GumboBC

IMO, WhoDat. No one can possibly say Peyton Manning has \"it\". If there\'s one player that has consistently proved that he can\'t win the big game it is Peyton Manning. And that goes for his entire college career and his entire NFL career. Even last year Peyton chocked in the AFC championship game. He was more responsible for them losing that game than anyone else.

I don\'t want to get into a Manning bashing deal here. I\'m just pointing out to you that Manning doesn\'t have some magical \"it\".

What Peyton does have is an incredible work ethic. The guy knows the offesive game as well as the coaches. He\'s probably the best at reading defenses. He has a good arm and makes quick decisions. And he\'s certainly good enough to win the super bowl. But, it\'s not going to be because of some magical \"it\". Like some claim Jake has.

Manning is better than any QB that supposedly has it. And that includes Tom Brady and Jake Delhomme.







[Edited on 24/6/2004 by GumboBC]

D_it_up

I know I\'m about to stir up a hornet\'s nest with this reply, but Billy, you say that Peyton was more responsible than anyone for the Colts loss to the Pats in the playoffs? Isn\'t that kind of reversing your beliefs? When someone says that AB was the majority of the reason for their losses with his fumbling problems, you quickly go on the defense for him. If memory serves me correctly, it\'s supposed to be a team effort. Not just one man. You\'ve even said that before yourself. I\'m not berating you by any means, just making a point. If any QB were to have \"it\" over another, it would be Peyton over AB and the majority of the QB\'s in the league. I do agree with you, however, that \"it\" is overrated. \"It\" is more of a team chemisty than an individual player. The head coach is what puts \"it\" into action. If the coach doesn\'t have the smarts and swagger (like Haslett), then the team won\'t have \"it\", either. Then you have coaches like Parcells and Bellichek who have \"it\" and can make even the worst franchises on paper look like superstars. \"It\" comes from the top and has a trickle-down effect in my honest opinion.

People shouldn't be afraid of their government. Governments should be afraid of their people.

GumboBC

D_it_up2 --

I admit Brooks was more responsible for us losing some games last year than any other individual player last year. The fumbles killed us in some games. But, as a whole, our team had many more factors that contributed to our losses than what Peyton had.

I don\'t deny that I\'ve gone over the top in defending Brooks in the past. But, only because some folks have gone over the top in bashing him.

Brooks has what it takes to lead us to the super bowl, IMO. But, he needs cut out some of the stupid mistakes. He also needs a supporting cast that cuts out the stupid mistakes.

Agreed. Haslett has got to somehow pull this team together and make the correct decisions.

WhoDat

Wow - major reversals for you.

And one for me... I argued in the past that he could not lead us there. I no longer feel that way - one for Billy - it\'s about time he got one.

Wait, wait, wait - Manning was recently called the best player in the league. It is hard to argue that he is the best QB in football. Are you telling me that he is simply has the best combonation of athleticism and smarts? Really? More so than Garcia? Culpepper?

But let\'s use someone else then? You don\'t feel Manning has \"it\" b/c his TEAM hasn\'t advanced far enough for you. OK - what about Favre? What makes Favre a hall of famer and Dilfer journeyman? You telling me that there aren\'t other QBs in the league with more smarts and athleticism than Favre???

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse


\"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"

JKool

DitUp2, great idea with \"it\" belonging to teams instead of players! I hadn\'t considered that one. I really like that idea - espc. since it fits in with my ideas regarding the importance of schemes and DL/DB Symbiosis.

HOWEVER, \"it\" is not usually applied to teams. Player\'s have \"it\", coaches bring \"it\" out in players, and some guys lose \"it\" or never had \"it\" - at least in common parlance. I really want to agree with you, so what do you say to that problem? I have a guess how I would answer this for you, but I\'d like to hear your thoughts.

WhoDat, why have ya been all hiddin\' on us and stuff? I\'m glad to see you\'re back; were we just borring you?

"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

WhoDat

Busy at work Granola-boy - glad to see I was missed.

I think you\'re using common parlance (nerd) and extending too far to a discussion of intangibles. Saying he\'s lost \"it\" or never had \"it\" to me translates into \"the right stuff\" - i.e. athleticism, strength, smarts, focus, whatever.

Intangibles, which we are saying are synonimous with \"it\", to me translates into some special characteristic that cannot easily be measured. Most often, that is manifested in players via some ability to lead (i.e. leadership). However, it can occur in different ways. Some players are simply charasmatic and likable. Others seem to have a sixth sense and be able to see a play develop before it happens - Vick and Sanders are great examples of runners who seem to have that - Favre is a good example of a QB to have that - and also a good example of another intangible: being able to make something out of nothing.

Finally, let me say that you could include even measurable attributes, such as smarts (wonderlic) in this. I don\'t think AB reads defenses real well. Manning does. Neither is all that bright, but one has something more than the other - or at least to date, that is the way it has appeared to me.

Got it granola-boy?

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse


\"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"

GumboBC

WhoDat --

I\'ve said on here many times that the ONE postion that athleticism is the LEAST important is at QB. Although, the more athleticism the better. But, not neccessary.

So, we need to get off the atleticism thing at QB.

There\'s many things that make a QB successful. The least of which, IMO, is \"it\".

Peyton Manning is the best QB in the NFL and you CAN\'T say he has it since he\'s let his team down so much when it counts. And I\'m talking about the stupid decisions he\'s made that have cost his teams games. Not that it was all his fault but you can\'t overlook the fact that he played terrible in those games. It was no \"it\" there.

But, IMO, Peyton is the best QB in the game today regardless of some of his past performances. Because Peyton shoulders more of the load in that offense and without Petyon, that team would go nowhere.

Petyon is the best QB in the league because of a lot of factors:

1. Great at reading defenses.
2. He\'s accurate.
3. He makes quick decisions


But, that\'s what makes Peyton successful.

Favre is great for other reasons:

1. Strong arm and can make some incredible throws.
2. He turns into a sandlot QB and makes some incredible plays.
3. He\'s pretty good at reading defenses, although he\'s a gambler at it cost him at times.

Overall, WhoDat, \"it\" really doesn\'t exsist. I think \"it\" is luck and what makes a QB succesful can be explained. Sometimes QB\'s have a great year, but they come back down to earth if they don\'t possess some of the tangibles. It\'s all about smarts, talent, and athleticism with QB\'s. You don\'t have to possess all of them but you better be stong in one to make up for the other. Ideally, you want all 3.


[Edited on 24/6/2004 by GumboBC]

[Edited on 24/6/2004 by GumboBC]

whowatches

Didn\'t Indiana Jones find \"it\" in that first movie, and when they opened \"it\", all of their faces melted off?

BlackandBlue

***WARNING***WARNING***

The picture below represents what was really in the ark that was in the first Indiana Jones movie. Try not to look directly at it, for fear that you may suffer the same results as they did in the movie.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.I\'m warning you
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

whowatches

..... and you\'re gonna have to listen to stories about his daughter!!!!