Killing an Often Repeated Myth

[Ring 6]

Your posting history proves otherwise.

Nope

 

[fightingirish595]

They do, and they are. It really doesn't matter how many times you argue against it. It's much more sensible just to acknowledge the fact, while noting that the type of team that gives Brady trouble is the type of team that gives every QB trouble.

Facts disagree

Throwing the montana stuff out, Just focusing on Brady here. Not all playoff teams matchup well with Brady. I agree with Deus that Brady struggles against teams that other QBs would struggle against. Bradys played well in playoff games where he got beat up and not so well in some others.

 

[Ring 6]

"High quality playoff caliber opponents" is not the 'myth', and that's the point.

My post my topic my definition if what myth I am defining.

 

[The Brandon Five]

"High quality playoff caliber opponents" is not the 'myth', and that's the point.

Yup, the 10-6 and 9-7 teams that Brady and The Patriots lost to were two of the best teams ever...wait, what?

 

[NormZauchin]

Maybe the point of contention revolves around the word "struggled." The stats don't take into account winning margin. I would think that Brady, while winning a high percentage of games in the post season and Super Bowl, has a closer margin of victory in those games than in the regular season. I know that it's true of the Super Bowl.

 

[Ring 6]

Throwing the montana stuff out, Just focusing on Brady here. Not all playoff teams matchup well with Brady. I agree with Deus that Brady struggles against teams that other QBs would struggle against. Bradys played well in playoff games where he got beat up and not so well in some others.

Montana is included because he has the highest non Brady winning percent. I could have continued the list with Wilson manning etc. probably would have been more clear if I had.

The point is that Brady vs playoff competition wins more than any other QB against all teams, and even against SB competition he wins more than anyone else against all teams.

 

[Ring 6]

Maybe the point of contention revolves around the word "struggled." The stats don't take into account winning margin. I would think that Brady, while winning a high percentage of games in the post season and Super Bowl, has a closer margin of victory in those games than in the regular season. I know that it's true of the Super Bowl.

I am only concerned with winning.

 

[Ring 6]

Yup, the 10-6 and 9-7 teams that Brady and The Patriots lost to were two of the best teams ever...wait, what?

They are part of his playoff record.

 

[Deus Irae]

My post my topic my definition if what myth I am defining.

Stop already. You're talking out of your ass, and you know it. This is embarrassing, for you. Your own O.P. lines it up:

I can't say how many times I have heard comments about Brady, BB and the Patriots about how they struggle with certain types of teams, and those are the kind of teams you face in the playoffs.

 

[The Brandon Five]

They are part of his playoff record.

I am saying that if anything the two teams they lost to were not necessarily the best teams, so the idea that they only beat lesser competition is kinda, sorta backwards. Here are the ranks of all their SB opponents.

Team Off. Rank Def. Rank
2001 Rams 1 7
2003 Panthers 10 15
2004 Eagles 8 2
2007 Giants 14 17
2011 Giants 9 25
2014 Seahawks 10 1
2016 Falcons 1 27

Of those teams, I would say the two Giants teams look the weakest overall with the Falcons right behind them. They lost to the Giants and needed an all-time comeback to beat the Falcons.

 

[fightingirish595]

I am only concerned with winning.

Would you agree or disagree though, that struggled doesnt necessarily lead to winning and losing. Personally I dont think Brady struggled in all 9 of his playoff losses

 

[fightingirish595]

I am saying that if anything the two teams they lost to were not necessarily the best teams, so the idea that they only beat lesser competition is kinda, sorta backwards. Here are the ranks of all their SB opponents.

Team Off. Rank Def. Rank
2001 Rams 1 7
2003 Panthers 10 15
2004 Eagles 8 2
2007 Giants 14 17
2011 Giants 9 25
2014 Seahawks 10 1
2016 Falcons 1 27

Of those teams, I would say the two Giants teams look the weakest overall with the Falcons right behind them. They lost to the Giants and needed an all-time comeback to beat the Falcons.

We shouldve learned by now defensive rank can be irrelevant. Falcons got pressure, Giants got tons of it in the first playoff loss. You can say the giants looked weak. But in 07, Their offensive and defensive lines could take over games

Edit. while the faclons defense got tired, we exposed them, but I didnt expect their defense to play that well in the beginning of the game. That didnt look like the number 27 defense

 

[Ring 6]

Stop already. You're talking out of your ass, and you know it. This is embarrassing, for you. Your own O.P. lines it up:

Is there really any point in making a post like that?

