If Brady makes the sb and loses

[NEPatsfan]

Figures....after given three shots (and failing) you 'attempt' to bring something to the table. Unfortunately, it's already been basically dismissed in my original post - which you didn't bother countering - and actually exposes you as quite ignorant on the subject.

Enjoy some light reading, maybe it will help you to move down the road of Truth.

Tom Brady All-Time Playoff Leader In, Like, Everything

 

[Ricky Roma]

Enjoy some light reading, maybe it will help you to move down the road of Truth.

Tom Brady All-Time Playoff Leader In, Like, Everything

Oh look...a bunch of volume stats! I also see Peyton's name on there a lot. So many places to start with this stupidity, but as I figured from the start when you couldn't address my points...you just don't offer much of a logical argument.

 

[NEhomer]

Getting back to the thought of what if Brady goes and loses again. Holy shit what a bummer place Pats fans would be in right now if Marshawn had punched it in! See, now we're talking about Brady being 4 for 6 when before we were talking 3 and couldn't get it done again. Imagine 3 and STILL couldn't get it done? Haven't won shit since spygate gets a big boost and of course .500 in SB...yada yada yada.

Gotta get there first but even if he does lose this one, we'll always have the Pats hater's kryptonite.

In fact, I won't even bother to post the picture because I believe you've all seen it. It's where Malcolm Butler makes an INT against the Seahawks. You know which one I mean?

 

[NEPatsfan]

Oh look...a bunch of volume stats! I also see Peyton's name on there a lot. So many places to start with this stupidity, but as I figured from the start when you couldn't address my points...you just don't offer much of a logical argument.

You don't have any points to address. You simply cry "cheater". That is about as pathetic of an argument a person can make.

You see Peyton on there, and he can be argued to be better than Monatana also.

 

[NEhomer]

Except in the playoffs.

The passing game in today's era is a joke compared to when Montana played, and yet Montana's playoff averages are somewhat better than Brady's. Given the differences in eras, he downright destroys him.

Put Montana in this era, where the game has never been more quarterback-oriented...where the position has never been more protected? Put him in an era where the salary cap and free agency limits the talent around everyone generally equally, with said passing rules? Put him in this era where the quarterback position itself determines wins and losses more than ever, given all the above?

Brady can win this years Super Bowl, earn the MVP in the regular season and the title game. He still won't be better than Montana. Brady is probably top 10 all time...not that I have some list...but there are a few guys I could certainly consider ahead of him.

Ok, I'll bite.

The first two bolds are just over the top simplifications. It is a stretch to say those things but if that's really how you see it then fine, we disagree.

Next is another point of disagreement. The QB position has always been the determiner of wins and losses. Bart Starr, Roger Staubach, Bob Griese...and yes, Joe Montana. The degree to which it's now more important cannot even be factored.

Next we see how thoroughly close minded you are. Let's say Joe has 5 wins in 7 appearances and Tom has 4 for 4. Would such accomplishments similarly not matter?

You don't have to answer.

 

[Ricky Roma]

You don't have any points to address. You simply cry "cheater". That is about as pathetic of an argument a person can make.

Where did I cry 'cheater?' You don't address the points because it seems...you CAN'T. Just hide behind your volume stats, 'truth and denial' stupidity, and false claims.

 

[NEPatsfan]

Where did I cry 'cheater?' You don't address the points because it seems...you CAN'T. Just hide behind your volume stats, 'truth and denial' stupidity, and false claims.

Ahh might have been the other niner guy.

Either way, Brady is statisically the GOAT, and there isn't much else you can measure it on beyond results, which is what statistics are.

 

[BigKen]

I know the thread is if Brady loses Super Bowl 50, but what if he wins?

I'll tell you exactly what will happen......all of the Patriot haters will go back to 2007 and Spygate and then try to connect the dots from, 2007 to the mysterious 2015 Deflategate and then somehow connect it to Super Bowl wins in 2015 and 2016.

You really want to try to clean shitty undies? What will all of the haters say if the Patriots win SB 50 and come back in 2017 for a shot at an unprecedented 3 Super Bowls in a row? Say what you will, Tom Brady will be playing for at least two more if not, more years. He's in superior physical condition and constantly works on his mechanics.

By the way, Womens Health magazine had a group of women go on Tom Brady's diet. They admitted that the group could only stay on it for two days before quitting. I think it was the Himilayan Pink Salt.

 

[Ricky Roma]

Ok, I'll bite.

The first two bolds are just over the top simplifications. It is a stretch to say those things but if that's really how you see it then fine, we disagree.

Next is another point of disagreement. The QB position has always been the determiner of wins and losses. Bart Starr, Roger Staubach, Bob Griese...and yes, Joe Montana. The degree to which it's now more important cannot even be factored.

Next we see how thoroughly close minded you are. Let's say Joe has 5 wins in 7 appearances and Tom has 4 for 4. Would such accomplishments similarly not matter?

You don't have to answer.

The passing game in today's era cannot be compared statistically straight up with Montana's era. It really isn't over the top when there are more guys with 100+ QB rating this past year than there was in the entire decade of the 1980's. There were probably as many 4000 yard QB's this year as that entire decade as well give or take a few. I could break it down even more, but having said that, Montana's average post season game is still overall statistically better.

QB's have always helped determine wins and loses, and of course the degree in how it's more important today cannot be measured. There is zero question however, that given how the passing game has never been easier with all the rules in the offensive favour, c/w free agency and salary cap, the QB in today's game plays a bigger factor in determining wins and losses. It's not really arguable.

And you can STFU on myself being close-minded. I never once talked about 'wins' or 'appearances' as any factor. Where do I say 4-4 is better than 4-6 or 5-7? In fact, I said Brady was a top 10 all time but there were other guys who I could make a case for being better......how many other guys have 4 Super Bowls?

