Did Manning make any difference on the Colts team at all this season? [Archive]

Daliman

01-19-2005, 05:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I dunno...but I will say this:

Vick was the MVP this year. We saw clearly how bad the Falcons were without him last year. THEY WERE BASICALLY THE SAME TEAM this year, with him in there, and now they are in the NFC championship game.

Enough said.

Manning does not perform well in big games. (His window is closing too)

[/ QUOTE ]

THe falcons quit early last year, and overachieved this year, simple as that. Michael VIck may be the most overrated QB in history.

Looks at the 1999 bears; 13-3 record, same team as year b4 and after, IIRC, and they didn't win 10 games total those 2 years.

Rick Diesel

01-19-2005, 05:10 PM

Tennessee??????

Mano

01-19-2005, 05:17 PM

Sorry, losing my mind. I meant Denver of course.

Victor

01-19-2005, 05:25 PM

[ QUOTE ]
THe falcons quit early last year, and overachieved this year, simple as that. Michael VIck may be the most overrated QB in history.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is bs.

You are clearly just racist against black quarterbacks. Go hang out with Rush.

NoPeak

01-19-2005, 05:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]

THe falcons quit early last year, and overachieved this year, simple as that. Michael VIck may be the most overrated QB in history.

Looks at the 1999 bears; 13-3 record, same team as year b4 and after, IIRC, and they didn't win 10 games total those 2 years.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would have to agree, Vick is highly overrated as a QB. He is a great athlete, but indeed overrated as a QB.

Lazymeatball

01-19-2005, 06:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
THe falcons quit early last year, and overachieved this year, simple as that. Michael VIck may be the most overrated QB in history.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is bs.

You are clearly just racist against black quarterbacks. Go hang out with Rush.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, you're an angry bigot, nice meeting you.

edit: unless there is some sort of sarcasm or joke here that I'm missing. Otherwise, see above.

PhatTBoll

01-19-2005, 06:25 PM

I guess it never occurred to you that the reason Stokely, Wayne, Edge (when receiving), and Pollard seem so talented is because Manning is so good at getting them the ball.

Daliman

01-19-2005, 07:46 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
THe falcons quit early last year, and overachieved this year, simple as that. Michael VIck may be the most overrated QB in history.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is bs.

You are clearly just racist against black quarterbacks. Go hang out with Rush.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL! Way to generalize.

My ranking of top NFL QB's
#1 Peyton Manning
#2 Daunte Culpepper
#3 Donovan McNabb

Also, my 1 y/o son has a Culpepper JErsey,and my favorite player is Randy Moss.

Go fuc<font color="black"></font>k yourself.

daryn

01-19-2005, 07:50 PM

i think he was joking, donk. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Mano

01-19-2005, 07:57 PM

That is certainly true. It is also true that Manning has such gaudy stats because he has such fine recievers to throw to, and a good running game to open it up. I think the Colts are a playoff team even without him. He had a fine season, but in the end, he was not the difference maker in the playoffs.

Manning is being compared to the greats like Montana, Elway, Favre, etc. . These players have all been able at some point in their carreers to put the team on their back and make the difference in a big game. The same could be said about Marino, but I think the Colts have a much stronger supporting cast than the Dolphins ever did. I just don't think Manning can be put in the same league as the others until he comes through in a meaningfull game.

Edge34

01-19-2005, 08:14 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I think pretty much any starting QB in the NFL would have gotten them to the second round of the playoffs

[/ QUOTE ]

For a second there, I could've sworn you were talking about the Patriots. Actually, whether you were or not, this still works.

The MVP award is given for the regular season, plenty of league MVPs haven't won the Super Bowl. That's why they give one of those too. Steve McNair certainly didn't do anything to convince me he deserved it in the playoffs, but he had a decent season last year. Peyton's accomplishments through 16 games, more like 14 or 15, tops.

Before Peyton came around, the Colts were perennial bottom-feeders. Hell, they even went 3-13 his first year, with a guy named Marshall Faulk behind him. Peyton is a team leader who knows how to step it up, regardless of games like the ones we've seen at Foxboro the last two offseasons.

Daliman

01-19-2005, 08:19 PM

If so, then so was I /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Toro

01-19-2005, 08:30 PM

[ QUOTE ]
For a second there, I could've sworn you were talking about the Patriots.

[/ QUOTE ]

Stick to fantasy football.

Shajen

01-20-2005, 08:24 AM

[ QUOTE ]

Looks at the 1999 bears...

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, don't make this personal, damnit /images/graemlins/grin.gif

__Q__

01-20-2005, 10:29 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Looks at the 1999 bears; 13-3 record, same team as year b4 and after, IIRC, and they didn't win 10 games total those 2 years.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, 1999 Bears didn't go 13-3. Also, they weren't the same team after they went 13-3 a couple years later. Many key people were injured or missing.

If your gonna comment on the Bears, get your facts right.

Shajen

01-20-2005, 10:41 AM

__Q__

01-20-2005, 10:52 AM

I like him too. I think he has great poise for a rookie. But i'm starting to worry about him being injury prone. Only time will tell.

