes it goes to a highlight play. Larry Brown and Desmond Howard were MVP's.
But let's not be disingenuous like Eli just sat back as the D did the work. He led game winning drives in both games. He was fully deserving.
I mean for fucks sake, we can't even have supposed Giants fans recognize that Eli is deserving
It's absolutely skewed toward QBs. Just because there have been non-QBs who have won it doesn't change that. It's fairly obvious that in absence of a no-doubt MVP candidate at another position, the winning QB takes the MVP award. It happens with some degree of regularity, too.
In SB42, you could make a deserving argument for Tyree, or for Strahan, or for Tuck. But since you really couldn't make a case for any of those above the others, Eli certainly appeared to get the benefit of what looked like a crowded field of MVP options. SB46 is way less ambiguous - Eli deserved every shred of that MVP award, IMO.
Why is it a ding against one's fandom to be realistic about how QBs tend to be the default option when the press chooses the SB MVP? Am I seriously less of a fan because I genuinely believed that Tuck or Tyree deserved the MVP in SB42? Last I checked, they were Giants also.
Most HoF QBs lead the league in multiple categories throughout their career.
Not rated highly by most opposition players,
You've got to consider his career low QBR among his contemporaries especially Big Ben, Rivers, Brady, Brees and Rodgers.
Those are reasons to keep him out.
But his amazing longevity and iron man ability - no small feats - have led to what will likely be the 3rd guy to crack 60,000 career yards passing, along with two rings and two super bowl MVP awards.
I think he gets in, but it will take him awhile. Would be amazing, surprising, and fantastic if we could mount another SB run this year, and win a Lombardy.
Of course who knows i his career continues after 2019, although I think its unlikely as a Giant, I definitely can see him playing elsewhere. Maybe for Gruden, if the Carr blows up.
Not rated highly by most opposition players,
You've got to consider his career low QBR among his contemporaries especially Big Ben, Rivers, Brady, Brees and Rodgers.
Those are reasons to keep him out.
But his amazing longevity and iron man ability - no small feats - have led to what will likely be the 3rd guy to crack 60,000 career yards passing, along with two rings and two super bowl MVP awards.
I think he gets in, but it will take him awhile. Would be amazing, surprising, and fantastic if we could mount another SB run this year, and win a Lombardy.
Of course who knows if his career continues after 2019, although I think its unlikely as a Giant, I definitely can see him playing elsewhere. Maybe for Gruden, if the Carr blows up.
The Pats allowed 21 sacks ALL year in 2007. The most in a game was 3 by the four different teams. They averaged 37ppg. The fewest point they scored in a game was 20. After that 24.
Obviously we held them to 14 points. And our D that day registered 5 sacks and at least 15 hits on Brady. It was an absolute beat down. The Pats had NO answers for that DL. Zip.
So to suggest that Eli should have been this runaway winner of the SB trophy is absurd. He played well but the D played extraordinary. One of the great defensive efforts in SB history.
Eli is going to have a lot of competition amongst other QBs slated to retire pretty soon. I actually think if he doesn't get in first or second ballot he may never get in due to the competition from his soon to be retiring peers.
The Pats allowed 21 sacks ALL year in 2007. The most in a game was 3 by the four different teams. They averaged 37ppg. The fewest point they scored in a game was 20. After that 24.
Obviously we held them to 14 points. And our D that day registered 5 sacks and at least 15 hits on Brady. It was an absolute beat down. The Pats had NO answers for that DL. Zip.
So to suggest that Eli should have been this runaway winner of the SB trophy is absurd. He played well but the D played extraordinary. One of the great defensive efforts in SB history.
The defense walked off the field down 14-10 very late. They played well, but they still broke late in the game. They are champions because of what Eli did.
But Simms should be in...
Quote:
Phil Simms Isn’t In.
But Simms should be in...
In what?
Quote:
In comment 14451470 joeinpa said:
Quote:
Phil Simms Isn’t In.
But Simms should be in...
In what?
HOF
The defense walked off the field down 14-10 very late. They played well, but they still broke late in the game. They are champions because of what Eli did.
Serious question - what seemed more likely that day? The Giants scoring 17 points or the Pats scoring 14.
In XLVI the Giants had the ball 37 minutes to 22 for NE. The offense was part of the reason that NE scored only 17 points.
The defense deserves credit for both games, but let's not forget the efficiency of the offense which kept NE off the field.
Even in XLII, NE was sitting on the sideline for the first 10 minutes watching the game. That's one way to keep the score down.
One thing I've come to hate about stats is that they offer a simplified way to evaluate a player that isn't fair to the player. Eli played in a much more difficult offense than many of his counterparts for a long time. A vertical offense that did not emphasize short completions.
Furthermore all the passing stats don't account for the other things a QB must do, including identifying blitzes and calling out protections. They don't account for calm composure and clear communication or leadership in the huddle. They don't account for the defensive strategy faced.
