Is there anyone out there better than Tom Brady?

[Trainer_Phil]

Or do you rank them on wins & losses?

(Regular Season Only)

No. Player W-L-T PCT.

1. John Elway      148-82-1      .643

2. Dan Marino      147-93-0      .613

3. Fran Tarkenton 125-109-6    .533

4. Warren Moon    102-97-0      .513

5. Dave Krieg        98-77-0      .560

 

At 48 - 14 Brady is on a pace to surpass even Elway in this category.

 

 

Remember a few season's ago when people (mostly blind Dolphins apologists) tried to justify Jay Fiedler remaining as Miami's starting QB was the team's win/loss record over a 3 or 4 year span while he started? If I recall, he had one of the top 2 or 3 winning percentages as a starting QB. I think we are all in agreement that Fiedler is not one of the 2 or 3 best QB's in the league. He wasn't even the best QB on a 3 - 13 team. Because the Pats have had success with Brady in the lineup doesn't mean its because Brady is a great QB. Last time I checked, they did have the best football coach in the league.

[Bill Swerski]

I am the first to say that football is a team sport but in a sport where greatness in QB's is measured by Super Bowl success then one must admit that Tom Brady has already proven himself to be one of the best ever.

 

828849[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Determining the individual worth of players by the number of SB rings on their fingers is not a good method, IMO. Teams with Super Bowl rings all have one thing in common: Dominant or very good defenses. Quarterbacks mean significantly less in the SB (e.g., Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Doug Johnson, etc.).

 

If Dan Fouts would've been on the 1970s Steelers teams, he'd have as many rings as Bradshaw. He was still vastly more proficient QB, no matter how many titles Terry won.

[NAUgrad]

How quickly you guys forget, if it wasn't for Bledsoe's performance against the Steelers in the AFC championship game during that first magical playoff run the Patriots wouldn't have advanced. There was even talk of Bledsoe taking er for Brady for the Superbowl that year. Brady is one of the better QBs in the league, but he is overrated.

 

828850[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

That's exactly what I was thinking. And in response to the 4th quarter comeback against Denver in 2003, bad play calling was the reason they lost the game. Did Brady come through when given the opporunity, yes, but if Shanny would've quit calling a pass play with his 3rd string QB and continue to run Portis then that game would've been over.

 

Also, let's not forget there has never been a QB who has been to more SB than Elway. To say that he never would've won one without Davis, okay, maybe. The talent on the team as a whole was a lot better then than the three SB he went to prior to the back to back wins.

Edited June 1, 2005 by NAUgrad

[charty]

I don't know about Bledsoe, but I'd argue that Brad Johnson or Trent Dilfer may have sufficed.

 

Saying that "the bottom line is that Brady's a winner" is simplistic and not completely correct.  Brady's team won three SBs and, not to discount what Brady has done, but they've ONLY won when that defense was dominant...

 

(Year, rank in points allowed, result)

 

2001, 6th, SB champs

2002, 17th, failed to make playoffs

2003, 1st, SB champs

2004, 2nd, SB champs

 

Not to discount what Brady has done, but NE's fate has seemed to be tied more closely to its defensive play than Brady's (who had a career season in 2002).

 

828809[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

It could also mean that a QB that does not consistantly turn the ball over and go three & out and keeps his defense off the field is actually helping the defensive stats of his team.

 

The year the pats were 17th and failed to make the playoffs, Brady thew for 3,764 yds, 62%, 28 TDs 14 Ints. He also added over 100 yards and 1 TD on the ground.

It was one of his best statistical years, which means he was doing his part.

 

Indy in the same span have been last in points allowed (2001), 7th (2002), 20th, and 19th. The year they were in the top 10, they got blown out by the Jets in the first round 41-0. Explain that one. So, you can take any set of stats and pull out info to support any argument.

Edited June 1, 2005 by charty

[charty]

That's exactly what I was thinking.  And in response to the 4th quarter comeback against Denver in 2003, bad play calling was the reason they lost the game.  Did Brady come through when given the opporunity, yes, but if Shanny would've quit calling a pass play with his 3rd string QB and continue to run Portis then that game would've been over.

