Rivers is overrated

[Pinstripe power]

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.

eli's playoff record when his defense give up 20 or less = 8-0
eli's playoff record when his defense gives up 21 or more = 0-3
clearly thewy win because eli is the greatest thing since the ionvention of fire and not because his defense plays well..................

all the evidence giants fans give are either incomplete, flawed or products of the team. for example, you use 4th quater success. eli is so good in the 4th quater so he's great.t hats not a fair comparison, becaus esome qb's like big ben, rodgers, brady etc where so good earlier in the game, they didn't need the 4th quater. eli has ll this 4th quater success because his team couldn't put away the opposing team. take his playoff/superbowl ratings. sample size dude. why should i discount over a hunderd games he;'s played in the regular seaosn because he played well in a handleful of games (especially considering he was pretty bad in his lsoes which people seem to turn a blind eye to nowadays.). His qb rating the last 4 years? its inferior to at least 5 other qbs, so how does that warrant a top 5 spot? see all incomplete or flawed evidence


i don't discount eli's achievement, but i certianly do not give him all the credit for team accomplishments or make his successes better than they are. there's is plenty of evidence to amke him a good qb, there is none to make him a top 5 qb comparivtive to his peers.

[bosox3431]

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.

The total wins can be misleading. Most of those guys played for a long *** time. The top 3 put in 16 or more seasons. But lets also look a little deeper at these wins. I'm not going to look at every player listed, I don't have time. So I used Marino, Montana and favre. They give us samples through 3 entire decades of football. I went through each odlf their years and what their record was for each season and if where their defenses were ranked by above average, average, below average, top 10 and top 5. Above and below I got by what was actually average, not by where they were ranked. Here's what I got and their combined records for each one

Above average- 330-137 .706 win%
Average- 7-6 .538 Marino was the only one who had an average defense
Below average- 94-98 .490 win%
Top 5- 161-53 .752 win%
Top 10- 232-80 .744 win%

That's a difference of .216 in win% going from above average to below average defenses. That's the difference of about 3.5 wins a season.

Ill note I only used seasons in which they started 11 games of the season. In those seasons, Montana had a top 5 defense 7 times out of 11 and top 10 9 out of 11 times. Only once was his defense below average. In 19 seasons, favre had a below average defense only 5 times. 5 times with top 5 and 7 with top 10. Marino got the raw end if the deal. 7 of each below and above and one average season. Only 4 top 10 and 2 top 5.

Here's how each qb broke down. Listed in this order: Montana, Marino and favre

Above average- 106-33; 77-33; 147-71
Below average- 3-6; 52-51; 39-41
Top 5- 81-20; 22-11; 58-22
Top 10- 108-30; 45-17; 79-33

So we got 3 qbs, who are all widely considered to be at least top 10 qbs of all time, two of them many argue between who is the best of all time. Yet without great defenses they don't even have a .500 win% between them. Great qbs do win a lot of games. They are also typically on very good-great teams for most of their career.

[valade16]

The total wins can be misleading. Most of those guys played for a long *** time. The top 3 put in 16 or more seasons. But lets also look a little deeper at these wins. I'm not going to look at every player listed, I don't have time. So I used Marino, Montana and favre. They give us samples through 3 entire decades of football. I went through each odlf their years and what their record was for each season and if where their defenses were ranked by above average, average, below average, top 10 and top 5. Above and below I got by what was actually average, not by where they were ranked. Here's what I got and their combined records for each one

Above average- 330-137 .706 win%
Average- 7-6 .538 Marino was the only one who had an average defense
Below average- 94-98 .490 win%
Top 5- 161-53 .752 win%
Top 10- 232-80 .744 win%

That's a difference of .216 in win% going from above average to below average defenses. That's the difference of about 3.5 wins a season.

