Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Should Eli Manning make the Hall of Fame?


bap1331

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, amfootball said:

Eli blows Aikman away in terms of stats. And Eli did not have dynastic team comprised of one of the best Olines, RB and WR in NFL history to get his rings. I believe Aikman deserves to be in the Hall but by the same token so does Eli more so.

Aikman was All Pro twice and has twice as many Pro Bowls as Eli does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

Phil Simms, also on the NY Giants, is NOT in with a Super Bowl win, but has 2 rings and -

 

Super Bowl MVP (1) (1987)
Pro Bowl MVP (1) (1985)
Pro Bowl Selections (2) (1985 & 1993)
Super Bowl Rings (2) (New York Giants, Super Bowl XXI and Super Bowl XXV)

 

Simms started 15 games in 1990, but broke his foot in game 15 against the Bills.  Hostetler took over that and the last regular season game, as well as playoffs and Super Bowl.  So Simms did the bulk of the work, but Hostetler won the SB game.So I call it 2 Rings, for Simms, but one SB started/won.

 

But Eli is better than Plunkett and Simms.  And has better career numbers and more consistency in his career. Eli  is also putting up incredible numbers recently (last 2 years or so) despite his team backpedaling down the W-L record chart, and just might be the low level benchmark for two time Super Bowl champ QB's to get in. We'll  see.

Good points. Disagree on Simms getting credit for second ring as Hos led the playoff run but I get your point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Jules said:

NO. NO. NO.

 

I swear this season it just became even more clear. The only thing the Giants with Eli have ever been good for is beating the Patriots or "just playing them tough and close" to get everyone excited over nothing.

 

58724098.jpg

 

 

The Giants have only had 3 seasons total since their 2007 run where they won 10 games; 2007, 2008, and 2010. And they didn't even make the playoffs in 2010 with the 10-6 record. 

 

They're useful for playing the Pats, but that's it. That team is a Monty Python movie after they play the Saints. They're never the same after we lay waste to their pathetic overrated defense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few stats that make Eli's case pretty compelling other than his two historic SB wins.

 

1) He has an 8-3 playoff record and 7 of those 8 wins came either on the road or a neutral site (SB). That is the most of any QB.

2) He has 5 post-season comebacks/GWDs. That puts him second all time only to Brady who has 9.

3) He is the current iron man of the NFL never missing a game since he became a starter in 2004.

4) If he plays out his current deal which has four more years and retires after (he is 34 now, would be 38 at end of deal), his stats are projected to be the following (just an estimate based on his career averages):

60,000 in yards

400 TDs (if he reaches 400 than he and Brady will he the only two QBs to reach this mark AND have multiple rings)

250 INTs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, BOTT said:

Make a guarantee in the most important game in NFL history and back it up?  When did Eli so that?

So you don't actually have to be good to get in the HoF, just run your mouth off and get lucky that the opposite team sat one of the NFL's greatest quarterbacks of all time for nearly the entire game.  Who almost won it anyways. Which the 'greatest game' has accusations of being rigged to allow for the merjer to prevent the AFL from disappearing. 

 

Namath got in with stats like trent dilfer.  27,000 yards,  50% completion percentage, 173 TD, 220 INT.

 

Those are some serious hofer numbers.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Narcosys said:

So you don't actually have to be good to get in the HoF, just run your mouth off and get lucky that the opposite team sat one of the NFL's greatest quarterbacks of all time for nearly the entire game.  Who almost won it anyways. Which the 'greatest game' has accusations of being rigged to allow for the merjer to prevent the AFL from disappearing. 

 

Namath got in with stats like trent dilfer.  27,000 yards,  50% completion percentage, 173 TD, 220 INT.

 

Those are some serious hofer numbers.  

My point wasn't that Namath deserves to be in

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the hall of fame and not the fall of greatest players.

 

I say with 2 SB's over the Pats including 1 over a previously undefeated Pats team that was just killing every other team it encountered then yes he's in.

 

Not because he has had a super great career but because he did some famous things in the SB.

 

Sort of like Namath is only in because he guaranteed victory in SB 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Narcosys said:

Then what was your point, because that was your counter to him saying if Namath got in, why cant Eli.

That Eli didn't have much in common with Namath.  Namath became a cultural icon after making a guarantee and winning maybe the biggest game in the history of the NFL.  Eli is Peyton's dorky kid brother who played great in the SB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

It's the hall of fame and not the fall of greatest players.

