Eli Manning

[bap1331]

How do you describe his inconsistency? I understand before 2007, he lived alot under Peyton's shadow which gave him a ton of pressure in his position. But after winning 2 Super Bowls, you would think that his confidence will be at an all time high and where he is supposed to be in the top 10 qb's list.

 

Do you think its him or the team that is off? Does his regular season inconsistency get him out of the hall of fame? Should he already be in because of his 2 rings especially for defeating an undefeated team?

 

Im just confused i guess..

[Qwiz]

Eli is like water. He runs hot and cold, but he has never been elite. People just see the name Manning and convince themselves that he is.

[Dustin]

Eli is like water. He runs hot and cold, but he has never been elite. People just see the name Manning and convince themselves that he is.

I would say water is pretty elite. 

[BloodyChamp]

The same way you describe the inconsistecy of Terry Bradshaw, Kurt Warner, Ken Stabler, etc. Gah...those guys were so inconsistent.

[Qwiz]

I would say water is pretty elite.

I was talking about the hot and cold part you nitpicker you. Lol.

[bap1331]

yea but you wonder if it is all bad mental preparation. because it doesnt explain how Eli went 2 whole playoff runs without being inconsistent. And then you wonder when the game is on the line to make the playoffs, he doesnt make it.

 

Getting ready for the Super Bowl is alot of pressure. How did he manage that especially going against an undefeated team, but notbe  able to manage a regular season game. lol...

[Shane Bond]

Eli is like water. He runs hot and cold, but he has never been elite. People just see the name Manning and convince themselves that he is.

Nothing matters. He was show time when lights were on the brightest stage not once but twice.

Who cares about Elite. He doesn't and Giants fan don't. I bet you won't either if he got Texans 2 rings.

[Qwiz]

Nothing matters. He was show time when lights were on the brightest stage not once but twice.

Who cares about Elite. He doesn't and Giants fan don't. I bet you won't either if he got Texans 2 rings.

I'm not saying I care either, just answering the question the OP posed. Still, the media crowns him elite and act surprised whenever the Giants come up short and he has seasons like last year. If Fitzpatrick can get us to the playoffs or a SB ring you are right, I wouldn't give a hoot if anyone believed he is elite or not.

[Synthetic]

Why do people hate Eli so much?

 

 

I swear, besides Romo, he's the most picked on QB in the league and he has two rings, against a much superior team that was supposed to wipe the floor with them in both SB's.

 

 

I like Eli Manning, he gets the job done. Despite all the flack he gets, all the negativity, all the "he'll never be like Peyton", he's got two rings on his hand. How many of thosesuper elite QB's have two rings on their hand?

 

I hope Eli Manning destroys teams this year just so I can sit and listen to you guys talk about how he'll never be as good as other QB's, despite his success he's had all this time.

[oldunclemark]

Eli's working with a new offense..

lets not judge too soon here..the NYGs wont see any Hall of Fame defenses in that division..

[bap1331]

Why do people hate Eli so much?

 

 

I swear, besides Romo, he's the most picked on QB in the league and he has two rings, against a much superior team that was supposed to wipe the floor with them in both SB's.

 

 

I like Eli Manning, he gets the job done. Despite all the flack he gets, all the negativity, all the "he'll never be like Peyton", he's got two rings on his hand. How many of thosesuper elite QB's have two rings on their hand?

 

I hope Eli Manning destroys teams this year just so I can sit and listen to you guys talk about how he'll never be as good as other QB's, despite his success he's had all this time.

 

i dont hate on him. I actually like the Giants kinda as a second team. I like them because if they make the playoffs, they will eliminate all the best teams in the NFC like the Packers, 49ers, and Seahawks. Making it a greater chance Luck faces the Mannings twice in the playoff run if Colts make it to the SB.  lol

[Guest nflfan014]

 against a much superior team that was supposed to wipe the floor with them in both SB's.

 

 

 

I have to disagree there.  They were supposed to wipe the floor with them in the 2007 SB, but in the 2011 SB most people were picking the Giants including New England media and Patriots fans themselves.  By then, it was well known that the Giants had their number - they had beaten them in the regular season that year - and weren't at all intimidated by the Patriots. 

