Will Tom Brady Become The Greatest...

[lancerman]

1 minute ago, seminoles1 said:

Ali is certainly up there.  Others I'd throw out would be Usain Bolt, Micheal Phelps, Roger Federer, Jack Nicklaus, Steffi Graf, Jesse Owens, and probably a couple more I'm forgetting.

Yes for the purpose of what this thread is talking about, I'm taking individual athletes first. Team sports are more popular. But as good as Jordan, Gretzky and Brady are... I can add a million qualifiers to any of them to say "well they needed this and this".

[seminoles1]

31 minutes ago, DontTazeMeBro said:

He wasn’t even the best tennis player in his prime. Nadal owned him

On 1 surface.  Federer is better on hard courts and grass courts.  Nadal is better on clay.  Almost half of their matches have been played on clay; that's why Nadal leads their head-to-head record so easily.  They were by far the 2 best clay court players so they met in so many clay court finals...but Nadal just happens to be by far the best clay court player of all-time so he beat Federer almost every time.

[Packerraymond]

5 minutes ago, lancerman said:

It depends on what you value as a QB. Rodgers and Manning are nothing alike. Whatsoever. Manning was as or less athletic than Brady for most of his career, Brady right now at 40 and even last year was overall probably more athletic than Manning (or even himself in his prime) was. Manning was also terrible when it came to interceptions. Something not true of Brady/Rodgers/Young. 

You probably couldn't find an elite QB more different than Rodgers than Manning.

And no I wouldn't put either of them over Brady for different reasons. Rodgers and Brady are basically 1A and 1B for stats in the years they both played simultaneously in the league (and that's factoring that Brady's best year was actually before that time frame so his numbers don't get the benefit of that the way Rodgers best year of 2011 does get put into it). 

And if we're being honest, Brady's played in more systems over his careers with more talent turnover than any of the guys mentioned. Especially Manning who his whole time in Indianapolis he had either Harrison or Wayne or both in the exact same system and then when he left he went to the most stacked offense in the league. Manning's far more of a system player than Brady. The one time Manning's system got changed was when Kubiak came in and it was simultaneously the year Manning lost it. Even Rodgers had Jordy his entire career thus far and for the early part of that he had Jennings and for the latter part he had Cobb. And we know how much Jordy meant to that offense. 

Marino's probably the pure best passer of all time, but if you are factoring mobility into your argument, I'll take Brady's ability to move in the pocket over Marino's and Mannings for that matter. 

So it's kind of hard to see where you are going with some of these comparisons. Also as far as arm strength, Brady has enough to get the job done. Jay Cutler has rocket for an arm, I wouldn't call him better than Brady or any of these guys. Arm strength is overrated if you can make the passes and Brady can make the passes. Brady gets a bad rep for being overly careful on deep balls because he would rather lead receivers with it and make them make a play, but he can throw a dime. That scrambling pass last night was as precise and as high risk as you will see them and he played it perfectly

Let's be real, Tom's more or less been in the same system since 2009, which is when his track of playing well enough to be called the GOAT became a consistent occurrence. 2007 was a phenomenal year but we all remember how equally great Moss was that year. Before that Brady wasn't the kind of player that would be named in these conversations even with the 3 SBs. It's his play from 2009 on that's got him here.

Manning and Rodgers are as different as QBs can be, and you're right on Manning turning the ball over a lot (actually a lot more than I recalled looking back at his numbers), I just think you take his arm talent which is right there with Marino mixed with his pre-snap ability to diagnose a defense (something I would say is only rivaled by Brady and Rodgers) and he's one of the best. Marino too.

Rodgers I don't think has quite as good an arm as Manning/Marino when you're talking time in the pocket to step in and drive a throw. Rodgers is so lethal cause the may be the only QB in NFL history that can be as accurate at literally any arm slot and foot placement as he is with a clean pocket. 