They simply give less-knowledgable fans a way to feel like they really understand this very complicated game and like they are a fair judge of talent and ability. It's ridiculous.
Quote:
The defense walked off the field down 14-10 very late. They played well, but they still broke late in the game. They are champions because of what Eli did.
Serious question - what seemed more likely that day? The Giants scoring 17 points or the Pats scoring 14.
No one is saying the Giants defense did anything other than a great job. The fact remains, they walked off the field as certain losers until Eli turned it around with a historic drive. That is absolutely indisputable. Like I said above I'll listen to arguments on either side, but I can't abide anything that calls Eli's contribution in that game into question to even the slightest degree. If we're listing the people who are most responsible for winning that game, his name is at the top of the list. I can't even consider anyone else.
Quote:
In comment 14451474 adamg said:
Quote:
In comment 14451470 joeinpa said:
Quote:
Phil Simms Isn’t In.
But Simms should be in...
In what?
HOF
I'd love for Simms to be in, but he's got a worse case than Eli.
Just my opinion, but for serious HOF consideration you need three things:
1. Stats (need to be roughly top 10 in [b]most[b] stats for your position at time of retirement and should be a league leader in some stats many times) - part of this comes with longevity - aka the counting stats, but so what, this is the HOF durability/longevity should be a consideration
2. Rings
3. Accolades (MVP's, All-Pro's, Pro-Bowl, awards, etc).
You can be light in one of the three, but if you are you need to be heavy in the others.
Simms checks boxes, but less than Eli. I doubt you get any support for Simms to the HOF outside of NY.
Tiki has a better case.
Simms probably has a better chance as a broadcaster
2) His stats are a result of health, longevity, and the offensive explosion of the league during his career.
3) He's done nothing in his career in the playoff other than two amazing runs. Not counting his rookie season he's gotten the Giants into the playoffs 6 out of 14 seasons and to this point only 2 of his last 10 seasons (of course he won the SB in one of those.)
In XLVI the Giants had the ball 37 minutes to 22 for NE. The offense was part of the reason that NE scored only 17 points.
The defense deserves credit for both games, but let's not forget the efficiency of the offense which kept NE off the field.
Even in XLII, NE was sitting on the sideline for the first 10 minutes watching the game. That's one way to keep the score down.
One thing I've come to hate about stats is that they offer a simplified way to evaluate a player that isn't fair to the player. Eli played in a much more difficult offense than many of his counterparts for a long time. A vertical offense that did not emphasize short completions.
Furthermore all the passing stats don't account for the other things a QB must do, including identifying blitzes and calling out protections. They don't account for calm composure and clear communication or leadership in the huddle. They don't account for the defensive strategy faced.
They simply give less-knowledgable fans a way to feel like they really understand this very complicated game and like they are a fair judge of talent and ability. It's ridiculous.
I've brought this up before. Hell, in 2011, NYG kept the ball away from NE winning the TOP battle 37:05 to 22:55 !!!!!
In XLVI the Giants had the ball 37 minutes to 22 for NE. The offense was part of the reason that NE scored only 17 points.
The defense deserves credit for both games, but let's not forget the efficiency of the offense which kept NE off the field.
Even in XLII, NE was sitting on the sideline for the first 10 minutes watching the game. That's one way to keep the score down.
One thing I've come to hate about stats is that they offer a simplified way to evaluate a player that isn't fair to the player. Eli played in a much more difficult offense than many of his counterparts for a long time. A vertical offense that did not emphasize short completions.
Furthermore all the passing stats don't account for the other things a QB must do, including identifying blitzes and calling out protections. They don't account for calm composure and clear communication or leadership in the huddle. They don't account for the defensive strategy faced.
They simply give less-knowledgable fans a way to feel like they really understand this very complicated game and like they are a fair judge of talent and ability. It's ridiculous.
The TOP argument doesn't hold water. The Pats ran 15 more plays than us in that game.
It also wore down their defense.
I read somewhere, that in real time, Tom Brady sat watching on the sidelines for nearly 60 minutes before taking the field for the first time.
You don't think that has an affect on anything? It sets a tone. And it also limits the touches of the other offense.
So the Patriots had 15 more plays. That wasn't enough to get it done. How many more plays and opportunities would they have had if the TOP had been closer?
They were worn out by the fourth quarter.
That is Joe Montana/Tom Brady level achievement. No one gives Montana shit for only scoring 13 points against Cincinnati before the John Taylor drive. No one gives Brady shit for having a major hand in his team being down 28-3 to Atlanta.
Want to knock him for other aspects of his career, fine. But the level of difficulty, the stakes involved...what Eli did in that game ranks right there with anything any QB has ever done in a single game. There is no downplaying it, not even a little bit.
Because controlling the game isn't the be all end all to winning.
Here is the problem I see with all the negative talk. The Giants were 9-7 in 2012 and Eli was pretty good even as the team began the decline. The O-line really fell apart thereafter and hopefully by 2019 it is fixed.
