the BEST patriot player in our history ?

[the taildragger]

I'm glad some of us appreciate players who helped establish the legacy of this franchise -- men who have largely been forgotten by the mainstream over the years because the Pats weren't always lighting up the marquee.

I understand the devotion, and respect the passion...

but honestly, there are some delusional things being tossed around in this thread.

I'll try to summarize the argument against TB as the greatest ever Patriot...pls. correct me if I'm wrong...

A. Hannah was arguably the greatest guard to ever play the game.
B. Brady has only played five years.
C. teams win championships, not individuals.

These are indeed facts, but they each conveniently sidestep the counter arguments which have been repeated throughout this thread which I will now try to summarize:

A. "you don't give a guard $40M, that's insane" - bob kraft (4/2006)
B. He's had the greatest first half to a career in pro football history.
C. how is this a knock on TB?...

Theme C is the most ridiculous "knock" of all -- we're not supposed to attach a higher value on QBs because it's a "team game," and apparently every player counts equally in value terms. This is called brainwashing -- no player believes this, especially in the parity era where QBs have even more value than they ever did when Hannah played.

Somebody even tried to compare QB'ing a football team to Tiger Woods winning majors all by himself. As any pro golfer or tennis player will tell you, there is twice as much pressure in the Ryder Cup or Davis Cup than in a major -- why? team accountability. Golfers are accountable to themselves and nobody else. QBs are team leaders with ten times the responsibility of a pro golfer. Tiger doesn't have to worry about 50 other guys, or answer to them when he screws up.

Again, nobody is basing the case for TB by trying to pretend it's a one-man band out there, on the contrary -- that's what makes the position so challenging -- all Hannah had to worry about were two or three guys at most on each play.

What we have said is that the QB has more to do with a team's success than any other position -- the TEAM indeed wins or loses together -- that's a straw argument -- the point that Hannah fans continue to ignore is that no other Patriot approaches the irreplaceability of TB -- in other words, while everyone on the roster is part of those championships, we don't win without TB -- you can't say that about anyone else without a serious debate (yes, even kickers are replaceable).

Dilfer and Johnson and Doug Williams had outstanding individual seasons which they could not duplicate (particularly Williams, though Dilfer's performance was also highly underrated, he won games for that team when the defense let down, and he was a damn fine leader). But because they were one-hit wonders with nothing else on their resumes, they're not HoFers. If you don't think Marino is haunted because he failed to win a Super Bowl (despite playing on some talented teams in his career), you're gravely mistaken.

but it's dangerous to get into this game of comparing QBs based on team success. Not that it isn't relevant at some level given the demands of that position, it's just an impossible concept to quantify for arguments sake.

that's why I deal with "skills." I expect Colts fans to play the "Dilfer card" (as if that isn't the exception to the rule)...but i'm just sad to see our own fans making that same ignorant comparison.

there's no need to wait for the end of his career...you can say it right now...in fact, if he retired tomorrow, his legend would grow to Jim Brown levels overnight...instead, we probably get to keep him for another five years at least.

I haven't seen an argument here that would ever convince me to trade him for anyone...not even Hannah.

cheers!:eat3: all in good fun...we're all fans of the same team!

 

[RayClay]

I do agree he was, relative to the contribution which can be made from his position, the best player on his team. He along with Leon Gray opened holes in the running which allowed the team to set the team rushing record.

However, several other outstanding players contributed to the success of the teams in the Hannah years (73-85): on offense, you had Sam "Bam", Stanley Morgan Russ Francis and Steve Grogan, and on defense you had Steve Nelson, Andre Tippett, Mike Haynes, Raymond Clayborn, Tim Fox, Julie Adams, etc. Furthermore, none of Hannah's teams won a Super Bowl, and ultimately the success of a player can only be measured by team success in a team game. (Please don't Ernie Banks/Ted Williams me.)

The quarterback position in football is possibly the most important position in all of team sports, with the exception of the goalie in ice hockey or soccer. Tom Brady not only led his team to three Super Bowls victories and was the MVP of two of them, but he raised the level of his play when his team most needed him: the last quarter and the overtime in the 2001 "Snow Bowl", the final drive in Super Bowls 36 and 38 (in which he set records for the most completions), etc. That to me is the true measure of greatness.

By your logic Greg Robinson Randall could be considered for the greatest Patriot ever, but Hannah could not. OK?

Or would it be limited to Brady Bledsoe and Huard?

 

[RayClay]

I do agree he was, relative to the contribution which can be made from his position, the best player on his team. He along with Leon Gray opened holes in the running which allowed the team to set the team rushing record.

