Can we stop with this "Choking" nonsense?

[Deus Irae]

Yeah except I didn't screw anything up, you did, you posted a definition that you apparently didn't read.

And clicking on a thread that you find dumb to say it "sucks" instead of trying to make a valid argument is a bit........dumb.

I read the definition. You were wrong. Just admit it and move on. This was your claim:

To "choke" means that when you have the game in hand you somehow meltdown and throw it all away.

That's clearly, by definition, not what choke means. Quit while you're a mile behind. The example given in the definition is precisely what happened in today's game. Or are you now going to tell me that problem is that you misunderstood what "in hand" means?

"In hand":

67. in hand,
a. under control: He kept the situation well in hand.

Either way, whether your mistake is a misunderstanding of "choke" or a misunderstanding of "in hand", Manning choked and you were wrong.

 

[Deus Irae]

I saw a few drops by Colts players today in important situations. I'm sure some of them may have run wrong routes also. The fact that you entertain the idea that Troy ran the wrong route but put it all on Manning, shows the difference is in the homerism.

This is your lamest argument yet. I acknowledged the possibility that Brady choked, but pointed out that there is a story out there claiming that Brown ran the wrong route. Did Manning throw the ball to a receiver running the wrong route on those three pass plays during that "and goal" situation and get picked off as a result?

One screw up doesn't make one a choker. Brady has choked in the past (see Dolphins, Miami) and will choke again in the future. However, he does it less than everyone else, and that's what makes him so good. Manning, on the other hand, makes it a habit, and that's why he's earned the label of choker. Every athlete chokes and fails sometimes (Ok, except maybe Marciano), it's how often you can be counted on that matters. Manning, like Marino before him, is a gas-pipe kind of guy.

 

[indycolts685]

From Webster's online:




http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/choke


Manning choked. That's just the way it is. The one who doesn't seem to understand what "choke" means is you.

If throwing for over 400 yards and 3 td's is considered choking then I hope Manning chokes in every game..

 

[neuronet]

Reminds me of philosophy classes all this quibbling about definitions of words. He didn't perform well. We can all agree on that.

 

[Deus Irae]

If throwing for over 400 yards and 3 td's is considered choking then I hope Manning chokes in every game..

As long as he tosses 2 picks and fails to score the winning points when he's got the opportunity on more than one occasion with the result that his team loses, I'd love him to choke every game too.


You see, Colts fans and Patriots fans CAN agree on some things.



P.S. Without the officials bailing Manning's ass out on numerous occasions, his numbers would have been far less impressive to you. Great call on that pass interference.....

 

[PatsFWB]

Manning was a total choke-artist in 2005, but he obviously didn't choke last year and I don't think he choked today.

Again, would you say Brady choked in last year's AFCCG?

When someone consistantly performs well most of the time (regular seasons) and then consistantly under performs under presure (post seasons) that is a choke artist IMHO. Sounds like Peyton to me. And don't use last years Super Bowl to excuse him. Even a blind squirel will find an acorn once in a lifetime. When Peyton wins another maybe I will stop calling him a Choke Artist.

 

[solman]

It's getting really silly how the homers on this site seem to have a huge misunderstanding of what it means to "choke" in a sports context. To "choke" means that when you have the game in hand you somehow meltdown and throw it all away. The 2004 Yankees "choked," Manning today did not "choke" nor did Brady "choke" in last year's AFCCG. Of course when your desperately trying to complete a miraculous drive down the field with under 2 minutes left, 95% time it's going to end in an interception. You aren't expected to pull off such a drive, which is what makes them special when they do happen, so they are not choke-jobs when they don't

The bottom line is that Peyton Manning has, throughout his career, performed worse in the playoffs and at critical times than he does during the regular season.

He certainly wasn't terrible today. Of all his playoff loses, this may be the one which is LEAST his fault (ironically it occurs when he has a great defense, while many of the losses that were entirely his fault came when he played with poor defenses).

But Peyton had the better team today. He made the critical errors. And couldn't get it done in the clutch.

Days like today are how we judge QBs.

Long before Tom Brady turned in the greatest statistical season of any QB ever, he was already revered for his ability to calmly lead his team to victory in critical situations at the end of big games.

Whatever it is that makes Tom's clutch performance possible, Peyton will never have it.

Who cares if people call Peyton a chocker or say he isn't clutch. Semantics don't matter.

