Manning's Playoff Teams

#201
#201
thebjd said:
Without the other wins the playoff games would not have been played. Teams don't accidently get to the playoffs. Manning has won nine playoff games and that is tied for 9th all-time. He is also tied for most playoff losses with Brett Favre. It is what it is.

I also remember a big comeback against Brady in the playoffs.
Click to expand...

And good QBs don't accidentally win playoff games.
 
#203
#203
VolsRule said:
Best big game playoff QBs in the last 40 years

1. Brady
2. Montana
3. Bradshaw
Click to expand...

Montana was 4-0, no interceptions and three Superbowl MVP's. 4th quarter comeback in his third Superbowl. How is Brady better than that if we are judging by championships and big games?
 
#204
#204
thebjd said:
Dilfer, Tebow, and Sanchez are three that just came to mind.
Click to expand...

Dilfer was a victim of having a kickass defense. The backup could have easily won there. Dilfer was never asked to go win a game in the postseason.
 
#205
#205
thebjd said:
Montana was 4-0, no interceptions and three Superbowl MVP's. 4th quarter comeback in his third Superbowl. How is Brady better than that if we are judging by championships and big games?
Click to expand...

This about 100 times. Montana was the epitome of clutch in big games.
 
#206
#206
and all 3 had better d than manning did. i guess that gets thrown out the window with manning. let manning switch with brady and he would have won just as much.
 
#207
#207
thebjd said:
Dilfer played in eleven post-season games? C'Mon man. He went twice. Once with the Bucs and once with the Ravens. He was 4-1. Plunkett was 8-2. Theismann was 6-2. I didn't pull their records out of my arse. Where did you get your info?
Click to expand...

I stand corrected...my eyes must be getting old and the columns of stats were running together. You were right, their winning percentages are higher. It is not really apples to apples with those players like it is with Manning and Brady. I tend to agree that winning percentages don't tell the entire story.

But...

Peyton's career winning percentage is .687. Heck throw out his 3-13 rookie year and his percentage is just like Brady's at .762. They both win at unprecedented levels, but his playoff percentage .450.

Brady's career winning percentage is .777, and his playoff percentage is .739.

There is no drop off with Brady. He essentially wins at the same rate that he would otherwise. There is enough of a sample size with each QB having played at least 20 games unlike Dilfer.

Truth be told we are splitting hairs. Statistically there is not much difference. Both have a command of their offense like we have never seen. Both are in the top 5 QB's of all time. Peyton was better earlier in his career, Brady has been better later in his career. We get to watch greatness every time they play, and we should just enjoy it.
 
Last edited:
#208
#208
JMSqb11 said:
Dilfer was a victim of having a kickass defense. The backup could have easily won there. Dilfer was never asked to go win a game in the postseason.
Click to expand...
Careful, that comment counteracts everything that is being discussed. Pats win because of Brady, Denver loses because of Peyton.

The fact is, football is a team sport. You can not pin wins or losses on one player.

The reason the Pats are so good is they have the best coach in the NFL and an excellent QB. If Peyton played for the Pats, his one and done record would be significantly lower.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#209
#209
jps2194 said:
Careful, that comment counteracts everything that is being discussed. Pats win because of Brady, Denver loses because of Peyton.

The fact is, football is a team sport. You can not pin wins or losses on one player.

The reason the Pats are so good is they have the best coach in the NFL and an excellent QB. If Peyton played for the Pats, his one and done record would be significantly lower.
Click to expand...


All I said is good QBs don't win accidentally in the playoffs. That excludes one hit wonders, like your Tebows and Dilfers, and Brad Johnsons and Delhommes. If you're good in the playoffs, you're consistently competing and on contention year after year and can make a playoff run. Since the argument is Brady vs Peyton, who do those criteria best compare to?

So if Brady was replaced by Peyton, the pats would be just as good. But if Brady is not there and Peyton isn't his replacement, they suck hands down. That's basically what you're saying.
 
