PDA

View Full Version : Simmons QB rankings


TonyR
12-15-2012, 01:56 PM
1c. Peyton Manning
You could have talked me into throwing Manning into the previous tier, but that means (a) we would have lost the Heaven Can Wait reference (underrated '70s movie), (b) I wouldn't have been able to mention Warren Beatty (shockingly competent as a QB), and (c) we would have been living a lie. Why? Because post–neck surgery Peyton Manning hasn't beaten ANYBODY yet. Check it out.

Losses: Houston, Atlanta, New England.
Wins: Oakland (twice), San Diego (twice), Kansas City, Cincy, Carolina, Tampa, New Orleans, Pittsburgh.

Look, it's been a brilliant comeback; it's been incredibly entertaining to have him back. I'd actually vote for Manning for "Most Valuable Player" (through 14 weeks) just because it took Manning less than three months to transform them into 2005 Colts West. But can we see Denver beat one good team before we officially nudge The Artist Formerly Known As Mr. Noodle into that Brady/Rodgers group? Win in Baltimore on Sunday and we can talk. Regardless, I thought this was Manning's finest season: He reinvented himself in a different city while playing the single most complicated position in any sport AND learning the strengths and weaknesses of an entirely new crew of teammates AND figuring out his own post-surgery limitations AND dealing with the mental strain of knowing that one brutal hit could ruin him … and he did this on the fly. And Sports Illustrated picked LeBron for Sportsman of the Year? Come on. http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8747330/nfl-qb-power-poll

Bacchus
12-15-2012, 02:23 PM
Cincinnati is better than the Ravens and Denver beat them on the road. The Bengals have not lost since Denver beat them.

DBroncos4life
12-15-2012, 02:28 PM
The whole he hasn't beat anyone is so played out. Dude was coming back from a career threatening injury and the NFL schedules the hard games right away. He is back what more does he need to prove to these experts?

HAT
12-15-2012, 02:51 PM
Cincinnati is better than the Ravens and Denver beat them on the road. The Bengals have not lost since Denver beat them.

lulz wut?

DENVERDUI55
12-15-2012, 02:58 PM
Elway has 6 superbowl games played? No mention of Terry Bradshaw instead Joe Montana's 4 rings are the record? Poorly edited article in my opinion.

ColoradoDarin
12-15-2012, 03:04 PM
Cincinnati is better than the Ravens and Denver beat them on the road. The Bengals have not lost since Denver beat them.

http://www.ceciliankennels.com/dogs/dallas%20cowboys%20star%202.jpg

2KBack
12-15-2012, 03:07 PM
lulz wut?

He's wrong about the Bengals record, but I'd say there isn't much gap between the two teams at this point. Hell, if Denver wins tomorrow, the Bengals have a real shot at the division.

LetsGoBroncos
12-15-2012, 03:14 PM
Pittsburgh, New Orleans when they were hot, Cincinatti

baja
12-15-2012, 03:23 PM
I would rather play the Ravens than the Bangles in the playoffs and I would like least of all to play the Steelers.

I don't think the Ravens will win their division.

dictionary
12-15-2012, 03:57 PM
Bill Simmons sucks bags of NE dicks for a living. Are any of us really surprised that he hates on Manning?

Tombstone RJ
12-15-2012, 04:06 PM
wow, he puts Peyton Manning in a tier so he can reference some dumbass movies? What a tard. The whole article is a waste of cyber space.

jerseyguy4
12-15-2012, 04:12 PM
I actually think it was a well written section on Peyton. He gave him his due, and only put an asterisk on his tie at #1 because he hasn't beaten a top rated team.

I can sort of see the Bengals argument, but I would even take it a step further. I don't think Peyton will yet earn his respect even AFTER the beating he gives Baltimore this weekend. Like it or not, showdown time will only come in the playoffs this year.

Bring it on!

broncosteven
12-15-2012, 04:30 PM
At the start of this looking on paper I thought we would be lucky to go 10-6, Maybe 11-5 if things worked out right. 8-8 if there were growing pains of if Peyton wasn't back to normal.

There are "playoff" teams like duh bears who lose or narrowly win against bad teams, Denver has taken care of business after sorting out things out after week 5.

Also before week 5 we had a guy named Joe Mays starting at MLB. I don't blame him for singlehandly losing those 3 games but he had a lot to do with being out of position vs Pats and Houston being able to run on us.

I love how Fox tweaked the team as the year went on, never being complacent or just content to show up and play the dudes he picked to start at the begining of the year.

TonyR
12-15-2012, 04:38 PM
He's wrong about the Bengals record, but I'd say there isn't much gap between the two teams at this point. Hell, if Denver wins tomorrow, the Bengals have a real shot at the division.

