Tom Brady Retiring, for real this time.

[gilthorp]

Let's all get used to the "had Purdy stayed healthy" line, because it will be used a lot in the future.

[purplemonster]

5 minutes ago, Bier Meister said:

oh, i cut and paste and no longer have the source. I do not know how long you have been here, but i brought some of this up when it was happening (rebutting Ugly Tuna, a staunch Pats fan).  

 

I made similar comments about ben and ruffled some feathers of a friend on here.

 

now... had purdy stayed healthy and hypothetically won the NFCC game and SB I would have been ecstatic but would not be anointing him a goat due to that defense and running game they have.  Having those elements early in one's career enable a qb to actually develop some game iq and abilities.  

after about 4 years brady and ben were able to start carrying their teams, but the championships were not won on their backs (early).

I guess I feel like that is cherry picking a bit. You are mentioning his INT's but he has had 21 TD's and 6 INT's in 10 SB's and a 97.7 passer rating. That is pretty good. Mahomes through 2 SB's is 2 TD's and 4 INT's and a 64 passer rating. You mention Purdy getting injured. Maybe Brady notices that guy coming up on him and doesn't get injured. Brady has been excellent with awareness around him and quick release. There are countless ways you can win and lose football games so generally I am inclined to go with who got the W in the end, and Brady usually did. He certainly caught a break in the Seattle game, that should have been in all likelihood a loss. But he did a lot of things in other games where he could have lost but didn't. I don't think a lot of QB's would come back from a 25 pt deficit late against the Falcons. If we are going to ding him for a 2INT game and low passer rating, we also should give him credit for winning a game like that. I do think that playing in an easy division helped, and it helped getting home field advantage which I think is underrated. He also helped his team by taking below market salary to get better players. But he also came up with the good when needed IMO 

[Bier Meister]

12 minutes ago, purplemonster said:

I guess I feel like that is cherry picking a bit. You are mentioning his INT's but he has had 21 TD's and 6 INT's in 10 SB's and a 97.7 passer rating. That is pretty good. Mahomes through 2 SB's is 2 TD's and 4 INT's and a 64 passer rating. You mention Purdy getting injured. Maybe Brady notices that guy coming up on him and doesn't get injured. Brady has been excellent with awareness around him and quick release. There are countless ways you can win and lose football games so generally I am inclined to go with who got the W in the end, and Brady usually did. He certainly caught a break in the Seattle game, that should have been in all likelihood a loss. But he did a lot of things in other games where he could have lost but didn't. I don't think a lot of QB's would come back from a 25 pt deficit late against the Falcons. If we are going to ding him for a 2INT game and low passer rating, we also should give him credit for winning a game like that. I do think that playing in an easy division helped, and it helped getting home field advantage which I think is underrated. He also helped his team by taking below market salary to get better players. But he also came up with the good when needed IMO 

long post coming...

Brady's post season game logs.  we have already established that the AFCE was a pathway for playoff entry.  For his first 6-7 seasons note his % of sub 300 yd games, sub 250 yd games, and sub 200 yd games.  I used to say "no one can get you 3 like brady."

