Theismann down on Brady

[AllieBuck]

Curran summed up my thoughts on this subject pretty well in this interview:

Curran blasts 'Brady lacked fire' proponents

 

[emoney_33]

Read that sentence in bold again and really think how dumb it sounds. If there was a lot more to the game than the 4th quarter, than the Pats would be 14-2. 5 out of 6 of their losses came after blowing 4th quarter leads. One game resulted in a blowout (New Orleans) and they had one 4th quarter comeback against Buffalo. Every other game they played in this season, they led in the 4th quarter.

The second dumbest thing I've read today.

 

[emoney_33]

Why stats are dumb.

Brady: 28 TD 13 INT 4,398 yds 96.2 rtg

Manning:33 TD 16 INT 4,500 yds 99.9 rtg

By this, Brady and Manning seem to be very close this year. However, we all know Brady did not play well for him and this was one of Peyton's best years. Stats stink.

What is your basis for "Brady did not play well for him" and that this was one of "Peyton's best years"?

I want to address this Brady thing, and more importantly the "eye test". The brain is a very powerful and intriguing thing, but it's just not capable of the type of analyzing that some people here try to pass off. Heck most people can't even realize things that happen right in front of their own eyes.

YouTube - Change Blindness; you cannot be aware of everything.

 

[dhamz]

What is your basis for "Brady did not play well for him" and that this was one of "Peyton's best years"?

Great QBs are judged by how they do in the clutch. It is why despite the fact that Manning's video game stats looked better than Brady's he was never the better QB. Manning was at his worst with the game on the line, Brady was at his best. It flipped this year. Manning was the clutch performer.

Brady's 4th quarter stats were the worst of his career in 2009:
134/79 59% 746 yds 5.6 avg 5 tds 4 ints 74.4 rating

Manning's were his best:
124/89 72% 1,049 yds 8.5 avg 8 tds 1 int 115.3 rating

 

[bigfandan]

It flipped this year. Manning was the clutch performer.

Brady's 4th quarter stats were the worst of his career in 2009:
134/79 59% 746 yds 5.6 avg 5 tds 4 ints 74.4 rating

Manning's were his best:
124/89 72% 1,049 yds 8.5 avg 8 tds 1 int 115.3 rating

Good job with the stats. It confirmed eye test results.

 

[ivanvamp]

I expect Brady to rebound in 2010. I could be wrong, but I thought most of the problems were fixable. Even having an off year, he did have a pretty good season. Not to Brady standards, but still above average for NFL standards.

I expect Brady to have a very big year next year, and that's even if Welker misses the first 8 games on PUP. I think it will bring Brady back to the days when he spread it out among 7-8 guys a game, which will make them even more dangerous in the long run.

Barring injury to Brady (knock on wood), I expect 4200+ yds, 30+ td, and fewer than 14 interceptions. Which will make for a phenomenal season, of course.

 

[Ring 6]

Add in frustrated -- for the entire season.

And while we're at it, let's throw in some trivial stats on offense:

30 penalties divided among Mankins, Neal, Koppen, and Vollmer. 16 false starts among the O-line, Baker, and Aiken. 6 delay of game penalties (some of which were slow substitution and slow communication from the sideline). Granted, some of the offensive penalties were holding (11), which should never be a point of emphasis given their commonness, but the false starts and delay of game ones -- are unacceptable and avoidable for an offense that practices to be in sync throughout the course of the season.

Galloway...was not a failed experiment. As a longtime veteran receiver -- he was an expectation. Simply stated, it wasn't too much to expect for a veteran to be a reliable option for Brady. Someone who could run proper routes (w/ and w/o the ball), and have reliable hands when his # is called. No one expected gaudy stats from him...just someone to take the heat off of Moss downfield and be one of a reliable trio for Brady. Well, it didn't happen the way it was drawn up, awakening Brady & Co. to the reality of playing out the season with the hand they were dealt (Aiken and the others). Persevere they did...right into the playoffs with an out of sync offense.

