Why not? No serious injury history, amazing worth ethic, two elite all pro TE's (Gronk being 3rd best offensive player outside of Megatron and AD), very strong oline, up and coming young RB's. And yes, Favre was relevant at age 38. Maybe you missed him playing for the NFC title game at age 40. Lost on the last drive. Manning came back from experimental stem cell surgery on his neck to go 13-3. Might of been in the SB if his secondary could cover hail mary's. Don't be mad because you're getting called out for a ridiculous statement.
I'm not mad over being called out over a 'ridiculous statement'. And, maybe you missed the fact that Favre wasn't relevant, he was a punchline at that stage, especially given the media circus regarding his retirement; which only got worse as he went to NY and the Minnesota. And the reason he lost that game IIRC was because he did what he had tried to do many times before that one year; be the hero all the time. That was an anomaly in terms of his play for a few years. He wasn't doing well and was forcing the ball - a lot. That year was when he was under tight reins if you recall. He relied more on his team than himself. GB didn't make it there because of Favre, they got there because of everyone else on the team. Favre being favre tried the old chuck it up routine and lost the game. Otherwise Favre would have been able to do more in the years previous as he was younger then. The team around Favre got him to that game, not Favre. Rodgers stepped into a good team when Favre left, not a team that relied on Favre. Otherwise why couldn't he repeat even a mild modicum of that success in NY or Minny? They had some talent on those teams. Favre just got old and his skills diminished, the same with every single player over 35. That's just nature. And Manning is not very relevant right now unless you're the media. They fondled over him because he came back, and against the better teams in the league (the early part of their schedule) that teams did not do well. People were openly questioning him and the team given some of his throws. When the schedule softened, they rattles off wins. Come playoff time, they faltered. Manning's arm was not the same, there's no two ways about it. Did it improve over the course of the season as he moved further away from the surgery? Yes. Was he the same player? No. There is a difference between letting a player go a year before he declines rather than hanging on to him a year too long. Maybe Manning has a decent year this year, but don't count on him having another one after this one. Maybe you're getting confused between relevant and still playing. Just because he plays doesn't mean he's truly relevant. For example are people still fearing Brady or his tight ends? Put even an average quarterback in his spot and the offense will still produce, take away the tight ends and see how well that offense works. The tight ends are the mismatch, not Brady anymore. Remember Matt Cassell? How did he do in that offense, and then afterwards in KC? There has been one constant in NE, and that is Bellicheat. He is the real engine of that car via schemes and in game management. Is he perfect? No. Brady can't carry that team anymore (not like he used to) and there's nothing wrong with that. He shouldn't be at this stage of his career. And yes Brady is on the decline, thats nature taking its course and there is nothing anyone can do about it. And, yes at age 38 I will bet he is no longer relevant. As with any other quarterback at that age. He is past his prime, that was about 5 years ago. Now, he's on the other side of that slope. He's 36 years old in a matter of days and no, thats not his prime. Brady and Manning are the guys people talk about with reverence, like they do anyone who is on their way out the door. Thats doesn't mean this year, but in the next 2-3 years at most neither will be the icons they have been. And you sound mad that I've even said such a thing. He was a great quarterback, now he is on the downside of his career; there's no arguing that as he isn't on the ascension. You don't have to agree with me, just check back in two years and see how things are. I have no fear of that. Players can play until whenever they want, it doesn't mean they will play well at that stage.
Sometimes, when I really want to get crazy, I drag out the old plastic of Live at the Filmore East, make sure my wife is out of the house, crank up the system, and listen to Crossroads - Baker on drums was unreal!!!! Clapton on Guitar - "Spoonful" And Bruce's bass..... Sounded more like a lead guitar!
Good times brother, good times. How have you been doing? Haven't seen you around as much the last week or so. PM me if you have the time.
Well he didn't say that Tom Brady IS irrelevant, he said in two years he'll be irrelevant....like it or not, smart or not, the body will break down for him and he'll likely start to be a chink in the pasties armor...it'll happen... And then I can't wait to see what all the pastie fans complain about then...Many of us here already know that pain all too well...
I really like the live and BBC version of "Steppin' Out", a song Clapton originally did with the Bluesbreakers. The BBC version of "Swlabr" is also fantastic.