 

I say with 2 SB's over the Pats including 1 over a previously undefeated Pats team that was just killing every other team it encountered then yes he's in.

 

Not because he has had a super great career but because he did some famous things in the SB.

 

Sort of like Namath is only in because he guaranteed victory in SB 3.

If it was about fame Bo Jackson would be in

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Sunday, December 27, 2015 at 4:11 PM, LJpalmbeacher said:

When I look at Eli, the term HOF DOES NOT JUMP OUT AT ME!!!

No.

 

Is this the standard we should use now? 

I think he gets in.  He has the hardware and he's going to finish very high all time in most important categories when he hangs them up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Blue Horseshoe said:

Honestly, I don't understand why championships matter for quarterbacks and not other players, especially defensive players, since the best quarterback in the league in a given season usually doesn't win the Super Bowl.

A QBs ability to lead his team to championships has always been the measuring stick for QBs. The QB is the one player in any team sport that controls the outcome of the game more than any other. Stats do matter to a point but when you have a guy like Namath in the Hall you see the significance of a championship, one in particular that put the AFC on the map.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, amfootball said:

A QBs ability to lead his team to championships has always been the measuring stick for QBs. The QB is the one player in any team sport that controls the outcome of the game more than any other. Stats do matter to a point but when you have a guy like Namath in the Hall you see the significance of a championship, one in particular that put the AFC on the map.

A great basketball player controls the game 100x more than a QB.  I'm not a baseball fan, but I'm thinking a great pitcher does too.  Hell, get a hot goalie and you might win the Stanley cup.

 

And that whole measuring stick stuff is crapola.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BOTT said:

A great basketball player controls the game 100x more than a QB.  I'm not a baseball fan, but I'm thinking a great pitcher does too.  Hell, get a hot goalie and you might win the Stanley cup.

 

And that whole measuring stick stuff is crapola.

A pitcher only pitches every 5th day so he does not control his team as much as a QB who plays every game. A great baskeball player does not have the ball in his hands every play like QB nor is his position as cerebrally demanding as a QB. I would agree about a goalie to a certain extent but he is just saving the puck. He is not asked to create plays to score like a QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, amfootball said:

A pitcher only pitches every 5th day so he does not control his team as much as a QB who plays every game. A great baskeball player does not have the ball in his hands every play like QB nor is his position as cerebrally demanding as a QB. I would agree about a goalie to a certain extent but he is just saving the puck. He is not asked to create plays to score like a QB.

A great basketball player damn near touches the ball every time....plus he hardly leaves the court unlike a QB who plays one way.  What does being cerebral have to do with it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BOTT said:

A great basketball player damn near touches the ball every time....plus he hardly leaves the court unlike a QB who plays one way.  What does being cerebral have to do with it?

Basketball is based more on athleticism than cerebral like QB. Two turnovers from a QB and a team more than likely loses the game. A great b-ball player can have 10 turnovers and his team still win. There is not that margin error for the QB position. It is the hardest position in all of sports so naturally guys that lead their teams to multiple championships are revered more so than those that don't ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, amfootball said:

Basketball is based more on athleticism than cerebral like QB. Two turnovers from a QB and a team more than likely loses the game. A great b-ball player can have 10 turnovers and his team still win. There is not that margin error for the QB position. It is the hardest position in all of sports so naturally guys that lead their teams to multiple championships are revered more so than those that don't ...

Sure, it's a more difficult position, but that doesn't mean he has more influence.  A great basketball player can say "give me the ball and get the hell out of the way".  

 

And Jim Plunkett and Eli are not even remotely as revered (or revered at all really) as Dan Marino, Aaron Rodgers, Steve Young and Peyton Manning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BOTT said:

Sure, it's a more difficult position, but that doesn't mean he has more influence.  A great basketball player can say "give me the ball and get the hell out of the way".  

 

And Jim Plunkett and Eli are not even remotely as revered (or revered at all really) as Dan Marino, Aaron Rodgers, Steve Young and Peyton Manning.

Sure, but the poster was asking why championships in the NFL matter so much when it comes to the QB and the Hall. That is what I was answering. Winning one ring is not an automatic induction but winning multiple rings pretty much assures a QB gets in other than Jim Plunkett. lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, amfootball said:

A QBs ability to lead his team to championships has always been the measuring stick for QBs. The QB is the one player in any team sport that controls the outcome of the game more than any other. Stats do matter to a point but when you have a guy like Namath in the Hall you see the significance of a championship, one in particular that put the AFC on the map.

