PATRIOTS-RAVENS

NFL, MLB, NHL, NBA, BPL... you get it
ramfan85
Carlton Owens
Posts: 2983
Joined: 11 years ago
x 447

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by ramfan85 »

Am I the only one who thinks Tony Eason was the best? I guess so.
0 x
Ramulous
Carlton Owens
Posts: 3470
Joined: 11 years ago
x 1733

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by Ramulous »

It is all in your definition of "best"
0 x
F*ck Alacki, DarthFriar, DirtyBeanFriar94, xCoachK, Boxworth, Friar Faithful, bicycleicycle, Matt_Keough, Patrick Norton, the Rosato brothers, and especially Benjamin Lord !
User avatar
TruePoint
Frank Keaney
Posts: 13851
Joined: 11 years ago
x 11427

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by TruePoint »

scine20 wrote:TP, give me one reason that Brady is the best of all time that doesn't have to do with his defense and kicker (which is the only reason Brady has even one ring).

Like I said, Brady people are IMPOSSIBLE to deal with.
As far as specific arguments, there are plenty.

Individually, as far as the most important parts of a QB's job - moving the chains, putting up points and taking care of the football:

- Top 5 in career passing yards (neck-and-neck with Brees and will pass Marino, so could finish third)
- Top 5 in career passing TDs (neck-and-neck with Brees and will pass Marino, so could finish third)
- Second lowest interception % in history
- Most career playoff TDs in history

As you said, though, football is a team sport. And QBs are fairly judged by their team's success:

- 3 SB championships and counting
- 6 AFC championships
- Most career playoff wins
- 3rd most wins all time (will retire #1)
- Best career winning percentage among QBs



Go find me another QB that combines the statistical achievement with the history of winning. You absolutely cannot. And you can't say that winning games and super bowls aren't even a part of the criteria, because if that is the case I think your criteria is flawed and we are just having different arguments. If you go look at who else is on those lists, you will see all of the other guys considered in the conversation, so they obviously mean something.
0 x
"If you build it, they will come." --Us, circa 2011
rambone 78
Frank Keaney
Posts: 16332
Joined: 11 years ago
x 5186

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by rambone 78 »

The Pats have amassed a great regular season record, and good postseason record, due to the fact that they have dominated a division which imo has consistently been the worst in football for quite a few years.

Quite simply, the other 3 teams have what you would call the "suck factor". They suck, and they can't get up.

So, the Pats win their weak ass division every year, get home field advantage most years, and end up in the AFC title game more years than not under Brady.

However, the Pats, by playing a weak schedule due to the division they're in, aren't prepared to play the better teams they play in the playoffs, and when they are forced to go on the road, frequently have lost those games.

In the SB, the Pats have never once dominated ANY of them, although they've been close games. Maybe they were unlucky against the Giants in '07, but they had more than their share of luck in the '01, '03, and '04 games.

They won those SB's largely on their defense, except the Carolina game. In '07 and '11, they lost because their OFFENSE stunk. What has Brady really done in his SB's? Not a lot.
Last edited by rambone 78 9 years ago, edited 1 time in total.
0 x
Ramulous
Carlton Owens
Posts: 3470
Joined: 11 years ago
x 1733

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by Ramulous »

All you guys remind me of seanmc......coming here to try to convert us to pc fans......

....if you're a Pats fan Brady is the greatest....

....if you hate the Pats he is overrated and a fraud....and the Pats are frauds.....
0 x
F*ck Alacki, DarthFriar, DirtyBeanFriar94, xCoachK, Boxworth, Friar Faithful, bicycleicycle, Matt_Keough, Patrick Norton, the Rosato brothers, and especially Benjamin Lord !
User avatar
TruePoint
Frank Keaney
Posts: 13851
Joined: 11 years ago
x 11427

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by TruePoint »

rambone 78 wrote: So, the Pats win their weak ass division every year, get home field advantage most years, and end up in the AFC title game more years than not under Brady.

However, the Pats, by playing a weak schedule due to the division they're in, aren't prepared to play the better teams they play in the playoffs, and when they are forced to go on the road, frequently have lost those games.
The Jets have gone to two AFC championship games every year and the Dolphins won the division twice, so clearly they weren't just all non-competitive teams. But even if I concede that the AFC East hasn't been great, the NFL scheduling model defeats your second arguement. The Patriots play the first place team from every other division every season, so their schedule is never going to be a walk. Go look at the schedule they played this year!
0 x
"If you build it, they will come." --Us, circa 2011
scine20
ARD
Posts: 660
Joined: 11 years ago
x 355

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by scine20 »

TruePoint wrote:
scine20 wrote:TP, give me one reason that Brady is the best of all time that doesn't have to do with his defense and kicker (which is the only reason Brady has even one ring).

