RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,286
|
Post by RSM789 on Mar 18, 2020 6:54:00 GMT -8
So then you are judging Brady on what he only did with Belichick and not judging what he does without Belichick. Not really a true comparison, in fact it is quite cowardly. Brady was on winning Super Bowl teams at ages 40 & 41. If he is indeed the GOAT, wouldn't there be enough talent to at least make the Bucs into a playoff team at age 43?
Manning showed just a few years ago that an older QB, with his prime behind him, can still improve a team. Montana showed that at the end of his career with the Chiefs. Tarkenton did that with the Vikings. If Brady can't do that, how can you make him the GOAT? I'm not talking making Tampa a Super Bowl champion, just get them to make the playoffs a couple of years.
Remember, we are talking about the single greatest QB of all time, not someone who had a great career and belongs in the Hall of Fame. The one single greatest QB and you don't think a qualification should be to improve a non-dumpster fire Tampa team? Wow, sounds like he is pre-ordained despite the actual results on the field.
|
|
Luca
Master Statesman
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by Luca on Mar 18, 2020 7:07:31 GMT -8
But Bellichick is cheap and inflexible and won't pay players. This may come as a surprise, but Bill Bellichick is the head coach, and as such he doesn't pay players anything. I get the impression that with the Patriots Bellichick makes decisions that normally would be left to a general manager. I think he is the de facto general manager. He doesn't directly pay the players but the decisions go pretty much through him...................................Luca |
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,814
|
Post by MDDad on Mar 18, 2020 13:25:53 GMT -8
So then you are judging Brady on what he only did with Belichick and not judging what he does without Belichick. Not really a true comparison, in fact it is quite cowardly. Brady was on winning Super Bowl teams at ages 40 & 41. If he is indeed the GOAT, wouldn't there be enough talent to at least make the Bucs into a playoff team at age 43? OK, my dear friend, I will take one more run at trying to pound some sense into that thick Friar head of yours. First of all, it's a little tiresome for you to refer to my opinions as cowardly. If we disagree on the comparative greatness of pro QB's that is neither heroic nor cowardly. Yes, I judge Brady by what he accomplished under Belichick, because that is the only coach he has played for. You named Montana and Bradshaw as your GOAT's. But you seem to forget that Bradshaw won all of his four Super Bowls under Chuck Noll. So it seems disingenuous for you to downgrade Brady for winning six Super Bowls under Belichick, but overlooking the fact that Bradshaw won two fewer also under a single coach. And no, there isn't necessarily enough talent left in Brady to lead Tampa Bay to the playoffs, because that result depends on the quality of the team. The Bucs are 17-31 over the last three years. In short, they suck and should aspire to mediocrity first. Montana absolutely did NOT show that at end of his career with the Chiefs. Kansas City was 20-12 in the two years before he arrived, and made the playoffs both years. They were 20-12 in their two years under Montana. And they were 22-10 in the two years immediately after he left. The numbers indicate that he did NOT make them better. And taking a 20-12 team to the playoffs is a much easier task at age 37 than taking a 12-20 team to the playoffs at age 43. Furthermore, you seem to discount the quality of the talent that surrounded Brady, Bradshaw and Montana. In the four years Bradshaw won Super Bowls in Pittsburgh, he was surrounded by 34 All-Pro or Pro-Bowl players, or 8.5 per year. In Montana's four Super Bowl wins in San Francisco, he played with 26 All-Pro or Pro -owl players, 6.5 per year. In Brady's six Super Bowl wins, he played with 20 All-Pro or Pro-Bowl players, or 3.3 per year. Talent wise, the teams around Bradshaw and Montana were much better than the Patriots around Brady, yet somehow Brady won two more Super Bowls than the guys you consider your GOAT's. |
|
RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,286
|
Post by RSM789 on Mar 19, 2020 9:49:07 GMT -8
Brady also lost 2 more Super Bowls than Montana & Bradshaw. If you don't think losing Super Bowls should be a negative towards GOAT, then John Elway and Jim Kelly should be at the top of your list. Great QB's can lose Super Bowls, however we should expect the greatest to win every one he has a shot at.
