How much does this SB loss damage Peyton Manning's legacy?

Boogs said:

Manning looked soft mentally on Sunday. We know he's soft physically. No real physical attributes anymore. He beats you with his timing and finesse. But you rough him up, or make it hard for him, and it just looked like he folded. He doesn't strike me as a good leader either when the going gets tough.

Click to expand...

I think that is because he has always seen the game as about him. If he can find the cracks and ways to throw his team to a win, or back from a deficit, then he is a good QB mentally, however when he doesn't see himself actually getting it done he has never been able to find a way to lead the team to wins. He doesn't seem to understand how to run team's to win unless he is leading the charge, whereas guys like Montana, Brady, Elway, and even Bradshaw, Stabler, and others were able to lead their teams to wins where they were only role players and they played the contest in such a way to maximize their opportunity to win without them having the big days. In that respect i guess the best comparison for Manning is Marino, who played the game the way that Manning does, big time when he can throw it all over you, but struggled when he had to lead a team without him being the engine for it.


Brady's performance against Indy was a great example of this, he sat back and allowed Blount and the run game and defense to do their jobs and understood how to win that game in that fashion, Manning, at least imo, has never shown that ability, be it college or the pro's, and as such has a track record of failure when it matters most.

Manning is an all time great passer, Brady is down to the final 2 for GOAT, a SB loss like the one Manning just suffered could knock him out of it, another Lombardi and he gets the nod.

Before the Superbowl:

Brady > Manning?

After the Superbowl:

Brady > Manning.

Ivan said:

I think that is because he has always seen the game as about him. If he can find the cracks and ways to throw his team to a win, or back from a deficit, then he is a good QB mentally, however when he doesn't see himself actually getting it done he has never been able to find a way to lead the team to wins. He doesn't seem to understand how to run team's to win unless he is leading the charge, whereas guys like Montana, Brady, Elway, and even Bradshaw, Stabler, and others were able to lead their teams to wins where they were only role players and they played the contest in such a way to maximize their opportunity to win without them having the big days. In that respect i guess the best comparison for Manning is Marino, who played the game the way that Manning does, big time when he can throw it all over you, but struggled when he had to lead a team without him being the engine for it.


Brady's performance against Indy was a great example of this, he sat back and allowed Blount and the run game and defense to do their jobs and understood how to win that game in that fashion, Manning, at least imo, has never shown that ability, be it college or the pro's, and as such has a track record of failure when it matters most.

Manning is an all time great passer, Brady is down to the final 2 for GOAT, a SB loss like the one Manning just suffered could knock him out of it, another Lombardi and he gets the nod.

Click to expand...

I couldn't see Peyton allowing Blount to do what he did to Indy either. I suspect there is an arrogance that won't allow him to do that. There is a video of Peyton (as a Colt) verbally fighting with his O-line. His O-line is begging him to run the ball on the goal line! He wouldn't do it! And just kept arguing with them on the sideline.
And the Manning apologists always say "if only Peyton had a good running back, if only they had a good running game." IMO, Peyton's style and possible arrogance, control issues or whatever, will never allow for a dominant running game.

Ivan said:

If it weren't for the SB this would be true, he made up ground until that game. The SB took him out of the GOAT discussion, and nothing short of winning the next 2 SB's will get him back in it. That game won't affect his standing as an all time great QB, but it did end the GOAT talk, at least for now. Even his staunchest defenders (Pollian, Dungy.....) would have a next to impossible time making that argument with a straight face.

Click to expand...

He was only in the discussion based on if he won.
If you are saying the SB widened the gap compared to what it was if he won, of course.
But there is just no way that Brady widened the gap by losing in the AFCCG because Manning lost in the SB.
Manning added more to his resume this year than Brady.
Losing the SB is not worse than not getting there because you lost in an earlier round.
Are you telling me the Patriots were better, or more successful than the Broncos this year?

Boogs said:

I couldn't see Peyton allowing Blount to do what he did to Indy either. I suspect there is an arrogance that won't allow him to do that. There is a video of Peyton (as a Colt) verbally fighting with his O-line. His O-line is begging him to run the ball on the goal line! He wouldn't do it! And just kept arguing with them on the sideline.
And the Manning apologists always say "if only Peyton had a good running back, if only they had a good running game." IMO, Peyton's style and possible arrogance, control issues or whatever, will never allow for a dominant running game.

