lol

As you can see, this topic exists a lot more than some here want to admit.  I'd say he has 2-3 years left and it's probably pointless to entertain trading him because I am not sure you get the value you'd want back.

But, clearly, tht :fire" you speak of does seem to be a problem.  His pregame antics are the same. He enjoys playing, but I wonder how easy it is for him during the season against bad or mediocre Ds, is counter-productive for him when the postseason hits.

I was simply shocked at this mediocre SB last year after such a poor performance. The game was right there the entire 4th qtr and he just made mistake after mistake.  I was on here saying "no way he has two back to back subpar games". I was wrong. He did.

You can give him a pass in SB 42 because of the O Line issues, the Giants front 7 playing out of their gourds, etc, but recently, we have a serious problem.

Paul Perillo was on Pats All Access pre-postseason saying "the last guy I am worried about is Tom Brady".

Hmmm.

I don't feel that way AT ALL anymore.  I feel the total opposite. FOr the last 2 years, I've said NE will win the division, go deep into the postseason but my main question is how Brady will run the offense and how he executes in it.

As Brady or any QB goes, so does the team.

Until I see differently, there is no way I can just pretend.  He a GOLDEN opportunity to really take control of this AFC title game in the second half and they didn't even get 1 FG.

Absolutely brutal. It's almost like the losses bother me more than him. 

I think the people that say Brady played poorly in last years Super Bowl are absolute fools that don't know a thing about football to be honest. If we win that game, Brady wins the MVP....hands down. The guy was given poor field position that entire game and yet was in fact perfect on one scoring drive and nearly perfect on the other. He had drops in that game that would of also helped us win. He was given the ball at the one yard line to start that game and was under tremendous pressure that resulted in a safety...big deal...it was two lousy points. It could of been worse.

Now the last game against the Ravens was not good...I can give anyone that, but the game against the Texans was very very good. The thing that was consistently BAD in BOTH contests was our defense - you don't give up 28 points in both your playoff games and think you're going to win anything. And we didn't.

Trade the guy and we will all see very quickly how average of a football team this is right now. Bruschi said the same right after our loss, if I'm not mistaken. We have very good players in...Welker, Gronk (who was hurt), Wilfork and Jones (who was hurt). That is not going to get it done.

Well is it time to replace Brady? Is he turnig into the new Bledsoe? Just unsure if he has the fire inside still to win another SB nor the arm to throw the ball longer than 20yds with accuracy. Or do most think if the Pats had just a few more pieces, they would pull it off. 2 cracks at the Giants left them empty. And now falling a game short against the Ravens. How much longer can the Pats run with Brady at the helm?

In response to antiqueman1's comment:

Well is it time to replace Brady? Is he turnig into the new Bledsoe? Just unsure if he has the fire inside still to win another SB nor the arm to throw the ball longer than 20yds with accuracy. Or do most think if the Pats had just a few more pieces, they would pull it off. 2 cracks at the Giants left them empty. And now falling a game short against the Ravens. How much longer can the Pats run with Brady at the helm?

Since it will be so easy to find a replacement for him, it is definitely time to let him go.  I am sure they can easily identify someone in the draft, or get someone through free agency, or maybe by trade.  Nothing easier than finding a quarterback who can throw thirty plus touchdown passes a year with few interceptions.  There must be fifty guys out there who can do that.  So far Brady is the only quarterback in the history of the NFL who has led offenses that have scored 500 plus points four different years, but there must be dozens of others who can do that.  He may be the only quarterback in the history of the NFL with 100 more wins than losses, but, again, quarterbacks who can do that probably grow on trees.  Of course it's time to get rid of Brady.  The Patriots will have their pick of quarterbacks who can play better than he.  There's nothing easier than finding a Hall of Fame quarterback.  Look at all the teams in the NFL that do it all the time. 

ne, brady probobaly still had 2-3 good years left....it would be nice if they drafted a qb now or if they dont, make sure mallett if the guy.

In response to redsoxfan94's comment:

ne, brady probobaly still had 2-3 good years left....it would be nice if they drafted a qb now or if they dont, make sure mallett if the guy.

Yeah. Let's get right on finding that elite QB, because, you know, we don't have any other needs at the moment. Brilliant point. Boy, I wish you were running the show in Foxboro. We would be perennial favs to win it all.