[BloodyChamp]

That doesn't change the fact that the Giants still beat the better team. Superstition is the only reason people ever picked the Giants to beat the Pats since 2007.

[Guest nflfan014]

That doesn't change the fact that the Giants still beat the better team. Superstition is the only reason people ever picked the Giants to beat the Pats since 2007.

The 2011 Pats weren't that good.  They were a dropped TD catch/deflected ball away from being eliminated at home by the Ravens.  There's this sentiment when the Pats lose to say "Oh they were favored" as revisionist history.

 

About Eli, though, if you combined Peyton in the regular season and Eli in the postseason, you'd have the perfect QB.  Eli is a statistically average, at best, QB, who throws about 20 INT a season, maybe wins 9 games at most, then for whatever reason turns into Joe Montana in elimination games.

[BloodyChamp]

So there was 1 team in the AFC better than them? That still makes them pretty good to me. They were favored outside of the people whose thought process was "the Giants have the Pats number for reasons I can't explain." Don't get me wrong...I get that in football. It just happens sometimes but not because anything involving how a team matches up.

[Guest nflfan014]

So there was 1 team in the AFC better than them? That still makes them pretty good to me.

 

They weren't head and shoulders above the Giants that year.  I'd argue other than at QB, the Giants had the better team by far, and any QB advantage was negated by the fact that the Giants D owed Brady and the Pats offense.

 

2007, no doubt, Pats were favored...I think by 14 and no one really expected the Giants to win.

[Guest nflfan014]

owned* not owed

[amfootball]

I think much depends on how you define elite. I look at it as a combo of regular season and post-season play as well as championships and league MVPs, etc. I don't think Eli is elite because he is not consistent even in the post-season. He had a few one and done's prior to 2007. And of course both of his rings came courtesy of having the best defensive line in football. He was average in both SBs save for the last drive. He deserves credit for his clutch play for sure but his overall body of work does not put him in the elite category. I feel the same way about Big Ben as well although he is a more consistent performer than Eli.

[Shane Bond]

Gaming winning TD drive in a Superbowl.

Is there anything bigger than that in football for a QB?. It's the equivalent for a pitcher pitching in Game 7 of a World Series and winning or buzzer beater in Game 7 of a NBA final.

And if a player has done that twice, in my mind I don't care if we call him Elite or coconut, he belongs to HOF.

[Blue Horseshoe]

This whole thing is one of the many things I find so ridiculous about judging quarterbacks by Super Bowls.

 

In 2007 the man was on the verge of being benched and Coughlin was on the verge of being fired.

Then because of a few flukey plays by the offense (On the game winning drive he almost threw the game away twice and fumbled it away another time) and a truly impressive performance by the defense he is magically transformed into an (Eli)te quarterback despite not really changing much at all.

 

Then in 2011 a similar thing happened and the Giants won a 2nd Super Bowl.  All of a sudden people were putting him in the Hall of Fame.

 

I'm sorry but I simply do not buy it.  He is a very average quarterback (In a lot of ways that is being generous) and is not Hall of Fame worthy at all.  Super Bowls are a meaningless statistic for comparing quarterbacks.

[Blue Horseshoe]

The same way you describe the inconsistecy of Terry Bradshaw, Kurt Warner, Ken Stabler, etc. Gah...those guys were so inconsistent.

 

Bradshaw, Warner, and Stabler were all league MVPs.  Eli was never even close to being that.

[supremecoltsfan300]

yea but you wonder if it is all bad mental preparation. because it doesnt explain how Eli went 2 whole playoff runs without being inconsistent. And then you wonder when the game is on the line to make the playoffs, he doesnt make it.

Getting ready for the Super Bowl is alot of pressure. How did he manage that especially going against an undefeated team, but notbe able to manage a regular season game. lol...