Are we saying that Eli had a great 2011 and historical playoff run and within two years he fell apart?
Let's try this question. If Eli had a true quality line as he did his first half of his career what would his stats be the last seven years and win totals?
No one is saying the Giants defense did anything other than a great job. The fact remains, they walked off the field as certain losers until Eli turned it around with a historic drive. That is absolutely indisputable. Like I said above I'll listen to arguments on either side, but I can't abide anything that calls Eli's contribution in that game into question to even the slightest degree. If we're listing the people who are most responsible for winning that game, his name is at the top of the list. I can't even consider anyone else.
Pats got the ball back with 30 seconds left at their own 26 and one timeout. A FG ties.
Guess how many yards they got? Minus 10.
Just the exclamation point on a historic performance.
Let’s be honest. The football gods were on Eli’s side for the go ahead drive that day.There was some serious serendipity going around. Samuel had a near interception. And then the play to Tyree. It was a drive that epitomized the saying - “sometimes it’s better to be lucky than good...”
It sort of reminded me of Brady getting the MVP in 2002 versus the Rams. He didn’t deserve it. That Pats D threw an absolute gem that day. Ty Law got totally screwed out of the MVP.
The better case for Eli was 2012.
Quote:
this is misleading:
Quote:
no one with as many losses as him as in the HOF.
Favre has more losses and Brees likely will
Not only did Joe Namath have more losses than wins, but he had more interceptions than touchdowns.
Namath might be the single most overrated player in the history of sports. I'm not sure he's a good argument.
Seriously the ultimate team sport and it's his record .
I have no compelling reason why he should not be .
None !
They may have a problem that he’s overrated but that’s it. Nobody has a problem with Eli especially voters. Why would they?
The case against? Simply not a great player. Never top 5. Almost always out of the top 10. Above average QB but not close to elite. Lot of TOs and a lot of losing. 500 QB, TO machine, & inconsistent player. He shouldn’t get in.
If the national media and opposition players continually default to "Eli sucks", how is he overrated?
Yes, the conversation got a little heated:)
So I guess if we have all Giants fans voting for the HOF he is a shoo in. But without that, could be a challenge.
Namath might be the single most overrated player in the history of sports. I'm not sure he's a good argument.
The stats are certainly underwhelming, even for that much more difficult era.
I’m too young to have seen Namath play live. Only the highlights. My dad saw him a few times and said it was mesmerizing how Namath could throw the ball flat footed.
A few years NFL Films did a great piece on him. The throwing talent just jumped off the screen. When Namath was at Alabama he was a actually a terrific runner with the ball before he tore up his knee his senior year. And back then, joint surgery was not nearly as advanced as today. So Namath basically played his entire NFL career with only one good leg. I think that probably needs to be factored in. And that was an era when hitting the QB was the real deal...
When is the last time you watched SB 42? Because the notion that "the offense didn't do shit" until the last winning drive in the 4th qtr is a crock, flat out wrong.
It's true the offense didn't SCORE very much - only 10 points all game until the last drive. But from the very beginning they ate clock with long sustained drives that kept the Brady Bunch on the Bench, and THAT was as much a key to winning IMO as the great pressure defense and of course Eli's last TD drive that put them ahead.
Long drives through the first half especially, but IIRC also the second half, meant the Pat's D was winded by that drive - that's partly why they couldn't stop Jacobs on 4th and 1 or Steve Smith on third and 10; they were low on gas.
That game was to a fair extent a beat-down on both side of the LOS. Rewatch the very first methodical drive, and see how much time it ate up. Recheck the TOP at halftime.
That team had a nice mix of ground game and passing attack, and if Plax wasn't playing on one leg we prolly would have scored more... Wasn't his TD catch for the win only his 1st or 2nd catch all day? Eli was playing with a short deck that day, and STILL outplayed Brady overall.
That's no small feat.
Well the average fans opinion is pretty worthless.
He belongs. Not a slam dunk, but he belongs...
Quote:
Rationalizing the MVP??
Quote:
Best player twice? Well, Eli received the MVP award - true - but that award is way too biased towards the QB. I can make better cases for several of the Dlinemen over Eli in each SB.
It isn't skewed just to QB's. Sometimes it goes to reputation. Ray Lewis was MVP against us. Sometimes it goes to a highlight play. Larry Brown and Desmond Howard were MVP's.
But let's not be disingenuous like Eli just sat back as the D did the work. He led game winning drives in both games. He was fully deserving.
I mean for fucks sake, we can't even have supposed Giants fans recognize that Eli is deserving
It's absolutely skewed toward QBs. Just because there have been non-QBs who have won it doesn't change that. It's fairly obvious that in absence of a no-doubt MVP candidate at another position, the winning QB takes the MVP award. It happens with some degree of regularity, too.