Click to expand...

I'm not a Bledsoe basher by any means, he was critical to the Patriots staying in NE, however after he was traded and was playing for Buffalo there was a really well publicized moment where the Bills, who as always were struggling, won a game by running the ball down the other team's throat, and at his post game press conference Bledsoe actually suggested that if that was the way the Bills were going to run their offense then they didn't need him there. That was after a win? Certain QB's come to believe they ARE the offense, whereas others know they just run it and don't care about what way they actually get it done just as long as they do get it done Manning sees himself as the offense, Brady sees himself as the one who runs it for them, that's ultimately what makes him the better QB, even if Manning has been a better passer.

Ivan said:

I'm not a Bledsoe basher by any means, he was critical to the Patriots staying in NE, however after he was traded and was playing for Buffalo there was a really well publicized moment where the Bills, who as always were struggling, won a game by running the ball down the other team's throat, and at his post game press conference Bledsoe actually suggested that if that was the way the Bills were going to run their offense then they didn't need him there. That was after a win? Certain QB's come to believe they ARE the offense, whereas others know they just run it and don't care about what way they actually get it done just as long as they do get it done Manning sees himself as the offense, Brady sees himself as the one who runs it for them, that's ultimately what makes him the better QB, even if Manning has been a better stat padder.

Click to expand...

Fixed for accuracy

AndyJohnson said:

He was only in the discussion based on if he won.
If you are saying the SB widened the gap compared to what it was if he won, of course.
But there is just no way that Brady widened the gap by losing in the AFCCG because Manning lost in the SB.
Manning added more to his resume this year than Brady.
Losing the SB is not worse than not getting there because you lost in an earlier round.
Are you telling me the Patriots were better, or more successful than the Broncos this year?

Click to expand...

I understand the argument you are making and agree in most instances, the fact that Brady made more SB's than Montana shouldn't count against him and i have made that argument many times. However in this instance it was a matter of Manning setting his play-off record straight, and if he wins and goes over .500 for play-off wins and SB's then he comes out of it in the GOAT discussion, Losing that game, especially in the manner they did and he played took him out of the GOAT discussion but leaves him in the discussion for the great QB's.

Although it seems counterintuitive and is impossible to prove i actually think Brady will have come away doing more for his legacy this season than Manning did, as he got the most out of a ravaged Patriots team and Manning fell short with a team everyone believed was going to win it all from day one. I can't argue the Patriots went farther because they didn't, but imo Brady comes out of this looking like he got the most out of it and Manning fell short once again. At least that is my take on the historical narrative that will come out of this game, we'll see? Some of that just depends upon what he does the next couple of seasons, because if this receiving corps and the patriots go win another SB in the next couple of seasons then it is going to look like it was just a matter of their inexperience that Brady turned them into what they became. And if they fall short and don't make it to the final four the next couple of seasons he will likely go down as the #2 all time, regardless of what the numbers say.

By the same reasoning I think Brady would have been seriously damaged had the Seahawks pounded him and the Patriots in that game. Fair-No, Perception-Most likely.

People applying logic and information that is at the forefront of our collected memory now are missing the point entirely when it comes to legacy discussions.

Does anyone remember the AFCCG losses Montana had? Or who they were against?

Nobody but autistic types or fans of the teams who were playing will ever remember, which is a very small segment of the whole of NFL fans who through our shared experiences and expressions of those experiences will determine what a player's legacy is.

Which is why ****ting the bed on the biggest stage in his 3rd shot at the trophy is more damaging to Peyton's legacy than losing the AFCCG in a much closer game will be to Brady's.

Look at other QBs from the past and see how they're remembered. Nobody brings up the times that the 9ers didn't make it, they remember the wins. Nobody brings up Jim Kelly's amazing games in the playoffs they remember the losses.

Which is why Peyton, as things stand, is going to be remembered more like Kelly or Marino who lucked into Rex Grossman. And he wouldn't have even gotten that if the Pats could have held on in the 2006 AFCCG...

