[QUOTE=SenorBeef]
I don’t know how to say this without sounding condescending, but I don’t mean to.
Totally casual, ignorant football fans tend to ignore line play completely. It’s all about the stars to them.
So when people start becoming more knowledgable football fans, they reach a stage where they realize the importance of line play. But in an effort to seperate themselves from the casual idiots, they overdo it. (I went through this stage myself to some degree). They play up the extreme importance of line play, and talk down the play of “skill” players (a term I hate, by the way). And since they feel that line play dwarfs everything else in comparison, the other players are relatively interchangable. Put another QB in on a team with a great line, and he’ll do just as well. Or the other side of the coin - it’s fine if a certain QB is terrible if he’s playing behind a bad line, because it’s the line’s fault.
It works both ways, of course. Bad line play will drag down an offense. But bad QB/RB play will make a line look worse than it is.
Part of the reason Brady enjoys so much time is that teams are generally unwilling to blitz them - on account of Brady’s ability to make quick, correct decisions and burn them for it. In turn, that makes the line play easier, and so they become even more productive. In turn, that production makes Brady even better. It’s a synergystic effect that can be credited to both the line and the quarterback. Put, say, Charlie Frye behind the Pats O-line and suddenly that offense comes to a screeching halt with a sack every 8 or 9 plays despite the skilled O-line.
[/QUOTE]
I agree with everything you say here. The Pats offensive line is getting a LOT of credit this year, including several pro bowl berths, but this is really the first year that that is the case since Brady took over. They’ve been toiling in relative anonymity for years (except maybe LT Matt Light).
[QUOTE=ShadowFacts]
I agree with everything you say here. The Pats offensive line is getting a LOT of credit this year, including several pro bowl berths, but this is really the first year that that is the case since Brady took over. They’ve been toiling in relative anonymity for years (except maybe LT Matt Light).
[/QUOTE]
Which is a shame because they have done a great job almost every year. Bottom line, Tom Brady is great, but not the best ever (or even close at this point). When all is said and done, I think Peyton will be considered a better overall QB.
[QUOTE=brickbacon]
Which is a shame because they have done a great job almost every year. Bottom line, Tom Brady is great, but not the best ever (or even close at this point). When all is said and done, I think Peyton will be considered a better overall QB.
[/QUOTE]
Peyton’s OL has been at least as good as Brady’s, if not better. And Peyton consistently perfoms significantly worse in the playoffs. Most (if not all) of his signature moments involve him walking off the field after an interception.
Brady doesn’t play better in the playoffs, but he does play close to his regular season level on the big stage.
I wish there were a stat along the lines of “Yards the ball traveled in the air before landing in a receiver’s hands.” Not “Yards Passing,” because how much of that is a function of broken coverages, broken tackles, etc. I’d imagine Brady’s numbers for my made up stat would be in Penningtonland, clearly not a pinnacle of greatness. Brady dinks and dunks, and it works for him. I guess Moss has expanded his game vertically somewhat, but still, the bulk of his success over the years is because he’s really excellent at taking what’s given. I’d say maybe you could award him Most Competent Ever, or perhaps Most Level-Headed Ever, but Greatest of All Time? Eh.
I don’t think every quarterback could have gone 26-28 against the Jags. I bet Palmer could probably have done it, Manning would be 24-28 with a pick, from forcing a rocket inadvisedly. I’d also bet that any quarterback currently playing this side of Cleo Lemon could have gone at least 20-28 with the kind of protection Brady had and the kind of short, short shit he threw every time.
Plus, doesn’t Brady just radiate “I’M A DOUCHE” with the brightness of a million suns? Or is that just my Michigan hatred shining through?
[QUOTE=aliquot]
I wish there were a stat along the lines of “Yards the ball traveled in the air before landing in a receiver’s hands.” Not “Yards Passing,” because how much of that is a function of broken coverages, broken tackles, etc. I’d imagine Brady’s numbers for my made up stat would be in Penningtonland, clearly not a pinnacle of greatness. Brady dinks and dunks, and it works for him. I guess Moss has expanded his game vertically somewhat, but still, the bulk of his success over the years is because he’s really excellent at taking what’s given. I’d say maybe you could award him Most Competent Ever, or perhaps Most Level-Headed Ever, but Greatest of All Time? Eh.
[/quote]
The stat you’re looking for is YAC. Sadly, it’s not an official stat, so you’re at the mercy of unofficial statisticians like FootballOutsiders or NFL Stats. The latter posted an analysis of this effect, but instead of yards after the catch they focused on yards travelled through the air, called Air Yards.
In their 2006 Air Yards study, (scroll down to see the table,) Brady clocked in with a below-average 3.5 air yards per attempt. Tony Romo led the league with 5.5 air yards per attempt.
This year, Tom Brady is in a three-way tie for third overall with Peyton Manning and Tono Romo at 4.9 air yards per attempt, behind Roethlisberger (5.2) and Schaub (5.0).
I’d be interested in seeing his numbers for more than just this season and last.
