Rodney Harrison: "We'd have easily won three Super Bowls with Peyton Manning"

[TAPLOOK]

That was before Peyton fell on his face again.

[Fx Stryker]

Everyone does realize if Peyton was a Patriot he would be use to playing in the cold and playing in any offense he was put in? He had to learn the Indy offense didn't he, lol.

So odds are he could do it. What Rodney said isn't wrong. Those Pats teams were so balanced. He isn't taking anything away from Bradu.

[Moose Of Woe]

That was before Peyton fell on his face again.

Brady did jack squat for his last 4 possessions. Manning was the last of the two to actually drive down and do something, but most of the credit goes to Moreno.

[TAPLOOK]

Brady did plenty. Look at the numbers. The Patriots were losing 24-0 no thanks to Peyton and he couldn't put them away. Peyton didn't move the ball Brady did. Even in the first half.

[GoPats]

Based on what, sir?

 

 

The eye test? Very unscientific but I do have pretty good vision.   ;)   The Patriots were going into that wind for the entire 3rd quarter. The Broncos didn't move the ball a whole lot going that way until the game-tying drive. 

[Superman]

The eye test? Very unscientific but I do have pretty good vision.   ;)   The Patriots were going into that wind for the entire 3rd quarter. The Broncos didn't move the ball a whole lot going that way until the game-tying drive. 

 

The Pats were trying to erase a three/four score lead. They HAD to throw, and still weren't just braving the wind. Most of Brady's throws were underneath. 

 

The Broncos weren't trying to throw into that wind, and didn't really need to until the game tying drive.

 

Raw stats, yes, Brady's numbers were better. But the situations required Brady to throw the ball into the wind. When the situation required Manning to throw into the wind, he tied the game.

[GoPats]

The Pats were trying to erase a three/four score lead. They HAD to throw, and still weren't just braving the wind. Most of Brady's throws were underneath. 

 

The Broncos weren't trying to throw into that wind, and didn't really need to until the game tying drive.

 

Raw stats, yes, Brady's numbers were better. But the situations required Brady to throw the ball into the wind. When the situation required Manning to throw into the wind, he tied the game.

 

You're not wrong about any of this, but personally it seemed to me that Brady had an easier time with the wind than Manning. I don't know how else to quantify it so it's strictly an anecdotal observation. It would make sense... stronger arm at this point, and more experience playing in that type of weather. The Monday night game last week in Carolina was a windy one too. 

[Superman]

You're not wrong about any of this, but personally it seemed to me that Brady had an easier time with the wind than Manning. I don't know how else to quantify it so it's strictly an anecdotal observation. It would make sense... stronger arm at this point, and more experience playing in that type of weather. The Monday night game last week in Carolina was a windy one too. 

 

That's fair. Brady has a stronger arm and more experience with the wind. But like I said earlier, reading some of the posts and articles, you'd think Manning was a bum out there.

 

Go back and look at Brady's stats in the 2003 and 2004 matchups against the Colts. You'll find strong similarities in those statlines. You'll see Brady handing the ball off to Corey Dillon, controlling the clock and allowing his defense to make plays. It's smart. It's not a reflection of his ability as a player.

 

And after spending the last few days talking about how Manning would have fit into those old Patriots teams, he went out and essentially played the game the way young Tom Brady would have, complete with the late game touchdown with the game on the line.

 

But because he didn't fill up the stat sheet, he choked, he failed in the clutch, he can't play in cold weather, etc. 

[amfootball]

That's fair. Brady has a stronger arm and more experience with the wind. But like I said earlier, reading some of the posts and articles, you'd think Manning was a bum out there.

 

Go back and look at Brady's stats in the 2003 and 2004 matchups against the Colts. You'll find strong similarities in those statlines. You'll see Brady handing the ball off to Corey Dillon, controlling the clock and allowing his defense to make plays. It's smart. It's not a reflection of his ability as a player.

 

And after spending the last few days talking about how Manning would have fit into those old Patriots teams, he went out and essentially played the game the way young Tom Brady would have, complete with the late game touchdown with the game on the line.

 

But because he didn't fill up the stat sheet, he choked, he failed in the clutch, he can't play in cold weather, etc. 

Brady never had a game where he handed the ball off 48 times.

[chad72]

Brady never had a game where he handed the ball off 48 times.

 

Why is that a bad thing if the RBs hold on to the ball and it works? Like Yehoodi said, the scores dictated playcalling a lot at least till the 3rd qtr.

