Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Hov34

Belichick Vs. Brady?

Brady or Belichick for 20 years in their prime?  

120 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Football is the ultimate team game. Attempting to credit a quarterback with wins or losses is just folly. It's the sort of thing morons discuss on the radio that other morons can't get enough of. I can't help but wonder what percentage of the morons that try to credit quarterbacks with wins and losses actually had their face in a huddle at any point of their life. We love it because of the unselfish nature needed for a team to win at the highest level. No NFL team wins a title with the players only in it for themselves. 

I'm not making an argument for either TB or BB. Perhaps both have had a big impact on getting the rest of their teams to buy in, but crediting a single player with wins is just stupid in every way. Joe Namath didn't beat the Colts. Eli Manning didn't beat the Pats (twice). Just stop, people. Please, stop. 

Edited by Hooper31
Stoopidity happens.
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hooper31 said:

Eli Manning didn't beat the Giants (twice).

Eli Manning couldn't even beat the Giants once in his entire career. Although probably not for a lack of trying. 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

Eli Manning couldn't even beat the Giants once in his entire career. Although probably not for a lack of trying. 😉

Oops. Of course meant Pats. WIll edit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hooper31 said:

Football is the ultimate team game. Attempting to credit a quarterback with wins or losses is just folly. It's the sort of thing morons discuss on the radio that other morons can't get enough of. I can't help but wonder what percentage of the morons that try to credit quarterbacks with wins and losses actually had their face in a huddle at any point of their life. We love it because of the unselfish nature needed for a team to win at the highest level. No NFL team wins a title with the players only in it for themselves. 

I'm not making an argument for either TB or BB. Perhaps both have had a big impact on getting the rest of their teams to buy in, but crediting a single player with wins is just stupid in every way. Joe Namath didn't beat the Colts. Eli Manning didn't beat the Giants (twice). Just stop, people. Please, stop. 

A single win or loss - maybe. Long stretches of success - absolutely. Every NFL dynasty has a QB at its core. If people still don't recognize the importance of a QB over all other positions they haven't been paying attention to football for the last 40 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, sn0mm1s said:

A single win or loss - maybe. Long stretches of success - absolutely. Every NFL dynasty has a QB at its core. If people still don't recognize the importance of a QB over all other positions they haven't been paying attention to football for the last 40 years.

No one is making the argument that quarterbacks aren't the most important position. The size of their paychecks (and yes, in comparison to the coaches too) tell the tale better than any other anecdotal evidence. 

I will look back at this Patriots era with fondness, and it's likely not over yet. I have a lot of respect for getting 53 men to all pull in the same direction putting their teammates before themselves. I believe strongly this is the most important element of winning titles. The existence of a thread like this points exactly to the selfish nature of men. People have a need to place a man before the other. We often feel a pull to rank and categorize individuals. I think the reason TB and BB continue to win is they understand this and refuse to buy into the petty nature that other timid souls cling to. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, mbuehner said:

Lets put it this way- you take Jordan in his prime and have him play with 4 college players, its still a game. You take Brady in his prime and have him play with 21 college kids, they get blown out of the building.

Sure, but we don't have to make up silly hypotheticals. The Patriots have surrounded Brady with low priced free agents and he's taken them to Superbowl titles from 2001 to today. 

When brady led the league in passing touchdowns in 2002 (and yes, he led the league with only 28, the same year that rich gannon won the league mvp with 26 passing touchdowns throwing to tim brown and jerry rice.), this is the list of studs brady was throwing to

Christian Fauria (7)

David Patten (5)

Troy brown (3)

Kevin Faulk (3)

Antowain Smith (2)

Deion branch (2)

Donald hayes (2)

Cam Cleeland (1)

Daniel Graham (1)

David Givens (1)

Mike Vrabel (1)

Marc Edwards (0)

J.R. Redmond (0)

I see a troy brown, but not a tim brown, and I don't see any Jerry Rice.