What matters is that he is 7-7 with 21 TDs and 17 Interceptions and an 84.6 QB rating in the post season.

 

[indycolts685]

As long as he tosses 2 picks and fails to score the winning points when he's got the opportunity on more than one occasion with the result that his team loses, I'd love him to choke every game too.


You see, Colts fans and Patriots fans CAN agree on some things.

Im not going to get into a flame war with you guys, just going to have a civil conversation, you have the right to your opinion, but I felt that Manning was actually our only bright spot today, the running game sucked defense sucked. one of those picks the idiot running back should have caught and he would have scored a TD, thats hardly Mannings fault. The Colts choked as a team today but Manning is hardly at fault..

 

[festy1986]

i suppose it's mannings fault that the ball bounced off of clarks hands to end the game? or the two INT that bounced off his WR hands first, we wouldn't blame Brady for that misfortane so why Manning?

The Colts didn't choke, but they certainly didn't play a good game.

As for the Pats in 06? I think losing a game in which your up by 18 at one point, with the coaching you have, the players and Brady? I think we have to classify that as a choke, Brady didn't, but the Pats did.

Lets just worry about the Chargers, Rivers has the weapons to hit guys if there as wide open as they were Saturday night, but I don't think the Pats will have too much trouble putting up atleast 28, so that is a number to look for.

Gotta get those turn overs, its what won the first game, and without them, this game will be a lot closer then some might think.

 

[indycolts685]

i suppose it's mannings fault that the ball bounced off of clarks hands to end the game? or the two INT that bounced off his WR hands first, we wouldn't blame Brady for that misfortane so why Manning?

The Colts didn't choke, but they certainly didn't play a good game.

As for the Pats in 06? I think losing a game in which your up by 18 at one point, with the coaching you have, the players and Brady? I think we have to classify that as a choke, Brady didn't, but the Pats did.

Lets just worry about the Chargers, Rivers has the weapons to hit guys if there as wide open as they were Saturday night, but I don't think the Pats will have too much trouble putting up atleast 28, so that is a number to look for.

Gotta get those turn overs, its what won the first game, and without them, this game will be a lot closer then some might think.

I would have rather lost to the Best (Pats) then the Chargers, I wouldn't feel as bad if we lost to the Pats because I don't think anybody would have expected us to have a chance.

 

[Deus Irae]

i suppose it's mannings fault that the ball bounced off of clarks hands to end the game? or the two INT that bounced off his WR hands first, we wouldn't blame Brady for that misfortane so why Manning?

Ok, so let's just use your logic on this one..... doesn't that mean that Manning SHOULD get 'credit' for the interceptions that should definitely have happened but opponents dropped easy picks (Merriman's stone hands moment springs immediately to mind)?

 

[indycolts685]

Ok, so let's just use your logic on this one..... doesn't that mean that Manning SHOULD get 'credit' for the interceptions that should definitely have happened but opponents dropped easy picks (Merriman's stone hands moment springs immediately to mind)?

You have to admit that would have been one heck of an INT if he had caught that. Either way it doesn't matter we lost again, Im not going to debate this because im sick to my stomach thinking about it again. Good luck Pats I actually hope you finish the deal and go 19-0..

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

Manning choked. That's just the way it is. The one who doesn't seem to understand what "choke" means is you.

What are you talking about Manning had a great game. Beat Dallas in Dallas, after losing to them twice in the regular season. Zero int. The Man was clutch.

Oh by the way his big bro sucks.

 

[festy1986]

Ok, so let's just use your logic on this one..... doesn't that mean that Manning SHOULD get 'credit' for the interceptions that should definitely have happened but opponents dropped easy picks (Merriman's stone hands moment springs immediately to mind)?

You could say he should of had it sure, and he made a bad pass.

Still, everyone makes bad passes, but the fact is, can anyone honestly say that Mannings play is the reason they lost the game?

 

[Deus Irae]

You could say he should of had it sure, and he made a bad pass.

Still, everyone makes bad passes, but the fact is, can anyone honestly say that Mannings play is the reason they lost the game?

1.) The post I was responding to was one where the OP didn't understand a word he was berating other for allegedly not understanding.

