PDA

View Full Version : Eli shouldn't be in the HOF



NYGFaninILL
02-08-2012, 03:54 PM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet.

Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet.

I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time!

I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot.

TroyArcher
02-08-2012, 03:59 PM
He is getting real close and has proven himself to be a better postseason QB than Peyton. 2-3 more years like this past year and he is a shoo in.

NYGFaninILL
02-08-2012, 04:00 PM
He is getting real close and has proven himself to be a better postseason QB than Peyton.* 2-3 more years like this past year and he is a shoo in.*

I agree with you, he doesnt have Peytons numbers yet though

bluesince86
02-08-2012, 04:04 PM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet.

Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet.

I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time!

I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot.

Im not saying that Eli would deserve to go if he were to retire tomorrow. But, Namath made the hall and he isnt one of the best fo all time. If Namath made the hall with his numbers and only 1 SB, thats setting the bar low for best of all time.

I know what the SB win meant for the League and all, but when you think of Best of all time Namath doesnt come to mind.

Hostetler
02-08-2012, 04:14 PM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet. Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet. I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time! I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot. Im not saying that Eli would deserve to go if he were to retire tomorrow. But, Namath made the hall and he isnt one of the best fo all time. If Namath made the hall with his numbers and only 1 SB, thats setting the bar low for best of all time. I know what the SB win meant for the League and all, but when you think of Best of all time Namath doesnt come to mind.</P>


</P>


Thats why Namath is in, for him it was not just the numbers, His victory assured the AFL/NFL merger - truly groundbreaking and HOF worthy. The Jets win changed football, and if you accomplish something that Drasticallychanges the sport for the better than that in and of itself is HOF worthy.</P>

burier
02-08-2012, 04:19 PM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet.

Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet.

I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time!

I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot.

so what does he have to do to get in?

It would be nearly impossible to top what he's done in two SB appearences.

He's got to win a third SB?

In my opinion a 3rd SB puts him in the top 5 all time and unequivically puts him ahead of Tom Brady.

Or does he just need to keep playing for 7 more years compling around 4000 yrds, 30 tds and 15 ints per year?

Is that really what the HOF is about. Compiliing stats??

bansaw
02-08-2012, 04:26 PM
I sure hope he shouldnt be in

He's got at least 7 real good years in him still.

bluesince86
02-08-2012, 04:26 PM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet. Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet. I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time! I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot. Im not saying that Eli would deserve to go if he were to retire tomorrow. But, Namath made the hall and he isnt one of the best fo all time. If Namath made the hall with his numbers and only 1 SB, thats setting the bar low for best of all time. I know what the SB win meant for the League and all, but when you think of Best of all time Namath doesnt come to mind.</P>


*</P>


Thats why Namath is in, for him it was not just the numbers, His victory assured the AFL/NFL merger - truly groundbreaking and HOF worthy. The Jets win changed football, and if you accomplish something that Drastically*changes the sport for the better than that in and of itself is HOF worthy.</P>

I get what you are saying, but for me I just dont think its enough. I mean yes, they were the first AFL team to win a SB but its not like that would never have happened in the future. Would you make that QB on a different team a HOFer if they had pedestrian career stats but won the first SB for the AFL? Im not sure that just because he won the 1st SB for the AFL that his career overall should have put him there. Yes, he was on the team and was the first AFL QB to win the SB and MVP, but he was 17/28 206 0 0 hardly a game winning performance. Was he really all that instrumental in wining the game that he deserved the MVP or was he more of a game manager and the whole guarantee thing got him the MVP and hence the HOF? (I ask only because I wasnt around to watch that game).

ru_gmen55
02-08-2012, 04:29 PM
If he copy and pastes this same regular season 4-6 more times, he'll be in for sure. He hasn't given us any reason to believe he won't yet...this season was easily his most consistent. I'm sure there are more, but off the top of my head, the only throw he made this year that made me say "uh oh...here we go..." was the interception against New England. It was a classic example of Eli just trying to do WAYYY too much with his arm. Then he led a comeback drive, and I didn't open my mouth for the rest of the season. He deserves our trust at this point...and I am 100% behind him.

bashful
02-08-2012, 04:30 PM
AN KURT WARNER IS - LOOK AT THE NUMBERS.
Not saying he is or isn't but Elis numbers are equal to Warners and he has two sb wins and mvp
As far as being better than his brother. His brother has all the stats but who would you take in the 4th quarter.

GameTime
02-08-2012, 04:33 PM
AN KURT WARNER IS - LOOK AT THE NUMBERS. Not saying he is or isn't but Elis numbers are equal to Warners and he has two sb wins and mvp As far as being better than his brother. His brother has all the stats but who would you take in the 4th quarter.</P>


If Eli's career continues the way it has and if Peytons continues in the same regard then Eli's career will eclips his brother's but Peyton will be veiwd by many in and out of the media as better....</P>


go figure...</P>


its almost like "how dare Eli be better then Peyton".....</P>

bansaw
02-08-2012, 04:36 PM
Kurt knows Eli has at least 3 more legitimate shots at 5,000 ...should bring easy 30TD

TrueBlue@NYC
02-08-2012, 04:36 PM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet. Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet. I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time! I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot. Im not saying that Eli would deserve to go if he were to retire tomorrow. But, Namath made the hall and he isnt one of the best fo all time. If Namath made the hall with his numbers and only 1 SB, thats setting the bar low for best of all time. I know what the SB win meant for the League and all, but when you think of Best of all time Namath doesnt come to mind.</P>


</P>


Thats why Namath is in, for him it was not just the numbers, His victory assured the AFL/NFL merger - truly groundbreaking and HOF worthy. The Jets win changed football, and if you accomplish something that Drasticallychanges the sport for the better than that in and of itself is HOF worthy.</P>


I get what you are saying, but for me I just dont think its enough. I mean yes, they were the first AFL team to win a SB but its not like that would never have happened in the future. Would you make that QB a HOFer if they had pedestrian career stats? Im not sure that just because he won the 1st SB for the AFL that his career overall should have put him there. Yes, he was on the team and was the first AFL QB to win the SB and MVP, but he was 17/28 206 0 0 hardly a game winning performance. Was he really all that instrumental in wining the game that he deserved the MVP or was he more of a game manager and the whole guarantee thing got him the MVP and hence the HOF? (I ask only because I wasnt around to watch that game).</P>


Everything you said is true. Namath's career doesn't warrant him being in the HOF b/c he really wasn't all that good. One game shouldn't put him in there. The only reason why he's in is b/c the media loved him and they are the ones that vote on the HOF. And back during the time that he was inducted, the media was even more NYC dominated than it is today. </P>


If he was brought up today for the HOF, a time when WR with the 2nd most career receptions can't get in, I doubt he makes it.Getting in today is alot harder than before, IMHO, and the voters hold guys to higher standards. </P>

Moss#83
02-08-2012, 04:39 PM
He is getting real close and has proven himself to be a better postseason QB than Peyton.* 2-3 more years like this past year and he is a shoo in.*

I agree with you, he doesnt have Peytons numbers yet thoughPost season wise he shatters Peyton's numbers.

Eli thrives against tougher competition while Peyton folds.

chasjay
02-08-2012, 04:40 PM
I hope it is a very long time before anybody needs to seriously wonder whether Eli is getting in the HOF or not. But I do understand the arguments that are taking place.

Regarding the HOF - everyone should remember that it isn't King Solomon making the judgements - it is 44 people (all or nearly all being sportswriters) - 44 people with their own criteria, their own likes and dislikes, their own varying degrees of principle and pettiness. Ideally, the best of the best would be chosen by the best of the best. However, if that were true, (in my humble opinion) Bill Parcells would have made it - obviously some people do not agree with me.

Brandon jacobs
02-08-2012, 04:42 PM
Wait, Wait hold on a minute! how in the HELL are people going to say ELI isn't worthy of the HOF when, he is the ONLY Giant QB to get this team to 2 Superbowls for starters but, also won both Superbowls? That has to show for something!

Eli will surpass 30,000 yards next season and he's a ways over 10 grand +of Joe montana's 40,550+ career stat.

and this kid has a load of years left on his career.

nihan87
02-08-2012, 04:44 PM
He is getting real close and has proven himself to be a better postseason QB than Peyton. 2-3 more years like this past year and he is a shoo in. I agree with you, he doesnt have Peytons numbers yet though</P>


</P>


1 is the loneliest number...</P>


</P>


With that being said, he has Peyton in the playoffs and Super Bowls, beat Brady twice and is breaking most of this organizations records. Dude is most definitely on track...and he's only 30.</P>

Shockdisnation03
02-08-2012, 04:47 PM
He is getting real close and has proven himself to be a better postseason QB than Peyton.* 2-3 more years like this past year and he is a shoo in.*

I agree with you, he doesnt have Peytons numbers yet though

Its Not What You Do During Regular Season, Its How Many Super Bowls You Can Get !!!

NYGFaninILL
02-08-2012, 04:48 PM
He is getting real close and has proven himself to be a better postseason QB than Peyton.* 2-3 more years like this past year and he is a shoo in.*

I agree with you, he doesnt have Peytons numbers yet though

Its Not What You Do During Regular Season, Its How Many Super Bowls You Can Get !!!


Tell that to Dan Marino...

