Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I was sorta disappointed at the Saints for not making that 1 yd line. However, they made up for it in fashion. BTW, Mardi Gras started out early this year, I have no reason why:rolleyes::p:D

Other than the Saints opening up later, this game was a purely, old style big D game, both sides.

Amazing how a team can hold back such a great offense like the Saints in the red zone.

The Saints never let up on Manning forcing him to make some bad passes into coverage when there were people in the open. It became very obvious that Manning did not want to get sacked so the fear or embarrassment of being towed down behind the line of scrimmage under a pile of black and gold uniforms made him lose his concentration. Don't fool yourself into thinking that Manning was not aware of the Saints brutal late hits on QBs in previous games. The Saints D rushing in are not unlike the physical Eagles of the 90s or the Bears of the 80s who know that this game is called "tackle" football as opposed to "flag" football.

Two weeks ago, the Saints D did the same thing to Favre.

There are just a few teams out there that can make a great QB lose their game in such an obvious fashion. But I think the Saints' D will be the key factor in a few return visits to the postseason.
 
Other than the Saints opening up later, this game was a purely, old style big D game, both sides.

Amazing how a team can hold back such a great offense like the Saints in the red zone.

The Saints never let up on Manning forcing him to make some bad passes into coverage when there were people in the open. It became very obvious that Manning did not want to get sacked so the fear or embarrassment of being towed down behind the line of scrimmage under a pile of black and gold uniforms made him lose his concentration. Don't fool yourself into thinking that Manning was not aware of the Saints brutal late hits on QBs in previous games. The Saints D rushing in are not unlike the physical Eagles of the 90s or the Bears of the 80s who know that this game is called "tackle" football as opposed to "flag" football.

Two weeks ago, the Saints D did the same thing to Favre.

There are just a few teams out there that can make a great QB lose their game in such an obvious fashion. But I think the Saints' D will be the key factor in a few return visits to the postseason.

True that, but even more impressive was Colt's 93 Freeny, that dude is an almost unstoppable force. Quite the QB tackler. Also, The Colts had a good defense on, they stood the Saints down on the red zone 1 yd line.
 
True that, but even more impressive was Colt's 93 Freeny, that dude is an almost unstoppable force. Quite the QB tackler. Also, The Colts had a good defense on, they stood the Saints down on the red zone 1 yd line.

I think the Colts D, if they stay healthy, will keep them a force in the NFL. I don't see Manning ever realistically getting this chance again, but his legacy is already huge. Indy got to SB this year but lost some great talent along the way. It was pricey.

Warner's legacy was also huge and he knew to hang it up even though he could have easily gone another five years (but would probably never win another Super Bowl) or even reach 8-8 in the regular season.

I think Favre won't get there either but he can bring the Vikes to two or three most postseasons because he has some weapons to work with on offense. But Favre should quit and he can at least say he finished strong. A few years from now, if he leaves this season, he will get inducted into the Hall of Fame.

Because Manning didn't win, I think he will continue with the Colts, but who knows for sure? If he had won, I am pretty sure he would have retired, on top, making a lot of the pundits consider him the best offensive football player of all time against a Marino, Montana, OJ, Rice, E. Smith, Aikman, Stabler, R. Craig, Namath, and Steve Young who obviously wore out their welcome and thus diminished in the eyes of many.

What would be disappointing for Manning would be if he goes one and out in one or more playoffs in the future, or worse, if he fails to bring Indy to the playoffs in the next few years even once. There will be so much negative press on the guy if he gets anything less than one more Super Bowl. The monkey is on his back again, and it's not a good place to be.
 
If he had won, I am pretty sure he would have retired, on top, making a lot of the pundits consider him the best offensive football player of all time against a Marino, Montana, OJ, Rice, E. Smith, Aikman, Stabler, R. Craig, Namath, and Steve Young who obviously wore out their welcome and thus diminished in the eyes of many.

I dunno man, I think top athletes like Manning have a hard time walking away at any point, let alone at their peak.

And in other news, it appears lots of people watched this Super Bowl. The most watched program in the history of television? Amazing.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35298021/ns/entertainment-television/
 
monkey is on his back again, and it's not a good place to be.

