Trying To Look At Peyton's Postseason Career Objectively

[DalTXColtsFan]

It's difficult as a Colts fan but I'm going to try:

1999: Did Peyton play a perfect game? No. Did he play better than a LOT of QBs who WON playoff games? I'm going to say yes.

2000: Did Peyton play a perfect game? No. Did he play well enough that the rest of the team should have been able to help him win the game? I'm going to say yes. EDITED to say the Colts LOST the regular-season game on the road at Miami that year 21-17.

2002: Nightmare across the board. Nobody played well that day - not the OL, RBs, defense, special teams, QB - nobody.

2003: 2 PERFECT games from Peyton. I submit that there has NEVER been more pressure on a QB to perform in the postseason than there was on Manning in the Denver game. People forget so quickly that the Colts were physically dominated and flat out beaten up by THAT SAME DENVER TEAM in their OWN HOUSE 2 weeks prior in a game that MATTERED. So how did Peyton respond to the pressure? Oh, only by picthing a perfect QB rating and then following it up with a stellar performance on the road at the #1 seed's home. People are so quick to say, oh but KC had a horrible defense that year. Doesn't matter - there was still pressure on Manning to score a TD every single time they had the ball because the Colts D and ST couldn't stop the Chiefs either. Remember when Manning got the team up 31-17 only to have Dante Hall run one back? You don't think there was PRESSURE on Peyton to score ANOTHER TD? You don't think the whole world thought that if the Colts had gone 3-and-out on that drive that the Colts wouldn't be able to stop the Chiefs from tying the game?

Now people are quick to blame the refs for the Pats game loss, but 2 of Peyton's 4 picks I put 100% on him - the one in the endzone to Harrison he should have thrown away, and one of them to Law was a terrible read. The playcalling in that game was abysmal as well. I hope our new front office collection NEVER allows the OC to call 48 passes and 18 runs in a playoff game again EVER.

2004: Another sandblasting of Denver followed by a physical domination by the Pats. Did the Colts lose that game because "Manning failed to step up his play"? You decide.

2005: Nightmare. Did the Colts lose that game because Manning failed to step up his play? You decide.

2006: People are quick to point out Manning's 3 picks against KC but they ignore his 30 completions, 18 of which went for first downs. His passing opened up Rhodes and Addai in the running game and kept the defense rested. His numbers weren't stellar against the Ravens but let's be honest, the Ravens had a brutal D that year. Also, remember the drive that started at the 1 and ended with Vini's 51-yard field goal? Heck of a drive. And on the last drive (Rhodes grinding it out) it's not hard to imagine that the Ravens D expecting pass, pass, pass contributed to the Colts' success running the ball. And the 3rd and 8 pass to Clark?

Manning stepped it up in the last 2 minutes against a Pats team that had owned him. And he threw for almost 300 yards against the Bears in the SuperBowl.

2007: 400+ passing yards against the Chargers. That's not stepping it up?

2008: It's tough to argue against someone saying Manning failed to step it up in this game. Plenty of blame to go around but didn't look like the QB who led the team to 9 straight wins to end the season including road wins at Pittsburgh and San DIego.

2009: Manning stepped it up against the Ravens and Jets - let's be honest. And is it fair to argue that he didn't play well enough in the Super Bowl that the rest of the team should have been able to win the game? You decide.

2010: Manning led the team to what should have been the winning field goal. For most quarterbacks that qualifies as stepping it up.

The reality in the NFL is that once a player gets a label, however nonsense that label is, the label never gets shaken.

Manning's postseason record is far from perfect but IMHO it's extremely unfair to say he's never demonstrated the ability to step it up in the big games.

Thoughts?

[OldManP]

Good analysis!

[Coltsman1788]

It's difficult as a Colts fan but I'm going to try:

1999: Did Peyton play a perfect game? No. Did he play better than a LOT of QBs who WON playoff games? I'm going to say yes.

2000: Did Peyton play a perfect game? No. Did he play well enough that the rest of the team should have been able to help him win the game? I'm going to say yes. EDITED to say the Colts LOST the regular-season game on the road at Miami that year 21-17.

2002: Nightmare across the board. Nobody played well that day - not the OL, RBs, defense, special teams, QB - nobody.