Like I said, Brady people are IMPOSSIBLE to deal with.
As far as specific arguments, there are plenty.

Individually, as far as the most important parts of a QB's job - moving the chains, putting up points and taking care of the football:

- Top 5 in career passing yards (neck-and-neck with Brees and will pass Marino, so could finish third)
- Top 5 in career passing TDs (neck-and-neck with Brees and will pass Marino, so could finish third)
- Second lowest interception % in history
- Most career playoff TDs in history

As you said, though, football is a team sport. And QBs are fairly judged by their team's success:

- 3 SB championships and counting
- 6 AFC championships
- Most career playoff wins
- 3rd most wins all time (will retire #1)
- Best career winning percentage among QBs



Go find me another QB that combines the statistical achievement with the history of winning. You absolutely cannot. And you can't say that winning games and super bowls aren't even a part of the criteria, because if that is the case I think your criteria is flawed and we are just having different arguments.
I generally judge by rating. The other stuff encompasses too many other variables out of a QB's control. If you look at that stat Manning blows Brady out of the water. Brady's played 13 full or mostly full seasons. Of the 12 seasons that both he and Manning played Manning had a better year ratings wise in 9 of them. That's a significant edge.

I also don't go by pure numbers. If I did I'd have to call Vinny Testaverde, Drew Bledsoe and Kerry Collins all-time greats which we all know they're not. It's all about averages which is why the QB rating stat is so important. It takes into account all important passing stats and combines them. Brady is 4th among active QB's in that stat. It's impossible to compare QB's who have played the majority of their careers after 2003 with QB's who played most or all of their careers before then because of the rule changes implemented after 2003 to make passing easier.

Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are deadlocked for playoff QB rating. Everyone loves to call Manning a choker. The numbers are identical.

Wins and losses mean nothing to me and never have. Nor have SB victories. I don't consider Brady to be one of the best 5 QB's playing today (nor do I consider Manning on that level anymore). I also don't consider Terry Bradshaw, just judging by the numbers an all-time great QB and certainly don't think that Troy Aikman should be in the HOF.

Any decent QB can go on a great team and win. But decent QB's don't put up great numbers. Only great QB's do that.
0 x
rambone 78
Frank Keaney
Posts: 16332
Joined: 11 years ago
x 5186

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by rambone 78 »

We're here to have fun...and in my case, to tweak the nose of Pats fans...I admit it....

hey, whatever happens, the Pats are good, can't deny that, but I'll still take my Giants' 4-1 SB record over the Pats 3-4 SB record any day, even though the G Men aren't nearly as consistent as the Pats...so what.....

Just WIN Baby!!!!!!
0 x
ramfan85
Carlton Owens
Posts: 2983
Joined: 11 years ago
x 447

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by ramfan85 »

I always wished they gave errors in football like in baseball. Not just for the Brady discussion, but in general.
I'll say this. Rodgers is considered the best qb at this time. I don't have a problem with that.
But, if the Pats were playing Seattle last week, I'd bet Brady would have gone after a one-armed Richard Sherman. I just don't understand that.

On the lighter side, this thread has never been so active.
0 x
scine20
ARD
Posts: 660
Joined: 11 years ago
x 355

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by scine20 »

ramfan85 wrote:I always wished they gave errors in football like in baseball. Not just for the Brady discussion, but in general.
I'll say this. Rodgers is considered the best qb at this time. I don't have a problem with that.
But, if the Pats were playing Seattle last week, I'd bet Brady would have gone after a one-armed Richard Sherman. I just don't understand that.

On the lighter side, this thread has never been so active.
I knew when I came in with my opinion that I'd have at least one poster jump all over me.
0 x
User avatar
TruePoint
Frank Keaney
Posts: 13851
Joined: 11 years ago
x 11427

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by TruePoint »

scine20 wrote:
TruePoint wrote:
scine20 wrote:TP, give me one reason that Brady is the best of all time that doesn't have to do with his defense and kicker (which is the only reason Brady has even one ring).

Like I said, Brady people are IMPOSSIBLE to deal with.
As far as specific arguments, there are plenty.

Individually, as far as the most important parts of a QB's job - moving the chains, putting up points and taking care of the football:

- Top 5 in career passing yards (neck-and-neck with Brees and will pass Marino, so could finish third)
- Top 5 in career passing TDs (neck-and-neck with Brees and will pass Marino, so could finish third)
- Second lowest interception % in history
- Most career playoff TDs in history

As you said, though, football is a team sport. And QBs are fairly judged by their team's success:

- 3 SB championships and counting
- 6 AFC championships
- Most career playoff wins
- 3rd most wins all time (will retire #1)
- Best career winning percentage among QBs



Go find me another QB that combines the statistical achievement with the history of winning. You absolutely cannot. And you can't say that winning games and super bowls aren't even a part of the criteria, because if that is the case I think your criteria is flawed and we are just having different arguments.
I generally judge by rating. The other stuff encompasses too many other variables out of a QB's control. If you look at that stat Manning blows Brady out of the water. Brady's played 13 full or mostly full seasons. Of the 12 seasons that both he and Manning played Manning had a better year ratings wise in 9 of them. That's a significant edge.