 

Also, let's not forget there has never been a QB who has been to more SB than Elway.  To say that he never would've won one without Davis, okay, maybe.  The talent on the team as a whole was a lot better then than the three SB he went to prior to the back to back wins.

 

828879[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I agree, when you look at what Elway did in his career, it is unbelievable. I think Peter King commented on this a couple weeks ago. Something to the effect that when you think that Elway took his team to the final 2 in 6 of the 13 yrs he was there while playing with maybe 1 lock for the HOF (S. Sharpe), it shows how great the guy really was.

 

Brady has a lot of work to pass Elway, and he is not the "gunslinger" was either, so it is hard to even compare the 2.

[Bill Swerski]

It could also mean that a QB that does not consistantly turn the ball over and go three and keeps his defense off the field is actually helping the defensive stats of his team.

 

828893[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

It means that, even when Brady had his best statistical year and his offense was 10th in the league in points scored, the Pats didn't do squat. And it supports my argument that a team's defensive prowess means a lot more than what its quarterback can do.

 

If Brady wins a Super Bowl with a 17th-ranked defense, not only will it be a first, but it may solidify him as the greatest QB ever. But until he wins a playoff game with a mediocre-to-poor defense, he'll still be comparable to Aikman.

 

Indy in the same span have been last in points allowed (2001), 7th (2002), 20th, and 19th.  The year they were in the top 10, they got blown out by the Jets in the first round 41-0.  Explain that one.  So, you can take any set of stats and pull out info to support any argument.

 

Sure, you can fit data to any biased conclusion that you want. It doesn't mean that your analysis is correct, though.

 

Indy was coming off of a 6-10 season in '02 and played a much softer schedule than previously. At most, I think that you could say that the Colts defense in '02 was inconsistent.... and they certainly weren't playing their best in the playoffs against the Jets. In addition, Indy's offense took a huge hit that year when Edge was recovering from a torn ACL and was an unusually-low 17th in the league in points scored.

Edited June 1, 2005 by Bill Swerski

[broncosn05]

Brady will meet his doom somewhere down the line.

[Hardrocker]

Tom Brady is probably on his way to the Hall of Fame...That said...it's just that you cannot make an arguement for him as the greatest of all time. Every team has elements that make it the best TEAM. You can make an arguement that Manning is a better QB but would not have won three rings with the Pats. I dont know that I would buy it but I do think you could make the arguement.

 

But let me ask this...If Steve Young was the QB of the Pats do they NOT win 3 rings? How about Farve?

 

Why cant we give credit to an organization for putting the best team on the field proving the sum of the parts is greater than the whole. Terry Bradshaw won alot of Super Bowl rings, yet his name is RARELY mentioned as being the best ever.

 

I'll say it this way. Tom Brady is an excellent quarterback, but if I can start a team TOMORROW and have my choice of QB's past and present...I wouldnt give him the time of day. History is full of excellent QB's who have quided their respective teams to the title without being among the GREATEST. Maybe that is too strong...Brady is truly remarkable. But he is no Marino, Montana, Staubaugh, Unitas, Manning...

 

We are in a different era. It is amazing that NE has won three rings in four years. But they have won their rings by a total of 9 points...in a salary cap era defined by a lack of domination. Their Coach stands out as GREAT. Brady deserves loads and loads of credit...give it to him. He certainly has earned it. I think he is etching a career that could land him in the Hall.

 

But GREATEST?

 

Better than Unitas? Tarkenton? Starr? Dawson? Farve? Marino? Elway? Montana? Young? Staughbach?

Edited June 2, 2005 by Hardrocker

[CaptainHook]

Yes. Peyton Manning is better.

[phenom]

I think that the Patriots are a great team. They are better than the sum of their parts. Collectively they just have those intangibles that make Super Bowl champions.

 

That, IMO, describes Brady. He doesn't wow you in any way physically. Elway, Marino, Manning, Favre, Culpepper are all measureably better. However, mentally you have to say he has proven himself to be in the class of Montana, Young, Aikman, Elway etc as far as being a leader. Particularly in the playoff's or big game situations.

 

I wouldn't put Brady or the Patriots offense in the unstoppable category ie Montana's 49ers, Young's 49er's, Manning's Colts (I also wouldn't say Aikman was the driving force behind the Cowboy offense either, that was more of a dominant O-line and Emmitt Smith).

