Wickersham book discussion

[Fuzz]

Yea not even close to being the same since he rode the bench for most of the year and had little to do with the early wins that clinched them the Division. He also wasn't a starter with KC the previous year and had bounced around the league.

Bill had more to do with that SB win than Foles.

Winning a superbowl is all about "getting hot" at the right time. Each playoff win is equivalent to winning the division. TB didnt even win the division last year.

 

[203Pat]

See, thats where I disagree. Its a team game. Nobody deserves the overwhelming majority of the credit for anything. He deserves more than everyone else, yes. But I think its more like 20% than 90%.

It is a team game but when the most important player on the team is no good then it doesn't really matter how good the other 52 are about 95% of the time.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Bill had nothing to do with this current discussion. The current discussion is "how much of an impact on the super bowl win did Brady have in Tampa?"

Are people actually debating he didn't?

Good grief.

 

[203Pat]

Are people actually debating he didn't?

Good grief.

Basically that Tampa was loaded when Brady showed up and a handful of other Joe Shmo quarterbacks could've have lead them to a ring.

 

[XLIX]

"Tim" Brady doesn't ALWAYS get the right breaks, does he?

Setting aside my typographical error, it just boggles the mind how little credit people like you give Brady. The facts are these:

Patriots go 5-13. Brady named starter. They win 6 Super Bowls in 19 years. Brady leaves. Patriots go 8-11.
Bucs win 5, 5 and 7 games in the 3 years before Brady arrives. Brady arrives. Bucs win Super Bowl.

That's some pretty serious cause and effect there. Any talk about how the Buccaneers were "stacked" is pure idiocy.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Basically that Tampa was loaded when Brady showed up and a handful of other Joe Shmo quarterbacks could've have lead them to a ring.

 

[203Pat]

Setting aside my typographical error, it just boggles the mind how little credit people like you give Brady. The facts are these:

Patriots go 5-13. Brady named starter. They win 6 Super Bowls in 19 years. Brady leaves. Patriots go 8-11.
Bucs win 5, 5 and 7 games in the 3 years before Brady arrives. Brady arrives. Bucs win Super Bowl.

That's some pretty serious cause and effect there. Any talk about how the Buccaneers were "stacked" is pure idiocy.

Just luck you know.

 

[gobesmug]

Before Salary Cap
BB as GM had to field a team where best players left after winning rings to "get paid"
Walsh also had Montanna

The salary cap is a good point.

Only the Broncos and Patriots have won back to back Superbowls since the salary cap was made in 94.

Walsh and Belichick both only won when they got their QB so that point is a wash.

I'll concede that the salary cap gives Belichick the edge.

But I'm also not saying Walsh was better than Belichick.

And come on, it's not like I'm comparing Bill to Rex Ryan. I'm comparing him to one of the GOAT HOF HCs who completely revolutionized the offensive side of the game with the west coast offense.

Belichick dominated his generation, just like Walsh dominanted his, Knoll before him and of course Lombardi.

I think it's very difficult to elevate any of those greats above the other. I mean you win in the rules and contemporaries you have.

However

If Bill can win 1 more Superbowl without Brady then I think that elevates himself because he would have done something the other guys didn't do.

Win across a different generation and without the HOF QB they had.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

The notion by many on this forum (not you) that any good QB would've won a SB with that Bucs team is odd.

I wonder how many good QBs switched teams after playing for one team and went on to win a SB their first year? @Ice_Ice_Brady ?

If we’re talking about backups, then Foles was pointed out, but I agree it isn’t exactly the same thing because we don’t know if the Eagles get a bye or how they do for 12 weeks or so where Wentz got them there. Tobin Rote in 1957 is a similar situation, in his first year, after Bobby Layne got injured.

