how much more would the Giants have won if both QBs had more weapons to throw to.
I give the edge to Eli, he had more natural QB tools, played big in the biggest games, and stood up to getting pounded when it counted the most. Phil was a phenomenal touch passer in a way Eli wasn't (see seam routes, screens, and dropping them in the bucket), but Phil needed more help around him in order to be successful. Eli was also an iron man.
Some wonks can get involved, but I beleive that when you consider the eras they played in, and compare their relative performances, they are very similar players. Phil had a much better W-L, but had the benefit of generally better defensive play. Eli had more stats, but rules were significantly changed in his favor. Both were tough good leaders. Both have two SB rings, and Phil could have likely had 2 SB MVPs if he didn't break his leg.
Eli had great weapons around him for most of his career.
I think you could say the front office failed him from 2012 forward. Injuries ruined Nicks and Cruz, they didn't capitalize on the score of OBJ by fixing the OL or continuing to feed the talent on defense. The weapons weren't replaced and over time with two rings in his pocket Eli declined with age.
But sorry there is nothing that Eli could do on the field better than Phil Simms. Simms was 10X the athlete that Eli was, he was a better passer, he was more accurate and had a better arm. The only thing that kept Phil out of the HOF were injuries and dumb coaching choices.
When I look at the Simms (Simms/Hostetler) Super Bowl teams they were defensively lead and were among the top 3 teams in the league those years.
With Eli's 2 Super Bowls we had some good players on defense and a great pass rush, but our defense wasn't dominating games and had rosters that weren't even top 5 in the NFL. I feel like Eli put the team on his back during those runs.
To this day, the greatest game I've watched a Giants QB play was the NFC champisonship game against San Francisco where Eli just kept getting pummeled and getting back up. I don't think Simms wins that game.
My thoughts exactly. But i think by the time OBJ came on the scene, Eli was beginning to decline.
Imgine if we had a OL that canhole about 3 seceonds and OBJ can finish his routes!!. One of the great mysteries, it's never discussed how much better OBJ could have been with a dcent OL..
I love them both. Two tough guys. Great leaders, each in their own way. Both were true Giants. I will say that Phil had a much stronger arm, especially for throwing in Giants Stadium.
disagree on the defense in 2007. People overlook how good that defense was. All you needed was the pass rush. And they did dominate on defense. You don't go undefeated on the road and hold all 3 playoff teams and SB team under 21 points if you're not good..
Pretty close, I think. Both struggled early. Both had very good years
Both contributed to two SB wins. Both were here for their entire careers. Both were great Giants. ELi played in a different league then Phil did and vice versa.
That said, I give the nod to Eli. Better big game winning drives and health.
Played with underwhelming offensive weapons his whole career and still got it done. I also don't think Eli could have stood up to the monsters Phil played against.
Of 2 different quarterbacks and 2 different teams. Phil had the great offensive line, running backs and all time defense and suspect wide receivers. Eli had a very good offensive line, a good defense, good running backs, and better wide receivers. I think the performance eli had in the 2 playoffs leading to the superbowls puts him over the top
He performed under tough conditions in bad weather and came out on top. Think about it. In Dallas in 2007, at Lambeau against green bay in freezing temperatures, an undefeated Patriots team and then in 2011 where he took a beating against the vaunted 49ers team that came after him with everything they had. I love phil, but eli delivered 2 superbowls and stepped up as the games got bigger and the pressure was at its peak.
With different rules. I think if you gave Simms the skill players that Eli played with the rules where the quarterback and receivers can't be hit at certain times and in certain ways, I believe Simms would have been just as effective. Simms, IMO, was a better thrower of the football. Anyone who says that Eli was "miles" better then Simms probably didn't see Phil play his entire career.
for their respective teams. I think if the Giants had maintained a good OL for Eli's back half we would not be having this discussion or at least it would not be very close.
disagree on the defense in 2007. People overlook how good that defense was. All you needed was the pass rush. And they did dominate on defense. You don't go undefeated on the road and hold all 3 playoff teams and SB team under 21 points if you're not good..
They were 17th in points allowed that year which puts them in the back half of the league. The defense was functional, but I couldn't call them "good" while being in the back half of the league in points allowed. They didn't carry the team.
For reference they were 2nd in points against in 1986. That defense carried the team. Not only did they break the barrier of good, they were exceptional.
