What Brady really did in 42&46.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    What Brady really did in 42&46.

    We all know the ineptitude of our defense which made Eli a legend in the closing minutes of two Super Bowls led to very bitter losses.

    But what some may not realize is exactly how well Brady played in those.

    If you subtract the 57 second and 29 second desperation drives those defensive collapses forced on him, his PR for each game was....

     

    2011 - 100.85 (despite Gronk KOd)

    2007 - 89.77 (despite being sacked 5 times)

    The 2 combined - 94.6

     

    So much for those who claim his SB performances have diminished. It's more like the team around him has diminished. Especially a defense that had 8 turnovers in the 3 wins and 1 in the two losses.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccsjl. Show ccsjl's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    SB 42 was the last playoff game, other than the Denver divisional win last year that Brady was the better QB. He was the worse of the 2 QBs in both last years AFC Champ and SB

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from nyjoseph. Show nyjoseph's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    In response to ccsjl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    SB 42 was the last playoff game, other than the Denver divisional win last year that Brady was the better QB. He was the worse of the 2 QBs in both last years AFC Champ and SB

    [/QUOTE]


    It's not telling the whole story truthfully.  2009 for example in the loss to BALT they had to adapt to life without WW in 1 week.

    So Flacco goes 4 for 10 with 34 yards, 0 TDs and 1 INT.  It's a toss-up who was worse at QB, but the game was not lost at QB.  The Pats simply could not stop the run all day and could not force Flacco to throw.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    In response to nyjoseph's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ccsjl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    SB 42 was the last playoff game, other than the Denver divisional win last year that Brady was the better QB. He was the worse of the 2 QBs in both last years AFC Champ and SB

    [/QUOTE]


    It's not telling the whole story truthfully.  2009 for example in the loss to BALT they had to adapt to life without WW in 1 week.

    So Flacco goes 4 for 10 with 34 yards, 0 TDs and 1 INT.  It's a toss-up who was worse at QB, but the game was not lost at QB.  The Pats simply could not stop the run all day and could not force Flacco to throw.

    [/QUOTE]

    No Hernandez, No Gronk, No Spikes, McCourty, Hightower, Jones and no Welker in the playoffs.  How did that team even make it to the playoffs?  A rookie UDFA named Edelman was their top receiver.  

    The fact that Brady managed t carry that bunch to the playoffs is pretty amazing.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    In response to ccsjl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    SB 42 was the last playoff game, other than the Denver divisional win last year that Brady was the better QB. He was the worse of the 2 QBs in both last years AFC Champ and SB

    [/QUOTE]


    Wonder why?

    Couldn't have anything to do with TB having to play top nfl defenses and the opposition getting to play a JV defense, could it?

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    Brady is one of the greatest, those games were lost due to some bad luck to the D.  Oh, and the coaches got out coached.  Only putting up 17 and 14 points wasn't because Brady was bad, it was the game plans that were bad.

    For TFB to lead that team to so many victories despite bad defenses shows how great he is.  Those people saying his SB have diminished are just haters. 

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from nyjoseph. Show nyjoseph's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    In response to shenanigan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to nyjoseph's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ccsjl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    SB 42 was the last playoff game, other than the Denver divisional win last year that Brady was the better QB. He was the worse of the 2 QBs in both last years AFC Champ and SB

    [/QUOTE]


    It's not telling the whole story truthfully.  2009 for example in the loss to BALT they had to adapt to life without WW in 1 week.

    So Flacco goes 4 for 10 with 34 yards, 0 TDs and 1 INT.  It's a toss-up who was worse at QB, but the game was not lost at QB.  The Pats simply could not stop the run all day and could not force Flacco to throw.

    [/QUOTE]

    No Hernandez, No Gronk, No Spikes, McCourty, Hightower, Jones and no Welker in the playoffs.  How did that team even make it to the playoffs?  A rookie UDFA named Edelman was their top receiver.  

    The fact that Brady managed t carry that bunch to the playoffs is pretty amazing.

