and some players win cause the rest of their team is elite.

since when have the pats ever had a bunch of elite offensive players except for half a season? even the pats defense isn't nearly as elite as ppl make it out to be, it's not like it was the top ranked defense in the 00s, heck it wasn't even top 5.

Even taking into account those factors, those stats are still pretty damn close. So, it's your contention that because Peyton has lost more often in the Playoffs, that his stats somehow take on diminished value? What percentage of a win is placed solely on the QB's shoulders? I'd like to hear a value from you.

There is no exact # and it varies game to game depending on how well the qb played. In a ton of mannings losses he was very responsible though, especially in the blowout losses.

Alright, let's approach it differently then. What do you think the maximum percentage that can be attributed to QB play? Obviously this is an estimate.

i mean the max is obviously 100% assuming the qb played as bad as one could and the rest of team played as well as it could, this is obviously pretty much impossible tho so realistically prob like 80% (again this is max, almost always it will be less than this although i'm sure there were like a couple of instances in nfl history that the QB had moar than 80% of the blame for a playoff loss).

They haven't had a ton of Manning blow out playoff loses.

What do you consider blow out?

@NYJ 41-0, 2 ints, 14/31--his fault. D also gave up 41 points.
@NWE 24-14, 4 ints, 23/47-4 ints is his fault.
@NWE 20-3, 1 int, 27/42-didn't plya well, but not horrible.
NOR, 31-17, 31-45, 1 int, not really his fault. he did throw a pick for a TD.

His other losses have all been 10 or less. So 4 bad losses in 19 playoff games. I think the 2 NE losses can be attributed to Manning. The jets game they just got raped. The NOR game they got unlucky and probably out coached.

Brady's blowout losses in the playoffs.

@Den, 27-13, 20-36 2 ints. Didn't play great, didn't play that awful.
Bal, 33-14, played pretty awful and was at home. 23-42, 3 ints.

His other 3 playoff loses were all decently close. He played below his normal average in all 3 games.

Wow, just wow. Yeah, I'm going to have to go ahead and completely disagree with you. I don't think it could be or ever would be this high but I now understand your arguments in this thread.

I don't think I can argue with you if this is what you think. Not a knock on you as you're entitled to your opinions but if this is you're thought process, we'll never see eye to eye no matter how much back and forth there is.

i can't remember 1 game off the top of my head where manning played well and the colts still lost, and no padding his stats during garbage time doesn't count. I mean maybe it happened once since he has had so many losses I can't remember all of them but I can't recall it. Also he def played horrible in the 20-3 new england game.

What are you saying? That I'm cherrypicking something insignificant like offensive TD's (as if they had a bunch of 70 yard drives where one of his teammates fumbled on the goaline)?

Their reg. season offense wasn't good either.

True, not every QB could've led their team to 13 offensive points. Not every QB could've done what Dilfer did either. But that was apparent to anyone who watched the game.

the problem was ur question not my answer, u asked for a max instead of an average. If you had asked me an average i'd say around 20%.

lol wat, u know there is something called a field goal or even changing field position right?

Yes, I'm saying that you're cherrypicking stats. Good observation. You do realize that the Raiders game was played in a snow storm, right? And he led one of the most pressure filled drives in the history of the Super bowl against the Rams, right? There are actually more to the games then offensive touchdowns. My lord, who knew?

http://www.pro-football-reference.co.../gamelog/post/

He didn't play that well vs Baltimore in 2007 and they won. 15-30, 2 ints in a 15-6 win. He was 22-38 against Pitt in a 18-21 loss at home (Bettis incident). He was 33-48, 3 tds and 2 ints in a 24-28 loss to SDG at home. Manning and the team pretty much have positive correlation between his play and winning. He has 9 playoff losses. Really not that many.

don't be stupid, playing in a nice heated dome with great offensive players does the same for your stats as playing in the snow with way worse offensive players.

It's actually 10 playoff losses not 9. 10 playoff losses in 11 years isnt that many? lol? His playoff record is 9-10 lollllll, it's not even .500

I usually tend to come down on Brady's side in this argument too (but think it's very close). I mean Antowain Smith was probably the worst RB in the AFC in '03; and I agree that their defense while good, wasn't as dominant as people remember.
But you Pat fans will come off as much less of a blatant homer if you just admit that 1st SB was a farce. That's all.

The game was TIED. He had 1:30 minutes and they went 53 yards. ZOMG the pressure. It's hilarious how some things are romanticized.

It's 9 games. Think about that sample size in basketball terms, it's 3 weeks of games. 9 game sample size is nothing with respect to long term or anything. It's a blip.

i've pretty much done that already. And while brady had less to do with that super bowl win than manning had to do in his only win, manning didn't have to do nearly as much to do with his ppl think as mannings defense pretty much carried him to that super bowl victory.

u mean 19 games which is moar than a full nfl regular season in which manning lost over half of them

pretty sure that for every QB: PlayoffLosses = PlayoffAppearances - Rangz, you've trolled better than this, getting sloppy

Yah but what about the snow vs. Oakland? Every game with snow is a defensive battle.

Don't you sip the Marino syrup, Epi? Isn't he like the Goat in your books? He was what 8-10 in the playoffs.

Epi starting to break, folding like Brady in a big game.