BB in damage control mode regarding Brady's departure

[Ian]

Not sure what you're getting at - Caldwell had 760 yards and 4 TDs with the Pats in 2006. Montana turned a no-name guy like Freddie Solomon into a nearly 1000, 8 TD in 1981 and similar in 1984. Both QBs won super bowls with a bad receiving corps.

(Sigh) you didn't look at the numbers, did you?

Caldwell: NFL.com | Official Site of the National Football League

Solomon: NFL.com | Official Site of the National Football League

Not even close to the same players. You make Solomon out to be some stiff when in fact, at his worst, he was Chris Hogan, who Brady had for all of 3 seasons.

Hogan: NFL.com | Official Site of the National Football League

 

[XLIX]

(Sigh) you didn't look at the numbers, did you?

He doesn't bother looking at numbers because the numbers don't support his argument.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

(Sigh) you didn't look at the numbers, did you?

Caldwell: NFL.com | Official Site of the National Football League

Solomon: NFL.com | Official Site of the National Football League

Not even close to the same players. You make Solomon out to be some stiff when in fact, at his worst, he was Chris Hogan, who Brady had for all of 3 seasons.

Hogan: NFL.com | Official Site of the National Football League

Solomon was nothing special when he didn't have Montana throwing him the ball.

Again, I'm not sure what you're getting at wrt to Caldwell. Are you saying that because Brady took Caldwell to the AFCCG in 2006 that that is more impressive than what Montana did? Don't forget Brady had Ben Watson and Troy Brown in 2006 as well.

And Montana took a couple guys name Willie Davis and JJ Birden to the AFCCG in 1993 as his top options.

Both Montana and Brady have a history of taking average to above-average receivers deep into the playoffs.

 

[BradytoMosstoGronk]

(Sigh) you didn't look at the numbers, did you?

Caldwell: NFL.com | Official Site of the National Football League

Solomon: NFL.com | Official Site of the National Football League

Not even close to the same players. You make Solomon out to be some stiff when in fact, at his worst, he was Chris Hogan, who Brady had for all of 3 seasons.

Hogan: NFL.com | Official Site of the National Football League

I can really appreciate your patience in all this. I think you should go ahead and give him the Joe Montana sub forum he wants.

 

[Ian]

Solomon was nothing special when he didn't have Montana throwing him the ball.

Again, I'm not sure what you're getting at wrt to Caldwell. Are you saying that because Brady took Caldwell to the AFCCG in 2006 that that is more impressive than what Montana did? Don't forget Brady had Ben Watson and Troy Brown in 2006 as well.

And Montana took a couple guys name Willie Davis and JJ Birden to the AFCCG in 1993 as his top options.

Both Montana and Brady have a history of taking average to above-average receivers deep into the playoffs.

I'm saying Montana had a better group of players overall consistently around him during his time in San Francisco.

And you say that about Davis and Burden, without looking up their numbers either. Again, both were much better than even Brown in terms of yards per reception. Not exactly stiffs. And Brown had been in the league for 13-years and was on a decline and was done after 2006.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

I'm saying Montana had a better group of players overall consistently around him during his time in San Francisco.

And you say that about Davis and Burden, without looking up their numbers either. Again, both were much better than even Brown in terms of yards per reception. Not exactly stiffs. And Brown had been in the league for 13-years and was on a decline and was done after 2006.

If that's your point, Caldwell is not the best example of a player that was "consistently around" Brady having only played in NE for 1 year.

Davis and Burden were not pro bowlers. Troy Brown was.

 

[Ian]

If that's your point, Caldwell is not the best example of a player that was "consistently around" Brady having only played in NE for 1 year.

Davis and Burden were not pro bowlers. Troy Brown was.

I'm looking strictly at numbers each season when you compare the players. And Pro Bowls are meaningless - because they're mostly voted on by fans anyway.

 

[Ian]

If that's your point, Caldwell is not the best example of a player that was "consistently around" Brady having only played in NE for 1 year.

