Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by SVN, Dec 26, 2007.
Big deal...they have to grind on about something, and the Patriots appear to provide all the grist for the mill these days...good, bad, or indifferent.
It's still the best regular season ANY NFL team has had to date, and they can rag on Brady all the want...there isn't one NFL team that wouldn't put him on their roster in a heartbeat.
Patriot envy....it is spreading.
Good, who cares.
Bert Jones is still the greatest ever. That's really important.
Why don't you RTFA before commenting on it?
It has nothing to do with the Pats' season, only with Brady's.
Also, the author of the bit, Aaron Schatz of FootballOutsiders.com is an avowed Pats fan from Framingham, so I don't think he's being motivated by "Pats envy."
Where are the comments on Manning playing 11 of his 16 games that year in a dome?
6 of Brady's last games were all played outside in the Northeast. Buffalo, Baltimore, New Jersey, 3-Boston.
Huge difference...No way he was going to stay on a 60 TD pace, 70+ comp. % or at 133.5 QB rating. Now that would have been sick!
I think he is having a great year. An MVP year and in the end the only thing that matters to Brady is 19 wins! I think he is more concerned with getting Moss his record than his own, but they just happen to go hand in hand. Brady truly only cares about the wins.
The article does, however, give us a variety of fox sports nomenclature explaining how Brady slipped in "their" list of greatest ever seasons (I believe Bert Jones in 1976 is their greatest ever QB for a season.)
There's also some blather comparing Brady's attempts to Mannings, in getting to the general vicinity of 50 TDs.
La, la, la.
It's far enough away from football to even worry about records. Probably, Brady will have the TD record. Probably, Moss will have the TD catch record. Certainly, Rice doing it in 12 games gives Moss fuel to keep shooting at a claim to "GOAT," which would take a hell of a lot of brilliant seasons for, say, 5 years.
But the real goal isn't records or titles like GOAT or even MVP. The real goal is a lombardi trophy.
So how far away from that goal is the idea that "statistically, when you bring in the normalizing math...." Fox Sports has dropped your current season from the top of the "greatest ever" list?
I'd pick at the stats themselves, la la la, but why? Tom Brady is a QB. The Patriots are a football team. The ultimate goal of every team is to win the super bowl.
Barring a loss to the Giants, we'll have to also go 19-0 to achieve that this year.
I'm pretty sure that's enough to ask of the 2007 Pats, including their QB and #1 receiver.
Brady is on pace to throw for the most TDs in NFL history as well as throwing fewer than ten INTs, all while winning 15 games with a very real possibility to win the sixteenth. I've been wondering when Colts fans would show up to go on about how Manning in '04 is better, and while this isn't a Colts fan, it does bring up the same "argument," to which I say: How many of Manning's TDs came in games he won? All of Brady's have, that to me means much more than how many attempts Brady has had or how many yards per attempt he's thrown for.
If Brady throws for more TDs, fewer INTs, wins more games and does all this while playing in far more outdoor, "bad weather" games I don't see an argument as to who had a better season.
First of all, commenting that the article in question focuses too much on stats is just silly -- it's like reading something by Bill James and criticizing it for being too much about stats. As creator of the DVOA and DPAR metrics, statistical discourse is the sole reason why a site like foxsports wants to publish Schatz.
His goal w/ his advanced SABR-style stats is to create metrics for football analysis that are as useful as possible. He's not trying to tell anyone that they should substitute his numbers for their own judgement, just trying to give people the best numerical tools to help aid their reaching their own judgment.
If pressed, as an ardent Pats fan, I'm sure Schatz would confess that, whatever the numbers say, he thinks Brady's '07 is all-around more impressive than Mannings. As a professional analyst hired for his advanced stats, it's his job to give us the data, and help us inerpret it.
As for the weather issre, various performances this year have prompted Schatz to attempt to devise a way to add adjustments for weather in his stats. It should prove to be a tricky task to do with as much objectivity as possible. I'm curious to see what he'll come up with for '08.
IMO, judging from the splits between playing indoors vs. outdoors in most QBs, I imagine that the positive effect from playing half your games in a dome will turn out to be quite large.
r u trying to tell me that brady is not haveing the greatest season ever of a QB? playing in the NE, agaisnt some of the best defenses lately ie balt, PIT
and he still can break the single season TD record? u must be kiding me
Then it is an interesting discussion of DVOA and DPAR metrics, but not of quarterbacks or team sports. To the extent that these metrics are useful, they must be predictive; modeling the past within a present season to compare the two is a trifling exercise, unless the metrics could quantify the probability/likelihood of winning. Put another way: You've got Tom Brady from 2004, and Bert Jones from 1976. You want to win a Super Bowl. Who do you take?
Then Schatz would do well to mention that his current palate of variables are inaccurate, in that accounting for quarterback play in and out of weather has not been considered.
I'm not against keeping statistics, and I don't much care that Fox publishes an article about Brady's season from a statistical perspective. I have long been one of those who said, "Yep, I'm pretty sure Manning's the better quarterback, can't argue with those numbers. Yep, I'm pretty sure I want Brady as my QB, can't argue with that one number: SB rings."
That's a fancy way of saying, the stats are only useful when you make a conscious decision to work in a vacuum, away from stats that are more difficult to quantify, i.e., "intangibles" such as the influence of weather (not really an intangible) and leadership.
Through this filter, we can derive a sort of fantasy football or Madden model that tells you what should happen, yet has little or no predictive power. (What did Schatz say would happen to Brady's value in the presence of Moss and Welker, prior to the opening game of the season?)
These articles will mean nothing in the grand scheme of things. Most of them are written by Manning ballwashers who are desperately trying to hang on to their GROSSLY inaccurate appointing of Manning as the best QB in the league for so many years.
IF the Pats go 16-0, and Brady breaks the TD record. There will be no question that Brady will be looked at as the Greatest QB ever to play the game (maybe not in the immediate aftermath... but in the not so distant future).
Same goes for BB.
Remember... Not even Ali got credit when he was doing it. It wasnâ€™t until years later that he finally received his just do.
Awwww - looks like some feelings are getting hurt.
Separate names with a comma.