Further, not a single one of Brady's Super Bowl victories were during his prime. If he is the reason for the Patriots success and not the defensive schemes that Belichick creates, then it would have been the other way around.
Don't take the cowardly comment personally, I was just making a dig in hopes of getting a wager out of you. Right now I would be willing to make the 2 part bet that next year, Tampa will not make the Super Bowl and the Patriots will once again win their division.
|
|
RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,286
|
Post by RSM789 on Mar 24, 2020 17:22:23 GMT -8
I was testing a remote yesterday and turned to ESPN. They were talking about Brady going to Tampa and Mike Greenberg made the statement that he believes Tampa with Brady has a better chance to win a Superbowl than the Patriots without Brady. Obviously I disagree.
The reason I mention it is if a guy like Greenberg will go on air with a statement like that, it gives more credence to the comparison I laid out. If Tampa wins their division in the next two years, it will show that Brady is indeed a difference maker. If they don't and the patriots win another couple of division titles the next two years, you really need to give Belichick the credit over Brady.
I wouldn't mind both teams going 0-16.
|
|
Bick
Administrator 
Posts: 6,900
|
Post by Bick on Mar 28, 2020 16:47:29 GMT -8
Tampa Bay doesn't have the defense to win that division. They should be prolific offensively if they can figure out how to block. Arguably have the best offensive weapons in the division now that they have a Q that won't give it away twice a game. Would be even better if they land Cooks who would play the Edelman role, only faster. Outside guys might be best tandem in the league.
|
|
RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,286
|
Post by RSM789 on Mar 29, 2020 22:50:36 GMT -8
Wasn't Cooks with New England the year they lost to Philly in the Super Bowl? I don't think they used Cooks in that role, i believe he was still the deep threat.
I believe Tampa won't win that division because of the Saints, but if Brady is all that many believe he is, they should still make the playoffs. They have an easier schedule this year based on last years 3rd year finish in the division. The NFC East is a joke and the NFC North showed themselves to be pretenders, so a playoff spot is wide open for the taking.
|
|
Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,900
|
Post by Bick on Mar 30, 2020 6:44:55 GMT -8
They'd have to get to 10-11 wins to get past the North & West teams, and you won't get there unless you fix your D and give up 100 less points.
Brady won't be giving it away 2x / game, so there's about 50 pts right there.
With the Rams running bunch most of the time, I thought Cooks was mostly used on the inside. Not even sure any more.
|
|
RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,286
|
Post by RSM789 on Mar 30, 2020 13:46:28 GMT -8
For the Rams, Robert Woods and Cooper Kupp caught most of the slants & interior passes. Cooks was used to stretch the defense to allow those interior passes.
