Dallas D sick of hearing about Peyton

[Yehoodi]

It was soon changed thereafter I believe.

 

I think the rule in question was the 5 yard chuck rule . . . which started in the mid 70s and some attribute it to Mel Blount's influence . . .  D holding and pass interference was always a rule from what I remember . . . the 5 yard chuck rule basically prevented DBs from hitting and pushing the WRs after the 5 yards . . . well basically stop them from doing everything to a WRs short of holding . . .

 

Apparently Bill Polian did not like how the rule was being administered, I for one tended to disagree with him . . .  as illegal contact is by definition "contact" the rule could be violated by a mere brush of a wr by a db, a touched elbow as the wr passed by . . . given this and the fact that the refs could award an automatic first down from just a mere brush of a wr, the refs were reluctant to do so and prefer to interpret "contact" as some form of contact that might involve something more just a mere brush or accidental contact . . . with the "re emphasis" on the rule it seems like any sort of contact garners an automatic first down . . .  

 

no Polian did not change the rule on its face, but if one changes the way contact is interpreted one is changing the rule as the change is made in the manner in which it is implemented . . . so what might be accidental or incidental contact was okay before, nowadays its a penalty . . . the end result of coarse is an effective change in the rule . . .

[Superman]

My thought was do to them what the Ravens did the Pats this past post-season. Every time a receiver got the ball they laid the wood. Pollard practically knocked Welker's teeth out on a catch at mid-field on the drive in the third quarter where he then dropped the pass right in his hands for the first down inside the 25. I think that hit had him both rattled and thinking.

 

I don't think the Cowboys stay in the cover 2 all game. If they do some man then pressing the receivers would be smart but I agree about pressuring Manning up the middle. I think Ware will have to be huge in this game as a disruptor for the Boys to slow down the offense and Manning's timing. Hurrying Manning is as good as a sack given the offense is predicated so much on timing.

 

Another big factor will be Murray. He has to get over 125 yards this game and clock control. If Dallas' time possession is not 35 minutes or better then they are toast. They have to ball control which I think they can do to limit Manning's possessions.

 

Lastly, Holiday can't go wild in this game. No easy TDs. Basically Cowboys have to play a perfect game. lol. I am looking forward to it!

 

The Cowboys have been predominantly Cover 2 this year so far. It's weird to me, because the zone coverage has led to them benching Morris Claiborne, who is much better in man coverage. I think they'd be better off playing more man, but the Kiffin system is predicated zone coverage and 1-gapping linemen, and it plays on the relationship between those two concepts. There are dozens of ways to use either concept, but Kiffin has been doing this for a long time, with a lot of different organizations, and a lot of different results. And he's always stuck with a ton of zone. I don't see them changing that for this Sunday.

 

To your point about hitting receivers, I think every defense wants to be physical with receivers once they get the ball. The defense wants the pass catchers to be thinking about the impending collision. And that can potentially impact the way receivers run routes and lay out for passes. I don't see how this game will be anything special in that regard. Anything more than the ordinary level of physicality is going to be penalized.

[Superman]

I think the rule in question was the 5 yard chuck rule . . . which started in the mid 70s and some attribute it to Mel Blount's influence . . .  D holding and pass interference was always a rule from what I remember . . . the 5 yard chuck rule basically prevented DBs from hitting and pushing the WRs after the 5 yards . . . well basically stop them from doing everything to a WRs short of holding . . .

 

Apparently Bill Polian did not like how the rule was being administered, I for one tended to disagree with him . . .  as illegal contact is by definition "contact" the rule could be violated by a mere brush of a wr by a db, a touched elbow as the wr passed by . . . given this and the fact that the refs could award an automatic first down from just a mere brush of a wr, the refs were reluctant to do so and prefer to interpret "contact" as some form of contact that might involve something more just a mere brush or accidental contact . . . with the "re emphasis" on the rule it seems like any sort of contact garners an automatic first down . . .  

 

no Polian did not change the rule on its face, but if one changes the way contact is interpreted one is changing the rule as the change is made in the manner in which it is implemented . . . so what might be accidental or incidental contact was okay before, nowadays its a penalty . . . the end result of coarse is an effective change in the rule . . .

 

 

You should also read the Clayton article I linked. Refs blatantly admitted to calling this differently in the playoffs.

 

Polian didn't go to the NFL and demand that the rule or the interpretation of the rule be changed. He complained because it wasn't being interpreted according to the letter of the law, and because it wasn't being applied consistently. The Competition Committee, which Polian was a member of at the time, reviewed the matter, and decided to clarify the rule and stress the importance of it being applied properly and consistently.

[Superman]

Indy has the scheme to attack Peyton better than the Cowboys, IMO. However, the Cowboys' LBs are more active. They tend to cheat to the inside wideout more often and squeeze the zones well by doing that when they play disciplined. Plus, when the 2007 Pats played the 2007 Colts at Lucas Oil Stadium, the Colts played the same Cover 2 concepts and Brackett got an INT off Brady and Bethea got one too. Pats fans were "deep down" livid that the Pats could not blow out the Colts when they won 24-20 despite having a hot year till that point. So, being patient vs the Cowboys, taking the run when it presents itself will be a big part of the Broncos' strategy.

