This is hard to say!

[Alaska Darin]

If you are gonna say the pats, you are even more full of sh-- than i thought...

 

What about all those games in the 90's when foxboro made the cards stadium look full?

481404[/snapback]

Which team has fans that regularly hang out on another team's board, making untrue statements and then deleting them when called out?

[IDBillzFan]

http://www.patriots.com/news/index.cfm?ac=...d=13124&pcid=41

You're right in that it wasn't '93, it was '94, but the difference is negligible.

481504[/snapback]

Someone's cooking the books or giving away tickets, which is good for the local market to keep the games on TV, but no way...no freakin' way...the Pats have sold out every regular AND PRESEASON game since 1994.

 

I smell books cookin'.

[AKC]

As far as Bradshaw went, he really didn't play in an era that helped QBs - his heyday was still pretty much power football and great defense.  Towards the end the game opened up a bit but he'd have been a much better QB today than he was then.

480888[/snapback]

 

I struggle with Bradshaw's legacy the same way I do with Brett Favre, although their levels of success are widely varied. The press during Bradshaw's day did him no favors in painting him as something less than the leader of the team and he always seemd to be making seat-of-his-pants throws when I watched him, much like Favre who I've seen far more of due to broadcast saturation. I have a difficult time geting him in the same company as the "Greatest" even though he has the hardware that suggests he deserves it.

[MDH]

Which team has fans that regularly hang out on another team's board, making untrue statements and then deleting them when called out?

481505[/snapback]

 

 

I'll take a wild guess and say every team's fans.

[AKC]

I'll take a wild guess and say every team's fans.

481532[/snapback]

 

It's not the way it used to be around here. We had well-mannered contributors from other teams who came in and shared in the knowledge pool. The poor element we've attracted of late, the kind who come in with monikers taking shots at our team, etc., have for the most part discouraged the great fans of the past who were regulars and earned the respect of those of us interested in the game.

[drnykterstein]

can we let this thread die. i'm sick of seeing that stupid name on the front page.

[lawnboy1977]

your crazy. hes not even the best QB playing right now, much less best ever...

 

all you can say about brady is that he can drive 35-40 yards with 2 min. left to set up for a fieldgoal.

 

i can argue that hes not even the most valuble player on his own team.

479031[/snapback]

I used to agree with that, but honestly with the team he has now and the way he is playing, look at the ATL and Denver games as examples.

[Johnny Coli]

I used to agree with that, but honestly with the team he has now and the way he is playing, look at the ATL and Denver games as examples.

481545[/snapback]

That Denver game is a horrible example. It was 28 to 3 with over 25 minutes to go in the game. The Pats scored 17 points in garbage time, which for this game, was the entire second half. Make no mistake, the only reason this game "looked" close to those who didn't have to witness it, was that Shanahan sat on a 25 point lead. When it looked like it was getting close, Denver just stopped them.

 

The Pats last drive, when they were down by 8 points (note that a FG wouldn't get it done...no Vinatieri to bail him out this time), and needed their "Hall of Fame" QB to put a great drive together with 5 minutes to go, mustered a drive of...drum roll...20 yards. Denver then ran out the clock.

 

Hardly a drive befitting Brady's placement in the pantheon of gridiron heros his bandwagon fans already have him in. But not shocking for those of us who know that he's really just a slightly better than mediocre QB.

[drnykterstein]

That Denver game is a horrible example.  It was 28 to 3 with over 25 minutes to go in the game.  The Pats scored 17 points in garbage time, which for this game, was the entire second half.  Make no mistake, the only reason this game "looked" close to those who didn't have to witness it, was that Shanahan sat on a 25 point lead.  When it looked like it was getting close, Denver just stopped them.

 

The Pats last drive, when they were down by 8 points (note that a FG wouldn't get it done...no Vinatieri to bail him out this time), and needed their "Hall of Fame" QB to put a great drive together with 5 minutes to go, mustered a drive of...drum roll...20 yards.  Denver then ran out the clock. 

 

Hardly a drive befitting Brady's placement in the pantheon of gridiron heros his bandwagon fans already have him in.  But not shocking for those of us who know that he's really just a slightly better than mediocre QB.

481556[/snapback]

3 Cheers for J. Coli and his very true post. Now can we let this thread die yet?

[MadBuffaloDisease]

3 Cheers for J. Coli and his very true post. Now can we let this thread die yet?

Well I WAS hoping someone could expain to me how Bledsoe could, according to some, play so crappy in that Pgh AFCCG in 2001 yet STILL not lose the game for the Pats, and what exactly happened in 2002 to cause the Pats to miss the playoffs despite returning their SB team totally intact, but I guess it won't be happening. So yeah, we CAN let this thread die.