No question belichick deserves credit for his input into those free agents and for coaching them up, and in fact they both deserve a ton of credit for what they've done in the salary cap era, but credit to brady for being able to succeed with or without great offensive weapons. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Hooper31 said:

No one is making the argument that quarterbacks aren't the most important position. The size of their paychecks (and yes, in comparison to the coaches too) tell the tale better than any other anecdotal evidence. 

I will look back at this Patriots era with fondness, and it's likely not over yet. I have a lot of respect for getting 53 men to all pull in the same direction putting their teammates before themselves. I believe strongly this is the most important element of winning titles. The existence of a thread like this points exactly to the selfish nature of men. People have a need to place a man before the other. We often feel a pull to rank and categorize individuals. I think the reason TB and BB continue to win is they understand this and refuse to buy into the petty nature that other timid souls cling to. 

So how could anyone in their right mind say that BB is more important than TB. It is delusional crazy talk meant to diminish the greatness of Brady.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sn0mm1s said:

So how could anyone in their right mind say that BB is more important than TB. It is delusional crazy talk meant to diminish the greatness of Brady.

Apologies if I wasn't clear. Not sure I can say it any other way. I think you're wasting your time. I respect both men for the exact opposite behavior that you're wanting to embrace. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hooper31 said:

Apologies if I wasn't clear. Not sure I can say it any other way. I think you're wasting your time. I respect both men for the exact opposite behavior that you're wanting to embrace. 

Oh, I get that, but it still doesn't answer the OP question. They are both important to the success. They both played a huge role in shaping the culture of the team (though, in this respect, it is always easier to make players buy in if you are winning). I am sure both have made personal/financial sacrifices for the benefit of the team. However, the question isn't who is more selfless, it is who would you rather take? There are apparently a majority of voters that would take BB over TB when starting a team - that is absolutely nuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sn0mm1s said:

Oh, I get that, but it still doesn't answer the OP question. They are both important to the success. They both played a huge role in shaping the culture of the team (though, in this respect, it is always easier to make players buy in if you are winning). I am sure both have made personal/financial sacrifices for the benefit of the team. However, the question isn't who is more selfless, it is who would you rather take? There are apparently a majority of voters that would take BB over TB when starting a team - that is absolutely nuts.

You're making the assumption that every man walking around has the same set of priorities. Or that there's a right or wrong set of priorities that everyone should agree upon. Would you rather win more titles? Or have a player on your team with the greatest statistics? And I don't think it's so easy to determine. 

Consider: Would you rather live a happy life? Or would you rather make the most money possible? How often to people answer this question honestly and actually act on it? What people say and do aren't always the same thing. They two scenarios are necessarily mutually exclusive. People can make boatloads of money and be happy, but we often see men sacrifice their happiness in order to make more money. 

Which would I pick? I would choose to have an organization that consistently put the team ahead of individual players. Which one is that? I don't know. I think having to pick one ahead of the other is dumb. I would rather just appreciate what they have in the building. The exercise of telling people they have to choose is just lame. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FInal thought here. 

There are no stupid questions, only the stupid people that ask them. 

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, sn0mm1s said:

So how could anyone in their right mind say that BB is more important than TB. It is delusional crazy talk meant to diminish the greatness of Brady.

There's definitely an element of that, and there always will be.  There's qlso a group that still don't understand gotte good brady is.

I posted that the pats were probably glad they didn't keep jimmy g because brady has been to 3 superbowls, won 2, and has a regular season mvp and a superbowl mvp plus set the all time record for yards in a superbowl with 505 and was told yeah but we don't know that jimmy g wouldn't have done the same thing.

Some people will never appreciate what he's done, and just see him as the guy that was lucky to play with belichick.  I will argue against anything involving this guy but even i can't argue that - they both got very lucky to get two decades together and appreciating either doesn't diminish the greatness of the other. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, IHEARTFF said:

Probably BB over 20 years. Brady in his prime was more valuable, but not early or lately.

