NFC Championship: #5 New York Giants (12-6) @ #2 Green Bay Packers (14-3)

First off, didn't Eli come out and say he wouldn't play for the Chargers if they drafted him? I'm pretty sure he did, so whether or not he's a douche or not, the Chargers can't really whine about it. And who cares anyway? They got a QB that's just as good, and also got a Pro Bowl LB and CB out of it. If the Chargers played in the NFC, they'd be making their second Super Bowl appearance in 2 years a week from Sunday.

As for Eli/Brady, Eli played way better yesterday, regardless of conditions. He is nowhere near Brady's level, in general, but he had a much more clutch performance yesterday. But one game is one game, Brady is still one of, if not the best postseason QB of all time.

But hats off to the Giants, they have been a joy to watch the last 4 weeks. They've put together an amazing run and I'm rally excited to see them in the Super Bowl. Hopefully, they'll give the Patriots a really good game, but fall short in the end. However, I won't even be that upset if they win it all because it's hard to hate/root against these guys.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Jan 21 2008, 12:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (playaofthegame @ Jan 21 2008, 12:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I didn't say Brady played better than Eli...I'm just saying Eli will never be on Brady's level and it's a joke that Giants fans believe that and the Patriots are gonna make Eli look like shit in the Super Bowl.

Also refrain from sayin ROFL ever again.</div>
Just like how they made Eli look like shit in the last game of the season right? ROFL!
</div>

There's a reason Eli did so well in that game. Because he had nothing to lose...you think he would have done so well if the Giants would have been eliminated if they lost the game? He would have choked under pressure like he always has.

 

I remember that sig, Brian. Who's laughing now?

Only question I have is where am I going to watch the Super Bowl?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thrilla @ Jan 21 2008, 12:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>First off, didn't Eli come out and say he wouldn't play for the Chargers if they drafted him? I'm pretty sure he did, so whether or not he's a douche or not, the Chargers can't really whine about it. And who cares anyway? They got a QB that's just as good, and also got a Pro Bowl LB and CB out of it. If the Chargers played in the NFC, they'd be making their second Super Bowl appearance in 2 years a week from Sunday.

As for Eli/Brady, Eli played way better yesterday, regardless of conditions. He is nowhere near Brady's level, in general, but he had a much more clutch performance yesterday. But one game is one game, Brady is still one of, if not the best postseason QB of all time.

But hats off to the Giants, they have been a joy to watch the last 4 weeks. They've put together an amazing run and I'm rally excited to see them in the Super Bowl. Hopefully, they'll give the Patriots a really good game, but fall short in the end. However, I won't even be that upset if they win it all because it's hard to hate/root against these guys.</div>

So you wouldn't be upset if the Pats lost? That would be the biggest chokejob ever, I would be very upset if I was a NE fan.

Also, no doubt Brady is a good post-season QB but before the prolific receiving core he was quite average empirically in the post-season, and now with Moss and everything he struggled, so he's just "one of" the best, not the best.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (playaofthegame @ Jan 21 2008, 12:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Jan 21 2008, 12:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (playaofthegame @ Jan 21 2008, 12:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I didn't say Brady played better than Eli...I'm just saying Eli will never be on Brady's level and it's a joke that Giants fans believe that and the Patriots are gonna make Eli look like shit in the Super Bowl.

Also refrain from sayin ROFL ever again.</div>
Just like how they made Eli look like shit in the last game of the season right? ROFL!
</div>

There's a reason Eli did so well in that game. Because he had nothing to lose...you think he would have done so well if the Giants would have been eliminated if they lost the game? He would have choked under pressure like he always has.
</div>
Choked under pressure like he always has? Since when has he choked under pressure this postseason? He's played some of the best football of his entire career in big games, this postseason. Listen, I hate the Giants, and I hate Eli Manning, but even I'm willing to give him some props.

 

I don't understand where this perception of Eli being a choker came from. He's been inconsistent as hell during the first 3 years of his career and he had shown that he wasn't ready to carry the team as a franchise QB yet, but he was never a choker. In fact, you could argue that he had shown the exact opposite at times. I remember some amazingly improbably comeback wins engineered by Eli (Denver a few years ago, Philly last season) and he seemed to step up in the biggest stage. Now its all starting to come together. And really, you need to stop using the "Eli's managing the game, he plays off the running game" bullcrap. Yes, he does manage the game well and NY does need the running game. But he made amazing throws last night (that throw to Amani was frickin' incredible), they weren't simply dump-off passes like the previous two games, and the Giants didn't get the run going as well.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Jan 21 2008, 12:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thrilla @ Jan 21 2008, 12:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>First off, didn't Eli come out and say he wouldn't play for the Chargers if they drafted him? I'm pretty sure he did, so whether or not he's a douche or not, the Chargers can't really whine about it. And who cares anyway? They got a QB that's just as good, and also got a Pro Bowl LB and CB out of it. If the Chargers played in the NFC, they'd be making their second Super Bowl appearance in 2 years a week from Sunday.

