Dan Patrick on Brady

[Drewwho]

Patrick is on to something.

I always figured there was a lot of ignorance in the Brady/Manning debate....but it's a little surprising how much bias either against Brady or pro-Manning is out there in the media.

With all the praise being heaped toward Tom this year, an underlying bias is also being systematically exposed....

Mike Wilbon said tonight that EVEN IF TOM BREAKS ALL THE MAJOR SINGLE SEASON MARKS AND GETS A FOURTH RING (BY THE AGE OF 31), he'd still consider Elway a better QB.

I fell off my couch.

Wilbon thinks Brady needs "signature moments" or "drives."

Snow Bowl? SB 36? SB 38?....Among the greatest drives in history....not good enough for Wilbon (and the silent majority).

Too bad Kornheiser couldn't remind Wilbon that most of Elway's signature moments were memorably for all the wrong reasons. Sure he had that 5 minute drive against the Browns...anyone remember what happened after that? Don't give me the bad team argument either....he didn't give his team a chance in those games....he had good (not great) receivers and a good (not great) back....he had weapons contrary to popular belief.

Now nobody expected Elway to win those games, obviously, that would've been Herculean, but he could've done a better job of giving his team a fighting chance. What kind of team were the 01 Pats? Yeah, good (not great) defense, but HORRIBLE offense....sorry, it was horrible....they had no business beating the RAms. Credit Brady for playing an efficient, smart and clutch game....he was better than Elway early in their careers and he's going to stand taller when it's said and done.

I respect Elway so I'm not going to turn this into a #7 bash fest....but let's just say that Tom already has plenty of drives, signature moments, and credentials that John doesn't.....I don't think we need to rehash his resume here.

John had the best arm in history. And for half his career a lousy coach....I'll concede both of those.

But I'm sorry, to accept the hypothetical that TB could finish the year on the pace he's on, without acknowledging that he'd have to be considered by consensus as a better all-around QB than Elway, is about as biased as you can get.

........

The first reason for the bias is that most pundits have already gone on record long ago calling Manning the better QB. Even as they credited Brady over the years for being great, they rarely elevated him to the level of Manning. And hardly ever would a pundit clearly elevate Brady above and beyond Manning. Ironically, by defending their original premature and ignorant positions of long ago, in the face of so much contrary evidence, they are actually undermining the very credibility they covet.

Second is pure jealousy. Tom is justifiably living the good life and leveraging his god-given glossy image into a brand that is impossible for pundits to latch onto. Peyton's commercialism tends to win over dudes, while Tom's wins over chicks....they're both making good coin, but Tom has his priorities straight....unfortunately, he's also losing the hearts of the self-obsessed, bitter, and largely ugly, media fraternity to Peyton Manning in the process....they can better relate to a guy whose head is shaped like a ****....sorry, couldn't resist.

The biggest driver for the national consensus of these guys is that 99/100 pundits CAN NOT compare and contrast QB skill sets independent of stats (passer rating are not individual stats but partly the function of the personnel around a QB). Their perspective was largely formed by the respective draft stocks and pedigrees of each QB. Brady's college pedigree is almost universally misunderstood, even by his defenders. But we all know where they were drafted.

And there's no denying that many pundits have simply been spellbound by Manning's pre snap girations....they sometimes even admit this fact, but it's usually disguised by the old, "he calls his own plays" argument. Well sure, and they're called -- repeat after me -- "au-di-bles"....actually not rare in the NFL....NEVER HAVE BEEN.

I've always loved the things that others hate about Brady....that he was the REAL underdog. That he always did more with less. That he was underrated despite his unprecedented success. That he never looked for sympathy. That he never let his dad go out and campaign for him. That he neither apologized for his off-field exploits nor drew attention to them. That he didn't do a million commercials about stuff he didn't really care about. That he didn't act like a buffoon at the line of scrimmage. That he never called out his coach, O-line or receivers or teammates in a press conference, just to make himself look good.

And above all, because he was simply a more physically impressive QB from a pure skills perspective. Bigger arm than Manning, check. Tighter spiral, check. Threw into tighter windows, check. Moved better in the pocket, check. Got better the tougher the game got, check. Didn't play in a dome....etc.

It's been pretty fun to observe the Manning apologists this year....some are slowly seeing the light of truth....others are digging in deeper....and looking stupid in the process.

Seriously, this is the best post I have read in a long long time!

 

[SVN]

Patrick is on to something.

I always figured there was a lot of ignorance in the Brady/Manning debate....but it's a little surprising how much bias either against Brady or pro-Manning is out there in the media.

With all the praise being heaped toward Tom this year, an underlying bias is also being systematically exposed....

