Did Peyton_Manning Choke Today?

[NaptownChief]

Originally Posted by -Slap-

Ever consider that McNabb has been basically by himself on offense?

How about the fact that he took the team from 5-11 to 11-5 in his first season as the starter?

The Colts were 3-13 under Harbaugh and 3-13 under Manning. It wasn't until Edgerrin James was drafted that the team showed any improvement.

rofl

Now you are back to yoga...First off they had Faulk the year before James and last I checked he was pretty good so to give James the credit is stetching a bunch. The following year in Manning's second season he turned that **** hole around to 13-3....McNabb's second year he did QB them to a 11-5 record which was admirable but we can't overlook a defense that was 4th in the league in allowing points. Manning in his second season posted that 13-3 with the 17th rated D. Funny how we can take the same story and make it sound so different.

[NaptownChief]

Originally Posted by Circle Orange

and those defenses would have been ringless without Elway, Montana, Young, and Favre to lead the team with big plays and scoring. You can't win with no points.

You must have missed the Baltimore Championship with Dilfer eh?

[Northman]

Originally Posted by CornStore

judging by slap's line of reasoning, elway only became a champ when TD joined the team. guess he had nothing to do with the broncos winning it all. and for the fiftieth time, i'm not comparing elway's career to manning's or saying manning is better than elway. my point is simply that no qb would have "looked good" in yesterday's game vs that defense with their offense coughing the ball up so many times.

btw, the pats secondary has been depleted throughout this season, and they've been forced to play earthwind moreland and troy brown when samuel/gay have missed games. however, moreland, the true weak link wasn't playing yesterday. samuel is highly underrated and gay is good as well. pats fans even know this. Ty Law is a great player and ballhawk but for the scheme to work you don't need incredible corners, as was demonstrated yesterday, you just need to not have HORRIBLE ones like moreland playing.

Which turns us back to the opening game of the year when Manning put up 24 points on this same team only with their starting rotation. so technically? Manning should have put up better numbers. sure, the receivers had a couple of drops but not to the extent that it cost them the game. its one thing when you are like denver and cant score and find yourself down 14-0 and 21-0. but this wasnt the case with the Colts on sunday. they were only down 6-3 at halftime. the drops you keep talking about, a majority of those happened in the first half so whats the excuse for the second half? the screen play was working very well for the Colts. the biggest problem for the Colts in the second half was time of possession which the Pats owned but,,, when the Colts did touch the ball they did nothing with it. so again, we come back to why didnt Manning make a play in the second half? as for the Pats defense? are they good? sure, but they also gave up a average of 15-20 points a game this year. and with a offense like the Colts that should have been no problem especially after what they accomplished at the beginning of the year against the starters. and when the game is close ITS UP TO THE QUARTERBACK to make some plays and take charge of the team. Manning didnt and therefore choked away his opportunity. as stated before, Manning was defeated before the first half was even over. he gave up and thats something that even Jake Plummer WOULDNT do.

[CornStore]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

Unless or until Vick's Falcons face that Pats defense, we won't really know for sure, will we, CornStore? We do know that the Pats lost to the Steelers and Dolphins... two teams that feature a pretty good defense, as do the Falcons.

RE: the 80s Broncos SB teams and Elway's supporting cast... name 5 defensive players on those teams (without looking it up).

you miss the point yet again. i'm talking about sticking a quarterback in. vick's falcons are a different team than manning's colts and perhaps match up well against the pats thanks to their monster running game, vick aside. maybe the falcons won't cough up the ball like the colts receivers did. maybe the game won't be played in foxboro in the snow.

and as far as the 80s broncos team, i didn't follow football that extensively again. and how does it matter whether or not they had "marquee' players (supposing they didn't)? as a whole, the defense certainly helped and did its job. when the defense wasn't as good, elway wasn't magically willing the team to playoff wins, infact his teams were going 7-9 or 8-8. nothing special. manning has a crappy offensive line, good WRs, a good RB, and a horrible defense and he consistently puts up 13-3 seasons with playoff wins thrown in.

[FADERPROOF]

That "depleted" NE secondary was also 8-1 with Ty Law out also.

