Jump to content

Peyton MVP


Integrity28

Recommended Posts

Associated Press named Peyton Manning its 2013 Most Valuable Player.

Manning surprisingly wasn't a unanimous winner, receiving 49 of a possible 50 votes. (Someone, absurdly, voted for Tom Brady.) In one of the greatest single NFL seasons of all-time, Peyton broke the records for passing yards (5,477) and touchdowns (55) en route to leading the Broncos to Super Bowl 48, completing 68.3 percent of his passes with a 115.1 quarterback rating. Manning also took home Offensive Player of the Year honors, with LeSean McCoy (10), Brady (1), Russell Wilson (1), and Drew Brees (1) also receiving votes. The MVP award is Manning's fifth of his career, but just his first since 2009.
 
 
Cracks me up that someone in the press bought into the press agenda of "Tom does more with less" to the point of giving him a vote. Comparing the two of them this season is ridiculous. Brady was relegated to game management for their playoff run, and how many points did Brady put up while missing throws in the AFCC game? Yeah.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he wins today, does he get the title "Greatest QB EVER"?

Right now, Its MONTANAS, but does Peyton inherit it with win today? Tough question.

 

no, not even close.  Montana played before the ty law rule, before they protected the passers.  he is 4/4 in superbowls, and until someone goes 5/5, he is the king

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no, not even close.  Montana played before the ty law rule, before they protected the passers.  he is 4/4 in superbowls, and until someone goes 5/5, he is the king

So you are one (like me) that believes championships (rings), and not all the gaudy statistical records that Peyton will hold, are more important.

I agree 100%, but DAN MARINO wont be sending Shannon Sharpe any Christmas cards based on the exact same feelings he shared right in front of Dan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you are one (like me) that believes championships (rings), and not all the gaudy statistical records that Peyton will hold, are more important.

I agree 100%, but DAN MARINO wont be sending Shannon Sharpe any Christmas cards based on the exact same feelings he shared right in front of Dan.

 

 

That's not entirely what he said.

 

He said 1.) Montana played when the rules didn't favor QBs as much, and 2.) Montana never made it to the big game and lost. 

 

It's not about counting rings, as much as it's about winning every SB he played in. 

 

Brady has more rings, but Manning is a better QB. Neither of them will ever achieve Montana status because they've both gotten their and choked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you are one (like me) that believes championships (rings), and not all the gaudy statistical records that Peyton will hold, are more important.

I agree 100%, but DAN MARINO wont be sending Shannon Sharpe any Christmas cards based on the exact same feelings he shared right in front of Dan.

 

when we are talking GOAT, yes.  best pure passer I've seen was probably marino.  best 2 minute drill was Elway.  but best big game QB is joe cool, and that is the #1 criteria in GOAT for me

 

the drive to beat the bengals is just pure excellence.  that final pass is literally perfect

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no, not even close.  Montana played before the ty law rule, before they protected the passers.  he is 4/4 in superbowls, and until someone goes 5/5, he is the king

 

 

Manning has so under performed in the playoffs, it's hard to put him even in the top 3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not entirely what he said.

 

He said 1.) Montana played when the rules didn't favor QBs as much, and 2.) Montana never made it to the big game and lost. 

 

It's not about counting rings, as much as it's about winning every SB he played in. 

 

Brady has more rings, but Manning is a better QB. Neither of them will ever achieve Montana status because they've both gotten their and choked.

Good points. So LOSING a SB (just not getting there) is an important criteria. Interesting. I will have to contemplate that BUT also then must Elevate TERRY BRADSHAW ahead of Peyton, since he also was 4 for 4, or did he actually lose 1?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

when we are talking GOAT, yes.  best pure passer I've seen was probably marino.  best 2 minute drill was Elway.  but best big game QB is joe cool, and that is the #1 criteria in GOAT for me

 

the drive to beat the bengals is just pure excellence.  that final pass is literally perfect

Yes, best PURE PASSER: Marino along with JoeWillie, and believe it or not, and I mention his name a lot and although he was a monstrous underachiever, the dude could really sling it was JEFF GEORGE, what a release and cannon that guy had.

Best 2 minute drill had to be Elway, Manning, Montana, Brady

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, best PURE PASSER: Marino along with JoeWillie, and believe it or not, and I mention his name a lot and although he was a monstrous underachiever, the dude could really sling it was JEFF GEORGE, what a release and cannon that guy had.

