Do Patriot fans have less loyalty to Tom Brady than Browns fans did to Bernie Kosar

[XLIX]

So in other words we can only discuss PLANS BEING LAID for moving on from Brady IN THE FUTURE, when it's obvious he's already a dead duck? How does that make ANY sense at all

If you want to talk about replacing Brady in the abstract, I'm game.... but the decision at hand (i.e. the one that has to be made about 8 months from now) is Brady/Garoppolo.

Yes, someday Brady will no longer be the QB of the NEP. Thank you for the insight.

 

[Jackson 2]

I think he also had many misses on his passes too. Brady was not blameless for the first three Quarters of play.

Also I object to the thesis of this whole fool post. What good did loyalty to a QB past his prime do? It only helped to drive a GOAT coach out of town... stupid fans Why should we want to emulate idiotic fans.

This is, for sure, beating a dead horse. But, in the interest of accuracy, it should be noted that in your original post you wrote "He (Brady) was terrible for most of three quarters.", to which I called BS. Above you wrote, "Brady was not blameless for the first 3 quarters of play.". To me, there's a huge difference between "terrible" and "not blameless." Beep, beep, beep, beep...

 

[Huckleberry1]

Let's try this another way.

What do you suppose Brady's stats will be in 2027?

All your bullsh1t about me trying to "get out" of some contention you want me to have made is just that.

It is cut and dried (and that's how you spell dried, just by the by). I know Brady's stats to date. Check the thread about the numbnuts trying to compare "stats" and make a case for Rodgers being as good as Brady.

I have lots of appreciation, fandom, love, what have you for what Brady's done for us, as a fan.

I do not have so much that I think his stats will be as good in 2027 as the stats to date (including wins to date, eye test to date, etc. to date).

Do you believe that Tom Brady will be playing in the NFL in 2027?

If not, does that make you some kind of traitor?

See, because I don't.

The extension to an absurd point - when Brady is 50 - is to get your head around the certainty that his play will not, in fact, continue to improve and/or hold steady indefinitely.

So you and I have the same facts at our disposal, and they are also, by the way, at the disposal of one Bill Belichick.

Garapollo barely figures into it.

So if you want to continue to embarrass yourself by playing bile hydrant be my guest. Whatever wool-gathering I do will not have one whit of influence over the timing or circumstances of Brady's departure.

I do not know when. Those who will pull the trigger do not know when. Brady does not know when, and nobody knows whether he will believe it's "time" for him to go. Frankly, I doubt it.

Absolutely no argument that he is at the top of his game. I don't think that you want to argue that he will be at the top of his game in 2027, do you?

So which is it, tough guy? Do you think Brady will be playing in 2027, or do you think I'm right?

Will Jimmy Garrapolo still be his backup?


Get back to me when you have facts, if I want Joseph Campbell I'll watch Power of the Myth.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Will Jimmy Garrapolo still be his backup?


Get back to me when you have facts, if I want Joseph Campbell I'll watch Power of the Myth.

I may not be in agreement with any given post, but Joseph Campbell references must be accorded due respect.

 

[AzPatsFan]

The intellectual dishonesty is getting out of hand. NOBODY is saying to get rid of Brady now.

I think the most anyone has made in terms of an argument is getting rid of Brady before we lost an excellent potential replacement (or should I say, a replacement with excellent potential). The idea being maybe moving on after the 2018-2019 season, turn the franchise over to the understudy -- and miss out on maybe 2-3 more years of Brady's career in order to reposition the franchise for his successor, exactly the same way the 49ers did with Joe Montana.

Nobody knows that this sport is a business more than TB12. And every business decision is about meeting a goal. He'll make business decisions that line up with his goals, such as taking a pay cut to maximize BB's roster flexibility and allow him the maximum chance to build a winner. That's good business for both parties.

But Brady knows that the franchise has other goals. One of those goals is to continue to be a valid and prestigious football franchise years after TB12 has gone to pasture. We are first and foremost New England Patriot fans,, we are Tom Brady fans because we are Patriots fans, not the other way around. We know that players last for a set time, and when Brady's time is up, it's up, just like our other former greats, it's the laundry that needs to go on forever. I for one am anxious to ensure that the franchise survives Brady's departure. I see a choice between two metaphorical options, trying to stay in the air too long resulting in a crash, vs taking a carefully controlled landing at a time of our choosing. And I don't like the idea of crashing if we can help it.

