Rex Ryan Looks Depleted...

[nyjunc]

I'm not blaming the Giants D for losing a lead like you are blaming the Pats D. The Giants had a 9-0 lead in the 1st quarter before the Pats scored 17 unanswered on their 2nd, 4th and 5th possessions, but they get a pass since they held NE to 0 points in the 4th and a total of 17. The Pats D gets a pass on 14 4th quarter points because they only allowed 3 points through 3 quarters. It doesn't matter to me when the other team scores the points. The points total is all that matters. It doesn't matter if you allow 7 in the 1st, 7 in the 2nd and 3 in the 4th, or 0 in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd and 17 in the 4th. The points are worth the same. They allowed a total of 17 points. Same as what the Giants allowed but the Giants didn't score a TD on D like the Pats did.

It is ridiculous to blame the Pats D for losing a lead because they held the other team to a total of 17 and scored a TD while putting the O in scoring position on all but 1 of the other scores.


I am certain you did, but I'm not going to go through all the post to find it. Regardless, if that is how you feel now, what are we talking about then? Whatever credit you want to give to Brady in that game against the Rams, you have to give more to Eli in the game against the Pats because he did more. Whatever credit you want to give to the Giants D, you have to give more to the Pats D since they allowed the same number of points but also scored a TD.

I'm certain I didn't, I always giove the NE D credit for playing great for 3 qtrs but it is a 4 qtr game and they nearly blew it but were rescued by Brady and the O. That was the only postseason run where the overrated Pats D played great almost throughout.

I don't give more to Eli b/c his D played better against better offenses. The NE D allowed 17 to SL, the NYG D allowed an average of 16 in 2 games. It's harder to do it twice and Brady was put in a near impossible spot and didn't need 2 fluke plays to happen to lead them to the GW score.

 

[DuderinoN703]

we'll see how many top 10 theys have not have much raw production. It's not fair to compare staright #s from players of different eras. as of now they have started around the same # of years, Eli has slight leads in some, Plunkett in others. They are both good QBs who helped their teams win 2 SBs.

Eli has a chance to be great, if he can play like he did in postseason for a full season there wouldn't be any doubt but he's never come close to that.

Jim Plunkett was good? Why were his stats so ****ty then? Eli Manning already owns him after 8 years. If Plunkett threw more TDs than INTs at minimum in his career I could see your point. He was mediocre at best.

 

[nyjunc]

Jim Plunkett was good? Why were his stats so ****ty then? Eli Manning already owns him after 8 years. If Plunkett threw more TDs than INTs at minimum in his career I could see your point. He was mediocre at best.

b/c stas then weren't what stats are today. Do you get the whole top 10 thing comparing him to his peers?

1983 leader in TD passes: Lynn Dickey 32(only QB to throw 30 or more)
2011 leader in TD passes: Drew Brees 46(3 had 40 or more)

1983 leader in pass yds: Lynn Dickey 4458(one of 2 w/ 4,000 or more)
2011 leader in pass yds: Drew Brees 5476(3 had 5,000 or more, everyone in top 10 had at least 4,000

INTs for Dickey and Brees: Dickey 29, Brees 14

1983 leader in rating: Steve Bartkowski 97.6
2011 leader in rating: Aaron Rodgers 122.5(4 QBs were over 100)

1983 leader in comp %: Ken Anderson 66.7%
2011 leader in comp %: Drew Brees 71.2%


Do you finally get the point now?

 

[DuderinoN703]

b/c stas then weren't what stats are today. Do you get the whole top 10 thing comparing him to his peers?

1983 leader in TD passes: Lynn Dickey 32(only QB to throw 30 or more)
2011 leader in TD passes: Drew Brees 46(3 had 40 or more)

1983 leader in pass yds: Lynn Dickey 4458(one of 2 w/ 4,000 or more)
2011 leader in pass yds: Drew Brees 5476(3 had 5,000 or more, everyone in top 10 had at least 4,000

INTs for Dickey and Brees: Dickey 29, Brees 14

1983 leader in rating: Steve Bartkowski 97.6
2011 leader in rating: Aaron Rodgers 122.5(4 QBs were over 100)

1983 leader in comp %: Ken Anderson 66.7%
2011 leader in comp %: Drew Brees 71.2%


Do you finally get the point now?

If a guy who finished with 30 or so more INTs than TDs in his career is considered good when compared to the other players of his time, that says a lot about the style of play back then. You think you're making your point that it isn't justified to compare stats from players 30 years ago to today and I agree with you on that when we're talking about today's game being so much more QB-passing important.

What I don't agree with you on is that it's reasonable to compare anything about Plunkett or Manning. Especially when you're comparing how they fared against their competition in their era. The era 30 years ago is different than it is now so it doesn't make sense to compare anything about them.