Deus Irae said:

They were doing the same thing in the lead up to the Patriots game. It was going to be a team thing.




Then the Broncos won, and suddenly it was all about Manning for 2 weeks.

Click to expand...

I was thinking about the "team thing" today. Yes, Manning had no control over allowing the KO return for a TD. And the Denver D did not come up with any turnovers or momentum changing plays that might have kick-started their offense.

Looking at Manning's career, though, you can go back to '99 season with the "New Triplets" and the divisional round loss at home to the Titans. Since then, the teams around Manning have changed; different head coaches, different coordinators, different receivers and running backs, different defensive standouts. The constant has been Manning and the fact that the brilliance he shows frequently in the regular season is very rare in the playoffs. It doesn't matter if he's in Indianapolis or Denver or throwing to Marvin Harrison or Demaryious Thomas. It's a team game, but the teams are following his lead.

Some Denver fans are starting to understand:

Manning's teams are not too shabby. - Page 2 - The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community

"Here's how Manning led teams ended their seasons...

2013 43-8 Loss to Seattle in the Super Bowl (Turnover fest)
2012 38-35 Loss to Baltimore (Interception ended the game)
2010 10-7 Lost to Mark Sanchez and the Jets (only managed 7 points)
2009 Lost Super Bowl to the Saints. (Interception decided the game)
2008 Lost to Chargers 23-17 (Couldn't get anything going in the 4th)
2007 Lost to Chargers 28-17 (Turnover fest)
2006 Beat Rex Grossman in the Super Bowl.
2005 Lost to the Steelers (Manning blew it on the final drive)
2004 Lost to the Patriots 20-3 (Turnovers killed team, managed 3 points)
2003 Lost to the Patriots 24-14 (Team committed 5 turnovers)


Looking back and trying to understand how a Manning led team laid a giant turd in the Super Bowl against a strong defense. I'm just surprised I didn't see this before and how soft some of his teams were."

Joker said:

as for Manning to Brady I offer only what I've seen...Brady has had tougher games and losses as the years pass but when he's lost Super Bowls, it's not because he didn't have his team IN POSITION to win it. In both losses, the Pats had a better than good chance to win. In Manning's two losses he has been destroyed. In his lone Super Bowl win, he was matched against a team with "who's that?????" QB......

The Colts prevailed over the Bears 29-17 on Sunday, but Manning would be wise to send a thank-you note to Chicago quarterback Rex Grossman. Much-maligned Grossman will be savaged even more after throwing a fourth-quarter interception to defensive back Kelvin Hayden that was returned 56 yards for the game-changing touchdown.

Manning, who completed 25 of 38 passes for 247 yards and one touchdown and threw one interception, was named the game's MVP. Afterward, he deflected at least a half-dozen attempts to elicit a comment about the perception -- after a series of playoff losses -- that he is now a winner.

THAT is Manning's Super Bowl body of work...one must be a profoundly ******ed, near vegetable football fan to even think of making any comparison with Brady and his body of work in Super Bowls.

Click to expand...

No it ain't. You only list the GOOD stuff!

Ivan said:

I understand the argument you are making and agree in most instances, the fact that Brady made more SB's than Montana shouldn't count against him and i have made that argument many times. However in this instance it was a matter of Manning setting his play-off record straight, and if he wins and goes over .500 for play-off wins and SB's then he comes out of it in the GOAT discussion, Losing that game, especially in the manner they did and he played took him out of the GOAT discussion but leaves him in the discussion for the great QB's.

Click to expand...

The concept is the same whether its Brady/Montana, Aikman/Elway or Manning/anyone. Leading your team to the SB and losing is better than losing in an earlier round. there is simply no debate. It would be like saying losing on the last week of the season and missing the playoffs at 10-6 is worse than going 4-12.
Again, you seem to be arguing that he took a step back from somewhere he never was, a 2 time SB winner.
Are you telling me that if the Patriots beat the Broncos then brady lost badly in the SB he would have lost ground to Manning?
Manning never was in the GOAT discussion. He didn't get dismissed because he lost a SB, he needed to win one to get into the discussion. Getting close doesn't move him backwards.
He has a better resume today than he had a year ago. He accomplished more this year than in all but one of his career seasons.

