Originally posted by quanchi112
@Petrus, your insufferable post won't show up with the quote you degenerate.Since you acknowledge its an advantage and that it can be overcome you concede the point. The problem is most wild card teams aren't consistent all year hence why they didn't win the division aka they aren't as good. You have more years than not of the top two seeds winning the sbowl as opposed to the bottom two seeds winning. This isn't hard to grasp.
Do you even know what the point was? I argued that when teams were playing their best and entered the playoffs lighting it up, homefield advantage wasn't that relevant, which is true. I never argued that most Wild-Card teams were on fire entering the playoffs. So, no. You missed the point, and I conceded nothing.
I've always said Brady's losses hurt him in the sbowl. He had the talent all around him. Montana didn't fail when he had the talent around him. Brady's production has went downhill in the postseason and in the Sbowl. Montana is the cream of the crop.
Okay, so which one is it? You bash Brady because he couldn't win with Moss, then you say having an elite WR isn't relevant, then you bash him again, then you say they both won without great WRs so it doesn't really matter, and now you say this. Make up your mind already.
This isn't just about regular season production. If we talk numbers only Peyton Manning is in the conversation despite his consistent drop off in the playoffs. Regular season numbers are fine and it shows a body of work but we all know great qb's really increase their numbers sometimes in a loss or against weak defenses. The playoffs is the battle of the elite.
Not really. Do you consider Eli Manning elite? Or even Terry Bradshaw? Only taking into account how a QB did in the playoffs is not a good measure of how truly great/bad he was. Eli Manning is definitely not an elite QB, and he's won the SB two times. He plays generally very well come playoff time and doesn't play very good during the season. That's not consistency. Saying a QB's greatness can only be measured for what he does during the post-season isn't accurate, especially because we have specific examples like Eli that disprove this.
Peyton Manning isn't in the conversation due to his numbers only. He's in the conversation because he's quite simply one of the best QBs to ever play the game regardless of numbers or how many SBs he won, period.
Montana is better than Brady. Plain and simple. What's worse for Brady is he played in an era which favors offensive production and protects the QB.
Well, if you want to go down that road...
Since Montana also played in an era when defenses were dominant [precisely because QBs were more limited], it's also safe to say his defense helped him carry his team more significantly than modern day defenses do. Therefore, Brady is required to do much more offensively than Montana was, because chances are, the opposing team will be able to crush his defense, which was not the case more often when Montana played.
There is more than one way to use the 'he played in a different era' card, you know.
An unblemished record is fantastic but we also look at the opponents. Montana beat hall of fame qb's in the sbowl. Marino and Elway. Marino had all,the numbers that year as well but came up short in the biggest game of the year. Ironic when the same thing happened to Brady in 07. ****, in Montana's times we had all time great teams, the 85 Bears, the 86 Giants, etc.
Okay, so now your argument changed from 'an undefeated SB record is better' to 'the opponents he beat were much better'.
I crush one argument and you just change it so that way you'll never lose, or how does this work, exactly? Stop moving the goalpost, my friend.
Now, if you want to break it down into opponents faced, very well.
Brady's 1st SB victory came against none other than the Greatest Show on Turf, a team that went 14-2 that year. So, essentially, he managed to outscore a record-breaking offense in the SB. Pretty good, I'd say.
Brady's 2nd SB victory came against a very tough Carolina defense, which managed to keep every regular season opponent under 30 pts except for one, and which held every post-season opponent under 23 points [including two games in which they held two opponents to 10 or less]. They managed to score 30+ on them to get the crown, once again.
Brady's 3rd SB victory came against the 13-3 Eagles, an extremely balanced team that scored 30+ six times and held its opponent to 20 pts or less 12 times during the season, including 5 allowing less than 10. Quite a formidable team, as well.
Brady's 4th SB victory came against the 12-4 Seahawks, a team that showed off one of the most prominent defenses of the modern era. It held opponents to 20 or less 11 times, including 6 in which they allowed 9 or less. They were also the defending SB champions and the 1st seed in the NFC for the second year in a row.