Unfortunately, I agree with you. The worst part about it, though, is the fact that this monkey isn't necessarily the Superbowl monkey, but his "legacy" monkey. Sometimes I almost feel like people refuse to give him [full] credit because he only owns one ring. I think his statistics are pretty impressive and regardless of the number of "big wins" he has, skill-wise, he'll always be [one of] the best the game has seen.

Back to Freeney though, that guy had a monster of a game. He's definitely had many better, but considering his state going into the game, I'd say he came through and delivered. If a QB is shaken by a defensive end, even when said defensive end has about one and a half good feet, that's not too shabby...

Manning has said he'll remain with the Colts. I definitely see the franchise dishing out the cash to keep him in the city when his contract runs out, although, as with many QBs, he'll likely offer up some of his salary to keep players like Reggie Wayne and such. He's brought and unbelievable amount of money to the city and is as valuable an economic asset as he is a football player. He said in an interview with Dan Marino that he doesn't see himself playing at age 40, so hopefully between now and then Indy can chase the Lombardi at least a couple more times.
 

You make it sound as if Manning is at end of his career trying to win one more. He's one of the least injured,least sacked qb's in the league. Not to mention the fact that he plays half his games in a dome. Regardless of yesterday's outcome,he's not going off into the sunset. Irsay said as much a week before the SB:
There's no question now that Manning has not just a strong arm, but a Hall of Fame arm. And Irsay vowed that he'll "get something done in the off-season" to ensure that Manning's arm will lead the Colts for years to come.
http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2010/02/02/jim-irsay-plans-to-pay-peyton-manning-this-off-season/

The Colts will do whatever they can to keep Manning upright and playing QB for as long as they can..And Freeney definitely wasn't the same player in the second half as he was in the first. You could see him limping in the third quarter.We could what if the scenarios to death..What if Freeney was 100%?What if Bob Sanders played? etc etc etc...
 
The worst part about it, though, is the fact that this monkey isn't necessarily the Superbowl monkey, but his "legacy" monkey. Sometimes I almost feel like people refuse to give him [full] credit because he only owns one ring.

The thing a lot of people seems to forget, or ignore, is that Football is a TEAM sport. Manning, no matter how good he is, can't win a game all by his lonesome. As much as I hate the Colts, I still have to give props the Manning. IMO, he is the greatest QB the game has ever seen.

What I find humorous is claims that Brady is a better QB than Manning because of the rings. IMO, Brady is a better than average QB on a great team. Case in point, the 2008 Pats went 11-5 with Matt Cassell. The same Matt Cassell that went 4-12 with the Chiefs a year later.

Back to Freeney though, that guy had a monster of a game.

Freeney is a beast. No question. Lesser linesmen would be riding the pine with a blown ankle.
 
The thing a lot of people seems to forget, or ignore, is that Football is a TEAM sport. Manning, no matter how good he is, can't win a game all by his lonesome.

No doubt. It's easy to get into that mindset, especially with the Colts [and Manning], and I think a lot of people do. This particular season was extra special because of the success we had with so many rookies. Colts have so many hot players, and that's what makes them so strong, both offensively and defensively. The coaching staff does a great job moulding new players into the team so as to make them as seamless as possible and I think they do an outstanding job.
 
You make it sound as if Manning is at end of his career trying to win one more.

Yes, that is exactly what I am saying.


I was, and still am primarily a San Francisco 49ers fan and a lot of us had a hard time seeing Joe Montana replaced with Steve Young. Our hearts wanted to stay with Montana who was still healthy and could scramble and avoid hits better than anybody before him, but as we saw him get older within his 30s, it became obvious we had to move on.

We were either going to keep Montana and probably never go to the Super Bowl again anytime soon, or we were going to move on with the rising, talented Steve Young, and win a Super Bowl, which we did with Steve Young throwing six touchdown passes. Yes, four rings was nice with Montana, but the 49ers made a calculated move, and went with Young and a 5th ring.

People's hearts in Indy may be with Manning, or in Minnesota with Favre, but like myself and other Niners fans, we had to live with a move to a younger quarterback in San Francisco, and after all is said and done, it's great we chose Steve Young.

Today, we look fondly both on Joe Montana and Steve Young. The leadership of the 49ers never let such a talented player like Montana let himself wear out his welcome in San Francisco. Luckily, we didn't have to see him "slow down" in a 49ers uniform. He left the starting position while on top.