However, several other outstanding players contributed to the success of the teams in the Hannah years (73-85): on offense, you had Sam "Bam", Stanley Morgan Russ Francis and Steve Grogan, and on defense you had Steve Nelson, Andre Tippett, Mike Haynes, Raymond Clayborn, Tim Fox, Julie Adams, etc. Furthermore, none of Hannah's teams won a Super Bowl, and ultimately the success of a player can only be measured by team success in a team game. (Please don't Ernie Banks/Ted Williams me.)

The quarterback position in football is possibly the most important position in all of team sports, with the exception of the goalie in ice hockey or soccer. Tom Brady not only led his team to three Super Bowls victories and was the MVP of two of them, but he raised the level of his play when his team most needed him: the last quarter and the overtime in the 2001 "Snow Bowl", the final drive in Super Bowls 36 and 38 (in which he set records for the most completions), etc. That to me is the true measure of greatness.

When we decide on the best Red Sox player, Ted Williams is out, But Bellhorn is in?

Yastrzemski can't be considered but Mientkiewicz can?

That's some interesting logic there.

 

[RayClay]

I'm glad some of us appreciate players who helped establish the legacy of this franchise -- men who have largely been forgotten by the mainstream over the years because the Pats weren't always lighting up the marquee.

I understand the devotion, and respect the passion...

but honestly, there are some delusional things being tossed around in this thread.

I'll try to summarize the argument against TB as the greatest ever Patriot...pls. correct me if I'm wrong...

A. Hannah was arguably the greatest guard to ever play the game.
B. Brady has only played five years.
C. teams win championships, not individuals.

These are indeed facts, but they each conveniently sidestep the counter arguments which have been repeated throughout this thread which I will now try to summarize:

A. "you don't give a guard $40M, that's insane" - bob kraft (4/2006)
B. He's had the greatest first half to a career in pro football history.
C. how is this a knock on TB?...

Theme C is the most ridiculous "knock" of all -- we're not supposed to attach a higher value on QBs because it's a "team game," and apparently every player counts equally in value terms. This is called brainwashing -- no player believes this, especially in the parity era where QBs have even more value than they ever did when Hannah played.

Somebody even tried to compare QB'ing a football team to Tiger Woods winning majors all by himself. As any pro golfer or tennis player will tell you, there is twice as much pressure in the Ryder Cup or Davis Cup than in a major -- why? team accountability. Golfers are accountable to themselves and nobody else. QBs are team leaders with ten times the responsibility of a pro golfer. Tiger doesn't have to worry about 50 other guys, or answer to them when he screws up.

Again, nobody is basing the case for TB by trying to pretend it's a one-man band out there, on the contrary -- that's what makes the position so challenging -- all Hannah had to worry about were two or three guys at most on each play.

What we have said is that the QB has more to do with a team's success than any other position -- the TEAM indeed wins or loses together -- that's a straw argument -- the point that Hannah fans continue to ignore is that no other Patriot approaches the irreplaceability of TB -- in other words, while everyone on the roster is part of those championships, we don't win without TB -- you can't say that about anyone else without a serious debate (yes, even kickers are replaceable).

Dilfer and Johnson and Doug Williams had outstanding individual seasons which they could not duplicate (particularly Williams, though Dilfer's performance was also highly underrated, he won games for that team when the defense let down, and he was a damn fine leader). But because they were one-hit wonders with nothing else on their resumes, they're not HoFers. If you don't think Marino is haunted because he failed to win a Super Bowl (despite playing on some talented teams in his career), you're gravely mistaken.

but it's dangerous to get into this game of comparing QBs based on team success. Not that it isn't relevant at some level given the demands of that position, it's just an impossible concept to quantify for arguments sake.

that's why I deal with "skills." I expect Colts fans to play the "Dilfer card" (as if that isn't the exception to the rule)...but i'm just sad to see our own fans making that same ignorant comparison.

there's no need to wait for the end of his career...you can say it right now...in fact, if he retired tomorrow, his legend would grow to Jim Brown levels overnight...instead, we probably get to keep him for another five years at least.

I haven't seen an argument here that would ever convince me to trade him for anyone...not even Hannah.

cheers!:eat3: all in good fun...we're all fans of the same team!

If we're going to decide which position is most important or which team was the best, that's one thing.

Our esteemed italian colleague merely asked who we thought was the best player.

I've seen Brady throw some pretty decent blocks and I'm sure Hannah could complete a pass if he had to in a game.

That's not the point.

Is QB a more important position than LB? Phil Simms was a pretty good QB. I would say that Lawrence Taylor was the best player on those teams.

If we limit all possible responses to "must play the most important position" and "must have played on a super bowl winning team" then we have a very limited amount of choices.

In other words, if we limit the possible answers to Brady or Bledsoe, we might as well not discuss it.