There may be more, but the closest to Brady that come to mind are:

• Craig Morton, who in 1977, went to Denver and led them to a conference championship. However, Denver got smacked 27-10 to Roger Stubach’s Cowboys. The irony is that Landry had chosen Morton over Staubach when both played for the Cowboys, and that decision likely cost them a Super Bowl. Denver was 9-5 the year before.
• Joe Montana, who led the Chiefs in 1993 to the 11-5 and the AFCCG. In 1992, it was a similar situation because Dave Krieg came from Seattle and led the Chiefs to 10-6 and the AFCDG.
• Arnie Herber, who retired as the NFL’s most accomplished QB in 1941 after leading (with Don Hutson) the Packers to multiple titles. In 1944, he came out of retirement at age 34 to lead the Giants (Packers rival) to the Championship Game, but he lost to the Packers. The Giants were 6-3-1 the year before and had a QB committee for years.
• In 1945, the Giants brought in Frank Filchock, who was a good quarterback but played second fiddle to Sammy Baugh in Washington. Filchock led the Giants to the championship game but then became embroiled in a gambling/throwing games scandal just before the game. He then threw six interceptions.
• Norm Van Brocklin, an established superstar, left the Rams for the Eagles in 1958. In his third and final season with the Eagles, he won the 1960 championship. So, not first year, but a star QB going to another city and winning it all.
• Y.A. Tittle, an established great, was considered washed at age 34 up by San Francisco. He went to the Giants and, beyond winning MVP, led them to three straight championship games, beginning in his first season there in 1961, all losses.
• Earl Morrall, who had the strangest quarterback career ever, was a career backup and yet he won MVP in 1968 Colts when Unitas got hurt. He went to the 1972 Dolphins and led them to the Super Bowl in his first year in Miami when Griese got hurt in week 5. Then Griese returned to play the Super Bowl.
• Kurt Warner, leading the Cardinals to the Super Bowl in 2008, his fourth year in Arizona, and Peyton Manning, being carried to an undeserved championship by Denver in 2015, also come to mind.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

And it gets even more damning because so many here scoffed at the idea Brady would have personnel input in Tampa. It was like 98% negativity about that here - almost a rage about the idea of an egomaniac player calling the shots - and how he’d try to build some dumb fantasy football team. This was one of the main reasons people were glad he went to Tampa, who they thought were desperate and that having Brady influencing personnel decisions is an example of why they’re a joke while the Patriots would never allow it.

Now…well, it turns out a key reason for having a “stacked team” is Brady’s lobbying for Gronk, AB, and Fournette. Not sure we need to get into it too far, but suffice to say the Patriots could have certainly had their own “stacked team” too with those guys, all of whom played below market due to Brady.

And yet…they try to take those acquisitions and load up a really backwards argument that it isn't a fair because Brady got all those players and Bill didn’t. The irony.

But in the end they were stacked

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

The salary cap is a good point.

Only the Broncos and Patriots have won back to back Superbowls since the salary cap was made in 94.

Walsh and Belichick both only won when they got their QB so that point is a wash.

I'll concede that the salary cap gives Belichick the edge.

But I'm also not saying Walsh was better than Belichick.

And come on, it's not like I'm comparing Bill to Rex Ryan. I'm comparing him to one of the GOAT HOF HCs who completely revolutionized the offensive side of the game with the west coast offense.

Belichick dominated his generation, just like Walsh dominanted his, Knoll before him and of course Lombardi.

I think it's very difficult to elevate any of those greats above the other. I mean you win in the rules and contemporaries you have.

However

If Bill can win 1 more Superbowl without Brady then I think that elevates himself because he would have done something the other guys didn't do.

Win across a different generation and without the HOF QB they had.

And the Donks lost draft picks for salary cap cheating to win their 2nd SB.
Not that the so-called sports journalists ever mention that. Saint Elway and all.

 

[50-yard-line]

Setting aside my typographical error, it just boggles the mind how little credit people like you give Brady. The facts are these:

Patriots go 5-13. Brady named starter. They win 6 Super Bowls in 19 years. Brady leaves. Patriots go 8-11.
Bucs win 5, 5 and 7 games in the 3 years before Brady arrives. Brady arrives. Bucs win Super Bowl.

That's some pretty serious cause and effect there. Any talk about how the Buccaneers were "stacked" is pure idiocy.

Oh eff off with that. I give Brady tons of credit. He's the best that ever played the game.

The Brady stans are the ones who take credit away from so many others, always.

Even WITH Brady, things have to go right to get there. I gave you examples earlier of things that were out of his control, that had to go the way they did.

