Super Bowl 51 - New England vs. Atlanta: In-Game Discussion

[TD Ryan2 314]

wow Lizzy - you're trying to hard!

He's the GOAT, agree or not, doesn't matter - he was crowned Sun night by the sports world.

Screaming he's not is about as effective as screaming that you don't want Trump crowned.

 

It happened.

It's over.

Brady won.

You lost.

It. Is. What. It. Is.

[ralphster 274]

He's got the most hardware, for some that makes him the goat. I'd say top 5, even with the cheating. Toms still about 10k yards behind Peyton n Farve, and about 100 tds behind Peyton. So I've got him somewhere behind Peyton, Montana and Farve but ahead of Elway, Marino, Tarkenton and Moon.

[RoadLizard 73]

wow Lizzy - you're trying to hard!

He's the GOAT, agree or not, doesn't matter - he was crowned Sun night by the sports world.

Screaming he's not is about as effective as screaming that you don't want Trump crowned.

 

It happened.

It's over.

Brady won.

You lost.

It. Is. What. It. Is.

How did I lose? I didnt play in the game. The Pats won, not just Brady. Its "too hard" , not "to hard". Too many periods in your last statement. You arent trying hard enough which is expected from a Patriots Knob -licker

 

And why would I give a rats fock what the sports world thinks? Thats THEIR opinion. There is NO factual, empirical data to support anyones claims of anything sports related. Its like Movies.... some people feel that Citizen Kane is the best movie ever made and some dont. There are NO absolutes with opinions, its just subjective. Im sorry you dont understand this and found my beautifully stated post hard to "get". I didnt have to try - logic and common sense come naturally to me.

 

Let me see if I can help you understand better: To say that Brady has been on teams that have won 5 Super Bowls is a FACT. To say that hes the best QB to ever play is an OPINION. See Ralphs comment above about "for some that makes him the goat". He gets it. I can provide more examples if this is eluding you. Hope that helps, big champ.

[TD Ryan2 314]

Stop with all the werds.

Just type:

I was wrong

 

you don't have to like him

you can still be a hater

 

There is no debate, even Reggie Wayne finally accepted it and called him the GOAT.

 

You lost Lizzy. 10+ years of hating and doubting NE... you've lost over and over thru the years and now you've lost for good. Try it: I was wrong.

[RoadLizard 73]

Stop with all the werds.

Just type:

I was wrong

 

you don't have to like him

you can still be a hater

 

There is no debate, even Reggie Wayne finally accepted it and called him the GOAT.

 

You lost Lizzy. 10+ years of hating and doubting NE... you've lost over and over thru the years and now you've lost for good. Try it: I was wrong.

Lets try again - its ALL opinions. No empirical data to back up claim of fact. Since when was Reggie Wayne's opinion weighted so heavily?

 

Use Google to help you with the big werds like empircal, opinion, anything with more than one syllable is obviously causing you problems.

 

What exactly did I "lose"? 'splain.

[Kopy 491]

I have Brady as #1. But even if their are still steadfast haters out there that will never put him at #1. How can you justify not putting him at least #2.

If we can just put people wherever we want. Then Dammit!!!, I'm putting Moon at #3.

[RoadLizard 73]

I have Brady as #1. But even if their are still steadfast haters out there that will never put him at #1. How can you justify not putting him at least #2.

If we can just put people wherever we want. Then Dammit!!!, I'm putting Moon at #3.

Thats the beauty of it - we can all place players anywhere we wish becasue its subjective. Just like a favorite pizza topping. Its similar to how older people tend to say Jim Brown is the best RB EVER. Now I dont feel that way - I think Barry Sanders is but thats becasue he was in his prime right when my interest in football was at its highest. It real;ly does depend a lot on ERA and who you saw play or didnt see play. My Dad and some other old fogeys say that Johnny Unitas waas the best they had seen. Thats who they saw play a lot. I get it.