As for Eli/Brady, Eli played way better yesterday, regardless of conditions. He is nowhere near Brady's level, in general, but he had a much more clutch performance yesterday. But one game is one game, Brady is still one of, if not the best postseason QB of all time.

But hats off to the Giants, they have been a joy to watch the last 4 weeks. They've put together an amazing run and I'm rally excited to see them in the Super Bowl. Hopefully, they'll give the Patriots a really good game, but fall short in the end. However, I won't even be that upset if they win it all because it's hard to hate/root against these guys.</div>

So you wouldn't be upset if the Pats lost? That would be the biggest chokejob ever, I would be very upset if I was a NE fan.

Also, no doubt Brady is a good post-season QB but before the prolific receiving core he was quite average empirically in the post-season, and now with Moss and everything he struggled, so he's just "one of" the best, not the best.
</div>The Patriots are my local team, but I don't live and die with them. I grew up a Miami Dolphins fan, and I still consider them my favorite team. I always rooted for the Patriots to do well against every other team in the league, just not the Dolphins. Yes, I want them to complete the perfect season, but I won't search out a sharp knife to slit my wrists with if the Giants win because I respect the run they've had and how well they've played on the road and in the playoffs.

Who are the better postseason QBs? Montana was great, Aikman was good too. Who else?

 

Quite average in the post season? Are you joking? How many comeback wins did he orchestrate in the playoffs? In his first year starting, he lead a ten point come back against the Raiders and a game winning drive in the Super Bowl. Brady led another game winning drive in the Super Bowl two years later. In his career, he has 28 game winning, fourth quarter drives. He's 84-1 when the Patriots have fourth quarter lead. He's 14-2 in the playoffs. Those are the numbers that matter and make him one of the all-time great playoff QBs in the history of the sport.

As for Eli Manning, it appears as though things are making sense for him now. He's capable of making any throw that is available, its just a matter of him realizing what is available and when he has been forcing it. Of course, having a couple of RBs like he has helps him out a great deal, as it does with any QB who has ever played the game (no insult to Eli there).

It should be a good Super Bowl, though I don't think it will be that close in the end. When the Patriots have two weeks to prepare, they are just about impossible to beat.

 

I use the term "slightly above average", and "quite average" interchangeably. To be very precise, Brady is a bit above average in the post-season and this is empirically supported.

You just saw a game that Brady was absolutely dreadful (with the best receiving core in the game as well) in but won, so you mentioning "14-2" and such is meaningless. One must analyze intelligent empirical information to deduce how much credit Brady should get for his record, since winning can be very arbitrary.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (agoo101284 @ Jan 21 2008, 03:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Quite average in the post season? Are you joking? How many comeback wins did he orchestrate in the playoffs?</div>

I can prove easily that his stats were average or "somewhat" above average, especially before this post-season, his Qb rating was around 80. His comebacks are always Field Goal drives that are good but nothing special.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>In his first year starting, he lead a ten point come back against the Raiders and a game winning drive in the Super Bowl.</div>

Why bring up the Raider game? The Tuck rule bailed the Pats right? That was not a great performance either way.

Did Brady overall play well in that first Superbowl? No he did not, and he was fortunate to still be in position to win because his defense kept him in the game. 5.7 adjusted yards per pass is below average.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Brady led another game winning drive in the Super Bowl two years later.</div>

The Panthers kicked the ball out of bounds and Brady did not have to do much though, did he? It's one thing to get your team in FG position like Peyton did against the Chargers or Steelers, TDs are more difficult to get. Brady does not have any Game Winning TD drives in the playoffs if I remember correctly.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>In his career, he has 28 game winning, fourth quarter drives. He's 84-1 when the Patriots have fourth quarter lead.</div>

Regular season stats? What the hell is this? This is a discussion just about the post-season right?


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>He's 14-2 in the playoffs. Those are the numbers that matter and make him one of the all-time great playoff QBs in the history of the sport.</div>

He's one of the best, not the best you even stated this yourself.

Brady managed the game in the majority of his wins, he won his first Superbowl with Defense, and defeated the Colts with a ball possession offense in 2003 and 2004. The Pats have had the first and second scoring defenses in the Superbowl Runs that Brady performed a bit above average.