Agree that Brady is in decline from his peak greatness. But, I would still say he is as good or better than he was 7-8 years ago (their D is not, however). And, no one knows how he will do the next two years or so - the odds are against him. Also, the older a player gets the more susceptible to injuries he becomes. But, he still has a great understanding of the game and still, generally, is very accurate (if not quite as accurate as a couple of years ago). Throws a great spiral still. So, while he may well decline - he's still relevant (barring injury) as a leader and passer. Manning is clearly not the thrower he was (though I've never thought he was a great passer or had a great arm like Elway or Marino). But, he is pretty accurate passer still (not quite as much as 4-5 years ago). However, Manning's strength is knowing the game better than anyone. He is truly the modern day John Unitas (in a way no QB has been in the past 20 years). I think that's why he's got greater longevity than Favre or even a Marino (though Dan was hindered by his neck/shoulder injury). And, take away one bad defensive play and Denver is in potentially in the SB (though I think they lose that game). I'm in general agreement about these two being in decline but I do think either could have a great post-season run and are definitely good enough to win another SB.
The Brady love is funny to me. He's a HoF QB for sure...but he's not as good as the media, Pats fans and younger NFL fans (or older brainwashed fans) think he is/was. Great post...
Brady dinks and dunks. He has never driven the ball downfield and/or made great, tight coverage throws.
Agree...I put him in the Montana category...the success of the team has made him into perhaps a bit more than he is, but the bottom line is that as the QB, he'll get the majority of the fame for the success... Again, not to say he's not on the list of the best of all time, just that his team's success has built him up more than his individual success...
There's a bit of revisionist history on Brady here. Especially the 'he's never thrown down the field or into tight coverage'. Seriously. I know we're Miami fans and the Pats are our enemy but Brady is as good as there has ever been and that includes Dan Marino. Sorry but it's true. He has everything and disputing it makes us look mealy mouthed and a little bit average as fans. Is he the same player he was four years ago? No. But he's still better than most.
You didn't say he was past his prime. You said irrelevant. Don't move the goal posts. Brett Favre was in the Championship game at age 40. Mark Sanchez will be irrelevant in 2 years. Not Tom Brady. Barring some catastrophic down fall, Brady will still be relevant in two years. So he doesn't have another 50/8 type year. He just threw for 4,800 yards, with a 1.3% INT rate. And 34 TDs, which is a little low percentage wise but still all pro. Until I see his INT % creep up he's still relevant.
Totally agree. He dinks and dunks and doesn't force the ball downfield? I guess they didn't watch when he was playing with Moss. I'm as big a Phin fan as anyone, but I'm not about to blind myself and talk down Brady. He's been one of the best QBs. Period.
Don't know if I can agree with that. I mean, his resume backs up your statement, but you really have to factor the era Brady has played most of his career in and the era Marino played most of his career in. If Marino in his prime played in post 2005 NFL, his numbers would be jaw dropping. That's not my opinion, but the opinion of most knowledgeable NFL minds who understand how the game was officiated prior to 2005 and how it's officiated today. Marino had Brady like numbers when defensive backs were allowed to rape and pillage WRs. Marino, in my opinion and the opinion of many others, is a much better passer than Tom Brady. If we're talking strictly QB talent, I really don't think I'm being biased with my opinion that Marino wins out. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs07/columns/story?columnist=chadiha_jeff&id=3186324
Bull****. I've never seen Brady put a pass 50 yards down field and on the money. Marino did it with ease. I've never seen Brady put so much heat on a short or intermediate throw that the defender would rather tackle the receiver than try to intercept the throw. I saw it many times with Marino. And most of all, Marino didn't let pressure rattle him to the point where he made bad throws, whereas Brady always has.
Not really. Brady hasn't consistently driven the ball down field. Their offense is designed to allow an intelligent QB to play well. Short, safe, high percentage throws that allow YAC. Look at Brady's numbers before Moss. and after Moss there are 4-5 othe QB's in the league that have equaled or surpassed Brady's numbers. As was mentioned before... Look what Cassel did while there. And that was after not starting a single game since high school. Brady is a HoF, but I have a hard time putting him in my all time top ten list.
Great point. Brady can't handle pressure. I've never in all my years watching football seen a QB have as much time in the pocket as he does.
Funny you caught that. That was indeed intended for Crazy#numbers#...forget the numbers sorry. Just trying to keep the mystique alive.
No, really. Brady has consistently thrown the ball down the field and into tight windows and disagreeing is about as hilarious as this place gets. Brilliant. You've even outdone the other fella. Quite an achievement.