Ill note I only used seasons in which they started 11 games of the season. In those seasons, Montana had a top 5 defense 7 times out of 11 and top 10 9 out of 11 times. Only once was his defense below average. In 19 seasons, favre had a below average defense only 5 times. 5 times with top 5 and 7 with top 10. Marino got the raw end if the deal. 7 of each below and above and one average season. Only 4 top 10 and 2 top 5.

Here's how each qb broke down. Listed in this order: Montana, Marino and favre

Above average- 106-33; 77-33; 147-71
Below average- 3-6; 52-51; 39-41
Top 5- 81-20; 22-11; 58-22
Top 10- 108-30; 45-17; 79-33

So we got 3 qbs, who are all widely considered to be at least top 10 qbs of all time, two of them many argue between who is the best of all time. Yet without great defenses they don't even have a .500 win% between them. Great qbs do win a lot of games. They are also typically on very good-great teams for most of their career.

I appreciate the work put into those stats, they are very informative, however I'm having trouble correlating them to some sort of detrimental argument against Eli.

You can't use the fact that Eli had a great Defense as a means to marginalize his 2 Superbowl trophies when your arguing that every Quarterback needs a good defense to win.

Additionally I find it funny that with Eli Manning it's "his playoff performances should carry less weight because there is a smaller sample size" yet with the Giants Defense it's "The regular season should carry less weight because they played well in the playoffs". You can't have it both ways.

If you want to praise good playoff performance by the Giants D you must do so with Eli as well, if you want to bring up Eli's less than elite regular season stats you must do so for the Giants D as well.

If were going by regular season stats than Eli Manning won a Superbowl with statistically one of the worst supporting casts of all-time, similarly, if were going by playoff performance then yes the Giants D played really well... but so did Eli. His playoff run was statistically one of the best ever as well.

Simply put, your damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[bosox3431]

I appreciate the work put into those stats, they are very informative, however I'm having trouble correlating them to some sort of detrimental argument against Eli.

You can't use the fact that Eli had a great Defense as a means to marginalize his 2 Superbowl trophies when your arguing that every Quarterback needs a good defense to win.

Additionally I find it funny that with Eli Manning it's "his playoff performances should carry less weight because there is a smaller sample size" yet with the Giants Defense it's "The regular season should carry less weight because they played well in the playoffs". You can't have it both ways.

If you want to praise good playoff performance by the Giants D you must do so with Eli as well, if you want to bring up Eli's less than elite regular season stats you must do so for the Giants D as well.

If were going by regular season stats than Eli Manning won a Superbowl with statistically one of the worst supporting casts of all-time, similarly, if were going by playoff performance then yes the Giants D played really well... but so did Eli. His playoff run was statistically one of the best ever as well.

Simply put, your damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Its not an argument against Eli. But an argument against the notion a qb should be rewarded when his team wins. Its nit just about Eli, its about any qb.

Also, I never brought up the giants defense playing until someone brought up how bad they were this year. They're the ones saying what Eli does in the regular season doesn't matter as much because of playoff performance. It was simply just a counter argument to theirs. They want to hold Eli's playoff performance in high regards, but simply.ignored the defenses performance.

[Wrigheyes4MVP]

He's definitely overrated, but he's better than Eli.

Rodgers
Brady
Brees
Manning
Romo
Ben
Rivers

It's rather clear, too. I have no idea where people are getting this idea that Eli is somehow better than Ben, Romo, or Rivers. He's not.

I agree with everything you say because stats are the only thing that matters.

[Wrigheyes4MVP]

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

If you watch him play you'd know.....

Seriously though, try watching him play rather than just look at the stat sheet. It might help you learn a few things about football.

[Mr Haha]

I agree with everything you say because stats are the only thing that matters.

Duh. Didn't you hear? They decided to not even play the games next season. It turns out the whole sport can be run much more efficiently if Madden simulations decide who should win.

[Pinstripe power]

If you watch him play you'd know.....