I also don't go by pure numbers. If I did I'd have to call Vinny Testaverde, Drew Bledsoe and Kerry Collins all-time greats which we all know they're not. It's all about averages which is why the QB rating stat is so important. It takes into account all important passing stats and combines them. Brady is 4th among active QB's in that stat. It's impossible to compare QB's who have played the majority of their careers after 2003 with QB's who played most or all of their careers before then because of the rule changes implemented after 2003 to make passing easier.

Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are deadlocked for playoff QB rating. Everyone loves to call Manning a choker. The numbers are identical.

Wins and losses mean nothing to me and never have. Nor have SB victories. I don't consider Brady to be one of the best 5 QB's playing today (nor do I consider Manning on that level anymore). I also don't consider Terry Bradshaw, just judging by the numbers an all-time great QB and certainly don't think that Troy Aikman should be in the HOF.

Any decent QB can go on a great team and win. But decent QB's don't put up great numbers. Only great QB's do that.
The team being great consistently is a function of the QB great, not the other way around. You might be the only person in the world that thinks QBR is a meaningful stat. For example, you say Brady and Manning have identical playoff ratings. Well, Brady has thrown 49 TDs and 24 INTs in 1,035 attempts. Manning has thrown 38 TDs and 24 INTs in 935 attempts. So the fact that they have the same rating renders the rating itself completely meaningless. Peyton turns it over more and throws fewer touchdowns. That ends that debate right there.
0 x
"If you build it, they will come." --Us, circa 2011
scine20
ARD
Posts: 660
Joined: 11 years ago
x 355

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by scine20 »

TruePoint wrote:The team being great consistently is a function of the QB great, not the other way around. You might be the only person in the world that thinks QBR is a meaningful stat. For example, you say Brady and Manning have identical playoff ratings. Well, Brady has thrown 49 TDs and 24 INTs in 1,035 attempts. Manning has thrown 38 TDs and 24 INTs in 935 attempts. So the fact that they have the same rating renders the rating itself completely meaningless. Peyton turns it over more and throws fewer touchdowns. That ends that debate right there.
No it doesn't. Because Manning is not dumping it off like Brady does. Brady has a 6.8 YPA in the playoffs which is not very good. That's why the ratings are identical. And without looking I would guess that Manning's completing a higher % of passes than Brady.

How do you measure a QB if not for his rating? The other stuff are things completely out of a QB's control.

I could very easily right now change the outcome of 3 plays in 2001, 2003 and 2004 and the Patriots would have never have even gotten to a SB in two of those years and lost the SB to Philly in the 3rd year. What would people say about Brady then?

It's so arbitrary, defining a QB by his win/loss record. It's like when people call Jim Kelly a choker because his kicker missed a kick but Brady the greatest ever because his kicker could make pressure kicks.
0 x
rambone 78
Frank Keaney
Posts: 16332
Joined: 11 years ago
x 5186

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by rambone 78 »

A QB get all the credit when his team wins, he gets the blame when they lose. It's a team game for sure.

The QB handles the ball most of the time, but he depends on the other 10 guys to do their job. In short, he's only as good as they are.
0 x
scine20
ARD
Posts: 660
Joined: 11 years ago
x 355

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by scine20 »

Do you know what the biggest determining factor in who won and who lost in about 90% of all games is? The QB that had the better rating. His team almost always wins.

In general I would guess that if you went through Brady's career in about 90% of his victories his rating was better than the opposition's. Obviously some of that's him. But a lot of that is also his defense stepping up.
0 x
ramfan85
Carlton Owens
Posts: 2983
Joined: 11 years ago
x 447

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by ramfan85 »

scine20 wrote:
ramfan85 wrote:I always wished they gave errors in football like in baseball. Not just for the Brady discussion, but in general.
I'll say this. Rodgers is considered the best qb at this time. I don't have a problem with that.
But, if the Pats were playing Seattle last week, I'd bet Brady would have gone after a one-armed Richard Sherman. I just don't understand that.

On the lighter side, this thread has never been so active.
I knew when I came in with my opinion that I'd have at least one poster jump all over me.

How am I jumping on you? I'm really not trying to. I think we're all having a pretty good discussion. You're defending your points well. I may disagree with a lot of them. But, I still enjoy reading other peoples' opinions.