 

You know the Cover 2 beater throws (over the MLB and under the safety is one, the one Eli threw to Manningham at the SB is another keeping one safety committed to a side before letting go to the sideline between CB and safety), I expect some of those to be thrown vs the Cowboys. Sean Lee is athletic enough to tip passes over his head and drop his depth a tad more to cause issues there. Ogletree got an INT on a ball thrown to Julius Thomas in pre-season down the middle, primarily because Peyton did not have a gauge on how athletic Ogletree was. The element of surprise will not be there with Sean Lee this time like the 2010 game. Plus, their safeties and coverage LBs can tend to come off the guy on the outside running the route to squeeze the zone. They were caught cheating enough times this year, and Eli send one past their heads to Cruz plus Rivers sent one past them to Gates for the game winning TD. If I can see those tendencies, Peyton definitely can.

 

Plus, the two pick sixes vs the Cowboys at Lucas Oil Stadium happened when Blair White did not space himself out well and another one where Tamme did not do so. Peyton is not playing with backups this time, big difference in spatial awareness of his wideouts. Ironically, the 2007 Pats went into Dallas and smoked them, didn't they? One can see similarities in schedule and production of offense with the 2013 Broncos too. Like the Pats of 2007, they will be coming to Dallas and Indy too for road games .

 

All good stuff there.

 

The last two times the Cowboys played Manning, they won. Two different defensive schemes, however. In 2006, they were a 3-4 defense under Parcells, and they did a lot of different things defensively. Forced three turnovers, and Vanderjagt missed two makeable FGs (the bloom was off the rose; he'd already missed against Pittsburgh at that point). But they were efficient on offense, especially late in the game, and our defense couldn't come up with a stop. I don't think they necessarily did anything special to stop the offense, but it was a solid all around win for them. Snapped our 9 game win streak, too.

 

The last time, like you mentioned, Manning was playing with backups. Blair White was a factor in a couple of those picks. And our offensive line was a mess, leading to lots of pressure. That was a Wade Phillips defense, and Wade had long been a tough matchup for Manning (he still hasn't played against the Texans since Wade took over their defense; I'll be looking at that game later this year also). But the results of the game were much more about the state of the roster than about anything they did schematically. 

 

When you look at the current Cowboys defense and line it up with the Broncos offense, I think it's going to come down to pass rush vs. execution. The Broncos are going to find matchups to exploit, and so long as they protect the passer and the receivers hold on to the ball, the passing game is going to work. Might not produce 44 points, but that's not the point. Efficiency and ball protection are the keys that Manning's passing attack are based on. If they get interior pass rush and disrupt timing, they can slow the passing attack down. But the heavy zone scheme is going to make it harder for them to disrupt timing, I think.

 

You mentioned Colts vs. Pats in 2007. Mathis got a sack on the first play. The Pats hadn't faced any real pass rush all year. They adjusted by going with quick hitters for pretty much the rest of the game, reserving their down field attempts for mostly max protect situations. And we stayed in a soft zone, even at the end when we needed a third down stop. Had to watch Brady go to Welker on a short throw, the pass rush nowhere near him, and then headbutt his offensive linemen in celebration as they kneeled the clock out. Had we done more than zone on the receivers, might have been a different outcome. (The difference in defensive approach in that game compared to the comeback in 2009 was drastic.)

[amfootball]

The Cowboys have been predominantly Cover 2 this year so far. It's weird to me, because the zone coverage has led to them benching Morris Claiborne, who is much better in man coverage. I think they'd be better off playing more man, but the Kiffin system is predicated zone coverage and 1-gapping linemen, and it plays on the relationship between those two concepts. There are dozens of ways to use either concept, but Kiffin has been doing this for a long time, with a lot of different organizations, and a lot of different results. And he's always stuck with a ton of zone. I don't see them changing that for this Sunday.

 

To your point about hitting receivers, I think every defense wants to be physical with receivers once they get the ball. The defense wants the pass catchers to be thinking about the impending collision. And that can potentially impact the way receivers run routes and lay out for passes. I don't see how this game will be anything special in that regard. Anything more than the ordinary level of physicality is going to be penalized.

That was my point. Take a few penalities if you have to but let the Broncos know early that they will be getting hit and hit often.

[-JJ-]

You should take care to read the article. He talks about how the rule was somewhat contradictory, so they changed the language. And the old language is included in the article. It was always five yards, had been since 1994.

I thought it was earlier since it was nicknamed the Mel Blount rule.

 

The refs had been enforcing it 5-7 yards. Maybe even a stretch at 8 yards occasionally.

 

In 2003 I thought Belichick did one of the best strategies ever, next to the hit Faulk every down in the Rams SB.

 

With the high flying colts coming in for the afccg with their incredible timing offense he set up a triple tier handoff defense.

The 1st tier would bump them within 5 yds and handoff to the next tier which threw the WR off with a little tug hold of the jersey around 6-7 yds.  The third tier would make the play if one was needed.

