Goat

[Crimpy]

Boy, the job the NFL and ESPN have done with their front-running, prisoner of the moment brainwashing re: Tom Brady is just masterful. Echo chamber propaganda at its finest.

The guy wasn't touched all night (a phantom roughing call was as close as KC got), and with the AFC championship on the line, the "GOAT" threw his third pick of the game; only to be bailed out by an idiotic neutral zone infraction.

Brady's career success reads like a shampoo bottle:

1. Calmly take all day to throw.
2. Pass to your choice of wide open receiver with 5 yards of seperation/or heave it up to Gronk.
3 Repeat.
WARNING: Do not apply pressure when using GOAT shampoo. Excessive mediocrity may result.

I pray that Bellichek does not retire when Brady does. This talk about him being nothing without Brady is beyond absurd. He's 15-5 without him, using 2nd and 3rd string QBs. Football is a team success sport more than any other. Its mind boggling how much people **** all over themselves giving Tom Brady all the credit, even on days when his stats are garbage.

 

[TemplarCane]

I’m not knocking Montana, and I liked him more when he was playing than I did Elway. But Elway was a far better athlete, and more dangerous as a QB, amd if you had to pick one or the other to win you a game, and they didn’t get to bring Jerry Rice along, I know who I would pick. Elway would translate to today’s game spot on. Montana, less so, IMO.

Possibly. Hard to argue. Montana did win two Super Bowls before Jerry Rice came on the scene. Montana also took an average KC team to the AFC title game in his last season. Without Jerry Rice.

Both are in the GOAT herd.

 

[Crimpy]

 

[OriginalGatorHater]

How you know he would have never won ? The pats were a bad franchise before Brady got there (2 super bowl appearances 0 wins in like 30 years). You’re basically asking would brady still be the GOAT if he wasn’t Brady

That is also the first Bellichek joined the team. It wasn't all Brady. Coach drafted lights out and brought in a lot of missing pieces. No, that is not what I am asking. I am asking if Brady happened to get drafted a bit later or a bit earlier would you still consider him the GOAT with out all of those SBs. It is a simple question. Had Brady went to another team and played just as well, but had no SBs would you consider him the GOAT?

 

[OriginalGatorHater]

I would say the Browns would be exponentially better with Brady than without Brady. Unless you've played some QB it is hard to truly appreciate how the offense if good because of him. He makes the running game successful by deciding when and where to run the ball with his presnap reads. Sure he needs guys around him to execute, but he is the guy who checks into a run, and where to run, or out of it and into a pass play. He regularly audibles and sets protection assignments for the offensive line and running backs. And of course he has a great feel for pressure and quick decision making which accounts for fewer negative plays, always a huge boost to offensive performance. I'd say the Browns would be in the playoffs most years he was their starter, especially considering how the Browns have had much better skill players and high draft picks (which the Browns tend to spend on finding a good QB) than the Pats have had in the 19 years.

Of course the Browns would be a lot better with Brady. I fully understand how Brady makes the offense better, but you can only do so much with a bad team. If the Browns had Brady they would not have had all of those high picks because they would frequently have winning seasons and often be the playoffs. So my question still stands. If Brady went to the browns. Had many winning seasons and playoff apperences, but no SBs would you still say he is the GOAT?.

 

[orange&green84]

Boy, the job the NFL and ESPN have done with their front-running, prisoner of the moment brainwashing re: Tom Brady is just masterful. Echo chamber propaganda at its finest.

The guy wasn't touched all night (a phantom roughing call was as close as KC got), and with the AFC championship on the line, the "GOAT" threw his third pick of the game; only to be bailed out by an idiotic neutral zone infraction.

Brady's career success reads like a shampoo bottle:

1. Calmly take all day to throw.
2. Pass to your choice of wide open receiver with 5 yards of seperation/or heave it up to Gronk.
3 Repeat.
WARNING: Do not apply pressure when using GOAT shampoo. Excessive mediocrity may result.

I pray that Bellichek does not retire when Brady does. This talk about him being nothing without Brady is beyond absurd. He's 15-5 without him, using 2nd and 3rd string QBs. Football is a team success sport more than any other. Its mind boggling how much people **** all over themselves giving Tom Brady all the credit, even on days when his stats are garbage.

