Tom "Iceman" Brady

[wilsowilso]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Huh? The main job of a quarterback is to pass. If he doesn't pass, he runs. Surely the reason Brady is better than Marino in your opinion isn't because he's a deadly runner. So if Marino is the better passer, why on earth would Brady be the better QB?

I don't know what kind of team you are coaching? The job of the quarterback is to lead. To lead his team to victory. Marino was of course a better passer, but no way was he a better leader. In fact he wasn't even close to Brady.

[FRPLG]

Brady is overrated.

Not one part of me thinks that they won that game simply because of Brady. He is good for sure but he isn't 'make a bad team good' good. He is a great leader and a good skill QB nut not the sickest qb ever.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

Brady is overrated.

Not one part of me thinks that they won that game simply because of Brady. He is good for sure but he isn't 'make a bad team good' good. He is a great leader and a good skill QB nut not the sickest qb ever.

Wow, that's pretty strong. You think Brady is overated, huh?

I'm not a big Brady fan myself, but I would have to think all those wins count for something.

[Hail2theskins]

I cant stand any brady supporter arguments because you only have one... look at the rings man look at the rings... who gives a flying f*ck. that doesnt mean anything, the pats are good because of coaching not because tom brady is some miracle QB. being a quarterback is about leadership, but its also about playing your goddamn posistion which he is NOT THE GREATEST AT, good yes, but no way in hell the greatest. Look at the skins for chrissakes, 3 different qbs with superbowl wins in 10 years. I gurantee you the pats could win with a different QB, then everyone might think a little differently about brady, get off his damn nuts. The pats have a GOOD TEAM with a GOOD QUARTERBACK and EXCELLENT COACHING, not the greatest QB in the nfl, the pats win with a strong team effort and a good coach. you cant just deny statistics on the field and then arbitraly throw in, look at how many rings hes got hes obviously the greatest. WHO CARES how many damn rings hes got, if hes not producing the numbers hes not the best qb in the nfl.

[wilsowilso]

Originally Posted by Hail2theskins

WHO CARES how many damn rings hes got, if hes not producing the numbers hes not the best qb in the nfl.

There is one number he has produced that is the only one that matters. 12-1 playoff record. If you think being the best is all about numbers maybe Dan Snyder has a job for you. Being the best is about winning period and if you try and argue that you are some kind of fan of stats numbers or math or something. Maybe it's not the Pats coaching afterall as much as it is Tom Brady is the man. Ask any HOF coach how they won all those big games and I promise you to a man they will say it was because of the players.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by Hail2theskins

I cant stand any brady supporter arguments because you only have one... look at the rings man look at the rings... who gives a flying f*ck. that doesnt mean anything, the pats are good because of coaching not because tom brady is some miracle QB. being a quarterback is about leadership, but its also about playing your goddamn posistion which he is NOT THE GREATEST AT, good yes, but no way in hell the greatest. Look at the skins for chrissakes, 3 different qbs with superbowl wins in 10 years. I gurantee you the pats could win with a different QB, then everyone might think a little differently about brady, get off his damn nuts. The pats have a GOOD TEAM with a GOOD QUARTERBACK and EXCELLENT COACHING, not the greatest QB in the nfl, the pats win with a strong team effort and a good coach. you cant just deny statistics on the field and then arbitraly throw in, look at how many rings hes got hes obviously the greatest. WHO CARES how many damn rings hes got, if hes not producing the numbers hes not the best qb in the nfl.

I totally respect your position. But to minimize three Super Bowl rings makes about as much sense as the Gibbs apologists try to do when pointing to his three Super Bowls to validate his greatness. You can't validate one and dismiss the other. They go hand in hand. Yes, coaching is critical to success, but the game is played between the lines.

If three rings are good enough to call a head coach great, then they're damn sure good enough to categorize a quarterback great who headed three teams to three Super Bowl wins. Would the Pats be as good without Brady, ummm...that's debatable actually.