2003: 2 PERFECT games from Peyton. I submit that there has NEVER been more pressure on a QB to perform in the postseason than there was on Manning in the Denver game. People forget so quickly that the Colts were physically dominated and flat out beaten up by THAT SAME DENVER TEAM in their OWN HOUSE 2 weeks prior in a game that MATTERED. So how did Peyton respond to the pressure? Oh, only by picthing a perfect QB rating and then following it up with a stellar performance on the road at the #1 seed's home. People are so quick to say, oh but KC had a horrible defense that year. Doesn't matter - there was still pressure on Manning to score a TD every single time they had the ball because the Colts D and ST couldn't stop the Chiefs either. Remember when Manning got the team up 31-17 only to have Dante Hall run one back? You don't think there was PRESSURE on Peyton to score ANOTHER TD? You don't think the whole world thought that if the Colts had gone 3-and-out on that drive that the Colts wouldn't be able to stop the Chiefs from tying the game?

Now people are quick to blame the refs for the Pats game loss, but 2 of Peyton's 4 picks I put 100% on him - the one in the endzone to Harrison he should have thrown away, and one of them to Law was a terrible read. The playcalling in that game was abysmal as well. I hope our new front office collection NEVER allows the OC to call 48 passes and 18 runs in a playoff game again EVER.

2004: Another sandblasting of Denver followed by a physical domination by the Pats. Did the Colts lose that game because "Manning failed to step up his play"? You decide.

2005: Nightmare. Did the Colts lose that game because Manning failed to step up his play? You decide.

2006: People are quick to point out Manning's 3 picks against KC but they ignore his 30 completions, 18 of which went for first downs. His passing opened up Rhodes and Addai in the running game and kept the defense rested. His numbers weren't stellar against the Ravens but let's be honest, the Ravens had a brutal D that year. Also, remember the drive that started at the 1 and ended with Vini's 51-yard field goal? Heck of a drive. And on the last drive (Rhodes grinding it out) it's not hard to imagine that the Ravens D expecting pass, pass, pass contributed to the Colts' success running the ball. And the 3rd and 8 pass to Clark?

Manning stepped it up in the last 2 minutes against a Pats team that had owned him. And he threw for almost 300 yards against the Bears in the SuperBowl.

2007: 400+ passing yards against the Chargers. That's not stepping it up?

2008: It's tough to argue against someone saying Manning failed to step it up in this game. Plenty of blame to go around but didn't look like the QB who led the team to 9 straight wins to end the season including road wins at Pittsburgh and San DIego.

2009: Manning stepped it up against the Ravens and Jets - let's be honest. And is it fair to argue that he didn't play well enough in the Super Bowl that the rest of the team should have been able to win the game? You decide.

2010: Manning led the team to what should have been the winning field goal. For most quarterbacks that qualifies as stepping it up.

The reality in the NFL is that once a player gets a label, however nonsense that label is, the label never gets shaken.

Manning's postseason record is far from perfect but IMHO it's extremely unfair to say he's never demonstrated the ability to step it up in the big games.

Thoughts?

One of the better objective analysis from a Peyton fan that I've seen around here in awhile. After reading how you started off with 1999 and 2000, I was becoming skeptical but you won me over by the end. Nice job. Peyton has nothing to be ashamed of certainly. It's just that so many want to pump him up as the greatest ever and that is what subjects him to heightened ridicule regarding his post-season results. He has been a legendary quarterback for us. One of the best of his era.

[DalTXColtsFan]

Thanks. Out of curiosity what was wrong with 1999 and 2000?

[IndyTrav]

Now that you've done Peyton, give Marvin a whirl..........

[Fr33UpFr33ney]

Which year was it we lost 40-0 against the jets?

[degjohn]

It's difficult as a Colts fan but I'm going to try:

1999: Did Peyton play a perfect game? No. Did he play better than a LOT of QBs who WON playoff games? I'm going to say yes.

2000: Did Peyton play a perfect game? No. Did he play well enough that the rest of the team should have been able to help him win the game? I'm going to say yes. EDITED to say the Colts LOST the regular-season game on the road at Miami that year 21-17.

2002: Nightmare across the board. Nobody played well that day - not the OL, RBs, defense, special teams, QB - nobody.

