What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

QB Tom Brady, TB (2 Viewers)

Hot Sauce Guy said:
Funniest thing I’ve read on the Internet in a while; thanks.👍🏼

play-action is play-action, in 1985 & today. You run to set up the pass. If the runs are effective, hey, keep running. If not, at least there’s the threat of the run.

And if the defense starts using formations to stop the run, & creeping that safety in, leaving a guy in single coverage, then the PA pass is even more effective.

Play action passing is play action passing. It’s a fundamental concept. It hasn’t changed. 
Click to expand...
You need an effective QB at demonstrating the play fake to have an effective play action pass. Period. You can have Barry Sanders in his prime back there but if the QB can’t sell it the linebackers won’t buy it. 
 

New chargers coach said so himself recently:“The data will tell you that you don’t need a good run game for play action to work.”

That’s part of why teams are relying on the run less and passing more. Running the ball early in the game benefits the defense and is a hindrance to explosive offense. 

 
Capella said:
You need an effective QB at demonstrating the play fake to have an effective play action pass. Period. You can have Barry Sanders in his prime back there but if the QB can’t sell it the linebackers won’t buy it. 
 

New chargers coach said so himself recently:“The data will tell you that you don’t need a good run game for play action to work.”
Click to expand...
I'm not going to throw out decades of football knowledge because one coach said something that's irrelevant to this discussion.

Dak is very good at selling the PA, so I'm not sure why you thought that was germane to this subject. 

Capella said:
 That’s part of why teams are relying on the run less and passing more. Running the ball early in the game benefits the defense and is a hindrance to explosive offense. 
Click to expand...
Preposterous. The NFL is moving more to a passing league 99% because rules changes have made it so you can't defend receivers & you can't even breathe on QBs. So without effective pass rush & without being able to shadow a WR without drawing a penalty, naturally teams are going to pass more. 

But that STILL doesn't mean you don't have to run to set up PA passing. You MUST establish the run, even if ineffective. You MUST make the defense believe you are willing to run, even if they are stout against it. The only thing achieved by not running the ball is shrinking the playbook. 

If there is no expectation of a run play, defenses can sit back with an extra DB. There is no balance to the offense & you cannot effectively run all of your playbook. 

I also think it's horrific coaching to have a EZE & Pollard on your roster & not even attempt to run the ball. I don't care if it's the '85 bears out there - they aren't gonna make every play every time. You have to at least test it. 

Sorry, but am unconvinced by your argument. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
TampaMike19 said:
I can't even assess what Bill Belichick is without Tom Brady at this point, especially if Tom goes deep into playoffs again and Bill doesn't even make it.

There's a few excuses for Bill (rookie QB, talent is a bit deficient) but man, Tom's looking on top for who was the genius behind that run. 
Click to expand...
Not really. They both get equal credit for the run. Neither could have done it without the other.  Brady winning in Tampa Bay (with a team loaded with Pro Bowlers) does nothing to diminish Belichick, even though the media loves to act like it does.  People forget that while Brady certainly was clutch at times early in his career, BB's defense did a lot of the heavy lifting early in the dynasty.  And it was Belichick's D that held the Rams 2018 offense (that had scored 135 points in its previous four games) to 3 points in Super Bowl 53.  And while Brady gets all of the glory for the comeback from 28-3 against Atlanta, let's not forget that Belichick's D held the Falcons offense (that had AVERAGED 38 points a game leading up to the Super Bowl) to 21 points in that Super Bowl (7 of the Falcons 28 came from Brady's pick 6), and of course made the key play that sparked the comeback, the sack fumble of Ryan when the score was 28-12, which gave the NE offense the ball deep in Falcon territory.  Brady gets tons of credit for the dynasty, but so does the Hoodie.  