Say it louder for the people in the back.

Also, coaching matters the most in football. Having a good QB is required as well, which Brady is. But Belichick is the real reason that franchise runs the way it does. I can't wait for the day when he retires.

 

[TemplarCane]

I’ll assume many posters to this thread are Colts, Fins, Jets, Bills, or Raider fans.

 

[Ethnicsands]

Possibly. Hard to argue. Montana did win two Super Bowls before Jerry Rice came on the scene. Montana also took an average KC team to the AFC title game in his last season. Without Jerry Rice.

Both are in the GOAT herd.

Definitely not knocking Montana. I ranked him goat before Elway came along. So it’s not a discussion to denigrate him.

That said, those teams were really good. Dwight Clark was a heck of a WR too. 80% of their OL was all pro in ‘85, and 3 of 4 DBs.

 

[TemplarCane]

Definitely not knocking Montana. I ranked him goat before Elway came along. So it’s not a discussion to denigrate him.

That said, those teams were really good. Dwight Clark was a heck of a WR too. 80% of their OL was all pro in ‘85, and 3 of 4 DBs.

I hear ya. Interesting note, there are only three players who started all four SBs for the 80s 49ers. Montana, Lott, and Keena Turner.

I only wish the Canes could get back to the plethora of QB talent they had in the 80s: Kelly, Kosar, Vinny, Walsh...

 

[HamburgerSV]

Of course the Browns would be a lot better with Brady. I fully understand how Brady makes the offense better, but you can only do so much with a bad team. If the Browns had Brady they would not have had all of those high picks because they would frequently have winning seasons and often be the playoffs. So my question still stands. If Brady went to the browns. Had many winning seasons and playoff apperences, but no SBs would you still say he is the GOAT?.

How do you know he wouldn’t have multiple Super Bowls? These hypotheticals are lazy....no one knows what would happen if we put manning on the patriots or Brady on the ravens or this or that. What we do know is he has 5 rings, has been to 9 Super Bowls and has beaten many teams that are more talented than the pats (like the chiefs last night) He has insane numbers and 12 game winning drives in the playoffs. And pats defenses have been mediocre for a while now and they’re still winning.

 

[Ethnicsands]

I hear ya. Interesting note, there are only three players who started all four SBs for the 80s 49ers. Montana, Lott, and Keena Turner.

I only wish the Canes could get back to the plethora of QB talent they had in the 80s: Kelly, Kosar, Vinny, Walsh...

That we can agree on.

Side note: how many common starters on all the NE SB teams?

 

[TemplarCane]

That we can agree on.

Side note: how many common starters on all the NE SB teams?

Good question. Probably one, QB Tom Brady.

 

[Katzenboyer]

Manning had Dungy for only a portion of his career. Brees had Payton for a vast majority. Brady for its entirety.

Jordan had Phil. Magic had Riley. Russell/Bird had Auerbach.

Sports "greatests" have all had great coaches. Do we discount MJ because his only six titles came when Phil Jackson was his coach - the guy with the most NBA championships in coaching history?

No. We don't. And it's why people put Lebron behind MJ - championships.

It only happens with Brady. And it's an objective falsehood. People who say otherwise are willfully blind about it.

 

[Katzenboyer]

Best resume, sure. Best player of all-time, no.

And Belichick got fired from Cleveland. That franchise is a continuous joke.

If Brady isn't the best, who is? Seriously, I want to hear argument on this, because it's crazy to me.

 

[Katzenboyer]

I’m not sure I’d rank Brady at the greatest player of all time regardless of position.

I’d rank Lawrence Taylor as best player of the modern era (post 1978). He literally changed how the game was played.

Fair enough - LT is someone you could make a case is the greatest player in football history. But 1.) Brady's right there, if not above him (and I think history will give him the title, and 2.) people on this board are saying he's not the greatest QUARTERBACK. The latter part is what people on the board here are thinking is crazy.

 

[frostycane]

That we can agree on.

Side note: how many common starters on all the NE SB teams?