[IDBillzFan]

That Denver game is a horrible example.  It was 28 to 3 with over 25 minutes to go in the game.  The Pats scored 17 points in garbage time, which for this game, was the entire second half.  Make no mistake, the only reason this game "looked" close to those who didn't have to witness it, was that Shanahan sat on a 25 point lead.  When it looked like it was getting close, Denver just stopped them.

 

The Pats last drive, when they were down by 8 points (note that a FG wouldn't get it done...no Vinatieri to bail him out this time), and needed their "Hall of Fame" QB to put a great drive together with 5 minutes to go, mustered a drive of...drum roll...20 yards.  Denver then ran out the clock. 

 

Hardly a drive befitting Brady's placement in the pantheon of gridiron heros his bandwagon fans already have him in.  But not shocking for those of us who know that he's really just a slightly better than mediocre QB.

481556[/snapback]

Great post. Saw the game. You're nuts-on accurate.

[The Dean]

Since this seems to be a catch-all thread for all things Brady, Bandwagon Pats fan-related, All-time great QBs and system and underrated QBs...I thought I'd throw this into the pot:

 

One of the all-time underrated, system QBs (who was as tough, smart and accurate as any QB I've ever seen) is Dan Fouts. The way Fouts ran the "Air Coryell" offense was a thing of beauty, I tell ya.

 

That pass-happy offense was very complicated and I think very few QBs could have run it as well as Fouts. It's true that Fouts passing numbers are inflated because he operated in this sytem...but he deserves every last one of them, IMO.

 

It's almost funny to hear announcers comment on how a QB "threw that before he made his break"...they say it as if it were an unbelievable accomplishment...like the QB was Kreskin. That's how Fouts made virtually EVERY throw. It's my understanding that Fouts threw to a spot on the field and expected the receiver to be there at the correct time. When it was working it was virtually unstoppable.

 

So, when discussing the greatest ever QBs...just remember to keep Terry B and Dan Fouts in the conversation (I'm not saying they are the best....but, they deserve to be mentioned). And let's not include Brady until he plays a few more years and see how he handles losing...being on inferior teams, playing for different coaches, etc. If he keeps up what he's done the past few years, he'll belong in the conversation.

 

Just remember...several years ago, when the Rams were flying high, many were calling Kurt Warner the second coming. Anyone want to include him in the "Best of All Time" conversation now?

[Ramius]

That Denver game is a horrible example.  It was 28 to 3 with over 25 minutes to go in the game.  The Pats scored 17 points in garbage time, which for this game, was the entire second half.  Make no mistake, the only reason this game "looked" close to those who didn't have to witness it, was that Shanahan sat on a 25 point lead.  When it looked like it was getting close, Denver just stopped them.

 

The Pats last drive, when they were down by 8 points (note that a FG wouldn't get it done...no Vinatieri to bail him out this time), and needed their "Hall of Fame" QB to put a great drive together with 5 minutes to go, mustered a drive of...drum roll...20 yards.  Denver then ran out the clock. 

 

Hardly a drive befitting Brady's placement in the pantheon of gridiron heros his bandwagon fans already have him in.  But not shocking for those of us who know that he's really just a slightly better than mediocre QB.

481556[/snapback]

 

hmmm, a 20 yard drive you say? thats about the length of the "super bowl winning" drives he put together to let vinatieri win it for them...

 

Regarding his drive length and his deep ball ability (cant throw anything over 20 yds), i will refer to him from now on as tom "20 yard" brady

[MDH]

Regarding his drive length and his deep ball ability (cant throw anything over 20 yds), i will refer to him from now on as tom "20 yard" brady

482117[/snapback]

 

 

Below are Tom Brady's career stats for "bombs", throws that are in the air for 40+ yards. As a comparison, I've included Manning's as he's considered a "real threat" with the long ball.

 

Brady (5 seasons*)- 12 of 42 (28.6% comp) for 638 yards 6TDs 6INTs

 

Manning - (8 seasons*)- 9 of 39 (23% comp) for 499 yards 5TDs 3INTs

 

* this includes the 6 games played be each this season.

