2000army
Third String But Playing on Special Teams
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2007
- Messages
- 506
- Reaction score
- 435
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Productivity, IMO, is measured by wins. At 11-5 (or 10-6), I would certainly NOT put this as his 2nd best season. He did, for the most part, have a very solid year though. Played a couple "meh" games, but overall, he was good.
Brady cannot win a game by himself, to measure the success of a QB by wins alone is extremely short-sighted. Brady's productivity has been the 2nd best of his career, and with the 2003 defense this team would probably also have 14+ wins. Productivity for a single player is most certainly not measured by team wins.
C'mon .... I specifically stated that it was statistically his 2nd best year.
I am just pointing out statistics can be misleading. Overall, I have been disapointed in Brady's play this season. Again, I am not putting all the blame on him, but he has done a lot of things uncharacteristic for him like making poor decisions and over relying on Welker and Moss without even looking at other players like Faulk and Watson.
I guess expectations should have been tempered because he was coming back from injuries and has missed a year, but I figured problems would be early in the season not later like the games vs. New Orleans and the second Miami game.
Minus the 2007 Season this has been Brady's most productive season since joining the NFL. Not bad for someone getting older.
With the 2003 defense this team might be 16-0. I think people over-estimate how good the pre-moss/welker offenses were because the overall team was so much better.
And before I get comments from either side, not saying the D is that bad this year, just that 2003 was special.
I think people have a tendancy to romanticize their recollection of the past. Brady always had his share of clunkers (as does Manning) despite playing at a consistently high level. And he almost always battled things like injuries and inconsistent effort or lack of sufficient talent within his surrounding cast. I also think people subconsciously struggle to seperate 2007 from the comparison where Tom is concerned.
Brady cannot win a game by himself, to measure the success of a QB by wins alone is extremely short-sighted. Brady's productivity has been the 2nd best of his career, and with the 2003 defense this team would probably also have 14+ wins. Productivity for a single player is most certainly not measured by team wins.
C'mon .... I specifically stated that it was statistically his 2nd best year.
Productivity, IMO, is measured by wins. At 11-5 (or 10-6), I would certainly NOT put this as his 2nd best season. He did, for the most part, have a very solid year though. Played a couple "meh" games, but overall, he was good.
I am just pointing out statistics can be misleading. Overall, I have been disapointed in Brady's play this season. Again, I am not putting all the blame on him, but he has done a lot of things uncharacteristic for him like making poor decisions and over relying on Welker and Moss without even looking at other players like Faulk and Watson.
I guess expectations should have been tempered because he was coming back from injuries and has missed a year, but I figured problems would be early in the season not later like the games vs. New Orleans and the second Miami game.
Thats surprising coming from a colts fan
Well, it's hard to measure QB's stats to. A lot goes into them. Brady didn't have Moss or Welker in those early years either and having them certainly skews them to his favor. Stats......... be they team or individual, are always limited in what they can show.
Looking at stats for the year is fun, but it means very little going into the playoffs. I'm glad I'm not a Vikings or Saints fan right now.I dont know if you were using this comment to hate on the defense, but clearly they arent the cause for our record only being 10-5. Currently they are 4th in the league in points per game (16.7) and 9th in yards per game (312.3). In 2003 they were 1st in points per game (14.9) and 7th in yards per game (291.6). By no means am I saying that the 09 defense can be compared to the 03 defense, but stats wise they arent that far off. An average of only 1.8 points difference and 12.8 yards per game is not going to turn 5 losses into wins.
Looking at stats for the year is fun, but it means very little going into the playoffs. I'm glad I'm not a Vikings or Saints fan right now.
The D (and possibly the O, too) is the best in the leage RIGHT NOW without Wilfork for the last 2, and that matters most to me going into the playoffs. For instance, I could care less how good the Broncos were in September. That does them no good right now.