Cian Fahey on Tom Brady (2)

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

He’s some goof who came out with his analysis that Brady was declining and had thrown some really poor balls that should have been picked much more than he was last year.

I guess the OP is referencing his article in an attempt to try and prove his point that Brady should’ve been given the first month off in order to save his health and energy.

Rest is good for a 40 year old athlete nursing an injury. Nothing controversial about that. Before Brady's Achilles issue his QBR was 110.9; post Achilles 83.7.

If we lose that 1st round bye for playoffs, we have a problem.

 

[Bruins29]

recognizing and reacting to defensive alignments and game plans especially no longer having BOTH muscle memory and recognition

Athletic processing???

 

[K. Dog]

Fahey is a .... Brady hater.

Fahey is a contrarian

@JMCoo @BaconGrundleCandy
What precisely do you disagree with in the Fahey analysis? That Brady was "simply great during the regular season"? That SBLI was "the greatest comeback in Super Bowl history"? That Brady is "historically good before the snap, putting him one step ahead of the defense in everything he does"? That he "throws with anticipation and timing to all levels"? That he has a "lightning quick release and post-snap processing"? That he had a 28/2 TD/INT ratio? That he was "one of the best quarterbacks in the league"?

What is so triggering about saying that not all of Brady's 12 regular season 2016 games were equally good, which is the only thing remotely controversial Fahey said? Would you all be this worked up if Fahey had said that Brady's arm strength increased throughout the season, and that therefore Brady should get more throwing time in? If not, why does changing "increased" to "decreased" and "more" to "less" bring out the expletives? What if he said that that there is no correlation between arm strength and date in season and that Brady's work schedule shouldn't be changed - would that be controversial? Or does he have to say that Brady's arm strength was exactly the same in each of the 12 regular season games, otherwise he's a contrarian?

If you want to discuss football, how would you rank Brady's regular season 2016 games by say apparent arm strength? What games specifically do you disagree with Fahey about anyway?

 

[K. Dog]

Rest is good for a 40 year old athlete nursing an injury. Nothing controversial about that.

That's what I would have thought. But apparently a lot of posters do find that to be a highly objectionable suggestion.

 

[Tony2046]

@JMCoo @BaconGrundleCandy
What precisely do you disagree with in the Fahey analysis? That Brady was "simply great during the regular season"? That SBLI was "the greatest comeback in Super Bowl history"? That Brady is "historically good before the snap, putting him one step ahead of the defense in everything he does"? That he "throws with anticipation and timing to all levels"? That he has a "lightning quick release and post-snap processing"? That he had a 28/2 TD/INT ratio? That he was "one of the best quarterbacks in the league"?

What is so triggering about saying that not all of Brady's 12 regular season 2016 games were equally good, which is the only thing remotely controversial Fahey said? Would you all be this worked up if Fahey had said that Brady's arm strength increased throughout the season, and that therefore Brady should get more throwing time in? If not, why does changing "increased" to "decreased" and "more" to "less" bring out the expletives?

If you want to discuss football, how would you rank Brady's regular season 2016 games? What games specifically do you disagree with Fahey about anyway?

I rank the 2016 as an A+ that culminated in one of the, if not the, greatest SB victories in NFL history.

A short tutorial of increase and decrease or less and more for ya:

Boss: "K. Dog you've been promoted. More money. Increased salary."

K. Dog: "Yayyy"

Boss: "K. Dog you've been demoted. Less money. Decreased salary"

K. Dog: " {insert expletive here}"


Brady is dealing with an injury but why would that stop the idiotic cliff campaigners from raging on?

 

[K. Dog]

And Brady played exceptionally well over 38, so why not just continue to use that arbitrary cutoff?

I don't understand your reasoning here. Brady did well last year with a 4 game rest at age 39. Wouldn't your analysis suggest we should replicate that? Why increase his regular season workload by 33% ?

Congratulations on passing your undergrad logic course

I'm just trying to use common sense. This doesn't seem like such a complicated question: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

 

[JarOfMayo51]

What possible relevance does the MVP award have to this thread? The issue is whether Brady should have been rested or should be rested in order to maximize the probability of a ring. MVPs are irrelevant at best, a distraction at worst.

What is scary to me is this. Maybe people here feel that an MVP award and personal accolades are relevant to team strategy. And maybe some Patriots personnel agree. And maybe that distraction - a quest for accolades - is why Brady wasn’t rested.

