Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Vick vs. Brady for MVP (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter LHUCKS
- Start date
SSOG
Moderator
Philip Rivers? Guy's 2nd in passing yards (behind Peyton Manning, who has 116 more yards... on 144 more attempts), 2nd in QB Rating, and 1st in all of the per attempt stats (YPA, NYPA, AYPA, ANYPA) despite having a zombie receiving corps (Jackson has missed 12 games, Naanee has missed 7 games, Floyd has missed 5 games, Gates has missed 4 games, and even his #4 and #5 receivers- Crayton and Buster Davis- have been unable to stay healthy). Sure, San Diego's record isn't as good... but imagine how bad it'd be if Rivers wasn't playing out of his mind this season.
Masked Vigilante
Footballguy
If your team gets swept by the Raiders, you are automatically out of the running.
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
1. Tom Brady · NWE2. Philip Rivers · SDG3. Michael Vick · PHI
Routilla
Footballguy
This. I could not vote for a dog killer.
nysportsfan
Footballguy
Which may be why he doesn't even finish top 3.
cheese
Footballguy
I somewhat agree with this and I love Rivers' game, but I honestly think if NE or PHI had been devestated by a similar set of injuries, Brady and/or Vick would win anyway. They simply won't lose the way they are playing. If your case is that Rivers would be on this level with a healthy team, fine. But if you're point is that Vick or Brady would be struggling with the conditions that Rivers is in, I completely disagree. I think part of that is their styles/systems are so unique that they rely much less on surrounding talent than conventional QBs.
Amen brother. Brady could be a Joe Montana/Peyton Manning/Dan Marino/Johnny Unitas clone and I wouldn't vote for him. I'll vote for a dog killer over Pretty Boy every day of the week.I like the Rivers argument too.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Agreed. But the Chargers are on pace to miss the playoffs, while the Patriots are 12-2 with Brady, no top notch or notable receivers and a defense that is statistically subpar. Rivers has been great this year, but while he and Brady have both done more with less, Brady has done it four games better, and against a much tougher schedule. NE is 7-1 against teams with winning records; SD is 3-2. Rivers is probably gonna finish 3rd, and he should, but Brady and Vick both should and will finish higher.
footballnerd
Footballguy
cheater vs killer 
LHUCKS
Footballguy
Not in the conversation, every sportswriter in America is declaring this a two horse race.
LHUCKS
Footballguy
I would agree.
Agreed."From Dog Killer to MVP"a headline that I am willing to bet, we don't see when the MVP is announced
Big_Russel
Footballguy
What does Brady's looks have to do with ANYTHING? Dude is as tough as any QB in the NFL. And much tougher im sure, then anyone posting on this forum. Bringing a guy's looks into the discussion may say more about some deep down feelings you guys may be harboring, than it does about his toughness. Just sayin.Amen brother. Brady could be a Joe Montana/Peyton Manning/Dan Marino/Johnny Unitas clone and I wouldn't vote for him. I'll vote for a dog killer over Pretty Boy every day of the week.I like the Rivers argument too.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Reading through this I have not seen it mentioned:
Vick has not played a full season; not even most of a full season. That is just typically a disqualifier. I voted for Brady for that reason.
However, let's face it, Vick has truly been the most valuable player this season in the whole league for the games he's played in.
No, I don't like the guy (putting it mildly), but I'm leaving the personal stuff out of it.
The Pats mustered a 10-6 (?) season with Matt Cassell. The Eagles would be nowhere without Vick and the guy quite simply dominates every single game. What he did vs a great Giants defense in the 4th was just sick. I might add that I think Andy Reid's offensive genius has helped make that happen, but so what Belichick has helped make Brady, Payton has helped make Brees, Tom Moore helped make P. Manning, etc. In Reid's hands Vick has changed the offensive rules of the game.
The Washington performance belongs in the category of Ernie Nevers, Paul Hornung, Gale Sayers, and Sid Luckman with the 1940 Bears. I absolutely hate to say it but that's the fact of the matter: it was one of the all time great single game performances ever.
Vick has not played a full season; not even most of a full season. That is just typically a disqualifier. I voted for Brady for that reason.
However, let's face it, Vick has truly been the most valuable player this season in the whole league for the games he's played in.
No, I don't like the guy (putting it mildly), but I'm leaving the personal stuff out of it.
