OT - Perhaps the worst sports' article ever written

[upstater]

I hate the Pats, but I have a hard time understanding how someone could admit Brady is a top 5 QB of all time and then call him "overrated".

Brady is easily top 3, and probably the greatest ever by the time he's done. There are about 26, 27 teams in the NFL that would kill to have a guy perform as "poorly" as Brady has. I still believe Peyton Manning (when healthy) is better. If Brady and Manning traded teams as rookies, Peyton would have all of the rings Brady does, plus the MVPs. Brady had a much, much, better defense for most of his career.

Who cares, the Giants claimed their 4th super bowl, cemented their place with the royalty of NFL franchises, and Eli and Coughlin just punched their tickets to the HOF.

HOF? Based on what just happened to Parcells, I have my doubts. I think Coughlin is assured more than Eli. Manning doesn't have the stats, and without those, he isn't getting in, but he could get those stats soon with the WR core he has. Right now, he's like Jim Plunkett. 2 SB victories without the great regular seasons.

 

[HuskyFan32]

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.

Ok so we agree. Brady is a great qb but is overrated and not the god everyone makes him out to be. He's been average in the playoffs since their last SB victory. That doesn't discount the fact that he has three rings but it does knock him down a peg.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Eh, that's pretty homeristic if you ask me.

OI'm not sure the loss of your TEs was significant. I don't think Brady got hurt on the Tuck sack, but people like Esiason think he broke his collarbone. People are also noting he was 20-23 with 2 TDs before the sack with a 144 passer rating (and his three incompletes were the safety throwaway and the two JPP batdowns). After the sack, his numbers dipped, but I think it had a lot more to do with the INT he threw and the drops, rather than injury. if he really did do damage to the shoulder, I'd take that back.

Dilfer and Young were incredulous about the safety call, they thought it was bad. I think the refs were within the rules, but still very surprised they called it. Can't remember seeing that before, personally. I think the non-PI on Moore was the proper call. The Boothe hold totally turned Wilfork around so Jacobs could run right by where Wilfork should have been. Not a guarantee that gets called there each time but you can't quibble with it. Patriots were similarly called for a hold on the next possession, and though that was a clear hold (arm across the neck) the refs never called the same thing happening to Patriots rushers before that (Boothe in fact twice had a choke on Deadrick earlier in the game in clear view). What about seconds ticking away after the Bradshaw TD and Brady calling timeout? I can't see how you think refs were favoring Patriots.

Let's add two noncalls on illegal hands to the face on stiff arms where the Giants got the face mask each time.

 

[upstater]

Ok so we agree. Brady is a great qb but is overrated and not the god everyone makes him out to be. He's been average in the playoffs since their last SB victory. That doesn't discount the fact that he has three rings but it does knock him down a peg.

Average compared to whom?
You honestly think Montana didn't have just as many stinkers as Brady?
Brady is not Montana--not yet anyway--but the fact is, Montana had a lot of stinkers as well.
It's the typical ebb and flow.
No QB, no matter how good, can do it by himself. The Patriots could have easily lost two of the Super Bowls they won, despite Brady playing flawlessly. I think he had a good performance the other night, it was no better or worse than his performance against the Eagles in the Super Bowl, a game the Patriots had in hand.
These games turn on one play. The Patriots were one play from losing to the Rams and Panthers. One play away from beating the Giants both times. One play from beating the Colts and facing the Bears in the Super Bowl.
You take the wins with the losses, and then you look back at the stats and see that he is the same guy.
No one talks about his 4 interception game against the Broncos knocking the Patriots out of the playoffs in the interim year between the Super Bowl victories. That game was as bad as his games against the Ravens and jets that they lost.

This is all selective reasoning. It's just like someone saying Montana was undefeated in Super Bowls, something that Brady will never match. But I can't understand crediting a QB for his team losing prior to Super Bowls. That makes little sense to me. You look at the total record.