2003: 2 PERFECT games from Peyton. I submit that there has NEVER been more pressure on a QB to perform in the postseason than there was on Manning in the Denver game. People forget so quickly that the Colts were physically dominated and flat out beaten up by THAT SAME DENVER TEAM in their OWN HOUSE 2 weeks prior in a game that MATTERED. So how did Peyton respond to the pressure? Oh, only by picthing a perfect QB rating and then following it up with a stellar performance on the road at the #1 seed's home. People are so quick to say, oh but KC had a horrible defense that year. Doesn't matter - there was still pressure on Manning to score a TD every single time they had the ball because the Colts D and ST couldn't stop the Chiefs either. Remember when Manning got the team up 31-17 only to have Dante Hall run one back? You don't think there was PRESSURE on Peyton to score ANOTHER TD? You don't think the whole world thought that if the Colts had gone 3-and-out on that drive that the Colts wouldn't be able to stop the Chiefs from tying the game?

Now people are quick to blame the refs for the Pats game loss, but 2 of Peyton's 4 picks I put 100% on him - the one in the endzone to Harrison he should have thrown away, and one of them to Law was a terrible read. The playcalling in that game was abysmal as well. I hope our new front office collection NEVER allows the OC to call 48 passes and 18 runs in a playoff game again EVER.

2004: Another sandblasting of Denver followed by a physical domination by the Pats. Did the Colts lose that game because "Manning failed to step up his play"? You decide.

2005: Nightmare. Did the Colts lose that game because Manning failed to step up his play? You decide.

2006: People are quick to point out Manning's 3 picks against KC but they ignore his 30 completions, 18 of which went for first downs. His passing opened up Rhodes and Addai in the running game and kept the defense rested. His numbers weren't stellar against the Ravens but let's be honest, the Ravens had a brutal D that year. Also, remember the drive that started at the 1 and ended with Vini's 51-yard field goal? Heck of a drive. And on the last drive (Rhodes grinding it out) it's not hard to imagine that the Ravens D expecting pass, pass, pass contributed to the Colts' success running the ball. And the 3rd and 8 pass to Clark?

Manning stepped it up in the last 2 minutes against a Pats team that had owned him. And he threw for almost 300 yards against the Bears in the SuperBowl.

2007: 400+ passing yards against the Chargers. That's not stepping it up?

2008: It's tough to argue against someone saying Manning failed to step it up in this game. Plenty of blame to go around but didn't look like the QB who led the team to 9 straight wins to end the season including road wins at Pittsburgh and San DIego.

2009: Manning stepped it up against the Ravens and Jets - let's be honest. And is it fair to argue that he didn't play well enough in the Super Bowl that the rest of the team should have been able to win the game? You decide.

2010: Manning led the team to what should have been the winning field goal. For most quarterbacks that qualifies as stepping it up.

The reality in the NFL is that once a player gets a label, however nonsense that label is, the label never gets shaken.

Manning's postseason record is far from perfect but IMHO it's extremely unfair to say he's never demonstrated the ability to step it up in the big games.

Thoughts?

A good breakdown here about playoff qb's.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=8700

See especially the following:

There are several players that stand out, but the cases of Peyton Manningand Warren Moon are especially interesting. The Houston Oilers, unable to get past the Divisional round, were known as a team with a great regular season offense that continued to lose playoff games they should have won, while the Colts are viewed as a similar team despite winning a Super Bowl and getting to another. Both quarterbacks have very solid individual passing stats and team drive stats, but both have a losing record (Moon is 3-7 while Manning is 9-10). How can that be?

With respect to their defensive issues, field position and a lack of opportunities are two great answers for that. When you so often have games where the offense touches the ball 8-9 times, and has to go 75, 80, 85 or even 90+ yards to score touchdowns, you have to play at a very high level offensively to score a lot of points, and even the best offenses can struggle to do that in the postseason against the best competition. It has become common to see a scene like this in a Colts game as opponents try to play keep away to minimize Manning's opportunities.

Manning and Moon had the worst starting field position of these 24 quarterbacks. Aikman and Roethlisberger? Some of the best starting field position. Would the Colts and Oilers have won more games if they could get more stops on defense to get the ball back to their offense and in better field position? It would seem so, but in the cases of Steve McNair and Randall Cunningham, that would appear to be no guarantee.

I have seen people say the Colts only scored 17 points in their playoff losses in 2008 and 2009. Looking at this clears that up. The worst field position in any of the 314 games I looked at belongs to Peyton Manning'sColts in the 2008 Wild Card game at San Diego, where they had to start at the 15.67 on average. The Colts did manage to score 17 points that day. The second worst game also belongs to the Colts, and it is the big one: Super Bowl 44 last year (16.63 was their average start). They scored 17 points in that one as well.Steve Young's 16.70 game against the Packers in the 1997 NFC Championship is the third worst game, and the 49ers scored 3 points on offense that day. Touchdowns are harder to come by when the field ahead of you is so long. In the games I looked at there were 1080 drives started at least 80 yards away from the end zone, and only 182 (16.9%) ended in a touchdown.