I think you are moving the needle from the point of "We all now Peyton will win the SB, so his legacy will be...." instead of from the point of where he was a year ago.

Although it seems counterintuitive and is impossible to prove i actually think Brady will have come away doing more for his legacy this season than Manning did, as he got the most out of a ravaged Patriots team and Manning fell short with a team everyone believed was going to win it all from day one.

Click to expand...

Thats not legacy stuff. I think you are looking at this from the point of view of an uneducated fan, or a steven A Smith/Skip Bayless muckraker. I am looking at it from the standpoint of an intelligent analysis of their careers.

Are you saying that 9-11 in the playoffs with 8 one and dones in 12 trips, 2 Conf championships and 1-1 in SBs is better than
11-12, 8/13 one and dones, 3 conf championships and 1-2 SBs?
It would follow that you think his legacy would have been elevated by a loss to the Patriots.

I can't argue the Patriots went farther because they didn't, but imo Brady comes out of this looking like he got the most out of it and Manning fell short once again. At least that is my take on the historical narrative that will come out of this game, we'll see? Some of that just depends upon what he does the next couple of seasons, because if this receiving corps and the patriots go win another SB in the next couple of seasons then it is going to look like it was just a matter of their inexperience that Brady turned them into what they became. And if they fall short and don't make it to the final four the next couple of seasons he will likely go down as the #2 all time, regardless of what the numbers say.

Click to expand...

All we can judge is what has happened. You can't judge a player by a game that hasn't been played.
As it is Brady is #2 to Montana. If Brady gets #4 there is nothing left that Montana has to put him ahead of Brady and Brady because, for the time being pretty much the indisputable GOAT. But again, its irrelevant because handing over an accomplisment that you have not achieved is a silly way to judge a career.

By the same reasoning I think Brady would have been seriously damaged had the Seahawks pounded him and the Patriots in that game. Fair-No, Perception-Most likely.

Click to expand...

Perhaps we are having a different discussion. I am talking about the reality of the players careers, and you seem to be talking about what 'people say'.

Boogs said:

I couldn't see Peyton allowing Blount to do what he did to Indy either. I suspect there is an arrogance that won't allow him to do that. There is a video of Peyton (as a Colt) verbally fighting with his O-line. His O-line is begging him to run the ball on the goal line! He wouldn't do it! And just kept arguing with them on the sideline.
And the Manning apologists always say "if only Peyton had a good running back, if only they had a good running game." IMO, Peyton's style and possible arrogance, control issues or whatever, will never allow for a dominant running game.

Click to expand...

I seem to recall a running back named Edgerrin James who played for Indy from 1999 through 2005. Excluding the 2001 season in which he was injured and played in only six games, James averaged 1427 yards on the ground per season during his Colts career.

NormZauchin said:

I seem to recall a running back named Edgerrin James who played for Indy from 1999 through 2005. Excluding the 2001 season in which he was injured and played in only six games, James averaged 1427 yards on the ground per season during his Colts career.

Click to expand...

Yes, James was a very talented runner.

The biggest difference between Brady and Manning IMO, and the reason I give the nod to Brady [hands-down] is simple:

=Manning craps the bed in epic fashion and then is INSULTED by and bristles at someone suggesting it was an embarrassing performance. (Newsflash Peytie: "embarrassing" doesn't even begin to cover what happened on that field Sun.);

=Brady turns in a bad performance, he and the team crap the bed, and his usual response is "we sucked."

Then there is Peyton's well-known history of throwing his teammates under the bus after especially tough losses. No one can gloss that over and pretend it never happened. It did, and it continues to happen, although more subtly these days--part of Manning's legacy that he can never re-write.

How much does this damage Peyton Manning's legacy?

Ivan said:

I understand the argument you are making and agree in most instances, the fact that Brady made more SB's than Montana shouldn't count against him and i have made that argument many times. However in this instance it was a matter of Manning setting his play-off record straight, and if he wins and goes over .500 for play-off wins and SB's then he comes out of it in the GOAT discussion, Losing that game, especially in the manner they did and he played took him out of the GOAT discussion but leaves him in the discussion for the great QB's.

