Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Jacksonville (+7.5) at New England (1-21-18)


Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, bluebombers87 said:

No joke I saw them the other day at Kroger! Was almost tempted to get them.

According to Wikipedia, they reintroduced Zima last July.  I bought a sixpack when it first came out.  Had my fill with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

12 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

To make them mad, just say 3-1 Peyton in Title Games. That will get them going or say Peyton has 5 MVP's to Tom's 2 lmao. They will just say Rings at that point.

Lol I'm convinced that's why Brady is sticking around. Catch mvps and records. I wear my colts gear with pride. But I wanna throw up whenever I see a pats logo. Especially tonight. This isn't healthy

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bluebombers87 said:

All have their strengths and weakness in terms of argument. 

 

Montana never lost lost a SB and was lights out. But he had Rice for a good part.

 

Brady has 5 rings. But Pats without him are 14-6.

 

Manning has just about all the records but only 2 rings. And one of those he was along for the ride.

 

At the end of the day, it’s gonna have more to do with the laundry you wear than any real objectivism. But the REAL answer is Manning.

Manning won with 2 different teams so he does have that. That is huge and something people overlook. No other QB has ever done that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chrisaaron1023 said:

Lol I'm convinced that's why Brady is sticking around. Catch mvps and records. I wear my colts gear with pride. But I wanna throw up whenever I see a pats logo. Especially tonight. This isn't healthy

He wont catch Peyton in MVP's, it's 5-2 but he may beat his TD's and Yards.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Manning won with 2 different teams so he does have that. That is huge and something people overlook. No other QB has ever done that.

Right and I’m sure Brady has other things other than rings for his argument as well.... none come to mind but nonetheless I’m sure they’re there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Roger said:

Manning was not the reason why Denver won SB 50.  He stunk it up.  Denver's defense was overwhelming.

Who cares he still won and is the only QB to win with 2 different teams. Ben stunk against Seattle and Tom stunk against the Rams but nobody cares, they won that is all that matters in the record books.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, bluebombers87 said:

All have their strengths and weakness in terms of argument. 

 

Montana never lost lost a SB and was lights out. But he had Rice for a good part.

 

Brady has 5 rings. But Pats without him are 14-6.

 

Manning has just about all the records but only 2 rings. And one of those he was along for the ride.

 

At the end of the day, it’s gonna have more to do with the laundry you wear than any real objectivism. But the REAL answer is Manning.

Montana was not better than Brady yes he’s undefeated and that’s also a dif era where you could maintain a super team due to the no cap casualties.  Manning is the closest person you can say is better than Brady based on his MVP awards and bowl wins  these two are the only ones you can debate about for the best qb ever Manning was the first to memorize how defenses functioned in all aspects Brady soon followed in his steps with that.. Brady benefited from having a better team as well but in the crunch time situations there’s no picking manning over Brady and I love manning hardcore I can’t blame manning for some of his clutch failures but you have to recognize that Brady nearly always come through in the most crucial times to lead his team to wins even in his Super Bowl losses He Put his team up in a clutch moment just to have his defense ruin his moment with little to no time left to come back

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, bluebombers87 said:

All have their strengths and weakness in terms of argument. 

 

Montana never lost lost a SB and was lights out. But he had Rice for a good part.

 

Brady has 5 rings. But Pats without him are 14-6.

 

Manning has just about all the records but only 2 rings. And one of those he was along for the ride.

 

At the end of the day, it’s gonna have more to do with the laundry you wear than any real objectivism. But the REAL answer is Manning.

Montana was not better than Brady yes he’s undefeated and that’s also a dif era where you could maintain a super team due to the no cap casualties.  Manning is the closest person you can say is better than Brady based on his MVP awards and bowl wins  these two are the only ones you can debate about for the best qb ever Manning was the first to memorize how defenses functioned in all aspects Brady soon followed in his steps with that.. Brady benefited from having a better team as well but in the crunch time situations there’s no picking manning over Brady and I love manning hardcore I can’t blame manning for some of his clutch failures but you have to recognize that Brady nearly always come through in the most crucial times to lead his team to wins even in his Super Bowl losses He Put his team up in a clutch moment just to have his defense ruin his moment with little to no time left to come back

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, bluebombers87 said:

All have their strengths and weakness in terms of argument. 