Lately? He was literally the league mvp last year,  and two weeks ago he led the Patriots to two touchdowns in the final 3 minutes of the afc championship game.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, bostonfred said:

Lately? He was literally the league mvp last year,  and two weeks ago he led the Patriots to two touchdowns in the final 3 minutes of the afc championship game.  

This year was a decent drop off and I don't think he was very good yesterday or against the Chiefs. Mentally, he is still great, but his throwing is not anything special anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bostonfred said:

Lately? He was literally the league mvp last year,  and two weeks ago he led the Patriots to two touchdowns in the final 3 minutes of the afc championship game.  

A case could be made that in Brady's prime years they didn't win anything. They won in 2004 and 2014 . . . so a decade in the middle with no rings. That cuts both ways, as you can look at it as Brady didn't win when he was at his best . . . or the team and the coaching staff didn't do enough to get the right pieces for them to win.

A couple other things. The great comebacks in recent seasons featured some combination of: good showing by the defense for chunks of game, the offense not being productive for much of the game, the offense wearing down the other teams so opponent's defenses were gassed at the end, really bad decision making on the part of the other team, and winning the coin toss for overtime.

I certainly am not minimizing Brady's contribution, but there is no way this year's Patriots should have won this year. Their overall talent level and athleticism was not up there with some of their other teams or the skill level of many other teams in the league this year. Coaching won out this year, and the roster did their collective jobs. But this may have been BB's greatest season coaching.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sn0mm1s said:

A QB has just as much impact on a team as a great BB player.

Not really - A QB can only do so much behind a poor o-line, relies on some level of competence from his skill players and does not play defense. It's obviously the most important position on a football team but one player can easily dominate a basketball game (offensively and defensively) since it's five on five. If a basketball can drive at will or is on fire shooting while also shutting down the other team's top threat that is something a QB can just not do on his own.

However the even more important part anyway is that there is way more game-planning, play calling and adjustments in a football game then a basketball game. It's miles and miles apart.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

Not really - A QB can only do so much behind a poor o-line, relies on some level of competence from his skill players and does not play defense. It's obviously the most important position on a football team but one player can easily dominate a basketball game (offensively and defensively) since it's five on five. If a basketball can drive at will or is on fire shooting while also shutting down the other team's top threat that is something a QB can just not do on his own.

However the even more important part anyway is that there is way more game-planning, play calling and adjustments in a football game then a basketball game. It's miles and miles apart.

IIRC, it has been shown that poor o-lines (if judged by sacks allowed) are more a function of the QB than the line or at least, the stickiest stat when a QB switches teams is sack rate. Basically, sacks are more a function of QB play/decision making than o-line play. Also, rarely are basketball players great on offense and defense - but we are drifting far from the point. QBs play a huge role in the success of a team. So, unless someone is really going to argue with a straight face that Kubiak > Manning, Walsh > Montana, JJ/Switzer > Aikman, Shanahan > Elway, Payton > Brees etc. etc. etc. there is no reason to say BB > Brady unless you are trying to diminish the greatness of Brady. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After last night's defensive game plan masterpiece, I'm officially leaning 60/40 Bill.

I didn't think this team had a snowball's chance in hell of winning a playoff game let alone the super bowl around week 13. 

Brady is the GOAT QB in this sport.

Bill is the GOAT Coach across all sports. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sn0mm1s said:

IIRC, it has been shown that poor o-lines (if judged by sacks allowed) are more a function of the QB than the line or at least, the stickiest stat when a QB switches teams is sack rate. Basically, sacks are more a function of QB play/decision making than o-line play. Also, rarely are basketball players great on offense and defense - but we are drifting far from the point. QBs play a huge role in the success of a team. So, unless someone is really going to argue with a straight face that Kubiak > Manning, Walsh > Montana, JJ/Switzer > Aikman, Shanahan > Elway, Payton > Brees etc. etc. etc. there is no reason to say BB > Brady unless you are trying to diminish the greatness of Brady. 

I was only pointing out your (imo) poor analogy about Jordan and Phil being the same thing as Brady and Belichick.

