The greats fall off the map at 38, with the exception of Moon. Believing an unathletic stick will defy the odds is a risky bet. 53% completion rate vs Baltimore supports the author's case more than the "Brady is different" rump swabbers.
Looking at the 53% completion rate in a vacuum is silly. If he completes another pass or two that were dropped, he'd have had a 60% completion rate and no one would have cared. He also converted 7/15 first downs in that game, and put up 428 yds of offense. They had the ball in FG range (inside the BAL 35) on EIGHT separate occasions. I don't know about you, but most of the time I will assume that if something like that happens we'd have a pretty good chance at winning the game.
They had a 13-7 lead with 5:00 remaining in the 3rd quarter, so in my opinion it doesn't really matter if they were winning 36-30, 23-17, or 13-7...the fact remains that Brady still had his team in the lead with 2/3 of the game being played vs a defense that came together and played nicely in the postseason.
Some of the much bigger factors of that game were:
--the 25+mph crosswinds that caused them to punt 3x in 8 opportunities in what normally is FG range, something that is no one's fault, and something that you'll rarely see
--the defensive side of the ball giving up 3 later game TD's in the last 1/3 (20 min) of the contest..again despite having the lead after 40 minutes
--Ridley's concussion which resulted in his knee moving forward and fumbling a split second before he was technically down
--A tipped pass at the LOS resulting in back to back turnovers when the offense had excellent drives that moved the ball down the field nicely
--Welker dropping the ball on their first drive of the 3rd quarter that would have either made the lead 16-7, or even potentially 20-7. That took away all the momentum they had, and changed the outcome of the game entirely
--Not being able to convert after the Pollard personal foul took the ball from the NE 25 all the way to the BAL 36, which once again would have given them a comfortable lead in the 3rd quarter
--Missing at least one/two shots at the EZ right before the half due to the mismanagement of time for a team who probably practices time management and situational football more than any other team in the NFL
--The lack of a running game despite BAL daring them to run in a nickel defense once again (NYJ 2010)
--The key loss of Rob Gronkowski the week before in a freak injury
--The early loss of Talib and Jones, which shifted the scheme and attack dramatically and led to being forced to play Marquice Cole on Anquan Boldin (arguably one of the top choices for most important aspect)
If you want to argue that the Patriot offense had an uncharacteristically poor performance in terms of converting their opportunities, then you'd be right, but let's not act like BAL totally shut down Brady either because it isn't true.
In the dynasty years of '01-'04 there were 9 playoff games, all victories. In 7 of those 9 playoff games (the anomaly being the Steelers game in the 04 AFCCG) the offense averaged 18.4 points....yet won every game.
I don't remember hearing anyone talk of how Brady wasn't good enough, or that the offense couldn't score enough back then, so I don't see how it's much different now aside from the fact that this defense cannot win close, low-scoring games. They have given up 33, 28, and 28 in three of the last four playoff losses. That's not on Brady..
