Mark Sanchez at 13th?

[DIRTEE]

Masshole - I thought your entry was right on point. I feel the exact same way. Welcome to the board.

BHA - I'm against drafting Sanchez, I honestly believe he's no better than Campbell and there are other key positions that need to be filled first. If all holes were filled, I wouldn't have a problem drafting him.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by DIRTEE

BHA - I'm against drafting Sanchez, I honestly believe he's no better than Campbell and there are other key positions that need to be filled first. If all holes were filled, I wouldn't have a problem drafting him.

Agreed. We can't and shouldn't try to fill all our needs now. And of course, you go with the best player available in the first round...but the BPA at a position of need. And at some point we need to start addressing the lack of youth on the OL, DEs, even LB and RB.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Agreed. We can't and shouldn't try to fill all our needs now. And of course, you go with the best player available in the first round...but the BPA at a position of need. And at some point we need to start addressing the lack of youth on the OL, DEs, even LB and RB.

BPA at a position of need? Mark Sanchez fits the bill. QB is arguably the biggest position of need on our team.

People keep saying that Jason Campbell has consistenly improved; that if he gets a better O-line, more consistent play from his receivers, more time in a system, more explosive play from the running back position, more this, more that... that he'll become a solid NFL QB. Well, if you gave every 2nd and 3rd string QB in the NFL all of that, they'd probably be "solid" QBs as well. Some things are stronger than others, but theres not a single team in the NFL that doesnt have multiple needs.

The truth is, no QB gets the "perfect" environment. People keep saying over and over again that Tom Brady would be horrible on this team, behind this line and with these receivers, but that's the biggest load of crap i've ever heard. Tom Brady makes good decisions. Tom Brady knows when to throw the football. Tom Brady knows when to take a chance. Tom Brady looks deep and makes it through his reads... you get my drift. If Tom Brady came here, he might take a few more sacks; he might not get quite as many yards or completions, but he would still be Tom Brady and he would still be one of the top 3 QBs in the league The truth is, guys like Tom Brady don't rely on everything around them being just right... guys like Tom Brady have "the intangibles." Guys like Tom Brady INSPIRE everyone around them. Guys like Tom Brady MAKE everyone around them better.

If you took a poll of the 31 teams in the NFL not named the New England Patriots - the 31 teams that passed on him atleast 5 times, and you asked them if they could go back and do the 2000 draft over again, atleast 30 of them would take Tom Brady with their 1st pick - regardless of what other "needs" they felt were more pressing at the time. Why? Because they know what a guy like Tom Brady can do. They know that a QB is the most important position in all of sports - and when you get a guy like that, you can build an entire team around him and have long-success. Mark Sanchez is that kind of player.

If the Skins dont get Sanchez, they will be looking for a new coach AND a new quarterback in 2010 anyways, because they felt some other need was more pressing. Some people may not feel QB is the teams most pressing need in 2009, but if you can look beyond the season as many people have criticized the FO for failing to do in the past, you will understand why QB IS a pressing need for this team.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

BPA at a position of need? Mark Sanchez fits the bill. QB is arguably the biggest position of need on our team.

People keep saying that Jason Campbell has consistenly improved; that if he gets a better O-line, more consistent play from his receivers, more time in a system, more explosive play from the running back position, more this, more that... that he'll become a solid NFL QB. Well, if you gave every 2nd and 3rd string QB in the NFL all of that, they'd probably be "solid" QBs as well. Some things are stronger than others, but theres not a single team in the NFL that doesnt have multiple needs.

The truth is, no QB gets the "perfect" environment. People keep saying over and over again that Tom Brady would be horrible on this team, behind this line and with these receivers, but that's the biggest load of crap i've ever heard. Tom Brady makes good decisions. Tom Brady knows when to throw the football. Tom Brady knows when to take a chance. Tom Brady looks deep and makes it through his reads... you get my drift. If Tom Brady came here, he might take a few more sacks; he might not get quite as many yards or completions, but he would still be Tom Brady and he would still be one of the top 3 QBs in the league The truth is, guys like Tom Brady don't rely on everything around them being just right... guys like Tom Brady have "the intangibles." Guys like Tom Brady INSPIRE everyone around them. Guys like Tom Brady MAKE everyone around them better.