Hostetler
02-08-2012, 04:51 PM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet. Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet. I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time! I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot. Im not saying that Eli would deserve to go if he were to retire tomorrow. But, Namath made the hall and he isnt one of the best fo all time. If Namath made the hall with his numbers and only 1 SB, thats setting the bar low for best of all time. I know what the SB win meant for the League and all, but when you think of Best of all time Namath doesnt come to mind.</P>


</P>


Thats why Namath is in, for him it was not just the numbers, His victory assured the AFL/NFL merger - truly groundbreaking and HOF worthy. The Jets win changed football, and if you accomplish something that Drasticallychanges the sport for the better than that in and of itself is HOF worthy.</P>


I get what you are saying, but for me I just dont think its enough. I mean yes, they were the first AFL team to win a SB but its not like that would never have happened in the future. Would you make that QB on a different team a HOFer if they had pedestrian career stats but won the first SB for the AFL? Im not sure that just because he won the 1st SB for the AFL that his career overall should have put him there. Yes, he was on the team and was the first AFL QB to win the SB and MVP, but he was 17/28 206 0 0 hardly a game winning performance. Was he really all that instrumental in wining the game that he deserved the MVP or was he more of a game manager and the whole guarantee thing got him the MVP and hence the HOF? (I ask only because I wasnt around to watch that game).</P>


Do you remember the USFL? Im sure there are many here that do - lets just say that until the Jets beat the Colts the AFL was looked on in the same manner. And yes - for that time period his numbers in that game were really good. The other point you bring up is the AFL would have won eventually, maybe, or maybe the league folds in 5 years. People seem to bail on perpetual losing entities.</P>

bluesince86
02-08-2012, 05:20 PM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet. Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet. I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time! I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot. Im not saying that Eli would deserve to go if he were to retire tomorrow. But, Namath made the hall and he isnt one of the best fo all time. If Namath made the hall with his numbers and only 1 SB, thats setting the bar low for best of all time. I know what the SB win meant for the League and all, but when you think of Best of all time Namath doesnt come to mind.</P>


*</P>


Thats why Namath is in, for him it was not just the numbers, His victory assured the AFL/NFL merger - truly groundbreaking and HOF worthy. The Jets win changed football, and if you accomplish something that Drastically*changes the sport for the better than that in and of itself is HOF worthy.</P>


I get what you are saying, but for me I just dont think its enough. I mean yes, they were the first AFL team to win a SB but its not like that would never have happened in the future. Would you make that QB on a different team a HOFer if they had pedestrian career stats but won the first SB for the AFL? Im not sure that just because he won the 1st SB for the AFL that his career overall should have put him there. Yes, he was on the team and was the first AFL QB to win the SB and MVP, but he was 17/28 206 0 0 hardly a game winning performance. Was he really all that instrumental in wining the game that he deserved the MVP or was he more of a game manager and the whole guarantee thing got him the MVP and hence the HOF? (I ask only because I wasnt around to watch that game).</P>


Do you remember the USFL? Im sure there are many here that do - lets just say that until the Jets beat the Colts the AFL was looked on in the same manner. And yes - for that time period his numbers in that game were really good. The other point you bring up is the AFL would have won eventually, maybe, or maybe the league folds in 5 years. People seem to bail on perpetual losing entities.</P>

Yes, I do remember the USFL (I was young at the time, but I do remember it), and maybe they would have bailed on the AFL. At the sametime maybe they wouldn't have. I guess we are just going to have to disagree, I dont feel that wining 1 SB even though it was the first for the AFL and having a pedestrian career over all (did he do anything after that super bowl?) should be enough to get someone in the hall, no matter what era they played in.

Again, I do get how big of a deal it was for the Jets to win that Super Bow, but teams win SB's and I dont think he did enough to separate himself from that team victory to make the hall. I think a section dedicated to that team would have been perfect to represent what that win meant for the league if thats the reason that was used to justify his entry. I personaly think that his whole personality and the media's love for him at the time had more to do with him getting in than his actual accomplishments.

Hostetler
02-08-2012, 05:25 PM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet. Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet. I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time! I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot. Im not saying that Eli would deserve to go if he were to retire tomorrow. But, Namath made the hall and he isnt one of the best fo all time. If Namath made the hall with his numbers and only 1 SB, thats setting the bar low for best of all time. I know what the SB win meant for the League and all, but when you think of Best of all time Namath doesnt come to mind.</P>


</P>


Thats why Namath is in, for him it was not just the numbers, His victory assured the AFL/NFL merger - truly groundbreaking and HOF worthy. The Jets win changed football, and if you accomplish something that Drasticallychanges the sport for the better than that in and of itself is HOF worthy.</P>


I get what you are saying, but for me I just dont think its enough. I mean yes, they were the first AFL team to win a SB but its not like that would never have happened in the future. Would you make that QB on a different team a HOFer if they had pedestrian career stats but won the first SB for the AFL? Im not sure that just because he won the 1st SB for the AFL that his career overall should have put him there. Yes, he was on the team and was the first AFL QB to win the SB and MVP, but he was 17/28 206 0 0 hardly a game winning performance. Was he really all that instrumental in wining the game that he deserved the MVP or was he more of a game manager and the whole guarantee thing got him the MVP and hence the HOF? (I ask only because I wasnt around to watch that game).</P>


Do you remember the USFL? Im sure there are many here that do - lets just say that until the Jets beat the Colts the AFL was looked on in the same manner. And yes - for that time period his numbers in that game were really good. The other point you bring up is the AFL would have won eventually, maybe, or maybe the league folds in 5 years. People seem to bail on perpetual losing entities.</P>


Yes, I do remember the USFL (I was young at the time, but I do remember it), and maybe they would have bailed on the AFL. At the sametime maybe they wouldn't have. I guess we are just going to have to disagree, I dont feel that wining 1 SB even though it was the first for the AFL and having a pedestrian career over all (did he do anything after that super bowl?) should be enough to get someone in the hall, no matter what era they played in. Again, I do get how big of a deal it was for the Jets to win that Super Bow, but teams win SB's and I dont think he did enough to separate himself from that team victory to make the hall. I think a section dedicated to that team would have been perfect to represent what that win meant for the league if thats the reason that was used to justify his entry. I personaly think that his whole personality and the media's love for him at the time had more to do with him getting in than his actual accomplishments.</P>


</P>


I agree, but, the NFL does not have full teams in the HOF, Joe was the symbolic player of that team, and to aknowledge what that team/player meant to the league as a whole is why he was inducted.</P>

GCGiant
02-08-2012, 05:32 PM
If his stock keeps increaseing as much as it did from the beginning of this year until now...he will own the HOF someday.

bluesince86
02-08-2012, 05:38 PM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet. Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet. I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time! I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot. Im not saying that Eli would deserve to go if he were to retire tomorrow. But, Namath made the hall and he isnt one of the best fo all time. If Namath made the hall with his numbers and only 1 SB, thats setting the bar low for best of all time. I know what the SB win meant for the League and all, but when you think of Best of all time Namath doesnt come to mind.</P>


*</P>


Thats why Namath is in, for him it was not just the numbers, His victory assured the AFL/NFL merger - truly groundbreaking and HOF worthy. The Jets win changed football, and if you accomplish something that Drastically*changes the sport for the better than that in and of itself is HOF worthy.</P>


I get what you are saying, but for me I just dont think its enough. I mean yes, they were the first AFL team to win a SB but its not like that would never have happened in the future. Would you make that QB on a different team a HOFer if they had pedestrian career stats but won the first SB for the AFL? Im not sure that just because he won the 1st SB for the AFL that his career overall should have put him there. Yes, he was on the team and was the first AFL QB to win the SB and MVP, but he was 17/28 206 0 0 hardly a game winning performance. Was he really all that instrumental in wining the game that he deserved the MVP or was he more of a game manager and the whole guarantee thing got him the MVP and hence the HOF? (I ask only because I wasnt around to watch that game).</P>


Do you remember the USFL? Im sure there are many here that do - lets just say that until the Jets beat the Colts the AFL was looked on in the same manner. And yes - for that time period his numbers in that game were really good. The other point you bring up is the AFL would have won eventually, maybe, or maybe the league folds in 5 years. People seem to bail on perpetual losing entities.</P>


Yes, I do remember the USFL (I was young at the time, but I do remember it), and maybe they would have bailed on the AFL. At the sametime maybe they wouldn't have. I guess we are just going to have to disagree, I dont feel that wining 1 SB even though it was the first for the AFL and having a pedestrian career over all (did he do anything after that super bowl?) should be enough to get someone in the hall, no matter what era they played in. Again, I do get how big of a deal it was for the Jets to win that Super Bow, but teams win SB's and I dont think he did enough to separate himself from that team victory to make the hall. I think a section dedicated to that team would have been perfect to represent what that win meant for the league if thats the reason that was used to justify his entry. I personaly think that his whole personality and the media's love for him at the time had more to do with him getting in than his actual accomplishments.</P>


*</P>


I agree, but, the NFL does not have full teams in the HOF, Joe was the symbolic player of that team, and to aknowledge what that team/player meant to the league as a whole is why he was inducted.</P>

True, they could have done something though to represent that team if they chose to, especially given the significance of that win and what it meant to the league. Not saying put all the players so to speak, but team in the sense of the organization and what they meant to the league. Good conversation man

THE_New_York_Giants
02-08-2012, 05:45 PM
Eli is going to play until he's at least 40 (pending injuries). I would not be surprised if he finishes his career with 60,000-70,000 yds, 400-450 TD's, 240INT's, and 3-4 super bowls.

gmen46
02-08-2012, 05:47 PM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet. Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet. I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time! I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot. Im not saying that Eli would deserve to go if he were to retire tomorrow. But, Namath made the hall and he isnt one of the best fo all time. If Namath made the hall with his numbers and only 1 SB, thats setting the bar low for best of all time. I know what the SB win meant for the League and all, but when you think of Best of all time Namath doesnt come to mind.</P>


*</P>


Thats why Namath is in, for him it was not just the numbers, His victory assured the AFL/NFL merger - truly groundbreaking and HOF worthy. The Jets win changed football, and if you accomplish something that Drastically*changes the sport for the better than that in and of itself is HOF worthy.</P>

Actually, Namath's Super Bowl victory had nothing to do with assuring the NFL/AFL merger.

The Jets Super Bowl III victory was simply the bow in the package known as the merger. It validated in the minds of skeptics of the merger that this would be a good thing in the long run.

The merger agreement occurred in June 1966, and was approved by U S Congress (which was required in order to ensure no anti trust violations were in play) before the end of 1966.

Having a final Championship game between champions of the NFL and of the AFL--eventually, but not at first, to be known as the "Super Bowl"-- was a result of the merger agreement.

Super Bowl III occurred Jan. 1969.

The "new NFL" league alignment did not come about officially until 1970, but the deal was done. Joe simply put a brash young face on the new league.