2001 Tuck ruling, Adam's kick(s). Do they beat the Rams without Willie eating Marshall?
2003/2004 DEFENSE. Look at the picks against the Colts - does Brady get a ring without Ty Law that year?
2014 Does Brady get a ring without Butler's pick?
2018 Do they even get there if they lose the toss to KC? Do they win the SB on O or D that year? 2nd-ranked O in the league gets 3 points!

Saying that things went just right for Tampa last year isn't denigrating Brady. Things went right for them. Almost without exception, this is how things happen in the NFL. I mean, cripes, the BEST team Brady ever played for, the '71 Bruins of the NFL, lost the SB on a dropped pick, a completely blown holding call (or in the grasp call) and a freakish helmet catch - any of which going the other way means the perfect season, and ALL of which out of his control..

 

[lancerman]

Basically that Tampa was loaded when Brady showed up and a handful of other Joe Shmo quarterbacks could've have lead them to a ring.

Jameis is doing well in NO and he led them to a losing record before Brady got to Tampa

 

[Pats1971]

Oh eff off with that. I give Brady tons of credit. He's the best that ever played the game.

The Brady stans are the ones who take credit away from so many others, always.

Even WITH Brady, things have to go right to get there. I gave you examples earlier of things that were out of his control, that had to go the way they did.

2001 Tuck ruling, Adam's kick(s). Do they beat the Rams without Willie eating Marshall?
2003/2004 DEFENSE. Look at the picks against the Colts - does Brady get a ring without Ty Law that year?
2014 Does Brady get a ring without Butler's pick?
2018 Do they even get there if they lose the toss to KC? Do they win the SB on O or D that year? 2nd-ranked O in the league gets 3 points!

Saying that things went just right for Tampa last year isn't denigrating Brady. Things went right for them. Almost without exception, this is how things happen in the NFL. I mean, cripes, the BEST team Brady ever played for, the '71 Bruins of the NFL, lost the SB on a dropped pick, a completely blown holding call (or in the grasp call) and a freakish helmet catch - any of which going the other way means the perfect season, and ALL of which out of his control..

Does Brady get a ring without he Butler pIck....hmm, does Brady get a ring without throwing 4 td's? Does the pick happen if Butler does not give up a 30 yard juggling catch by the receiver to be down there? What you are doing is assuming that nothing happens if something you pick didnt happen. I never understood why people think that taking away something means something bad happens instead. If you have to sit around and cherry pick plays in a game and ignore all the others, then its really not a good argument on your side. I have said this before, but Its not only valuable, its most valuable. When people talk about games in the past, and they say, wow remember the montana catch game against the cowboys? Nobody jumps in and says, yeah but Montana does not even make that play if its wasnt for this tackle that was made in the 3rd quarter that caused this and this to happen.

 

[venecol]

If we’re talking about backups, then Foles was pointed out, but I agree it isn’t exactly the same thing because we don’t know if the Eagles get a bye or how they do for 12 weeks or so where Wentz got them there. Tobin Rote in 1957 is a similar situation, in his first year, after Bobby Layne got injured.

There may be more, but the closest to Brady that come to mind are:

• Craig Morton, who in 1977, went to Denver and led them to a conference championship. However, Denver got smacked 27-10 to Roger Stubach’s Cowboys. The irony is that Landry had chosen Morton over Staubach when both played for the Cowboys, and that decision likely cost them a Super Bowl. Denver was 9-5 the year before.
• Joe Montana, who led the Chiefs in 1993 to the 11-5 and the AFCCG. In 1992, it was a similar situation because Dave Krieg came from Seattle and led the Chiefs to 10-6 and the AFCDG.
• Arnie Herber, who retired as the NFL’s most accomplished QB in 1941 after leading (with Don Hutson) the Packers to multiple titles. In 1944, he came out of retirement at age to lead the Giants (Packers rival) to the Championship Game, but he lost to the Packers. The Giants were 6-3-1 the year before and had a QB committee for years.
• In 1945, the Giants brought in Frank Filchock, who was a good quarterback but played second fiddle to Sammy Baugh in Washington. Filchock led the Giants to the championship game but then became embroiled in a gambling/throwing games scandal just before the game. He then threw six interceptions.
• Norm Van Brocklin, an established superstar, left the Rams for the Eagles in 1958. In his third and final season with the Eagles, he won the 1960 championship. So, not first year, but a star QB goimg to another city and winning it all.
• Y.A. Tittle, an established great, was considered washed at age 34 up by San Francisco. He went to the Giants and, beyond winning MVP, led them to three straight championship games, beginning in his first season there in 1961, all losses.
• Earl Morrall, who had the strangest quarterback career ever, was a career backup and yet he won MVP in 1968 Colts when Unitas got hurt. He went to the 1972 Dolphins and led them to the Super Bowl in his first year in Miami when Griese got hurt in week 5. Then Griese returned to play the Super Bowl.
• Kurt Warner, leading the Cardinals to the Super Bowl in 2008, his fourth year in Arizona, and Peyton Manning, being carried to an undeserved championship by Denver in 2015, also come to mind.