Brady and other modern-era QBs have certainly benenfitted from some rule changes to open up the game, but so did Marino relative to his predecessors. Five or six years before Marino entered the league DBs could make contact with receivers even beyond 5 yards from the LOS and pass protectors couldn't extend their arms and use open hands, which made it much harder to pass protect. Marino was one of the early beneficiaries of those rules. The game continually changes and you can't compare stats from different eras straight up. But it's also more than a little hyperbolic to suggest that defensive backs "were allowed to rape and pillage WRs" during Marino's era. Brady is very good and far from irrelevant. Like every other QB, his numbers are somewhat dependent on the system he plays in and the talent around him, but that is true of everyone, including Marino. Favre was certainly relevant at age 40. He had maybe the best season of his record-breaking, future HOF career. Kurt Warner was certainly relevant at ages 37-38. I see nothing to suggest that Manning and Brady will suddenly cease to be relevant in the next few years.
Hahahaha wow. Not only is this a whole lot of re-hashing of disagreements in another sub forum but they are blatantly being exaggerated for the sake of... whatever this is. But for the sake of this particular statement you've made, let's revisit it. You said Brady will be IRRELEVANT. You never said he'd be past his prime. Are we saying that Peyton Manning won't be relevant this year? He's going to be 38. He'll be on the same level as Brady. Is Manning past him prime? Absolutely he is, there's nobody questioning that. But that's not what you said about Brady. You said he'd be IRRELEVANT. I mean, I feel like we quibble over this type of thing quite often but here we go - just what does "irrelevant" mean to you? You're going to sit there and act like Brady won't be a factor in the league in 2 years? Not even in the discussion? Nobody will pay attention to him? He won't be viewed as any type of threat by a defensive coordinator? That, to me, is lunacy. When you say "irrelevant" I'm expecting some type of Carson Palmer level plunge which I just don't see happening. Stick to your original argument. Brady being irrelevant. You then follow this comment up by claiming nobody was relevant at the age of 38 or older... well, let's just see about that... I mean, what about these stats? Would those be relevant? 68% completion percentage with 4200 yards, 33 touchdowns and 7 INTs with a 107.2 QB rating? Is THAT relevant? I'd say so! That sounds AWFULLY relevant to me! That sounds like MVP candidate type numbers, if we're being honest.... But surely someone who is 38 couldn't do that. No way no how. Certainly not someone you specifically named in your little tirade there, right? That was Brett Favre at age 39. Same guy you said insinuated wasn't relevant and was way past his prime. But hey, he was 39, not 38. There I go, changing things around again and not understanding or making up definitions or whatever it is. I guess this is me being a big old dummy or whatever it is you'd like to call me. I don't mind. I'm pretty happy with where being a big ol dummy has gotten me in life It seems that you have a strange bone to pick with me so perhaps the ignore button on me would suit us both. Just a suggestion, if not, then oh well. Here's to hoping you're right that Brady will be irrelevant, I'd certainly enjoy it. But... I suppose only time will tell.
You bastard. I see your posts talk like an older guy then I saw "Age:17" and I thought what the hell... either this is one of the most worldy 17 year olds ever or I'm being deceived. Curiosity was KILLING me so I had to know.
cant we all just be glad brady is at least getting NEAR the end of his career? Im personally going to throw a party on the day he announces retirement.
I never said he was past his prime? And I'm moving goalposts? If you're going to say I've done something at least maybe make sure of what that is? Here's my first post below. Maybe you're just making **** up? And please show me when I have used 'irrelevant'? You've said it and someone else has, but that wasn't me. I said 'cease to be relevant' which is not the same as irrelevant. And I said in 'about another 2 years' from now. So if you wish to say he's relevant now thats great, but in 'about' two years from now your opinion is as good as mine; a 50/50 chance. Players can drop off the map in two years no matter who you are. Marino disappeared in less than one year thanks to injuries. Some players won't make it another 2 years especially plus 35. People don't agree thats fine, but not one thing anyone says today will prove or disprove what I said. Only time will do that, so in about two years everyone can revisit it and see how it shakes out. And finally, it appears people in general only read what they wish to, not what is actually there. Otherwise there are a few people getting their panties in a twist over 'about two years' and you say I am 'moving goal posts'. I know you can do better than this, because I've seen it. I expect it from one poster in particular in this thread, but you are not on his level.
Same here my dream would be after he announces his retirement so does Belichick. To be fair it's pointless to compare what Marino did with Brady. Different Era, different types of WR, lineman the whole works. I think Marino is the greatest pure passer, but I have to say Brady is one of the best at finding a way to win. Superbowls recently or not NO ONE wants Brady to have the ball with a minute left or more. Yes I think he gets worked up pretty hard under pressure, the key is pressuring him isn't that easy or he would lose a lot more. Despite the fact I respect his skill, I don't like the guy personally and I think hes a whiner. Also how the media is all over his jock for example the fact he started throwing to his new receivers... As Tannehill said he had already started and I'm sure other QB's have also.