Hostetler
02-08-2012, 05:50 PM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet. Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet. I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time! I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot. Im not saying that Eli would deserve to go if he were to retire tomorrow. But, Namath made the hall and he isnt one of the best fo all time. If Namath made the hall with his numbers and only 1 SB, thats setting the bar low for best of all time. I know what the SB win meant for the League and all, but when you think of Best of all time Namath doesnt come to mind.</P>


</P>


Thats why Namath is in, for him it was not just the numbers, His victory assured the AFL/NFL merger - truly groundbreaking and HOF worthy. The Jets win changed football, and if you accomplish something that Drasticallychanges the sport for the better than that in and of itself is HOF worthy.</P>


I get what you are saying, but for me I just dont think its enough. I mean yes, they were the first AFL team to win a SB but its not like that would never have happened in the future. Would you make that QB on a different team a HOFer if they had pedestrian career stats but won the first SB for the AFL? Im not sure that just because he won the 1st SB for the AFL that his career overall should have put him there. Yes, he was on the team and was the first AFL QB to win the SB and MVP, but he was 17/28 206 0 0 hardly a game winning performance. Was he really all that instrumental in wining the game that he deserved the MVP or was he more of a game manager and the whole guarantee thing got him the MVP and hence the HOF? (I ask only because I wasnt around to watch that game).</P>


Do you remember the USFL? Im sure there are many here that do - lets just say that until the Jets beat the Colts the AFL was looked on in the same manner. And yes - for that time period his numbers in that game were really good. The other point you bring up is the AFL would have won eventually, maybe, or maybe the league folds in 5 years. People seem to bail on perpetual losing entities.</P>


Yes, I do remember the USFL (I was young at the time, but I do remember it), and maybe they would have bailed on the AFL. At the sametime maybe they wouldn't have. I guess we are just going to have to disagree, I dont feel that wining 1 SB even though it was the first for the AFL and having a pedestrian career over all (did he do anything after that super bowl?) should be enough to get someone in the hall, no matter what era they played in. Again, I do get how big of a deal it was for the Jets to win that Super Bow, but teams win SB's and I dont think he did enough to separate himself from that team victory to make the hall. I think a section dedicated to that team would have been perfect to represent what that win meant for the league if thats the reason that was used to justify his entry. I personaly think that his whole personality and the media's love for him at the time had more to do with him getting in than his actual accomplishments.</P>


</P>


I agree, but, the NFL does not have full teams in the HOF, Joe was the symbolic player of that team, and to aknowledge what that team/player meant to the league as a whole is why he was inducted.</P>


True, they could have done something though to represent that team if they chose to, especially given the significance of that win and what it meant to the league. Not saying put all the players so to speak, but team in the sense of the organization and what they meant to the league. Good conversation man</P>


Thank you and it was nice having the conversation with you as well</P>

Drez
02-08-2012, 05:58 PM
AN KURT WARNER IS - LOOK AT THE NUMBERS. Not saying he is or isn't but Elis numbers are equal to Warners and he has two sb wins and mvp As far as being better than his brother. His brother has all the stats but who would you take in the 4th quarter.</P>


But, even more than that, if you take a look at Eli's numbers versus Brady's, Peyton's, and Brees' all after 7 seasons as full time starters, Eli's stacks up very nicely to them, not quite as good, but damn close.</P>

gmen46
02-08-2012, 06:03 PM
Eli is going to play until he's at least 40 (pending injuries). I would not be surprised if he finishes his career with 60,000-70,000 yds, 400-450 TD's, 240INT's, and 3-4 super bowls.

I don't know about playing until he's 40 (although I'd be thrilled if he could manage it). I think once Eli believes he is unable to perform at his normal high level, he will decide to hang up his cleats.

You just never know what will happen to the body once you pass into your early 30s. Look at iron man Peyton. This time 1 year ago, nobody--and I mean NOBODY--anticipated what the poor guy has suffered this past year.

And then there's Bret, the poster child for the dangers of clinging on 1 year (or 3) too long.

However, Eli SHOULD be able to play at his high level for at least another 5 years,if he wishes to, and very possibly extend that to 6 or 7 years (would be 37).

Plenty of time for AT LEAST 1 more Super Bowl!!

Forget this entire HOF debate. Since the vote doesn't occur for anyone before 5 years after he retires anyway, why even go there now?

Is there ANY doubt this dude ultimately makes it, after what he did this entire season?

JDE123
02-08-2012, 06:16 PM
So we're going to take the least impressive part of Peyton's resume (post-season performance) and compare it against the ONLY impressive part of Eli's (the 2 Super Bowls) to determine that Eli is better?

Outside of the 2 Super Bowl Runs, Eli is 0-3 in the playoffs. He's been to the Pro Bowl 2 times in 8 years, his regular season record is 69-51, and he's never been the NFL MVP.

Peyton has been to the Pro Bowl 11 times, has been NFL MVP 4 times, and his regular season record is 141-67.

You could argue that Peyton is the greatest quarterback to ever play the game. You can't even argue that Eli is the best quarterback of his era. I like Eli and think he has a chance for the HOF, but he needs to start putting together some impressive regular seasons and/or add another Super Bowl ring.

Drez
02-08-2012, 06:20 PM
Eli is going to play until he's at least 40 (pending injuries). I would not be surprised if he finishes his career with 60,000-70,000 yds, 400-450 TD's, 240INT's, and 3-4 super bowls. I don't know about playing until he's 40 (although I'd be thrilled if he could manage it). I think once Eli believes he is unable to perform at his normal high level, he will decide to hang up his cleats. You just never know what will happen to the body once you pass into your early 30s. Look at iron man Peyton. This time 1 year ago, nobody--and I mean NOBODY--anticipated what the poor guy has suffered this past year. And then there's Bret, the poster child for the dangers of clinging on 1 year (or 3) too long. However, Eli SHOULD be able to play at his high level for at least another 5 years,if he wishes to, and very possibly extend that to 6 or 7 years (would be 37). Plenty of time for AT LEAST 1 more Super Bowl!! Forget this entire HOF debate. Since the vote doesn't occur for anyone before 5 years after he retires anyway, why even go there now? Is there ANY doubt this dude ultimately makes it, after what he did this entire season?</P>


The thing that kind of annoys me about this whole argument about Eli and the HoF, is that I don't think anyone ever said that if Eli never played another snap that he'd be in the Hall. I'm certain everyone that has said that Eli "is" a HoFer said it with the understanding that he finish the rest of his career and do so following the arc his career has traced thus far. The thing I've heard people say is that the second SB win solidifies his position as a serious/shoo-in candidate for the Hall when his career is over.</P>

THE_New_York_Giants
02-08-2012, 06:21 PM
Eli is going to play until he's at least 40 (pending injuries). I would not be surprised if he finishes his career with 60,000-70,000 yds, 400-450 TD's, 240INT's, and 3-4 super bowls. I don't know about playing until he's 40 (although I'd be thrilled if he could manage it). I think once Eli believes he is unable to perform at his normal high level, he will decide to hang up his cleats. You just never know what will happen to the body once you pass into your early 30s. Look at iron man Peyton. This time 1 year ago, nobody--and I mean NOBODY--anticipated what the poor guy has suffered this past year. And then there's Bret, the poster child for the dangers of clinging on 1 year (or 3) too long. However, Eli SHOULD be able to play at his high level for at least another 5 years,if he wishes to, and very possibly extend that to 6 or 7 years (would be 37). Plenty of time for AT LEAST 1 more Super Bowl!! Forget this entire HOF debate. Since the vote doesn't occur for anyone before 5 years after he retires anyway, why even go there now? Is there ANY doubt this dude ultimately makes it, after what he did this entire season?</P>


The thing that kind of annoys me about this whole argument about Eli and the HoF, is that I don't think anyone ever said that if Eli never played another snap that he'd be in the Hall. I'm certain everyone that has said that Eli "is" a HoFer said it with the understanding that he finish the rest of his career and do so following the arc his career has traced thus far. The thing I've heard people say is that the second SB win solidifies his position as a serious/shoo-in candidate for the Hall when his career is over.</P>

Well, we all know he is going to have #10 forever cemented in Giants stadium.

Drez
02-08-2012, 06:23 PM
Eli is going to play until he's at least 40 (pending injuries). I would not be surprised if he finishes his career with 60,000-70,000 yds, 400-450 TD's, 240INT's, and 3-4 super bowls. I don't know about playing until he's 40 (although I'd be thrilled if he could manage it). I think once Eli believes he is unable to perform at his normal high level, he will decide to hang up his cleats. You just never know what will happen to the body once you pass into your early 30s. Look at iron man Peyton. This time 1 year ago, nobody--and I mean NOBODY--anticipated what the poor guy has suffered this past year. And then there's Bret, the poster child for the dangers of clinging on 1 year (or 3) too long. However, Eli SHOULD be able to play at his high level for at least another 5 years,if he wishes to, and very possibly extend that to 6 or 7 years (would be 37). Plenty of time for AT LEAST 1 more Super Bowl!! Forget this entire HOF debate. Since the vote doesn't occur for anyone before 5 years after he retires anyway, why even go there now? Is there ANY doubt this dude ultimately makes it, after what he did this entire season?</P>


The thing that kind of annoys me about this whole argument about Eli and the HoF, is that I don't think anyone ever said that if Eli never played another snap that he'd be in the Hall. I'm certain everyone that has said that Eli "is" a HoFer said it with the understanding that he finish the rest of his career and do so following the arc his career has traced thus far. The thing I've heard people say is that the second SB win solidifies his position as a serious/shoo-in candidate for the Hall when his career is over.</P>


Well, we all know he is going to have #10 forever cemented in Giants stadium.</P>


Yup. And depending on what the number situation looks like, might even get his number retired.</P>

byron
02-08-2012, 06:40 PM
thats right he's still playing the game....

Roosevelt
02-08-2012, 07:59 PM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet.

Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet.

I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time!

I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot.

so what does he have to do to get in?

It would be nearly impossible to top what he's done in two SB appearences.

He's got to win a third SB?

In my opinion a 3rd SB puts him in the top 5 all time and unequivically puts him ahead of Tom Brady.

Or does he just need to keep playing for 7 more years compling around 4000 yrds, 30 tds and 15 ints per year?

Is that really what the HOF is about. Compiliing stats??

Jim Plunkett has 2 SB's to his name and is not in the HOF.

Most HOF'ers were elite for more than one year.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

But I wouldn't worry, Eli has a very good chance to get there if he keeps playing like he did this year.

gmen46
02-08-2012, 08:02 PM
So we're going to take the least impressive part of Peyton's resume (post-season performance) and compare it against the ONLY impressive part of Eli's (the 2 Super Bowls) to determine that Eli is better?

Outside of the 2 Super Bowl Runs, Eli is 0-3 in the playoffs.* He's been to the Pro Bowl 2 times in 8 years, his regular season record is 69-51, and he's never been the NFL MVP.

Peyton has been to the Pro Bowl 11 times, has been NFL MVP 4 times, and his regular season record is 141-67.

You could argue that Peyton is the greatest quarterback to ever play the game.* You can't even argue that Eli is the best quarterback of his era.* I like Eli and think he has a chance for the HOF, but he needs to start putting together some impressive regular seasons and/or add another Super Bowl ring.


