Eli Manning retires

[Songbird]

LOL. Franco Harris made an easy receptionn too.

 

[Webster]

Can we please stop basing so much of our evaluations of quarterbacks on their teams' win-loss records? It is actually even worse than judging starting pitchers by their records.

The primary case for him to get in is the two SB wins, so his win/loss record is of course relevant to his case.

Plus, a pitcher’s actions are the same whether leading by 10 or losing by 10 and you can look at other stats to measure their effectiveness. Football is a game of interrelation — the best RB won’t do well behind a crappy line and the most effective QB is going to have a losing record if his defense always stinks, so determining whether someone is HOF worthy is always an imperfect exercise. However, the ability to lead a team to a win, although not solely a measure of a QB’s effectiveness, has to be considered.

 

[Songbird]

This is sort of funny.

 

[playthrough]

And because he’s a Manning and spent his career in New York.

No chance a dude with the same resume but a different name who spent his career in Minnesota is getting in.

Yep. The Hall puts in Bill Cowher, with his one ring and now-TV familiarity, of course they're putting in a guy with two rings who played in NYC and is part of the league's royal family. (I know that comparing coaches and players is apples/oranges, but anyhoo.) ESPN and the Hall are already salivating at that induction ceremony. Archie and Peyton will get more air time than the other inductees.

 

[justgladtobehere]

Yes, they're inflated due to era. But 7th all-time passing yards, 7th all-time passing TDs. Top 10 in both, along with the other stuff, makes it easy.

There really isn't an argument if he's getting in or not. He's getting in.

I noted this before. 8 out of the top 10 QBs in yards began their career after 1990. The same is true of TDs. Eli is 12th in interceptions. Only two of the top 11 QBs in this stat started their career after 1990.

His yards and TDs are purely a product of when Eli played in the NFL. Yet, in an era when interceptions were less frequent, Eli threw a ton. That's not good.

 

[CD Boogie]

He's not making it. Jim Plunkett has just as many rings and he's not in. Unlike the baseball Hall, the electorate is not New York-centric. The fairest summary of his career is that Eli Manning was an OK to slightly better than OK quarterback for most of a long career in which he had two superb playoff runs. That doesn't shriek Canton to me.

Dude, ya wanna double down on your losing bet? Eli is going into Canton on ****ing roller skates. Ya can argue that he doesn't deserve it, but to argue that he's not going to make it is just idiocy. Jim Plunkett? JFC.

 

[sgreenwell]

If I had to bet money on it, I'd say Eli is in. However, as this thread probably illustrates, it'll probably be pretty contentious when it is announced. It'll probably help that he will first be considered in 5 years, and not 10+ years from now, when as others have noted he'll be further down the passing yards leaderboard.

I also don't think Eli is that comparable to Plunkett, except for the two SB wins. Plunkett was MVP in one; Eli was MVP in both. Eli has always been seen as a QB you can build a team around, whereas Plunkett was traded once and released once, and didn't find success until later. This *is* value in providing some stability to build around, and for about 10 years, you knew Eli was good enough to be a playoff-caliber quarterback. I don't think he was a Top 5 quarterback most year, but he was probably Top 10 for most of his career. If I had a vote, he wouldn't be on my ballot, but I can understand why other people would; it's not a 'this is ****ing crazy town' pick, like people wasting baseball HoF votes on Brad Penny.

(By the way, I'm glad the NBA wasn't the only league with insane draft pick trades in the earlier days. From Wikipedia: Prior to the 1976 NFL Draft, Plunkett was traded to the San Francisco 49ers in exchange for quarterback Tom Owen, two first round picks in 1976, and a first and second round pick in 1977. Plunkett led the 49ers to a 6–1 start before faltering to an 8–6 record. After a 5–9 season in 1977, the 49ers released him during the 1978 preseason.)

 

[outofplace]

If I had to bet money on it, I'd say Eli is in. However, as this thread probably illustrates, it'll probably be pretty contentious when it is announced. It'll probably help that he will first be considered in 5 years, and not 10+ years from now, when as others have noted he'll be further down the passing yards leaderboard.

I also don't think Eli is that comparable to Plunkett, except for the two SB wins. Plunkett was MVP in one; Eli was MVP in both. Eli has always been seen as a QB you can build a team around, whereas Plunkett was traded once and released once, and didn't find success until later. This *is* value in providing some stability to build around, and for about 10 years, you knew Eli was good enough to be a playoff-caliber quarterback. I don't think he was a Top 5 quarterback most year, but he was probably Top 10 for most of his career. If I had a vote, he wouldn't be on my ballot, but I can understand why other people would; it's not a 'this is ****ing crazy town' pick, like people wasting baseball HoF votes on Brad Penny.

(By the way, I'm glad the NBA wasn't the only league with insane draft pick trades in the earlier days. From Wikipedia: Prior to the 1976 NFL Draft, Plunkett was traded to the San Francisco 49ers in exchange for quarterback Tom Owen, two first round picks in 1976, and a first and second round pick in 1977. Plunkett led the 49ers to a 6–1 start before faltering to an 8–6 record. After a 5–9 season in 1977, the 49ers released him during the 1978 preseason.)