 

Montana never lost lost a SB and was lights out. But he had Rice for a good part.

 

Brady has 5 rings. But Pats without him are 14-6.

 

Manning has just about all the records but only 2 rings. And one of those he was along for the ride.

 

At the end of the day, it’s gonna have more to do with the laundry you wear than any real objectivism. But the REAL answer is Manning.

Montana was not better than Brady yes he’s undefeated and that’s also a dif era where you could maintain a super team due to the no cap casualties.  Manning is the closest person you can say is better than Brady based on his MVP awards and bowl wins  these two are the only ones you can debate about for the best qb ever Manning was the first to memorize how defenses functioned in all aspects Brady soon followed in his steps with that.. Brady benefited from having a better team as well but in the crunch time situations there’s no picking manning over Brady and I love manning hardcore I can’t blame manning for some of his clutch failures but you have to recognize that Brady nearly always come through in the most crucial times to lead his team to wins even in his Super Bowl losses He Put his team up in a clutch moment just to have his defense ruin his moment with little to no time left to come back

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bluebombers87 said:

While I agree that D was the reason they won, he did manage the game. Still had to score SOME points.

Read the article I linked above.  Defense set up both touchdowns. Manning did nothing good.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, aaron11 said:

a win is a win

 

brady didnt carry his team to those early super bowls either

I know, Ben was awful against Seattle and nobody ever brings that up. Brady had 133 yards passing vs the Rams and was bad, like I said who cares as long as your team wins that means your QB didn't screw it up. Manning had to carry his teams his whole career, then the 1 time he his D carries him, nobody wants to give him credit. He actually played Good vs NE to get there so that needs to be factored in.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, will426 said:

Montana was not better than Brady yes he’s undefeated and that’s also a dif era where you could maintain a super team due to the no cap casualties.  Manning is the closest person you can say is better than Brady based on his MVP awards and bowl wins  these two are the only ones you can debate about for the best qb ever Manning was the first to memorize how defenses functioned in all aspects Brady soon followed in his steps with that.. Brady benefited from having a better team as well but in the crunch time situations there’s no picking manning over Brady and I love manning hardcore I can’t blame manning for some of his clutch failures but you have to recognize that Brady nearly always come through in the most crucial times to lead his team to wins even in his Super Bowl losses He Put his team up in a clutch moment just to have his defense ruin his moment with little to no time left to come back

Manning has more fourth quarter comeback wins. Sorry but I’d go with Manning with the game on the line.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

 He actually played Good vs NE to get there so that needs to be factored in.

thats what i was getting at.  he was nothing special in the super bowl, but he had a good game against the patriots to get there  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, will426 said:

Montana was not better than Brady yes he’s undefeated and that’s also a dif era where you could maintain a super team due to the no cap casualties.  Manning is the closest person you can say is better than Brady based on his MVP awards and bowl wins  these two are the only ones you can debate about for the best qb ever Manning was the first to memorize how defenses functioned in all aspects Brady soon followed in his steps with that.. Brady benefited from having a better team as well but in the crunch time situations there’s no picking manning over Brady and I love manning hardcore I can’t blame manning for some of his clutch failures but you have to recognize that Brady nearly always come through in the most crucial times to lead his team to wins even in his Super Bowl losses He Put his team up in a clutch moment just to have his defense ruin his moment with little to no time left to come back

Also, it was much harder for a QB in those days. Players got away with near muggings against offensive players.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bluebombers87 said:

Manning has more fourth quarter comeback wins. Sorry but I’d go with Manning with the game on the line.

A lot of people will bring up his INT against the Saints to why he isn't clutch but Brady had one against us in the AFC Title Game that was just as bad IMO. Manning has been clutch a lot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, aaron11 said:

thats what i was getting at.  he was nothing special in the super bowl, but he had a good game against the patriots to get there  

"Nothing special?" One pick to a defensive end, one lost fumble, and a passer rating of 56.6. Sounds pretty special to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Roger said:

"Nothing special?" One pick to a defensive end, one lost fumble, and a passer rating of 56.6. Sounds pretty special to me.

its the patriots games that matter most

 

same was true when we won in 2006 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Roger said:

"Nothing special?" One pick to a defensive end, one lost fumble, and a passer rating of 56.6. Sounds pretty special to me.