I think people here are touching on an important fact. Football is a team game. Yet, whenever teams play, the buildup is something like "Brady vs Manning," even though they're never on the field at the same time. Years ago it would have simply been "Pats vs Broncos." I think I like the old way better.
0 x
scine20
ARD
Posts: 660
Joined: 11 years ago
x 355

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by scine20 »

ramfan85 wrote:
scine20 wrote:
ramfan85 wrote:I always wished they gave errors in football like in baseball. Not just for the Brady discussion, but in general.
I'll say this. Rodgers is considered the best qb at this time. I don't have a problem with that.
But, if the Pats were playing Seattle last week, I'd bet Brady would have gone after a one-armed Richard Sherman. I just don't understand that.

On the lighter side, this thread has never been so active.
I knew when I came in with my opinion that I'd have at least one poster jump all over me.

How am I jumping on you? I'm really not trying to. I think we're all having a pretty good discussion. You're defending your points well. I may disagree with a lot of them. But, I still enjoy reading other peoples' opinions.

I think people here are touching on an important fact. Football is a team game. Yet, whenever teams play, the buildup is something like "Brady vs Manning," even though they're never on the field at the same time. Years ago it would have simply been "Pats vs Broncos." I think I like the old way better.
You're not at all. I was saying that one specific poster is. Which I knew would happen.
0 x
User avatar
TruePoint
Frank Keaney
Posts: 13851
Joined: 11 years ago
x 11427

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by TruePoint »

Trying to force the ball down the field does not make you a better QB. This isn't gymnastics; you don't get credit for degree of difficulty. The point is to win the game. Maybe if Manning checked down more he'd throw less picks and win more games. But then his precious rating would go down! It also should be noted that Manning was surrounded by all-pros his whole career and managed to do less with more. But no, we should just defer to an arcane rating system.

Also I'm not jumping on you, we are having a discussion, right? I don't get how I'm jumping.
0 x
"If you build it, they will come." --Us, circa 2011
User avatar
adam914
Ernie Calverley
Posts: 9718
Joined: 11 years ago
x 7385

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by adam914 »

Hey Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer have won Super Bowls. That should end the argument right there.
0 x
"Our goals have not changed, we want to be the best program in the Atlantic 10, and even more than that we want to get to a Final Four someday." - Thorr Bjorn - March 22, 2018
ramfan85
Carlton Owens
Posts: 2983
Joined: 11 years ago
x 447

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by ramfan85 »

Good point, adam.
I've noticed this year that Dilfer talks as if he's won several SB's. He can't possibly think the Pats are cheaters. Didn't he say earlier this year that the Pats only want to make the playoffs???
0 x
User avatar
TruePoint
Frank Keaney
Posts: 13851
Joined: 11 years ago
x 11427

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by TruePoint »

adam914 wrote:Hey Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer have won Super Bowls. That should end the argument right there.
I don't think anyone is saying that should be the sole criteria, right? It is part of an overall evaluation. Those guys lucked out once. They didn't win big, over and over, and combine that with elite statistics from a historical perspective over the length of their careers.
0 x
"If you build it, they will come." --Us, circa 2011
rambone 78
Frank Keaney
Posts: 16332
Joined: 11 years ago
x 5186

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by rambone 78 »

Dilfer won his SB by being a game manager, and not turning the ball over. He didn't need to do much, his defense was dominating.

Now, this Sunday, Wilson will need to avoid turnovers and make a few plays, and let his defense do the rest.

If he does that, the Pats SB record will move to 3-5.

I have to say, all this controversy has to make the NFL happy in one regard. The ratings will go thru the roof.

A lot of people will be rooting for both teams to lose.
0 x
scine20
ARD
Posts: 660
Joined: 11 years ago
x 355

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by scine20 »

TruePoint wrote:Trying to force the ball down the field does not make you a better QB. This isn't gymnastics; you don't get credit for degree of difficulty. The point is to win the game. Maybe if Manning checked down more he'd throw less picks and win more games. But then his precious rating would go down! It also should be noted that Manning was surrounded by all-pros his whole career and managed to do less with more. But no, we should just defer to an arcane rating system.

Also I'm not jumping on you, we are having a discussion, right? I don't get how I'm jumping.
I didn't mean it in a bad way. I meant that I'd get a reaction.
0 x
User avatar
SmartyBarrett
Sly Williams
Posts: 3796
Joined: 11 years ago
Location: Boston
x 2701

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by SmartyBarrett »

scine20 wrote:The tapes were promptly destroyed. Why do you think that is?
This is one of several Spygate misconceptions that is simply not true.
folks always tend to forget the fact that Goodell played the tapes on a loop for the media at his press conference in 2007.
Image

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2014/10/13/n ... iots-game/
0 x
Captainron@
Kenny Green
Posts: 251
Joined: 11 years ago
x 7

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by Captainron@ »

SmartyBarrett wrote:
scine20 wrote:The tapes were promptly destroyed. Why do you think that is?
This is one of several Spygate misconceptions that is simply not true.
folks always tend to forget the fact that Goodell played the tapes on a loop for the media at his press conference in 2007.
Image

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2014/10/13/new-york-reporter-drums-up-spygate-in-anticipation-of-jets-patriots-game/

And the fact that the league offered them the tapes back and the Pats said no. That's when they got rid of them.
0 x
banderson1311
Frenchy Tomlin
Posts: 11
Joined: 11 years ago

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by banderson1311 »

TruePoint is doing the lord's work on this thread.