I just hope we can draft Mike Williams to drastically improve what must have been one of the worst wide reciever corps of all time.

sublime

01-20-2005, 10:57 AM

Before Peyton came around, the Colts were perennial bottom-feeders. Hell, they even went 3-13 his first year, with a guy named Marshall Faulk behind him. Peyton is a team leader who knows how to step it up, regardless of games like the ones we've seen at Foxboro the last two offseasons.

hey edge-

manning is the best QB in the NFL. I agree 100%. the team leader stuff i dont buy though. he whines and shakes his head EVERY time things dont go his way. stepping it up means you play your best in the most meaningfull games, clearly manning doesnt not do that.

EDIT: i now recall some whacky posts you have made in the past. you are clearly a "homer" and will never speak rationally on these issues.

sublime

01-20-2005, 10:58 AM

and my favorite player is Randy Moss.

are you serious?

Shajen

01-20-2005, 10:58 AM

The O line needs improvement too.

I feel pretty good though. Minus a few key injuries on D, (and Grossman's injury of course) the Bears didn't play horribly this last year.

Daliman

01-20-2005, 11:12 AM

[ QUOTE ]
and my favorite player is Randy Moss.

are you serious?

[/ QUOTE ]
Ya, goes back some. I'm no fan of his recent antics, but in the grand scheme, is what he did/has done a big deal? There isn't a team out there tha wouldn;t love to have him, and don't say the patriots, cuz they had no problem taking Dilon and HIS problems.

Daliman

01-20-2005, 11:13 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Looks at the 1999 bears; 13-3 record, same team as year b4 and after, IIRC, and they didn't win 10 games total those 2 years.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, 1999 Bears didn't go 13-3. Also, they weren't the same team after they went 13-3 a couple years later. Many key people were injured or missing.

If your gonna comment on the Bears, get your facts right.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whatdya think of Grossman?

I like him. Think he has some serious potential.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not a bear fan, but I think he's decent with upside.

Lazymeatball

01-20-2005, 11:15 AM

All of Dillon's problems vanished when he got the hell out of Cincinnati(edited). The Pats wouldn't put up with Moss's crap, note the Terry Glenn fiasco of the past.

PhatTBoll

01-20-2005, 11:19 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Manning is being compared to the greats like Montana, Elway, Favre, etc. . These players have all been able at some point in their carreers to put the team on their back and make the difference in a big game. The same could be said about Marino, but I think the Colts have a much stronger supporting cast than the Dolphins ever did. I just don't think Manning can be put in the same league as the others until he comes through in a meaningfull game.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is all perfectly valid. But it's not what you were saying with your original post. The MVP is based on the regular season, not the playoffs.

Also, their performance against the Pats might indicate that the Colts receivers are not necessarily as great as their numbers would indicate. Brandon Stokely in particular has had a habit of dropping crucial passes throughout his career. Ask any Seahawks fan how badly dropped passes can screw you.

Daliman

01-20-2005, 11:20 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Looks at the 1999 bears; 13-3 record, same team as year b4 and after, IIRC, and they didn't win 10 games total those 2 years.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, 1999 Bears didn't go 13-3. Also, they weren't the same team after they went 13-3 a couple years later. Many key people were injured or missing.

If your gonna comment on the Bears, get your facts right.

[/ QUOTE ]

2000 5-11
2001 13-3
2002 4-12

Ok, so it was 2001. So sue me. Just SEEMS so much longer ago, and I even said IIRC meaning If I Remember Correctly, so let's not get picky. Point is the same, and I said nothing about " a couple years later". I said the year b4 and after. Reading is a skill.

Daliman

01-20-2005, 11:22 AM

[ QUOTE ]
All of Dillon's problems vanished when he got the hell out of Cleveland. The Pats wouldn't put up with Moss's crap, note the Terry Glenn fiasco of the past.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, Cincinnati, but I know what ya mean. Could easily say the same for Moss's troubles if he got on an actual good team.

P.S. Comparing Moss with her is just crazy talk.

Edge34

01-20-2005, 11:26 AM

[ QUOTE ]
EDIT: i now recall some whacky posts you have made in the past. you are clearly a "homer" and will never speak rationally on these issues.

[/ QUOTE ]

You believe that because I made a few comments regarding the officiating in the Pats-Colts game last weekend, but I also was very quick to point out that the Colts didn't play a good enough game, most likely, to win anyways. Homer? Don't think so. Sure, I'm a fan, and a bit of extra kudos for your home guy are standard, but I simply don't think questioning Manning's MVP status as the OP did is valid.

Manning is a quietly intense guy most of the time, and shaking his head is about as frustrated as you'll ever see him get. Ask anybody in the Colts organization and they'll all say the same thing - without Peyton the team just wouldn't be the same.

Its too bad that you consider me a homer and think I've made "whacky" posts, I'd like to think most of what I've said on this topic has been at least relatively unbiased...I mean, you've got a Colts fan in me arguing that he's the best, and you've got a lot of Pats fan's kissing Brady's ass (not saying you)...that's sports talk, man. I'll do my best to make sure you don't think I'm too far off base.

Playing your best in the big games - Fran Tarkenton never won a Super Bowl. Dan Marino never won one. Lots of QBs never won the Big One, and a lot of questionable QBs (Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer recently come to mind) have taken the trip to Disney World.

If you still think I'm not worthy of paying attention to, that's your call bro, but I do have some idea what I'm talkin' about here...

