Eli Manning HOF Now?

[Qwiz]

Boldin is not an elite receiver. Not even close. Fitzgerald and Holt I understand, but you can't fault the quarterback for having weapons. Heck, Eli Manning has Cruz, had Manningham, Shockey, Steve Smith...Peyton Manning, like Gavin mentioned, had Clark, Wayne, Harrison, Edgerrin for starters...If you're going to look at the picture one way, you have to look at it the same for other players too.

[IndyTrav]

Boldin is not an elite receiver. Not even close. Fitzgerald and Holt I understand, but you can't fault the quarterback for having weapons. Heck, Eli Manning has Cruz, had Manningham, Shockey, Steve Smith...Peyton Manning, like Gavin mentioned, had Clark, Wayne, Harrison, Edgerrin for starters...If you're going to look at the picture one way, you have to look at it the same for other players too.

Yes he was. He managed 101rec 1300yds his rookie year.

Wayne/Harrison etc all did it only with Manning. Those other players all did it without Warner.

Manning 98-2011 Greatness

Warner 98 DNP 99 Greatness 00 injured 01 Greatness. 02-07 DNP/Injured 08-09 Good.

4 years in his entire career where he made a serious impact.

Manningham/Steve Smith?! Shockley?! If anything Eli has done it with less talent around him than other QBs.

[Qwiz]

Yes he was. He managed 101rec 1300yds his rookie year.

Wayne/Harrison etc all did it only with Manning. Those other players all did it without Warner.

Manning 98-2011 Greatness

Warner 98 DNP 99 Greatness 00 injured 01 Greatness. 02-07 DNP/Injured 08-09 Good.

4 years in his entire career where he made a serious impact.

Manningham/Steve Smith?! Shockley?! If anything Eli has done it with less talent around him than other QBs.

Boldin also had 101 receptions his rookie year, the second-most in a single year he's ever had. In recent seasons, however, he has consistently been decreasing in receptions, with 89, 84, 64, and 57 respectively. He has also decreased in touchdowns since 2008, with the exception of 2010, and that year he only had 7. He's not even the number one in Baltimore. Wayne put up respectable numbers (including 960 yards, much more than Boldin) last season with the QB carousel that was the Colts season. The only quarterback Wayne ever played with was Manning, while Harrison put up 800+ yard seasons before Manning was put at the helm. I wouldn't exactly call 98 and 2011 Manning greatness, since he set a rookie record for interceptions in the former and did not play the latter. Eli has had plenty of weapons, including a monster defense behind him, ala Joe Flacco and Roethlisberger.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Yes he was. He managed 101rec 1300yds his rookie year.

Wayne/Harrison etc all did it only with Manning. Those other players all did it without Warner.

Manning 98-2011 Greatness

Warner 98 DNP 99 Greatness 00 injured 01 Greatness. 02-07 DNP/Injured 08-09 Good.

4 years in his entire career where he made a serious impact.

Manningham/Steve Smith?! Shockley?! If anything Eli has done it with less talent around him than other QBs.

Warner's NFL career actually started in 94 when he was in the Packers camp and cut during training camp. Then it's off to the NFL Europe & the Arena League, but his clock started ticking in 94..

[Gavin]

Yes he was. He managed 101rec 1300yds his rookie year.

Wayne/Harrison etc all did it only with Manning. Those other players all did it without Warner.

Manning 98-2011 Greatness

Warner 98 DNP 99 Greatness 00 injured 01 Greatness. 02-07 DNP/Injured 08-09 Good.

4 years in his entire career where he made a serious impact.

Manningham/Steve Smith?! Shockley?! If anything Eli has done it with less talent around him than other QBs.

So in other words this was just a experiment to compare Peyton to Kurt to build Peyton up nevermind that Kurt TOOK Fitzgerald and the Cardinals to the Super Bowl as well as Holt, Faulk and Bruce, something none of those players have ever been to before Kurt, Take Kurt away and Holt dont have those huge numbers let alone get to the Super Bowl, Both Holt and Bruces production dropped of there last couple years the minute they went to San Fran and Jacksonville

[IndyTrav]

Boldin also had 101 receptions his rookie year, the second-most in a single year he's ever had. In recent seasons, however, he has consistently been decreasing in receptions, with 89, 84, 64, and 57 respectively. He has also decreased in touchdowns since 2008, with the exception of 2010, and that year he only had 7. He's not even the number one in Baltimore. Wayne put up respectable numbers (including 960 yards, much more than Boldin) last season with the QB carousel that was the Colts season. The only quarterback Wayne ever played with was Manning, while Harrison put up 800+ yard seasons before Manning was put at the helm. I wouldn't exactly call 98 and 2011 Manning greatness, since he set a rookie record for interceptions in the former and did not play the latter. Eli has had plenty of weapons, including a monster defense behind him, ala Joe Flacco and Roethlisberger.

