Superbowl LV Thread: Chiefs v Buccaneers (MOD Note Post #1)

adrian522

Inquitus wrote: »

Mahomes was badly let down by Kelce, Hill and his Offensive line. He made some unbelievable throws on the run that should have been caught, he did his best and never stopped trying, but if the whole team is shítting the bed around you there is nothing you can do. Buccs won it handy, the Chiefs never got going, it was a bit of an anticlimax, but well done to Brady and the Buccs, Gronk, Fournette and Brown all played an important role in the match along with their awesome pass rush who hounded Mahomes all night long.

Kelce was pretty good overall. He had 10 catches for 133 yards, can't ask for much more than that. A few drops but he certainly didn't let anyone down.

Foxtrol

adrian522 wrote: »

I think ultimately the Chiefs didn't really do enough to support their backup tackles. Early on they tried to go with a quick passing game but once they got behind that all went out the window, they should have kept a TE or RB back to help with pass blocking but I guess hindsight is 20/20

I didn't really understand people who said the chiefs were going to win in a blowout. it was obvious that Tampa had an advantage in the trenches on both sides of the ball, they would be able to pressure Mahomes and be able to protect Brady.

Also apart from the AFC championship game they hadn't really played all that well or blew teams away. They struggled against fairly mediocre team and defensively they even struggled to stop the Browns moving the ball up and down the field.

Pair that with Tampa having the experience of the first day and they were never getting beaten with a load of deep passes and Brady was more than capable of picking apart the Chiefs secondary.

The scary thing about this is Tampa will probably be better next year as they really only got things figured out in December next year.

From KC perspective it is a missed opportunity but they had a QB carrying an injury and no one really on the offensive line so they were always going to struggle and if the offense is not putting up points they are not built to win a defensive battle. It's not the end of the world, they will be competitive for many years to come.

I was probably the most vocal person believing that there was a good chance that the Chiefs would win this convincingly, so I'm guessing this was somewhat aimed at me.

Four things I didn't believe would happen, happened last night:
- Mahomes being injured so much that it seemed to change their gameplan
- All Chiefs' skill players being incredibly poor (very rare)
- Refs putting themselves in the middle of the Super Bowl by throwing loads of flags (very rare)
- Poor Reid play calling (very rare these days)

I still feel if 3 of those 4 things happen Chiefs could have won that game, 2 of 4 Chiefs very likely win, and 1 or none of the 4 happen it ends up being a convincing Chiefs' victory.

It is possible that Tampa could be better again next year but there are a lot of players hitting FA and not much space to work with. Maybe they start to get some Patriot's like team friendly deals but there is a good chance that guys will want to get paid now after getting a ring.

Foxtrol

Leroy42 wrote: »

Few points on the game last night.

Chiefs shat the bed. They were poor in almost every position. Sure the OL was impacted by injuries, but that is no reason for their punter to have a mare. Of for Kelcee to drop passes, or Hill to be almost totally ineffectual.

Their defence made a great goal-line stand, that should have lifted the entire team and got the offence moving, but they ended up punting and the Bucs got their TD anyway. All it did was delay the score.

They failed to keep Brady out just before HT. Crucial. Calling that Time out was insane. They obviously felt they could get the ball back and score, but the previous 29 minutes of football should have shown that even if they got the ball back, the chance of then scoring was remote and so the better option was to stop the Bucs from taking advantage of the momentum. Hubris, pure and simple.

Mahomes, as great an entertainer and talent that he is, failed to drive his team when it needed him the most. Yes, the rest of the team played badly, but that is when great players really make the difference. They adapt and take what they can get. Brady has built his entire career on that. Instead, Mahomes was always looking for the great play, the highlight reel. (I am not suggesting he was doing to for himself btw). What he needed, what the team needed, was a steady hand, a series of 5 yard passes. They managed it a few times to move down the field but then would not be able to get it done. And Mahomes would run 20 years backwards trying to eek out the TD pass when a quick 3 or 4 yard dump would have kept the Bucs guessing.

No doubt Mahomes will learn from this, he certainly learned from the last time Brady beat him in the AFC game.

My feeling as that the Bucs knew they had to play the game of their lives to have a chance. KC seems to think they just needed to turn up.

Very disappointing from KC, a massive missed opportunity to repeat.

Strongly disagree with this. What Mahomes was doing was adapting to what he could get, despite being on basically one foot. The short passing game wasn't working and once the Buccs got their lead their defense could pin their ears back and attack while not having to blitz due to the backup OL. Despite that he repeatedly threw passes from under incredible pressure that hit the hands and face of his receivers but they dropped them again and again. Switch the QBs and Brady would have been killed out there.

