Comparing Brady vs BB careers as QB vs HC - SBs and Playoff berths.

Brady: SB - 50%, Playoffs - 90%

BB: SB - 29%, Playoffs - 58%

BB without Brady: SB - 0 for 7, Playoffs - 1 for 7

Brady without BB: Hasn't happened.



Let the spin begin.

And what is Bill Walsh's record without Montana? We'll never know unless we look at his short stint at Stanford.

What a ridiculous thread.  

This post has been removed.

In Response to Re: Where the Super Bowls grow.:



You really think Smith's 3.1 yac in 2003 deserves to be called a "run game"?

Take it up with BB. He's running the team.

In Response to Re: Where the Super Bowls grow.:



Elaborate if you expect to be taken seriously. I realize facts can be pesky things when you have silly notions you are trying to protect.

In Response to Re: Where the Super Bowls grow.:



Exactly. Facts? Whatever.

In Response to Re: Where the Super Bowls grow.:

It's not a fair comparison, TB never played for anyone else but BB in the NFL.  Sure, those are facts but they are truly skewed to to fit your agenda.

In Response to Re: Where the Super Bowls grow.:


My agenda is driven by the facts, not vice versa. If the facts showed something else, I would believe the something else.

Tom Brady possessed the magic he has long before he ever met BB.

I am pretty sure you didn't need to post your Giants based point of view twice.

The only thing I care about with BB's time in Cleveland is that he beat Parcells head to head which proves he was the better football mind, laid the groundwork for Baltimore to emerge in the cap era, eventually seeing them win a title in 2000, and look back at how BB was 100 steps ahead of almost every GM allocating funds to each position on a 53 man roster.

When Modell finally admitted he totally missed the boat by scapegoating Belichick, it came far too late.  Gee, thanks for saying publicly that you were too arrogant and ignorant to not allow a wizard to help fix your old Browns team at the dawn of the cap era.  lmao

Maybe if BB got his way by benching Kosar earlier, Testaverde goes to a Pro Bowl prior to 1996 and maybe BB ends up as coach of the Ravens when they moved? Then again, the Pats don't make a SB in 1996 with BB as Def Coordinator.

The fact remains, every single HOF coach had a good or great QB to work with over a period of time. They go hand in hand. This isn't something new, so yes, Babe's troll post/premise is flawed.  Of course Brady helps the Pats. BUt, BB was trying to help the Browns and didn't get a chance to fully do so due to Modell's meddling.

If it was JUST about Brady, we don't blow SB 42 and SB 46. He wasn't as good as he needed to be in each case. Also, BB and Matt Cassel went 11-5 on an OLD Pats club, so Babe loses there, too. He's tried this little game before and he loses every time.

Babe would be correct if Brady was better in SB 42 AND SB 46, but as usual, he's not correct. We lost each of our last 2 SBs with the bulk of the problems on offense over the 4 qtrs.

Keep in mind, Babe is the one who calls BB an "average" GM, yet BB is the one who is so wise with the allocation of funding at which positions, that this gives Brady a lot of help to succeed. Note how in 2002 and 2009, Brady's 2 worst seasons for different reasons, in each case, the team was in transition.

And the irony for you as a Giants fan is, Jerry Reese is borrowing BB's blueprint and clearly managing it very well so far.

To condense Babe's dozen whining posts.....

Anything bad that happens to the team is never Brady's fault.

Or, let's pretend the most important position, arguably in all of pro sports, is somehow not a big deal, but only in the postseason or when it's convenient for Babe.

Also, let's pretend 6 TDs against an 8-8 Denver club with an injured and weak D is somehow an important reference point to what the crux of the problem is really about with Brady and the offense overall since 2005 in the playoffs.

I believe it was the intelligent Heath Evans who said NE needs to get back to the 2006 offense with Dillon here, with more balance and more of an attitude with the offense.

Any Pats fan who disagrees with Evans, wanting to see Brady struggle more so moving forward, is clearly not a Pats fan.

In Response to Re: Where the Super Bowls grow.:


No, context means the landscape within a discussion.

Example:  NFL pre cap and Cap Era.

Those are different contexts due to the cap.   That's not spin. That's a fact. 

No, but we don;t sit there and look at what happens and then act like it didn't.

Pretty sad when my grandmother is asking what happened to Brady. I live in the RTP area of NC after moving back here from Chicago.  I don't see what that has to do with the rest of my family mostly still living in Mass.

Were you at the first MNF game in 15 years in Foxborough or the 1996 AFC title game, Gramps?

I don't think you were. 

In Response to Re: Where the Super Bowls grow.:


Immature response.  This board is for Pats fans opinion and if the best/most elite players or coaches on the Pats have a flaw or two, you might see criticism here.

Even BB and Brady would tell you they need to be better.

No, but she thinks taking a Safety like he's never played QB before or throwing god awful INTs on 1st down with a lead, wildly downfield, is absolutely crappy.

She also isn't stupid enough to think Mark Sanchez's 125 QBR in the 2010 divisionals was really worthy of a 125 QBR, or whatever it was.  QBR is about as relevant of a statistical tool as calculator in a chemistry class.

Oh wait, I just brought up ANOTHER postseason game where Brady threw a GOD AWFUL INT taking momentum away from his team. Remember that one, Babe?  A wild dump off into the air way over BJGE's head.  Do you root for those plays?

In Response to Re: Where the Super Bowls grow.:


No, it doesn't count because you're a fan who only came back AFTER this team started winning SBs.

In Response to Re: Where the Super Bowls grow.:


This is what we all think of you.  The only one here who claims to be Pats fan with a schtick is yourself.

In Response to Re: Where the Super Bowls grow.:



I won't argue that BB has a greater football mind than Parcells. That put the keebosh on your attempt to divert here.

In Response to Re: Where the Super Bowls grow.:


Context with you means spin time. Period.

In Response to Re: Where the Super Bowls grow.:



Try to keep up. I revised my view on BB as GM and called him "exceptional". You can't use that diversion anymore.

In Response to Re: Where the Super Bowls grow.:



I covered this in the OP. It shows BB is 1 for 7 making the playoffs without Brady.

I understand the tendency by the delusional to try to defend their delusion by cherry picking one year out of 17. But I'm not going to let you get away with that. The schedule was joke that year anyway. The previously 1-15 Fish beat us for the division title, then went on to another losing season the next year.

In Response to Re: Where the Super Bowls grow.:



I have to correct every single thing you write it seems.

A D fail in the endgame lost both those SBs, as it lost the SB berth in '06 and was responsible for 3 of our four losses last year (the other loss was because the D couldn't get BR off the field).

You might have notice BB didn't do anything at the QB position this offseason, he went all in on defense.

It appears he doesn't agree with you that Brady is the problem dumbkoff.

In Response to Re: Where the Super Bowls grow.:



News flash for you genius. Not every HOF QB has had a HOF coach. By far, the SBs go with the HOF QBs rather than the coaches.