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

[Ring 6]

I agree with every one of these points, and the conclusion that you rightly complete the series with. However, the conclusion Andy reaches is "Brady should therefore start every season ever." (Actually proud that I got Andy to take 2027 off the table).

Now you lie?
Show me where I said ANYTHING resembling that.

I don't think there are JG supporters here. There are Patriots supporters and there are people trying to build a shrine to a player, not a football team.

Recognizing Brady's contribution to the team is having your eyes open. Wanting brady to stay as long as he can IS HAVING THE TEAMS BEST INTEREST IN MIND.

I've got no real desire to support JG, or support a transition to JG, specifically. Liked what I saw, he went down, now he's got a strain in training camp, I'm like "oh hell, he might be one of those."

JG just becomes representative of the future divergence of interests between the Patriots and Brady because his number is up first, and because he shows promise. This is really about Brady. (And apparently some guy called Kellerman).

There's an inflection point in 2018 due to two contracts; and you might buy another year to waffle by tagging Garapollo. That's why we're determining JG's value at all. And the question isn't "Is he better than Brady?" It's "What's the total estimated value of JG vs. next guy up vs. TFB for the indefinite future."

Lots of mad love for Brady. 2 interceptions. Granted, that's in 12 games. But who does that? (You can say "3 interceptions if he had a full season" to compensate, and promote his 28 TDs to 35, amortized.) That was 2016.

I will keep Brady for the 2016 season every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Now comes 2017. Then 2018. Then 2019. Etc. Then comes 2020-22, the Andy Johnson range. WHY???? He just had a historically great season in 2016! If he was better in '16 than '15, shouldn't he be better in '17 than '16, and much better by 2020 than 2017?

Misrepresenting what other people say is the surest sign you are full of crap.

For my part I've said from the beginning that it's not about what happened in 2016 and it's only tangentially related to Brady's "heir apparent."

People hemmed and hawed about the GOAT argument based on rings, until that was put to rest in epic fashion. Well, let's put that to rest too but properly recount just how GOATy the GOAT is. Since 2007 inclusive, just after they changed the game to get Manning a ring, Brady's had 5 seasons with ratings over 100, 3 of them over 110. Montana had 2 his whole career. Montana never played a full season with fewer than 7 interceptions - by the way, that 7 was against 13 TDs, playing with the Chiefs. He also played only 11 games that year, fwiw. Brady's thrown 7 int.s or fewer for three regular seasons, in each case doubling that number of TDs, in 2 out of 3 cases nearly tripling it.

It's comparing across eras, but the comparisons are pretty flattering to Tom.

As a snapshot, Brady's never had a better year than 2016 (if we forget that it was a shortened season)...and come to think of it, I don't know who has. It's really an incredible body of work within the incredible body of work that Brady's career has been.

But it does not stand to reason that TFB has just gotten a glimpse of what he could be by age 49.

We haven't seen 2017 yet. If he comes back with an improvement over 2016, or anything like a semblance of 2016, that's one thing. If he takes a step back, that's another thing. If there's a "small decline" with the upgrade in talent, that's a third thing. And if there's a really sub-par year, that's yet another thing.

The certainties are the contracts and the "just a number" representing TFB's age.

I do not know the answer in the gray areas. That's all I've ever asserted.

On the emotional side we have claims of clairvoyance into the 2017 and 2018 results, Brady's longevity, etc., and claims that Garapollo is not judged as anything special in Foxborough (whatever you and I think).

The game plan seems to be "Eff the future, Brady plays whether that's best for the team or not." I'm not old enough for that.

Again making things up.

One certainty is that one talent TFB does not have is the ability to objectively judge his own future worth to the team. This is because he is a human being not a fugging robot. That's not his job. So if TFB says he's going to play until he's 45 or until he sucks, fine, but it might not be in NE.

You appear to be arguing against a fictitious argument you have made up.

 

[Ivan]

I'm not sure why this is complicated, you don't get rid of the best player in football while they are the best player in football.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Now you lie?
Show me where I said ANYTHING resembling that.




Recognizing Brady's contribution to the team is having your eyes open. Wanting brady to stay as long as he can IS HAVING THE TEAMS BEST INTEREST IN MIND.



Misrepresenting what other people say is the surest sign you are full of crap.

[quite]For my part I've said from the beginning that it's not about what happened in 2016 and it's only tangentially related to Brady's "heir apparent."

