Pelican Parts Forums

Pelican Parts Forums (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/)
-   Off Topic Discussions (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/)
-   -   Tom Brady is the best quarterback of all time. End of discussion (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/944942-tom-brady-best-quarterback-all-time-end-discussion.html)

onewhippedpuppy 02-07-2017 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cabmando (Post 9464482)
I don't know. Montanna did pretty well with the Chiefs. The guy was good. And I guess if you look at what Manning did as a Colt and then as a Bronco under two different systems an argument could be made.

As a Chiefs fan, I only wish Montana was as good a Chief as he was a 49er. I love Montana and grew up idolizing him but he was past due for retirement when he hit the Chiefs.

As for Manning on the Broncos, he won because of his defense. He was mediocre at best.

Heel n Toe 02-07-2017 09:32 PM

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1486531948.jpg

stomachmonkey 02-08-2017 04:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taz's Master (Post 9463767)
If not for Ryan's critical sack, we may well be discussing Brady's pick-6 and his errant throws. His comeback was magnificent, but the hole he dug his team out of, he had dug, in large part, by himself. That said, I'm not sure anyone else could have done what he did. And he's done it with solid, but not spectacular talents at his side. But I would not discount Bellicheck's contributions to Tom's career. Those two are awesome together, but I don't think we'd be discussing Brady's greatness had he played under someone else.

Brady's poor performance early on was the result of Atlantas aggressive defense and his lines inability to control them.

There were a lot of passes that were made under intense pressure.

As noted already, once Atlanta had what was effectively a win guaranteed lead they started playing to not lose. It's different than playing to win which is what the Pats did.

wdfifteen 02-08-2017 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stomachmonkey (Post 9465036)
As noted already, once Atlanta had what was effectively a win guaranteed lead they started playing to not lose. It's different than playing to win which is what the Pats did.

I agree, but I don't understand that coaching decision. What would be the downside of Atlanta playing the second half just like they played the first?

wdfifteen 02-08-2017 08:06 AM

I overheard an interesting analysis on the plane yesterday, complete with data. I love data. The guy was saying NE just plain wore the Falcons out. Their defense played the equivalent of 1 1/2 games.

I looked it up and it appears the guy was right.
Playing not to lose wasn't a coaching decision, by the 4th quarter it was all they could do.


"Entering Super Bowl 51, it seemed the Patriots’ best—and maybe only—chance was to keep Atlanta’s electrifying offense off the field. Sure enough, the Falcons finished with 46 snaps in Super Bowl 51, 18 fewer than the NFL average in 2016.
But the game’s biggest factor wasn’t that Atlanta’s offense was off the field. It was that Atlanta’s defense was on it. A lot. For 93 snaps, to be exact. Naturally, fatigue set in. And that’s the biggest reason why the Falcons suffered the greatest collapse in Super Bowl history.
It’s worth examining exactly how those 93 snaps exhausted the Falcons. For starters, 93 snaps equates to playing a game and a half. Then factor in the adrenaline of that game being on the Super Bowl stage, and what happens to a player’s energy as that adrenaline wears off. Then add in the halftime, which is twice as long as usual. Yes, that gives your body more time to rest. But it also means your body must operate on an unfamiliar internal clock. Over your previous 18 games, your body had grown accustom to its halftime routine. Oh, and speaking of 18 games, that, too, is a lot. Its cumulative effect magnifies the toll of those 93 snaps."

Crowbob 02-08-2017 08:15 AM

Immediately following the hoopla at games end, my GF said the Pats wore out the Falcons defense plain and simple.

stomachmonkey 02-08-2017 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wdfifteen (Post 9465194)
I agree, but I don't understand that coaching decision. What would be the downside of Atlanta playing the second half just like they played the first?

The defense runs out of gas. They get tired.

It can also result in big plays by the offense. If you are bringing too many guys you'll end up under covering receivers.

If the pass rush fails, as will start to happen when the defense is tired, Brady will smoke you every time.

stomachmonkey 02-08-2017 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wdfifteen (Post 9465223)
I overheard an interesting analysis on the plane yesterday, complete with data. I love data. The guy was saying NE just plain wore the Falcons out. Their defense played the equivalent of 1 1/2 games.

I looked it up and it appears the guy was right.
Playing not to lose wasn't a coaching decision, by the 4th quarter it was all they could do.