But he was asked to do a lot less than Eli. Played similar number of years and threw like half the passes Eli did. Never had a year anywhere close to as impactful as Eli was in 2011. In 86, Simms threw 58 passes in the entire post season. Eli threw 58 in the 49er game alone, all while getting the shit kicked out of him. Game winning drives for Simms? 17. Eli? 37. I fucking loved Simms but it's not close.
Since they inevitably involve disparaging one guy vs. another.
Phil "10x" the athlete Eli was? I love Phil as much as anyone, but c'mon.
Eli benefited from more passer-friendly rules and some excellent receivers. Phil benefited from a top-caliber defense that didn't require him to constantly come from behind.
Here's my take: they're pretty close, they're both great, and hopefully we won't see another 15-year gap before we get another QB on their level.
RE: It has nothing to do with supporting casts or eras
Phil Simms vs Eli Manning both of whom are among my 5 favorite Giants players on and off the field as fan since 1965.
Staying healthy = Eli
Toughness = Tie both tough as hell
Everything else = Phil
Arm, Accuracy, Ball Security, Athlete, Team Leader. All of it Phil.
They tie for toughness? Look, I don't want to knock Simms, but who missed games due to injury? Elis ironman streak alone puts him above Simms in toughness. As far as team leader, again Eli carried the team on his back in 2911. A subpar defense and a non existent running game for most of the season. Tell me the year that simms carried the team on his back.
Simms had one of the greatest defenses for most of his career. The best defensive player Eli had was Strahan and he retired after the first superbowl.
Toughness doesn't equal staying healthy and read it again.
Eli played in a different era when QBs were protected. Simms did not. I don't care who they played with. It has zero relevance on who was better just like the iron man streak has no relevance on who was better or tougher.
There is nothing that Eli Manning could do better on a football field than Phil Simms except stay healthy.
I'm not knocking Eli who will be in the HOF and is a two time Super Bowl MVP and one of my favorite players ever in any sport.
Most of the people who are discussing this never saw Phil Simms play especially early in career when he could really run. Simms could run backward faster than Eli could run forward.
Phil took a beating but then again he didn't chuck and duck.
He threw 14 passes for 90 yards while the Giants ran the ball 46 times. Cmon.
The game was much different in the 80's
I remember. Phil was asked to a lot more hang tough on third and longs after two straight runs and keep the drives alive. That's why it's really hard to compare the two. Eli never got the benefit of the top defense and running game and Phil never got the chance to play in an attacking downfield passing game.
But, additionally, that Redskin game was a good win but you can't compare completing 7 passes to Eli beating Favre (and later Rogers) in Lambeau. Maybe Phil could have done that. But Eli actually did.
is greater than anything Simms ever did. That season gives him the edge. The rest of their careers is a toss-up and you could maybe give the edge to Simms, but Eli's 2011 season was on another level.
How can I help but be biased considering I was born in '87, but still, it seems Eli is the answer no matter how you look at it.
At peak performance? Eli in 2011? No Giants QB has matched that level of MVP-like play, and no QB in NFL HISTORY has had a season that could better be defined as purely "clutch".
In terms of long-term play? I mean clearly Eli was more durable, played more years, and holds all statistical advantages even when discounting for era played in. Even if you want to talk about "well Eli played in an era where defense's couldn't kill the QB"... okay, well that certainly didn't help Big Ben in staying on the field.
Admittedly: Simms' Super Bowl 21 performance was probably the standalone best performance by a Giants QB in any one game in history, but personally I think it depends on how you want to look at that. I personally think Eli's performance in the NFCCG against the 9ers is up there with the greatest performance of all time, even if the stats don't show it. That 9ers defense was one of the best since turn of the century, and that 3rd and 15 TD strike to Manningham was IMO the most ballsy play I've ever seen by a QB on a football field.
You cannot contribute if you are not on the field. Yes, I know the rules in Eli's era were more protective of quarterbacks, but still quarterbacks got hurt. Daniel Jones could not even play his entire shortened (did not start the first 2 games) season without missing time.
Big Ben and Brees both missed time last year under the new rules. Let's not minimize what Eli accomplished by not missing games.
When I look at the Simms (Simms/Hostetler) Super Bowl teams they were defensively lead and were among the top 3 teams in the league those years.
With Eli's 2 Super Bowls we had some good players on defense and a great pass rush, but our defense wasn't dominating games and had rosters that weren't even top 5 in the NFL. I feel like Eli put the team on his back during those runs.