[Coltsman1788]

Thanks. Out of curiosity what was wrong with 1999 and 2000?

Initially, it kinda seemed like you were going to just make the traditional excuses that people make all the time to justify whenever Peyton comes up short in the playoffs. You know "he lost but..." But that could just be me. However, after I fully read the rest of your analysis, I think that you ended up offering a fair, objective perspective overall. So like I said, nicely done!

[DalTXColtsFan]

Admittedly the 1999 and 2000 analyses didn't address the question of whether or not he stepped it up in the postseason, or rather, if he didn't, would it have made any difference if he had.

In the 1999 regular season he tore some really good defenses to shreds (Miami twice, Buffalo early) had decent days against a couple (KC and NYG), and got shut down by others (NYJ twice, Buf last week of RS). In the playoffs he actually put up better numbers against the Titans than Mark Brunell did with a HECK of a lot less offensive help. Does that qualify as "stepping it up"? Probably not, but it's probably unfair to call it choking too.

I'd call his RS vs. PS performances in Miami in 2000 about a push. He CERTAINLY played well enough against Miami that the other 52 guys should have been able to win the game. Stepping up? Probably not, but certainly not stepping down either.

[WSO]

Not being a homer I'd say Peyton played poorly against the Titans (1999), Jets (2002), Patriots (2003), Patriots (2004), Kansas City (2006),Baltimore (2006), NO (2009).

[mahagga73]

Most people don't want to be objective and will blame the defense for only one ring,ignoring the fact it was the defense that won that SB above anything else, and the fact they had some good defenses early in the decade and still didn't win.PM has played pretty good overall,not great,in the playoffs.

[Tony Sullivan]

The things that makes me upset about Peyton is that other than that one season where Bob Sanders and the D stepped up it's ALWAYS in all ways been on Peyton.

[Knuckles79]

Most people don't want to be objective and will blame the defense for only one ring,ignoring the fact it was the defense that won that SB above anything else, and the fact they had some good defenses early in the decade and still didn't win.PM has played pretty good overall,not great,in the playoffs.

i believe it was a team effort that won us the SB and Rexs pour play! please explain how you say our d won the SB yeah they made some plays but so did addia rhodes MVP runner ups! Reggie Waynes td and oh yeah the MVP Peyton Manning

[mahagga73]

i believe it was a team effort that won us the SB and Rexs pour play! please explain how you say our d won the SB yeah they made some plays but so did addia rhodes MVP runner ups! Reggie Waynes td and oh yeah the MVP Peyton Manning

Of all facets involved the defense against the Ravens,Chiefs,and Bears was the biggest factor in the winning of the SB.Not hard to understand.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Admittedly the 1999 and 2000 analyses didn't address the question of whether or not he stepped it up in the postseason, or rather, if he didn't, would it have made any difference if he had.

In the 1999 regular season he tore some really good defenses to shreds (Miami twice, Buffalo early) had decent days against a couple (KC and NYG), and got shut down by others (NYJ twice, Buf last week of RS). In the playoffs he actually put up better numbers against the Titans than Mark Brunell did with a HECK of a lot less offensive help. Does that qualify as "stepping it up"? Probably not, but it's probably unfair to call it choking too.

I'd call his RS vs. PS performances in Miami in 2000 about a push. He CERTAINLY played well enough against Miami that the other 52 guys should have been able to win the game. Stepping up? Probably not, but certainly not stepping down either.

It's going way back, but was there a Caldwellesque mistake by Mora about a penalty that he declined/didn't decline or something that set up the Vandy miss? I'll try to dig around.

Manning has been failed by some coaching blunders over the year with Mora/Dungy/Caldwell and limited by their lack of aggressiveness on top of it.

[Knuckles79]

Of all facets involved the defense against the Ravens,Chiefs,and Bears was the biggest factor in the winning of the SB.Not hard to understand.

not really we still had to drive down field to score points to win ! yeah i believe our d was a big part but i wouldnt say they are the sole reason!

[Fx Stryker]

Which year was it we lost 40-0 against the jets?

2002?

[jemack]

And your point? PM should have been great enough to carry the team on his shoulders when STs and the defense faultered in the post season? How bout this.... Name me a post season game when the defense and STs played above average (or maybe just average) and the Colts didn't win. It's a team sport. This is why PM is a better QB than Brady , even with his SB rings. Brady has a much better supporting cast. Why should that be Manning's fault?