Besides his Super Bowl ring and record six TDs, the new guy and at first unwelcome guy name Steve Young retired a 49ers with the highest rating of any QB at the time, and to date I believe.

Call Policy, DeBartolo, Walsh, and others within the 49ers organization cold hearted and in love with youth, but they knew when to find new, great talent, and when to let them eventually step aside and let newer guys come in who could be built into superstars.

We kept changing the team, and as a result, we had five wins in the Super Bowl in five tries. No team can claim that honor. And we did it between 1981 to 1994 which is amazingly impressive. And oh yeah, with our "young" players on our teams, we also had a few other decent seasons in that time period, too.

In short, you build a dynasty around players, coaches, and managers, not just one player.

I am convinced if this was the Peyton Manning of of the mid-2000s, made of iron and completely unflappable and not prone to errors in judgment, he would have blown out the Saints last night. But guess what, this is not 2003, 2004, 2005, or 2006, and Peyton's not the type of guy who could pull off 40 completions with ease and get 300 yards before he breaks a sweat.

Peyton had insanely great protection on a team that also has one of the most impressive Ds around. He has some good tools on offense, but let's look at who Peyton is these days. He's not the same QB I saw ten, eight, or even three years ago. If Indy's lineup had been a little stronger on O or D in past years, Peyton would be wearing 4 rings like Bradshaw or Montana. Peyton was great, and still is, but he is declining as last night clearly exhibited.

He couldn't hit obvious receivers, and his excellent changeup in picking receivers he once had made him try and rely on them when he should have used the extra time to scan what were plenty of open guys. Manning's mistake in the SB which killed him is not unlike the mistake Favre made in the playoffs.

These are the types of mistakes either rookies or declining players make. I am not going to chalk this up to a "bad" game that Manning had. The man gave it all he had, but last night showed us all he can give us against such a talented D as the one the Saints had.

Indy needs to use what young, rising players they have and rebuild another great run of wins with a younger QB. They should not hang onto Manning forever and be one sack from complete ruin. My money for a QB healing is always on an OK 20-something QB over a great 30-something QB if they take an extremely hard hit. (Same goes with the Vikings and they need to rebuild).
 
Warner's legacy was also huge and he knew to hang it up even though he could have easily gone another five years (but would probably never win another Super Bowl) or even reach 8-8 in the regular season.
Easily gone another five years? The dude is beat up and old (he was born in '71). Maybe he could've hung around as a back up for 5 years, but there's no way he could take the abuse of being a starter for another 5 years.


Lethal
 
Easily gone another five years? The dude is beat up and old (he was born in '71). Maybe he could've hung around as a back up for 5 years, but there's no way he could take the abuse of being a starter for another 5 years.


Lethal

From about age 33, when Troy Aikman left, to one's early 40s, is a sketchy time to keep a starting QB. No matter how tough, any professional, starting QB has taken their lumps. These types of injuries have a cumulative effect.

In a perfect world, all great QBs would have Testaverde and DeBerg types of longevity, but that's not the case in a physical game like football.

If this was golf and there were players in a cup representing my country, I would say, "sure", let's have the whole freaking team stay until they are 40, starters and backups alike.

This is football. It's hard, and short which explains why Favre, a young man by most other occupations, is considered and "old" man.

There may never be a man who is 40 who had the season Favre had, or perhaps there may never be any QB over 35 who had the season Favre had. At times, he looked like the most amazing QB I have ever seen, throwing a bullet to a passer with three men on him, dodging rushers, running backwards off balance and getting the pass right there, and taking huge hits and retaining composure. Favre had a fairly tale old man's wet dream of a regular season.

Warner had the good sense in knowing this was unlikely for him, and now (or soon) Manning will have to face the music.

How many people actually think Manning will be 34 and holding up a Lombardi Trophy next year? Or how about him being 35 and holding up that trophy? Will Manning suddenly just "get better" and have a late run like John Elway? Will you bet your whole team on it?
 
From about age 33, when Troy Aikman left, to one's early 40s, is a sketchy time to keep a starting QB. No matter how tough, any professional, starting QB has taken their lumps. These types of injuries have a cumulative effect.

In a perfect world, all great QBs would have Testaverde and DeBerg types of longevity, but that's not the case in a physical game like football.