Also, who knew the crazy guy with the self-published Spygate book was a URI alum?
0 x
scine20
ARD
Posts: 660
Joined: 11 years ago
x 355

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by scine20 »

Goodell showed a minimal amount of those tapes IMO.
0 x
rambone 78
Frank Keaney
Posts: 16332
Joined: 11 years ago
x 5186

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by rambone 78 »

scine, I think we're up against it here.

Goodell and Kraft are too buddy-buddy to have anything big come down.

The Pats will get slapped on the wrist after the SB, and no more.

The Rice situation has spooked him big time. He's not going to mess with his baby [the SB that is].
0 x
User avatar
rodfromcranston
Frank Keaney
Posts: 13068
Joined: 11 years ago
x 1517

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by rodfromcranston »

This scene guy is the one who knows squat about football.
Anyone who saw Montana play knows he was THE BEST EVER.
Look at his first Super Bowl roster. Not many on the team that he was on
years later.
No Rice, No Taylor, no Lott, among others.
Montana won FOUR Super Bowls. Never threw a single interception and had the highest
QB rating of all time. Oh, and ZERO losses.
He was three time MVP of the Super Bowl, and well could have had four.
He beat Elway, Marino, Andeson and Esaison.
Now for the idiots who claim he could only do it in Walsh's system,
he went to the AFC Championship game with the lowly KC Chiefs.
Oh, and by the way, during the regular season, he beat the reigning
Super Bowl champ 49ers and Steve Young.
He also won an NCAA Championship at ND.
THE ULTIMATE WINNER, THE GREATEST OF ALL TIME, and that's just not my opinion,
either.
So, anyone who thinks Elway and three losses in Super Bowls, or Marino with zero, or Manning with his
pitiful post season record, or Steve Young with one Super Bowl (oh and who was he second string to for so many years?)has ZERO credibility in my eyes and knows jack shit about football.
Manning and Brady play in an era where QBs wear skirts, and all the rules favor the offense.
How would they have played when guys like Lawrence Taylor was breaking QB's legs and trying
to put them out of the game?
Not as well.
Last edited by rodfromcranston 9 years ago, edited 1 time in total.
0 x
< Arthur is my spirit animal.
scine20
ARD
Posts: 660
Joined: 11 years ago
x 355

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by scine20 »

We'll never agree Rod. You and I have a much different way of evaluating QB's.

Last I looked Montana didn't "beat" those guys. The 49ers beat the Bengals twice, the Dolphins and Broncos.

I seem to remember seeing 11 players on offense and defense. Not one on each.
0 x
User avatar
rodfromcranston
Frank Keaney
Posts: 13068
Joined: 11 years ago
x 1517

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by rodfromcranston »

Oh, please! Cut the shit. It's the QB who gets the lion's share
of the glory.
0 x
< Arthur is my spirit animal.
scine20
ARD
Posts: 660
Joined: 11 years ago
x 355

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by scine20 »

rambone 78 wrote:scine, I think we're up against it here.

Goodell and Kraft are too buddy-buddy to have anything big come down.

The Pats will get slapped on the wrist after the SB, and no more.

The Rice situation has spooked him big time. He's not going to mess with his baby [the SB that is].
This new guy that they're investigating is interesting. There's no way that anyone will believe that he did it on his own. So if he did it it had to be ordered by someone else. And that likely is Brady. Or possibly Belichick. But there's no way that Brady didn't know. He's lying through his teeth. I just don't see how the NFL will get away without leveling punishment on NE, even if Goodell is friendly with Kraft. Goodell does have a job to do and if he won't do it because of his relationship with an owner then he should be replaced.

By the way did you see the fumble stat study? The study alone shows that there's a huge discrepancy between NE and other teams.

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/bl ... impossible
0 x
scine20
ARD
Posts: 660
Joined: 11 years ago
x 355

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by scine20 »

rodfromcranston wrote:Oh, please! Cut the shit. It's the QB who gets the lion's share
of the glory.
Oh I know that. It doesn't mean I agree.