We have a backup QB who has every chance of being an acceptable starter and possibly a very good one. And we have an aging quarterback who might or might not still be playing football in 3 years. The math seems obvious. Ride Brady into the ground and crash into the ground with him when the heir is right there with years of understudy experience? Let the heir go and if Brady falls apart prematurely, "figure out" the quarterback position then because that worked so well for the Jets after Joe Namath? Or have a plan and stick to it despite the opportunity to go double or nothing on a guy who's already doubled down several times on longevity being able to stabilize the position for the 3-4 more years it'll take to get the next successor lined up?

Quarterback is not a position you just let happen. Your quarterback defines your franchise, and you do not improvise at quarterback if you don't have to. You PLAN your moves at that position, for years in advance if you can. Especially when you have the luxury of time. A lot of people are seeing the decision to hold onto Garoppolo as a sign that that plan is in motion. And I for one agree that it is time to at least examine what a post-Brady Patriots franchise will look like and how to assemble the best possible Patriots franchise that does not have Tom Brady in it. And I'm sure BB is doing that because that's simple organizational due dilligence. And if that team looks better in 2 years than it does in 5 when Garoppolo is long gone, making some decisions based on that is the opposite of dumb or vindictive. It's just business.

Ivan and Andy assume this is the Brady Fans Forum not the Patriots Fans blog. Or at least they act that way. They are free to open their own Brady fans.

 

[Ring 6]

Ivan and Andy assume this is the Brady Fans Forum not the Patriots Fans blog. Or at least they act that way. They are free to open their own Brady fans.

And we are also free to post here as we please.

And wanting Brady to stay here as long as possible is wanting what is best for the patriots.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Moving on, we seem to all be in agreement that Brady is unlikely to repeat or approximate his 2016 level of play in 2027. We both agree that he is likely to do so in 2017.

Others here have basically said you can't ever talk about more than 5 years out. I think that this rule is very true of most QBs, young or old. I would be surprised if Brady is on the 2022 roster... although granted, Brady. Still seems unlikely. At 2022 if I've got a line on a winner (or apparent winner) even if Brady is still playing well, I pull the trigger (of course it's what BB does that matters.)

Would you do this in the 2022 off season or not?

 

[PatriotsReign]

Ivan and Andy assume this is the Brady Fans Forum not the Patriots Fans blog. Or at least they act that way. They are free to open their own Brady fans.

I'd bet the house 99.9% of us are more Patriots fans than Brady fans.

And saying the team is more important than Brady isn't a knock on Brady, it seems just the obvious truth.

 

[Tony2046]

Moving on, we seem to all be in agreement that Brady is unlikely to repeat or approximate his 2016 level of play in 2027. We both agree that he is likely to do so in 2017.

Others here have basically said you can't ever talk about more than 5 years out. I think that this rule is very true of most QBs, young or old. I would be surprised if Brady is on the 2022 roster... although granted, Brady. Still seems unlikely. At 2022 if I've got a line on a winner (or apparent winner) even if Brady is still playing well, I pull the trigger (of course it's what BB does that matters.)

Would you do this in the 2022 off season or not?

I understand the premise but how do you correlate that with moving onto JG? How will JG perform in 2018 or 2019 or whenever? Nobody knows.

Father time? Cliff? No argument against those beloved counter points except for the when.

Brady hasn't hit the "Cliff" yet and "Father time" is still napping.

 

[Tony2046]

I'd bet the house 99.9% of us are more Patriots fans than Brady fans.

And saying the team is more important than Brady isn't a knock on Brady, it seems just the obvious truth.

It's not Brady fan vs Patriots fan rather they both are opinions of what is best for the Pats.

Moving on from a Super Bowl winning QB to make sure we don't lose a 2 regular season game winning QB is just dumbfounding.

