Tom Brady and the mediocrity gauge

[Def.]

That argument makes no sense. Who you play in the reg has no influence on who you play in the post. It's all about who wins.

 

If that was the case, then someone from the NFC North would be in the SB every year. That division has been unbelievably weak for 10 years...

 

New England is 29-9 in division play since 2001. There has only been 2 years where 3 or more teams in the AFC East had a winning record. One of those years was 2001 when Indy was still a part of the division.

[Caveman_Nick]

New England is 29-9 in division play since 2001. There has only been 2 years where 3 or more teams in the AFC East had a winning record. One of those years was 2001 when Indy was still a part of the division.

 

 

To quote H8, this is fokking stupid.

 

With 8 4 team divisions in today's NFL, how often do you think three teams in any division will have winning records?

 

[Def.]

To further add to that -

 

Green Bay is 26-12 and Chicago is 22-16 in division play since 2001. There was only been 1 years where 3 or more teams in the NFC Norse had a winning record.

 

Actually kind of pondering if the Pats have the best division record since 2001 now.

[Def.]

To quote H8, this is fokking stupid.

 

With 8 4 team divisions in today's NFL, how often do you think three teams in any division will have winning records?

 

 

3 AFC East teams went to the playoffs in 2002 and the 4th was 8-8.

 

You're right though, kinda silly. But had it in because of the 2001 year with 5 teams in each division.

Edited July 13, 2007 by Def.

[hitch]

Only problem with the Brady to Aikman comparison, is well, it's wrong. Brady DOES have the numbers. In fact his numbers dwarf anything Aikman ever did. He's thrown for over 4,000 yards. He's thrown for 3,500 yards 5 consecutive years. Aikman NEVER went over 3,500 yards. EVER. Brady hasn't hit 30 tds in a year yet, but has thrown for 20+ five consecutive years, twice hitting 28 (and leading the league). Aikaman went over 20 ONCE, 23. Brady will pass Aikman for career TDs this year, in his 8th year (7th as a starter) Aikman played 12 years. Aikman was the ULTIMATE system QB. And a damn good one. But to compare Aikman to Brady is just ignorant of the facts.

 

 

IGNORANT of the facts? Slowdown, Cocheese. For goodness sake, as a lifelong, dieharder, Im not trying to compare Brady to some also-ran. Are you kidding me? Aikman had a little fella running behind him who's led the NFL in career rushing yardage and scored a boatload of TDs (off hand, Im not sure if Emmitt is the alltime leader there also), but nevertheless.......without all those dominant Emmitt #s, Aikman would have been throwing for between 25-30 and 4000 every year as well. The comparison is right on. Both have 3 rings. Both are HOFers. One just happened to played in the greatest rushing offense the league has ever seen. Give Tommy boy a call and ask him if he thinks an Aikman comparison is a slap in the face.....and be careful how you throw around that word ignorant.....knucklehead.

[Bring Back Pat!!!]

IGNORANT of the facts? Slowdown, Cocheese. For goodness sake, as a lifelong, dieharder, Im not trying to compare Brady to some also-ran. Are you kidding me? Aikman had a little fella running behind him who's led the NFL in career rushing yardage and scored a boatload of TDs (off hand, Im not sure if Emmitt is the alltime leader there also), but nevertheless.......without all those dominant Emmitt #s, Aikman would have been throwing for between 25-30 and 4000 every year as well. The comparison is right on. Both have 3 rings. Both are HOFers. One just happened to played in the greatest rushing offense the league has ever seen. Give Tommy boy a call and ask him if he thinks an Aikman comparison is a slap in the face.....and be careful how you throw around that word ignorant.....knucklehead.

 

Look, just because the guys both have 3 rings and are HOFers doesn't mean they're similar players. You were speaking of the fact that Brady's numbers pailed in comparison to other QBs without as many rings (Peyton was the implication I believe) the same way that Aikman's numbers pailed in comparison to Young's, even though he won more championships. I simply pointed out that that is not accurate. Brady's numbers are much closer to Peyton's than Aikman's ever were to Young's, and Brady's destroys Aikmans. Now if you'd like to bring in the why question, fine. But that's not what you were talking about in your original post.