 

There are no bad choices here. I believe the top 10 or maybe the top 5 can be interchanged in quite a few cases. Thats fine. Great is great whether its 1st, 3rd, or 5th. Lets just lave it at that for Chrissakes. Until the US constitution or some other governing body comes up with tangible criteria that can be measured or assigned a point value, we have to go with our own gut feel and opinions.

[weepaws 2,460]

Don't know why we can't just rank players where we want to.

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

He's got the most hardware, for some that makes him the goat. I'd say top 5, even with the cheating. Toms still about 10k yards behind Peyton n Farve, and about 100 tds behind Peyton. So I've got him somewhere behind Peyton, Montana and Farve but ahead of Elway, Marino, Tarkenton and Moon.

I held onto Peyton being better for a while, but I thought Brady passed him a while ago. I think we have to remember Manning had two HOF receivers and the team was built around the offense. His numbers get a boost since so much of the talent was on offense.

 

The Pats on the other hand spread the talent to both sides of the ball pretty equally, and Brady has only had one HOF caliber receiver in Moss. Manning also struggled a lot more in the playoffs than he should have with the caliber of players he had to work with.

[weepaws 2,460]

Could you make the argument that the two WRs Manning played with became HOF players because of how good Manning was ?

 

Now with that said I still would rank Brady ahead of him myself.

 

So just asking a question.

 

Thanks.

 

Not much else to chat about.

[frank 2,145]

Anything Skip says should be flushed immediately else it starts to stink. There is no more hatable sports personality than Bayless. Even Cowherd is better, and Cowherd is the slimy effluvium that collects in the lees of a slow moving sewage canal.

I don't like Bayless and Cowherd as much as you do, but otherwise I agree.

[jaxjag 43]

Don't know why we can't just rank players where we want to.

 

Because sometimes there is so much obvious bias that the "opinion" loses meaning.

 

Everyone knows Fred Taylor is the best RB to ever play the game.

[jaxjag 43]

He's got the most hardware, for some that makes him the goat. I'd say top 5, even with the cheating. Toms still about 10k yards behind Peyton n Farve, and about 100 tds behind Peyton. So I've got him somewhere behind Peyton, Montana and Farve but ahead of Elway, Marino, Tarkenton and Moon.

 

Actually, he has 85 fewer TDs than Manning. Probably less of a difference if you counted post season. On the flip side, he has 99 fewer interceptions than Manning. Brady's TD to Int ratio is much better than Peyton's.

 

Peyton compiled ridiculous fantasy numbers; his offense was built around him. A great QB, no doubt. But, guys do compile big numbers these days - Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Ryan, etc. it's a pass happy league.

 

Brady has won. That's what matters. It isn't just "hardware". Five World Championships? Seven AFC Championships; 11 or 12 AFCC appearances? Its off the charts. Way better then Manning or Favre. In the same class as Montana.

[weepaws 2,460]

I would second that vote for Fred.

[RoadLizard 73]

I held onto Peyton being better for a while, but I thought Brady passed him a while ago. I think we have to remember Manning had two HOF receivers and the team was built around the offense. His numbers get a boost since so much of the talent was on offense.

 

The Pats on the other hand spread the talent to both sides of the ball pretty equally, and Brady has only had one HOF caliber receiver in Moss. Manning also struggled a lot more in the playoffs than he should have with the caliber of players he had to work with.

Joe Montana and Terry Bradshaw also benefitted tremendously from this exact thing. They are 4-ring winners and its fair to say they would NOT have won that may without the incredible supporting cast they had. Its a team sport, after all. Now, it is also fair to say that Brady has done MORE with LESS than either of these guys and thats a big feather in the cap. Hell, the Steelers had a HOF defense on top of the offense. Indy and Frisco never enjoyed such a thing. Brady, OTOH always had a very strong and opportunistic defense. Especially the Pats run from 2000- 2005 where IMO the defense had more to do with winning thatn the offense ever did. The recent Pats success is basically Tom & the offense.