Brady's 5th SB victory came against one of the most prominent offenses of the modern era, scoring 30+ in 11 games, including 5 in which they scored 40+. As you very well know, the Patriots won in what turned out to be the biggest comeback in NFL history in the only OT SB ever played. So yeah, pretty fascinating stuff, too.
So, please, don't go around using that argument, because the teams the Patriots defeated in at least 4 of their 5 SBs are incredibly impressive teams, regardless of era.
You can't prove they would have won without the cheating since they cheated.
Just like you can't prove they cheated, with the exception of Spygate. 🙂
Since there's only one solid piece of evidence that proves they cheated, it's not relevant, anyway.
Why wouldn't we analyze their strengths and weaknesses ? The rule changes make it easier for the QB. That's undeniable and the point of the rule changes.
Then by all means, analyze them.
Montana as well as Jordan is unblemished in championships. Mythic. Stuff of legend.
Yeah. Just like Floyd Mayweather. 👆
Originally posted by Petrus
Way weaker, and I'd still say that's not the case.
Differing opinions. Never losing with a career that spans over a decade is hella impressive.
Oh, and Ali is not only the greatest boxer, but the the greatest sportsman ever. While past his prime, he dominated in a era which sported the greatest HW boxers ever.
Shavers, Liston, Foreman, Fraizer, Norton are just a few names Ali has fought and bested. The latter three he bested while PAST his prime - keep in mind that even at the age of 40, some theorize that even Iron Mike was ducking Foreman - and Ali had to deal with that beast in his prime, while being past his.
Originally posted by Deronn_soloOh, and Ali is not only the greatest boxer, but the the greatest sportsman ever. While past his prime, he dominated in a era which sported the greatest HW boxers ever.
Shavers, Liston, Foreman, Fraizer, Norton are just a few names Ali has fought and bested. The latter three he bested while PAST his prime - keep in mind that even at the age of 40, some theorize that even Iron Mike was ducking Foreman - and Ali had to deal with that beast in his prime, while being past his.
👆 👆
Originally posted by PetrusNo, that's subjective and not worth arguing. It's an advantage but can be overcome. If the game is tight the crowd can really make the advantage more so. The pats are more successful in the playoffs with the home field advantage. For ****s sake it's as if you don't understand what the word advantage means.
Do you even know what the point was? I argued that when teams were playing their best and entered the playoffs lighting it up, homefield advantage wasn't that relevant, which is true. I never argued that most Wild-Card teams were on fire entering the playoffs. So, no. You missed the point, and I conceded nothing.
Because with moss he didn't deliver. Montana won without rice. Montana delivered Brady didn't. The team ultimately matters but Brady has won due to scheming really offensively and playing solid defense when necessary. Brady went in as the heavy favorite and underperformed below his own seasons expectations. Undeniable. The same can't be said for Montana Mr. undefeated in the sbowl without an int. Perfection!!
Okay, so which one is it? You bash Brady because he couldn't win with Moss, then you say having an elite WR isn't relevant, then you bash him again, then you say they both won without great WRs so it doesn't really matter, and now you say this. Make up your mind already.
[/B]
I consider Eli clutch. I didn't say only the postseason. I said it holds greater weight due to the best teams making the playoffs. Eli doing what he did in two runs was amazing. The stuff of legend. No one considers him an all time QB nor Bradshaw because they weren't consistent.
Not really. Do you consider Eli Manning elite? Or even Terry Bradshaw? Only taking into account how a QB did in the playoffs is not a good measure of how truly great/bad he was. Eli Manning is definitely not an elite QB, and he's won the SB two times. He plays generally very well come playoff time and doesn't play very good during the season. That's not consistency. Saying a QB's greatness can only be measured for what he does during the post-season isn't accurate, especially because we have specific examples like Eli that disprove this.
