View Full Version : Good News: Found a Peyton Manning Playoff Win OUTSIDE
In fact, it's pretty much the best case scenario for us: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/200401110kan.htm
Not only did Mannings team win a playoff game outside, and not only was it (obviously) on the road, but the temperature was 40° and the opponent was (wait for it) the Kansas City Chiefs. Granted, Vermeils Chiefs were pretty much the mirror image of the current team (as some may recall, the game in question is the infamous Puntless Playoff,) but it CAN be done. Despite the weather (40° with a 16 mph wind) Manning was a very Manning-like 22/30 for 304 yds, 3 TDs and 0 Ints. "The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dream shall never die." :tongue:
Or maybe this game's evidence that equally infamous <40° stat on Manning is a Texas Sharpshooter Effect. Eleven of his playoff games were at home, all but one in Indys dome. Two more were at Super Bowl sites partly chosen (till now) for favorable weather conditions (though SB XLI was a strong argument they shouldn't even be held outside: No snow, but plenty of rain; I think there were more turnovers than the also infamous Cowboys-Colts Blunder Bowl.) One was in Miami, and another in San Diego, so that leaves a total of SIX games.
One was @Baltimore the year he won SB XLI, but the temperature was in the mid-fifties. That leaves just five others:
2002: 41-0 Wildcard loss @NY, who lost in the next round
2003: 38-31 Divisional win @Kansas City (linked game)
2003: 24-14 AFCCG loss @NE, who "won" the SB
2004: 20-3 Divisional loss @NE, who "won" the SB
2012: 38-35 Divisional loss hosting Baltimore, who won the SB (though that seemed a foregone conclusion once Stabby McGee announced retirement and the NFL chose to give him a Ring as a going away present.)
Four of those games were losses, but ONE was a WIN—it just happens to have been played at the magical cutoff temperature of 40°, below which "Peyton Manning has never won a playoff game." Not that 1-4 is a great record, but only last years frigid loss was at home (so the home team had the edge in all the rest) and three of those teams were SB winners (under highly dubious circumstances, yet even if that taints their wins it means neither Peyton Manning nor anyone else could stop them.) 1-4 is only "rarely" though; arbitrarily cutting off that one win allows commentators to definitively say, "NEVER!"
Unfortunately, it's just not "definitive" when we fit the data to our curve. Not when we look at all the great RBs who had lots of carries one year, focus on the ones whose careers promptly tanked thereafter then choose the lowest number of season carries by any of them to say, "every back who had 370 carries in a year was never good again." And not when we say "Petyon Manning's lost ALL his cold weather playoff games, except those he won." 54° isn't exactly balmy, but if we say, "playoff games <60°" Manning's 2-6 (again, all but one was on the road.)
Put another way, falling two miles is hardly an ideal scenario, but we must say, "no one has EVER survived a fall of >5.5 miles" because according to the Guinness Book of World Records a Serbian flight attendant DID survive a fall of slightly >5 miles when a bomb exploded on her plane in 1972. We certainly shouldn't say "3 miles" because three WWII bomber crewmen each in separate incidents) survived that, and "just under 2 miles" is out of the question, because a German HS student survived THAT after he plane was struck by lightning feel apart in 1971. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesna_Vulovi%C4%87
None of that means a fall of "only" 1 mile is invariably survived OR that a fall of >5.5 miles is invariably fatal. From ANY height, the human body reaches (but never exceeds) ~130 mph after just a few hundred feet, but terminal velocity is usually (if not ALWAYS) something of a double entendre. Peyton Manning had NEVER lost a game when he led by 22 pts (presumably because he lost at least one after leading by 21) and Brady had NEVER come back from 24 pts down (most likely because, well, you get the idea)—until each did both Sunday.
The 40° playoff quote isn't a statistical certainty ("statistical certainty" is practically a contradiction in terms) it's an artifact, more like a record: No one has ever thrown more than 50 TDs in a season, because that's how many Brady had just six years ago. Records are made to be broken though. The stat's more like a probability, but the last three years have DOUBLED the number of 24 pt second half comebacks (our games alone have featured two) so Win Probability has seen some adjustments, too. Win Probability gets adjusted after every game, really.
