I just dont understand this Brady-Rodgers stuff. Sorry

[ProBoxingInsidr]

Because defenses dont exist
Bledsoe the year before he got hurt:
17td 13int
Brady the following year when they won the sb:
18td 12int.
But im sure you already knew that since youre some fucking pats historian.

Yeah, huge fucking difference, no way a great coaching staff and defense pulled that out.
God youre an annoying blowhard. Gonna make a cup of coffee and try to guess how youre gonna spin those stats

i hate the patriots and am no brady fan. i am just realistic. but ok, i guess they were good at 5-11 because defenses didnt exist. whatever that means. and i guess stating facts (like their record) shouldnt get in the way of your story (they were good before brady).

bledsoe was a good qb. no doubt. but to pretend you could plug jp losman in there and the pats would be basically the same is absurd

 

[Da Speeit]

i hate the patriots and am no brady fan. i am just realistic. but ok, i guess they were good at 5-11 because defenses didnt exist. whatever that means. and i guess stating facts (like their record) shouldnt get in the way of your story (they were good before brady).

bledsoe was a good qb. no doubt. but to pretend you could plug jp losman in there and the pats would be basically the same is absurd

I love how i said “they werent a shit team” and its turned in to “they were good”

Bledsoe was a probowler with the pats and number 1 pick. He went on to be a probowler again after he left, coming off a horrible injury. And you think its crazy to say a defensively led team that won a sb might win a sb with him. How dumb is that?

 

[ProBoxingInsidr]

I love how i said “they werent a shit team” and its turned in to “they were good”

Bledsoe was a probowler with the pats and number 1 pick. He went on to be a probowler again after he left, coming off a horrible injury. And you think its crazy to say a defensively led team that won a sb might win a sb with him. How dumb is that?

"New England weren't exactly a shit team with Bledsoe. Some would argue they win that SB anyway based on their defensive play had he not gotten knicked."

so you are surprised someone would interpret that as saying they were a good team? because yes, 5-11 is a "shit team." but the very next year you think belichick's system kicked in and made them a super bowl contender no matter who was playing qb?

41-55 was his record before tom brady. but to you he was already awesome. i guessed based on 1 winning season in 5 years he was a regular vince lombardi. brady is good, bill is good. they needed each other equally

 

[Corona]

Brady nut huggers acting like Belichick was some giant can before Brady are fucking idiots. Let’s look at some facts here.

The 65-year-old served in various roles for the Colts, Lions, Broncos and Giants between 1975 and 1984, but let's start with 1985. As a defensive coordinator, Belichick was excellent. During his six-year stint as defensive coordinator with the Giants under Bill Parcells, Belichick's defenses finished with an average rank of just over fifth in points allowed and placed seventh or better in each season between 1986 and 1990 by DVOA. (There is not yet DVOA data for the 1985 season.) His defenses helped win two Super Bowls while holding two of the league's best offenses below their season averages.

Belichick later took over a Jets defense that ranked 29th in points allowed and immediately delivered three consecutive top-10 finishes from 1997 to 1999

Taking over a 3-13 Browns team, Belichick managed to coax Cleveland to a 6-10 record in Year 1. It was a promising start, but the Browns went 7-9 in each of the next two seasons before finally breaking through with an 11-5 season and a playoff win in 1994. And yes, if you're wondering, Belichick is the last Cleveland Browns coach to win a playoff game.

So he gradually improved Cleveland, which by all accounts has been the worst franchise in the nfl and possibly all sports over the last 40 years or so. And then had a 5-11 year before being fired. All while playing quarterback roulette with a bunch of garbage cans.

He then took over a mediocre patriots team that went 5-11 in his first year, then to the Super Bowl in his second with Brady at qb(worth noting that Bledsoe won the afc championship game and not Brady). So there begins the Brady era. In the Brady era he’s also managed to go 11-5 with Matt Cassel(lol) and 3-1 with Jimmy G/Jacoby Brisset(LMAO).

He’s also lost 8 offensive/defensive coordinators in his stint there. So you can’t attribute most of his success to other coaches.

All in all Bill is a great coach(arguably goat) with a great quarterback(the goat statistically) in a very well ran franchise. Suggesting that either guy made the other is absolutely ridiculous.

 

[Lord Commander Palis]

Nope Rodgers is the best QB to play the game with all the intangibles, Brady has the rings , and has always has an owner/ coach that always provided weapons for Brady, Rodgers hasn’t had that luxury for years now, you put Rodgers on the pats and they have 8-10 rings , Rodgers has carried the packers for years ,but again the organization failed to provide him and the defense with what they need to make a deep run year after year.

Ya.... no.

8-10 SB

 

[rearnakedchoke]

Ya.... no.

8-10 SB

Agreed. Like the time gb went 15-1 and lost in divisional game of playoffs.

 

[Gregolian]

Here's the thing that pisses me off about this. McCarthy has been responsible IMO for two of the losses in NFC title games. The Cardinals one and the one in Seattle with shit tier playing to not lose on offense playcalling.

That fat fuck needs to get fired.

 

[Corona]

Agreed. Like the time gb went 15-1 and lost in divisional game of playoffs.

To the same team that beat the 13-3 patriots in the super bowl 2 games later lmao. And the 18-0 patriots a few years earlier.