If this was golf and there were players in a cup representing my country, I would say, "sure", let's have the whole freaking team stay until they are 40, starters and backups alike.

This is football. It's hard, and short which explains why Favre, a young man by most other occupations, is considered and "old" man.

There may never be a man who is 40 who had the season Favre had, or perhaps there may never be any QB over 35 who had the season Favre had. At times, he looked like the most amazing QB I have ever seen, throwing a bullet to a passer with three men on him, dodging rushers, running backwards off balance and getting the pass right there, and taking huge hits and retaining composure. Favre had a fairly tale old man's wet dream of a regular season.

Warner had the good sense in knowing this was unlikely for him, and now (or soon) Manning will have to face the music.

How many people actually think Manning will be 34 and holding up a Lombardi Trophy next year? Or how about him being 35 and holding up that trophy? Will Manning suddenly just "get better" and have a late run like John Elway? Will you bet your whole team on it?
Are there two of you sharing the same account or something 'cause you aren't making any sense. What does any of what you just said have to do w/me disagreeing w/your statement that you think Warner could easily last another 5 years in the NFL?


Lethal
 
I am finished with the NFL. Anyone who believes that the NFL isn't fixed is a fool. The Vikings and Colts are far superior teams.

Bye bye NFL.
 
Are there two of you sharing the same account or something 'cause you aren't making any sense. What does any of what you just said have to do w/me disagreeing w/your statement that you think Warner could easily last another 5 years in the NFL?


Lethal

IMHO, both Warner and Manning, while still great, are older and in decline.

At one time Warner was the centerpiece of the "greatest show on turf" putting up crazy numbers with the Rams, and Manning had this amazing season in 2004 with a 121 QB rating. These were great years but in NFL's past, yet also the absolute peak of these two legendary players.

Great QBs have a learning curve, a peak which could be only one season, and a decline. Both Warner and Manning, definite future Hall of Famers, are in their decline period, Warner being just a little further into the decline (thus him quitting).

Warner made the right move to retire, even though he is so talented that if he wanted to, he could play until he's 42 like a Steve De Berg, although maybe as a backup but elder mentor.

Manning should retire or go one more year and see what happens. But if anybody thinks he will get better with age are not thinking football, but red wine. ;)

It would be great to see Manning go to next year's Super Bowl, and win it, and then retire. I wouldn't be able to stand seeing him get to the Super Bowl, and then lose again. It would be too painful for me to see. The only scenario I could see Peyton Manning going to the Super Bowl, and lose, and still feel OK for the man, is if he lost in an epic, high scoring air battle against his brother, Eli Manning.

In that case, both QBs would be "heroes" and filling up commercials on tv the way they did not too long ago. With Eli a new ring member, and Peyton a past one, it was fair to call them on par with the Williams sisters of tennis.

The Mannings need only to go against each other to top the rings each one has on their finger. In that case, I wouldn't care which one won.
 
I am finished with the NFL. Anyone who believes that the NFL isn't fixed is a fool. The Vikings and Colts are far superior teams.

Bye bye NFL.

Ummm, no

The Vikings were led by a gunslinger that you just know was going to find a a way to throw an interception to doom his team when it counted most as he has done so often

The Colts are a one man show and when that one man makes a mistake, the team crumbles around him

Brees is the real deal

IMHO, both Warner and Manning, while still great, are older and in decline.

At one time Warner was the centerpiece of the "greatest show on turf" putting up crazy numbers with the Rams, and Manning had this amazing season in 2004 with a 121 QB rating. These were great years but in NFL's past, yet also the absolute peak of these two legendary players.

Great QBs have a learning curve, a peak which could be only one season, and a decline. Both Warner and Manning, definite future Hall of Famers, are in their decline period, Warner being just a little further into the decline (thus him quitting).

Warner made the right move to retire, even though he is so talented that if he wanted to, he could play until he's 42 like a Steve De Berg, although maybe as a backup but elder mentor.

Manning should retire or go one more year and see what happens. But if anybody thinks he will get better with age are not thinking football, but red wine. ;)

It would be great to see Manning go to next year's Super Bowl, and win it, and then retire. I wouldn't be able to stand seeing him get to the Super Bowl, and then lose again. It would be too painful for me to see. The only scenario I could see Peyton Manning going to the Super Bowl, and lose, and still feel OK for the man, is if he lost in an epic, high scoring air battle against his brother, Eli Manning.