 

[RayClay]

I may not be in agreement with any given post, but Joseph Campbell references must be accorded due respect.

I think "Hero with a Thousand Faces" is much more appropriate when discussing Tom.

 

[RayClay]

Moving on, we seem to all be in agreement that Brady is unlikely to repeat or approximate his 2016 level of play in 2027.

Blasphemy!

 

[RayClay]

I'd bet the house 99.9% of us are more Patriots fans than Brady fans.

And saying the team is more important than Brady isn't a knock on Brady, it seems just the obvious truth.

All I can say is Willie Mays.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Ivan and Andy assume this is the Brady Fans Forum not the Patriots Fans blog. Or at least they act that way. They are free to open their own Brady fans.

Feel free to make your argument as to how detrimental Tom Brady is the the Patriots success? And be sure to include why a player who couldn't make it through 2 games when asked to replace Brady for 4 should be given the job that is currently taken by the best player in the NFL?

Go ahead and try to make any fact based argument for why Garrapolo should be given a job he can't win on his own?


Go for it.

Let's see it?

Can't wait to see it.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Moving on, we seem to all be in agreement that Brady is unlikely to repeat or approximate his 2016 level of play in 2027. We both agree that he is likely to do so in 2017.

Others here have basically said you can't ever talk about more than 5 years out. I think that this rule is very true of most QBs, young or old. I would be surprised if Brady is on the 2022 roster... although granted, Brady. Still seems unlikely. At 2022 if I've got a line on a winner (or apparent winner) even if Brady is still playing well, I pull the trigger (of course it's what BB does that matters.)

Would you do this in the 2022 off season or not?

You should create a message board where you talk to yourself because that's what you have really been doing here.

Go ahead and try to back your position without bringing Elon Musk into it. "In 2069 there will be no human offensive lineman...."

 

[scout]

Feel free to make your argument as to how detrimental Tom Brady is the the Patriots success? And be sure to include why a player who couldn't make it through 2 games when asked to replace Brady for 4 should be given the job that is currently taken by the best player in the NFL?

Go ahead and try to make any fact based argument for why Garrapolo should be given a job he can't win on his own?


Go for it.

Let's see it?

Can't wait to see it.

Please stop. A QB is injury translates to not being successful. Thus, somehow Tom Brady's injury that caused him to be lost for the season becomes relevant.

 

[Ring 6]

Please stop. A QB is injury translates to not being successful. Thus, somehow Tom Brady's injury that caused him to be lost for the season becomes relevant.

Sure it does but he has had 1 in over 200 games. Jimmy has had 1 in 2 games.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Please stop. A QB is injury translates to not being successful. Thus, somehow Tom Brady's injury that caused him to be lost for the season becomes relevant.

When people stop using Kellermans cliff as their argument against Brady I will stop using Jimmy Garrapolos frailty against him. If Brady's age is going to be used against him then Garrapolo's inability to play the 4 games he was counted upon to start is going to be be the used in return.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Please stop. A QB is injury translates to not being successful. Thus, somehow Tom Brady's injury that caused him to be lost for the season becomes relevant.

And truth be told a players ability to withstand the pounding of an NFL season is far more relevant than a players age is. If you don't believe me look at the age of all those QB's who were knocked out of ganes or the season the past three years, then compare it to Brady's age.


When someone , anyone, can make a fact based argument why Jimmy Garrapolo deserves to take the QB job from Brady then I'll make a fact based argument for why Brady should keep it. If they try to use Brady's age then I will use Garrapolo's inability to make it through two games, let alone a full season plus the playoffs. So far not one person has done so.

 

[scout]

When people stop using Kellermans cliff as their argument against Brady I will stop using Jimmy Garrapolos frailty against him. If Brady's age is going to be used against him then Garrapolo's inability to play the 4 games he was counted upon to start is going to be be the used in return.

Awesome. Your criteria for defending Brady is based upon another members bizarre logic? Using an injury as grounds for not choosing an NFL player sets up a precedence for future acquisitions or opens the doors for questions regarding current players (Gronk). I've said all along that I'm fine with BB's decision. The problem appears to be that some members already know his thinking.