-Edge

sublime

01-20-2005, 11:32 AM

Ya, goes back some. I'm no fan of his recent antics, but in the grand scheme, is what he did/has done a big deal? There isn't a team out there tha wouldn;t love to have him, and don't say the patriots, cuz they had no problem taking Dilon and HIS problems.

dillon spoke his mind a LOT, and im not sure of off-field problems. but moss is a complete moron, i mean lets be real. the guy has been a problem EVERYWHERE, even going back to high school. he takes plays off etc....

i am not denying he is a great talent, just an odd choice for favorite player i guess.

sublime

01-20-2005, 11:43 AM

You believe that because I made a few comments regarding the officiating in the Pats-Colts game last weekend, but I also was very quick to point out that the Colts didn't play a good enough game, most likely, to win anyways. Homer? Don't think so. Sure, I'm a fan, and a bit of extra kudos for your home guy are standard, but I simply don't think questioning Manning's MVP status as the OP did is valid.

the colts are a soft team. they got beat up last week, by a better team. plain and simple.

as for manning being the MVP? under the current rules, of course he is the MVP. he improves his entire team and its NOT the other way around as some have suggested .

IMO, the MVP should not be decided until after the season (super bowl included) but thats just my humble and not listened to opinion.

mean, you've got a Colts fan in me arguing that he's the best, and you've got a lot of Pats fan's kissing Brady's ass (not saying you)...that's sports talk, man. I'll do my best to make sure you don't think I'm too far off base

i guess what i thought was "whackiness" was when you said tom brady was overrated. hes not, i mean ask almost any NFL fan across the country to name the top 5 QB's (some even 10) and he wont crack the list. i agree some give him way to much credit than he deserves, but thats the way it works with the QB position. i dont deny the fact that manning has better QB "skills" than brady, but the simple fact is that when the heat gets turned up brady seems to elevate his game and manning does the opposite.

sorry for being a wiseass

daryn

01-20-2005, 03:50 PM

some people just don't know the definition of overrated.

PhatTBoll

01-20-2005, 03:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]
i guess what i thought was "whackiness" was when you said tom brady was overrated. hes not, i mean ask almost any NFL fan across the country to name the top 5 QB's (some even 10) and he wont crack the list.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're wrong here. I despise the Patriots but will admit that Brady is top 5, at least.

sublime

01-20-2005, 04:04 PM

I think you're wrong here. I despise the Patriots but will admit that Brady is top 5, at least.

how does that make me wrong? i said "most" people, and i feel I am correct in that statement. the fact that you despise the patriots and admit that brady is top 5 doesnt change the validity of my statement. i despise peyton manning and will admit he is the best overall QB in the NFL. I despise the NYY but can admit that Mariano Rivera is a great closer.

Daliman

01-20-2005, 04:18 PM

BRady is overrated only when NFL analyst guys say he's the best in the league, not when they say top 5. I have zero problem with top 5, but he AIN'T the best. VIck is WAY more overrated, btw.

Shajen

01-20-2005, 04:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]
BRady is overrated only when NFL analyst guys say he's the best in the league, not when they say top 5. I have zero problem with top 5, but he AIN'T the best. VIck is WAY more overrated, btw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, man, here goes:

In 2002, with Vick in his second year in the league, he took a team that was horrible in 2001 (6-9, with Chris (Crystal Chandalier Chandler starting the majority of the games) to a 9-6 record AND two games into the playoffs...in his first full year as a starter.

With Vick out with a broken leg for the majority of 2003, the Falcons LOST 11 out of 12 games. With him back in the lineup, they finished the season 3-1.

In 2004, with Vick healthy for the entire season, they went 11-5, and Vick didn't play much if any in the last two losses. So, with Vick in for the entire game, the Falcons were 11-3 on the season....and are still playing while Manning is NOT. Manning is an excellent quarterback, but MVP? No. Clearly it's Mike Vick.

sublime

01-20-2005, 04:47 PM

BRady is overrated only when NFL analyst guys say he's the best in the league

i dont ever recall hearing this, are you sure it wasnt "i wouldnt want any other guy to be directing my team in a clutch moment"? because that would be hard to argue with.

Mano

01-20-2005, 04:53 PM

Not sure where Brady ranks among NFL QB's, but it's up there. One thing that can be said about Brady is that he is at his best when it matters the most, whereas the next big game Manning wins will be his first.

DMBFan23

01-20-2005, 04:55 PM

people are comparing him to joe montana, and one time I heard "if I had to do a fantasy draft of an NFL football team, my first pick would be...<stupid ass dramatic pause>...Tom Brady"

Top 10, definitely, Top 5, ok maybe. but I wish the media would stop fellating him all the time.

PhatTBoll

01-20-2005, 04:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
how does that make me wrong? i said "most" people, and i feel I am correct in that statement. the fact that you despise the patriots and admit that brady is top 5 doesnt change the validity of my statement. i despise peyton manning and will admit he is the best overall QB in the NFL. I despise the NYY but can admit that Mariano Rivera is a great closer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh, ok. I'll spell my point out for you. I think everyone pretty much agrees that Brady is at least top 5. I used myself as an example because even though I would love nothing more than for Brady to suck, he is actually very good. I know many other people who feel the same way.

You never said that most people don't believe that Manning is the best overall QB, or that most people don't believe that Rivera is a great closer. You did say that most people don't believe Brady is top 5. I can't remember the last time I heard somebody say unequivocally that Brady isn't in this category.