Of course Boldin is decreasing. The guy was arguably the most physical WR in the NFL for years. It's caught up to him. The man had his face broken and refused painkillers and was on the field in 2 weeks. That's the type of player he is.

Marvin and Reggie had 800 and 900? Fitz and Holt have had over 1400. Bruce had a 1700. All of them went over 1200 multiple times without Warner. I cannot believe its even an argument to think that Warner was blessed with arguably the greatest WR tandems of all time on two different teams.

Peyton set the rookie Int mark? He also set nearly every other rookie passing mark, yet you left that out.

[FireJimCaldwell]

So in other words this was just a experiment to compare Peyton to Kurt to build Peyton up nevermind that Kurt TOOK Fitzgerald and the Cardinals to the Super Bowl as well as Holt, Faulk and Bruce, something none of those players have ever been to before Kurt, Take Kurt away and Holt dont have those huge numbers let alone get to the Super Bowl, Both Holt and Bruces production dropped of there last couple years the minute they went to San Fran and Jacksonville

Green & Bulger both produced #'s in St. Louis, so to say that Holt wouldn't have huge #'s is 100% inaccurate.

Holt in fact had better #'s without Warner than he did with Warner.

The fact that Bulger, an average at best QB beat out Warner doesn't say much for Warner himself. It also shows that an average QB can produce #'s in the Martz system.

Again, if Trent Green doesn't blow out his knee the world likely never hears the story of Kurt Warner.

It is a bit comical to see someone try to compare Peyton & Warner, or to belittle Manning int he process.

[Qwiz]

Of course Boldin is decreasing. The guy was arguably the most physical WR in the NFL for years. It's caught up to him. The man had his face broken and refused painkillers and was on the field in 2 weeks. That's the type of player he is.

Marvin and Reggie had 800 and 900? Fitz and Holt have had over 1400. Bruce had a 1700. All of them went over 1200 multiple times without Warner. I cannot believe its even an argument to think that Warner was blessed with arguably the greatest WR tandems of all time on two different teams.

Peyton set the rookie Int mark? He also set nearly every other rookie passing mark, yet you left that out.

Only because Newton has since broken all of them. Manning's interception record, however, withstands. And Fitzgerald isn't physical? Fitzgerald hasn't been double and triple teamed every game since he first got into the league? Andre Johnson, Calvin Johnson are incredibly physical receivers as well, and I don't see them declining at any time in the next five years. Say what you will, but Reggie Wayne is a very capable receiver without Manning, as was Marvin. Pair them with Orlovsky, Flynn, or any decent #2 quarterback in the NFL and they will put up numbers.

[IndyTrav]

So in other words this was just a experiment to compare Peyton to Kurt to build Peyton up nevermind that Kurt TOOK Fitzgerald and the Cardinals to the Super Bowl as well as Holt, Faulk and Bruce, something none of those players have ever been to before Kurt, Take Kurt away and Holt dont have those huge numbers let alone get to the Super Bowl, Both Holt and Bruces production dropped of there last couple years the minute they went to San Fran and Jacksonville

It had nothing to do with Peyton, until posters decided to say, "well Peyton had weapons too", to which the reply is those WR have never had to play without Peyton, where as Warners WR have put up superior #'s both before and after Warner...

Bruce and Holts #'s dropped? Between 02-03 Warner started 7 (6-1) games...Lost all 7....Holt had 208rec, 2998yds, 16Tds.....And this is attributed to Warner how?

Holt after Warner left town-94/1300/10...102/1300/9...93/1200/10....93/1200/7......And yet Warner somehow "made" him?!

Isaac Bruce had seasons of 119/1700/13...84/1300/7...79/1100/7....89/1300/6....74/1100/3.....And yet Warner some how "made" him?!

Fitz? He's had 90/1100/6..80/1400/8 without Warner, and with arguably the worst QB situation in the NFL....

Warner record? 13-3...8-3...14-2...0-6...0-1...5-4...2-8....1-4....5-6.....9-7...10-5.....3 of his 12 years he played all 16 games.....He had 4 years where he didnt even make it into double digits of appearences......He couldn't keep a roster spot on the team he 'took to the Super Bowl' as you put it, he couldn't keep a roster spot in NY, and it took him 3 years to earn a roster spot in Arizona.....

[Qwiz]

Green & Bulger both produced #'s in St. Louis, so to say that Holt wouldn't have huge #'s is 100% inaccurate.

Holt in fact had better #'s without Warner than he did with Warner.

The fact that Bulger, an average at best QB beat out Warner doesn't say much for Warner himself. It also shows that an average QB can produce #'s in the Martz system.

Again, if Trent Green doesn't blow out his knee the world likely never hears the story of Kurt Warner.

It is a bit comical to see someone try to compare Peyton & Warner, or to belittle Manning int he process.

