The Official 'Trade Brady' Debate Thread - Do Not Start Another One

[scout]

teams that have won without a top-tier QB since 2001: Bucs, Giants
teams that have won without a top-tier defense since 2001: Colts

Looks to me like you can win it all without one, but you absolutely have to have at least one of the two, and are much better off if you have both (obviously).

It's also worth noting that, since the offense-favoring rule changes in 2004, we've had 1 team win without an elite defense and 1 team win without an elite QB. And the team without the elite QB won because he suddenly started playing like one. This year, they went out with a whimper in the playoffs, largely because Eli regressed back to what he really is.

What you have to realize, though, is how big of a role luck plays in determining who actually wins the SB. The Patriots had chance go in their favor many times from 2001 to 2004, and it showed. They were a miracle helmet catch/horrendously blown call from winning in 2007. So, rather than judging entire philosophies based on lucky bounces here and there, I'd rather look at the teams that, year in and year out, are in the running. The ones that are in the playoffs every year, in the conference championship games, going to Super Bowls.

Who fits that description this decade? The Pats, Steelers, and Colts. It's a short list, and I feel very comfortable saying that, in this decade, those three franchises are in a class of their own. All 3 have perennial all pros at QB. All three also have very good defenses. So, basically, you need your QB and your defense to both be, at the very least, very good.

Luckily for the Pats, they already have a great QB and a very good defense. With Brady, they're Super Bowl-caliber right now. With Cassel, they're in the class of the Ravens, Titans, and Giants. Cassel is a good QB, but he's not Brady, Peyton, or Roethlisberger by a long shot.

The Patriots already have a top-tier defense (go ahead and check the rankings). Even if you want to argue that they don't, trading away the best QB in the league so that you'll have a better chance at getting an even better D (but still without any guarantee) is still trading away a necessity that you already have so that you might be able to get another one. It just doesn't add up.

Actually, the Colts defense was playing good ball at the right time. Their defense handled the teams in the playoffs, although they were really bad during the regular season.
When the Patriots won in 2001, it was their defense which carried them.
The Steelers last Super Bowl was also won because of their defense. They won despite Big Ben in that game. This year, he is winning games for them, but they would not be there without that defense. Defense wins championships.
Everybody remembers the big three from the Dallas Cowboy's dynasty. I followed them closely back then, as I lived in Dallas. They had a great defense which is why they were so successful.
No one talks about the greatest offense ever in a Super Bowl. I'm not sure who that would be, tho, you could claim the Bears defense as the greatest with maybe Baltimore coming in second.
The Patriots will probably not win another Super Bowl unless they make some significant changes with their defense. How do you call them a top tier defense with those red zone numbers?

 

[BradyFTW!]

Actually, the Colts defense was playing good ball at the right time. Their defense handled the teams in the playoffs, although they were really bad during the regular season.
When the Patriots won in 2001, it was their defense which carried them.
The Steelers last Super Bowl was also won because of their defense. They won despite Big Ben in that game. This year, he is winning games for them, but they would not be there without that defense. Defense wins championships.
Everybody remembers the big three from the Dallas Cowboy's dynasty. I followed them closely back then, as I lived in Dallas. They had a great defense which is why they were so successful.
No one talks about the greatest offense ever in a Super Bowl. I'm not sure who that would be, tho, you could claim the Bears defense as the greatest with maybe Baltimore coming in second.
The Patriots will probably not win another Super Bowl unless they make some significant changes with their defense. How do you call them a top tier defense with those red zone numbers?

Nobody's denying that you need a very good defense to win a Super Bowl. My point is that we already have one, and if you don't believe me go ahead and look at the statistics. What you also need is a top-tier QB, and we already have one of those two, unless a couple people in this thread have their way.

BTW, do you have any response to my previous post, or are you just going to ignore it, like you ignore everything that completely invalidates your argument?

 

[Miguel]

I hear all these pseudo-learned people saying you can't allocate $28 million to the QB position? Oh? Why Not? The Clots did when the CAP was a hell of a lot smaller, several years ago. The Patriots can, due to their previous prudent CAP management.