[Hail2theskins]

Originally Posted by wilsowilso

There is one number he has produced that is the only one that matters. 12-1 playoff record. If you think being the best is all about numbers maybe Dan Snyder has a job for you. Being the best is about winning period and if you try and argue that you are some kind of fan of stats numbers or math or something. Maybe it's not the Pats coaching afterall as much as it is Tom Brady is the man. Ask any HOF coach how they won all those big games and I promise you to a man they will say it was because of the players.

right, cuz most good coaches are modest, and that quote you took out was completley out of context, im not saying hes the worst qb in the history of the nfl, but i give more credit to his team and coaching in general then i give tom brady the person, hes a good qb and all which was what i said, but you cant give the pats success strictly to tom brady, you have to give it equally throughout that team, as belichick says himself every game is a team effort noone on the field is more important than the other, if you want to go by what coaches say.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by Hail2theskins

right, cuz most good coaches are modest, and by the way, dont take my posts out of context again, im not saying hes the worst qb in the history of the nfl, but i give more credit to his team and coaching in general then i give tom brady the person, hes a good qb and all which was what i said, but you cant give the pats success strictly to tom brady, you have to give it equally throughout that team, as belichick says himself every game is a team effort noone on the field is more important than the other, if you want to go by what coaches say.

No, I understood your post. Of course Brady has a good team around him and a good coach. Good quarterbacking alone doesn't get you anywhere.

But there is something about Brady that gets into his opponents head and his team's head as well. They believe when this guy is under center anything can happen. Not many, if any, quarterbacks have that intangible working for them right now.

[Hail2theskins]

that wasnt directed towards you 12thman, i was late to put my quote in.

[wilsowilso]

Originally Posted by Hail2theskins

right, cuz most good coaches are modest, and that quote you took out was completley out of context, im not saying hes the worst qb in the history of the nfl, but i give more credit to his team and coaching in general then i give tom brady the person, hes a good qb and all which was what i said, but you cant give the pats success strictly to tom brady, you have to give it equally throughout that team, as belichick says himself every game is a team effort noone on the field is more important than the other, if you want to go by what coaches say.

I'm not sure if anyone who says Tom Brady is a "good" QB has any idea what he actually does on the field. There isn't anyone in the NFL that has his football awareness and poise and most importantly the ability to make the correct read with his accurate delivery. I will say you are right that Brady doesn't deserve all the credit, but he is the smartest player on the field whenever he plays and that's including next week. One thing is for certain. If NE goes to INDY and wins next week anyone who still says Manning is better than Brady is a fool. Quite honestly I hope the Colts win because I am sick of Belichik and the Patriots in general, but I know better. The Iceman Cometh!

[jdlea]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Huh? The main job of a quarterback is to pass. If he doesn't pass, he runs. Surely the reason Brady is better than Marino in your opinion isn't because he's a deadly runner. So if Marino is the better passer, why on earth would Brady be the better QB?

Because his main job is to throw the football yes, but he also has to lead his team. Brady is a great leader and, in turn, is a great winner. I'd rather go into a fourth quarter with Brady at QB than anyone else in football right now. I'd take him over Peyton because I know when the game's on the line, he's gonna produce. He's not gonna let the bright lights of the playoffs stun him and he's gonna lead his team. That's what a quarterback is, a lot more than a passer. To quote Al Pacino, "it's the top spot kid. It's the guy who gets the credit and it's the guy who takes the blame. And the other guys on your team will break their noses and their ribs and their necks for you...once they understand you." That's what Brady is. He has guys who believe and he makes em believe with 4th quarters like yesterday...playing quarterback is about a whole lot more than passing.

[The Huddle]

Originally Posted by Hail2theskins

I cant stand any brady supporter arguments because you only have one... look at the rings man look at the rings... who gives a flying f*ck. that doesnt mean anything, the pats are good because of coaching not because tom brady is some miracle QB. being a quarterback is about leadership, but its also about playing your goddamn posistion which he is NOT THE GREATEST AT, good yes, but no way in hell the greatest. Look at the skins for chrissakes, 3 different qbs with superbowl wins in 10 years. I gurantee you the pats could win with a different QB, then everyone might think a little differently about brady, get off his damn nuts. The pats have a GOOD TEAM with a GOOD QUARTERBACK and EXCELLENT COACHING, not the greatest QB in the nfl, the pats win with a strong team effort and a good coach. you cant just deny statistics on the field and then arbitraly throw in, look at how many rings hes got hes obviously the greatest. WHO CARES how many damn rings hes got, if hes not producing the numbers hes not the best qb in the nfl.