Part of the thing with eli is he gets a little too much credit for the superbowl. Yes, he played very well and was clutch. But in the first superbowl he scored just just 14 points. In the second, he scored 15 points before the patriots let him score a td, he only really would have scored 18 points in all likelihood. His performance was great but people have made it out like it was all time great. It wasn't. Steve young's performance where he threw 6 tds and scored 42 points was all time great.

I think Eli is a better flacco, but a guy who turns it over more than flacco. In terms of ranking, i don't think he was ever close to a top five guy, but i do think he was on always on the border of being a top 10 guy. Thing with backend 10 guys is that they don't always have consistency in regards to great qb play.

[Stephen]

eli is average at best. I'd take flacco big ben romo foles maybe even jake locker if he could stay healthy over eli. even fitzpatrick is comparable to eli

[BloodyChamp]

Bradshaw, Warner, and Stabler were all league MVPs. Eli was never even close to being that.

They were also erratic with the football at times, benched, and ran out of town. That sorta falls under the term inconsistent.

[BloodyChamp]

Super Bowls are a meaningless statistic for comparing quarterbacks.

Superbowls are not a tell all statistic but they certainly aren't meaningless.

[NFLfan]

I think much depends on how you define elite. I look at it as a combo of regular season and post-season play as well as championships and league MVPs, etc. I don't think Eli is elite because he is not consistent even in the post-season. He had a few one and done's prior to 2007. And of course both of his rings came courtesy of having the best defensive line in football. He was average in both SBs save for the last drive. He deserves credit for his clutch play for sure but his overall body of work does not put him in the elite category. I feel the same way about Big Ben as well although he is a more consistent performer than Eli.

Many football experts believe Eli is a shoe-in for the Hall of Fame. Like you, I believe he is too inconsistent and throws too many INTs to be considered "elite" and to be a "shoe-in" for the HOF. As others here have written, he is perceived to be better than he is because he has won two Super Bowl championships, but looking at his play and his stats, he's clearly not a top quarterback. The Giants defense was the true MVP of Super Bowl 42.

Roethlisberger is one of the elite QBs and he will without a doubt be in the HOF. He can probably put up more yards & TDs, but he is leading a rather conservative offense predicated on the run game. Unlike many of the coaches of the other top QBs, Big Ben's coaches don't have him throwing 50 times in any game.

I believe Philip Rivers is the best of the three but unfortunately he does not have the championships to stamp him as one of the best. I would taken him over Eli any day.

[Loneranger]

Bradshaw, Warner, and Stabler were all league MVPs.  Eli was never even close to being that.

Neither would the players you mentioned if Peyton was in the League then. He sort of owns that award and I would not be surprised to see him win another one.

[The Old Crow]

Part of the thing with eli is he gets a little too much credit for the superbowl. Yes, he played very well and was clutch. But in the first superbowl he scored just just 14 points. In the second, he scored 15 points before the patriots let him score a td, he only really would have scored 18 points in all likelihood. His performance was great but people have made it out like it was all time great. It wasn't. Steve young's performance where he threw 6 tds and scored 42 points was all time great.

I think Eli is a better flacco, but a guy who turns it over more than flacco. In terms of ranking, i don't think he was ever close to a top five guy, but i do think he was on always on the border of being a top 10 guy. Thing with backend 10 guys is that they don't always have consistency in regards to great qb play.

I think the book on Eli is very similar to the one on Flacco. Both of those guys are better quarterbacks in the playoffs and Super Bowl, than the regular season. Who knows why this is, but the stats back this up.

As far as 2011, and no offense to our Patriot friends, in my opinion the Ravens were the better team that year, and matched up better with the Giants in the Super Bowl. Had Evans not dropped the pass , I think the Ravens would have been Super Bowl Champions that year. That being said, they would not have repeated in. 2012, as Ozzie would have busted up the team a year earlier. As we all know the best team doesn't always win the Super Bowl, as you need luck. We got that in 2012 against , I think , a better Denver team.

I think another great Ravens team that didn't win the Super Bowl was the 2006 Ravens. That was an unbelievable defense that held Peyton Manning and the Colts to 15 points, but lost 15-6. That team was betrayed by a horrific game by Steve McNair, horrible coaching by Brian Billick, and chiefly an unimaginative offensive game plan by Matt Cavanaugh , who should have been fired years before.

