In response to DanishPastry's comment:
In response to PatsEng's comment:
Other than the NO game when has that happened? 1 game is enough to call him clutch? Sorry but this is the type of stuff which is why I think he's overrated by many. The kid after the NO game was so clutch BB started to take snaps away from him until he was a healthy inactive. He had 1 great game in Atl where a 1/4 of his stats came from and in NO he only had 3 recs but one was the game winner where everyone fell in love with the kid. 1 catch doesn't make a career but it seems that one catch turns him into Branch in some Pats fans eyes. The kid has been good and if he does what he did on Friday I'd be happy to have him as a 4th/5th WR on the team but lets not start tossing around clutch and Branch comparisons until the kid has done it consistently and not as a 1 off catch here and there.
I'm not saying he is an all time great, and I do say that he must work on catching more of his targets. But having played only one season three games stand out to me. Atlanta was a good game for him, NO for obvious reasons, and then try to go back and watch the Denver game, The Comeback. Opening drive of the 2nd half, down 24 who does Brady go to like 3 times straight? KT. At the time both Amendola and Gronk were both healthy, so he was targeted above those two and Edelman. Clutch.
So that is at least twice Brady has trusted him, where he delivered. Again, we're talking about a #4-5-6 kind of guy, not a HOF'er. The Branch comparison was for an area where Branch was better, so it's not like I'm trying to make it sound like he is Branch level. He is not. But he is a nice player, who DOES show up when it matters.
Supra societatem nemo
The start of the 3rd is when we are starting to define clutch? Brady has tossed to different guys 3 times straight in a no huddle situation when the D match ups gave it to him which was the case in the Den game. He's done it with multiple WRs so I'm not about to call that clutch. Final drive or two when we needed a score or we loss (like in NO) sure but at the beginning of a half where the situational miss match was present in no huddle? Atl he was consistently good all game but I wouldn't call that clutch just a great game overall. Really NO is the only game I can point to and say that was a must need clutch play on his part. I can also go back and point out in 4th quarters him dropping a ball or two that would have extended a series so how are you defining clutch is all I'm asking. When he comes up with more than 1 game where him making a difficult catch and is a difference maker I'll be happy to label him such but to me labeling him clutch is putting him on the same level as Faulk, Brown, and Branch in the SB years and he has a lot more games ahead of him before you can put him in the same group as far as clutch catches make. People toss around the Clutch term way to often like Amendola was clutch when we signed him apparently. Still have no clue where that came for, at least Thompkins got 1 clutch catch before you labeled him that.