Bulger replaced Warner due to poor ball handling on Warner's part, excelled, and snagged the starting job, similar to Brady taking over from Bledsoe. Bulger has not won a Super Bowl, nor been to one; Kurt Warner has appeared in 3, won one, and led a decrepit team to the promised land for the first time in franchise history. It's equally comical to see someone tear down one quarterback only to make Peyton Manning look greater. The guy doesn't belch rainbows. They are both Hall of Famers, no questions asked.

[supremecoltsfan300]

Only because Newton has since broken all of them. Manning's interception record, however, withstands. And Fitzgerald isn't physical? Fitzgerald hasn't been double and triple teamed every game since he first got into the league? Andre Johnson, Calvin Johnson are incredibly physical receivers as well, and I don't see them declining at any time in the next five years. Say what you will, but Reggie Wayne is a very capable receiver without Manning, as was Marvin. Pair them with Orlovsky, Flynn, or any decent #2 quarterback in the NFL and they will put up numbers.

Manning's most important rookie record, 26 tds still stands. Newton broke the passing yard record during the year where defenses suffered horribly from the lockout. Stats last year were inflated b/c of that.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Bulger replaced Warner due to poor ball handling on Warner's part, excelled, and snagged the starting job, similar to Brady taking over from Bledsoe. Bulger has not won a Super Bowl, nor been to one; Kurt Warner has appeared in 3, won one, and led a decrepit team to the promised land for the first time in franchise history. It's equally comical to see someone tear down one quarterback only to make Peyton Manning look greater. The guy doesn't belch rainbows. They are both Hall of Famers, no questions asked.

I don't compare the two. That would be a waste of time. Then buy him a ticket.

[Qwiz]

It had nothing to do with Peyton, until posters decided to say, "well Peyton had weapons too", to which the reply is those WR have never had to play without Peyton, where as Warners WR have put up superior #'s both before and after Warner...

Bruce and Holts #'s dropped? Between 02-03 Warner started 7 (6-1) games...Lost all 7....Holt had 208rec, 2998yds, 16Tds.....And this is attributed to Warner how?

Holt after Warner left town-94/1300/10...102/1300/9...93/1200/10....93/1200/7......And yet Warner somehow "made" him?!

Isaac Bruce had seasons of 119/1700/13...84/1300/7...79/1100/7....89/1300/6....74/1100/3.....And yet Warner some how "made" him?!

Fitz? He's had 90/1100/6..80/1400/8 without Warner, and with arguably the worst QB situation in the NFL....

Warner record? 13-3...8-3...14-2...0-6...0-1...5-4...2-8....1-4....5-6.....9-7...10-5.....3 of his 12 years he played all 16 games.....He had 4 years where he didnt even make it into double digits of appearences......He couldn't keep a roster spot on the team he 'took to the Super Bowl' as you put it, he couldn't keep a roster spot in NY, and it took him 3 years to earn a roster spot in Arizona.....

Fitzgerald also had 2,523 yards, including a career high 1,431 yards, with Warner. He also had the second and third highest average yards in his career with in the two seasons with Warner as the full-time starter. And, unsurprisingly, he scored his two-highest career touchdown numbers in those two seasons as well. The worst quarterback situation in the NFL went to the team who picked #1 overall this past season, actually. Kolb and Skelton are not horrible, which is the reason their head coach still has not decided yet on who will be the starter. Warner has appeared in 3 Super Bowls as the starting quarterback, something not every starter can say.

[Qwiz]

Manning's most important rookie record, 26 tds still stands. Newton broke the passing yard record during the year where defenses suffered horribly from the lockout. Stats last year were inflated b/c of that.

And Brees, Brady, and Stafford, quarterbacks who are very, very good, great in the case of the first two, only broke Marino's record due to the lockout as well, right? -__- Something those three and Newton have in common is at least one good receiving threat, coupled with a lack of a decent running game. That would theoretically make them one dimensional, but it did not. The quarterback play was great, in fact, rookie quarterbacks suffered just as much as defenses. Huge playbooks are not easy to memorize.

[supremecoltsfan300]

And Brees, Brady, and Stafford, quarterbacks who are very, very good, great in the case of the first two, only broke Marino's record due to the lockout as well, right? -__- Something those three and Newton have in common is at least one good receiving threat, coupled with a lack of a decent running game. That would theoretically make them one dimensional, but it did not. The quarterback play was great, in fact, rookie quarterbacks suffered just as much as defenses. Huge playbooks are not easy to memorize.

Lol that's exactly why marino's record was broke. 4 qbs with almost 5k yards, when only two previous had approached it in nfl history. Defenses were historically bad last year b/c of the lockout. And most of the high passing yardage games occurred very early in the season. Specifically, Cam had two 400 yard games in the first two weeks and after that this numbers went substantially down. The lockout dramatically affected all the passing numbers last year.

