After All: He's Only 40!

the 'stache · #1 01-25-2018, 02:19 AM

See, now the bolded part is pure hyperbole. Because in 2008, they did lose Brady. The year after he was First Team NFL All Pro, and NFL MVP for the first time, he blew out his ACL in week one. Attempted 11 passes before getting hurt.

The Patriots without "Tom Terrific" went 11-5. They suffered soooo mightily as Matt Cassel came in and threw for 3,700 yards and 21 TD passes. Somehow, without Captain America, Wes Welker and Randy Moss both managed to go for over 1,000 yards. Welker went to the Pro Bowl.

And this?

"High performance. Brady brings that to level not seen before."

What level is that? 13th best, all-time, in the post season?

Again, pure hyperbole. It sounds good. But factually, inaccurate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KCRfan1

Look no further than Green Bay this season for how important the quarterback is. The loss of AR flipped their season. Even with other injuries, the quarterback was key, and usually is with teams.

Brady drives the Pats. They can have injury and turnover at other positions, but not at QB.

It's not the X's and O's, it's the Jimmy's and the Joe's. Play calling is important, more importantly is the players and execution. High performance. Brady brings that to level not seen before. His overall body of work is superior to others and is the GOAT.

the 'stache · #2 01-25-2018, 02:42 AM

Oh, and before any of you guys want to dismiss what I'm saying as "being a Brady/Patriots hater"...please, just stop before you begin. If I didn't have Aaron Rodgers at quarterback, would I have Brady taking snaps from Corey Linsley? Hell, yes. In a New York minute. He might be smug, at times, but so is Rodgers. Show me a Hall of Fame athlete in any sport that doesn't come across as confident at one time or another? I think the Patriots have done some questionable things, yes. But so have other NFL teams. The difference is that the Patriots had the spotlight shined on them because of their success.

I don't hate Brady, or the Pats. Now, if he played for the Vikings, that would be a different story.

But the basis of my analysis is made without any personal bias. I'm a Packer fan, absolutely. I think Rodgers is the best to ever play the game. He doesn't have the rings because his team and coaching staff haven't been as good as those in Boston. But as a pure passer, nobody has ever played the game at a higher level. I say that with a caveat because the rules of the game have changed. Marino might have thrown 50 TDs every year had he played today.

But when the narrative of Super Bowl rings is removed, how can you objectively state that Brady is the best ever? The numbers don't support that assessment. Rodgers has had one comeback after another. Only, he doesn't get the press because the Packers defense blows it. He loses. Brady wins. He has the Packers ahead of Seattle with a few minutes left, and then the D and special teams turn into the keystone cops. With a minute remaining, he drives them the length of the field, and Crosby kicks a field goal to tie it. Then the Packer D falls flat on their face again. Rodgers, playing on one leg, misses a chance to go to his second Super Bowl. And therein is the difference. The Patriots wouldn't have done this:

With 3:52 left in the game, the Packers leading 19-7...
The Packer D allowed Seattle to go 69 yards for a touchdown in 1:16. 19-14 Pack.
The Packer special teams then allowed Seattle to recover an onside kick.
The Packer D allowed Seattle to go 50 yards for a touchdown in :40. 20-19 Seattle.
The Packer D allowed Seattle a two-point conversion. 22-19 Seattle.

Aaron Rodgers takes the Packers 48 yards in 1 minute, and Crosby kicks the tying field goal. 22-22.

On 3rd and 7, the Packer D gives up a 35 yard pass play to Doug Baldwin.
Next play, the Packer D gives up a 35 yard pass play to Jermaine Kearse. Touchdown. Seattle wins 28-22.

Think that would have ever happened in New England?

TUM301 · #3 01-25-2018, 05:05 AM

I`ll take Brady.

Peter_Spaeth · #4 01-25-2018, 06:33 AM

Bill, I don't know the answer to this, but is it possible the Patriots' defensive statistics are in part attributable to the success of the offense under Brady, either in that the opponents' time of possession is reduced, and/or that the opponents are behind more than usual and forced to play out of their normal game? I've certainly seen a lot of that in watching games but not sure it's a statistically valid observation.

egri · #5 01-25-2018, 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the 'stache

The Patriots without "Tom Terrific" went 11-5. They suffered soooo mightily as Matt Cassel came in and threw for 3,700 yards and 21 TD passes. Somehow, without Captain America, Wes Welker and Randy Moss both managed to go for over 1,000 yards. Welker went to the Pro Bowl.