 

[BigKen]

Where did I cry 'cheater?' You don't address the points because it seems...you CAN'T. Just hide behind your volume stats, 'truth and denial' stupidity, and false claims.

Ricky.........I've read all of your responses and it's more than apparent that you'd kill your mother rather than admit that there was ever any QB better than Montana. The biggest problem with being so attached is that any time anyone threatens your hero, you'd dig through a mile of shit to find any nut to discredit that threat.

The biggest argument against Montana is that he couldn't last 15 years and still play at the top of the NFL game. Brady is 39 years old and is still throwing more than 30 TDs and for more than 4500 yards a season. Tou lose face and audience when you start to call statistics bullshit. Once you start that, your arguments for Montana have no basis. Without statistics you have nothing to compare Montana with because your using his statistics as the base of your argument.

Time to go back to Madden 2015.

 

[Ricky Roma]

Ahh might have been the other niner guy.

It 'might have been' huh?

Either way, Brady is statisically the GOAT, and there isn't much else you can measure it on beyond results, which is what statistics are.

....and Roger Staubach might not be ranked in the top 100 when it comes to say...passing yards all time. Do I actually need to break this down even more? Yeah...you just stick to your little stats at face value.

 

[NEPatsfan]

The passing game in today's era cannot be compared statistically straight up with Montana's era. It really isn't over the top when there are more guys with 100+ QB rating this past year than there was in the entire decade of the 1980's. There were probably as many 4000 yard QB's this year as that entire decade as well give or take a few. I could break it down even more, but having said that, Montana's average post season game is still overall statistically better.

QB's have always helped determine wins and loses, and of course the degree in how it's more important today cannot be measured. There is zero question however, that given how the passing game has never been easier with all the rules in the offensive favour, c/w free agency and salary cap, the QB in today's game plays a bigger factor in determining wins and losses. It's not really arguable.

And you can STFU on myself being close-minded. I never once talked about 'wins' or 'appearances' as any factor. Where do I say 4-4 is better than 4-6 or 5-7? In fact, I said Brady was a top 10 all time but there were other guys who I could make a case for being better......how many other guys have 4 Super Bowls?

OH I see how it works for you, only stats that fit your blindly moronic view are acceptable.

You are in fact, in denial.

 

[Ricky Roma]

The biggest argument against Montana is that he couldn't last 15 years and still play at the top of the NFL game. Brady is 39 years old and is still throwing more than 30 TDs and for more than 4500 yards a season. Tou lose face and audience when you start to call statistics bullshit. Once you start that, your arguments for Montana have no basis. Without statistics you have nothing to compare Montana with because your using his statistics as the base of your argument.

Time to go back to Madden 2015.

It's arguments like this that makes me laugh at some of you little patty fans. The quarterback position has never been more protected than it currently is. The passing game has never been any easier for quarterbacks to excel at than it currently is.

Time to STFU.

 

[NEPatsfan]

It 'might have been' huh?



....and Roger Staubach might not be ranked in the top 100 when it comes to say...passing yards all time. Do I actually need to break this down even more? Yeah...you just stick to your little stats at face value.

Break down anything you want, it won't make you any less of a moron.

 

[NEPatsfan]

It's arguments like this that makes me laugh at some of you little patty fans. The quarterback position has never been more protected than it currently is. The passing game has never been any easier for quarterbacks to excel at than it currently is.

Time to STFU.

Defenses have never been more complicated than they currently are.

Time to STFU.

 

[Ricky Roma]

OH I see how it works for you, only stats that fit your blindly moronic view are acceptable.

You are in fact, in denial.

Denial of what? You're pretty stupid and desperate if you actually cannot see the blatant differences. I am actually educated you...schooling you in reality...but you are simply too ignorant. Watch me prove this again:

Defenses have never been more complicated than they currently are.

....and yet the passing numbers still supercede anything in history.

I know...I know....you cannot grasp it. Heh.

 

[NEhomer]

...
And you can STFU on myself being close-minded. I never once talked about 'wins' or 'appearances' as any factor. Where do I say 4-4 is better than 4-6 or 5-7? In fact, I said Brady was a top 10 all time but there were other guys who I could make a case for being better......how many other guys have 4 Super Bowls?

You said that even if Brady gets to those numbers, he still won't be as good as Montana. I just asked about what if those numbers were reversed and you're all with the STFUs.

^^^^

Pretty much what Ken says. I think objectively speaking both are great so I don't need to respondwith anger to threats that Montana's as good or better. I'm ok with Montana's better. Dude won 4 SBs without tossing a pick. That's mind-blowingly clutch.

 

[NEhomer]

It's arguments like this that makes me laugh at some of you little patty fans. The quarterback position has never been more protected than it currently is. The passing game has never been any easier for quarterbacks to excel at than it currently is.

Time to STFU.

...you're repeating yourself.

 

[NEPatsfan]

Denial of what? You're pretty stupid and desperate if you actually cannot see the blatant differences. I am actually educated you...schooling you in reality...but you are simply too ignorant. Watch me prove this again:



....and yet the passing numbers still supercede anything in history.

I know...I know....you cannot grasp it. Heh.

You sound like a full grown man who hasn't passed into manhood from childhood.

Brady is better than Monatana. Someday player x will be better than Brady. Further in time after that player x will be surpassed by player y as the best of all time.

It's how it works. Get over it.

 

[Ricky Roma]

You said that even if Brady gets to those numbers, he still won't be as good as Montana. I just asked about what if those numbers were reversed and you're all with the STFUs.

If it was reversed, I wouldn't care. It should be obvious when I originally stated that I didn't care if he won another Super Bowl or not. Winning SB's by itself, really has no bearing. If that was the case...the whole Trent Dilfer/Dan Marino thing...