k	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
1	2001	2002-01-19	17	19	24.169	NWE		OAK	W 16-13	*	32	52	61.54	312	0	1	70.4	2	15	6.00	5.13	5	16	3.20	1	1	6	1	0	0	1	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
2	2001	2002-01-27	18	20	24.177	NWE	@	PIT	W 24-17	*	12	18	66.67	115	0	0	84.3	2	14	6.39	6.39	2	3	1.50	0	0	0	0		0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
3	2001	2002-02-03	19	21	24.184	NWE	N	STL	W 20-17	*	16	27	59.26	145	1	0	86.2	1	7	5.37	6.11	1	3	3.00	0	0	0	0		0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
Rk	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
4	2003	2004-01-10	17	19	26.160	NWE		TEN	W 17-14	*	21	41	51.22	201	1	0	73.3	0	0	4.90	5.39	5	5	1.00	0	0	0	0		0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
5	2003	2004-01-18	18	20	26.168	NWE		IND	W 24-14	*	22	37	59.46	237	1	1	76.1	0	0	6.41	5.73	5	1	0.20	0	0	0	0		0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
6	2003	2004-02-01	19	21	26.182	NWE	N	CAR	W 32-29	*	32	48	66.67	354	3	1	100.5	0	0	7.38	7.69	2	12	6.00	0	0	0	0		0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
Rk	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
7	2004	2005-01-16	17	19	27.166	NWE		IND	W 20-3	*	18	27	66.67	144	1	0	92.2	3	29	5.33	6.07	4	6	1.50	1	1	6	0		0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
8	2004	2005-01-23	18	20	27.173	NWE	@	PIT	W 41-27	*	14	21	66.67	207	2	0	130.5	2	11	9.86	11.76	2	-2	-1.00	0	0	0	0		0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
9	2004	2005-02-06	19	21	27.187	NWE	N	PHI	W 24-21	*	23	33	69.70	236	2	0	110.2	2	17	7.15	8.36	1	-1	-1.00	0	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
Rk	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
10	2005	2006-01-07	17	18	28.157	NWE		JAX	W 28-3	*	15	27	55.56	201	3	0	116.4	4	12	7.44	9.67	2	9	4.50	0	0	0	2	0	0	2	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
11	2005	2006-01-14	18	19	28.164	NWE	@	DEN	L 13-27	*	20	36	55.56	341	1	2	74.0	0	0	9.47	7.53	1	-1	-1.00	0	0	0	0		0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
Rk	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
12	2006	2007-01-07	17	18	29.157	NWE		NYJ	W 37-16	*	22	34	64.71	212	2	0	101.6	1	12	6.24	7.41	2	14	7.00	0	0	0	0		0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
13	2006	2007-01-14	18	19	29.164	NWE	@	SDG	W 24-21	*	27	51	52.94	280	2	3	57.6	2	4	5.49	3.63	2	3	1.50	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
14	2006	2007-01-21	19	20	29.171	NWE	@	IND	L 34-38	*	21	34	61.76	232	1	1	79.5	1	6	6.82	6.09	4	1	0.25	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
Rk	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
15	2007	2008-01-12	17	19	30.162	NWE		JAX	W 31-20	*	26	28	92.86	262	3	0	141.4	1	4	9.36	11.50	2	1	0.50	0	0	0	0		0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
16	2007	2008-01-20	18	20	30.170	NWE		SDG	W 21-12	*	22	33	66.67	209	2	3	66.4	2	11	6.33	3.45	2	-2	-1.00	0	0	0	0		0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
17	2007	2008-02-03	19	21	30.184	NWE	N	NYG	L 14-17	*	29	48	60.42	266	1	0	82.5	5	37	5.54	5.96	0	0		0	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
Rk	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
18	2009	2010-01-10	17	18	32.160	NWE		BAL	L 14-33	*	23	42	54.76	154	2	3	49.1	3	22	3.67	1.40	0	0		0	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
Rk	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
19	2010	2011-01-16	17	19	33.166	NWE		NYJ	L 21-28	*	29	45	64.44	299	2	1	89.0	5	40	6.64	6.53	2	2	1.00	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
Rk	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