People hemmed and hawed about the GOAT argument based on rings, until that was put to rest in epic fashion. Well, let's put that to rest too but properly recount just how GOATy the GOAT is. Since 2007 inclusive, just after they changed the game to get Manning a ring, Brady's had 5 seasons with ratings over 100, 3 of them over 110. Montana had 2 his whole career. Montana never played a full season with fewer than 7 interceptions - by the way, that 7 was against 13 TDs, playing with the Chiefs. He also played only 11 games that year, fwiw. Brady's thrown 7 int.s or fewer for three regular seasons, in each case doubling that number of TDs, in 2 out of 3 cases nearly tripling it.

It's comparing across eras, but the comparisons are pretty flattering to Tom.

As a snapshot, Brady's never had a better year than 2016 (if we forget that it was a shortened season)...and come to think of it, I don't know who has. It's really an incredible body of work within the incredible body of work that Brady's career has been.

But it does not stand to reason that TFB has just gotten a glimpse of what he could be by age 49.

We haven't seen 2017 yet. If he comes back with an improvement over 2016, or anything like a semblance of 2016, that's one thing. If he takes a step back, that's another thing. If there's a "small decline" with the upgrade in talent, that's a third thing. And if there's a really sub-par year, that's yet another thing.

The certainties are the contracts and the "just a number" representing TFB's age.

I do not know the answer in the gray areas. That's all I've ever asserted.

On the emotional side we have claims of clairvoyance into the 2017 and 2018 results, Brady's longevity, etc., and claims that Garapollo is not judged as anything special in Foxborough (whatever you and I think).

The game plan seems to be "Eff the future, Brady plays whether that's best for the team or not." I'm not old enough for that.

Again making things up.


You appear to be arguing against a fictitious argument you have made up.

You must have the wrong number. You were trying to call Kettle?

Love the all caps though, adds a certain je ne sais quois to your always trenchant analysis.

 

[Tony2046]

I agree with every one of these points, and the conclusion that you rightly complete the series with. However, the conclusion Andy reaches is "Brady should therefore start every season ever." (Actually proud that I got Andy to take 2027 off the table).



I don't think there are JG supporters here. There are Patriots supporters and there are people trying to build a shrine to a player, not a football team. I've got no real desire to support JG, or support a transition to JG, specifically. Liked what I saw, he went down, now he's got a strain in training camp, I'm like "oh hell, he might be one of those."

JG just becomes representative of the future divergence of interests between the Patriots and Brady because his number is up first, and because he shows promise. This is really about Brady. (And apparently some guy called Kellerman).

There's an inflection point in 2018 due to two contracts; and you might buy another year to waffle by tagging Garapollo. That's why we're determining JG's value at all. And the question isn't "Is he better than Brady?" It's "What's the total estimated value of JG vs. next guy up vs. TFB for the indefinite future."

Lots of mad love for Brady. 2 interceptions. Granted, that's in 12 games. But who does that? (You can say "3 interceptions if he had a full season" to compensate, and promote his 28 TDs to 35, amortized.) That was 2016.

I will keep Brady for the 2016 season every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Now comes 2017. Then 2018. Then 2019. Etc. Then comes 2020-22, the Andy Johnson range. WHY???? He just had a historically great season in 2016! If he was better in '16 than '15, shouldn't he be better in '17 than '16, and much better by 2020 than 2017?

For my part I've said from the beginning that it's not about what happened in 2016 and it's only tangentially related to Brady's "heir apparent."

People hemmed and hawed about the GOAT argument based on rings, until that was put to rest in epic fashion. Well, let's put that to rest too but properly recount just how GOATy the GOAT is. Since 2007 inclusive, just after they changed the game to get Manning a ring, Brady's had 5 seasons with ratings over 100, 3 of them over 110. Montana had 2 his whole career. Montana never played a full season with fewer than 7 interceptions - by the way, that 7 was against 13 TDs, playing with the Chiefs. He also played only 11 games that year, fwiw. Brady's thrown 7 int.s or fewer for three regular seasons, in each case doubling that number of TDs, in 2 out of 3 cases nearly tripling it.

It's comparing across eras, but the comparisons are pretty flattering to Tom.

As a snapshot, Brady's never had a better year than 2016 (if we forget that it was a shortened season)...and come to think of it, I don't know who has. It's really an incredible body of work within the incredible body of work that Brady's career has been.

But it does not stand to reason that TFB has just gotten a glimpse of what he could be by age 49.

We haven't seen 2017 yet. If he comes back with an improvement over 2016, or anything like a semblance of 2016, that's one thing. If he takes a step back, that's another thing. If there's a "small decline" with the upgrade in talent, that's a third thing. And if there's a really sub-par year, that's yet another thing.