Davis and Burden were not pro bowlers. Troy Brown was.

And BTW, have you looked at Montana's completion percentages over his career? Brady never finished a season below 60% during his entire career. Montana did it twice.

 

[Ian]

(LOL - Montana sucks - terrible player )

 

[SHOWTIME15]

I'm looking strictly at numbers each season when you compare the players. And Pro Bowls are meaningless - because they're mostly voted on by fans anyway.

And BTW, have you looked at Montana's completion percentages over his career? Brady never finished a season below 60% during his entire career. Montana did it twice.

You can't compare numbers across eras. It was a much different league back in the 80s than it was from 2000-2020. You can easily see this by looking at the highest scoring team in 1989, which was the 49ers who scored 442 points, as compared to the highest scoring team in 2004, which was the Colts who scored 522 points. Obviously, Brady has played in an era more geared towards offenses.

Montana's completion percentage was up there with all the other greats of the 80s. With the league shifting towards a more offensive oriented game since then, the QB numbers are going to go up across the board.

 

[Ian]

You can't compare numbers across eras. It was a much different league back in the 80s than it was from 2000-2020. You can easily see this by looking at the highest scoring team in 1989, which was the 49ers who scored 442 points, as compared to the highest scoring team in 2004, which was the Colts who scored 522 points. Obviously, Brady has played in an era more geared towards offenses.

Montana's completion percentage was up there with all the other greats of the 80s. With the league shifting towards a more offensive oriented game since then, the QB numbers are going to go up across the board.

LOL, so these numbers you're throwing out all the time aren't relevant either? I feel like the goalposts move with each conversation and it's a little exhausting for someone like myself to keep up.

 

[PatsWSB47]

LOL, so these numbers you're throwing out all the time aren't relevant either? I feel like the goalposts move with each conversation and it's a little exhausting for someone like myself to keep up.

You should trying to get anything through to him for 2 plus years, lol. It can never be done. Even Max Kellerman has finally seen the light.

 

[Ring 6]

Would have at least made the playoffs in 2020 and then won it all last year. We'd be right there again this year too.

No. The team we had last year wouldn’t have been there is we spent 50 mill on Brady. The 70 mill spent would have been 20.

 

[Ring 6]

Those stats are important. However, I don't agree with you that they represent the conclusions you seemed to have been drawing. We can reset your characterization of the 2021 offense... bad, fair, good, very good or great... which one of those would you use? I say good. Improved from 2020.

I didn’t draw any conclusions other than pointing out how unlikely it was that from the point they started at that free agency could produce this results.
Yea good. It was a top 10 offense. Considering it was with a rookie QB it was closer to great on the rookie QB curve.

 

[Ring 6]

That's what I'm talking about, right there, you're suggesting the 2021 Patriots offense represented some noteworthy unprecedented accomplishment. I don't agree with that sentiment. The offense was good, better than 2020, and I agree an encouraging sign for the future.

There was a similar improvement from 2000 to 2001, except of course the 2001 Brady led team played well enough to win a Super Bowl. Also, despite the 10 wins and all of the encouraging signs from the current offense, they got smoked in the wild card round and really did not resemble a playoff caliber team.

It was noteworthy and unprecedented WITH A ROOKIE QB.
It was one of the best few offensive seasons in league history with a rookie at qb.

 

[Ring 6]

I don't entirely disagree with how you've stated it here. However, if you want to cherry-pick FA signings like Bourne and Henry then of course you can point to their favorable impact on the improvement of the offense. But one could also single out Agholor and Smith (two more prominent signings) as not working out.

And generally all of the FA signings... what are we talking about here?... at best a 50% success rate of their investment. Also, what's the longer term impact of that 2021 FA class for the Patriots? It limited their ability to spend this offseason so if they're going to continue to improve then they're going to have to get better returns on that FA class overall.