Thanks, good work.

So, Herber (1944) & Tittle (1961) come the closest to what Brady accomplished in 2020 but neither won it all.

I think we can conclude that what TFB did in 2020 has never been done before and that no, not just any good QB could've gone into Tampa and did what he did.

I'm curious to see how far Stafford gets with a much better team (recent success-wise).

 

[venecol]

Oh eff off with that. I give Brady tons of credit. He's the best that ever played the game.

The Brady stans are the ones who take credit away from so many others, always.

Even WITH Brady, things have to go right to get there. I gave you examples earlier of things that were out of his control, that had to go the way they did.

2001 Tuck ruling, Adam's kick(s). Do they beat the Rams without Willie eating Marshall?
2003/2004 DEFENSE. Look at the picks against the Colts - does Brady get a ring without Ty Law that year?
2014 Does Brady get a ring without Butler's pick?
2018 Do they even get there if they lose the toss to KC? Do they win the SB on O or D that year? 2nd-ranked O in the league gets 3 points!

Saying that things went just right for Tampa last year isn't denigrating Brady. Things went right for them. Almost without exception, this is how things happen in the NFL. I mean, cripes, the BEST team Brady ever played for, the '71 Bruins of the NFL, lost the SB on a dropped pick, a completely blown holding call (or in the grasp call) and a freakish helmet catch - any of which going the other way means the perfect season, and ALL of which out of his control..

I agree 100%. That's what I've been saying for years. Brady is the Luckiest of all Time. The LOAT.

If you want to join my fan club of one, I'll send you an autographed poster of me.

Sincerely,

Rob Parker

 

[Pats1971]

I agree 100%. That's what I've been saying for years. Brady is the Luckiest of all Time. The LOAT.

If you want to join my fan club of one, I'll send you an autographed poster of me.

Sincerely,

Rob Parker

Its when they cannot bring themselves to give credit, they say things that cannot be proven incorrect. When people use luck, its basically saying. I give you no credit for anything, so I have to give a reason for it to make sense....ummm Luck? Luck cannot be proven or disproven, so they can basically take credit away and not have to prove anything.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Thanks, good work.

So, Herber (1944) & Tittle (1961) come the closest to what Brady accomplished in 2020 but neither won it all.

I think we can conclude that what TFB did in 2020 has never been done before and that no, not just any good QB could've gone into Tampa and did what he did.

I'm curious to see how far Stafford gets with a much better team (recent success-wise).

Yes - Herber and Tittle are most similar because they were established superstars. Tittle is closest because he was still playing at a Hall of Fame level.

A couple of other guys worth mentioning is Randall Cunningham going to the Vikings in 97 and taking them far, and then 15-1 in 98. And of course Brees. I forgot Brees took the Saints all the way to the NFCCG in his first year there in 2006.

Stafford will be interesting…I still think he’ll face plant when there’s adversity, but we’ll see. Rivers and Brady showed last year that these guys are what they are and not just some system.

 

[50-yard-line]

Its when they cannot bring themselves to give credit, they say things that cannot be proven incorrect. When people use luck, its basically saying. I give you no credit for anything, so I have to give a reason for it to make sense....ummm Luck? Luck cannot be proven or disproven, so they can basically take credit away and not have to prove anything.

You must be a farmer with all the strawmen surrounding you.

 

[DarrylS]

Another interesting point is that the alleged dust up between BB & Mangini happened 15 years ago, so all the coaches, wives and staff kept quiet up to now??? Or perhaps a guy said he heard a guy say...