I think Belichick has been more important - but that does not diminish Brady at all. He's obviously the most accomplished QB of all time and if he isn't the most "skilled" he's surely close to the top.

I think they both needed each other to accomplish what the Pats did. On the flip side Belichick likely has maybe 2-4 SBs with say Philip Rivers or and Eli Manning and I could see Brady having 2-3 with San Diego or New York.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

I think Belichick has been more important - but that does not diminish Brady at all. He's obviously the most accomplished QB of all time and if he isn't the most "skilled" he's surely close to the top.

It does diminish Brady and it is meant to. That is really the point of this poll isn't it? Who is more responsible for the Pats success - BB or TB? You want to know why so many teams are perpetually stuck in mediocrity if this poll is representative of owner/GM thinking? It is because they think the coach off the field is more important than the coach on the field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sn0mm1s said:

It does diminish Brady and it is meant to. That is really the point of this poll isn't it? Who is more responsible for the Pats success - BB or TB? You want to know why so many teams are perpetually stuck in mediocrity if this poll is representative of owner/GM thinking? It is because they think the coach off the field is more important than the coach on the field.

Who was more responsible for yesterday's win?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm one who goes heavily in favor of BB....to the point that I almost feel Brady would be Rich Gannon at best if he came up in almost any other situation/team. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, IHEARTFF said:

Who was more responsible for yesterday's win?

Who was more responsible for KC or SD win? Or ATL win? You can play these games all day. Over 20 years - who is more responsible... the guy actually playing or the guy not playing? People are fooling themselves if they think that the wins are because of the guy not on the field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, sn0mm1s said:

It does diminish Brady and it is meant to. That is really the point of this poll isn't it? Who is more responsible for the Pats success - BB or TB? You want to know why so many teams are perpetually stuck in mediocrity if this poll is representative of owner/GM thinking? It is because they think the coach off the field is more important than the coach on the field.

You seem to want it to mean that, but I don't see it that way. I don't think anyone is saying Belchick would have won multiple titles in New England with Bobby Hoyer for his entire career and/or that Brady was only along for the ride. If Belichick was the most important piece of the puzzle, Brady was surely #2.  

Let's put it this way - how many titles would the Pats have won with Brady if Belichick never left the NYJ and Kraft went with Dom Capers as the HC as he was all set to do? We'll never know for sure of course but I think the trophy case would have looked much different.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hooper31 said:

FInal thought here. 

There are no stupid questions, only the stupid people that ask them. 

You must be a blast at parties.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sn0mm1s said:

It does diminish Brady and it is meant to. That is really the point of this poll isn't it? Who is more responsible for the Pats success - BB or TB? You want to know why so many teams are perpetually stuck in mediocrity if this poll is representative of owner/GM thinking? It is because they think the coach off the field is more important than the coach on the field.

I can't remember what I posted where and when, but one of the points brought up in the Pro-Brady camp is it's harder to find a franchise QB and when that happens, the QB can carry the day. So essentially, Brady is the driving force and BB has been along for the ride.

There have been other top QBs in the Brady era. We can quibble about how close they are/were compared to Brady. But in terms of QBs with strong resumes, Peyton, Brees, Rodgers, Roethlisberger, Favre, and Warner were all at some points excellent QBs. If QBs are the ones driving the bus, wouldn't all of those players gone to SB after SB?

Has Brady been just that much better than all those QBs? Or are people going to say those QBs all played with terrible coaches and that's why they weren't regular participants in the SB?

Another thing mentioned a lot is the Patriots get gifted 6 wins a year by playing in the AFC East. For starters, they rarely have gone 6-0 (they average 4.5 wins and 1.5 losses a year against divisional foes). They still had to play 10 other games and win in the playoffs. For years, the Colts played in a division that was worse than the AFC East has been. Brees played in a division where there were years where the other teams weren't that great.