The same can be said for all sports. Baseball and basketball of today is different than 30-40-50 years ago. Different eras, different times, completely different situations.

 

[JETSJETSJETS]

If a guy who finished with 30 or so more INTs than TDs in his career is considered good when compared to the other players of his time, that says a lot about the style of play back then. You think you're making your point that it isn't justified to compare stats from players 30 years ago to today and I agree with you on that when we're talking about today's game being so much more QB-passing important.

What I don't agree with you on is that it's reasonable to compare anything about Plunkett or Manning. Especially when you're comparing how they fared against their competition in their era. The era 30 years ago is different than it is now so it doesn't make sense to compare anything about them.

The same can be said for all sports. Baseball and basketball of today is different than 30-40-50 years ago. Different eras, different times, completely different situations.

Joe Namath is a HoF QB. His rating? 65.5. He had 173 TDs and 220 ints. He was in the AFL All-time team, had two AFL MVPs, and several All-Pro equivalent titles. Its not the same NFL anymore. A rating of 65.5. There were 32 QBs last year that had a higher rating than that.

 

[nyjunc]

If a guy who finished with 30 or so more INTs than TDs in his career is considered good when compared to the other players of his time, that says a lot about the style of play back then. You think you're making your point that it isn't justified to compare stats from players 30 years ago to today and I agree with you on that when we're talking about today's game being so much more QB-passing important.

What I don't agree with you on is that it's reasonable to compare anything about Plunkett or Manning. Especially when you're comparing how they fared against their competition in their era. The era 30 years ago is different than it is now so it doesn't make sense to compare anything about them.

The same can be said for all sports. Baseball and basketball of today is different than 30-40-50 years ago. Different eras, different times, completely different situations.

You can always compare players of any ear against their peers which is where those top 10s come in.

 

[The New Guy]

I'm certain I didn't, I always giove the NE D credit for playing great for 3 qtrs but it is a 4 qtr game and they nearly blew it but were rescued by Brady and the O. That was the only postseason run where the overrated Pats D played great almost throughout.

I don't give more to Eli b/c his D played better against better offenses. The NE D allowed 17 to SL, the NYG D allowed an average of 16 in 2 games. It's harder to do it twice and Brady was put in a near impossible spot and didn't need 2 fluke plays to happen to lead them to the GW score.

If you didn't have 20,000+ post to go through, I would search for the quote as I am certain you said it. It doesn't matter. As long as you think the NE D played a bigger role in their first SB than Brady did, then we agree.

I was only comparing the Giants last SB win with the Pats first SB win. It is debatable, but I think the Rams had a better offense in 2001 than the Pats had in 2011. The Rams scored 503 points (ranked #1) in an era where scoring points wasn't as easy as it was in 2011. Only 2 other teams were in the 400 point range. (Colts 413, and the Niners 409) The Pats scored 513 points (ranked #3) and had GB and NO ahead of them with 560 and 540 points and 4 other teams in the 400 point range. To me, what the Pats D did to that Rams O was more impressive than what the Giants D did to the Pats O. Both were great performances by the D, but I give the edge to the Pats D since they not only held the Rams to 17 points, but they scored a TD. They put their team in a spot where they only needed to score 11 points on O to win the game against a high powered Rams O.

Brady led the game winning drive and gets credit for that, but he didn't do much the rest of the game. Eli led a game winning drive as well, and did more throughout the rest of the game. So, if you compare the Giants last SB win to the Pats first SB win, I don't see how you can give Brady or the Giants D more credit than Eli and the Pats D.

 

[DuderinoN703]

Joe Namath is a HoF QB. His rating? 65.5. He had 173 TDs and 220 ints. He was in the AFL All-time team, had two AFL MVPs, and several All-Pro equivalent titles. Its not the same NFL anymore. A rating of 65.5. There were 32 QBs last year that had a higher rating than that.

Not sure where we disagree

---------- Post added at 12:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:30 PM ----------

You can always compare players of any ear against their peers which is where those top 10s come in.

I don't agree. You act like stats aren't all that important but how can that be? Stats tell you the numbers a QB or any player was worth. If you think it's unfair to compare stats between eras (which I agree with), it's also unfair to compare players at all.

 

[Kinzua]

Junc, I don't think you actually ever saw Plunkett play -- or even know much about him except his stats. Aside from being a QB and #1 pick in his draft class, there really isn't much similarity between Plunkett and Eli Manning. Despite his streakiness and moodiness, Manning has been a much better QB so far in his career than Plunkett was. In his eighth season, Manning won his second Super Bowl MVP after an outstanding regular season and playoff run. By his eighth season, Plunkett had been traded by his original team, released by his second team, and signed as a backup QB by Oakland. In both of his SB seasons, he started the season as the backup QB.