USATODAY.com

 

[JSn]

USATODAY.com

Nice! I love the way you argue, hehe.

Looked up Brady and Cassel there too. Decided it'd be nice to have a side by side comparison. Bang for buck, Cassel won this year by a lot. Epic waste goes to Tommy, (not blaming him, obviously). Keep in mind, kiddies, these are just cap hits.

Tom F. Brady

Year	Team     	Cap Value
2008	Patriots 	$ 14,621,320
2007	Patriots 	$ 7,345,160
2006	Patriots 	$ 13,828,590 
2005	Patriots 	$ 8,427,930
2004	Patriots 	$ 5,062,950
2003	Patriots 	$ 3,323,450
2002	Patriots 	$ 1,091,613
2001	Patriots 	$ 314,993
2000	Patriots 	$ 205,800

Peyton Meh. Manning

Year	Team	Cap Value
2008	Colts 	$ 18,704,320
2007	Colts 	$ 8,203,840
2006	Colts 	$ 10,571,068
2005	Colts 	$ 8,435,186
2004	Colts 	$ 8,304,366
2003	Colts 	$ 15,360,833
2002	Colts 	$ 10,334,483
2001	Colts 	$ 8,487,893
2000	Colts 	$ 6,702,500

Matt No Hassle Cassel

Year	Team		Cap Value
2008	Patriots 	$ 539,140
2007	Patriots 	$ 454,140
2006	Patriots 	$ 368,780
2005	Patriots 	$ 243,500

 

[Brady'sButtBoy]

A
The Patriots will probably not win another Super Bowl unless they make some significant changes with their defense. How do you call them a top tier defense with those red zone numbers?

"...significant changes" is over stating things. Check back here after the Cards win the Superbowl by blowing by the Stillers. What we didn't have enough of were play makers, as opposed to a machine-like D.

The problem was we couldn't make one the one big play on D to stop the Colts or Giants in the last two playoffs, or the stinking Jets in this year's second game.

Actually, we are so close to being good enough on D that we nearly made the playoffs without the NFL's best player while simultaneously losing several major D players for the season.

We don't a large scale rebuilding. What we need is an Adrian Wilson, Ed Reed, Haynesworth, James Harrison, Polomaulu, etc. We are so close as a team all we need is one dominant player on D, and we don't have one anymore. Mayo is close and Seymour reached near dominant form at times this year.

This team makes just 4-5 plays on D that slipped away and we're right there with 4, maybe 5 SB's.

What we must have from the blizzard of coming picks is at least one superman, an overwhelming force that makes everything around him better - like Seymour in our 1st SB, and then Rodney, and, of course the epitome, Brady.

 

[scout]

"...significant changes" is over stating things. Check back here after the Cards win the Superbowl by blowing by the Stillers. What we didn't have enough of were play makers, as opposed to a machine-like D.

The problem was we couldn't make one the one big play on D to stop the Colts or Giants in the last two playoffs, or the stinking Jets in this year's second game.

Actually, we are so close to being good enough on D that we nearly made the playoffs without the NFL's best player while simultaneously losing several major D players for the season.

We don't a large scale rebuilding. What we need is an Adrian Wilson, Ed Reed, Haynesworth, James Harrison, Polomaulu, etc. We are so close as a team all we need is one dominant player on D, and we don't have one anymore. Mayo is close and Seymour reached near dominant form at times this year.

This team makes just 4-5 plays on D that slipped away and we're right there with 4, maybe 5 SB's.

What we must have from the blizzard of coming picks is at least one superman, an overwhelming force that makes everything around him better - like Seymour in our 1st SB, and then Rodney, and, of course the epitome, Brady.

Even tho, it's hard for me to get past your name, we do agree that defene wins championships.
The bottom line regarding the Pats/Giants Super bowl was that the Giants had the better defense, even tho we had the better qb. You might be right with that dominant play maker, tho, your throwing out there defensive MVP candidates. Either we get lucky in the draft or we maneuver down to grab one of those top tier rookies. I'm thinking we don't get one of those guys in free agency.
I hope your right about the Cards, but I just don't see it happening. Again, its that defensive thing.