2.) One can choke and still not be the 'only' reason a team loses a game. As someone in this thread pointed out, the ball bounced off of Clark's hands to end the game. It wasn't a great throw, and was an over the shoulder situation on an angle, but Clark's a tight end who probably catches that 50% of the time and maybe more. Had he caught it, Manning would have had another opportunity. Nonetheless, had Manning not choked during that "and goal" situation, the Colts would likely have won.

 

[Eugene Chung]

If throwing for over 400 yards and 3 td's is considered choking then I hope Manning chokes in every game..

http://coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_2066_Monday_Morning_Hangover%3A_final_four.html

"Colts fans will point to Manning's 402 yards against the Chargers Sunday. But as you’ll see below – and as the Cold, Hard Football Facts have long declared – passing yards are an empty, meaningless number. The four divisional-round winners this year all passed for fewer yards than the loser.

"The NFL is all about passing efficiency, and Manning and the Indy offense were anything but efficient on Sunday with the game on the line. He completed just 2 of his final 10 passes – all 10 in San Diego territory – for 21 yards as Indy’s final two drives and final two chances at victory sputtered to an inglorious, ignominious and inefficient end."

 

[PatriotsReign]

4: to lose one's composure and fail to perform effectively in a critical situation

Except that didn't happen today. The situation wasn't a "critical" one it was one of desperation, and he never lost his composure or failed to perform effectively, he just couldn't pull off a miracle drive.

By your logic, a fighter on the ropes, about to get knocked out is a choker if he doesn't somehow manage to miraculously knock the other guy out.

Just out of curiosity, is it possible for Manning to lose a game and not "choke?" If so, I'd really like to hear this scenario because you make it sound like any loss is a choke job.

Wildo, with the Colts weapons, home field advantage, referee advantage, skill player (big) advantage, Manning was EXPECTED to lead his team to victory. ESPECIALLY after Rivers & LT were injured. The Pats put up 38 on this Chargers team and all the Colts could muster was 24?

The QB is the single most important position in sports. The fact that Manning failed to lead a HUGELY talented team to victory has me leaning heavily toward choke or failure.

You can't compare his performance to Brady's last year as the Patriots were the LESS talented team pulling for the upset. When you make a list of all the factors the Colts and Manning had on their side....OOPS is all that comes to mind.

 

[NEPat]

I agree that Manning didn't choke. Outside of some Pats fan, who naturally like to get on Manning for everything, no one thinks he did.

If we're putting the "choking" label on anyone, it should go to the defense.

 

[fair catch fryar]

Is every team able to gain 60+ yards on every drive? No. There were no visible signs of him losing his composure. Up to the end, he was still hitting his receivers. Don't act like the good teams can't go 3-and-out.

I could make a case for Vinatieri "choking" with his missed FG earlier this year against the Bolts - but I really don't see how Manning choked here.

We get it - Tom Brady is a god. I think he's pretty good too. One of the greatest, even. No need to try and continue pounding that fact into everyone's throats when everyone knows it already.

Guess what? This is a Patriot's message board and Tom Brady is the second coming as far as Pats fans are concerned. Quit telling people what to do on their own team's site.

 

[Wildo7]

I read the definition. You were wrong. Just admit it and move on. This was your claim:



That's clearly, by definition, not what choke means. Quit while you're a mile behind. The example given in the definition is precisely what happened in today's game. Or are you now going to tell me that problem is that you misunderstood what "in hand" means?

"In hand":




Either way, whether your mistake is a misunderstanding of "choke" or a misunderstanding of "in hand", Manning choked and you were wrong.

This is what's so sad about your whole argument, you ignore the fact that at know point did Manning "lose composure" which is a crucial part of the definition you posted (and again, I guess didn't read). Now you are trying to make it as if I was giving a dictionary definition that was wrong. My definition is in line with the one you posted, which is the most hilarious part of your whole "I win, I win" argument tactics, and the rest of the reasonable sports world in no way thinks that what Manning did yesterday was choke.

Here's another definition, from a dictionary:

"4. To fail to perform effectively because of nervous agitation or tension, especially in an athletic contest: choked by missing an easy putt on the final hole."

So because the term "choke" is a sports term, there is obviously no universal definition of it like the one you mentioned. Does this describe what happened yesterday, ugggh no, not even close so get off the hate-Manning-for-the-sake-of-it crap. You tried to use semantics to discredit my idea of choke, which is in-line with what most of the world thinks it is. You failed. This is the very reason why no one outside of this board is saying "Manning choked" when in past playoff performances they were. Move on.