Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
mdonnelly21

How does this SB effect Tom Brady's status of all time?

...  

105 members have voted

  1. 1. How did this SB Effect Tom Brady's Status

    • It was a surplus to his career by a lot
      13
    • It was surplus to his career by a little
      32
    • It did not help or hurt
      46
    • It hurt his career
      15


Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, childofpudding said:

Thanks for the clip, I had not yet seen the All-22, so I just assumed the quarters. I still disagree, though. Looks like Brady's 3-step hitch is plenty of time for Gronk's post route to develop, but the coverage underneath was softer than he expected, as the two slot DBs moved back as Brady finished his drop. Seems pretty clear from that clip that his first read is to Gronkowski or Hogan, and by the time he moves off that it's too late.

I will say this. Considering PHI's coverage on the 1st down, Brady could have read the Cover 4 and changed his 1st read to White in the flat. Two plays is admittedly a very small sample size, but it looked like PHI was gearing up to either make a RZ stand, try to jump a route later in the drive, or hope beyond hope that one of their DL would make a game-changing play after being held in check for most of the game. Third option happened.

When a QB gets sacked in 2.8 seconds and it wasn't a free rush at the passer, ie. a missed protection pickup, that's rarely the QB's fault. Tip your hat to Graham and move on.

Gronk ran the deep Dag, Hogan ran the Post.

A typical deep vertical stem route b/w 12-15 yards (post, corner, dig, dag, curl, or comeback) which were the strongside patterns are timed with a 5 step drop. That wasn't the case as Gronk wasn't even into his break before Brady finished his drop, he was attempting to climb the pocket and was trying to buy time that wasn't there.

 

Also of note, 2.8 seconds is a decent amount of time for the development of shallow routes, especially from the gun. A QB ideally makes his decision within 1.5 seconds, and the ball should be out by 2 to 2.5 seconds in those cases. A case in which we have seen here.

Edited by Carmen Cygni

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/11/2018 at 4:59 AM, GongKong said:

Dan Marino best QB of his era.  Was better than Montana,  Elway, Simms, and even other QB of his era. 

Played on a team that wasn't as good as SF which was a dynasty level team with HOFers all over it. 

Yup. Dan Marino. How bout them apples?

Brady in this era has been unbelievable.  8 super bowls, 5 championships, epic stats. I always thought manning was better but no one has been as good as Brady in this era. It's other worldly what he has accomplished.

And personally, I think it's impossible to compare across eras. Game and rules change and that matters. Also huge amount of RECENCY bias in judging now vs then. Back them couldn't watch non market games. No direct tv. Couldn't watch all the highlights as cable and ESPN not there or new to market. Sports page is where you saw much non market teams.  Just different era. Different fan experience.

Just my two cents. I still say Marino. Said it back then, say it now for that era. Brady this era and it isn't even close anymore.

 

current eras also have distinct disadvantage for the QBs. 

IMO most football forums always overlook the mental aspect of the game.  IMO it takes much more mental toll today then in the past.  more media coverage, more scrutiny, and more eyes on the QB then ever before. the game used to be simple.  but now there is so much pressure to win than ever before.  i firmly believe half of the failed QBs in recent memory all failed because they weren't ready above the shoulder on and off the field.  i'm not saying past players didnt feel the mental pressure, but maybe life in general were simple enough that it was much easier to tune out the noise. 

also another thing that nobody mentions - QB is a game of processing speed more than anything else.  QBs have to process more on the field. bigger playbook, faster game speed, and more complex defense is making the game more complicated than ever before.  there are more game tapes to study. it's much easier access these tapes too.  that's why IMO, QBs will continue get smarter.  not necessarily bigger and faster, but smarter.  

  IMO today's game is easier yet harder for the QB. i don't know if that make any sense, but that's how it feels sometimes.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Wolverine_Joe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Carmen Cygni said:

Gronk ran the deep Dag, Hogan ran the Post.

A typical deep vertical stem route b/w 12-15 yards (post, corner, dig, dag, curl, or comeback) which were the strongside patterns are timed with a 5 step drop. That wasn't the case as Gronk wasn't even into his break before Brady finished his drop, he was attempting to climb the pocket and was trying to buy time that wasn't there.

 

Also of note, 2.8 seconds is a decent amount of time for the development of shallow routes, especially from the gun. A QB ideally makes his decision within 1.5 seconds, and the ball should be out by 2 to 2.5 seconds in those cases. A case in which we have seen here.

Yeah, my bad on the Gronk route. I've honestly never heard the term dag route, I'd just call it a shallow corner. Point still stands. If Brady finishes his drop, steps forward and throws, Gronk would be at or near the sideline by the time the ball got to him. Shotgun snap with 3-step drop allows enough time for that. The whole point is that his first read wasn't the shallow route. Maybe it should have been but he was expecting the opening to be behind the LB and slot DBs and it wasn't. 2.8 seconds isn't much time to do read progressions.

