Irish Times Article on the Superbowl by Brian O'Connor

poldebruin

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

Oh no look at you trying to make me look silly good man.

Not at all - just messing.

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

But yes I am a hypocrite in this case as Most Non Pats on here always nitpick Pats fans and bring up ridiculous points. And when the argument doesn't go their way they use the good old lines "typical Pats fan".Small minority of those who don't. Ask yourself why a lot of the long time Pats fans posters in here don't post as often as they did in the past. I use other teams forums and you get less of it there than you do here.

I haven't been on the forum long enough to have seen or comment on that - if it is the case it seems a shame that they would have stopped posting because of it.

poldebruin

Dodge wrote: »

For the record some Pats fans here ARE pretty precious about criticisms of their team

But as I said earlier, anyone who denies Brady is one of the best QBs of all time must be compeltley bitter about something

I think the opposition was just a response to the "to consider him top 10 is laughable". I think you could make an argument that he is not top 10 without assuming someone to be bitter. I have seen Otto Graham named no. 1 on many such lists, and omitted altogether on others. That is an example of the futility of arguing too hard for anyone's inclusion or exclusion.

(I would have him in a top 10 easily)

matthew8

You said without facts that Favre was better and used the above as one of your arguments.

matthew8 wrote: »

All time, absolutely. More MVPs, pro bowls, 30k more yards, 200 more TDs.

So every time you saw Brady you form an opinion on him. If you have failed to watch him any other time where he was excellent good or better and then you try convince us he is not as good as other guys this to me smacks of you saying he is not good in your eyes. How else can we take it in the context of the conversation if you admit everytime you saw him he was bad. So you are either trying to form your own opinion on what others say and balancing it with what you see which in this case wasn't a lot.

I was saying that to refute the claim that I was bitter about how good Tom Brady was. How could I be bitter about a player playing badly against my team?

bruschi

matthew8 wrote: »

I said that I prefer him to Brady, and the reason I prefer him to Brady is his longevity and the amount of records he holds. I'm not going to argue with the Patriots fans anymore, because they, of all people, think that my rating of Brady is biased by bitterness (I'm thankful that Brady rarely looks like a great against the Ravens, not bitter) and they are the objective ones.

to be honest, I thought most of the people responding were not Pats fans. Maybe I'm wrong, but poledebruin, adrian, dodge, davyjose, D3PO, frostie, chucky are not Patriots fans. (please correct me if I am wrong guys, hard to remember everyones team on here)

Personally, I didnt bother responding because it was a ridicuolus statement and there was enough already saying as much and nobody at all in agreement with it.

matthew8

bruschi wrote: »

to be honest, I thought most of the people responding were not Pats fans. Maybe I'm wrong, but poledebruin, adrian, dodge, davyjose, D3PO, frostie, chucky are not Patriots fans. (please correct me if I am wrong guys, hard to remember everyones team on here)

Personally, I didnt bother responding because it was a ridicuolus statement and there was enough already saying as much and nobody at all in agreement with it.

I meant I wouldn't argue with the Patriots fans' posts. As for nobody at all agreeing, Dohnny Jepp seems to have thanked my post. Do you believe that was sarcastic?

bruschi

matthew8 wrote: »

I meant I wouldn't argue with the Patriots fans' posts. As for nobody at all agreeing, Dohnny Jepp seems to have thanked my post. Do you believe that was sarcastic?

couldnt care less to be honest. Still think its a ridiculous claim to make.

D3PO

matthew8 wrote: »

I said that I prefer him to Brady, and the reason I prefer him to Brady is his longevity and the amount of records he holds. I'm not going to argue with the Patriots fans anymore, because they, of all people, think that my rating of Brady is biased by bitterness (I'm thankful that Brady rarely looks like a great against the Ravens, not bitter) and they are the objective ones.

Im not a Pats fan but seriously your talking through your hole.

When the f**k did records make you a good player ?