Since very few, if any, fans on this board are actually comparing Eli to Peyton, and since this thread is about whether or not Eli can yet be thought of as HOF material, I don't see the relevance of your post here.

Aside from that, your argument is one of the worst examples of "reasoning" when it comes to what sets apart elite QBs (or any professional athlete) that I've ever read.

You're seriously pulling out the old "outside of his 2 (TWO!) Super Bowl runs, Eli is 0-3 in the playoffs"?

Why don't you say "outside of his touchdowns, Eli has thrown nothing but interceptions in his career", while you're at it?

Or, how about "aside from his 3 Super Bowl rings, Tom Brady is only 0-2 in the Super Bowl"?

How about this, instead, since we're cherry picking Eli's career stats--since 2007 Eli is 8-1 in the playoffs and has won 2 Super Bowl MVP awards on his way to 2 Super Bowl victories.

How many other quarterbacks in the NFL can make this claim?

I'll tell you how many. NONE! Zero, nada, zip, no one, nobody, naught, nil, zilch, goose egg.

In fact, there have been only 4 other QBs in the HISTORY of the NFL that have won 2 Super Bowl MVP awards. Bart Starr, Terry Bradshaw, Joe Montana, Tom Brady.

All HOFers, or guaranteed future HOF.

As for, Peyton's number of MVP and Pro Bowl selections, as impressive as they are, if you don't think Peyton would trade ALL those accolades in for a second Super Bowl win and MVP, then you shouldn't even be talking about anything relating to the NFL.

Firenugget
02-08-2012, 08:08 PM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet.

Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet.

I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time!

I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot.

Agreed. At the end of his career I'm sure he'll have amassed enough #'s to easily put him in, especially with 2 (and who knows..) SB's . But like you said, if he retired tomorrow, no.

giantsfan420
02-08-2012, 08:09 PM
So we're going to take the least impressive part of Peyton's resume (post-season performance) and compare it against the ONLY impressive part of Eli's (the 2 Super Bowls) to determine that Eli is better?

Outside of the 2 Super Bowl Runs, Eli is 0-3 in the playoffs.* He's been to the Pro Bowl 2 times in 8 years, his regular season record is 69-51, and he's never been the NFL MVP.

Peyton has been to the Pro Bowl 11 times, has been NFL MVP 4 times, and his regular season record is 141-67.

You could argue that Peyton is the greatest quarterback to ever play the game.* You can't even argue that Eli is the best quarterback of his era.* I like Eli and think he has a chance for the HOF, but he needs to start putting together some impressive regular seasons and/or add another Super Bowl ring.


Since very few, if any, fans on this board are actually comparing Eli to Peyton, and since this thread is about whether or not Eli can yet be thought of as HOF material, I don't see the relevance of your post here.

Aside from that, your argument is one of the worst examples of "reasoning" when it comes to what sets apart elite QBs (or any professional athlete) that I've ever read.

You're seriously pulling out the old "outside of his 2 (TWO!) Super Bowl runs, Eli is 0-3 in the playoffs"?

Why don't you say "outside of his touchdowns, Eli has thrown nothing but interceptions in his career", while you're at it?

Or, how about "aside from his 3 Super Bowl rings, Tom Brady is only 0-2 in the Super Bowl"?

How about this, instead, since we're cherry picking Eli's career stats--since 2007 Eli is 8-1 in the playoffs and has won 2 Super Bowl MVP awards on his way to 2 Super Bowl victories.

How many other quarterbacks in the NFL can make this claim?

I'll tell you how many. NONE! Zero, nada, zip, no one, nobody, naught, nil, zilch, goose egg.

In fact, there have been only 4 other QBs in the HISTORY of the NFL that have won 2 Super Bowl MVP awards. Bart Starr, Terry Bradshaw, Joe Montana, Tom Brady.

All HOFers, or guaranteed future HOF.

As for, Peyton's number of MVP and Pro Bowl selections, as impressive as they are, if you don't think Peyton would trade ALL those accolades in for a second Super Bowl win and MVP, then you shouldn't even be talking about anything relating to the NFL.

dead on as usual. not to mention, if putting up a qb's numbers compared to Peytons numbers as the metric to make the HOF, NO QB WOULD MAKE THE HOF EVER AGAIN.

Peyton is the exception, not the rule. Eli is the exception, not the rule. People are comparing SB runs and performances as just if they won or lost...it goes WAYYYY beyond that. Its sports writers voting the players in, you don't think that 07 Super Bowl won't be on the minds of sports writers for the rest of history?? Or all this seasons 4th quarter comebacks/tds and SB 4TH QUARTER COMEBACK AGAIN AGAINST BRADY/BB AGAIN won't be on sports writers minds forever??

sorry, not every win or loss is valued equally. Namath made the HOF with some of the WORST qb stats of all time, simply bc of "the prediction" and the jets victory leading to the merger. In fact, Namaths SB performance wasnt even all that special. the final score was like 17-10 and the Colts played HORRIFICALLY...

Eli IS A HOF RIGHT NOW THATS JUST THE TRUTH. The great thing, HE ISN'T GETTING VOTED ON TOMORROW...he has 7-8 more years left of amazing play...don't know how people don't understand this, ESPECIALLY warner who will probably make the HOF based on the whole "bag boy turned SB MVP"...

JDE123
02-08-2012, 08:34 PM
So we're going to take the least impressive part of Peyton's resume (post-season performance) and compare it against the ONLY impressive part of Eli's (the 2 Super Bowls) to determine that Eli is better?

Outside of the 2 Super Bowl Runs, Eli is 0-3 in the playoffs. He's been to the Pro Bowl 2 times in 8 years, his regular season record is 69-51, and he's never been the NFL MVP.

Peyton has been to the Pro Bowl 11 times, has been NFL MVP 4 times, and his regular season record is 141-67.

You could argue that Peyton is the greatest quarterback to ever play the game. You can't even argue that Eli is the best quarterback of his era. I like Eli and think he has a chance for the HOF, but he needs to start putting together some impressive regular seasons and/or add another Super Bowl ring.


Since very few, if any, fans on this board are actually comparing Eli to Peyton, and since this thread is about whether or not Eli can yet be thought of as HOF material, I don't see the relevance of your post here.

Aside from that, your argument is one of the worst examples of "reasoning" when it comes to what sets apart elite QBs (or any professional athlete) that I've ever read.

You're seriously pulling out the old "outside of his 2 (TWO!) Super Bowl runs, Eli is 0-3 in the playoffs"?

Why don't you say "outside of his touchdowns, Eli has thrown nothing but interceptions in his career", while you're at it?

Or, how about "aside from his 3 Super Bowl rings, Tom Brady is only 0-2 in the Super Bowl"?

How about this, instead, since we're cherry picking Eli's career stats--since 2007 Eli is 8-1 in the playoffs and has won 2 Super Bowl MVP awards on his way to 2 Super Bowl victories.

How many other quarterbacks in the NFL can make this claim?

I'll tell you how many. NONE! Zero, nada, zip, no one, nobody, naught, nil, zilch, goose egg.

In fact, there have been only 4 other QBs in the HISTORY of the NFL that have won 2 Super Bowl MVP awards. Bart Starr, Terry Bradshaw, Joe Montana, Tom Brady.

All HOFers, or guaranteed future HOF.

As for, Peyton's number of MVP and Pro Bowl selections, as impressive as they are, if you don't think Peyton would trade ALL those accolades in for a second Super Bowl win and MVP, then you shouldn't even be talking about anything relating to the NFL.

Geez, what a d!ck post.

Fist off, I was responding to the earlier post which said:

Post season wise he shatters Peyton's numbers.
Eli thrives against tougher competition while Peyton folds.




I guess I missed the 'quote' button. So sorry.

Secondly, my point is that the 2 SB runs is all Eli has at this point, so if you're putting him in the hall right now then you're basically saying that 2 good post-seasons gets you in the HOF. And if you think that is the case, you shouldn't be talking about anything relating to the NFL.

Lastly, I'm pretty sure I said Eli has a chance if he either puts together a few good regular seasons or adds another ring. That seems to be pretty much consistent with what every rational poster on here is saying.

Go get your panties out of a bunch and quit misrepresenting what other people are saying.

JDE123
02-08-2012, 08:38 PM
Although you almost make a rational point in your insulting and idiotic rant. If you take away Brady's 3 Superbowl rings you still have 7 trips to the pro bowl, 2 NFL MVP's, the single season TD record, 40,000 passing yards, a career QB rating of 95+.

Big Blue 418
02-08-2012, 08:41 PM
If Joe Namath and Troy Aikman are in the hof , Eli should be if he retired . Kurt Warner would be better off bagging grociers than talking football and hof because he ain't one himself

Bohemian
02-08-2012, 09:00 PM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet.

Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet.

I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time!

I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot.

Considering that he is nowhere to being done playing, he is cruising to the hall if he keeps it up. There are some really lame QBs in the hall, specially if you are looking for numbers. Playing in NY is an absolute nightmare, and he has completely overcome all the nonsense that the city has thrown his way... and that very fact will be a discussion that the selection committee consider when the time is right.

The only question that I have is whether Eli is a first ballot HOF or not.

gmen46
02-08-2012, 09:22 PM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet.

Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet.

I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time!

I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot.

so what does he have to do to get in?

It would be nearly impossible to top what he's done in two SB appearences.

He's got to win a third SB?

In my opinion a 3rd SB puts him in the top 5 all time and unequivically puts him ahead of Tom Brady.

Or does he just need to keep playing for 7 more years compling around 4000 yrds, 30 tds and 15 ints per year?

Is that really what the HOF is about. Compiliing stats??

Jim Plunkett has 2 SB's to his name and is not in the HOF.

Most HOF'ers were elite for more than one year.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

But I wouldn't worry, Eli has a very good chance to get there if he keeps playing like he did this year.


What "bubble" are you bursting here, exactly?

Plunket threw for 20 (exactly) TDs once in his 16 year career. He threw more interceptions than TDs in NINE of his seasons as a pro. He NEVER threw for 3000 yards in a season.

Not to mention he was cast off and left for dead by two teams (including the team that drafted him First Overall in 71) after 7 years, before he was resuscitated by the Raiders

Of COURSE he's not in HOF. Neither is Jeff Hostetler, Mark Rypien, Doug Williams, Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, or Jim McMahon.

But to imply Eli is more comparable to THEM (which you do, by bringing Plunkett in) than he is to the more elite future HOF QBs is ridiculously insulting to the man. And it's inaccurate.