 

Not great for colt fans but from my side it was a brilliant strategy

[The Old Crow]

The misconception is Denver has bad weather in Nov. and Dec. Not really. The snows normally melt overnight because the sun and the temp. normally is around freezing at night. West of Denver where the altitudes get higher is where is gets bad but not in Denver. Welker is used to playing in worse weather conditions outside of Boston. Chicago, Green Bay Cleveland, Pittsburg, New York and Boston on average has worse weather than Denver. I have seen colder games played in Cincy also. 

 

That is probably true, but in last year's Ravens at Bronco's playoff game, the temperature was 13 degrees, and by halftime it dropped to 9 degrees with a minus 3 wind chill. When I heard the weather report for the game in Baltimore, I thought we had a chance. Had the weather been warmer, the game would have probably been more like the earlier blow-out in Baltimore. 

 

Of course , Manning also lost the 2009 Super Bowl in Florida. These losses are the only question marks for himself, and Denver this year. 

[Superman]

I thought it was earlier since it was nicknamed the Mel Blount rule.

 

The refs had been enforcing it 5-7 yards. Maybe even a stretch at 8 yards occasionally.

 

In 2003 I thought Belichick did one of the best strategies ever, next to the hit Faulk every down in the Rams SB.

 

With the high flying colts coming in for the afccg with their incredible timing offense he set up a triple tier handoff defense.

The 1st tier would bump them within 5 yds and handoff to the next tier which threw the WR off with a little tug hold of the jersey around 6-7 yds.  The third tier would make the play if one was needed.

 

Not great for colt fans but from my side it was a brilliant strategy

 

You're right. The Mel Blount rule was back in the 70s, which initially instituted the five yard rule. In 1994 the rule was revised, with an intent to reduce defensive holding. The new wording at that time was contradictory and ambiguous, so they clarified the wording in 2004.

 

Either way, it was always five yards, never ten.

[-JJ-]

You're right. The Mel Blount rule was back in the 70s, which initially instituted the five yard rule. In 1994 the rule was revised, with an intent to reduce defensive holding. The new wording at that time was contradictory and ambiguous, so they clarified the wording in 2004.

 

Either way, it was always five yards, never ten.

Right,always 5.

 

I think they should compromise and make it 7 yards  :>    

 

..........and can call it the Ty Law rule, of course.

[crazycolt1]

That is probably true, but in last year's Ravens at Bronco's playoff game, the temperature was 13 degrees, and by halftime it dropped to 9 degrees with a minus 3 wind chill. When I heard the weather report for the game in Baltimore, I thought we had a chance. Had the weather been warmer, the game would have probably been more like the earlier blow-out in Baltimore. 

 

Of course , Manning also lost the 2009 Super Bowl in Florida. These losses are the only question marks for himself, and Denver this year. 

So the question marks don't go against the whole team, just Manning? I was reading an article where 85% of all the playoff games Manning has lost the Colts and the Broncos had a lead in the 4th quarter. The defense and special teams gave up more games than won. Manning lost 5 playoff games with a lead with less that 3 minutes left in those games. The QB don't play defense and or special teams. Did Manning give up the long pass in the playoff game last season against the Ravens? You seem to make it a point what Manning did and didn't do but the last time I watched a game the QB is not the only player on the team and there are 3 parts to a team. Offense, defense and special teams. 

[amfootball]

That is probably true, but in last year's Ravens at Bronco's playoff game, the temperature was 13 degrees, and by halftime it dropped to 9 degrees with a minus 3 wind chill. When I heard the weather report for the game in Baltimore, I thought we had a chance. Had the weather been warmer, the game would have probably been more like the earlier blow-out in Baltimore. 

 

Of course , Manning also lost the 2009 Super Bowl in Florida. These losses are the only question marks for himself, and Denver this year. 

Good points. Manning has never been a good bad weather QB. His ball is just not strong enough in the bad weather and of course since the neck surgeries he has lost some velocity. But I think more than Manning is the type of offense the Broncos are running. If the NFL has proven anything in recent history, it is that air attacks get grounded in January. Denver will need to find more of a running game and their D will need to be a lot better as well in the playoffs. I think the other big factor this year is the Super Bowl being in New York. They are predicting a harsh winter up here so likely there will be snow for that game along with bitter cold temps given kickoff is not until 6:30 EST.

[The Old Crow]

Good points. Manning has never been a good bad weather QB. His ball is just not strong enough in the bad weather and of course since the neck surgeries he has lost some velocity. But I think more than Manning is the type of offense the Broncos are running. If the NFL has proven anything in recent history, it is that air attacks get grounded in January. Denver will need to find more of a running game and their D will need to be a lot better as well in the playoffs. I think the other big factor this year is the Super Bowl being in New York. They are predicting a harsh winter up here so likely there will be snow for that game along with bitter cold temps given kickoff is not until 6:30 EST.

I agree. I think Irsay and Grigson have come to the same conclusion with the running game and powerful o line.

[The Old Crow]

So the question marks don't go against the whole team, just Manning? I was reading an article where 85% of all the playoff games Manning has lost the Colts and the Broncos had a lead in the 4th quarter. The defense and special teams gave up more games than won. Manning lost 5 playoff games with a lead with less that 3 minutes left in those games. The QB don't play defense and or special teams. Did Manning give up the long pass in the playoff game last season against the Ravens? You seem to make it a point what Manning did and didn't do but the last time I watched a game the QB is not the only player on the team and there are 3 parts to a team. Offense, defense and special teams.