Besides which Bradys "records" are far better than Farves anyway


Put Manning, Brady, Rodgers or Brees playing 21 NFL seasons and they all make Farves "records" look pedrestrian except perhaps his Interception record

Gronkosaurus

Dodge wrote: »

For the record some Pats fans here ARE pretty precious about criticisms of their team

I think this season, we Pats fans have been the most critical about our team to be honest! The weekly game threads back that up.

matthew8

Gronkosaurus wrote: »

I think this season, we Pats fans have been the most critical about our team to be honest! The weekly game threads back that up.

I think that their reputation is one of being very confrontational and reactive.

Besides which Bradys "records" are far better than Farves anyway

Which ones?

Put Manning, Brady, Rodgers or Brees playing 21 NFL seasons and they all make Farves "records" look pedrestrian except perhaps his Interception record

Sure, but there's absolutely no way that they are able to last as long as Favre.

When the f**k did records make you a good player ?

I never thought this was disputed to be honest. Explain more.

tallaghtoutlaws

Gronkosaurus wrote: »

I think this season, we Pats fans have been the most critical about our team to be honest! The weekly game threads back that up.

Definitely but even when we are critical we take flak from a large contingent of non Pats fans. Or we get called sensitive when we defend the Pats. I remember knocking a certain team once and got lambasted for what I said about the team even though the facts didnt lie. And 2 guys on here who support said team got "sensitive" over it but you didn't see me throwing that out there making a point to call them sensitive or give them sh1t for defending the team they support. Its natural if you are passionate about a team in any sport to come to its defense and this season easily 90% of all the Pats fans have criticised their the team.

Dodge

I love the fact that 2 Pats fans are defending the fact they're not sensitive, by arguing

tallaghtoutlaws

Dodge wrote: »

I love the fact that 2 Pats fans are defending the fact they're not sensitive, by arguing

And this sums up what I was talking about above no matter how many smileys you put after it. I am a very opinionated person and who I support has nothing to do with that. And I know the other 2 lads who always get targeted are as well. It just happens we are Pats fans. I am also an arrogant pr1ck and the team I support doesnt make me that way. Sad that so many feel the need to associate the 2.

Dodge

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

. I am also an arrogant pr1ck

So is the other guy.

So you agree that people are right to call you out on this?

D3PO

matthew8 wrote: »

I
Sure, but there's absolutely no way that they are able to last as long as Favre.

.

And your point is ? Your arguing that Farve is great becasue of these records. Just becasue you get to play for a long time doesnt make you great it just means your better than your backup.

tallaghtoutlaws

Dodge wrote: »

So is the other guy.

:rolleyes:

So you agree that people are right to call you out on this?

No because it has nothing to do with the team I support. The problem is when I post about the Pats on here people confuse my arrogance and passion for the Pats as the same thing. So when I actually knock the Pats or say something good about the Pats I am labelled as Arrogant Pats fan when in fact I am an arrogant person who just happens to follow the Pats. So it doesn't give people justification to tar all Pats fans as arrogant. My arrogance carries through every post I make regardless of topic. So to use the "Pats" as the reason if ridiculous at best.

matthew8

D3PO wrote: »

And your point is ? Your arguing that Farve is great becasue of these records. Just becasue you get to play for a long time doesnt make you great it just means your better than your backup.

Playing for so long contributes to greatness. Ray Lewis wouldn't be in my top 50 players if he hadn't lasted this long, nor would Favre. If you play for so long it's an indicator of good health which contributes to how good a player you are. And it's not like Favre (and Lewis) haven't taken a lot of hits over their long careers.

tallaghtoutlaws

matthew8 wrote: »

Playing for so long contributes to greatness. Ray Lewis wouldn't be in my top 50 players if he hadn't lasted this long, nor would Favre. If you play for so long it's an indicator of good health which contributes to how good a player you are. And it's not like Favre (and Lewis) haven't taken a lot of hits over their long careers.

Ah here now length of time playing has nothing to do with greatness. Jeff Garcia played until 40 does this make him great also?

matthew8

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

Ah here now length of time playing has nothing to do with greatness. Jeff Garcia played until 40 does this make him great also?

