Originally Posted by scott99

Stats-smats, It's pretty simple. If Brady plays like he did against the Broncos, we win, if he plays like he did against the Ravens, we lose.

Originally Posted by ivanvamp

Brady has only had two "terrible" games which were followed by a bye week before his next game. Here they were:

2001 - week 16, he went 17-29 (58.6%), 198 yds, 1 td, 2 int, 62.1 rating against the Panthers. They earned a bye for the playoffs as the #2 seed, then hosted the Raiders in the Snow Bowl game. For that game, Brady had this line: 32-52 (61.5%), 312 yds, 0 td, 1 int, 70.4 rating.

2002 - week 6, he put up this line in a 28-10 loss to the Packers: 24-44 (54.5%), 183 yds, 1 td, 3 int, 44.0 rating. They had a bye for week 7, then they lost to Denver in week 8, 24-16, with Brady putting up this line: 15-29 (51.7%), 130 yds, 1 td, 0 int, 75.4 rating.

In 2007 he had a "bad" game in the AFCCG against SD in a 21-12 win: 22-33 (66.7%), 209 yds, 2 td, 3 int, 66.4 rating. They had the bye then played the Giants in the SB, where Brady put up this line: 29-48 (60.4%), 266 yds, 1 td, 0 int, 82.5 rating.

Here are all of Brady's stat lines the week after a bye. I'll designate which games followed anything less than a "good" performance, according to my rubric (marked with an *):

2001 - Divisional Round - 32-52 (61.5%), 312 yds, 0 td, 1 int, 70.4 rating - beat Oak 16-13*

2001 - Super Bowl - 16-27 (59.3%), 145 yds, 1 td, 0 int, 86.2 rating - beat StL 20-17

2002 - Week 8 - 15-29 (51.7%), 130 yds, 1 td, 0 int, 75.4 rating - lost to Den 24-16*

2003 - Week 10 - 15-34 (44.1%), 212 yds, 0 td, 0 int, 64.8 rating - beat Dal 12-0

2003 - Divisional Round - 21-41 (51.2%), 201 yds, 1 td, 0 int, 73.3 rating - beat Ten 17-14

2003 - Super Bowl - 32-48 (66.7%), 354 yds, 3 td, 1 int, 100.5 rating - beat Car 32-29*

2004 - Week 3 - 17-30 (56.7%), 298 yds, 2 td, 0 int, 112.9 rating - beat Buf 31-17*

2004 - Super Bowl - 23-33 (69.7%), 236 yds, 2 td, 0 int, 110.2 rating - beat Phi 24-21

2005 - Week 7 - 14-21 (66.7%), 199 yds, 1 td, 0 int, 113.0 rating - beat Buf 21-16*

2006 - Week 6 - 18-27 (66.7%), 195 yds, 2 td, 0 int, 112.4 rating - beat Buf 28-6

2007 - Week 10 - 31-39 (79.5%), 373 yds, 5 td, 0 int, 146.1 rating - beat Buf 56-10

2007 - Divisional Round - 26-28 (92.9%), 262 yds, 3 td, 0 int, 141.4 rating - beat Jax 31-20

2007 - Super Bowl - 29-48 (60.4%), 266 yds, 1 td, 0 int, 82.5 rating - lost to NYG 17-14*

2008 - N/A

2009 - Week 8 - 25-37 (67.6%), 332 yds, 1 td, 1 int, 93.5 rating - beat Mia 27-17

2010 - Week 5 - 27-44 (61.4%), 292 yds, 1 td, 2 int, 69.5 rating - beat Bal 23-20

2010 - Divisional Round - 29-45 (64.4%), 299 yds, 2 td, 1 int, 89.0 rating - lost to NYJ 28-21

2011 - Week 7 - 24-35 (68.6%), 198 yds, 2 td, 0 int, 101.8 rating - lost to Pit 25-17

2011 - Divisional Round - 26-34 (76.5%), 363 yds, 6 td, 1 int, 137.6 rating - beat Den 45-10

That's 18 games following a bye. Of these 18, here's where they would fit in my rubric:

excellent: 3 (16.7%)
very good: 6 (33.3%)
good: 3 (16.7%)
average: 2 (11.1%)
poor: 3 (16.7%)
terrible: 1 (5.6%)

So 12 of the 18 (66.7%) were "good" or better.

Of these 18, just 6 of them followed a performance that was "average" or worse. Here were the QB ratings in those 6 instances: 70.4, 75.4, 100.5, 112.9, 113.0, and 82.5.

So again, a bit of a mixed bag. He's never been hideous in that situation, but he's never been insanely brilliant either. He's either been below average or very good. 50-50 proposition, really.

Wish I had better news to share!

Originally Posted by ivanvamp

No doubt. And a QB can play really well but still finish with just a so-so QB rating. For example, let's say Brady hits 90% of his completions and gets the team down to the 1 every time, but they run the ball in from there. He won't have the TD on his stat line which really would have boosted his QB rating.

So to you, and to Andy, I agree, it's not a crystal clear picture. But it really is about all I have available, unfortunately. Baseball stat geeks have done a ridiculously great job of breaking down everything that happens on a field and the stats are incredible. There is something called "linear weights" that quantifies everything. I wish there was something like that for football but, to my knowledge, there is not. So this is all I have to go with. Sorry!

Originally Posted by BigHoss28

Disagree... The Ravens are just as good as the Giants in my opinion.

Originally Posted by Seacoast Fan

Stop apologizing and start working...you've been given your assignment, now MOVE!

Just kidding, of course...great thread, a ton of work and time went into it. I say this alot here, but its threads like this that keep me coming to this board. I dont always agree with the posts, and sometimes the posts show, like yours did, that things are not alway clear cut, but its a great read anyway! thanks.

Originally Posted by PatriotSeven

He tossed a meaningless interception which hurt his passer rating, but was the right risk to take