20	2011	2012-01-14	17	19	34.164	NWE		DEN	W 45-10	*	26	34	76.47	363	6	1	137.6	0	0	10.68	12.88	3	8	2.67	0	0	0	0		0	0	0	0	1	48	48.00	0	48	48.0	0	0.0%	1	100.0%	0							
21	2011	2012-01-22	18	20	34.172	NWE		BAL	W 23-20	*	22	36	61.11	239	0	2	57.5	1	5	6.64	4.14	6	2	0.33	1	1	6	0		0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
22	2011	2012-02-05	19	21	34.186	NWE	N	NYG	L 17-21	*	27	41	65.85	276	2	1	91.1	2	10	6.73	6.61	0	0		0	0	0	0			0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0							
Rk	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
23	2012	2013-01-13	17	19	35.163	NWE		HOU	W 41-28	*	25	40	62.50	344	3	0	115.0	1	9	8.60	10.10	1	-1	-1.00	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0	67	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
24	2012	2013-01-20	18	20	35.170	NWE		BAL	L 13-28	*	29	54	53.70	320	1	2	62.3	0	0	5.93	4.63	2	5	2.50	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0	83	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
Rk	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
25	2013	2014-01-11	17	19	36.161	NWE		IND	W 43-22	*	13	25	52.00	198	0	0	78.4	2	13	7.92	7.92	1	-1	-1.00	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0	74	100%	0	0%	2	6%	
26	2013	2014-01-19	18	20	36.169	NWE	@	DEN	L 16-26	*	24	38	63.16	277	1	0	93.9	2	21	7.29	7.82	2	7	3.50	1	1	6	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0	59	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
Rk	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
27	2014	2015-01-10	17	19	37.160	NWE		BAL	W 35-31	*	33	50	66.00	367	3	1	99.3	2	10	7.34	7.64	6	0	0.00	1	1	6	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0									0	68	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
28	2014	2015-01-18	18	20	37.168	NWE		IND	W 45-7	*	23	35	65.71	226	3	1	100.4	1	6	6.46	6.89	3	13	4.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0									0	76	97%	0	0%	0	0%	
29	2014	2015-02-01	19	21	37.182	NWE	N	SEA	W 28-24	*	37	50	74.00	328	4	2	101.1	1	8	6.56	6.36	2	-3	-1.50	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0									0	74	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
Rk	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
30	2015	2016-01-16	17	19	38.166	NWE		KAN	W 27-20	*	28	42	66.67	302	2	0	103.5	0	0	7.19	8.14	6	6	1.00	1	1	6	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0									0	58	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
31	2015	2016-01-24	18	20	38.174	NWE	@	DEN	L 18-20	*	27	56	48.21	310	1	2	56.4	4	18	5.54	4.29	3	13	4.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0									0	83	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
Rk	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
32	2016	2017-01-14	17	19	39.164	NWE		HOU	W 34-16	*	18	38	47.37	287	2	2	68.6	2	8	7.55	6.24	4	-1	-0.25	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0									0	69	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
33	2016	2017-01-22	18	20	39.172	NWE		PIT	W 36-17	*	32	42	76.19	384	3	0	127.5	2	10	9.14	10.57	4	-1	-0.25	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0									0	74	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
34	2016	2017-02-05	19	21	39.186	NWE	N	ATL	W 34-28	*	43	62	69.35	466	2	1	95.2	5	24	7.52	7.44	1	15	15.00	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0									0	99	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
Rk	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
35	2017	2018-01-13	17	19	40.163	NWE		TEN	W 35-14	*	35	53	66.04	337	3	0	102.5	0	0	6.36	7.49	1	2	2.00	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0									0	78	96%	0	0%	0	0%	
