The whole 4th qtr comeback crap is perhaps the most useless and retarded stat/category they keep track of. First, as Manning has stated and as I have been saying for over 15 years (I'm only 29) years, I'd rather have a qb that is successful and has few 4th qtr comebacks because it most likely meant he did his job and the team did their job in the first 3 qtrs. Peyton is my current fav nfl player but my all-time fav player/athlete is Steve Young and he had few 4th qtr comebacks because he was often not in the game since the 9ers were winning and he did his job.

Another issue with the whole category is it doesn't separate the wins/drives based on when it took place and also the score, etc. A team could be down by 4, field a punt to start the 4th qtr, return it to the 2 yard line, get a rush td and bam, hold on to win. HOW IS THAT AN INDICATION OF THE QB DOING SOMETHING? Same goes for OT. Usually big kick/punt returns set up short field position and all a qb does is hand off for a FG win. How is that the QB?

If they really want to go squirt on this 4th qtr crap they really should put them in context. Eli's SB 4th qtr game winning drive was amazing. That is something to be impressed by.  

Then you have the choke/clutch thing which as stated, is retarded to talk about concerning a qb/individual player. As stated and as MANY in the media seem to not grasp, football is a TEAM SPORT and one guy does not win or lose it, especially the QB. How could anyone pin the chargers loss on Manning? He did his job but the D didn't do theirs. He easily had the best passing game in the entire playoffs (he did more vs San Diego than brady did vs them and Peyton had worse protection) yet bam, they lost. How was Brady better vs the Chargers because they simply won? Is Manning a choker for that? Then you have this SB...I think Brady didn't do much regardless of the pressure. Do I think he choked? No. I put more of that loss on the OL being horrible and the Giants D simply being fantastic.

I can't stand the win/loss crap being tied to a QB and the player being judged by that. Brady is no doubt a better qb now than he was in 01, 03, 04 yet bam, there they were winning SBs and now they aren't. The only reason people do this choke/clutch, win/loss stuff with QBs is because the sports world has some weird belief that the qb is God on the field and controls everything like it is a video game. Plus, it is easier to break things down to the most simplistic term of looking at a win or loss and saying a guy is good/bad based on it. Also, it gives people something to talk about and act like they are being intelligent when they aren't. Yes, winning is all that matters but you CAN'T judge a single player in a team sport by it. If football were tennis then ok, go for it. The same is true for ANY comparison really. Nobody can truly say X player is better than Y player unless they play under the same conditions, same players, same plays, etc.

Don't even get me started on when people try and compare teams/players of different eras. HTF can anyone logically try and say a team from say this decade is better than a team from the 60s? Did they throw them into some alternate world where they could play each other multiple times? Same with players...is Joe Montana really soooo great because he won 4 Sbs in an era where there was no cap/free agency? So I'm to believe Manning, Young, etc couldn't have won on the same team under the same circumstances? Both those guys are to me better passers than Montana yet there is Montana with more success. Or how about Terry Bradshaw. He was a mediocre passer outside of the playoffs and a couple ok seasons...so he's better than Marino because he has 4 rings and the luxury of playing with a great defense?

The whole debating in sports is really silly. I realize I do it to a degree but I understand it is silly when I do it. The only defense I have for when I do it is I at least try and break it down more than just wins/losses or "end stats" and I look at efficiency and the circumstances. Take Brady/Manning. I say Manning is clearly the better qb because I believe he can do more with less (Manning handles blitzes/pressure better IMO) and if both QBed on the same team he'd outplay Brady because to me he is simply the better passer and makes better decisions. However, I can NEVER have this proven so it is just my opinion. Many it seems, do not grasp it is just their opinion when they state their stuff as fact.

I wish people would quit this crap but they never will...at least the actual players and people in the sports do not put much value in this stuff. It is just the media and fans that really do it.

Oh and I won't even touch the qb head to head crap. I guess I watch a different game as I have never seen Brady going up against Manning or any other Qbs. Again, it is like people think it is a video game. Bugs me

because he's the leader of the offense and usually the team. He's the guy everyone focuses on, however, a QB is only as uccessful as his WRs getting open and catching the ball and O line blocking for him.

If those parts of the offense are not working a QB will not be successful no matter how good he is. So a QB is really only as good as his WRs and O line and when those things are missing, he looks like a choker, when they play well he looks clutch, its as simple as that.

if you can make it to the NFL, you probably don't have problems with "the big game". You've already played in plenty in your life just to get there, and you play in front of 100's of thousands of screaming fans week in and week out.