The Pats mustered a 10-6 (?) season with Matt Cassell. The Eagles would be nowhere without Vick and the guy quite simply dominates every single game. What he did vs a great Giants defense in the 4th was just sick. I might add that I think Andy Reid's offensive genius has helped make that happen, but so what Belichick has helped make Brady, Payton has helped make Brees, Tom Moore helped make P. Manning, etc. In Reid's hands Vick has changed the offensive rules of the game.
The Washington performance belongs in the category of Ernie Nevers, Paul Hornung, Gale Sayers, and Sid Luckman with the 1940 Bears. I absolutely hate to say it but that's the fact of the matter: it was one of the all time great single game performances ever.
Last edited by a moderator:
Invictus~Bronte
Footballguy
I think the long hair has made Brady believe he is now INVINCIBLE ala Samson of Bible lore. 
He's grown it out since his transplants. Plus his hot wife digs it. He has been playing on another level, you guys ripping his looks are jealous. And as far as MVP here is the deal. If you took Brady or Rivers off the team how competitive would they be? Would the Eagles still be in it with Kolb instead of Vick ? More likely then Hoyer (sic) for the Pats that's for sure.
He's grown it out since his transplants. Plus his hot wife digs it. He has been playing on another level, you guys ripping his looks are jealous. And as far as MVP here is the deal. If you took Brady or Rivers off the team how competitive would they be? Would the Eagles still be in it with Kolb instead of Vick ? More likely then Hoyer (sic) for the Pats that's for sure.
Road Warriors
Footballguy
A couple of points I disagree with here. 1. The 2007 - 2008 Patriots: NE had one of the best teams assembled in the NFL in 2007, then with the same cast except Brady, went 11-5 ( a 5 game Regular season swing ). And that was being led by what has proven to be a decent NFL caliber QB (Cassel). Add to that, the current NE defense has only 2 starters from the 2007 season, and one receiver from that team, its safe to say the '07-'08 year teams don't resemble this current year's team. To assume that NE would be winning without Brady this year based on what happened in '07-'08 is off the mark.
2. The 2009 Eagles went 10-4 with McNabb, who was just benched for Rex Grossman. Kolb has looked like a decent NFL caliber QB in his time. To assume the Eagles would be a sub-500 team without Vick has no merit, IMO. This is a good team, and Vick has made the offense more dynamic than it had been, but this is not a cellar dwelling team without him.
Vick has had a tremendous season, and has grown as a QB in a manner I never thought we'd see. He is no longer the athlete that takes one read then runs. He is doing a great job in the pocket and using his legs as a weapon rather than a crutch. He's a worthy MVP contender. But I don't think his performance, even on a per game basis, has outdone Brady this year.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Ok, fair enough. I can't dispute the Pats commentary from a Pats fan especially, & in my book Brady's a great player and as I said I voted for him for MVP.
I know this is pure opinion only, but the Eagles are 8-1 in games that Vick has started and played through, with only a 5 point loss to what is now seen as a very good Bears team at Chicago. I think Kolb looked pretty good too, but...
With Kolb the Eagles beat San Fran by 3 points.
With Kolb they lose to a mediocre Titans team by 18.
With Kolb they were losing 13-3 at half to the Pack at Philly.
With Kolb the Eagles muster 6 second half points vs the Skins. (We know what Vick did vs the Skins later).
You really think the Eagles would have been 8-1 in those games with Kolb playing a full season? I was thinking overall more like 7-9 to 9-7 with Kolb in there, not so much "cellar dwelling"; good, decent, but not great and probably not beating out the Giants for the NFC East crown and maybe not the Pack for the No. 2 Wildcard spot, but perhaps in contention right after them.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
I vote Brady right now. If both guys produce at their per-game averages for the next two games and both guys' teams win both games, I'd change my vote to Vick.
There's no question in my mind that Vick has been more impressive on a per-game basis when you consider his passing and rushing contributions. The only question is how much his missed time dilutes his value. Playing in only 11 of 14 games is a problem; playing in only 13 of 16 games, less so.
There's no question in my mind that Vick has been more impressive on a per-game basis when you consider his passing and rushing contributions. The only question is how much his missed time dilutes his value. Playing in only 11 of 14 games is a problem; playing in only 13 of 16 games, less so.
I'm one of the biggest Vick fans around, but no way this doesnt go to Brady, deservedly. You cant just discount the missed time. Part of being valuable to your team is being able to take the field. This is only the second time in his career Vick has missed more than 1 game due to injury and his injury risk is overstated in my opinion, but he did miss time this year, while Brady has played every game.