I think Brady is one of the smartest, most accurate QBs to ever play the game, and probably the best short to intermediate thrower of the football I've ever seen. Just never been impressed with his ability to drive a deep ball consistently or to extend plays and throw on the run. If I were starting a franchise with a choice of any of these guys I just know I wouldn't choose him 1st, probably somewhere 3-5th. I can call him the most successful QB to ever play the game but I don't think he's the best.

[tom cody]

No, he's the GOAT football player ever but give me Phelps, Gretzky, Pele, Jordan and Ruth over him all time in terms of sports.

[DontTazeMeBro]

7 minutes ago, seminoles1 said:

On 1 surface.  Federer is better on hard courts and grass courts.  Nadal is better on clay.  Almost half of their matches have been played on clay; that's why Nadal leads their head-to-head record so easily.  They were by far the 2 best clay court players so they met in so many clay court finals...but Nadal just happens to be by far the best clay court player of all-time so he beat Federer almost every time.

It’s 11-9 advantage Federer on hard courts. In Grand Slams 3-1 Nadal with Federer getting his first W in 2017. 2-1 Federer at Wimbledon and Nadal probably would’ve won 2007 if he didn’t get hurt. Either way, they were dead even on grass. Which isn’t even that relevant because it’s not a grass sport.

And then in Djokovic you have another player in Federer’s own era that makes have been better 

[DLF54927]

Brady is not even close to Gretzky-level.

99 is from another planet.

[Non-Issue]

Just now, lancerman said:

Yes for the purpose of what this thread is talking about, I'm taking individual athletes first. Team sports are more popular. But as good as Jordan, Gretzky and Brady are... I can add a million qualifiers to any of them to say "well they needed this and this".

Yeah, in this context I just dont think the sport compares favorably. The athletes might. But the sport hampers football players in that it's so team oriented. Even in regards to other team sports, it's very team oriented. Then you add the individual sports and it just falls further behind.

Then, as has been mentioned, this is almost exclusively an american sport. 8 billion people in the world and I bet 80% of them have never seen a football game, much less heard of Tom Brady. I mean, hell... you get outside the US and people all over the world, even kids, know who Pele is. And the dudes career was winding down in the 70's.

I can say if brady wins another SB he goes from the GOAT NFL QB to having a strong argument for greatest football player ever. It would essentially be him and Rice. That would become the new "Brady v Manning" debate.

 

[NJniners]

2 hours ago, lancerman said:

Uggghhh I have a lot of problems with that. For one Phelps is overinflated because his sport has so many different types of meets so he can have a saturated gold metal count. Like Brady would have well over 30 Lombardi trophy's if you had 7 or so chances to win one each year. I don't even think Phelps is the most tramcedent Olympian of his era compared to Bolt. 

And as someone whose spent plenty of time in Marciano's old stomping grounds where he is quite literally canonized, Ali/Lewis were better heavyweights overall. And Sugar Ray Robinson is most probably the best pound for pound fighter ever. Hell Mayweather is up their now too. Ali lost but he lost after being taken out of the game for awhile and it was in what many consider the most competive era of boxing history. 

Though I would say Brady and Ali are very similar when you look at how their careers played out in almost two halves and how after a great start they overcame a lull in the middle to go on arguably the greatest run of their career. 

Messi may not have won a World Cup, but from a domination standpoint, no one has ever given defenses nearly as many problems as him.

Phelps being able to compete in so many different forms of his sport is not his fault. I think hed still be recognized as the greatest Olympian ever even if he only competed in one form of swimming. Hes just that good.

Mayweather, Robinson, and Marciano i hold all higher than Ali. I think Alis personality had so much to do with his greatness. Yes he was one of the greatest. But without his personality, where he would even call himself "The Greatest", i dont think hed be such a consensus #1 like he is to most non-boxing fanatics. I hold Marciano still as the #1, as do a very large amount of people. For the record, i have Mayweather at #2.