|
|
Luca
Master Statesman
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by Luca on Mar 31, 2020 9:09:23 GMT -8
Brady also lost 2 more Super Bowls than Montana & Bradshaw. If you don't think losing Super Bowls should be a negative towards GOAT, then John Elway and Jim Kelly should be at the top of your list. Great QB's can lose Super Bowls, however we should expect the greatest to win every one he has a shot at. I think this sentence summarizes and explains the differences in opinions on this topic. It's evident that people define the GOAT differently. If your definition includes somebody who wins every Super Bowl he has a shot at, then you are going to have a different candidate than somebody who summarizes career statistics, overall accomplishment given the talent around him, and subjective criteria like accuracy, arm strength, leadership, toughness, etc. For them, team accomplishments like championships count somewhat, but even the GOAT can only do so much if surrounded by mediocrity. In the final analysis, it depends on how you choose to define the term. Actually, John Elway is pretty near the top of my list, for what it's worth. By the way, Bick, I haven't followed Tampa Bay but I'd be surprised if Brady would sign up with a team that doesn't have substantial past blocking ability. You'd think you would be a prime consideration for him at his age............Luca |
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,814
|
Post by MDDad on Mar 31, 2020 9:34:29 GMT -8
Brady also lost 2 more Super Bowls than Montana & Bradshaw. If you don't think losing Super Bowls should be a negative towards GOAT, then John Elway and Jim Kelly should be at the top of your list. Great QB's can lose Super Bowls, however we should expect the greatest to win every one he has a shot at. It's evident that people define the GOAT differently. If your definition includes somebody who wins every Super Bowl he has a shot at, No professional athlete in any sport has ever one every championship he "has a shot at". Terry Bradshaw "had a shot" at 14 Super Bowls and he won four, with a much better supporting cast than Tom Brady. Joe Montana "had a shot" at 13, and he also won four. Winning a Super Bowl is the greatest achievement in pro football. But GETTING to the Super Bowl is the second greatest achievement, and should be recognized as such. I think the bottom line is that if you google some version of "greatest quarterbacks in NFL history", you get as many lists as you want to read. Virtually ever one has Tom Brady in the top three. Very, very few have Terry Bradshaw in the top ten. |
|
SK80
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 7,376
|
Post by SK80 on Mar 31, 2020 10:45:16 GMT -8
The problem with analyzing most sport "GOATS" is did they, or those included in the conversation ever have at each other? You MJ in the NBA as GOAT, will or did LBJ ever have a one on one with him..? Nope. What I'm saying is these debates go on and on and over and over especiacillay those distanced by eras or generations. Think Smoking Joe Frazier could be in the conversation had he not actually lost 2 of 3 to the GOAT Ali..., I think Larry Holmes was one of the most dominant boxers I ever saw yet he won't be in the convo because he beat up a punch drunk GOAT.
I will say this, there is still a consensus, and with that when debating GOAT QB ALL TIMME, it's Brady by most measures. The RSM FACTOR just isn't that heavy to tilt that scale!
|
|
RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,286
|
Post by RSM789 on Mar 31, 2020 14:01:35 GMT -8
. I'd be surprised if Brady would sign up with a team that doesn't have substantial past blocking ability. You'd think you would be a prime consideration for him at his age............Luca If that wasn't just a spelling error, then it is a great Freudian slip... |
|
RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,286
|
Post by RSM789 on Mar 31, 2020 14:06:49 GMT -8
...GOAT QB ALL TIMME, it's Brady by most measures. The RSM FACTOR just isn't that heavy to tilt that scale! So if Brady is the GOAT, shouldn't he be able to lead Tampa to a couple of playoff berths the next two years? If I am going to label someone as the single greatest QB in the history of the game, he doesn't get to slack off for a few years and still hold the belt. Would you still consider Brady to be GOAT if Tampa goes 5-11 next year and The Patriots end up back in the Super Bowl without him? |
|
RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,286
|
Post by RSM789 on Mar 31, 2020 14:19:19 GMT -8
No professional athlete in any sport has ever one every championship he "has a shot at". Terry Bradshaw "had a shot" at 14 Super Bowls and he won four, with a much better supporting cast than Tom Brady. Joe Montana "had a shot" at 13, and he also won four. Winning a Super Bowl is the greatest achievement in pro football. But GETTING to the Super Bowl is the second greatest achievement, and should be recognized as such. So if we take percentages, Montana won 4 Super Bowls in 13 years (31%) & Bradshaw won 4 in 14 (29%). Assuming Brady doesn't win a Super Bowl in the next two years, his percentage is lower (27%) than those two. Note, if Brady does win a Super Bowl with Tampa, I would change my stance in regards to him being GOAT. Doing what Peyton Manning did, winning it with different teams & different coaches, says alot about a player as far as being GOAT. I agree losing Super Bowls is a great accomplishment for most players, but if we are to choose the greatest, by definition he has to do better than most or all. Following your line of thought, where do you place the following three QB's as far as being great (no need for a number, just a couple of other QB's you would put them in the same category as); 1) Fran Tarkenton; 2) Dan Marino; 3) Jim Kelly. |
|