[CornStore]

again = then* i didn't follow football extensively during those broncos super bowl years in the 80s, that's why i did research on how good the defense was before posting.

[NaptownChief]

Originally Posted by Anubis_Zyklon

Manning didnt and therefore choked away his opportunity. as stated before, Manning was defeated before the first half was even over. he gave up and thats something that even Jake Plummer WOULDNT do.

Boy, how bad are the Donks considering such a ****ty choking QB owns them like no other QB has owned a team in the playoffs?

[Northman]

Originally Posted by NaptownChief

Boy, how bad are the Donks considering such a ****ty choking QB owns them like no other QB has owned a team in the playoffs?

how bad are the chiefs? at home even.

[alkemical]

exit, stage left

[CornStore]

Originally Posted by Anubis_Zyklon

Which turns us back to the opening game of the year when Manning put up 24 points on this same team only with their starting rotation. so technically? Manning should have put up better numbers. sure, the receivers had a couple of drops but not to the extent that it cost them the game. its one thing when you are like denver and cant score and find yourself down 14-0 and 21-0. but this wasnt the case with the Colts on sunday. they were only down 6-3 at halftime. the drops you keep talking about, a majority of those happened in the first half so whats the excuse for the second half? the screen play was working very well for the Colts. the biggest problem for the Colts in the second half was time of possession which the Pats owned but,,, when the Colts did touch the ball they did nothing with it. so again, we come back to why didnt Manning make a play in the second half? as for the Pats defense? are they good? sure, but they also gave up a average of 15-20 points a game this year. and with a offense like the Colts that should have been no problem especially after what they accomplished at the beginning of the year against the starters. and when the game is close ITS UP TO THE QUARTERBACK to make some plays and take charge of the team. Manning didnt and therefore choked away his opportunity. as stated before, Manning was defeated before the first half was even over. he gave up and thats something that even Jake Plummer WOULDNT do.

cripes dude, he put up 24 points vs a "cautious" bill belicheck who was saving defensive looks for the playoffs. he did it when his receivers weren't dropping balls and fumbling it over to the pats (though edge did fumble). he also did it when it wasn't the snow and when belicheck didn't have an extra bye week to prepare. and maybe just maybe the pats defense played LIGHTS OUT yesterday and didn't play with the same intensity in the regular season game? you can't just compare situations like that and say he "should" have done this or that. give credit where it's due (NE defense) and place blame where its due (colts O-line and receivers)

i still can't believe you're saying 5 drops which all killed drives and 2 fumbles "didn't make much of a difference" THATS SEVEN POTENTIAL SCORING DRIVES, and the pats controlled the clock bigtime.

the colts didn't get many chances in the second half because NE controlled the clock. when they did, they had at least one drive end via fumble and another end via a dropped pass if i recall correctly. and you talk about NE's 15-20 point average and attempt to just extrapolate out to this game. first off, they didn't spend the entire season in the snow in foxboro after a bye. second, obviously the players were more "intense" for yesterday's games. two big factors you ignore.

anyways i gotta go, i'll probably check in later if you guys reply.

[NaptownChief]

The most important thing about success in playoff football is defense...That is the most glaring stat in pro sports. To act like McNabb is something because of playoff success despite never having worse than the #7th ranked defense in his career in points allowed while Manning has been saddled with a terrible defense most of his career shows how little you boys understand the game or how much you enjoy manipulating reality.

I can assure you Manning would trade his receivers for Philly's receivers in a heartbeat if it came with a defense swap.

[NaptownChief]

Originally Posted by Anubis_Zyklon

how bad are the chiefs? at home even.

They are terrible....and at home, still terrible but based on the last game against the Donks obviously not as bad as them.

[Clockwork Orange]

Originally Posted by NaptownChief

Boy, how bad are the Donks considering such a ****ty choking QB owns them like no other QB has owned a team in the playoffs?

Good enough to qualify for the playoffs, which puts us a few notches higher than the Chefs.

It's just unfortunate for PayMeATon that he had to go to New England after beating Denver instead of another trip to Narrowhead. If he had, we'd be talking about the Chefs in the same light as the Broncos.