[Warhorse]

Why dont we get back to the original question of the thread. This is not about the vicissitudes of Warner and Manning.

Eli is a top flight QB who has been on two SB winning teams. He was part of those wins, but he had a lot of help. At this point, he would not go in. If he plays another 5 years, as FJC said, I believe, he will be in.

[Qwiz]

Lol that's exactly why marino's record was broke. 4 qbs with almost 5k yards, when only two previous had approached it in nfl history. Defenses were historically bad last year b/c of the lockout. And most of the high passing yardage games occurred very early in the season. Specifically, Cam had two 400 yard games in the first two weeks and after that this numbers went substantially down. The lockout dramatically affected all the passing numbers last year.

But Marino had a running game. Those other three did not. Defensive signals and shifts are much easier to learn than entirely new lingo, schemes, as well as getting in rhythm with your receivers for rookie quarterbacks. Considering the fact that Steve Smith is the only real receiver for Carolina makes Newton's feat even more incredible.

[Qwiz]

Why dont we get back to the original question of the thread. This is not about the vicissitudes of Warner and Manning.

Eli is a top flight QB who has been on two SB winning teams. He was part of those wins, but he had a lot of help. At this point, he would not go in. If he plays another 5 years, as FJC said, I believe, he will be in.

Agreed, as long as he doesn't tank or go to suck city in those five years. Those defenses in the NFC East are no joke.

[ImaColt]

I agree with Phil Simms, I have Eli Manning in the HOF right now. Two Super Bowl rings, two Super Bowl MVP awards and some of the most clutch performances in recent times with the potential for more rings. Eli, and Peyton, will one day be standing on stage at Canton with Boomer and co.

[trsean]

Eli has had plenty of weapons, including a monster defense behind him, ala Joe Flacco and Roethlisberger.

The topic of this thread is silly even among silly off-season talk because Eli is NOT retiring tomorrow, so the point is moot. But let's address the above in part.

First the notion of Eli benefits from "plenty of weapons."

Since 2007, Eli's primary receiver has changed every year with different leaders in receptions and yards. He's had to deal with so much turnover in that department, it's ridiculous. In 2007, he had Burress. In 2008 (The Giants most dominant regular season of recent memory), his primary receiver? One Dominik Hixon. I challenge any non-Giant fan to be able to pick him out of a line up. In 2009, he was converting 3rd downs with team leader in yards/receptions Steve Smith, now of the Rams after the Eagles shooed him away. He followed that up with Hakeem Nicks in 2010. And in 2011, he helped UDFA receiver salsa his way into the Giants record books.

He's also gone from Shockey to Boss to Beckum to Ballard to now Pascoe at the TE position. All of which, outside Shockey, was either an UDFA or a late round pick.

Through all this changeover, Eli's yards and completion percentage have improved each of those years and had an offense that ranked in the top ten each one of those years. The only constant? Eli. Never missing a start. Never making a complaint. Expected to go out there each season when people expect him to falter after losing receivers and make household names out of new ones.

Additionally, of all those years, the only time the Giants had a defense ranked in the top HALF of the league was 2008. So yeah, not exactly Baltimore and Pittsburgh.

[shakedownstreet]

[Qwiz]

The topic of this thread is silly even among silly off-season talk because Eli is NOT retiring tomorrow, so the point is moot. But let's address the above in part.

First the notion of Eli benefits from "plenty of weapons."

Since 2007, Eli's primary receiver has changed every year with different leaders in receptions and yards. He's had to deal with so much turnover in that department, it's ridiculous. In 2007, he had Burress. In 2008 (The Giants most dominant regular season of recent memory), his primary receiver? One Dominik Hixon. I challenge any non-Giant fan to be able to pick him out of a line up. In 2009, he was converting 3rd downs with team leader in yards/receptions Steve Smith, now of the Rams after the Eagles shooed him away. He followed that up with Hakeem Nicks in 2010. And in 2011, he helped UDFA receiver salsa his way into the Giants record books.

He's also gone from Shockey to Boss to Beckum to Ballard to now Pascoe at the TE position. All of which, outside Shockey, was either an UDFA or a late round pick.

Through all this changeover, Eli's yards and completion percentage have improved each of those years and had an offense that ranked in the top ten each one of those years. The only constant? Eli. Never missing a start. Never making a complaint. Expected to go out there each season when people expect him to falter after losing receivers and make household names out of new ones.

Additionally, of all those years, the only time the Giants had a defense ranked in the top HALF of the league was 2008. So yeah, not exactly Baltimore and Pittsburgh.

