Tom Brady is the greatest QB - perhaps the greatest player - the NFL has ever seen. At age 39, he just continues to defy the odds in every conceivable way. After a Super Bowl in which he took nearly 20 hits and threw a Super Bowl record 62 times, he proclaimed that his body felt "great". More avocado ice cream, anyone? As an aside, it's entirely possible that his absurd four-game suspension at the start of the year left him fresher at the end. Thank you Roger.
Time is undefeated, but Brady is putting up a hell of a fight. One of the decisions Bill Belichick needs to make is deciding about the QB position for the future, and one huge aspect of that is trying to accurately project what Tom Brady will be over the next year, and maybe even 3-4 years out. As we shall see, this is not an easy task when it comes to Brady.
Let's look at Brady's stats the past 7 seasons.
2010 (33): 65.9%, 7.9 ypa, 36 td, 7.3 td%, 4 int, 0.8 int%, 111.0 rating
2011 (34): 65.6%, 8.6 ypa, 39 td, 6.4 td%, 12 int, 2.0 int%, 105.6 rating
2012 (35): 63.0%, 7.6 ypa, 34 td, 5.3 td%, 8 int, 1.3 int%, 98.7 rating
2013 (36): 60.5%, 6.9 ypa, 25 td, 4.0 td%, 11 int, 1.8 int%, 87.3 rating
2014 (37): 64.1%, 7.1 ypa, 33 td, 5.7 td%, 9 int, 1.5 int%, 97.4 rating
2015 (38): 64.4%, 7.6 ypa, 36 td, 5.8 td%, 7 int, 1.1 int%, 102.2 rating
2016 (39): 67.4%, 8.2 ypa, 28 td, 6.5 td%, 2 int, 0.5 int%, 112.2 rating
The numbers go down from 2010-2013. We can give a million reasons why, but the numbers are the numbers. Those numbers from 2010-2013 fit a typical aging curve for NFL quarterbacks.
But then from 2013-2016, the numbers go back up again. The past two seasons, Brady has been just phenomenal. 65.6%, 7.9 ypa, 64 td, 6.1 td%, 9 int, 0.9 int%, 106.3 rating
So if you didn't know his age, and just looked at his last four years' worth of numbers, you'd think he's a QB that is just entering his prime. Which is.....CRAZY, given his age. People say Aaron Rodgers is playing the position as well as anyone ever has, and that may be so, but it's hard to say that Tom Brady is NOT playing the position as well as anyone ever has.
But is it realistic to think that he could be THIS good moving forward? Can he really repeat these numbers at age 40, 41, and 42?
We really have no precedent for this.
- Peyton Manning was shot at age 39 (2,249 yds, 9 td, 17 int, 67.9 rating), and just because he won a Super Bowl doesn't mean he was good - he wasn't; he needed an historically great defense to win it for him (ironically, it was also his defense that carried him to his first SB title with the Colts). Brady just put up a 112.2 rating and had one of the greatest performances in Super Bowl history at age 39.
- Brett Favre had a good year at age 40 (4,202 yds, 33 td, 7 int, 107.2 rating) but then fell off a cliff at age 41 (2,509 yds, 11 td, 19 int, 69.9 rating).
- John Elway won a Super Bowl at age 38 but then retired.
- Dan Marino's last season was at age 38, and that last year was awful (2,448 yds, 12 td, 17 int, 67.4 rating).
- Joe Montana's last season was at age 38, and he wasn't awful, but he wasn't particularly great either (3,283 yds, 16 td, 9 int, 83.6 rating).
- Jim Kelly put up a QB rating of 73.2 in his last year, at age 36.
- Dan Fouts put up a QB rating of 70.0 in his last year, at age 36.
- Steve Young was great at age 37 (101.1 rating), but then fell off a cliff and was hurt at age 38 (60.9 rating), and then retired.
- Fran Tarkenton threw 32 interceptions and had a 68.9 rating in his last year, at age 38.
- Warren Moon's last real season was at age 42, and his rating was 76.6 that year. He'd survive in the NFL for two more seasons as a backup and would only play in two more games. He was decent at age 41 (83.7 rating), but the year before, at age 40, he had a 68.7 rating.
You just cannot really find examples of NFL quarterbacks playing well in their 40s. Most retire before then, but those that make it to their 40s aren't playing at their previous level. It seems obvious as to why. Their reflexes are slower, their foot speed and maneuverability in the pocket is lessened, their arm strength diminished. And in the NFL, split seconds' worth of decline is often the difference between an INT and a completion. Take Brady's sideline pass to Hogan in overtime of the Super Bowl that was *thisclose* to being intercepted. Brady threw a great pass that fit in a very small window. Take just a *tiny* bit of arm strength away, or take just a *tiny* bit of reaction time away from Brady, and that could have been a Super Bowl-losing pick six.
So what can we realistically expect from Brady moving forward? I don't think it would surprise any of us to see him play at a Pro Bowl level for two more seasons, given how good he is now and the way he takes care of his body. But it is unrealistic to expect this kind of production for four more seasons.