36	2017	2018-01-21	18	20	40.171	NWE		JAX	W 24-20	*	26	38	68.42	290	2	0	108.4	3	12	7.63	8.68	5	0	0.00	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0									0	64	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
37	2017	2018-02-04	19	21	40.185	NWE	N	PHI	L 33-41	*	28	48	58.33	505	3	0	115.4	1	5	10.52	11.77	1	6	6.00	0	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0									0	76	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
Rk	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
38	2018	2019-01-13	17	19	41.163	NWE		LAC	W 41-28	*	34	44	77.27	343	1	0	106.5	0	0	7.80	8.25	2	-1	-0.50	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0									0	83	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
39	2018	2019-01-20	18	20	41.170	NWE	@	KAN	W 37-31	*	30	46	65.22	348	1	2	77.1	0	0	7.57	6.04	1	-1	-1.00	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0									0	97	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
40	2018	2019-02-03	19	21	41.184	NWE	N	LAR	W 13-3	*	21	35	60.00	262	0	1	71.4	1	9	7.49	6.20	2	-2	-1.00	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0									0	72	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
Rk	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
41	2019	2020-01-04	18	18	42.154	NWE		TEN	L 13-20	*	20	37	54.05	209	0	1	59.4	0	0	5.65	4.43	0	0		0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0									0	61	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
Rk	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
42	2020	2021-01-09	18	18	43.159	TAM	@	WAS	W 31-23	*	22	40	55.00	381	2	0	104.3	3	16	9.53	10.53	3	-2	-0.67	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0									0	73	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
43	2020	2021-01-17	19	19	43.167	TAM	@	NOR	W 30-20	*	18	33	54.55	199	2	0	92.9	1	10	6.03	7.24	5	2	0.40	1	1	6	1	0	0	1	0	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0	70	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
44	2020	2021-01-24	20	20	43.174	TAM	@	GNB	W 31-26	*	20	36	55.56	280	3	3	73.8	1	5	7.78	5.69	1	-1	-1.00	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0									0	64	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
45	2020	2021-02-07	21	21	43.188	TAM	N	KAN	W 31-9	*	21	29	72.41	201	3	0	125.8	1	6	6.93	9.00	4	-2	-0.50	0	0	0	1	0	0	1	-15	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0	67	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
Rk	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
46	2021	2022-01-16	18	19	44.166	TAM		PHI	W 31-15	*	29	37	78.38	271	2	0	115.2	4	28	7.32	8.41	0	0		0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0									0	73	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
47	2021	2022-01-23	19	20	44.173	TAM		LAR	L 27-30	*	30	54	55.56	329	1	1	72.2	3	21	6.09	5.63	1	0	0.00	0	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0									0	72	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
Rk	Year	Date	G#	Week	Age	Tm		Opp	Result	GS	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Rate	Sk	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	TD	Pts	Fmb	FL	FF	FR	Yds	TD	Pnt	Yds	Y/P	RetYds	Net	NY/P	TB	TB%	In20	In20%	Blck	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Status
48	2022	2023-01-16	18	19	45.166	TAM		DAL	L 14-31	*	35	66	53.03	351	2	1	72.2	2	17	5.32	5.24	0	0		0	0	0	1	0	0	1	6	0	0	0		0	0		0		0		0	82	100%	0	0%	0	0%	
48 Games							35-13-0		1200	1921	62.47	13400	88	40	89.8	81	512	6.98	6.95	114	133	1.17	7	7	42	16	5	0	6	-9	0	1	48	48.00	0	48	48.0	0	0.0%	1	100.0%	0							
More Brady Pages
Tom Brady Overview