Seriously though, try watching him play rather than just look at the stat sheet. It might help you learn a few things about football.

i do watch him play, and he seem just as likely to have a heartbreaking interception or fumble as he is to bring his team back to win.



o wait i forgot, we only use this season because it helps your arguement and are supposed to completley forget and ignore the other 7 he played because they hurt your arguement. got to love giants fans logic. i could make mark sanchez look better than eli using the insane logic you guys use. just take out all the bad things makr sanchez does and compare him to eli's flaws only, just like you all do for any comparison involving eli and anotehr qb

[valade16]

i do watch him play, and he seem just as likely to have a heartbreaking interception or fumble as he is to bring his team back to win.

o wait i forgot, we only use this season because it helps your arguement and are supposed to completley forget and ignore the other 7 he played because they hurt your arguement. got to love giants fans logic. i could make mark sanchez look better than eli using the insane logic you guys use. just take out all the bad things makr sanchez does and compare him to eli's flaws only, just like you all do for any comparison involving eli and anotehr qb

Are you serious?! You try to argue TONY ROMO is better than Eli and you say that ELI is as likely to have a heartbreaking interception as to bring his team back?!

AHAHAHAHA. Tony Romo is way more likely to screw it up and cause his team to lose than Eli ever will be, yet you knock Eli?



The only person that has had a bigger bias against something than you have against Eli is Hitler against Jews...

List out all the times Eli has made a heartbreaking interception or fumble to lose the game, I'd like to see how "llikely" it is. Put your money where your mouth is and show me the stats...

[Mr Haha]

Are you serious?! You try to argue TONY ROMO is better than Eli and you say that ELI is as likely to have a heartbreaking interception as to bring his team back?!

AHAHAHAHA. Tony Romo is way more likely to screw it up and cause his team to lose than Eli ever will be, yet you knock Eli?



The only person that has had a bigger bias against something than you have against Eli is Hitler against Jews...

List out all the times Eli has made a heartbreaking interception or fumble to lose the game, I'd like to see how "llikely" it is. Put your money where your mouth is and show me the stats...

lol.

And you can actually see them losing their minds like Hitler when Berlin was being taken over...

[Pinstripe power]

Are you serious?! You try to argue TONY ROMO is better than Eli and you say that ELI is as likely to have a heartbreaking interception as to bring his team back?!

AHAHAHAHA. Tony Romo is way more likely to screw it up and cause his team to lose than Eli ever will be, yet you knock Eli?



The only person that has had a bigger bias against something than you have against Eli is Hitler against Jews...

List out all the times Eli has made a heartbreaking interception or fumble to lose the game, I'd like to see how "llikely" it is. Put your money where your mouth is and show me the stats...

that because if you look at fact, and not peoples misconceptions, you'll notcie eli has done it more than romo over his career

[Wrigheyes4MVP]

Guys...Tony Romo is clearly more clutch than Eli Manning. This is a no brainer.

[Mr Haha]

Guys...Tony Romo is clearly more clutch than Eli Manning. This is a no brainer.

You should have SEEN this 4th quarter comeback he led on my Madden sim last night. It was so clutch.

[DBR96A]

Just looking at the first post, do people really rank Peyton that low now? Big Ben and Eli are better than him?

Over the last four seasons, Ben Roethlisberger has had markedly inferior talent around him on offense than Philip Rivers has, and yet, he's only been marginally less efficient than Rivers in spite of that. Furthermore, Roethlisberger and Eli Manning have both shown flashes of greatness in the playoffs that Rivers really hasn't.

[Wrigheyes4MVP]

Over the last four seasons, Ben Roethlisberger has had markedly inferior talent around him on offense than Philip Rivers has, and yet, he's only been marginally less efficient than Rivers in spite of that. Furthermore, Roethlisberger and Eli Manning have both shown flashes of greatness in the playoffs that Rivers really hasn't.

Nope, I'm sorry but performing at a high level in the playoffs and leading your team to SB victories doesn't matter at all.

Its all about the stats. Nothing else matters. Qb rating baby!!!! Woooooo!!!!