Stupid question. Of course it's time to replace the GOAT.

Why I'll bet nobody else will even make him an offer since a crackerjack football expert like you has deemed him washed up. Let's move right on to our next HOF QB. Shouldn't take more than a week or so to find one.

Oh, btw, - Learn the game.

In response to BabeParilli's comment:

Stupid question. Of course it's time to replace the GOAT.

Why I'll bet nobody else will even make him an offer since a crackerjack football expert like you has deemed him washed up. Let's move right on to our next HOF QB. Shouldn't take more than a week or so to find one.

Oh, btw, - Learn the game.

Thank God you are not running the show either, just your mouth once again. Let's see, the 49ers look pretty successful after replacing their starting QB with a backup midseason. Oh, I guess it can't happen. And I never said trade, just asked if it was time to think about replacing him. A bit sensitive about it I see as usual babepar.  

In response to RockScully's comment:

lol

As you can see, this topic exists a lot more than some here want to admit.  I'd say he has 2-3 years left and it's probably pointless to entertain trading him because I am not sure you get the value you'd want back.

But, clearly, tht :fire" you speak of does seem to be a problem.  His pregame antics are the same. He enjoys playing, but I wonder how easy it is for him during the season against bad or mediocre Ds, is counter-productive for him when the postseason hits.

I was simply shocked at this mediocre SB last year after such a poor performance. The game was right there the entire 4th qtr and he just made mistake after mistake.  I was on here saying "no way he has two back to back subpar games". I was wrong. He did.

You can give him a pass in SB 42 because of the O Line issues, the Giants front 7 playing out of their gourds, etc, but recently, we have a serious problem.

Paul Perillo was on Pats All Access pre-postseason saying "the last guy I am worried about is Tom Brady".

Hmmm.

I don't feel that way AT ALL anymore.  I feel the total opposite. FOr the last 2 years, I've said NE will win the division, go deep into the postseason but my main question is how Brady will run the offense and how he executes in it.

As Brady or any QB goes, so does the team.

Until I see differently, there is no way I can just pretend.  He a GOLDEN opportunity to really take control of this AFC title game in the second half and they didn't even get 1 FG.

Absolutely brutal. It's almost like the losses bother me more than him. 

I totally agree. Subpar at best. And I think their division is too easy and that hurts him come playoffs. I have to add how frustrated I was to see him not take off and run especially for those short yrds. I just don't think he has what it takes to win another SB. And I would hate to see it turn into aother Bledsoe situation.

In response to mthurl's comment:

I think the people that say Brady played poorly in last years Super Bowl are absolute fools that don't know a thing about football to be honest. If we win that game, Brady wins the MVP....hands down. The guy was given poor field position that entire game and yet was in fact perfect on one scoring drive and nearly perfect on the other. He had drops in that game that would of also helped us win. He was given the ball at the one yard line to start that game and was under tremendous pressure that resulted in a safety...big deal...it was two lousy points. It could of been worse.

Now the last game against the Ravens was not good...I can give anyone that, but the game against the Texans was very very good. The thing that was consistently BAD in BOTH contests was our defense - you don't give up 28 points in both your playoff games and think you're going to win anything. And we didn't.

Trade the guy and we will all see very quickly how average of a football team this is right now. Bruschi said the same right after our loss, if I'm not mistaken. We have very good players in...Welker, Gronk (who was hurt), Wilfork and Jones (who was hurt). That is not going to get it done.

2 'lousy points' and gave the Giants the ball. Did they not then score on that drive? I never said trade him, just said maybe it is time to replace him. He could have helped his own cause out this yr by running the ball for some yds. Also, if you are referring to that poorly thrown pass last yr to Welker, then view it from this angle. If Welker had caught that poorly thrown pass then people would have said that was one of the best or most amazing catches ever.

In response to redsoxfan94's comment:

In response to RockScully's comment:

lol

As you can see, this topic exists a lot more than some here want to admit.  I'd say he has 2-3 years left and it's probably pointless to entertain trading him because I am not sure you get the value you'd want back.

But, clearly, tht :fire" you speak of does seem to be a problem.  His pregame antics are the same. He enjoys playing, but I wonder how easy it is for him during the season against bad or mediocre Ds, is counter-productive for him when the postseason hits.