 

 

But you can't argue with his results and if I was a Patriot fan I wouldn't want any other QB............

[Jrick35]

The question was, "Is there anybody out there better than Tom Brady?" To know the answer to that question one must know what a QB's job is. A QB's job is to lead his team to victory.

 

To that end I'm not sure there is anybody out there better than Tom Brady right now. Does that mean he is the best ever, that's an unending debate. There are far too many intangibles to consider to ever fully answer, who is the best ever.

 

But as a starter Tom Brady is:

 

48 - 14 in the regular season.

6 - 0 in the Playoffs

3 - 0 in the Super Bowl

and a 2 time Super Bowl MVP

 

How many QB's ever, have done all of those things. Whether playing on a Great Team or a Bad team or a mediocre team, there is only a very few QB's that have equaled this kind of success in either the regular season or the psot season. And he is only going to be 28 this year. He hasn't even reached his peak yet.

 

I am the first to admit that he owes a lot of his success to his team and coaches, but all great QB's have to share their success with their teams and coaches. But let's face it there have been some really good teams with QB's that have single-handedly cost them the big game by playing poorly when their teams needed them to play well. Tom Brady has always played well when his team needed him to.

 

As pointed out earlier in this thread he actually played his best when his team was at it's weakest during the 9-7 season when they missed the playoffs. If his team was going to do anything that year it was going to be on his shoulders to make it happen and he had his best year ever statistically. They needed him to play at his best to make up for their other deficiencies and he did. It wasn't enough to get to the playoffs but that doesn't change the fact that he played well when they needed him to.

 

Their have been a ton of QB's labeled as being unable to win the big one, regardless of how well they play during the season. Brady plays his best in the big games.

 

Brady is all ready one of the best ever at doing what QB's are suppsed to do, which is win games. He is also already the 11th highest rated passer in NFL History. That stat alone makes him one of the best ever.

 

But to answer the question of, "Is there anybody out there better than Tom Brady?", right now there is no other Active QB in the game who has won more games/season or more playoff games/season or more Super Bowls/season than Tom Brady has in the last 4 years.

 

To measure his greatness or the lack thereof against former players we can only really do that when he retires so that we can reflect on his entire career the way we can the former QB's career's.

[NAUgrad]

The question was, "Is there anybody out there better than Tom Brady?" To know the answer to that question one must know what a QB's job is. A QB's job is to lead his team to victory.

 

To that end I'm not sure there is anybody out there better than Tom Brady right now. Does that mean he is the best ever, that's an unending debate. There are far too many intangibles to consider to ever fully answer, who is the best ever.

 

But as a starter Tom Brady is:

 

48 - 14 in the regular season.

6 - 0 in the Playoffs

3 - 0 in the Super Bowl

and a 2 time Super Bowl MVP

 

How many QB's ever, have done all of those things. Whether playing on a Great Team or a Bad team or a mediocre team, there is only a very few QB's that have equaled this kind of success in either the regular season or the psot season. And he is only going to be 28 this year. He hasn't even reached his peak yet.

 

Their have been a ton of QB's labeled as being unable to win the big one, regardless of how well they play during the season. Brady plays his best in the big games.

 

But to answer the question of, "Is there anybody out there better than Tom Brady?", right now there is no other Active QB in the game who has won more games/season or more playoff games/season or more Super Bowls/season than Tom Brady has in the last 4 years.

 

To measure his greatness or the lack thereof against former players we can only really do that when he retires so that we can reflect on his entire career the way we can the former QB's career's.

829612[/snapback]

 

If you want to look at his success in the past 4 years, then you are opening up the idea of comparing him to all QB's in the past. If you want to compare his past to only active QB's then your probably right, based on just W/L he is the best if you include playoff wins. If you just want wins, then it looks like Rothlisberger is better than Brady even though he lost 1 game in the playoffs.

 

I see your point about Brady's effectiveness, but don't make an arguement only including certain things and taking out certain things.