To this day, the greatest game I've watched a Giants QB play was the NFC champisonship game against San Francisco where Eli just kept getting pummeled and getting back up. I don't think Simms wins that game.
Yea I mean holding the best offensive team ever to 14 points is really trying on the QB.
When I look at the Simms (Simms/Hostetler) Super Bowl teams they were defensively lead and were among the top 3 teams in the league those years.
With Eli's 2 Super Bowls we had some good players on defense and a great pass rush, but our defense wasn't dominating games and had rosters that weren't even top 5 in the NFL. I feel like Eli put the team on his back during those runs.
To this day, the greatest game I've watched a Giants QB play was the NFC champisonship game against San Francisco where Eli just kept getting pummeled and getting back up. I don't think Simms wins that game.
Yea I mean holding the best offensive team ever to 14 points is really trying on the QB.
Just like Phil had a defense that held opponents to 23 points in 3 playoff games before the broncos scored a meaningless 10 points in garbage time in the Super Bowl.
Maybe they're both really good QBs that also got some help along the way?
More was asked of Eli with the game winning Superbowl Drives, and he didn't have the best defensive player ever flying around on defense.
I'd go with Eli
Daniel Jones numbers will probably look far better than Eli’s if he starts for a decade .....won’t mean he is a better qb.
Look at the advanced stats. Phil rates better relative to his peers than Eli does.
Both are similar in Giants history. both have arguments to why they are more important/better. Not a cut and dry discussion.
I give the edge to Eli, he had more natural QB tools, played big in the biggest games, and stood up to getting pounded when it counted the most. Phil was a phenomenal touch passer in a way Eli wasn't (see seam routes, screens, and dropping them in the bucket), but Phil needed more help around him in order to be successful. Eli was also an iron man.
Some wonks can get involved, but I beleive that when you consider the eras they played in, and compare their relative performances, they are very similar players. Phil had a much better W-L, but had the benefit of generally better defensive play. Eli had more stats, but rules were significantly changed in his favor. Both were tough good leaders. Both have two SB rings, and Phil could have likely had 2 SB MVPs if he didn't break his leg.
Very interesting question
I think you could say the front office failed him from 2012 forward. Injuries ruined Nicks and Cruz, they didn't capitalize on the score of OBJ by fixing the OL or continuing to feed the talent on defense. The weapons weren't replaced and over time with two rings in his pocket Eli declined with age.
With Eli's 2 Super Bowls we had some good players on defense and a great pass rush, but our defense wasn't dominating games and had rosters that weren't even top 5 in the NFL. I feel like Eli put the team on his back during those runs.
To this day, the greatest game I've watched a Giants QB play was the NFC champisonship game against San Francisco where Eli just kept getting pummeled and getting back up. I don't think Simms wins that game.
Imgine if we had a OL that canhole about 3 seceonds and OBJ can finish his routes!!. One of the great mysteries, it's never discussed how much better OBJ could have been with a dcent OL..
That said, I give the nod to Eli. Better big game winning drives and health.
He performed under tough conditions in bad weather and came out on top. Think about it. In Dallas in 2007, at Lambeau against green bay in freezing temperatures, an undefeated Patriots team and then in 2011 where he took a beating against the vaunted 49ers team that came after him with everything they had. I love phil, but eli delivered 2 superbowls and stepped up as the games got bigger and the pressure was at its peak.
They were 17th in points allowed that year which puts them in the back half of the league. The defense was functional, but I couldn't call them "good" while being in the back half of the league in points allowed. They didn't carry the team.
For reference they were 2nd in points against in 1986. That defense carried the team. Not only did they break the barrier of good, they were exceptional.
????
This game at home? - ( New Window )
Phil took a beating but then again he didn't chuck and duck.
Quote:
The only thing I'd give to Eli is durability.
Phil took a beating but then again he didn't chuck and duck.
He threw 14 passes for 90 yards while the Giants ran the ball 46 times. Cmon.
Staying healthy = Eli
Toughness = Tie both tough as hell
Everything else = Phil
Arm, Accuracy, Ball Security, Athlete, Team Leader. All of it Phil.
Phil "10x" the athlete Eli was? I love Phil as much as anyone, but c'mon.
Eli benefited from more passer-friendly rules and some excellent receivers. Phil benefited from a top-caliber defense that didn't require him to constantly come from behind.
Here's my take: they're pretty close, they're both great, and hopefully we won't see another 15-year gap before we get another QB on their level.