[QUOTE=Ellis Dee]
I’d be interested in seeing his numbers for more than just this season and last.
[/QUOTE]
Thanks for that. “Air yards.” Nice.
I’d also like to see some historical air yards. I can’t imagine how much this number has plummeted, as the game has gone from Warren Moon to David Carr.
YAC shouldn’t necesarily be counted against the QB. Hitting the right receiver, and hitting him in stride, are critical skills. A lot of QBs hit the wrong guy, resulting in an instant tackle after a short pass, or make their guy slow up or dive for the ball, negating YAC. If Brady picks the right guy as a recipient of a short pass and it’s made for a long gain, the receiver should get some credit but so should Brady.
[QUOTE=HoboStew]
There are a dozen quarterbacks in the league who would do as well as Brady if they were manning the pats offense.
[/QUOTE]
Well, if this is your opinion, than can you explain why no one ever has?
I mean, certainly, Moss-Welker-Maroney-Watson-Light-Koppen is a pretty good set of tools with which to work.
But they are no better, and actually almost certainly not as good as, Rice-Taylor-Jones-Craig-Rathman-McIntyre-Paris.
They definitely fall short of Irvin-Novacek-Smith-Johnston-Allen-Stepnoski.
And Swann-Stallworth-Harris-Webster-Kolb.
Or Thomas-Reed-Lofton-Beebe-McKellar-Hull-Woolford-Ritcher-Ballard (note that four of five players on the Buffalo Bills’ offensive line in the early-1990’s were multiple-year All-Pros).
Or, for that matter, Harrison-Wayne-Clark-James-Glenn-Saturday.
And yet of Joe Montana, Troy Aikman, Terry Bradshaw, Jim Kelly, and Peyton Manning, not a single blessed one has ever put up a season like the one Brady is having right now. So if there are a dozen QBs in the league right now who could do what Brady’s done, then why is there not a single QB who has done what Brady’s done, including those who have worked with demonstrably superior talent at the other skill positions and along the line?
[QUOTE=SenorBeef]
YAC shouldn’t necesarily be counted against the QB. Hitting the right receiver, and hitting him in stride, are critical skills. A lot of QBs hit the wrong guy, resulting in an instant tackle after a short pass, or make their guy slow up or dive for the ball, negating YAC. If Brady picks the right guy as a recipient of a short pass and it’s made for a long gain, the receiver should get some credit but so should Brady.
[/QUOTE]
Check out the links I posted. Several of them discuss this very question, with a fair amount of statistical analysis backing up their assertions. Their conclusions disagree with yours.
I’m not saying I agree with them; historically I have held the same opinion as you. I have also historically resisted the conclusions drawn from statisical analysis, but the article does make you stop and think, at least.
ETA: I can’t resist pointing out that NFL Stats specifically disagree with some FootballOutsiders conclusions, throwing the whole home-grown NFL analysis effort into question.
[QUOTE=Ellis Dee]
Check out the links I posted. Several of them discuss this very question, with a fair amount of statistical analysis backing up their assertions. Their conclusions disagree with yours.
I’m not saying I agree with them; historically I have held the same opinion as you. I have also historically resisted the conclusions drawn from statisical analysis, but the article does make you stop and think, at least.
ETA: I can’t resist pointing out that NFL Stats specifically disagree with some FootballOutsiders conclusions, throwing the whole home-grown NFL analysis effort into question.
[/QUOTE]
maybe everyone should just read this guy’s posts and leave it at that. There’s just no rationalizing that Brady is not the best of all time. He clearly is, nothing more to discuss.
[QUOTE=storyteller0910]
And yet of Joe Montana, Troy Aikman, Terry Bradshaw, Jim Kelly, and Peyton Manning, not a single blessed one has ever put up a season like the one Brady is having right now. So if there are a dozen QBs in the league right now who could do what Brady’s done, then why is there not a single QB who has done what Brady’s done, including those who have worked with demonstrably superior talent at the other skill positions and along the line?
[/QUOTE]
It’s a perfect storm-type thing. Brady is the right quarterback on the right team at the right time. Right now, the Patriots are the best team. Next year, with essentially the same personnel, they may not be. Last year, with much the same personnel, they were not. So, what does that tell you?
Brady is very good, working toward great. He’s likely a first-ballot Hall of Famer even if he never plays again. But it’s a team game. The defense is just as responsible for the success as the offense.
[QUOTE=Airman Doors, USAF]
It’s a perfect storm-type thing. Brady is the right quarterback on the right team at the right time. Right now, the Patriots are the best team. Next year, with essentially the same personnel, they may not be. Last year, with much the same personnel, they were not. So, what does that tell you?
Brady is very good, working toward great. He’s likely a first-ballot Hall of Famer even if he never plays again. But it’s a team game. The defense is just as responsible for the success as the offense.
[/QUOTE]
Well so far they’ve been the team of my wildest dreams with all the right moves that have resulted in 18 - 0. I’m not worried about next year, I’d just like to see a perfect season this year. We’re so close!
