Enigma869 wrote:YoungJRNY wrote: I really do hate the argument that Brady has won over time with far less talent to bolster his career more than it is. You don't have to necessarily have to have world beaters around you to do what Brady and New England has done over the past decade. Teams like Washington, Philly and Dallas have have one of the most talented teams in the NFL over time and they couldn't sniff a Super Bowl. New England is just so well coached and is impeccable in their ways and understand the mindset of perfection. I think head coaching the ability to understand your quarterback and that relationship plays a huge part in what New England has become (you saw that mystique leave New Orleans when Sean Payton left Bree's side this past season.)
New England benefits from having, what's said, to own one of the most genius head coach's to ever coach the game in today's era. Manning DID go to a Super Bowl with that corpse Jim Caldwell running the ship. Brady is the best ever in the modern-era but guys like David Patton, Wes Welker and Deion Branch sure did make enormous plays for Brady as well, especially yards after the catch. What separates Brady from the rest, is always putting the ball on the money in his play-makers hands and making defense's pay, less-talent or not. The players around him deserve more credit, especially the TE's and wideouts over the time churning plays upfield that made Brady's offense run so fluently in ANY variation.
It may not be relevant to you. It's VERY relevant to me, especially when Brady is most often compared to Montana. Last I checked, Montana played all of his prime years with the greatest wide receiver to ever play in the NFL, and that's probably the only position in football that you probably wouldn't get much of a debate on who was the best ever at his position. Also, last I checked, Bill Walsh was considered every bit the great head coach that Belichick is. Name one single Hall of Fame player on the Patriots Super Bowl Teams that Brady won with (and kickers don't count, even though I think Adam will get in). Again, you say it doesn't matter. I say the guys around you matter a great deal. David Patten, David Givens, Deion Branch, and Troy Brown were VERY average NFL players. Your argument about Welker and the Tight Ends isn't a good one, considering none of them were on any of those championship teams. The immortal Christian Fauria and Jermaine Wiggins were the Tight Ends on those teams!
That's what I'm sayin'. I'm sayin' those average players like Branch and Brown deserve much more credit to the championship team than any else regardless of their talent level. I thought they were pretty damn talented if you ask me. Not Jerry Rice talented, but talented enough to haul in pass's from Brady.
You say Montana played his prime years with the greatest wide receiver to ever play in the NFL, but yet you said yourself a number of times that Randy Moss may have been the most talented WR to ever play the game. Yet, New England hasn't won a Super Bowl with guys like Welker
(a pass-catching machine) or Moss. Brady had Moss at his disposal a couple of years and set records with him respectively and has had counterparts full of immense raw talent like Chad Johnson but couldn't seen to grasp the New England-run system. Over the past few years, it seems like Bellichick would rather go back to average football players like Troy Brown, Deion Branch and David Patten
(how many stints did they have with the team?) because they simply worked BEST with Brady in how he wants things drawn because they were highly successful in the early 2000's. Though Brady deserves most of the credit with New England's recent success, there should be equally amount of praise around the Pats organization for putting together one reckoning staff around the franchise. What New England got going on is simply a group that comes around every other decade.
Love this game.