 

Peyton handed it off 42 times in the SB he won because his D held on to the lead, and threw 42 times in the SB he lost because his D gave up the lead and he had to throw more to come from behind as the game went on  .

 

The difference is a D that could hang on to the lead.

[GoPats]

That's fair. Brady has a stronger arm and more experience with the wind. But like I said earlier, reading some of the posts and articles, you'd think Manning was a bum out there.

 

Go back and look at Brady's stats in the 2003 and 2004 matchups against the Colts. You'll find strong similarities in those statlines. You'll see Brady handing the ball off to Corey Dillon, controlling the clock and allowing his defense to make plays. It's smart. It's not a reflection of his ability as a player.

 

And after spending the last few days talking about how Manning would have fit into those old Patriots teams, he went out and essentially played the game the way young Tom Brady would have, complete with the late game touchdown with the game on the line.

 

But because he didn't fill up the stat sheet, he choked, he failed in the clutch, he can't play in cold weather, etc. 

 

I gotcha man. 

 

It's one of those things that's hard to quantify... I don't think Manning played a bad game at all, aside from the pick. 

 

I'd describe it the way I'd describe Brady's play in most of the Patriots' critical losses over the years: "He wasn't god awful, but he also wasn't god-like." Which is totally unfair to both of those guys! We expect so much out of them both. 

[Superman]

Brady never had a game where he handed the ball off 48 times.

 

Did he ever have a game where he threw for 150 yards and only a couple touchdowns? And did they win?

[TAPLOOK]

Manning had the superior team last night and was handed a 24-0 lead but still lost. 150 yards, 19/36, INT.

While Brady, 344 yards, 34/50, 3 TD, 0 INT.

And is now 10-4 vs Peyton.

The debate should be Brady vs Montana, not Brady vs Manning.

[amfootball]

Did he ever have a game where he threw for 150 yards and only a couple touchdowns? And did they win?

Brady never had a game where he was up by 24 and lost. I am not sure what to tell you but Manning had a 52 percent completion percentage and appeared to be gun shy all game. I get running the ball with a big lead but once the Pats made it a ball game at 24-14 he needed to step on the pedal and put the game away. He has had a historic passing O this year. That has been Denver's MO yet they abandoned it and it cost them.

[amfootball]

Why is that a bad thing if the RBs hold on to the ball and it works? Like Yehoodi said, the scores dictated playcalling a lot at least till the 3rd qtr.

 

Peyton handed it off 42 times in the SB he won because his D held on to the lead, and threw 42 times in the SB he lost because his D gave up the lead and he had to throw more to come from behind as the game went on  .

 

The difference is a D that could hang on to the lead.

Bu that is just it Denver's D has been awful all year. They are 28 in points allowed. If Manning thought 24 points would be enough with Brady on the other side and his D that has been dreadful against the pass then he miscalculated badly.

[Superman]

Brady never had a game where he was up by 24 and lost. I am not sure what to tell you but Manning had a 52 percent completion percentage and appeared to be gun shy all game. I get running the ball with a big lead but once the Pats made it a ball game at 24-14 he needed to step on the pedal and put the game away. He has had a historic passing O this year. That has been Denver's MO yet they abandoned it and it cost them.

 

I don't think Manning's play last night needs or deserves defending. He played okay, was affected by the wind and the score, but wasn't bad. If you think he should have done more, that's fine. I think the defense gave up a 24 point lead. There's blame to go around.

 

But I especially don't understand criticism of handing the ball off, with the wind, with the lead, and with the run game working. I think you're reaching for an angle, and it doesn't make sense. Brady had the better game, and Manning wasn't particularly impressive. Even saying that, I don't have a problem with the gameplan or the execution.

[amfootball]

I don't think Manning's play last night needs or deserves defending. He played okay, was affected by the wind and the score, but wasn't bad. If you think he should have done more, that's fine. I think the defense gave up a 24 point lead. There's blame to go around.

 

But I especially don't understand criticism of handing the ball off, with the wind, with the lead, and with the run game working. I think you're reaching for an angle, and it doesn't make sense. Brady had the better game, and Manning wasn't particularly impressive. Even saying that, I don't have a problem with the gameplan or the execution.

No knocks on Manning from me. It was a sloppy game all around. My comment on the running seems as if they wanted to stick to it to a fault. I get it as the Pats have been woeful against the run since Wilfork and Mayo went out. I just kept expecting to see Manning sling it in the second half to put the Pats away and he seemed content with the run. Not his best game and the elements seemed to effect him more but for sure lots of blame to go around. If I had to pick a the goat it would be Welker.

