What if Brady succeeds elsewhere? Ramifications for BB.

[TheRainMaker]

Is this real life?

I’m a spectator at this point. This is getting too funny.

 

[TheRainMaker]

Bill has said himself every year that it is the players that win the games. He has also said that there is no single player more responsible for the Pats success than Brady. He said that when he was asked about Adam V's importance to the team I think either last year or the year before. It is always the players that make coaches great not the other way around. I mean Harbaugh was about to be fired in Baltimore because of awful Joe Flacco and one year later he is coach of the year because of Lamar. That is the way it is regardless if sport but probably more so in football because the QB impacts the game more than any other position in any team sport.

That being said, I have complete faith that BB can find the next guy and the Pats success will continue. Probably not to the tune of 6 SBs but if he can get an above average QB, I see no reason the Pats can't continue to dominate. He is the best coach and the best GM and had the incredible fortune of drafting the GOAT QB. We are a blessed fanbase.

What you’re presenting is a tough concept for many on here to grasp.

 

[RobertWeathers]

@Deus Irae is this true?

I'm anxious to see what he says. I can't reply to him b/c hes doesn't like my bluntness.

 

[TheRainMaker]

I'm anxious to see what he says. I can't reply to him b/c hes doesn't like my bluntness.

And please take @robertweathers off of ignore. Nobody should be on the ignore list.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

I’m a spectator at this point. This is getting too funny.

These guys have been waiting 20 years for their moment to shine. Lol.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Is this real life?

Some fans think this is this just fantasy.
The dynasty is caught in a landslide.
The new fans have no escape from reality.
They need to open their eyes,
Look up to the Chiefs
and see....

Brady is a poor boy
BB has no sympathy
Gisele says easy come, easy go.
Duron gets high
Early Bird's tugged low.
Any way the wind blows doesn't really matter to BB, to BB.....

 

[Clonamery]

Some fans think this is this just fantasy.
The dynasty is caught in a landslide.
The new fans have no escape from reality.
The need to open their eyes,
Look up to the Chiefs
and see....

Brady is a poor boy
BB has no sympathy
Gisele says easy come, easy go.
Duron gets high
Early Bird offers low.
Any way the wind blows doesn't really matter to BB, to BB.....

Nice poem for a blunt dude.

 

[RobertWeathers]

And please take @robertweathers off of ignore. Nobody should be on the ignore list.

Hes too much of a sissy to take me off ignore.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Nice poem for a blunt dude.

Just popped in there....

Watched, "Bohemian Rhapsody" on flight recently. Not a big Queen fan but pretty good movie.

 

[Clonamery]

Just popped in there....

Watched, "Bohemian Rhapsody" on flight recently. Not a big Queen fan but pretty good movie.

That’s generally how inspiration goes, then the editing.

Yes, agree it was pretty good.

 

[TBR]

Interesting premise. But I honestly feel Stidham is a better QB than Cassel, when Cassel was forced to go in for Brady, and the Matt Cassel led Patriots went 11-5. Belichick is the greatest coach of all time. If it's Stidham and new weapons, he can win. Not bad mouthing Brady, but he seems to zero in on Edelman constantly, maybe a different QB doesn't do that.

Brady would have 4 instead of 3 of the last 7 Super Bowl wins if he had Edelman to "zero in" on against Philadelphia. Not that the offense lost them that game.

 

[Tony2046]

I get that Brady is your favorite part of the dynasty success. Doesn't mean that he was necessary or sufficient


I agree that after 2004 the consensus opinion was that Brady had become an elite QB. The vast majority of people still thought that Peyton was better, and most people still scoffed at the idea that Brady was the GOAT over Montana, but folks conceded that Brady was now elite. And all the statistical measures agree that 2004 was the year he ascended.

There absolutely were people who were claiming Brady was elite prior to 2004 for all the reasons you mention, and there were folks correctly predicting that Brady would become the GOAT. But his play hadn't risen to that level yet.