You obviously have to play to a high standard for it to matter, but surely you must accept the difference between keeping your franchise going strong for 15 years and keeping it strong for 10 years.

FreeOSCAR

As a Jets fan I find the majority of Patriots fans (the big posters anyways) on here to post fairly decent againts Rivals/Other teams. Their were plenty of times this year were they could have gloated or pissed more on what the Jets season was but they didnt.

I have noticed people love to get sly digs in against the Patriots though whenever they can but this can be attributed to the fact they have the biggest userbase on here and because they have been so successfull over the past decade.
On the other side I have come accross other Pats supports in Pubs and the International Series game last year who openly called me a Jets "arsehole" and saying stuff like Jets suck. Fair enough you think that but keep your opinion to yourselves like.
I'm debating whether to wear a Jersey at all out on Sunday night because I'll be surrounded by wasted Giants and Pats fans.

Ramblings aside what Im trying to get accross is that the Patriots fans on here are really not that bad, unlike on some Soccer threads were people constantly mock the defeat of the other teams and infractions ensue soon after.

FWIW I hope that the Giants win on Sunday. I think I will be less bitter about that in the long run.

tallaghtoutlaws

matthew8 wrote: »

You obviously have to play to a high standard for it to matter, but surely you must accept the difference between keeping your franchise going strong for 15 years and keeping it strong for 10 years.

I commend Favre being a Favre fan for lasting as long as he did but the Packers had a few bad and average seasons even with Favre under Centre. But even then even then I find it ironic that you say Super Bowls are won by a team and not the QB and then you would make a claim like Favre Kept the Packers going strong for 15 years as one of your reasons why he is better than Brady. Using season records to prove Brett Favres worth over Tom Brady is stupid. but if you want to go down that road. Tom Brady has had all winning season in his 9 seasons and Favre has had 12 winning seasons 1 losing season and 2 .500 seasons. So using that logic we can say that 3 Super Bowl wins and 5 total appearances and all his records trump Favres 1 win and 2 appearances. You can't have your cake and eat it to be honest.

poldebruin

D3PO wrote: »

Just becasue you get to play for a long time doesnt make you great it just means your better than your backup.

you can't really believe that though (surely?). To survive in the NFL you have to be better than the 32+ backup qbs in the league and better than every qb that comes out of college, every year for 19 years. When there is a better option (as Favre found out all too well) teams move on.

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

Ah here now length of time playing has nothing to do with greatness. Jeff Garcia played until 40 does this make him great also?

I don't think playing for a long time in isolation makes for greatness, and I don't think that is what's being argued. It is certainly high on my list when I think about what contributes to a players greatness. To be able to consistently have your team win (whilst being a major factor in it) over 19 years is a great achievement.

There are cases where a player can have such an impact, or such a standout season or two that despite shortness of a career they could still be considered great - Gale Sayers, Don Hutson, who someone else pointed at as possibly the greatest ever, only played 100 or so games.

matthew8

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

I commend Favre being a Favre fan for lasting as long as he did but the Packers had a few bad and average seasons even with Favre under Centre. But even then even then I find it ironic that you say Super Bowls are won by a team and not the QB and then you would make a claim like Favre Kept the Packers going strong for 15 years as one of your reasons why he is better than Brady. Using season records to prove Brett Favres worth over Tom Brady is stupid. but if you want to go down that road. Tom Brady has had all winning season in his 9 seasons and Favre has had 12 winning seasons 1 losing season and 2 .500 seasons. So using that logic we can say that 3 Super Bowl wins and 5 total appearances and all his records trump Favres 1 win and 2 appearances. You can't have your cake and eat it to be honest.

QBs can keep teams going strong in the regular season by their own, but when it comes to the playoffs just a QB won't cut it, as Rodgers and Brees found out. Brady has also found it out over the years.

