Peyton Manning the Greatest QB?

[Golfingdad]

Enlighten me ... are you seriously telling me Peyton calls his own plays to the degree like the guys in the era's I referenced ... LOL back at ya

Not even close. When you consider how sophisticated offenses and defenses are today, and the advent of the audible, Peyton calls his own plays to a degree far far BEYOND those qbs you are talking about.

[Slice of Life]

Enlighten me ... are you seriously telling me you believe Peyton calls his own plays to the degree like the guys in the era's I referenced ... LOL back at ya

Absolutely, yes.

Not sure how to enlighten you, you've already explained that you're not really a football nut anymore.

"Tony Dungy coached Peyton Manning for seven seasons in Indianapolis and gave him wide leeway to call the plays, run the offense and generally act like a coach on the field." -PFT

[newtogolf]

Not even close. When you consider how sophisticated offenses and defenses are today, and the advent of the audible, Peyton calls his own plays to a degree far far BEYOND those qbs you are talking about.

Joe Paradiso

[inthehole]

OK - I'm man enough to admit I didn't know PM was THAT involved in calling plays ... thanks for the enlightenment.     Additional props and respect for PM given ...

I'll stick to the golf threads or football nostalgia threads ...

[saevel25]

Absolutely, yes.

Not sure how to enlighten you, you've already explained that you're not really a football nut anymore.

"Tony Dungy coached Peyton Manning for seven seasons in Indianapolis and gave him wide leeway to call the plays, run the offense and generally act like a coach on the field." -PFT

Which is kinda surprising since the colts ran one of the simplest offenses in the NFL.

http://smartfootball.com/offense/peyton-manning-and-tom-moores-indianapolis-colts-offense#sthash.Es6yTlqK.dpbs

Basically Peyton ran the same formations, and just changed the Wide Receiver routes to fit what he saw on the field. He could check down to a run play. The Colts ran maybe 4-5 different run plays, nothing special. When I always watched them play it was a lot of zone blocking to the edge.

I personally like this concept. If you keep formations the same, and run different routes, then it is very hard to key on tendencies. It also fits into Peyton's no huddle offense. Keep the same formation, let Peyton read the defense. Then you hear the annoying audibles he goes through on the field to call the play. Its like he's able to mix match routes and create plays on the fly.

Not sure if he runs the same system in Denver or not.

[Slice of Life]

Today, Manning is given a set of plays to chose from that go with the players that were sent in by the offensive coordinator.  Peyton has the choice to call the play from the OC or to check off at the line to an one of the alternative plays that go with the player package.

I believe you're underestimating what Manning does. What you explained, is what the average QB does/gets. They get a handful of plays to choose from/change based on personnel and situations.

Manning is different...again, I'll re-quote from Profootballtalk.com

" Tony Dungy coached Peyton Manning for seven seasons in Indianapolis and gave him wide leeway to call the plays, run the offense and generally act like a coach on the field."

He ran the offense, he called the plays. He had the entire playbook at his disposal and could choose or audible any play he wanted. He could start with one play and audible to something completely different or even change routes on the fly based on what he saw on the defense.

That's what I understand...and what I've heard from both his coaches and teammates.

[Slice of Life]

Which is kinda surprising since the colts ran one of the simplest offenses in the NFL.

http://smartfootball.com/offense/peyton-manning-and-tom-moores-indianapolis-colts-offense#sthash.Es6yTlqK.dpbs

Basically Peyton ran the same formations, and just changed the Wide Receiver routes to fit what he saw on the field. He could check down to a run play. The Colts ran maybe 4-5 different run plays, nothing special. When I always watched them play it was a lot of zone blocking to the edge.

I personally like this concept. If you keep formations the same, and run different routes, then it is very hard to key on tendencies. It also fits into Peyton's no huddle offense. Keep the same formation, let Peyton read the defense. Then you hear the annoying audibles he goes through on the field to call the play. Its like he's able to mix match routes and create plays on the fly.

Not sure if he runs the same system in Denver or not.

OMAHA OMAHA OMAHA

[Slice of Life]

For the record, I can't say Peyton was the greatest ever. Maybe? Maybe not. He's definitely above Brady on the list.

As a Cleveland homer, I'll say Otto Graham.

[boogielicious]

Quote:

Originally Posted by boogielicious

All of the above debate will be moot in a few years anyway after A-A-Ron Rogers wins his 5th Superbowl.  That is after his team gets a defense.

I underlined the key word for ya

Quote:

Originally Posted by boogielicious

Game, set, match.

I'm glad you agree that we won

Not even close Matt!  Not with his playoff record.

[newtogolf]

I believe you're underestimating what Manning does. What you explained, is what the average QB does/gets. They get a handful of plays to choose from/change based on personnel and situations.

Manning is different...again, I'll re-quote from Profootballtalk.com

"Tony Dungy coached Peyton Manning for seven seasons in Indianapolis and gave him wide leeway to call the plays, run the offense and generally act like a coach on the field."

He ran the offense, he called the plays. He had the entire playbook at his disposal and could choose or audible any play he wanted. He could start with one play and audible to something completely different or even change routes on the fly based on what he saw on the defense.

That's what I understand...and what I've heard from both his coaches and teammates.

I've heard Dungy discuss Manning and overall I think we're saying the same thing but differ in how we perceive the number of options he had to choose from.  If the OC sends in 5 WR's he's not calling a draw play or an off tackle run.  The personnel they send in limits his play calling options and formations whereas Bradshaw almost always had the same personnel on the field so he had the entire playbook to choose from.