    [/QUOTE]

    The sentence I highlighted is why Brady is already the equal of Montana IMO.  People always say Montana won all 4 SBs he played in.  True.  But he also failed to make the SB with superior talent and never brought an obviously flawed team to the SB.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    The whole team let chance to win slip away, bit by bit in both games.  But if you look at points scored, offense was was more below its potential than defense.  In other words defense played more adequately than offense.   offense did not perform to expectation, while defense was typically "not great" as it had shown all year.

    This is why offense (O'Brien and mcd) should be blamed in both cases, even though defense lost it in the end with help from refs (and jints).

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccsjl. Show ccsjl's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    Face it good throw to Welker last year and Pats had ring #4

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    In response to ccsjl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    SB 42 was the last playoff game, other than the Denver divisional win last year that Brady was the better QB. He was the worse of the 2 QBs in both last years AFC Champ and SB

    [/QUOTE]


    Hmmm. Do you think it was likely in the AFCCG that Falcco was going to fare better against the 31st rated D in yards than Brady was going to do against the 4th rated D in yards (and the 1st rated in DPR)?

     

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    In response to TFB12's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Brady is one of the greatest, those games were lost due to some bad luck to the D.  Oh, and the coaches got out coached.  Only putting up 17 and 14 points wasn't because Brady was bad, it was the game plans that were bad.

    For TFB to lead that team to so many victories despite bad defenses shows how great he is.  Those people saying his SB have diminished are just haters. 

    [/QUOTE]


    I wouldn't call Asante Samuel dropping the Lombardi bad luck.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    In response to ccsjl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Face it good throw to Welker last year and Pats had ring #4

    [/QUOTE]


    Face it...

     

    http://theawesomeboston.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/wes-welker-butterfinger.jpg

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccsjl. Show ccsjl's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    SB 38 against Carolina, should have been a tie game with Adams kick, but Fox kept going for 2 after TDs and missing it!

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    In response to ipotnyc's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    The Tyree helmet catch and the Samuel missed INT.  

    Eli STUNK in that drive, but the bottom line is this is what football comes down to - inches.

    Coulda, shoulda, woulda doesn't mean anything because the 3 teams the Pats beat for their rings have their own "excuses."

    My point is: accept championships with humilty and not chest-thumping.  This is what the Pats motto is, and this is what they must do on Sunday to move on.

    [/QUOTE]


    Yup. That's why I say the Giants made plays and we didn't. Asante doesn't drop the ball and Wes doesn't drop the ball, then Eli is no hero and Brady is near unanimous GOAT with 5 rings and probably 4 SBMVPs.

    Just two plays likely made all that difference.

    (not to mention the defensive meltdown against the Colts in '06 probably being another Lombardi)

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    In response to ccsjl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    SB 38 against Carolina, should have been a tie game with Adams kick, but Fox kept going for 2 after TDs and missing it!

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah. And AV missed a FG earlier.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccsjl. Show ccsjl's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    2006 AFC Champ game was NEVER going to be won by Pats. Refs were instructed in that one, cause 1. League wanted Jughead to win something, which he could not do by himself, without officiating help and 2. That year was all talk about Black head coaches, League knew Lovie would not beat Belichick, so another reason to fix game with 2 black head coaches in it

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from IrishMob7. Show IrishMob7's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ccsjl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    SB 38 against Carolina, should have been a tie game with Adams kick, but Fox kept going for 2 after TDs and missing it!

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah. And AV missed a FG earlier.

    [/QUOTE]

    Exactly.  He missed two in the Carolina game.  So many people(haters) say that the only reason the Pats won is because Vinatieri was money in the playoffs blah blah blah but what they fail to realize is that he was a career 3 for 5 in the SBs with the Pats.  Hardly an admirable percentage.  Sure, field goals made during the expiring seconds are 'sexy' and will always be remembered, but the 2 missed field goals that were missed previously in the game are the only reason that heroic time-expiring field goal was necessary. 