#210
#210
I agree with Peyton and Brady being interchangeable, but don't think the Pats would suck hands down without either one of them.

What I'm saying is the Patriots are so well coached, any competent QB would make them a playoff caliber team. A great QB would make them a Super Bowl team - like Brady has consistently done. Look at how consistent they have been AS A TEAM for a long time now. Every time they lose a player, somebody else steps in and they don't miss a beat. That is due to an incredible system put in place by Belichick and the rest of the staff. Even the year Brady was lost for the season in the first game, they still finished 11-5.

This points to the fact that the reason the Pats are so good is not only because of Brady. I don't buy into all of the talk that he is the reason the Pats have won their super bowls and Peyton is the reason his teams are one and done.

Football is a team sport and you win and lose as a team. To those that say Peyton is a loser and not a great QB, I just completely disagree.
 
#211
#211
jps2194 said:
I agree with Peyton and Brady being interchangeable, but don't think the Pats would suck hands down without either one of them.

What I'm saying is the Patriots are so well coached, any competent QB would make them a playoff caliber team. A great QB would make them a Super Bowl team - like Brady has consistently done. Look at how consistent they have been AS A TEAM for a long time now. Every time they lose a player, somebody else steps in and they don't miss a beat. That is due to an incredible system put in place by Belichick and the rest of the staff. Even the year Brady was lost for the season in the first game, they still finished 11-5.

This points to the fact that the reason the Pats are so good is not only because of Brady. I don't buy into all of the talk that he is the reason the Pats have won their super bowls and Peyton is the reason his teams are one and done.

Football is a team sport and you win and lose as a team. To those that say Peyton is a loser and not a great QB, I just completely disagree.
Click to expand...

I partially agree with that but the year Cassel went 11-5 is because he was essentially a rookie. They had their best rushing offense of the decade and their defense was still crushing folks. Saying that system could have any competent QB run it is 50/50. The Fact Cassel lead them to an 11-5 record is the equivalent of a rookie QB leading a team to a playoff-esque record. It could have been a one hit wonder year. We never know because we only had one year without Brady to see what it truly is.

And yes football is a team sport but through media and fandom, the QB shoulders the teams
 
#212
#212
JMSqb11 said:
I partially agree with that but the year Cassel went 11-5 is because he was essentially a rookie. They had their best rushing offense of the decade and their defense was still crushing folks. Saying that system could have any competent QB run it is 50/50. The Fact Cassel lead them to an 11-5 record is the equivalent of a rookie QB leading a team to a playoff-esque record. It could have been a one hit wonder year. We never know because we only had one year without Brady to see what it truly is.

And yes football is a team sport but through media and fandom, the QB shoulders the teams
Click to expand...

Most fans and media are idiots. How can a sport with so many starters be so quarterback-centered? It's ridiculous.
 
#213
#213
For all you guys that said Belichick being a peice of sh!t, y'all just saw why all that crap was behind him. If you listened closely he had a very heartfelt congrats to Harbaugh at the 50.
 
#214
#214
In the Boro said:
I stand corrected...my eyes must be getting old and the columns of stats were running together. You were right, their winning percentages are higher. It is not really apples to apples with those players like it is with Manning and Brady. I tend to agree that winning percentages don't tell the entire story.

But...

Peyton's career winning percentage is .687. Heck throw out his 3-13 rookie year and his percentage is just like Brady's at .762. They both win at unprecedented levels, but his playoff percentage .450.

Brady's career winning percentage is .777, and his playoff percentage is .739.

There is no drop off with Brady. He essentially wins at the same rate that he would otherwise. There is enough of a sample size with each QB having played at least 20 games unlike Dilfer.

Truth be told we are splitting hairs. Statistically there is not much difference. Both have a command of their offense like we have never seen. Both are in the top 5 QB's of all time. Peyton was better earlier in his career, Brady has been better later in his career. We get to watch greatness every time they play, and we should just enjoy it.
Click to expand...