Mano

01-20-2005, 05:02 PM

For a fantasy team, Manning is definitely the pick. If you had to pick a QB for a big game, I don't know - you could certainlly make a case for Brady.

Daliman

01-20-2005, 05:29 PM

THe falcons quit last year, simple as that. Yes, he is ab x-factor, but MVP? Not close. THe Colts had to beat more than a 9-8 team to get to the championships game, and I submit that the colts will have won as many games in the playoffs as the Falcons. How great was vick when they were getting destroyed by a subpar Chiefs team? Didn't green bay annihilate them too? Had they actually finished off the season, they'd have been the 2nd worst 13-3 team ever behind the bears of 2001.

vs detroit, (6-10) 10-17 loss
vs KC (7-9) 10-56 loss
Tampa bay (5-11) 0-27 loss

Show me another great team that lost 3 games to losing teams this badly in history with their team fully in place, and I may start beleiving you on Vick.

istewart

01-20-2005, 05:36 PM

Tom Brady : New England Patriots
::
Derek Jeter : New York Yankees

__Q__

01-20-2005, 05:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, so it was 2001. So sue me. Just SEEMS so much longer ago, and I even said IIRC meaning If I Remember Correctly, so let's not get picky. Point is the same, and I said nothing about " a couple years later". I said the year b4 and after. Reading is a skill.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey don't worry about the fact that it was 2001. Thats just a minor mistake.

My point is that the 13-3 Bears were a poor choice for you argument. Your argument was based on the assertion that 13-3 bears were the same team as the team that had a losing season the next year. The problem with your argument is that this assertion is false. The bears were successful in 2001 because they had the number 1 defense in football. The fallowing year, they had the 25th. The reason was it wasn't the SAME defense. It wasn't the same team. As a result of free agency and injuries, they lost Ted Washington, RW McQuarters, Warrick Holdman, Tony Parrish, and a few others. At one point, the Bears only had 4 of the defensive starters from the previous year, suited up for games.

They also lost players on offense, but the bears offense was never that good.

Anyway, your assertion was false. The fact that you had the year wrong was minor, but it did tip me off to the fact that you really weren't aware of what was going on with the bears during those years. In 2001, they fielded a darn good football team, in 2002 they didn't. Plain and simple.

hoyaboy1

01-20-2005, 06:17 PM

The Bears 2001 team was not good. They feasted on an easy schedule and got torched by the first team they played in the playoffs, the Eagles (at home, too).

Gatts

01-20-2005, 06:24 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Tom Brady : New England Patriots
::
Derek Jeter : New York Yankees

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, except Tom Brady is one of the most valuable players in the league.

istewart

01-20-2005, 06:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Tom Brady : New England Patriots
::
Derek Jeter : New York Yankees

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, except Tom Brady is one of the most valuable players in the league.

[/ QUOTE ]

Derek Jeter is quite valuable as well, but the point is they are both relatively overhyped by fans, yet their successes in the postseason are unbelievable.

<---diehard Yankee fan.

hoyaboy1

01-20-2005, 06:28 PM

A QB has far more influence on their team's success than a SS. Brady is far more valuable.

Gatts

01-20-2005, 06:35 PM

It's pretty hard to overhype Tom Brady's value, he is easily a top 5 valuable player.

Shajen

01-20-2005, 06:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
THe falcons quit last year, simple as that. Yes, he is ab x-factor, but MVP? Not close. THe Colts had to beat more than a 9-8 team to get to the championships game, and I submit that the colts will have won as many games in the playoffs as the Falcons. How great was vick when they were getting destroyed by a subpar Chiefs team? Didn't green bay annihilate them too? Had they actually finished off the season, they'd have been the 2nd worst 13-3 team ever behind the bears of 2001.

vs detroit, (6-10) 10-17 loss
vs KC (7-9) 10-56 loss
Tampa bay (5-11) 0-27 loss

Show me another great team that lost 3 games to losing teams this badly in history with their team fully in place, and I may start beleiving you on Vick.

[/ QUOTE ]

My point, which everyone on this damned board seems to be missing, is that WITHOUT VICK, THE FALCONS SUCK REALLY REALLY BAD. With him in the lineup, they win at a pretty impressive rate.

Could the same be said of the Colts? I don't know. Peyton has been remarkably healthy during this run, so we won't know.

Gatts

01-20-2005, 06:47 PM

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the way value is accrued in sports, and the meaning of it.

This is theoretical: You have a team composed of the best players of all time, and an average quarterback. The team goes undefeated, winning 70-0 each game.

Now replace the QB with Peyton Manning c2004. The team now wins 91-0 each game. Yet, they still go 19-0.

Now just because the final outcome is the same, doesn't mean the value is the same. If Peyton Manning added the most value (say, points per game, which could be converted to theoretical wins), he is the most valuable player, period.

Daliman

01-20-2005, 06:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the way value is accrued in sports, and the meaning of it.

This is theoretical: You have a team composed of the best players of all time, and an average quarterback. The team goes undefeated, winning 70-0 each game.

Now replace the QB with Peyton Manning c2004. The team now wins 91-0 each game. Yet, they still go 19-0.

Now just because the final outcome is the same, doesn't mean the value is the same. If Peyton Manning added the most value (say, points per game, which could be converted to theoretical wins), he is the most valuable player, period.