I am not blaming all on Manning by any means. I agree with what you say about the team losing , etc. What I was trying to say is Manning is so dang good, you pray for cold weather to give you some kind of edge. I'm not saying it's his kryptonite, but I'd rather face him in the freezing cold , than a dome, or sunny, hot conditions.

[pacolts56]

Dallas Cowboys LB Ernie Sims: ‘I’m sick of hearing about Peyton Manning’

“I’m sick of hearing about Peyton Manning,” said Sims, who is expected to start Sunday at weakside linebacker in place of Bruce Carter. “We just got to go out there and do what we’ve got to do.”

Then yes, do something about it, Ernie....or else your home field is about to become the world's biggest vomitorium.

[Synthetic]

They aren't the only ones. I got sick to death of hearing about him last year, so I think I should win the award, sorry Cowboys beat ya to it.

[bayone]

So the question marks don't go against the whole team, just Manning? I was reading an article where 85% of all the playoff games Manning has lost the Colts and the Broncos had a lead in the 4th quarter. The defense and special teams gave up more games than won. Manning lost 5 playoff games with a lead with less that 3 minutes left in those games. The QB don't play defense and or special teams. Did Manning give up the long pass in the playoff game last season against the Ravens? You seem to make it a point what Manning did and didn't do but the last time I watched a game the QB is not the only player on the team and there are 3 parts to a team. Offense, defense and special teams. 

 

 

I am not blaming all on Manning by any means. I agree with what you say about the team losing , etc. What I was trying to say is Manning is so dang good, you pray for cold weather to give you some kind of edge. I'm not saying it's his kryptonite, but I'd rather face him in the freezing cold , than a dome, or sunny, hot conditions.

 

one last time i will post this & only post this weekend time wise probably  as is a quick copy & paste,

 

May everyone team enjoy success

============================================

 

Manning's had a lead in the final 0:40 of the fourth quarter and lost four playoff games thanks to the defense.

 

& thats just just the start of problems he had finishing

 

as far as 1 & dones

 

2 GOOD ARTICLES , ((( sorry I have no time to respond to quotes nor debate this i only have time for this as its a staright copy & Paste From my computer ))) , its been done but here is another analysis, , take the info as u wish , read the articles , very detailed & 1st after MHR summary has quite short videos as well of specific plays pointed out where team let Peyton down

 

MHR one is just a small summary 1st ARTICLE THAT FOLLOWS from Jan 2013, I took a few excerpts out of MHR article

 

In the eight one-and-done games in particular

 

As you now see, Manning has experienced just about everything in the playoffs, and it usually is something bad for his team. The combination of rare events is the reason for a 9-11.

 

The staggering number of drops (over 30 in the equivalent of half a season) and tipped-ball interceptions do QB numbers little justice. One loss was by 41 points (( early in carer to jjets )), and the other seven by 26 points combined.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

If that is not bizarre enough, there is the fact that even when Manning and his entire offense avoids turnovers, he still loses at a most historic rate.

• In the regular season Manning's teams are 40-2 (.952) when they have zero giveaways on offense. That is the best record in the league since 1998.
• In the playoffs Manning's Colts were 1-5 (.167) when they had zero giveaways on offense. The rest of the league is 50-5 (.909), and that even includes two games where neither team had a giveaway.

 

When your defense allows a fourth-quarter comeback 60 percent of the time (6-4), you have a real problem.

 

It is one thing to let Drew Brees do it, but when it's Jay Fiedler, Billy Volek, Mark Sanchez and Joe Flacco? That is completely unacceptable.

 

Manning's had a lead in the final 0:40 of the fourth quarter and lost four playoff games.

 

The only four times Manning's teams have held off comeback attempts, they led to three straight wins and a Super Bowl in 2006, and a Super Bowl appearance in 2009 after holding off the Jets.

 

http://www.milehighreport.com/2013/7/23/4548270/peyton-manning-physical-v-mental

 

2 articles, each quite long with many stats, short Video key play , the above MHR REVIEW based on them , same site , done a year apart

----------------------------------------------------------------

 

2013 9 & 11 analyzed , has moving Pictures, short videos to help with points is makes

 

details each playoff loss of 1 & done

ends with

throw in the ridiculous bad luck Manning has suffered through, and only then does 9-11 start to make some sense.

So 9-11 is not an accident for Manning. It’s a misfortune of unbelievable events, and it’s a call for help in what is proven to be the ultimate team game.\

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/peyton-mannings-9-11-playoff-record-is-call-for-help/20868/

========================================

ARTICLE 2 , same site 2012 ( 9 & 10 record ), also details each game presented a bit differently

 

What’s a lost comeback?

 

It’s a game where the quarterback met all the requirements for a fourth quarter comeback, except the team still lost the game because they lost the lead again. Manning had lost comebacks against the 2007 Chargers and 2010 Jets, which may very well end up being his final game and drive for the Colts.

