The Pats do not "own" Peyton Manning.

Jack of Arcades · #1 11-04-2005, 11:47 AM

The Pats "own" the Colts. The Colts have lost to the Pats 4 times now due to just about everyone except Peyton Manning. Let's look at the stats.

2004 Divisional Playoffs: 27/42, 238 yards, one garbage time INT.
2004 Week 1: 16/29, 256 yards, 2 TD, 1 INT
2003 Conference Championship: 23/47, 237, 1 TD, 4 INT
2003 Week 13: 29/48, 278, 4 TD, 1 INT

Looks to me like he's played pretty well in 3 games and pretty awful in one. Yet, everyone you talk to will say Peyton Manning chokes against the Pats. Manning doesn't choke; everyone else on the team chokes. For example, let's take a look at why the Colts only scored three points last year in the playoffs.

Edgerrin James had 14 carries for 39 yards. His longest carry was 7 yards. He had 0 first downs. The Colts picked up no first downs on the ground! They also lost two fumbles.

How is that Peyton's fault? The Colts were not able to get anything going on the ground at all. Considering how good his opponent was, he played pretty damned well. The only problem is, he was the only one that did.

brettbrettr · #2 11-04-2005, 11:49 AM

[ QUOTE ]

Looks to me like he's played pretty well in 3 games and pretty awful in one.

[/ QUOTE ]
Good post Jack, the only thing I would say is in regards to the above, his pretty awful game came at the least opportune time.

TheRover · #3 11-04-2005, 11:54 AM

omg so awesome [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

I swear Football Outsiders or some such place did an article with all this and much more on the subject but I'll be damned if I can ever find it.

DougOzzzz · #4 11-04-2005, 12:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The Pats "own" the Colts. The Colts have lost to the Pats 4 times now due to just about everyone except Peyton Manning. Let's look at the stats.

2004 Divisional Playoffs: 27/42, 238 yards, one garbage time INT.
2004 Week 1: 16/29, 256 yards, 2 TD, 1 INT
2003 Conference Championship: 23/47, 237, 1 TD, 4 INT
2003 Week 13: 29/48, 278, 4 TD, 1 INT

Looks to me like he's played pretty well in 3 games and pretty awful in one. Yet, everyone you talk to will say Peyton Manning chokes against the Pats. Manning doesn't choke; everyone else on the team chokes. For example, let's take a look at why the Colts only scored three points last year in the playoffs.

Edgerrin James had 14 carries for 39 yards. His longest carry was 7 yards. He had 0 first downs. The Colts picked up no first downs on the ground! They also lost two fumbles.

How is that Peyton's fault? The Colts were not able to get anything going on the ground at all. Considering how good his opponent was, he played pretty damned well. The only problem is, he was the only one that did.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think this takes everything into account.

First of all, those are pretty crappy numbers for Peyton Manning. You are talking about a guy with a career YPA of 7.6 being held to 6.08 against the Pats.

Second - if they shut down the Colts' rushing, that adds to the impressiveness of containing Peyton. That would show the Pats were not "keying" in on the pass. Maybe their game plan was something along the lines of "Peyton's going to get his yards, but we're not going to let them establish the run." If the Pats held Peyton to these numbers while keying on the run then I would say without a doubt that Peyton has been majorly owned by NE.

Jack of Arcades · #5 11-04-2005, 12:15 PM

[ QUOTE ]
First of all, those are pretty crappy numbers for Peyton Manning. You are talking about a guy with a career YPA of 7.6 being held to 6.08 against the Pats.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well... yeah. That's why the Pats are the World Champions. It's harder to win against them than anybody else. Gods become mortals. That doesn't mean Peyton has sucked, he's played pretty well.

[ QUOTE ]
Second - if they shut down the Colts' rushing, that adds to the impressiveness of containing Peyton.

[/ QUOTE ]

Given the fact that the Colts rely so much on play action passes, don't you think it's more impressive what Peyton was able to accomplish without a running game? It actually works both ways.

Jack of Arcades · #6 11-04-2005, 12:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Looks to me like he's played pretty well in 3 games and pretty awful in one.

[/ QUOTE ]
Good post Jack, the only thing I would say is in regards to the above, his pretty awful game came at the least opportune time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, of course. The 2003 Pats were just amazing on defense. 2004 was obviously worse on D, but their offense was so much better with Tom Brady taking a step forward and becoming one of the best QBs in the league that year.

Jack of Arcades · #7 11-04-2005, 12:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
omg so awesome [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

I swear Football Outsiders or some such place did an article with all this and much more on the subject but I'll be damned if I can ever find it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was looking for it. A little bit of it is in their book's entry on Peyton.

DougOzzzz · #8 11-04-2005, 12:23 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Well... yeah. That's why the Pats are the World Champions. It's harder to win against them than anybody else. Gods become mortals. That doesn't mean Peyton has sucked, he's played pretty well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have the time to look it up but I am sure the Pats did not hold all other opps to 1.5 fewer YPA than average. Sample size aside, Peyton's numbers are not good for him, even factoring in the opposition.

[ QUOTE ]

Given the fact that the Colts rely so much on play action passes, don't you think it's more impressive what Peyton was able to accomplish without a running game? It actually works both ways.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe. I don't really know. I'm not a football expert but I thought one of the main purposes of the play-action pass was to help the running game by keeping the defense thinking "pass" even when you run the ball.

kenberman · #9 11-04-2005, 02:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
2004 Divisional Playoffs: 27/42, 238 yards, one garbage time INT.
2004 Week 1: 16/29, 256 yards, 2 TD, 1 INT
2003 Conference Championship: 23/47, 237, 1 TD, 4 INT

[/ QUOTE ]

or, you could look at it this way: I don't think any of the above 3 games were good for Peyton Manning. out of the last 4, he has played "above average" once. (you are also ignoring all the other losses the Colts have vs NE). this, from a QB whose stats & performance for most other games were eye popping.

Over the last 2 years, he played far worse against the Patriots than against any other team, particularly on the road. this doesn't mean he's a bad QB, or that he has choked. it simply means the Patriots play him tougher, and may even be in his head more than any other team is.

does this mean they "own" him? meh, I dunno, that's semantics.

legend42 · #10 11-04-2005, 02:33 PM

Stats don't tell the story here. A lot of those numbers came after the Pats opened a big lead, and were in relative prevent mode.

If you watched those games with even a modicum of knowledge and objectivity, there is no way you would assert that Peyton has played well against New England over the past few years.