 

[Lifer]

Nobody's denying that you need a very good defense to win a Super Bowl. My point is that we already have one, and if you don't believe me go ahead and look at the statistics. What you also need is a top-tier QB, and we already have one of those two, unless a couple people in this thread have their way.

BTW, do you have any response to my previous post, or are you just going to ignore it, like you ignore everything that completely invalidates your argument?

top tier defense. Give me a break. Pittsburgh has a top tier defense. Baltimore has a top tier defense.

the Patriots do not. Statistics?? The Statistics used to rank defenses are totally useless. A team is #1 in pass defense, based on yardage? Maybe its because they give up 300 on the ground and other teams dont have to pass.

the 70's Patriots teams always were ranked high based on yardage, but guess what? they could never make a play when it counted.
conversely, the 2001 Patriots were ranked something like 18th in defense, they bent but didnt break.

Use your eyes. The Patriots havent been a top tier defense since 2004.

 

[Patjew]

ranked something like 18th in defense, they bent but didnt break.

Use your eyes. The Patriots havent been a top tier defense since 2004.

I think they were the second half of 2005 including the playoffs. But since then the D seems to vary from very good to mediocre.

 

[Joker]

Warner going to his 3rd Super Bowl

Elway winning 2 at the end of his career

yeah...let's get rid of Tom Brady and forget he's ALREADY won THREE Super Bowls and use as our argument Cassel is younger and just went 11-5 and ended up out of the playoffs.

Really, for all the fantasy geek freaks that think this CRAP is even a REMOTE possibility, find a competent mental health professional and find your way back to the real world.

 

[PATRIOT64]

top tier defense. Give me a break. Pittsburgh has a top tier defense. Baltimore has a top tier defense.

the Patriots do not. Statistics?? The Statistics used to rank defenses are totally useless. A team is #1 in pass defense, based on yardage? Maybe its because they give up 300 on the ground and other teams dont have to pass.

the 70's Patriots teams always were ranked high based on yardage, but guess what? they could never make a play when it counted.
conversely, the 2001 Patriots were ranked something like 18th in defense, they bent but didnt break.

Use your eyes. The Patriots havent been a top tier defense since 2004.

Agreed with 1,000% - Homers don't see reality

Our defense has had virtually NO SERIOUS pass rusher since Willie Mac left

Our secondary when guys got injured used to be filled in with guys from the streets that contributed enough to keep the offenses in check - Nowadays this secondary has way too many has beens and also-rans to make it a formidable one

Our BIGGEST concern to fill some holes this offseason has to start and probably end with some nice aquisitions to the backfieLd,Which of course is the cornerback position - even Hobbs is not a certified lock on his side IMO.

I expect some FA action and at least 2 picks on draft day to be in the cornerback area and for a good look at a pass rushing specialist,otherwise this team will never win another SB Title in the near future - Brady or no Brady

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

Agreed with 1,000% - Homers don't see reality
Our defense has had virtually NO SERIOUS pass rusher since Willie Mac left

Anyone who thinks we have a pass rush, should watch the nfl networks superbowl shows they're running this week. Watch how aggressive the Pats blitzing was against Philly. Willie, Bru, etc were all over Mcnabb. That was the last time I saw this defense have a great pass rush. Hopefully, this draft will yeild some pass rushers.

 

[Synovia]

1) Unhealthy Brady = untradeable.
2) Healthy Brady = why the heck would you trade him.

This is why this thread breaks down: You people can not possibly see that there is a possiblility that Brady is neither 100%, nor unable to play.

 

[Synovia]

On the other hand, Brady is capable of winning the Super Bowl with the offense and defense that we have right now. I think a lot of you have been spoiled by the Belichick era, and think that the Patriots have this unlimited window of opportunity that will never close.

Again, the assumption that:

1) 2007 was NOT A CAREER YEAR
2) Brady comes back 100%.


I think both assumptions are false. Even if Brady comes back 100%, and is as elite as he ever could be, theres almost NO CHANCE, that he ever throws 50 TDs in a season again.

 

[ScottieC]

Again, the assumption that:

1) 2007 was NOT A CAREER YEAR
2) Brady comes back 100%.