In SB42, you could make a deserving argument for Tyree, or for Strahan, or for Tuck. But since you really couldn't make a case for any of those above the others, Eli certainly appeared to get the benefit of what looked like a crowded field of MVP options. SB46 is way less ambiguous - Eli deserved every shred of that MVP award, IMO.
Why is it a ding against one's fandom to be realistic about how QBs tend to be the default option when the press chooses the SB MVP? Am I seriously less of a fan because I genuinely believed that Tuck or Tyree deserved the MVP in SB42? Last I checked, they were Giants also.
What the hell? Did people miss the key word in what I said?
I said the MVP isn't JUST skewed for QB's.
It is skewed towards reputations too. It is skewed towards a guy who has rely good stats, even if the outcome wasn't completely impacted.
What I said is that Eli deserved those MVP's by leading two 4th quarter comebacks. It wasn't just that he was the QB - it was that he actually meaningfully contributed while the game was in balance. I didn't say the MVP couldn't have gone to somebody else, but he absolutely didn't get it just for being the QB.
It might be the worst, most mythical exaggeration in the history of this team.
After all these years, a guy who couldn't even get a fingertip on a ball at the height of his jump is used as an example of us getting lucky. Not shockingly, it is almost always used to try and say that Eli was gifted something.
Quote:
No one is saying the Giants defense did anything other than a great job. The fact remains, they walked off the field as certain losers until Eli turned it around with a historic drive. That is absolutely indisputable. Like I said above I'll listen to arguments on either side, but I can't abide anything that calls Eli's contribution in that game into question to even the slightest degree. If we're listing the people who are most responsible for winning that game, his name is at the top of the list. I can't even consider anyone else.
Pats got the ball back with 30 seconds left at their own 26 and one timeout. A FG ties.
Guess how many yards they got? Minus 10.
Just the exclamation point on a historic performance.
Let’s be honest. The football gods were on Eli’s side for the go ahead drive that day.There was some serious serendipity going around. Samuel had a near interception. And then the play to Tyree. It was a drive that epitomized the saying - “sometimes it’s better to be lucky than good...”
It sort of reminded me of Brady getting the MVP in 2002 versus the Rams. He didn’t deserve it. That Pats D threw an absolute gem that day. Ty Law got totally screwed out of the MVP.
The better case for Eli was 2012.
Do these football Gods ever work against Eli? Or have they only conveniently shown up at times when they work in your favor to discredit Eli?
Paralysis by analysis.
Football isn't this complicated. Have the ball more, more chances to score, and limits the opportunities for the other team to score.
We're not talking about the difference between 2 minutes and a minute and 20 seconds. We're talking about opening the game up by having the ball for ten minutes (nearly 60 minutes in real time) before the other team even gets a shot. Tom Brady and company were still on their first drive when the second quarter started.
It might be the worst, most mythical exaggeration in the history of this team.
After all these years, a guy who couldn't even get a fingertip on a ball at the height of his jump is used as an example of us getting lucky. Not shockingly, it is almost always used to try and say that Eli was gifted something.
What would you expect from a Redskins fan?
Should he get in?
For the first question our opinion really doesn't matter. What does the national media think about Eli? You know the deal here. Half of them thinks he sucked, lucky and overrated. Who else is in the Hall of Fame with that kind of opinion about them? I don't know if he gets in. It's 50/50.
Should he get in? Fuck yes,I won't try to make the argument because it's been done in this thread by virtually everybody making the case why Eli should get in is correct.
It's also nearly universally accepted that in absence of a compelling candidate at another position, the winning QB has the inside track to the SB MVP trophy.
Can anyone really say with a straight face that there is absolutely no merit to Tuck or Tyree having been MVP of SB42? And it still seems odd that there are fans who act like the mere suggestion of recognizing the outstanding effort of other Giants in winning that game (in addition to Eli's performance) somehow makes you less of a Giants fan.
Ponderous.
I'm sure we can come up with sound arguments there too.
Quote:
that the QB position is the most important position on the entire team. They touch the ball every play and have an opportunity to make a big play every snap. So wouldnt that explain why QBs have won the most SB MVPs? How is that skewed?
It's also nearly universally accepted that in absence of a compelling candidate at another position, the winning QB has the inside track to the SB MVP trophy.
Can anyone really say with a straight face that there is absolutely no merit to Tuck or Tyree having been MVP of SB42? And it still seems odd that there are fans who act like the mere suggestion of recognizing the outstanding effort of other Giants in winning that game (in addition to Eli's performance) somehow makes you less of a Giants fan.
Ponderous.
Tuck could have won the MVP, I will give you that. Tyree not so much. He made the spectacular play, but was really a non factor the rest of the game.
Quote:
In comment 14451896 RinR said:
Quote:
that the QB position is the most important position on the entire team. They touch the ball every play and have an opportunity to make a big play every snap. So wouldnt that explain why QBs have won the most SB MVPs? How is that skewed?