[Moose Of Woe]

No knocks on Manning from me. It was a sloppy game all around. My comment on the running seems as if they wanted to stick to it to a fault. I get it as the Pats have been woeful against the run since Wilfork and Mayo went out. I just kept expecting to see Manning sling it in the second half to put the Pats away and he seemed content with the run. Not his best game and the elements seemed to effect him more but for sure lots of blame to go around. If I had to pick a the goat it would be Welker.

Sticking to the run was fine. It worked. Why change what works?

 

The problems came when they handed it off to someone not named Moreno.  If Moreno isn't your back don't bother running as the other three backs are a liability. The sooner Denver figures that out the better. I'm beginning to wonder at this point if they ever will. Moreno needs a break? Sure. Pass the ball not hand it off to one of the three stooges.

 

You can only see the same thing happen game after game before you seriously question just what the heck the coaches are doing. When you fumble time and time again and Denver keeps putting those guys in games I shake my head. Mostly Ball at this point. You need to bench that sucker and leave him there. That doesn't mean you replace one fumble prone guy with another one (Hillman) which is what I'm sure we'll see next week. The solution is you keep them both on the sideline and find someone who can hold on to the football.  If nothing else take a gamble on an unknown instead of begging to screw yourself over with a fumbilitis RB.

[amfootball]

Sticking to the run was fine. It worked. Why change what works?

 

The problems came when they handed it off to someone not named Moreno.  If Moreno isn't your back don't bother running as the other three backs are a liability. The sooner Denver figures that out the better. I'm beginning to wonder at this point if they ever will. Moreno needs a break? Sure. Pass the ball not hand it off to one of the three stooges.

Running the ball was not leading to scoring drives in the second half. At 24-14 the Colts needed to put up points not clock eat.

[Moose Of Woe]

Running the ball was not leading to scoring drives in the second half. At 24-14 the Colts needed to put up points not clock eat.

It wasn't leading to scoring drives because of 2 turnovers (1 INT, 1 fumble) and dropped passes whenever Manning actually did throw. Some were bad passes, many were just flat out drops and horrible "efforts" by receivers who spend more time crying for a flag than fighting for the ball.

 

And the Broncos, not the Colts.

[Fx Stryker]

Running the ball was not leading to scoring drives in the second half. At 24-14 the Colts needed to put up points not clock eat.

 

Even Pats fans don't see him as a Bronco!

[amfootball]

It wasn't leading to scoring drives because of 3 turnovers. 4 with the game ender.

 

And the Broncos, not the Colts.

Which is why I would have kept it in Manning's hands. Denver's run game has turned it over all season. Remember the Indy game?

 

Hard to still get used to Manning in that silly Broncos uniform. I still feel like the Pats beat the Colts last night not that lousy Broncos.

[amfootball]

Even Pats fans don't see him as a Bronco!

I liked him better in that classic Colts uniform and not that silly orange. ;)

[Moose Of Woe]

I liked him better in that classic Colts uniform and not that silly orange. ;)

He looked much better in blue and white, yes.

 

Still would have loved to see him in the red and gold of San Fran. I'm not sure the rest of the NFL would have enjoyed it very much. Having success in Denver, but SF was by far his best shot at a SB winning team. Denver might pull it off, but it's a long shot. They're just too mistake prone.

[Fx Stryker]

Brady never had a game where he handed the ball off 48 times.

 

No, but there were plenty of 40+ rush attempts with Brady under 200 yards passing and the Pats won from 2001-2004.

I liked him better in that classic Colts uniform and not that silly orange. ;)

I think a lot of us do.

[amfootball]

No, but there were plenty of 40+ rush attempts with Brady under 200 yards passing and the Pats won from 2001-2004.

Also a different era of football where passing rules were different and the NE offense did not have great weapons for Brady.

 

Are you honestly telling me you expected to see Manning of all QBs hand it off that many times?

[Fx Stryker]

Also a different era of football where passing rules were different and the NE offense did not have great weapons for Brady.

 

Are you honestly telling me you expected to see Manning of all QBs hand it off that many times?

You said Brady never handed it off 48 times. Where there are plenty of games he has 40+ hands offs and under 200 yards. Like against the '04 Browns where he handed off 50 times.

[Superman]

Also a different era of football where passing rules were different and the NE offense did not have great weapons for Brady.

