Goat

[OrangeBowlMagic]

Tell you what Orangebowlmagic, back up what you say with something other than luck. I mean seriously, look at the stats. Go deep on those stats, like Yards per completion, Yards per pass attempt, td/int ratio. 4th quarter comebacks, (and dont say he plays like crap for 3 quarters etc, No one said that about Montana when he was the comeback kid) Check out Peyton Mannings stat line on his superbowl 50 win... I have a hard time believing you are going to find anything. Then look at career numbers as well and use those same metrics against guys like Moon, Montana, Young, Manning,Farve ,Rodgers etc.
I mean people love to blow Brees, you realize he has had like 4-5 7 win seasons in which he was the starter for the whole season. Look at Rodgers this year, he was terrible. But no your right Brady is just lucky. He's not actually good.

Never said he wasn't good. Said he's not the GOAT. Huge difference.

 

[Insanecane]

Never said he wasn't good. Said he's not the GOAT. Huge difference.

 

[Katzenboyer]

He's not the best QB to ever play.

Yes he is. You don't have his success in the Super Bowl era, including playoffs, by getting "lucky."

Does Belichick also deserve credit for that success? Of course! But again, all the greats -- across all sports -- had legendary coaches behind them. MJ had Phil Jackson. Russell had Auerbach. Magic had Riley. Montana had Walsh.

Belichick's status as probably the best ever does not impact Brady's status as the best ever. On top of Super Bowl wins, the stats back it up - the guy probably finishes Top 3 all time in passing yards, completions, TDs, percentage, you name it. His stats, plus his legendary Super Bowl record, cements that fact that he's the best to ever play the game.

 

[CaneOil]

Marino had no touch. I don't even like the Dolphins (or really the NFL in general), but that's an immediate ignore. I'll never take anything you say seriously no matter what, so no reason to see what you post. Good lord, what a dumbass thing to say LMAO.

Not close he didn't compared to Brady. He was a long ball guy. Up in NE we could always depend on Marino to ***** the game up for the Dolphins.

 

[Hegemon]

Peyton manning has 5 mvps. So what is he?

Not as butthurt as you.

 

[JTKoval]

Brady is goat game qb. Not top combine guy. I prefer winning.

 

[orange&green84]

So then who's the greatest of all time? Because if you look at the other two commonly mentioned, they also played for generational organizations.

Manning? Played for a HOF coach with Dungy, and a HOF front office guy in Polian.

How about Montana? Bill Walsh -- HOFer, and considered one of the all-time great football coaches. Eddie Debartolo is one of the all-time great owners, and another HOFer. Oh, and the 49ers never had to worry about a salary cap.

Why is this "organizational" argument only applicable to Brady? Here's a hint - because you don't like the guy, and it's blinded you to the fact that he is hands down the best QB that's ever lived. Open and shut case; the only people arguing against it are the ones that hate the Pats. Which is fine - I hate Alabama; but that doesn't take away from Saban's greatness.

Manning only played with Dungy for a portion of his career. He also dragged John Fox, Gary Zubiak, and Jim Caldwell to Super Bowl trips; won with Zubiak. There is no clear definition of GOAT with QBs, since each has their own argument. Last night was an argument as to why Belichick is the GOAT as a head coach, not Brady. Brady got to go against the Chiefs who had the 24th ranked total defense in the league this year, and then got to face the Rams vaunted defense which is ranked 20th.

Brady's a Mount Rushmore QB, but he's not the GOAT.

 

[Katzenboyer]

Also, the "Brady-is-a-dink-and-dunk QB" take is one of the worst I've seen in awhile. Especially for the people who put Joe Montana ahead of him as the GOAT.

Montana's 49er teams invented the West Coast offense. There was not better example of a guy who lived on dink and dunk than #16. Why isn't that held against him?

 

[Katzenboyer]

There is no clear definition of GOAT with QBs.

Yes there is. The clear definition is "does the QB you are considering as the GOAT have stats and wins that are remotely comparable to Tom Brady? No? Then your guy isn't the GOAT."