Jemack

[doogansquest]

A good breakdown here about playoff qb's.

http://www.pro-footb...om/blog/?p=8700

See especially the following:

There are several players that stand out, but the cases of Peyton Manningand Warren Moon are especially interesting. The Houston Oilers, unable to get past the Divisional round, were known as a team with a great regular season offense that continued to lose playoff games they should have won, while the Colts are viewed as a similar team despite winning a Super Bowl and getting to another. Both quarterbacks have very solid individual passing stats and team drive stats, but both have a losing record (Moon is 3-7 while Manning is 9-10). How can that be?

With respect to their defensive issues, field position and a lack of opportunities are two great answers for that. When you so often have games where the offense touches the ball 8-9 times, and has to go 75, 80, 85 or even 90+ yards to score touchdowns, you have to play at a very high level offensively to score a lot of points, and even the best offenses can struggle to do that in the postseason against the best competition. It has become common to see a scene like this in a Colts game as opponents try to play keep away to minimize Manning's opportunities.

Manning and Moon had the worst starting field position of these 24 quarterbacks. Aikman and Roethlisberger? Some of the best starting field position. Would the Colts and Oilers have won more games if they could get more stops on defense to get the ball back to their offense and in better field position? It would seem so, but in the cases of Steve McNair and Randall Cunningham, that would appear to be no guarantee.

I have seen people say the Colts only scored 17 points in their playoff losses in 2008 and 2009. Looking at this clears that up. The worst field position in any of the 314 games I looked at belongs to Peyton Manning'sColts in the 2008 Wild Card game at San Diego, where they had to start at the 15.67 on average. The Colts did manage to score 17 points that day. The second worst game also belongs to the Colts, and it is the big one: Super Bowl 44 last year (16.63 was their average start). They scored 17 points in that one as well.Steve Young's 16.70 game against the Packers in the 1997 NFC Championship is the third worst game, and the 49ers scored 3 points on offense that day. Touchdowns are harder to come by when the field ahead of you is so long. In the games I looked at there were 1080 drives started at least 80 yards away from the end zone, and only 182 (16.9%) ended in a touchdown.

Interesting set of numbers. Thanks for posting that! Maybe in a bigger font, though...

Overall, it's most interesting to note that Manning touches the ball fewer times than other successful QB's, which he can't control. He starts in worse field position than successful QB's - again, which he can't control. Yet he scores more points than most who have a similar lack of help. Not to mention how small his t.o.p. is/was in those games.

[DalTXColtsFan]

And your point? PM should have been great enough to carry the team on his shoulders when STs and the defense faultered in the post season? How bout this.... Name me a post season game when the defense and STs played above average (or maybe just average) and the Colts didn't win. It's a team sport. This is why PM is a better QB than Brady , even with his SB rings. Brady has a much better supporting cast. Why should that be Manning's fault?

Jemack

I was hoping to keep Manning vs. Brady out of this thread and concentrate on one question: "Is it fair to say Peyton has never shown that he can step it up in the postseason?". THAT is my point. I believe it is NOT fair and I believe I supported my point.

[tonychen]

When brady did not have the ability to step it up, he had a heck of a team and they won 3 sbs.

When brady became an elite and stepped it up the team let him down just like what we saw yesterday.

In peyton's career after 02, his team never supported him enough and it had always been on his shoulder to bring a perfect game to win.

In the only year we had a decent runnung game and the defense stepped it up, we won th sb even when peyton did not play extremely well.

We never gave peyton enough help like the giants gave eli. Peyton > eli > brady. Had we had a team even a little closer to the giants, we must be counting sb rings by now.

[Gonzo]

Tenth best career playoff passer rating in NFL history. He's been a good playoff QB.

Rank Quarterback Rating 1 Aaron Rodgers 105.5 2 Bart Starr 104.8 3 Kurt Warner 102.8 4 Drew Brees 100.4 5 Joe Montana 95.6 6 Mark Sanchez 94.3 7 Ken Anderson 93.5 8 Joe Theismann 91.4 9 Tom Brady 89.1 10 Peyton Manning 88.4 11 Troy Aikman 88.3 12 Brett Favre 86.3 13 Steve Young 85.8 14 Warren Moon 84.9 15 Rich Gannon 84.6 16 Matt Hasselbeck 84.4 17 Ken Stabler 84.2 18 Ben Roethlisberger 83.7 19 Bernie Kosar 83.5 20 Jake Delhomme 83.3 21 Terry Bradshaw 83.0 22 Jim Plunkett 81.9

EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_career_passer_rating_leaders#Postseason

Edited February 6, 2012 by Gonzo

[Case]

not really we still had to drive down field to score points to win ! yeah i believe our d was a big part but i wouldnt say they are the sole reason!