STILL, even if you want to give him some blame for that play, which I'm fine with, it doesn't significantly negate my point. He still threw for 505 yards and the offense scored 33 points (37 minus the ST miscues) against the #4 defense that allowed 18ppg in the regular season and 17 combined vs. ATL and MIN. If you think that game hurts his legacy, you're fooling yourself.

Edited by childofpudding

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, childofpudding said:

Yeah, my bad on the Gronk route. I've honestly never heard the term dag route, I'd just call it a shallow corner. Point still stands. If Brady finishes his drop, steps forward and throws, Gronk would be at or near the sideline by the time the ball got to him. Shotgun snap with 3-step drop allows enough time for that. The whole point is that his first read wasn't the shallow route. Maybe it should have been but he was expecting the opening to be behind the LB and slot DBs and it wasn't. 2.8 seconds isn't much time to do read progressions.

STILL, even if you want to give him some blame for that play, which I'm fine with, it doesn't significantly negate my point. He still threw for 505 yards and the offense scored 33 points (37 minus the ST miscues) against the #4 defense.

Dig is a horizontal in-breaking route (Down and In), Dag is a horizontal out-breaking route (Down and Out), the auditory appeal of what could be Dog for a possible Down and Out is the term already used for LB's.

Gronk doesn't run a corner route there but rather a Dag that leverages with a slightly more diagonal flattening due to the perimeter CB taking the #1 post inside and he's looking to eat up more ground.

From a presnap read, the 5 yd Dig was not the primary read, but Brady's progression should have immediately been drawn underneath as the Mike drifted away from the shallow part of the MOF in his attempt to wall the #2 (Gronk).

2.8 seconds is plenty of time to go thru progressions. A QB begins those progressions as he begins to drop and ID the defense postnsap, one doesn't start a progression read when he finishes his drop.

In fact vs Quarters coverage the best way to beat it is quick passing in a Levels or a Drive concept which the Patriots ran there. Although it is a Hi-Low progression read, it's purpose is to stress the Mike (or MILB in a 3-4) with the #1 receiver running a deep vertical route up field, the #2 receiver will run a 12-15 yard Dag with a little bit of bend or stutter step to the middle of the field (which Gronk did) before cutting outside to try and hold the safety, then the #3 receiver (usually the RB or wing back) will run a flat, swing, or slip to draw the OLB or slot CB to the flats. You can also tag a shallow backside route (which was run by the weakside #2/Amendola) for an additional quick game passing concept in short yardage situations.

Edited by Carmen Cygni

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Carmen Cygni said:

Dig is a horizontal in-breaking route (Down and In), Dag is a horizontal out-breaking route (Down and Out), the auditory appeal of what could be Dog for a possible Down and Out is the term already used for LB's.

Gronk doesn't run a corner route there but rather a Dag that leverages with a slightly more diagonal flattening due to the perimeter CB taking the #1 post inside and he's looking to eat up more ground.

From a presnap read, the 5 yd Dig was not the primary read, but Brady's progression should have immediately been drawn underneath as the Mike drifted away from the shallow part of the MOF in his attempt to wall the #2 (Gronk).

2.8 seconds is plenty of time to go thru progressions. A QB begins those progressions as he begins to drop and ID the defense postnsap, one doesn't start a progression read when he finishes his drop.

In fact vs Quarters coverage the best way to beat it is quick passing in a Levels or a Drive concept which the Patriots ran there. Although it is a Hi-Low progression read, it's purpose is to stress the Mike (or MILB in a 3-4) with the #1 receiver running a deep vertical route up field, the #2 receiver will run a 12-15 yard Dag with a little bit of bend or stutter step to the middle of the field (which Gronk did) before cutting outside to try and hold the safety, then the #3 receiver (usually the RB or wing back) will run a flat, swing, or slip to draw the OLB or slot CB to the flats. You can also tag a shallow backside route (which was run by the weakside #2/Amendola) for an additional quick game passing concept in short yardage situations.

Ok. Patriots offense doing enough to put up 37 pts against the #4 defense. What does that mean to you? Anything?

Only legacy that might have taken a hit from that game was Belichick's. Fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, childofpudding said:

Ok. Patriots offense doing enough to put up 37 pts against the #4 defense. What does that mean to you? Anything?

Only legacy that might have taken a hit from that game was Belichick's. Fact.

That's fine. I was just enjoying the breakdown of a single play and pointing out that Brady did in fact have the time to make a proper read and throw (x2) within the time he was given

Edited by Carmen Cygni

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/11/2018 at 8:59 PM, GongKong said:

Dan Marino best QB of his era.  Was better than Montana,  Elway, Simms, and even other QB of his era. 

Played on a team that wasn't as good as SF which was a dynasty level team with HOFers all over it. 