If you took a poll of the 31 teams in the NFL not named the New England Patriots - the 31 teams that passed on him atleast 5 times, and you asked them if they could go back and do the 2000 draft over again, atleast 30 of them would take Tom Brady with their 1st pick - regardless of what other "needs" they felt were more pressing at the time. Why? Because they know what a guy like Tom Brady can do. They know that a QB is the most important position in all of sports - and when you get a guy like that, you can build an entire team around him and have long-success. Mark Sanchez is that kind of player.

If the Skins dont get Sanchez, they will be looking for a new coach AND a new quarterback in 2010 anyways, because they felt some other need was more pressing. Some people may not feel QB is the teams most pressing need in 2009, but if you can look beyond the season as many people have criticized the FO for failing to do in the past, you will understand why QB IS a pressing need for this team.

You're regressing, BHA.

You're also missing the point on Brady. He, himself, wouldn't be any worse of a quarterback here than in New England. He, himself, would be the same guy. He just wouldn't win as much or make as many pro bowls as he would playing for NE. It wouldn't be his fault. I'm sure when we're 10-6 and exiting from the playoffs in the wild card round, you'll be all over Brady for his inspirational demeanor and his ability to make Santana Moss look a little bit better than he really is. Championship!

And then there's the assumption that Mark Sanchez is basically Tom Brady, and/or would have a Brady-like inspirational effect on the Redskins. Well, uh, not exactly.

Here's the deal, I enjoy you're refreshing forward induction approach here, but it's unnecessary. I don't care what system you run. You simply don't replace a 27 year old QB with similar value to Campbell if you:

a) know what you are doing
b) don't have a really, really problematic externality (can't contact your QB)

That's the problem in a nutshell. You're saying that QB will be a problem in the future, and we should address it now. That's simply not the case, contract issues aside. You have to go forward under the assumption that Jason Campbell can't go anywhere in 2010 unless the team chooses a different path. If the team is at that point right now, it's very clear they have no idea what they are doing.



Oh, and teams would not pass over Tom Brady again because he's really good, i.e. better than Sanchez will ever be. Not for any other cosmic reason.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

You're regressing, BHA.

You're also missing the point on Brady. He, himself, wouldn't be any worse of a quarterback here than in New England. He, himself, would be the same guy. He just wouldn't win as much or make as many pro bowls as he would playing for NE. It wouldn't be his fault. I'm sure when we're 10-6 and exiting from the playoffs in the wild card round, you'll be all over Brady for his inspirational demeanor and his ability to make Santana Moss look a little bit better than he really is. Championship!

And then there's the assumption that Mark Sanchez is basically Tom Brady, and/or would have a Brady-like inspirational effect on the Redskins. Well, uh, not exactly.

Here's the deal, I enjoy you're refreshing forward induction approach here, but it's unnecessary. I don't care what system you run. You simply don't replace a 27 year old QB with similar value to Campbell if you:

a) know what you are doing
b) don't have a really, really problematic externality (can't contact your QB)

That's the problem in a nutshell. You're saying that QB will be a problem in the future, and we should address it now. That's simply not the case, contract issues aside. You have to go forward under the assumption that Jason Campbell can't go anywhere in 2010 unless the team chooses a different path. If the team is at that point right now, it's very clear they have no idea what they are doing.



Oh, and teams would not pass over Tom Brady again because he's really good, i.e. better than Sanchez will ever be. Not for any other cosmic reason.

This is where you and I disagree - i can envision no realistic scenario in which the team doesnt go in a different path. None. The idea that the team will have any reason to stick with Campbell is a fantasy to me. (Whether the team "knows what theyre doing" or not is largely irrelevant.)

Mark Sanchez is a good fit for the WCO- Jason Campbell isnt. if Campbell were entering his 4th season under Saunders now, we wouldnt be having this discussion. Campbell is a good fit for that type of system. He isnt for Zorns. If Zorn beleived in Campbell, he wouldnt be so high on Sanchez, would he?

Also, someone else made a good point-it was something like: Zorn/Sanchez could go 6-10 in 2009 and everyone could be fine for 2010, but Zorn/Campbell could go 9-7 and everyone (Zorn/Campbell/Cerrato) loses their jobs. Like it or not, the stakes are much higher for Zorn if Campbell is here. Realistically, given the level of patience in the modern NFL (and our owners impatience in particular), anything less than 11-5 or an NFC championship game appearance and we're starting from scratch in 2010. Given JCs complete lack of natural suitability for this offense, and the other holes we have on this team, do you really think thats a likely outcome?