Defense wins championships.  It always has.

What role does the quarterback have on defense?

The whole "leads his to team to a championship" is a complete myth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Blue Horseshoe said:

Defense wins championships.  It always has.

What role does the quarterback have on defense?

The whole "leads his to team to a championship" is a complete myth.

Defense wins championships is as much of a myth as anything else. Pats defense was plain awful the entire post-season last year except for the Colts game and cashing in on Pete Carroll's brain fart to seal Brady's historic comeback.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Blue Horseshoe said:

Defense wins championships.  It always has.

What role does the quarterback have on defense?

The whole "leads his to team to a championship" is a complete myth.

Defense is definitely huge but since 1992 the first year Troy Aikman won his SB, only Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson have won a SB that aren't franchise QB's. 2 out of the last 23 SB winners didn't have Very Good to Great QB's. Dilfer and Johnson were ok though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Defense is definitely huge but since 1992 the first year Troy Aikman won his SB, only Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson have won a SB that aren't franchise QB's. 2 out of the last 23 SB winners didn't have Very Good to Great QB's. Dilfer and Johnson were ok though.

I wouldn't have called Russell Wilson a franchise QB when they won the SB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, amfootball said:

Defense wins championships is as much of a myth as anything else. Pats defense was plain awful the entire post-season last year except for the Colts game and cashing in on Pete Carroll's brain fart to seal Brady's historic comeback.

 

 

So, you are telling me that "defense wins championships" is a myth with Eli Manning?

As for the Patriots this was the only one of their wins where the defense was not the primary strength of the team. 

 

So let's look at just the winners since 2000, an era in which the game is radically biased toward the passing offense and see which side of the team was most dominant all year long

2000 - Ravens - defense

2001 - Patriots - defense

2002 - Buccaneers - defense

2003 - Patriots - defense

2004 - Patriots - defense

2005 - Steelers - defense

2006 - Colts - An interesting case because the offense carried the team until the playoffs where the hideous defense spontaneously came to life

2007 - Giants - defense

2008 - Steelers - defense

2009 - Saints - balanced

2010 - Packers - offense

2011 - Giants - defense

2012 - Ravens - defense

2013 - Seahawks - defense

2014 - Patriots - offense

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Blue Horseshoe said:

So, you are telling me that "defense wins championships" is a myth with Eli Manning?

As for the Patriots this was the only one of their wins where the defense was not the primary strength of the team. 

 

So let's look at just the winners since 2000, an era in which the game is radically biased toward the passing offense and see which side of the team was most dominant all year long

2000 - Ravens - defense

2001 - Patriots - defense

2002 - Buccaneers - defense

2003 - Patriots - defense

2004 - Patriots - defense

2005 - Steelers - defense

2006 - Colts - An interesting case because the offense carried the team until the playoffs where the hideous defense spontaneously came to life

2007 - Giants - defense

2008 - Steelers - defense

2009 - Saints - balanced

2010 - Packers - offense

2011 - Giants - defense

2012 - Ravens - defense

2013 - Seahawks - defense

2014 - Patriots - offense

The Ravens defense wasn't anything special during that SB run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, BOTT said:

That Eli didn't have much in common with Namath.  Namath became a cultural icon after making a guarantee and winning maybe the biggest game in the history of the NFL.  Eli is Peyton's dorky kid brother who played great in the SB.

 

And ruined a perfect season in the most important game of the season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎12‎/‎29‎/‎2015 at 6:41 PM, RollerColt said:

I'm also in the to be determined camp. If Eli were to retire tomorrow, I don't think he'd be a guaranteed lock. But times change, and we may see a lot of changes with Giants next year. Who knows. I must say, Eli has at least the potential for greatness...  

You make the best point, RC..

Eli's final few years will determine his post-career honors..

With the receivers they have, the NYGs can have quite an offense for the next couple of seasons...