 

More Brady Pages

Tom Brady Overview

[Bier Meister]

24 minutes ago, gilthorp said:

Let's all get used to the "had Purdy stayed healthy" line, because it will be used a lot in the future.

right now i am more interested in "when will purdy get healthy?"

[League_Champion]

33 minutes ago, Bier Meister said:

now... had purdy stayed healthy and hypothetically won the NFCC game and SB I would have been ecstatic but would not be anointing him a goat due to that defense and running game they have.  Having those elements early in one's career enable a qb to actually develop some game iq and abilities.  

after about 4 years brady and ben were able to start carrying their teams, but the championships were not won on their backs (early).

Are we serious? Brady was a master at reading and carving up defenses with precise accuracy. Nobody had the awareness and pure football instincts that he did, it's not close. 

Most of those Patriot teams were nothing to write home about, he absolutely carried them. To think otherwise is ridiculous. 

 

[darin3]

1 minute ago, Bier Meister said:

right now i am more interested in "when will purdy get healthy?"

Hey good thing you have another QB that you spent a small fortune to get.

[Bier Meister]

2 minutes ago, League_Champion said:

Are we serious? Brady was a master at reading and carving up defenses with precise accuracy. Nobody had the awareness and pure football instincts that he did, it's not close. 

Most of those Patriot teams were nothing to write home about, he absolutely carried them. To think otherwise is ridiculous. 

 

I don't think you were watching those teams and games.  early on they just didn't want him to turn it over. D/ST created a lot of short fields and points of their own.  It was the defense that controlled Indy and the greatest show on turf. Many SB moments for NEP/TBB were made by the defense.

[League_Champion]

6 minutes ago, Bier Meister said:

I don't think you were watching those teams and games.  early on they just didn't want him to turn it over. D/ST created a lot of short fields and points of their own.  It was the defense that controlled Indy and the greatest show on turf. Many SB moments for NEP/TBB were made by the defense.

44 career 4th QT comebacks. 

[gilthorp]

I lean on your side Bier, but the guy did carry a few of his teams, way before he became annoying. I'm not in the camp he's the GOAT. 

[Bier Meister]

Just now, gilthorp said:

I lean on your side Bier, but the guy did carry a few of his teams, way before he became annoying. I'm not in the camp he's the GOAT. 

Let's be clear... i am talking about his first 6-7 years.  He certainly started carrying his teams and developed into an excellent qb

[League_Champion]

10 minutes ago, Bier Meister said:

Let's be clear... i am talking about his first 6-7 years.  He certainly started carrying his teams and developed into an excellent qb

Who's your GOAT, let me guess, Joe Montana?? 😊

[Bier Meister]

1 minute ago, League_Champion said:

Who's your GOAT, let me guess, Joe Montana?? 😊

Manning... no one has run an offense like payton.

[League_Champion]

5 minutes ago, Bier Meister said:

Manning... no one has run an offense like payton.

Manning is the GOAT? If you say so. 

[League_Champion]

3 hours ago, Bobby Brown said:

In the future I'll make a more concerted effort to post meaningful tidbits, like Davis Mills being a future HOFr and Hurts not belonging in the NFL, 20 to 30 times a week.  

 

[stevegrab]

If the Eagles win the SB Jalen Hurts will be crowned GOAT, even though he wasn't a legit NFL starter not long ago. 

[League_Champion]

1 minute ago, stevegrab said:

If the Eagles win the SB

Ever dream about what it would be like if the Browns won the Superbowl? 

[stevegrab]

8 minutes ago, League_Champion said:

Ever dream about what it would be like if the Browns won the Superbowl? 

No I wish I could be an Eagles fan like you .  

Three cheers for LC and his contributions to the Eagles success. How long was it they went without an NFL championship when they won one recently? Oh right 57 years, just a bit less than it has been now for the Browns.

Let me guess you weren't a fan then, they were bad news since they sucked (not champs). 

I'd be rooting for Tom Brady if he were facing the Eagles in SB.

[League_Champion]

1 minute ago, stevegrab said:

wish I could be an Eagles fan like you

I'm sure you do. It has to be sad & lonely being a Browns fan. Even before the Eagles won their first Super at least they were competitive and a joy to watch. Cleveland is just sad, I'm sorry but that's just how everyone thinks. 

Let go of the hate in your heart. 

[Def.]

1 hour ago, Bier Meister said:

Manning... no one has run an offense like payton.

Thank you for pointing this out to all the hot cakes types. 

[gilthorp]

hot cakes are where it's at Def

[purplemonster]

I'll take a look at it these stats, but I think I'm going to have a hard time agreeing. Manning was 14-13 in the playoffs and Brady 35-13. Brady had better stats than Manning in SB's and in the playoffs in general;  Manning was 3TD's and 5 INT's in 4 super bowl games and a passer rating of 77. Mahomes has better playoff stats in general but much worse stats so far for the 2 Super Bowls he's been in. 