Brady has led the Pats to the best record in football while being on pace for 4000 yards, 35 TD's, and five interceptions. He set the record for longest time without throwing an interception and has been the model for efficiency. Then look as his schedule. He has played the Jets twice, Baltimore, San Diego, Pitt, Colts, and Green Bay and lost only to the Jets once. What more could you ask for in your MVP?
Vick gets a lot of "style points" but the end result is the same. At the end of the day, it doesnt matter if your game winning drive came with amazing flashy plays from Vick or with Brady systematically picking apart the defense, a win is a win.
Go ahead and give Vick Offensive Player of the Year and Comeback Player of the Year, but Brady is the MVP.
Brady has led the Pats to the best record in football while being on pace for 4000 yards, 35 TD's, and five interceptions. He set the record for longest time without throwing an interception and has been the model for efficiency. Then look as his schedule. He has played the Jets twice, Baltimore, San Diego, Pitt, Colts, and Green Bay and lost only to the Jets once. What more could you ask for in your MVP?
Vick gets a lot of "style points" but the end result is the same. At the end of the day, it doesnt matter if your game winning drive came with amazing flashy plays from Vick or with Brady systematically picking apart the defense, a win is a win.
Go ahead and give Vick Offensive Player of the Year and Comeback Player of the Year, but Brady is the MVP.
Last edited by a moderator:
parrot
Footballguy
Vick has played great, but he inherited the #5 scoring offense from last year, almost wholly intact, the only real missing part being Westbrook, who missed half of their games last year due to injury. Brady's offense on the other hand, has been cobbled together from spare parts. Brady gets my vote due to that, but I wouldn't feel it was any kind of injustice if it were given to Vick; he has been pretty incredible.ROBOPUNTER
Footballguy
Veiled racism in this post
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
The Eagles were 11th in total yards last year. They are first this year despite losing Westbrook and not getting a single offensive player out of the 2010 draft. The Patriots were 3rd last year, and were 5th two years ago when Matt Cassell was the starting QB. They are 9th this year despite adding two of the most highly regarding TEs in college football in the 2010 draft (obviously they lost Moss after a few games, but that was by choice).
I don't think this line of reasoning helps you as much as you think it does.
Last edited by a moderator:
MVP to me is always tied to team success. Rivers loses some votes because his team sleeps through the first 8 games every year. See Brady yelling at guys getting people ready to play? Chargers have a top 3 offense and top 3 defense, yet they're currently out of the playoffs. Sorry that costs Rivers some votes.
Brady gets MVP
Vick gets comeback player of the year
Rivers gets a "try getting your team ready to play week 1 next year" award.
Brady gets MVP
Vick gets comeback player of the year
Rivers gets a "try getting your team ready to play week 1 next year" award.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I have thought this has been an interesting stat:TobiasFunke said:parrot said:Road Warriors said:
The Eagles were 11th in total yards last year. They are first this year despite losing Westbrook and not getting a single offensive player out of the 2010 draft. The Patriots were 3rd last year, and were 5th two years ago when Matt Cassell was the starting QB. They are 9th this year despite adding two of the most highly regarding TEs in college football in the 2010 draft (obviously they lost Moss after a few games, but that was by choice).
I don't think this line of reasoning helps you as much as you think it does.
This year McCoy is getting 5.3 yards per carry; last year it was 4.1.
Vick (sort of like Reggie Bush when he's healthy and effective) opens up the gameplan and offensive opportuinties even when he is not the primary passer or ball-carrier.
Road Warriors
Footballguy
Honestly, the addition of 2 rookie pass catchers is not usually the formula for instant success. Very few "highly regarded" receivers ( either WR or TE ) come out and light it up in year 1. That the Patriots have been as successful integrating these 2 rookies into the top scoring offense in the league is a testament to both Brady and the coaching staff, IMO.TobiasFunke said:parrot said:Road Warriors said:
The Eagles were 11th in total yards last year. They are first this year despite losing Westbrook and not getting a single offensive player out of the 2010 draft. The Patriots were 3rd last year, and were 5th two years ago when Matt Cassell was the starting QB. They are 9th this year despite adding two of the most highly regarding TEs in college football in the 2010 draft (obviously they lost Moss after a few games, but that was by choice).
I don't think this line of reasoning helps you as much as you think it does.