It's also nearly universally accepted that in absence of a compelling candidate at another position, the winning QB has the inside track to the SB MVP trophy.
Can anyone really say with a straight face that there is absolutely no merit to Tuck or Tyree having been MVP of SB42? And it still seems odd that there are fans who act like the mere suggestion of recognizing the outstanding effort of other Giants in winning that game (in addition to Eli's performance) somehow makes you less of a Giants fan.
Ponderous.
Tuck could have won the MVP, I will give you that. Tyree not so much. He made the spectacular play, but was really a non factor the rest of the game.
Tyree had the first Giants TD to give them a 10 - 7 lead.
Not saying he should have won the MVP or not, but that's a big omission.
The question is, did Eli not play well enough to get it? A lot of players can make arguments that they could have been the MVP - but because others can say they could have been MVP doesn't (or at least in a sane world - shouldn't) discredit Eli from being awarded it.
Tuck was great. Strahan was great. The whole defensive line was great.
But when it came to crunch time, the defense walked off the field giving up the go ahead TD with two minutes to play, down four points.
It was TD or bust. Manning when out there and drove the team 83 yards for the winning score including an insane play for the ages that will still be playing on a loop in 50 years when they show old highlights.
Manning DESERVED the MVP.
I actually made this case - above - last night with Law over Brady in 2002.
Law was the superior player in that game - by far. He had a pick six and was enormously instrumental in the Pats suffocating that Rams explosive O.
And that's the bigger question on that play. It's not whether Samuel should have picked it off. He certainly should have. The question is could he have gotten both feet in bounds because he was so close to the sidelines.
But I know, you guys will chalk that up as "an excuse".
Let’s be honest. The football gods were on Eli’s side for the go ahead drive that day.There was some serious serendipity going around. Samuel had a near interception. And then the play to Tyree. It was a drive that epitomized the saying - “sometimes it’s better to be lucky than good...”
It sort of reminded me of Brady getting the MVP in 2002 versus the Rams. He didn’t deserve it. That Pats D threw an absolute gem that day. Ty Law got totally screwed out of the MVP.
The better case for Eli was 2012.
Do these football Gods ever work against Eli?
Definitely yes. And that has manifested itself in the way ownership and management have failed in building a consistently good team the last eight years.
I like to think that over the years I've been as objective as possible with Eli. Early on I backed him up when everybody wanted him run out of town, and I've been willing to acknowledge the decline in his play and the need to move on in recent years.
Objectively, it's unbelievable to me that anyone would view his performance in 42 as something other than incredible.
How does one drop a ball that he gets nothing but a fingertip on??
Do you know what a dropped ball even fucking is?
Bunch of biased, blind motherfuckers
Ridiculous.
But I know, you guys will chalk that up as "an excuse".
Fyi, Plax said Steve Smith is the one who ran the wrong route.
Manning took full advantage of it when the opportunity was presented, and he should, does, and will get credit for it.
The SB MVPs are a non-factor. If Tuck won one of them, I don't think Manning would have been slighted, and I don't it would change his HOF creds.
The biggest knock on Manning is he was good in an era of very good play. Brees & Brady have been consistently very good, and frequently great. His brother was the same. Rodgers also to some extent.
Manning also runs up against Roethlisberger who's been equally successful, and has dipped his to into a level above Manning.
The question is, did Eli not play well enough to get it? A lot of players can make arguments that they could have been the MVP - but because others can say they could have been MVP doesn't (or at least in a sane world - shouldn't) discredit Eli from being awarded it.
I do agree with you there - I just think where we might disagree is that I think there is almost a presumption of a "tie goes to the QB" when there are multiple worthy candidates. That isn't to state that Eli wasn't deserving, but that there were others there were also worthy. Had Tuck won, and I think most fans, if they're being honest, would have found it perfectly reasonable for him to win, Eli would only have one SB MVP instead of two. And thus, if his HOF case is so heavily leveraged to that one accomplishment (which I don't even necessarily think is fair, per se), it is worth noting that there were a few other Giants who could have won the SB MVP that day.
Had one of them one the MVP instead of Eli, does Eli's HOF candidacy materially change? And if so, how can anyone use that as the sole determinant (as so many posters have in this thread and previous debates on this topic) of Eli's HOF worthiness?
He's either a HOFer or he's not, but to pin it entirely on the back of how a group of media members voted on one solitary day seems a bit silly to me.
QB's are going to be the focal point of most games, so I understand how they have more MVP's. But the cases where a QB who gets the award and didn't do much to earn it should be the ones scrutinized, not the ones where eli definitely had the evidence to support winning them.
But I know, you guys will chalk that up as "an excuse".
Totally agree with this. Eli was incensed. Had Samuel actually made that INT, I think the blame would have justifiably fallen on Tyree for running the wrong route.
I see a lot of hand wringing and arguing, but I honestly don't waste a lot of time worrying about it.
