• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

2018 NFL SEASON Thread

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
I'mWithDan said:
Let's introduce you to the NE Pro Bowl QB's, presented by Mr. Orange

Jimmy G - 65%, 17 Passing Yards /G, 1 TD in 11 appearances
Matt Cassell - 63% comp, 131 Passing Yards /G, 21 Td's in 30 appearances
Jacoby Brissett - 61% comp, 133 Passing Yards /G, 0 Td's in 3 appearances

I think he's really on to something here.
Click to expand...

I might be missing a joke or something, but these stats aren't correct.

The two games Jimmy G started in 2016 when Brady was suspended he went:
- 24-33, 264 yards, 1 TD, 0 INT, 106.1 rating in a win
- 18-26, 232 yards, 3 TD, 0 INT, 135.4 rating in a win

Those were the first two starts of his career as well. Honestly not too shabby, and better than the 17 yards per game and 1 overall TD you have him credited for.

Brissett's numbers sucked, but he's a shitty quarterback. Like, really fucking horrible. We saw that when he got to start all year for the Colts last season and my dumbass took a flyer on him in fantasy. He's lucky to have a job.

Cassell also had 23 touchdowns with the Patriots, not 21. You're also using the games where he went in and took a knee on the final drive instead of Brady as games being factored into his "yards per game" games, which isn't close to being fair. You did the same thing above with Jimmy G to make his yards per game look awful. In games Cassell started with the Patriots, he averaged almost 240 yards per game, with an 88.4 rating and nearly a 2:1 TD:INT ratio. Not as bad as you're making him look by including the games where the Patriots were kicking ass so he went in for a drive and technically "played".
 
Stark said:
I might be missing a joke or something, but these stats aren't correct.

The two games Jimmy G started in 2016 when Brady was suspended he went:
- 24-33, 264 yards, 1 TD, 0 INT, 106.1 rating in a win
- 18-26, 232 yards, 3 TD, 0 INT, 135.4 rating in a win

Those were the first two starts of his career as well. Honestly not too shabby, and better than the 17 yards per game and 1 overall TD you have him credited for.

Brissett's numbers sucked, but he's a shitty quarterback. Like, really fucking horrible. We saw that when he got to start all year for the Colts last season and my dumbass took a flyer on him in fantasy. He's lucky to have a job.

Cassell also had 23 touchdowns with the Patriots, not 21. You're also using the games where he went in and took a knee on the final drive instead of Brady as games being factored into his "yards per game" games, which isn't close to being fair. You did the same thing above with Jimmy G to make his yards per game look awful. In games Cassell started with the Patriots, he averaged almost 240 yards per game, with an 88.4 rating and nearly a 2:1 TD:INT ratio. Not as bad as you're making him look by including the games where the Patriots were kicking ass so he went in for a drive and technically "played".
Click to expand...

Cassel I missed the TD's in year 1.

Jimmy G I ran a query forgetting he was there in 2016.

My point stands. None of these guys did anything Brady like when playing.

Attributing W/L as a single stat for comparison is the the only thing that works at all here.

None of these QB's were very good with NE......nowhere near Pro Bowl level and not in the same universe as Brady.

This talking point (other QB's being pro bowl caliber) wasn't worth double checking I counted right.

1 QB had a decent season there......the other two did next to nothing and had a team overpay for them.

I don't understand how that, in anyone's mind, is something that is an argument against a player being the best ever. Even guys like Charlie Frye have played well in 2-3 game sample sizes. It means nothing.
 
Coach and Quarterback as Art Rooney used to say.

And to perhaps add to that? A good front office.

Belichick just happens to be one of the greatest coaches to ever be in this game (Shula, Parcells, Walsh, Lombardi, Gibbs, Knoll, and yes, Paul Brown).

Brady is...well, great. I've seen him win with a medicore defense, a great defense...a medicore offense...and one like the 2007 Patriots with Welker and Moss

It's about luck and timing as well.
 
I'mWithDan said:
Cassel I missed the TD's in year 1.

Jimmy G I ran a query forgetting he was there in 2016.

My point stands. None of these guys did anything Brady like when playing.

Attributing W/L as a single stat for comparison is the the only thing that works at all here.

None of these QB's were very good with NE......nowhere near Pro Bowl level and not in the same universe as Brady.

This talking point (other QB's being pro bowl caliber) wasn't worth double checking I counted right.

1 QB had a decent season there......the other two did next to nothing and had a team overpay for them.

I don't understand how that, in anyone's mind, is something that is an argument against a player being the best ever.
Click to expand...

I wasn't being confrontational, just wanted to front with that. The stats just seemed off to me (mostly Jimmy's) so I wanted to double check to make sure we've got the right facts out here for this discussion.

Of course these guys aren't in the same universe as Brady. He's Tom Brady. Brissett shouldn't even be in the league, Jimmy G is an above average to good starter, and Cassell had one of his only two good seasons of his career in New England.

I thought Jimmy G's numbers in his first two career starts were really damn good, and something he hasn't been able to really replicate in San Fran (getting hurt doesn't help obviously).

My point was originally (not speaking for @Mr. Orange here) was that Brady has a hell of a lot of help overall, and that even average QBs like Cassell and Jimmy G can find success and win there. Brady's career numbers in AFC title games are not good at all, but he has won more than he's lost because the Patriots are always so well-rounded and well-coached.