[QUOTE=Airman Doors, USAF]
It’s a perfect storm-type thing. Brady is the right quarterback on the right team at the right time. Right now, the Patriots are the best team. Next year, with essentially the same personnel, they may not be. Last year, with much the same personnel, they were not. So, what does that tell you?
[/quote]
Last year, they were a game away from the Superbowl and the personel was significantly weaker on offense. Welker and Moss are not just little role players, they boosted the Pats receiving corp from average to great. Brady has already won three rings with mediocre to poor receiving corps. “Perfect storm” my ass. It isn’t like he just caught lightning in a bottle for a year. He’s aready done it over and over again.
You’re acting like he’s Trent Dilfer or something. Methinks someone is still smarting from the ass-kicking the Pats delivered to the Steelers this year.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
You’re acting like he’s Trent Dilfer or something. Methinks someone is still smarting from the ass-kicking the Pats delivered to the Steelers this year.
[/QUOTE]
Not at all. The best team won, absolutely. But there are 22 starters for the Patriots, and they have all contributed. Brady couldn’t throw without his line, and the Patriots couldn’t win without their defense.
Bradshaw was nobody without his teammates.Without them he was just a dumb hick from Louisiana Tech. Same same with Brady. He couldn’t even position himself as the regular starter for Michigan. But he fit in exceptionally well with Bellichick’s system, and he has made himself into an outstanding player.
Is he the best ever? Not yet. Maybe someday. But he doesn’t jump out at me the way, say, Barry Sanders did at running back. It’s one thing to be so great that everybody knows it even as you’re playing. It’s another thing to accumulate recognition over your career. Brady is the latter.
[QUOTE=Airman Doors, USAF]
Not at all. The best team won, absolutely. But there are 22 starters for the Patriots, and they have all contributed. Brady couldn’t throw without his line, and the Patriots couldn’t win without their defense.
[/quote]
ha ha ha ha ha.
Yeah, whatever would they do without their 8th ranked defense?
They could have given up about 20 more points in every game and still gone 14-2 during the regular season.
Couldn’t win without their defense? What the fuck?
Bradshsaw was nobody WITH his teammates. A 1-1 career INT/TD ratio, and a what, 80.0 rating? Come on.
Yes, you’ve successfully identified a player from history who was able to win championships because of defense, and a good running game. Bully for you. What’s that have to do with Brady?
Your post is what gets at the heart of all this Pats-hate from the Steelers fans. That 70’s Steelers worship is now watered down. “Oh, you mean another team can do that? They weren’t the end-all of football teams?”
It rips Steeler’s fans apart. The Pats are doing it just as frequently, and they’re doing it with more panache, and they’re doing it with a season mixed in that was the greatest season ever put together by a professional football team. . .and the ONLY team that has a conceivable argument with that is the Bears.
[QUOTE=Ellis Dee]
I’m starting to get what you’re saying.
In a nutshell, Tom Brady is too good to be included in the GOAT conversation, because IYO it’s a purely emotional designation, and in order to qualify you have to put yourself in far more bad situations (that you subsequently claw your way out of through pure grit) than someone as good as Tom Brady will ever find himself in. Am I close? Brady’s too good to be considered for GOAT? I can even almost agree with you based on that logic.
Based on that logic, someone like Elway or Favre or Bernie Kosar is the GOAT. Guys like Marino, Peyton and Brady don’t even get in the discussion. They’re in the best of all time discussion, not the greatest.
Brady is without a doubt the BOAT.
[/QUOTE]
I’m willing to settle for you saying that Brady is in the top 5. I’d like to see a little more, but not much more.
Still, we run into the problem with comparing eras. Sammy Baugh or Johnny Unitas were great quarterbacks, but they’re not even in the conversation.
Also, it pains me to see from many people that Brady has somehow transcended the contributions (or lack thereof) of his teammates.
His offensive line has been playing very well and together for multiple years, he’s got speedy, smart receivers, a servicable running game, and a good defense when he’s not on the field. Not only that, but he’s been under the same coach the entire time and is familiar with the system and he’s also a smart guy himself, which helps.
[QUOTE=Least Original User Name Ever]
Still, we run into the problem with comparing eras. Sammy Baugh or Johnny Unitas were great quarterbacks, but they’re not even in the conversation.
[/QUOTE]
[hijack] OTOH, Baugh is still arguably the greatest punter of any era. Pretty amazing. [/hijack]
Still, we run into the problem with comparing eras. Sammy Baugh or Johnny Unitas were great quarterbacks, but they’re not even in the conversation.
[/QUOTE]
Well, this is certainly true. There is an argument to be made that naming one player “the Greatest of All Time” is impossible to do with any kind of certainty, no matter what kind of numbers Brady (or a successor) might put up. I don’t know how you make any kind of comparison between Brady and Sammy Baugh. Or Unitas. Or especially Otto Graham, who gets to be in the conversation . If you want to say that distinguishing among the greatest is impossible and ultimately pointless - I can get behind that.