Yesterday was the perfect example of a great scheme and game plan that won the game. Put another way, Brady and the offense got NE 13 points. In just about any other game, 13 points would not be enough to win a football game, especially in this era.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a parallel universe somewhere where Tom Brady is the play by play guy calling that game last night after a solid career as a backup, journeyman, spot starter and 1 time Pro Bowler.....with his major point of trivia being that he was the QB drafted right before Super Bowl Starter, All Pro and All Time New England GOAT QB Spergon Wynn.  Man...CLE even ruins careers in parallel universes. 

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, sn0mm1s said:

Who was more responsible for KC or SD win? Or ATL win? You can play these games all day. Over 20 years - who is more responsible... the guy actually playing or the guy not playing? People are fooling themselves if they think that the wins are because of the guy not on the field.

When you can win the super bowl with fewer points scored than the worst offense in the nfl, you have to give the coach credit not the qb in my opinion. I also think coach was more responsible for kc win as well.

This stuff is especially evident when you see qbs as good as brady not have anywhere near the team success. Prime example is Rodgers with fat mike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, IHEARTFF said:

When you can win the super bowl with fewer points scored than the worst offense in the nfl, you have to give the coach credit not the qb in my opinion. I also think coach was more responsible for kc win as well.

This stuff is especially evident when you see qbs as good as brady not have anywhere near the team success. Prime example is Rodgers with fat mike.

The fact that the answer is BB in either scenario just shows how biased you are. It is OK to dislike Brady, but this BB > TB schtick is delusional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thunderlips said:

I'm one who goes heavily in favor of BB....to the point that I almost feel Brady would be Rich Gannon at best if he came up in almost any other situation/team. 

Im on record as believing it is impossible to split the BB/TB atom 1 way or the other but the way some insist on denigrating Bradys contributions is maddening and imho so often based on hate, nfl ignorance or some combination of both. So many seem determined to act as if NEs success was preordained (see Bledsoe, Drew) and it is just so much ignorance\hate driven horse poo (IE people who really haven't followed NE\TB closely and are oblivious to their record prior to TB). Yes. if u put TB in a horrible hc/ownership situation of course it would be impossible to succeed and he would have struggled just like rodgers, manning, montana, marino etc would have (or did). However, those who surmise that TB would have just given up and not have found some success somewhere else are in large part missing what makes him so special. Not the most talented qb, but his LEADERSHIP, intelligence, mental toughness, drive, dedication to his craft, determination and will to win are unparalleled. I challenge anyone to make a case for another qb better at those qualities.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IHEARTFF said:

When you can win the super bowl with fewer points scored than the worst offense in the nfl, you have to give the coach credit not the qb in my opinion. I also think coach was more responsible for kc win as well.

This stuff is especially evident when you see qbs as good as brady not have anywhere near the team success. Prime example is Rodgers with fat mike.

I wouldn't argue the bolded, but must we ignore the fact that in order to even get to the sb they beat the best team in the afc twice while giving up 70+ points? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Anarchy99 said:

Has Brady been just that much better than all those QBs?

Yes. 

There isn't one measure of "good" for a quarterback because they aren't always trying to do the same thing. Sometimes you need to be a game manager and keep the mistakes down.  Sometimes you want to control the ToP with long sustained drives.  Sometimes you want to exhaust the defense with no huddle. Sometimes you need to be able to audiblr or call a timeout.  Sometimes you need to decide whether to run a play before two minutes or call timeout. 

Brady does all of these as well as anyone ever, and transitions seamlessly on a dime.  The dart he threw to gronk in thr 4th quarter when he was triple covered was thrown where gronk could make the play and nobody else could.  That was a superbowl winning throw and it looked effortless.  

There's only two situations where i think another quarterback would be an upgrade over brady - when there's interior pressure and good coverage on his primary receivers, or when it's less than 30 seconds left in the game, down by 4 or more and on from the wrong side of midfield.  And in those situations, if i had Aaron Rodgers on the bench i'd put him in. There's other guys who can run faster or throw farther and these days there's guys who can put more velocity on certain passes with a little better accuracy.  But there's still nobody with his complete skillset who id take in any situation.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, NE_REVIVAL said:

I wouldn't argue the bolded, but must we ignore the fact that in order to even get to the sb they beat the best team in the afc twice while giving up 70+ points? 