 

[lancerman]

6 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Let's be real, Tom's more or less been in the same system since 2009, which is when his track of playing well enough to be called the GOAT became a consistent occurrence. 2007 was a phenomenal year but we all remember how equally great Moss was that year. Before that Brady wasn't the kind of player that would be named in these conversations even with the 3 SBs. It's his play from 2009 on that's got him here.

Manning and Rodgers are as different as QBs can be, and you're right on Manning turning the ball over a lot (actually a lot more than I recalled looking back at his numbers), I just think you take his arm talent which is right there with Marino mixed with his pre-snap ability to diagnose a defense (something I would say is only rivaled by Brady and Rodgers) and he's one of the best. Marino too.

Rodgers I don't think has quite as good an arm as Manning/Marino when you're talking time in the pocket to step in and drive a throw. Rodgers is so lethal cause the may be the only QB in NFL history that can be as accurate at literally any arm slot and foot placement as he is with a clean pocket. 

I think Brady is one of the smartest, most accurate QBs to ever play the game, and probably the best short to intermediate thrower of the football I've ever seen. Just never been impressed with his ability to drive a deep ball consistently or to extend plays and throw on the run. If I were starting a franchise with a choice of any of these guys I just know I wouldn't choose him 1st, probably somewhere 3-5th. I can call him the most successful QB to ever play the game but I don't think he's the best.

Disagree with this. After Brady's third Super Bowl at such a young age he was already viewed as someone who could be the GOAT someday. Even before 2006 you had Marino interviewing him for the 2006 AFCCG basically saying if he won it all here he's maybe the GOAT. Brady was one of the top QB's in the league in 2003 and 2004. And I think he was even the league leader in TD's in 2002. He played excellent in that Super Bowl against the Panthers and was lights out in a lot of those playoff games. 2001 was the only run where he really was more of a system player, but he was more of a high level system player who you could trust to take control in key moments. The debate between Brady and Manning was very apparent well before 2007. There's kind of been a bit of revisionism in that people act like 2001 Brady was the same as 2002-2005 Brady. No by that point he was largely viewed as a top QB in the league and someone who was more of a winner but didn't have the stats because he didn't have the WR's Manning did. And then he affirmed a lot of those presumptions in 2007 when he got Moss and had the best QB year ever up to that point. That was just the validation that "yeah he will get monster stats when you give him the tools, but he can still win without them". 

So no I take great disagreement with 2009 on being the benchmark for Brady's case. It was like that very early in his career. And I would also disagree with 2009 on being relatively the same system. The double TE set with Welker in the slot position was a very different offense than what we've seen from 2014-now. Just like 07-09 were very different. Brady's offense has been arguably the most malleable offense of any great QB ever. Even Montana was pretty much just the WCO, when he got Rice it was just the WCO with Rice in it. When Brady got Moss, they changed the entire offense. 

To your other points. Yes Manning and Rodgers are very different, and I think Manning's turn over numbers are a huge mark against him and a lot of his lack of success as far as winning is in part to that. Manning likely has 3 Super Bowls without that pick six in 09. Manning had to actually revert to being more of a system QB in 06 to win his SB. He really struggled in getting it done as the main feature whenever he went up against physical defenses that could disrupt his timing. He also played in a very simplistic offense. Once you figured it out it was like a variation of the same several plays just disguised a bit. It's just that Manning was smart enough to know when to run each one and he had exceptional timing and exceptional receivers who could execute it. It was just very susceptible to physical defenses and as result he needed to lean on something else when he did win Super Bowl's. 

Just off the top of my head though I'd give Brady this. 

-Best pre snap read along with Manning

-Best pocket presence and in pocket movement I've ever seen. 