If we want a stat we can take to the bank we'll have to settle for something like "Peyton Manning has NEVER won a playoff game after the gun." Then again, neither has anyone else. Does the NFL even use a gun anymore? I can't remember the last time I heard one. If not, I guess that would make it even harder to overcome the stat. :tongue: None of that means Peyton will win his next freezing playoff game; that's up to him, his teammates, his coaches and, unfortunately, his opponents. He's not guaranteed to lose it though, and a friendly crowd can't hurt his chances.
Ray Lewis Tribute Video included as a bonus: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uj2dmQruJXs
Timmy!
11-26-2013, 10:11 AM
:tumbleweed:
I'd have thought you'd be thrilled; it's not only a positive post, but raises serious problems with the oft-quoted "PFM's never won a playoff game <40°" "stat."
dogfish
11-26-2013, 01:02 PM
dude, give it an effin' rest already. . .
:welcome:
chazoe60
11-26-2013, 03:15 PM
Joel is a more coherent but equally nutty version of Superchop.
CoachChaz
11-26-2013, 03:28 PM
Why he doesnt just admit he despised the Broncos is still a mystery.
chazoe60
11-26-2013, 03:31 PM
Joel reminds me of this line from the Big Lebowski:
".........or El-Duderino, if you're not into the whole brevity thing"
Dzone
11-26-2013, 03:51 PM
Brevity is brilliance, simplicity is supreme and less is more
I dont mind Joels posts, but I usually dont have time to read them:coffee:
Why he doesnt just admit he despised the Broncos is still a mystery.
Um, because it's not true? I don't have to hero worship everyone who ever donned an orange jersey (even if he spent most of his career repeatedly humiliating us) just to like the team.
Really though, this is ridiculous: I don't think there's a single negative word about Manning in that whole post, yet it's somehow Manning- and Bronco-bashing? Did ya'll just ASSUME what I said instead of reading it? 'Cause I know that happens a lot, though I've never understood why it's MY failing. It's OK; I'm confident someone will come by to tell me. ;)
dogfish
11-26-2013, 04:34 PM
Really though, this is ridiculous: I don't think there's a single negative word about Manning in that whole post, yet it's somehow Manning- and Bronco-bashing? Did ya'll just ASSUME what I said instead of reading it? 'Cause I know that happens a lot, though I've never understood why it's MY failing. It's OK; I'm confident someone will come by to tell me. ;)
gimme a break. . . you know exactly what you're doing, and so does everyone else. . .
don't try to act coy. . . :coffee:
NightTrainLayne
11-26-2013, 05:38 PM
I found this last week and started a post to rebuttal one of the long diatribes about Manning's ineffectiveness in the cold.
Decided it wasn't worth the effort.
powderaddict
11-26-2013, 05:41 PM
tl;dr
I found this last week and started a post to rebuttal one of the long diatribes about Manning's ineffectiveness in the cold.
Decided it wasn't worth the effort.
Guess you were right.
gimme a break. . . you know exactly what you're doing, and so does everyone else. . .
don't try to act coy. . . :coffee:
Yes, I do know exactly what I'm doing; I did say it outright at the start of the thread. This is as close to a mea culpa as it'll get, but if that's not good enough: Neither my fault nor problem.
sneakers
11-26-2013, 10:54 PM
too many words
Simple Jaded
11-26-2013, 11:42 PM
Instead of judging Manning by his record in these games you should just come up with some complex algorithm that makes his record say what you want it to say. Like that passer rating you've been working on.
Broncolingus
11-27-2013, 03:34 PM
I'd like to see Peyton get that (now admittedly true) 'cold weather' monkey off his back starting this year...
...hell, he'd better if Denver expects to do anything in the post season.
Hawgdriver
11-28-2013, 03:19 AM
tl;dr
Joel please make your point with more concision and directness. You seem super nice but too long winded.
Maybe I'm wasting my time here, because I haven't been around for awhile, but Joel... have you checked Manning's actual cold-weather (sub-40) splits? If you have, do you think there's any reason to believe he's hurt significantly more by these temperatures than any other elite (particularly interested in Brady, Brees, Rodgers) quarterback? If so, do you think the effect remains when adjusted for homefield advantage? Please be careful about how you phrase your response, I don't speak anecdote.
Maybe I'm wasting my time here, because I haven't been around for awhile, but Joel... have you checked Manning's actual cold-weather (sub-40) splits? If you have, do you think there's any reason to believe he's hurt significantly more by these temperatures than any other elite (particularly interested in Brady, Brees, Rodgers) quarterback? If so, do you think the effect remains when adjusted for homefield advantage? Please be careful about how you phrase your response, I don't speak anecdote.
