Should Eli Manning make the Hall of Fame?

[Blue Horseshoe]

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.

[amfootball]

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.

[jvan1973]

He isn't looking like a HOFer tonight.   The giants mailed it tonight

[Hi-Tek]

Sure is making a case for himself tonight

[buffalo34]

Haven't the Vikings always had Eli's number though? I remember that 2007 game where I think he threw 4 INTs vs. them, 3 of them returned for TDs.

[BloodyChamp]

23 minutes ago, buffalo34 said:

Haven't the Vikings always had Eli's number though? I remember that 2007 game where I think he threw 4 INTs vs. them, 3 of them returned for TDs.

Don't let unc see this!!!!!!

[Synthetic]

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.

 

 

 

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. 

[Patagonia Chris]

I always like using the pro-football-reference tool of "similar players" on topics like these. According to that site Manning is most similar to: Mark Brunell, Troy Aikman, Jim Kelly, Terry Bradshaw, Steve McNair, Tony Romo, Donovan McNabb, Drew Bledsoe, Carson Palmer, Ben Roethlisberger.

[amfootball]

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

[Narcosys]

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.  

[BOTT]

14 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

 

[BOTT]

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

[Narcosys]

48 minutes ago, BOTT said:

My point wasn't that Namath deserves to be in

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

[Valpo2004]

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.

[BOTT]

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.

[BOTT]

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

[jet1968]

Dan Fouts never even made it to the Super Bowl and he is in.

Joe Namath wasnt that good and he is in.

[Blue Horseshoe]

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.

[rockywoj]

I agree with the old uncle ... I feel that it's yet to be determined.  4 or 5 years from now, depending upon how those years go, there might not be a debate.  Just too early right now, imho, to bother thinking about it.   

[CR91]

I think yes, but it will take eli some time

[bababooey]

2 time super bowl MVPs w the career stats he has don't miss the HoF. However, we all know he is a victor Cruz 99 yarder from being a one time SB mvp and miss the playoffs for 7 straight years since

[SteelDragon]

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. 

[amfootball]

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.

[BOTT]

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.

[amfootball]

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.

[BOTT]

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?

[amfootball]

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 ...

[BOTT]

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.

[amfootball]

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.

[Blue Horseshoe]

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.

[amfootball]

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.

 

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

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.

[BOTT]

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.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, BOTT said:

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

Borderline but he is Very Good at worse.

[BOTT]

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Borderline but he is Very Good at worse.

I meant then, not now.  He didn't do a whole lot during that SB run.

[Blue Horseshoe]

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

[RollerColt]

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...  

[BOTT]

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.

[Narcosys]

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. 

[oldunclemark]

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