None of those guys had even remotely an entire career comparable to what Eli has had in only 8 years so far (and counting).

Not statistically, not in career wins, not in number of big game situations, not in SB rings, and certainly not in SB MVP awards.

Eli has thrown for a MINIMUM of 20 TDs and 3000 yards in each of his 7 seasons as a starter. He's thrown for 4000 yards in each of his last 3 years.

Want to compare to contemporaries? Only Brees, Peyton, and Brady have matched or exceeded that streak of TDs and yards per year, and they've each been in the league for 2-6 more years than Eli).

Except for his 7 game rookie season, Eli never threw more interceptions than TDs in any season--unlike most of the QBs I mention above.

He set a new record for number of TDs in the 4th quarter this year, surpassing Peyton and Unitas.

I believe he tied or set a new record for road wins in the post season (not positive, but I believe so).

I hate to burst YOUR bubble, but Eli doesn't NEED to duplicate this past year statistically for several more years in order to make the HOF.

Although I would really love to see that.

If he just continues at his career annual average for another 4-5 years (25-26 TDs, 37-3800 yards, 17 interceptions per year), and maybe 2-3 more post seasons (not necessarily Super Bowls) he will be elected to the HOF.

To bring Plunkett into this conversation is laughable, to say the least, and bears no relation to the reality of Eli's career..

JDE123
02-08-2012, 09:39 PM
I'm sorry - I'm not going after you just because you went after me, but your post is absolutely idiotic. Plunkett was drafted in 1971, a year in which the leading passer threw for 3,075 yards. In fact, from '71-'77 there was never a season in which more than 1 person passed for more than 3,000 yards, and twice no one exceeded 3,000. Just for the record, the NFL regular season consisted of only 14 games through the '77 season.

Comparing passing stats to 30 years ago to make your case is ridiculous. I believe Plunkett is talked about in relation to Manning because he, like Eli, had what most would consider to be a pedestrian career outside of his 2 Super Bowl titles.

Also, 4th quarter touchdowns is completely meaningless. It's somewhat akin to Tebow's miraculous 4th quarter comebacks this year - the prerequisite being that you need to be losing in the 4th quarter to prompt the comeback. Personally, I'll take the quarterback who throws his TD's in the 1rst quarter...

Big Blue 418
02-08-2012, 09:41 PM
I'm sorry - I'm not going after you just because you went after me, but your post is absolutely idiotic.* Plunkett was drafted in 1971, a year in which the leading passer threw for 3,075 yards.* In fact, from '71-'77 there was never a season in which more than 1 person passed for more than 3,000 yards, and twice no one exceeded 3,000.* Just for the record, the NFL regular season consisted of only 14 games through the '77 season.

Comparing passing stats to 30 years ago to make your case is ridiculous.* I believe Plunkett is talked about in relation to Manning because he, like Eli, had what most would consider to be a pedestrian career outside of his 2 Super Bowl titles.

Also, 4th quarter touchdowns is completely meaningless.* It's somewhat akin to Tebow's miraculous 4th quarter comebacks this year - the prerequisite being that you need to be losing in the 4th quarter to prompt the comeback.* Personally, I'll take the quarterback who throws his TD's in the 1rst quarter...


Throwing 4th qtr touchdowns are meaningless ? Yeah tell that to the teams that lost the games ...

bleedinblue27
02-08-2012, 09:57 PM
IN,not dout, hands down! this year proved it! TC wont be going anywhere anytime soon and Eli will (WILL) get a few more rings!!!
the San Fran gamw was historic!!

Breezely
02-08-2012, 10:00 PM
I don't know why but this whole HOF talk really irks me, Why is all this talk about the HOF when Eli hasn't retired yet (from what I know). Let the kid have a career first and then we can talk.

The HOF is almost starting to be like the BCS. It is starting to resemble more of a popularity contest than an elite grouping.

Before Eli is done, I believe he will make more plays and win more games. That is what I know. Don't get me wrong, I am an extreme Eli supporter. But I don't like all this HOF talk. Let the kid play the game!!!!!!!!!!

ralphpal
02-08-2012, 10:05 PM
He won 2 superbowl MVPs in comback fashion against one of the best QBs and headcoaches of all time. Thats what is going to be in the back of the minds of the HOF people. He just has almost have the same stats as this year . We have alot of great teams in the NFC now that the Giants might not even make the playoffs next year . He did the hard part 1st (winning MVPs in the superbowl) now he just has to do ther easy parts . Pad the stats, with God willing another superbowl victory thrown in.

Harooni
02-08-2012, 10:38 PM
I heard a analyst say that Eli would need 1 or 2 league MVP's. 2 sb is enough imo.

giantsfan420
02-08-2012, 10:41 PM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet.

Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet.

I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time!

I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot.

so what does he have to do to get in?

It would be nearly impossible to top what he's done in two SB appearences.

He's got to win a third SB?

In my opinion a 3rd SB puts him in the top 5 all time and unequivically puts him ahead of Tom Brady.

Or does he just need to keep playing for 7 more years compling around 4000 yrds, 30 tds and 15 ints per year?

Is that really what the HOF is about. Compiliing stats??

Jim Plunkett has 2 SB's to his name and is not in the HOF.

Most HOF'ers were elite for more than one year.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

But I wouldn't worry, Eli has a very good chance to get there if he keeps playing like he did this year.


What "bubble" are you bursting here, exactly?

Plunket threw for 20 (exactly) TDs once in his 16 year career. He threw more interceptions than TDs in NINE of his seasons as a pro. He NEVER threw for 3000 yards in a season.

Not to mention he was cast off and left for dead by two teams (including the team that drafted him First Overall in 71) after 7 years, before he was resuscitated by the Raiders

Of COURSE he's not in HOF. Neither is Jeff Hostetler, Mark Rypien, Doug Williams, Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, or Jim McMahon.

But to imply Eli is more comparable to THEM (which you do, by bringing Plunkett in) than he is to the more elite future HOF QBs is ridiculously insulting to the man. And it's inaccurate.

None of those guys had even remotely an entire career comparable to what Eli has had in only 8 years so far (and counting).

Not statistically, not in career wins, not in number of big game situations, not in SB rings, and certainly not in SB MVP awards.

Eli has thrown for a MINIMUM of 20 TDs and 3000 yards in each of his 7 seasons as a starter. He's thrown for 4000 yards in each of his last 3 years.

Want to compare to contemporaries? Only Brees, Peyton, and Brady have matched or exceeded that streak of TDs and yards per year, and they've each been in the league for 2-6 more years than Eli).

Except for his 7 game rookie season, Eli never threw more interceptions than TDs in any season--unlike most of the QBs I mention above.

He set a new record for number of TDs in the 4th quarter this year, surpassing Peyton and Unitas.

I believe he tied or set a new record for road wins in the post season (not positive, but I believe so).

I hate to burst YOUR bubble, but Eli doesn't NEED to duplicate this past year statistically for several more years in order to make the HOF.

Although I would really love to see that.

If he just continues at his career annual average for another 4-5 years (25-26 TDs, 37-3800 yards, 17 interceptions per year), and maybe 2-3 more post seasons (not necessarily Super Bowls) he will be elected to the HOF.

To bring Plunkett into this conversation is laughable, to say the least, and bears no relation to the reality of Eli's career..

game...set...match.

when ur in as many "1 of only 5 qb's to..." categories as eli is in, its pretty much a lock

and yes, he now has the most road wins in playoff nfl history

Drez
02-08-2012, 10:58 PM
So we're going to take the least impressive part of Peyton's resume (post-season performance) and compare it against the ONLY impressive part of Eli's (the 2 Super Bowls) to determine that Eli is better?

Outside of the 2 Super Bowl Runs, Eli is 0-3 in the playoffs. He's been to the Pro Bowl 2 times in 8 years, his regular season record is 69-51, and he's never been the NFL MVP.

Peyton has been to the Pro Bowl 11 times, has been NFL MVP 4 times, and his regular season record is 141-67.

You could argue that Peyton is the greatest quarterback to ever play the game. You can't even argue that Eli is the best quarterback of his era. I like Eli and think he has a chance for the HOF, but he needs to start putting together some impressive regular seasons and/or add another Super Bowl ring.
Since very few, if any, fans on this board are actually comparing Eli to Peyton, and since this thread is about whether or not Eli can yet be thought of as HOF material, I don't see the relevance of your post here. Aside from that, your argument is one of the worst examples of "reasoning" when it comes to what sets apart elite QBs (or any professional athlete) that I've ever read. You're seriously pulling out the old "outside of his 2 (TWO!) Super Bowl runs, Eli is 0-3 in the playoffs"? Why don't you say "outside of his touchdowns, Eli has thrown nothing but interceptions in his career", while you're at it? Or, how about "aside from his 3 Super Bowl rings, Tom Brady is only 0-2 in the Super Bowl"? How about this, instead, since we're cherry picking Eli's career stats--since 2007 Eli is 8-1 in the playoffs and has won 2 Super Bowl MVP awards on his way to 2 Super Bowl victories. How many other quarterbacks in the NFL can make this claim? I'll tell you how many. NONE! Zero, nada, zip, no one, nobody, naught, nil, zilch, goose egg. In fact, there have been only 4 other QBs in the HISTORY of the NFL that have won 2 Super Bowl MVP awards. Bart Starr, Terry Bradshaw, Joe Montana, Tom Brady. All HOFers, or guaranteed future HOF. As for, Peyton's number of MVP and Pro Bowl selections, as impressive as they are, if you don't think Peyton would trade ALL those accolades in for a second Super Bowl win and MVP, then you shouldn't even be talking about anything relating to the NFL.

Geez, what a d!ck post.

Fist off, I was responding to the earlier post which said:

Post season wise he shatters Peyton's numbers. Eli thrives against tougher competition while Peyton folds.

I guess I missed the 'quote' button. So sorry.

Secondly, my point is that the 2 SB runs is all Eli has at this point, so if you're putting him in the hall right now then you're basically saying that 2 good post-seasons gets you in the HOF. And if you think that is the case, you shouldn't be talking about anything relating to the NFL.

Lastly, I'm pretty sure I said Eli has a chance if he either puts together a few good regular seasons or adds another ring. That seems to be pretty much consistent with what every rational poster on here is saying.

