December 10th, 2010 / 12:24 pm
Power Quote
Mike Young
Power Quote
Peyton Manning on Writing
“People always say, ‘Hang in there.’ And I went, ‘I never was out there, wherever there is. I’ve always been in there, I’ll always be in there.’ Wherever that is, I never have left.”
Tags: peyton
and then he threw for an interception.
this makes me miss the south
When he says IN THERE what he really means is INSIDE ME.
(Yes, please).
ah, but this is after last night’s win, in which the INT column stayed clean!
i feel like i always secretly (or not so) like to root for someone whose whatever-it-is (dilligently robotic arrogance in this case) is so of-itself-and-nothing-else as to give that person’s entire life the feel of one long philosophical experiment
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94JjQjFSt54&feature=related
GOD DAMN IT DONALD
lol
Love Peyton. I actually think of him a lot with regard to my writing; he is one of my role models.
And the he thought, “Wait. I’m worth over a hundred million dollars and I can’t clean up my chin acne? WTF.”
what is “pick six” in manningese?
or “ring-to-mvp ratio”?
or “how many rings does philip rivers have”?
(Manning has won the same number of Superbowls as Favre and obviously did what Marino never did.)
WOAH! Let’s not drag the good name of Dan Marino into this. Dan Marino never had a real team. Peyton’s always had weapons. The Colts never had a running game but they have receivers that are actually worthy of a top tier QB, unlike 80’s-90’s Miami.
“Dan Marino never had a real team.”
Sounds like an excuse to me.
(Is it wrong that I want Donovan McNabb to win a Superbowl more than any other player right now?)
why compare him to Rivers rather than to Brady? – the latter a quarterback without a hall-of-fame running back or receiver (except for Moss, for a couple of (record-making) years)
Manning has benefited statistically from being the quarterback of a passing-as-ball-control team, and from having had Dungy and Polian as coach-and-gm – and from some great offensive and defensive teammates (Saturday was the in-fact mvp of their Super Bowl win)
not excuses – every great player of a team sport is disclosed as “great” because their play on teams made this discernment possible
but four mvps? a zillion ads? relentless punditical genuflection? a single-name id as recognizable as Liberace’s?
bah
it’s probably going to be “wrong” if he finishes his career with Coach Queeg
Why compare him to Brady, a glorified system QB who could get injured and replaced by a random who still goes on to win 11 games.
Do you think that Jim Sorgi, or whoever backs up Manning now, could win 11 games?
Not to mention, of course, that the Pats were more of a defensive powerhouse during their championships.
Also, before Peyton’s bad few game stretch, he was being praised by all corners this year for keeping his numbers up despite having all his WRers get injured.
Answer to relevant comparison: I think Cassel could have won 11+ games with the weapons Manning used to have at Indy.
The Patriots a “defensive powerhouse” – comparable defensively to the Ravens or the Steelers of the ’00s? or, defensively, to the Cowboys, the ‘9ers, or the Steelers of their great runs? to the Bucs or the Bears of their championship seasons??
– as opposed to ‘a complete team able to overcome, over the marathon of a season, its weaknesses’?
Yes, Manning was overpraised earlier this year – a point I thought I was making about his career in general – , just as Vick and, now, Brady have gone through periods of overpraise this season.
rings??
I didn’t realize that there was only one person on a football team. Thanks for clarifying.
Brady has won 26 consecutive home games, and his #1 receiver is Deon Branch. That’s fucking ridiculous.
The fallacy is in giving all the credit to the QB here. Brady didn’t “do what he did” in terms of getting those championships, the PATRIOTS won those championships (all by three points)
Brady’s QB rating and stats were nothing amazing during those championship runs (well below Peyton’s). When Brady did start having amazing QB seasons, the Pats, as you point out, failed to win. I’m not sure why the Pats inability to win championships when they have had their best receiving threads would be a point in favor of Brady. It would make more sense to realize that defense and Adam Vinatieri deserve more credit for the times the Pats won.
Football is a team sport and far too much is made of rings. QB’s don’t play defense or special teams and they don’t run the entire offense. Belichik is certainly the coach of the decade, but Brady is not the best QB of his era.
Well, his number 1 receiver during most of that stretch was Randy Moss. Also, Wes Welker is one of the best offensive threats in the game.
Not sure what you’re calling “fucking ridiculous”, letters.
