Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board
Brian Fowler

The Big Game, v.53

Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, FluffSnackwell said:

The one legitimate argument I've heard Joe Montana make is that there aren't any consistently good much less great teams anymore except the Patriots, who obviously fit that ball due in equal measure to having Brady and Bellichick.

However, the 49ers were still successful immediately following Montana's departure (NFC championship game and then a Super Bowl win the following season?).  I don't think Bryan Hoyer is dragging this Patriots team to an AFC Championship game.

...he's also had arguably the best coach (in the history of the game) helping him navigate through a field of fatally flawed teams.

It's not like Montana didn't have Bill Walsh and then a Walsh disciple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pittsburgh and Baltimore have both been pretty consistently very good and occasionally great, and the Colts and then the Broncos with Manning had great teams. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peyton wasn't great or even good in either of the postseasons where his team won the Super Bowl. He was mediocre in all his other postseasons too except for the one where he thrashed a top ranked Jets defense with a cast of nobodies before eventually getting beat by the Saints in the Super Bowl. Yeah, he passed for 600 yards in back-to-back Wild Card round wins over mediocre as hell Jack Plumber led Broncos teams. Big whoop. The Steelers have been quite the underachievers since their last Super Bowl appearance. The Steelers were at their best in that in-between period for the Pats where they didn't win any Super Bowls. The Patriots run at the turn of the century was definitely aided by coming along at the dawn of parity when there just weren't very many good teams at all. This is really Joe's argument though. I'm willing to give Brady best ever simply on the back of the two greatest comebacks in Super Bowl history. It is a valid argument though.  Is it more challenging to  dominate in a decade with four or five consistently great teams (Giants, Bears, Redskins, 9ers and Broncos) or in an era where seemingly every other team in the league is constantly up and down besides yours which is led by a diabolical genius?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Brian Fowler said:

FWIW, over this 8 straight trips to the AFC title game run, the AFC East actuality has the best cumulative win percentage by the three non-champions of any division.

The 2008 11-5 thing is fascinating to me. It's objectively a very good record, but it also was a five game drop off from the previous year. 

It just means Tom Brady's WAR average for the prior year was 5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would imply the Rams have fans in Southern California

  • Like 3
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a video up on CNN about some kid using his science fair project to show that Tom Brady cheats.

I...guess that's an appropriate analogy for the state of public science education in the U.S.  I hope he gets flunked back to the Bronze Age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure he won the science fair

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Brian Fowler said:

I'm pretty sure he won the science fair

And that’s why my kid goes to Catholic school.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Must. Resist. Jokes. About. Religion.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/27/2019 at 12:47 PM, Brian Fowler said:

That would imply the Rams have fans in Southern California

As someone that lives in Los Angeles, even with them heading into the Super Bowl it still feels like the only people here that care about the Rams are St. Louis transplants and people over 50 that are old enough to have been Rams fans the first time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty much - everyone I know (And really this is my feeling, too) is pretty much like sure it would be cool if the Rams won the Super Bowl and I definitely want them to beat the Patriots, but if they don't it won't it's not going to affect me in the slightest.  

I'm 35 and have zero Rams connection (I remember them being a) terrible and b) having a Cruella De Ville owner) - my brothers are both right around 50 and going crazy over them being in the Super Bowl so yea ... Clint's timeline seems just about right.  

Also ... Todd Gurley is the best.  

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that middling QBs seem to be the Patriot's kryptonite in the Super Bowl, and Goff has pretty much been middling lately, I wouldn't be shocked to see the Patriots lose.

I also don't buy into the bullshit narrative from the Patriots that this is one of their toughest tests ever or whatever they were saying. However, it does have that feeling of that last Super Bowl run from the Montana/Young era of the 49ers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://sports.yahoo.com/why-tom-brady-good-according-185600862.html

 

The "He's a System QB!" has some merits, but also a bunch of flaws. Since B&B have worked together for so long, there's in innate understanding of the system. You don't have situations like Alex Smith's, where he had six play-callers in his first six years. The System is set up for Tom Brady to maximize. That's true. But to say that just about any QB could be "good to great" in the system is fatally flawed. Especially with the Kill Play System they mention in the article. In less than 15 seconds, you have to read the defense mentally imagine how each play would work, and then either run the original play or the Kill Play. That's not easy to do on Madden, when you're sitting in a comfy chair. Now tired and achy, 65,000 people screaming at you, and defense out to put as much of a legal murder on you as they can. It takes a special kind of QB to stay cool under those situations. 