The certainties are the contracts and the "just a number" representing TFB's age.

I do not know the answer in the gray areas. That's all I've ever asserted.

On the emotional side we have claims of clairvoyance into the 2017 and 2018 results, Brady's longevity, etc., and claims that Garapollo is not judged as anything special in Foxborough (whatever you and I think).

The game plan seems to be "Eff the future, Brady plays whether that's best for the team or not." I'm not old enough for that.

One certainty is that one talent TFB does not have is the ability to objectively judge his own future worth to the team. This is because he is a human being not a fugging robot. That's not his job. So if TFB says he's going to play until he's 45 or until he sucks, fine, but it might not be in NE.

@PatriotsReign

Of course this is about JG or Brady. If Jimmy wasn't on the other side of the equation we could just let Brady be Brady until he wasn't and then move on to the next man up. But this is not what is happening here. People believe that JG could be the guy for the next decade and do not want to lose him and are willing to see Brady retire/traded etc.. to keep him.

If JG was not on the roster and did not show flashes of being a capable QB this thread would not exist.

I too like JG, btw, and I also think he'll be a very good QB but I would not support (not that BB cares what I think) pushing Brady aside so that we did not lose JG to FA. I would rather watch Brady take us on a few more SB rides and hopefully win one or two more.

As you say it's a timing issue. But it's a timing issue because people believe JG is that good. IOW this is all about JG vs Brady.

Anyways unlike some I do not consider those who wish to keep JG over Brady anti-Patriot etc... but I do think that if Brady is playing at an elite level he should continue to lead this team. If that means losing JG then so be it. I don't like gambling on unknowns.

 

[Ring 6]

You must have the wrong number. You were trying to call Kettle?

Love the all caps though, adds a certain je ne sais quois to your always trenchant analysis.

At any time you can show me where I have said these things you claim I have.
Of course you will avoid that because you are well aware it never happened.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Tony, it's about possible futures, not Brady vs. JG.

Let's assign some representative numbers. Let's say a fair number of QBs -- though not just "the average QB" - gets to 80, representing good skills you could possibly build a SB winner with where the QB really figures into it (not a Dilfer). Some QBs get to 90, representing great skills... let's say that's where the Breeses and Rodgerses of the world are. Then there's 100, representing Brady only, ever. Throw in 5 other QBs over different eras, and we'll call that the 91-99 club. Then 50 is the bulk of NFL QBs.

(1) as of 2016 Brady still = 100
(2) If they think JG is an 80 guy rather than a 50 guy, and you get those through the draft one out of every four attempts (the remainders being the 50 crowd,) there is value to that. Notice that TFB is still the only 100 ever. It's not TFB vs. JG.
(3) Review the record of 40+ year old QBs who have excelled up to that point.
(4) Adjust for TFB*

*the tricky part. Brady was just better this year by some measures (e.g. accuracy) than previous years. There's certainly no "visible decline" narrative.

We're comparing futures, which is to say that we don't know what we're even comparing. With Brady completing another circuit of 3 years, we can expect 1-2 more SB appearances, and 1 more ring, assuming the whole 3-year run happens w/Brady playing at his same level. I am sorry, that's what he's done to date. So it's no big insult to say that Brady playing at his historic high level gets us 1 more ring in his remaining 3 years (think of what it would mean to say to a Packers fan "Rodgers is going to get at least 1 more ring - and I bet he gets it in the next 3 years!" before you think of it as insulting).

The history says that "now" is the time that Brady goes south, but looking at past greats, I don't see the "cliff" so much as a decline. Elway in his 15th and 16th seasons won SBs, but needed Terrell Davis by the end... and his "it factor" was never anything close to Brady's, and while the decline was noticeable, the highs were not as high. We can't compare across eras, of course... but we can compare vs. Montana. It was possible to have single digit interceptions, but Elway could never manage it.

So Brady's at where Elway's decline came, and it was decline not cliff. I think we discussed Favrevruh and Forehead. And everybody tells me TFB has reinvented aging. So far nothing's proven him wrong.

But now the Pats are coming close to the position of betting something on it. I think his reinvention of aging, staying sane with our optimism, might put his decline at 42 or 43, maybe earlier maybe later. One more 3-year circuit, being (historically) optimistic. Somehow, without precedent and without substantiation, we're supposed to believe that 45 is the real number. I'd like to. Part of me does. But like I said, remaining sane, it's already extraordinary to posit 20 years without a decline, 2000-2019.

