I am a Pats fan so it is hard for me to say no or be totally objective. If we are going to judge a quarterback solely won putting W's on the board when it counts then I would say that he stands up there with Montana and Bradshaw....all with 4 each, if he can beat the Giants. If we talk about ability at the position separately, that is a debate that could go on from now until the end of time. There are many different arguments that can be made for guys like Manning, Marino, Elway, Favre, Brady, Montana, etc. I don't think there is a right answer to that question. If you look at guys who have been proven winners (as in rings) where their ability really carried them beyond the ability of the guys who surrounded him. Teams where the QB made everyone better around him, I think you would have to look at Brady as being one of the best.
Yes. Ask any well versed, but not nerdy super memory who Tom Brady's WRs were from his first 3 Super Bowls and runs as opposed to everyone else. Brady has consistently won with "no-names" year after year, after year (Givens who?). Now, as much as I hate Peyton (Eli is catching up.) The idea of Eli being a better QB than Peyton has to be among the dumbest conversation ESPN/Sports Radio has forced. If there was a Madden Simulation with the All-Madden Defense going against the All-Madden Offense with the Peyton or Eli taking snaps and calling all the plays, no way Eli gets more points than Peyton. Its absolutely absurd they are even compared. Eli is getting another ring because Victor Cruz is a freak of nature and his O-Line eats bitches for lunch. Oh and fuck Joe Flacco, he got 20 points against the worst defense in the league and if he was a good QB, he would have saw Torrey Smith 5 seconds earlier, hit him in stride and that would have been an easy TD. He's above average. If they didn't have Ray Rice, he'd be fucked. As they mentioned on Grantland, all QB's with nicknames suck. T-Jack, Matty Ice, Jake the Snake, Joe Cool...just saying. None of the elite QBs have nicknames besides Broadway Joe, but that's a gimmie.
Uh huh. Focus: Obviously this thread doesn't need another Pats fan saying, "of course Tom Brady is the greatest quarterback!" That said, the guy has three rings and two MVP's. He's about to play in another superbowl, where anything can happen. He's consistently been a record-breaking dominant player at his position through regular season play. I think "best of all time" is a stupid and impossible to truly determine title, but what exactly are the arguments against him being easily in the conversation?
Give it a rest, already. Jesus Christ, how long are you going to milk this ridiculous argument? Did you miss the part where Matt Walsh, the former Patriots assistant who made the allegations about Super Bowl XXXVI, couldn't even produce the tape he claimed to have? "Take it to PM?" Fuck that, stop cluttering up the NFL thread with your nonsense, and make an effort to contribute a constructive thought. Leave the baseless opinions in ESPN.com's comment sections, where they belong.
Wow, what a brain fart / bad attempt at a reverse jinx. You know any discussion over that title is basically....75% of all sports conversation right? I'm jumping on this bandwagon. That's been 90% of your posts in this thread. We get it, you're not over it. Everyone else is mmmk? You don't have to bring it up every page. You're apparently a cokehead, but we don't keep bringing that back up everytime you post something stupid do we? No we swept it under the rug and enjoy the show.
Seriously? It was a 32 yard field goal. I don't care if Harbaugh whipped him to the line of scrimmage to force him to kick into a hurricane with a broken leg. You can't miss a chip shot like that with a super bowl berth on the line. The coaching error was minor, the miss not so much. I agree that there still isn't a lock for best QB ever, but I would put Brady very high up there. In my opinion, it's really a race between him and Montana. Maybe Peyton Manning is in there, but I would have always taken Brady over him so I'll just leave him out for now. Looking at some of the other candidates Brady's resume is stronger. Marino? Never won a title. Bradshaw? No fucking way, we're talking about a guy who once threw 6 tds and 24 picks in a year. He would have been average on most teams, and it was the rest of the team more than him that won those titles. Favre? The perennial choker. Also, way too inconsistent to hold that title. Otto Graham has a strong case and is often forgotten in these discussions, but he played in an era when the NFL was much less talented. Elway? Pretty good, but doesn't quite have the stats to stand at the top. Maybe give Bart Starr a look. Still, his team was absolutely sick and he never had to win with weak receivers or a bad defense, something Brady has done at different points in his career.
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.prosportsdaily.com/articles/indianapolis-colts-have-eye-on-alouettes-marc-trestman-621403.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.prosportsdaily.com/articles/ ... 21403.html</a> The Colts are about to become a bad, bad joke in the NFL if they let Manning go and hire that guy. Oh, let the French jokes abound... <a class="postlink" href="http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8264abc5/article/with-indy-seemingly-turning-the-page-where-will-peyton-end-up" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8 ... ton-end-up</a> "I don't want to get into some kind of fan campaign with the owner (Jim Irsay), but I think it's well documented that I want to play in the same place my whole career," Manning said in an interview with The Indianapolis Star this week. Is this the guy who avenges a 2-12 team or splits to a place like Arizona, Miami or another big-market team? My suspicion is that they continue to clean house instead of paying him $48 million to recover from surgery and play next year. Andrew Luck has to be a bit cheaper than $48M PLUS a new contract for one of the elite qb's to ever play the game. Also, even with Manning, things are shaping up for Indy to suck really really bad next year.