 

We just cant evaluate a guys entire career with 3 or 4 years left

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Funny.   I would say that a GM's adequacy is directly related to the QB he's blessed or cursed with.  But there are exceptions.  Our previous GM was blessed with one of the best prospects to ever come out of college.  He had success for three years, but he was a mediocre GM at best.     Then there's John Lynch, who found ways to win without a top draft pick or even a highly paid veteran QB.  They're consistently in contention and one of the best teams in the league.  Double digit win totals all but 2 of his 7 seasons.   My biggest complaint with CB is that he didn't make a real attempt to draft a QB until AR.  All chips are in now.
    • If being a GM were easy, anyone could do it. Reality in life is like a hard teacher, she gives the test first, then the lessons come later.
    • Championing the Art of Mediocrity   In the realm of NFL management where big splashes and bold moves often steal the spotlight, Chris Ballard of the Indianapolis Colts stands as a beacon of mediocrity—oops, I mean, moderation and stability. Ballard has mastered the art of steering clear of both spectacular success and abject failure, opting instead for a comfortable middle ground where his team consistently hovers around average.   While other GMs chase after flashy signings and high-profile trades, Ballard prefers a more subtle approach. His teams are like the middle child of the NFL—neither the star of the family nor the problem child. Take, for instance, his draft picks: solid, dependable players who rarely make headlines but also rarely make Pro Bowls. It's a strategy that ensures the Colts remain perennially in the hunt for the playoffs without ever seriously threatening to win it all.   Critics may scoff at Ballard's reluctance to swing for the fences, pointing to the lack of marquee names on his roster or the absence of Lombardi Trophies in his trophy case. Yet, Ballard remains unfazed, steadfast in his belief that consistently finishing just outside the top tier is a commendable achievement in itself.   In a league where greatness is often measured by Super Bowl rings and MVP titles, Ballard's Colts serve as a refreshing reminder that there's honor in being consistently okay. While other teams chase after glory, Ballard quietly celebrates the virtues of stability and predictability—a strategy that ensures his team remains perpetually good enough to keep fans interested without ever giving them false hope of a championship.   So here's to you, Chris Ballard, our unsung hero of NFL mediocrity. May our Colts continue to embody the spirit of contentment in a league that sometimes seems obsessed with extremes. Your dedication to the middle ground is a testament to the fact that in a world of winners and losers, there's beauty in just being average.   Our Chris Ballard, the enigmatic mastermind behind the Indianapolis Colts' draft selections, continues to astound with his unconventional approach to player evaluation. Known for his ability to turn perceived draft flops into valuable lessons in resilience, Ballard has elevated the art of optimism in the face of adversity.   Take, for instance, his selection of Quincy Wilson, a cornerback whose career trajectory seemed to follow the path less traveled—straight to the sidelines. Wilson's ability to excel in the role of 'spectator extraordinaire' brought a new dimension to the Colts' bench, proving that even inactivity can be a form of contribution.   Then there's TJ Green, whose ability to redefine the term 'safety' by providing the opposing offense with a false sense of security is a testament to Ballard's commitment to strategic innovation. Green's unpredictable presence on the field undoubtedly kept quarterbacks on their toes, in excitement.    And who could forget Ben Banogu, a defensive end whose knack for demonstrating the art of camouflage by seamlessly blending into the turf has left spectators marveling at his commitment to environmental integration. Banogu's ability to remain inconspicuous during critical moments showcases Ballard's emphasis on adaptability and the importance of being one with your surroundings.   Ballard's genius lies not just in his ability to select players, but in his skillful navigation of the delicate dance between expectation and reality. His selections may not always align with conventional wisdom, but they consistently challenge perceptions and redefine what it means to be a draft bust.   As Ballard continues to forge ahead, his unorthodox approach serves as a beacon of hope for aspiring NFL general managers everywhere, including those perusing fan forums. Because if there's one thing Chris Ballard has taught us, it's that in the unpredictable world of professional football, even the most unexpected outcomes can be reframed as victories in disguise.   AKB
    • He started 14 games at SS in 2019 and started 8 games in 2018 for the Jags.  I meant to post this earlier in the thread.   https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HarrRo02.htm        
    • The additions of say Taylor, Raimann, and looking back to Leonard could be called important, savy drafting.  Our Colts have been waiting for awhile for a special, difference making player to surprisingly fall to US. Right when we really really needed it to happen, it sure looks like we got two of them. 🙏 for good health.  AR a surprise at 4, not at all.  But      
  • Members

    • AKB

      AKB 5,271

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • John Waylon

      John Waylon 5,271

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Smonroe

      Smonroe 6,304

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • jvan1973

      jvan1973 11,066

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • TheNewGuy

      TheNewGuy 85

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • iuswingman

      iuswingman 253

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • TheRadiantAerynSun

      TheRadiantAerynSun 6

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • dw49

      dw49 1,386

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • bluephantom87

      bluephantom87 1,193

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • compuls1v3

      compuls1v3 1,999

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...