 

So, the guy that “can't” throw the ball more than 20 yards has more completions, attempts, yards, and TDs in his career than Manning on balls in the air over 40 yards…and he’s done it in 3 fewer seasons than Manning. He also has a better completion percentage as well as a better YPA (15.2 for Brady vs. 12.8 for Manning).

 

Granted, Manning is better at the intermediate stuff than Brady, but this notion that Brady "can't" throw the deep ball is pure make-believe.

[mtdoak]

I've said this before and I'll say it again: Put Brady on the Browns and he'd maybe make one pro bowl. The Patriots dynasty (i hate saying that) is based on one thing: a STRONG TEAM. Weis's offensive system was based to minimize mistakes and use quick passes keep the LBs off the line so they could run the ball. The kinda of system that QBs like Bledsoe would flounder in, but the kind Brady excels in. If you need an example, look at ND. Look at Brady Quinn. he's QB rating has gone up from 82 last year to 102 this year. Is Brady Quinn or the Irish THAT much better last year than this year? No, but Brady Quinn is in a BETTER SYSTEM that helps him succeed. QBs like Marino, Manning, Kelly, Young, Montana, and Favre won in several different systems. I'll give credit to the Management and coaching of the Pats for putting together one of the greatest teams of all time. And I would gladly take Brady on the bills, as he's an excellent QB. But, until he has to do it outside of the Weis offense (which is still there for the most part), I will never consider him an 'all time great'

[ATBNG]

That Denver game is a horrible example.  It was 28 to 3 with over 25 minutes to go in the game.  The Pats scored 17 points in garbage time, which for this game, was the entire second half.  Make no mistake, the only reason this game "looked" close to those who didn't have to witness it, was that Shanahan sat on a 25 point lead.  When it looked like it was getting close, Denver just stopped them.

 

The Pats last drive, when they were down by 8 points (note that a FG wouldn't get it done...no Vinatieri to bail him out this time), and needed their "Hall of Fame" QB to put a great drive together with 5 minutes to go, mustered a drive of...drum roll...20 yards.  Denver then ran out the clock. 

 

Hardly a drive befitting Brady's placement in the pantheon of gridiron heros his bandwagon fans already have him in.  But not shocking for those of us who know that he's really just a slightly better than mediocre QB.

481556[/snapback]

 

The game wasn't as close as the final, but blaming Brady for the failure of the final drive seems a bit much. On the last series, he hit Givens in the chest with a perfect 20 yard throw that was going for at least another 10 yards and Givens dropped the ball. He also made a good throw to Branch on 3rd and 20 which was well defensed by the Broncos.

 

The guy has played four full seasons, and has led his team to the Super Bowl in three of them, and you say with pride that you "know that he's really just a slightly better than mediocre QB." It's not really a defensible conclusion intellectually. No QB has done that in the history of the league in his first five years (even counting 2000). He's 9-0 in the playoffs. How on earth could he possibly be "slightly better than mediocre?"

[ATBNG]

Below are Tom Brady's career stats for "bombs", throws that are in the air for 40+ yards.  As a comparison, I've included Manning's as he's considered a "real threat" with the long ball.

 

Brady (5 seasons*)- 12 of 42 (28.6% comp) for 638 yards 6TDs 6INTs

 

Manning - (8 seasons*)- 9 of 39 (23% comp) for 499 yards 5TDs 3INTs

 

* this includes the 6 games played be each this season.

 

So, the guy that “can't” throw the ball more than 20 yards has more completions, attempts, yards, and TDs in his career than Manning on balls in the air over 40 yards…and he’s done it in 3 fewer seasons than Manning.  He also has a better completion percentage as well as a better YPA (15.2 for Brady vs. 12.8 for Manning).

 

Granted, Manning is better at the intermediate stuff than Brady, but this notion that Brady "can't" throw the deep ball is pure make-believe.

482236[/snapback]

 

I agree.

 

The other point here is that the Patriots have a philosophy and personnel that have in part led to these numbers. They don't have a monster wide receiver like a CJ, Owens or Moss deliberately. Their best receiver (Branch) is very small by NFL standards, and the strength of his game is his route running (especially good at recognizing up blitzes and cutting off accordingly). Givens is a little more of an intermediate, physical guy, but he doesn't have a ton of speed (combine slow if you will) and is mostly used from 8-15 yards. Dwight's a slot receiver at best. Patten did a nice job for them but he's not a top level WR talent. Brown's production has slipped steadily since 2001, and is another guy that doesn't have blow away physical skills, but is smart, has good hands and runs intelligent routes.

