primetime
Pro Bowl Player
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2005
- Messages
- 13,627
- Reaction score
- 15,375
TeamPats said:I mean a Pats fan # 1 defense is scoreboard and winning %, let's not be too hypocritical here.
In the first couple of years, maybe. Brady's now so statistically impressive that his numbers can stand on their own too.
The difference between Brady and Roethlisberger is the Patriots take the ball, put it in Brady's hands, and say win this game. Like Montana before him, it's rare that he fails to do this, which is why the Patriots win most of their games. When he has a bad game as in Denver (which wasn't even a bad game, one bad pass... but it was a bad game for Brady), we're all left scratching our heads because it's rare. On the other hand, the Steelers give the ball to Roethlisberger and say don't lose this for us. If the Steelers win, it's usually a result of something else - a big defensive play, a Willie Parker 80 yard run (and referee help), and so on. If the Steelers lose, well, some of the blame gets deflected off Roethlisberger.
Do I think he's a good QB? Well, he has more rings than Peyton. Still, he's young and still has potential yet to be reached. But the same could be said for Brady. I think Manning and Brady are on a different plane than anyone else, with Carson Palmer soon to be there (depending on the injury). Roethlisberger will always be a good QB, but he'll never be among the best. Do I think that, with a different QB, such as Trent Green or Brad Johnson, this Steelers team would've still won? Yes, I do. Do I think that with Johnson or Green the Patriots would've been anything but a .500 team this year? No, I don't. That's where the difference lies.