I assume you're a Patriots fan. I asked TP yesterday and he didn't have a good answer. What would people say about Brady if Vinatieri didn't make the FG in the snow against Oakland, if Drew Bennett had caught the pass at the end of the Titans game and the Titans had gone on to score and if McNabb had played a better game against NE in the SB? Of course Brady had nothing to do with any of those things. But yet he gets the credit.

Just like Jim Kelly's a choker because his kicker couldn't make a pressure kick while Brady's kicker excelled at making pressure kicks.
0 x
User avatar
rodfromcranston
Frank Keaney
Posts: 13068
Joined: 11 years ago
x 1517

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by rodfromcranston »

IF is for losers. Brady did have Vinateri, and all the rest of what happened,
happened.
The old saying is,"better to be lucky than good."
Personally, I think some of Brady's Super Bowl and post season games
have not been up to par with his regular season performances.
The greatest single season any QB had to date in 2007, and he
leads his team to 14 points against the Giants?
I don't see Brady rising to Mount Rushmore-like Montana Super Bowl status,
for those reasons.
Jim Kelly is a choker, because he and his team sucked in so many Super Bowls,
it became a national joke.
0 x
< Arthur is my spirit animal.
rambone 78
Frank Keaney
Posts: 16332
Joined: 11 years ago
x 5186

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by rambone 78 »

That's true. A softer football is easier to hold onto. Not as likely to fumble.

I don't know. This whole thing has taken on a life of it's own.

Even if there are little or no penalties on the Pats, many people are still not going to believe they're innocent. The damage has been done.

There are WAY too many issues, over too long a time frame, to say the Pats have never messed with the rules.

One thing the Pats have done a good job of, is bending, skirting, and breaking the rules to gain an advantage. Of course other teams aren't totally innocent either, but the Pats take the cake.
0 x
User avatar
SGreenwell
Sly Williams
Posts: 4373
Joined: 11 years ago
Location: Houston, TX (via Charlestown, RI)
x 2973
Contact:

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by SGreenwell »

scine20 wrote:
rodfromcranston wrote:Oh, please! Cut the shit. It's the QB who gets the lion's share
of the glory.
Oh I know that. It doesn't mean I agree.

I assume you're a Patriots fan. I asked TP yesterday and he didn't have a good answer. What would people say about Brady if Vinatieri didn't make the FG in the snow against Oakland, if Drew Bennett had caught the pass at the end of the Titans game and the Titans had gone on to score and if McNabb had played a better game against NE in the SB? Of course Brady had nothing to do with any of those things. But yet he gets the credit.

Just like Jim Kelly's a choker because his kicker couldn't make a pressure kick while Brady's kicker excelled at making pressure kicks.
But Vinatieri DID make the kick. And Brady HAS won all those Super Bowls. It's fine if you want to say that Brady has gotten some luck to win those Super Bowls, but pretty much all winning teams get some luck to win. The Patriots had an undefeated regular season because they got lucky during some of those games, but then lost the Super Bowl because they got unlucky with the helmet catch.

Over the course of a career, that stuff tends to even out. Maybe Jim Kelly got a bit more unlucky than others, but he is in the Hall of Fame. But he probably is on a tier lower than Brady and Montana because he ultimately didn't win a Super Bowl, despite being in it four times. Similarly, I'd say Brady's late career work has probably finally pushed him past Peyton Manning. Brady is probably the best QB of the past 20 years, although Aaron Rodgers and (very outside shot) Eli Manning have a chance of adding enough to their resume to surpass him.

Comparing Brady to Montana (and to older guys who won titles in the 60s and 70s) is tough for me, because the rules of the game have changed so much. It's like when people compare Russell to Jordan, or Babe Ruth to current MLB players. I think there are arguments that can be made for putting one over the other, and vice versa.
0 x
User avatar
TruePoint
Frank Keaney
Posts: 13851
Joined: 11 years ago
x 11427

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by TruePoint »

scine20 wrote:
rodfromcranston wrote:Oh, please! Cut the shit. It's the QB who gets the lion's share
of the glory.
Oh I know that. It doesn't mean I agree.

I assume you're a Patriots fan. I asked TP yesterday and he didn't have a good answer. What would people say about Brady if Vinatieri didn't make the FG in the snow against Oakland, if Drew Bennett had caught the pass at the end of the Titans game and the Titans had gone on to score and if McNabb had played a better game against NE in the SB? Of course Brady had nothing to do with any of those things. But yet he gets the credit.

Just like Jim Kelly's a choker because his kicker couldn't make a pressure kick while Brady's kicker excelled at making pressure kicks.
The answer is that assuming every break would go against anyone is ridiculous. What if Tyree and Manningham hadn't caught those balls, or if Reche Caldwell could catch? Would you still be arguing if he were 6-0 in Super Bowls and about to win his 7th? All those breaks even out, you can't diminish a guy's accomplishments by saying "yeah, but what if everything possible went against them?"