All crap, pure and simple. Your arguement ("I guarantee you the Pats could win with a different QB") is all a bunch of hot air with no factual evidence whatsoever. You're basically saying "I hate Brady and don't think he's as good as everybody says he is, so even though I have nothing to back it up you should believe me".

Winning is what its all about and the bottom line is that the Pats are a good team largely because of Brady, certainly not in spite of him. The guy gets it done when it matters: 80-25 as a starter (he'll almost certainly be the fastest QB ever to 100 wins), 12-1 in the postseason (that's an NFL record by the way), including leading 2 game-winning drives in Super Bowls...Brady does what his team asks him to do: if they ask him to hand the ball off 50 times and just throw screens that's what he does, and when they ask him to put the team in his shoulders in the toughest spots and hit the big plays, he does that, too.

It's fine to hate him for whatever reason you want, but you'd better get used to the idea that he's headed to Canton and nothing's likely to stop that.

[GTripp0012]

For clarification:
When someone asks what Tom Brady has done, it doesn't help your case to spout off what the New England Patriots have done. The New England Patriots have won 3 championships in the last 5 years. The New England Patriots have won their division and made the playoffs 4 times in the last 5 years. Tom Brady is a player on the New England Patriots. He is not the team. He's the best player on the team and the biggest reason why they are so good.

Let's say you are trying to win an election, lets say for town mayor of Foxborough, MA, against 52 other people. The rules are simple, most votes wins. You are the most qualified candidate and collect 10% of the votes. You win by a significant margin. Does that mean that if you ran for President of the U.S., against a candidate from Indianapolis by the name of Peyton Manning, that you are a lock to win?

You could have a lot of national media talking heads that call you a "winner", or a "money-man" or "clutch", but none of those titles actually says anything about you as a candidate.

Likewise, a 12-1 record says nothing about you as a football player. It says that you played on a pretty good team. Did you make them good? Who knows?

In the case of Brady, he does contribute a hefty part to his team's success. Probably more than any other individual on the Patriots. But it's very, very clear that Peyton Manning does a lot more to help the Colts win than Brady does to help the Pats win. Peyton has consistently been putting up 12 win seasons with no defense to speak of whatsoever.

The Patriots have been a better football team than the Colts for years. But Manning wins just as many games if not more than Brady does every year. If he beats Brady in the playoffs this week, the arguement should stop, IMO.

[wilsowilso]

The Colts are a flawed football team so I will agree that Manning does a lot more to create that problem than you think. He is all numbers and absolutely no substance. The team has the mindset that they can run anybody off the field and then when the pressure rises what happens? Have you noticed what happens to that team whenever they meet a good defense in the playoffs? They lose. Every time. One win won't change that, but it will help. If the Colts lose next week the argument should never have even happened in the first place.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by wilsowilso

I'm not sure if anyone who says Tom Brady is a "good" QB has any idea what he actually does on the field. There isn't anyone in the NFL that has his football awareness and poise and most importantly the ability to make the correct read with his accurate delivery. I will say you are right that Brady doesn't deserve all the credit, but he is the smartest player on the field whenever he plays and that's including next week. One thing is for certain. If NE goes to INDY and wins next week anyone who still says Manning is better than Brady is a fool. Quite honestly I hope the Colts win because I am sick of Belichik and the Patriots in general, but I know better. The Iceman Cometh!

You're definately coming off like a Brady fanboy.

The only sentence I take large issue with in this post is this one: "If NE goes to INDY and wins next week anyone who still says Manning is better than Brady is a fool."

That's too general. What if they go into Indy and win in the same fashion they beat San Diego. What have they proved? That they can get lucky at key times and win despite getting outplayed? Brady 4 Prezident!!!!

The only arguement that could possibly hold any water is one that says the playoffs and regular season are two seperate seasons, and that the complexity of the playoffs is so different from the regular season that its practically not even football. In which case, Brady's performance over 13 games is better than Peytons over 10. But why? Why would it be any different? The pressure is always really, really high during an NFL game. Any game. Peyton Manning obviously isn't bothered by pressure. Cold weather maybe, but not pressure.

The last two times these teams have played, Manning killed them. Torched them. Both times on the road. Where were you for those games?

There obviously is one QB who is more poised with better leadership than Brady, and thats Manning. His production is unbe-freakin-leavable. He wins 75% of his games with little to no help. He is better that Brady in every facet of the game.

I think we will see that this week.