by W.H.

Now that the 12-4 Colts have been eliminated, the national media can get back to their yearly discussion on the lack of clutch ability inside Peyton Manning.  This needless debate is expected from talking heads who have hours of programming to fill between weekends of actual games.  But when a respectable sports journalist like Jason Whitlock rolls out the “Manning can't play in January card” I start looking for facts.  Is Peyton really that bad in the post-season?  What statistics are there out there to prove that?

Since Manning has just completed his 15^th post-season game I think it would be fair to compare his numbers against some of the other all-time great quarterbacks from the Super Bowl era.  We're talking about the best of the best here: quarterbacks with 15-plus post-season starts, who played their entire career during the seasons in which the NFL decided it's champion with the Super Bowl.  But what defines clutch?  Or for that matter a choker?  Of course John Elway's Drive was clutch; so was Montana to Clark, Captain Willard taking out Colonel Kurtz before the air raid, and Chief Brody shooting the gas tank to explode the shark.  We can't measure great moments like those though.  We must take a look at the whole body of work a quarterback established in the playoffs.

Can a guy with that trophy still be called a choker?

Obviously winning percentage is key to this argument since Indy's losses seem to spark this argument every season, even despite the fact that Peyton has a ring now.  But winning percentage isn't everything, Terry Bradshaw has the second highest playoff winning percentage of the QB's we'll be discussing, but his actual numbers in those games are so atrocious you'd wonder if anyone other than the Steel Curtain era Steelers could have overcame such incompetence.  Peyton should be measured outside of his teams' performance in some aspects.

Before delving into Manning playoff  performance it would be important to take a look at his regular season record in terms of how often he leads his team to the post-season.  After all, it is impossible to become a “clutch performer” if you have no opportunities to be clutch.  Since injuries are a fact of life in the NFL most QB's don't make it through every season and start every game, therefore we can't expect to get an accurate total just looking at the number of seasons each QB was in the league.  However, by counting the seasons in which each quarterback started at least half of his teams games we could get a bearing on how often he leads his team to the playoffs.  After all it does take a significant amount of clutch ability to win regular season games.

PERCENT QB LEADS TEAM TO PLAYOFFS

(Tiebreakers – number of seasons, then if still tied -  Super Bowl titles)

So your first question is, "Why is Jim Kelly considered one of the all-time greats?"  And I imagine the second question is, "What the hell are Brunell and Johnson doing on this list?" Brunell and Johnson are merely a testament to how hard it is to find guys that have seven playoff starts.  As for Jim Kelly?  Well, Warren Moon didn't have enough playoff starts and lowering the playoff start minimum to fit him would also mean including Craig Morton, Ken Stabler and Bob Griese who are much better used as yardsticks to measure the greatness of their contemporaries, Bradshaw and Staubach, but are not in the same class with the best of all time.  Besides, Jim Kelly is no slouch compared to his fellow hall of famers.  He may be the Donovan McNabb or Fran Tarkenton of his era (except that both of them are better quarterbacks) but he started as many Super Bowls as Montana, Bradshaw, Staubach and Brady.  Plus there is a valid argument that he came within a Thurman Thomas helmet or a stiff breeze of a championship.

"Oh there it is! Sorry Jim."

Regardless of who's deserving to be compared here, Peyton is one of the best all-time in terms of getting his team to the post-season and destroys most of his contemporaries.  But the important thing here though is not proving how Peyton wins in the regular season, it's discovering if he really is a flop in the playoffs.  Here's his winning percentage in the post-season compared to the greats and his contemporaries.

PLAYOFF WINNING PERCENTAGE

(Tiebreakers –  Super Bowl titles, then if tied - Super Bowl starts)

Neither comparison is flattering to Manning.  In fact they may justify the criticism he receives from the media.  But couldn't his teams troubles be linked to another factor besides his performance?  Obviously if Indianapolis flounders in the playoffs and Peyton Manning is a Colt, then Peyton Manning must flounder in the playoffs.  A logical conclusion but if Caddyshack 2 is a terrible movie and Chevy Chase is in it, does that mean Chevy Chase is terrible in Caddyshack 2?  Well no but the script sucks, Mason is no Dangerfield, expectations were high because of its namesake, and there just wasn't much left to milk out of that idea.  So really there are a lot of elements to consider before making a broad judgment based on team winning percentage. 

