OT - Drew Brees

[superjohn]

Brady threw to hot garbage the first half of his career, and still killed it. Julian 'freakin' Edelman, all 5'8 or 5'9 of him (i've stood next to the guy), was Brady's best receiver his last Superbowl (Gronk was hurt). And Jordie Nelson is a better receiver than Edelman. Also, Greg Jennings might very well have been a Top 10 receiver in the league during his time.

Patriots players go to other teams and rarely ever thrive. I can only think of 1 year of Wes Welker, and he was catching balls from another QB in the GOAT conversation.

Yes, Brady's played with 2 HOFs in his career (Moss and Gronk), but let's not pretend he's throwing to studs all the time:

• Moss for only two years (2007&2009); Brady was out all 2008, and Moss forced his way out in 2010. As a result, Brady put up godlike numbers in 2007.
• And Gronk has been hurt or hobbled half his career. He was out for the year the last time they won a Superbowl. And he was merely a decoy in the 2012 one (could barely walk).
• Not really apropos of anything, but an interesting stat I saw: Gronk and Edelman rarely play together (2 of these games Brady didn't even play due to suspension)
  • 2015: Patriots Games Played: 18. Games with both players: 11
  • 2016: Patriots Games Played: 19. Games with both players: 8
  • 2017: Patriots Games Played: 19. Games with both players: 0
  • 2018: Patriots Games Played: 4. Games with both players: 0

And Brady has dragged plenty of mediocre teams late into the playoffs. They were one play away from going to the Superbowl in 2006 (iirc) against Manning and the Colts. They would have beat the lowly bears as well and had another ring. Brady's top target? Reche Caldwell. Reche freakin' Caldwel. Rodgers never had that poor of a cast.

I guess it comes down to preference. I prefer a QB who actually runs the offense as it's supposed to be run. As you game planned all week, and only ad libs when absolutely necessary. I prefer a guy who reads the defense quickly and makes the best decisions possible. I think over the long haul, it leads to more consistent winning. I prefer consistent execution over spectacular get out of your seat plays.

I concede that BB over Montgomery is a huge advantage. But I laugh when people say Brady wins solely because of BB. I've yet to see BB make spectacular throw after spectacular throw and miraculous comeback after miraculous comeback. It's predominantly Brady who's the architect of those things; Arguably the two greatest comebacks in Superbowl history. Nothing compares to 2016, and coming back down 2 TDs in the 4th against one of the best D's in football was unreal.



Of course Brady would say that. Because he's a great guy and always magnanimous. Rodgers isn't. He's the type of guy to trash his own team: I remember when he railed on Packers' young wide receivers for "piss-poor" (his words) performances.

And I'd agree actually with Brady here actually, Rodgers has more natural talent, but I think Brady is a better overall QB. Being a great QB is about much, much more than having great talent.

"He would throw for 7000 yards every season." -Brady on what Rodgers would do if he was in Brady's situation

Brady is a great guy and Rodgers isn't. I'll take what you say on this matter with a grain of salt.

 

[gtcam]

Top 15... Mt Rushmore of QBs would have to include Brady, Montana, Bradshaw and Manning or Elway.
Second five putting him out of the top 10 would include Staubach, Roethlisberger, Aikman, Favre and Griese. You have to make Super Bowls and win some to be considered one of the greatest.

Bart Starr, John Unitas, YA Tittle, Sammy Baugh, Otto Graham, Len Dawson need to be in any discussion

There were QBs before the 80's!!!!

 

[the Q]

Brady threw to hot garbage the first half of his career, and still killed it. Julian 'freakin' Edelman, all 5'8 or 5'9 of him (i've stood next to the guy), was Brady's best receiver his last Superbowl (Gronk was hurt). And Jordie Nelson is a better receiver than Edelman. Also, Greg Jennings might very well have been a Top 10 receiver in the league during his time.

Patriots players go to other teams and rarely ever thrive. I can only think of 1 year of Wes Welker, and he was catching balls from another QB in the GOAT conversation.

Yes, Brady's played with 2 HOFs in his career (Moss and Gronk), but let's not pretend he's throwing to studs all the time:

• Moss for only two years (2007&2009); Brady was out all 2008, and Moss forced his way out in 2010. As a result, Brady put up godlike numbers in 2007.
• And Gronk has been hurt or hobbled half his career. He was out for the year the last time they won a Superbowl. And he was merely a decoy in the 2012 one (could barely walk).
• Not really apropos of anything, but an interesting stat I saw: Gronk and Edelman rarely play together (2 of these games Brady didn't even play due to suspension)
  • 2015: Patriots Games Played: 18. Games with both players: 11
  • 2016: Patriots Games Played: 19. Games with both players: 8
  • 2017: Patriots Games Played: 19. Games with both players: 0
  • 2018: Patriots Games Played: 4. Games with both players: 0

And Brady has dragged plenty of mediocre teams late into the playoffs. They were one play away from going to the Superbowl in 2006 (iirc) against Manning and the Colts. They would have beat the lowly bears as well and had another ring. Brady's top target? Reche Caldwell. Reche freakin' Caldwel. Rodgers never had that poor of a cast.

I guess it comes down to preference. I prefer a QB who actually runs the offense as it's supposed to be run. As you game planned all week, and only ad libs when absolutely necessary. I prefer a guy who reads the defense quickly and makes the best decisions possible. I think over the long haul, it leads to more consistent winning. I prefer consistent execution over spectacular get out of your seat plays.

