RDS11
On the Game Day Roster
- Joined
- May 11, 2008
- Messages
- 428
- Reaction score
- 248
I really hope the Pats move on from Mac Jones after the season. But...anybody really think that with any other above average starting caliber QB the Pats would make the playoffs ? Other than Mahomes, anybody could take that offense and have a chance at winning playoff games ? Chances are, even if we are in position to draft near the top, the guy that will come in won't be as good as Mahomes, or as good as Brady was during the early years of the dynasty. It would be great to draft a Burrow, but then it could be Wentz or Mayfield instead.
Another thing that astonish me. Most of us have seen Brady for 20 years, and yet some of us are still somewhat diminishing the value he added to the team. Really, haven't we seen enough miracles over 20 years and doubt him ? Reading this thread, and seeing comments about Brady not being elite back in 2001...go take a look at his efficiency stats from 2001. Other than the sack rate, he was in the top of the NFL in most other efficiency stats. He was very much elite given his stats for adjusted yards per attempt, rating, completion percentage TD percentage and interception percentage. That's while throwing to the likes of Charles Johnson, Wiggins and Patten. He had Brown, and not much else.
Then, we also get the incredibly dumb argument that goes like : ''...but Brady couldn't win these Super Bowl alone !''
Of course not ! Who's stupid enough to think that ! Nobody could take a bunch of high school kids and win a Super Bowl. But guess what, this is the NFL, there are great players in all teams. Some teams have more talent than others, that's true. Brady played with a number of great players, some Hall of famers. But what have these players win without Brady : Mankins, Law, Seymour, Harrison, Bruschi, Revis, Milloy, or even Mike Evans, Lavonte David ? I'm not trying to take anything away from their great careers, it's just that without Brady, they have not won anything. They were key pieces for their time, but replaceable pieces. And while players were coming and going, Brady won in the 2000s, the 2010s and the 2020s.
Another dumb argument I'm tired of seeing from a fanbase that should know better : '' ... yeah, but Trent Dilfer won a Super Bowl''.
Yes, he did. But then again, he won with an historically good defense, one of the best of all time. Do we really think this is the model to achieve continuous success ? That's catching lightning in a bottle : for that to happen you need a great number of great players, all having a career year at the same time, and avoiding injuries. And then, some luck that during the 1 year all this is coming together at the same time, you don't have 1 bad game in the playoffs that wipe out everything. These Ravens were 10-6 the year after the Super Bowl, and 7-9 the year after that.
I don't want to get into the Belichick / Brady debate, because that's not the point. Belichick is probably the best game day coach in history. The fact that he has game plans in the HoF says something. But it's not a fringe top-10 quarterback that can save this mess. It would have to be a generational QB talent.
Alright, rant over.
Another thing that astonish me. Most of us have seen Brady for 20 years, and yet some of us are still somewhat diminishing the value he added to the team. Really, haven't we seen enough miracles over 20 years and doubt him ? Reading this thread, and seeing comments about Brady not being elite back in 2001...go take a look at his efficiency stats from 2001. Other than the sack rate, he was in the top of the NFL in most other efficiency stats. He was very much elite given his stats for adjusted yards per attempt, rating, completion percentage TD percentage and interception percentage. That's while throwing to the likes of Charles Johnson, Wiggins and Patten. He had Brown, and not much else.
Then, we also get the incredibly dumb argument that goes like : ''...but Brady couldn't win these Super Bowl alone !''
Of course not ! Who's stupid enough to think that ! Nobody could take a bunch of high school kids and win a Super Bowl. But guess what, this is the NFL, there are great players in all teams. Some teams have more talent than others, that's true. Brady played with a number of great players, some Hall of famers. But what have these players win without Brady : Mankins, Law, Seymour, Harrison, Bruschi, Revis, Milloy, or even Mike Evans, Lavonte David ? I'm not trying to take anything away from their great careers, it's just that without Brady, they have not won anything. They were key pieces for their time, but replaceable pieces. And while players were coming and going, Brady won in the 2000s, the 2010s and the 2020s.
Another dumb argument I'm tired of seeing from a fanbase that should know better : '' ... yeah, but Trent Dilfer won a Super Bowl''.
Yes, he did. But then again, he won with an historically good defense, one of the best of all time. Do we really think this is the model to achieve continuous success ? That's catching lightning in a bottle : for that to happen you need a great number of great players, all having a career year at the same time, and avoiding injuries. And then, some luck that during the 1 year all this is coming together at the same time, you don't have 1 bad game in the playoffs that wipe out everything. These Ravens were 10-6 the year after the Super Bowl, and 7-9 the year after that.
I don't want to get into the Belichick / Brady debate, because that's not the point. Belichick is probably the best game day coach in history. The fact that he has game plans in the HoF says something. But it's not a fringe top-10 quarterback that can save this mess. It would have to be a generational QB talent.
Alright, rant over.