I like to think that over the years I've been as objective as possible with Eli. Early on I backed him up when everybody wanted him run out of town, and I've been willing to acknowledge the decline in his play and the need to move on in recent years.
Objectively, it's unbelievable to me that anyone would view his performance in 42 as something other than incredible.
Who said Eli didn't play well in the game?
His performance, however, was less significant that day than what the defense did, specifically that DL. They dialed it up to hold a historic offense, and a team that was undefeated to 14 points, on a neutral site. And this was a month after getting torched at home for 38.
It's less about Eli and more about recognizing, really, the more incredible performance.
There was nothing difficult about the catch. He misjudged it a little. Maybe he was worried about staying in bounds. But it never got to that point because he dropped it.
A confident guy with good hands? He'll tell you he catches that all day.
Nobody in front of him. He saw the ball. It was a soft throw. He wasn't even running. It was right at him. He had to jump straight up. No adjustment. Ball is in front of him. He sees it the whole way. Just jump straigh up. That doesn't make it diffcult.
Gets two hands on it? Right.
Easy catch!!
I've heard the samuel play referred to as an easy catch - usually by KWALL.
Maybe easy for Tyree or Manningham.....
It was not either an easy catch nor a dropped pass. It was a high ball that a DB makes a great attempt on just to barely make contact with - and who would've come down out of bounds.
But when people say eli was a "game manager" in that playoff run, I expect nothing different than that fucked up take.
As I mentioned earlier, I think that is why he failed to make the catch. He was too concerned about his body position. And for a split second took his eye off the ball to begin trying to execute getting his feet down.
But Samuel should have had it. His reaction validates it.
Espn...
USAtoday...
Instead, the ball went through Samuel’s hands, and on the very next play Manning hit Tyree down the middle for what has now become known as the infamous “helmet catch.”
Kyle Brady..."it was a very catchable ball"
Adalius Thomas..."Asante dropped the interception"
Asante Samuel...."I dropped an interception. I think I mistimed the jump. I didn't jump high enough."
Like I said. anyone calling Manning a glorified game manager during the super Bowl runs is not a person with very good perception.
On the top screen you can see he sees the ball. He stops and has time to get ready to jump. Its coming at him but he misjudged it a little. He said he was worried about the sideline so he didn't jump higher.
In the same position, he makes the catch all day. He blew it.
I posted the fucking video. We all can see through horseshit. Well, those of us who don't cling to old agendas and shitty takes.
This has nothing to do with Manning. Its about a guy catching a ball. He should have caught.
I also think the Welker drop wasn't tough. But at least he had to adjust. And reach back. But he had time to do it but blew it.
Samuel? It was easier than the Welker play. Much easier.
They're all blind and biased MFers!!!
But the interception wouldn't have been Eli's fault. He actually would have been off the hook because Tyree ran the wrong route.
Just a fucking bizarre take. Then and today.
An easy catch where the DB jumps, is on the sidelines and barely touches the ball. Riiiight.
Eli's probably getting in, he's got the two improbable rings and the compilation of stats.
What could hinder him is the painfully inconsistent stretches, ordinary record, and absolute head-scratching decision making all too often, during the regular seasons.
bw in dc : 1:40 pm : link : reply
is that Fat-Mara is going all out here to protect Eli from criticism on the play with his "this wasn't an easy catch" routine.
The great irony here is two posters who claim to be quite good at watching the sport really have no fucking clue what an easy catch is.
Notice that neither the fans no the Giants on the sidelines seem remotely shocked that Samuel didn't catch it.
The guy who claimed Eli was a game manager? He's shocked.
Color me un-shocked....
This is ridiculous and inane. This is what I always expect from the casual fan who don’t delve deeply into a game as we ostensibly do..
That’s all I have to say. Outta here..
Samuel's a DB, most of them have shite for hands.
But do people care to acknowledge that Eli threw to a spot expecting Tyree to be there and Tyree simply wasn't? Eli was as demonstrative after that play as you'll ever see him.
Samuel's a DB, most of them have shite for hands.
Samuel actually had good hands. Led the league in INTs twice. And had 51 career INTs. Which is why he knows he should have made that catch. Again, whether he gets his feet down or not is a different question...
I totally agree. I think Welker makes that catch 93X out of 100. But he did get twisted up in the air because Brady slightly misfired.
Quote:
but the degree of difficulty in that pass was being thrown to his opposite shoulder, creating a body control maneuver that affected the end result.
Samuel's a DB, most of them have shite for hands.
Samuel actually had good hands. Led the league in INTs twice. And had 51 career INTs. Which is why he knows he should have made that catch. Again, whether he gets his feet down or not is a different question...
I totally agree. I think Welker makes that catch 93X out of 100. But he did get twisted up in the air because Brady slightly misfired.
That high pass in the biggest game in the sport, I don't think Samuel catches it half out of a hundred.
But - You can bet any amount of money here on what would be said if that's Tyree missing the ball.