 

Are you honestly telling me you expected to see Manning of all QBs hand it off that many times?

 

I don't think anyone expected it. That doesn't make it a flawed strategy.

 

For all these people talking about how Manning tries to do to much, and so on, it's insane to criticize a gameplan that exploited the weakness of the defense, and did so to the tune of nearly 300 yards. When you're running at 6 yards/carry, you keep running it.

 

It's what the Colts did against the Bears in SB41. The Bears played two deep zone coverage, keeping the box light, and Manning "Orange 12'd" the ball all the way down the field all game long. Then people say that he had a poor game. Hogwash. The Bears didn't want him to throw the ball, especially after their busted coverage resulted in the Reggie Wayne touchdown.

 

Same thing last night. The Pats gave the Broncos a light box all game long, and the run was effective, so they stuck with it. Add in the wind and the score, and there's no reason to criticize the gameplan. 

[amfootball]

I don't think anyone expected it. That doesn't make it a flawed strategy.

 

For all these people talking about how Manning tries to do to much, and so on, it's insane to criticize a gameplan that exploited the weakness of the defense, and did so to the tune of nearly 300 yards. When you're running at 6 yards/carry, you keep running it.

 

It's what the Colts did against the Bears in SB41. The Bears played two deep zone coverage, keeping the box light, and Manning "Orange 12'd" the ball all the way down the field all game long. Then people say that he had a poor game. Hogwash. The Bears didn't want him to throw the ball, especially after their busted coverage resulted in the Reggie Wayne touchdown.

 

Same thing last night. The Pats gave the Broncos a light box all game long, and the run was effective, so they stuck with it. Add in the wind and the score, and there's no reason to criticize the gameplan. 

I hear you. But all the runs did not lead to any points and the Pats were storming back. At some point you have to score not just clock eat. The one possession they did score on in the fourth, Manning passed the ball.

[amfootball]

You said Brady never handed it off 48 times. Where there are plenty of games he has 40+ hands offs and under 200 yards. Like against the '04 Browns where he handed off 50 times.

It is not just he handing off but the lack of scoring. If the running is leading to points then fine but the Pats were storming back and Denver was standing pat and clock eating to the point that the Pats came all the way back to take the lead after being down 24. That is way too conservative and cost them. Hard to argue it didn't.

[Fx Stryker]

It is not just he handing off but the lack of scoring. If the running is leading to points then fine but the Pats were storming back and Denver was standing pat and clock eating to the point that the Pats came all the way back to take the lead after being down 24. That is way too conservative and cost them. Hard to argue it didn't.

What about in the '04 divisional round where Brady handed it off 40 times against the Colts? With 15mph winds and it was 27 degrees. The Patriots didn't score on any drive they ran it, but they continued to run the ball. They won the game because they controlled the clock. Which the Broncos did. Unfortunately for them the Broncos D couldn't stop the Pats like Bruschi and them did Manning.

So when it came time that Manning HAD to throw the ball he did, and he scored.

[amfootball]

What about in the '04 divisional round where Brady handed it off 40 times against the Colts? With 15mph winds and it was 27 degrees. The Patriots didn't score on any drive they ran it, but they continued to run the ball. They won the game because they controlled the clock. Which the Broncos did. Unfortunately for them the Broncos D couldn't stop the Pats like Bruschi and them did Manning.

So when it came time that Manning HAD to throw the ball he did, and he scored.

That is my point. The Pats had the D to do that. The Broncos do not. At some point when you see Pats storming back you have to throw. Waiting until the end was too late as they could only tie. Had they gone to the pass sooner maybe they put the game away. I was just surprised to see the Pats go 31 unanswered after the Broncs were up 24.

[Superman]

I hear you. But all the runs did not lead to any points and the Pats were storming back. At some point you have to score not just clock eat. The one possession they did score on in the fourth, Manning passed the ball.

 

You're exaggerating this now.

 

The Broncos first possession in the second half, they ran the ball five times to start, with two first downs. They ran a 5th time for 4 yards, then threw on 2nd and 6, which was fumbled. So the run was working, then they threw it and turned it over.

 

Their second possession went run, pass, pass (first down), run, run, sack on third down, punt.

 

Their third possession went run, switch sides into the wind, run (first down), interception.

 

Their fourth possession went run, pass, pass, punt.