Plunkett was actually out of the league for an entire season before the Raiders brought him in as a backup. Even his numbers with the Raiders aren't great. As you said, he is not at all comparable to Manning.

 

[Batman]

Plunkett was actually out of the league for an entire season before the Raiders brought him in as a backup. Even his numbers with the Raiders aren't great. As you said, he is not at all comparable to Manning.

Plunkett seems a lot more comparable to Kurt Warner, where the highs were insanely high and the lows were pretty damn low to the point of almost bouncing around the league for a while.

 

[tapintoamerica]

Can we please stop basing so much of our evaluations of quarterbacks on their teams' win-loss records? It is actually even worse than judging starting pitchers by their records.

Much worse. Case in point: Trent Dilfer posted a 3-0 record in the 2000 playoffs.
Another thing I haven’t grasped is TD/INT ratio. You can throw a pick from anywhere, but touchdowns of a long distance are not only unlikely; they consist more of running than passing.
TD/INT makes more sense to me if confined to the red zone.

 

[tapintoamerica]

I noted this before. 8 out of the top 10 QBs in yards began their career after 1990. The same is true of TDs. Eli is 12th in interceptions. Only two of the top 11 QBs in this stat started their career after 1990.

His yards and TDs are purely a product of when Eli played in the NFL. Yet, in an era when interceptions were less frequent, Eli threw a ton. That's not good.

Why has INT rate been cut in half over the past 40 years? Rules changes, I imagine. But what other reasons?

 

[justgladtobehere]

Why has INT rate been cut in half over the past 40 years? Rules changes, I imagine. But what other reasons?

I think it is a better understanding of the need to keep possession of the football as possession has become more important with scoring going up. Plus, everything in the last 40 years has emphasized completion percentage over throwing deep.

 

[Batman]

Why has INT rate been cut in half over the past 40 years? Rules changes, I imagine. But what other reasons?

The rise of the West Coast Offense in the 80s and 90s, and its spread-style successors have certainly had a lot to do with it. Most teams' passing games now are based on short, quick throws that are easier to complete, or at least harder to intercept. It's hard to jump the route on a bubble screen that's out of the quarterback's hand one or two seconds after the snap. A lot of other routes are probably run within 5-7 yards of the line of scrimmage, where there are holes in zone coverage or receivers can rub off defenders to get others open.
It's the same reason completion percentages are way up nowadays.

 

[Tweener]

Yep. The Hall puts in Bill Cowher, with his one ring and now-TV familiarity, of course they're putting in a guy with two rings who played in NYC and is part of the league's royal family. (I know that comparing coaches and players is apples/oranges, but anyhoo.) ESPN and the Hall are already salivating at that induction ceremony. Archie and Peyton will get more air time than the other inductees.

I’ve heard the argument today that every other two-time Super Bowl MVP has been inducted. But I think the you can say that Eli has never been a top-five quarterback, and there aren’t many guys in the Hall (and there shouldn’t be) who were not elite at some point in their career.

 

[Tweener]

I mean, he probably would, probably on the fact that he won the only two titles in Vikings history after their previous failures.

OK, New England, not Minnesota.

 

[bigpern23]

Luckiest mother ****er to ever play. He should give that first mvp to his defense.

Tuck, in particular. Manning is still a Hall of Famer.

 

[bigpern23]

And because he’s a Manning and spent his career in New York.

No chance a dude with the same resume but a different name who spent his career in Minnesota is getting in.

Same resume, including two Super Bowl MVPs in Minnesota? Still a Hall of Famer.

 

[bigpern23]

OK, New England, not Minnesota.

Yup, Manning would still be a Hall of Famer.

 

[bigpern23]

Bart Starr, Terry Bradshaw, Joe Montana, Eli Manning and Tom Brady. Those are your multiple-SBMVPs. That's it. Oh, and Manning retires in the top 10 in many passing categories.

You guys are kidding yourselves if you think he's not in the HOF.

If anything, his performance is all the more impressive considering the incompetence of the front office and coaching he has played under since the Accorsi/Coughlin years. Offensive line has been a glaring need for YEARS, and Reese/Gettlemen have done ****all to rectify it.

Manning's biggest fault, to me, has been his skittishness in the pocket when he's harassed by opposing pass rushers (the Tyree Catch notwithstanding). He's no different than just about any QB not named Favre or Roethlisberger in that respect. But knowing how much he struggles when he's getting hit, Reese and Gettleman did a pisspoor job of addressing the problem and putting a competent offensive line around him.

Now, I'm not going to "what-if" his career. His numbers are what they are, his results are what they are. And, top 10 in a bunch of passing categories and two Super Bowl MVPs are HOF worthy.

 

[JC]

Tuck, in particular. Manning is still a Hall of Famer.

Sure, still the luckiest MFer to ever play. The Tyree catch and the Welker drop. Where was his hall of fame skills in the other 14 years.