It's also kind of bizarre that some people seem to take a comment that a 40 year old QB is likely to benefit from rest as some kind of insult to Brady, when it is only a statistical inference. It's no more an insult than to say Brady shouldn't rush as much as some QBs. But the hypersensitivity to an alternate strategy which had worked great last season suggests the question: was the decision not to rest Brady based on ego or on maximizing chance of ring?

Why would they rest Brady in this final 3 game stretch when there is a lot at stake in terms of playoff seeding? The whole team gets an extra week of rest if they can secure the 1 or 2 seed

If they lose to Pittsburgh, the best they can hope for is the #2, but if they drop another game then the Jaguars could actually steal it from them and then the Pats are playing in the wild card round

You only rest your star QB if you've clinched your division and seeding

 

[Bruins29]

Last time I checked - football was about chemistry.

Brady literally has 7 new players that he needs to get on the same page with and one just arrived here.
Cooks, Allen and Dorsett need as much work as possible to get/remain/improve their chemistry with Brady and it needs work. Dorsett especially.
Britt is brand new and they have 3 games to sort it out
Gilly and Rex are also in their first year here and Rex is practically a receiver. Hollister is also in his first year here.

This does not even take into account the linemen.

The fact that a poster/posters think that the Pats should just rest a player when "trying to get better" is the most important thing is seriously mind boggling.

Then again there is a poster here who seems to redefine stupidity every time he posts/starts a thread.

 

[primetime]

I don't understand your reasoning here. Brady did well last year with a 4 game rest at age 39. Wouldn't your analysis suggest we should replicate that? Why increase his regular season workload by 33% ?

I'm just trying to use common sense. This doesn't seem like such a complicated question: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Brady's game in Week 14 last season was terrible, playing in a stadium he often plays poorly in. The Patriots won, but he played badly. 50% completion percentage, 0 TDs, sacked twice.

Of course, things did not start out that way Sunday. Brady missed on his first six throws and was throttled by the Broncos defense, getting hit in the pocket and even fumbling before finally completing his first pass. He looked completely out of sorts, while Trevor Siemian looked like the unflappable veteran.

Turns out that players sometimes just have bad games. Or maybe that would have never happened if Brady hadn't been rusty from missing the first four games of the season... it's almost like we can invent any narrative we want.

 

[Ring 6]

I most certainly did not post “half the sentence.” I quoted it verbatim. You said what you said, and it was incorrect.

Bad wording on my part. I meant you ignored that you lie included me saying there were no other candidates. See I can admit when I make a mistake.
You still haven’t admitted you lied multiple times when you attributed “Floyd mastered the system” to me.

And for the record, Wentz had thrown his league leading (and franchise record setting) 33rd TD pass on the team with the best record in the NFL who also became the first squad to clinch a postseason berth on Sunday prior to his injury. Tell me when the last time that a TD leading QB who led his team to the best record in the NFL didn’t win the MVP. I’ll wait. It certainly doesn’t happen often, if ever.

At the time he was tied for the best record,but what to hell let’s do it your way. I will take this to mean you think Wentz is better than Tom Brady and will now repeat it consistently and ignore you if you say you didn’t say that.

I think it’s fairly safe to say that Wentz was fully in the running, much more than you’re willing to accept. Actually, Sports Illustrated had him overtake Brady 4 weeks ago, and USA Today still has him ranked first even after the injury, with Brown second and Brady third. Considering all of these facts, I think he’d have gained more than a handful of first place votes (or, as you said—“possible” first round votes.)

It’s fine that you think Wentz is better than Tom Brady. I think that’s crazy though.

 

[supafly]

Rest is good for a 40 year old athlete nursing an injury. Nothing controversial about that. Before Brady's Achilles issue his QBR was 110.9; post Achilles 83.7.

If we lose that 1st round bye for playoffs, we have a problem.

I’m not meaning for anything to sound controversial and I most certainly haven’t piled on the OP for his suggestion. I’m merely explaining who Cian Fahley is and why his analysis is being discussed.

I can’t say that I personally agree with the suggestion, but I don’t find it worthy of an attempt at ridicule, either. I simply think that Brady plays because he gives the team its best chance at succeeding.

 

[supafly]

At the time he was tied for the best record,but what to hell let’s do it your way. I will take this to mean you think Wentz is better than Tom Brady and will now repeat it consistently and ignore you if you say you didn’t say that.


It’s fine that you think Wentz is better than Tom Brady. I think that’s crazy though.

Well, Wentz and his team still have the best record, so it’s not really “at the time,” is it? It’s right now.