Just because there is no consistent number one receiver doesn't change anything. Burress is nothing to complain about since, you know, he's 6'5 and...well...Plaxico Burress. Steve Smith, Hakim Nicks, and Victor Cruz are all very good as well. Just because a player is not drafted does not make him incapable. Arian Foster, almost Tom Brady, Kurt Warner, all prove that there are a lot of dimaonds in the rough. Shockey put up some of his best numbers receiving in his time with Eli Manning, but his career high was back in 2002, way before Manning was drafted. In other words, he wasn't a terrible target. Kevin Boss is understandable, but he was a pretty big TE for Manning to target. Like, Rob Gronkowski size lol. Ballard is so good that he was targeted and snatched up by the Patriots, which is saying something. Eli, for all his Super Bowl glory, is not an elite player though. The Giants defense, in 2007 alone, racked up 53 sacks and 15 interceptions. 2006? 32 sacks, 17 interceptions. 2008? 42 sacks. 32, 48, and 48 sacks respectively since 2009.Say what you will about their rankings, but being able to get pressure on the quarterback is key, as are interceptions. Do they have Polamalu or Ngata? No, but Tuck, Osi, Strahan, and Rolle are not exactly bad players either.

[trsean]

Just because there is no consistent number one receiver doesn't change anything. Burress is nothing to complain about since, you know, he's 6'5 and...well...Plaxico Burress. Steve Smith, Hakim Nicks, and Victor Cruz are all very good as well. Just because a player is not drafted does not make him incapable. Arian Foster, almost Tom Brady, Kurt Warner, all prove that there are a lot of dimaonds in the rough. Shockey put up some of his best numbers receiving in his time with Eli Manning, but his career high was back in 2002, way before Manning was drafted. In other words, he wasn't a terrible target. Kevin Boss is understandable, but he was a pretty big TE for Manning to target. Like, Rob Gronkowski size lol. Ballard is so good that he was targeted and snatched up by the Patriots, which is saying something. Eli, for all his Super Bowl glory, is not an elite player though. The Giants defense, in 2007 alone, racked up 53 sacks and 15 interceptions. 2006? 32 sacks, 17 interceptions. 2008? 42 sacks. 32, 48, and 48 sacks respectively since 2009.Say what you will about their rankings, but being able to get pressure on the quarterback is key, as are interceptions. Do they have Polamalu or Ngata? No, but Tuck, Osi, Strahan, and Rolle are not exactly bad players either.

You mention the skill these players have and how other teams want them, and yet the Giants are the one who continue to let them go and their offense doesn't regress, but improves. If you feel that is something can be dismissed as saying nothing about the QB leading the offense with the leagues worst ranked running game, then I don't know how much there is else to say. But on a side note, I'll take the under on how much more we hear from Mario Manningham in his future.

And I'm at a loss at how you believe a team that gave up 400 points during their Super Bowl season has some sort of dominant defense to be compared to the consistency of the Ravens and Steelers. It's almost disrespectful to those teams. There were only 3 teams that gave up more points than the Giants did, and none of them made the playoffs. The reason the Giants did? The quarterback.

[Qwiz]

You mention the skill these players have and how other teams want them, and yet the Giants are the one who continue to let them go and their offense doesn't regress, but improves. If you feel that is something can be dismissed as saying nothing about the QB leading the offense with the leagues worst ranked running game, then I don't know how much there is else to say. But on a side note, I'll take the under on how much more we hear from Mario Manningham in his future.

And I'm at a loss at how you believe a team that gave up 400 points during their Super Bowl season has some sort of dominant defense to be compared to the consistency of the Ravens and Steelers. It's almost disrespectful to those teams. There were only 3 teams that gave up more points than the Giants did, and none of them made the playoffs. The reason the Giants did? The quarterback.

That same defense also stepped it up against Tom Brady when things mattered the most: In the Super Bowl. Manning only completed a single touchdown pass in that game, and it was one for merely two yards. The Giants defense this year wasn't perfect, very true, but they were still good. Eli stepped it up as well. Thing is, though, this was only his third season out of eight where he managed at least 4,000 yards. His completion percentage was also one of his best ever. I'm not saying that he's a bad quarterback, all he has to do is continue to put up numbers like this consistently....Regardless of who his number one or runningback is. That's what elite quarterbacks do, anyway.

[supremecoltsfan300]

You mention the skill these players have and how other teams want them, and yet the Giants are the one who continue to let them go and their offense doesn't regress, but improves. If you feel that is something can be dismissed as saying nothing about the QB leading the offense with the leagues worst ranked running game, then I don't know how much there is else to say. But on a side note, I'll take the under on how much more we hear from Mario Manningham in his future.

And I'm at a loss at how you believe a team that gave up 400 points during their Super Bowl season has some sort of dominant defense to be compared to the consistency of the Ravens and Steelers. It's almost disrespectful to those teams. There were only 3 teams that gave up more points than the Giants did, and none of them made the playoffs. The reason the Giants did? The quarterback.

