Men's Apparel Jerseys Hats Novelties Throwback Women's Youth
 
REGISTER FOR PATSFANS.COM

Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!


Go Back   New England Patriots Forums - PatsFans.com Patriots Fan Messageboard > PatsFans.com Forums > PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum
Forgot Password? Join PatsFans.com!
Register Blogs FAQ Members List Calendar Arcade Mark Forums Read Chat Room

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-24-2009, 07:51 PM   #961
"There Will Be Blood"
 
IcyPatriot's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Here
Posts: 14,852
Default Re: The Official 'Trade Brady' Debate Thread - Do Not Start Another One

Quote:
Originally Posted by BradyFTW! View Post
teams that have won without a top-tier QB since 2001: Bucs, Giants
teams that have won without a top-tier defense since 2001: Colts

Looks to me like you can win it all without one, but you absolutely have to have at least one of the two, and are much better off if you have both (obviously).

What you have to realize, though, is how big of a role luck plays in determining who actually wins the SB. The Patriots had chance go in their favor many times from 2001 to 2004, and it showed. They were a miracle helmet catch/horrendously blown call from winning in 2007. So, rather than judging entire philosophies based on lucky bounces here and there, I'd rather look at the teams that, year in and year out, are in the running. The ones that are in the playoffs every year, in the conference championship games, going to Super Bowls.

Who fits that description this decade? The Pats, Steelers, and Colts. It's a short list, and I feel very comfortable saying that, in this decade, those three franchises are in a class of their own. All 3 have perennial all pros at QB. All three also have very good defenses. So, basically, you need your QB and your defense to both be, at the very least, very good.

Luckily for the Pats, they already have a great QB and a very good defense. With Brady, they're Super Bowl-caliber right now. With Cassel, they're in the class of the Ravens, Titans, and Giants. Cassel is a good QB, but he's not Brady, Peyton, or Roethlisberger by a long shot.

The Patriots already have a top-tier defense (go ahead and check the rankings). Even if you want to argue that they don't, trading away the best QB in the league so that you'll have a better chance at getting an even better D (but still without any guarantee) is still trading away a necessity that you already have so that you might be able to get another one. It just doesn't add up.

Good summation BradyFTW.

If we can get 2 picks for Cassel we'll be fine because I believe Bill will take 4 picks in the 1st three rounds this year and the same next year ... out of those 8 we'll have 6 players to help us win while Brady is still ripe.
IcyPatriot is offline   Reply With Quote
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!

Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a free Patriots T-Shirt and save 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account.

NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 188

Updated 10/31/09

Help Us Reach Our Goal!

Old 01-24-2009, 09:12 PM   #962
In the Starting Line-up
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,501
Default Re: The Official 'Trade Brady' Debate Thread - Do Not Start Another One

Quote:
Originally Posted by BradyFTW! View Post
teams that have won without a top-tier QB since 2001: Bucs, Giants
teams that have won without a top-tier defense since 2001: Colts

Looks to me like you can win it all without one, but you absolutely have to have at least one of the two, and are much better off if you have both (obviously).

It's also worth noting that, since the offense-favoring rule changes in 2004, we've had 1 team win without an elite defense and 1 team win without an elite QB. And the team without the elite QB won because he suddenly started playing like one. This year, they went out with a whimper in the playoffs, largely because Eli regressed back to what he really is.

What you have to realize, though, is how big of a role luck plays in determining who actually wins the SB. The Patriots had chance go in their favor many times from 2001 to 2004, and it showed. They were a miracle helmet catch/horrendously blown call from winning in 2007. So, rather than judging entire philosophies based on lucky bounces here and there, I'd rather look at the teams that, year in and year out, are in the running. The ones that are in the playoffs every year, in the conference championship games, going to Super Bowls.

Who fits that description this decade? The Pats, Steelers, and Colts. It's a short list, and I feel very comfortable saying that, in this decade, those three franchises are in a class of their own. All 3 have perennial all pros at QB. All three also have very good defenses. So, basically, you need your QB and your defense to both be, at the very least, very good.

Luckily for the Pats, they already have a great QB and a very good defense. With Brady, they're Super Bowl-caliber right now. With Cassel, they're in the class of the Ravens, Titans, and Giants. Cassel is a good QB, but he's not Brady, Peyton, or Roethlisberger by a long shot.

The Patriots already have a top-tier defense (go ahead and check the rankings). Even if you want to argue that they don't, trading away the best QB in the league so that you'll have a better chance at getting an even better D (but still without any guarantee) is still trading away a necessity that you already have so that you might be able to get another one. It just doesn't add up.

