Reid vs BB at developing QBs

[crawhammer]

The Patriots went 11-5 during the regular 2001 season.Here's Brady's numbers...

QB Tom Brady* 24 1 14 264 for 413, 2,843 yards, 18 td, 12 int, & 36 rushes for 43 yards and 0 td

It is time you mods put this obvious troll on read only. He never stops with the outright lying going back to the thousands of :Lamar Jackson posts he's made on our board. It's time.

Don't be such a dink. Given your foul nature and tendency to only attack the poster, you're given more slack than I would allow as a Mod. And I'm "lying" about what exactly? I'm giving you actual data and my opinion. And it's comical that you are coming back at me with stats when you rip me for using stats in my arguments.

I know Brady's stats for 2001. The fact is the team went from 5-13 with Bledsoe and Belichick to 14-3 and a Super Bowl championship on a game-winning drive with Brady and Belichick. The obvious major difference was the change at quarterback. And given the sustained success of the team for 18 seasons with Brady (17 division titles and 6 Super Bowl championships with 6 game-winning drives by Brady), followed by an immediate return to mediocrity after he left, it's even more obvious who was mostly responsible for the winning. I don't get all the pushback on this... we were fortunate to have had the GOAT for nearly two decades, greatest dynasty in NFL history (2001-2019), be grateful. But it's over and he won elsewhere while the Patriots haven't. No lie. It is what it is.

 

[Ian]

Reid is the best offensive mind in the league. It's not simply a matter of him developing QB's if at all, it's about his ability to gameplan for opposing defenses, create unique plays to get guys open and make his QB's life easier.

If Patrick Mahomes went to the Texans he'd win about as many games as Deshaun Watson did there.

That whole "coaching matters" thing...but I digress

 

[Ring 6]

I would say a lot of the core from the 2001 team was on the 2000 roster as well. The team was underperforming in 01 as well before Bledsoe got hurt. They were simply better with Brady vs Bledsoe

The turnover from 2000 to 2001 patriots was one of the biggest overhauls ever

 

[All3Phases]

The turnover from 2000 to 2001 patriots was one of the biggest overhauls ever

Agree they changed quarterbacks and immediately started winning games after losing

 

[crawhammer]

So your argument is that the 2001 Patriots were a more talented than the 2001 Rams?

Maybe, when you look back at it now. The Rams were soft. They won only 1 playoff game over the next several seasons and from 2002 to 2016 they only had 1 winning season. Their defense had an average ranking of 27th for 8 seasons following SB 36. Warner's career was also in shambles for several years, he had a moderate resurgence at the end, but nothing like his MVP seasons. After a one season letdown the Patriots won 16 division titles in a row with Brady. And the 2001 defense had many solid foundational pieces that were significant to the dynasty 1.0.

So who was the more talented team? The Rams had talent, could have been Olympic gold medalists in a 5x5 relay, but they were soft, lacked toughness, unlike the Patriots who were physically and mentally tough. We knocked the snot out of them for most of that game, the Rams offense got it going in the end, but their defense couldn't stop Brady when it counted, as would very typically be the case throughout Brady's illustrious career. All things considered, perhaps the Rams had more talent, but the Patriots had the better team.

And my main argument still stands... going from 5-13 to 14-3 with a Super Bowl title was entirely dependent on the change at quarterback.

 

[Ian]

And my main argument still stands... going from 5-13 to 14-3 with a Super Bowl title was entirely dependent on the change at quarterback.

Go ahead and compare and contrast the 2001 roster and the 2000 roster and tell me that the "change at quarterback" was entirely the reason for the difference in what transpired that season. I feel like you have a bit of a short memory there.

 

[Ian]

Agree they changed quarterbacks and immediately started winning games after losing

I'll also pose the question of having you compare and contrast the 2001 roster and the 2000 roster and tell me that the "change at quarterback" was entirely the difference. There was a lot more to it than just Brady, albeit Brady was obviously much better at not turning it over compared to Drew.

 

[All3Phases]

I'll also pose the question of having you compare and contrast the 2001 roster and the 2000 roster and tell me that the "change at quarterback" was entirely the difference. There was a lot more to it than just Brady, albeit Brady was obviously much better at not turning it over compared to Drew.