 

That was significant, because it is yet another “record” for Manning in the playoffs. Out of the 101 games won with a fourth quarter comeback, there were 34 of them where each team took the lead at least once in the final quarter. That means there are 34 lost comebacks in playoff history. It’s happened to a lot of the greatest quarterbacks once. But it’s only happened to one quarterback twice.

 

Peyton Manning is the only quarterback in NFL history with two lost comebacks in the playoffs.

 

That’s two wasted efforts the Colts had at home, and against one offense led by Billy Volek, and then after allowing that big return to Cromartie in the final minute against the Jets.

 

Lazy analysis

 

The 9-10 record is just the latest crutch for those who would rather not analyze what actually happened in the games. How will perception ever lose if reality is never even given a chance?

 

I didn’t spend 5,000 words talking about what should have happened for Manning’s Colts in the playoffs, what would have happened, and what could have happened if things went differently.

 

I talked about the facts of what did happen. I looked at what Manning did, along with what his teammates and the opponent did in those games. Now what’s stopping anyone else from doing the same?

 

It’s only when you put it all together that 9-10 makes sense. If you’re just looking at the quarterback, 9-10 shouldn’t even be on your mind. That’s just being lazy.

 

http://http://network.yardbarker.com/nfl/article_external/why_the_colts_are_a_9_10_playoff_team_in_the_peyton_manning_era/9955468

[crazycolt1]

 

one last time i will post this & only post this weekend time wise probably  as is a quick copy & paste,

 

May everyone team enjoy success

============================================

 

Manning's had a lead in the final 0:40 of the fourth quarter and lost four playoff games thanks to the defense.

 

& thats just just the start of problems he had finishing

 

as far as 1 & dones

 

2 GOOD ARTICLES , ((( sorry I have no time to respond to quotes nor debate this i only have time for this as its a staright copy & Paste From my computer ))) , its been done but here is another analysis, , take the info as u wish , read the articles , very detailed & 1st after MHR summary has quite short videos as well of specific plays pointed out where team let Peyton down

 

MHR one is just a small summary 1st ARTICLE THAT FOLLOWS from Jan 2013, I took a few excerpts out of MHR article

 

In the eight one-and-done games in particular

 

As you now see, Manning has experienced just about everything in the playoffs, and it usually is something bad for his team. The combination of rare events is the reason for a 9-11.

 

The staggering number of drops (over 30 in the equivalent of half a season) and tipped-ball interceptions do QB numbers little justice. One loss was by 41 points (( early in carer to jjets )), and the other seven by 26 points combined.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

If that is not bizarre enough, there is the fact that even when Manning and his entire offense avoids turnovers, he still loses at a most historic rate.

• In the regular season Manning's teams are 40-2 (.952) when they have zero giveaways on offense. That is the best record in the league since 1998.
• In the playoffs Manning's Colts were 1-5 (.167) when they had zero giveaways on offense. The rest of the league is 50-5 (.909), and that even includes two games where neither team had a giveaway.

 

When your defense allows a fourth-quarter comeback 60 percent of the time (6-4), you have a real problem.

 

It is one thing to let Drew Brees do it, but when it's Jay Fiedler, Billy Volek, Mark Sanchez and Joe Flacco? That is completely unacceptable.

 

Manning's had a lead in the final 0:40 of the fourth quarter and lost four playoff games.

 

The only four times Manning's teams have held off comeback attempts, they led to three straight wins and a Super Bowl in 2006, and a Super Bowl appearance in 2009 after holding off the Jets.

 

http://www.milehighreport.com/2013/7/23/4548270/peyton-manning-physical-v-mental

 

2 articles, each quite long with many stats, short Video key play , the above MHR REVIEW based on them , same site , done a year apart

----------------------------------------------------------------

 

2013 9 & 11 analyzed , has moving Pictures, short videos to help with points is makes

 

details each playoff loss of 1 & done

ends with

throw in the ridiculous bad luck Manning has suffered through, and only then does 9-11 start to make some sense.

So 9-11 is not an accident for Manning. It’s a misfortune of unbelievable events, and it’s a call for help in what is proven to be the ultimate team game.\

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/peyton-mannings-9-11-playoff-record-is-call-for-help/20868/

========================================

ARTICLE 2 , same site 2012 ( 9 & 10 record ), also details each game presented a bit differently

 

What’s a lost comeback?

 

It’s a game where the quarterback met all the requirements for a fourth quarter comeback, except the team still lost the game because they lost the lead again. Manning had lost comebacks against the 2007 Chargers and 2010 Jets, which may very well end up being his final game and drive for the Colts.

 

That was significant, because it is yet another “record” for Manning in the playoffs. Out of the 101 games won with a fourth quarter comeback, there were 34 of them where each team took the lead at least once in the final quarter. That means there are 34 lost comebacks in playoff history. It’s happened to a lot of the greatest quarterbacks once. But it’s only happened to one quarterback twice.

 

Peyton Manning is the only quarterback in NFL history with two lost comebacks in the playoffs.

 

That’s two wasted efforts the Colts had at home, and against one offense led by Billy Volek, and then after allowing that big return to Cromartie in the final minute against the Jets.

 

Lazy analysis

 

The 9-10 record is just the latest crutch for those who would rather not analyze what actually happened in the games. How will perception ever lose if reality is never even given a chance?