Sometimes a quarterback can have a great performance ruined by a fluke moment or the rest of his team.  Just ask John Elway about his last college game.  He engineered a final scoring drive that left barely any time on the clock, but after a few freak laterals and a trampled tuba player he found himself on the losing end.  If Peyton is by definition “not clutch” then his numbers, and not just his teams win-loss record, would have to drop significantly during the post-season.  We can't just look at raw numbers though.  Touchdowns and yards are definitive stats but if a team has a strong running game their quarterback, even if he's a Hall of Famer, may be underused compared to a pass-first team.  So let's take a look at a few key categories that are important to a team's success in the playoffs that require the quarterback to perform to expected levels.  

There are some analysts that argue about the over-importance placed on completion percentage.  There may be a valid point to that argument in the regards that some great quarterbacks have had lousy career completion percentages (John Elway 56%, Roger Staubach 54%).  Also there's been a dramatic variation in the rules covering pass defense in the last thirty years which makes older quarterbacks pale in comparison to the new breed.


When this was legal, percentages were obviously lower
 

But regardless of changes in the style of play a successful team does key things like converting 3^rd downs and spreading the field in order to keep the defense from stacking the line.  If a team makes it to the playoffs they are executing their offensive game plan correctly, however if there is a substantial differential between a quarterback's completion percentage between the season and playoffs his team would most likely suffer due to longer third down attempts and less conversions of those attempts.

COMPLETION PERCENTAGE DIFFERENTIAL FROM SEASON TO PLAYOFFS

(Tiebreakers – actual playoff completion percentage)

Peyton doesn't fare considerably well against the greats or his contemporaries.  However, these numbers may not do justice to his quality of play.  After all, Terry Bradshaw leads the greats based more on his abysmal regular season stats than his quality of post-season play.  Even for that era 51% is atrocious.  Manning may play worse in the playoffs but only because he set the bar so high in the regular season.  Looking at pure completion percentage, Manning would be fourth among both sets of competition.  Although no one wants to struggle with elimination eminent, most teams would probably prefer 61% over 57% or less.

Yeah, that face probably

caused a few incompletions

Even the greats see their completion percentage drop during the playoffs due to the caliber of the opposition being consistently superior to their regular season competition.  Late December and January weather is a factor as well, but it's safe to say that the best quarterbacks of the Super Bowl Era raise their game when elimination is on the line.  The top four QB's on this list, with at least 15 games of playoff experience, are also the top four in playoff winning percentage and have accumulated 14 rings among them.  The bottom 7 average one ring apiece. 

There are other important factors in QB performance besides completion percentage.  After all, completing passes advances the ball but that is meaningless unless you consistently keep the ball out of the opposition's hands and put points on the board.  Touchdowns may not tell the whole story as a standalone statistic.  But comparing TD's against the number of interceptions a QB throws can help evaluate how effective he is at keeping his team ahead in games.  Let's look at how Peyton Manning fares against his competition in the variation between regular season and playoff TD/INT Ratio.

TD per INT RATIO DIFFERENTIAL FROM SEASON TO PLAYOFFS

(Tiebreakers – actual playoff TD/INT ratio)

More and more it seems like Peyton really is a post-season choker.  Both the greats and contemporaries hold a significant advantage to Manning in this category, except for the dreadful McNair and Johnson.  However, the same two fallacies apply to this measurement as did the completion percentage differential.  First of all Peyton would be towards the middle of the pack in both categories had we just measured the playoff TD/INT Ratio.  Secondly, in the "Best QB's of Super Bowl Era" grouping the scores are inflated by poor regular season performances (see Bradshaw and Aikman).

And yet for the third consecutive grouping we see Super Bowl ring totals rise toward the top in the "Best QB's" category.  Clearly we're looking in the right direction in terms of what generates post-season success.  But there needs to be a way to fairly evaluate the regular season to post-season differentials while still valuing good performances.  So we'll be back with Part II of this discussion in a few days.  In the mean time four of Manning's contemporaries will participate in the playoffs so we'll update their stats when we return to the discussion.