If JG is an "80" and stays an 80, he could still be the best option for a number of years. We're back to the crap shoot trying to turn him into a 90 or trying to fish one out of the draft.

So no it's not JG vs TFB. It's TFB vs. Time. JG figures into it in a sense of "where will we be when Brady can't do it."

You've always been generous with my woolgathering so I'll go a little longer here. It is worth noting that Brady works on finesse aspects of the game like nobody else ever has. I don't think his arm is as strong as it was in 07 - and I don't think he ever had the world's strongest arm (though certainly it was among the league's best). Quick release, intimate understanding of and instant recognition of coverages, the "pocket shift" (because he's never going to be Fran Tarkenton, and sometimes your O-line loses the battle up front) - all that stuff contributes to his on-field mastery. He works on another "little thing" every time you think you know his game. All that is stipulated, and all that plays into how he can put off the inevitable. There's also cult status, for want of a better term. If you're playing with anybody else and you're down 28-3, you just don't believe you're coming back. With Brady, you don't even entertain the idea of the loss until the last whistle blows because Brady. He makes everybody around him better a lot of ways, and that even extends to defense, because no play is ever unimportant. You've never really lost until the final score says so.

So you give up all of that when Brady leaves too, however that happens.

Even incorporating all of that, we're not talking about JG being better than TFB or being the next TFB. We're talking about when it will just be a bad bet to bet on Brady. So far betting on Brady has been a good bet for a long time.

All of that figures into my position of letting BB make that call. It's more satisfying to say you know for certain what will happen in the future. I don't, and admit it. There are guys paid to evaluate risk and opportunity in the NFL, and the Pats have done it pretty well. I'll rely on them.

I just don't think they'll view the eventual Brady end-game as a "no-brainer."

 

[Bradyking12]

Tony, it's about possible futures, not Brady vs. JG.

Let's assign some representative numbers. Let's say a fair number of QBs -- though not just "the average QB" - gets to 80, representing good skills you could possibly build a SB winner with where the QB really figures into it (not a Dilfer). Some QBs get to 90, representing great skills... let's say that's where the Breeses and Rodgerses of the world are. Then there's 100, representing Brady only, ever. Throw in 5 other QBs over different eras, and we'll call that the 91-99 club. Then 50 is the bulk of NFL QBs.

(1) as of 2016 Brady still = 100
(2) If they think JG is an 80 guy rather than a 50 guy, and you get those through the draft one out of every four attempts (the remainders being the 50 crowd,) there is value to that. Notice that TFB is still the only 100 ever. It's not TFB vs. JG.
(3) Review the record of 40+ year old QBs who have excelled up to that point.
(4) Adjust for TFB*

*the tricky part. Brady was just better this year by some measures (e.g. accuracy) than previous years. There's certainly no "visible decline" narrative.

We're comparing futures, which is to say that we don't know what we're even comparing. With Brady completing another circuit of 3 years, we can expect 1-2 more SB appearances, and 1 more ring, assuming the whole 3-year run happens w/Brady playing at his same level. I am sorry, that's what he's done to date. So it's no big insult to say that Brady playing at his historic high level gets us 1 more ring in his remaining 3 years (think of what it would mean to say to a Packers fan "Rodgers is going to get at least 1 more ring - and I bet he gets it in the next 3 years!" before you think of it as insulting).

The history says that "now" is the time that Brady goes south, but looking at past greats, I don't see the "cliff" so much as a decline. Elway in his 15th and 16th seasons won SBs, but needed Terrell Davis by the end... and his "it factor" was never anything close to Brady's, and while the decline was noticeable, the highs were not as high. We can't compare across eras, of course... but we can compare vs. Montana. It was possible to have single digit interceptions, but Elway could never manage it.

So Brady's at where Elway's decline came, and it was decline not cliff. I think we discussed Favrevruh and Forehead. And everybody tells me TFB has reinvented aging. So far nothing's proven him wrong.

But now the Pats are coming close to the position of betting something on it. I think his reinvention of aging, staying sane with our optimism, might put his decline at 42 or 43, maybe earlier maybe later. One more 3-year circuit, being (historically) optimistic. Somehow, without precedent and without substantiation, we're supposed to believe that 45 is the real number. I'd like to. Part of me does. But like I said, remaining sane, it's already extraordinary to posit 20 years without a decline, 2000-2019.

If JG is an "80" and stays an 80, he could still be the best option for a number of years. We're back to the crap shoot trying to turn him into a 90 or trying to fish one out of the draft.

