RealGM

eagereyez wrote:

Danny1616 wrote:

celtics543 wrote:
You can argue that but Brady still had to put them in a position to win and completed a comeback against the Legion of Boom on the biggest stage possible.

I think you could argue this the other way and say that if his defense hadn't let him down against Philly he'd have 7 rings already.

Not only that but Brady broke NFL records throwing for over 400 yards and 4 touchdowns against the legion of boom, one of the greatest defenses in NFL history that had decimated Manning and the Bronco's in the Super Bowl the year prior.

Brady's performance against the Seahawks is one of the greatest games in QB history.

The LOB was decimated by injuries in that SB. Sherman was playing with one arm. ET3 dislocated his shoulder in the NFC championship game. Lane broke his arm at the end of the 1st quarter. Chancellor was the most healthy and he was playing through a bone bruise.

Nothing to take away from NE - they can only beat the team that is put in front of them. But I would not compare that version of the LOB to the one that played against Denver.

Excuses.

Brady was dealing with a bad ankle all season, Gronk was dealing with knee issues early on and was coming back from an ACL tear, only playing 10 games during the season.

Chandler Jones and Hightower also had injury issues.

Seahawks were still the highest rated defense in the league during that season.

It's the NFL, everyone is dealing with something. If they are on the field they are healthy.

Pats beat the Falcons without Gronk and Brady put up 505 yards against the Eagles without Edelman.

freethedevil wrote:

Effigy wrote:Yeah the reprehensible putridness of the rest of the AFC East for 20 years is the most embarrassing thing in Sports. It’s incredible. It’s like getting to play in a division with only the Hornets, Knicks and Kings for the last 16 years.

Insane to actually use the "weak competition" argument when citing a player who played during expansion. Who was jordan's best compeition during his first three peat? The same players he beat in his second three peat. Brady has taken the lunch of up and comers in their prime, Jordan took the lunch of the older versions of the players he'd already taken lunch from.

Um, except I didn’t do that at all, did I? Brady’s the goat, no doubt about it, but it does piss me off that any team got to play in a division with three teams run by inbred chimpanzees for 20 years. I would love it if the Broncos, Chiefs and Raiders were dogcrap for 20 years. Ok, I basically got that with the Raiders, but not the other two.

Effigy wrote:

freethedevil wrote:

Effigy wrote:Yeah the reprehensible putridness of the rest of the AFC East for 20 years is the most embarrassing thing in Sports. It’s incredible. It’s like getting to play in a division with only the Hornets, Knicks and Kings for the last 16 years.

Insane to actually use the "weak competition" argument when citing a player who played during expansion. Who was jordan's best compeition during his first three peat? The same players he beat in his second three peat. Brady has taken the lunch of up and comers in their prime, Jordan took the lunch of the older versions of the players he'd already taken lunch from.

Um, except I didn’t do that at all, did I? Brady’s the goat, no doubt about it, but it does piss me off that any team got to play in a division with three teams run by inbred chimpanzees for 20 years. I would love it if the Broncos, Chiefs and Raiders were dogcrap for 20 years. Ok, I basically got that with the Raiders, but not the other two.

You realize that Brady actually has a better record against other divisions outside of the AFC east, right?

While the Patriots' 86-24 record against the AFC East is staggering, their winning percentage (134-44, .753) against everyone else is the best in the NFL, while they have 25 more non-division victories than any other team.

New England's record against eventual division winners (24-14) makes them the only team in the NFL with a winning record in this category. Against teams who eventually made the playoffs in a given season, the Patriots (60-33, .645) are the best in the league, with the Steelers at a not-so-close second with a .480 winning percentage.

Their success against teams who finished with a winning record (75-45, .625) is also an NFL-best mark, with the Steelers trailing by a considerable margin at a .440 winning percentage.

This is pure domination, it's not a product of playing in a "weak" division.

IgorK wrote:

levon wrote:

Duke4life831 wrote:6 superbowls is far more impressive than 6 NBA championships.

as someone who doesn't watch football, why do you say that? my understanding is that individual NBA players influence the outcome in basketball more than individuals in football?