I dont. And every opinion I have about the direction this team should go is based on that premise. "Slow, steady improvement" on Campbells part is not going to cut it. Maybe, if he were only entering his 2nd or 3rd year in the league... but not his 5th. Campbell is close to realizing his potential. Theres not that much more room for improvement, atleast not in this system. My #1 hope is that this team drafts a rookie WCO QB (quick release, good decionsmaker, extremely accurate with short passes) and then keeps the system in place for him atleast 3-4 years. Blame it on whatever and whomever you want, but Campbell is damaged goods and will never become a franchise QB in this system. IMO Its time to cut our losses and move on.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

This is where you and I disagree - i can envision no realistic scenario in which the team doesnt go in a different path. None. The idea that the team will have any reason to stick with Campbell is a fantasy to me. (Whether the team "knows what theyre doing" or not is largely irrelevant.)

Mark Sanchez is a good fit for the WCO- Jason Campbell isnt. if Campbell were entering his 4th season under Saunders now, we wouldnt be having this discussion. Campbell is a good fit for that type of system. He isnt for Zorns. If Zorn beleived in Campbell, he wouldnt be so high on Sanchez, would he?

Zorn would want Sanchez if JC wasn't his QB (read what Smootsmack wrote). I doubt Zorn would want to put his career in the hands of a rookie QB, instead of the player that proved to be a good QB when he had protection.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

This is where you and I disagree - i can envision no realistic scenario in which the team doesnt go in a different path. None. The idea that the team will have any reason to stick with Campbell is a fantasy to me. (Whether the team "knows what theyre doing" or not is largely irrelevant.)

Mark Sanchez is a good fit for the WCO- Jason Campbell isnt. if Campbell were entering his 4th season under Saunders now, we wouldnt be having this discussion. Campbell is a good fit for that type of system. He isnt for Zorns. If Zorn beleived in Campbell, he wouldnt be so high on Sanchez, would he?

Also, someone else made a good point-it was something like: Zorn/Sanchez could go 6-10 in 2009 and everyone could be fine for 2010, but Zorn/Campbell could go 9-7 and everyone (Zorn/Campbell/Cerrato) loses their jobs. Like it or not, the stakes are much higher for Zorn if Campbell is here. Realistically, given the level of patience in the modern NFL (and our owners impatience in particular), anything less than 11-5 or an NFC championship game appearance and we're starting from scratch in 2010. Given JCs complete lack of natural suitability for this offense, and the other holes we have on this team, do you really think thats a likely outcome?

I dont. And every opinion I have about the direction this team should go is based on that premise. "Slow, steady improvement" on Campbells part is not going to cut it. Maybe, if he were only entering his 2nd or 3rd year in the league... but not his 5th. Campbell is close to realizing his potential. Theres not that much more room for improvement, atleast not in this system. My #1 hope is that this team drafts a rookie WCO QB (quick release, good decionsmaker, extremely accurate with short passes) and then keeps the system in place for him atleast 3-4 years. Blame it on whatever and whomever you want, but Campbell is damaged goods and will never become a franchise QB in this system. IMO Its time to cut our losses and move on.

I cannot understand your extreme dislike of JC.

In a new system in 2008, and behind a creaky OL, his qb rating was better than Favre, Flacco, Kerry Collins, and Roethlisberger. His completion percentage was better than Romo, Eli Manning, and Matt Ryan. He also threw for more yards than Eli Manning. And he threw fewer interceptions than just about everyone who starts.

So, in a new system with a creaky offensive line, he outperformed some Super Bowl winning QB's. It seems to me that, in the best-case scenario, your views are very much overstated, and in the worst-case scenario your views on JC are way off.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by Lotus

I cannot understand your extreme dislike of JC.

In a new system in 2008, and behind a creaky OL, his qb rating was better than Favre, Flacco, Kerry Collins, and Roethlisberger. His completion percentage was better than Romo, Eli Manning, and Matt Ryan. He also threw for more yards than Eli Manning. And he threw fewer interceptions than just about everyone who starts.

So, in a new system with a creaky offensive line, he outperformed some Super Bowl winning QB's. It seems to me that, in the best-case scenario, your views are very much overstated, and in the worst-case scenario your views on JC are way off.

Dont forget the fact that he didnt throw a pick till the Pitt game

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Lotus

I cannot understand your extreme dislike of JC.

