A ring for the thumb: Can Brady win Five Superbowls?

letekro said:

Through 3 quarters, the Seahawks had outgained the Patriots 321-245. Your perpetually rose-colored glasses may tell you otherwise, but the Patriots dominated the fourth quarter, not the game.

Click to expand...

PatsFanInVa said:

Another back-to-back win would be oh so sweet. It would solidify just what these Patriot teams, Brady, Belichick, and Kraft have achieved so well... Brady would join Bradshaw as the only QB to win it B2B twice... but separated by 10 intervening years, not 2. Brady would get "one for the thumb" of course. And every TD he throws would be yet another record. With his playoff and regular season successes, the GOAT conversation would be just plain over (sorry Joe Montana.)

But I confess my vote was for "Yes but not this year." One thing that should be clear by now is that barring an announcement of "This year then I'm gone" (and probably including such an announcement,) the Pats will not deeply mortgage the future and depend on new acquisitions to "buy" the championship.

And if you look at the teams that won rings, it's conspicuous that the most "loaded" teams (The Welker + Moss years) just did not get it done. Of course we wuz robbed in 07-08, but if only by the hand of the Almighty, we didn't win that one. It is what it is.

The 2014 team put an exclamation point on the way they played the 2014 season: 60 minutes, not 59 minutes and 30 seconds, not 58 minutes, etc. Nothing came easy... for the '14 team, being down on the scoreboard was fuel. You'd rather not be in that position, but they got tough that way.

I know that every year is different and every team is different. I hope 2015's team retains that kind of resolve. There's no guaranty, even if they do... but I firmly believe that you need enough talent to win, and you need to stay healthy (largely one of those uncontrollable outcomes)... and you need decent depth to have a shot even if you aren't healthy.

But teams win games, not individuals, even TFB (though of course we like our chances less without a healthy Brady).

Unfortunately my brain can't go with what my heart says... and I had to figure he wins a SB every 3-4 years on average. That includes winning 3 of 4, and it included losing 2 of 4, before 2014. One thing seems likely, given past performance... there is enough time that even by the average performances, we'll see him at least once more on the biggest stage. Of course when the drop-off comes, it might come very suddenly - as suddenly as last year's early season faux drop-off.

Click to expand...

Ivan said:

The Seahawks didn't complete a pass until there five minutes left in the first half and even Brady was caught talking about how they were owning them during it.

Click to expand...

RayClay said:

Though it sucks what obstacles returning champs have, I must say I'm excited to see what BB will come up with in FA and the draft to patch the various spots [or hit big with an acquired CB, DT or other vulnerable area. I have no doubt they can hit with a couple guards as the relative value odf contributors there should fall to where they have mid round picks [low second, thirds, extra seconds with a trade].

I', really wondering if he might throw some new players out there in early games to rest up the injured and offset the short off season. Nothing like getting thrown into the fire to prepare players for roles later in the season.

Click to expand...

letekro said:

If you had said, "Patriots pass defense was dominant for the first 25 minutes of the game," then I would have to agree with that statement. But your statement, was, "Patriots dominated the game." No big deal, I felt they did outplay the seahawks (which is why they won), but domination is several degrees too strong, IMO.

Click to expand...

supafly said:

Yes, the word "domination" would be several degrees too strong, as you said.

I think we can both see Ivan's point, which is that we moved the ball well, had a solid defense for much of the game, and came to win that day.

I think we can debate what the specifics are, but I'd have us winning the 1st and 4th, with SEA winning the 2nd and 3rd. The first and second quarters are more debatable, since they are the ones with the same amount of points, but I'd give SEA the 2nd for the way they ended the half to tie the game, which shifted the momentum greatly--as seen in the 3rd quarter where they ran with it and should've put the game away permanently.

Click to expand...

letekro said:

If you had said, "Patriots pass defense was dominant for the first 25 minutes of the game," then I would have to agree with that statement. But your statement, was, "Patriots dominated the game." No big deal, I felt they did outplay the seahawks (which is why they won), but domination is several degrees too strong, IMO.

Click to expand...

Ivan said:

What I have said repeatedly is that they outplayed the Seahawks in the first half and fourth quarter, the Seahawks dominated them in the third. It was a close game and a great game but the idea that they simply lucked out on a bad decision by Caroll is absurd. I'm not saying you were saying that, simply that it was what i was directing my comment at in the first place. My point is simply that the better team won that game.

Click to expand...