Big_Russel
Footballguy
Don't forget Alge Crumpler. If I had to pick one person most directly tied to their fast development, it would be hard not to give the credit to Alge.Honestly, the addition of 2 rookie pass catchers is not usually the formula for instant success. Very few "highly regarded" receivers ( either WR or TE ) come out and light it up in year 1. That the Patriots have been as successful integrating these 2 rookies into the top scoring offense in the league is a testament to both Brady and the coaching staff, IMO.TobiasFunke said:parrot said:Road Warriors said:
The Eagles were 11th in total yards last year. They are first this year despite losing Westbrook and not getting a single offensive player out of the 2010 draft. The Patriots were 3rd last year, and were 5th two years ago when Matt Cassell was the starting QB. They are 9th this year despite adding two of the most highly regarding TEs in college football in the 2010 draft (obviously they lost Moss after a few games, but that was by choice).
I don't think this line of reasoning helps you as much as you think it does.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
Agreed. However, using "scoring offense" is misleading. It brings turnovers, field goals, special teams and other non-offense-related (i.e. non-Brady-related) factors into the equation. Total yards is the far superior measure of a team's offensive prowess in my opinion. And when you look at yards, the Patriots haven't improved noticeably this year over last year or the year before (when Brady wasn't the QB). The Eagles, on the other hand, have jumped from barely better than league average to #1 in the NFL. The pick up almost a half-yard per play more than the 2010 Patriots (and the 2009 Eagles).Honestly, the addition of 2 rookie pass catchers is not usually the formula for instant success. Very few "highly regarded" receivers ( either WR or TE ) come out and light it up in year 1. That the Patriots have been as successful integrating these 2 rookies into the top scoring offense in the league is a testament to both Brady and the coaching staff, IMO.TobiasFunke said:parrot said:Road Warriors said:
The Eagles were 11th in total yards last year. They are first this year despite losing Westbrook and not getting a single offensive player out of the 2010 draft. The Patriots were 3rd last year, and were 5th two years ago when Matt Cassell was the starting QB. They are 9th this year despite adding two of the most highly regarding TEs in college football in the 2010 draft (obviously they lost Moss after a few games, but that was by choice).
I don't think this line of reasoning helps you as much as you think it does.
If you want to talk about difference-makers, the numbers clearly favor Vick. As I said, the only question is how much you discount his value because of the missed time.
Road Warriors
Footballguy
Tough to gauge where the Eagles would be with Kolb at the helm at this point. In some way, I discount the actual results Kolb / Vick in the early part of the year, as each came into games where the week's prep work went to the other and the offensive gameplan was designed for the other. I think these are 2 very different QBs, and given a full season of a starting role, the Eagles would be fairly successful with either. Reid is a good coach, and would tailor his gameplanning and play calling for the strengths each brings. To your question, I doubt Kolb can come back 4 TDs in the final 8 minutes vs. the Giants. Most of the other games where Vick was the starter were winnable games for the Eagles. The WAS game, for example, while spectacular, probably didn't need the Eagles to score that much to pull a W. I think the Eagles are probably 1-2 games worse off than they are right now if Kolb had been the starter.SaintsInDome2006 said:
Road Warriors
Footballguy
Don't forget Alge Crumpler. If I had to pick one person most directly tied to their fast development, it would be hard not to give the credit to Alge.Honestly, the addition of 2 rookie pass catchers is not usually the formula for instant success. Very few "highly regarded" receivers ( either WR or TE ) come out and light it up in year 1. That the Patriots have been as successful integrating these 2 rookies into the top scoring offense in the league is a testament to both Brady and the coaching staff, IMO.TobiasFunke said:The Eagles were 11th in total yards last year. They are first this year despite losing Westbrook and not getting a single offensive player out of the 2010 draft. The Patriots were 3rd last year, and were 5th two years ago when Matt Cassell was the starting QB. They are 9th this year despite adding two of the most highly regarding TEs in college football in the 2010 draft (obviously they lost Moss after a few games, but that was by choice).I don't think this line of reasoning helps you as much as you think it does.