It's actually demeaning to Brady's 2010-2017 play to claim the earlier Brady was playing at a GOAT level. Most people at the time attributed the winning to the team -- and to Belichick -- and not to Brady alone.

I've shown in particular that the 2001 superbowl was clearly more of a defense and coaching success than a QB/offense success. To suggest otherwise is just Brady homerism.

My beef is with those who want to venerate Brady by trashing Belichick. I don't want to be pushed into the opposite effort, to try and defend the GOAT Coach/GM by attacking the GOAT QB.

But if I had to choose, I'd say the early years were more Belichick than Brady, and the later years more Brady than Belichick. But both are the GOAT.

Perhaps it would be best if Brady stays with the Pats and he and Belichick retire together, leaving this as a debate for the ages.

That's fair but painting Brady as a JAG in 2001 with contextless stats is not.

A while back we had a thread discussing who deserved more credit for the dynasty.

Funny enough everyone gave both BB and TB credit. The debate was whether it was 60/40 or 40/60 or something/something. Point being that no one discredits BB for his part in the dynasty. It's just an oddly intense debate over which way to swing ten percentile points. Haha

I clearly remember how I felt about Brady when he first took the starting job. My brother and I loved Bledsoe but admitted that there was something special about Brady. He had a different kind of composure. He didn't choke. We felt more confident about winning games.

By the end of the 2001 season most knew that Brady was the man. Stats be damned. He just had that "it" factor and most were relieved that Brady , and not Bledsoe, would be playing in the Super Bowl.

By the way, Brady ( the comeback kid) started his winning in college with an orange bowl victory over the Crimson Tide.

Oddly some "Pat's fans" quietly question Brady's greatness. Over the years I've heard the Rodgers comparisons, the Montana yips, the wailing Garoppolites and now the tourch passing Mahomies.

Anyway both BB and TB have delivered an eternity's worth of memories and trophies. There can be no bad endings and there can be no diminished legacies. Stats be damned.

 

[Tony2046]

Even Belichick has said the 2001 win was totally unexpected.

Because he didn't expect Brady to be Brady. What else changed?

 

[primetime]

It's sick because of how spoiled we've been by this era but after twenty years of this I won't say I'm not a little excited for something new and unknown, and I suspect I'm not alone in that feeling either.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

There are no "facts" involved in your attribution of the key to 2001 success to Brady and prior failures to Belichick. That's just your bias.

And I notice you defend some of the great players on the team but not Belichick. That's my beef with you and your ilk. You refuse to credit Belichick for his contribution as the consensus GOAT Coach/GM because you fear it diminishes Brady.

Silly.

Everyone here is crediting Belichick as a major factor in the dynasty.

What people have a problem with is the silly notion that the team’s best player (by far) is merely a replaceable cog. Didn’t you just write that Brady wasn’t necessary or sufficient?

Then you’ll have to explain to me how Belichick was 36-44 in Cleveland and is 18-19 in New England in games not started by Brady. That’s 54-63...a 117 game sample size. And over those seven seasons, one playoff win. It’s not like this was just a year or two while Belichick was building his foundation. 117 games is a lot of games. He’s 209-64 with Brady. That’s right...63 losses without Brady; 64 with Brady. 54 wins without Brady; 209 with him.

Shouldn’t the evidence be on your side here instead of totally stacked against you?

I have no problem with the notion that Belichick is the GOAT despite this very bold split. He has gotten the most out of the opportunity. Every legendary coach has legendary players. You can’t name an all-time great coach without naming an all-time great player, and usually it’s a QB.

Facts are facts. If you think this belittles Belichick, that’s on you. I don’t think it does.

 

[Biffins]

During the first dynasty run, no one other than Pats homers was arguing Brady was the best QB in the league.

The most amusing part of this is to look at the 2001 season and see Brady homers attributing all the success to Brady. Particularly in the SuperBowl game. The defense held the "Greatest Show on Turf" that had scored a record 503 points to 17 points, and actually scored 7 points on Ty Law's interception return, for a net of 10. The Brady led offense scored 13 points against a defense that was giving up 17 a game. I mean WTF, it's obvious to any objective observer that the defense was amazing in that game. Brady was clutch. Vinatieri was clutch. The coaching was other worldly.