Actually, the Colts defense was playing good ball at the right time. Their defense handled the teams in the playoffs, although they were really bad during the regular season.
When the Patriots won in 2001, it was their defense which carried them.
The Steelers last Super Bowl was also won because of their defense. They won despite Big Ben in that game. This year, he is winning games for them, but they would not be there without that defense. Defense wins championships.
Everybody remembers the big three from the Dallas Cowboy's dynasty. I followed them closely back then, as I lived in Dallas. They had a great defense which is why they were so successful.
No one talks about the greatest offense ever in a Super Bowl. I'm not sure who that would be, tho, you could claim the Bears defense as the greatest with maybe Baltimore coming in second.
The Patriots will probably not win another Super Bowl unless they make some significant changes with their defense. How do you call them a top tier defense with those red zone numbers?
scout is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2009, 01:28 PM   #963
PatsFans.com Supporter
 

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 5,406
Default Re: The Official 'Trade Brady' Debate Thread - Do Not Start Another One

Quote:
Originally Posted by scout View Post
Actually, the Colts defense was playing good ball at the right time. Their defense handled the teams in the playoffs, although they were really bad during the regular season.
When the Patriots won in 2001, it was their defense which carried them.
The Steelers last Super Bowl was also won because of their defense. They won despite Big Ben in that game. This year, he is winning games for them, but they would not be there without that defense. Defense wins championships.
Everybody remembers the big three from the Dallas Cowboy's dynasty. I followed them closely back then, as I lived in Dallas. They had a great defense which is why they were so successful.
No one talks about the greatest offense ever in a Super Bowl. I'm not sure who that would be, tho, you could claim the Bears defense as the greatest with maybe Baltimore coming in second.
The Patriots will probably not win another Super Bowl unless they make some significant changes with their defense. How do you call them a top tier defense with those red zone numbers?
Nobody's denying that you need a very good defense to win a Super Bowl. My point is that we already have one, and if you don't believe me go ahead and look at the statistics. What you also need is a top-tier QB, and we already have one of those two, unless a couple people in this thread have their way.

BTW, do you have any response to my previous post, or are you just going to ignore it, like you ignore everything that completely invalidates your argument?
BradyFTW! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2009, 07:00 PM   #964
Moderator
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,896
Default Re: The Official 'Trade Brady' Debate Thread - Do Not Start Another One

Quote:
Originally Posted by AzPatsFan View Post
I hear all these pseudo-learned people saying you can't allocate $28 million to the QB position? Oh? Why Not? The Clots did when the CAP was a hell of a lot smaller, several years ago. The Patriots can, due to their previous prudent CAP management.
USATODAY.com
__________________
My youngest sister's best friend is on the board of directors of a food pantry in Malden, Massachusetts that distributed 285,000 meals and meal equivalents in 2005. I am asking that if you have found my salary cap pages useful that if you are able to do so, please make a donation to it. Please contact me for more information.
Miguel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2009, 07:43 PM   #965
JSn
Canada's Wicked Hosah!
 
JSn's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,097
Default Re: The Official 'Trade Brady' Debate Thread - Do Not Start Another One

Quote:
Originally Posted by Miguel View Post
Nice! I love the way you argue, hehe.

Looked up Brady and Cassel there too. Decided it'd be nice to have a side by side comparison. Bang for buck, Cassel won this year by a lot. Epic waste goes to Tommy, (not blaming him, obviously). Keep in mind, kiddies, these are just cap hits.

Tom F. Brady
Code:
Year	Team     	Cap Value
2008	Patriots 	$ 14,621,320
2007	Patriots 	$ 7,345,160
2006	Patriots 	$ 13,828,590 
2005	Patriots 	$ 8,427,930
2004	Patriots 	$ 5,062,950
2003	Patriots 	$ 3,323,450
2002	Patriots 	$ 1,091,613
2001	Patriots 	$ 314,993
2000	Patriots 	$ 205,800
Peyton Meh. Manning
Code:
Year	Team	Cap Value
2008	Colts 	$ 18,704,320
2007	Colts 	$ 8,203,840
2006	Colts 	$ 10,571,068
2005	Colts 	$ 8,435,186
2004	Colts 	$ 8,304,366
2003	Colts 	$ 15,360,833
2002	Colts 	$ 10,334,483
2001	Colts 	$ 8,487,893
2000	Colts 	$ 6,702,500
Matt No Hassle Cassel
Code:
Year	Team		Cap Value
2008	Patriots 	$ 539,140
2007	Patriots 	$ 454,140
2006	Patriots 	$ 368,780
2005	Patriots 	$ 243,500
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
JSn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2009, 07:50 PM   #966
Second Team and Threatening Starter's Job
 

Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,212
Default Re: The Official 'Trade Brady' Debate Thread - Do Not Start Another One

Quote:
Originally Posted by scout View Post
A
The Patriots will probably not win another Super Bowl unless they make some significant changes with their defense. How do you call them a top tier defense with those red zone numbers?


"...significant changes" is over stating things. Check back here after the Cards win the Superbowl by blowing by the Stillers. What we didn't have enough of were play makers, as opposed to a machine-like D.

The problem was we couldn't make one the one big play on D to stop the Colts or Giants in the last two playoffs, or the stinking Jets in this year's second game.

Actually, we are so close to being good enough on D that we nearly made the playoffs without the NFL's best player while simultaneously losing several major D players for the season.