To me , 2006 to the Ravens, was like 2009 to Colt fans. The 2009 Ravens team that lost to the Colts 20-3, wasn't nearly as good as the 2006, 2011, or 2012 squads. The Colts losing that Super Bowl to the Saints, was like that 1998 Vikings squad losing to Atlanta. Both were better teams , and should have won. Sometimes it just turns out that way.

[oldunclemark]

Bradshaw, Warner, and Stabler were all league MVPs.  Eli was never even close to being that.

Kenny Stabler was a baaaaaaaaad man!

[The Old Crow]

Kenny Stabler was a baaaaaaaaad man!

Did not enjoy Ghost to the Post !!!!

[supremecoltsfan300]

I think the book on Eli is very similar to the one on Flacco. Both of those guys are better quarterbacks in the playoffs and Super Bowl, than the regular season. Who knows why this is, but the stats back this up.

As far as 2011, and no offense to our Patriot friends, in my opinion the Ravens were the better team that year, and matched up better with the Giants in the Super Bowl. Had Evans not dropped the pass , I think the Ravens would have been Super Bowl Champions that year. That being said, they would not have repeated in. 2012, as Ozzie would have busted up the team a year earlier. As we all know the best team doesn't always win the Super Bowl, as you need luck. We got that in 2012 against , I think , a better Denver team.

I think another great Ravens team that didn't win the Super Bowl was the 2006 Ravens. That was an unbelievable defense that held Peyton Manning and the Colts to 15 points, but lost 15-6. That team was betrayed by a horrific game by Steve McNair, horrible coaching by Brian Billick, and chiefly an unimaginative offensive game plan by Matt Cavanaugh , who should have been fired years before.

To me , 2006 to the Ravens, was like 2009 to Colt fans. The 2009 Ravens team that lost to the Colts 20-3, wasn't nearly as good as the 2006, 2011, or 2012 squads. The Colts losing that Super Bowl to the Saints, was like that 1998 Vikings squad losing to Atlanta. Both were better teams , and should have won. Sometimes it just turns out that way.

 

Great post

 

I think people forget about that 2006 playoff run for the Colts. Only team in history to beat the Number 1, 2, and 3 defenses in one playoff run.  Idk if your 06 Ravens could have beaten the patriots. You guys had the better defense (that defense imo was one of the five best of the decade), but your Offense probably couldn't have scored that much against the patriots defense which was very good that year.  But if you had beaten them, I think you guys would have destroyed that 06 bears team. They had a great defense too, but their offense (even though it was statistically the second best in the nfl) would have turned the ball over way too much against that elite ravens D.

 

Looking back at that ravens D...You guys had 6 pro bowl players on defense, and that's not including Pryce who had 13 sacks and Ngata who was a rookie that year. Just flat out nasty. That defense wasn't better than 2000, but in retrospect it was probably pretty close.

[amfootball]

I think the book on Eli is very similar to the one on Flacco. Both of those guys are better quarterbacks in the playoffs and Super Bowl, than the regular season. Who knows why this is, but the stats back this up.

As far as 2011, and no offense to our Patriot friends, in my opinion the Ravens were the better team that year, and matched up better with the Giants in the Super Bowl. Had Evans not dropped the pass , I think the Ravens would have been Super Bowl Champions that year. That being said, they would not have repeated in. 2012, as Ozzie would have busted up the team a year earlier. As we all know the best team doesn't always win the Super Bowl, as you need luck. We got that in 2012 against , I think , a better Denver team.

I think another great Ravens team that didn't win the Super Bowl was the 2006 Ravens. That was an unbelievable defense that held Peyton Manning and the Colts to 15 points, but lost 15-6. That team was betrayed by a horrific game by Steve McNair, horrible coaching by Brian Billick, and chiefly an unimaginative offensive game plan by Matt Cavanaugh , who should have been fired years before.