Could the Patriots keep winning titles if Brady played like he did early in his career? Think about the first phase of his career, before Welker and Moss arrived and he began putting up Madden-style passing numbers. From 2001-2006, his average season was:
3,593 yds, 24 td, 13 int, 88.4 rating
That would be better than other great QBs have managed to produce this late in their careers. It would be, however, a significant step down from what he has produced the last few seasons. So could they win if he was performing at that level? Where would Brady rank in today's game with those numbers?
An 88.4 rating would put Brady, if he had those numbers in 2016, in the same company as Russell Wilson (92.6), Andy Dalton (91.8), Alex Smith (91.2), Colin Kaepernick (90.7), Tyrod Taylor (89.6), Philip Rivers (87.9), Carson Palmer (87.2), Jameis Winston (86.1), and Eli Manning (86.0), right about in the middle of the pack among NFL starting QBs.
For reference' sake, here are the regular season QB ratings of the last 10 Super Bowl winning QBs:
2007 - Eli Manning - 73.9
2008 - Ben Roethlisberger - 80.1
2009 - Drew Brees - 109.6
2010 - Aaron Rodgers - 102.1
2011 - Eli Manning - 92.9
2012 - Joe Flacco - 87.7
2013 - Russell Wilson - 101.2
2014 - Tom Brady - 97.4
2015 - Peyton Manning - 67.9
2016 - Tom Brady - 112.2
So of the last 10 QBs to win a Super Bowl, 4 of them had passer ratings lower than what Brady averaged in the early part of his career. The point being: If Brady declined to the point where he was essentially the same QB he was in the first phase of his career, it is still very possible for the Patriots to win another Super Bowl.
Now, with that being said, nobody knows what Brady will be over the next four years, or if he will even last four years. But if this is what he became, it would be prudent for the Patriots to trade JG, for two reasons:
First, because the key to winning over the next four years would be to put as much talent around Brady as possible, as he declines (should a decline actually happen). JG provides nice insurance off the bench, but as long as he's on the bench, he's not actually helping the team on the field. Adding another first round pick (or a first rounder plus something else) would give them more talent.
Second, adding more talent would be helpful for Brady's successor, assuming he isn't as good as Brady, even Brady's decline years.
It is possible that Brady falls off a cliff. We've seen it in the NFL, even among the all-time greats, many times before. As good a job he does taking care of himself, it's still unrealistic to think that he will continue playing at this level in his 40s, but it does leave Patriots' fans optimistic that he could at least play at the level he did early in his career, and if he can do THAT, the Patriots still should very much be in the hunt for more Lombardis. In this scenario, trading JG would be the best course of action.
Time is undefeated, but Brady is putting up a hell of a fight. One of the decisions Bill Belichick needs to make is deciding about the QB position for the future, and one huge aspect of that is trying to accurately project what Tom Brady will be over the next year, and maybe even 3-4 years out. As we shall see, this is not an easy task when it comes to Brady.
Let's look at Brady's stats the past 7 seasons.
2010 (33): 65.9%, 7.9 ypa, 36 td, 7.3 td%, 4 int, 0.8 int%, 111.0 rating
2011 (34): 65.6%, 8.6 ypa, 39 td, 6.4 td%, 12 int, 2.0 int%, 105.6 rating
2012 (35): 63.0%, 7.6 ypa, 34 td, 5.3 td%, 8 int, 1.3 int%, 98.7 rating
2013 (36): 60.5%, 6.9 ypa, 25 td, 4.0 td%, 11 int, 1.8 int%, 87.3 rating
2014 (37): 64.1%, 7.1 ypa, 33 td, 5.7 td%, 9 int, 1.5 int%, 97.4 rating
2015 (38): 64.4%, 7.6 ypa, 36 td, 5.8 td%, 7 int, 1.1 int%, 102.2 rating
2016 (39): 67.4%, 8.2 ypa, 28 td, 6.5 td%, 2 int, 0.5 int%, 112.2 rating
The numbers go down from 2010-2013. We can give a million reasons why, but the numbers are the numbers. Those numbers from 2010-2013 fit a typical aging curve for NFL quarterbacks.
But then from 2013-2016, the numbers go back up again. The past two seasons, Brady has been just phenomenal. 65.6%, 7.9 ypa, 64 td, 6.1 td%, 9 int, 0.9 int%, 106.3 rating
So if you didn't know his age, and just looked at his last four years' worth of numbers, you'd think he's a QB that is just entering his prime. Which is.....CRAZY, given his age. People say Aaron Rodgers is playing the position as well as anyone ever has, and that may be so, but it's hard to say that Tom Brady is NOT playing the position as well as anyone ever has.
But is it realistic to think that he could be THIS good moving forward? Can he really repeat these numbers at age 40, 41, and 42?
We really have no precedent for this.