 

Then went the touchdown drive, on their fifth possession. Up to that point, it was 7 pass plays, 11 runs, two turnovers, two punts. Not great play, obviously, but it's not like they were patently refusing to pass the ball. The fact is the run was far more effective, and they probably should have forced the run a little bit more, as it was working and the pass really wasn't. After analyzing this a bit more, it's shocking that people are suggesting the Broncos should have thrown the ball more. They should have thrown it less, at least at that point in the game.

[Fx Stryker]

That is my point. The Pats had the D to do that. The Broncos do not. At some point when you see Pats storming back you have to throw. Waiting until the end was too late as they could only tie. Had they gone to the pass sooner maybe they put the game away. I was just surprised to see the Pats go 31 unanswered after the Broncs were up 24.

So you hold Peyton to such a standard that he should abandon a winning game plan, that has been winning for decades, to put everything on his shoulders. Why is it okay for other quarterbacks to try and win a game that way, but not Peyton. He ran the same type of offense last night that won the Patriots many games, an offense you said he couldn't run. Somehow this game plan is not okay when Peyton does it.

Last nights game continues to prove how Peyton can do anything he needs to win the game, but his team always finds a way to fail him.

[Jules]

The debate should be Brady vs Montana, not Brady vs Manning.

 

With all due respect to Brady, he can't hold Montana's jock strap in the postseason. Sorry...

 

Montana would not have let his team lose to two cruddy Giants teams who pretty much backed into the playoffs.

[Jules]

I liked him better in that classic Colts uniform and not that silly orange. ;)

 

Well that's also cause that bright orange color can clash with the undertones of Manning's pale skin.

[Sports Central1]

If I'm not mistaken Peyton has a winning record against Eli and the Giants.  The Colts and Broncos did pretty good against the Giants' D under Peyton.  Colts' and Broncos' offensive line protected Peyton very well against the Giants' pass rush.  Eli and the Giants own the Patriots with 3 straight wins.  So the whole idea that the Patriots have the best offensive line isn't true.  Also, Peyton hasn't been sacked much this year and I think he's been sacked the least of all QB's so far?  For some years the Colts' offensive line was the best in the NFL and the Broncos' have the best offensive line in the NFL.

 

Aquib Talib gets injured and leaves the game last night against the Broncos for a few plays and the Pats put Arrington on the outside to cover the Broncos' best WR as Arrington isn't that great on the outside.  Peyton didn't target him once when Aquib was out.

[Dustin]

If I'm not mistaken Peyton has a winning record against Eli and the Giants. The Colts and Broncos did pretty good against the Giants' D under Peyton. Colts' and Broncos' offensive line protected Peyton very well against the Giants' pass rush. Eli and the Giants own the Patriots with 3 straight wins. So the whole idea that the Patriots have the best offensive line isn't true. Also, Peyton hasn't been sacked much this year and I think he's been sacked the least of all QB's so far? For some years the Colts' offensive line was the best in the NFL and the Broncos' have the best offensive line in the NFL.

Aquib Talib gets injured and leaves the game last night against the Broncos for a few plays and the Pats put Arrington on the outside to cover the Broncos' best WR as Arrington isn't that great on the outside. Peyton didn't target him once when Aquib was out.

Peyton gts the ball out of his hands faster than any QB in the NFL. He made a lot of olines look good that weren't.

[Sports Central1]

With all due respect to Brady, he can't hold Montana's jock strap in the postseason. Sorry...

 

Montana would not have let his team lose to two cruddy Giants teams who pretty much backed into the playoffs.

 

Giants pass rush would have smoked the 49ers offensive line just like the Giants, Bears and Redskins did through out the 1980's.   The NFC was very dominant over the AFC for some 15 years.

 

It wasn't like Montana and the 49ers beat the 2000 Ravens or 2003-04 Patriots or Steelers.  With all due respect, the NFC beat up on the AFC through out the 1980's and into the late 1990's until Elway and the Broncos finally won in 1997.  Montana and the 49ers beat the Bengals and Broncos.  Broncos for years were the only real dominate team in the AFC in the 1980's and then the Bills went to 4 straight Super Bowls.

 

But Montana is one of the best ever.  He deserves that.

[Sports Central1]

Peyton gts the ball out of his hands faster than any QB in the NFL. He made a lot of olines look good that weren't.

 

No, Peyton's offensive lines were some of the greatest in the history of the NFL.  Colts fans need to stop throwing everyone under the bus for Peyton.  It's sort of like some Cowboys fans who trash everyone in the Cowboys organization except Romo.