Brady named to NFL 100 All-Time team

[QuantumMechanic]

I think the changes in what defenders could do to receivers in 1978 was at least as significant as the offensive holding rule changes. Before 1978 a receiver could be chucked (as long as by a different defender each time), including being knocked down or OOB, all the way down the field before the ball was thrown. 1978 brought in the 5yd chuck zone with no contact theoretically allowed after that.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

I think the changes in what defenders could do to receivers in 1978 was at least as significant as the offensive holding rule changes. Before 1978 a receiver could be chucked (as long as by a different defender each time), including being knocked down or OOB, all the way down the field before the ball was thrown. 1978 brought in the 5yd chuck zone with no contact theoretically allowed after that.

Maybe, I guess its a bit subjective? DBs had a big advantage but if you're familiar with those eras WRs were quite physical as well and they weren't specifically restricted the way an OL'm was. Both were huge game changers. Personally I think allowing OL'm to make it a fair fight so to speak had a greater effect. From the type of athlete/player you'd look for (considering what you could now do) to the plays you could call. Again a bit subjective I suppose.

As big as they were though 2004's changes were that much bigger in terms of an inflation of stats that is still going on today. I use the word changes loosely regarding 04.

 

[Tony2046]

Everyone has their own scale. Mine is what you accomplish. I don’t put stock in could have or would have. To me the most important talent is the one that gets the job done and the reason you play is to win.
You certainly can grade on who you think had the best arm or whatever criteria you want but most times disagreement in ranking players starts with different yardsticks.

Doesn't this post disagree with your last post?

 

[Ring 6]

Doesn't this post disagree with your last post?

I don’t think so. How so?

 

[Tony2046]

I don’t think so. How so?

Sorry man but I'll have to reply tomorrow.

 

[Patjew]

Sorry man but I'll have to reply tomorrow.

 

[qbno12]

That list is a sham if Rodgers and Brees are on it. They haven't been consistently good throughout their career. Rodgers has a terrible playoff record and is not known to to be a leader. Brees on the other hand has benefited by playing in dome for most of his career. He has the stats but so does Marino. If Marino is out and Rodgers/Brees are in then **** them.

 

[Zarozzor]

The recency bias some people have with Brees is absolutely incredible. The NFL reddit regarding this subject is unreadable. The only time you could argue he was the best in the league is 2009. I suspect he will plummet down the rankings after his retirement similar to Marino and Favre. Stat whores never have staying power. Winners do.

 

[Biffins]

The nostalgia for the old players is understandable, but there is little question that the professionalization of the sport after the time of the merger and then FAcy has produced superior athletes and competition.

50 years from now, with 36 teams and 14 playoff teams and more international athletes coming to NFL as global popularity increases and genetic and legal supplementation enhancement produces even bigger and faster athletes, someone sitting on their armchair will use the exact same statement to belittle Brady’s accomplishments.

I can imagine comments in 2070 be like “Only these old farts in their 70s 80s keep raving about this Brady guy from 2000s. Noone else has seen him play. Saw some old videos and he runs like molasses. Doesn’t hold a candle in running speed to even the 30th ranked QB today. And he played in the pass happy era and yet he was surpassed in career passing stats within a decade. And now he’s not even top 20 career passing yards. Why is this guy even being considered for top 5?”

 

[sean10mm]

I'm really confident Rodgers and Brees aren't on the list. The NFL 100 team has had the exact opposite of recency bias so far. They never missed a chance to drop a 2000s or even 1990s candidate off the list to fit in someone from the black & white era. The panel is basically all middle aged to outright old people.

The only other modern guy to join Brady will be Peyton Manning IMO. I can trash him all day, but he was just a huge presence in the league for what was a very long career by normal standards.

 

[sean10mm]

50 years from now, with 36 teams and 14 playoff teams and more international athletes coming to NFL as global popularity increases and genetic and legal supplementation enhancement produces even bigger and faster athletes, someone sitting on their armchair will use the exact same statement to belittle Brady’s accomplishments.

I can imagine comments in 2070 be like “Only these old farts in their 70s 80s keep raving about this Brady guy from 2000s. Noone else has seen him play. Saw some old videos and he runs like molasses. Doesn’t hold a candle in running speed to even the 30th ranked QB today. And he played in the pass happy era and yet he was surpassed in career passing stats within a decade. And now he’s not even top 20 career passing yards. Why is this guy even being considered for top 5?”

History buries everybody, but championships keep their luster a lot longer than stats. Brady will outlive everyone else from his era, which is all you can do really.

 

[primetime]

50 years from now, with 36 teams and 14 playoff teams and more international athletes coming to NFL as global popularity increases and genetic and legal supplementation enhancement produces even bigger and faster athletes, someone sitting on their armchair will use the exact same statement to belittle Brady’s accomplishments.