Giants were 3rd in sacks, 25th in scoring defense (not 28th), 4th in takeaways in the regular season. In the playoffs they gave up only 14 pts per game (which was the best), had the most sacks, had the lowest percent of 3rrd down converstions against them. Without that defense playing that well, the Giants dont win the SB at all. They went against good offenses in the playoffs and contained them. Eli was a big factor but he needed that defense.

[Gavin]

The Giants defense ranked 21st in minutes that there defense was out on the field with an average of 30 minutes and 30 seconds on the field, surpisingly (well not surprisingly) most of the top teams that had better defensive numbers also had a lower time that there defenses were on the field because they could run the ball, Including, San Fran, Pitt, Philly. Houston, Baltimore, Its a pretty good assumption thats why there defensive numbers were not very good in regards to points becaus the Giants could not run the ball, They were top 3 in sacks made and tied for 6th with three other teams in interceptions made, Middle of the pack in forced fumbles with 13, 7 of those recovered, Now what they seemed to miss is that guy in the middle that can plug up the run game, they werent very good in doing that, way better than us of course but we were ran on quite a bit more than them, Really it looks like a misconception that they could not run the ball because they did have 17 rushing touchdowns or 6th most in the NFL, The problem they encountered was of there own doing, they ran the ball 411 times which was only good for 22nd in the league.....But hey hard to tell a 2 time Super Bowl champion what there problems were

[trsean]

Giants were 3rd in sacks, 25th in scoring defense (not 28th), 4th in takeaways in the regular season. In the playoffs they gave up only 14 pts per game (which was the best), had the most sacks, had the lowest percent of 3rrd down converstions against them. Without that defense playing that well, the Giants dont win the SB at all. They went against good offenses in the playoffs and contained them. Eli was a big factor but he needed that defense.

Absolutely the Giants needed a better performance from their defense in the playoffs to win the Super Bowl. When was the last team that won a Super Bowl that didn't need improvement from it's defense to pull it all together?

The point is there would be no post season opportunity to improve without the quarterback bailing them out during the season.

[trsean]

Manning only completed a single touchdown pass in that game, and it was one for merely two yards.

Yeah, I don't get the relevance of this.

[Qwiz]

Yeah, I don't get the relevance of this.

Well, you made it seem as though Manning was the only one completely responsible for all of the Giants postseason success. If not for that defense, Brady would have put up more points, something which Eli could not have responded to.

[trsean]

Well, you made it seem as though Manning was the only one completely responsible for all of the Giants postseason success. If not for that defense, Brady would have put up more points, something which Eli could not have responded to.

No, I said Eli is most responsible for them reaching the post season. Eli could not have responded if the Patriots scored more points? Are you saying Eli can't win shoot outs? Are 2 yard touchdown passes worth fewer points than 20 yard?

[supremecoltsfan300]

No, I said Eli is most responsible for them reaching the post season. Eli could not have responded if the Patriots scored more points? Are you saying Eli can't win shoot outs? Are 2 yard touchdown passes worth fewer points than 20 yard?

Yeah a td is a td from any distance.

I do think Eli, unless it's vs the cowboys, cant win shootouts the majority of the times. Eli was lucky that his defense held the high scoring patriots to just 14 and 17 pts in both of his wins in the sb.

[trsean]

Yeah a td is a td from any distance.

I do think Eli, unless it's vs the cowboys, cant win shootouts the majority of the times. Eli was lucky that his defense held the high scoring patriots to just 14 and 17 pts in both of his wins in the sb.

I don't get what this means, either. Eli HAS won shoot outs, against teams other than the Cowboys (that deserves a "huh?" in its own right), so therefore he CAN win shootouts. The idea of winning a shootout often usually requires getting the ball last after the score goes back and forth. In games where he didn't have the ball last, but had just scored, like in the game against GB in the reg season, he lost. In the second half of the Pats game in the regular season, where he and Brady went back and forth in the final drives, he did have the ball last, and he won.

As far as getting lucky to have the Patriots score under 20 in both SB wins, that's true (even though Tom Brady has won only a couple playoff games where he's opponents scored more than 21), but Eli proved he could hang in there and go score for score with both regular season Brady in 2007 and regular season Rodgers and Brady in 2011.

Brees, however, consistently makes all of the giants his....female dog.

[oldunclemark]

The Kurt Warner Hall-of-Fame candidacy is a good debate..I dont have an answer

Was he one of the best?. Certainly.

But does your definition of greatness require a certain number of years.? and the lack of medicore years

Gayle Sayers is in the Hall-of-Fame....and he didnt play 6 years..probably just four full

But he was the most feared offensive player in the game for about 3 of them....until his knee injury...

By Gayle Sayers standards...Kurt Warner gets in....

Chris Carter played 16 years and was the best receiver I ever saw....

He made catches Jerry Rice couldnt even dream of...

seven 1,000-yard years but 6 or 7 that werent so great and some off field problems.