Of course you highlighted part of a sentence as if the rest didn't exist.

Evidently you think you have some kind if cause celebre here but my post was about having a higher winning percentage in the post season against the best teams in the NFL than ANYONE else had against an average schedule.

 

[Ring 6]

Would you agree or disagree though, that struggled doesnt necessarily lead to winning and losing. Personally I dont think Brady struggled in all 9 of his playoff losses

Again I'm just talking about the team winning or losing.

 

[Ring 6]

I am saying that if anything the two teams they lost to were not necessarily the best teams, so the idea that they only beat lesser competition is kinda, sorta backwards. Here are the ranks of all their SB opponents.

Team Off. Rank Def. Rank
2001 Rams 1 7
2003 Panthers 10 15
2004 Eagles 8 2
2007 Giants 14 17
2011 Giants 9 25
2014 Seahawks 10 1
2016 Falcons 1 27

Of those teams, I would say the two Giants teams look the weakest overall with the Falcons right behind them. They lost to the Giants and needed an all-time comeback to beat the Falcons.

I am saying if you compare Tom Brady and the patriots vs playoff and SB teams they win more often than any QB in history does in the regular season.

It's irrelevant to me which were wins and losses. They are better against the best than the next best guy is against the average

 

[fightingirish595]

Again I'm just talking about the team winning or losing.

Fair enough

 

[fightingirish595]

I am saying if you compare Tom Brady and the patriots vs playoff and SB teams they win more often than any QB in history does in the regular season.

It's irrelevant to me which were wins and losses. They are better against the best than the next best guy is against the average

I do think the Superbowl one is too small a sample size, that playoff one is fair though

 

[Deus Irae]

Is there really any point in making a post like that?

Of course you highlighted part of a sentence as if the rest didn't exist.

Evidently you think you have some kind if cause celebre here but my post was about having a higher winning percentage in the post season against the best teams in the NFL than ANYONE else had against an average schedule.

I'm tired of people idiotically arguing against every freakin' point that doesn't say "Patriots can do every damn thing they want, to anyone they want!". The reality, and it is a reality, is that the so-called "Blueprint" for playing against Brady is real. It doesn't mean that Brady can't beat teams who deploy it. It means that he's more likely to struggle against them.

It's the simple, accurate, flip side to the other reality, which is that some types of defenses give opponents almost no chance against Brady (i.e. Steelers).

 

[Ring 6]

We shouldve learned by now defensive rank can be irrelevant. Falcons got pressure, Giants got tons of it in the first playoff loss. You can say the giants looked weak. But in 07, Their offensive and defensive lines could take over games

Edit. while the faclons defense got tired, we exposed them, but I didnt expect their defense to play that well in the beginning of the game. That didnt look like the number 27 defense

It looked worse than the 27th ranked defense when all was said and done.
They allowed more points and yards per drive than any defense did for the season. They allowed the most completed passes and first downs in post season history and the 8th most yards in lost season history, while letting the opponent score on 5 consecutive drives to lose a 25 point lead.

 

[Ring 6]

I'm tired of people idiotically arguing against every freakin' point that doesn't say "Patriots can do every damn thing they want, to anyone they want!". The reality, and it is a reality, is that the so-called "Blueprint" for playing against Brady is real. It doesn't mean that Brady can't beat teams who deploy it. It means that he's more likely to struggle against them.

It's the simple, accurate, flip side to the other reality, which is that some types of defenses give opponents almost no chance against Brady (i.e. Steelers).

I'm not sure why you even bring that up because it has nothing to do with what I am saying.

I don't care if his numbers are better it worse. I don't care if he scores more points or less. I am talking about winning.
Tom Brady wins more against the best competition than anyone else wins against average competition.
Whatever he does to accomplish that isn't for this discussion.

Note that his win % in the post season isn't as high as his win % in the regular season. But it is higher than anyone else in the world in the regular season.
Not sure where you get thevimplication of perfection from in that but I think you are bringing the frustration of your last arguments into a discussion it doesn't belong in