So no it's not JG vs TFB. It's TFB vs. Time. JG figures into it in a sense of "where will we be when Brady can't do it."

You've always been generous with my woolgathering so I'll go a little longer here. It is worth noting that Brady works on finesse aspects of the game like nobody else ever has. I don't think his arm is as strong as it was in 07 - and I don't think he ever had the world's strongest arm (though certainly it was among the league's best). Quick release, intimate understanding of and instant recognition of coverages, the "pocket shift" (because he's never going to be Fran Tarkenton, and sometimes your O-line loses the battle up front) - all that stuff contributes to his on-field mastery. He works on another "little thing" every time you think you know his game. All that is stipulated, and all that plays into how he can put off the inevitable. There's also cult status, for want of a better term. If you're playing with anybody else and you're down 28-3, you just don't believe you're coming back. With Brady, you don't even entertain the idea of the loss until the last whistle blows because Brady. He makes everybody around him better a lot of ways, and that even extends to defense, because no play is ever unimportant. You've never really lost until the final score says so.

So you give up all of that when Brady leaves too, however that happens.

Even incorporating all of that, we're not talking about JG being better than TFB or being the next TFB. We're talking about when it will just be a bad bet to bet on Brady. So far betting on Brady has been a good bet for a long time.

All of that figures into my position of letting BB make that call. It's more satisfying to say you know for certain what will happen in the future. I don't, and admit it. There are guys paid to evaluate risk and opportunity in the NFL, and the Pats have done it pretty well. I'll rely on them.

I just don't think they'll view the eventual Brady end-game as a "no-brainer."

Somehow someway JG is the heir apparent, at the latest a possibility 2019 will be Brady's last season, JG will be gone in that sense, a drafted QB in '18 won't be ready in 2 years imo

Unless they use Jacoby as a placeholder and honestly none of that sounds like BB, thats a lot of gambling, and JG is capable of winning a Super Bowl and BB knows it because he did not get traded, (we we're offered 1st rounders)

Which tells me he believes that if TB got hurt that this team could still win the SB with JG under helm, what does make me nervous is Brady doing alot more self marketing than normal (Madden, Mattress, Aston Martin, etc..) like he's setting the waters in place for when he retires

Well all in all BB knows what he's doing and sure he already has intel he needs, I doubt Brady's beating around the bush to BB like he is to the media, who knows we're better off trying to figure out how many licks it takes to get to the center of a tootsie roll pop than trying to figure what BB has in mind or up his sleeve

 

[StockingAnarchyNumber12]

Rumor has it Brady will retire the same age as number of pages this thread hits. Keep going guys!

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Rumor has it Brady will retire the same age as number of pages this thread hits. Keep going guys!

That's putting a lot on us. You sure he's reading?

 

[Ivan]

Tony, it's about possible futures, not Brady vs. JG.

Let's assign some representative numbers. Let's say a fair number of QBs -- though not just "the average QB" - gets to 80, representing good skills you could possibly build a SB winner with where the QB really figures into it (not a Dilfer). Some QBs get to 90, representing great skills... let's say that's where the Breeses and Rodgerses of the world are. Then there's 100, representing Brady only, ever. Throw in 5 other QBs over different eras, and we'll call that the 91-99 club. Then 50 is the bulk of NFL QBs.

(1) as of 2016 Brady still = 100
(2) If they think JG is an 80 guy rather than a 50 guy, and you get those through the draft one out of every four attempts (the remainders being the 50 crowd,) there is value to that. Notice that TFB is still the only 100 ever. It's not TFB vs. JG.
(3) Review the record of 40+ year old QBs who have excelled up to that point.
(4) Adjust for TFB*

*the tricky part. Brady was just better this year by some measures (e.g. accuracy) than previous years. There's certainly no "visible decline" narrative.

We're comparing futures, which is to say that we don't know what we're even comparing. With Brady completing another circuit of 3 years, we can expect 1-2 more SB appearances, and 1 more ring, assuming the whole 3-year run happens w/Brady playing at his same level. I am sorry, that's what he's done to date. So it's no big insult to say that Brady playing at his historic high level gets us 1 more ring in his remaining 3 years (think of what it would mean to say to a Packers fan "Rodgers is going to get at least 1 more ring - and I bet he gets it in the next 3 years!" before you think of it as insulting).

The history says that "now" is the time that Brady goes south, but looking at past greats, I don't see the "cliff" so much as a decline. Elway in his 15th and 16th seasons won SBs, but needed Terrell Davis by the end... and his "it factor" was never anything close to Brady's, and while the decline was noticeable, the highs were not as high. We can't compare across eras, of course... but we can compare vs. Montana. It was possible to have single digit interceptions, but Elway could never manage it.