Dodge

This thread has gotten far too personal. Apologies for my part in it

jack presley

Another NFL article in the Times today. At least they had the sense this time to copy a Denver Post article instead of having one of their own write it

adrian522

There was one about concussions in the Times yesterday (copy from NY Times I think)

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2012/0201/1224311046702.html

tallaghtoutlaws

matthew8 wrote: »

QBs can keep teams going strong in the regular season by their own, but when it comes to the playoffs just a QB won't cut it, as Rodgers and Brees found out. Brady has also found it out over the years.

This has no relevance to your argument though. Either you can commend QBs for every single win or you can't. One mintue you are saying QBs cant get credit in arguments for Super Bowl wins as its a team sport next minute you are saying Favre has kept Green Bay going longer even though they are the same thing. The team decides the season with the help of the quality of the QB and this includes Favre, Brady, Rodgers etc etc.

But I love the fact you ignored the facts about Favre and the 15 year thing and choose not to debate it because it wont bolster your argument. Favre was a great QB but the Packers werent always succesful with him there as I said in my previous post. So if you are going to use that you have failed to prove anything and in fact make a better case for Brady who has done more than Favre in less years by your own logic.

D3PO

matthew8 wrote: »

Playing for so long contributes to greatness. Ray Lewis wouldn't be in my top 50 players if he hadn't lasted this long, nor would Favre. If you play for so long it's an indicator of good health which contributes to how good a player you are. And it's not like Favre (and Lewis) haven't taken a lot of hits over their long careers.

so Vinny Testaverde, Jeff Garcia and Kurt Warner amongst others must all be better than Brady so :rolleyes:

jack presley

D3PO wrote: »

matthew8 wrote: »

Playing for so long contributes to greatness. Ray Lewis wouldn't be in my top 50 players if he hadn't lasted this long, nor would Favre. If you play for so long it's an indicator of good health which contributes to how good a player you are. And it's not like Favre (and Lewis) haven't taken a lot of hits over their long careers.

so Vinny Testaverde, Jeff Garcia and Kurt Warner amongst others must all be better than Brady so :rolleyes:

Morten Anderson - the greatest player ever!

tallaghtoutlaws

jack presley wrote: »

Morten Anderson - the greatest player ever!

Legend he is. I heard the renamed his home town in Denmark after him

bruschi

matthew8 wrote: »

QBs can keep teams going strong in the regular season by their own, but when it comes to the playoffs just a QB won't cut it, as Rodgers and Brees found out. Brady has also found it out over the years.

sorry, I am getting highly confused here now again.

what reasons do you have for not considering Brady one of the top 10 players of all time, but yet consider others like Manning, Favre, Lewis are in your top 10 considerations?

matthew8

This has no relevance to your argument though. Either you can commend QBs for every single win or you can't. One mintue you are saying QBs cant get credit in arguments for Super Bowl wins as its a team sport next minute you are saying Favre has kept Green Bay going longer even though they are the same thing. The team decides the season with the help of the quality of the QB and this includes Favre, Brady, Rodgers etc etc.

Having just a QB and few other pieces can get you by in the regular season. Peyton Manning proved this. Brady has got the Patriots by for 10 years or so, Favre got his teams by for 17 years. That's a big difference. But seldom do you see QBs do it on their own in the playoffs.

But I love the fact you ignored the facts about Favre and the 15 year thing and choose not to debate it because it wont bolster your argument. Favre was a great QB but the Packers werent always succesful with him there as I said in my previous post. So if you are going to use that you have failed to prove anything and in fact make a better case for Brady who has done more than Favre in less years by your own logic.

I have absolutely no idea what you are saying here.

D3PO wrote: »

so Vinny Testaverde, Jeff Garcia and Kurt Warner amongst others must all be better than Brady so :rolleyes:

I said that the play has to be a high standard to matter, but go ahead, ignore me. As for Kurt Warner, he lasted long but in that regard he's no Brett Favre (who lasted 7 more years). Brady to date has had a career nearly as long as Warner, and has started as many seasons.

matthew8

bruschi wrote: »

sorry, I am getting highly confused here now again.

what reasons do you have for not considering Brady one of the top 10 players of all time, but yet consider others like Manning, Favre, Lewis are in your top 10 considerations?