Mike Wilbon said tonight that EVEN IF TOM BREAKS ALL THE MAJOR SINGLE SEASON MARKS AND GETS A FOURTH RING (BY THE AGE OF 31), he'd still consider Elway a better QB.

I fell off my couch.

Wilbon thinks Brady needs "signature moments" or "drives."

Snow Bowl? SB 36? SB 38?....Among the greatest drives in history....not good enough for Wilbon (and the silent majority).

Too bad Kornheiser couldn't remind Wilbon that most of Elway's signature moments were memorably for all the wrong reasons. Sure he had that 5 minute drive against the Browns...anyone remember what happened after that? Don't give me the bad team argument either....he didn't give his team a chance in those games....he had good (not great) receivers and a good (not great) back....he had weapons contrary to popular belief.

Now nobody expected Elway to win those games, obviously, that would've been Herculean, but he could've done a better job of giving his team a fighting chance. What kind of team were the 01 Pats? Yeah, good (not great) defense, but HORRIBLE offense....sorry, it was horrible....they had no business beating the RAms. Credit Brady for playing an efficient, smart and clutch game....he was better than Elway early in their careers and he's going to stand taller when it's said and done.

I respect Elway so I'm not going to turn this into a #7 bash fest....but let's just say that Tom already has plenty of drives, signature moments, and credentials that John doesn't.....I don't think we need to rehash his resume here.

John had the best arm in history. And for half his career a lousy coach....I'll concede both of those.

But I'm sorry, to accept the hypothetical that TB could finish the year on the pace he's on, without acknowledging that he'd have to be considered by consensus as a better all-around QB than Elway, is about as biased as you can get.

........

The first reason for the bias is that most pundits have already gone on record long ago calling Manning the better QB. Even as they credited Brady over the years for being great, they rarely elevated him to the level of Manning. And hardly ever would a pundit clearly elevate Brady above and beyond Manning. Ironically, by defending their original premature and ignorant positions of long ago, in the face of so much contrary evidence, they are actually undermining the very credibility they covet.

Second is pure jealousy. Tom is justifiably living the good life and leveraging his god-given glossy image into a brand that is impossible for pundits to latch onto. Peyton's commercialism tends to win over dudes, while Tom's wins over chicks....they're both making good coin, but Tom has his priorities straight....unfortunately, he's also losing the hearts of the self-obsessed, bitter, and largely ugly, media fraternity to Peyton Manning in the process....they can better relate to a guy whose head is shaped like a ****....sorry, couldn't resist.

The biggest driver for the national consensus of these guys is that 99/100 pundits CAN NOT compare and contrast QB skill sets independent of stats (passer rating are not individual stats but partly the function of the personnel around a QB). Their perspective was largely formed by the respective draft stocks and pedigrees of each QB. Brady's college pedigree is almost universally misunderstood, even by his defenders. But we all know where they were drafted.

And there's no denying that many pundits have simply been spellbound by Manning's pre snap girations....they sometimes even admit this fact, but it's usually disguised by the old, "he calls his own plays" argument. Well sure, and they're called -- repeat after me -- "au-di-bles"....actually not rare in the NFL....NEVER HAVE BEEN.

I've always loved the things that others hate about Brady....that he was the REAL underdog. That he always did more with less. That he was underrated despite his unprecedented success. That he never looked for sympathy. That he never let his dad go out and campaign for him. That he neither apologized for his off-field exploits nor drew attention to them. That he didn't do a million commercials about stuff he didn't really care about. That he didn't act like a buffoon at the line of scrimmage. That he never called out his coach, O-line or receivers or teammates in a press conference, just to make himself look good.

And above all, because he was simply a more physically impressive QB from a pure skills perspective. Bigger arm than Manning, check. Tighter spiral, check. Threw into tighter windows, check. Moved better in the pocket, check. Got better the tougher the game got, check. Didn't play in a dome....etc.

It's been pretty fun to observe the Manning apologists this year....some are slowly seeing the light of truth....others are digging in deeper....and looking stupid in the process.

You can clearly say all the people who say they take either one of them are struggling to take brady so they are being diplomatic. Until last yr, manning was better QB because he puts up nos because he doesnt have a defense and a team around and brady is a system qb. Now that myth is getting erased and people are finding it hard to pick brady.
Face it, he will always be considered an underdog inspite of the lavish praise.He doesnt have the manning legacy and stories, he plays for a coach who lot of people dislike, and most importantly he makes it look easy which the pundits interpret as being a system QB.

On the manning gyrations, deion sanders made a point of this on sunday. He said brady is doing the same thing except he is not as animated as peyton. He made fun of it by telling eisen on his right "thats a good tie" then turning to marucci on the left "those are good cufflings". Just imitating manning.

 

[NYCPatsFan]

Patrick is on to something.