We wouldn't of won the super bowl if our d didn't play as well as they did. We would of lost to Baltimore.

[Thewholefnshow28]

The things that makes me upset about Peyton is that other than that one season where Bob Sanders and the D stepped up it's ALWAYS in all ways been on Peyton.

That is why I have always said that the best thing for Manning's legacy was this season. It finally showed what a lot of us thought and that Manning carried this team and without him it would have been a prennial loser.

This season truly put into perspective his playoff record. Yeah it is not the greatest, but when you have to carry a team when playing against routinely the cream of the crop you are not going to have a great record.

Our Super Bowl run should have been the wake up call that we needed a real defense that didn't rely on Manning to get us a lead. Yet, we kept with the typical play with the lead crap and continued to be one and done the moment Manning had a bad day.

In a sad way Peyton's career has been kind of wasted because this franchise put everything on his shoulder and went go win us multiple titles.

[seeblu]

When brady did not have the ability to step it up, he had a heck of a team and they won 3 sbs.

When brady became an elite and stepped it up the team let him down just like what we saw yesterday.

In peyton's career after 02, his team never supported him enough and it had always been on his shoulder to bring a perfect game to win.

In the only year we had a decent runnung game and the defense stepped it up, we won th sb even when peyton did not play extremely well.

We never gave peyton enough help like the giants gave eli. Peyton > eli > brady. Had we had a team even a little closer to the giants, we must be counting sb rings by now.

A decision was made by B Polian and T. Dungy, that the Colts would design a team that would get ahead in points and then force the other team to play catch up. Drafting players who were supposed to "get to the opposing QB" smaller, faster players, would be the "modus operandi". Freeney, Mathis and the DT's were to put so much pressure on the opposing QB's causing fumbles, sacks, turnovers, INT's etc.

It worked very well most of the time. But against teams like the Pats and the Bolts, it seldome worked as well as planned. The Colts were not able to run the ball well after Edge moved on. The stretch play never worked that well after Edge was gone. Colts just could not get that yard on 3 and 1, time after time. The Bolts and the Pats stopped us too often.

The Bolts and the Pats had good running games to support their QB's. Brady and Rivers had good runnings game most of the time. Look what happened to Rivers this year, when the Bolts could not run the ball. The Pats had little success running the ball against the Giants and lost the Super Bowl.

One trick ponies just won't work when "push comes to shove." To win the big games in the NFL, the team must be well balanced enough to get the job done, offensively and on defense. The Giants were not all that much better than the Pats, but were better balanced on O and D and it won them the Super Bowl. The Giants won two games against the Pats this season by a total of 6 points.

[Knuckles79]

We wouldn't of won the super bowl if our d didn't play as well as they did. We would of lost to Baltimore.

i agree but i still say TEAM effort. We had to get in fiekd goal range. And also make them

[BleedingBlue]

easy. We're a 2-14 team in a crappy division. Once Edge left we had no running game. Its easy to defend obvious pass scenerios and we had plenty of them in the playoffs especially recently.\

This team with a healthy manning doesn't guarantee beating the new built-to-beat-the-colts Texans.

[jemack]

I was hoping to keep Manning vs. Brady out of this thread and concentrate on one question: "Is it fair to say Peyton has never shown that he can step it up in the postseason?". THAT is my point. I believe it is NOT fair and I believe I supported my point.

Well the SB was about to begin and you know.... When I read "Manning failing to step up? You decide" it sounds as though you're presenting both cases. Sorry if I missunderstood. Am I right and you're wrong? You decide.

Jemack

[FanFromtheWasteland]

That is why I have always said that the best thing for Manning's legacy was this season. It finally showed what a lot of us thought and that Manning carried this team and without him it would have been a prennial loser.

This season truly put into perspective his playoff record. Yeah it is not the greatest, but when you have to carry a team when playing against routinely the cream of the crop you are not going to have a great record.

Our Super Bowl run should have been the wake up call that we needed a real defense that didn't rely on Manning to get us a lead. Yet, we kept with the typical play with the lead crap and continued to be one and done the moment Manning had a bad day.