Foxtrol

el Fenomeno wrote: »

It's great. The Belichick argument is gone. The AFC East argument is gone. What now? Oh well, he supported Trump...and...and....Devin White and that defence...and...and....

I don't really see it as ever being a 'Belichick' argument, it was more a general argument that superior coaching, supporting players, and general set up put him in a position to succeed - which was exactly the case last night.

You could put something like 10 to 20 other QBs from around the league in as the Buccs QB and give them that game script as last night, asking them to make those same throws, and they'd win that game - some in an even more convincing manner.

To put it in context, the opposing team in his last two Super Bowl wins have scored a combined 12 points - Brady doesn't play defense.

adrian522

Foxtrol wrote: »

I was probably the most vocal person believing that there was a good chance that the Chiefs would win this convincingly, so I'm guessing this was somewhat aimed at me.

Four things I didn't believe would happen, happened last night:
- Mahomes being injured so much that it seemed to change their gameplan
- All Chiefs' skill players being incredibly poor (very rare)
- Refs putting themselves in the middle of the Super Bowl by throwing loads of flags (very rare)
- Poor Reid play calling (very rare these days)

I still feel if 3 of those 4 things happen Chiefs could have won that game, 2 of 4 Chiefs very likely win, and 1 or none of the 4 happen it ends up being a convincing Chiefs' victory.

It is possible that Tampa could be better again next year but there are a lot of players hitting FA and not much space to work with. Maybe they start to get some Patriot's like team friendly deals but there is a good chance that guys will want to get paid now after getting a ring.

It wasn't really aimed at anyone, just my thoughts on the game and how it went.

I did disagree when you said that the areas the Buccs had an advantage weren't that important, but overall the narrative that KC were going to blow out the Buccs seemed to be based on the AFC championship game but seemed to ignore all the other games KC played since around week 8.

BizzyC

I dont understand how anyone could put an ounce of blame on Mahomes for last night.
The Bucs D were phenominal - personally I thought Devin White was the MVP.

Mahomes was getting beat up like hell all game, but only gave up a couple of sacks.
He hit 2 receivers in the face in the end zone, one while laying out horizontally, and neither hauled it in.
For all the talk about his foot, he extended plays brilliantly and ran the ball better than the backs... I think the only let downs for them last night were unhealthy Oline, dropped passes and some bad play calls.

You cant blame Hill for being schemed out of the game for the most part, or the backs for being unable to get traction vs the best run D in the league. They needed the receivers to catch that balls that did hit them and they needed better schemes to open things up.

Like why didn't they have a 2 back set so that they could chip the rushers to open up the deeper routes before releasing underneath, why did they call that timeout at the end of the 1st half giving Bucs time to score, why didn't they bring more inside pass rush against Brady...

There is a lot of questions going around about their performance, but none of them should be about Mahomes or how he played.

tanko

Has there been much talk about how the officials handled the game and applied the rules. Would the consensus be that they were fair to both team or do Kansas City have any grounds to feel hard done by with some of the calls?

Inquitus

tanko wrote: »

Has there been much talk about how the officials handled the game and applied the rules. Would the consensus be that they were fair to both team or do Kansas City have any grounds to feel hard done by with some of the calls?

I thought the PI calls were fair, they had their hands all over the Buccs WR's. They should have adjusted when they started getting called, but failed to do so!

adrian522

tanko wrote: »

Has there been much talk about how the officials handled the game and applied the rules. Would the consensus be that they were fair to both team or do Kansas City have any grounds to feel hard done by with some of the calls?

Probably in the superbowl there is an expectation that a lot of these penalties are not called unless they are very obvious calls. Anything borderline would usually not be called in the superbowl.

I though most of the calls were ok. One critical one was for lining up offside, there were a few pass interference penalties which I thought were ok.

The holding call that pulled back a Brady interception probably shouldn't have been called, seemed like one they could have let go.

tanko

tanko wrote: »

Has there been much talk about how the officials handled the game and applied the rules. Would the consensus be that they were fair to both team or do Kansas City have any grounds to feel hard done by with some of the calls?

Kansas have no reason whatsoever to feel aggrieved, in my humblest.

Buccs definitely did get away with some infractions in the second half though.

martingriff

tanko wrote: »

Has there been much talk about how the officials handled the game and applied the rules. Would the consensus be that they were fair to both team or do Kansas City have any grounds to feel hard done by with some of the calls?