But the Brady-homers want to claim that he somehow carried the team that year. Nonsense. He was a decent QB that year -- 12th ranked by DVOA -- and he did his job when it counted. The whole team punched above their weight that year. Coaching won that superbowl.

Be honest: if Mike Martz was coaching the Patriots in that game, and Belichick was coaching the Rams, what do you think would have happened? If Kurt Warner was QB for the Pats that year, and Brady QB for the Rams, what would have happened?

Brady is the GOAT, but he was an average QB until 2004.

You’re right. Any walk-in QB could have won 3 SBs in 4 years..........

Now can you pass on that stuff you’re smoking. I’d like a hit.

 

[Biffins]

I can't read the entire 9 page thread

I guess no point getting you upto speed on AB stuff then. That thread is 600 pages.

 

[Kasmir]

That's fair but painting Brady as a JAG in 2001 with contextless stats is not.

A while back we had a thread discussing who deserved more credit for the dynasty.

Funny enough everyone gave both BB and TB credit. The debate was whether it was 60/40 or 40/60 or something/something. Point being that no one discredits BB for his part in the dynasty. It's just an oddly intense debate over which way to swing ten percentile points. Haha

I clearly remember how I felt about Brady when he first took the starting job. My brother and I loved Bledsoe but admitted that there was something special about Brady. He had a different kind of composure. He didn't choke. We felt more confident about winning games.

By the end of the 2001 season most knew that Brady was the man. Stats be damned. He just had that "it" factor and most were relieved that Brady , and not Bledsoe, would be playing in the Super Bowl.

By the way, Brady ( the comeback kid) started his winning in college with an orange bowl victory over the Crimson Tide.

Oddly some "Pat's fans" quietly question Brady's greatness. Over the years I've heard the Rodgers comparisons, the Montana yips, the wailing Garoppolites and now the tourch passing Mahomies.

Anyway both BB and TB have delivered an eternity's worth of memories and trophies. There can be no bad endings and there can be no diminished legacies. Stats be damned.

Stop the ******** statistical argument implying BB would be a loser without Brady.

Again, I could equally argue Brady has won no games without Belichick. And at Michigan despite he couldn't beat out Drew Henson and was so unimpressive he barely got drafted. Without Belichick, Brady may never had played an NFL game.

That's a ******** argument too, but it's at least as credible as yours. Stop demeaning Belichick and I'll stop defending him.

IMO, both Brady and Belichick are GOAT. That coincidence is why this team has had the greatest run in NFL history over the last 20 years.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Stop the ******** statistical argument implying BB would be a loser without Brady.

Again, I could equally argue Brady has won no games without Belichick. And at Michigan despite he couldn't beat out Drew Henson and was so unimpressive he barely got drafted. Without Belichick, Brady may never had played an NFL game.

That's a ******** argument too, but it's at least as credible as yours. Stop demeaning Belichick and I'll stop defending him.

IMO, both Brady and Belichick are GOAT. That coincidence is why this team has had the greatest run in NFL history over the last 20 years.

Are you gonna be okay?

 

[Clonamery]

Stop the ******** statistical argument implying BB would be a loser without Brady.

Again, I could equally argue Brady has won no games without Belichick. And at Michigan despite he couldn't beat out Drew Henson and was so unimpressive he barely got drafted. Without Belichick, Brady may never had played an NFL game.

That's a ******** argument too, but it's at least as credible as yours. Stop demeaning Belichick and I'll stop defending him.

IMO, both Brady and Belichick are GOAT. That coincidence is why this team has had the greatest run in NFL history over the last 20 years.

Sorry, Polian had him as a 1st round grade and would have taken if but for Peyton Manning supposedly. I’m going to say it not that I necessarily believe any of it but Polian knows more about NFL football than you. And maybe me, too. Maybe.