 

Second, to say that without Emmitt that Aikaman would have thrown for 4,000 yards and 30+tds, well, go ahead and think that. It's not something that can ever ever be proved, so if that's your arguement, fine, but I try to deal with facts and provable commodities. But since you brought it up, let's look at that QBs with the last three RBs that broke the touchdown record, and how they faired:

 

2006 Phillip Rivers 3388 yards 22 tds

2005 Matt Hasselebeck 3459 yards 24 tds

2003 Trent Green 4039 yards 24 tds

 

Now, Aikman's stats the year emmitt scored 25 tds:

1995 Troy Aikman 3304 yards 16 tds

 

And the year before when Emmitt scored 21 tds:

1994 Troy Aikman 2676 yards 13 tds

 

Other QBs with the best RBs in the league managed to put up good to great numbers. But Aikman didn't. I don't think that 'Emmitt held Aikman's numbers down' argument works very well at all.

 

Third, do you really think Brady is ever going to say no when asked if he sees a comparison to any HOF QB and himself? Of course not. Ask him if he sees the comparison to Montana, he'll say yes. Ask him about Aikman, he'll say yes. What's he going to say, No, I'm way better than Aikman ever was? So his opinion on the correct comparison means nothing since he's never going to say anything bad about another HOF QB.

 

The bottom line is Aikman was the ultimate system QB, and the ultimate game manager. The best there may have ever been at those things. And he won. But Brady is much more than that. He's had to win games without any running game, and he's won games with a good running game. I'd say only Dillon's first year has he ever had a great running game, and that never approached what Aikman had. The comparison between Aikman and Brady is just poor.

Edited July 14, 2007 by Bring Back Pat!!!

[hitch]

Look, just because the guys both have 3 rings and are HOFers doesn't mean they're similar players. You were speaking of the fact that Brady's numbers pailed in comparison to other QBs without as many rings (Peyton was the implication I believe) the same way that Aikman's numbers pailed in comparison to Young's, even though he won more championships. I simply pointed out that that is not accurate. Brady's numbers are much closer to Peyton's than Aikman's ever were to Young's, and Brady's destroys Aikmans. Now if you'd like to bring in the why question, fine. But that's not what you were talking about in your original post.

 

Second, to say that without Emmitt that Aikaman would have thrown for 4,000 yards and 30+tds, well, go ahead and think that. It's not something that can ever ever be proved, so if that's your arguement, fine, but I try to deal with facts and provable commodities. But since you brought it up, let's look at that QBs with the last three RBs that broke the touchdown record, and how they faired:

 

2006 Phillip Rivers 3388 yards 22 tds

2005 Matt Hasselebeck 3459 yards 24 tds

2003 Trent Green 4039 yards 24 tds

 

Now, Aikman's stats the year emmitt scored 25 tds:

1995 Troy Aikman 3304 yards 16 tds

 

And the year before when Emmitt scored 21 tds:

1994 Troy Aikman 2676 yards 13 tds

 

Other QBs with the best RBs in the league managed to put up good to great numbers. But Aikman didn't. I don't think that 'Emmitt held Aikman's numbers down' argument works very well at all.

 

Third, do you really think Brady is ever going to say no when asked if he sees a comparison to any HOF QB and himself? Of course not. Ask him if he sees the comparison to Montana, he'll say yes. Ask him about Aikman, he'll say yes. What's he going to say, No, I'm way better than Aikman ever was? So his opinion on the correct comparison means nothing since he's never going to say anything bad about another HOF QB.

 

The bottom line is Aikman was the ultimate system QB, and the ultimate game manager. The best there may have ever been at those things. And he won. But Brady is much more than that. He's had to win games without any running game, and he's won games with a good running game. I'd say only Dillon's first year has he ever had a great running game, and that never approached what Aikman had. The comparison between Aikman and Brady is just poor.

 

 

Look, here's the deal. No comparison is ever perfect. Nor is any opinion. But here's the beef. Troy Aikman is a first ballot HOFer and a QB with 3 rings. And I understand how little this means to you as a basis of comparison. And I realize he's retired, and I know exactly what his #s from his playing days were. We all have access to the #s obviously. He didnt have a chance to light up the night thru the air because his 'system' was so great. Though he no doubt could have....again, the dreaded hypothetical. And comparisons between ex HOF QBs and current players who appear headed in the same direction are basically in vein. But personally, Id have a hard time standing in front of Troy Aikman and telling him, "Yeah, you know Aikman, I know youve won three titles, and made 6 straight Pro Bowls, and are basically one of the most accurate passers and big game QBs Ive ever seen, but Ive pretty much got you pegged as a 'system' guy. What do you think you could have done in Cleveland?" That's just plain funny. When a man reaches a point of having won 3 rings, just as in the case of say Bradshaw or Bart Starr or Unitas or Montana or even Brady, Im gonna go ahead and let go of the 'system' references. We all understand great QBs dont win titles all by themselves....not even Brady himself. It kills me to hear people say you could put Peyton Manning on the Pats and get the same results. Kills. But to point out the obvious, and as much as I love Brady, he's never won a Superbowl independent of Charlie Weiss and his great 'system'. The system itself may still be the same, but when the guy running the system leaves it and moves on, its not the same system.....because the head friggin' engineer is gone. So Brady is yet to win a ring outside of the Weiss system. That's no hard knock on Brady because he still has alot of good football left in him and more chances to win rings. Heck, Montana never won a ring outside of Walsh's system, nor Favre outside of Holmgren's system, nor Bradshaw away from Knoll's system (if you want to call it that) or now even Manning outside of Tom Moore's system. Aikman actually won a ring wihout Norv Turner and his great system.