Don’t ask that question. Lol the answer is 1. Say what you want about coaching, Belicheck is amazing no doubt, but you still need someone to go out and make plays. Brady makes great reads both pre and post snap.
Please again if what he does is so easy why doesn’t everyone do it? That Chiefs team is way more talented than the Pats. Would you take any of the Pats Wr over theirs? Heck even the TE is a wash. I guess the Pats have the advantage at RB. But given no history on TB12 you’d probably take Mahoney over him. What guys would you prefer defensively? Eric Berry is the best player on either D. The Pats were running two friggin UDFAs at CB. That’s good scheming. I think the hate must be a form of jealousy. I don’t know. But appreciate it for what it is.... impressive.

 

[Katzenboyer]

Boy, the job the NFL and ESPN have done with their front-running, prisoner of the moment brainwashing re: Tom Brady is just masterful. Echo chamber propaganda at its finest.

The guy wasn't touched all night (a phantom roughing call was as close as KC got), and with the AFC championship on the line, the "GOAT" threw his third pick of the game; only to be bailed out by an idiotic neutral zone infraction.

Brady's career success reads like a shampoo bottle:

1. Calmly take all day to throw.
2. Pass to your choice of wide open receiver with 5 yards of seperation/or heave it up to Gronk.
3 Repeat.
WARNING: Do not apply pressure when using GOAT shampoo. Excessive mediocrity may result.

I pray that Bellichek does not retire when Brady does. This talk about him being nothing without Brady is beyond absurd. He's 15-5 without him, using 2nd and 3rd string QBs. Football is a team success sport more than any other. Its mind boggling how much people **** all over themselves giving Tom Brady all the credit, even on days when his stats are garbage.

Conversation isn't whether Belichick deserves credit. Conversation is over whether Brady is best QB of all time.

Manning had far better offenses than Brady has ever had, save maybe the 2007-2009 teams the Pats had. His numbers are still on a practically equal plain.

Elway arguably had better weapons, as did Montana. And neither had teams that needed to deal with the salary cap.

And your argument about the "third INT" is pure TRASH. Two of those INTs hit the receivers in their hands, and the dude was dropping dimes all over the field. The guy is nails in the playoffs; always has been, and it's ultimately why he goes down as the greatest in history.

 

[orange&green84]

If Brady isn't the best, who is? Seriously, I want to hear argument on this, because it's crazy to me.

Depends on how you want to look at it. Brady's got a great resume, but he also has arguably the best HC of all-time. I personally think what Peyton Manning was able to accomplish over 4 different HC's spanning over 2 franchises is a remarkable feat. Joe Montana going 4-0 in the Super Bowl is pretty impressive, while also taking KC to an AFC title game. Brady's in the same tier, but there's no clear cut GOAT. Brady just has a better resume.

 

[orange&green84]

Conversation isn't whether Belichick deserves credit. Conversation is over whether Brady is best QB of all time.

Manning had far better offenses than Brady has ever had, save maybe the 2007-2009 teams the Pats had. His numbers are still on a practically equal plain.

Elway arguably had better weapons, as did Montana. And neither had teams that needed to deal with the salary cap.

And your argument about the "third INT" is pure TRASH. Two of those INTs hit the receivers in their hands, and the dude was dropping dimes all over the field. The guy is nails in the playoffs; always has been, and it's ultimately why he goes down as the greatest in history.

That 3rd INT that was called back from Dee Ford's penalty was out of reach for 6'6 Gronk. And spare me with the Brady has never had any weapons talk. Gronk's going to go down as one of the best TEs in the NFL and Edelman's not exactly a scrub. NE might also have the 2 best RB combo in the NFL this year sans the Rams and maybe the Saints.

 

[TemplarCane]

Fair enough - LT is someone you could make a case is the greatest player in football history. But 1.) Brady's right there, if not above him (and I think history will give him the title, and 2.) people on this board are saying he's not the greatest QUARTERBACK. The latter part is what people on the board here are thinking is crazy.

Agreed, and comparing LBs to QBs is silly.

I don’t believe there is any one GOAT at any position. There are a collection of elite players who you can say no one is better than, but there are equals. Especially in team sports, and especially in football.