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

[Ring 6]

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.

So you would rather have lost to Denver than win that game and then lose in the SB?
You wish Lee Evans held onto the ball?
You would have wanted to lose in the AFCCG in 2007?

I find those things hard to fathom.

In any event I am talking about assessing the players objectively, not what Joe Fan misunderstands about the assessment. I don't care if a fan would be happier for his team to lose early because he thinks it is less disappointing, the player who wins his way to the SB did better than the one would could not.

 

[JMC00]

Re: After last night...

Brady got us the lead with less than 3 minutes to go in both Superbowl games.

And yet in terms of the national mindset, Brady's two close last minute losses hurt him a lot and Manning's two choke jobs don't effect him at all.

Which is a complete joke.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

Manning may not even be the greatest regular season QB of all time, as his regular season percentage is far lower than the 77% own by Brady. So it can be argued that he's deficient in both regular season and playoffs.

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

So you would rather have lost to Denver than win that game and then lose in the SB?

For the 2 weeks between AFCGC and the Superbowl, definitely not. For every week after losing the superbowl, sure. I understand you can't win the big game if you aren't there, but we're talking about losing.

Would you rather get an infected foot and have to deal with a 1 week stay at the hospital followed by 5 months of rehab or would you prefer to wait 2 more weeks and have your foot amputated and be walking on crutches or with a prosthetic the day after amputation?

And for the record, I said I agree with you from a numbers viewpoint (I said this earlier). From a fan/emotional level losing always sucks, but it sucks worse when you have gone farther into the playoffs. you don't say "what if" when you on't make the playoffs or lose earlier (with the possible lone exception -- for me -- of 2006 because whoever won the AFC was winning the superbowl).

 

[IllegalContact]

bottom line?

manning's legacy is intact hasn't changed since the last time he was part of the best offense ever and came to foxboro to put up 3 points.

he's one big achilles heel

 

[Ring 6]

For the 2 weeks between AFCGC and the Superbowl, definitely not. For every week after losing the superbowl, sure. I understand you can't win the big game if you aren't there, but we're talking about losing.

But you are still dealing with the loss in the AFCCG. Either way you deal with failing, I would think more wins before the loss nets out to better.

Would you rather get an infected foot and have to deal with a 1 week stay at the hospital followed by 5 months of rehab or would you prefer to wait 2 more weeks and have your foot amputated and be walking on crutches or with a prosthetic the day after amputation?

That is not a reasonable analogy.
A reasonable analogy is would you rather lose the foot today or have 2 more weeks to use it.

And for the record, I said I agree with you from a numbers viewpoint (I said this earlier). From a fan/emotional level losing always sucks, but it sucks worse when you have gone farther into the playoffs. you don't say "what if" when you on't make the playoffs or lose earlier (with the possible lone exception -- for me -- of 2006 because whoever won the AFC was winning the superbowl).

I see it the other way around. I will take as many wins as possible before losing. Beating Denver would have been awesome. Losing in the SB would have been losing, just like losing to Denver was, no better, no worse.

 

[Ring 6]

bottom line?

manning's legacy is intact hasn't changed since the last time he was part of the best offense ever and came to foxboro to put up 3 points.

he's one big achilles heel

Honestly, I think characterizations like that, or calling him a choker are wrong.
He is a great QB in most situations, but in a tough game, vs a good opponent, under pressure, he is very average. The problem for him is that average is in the category that is most important of all in ranking the greatest QBs of all time, as well as the most important factor in your teams ultimate success.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: After last night...

And yet in terms of the national mindset, Brady's two close last minute losses hurt him a lot and Manning's two choke jobs don't effect him at all.

Which is a complete joke.

That is actually probably a very correct statement.
But you are looking at it wrong.
Brady is hurt more by those 2 losses because those wins would make him indisputably the GOAT.
Manning isn't hurt as much by his to losses because they confirm what anyone with an objective opinion knows he is, a very average QB in big games, who doesn't belong in the discussion.

Bradys losses snatched from the jaws of defeat by late TDs allowed by the D, prevent him from having the resume he might have.
Manning losses just confirm that he is what he is.

 

[IllegalContact]

Honestly, I think characterizations like that, or calling him a choker are wrong.
He is a great QB in most situations, but in a tough game, vs a good opponent, under pressure, he is very average. The problem for him is that average is in the category that is most important of all in ranking the greatest QBs of all time, as well as the most important factor in your teams ultimate success.

Except that his support has always been top notch.....constantly surrounded by 1st round talent.....the high flying offense that winds up virtually shut out in the playoffs is a classic example of a choke

His playoffs end poorly much more frequently

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

But you are still dealing with the loss in the AFCCG. Either way you deal with failing, I would think more wins before the loss nets out to better.


I see it the other way around. I will take as many wins as possible before losing. Beating Denver would have been awesome. Losing in the SB would have been losing, just like losing to Denver was, no better, no worse.

I understand your point. I was just trying to express the other side of it (not trying to convince you that your opinion is wrong).

 

[Deus Irae]

 

[Deus Irae]

 

[Ring 6]

Except that his support has always been top notch.....constantly surrounded by 1st round talent.....the high flying offense that winds up virtually shut out in the playoffs is a classic example of a choke

His playoffs end poorly much more frequently

No. He is very average.
13 trips to the playoffs.
11-12 record.
3 trips to the SB and one win in 13 years, which is close to the average of all playoff teams.
It is thoroughly average any way you slice it.