In a new system in 2008, and behind a creaky OL, his qb rating was better than Favre, Flacco, Kerry Collins, and Roethlisberger. His completion percentage was better than Romo, Eli Manning, and Matt Ryan. He also threw for more yards than Eli Manning. And he threw fewer interceptions than just about everyone who starts.

So, in a new system with a creaky offensive line, he outperformed some Super Bowl winning QB's. It seems to me that, in the best-case scenario, your views are very much overstated, and in the worst-case scenario your views on JC are way off.

Many people are like this, I don't understand why such hatred for Campbell. I guess these people didn't see wideouts dropping good passes or our old offensive linemen getting bulldozed during the second half of the season. I wish people would write long threads on why we should draft a stud o-lineman instead of all of this anti-Campbell stuff. It reminds me when Reed Doughty became Redskins enemy #1 and people stopped talking about him when he got hurt.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

This is where you and I disagree - i can envision no realistic scenario in which the team doesnt go in a different path. None. The idea that the team will have any reason to stick with Campbell is a fantasy to me. (Whether the team "knows what theyre doing" or not is largely irrelevant.)

Mark Sanchez is a good fit for the WCO- Jason Campbell isnt. if Campbell were entering his 4th season under Saunders now, we wouldnt be having this discussion. Campbell is a good fit for that type of system. He isnt for Zorns. If Zorn beleived in Campbell, he wouldnt be so high on Sanchez, would he?

Also, someone else made a good point-it was something like: Zorn/Sanchez could go 6-10 in 2009 and everyone could be fine for 2010, but Zorn/Campbell could go 9-7 and everyone (Zorn/Campbell/Cerrato) loses their jobs. Like it or not, the stakes are much higher for Zorn if Campbell is here. Realistically, given the level of patience in the modern NFL (and our owners impatience in particular), anything less than 11-5 or an NFC championship game appearance and we're starting from scratch in 2010. Given JCs complete lack of natural suitability for this offense, and the other holes we have on this team, do you really think thats a likely outcome?

I dont. And every opinion I have about the direction this team should go is based on that premise. "Slow, steady improvement" on Campbells part is not going to cut it. Maybe, if he were only entering his 2nd or 3rd year in the league... but not his 5th. Campbell is close to realizing his potential. Theres not that much more room for improvement, atleast not in this system. My #1 hope is that this team drafts a rookie WCO QB (quick release, good decionsmaker, extremely accurate with short passes) and then keeps the system in place for him atleast 3-4 years. Blame it on whatever and whomever you want, but Campbell is damaged goods and will never become a franchise QB in this system. IMO Its time to cut our losses and move on.

Sanchez is a good fit for the USC system (just like every other USC QB, hell John David Booty looked like an NFL QB out there) But seriously people JC has been in 6 or 7 different systems going back to college. It's only been one year and everyone wants a QB who wasnt a better prospect than Matt Leinart and look at him.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Also, someone else made a good point-it was something like: Zorn/Sanchez could go 6-10 in 2009 and everyone could be fine for 2010, but Zorn/Campbell could go 9-7 and everyone (Zorn/Campbell/Cerrato) loses their jobs. Like it or not, the stakes are much higher for Zorn if Campbell is here. Realistically, given the level of patience in the modern NFL (and our owners impatience in particular), anything less than 11-5 or an NFC championship game appearance and we're starting from scratch in 2010. Given JCs complete lack of natural suitability for this offense, and the other holes we have on this team, do you really think thats a likely outcome?

I think you are GROSSLY overstating what will be required for year 3 of Zorn/Campbell. No owner, even Snyder, is going to fire a coach with a .500 season and a winning season as their first two seasons. Again, it amazes me the way some of you guys talk, like we're coming off of a 2-14 season or something. We won ONE less game than the previous season, and you could put 3 of them (Rams, Bengals, Niners) squarely on the defense. The funniest, most ironic thing is the lack of patience and foresight you kill the front office of is the justification for mortgaging the future because you're unhappy with consistent progress.

Originally Posted by BHA

I dont. And every opinion I have about the direction this team should go is based on that premise. "Slow, steady improvement" on Campbells part is not going to cut it. Maybe, if he were only entering his 2nd or 3rd year in the league... but not his 5th. Campbell is close to realizing his potential. Theres not that much more room for improvement, atleast not in this system. My #1 hope is that this team drafts a rookie WCO QB (quick release, good decionsmaker, extremely accurate with short passes) and then keeps the system in place for him atleast 3-4 years. Blame it on whatever and whomever you want, but Campbell is damaged goods and will never become a franchise QB in this system. IMO Its time to cut our losses and move on.