Yup. Dan Marino. How bout them apples?

Brady in this era has been unbelievable.  8 super bowls, 5 championships, epic stats. I always thought manning was better but no one has been as good as Brady in this era. It's other worldly what he has accomplished.

And personally, I think it's impossible to compare across eras. Game and rules change and that matters. Also huge amount of RECENCY bias in judging now vs then. Back them couldn't watch non market games. No direct tv. Couldn't watch all the highlights as cable and ESPN not there or new to market. Sports page is where you saw much non market teams.  Just different era. Different fan experience.

Just my two cents. I still say Marino. Said it back then, say it now for that era. Brady this era and it isn't even close anymore.

I can get behind Marino, as I too think he was the most talented of his era. However regarding Montana, not sure I'd agree that he played on teams with HOF players "all over it". Rice, Lott, Haley, and Dean are in the HOF from that era. If you include Young as a backup, fine. No one else. 49ers rosters usually had good players though, and in the 80's they were a better squad than Miami most years while playing in the better conference. 

Edited by PapaShogun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aaaaaah- useless stiff exposed who would be nothing more than a backup on any team without the Belichick System.

Won 5 Super Bowls- big whoop. That could have been 6 or 7 if he had the guts God gave a lazy coon hound.

Dropped vital pass that I could have caught in my athletic supporter. I was a pretty good halfback in the 6th grade myself, I ever tell you that?

Too tall, too good looking, girlfriend way too beautiful. It's not fair. Nothing is, really, if you think about it. God. Brady's what, like 6-4? I stopped growing at 5-9 (I guess really 5-7 and a half in my sock feet). Why is it always the tall guys???

HEALTH foods. Yeah right. Anybody ever teach ME about nutrition??? You're darned right they didn't! What'd have for breakfast? Stinkin' Cocoa Puffs, every day, for my first twenty-five years. Aaaaah- I bet all this hoo-ha about rice and seaweed and Quinoa is all fake anyways. Betcha Brady eats bacon and eggs and stuff like everybody else, if he told the truth. How come they pronounce it "Keen-Wahh" anyway, steada Quin-Owa?

Played into his forties. Whoop-te-doo. Hey, would still be playing, if I had, you know, Gronkowski and Randy Moss and all them guys to throw to, and this whole big SYSTEM and support network around me, and and- that time I got cut during try-outs for theJV's? That was totally unfair of them, and if I'd just had a little bit of love and support growing up, I coulda been something myself....... how come some guys end up with everything??

Also, New England- wouldn't you know? They've got, what, the Red Sox, and the Celtics, and the freakin' Boston Bruins, fer cripes' sakes- you ever notice how every freakin' year some team from BAHHHHHH-STUNNNN wins a championship? Everybody talks weird up there, anyway. Chowdah. I get it. What's wrong with Toledo, anyway? We're okay! My parents didn't like me, I can tell you that.

So, Brady. What's he get, like eighty million dollars a year? You think that's fair? You think that's right? You think they couldn't give some of that to a guy who has to bag groceries all day, while still being forced to wear a bow tie in this day and age? Hey, I do my job!

Ever notice how Brady almost never blocks or tackles anyone? Hunh? That's how I hurt my knee that time. We always had to block, playing Flag Football, I remember that. 

How come they always show him grinning like that? The Big Bum. If he'd had to go through what I went through................

Oh, hey, and what's all this about GOAT, anyway? Every time I read that, I think, you know, ba-a-a-aahhhh, like, I mean, a goat on a farm. Stupid acronyms. I asked Betsy Kettleman to go to the Prom with me, but no-o-o, she went with BRA-A-ADY, instead........... actually, his name was Ted Putzleman, now that I think of it...... the QUARTERBACK of our team of COURSE! 

So, Brady. 5 Super Bowls. Money. Fame. Tall. Handsome. Hot wife. I don't want to hear it!! There IS no justice. Who cares?

Life stinks, and then you die.

Image result for Tom Brady

Edited by bzane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Carmen Cygni said:

That's fine. I was just enjoying the breakdown of a single play and pointing out that Brady did in fact have the time to make a proper read and throw (x2) within the time he was given

That's debatable, as we've demonstrated by debating it. Average time to sack is about 4.3 seconds and that was 2.8 seconds. I do see your point of view, though. I don't mind giving some blame to Brady on that play, but most of the blame goes to Mason for getting steamrolled.  And, of course, credit to Graham.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, childofpudding said:

That's debatable, as we've demonstrated by debating it. Average time to sack is about 4.3 seconds and that was 2.8 seconds. I do see your point of view, though. I don't mind giving some blame to Brady on that play, but most of the blame goes to Mason for getting steamrolled.  And, of course, credit to Graham.

4.3 seconds is an eternity in an NFL the pocket. Where did you dig that number from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a graphic also shown in there that shows the amount of sacks at each time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



×