And yes—I’ve burned all of my Brady jerseys and memorabilia and replaced them with Carson Wentz gear.

Merry Christmas, You filthy animal.

 

[supafly]

Fahey does not argue Brady is declining. I believe he argues 2016 was Brady's best year in many years and better than nearly any other QB, although I don’t recollect exactly.

What Fahey does argue is this: Brady benefited from the extra rest in 2016.

I thought he was the guy who had claimed that there were many more INTs left on the table that should’ve been picked, particularly in the SB.

 

[Ring 6]

Well, Wentz and his team still have the best record, so it’s not really “at the time,” is it? It’s right now.

Yes we were talking about at the time unless you are saying he is still the favorite.

And yes—I’ve burned all of my Brady jerseys and memorabilia and replaced them with Carson Wentz gear.

Merry Christmas, You filthy animal.

Act like a clown, get treated like a clown.
Still ignoring the lie you told numerous times,huh?

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

@JMCoo @BaconGrundleCandy
What precisely do you disagree with in the Fahey analysis? That Brady was "simply great during the regular season"? That SBLI was "the greatest comeback in Super Bowl history"? That Brady is "historically good before the snap, putting him one step ahead of the defense in everything he does"? That he "throws with anticipation and timing to all levels"? That he has a "lightning quick release and post-snap processing"? That he had a 28/2 TD/INT ratio? That he was "one of the best quarterbacks in the league"?

What is so triggering about saying that not all of Brady's 12 regular season 2016 games were equally good, which is the only thing remotely controversial Fahey said? Would you all be this worked up if Fahey had said that Brady's arm strength increased throughout the season, and that therefore Brady should get more throwing time in? If not, why does changing "increased" to "decreased" and "more" to "less" bring out the expletives? What if he said that that there is no correlation between arm strength and date in season and that Brady's work schedule shouldn't be changed - would that be controversial? Or does he have to say that Brady's arm strength was exactly the same in each of the 12 regular season games, otherwise he's a contrarian?

If you want to discuss football, how would you rank Brady's regular season 2016 games by say apparent arm strength? What games specifically do you disagree with Fahey about anyway?

I'm not getting worked up or triggered abt anything.

Just pointed out I thought Fahey is a moron.


We're talking abt arm strength, correct? He once said Wentz had a weak arm ... AFTER he threw a ball 62 yards for a TD.

He makes up "stats" & pretends everyone should give a ****. He's literally deciding what passes are & aren't "int'able" like people haven't been watching the sport for decades saying "Man DB'S can't catch or that would have been a TD".

Many other examples just like that.

Honestly Wtf is he to tell me anything abt anything?

I only thought abt this for 5 seconds but an Achilles injury will mess with a lot of mechanics & some velocity.

 

[supafly]

Still ignoring the lie you told numerous times,huh?

The bottom line was that you strongly suggested in multiple posts how well Floyd had picked up our system, and didn’t care for my use of the term “master the system,” so that’s now suddenly what you’re focused on.

If that’s what this is all about, you’re a sad person who looks for reasons to argue with people for no particular reason—which is pretty much the consensus on the forum.

 

[PScottman]

Athletic processing???

Frickin Microsoft is probably trying to patent it as we speak.

 

[Ring 6]

The bottom line was that you strongly suggested in multiple posts how well Floyd had picked up our system, and didn’t care for my use of the term “master the system,” so that’s now suddenly what you’re focused on.

Still lying.
I said Floyd leaned the system pretty quickly evidenced by the fact that he was on the field contributing.
You, pulling the crap you normally do, tried to make it sound like my opinion was something it clearly wasn’t and repeated it many times and just ignoring me correcting you. It’s a silly immature game. As I said act like a clown and you will get treated like a clown.

If that’s what this is all about, you’re a sad person who looks for reasons to argue with people for no particular reason—which is pretty much the consensus on the forum.

So then you go to your only other tool in the bag, personal insults.

Lie then when caught ignore it then thrown out personal insults. Clown.

 

[Kontradiction]

LOL... Jesus, you two. This is getting pretty sad.

 

[supafly]

LOL... Jesus, you two. This is getting pretty sad.

All he does is pick fights and talk down to people and as soon as someone calls him out or sticks up for themselves, they’re belittled for pages at a time. It’s an ongoing problem, and has been for a long while.

At any given time in this forum, there will be multiple threads with ongoing pissing matches with other posters, and it's been that way for years. He doesn’t use the forum as a place to be respectful and talk football. He uses it as a platform to debate any and every detail that he can.