I think a couple of interference call might be soft given the player was no where near the ball but they did have themselves to blame for been in that position. May have missed a false start in the play before I think the 3rd or 4th TD but your bot going to get every call

ELM327

There's a couple of soft calls but the Chiefs stunk up the joint and would have lost and lost bad regardless.

thefa

Foxtrol wrote: »

I don't really see it as ever being a 'Belichick' argument, it was more a general argument that superior coaching, supporting players, and general set up put him in a position to succeed - which was exactly the case last night.

You could put something like 10 to 20 other QBs from around the league in as the Buccs QB and give them that game script as last night, asking them to make those same throws, and they'd win that game - some in an even more convincing manner.

To put it in context, the opposing team in his last two Super Bowl wins have scored a combined 12 points - Brady doesn't play defense.

Loads of credit needs to go to the defense but I don’t think you could. Brady himself had struggles in the first half of the year with the BA offence and building chemistry with the likes of Evans took a while. On top of that, there’s a good chunk of the top 20 QBs that don’t have Brady’s accuracy. You probably don’t score 28 points and you end giving Mahomes more possession which could wear the defense.

On the off chance you were saying throw them in from the start of the season, that’s more of a runner but do you make the super bowl with an average or slightly above average quarterback?

Foxtrol

adrian522 wrote: »

It wasn't really aimed at anyone, just my thoughts on the game and how it went.

I did disagree when you said that the areas the Buccs had an advantage weren't that important,

Last night went how it did but I think if they played another 10 times I don't think the Buccs' advantage would have been more important.

but overall the narrative that KC were going to blow out the Buccs seemed to be based on the AFC championship game but seemed to ignore all the other games KC played since around week 8.

AFC championship played a part in that thinking but more so was them being to turn it on practically every time it really mattered for nearly 3 years now.

adrian522 wrote: »

Kelce was pretty good overall. He had 10 catches for 133 yards, can't ask for much more than that. A few drops but he certainly didn't let anyone down.

I'd put those stats down to garbage time. He had uncharacteristic drops at key points in the game and seemed to be bullied out there at times.

Foxtrol

ELM327 wrote: »

There's a couple of soft calls but the Chiefs stunk up the joint and would have lost and lost bad regardless.

That is pretty much in line with my thinking but I don't believe they lose bad if they weren't down as much as they were at half time. If the game was reffed the way it was for the NFC Conference game then they wouldn't have been.

Foxtrol

thefa wrote: »

Loads of credit needs to go to the defense but I don’t think you could. Brady himself had struggles in the first half of the year with the BA offence and building chemistry with the likes of Evans took a while. On top of that, there’s a good chunk of the top 20 QBs that don’t have Brady’s accuracy. You probably don’t score 28 points and you end giving Mahomes more possession which could wear the defense.

On the off chance you were saying throw them in from the start of the season, that’s more of a runner but do you make the super bowl with an average or slightly above average quarterback?

I'm not saying throw a QB in completely cold last night nor that the top 20 QBs could have gotten them to the Super Bowl - my point was that practically any average or above QB that knew their play book and players as well as Brady would have likely won that game last night based on how the game played out.

For me Brady deserves far more credit for helping to get the Buccs to the Super Bowl than he did for his performance last night. I just don't understand the resultist mindset of saying things I've seen the last 12 hours like 'no one can argue against him being the GOAT now' - based on a game he won but had such a minimal contribution. A player taking what was given to him, throwing pretty accurately, and not doing things to mess up the game (which describes Brady's last two Super Bowls) simply doesn't move the needle for me in GOAT conversations.

That is far from 'hating on Brady'. In hindsight I'm gutted that we didn't give him his wish and bring Brady back home last offseason. Even with the other injuries I feel the 49ers would have been close to making it back to the Super Bowl - though I think defensive injuries would have stopped us from winning it all like the Buccs.

Itssoeasy

Next gen stats have said that Patrick mahomes scrambled for 497 yards last night. So the bucs defence did a great job and those huge drop backs he was doing add up.

ELM327

In this game, the QB's mark of success is the number of rings. You have to be an upper echelon all time great to be even considered as a great QB without a ring (basically Marino), and you have to be a garbage QB to be considered not good if you have a ring (Dilfer).

Brady winning 7 rings makes him the best of all time.
Peyton was gone but won a ring with the broncos based on a run game and a defense. Elway was gone over the cliff for his second ring in Denver. You don't remember the details, you remember the rings.

