Rivers is overrated

[valade16]

1. Brady
2. Rodgers
3. Brees
4. Eli (still not getting respect )
5. Peyton
6. Big Ben
7. Rivers
8. Matthew Stafford
9. Matt Schaub
10. newton(based on pure potential and the fact that he is a legit dual threat)
11. Romo
12. Ryan

Peyton below Eli?

Romo below Newton?

[bosox3431]

I think people are mostly starting to get it. The ones who don't are just the loudest. But they are really, really outnumbered.

Outnumbered? Did you see the, where do you rank Eli thread? Maybe outnumberedin amount of people who discuss it. And against, when someone ranks him the 7ish range, how is that not giving him respect? Please answer me that. Apparently if we don't have him ranked exactly where you see fit were haters or not giving him respect.

[Mr Haha]

Outnumbered? Did you see the, where do you rank Eli thread? Maybe outnumberedin amount of people who discuss it. And against, when someone ranks him the 7ish range, how is that not giving him respect? Please answer me that. Apparently if we don't have him ranked exactly where you see fit were haters or not giving him respect.

He mentioned that he still doesn't get respect, but I don't see that on here. I think a big majority are giving him respect. You see it all over the place now. However, there are about 6 or 7 of you that troll around on QB threads just to bash him, and you all have found yourselves in the distinct minority. My advice: Get used to it.

[Pinstripe power]

He mentioned that he still doesn't get respect, but I don't see that on here. I think a big majority are giving him respect. You see it all over the place now. However, there are about 6 or 7 of you that troll around on QB threads just to bash him, and you all have found yourselves in the distinct minority. My advice: Get used to it.

see you seem to have a disconnect of giving him respect and agreeing with you. we are giving the respect he deserves, you just think he deserves more

[Mr Haha]

see you seem to have a disconnect of giving him respect and agreeing with you. we are giving the respect he deserves, you just think he deserves more

Pinny, after the worst season in the history of Eli hating, I feel for you, my man.

[Pinstripe power]

Pinny, after the worst season in the history of Eli hating, I feel for you, my man.

doesn't bother me at all. he played well, i gave him his credit, im just not delusional like you and a select few giants fans that now think he's the greatest thing since the invention of written word

[valade16]

see you seem to have a disconnect of giving him respect and agreeing with you. we are giving the respect he deserves, you just think he deserves more

It's not necessarily that he deserves more it's that the guys you rank above him deserve less.

[Pinstripe power]

It's not necessarily that he deserves more it's that the guys you rank above him deserve less.

no they don't. you guys look way to much at team attributes to evaulate an indidividaul, but yet anyone who hurts that arguement is an exception

[valade16]

no they don't. you guys look way to much at team attributes to evaulate an indidividaul, but yet anyone who hurts that arguement is an exception

What you fail to realize is every single stat you have is a product of the team. Discounting how well Eli played in the Superbowl to win 2 of them is no more/less reliant on team attributes than saying Tony Romo threw for 36 TDs.

Stats are not an infallible measure of individual performance because stats are heavily affected by the team a person is on.

[Pinstripe power]

What you fail to realize is every single stat you have is a product of the team. Discounting how well Eli played in the Superbowl to win 2 of them is no more/less reliant on team attributes than saying Tony Romo threw for 36 TDs.

Stats are not an infallible measure of individual performance because stats are heavily affected by the team a person is on.

they are much better barameters than wins. As i always say, Trent Dilfer won a superbowl, dna marino didn't and archie manning has the worst winning percetnage in NFL histroy. thats all i need to say about the winning arguement

[valade16]

they are much better barameters than wins. As i always say, Trent Dilfer won a superbowl, dna marino didn't and archie manning has the worst winning percetnage in NFL histroy. thats all i need to say about the winning arguement

It works both ways. as the 5th most Passing yards in a season ever, Eli is 6th. Culpepper threw 39 TDs in a season (and had statistically one of the greatest seasons ever, it was 7th all-time for Passer Rating). Steve Buerhlein threw 36 TDs in 1999 for CAR. Vinny Testaverde is 10th all-time in TDs thrown, ahead of Joe Montana. Chad Pennington had one of the most efficient seasons ever in 2002. Culpepper has a career 87.8 QB Rating, ahead of Favre and Dan Marino. Heck, Rodgers and Romo are No. 1 and 2 all-time in Passer Rating.

Stats need to be looked at along with wins. You shouldn't completely, 100% discount wins. Look at the list of Quarterbacks with the most wins ever:

Favre, Elway, Marino, Manning, Brady, Tarkentan, Unitas, Montana, Bradshaw, Moon.