 
Ghost Rider said:
Not really. They both get equal credit for the run. Neither could have done it without the other.  Brady winning in Tampa Bay (with a team loaded with Pro Bowlers) does nothing to diminish Belichick, even though the media loves to act like it does.  People forget that while Brady certainly was clutch at times early in his career, BB's defense did a lot of the heavy lifting early in the dynasty.  And it was Belichick's D that held the Rams 2018 offense (that had scored 135 points in its previous four games) to 3 points in Super Bowl 53.  And while Brady gets all of the glory for the comeback from 28-3 against Atlanta, let's not forget that Belichick's D held the Falcons offense (that had AVERAGED 38 points a game leading up to the Super Bowl) to 21 points in that Super Bowl (7 of the Falcons 28 came from Brady's pick 6), and of course made the key play that sparked the comeback, the sack fumble of Ryan when the score was 28-12, which gave the NE offense the ball deep in Falcon territory.  Brady gets tons of credit for the dynasty, but so does the Hoodie.  
Click to expand...
I agree with all of that with the caveat that Brady winning in Tampa with a different coach and different system proves Brady can win without BB, while the opposite can't be said of BB.  We can't pretend it doesn't muffle the cacophony calls of the "it was mostly Bill" crowd and amplify the "it was mostly Brady" voters. So fair or not, one has proven they can win without the other and one hasn't. I am on record as believing it was both and it's impossible to split them; however, I am very happy the "it was mostly Bill" crowd had most of the wind taken out of their sails.  

 
I've been an "in Bill we trust" disciple (mostly, not hardcore) for years. 

I think the fire and skill level of Bill has eroded. Brady's hasn't.  

We've watched the coaching tree get picked off over the years. And with how so many of them that bailed flopped, we kind of assumed that it was Bill all along as the brains of the operation. But my instinct is that Bill is no longer a shark in terms of how he heads up a coaching staff. I feel like he's a little lost. Bedard mentioned this a few days ago.

They each carried each other and now it's just Brady as the elite, surrounded by elite talent.

 
NE_REVIVAL said:
I agree with all of that with the caveat that Brady winning in Tampa with a different coach and different system proves Brady can win without BB, while the opposite can't be said of BB.  We can't pretend it doesn't muffle the cacophony calls of the "it was mostly Bill" crowd and amplify the "it was mostly Brady" voters. So fair or not, one has proven they can win without the other and one hasn't. I am on record as believing it was both and it's impossible to split them; however, I am very happy the "it was mostly Bill" crowd had most of the wind taken out of their sails.  
Click to expand...
 Belichick has won without Brady. Two rings as a DC.  Not the same as being a head coach, but I think we can all agree that one man does not win championships, and Belichick winning two rings as a DC is no less impressive than Brady winning 1 with an absolutely loaded Bucs team. 

 
Ghost Rider said:
 Belichick has won without Brady. Two rings as a DC.  Not the same as being a head coach, but I think we can all agree that one man does not win championships, and Belichick winning two rings as a DC is no less impressive than Brady winning 1 with an absolutely loaded Bucs team. 
Click to expand...
Agreed.  Other than a sore knee and limited acclimation period, there weren't any team limitations to overcome to get to a superbowl that was won primarily because of the shambles that was KC's offensive line.

Even if TB crushes NE this weekend, which I fully expect, it won't tell the tale because the pats retain personnel limitations that may take a year to two to resolve....and it could be argued the resource limitations exist because BB and Kraft leveraged the future to give TB his last couple rings in NE.

 
SeniorVBDStudent said:
Agreed.  Other than a sore knee and limited acclimation period, there weren't any team limitations to overcome to get to a superbowl that was won primarily because of the shambles that was KC's offensive line.

Even if TB crushes NE this weekend, which I fully expect, it won't tell the tale because the pats retain personnel limitations that may take a year to two to resolve....and it could be argued the resource limitations exist because BB and Kraft leveraged the future to give TB his last couple rings in NE.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Not that Jimmy G is a future HOFer, but had he still be on the team last year and healthy, he would have been a better option than having to get a past-his-prime Cam, but that clever Tom Brady set it up to where he could leave and they had zero options to go to right away because of his bellyaching to Daddy Kraft.  Very much a power move on Brady's part, and it worked to perfection, but it has to be taken into account when assessing how well both have done right away since the split.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SeniorVBDStudent said:
Agreed.  Other than a sore knee and limited acclimation period, there weren't any team limitations to overcome to get to a superbowl that was won primarily because of the shambles that was KC's offensive line.