Tom went to a 7-9 team and made them win. Through ability and leadership. His requested signings were as important as his throwing ability. His reading the defense was as important as his work ethic. Tom made that sub 500 team SB champs, and could repeat next year. At 43 years old. He's literally had 2 HOF careers

ELM327

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Next gen stats have said that Patrick mahomes scrambled for 497 yards last night. So the bucs defence did a great job and those huge drop backs he was doing add up.

Yards running backwards like a deer in the headlights dont count towards real stats (thankfully) :D


He got stung yesterday, thanks to bad coaching, bad play calls , bad O Line and stringent refereeing. Seeing his mrs afterwards was delightful. Sore loser doesnt even cut it!

adrian522

It will be interesting to see how the chiefs manage with Mahomes contract starting to kick in now. It's going to be more difficult to put this elite roster together like they have the last few years.

2020 cap hit for Mahomes was $5m
2021 it will be $24m.

AbusesToilets

Foxtrol wrote: »

I'm not saying throw a QB in completely cold last night nor that the top 20 QBs could have gotten them to the Super Bowl - my point was that practically any average or above QB that knew their play book and players as well as Brady would have likely won that game last night based on how the game played out.

For me Brady deserves far more credit for helping to get the Buccs to the Super Bowl than he did for his performance last night. I just don't understand the resultist mindset of saying things I've seen the last 12 hours like 'no one can argue against him being the GOAT now' - based on a game he won but had such a minimal contribution. A player taking what was given to him, throwing pretty accurately, and not doing things to mess up the game (which describes Brady's last two Super Bowls) simply doesn't move the needle for me in GOAT conversations.

That is far from 'hating on Brady'. In hindsight I'm gutted that we didn't give him his wish and bring Brady back home last offseason. Even with the other injuries I feel the 49ers would have been close to making it back to the Super Bowl - though I think defensive injuries would have stopped us from winning it all like the Buccs.

Brady was still the one on the field, diagnosing coverages and adjusting the line. He's the one making the reads and getting the ball where it needed to go. All things he's elite at.

Saying any old QB could simply execute a game plan ignores all the work a QB has to do for a play to work. But sure anything to try and diminish the performance. Was Brady the sole reason they won? Obviously not, he did his job practically flawlessly.

Foxtrol

ELM327 wrote: »

In this game, the QB's mark of success is the number of rings. You have to be an upper echelon all time great to be even considered as a great QB without a ring (basically Marino), and you have to be a garbage QB to be considered not good if you have a ring (Dilfer).

Brady winning 7 rings makes him the best of all time.
Peyton was gone but won a ring with the broncos based on a run game and a defense. Elway was gone over the cliff for his second ring in Denver. You don't remember the details, you remember the rings.

Tom went to a 7-9 team and made them win. Through ability and leadership. His requested signings were as important as his throwing ability. His reading the defense was as important as his work ethic. Tom made that sub 500 team SB champs, and could repeat next year. At 43 years old. He's literally had 2 HOF careers

The bold is basically saying 'other people forget details and make poor arguments so I too must ignore details today and make the same poor arguments'.

A ring means your team won a Super Bowl, no more no less. If people want to be sheep and follow how they're told how to measure a player 'in this game' then you're free to do so, just like others are free to make up their own minds - for me I don't rely on counting the number trophies players have won in other team sports when comparing them so I don't solely focus on it for the NFL.

Foxtrol

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Brady was still the one on the field, diagnosing coverages and adjusting the line. He's the one making the reads and getting the ball where it needed to go. All things he's elite.

Saying any old QB could simply execute a game plan ignores all the work a QB has to do for a play to work. But sure anything to try and diminish the performance. Was Brady the sole reason they won? Obviously not, he did his job practically flawlessly.

I'm not taking anything away from his performance, I'm just not creating some ridiculous narrative that it was something epic. What you said in your first paragraph is what any average and above QB in the league should be able to do, not something special.

Brady did a great job of what he was asked to do, which in this situation was very little. I've seen much more impressive performances from him in games that he lost.

As people have pointed out, Brady seems to be a pretty modest guy. The man has been an amazing player for incredibly long period so people don't have to make things up about him to seem even better.

thefa

Foxtrol wrote: »

I'm not saying throw a QB in completely cold last night nor that the top 20 QBs could have gotten them to the Super Bowl - my point was that practically any average or above QB that knew their play book and players as well as Brady would have likely won that game last night based on how the game played out.