I haven't checked anything but his playoff games, but checked each of those on the road (the only time, other than last year, the games weren't climate-controlled.) The "never won a playoff game <40°" stat only works because he DID win a playoff game (and played quite well, on the road) AT 40°: It's a set up.
Which is all I said in the OP; I don't know htf so many people got "hur hur, Manning sucks in the cold, hur hur" except that some people get that from my posts WHATEVER I say.
Instead of judging Manning by his record in these games you should just come up with some complex algorithm that makes his record say what you want it to say. Like that passer rating you've been working on.
As I've repeatedly told you (and documented) I didn't invent the idea of including runs and sacks in QB rating, only borrowed and modified it. Neither I nor anyone sought to make anyone look good. Here: http://www.profootballresearchers.org/Coffin_Corner/15-01-506.pdf Note the date; whom, exactly, do you suggest the author was trying to make look good? He outright SAID he started from the same place I did, so the most logical answer is probably Elway. We've been through all this, more than once: Why do you STILL insist it's something I pulled out of my rear two years ago?
You know there's a difference between jaded and childish, right? Often it's a decade or so of living, but I'm not your shrink, nor licensed to be anyones, so I'll do you the courtesy of not psychoanalyzing you online. Is it too much to ask the same in return, or is common courtesy beyond the otherwise vast limits of your wisdom and maturity?
Most of the time your posts are too long, people dont read the whole thing. They get maybe the first couple lines and form their opinions for reaction from that. Try cutting the posts down to exactly what youre trying to say. It would make your stuff a whole lot easier to read.
I haven't checked anything but his playoff games, but checked each of those on the road (the only time, other than last year, the games weren't climate-controlled.) The "never won a playoff game <40°" stat only works because he DID win a playoff game (and played quite well, on the road) AT 40°: It's a set up.
Which is all I said in the OP; I don't know htf so many people got "hur hur, Manning sucks in the cold, hur hur" except that some people get that from my posts WHATEVER I say.
Gotcha. I was probably reading more into other people's reactions to your posts than I should have.
Hawgdriver
11-29-2013, 02:23 PM
Most of the time your posts are too long, people dont read the whole thing. They get maybe the first couple lines and form their opinions for reaction from that. Try cutting the posts down to exactly what youre trying to say. It would make your stuff a whole lot easier to read.
I expect the "exactly what you are trying to say" in the first line, so put it there if you can. :)
I have to work on this a lot myself.
Simple Jaded
11-29-2013, 10:01 PM
As I've repeatedly told you (and documented) I didn't invent the idea of including runs and sacks in QB rating, only borrowed and modified it. Neither I nor anyone sought to make anyone look good. Here: http://www.profootballresearchers.org/Coffin_Corner/15-01-506.pdf Note the date; whom, exactly, do you suggest the author was trying to make look good? He outright SAID he started from the same place I did, so the most logical answer is probably Elway. We've been through all this, more than once: Why do you STILL insist it's something I pulled out of my rear two years ago?
You know there's a difference between jaded and childish, right? Often it's a decade or so of living, but I'm not your shrink, nor licensed to be anyones, so I'll do you the courtesy of not psychoanalyzing you online. Is it too much to ask the same in return, or is common courtesy beyond the otherwise vast limits of your wisdom and maturity?
It's childish to point out your hypocrisy as often as you reveal it? I can live with that.
Besides, I'm not psychoanalyzing you, Joel, I'm judging based on the history and tone of your posts, like I said I could be wrong about you, wouldn't be the first time I was wrong, but I know butthurt when I see it.......I was there in 2009. People at the time questioned my loyalty just as often even though I have never once talked about another NFL team as anything more than a casual interest, much less admitted that I once hated the Broncos and the greatest player in franchise history.
Oh well, I guess.
I imagine this MB will be treated to more of your condescending threads and "I told you so" posts after every loss, at which point I guess you can look forward to more of my childishness.
Edit:
By the way, the thread you started was about Tim Tebow, but if in fact you've dusted off and modified an article about Elway to prop up Tebow it changes nothing. The time, effort and brain damage invested only mirrors the effort you've put into doing the opposite with Manning.
The thread I started was about including sack and rushing stats in QB Rating rather than just using a Passer Rating stacked in favor of the West Coast Offense (a pass for -5 yds shouldn't raise a passers rating—but it does!) All that logic predates Tebows birth, let alone NFL debut, though it was certainly as relevant to him as to everyone else.