No, no he hasn't. Brady has never not won, and he's always had outstanding talent around him. In 2001, Brady had a ground game that gained 1700 yards, a receiving corps that caught close to 200 passes and over 2000 yards (not counting backs/TEs), and a defense that ranked 6th in points allowed. 2003 Brady had a ground game that had 1600 yards, receivers that caught 164 passes and over 2200 yards (no backs/TE's) and the number one ranked defense in points allowed. 2004 Brady had Corey Dillon and his 1600 yards alone. The team rushed for 2100 yards. Receivers caught 162 passes for 2400+ yards. Defense was second in points allowed. 08, he was injured. 09 Brady had Welker catching 123 balls, Randy Moss 83 catches, 1264 yards and 13 TD's, and a defense that ranked 5th in points allowed. 2010 had Welker catching 83 balls before his injury, BenJarvis Green-Ellis running for 1000+ and 13 TDs, and Brady tossing 37 TDs. Defense ranked 8th in points allowed. 2011 Brady had a pair of TEs that were completely uncoverable. They had a combined 169 catches, 2200 yards, and 24 TD's. Tight ends! Brady didn't need any receivers, but he had one that caught 122 passes for 1500 yards and 9 TD's anyway. Oh, and the ground game gained 1700 yards and scored 18 times. New England's defense is middle of the pack this year but with Brady playing real life Madden, it won't matter. I'm tired of hearing people say it's all Brady. It clearly isn't. New England is the epitome of the sum being greater than its parts. Brady gets the attention because he's fucking a supermodel and he seems to be the only guy putting up numbers. Brady is/was lucky enough to be a part of an organization run by one of the greatest coaches in the history of the game.
Agreed. I think he is an absolute prick, but Belicheck is a fucking genius and implemented a system in a way that few coaches in the NFL ever had, in its resistance to turnover-related failures. Its very much like a college system in the fact that the great receivers are less important than the routes they are running and the formations that are designed to get them open. I don't like him, but Brady is very good QB. But I would stop well short of putting him in GOAT conversations. Lets not forget that Brady had both Moss and Welker in his MVP seasons. He wasn't throwing to schmucks.
Barring the stupidity about the supermodel, I actually agree with you, but with two things to consider: 1) That's exactly what they used to say about Montana. 2) Brady has been among the only consistent pieces to this puzzle, and his contributions have been crucial to the success of the organization. You're not pulling this off with Brett Favre, that's for sure, and honestly I question whether Peyton Manning has the right type of ego suited to truly being a piece of the puzzle the way Brady has, and the ice in his veins to execute in the clutch the way Brady has. Manning didn't win until he figured out that he couldn't do it himself, and he took such a back seat in that game that I've always thought Bob Sanders deserved that MVP more than he did. Maybe someone like Brees could have done what Brady's done, but I'm not convinced. Speaking of ice cubes in the blood, worth mentioning because it almost always gets left out, is that another absolutely crucial part of the original puzzle was Adam Vinatieri. What the fuck is it with you guys and this nonsense? What the hell did the guy ever do to you? Or anyone, for that matter? Are you so bothered by a guy who's pretty and successful that you have to bust out this silly hyperbole?
1) I think it would be fair to say that about any successful QB. However, I'm of the belief Montana was better because he won 4 Super Bowls, and he did it with 2 different types of offenses. Montana won his first two Super Bowls in '81 and '83. In '81, the 49ers would run you into the ground and take the ball away on defense. '83 was a bit different. Instead of being carried by a grinding running game and a stout defense, Montana did a bit more heavy lifting. He had a 94.6 rating and passed for nearly 4000 yards which was unheard of when defenses were allowed to paralyze your ass. But still, the 49er's ran for over 2000 yards that season. In 88, Montana had been injured and was trying to keep Steve Young from taking his job. Then the playoffs came and he got hot. 8 TDs and 1 INT and a 275 yds a game average later, he won his 3rd Super Bowl and 2nd MVP. In 89, the 49ers missed a perfect season by only a combined 6 points. 26 TD's, 8 INTs. 70.2% completion. They outscored their playoff opposition 126-26. 3rd Super Bowl MVP. Again, a different era when offense wasn't nearly as emphasized as it is now. Montana, at least to me, seems like the clear #1. 2) I sometimes struggle with Brady being given the credit he has, because the Patriots plugged in a QB best known for backing up Carson Palmer and Matt Leinart and went 11-5 against pretty tough competition. 11-5 didn't even make the playoffs that year! Even more damning for Brady, Cassel has played, for the most part, like absolute shit in Kansas City. I'm of the belief that Belichick doesn't get enough of the credit for making the Patriots so good for so long.