Even if TB crushes NE this weekend, which I fully expect, it won't tell the tale because the pats retain personnel limitations that may take a year to two to resolve....and it could be argued the resource limitations exist because BB and Kraft leveraged the future to give TB his last couple rings in NE.
Click to expand...
Ghost Rider said:
 Belichick has won without Brady. Two rings as a DC.  Not the same as being a head coach, but I think we can all agree that one man does not win championships, and Belichick winning two rings as a DC is no less impressive than Brady winning 1 with an absolutely loaded Bucs team. 
Click to expand...
I am on record as believing BB is the best HC of all time and I agree with those points. My post was more directed toward the it was all about Bill crowd and Tom winning a SB without his help. BB is obviously a brilliant coach but Tom winning a SB without him has to matter in the was it Bill or Tom debate.   

 
SeniorVBDStudent said:
Agreed.  Other than a sore knee and limited acclimation period, there weren't any team limitations to overcome to get to a superbowl that was won primarily because of the shambles that was KC's offensive line.

Even if TB crushes NE this weekend, which I fully expect, it won't tell the tale because the pats retain personnel limitations that may take a year to two to resolve....and it could be argued the resource limitations exist because BB and Kraft leveraged the future to give TB his last couple rings in NE.
Click to expand...
As I pointed out in my post I think both BB & TB are equally responsible for the dynasty and you really can't split them up. I agreed with the majority of what the op had written other than imo TB winning a SB does take the wind out of the it was all BB crowd of which there were many. So in that respect it is hard to deny BBs rep takes a bit of a hit. Doesn't mean i don't think he is the best HC ever, it just means Brady proved he doesn't need BB to win a SB. BB has obviously not done that as a HC.

You and others make it sound so easy, limited acclimation period the only thing in the way of taking a team that had 1 winning season in the previous 10 to the playoffs and a SB win. Totally new system, terminology and players and all he had to overcome was a sore knee. The Tampa def dominated the SB but getting the team there was a lot more complicated than that. Many insisted Brady was washed up in 2019 while some of us felt it had more to do with the chicken crap BB put around him. There is little doubt now about who was right; so now (for some) the argument morphs into well Brady was the reason he was surrounded by chicken crap. All I can say to that is oy. 

People can argue resource limitations exist because BB and Kraft leveraged the future to "give" Brady his SB win vs the Falcons and Rams but they would be wrong. Drafting Jimmy didn't help Brady one iota but a wr\rb\te in his place could have. Some actually wanted to keep Jimmah over Tom, howz that workin out for SF? One constant (for the most part) over Brady's time in NE was BBs refusal again and again to mortgage the future (or even draft offensive weapons) for the sb push. Yes, great QBs command big contracts but imho they are in bad shape primarily due to poor drafting not drunken sailor type FA spending during Brady's last 5 yrs. 

It's all good, reasonable minds can disagree.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Clearly there is an obvious difference. One can go and be a magnet and attract players. The other has to rebuild(including dead money from the one left). One is a GM. 
 

Having said this, I fully expect the Pats to get lambasted this weekend. I also expect the other will build a team for the future. 
 

I also believe the comments about Belichick from Kraft. But I think it is ok, because Belichick knows he is a f a hole. And he is good at knowing it. 

 
NE_REVIVAL said:
I am on record as believing BB is the best HC of all time and I agree with those points. My post was more directed toward the it was all about Bill crowd and Tom winning a SB without his help. BB is obviously a brilliant coach but Tom winning a SB without him has to matter in the was it Bill or Tom debate.   
Click to expand...
I think Brady winning a Super Bowl last year is a credit to him, but that doesn't mean it has to be a mark against Belichick. 

Ultimately, players are almost always going to be more valuable than coaches.  Even the best coaches need players.  Heck, look at how Bill Walsh's record in SF was before he got Montana. Look at the NBA where Popovich cannot win a playoff series without having a top tier NBA star.  Coaches need players, and that is the way it is in all team sports.  Players need coaches, too, but I think a great player is more likely to win with an average coach than a great coach is to win with average players. 