Staying healthy = Eli
Toughness = Tie both tough as hell
Everything else = Phil
Arm, Accuracy, Ball Security, Athlete, Team Leader. All of it Phil.
They tie for toughness? Look, I don't want to knock Simms, but who missed games due to injury? Elis ironman streak alone puts him above Simms in toughness. As far as team leader, again Eli carried the team on his back in 2911. A subpar defense and a non existent running game for most of the season. Tell me the year that simms carried the team on his back.
Simms had one of the greatest defenses for most of his career. The best defensive player Eli had was Strahan and he retired after the first superbowl.
Eli played in a different era when QBs were protected. Simms did not. I don't care who they played with. It has zero relevance on who was better just like the iron man streak has no relevance on who was better or tougher.
There is nothing that Eli Manning could do better on a football field than Phil Simms except stay healthy.
I'm not knocking Eli who will be in the HOF and is a two time Super Bowl MVP and one of my favorite players ever in any sport.
Most of the people who are discussing this never saw Phil Simms play especially early in career when he could really run. Simms could run backward faster than Eli could run forward.
Too bad Simms suffered so many injuries and lost Parcells' confidence one year early in his career.
Love them both.
Quote:
In comment 14925238 Spider43 said:
Quote:
The only thing I'd give to Eli is durability.
Phil took a beating but then again he didn't chuck and duck.
He threw 14 passes for 90 yards while the Giants ran the ball 46 times. Cmon.
The game was much different in the 80's
Quote:
In comment 14925246 Mendenhall said:
Quote:
In comment 14925238 Spider43 said:
Quote:
The only thing I'd give to Eli is durability.
Phil took a beating but then again he didn't chuck and duck.
He threw 14 passes for 90 yards while the Giants ran the ball 46 times. Cmon.
The game was much different in the 80's
I remember. Phil was asked to a lot more hang tough on third and longs after two straight runs and keep the drives alive. That's why it's really hard to compare the two. Eli never got the benefit of the top defense and running game and Phil never got the chance to play in an attacking downfield passing game.
But, additionally, that Redskin game was a good win but you can't compare completing 7 passes to Eli beating Favre (and later Rogers) in Lambeau. Maybe Phil could have done that. But Eli actually did.
At peak performance? Eli in 2011? No Giants QB has matched that level of MVP-like play, and no QB in NFL HISTORY has had a season that could better be defined as purely "clutch".
In terms of long-term play? I mean clearly Eli was more durable, played more years, and holds all statistical advantages even when discounting for era played in. Even if you want to talk about "well Eli played in an era where defense's couldn't kill the QB"... okay, well that certainly didn't help Big Ben in staying on the field.
Admittedly: Simms' Super Bowl 21 performance was probably the standalone best performance by a Giants QB in any one game in history, but personally I think it depends on how you want to look at that. I personally think Eli's performance in the NFCCG against the 9ers is up there with the greatest performance of all time, even if the stats don't show it. That 9ers defense was one of the best since turn of the century, and that 3rd and 15 TD strike to Manningham was IMO the most ballsy play I've ever seen by a QB on a football field.
Big Ben and Brees both missed time last year under the new rules. Let's not minimize what Eli accomplished by not missing games.
With Eli's 2 Super Bowls we had some good players on defense and a great pass rush, but our defense wasn't dominating games and had rosters that weren't even top 5 in the NFL. I feel like Eli put the team on his back during those runs.
To this day, the greatest game I've watched a Giants QB play was the NFC champisonship game against San Francisco where Eli just kept getting pummeled and getting back up. I don't think Simms wins that game.
Yea I mean holding the best offensive team ever to 14 points is really trying on the QB.
Quote:
When I look at the Simms (Simms/Hostetler) Super Bowl teams they were defensively lead and were among the top 3 teams in the league those years.
With Eli's 2 Super Bowls we had some good players on defense and a great pass rush, but our defense wasn't dominating games and had rosters that weren't even top 5 in the NFL. I feel like Eli put the team on his back during those runs.
To this day, the greatest game I've watched a Giants QB play was the NFC champisonship game against San Francisco where Eli just kept getting pummeled and getting back up. I don't think Simms wins that game.
Yea I mean holding the best offensive team ever to 14 points is really trying on the QB.
Just like Phil had a defense that held opponents to 23 points in 3 playoff games before the broncos scored a meaningless 10 points in garbage time in the Super Bowl.
Maybe they're both really good QBs that also got some help along the way?