The 2010 NFL Thread

[Guest jaywhyte]

Jive go for Peyton in a DOME vs Peyton OUTSIDE

damshow - Nope. Just not biased.

naiwf - I see what you're saying. Tom Brady & Brett Favre have played their careers (Favre most of his career) playing outside.

No doubt Sanchez will get better.

Either way, saying Sanchez wasn't use to the wind as an excuse for a loss is just well, a terrible excuse for a loss.

[Jive]

Jive go for Peyton in a DOME vs Peyton OUTSIDE

K.

OUTDOORS

Tom Brady - 93.0 QB Rating, 212 TD vs 90 INT (2.35-1), 7.2 YPA

Peyton Manning - 90.9 QB Rating, 159 TD vs 92 INT (1.72-1), 7.4 YPA

INDOORS

Tom Brady - 98.7 QB Rating, 25 TD vs 13 INT (1.92-1), 8.1 YPA

Peyton Manning - 99.9 QB Rating, 220 TD vs 91 INT (2.41-1), 7.9 YPA

WIND OR RAIN

Tom Brady - 93.1 QB Rating, 103 TD vs 39 INT (2.64-1), 7.4 YPA

Peyton Manning - 83.6 QB Rating, 49 TD vs 39 INT (1.25-1), 6.95 YPA

Edited December 7, 2010 by Jive

[Pizza]

Jaywhyte is doing worse in this argument than the Jets did in the game last night.

[TCO]

Even if Peyton's stats were much better at home, it could be argued that crowd noise has a bigger effect than weather because it's meant to be very quiet presnap for him to make his adjustments in Indy, something he's not going to get away from home.

It's all a moot point anyway when somebody is questioning Peyton fucking Manning's career.

[Kyle_]

Jets did the same thing last year. Off to a great start, gets cold out, Sanchez plays like shit. Big reason Peyton Manning has epic career stats, he gets to play in a dome AT LEAST 50% of his games. Just saying...

I hate Peyton Manning, but he's still the best QB in the league(or at least he was until this season) and will still go down as one of the best of all time.

But this guy says Ted DiBiase is someone that's likely to be the next World Champion, so anything he says will be ignored from now on by me

Edited December 8, 2010 by Kyle_

[Guest jaywhyte]

Jets did the same thing last year. Off to a great start, gets cold out, Sanchez plays like shit. Big reason Peyton Manning has epic career stats, he gets to play in a dome AT LEAST 50% of his games. Just saying...

I hate Peyton Manning, but he's still the best QB in the league(or at least he was until this season) and will still go down as one of the best of all time.

But this guy says Ted DiBiase is someone that's likely to be the next World Champion, so anything he says will be ignored from now on by me

and you have the Ultimate Warrior as your pic, 'nuff said.

In any event, Peyton has ALWAYS, ALWAYS had a great supporting cast around him. Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne, Edgerrin James, Dallas Clark, etc etc

But Tom Brady has the rings

Edited December 8, 2010 by jaywhyte

[Lowerdeck]

But Tom Brady has the rings

The Colts won the Super Bowl in 2007.

This was the year where they came back in the AFC Title game against the Patriots to win, then beat the Bears. Being a Pats fan, I just drank a lot during those two games - not fun watching Peyton and the Colts win.

[sahyder1]

If Manning had the defense that Brady has had for most of his career he'd have 4-5 rings

[Kyle_]

Jets did the same thing last year. Off to a great start, gets cold out, Sanchez plays like shit. Big reason Peyton Manning has epic career stats, he gets to play in a dome AT LEAST 50% of his games. Just saying...

I hate Peyton Manning, but he's still the best QB in the league(or at least he was until this season) and will still go down as one of the best of all time.

But this guy says Ted DiBiase is someone that's likely to be the next World Champion, so anything he says will be ignored from now on by me

and you have the Ultimate Warrior as your pic, 'nuff said.

In any event, Peyton has ALWAYS, ALWAYS had a great supporting cast around him. Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne, Edgerrin James, Dallas Clark, etc etc

But Tom Brady has the rings

Sorry for showing my support for my childhood favorite wrestler, I'm trying to stop violence against children you bastard!

[EddieRuckus]

Everyone just put jaywhyte on ignore and continue to talk good football talk, the little troll thinks it's cool to rile up people on the internet and gets a kick out of it.