Brady's 6 is already greater than Jordan's 6. It's more difficult to win in football for many reasons - 1-and-done playoff format, less control (Brady only plays offense, so he has no say on the defensive end, unlike basketball players), and the fact that you have 50+ teammates you need to rely on (whereas in basketball you're playing with a 12-man roster which shrinks to about 8 during playoffs).

I mean, from an individual perspective, that actually make Brady sounds less impressive. It highlights that he needed the organization to be as great as it was to support him and allow for the accomplishment to happen. Whereas Jordan's feels more like it was all him. Brady was on the sideline effectively as a cheerleader in some of those most key moments of the Patiots 6 rings, where Jordan always played some kind of active role in every key moment.

I think from a *team* perspective the Patriots winning 6 is far more impressive than the Bulls winning 6, but from any 1 player perspective, Jordan's performance in those 6 rings is more Impressive than Brady's performance in his 6.

I think that by saying team success being harder to achieve in the NFL is in itself is admission that one player can't really have that much impact on the game which suggests Brady didn't have as much impact as Jordan. It's simply the nature of their sports.

This is further supported by the fact that Brady wasn't even the MVP of the Superbowl in 2 of his Finals. And Brady was only the league MVP 3 times vs Jordan's 6s. BOTH of thse strongly support that Brady had to rely on his team more than Jordan did. Tom brady stats in his most recent superbowl win: 21-35, 262 YDS, 1 INT For a QB those are worse than Lebron game 6 vs mavs in 2011 level stats, except his defense bailed him out for the win.

If people are going to hold it against Kobe in the Kobe vs Lebron debate that Kobe wasn't the best player in the finals in 3 of his finals, why doesn't Brady get the same treatment when he wasn't the MVP of 2 of his finals? Same goes for Steph Curry. When you compare Lebron and steph curry, they both have 3 rings, but then you realize Lebron was Finals MVP 3 times. You have to think the same way when comparing Brady in superbowls and Jordan in Finals.

Drygon wrote:

PhilBlackson wrote:The issue I have with that is Brady has had a couple of Superbowls "he" won where he was actually pretty mediocre to dare I say bad (gasp) but the Pats' TEAM DEFENSE was really what won them the game but hey he's the GOAT so he gets the narrative of all the credit...

For that reason, Jordan is still ahead for me.

Michael Jordan was pretty bad against SuperSonics in NBA Finals 1996 and got bailed out by Dennis Rodman in that series.

Nobody cares or even remembers. Same will happened with Brady even if he was poor in some of those SuperBowls wins.

Watch on YouTube

Jordan still had 27.3, 5.3, 4.2, 1.7, 0.2. He was fairly inefficient but everything else measures up, including his D. Those are still great stats for an NBA player and not nearly as bad as the stats brady has put up in some superbowls.

The idea that going 6-3 in the Finals is less impressive than going 6-0 has always been hilarious to me.

So it’s more impressive that Jordan lost in the ECF or 2nd round, as opposed to reaching the Finals?

Makes no damn sense lol.

Cant really compare them because the sports and league rules are so different. Not to mention nba has 5 guys on the court doing everything while nfl has 11 on the field and they are different for offense, defense, and sometimes special teams. It would be like comparing them to Tiger or Serena. Different categories. They’re all great and at the top of their respective mountains.

Different sports, and MJ had to play on both sides of the court so I think Jordans is probably more impressive. I do need to throw these numbers in here, i guarantee it will surprise a lot of posters.

Rodgers last 5 seasons: 71 g, 1615-2537 (63.7%), 18747 yds, 7.4 y/a, 150 td, 28 int, 101.0 rating, 42-28-1, 0 conf champ, 0 SB champ, 1 MVP
Brady last 5 seasons: 76 g, 1826-2789 (65.5%), 21365 yds, 7.7 y/a, 158 td, 37 int, 101.9 rating, 59-17-0, 4 conf champ, 3 sb champ, 1 MVP, 2 SB MVP

Brady doing what he is doing is INSANE.

The Comedian wrote:Different sports, and MJ had to play on both sides of the court so I think Jordans is probably more impressive. I do need to throw these numbers in here, i guarantee it will surprise a lot of posters.