Judging someones mentality is psychoanalysis, judging it without a medical degree is amateur psychoanalysis and judging it solely on posts online is weak psychoanalysis even for an amateur. Saying you know I'm butthurt because it looks like when you were butthurt in 2009 is just classic projection.
Liking another team or teams to a lesser extent than Denver doesn't preclude being a Denver fan, and I freely admit I wasn't a Broncos fan till the AFCCG loss to Jacksonville. I needed a new team when the owner of the one I grew up with moved it out of state from spite because Harris County wouldn't build an expensive new stadium for a team that couldn't sellout the Dome.
I hope for your sake you're never in that situation since it would apparently mean you quit watching football, but until then, yes, I hated Elway and the Broncos knocking the Oilers out of the playoffs with The Drive II. I hated every team that beat Houston in the playoffs, and Esiasons Bengals and Kosars Browns for making them perennial wildcards.
If anyone wants to psychoanalyze me, start with the team I grew up with making the playoffs SEVEN STRAIGHT YEARS but NEVER GETTING PAST THE DIVISIONAL ROUND. After that, no, just making the postseason isn't good enough, especially not for a team that's been to six Super Bowls, and greeted my conversion by winning two in a row. We're Denver, not Detroit.
BroncoWave
11-30-2013, 11:22 AM
http://weknowgifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/didnt-read-lol-gif-4.gif
http://weknowgifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/didnt-read-lol-gif-4.gif
It was a reply to Jaded, but your attention spans still aren't my fault nor problem regardless.
Hawgdriver
11-30-2013, 02:45 PM
It was a reply to Jaded, but your attention spans still aren't my fault nor problem regardless.
I disagree. You are writing for us, your readers. Or your "didn't readers."
What you need is a different audience. Until then, expect more of the same tl;dr reaction from this audience.
When a reader has expectations, and they are frustrated, they stop reading. It's not a matter of attention span, it's a matter of meeting reader expectations.
MOtorboat
11-30-2013, 02:53 PM
I disagree. You are writing for us, your readers. Or your "didn't readers."
What you need is a different audience. Until then, expect more of the same tl;dr reaction from this audience.
When a reader has expectations, and they are frustrated, they stop reading. It's not a matter of attention span, it's a matter of meeting reader expectations.
Part of it is that we basically know what he's going to say at this point.
He finally saw a shot to disparage Manning going into the Kansas City game, and mid-way through the game he began to get giddy, only to be thwarted for a week.
You could literally see him getting giddy during the middle of the Patriots game in the game thread as the Patriots made their comeback.
So, all week, we get spam and bullshit threads like this.
You'd think this team was 2-9, not 9-2, if you were living in a cave, came out this week and read this board.
Hawgdriver
11-30-2013, 02:54 PM
Man I hope that's not actually the case but I see your point, for sure.
Part of it is that we basically know what he's going to say at this point.
He finally saw a shot to disparage Manning going into the Kansas City game, and mid-way through the game he began to get giddy, only to be thwarted for a week.
You could literally see him getting giddy during the middle of the Patriots game in the game thread as the Patriots made their comeback.
So, all week, we get spam and bullshit threads like this.
You'd think this team was 2-9, not 9-2, if you were living in a cave, came out this week and read this board.
How did I disparage Manning going into the KC game? I practically begged for protection he hadn't had in a month (which he mercifully got.) My only (possible) giddiness was in NE thread BEFORE halftime; IIRC my first comment was that this was the best I remembering feeling before a NE game since (at least) 2005.
If you don't want to read my posts, that's your prerogative, but don't refuse to read them and then complain about what you incorrectly ASSUME I said.
MOtorboat
11-30-2013, 03:26 PM
How did I disparage Manning going into the KC game? I practically begged for protection he hadn't had in a month (which he mercifully got.) My only (possible) giddiness was in NE thread BEFORE halftime; IIRC my first comment was that this was the best I remembering feeling before a NE game since (at least) 2005.
If you don't want to read my posts, that's your prerogative, but don't refuse to read them and then complain about what you incorrectly ASSUME I said.
Oh, I'm reading. I'm one of the few that even attempts to wade through your 30,000 words of Manning hate.
You may not THINK you sound that way, but you do. And I'm not the only one who thinks that.
Oh, I'm reading. I'm one of the few that even attempts to wade through your 30,000 words of Manning hate.