I had my typical Pats 
glasses on, where all good can only be achieved by BB or Brady. jk.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
You forgot: With Kolb, they beat the Falcons, which is still the Eagles most impressive win to date this season.SaintsInDome2006 said:
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
The post about the TEs was to contrast a post claiming that the Pats were using cobbled-together pieces to form the league's best offense out of rubble, while the Eagles were basically the same team they were last year so Vick shouldn't get the credit.The conclusion, which nobody has challenged, is that when you look at yards gained instead of misleading scoring numbers, the Pats are the same offense- actually slightly worse- than the 2009 and even the 2008 Cassell-led Pats, while the Eagles have jumped from #11 to #1 in total offense under Vick.In other words, if you want to evaluate the MVP based on who has made the biggest difference in offensive production as compared to last year or previous seasons without the player, the choice is obvious. It's Vick by a mile.Don't forget Alge Crumpler. If I had to pick one person most directly tied to their fast development, it would be hard not to give the credit to Alge.Honestly, the addition of 2 rookie pass catchers is not usually the formula for instant success. Very few "highly regarded" receivers ( either WR or TE ) come out and light it up in year 1. That the Patriots have been as successful integrating these 2 rookies into the top scoring offense in the league is a testament to both Brady and the coaching staff, IMO.TobiasFunke said:The Eagles were 11th in total yards last year. They are first this year despite losing Westbrook and not getting a single offensive player out of the 2010 draft. The Patriots were 3rd last year, and were 5th two years ago when Matt Cassell was the starting QB. They are 9th this year despite adding two of the most highly regarding TEs in college football in the 2010 draft (obviously they lost Moss after a few games, but that was by choice).I don't think this line of reasoning helps you as much as you think it does.
Isnt using just pure yards misleading too since that plays a lot into the defense and special teams as well? Field position, game situation (not gonna put up a ton more yards when youre blowing people out), and so on. If one just wants to use stats, would dvoa and the like trump points scored or yardage?The post about the TEs was to contrast a post claiming that the Pats were using cobbled-together pieces to form the league's best offense out of rubble, while the Eagles were basically the same team they were last year so Vick shouldn't get the credit.The conclusion, which nobody has challenged, is that when you look at yards gained instead of misleading scoring numbers, the Pats are the same offense- actually slightly worse- than the 2009 and even the 2008 Cassell-led Pats, while the Eagles have jumped from #11 to #1 in total offense under Vick.In other words, if you want to evaluate the MVP based on who has made the biggest difference in offensive production as compared to last year or previous seasons without the player, the choice is obvious. It's Vick by a mile.Don't forget Alge Crumpler. If I had to pick one person most directly tied to their fast development, it would be hard not to give the credit to Alge.Honestly, the addition of 2 rookie pass catchers is not usually the formula for instant success. Very few "highly regarded" receivers ( either WR or TE ) come out and light it up in year 1. That the Patriots have been as successful integrating these 2 rookies into the top scoring offense in the league is a testament to both Brady and the coaching staff, IMO.TobiasFunke said:The Eagles were 11th in total yards last year. They are first this year despite losing Westbrook and not getting a single offensive player out of the 2010 draft. The Patriots were 3rd last year, and were 5th two years ago when Matt Cassell was the starting QB. They are 9th this year despite adding two of the most highly regarding TEs in college football in the 2010 draft (obviously they lost Moss after a few games, but that was by choice).I don't think this line of reasoning helps you as much as you think it does.
glasses on, where all good can only be achieved by BB or Brady. jk.
Road Warriors
Footballguy
This might be the first explanation I've heard regarding using yards as the ranking measure of offense & defense that makes sense. I think a combination of scoring and yards is a better measure of overall offensive efficiency. For example, the MIA game this year, the Patriots had huge special teams plays as well as a pick-6. The offense didn't have the ball for large chunks of time, and when they did get the ball, were playing a very conservative style, reducing the yards produced in that game. By the yards measure, it looked like a down game for the NE offense. Taken in context, you see that was a very efficient offensive output, where the outcome of the game was never in question. IMO, Vick has made an offense laden with playmakers better. Brady has had significant turnover in his offense just this season, and has maintained a high level of efficiency and is leading the top scoring offense in the league ( after subtracting out the 8 ST/DT TDs they've scored, they have a 4 pt advantage over the Eagles ) I agree Vick has a reasonable argument for MVP, I just disagree with your final premise. IMO, if Brady continues to play clean with the ball & NE wins the final 2 games, there is nothing Vick could do to win the MVP.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
Absolutely. Good call. DVOA>>Yards>>Scoring.New England is first in adjusted DVOA for 2010 to date, and first in non-adjusted DVOA (both by a substantial margin)2009: First in adjusted DVOA, third in non-adjusted DVOA.2008 (Cassel): Eighth in adjusted DVOA, eighth in non-adjusted DVOA.Philadelphia is third in adjusted DVOA for 2010 to date, second in non-adjusted DVOA.2009 (McNabb): Tenth in adjusted DVOA, 11th in non-adjusted DVOA.2008 (McNabb): 13th in adjusted DVOA, 13th in non-adjusted DVOA.So yeah, they're both pretty good. As far as difference-making, I probably would give the slight edge to Vick, who took a league-average type offense and almost singlehandedly turned it into one of the league's best. Although seeing those heady DVOA numbers for New England this season is changing my mind a bit.