Rodgers last 5 seasons: 71 g, 1615-2537 (63.7%), 18747 yds, 7.4 y/a, 150 td, 28 int, 101.0 rating, 42-28-1, 0 conf champ, 0 SB champ, 1 MVP
Brady last 5 seasons: 76 g, 1826-2789 (65.5%), 21365 yds, 7.7 y/a, 158 td, 37 int, 101.9 rating, 59-17-0, 4 conf champ, 3 sb champ, 1 MVP, 2 SB MVP

Brady doing what he is doing is INSANE.

Brady set the standard so high that when he doesn't perform at an MVP level, but only an elite level, the media goes crazy and acts like he's declining.

Last season he was actually better statistically than he was in 2013 and 2014 despite Gronk being hurt and Edelman missing a chunk of the season, yet the media acted like this was evidence he was declining, because he didn't up the numbers he had in 2016 and 2017.

Danny1616 wrote:

dakomish23 wrote:When he does the equivalent of stripping Malone before the game winning offensive play, then I'll put him above MJ.

He led his team to an overtime victory over the Falcons after being down 28-3 in the Super Bowl.

In doing so, he broke an NFL record throwing over 200 yards in the 4th quarter and overtime.

Oh and the 2nd biggest comeback in Super Bowl history was Brady leading his team down 24-14 in the 4th quarter in the 2014 Super Bowl against one of the greatest defenses ever in the Seattle Seahawks.

So Brady is responsible for the two greatest comebacks in Super Bowl history.

He's the definition of clutch.

The point wasn't about being clutch. It's about playing on both sides.

I wouldn't ever label a DH the best player in baseball either.

snoopdogg88 wrote:The idea that going 6-3 in the Finals is less impressive than going 6-0 has always been hilarious to me.

So it’s more impressive that Jordan lost in the ECF or 2nd round, as opposed to reaching the Finals?

Makes no damn sense lol.

No, what's more impressive is winning 6 titles in 13 years as opposed to winning 6 titles in 19 years.

Danny1616 wrote:

Effigy wrote:

freethedevil wrote:Insane to actually use the "weak competition" argument when citing a player who played during expansion. Who was jordan's best compeition during his first three peat? The same players he beat in his second three peat. Brady has taken the lunch of up and comers in their prime, Jordan took the lunch of the older versions of the players he'd already taken lunch from.

Um, except I didn’t do that at all, did I? Brady’s the goat, no doubt about it, but it does piss me off that any team got to play in a division with three teams run by inbred chimpanzees for 20 years. I would love it if the Broncos, Chiefs and Raiders were dogcrap for 20 years. Ok, I basically got that with the Raiders, but not the other two.

You realize that Brady actually has a better record against other divisions outside of the AFC east, right?

While the Patriots' 86-24 record against the AFC East is staggering, their winning percentage (134-44, .753) against everyone else is the best in the NFL, while they have 25 more non-division victories than any other team.

New England's record against eventual division winners (24-14) makes them the only team in the NFL with a winning record in this category. Against teams who eventually made the playoffs in a given season, the Patriots (60-33, .645) are the best in the league, with the Steelers at a not-so-close second with a .480 winning percentage.

Their success against teams who finished with a winning record (75-45, .625) is also an NFL-best mark, with the Steelers trailing by a considerable margin at a .440 winning percentage.

This is pure domination, it's not a product of playing in a "weak" division.

Not according to the stat you just provided. According to that, he's 78.2 against the AFC East and 75.3 against everyone else....

Effigy wrote:

Danny1616 wrote:

Effigy wrote:
Um, except I didn’t do that at all, did I? Brady’s the goat, no doubt about it, but it does piss me off that any team got to play in a division with three teams run by inbred chimpanzees for 20 years. I would love it if the Broncos, Chiefs and Raiders were dogcrap for 20 years. Ok, I basically got that with the Raiders, but not the other two.

You realize that Brady actually has a better record against other divisions outside of the AFC east, right?

While the Patriots' 86-24 record against the AFC East is staggering, their winning percentage (134-44, .753) against everyone else is the best in the NFL, while they have 25 more non-division victories than any other team.

New England's record against eventual division winners (24-14) makes them the only team in the NFL with a winning record in this category. Against teams who eventually made the playoffs in a given season, the Patriots (60-33, .645) are the best in the league, with the Steelers at a not-so-close second with a .480 winning percentage.