In a sad way Peyton's career has been kind of wasted because this franchise put everything on his shoulder and went go win us multiple titles.

And it didn’t make sense to waste a roster spot on a big bad full back that could get the 1^st and goal at the 3 touchdown instead of having to kick a field goal because our running back was stuffed 3 plays in a row, but we could waste a roster spot on a perennial injured Safety and then IR him in week 14.

[CanuckColtsFan]

We wouldn't of won the super bowl if our d didn't play as well as they did. We would of lost to Baltimore.

That goal line stand was one of the most exciting moments in sports

[WSO]

Tenth best career playoff passer rating in NFL history. He's been a good playoff QB.

Rank Quarterback Rating 1 Aaron Rodgers 105.5 2 Bart Starr 104.8 3 Kurt Warner 102.8 4 Drew Brees 100.4 5 Joe Montana 95.6 6 Mark Sanchez 94.3 7 Ken Anderson 93.5 8 Joe Theismann 91.4 9 Tom Brady 89.1 10 Peyton Manning 88.4 11 Troy Aikman 88.3 12 Brett Favre 86.3 13 Steve Young 85.8 14 Warren Moon 84.9 15 Rich Gannon 84.6 16 Matt Hasselbeck 84.4 17 Ken Stabler 84.2 18 Ben Roethlisberger 83.7 19 Bernie Kosar 83.5 20 Jake Delhomme 83.3 21 Terry Bradshaw 83.0 22 Jim Plunkett 81.9

EDIT: http://en.wikipedia....ders#Postseason

Brady after the SB is now 87,8 so Manning is ranked #9

[Moose Of Woe]

Brady after the SB is now 87,8 so Manning is ranked #9

I look at that list and see Mark Sanchez and to an equally laughable extent Hasselbeck.

Mark Sanchez is better in the playoffs than Manning and Brady....and therefore more clutch/a better QB than either of them. He's a winner!

[Gonzo]

I look at that list and see Mark Sanchez and to an equally laughable extent Hasselbeck.

Mark Sanchez is better in the playoffs than Manning and Brady....and therefore more clutch/a better QB than either of them. He's a winner!

Hasselbeck has had a pretty underrated career, but definitely not a great. Sanchez is also probably an aberration, but his career is far from over. Still, for the most part it's pretty stellar company to be in. Most of that list is made up of guys that are in the hall or soon will be.

Main point is that Manning has been pretty successful in the postseason.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Tom Brady in his 3 championship years doesn't come close to being the quarterback Tom Brady has been in his last 3 playoff runs. He was on better teams then. He's a far better quarterback now, but he was on far better teams when he won his 3 titles.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Tenth best career playoff passer rating in NFL history. He's been a good playoff QB.

Rank Quarterback Rating 1 Aaron Rodgers 105.5 2 Bart Starr 104.8 3 Kurt Warner 102.8 4 Drew Brees 100.4 5 Joe Montana 95.6 6 Mark Sanchez 94.3 7 Ken Anderson 93.5 8 Joe Theismann 91.4 9 Tom Brady 89.1 10 Peyton Manning 88.4 11 Troy Aikman 88.3 12 Brett Favre 86.3 13 Steve Young 85.8 14 Warren Moon 84.9 15 Rich Gannon 84.6 16 Matt Hasselbeck 84.4 17 Ken Stabler 84.2 18 Ben Roethlisberger 83.7 19 Bernie Kosar 83.5 20 Jake Delhomme 83.3 21 Terry Bradshaw 83.0 22 Jim Plunkett 81.9

EDIT: http://en.wikipedia....ders#Postseason

Brady after the SB is now 87,8 so Manning is ranked #9

Eli is @ 89.3

So assuming everyone else is accurate, it would be

Eli 9th

Peyton 10th

Brady 11th.

[mouthofsouth]

Peyton has never been blessed with a really good defense. In the regular season the offense led by him was counted on to score enough points to win games anyway. But the playoffs move up a level. It takes a balanced team usually to be successful in the postseason.

[Warhorse]

Who is that Terry Bradshaw guy? Wasn't he the one who rode the tails of those great Steeler defenses?