[/ QUOTE ]
Completely agree.

[ QUOTE ]
It's pretty hard to overhype Tom Brady's value, he is easily a top 5 valuable player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Completely disagree.

10 players I'd take before Brady
Manning
Culpepper
McNabb
Holmes
Moss
Owens
Tomlinson
Harrison
Ray Lewis
Alexander

__Q__

01-20-2005, 06:55 PM

I agree with you, they weren't the best team in the NFL. I never said they were. I wasn't suprised when they got beat by the Eagles. They weren't as good of a team as the Eagles were that year.

Were they good enough to win the super bowl? No. Relative to other teams in the league in that year? Yes, they were good.

Gatts

01-20-2005, 07:06 PM

You underestimate just how much of an impact a QB has on the team. Even Jerry Rice in his prime would add less value than the top QB in the league.

Daliman

01-21-2005, 04:27 AM

[ QUOTE ]
You underestimate just how much of an impact a QB has on the team. Even Jerry Rice in his prime would add less value than the top QB in the league.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, i don't. I just don't consider Brady the top QB.

Jerry Rice is a bad example, btw. No reciever has ever been MVP, IIRC.

Lazymeatball

01-21-2005, 12:28 PM

Your list is rediculous. To include receivers above Tom Brady is just rediculous, to include Rodney Harrison and Ray Louis above him is just a joke.

I suck at arguing sports rationally, so I'll retract my statement if some support is given to your debacle of a list. I thought someone who could memorize arithmetic quizzes would have a better sports IQ.

ps. You make me feel like dancing.

DMBFan23

01-21-2005, 01:06 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You underestimate just how much of an impact a QB has on the team. Even Jerry Rice in his prime would add less value than the top QB in the league.

[/ QUOTE ]

maybe not more value than the top QB, but this definitely goes both ways. look at how much better donovan's passing stats were with TO. and look at the impact that Randy Moss has on an offense.

Conversely, Peyton and that system have the ability to turn Brandon Stokley and Reggie Wayne into 1000 yard recievers.

I love how everyone (commentators especially) acts like the QB magically wills his team to victory. there are a shitload of other guys involved, 11-15 of which the QB has virtually NO influence over (the defense, kicker, etc) other than to not leave his them in shitty field position. I don't get how announcers can say "defense wins championships" and then in the next sentence say "OMG TOM BRADY HAS SIMPLY WILLED THIS TEAM TO VICTORY HOW AMAZING OMG I WANT TO HAVE HIS BABY AND THEN LICK HIS GRUNDEL"

I hate Tom Brady.

apd138

01-21-2005, 02:30 PM

[ QUOTE ]
It's pretty hard to overhype Tom Brady's value, he is easily a top 5 valuable player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Completely disagree.

10 players I'd take before Brady
Manning-yes
Culpepper-push
McNabb-push
Holmes-running backs are cheap look at denver they have to beat them off with sticks
Moss-hahahaha ha
Owens-can't see a wide out over a qb but if there was one he would be it
Tomlinson-see above
Harrison-peyton manning factor
Ray Lewis-too old to take over brady not even best defender on own team
Alexander see above

[/ QUOTE ]

droolie

01-21-2005, 04:02 PM

Tom Brady is underrated. Until he is consistently mentioned in the top 3 players in the league this will continue to be the case. Very few people have him as the MVP of the league yet if they had to win just one game they would choose him. Does this make any sense?

Brady won two superbowls with Antoine Smith as his #1 running back, no receiver over 6' tall and basically no tight end. His decision making, pocket presence and throwing accuracy are HOF caliber. He is at his best when the stakes are highest. He does not rely on physical gifts such as speed or arm strength that could easily deteriorate over time. He is young and still improving but has incredible playoff experience with no lingering baggage to overcome. He is by acclimation the hardest working member of his lengendarily hard working team and yet does not need or demand attention. He is the epitome of a team player who has one of the greatest records a starting QB has ever had.

The only reason why he is not considered the league MVP and the #1 player in the league is his lack of gaudy stats and the fact that Belicheck gets all the credit for his teams success. The fact that some of you would choose a WR over Tom Brady is hilarious. I can hear an argument for preferring some of the other top QB's (especially Manning who has no D on his team) as being superior players but a WR c'mon! What did TO do for SF last year? People just don't seem to understand that the player who touches the ball every play and can potentially give the ball to the other team on every play if they make poor choices are by definition the most valuable players in the league.

Patrick del Poker Grande

01-21-2005, 04:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Tom Brady is underrated.

[/ QUOTE ]
You misunderstand the meaning of underrated. All you ever hear is how great he is and has he played long enough to be a lock for Canton. It's impossible to be underrated under these circumstances - if anything you can only be overrated (not saying he's overrated).

Drac

01-21-2005, 04:13 PM

Tom Brady is a perfect fit for that system. Put him in Indy and the Colts win fewer games in the regular season and don't do squat in the playoffs. Brady has the one key thing Manning doesn't...a defense that doesn't suck. Brady rarely wins games but it's even more rare that he loses them which is why he is perfect for New England.