For me Brady deserves far more credit for helping to get the Buccs to the Super Bowl than he did for his performance last night. I just don't understand the resultist mindset of saying things I've seen the last 12 hours like 'no one can argue against him being the GOAT now' - based on a game he won but had such a minimal contribution. A player taking what was given to him, throwing pretty accurately, and not doing things to mess up the game (which describes Brady's last two Super Bowls) simply doesn't move the needle for me in GOAT conversations.

That is far from 'hating on Brady'. In hindsight I'm gutted that we didn't give him his wish and bring Brady back home last offseason. Even with the other injuries I feel the 49ers would have been close to making it back to the Super Bowl - though I think defensive injuries would have stopped us from winning it all like the Buccs.

I get you now. I thought the GOAT conversation had almost been settled since he won the NFC in the first year at his age and beating Brees and Rodgers, albeit only the latter in good form. People forget too how poor last season ended for him too with the Pats. One thing that last night added to it that you might be discounting is the head-to-head with Mahomes. Mahomes would have had 2 Super Bowls in 3 seasons as starter had he won last night which would have been the same as Brady.

Just rounding back to the point that a number of quarterbacks could have seen the game plan out last night given if they had the same experience and integration, a small number of them probably could alright and it wasn’t a historic performance either but at the end of the day, the best players often earn the opportunities to play on the best teams and he took it this year.

Surprised the 49ers didn’t go after Stafford properly. Hopefully the super bowl window doesn’t shut on the team and the faith in Jimmy G pays off.

Foxtrol

thefa wrote: »

I get you now. I thought the GOAT conversation had almost been settled since he won the NFC in the first year at his age and beating Brees and Rodgers, albeit only the latter in good form. People forget too how poor last season ended for him too with the Pats. One thing that last night added to it that you might be discounting is the head-to-head with Mahomes. Mahomes would have had 2 Super Bowls in 3 seasons as starter had he won last night which would have been the same as Brady.

Just rounding back to the point that a number of quarterbacks could have seen the game plan out last night given if they had the same experience and integration, a small number of them probably could alright and it wasn’t a historic performance either but at the end of the day, the best players often earn the opportunities to play on the best teams and he took it this year.

Surprised the 49ers didn’t go after Stafford properly. Hopefully the super bowl window doesn’t shut on the team and the faith in Jimmy G pays off.

Not that I'm in agreement but I totally get the run putting it over the edge or reinforcing opinions - for me this year has definitely improved his case, even if he was hardly turning around some basket case like some are trying to portray the Buccs as being prior to him joining. It is the focus on the single result of last night that makes absolutely no sense to me.

Nerdlingr

Just thinking of it again today, but the decision by KC to take a time out when TB had the ball just before half time was baffling at the time... and even worse now. Why on earth would you play into Brady's hands when he's got his hands on the ball?! I know the reasons for doing it but let the clock run down, reset and go again in the second half 14-6 down.

dh1985

thefa wrote: »

I get you now. I thought the GOAT conversation had almost been settled since he won the NFC in the first year at his age and beating Brees and Rodgers, albeit only the latter in good form. People forget too how poor last season ended for him too with the Pats. One thing that last night added to it that you might be discounting is the head-to-head with Mahomes. Mahomes would have had 2 Super Bowls in 3 seasons as starter had he won last night which would have been the same as Brady.

Just rounding back to the point that a number of quarterbacks could have seen the game plan out last night given if they had the same experience and integration, a small number of them probably could alright and it wasn’t a historic performance either but at the end of the day, the best players often earn the opportunities to play on the best teams and he took it this year.

Surprised the 49ers didn’t go after Stafford properly. Hopefully the super bowl window doesn’t shut on the team and the faith in Jimmy G pays off.

The goat conversation was settled back in 2015 when he led the Patriots past the legion of boom or if there was any doubters after 2015, then the comeback from 28-9 against the Falcons on 2017 surely put that to bed even for the biggest of haters. He has two rings since and lost another where he put up over 500 yard passing. The goat discussion is long over.
Brady may not have the physical attributes of a mahomes or whoever but physicality is not the only metric for a qb. What brady has is a unequalled football brain and the ability to inspire others around him. Great sportmens do this. They force othees around them to perform and lift their game.
No offense to mahomes, he is a talented young man and a thrill to watch but he hasn't the football brain that brady has as of yet and may never have. What brady has done over two decades is incredible.

thefa

dh1985 wrote: »

The goat conversation was settled back in 2015 when he led the Patriots past the legion of boom or if there was any doubters after 2015, then the comeback from 28-9 against the Falcons on 2017 surely put that to bed even for the biggest of haters. He has two rings since and lost another where he put up over 500 yard passing. The goat discussion is long over.
Brady may not have the physical attributes of a mahomes or whoever but physicality is not the only metric for a qb. What brady has is a unequalled football brain and the ability to inspire others around him. Great sportmens do this. They force othees around them to perform and lift their game.
No offense to mahomes, he is a talented young man and a thrill to watch but he hasn't the football brain that brady has as of yet and may never have. What brady has done over two decades is incredible.