"Entering Super Bowl 51, it seemed the Patriots’ best—and maybe only—chance was to keep Atlanta’s electrifying offense off the field. Sure enough, the Falcons finished with 46 snaps in Super Bowl 51, 18 fewer than the NFL average in 2016.
But the game’s biggest factor wasn’t that Atlanta’s offense was off the field. It was that Atlanta’s defense was on it. A lot. For 93 snaps, to be exact. Naturally, fatigue set in. And that’s the biggest reason why the Falcons suffered the greatest collapse in Super Bowl history.
It’s worth examining exactly how those 93 snaps exhausted the Falcons. For starters, 93 snaps equates to playing a game and a half. Then factor in the adrenaline of that game being on the Super Bowl stage, and what happens to a player’s energy as that adrenaline wears off. Then add in the halftime, which is twice as long as usual. Yes, that gives your body more time to rest. But it also means your body must operate on an unfamiliar internal clock. Over your previous 18 games, your body had grown accustom to its halftime routine. Oh, and speaking of 18 games, that, too, is a lot. Its cumulative effect magnifies the toll of those 93 snaps."

Yup

sammyg2 02-08-2017 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crowbob (Post 9465242)
Immediately following the hoopla at games end, my GF said the Pats wore out the Falcons defense plain and simple.

Smart girl.

Take a look at time of possession. The falcons defense was on the field almost the entire first half.

wdfifteen 02-08-2017 11:44 AM

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1486582955.jpg


The first half was so boring I stepped over to the beach to swim and missed half time and part of the 3rd quarter.

wdfifteen 02-08-2017 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sammyg2 (Post 9465396)

Take a look at time of possession. The falcons defense was on the field almost the entire first half.

Ironic that those long drives down the field with nothing to show for them turned out to be a factor in the Pat's win.

stevej37 02-08-2017 11:52 AM

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1486583521.jpg

yazhound 02-13-2017 02:48 PM

No uh, "Brady rule" back in the olds days. Far less rules for DBs/Safeties. Only advantage receivers had they do not now was the use of stickem. Current NFL rules adjusted to assuage the viewers needs for "big downfield plays". All makes numbers far better than in earlier days. And far easier for QBs now to shine. Put Brady in the game then, without Bill B. as coach... not sure if we would even remember his name. Previous poster about Seahawks bad call, and Falcons failure to run up middle, run down clock and kick field goal and Pats two less SB victories correctly points out the vagaries of competition and accolades in team sports, esp football. And, huh, best athlete? Brainiest maybe, best, hardly. A quitter, never.

JJ 911SC 02-04-2018 07:24 PM

Game over... for Brady

flskala 02-04-2018 07:30 PM

Brady has lost 3 Super Bowls! Two to a retard and one to a back up QB.

GOAT - yeeeeeaaaaaaaahhhhhh ryyyyyytttte!

Porsche-O-Phile 02-04-2018 07:32 PM

Nah, he’ll be back. A Brady with a chip on his shoulder is unstoppable. That’s what next season will have.

How great would it be if NE picked up Foles as a free agent in the off season to be Brady’s replacement after next year? :)

Anyway - awesome game, congrats to Philly! I’m going out for a run.

tabs 02-04-2018 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile (Post 9914041)
Nah, he’ll be back. A Brady with a chip on his shoulder is unstoppable. That’s what next season will have.

How great would it be if NE picked up Foles as a free agent in the off season to be Brady’s replacement after next year? :)

Anyway - awesome game, congrats to Philly! I’m going out for a run.

Retirement

mattdavis11 02-04-2018 07:46 PM

Adam Vinatieri.

cabmandone 02-05-2018 04:49 AM

Anyone wanting to bash Brady just remember he's playing at a very high level at a time when most see their skills decline. He doesn't have a super star roster around him.... RB White, WR Amendola, Hogan and some other guy. The only real household name he has on the team is Gronk.
I won't argue he's the greatest of all time but he's certainly one of the best of this era.

Tervuren 02-05-2018 05:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cabmando (Post 9914227)
Anyone wanting to bash Brady just remember he's playing at a very high level at a time when most see their skills decline. He doesn't have a super star roster around him.... RB White, WR Amendola, Hogan and some other guy. The only real household name he has on the team is Gronk.
I won't argue he's the greatest of all time but he's certainly one of the best of this era.

And its one loss out of many wins.

My beef isn't that he doesn't have talent, it is the dark cloud of dishonesty that swirls with the team.

For others, I suspect they like to see a strong guy loose.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:45 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2025 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Pelican Parts Website


DTO Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.