 

I didn’t spend 5,000 words talking about what should have happened for Manning’s Colts in the playoffs, what would have happened, and what could have happened if things went differently.

 

I talked about the facts of what did happen. I looked at what Manning did, along with what his teammates and the opponent did in those games. Now what’s stopping anyone else from doing the same?

 

It’s only when you put it all together that 9-10 makes sense. If you’re just looking at the quarterback, 9-10 shouldn’t even be on your mind. That’s just being lazy.

 

http://http://network.yardbarker.com/nfl/article_external/why_the_colts_are_a_9_10_playoff_team_in_the_peyton_manning_era/9955468

 

It's much easier just to put the negative comments on him. But when you bring facts into the picture the negative ones start ignoring the facts because it don't fit there personna of their fav QB being better than Manning in the playoffs. Your list was well done and I for one are happy you put it out. 

[bayone]

It's much easier just to put the negative comments on him. But when you bring facts into the picture the negative ones start ignoring the facts because it don't fit there personna of their fav QB being better than Manning in the playoffs. Your list was well done and I for one are happy you put it out. 

 

I have no idea how many times i actually have posted this, its always forgotten, Peyton can cover defects for so long , at some point the team must step up too

 

Also only time team healthy for playoffs they won the Superbowl

 

It stays on my computer for this but am sick of re posting and defending what are facts,.

 

I am in no way saying Peyton shouldn't get some blame, he is part of the team, just not the level that so many have placed upon him ,

 

unfortunately that is  the nature of being a QB, u get the credit and the criticism,

 

HOWEVER, if that was always so why are so many admitting he is having a great season and then state look at all the weapons he has what do u expect ? sometimes u just can win if someone cant be objective, and admittingly with Peyton its hard for me too

 

Best weapon is his mind , Collie was a rookie, Garcon a second year when they pulled out starters  in a undefeated season so would be healthy for playoffs, then having AFC game won Polian leaves Freeney in with 2 minutes left and he gets hurt , sickens me

 

Have a great weekend, glad u liked it, I believe u commented on it before

 

Know many are sick of Hearing so much about Peyton this year and understand their viewpoint as its on every show

 

Take care , must leave

[oldunclemark]

'B'...you are right..

There is a lot of Peyton fatigue..

So much all sports radio and sports channels..and they overcover everything connected with the NFL..

I love Peyton...but even I get tired of hearing about him this year...

Love attaching him play...tired of hearing 24-7 analysis

[DILLIGAFER]

if you think people are sick of hearing about him.. bet he is 100 times more sick of people bugging him and talking about him.

[amfootball]

 

one last time i will post this & only post this weekend time wise probably  as is a quick copy & paste,

 

May everyone team enjoy success

============================================

 

Manning's had a lead in the final 0:40 of the fourth quarter and lost four playoff games thanks to the defense.

 

& thats just just the start of problems he had finishing

 

as far as 1 & dones

 

2 GOOD ARTICLES , ((( sorry I have no time to respond to quotes nor debate this i only have time for this as its a staright copy & Paste From my computer ))) , its been done but here is another analysis, , take the info as u wish , read the articles , very detailed & 1st after MHR summary has quite short videos as well of specific plays pointed out where team let Peyton down

 

MHR one is just a small summary 1st ARTICLE THAT FOLLOWS from Jan 2013, I took a few excerpts out of MHR article

 

In the eight one-and-done games in particular

 

As you now see, Manning has experienced just about everything in the playoffs, and it usually is something bad for his team. The combination of rare events is the reason for a 9-11.

 

The staggering number of drops (over 30 in the equivalent of half a season) and tipped-ball interceptions do QB numbers little justice. One loss was by 41 points (( early in carer to jjets )), and the other seven by 26 points combined.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

If that is not bizarre enough, there is the fact that even when Manning and his entire offense avoids turnovers, he still loses at a most historic rate.

• In the regular season Manning's teams are 40-2 (.952) when they have zero giveaways on offense. That is the best record in the league since 1998.
• In the playoffs Manning's Colts were 1-5 (.167) when they had zero giveaways on offense. The rest of the league is 50-5 (.909), and that even includes two games where neither team had a giveaway.

 

When your defense allows a fourth-quarter comeback 60 percent of the time (6-4), you have a real problem.

 

It is one thing to let Drew Brees do it, but when it's Jay Fiedler, Billy Volek, Mark Sanchez and Joe Flacco? That is completely unacceptable.

 

Manning's had a lead in the final 0:40 of the fourth quarter and lost four playoff games.

 

The only four times Manning's teams have held off comeback attempts, they led to three straight wins and a Super Bowl in 2006, and a Super Bowl appearance in 2009 after holding off the Jets.

 

http://www.milehighreport.com/2013/7/23/4548270/peyton-manning-physical-v-mental

 

2 articles, each quite long with many stats, short Video key play , the above MHR REVIEW based on them , same site , done a year apart

----------------------------------------------------------------

 

2013 9 & 11 analyzed , has moving Pictures, short videos to help with points is makes

 

details each playoff loss of 1 & done

ends with

throw in the ridiculous bad luck Manning has suffered through, and only then does 9-11 start to make some sense.

