Don't do revisionist history. Jake Delhome was a real QB before his injury that fucked him up and made him terrible. If you took the stat lines of the QBs Brady had to go up against, average them, and compare them to Rex Grossman, its laughable. Rex Grossman fucked up the Center-QB exchange in the Superbowl. THE SIMPLEST AND MOST IMPORTANT THING IN ALL OF FOOTBALL AFTER TYING YOUR CLEATS.
2003 season - Jake Delhomme: 59.2% completion, 3,219 yards, 7.17 yards per completion, 80.6 QBR. Tom Brady: 60.2% completion, 3,764 yards, 6.26 yards per completion, 85.9 QBR. Those are not two wildly different quarterbacks.
Oh Jesus fucking Christ. They're both hall of fame QBs and other teams would kill to have either of them. The only people who bitch about which one is better are people too invested in the argument to be objective in the first place, making it a joke. Just be satisfied that you have one of the best QBs in the game, and quit bitching because someone else thinks your guy isn't THE best. Nawt everyone sucks Tawmmy Brady's dick? He is the greatest eva! No One Denies This! Who. Fucking. Cares. Besides, last I checked, Joe Montana has 4 Super Bowl rings and played in an era where defenders weren't penalized for breathing too hard near a superstar QB. He never lost a Super Bowl, let alone one to Eli fucking Manning. Why not make some arguments for him? Oh, because that doesn't fit your "more superbowls means better QB" narrative. Again, too invested to be objective. They're both amazing. Move on.
Probably because he has nothing to do with Peyton vs. Brady. And losing before the Super Bowl does not make you better than losing in the Super Bowl. Common misconception though.
You say that like "Peyton vs. Brady" isn't constantly framed as being a debate about the "best ever," but keep being smug like you don't know that's what you're debating. Besides, Montana played in an era when the rules weren't designed to protect QBs, WRs, and pad passing stats, yet he still won every Super Bowl he played in, which gives him more rings than Brady.
Sorry bout the smugness, my team just had the greatest comeback in franchise history. What did your team do this week? Also, you can't be the best ever with a sub-.500 playoff record and eight one-and-dones. I don't make the rules, I just repeat 'em.
...You say that like you own the team, or have some vested interest short of being a fan. You're like the fat fuck that cried when the Giants lost, you're a person who is the reason we hate Pats fans, and the reason people hate obnoxious football fans in general. Congrats. You won a regular season home game against a good team. Celebrate like its a fucking Super Bowl, and that game single handedly made Brady the greatest QB ever. In five years, that game will be a blip on the Patriots radar. It will be a trivia question, meaningless when your team fails to win the Super Bowl this year (and they won't, they'd have to get past the Broncos again, or the Saints or Seahawks, both of whom are better than the Pats).
Yeah, yeah, who cares. e: Funny that you say this, I actually know what that feels like too. Bears fan right?
Remember who the Bears beat to win a SB? Of course not cause it was pre-Brady. The Pats havent won a Super Bowl in a decade. Sure you can hold that over teams who haven't won one in the last 10 years, but stop acting like Pats and Brady have ruled the NFL post season with an iron fist recently. Its tiresome. Stop pretending he's Eli Manning or something.
Since you're probably all bored of this. Spoiler It was pre-I was born. Which is the point. Heh. (Tony Eason, 0/6, 3 sacks and a fumble before being benched.) 8 < 10 Hey, that's you!
What, should I give a shit now? Anyway, this is boring. Much more interesting debate: how many Super Bowls do the Ravens win if they draft Brady instead of Chris Redman?
What, should I give a shit now? Or you could just take that at face value and stop trolling for an argument.
Actually the debate is usually framed in "the best of their era" (early 2000's until now) which is a cogent argument. Who else makes it? Maybe Brees, and if you're really stretching maybe Roethlisberger. You can also make a case for Eli, but I personally think he's too inconsistent.
You compared Brady and Jake Delhomme. My statement was saying if you averaged the QBs Brady faced in the SB to the QB that Peyton Faced in the SB it would be ridiculous. Spelled out, if you averaged the stat lines of Donovan, Jake and Kurt then compared them to Rex Grossman, DoJakurt is a way better QB than Rex Grossman. All three of those QBs are better than Rex Grossman. Which makes all of Brady's SB wins more significant than Peyton's SB win. And D26 needs to stop being so butthurt.