Go get your panties out of a bunch and quit misrepresenting what other people are saying.
</P>


Rephrasing your SB/playoff run comment doesn't make it any less ridiculous. Most QB's don't have 1 SB run, much less 2. And even with losses in the other years, that still makes him 8-3 in the postseason, which is fantastic no matter what. Use the "say it out loud" rule here. Say these words out loud and see if they sound silly, "Outside of Eli's two Super Bowl MVP winning postseason runs, he hasn't won a game in the postseason." Sounds kind of lame, no?</P>


At this point, they'd at least have to discuss Eli as a HoFer. If he never played another snap, he may or may not get in, but they'd have to at least consider it.</P>


If he goes on and plays a few more seasons like he's had since the '07 run, he's a lock. </P>

arkgiant
02-08-2012, 11:31 PM
He is in. 2 last minute scores to win two SBs. The rest is just gravy. He is in Nuff said.

ibbill
02-08-2012, 11:47 PM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet.

Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet.

I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time!

I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot.

Peyton played in a crap division was almost a 6 game given every year. but 2 of the years.

gmen46
02-09-2012, 12:00 AM
I'm sorry - I'm not going after you just because you went after me, but your post is absolutely idiotic.* Plunkett was drafted in 1971, a year in which the leading passer threw for 3,075 yards.* In fact, from '71-'77 there was never a season in which more than 1 person passed for more than 3,000 yards, and twice no one exceeded 3,000.* Just for the record, the NFL regular season consisted of only 14 games through the '77 season.

Comparing passing stats to 30 years ago to make your case is ridiculous.* I believe Plunkett is talked about in relation to Manning because he, like Eli, had what most would consider to be a pedestrian career outside of his 2 Super Bowl titles.

Also, 4th quarter touchdowns is completely meaningless.* It's somewhat akin to Tebow's miraculous 4th quarter comebacks this year - the prerequisite being that you need to be losing in the 4th quarter to prompt the comeback.* Personally, I'll take the quarterback who throws his TD's in the 1rst quarter...


I didn't think it was necessary to predicate my comments about Plunkett with the pretty well known fact that many passing numbers are larger today than before the 80s.

You are correct. Most of Plunkett's days were in the 70s, the rest were in the first half of the 80s, when passing yards began to rise with the likes of Marino, Fouts, Moon, Kelly, a handful of others.

However, I would think that you'd agree that the fact that Plunkett threw more interceptions than he did TDs in 9 of his 16 seasons, that until he went to the Raiders the 8th season of his career he did nothing to elevate his teams, let alone win many games, would have some relevance in making any comparisons.

And, as I said to the other poster (Roosevelt, who I usually agree with) I was responding to regarding raising Plunkett as an argument when debating Eli's accomplishments is insulting to Eli--not to mention to anyone reading the comparison--and is completely irrelevant and inaccurate.

Plunkett DID have a "pedestrian" career outside his 2 Super Bowls.

Eli's career has been anything but pedestrian. I've already gone to some lengths on a couple other threads in summarizing Eli's accomplishments.

If you REALLY believe Eli's career is more comparable to Plunkett's than it is to the top 4 QBs of today, that aside from two Super Bowl rings it is "pedestrian", then there is no value in discussing this any further. You really should consider discussing other topics.

Oh, yeah--if the 4th quarter touchdowns were, in fact, "completely meaningless" as you seem to believe, then why do all NFL players, past and present, all pundits, and most fans (aside from you apparently) recognize it as one of the more crucial measures of a quarterback's ability to lead his team out of trouble and into winning situations? Why were Johnny Unitas and Peyton Manning admired for their previous record of 14 4th quarter touchdowns in a season? Were they "losers because they got behind earlier in the game"?

You seriously don't see the value in having a quarterback you feel absolutely confident will be able to pull a victory out because the defense allowed the opponent to get ahead?

You honestly believe that the only tru elite QB is one who always jumps ahead in every game and never needs to lead a come from behind win?

What about Peyton and Brady (and Montana before them), who are constantly revered for their respective abilities to lead come-from-behind victories when called upon? Are they, like Eli, looked upon as losers or "pedestrian" in you eyes? Or are they viewed as some of the greatest QBs ever?

You assume that all the 4th quarter TDs means they were all come-from-behind TDs. Not always the case, although they are an indicator of a quality QB--though obviously not to you.

Enough

YATittle1962
02-09-2012, 12:09 AM
he's not

rebelfan1966
02-09-2012, 12:10 AM
I did hear Steve Young say Eli should be considered for a yellow jacket now.... that shocked me honestly.

JDE123
02-09-2012, 12:23 AM
If he goes on and plays a few more seasons like he's had since the '07 run, he's a lock. </p>

On this, I think we can all agree.

I just don't understand you people who think that 2 Super Bowl rings + nothing = Hall of Fame. Especially since we're not even talking about 2 great seasons. We're talking about 1 really good season this year (in which he wasn't even remotely in consideration for MVP), and a pretty crappy season in '07 that ended great.

Try your say it out loud game as well. "Now introducing...quarterback of the New York Giants for 8 seasons...he led them to 2 Super Bowl victories, earning MVP honors each time...he went to the pro bowl twice...was the NFL MVP....never...was the AP Offensive Player-of-the-year...never...had a combined record of 76-54....a career passer rating of 82.1....and in his 7 years as a starter he averaged 3,800 yards, 26 touchdowns, and 17 interceptions per season..."

I'm sorry, but if that's the standard for induction then we've got about a dozen hall-of-fame quarterbacks playing right now and I just don't think that's very realistic.

giantsfan420
02-09-2012, 12:28 AM
If he goes on and plays a few more seasons like he's had since the '07 run, he's a lock. </p>

On this, I think we can all agree.

I just don't understand you people who think that 2 Super Bowl rings + nothing = Hall of Fame.* Especially since we're not even talking about 2 great seasons.* We're talking about 1 really good season this year (in which he wasn't even remotely in consideration for MVP), and a pretty crappy season in '07 that ended great.

Try your say it out loud game as well.* "Now introducing...quarterback of the New York Giants for 8 seasons...he led them to 2 Super Bowl victories, earning MVP honors each time...he went to the pro bowl twice...was the NFL MVP....never...was the AP Offensive Player-of-the-year...never...had a combined record of 76-54....a career passer rating of 82.1....and in his 7 years as a starter he averaged 3,800 yards, 26 touchdowns, and 17 interceptions per season..."

I'm sorry, but if that's the standard for induction then we've got about a dozen hall-of-fame quarterbacks playing right now and I just don't think that's very realistic.



And for the HOF debate, Warner went on NFL Network show and recanted his statement in an "instadebate" with Lombardi.

He said he meant if Eli were to retire right now, then he wouldn't be a lock. He then said if he played a few more seasons at this level, even without another Super Bowl, he'll be a lock.

Lombardi said he's a lock already right now. He said for the voters, its if the player was able to lead his team to Championships. And he said the way in which Eli did it, he's a lock as of right now.

I respect Lombardi's opinion more than almost any NFL analyst and that was before seeing this clip.

JDE123
02-09-2012, 12:49 AM
Oh, yeah--if the 4th quarter touchdowns were, in fact, "completely meaningless" as you seem to believe, then why do all NFL players, past and present, all pundits, and most fans (aside from you apparently) recognize it as one of the more crucial measures of a quarterback's ability to lead his team out of trouble and into winning situations? Why were Johnny Unitas and Peyton Manning admired for their previous record of 14 4th quarter touchdowns in a season? Were they "losers because they got behind earlier in the game"?

You seriously don't see the value in having a quarterback you feel absolutely confident will be able to pull a victory out because the defense allowed the opponent to get ahead?

You honestly believe that the only tru elite QB is one who always jumps ahead in every game and never needs to lead a come from behind win?

What about Peyton and Brady (and Montana before them), who are constantly revered for their respective abilities to lead come-from-behind victories when called upon? Are they, like Eli, looked upon as losers or "pedestrian" in you eyes? Or are they viewed as some of the greatest QBs ever?

You assume that all the 4th quarter TDs means they were all come-from-behind TDs. Not always the case, although they are an indicator of a quality QB--though obviously not to you.

Enough

You do realize that Eli only threw for 29 touchdowns this year, right? There are 5 QBs who threw for more, and each of them had a higher quarterback rating and fewer interceptions (except for Stafford who had 16 INTs, same as Eli).

And if Eli threw for a record 15 touchdowns in 4th quarters this year, that means he only threw 14 touchdowns in every other quarter combined for the entire season. I'm sorry, but I don't think that's a fact worth celebrating. In fact, I think it's horrific.

giantsfan420
02-09-2012, 12:53 AM
Oh, yeah--if the 4th quarter touchdowns were, in fact, "completely meaningless" as you seem to believe, then why do all NFL players, past and present, all pundits, and most fans (aside from you apparently) recognize it as one of the more crucial measures of a quarterback's ability to lead his team out of trouble and into winning situations? Why were Johnny Unitas and Peyton Manning admired for their previous record of 14 4th quarter touchdowns in a season? Were they "losers because they got behind earlier in the game"?

You seriously don't see the value in having a quarterback you feel absolutely confident will be able to pull a victory out because the defense allowed the opponent to get ahead?

You honestly believe that the only tru elite QB is one who always jumps ahead in every game and never needs to lead a come from behind win?

What about Peyton and Brady (and Montana before them), who are constantly revered for their respective abilities to lead come-from-behind victories when called upon? Are they, like Eli, looked upon as losers or "pedestrian" in you eyes? Or are they viewed as some of the greatest QBs ever?

You assume that all the 4th quarter TDs means they were all come-from-behind TDs. Not always the case, although they are an indicator of a quality QB--though obviously not to you.

Enough

You do realize that Eli only threw for 29 touchdowns this year, right?* There are 5 QBs who threw for more, and each of them had a higher quarterback rating and fewer interceptions (except for Stafford who had 16 INTs, same as Eli).

And if Eli threw for a record 15 touchdowns in 4th quarters this year, that means he only threw 14 touchdowns in every other quarter combined for the entire season.* I'm sorry, but I don't think that's a fact worth celebrating.* In fact, I think it's horrific.


your right. god damn eli manning. horrific, 29 tds and 15 came in the 4th quarter to break a record held by Jonny Unitas and Peyton. Right at 5000 yards, 7 game winning drives...with the worst ranked run game and 28th defense...dang you eli! dang you for carrying the team for practically the entire season...

hmm, why did all his teammates say eli is one of the best qbs in the league and say when they were losing late in the 4th they werent even nervous they knew eli would win it for them...horrific...

the fact u could use horrific in ANY way to describe ANY part of elis play this season makes you a grade a moron dip ****...

you should prob stop posting now...whats the saying? it is better to be thought a moron than to open your mouth and remove all doubt...ur that guy

JDE123
02-09-2012, 12:59 AM
Oh, yeah--if the 4th quarter touchdowns were, in fact, "completely meaningless" as you seem to believe, then why do all NFL players, past and present, all pundits, and most fans (aside from you apparently) recognize it as one of the more crucial measures of a quarterback's ability to lead his team out of trouble and into winning situations? Why were Johnny Unitas and Peyton Manning admired for their previous record of 14 4th quarter touchdowns in a season? Were they "losers because they got behind earlier in the game"?

