Brady sucks now

[ralaw]

.

Who said he played a horrible game? The first game vs the Giants he was average. Last game he was above average. Brady set a pretty high bar for himself. For me, a player of Brady's calibur is expected to do better than 0 points in the last 4 possessions of a one score game. 4th quarter INTs are unacceptable whn you are talking about a player like Brady.

Let's call it what it is. He was good in a game where he had to be great. If that doesn't change his legacy for you, than not sure what else I can say.



Great, another "What if scenario". Sometimes NFL QB's are judged on things that are not within their control. Unfair, but its a buy product of playing the most important position on the field. My point is, if Tom Brady played the game that matched the bar he set for himself, he'd have 5 SBs and would be the best QB of all time.

Your opinion of the "bar he set for himself" is skewed, because he won 3 SB's. If Vinatieri misses those kicks Brady loses those SB's and the "bar he set for himself" is much lower even though his performances are the same.

 

[Houston]

I wanted Peyton to win more superbowls so it'd shut up the "Brady G.O.A.T" talk, but instead it looks like his little brother is the one doing it

:lol:

 

[shag773]

Ok thanks.

That's the point.

If we know this, let's be able to have an intelligent discussion on it rather than regurgitating what NFL Flilms and ESPN shoves down our throats. That's been Warner's point the entire time.

It has nothing to do with NFL Films or ESPN, and everythng to do with what I saw with my own two eyes. If it's unfair for me to expect great performances in two winnable Super Bowls from a player of Brady's calibur, than I guess I'm not capable of having an intelligent discussion.

 

[FirstTimer]

It has nothing to do with NFL Films or ESPN, and everythng to do with what I saw with my own two eyes. If it's unfair for me to expect great performances in two winnable Super Bowls from a player of Brady's calibur, than I guess I'm not capable of having an intelligent discussion.

In on he lead a go ahead TD drive that required a miracle play and a dropped INT to be outdone. In the other he set a Super Bowls completition record while coming back from a defecit and extending a lead, watched his defense give up another late scoring drive and then still ended up having his team in position for a wing and a paryer at the endzone to end the game despite getting the ball back with only a minute left and down 4.

Come on.

What you're not getting is the Super Bowls were winnablebecause of Tom Brady having his team in the lead with mere minutes left to play in each as a result of him putting up points.

 

[Len B]

Pand, I get that you're upset that Peyton is labeled a choker and Tom was glorified for never choking at the time, but what's your point?

Anyone with a brain knows Peyton and Tom are top 5 all-time, so I'm not sure why you are catering to the espn first take crowd by making an awful pot.kettle.black thread. People in nature are retarded, so don't listen to them.

 

[shag773]

Your opinion of the "bar he set for himself" is skewed, because he won 3 SB's. If Vinatieri misses those kicks Brady loses those SB's and the "bar he set for himself" is much lower even though his performances are the same.

Not to nitpick, but only 2 of his 3 SB wins came down to a kick, and all of them were kicked in a tie ball game, which means it wasn't a given those were losses.

So what are you saying? Brady wasn't as good as we thought he was after he won his first 3 SB wins, and it just caught up with him after losing the last two?

So where does that put him historically?

 

[FirstTimer]

Not to nitpick, but only 2 of his 3 SB wins came down to a kick, and all of them were kicked in a tie ball game, which means it wasn't a given those were losses.

So what are you saying? Brady wasn't as good as we thought he was after he won his first 3 SB wins, and it just caught up with him after losing the last two?

So where does that put him historically?

How good did you think he was?

I always thought Peyton Manning was easily better.

 

[Deviant]

I'm looking back at Brady's games from his first two Super Bowl seasons and... he really wasn't even that great. If anyone should be considered "clutch" during those times, it's Adam Vinatieri. Honestly, Tom Brady ranged from OK to good in the games he played during that stretch and he managed the games.

I get Brady has to put the Patriots in position for this to happen, but this is essentially every playoff game during that stretch:

The "Tuck Rule" Game (NE 16 - OAK 13): This game pretty much says enough to me and hammers that point that one play pretty much changes the story. If that's called a fumble, The Raiders advance. The story would be about Gruden, Gannon, and that Raider defense. Instead, it's called an incomplete pass. Vinatieri gets set up to send it to overtime. Patriots win the coin toss, Brady finds a way to go 8-for-8, including converting a 4th down, Vinatieri send them to the AFC Championship game.

Bledsoe's Back (NE 24 - PIT 17): Brady gets injured and Bledsoe finishes the game. Patriots scored on special teams twice (1 KR TD, 1 blocked FG return) and with a Bledsoe score. Kordell Stewart looked bad and the offense couldn't get it together.

Super Bowl 36 (NE 20 - STL 17): This is where the "Brady is clutch" in the 4th quarter really begins. In my opinion, I give a ton more credit to Kurt Warner in this game because the Rams looked bad in the first three quarters and Warner threw a pick six to Ty Law earlier in the game. But, he came roaring back in the 4th and made up the two scores to eventually get the game tied up and it looked like he brought them into overtime for a chance to win.