And post snap he's still really good at not staring at the receiver until the ball is about to be delivered. It's very hard for defenders to jump routes on Brady. Most of the picks I've seen him throw were either doinks off receiver hands, or unsighted lines.

The way the system is set up, he has good parts that can be somewhat interchangeable. Not saying those parts are easy to find (Will we ever see another Gronk?), but how many "Small, gritty receivers with pretty safe hands willing to risk a hit over the middle to make a catch" (Welker, Amendola, Edleman, Branch, etcetera) and "Deceptively good pass catchers out of the backfield" (White, Lewis, Woodhead, etcetera)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think it's remarkable that Brady has gone this long without any sort of shoulder or neck problems that eventually plagued Manning. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's because Manning took a LOT more hits than Brady.

Some of this was rule changes to prevent head hunting.. some of it is passing style related (Manning usually hung in the pocket longer, Brady, especially in later years does a lot of <3.0 seconds until pass is out, and it's hard to get to somebody with a head of steam that fast.  Manning would also hang in till the very last second to try to throw (and again, these hits would likely draw a flag these days), while Brady is more willing to turtle or to just throw it away.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They've completely redesigned the system in New England at least twice, arguably three times during Brady's career. It's not the fucking system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I'm not entirely sure Manning's taken "a lot" more hits than Brady.

It was only this year that Brady surpassed Manning for RS games played (and only by 3).  Pretty sure he already had him beat on playoff games.  And, by sack totals, Brady's been sacked almost 60% more than Manning.

Obviously that doesn't include hits and knockdowns, and maybe I'm just not looking at the right website that has the stats on hits (if there is one, please share), but I don't know if those first 3 seasons of his career (with sack totals of 22, 14, 20, because otherwise their careers overlapped, and any rules changes would have benefited both) explain the lack of serious injury, so much as "Brady's lucky" explains it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no data to back this up at all, but I would imagine years and years of being sacked onto the hard-as-fuck Hoosier Dome field probably didn't help Manning.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was wondering if it might be something related to the Pats having more confidence in their back-ups than Indy and Denver, and not having to feel like they've got to rush their #1 guy if he's not 100%; but I had a look at some numbers, see if I could support that. Manning's back-ups actually threw more passes in games that he started than Brady's back-ups threw in games that he started; although year on year, Manning had more years where he threw all of his teams passes than Brady; although some of those have to do with trick plays. In short, it's a feeling I've got, but not one I've got any numbers to support apart from the Matt Cassell year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, this idea that Manning took a lot more hits than Brady isn't true. Midway through his career, Manning also became more mobile in the pocket and not hang in there as long. It would always draw guffaws from announcers for how awkward Manning looked running, but it saved his ass and extended plays. He wasn't the most athletic runner, but he was decent enough.

Manning's other weapon in the pocket and one that I don't think I've ever seen anyone do better is that he would drop back, but had this innate ability to almost always know when pressure was coming for him to jog up a few steps, again saving his ass.

It could always be genetics though, or throwing mechanics, or any number of factors, but it's still odd that Brady hasn't encountered any issues with his throwing arm, neck, or back. Brady did tear his ACL though, and has had issues with his ankles and feet, but he's been lucky enough to avoid any of the issues that would really cause a fast decline in his performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brady to my knowledge has never been obliterated like Joe Montana was by Leonard Marshall.

I would have been 5 when this hit happened, but was it responsible for Montana's back issues or did this compound them? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Compounded, he first severely hurt his back in the mid-80s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Niners traded for Steve Young in 1987.  Prior to the trade, the Niners told Young that Montana, because of back surgery, was finished as their starting quarterback. And that led to Young agreeing to be traded to SF. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rams better fucking win today.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...