[/B]
False. His playoff record and production are sub par. He frequently underperformed and was outgunned in the sbowl. He never played great on either of his two sbowl trophies. Eli won it both times while Peyton was never put in that situation because thank heavens he'd clam up under the immense pressure. In a playoff game give me Eli all day or choker Peyton.Peyton Manning isn't in the conversation due to his numbers only. He's in the conversation because he's quite simply one of the best QBs to ever play the game regardless of numbers or how many SBs he won, period.
[/B]
Montana and the offense was the focal point of his teams. His defenses were great but not all time smothering defense amazing such as the Ravens, etc. Brady's defenses won him multiple sbowls. In the first few he wasn't the QB he later developed into becoming. His numbers were rather pedestrian but they eeked out wins in the cheating spy gate era. Plus Montana won a sbowl as a 10-6 squad. What was the worst record the Pats won, 11-5?
Well, if you want to go down that road...Since Montana also played in an era when defenses were dominant [precisely because QBs were more limited], it's also safe to say his defense helped him carry his team more significantly than modern day defenses do. Therefore, Brady is required to do much more offensively than Montana was, because chances are, the opposing team will be able to crush his defense, which was not the case more often when Montana played.
[/B]
The era in which Montana played made it more difficult for qb's so that directly impacts his play. Body's play was aided by the new rule changes which increases his individual play/statistics.
There is more than one way to use the 'he played in a different era' card, you know.
[/B]
No, it is a multi layered argument. Montana faced all time great qb's in his historical performance years and outplayed them on the grandest stage. Brady in a historical year was outplayed by Eli Manning. I am comparing each of them in how they reacted in their own era. Brady went down while Montana didn't. He both lost and underperformed unlike Cool Joe.
Okay, so now your argument changed from 'an undefeated SB record is better' to 'the opponents he beat were much better'.
[/B]
I am glad you bring this up which makes my point for me exactly. Look at how the patriots defense limited the offense of the Rams. That has nothing to do with tom Brady. Look at Brady's numbers they were pedestrian. It's like saying man Peyton Mannings team in his final year crushed the panthers. Peyton didn't play great but he played well enough for the team to win mainly due to their defense. The same can be said for Tom Brady when his team beat the Rams.
I crush one argument and you just change it so that way you'll never lose, or how does this work, exactly? Stop moving the goalpost, my friend.Now, if you want to break it down into opponents faced, very well.
Brady's 1st SB victory came against none other than the Greatest Show on Turf, a team that went 14-2 that year. So, essentially, he managed to outscore a record-breaking offense in the SB. Pretty good, I'd say.
[/B]
Ok he played well against a panthers defense. I expect this for someone to be argued the best of all time. Also though this was in the spy gate era. Panthers weren't that great though tbh and you know it.
Brady's 2nd SB victory came against a very tough Carolina defense, which managed to keep every regular season opponent under 30 pts except for one, and which held every post-season opponent under 23 points [including two games in which they held two opponents to 10 or less]. They managed to score 30+ on them to get the crown, once again.
[/B]
Terrell Owens was not at his best and Donovan McNabb was a consistent loser. The pats defense really clamped down on the Eagles. You can't say Brady played great. He played well enough but the defense was the driving force of their first three sbowls.
Brady's 3rd SB victory came against the 13-3 Eagles, an extremely balanced team that scored 30+ six times and held its opponent to 20 pts or less 12 times during the season, including 5 allowing less than 10. Quite a formidable team, as well.
[/B]
Yes, they were beaten by the worst call in sbowl history. A yard away and they threw it. The defense won it for them. But of somehow turns into Brady did it all by himself. Way to go, Tom. He picked that ball off nicely. Their secondary had all sorts of nagging injuries for that game as well. Tom played well enough and great at times I do agree but his defense won the game at the goal line. Literally.
Brady's 4th SB victory came against the 12-4 Seahawks, a team that showed off one of the most prominent defenses of the modern era. It held opponents to 20 or less 11 times, including 6 in which they allowed 9 or less. They were also the defending SB champions and the 1st seed in the NFC for the second year in a row.