Oh I agree but i don’t doubt there would have been some questioning his influence had he flopped outside of the Pats organization. He’s killed that and helped halt a chiefs/mahomes dynasty while he was at it.

Foxtrol

dh1985 wrote: »

The goat conversation was settled back in 2015 when he led the Patriots past the legion of boom or if there was any doubters after 2015, then the comeback from 28-9 against the Falcons on 2017 surely put that to bed even for the biggest of haters. He has two rings since and lost another where he put up over 500 yard passing. The goat discussion is long over.
Brady may not have the physical attributes of a mahomes or whoever but physicality is not the only metric for a qb. What brady has is a unequalled football brain and the ability to inspire others around him. Great sportmens do this. They force othees around them to perform and lift their game.
No offense to mahomes, he is a talented young man and a thrill to watch but he hasn't the football brain that brady has as of yet and may never have. What brady has done over two decades is incredible.

So Brady gets all the credit for rings even when his team mates outplay him while somehow also getting all the credit for playing well but his team loses

It is all about wins and rings until it doesn't suit the agenda and then playing well on a losing team is suddenly valuable...

AbusesToilets

Foxtrol wrote: »

So Brady gets all the credit for rings even when his team mates outplay him while somehow also getting all the credit for playing well but his team loses

It is all about wins and rings until it doesn't suit the agenda and then playing well on a losing team is suddenly valuable...

Thankfully Brady has all the stats to go along with the wins, so no need to bother yourself about it.

eagle eye

AbusesToilets wrote:

Thankfully Brady has all the stats to go along with the wins, so no need to bother yourself about it.

Brady does everything to make it happen, from getting up at 4.30am to do two hours of stretching to keeping his body in prime condition with diet and other stuff like drinking his weight in water one day per week and then taking pay cuts to allow the team the cap room to sign that player that's needed to improve the team and put them in a position to win it all.
He's not the GOAT through luck, it's through dedication, hard work, selflessness and discipline.

CMcsporty

Brady took pay cuts?
That is something i never knew about him.
The skeptic in me wonders about that though! I mean it might be on the books as a pay cut but did he really loose out financially?

ELM327

He didnt take pay cuts, he restructured several times (which didnt impact him) and at the high poiint of his career earning (early 30's) he didnt max out what he could have asked for.

TheDoctor

TheDoctor wrote: »

166-90 for the regular season
8-4 for the playoffs

Going Chiefs

166-90 for the regular season
8-5 for the playoffs

174-95 for the year

eagle eye

ELM327 wrote: »

He didnt take pay cuts, he restructured several times (which didnt impact him) and at the high poiint of his career earning (early 30's) he didnt max out what he could have asked for.

If he'd looked to match Peyton's 2005 contract, Eli's 2009 one in 2010, Brees in 2013 and Roethlisberger in '17, he'd have earned close to $100 million more over his Patriots career.

BizzyC

He didn't take "Pay cuts", they never actually reduced his pay.

He did make a tonne of team-friendly deals though, the majority of his family's wealth comes from off-field money and his wife so he was willing to put winning above getting paid is fair rate.
It just got to the point where he didn't see why he was earning less than he could when Bill wasn't spending that extra money to give him a halfway decent offence to work with.

rebelyell99

As a broncos fan ive never really liked Brady but i respect what he has achieved in the game . I just feel a bit for some of the bucs players who are not getting the recognition they deserve , I believe the bucs won the superbowl this year because of there defence and Todd Bowles scheme. Devin White and Lavonte David have been unbelievable all year .If you look at the saints divisional round game brady didnt play that well got lucky on a number of throws , it was the Defense saw them home . I know quarterback is an important position but i wish other position players got more recognition at times for example the superbowl mvp should have gone to a defensive player like Barrett or White imo.

eagle eye

rebelyell99 wrote:

As a broncos fan ive never really liked Brady but i respect what he has achieved in the game . I just feel a bit for some of the bucs players who are not getting the recognition they deserve , I believe the bucs won the superbowl this year because of there defence and Todd Bowles scheme. Devin White and Lavonte David have been unbelievable all year .If you look at the saints divisional round game brady didnt play that well got lucky on a number of throws , it was the Defense saw them home . I know quarterback is an important position but i wish other position players got more recognition at times for example the superbowl mvp should have gone to a defensive player like Barrett or White imo.