In fact, Peyton has better stats than Brady in the Playoffs. QB rating is a joke, so stat nerds use "adjusted yards per pass". The "Hidden game of Football" is a great empirical analysis of the game, and figured out the following: Basically, on average a TD has been measured to be worth 10 yards of field position because TDs are a matter of chance and random; not all 30+ yard passes end up being TDs but many QBs like Brady and Peyton throw short-little touchdowns. Interceptions are worth -45 yards of field position on average, taking this into account, Manning averages 6.4 yards per pass, and Brady has 6.2 They are both comparable in Playoff performance but Manning has gone into the playoffs with a pathetic defense various occasions, which cost him games against Miami, San Diego and such.

6.0 Yards per pass is the average, so to put 6.4 into perspective, that is like having a QB rating of 88.5 in the playoffs. 6.2 is like having a QB rating of 85.5. Both are above average, but only somewhat.

Montana has had better numbers in the playoffs, and some other Qbs I am forgetting about. Even Jake Delhomme has better numbers, but then one has to realize that it's not just about playoff stats, because that is not a large sample size of data either.

<u>About Eli Manning: </u>

The running game did not help him too much against Green Bay, he just made some nice throws and had an overall above average game so he should get some more credit from the people saying the running game saved him or whatever.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (playaofthegame @ Jan 21 2008, 12:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I didn't say Brady played better than Eli...I'm just saying Eli will never be on Brady's level and it's a joke that Giants fans believe that and the Patriots are gonna make Eli look like shit in the Super Bowl.

Also refrain from sayin ROFL ever again.</div>

That's the kind of empty talk that comes from a fan who maybe isn't as confident in his team as he once was.

I feel no need to make excuses or dump on the Patriots because I know my team is playing the best football right now.

 

As a Giants fan, I know I'm not supposed to be happy to be just in the Super Bowl. But that is what I'm feeling right now.

If the Giants lose, there is no shame in losing to a team like the New England Patriots.

However. The Giants have a chance to pull off what may be the greatest upset in sports history by beating the only 18-0 NFL team in history. So I am very excited about the possibility. Pats are favored by two TD's, but I think it could definetly be closer and maybe go down to the wire. I do think the Giants have a shot to win at least.

 

Wow, Peyton Manning and Jake Delhomme are better postseason QBs than Tom Brady, I've heard it all now.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ Jan 21 2008, 11:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>As a Giants fan, I know I'm not supposed to be happy to be just in the Super Bowl. But that is what I'm feeling right now.

If the Giants lose, there is no shame in losing to a team like the New England Patriots.

However. The Giants have a chance to pull off what may be the greatest upset in sports history by beating the only 18-0 NFL team in history. So I am very excited about the possibility. Pats are favored by two TD's, but I think it could definetly be closer and maybe go down to the wire. I do think the Giants have a shot to win at least.</div>

It wouldn't be in the top five upsets of the last year.

And I couldn't disagree with you more. It's not enough to just go, they have to win!

It's one game. The opportunity to be World Champions is too precious to rationalize that way.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thrilla @ Jan 22 2008, 12:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Wow, Peyton Manning and Jake Delhomme are better postseason QBs than Tom Brady, I've heard it all now.</div>


What the hell kind of analysis is that? No you didn't prove your point, you said absolutely nothing. You didn't retort anything.



The single most important factor in winning statistically correlates with yards per pass. QB rating improperly weighs it's categories.

So why aren't their numbers better? Delhomme does have better numbers in any QB rating system, Peyton has better numbers in the superior QB rating system.

Guess what, Brady's stats with average receivers are very close to average. This applies to the regular and post season.

I don't know if you noticed, but the Pats have a good defense. Winning does not mean one has good stats.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thrilla @ Jan 22 2008, 12:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Wow, Peyton Manning and Jake Delhomme are better postseason QBs than Tom Brady, I've heard it all now.</div>

LOL.

The only player in the conversation is Joe Montana. Period.

However, that doesn't count for anything on February 3rd. The team that plays better will win no matter what Brady has done in the past.

 

First people, explain why X QB is not better then Brady in the post-season. Don't give an elementary school kid answer.

I made an intelligent analysis in order to prove a point, I didn't just say Brady was overrated, I actually tried to create an intelligent discussion.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Jan 22 2008, 12:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thrilla @ Jan 22 2008, 12:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Wow, Peyton Manning and Jake Delhomme are better postseason QBs than Tom Brady, I've heard it all now.</div>

LOL.

The only player in the conversation is Joe Montana. Period.

However, that doesn't count for anything on February 3rd. The team that plays better will win no matter what Brady has done in the past.
</div>

Thrilla generalized my entire post, what point did he make?