Brady just lost another big game. He has lost his last two superbowls and his most recent championship game. He has lost five of his last eight playoff games. As he has become more prolific as a passer his teams have been less successful in the postseason. Is he a choker?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#215
#215
JMSqb11 said:
For all you guys that said Belichick being a peice of sh!t, y'all just saw why all that crap was behind him. If you listened closely he had a very heartfelt congrats to Harbaugh at the 50.
Click to expand...

He is the best in the league.
 
#217
#217
I was going to revisit this topic as well. Brady's excellent postseason record is based on a 9-0 run in winning Super Bowls following the 2001, 2003 and 2004 seasons. Those Super Bowl victories were, in each case, achieved by a field goal and Brady was the quarterback of teams whose defenses finished 6th, 1st and 2nd, respectively, in scoring defense (see 2001 NFL Opposition & Defensive Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com , 2003 NFL Opposition & Defensive Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com , and 2004 NFL Opposition & Defensive Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com , respectively).

What does all of this prove? As great a quarterback as Brady is, defenses truly do win championships. The most dominant offensive juggernauts that Brady played on did not win the proverbial big prize. Since the 2004 season, Brady's postseason record is a far more Peytonesque 8-7. Were the Ravens a better team than the Broncos and/or Patriots? Was Flacco a better overall quarterback than Manning or Brady? No and no. However, the Ravens definitely picked the right time of the year to get red hot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#218
#218
thebjd said:
Brady just lost another big game. He has lost his last two superbowls and his most recent championship game. He has lost five of his last eight playoff games. As he has become more prolific as a passer his teams have been less successful in the postseason. Is he a choker?
Click to expand...

I would say yes, but its hard to overlook his early success. That said, I think Brady is, and always has been, a product of the Patriots coaching and scheme. No player gets more schematically throwing 3 yard passes than he.
 
#219
#219
As I said previously, the Patriots have been so good because of Belichick and a great QB. The year without Brady, the Patriots still went 11-5. Belichick got out-coached tonight and his team was outplayed.
 
#220
#220
JMSqb11 said:
For all you guys that said Belichick being a peice of sh!t, y'all just saw why all that crap was behind him. If you listened closely he had a very heartfelt congrats to Harbaugh at the 50.
Click to expand...
I personally cannot stand him, but I admit he is the best coach in the NFL. Although he congratulated Harbaugh, he was sulking too much to grant an interview.
 
#221
#221
To further underscore the dichotomy in postseason success for Brady and the Patriots, ESPN just ran a graphic which indicated that Brady was 10-0 in his first ten postseason appearances and 7-7 since then. Brady's most prolific offensive seasons, all in recent years, were not accompanied by great defenses.

Incidentally, this was the first home game in Brady's career that the Patriots lost after leading at halftime. In this case, New England didn't simply lose; they were outscored 21-0 in the second half. I believe that they said that this loss snapped a 66-game winning streak under those specific circumstances.
 
#224
#224
CA_Vol said:
I would say yes, but its hard to overlook his early success. That said, I think Brady is, and always has been, a product of the Patriots coaching and scheme. No player gets more schematically throwing 3 yard passes than he.
Click to expand...

I don't think he or Manning is a choker. I realize winning in the playoffs is very hard and it is even more difficult when the team relies on one player to pull the load such as Marino, Manning, Elway (early in his career) and now Brady late in his career.
 
Last edited:
#225
#225
Why is there all the hate towards Brady? At first, I thought it had to do with Manning's struggles with Brady and the Pats...similar to Manning's struggles with UF while he was at UT.

But lately, I've heard hatred towards Brady and the Pats from people with no affiliation to Manning or UT. I've come to the conclusion that people find faults with winners and can't stand them. Yes, Manning has a lot of success and individual records but his teams have often come up short.

I just don't get the Brady hatred, and I'm a Manning fan.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top