Wow. The world, and fans, are so fickle. He's one of the best to ever play the game. Their expectations are ridiculous.
Great job illustrating why QBs shouldn't be credited with Super Bowl wins and blamed when it doesn't happen. Brady is much more dangerous now as a passer than he was in 01-04 yet the Pats can't win the big game anymore.
There is no doubt that Brady is a HoF QB. However, out of his 9 seasons he has had only 2 great ones. The other 7 were HoF good, but not "one of the best ever" good. He is a better Qb now than he was during those SB runs, which is why I laugh when people try to say that Brady carried those teams to their Super Bowl wins. Brady will be 34 next season and has played only 9 seasons. He will start to decline shortly and unless he puts up another 3-5 years like his 2007 or 2010 seasons he won't be an all-time great QB. At 34 and older, I don't see that happening.
… Does not win championships anymore. Don’t get carried away and try to fit this article into an ideological peghole. Its point is that Brady can and has played poorly at inopportune moments, and that causes the Patriots to lose playoff games. It’s also authored by a Colts fan, someone who’s had to put up with years of “Manning chokes in the playoffs, Brady doesn’t” talk. He’s getting a bit of revenge.
Defense wins championships. Did you not read the entire article that you posted? It doesn't say anything about Brady playing bad at inopportune times, it stats that even though he has played badly in at least one game in 4 out of 5 playoff runs his defense stepped up and carried him. That's the point, someone like Manning or Marino has a great playoff game but they still lose (example Marino scored 34 points in a playoff game with a 110QB yet the defense gave up 44 points) where as Brady can have even a poor playoff game and not lose. Brady produced as many playoff games with a rating below 80 (five) as he did above 100. In four of his five postseasons, Brady had played poorly at least once. But every time he played poorly, his defense bailed him out. Colts fan or not, the stats don't lie.
Not this again. You’re obviously not going to listen to anything I say on this topic, and now you’re hijacking the thread. You can believe whatever you want, but at least refrain from twisting the article to suit your purposes. The article is not about how great defenses win championships, it’s about how poor play from Brady at inopportune moments sank the Patriots’ championship hopes, and the rest of the team wasn’t good enough to compensate for mistakes by the quarterback. In other words, the Patriots aren’t special, they’re vulnerable to the same flaws and trends as the other 31 NFL teams, and the Patriots defense isn’t good enough to help Brady when he’s having a bad game. Just like the Colts.
Bro, you really need to reread your own post. This article has absolutely nothing to do with what you think it does. It CLEARLY implies that Brady never played extremely well in all of his playoff games and his defense carried him. It is saying that ever since his defenses have not been as good, and even though he's playing better now than how he played then, they can't win the big games. In a nut shell it is saying that Brady at his best can't win without great defensive play.
No, it’s saying that in the recent instances in which Brady has not played well, the Patriots didn’t have a good enough defense to bail him out, and that Brady should be called out for not playing well in those instances in the first place. You’re reading what you want to read, not what it’s actually saying. Highlighting [URL="http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=3315”]the suckitude of the Patriots’ defense[/URL] has been a CHFF thing for the last few months, by the way.
You're too funny. And 100% wrong. I'm not understanding how you're even coming to the conclusion you are. It CLEARLY states that even though Brady is playing better NOW than when he did when the Patriots won their Super Bowls they can't win because the defense isn't as good. For example, in 3 out of his first 6 playoff games he posted a QBR under 75 for an average of a 73 QBR. Yet the Patriots won 2 Super Bowls during those runs.Why? Because his defense bailed him out. Now, move ahead to the 2005 post season. Brady puts up a 74 QBR, but they lose. Why? Because the defense wasn't as good. In 2006 he posts a 57 QBR and they win. The very next game he posts a 79 QBR and they lose. Why? Defense couldn't bail him out with two sub-par games in a row. Now in the 2007 season he puts up a 66 QBR and they win, again. However, in the Super Bowl he puts up an 82 QBR (average) and they lose. Why? 2009 he posts a 49 QBR. They lose. In 2010 he puts up an 89 QBR and they lose. This article CLEARLY talks about how even though Bray is a better QB NOW than what he was THEN the Patriots can't win because of their defense. It CLEARLY implies that Brady's best isn't good enough without a great defense.
Super Bowls equal great teams. What "numbers" does Brady have? Peyton's numbers are better than Brady's so how is Brady better than Manning? Even in the playoff's Manning has a QBR of 89 where as Brady's is 86. In today's game who doesn't have a different supporting cast?
He had an elite season this year and during his 50 TD season. That's two out of his 11 years in the league. Wow. <-----(Sarcasm) He beat Bernie Kosar's consecutive throws without an INT. Wow.<----(Sarcasm) Why is it that the Pats can produce with every other team's castoff's and 7th round players? System, that's why. Cassell, Welker, Branch, and the list goes on and on. I may have been inclined to believe it's Brady if it were just one WR. But it's WR's, RB's, TE's etc etc.