[bigrocks]

Actually, the original post said... 'This guy will go down as the greatest player of all time....Could there possibly be anyone better than the man named "Brady"'

 

 

It doesn't even ask the question is Brady the best QB now or ever... the poster blantanly says he is the greatest player ever.

 

I think we all know the answer to that.... Personally, I don't think Brady even makes the top 10 QBs ever. As far as greatest player. he doesn't even warrant mentioning.

[Jrick35]

If you want to look at his success in the past 4 years, then you are opening up the idea of comparing him to all QB's in the past.  If you want to compare his past to only active QB's then your probably right, based on just W/L he is the best if you include playoff wins.  If you just want wins, then it looks like Rothlisberger is better than Brady even though he lost 1 game in the playoffs.

 

I see your point about Brady's effectiveness, but don't make an arguement only including certain things and taking out certain things.

 

829646[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

What did I "take out"?

 

I was merely pointing out that I felt the original poster of this thread might have been asking if Brady is the best playing right now.

 

Everyone was approaching this thread as if he meant Brady was the greatest of all time. I was merely pointing out that he might not have meant for it to be taken that way.

 

But you can't be serious comparing 1 season by Roethlisberger (albeit a great rookie season) with what Brady has accomplished since becoming the Pats starter 4 years ago, can you?

[Hitman]

Yes.  Peyton Manning is better.

 

829200[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Concur.

[jgcoach]

What did I "take out"?

 

I was merely pointing out that I felt the original poster of this thread might have been asking if Brady is the best playing right now.

 

Everyone was approaching this thread as if he meant Brady was the greatest of all time. I was merely pointing out that he might not have meant for it to be taken that way.

 

But you can't be serious comparing 1 season by Roethlisberger (albeit a great rookie season) with what Brady has accomplished since becoming the Pats starter 4 years ago, can you?

 

829713[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Although Big Ben can't even be considered in the same sentence with Brady their respective seasons and accomplishments can be attributed to facts which parrarell each other. Such as defences and a running game. Greatest player today, no way, maybe when cows fly. HOF, I'd say yes, he'll get there unless his career is cut short by injury.

[1stimer]

Marino is often referred to as one of the greatest QB's ever but anytime someone brings him up there is someone else there to remind us that he never won a Super Bowl.

828849[/snapback]

 

 

 

I think that should be reserved for the pessimist / optimist debate ... a realist would say Brady is not as good as Marino, Elway, Manning, Montana, and several others. Put any of those guys on the Patriots teams of the last 4 years and they all would have done as much and most likely more than he did.

 

The "team" comment made in a previous reply is very accurate. Football is a team sport. Even if you have the greatest athlete in the league it is not enough to take you to the Big Game. Unlike say MJ and the Bulls. To say Brady was the best ever would be like comparing him as the Michael Jordan of football. That is just plain rediculous.

[Bill Swerski]

The question was, "Is there anybody out there better than Tom Brady?" To know the answer to that question one must know what a QB's job is. A QB's job is to lead his team to victory.

Brady is all ready one of the best ever at doing what QB's are suppsed to do, which is win games. He is also already the 11th highest rated passer in NFL History. That stat alone makes him one of the best ever.

 

829612[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I disagree with your idea of what a QB is supposed to do. IMO, a quarterback has three jobs: (1) Putting his offense in a position to score, (2) controlling the clock, and (3) avoiding turnovers. To put the "win the game" burden on one player's shoulder is unrealistic. Individuals don't win Super Bowls.

 

Defenses win playoff games and Brady's played with great ones in three of his four seasons (and, not surprisingly, he didn't get anywhere without one). Great defenses can make even mediocre QBs look good in the big games (e.g., Doug Williams, Mark Rypien, and Jim McMahon in their respective SBs). NE's defense has ranked 5th and 3rd in takeaways, respectively, over the past two seasons and just about any QB would benefit from those additional opportunities... especially in the playoffs where the NE defense seems to force about two or three per game.

 

I agree that Brady is very good but, through no fault of his own, he's going to have to go deep into the playoffs with a mediocre-to-poor defense before he goes down as one of the greatest ever. Until then, he's going to be in the same category as future-HOFer Troy Aikman. And that's no slight, as Aikman was a rock-solid QB.