"Eli missed a wide-open Tyree!!"
"Eli threw another patented uncatchable high ball"
The consistency in driving home a narrative knows no bounds, nor rationality.
I don't think that was a great throw. Eli has a history of missing high when he misses. But that wasn't an easy INT.
My wonderment about that play is why do some continue to argue vehemently that it was an easy catch.
What is the motivation??
It isn't that hard. Clinging to terrible takes is rampant. KWALL has repeatedly referred to Eli as a game manager for the SB runs and even made the infamous parallel that Mark Sanchez played just as well. And then you have bw. Nuff said.
Quote:
But that wasn't an easy INT.
My wonderment about that play is why do some continue to argue vehemently that it was an easy catch.
What is the motivation??
It isn't that hard. Clinging to terrible takes is rampant. KWALL has repeatedly referred to Eli as a game manager for the SB runs and even made the infamous parallel that Mark Sanchez played just as well. And then you have bw. Nuff said.
But do people care to acknowledge that Eli threw to a spot expecting Tyree to be there and Tyree simply wasn't? Eli was as demonstrative after that play as you'll ever see him.
That's been acknowledged above. Several times.
It can't be argued and a place like BBi makes it so obvious.
You have guys that "LOL" at the thought of Eli having a sub .500 record while the thought makes the rest of us want to puke.
You have people who admittedly are still mad at hime for not wanting to go to San Diego. Imagine a "Giants fan" feeling that way?
What kind of Giants fan tries to diminish Eli's Super Bowl 42 performance?
Just like you can point to posters who probably don't like Eli and actively look to marginalize him, you can certainly also point to posters who would put him on the same level as QBs who have had better careers and overreact when questioned.
I don't want to miss the punchline that we've all been punked.
Just never understood why anyone would go on long debates about Eli being a game manager in the SB runs. Or trying several tacts to de-emphasize anything he did in the road to two titles.
Maybe it isn't a troll job, but if not, quite a few posters just stubbornly stand by some shitty takes. My favorite posts were ones saying guys like Josh Freeman or Derek Carr are better than Eli based on one decent year.
and zero SB wins...
It can't be argued and a place like BBi makes it so obvious.
You have guys that "LOL" at the thought of Eli having a sub .500 record while the thought makes the rest of us want to puke.
You have people who admittedly are still mad at hime for not wanting to go to San Diego. Imagine a "Giants fan" feeling that way?
What kind of Giants fan tries to diminish Eli's Super Bowl 42 performance?
I am not diminishing Eli's performance at all in SB 42. He played very well.
But I am tacking and saying there was a more historical performance on the other side of the ball, the D, and Tuck, IMV, should have been the MVP instead. You would think with some of these retorts that I am suggesting Ty Warren should have been the MVP.
And I've been consistent with my position because I said Ty Law should have been the MVP in SB32 when the Pats beat the Rams and Brady was incorrectly awarded the MVP.
I have never said Eli is a game manager, root for a his career W/L to be .500 or <, etc.
But I admit I did not like how the Mannings and Condon handled the 2004 draft. It was the height of arrogance and reeked of Archie protecting his youngest son. And that totally flew in the face of what Peyton did six year earlier. He was more than willing to play for the hapless Colts in '98 and even told Polian that he looked forward to "kicking his ass" every time the he played the Colts if another team - ironically it would have been San Diego! - drafted him. So I never understood what the hell changed...
The soft toss bounced off his hands. Any guy who can can catch would tell you he catches that ball all day. It was right at him.
But we got it wrong. All of the writers got it wrong. His teammates were wrong even the ones talking about it years later. Hell he did he dropped it. He’s wrong too.
For KWALL to shit on eli for 16 consecutive years. Nothing more or less.
That's as silly as saying people play WR because they can't tackle or cover.
There are some great players who played in the secondary with great hands - Sanders, Green, Law, Reed, both Woodsons, etc.
I get what you are saying to a degree. But it's just not right to say that corners/DBs are just faild WRs.
Deion Sanders influenced a generation of players who solely wanted to play corner. It's a marquee position that has considerable influence the game - both from the impact on a game and the impact on the cap.
This is a refrain I've heard from people that played pre 2000-ish. This has changed greatly in the last 20 years. Actually, it is much more difficult to find guys that can cover and do all things a dback is responsible for than guys who can play WR. Covering someone man to man, being able to find and locate the ball and adjust on the fly is much more difficult that knowing the route and where the QB is going with the ball. In college a lot of times, if that guy is a truly special player they find ways to incorporate him into offense.
The press doesn't like him.
Being Peyton's brother doesn't help.
If he takes the Giants deep into the playoffs with excellent play then he has a chance. Another Super Bowl would help a lot.
I love Eli and it is a shame that the last half of his career has been wasted behind a bad OL.
I hope Eli lands on a good team in 2020 with a chance to win.
