Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by SVN, Feb 7, 2012.
Tom Brady: Not So Terrific | Cold Hard Football Facts
This is retarded. Any QB with that many opportunities in the post season is going to regress to the mean, just like Derek Jeter in baseball.
I didn't read the whole thing i stopped at the part that read Bradys to TD's came on the hurry up offense that totaled 10 plays. That jogged my memory, i was wondering myself Sunday night why they weren't using the hurry up more. Who ever makes that call needs to be held accountable
when was the last time brady had a good game in the playoffs against a real contending team?
I think everything he says there is legit. Brady's accuracy on deep balls has always been the worst part of his game (besides running, which, really, nobody cares about). I have no doubt that Peyton Manning hits Gronkowski for the TD on that INT in the 4th quarter.
But lost in the article (or forgotten, anyway) is the fact that Brady is the only QB in history besides John Elway to have played in 5 super bowls. It's DAMNED hard to get there and even harder to win it all. Every great QB - including Montana - had some rough patches in the playoffs. Not one escaped that dubious distinction. Why? Because in the playoffs, you're playing the best teams in the league. It's easier to rack up stats - whether you're Tom Brady or Ryan Fitzpatrick - against bad teams. Much harder to do against great teams. You will find very few QB with better career playoff QB ratings than regular season QB ratings.
So in terms of Brady's 3-2 SB record....what's better: going 3-2 in the Super Bowl or going, say, 2-0? Well, 2-0 is a better winning percentage, but 3-2 means that you have gotten your team there 3 more times than the 2-0 player. Somehow it's better to lose earlier in the playoffs (or to not make the playoffs at all) than it is to lose in the Super Bowl? That's crazy. Think of it like golf...
Montana: 4 tournament wins, 0 2nd place finishes, a bunch of top 10's, a few missed cuts
Brady: 3 tournament wins, 2 2nd place finishes, a bunch of top 10's, and just 1 missed cut
Peyton: 1 tournament win, 1 2nd place finish, a bunch of top 10's, and a couple of missed cuts
Elway: 2 tournament wins, 3 2nd place finishes, a bunch of top 10's, and a few missed cuts
Favre: 1 tournament win, 1 2nd place finish, a bunch of top 10's, and quite a few missed cuts
I mean, when viewed like that, Brady's resume - especially when you include the number of records he holds - stacks up favorably against anybody.
Jacksonville Jaguars 2007. Unless you count the Denver game in which he started up shaky
Blame that on Gronk. They go hurry up out of the 2 TE set. Gronk played a lot fewer plays than normal, and when he was in, it was clear he wasn't 100%. So they really were hampered a bit with his limitations.
The safety was beyond stupid, but he played awesome for portions of the game. After the sack, he was off, clearly hurting. It sucks. Incidentally, that's why he doesn't run more.
I wouldn't call that a good game. At least not by his standards.
As i said, put any QB in the playoffs for a decade straight and things will even out.
This has nothing to do with the article because I haven't read it and won't. CHFF has gone way downhill. It used to be a must read and I probably had 5000 posts on their forum before they moved it. Between them moving a bunch of stuff to "premium content" and Kerry expanding his media gigs to SI, EEI, radio spots, etc. The articles have really hit rock bottom a while ago.
It's really become Prisco-esque and he used to make fun of him all the time.
I'm not talking playoff team....I'm talking SB caliber teams
I posted this because so many people seem to be ready to say he is NOT G.O.A.T at the first chance but were ready to anoint peyton as the best ever before he played the saints.The media bias towards the mannings is amazing. When peyton loses he doesnt have a defense but when brady loses 2 SB's in last 2 mins of the game he takes a beating...
So basically he's saying a quarterback being judged by stats significantly affected by 52 other men on his team, looks worse when looking over a selective time span that included more losses(which tend to significantly affect QB's stats as much as he affects wins), than the entire time span of his career?
Fantastic objective analysis.
What an idiot.