I give Brady credit. He did have to drive the ball to put them in position to win with Vinatieri with no timeouts an not turn the ball over. For him to do that, especially when he was pretty much non-existent all game (he was under 100 yards passing until that drive), is great. But, that's all he has to do. The game is tied. He doesn't have to force throws or win the game by scoring a touchdown. He just has to get them in field goal range and not turn the ball over. From that point on, it's all Vinatieri. He makes it, they win. He misses... well, they're only in overtime. Vinatieri makes it. Pats win. Brady's legend begins.

This isn't like Eli's situation in his first Super Bowl where he HAS to score on that final drive or else. This isn't like Eli's second Super Bowl where he can either score and go up by 4 to force Brady to score or wind the clock a little more and settle for a field goal (but if the kicker misses, the Giants lose). This isn't like Flacco's situation in the AFC Championship game where you can score and end it (Lee Evans drops the TD pass) or he could settle with great field goal range, but if the kicker misses it, the Ravens lose. Cundiff shanks it. Ravens lose.

In each of those situations, the quarterback HAS TO WIN or the game is over. In this situation, all Brady has to do is NOT LOSE and either outcome produces a win/winning situation. Brady doesn't have to score a touchdown. He doesn't have to win the game. He just has to put them in a winning situation.

Fuck Drew Bennett - AFC Divisional 2003 (NE 17 - TEN 14): I kinda' remember this game because I wanted to see Steve McNair win it all this year and this goes back to my point of Tom Brady not having to win the game. The Patriots have a fairly quiet game offensively and I think they missed a field goal in the second. Right after that, I think Ty Law intercepted a pass and the Patriots scored on offense. The Titans had a field goal of theirs blocked and the game was pretty back and forth and loopy for the first half and the score was 14-14 at some point in the third quarter.

In the middle of the fourth, the Patriots got great field position inside Titans' territory from a punt return and the Patriots didn't really move the ball further so they settled for an Adam Vinatieri field goal. 17-14 Pats.

Steve McNair starts driving the Titans down the field and they got inside the 30 and I was pretty sure they were going to score and end the game. Then they had two consecutive penalties called against them. One of them I'm sure was intentional grounding. The other was probably holding. They were back at midfield. McNair got a completion that brought them back into 40 and it was fourth down. He got pressured because Rodney Harrison came absolutely free and McNair threw the ball like a hanging punt. Drew Bennett had position to make the catch and all he had to do was just catch it. Just secure it. No one else touched the ball but him and it bounced off his hands and the defenders were able to come in time for him to not juggle it in his hands. Brady's legend continues.

Peyton Shits The Bed - AFC Championship 2003 (NE 24 - IND 14): Yeah, I think we all know this game. Not much to say. Title says it all.

Super Bowl 38 (NE 32 - CAR 29) - This was a great Super Bowl and this is actually a performance I thought Brady was great in. Even though the situation at the end was similar to Super Bowl 36, I give Brady much more credit here because he had to trade scores back and forth with Delhomme. Brady was fantastic and he really did more than his part to be in a position to be in a position to win with the score 29-29. Even though Vinatieri scored the winning points, Brady gets 100% praise for this one in my books.

I can analyze the third season, but I don't have the effort for it right now. But, this is what W2B and I are talking about. One play/series can determine an outcome, but we overlook scenarios and create "legends" because of a general statistic. We assume Brady is just a winner because his postseason record was once 10-0 and because he's a 3-Time Super Bowl champion. So, we create this idea that Tom Brady is a god and that when ever he's on the field, the Patriots just can't lose.

The Patriots were unreasonably favored in this past Super Bowl because of it when the Giants had better match-ups. People think "Oh, well it's Tom Brady, there's just no way he'll lose again in the Super Bowl." "He's too determined." "You can't beat Brady twice." What kind of thinking is that?

 

[shag773]

In on he lead a go ahead TD drive that required a miracle play and a dropped INT to be outdone. In the other he set a Super Bowls completition record while coming back from a defecit and extending a lead, watched his defense give up another late scoring drive and then still ended up having his team in position for a wing and a paryer at the endzone to end the game despite getting the ball back with only a minute left and down 4.

Come on.

What you're not getting is the Super Bowls were winnablebecause of Tom Brady having his team in the lead with mere minutes left to play in each as a result of him putting up points.

His offense put up 14 then 17 points in the last two SBs. That's putting up points?

So asking him to lead one TD scoring drive in the fourth quarter that thwarts the chances of any comeback is too much to ask? Asking him not to throw a terrible INT on 1st and 10 with great field position in the 4th quarter is too much to ask?

Come on...

 

[shag773]

How good did you think he was?

I always thought Peyton Manning was easily better.

Again, I freely admit to looking at rings and being impressed. But it was hard to ignore Manning's regular season numbers, and just the awesome spectacle of watching him play QB. It took a while, but I was eventually on board with Manning over Brady..

 

[bucky]

Your opinion of the "bar he set for himself" is skewed, because he won 3 SB's. If Vinatieri misses those kicks Brady loses those SB's and the "bar he set for himself" is much lower even though his performances are the same.