If I was coaching a college team and I had a kid that was going to be a superstar WR vs superstar CB. I'm pushing that kid to play CB, it is a harder position to fill with good players and it enables you to do so much on defense. But it really comes down to the scarcity issue. Easier to find good WR's than CB's. I agree though it is very different skill set. Samuel had to do something that looks routine for WR's, high pointing a ball he can barely get to as is and getting his feet in bounds. Not something that he practices all that often while WR's probably do drills like that everyday.
It's not unequivocal Samuel or Welker should or should not have made each play. Each would have been a great play if made and would have been the story if so.
No matter the above that doesn't diminish the subsequent plays Manning made in those games.
The difference very often in a close game is who takes advantage of the breaks. Doing so is not a guarantee or a given.
For me the more interesting question is, say the Pats do make one of those plays, is Manning not Hall worthy?
:-)
:-)
Or the WR running the wrong route. :)
Quote:
he tends to throw too high and that same tendency kept the Giants from losing that Superbowl on a potential Samuel pick...
:-)
Or the WR running the wrong route. :)
How does that help him get into the HoF?
Quote:
In comment 14452751 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
he tends to throw too high and that same tendency kept the Giants from losing that Superbowl on a potential Samuel pick...
:-)
Or the WR running the wrong route. :)
How does that help him get into the HoF?
Because if he run the right route and catches it... there’s no miracle tyree play :)
Proving TTH's point.
Who's dismissing Eli here?
Quote:
To dismiss one of their teams most iconic players.
Proving TTH's point.
Who's dismissing Eli here?
You can’t see people diminishing his award or the semantics of a stupid play?
Shocked! I’d tell ya...
Quote:
In comment 14452584 dep026 said:
Quote:
To dismiss one of their teams most iconic players.
Proving TTH's point.
Who's dismissing Eli here?
You can’t see people diminishing his award or the semantics of a stupid play?
Shocked! I’d tell ya...
That's not what you said. You said dismiss.
Like I said earlier in the thread, I wouldn't be surprised either way with Eli, if he gets in or doesn't. And I do think that Tuck should have gotten the MVP in SB42 even though I do think Eli was plenty deserving himself. Does that mean that I'm dismissing him in your view?
Not everything is as binary as it seems like you're making it out to be.
Quote:
In comment 14452764 dep026 said:
Quote:
In comment 14452751 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
he tends to throw too high and that same tendency kept the Giants from losing that Superbowl on a potential Samuel pick...
:-)
Or the WR running the wrong route. :)
How does that help him get into the HoF?
Because if he run the right route and catches it... there’s no miracle tyree play :)
Too high per posts above to catch
Dictated.
1- he is not Peyton
2- he forced a trade
3- he is boring in the media capital of the world
He has won 2 SB, both times having the ball in his hands last and trailing and leading to wins. His 2nd half SB numbers are ridiculous
It still amazes me people say - outside of 2 SB runs he has not done anything else. He did win 2.
I am still convinced he would have 3 if Plax didn’t derail the 08 team
It's hard to write off the national narrative when those two very good seasons were a long time ago, and 2004-2007 weren't exactly remarkable seasons either.
The Giants offense as one that imposed it's will on teams lasted 2008-2012 (and not even the entire 2012). What was common on those 5 teams were a plethora of offensive weapons (at least one stud outside WR, a good slot WR, a decent #3 WR, a good TE, and a good running game).
The makeup of the Giants offense didn't get enough credit in those years. The Giants utilized every last guy on offense to win games.
Mario Manningham, the unsung hero against the 49ers and Patriots that SB season. Without him, no Lombardi.
It's hard to write off the national narrative when those two very good seasons were a long time ago, and 2004-2007 weren't exactly remarkable seasons either.
The Giants offense as one that imposed it's will on teams lasted 2008-2012 (and not even the entire 2012). What was common on those 5 teams were a plethora of offensive weapons (at least one stud outside WR, a good slot WR, a decent #3 WR, a good TE, and a good running game).
The makeup of the Giants offense didn't get enough credit in those years. The Giants utilized every last guy on offense to win games.
Mario Manningham, the unsung hero against the 49ers and Patriots that SB season. Without him, no Lombardi.
As a 9ers fan, how impressed were you with Eli's resilience in the 2011 title game?
IMO, and a lot of Giants' fans here support this observation, that the toughness and resiliency he showed in that game - most QBs even "GOATS" like Brady or Rodgers likely crumble under that onslaught your D laid on our OL and QB - was absolutely an HOF level performance, stats be damned.
Quote:
having an overall losing record in his starts is pretty tough to ignore.
Obviously assuming that he retires with a record less than .500. He's 116-114 now.
Eli's record of 116-114 puts Eli just about where he should be a middle grade QB, in short, nothing special...definitely not a HOF QB...
Makes sense.
Makes sense.
Or one poster made one of those points and a completely different poster made the other point? No single poster made both of those points.
Does that help it make more sense?