Looking back that loss to the giants is a prime example of this argument. Rodgers receivers dropped 9 passes that game, his defense gave up 37 points and they ultimately turned the ball over 4 times. Has anything remotely close to that ever happened to Brady? Lmao. That’s a prime example of his team letting him down.

 

[Gregolian]

To the same team that beat the 13-3 patriots in the super bowl 2 games later lmao. And the 18-0 patriots a few years earlier.

The thing that annoys me is even the years when the Pats defense has been.. well.... bad, they're still "bend don't break" quite a bit.

Packers? Ever since the goddamn Super Bowl has been in "let's spot the other team a 3 score lead."

 

[rearnakedchoke]

To the same team that beat the 13-3 patriots in the super bowl 2 games later lmao. And the 18-0 patriots a few years earlier.

And he would have 8-10 rings, so what about 9-11 sb appearances? Yeah ok.

 

[Corona]

And he would have 8-10 rings, so what about 9-11 sb appearances? Yeah ok.

I didn’t say he’d have 8+ rings I’m pointing out that you’re trying to downplay him for losing to the same team that beat Brady twice in two of the patriots best seasons.

 

[rearnakedchoke]

I didn’t say he’d have 8+ rings I’m pointing out that you’re trying to downplay him for losing to the same team that beat Brady twice in two of the patriots best seasons.

I was responding to the fact that someone is saying he would have 8-10 rings if he was on the pats instead. I dont think you can say that.

 

[Da Speeit]

"New England weren't exactly a shit team with Bledsoe. Some would argue they win that SB anyway based on their defensive play had he not gotten knicked."

so you are surprised someone would interpret that as saying they were a good team? because yes, 5-11 is a "shit team." but the very next year you think belichick's system kicked in and made them a super bowl contender no matter who was playing qb?

41-55 was his record before tom brady. but to you he was already awesome. i guessed based on 1 winning season in 5 years he was a regular vince lombardi. brady is good, bill is good. they needed each other equally

I'm done pretending you know what the fuck you're talking about. Read Carona's post below yours.

 

[Bamboozled]

Ya.... no.

8-10 SB

He'd probably have 8. AFC is whack as fuck.

 

[Corona]

He'd probably have 8. AFC is whack as fuck.

How dare you suggest such a thing. The afc is a gauntlet with countless future HOF competition.

Spoiler

 

[Gregolian]

How dare you suggest such a thing. The afc is a gauntlet with countless future HOF competition.

Spoiler

NVM the fucking QBs they've played in the fucking playoffs.

You can count on like one hand the AFC title winners on one hand for the last like DECADE AND A HALF.

Pats
Broncos
Ravens
Steelers
Colts when Peyton was there

5 teams have been basically the sole representatives of a conference of 16....

 

[Corona]

NVM the fucking QBs they've played in the fucking playoffs.

You can count on like one hand the AFC title winners on one hand for the last like DECADE AND A HALF.

Pats
Broncos
Ravens
Steelers
Colts when Peyton was there

5 teams have been basically the sole representatives of a conference of 16....

Realists.. Brady plays on a better team and for a better coach than Rodgers, hence why he is more successful. Example.


Last 2 games:

Aaron Rodgers:


7.5 YPA / 3 TD / 0 INT / 94.8 RATING / 0-2 RECORD


Tom Brady:


7.7 YPA / 1 TD / 0 INT / 91.6 RATING / 2-0 RECORD

Brady fans....

HE HAS MORE RINGS!!!

 

[Gregolian]

Realists.. Brady plays on a better team and for a better coach than Rodgers, hence why he is more successful. Example.


Last 2 games:

Aaron Rodgers:


7.5 YPA / 3 TD / 0 INT / 94.8 RATING / 0-2 RECORD


Tom Brady:


7.7 YPA / 1 TD / 0 INT / 91.6 RATING / 2-0 RECORD

Brady fans....

HE HAS MORE RINGS!!!

Like I said in my initial super long post. They'll be the 1a and 1b best QBs all time... who gets the (a) after the 1 is down to whether you give a ton of play to Super Bowl rings, which even the players admit when discussing this thing fall more to the team you're with or the on-field play.

Like... if we use rings as a barometer...... That means Trent Dilfer is a better QB than Dan Marino......

 

[the ambush]

yes i know Rodgers is a great qb. Atg. But cmon......

Lets do it like this.

One guy is in his 40s. Still playing at an elite level, taking patchwork teams of nobodies and castoffs deep into the playoffs/superbowl, has won 5 superbowls, which arguably should be 8, ALL on a reduced salary....has Gronk who’s never there when he actually needs him, Belechick who’s defenses are getting sorrier and sorrier as the years go by, and had Randy Moss for a few years......

The other throws a beautiful football, but is hated by most of his team. Blames everyone else when stuff goes wrong but takes all the credit when it goes right. Has one superbowl and an otherwise embarrassing playoff record. All on one of the largest contracts in league history ( gee i wonder why they cant get players these days). And had a stacked team during his lone SB run and for a few years before and after.


Sorry. But its the most ludicrous argument in all of sports.

The truth is Pittsburgh was tired or winning SuperBowl championships and decided to offer Rodgers one.

J/K

 

[Graves The Elder]

if we use rings as a barometer...... That means Trent Dilfer is a better QB than Dan Marino......