"Winning the BIG GAME"=really overrated.

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
one thing that's been bothering me all week is all the "can Peyton win the BIG GAME" thing...as if he quality as a QB overall will be decided on that...

...i'm not saying it's not great he won or that it's not important to win big games, but it gets a little irritating when people seem to think it's a "black mark" on a player just cuz they didn't win a superbowl..

like for example, Dan fucking Marino was amazing, and was a GREAT - full stop - QB. I mean, seriously, if you put him on the 49ers instead of Montana or Young do you think they wouldn't have won...

...also, look at dudes like Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson...they are unspectacular, average at best QBs, they just happened to be on great teams when they won...

M@tt He1g3s0n: oh u mad cuz im stylin on u (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 5 February 2007 21:41 (eighteen years ago)

i dunno man, marino looked like he was gonna cry.

hstencil (hstencil), Monday, 5 February 2007 21:59 (eighteen years ago)

Marino now is the ONLY ONE haw haw.

c(,,c) (Leee), Monday, 5 February 2007 22:05 (eighteen years ago)

it's overrated but not totally imaginary.

jhoshea (scoopsnoodle), Monday, 5 February 2007 22:16 (eighteen years ago)

actually, manning really didn't win that game, y'know? the best point phil simms made was that addai and rhodes should have gotten co-mvp. they shredded the bears d, not peyton's quick outs to marvin harrison.

jonathan quayle higgins (j.q. higgins), Monday, 5 February 2007 22:17 (eighteen years ago)

Ask Charles Barkley. It matters.

Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Monday, 5 February 2007 22:36 (eighteen years ago)

actually, manning really didn't win that game, y'know? the best point phil simms made was that addai and rhodes should have gotten co-mvp. they shredded the bears d, not peyton's quick outs to marvin harrison.

Right, but having Manning means that all kinds of slants and runs will be open when they otherwise wouldn't be. Plus, Manning is just sitting up there, recognizing defenses, calling audibles... he does a lot of stuff that doesn't show up in the stats AND he has great stats.

polyphonic (polyphonic), Monday, 5 February 2007 22:40 (eighteen years ago)

actually, manning really didn't win that game, y'know? the best point phil simms made was that addai and rhodes should have gotten co-mvp. they shredded the bears d, not peyton's quick outs to marvin harrison.

yeah that's what i mean...there's this wierd perception that a Qb is the only factor in winning the "big game"...

M@tt He1g3s0n: oh u mad cuz im stylin on u (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 5 February 2007 22:49 (eighteen years ago)

Ask Charles Barkley. It matters.

lol, "dwayne wade, is that your dad?"

hstencil (hstencil), Monday, 5 February 2007 22:59 (eighteen years ago)

"I mean, seriously, if you put him on the 49ers instead of Montana or Young do you think they wouldn't have won..."

I've never been totally sold on this argument. Yeah I suspect that Marino might have won, but Montana and Young had mobility (and therefore flexibility) that Marino didn't. And Marino was around for AGES so it seems hard to believe that the Dolphins couldn't have built a good team around him and won if he was actually that great.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 5 February 2007 23:00 (eighteen years ago)

well, i think it probably stems from the two minute drill, but that's really more a creature of nfl rules, i think.

"Right, but having Manning means that all kinds of slants and runs will be open when they otherwise wouldn't be."

-is that true, though? addai and rhodes probably got additional yards b/c of how deep the safeties were playing, but a defense that's executing shouldn't be letting backs get in to the defensive backfield. there are certainly a lot of west coast schemes that have been successful on the premise that most d's will give up quick slants, screens and swing passes and they hardly required a wizard to run them.

jonathan quayle higgins (j.q. higgins), Monday, 5 February 2007 23:07 (eighteen years ago)

I mean, seriously, if you put him on the 49ers instead of Montana or Young do you think they wouldn't have won...

far lesser qbs than montana, young or marino could've won w/a couple of those 9ers teams.

jhoshea (scoopsnoodle), Monday, 5 February 2007 23:15 (eighteen years ago)

is that true, though? addai and rhodes probably got additional yards b/c of how deep the safeties were playing, but a defense that's executing shouldn't be letting backs get in to the defensive backfield. there are certainly a lot of west coast schemes that have been successful on the premise that most d's will give up quick slants, screens and swing passes and they hardly required a wizard to run them.

The Bears defense didn't execute all that well, but they were definitely giving Manning the short stuff and the runs and didn't think Manning would take it and exploit it. I guess they didn't watch Manning against the Ravens and Patriots, when he basically did the same exact thing. I think Alex Brown said as much in the post-game comments.

The problem the Bears had with the running game / slants is that stuff that should have been 3 or 4 yards was 10 yards because they kept missing assignments, taking bad angles, or just couldn't make the first tackle on Rhodes/Addai.

polyphonic (polyphonic), Monday, 5 February 2007 23:32 (eighteen years ago)

All good QBs and running backs know that when they get MVP it's only because the O-line gave them the opportunity anyway. The main purpose of the backfield is to take media attention away from the heavyset ugly men who actually work during the game

TOMBO7 (TOMBOT), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 15:40 (eighteen years ago)

i think the bottom line is that very seldom can a victory be credited to one guy, whether it's a soul crushing run, stout o line, brilliant game planning/adjustment...there's really just too many variables to limit the ultimate credit.

re:

o line/qbs i totally thought of old school skins and the average qbs that won w/ the hogs...or the timmy smith bowl!

jonathan quayle higgins (j.q. higgins), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 15:47 (eighteen years ago)

All three men were equally good choices as MVP; Manning won it because, yes, he's a quarterback, but keep in mind the fact that all three of them came up with a way to destroy the Bears' (EXTREMELY OVERRATED AND I'VE BEEN DENNY GREENING THEM ALL YEAR YOU MIGHT ALL RECALL) defense gives the bonus to Manning because he calls all the plays on the offense, basically. It's ok, because Rhodes was in the Disneyland commercial. You can have that argument all day with virtually any SB; teams win, not single guys.