Here's the list of QBs with the highest winning % in NFL history:

Brady, Staubach, Montana, Roethlisberger, Manning, Bradshaw, Stabler, Young, Unitas, and Elway.

Now looking at those lists are they perfect? No. But do we see a definite correlation between wins and good Quarterbacks? yes we do. From that first list I see 7 Quarterbacks I'd put on my Top 10 list ever. From the 2nd I see 7 as well. That is a pretty good amount.

Now let's look at Passer Rating:

Rodgers, Romo, Young, Brady, Rivers, Manning, Brees, Warner, Montana, Schaub.

Now I took out all active Quarterbacks to get the best Passer Ratings from the pre-2004 Pass Rules era's:

Young, Montana, Graham, Marino, Favre, Gannon, Kelly, Staubach, Lomax, Jurgenson.

Looking at those lists we see the same thing. They are by no means perfect but they do have a good correlation between stats and good Quarterbacks. From the first list I'd say 4 are on my Top 10 list but 2 or 3 have a chance of making it on there with more longevity. From the 2nd list I see 7 I would put on my Top 10 ever list.

7 happens to be the same number as the "wins" Top 10s. So we can see that Stats don't exactly weed out those that aren't all-time Greats as much as you think, and certainly not anymore than the wins numbers.

But let's combine the 2 lists and include only those that are on both sides of the list:

Favre, Marino, Manning, Brady, Montana, Staubach, and Young.

Now, is that the definitive Top 7 best Modern Era Quarterbacks ever? No. But I think every single one of those Players would be on most peoples Top 10 best ever list.

Also notice that every single one of those Quarterbacks has won a Superbowl except Marino. This shows me that the examples you pointed to about Marino not having a Ring or Dilfer having won are outliers more so than a way to prove there is no correlation between good Quarterbacks and Superbowl wins.

So to become a truly Elite Quarterback and be talked about as one of the best ever we can conclude that generally you need 3 things - good stats. Lots of wins (or a high %), and a Superbowl. Having all 3 guarantees you greatness.

That is how I measure my Quarterbacks, by combining all the data from all the different variables to arrive at my conclusion. I don't simply look at wins or stats, because both can be misleading.

[JayStar-8]

So to become a truly Elite Quarterback and be talked about as one of the best ever we can conclude that generally you need 3 things - good stats. Lots of wins (or a high %), and a Superbowl. Having all 3 guarantees you greatness.

That is how I measure my Quarterbacks, by combining all the data from all the different variables to arrive at my conclusion. I don't simply look at wins or stats, because both can be misleading.

good post.

[JayStar-8]

Is Pinny still saying Eli Manning=Trent Dilfer?

[Pinstripe power]

Is Pinny still saying Eli Manning=Trent Dilfer?

no i'm not saying that at all. Eli is a much better qb than trent dilfer was. My point is you can't blindly say he won a superbowl so he's good. You guys say it like its a 100% true fact. trent dilfer proves that wrong. SO once there is one exception (dilfer for example), you cant say that anymore without proving eli is part of the norm not the exception. I wouldn't care nearly as much if you guys brought some actual evidence, but all we get is he won 2 superbowls or you watch hiom play and know

[valade16]

no i'm not saying that at all. Eli is a much better qb than trent dilfer was. My point is you can't blindly say he won a superbowl so he's good. You guys say it like its a 100% true fact. trent dilfer proves that wrong. SO once there is one exception (dilfer for example), you cant say that anymore without proving eli is part of the norm not the exception. I wouldn't care nearly as much if you guys brought some actual evidence, but all we get is he won 2 superbowls or you watch hiom play and know

To the first point, we aren't saying he won 2 Superbowls so he's good, were saying he won 2 Superbowls because he's a good Quarterback; there's a difference there you aren't grasping.

And to the 2nd point, I don't normally do this but you are deserving:



No evidence? I've brought up his QB Rating the last 4 years, his Playoff QB Rating, his QB Rating in his Superbowls, his teams defensive/rushing ranks, his 4th Quarter QB Rating.

Is none of that evidence? No, it's just you hate Eli and so discount everything that's been said. Normally I don't call someone a hater on a player but in your case it's fully justified. You continually discount achievements and discounts by Eli and it's evidenced by your literally saying no one has provided evidence.

It must be hard for you to think Eli's a good Quarteback considering to you there is no evidence for it. So what else are we forced to conclude other than you flat out don't like Eli Manning for whatever reason, be it the hype, the Superbowls, whatever.

If you simply admitted it things would be better for you. Wallowing in this denial of hate serves no purpose.