So 9-11 is not an accident for Manning. It’s a misfortune of unbelievable events, and it’s a call for help in what is proven to be the ultimate team game.\

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/peyton-mannings-9-11-playoff-record-is-call-for-help/20868/

========================================

ARTICLE 2 , same site 2012 ( 9 & 10 record ), also details each game presented a bit differently

 

What’s a lost comeback?

 

It’s a game where the quarterback met all the requirements for a fourth quarter comeback, except the team still lost the game because they lost the lead again. Manning had lost comebacks against the 2007 Chargers and 2010 Jets, which may very well end up being his final game and drive for the Colts.

 

That was significant, because it is yet another “record” for Manning in the playoffs. Out of the 101 games won with a fourth quarter comeback, there were 34 of them where each team took the lead at least once in the final quarter. That means there are 34 lost comebacks in playoff history. It’s happened to a lot of the greatest quarterbacks once. But it’s only happened to one quarterback twice.

 

Peyton Manning is the only quarterback in NFL history with two lost comebacks in the playoffs.

 

That’s two wasted efforts the Colts had at home, and against one offense led by Billy Volek, and then after allowing that big return to Cromartie in the final minute against the Jets.

 

Lazy analysis

 

The 9-10 record is just the latest crutch for those who would rather not analyze what actually happened in the games. How will perception ever lose if reality is never even given a chance?

 

I didn’t spend 5,000 words talking about what should have happened for Manning’s Colts in the playoffs, what would have happened, and what could have happened if things went differently.

 

I talked about the facts of what did happen. I looked at what Manning did, along with what his teammates and the opponent did in those games. Now what’s stopping anyone else from doing the same?

 

It’s only when you put it all together that 9-10 makes sense. If you’re just looking at the quarterback, 9-10 shouldn’t even be on your mind. That’s just being lazy.

 

http://http://network.yardbarker.com/nfl/article_external/why_the_colts_are_a_9_10_playoff_team_in_the_peyton_manning_era/9955468

 

I think this article is the epitome of a sport that is predicated on team. I think most QBs could explain away their playoff losses or any loss for that matter on dropped balls (Aaron Rodgers), tipped passes (Drew Brees), or the defenses ability to close out the game (Brady would have two more rings if his D could have closed the deal in the last two SBs).

 

My contention with Manning over the years is that he is simply the best player when he steps on the field every time but he has not been that player enough in the playoffs. Playing well often won't cut it in the playoffs given the competition. It requires a higher level of play and his team and fans are expecting that from him as they would from any player of his rare caliber.

 

I find it interesting that this writer who obviously worships at the altar of Manning did not do the same analysis of Manning's playoff wins. In 2006 when he won his one ring he had 3 TDs to 7 picks during the playoffs. It was his run game, defense and Adam V. that got him his ring.

[DILLIGAFER]

I think this article is the epitome of a sport that is predicated on team. I think most QBs could explain away their playoff losses or any loss for that matter on dropped balls (Aaron Rodgers), tipped passes (Drew Brees), or the defenses ability to close out the game (Brady would have two more rings if his D could have closed the deal in the last two SBs).

My contention with Manning over the years is that he is simply the best player when he steps on the field every time but he has not been that player enough in the playoffs. Playing well often won't cut it in the playoffs given the competition. It requires a higher level of play and his team and fans are expecting that from him as they would from any player of his rare caliber.

I find it interesting that this writer who obviously worships at the altar of Manning did not do the same analysis of Manning's playoff wins. In 2006 when he won his one ring he had 3 TDs to 7 picks during the playoffs. It was his run game, defense and Adam V. that got him his ring.

I don't know of any poster who can twist and manipulate stats to fit their own agenda like you can.

Adam Vinny got Brady 2 rings and saved his can on several occasions. Bill B. Won those other rings for the Pats.

Brady has been less stellar in the playoffs the last 7 years.

[DILLIGAFER]

You could also say Brady has choked in two SuperBowls. That Safety to start the game was pathetic.

[oldunclemark]

Meanwhile, Dallas is still sick of hearing about Peyton...

[MAC]

I find it interesting that this writer who obviously worships at the altar of Manning did not do the same analysis of Manning's playoff wins. In 2006 when he won his one ring he had 3 TDs to 7 picks during the playoffs. It was his run game, defense and Adam V. that got him his ring.

This strongly suggests that you have had all memory of that years AFC championship game surgically removed. He was brilliant in that game. 

 

It also suggests that you didn't watch the other games. His stats may have been sub-par against the Ravens, but they had a superb defense (as all Pats fans well know). That game played out as a chess match with Ray Lewis, and Peyton methodically dissected them for FIVE scoring drives - leading all the way.

 

Similarly the SB was a dull afterthought, but it was also the ONLY SB ever played in bad weather. Wasn't that Peyton's Achilles heel? Weren't the Bears built for exactly that type of game? Shouldn't that big Bear pass rush have had him running for his life? The Colts nearly doubled up the time of possession. The stats were average because it was a dull conservative game - over pretty early.

