Sports thread: Everything sport related here.
- Thread starter Gollevainen
- Start date
vesicles
Colonel
SEAHAWKS babe! Peyton has a superbowl ring already, he doesn't need another one.
A Superbowl ring is not something to be shared among NFL teams. If you haven't got one, then you should get one next time... It's not like that. It is given to whom most deserve. Peyton Manning is way too good to have only one Superbowl ring. Seahawks, on the other hand, is simply a black horse. They don't deserve to have it. If they do, it's simply luck.
Hehehe...well, I do not think we can take the good looking wife into consideration regarding their quarterback performance.
The Superbowl Rings are something we cannot attribute alone to the QB either...far too many other factors.
In the end, each quarterback has a carreer QB efficency rating and that's what I look at.
Peyton Manning is number two all time with an efficenciy rating of 97.2.
Tom Brady is number six six all time with a carreer rating of 95.7.
...and if you throw out people who have less than ten years in the league, Manning is number one...Brady is number five.
Now, you do have to consider other things too. How good are they in clutch performances?
For example, Tony Romo has a better rating than Tom Brady, but I would not rank him as a better quarterback. When the chips are down, particularly down the stretch when playoffs are at stake, Brady has shown he can get the job done and get his team to, and win the playoff games. Romo has not. So I would say Brady is a better QB than Romo even though Romos rating is better than Brady's.
But Manning has a good history of getting to and winning playoffs too...though not as good as Brady's, but then Manning's efficency rating is a good bit higher than Brady's.
Anyhow, I believe Brady is one of the best quaterbacks too. He is probably also right up there near the top in terms of all time quaterbacks. His eighteen playoff wins is a record itself.
Equation
Lieutenant General
If Peyton was that good he should have more than one superbowl rings. His last Superbowl performance ended with an interception by the New Orleans Saints to secure their victory. Now Seahawks defense are scary. I saw how fast and hard hitting they did on the 49ers and they cover well too.
broadsword
Brigadier
LI NA 3rd time lucky winner of 2014 Australian Tennis Open.
Last edited by a moderator:
Why do you say she was lucky? Doesn't skill and athletic ability have something to do with her victories?
Li Na (C) of China addresses the awarding ceremony for women's singles final match against Dominika Cibulkova of Slovakia at 2014 Australian Open tennis tournament in Melbourne, Australia, Jan. 25, 2014. Li Na won 2-0 to claim the title of the event. (Xinhua/Li Jundong)
Last edited:
SteelBird
Colonel
When it comes to the final, there is no way you can win by luck, except the penalty shootout of association football. I'm not a fan of tennis, or I find it boring watching tennis match; however, I do watch it once a while especially there are live show on the recent event. Given athletes who are qualified to the final are the best among the best, the possibility of winning by luck is almost zero.
Well said, however it does help ones enjoyment when there's a expert commentator like American great Jim Courier explaining the game as it unfolds. He enlightens viewers as to why certain strokes are played and the tactical advantages of each players chosen style of play.
I would also like to say that winning in tennis unlike team sport is entirely up to the individual, and one can't afford to have an off day. In team sport the team can "carry "you through the game if you are having one of those days and you can still end up with a Superbowl or World Cup winning Trophy.