Edited June 2, 2005 by Bill Swerski

[policyvote]

When comparing individuals in football, to me you have to take all of the "team" stuff with a grain of salt. Yes, Brady has three rings, but so does Vinatieri and Vrabel and Bruschi and Seymour and frigging Patrick Pass or whoever.

 

Granted, Brady played under arguably the smartest/best OC in football, and definitely the smarest/best head coach in football, but really his supporting cast on OFFENSE is mediocre at best. He hasn't yet played with a legitimate #1 WR, just a rotating crew of hard-working #2s. The running game has vacillated between good and horrible during his tenure. The defense has been spectacular, yes, but overall I'd say Brady is a very good QB who happens to be in a great system that's tailored perfectly to his strengths.

 

I will repeat my philosophy on QBs here: a QB is 10% physical tools, 40% mental game, and 50% situation. Brady has decent physical tools, brings the mental game hardcore, and his offensive scheme is brilliant, maximizes the talent around him, and doesn't ask him to do anything he can't. The results are that Brady gets it done.

 

I like the Brady/Aikman comparison, but I put Brady above Aikman because they both benefitted from great coaching and defense, but while Aikman had Irvin, Smith, Novachek, Johnston, and the most dominant OL ever, Brady has had Brown/Givens/Branch, Smith/Dillon, and a patchwork of roleplayers blocking for him.

 

Peace

policy

[Hardrocker]

I like the Brady/Aikman comparison, but I put Brady above Aikman because they both benefitted from great coaching and defense, but while Aikman had Irvin, Smith, Novachek, Johnston, and the most dominant OL ever, Brady has had Brown/Givens/Branch, Smith/Dillon, and a patchwork of roleplayers blocking for him.

 

Peace

policy

 

830022[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

TRUE...

[seminoles]

Brady is not the best nor will he ever be the best. period. again. oh what the heck, one more.

[Rovers]

I like the Brady/Aikman comparison, but I put Brady above Aikman because they both benefitted from great coaching and defense, but while Aikman had Irvin, Smith, Novachek, Johnston, and the most dominant OL ever, Brady has had Brown/Givens/Branch, Smith/Dillon, and a patchwork of roleplayers blocking for him.

 

 

Policy, you summed this whole thread up with one short paragraph. You really do drop knowledge!

[Perchoutofwater]

This Gators guy is a pretty good fisherman. Oh and Peace Policy and Rovers, I agreed with the two of you in the third post in this thread.

[McBoog]

2001, 6th, SB champs

2002, 17th, failed to make playoffs

2003, 1st, SB champs

2004, 2nd, SB champs

 

Not to discount what Brady has done, but NE's fate has seemed to be tied more closely to its defensive play than Brady's (who had a career season in 2002).

 

828809[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

This says it all Bill! All except for trivia buffs and Pats fans will Brady be remembered as one of the truly great QBs.

 

I have enough trouble remebering what Aikman actually did as a player. I know he was on a great TEAM and did what he had to do to help the TEAM win. But he ain't no Elway! I hate Elway, how he entered the league, how he played and how he made the Chargers miserable. But he could carry a team by himself. He could win a game by himself. Brady just doesn't cut the same mustard.

 

Sorry... :bawling:

[Furd]

I agree mostly with JRick and policy.

 

Brady has won 3 Superbowls in 4 years. Its pretty facile to say that you could plug an average quarterback in for Brady and get the same results.

 

He doesn't have the cannon arm. He's not a scrambler or a gunslinger. He doesn't put up gaudy numbers. He just leads his team to Super Bowl victories. And he was awarded two MVPs which I guess they give to "QBs who don't lose games for their teams."

 

Its way too early to say where Brady belongs in the echelon of QBs. But what he has done in his five year career is pretty impressive. A coach or "offensive system" does not find the open receiver, or make the smart play or lead the team down the field.

 

To say that he is a slightly better than average QB is ridiculous, as it is to say that Ty Law or Corey Dillon is just as important. (Antowain Smith anyone?), as it is to suggest that Brad Johnson or Trent Dilfer would have led the Patriots to 3 Super Bowl wins in 4 years.

 

He isn't up there with the Elways or Montanas, and likely will never be, but I'd say that he is pretty close right now. Time will tell.