You may not THINK you sound that way, but you do. And I'm not the only one who thinks that.
You're not the only who thinks my posts consist of naught but "Manning hate," no, but it's not exactly a unanimous consensus. How anyone who reads my posts can take them that way at this point; I've criticized a LOT of things this year, but Manning wasn't among them till last weeks awful performance. Except, some people take "we have to protect the franchise, and give him some run support so he doesn't have to do it alone" as "if Manning can't do it alone and be indestructible he's worthless." Believe what you like; you're pretty good at it.
Simple Jaded
11-30-2013, 09:47 PM
Nobody has been harping on Manning's shortcomings (real, contrived or otherwise) than you Joel, it started with all the free agents they couldn't sign. I hate to see what the last two years woulda been like if Manning turned out to be the waste of time you'd hoped he'd be.
Nobody has been harping on Manning's shortcomings (real, contrived or otherwise) than you Joel, it started with all the free agents they couldn't sign. I hate to see what the last two years woulda been like if Manning turned out to be the waste of time you'd hoped he'd be.
That's how it started TWO YEARS AGO: We're not going to your mothers for Christmas and yes, that dress makes your butt look fat. ;) Since Opening Day the only time I recall criticizing Manning was LAST WEEK, when he played like crap. I hope he uses it for motivation: "I'll NEVER AGAIN freeze my tail off for 4 hours while 70,000 people scream for my blood, and I'm not ready to retire."
I won't say it's never happened, but since Opening Day LAST year the only time I recall criticizing him was the first month (when he looked like crap; he and the whole team are on record he didn't regain his old form till THIS offseason) and after the unimpressive playoff loss. I reserve the right to say ANY player played like crap when he actually did.
That's how it started TWO YEARS AGO: We're not going to your mothers for Christmas and yes, that dress makes your butt look fat. ;) Since Opening Day the only time I recall criticizing Manning was LAST WEEK, when he played like crap. I hope he uses it for motivation: "I'll NEVER AGAIN freeze my tail off for 4 hours while 70,000 people scream for my blood, and I'm not ready to retire." I won't say it's never happened, but since Opening Day LAST year the only time I recall criticizing him was the first month (when he looked like crap; he and the whole team are on record he didn't regain his old form till THIS offseason) and after the unimpressive playoff loss. I reserve the right to say ANY player played like crap when he actually did.
That was your last recollection of criticizing Peyton?
That was your last recollection of criticizing Peyton?
Since the season started, yeah. Was there one between Opening Day and last weeks game? Note: Saying we must protect him better so he's not limping, fumbling and throwing picks doesn't count; that's on his blockers, not him.
Simple Jaded
12-01-2013, 01:20 AM
So you're saying the only time you've criticized the QB is the first time all season he looked remotely human? Again, I don't see how this helps change the notion that it's hypocritical coming from you. One bad game and you've gone full retard, this after earning the reputation of being one of the biggest defenders of the some of the worst QBing the league has seen in decades.
You asked before what I expect from you; well I guess if you weren't playing favorites I would expect you to come to the defense Manning's play, considering he is the Denver Broncos QB and he played like shit.
Yeah, the only time I recall criticizing him in the last 11 games is the last one, when he looked like crap. Hardly the record of someone who bashes him incessantly. Criticizing Manning or even questioning his signing doesn't automatically make one a devotee of any other QB, only a critic of Manning at a particular time.
Defending a QBs awful game SOLELY because he's OUR QB is the very definition of favoritism. If the table's were turned we'd mock Bradys crappy play, but PFM gets a pass: THAT'S favoritism.
Simple Jaded
12-01-2013, 02:10 AM
Yeah, the only time I recall criticizing him in the last 11 games is the last one, when he looked like crap. Hardly the record of someone who bashes him incessantly. Criticizing Manning or even questioning his signing doesn't automatically make one a devotee of any other QB, only a critic of Manning at a particular time.
Defending a QBs awful game SOLELY because he's OUR QB is the very definition of favoritism. If the table's were turned we'd mock Bradys crappy play, but PFM gets a pass: THAT'S favoritism.
And that's why you're a hypocrite.
And that's why you're a hypocrite.
34/50 for 344 yds, 3 TDs and 0 Ints (plus a win) isn't crap. Admitting a QB played awfully yet calling someone a hypocrite for not defending that play soley because he's OUR QB IS hypocrisy.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4 Release Candidate 2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.