The season before, with the same receivers and playing a tougher schedule, Tom Brady put up 50 TDs and 4,800 yards. That is a major drop off, especially as all 5 of the 2008 Patriots losses were to playoff bound teams. In 2007, Randy Moss alone caught 23 TDs from Brady, 2 more than Cassel put up the entire following year. You can’t look at the stats and not see how losing Brady hurt them in a big way, especially on a team that missed the playoffs on tiebreakers.

As for the Patriots defense bailing him out all the time, he dragged the 31st ranked defense to Super Bowl 46, where Bill Belichick had so little faith in them he gave up a score to the Giants to get the offense back on the field sooner. Then two years ago, he lead the #1 offense even though all his favorite targets missed significant time that year. Gronkowski and Edelman missed several games as did Amendola, and defense captain Jerod Mayo was banged up so badly he retired after the season. In spite of this, in Denver, against the #1 defense with his center, Bryan Stork, tipping the snaps, they were a pair of missed PATs away from going to SB 50.

PowderedH2O · #6 01-25-2018, 08:42 AM

Bill, I believe that Brady caught a break on the tuck rule as well. But, if you are using Starr's 9-1 record, you also have to acknowledge the break he caught. In 1965, trailing 10-7 with 1:58 left in a playoff game against the Colts (in which Tom Matte, the running back, was the Colts' quarterback due to injuries to Unitas and Cuozzo), the Packers' kicker made a 22 yard field goal. Well, the referee said he made it, but television replays showed it was wide. There was no replay, so it stands. The Packers go on to win the game in overtime (with Zeke Bratkowski at QB for the Packers after Starr was injured, yet Starr gets credit for that win), and the following week, the Packers beat the Browns for the title. If the field goal is ruled correctly, it is a Colts vs Browns NFL Championship Game. Starr has one less ring. Maybe they dismantle some of the pieces and don't go on to win those Super Bowls. Who knows?

Peter_Spaeth · #7 01-25-2018, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PowderedH2O

Bill, I believe that Brady caught a break on the tuck rule as well. But, if you are using Starr's 9-1 record, you also have to acknowledge the break he caught. In 1965, trailing 10-7 with 1:58 left in a playoff game against the Colts (in which Tom Matte, the running back, was the Colts' quarterback due to injuries to Unitas and Cuozzo), the Packers' kicker made a 22 yard field goal. Well, the referee said he made it, but television replays showed it was wide. There was no replay, so it stands. The Packers go on to win the game in overtime (with Zeke Bratkowski at QB for the Packers after Starr was injured, yet Starr gets credit for that win), and the following week, the Packers beat the Browns for the title. If the field goal is ruled correctly, it is a Colts vs Browns NFL Championship Game. Starr has one less ring. Maybe they dismantle some of the pieces and don't go on to win those Super Bowls. Who knows?

You can always play what if. What if Tyree doesn't make that absurd catch, or the refs call one of the multiple holds that gave Manning time to throw? What if Welker doesn't drop an easy ball, or that other guy doesn't make another circus catch?

frankbmd · #8 01-25-2018, 01:53 PM

Every close game is subject to partisan second guessing of the officiating and conspiracy theories of their participation in bribery and/or collusion.

NB: This post refers only to football.

Oh, and by the way, "Kill The Ump, da bum."

Peter_Spaeth · #9 01-25-2018, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by egri

The season before, with the same receivers and playing a tougher schedule, Tom Brady put up 50 TDs and 4,800 yards. That is a major drop off, especially as all 5 of the 2008 Patriots losses were to playoff bound teams. In 2007, Randy Moss alone caught 23 TDs from Brady, 2 more than Cassel put up the entire following year. You can’t look at the stats and not see how losing Brady hurt them in a big way, especially on a team that missed the playoffs on tiebreakers.

As for the Patriots defense bailing him out all the time, he dragged the 31st ranked defense to Super Bowl 46, where Bill Belichick had so little faith in them he gave up a score to the Giants to get the offense back on the field sooner. Then two years ago, he lead the #1 offense even though all his favorite targets missed significant time that year. Gronkowski and Edelman missed several games as did Amendola, and defense captain Jerod Mayo was banged up so badly he retired after the season. In spite of this, in Denver, against the #1 defense with his center, Bryan Stork, tipping the snaps, they were a pair of missed PATs away from going to SB 50.

From memory that was a weak 11-5 team that everyone knew had no chance of going deep into the playoffs. It's just pointless to try to minimize Brady's role in the Patriot's dominance.

1952boyntoncollector · #10 01-25-2018, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the 'stache

S

The Patriots without "Tom Terrific" went 11-5. They suffered soooo mightily as Matt Cassel came in and threw for 3,700 yards and 21 TD passes. Somehow, without Captain America, Wes Welker and Randy Moss both managed to go for over 1,000 yards. Welker went to the Pro Bowl.
.

and they didnt make the playoffs....