 

By the way, those were the #1, #2, and #3 defenses in points against in the league. One would expect his stats to be reduced - the question is whether he could find some way to win anyway. He did. Note that the Pats didn't give up more than 27 to anyone else that year, and that was ALSO the Colts. The next highest was 23. Most teams didn't even reach 20.

 

In fact the only game that gives any credence to your argument is the KC game (#11 in points against) because of the three picks. Of course he had a 79% completion percentage and led five scoring drives. Yes, they won comfortably because the defense stepped up - just like it HAS to at some point for any SB winner. (Consider 2001, 2003, 2004 for for example. ) But to suggest that the Colts defense carried the team that offseason is wishful thinking. What they did was their jobs. If they had done the same in other years, Peyton might well have about ten super bowls by now.

[amfootball]

This strongly suggests that you have had all memory of that years AFC championship game surgically removed. He was brilliant in that game. 

 

It also suggests that you didn't watch the other games. His stats may have been sub-par against the Ravens, but they had a superb defense (as all Pats fans well know). That game played out as a chess match with Ray Lewis, and Peyton methodically dissected them for FIVE scoring drives - leading all the way.

 

Similarly the SB was a dull afterthought, but it was also the ONLY SB ever played in bad weather. Wasn't that Peyton's Achilles heel? Weren't the Bears built for exactly that type of game? Shouldn't that big Bear pass rush have had him running for his life? The Colts nearly doubled up the time of possession. The stats were average because it was a dull conservative game - over pretty early.

 

By the way, those were the #1, #2, and #3 defenses in points against in the league. One would expect his stats to be reduced - the question is whether he could find some way to win anyway. He did. Note that the Pats didn't give up more than 27 to anyone else that year, and that was ALSO the Colts. The next highest was 23. Most teams didn't even reach 20.

 

In fact the only game that gives any credence to your argument is the KC game (#11 in points against) because of the three picks. Of course he had a 79% completion percentage and led five scoring drives. Yes, they won comfortably because the defense stepped up - just like it HAS to at some point for any SB winner. (Consider 2001, 2003, 2004 for for example. ) But to suggest that the Colts defense carried the team that offseason is wishful thinking. What they did was their jobs. If they had done the same in other years, Peyton might well have about ten super bowls by now.

You missed my entire point. If one is going to take Manning's losses as this author has done and dissect all the mistakes his team made to "cost" him the game then one needs to also look at his wins and do the same. I picked the 2006 season because that is the season he won his ring and it was a complete team effort from the defense suring up its run defense, to Addai and Adam V. Manning certainly did his share but so did his team.

 

I would think as a Manning fan you would find that type of article embarrassing. At some point the excuse making is over the top and takes away from the Manning's greatness.

 

I am not sure there is a simple and legit answer to his playoff woes. When I watch him play I see an awful lot of Marino in him. At times he does not know when to reel it in and take the safe play. He gets impatient and will call a pass instead of a run when the game is tight or vice versa.

[bayone]

This strongly suggests that you have had all memory of that years AFC championship game surgically removed. He was brilliant in that game. 

 

It also suggests that you didn't watch the other games. His stats may have been sub-par against the Ravens, but they had a superb defense (as all Pats fans well know). That game played out as a chess match with Ray Lewis, and Peyton methodically dissected them for FIVE scoring drives - leading all the way.

 

Similarly the SB was a dull afterthought, but it was also the ONLY SB ever played in bad weather. Wasn't that Peyton's Achilles heel? Weren't the Bears built for exactly that type of game? Shouldn't that big Bear pass rush have had him running for his life? The Colts nearly doubled up the time of possession. The stats were average because it was a dull conservative game - over pretty early.

 

By the way, those were the #1, #2, and #3 defenses in points against in the league. One would expect his stats to be reduced - the question is whether he could find some way to win anyway. He did. Note that the Pats didn't give up more than 27 to anyone else that year, and that was ALSO the Colts. The next highest was 23. Most teams didn't even reach 20.

 

In fact the only game that gives any credence to your argument is the KC game (#11 in points against) because of the three picks. Of course he had a 79% completion percentage and led five scoring drives. Yes, they won comfortably because the defense stepped up - just like it HAS to at some point for any SB winner. (Consider 2001, 2003, 2004 for for example. ) But to suggest that the Colts defense carried the team that offseason is wishful thinking. What they did was their jobs. If they had done the same in other years, Peyton might well have about ten super bowls by now.

 

agreed

 

 

I am  tired of  defending this article to same few

 

article discusses specific games and looking at a team game  

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Have good day , great win but Costly yesterday, am just waking up myself, dont ask , had to watch game on DVR late

 

ayers in sling  post game, Wesly woodward unknown injury, & real good corner in harris esp in slot concussion

 

have feeling bailey will be in Vs Jaxsonvile to test him, Denver said could played  but didnt want him to play on turf as thats how got hurt , Indy is turf too , right, though may be of different typpe , i have no idea when comes to this

 

sorry if rest off topic

 

Dont want to make excuses but Our Colts have great chance to win in Indy , esp if these players dont return , but even without

 

Colts are balanced ball control and can if want spread out and throw like Romo did and Colts better D to me  7 much better DB's

 

Luck can exploit the middle or throw deep

 

take care, catching up now