And then nobody thinks of him as GOAT. You saying that Brady wasn't "GOAT" good back when they were winning SB's. You saying Brady was just good and the kicker and defense won those SB's? Then Brady was never really in the GOAT conversation.

I'm with shag773. NE's playoffs since the SB wins have affected Brady's legacy. Not enough to take him completely out of the GOAT convo, or keep him from being a first ballot HOF'er. But it does effect his GOAT legacy.

Brett Favre, after his first two SB seasons (one win), threw horrible late game ints in the playoffs. That does affect Brett's GOAT standing. I don't have Brett anywhere near GOAT because of it.

Brady's playoff performances, since the SB wins, to me, have an affect on his GOAT legacy. That's not even close to saying he's not one of the best ever. He is one of the best ever.

 

[FirstTimer]

His offense put up 14 then 17 points in the last two SBs. That's putting up points?

Yes. That's "putting up points". I didn't say he set Super Bowl scoring records. I said his offense scored enough points to win games through 58 minutes of football before his defense gave the lead up.

I don't down grade Brady because he lsot Super Bowls watching his defense give up leads on the sideline after either A. Having his team in front the entire second half or B. Just engineering a go ahead TD drive.

That's football retarded.

So asking him to lead one TD scoring drive in the fourth quarter that thwarts the chances of any comeback is too much to ask?

That's hilarious you even bring that up because in 2007 he did just that.........and took the lead...then the Pats defense lost it.

Asking him not to throw a terrible INT on 1st and 10 with great field position in the 4th quarter is too much to ask?

Come on...

I never said he was perfect or some unfalliable fourth quarter option. Quit being thick headed. The guy played well enough to have his team ahead in the Super Bowl with minutes to go in the 4th quarter, and the defense gave up TD drives.

I think it's stupid we hold this against Brady yet you could easily turn around to a guy like Joe Cool who playing in a Super Bowl at home didn't play well enough to have his team not need him to lead a long TD drive and needed a dropped INT to win the game in "clutch" fashion.

This is getting stupid. Brady played well enough for his team to win the game the last time he set foot on the field with any real shot at winning the game. That's what I look at. Not "ZOMG! He only put up x amount of points in the Super Bowl!"

 

[bucky]

Yes. That's "putting up points". I didn't say he set Super Bowl scoring records. I said his offense scored enough points to win games through 58 minutes of football before his defense gave the lead up.

Really? 14 points and that's enough? Scoring only 14 points in a playoff game, especially a SB is putting a LOT of pressure on your defense. To me, that's a little unfair to the defense saying they gave up the points at the end. 14 points in today's NFL isn't much.

GB struggles on offense and only scores 14 points and I'm not putting all the blame on the defense.

Unless the ball is knocked out of the QB's hands by a blown block, or a tipped pass by the receiver, a 4th QTR int is completely on the QB.

 

[Liquidrob]

according to FT Brady did his job and was done after the first drive the 3rd in this super bowl, they had the lead, why the need to score more?

 

[FirstTimer]

Really? 14 points and that's enough?

It would have been more than enough had Tyree not made a miracle grab or Asante holds onto a pick.

So yes. That's enough.

To me, that's a little unfair to the defense saying they gave up the points at the end.

Wrong.

No one else was out there.

The defense was.

Tough shit.

GB struggles on offense and only scores 14 points and I'm not putting all the blame on the defense.

I'm not putting all the blame on the defense. Read the thread again.

Unless the ball is knocked out of the QB's hands by a blown block, or a tipped pass by the receiver, a 4th QTR int is completely on the QB.

The hell does this have to do with anything?

 

[FirstTimer]

according to FT Brady did his job and was done after the first drive the 3rd in this super bowl, they had the lead, why the need to score more?

Wrong.

MMA meathead hyperbole FTL.

 

[Liquidrob]

The Giants D totally shit the bed in the super bowl IMO, the Giants were up 9 points at one point, good thing Eli kept trying to score

 

[shag773]

according to FT Brady did his job and was done after the first drive the 3rd in this super bowl, they had the lead, why the need to score more?

I'm sure the offensive gameplan in each of those games were..."Lets score 14-17 points, then we'll put it in the hands of our defense...."

Sounds like a winning formula to me....

 

[FirstTimer]

You can't sit there and say that the Pats 2007 team with the greatest offense in NFL history should of only scored 14 points. Their defense showed up minus that Tyree play and the Samuel INT drop, but again I think even Tom would say that 14 points is not acceptable with the team they had that year.

Ok?

And the point is?...........................

Even if I agree with your assesment of 2007 who would you put that offensive issue on? Brady or the Patriots Oline that got dominated the entire night and got Brady killed?

I'm sure Brady was the one missing blocks.

/Giselle.

 

[FirstTimer]

ZOMG. The Patriots offense only put up 14 points! Clearly Brady was fucking up the whole game!

It's not liek we weren't all alive for that game and are unable to objectively view and make assessments of the plays. Nope, much better to just bitch about the amount of poitn sbeing scored then just ramble on about Brady.