I think both assumptions are false. Even if Brady comes back 100%, and is as elite as he ever could be, theres almost NO CHANCE, that he ever throws 50 TDs in a season again.

"he ever throws 50 TDs in a season again."

Seeing how one guy has done that.......ever, you're really going out on a limb with that statement.

 

[BradyManny]

This is why this thread breaks down: You people can not possibly see that there is a possiblility that Brady is neither 100%, nor unable to play.

What you don't understand is that GMs aren't going to trade for Brady if he's not 100%, and if they would, they wouldn't send over the mass amounts Day 1 picks that you and your "trade Brady" cohorts think are coming.

Again, answer the questions I posed to you.

Or here's a new one. Who yields you more in trade? Cassel right now, or Brady, if he comes back and can't come to 100%? Remember Randy Moss yielded a 4th rounder.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Again, the assumption that:

1) 2007 was NOT A CAREER YEAR
2) Brady comes back 100%.


I think both assumptions are false. Even if Brady comes back 100%, and is as elite as he ever could be, theres almost NO CHANCE, that he ever throws 50 TDs in a season again.

Hahaha, of course 2007 was a career year. Nobody said otherwise. So you're saying that we should trade him because he'll never throw 50 touchdown passes again?

All that I said was that Brady is good enough for us to win multiple SBs with him right now. He obviously doesn't need to throw 50 TDs for the Pats to win the Super Bowl. Exhibits A, B, and C being the three Super Bowls that we won without him throwing for 50 TDs.

Once again, if you have to use such a blatant straw man argument to try to dispute one sentence of a multiple paragraph post, then it's pretty clear that you don't have a leg to stand on.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

If Brady comes back HEALTHY he starts.

Again. There are two scenarios:

1) Unhealthy Brady = untradeable.
2) Healthy Brady = why the heck would you trade him.

No one in favor of this thread has yet to commit to one of those two scenarios because they know both end up in keeping Brady. That's why we're stuck in this fantasy land where guys can get traded while rehabbing from an ACL injury.

Bull****. An unhealthy Brady is still tradeable just for conditional picks. Heck, Pacman was tradeable.

 

[BradyManny]

Bull****. An unhealthy Brady is still tradeable just for conditional picks. Heck, Pacman was tradeable.

LOL. So you'd trade Brady for conditional picks? I'm sorry, but you are truly making a fool of yourself. Why the hell would you make that trade?

 

[AzPatsFan]

Please desist wiht this either or situation. Belichick will never paint himslef into a corner when he doesn't have to do so.

He won't trade either one, until such time as he knows he has at least one good QB remaining.

The ony question is, when that time will come.

I suspect it won't be until mid season 2009. Bu it should be certain by 2010 summer camp, at the latest.

But y'all are perfectly free to pick a time. But it isn't before he plays in a game, and Belichick knows, that he shows he has his escapability or shiftyness, to step aside or step up, to gain precisous fractions of a second.

Just because he can hobble, does not mean he can play. Look at Culpepper's career in that he came back way to soon. He didn't help himself; and he didn't help the Phins.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Actually, the Colts defense was playing good ball at the right time. Their defense handled the teams in the playoffs, although they were really bad during the regular season.
When the Patriots won in 2001, it was their defense which carried them.
The Steelers last Super Bowl was also won because of their defense. They won despite Big Ben in that game. This year, he is winning games for them, but they would not be there without that defense. Defense wins championships.
Everybody remembers the big three from the Dallas Cowboy's dynasty. I followed them closely back then, as I lived in Dallas. They had a great defense which is why they were so successful.
No one talks about the greatest offense ever in a Super Bowl. I'm not sure who that would be, tho, you could claim the Bears defense as the greatest with maybe Baltimore coming in second.
The Patriots will probably not win another Super Bowl unless they make some significant changes with their defense. How do you call them a top tier defense with those red zone numbers?

I think those red zone numbers were very good. Not superb yet, but well on the way. Yielding only 40 red zone opportunities to opponents was excellent; and shows in their 8th league ranking in points allowed. A couple of the Superbowl winning editions did not do as well. And this Defense doesn't need much more talent and it gets it this year, It already has much of what it needs except experience.