Also, as far as the League's leak - we shall see. They've leaked more bad and conflicting information - in this case and the Rice case and numerous others - that you'll have to forgive me for being skeptical and wanting to see documented and verifiable evidence before I make a judgment one way or the other. To me, between Belichick and Brady and the NFL League Office, there is no question that Bill and Brady are more credible. The League has been shown to be corrupt and incompetent over and over and over and over again.
0 x
"If you build it, they will come." --Us, circa 2011
rambone 78
Frank Keaney
Posts: 16332
Joined: 11 years ago
x 5186

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by rambone 78 »

A locker room attendant?

Acting on whose orders? Wouldn't do it on his own, now would he? Hmmm............
0 x
User avatar
TruePoint
Frank Keaney
Posts: 13851
Joined: 11 years ago
x 11427

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by TruePoint »

rambone 78 wrote:A locker room attendant?

Acting on whose orders? Wouldn't do it on his own, now would he? Hmmm............
IF he exists and IF he actually did something to the balls, then yes he would have been ordered to do so.
0 x
"If you build it, they will come." --Us, circa 2011
ramfan85
Carlton Owens
Posts: 2983
Joined: 11 years ago
x 447

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by ramfan85 »

I still smell a setup. If there's no video, it's going to be hard to prove anything illegal was done. If they have a video, I'd like to know if they have them for every ball boy for every game played this year.
Now, besides the Colts, the Ravens and maybe the Jets are somehow involved in this? Did they all issue formal complaints during the first half of the game?
0 x
scine20
ARD
Posts: 660
Joined: 11 years ago
x 355

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by scine20 »

Eli Manning?

Talk about overrated!
0 x
UCH21377
Cuttino Mobley
Posts: 1590
Joined: 11 years ago
x 1001

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by UCH21377 »

scine20 wrote:
TruePoint wrote:
scine20 wrote:TP, give me one reason that Brady is the best of all time that doesn't have to do with his defense and kicker (which is the only reason Brady has even one ring).

Like I said, Brady people are IMPOSSIBLE to deal with.
As far as specific arguments, there are plenty.

Individually, as far as the most important parts of a QB's job - moving the chains, putting up points and taking care of the football:

- Top 5 in career passing yards (neck-and-neck with Brees and will pass Marino, so could finish third)
- Top 5 in career passing TDs (neck-and-neck with Brees and will pass Marino, so could finish third)
- Second lowest interception % in history
- Most career playoff TDs in history

As you said, though, football is a team sport. And QBs are fairly judged by their team's success:

- 3 SB championships and counting
- 6 AFC championships
- Most career playoff wins
- 3rd most wins all time (will retire #1)
- Best career winning percentage among QBs



Go find me another QB that combines the statistical achievement with the history of winning. You absolutely cannot. And you can't say that winning games and super bowls aren't even a part of the criteria, because if that is the case I think your criteria is flawed and we are just having different arguments.
I generally judge by rating. The other stuff encompasses too many other variables out of a QB's control. If you look at that stat Manning blows Brady out of the water. Brady's played 13 full or mostly full seasons. Of the 12 seasons that both he and Manning played Manning had a better year ratings wise in 9 of them. That's a significant edge.

I also don't go by pure numbers. If I did I'd have to call Vinny Testaverde, Drew Bledsoe and Kerry Collins all-time greats which we all know they're not. It's all about averages which is why the QB rating stat is so important. It takes into account all important passing stats and combines them. Brady is 4th among active QB's in that stat. It's impossible to compare QB's who have played the majority of their careers after 2003 with QB's who played most or all of their careers before then because of the rule changes implemented after 2003 to make passing easier.

Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are deadlocked for playoff QB rating. Everyone loves to call Manning a choker. The numbers are identical.

Wins and losses mean nothing to me and never have. Nor have SB victories. I don't consider Brady to be one of the best 5 QB's playing today (nor do I consider Manning on that level anymore). I also don't consider Terry Bradshaw, just judging by the numbers an all-time great QB and certainly don't think that Troy Aikman should be in the HOF.

Any decent QB can go on a great team and win. But decent QB's don't put up great numbers. Only great QB's do that.
Scine which 5 QB's playing now are better than Brady or Manning? Rogers, for sure. Luck? not yet IMO, but close. Brees? he was lousy this year. I like Russel Wilson a lot, but he's not better than Brady. Rivers? Romo? Just don't see it. Ryan? No WAy. Cam? No. Am I forgetting somebody? Rothlesburger? I could listen to an argument for him.

AS for the old timers, Bradshaw was a very good QB, it was a TOTALLY different game. Johnny U and Staubach could succeed now, no problem. There were others too, the game was totally different, so it's hard to compare.