Perhaps if people were more truthful in their evaluation, it would be received better.
Peyton Manning is the biggest choker ever and sucks in the playoffs is wrong and opens up a valid counterargument.
Peyton Manning becomes mediocre in the post season, and has very average results which are underachieiving compared to his regular season success and eliminate him from consideration as the best QB ever because he may is in the discussion for best regular season QB ever, but no better than average when it matters most is an accurate depiction that prevents the counter argument that he doesn't suck, teams lose games and he didn't choke.

 

[Ring 6]

I understand your point. I was just trying to express the other side of it (not trying to convince you that your opinion is wrong).

Agreed, and I was doing the same.

 

[Ivan]

Re: After last night...

And yet in terms of the national mindset, Brady's two close last minute losses hurt him a lot and Manning's two choke jobs don't effect him at all.

Which is a complete joke.

I think this one really hurt him. He still has his protectors but everyone saw what happened the other night and when you play like the Sanchize in a New York Super Bowl there is a price to pay for it, and in this case the price is that he is no longer in the GOAT debate. I agree with you in that it won't have much effect on the arguments about him being an all time great QB because he won't fall out of that discussion but he is done in the GOAT debate.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: After last night...

I think this one really hurt him. He still has his protectors but everyone saw what happened the other night and when you play like the Sanchize in a New York Super Bowl there is a price to pay for it, and in this case the price is that he is no longer in the GOAT debate. I agree with you in that it won't have much effect on the arguments about him being an all time great QB because he won't fall out of that discussion but he is done in the GOAT debate.

The only way he was in it before that game was if you handed him a hypothetical win.
It hurt him in the view of those that already gave him credit for wining this game.
For those that judged him on his resume, it kept him pretty much where he was, after getting a bump for winning a 3rd AFC Championship.

If I would be rich if I won the lottery, and I buy a ticket, my wealth is not adversely affected by not having the winning numbers, I still am what I was.

 

[Danger Zone]

And what I think what hurt Peyton as much as anything (at least in my opinion of him) was him throwing yet another pick-6.

 

[Ring 6]

And what I think what hurt Peyton as much as anything (at least in my opinion of him) was him throwing yet another pick-6.

Funny, it did nothing to my opinion, because I expected it.

 

[brdmaverick]

I'm sorry, I'm getting frustrated reading some of these threads...sure winning may have helped his legacy but losing didn't hurt it.

Why are we enfatuated with calling Manning a regular season quarterback. The guy has had fantastic regular seasons, but let's not forget that he DID win a Super Bowl. Not only that, he's now been to three!

I feel like it's the media's job to continuously look at a QBs career and for some reason try to downgrade him because "he didn't win one more." After all, Marino never won one and I bet he wishes SO SO badly he did. But instead, we look and say "oh, poor day, but he NEVER got it done." That is true, but for Peyton he does have one but we're still like "oh, but he doesn't have two." And even with Brady, some are like "oh, he's losing it b/c he doesn't have his fourth by now." C'mon, if Brady gets a fourth taht would be terrific but it shouldn't be expected, just like with Manning.

He is a great QB. That's the fact. Yes, his record in the playoffs isn't nearly as good as his regular season record, but neither is Brady's. It's a given fact that you play better teams and only one team can win. Once you lose, there is no chance at redemption like the regular season.

While I enjoyed the Manning beatdown the other night, I will in no way try to downgrade how great of a QB he has been and what he has meant to the league.

 

[Ivan]

Re: After last night...

The only way he was in it before that game was if you handed him a hypothetical win.
It hurt him in the view of those that already gave him credit for wining this game.
For those that judged him on his resume, it kept him pretty much where he was, after getting a bump for winning a 3rd AFC Championship.

If I would be rich if I won the lottery, and I buy a ticket, my wealth is not adversely affected by not having the winning numbers, I still am what I was.

Andy, you are acting as if people tally up the pieces and come to a rational conclusion based upon the facts, they don't, the GOAT debate like all "greatest ever" debates is about perception not some agreed upon statistical reality. The fact of the matter is that if you watched the hype leading up to that game there were many who were prepared to hand the GOAT title to Manning if they won that game based upon his passing numbers, MVP's, and the fact that it would have given him 2 Lombardi's with different coaches, which has never been done. There are many who want manning to have that title and they were completely willing to tailor their arguments to fit that desire. What happened Sunday night cut the legs right out from under their arguments and they now have no way to make that argument.

A real argument could be made that Brady is the GOAT when you look at all the aspects of his career. Career winning %, wins, play-off wins, Lombardi's etc...., however the overall perception nationally at this point is that Montana is the GOAT because of his 4-0 in Super Bowls, and great performances in those games. even if Brady wins another Lombardi it will be difficult outside of Patriot Nation to convince people that Brady is the GOAT. Rational-No, Perception-yes. People will define it the way they want, and they will tailor their arguments to match their perceptions, and short of Brady winning 3 more Lombardi's it will be hard to convince many that he ultimately is the GOAT. If he gets 2 there are still many who will point to the 2 losses as proof that Montana was better, 3 and only the hard core haters will be left banging the drum for Montana.


What is comical to me is that many of the Brady haters (my oldest brother for example) will claim Montana is the GOAT because of 4-0, yet still want to argue that Manning is better than Brady despite his play-off and SB record, they just turn to the passing numbers and MVP's and claim those trump Brady and that he is just a "game manager"