 

See why this isnt so cut and dry? Its interesting discussion though, provided it isnt slathered with fanboy stupid-

[Kopy 491]

I'm not buying any of this. All you guys are flat out; out of your friggen minds. You have now, ALL, officially jumped the shark.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No one likes Bayless or Cowherd.

[RoadLizard 73]

I'm not buying any of this. All you guys are flat out; out of your friggen minds. You have now, ALL, officially jumped the shark

 

No one likes Bayless or Cowherd.

Yeah, I dont either. Clowns.

[jaxjag 43]

I would second that vote for Fred.

 

Hated the "fragile" tag. Finished with top 15 career numbers. Very under-rated.

[weepaws 2,460]

I agree.

 

I thought he was underrated.

 

I picked him up often in ff , and it did hurt sometimes based on injuries.

 

But when he was right he was a great Rb.

[Marshall 98]

Anything Skip says should be flushed immediately else it starts to stink. There is no more hatable sports personality than Bayless. Even Cowherd is better, and Cowherd is the slimy effluvium that collects in the lees of a slow moving sewage canal.

 

I agree with you - as does ESPN. Contrary to what was stated a few posts earlier, ESPN gave Bayless the boot and he ran to FOX's loving embrace, where his bile is currently and carefully nourished.

[Marshall 98]

I have Brady as #1. But even if their are still steadfast haters out there that will never put him at #1. How can you justify not putting him at least #2.

If we can just put people wherever we want. Then Dammit!!!, I'm putting Moon at #3.

 

No matter what, Joe Montana will always be #1 in my heart.

[redsrback 30]

He's got the most hardware, for some that makes him the goat. I'd say top 5, even with the cheating. Toms still about 10k yards behind Peyton n Farve, and about 100 tds behind Peyton. So I've got him somewhere behind Peyton, Montana and Farve but ahead of Elway, Marino, Tarkenton and Moon.

You left so many off but somehow put tark and moon on here, unreal

[ralphster 274]

You left so many off but somehow put tark and moon on here, unreal

You're right. I'm sure your list is the correct one.

[R8RMick 242]

Enjoy it while you can, dude is pushing 40 and the laws of human physics are inevitable. When he goes, they're done. Not many can throw those outside dimes that Brady was pulling off in the 4th QTR. Can't believe they're trading Garrapolo.

[weepaws 2,460]

These are the moves that the Patriots make that always seem to work out for them in the end.

 

They started out 3-1 with out Brady and Gronk.

 

It's an amazing system.

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

Enjoy it while you can, dude is pushing 40 and the laws of human physics are inevitable. When he goes, they're done. Not many can throw those outside dimes that Brady was pulling off in the 4th QTR. Can't believe they're trading Garrapolo.

Their only choice is to sign him as a starter to sit on the bench. One of New England's strengths is their cap flexibility. If I thought I could sign Garappolo to low end starter money, I would consider keeping him. If it would interfere with win now plans at all, I am trading him. A high 1st round pick would be really good for the Pats, but they do have to actually capitalize on that pick. If I am them I try to trade say the 3rd overall pick for multiple picks, unless some monster is sitting there that won't be later.

[murf74 461]

Isn't there a pro football qb with more championships than Brady?

 

Let's also note this is the easiest era in football to throw. You can't touch a wr. Hell you can only touch a qb if circumstances are perfect

[weepaws 2,460]

Would agree that the NFL as so watered down the rules in the passing game to really handcuff the Defence.

 

That of course is the reason we see so much passing yards.

 

But I would still rank mr Brady third.

 

Hard to knock a Qb that has won the most Super Bowls at his postion.

[RoadLizard 73]

Would agree that the NFL as so watered down the rules in the passing game to really handcuff the Defence.

 

That of course is the reason we see so much passing yards.

 

But I would still rank mr Brady third.

 

Hard to knock a Qb that has won the most Super Bowls at his postion.

 

Isn't there a pro football qb with more championships than Brady?