I don't necessarily disagree, but before last week the Ravens had a 15 game home winning streak. And they are currently 9-4, only 1 game worse than us.

TonyR
12-15-2012, 04:40 PM
I actually think it was a well written section on Peyton. He gave him his due, and only put an asterisk on his tie at #1 because he hasn't beaten a top rated team.

Yup. Everything he said is perfectly fair. But I posted this knowing we'd get the standard "this guy is an idiot and this article sucks!" responses.

LetsGoBroncos
12-15-2012, 06:02 PM
I would rather play the Ravens than the Bangles in the playoffs and I would like least of all to play the Steelers.

I don't think the Ravens will win their division.

Agree with everything you said. NE and Pittsburgh with no pressure are the only things I'm worried about

lonestar
12-15-2012, 06:18 PM
f the Patriots happen to win this Super Bowl (note: They're favored in Vegas right now, although that's almost always the kiss of death), Brady would tie Montana's record (four rings), break Elway's record (six Super Bowl appearances) and make history in the following sense

pretty sure John only went 5 times.. 86, 87, 88, 98, 99

sorry but I take issue with the accuracy of this writers info.. therefore most of the rest of the article.. well not sure if any of the rest of his numbers are good either..

Tombstone RJ
12-15-2012, 06:41 PM
Yup. Everything he said is perfectly fair. But I posted this knowing we'd get the standard "this guy is an idiot and this article sucks!" responses.

I guess you see it that way. I see it as a sports writer trying to be creative and failing. Also, he states that the Broncos haven't beaten any good teams which is not true. Pittsburgh was at full strength when the Broncos beat them. Cincy is no slouch.

He conviniently ignores the fact that the Broncos were competitve in the 3 losses and yes, the Broncos were still gelling at that time too.

The packers record is worse than the Broncos and they are playing in a pretty mediocre if not weak division too. The pack have lost to the niners, the seahawks, the colts and the giants and they are on a 2 game losing streak. Rogers is having another good year but not so much better than Manning that he's in another tier. Meh, it's just a silly article IMHO.

lonestar
12-15-2012, 06:52 PM
I guess you see it that way. I see it as a sports writer trying to be creative and failing. Also, he states that the Broncos haven't beaten any good teams which is not true. Pittsburgh was at full strength when the Broncos beat them. Cincy is no slouch.

He conviniently ignores the fact that the Broncos were competitve in the 3 losses and yes, the Broncos were still gelling at that time too.

The packers record is worse than the Broncos and they are playing in a pretty mediocre if not weak division too. The pack have lost to the niners, the seahawks, the colts and the giants and they are on a 2 game losing streak. Rogers is having another good year but not so much better than Manning that he's in another tier. Meh, it's just a silly article IMHO.

Pit at full strength! not hardly most of their oline was not in the same spot for two consecutive games at the point. IIRC many of their starters on defense did not play including the starting safety who Was left home because of sickle cell issue at high altitude.

Selective memory?

Tombstone RJ
12-15-2012, 07:03 PM
Pit at full strength! not hardly most of their oline was not in the same spot for two consecutive games at the point. IIRC many of their starters on defense did not play including the starting safety who Was left home because of sickle cell issue at high altitude.

Selective memory?

well rapistburger was playing, right? It was the first game of the year for both teams so injuries or not, the Broncos were just beginning the new era with Manning.

Bacchus
12-15-2012, 07:12 PM
http://www.ceciliankennels.com/dogs/dallas%20cowboys%20star%202.jpg

LOL.... I meant to say They have only lost once since Denver beat them...^5

TonyR
12-15-2012, 09:48 PM
I guess you see it that way...

Doesn't really matter how I see it. Cincinnati and Pittsburgh were good wins. But perception is reality. Denver got beat by the 3 best teams they played. That's just a fact. They need to beat Baltimore to prove to people they belong. Win and the doubters will dwindle, lose and they'll multiply. It's really that simple.

lonestar
12-15-2012, 11:39 PM
well rapistburger was playing, right? It was the first game of the year for both teams so injuries or not, the Broncos were just beginning the new era with Manning.
Your comment was PIT was at full strength which what I was calling in doubt.

Yes he played but many of his teammates either did not or were playing out of position. His oline was jury rigged Mendenhall did not play, as mentioned before starting SS Clark did not play.
Nor did Harrison play
Hardly at full strength.

ZONA
12-16-2012, 01:24 AM
The Bengals are 1 QB away from a really really good team. Dalton misses wide open guys ALL the time. I've watched 5 of their games and I always felt like if they had a QB even 1 level above Dalton, they would be leading that division right now.

broncosteven
12-16-2012, 03:08 PM
Simmons is going to say Balt wasnt full strength but fact is we have taken care of business for the last 9 straight. Teams drop easy games (on paper) all the time.