 
SeniorVBDStudent said:
Agreed.  Other than a sore knee and limited acclimation period, there weren't any team limitations to overcome to get to a superbowl that was won primarily because of the shambles that was KC's offensive line.
Click to expand...
Did KC’s offensive line give up 31 points? People try to act like it was a 13-9 game. It was a whooping on both sides of the ball. 

 
Capella said:
Did KC’s offensive line give up 31 points? People try to act like it was a 13-9 game. It was a whooping on both sides of the ball. 
Click to expand...
And the Chiefs had scored more 31 points in 10 of their last 18 games before the Super Bowl last year.  Look, your team won, be happy!  I would be as well.  Just don't act like the Chiefs missing two of their best o-lineman wasn't a major game changer. 

 
Ghost Rider said:
And the Chiefs had scored more 31 points in 10 of their last 18 games before the Super Bowl last year.  Look, your team won, be happy!  I would be as well.  Just don't act like the Chiefs missing two of their best o-lineman wasn't a major game changer. 
Click to expand...
why would you think I wasn’t happy about my team winning the super bowl? The chiefs losing two lineman of course affected the game. The Bucs were starting a right guard making his second career start after their very good starter got hurt in a playoff game. Having depth and prepared backups is part of the whole deal, not an excuse. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
greenmountaingoat said:
I've been an "in Bill we trust" disciple (mostly, not hardcore) for years. 

I think the fire and skill level of Bill has eroded. Brady's hasn't.  
Click to expand...


I don't see how this is so complicated.

Belichick does some things extremely well, many of them actually. He's done pretty well in most trades. He does a good job in UDFA. Like the Ravens, he's got a system down for getting compensation picks. He manages to make trades that bring in volume of draft picks, he can split a quarter into 4 dimes, 2 nickels and 6 pennies. His late game management is very good. His Special Teams units, his personal bread and butter, usually are very productive.

But he's generally a lousy drafter. Sure he's hit on picks, but he's had a ton of them. You can argue with his unparalleled job security, that he's made more picks at his own discretion in the last 20 years than any other personnel decision maker in the NFL period.

If Belichick was a better drafter, Brady would still be a Patriot. There would be a constant reload of new cost controlled talent to help the team win and maintain depth to curb the impact of nominal injury attrition.

One could also argue his flavor of the Perkins-Erdhardt offense was much like Phil Jackson's Triangle Offense, it was versatile but too complicated for the reality of the abilities of most of the general NFL talent pool.

You could argue the Patriots might have been better off in the last 20 years just trading their draft picks. They would have gotten a  better return on players who could contribute. Yes, there was some really nice picks in that mix, but the overall results across the entire Belichick drafting history is pretty ugly.

What makes me happiest is that, in the end, Joe Montana loses. Montana was one of the greatest QB1s to ever play the game. But it's no secret that he's an arrogant diva and has always been that kind of guy who needed it to be all about him. That Montana lost the "Best QB1 To Ever Play The Game" title to Brady tends to please me to no end.

That being said, being in Tampa has given more media exposure to Brady and he's been more candid and while he clearly says the right things and shows leadership and he's a winner, his inner sociopath comes out more. It's well known he saw a sports psychologist at Michigan and while I think it's a good thing for the perception of general mental health in America, I have no doubt he found his personal Dr. Melfi and his inner "stone cold killer" came out.

Winners tend to be throat cutters. Just how it works.

If Belichick wanted a different narrative than this, he should have drafted better.

 
Tom Brady completed 30-of-41 passes for 411 yards and five touchdowns in the Bucs' 45-17, Week 5 win over the Dolphins.

After Brady's 269-yard scoreless return to Foxboro last Sunday night, he rebounded in a large way, clobbering a familiar opponent from his AFC East days. It was a flawless effort from the 44-year-old, who also added a 13-yard run at the end of the first half. Brady's five touchdowns were a 10-yard hookup to Giovani Bernard followed by two to Antonio Brown and then another two to Mike Evans. Brown's were from 62 and four yards out, while Evans' scores were 34- and 22-yard hookups in the fourth quarter. Brady has now thrown four-plus touchdowns three times in the first five weeks and will head to Philadelphia as an obvious top-tier fantasy QB1 next week.