Although it seems counterintuitive and is impossible to prove i actually think Brady will have come away doing more for his legacy this season than Manning did, as he got the most out of a ravaged Patriots team and Manning fell short with a team everyone believed was going to win it all from day one. I can't argue the Patriots went farther because they didn't, but imo Brady comes out of this looking like he got the most out of it and Manning fell short once again. At least that is my take on the historical narrative that will come out of this game, we'll see? Some of that just depends upon what he does the next couple of seasons, because if this receiving corps and the patriots go win another SB in the next couple of seasons then it is going to look like it was just a matter of their inexperience that Brady turned them into what they became. And if they fall short and don't make it to the final four the next couple of seasons he will likely go down as the #2 all time, regardless of what the numbers say.

By the same reasoning I think Brady would have been seriously damaged had the Seahawks pounded him and the Patriots in that game. Fair-No, Perception-Most likely.

Click to expand...

I completely agree, but I also acknowledge Andy's point that its ludicrous to say Peyton's legacy would be hurt less had he lost to the Patriots in the title game.

Instead I offer that anything other than a SB win hurt his legacy. You can say that from a pure numbers standpoint Peyton added to his resume. He did, but legacies can't be boiled down that simply, especially given the context of the season.

NormZauchin said:

I seem to recall a running back named Edgerrin James who played for Indy from 1999 through 2005. Excluding the 2001 season in which he was injured and played in only six games, James averaged 1427 yards on the ground per season during his Colts career.

Click to expand...

Yup, Manning had a great offense surrounding him when he played with the Colts. He had 2 HOF caliber receivers in Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne, Pro Bowl RB Edgerrin James, and Pro Bowl TE Dallas Clark.

In Denver, Manning enjoyed having the pro-bowl talents of WRs Demaryius Thomas, Eric Decker, Wes Welker, and TE Julius Thomas. RB Knowshown Moreno enjoyed his first 1,000 yard 10 TD season. And of course the Broncos did score the most points of all time in the regular season. How can you blame everyone else on the team? The MOST PROLIFIC OFFENSE of ALL TIME laid a TURD in the Superbowl. And Manning was at the helm.

When the Titanic hits the Iceberg that was the Seattle defense, don't you have to put some blame on the guy steering the Denver Ship??

DocHoliday said:

I completely agree, but I also acknowledge Andy's point that its ludicrous to say Peyton's legacy would be hurt less had he lost to the Patriots in the title game.

Instead I offer that anything other than a SB win hurt his legacy. You can say that from a pure numbers standpoint Peyton added to his resume. He did, but legacies can't be boiled down that simply, especially given the context of the season.

Click to expand...

Manning's legacy would have been much better served if he'd lost a close, high scoring game to Brady (say 30+ scored by each) than it was by him getting to the Super Bowl only to end up getting beaten in the manner he was.

Having a couple more really good playoff wins helps his legacy for sure but people will have a hard time forgetting how dreadful he looked in that game. Especially in the first half, that second INT where he closed his eyes and chucked the ball up in the air, lol, just horrific. He's lucky it wasn't worse, could'v had 4 INTs easy.

AndyJohnson said:

Perhaps we are having a different discussion. I am talking about the reality of the players careers, and you seem to be talking about what 'people say'.

Click to expand...

From a pure numbers perspective your arguments are sound.

From a fan/media/water cooler conversation, nobody really remembers playoff losses unless you are a fan of the team. if we say how many 1 and dones or NFCCG losses did Joe Montana have, not many people can answer that. But, many can tell you he was 4-0 in Superbowls. Likewise, you can tell me how many SB losses Jim Kelly has but not his other playoff appearances.

Getting to the SB is great, but really only if you win. Granted you only have a chance to win if you get there, but the loss hurts more for fans and players if you lose the SB than any other point during the playoffs. While Elway was being a little bit of the showman, he was asked when he got over his SB losses. his response, "I still hasn't".

and he was lucky enough to ride off into the sunset winning his last 2.