Will Mahomes be viewed as a better all time QB than Peyton if he wins this years SuperBowl?

[Solid84]

39 minutes ago, IinD said:

I just thought this was funny.

I bet it's a general thing with fewer holding penalties in the SB. It's a conscious decision by the refs to not influence the game too much in the Super Bowl.

 

We talked about it in the game day threat for the Super Bowl.

 

I don't like it though. Which would you rather: Have a non-call affect the outcome of the game or an actual holding being called and affecting the outcome?

[IinD]

7 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

I bet it's a general thing with fewer holding penalties in the SB. It's a conscious decision by the refs to not influence the game too much in the Super Bowl.

 

We talked about it in the game day threat for the Super Bowl.

 

I don't like it though. Which would you rather: Have a non-call affect the outcome of the game or an actual holding being called and affecting the outcome?

Definitely frustrating in general. You could clearly see KC is being officiated like the old Pats teams where Freeney and Mathis all of a sudden became useless against them. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

58 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

Montana is my number 1 because of the era he played in... and the Patriot's cheating... I'm not ever going to let that go.

Great choice. You can't go wrong with Montana at all, or Brady, Peyton, Mahomes, or even Elway. If Rodgers can get that 2nd ring he would even be in this conversation because of his League MVPs and TD to INT ratio which is incredible. 

[JediXMan]

2 hours ago, IinD said:

I just thought this was funny.

They can call holding calls on every play and the games would be 5 hours long but that’s a ridiculous stat lol.

[2006Coltsbestever]

17 minutes ago, JediXMan said:

They can call holding calls on every play and the games would be 5 hours long but that’s a ridiculous stat lol.

REFS call it when they want and they let it go when they want. Problem is, nothing anyone can do about it because holding goes on all the time. Stink I have is, is when one team gets called a lot more for it.

[Yoshinator]

51 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

REFS call it when they want and they let it go when they want. Problem is, nothing anyone can do about it because holding goes on all the time. Stink I have is, is when one team gets called a lot more for it.

The refs are in the same position as a poker player when they bluff to try and win a hand. If they call too many penalties, people will catch on. They can literally call a flag every play if they choose, but they won't. They pick their spots, just like a poker player does when they bluff.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, Yoshinator said:

The refs are in the same position as a poker player when they bluff to try and win a hand. If they call too many penalties, people will catch on. They can literally call a flag every play if they choose, but they won't. They pick their spots, just like a poker player does when they bluff.

Yep, that is why many think games are altered. I have seen some games where they call almost nothing all game, then at the end they will call a penalty on a team that has devastating consequences to why a team loses. Many people ignore it because when they look at the box score at the end of a game, they will say look 'Team A' had 4 penalties, 'Team B' had 4 penalties - it was even, REFS were great. Problem with that is, what if 'Team B' gets called for a cheap penalty at the end of the game that sets up a game winning score for 'Team A'. - It happens a lot.

[chad72]

2 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

REFS call it when they want and they let it go when they want. Problem is, nothing anyone can do about it because holding goes on all the time. Stink I have is, is when one team gets called a lot more for it.

 

I will give you another lop sided stat but that is not on the refs, it is on the players.

 

Eagles have played 3 SBs and have ZERO sacks in all of them.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

4 hours ago, Solid84 said:

Montana is my number 1 because of the era he played in... and the Patriot's cheating... I'm not ever going to let that go.

 

Well said.

People seem these days to throw morality out the door when it comes to football. 

But I say if Brady and Belichekh/Patriots are talked in such High Esteem and best ever, why shouldn't Barry Bonds, Mark Mcguire, Lance Armstrong, Shoeless Joe Jackson, Sammy Sosa etc.... ????

[shasta519]

12 hours ago, Tsarquise said:

Funny enough, the Chargers three losses that year came from the Chiefs, Ravens and Patriots. Colts path to the Superbowl. 

 

By 3 pts each too. I was stoked that NE beat SD. For some reason SD had Manning's number in that back half of 2000s.

[PRnum1]

Imho, the answer is yes.  But you are really comparing apples to oranges.

 

Manning came out in the ERA when the prototypical QB was 240, 6'5 and stood in the pocket and launched the ball downfield with great accuracy.  Rivers, Drew Bledsoe, Joe Flacco, etc were in that same QB mold.