This is not a subject so easily boiled down stats, but he has a heavy advantage in situations where it counts that it's going to be hard to unseat him IMO 

[Bier Meister]

12 minutes ago, purplemonster said:

I'll take a look at it these stats, but I think I'm going to have a hard time agreeing. Manning was 14-13 in the playoffs and Brady 35-13. Brady had better stats than Manning in SB's and in the playoffs in general;  Manning was 3TD's and 5 INT's in 4 super bowl games and a passer rating of 77. Mahomes has better playoff stats in general but much worse stats so far for the 2 Super Bowls he's been in. 

This is not a subject so easily boiled down stats, but he has a heavy advantage in situations where it counts that it's going to be hard to unseat him IMO 

going back in time a bit... manning had much stronger offensive weapons, but very little support on defense.  Manning was asked to carry the team (with help from james).  brady was winning games with under 150 yards.

fouts was a much better qb than bradshaw= running game and dominent defense.  better player doesn't always get the W 

[Bier Meister]

1 minute ago, Bier Meister said:

going back in time a bit... manning had much stronger offensive weapons, but very little support on defense.  Manning was asked to carry the team (with help from james).  brady was winning games with under 150 yards.

fouts was a much better qb than bradshaw= running game and dominent defense.  better player doesn't always get the W 

If you look at the title manning won with denver at the end of his career, it looks a lot like brady starting out.... dominant defense.

 

he was able to finally win in indy when he had a mediocre defense that was opportunistic in the playoffs (much like brees)

[stevegrab]

28 minutes ago, Bier Meister said:

going back in time a bit... manning had much stronger offensive weapons, but very little support on defense.  Manning was asked to carry the team (with help from james).  brady was winning games with under 150 yards.

fouts was a much better qb than bradshaw= running game and dominent defense.  better player doesn't always get the W 

Exactly football is a TEAM sport, the team wins or loses, not the QB by themselves. A strong defense and good running game make things a lot easier for a QB. So the playoff record stat is kind of pointless. 

I'm not even trying to argue against Brady being the GOAT, because it doesn't really matter to me. 

[purplemonster]

1 hour ago, Bier Meister said:

If you look at the title manning won with denver at the end of his career, it looks a lot like brady starting out.... dominant defense.

 

he was able to finally win in indy when he had a mediocre defense that was opportunistic in the playoffs (much like brees)

Well, I am sure you are probably aware but passing yards in a game have almost no relation to wins. You could say well that's because their defense was doing such a good job he didn't need to throw for a lot, and I suppose that's true. But that doesn't mean he couldn't, it meant he didn't have to. 

Here was an interesting article, I don't know how much to attribute to it but, he had a better D than is typical for SB winners, but also had an offense that was better too. Brady played with a lot of replaceable parts too, he did not have the dominance of a guy like Rice for so many years. I think that should be taken into account some too. https://www.bruinsportsanalytics.com/post/defense_wins
It is no secret that the Patriots are a repeat offender in Super Bowl victories over the past 20 years. Led by defensive-minded head coach Bill Belichick, with Tom Brady at quarterback, it is unclear whether their defense or offense can be credited with their dominance. In order to answer this question, we will take a look at all six Patriots’ Super Bowl wins in the Tom Brady, Bill Belichick era. The Patriots have an average offensive ranking of 5.5 in their six championship seasons, with an average defensive ranking of 4.3. However, with a p-value of 0.54, we are unable to conclude from this data whether the Patriots’ offense or defense deserves more credit for their six Super Bowl titles.

After removing the Patriots from the Super Bowl winner data, the average offensive ranking of teams increases from 8.4 to 9.4. This means that the Patriots, in their championship seasons, generally had a higher ranked offense than other Super Bowl winners in the past 20 years. Additionally, the average defensive ranking of teams increases from 8.2 to 9.5. Therefore, the Patriots, in their championship seasons, also generally had a higher ranked defense than other Super Bowl winners in the past 20 years.

Edited February 2, 2023 by purplemonster