I was simply shocked at this mediocre SB last year after such a poor performance. The game was right there the entire 4th qtr and he just made mistake after mistake.  I was on here saying "no way he has two back to back subpar games". I was wrong. He did.

You can give him a pass in SB 42 because of the O Line issues, the Giants front 7 playing out of their gourds, etc, but recently, we have a serious problem.

Paul Perillo was on Pats All Access pre-postseason saying "the last guy I am worried about is Tom Brady".

Hmmm.

I don't feel that way AT ALL anymore.  I feel the total opposite. FOr the last 2 years, I've said NE will win the division, go deep into the postseason but my main question is how Brady will run the offense and how he executes in it.

As Brady or any QB goes, so does the team.

Until I see differently, there is no way I can just pretend.  He a GOLDEN opportunity to really take control of this AFC title game in the second half and they didn't even get 1 FG.

Absolutely brutal. It's almost like the losses bother me more than him. 

he doesnt seem to have the same passion as he used to, on that we agree. i still think brady has another ring in him before he retires though.

I think step 1 is to let Welker go.  Since 2007 and since 2010 with him being so spoiled with arguably the best 3 different size in between hash route runners in the NFL, his skills have compromised a bit.  His deep ball is horrendous, he ignores trying to establish playaction in 90% of the games, and his perimeter throws are also not that good.  SOme of it may be having to do with the his leg injury in 2008 with a paranoia in stepping forward with the right mechanics, but regardless, it's been weak in that area.

I want to see him forced back into his non-comfort zone because I think it will make him mentally tougher and a better overall QB.

Ever notice sometimes when he runs a screen or a quick hitch to Welker he sort of strolls down the field like ho-hum?  It's because his underneath targets are so good, it is ho hum. I saw him make more incredible passes in 2005 or 2006 than he has in recent years. It's because he had to.

I know this isn't a huge deal, but you'd never see him look that bored back in 2006 when he was sort forced to raise the bar with just Caldwell, Watson and an old Troy Brown as his top options.

He's changed. There's no doubt. He puts up better stats in the regular season and looks more like a younger QB trying to grow into the league now in the postseason.

I just was watching Schlereth and Jaws saying the whole reason why the Rams lost SB 36 is because they chose to throw so much.  47 times.

Again, that was a choice. They didn't have to throw so much in the first half or abandon the run so early in the 3rd qtr eiher.  Only down 14-3  at the half or 17-10 doesn't mean you panic and take out half your playbook.

Brady seems to want to get to that 40 pass plateau and I just don't get it.  It's a clear path to a loss.

In response to TB17JM16's comment:

Keep Brady for 2 more years, find a way to keep Gronk healthy for the playoffs, replace midget wr's with bigger targets and improve 2nd half defense. Turnovers.

I think the 2nd half D is clearly contingent on what the offense is doing. That's been the problem. Jaws was talking about this today from New Orleans.

It's the truth.  To always ask the D to rally and bail out the offense so frequently is unrealistic.

People think because Brady has the gaudy stats it means the offense is being run well. I disagree.

I think you take each game, each qtr, each half, etc, for what it is.  You have to adjust.   To be fair, Gronk needs to be there, but I also think they can be a much better offense without Welker as a predictable option and the majority of Brady's 1st reads on routes. It's just to easy to defend. I think Edelman, not known as a lead target for Brady, could be effective in the role if less productive. Move Hernandez all around. Slot, outside, backfield, motion, decoy, etc.

The second half D would be BETTER if the offense wasn't constantly disappearing for large chunks of the game.

Obviously, turnovers are also a problem.

As much as I like Ridley, it may make sense to see if Bolden can handle a full load.  Use Ridley as the guy who spells Bolden, and then use Vereen as the new Woodhead on certain downs or in certain, strategic times of the game (trailing, needing to the run 2 minute, the lead RB in situations when you have distinct spread offense advantages, etc). Ridley may just be a Faulk type where the less he's used the more dynamic he can be.  Lean on Bolden as another BJGE guy.

From there, it's simply Brady not throwing any picks.  Don't turn it over next postseason and they're back in the SB.

NO...

A more diverse offense would help. As will a better D.