I didn't bother clicking the link, but that's a ridiculous comment by Faulk. Just to show how stupid Faulk's theory is, here are a few comparisons between the two quarterbacks: prior to 2007 for Brady and through Dilfer's SB year in Baltimore (he was a backup after that):
Touchdown passes and Interceptions
Dilfer: 1/6, 4/18, 12/19, 21/11, 21/15, 11/11, 12/11; 6-year total 82/91
Brady: 18/12, 28/14, 23/12, 28/14, 26/14, 21/12; 7-year total 147/76
career: Dilfer 3.6 TD%, 4.1 INT%; Brady 5.4 TD%, 2.4 INT%
Passer Rating
Dilfer: 36.3, 60.1, 64.8, 82.8, 74.0, 75.8, 76.6; career: 70.2
Brady: 86.5, 85.7, 85.9, 92.6, 92.3, 87.9; career: 92.9
Completion Percentage
Dilfer: 46.3, 54.0, 55.4, 56.2, 52.4, 59.8, 59.3; career: 55.5
Brady: 63.9, 62.1, 60.2, 60.8, 63.0, 61.8; career: 63.0
Yards per Attempt
Dilfer: 5.3, 6.7, 5.9, 6.6, 6.4, 6.6, 6.6; career: 6.5
Brady: 6.9, 6.3, 6.9, 7.8, 7.8, 6.8; career: 7.2
Faulk may also want to note that Brady led the NFL in touchdowns in 2002 and yards in 2005, so his theory that Brady did nothing prior to 2007 is bogus. By comparison the only thing Dilfer came close to leading the league in was most interceptions thrown, when he was fourth in both '95 and '96.
Marshall Faulk has made a lot of dumb comments about the Pats over the years, but this one may be the most idiotic opinion of his ever.