[/B]
The defense held the offense to three tds. You're making a case for the defensive side of the ball and bellichick. I do agree this is Brady's finest sbowl performance. He made the plays he needed to make as the defense shut them the **** down and forced that turnover when necessary. The defense was gassed by the game's end. The overtime drive was merely a formality at that point. But watch the fourth quarter and when the defense was gassed he was protected and tore them to shreds due to the game plan and the time of possession. Brady wasn't able to do so until the defense was gassed. Brady isn't at his best when the other team is. When the game plan works and bellichick can exploit their weaknesses due to the schemes and wide receiver formations he's at his best.
Brady's 5th SB victory came against one of the most prominent offenses of the modern era, scoring 30+ in 11 games, including 5 in which they scored 40+. As you very well know, the Patriots won in what turned out to be the biggest comeback in NFL history in the only OT SB ever played. So yeah, pretty fascinating stuff, too.So, please, don't go around using that argument, because the teams the Patriots defeated in at least 4 of their 5 SBs are incredibly impressive teams, regardless of era.
[/B]
The most impressive team they faced was the Falcons this year and the masterful job the defense did. The Falcons defense wasn't amazing it was the offense. Bellichick gets the credit for his defensive genius. The Seahawks weren't healthy as you previously brought up. Secondary was banged up and that was the strength of the defense. And the pats defense won at the goal line. Should have run it with Lynch.
That is the egregious cheat so thanks for conceding that point.
Just like you can't prove they cheated, with the exception of Spygate. 🙂Since there's only one solid piece of evidence that proves they cheated, it's not relevant, anyway.
Then by all means, analyze them.
Yeah. Just like Floyd Mayweather. 👆 [/B]
It diminshed their legacy aka will never go away. Since we are splitting hairs this matters. May weather didn't best any all time greats. Joe clearly did. Elway and Marino. Outplayed them. Also played in a much more difficult era in terms of QB play than the softer game we have in today's current game.
Originally posted by PetrusJust as your nation always gives in so do you. I dismantled your pitiful arguments point by point. Greatest of all time is subjective since different eras can't compete against each other. Look at what the best offense to ever hit the field did to teams in 1989 under Joe Montana. Imagine what they'd do in today's era with today's softer pro offensive rules. Montana didn't slow down in the postseason while Brady usually does in the postseason.
And, honestly, I'm growing tired of dismantling your arguments, Quanchi. So that's the last reply you'll get. Bye now. 🤣
Originally posted by Deronn_soloYou don't have Jordan in there ??
Who is your top 5 greatest sports[wo]man, tbh? I have: Ali, Tiger, Phelps, Serena and maybe Wayne Gretzky.Wait, Bolt is a beast too, and i favor individual athletes over team sport ones, so Usain prolly takes Wayne's spot.
It's hard to compare across team sports to individual sports.
I favor individual sports players over team players mainly because they can single handily win without any significant dependence on others, at least when the competition start. Maybe a bit flawed, but that is how I see it currently. Great arguments can sway me to believe different, however.
Plus, Wayne Gretzky is the greatest team sports player ever, so i can't really make place for MJ if I had to put one team sport player on there. The dude was clearly more dominant than your Airness on an individual level.
My favorite player of all time when I was younger was Deion Sanders. I'm a niners fan so when he went to the hated Cowboys I hated it. I cheered for them though in the sbowl against the more despised Steelers. I still remember how dominant the Niners of 94 were. Beat your Cowboys twice that year. Young was on a mission that year.
Originally posted by Deronn_solo
Who is your top 5 greatest sports[wo]man, tbh? I have: Ali, Tiger, Phelps, Serena and maybe Wayne Gretzky.Wait, Bolt is a beast too, and i favor individual athletes over team sport ones, so Usain prolly takes Wayne's spot.
Top 5 greatest sportsmen/women [in no particular order]:
Federer
Ali
Tiger
Usain
Senna
Followed very, very closely by:
Jordan
Jerry Rice
Serena