NFL playoff thread

Is there any way we can make this thread about the Steelers, a team that was shit this year and last year? Thanks.

 

If you insist, we can do more.

Or you and the other whiners can get over it. Flacco is relevant to the discussion and a huge chunk of his history in big games came against the Steelers.

 

People might listen to you if you had the capacity to analyze anything without relating it to the Steelers.

 

Bingo.

 

Don't give him false hope. No one ever will listen to him.

 

You're just mad because I caught you being clueless again on the Hot Stove thread.

 

That little bit of exaggeration might be valid if y'all didn't whine just as much about posts regarding the Steelers when they are still playing, too.

 

Catching up late ...

That narrative was created by people like Mike Shanahan, years after the fact.

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/01/11/sports/pro-football-now-steelers-are-obstacle-to-elway-s-hopes.html

It wasn't being said at the time.

And yes, the Broncos were heavy underdogs in 1986 and '89. At the time, the Broncos were widely seen as a one-man team. But the gifted Elway was also seen as a Superman QB and the dominant narrative seemed to be "If anyone can pull this off, maybe Elway can." See, for instance:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=Ws9RAAAAIBAJ&sjid=9m0DAAAAIBAJ&pg=7037,5893544&dq=elway+giants&hl=en

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1298&dat=19870122&id=G-JNAAAAIBAJ&sjid=UIsDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6534,3255353

But in 1987, at least where I was in Maryland at the time, nobody thought the Redskins had much of a chance in that game. And Google seems to back that up, too:

http://articles.latimes.com/1988-01-31/sports/sp-39700_1_washington-redskins

And yes, Azrael is correct about Elway's reputation before 1998. Even Elway himself recognized it:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=WtBRAAAAIBAJ&sjid=KW8DAAAAIBAJ&pg=3490,1448150&dq=elway+best+never+win+super+bowl&hl=en

"I know, I know, '... but he never won a Super Bowl.' I'm sure they'll be saying it through eternity."

More:

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19980119&slug=2729605

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=VP&p_theme=vp&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0EAFF5BD75735C9A&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date&s_trackval=GooglePM

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=DP&p_theme=dp&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0EB1D22966A01F1C&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date&s_trackval=GooglePM

Bottom line: Elway's reputation did a 180 after winning the Super Bowl in 1998.

 

Interesting. It was out there. But it was hardly the only or even dominant storyline. His reputation did maybe a 45 or a 90, not a 180.

Again, though -- we're talking about a guy who took his team on his back to three Super Bowls (something that even your clips acknowledge, he was all alone out there). Also, when you say -- But the gifted Elway was also seen as a Superman QB and the dominant narrative seemed to be "If anyone can pull this off, maybe Elway can." -- the fact that he didn't do it doesn't mean he choked, it just means it couldn't be done. Phil Simms completed 88 percent of his passes that day!

If it was out there at that time, it was quite silly, because Elway was well above .500 in the playoffs back then and he was winning close games with big moments.

We are talking about Peyton Manning being unable to win even one game most years against clearly inferior teams.

 

Elway's team was 7-8 in the playoffs, with 4 one-and-dones, entering the postseason of his first Super Bowl-winning run.

 

7-7, not 7-8, and three one-and-dones, not four. Small point, granted. I think the discrepancy was in '83, it looks like the Broncos started Steve DeBerg in that game.

So with Elway they were 7-5 through '91, with a grand total of one home loss and one one-and-done (his second year and first playoff game). They made four AFC championship games and three Super Bowls in that eight-year span. If that is something that you want to put up against the Colts' resume, you lose that one. In '93 they lost in LA because they Raiders were a flat-out better team. The only really bad or head-scratching loss of his career was the '96 one against Jacksonville. It happens. In '87, the 49ers lost to the Vikings, and there is no way that should have happened.

But I tell you what, we'll come back here in two years and see if Manning has another ring or two. If Elway is your tentpole, that ought to settle it.

 

Go back and read some of the old stories. In the early to mid-'90s, there are dozens and dozens of articles describing Elway as a Super Bowl "underachiever", as the "Least Valuable Player" in the Super Bowl against the 49ers, as a guy who could "never be described as the greatest of all-time" unless he actually played well in a Super Bowl.

Yes, those stories are ignoring his fantastic performances in earlier rounds. And I agree with you that he never "choked" in those Super Bowls, even though some ill-advised writers did try to advance that theory, especially after the 49ers blowout in 1989 (which is ludicrous; Elway didn't play well but he sure as hell didn't give up 55 points.) You're also right that except for the Jacksonville game (and to a lesser extent, the Redskins Super Bowl), he wasn't losing against clearly inferior teams, like Manning has.

But until Terry Bradshaw started calling on national TV in 1998 for Elway to get "the Super Bowl championship he deserved", there wasn't a whole lot of sentiment for Elway as the greatest of all time or as someone who came up big in the playoffs, that's for sure.