Best 2 minute drill had to be Elway, Manning, Montana, Brady

 

brady's 2 minute drill is kinda sucky.  the last 5 years he seems to fail as much as all the others.  SB vs giants he went deep 4 times instead of getting underneath chunks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good points. So LOSING a SB (just not getting there) is an important criteria. Interesting. I will have to contemplate that BUT also then must Elevate TERRY BRADSHAW ahead of Peyton, since he also was 4 for 4, or did he actually lose 1?

 

bradshaw gets little love.  probably because the defense got so much.  he called his own plays I think.  its a fun debate, and there are half a dozen right answers.  I always say Montana because I was falling in love with the NFL while he was dominant.  you can make a case that 7 time champion otto graham should be in the top 10

 

and yes we seem to short Namath on these lists, but as a pure passer, even shula gives him his due

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bradshaw gets little love.  probably because the defense got so much.  he called his own plays I think.  its a fun debate, and there are half a dozen right answers.  I always say Montana because I was falling in love with the NFL while he was dominant.  you can make a case that 7 time champion otto graham should be in the top 10

 

and yes we seem to short Namath on these lists, but as a pure passer, even shula gives him his due

JoeWillie was gifted. He was brilliantly smart, called all his own plays. I go back and watch his old films and that throwing motion and release were things of beauty. AND he was a great athlete. one that his old coach, BEAR BRYANT, said was the best he'd ever seen.

Back around 1970, one of the old football magazines back then, SPORT or one of them had a poll of all coaches and players rating the QB's back then, their were 5 categories, each worth 5 points so obviously a perfect score was 25. The 5 categories were:

1.Playcalling

2.Accuracy

3.Ability to throw short and long

4.Two minute drill

5.Decision making

Namath scored a 23.5, the next closest was a 16 (I think it was by Brodie or Dawson). Joe was so much the best back then, sort of like Montana in the 80's and Manning now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

peyton, win or lose will be considered one of the all time best qb's to play. deservedly so. trying to rank them is futile imo. I don't think its possible to put them in a specific ranking and that's the be all, end all. I also don't think championship wins being the ultimate marker is fair, considering the game is not played qb vs qb....but team vs team. that said.....different eras, teams, systems, etc make it impossible to put anyone in any definite spot. who knows what marino would do today on the patriots? or manning on montanas 49'ers teams. its not apples to apples, and so any list you see is purely subjective and subject to scrutiny. manning is definitely one of the top qb's to ever play the game....a first ballot hall of famer. anyone putting together an all-time "dream team" would be justified in choosing him as their qb. just like they would be justified in choosing Montana, marino, unitas etc.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bradshaw gets little love. probably because the defense got so much. he called his own plays I think.

Funny story on this... I was at a convention in Pittsburgh and the keynote was Rocky Bleier. Great speaker... Anyways, he starts going on about Bradshaw and how he always brags about calling his own plays. "Brady/manning can pass for 50 TDs... BUT I CALLED MY OWN PLAYS" etc. etc.... Then he tacks on at the end "what terry doesn't tell anybody is that our offense only had 4 plays"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny story on this... I was at a convention in Pittsburgh and the keynote was Rocky Bleier. Great speaker... Anyways, he starts going on about Bradshaw and how he always brags about calling his own plays. "Brady/manning can pass for 50 TDs... BUT I CALLED MY OWN PLAYS" etc. etc.... Then he tacks on at the end "what terry doesn't tell anybody is that our offense only had 4 plays"

 

hahaha classic !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's crazy when you think about how impressive winning 5 MVPs is, then realize that he'd still need another 4 to tie Gretzky.

 

 

Question, who would you say was more dominant in their sport, Bonds or Gretzky?  I've often heard from many hackey fans that in today's game, Gretzky would be more around a 50-60 goal per year type of guy than the 90-100 he was routinely netting. I can't really argue for or against him, as I wasn't big huge into hockey growing up, but I can say that Barry Bonds is the most dominant player that I've ever seen over his career. 

 

 

*I also believe that prime Shaq, while not the best basketball player I've ever seen, was the most dominant player for a stretch of time that I've ever seen in any sport. His time with the Lakers, especially in the playoffs, he was a man amongst boys. If only he cared enough about conditioning and truly being the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question, who would you say was more dominant in their sport, Bonds or Gretzky?  I've often heard from many hackey fans that in today's game, Gretzky would be more around a 50-60 goal per year type of guy than the 90-100 he was routinely netting. I can't really argue for or against him, as I wasn't big huge into hockey growing up, but I can say that Barry Bonds is the most dominant player that I've ever seen over his career. 

 

 

*I also believe that prime Shaq, while not the best basketball player I've ever seen, was the most dominant player for a stretch of time that I've ever seen in any sport. His time with the Lakers, especially in the playoffs, he was a man amongst boys. If only he cared enough about conditioning and truly being the best.