    I will give Adam his due, though.  He's the best 'clutch' kicker when it mattered most.  Not many guys can kick a field goall with that much on the line at the end of the game and drill it with ease.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccsjl. Show ccsjl's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    Your forgetting the 2001 AFC Championship game. Pats up by 7 with 2 mins to play and Adam missed a FG to seal it. Milloys INT of Stewart sealed the game.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from IrishMob7. Show IrishMob7's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    In response to ipotnyc's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    The Tyree helmet catch and the Samuel missed INT.  

    Eli STUNK in that drive, but the bottom line is this is what football comes down to - inches.

    Coulda, shoulda, woulda doesn't mean anything because the 3 teams the Pats beat for their rings have their own "excuses."

    My point is: accept championships with humilty and not chest-thumping.  This is what the Pats motto is, and this is what they must do on Sunday to move on.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yup.  I agree on everything.  Football, like baseball, is a game of inches.  Hell, the same can be said for hockey and basketball, but I'd put more emphasis in football and baseball. 

    Fact is, if 2 dropped passes were caught, we wouldn't be having all of this b*tching on this forum.  The same type of thing can be said from our opponents during the dynastic run from 01-04. That's why people need to take Super Bowls for what they are: great teams with great coaching who got more breaks than the opposition.  I'm not saying it's a crapshoot but one or two plays in any Super Bowl can be the difference between a fanbase celebrating, or commiserating.

    Let's just be thankful that we've had the opportunity to witness our team playing in 5 out of the last 11 Super Bowls.  This has truly been a hell of a ride.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    Come on, Babe...  throwing gas on the fire!  There are those who will stick to their guns one way about Brady and others who "realize" he is not wholly to blame for any Pats loss.  Let the sleeping dog lie whilst we await the next Pats SB win in February!!  GO PATS!

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    This thread is another baiting attempt to draw some into argument, just like Prolate's thread about play calling vs execution.  Some of us have tried to avoid the back and forth that makes this board annoying, often with little help from fellow posters and with no help at all from Mods.

    The Patriots haven't won a Super Bowl since 04' and since that time have been bounced in the first round twice, had Brady taken out on a stretcher after the opening play of a season, needed an amazing play by the Sterling Moore to even get out of the AFC Championship game last year and move on.

    Nobody ever said Tom Brady wasn't the best, well with a few exceptions and a troll or two, but it's fairly evident that the Patriot's as a whole are better when Tom Brady is surrounded by a powerful running game.  It's the only common denominator difference between the championship years and every year since.

    To even deny this makes one look foolish, when they win this year it will be even more evident.  Taking threat of play action away from the best play action QB in the game and saying it doesn't make a difference makes one sound stupid... try not to sound stupid.

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from FrnkBnhm. Show FrnkBnhm's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    We all know the ineptitude of our defense which made Eli a legend in the closing minutes of two Super Bowls led to very bitter losses.

    But what some may not realize is exactly how well Brady played in those.

    If you subtract the 57 second and 29 second desperation drives those defensive collapses forced on him, his PR for each game was....

     

    2011 - 100.85 (despite Gronk KOd)

    2007 - 89.77 (despite being sacked 5 times)

    The 2 combined - 94.6

     

    So much for those who claim his SB performances have diminished. It's more like the team around him has diminished. Especially a defense that had 8 turnovers in the 3 wins and 1 in the two losses.

    [/QUOTE]

    Even if we accept that you can just remove some plays to improve his rating, considering he had a 105.6 rating in 2011 and a whopping 117.2 in 2007 those are still below average performances for him those seasons...

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: What Brady really did in 42&46.

    In response to FrnkBnhm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Even if we accept that you can just remove some plays to improve his rating, considering he had a 105.6 rating in 2011 and a whopping 117.2 in 2007 those are still below average performances for him those seasons...

    [/QUOTE]

    "Points scored" counts for something as well right, that's important...?

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share