Unlike yourself, I actually remembered Plunkett, and what I remembered was a QB who had resurrected his career in Oakland (ala Kurt Warner in Arizona), but the fact is that except for his Super Bowls, he had much less success than Eli Manning. Since he played a long time ago, I looked him up. Check out his bio: Plunkett

 

[nyjunc]

If you didn't have 20,000+ post to go through, I would search for the quote as I am certain you said it. It doesn't matter. As long as you think the NE D played a bigger role in their first SB than Brady did, then we agree.

I was only comparing the Giants last SB win with the Pats first SB win. It is debatable, but I think the Rams had a better offense in 2001 than the Pats had in 2011. The Rams scored 503 points (ranked #1) in an era where scoring points wasn't as easy as it was in 2011. Only 2 other teams were in the 400 point range. (Colts 413, and the Niners 409) The Pats scored 513 points (ranked #3) and had GB and NO ahead of them with 560 and 540 points and 4 other teams in the 400 point range. To me, what the Pats D did to that Rams O was more impressive than what the Giants D did to the Pats O. Both were great performances by the D, but I give the edge to the Pats D since they not only held the Rams to 17 points, but they scored a TD. They put their team in a spot where they only needed to score 11 points on O to win the game against a high powered Rams O.

Brady led the game winning drive and gets credit for that, but he didn't do much the rest of the game. Eli led a game winning drive as well, and did more throughout the rest of the game. So, if you compare the Giants last SB win to the Pats first SB win, I don't see how you can give Brady or the Giants D more credit than Eli and the Pats D.

Myabe it was in comparison to Peyton winning his SB b/c certainly Brady did more than Peyton did. The D was great for 3 qtrs but folded in the 4th, Brady and the O rescued them.

I'm getting dizzy, both D's and both QBs deserve a ton of credit.

Junc, I don't think you actually ever saw Plunkett play -- or even know much about him except his stats. Aside from being a QB and #1 pick in his draft class, there really isn't much similarity between Plunkett and Eli Manning. Despite his streakiness and moodiness, Manning has been a much better QB so far in his career than Plunkett was. In his eighth season, Manning won his second Super Bowl MVP after an outstanding regular season and playoff run. By his eighth season, Plunkett had been traded by his original team, released by his second team, and signed as a backup QB by Oakland. In both of his SB seasons, he started the season as the backup QB.

Unlike yourself, I actually remembered Plunkett, and what I remembered was a QB who had resurrected his career in Oakland (ala Kurt Warner in Arizona), but the fact is that except for his Super Bowls, he had much less success than Eli Manning. Since he played a long time ago, I looked him up. Check out his bio: Plunkett

I did see him play later in his career and I think there are numerous similarities.

-both #1 overall picks
-both struggled migfhtily early in their careers
-both led a WC team to their first SB and won SB MVP
-both won second SBs a few years later
-Neither has ever been an elite QB

Eli has a chance to be great, we'll see what he does going forward.


Eli was getting close to being an ex-Giant, remember he didn't have a good reg season in 2007, Coughlin was on the way and the heat was on Eli. he came through in jan/Feb but if not for that run Coughlin would have been gone and Eli not too far behind him.

 

[Kinzua]

Myabe it was in comparison to Peyton winning his SB b/c certainly Brady did more than Peyton did. The D was great for 3 qtrs but folded in the 4th, Brady and the O rescued them.

I'm getting dizzy, both D's and both QBs deserve a ton of credit.



I did see him play later in his career and I think there are numerous similarities.

-both #1 overall picks
-both struggled migfhtily early in their careers
-both led a WC team to their first SB and won SB MVP
-both won second SBs a few years later
-Neither has ever been an elite QB

Eli has a chance to be great, we'll see what he does going forward.


Eli was getting close to being an ex-Giant, remember he didn't have a good reg season in 2007, Coughlin was on the way and the heat was on Eli. he came through in jan/Feb but if not for that run Coughlin would have been gone and Eli not too far behind him.

Did you bother to read the article?

In the first 8 years of his NFL career, Plunkett played on 3 diffferent teams, pretty much failed, and was relegated to backup duty. He wasn't instrumental in his team being successful after his first or second year.

In the first 8 years of his NFL career, Eli has won 2 Super Bowls in 5 years, been named Super Bowl MVP twice, and was generally credited with almost single-handedly (along with Nicks and Cruz) of keeping the Gnats in the playoff hunt until their D finally got rolling late in the season. While not considered elite until 2011, he sure wasn't considered a failure, even in his early years. He only suffered in comparison to his brother and to the 2 other outstanding QBs in his class, Roethlisberger and Rivers.

 

[The New Guy]

Myabe it was in comparison to Peyton winning his SB b/c certainly Brady did more than Peyton did. The D was great for 3 qtrs but folded in the 4th, Brady and the O rescued them.