 

Depends how much you want to count drugs into the equation, I would say Bonds if we're not counting it. The only other player in history that you can compare to him statistically is Babe Ruth and his stretch in the early 2000s is the most dominant I've ever seen a player be. But with Gretzky...I don't think there will ever be something like him in pro sports ever again. Where a kid comes in and just starts shattering every single record immediately, I mean come on, he set so many that he set the record for most records before he even got to LA. Real tough to say between those two. I also don't think you can knock Bonds for not having any rings simply because of the nature of baseball, but I'm sure plenty of people would disagree with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question, who would you say was more dominant in their sport, Bonds or Gretzky?  I've often heard from many hackey fans that in today's game, Gretzky would be more around a 50-60 goal per year type of guy than the 90-100 he was routinely netting. I can't really argue for or against him, as I wasn't big huge into hockey growing up, but I can say that Barry Bonds is the most dominant player that I've ever seen over his career. 

 

 

*I also believe that prime Shaq, while not the best basketball player I've ever seen, was the most dominant player for a stretch of time that I've ever seen in any sport. His time with the Lakers, especially in the playoffs, he was a man amongst boys. If only he cared enough about conditioning and truly being the best.

 

There shouldn't be a HOF if Bonds isn't in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you take out all his goals, Gretzky would still be the all-time points leader. He's probably the most dominant athlete ever.

 

I think the problem is that there's really no method to compare baseball and hockey players. What we're reduced to doing is normatively judging which statistics count more for games that couldn't be any more different. I don't even know where to begin in that sort of discussion. Hockey and basketball are way more easier to do, but trying to compare baseball to anything else is a cluster****.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the problem is that there's really no method to compare baseball and hockey players. What we're reduced to doing is normatively judging which statistics count more for games that couldn't be any more different. I don't even know where to begin in that sort of discussion. Hockey and basketball are way more easier to do, but trying to compare baseball to anything else is a cluster****.

 

I guess, but having more assists than anyone else has points is absurd. The only thing I can think to compare it to is Ruth hitting more home runs than any other team in the AL, except Gretzky basically did it for his career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess, but having more assists than anyone else has points is absurd. The only thing I can think to compare it to is Ruth hitting more home runs than any other team in the AL, except Gretzky basically did it for his career.

 

 

Phillip Seymour Hoffman is dead, I no longer care about anything for the immediate future.

 

This. I'm sure I could have thought of something if that didn't just happen. ****.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question, who would you say was more dominant in their sport, Bonds or Gretzky?  I've often heard from many hackey fans that in today's game, Gretzky would be more around a 50-60 goal per year type of guy than the 90-100 he was routinely netting. I can't really argue for or against him, as I wasn't big huge into hockey growing up, but I can say that Barry Bonds is the most dominant player that I've ever seen over his career. 

 

 

*I also believe that prime Shaq, while not the best basketball player I've ever seen, was the most dominant player for a stretch of time that I've ever seen in any sport. His time with the Lakers, especially in the playoffs, he was a man amongst boys. If only he cared enough about conditioning and truly being the best.

NEITHER, the most dominant athlete, to absoloutely dominate his sport like no other is TIGER WOODS in the 1999-2000 era when he held all 4 majors at the same time, he had won like 6 of the last 9 and had won the US OPEN by like 15, the British by like 8, and players were handing him the trophys before he even put a peg in the ground. NEVER will anyone repeat the performance of TIGER WOODS for that stretch of Golf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This. I'm sure I could have thought of something if that didn't just happen. ****.

 

I usually don't care too much about celebrity deaths, but this really ruined my day. With so many hack actors out there in mainstream hollywood, it was always a wonderful change of pace to see his work.  I mean christ, he made Along Came Polly watchable. I love Aaron Sorkin, but PSH's dialogue with Tom Hanks in Charlie Wilson's War made that one of my favorite movies of the last decade. Ughhh f*ck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I usually don't care too much about celebrity deaths, but this really ruined my day. With so many hack actors out there in mainstream hollywood, it was always a wonderful change of pace to see his work.  I mean christ, he made Along Came Polly watchable. I love Aaron Sorkin, but PSH's dialogue with Tom Hanks in Charlie Wilson's War made that one of my favorite movies of the last decade. Ughhh f*ck.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I also don't think you can knock Bonds for not having any rings simply because of the nature of baseball, but I'm sure plenty of people would disagree with that.

 

I would love to see someone make this argument. I can't even imagine how I'd begin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...