The reason I bring it up is because you tend to speak the language of absurdity and those are examples of it. Or do you contest saying that putting 'if' in a sentence makes it automatically hypothetical? Feel better that you know why? This is just having that pointed out. Aw calling what I wrote a tirade....thats so ad hominem of you, at least you can use a fallacy of logic. That's great that you've improved. And if you want to be precise, what I said was he will 'cease to be relevant'. Other people like yourself are using the word 'irrelevant'. Irrelevant has no meaning or relevance to anything, ceasing to have relevance means you don't have it anymore - which means at one point it did. There is a difference. He'll be 38 and hardly the player he is even now. His skills will continue to diminish. I never said he had no relevance, only that in about two years he would cease to be relevant. Why, because he will be on his last legs at that age. He may have a last hoorah, but what does it matter? he will firmly have one foot out the door whether he, or you sees it. There will be some new hot shot taking up the mantle in the public eye and he will the guy that 'was'. Because his best days are behind him and yes he is past his prime. No one is there prime at 36 years old. No one. Again, Favre at 39 or 40 was largely not relevant other than the media circus surrounding him. What did he do? The 'great' year people reference only came about because he was on a tight leash with regards to playcalling; which was done by his head coach for a reason. That was when McCarthy really began to take over the team from 'Lord Favre' and when he reverted to being the Favre he was in the 2-3 years before and the few years after for the most part as it turns out, he threw the ball up to no one in particular and ended the season. Favre wasn't very relevant, because as I said the team got him to that game, not the other way around. Compare it to Alex Smith, who had a great season last year for him. How much of that was due to the talent around him? That's the same thing that happened to Favre; the team got better around him. Yes, 2 years before the team struggled for talent, but that changed and Favre benefited from it; the same as Smith. For instance if you look at the numbers even just a little you can see why McCarthy and Co. reined him in: 2007 - 535 attempts (the great season) 2006 - 613 attempts (18 TD's 18 INT's) 2005 - 607 attempts (20 TD's 29 INT's) He was asked to carry the team and couldn't anymore. When he had between 70-80 attempts less for a season his numbers improved. The team around him was better and he didn't need to carry them, they reined him in and when he have to carry them on that last drive he threw it up to no one in particular. Before the great year he was largely a media driven player of importance, as his actual performance was lacking. After he left GB he hardly lit the world on fire either aside from his first season in Minny when once again he has saw his attempts go down. He wasn't the player he was several years earlier and no he wasn't as relevant as before. The media desperately wanted him to be, especially John Madden, but he wasn't.
I live half an hour from Gillette Stadium, so I see plenty of him and the Patriots. I've had discussions with Patriots fans where they will readily admit his deep field accuracy isn't all that great and that he's a complete ***** after taking a couple hits. The '07-'08 Super Bowl is very illustrative of this. What makes Brady great is that he's smart (no surprise considering that he's a Michigan alum), so he picked up Belichick's system and ran with it. If he had been drafted by any team but the Patriots he would never have amounted to anything other than a career backup and not a very remarkable one. To suggest that he's ever had any of Marino's physical gifts or that it was blatantly obvious he was going to be a great QB like Marino is the very definition of revisionist history.
Screw Brady and screw the Pats. They better be putting in that work, their stranglehold on this Division is coming to an end sooner than later. Maybe not this year, but the end is near.
This is true, the man is a gigantic vagina. He pouts and cries to the refs whenever he gets breathed on. Softest QB to ever play the game, and we had Ray Lucas.
Don't get mad but your in no place to call people out for ridiculous statements if your making more of your own. Oh right, these are just opinions...... why are we so offended by different perspectives ?
F#ck all this Tom Brady love fest crap, I say piss on the Patriots and Tom F'n Brady. This forum should give a rat's azz... if Brady or the Patriots fans feel offended by OUR QB comments.
Wait!! What??? This is all utter NONE-SENSE. The dude has had a VERY serious injury. Bad enough to miss an entire season and garner wearing a very large brace. He does not have an amazing work ethic. That is absolute BS. He has a normal work ethic. Just like 85% of the guys in the league. Nothing less, nothing more. Gronk? Third best offensive weapon in the league? What exactly are you basing THAT on? That is easily one of the most preposterous things I have ever read..anywhere!!!
the days of calling Brady a system qb are long gone. He is one of the best to ever play, you can point to what you want, I will point to the clutch 4th qtr wins, the total offensive blowouts, the super bowls. Boomer is right, you dont have to be a fan of his to acknowledge what he is and what he has done. What will he be in 2 years? Dont know, has to break down at some point but when is the question that I cant answer