 

[CaneOil]

Agree 100% with all of this. Completely. I'm not saying Brady deserves no credit...of course he deserves a ton of praise. He's great. You couldn't plug ANY QB in there and get these results...not even close. But you could plug SOME in and get as good or, IMO, even better results. To be the GOAT, that can't happen. Take MJ off the Bulls in the 90s and put ANY player in the entire league in his place, you don't get his production and you don't go 6/6 in the finals. THAT is a GOAT. Tom Brady is a great player. He's not the best QB to ever play.

Jordan 7 years in the 80's and he doesn't win one. Much better and tougher players and a tougher game. We had fun with Jordan at the garden, poor guy couldn't win **** against Boston. The great players retired or got old Jordan got to win. Jordan is the GOAT of the 90's. They had to change the game it was too tough for the next generation. Brady won with some weaker teams, Jordan did not.

 

[orange&green84]

Yes there is. The clear definition is "does the QB you are considering as the GOAT have stats and wins that are remotely comparable to Tom Brady? No? Then your guy isn't the GOAT."

Wins is more coaching than anything. Manning has had high success regardless of the HC. Brady's had Belichick. Belichick has shut down high scoring offenses multiple times. Brady's a great QB, but coaches should be getting measured by wins and losses, not QBs. Marino never won a SB, yet Joe Flacco has. Am I to believe that Flacco is a better QB than Marino? How about Eli Manning? He's 2-0 against Brady in the SB? Is he better than Brady (he isn't)? You see how asinine it is to focus solely on the number of SB rings a QB has?

Edit: You also had a lot of people judging Malik from the 2017 season because of our W/L record. We saw how that worked out.

 

[CaneOil]

Brady is goat game qb. Not top combine guy. I prefer winning.

Funny you bring that up. Did you see his combine? It was a hoot. Worst looking football prospect I've ever seen.

 

[OrangeBowlMagic]

So right tho

 

[OrangeBowlMagic]

Yes he is. You don't have his success in the Super Bowl era, including playoffs, by getting "lucky."

Does Belichick also deserve credit for that success? Of course! But again, all the greats -- across all sports -- had legendary coaches behind them. MJ had Phil Jackson. Russell had Auerbach. Magic had Riley. Montana had Walsh.

Belichick's status as probably the best ever does not impact Brady's status as the best ever. On top of Super Bowl wins, the stats back it up - the guy probably finishes Top 3 all time in passing yards, completions, TDs, percentage, you name it. His stats, plus his legendary Super Bowl record, cements that fact that he's the best to ever play the game.

Oh no? What was the tuck rule? What was Dee Ford? What was Robert Alford? What was Pete Carroll the dumbass? Could EASILY make an argument that Brady should be maybe 2-6 in Super Bowls. His performances could've easily dictated that record. Would he be your GOAT then?

Now, that didn't happen. And he deserves credit for getting the wins, which he gets. But the amount he gets is ridiculous for what he actually does. The numbers speak for themselves. Great player. Even better system. Even better luck. You can't have a worse postseason passer rating than Mark Sanchez and say you're the GOAT. Sorry.

 

[orange&green84]

Oh no? What was the tuck rule? What was Dee Ford? What was Robert Alford? What was Pete Carroll the dumbass? Could EASILY make an argument that Brady should be maybe 2-6 in Super Bowls. His performances could've easily dictated that record. Would he be your GOAT then?

Now, that didn't happen. And he deserves credit for getting the wins, which he gets. But the amount he gets is ridiculous for what he actually does. The numbers speak for themselves. Great player. Even better system. Even better luck. You can't have a worse postseason passer rating than Mark Sanchez and say you're the GOAT. Sorry.

I look at the work the Pats did this year - they blew out the Chargers at home (at one point the score was 35-7). Then the defense basically shut down the top two ranked offenses in the league this year. Brady's stats were mediocre this game. If there's a GOAT, it's Belichick.

Brady's also working behind arguably the best OL in the league this year. In all 3 games of the playoffs, he was sacked once.

 

[swagsick]

Wow.

Again.

Trash

 

[OrangeBowlMagic]

Also, the "Brady-is-a-dink-and-dunk QB" take is one of the worst I've seen in awhile. Especially for the people who put Joe Montana ahead of him as the GOAT.

Montana's 49er teams invented the West Coast offense. There was not better example of a guy who lived on dink and dunk than #16. Why isn't that held against him?