 

No. But there is a caveat to that being that KC had one of the worst defenses in the NFL. Additionally, I don't think he played that well in the afc title game. He threw 2 picks and tried to throw a 3rd that would lost the game. Brady has plenty of great games/moments, but these last 2 games are not they.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Thunderlips said:

I'm one who goes heavily in favor of BB....to the point that I almost feel Brady would be Rich Gannon at best if he came up in almost any other situation/team. 

Well he was just a 6th round draft pick. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is one for the hockey fans out there. Bill Belichick is the Scotty Bowman of the NFL.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, sn0mm1s said:

IIRC, it has been shown that poor o-lines (if judged by sacks allowed) are more a function of the QB than the line or at least, the stickiest stat when a QB switches teams is sack rate. Basically, sacks are more a function of QB play/decision making than o-line play. Also, rarely are basketball players great on offense and defense - but we are drifting far from the point. QBs play a huge role in the success of a team. So, unless someone is really going to argue with a straight face that Kubiak > Manning, Walsh > Montana, JJ/Switzer > Aikman, Shanahan > Elway, Payton > Brees etc. etc. etc. there is no reason to say BB > Brady unless you are trying to diminish the greatness of Brady. 

I’d argue with a straight face that a case could be made for all those coaches over their qbs. In fact the Johnson/aikman and shanahan/elway ones are easy calls in favor of the coaches. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something has to be said for the level of commitment on Brady's part. Love of the game? Check. Level of fitness and stamina? Check. Desire to drive himself beyond TC and roster moves? Check. Willing to forgo money (for now...lol). Check. Class act on and off field. Check. Talent ascending the field of wannabes? Check. Ability to attract a supermodel wife? Check. Commercials and other means of off the field streams of compensation? Check. All the while being the GOAT at his position? Check. 

Still...this is a man who found a great thing and never let go. At any cost. Gotta vote Darth Hoodie here. No question. He kept him by the Dark Side of the Force. Brady knows a good thing when he sees it. We do too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brady just can't get over that 20% mark.

Belicheck is the Muhammed Ali of the NFL with his version of the rope a dope. Slow, many play, time eating drives that wear out the defense and by the time the 4th Q rolls around and they have been out there twice as long as the Pats D, the Pats O strikes and knocks them out. I believe one of his goals is to always win time of possession. A staggering 44-21 vs the Chiefs. Only the RAMS D kept this close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, bostonfred said:

Sure, but we don't have to make up silly hypotheticals. The Patriots have surrounded Brady with low priced free agents and he's taken them to Superbowl titles from 2001 to today. 

When brady led the league in passing touchdowns in 2002 (and yes, he led the league with only 28, the same year that rich gannon won the league mvp with 26 passing touchdowns throwing to tim brown and jerry rice.), this is the list of studs brady was throwing to

 

Yeah but the question was comparing basketball superstars to QBs. The basketball star is more important, I think thats an objective truth.

Trent Dilfer has a super bowl ring. Can you name an NBA championship team who's biggest star was in the bottom half of the league at his position?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, travdogg said:

I’d argue with a straight face that a case could be made for all those coaches over their qbs. In fact the Johnson/aikman and shanahan/elway ones are easy calls in favor of the coaches. 

Shanahan/Elway is an interesting thought.  You could certainly argue that if those two were together during Elway's whole career, they might have gotten a handful of rings.  

But things happen how they happen.  Brady is undoubtedly the most successful QB of all-time (which does not necessarily make him the greatest, although he is certainly in the conversation).  Belichick has a much stronger argument for being the best coach of all-time than Brady does for being the greatest QB. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/3/2019 at 7:01 AM, Leroy Hoard said:

I suppose Bill could be run over by the truck shipping his supply of hoodies.