I’m not cherry picking, I am doing the exact opposite and considering the totality. I could not give 2 craps what an individual does, I care about the unit and team. The free agents they signed in offense, all of them, turned what was before FA non even an NFL caliber offense into one of the most productive in the league. The totality of the signings was successful.

 

[Ring 6]

We're not going to get anywhere on this because it's too hypothetical and there are too many unknowable variables. Generally I believe they could have kept Brady with a representative supporting cast and would have remained postseason competitive. The past two seasons they haven't been that without Brady and with all of those FA signings. Conversely the team Brady plays for now went from not postseason competitive (for 17 years) to Super Bowl champions.

It’s not that hypothetical at all.
They were clearly not good enough to win a championship in 2019. They lost a number of players and had no resources to add players. There is virtually no scenario where they improve from 2019 to 2020.
The supporting cast would surely have declined. The only way to disagree with that is sent the facts.

The improvements through free agency which you are telling ne weren’t much any way would not have happened with 50 mill of that cap space spent on Brady.

Put it this way. Given the roster and the cap, if you kept Brady you were saying put a crappy team around him in 20 and 21 and start rebuilding in 22 when he is 45.
We would be well behind where we are in the rebuild.
Staying in top was not realistic, Brady leaving allowed the rebuild to start sooner

 

[crawhammer]

I didn’t draw any conclusions other than pointing out how unlikely it was that from the point they started at that free agency could produce this results.
Yea good. It was a top 10 offense. Considering it was with a rookie QB it was closer to great on the rookie QB curve.

Ok, we agree the offense was good, where it places them relative to the rest of the league is a different story. Off the top of my head, I think all of these offenses were better... Buffalo, Cincinnati, KC, LAC, LAR, Tampa Bay, Dallas, SF, Green bay, Arizona... Tennessee with a healthy Henry, same for Baltimore with Jackson, Indianapolis slightly better... so yeah I'd have them somewhere between 11-14.

We can agree on the potential however... the rookie QB should improve, Parker should help, I like their running game. Add an immediately impactful player or two through the draft... the potential for growth is definitely there.

 

[Ring 6]

Ok, we agree the offense was good, where it places them relative to the rest of the league is a different story. Off the top of my head, I think all of these offenses were better... Buffalo, Cincinnati, KC, LAC, LAR, Tampa Bay, Dallas, SF, Green bay, Arizona... Tennessee with a healthy Henry, same for Baltimore with Jackson, Indianapolis slightly better... so yeah I'd have them somewhere between 11-14.

We can agree on the potential however... the rookie QB should improve, Parker should help, I like their running game. Add an immediately impactful player or two through the draft... the potential for growth is definitely there.

Raiders, SF, Arizona we’re not better. You don’t get to make worse offenses better by saying what if. It’s results not opinions. Indy was not better.
Others that you call better were a coin flip.

 

[crawhammer]

I’m not cherry picking, I am doing the exact opposite and considering the totality. I could not give 2 craps what an individual does, I care about the unit and team. The free agents they signed in offense, all of them, turned what was before FA non even an NFL caliber offense into one of the most productive in the league. The totality of the signings was successful.

Debatable at least.

Look they smoked the Jets and Jaguars with a combined 104 points. They average 24 points against everyone else. They were average, which is much better than they were in 2020. Bourne and Henry were plus signings. Agholor and Smith were not. So all of them were not contributing to the improvement of the offense.

We would be well behind where we are in the rebuild.
Staying in top was not realistic, Brady leaving allowed the rebuild to start sooner

They won the division 16 seasons in a row with Brady. He was impactful enough to win a Super Bowl with a team who hadn't won a playoff game in 18 years. It's hardly unrealistic to think Brady could win a Super Bowl with an otherwise less than stellar team.

But whatever, you're all about the rebuild, which is fine. Whether or not we can agree on the timing being right, a rebuild was inevitable post-Brady. The success or failure of the rebuild is TBD. Next season will tell us a lot about where this team stands in this revamped AFC.