He played well this Sunday. No one said they didn't have an easy schedule this year, but that point is totally irrelevant since you were the one comparing 2007 to 2008. I mean, what does your point about this year's schedule prove? NOTHING.
The amazing offense was missing its biggest weapon on Sunday, you may have noticed that, because otherwise this offense gained more yards than any since the 2000 Rams. Yes, it was a good offense.
Ravens should have won that game? Based on what? A play knocked away by a Patriot? Or the tie FG? IF IF IF. If Brady squats on the ball instead of throwing a crazy INT after a Spikes INT, the Ravens don't sniff anything at the end. Crazy to play the If game. IF SF doesn't have a brain fart in a return game twice, or manages to drop two Eli ducks, the Giants lose too!
Brady's playoff record and stats are still through the roof, and even the last 12 games he has had good games and bad, as many good as bad. No one seems to remember that Tom through 2005 did not have great playoff performances every game. Go back and look at the Titans, Steelers, Broncos and Raiders games. They won those. Because of the defense. Other times, they won games because of the offense. Point is, there's not a great deal of difference.
Heck, even Brady's performance against the Ravens is underrated. Look at the yards gained against that D, and realize the Patriots ran the ball for TDs. So people moaning about the lack of TDs thrown should consider that points are what counts.