He's NOT in the Hall-of-Fame..

so by Cris Carter standards....Warner isnt good enough. See?

[IndyTrav]

The Kurt Warner Hall-of-Fame candidacy is a good debate..I dont have an answer

Was he one of the best?. Certainly.

But does your definition of greatness require a certain number of years.? and the lack of medicore years

Gayle Sayers is in the Hall-of-Fame....and he didnt play 6 years..probably just four full

But he was the most feared offensive player in the game for about 3 of them....until his knee injury...

By Gayle Sayers standards...Kurt Warner gets in....

Chris Carter played 16 years and was the best receiver I ever saw....

He made catches Jerry Rice couldnt even dream of...

seven 1,000-yard years but 6 or 7 that werent so great and some off field problems.

He's NOT in the Hall-of-Fame..

so by Cris Carter standards....Warner isnt good enough. See?

The problem with Sayers, and Peter King suggested this in his most recent MMQB column, is Sayers was transcendent. He was amazing. He was the best in the league without question. 5straight All Pros. He was one of a kind. (All this in reference to Sayers v Terrell Davis) for HoF.

The problem with Cris Carter that absolutely no one accounts for, is it can be argued he was rarely the best WR on his own team. That's not good when trying to make the HoF.

Consider this. Carter played 15 seasons, of those 15 seasons he only led his team in yards 5 times. And of those 5, two were pretty awful (900/681yds).....

Guys like Reed Rice Harrison Brown Holt they all led there teams in yards far more than Carter ever did.

Carter played all 16 games 13 times, and he surpassed 1300yds once. And 1200 4 times. Those #s are frankly abysmal compared to what other WR have done, Carter caught TDs, and that's about it.

[FireJimCaldwell]

The problem with Sayers, and Peter King suggested this in his most recent MMQB column, is Sayers was transcendent. He was amazing. He was the best in the league without question. 5straight All Pros. He was one of a kind. (All this in reference to Sayers v Terrell Davis) for HoF.

The problem with Cris Carter that absolutely no one accounts for, is it can be argued he was rarely the best WR on his own team. That's not good when trying to make the HoF.

Consider this. Carter played 15 seasons, of those 15 seasons he only led his team in yards 5 times. And of those 5, two were pretty awful (900/681yds).....

Guys like Reed Rice Harrison Brown Holt they all led there teams in yards far more than Carter ever did.

Carter played all 16 games 13 times, and he surpassed 1300yds once. And 1200 4 times. Those #s are frankly abysmal compared to what other WR have done, Carter caught TDs, and that's about it.

Reggie could run into the same thing about not even being the best WR on his team for a number of years.

The wide receiver position has a road block when it comes to the Hall of Fame. Marvin is deserving but I would honestly be surprised if he goes in on the first ballot. I don't think it will take him as long as someone like Art Monk, or players like Carter or Reed who are still on the outside looking in. Harrison & Wayne could also take a major hit if Manning's new 88 & 87 have huge years over the next 5 years or so.

[IndyTrav]

Reggie could run into the same thing about not even being the best WR on his team for a number of years.

The wide receiver position has a road block when it comes to the Hall of Fame. Marvin is deserving but I would honestly be surprised if he goes in on the first ballot. I don't think it will take him as long as someone like Art Monk, or players like Carter or Reed who are still on the outside looking in. Harrison & Wayne could also take a major hit if Manning's new 88 & 87 have huge years over the next 5 years or so.

Reggie I don't think has a shot at making it.

Marvin, I feel if he does make it, will take awhile.

The problem being the sheer # of WRs all being in the same ball park, with more on the way. I think it's going to boil down to several factors with the main one being transcendence. Players like Moss and TO proved they could do it with multiple teams, QBs, and systems....now future players (based in the paths they are on Fitz/Calvin) they are head and shoulders above other WR in the league.

But back to Marvin. If he makes it in, it will open the flood gates. If Marvin's in, Reed Carter Brown Smith Holt Ward Bruce Fryer Ellard Wayne Mason Ocho are all in as well.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Reggie I don't think has a shot at making it.

Marvin, I feel if he does make it, will take awhile.

The problem being the sheer # of WRs all being in the same ball park, with more on the way. I think it's going to boil down to several factors with the main one being transcendence. Players like Moss and TO proved they could do it with multiple teams, QBs, and systems....now future players (based in the paths they are on Fitz/Calvin) they are head and shoulders above other WR in the league.

But back to Marvin. If he makes it in, it will open the flood gates. If Marvin's in, Reed Carter Brown Smith Holt Ward Bruce Fryer Ellard Wayne Mason Ocho are all in as well.

I agree. The #'s are only going to continue to grow.