Finally, Mo's post, some stats, and JMHO, are reasons (not excuses) why Brady appeared to be frustrated throughout the season. The last time I worked out and huddled with Brady, he didn't appear to be disinterested or unfocused. And it's not homerism to say, as a tv viewer, I only witnessed frustration on his part. For the positive qualities he's exhibited to now be scrutinized is quite frankly -- undeserving and unfair. He's earned so much more respect than he's being given...and like Belichick will do for him this season, I'd prefer to show my support for him while he's in NE. Not too much to ask...

Its just flat out stupid to try to say you know what is going on in the guys mind and what his attitude is (people are now saying his wife is hot so he doesn't care, because look at his expresion) based upon body language or facial expression of someone you have never spent time around.
My God, how many people do you know pretty well, and you don't know what they are thinking until they tell you?
Curran is right, the proof is in the actions. Aloof, or not caring is not based upon body language or facial expression its based upon effort and action, which has been unchanged. Most of this board predicted Brady would be on pup because he couldn;'t possibly be ready for the season after that injury, and he showed up for camp 100%. Um, that isnt by accident that is by determined, committed effort in rehab. Now, because some joker who hasn't been within 20 miles of him in person, says he knows from body language that Brady is 'aloof' Patriots FANS buy it?
Lets start up the lynch mob, because when Marshall Faulk makes his next stupid anti-Patriot statement based solely upon sour grapes, if he targets Brady we will be over the 50% mark of fans who have turned on him due to unsubstantiated ignorant opinions.

 

[Ring 6]

I expect Brady to have a very big year next year, and that's even if Welker misses the first 8 games on PUP. I think it will bring Brady back to the days when he spread it out among 7-8 guys a game, which will make them even more dangerous in the long run.

Barring injury to Brady (knock on wood), I expect 4200+ yds, 30+ td, and fewer than 14 interceptions. Which will make for a phenomenal season, of course.

Um, he was 4398, 28, 13 this year. So he had a phenomenal season in 2009.
I don't care about the stats, wins matter.
If the other 52 players surrounding Tom Brady were as good as 2003, 2004, 2007 (2001 debatable) he would be playing today.
The problem isn't Tom Brady. For some reason many fanms get an idea in their head, and fail to reconsider when facts change.
Early this season Brady was a bit slower than he typically is to process information, make a decision and pull the trigger. That is because he had gone essentially a year and a half without playing football, but for a handful of snaps a year earlier. THAT is why there was hesitiation or 'rust'.
That went away, but the use of it as a blame, excuse, reason, agenda or whatever still apparently has not.

 

[swheeler23]

Brady's career is pretty amazing. 10 years , two his rookie year and 2008 he did not play in
8 years =4 super bowls, 3 rings
no one can keep that pace up for an entire career
If he did he would have 6 rings and 8 super bowls played, in a 16 year career
He will bounce back

 

[patsinthesnow]

Btw, based on what I said earlier, I blame alot of it on the receiving corps, not Brady.

2007:
1. Moss
2. Welker
3. Gaffney
4. Stallworth
5. Brown
6. Jackson

2008:
1. Moss
2. Welker
3. Edelman
4. Aikmen
5. Stanback
6. ..?

 

[Ring 6]

Btw, based on what I said earlier, I blame alot of it on the receiving corps, not Brady.

2007:
1. Moss
2. Welker
3. Gaffney
4. Stallworth
5. Brown
6. Jackson

2008:
1. Moss
2. Welker
3. Edelman
4. Aikmen
5. Stanback
6. ..?

I sratch my head over this one. What team has better 1 and 2 than Moss and Welker?
Can we really say that having the best 1 and 2 is a lack of weapons?
I think its an excuse, and I understand why.
In 2007 we were so dominant in the passing game that a team that would have been mediocre with an average passing game was a minute from 19-0.
If you compare that as your standard no WR corps in history stands up to it.