As to Manning never winning a big game...how about going to KC and knocking them off last year when he had to be PERFECT because his defense was so terrible and he was just that...perfect. KC is one of the toughest places to play in the league and he got the job done there. The next game he was awful, no doubt about it. This year in NE he wasn't awful but they couldn't run the ball and you couldn't stretch the defense with that weather and that killed their chances. Was he great that game? No. He sure as heck didn't lose that game either. Until Indy developes at least an average defense they are doomed in the playoffs UNLESS they can get home field throughout...then they have a shot inside on the turf to outscore people.

Drac

01-21-2005, 04:25 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Tom Brady is underrated. Until he is consistently mentioned in the top 3 players in the league this will continue to be the case. Very few people have him as the MVP of the league yet if they had to win just one game they would choose him. Does this make any sense?

Brady won two superbowls with Antoine Smith as his #1 running back, no receiver over 6' tall and basically no tight end. His decision making, pocket presence and throwing accuracy are HOF caliber. He is at his best when the stakes are highest. He does not rely on physical gifts such as speed or arm strength that could easily deteriorate over time. He is young and still improving but has incredible playoff experience with no lingering baggage to overcome. He is by acclimation the hardest working member of his lengendarily hard working team and yet does not need or demand attention. He is the epitome of a team player who has one of the greatest records a starting QB has ever had.

The only reason why he is not considered the league MVP and the #1 player in the league is his lack of gaudy stats and the fact that Belicheck gets all the credit for his teams success. The fact that some of you would choose a WR over Tom Brady is hilarious. I can hear an argument for preferring some of the other top QB's (especially Manning who has no D on his team) as being superior players but a WR c'mon! What did TO do for SF last year? People just don't seem to understand that the player who touches the ball every play and can potentially give the ball to the other team on every play if they make poor choices are by definition the most valuable players in the league.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is no way in hell Brady is one of the top 3 players in the league. Pick a good offensive team with a crappy D (Vikes, Colts, Packers) and stick Brady in for their QB's. Do you think they're a better team now? No way. The people in NE that don't get enough credit are on the other side of the ball. I've heard tons of talk about Brady being a lock for Canton...how can you be underrated if they say you're a lock for the HOF? Particularly when there are a handful of QB's every year that he's been in the league that are clearly superior to him. Brady is what he is...not a league MVP caliber player because he just isn't that good. He is great at what the Pats need him for and deserves a lot of credit for what he's done. He and Beligod still get more credit than they deserve while the D doesn't get enough and their O line does a pretty nice job too. For a sport that requires so many guys to play well for a team to win Brady gets more than enough credit.

droolie

01-21-2005, 04:57 PM

[ QUOTE ]

There is no way in hell Brady is one of the top 3 players in the league. Pick a good offensive team with a crappy D (Vikes, Colts, Packers) and stick Brady in for their QB's. Do you think they're a better team now? No way. The people in NE that don't get enough credit are on the other side of the ball. I've heard tons of talk about Brady being a lock for Canton...how can you be underrated if they say you're a lock for the HOF? Particularly when there are a handful of QB's every year that he's been in the league that are clearly superior to him. Brady is what he is...not a league MVP caliber player because he just isn't that good. He is great at what the Pats need him for and deserves a lot of credit for what he's done. He and Beligod still get more credit than they deserve while the D doesn't get enough and their O line does a pretty nice job too. For a sport that requires so many guys to play well for a team to win Brady gets more than enough credit.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Packers and Green Bay would be better teams with Brady at QB. Would they win championships? I doubt it but they would be better.

I think it's a tossup between Brady and Manning.

Manning has three top WR's, a top RB and two solid TE's. He's always on the field putting up numbers because his D gives up points so quickly. The Pats have a bend, don't break D and ball control offense which eats up clock and puts the ball in Brady's hands less than Manning. Manning has a problem with coughing up furballs in big games Brady does not. Manning loses his cool and gets frustrated when things start turning sour; Brady rallies his team. I think Manning has a better arm and is possibly more accurate with his deep balls.

Culpepper and Favre are good QB's but both have major leaks in their games. Neither are good in the playoffs and both make backbreaking errors at critical times. Favre in his prime was better than Brady is now but that was long time ago. Are we that blinded by the spectacular playes these guys make that we fail to see their major flaws?

Consitency and prudence are far more important than occasional brilliance when you want to win championships.

pudley4

01-21-2005, 04:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
As to Manning never winning a big game...how about going to KC and knocking them off last year when he had to be PERFECT because his defense was so terrible and he was just that...perfect.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh wow, he was perfect against the worst defense in the league. Wow, how remarkable.

[ QUOTE ]
Tom Brady is a perfect fit for that system. Put him in Indy and the Colts win fewer games in the regular season

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, no.

Lazymeatball

01-21-2005, 05:06 PM

I didn't see one Post in OOT with Brady in the subject line this week. That = underrated.

ps. I'm heavily biased.

DMBFan23

01-21-2005, 05:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As to Manning never winning a big game...how about going to KC and knocking them off last year when he had to be PERFECT because his defense was so terrible and he was just that...perfect.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh wow, he was perfect against the worst defense in the league. Wow, how remarkable.

[ QUOTE ]
Tom Brady is a perfect fit for that system. Put him in Indy and the Colts win fewer games in the regular season

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, no.

