Well, not sure if I learned anything here..... Ryan was 28-3 away from making it 9 Super Bowl winning QB's the last 9 years. Ryan Peyton Brady Russ Flacco Eli Rodgers Brees Ben But now it's 8 QB's in 9 years as Brady came back. Ryan had an unbelievable year, and a perfect passer rating midway thru the 4th, and honestly, after the Julio catch, a FG was there for them. That's a haunting loss. Brady has pretty much ended all debate, ever as to greatest QB career in NFL history. He has all the postseason records, all the SB records, ton of regular season numbers (and still counting) wins, variations of offenses around him, everything. If he plays 2-3-4 more years, Jesus at what his total numbers are gonna look like. :x
I can't stand the Pats, but I have to respect their greatness as a franchise and Brady is GOAT over my previous GOAT Montana.
Brady has finally proven that he can win without cheating. If he can give me another two or three clean rings, I'll gladly put him in my top 5.
Matt Ryan threw for more yards per attempt, higher completion percentage, fewer interceptions, and a higher QB rating by 50 points, same amount of sacks as Brady, and lost. Sheesh.
On the Edelman catch, which Falcon should have had that, the first tip? Anyone have a still of it?????
Yup, watchin it now. 2:25, ball hits BOTH hands of the DB, somehow miraculously caught by Edelman. That was a pick by Brady, that wasn't picked. SB MVP. Crazy. QB is everything tho.
I wonder how much gratitude Belichick has towards Brady? A sub par coaching record to 11 AFC Championship games,7 Super Bowls, 5 Super Bowl Championships with one guy. To the world you may be one person but you may mean the world to one person.
The quote is a good one, but it absolutely does not apply in this situation. I am not a Tom Brady fan, in spite of his parents living down the street from me......but you can bet your *** that Tom Brady is not viewed as just one person to the world.
Two different lists. All of the teams, that over the years have climbed all over one another to draft a QB early cuz "gotta have a franchise quarterback" and then a list of QB's that were taken mid to late first round, and the rounds beyond. (or supp drafts) The irony I find, of thee most successful of the Top picks, Elway and Peyton, 3 of their 4 Super Bowls came at the end of their careers, when they were no longer franchise QB's. Elway winning his at 37-38 with TD doin the work, and Peyton his last year with that defense. Aikman and Eli, clearly did not win their SB's on their own, tho they didn't hurt their teams either. They did what you ask of the position, be steady, be smart, don't turn the ball over, let the other guys do their jobs. Just from glancing over the lists, it certainly seems like the better path is taking QB's later than the Top 10, no? The all important, gotta have position, trade anything and everything to get one, yet, history seems to show that you're better off balancing your team, and adding the QB later, and let them succeed that way. This isn't a be all end all, it's just some homework I did and split the list out a lil bit and tried to see if there was anything that stood out. I'm sure I probably forgot a couple QB's over the years that could go on either list, but these seem to be the main ones worth going over. Nothin to discuss, just postin it in here for safe keeping.
^ yeah that point is well taken. can't sacrifice the balance of the team for what people think is the only focal point. getting a franchise guy is great, but sacrificing everything for him rarely works.
Young and Kozar were high 1st round picks relatively. Also the 2nd list is deceptive or incomplete because it's picks the best quarterbacks and ignores the busts while the 1st list includes them.
@CP1708 bottom line is, drafting QBs is a crapshoot. However, if you want better odds of your QB not busting, then draft him in the 1st or 2nd rounds. Drafting a QB any later than that and him turning out to be a franchise QB has about the same odds of winning the Powerball.
What the hell is a 2nd, 3rd, 4th round bust? Deceptive. The list is right in your face. Pretty obviously, the second list has the better QB's thru history, all taken outside the Top 10 of the NFL draft since that position became the be all end all it's claimed to be. You could go thru the 70's if you want and try to adjust the settings, but it really isn't gonna change anything given how much of a run heavy era those QB's played, not to mention someone like Bradshaw having Franco Harris, and the steel curtain as pretty solid reasons for his success. He certainly wouldn't add much in the passing acumen compared to the QB's of the last 30 years. You get picked in the Top 10 of the NFL Draft, you're supposed to be the face of the franchise, a "franchise" QB, etc. You get picked in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th round as a QB, you aren't supposed to be ****. Go name all the "busts" you want, doesn't change the top of either list, and it's pretty damn clear which one is better. "relatively" Dude talkin about deceptive, but wants to include Young and Kosar as "relatively" high first round picks.
Sigh Who said anything specifically about 2nd, 3rd etc round busts? Theres busts outside the top 10...you know. Is it fine that Christian Ponder was a bust because he was picked at 12 instead at 8 like Jake Locker? Are the Browns totally cool with Manizel being a junkie because he was picked outside of top 10? Do you think the 49ers were happy that they got no production from Carmazzi because he was a 3rd especially when Tom Brady was still available? McNown, McGwire, Marnovich, Manuel, Freeman, Boller, Druckenmiller, Quinn, Weeden, Pat White and Nagle are all ok because they were werent top 10 picks. And Steve Young was "relatively" high pick, he was picked 1st in 1984 Supplemental Draft of USFL and CFL players. I mean he was picked ahead of 2 HOFers....Reggie White and Gary Zimmerman. If there was no USFL at that time, its pretty safe to say Steve Young would been picked in top 10. Kozar situation is explained here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Kosar You cant tell me he wouldnt have been a top 10 pick in the regular draft. He named 40 of 51 quarterbacks drafted in the top 10 since 1979. He named 29 of 456 quarterbacks drafted outside of top 10 not including Free agents. Im not that good at math but I know 456 (not including free agents) is much larger pool than 51. Basically like the guy above said drafting a quarterback or any position is a crapshoot but when you draft outside the 1st round its even more of a crapshoot.
i think that's the point. it's a crapshoot. so don't trip over yourself to jump up and take a guy early
30% of Super bowl winners were the 1st pick in the draft and 56% were 1st rounders I see both sides but it's statistically easier to hit on a great quarterback and a win a Super Bowl than it is to build up a roster good enough to overcome a mediocre one in the salary cap era
If that was his point. it was all over the place because he included quarterbacks whose teams didn't have to jump up and to take them.