So Brady's at where Elway's decline came, and it was decline not cliff. I think we discussed Favrevruh and Forehead. And everybody tells me TFB has reinvented aging. So far nothing's proven him wrong.

But now the Pats are coming close to the position of betting something on it. I think his reinvention of aging, staying sane with our optimism, might put his decline at 42 or 43, maybe earlier maybe later. One more 3-year circuit, being (historically) optimistic. Somehow, without precedent and without substantiation, we're supposed to believe that 45 is the real number. I'd like to. Part of me does. But like I said, remaining sane, it's already extraordinary to posit 20 years without a decline, 2000-2019.

If JG is an "80" and stays an 80, he could still be the best option for a number of years. We're back to the crap shoot trying to turn him into a 90 or trying to fish one out of the draft.

So no it's not JG vs TFB. It's TFB vs. Time. JG figures into it in a sense of "where will we be when Brady can't do it."

You've always been generous with my woolgathering so I'll go a little longer here. It is worth noting that Brady works on finesse aspects of the game like nobody else ever has. I don't think his arm is as strong as it was in 07 - and I don't think he ever had the world's strongest arm (though certainly it was among the league's best). Quick release, intimate understanding of and instant recognition of coverages, the "pocket shift" (because he's never going to be Fran Tarkenton, and sometimes your O-line loses the battle up front) - all that stuff contributes to his on-field mastery. He works on another "little thing" every time you think you know his game. All that is stipulated, and all that plays into how he can put off the inevitable. There's also cult status, for want of a better term. If you're playing with anybody else and you're down 28-3, you just don't believe you're coming back. With Brady, you don't even entertain the idea of the loss until the last whistle blows because Brady. He makes everybody around him better a lot of ways, and that even extends to defense, because no play is ever unimportant. You've never really lost until the final score says so.

So you give up all of that when Brady leaves too, however that happens.

Even incorporating all of that, we're not talking about JG being better than TFB or being the next TFB. We're talking about when it will just be a bad bet to bet on Brady. So far betting on Brady has been a good bet for a long time.

All of that figures into my position of letting BB make that call. It's more satisfying to say you know for certain what will happen in the future. I don't, and admit it. There are guys paid to evaluate risk and opportunity in the NFL, and the Pats have done it pretty well. I'll rely on them.

I just don't think they'll view the eventual Brady end-game as a "no-brainer."

No, it's about championships, and no player has ever given their team more opportunity to win them than Brady does. And it's all about Brady vs Garrapolo, I don't know how you can suggest it isn't, if Garrapolo had already been traded this discussion wouldn't be taking place.

 

[PatriotsReign]

@PatriotsReign

Of course this is about JG or Brady. If Jimmy wasn't on the other side of the equation we could just let Brady be Brady until he wasn't and then move on to the next man up. But this is not what is happening here. People believe that JG could be the guy for the next decade and do not want to lose him and are willing to see Brady retire/traded etc.. to keep him.

If JG was not on the roster and did not show flashes of being a capable QB this thread would not exist.

I too like JG, btw, and I also think he'll be a very good QB but I would not support (not that BB cares what I think) pushing Brady aside so that we did not lose JG to FA. I would rather watch Brady take us on a few more SB rides and hopefully win one or two more.

As you say it's a timing issue. But it's a timing issue because people believe JG is that good. IOW this is all about JG vs Brady.

Anyways unlike some I do not consider those who wish to keep JG over Brady anti-Patriot etc... but I do think that if Brady is playing at an elite level he should continue to lead this team. If that means losing JG then so be it. I don't like gambling on unknowns.

It's more about possibly having a capable quarterback next in line than JG specifically. It's not like we have any "Let's go Jimmy/Bring in Jimmy" fans here.

All of us in this debate love Brady over any other player by miles. But we do have some "When Belichick feels it's time, we're good" fans here.

And when that happens, we'll all be adults and accept it without complaining, right?

 

[Tony2046]

Tony, it's about possible futures, not Brady vs. JG.

Let's assign some representative numbers. Let's say a fair number of QBs -- though not just "the average QB" - gets to 80, representing good skills you could possibly build a SB winner with where the QB really figures into it (not a Dilfer). Some QBs get to 90, representing great skills... let's say that's where the Breeses and Rodgerses of the world are. Then there's 100, representing Brady only, ever. Throw in 5 other QBs over different eras, and we'll call that the 91-99 club. Then 50 is the bulk of NFL QBs.