Re: the original argument, I think it's a bit unfortunate but it is definitely true that not having won a Super Bowl hurts you in terms of perception. Steve Young probably would've shot himself in the face if he hadn't pulled off that SB win. See also: "Tiki Barber/Barry Sanders is leaving football...BEFORE WINNING A SUPER BOWL" arguments about "quitters." I don't think it is particularly fair--I mean, really, you're right, who is going to argue that Trent Dilfer is a better QB than Marino or Kelly? Besides Dilfer's mom, maybe. It just seems to put those dudes down to a level which just isn't regarded as highly...they're still first ballot HOFers but there's that asterisk.

No it's not fair but life is a game of inches etc.

Allyzay doesnt get into the monkeys or vindications (allyzay), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 15:52 (eighteen years ago)

The most unfair thing about the "QBS MUST WIN A SUPER BOWL TO BE TRULY THE BEST" argument is it has resulted in the blatantly untrue idea being propagated that John Elway was a better QB than Marino or Kelly.

Allyzay doesnt get into the monkeys or vindications (allyzay), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 15:53 (eighteen years ago)

the weird exception to this rule: Troy Aikman doesn't seem to get a whole lot of love as a "great QB" even though he was a stud in college, presided over probably the greatest team of recent memory...yet...one-time champ and oft-times chump brett favre is more highly regarded...strange..

M@tt He1g3s0n: oh u mad cuz im stylin on u (Matt Helgeson), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 16:07 (eighteen years ago)

presided over probably the greatest team of recent memory...

he didn't play for the 2003-4 pats.

chicago kevin (chicago kevin), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 16:12 (eighteen years ago)

We shd let MADDEN decide.

David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 16:16 (eighteen years ago)

I'm yellow carding you for that, kevin.

Allyzay doesnt get into the monkeys or vindications (allyzay), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 16:17 (eighteen years ago)

DANG!

chicago kevin (chicago kevin), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 16:18 (eighteen years ago)

Troy Aikman gets the shaft because of who else was on his team, which is funny considering that Michael Irvin is like the most hated man in the NFL so you'd think he'd get more cred and Irvin would get dissed. But yeah, that's kind of weird.

Allyzay doesnt get into the monkeys or vindications (allyzay), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 16:19 (eighteen years ago)

i'm not even a fan of the cowboys or aikman, really, but it's weird that tom brady is now pretty much considered top 10 all time by the "experts" and such and aikman doesn't even come up in the coversation? like i bet you could ask like 50 people and 45 would say favre is hands-down better than aikman? why? especially if "winning big games" is supposed to be so important...aikman won a grip of big games.

M@tt He1g3s0n: oh u mad cuz im stylin on u (Matt Helgeson), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 16:38 (eighteen years ago)

I'm just going to blame media attention for this one? Aikman wasn't really a big focus of the media during the Cowboys' run--weirdly, since he's the QB, ostensibly handsome, and very well-spoken and good mannered! People seemed to replace the regular QB obsession with Jimmy Johnson obsession.

It is completely bizarre. Of course, Aikman was a first round HOFer and all that and people all still know who he is...but yeah, I don't know why he doesn't enter into the conversation when some of these other people do.

Allyzay doesnt get into the monkeys or vindications (allyzay), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 16:42 (eighteen years ago)

In 1998 the Cowboys lost to the Arizona Cardinals in the wildcard playoffs. Short of curing cancer or becoming Michael Irving's tailor, nothing will erase that black mark.

lk (lawrence kansas), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 16:42 (eighteen years ago)

farve at his best was def better than aikman, i mean dude is closing in on marino's records. but yeah aikman is way underrated.

jhoshea (scoopsnoodle), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 16:43 (eighteen years ago)

favre is definitely regarded as more of a big play guy, but aikman was silly accurate...i mean, he made alvin harper into a threat! besides, one wonders how many games favre pulled out where he created the deficit in the first place by one of his trademark "questionable decisions."

jonathan quayle higgins (j.q. higgins), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 17:13 (eighteen years ago)

the troy aikman story and the peyton manning story do not make good six-minute montage-mentaries before the game. everybody loves hearing about the brett favres of the world and how they got over their painkiller addictions and undisciplined approach!

tom brady is such an uncharismatic mannequin that in order to make an ad campaign featuring him they were forced to hire his entire o-line to put some life into the room!

TOMBO7 (TOMBOT), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 17:54 (eighteen years ago)

aikman's stats were never CRAZY, like i think the dude threw for 20 TDs only once in his career, and never topped 3500 yds passing. he was definitely a HOFer but i totally understand why he's overlooked.

roger goodell (gear), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 17:59 (eighteen years ago)

best thing abt favre coming back for another year: he's a lock to break the career interception record...

M@tt He1g3s0n: oh u mad cuz im stylin on u (Matt Helgeson), Tuesday, 6 February 2007 20:05 (eighteen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.