 

Those QB's above had very little mobility.  Yes there were mobile QB's at that time but they did not have much success.  Accuracy in throwing the ball was a problem.  Probably the most successful mobile QB in that era was Randall Cunningham.

 

Fast forward to 2016, a new evolution of QB came out.  Slim tall mobile QB's with rocket arms.

 

Mahommes, Josh Allen, Herbert, Burrow, Lamar Jackson, etc.  These QB's all had the mobility factor and they were accurate.

 

Mahommes has this extra mobility element in his arsenal in that when the play is not there he can take off for a 20 yard run.  Neither Manning or Rivers ever had that.

 

So I would say Manning was a great QB for his era and Mahommes is a better QB for his era.  But the comparison is difficult because they are so different.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

1 minute ago, shasta519 said:

 

By 3 pts each too. I was stoked that NE beat SD. For some reason SD had Manning's number in that back half of 2000s.

 

They sure did. 

I remember them beating us in a playoff game without Phillip Rivers AND Ladainian Thomas. A backup qb, Billy Volek, outplayed our vaunted offense. 

[chad72]

3 hours ago, JediXMan said:

They can call holding calls on every play and the games would be 5 hours long but that’s a ridiculous stat lol.

 

If you just do overall penalties in the 3 Chiefs SBs, this is how it stacks up

 

2019 SB: 49ers 5 penalties - 45 yards  VS  Chiefs 4-24

2022 SB: Eagles 6-33  VS Chiefs  3-14

2023 SB: 49ers 6-40   VS Chiefs 6-55 - this SB I thought was a well called SB, it seemed more even to me than previous ones

 

Seahawks vs Patriots SB - Seahawks 7-70, Patriots 5-36

Falcons vs Patriots SB - Falcons 9-65, Patriots 4-23

Rams vs Patriots SB - Rams 9-65, Patriots 3-20

 

Maybe Andy Reid does do things like Belichick and they obsess over the penalties and know the refs tendencies etc. Here is a good non-conspiracy explanation of why Patriots had less penalties:

 

https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2018/2/1/16958718/super-bowl-new-england-patriots-bill-belichick-rules-penalties-study

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

10 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Well said.

People seem these days to throw morality out the door when it comes to football. 

But I say if Brady and Belichekh/Patriots are talked in such High Esteem and best ever, why shouldn't Barry Bonds, Mark Mcguire, Lance Armstrong, Shoeless Joe Jackson, Sammy Sosa etc.... ????

Barry Bonds not being in the Hall of Fame is a joke, he was never even found guilty of anything. Pete Rose should be in as well, look at gambling now 

[2006Coltsbestever]

10 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

By 3 pts each too. I was stoked that NE beat SD. For some reason SD had Manning's number in that back half of 2000s.

I wasn't really scared of the Chargers, but I was happy we drew the Pats because I wanted Peyton to beat Tom Brady more than anything.

[2006Coltsbestever]

7 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

If you just do overall penalties in the 3 Chiefs SBs, this is how it stacks up

 

2019 SB: 49ers 5 penalties - 45 yards  VS  Chiefs 4-24

2022 SB: Eagles 6-33  VS Chiefs  3-14

2023 SB: 49ers 6-40   VS Chiefs 6-55 - this SB I thought was a well called SB, it seemed more even to me than previous ones

 

 

Falcons vs Patriots SB - Falcons 9-65, Patriots 4-23

I will say this, I thought this year's SB was well called. 49ers didn't get screwed, they just made a lot of mistakes that beat themselves. So that isn't the REFS fault this time.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Barry Bonds not being in the Hall of Fame is a joke, he was never even found guilty of anything. Pete Rose should be in as well, look at gambling now 

 

in the MLB, I always say Babe Ruth as the greatest because of his Dominant numbers compared to others in his day....plus I'm a Yankee fan and lets face it, as great as his numbers were, his persona was greater than his numbers..

I don't think you can compare players from different era's BUT like Belichek said about Bert Jones when asked who's the greatest QB he's ever seen "Bert is tough to beat". 

The same is true imo about Bonds, he's tough to beat.