It's hard to feel bad for Manning. He's banked millions in money and endorsements, won a Super Bowl, and will some day have a street named after him in Indianapolis. It's romantic for a guy to stay with one team his entire career, but facts are facts. Manning and his surgically repaired neck aren't standing behind an offensive line more suited to being lawn ornaments then protecting anybody. As a Seattle fan, I can't help but be intrigued by the idea of Manning running things up here. Manning at 75-85% is better than Tarvaris fucking Jackson at 9000%. A young nasty defense, an actual running game, big physical receivers. Yep. Looks like the only thing Seattle is missing is a half-decent QB.
I don't understand your use of receptions caught as proof of the talent level around him. The number of completions for Brady is a strike against him in this case? Tom Brady made David Patton, Deion Branch, David Givens, and Troy Brown's grandfather (oh, that was actually Brown out there in 2005? Fooled me) look good. How did Branch, Patton, and Givens do once they left the Patriots? If the Patriots have had "outstanding talent" at wide receiver, those words have lost any and all meaning. There might be more wide receiver talent on the current NYG roster than in the past decade of Patriots teams combined.
I guess my wording was awkward. I didn't mean to say he did it with weak receivers and a bad defense at the same time, but he has played under both circumstances in his career. Maybe weak is too strong a word, but those receivers in the early 2000s certainly weren't anything special, and the receiving numbers you're quoting actually backs that up more than anything. The last two years he's gone 27-5 in the regular season, which is an insanely strong win percentage, especially considering the defense has been suspect. No, Brady hasn't been on bad teams, and he doesn't cruise through the playoffs surrounded by scrubs. Those teams did have holes though (other than '07 anyway) and Brady has had more to do with their success than any other component. Like I was saying, I can see how someone would make a case for Montana being the GOAT. Those other guys I listed like Favre, Marino, Elway, etc. I don't see it. Brady has been more impressive than any of them. Going back to Montana, Brady still has some ground he can make up before he retires. Like winning it all this year. Edit: This was at a time when the pats roster was at it's strongest, and they did still miss the playoffs that year. Cassel was serviceable, good even, but look at Brady's numbers the year before and the three years after. They're way better and so is his average win total. He got the top seed 3 of those 4 years while Cassel missed the playoffs. I've seen people comparing the pats without Brady to the colts without Manning, and it's a really bad comparison, for a lot of reasons. And Cassel did have a year in KC that was hands down better than his season with the pats.
You're right. Wes Welker and Randy Moss are awful, terrible, no name, no talent players, and not two of the most dynamic receivers in NFL history. Similarly, it is quite clear that this Gronkowski guy is a flash-in-the-pan who couldn't be good on any other team. Seriously, have the Patriots had amazing receivers? No. At the same time, it isn't as if we're thinking they have a bunch of number 1 receivers. I'd say their receivers are about on par with the rest of the league. Brady's best season came when he had Randy Moss at his most uncoverable. So can we please stop with this "Tom Brady never had good wide receivers" talk, please? Yes, he elevated a lot of his receivers. That is what a good QB does, but that doesn't make him into the end-all be-all QB god you are making him out to be. Tom Brady is great. He is a hall of famer. He should be in the conversation for greatest of all time. But he has thrown to more than the no-name fresh of the couch scrubs that you all seem to think he throws too. That argument is invalid the second you say the names Randy Moss and Wes Welker.
You're kidding right? Did he win any of his 3 Superbowls with these guys? What happened after they didn't play with Brady? Go check, I'll wait...oh he didn't and they sucked? I'm wearing my shocked face right now. NoAny of these guys on any ballots to go to the HOF? Are they ever even in consideration? Anyone wearing their jersey years later? Any NFL Films specials ever going to come out about them? Not a chance in hell. Ask Larry Fitzgerald how much credit should go to QB. Come on now, silliest argument in the world being up receptions and not giving Brady any credit, where credit is due. He touches the ball every play. He's going to the Superbowl where he had to throw to Matthew fuckig Slater in the AFC game. C'mon now.
I used receptions in the context that it was only the receivers making them. As I pointed out before, the sum was greater than its parts. I don't know about you, but I'd rather have 3 average receivers that got me 50-60 catches for 800 yards a year then Larry Fitzgerald and the scrubs he plays with every season. Production trumps talent any day of the week. I would also argue that the league's best receiver this year was a 30 year old white guy who's 5'9" and 190 pounds.