[/ QUOTE ]

I once read a quote in SI that said:
"Put John Elway on those 49er teams, and nothing changes in San Fran. Put Joe Montana on those Bronco teams Elway was on in the Mid 80s, and by 28 Joe is either dead or selling car insurance"

not as big a dichotomy in our present day case, but you get the idea. Peyton would be doing everything Tom Brady is doing in NE. why aren't we talking more about the impact of game planning and defense here?

Daliman

01-21-2005, 05:20 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's pretty hard to overhype Tom Brady's value, he is easily a top 5 valuable player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Completely disagree.

10 players I'd take before Brady
Manning-yes
Culpepper-push
McNabb-push
Holmes-running backs are cheap look at denver they have to beat them off with sticks
Moss-hahahaha ha
Owens-can't see a wide out over a qb but if there was one he would be it
Tomlinson-see above
Harrison-peyton manning factor
Ray Lewis-too old to take over brady not even best defender on own team
Alexander see above

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

RB's are cheap? Not only is that utter silliness even in Fantasy football, they are the 2nd most important position to have a great player at. I'm going to make a poll on this, just to see what others think.

Ans yes, Moss before Brady, EASILY. Newsflash: Moss is better than owens, and he had 1 less TD in 4 less games, all while hampered. Moss is the most talented WR ever, and may end up the best of all time. Brady just ain't that impressive to me.

Mano

01-21-2005, 05:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Until Indy developes at least an average defense they are doomed in the playoffs UNLESS they can get home field throughout...then they have a shot inside on the turf to outscore people.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am sick of hearing people referring to the Colts defense as terrible. Since about midseason, they have played very solid. If you Colts fans had been told before the game that your D would hold the Pat's to 6 pts. at the half and 20 overall, I think most of you would have taken it and been confident of a win. When your offense scores a total of 3 pts. in a playoff game pointing your finger at the Defense doesn't cut it.

Lazymeatball

01-21-2005, 06:18 PM

Daliman,
I'm no sports authority, and I love Randy Moss, think he is
easily the most dominating receiver in the league right now, but isn't it common knowledge that Jerry Rice is the best receiver ever for the moment.

Mano,
I was impressed with the Colt's defense's performance last week, especially Dwight Freeney, but didn't they rank in the high 20's in the league as far as defenses go this season? (Ironically, I believe they matched the Pat's in sacks)

Daliman

01-21-2005, 06:30 PM

Agrreed on Rice. I said Moss is the most TALENTED, and I doubt I'll get many dissebters. BEst is still a ways off.

Mano

01-21-2005, 06:32 PM

I think the Colts defense really came around the second half of the season. And blaming the loss to the Pat's is really letting Manning and the entire Colts offense off much too light. With the effort their defense gave the Colts offense should have at least been able to manage to make it close, if not win. I have included scores for the second half of the season, and other than the Denver game, which was pretty meaningless to the Colts, the defense looks ok.

Sun. Nov. 14 Houston Win 49-14
Sun. Nov. 21 @Chicago Win 41-10
Thu. Nov. 25 @Detroit Win 41-9
Sun. Dec. 5 Tennessee Win 51-24
Sun. Dec. 12 @Houston Win 23-14
Sun. Dec. 19 Baltimore Win 20-10
Sun. Dec. 26 San Diego Win 34-31 (OT)
Sun. Jan. 2 @Denver Loss 33-14

Sluss

01-21-2005, 06:33 PM

You keep insisting you would want Randy Moss on your team. This is a guy who takes off almost any play not designed for him and sometimes just takes whole games off. Plus, he cowers like a little girl when ever he goes across the middle.

This doesn't even cover the off the field and locker room problems. Plus his complete and total lack of work ethic. Guy makes some great plays, but I would take at least 7 or 8 recievers in the league over him.

Then again I could just be angry you ripped on a Bears team that would have beat the Eagles if it wasn't for a Hugh Dougl-ass cheap shot. /images/graemlins/mad.gif

Edge34

01-21-2005, 06:35 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Until Indy developes at least an average defense they are doomed in the playoffs UNLESS they can get home field throughout...then they have a shot inside on the turf to outscore people.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am sick of hearing people referring to the Colts defense as terrible. Since about midseason, they have played very solid. If you Colts fans had been told before the game that your D would hold the Pat's to 6 pts. at the half and 20 overall, I think most of you would have taken it and been confident of a win. When your offense scores a total of 3 pts. in a playoff game pointing your finger at the Defense doesn't cut it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, they were decent. Even showed flashes of being considered "good" at points. But the fact of the matter is, the Colts defense isn't very good in the big picture, and is nowhere near the elites in the league like Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and New England. Nobody here is discounting the fact that the offense didn't play great football, but the Defense hasn't ever been able to consistently step it up and play shut-down football, and that's what championship TEAMS have.

Daliman

01-21-2005, 06:43 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You keep insisting you would want Randy Moss on your team. This is a guy who takes off almost any play not designed for him and sometimes just takes whole games off. Plus, he cowers like a little girl when ever he goes across the middle.

This doesn't even cover the off the field and locker room problems. Plus his complete and total lack of work ethic. Guy makes some great plays, but I would take at least 7 or 8 recievers in the league over him.