I'm getting dizzy, both D's and both QBs deserve a ton of credit.

It's from the spinning. :rimshot:

 

[nyjunc]

Did you bother to read the article?

In the first 8 years of his NFL career, Plunkett played on 3 diffferent teams, pretty much failed, and was relegated to backup duty. He wasn't instrumental in his team being successful after his first or second year.

In the first 8 years of his NFL career, Eli has won 2 Super Bowls in 5 years, been named Super Bowl MVP twice, and was generally credited with almost single-handedly (along with Nicks and Cruz) of keeping the Gnats in the playoff hunt until their D finally got rolling late in the season. While not considered elite until 2011, he sure wasn't considered a failure, even in his early years. He only suffered in comparison to his brother and to the 2 other outstanding QBs in his class, Roethlisberger and Rivers.

I understand that, I didn't say they had the exact same careers but were very similar. Eli was nearly run out of town if not for that 2007 run.

He's still not considered elite, off of what he did last year he's still not in the top 30 from the players vote of the top 100.

He was considered a failure early in his career, through 3 seasons he hadn't led the Giants to a playoff win, in year 4 he threw 20 INTs and was on thin ince along w/ the HC until they made that great postseason run.

 

[Kinzua]

I understand that, I didn't say they had the exact same careers but were very similar. Eli was nearly run out of town if not for that 2007 run.

He's still not considered elite, off of what he did last year he's still not in the top 30 from the players vote of the top 100.

He was considered a failure early in his career, through 3 seasons he hadn't led the Giants to a playoff win, in year 4 he threw 20 INTs and was on thin ince along w/ the HC until they made that great postseason run.

Aside from the fact that both were QBs who were the first picks in their draft classes, there is nothing similar about Plunkett's and Eli's careers through their first eight years.

• Plunkett was good early on and then declined. Eli started out pretty mediocre and has improved.
• That Eli would have been "run out of town" if he hadn't won the Super Bowl in 2007 is your opinion; Plunkett was "run out of town" after his 5th season.
• Plunkett was traded away by his original team, cut by his second team, and was signed as a backup QB by a third team in his first eight seasons while Eli has been with his original team his entire career.
• Plunkett spent his 8th season on the bench, and was never again a full time starter. Eli spent his 8th season keeping his team in the playoff hunt until the defense and the running game got up to speed, and is unlikely to lose his starting job any time soon.
• Plunkett had led none of his teams to championships in his first 8 years and didn't win his first Super Bowl until his 10th season (1980). Eli has already won two Super Bowl rings in his first 8 seasons.

By the end of his career, Plunkett had won 2 SBs and been named Super Bowl MVP twice, so eventually he had another similarity with Eli. Of course, if Eli plays for 16 seasons, he might win a couple of more Super Bowls.

 

[nyjunc]

Aside from the fact that both were QBs who were the first picks in their draft classes, there is nothing similar about Plunkett's and Eli's careers through their first eight years.

• Plunkett was good early on and then declined. Eli started out pretty mediocre and has improved.
• That Eli would have been "run out of town" if he hadn't won the Super Bowl in 2007 is your opinion; Plunkett was "run out of town" after his 5th season.
• Plunkett was traded away by his original team, cut by his second team, and was signed as a backup QB by a third team in his first eight seasons while Eli has been with his original team his entire career.
• Plunkett spent his 8th season on the bench, and was never again a full time starter. Eli spent his 8th season keeping his team in the playoff hunt until the defense and the running game got up to speed, and is unlikely to lose his starting job any time soon.
• Plunkett had led none of his teams to championships in his first 8 years and didn't win his first Super Bowl until his 10th season (1980). Eli has already won two Super Bowl rings in his first 8 seasons.

By the end of his career, Plunkett had won 2 SBs and been named Super Bowl MVP twice, so eventually he had another similarity with Eli. Of course, if Eli plays for 16 seasons, he might win a couple of more Super Bowls.

other than the fact that both were #1 overall picks, both struggled early in their careers, both won SB MVps, both helped their teams win 2 SBs in a relatively short period of time and neither was elite there is very little they have in common.

You act like Eli has had this steady rise. Eli was bad his first year, got better in year 2, remained the same in year 3, got worse in year 4, had his best season in year 5, took a step back in year 6, had his worst non rookie season in year 7 and improved in year 8. There wasn't consistency in the way he improved, this is a man who threw 25 INts just a season ago.

Plunkett didn't play onn teams w/ defenses like the Giants had in 2007 and 2011 and didn't play in the parity/FA era and he won his first SB in his 7th full season season starting, his 2nd in his 9th full season starting. Eli has been starting 7 full seasons- very similar.

Plunkett only has 1 SB MVP