I think whenever there is a change at quarterback, that will always be the biggest change. Switching tackles or running backs doesnt transform an offense...Do you agree? The offense didnt exactly get off to a great start with Drew in 01 either

 

[h0c2000]

@Ian where did all the posts go? There's no indication of what's missing nor why? Like a fart in the wind, puff, a bunch of posts are gone.

 

[crawhammer]

But nothing to do with Urban Meyer or his scheme... sound logic.

Who claimed that? Not sure who you're arguing with here.

He was a pudgy weak rookie used to playing a 13 game schedule and entered a league where he could play close to 20 games including the playoffs. Not surprisingly week thirteen was after the bye week where he started to wear down.

Hence the 5th QB off the board I suppose. What kind of shape was he in last season? Because he was worse.

Only you could be here arguing how great Daniel Jones has been... Daniel Jones.

He was 12-25 before Daboll arrived, he won 9 games with Daboll... he won almost as many games in one season of Daboll as he had three seasons prior. Giants fans were calling for his replacement... laughable.

Learn the game.

Sorry bud, Daniel Jones was very good last season. Learn how to judge a player. DJ wasn't bad his rookie season either, look it up. He and the rest of that team were garbage with Joe Judge (who's now back in our building for some unknowable reason). Yes, Daboll is a good head coach who's had a very favorable impact on his quarterback... congratulations to him for earning his money (unlike someone else we know).

You've been asked by the mod's and fellow posters to stop being such a hard-on weirdo about Brady... I see it's beyond your ability to stop.

It doesn't mean the rest of us have to indulge you.

Okay, as I'm replying to your post.

Whatever, I'm a "hard-on weirdo" for recognizing Brady's unprecedented impact to two franchises. As opposed to oddly trying to diminish his undeniable importance to the Patriots dynasty (being the only player there for all of it), maybe you should just appreciate it more. I know it goes against your 53 equal parts theory but why don't you just look at the 3 seasons before and after Brady (plus 2008) and compare them to the sustained excellence of 2001 to 2019. 7 seasons with 0 division titles vs 18 seasons with 17 division titles. Pretty remarkable.

 

[crawhammer]

Go ahead and compare and contrast the 2001 roster and the 2000 roster and tell me that the "change at quarterback" was entirely the reason for the difference in what transpired that season. I feel like you have a bit of a short memory there.

I suppose I could do that but it won't change my argument. I never said "entirely the reason." I said entirely dependent, which is different. Meaning simply if Brady doesn't become the quarterback then they don't win the Super Bowl. There were other changes from 2000 to 2001 but the most impactful change happened in week 3 of the season. That doesn't discount whatever other changes there were, nice roster building by Bill, back when he was on his game as a GM for a few seasons (down the toilet in 2006, followed by a lot of hit or miss, until the drafts especially went south in a major way for a very long time). But I'm pretty sure you can't come up with one other single change that was nearly as critical as Bledsoe to Brady.

 

[Ring 6]

Agree they changed quarterbacks and immediately started winning games after losing

You probably weren’t a fan then so go back and compare the 2000 and 2001 rosters.

 

[All3Phases]

You probably weren’t a fan then so go back and compare the 2000 and 2001 rosters.

I was, and the quarterback is the biggest change any team will go through from 1 offseason to the next...They were 0-2 and anemic under bledsoe in 01. They scored and additional 6ppg under brady vs Bledsoe...You can chalk it up to everybody else and not brady, but its a constant trend whenever a Patriot team fields a roster

 

[Ring 6]

Maybe, when you look back at it now. The Rams were soft. They won only 1 playoff game over the next several seasons and from 2002 to 2016 they only had 1 winning season. Their defense had an average ranking of 27th for 8 seasons following SB 36. Warner's career was also in shambles for several years, he had a moderate resurgence at the end, but nothing like his MVP seasons. After a one season letdown the Patriots won 16 division titles in a row with Brady. And the 2001 defense had many solid foundational pieces that were significant to the dynasty 1.0.