-Best short and mid range passer ever (his mid range passes are lightining)

-One of the most efficient QB's ever (Rodgers is the only guy better at this, and a lot of that is because of his number pre 2008)

-Proven to have played in the greatest variety of offensive schemes and with an incredible amount of turnover (Brady's literally won Super Bowls with completely different teams)

The only thing you could say Brady really lacks is scrambling ability. But he's not different than Manning or Marino in that regard. And again Brady's deep ball is more a result of him being one of the most careful QB's ever and he leads a lot of receivers. When he had Moss he had no issues hitting him on a dime in double coverage. Even with Cooks (and Cooks has dropped a few) he has no problem hitting him on a dime. It's just outside those two, he doesn't really have deep threats he trusts the way Manning, Rodgers, and Marino did. But he has shown he can do it, he just is very selective with it. 

Also 4th quarter and down in points, Brady has had some of the most incredible master classes of drives I've ever seen. Ever. Rodgers can sling it, and maybe hit that bomb or hail mary. But when Brady's in that position it's like watching a chess grandmaster. 

 

[lancerman]

17 minutes ago, NJniners said:

Messi may not have won a World Cup, but from a domination standpoint, no one has ever given defenses nearly as many problems as him.

Phelps being able to compete in so many different forms of his sport is not his fault. I think hed still be recognized as the greatest Olympian ever even if he only competed in one form of swimming. Hes just that good.

Mayweather, Robinson, and Marciano i hold all higher than Ali. I think Alis personality had so much to do with his greatness. Yes he was one of the greatest. But without his personality, where he would even call himself "The Greatest", i dont think hed be such a consensus #1 like he is to most non-boxing fanatics. I hold Marciano still as the #1, as do a very large amount of people. For the record, i have Mayweather at #2.

 

Messi's great. I don't know if he's better than Pele or Maradona but they were before my time largely. Again though, team sport. My problem with soccer is my same with hockey. If their goalie gets hot, it doesn't even matter if they are their or not. 

I agree it's not Phelps fault that swimming has more competitions. But Phelps gold medal count is more of a factor of that than anything else. A female gymnast for instance can win medals on 4 apparatus', the all around, and the all around team competition. But I'd argue the 4 apparatus' are significantly different disciplines than the different swim Phelps is in. And I don't think that him higher than Bolt who is just clear cut better than anyone else at his sport an it's very simple to discern that. Not that I don't hold Phelps in high esteem. He is the greatest swimmer ever. But the medal count is more a feature of the sport and it does give him an unfair advantage over other athletes when comparing them across the board. 

Ali's personality has a lot to do with his greatness as far as an iconic figure. But Ali in my estimation was easily the best boxer. Before he got stripped of the title he was massacring guys. A younger Ali was going guys like Liston and Patterson and outright embarrassing them. And Liston is widely regarded as one of the greatest heavyweights ever, he was Foreman before Foreman (and when it comes to Ali we have to talk about Foreman). Then yes he lost to Frazier who is widely regarded as a top 10 heavyweight of all time (and if he didn't lose to Ali twice would probably be a top 5 of all time), but that was after a long layoff and Ali lost a lot of the physical abilities that made him great. He had to rework his game completely and become a much smarter fighter who did more brawling and took more punishment. Early Ali was like Mayweather in that he never got hit even as a heavyweight, later Ali was like a hybrid. Then he won series 2-1 against Frazier, 2-1 against Norton, and beat Foreman who is also a top 10 all time heavyweight. Very few great fighters have as many top 10 heavyweights in their same era and Ali fought 3 of them in Liston/Frazier/Foreman and he's 5-1 against them total. Likewise Larry Holmes who a much older and washed up Ali lost to in his last real competetive bout (and when I say competitive I mean a fight that actually meant something) was also probably a top 10 fighter. 

I give Ali alot of credit for the era he fought in, the fights he fought, and his ability to reinvent himself when he lost the physical abilities that made him a phenom so early in his career. Louis is the only heavyweight I put near him. 