LOVE me some Hoodie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, bostonfred said:

Sure, but we don't have to make up silly hypotheticals. The Patriots have surrounded Brady with low priced free agents and he's taken them to Superbowl titles from 2001 to today. 

When brady led the league in passing touchdowns in 2002 (and yes, he led the league with only 28, the same year that rich gannon won the league mvp with 26 passing touchdowns throwing to tim brown and jerry rice.), this is the list of studs brady was throwing to

Christian Fauria (7)

David Patten (5)

Troy brown (3)

Kevin Faulk (3)

Antowain Smith (2)

Deion branch (2)

Donald hayes (2)

Cam Cleeland (1)

Daniel Graham (1)

David Givens (1)

Mike Vrabel (1)

Marc Edwards (0)

J.R. Redmond (0)

I see a troy brown, but not a tim brown, and I don't see any Jerry Rice.

No question belichick deserves credit for his input into those free agents and for coaching them up, and in fact they both deserve a ton of credit for what they've done in the salary cap era, but credit to brady for being able to succeed with or without great offensive weapons. 

Come on. It's not like there's been legit talent on both sides of the ball for almost his entire tenure.  And the team success has as much to do with the D as it does with the O.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IHEARTFF said:

No. But there is a caveat to that being that KC had one of the worst defenses in the NFL. Additionally, I don't think he played that well in the afc title game. He threw 2 picks and tried to throw a 3rd that would lost the game. Brady has plenty of great games/moments, but these last 2 games are not they.

For some there is always a caveat, TB was immense in the 4th Qtr & overtime vs the Chiefs and again with 9 mins left vs the Rams when it mattered most. To each his own 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol @ this site... SMH; guy couldn’t win with Bernie Kosar or Drew Bledsoe but because Matt Cassell lit it up with prime Randy Moss were supposed to believe he’s better than having Brady? Gtfoh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mbuehner said:

Yeah but the question was comparing basketball superstars to QBs. The basketball star is more important, I think thats an objective truth.

Trent Dilfer has a super bowl ring. Can you name an NBA championship team who's biggest star was in the bottom half of the league at his position?

 

Dilfer wasn't the Raven's biggest star - wasn't even close. And, the 2003-2004 Pistons more or less fit that mold. Rip Hamilton was the "biggest" star while I wouldn't say he was in the bottom 1/2 of the league, I could still pick a bunch of guards over him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Thunderlips said:

Come on. It's not like there's been legit talent on both sides of the ball for almost his entire tenure.  And the team success has as much to do with the D as it does with the O.  

Actually, it has been shown, through multiple methods that O > D.

And, I wouldn't say that the Pats have surrounded Brady with legit talent either. How many HOFers do you think Brady has played with on the offensive side of the ball? Moss and Gronk?

Edited by sn0mm1s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, sn0mm1s said:

Actually, it has been shown, through multiple methods that O > D.

And, I wouldn't say that the Pats have surrounded Brady with legit talent either. How many HOFers do you think Brady has played with on the offensive side of the ball? Moss and Gronk?

 

Its not just about Hall of Famers...it's about talent. Its about depth. The Patriots are a team that have a system that they like and they seem to build redundancies into their roster so that if one player gets hurt....they have the talent behind that man to not miss much of a step.  

 

As far as D goes...it's one half of the game. It's important.   And it's one half that has had some very nice playmakers over the years that have contributed to several of their Super Bowl wins.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BoltNlava said:

Something has to be said for the level of commitment on Brady's part. Love of the game? Check. Level of fitness and stamina? Check. Desire to drive himself beyond TC and roster moves? Check. Willing to forgo money (for now...lol). Check. Class act on and off field. Check. 

He’s moulded an image that he spends a lot of time convincing people is true. No doubt about that. I’m guessing most nfl players spend time on their health, they just don’t have to tell everyone about. Brady seems like the biggest whiny baby in football to me. I’ve seen him throw more temper tantrums than a diva wr.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.