[MCurtis32]

It took loosing to the Patriots several times before manning figured out how to win against them. Early on they would not involve james in the offense, he would only block. The Pats would rush 2 guys and drop back 9 into coverage. Peyton would continue trying to throw. Marvin was a non factor. They would either hold him or knock him down. I think it was Peyton's fault early on in his playcalling against the Patriots. Later it was found out why the Patriots always new what was coming from opposing offenses. They actually changed the rules on holding recievers due to the Patriots style of play. You take all this info and it landed the Patriots 3 superbowls. I take that back, Peyton did well not complaining about getting cheated out of 3 superbowls.

[Jules]

We wouldn't of won the super bowl if our d didn't play as well as they did. We would of lost to Baltimore.

Don't forget about the run game that postseason. That was a good o line and Addai/Rhodes were both money. Rhodes iced the game very well vs. Baltimore....which was a brutal run D to run on all season.

The run game was key in all 4 of those playoff wins.

I don't care how good your QB is. You need to run the ball some too.

This year the Giants were a last ranked rushing offense but stepped it up there considerably come playoff time.

[chad72]

It took loosing to the Patriots several times before manning figured out how to win against them. Early on they would not involve james in the offense, he would only block. The Pats would rush 2 guys and drop back 9 into coverage. Peyton would continue trying to throw. Marvin was a non factor. They would either hold him or knock him down. I think it was Peyton's fault early on in his playcalling against the Patriots. Later it was found out why the Patriots always new what was coming from opposing offenses. They actually changed the rules on holding recievers due to the Patriots style of play. You take all this info and it landed the Patriots 3 superbowls. I take that back, Peyton did well not complaining about getting cheated out of 3 superbowls.

I also think a lot of the Pats' defensive success had to do with Romeo Crennel. Look at Crennel and how well he limited Peyton even when he was on the Browns (we relied on a Mathis fumble recovery TD to win at the Browns in 2008). That guy flat out knows how to play pass oriented QBs. Then, we remember the Chiefs game where Mike Hart won with a game winning TD at home 19-12, no TDs for Peyton in 2009, our SB losing year. Then came the Packers with their high flying passing offense. The one difference was Aaron Rodgers was a mobile QB which accounted for 1 of the 2 Packers TDs but the Packers' streak was spoilt by this DC who has known how to play pass happy QBs for the longest time. Peyton's numbers starting 2005 vs the Pats took off, why do you think was the reason? No Romeo Crennel, hands down, was the singular factor. Glad the Pats let him go.

The Packers were almost like the 2005 Colts, 13-0, streak spoilt by an AFC West team, had the son of a key co-ordinator die before the playoffs, came out rusty and were one and done in the playoffs. Does that mean they win it all next year if they get their D straightened out? We will see.

We never generated great field position for Peyton with turnovers and on ST, made it worse for him in the playoffs. That accounted for several losses. Not to mention - if you just add up the rushing yards and time of possession stats for the opponent, I would be shocked if our opponents did not average 125 plus yards against our D. We bent and broke vs good elite Ds. Even turnovers, when they came vs the Chargers in the 2008 were both in the end zone with Bethea's INT, and Brackett's fumble recovery touchback, if I remember right.

2003 - Peyton never made adjustments in the AFCCG, the Pats were daring us to run and we did not (Peyton terrible play)

2004 - Conservative playcalling, because of what happened in 2003 (Peyton above average play, nothing special)

2005 - Rust for the entire team, spotting an 0-14 deficit against a playoff team, not going to win many of those (Peyton above average play due to the rusty start)

2006 - In rhythm, healthy and D and running game all came together (Peyton great at game management, good solid play as QB except for one great spectacular half)

2007 - Bad red zone offense, could not run the ball well vs Merriman & Philips, terrible pass rush vs Volek, and bad run D vs Turner & Sproles (Peyton very good QB play except in red zone)

2008 - Robo Punter and Sproles, enough said (Peyton good solid play but just not good enough, could have done more with 3 possessions with 17-14 lead and did not)

2009 - Favorable matchups in the playoffs vs Ravens and Jets, played just 1 good passing team that we beat 35-34 (Pats) thanks to the 4th & 2, the next good one, we lost. Chances are, if we had to play the Chargers we would have lost (Peyton very good play throughout the playoffs, better than the SB winning year, IMO)

2010 - Jet's rush O (thanks to our rush D) and our ST play (Peyton very good play, enough to win it if we held up in the other 2 phases)

Out of the 19 games Peyton played and 10 losses, the only 4 games I will give him a pass are the 2 Chargers games, the Saints game, and the Jets' last playoff loss. His QB play in the playoffs actually improved starting 2006 for me.