You seriously don't see the value in having a quarterback you feel absolutely confident will be able to pull a victory out because the defense allowed the opponent to get ahead?

You honestly believe that the only tru elite QB is one who always jumps ahead in every game and never needs to lead a come from behind win?

What about Peyton and Brady (and Montana before them), who are constantly revered for their respective abilities to lead come-from-behind victories when called upon? Are they, like Eli, looked upon as losers or "pedestrian" in you eyes? Or are they viewed as some of the greatest QBs ever?

You assume that all the 4th quarter TDs means they were all come-from-behind TDs. Not always the case, although they are an indicator of a quality QB--though obviously not to you.

Enough

You do realize that Eli only threw for 29 touchdowns this year, right? There are 5 QBs who threw for more, and each of them had a higher quarterback rating and fewer interceptions (except for Stafford who had 16 INTs, same as Eli).

And if Eli threw for a record 15 touchdowns in 4th quarters this year, that means he only threw 14 touchdowns in every other quarter combined for the entire season. I'm sorry, but I don't think that's a fact worth celebrating. In fact, I think it's horrific.


your right. god damn eli manning. horrific, 29 tds and 15 came in the 4th quarter to break a record held by Jonny Unitas and Peyton. Right at 5000 yards, 7 game winning drives...with the worst ranked run game and 28th defense...dang you eli! dang you for carrying the team for practically the entire season...

hmm, why did all his teammates say eli is one of the best qbs in the league and say when they were losing late in the 4th they werent even nervous they knew eli would win it for them...horrific...

the fact u could use horrific in ANY way to describe ANY part of elis play this season makes you a grade a moron dip ****...

you should prob stop posting now...whats the saying? it is better to be thought a moron than to open your mouth and remove all doubt...ur that guy

That sounds a lot like what Tebow's teammate say about him. You think Tim is "elite" as well?

giantsfan420
02-09-2012, 01:21 AM
Oh, yeah--if the 4th quarter touchdowns were, in fact, "completely meaningless" as you seem to believe, then why do all NFL players, past and present, all pundits, and most fans (aside from you apparently) recognize it as one of the more crucial measures of a quarterback's ability to lead his team out of trouble and into winning situations? Why were Johnny Unitas and Peyton Manning admired for their previous record of 14 4th quarter touchdowns in a season? Were they "losers because they got behind earlier in the game"?

You seriously don't see the value in having a quarterback you feel absolutely confident will be able to pull a victory out because the defense allowed the opponent to get ahead?

You honestly believe that the only tru elite QB is one who always jumps ahead in every game and never needs to lead a come from behind win?

What about Peyton and Brady (and Montana before them), who are constantly revered for their respective abilities to lead come-from-behind victories when called upon? Are they, like Eli, looked upon as losers or "pedestrian" in you eyes? Or are they viewed as some of the greatest QBs ever?

You assume that all the 4th quarter TDs means they were all come-from-behind TDs. Not always the case, although they are an indicator of a quality QB--though obviously not to you.

Enough

You do realize that Eli only threw for 29 touchdowns this year, right?* There are 5 QBs who threw for more, and each of them had a higher quarterback rating and fewer interceptions (except for Stafford who had 16 INTs, same as Eli).

And if Eli threw for a record 15 touchdowns in 4th quarters this year, that means he only threw 14 touchdowns in every other quarter combined for the entire season.* I'm sorry, but I don't think that's a fact worth celebrating.* In fact, I think it's horrific.


your right. god damn eli manning. horrific, 29 tds and 15 came in the 4th quarter to break a record held by Jonny Unitas and Peyton. Right at 5000 yards, 7 game winning drives...with the worst ranked run game and 28th defense...dang you eli! dang you for carrying the team for practically the entire season...

hmm, why did all his teammates say eli is one of the best qbs in the league and say when they were losing late in the 4th they werent even nervous they knew eli would win it for them...horrific...

the fact u could use horrific in ANY way to describe ANY part of elis play this season makes you a grade a moron dip ****...

you should prob stop posting now...whats the saying? it is better to be thought a moron than to open your mouth and remove all doubt...ur that guy

That sounds a lot like what Tebow's teammate say about him.* You think Tim is "elite" as well?


r u trying to see how stupid you can get??

now your honestly comparing eli to tebow??

LMFAO AT U, not with u, AT U
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

yeah our horrific qb is like tebow...ur a moron. why would u erase any and all doubt? oh yeah, bc ur a moron.

JDE123
02-09-2012, 01:39 AM
r u trying to see how stupid you can get??

now your honestly comparing eli to tebow??

LMFAO AT U, not with u, AT U
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

yeah our horrific qb is like tebow...ur a moron. why would u erase any and all doubt? oh yeah, bc ur a moron.

Actually, I was responding to...

hmm, why did all his teammates say eli is one of the best qbs in the
league and say when they were losing late in the 4th they werent even
nervous they knew eli would win it for them..

Your point - Eli MUST be great because his teammates say so.

My point - If that is true, then you must be saying that Tebow is great because his teammates say so.

Fact - We all know that Tebow is not great.

Conclusion - Perhaps it takes more to be great that simply having your teammates say so.

Why do I think that I'm not the moron here?

Either way, goodbye - I'll look forward to ignoring your existence.

GCGiant
02-09-2012, 06:51 AM
What I find amusing is that people who gave Eli zero chance to succeed and who at one time have called Eli a bust are now telling us why he won't be in the HOF. You would think that at some point in time after being so wrong about a topic that you might decide to sit back and read and listen and maybe learn something.

Harooni
02-09-2012, 09:41 AM
What I find amusing is that people who gave Eli zero chance to succeed and who at one time have called Eli a bust are now telling us why he won't be in the HOF. You would think that at some point in time after being so wrong about a topic that you might decide to sit back and read and listen and maybe learn something. you are exaggerating no one here ever called Eli a bust. They said avg to slightly above avg with a knack for the 2 min drill

Mohann
02-09-2012, 09:48 AM
What I find amusing is that people who gave Eli zero chance to succeed and who at one time have called Eli a bust are now telling us why he won't be in the HOF. You would think that at some point in time after being so wrong about a topic that you might decide to sit back and read and listen and maybe learn something. you are exaggerating no one here ever called Eli a bust. They said avg to slightly above avg with a knack for the 2 min drill

It's been a while, but Eli has been called a bust on here by Giants fans many times.

gumby742
02-09-2012, 10:02 AM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet. Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet. I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time! I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot. so what does he have to do to get in? It would be nearly impossible to top what he's done in two SB appearences. He's got to win a third SB? In my opinion a 3rd SB puts him in the top 5 all time and unequivically puts him ahead of Tom Brady. Or does he just need to keep playing for 7 more years compling around 4000 yrds, 30 tds and 15 ints per year? Is that really what the HOF is about. Compiliing stats??</P>


Stats absolutely matter. Otherwise, Jimmy Plunkett would be in the HOF too.</P>


Elidoesn't deserve the Hall - YET. </P>


Remember that Brees and Brady had similar stats at this point in Eli's career. It wasn't until around their 8th year, that's when they really turned it on - and now they are "locks" for the hall. Eli needs to follow the same pattern in order to be a lock.</P>

Kruunch
02-09-2012, 10:07 AM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet.

Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet.

I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time!

I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot.


I agree with everything except that Eli isn't better than Peyton.

Statistically you would be correct.

However in clutch situations, Eli has proven to be a better 4th quarter QB than Peyton (statistically speaking).

lnp12
02-09-2012, 10:53 AM
Oh, yeah--if the 4th quarter touchdowns were, in fact, "completely meaningless" as you seem to believe, then why do all NFL players, past and present, all pundits, and most fans (aside from you apparently) recognize it as one of the more crucial measures of a quarterback's ability to lead his team out of trouble and into winning situations? Why were Johnny Unitas and Peyton Manning admired for their previous record of 14 4th quarter touchdowns in a season? Were they "losers because they got behind earlier in the game"?

You seriously don't see the value in having a quarterback you feel absolutely confident will be able to pull a victory out because the defense allowed the opponent to get ahead?

You honestly believe that the only tru elite QB is one who always jumps ahead in every game and never needs to lead a come from behind win?

What about Peyton and Brady (and Montana before them), who are constantly revered for their respective abilities to lead come-from-behind victories when called upon? Are they, like Eli, looked upon as losers or "pedestrian" in you eyes? Or are they viewed as some of the greatest QBs ever?

You assume that all the 4th quarter TDs means they were all come-from-behind TDs. Not always the case, although they are an indicator of a quality QB--though obviously not to you.

Enough

You do realize that Eli only threw for 29 touchdowns this year, right? There are 5 QBs who threw for more, and each of them had a higher quarterback rating and fewer interceptions (except for Stafford who had 16 INTs, same as Eli).

And if Eli threw for a record 15 touchdowns in 4th quarters this year, that means he only threw 14 touchdowns in every other quarter combined for the entire season. I'm sorry, but I don't think that's a fact worth celebrating. In fact, I think it's <font size="5">horrific</font>.
horrific??? seriously? the guy just won a SUPER BOWL and was named the MVP and you call him horrific?!?!?! are you even a giants fan?!

you do also realize that 4th quarter TDs do not always mean he sucked or was trailing the whole game. For most of the year our defense was mediocre because of injuries, and could not seem to stop teams late in the game (see: Green Bay). Lets also not forget our OL which couldnt seem to stop anyone at times. Eli literally carried the team on his back for some games to bring them to a victory. That IS a fact worth celebrating, whether you like it not.

CantBlameShockeyNow
02-09-2012, 10:53 AM
Eli has three 1st round playoff losses. One of them to a back-up QB. He missed the playoffs 2 straight years as well.

The HOF looks at the entire body of work. Not 2 very successful playoff seasons...the only two so far with any playoff wins.

He is consistently inconsistent.

He also led the league in Ints and turnovers in 2010-2011.

