Dude, he got deep dicked. Yeah he made a couple of catches after some pushoffs, but for the most part was a rag doll all night.

He could have pulled a Rahim Moore.

Literally every single time Manning targeted whoever Flowers was covering, something positive for Denver occurred.

When are you and Knowmo getting married?

He had what 80 yards on throws like 2 yards from the LOS ROFL Dink and duck gawds.

Since most people don't grade their players on whether they allowed a reception or not, it'd probably be best to evaluate Flowers as to whether or not he did his job, prevented significant YAC, and made plays in the run game.


Additionally, your choice of statistics used (catches in relation to times thrown at) doesn't really provide context for the entire game. If Flowers had been exceptional sans those 9 snaps, it would be irrelevant in your view, would it not? Despite the fact that his coverage on the plays not targeted may have led to poor decisions from Peyton Manning, more time elapsed in the pocket, etc.

http://i.imgur.com/tIKiwBU.gif

This is what you do to someone about to set an illegal pick

Yeah, Manning made a lot of poor decisions in that game. I guess we can assume it was due to Flowers' coverage.

Nobody is assuming anything.

It's entirely ridiculous to attempt to grade a defensive back' performance based on catches allowed vs. times thrown at.

There is literally no level of football that does that. None. It's a fun stat to throw out to try and provide validation to an argument. As far as providing relevant information to accurately determine how a player performed, it is completely flawed and provides no acknowledgement of a variety of variables.

What a pussy Pampered Peyton is ROFL

SportsCenter‏@SportsCenter39m
Crazy Stat of the Day: Tom Brady is 23-5 in games played in freezing temperatures since 2003. Peyton Manning is 1-6.

So, are you of the opinion that Flowers "manhandled" Welker?

No.

Unless you're referring to physically, after/away from certain plays. Then sure, I suppose I could agree with that. I think "manhandling" is a term that's quite subjective and open to quite a large variation of definitions from individuals.

I don't think either player was "manhandled" in that game if we're referring to their performances viewed as a whole. If you want to see some manhandling, JJ Watt's game at home against Indy is probably what I'd personally refer to as such.

Fair enough, I guess there's not enough objective information to get a complete picture of how Flowers performed in that game. Still, Manning had 24 completions, 8 of which were to Flowers' guy. Manning had 16 incompletions, only 1 of which was to Flowers, and he gave up the yards anyway through a penalty. I think anyone would have an uphill battle trying to paint that as a positive.

On another note, is it a Chiefs fan thing to celebrate parts of the game which truly don't matter? Case in point, Holliday had a return of 40 or 50 yards a few weeks ago, and was hit hard by the punter at the end. Multiple Chiefs fans on here mocked him for celebrating, because he got hit hard. The fact is, his long return had an effect on the game, the hard hit didn't.

Similarly, Welker having success every time he was thrown to had an effect on the game. Flowers hitting him after the whistle a few times didn't. Guess which one Chiefs fans find more important?

Flowers held Welker to under 10 yards a catch and kept him out of the end zone. Not many cornerbacks can claim that about Welker this year.

Did he "manhandle" him? No. Did Flowers play a solid game against him? Absolutely.

MagicHef cries a lot.