Tom Brady - Goat or overrated?

I have to admit, RSM, you do make me laugh. You are certainly funny, if also nonsensical...kind of like Peter Griffin in Family Guy.

It's fascinating that you talk about other people moving the goalposts, when yours seem to be on greased ice. First you insisted Tom Brady could not be considered for the GOAT because he won all his Super Bowls for only one head coach. I assume you remembered that Terry Bradshaw won all his Super Bowls playing for Chuck Noll, because you dropped it as a disqualifier pretty quickly. Then you said Brady could not be the GOAT because he won Super Bowls early and late in his career, but not in the middle. That may have been the most irrelevant and bizarre WTF qualifier I've ever heard in the world of sports debate.

Your latest line in the sand seems to be that an athlete can't be considered the GOAT in his sport if he "allows" his team to lose championship games, so let's take a look at that.

In pro hockey, the GOAT is generally considered to be Wayne Gretzky. Those who disagree almost all name Bobby Orr. Gretzy won four Stanley Cups with the Edmonton Oilers, but his '82-'83 team, which he led to the finals as the league's MVP got swept in four games. And his Kings team he led to the finals in '92-'93 lost in five. How can he be the GOAT if he twice allowed his teams to lose in the championship games? Bobby Orr won two Stanley Cups, but the Bruins team he led to the finals in '73-'74 as the #1 seed got beat in six games. So he can't possibly be the GOAT either.

In baseball, there is no clear consensus as to the GOAT, but Babe Ruth and Willie Mays probably have more supporters than anyone else. Ruth won three World Series with the Red Sox as a pitcher, and three with the Yankees as an outfielder. But the Yankee teams he led to the World Series in '21, '22 and '26 all got beat. Those were excellent teams that never should have lost, so how can Ruth be considered the GOAT. Mays led his team to one world championship in '54, but the '51 team he led to the World Series as the NL Rookie of the Year lost, so did the '62 team on which Mays was the league MVP, and so did his '73 Mets, when Mays was a broken down old man, at 42 the same age as Brady is now. So neither Ruth nor Mays can be considered for GOAT, because a GOAT would never allow his teams to lose in the championship finals.

If Babe Ruth is not the greatest hitter of all time, the GOAT is probably Ted Williams or Barry Bonds. Williams led his team to one World Series, and thy lost. He was the AL MVP that year, but he allowed his team to lose on the game's biggest stage. He can't be the GOAT when it comes to hitters. Bonds led his team to one World Series, in 2002 against the Angels. He was the NL MVP and the Angels were a mediocre team. Bonds allowed his team to lose, so he can't be the GOAT when it comes to hitters either.

Many people with short memories or poor knowledge of the game consider Sandy Koufax the GOAT when it comes to pitchers. (That is an absurd position to begin with, as Koufax was "great" for less than four years. In the eight years before 1963, he was a forgettable 68-60 with a 3.71 ERA. He became great when baseball increased the size of the strike zone, raised the pitching mound to somewhere around ten feet, and the Dodgers moved to cavernous Dodger Stadium.) Koufax's Dodgers won the World Series in '55 and '59, when he contributed little, and in '63 and '65 when he was dominant. But they also lost in '56, and again '66, when Sandy was 27-9 with a 1.73 ERA over 323 innings, won the Cy Young Award and was second in MVP voting as a pitcher. So he can't possibly be considered the GOAT if he allowed his team to lose.

See how specious your latest argument is.

Look, the last time I checked, Tom Brady holds between 55 and 60 NFL records, including most Super Bowl MVP awards, which you seem to value at a premium. Bradshaw has two. The only record I can find that Bradshaw holds is Highest Super Bowl Winning Percentage, which he shares with 12 or 15 others, many of whom are dogs. If there's a record for Most Times Re-Entered A Game After Getting Knocked Stupid, Bradshaw would likely hold that one too, but I don't think those stats are officially kept.

Finally, you have to remember the era in which Bradshaw played. The Steelers were a very poor team from '65 to '71, with eight losing records and four last-place finishes. They were rewarded with high draft picks that they used wisely. They drafted Joe Greene and L.C. Greenwood in '69, Bradshaw and Mel Blount in '70, Jack Ham in '71, Franco Harris in '72 and Lynn Swann, Jack Lambert, John Stallworth and Mike Webster in '74. That's ten all-pro's in six years, and that '74 draft put them over the top. It was also the era before free agency, when an organization could assemble an all-star team like this one and keep it together for ten or 12 years. That's why the Steelers won four Super Bowls.

I'm convinced you don't want to accept Brady as the GOAT because you don't like him.  I don't either.  But reality is what it is -- in the debate for GOAT at quarterback, Bradshaw can't carry Brady's jock.

This is usually the point in the conversation where you come back at me with some clever Mater Dei jabs, so go ahead. I'll wait.

First, you never offer any counterpoints to the objective evidence I present, and God knows I've presented plenty of it.  Instead, you just act like you never read it and instead attack what you see as my disingenuousness (if that's a word).

Second, if the "Greatest Of All Time" does not equate to who is ranked higher or who has the more accomplished career, then what the hell does it mean?   If you think it means the quarterback who got knocked silly the most times, or who lost his hair the earliest, or who had the good fortune to play on an all-star team for his entire career, then we have completely different perceptions as to what it means, and I concede the title does indeed belong to Bradshaw.  But by virtually every other objective standard and subjective evaluation, it is Brady...much as I dislike the guy.

And third, you're the guy who went to a gay all-boys high school, so smearing someone else with the "boyfriend" label seems somewhat Freudian.

Now we can either finally let this dead horse lie, since all that remains is four hooves and some chunks of hide, or you can objectively make your case for Bradshaw.  The ball's in your court.

After observing this conversation for some months now, I have to conclude that the GOAT is....Roger Staubach. He attended the all-boys Purcell Catholic High School in Cincinnati, and then the Naval Academy.

And he loves sex with his wife.

No contest.

Why is this important?

Why not something with more gravitas?...........
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_many_angels_can_dance_on_the_head_of_a_pin%3F

I think that's a no-brainer, but until there is agreement on what better and more valuable actually mean, there is no point in answering.

We actually have had that conversation, not sure if it was here or on TOB.

My vote is for Russell, 11 titles in 13 years, including one where he is a player/coach, cinches it for me. The fact that he won those titles playing against Chamberlain (who I believe was the most dominant player ever) and usually against a Lakers team with West & Baylor shows he didn't just beat great players, he beat them over & over. His greatness came from not only his skills, but his ability to make his teammates better, resulting in championships nearly every year.

I believe MDDad's vote was for Jordan or Chamberlain.

The only reason our discussion on Brady stopped was because MDDad went down the VP route and started declaring that I had written certain things when I didn't, changing it from a fun sports conversation to more of a "score points by lying" political debate. I gave him a chance to retract those accusations, he chose not to. I'm happy to participate in any discussion on sports, but when someone wants to win so bad that they begin lying about what I said, I'm out.