Then again I could just be angry you ripped on a Bears team that would have beat the Eagles if it wasn't for a Hugh Dougl-ass cheap shot. /images/graemlins/mad.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, yes, he takes a few plays off, but also makes some GREAT downfild blocks. I've never ONCE seen him have a problem going over the middle, not sure where you get this from, cuz it's a misnomer. As far as his off-field stuff, lets add it up.
1. Pushed along a parking attendant with his car.
2. Squirted a ref with a water bttle in a game that was already out-of-hand.
3. Left the field with 2 seconds left in a game that could not be won 1 time in 1000.
4. Faked mooning a hostile GB crowd.

Wow, he should be in prison.

His work ethic in practice is fine, no one will ever tell you he's not prepared. I'd be interested in hearing the 8 recievers you'd rather have, btw.

And for the record, the hit on Miller was 100% clean and legal, if a bit malicious. Miller moved towards the interceptor, he was fair game. You gotta let it go, man...

Sluss

01-21-2005, 07:09 PM

I think the guy is great at catching touchdowns because it is what he "wants" to do.

Just this past week Moss cowered when he saw Trotter coming after him over the middle and aligator armed a ball. Plus, watching every Bears game in the past couple of years I've seen him pull away from a ball everytime he even caught Urlacher out of the corner of his eye. Plus, many other times in various games I've seen him play.

Let's see if I can come up with eight recievers:

1. T.O
2. Harrison
3. Hines Ward
4. Chad Johnson
5. Holt
6. Joe Horn

Alright I was talking out my ass I can only come up with 6. Not saying any of these guys are more talented. Just saying these guys would give you the same or better results more consistently. And are six guys I would be happier to have on my team.

I am damn bitter about the Miller thing. Shane Mathews at quarterback. ahhhh! Plus the injury plagued horrible four years since then hasn't helped.

Daliman

01-21-2005, 08:19 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Alright I was talking out my ass I can only come up with 6. Not saying any of these guys are more talented. Just saying these guys would give you the same or better results more consistently. And are six guys I would be happier to have on my team.

[/ QUOTE ]

Say you'd rather have them that's fine, but only 2 on that list have CLOSE to same results, and none overall have better, save for a few more catches and a lot Harrison's insane year. Moss is the picture of consistancy, also, so bad comparison.

Drac

01-22-2005, 12:00 AM

Moss is an idiot. Moss changes defenses more than any other single player in the NFL.

Drac

01-22-2005, 12:07 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I think the Colts defense really came around the second half of the season. And blaming the loss to the Pat's is really letting Manning and the entire Colts offense off much too light. With the effort their defense gave the Colts offense should have at least been able to manage to make it close, if not win. I have included scores for the second half of the season, and other than the Denver game, which was pretty meaningless to the Colts, the defense looks ok.

Sun. Nov. 14 Houston Win 49-14
Sun. Nov. 21 @Chicago Win 41-10
Thu. Nov. 25 @Detroit Win 41-9
Sun. Dec. 5 Tennessee Win 51-24
Sun. Dec. 12 @Houston Win 23-14
Sun. Dec. 19 Baltimore Win 20-10
Sun. Dec. 26 San Diego Win 34-31 (OT)
Sun. Jan. 2 @Denver Loss 33-14

[/ QUOTE ]

Not being able to run the ball killed any chance Indy had. Blame the line or give credit to NE but that, a -3 in turnovers and giving up aprox 200 yds rushing lost them that game. Manning didn't lose it.

Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore are 3 of the bottom offenses in the league. They played one team on that list with a decent offense (not counting the throw away vs. Denver) and gave up 31 points. Their D blows. It's clearly in the bottom 1/3 of the league if not the bottom 5 overall. I've watched this team for almost 20 years and their D has been brutal the entire time. Third and 10+ yds is almost a gimme for their opponents. What, one pro bowl D in 30 years and you're trying to say their D is OK? You're wrong here, and it's not even close.

apd138

01-23-2005, 02:54 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's pretty hard to overhype Tom Brady's value, he is easily a top 5 valuable player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Completely disagree.

10 players I'd take before Brady
Manning-yes
Culpepper-push
McNabb-push
Holmes-running backs are cheap look at denver they have to beat them off with sticks
Moss-hahahaha ha
Owens-can't see a wide out over a qb but if there was one he would be it
Tomlinson-see above
Harrison-peyton manning factor
Ray Lewis-too old to take over brady not even best defender on own team
Alexander see above

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

RB's are cheap? Not only is that utter silliness even in Fantasy football, they are the 2nd most important position to have a great player at. I'm going to make a poll on this, just to see what others think.

Ans yes, Moss before Brady, EASILY. Newsflash: Moss is better than owens, and he had 1 less TD in 4 less games, all while hampered. Moss is the most talented WR ever, and may end up the best of all time. Brady just ain't that impressive to me.

[/ QUOTE ] Cory Dillon, Clinton Portis, Ladanian Tomlinson (a guy on your list you would take over Brady) and soon to be Travis Henry and Reuben Droughns(spelling) all top backs and all let go/traded by their teams in the prime of their careers. I didn't really feel like getting in depth about your list but if I had I would have been sure to mention the limited life of running backs (Eddie George) I could name others but I doubt you will argue this point. On the Moss thing you are probably right that he is a slightly better talent, but I would prefer to have Owens due to his leadership skills this is completely debatable though. Ask the Colts whether they would rather lose Peyton, Edge, or Marvin (i use this example bacause they are all at or near the top in their positions) and they would start rolling around laughing.