They don't get by NE without Peyton so yes he was special. It's about time his Defense helped him, the guy was the whole team his whole career until his last year in Denver.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, will426 said:

Didn’t say he didn’t you still have to credit Brady as you would credit manning.

i do credit brady and the patriots

 

if not for the manning brothers they would have 10 super bowl wins 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, bluebombers87 said:

Manning has more fourth quarter comeback wins. Sorry but I’d go with Manning with the game on the line.

You’re right and how many of those games contributed to winning playoff games or making it to the bowl or in fact winning the bowl.  Not to discredit manning Brady does it when it matters on a bigger stage as much as I hate to say it 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, bluebombers87 said:

Also, it was much harder for a QB in those days. Players got away with near muggings against offensive players.

You’re right but you have a super team either way  what have the Niners done since the cap got introduced nada 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, aaron11 said:

its the patriots games that matter most

 

same was true when we won in 2006 

Yep! That is what none of these Manning haters will admit too. They say he beat Rex Grossman in the SB to poo poo our win. They are so dense to realize he beat the Ravens Defense with Ray and Ed and beat Tom Brady before that SB. Why not include that? They wont because they focus on the SB only. Just like Peyton played Good vs the Steelers and Pats before the SB in 2015, lets not mention that lmao 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

They don't get by NE without Peyton so yes he was special. It's about time his Defense helped him, the guy was the whole team his whole career until his last year in Denver.

His last two years in Denver.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Roger said:

Manning was not the reason why Denver won SB 50.  He stunk it up.  Denver's defense was overwhelming.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/02/peyton-manning-worst-super-bowl-50-quarterback-ever

 And just imagine what would have been possible with a defense like that his entire career. If he can play just well enough to help win it and win, just...wow. Manning would probably have 10 rings or something.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IcyRhythms said:

 And just imagine what would have been possible with a defense like that his entire career. If he can play just well enough to help win it and win, just...wow. Manning would probably have 10 rings or something.

I hope he runs for Senator.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, will426 said:

You’re right and how many of those games contributed to winning playoff games or making it to the bowl or in fact winning the bowl.  Not to discredit manning Brady does it when it matters on a bigger stage as much as I hate to say it 

They virtually all contributed to winning playoff games. Can’t make the playoffs without winning regular season.

 

Manning couldn’t fall back on his defense or his genius coach like Brady could/did. Brady might read defenses but Manning was the O coordinator. He ran the show. McDaniels and Weiss get a lot of credit in NE. I’m not trying to knock Brady but when it comes to football IQ Manning takes the cake.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Yeah I am ok with it, it was probably time for Kyle to explore other avenues. He helped us win a WS so it is all good.
    • I will be wearing the blue TY Hilton jersey that I have.  I have 88, 18, 12, 13, 87 jerseys. I need 56, 53, 98, and 99.
    • That sucks I really liked Len, enjoyed his play by play for years. 
    • Do you think Bill Belichick has cornered the market on ideas?   Do you think he does not make mistakes?   BB made Dont’a Hightower one of the NFL ‘s highest paid players.  So, poof,  there goes your Leonard argument.  When players perform at a premium level you pay them what they’re worth.   Period.   You’re badly over-thinking this.   There is no perfect formula to a championship.   You think Ballard is not aware that when he pays a guard premium money that means he’ll be paying other positions less than premium.   He 100 percent knows that.     It’s always, Always, ALWAYS better to have too much talent than not enough.  Dallas has paid a fortune into its OL for years.   Smith, Martin, used to have Frederick at Center.  Used to have a good guard who left in FA, and then Collins who is now getting paid.   3 of their 5 getting top money and it used to be 4 before Frederick had to retire early.   They had a top 3 OL for years.   They figured out the rest of the roster.     They’re paying big money while a good number of younger players are on their cheaper rookie contracts.   That’s life for GM’s in the NFL.  Too much talent is always a good thing.    You never take a lesser player who plays a premium position over a much better player at a so-called non-premium position.   Never.   Do you think it’s a coincidence that the play of the Colts OL dramatically improved when Nelson joined the team?   Come on....   Sorry, but your logic is twisted beyond all recognition.     
    • Dang, four playoff spots up got grabs between six teams.  
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...