 

The simple point I made in the Aikman/Brady comparison is that each has 3 rings and statistically is/was inferior to other QBs of the day. Aikman to Favre and Young, and Brady to Manning. Much more than Aikman?...a guy with 3 rings? Again, funny stuff. Say what you want about Brady's #s, and I think theyre absolutely fan-friggin-tastic, but theyre not close to Manning's, just like Aikman's werent close to Young's or Favre's. Manning has thrown for 4000plus yds SEVEN times. And over 3700yds every single season in the league. Brady has hit 4000 once and 3700 twice (which includes that 4000yd season). No comparison. Manning has thrown for 26plus TDs NINE times, or every single year he's been in the league....over 30TDs 3x, including of course the legendary 49. Brady has NEVER thrown for 30 and has 26 or more three times. Again, really no statistical comparison. And as much as I love our boy Brady, Im just not ready to compare him to Montana. The guy had 3 300yd games in Superbowls without ever throwing a pick. And he has 4 rings....during an era when there were SEVERAL great NFL teams. Washington won multiple titles, as well as Oakland and the Giants. Not the case today. Let our man Tom get his 4th this year, and Ill drop back by and compare him to Goldenboy Joe. Until then, he's the modern day Aikman. And that's no knock. Say what you will......

[muchofawhere]

Brady's had an outstanding career so far. Maybe it's the system, maybe it's him. Whatever. This has been an interesting discussion.

But I'm interested in his 2007 fantasy value. Is Brady the #2 QB behind Manning? With NE's upgrades, is Brady a good to great value pick in the 3rd or 4th round?

 

And how about Branch? Is he a good to great value pick in the 5th or 6th?

[hitch]

Brady's had an outstanding career so far. Maybe it's the system, maybe it's him. Whatever. This has been an interesting discussion.

But I'm interested in his 2007 fantasy value. Is Brady the #2 QB behind Manning? With NE's upgrades, is Brady a good to great value pick in the 3rd or 4th round?

 

And how about Branch? Is he a good to great value pick in the 5th or 6th?

 

I think he's as reliable a QB choice as there is besides Manning. But he's up and down. He'll have weeks where he gets you 180yds and 1TD or 210yds and a pick. he's not prolific. He'll have the occasional game with 3 or 4TDs.....maybe twice during the season. This year he may be overvalued a little because of Moss and Stallworth. personally, I think the Pats will be so good on D and overall that Brady wont be superhard pressed, AGAIN, to put up big #s. If I could get him in the 5th, I would. If not, look at Bulger or Branch's guy Hasselbeck. As for Branch, he's never had a 1000yd season, so view his upside with a little caution. He also gets dinged alot. Plus he's short and has never been a big red zone guy to this point, but maybe that could change. I dont look for big changes from WRs when theyve had 5 years in the league to prove what they can do. I think he'll catch a ton of balls and get consistent yardage, but Im not sure of the TDs. In a PPR league, he'd probably have pretty good 5th our 6th round value.

Edited July 15, 2007 by hitch

[muchofawhere]

I think he's as reliable a QB choice as there is besides Manning. But he's up and down. He'll have weeks where he gets you 180yds and 1TD or 210yds and a pick. he's not prolific. He'll have the occasional game with 3 or 4TDs.....maybe twice during the season. This year he may be overvalued a little because of Moss and Stallworth. personally, I think the Pats will be so good on D and overall that Brady wont be superhard pressed, AGAIN, to put up big #s. If I could get him in the 5th, I would. If not, look at Bulger or Branch's guy Hasselbeck. As for Branch, he's never had a 1000yd season, so view his upside with a little caution. He also gets dinged alot. Plus he's short and has never been a big red zone guy to this point, but maybe that could change. I dont look for big changes from WRs when theyve had 5 years in the league to prove what they can do. I think he'll catch a ton of balls and get consistent yardage, but Im not sure of the TDs. In a PPR league, he'd probably have pretty good 5th our 6th round value.

Thanks. Good points