It's Campbell's 3rd year as a starter. His first year was a wash. He didn't touch the field and that offense was scrapped, how can you count that? He played midway thru his second season, started all of his third and all of his 4th. Why are you in such a hurry to throw dirt on his grave as a QB? The argument of "he's not a fit for the WCO" just doesn't hold water. Completion percentage-up. Yards-up. TD-up. INT-down. What's your criteria for 'not a good fit'?

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

I think you are GROSSLY overstating what will be required for year 3 of Zorn/Campbell. No owner, even Snyder, is going to fire a coach with a .500 season and a winning season as their first two seasons. Again, it amazes me the way some of you guys talk, like we're coming off of a 2-14 season or something. We won ONE less game than the previous season, and you could put 3 of them (Rams, Bengals, Niners) squarely on the defense. The funniest, most ironic thing is the lack of patience and foresight you kill the front office of is the justification for mortgaging the future because you're unhappy with consistent progress.


It's Campbell's 3rd year as a starter. His first year was a wash. He didn't touch the field and that offense was scrapped, how can you count that? He played midway thru his second season, started all of his third and all of his 4th. Why are you in such a hurry to throw dirt on his grave as a QB? The argument of "he's not a fit for the WCO" just doesn't hold water. Completion percentage-up. Yards-up. TD-up. INT-down. What's your criteria for 'not a good fit'?

Its so obvious, Sanchez went to USC, Campbell didn't lock it up man. Say it with me: CHAMPIONSHIP!!!!

[Masshole]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

BPA at a position of need? Mark Sanchez fits the bill. QB is arguably the biggest position of need on our team.

People keep saying that Jason Campbell has consistenly improved; that if he gets a better O-line, more consistent play from his receivers, more time in a system, more explosive play from the running back position, more this, more that... that he'll become a solid NFL QB. Well, if you gave every 2nd and 3rd string QB in the NFL all of that, they'd probably be "solid" QBs as well. Some things are stronger than others, but theres not a single team in the NFL that doesnt have multiple needs.

The truth is, no QB gets the "perfect" environment. People keep saying over and over again that Tom Brady would be horrible on this team, behind this line and with these receivers, but that's the biggest load of crap i've ever heard. Tom Brady makes good decisions. Tom Brady knows when to throw the football. Tom Brady knows when to take a chance. Tom Brady looks deep and makes it through his reads... you get my drift.

86.5
85.7
85.9

Those are Tom Brady's numbers through his first three years starting. He didn't take off until his fourth year as a starter, 5th year in the league.

82.5 was Phillip Rivers' Qb rating last year. It was 105.5 this year, his fifth year in the league. Drew Brees in his first and second years starting went 76.9/67.5 then in his third year starting, fourth in the league, he went 104.7. Brett Favre 85.3, 72.9 in his first two years starting, took off in his 4th year. In 2001, Peyton Manning, in his fourth year as a starter and in the league, went 6-10 with the Colts, posted an 84.1 QB rating (about the same as Campbell's this year), then went 88.1 the next, and in his 6th year got to 99 and never looked back or went under that, nor did the Colts go anything less than 12-4 once he was locked in.

Are we seeing a trend?

Franchise QB's don't just come out ready made. Rothlesberger won early because he inherited a team that was STACKED and just needed a QB. Ryan was good, but we'll see what happens this year after teams have made adjustments. Franchise Qb's take time, they take patience and they take coaching before you get them to that level. Now, Brady experienced more on field success early then he should have because Bellichik cheated (no seriously. they played WAY over their stats, they had no business winning as many games as they did based on all of their efficiency stats. They cheated and besides completely undermining the integrity of the game, the reason the NFL won't do anything more than take away a draft pick and sweep it under the rug is because what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas, namely paid out Super Bowl bets that would become defunct if further investigative action was taking).