[lancerman]

Fun fact I saw on reddit. Tom Brady is now 17 wins above .500 in the playoffs. No other QB has 17 wins (Joe Montana has the 2nd most wins with 16)

[Hunter2_1]

2 hours ago, HorizontoZenith said:

 

But... Wait a minute... Brady lost a game without his top receivers? 

Lol.  You just tried using Rodgers not scoring more than 20 points when he lost Nelson, Cobb, Adams, Jones and had Abbrederis and Janis as his receivers and then you use 2013 as a good example of how Brady is better when Brady scored only 16 points and he had Edleman and Ammendola?

Okay.  Lolololololololololololoollololololololololololololol

You really need to do something about your Brady-hate. Watch videos with him in children's hospitals or something. 

[LD696]

Do we factor in international recognition too? Because than he has no chance, at all. Looks like most Americans can't fathom how obscure football is to the rest of the world.

I'm from Eastern Europe. I've only known Dan Marino from Ace Ventura and up until I got into football I thought he's a rugby player, because that's how much ish was given about precisely translating football terms in synichronized movies for example. It's a very niche thing around here (even in Germany or Poland, where the sport is more popular, 90+ % of my colleagues or people I've talked to had no idea about it), but Jordan's or Ali's name at least rings a bell for most people.

[mission27]

1 hour ago, Packerraymond said:

Let's be real, Tom's more or less been in the same system since 2009, which is when his track of playing well enough to be called the GOAT became a consistent occurrence.

That's really not true at all tbh.  In what way has he been in the same system since 2009?  What is the system? 

Offensive Coordinator: Since 2007 Brady has gone from Josh McDaniels, to a few years without an official offensive coordinator when Belichick was even calling some plays, to Bill O'Brien, and back to McDaniels.  He'll probably have another OC next season.  

Formations: He's had years where he is almost always under center and years where he is in shotgun most of the time.  Some years the offense runs through the tight ends, or the running backs coming out of the backfield.  Some years they run almost exclusively 4 and 5 wide and spread the ball around to a bunch of different receivers. 

Approach: Some years he's almost never run the no-huddle and they actively chew clock from the kickoff to the end of the game.  At least one year he was in the no-huddle practically every drive of the season.  Sometimes the offense is centered around short to medium range passing.  Sometimes the offense is centered around running the ball and setting up play action medium to deep routes.  

Personnel: He's put up big numbers with all-time great receivers and with lesser talents.  He's had four leading receivers (Moss, Welker, Edelman, Gronk) over 10 years and that doesn't count Deion Branch and Brandin Cooks who were his number one targets for long stretches as well.  He's thrown a touchdown to almost 70 different receivers over his career.  

And this stuff doesn't just change year to year.  It changes week to week.  The one common denominator is Brady.  The only thing consistent about the Patriots offensive 'system' over the past 10 years has been inconsistency and Brady consistently adapting to that inconsistency.  And that's the point.  Brady is asked to evolve every year and every week and run a new system specifically designed to emphasize the strengths of his teammates and attack the other team's biggest weaknesses.  

Brady's offense... like Brady's workout routine... is all about pliability. 

A guy like Manning, like most great QBs, had a recipe that he stuck to for a decade in Indy.  He ran the same system, same plays, same formations, with the same receivers for almost his entire career.  Then he went to Denver and ran the same thing there, with 4-5 pro bowl caliber targets.  It usually worked and allowed him to put up some insane numbers and win a lot but when he ran into a team that knew how to stop that offense and had the players to do it, he was beatable

If there's one thing Brady had done well over his career and allowed him to win as much as he has, its evolve over and over again to fit the weapons around him, the strengths and weaknesses of his opponents, and even the quality of his own defense.  I think that is what people will remember about him in 20-30 years.  That and his cool, calm, collected demeanor in the big spots. 

In short... @Packerraymond whispers to the warrior "you have run the same system since 2009."  The warrior whispers back "I am the system." 

[sunnygsm]

No. That's silly and undermines the careers of many athletes.