I always figured there was a lot of ignorance in the Brady/Manning debate....but it's a little surprising how much bias either against Brady or pro-Manning is out there in the media.

With all the praise being heaped toward Tom this year, an underlying bias is also being systematically exposed....

Mike Wilbon said tonight that EVEN IF TOM BREAKS ALL THE MAJOR SINGLE SEASON MARKS AND GETS A FOURTH RING (BY THE AGE OF 31), he'd still consider Elway a better QB.

I fell off my couch.

Wilbon thinks Brady needs "signature moments" or "drives."

Snow Bowl? SB 36? SB 38?....Among the greatest drives in history....not good enough for Wilbon (and the silent majority).

............

It's been pretty fun to observe the Manning apologists this year....some are slowly seeing the light of truth....others are digging in deeper....and looking stupid in the process.

Excellent post!! I felt like hurling my shoe when I heard him about Brady and another SB ring.

People will have different opinions on who is a better QB; but to suggest that Brady might still be considered inferior even after another SB ring is a bit of an insult.

 

[eric5280]

I like to do a little myth busters impersonation when refuting arguments against Tom Brady.

Myth: Tom Brady's accomplishments are a result of Belichick's genius
Fact: While Belichick will go down in history as an all time great coach, Brady has helped Belichick with his legacy as much as Belichick has helped Brady. Since Brady hasn't played without Belichick, there isn't evidence to show Brady wouldn't be great without Belichick. However, Belichick has been a head coach for six seasons without Brady and up until the Belichick-Brady union, Belichick had a less than stellar record (.394 winning percentage).

Myth: Brady is a system quarterback that benefitted because of his surrounding players.
Fact: A guy named Drew Bledsoe was the starting quarterback with the same personnel and head coach that Brady inherited and managed a 5-13 record during that time. When Brady took over, the team experienced a decisive turnaround, one of which has not changed after 6+ years. Brady in his six seasons, has put up elite QB statistics despite playing with only 2 pro bowlers on the offensive side (Troy Brown in 2001 and Corey Dillon in 2004).

Myth: Brady's three superbowl rings were because of the defense. Manning didn't win because his defenses sucked.
Fact: The Patriots did have really good defenses during their superbowl runs but their success wasn't just because of their defense. They gave up 17, 21 and 29 points respectively in their superbowls. Of superbowl winning teams, only 10 (24%) teams have surrendered more than 17 points, only 4 (10%) teams have given up more than 21 points and only 1 team (2%) gave up more than 29 points. That translates into Brady having less help than most of superbowl winning quarterbacks. On a side note, Manning's QB rating during last year's superbowl run was 79. Manning also had 3 teams that boasted a top 7 scoring defense (2nd back in 2005) and netted 0 rings during that time.

Myth: Brady has a great win-loss record but only average stats.
Fact: Brady actually has very elite statistics if you look at the career averages. Here is a excel sheet of all Hall of Fame Quarterbacks that played most of the career after the AFL/NFL merger (1967) http://www.lil-e.net/ftj/qbcomparison.xls I also included a bunch of modern contemporary QBs for comparison purposes. Brady is among the elite in QB rating, Yards/game, TD/Game and has the highest TD/INT ratio of any player. The reason people underrate Brady's statistics is that he lacked (until this year obviously) a standout statistical season. However, he also has yet to have a bad statistical season. He always throws 3500+, 23+td and under 14ints every year he's been a full time starter. Guys like Favre, Marino and Manning have all had bad seasons where they threw 20+ ints.

Myth: Brady is an average QB who would still be an average QB even if he had weapons comparable to Mannings
Fact: See 2007 season.

I've got some more but I need to take a breather.

 

[eric5280]

I'd also like to add a couple of common theories and why they don't make any sense at all.

Theory #1. Brady is a system quarterback. You could put another average QB on the Patriots team and they would still be very good.
Flaw in theory: If this were the case, why would the Patriots pay him so much money? The Patriots organization has a legendary reputation for not overpaying for players and have a lengthy track record of not resigning players they feel are over valued. If the system was truly that good and talent at the QB position were not necessary, certainly the Patriots just sign an average QB for less money and spend that money in the secondary and special teams and other places they feel the money would go to better use. But they don't and it's not because they're stupid.

Theory #2. Manning is such a talent that he would put up elite statistics even if he had average players on the offensive side.
Flaw in the theory: Why would the Colts continously pay big money to keep their elite offensive players? Wouldn't they be better off going the Pats route and getting average receivers like Patten Givens and Caldwell, and spend the money saved on the defense and special teams? That would certainly make their team much better if one believe's Manning could carry their offense with lesser and cheaper players.

 

[letekro]

Michael Irvin was saying today in Miami that Manning is a better QB, because he would be great in Brady's system, but Brady would not be great in his. His support for this argument: that Manning put up great numbers in high school and college, whereas Brady has only really excelled at the NFL level. I sh*t you not.