(1) as of 2016 Brady still = 100
(2) If they think JG is an 80 guy rather than a 50 guy, and you get those through the draft one out of every four attempts (the remainders being the 50 crowd,) there is value to that. Notice that TFB is still the only 100 ever. It's not TFB vs. JG.
(3) Review the record of 40+ year old QBs who have excelled up to that point.
(4) Adjust for TFB*

*the tricky part. Brady was just better this year by some measures (e.g. accuracy) than previous years. There's certainly no "visible decline" narrative.

We're comparing futures, which is to say that we don't know what we're even comparing. With Brady completing another circuit of 3 years, we can expect 1-2 more SB appearances, and 1 more ring, assuming the whole 3-year run happens w/Brady playing at his same level. I am sorry, that's what he's done to date. So it's no big insult to say that Brady playing at his historic high level gets us 1 more ring in his remaining 3 years (think of what it would mean to say to a Packers fan "Rodgers is going to get at least 1 more ring - and I bet he gets it in the next 3 years!" before you think of it as insulting).

The history says that "now" is the time that Brady goes south, but looking at past greats, I don't see the "cliff" so much as a decline. Elway in his 15th and 16th seasons won SBs, but needed Terrell Davis by the end... and his "it factor" was never anything close to Brady's, and while the decline was noticeable, the highs were not as high. We can't compare across eras, of course... but we can compare vs. Montana. It was possible to have single digit interceptions, but Elway could never manage it.

So Brady's at where Elway's decline came, and it was decline not cliff. I think we discussed Favrevruh and Forehead. And everybody tells me TFB has reinvented aging. So far nothing's proven him wrong.

But now the Pats are coming close to the position of betting something on it. I think his reinvention of aging, staying sane with our optimism, might put his decline at 42 or 43, maybe earlier maybe later. One more 3-year circuit, being (historically) optimistic. Somehow, without precedent and without substantiation, we're supposed to believe that 45 is the real number. I'd like to. Part of me does. But like I said, remaining sane, it's already extraordinary to posit 20 years without a decline, 2000-2019.

If JG is an "80" and stays an 80, he could still be the best option for a number of years. We're back to the crap shoot trying to turn him into a 90 or trying to fish one out of the draft.

So no it's not JG vs TFB. It's TFB vs. Time. JG figures into it in a sense of "where will we be when Brady can't do it."

You've always been generous with my woolgathering so I'll go a little longer here. It is worth noting that Brady works on finesse aspects of the game like nobody else ever has. I don't think his arm is as strong as it was in 07 - and I don't think he ever had the world's strongest arm (though certainly it was among the league's best). Quick release, intimate understanding of and instant recognition of coverages, the "pocket shift" (because he's never going to be Fran Tarkenton, and sometimes your O-line loses the battle up front) - all that stuff contributes to his on-field mastery. He works on another "little thing" every time you think you know his game. All that is stipulated, and all that plays into how he can put off the inevitable. There's also cult status, for want of a better term. If you're playing with anybody else and you're down 28-3, you just don't believe you're coming back. With Brady, you don't even entertain the idea of the loss until the last whistle blows because Brady. He makes everybody around him better a lot of ways, and that even extends to defense, because no play is ever unimportant. You've never really lost until the final score says so.

So you give up all of that when Brady leaves too, however that happens.

Even incorporating all of that, we're not talking about JG being better than TFB or being the next TFB. We're talking about when it will just be a bad bet to bet on Brady. So far betting on Brady has been a good bet for a long time.

All of that figures into my position of letting BB make that call. It's more satisfying to say you know for certain what will happen in the future. I don't, and admit it. There are guys paid to evaluate risk and opportunity in the NFL, and the Pats have done it pretty well. I'll rely on them.

I just don't think they'll view the eventual Brady end-game as a "no-brainer."

Good post and good thoughts VA.

Whether we are speaking of possible futures or skill sets it is still TB vs JG. This thread would not exist if JG and his performances were not a factor. People would not discuss JB vs TB or their possible futures ad nauseum although that could change if JB lights up the preseason.

I do think your QB assessments regarding both current and possible future performance levels are completely reasonable. In fact I'd say if JG was drafted two years later than he was most would consider it a dream come true scenario. A smooth transition from Brady to Jimmy. Unfortunately that's not where we are and is the crux of the current debate.