[saevel25]

Not even close Matt!  Not with his playoff record.

Sure it does. You basically admitted that Aaron Rodgers needs a better team to become the greatest of all time (to win more super bowls). Yet you don't give Peyton credit because he played on less complete teams than Tom Brady. Way to contradict yourself.

[Slice of Life]

I've heard Dungy discuss Manning and overall I think we're saying the same thing but differ in how we perceive the number of options he had to choose from.  If the OC sends in 5 WR's he's not calling a draw play or an off tackle run.  The personnel they send in limits his play calling options and formations whereas Bradshaw almost always had the same personnel on the field so he had the entire playbook to choose from.

Derrrp lol

I can't say much since I didn't watch a lot of Steelers games when I was -10 years old, but I have a hard time believing that they didn't substitute people in and out, and only had one formation. If that's the case, calling plays would actually be much easier, since you wouldn't have to consider personnel.

[Slice of Life]

Sure it does. You basically admitted that Aaron Rodgers needs a better team to become the greatest of all time (to win more super bowls). Yet you don't give Peyton credit because he played on less complete teams than Tom Brady. Way to contradict yourself.

He's been contradicting himself since the beginning.

If he can't understand why the team defense stats I posted are important, there's no hope...

[newtogolf]

Derrrp lol

I can't say much since I didn't watch a lot of Steelers games when I was -10 years old, but I have a hard time believing that they didn't substitute people in and out, and only had one formation. If that's the case, calling plays would actually be much easier, since you wouldn't have to consider personnel.

They had different formations but not close to what they have today.  As for substitutions it was minimal except to give players a breather or for injury.  Teams back then had short yardage personnel and "hail mary" personnel but for the most part the starters played a very high percentage of the plays and didn't swap in and out like they do today.

[Slice of Life]

They had different formations but not close to what they have today.  As for substitutions it was minimal except to give players a breather or for injury.  Teams back then had short yardage personnel and "hail mary" personnel but for the most part the starters played a very high percentage of the plays and didn't swap in and out like they do today.

With that being the case, I'd argue that it would be easier to call plays in the huddle, since there are less variables. It's essentially remembering everyones routes and or blocking schemes depending on the play...who the hot receiver is...etc.,

[boogielicious]

Quote:

Originally Posted by boogielicious

Not even close Matt!  Not with his playoff record.

Sure it does. You basically admitted that Aaron Rodgers needs a better team to become the greatest of all time (to win more super bowls). Yet you don't give Peyton credit because he played on less complete teams than Tom Brady. Way to contradict yourself.

Less complete teams?  No way Matt.  He had great teams with tremendous offenses that faltered in the playoffs.  Let's leave Brady out of this because, again, I think guys like Starr and Montana are the best all time because they got it done in the playoffs.  If Brady had won the other two SBs, and he was very close, then I would add him.

Let's take a look:

2002 - #5 Seed.  Lost to Jets 41-0. Offense #9 Yards, 21.8 PPG (#17). Defense 19.5 (#7)

2003 - Co-MVP; #3 seed, scored 41 and 38 points over the Broncos and KC (did not punt once).  Lost to Pats 24-14. By yards, #3 offense, #1 passing. 27.9 PPG (#2).  Defense 21.0 (#20)

2004 - MVP; #3 seed, scored 49 over Denver.  Lost 20-3 to the Pats. #2 offense, #1 passing. 32.2 PPG (#1), Defense 21.9 (#19).

2005- #1 Seed. Lost to Pitt 21-18. #3 offense, #3 passing. 27.4 PPG (#2), Defense 15.4 (#2)

2006- Only SB Championship.  #3 offense, #2 passing 26.7 PPG (#2), Defense 22.5 (#23)

2007 - #2 seed, Lost to SD 28-24. #5 offense,  28.1 PPG (#3), Defense 16.1 (#1)

2008 - MVP #5 seed. Lost to SD 23-17.  #5 passing offense 23.6 PPG (#13), Defense 18.6 (#7) How did he get MVP again???

2009 - MVP #1 seed.  Lost to NO 31-17 in SB, #9 offense, #2 passing offense, 26.0 PPG (#7), Defense 19.2 (#8)

2010 - #3 seed.  Lost to Jets 17-16.  #4 offense, #1 passing, 27.2 PPG (#4), Defense 24.2 (#23)

2011 - injured

2012 - #1 seed.  Lost to Baltimore 38-35, #4 offense, #5 Passing, 30.1 PPG (#2), Defense 18.1 (#4)

2013 - MVP #1 seed.  Lost to Seattle 43-8, #1 offense (#1 passing), 37.9 PPG (#1), Defense 24.9 PPG (#22)

The playoff loses all have a commonality, the offense scored below their regular season average.  Some by a lot.  It wasn't because the defense got blown out (except maybe for last year and 2002). So to have his team shoulder the blame (specifically the defense) is not accurate.

Is he a great QB?  Certainly.  Would I have him on my team.  Sure.  Is he the GOAT?  Not yet.

[Slice of Life]

Would I have him on my team.  Sure.

You just admitted that Peyton is > Brady. Since you want him on your team.

[boogielicious]

Quote:

Originally Posted by boogielicious

Would I have him on my team.  Sure.

You just admitted that Peyton is > Brady. Since you want him on your team.

I would take Manning over Brady for a fantasy pick for sure.  To win games in the playoffs?  No way.