[winstoncup bronco]

Originally Posted by NaptownChief

The most important thing about success in playoff football is defense...That is the most glaring stat in pro sports. To act like McNabb is something because of playoff success despite never having worse than the #7th ranked defense in his career in points allowed while Manning has been saddled with a terrible defense most of his career shows how little you boys understand the game or how much you enjoy manipulating reality.

I can assure you Manning would trade his receivers for Philly's receivers in a heartbeat if it came with a defense swap.

Yeah but, didn't you hear? It's the Colts offenses fault for scoring too quickly, thereby giving the opposing team more possessions, so blame Manning, not the defense.

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by CornStore

you miss the point yet again. i'm talking about sticking a quarterback in. vick's falcons are a different team than manning's colts and perhaps match up well against the pats thanks to their monster running game, vick aside. maybe the falcons won't cough up the ball like the colts receivers did. maybe the game won't be played in foxboro in the snow.

I'm not buying your contention that all the Manning incompletions yesterday were 100% the fault of the WRs. An incompletion can be the fault of the QB, the WR, or both, but in most cases, when the WR corps and the QB are not on the same page for an entire game, there's plenty of blame to go around (ie: Manning gets some of it.)

and as far as the 80s broncos team, i didn't follow football that extensively again. and how does it matter whether or not they had "marquee' players (supposing they didn't)? as a whole, the defense certainly helped and did its job. when the defense wasn't as good, elway wasn't magically willing the team to playoff wins, infact his teams were going 7-9 or 8-8. nothing special. manning has a crappy offensive line, good WRs, a good RB, and a horrible defense and he consistently puts up 13-3 seasons with playoff wins thrown in.

OK, so you really don't know what you're talking about when you speak of what Elway could or could not have done. Thanks for admitting it.

[Northman]

Originally Posted by NaptownChief

They are terrible....and at home, still terrible but based on the last game against the Donks obviously not as bad as them.

every dog has its day but the chiefs seem to have it very often.

[Northman]

Originally Posted by CornStore

cripes dude, he put up 24 points vs a "cautious" bill belicheck who was saving defensive looks for the playoffs. he did it when his receivers weren't dropping balls and fumbling it over to the pats (though edge did fumble). he also did it when it wasn't the snow and when belicheck didn't have an extra bye week to prepare. and maybe just maybe the pats defense played LIGHTS OUT yesterday and didn't play with the same intensity in the regular season game? you can't just compare situations like that and say he "should" have done this or that. give credit where it's due (NE defense) and place blame where its due (colts O-line and receivers)

i still can't believe you're saying 5 drops which all killed drives and 2 fumbles "didn't make much of a difference" THATS SEVEN POTENTIAL SCORING DRIVES, and the pats controlled the clock bigtime.

the colts didn't get many chances in the second half because NE controlled the clock. when they did, they had at least one drive end via fumble and another end via a dropped pass if i recall correctly. and you talk about NE's 15-20 point average and attempt to just extrapolate out to this game. first off, they didn't spend the entire season in the snow in foxboro after a bye. second, obviously the players were more "intense" for yesterday's games. two big factors you ignore.

anyways i gotta go, i'll probably check in later if you guys reply.

hmmm, so now your telling me Corn that you can read Bill's mind and know for a fact that he was being cautious? do you have a link that proves this theory of yours? and you do realize that there was another team playing in that snow as well right? again, you harp on the drops as if it gave the Pats a 30-3 lead or something. even with the drops the game was still within reach why cant you grasp the idea that when you get that lucky that you as a Qb need to LIFT your head up and help try and make something happen? if the Pats had 1 incentive for playing LIGHTS OUT as you call it, it is because of the crap they took last year about the holding on the receivers. well, that didnt happen this past sunday and everything was in favor of Peyton to take advantage of that. Dungy's gameplan of only running James 15 times didnt help but during the course of the year Dungy allowed Peyton to run that team and make audibles and all sorts of ****. and then your going to tell me that all of sudden Dungy pulls in the reigns on Manning? im not buying but you can continue to try and spin this whole event any which way you like. but, your just flat out wrong.

[NaptownChief]

Originally Posted by Anubis_Zyklon

your going to tell me that all of sudden Dungy pulls in the reigns on Manning? im not buying but you can continue to try and spin this whole event any which way you like. but, your just flat out wrong.

