Tom Brady

That's right but it has spun into a discussion about Brady being the best PLAYER ever and that is so laughable.

You took issue with someone presenting statistical data to show why Brady is the greatest of all time, yet your entire first post did nothing but listing statistical data to show why, according to you, he isn't.

Hypocrite much?

I am not a fan of Brady at all, but I can give credit where credit is due. He's in a class of his own...
Statistics aside he is in a class of his own I’ll give him that ... in this era
Oh yeah definitely,in this era he is indeed in a class of his own. The best quarterback to have played the game in the last 20 years. Jerry rice said it perfectly that when he was playing,players were not protected back then like they are now.pretty much echoing me that the NFL puts skirts on quarterbacks now. :thup: Rice told the truth when he said he believes he played in a tougher time in the NFL than Brady did.This one sports message board I know of,one poster there hit the nail on the head saying ifDan Marino was playing in this era the past 20 years,with the rules the NFL has now to protect quarterbacks,he would be throwing 70 touchdowns a year the way the NFL protects quarterbacks in this day and age. :thup:
It started in 1970 with the narrowing of hash marks to prevent defensive secondaries from cocking their coverages into the wide side.
For rules changes, in 1978, it was Katy bar the door.
No contacting eligibles beyond 5 yards of the LOS with only one contact of those players allowed; OL could extend their arms in pass protection, open their hands and even allowed holding if their hands remained within the torso of the defender. All to encourage throwing the ball more often across a TV screen in order to appease an intellectually challenged clientele.
 
I’ll take Bart Starr. 5 in 7 years including an unmatched three straight with wins over two consecutive AFL champs. All without the luxury of rules designed to protect QBs and hamstring defenses including legalized holding in pass protection.
Come on, Roshawn! The Packers were known for one play on offense...the sweep. They ran it constantly. Bart Star isn't even in the conversation of greatest QB's!
QBs called plays back then. Starr threw only 4 int’s all season in 1966.
Starr won five in only seven years. And he had to do it without the aid and protection of rules changes aimed at enhancing offense.
What play did Starr call over and over and over again? The other teams KNEW the Packers were going to run the sweep and they still couldn't stop it! THAT is what made the Packers a dynasty...not Bart Starr's ability at QB!

As for winning Super Bowls? The NFL was SO much better than the AFL at that point it wasn't really even a contest! That's also before the salary cap and free agency made it damn near impossible to keep all of your star players. The Packers were LOADED with Hall of Fame players!
The SB was a vacation. It was winning the NFL that mattered. Five in only seven years including an unmatched three straight and beating Jim Brown. Packers weren’t the only team who kept their players.
If Brady had to play under rules of that era his career would have been over before he won three. No one touched Brady last night. Literally.
Would his career have lasted as long under the previous rules? Probably not. Would Tom Brady have been a far better quarterback than Bart Starr was? It would be night and day. Put Brady on that same Packers team that Starr ran and my guess is they'd go undefeated.
 
I’ll take Bart Starr. 5 in 7 years including an unmatched three straight with wins over two consecutive AFL champs. All without the luxury of rules designed to protect QBs and hamstring defenses including legalized holding in pass protection.
Come on, Roshawn! The Packers were known for one play on offense...the sweep. They ran it constantly. Bart Star isn't even in the conversation of greatest QB's!
QBs called plays back then. Starr threw only 4 int’s all season in 1966.
Starr won five in only seven years. And he had to do it without the aid and protection of rules changes aimed at enhancing offense.
What play did Starr call over and over and over again? The other teams KNEW the Packers were going to run the sweep and they still couldn't stop it! THAT is what made the Packers a dynasty...not Bart Starr's ability at QB!

As for winning Super Bowls? The NFL was SO much better than the AFL at that point it wasn't really even a contest! That's also before the salary cap and free agency made it damn near impossible to keep all of your star players. The Packers were LOADED with Hall of Fame players!
The SB was a vacation. It was winning the NFL that mattered. Five in only seven years including an unmatched three straight and beating Jim Brown. Packers weren’t the only team who kept their players.
If Brady had to play under rules of that era his career would have been over before he won three. No one touched Brady last night. Literally.
Would his career have lasted as long under the previous rules? Probably not. Would Tom Brady have been a far better quarterback than Bart Starr was? It would be night and day. Put Brady on that same Packers team that Starr ran and my guess is they'd go undefeated.
Not when eligibles could not run routes unimpeded and lineman had to block with their wings up. Bradys pocket time would be severely diminished. Completely different game.
 
1612904465517.png


1612904494254.png
 
resting your body is as key as training it...that's one of my philosophies!

worked for Brady

Et1LeHXWYAEF1vv
 

Forum List

Back
Top