As for my team, yay being better than last year, but boo not living up the possible potential. I don't think the NFC West should be excluded from the playoffs, but the winner should definitely NOT have a home game, especially if they're below a .500 winning percentage. Hell, if any NFC West team does finish below .500 then they should not be in the playoffs, especially if there is an 8-8 or 9-7 team from the NFC.

[gunnar hendershow]

One of New York, Philadelphia, New Orleans, Green Bay, and Chicago is going to miss out on the playoffs so a team from the NFC West can get blown out in round 1. I honestly want a rule stating if your overall record is below .500 you shouldn't get an automatic playoff bid from winning the division. It's just something that's going to happen every few years when there's 8 fucking divisions.

[EddieRuckus]

Definitely agree with that, and even though it would suck as a fan of my team to get first and not make the playoffs, as a fan of the game I would rather have some other team who does have a better record go on to the playoffs for a chance to compete.

[SeanDMan]

You guys should just add more teams to the playoffs.

[sahyder1]

One of New York, Philadelphia, New Orleans, Green Bay, and Chicago is going to miss out on the playoffs so a team from the NFC West can get blown out in round 1. I honestly want a rule stating if your overall record is below .500 you shouldn't get an automatic playoff bid from winning the division. It's just something that's going to happen every few years when there's 8 fucking divisions.

That will never happen. You can take that to the bank. It is cyclical. It's not like year in and year out a .500 team wins the division. Division winners will always go to playoffs and there is no reason why they shouldn't. Plus you make it sound like the teams you listed above aren't capable of stinking up the place in the playoffs.

[EddieRuckus]

As much as those teams have the ability to "stink" up the place, they don't have as much ability to be blown out the way Seattle, Arizona, St. Louis, or San Fran do. Sure they might "surprise" people and win their home game against a "better" team, but after wildcard weekend when they have to go visit they will have a LOT of people questioning if one of the teams damshow mentioned would have done better.

Edited December 8, 2010 by Dr. Eddienald Bushroot

[Panni]

Not that I think it's going to happen, but it's not impossible that a team like St. Louis or Seattle gets red hot in the playoffs. Nobody expected the Arizona Cardinals to get to the Super Bowl a few years back when they were 9-7, and they just happened to get hot. I could see the Rams winning a game at home, and then maybe getting lucky on the road in the Divisional round. It's not out of the question.

[gunnar hendershow]

One of New York, Philadelphia, New Orleans, Green Bay, and Chicago is going to miss out on the playoffs so a team from the NFC West can get blown out in round 1. I honestly want a rule stating if your overall record is below .500 you shouldn't get an automatic playoff bid from winning the division. It's just something that's going to happen every few years when there's 8 fucking divisions.

That will never happen. You can take that to the bank. It is cyclical. It's not like year in and year out a .500 team wins the division. Division winners will always go to playoffs and there is no reason why they shouldn't. Plus you make it sound like the teams you listed above aren't capable of stinking up the place in the playoffs.

I said every few years. Geez.

And I highly doubt any of those five would lose when put against anyone from the NFC West come playoff time. Barring the 1 in 100 fluke game where Aaron Rodgers' hand falls off in the 2nd quarter or something.

Adding to this, you have to earn the right to get lucky in the playoffs. If you happen to win 7 games, 4 of them against teams in your division worse than you and are 3-7 and against the rest of the NFL you haven't earned that right.

Edited December 8, 2010 by damshow

[sahyder1]

And I highly doubt any of those five would lose when put against anyone from the NFC West come playoff time. Barring the 1 in 100 fluke game where Aaron Rodgers' hand falls off in the 2nd quarter or something.

Yeah, because it's not like it's been shown over and over that anybody can win on a given Sunday. Those "flukes" happen, they are a part of sports. If you're not going to send a division winner to the playoffs, why even have divisions?

[Guest jaywhyte]

But Tom Brady has the rings

The Colts won the Super Bowl in 2007.

This was the year where they came back in the AFC Title game against the Patriots to win, then beat the Bears. Being a Pats fan, I just drank a lot during those two games - not fun watching Peyton and the Colts win.

rings is plural, son

[Guest jaywhyte]

Jaywhyte is doing worse in this argument than the Jets did in the game last night.

That's alright, I don't have to win an argument. The results speak for themselves.