So who was the more talented team? The Rams had talent, could have been Olympic gold medalists in a 5x5 relay, but they were soft, lacked toughness, unlike the Patriots who were physically and mentally tough. We knocked the snot out of them for most of that game, the Rams offense got it going in the end, but their defense couldn't stop Brady when it counted, as would very typically be the case throughout Brady's illustrious career. All things considered, perhaps the Rams had more talent, but the Patriots had the better team.

And my main argument still stands... going from 5-13 to 14-3 with a Super Bowl title was entirely dependent on the change at quarterback.

Wow. You would shill through anything wouldn’t you.
Your argument is now that the 2001 Rams were not talented because of future years with different players. The team that was #1 in total offense and scoring for the 3rd straight year 3 and were #7 in defense and #3 in points allowed.
Prior to that game they were 37-11 in the regular season and 5-1 in the post season but they were soft.
You simply have no integrity.

 

[Joker]

You left out the fact that in 18 games (5-13) from 2000-01 under Bledsoe the Patriots scored 16.4 PPG and under rookie Brady they scored 22.3 PPG in 14 games (11-3). Did an additional TD scored per game help? Or was that just a coincidence and Brady was mediocre and the team happened to turn it around at the exact time of the qb change?

You're reading comprehension is sorely lacking. Here is his exact statement...You mean the season Brady stepped in, went 14-3, and won a Super Bowl in his first ever season as a starter in the NFL.. The FACT is, THAT season, 2001, the Pats went 11-5 in the regular season. As per your contention that Brady's stats were so remarkable...2800 yards and 18 TD's is indeed pedestrian.Warner amassed a league-high 36 touchdown passes and 4,830 passing yards in 2001. The Pats sunk to 9-7 in 2002.

 

[All3Phases]

You're reading comprehension is sorely lacking. Here is his exact statement...You mean the season Brady stepped in, went 14-3, and won a Super Bowl in his first ever season as a starter in the NFL.. The FACT is, THAT season, 2001, the Pats went 11-5 in the regular season. As per your contention that Brady's stats were so remarkable...2800 yards and 18 TD's is indeed pedestrian.Warner amassed a league-high 36 touchdown passes and 4,830 passing yards in 2001. The Pats sunk to 9-7 in 2002.

Not sure what this post is trying to solve...The Patriots got much better once Brady stepped onto the field

 

[Ian]

I think whenever there is a change at quarterback, that will always be the biggest change. Switching tackles or running backs doesnt transform an offense...Do you agree? The offense didnt exactly get off to a great start with Drew in 01 either

You're acting like I'm taking something away from Brady. I'm not. But the difference between '01 and '00 rosters is night and day.

 

[Ring 6]

I was, and the quarterback is the biggest change any team will go through from 1 offseason to the next...They were 0-2 and anemic under bledsoe in 01. They scored and additional 6ppg under brady vs Bledsoe...You can chalk it up to everybody else and not brady, but its a constant trend whenever a Patriot team fields a roster

Yeah Richard Seymour, Matt Light, Mike Vrabel, Brian Cox, Antowain Smith, Marc Edwards, David Patten, Mike Compton, Robinson-Randall, Anthony Pleasant, Roman Pfeiffer, Brian Cox, Terrell Buckley had nothing to do with it

 

[Ian]

I suppose I could do that but it won't change my argument.

It sort of should. I love Brady as much as the next guy but it was his penchant to not turn it over and manage the offense as the real reason why the team ended up winning a championship that season. In crunch time, he moved the ball and didn't turn it over. That's what they needed that year and then Vinatieri did the rest, while the defense forced turnovers. There was a lot more special about that roster as a whole than just one guy.

 

[Ian]

I think whenever there is a change at quarterback, that will always be the biggest change. Switching tackles or running backs doesnt transform an offense...Do you agree? The offense didnt exactly get off to a great start with Drew in 01 either

Obviously, I don't disagree. But at the same time, and I love Brady as much as the next guy, it was his penchant to not turn it over and manage the offense as the real reason why the team ended up winning a championship that season. In crunch time, he moved the ball and didn't turn it over. That's what they needed that year and then Vinatieri did the rest, while the defense forced turnovers. There was a lot more special about that roster as a whole than just one guy