FLNYGFAN
02-09-2012, 10:55 AM
He is getting real close and has proven himself to be a better postseason QB than Peyton.* 2-3 more years like this past year and he is a shoo in.*

I agree with you, he doesnt have Peytons numbers yet though

He doesn't have to have Peyton's numbers. He'll get in on his own merits when the time comes.

JDE123
02-09-2012, 12:12 PM
Oh, yeah--if the 4th quarter touchdowns were, in fact, "completely meaningless" as you seem to believe, then why do all NFL players, past and present, all pundits, and most fans (aside from you apparently) recognize it as one of the more crucial measures of a quarterback's ability to lead his team out of trouble and into winning situations? Why were Johnny Unitas and Peyton Manning admired for their previous record of 14 4th quarter touchdowns in a season? Were they "losers because they got behind earlier in the game"?

You seriously don't see the value in having a quarterback you feel absolutely confident will be able to pull a victory out because the defense allowed the opponent to get ahead?

You honestly believe that the only tru elite QB is one who always jumps ahead in every game and never needs to lead a come from behind win?

What about Peyton and Brady (and Montana before them), who are constantly revered for their respective abilities to lead come-from-behind victories when called upon? Are they, like Eli, looked upon as losers or "pedestrian" in you eyes? Or are they viewed as some of the greatest QBs ever?

You assume that all the 4th quarter TDs means they were all come-from-behind TDs. Not always the case, although they are an indicator of a quality QB--though obviously not to you.

Enough

You do realize that Eli only threw for 29 touchdowns this year, right? There are 5 QBs who threw for more, and each of them had a higher quarterback rating and fewer interceptions (except for Stafford who had 16 INTs, same as Eli).

And if Eli threw for a record 15 touchdowns in 4th quarters this year, that means he only threw 14 touchdowns in every other quarter combined for the entire season. I'm sorry, but I don't think that's a fact worth celebrating. In fact, I think it's <font size="5">horrific</font>.
horrific??? seriously? the guy just won a SUPER BOWL and was named the MVP and you call him horrific?!?!?! are you even a giants fan?!

you do also realize that 4th quarter TDs do not always mean he sucked or was trailing the whole game. For most of the year our defense was mediocre because of injuries, and could not seem to stop teams late in the game (see: Green Bay). Lets also not forget our OL which couldnt seem to stop anyone at times. Eli literally carried the team on his back for some games to bring them to a victory. That IS a fact worth celebrating, whether you like it not.

Can you read?

In the first 3 quarters of every game this season (48 quarters in case you're math impaired as well), Eli threw for a total of 14 TDs. I said THAT is horrific.

I'm glad Eli played so well in the 4th quarter - better than any other QB in the league, in fact. I just think it's idiotic to suggest that his 4th quarter performance makes him better than the (at least) 3 other QBs in the league who played better for the entire game.

It's really not that complicated:

15 TDs in 4th quarters = great
14 TDs in quarters 1-3 = terrible
29 TDs for the season = very good (6th in the league)

It doesn't mean Eli isn't one of the best quarterbacks in the game (I'd say 4th or 5th, depending on whether Peyton can still play). It doesn't take away his rings or SB MVP trophies. But I'm sorry, the guy who threw 46 TDs played better than the guy who threw 29 - it doesn't matter what quarter they came in.

Pa1jintfan
02-09-2012, 12:25 PM
Here's a formula for determining if he is a HOFer
Nyg-EM= 00.00000


Giants minus Eli equals no rings. No Lombardi, nothing, not even a playoff appearance..... " there, right that down". Eli is becoming the most clutch QB to ever take a snap in this league I trust him every time he drops back or changes a play. I believe giving up those draft picks back in 2004 were totally worth it. Where is Shawn merriman. How many rings does that side armed thrower have in San Diego. Eli is the greatest giant QB ever. Book it.

Roosevelt
02-10-2012, 10:41 PM
Not yet at least... I keep seeing you guys bash on Warner and Simms because their either saying that Eli isn't better than Peyton or that Eli doesnt deserve the HOF yet.

Well, Eli ISN'T better than Peyton and he DOESN'T deseve the hall yet.

I love Eli as our QB, but in order to be in the HOF you have to be one of the best of ALL time!

I think he will be eventually, but if he was to retire tomorrow, I do not believe he would be on the Ballot.

so what does he have to do to get in?

It would be nearly impossible to top what he's done in two SB appearences.

He's got to win a third SB?

In my opinion a 3rd SB puts him in the top 5 all time and unequivically puts him ahead of Tom Brady.

Or does he just need to keep playing for 7 more years compling around 4000 yrds, 30 tds and 15 ints per year?

Is that really what the HOF is about. Compiliing stats??

Jim Plunkett has 2 SB's to his name and is not in the HOF.

Most HOF'ers were elite for more than one year.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

But I wouldn't worry, Eli has a very good chance to get there if he keeps playing like he did this year.


What "bubble" are you bursting here, exactly?

Plunket threw for 20 (exactly) TDs once in his 16 year career. He threw more interceptions than TDs in NINE of his seasons as a pro. He NEVER threw for 3000 yards in a season.

Not to mention he was cast off and left for dead by two teams (including the team that drafted him First Overall in 71) after 7 years, before he was resuscitated by the Raiders

Of COURSE he's not in HOF. Neither is Jeff Hostetler, Mark Rypien, Doug Williams, Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, or Jim McMahon.

But to imply Eli is more comparable to THEM (which you do, by bringing Plunkett in) than he is to the more elite future HOF QBs is ridiculously insulting to the man. And it's inaccurate.

None of those guys had even remotely an entire career comparable to what Eli has had in only 8 years so far (and counting).

Not statistically, not in career wins, not in number of big game situations, not in SB rings, and certainly not in SB MVP awards.

Eli has thrown for a MINIMUM of 20 TDs and 3000 yards in each of his 7 seasons as a starter. He's thrown for 4000 yards in each of his last 3 years.

Want to compare to contemporaries? Only Brees, Peyton, and Brady have matched or exceeded that streak of TDs and yards per year, and they've each been in the league for 2-6 more years than Eli).

Except for his 7 game rookie season, Eli never threw more interceptions than TDs in any season--unlike most of the QBs I mention above.

He set a new record for number of TDs in the 4th quarter this year, surpassing Peyton and Unitas.

I believe he tied or set a new record for road wins in the post season (not positive, but I believe so).

I hate to burst YOUR bubble, but Eli doesn't NEED to duplicate this past year statistically for several more years in order to make the HOF.

Although I would really love to see that.

If he just continues at his career annual average for another 4-5 years (25-26 TDs, 37-3800 yards, 17 interceptions per year), and maybe 2-3 more post seasons (not necessarily Super Bowls) he will be elected to the HOF.

To bring Plunkett into this conversation is laughable, to say the least, and bears no relation to the reality of Eli's career..

Interesting that you think Plunkett's career is laughable compared to Eli. Maybe you're not quite the football historian you think you are?

Burier's point was 2 Super Bowls. I simply brought up another QB not in the HOF who won 2 Super Bowls. The connotations boggle the mind I know.

Don't worry about my bubble. I'm the not the one worrying about whether or not Eli makes the HOF while he's still playing. And you know what else? I haven't thought about his career after football either.

YATittle1962
02-10-2012, 11:00 PM
Eli has three 1st round playoff losses. One of them to a back-up QB. He missed the playoffs 2 straight years as well.

The HOF looks at the entire body of work. Not 2 very successful playoff seasons...the only two so far with any playoff wins.

He is consistently inconsistent.

He also led the league in Ints and turnovers in 2010-2011.

have you taken a look at some of the guys who are actually in the Hall?

....then look at some of the guys who are still not?

its an embarrassing popularity contest voted on by the most bitter biased humans that exist and should not hold the prestige that it does

no disrespect to the men who wear the yellow blazers.....but the NFL like the MLB HOF is an absolute joke as is the process that votes the members in

giantsfan420
02-10-2012, 11:06 PM
Oh, yeah--if the 4th quarter touchdowns were, in fact, "completely meaningless" as you seem to believe, then why do all NFL players, past and present, all pundits, and most fans (aside from you apparently) recognize it as one of the more crucial measures of a quarterback's ability to lead his team out of trouble and into winning situations? Why were Johnny Unitas and Peyton Manning admired for their previous record of 14 4th quarter touchdowns in a season? Were they "losers because they got behind earlier in the game"?

You seriously don't see the value in having a quarterback you feel absolutely confident will be able to pull a victory out because the defense allowed the opponent to get ahead?

You honestly believe that the only tru elite QB is one who always jumps ahead in every game and never needs to lead a come from behind win?

What about Peyton and Brady (and Montana before them), who are constantly revered for their respective abilities to lead come-from-behind victories when called upon? Are they, like Eli, looked upon as losers or "pedestrian" in you eyes? Or are they viewed as some of the greatest QBs ever?

You assume that all the 4th quarter TDs means they were all come-from-behind TDs. Not always the case, although they are an indicator of a quality QB--though obviously not to you.

Enough

You do realize that Eli only threw for 29 touchdowns this year, right?* There are 5 QBs who threw for more, and each of them had a higher quarterback rating and fewer interceptions (except for Stafford who had 16 INTs, same as Eli).

And if Eli threw for a record 15 touchdowns in 4th quarters this year, that means he only threw 14 touchdowns in every other quarter combined for the entire season.* I'm sorry, but I don't think that's a fact worth celebrating.* In fact, I think it's <font size="5">horrific</font>.
horrific??? seriously? the guy just won a SUPER BOWL and was named the MVP and you call him horrific?!?!?! are you even a giants fan?!

you do also realize that 4th quarter TDs do not always mean he sucked or was trailing the whole game. For most of the year our defense was mediocre because of injuries, and could not seem to stop teams late in the game (see: Green Bay). Lets also not forget our OL which couldnt seem to stop anyone at times. Eli literally carried the team on his back for some games to bring them to a victory. That IS a fact worth celebrating, whether you like it not.


lol in another thread, may be this one, he said the 15 4th quarter touchdowns isnt a good thing.
he also compared eli to tebow and went "is tebow elite?" besides the horrific comment, he also said that because NY lost to Washington twice, it means NY is not better than anyone. Then he said the AFC East is a harder division than the NFC East, literally he said that the Pats would do better in our division than the Giants would do in their division, even tho we swept the afc east this season and are 7-1 vs that division the past two seasons we faced them...

but to answer your question, he admitted full out he's a fan of the Patriots and that NE has the better team, better coach, and better QB.