However, the fact that he cheated doesn't negate the fact that Bellichik is, along with Bill Walsh, the best Coach/football mind in the modern era. And for all intents and purposes, Montana and Brady are considered the best QB's of the era (though I personally view Brady with a large astericks for the early work, now he's clearly a beast). So you can play the chicken and the egg game with them, but considering the two best qb's ever were starters at big name schools and still fell to the lower rounds tells me that many teams scouted them both and passed them over. So did all these professional scouts just miss something? Or did these two football geniuses take good qb's and make them great?

I mean, I don't necessarily know the answer to that, but what I do know is, statistically speaking, Franchise QB's make the leap between their 4th and 6th years in the league on average, and Campbell's about to hit 5th year, and really only just completed his first full season starting. So if he were a Franchise Qb (and I fully believe he has that potential), we would have only seen flashes of it by now, not the full package (like say, when he started 08 with a 100.7 QB Rating and beat the Cowboys and the Eagles with masterful performances on the road, or the Cardinals, or the comeback win against the Saints, to name a few). Bottom line is, it sure seems like you have to give qb's anywhere from 3-5 years to see what you've got, and we keep insisting on judging them in 2. And we don't win anything and haven't since Danny got here, and we ask why. That's why.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

BPA at a position of need? Mark Sanchez fits the bill. QB is arguably the biggest position of need on our team.

People keep saying that Jason Campbell has consistenly improved; that if he gets a better O-line, more consistent play from his receivers, more time in a system, more explosive play from the running back position, more this, more that... that he'll become a solid NFL QB. Well, if you gave every 2nd and 3rd string QB in the NFL all of that, they'd probably be "solid" QBs as well. Some things are stronger than others, but theres not a single team in the NFL that doesnt have multiple needs.

The truth is, no QB gets the "perfect" environment. People keep saying over and over again that Tom Brady would be horrible on this team, behind this line and with these receivers, but that's the biggest load of crap i've ever heard. Tom Brady makes good decisions. Tom Brady knows when to throw the football. Tom Brady knows when to take a chance. Tom Brady looks deep and makes it through his reads... you get my drift. If Tom Brady came here, he might take a few more sacks; he might not get quite as many yards or completions, but he would still be Tom Brady and he would still be one of the top 3 QBs in the league The truth is, guys like Tom Brady don't rely on everything around them being just right... guys like Tom Brady have "the intangibles." Guys like Tom Brady INSPIRE everyone around them. Guys like Tom Brady MAKE everyone around them better.

If you took a poll of the 31 teams in the NFL not named the New England Patriots - the 31 teams that passed on him atleast 5 times, and you asked them if they could go back and do the 2000 draft over again, atleast 30 of them would take Tom Brady with their 1st pick - regardless of what other "needs" they felt were more pressing at the time. Why? Because they know what a guy like Tom Brady can do. They know that a QB is the most important position in all of sports - and when you get a guy like that, you can build an entire team around him and have long-success. Mark Sanchez is that kind of player.

OMG yeah that's why Brady looked like a below average QB when the dominant NY defense pressured or sacked him all game SB before last Seriously bro, seriously think about what you're saying. Protection and WR talent don't matter?! Are you just angry about something else altogether? Why ignore historical fact and reality toward a point that doesn't prove anything.

...most QBs in the league can be quite good when surrounded by phenomenal talent and great protection. It's that simple. A very small handful can "will" their way to success in lesser conditions. Tom Brady is not among that group. Belichick, aside from the year Reche Caldwell was NE's #1 WR, has always surrounded his QB w/ awesome talent and truly phenomenal pass protection. I would put Brees and even Dono way ahead in that category compared to Brady.

[Zerohero]

Originally Posted by The Goat

OMG yeah that's why Brady looked like a below average QB when the dominant NY defense pressured or sacked him all game SB before last Seriously bro, seriously think about what you're saying. Protection and WR talent don't matter?! Are you just angry about something else altogether? Why ignore historical fact and reality toward a point that doesn't prove anything.

...most QBs in the league can be quite good when surrounded by phenomenal talent and great protection. It's that simple. A very small handful can "will" their way to success in lesser conditions. Tom Brady is not among that group. Belichick, aside from the year Reche Caldwell was NE's #1 WR, has always surrounded his QB w/ awesome talent and truly phenomenal pass protection. I would put Brees and even Dono way ahead in that category compared to Brady.

Wasn't Brady hurt that game? I understand your points on he has had a great system but i think his intangibles still would make him pretty successful in other offenses. While he has had a very good team to play with, he has brought his team back and won in the last minute too many times to say he cant will his team to victory.