He is living off of reputations, I actually provided some legitimate information.

The point is that not only are the playoffs a small sample size of information, Brady's stats are not impressive (Second greatest post-season QB of all time? The stats don't support that but they do support that he had a great defense around him). There are many people "in his league" in the post-season. His defense has kept him in games and that is inarguable.

Of course I would not take Delhomme over Brady, but you lost sight of context since that was never what I said.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Jan 22 2008, 12:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Jan 22 2008, 12:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thrilla @ Jan 22 2008, 12:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Wow, Peyton Manning and Jake Delhomme are better postseason QBs than Tom Brady, I've heard it all now.</div>

LOL.

The only player in the conversation is Joe Montana. Period.

However, that doesn't count for anything on February 3rd. The team that plays better will win no matter what Brady has done in the past.
</div>

Thrilla generalized my entire post, what point did he make?

He is living off of reputations, I actually provided some legitimate information.

The point is that not only are the playoffs a small sample size of information, brady's stats are not impressive. There are many people in his league in the post-season. his defense has kept him in games and that is inarguable.

Of course I would not take Delhomme over Brady, but you lost sight of context since that was never what I said.
</div>

I realize football is a team game and that a quarterback can't win a game by himself.

There are so many variables in football that skew stats. It's a unique sport that way.

Brady has come up huge in so many big spots. It's not necessary to haul out a bunch of data to know how incredible he's been in the postseason.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Jan 22 2008, 12:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Jan 22 2008, 12:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Jan 22 2008, 12:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thrilla @ Jan 22 2008, 12:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Wow, Peyton Manning and Jake Delhomme are better postseason QBs than Tom Brady, I've heard it all now.</div>

LOL.

The only player in the conversation is Joe Montana. Period.

However, that doesn't count for anything on February 3rd. The team that plays better will win no matter what Brady has done in the past.
</div>

Thrilla generalized my entire post, what point did he make?

He is living off of reputations, I actually provided some legitimate information.

The point is that not only are the playoffs a small sample size of information, brady's stats are not impressive. There are many people in his league in the post-season. his defense has kept him in games and that is inarguable.

Of course I would not take Delhomme over Brady, but you lost sight of context since that was never what I said.
</div>

I realize football is a team game and that a quarterback can't win a game by himself.

There are so many variables in football that skew stats. It's a unique sport that way.

Brady has come up huge in so many big spots. It's not necessary to haul out a bunch of data to know how incredible he's been in the postseason.
</div>

There is no doubt Brady is good in the playoffs, but that wasn't my argument. Peyton and Delhomme have overall comparable performances.

Brady has had good post-season comebacks (2-4 was it?), but his stats are a bit less impressive then you think, that was the whole point. Playing well in the first, second, and third quarter counts just as much.

And if we are talking about GW drives, he has no GW TD drives (IIRC), whereas Peyton has put his team in FG positions at the end of games and not been as fortunate. So even that is overstated.

Back to the Giants: What do you people think of Jeremy Shockey's impact on the team? I've heard some bad stuff being said about him recently.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Jan 22 2008, 12:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Jan 22 2008, 12:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Jan 22 2008, 12:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Jan 22 2008, 12:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thrilla @ Jan 22 2008, 12:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Wow, Peyton Manning and Jake Delhomme are better postseason QBs than Tom Brady, I've heard it all now.</div>

LOL.

The only player in the conversation is Joe Montana. Period.

However, that doesn't count for anything on February 3rd. The team that plays better will win no matter what Brady has done in the past.
</div>

Thrilla generalized my entire post, what point did he make?

He is living off of reputations, I actually provided some legitimate information.

The point is that not only are the playoffs a small sample size of information, brady's stats are not impressive. There are many people in his league in the post-season. his defense has kept him in games and that is inarguable.

Of course I would not take Delhomme over Brady, but you lost sight of context since that was never what I said.
</div>

I realize football is a team game and that a quarterback can't win a game by himself.

There are so many variables in football that skew stats. It's a unique sport that way.

Brady has come up huge in so many big spots. It's not necessary to haul out a bunch of data to know how incredible he's been in the postseason.
</div>

There is no doubt Brady is good in the playoffs, but that wasn't my point. Peyton and Delhomme have overall comparable performances and this is easily proved.

Brady has had good post-season comebacks (2-4 was it?), but his stats are a bit less impressive then you think, that was the whole point. Playing well in the first, second, and third quarter counts just as much.
</div>

No it does not.

If you suck the whole game and your teammates pick you up and give you a chance to win in the fourth quarter and you come through, that is what being a great quarterback is all about.

Your definition of "comparable performances" is unclear. Whatever it is, I doubt I agree with it.