Oct 10, 2021, 4:01 PM ET
Click to expand...

 
Tom Brady completed 34-of-42 passes for 297 yards, two touchdowns and an interception in the Bucs' 28-22, Week 6 win over the Eagles. 

Brady set a breakneck early tone on the opening drive, finding each of his big three wideouts for first-down conversions as the Bucs marched down the field in five minutes for a touchdown. Proving that his thumb injury was not an issue, Brady ended the opening frame 11-of-12 for 121 yards and two scores. He was quieter the rest of the night as a sort of bizarre equilibrium settled in between the two teams where the Eagles failed to threaten with the Bucs nevertheless failing to put the game away. The script was flipped in the fourth quarter with the Eagles finally coming alive and drawing to 28-22 after falling behind 28-7. Brady then, as he always does, easily iced the game with a march deep into Eagles territory. Brady ended up sailing a throw or two, but it was stunning how accurate he appeared as he played through a sprained throwing hand ligament. He has 10 days to rest up for a Week 7 home matchup with the Bears.  

Oct 14, 2021, 11:32 PM ET
Click to expand...

 
Tom Brady completed 30-of-46 passes for 307 yards, two touchdowns, and one interception before leaving Monday night's Week 11 game against the Giants midway through the fourth quarter with the Bucs leading 30-10.

Blaine Gabbert took over under center midway through the final 15 minutes. After a stunning Week 10 loss to Washington where Brady went for 220 yards, two scores, and a pair of picks, Brady was pretty flawless in this one with his lone interception coming on a drop by Mike Evans deep in Tampa territory that led to the Giants' lone touchdown. Brady's two touchdown throws were 13- and five-yard hookups with Chris Godwin and Mike Evans. In the midst of the easy win, Brady eclipsed 3,000 yards for the season, doing so for the 19th time in his career, claiming sole possession of the most times in NFL history, breaking his tie with Brett Favre. Brady and the Bucs will go to Indianapolis next week.

Nov 22, 2021, 11:00 PM ET
Click to expand...

 
DropKick said:
Didn't play well or manage the clock effectively in the second half.

Caught a break getting out with a win.
Click to expand...


Get a grip.

He faced one of the best Ds in the league and finished 31-46-363-2-0.

And he somehow managed to run for 16 yards and had a QB sneak for a TD.

Please.

 
Wow. Didn’t expect to see a Brady hater in here. Brady carrying me to three potential championships this week. Not sure what qb people rather have. Then again I don’t play in leagues that award points for game clock management or disallow points in overtime…

 
SoBeDad said:
Only one other team, the Patriots, has given up fewer points per game than the Bills. Losing White brings them down several notches.
Click to expand...
That may be right but it sure does feel like they’ve struggled of late.  Also, what was the quality of their opponents earlier?  

 
DropKick said:
Didn't play well or manage the clock effectively in the second half.

Caught a break getting out with a win.
Click to expand...


I don't know, I thought the kid looked good under pressure. If he doesn't re-sign with the Bucs, I think he can have a pretty good career elsewhere.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
tigerz said:
Wow. Didn’t expect to see a Brady hater in here. Brady carrying me to three potential championships this week. Not sure what qb people rather have. Then again I don’t play in leagues that award points for game clock management or disallow points in overtime…
Click to expand...


Not a Brady hater... huge fan actually.  I thought he played poorly in the second half when they scored 3 points.  Missed on numerous passes...  snapping the ball with 10+ seconds on the play clock as they're trying to run down time and throwing the ball 40 yards down field when they only need 4 yards for a first down late in the game.  Could have easily lost in regulation after blowing a 21 point lead... 

This is called an "observation".    Idiot comments like "which QB would you rather have" or awarding points for this or that are not really necessary.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ministry of Pain
Atlanta Falcons Offense '24- WR/RB/TE/QB and the OL
Replies
3
Views
158
zamboni
zamboni
ignatiusjreilly
QB/TE draft strategy 2023
2
Replies
82
Views
3K
Pip's Invitation
Pip's Invitation
T
Travdogg's final mock draft (updated post 73 as of draft day morning)
2
Replies
92
Views
3K
Snotbubbles
Snotbubbles

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top