Well if you remember last year Mahomes got it and it should have been Damien Williams.
Peyton Manning got it when it should have been Addai or Rhodes.
Mahomes QB rating was 78 or something like that and Manning's was 81.8 iirc.
Brady's rating was 125.

adrian522

I think the offensive line was as big a reason for the win as the defense, Brady was only pressured on 4 drop backs. Mahomes was pressured on 29 of his drop backs which is the most in superbowl history..

Foxtrol

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Thankfully Brady has all the stats to go along with the wins, so no need to bother yourself about it.

Can't argue that Brady has the lead in many cumulative stats but isn't that somewhat expected given he has the most starts and most pass attempts in history? On the other side Brady however doesn't lead many (any?) stats related to per game or per attempt. No one is saying Frank Gore is one of the top 3rd greatest running backs in history based on cumulative stats.

I have again and again said the man's success and longevity is absolutely incredible - we'll unlikely see it again (apparently this is 'hating' on him). I'm glad we have a few 49ers fans in the discussion as the GOAT, alongside a 49ers player.

I don't know why a comment that his performance on Sunday wasn't anything special compared to what his defense did brings out all the usual defenders. That isn't a knock against him, the performance of the Buccs team in every phase of the game and the game script meant Brady didn't have to be special - we don't need to pretend his performance was something it wasn't. The man's achievements should be able to stand on their own without them being supported by fantasy.

eagle eye

Foxtrol wrote:

Can't argue that Brady has the lead in many cumulative stats but isn't that somewhat expected given he has the most starts and most pass attempts in history? On the other side Brady however doesn't lead many (any?) stats related to per game or per attempt. No one is saying Frank Gore is one of the top 3rd greatest running backs in history based on cumulative stats.

Brady holds the record for the most passing attempts, completions and yards in a Superbowl. He also holds the record for most pass attempts without an interception which is 48 between the New York Giants game and the Philadelphia Eagles game.

Foxtrol

eagle eye wrote: »

Well if you remember last year Mahomes got it and it should have been Damien Williams.
Peyton Manning got it when it should have been Addai or Rhodes.
Mahomes QB rating was 78 or something like that and Manning's was 81.8 iirc.
Brady's rating was 125.

I wasn't at all surprised of the QB getting it based on history - it is just another symptom of the problem of the 'QB wins' mentality that permeates the large parts of the NFL media and fan bases (especially the older demographic).

Man Vs ManUre

The recent super bowl that Brady lost, eagles vs patriots in the new Vikings stadium, was the most offensively perfect final I have seen. Both quarterbacks throwing passes, running yards, practically no mistakes or turnovers. Tho a bad night for the defence teams.
But my favorite in recent years was the comeback the year before vs Atlanta. That was Brady’s greatest night.

el Fenomeno

I think the answer is - as always - somewhere in the middle.

Brady's performances this year have been very good, but nothing transcendent or unprecedented that would carry any roster of stragglers to a Super Bowl victory. Of course the Buccs extremely talented roster has helped him, and that's probably the same story for many of his SB wins and much of his career.

And there's an argument to be made that - on a purely physical level - he's never been as impressive as a Rodgers or Mahomes at their peak. By that, I mean the velocity, zip, trajectory etc. he gets on his throws, and he doesn't get throws off from alien body positions like Mahomes has (to be fair, has anyone ever been able to do that? It's incredible).

But no one has ever championed Brady as the GOAT based on the physical throws he can make that no one else can. It's the total package with Brady, and you have to give more weight to those dreaded intangibles you hear godawful draftniks on twitter harp on about when they try to find a reason to big up a prospect they like who looks awful on tape.

Simply put, I'm sure you could put 10 or 12 quarterbacks into the game on Sunday and they would have probably equalled Brady's statistical performance, if all else remains equal. Probably the same story for any one game in a vacuum this season for Tampa.

But put those same QBs into Tampa at the start of the year and ask them to play out the whole season, and I don't think they come close. As soon as Brady signed with Tampa, I'm sure a lot of those other players on the roster started taking the season more seriously due to the "oh shít, we have Tom Brady now" effect.

The belief he'll have given those players to play beyond their means will never be able to be measured. They'll have seen the sheer amount of work and preparation he puts in - at 43 years old and having won everything possible multiple times over - and that will have inspired them. The motivation, belief and leadership that comes with him is a much bigger factor than any on-field measurable.