We don't a large scale rebuilding. What we need is an Adrian Wilson, Ed Reed, Haynesworth, James Harrison, Polomaulu, etc. We are so close as a team all we need is one dominant player on D, and we don't have one anymore. Mayo is close and Seymour reached near dominant form at times this year.

This team makes just 4-5 plays on D that slipped away and we're right there with 4, maybe 5 SB's.

What we must have from the blizzard of coming picks is at least one superman, an overwhelming force that makes everything around him better - like Seymour in our 1st SB, and then Rodney, and, of course the epitome, Brady.
__________________
King of my matchbox sized world

Last edited by Brady'sButtBoy; 01-25-2009 at 07:52 PM.
Brady'sButtBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2009, 08:24 PM   #967
In the Starting Line-up
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,501
Default Re: The Official 'Trade Brady' Debate Thread - Do Not Start Another One

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brady'sButtBoy View Post

"...significant changes" is over stating things. Check back here after the Cards win the Superbowl by blowing by the Stillers. What we didn't have enough of were play makers, as opposed to a machine-like D.

The problem was we couldn't make one the one big play on D to stop the Colts or Giants in the last two playoffs, or the stinking Jets in this year's second game.

Actually, we are so close to being good enough on D that we nearly made the playoffs without the NFL's best player while simultaneously losing several major D players for the season.

We don't a large scale rebuilding. What we need is an Adrian Wilson, Ed Reed, Haynesworth, James Harrison, Polomaulu, etc. We are so close as a team all we need is one dominant player on D, and we don't have one anymore. Mayo is close and Seymour reached near dominant form at times this year.

This team makes just 4-5 plays on D that slipped away and we're right there with 4, maybe 5 SB's.

What we must have from the blizzard of coming picks is at least one superman, an overwhelming force that makes everything around him better - like Seymour in our 1st SB, and then Rodney, and, of course the epitome, Brady.
Even tho, it's hard for me to get past your name, we do agree that defene wins championships.
The bottom line regarding the Pats/Giants Super bowl was that the Giants had the better defense, even tho we had the better qb. You might be right with that dominant play maker, tho, your throwing out there defensive MVP candidates. Either we get lucky in the draft or we maneuver down to grab one of those top tier rookies. I'm thinking we don't get one of those guys in free agency.
I hope your right about the Cards, but I just don't see it happening. Again, its that defensive thing.
scout is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2009, 09:31 PM   #968
In the Starting Line-up
 

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Olathe,KS
Posts: 2,929
Default Re: The Official 'Trade Brady' Debate Thread - Do Not Start Another One

Quote:
Originally Posted by BradyFTW! View Post
Nobody's denying that you need a very good defense to win a Super Bowl. My point is that we already have one, and if you don't believe me go ahead and look at the statistics. What you also need is a top-tier QB, and we already have one of those two, unless a couple people in this thread have their way.

BTW, do you have any response to my previous post, or are you just going to ignore it, like you ignore everything that completely invalidates your argument?
top tier defense. Give me a break. Pittsburgh has a top tier defense. Baltimore has a top tier defense.

the Patriots do not. Statistics?? The Statistics used to rank defenses are totally useless. A team is #1 in pass defense, based on yardage? Maybe its because they give up 300 on the ground and other teams dont have to pass.

the 70's Patriots teams always were ranked high based on yardage, but guess what? they could never make a play when it counted.
conversely, the 2001 Patriots were ranked something like 18th in defense, they bent but didnt break.

Use your eyes. The Patriots havent been a top tier defense since 2004.
Lifer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2009, 10:33 PM   #969
PatsFans.com Supporter
 
Patjew's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Shenzhen, China
Posts: 5,952
Default Re: The Official 'Trade Brady' Debate Thread - Do Not Start Another One

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lifer View Post
ranked something like 18th in defense, they bent but didnt break.

Use your eyes. The Patriots havent been a top tier defense since 2004.
I think they were the second half of 2005 including the playoffs. But since then the D seems to vary from very good to mediocre.
__________________
Ian bows to no one. He is like the love child of Chuck Norris and Adam Seward.
Patjew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2009, 01:13 AM   #970
In the Starting Line-up
 
Joker's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 3,610
Default Re: The Official 'Trade Brady' Debate Thread - Do Not Start Another One

Warner going to his 3rd Super Bowl

Elway winning 2 at the end of his career

yeah...let's get rid of Tom Brady and forget he's ALREADY won THREE Super Bowls and use as our argument Cassel is younger and just went 11-5 and ended up out of the playoffs.

Really, for all the fantasy geek freaks that think this CRAP is even a REMOTE possibility, find a competent mental health professional and find your way back to the real world.
Joker is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
brady-cassel comparisons, classic thread

Sponsored Links


PATRIOTS MERCHANDISE

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0

© Copyright 2008 PatsFans.com - The opinions posted in this forum do not necessarily reflect the opinions of PatsFans.com or our staff.
We are not affiliated with the New England Patriots™ or the NFL™. The Photo Used In the header was taken by Ian Logue.

This site is owned and operated by I&K Internet Design Enterprises, LLC


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426