I don't consider Lewis or Favre top 10, but higher up than Brady.

bruschi

matthew8 wrote: »

I don't consider Lewis or Favre top 10, but higher up than Brady.

thats great for you.

So why do you not consider Brady top 10 when you rate Favre Lewis and Manning as being ahead of him?

tallaghtoutlaws

matthew8 wrote: »

Having just a QB and few other pieces can get you by in the regular season. Peyton Manning proved this. Brady has got the Patriots by for 10 years or so, Favre got his teams by for 17 years. That's a big difference. But seldom do you see QBs do it on their own in the playoffs.

I already addressed this and you keep going around in circles with it and ignoring very valid points I brought up so let me quote what I wrote for you and Favre had 16 seasons with Green Bay. My quote:

I commend Favre being a Favre fan for lasting as long as he did but the Packers had a few bad and average seasons even with Favre under Centre. But even then even then I find it ironic that you say Super Bowls are won by a team and not the QB and then you would make a claim like Favre Kept the Packers going strong for 15 years as one of your reasons why he is better than Brady. Using season records to prove Brett Favres worth over Tom Brady is stupid. but if you want to go down that road. Tom Brady has had all winning season in his 9 seasons and Favre has had 12 winning seasons 1 losing season and 2 .500 seasons. So using that logic we can say that 3 Super Bowl wins and 5 total appearances and all his records trump Favres 1 win and 2 appearances. You can't have your cake and eat it to be honest.

And got his team by? Oh so this is about getting a team by. So that means Garcia and other can be factored in if its just getting a team by. So winning seasons and bowls and all the other stuff are all off the table now are they? So its boiled down to Favre 16 seasons versus Bradys 9 seasons? Oh I see.

I have absolutely no idea what you are saying here.

I am saying you are moving the goal posts to suit your own argument and when valid points are brought up you don't answer them.

I said that the play has to be a high standard to matter, but go ahead, ignore me. As for Kurt Warner, he lasted long but in that regard he's no Brett Favre (who lasted 7 more years). Brady to date has had a career nearly as long as Warner, and has started as many seasons.

This makes no sense and it does seem you clearly are just using the amount of years played as your argument. I put your argument to Favre vs Brady to some die hard Favre and Packers fans 6 of them to be precise and all of them chose Brady bar 1 but he is a bitter old fool anyways.

tallaghtoutlaws

matthew8 wrote: »

I don't consider Lewis or Favre top 10, but higher up than Brady.

Wait at the start you said you would consider them top 10

I'll name more than 10, narrowing it down to 10 is very hard:
Jerry Rice, Jim Brown, Lawrence Taylor, Ray Lewis, Dick Butkus, Otto Graham, Barry Sanders, Peyton Manning, Brett Favre, Dan Marino, Johnny Unitas, Ronnie Lott, Joe Green, Walter Payton, Reggie White. I haven't seen all these guys play (obviously) but Tom Brady at this time hasn't had as good a career as these players. There's still a lot of time to break into the top 10 though (and I wouldn't rule him out becoming the greatest ever either).

And why do you keep saying Ray Lewis. You said yourself comparing different positions is like comparing apples and oranges.

Chucky the tree

poldebruin wrote: »

I'm not sure if this post is missing a smilie at the end or not? If not, it is comparable to the "brady in the top 10 is laughable" comment.

It's not, Favre was never that good of a QB.

Gronkosaurus

Just to throw in some stats - the reason matthew thinks Favre is better than Brady - for interest's sake.

Career Yards Per Game
Brett Favre - 237.8
Tom Brady - 248

Career Yards Per Attempt
Brett Favre - 7.1
Tom Brady - 7.5

Career TD:Int Ratio
Brett Favre - 1.5 : 1
Tom Brady - 2.6 : 1

Career Completion Percentage
Brett Favre - 62%
Tom Brady - 63.8%

Career QB Rating
Brett Favre - 86
Tom Brady - 96.4

And my personal favourite....