IMO, the fact that Hannah had such an effect while playing a position that is not normally singled out is a tribute to how great a player he was.

A Jeff Hostetler can come off the bench and win the SuperBowl. That's the nature of the position.

That doesn't make him a greater player than Reggie White, **** Butkus or Lawrence Taylor, does it?

 

[scout]

A comment on using the Superbowl as the greatest comparison. In 1976 the Patriots almost surely would have gone to the Superbowl and I think, won, had Ben Dreith not made a bogus call. John Hannah was a big part of that 76 team. Forward to 2001, where you have the tuck game. Because the referee ruled in favor of the Patriots, they win the game. They go on to the Superbowl and win their first title. Do you really want to use winning a Superbowl as determining the greatest player?

 

[the taildragger]

Do you really want to use winning a Superbowl as determining the greatest player?

nope. and I can't make myself more clear.

it's about skills.

if you want to compare players at different positions, then it goes beyond skills to positional value.

got it?

 

[the taildragger]

If we're going to decide which position is most important or which team was the best, that's one thing.

Our esteemed italian colleague merely asked who we thought was the best player.

I've seen Brady throw some pretty decent blocks and I'm sure Hannah could complete a pass if he had to in a game.

That's not the point.

Is QB a more important position than LB? Phil Simms was a pretty good QB. I would say that Lawrence Taylor was the best player on those teams.

If we limit all possible responses to "must play the most important position" and "must have played on a super bowl winning team" then we have a very limited amount of choices.

In other words, if we limit the possible answers to Brady or Bledsoe, we might as well not discuss it.

IMO, the fact that Hannah had such an effect while playing a position that is not normally singled out is a tribute to how great a player he was.

A Jeff Hostetler can come off the bench and win the SuperBowl. That's the nature of the position.

That doesn't make him a greater player than Reggie White, **** Butkus or Lawrence Taylor, does it?

LT was a better player than Hostetler and Simms -- no argument here. But again, we're discussing Brady and Hannah, right? In that case I'll take TB. good luck persuading me otherwise.

 

[RayClay]

nope. and I can't make myself more clear.

it's about skills.

if you want to compare players at different positions, then it goes beyond skills to positional value.

got it?

No, because then you can only compare quarterbacks.

There are other players besides quarterbacks.

 

[the taildragger]

Forward to 2001, where you have the tuck game. Because the referee ruled in favor of the Patriots, they win the game.

it had nothing to do with the fact that our QB had a monster 4th quarter and overtime??

if the guy's arm is going forward the referee has to make that call...therefore it's can't be a "bogus" call...Now, if the refs make the wrong call in that game and we don't win the super bowl, it doesn't change Tom's performance when the coaches unleashed him...and therefore it doesn't change my opinion of him.

we keep skirting the topic -- which is a comparison of players, not records.

You can continue to pretend that the Pats never suffered any bad fortune over the past five years, but I can give you a laundry list that says that's dumb...in fact, I could argue that no championship-winning team has ever had to endure and overcome as much as the Pats -- I don't know how anyone who has followed this run could possibly believe they've been "lucky" -- anytime I hear that angels or god helped us make a damn kick I vomit -- the angels also helped Janikowski make two kicks.

it's not about rings, wins, or team composition, it's about player value.

Hannah was a great player, better than Simms and Hostetler and Dilfer, but not better than Brady.

 

[RayClay]

LT was a better player than Hostetler and Simms -- no argument here. But again, we're discussing Brady and Hannah, right? In that case I'll take TB. good luck persuading me otherwise.

I'm not trying to persuade anyone. The only reason I'm still in this thread is to point out that limiting this discussion to players that have the best skills, (quarterbacks) and have contributed the most to super bowl wins leaves choices like this.

a. Brady
b. Brady
c. Brady
d. Brady
e. Bledsoe

If you truly think Brady's the best based on his first 5 years in the league I think you have a good argument.

 

[the taildragger]

No, because then you can only compare quarterbacks.

There are other players besides quarterbacks.

I'll say it again. you CAN compare different players at different positions, but you have to account for value. Please explain to me how you get around this?

Brady can't block as well as Hannah so he's not a better player?...this is getting silly.

 

[the taildragger]

I'm not trying to persuade anyone. The only reason I'm still in this thread is to point out that limiting this discussion to players that have the best skills, (quarterbacks) and have contributed the most to super bowl wins leaves choices like this.

a. Brady
b. Brady
c. Brady
d. Brady
e. Bledsoe

If you truly think Brady's the best based on his first 5 years in the league I think you have a good argument.

when his first five years were better than graham, luckman, starr, montana...the veritable mount rushmore of the sport, then I have to put him above Hannah (a fearless player and dominating blocker who never did as much by himself to win games as brady does).