I can imagine comments in 2070 be like “Only these old farts in their 70s 80s keep raving about this Brady guy from 2000s. Noone else has seen him play. Saw some old videos and he runs like molasses. Doesn’t hold a candle in running speed to even the 30th ranked QB today. And he played in the pass happy era and yet he was surpassed in career passing stats within a decade. And now he’s not even top 20 career passing yards. Why is this guy even being considered for top 5?”

And they'll probably be right.

I like how this forum is so insecure that it's preemptively defending Brady against criticism from people who won't be born for decades.

 

[venecol]

For the purposes of selecting greatest players of last 100 years, the rule changes are irrelevant. Clearly, they are selecting by eras or decades, comparing players from each one, and then moving on to next era/decade. I don't think there is room for 3rd best in any one period if you are limited to only 10 selections, but maybe top 2 in some.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

And they'll probably be right.

I like how this forum is so insecure that it's preemptively defending Brady against criticism from people who won't be born for decades.

It's cringe worthy, the way QB wins/accomplishments are brought up thinking it'll help Brady. Not knowing those are far and away not the reasons 12 is the GOAT. Idk Idk

My fault for expecting more intelligent discussion regarding the position or game.

 

[Biffins]

The recency bias some people have with Brees is absolutely incredible. The NFL reddit regarding this subject is unreadable. The only time you could argue he was the best in the league is 2009. I suspect he will plummet down the rankings after his retirement similar to Marino and Favre. Stat whores never have staying power. Winners do.

Exactly, who still talks about Frank Tarkenton’s stats. Yet people still talk about Bradshaw’s 4 SBs. At no point in the 70s would anyone, including the Steelers, call Bradshaw a better QB than Tarkenton. Staubach and Tarkenton were miles better than Bradshaw.

Similarly Marino’s monstrous stats fade while Aikman’s 3 SBs are more memorable.

 

[TinhWoodhead]

I assumed this was done in the offseason?

 

[Ring 6]

50 years from now, with 36 teams and 14 playoff teams and more international athletes coming to NFL as global popularity increases and genetic and legal supplementation enhancement produces even bigger and faster athletes, someone sitting on their armchair will use the exact same statement to belittle Brady’s accomplishments.

I can imagine comments in 2070 be like “Only these old farts in their 70s 80s keep raving about this Brady guy from 2000s. Noone else has seen him play. Saw some old videos and he runs like molasses. Doesn’t hold a candle in running speed to even the 30th ranked QB today. And he played in the pass happy era and yet he was surpassed in career passing stats within a decade. And now he’s not even top 20 career passing yards. Why is this guy even being considered for top 5?”

Because of one thing. WINNING. That transcends generations.

 

[Ring 6]

It's cringe worthy, the way QB wins/accomplishments are brought up thinking it'll help Brady. Not knowing those are far and away not the reasons 12 is the GOAT. Idk Idk

My fault for expecting more intelligent discussion regarding the position or game.

The are the results of the qualities that make him the GOAT. The wins and accomplishments define who he is.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

It's cringe worthy, the way QB wins/accomplishments are brought up thinking it'll help Brady. Not knowing those are far and away not the reasons 12 is the GOAT. Idk Idk

My fault for expecting more intelligent discussion regarding the position or game.

Oh you’ll have to explain to us idiots about how you can equalize stats across tremendously different eras to come up with a ranking method while throwing away the measure by which every QB has always been judged (wins) which also happens to in itself equalize competitive factors and smooth cross-era statistical inconsistency.

Brady is the GOAT due to his accomplishments and wins, which can only happen by possessing incredible skills and longevity.

Please save your pompous, pretentious sht for draft talk. This has been a great thread thus far and looks like it’s about to get Grundled.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

Oh you’ll have to explain to us idiots about how you can equalize stats across tremendously different eras to come up with a ranking method while throwing away the measure by which every QB has always been judged (wins) which also happens to in itself equalize competitive factors and smooth cross-era statistical inconsistency.

Brady is the GOAT due to his accomplishments and wins, which can only happen by possessing incredible skills and longevity.

Please save your pompous, pretentious sht for draft talk. This has been a great thread thus far and looks like it’s about to get Grundled.

You're the insecure fan just mentioned lol. I didn't mention or @ you.
Damm that's one long sentence btw.

Brady is the GOAT bc of what he does or doesn't do on the field. Not bc of all his wins. I wouldn't expect you to understand the nuances of the position, so grasping at "QB Wins" is par for the course.

How do you follow that? Is Favre considered top 3/5? Ben top 10? Of course not bc you look at what they've done on the field. The nuances, the arm talent, the footwork. The acumen & IQ displayed. QB wins is far down the list.