Superbowl Rings
Brett Favre - 1
Tom Brady - 3 and counting

themont85

Farve was so good in the 90s when the Packers had a great team and kept them in contention for a few years when talent dwindled and they had multiple coaching changes.

eagle eye

Dodge wrote: »

I love the fact that 2 Pats fans are defending the fact they're not sensitive, by arguing

I'm a long time Pats fan who sat in the freezing cold Foxboro Stadium during a couple of bad seasons and one good one back before Belichick took the reigns and drafted Brady. We haven't had a losing regular season since 2000, we've lost on average just 4 games a season since that time. How could you not love your team when its been that good. The day that changes is when Brady(unless we get incredibly lucky) and/or Belichick leave and its a day that I get more scared about every season that passes.

In the five superbowls that we've been to since the new millenium there are three common demonitors and they are Belichick, Brady and Bob Kraft. You can credit whichever one you want but for me its all of them.

Its only natural to be proud of your team anyways and to be extremely proud when you are a Patriots fan with all the great stuff thats happened over the last 12 years. Its only natural to want to defend a team when people attack them because I think we are held to a higher standard by fans of other clubs/football fans in general. If and when we lose its a big deal which is not the case with most other teams. Its like people just don't like us now because we have been so successful over the last 12 years or so.
Every year Vegas has us amongst the top four teams in the betting for the Superbowl. Every year the media want to write about the end of the Patriots dynasty but as long as we have winning seasons they can't do that. If you have followed the team as long as myself and some others on here and remember the old days, when a winning season was a huge surprise and 8-8 was considered a very successful season, you would understand that we are not cocky and we don't really get annoyed but we will defend our team because we know what its like to follow a bad team. I know it won't last forever but I'll defend my team and enjoy the ride for as long as it does. Only thing I hope is that it doesn't go back to the real bad days when 5-11 or something similar was the regular story.

Bob Kraft is the original reason for all thats happened. He bought Foxboro and saved the Patriots because they were moving only for him. He bought the Patriots after that and improved everything about the organisation from the front office to the facilities to the coaching. He brought in guys that had experience of winning in the beginning to bring that mentality to the New England Patriots. And then he hired Bill Belichick who in turn drafted Brady and the rest is history.

Chucky the tree

themont85 wrote: »

Farve was so good in the 90s when the Packers had a great team and kept them in contention for a few years when talent dwindled and they had multiple coaching changes.

Farve had two head coaches in the 90s and two in 2000's with the Packers.

matthew8

bruschi wrote: »

thats great for you.

So why do you not consider Brady top 10 when you rate Favre Lewis and Manning as being ahead of him?

I don't consider him top 10 because there are many people I rank ahead of him. Simple as.

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

Wait at the start you said you would consider them top 10



And why do you keep saying Ray Lewis. You said yourself comparing different positions is like comparing apples and oranges.

I said better than Brady, not top 10. I was told to name 10 better than Brady. I said it is like apples and oranges which means it's purely a personal choice who you rank higher and it's not worth debating.

Chucky the tree wrote: »

It's not, Favre was never that good of a QB.

What? He's HOF bound. First ballot. Like Tom Brady.

Gronkosaurus wrote: »

Just to throw in some stats - the reason matthew thinks Favre is better than Brady - for interest's sake.

Career Yards Per Game
Brett Favre - 237.8
Tom Brady - 248

Career Yards Per Attempt
Brett Favre - 7.1
Tom Brady - 7.5

Career TD:Int Ratio
Brett Favre - 1.5 : 1
Tom Brady - 2.6 : 1

Career Completion Percentage
Brett Favre - 62%
Tom Brady - 63.8%

Career QB Rating
Brett Favre - 86
Tom Brady - 96.4

And my personal favourite....

Superbowl Rings
Brett Favre - 1
Tom Brady - 3 and counting

Years in the league:
Brett Favre - 20
Tom Brady - 11

Passing yards:
Brett Favre - 71,838
Tom Brady - 39,979

Touchdowns:
Brett Favre - 508
Tom Brady - 300

Pro bowl selections:
Brett Favre - 11
Tom Brady - 7

MVP awards:
Brett Favre - 3
Tom Brady - 2

Consecutive started games:
Brett Favre - 297
Tom Brady - 111

Gronkosaurus

You really don't get it, do you?