I agree with Rod, Montana was best ever.
0 x
scine20
ARD
Posts: 660
Joined: 11 years ago
x 355

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by scine20 »

It's amazing the denial that Patriots fans are in over this.
0 x
scine20
ARD
Posts: 660
Joined: 11 years ago
x 355

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by scine20 »

Right now? I'd take Rodgers, Romo, Wilson (regardless of Sunday's result), Luck and Roethlisberger. Those are my top 5 QB's at the moment.
0 x
scine20
ARD
Posts: 660
Joined: 11 years ago
x 355

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by scine20 »

TruePoint wrote:
rambone 78 wrote:A locker room attendant?

Acting on whose orders? Wouldn't do it on his own, now would he? Hmmm............
IF he exists and IF he actually did something to the balls, then yes he would have been ordered to do so.
So Jay Glazer's making it up?
0 x
User avatar
adam914
Ernie Calverley
Posts: 9718
Joined: 11 years ago
x 7385

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by adam914 »

Neil deGrasse Tyson, quite possibly the smartest man on the planet, has weighed in. This is good enough for me.

0 x
"Our goals have not changed, we want to be the best program in the Atlantic 10, and even more than that we want to get to a Final Four someday." - Thorr Bjorn - March 22, 2018
UCH21377
Cuttino Mobley
Posts: 1590
Joined: 11 years ago
x 1001

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by UCH21377 »

scine20 wrote:Right now? I'd take Rodgers, Romo, Wilson (regardless of Sunday's result), Luck and Roethlisberger. Those are my top 5 QB's at the moment.
Scine the only one I really can take issue with is Romo. He played very well this year, but his repeated history of screwing up in big spots has to be taken into consideration.
0 x
User avatar
SmartyBarrett
Sly Williams
Posts: 3796
Joined: 11 years ago
Location: Boston
x 2701

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by SmartyBarrett »

scine20 wrote:
TruePoint wrote:
rambone 78 wrote:A locker room attendant?

Acting on whose orders? Wouldn't do it on his own, now would he? Hmmm............
IF he exists and IF he actually did something to the balls, then yes he would have been ordered to do so.
So Jay Glazer's making it up?
There have been dozens of false reports throughout this entire saga. I won't list them all here, but it's foolish to believe a single tweet over all else until it gains a little more steam or becomes official.

Also, NDGT is basing his science on a report that has been reported to be false.
0 x
rambone 78
Frank Keaney
Posts: 16332
Joined: 11 years ago
x 5186

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by rambone 78 »

TP, if this is real, then I would guess you will be a little nervous.

If they actually have video of him deflating the balls, which I would guess would come from security cameras in the locker room, then that might be the smoking gun.

Of course, I'm sure the guy isn't going to say Brady or someone specifically told him to deflate them, but he would know that they like the balls softer.

But then again, who knows? Whatever happens now, there's going to be a cloud over this SB, like it or not.

What seems odd, is why is the NFL saying this might take weeks to settle?
0 x
User avatar
adam914
Ernie Calverley
Posts: 9718
Joined: 11 years ago
x 7385

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by adam914 »

SmartyBarrett wrote: Also, NDGT is basing his science on a report that has been reported to be false.
Actually, he is basing it off of words that came out of Belichick's mouth in his press conference.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-foo ... snt-add-up
0 x
"Our goals have not changed, we want to be the best program in the Atlantic 10, and even more than that we want to get to a Final Four someday." - Thorr Bjorn - March 22, 2018
User avatar
TruePoint
Frank Keaney
Posts: 13851
Joined: 11 years ago
x 11427

Re: PATRIOTS-RAVENS

Unread post by TruePoint »

scine20 wrote:
TruePoint wrote:
rambone 78 wrote:A locker room attendant?


Acting on whose orders? Wouldn't do it on his own, now would he? Hmmm............
IF he exists and IF he actually did something to the balls, then yes he would have been ordered to do so.
So Jay Glazer's making it up?
I'm sure someone in the NFL office told him that. They've also told Mort there were 11 balls at least 2 PSI under the limit while telling Florio only one ball was that deflated (the one the Colts possessed, BTW) and the rest were roughly 1 PSI light. That is after almost everything that was leaked by the NFL during the Rice investigation turned out to be either false or later contradicted by another leak. So forgive me for taking a wait-and-see approach to that type of information.

In addition, there could really be a video of a locker room attendant who really did take the balls from the refs locker room and they really may have interviewed him and he really may be a person of interest. But that does not mean that locker room attendant deflated any footballs.

Rambone - your last post is my issue with you in a nutshell. You said "if they actually have video of him deflating the balls..." Yeah, if they have that, Pats are dead to rights. Obviously. Can you go find me a source that says they have a kid deflating footballs on video? (Hint: you cannot.)
0 x
"If you build it, they will come." --Us, circa 2011
Post Reply