Last edited by a moderator:
Insein
Footballguy
How does DVOA work? I'm curious.
Road Warriors
Footballguy
Why do you insist on using the '08 or '09 teams as a barometer for what NE is doing this year? The NE offense for the 1st 9 games, had exactly 4 regulars from those teams... Brady, Welker, Light, Koppen. Moss was a huge part of the offensive production of the earlier teams, but obviously wasn't the same player this year. NE has played with 3 new starters on the OL for much of the year, getting Mankins back from holdout just a couple of weeks back. The offensive skill personnel is almost 100% turnover from earlier this season, never mind from previous years. What NE is doing this year should be viewed in context of this year, because the team is so significantly different than previous seasons. Vick has raised the level of the McNabb led Eagles, with essentially the same personnel. He has added value. Brady has raised the level of a completely different set of offensive players. He too has added value. How much is up to the eye of the beholder.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
It wasn't my insistence. I was initially replying to this post:
I thought this post missed the point. Vick has inherited a substantially similar offense, yes, but he has improved it significantly. Brady's offense has changed, but really it has only lost one substantial piece. The system has been productive for years, and Welker and the O-Line (and to some extent the TEs, although they're not reflected in the 2008 and 2009 stats) are far from "spare parts."I must say, however, that looking more closely at the DVOA numbers is making me rethink my view a bit. I said I'd personally vote for Brady now but Vick in two weeks if both players continue to do what they're doing, but now I think I might vote for Brady even after Week 17. Those are impressive efficiency stats for the Patriots. Both are certainly deserving.
Last edited by a moderator:
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
DVOA also tries to account for caliber of opponent but I'm not sure how well it does that. I like the stats but I also like to marry them up with what my eyes tell me, both about the player in question and the team theyre playing against. Brady has the efficiency stats and the pats basically changed up a ton of their offensive strategy during the season and got better doing it. As always the qb's themselves get far too much credit, and blame, but given the stats, the strength of schedule, both how i see and how dvoa sees the caliber of opponent, and the changes new england has successfully carried out during the season I'd just have to give the award to brady as it stands now. incorporating woodhead, reincorporating branch, shredding the jets d, bears d and so on over the course of a season played with no missed time. just how i see it, i can see the arguments for vick too. im probably equally biased with the two, homerism for brady, fantasy football with vick.
"Brady's offense has changed, but really it has only lost one substantial piece. The system has been productive for years, and Welker and the O-Line (and to some extent the TEs, although they're not reflected in the 2008 and 2009 stats) are far from "spare parts.""
Folks do sometimes try and downplay the supporting cast too much when making an argument but I would say woodhead and bjge are spare parts, outside of that system and that orchestra conducted by brady they dont see the field. welker is great, a phenomenal possession receiver to move the chains, I think he is just now getting fully healthy and probably wont regain his form 100% until 2011. gronk and hernandez are very nice pieces, both very talented and being utilized extremely well. thats amazing really for 2 rookie te's. the o-line was able to be at least adequate even with mankins out and connolly in. that being said, it all works with bradys ability to find the open receiver dang near every time, slide in the pocket, audible and all that other good jazz. the pats do not have an offensive weapon that just beats people consistently, the timing and the rapport brady builds with his receivers allows them to do what they do. that makes him pretty dang valuable in my eyes. of course as always,when times are good the qb does get too much credit.
Folks do sometimes try and downplay the supporting cast too much when making an argument but I would say woodhead and bjge are spare parts, outside of that system and that orchestra conducted by brady they dont see the field. welker is great, a phenomenal possession receiver to move the chains, I think he is just now getting fully healthy and probably wont regain his form 100% until 2011. gronk and hernandez are very nice pieces, both very talented and being utilized extremely well. thats amazing really for 2 rookie te's. the o-line was able to be at least adequate even with mankins out and connolly in. that being said, it all works with bradys ability to find the open receiver dang near every time, slide in the pocket, audible and all that other good jazz. the pats do not have an offensive weapon that just beats people consistently, the timing and the rapport brady builds with his receivers allows them to do what they do. that makes him pretty dang valuable in my eyes. of course as always,when times are good the qb does get too much credit.