Favre has those stats because he played 9 years more than Brady. I've broken them down to comparable stats in my post (per game, per attempt etc.) and Brady trumps Favre in almost every meaningful stat.

Deal with it.

tallaghtoutlaws

I said better than Brady, not top 10. I was told to name 10 better than Brady. I said it is like apples and oranges which means it's purely a personal choice who you rank higher and it's not worth debating.

Still ignoring all the facts and steering around the debate. Keep on moving the goal posts why don't you.

Years in the league:
Brett Favre - 20
Tom Brady - 11

ridiculous comparing 20 against 11 especially when Brady has only played 9 seasons. Neither QB started their rookie years and Brady was injured for a season. Once again hanging on to pointless facts.

Passing yards:
Brett Favre - 71,838
Tom Brady - 39,979

Brady will pass Favre if he plays the same length of time. But either way its a pointless fact.

Touchdowns:
Brett Favre - 508
Tom Brady - 300

Brady only 208 short and has play 11 years less. Really making this stat look silly but why not add Ints to your argument and the Ratio

Brett Favre: 508/336 TD to Int Ratio: 1.52
Tom Brady: 300/115 TD to Int Ratio: 2.61

Pro bowl selections:
Brett Favre - 11
Tom Brady - 7

Easy to make this look better for Favre but Brady has been selected 7 of his 9 seasons playing. Favre 11/20

MVP awards:
Brett Favre - 3
Tom Brady - 2

Wow look at the huge difference.

Consecutive started games:
Brett Favre - 297
Tom Brady - 111

This is retarded. Brady was injured in 08 so this stat is another pointless stat.

The sad thing is by posting these things for Favre Vs Brady you are making it look even weaker by the Post. And add the comparison in Super Bowl rings it destroys your argument. So this is clearly down to personal choice and if you truly think the above make Favre better than Brady you really need to wake up and watch more football. It totally puts your credibility into question.

Hazys

matthew8 wrote: »

I don't consider him top 10 because there are many people I rank ahead of him. Simple as.

I said better than Brady, not top 10. I was told to name 10 better than Brady. I said it is like apples and oranges which means it's purely a personal choice who you rank higher and it's not worth debating.

What? He's HOF bound. First ballot. Like Tom Brady.


Years in the league:
Brett Favre - 20
Tom Brady - 11

Passing yards:
Brett Favre - 71,838
Tom Brady - 39,979

Touchdowns:
Brett Favre - 508
Tom Brady - 300

Pro bowl selections:
Brett Favre - 11
Tom Brady - 7

MVP awards:
Brett Favre - 3
Tom Brady - 2

Consecutive started games:
Brett Favre - 297
Tom Brady - 111

Morten Andersen Vs Tom Brady

Years in the league:
Andersen: 25
Brady: 11

Passing yards:
Andersen: 0
Brady: 39979

Total Points:
Andersen: 2544
Brady: 1946

Pro bowl selections:
Andersen: 8
Brady: 7

MVP awards:
Andersen: 0
Brady: 2

Consecutive started games:
Andersen: 248
Brady: 111

Andersen wins 4 out of 6 of Matthew8's categories.

Using Matthew8's reasoning, clearly Morten Andersen is a better player than Tom Brady.

poldebruin

Chucky the tree wrote: »

It's not, Favre was never that good of a QB.

I think somewhere else in this thread you accused someone's credibility of being thrown out the window because of an opinion they expressed?

Now i can see what you meant.

poldebruin

Gronkosaurus wrote: »

You really don't get it, do you?

Favre has those stats because he played 9 years more than Brady. I've broken them down to comparable stats in my post (per game, per attempt etc.) and Brady trumps Favre in almost every meaningful stat.

Deal with it.

actually, I would think it is you who doesn't get it.