He could have at least pulled up Montana's playoff stats in all the years he DIDN'T win the Super Bowl to compare them.
As someone on the team commented, while the no-huddle takes a heavy toll on the D, it also takes a bit of a toll on the O. Combine that with GRONK's gimpy ankle, and there was only so much of it they could use.
When Brady had his great games in the early 2000's he really wasn't the center of attention. The Patriots back them relied on Defense and a balanced attack with both passing And running, it wasn't Bradycentric. Brady didn't have to do as much, he was asked to be more of a game manager. Usually he was asked to be a star QB when, with time running out, to bring the team down the field with short, high percentage pass's into FG range. If you go back and look at the scores form those games you'll see scores like 20-17, 17-14, 23-17 etc. A high scoring win was unusual, thats why i think, and have been saying the team needs to go back to that philosophy. Get away from the idea that team's fate revolves around whether TB has a good game or not. Its to easy for a high quality team to shut down or contain the One player that the opposing teams offense revolves around.
Well, first off, that says that his standards are off the charts great. It's like saying, wow, Michael Jordan only scored 28. He sucks.
But second, he really did play well. He made one major mistake, and even that was defensible. Let's take an objective look at his game.
(1) The safety. He had to get rid of the ball. Why would he throw it where he did? Because, as Steve Young pointed out at halftime, that is NEVER called intentional grounding. As in, ever. I'm sure Brady threw it to a spot where he knew nobody could get to it, and where it's never called a penalty. I'm sure he felt very safe putting it there. He probably was as shocked as anyone that a flag was thrown there. So I guess that was a mistake, but the kind of mistake that is totally understandable.
(2) He ended up, at one point, being 20-23, with the three incompletions being two JPP tipped passes and the grounding (which, even if it wasn't grounding, was a ball he had to throw away due to the pressure...can't fault him for the INC). So he was right on the button through 23 passes.
(3) Then he got sacked by Tuck, which obviously hurt his already injured left shoulder. From there you could see that his accuracy was off. And he finished 7-18 from that point on, which sounds horrible until you realize that (a) he was due to cool off, and (b) you take into account his injury.
(4) The INT. This was his mistake, and he'll kick himself when he sees the film and notices Hernandez wide open on the right for about 15 yards. But here's why it was defensible. You have Gronk deep, and he beat his man by about 3 yards. You have what amounts to a backup linebacker on him. You could throw that ball up there a hundred times and probably only on one of those occasions does it end up as an interception. Well, guess what, that was the one time. So it was the wrong play...the big mistake. But even that mistake was a defensible one.
(5) The drops. Pats players had, I believe, 4 drops on the day. One was a tough catch (Welker), but by everyone's admission, that's a play he makes far more than he doesn't. It wasn't a perfect throw, but Eli had some non-perfect throws too that got caught.
In the end, if you take away the spike and the hail mary, Brady finished with a 69% completion rate, which, as it turns out, is essentially the same as Eli's. And take away the batted balls and the "have to throw it away safety", and the drops and Brady ends up completing 27-34, which is a 79.4% completion rate.
Now, one may say, but you can't take them away. And of course you can't. But if you're assessing how Tom Brady did throwing the football, an objective analysis takes these things into account. The Giants didn't drop a single pass, and they made several outstanding catches to help their QB. The Pats dropped 3-4 balls, and nobody made even one outstanding catch to help Brady. Plus, Brady had the hail mary and the spike and the "must throw it away" play where he wasn't trying to complete it. So on passes that Brady was actually trying to complete (that had an actual chance to be completed), he was tremendous.
He wasn't perfect. But you know what? Neither was Eli. He bounced a bunch of balls into the dirt. He threw really high on a ball that Nicks made a crazy good catch on. He was really good, but not perfect. Same with Brady, who got no help from his receivers at all on Sunday.
He was 3 drops away from having a 79% completion rate.
Edit: Didnt see your last post.
Separate names with a comma.