 

Let's also note this is the easiest era in football to throw. You can't touch a wr. Hell you can only touch a qb if circumstances are perfect

 

All of this has to be taken into account. Hence, my very legit argument that you have to consider era along with many other factors when determining the best player at ANY position in the NFL. Now, in fairness, the watered down talent level in football also gpes in Brady's favor since he keeps performing even in an era of rampant free agency, salary caps, etc, etc. Very consistent. Huge plus for him. Still, the league is ripe(both rules and defensive schemes) for the kind of system Brady plays in and that cannot be denied.

 

The problem with putting too much emphasis on rings is that its truly a team accomplishment in every way possible. Also, using rings basically means that the greatest QB list leaves off way too many great QBs and adds some that dont belong there at all. Its the "Trent Dilfer is better than Dan Marino" paradigm that always screws up the "only rings matter" posse. They always try to talk their way out of it but you cant make a steadfast criteria and stick to it only to abandon it for "special cases". Doesnt work. If its rings then its rings.

[jaxjag 43]

 

 

All of this has to be taken into account. Hence, my very legit argument that you have to consider era along with many other factors when determining the best player at ANY position in the NFL. Now, in fairness, the watered down talent level in football also gpes in Brady's favor since he keeps performing even in an era of rampant free agency, salary caps, etc, etc. Very consistent. Huge plus for him. Still, the league is ripe(both rules and defensive schemes) for the kind of system Brady plays in and that cannot be denied.

 

The problem with putting too much emphasis on rings is that its truly a team accomplishment in every way possible. Also, using rings basically means that the greatest QB list leaves off way too many great QBs and adds some that dont belong there at all. Its the "Trent Dilfer is better than Dan Marino" paradigm that always screws up the "only rings matter" posse. They always try to talk their way out of it but you cant make a steadfast criteria and stick to it only to abandon it for "special cases". Doesnt work. If its rings then its rings.

 

If you're talking about winning a single ring, Dilfer was in the right place at the right time. Sometimes mediocre QBs win with historic defenses. As far as never winning... it happens. Marino went against a superior 49ers team and often played second fiddle to Kelly's Bills. John Elway may never have won if not for the late rings on the backs of an innovative running game and Terrell Davis. Favre has only one ring; Rodgers only has one to date. Peyton did get two but the last was in full Dilfer mode. It is hard to win a championship. Lots of things have to right, including health and a little luck.

 

Win five? That's a different conversation than Trent Dilfer

[RoadLizard 73]

 

If you're talking about winning a single ring, Dilfer was in the right place at the right time. Sometimes mediocre QBs win with historic defenses. As far as never winning... it happens. Marino went against a superior 49ers team and often played second fiddle to Kelly's Bills. John Elway may never have won if not for the late rings on the backs of an innovative running game and Terrell Davis. Favre has only one ring; Rodgers only has one to date. Peyton did get two but the last was in full Dilfer mode. It is hard to win a championship. Lots of things have to right, including health and a little luck.

 

Win five? That's a different conversation than Trent Dilfer

Agreed - but Bradys first 3 rings were quasi-Dilfer Mode too. Defense held up against some great offenses & Vinatieri booted FGs. Manning is the ONLY QB ever to win two as the starter for both teams. Thats pretty unique. Love to see Brady go somewhere else to see just how good that would work out. Never happen though. Also, if we use rings then Troy Aikman becomes the #3 best QB ever with 3 rings. Interesting choice seeing as he was surrounded my massive talent on both sides of the ball. 5 rings is crazy, no doubt. It certainly means a lot. But, this discussion could go on forever because there are so many variables to account for. Great discusion though - we should do RBs next....

[TUM301 10]

Agreed - but Bradys first 3 rings were quasi-Dilfer Mode too. Defense held up against some great offenses & Vinatieri booted FGs. Manning is the ONLY QB ever to win two as the starter for both teams. Thats pretty unique. Love to see Brady go somewhere else to see just how good that would work out. Never happen though. Also, if we use rings then Troy Aikman becomes the #3 best QB ever with 3 rings. Interesting choice seeing as he was surrounded my massive talent on both sides of the ball. 5 rings is crazy, no doubt. It certainly means a lot. But, this discussion could go on forever because there are so many variables to account for. Great discusion though - we should do RBs next....