 

[Ring 6]

Brady's career is pretty amazing. 10 years , two his rookie year and 2008 he did not play in
8 years =4 super bowls, 3 rings
no one can keep that pace up for an entire career
If he did he would have 6 rings and 8 super bowls played, in a 16 year career
He will bounce back

The trend appears to be to say that since his last 4 years have 'only' resulted in
50-14 record in reg season
2 trips to AFFC
1 trip to SB
2 other playoff berths
4 division championships

that you start subtracting away from the 3 SBs in 4 years......i.e. Manning is better because Brady won 3 but they were 5 years ago, so they don't coiunt anymore

 

[patsinthesnow]

I sratch my head over this one. What team has better 1 and 2 than Moss and Welker?
Can we really say that having the best 1 and 2 is a lack of weapons?
I think its an excuse, and I understand why.
In 2007 we were so dominant in the passing game that a team that would have been mediocre with an average passing game was a minute from 19-0.
If you compare that as your standard no WR corps in history stands up to it.

I just think not having an NFL caliber 3rd option will cause the offense to come to a halt, which it did in most games.

The 3rd options were special teamers, and a 7th round rookie transition player.

 

[iapatsfan]

I sratch my head over this one. What team has better 1 and 2 than Moss and Welker?
Can we really say that having the best 1 and 2 is a lack of weapons?
I think its an excuse, and I understand why.
In 2007 we were so dominant in the passing game that a team that would have been mediocre with an average passing game was a minute from 19-0.
If you compare that as your standard no WR corps in history stands up to it.

Yes we can say that. If a QB only has two viable options to throw to, any team can game plan for that. I've said this many times on this board and I'll say it again, I would rather have 4-5 B-level WRs than 2 A-level. Brady works best when he can drop back with multiple options to choose from. This year he had only two for most of the time and only one for some of the time. I would compare last yrs O to the Bengals of a couple yrs ago with Ocho and TJ. They had an avg running game with 2 great WRs. They changed their approach, and I think they were a much more balanced team this year than in the past. I'm not saying the Bengal's are a better team than the Pats in any way, but I think the Pats could take a page out of their book and go more to a ground game with an aggressive D.

 

[ivanvamp]

Um, he was 4398, 28, 13 this year. So he had a phenomenal season in 2009.

I agree. He had the 2nd best season, statistically, of a lock-first-ballot-HOF career. I wasn't arguing otherwise.

I don't care about the stats, wins matter.
If the other 52 players surrounding Tom Brady were as good as 2003, 2004, 2007 (2001 debatable) he would be playing today.
The problem isn't Tom Brady. For some reason many fanms get an idea in their head, and fail to reconsider when facts change.
Early this season Brady was a bit slower than he typically is to process information, make a decision and pull the trigger. That is because he had gone essentially a year and a half without playing football, but for a handful of snaps a year earlier. THAT is why there was hesitiation or 'rust'.
That went away, but the use of it as a blame, excuse, reason, agenda or whatever still apparently has not.

Again, I don't disagree.

 

[Deus Irae]

I sratch my head over this one. What team has better 1 and 2 than Moss and Welker?
Can we really say that having the best 1 and 2 is a lack of weapons?
I think its an excuse, and I understand why.
In 2007 we were so dominant in the passing game that a team that would have been mediocre with an average passing game was a minute from 19-0.
If you compare that as your standard no WR corps in history stands up to it.

WR3 (Stallworth/Gaffney) receptions: 82

WR3 (Aiken/Galloway) receptions: 27

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

The second dumbest thing I've read today.

So you think games are won between the 1st and 3rd quarter? Because that is what it sounds like your saying. If your going to say something ridiculous like there are more to games than the 4th quarter, have something to back it up instead of saying how dumb my statement is that games are obviously won in the 4th quarter.

 

[emoney_33]

So you think games are won between the 1st and 3rd quarter? Because that is what it sounds like your saying. If your going to say something ridiculous like there are more to games than the 4th quarter, have something to back it up.

You are the only person in the world that can't see the problem with this statement.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

You are the only person in the world that can't see the problem with this statement.

Nice debating with you. Keep thinking games are won between the 1st and 3rd quarter.

 

[BradyManny]

WR3 (Stallworth/Gaffney) receptions: 82

WR3 (Aiken/Galloway) receptions: 27

That's frightening.