Peyton Manning's "Legacy!"

I'm not interested in what could've been.

Tom Brady could've been Theismanned in his rookie year. But he wasn't.

Are you really trying to argue that Magic is not one of the top 5 players of all time?

No one knows if he would've won rings elsewhere. Just like no one knows if LeBron would win any if he stayed in Cleveland.

Bottom line is that they both did win rings. And both are among the greatest players to ever play. And their rings factor into that greatness.

 

You're getting hung up on "just."

It's a discussion of the best quarterback of all time. I think everybody on this board would have Peyton Manning in the top five ever -- anybody who doesn't can be dismissed immediately, put it that way. But when you're getting down to that, yeah, championships and whether you're at your best against the best are a great indicator. Not perfect, of course; I don't know anyone who would say either that Favre had a bad game or Elway had a good game in 1997-98, but the Broncos won. But it's an indication, and in Manning's case there is a persistence to some historic offenses coming up very short in the playoffs.

But remember again what we're talking about. It's like MVP debates. Everyone had their reasons that Cabrera wasn't deserving or Trout's defense didn't make all that big a difference or stolen bases are being over- or under-rated or what have you. None of that means we wouldn't be pleased as punch to have either guy on the team we root for.

 

If you want to talk about looking at how a player played in key games, I may follow you, depending on the sport.

As long as we're talking about how the player played and not trying to stick the entire team's performance on him.

 

That has always been my point with Manning. The playoff losses mostly share the trait of his offense (and usually himself) not playing very well. And this after some regular seasons that put him atop the record books.

 

See, I'm not sure I agree with that, but I'm not going to dismiss it with an eyeroll and a Wikipedia link.

 

Do you discount the leadership role quarterbacks have played throughout NFL history? Of course it's not the only factor in a team's success, but to say a quarterback doesn't have a disproportionate impact on a team's performance is silly.

Going the other way, do you really think someone would say Henri Richard is better than Wayne Gretzky, because Richard won 11 Stanley Cups with a dynastic team and Gretzky only won four?

 

The inescapable fact about Manning is that in the last two SBs, he threw a horrible/game-altering pick - 6 in each of them. I really appreciate and respect his work, but that's hard to stomach.

 

Yes. I'm more or less going to dismiss any attempt to describe the impact of a QB's leadership on the team as a whole. It may or may not exist, but I can't imagine a coherent, logically sound argument involving it.

 

I agree that anybody who doesn't think Manning is a top 5 all-time QB is out of their minds...

That's not the debate. If the Broncos had won on Sunday, we'd probably be arguing Manning's credentials vs. Montana's in the GOAT debate.

Does losing 43-8 change the debate? Of course it does.

 

Would losing 43-42 have changed the debate?

 

Certainly not as much, though if Manning had gacked up a terribly thrown interception on his final possession, it might swing the debate significantly.

 

This particular debate? No.