Brady’s the quarterback I’d choose from the decade or so he shares with Manning, McNabb, Rivers, and so on. The home-win streak is impressive, but I do think he’s been overpraised by the football punditocracy after sparkling wins (like last week’s): ‘Tom [slurp] could throw a grain of sand [slurp] through a needle’s eye at 100 [slurp] yards!!!’ – blech.
Branch had two excellent Super Bowls, but, while he was on the Pats (’til ’06), he missed a lot of games due to injury. He’s been back for less than a full season (so far). He’s been Brady’s “#1 receiver” only inconsistently – when they’ve been on the same team.
As far as Moss goes, McNabblove, he’s won 0 Super Bowls “during that stretch”, because he was on Minnesota and Oaktown. During Welker’s first three years (at Miami), Welker was a excellent special-teams player. Since the Pats got him, he did indeed lead the league in receptions two years: he is, even on a rehab comeback, “one of the best offensive threats in the game” right now. But he hasn’t won a championship, either (unless my memory sieve’d that fact out!).
Look again at what I said: Brady’s done what he’s done without a hall-of-fame running back or receiver (excepting the non-championship years with Moss, who probably will go in the Hall). Branch? behind a small handful of all-pro seasons?? Welker? likewise, an all-star, but not an all-timer yet, eh?
Shorthand for ‘championships’, Sean.
In team sports, players, coaches, and fans keep track of individual-player statistics to decide who’s best at some skill or position, but winning championships is, for most players/observers, still the most relevant benchmark of ‘success’ in team sports.
Of course, the dialectical relationship between ‘team’ and ‘player’ (‘whole’ and ‘part’) is impossible objectively to analyze completely. There’ll always be reasonable arguments about who contributes most to / detracts most from the team’s accomplishments, who would’ve done what in different circumstances, and so on, like the arguments you see on this thread. It’s fun – however heated it gets – and (one hopes), committed to their perspectives as the participants in these debates are going to be, nobody believes in the indisputable objectivity of their conclusions – nor in the importance of the drama of sports in comparison to warfare, famine, epidemic, poverty, and so on.
It’s ‘just’ a sports rap, you know?
The fallacy is in giving all the credit to the QB here. Brady didn’t “do what he did” in terms of getting those championships, the PATRIOTS won those championships (all by three points)
Brady’s QB rating and stats were nothing amazing during those championship runs (well below Peyton’s). When Brady did start having amazing QB seasons, the Pats, as you point out, failed to win. I’m not sure why the Pats inability to win championships when they have had their best receiving threads would be a point in favor of Brady. It would make more sense to realize that defense and Adam Vinatieri deserve more credit for the times the Pats won.
Football is a team sport and far too much is made of rings. QB’s don’t play defense or special teams and they don’t run the entire offense. Belichik is certainly the coach of the decade, but Brady is not the best QB of his era.
Like, look at some of the actual championships.
It is one thing to say that the Pats haven’t had a hall of fame running back. And true, they haven’t. But Brady doesn’t do the runs and the Pats outran all three of their opponents in their three championship superbowls. They threw for less yards than 2 of the 3.
Pats beat the Eagles and Rams mostly because those two teams turned the ball over a ton and the pats didn’t. You can give Brady some credit for only throwing one interception in those three games, but he doesnt’ get credit for the Pats intercepting opponents or forcing fumbles.
Not taking into account the team nature of the game is fallacious thinking, McNabbesque – look again at the third paragraph of the first comment you responded to on this thread for evidence that the fallacy is not at work in this conversation.
As you say, Brady’s passer ratings were lower than Manning’s in all the years that they both started and didn’t get injured, except for two (’01 and ’07). There’s no question (from me!) that the defense/special teams of Brady’s championship years contributed to those achievements – as surely they did for Indy’s success with Manning.
But look again at my argument: Manning’s accomplishments – Hall of Fame, first ballot – came within a passing-as-ball-control strategy on a team with more (in my opinion) stars than Brady worked with — a system that Manning worked as well in as possible, I guess. But it’s also hard to imagine Manning doing as well as Brady has with Belichik, and Brady’s 3/4 in Super Bowls ought to be preferred to Manning’s 1/2, in my view.
It’s because football is a team sport that rings ought to be weighed somewhat as heavily as passing stats when comparing quarterbacks, is my argument.
[…] Mark Rylance Kenneth Anger Damien Hirst Anton LaVey Prince Gerhard Richter Judy Garland Kimora Lee Peyton Manning Mark David Chapman David Tudor Bill Evans Ted Bundy Ray Lewis Andre Agassi Wu-Tang Aleister Crowley […]