The statistics (one part of any argument) are close enough (on a per game basis) as to be almost identical between the two. The point is - that it will be tough for Brady to maintain the pace (tough - not impossible) You have said yourself he has had a great career to date ... can he keep that up for another 9 years? You can't just throw away the longevity side of things.

Favre won 190 or so games over 19 years (i think) while breaking every exitsing nfl career passing mark in the process - to argue he was poor statistically in comparison to anyone is weak.

matthew8

Hazys wrote: »

Morten Andersen Vs Tom Brady

Years in the league:
Andersen: 25
Brady: 11

Passing yards:
Andersen: 0
Brady: 39979

Total Points:
Andersen: 2544
Brady: 1946

Pro bowl selections:
Andersen: 8
Brady: 7

MVP awards:
Andersen: 0
Brady: 2

Consecutive started games:
Andersen: 248
Brady: 111

Andersen wins 4 out of 6 of Matthew8's categories.

Using Matthew8's reasoning, clearly Morten Andersen is a better player than Tom Brady.

Obviously it's not a question of who wins more categories. I used QB stats to compare the 2 QBs. As I said when comparing 2 different positions it's apples and oranges and just a personal opinion. Besides, the category was TDs, not points. Thanks to Poldebruin for Answering the other posts.

tallaghtoutlaws

matthew8 wrote: »

Obviously it's not a question of who wins more categories. I used QB stats to compare the 2 QBs. As I said when comparing 2 different positions it's apples and oranges and just a personal opinion. Besides, the category was TDs, not points. Thanks to Poldebruin for Answering the other posts.

But yet you kept mentioning Ray Lewis.

tallaghtoutlaws

poldebruin wrote: »

actually, I would think it is you who doesn't get it.

The statistics (one part of any argument) are close enough (on a per game basis) as to be almost identical between the two. The point is - that it will be tough for Brady to maintain the pace (tough - not impossible) You have said yourself he has had a great career to date ... can he keep that up for another 9 years? You can't just throw away the longevity side of things.

Favre won 190 or so games over 19 years (i think) while breaking every exitsing nfl career passing mark in the process - to argue he was poor statistically in comparison to anyone is weak.

No one is throwing away the Longevity of Brett Favre's career. The man was a legend of the game. But to use that as your sole reason to pretend he is better than Brady is ridiculous. Sure Favre was awesome in his hay day and tough sun of a gun but Brady is better QB even if Brady retires after Sunday.

The problem here is Matthew8 is trying to say that because Brett Favre has lasted longer than Brady he is better. Don't forget he also brought up the stats to back up his argument and they prove nothing to back up his argument.

But I will call you out on the part in bold. Maintain what pace? Leaving out games played and passing yards what Pace has Brady got to keep up with? Brady has done most of what Favre has done in half the time. But why do you think it will be hard for Brady to last 9 more year? Has he shown he wont last in your opinion?

I loved Brett Favre I grew up watching his whole career and he was one of my idols. I love his toughness and his gun slinging ways and have a soft spot for the Packers and Wisconsin folk as I spend a lot of time there. But you can compare 20 seasons on 9 all you want and pretend Brady isnt the better QB. The facts are Brady has done more in his 9 seasons than Brett Favre has done in 20.

On a side note even Montana believes Brady will last a while longer:

Montana believes that Brady could one day move into the lead.

“He’s had a great career. The thing with him is he’s still got enough age on him that he can probably get back here another time or two,” Montana said. “So it will be fun to watch him.”

Hazys

Give it up Matthew8 its a ridiculous argument.

If it helps, a bunch of reporters ranked the Top100 players of all time last year:

http://top100.nfl.com/all-time-100

Farve: 20th
Brady: 21st

Farve is retired but Brady has 3 or 4 more seasons at the highest level left to play (not to mention the list doesnt include this season and what could happen come Sunday), so its remotely possible that Brady may move up a spot or two in the next list.

Off topic but Manning is 8 in the list which i think is a bit ridiculous, there is no way he should be that far ahead of Brady. (Maybe i can turn this into a Brady Manning debate lol)