BoxingRobes
Junior
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2013
- Messages
- 10,844
He's the GOAT. Anyone saying otherwise...log off and never return.
I don't think that word means what you think it means.
Unfortunately, wasn't around to watch those fellas. Coming up my dad always told me that he thought Magic and Bird(in that order) were the s.
I think Bron would have done fine back then. He's a freight train and an elite passer, you couldn't just focus your whole D on him.
How many of those guys have 6 rings?Brady's an excellent clutch QB. You guys make it sound like he's the only one that does it. Manning has plenty of performances where he's done the same thing. As has Rodgers.
Let's not forget that Brady got bailed out by Dee Ford being lined up just inches off-sides in which he had no impact on the play. Yet Brady threw an interception. Then there's the Seahawks foolishly outsmarting themselves by not running Lynch on the 1-yard line. Or let's talk about the Falcons who could've easily made their game a 2-score game (similar to the Pats last night) if they just ran the ball and kicked a FG. Brady's a great QB and this is in no way to knock him as a QB. Having said that, when people start talking about Brady as the GOAT, you force the rational group to start talking about context. Brady's a great QB. He's also probably the luckiest QB to ever play in the NFL as well.
That Patriots team had Lawyer Milloy, Richard Seymour, Teddy Bruschi, Willie McGinest and Ty Law. They underachieved during the regular season, but that team was loaded on defense.
He would do fine but would he have beaten LA, Boston or Detroit? Not with any team he's been on so far. I could imagine him playing Detroit, they absolutely beat up players. When BB was king.
Brady's an excellent clutch QB. You guys make it sound like he's the only one that does it. Manning has plenty of performances where he's done the same thing. As has Rodgers.
Let's not forget that Brady got bailed out by Dee Ford being lined up just inches off-sides in which he had no impact on the play. Yet Brady threw an interception. Then there's the Seahawks foolishly outsmarting themselves by not running Lynch on the 1-yard line. Or let's talk about the Falcons who could've easily made their game a 2-score game (similar to the Pats last night) if they just ran the ball and kicked a FG. Brady's a great QB and this is in no way to knock him as a QB. Having said that, when people start talking about Brady as the GOAT, you force the rational group to start talking about context. Brady's a great QB. He's also probably the luckiest QB to ever play in the NFL as well.
Explain this then.....Since you brought up winning 11 games with Matt Cassell.
Patriots scored 589 points in 2007......Brady got hurt and they scored 410 points the following year with Casell.
Entire same offense was back...Welker & Moss playing at Pro Bowl levels, entire offensive line....
2007 Brady 4806 Yards 50 TD 8 Int 68.9 Comp% 117.2 Rating 88.5 QBR 8.3 Yrds/attempt 21 Sacks 589 Points Scored
2008 Cassell 3693 Yards 21 TD 11 Int 63.4 Comp% 89.4 Rating 65.3 QBR 7.2 Yrds/attempt 47 Sacks 410 Points Scored
21 to 47 sacks....Did the OLine forget how to block?
50 to 21 TD's.....Did WR/TE forget how to catch TD's?
How does "coaching" explain that HUGE Dropoff in production?
I love how there is always some convoluted reason for Brady's success and never is own talent. And there is that luck thing again. Brady should play the lottery with all that luck...17 years of lottery winnings. You passed rational thought and context a few pages back.
Context would actually tell you Brady is the GOAT. Context and rational thought would tell you when someone is offside then they are offside and it is not Brady being lucky. Context would tell you that when Brady drives down to take the lead once again, and the D lets the Seattle drive down for a winning TD it is not Brady being lucky when the D makes a great play.
You some like that nut job on Fox sports Parker or whatever his name is....
How many of those guys have 6 rings?
It's hard to compare teams across eras but I think 2016 Cavs and the Heat team that beat the Thunder could have competed with them.
MJ couldn't beat them either until they was all old. Those were some great teams.
When I look at bb , I take a lot into consideration. You can't just say so and so has X amount of rings so he's the best. Who did they beat, who was his teammates, what era did he play in, who was his coach. All that plays into the rings. I look more at the individuals abilities first then everything else.
None because they didn't have Brady. 2002 he had his first SB with a 17th ranked defense. His offense wasn't loaded either.How many of those guys have a HC with 6 rings?
Brady threw a pick when Dee Ford didn't even have anything to do with the play. That was the point of that post. That pick would've ended the Pats' season.
It still does not make Brady lucky. He was offside. The paly does not count. That's the way penalties work.
Are we going to go back in every game and look at every play that would have counted if not for a penalty. It is a stupid line of thinking to say a penalty makes the QB lucky. The Pats had penalties vs KC...how come they were not lucky and did not win the game?
We will also ignore the fact that the ball went through Gronk's hands as well....because that is Brady luck as well.
None because they didn't have Brady. 2002 he had his first SB with a 17th ranked defense. His offense wasn't loaded either.
Brady overthrew a 6'6 Gronk.
And yes, Brady's been incredibly lucky.
It means literally exactly what I think it means, that's why I used it. Thanks, though.