- Peyton Manning was shot at age 39 (2,249 yds, 9 td, 17 int, 67.9 rating), and just because he won a Super Bowl doesn't mean he was good - he wasn't; he needed an historically great defense to win it for him (ironically, it was also his defense that carried him to his first SB title with the Colts). Brady just put up a 112.2 rating and had one of the greatest performances in Super Bowl history at age 39.
- Brett Favre had a good year at age 40 (4,202 yds, 33 td, 7 int, 107.2 rating) but then fell off a cliff at age 41 (2,509 yds, 11 td, 19 int, 69.9 rating).
- John Elway won a Super Bowl at age 38 but then retired.
- Dan Marino's last season was at age 38, and that last year was awful (2,448 yds, 12 td, 17 int, 67.4 rating).
- Joe Montana's last season was at age 38, and he wasn't awful, but he wasn't particularly great either (3,283 yds, 16 td, 9 int, 83.6 rating).
- Jim Kelly put up a QB rating of 73.2 in his last year, at age 36.
- Dan Fouts put up a QB rating of 70.0 in his last year, at age 36.
- Steve Young was great at age 37 (101.1 rating), but then fell off a cliff and was hurt at age 38 (60.9 rating), and then retired.
- Fran Tarkenton threw 32 interceptions and had a 68.9 rating in his last year, at age 38.
- Warren Moon's last real season was at age 42, and his rating was 76.6 that year. He'd survive in the NFL for two more seasons as a backup and would only play in two more games. He was decent at age 41 (83.7 rating), but the year before, at age 40, he had a 68.7 rating.
You just cannot really find examples of NFL quarterbacks playing well in their 40s. Most retire before then, but those that make it to their 40s aren't playing at their previous level. It seems obvious as to why. Their reflexes are slower, their foot speed and maneuverability in the pocket is lessened, their arm strength diminished. And in the NFL, split seconds' worth of decline is often the difference between an INT and a completion. Take Brady's sideline pass to Hogan in overtime of the Super Bowl that was *thisclose* to being intercepted. Brady threw a great pass that fit in a very small window. Take just a *tiny* bit of arm strength away, or take just a *tiny* bit of reaction time away from Brady, and that could have been a Super Bowl-losing pick six.
So what can we realistically expect from Brady moving forward? I don't think it would surprise any of us to see him play at a Pro Bowl level for two more seasons, given how good he is now and the way he takes care of his body. But it is unrealistic to expect this kind of production for four more seasons.
Could the Patriots keep winning titles if Brady played like he did early in his career? Think about the first phase of his career, before Welker and Moss arrived and he began putting up Madden-style passing numbers. From 2001-2006, his average season was:
3,593 yds, 24 td, 13 int, 88.4 rating
That would be better than other great QBs have managed to produce this late in their careers. It would be, however, a significant step down from what he has produced the last few seasons. So could they win if he was performing at that level? Where would Brady rank in today's game with those numbers?
An 88.4 rating would put Brady, if he had those numbers in 2016, in the same company as Russell Wilson (92.6), Andy Dalton (91.8), Alex Smith (91.2), Colin Kaepernick (90.7), Tyrod Taylor (89.6), Philip Rivers (87.9), Carson Palmer (87.2), Jameis Winston (86.1), and Eli Manning (86.0), right about in the middle of the pack among NFL starting QBs.
For reference' sake, here are the regular season QB ratings of the last 10 Super Bowl winning QBs:
2007 - Eli Manning - 73.9
2008 - Ben Roethlisberger - 80.1
2009 - Drew Brees - 109.6
2010 - Aaron Rodgers - 102.1
2011 - Eli Manning - 92.9
2012 - Joe Flacco - 87.7
2013 - Russell Wilson - 101.2
2014 - Tom Brady - 97.4
2015 - Peyton Manning - 67.9
2016 - Tom Brady - 112.2
So of the last 10 QBs to win a Super Bowl, 4 of them had passer ratings lower than what Brady averaged in the early part of his career. The point being: If Brady declined to the point where he was essentially the same QB he was in the first phase of his career, it is still very possible for the Patriots to win another Super Bowl.
Now, with that being said, nobody knows what Brady will be over the next four years, or if he will even last four years. But if this is what he became, it would be prudent for the Patriots to trade JG, for two reasons:
First, because the key to winning over the next four years would be to put as much talent around Brady as possible, as he declines (should a decline actually happen). JG provides nice insurance off the bench, but as long as he's on the bench, he's not actually helping the team on the field. Adding another first round pick (or a first rounder plus something else) would give them more talent.
Second, adding more talent would be helpful for Brady's successor, assuming he isn't as good as Brady, even Brady's decline years.
It is possible that Brady falls off a cliff. We've seen it in the NFL, even among the all-time greats, many times before. As good a job he does taking care of himself, it's still unrealistic to think that he will continue playing at this level in his 40s, but it does leave Patriots' fans optimistic that he could at least play at the level he did early in his career, and if he can do THAT, the Patriots still should very much be in the hunt for more Lombardis. In this scenario, trading JG would be the best course of action.