[2006Coltsbestever]

16 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

They sure did. 

I remember them beating us in a playoff game without Phillip Rivers AND Ladainian Thomas. A backup qb, Billy Volek, outplayed our vaunted offense. 

I remember watching Bill Volek marching up and down the field. I was ready to break my TV in half 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

11 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I wasn't really scared of the Chargers, but I was happy we drew the Pats because I wanted Peyton to beat Tom Brady more than anything.

 

I liked that the the colts got to play the AFCCG at home.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I remember watching Bill Volek marching up and down the field. I was ready to break my TV in half 

 

I can't tell you how much of my colts caps and shirts bit the dust because of the Chargers. Lol

[2006Coltsbestever]

4 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

in the MLB, I always say Babe Ruth as the greatest because of his Dominant numbers compared to others in his day....plus I'm a Yankee fan and lets face it, as great as his numbers were, his persona was greater than his numbers..

I don't think you can compare players from different era's BUT like Belichek said about Bert Jones when asked who's the greatest QB he's ever seen "Bert is tough to beat". 

The same is true imo about Bonds, he's tough to beat.

Baseball is different and tough to rank who the greatest player ever was or greatest team ever because of Segregation. African American's weren't allowed to play until 1947. So, do you by since 1947 or include everything before that as well? 

 

If you include everything, it would be hard to argue that the 1927 Yankees weren't the greatest team ever and Babe Ruth isn't the GOAT. If you go by since 1947 and because athletes are even much bigger, quicker, and stronger now, I will say the 1998 Yankees are the best team I have ever seen but Willie Mays was the best all-around Baseball player that I have seen. Mays played into the 1970's and was still great. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

That is a question a lot of people wonder about. Would our 2006 team been able to go into San Diego and win the AFC Championship?

 

I think so because it was just our year after all the battles, we went through vs the Pats and Steelers from 2003-2005 and coming up short. We were mentally strong that season and our Defense was playing with a chip on their shoulder. Peyton knew his legacy was on the line that season = as in, he either is going to be the next Dan Marino and a choke or become a Champion. 

[chad72]

29 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I remember watching Bill Volek marching up and down the field. I was ready to break my TV in half 

 

I do think that Bill Polian should have gotten Dungy to hire a different DC instead of Ron Meeks, there are lots of teams that play the 4-3 and bring the heat to get timely stops. It was always a slow bleeding death and it was punctuated by a backup having his way against us in that game, very agonizing to watch.

[throwing BBZ]

Mahomes playoffs

15-3

41 TD's  8 int

68%

Manning

14-13

40 TD's  25 int

63%

7 times went to playoffs with No wins.

 Game over.

[jvan1973]

3 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

Mahomes playoffs

15-3

41 TD's  8 int

68%

Manning

14-13

40 TD's  25 int

63%

7 times went to playoffs with No wins.

 Game over.

Odd, I thought football was a team sport.  How many times did Mahomes face Tom Brady?  How did he do?  

[chad72]

3 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

Odd, I thought football was a team sport.  How many times did Mahomes face Tom Brady?  How did he do?  

 

I see what you are saying. Peyton walked into a far more difficult situation as a No.1 pick instead of a playoff team like Mahomes walked into that he took to the next level with Andy Reid. I am here only providing numbers.

 

But to be fair, let us compare apples to apples if there is a small sample set. If Mahomes has played only 2 games in the playoffs vs Brady, you have to stop at 2 games. Same thing in the regular season. Let us see what the numbers say:

 

1. Playoffs - First 2 games: Peyton was 0-2 vs Brady his first 2 playoff games, just like Mahomes. Then Peyton got to 3-0 the next 3 playoff games to finish 3-2. Mahomes will never have a chance for anything more than 2 playoff games since Tom is retired.

 

2. First 6 games including regular season: Mahomes is 3-1 vs Brady in the regular season in 4 games and 0-2 in the playoffs for an overall 3-3 in the first 6 games vs Tom Brady. So, if you take the first 6 games, Peyton was 0-6 vs Tom Brady, 0-4 in the regular season and 0-2 in the playoffs.

 

Again, their records are reflections of their teams. But unfortunately, too much credit and too much blame is given to QBs, there in lies the true problem, IMO.