Their success against teams who finished with a winning record (75-45, .625) is also an NFL-best mark, with the Steelers trailing by a considerable margin at a .440 winning percentage.

This is pure domination, it's not a product of playing in a "weak" division.

Not according to the stat you just provided. According to that, he's 78.2 against the AFC East and 75.3 against everyone else....

Lol, the difference is minimal but here is a more detailed analysis.

This updated from May, 2018. Against the AFC the Patriots have a 74.2% winning percentage and against the NFC the Patriots have a 74.1% winning percentage.

In order against each division this is the Patriots winning percentage:

AFC North: 75%

AFC South: 80%

AFC East: 74%

AFC West: 67%.

NFC North: 74%

NFC South: 77%

NFC East: 70%

NFC West: 75%

So Brady has a higher winning percentage against the AFC North, AFC South, NFC South and NFC West than the AFC East.

So the argument that Brady takes advantage of a weak division is BS.

In fact Brady's worst record against any team in the NFL with at least 10 games are the Dolphins, surprisingly.

https://patriotsdynasty.info/blog/2018/05-11/debunking-myth-easy-afc-east

Edrees wrote:

IgorK wrote:

levon wrote:as someone who doesn't watch football, why do you say that? my understanding is that individual NBA players influence the outcome in basketball more than individuals in football?

Brady's 6 is already greater than Jordan's 6. It's more difficult to win in football for many reasons - 1-and-done playoff format, less control (Brady only plays offense, so he has no say on the defensive end, unlike basketball players), and the fact that you have 50+ teammates you need to rely on (whereas in basketball you're playing with a 12-man roster which shrinks to about 8 during playoffs).

I mean, from an individual perspective, that actually make Brady sounds less impressive.

Check the thread title.

Sark wrote:

snoopdogg88 wrote:The idea that going 6-3 in the Finals is less impressive than going 6-0 has always been hilarious to me.

So it’s more impressive that Jordan lost in the ECF or 2nd round, as opposed to reaching the Finals?

Makes no damn sense lol.

No, what's more impressive is winning 6 titles in 13 years as opposed to winning 6 titles in 19 years.

Since when did we reward players for playing less?

D.Brasco wrote:Right now they are both tied with 6 rings a piece but with the recent AB signing many are thinking the Pats are almost guaranteed a 7th this year.

What it takes to get and contribute for a championship differs in the NBA and NFL but does Brady with 7 rings solidify him as the most successful North American modern athlete?

North American, I guess you'd have to consider Gretzky

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

Football is much more of a team sport than basketball is. Jordan was a much bigger reason for the Bulls success than Brady was for the Patriots.

Not saying Brady didn't play a part, of course he did, he played a huge part, but he can only play half the game. Still have 11 players out there on defense, and for the most part outside of a few years, he's had some great defenses backing him.

freethedevil wrote:

Sark wrote:

snoopdogg88 wrote:The idea that going 6-3 in the Finals is less impressive than going 6-0 has always been hilarious to me.

So it’s more impressive that Jordan lost in the ECF or 2nd round, as opposed to reaching the Finals?

Makes no damn sense lol.

No, what's more impressive is winning 6 titles in 13 years as opposed to winning 6 titles in 19 years.

Since when did we reward players for playing less?

Reward is for efficiency.

Sark wrote:

freethedevil wrote:

Sark wrote:

No, what's more impressive is winning 6 titles in 13 years as opposed to winning 6 titles in 19 years.

Since when did we reward players for playing less?

Reward is for efficiency.

Effiency doesn't help teams win, volume does

basketballRob wrote:

D.Brasco wrote:Right now they are both tied with 6 rings a piece but with the recent AB signing many are thinking the Pats are almost guaranteed a 7th this year.

What it takes to get and contribute for a championship differs in the NBA and NFL but does Brady with 7 rings solidify him as the most successful North American modern athlete?

North American, I guess you'd have to consider Gretzky

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

As winner? no.

GOAT is a more interesting discussion, but I don't think nfl has an equivalent to orr.

freethedevil wrote:

Sark wrote:

freethedevil wrote:

Since when did we reward players for playing less?

Reward is for efficiency.

Effiency doesn't help teams win, volume does

We're not comparing teams, we're comparing players.