 

Because of that, they're not really trying to hit 20-40 yard passes in their offense. They will go up top with the 40+ tries a lot more using Bethel Johnson, who couldn't run a complicated route to save his life but can be effective as a burner on a fly route.

 

Since Belichick has come in, they have not really paid big money for a wide receiver (Brown made OK money through his prime, but he also has had a great deal of special teams value). I think this is by design. Have more depth at the position, be able to go five wide and take advantage of your quarterback's ability to be able to make the right read to get a good matchup, and save the few million you'd be paying for that stud wideout for other areas of the team.

 

This isn't a knock at Moulds (who I like a great, great deal), but I don't think the Pats would ever want him....at 6 or 8 million on the cap as he has been in recent years. While the NFL publicity machine and fantasy football owners drool over these loudmouthed big receivers like Owens and CJ and broadcasts eight different angles of their touchdown dances, the last five Super Bowl winners have not had a top ten receiver on it, and maybe not a receiver in the top twenty. I'll hear arguments for Branch last year (although he missed half of it) and maybe Brown in 2001, but there's pretty much no one from Baltimore (2000), Tampa (2002), and New England (2003).

[ATBNG]

I have no doubt he could have beaten the Rams in the SB the following week, given his performance against a better defense in their house (the Steelers), versus the Rams' weaker defense on a neutral field. 

480806[/snapback]

 

You should have doubt, and lots of it.

 

Let's go back to January, 2005, and that gag job Drew threw up against Pittsburgh's (mostly) second unit in an elimination game. Was that solely his fault? No - lots of blame was available to be spread around that day.

 

Did he play anything close to well? No. 2 fumbles and a pick versus no touchdowns. I just don't understand how you as a fan could watch that debacle take place year, and then similarly transpose an argument that that same guy would have won the Super Bowl given the opportunity. Forget the strength of the opposing team's defense and focus on the way Drew Bledsoe plays when the stakes are highest. If only Mr. October were a compliment in football.....

 

He's got six TD's versus 12 interceptions and three fumbles in his seven playoff games. There's basically no such thing as Drew Bledsoe in a big game without a nut-crunching turnover, and he's averaging over 2 per playoff game.

 

Drew Bledsoe is never going to start and win a Super Bowl as a QB.

[Coach Tuesday]

Forgive me for not going back and reading this entire thread to see if this point has been made, BUT... isn't the issue not WHAT Brady's downfield completion ratio is, but what it is in KEY MOMENTS/GAMES? Isn't that what "defines" his legacy? His ability to hit the long passes in the playoffs in Pittsburgh, in the Superbowl against Carolina, etc.? Isn't this one of those instances of the stats not telling the whole story?

[MadBuffaloDisease]

You should have doubt, and lots of it.

 

Let's go back to January, 2005, and that gag job Drew threw up against Pittsburgh's (mostly) second unit in an elimination game. Was that solely his fault? No - lots of blame was available to be spread around that day.

 

Did he play anything close to well? No. 2 fumbles and a pick versus no touchdowns. I just don't understand how you as a fan could watch that debacle take place year, and then similarly transpose an argument that that same guy would have won the Super Bowl given the opportunity. Forget the strength of the opposing team's defense and focus on the way Drew Bledsoe plays when the stakes are highest. If only Mr. October were a compliment in football.....

 

He's got six TD's versus 12 interceptions and three fumbles in his seven playoff games. There's basically no such thing as Drew Bledsoe in a big game without a nut-crunching turnover, and he's averaging over 2 per playoff game.

 

Drew Bledsoe is never going to start and win a Super Bowl as a QB.

Bledsoe is obviously on the downside of his career and has been for a few years. We're talking 2005, but I was talking about 4 years earlier, i.e. 2001. Brady is obviously is in his prime. My point in talking about the Steelers AFCCG is that it was a big game, on the road, against one of the top defenses in the NFL, and still Bledsoe was able to not lose the game, and actually help win it by a TD, thus proving the Pats could win without Brady. And that was coming off the bench a little before the half, and after a 4 month layoff recovering from his injury. With a week to prepare to face the Rams, a team with a weaker defense and on a neutral field, I have little doubt he could have won that game. Maybe not the other SB's, but again, he was on the downside of his career. Maybe back in the mid-90's he could have, and maybe if his defense in the Packers SB could have mustered 3 turnovers, which is what the Pats defense has averaged in their 3 SB wins under Brady, that might have been a win as well.