Pats doing well will "tarnish Brady's legacy"?

[aluminum seats]

I hate to start another media thread, but this gets to something so fundamentally idiotic I couldn't resist. Some moron writes to Peter King about how if the Pats win the Super Bowl this year it will hurt Brady's "legacy" which King actually agrees with.

Sigh.

This is the same line of thinking that had the dopes pulling out Belichick's coaching record without Brady, suggesting his success came solely from Brady. It creates a real nice situation for them this year, in that they'll be able to either disparage Brady or Belichick depending on how the Pats do. This is almost painfully stupid. Here's the thing.....winning Super Bowls is hard. Doing the things that Brady has done is absolutely remarkable. Developing a dynasty like Belichick (and Pioli) has done is extraordinary.

This team may be able to win it with Cassel--either because the complete team will be able to do it with simply decent qb play, or he'll be something special as well, or whatever. But the brilliance of Brady and Belichick isn't something that depends on anything this year--it's already been categorically established. Is that so hard to understand?

 

[primetime]

Cassel isn't going to throw for 50 TDs and set records no matter who he's throwing to. He'll be lucky to hit 20. The line of thinking is stupid.

 

[Truck]

This kind of sh*t is stupid.
Its very simple:
BB + Brady + everyone else on the pats = awesome and everyone constantly whining about running up the score
BB + Cassel + everyone else on the pats = good enough for a playoff run, maybe a superbowl

 

[thenepatsrule]

people who have been watching nfl for the last 10 years know what brady is capable of and that he is one of the best to have ever played the game........ looks like king is a person with short lived memory.........

 

[DarrylS]

The media ass clowns need to justify their fat cat salaries... unfortunately someone will repeat this and look like a complete moroon..

 

[JAYHAWKS34]

I hate to start another media thread, but this gets to something so fundamentally idiotic I couldn't resist. Some moron writes to Peter King about how if the Pats win the Super Bowl this year it will hurt Brady's "legacy" which King actually agrees with.

Sigh.

This is the same line of thinking that had the dopes pulling out Belichick's coaching record without Brady, suggesting his success came solely from Brady. It creates a real nice situation for them this year, in that they'll be able to either disparage Brady or Belichick depending on how the Pats do. This is almost painfully stupid. Here's the thing.....winning Super Bowls is hard. Doing the things that Brady has done is absolutely remarkable. Developing a dynasty like Belichick (and Pioli) has done is extraordinary.

This team may be able to win it with Cassel--either because the complete team will be able to do it with simply decent qb play, or he'll be something special as well, or whatever. But the brilliance of Brady and Belichick isn't something that depends on anything this year--it's already been categorically established. Is that so hard to understand?

This is stupid to even bring this up

 

[Mungo]

what a ghey thread

 

[BradyManny]

It's completely asinine, but it's true, Brady haters will use our success this year against him.

In reality, whatever success we have this year should only increase his legacy - for whatever success Cassel has, you have to consider Brady's role in mentoring him and the 4 years Cassel has spent watching and learning from Brady.

 

[LasVegasPatsFan]

Let me put your mind at ease. New England Patriots hasn't won a superbowl EVER until Tom Brady took field. Since then they won 3. I guess if Denver or San Fran wins another superbowl it will tarnish Elway's and Montana's legacy as well. Just saying

 

[Jimke]

Let's wait until Cassel engineers a last minute Superbowl win over

the Cowboys before we discuss this subject.

 

[aluminum seats]

what a ghey thread

Thanks for the contribution, Junior. That's terrific.

 

[JoePats]

It's not surprising that this popped up. In fact many here on this board predicted this last week. If the Pats did well, Brady becomes a system QB, and if the Pats did poorly, then BB is an average coach.

 

[Lifer]

I will remind everyone the Patriots have not won a Super Bowl since David Patten left. They have yet to prove they can go all the way without David Patten and Brady and Belichick have not grabbed the brass ring since.

Hence, history shall show that the real key to the Patriots dynasty was David Patten.

 

[ginachen]

If Steve Young's success after Joe Montana get hurt didn't tarnish Montana's legacy for being one of the greatest QB ever, then Tom Brady's shouldn't either, but of course, lots haters out there will think so.

 

[MassPats38]

Posters here have been arguing the Patriots couldn't do it without Brady. If you believe that (and I don't as success in the NFL is helped by stars but achieved by teams), then succeeding with Cassel disproves that theory and thus takes something away from Brady's contribution to past glory.

In the end, Brady is great. His stats and achievements prove it, and nobody can take that away from him or his contributions to the success of the Patriots. The reality is the 49'ers, not just Montana, were great (the team had a hall of fame back-up). So were the Cowboys (anybody remember the Herschel Walker deal with the Vikings that built that team?), not just Troy. And the Packers (anyone remember Reggie White or Gilbert Brown), not just Starr or Favre. If a team succeeds with a QB out of nowhere (and this would not be the first or last time), then it simply proves the team as a whole is good (not as good or better than when it had the superstar). That does not logically detract from what the superstar adds to the team. Hall of fame QB's like Marino, Moon, Kelly and Elway have not been able to single-handedly carry their respective teams to glory. It takes a team effort to do that.

Haters will hate. With Brady out, everybody is hoping Belichick will be exposed as a fraud. If Belichick is not exposed, the attack turns to Brady in an attempt to marginalize what he has done. If both coach and QB succeed, then Belichick cheated and handed those blueprints to Brady, who thus achieved not on his ability to react to defenses but rather because he knew what was coming. This chain of logic helps the haters avoid facing the inescapable reality that the Patriots organization is solid and their teams' organization is not quite as solid, which provides the simple but painful explanation for their teams' repeated failures against the Patriots over the years.

 

[signbabybrady]

The only way that would be true IMO is if Cassel were to outdo Brady's numbers from last year. Not happening. And if someone tries to pull that crap the numbers and stats will stand really strong against it.

 

[Fixit]

Steve Young did okay, but no one thinks that tarnished Montana's legacy at all. This is a desperate attempt for all of those people who cling to the "Brady is a system QB" garbage.

 

[bitsygirl]

The Pats haven't won a Super Bowl since Charlie and Romeo left!
Parcells never won a Super Bowl without BB.
Coincidence? I'm not sure.

 

[Fixit]

If Steve Young's success after Joe Montana get hurt didn't tarnish Montana's legacy for being one of the greatest QB ever, then Tom Brady's shouldn't either, but of course, lots haters out there will think so.

Oops, you beat me.

 

[JAYHAWKS34]

The Pats haven't won a Super Bowl since Charlie and Romeo left!
Parcells never won a Super Bowl without BB.
Coincidence? I'm not sure.

Thank you, everyone in this forum is now dumber because of that comment, you are awarded no points