And I think the "Brady has 7 rings" talk and how it seems that the reporting suggests he won it singke handedly, is more down to the importance of the QB position more than anything. People like to talk about and attribute things to the big name franchise QB. I don't think for a second anyone is saying Brady could have carried a 32nd ranked offence and 32nd ranked defence to a championship.

The_Honeybadger

rebelyell99 wrote: »

As a broncos fan ive never really liked Brady but i respect what he has achieved in the game . I just feel a bit for some of the bucs players who are not getting the recognition they deserve , I believe the bucs won the superbowl this year because of there defence and Todd Bowles scheme. Devin White and Lavonte David have been unbelievable all year .If you look at the saints divisional round game brady didnt play that well got lucky on a number of throws , it was the Defense saw them home . I know quarterback is an important position but i wish other position players got more recognition at times for example the superbowl mvp should have gone to a defensive player like Barrett or White imo.

I think the defence has been well recognised for their contribution to be fair. It is brought up in nearly everything I have read or listened to about the game. They were excellent and I think everyone acknowledges that.

Brady is the biggest name in the sport and with the story of him leaving the Pats etc he was always going to be the main headline. I doubt David, Vea or any of the others on the defence that just won their first ring will mind Brady getting a lot of the attention. As others have said he wasn’t particularly brilliant in the game but very unlikely they get that ring without him, and I’m sure they recognise that. His experience and leadership during the game and over the course of the season does not show up in the box score but that was probably as big a factor as anything he did on the field.

Foxtrol

eagle eye wrote: »

Brady holds the record for the most passing attempts, completions and yards in a Superbowl. He also holds the record for most pass attempts without an interception which is 48 between the New York Giants game and the Philadelphia Eagles game.

Thank you for giving me stats that back up my argument. He leads plenty of cumulative stats or wild US stats based on very specific conditions - like stats in a Super Bowl.

None of what you pointed to counter my point that on a per game or per attempt basis he leads few if any.

Actually Brady's pass interception % is actually one of his better ones - where he is tied 4th behind Rodgers, Mahomes, Dak, and tied with Kaepernick. The 3 ahead of him though play a more aggressive game than Brady.

The_Honeybadger

Haha, love this

https://twitter.com/txalpha06/status/1359128547621748739?s=21

eagle eye

Foxtrol wrote:

Actually Brady's pass interception % is actually one of his better ones - where he is tied 4th behind Rodgers, Mahomes, Dak, and tied with Kaepernick. The 3 ahead of him though play a more aggressive game than Brady.

Third in single season passing yards, tied second for most touchdowns in a season, sixth on season passer rating.
Anybody can have a good season though it's about consistency. That's what separates the best from the rest.

AbusesToilets

Foxtrol wrote: »

Can't argue that Brady has the lead in many cumulative stats but isn't that somewhat expected given he has the most starts and most pass attempts in history? On the other side Brady however doesn't lead many (any?) stats related to per game or per attempt. No one is saying Frank Gore is one of the top 3rd greatest running backs in history based on cumulative stats.

I have again and again said the man's success and longevity is absolutely incredible - we'll unlikely see it again (apparently this is 'hating' on him). I'm glad we have a few 49ers fans in the discussion as the GOAT, alongside a 49ers player.

I don't know why a comment that his performance on Sunday wasn't anything special compared to what his defense did brings out all the usual defenders. That isn't a knock against him, the performance of the Buccs team in every phase of the game and the game script meant Brady didn't have to be special - we don't need to pretend his performance was something it wasn't. The man's achievements should be able to stand on their own without them being supported by fantasy.

The old efficiency stats argument. Tell me, for all of Rodgers' efficiency, to take an example, how has that translated into winning success? You'd swear the game was played on a Excel spreadsheet, with how much weight folks give to stats. The fact is that Brady is still has top marks across whatever metric you choose to hang your hat on. Difference being, he also has the wins. The whole point of the game.

AbusesToilets

Foxtrol wrote: »

Thank you for giving me stats that back up my argument. He leads plenty of cumulative stats or wild US stats based on very specific conditions - like stats in a Super Bowl.

None of what you pointed to counter my point that on a per game or per attempt basis he leads few if any.

Actually Brady's pass interception % is actually one of his better ones - where he is tied 4th behind Rodgers, Mahomes, Dak, and tied with Kaepernick. The 3 ahead of him though play a more aggressive game than Brady.

Those wild playoff stats, where he has seasons worth of MVP level play, against the very best teams in the league year after year