 

[RayClay]

I'll say it again. you CAN compare different players at different positions, but you have to account for value. Please explain to me how you get around this?

Brady can't block as well as Hannah so he's not a better player?...this is getting silly.

I think I'm responding to other posters and you're getting caught in the crossfire.

I think we pretty much agree and you just prefer Brady to Hannah. Good enough.

 

[the taildragger]

I think I'm responding to other posters and you're getting caught in the crossfire.

I think we pretty much agree and you just prefer Brady to Hannah. Good enough.

just wish I knew how to change your mind.
:eat3: :eat2:

 

[RayClay]

just wish I knew how to change your mind.
:eat3: :eat2:

That's no problem. Our boy Tom isn't even 29 and he's being compared to all time greats, including QBs like Montana.

All he has to do is keep on what he's doing.

Personally, I don't care about individual accomplishments much. Just like to argue on an even playing field.

 

[Ayuh]

Should have made this thread a poll for all the action it's garnered. I vote for Hog.

"I guess I just want to be remembered as a player who did the best that he could with what he had."- John Hannah

 

[PATRIOTS-80]

That's no problem. Our boy Tom isn't even 29 and he's being compared to all time greats, including QBs like Montana.

All he has to do is keep on what he's doing.

Personally, I don't care about individual accomplishments much. Just like to argue on an even playing field.

The reason I really believe in the comparison is because both Brady and Montana did the same thing for their team. When Montana when go into the huddle and the game was on the line with 3 minutes to go, it was a thing of beauty to watch. He was "Joe Cool." He was cool, calm and collect. He would orchestrate it and take the game over. And our boy Tom has done it. He did it in the Snow Bowl in 2001 (which for all intensive purposes was his rookie year). He did it in the Super Bowl against the Rams. And with the game on the line he did it against the Panthers. And he led his team in a tough game against the Eagles. Montana didn't have all the passing records. He didn't throw the most yards or throw the most TD, but he had that magic. And so does Brady. The most scary thing (for the opposition) is Brady still has his best, most mature years ahead of him.

ps. sure Brady has BB, but Montana had Walsh. Both genius.

Sure there are footballs greats that don't play the QB position. Like Hannah. They dominate and carry their team. But I wouldn't trade any HOF for our leader right now. Why? You can't argue with what Brady has brought to the table as far as rising to the occasion and taking over games, and carrying his team (like he did last year with no running game, which isn't ideal for team success and is hard to do for any QB).

If I picked my HOF Patriot team, d@mn straight I would have Brady at QB and Hannah at G. If in fact I think we should have a poll and vote for it for all the time team.

 

[Kdo5]

Tom Brady is the greatest Quarterback in Pats history. His stats sheet is pretty normal, until last season when he just exploded for 4000 yards, but which other Quarterback stepped in as a 1 year pro and won the Superbowl. He had a supporting cast, but not that great a one. He led the drives against Oakland and the Rams to win us the title in the clutch. Lets face it, put aside the oldies who never won a super bowl ring. Brady's the real deal, three championships. He has a great supporting cast, but last year he proved he can lead this team to a winning record and led us to the playoffs when so many of our stars were down with injury. Givens and Graham were out for a quite a lot of games. So he has Branch and Watson and he made it happen, no decent running game to support him. Oh not to mention he was playing with a hernia and threw the most yards of any QB in the league. Uhh yeah, best offensive player we have ever had, and there will be more to come from this guy.

On the defense its hard to choose a single player, during the dynasty we currently have, our defense has really been about all the players, but we have those veterans. Willie played magnificent for us, Bruschi has always been a leader and an incredibly tough playmaker. Remember, he just makes those interceptions, rips the ball from Dominique Rhodes hands in the playoffs, we are really lucky to have him. Vrabel is an unheralded player who has been a great asset to our defense. And then we have Rodney Harrison, and Lawyer Milloy. No I dont think Ty Law by any means crosses these guys. He is a great player but not as good as any of the mentioned players. Rodney has only been here two years and thats problably saying a bit too much, but he stepped in in 2003, Milloy, the captain was gone, Law suffered some injuries, and pretty much just like in 2004 with Gay, Brown and Wilson as his companions in the backfield he makes them all look good because he helps them become very good players. Lawyer Milloy was great for the time we had them. Yeah, I wasnt around when all these old guys played in the 70's so I'm not gonna pretend I've seen every game they've played in.

 

[oldrover]

Brady. No question. Best QB, best leader, best in the clutch. That's no disrespect to Hannah or Haynes or anyone else.

Brady.

Period.

 

[PATRIOTS-80]

Go and watch the AFC championship game against the 15-1 Steelers who beat us that year at Heinz Field. Brady had a fever in that game and was on the IV the night before.

The legend of Tom Brady grows.