Imo, this discussion is at least a year too early although I understand that the lack of a trade initiated the discussion. Brady is starting next season and any real discussions or evaluations should start after the next season is over. I think that's all BB is doing btw. Why trade away a possible future franchise QB when you can easily keep him for another year? I don't think it's anything more than that.

In my mind BB has set this up perfectly given the parameters. He didn't need to trade JG for picks because somehow he has assembled a serious SB contending roster, maintained cap room for additional moves and kept a viable backup QB for at least another year. That's just freaking amazing. Would he have traded JG otherwise?

The disagreement, currently, is do the Patriots trade away a known but aging SB winner (TB) for a young and promising QB (JG)? My answer is to stick with the winning formula especially if Brady continues to play at an elite level. The Pats have never blown a team out of a SB. The difference between a victory and a loss may be the same difference between Brady and JG.

The luxury for both sides of the debate is that we'll soon get another years worth of input to either refine or change our positions.

This "problem" could still solve itself.

So until then it's

Brady



VS

Jimmy.

 

[Ring 6]

It's more about possibly having a capable quarterback next in line than JG specifically. It's not like we have any "Let's go Jimmy/Bring in Jimmy" fans here.

I disagree. I think there are many who, if Brady plays in 2017 like he did in 2016 would still say get rid of him instead of jimmy because jimmy will be here longer.

All of us in this debate love Brady over any other player by miles. But we do have some "When Belichick feels it's time, we're good" fans here.

And when that happens, we'll all be adults and accept it without complaining, right?

Since when does anything belichick does get accepted without complaint here?
And remember this is the same guy who lived vinny testaverde and hasn't exactly set the world on fire with his non brady QB evaluations here.
I think the blind faith that whoever belichick decides to throw in there at the expense of more years of near peak Brady is a poor gamble.

That said all of this is non sense anyway because BB isn't getting rid of Brady while he can still play at a level resembling where he is now.

 

[Tony2046]

It's more about possibly having a capable quarterback next in line than JG specifically. It's not like we have any "Let's go Jimmy/Bring in Jimmy" fans here.

All of us in this debate love Brady over any other player by miles. But we do have some "When Belichick feels it's time, we're good" fans here.

And when that happens, we'll all be adults and accept it without complaining, right?

I know all Patriot fans love Brady. I've never said anything to the contrary. This is about JG because JG seems to be more than just a capable QB and could be a future franchise QB. It's definitely not about JB or any other QB or at least not yet. Geez I hope JB lights up the preseason. That'll be fun.

If BB trades or cuts TB and TB goes on to win another SB with another team we'll see how many "adults" we have in this forum.

 

[Bradyking12]

It's more about possibly having a capable quarterback next in line than JG specifically. It's not like we have any "Let's go Jimmy/Bring in Jimmy" fans here.

All of us in this debate love Brady over any other player by miles. But we do have some "When Belichick feels it's time, we're good" fans here.

And when that happens, we'll all be adults and accept it without complaining, right?

Whatever keeps this dynasty rolling with no down years/periods

 

[Tony2046]

Whatever keeps this dynasty rolling with no down years/periods

There will be down years after Brady. Whether that's with JG or anyone else.

JG will have a learning curve to go through. His first full season will probably include getting sacked 40+ times and everything else that goes along with a first year QB.

Whoever and whenever the next QB is after Brady I hope Patsfans give him the time to grow before going full game day thread on his ass.

 

[Ring 6]

Whatever keeps this dynasty rolling with no down years/periods

Would you rather have 2 championships and 8 years of mediocre or 10 years of pretty good and no championships?

 

[Galeb]

That isn't emotion.

Agreed. It is behavior triggered by an emotion.

 

[Ring 6]

Agreed. It is behavior triggered by an emotion.

Not at all.

 

[PatsWSB47]

I think when JG was drafted this same kind of thread was being debated among the coaching staff and the what ifs won out. Brady threw a monkey wrench in the whole thing by actually getting better......maybe fueled by the help of the new competition coupled with his legacy being challenged. I'll add a revenge factor in there but to a lesser degree. In any event there seemed to have been a hotter fire lit under his already on fire ass. Proving his legitimacy has always motivated him but drafting JG in the same time frame as deflategate has created a doubling down of that I think. Maybe BB had the competition thing as part of the formula which had little downside with the possible outcomes. Whether Brady responded with what he has or he declined and JG was waiting in the wings, to he had a plan in place. I'm not sure even BB expected all this to still be play in 2017 and beyond. For me its going to be hard to let go of Brady. I have a feeling he'll get a little extra time over anyone else. Just my 2 cents.