Montana isn't even close either. Neither Montana nor Brady could hold a candle to Aaron Rodgers. He's lightyears better. Just different situations. Put Rodgers in New England in 2000 and he's got 10 rings and they're blowouts. Tom Brady was sacked once in 3 games this postseason and his OL knocked people around to the tune of 160 YPG rushing. Oh, and the defense is led by the best coach ever. Your GOAT had the ball in his hands against the worst defense in the league 2 weeks ago with the game on the line and threw a pick. But Dee Ford lined up offsides. Oops. The GOAT gets a do-over, and of course he capitalizes, cause he's a great player. But he ain't the GOAT.

 

[monkey1371]

I don't hate Brady at all. Sure, it's weird he kisses his kids for extended periods on the mouth, but I'm sure some people enjoy that sort of thing. Maybe you're in that camp too, I'm not sure. But I watch Tom Brady play the position and I watch others and what I see is Tom Brady is incredibly clutch, and incredibly lucky. He's not overly talented. He's great, but he's nowhere near the player Aaron Rodgers is. He's nowhere near the player Dan Marino was, but that was a different era and that's hard to translate. He's not as good as Drew Brees. Put any of these players on the Pats in 2000 with everything around the same and they'd all have going on 10 rings.

Every player needs a few lucky bounces to go his way, but Brady's luck has been absolutely unparalleled. And don't believe me, check the article below that was just written today, when I've been saying this for years. Tuck Rule, Marshawn Lynch, 28-3 and a dropped Robert Alford INT that hit him in the chest, Dee Ford, playing Jared ******* Goff in a Super Bowl and being AWFUL for 50 minutes of it and still winning. His luck is unmatched. Great player, no doubt. And he's been a clutch player on several occasions. Not the GOAT.

The Brady Luck

Luck is BS argument when it happens over 17 seasons......It is conveniently used one way to justify a position, while ignoring all contradictory "unlucky" things that have happened.

For example......Articles like this all always somehow just ignore that insane, Kearse freak catch bouncing off his leg that puts Seattle in position for Brady to get lucky by them not running it with Lynch in 2014.

• Or what about Manning escape and Tyree catch that cost him a Superbowl for example.
• Or the Miracle in Miami play that make NE have to play the AFC Championship game in KC instead of home this year (Which they overcame).

Point is you only want to remember the times "Luck" benefited the Patriots/Brady.....I am sure if you go over the 17 years of their/his dominance you will find equally amount of "unlucky breaks" they got that would basically even them out.

 

[OrangeBowlMagic]

I look at the work the Pats did this year - they blew out the Chargers at home (at one point the score was 35-7). Then the defense basically shut down the top two ranked offenses in the league this year. Brady's stats were mediocre this game. If there's a GOAT, it's Belichick.

Brady's also working behind arguably the best OL in the league this year. In all 3 games of the playoffs, he was sacked once.

7 first half points in 3 games. I said that above. That's what the Pats gave up this year in the playoffs. 7 points in 3 games. And a Brady led offense was losing or tied in the 4th quarter in 2 of those games, when Belichick DOMINATED the opposing offense, at least for a half. And last night, for an entire game.

 

[OrangeBowlMagic]

Luck is BS argument when it happens over 17 seasons......It is conveniently used one way to justify a position, while ignoring all contradictory "unlucky" things that have happened.

For example......Articles like this all always somehow just ignore that insane, Kearse freak catch bouncing off his leg that puts Seattle in position for Brady to get lucky by them not running it with Lynch in 2014.

• Or what about Manning escape and Tyree catch that cost him a Superbowl for example.
• Or the Miracle in Miami play that make NE have to play the AFC Championship game in KC instead of home this year (Which they overcame).

Point is you only want to remember the times "Luck" benefited the Patriots/Brady.....I am sure if you go over the 17 years of their/his dominance you will find equally amount of "unlucky breaks" they got that would basically even them out.

That play was first down on the plus 40 with over a minute left and 2 TOs. That wasn't a play that won/lost a game, which was what the INT he threw against KC was. Or the fumble he lost against Oakland was. Or the INT he threw to Robert Alford was.