Quasi-Dilfer Mode ? Hmmmm, the I`st game he was basically a rookie against "the Greatest Show on Trurf" , zero turnovers and a last minute game winning drive with no timeouts. The next 2 games Panthers and Eagles, he averaged 26 completions 295 yds and had 5 TD`s and 1 pick. Plus another last minute game winning drive. I know you`re a Manning guy and the 2 with different teams, unique yes but that 2`nd one, well he was on the winning team. The last items that convince me Brady is # 1, longevity and the fact he`s done this with ZERO Hall Of Famers. As you said, comparing different eras is great discussion and what makes the site interesting.

O K, as far as RB`s go, I`ll take Walter Payton.

[edjr 5,566]

Agreed - but Bradys first 3 rings were quasi-Dilfer Mode too.

 

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

Quasi-Dilfer Mode ? Hmmmm, the I`st game he was basically a rookie against "the Greatest Show on Trurf" , zero turnovers and a last minute game winning drive with no timeouts. The next 2 games Panthers and Eagles, he averaged 26 completions 295 yds and had 5 TD`s and 1 pick. Plus another last minute game winning drive. I know you`re a Manning guy and the 2 with different teams, unique yes but that 2`nd one, well he was on the winning team. The last items that convince me Brady is # 1, longevity and the fact he`s done this with ZERO Hall Of Famers. As you said, comparing different eras is great discussion and what makes the site interesting.

O K, as far as RB`s go, I`ll take Walter Payton.

I completely agree. The debate for #2 is really tough across generations. Easier now that Brady is #1 hands down

[jaxjag 43]

Agreed - but Bradys first 3 rings were quasi-Dilfer Mode too. Defense held up against some great offenses & Vinatieri booted FGs. Manning is the ONLY QB ever to win two as the starter for both teams. Thats pretty unique. Love to see Brady go somewhere else to see just how good that would work out. Never happen though. Also, if we use rings then Troy Aikman becomes the #3 best QB ever with 3 rings. Interesting choice seeing as he was surrounded my massive talent on both sides of the ball. 5 rings is crazy, no doubt. It certainly means a lot. But, this discussion could go on forever because there are so many variables to account for. Great discusion though - we should do RBs next....

 

I wouldn't make a big deal about winning a SB in Denver. Great defense. period. That season, Manning had almost twice as many interceptions as TDs and a 67.9 QB rating.

 

He kinda sucked but got really lucky.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Isn't there a pro football qb with more championships than Brady?

 

Let's also note this is the easiest era in football to throw. You can't touch a wr. Hell you can only touch a qb if circumstances are perfect

 

No.

[R8RMick 242]

Agreed - but Bradys first 3 rings were quasi-Dilfer Mode too. Defense held up against some great offenses & Vinatieri booted FGs. Manning is the ONLY QB ever to win two as the starter for both teams. Thats pretty unique. Love to see Brady go somewhere else to see just how good that would work out. Never happen though. Also, if we use rings then Troy Aikman becomes the #3 best QB ever with 3 rings. Interesting choice seeing as he was surrounded my massive talent on both sides of the ball. 5 rings is crazy, no doubt. It certainly means a lot. But, this discussion could go on forever because there are so many variables to account for. Great discusion though - we should do RBs next....

What's unique about winning a super bowl where your opposite number turns the ball over 5 times? I'm more impressed with Peyton's Denver super bowl, because they don't win that game without him. Was really happy for him, seriously, because his career has been all about playing horrible in season ending playoff games.

[murf74 461]

 

No.

Before they called it Super Bowl.

[jaxjag 43]

Before they called it Super Bowl.

 

Before the SB? It was a smaller league and a different game. Basically a one game play-off.

 

Perhaps your referring to Otto Graham who some credit with 7 championships. Four of those came, however, before the Browns were actually in the NFL