To me , 2006 to the Ravens, was like 2009 to Colt fans. The 2009 Ravens team that lost to the Colts 20-3, wasn't nearly as good as the 2006, 2011, or 2012 squads. The Colts losing that Super Bowl to the Saints, was like that 1998 Vikings squad losing to Atlanta. Both were better teams , and should have won. Sometimes it just turns out that way.

Yeah, I suppose we can all play that game. I believe the 2010 Pats were better than the 2011 but they could not muster enough to beat the Jets in the divisional round. Tha year in 2010 Brady won the unanimous MVP and only threw 4 picks to 36 TDs but the team just didn't show up in that playoff game.

 

I also believe the 2006 Pats should have been Super Bowl champs. They had the Colts beat at 21-3 and then wilted at the end. There is no doubt in my mind that the Pats beat the Bears in the Super Bowl that year.

[The Old Crow]

Great post

I think people forget about that 2006 playoff run for the Colts. Only team in history to beat the Number 1, 2, and 3 defenses in one playoff run. Idk if your 06 Ravens could have beaten the patriots. You guys had the better defense (that defense imo was one of the five best of the decade), but your Offense probably couldn't have scored that much against the patriots defense which was very good that year. But if you had beaten them, I think you guys would have destroyed that 06 bears team. They had a great defense too, but their offense (even though it was statistically the second best in the nfl) would have turned the ball over way too much against that elite ravens D.

Looking back at that ravens D...You guys had 6 pro bowl players on defense, and that's not including Pryce who had 13 sacks and Ngata who was a rookie that year. Just flat out nasty. That defense wasn't better than 2000, but in retrospect it was probably pretty close.

You may be right. The 2006 Patriots certainly had a better all around team than the Ravens. I think our offense with McNair was better than the 2000 team with Dilfer. I do agree that the Patriots and Ravens would have beaten the Bears that year , but the Colts were the hot team , and got the job done.

The 2009 Colt team was very dominant and should have went undefeated, but I think Irsay and Polian miscalculated that year, and killed the Colts momentum , and illusion of invincibility. I still think that team was better than the Saints.

[The Old Crow]

Yeah, I suppose we can all play that game. I believe the 2010 Pats were better than the 2011 but they could not muster enough to beat the Jets in the divisional round. Tha year in 2010 Brady won the unanimous MVP and only threw 4 picks to 36 TDs but the team just didn't show up in that playoff game.

I also believe the 2006 Pats should have been Super Bowl champs. They had the Colts beat at 21-3 and then wilted at the end. There is no doubt in my mind that the Pats beat the Bears in the Super Bowl that year.

That had to be a tough loss for the Patriots. The Ravens- Colts game in 2006 was marked more by frustration, than letting a big lead get away. The frustration was watching an incompetent Matt Cavanaugh waste another great Ravens defense. We had to relive this later with another goof named Cam Cameron.

[mycou1992]

Maybe for him, pressure is motivation

[amfootball]

That had to be a tough loss for the Patriots. The Ravens- Colts game in 2006 was marked more by frustration, than letting a big lead get away. The frustration was watching an incompetent Matt Cavanaugh waste another great Ravens defense. We had to relive this later with another goof named Cam Cameron.

Yeah, I remember that game in 2006. The Ravens dominated defensively holding the Colts without a TD but nothing on O. Still though, blowing a 21-3 lead really hurts. Especially since it was the lousy Bears in the super bowl.

 

How do you think the Pats/Ravens would have matched up that year had you beaten the Colts? The game would have been in Baltimore as you were the #2 seed and the Pats were the #4. The Pats D was very good that year too but ran out of gas the second half of Indy. I don't think that would have factored in against the Ravens given your issues on O. I think the Pats win in a 20-17 game or Ravens win 17-14.

[Blue Horseshoe]

You may be right. The 2006 Patriots certainly had a better all around team than the Ravens. I think our offense with McNair was better than the 2000 team with Dilfer. I do agree that the Patriots and Ravens would have beaten the Bears that year , but the Colts were the hot team , and got the job done.