I have nothing to confirm what happen yet but having watched all the Colts games this year and based on Manning's post game interview I'm guessing Dungy did pull in the reins and limit his audibles. It is certainly possible that Peyton pissed down his leg and was the one that got conservative early but I highly doubt it. I will be keeping an ear out here locally to see what I find out but my guess is Dungy pulled his Tampa offensive game plan out for this one.

[Northman]

Originally Posted by NaptownChief

I have nothing to confirm what happen yet but having watched all the Colts games this year and based on Manning's post game interview I'm guessing Dungy did pull in the reins and limit his audibles. It is certainly possible that Peyton pissed down his leg and was the one that got conservative early but I highly doubt it. I will be keeping an ear out here locally to see what I find out but my guess is Dungy pulled his Tampa offensive game plan out for this one.

yea, but Nap dont you think that Dungy would have run the ball more if he were going conservative? he only ran James like 15 times man. thats hardly any touches especially with the game as close as it was.

[NaptownChief]

Originally Posted by Anubis_Zyklon

yea, but Nap dont you think that Dungy would have run the ball more if he were going conservative? he only ran James like 15 times man. thats hardly any touches especially with the game as close as it was.

Early on in the game they called run plays on nearly every first down which is very unlike them. The total of 15 runs for James is only low due to the fact the Pats killed damn near the whole clock in the 2nd half with Dillon and Faulk. And when the Colts finally got the ball back Wayne fumbled on the first play. If you go back and look at the first half, it wasn't until about 5-7 mintues to go in the half before they threw a pass out to Wayne or Harrison outside. It was all run James, dump to Pollard or a quick screen to Stokely in the slot. It was very conservative for Colts standards.

[NaptownChief]

and I forgot to mention boat loads of screen passes to James.

[Northman]

Originally Posted by NaptownChief

and I forgot to mention boat loads of screen passes to James.

which were very effective i might add. i didnt see the Pats stop that play once on sunday.

[NaptownChief]

Originally Posted by Anubis_Zyklon

which were very effective i might add. i didnt see the Pats stop that play once on sunday.

It was their most effective play but it is still a conservative play call. They didn't throw one single pass beyond 15 yards. With their beat up CB's that should have been the one thing to try and take advantage of....

If you were a Patriots fan and were allowed to call the Colts offensive plays it would have looked just like what we saw yesterday. Having the Colts going deep on their CB's would be the one thing that would scare the hell out of you and it was the one thing the Colts didn't do.

Again, I don't know if it was Manning that pissed down his leg or Dungy but either way it was gutless and stacked the odds heavily against the Colts by removing their strength.

[Northman]

Originally Posted by NaptownChief

Again, I don't know if it was Manning that pissed down his leg or Dungy but either way it was gutless and stacked the odds heavily against the Colts by removing their strength.

now that i agree with.

[Pendejo]

Originally Posted by NaptownChief

I have nothing to confirm what happen yet but having watched all the Colts games this year and based on Manning's post game interview I'm guessing Dungy did pull in the reins and limit his audibles. It is certainly possible that Peyton pissed down his leg and was the one that got conservative early but I highly doubt it. I will be keeping an ear out here locally to see what I find out but my guess is Dungy pulled his Tampa offensive game plan out for this one.

If that's true then Dungy is a fool. They air it out...it's what they do best...in doors of course. I'd be surprised if Peyton doesn't have just as much stroke as Dungy when it comes to calling the offense.

He just didn't get it done. The Patriots dropped balls too. That's no excuse for only managing 3 points.

Then again...it'd be nearly impossible for him to play to the level that NFL machine, and the media have constructed for him. Just wait for the NFL's spin this summer..."It turns out that Peyton was only about 60% for the playoff game. You see he spent the two days leading up to the game in Thailand building homes for victims of the Tsnunami...using nothing but his bare hands. He single handedly gnawed down at least three hundred trees...which he used to build 17 homes. 1700 sq feet each...with 2 1/2 baths...shag carpeting, and a breakfast nook with a breathtaking view. After achieving that he nursed a litter of orphaned piglets back to health after miraculously sprouting 3 teats."

That's enough of that...whoa.