I think there a two factors at play here, one obvious, one not so obvious:

1. Peyton Manning was the number 1 pick in the draft, people had been anxiously awaiting his NFL arrival since high school; Tom Brady was a sixth round pick that no one had really heard of. (Michael Irvin's argument)

2. Peyton has played two full seasons in his prime more than Brady.

Peyton played a full season in 1999 and 2000. Thus, for the past seven years, he has been two years ahead of Brady in terms of development. Brady's numbers don't match up because he has two less years of quality, prime-of-career stats. Two years from now, if we compare Brady's first 9 seasons to Peyton's first 9, I think they will be neck and neck (without even getting into the dome and supporting cast arguments).

 

[eric5280]

I read that and was pleased. For the most part the vast majority said he was not overated and is one of the best QBs ever.

http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=217935


Case in point. From the Extremeskins board "Is Tom Brady Overrated'...amazing that this question is even asked!

 

[eric5280]

Michael Irvin was saying today in Miami that Manning is a better QB, because he would be great in Brady's system, but Brady would not be great in his. His support for this argument: that Manning put up great numbers in high school and college, whereas Brady has only really excelled at the NFL level. I sh*t you not.

I think there a two factors at play here, one obvious, one not so obvious:

1. Peyton Manning was the number 1 pick in the draft, people had been anxiously awaiting his NFL arrival since high school; Tom Brady was a sixth round pick that no one had really heard of. (Michael Irvin's argument)

2. Peyton has played two full seasons in his prime more than Brady.

Peyton played a full season in 1999 and 2000. Thus, for the past seven years, he has been two years ahead of Brady in terms of development. Brady's numbers don't match up because he has two less years of quality, prime-of-career stats. Two years from now, if we compare Brady's first 9 seasons to Peyton's first 9, I think they will be neck and neck (without even getting into the dome and supporting cast arguments).

Let me just add to this. There are other situations that lend to Manning putting up great numbers (other than his obvious talent).
1. He plays in a dome which is conducive for better offensive performances. Most of the prolific offenses play in a dome (98 Vikings, 99-01 Rams, 01-06 Colts).
2. He played most of his career with an offense oriented team. He's been given pro bowl receivers, o-line, te and running back. The team was designed to outscore the opposition.
3. Having a bad defense historically leads to inflated QB statistics. When your defense gives up a lot of points, it puts the offense in a position to put scoring quickly as a higher priority than game and clock management. It also forces offenses to air it out rather than run out the clock by running the ball.

 

[upstater1]

There needs to be a re-vamping of how college QB's are scouted.

Instead of drooling over the cannon arm, these attributes should be given more weight:
- Come from behind and 4th quarter victories
- Intelligence (identifying the defense and blitz)
- Field vision (seeing and recognizing the open receiver, not just primary)
- Pocket presence (avoiding the rush with side steps, keeping your cool)
- Ability to motivate and earn respect of teammates through hard work.

It's just like in baseball, guys like Maddux and Roy Oswalt would never have gotten a chance if scouts just emphasized height or a blazing fastball.

Guys like Trent Edwards will always be better QB's than cannon-arms like Jay Cutler.

Still very difficult to do. I could point to you a number of college QBs with great leadership attributes, but they don't have the arm to compete in the NFL. These are great college QBs that don't translate well into the NFL, and frankly I think Edwards' at Buffalo hasn't really been all that great yet.

 

[FlyingElvis75]

SVN or whoever - wasn't there a poll on SI asking players/coaches if they would prefer Brady or Manning on their team? I recall that Brady won 65% - 35%. I would say the opinion of current players & coaches is a bit more important than these "pundits."

 

[mac]

They all thought he was cute when he was a 6th round system QB on a Cinderella team. By the time he'd won the third Lombardi he was making all the pundits nervous because they can't identify what he is if their lives depended on it. Those darned intangibles that are proving more and more to be far more significant to success as an NFL QB than all the measurables or even pedigree. That's why they gave his 3rd SB MVP to Deion.

Time the so called experts just said "uncle". And I think one by one they are.

I thought Brady should have got his 3rd MVP. Branch had a great day, but there is no doubt a QB is more valuable overall.

 

[upstater1]

Elway??

Great arm???

Strong arm, but one of the most inaccurate passers (among the greats) I've ever seen. In the league's pantheon of QBs (say top 25) I struggle to come up with a guy who was less accurate. Maybe Terry Bradshaw. But Elway at times couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. He used to drive balls into the turf regularly. he had horrible throwing mechanics that killed drive after drive.

 

[patsox23]

Tom Brady gets PLENTY of respect. This thread is silly.