5 year comps:

Johnson 366-5872 49td

Rice 346 6364 66td

8 year comp:

Fitzgerald 693- 9615 73 td

Rice 610-10273 103 td

I doubt either catch Rice, mostly due to longevity but with the shift in the passing game and relaxed rules,and 1/8th of the league throwing for close to 5k, the individual #'s should increase over time when that number grows to 1/6th, 1/4th, etc.

I agree that it's not as simple as many around here think it will be for Harrison, and even harder for Wayne. I think if Wayne had followed Manning to Denver, and went on to eclipse the #'s that Manning/Harrison established, that would have bettered his cause than if he puts up the same core #'s with Luck.

Another good thing about Harrison is that Moss returns, and Owens wants to return(reportedly visiting Seattle) which will extend the # of years neither of them are on the ballot.

[IndyTrav]

I agree. The #'s are only going to continue to grow.

5 year comps:

Johnson 366-5872 49td

Rice 346 6364 66td

8 year comp:

Fitzgerald 693- 9615 73 td

Rice 610-10273 103 td

I doubt either catch Rice, mostly due to longevity but with the shift in the passing game and relaxed rules,and 1/8th of the league throwing for close to 5k, the individual #'s should increase over time when that number grows to 1/6th, 1/4th, etc.

I agree that it's not as simple as many around here think it will be for Harrison, and even harder for Wayne. I think if Wayne had followed Manning to Denver, and went on to eclipse the #'s that Manning/Harrison established, that would have bettered his cause than if he puts up the same core #'s with Luck.

Another good thing about Harrison is that Moss returns, and Owens wants to return(reportedly visiting Seattle) which will extend the # of years neither of them are on the ballot.

Awhile back I was making an argument for Ward over Harrison into the HoF (I felt I won, but it is a Colts forum so others didn't feel that way).

Ward played 2 more years, 27 more games ( less than 2 full seasons) and only trails Marvin by 102rec 2500yds and 43 tds. And while those #s may seem high, (onlu the TDs to me) Ward played 2 more seasons and his team STILL attempted 400+ less passes. With random QBs, in a smash mouth division the HoF loves, and was renowned for blocking. Which are three things I feel make up for his slight lack in #s. ( and he had a SB MVP.)

[FireJimCaldwell]

Awhile back I was making an argument for Ward over Harrison into the HoF (I felt I won, but it is a Colts forum so others didn't feel that way).

Ward played 2 more years, 27 more games ( less than 2 full seasons) and only trails Marvin by 102rec 2500yds and 43 tds. And while those #s may seem high, (onlu the TDs to me) Ward played 2 more seasons and his team STILL attempted 400+ less passes. With random QBs, in a smash mouth division the HoF loves, and was renowned for blocking. Which are three things I feel make up for his slight lack in #s. ( and he had a SB MVP.)

I can see the argument for Ward, his blocking is an added dimension that many receivers do not have in their repertoire.

When you look at the core #'s.

Per Game:

Harrison 5.8 catches, 76.7 yards and 0.67 td

Ward 4.6 catches 55.7 yards and 0.39 td

When you add their blocking into the mix and I would say Ward has a far greater difference in his blocking compared to Harrison's than Harrison does when you crunch the #'s above.

Obviously the catches/yards/td's are larger components to a wide receiver's game, and that would likely give the edge to Harrison to most, and likely 95% around here, I think the argument for the two are closer than many would want to admit.

Those per game #'s transposed into a season would be:

Harrison 93 -1228 11 td's

Ward 74-891 6 td's

Again the #'s favor Harrison and they have always favored Harrison, well outside of post season. Then the #s are flipped to Ward's favor.

[IndyTrav]

I can see the argument for Ward, his blocking is an added dimension that many receivers do not have in their repertoire.

When you look at the core #'s.

Per Game:

Harrison 5.8 catches, 76.7 yards and 0.67 td

Ward 4.6 catches 55.7 yards and 0.39 td

When you add their blocking into the mix and I would say Ward has a far greater difference in his blocking compared to Harrison's than Harrison does when you crunch the #'s above.

Obviously the catches/yards/td's are larger components to a wide receiver's game, and that would likely give the edge to Harrison to most, and likely 95% around here, I think the argument for the two are closer than many would want to admit.

Those per game #'s transposed into a season would be:

Harrison 93 -1228 11 td's

Ward 74-891 6 td's

Again the #'s favor Harrison and they have always favored Harrison, well outside of post season. Then the #s are flipped to Ward's favor.

Whole heartedly agree with everything you said.

This is what I just find fascinating. As you say, Harrison has the raw #s over Ward +1 Marvin. Marvin has slightly more accolades +1, Ward was a better blocker +1 Ward. Ward had better post season success +1. Marvin had Goat, Ward a handful of different QBs +1 Ward ( when you consider the slight diff in #s) Pitt is loved by HoF +1 Ward etc etc

Obviously that's an arcane way of looking at it, but at least it gives a tangible way of comparing the two.