The 2009 Colt team was very dominant and should have went undefeated, but I think Irsay and Polian miscalculated that year, and killed the Colts momentum , and illusion of invincibility. I still think that team was better than the Saints.

 

I feel like signng up for 50 accounts so that I can give this post 50 likes!

 

One thing about the Saint game though.  The defense was very dependent on edge pressure from Freeney and Mathis.  When Freeney was unable to continue playing it completely fell apart and the Saints were able to move the ball at will.  That is what makes the Porter interception so overrated.  Even had it not occurred there is absolutely no evidence that the Saints could not march down and kick a field goal because they had scored on every possession after Freeney left.  Brees even talks about it in their America's Game episode. 

[The Old Crow]

Yeah, I remember that game in 2006. The Ravens dominated defensively holding the Colts without a TD but nothing on O. Still though, blowing a 21-3 lead really hurts. Especially since it was the lousy Bears in the super bowl.

How do you think the Pats/Ravens would have matched up that year had you beaten the Colts? The game would have been in Baltimore as you were the #2 seed and the Pats were the #4. The Pats D was very good that year too but ran out of gas the second half of Indy. I don't think that would have factored in against the Ravens given your issues on O. I think the Pats win in a 20-17 game or Ravens win 17-14.

Honestly, looking back on it, with Billick and Cavanaugh and their vanilla offense, I think the Patriots would have won like the Colts did, even in Baltimore. The shame of it is, that was one of the best Baltimore defenses of all time, and McNair was an upgrade from Dilfer, comparing 2006 to 2000. I also go back to the 2001 Ravens who had the defense to repeat, but Billick never gave Dilfer the chance to repeat , then signed horrible QB Elvis Gerbac, who flopped against Pittsburgh in the playoffs. Later, Billick put pressure on Ozzie to draft Kyle Boller , which was also a disaster. Brian did some good things, but like Polian , it was time to go.

[The Old Crow]

I feel like signng up for 50 accounts so that I can give this post 50 likes!

One thing about the Saint game though. The defense was very dependent on edge pressure from Freeney and Mathis. When Freeney was unable to continue playing it completely fell apart and the Saints were able to move the ball at will. That is what makes the Porter interception so overrated. Even had it not occurred there is absolutely no evidence that the Saints could not march down and kick a field goal because they had scored on every possession after Freeney left. Brees even talks about it in their America's Game episode.

That 2009 Colts team was so dominant. I just think they lost their momentum due to all the hoopla with the undefeated season. The story of that team reminds me very much of the 1968 Baltimore Colts who were 13-1, and should have massacred the Jets. This team was also plagued by distractions from management, and it had to be one of Shula's worst coached games.

I think the 2009 Colts team was better than the Saints, and even though it didn't work out that way, you'll never convince me they weren't better. Polian and Irsay mishandled things with the undefeated season, creating the distraction. Obviously , they did things sincerely to what they thought was in the best interests of the team, but unfortunately, the team lost their shield of invincibility, and some momentum.

What ifs are always interesting to think about when you look back. What would have happened if the winds weren't so bad at Municipal Stadium that day when the Colts and Browns played in the NFL Championship game? The weather was so bad it was 0-0 at half , before Cleveland scored 27 points in the second half. It just shows you a lot of factors, and luck, go into winning a Championship.

[YOUR GM]

yea but you wonder if it is all bad mental preparation. because it doesnt explain how Eli went 2 whole playoff runs without being inconsistent. And then you wonder when the game is on the line to make the playoffs, he doesnt make it.

Getting ready for the Super Bowl is alot of pressure. How did he manage that especially going against an undefeated team, but notbe able to manage a regular season game. lol...

Eli didn't dominate either Super Bowl. He had a hand in the 2 biggest plays in them, but I wouldn't say he won them because of his "elite" preparation. If we're being honest, he was actually just really lucky. The guy has had 1 stellar regular season in his career, surrounded by a bunch of years of pedestrian numbers with plenty of inconsistency thrown in. My opinion of him is, he's a quarterback you can win it all with, but not elite by a long shot