In that case, both QBs would be "heroes" and filling up commercials on tv the way they did not too long ago. With Eli a new ring member, and Peyton a past one, it was fair to call them on par with the Williams sisters of tennis.

The Mannings need only to go against each other to top the rings each one has on their finger. In that case, I wouldn't care which one won.

I disagree

Warner had 2 of his best seasons the past two years
He could have played a couple more, but wanted to do other things
I don't have a problem with his retirement

Manning has several more high level years ahead of him
Although I am no fan of his, he is a tough competitor and a very smart QB
If he retired now, he would be seen as a quitter because he can't win the big games
He has never been a big game QB
Never beat the Gators while at Tennessee and Tee Martin wins the NC the next year
Plays great in the regular season but doesn't deliver the big wins
Brady has been a much better money QB

His brother Eli is not even in the same conversation and is a marginal QB at best
To compare them to the Williams sisters is laughable in my opinion

Woof, Woof - Dawg
pawprint.gif
 
The Colts are a one man show and when that one man makes a mistake, the team crumbles around him.

Don't you mean the Colts are a one trick pony?;) They place waaayyy too much emphasis on Manning.

Most Super Bowl winners might not have been the best in every area (except the '72 Dolphins, #1 in pretty much every category) but they never had any glaring weakness that could be exploited either. Most of the Super Bowl dynasties have had one thing in common though: the best coaches. The 60's Packers, the 70's Fins, the 80's Steeler's, the 90's Niner's and Cowboys, the 2000's Pats all had arguably the greatest coaches of their time.

Look at this year's Saints. They could barely move the ball during the 1st Qtr. Coaching made some adjustments. Wham! The Saints comes Marching In;) up and down the field seemingly at will. The Colts stuck to the riding their thoroughbred and ran it into the ground.
 
His brother Eli is not even in the same conversation and is a marginal QB at best
To compare them to the Williams sisters is laughable in my opinion

Woof, Woof - Dawg
pawprint.gif

Eli is a Super Bowl winning QB with his best years ahead of him and the best family in the NFL advising him. He will be elite, and he would already be at Peyton's level if he had the kind of team around him like Peyton does/did.

But he's my frat brother, so maybe I'm a bit partial...:D
 
To compare them to the Williams sisters is laughable in my opinion

Woof, Woof - Dawg
pawprint.gif

Yes, if you look at all four athletes, and what they have done for their sports, yes, it is a joke to put the Mannings in the same sentence. How many majors have each Williams sister won? Too many to count.

What would truly legitimize the sister vs. sister rivalry having a comparable brother vs. brother rivalry is IF the Giants went against the Colts in the Super Bowl. That is what I hope can happen next year. This year, the Giants just missed the playoffs so that was a bummer. I was especially sad since I thought if Peyton won, he could have just gone off in the sunset. But as it stands, it's been confirmed he will continue on with the Colts. As to where Peyton Manning will finish his career is anybody's guess as few would have thought Favre would have gone to the Jets and then go to the Vikings.

If you really want to get technical about rivalries, even if the Mannings did go against each other, they would never be on the field at the same time. What would have been great, in a perfect world, would be Petyon Manning the QB against Eli Manning, the league leader in sacks and defensive player of the year, and then have them meet up in the Super Bowl. If this was the case the hype would be uncontrollable.

The back story of sibling rivalries really make sports that much more interesting as sports is one area where young kids play out their issues against each other. I was truly hoping for Patrick McEnroe to get near John's level back in the day in tennis but it never happened.
 
The only scenario I could see Peyton Manning going to the Super Bowl, and lose, and still feel OK for the man, is if he lost in an epic, high scoring air battle against his brother, Eli Manning.

In that case, both QBs would be "heroes" and filling up commercials on tv the way they did not too long ago. With Eli a new ring member, and Peyton a past one, it was fair to call them on par with the Williams sisters of tennis.

The Mannings need only to go against each other to top the rings each one has on their finger. In that case, I wouldn't care which one won.

What would have been great, in a perfect world, would be Petyon Manning the QB against Eli Manning, the league leader in sacks and defensive player of the year, and then have them meet up in the Super Bowl. If this was the case the hype would be uncontrollable.
How about we stick to reality and not the land of make believe?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.