I concede that BB over Montgomery is a huge advantage. But I laugh when people say Brady wins solely because of BB. I've yet to see BB make spectacular throw after spectacular throw and miraculous comeback after miraculous comeback. It's predominantly Brady who's the architect of those things; Arguably the two greatest comebacks in Superbowl history. Nothing compares to 2016, and coming back down 2 TDs in the 4th against one of the best D's in football was unreal.



Of course Brady would say that. Because he's a great guy and always magnanimous. Rodgers isn't. He's the type of guy to trash his own team: I remember when he railed on Packers' young wide receivers for "piss-poor" (his words) performances.

And I'd agree actually with Brady here actually, Rodgers has more natural talent, but I think Brady is a better overall QB. Being a great QB is about much, much more than having great talent.

Yes nothing will touch what the nfl did in those 2 games

 

[johnhuskies95]

“I’m not sure how great of a leader he is”. Lol, ignoring the Skip Bayless-ism for a second there, hinting that Rodgers struggles in the pocket is absurd. If this is gonna become a Rodgers-Brady debate, Rodgers could throw an interception on each of his next 62 passes and still have a higher career passer rating than Brady.

In Rodgers’ 7 career playoff losses the Packers given up on average more than 36 points per game. The Patriots have given up more than 33 points in the playoffs twice in Brady’s entire career. Judging QBs off team wins is almost as bad as judging starting pitchers by their W-L record.

Obviously both great quarterbacks, but give me Rodgers.

 

[intlzncster]

“I’m not sure how great of a leader he is”. Lol, ignoring the Skip Bayless-ism for a second there, hinting that Rodgers struggles in the pocket is absurd.

Interesting, why doesn't he stay inside the pocket more then? That's categorically more effective QBing. Why would you want to break the play? They basically had to teach Russell Wilson how to do this, and to his credit, he's picked it up.

If this is gonna become a Rodgers-Brady debate, Rodgers could throw an interception on each of his next 62 passes and still have a higher career passer rating than Brady.

That's a great stat, no sarc. You could pick and choose a number of stats either way.

In Rodgers’ 7 career playoff losses the Packers given up on average more than 36 points per game. The Patriots have given up more than 33 points in the playoffs twice in Brady’s entire career.

There's a ton that goes into that other than pure defense though. Rhetorically, Who sustains longer more deliberate drives that keep the other teams offense off the field? To get 33 pts, you need a higher number of possessions. Should give them that many.

Judging QBs off team wins is almost as bad as judging starting pitchers by their W-L record.

Never understood this one. It's not remotely the same as wins and losses for pitchers, for a number of reasons (pitchers not scoring, time limitation of the game, etc etc). But most importantly because of the nature of the game: baseball makes sense to ignore wins and losses because it's basically an individual sport played together as a group. I get what concept you are trying to impart, but it's apples to oranges.

Let me ask you, how many great QBs don't have Superbowls? Really only 4. Marino, Kelly, Tarkenton, Fouts. And all of those but Fouts made Superbowls (Marino 1; Kelly 4; Tark 3).

Why do you think that is? Why is it that the vast majority of great QBs have all won (or even played in) Superbowls? Or why do most of the elite guys have multiple Superbowls? Because great QBing correlates/causates to winning and winning big. Lists of the best QBs, even when looking at pure numbers, are all littered with QBs who've won multiple.

Of course it's a team game. So's basketball. But guys get judged on championships, because that's where the great ones separate themselves. Do some get unlucky? Absolutely. Is it a perfect metric? No. But no metric is perfect though, including all the usual stats.

Obviously both great quarterbacks, but give me Rodgers.

You can have the better thrower, I'll take the better QB. Different things. imho

 

[Dream Jobbed 2.0]

Rodgers is the best QB I've ever seen. Brees is maybe the most underrated player ever, he's almost never talked about outside of this week. Before this week I'm sure most people had no clue Brees was about to become the all-time leading passer. Another one that is shocking to me, Frank Gore is still playing and is the 4th leading rusher ever.

Gore has insane longevity for a RB. I swear he started his career when Steve Young was still the QB in San Fran

 

[superjohn]

“I’m not sure how great of a leader he is”. Lol, ignoring the Skip Bayless-ism for a second there, hinting that Rodgers struggles in the pocket is absurd. If this is gonna become a Rodgers-Brady debate, Rodgers could throw an interception on each of his next 62 passes and still have a higher career passer rating than Brady.

In Rodgers’ 7 career playoff losses the Packers given up on average more than 36 points per game. The Patriots have given up more than 33 points in the playoffs twice in Brady’s entire career. Judging QBs off team wins is almost as bad as judging starting pitchers by their W-L record.

Obviously both great quarterbacks, but give me Rodgers.

Thank you.

 

[Deepster]

I concede that BB over Montgomery is a huge advantage. But I laugh when people say Brady wins solely because of BB. I've yet to see BB make spectacular throw after spectacular throw and miraculous comeback after miraculous comeback. It's predominantly Brady who's the architect of those things; Arguably the two greatest comebacks in Superbowl history. Nothing compares to 2016, and coming back down 2 TDs in the 4th against one of the best D's in football was unreal.

I'm going to obviously disagree here. Backups like Brissett and Garoppalo and Matt Cassels have looked like Pro Bowlers in that system. I'm not sure that Brady would be more than Matt Stafford if you threw him on the Lions this entire time.