If you replace Tom Brady with Peyton Manning, year-for-year, I almost would guarantee that Manning has a better career up until probably the age-38 to 39 season, where Brady still seems to be going strong and Manning was done. Montana/Elway/Marino are harder to gauge because of the difference in era, but I think in terms of pure talent and (if) they were given the chance to grow with Belichick like Brady along with having the same teams and defenses (!!!) then guys like Manning, Brees, Rodgers, and Favre would have been just as good if not better.
 
godfather said:
Pretty spot on. He was about to be run out of the league. And make no mistake, I think Bill is great as a coach. All coaches are only as good as their players. In all sports.

If Brady is just this system QB. Then where the FUCK WAS this great system when he was in Cleveland.

Because we weren't very good. And Vinny wasn't a crappy QB either.
Click to expand...
11-5 in 94 I think
 
Here's my final say of the subject for now since I've gotta go to work:

Tom Brady is not a system quarterback. He's really damn good, and when he was in his prime, I think he could have been an MVP candidate on pretty much any team in the league because his decision making and clutch play is out of this world. I've got him in my top-3 easily with Peyton Manning and Joe Montana, but I do probably have him third as of right now.

HOWEVER: the main point I've been trying to make for the last ~18 hours is that Brady has won so much because he gets a lot of help from his team, more than most great QBs get, and he has had a relatively lucky track record compared to other great QBs.

Example, Tom Brady's W-L record in the playoffs when throwing more INTs than TDs (minimum 30 passing attempts in the game) is 5-4.

Every other quarterback since 1950 is 19-150. Brady has over 20% of the wins in playoff scenarios where QBs play relatively poor games.

Tom Brady has more seasons with a top-10 defense than Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers, and Drew Brees combined. If Drew Brees had those defenses, I feel like he'd have more than one ring. Ditto Aaron Rodgers. The Packers had the 22nd ranked defense this year and an idiot at head coach. Give Tom Brady the 22nd ranked defense and Mike McCarthy instead of Belichick and I guarantee he misses the playoffs this year.

I'm not trying to discredit Brady. I'm just saying he's had a lot of things slide his way to get him five rings and a serious chance at his sixth this year, without even getting into the deflategate bullshit.
 
Stark said:
This was kind of the point I was trying to make last night where I was saying that the Patriots are a hell of a system. Brady is a phenomenal QB of course and without him turning into the player he ended up being, that dynasty very likely isn't as memorable as it has become. Him and Belichick have one of the most cohesive QB-coach relationships ever.

However, look at a few things:

2008 - Brady misses 15 games; Matt Cassell steps in and goes 10-5. The Patriots were good and you could have substituted Tom Brady for whoever you wanted pretty much and they would have had success because that system is Spurs-esque.
2016 - Brady suspended 4 games for cheating his dick off in the Super Bowl; Brissett and Jimmy G both played two games each and went a combined 3-1. They probably would have went 4-0 if Jimmy played all four games, but that's neither here nor there.

Again - Brady is fantastic. Phenomenal. A great QB. But he's also not some unprecedented Jesus Christ at the position like a few people are making him out to be; putting him on a God tier by himself completely with him blowing Montana, Peyton, and whoever else completely out of the water. There's a few too many things you can bring up against him to stop that kind of thing from happening.

He's still tier one with whoever you want to have with him (without getting too much into it, I'd probably have him there with Montana and Manning), but he's not there by himself, just like I don't have LeBron on a tier by himself separate from Jordan just yet.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Couldn’t have said it better myself. He’s tier 1, but not a class of his own.
 
Stark said:
I wasn't being confrontational, just wanted to front with that. The stats just seemed off to me (mostly Jimmy's) so I wanted to double check to make sure we've got the right facts out here for this discussion.

Of course these guys aren't in the same universe as Brady. He's Tom Brady. Brissett shouldn't even be in the league, Jimmy G is an above average to good starter, and Cassell had one of his only two good seasons of his career in New England.

I thought Jimmy G's numbers in his first two career starts were really damn good, and something he hasn't been able to really replicate in San Fran (getting hurt doesn't help obviously).

My point was originally (not speaking for @Mr. Orange here) was that Brady has a hell of a lot of help overall, and that even average QBs like Cassell and Jimmy G can find success and win there. Brady's career numbers in AFC title games are not good at all, but he has won more than he's lost because the Patriots are always so well-rounded and well-coached.

If you replace Tom Brady with Peyton Manning, year-for-year, I almost would guarantee that Manning has a better career up until probably the age-38 to 39 season, where Brady still seems to be going strong and Manning was done. Montana/Elway/Marino are harder to gauge because of the difference in era, but I think in terms of pure talent and (if) they were given the chance to grow with Belichick like Brady along with having the same teams and defenses (!!!) then guys like Manning, Brees, Rodgers, and Favre would have been just as good if not better.
Click to expand...

No, I didn't take it that way......I honestly didn't bother double checking the numbers after a first glance. It was lazy but I didn't want to waste a ton of time looking that up, given the results. At best, it's (2) QB's, who in small sample sizes, put up middle third QB numbers. On a team with a good coach, you can scratch out wins in the interim. Over the course of 15 years, that's not getting your anywhere. You need a truly sport defining player.

I also think "replace player with x and he'd have the same career" is not something you can reasonably argue. Even if you wanted to go that route, think of the separation here between these players, when you are talking about the upper echelon of QB's:

Playoffs:

Manning: 271.8 YPG, TD% 3.9, INT% 2.4, Rating 87.4
Brady: 279.9 YPG, TD% 4.7, INT% 2.1, Rating 90.9

We'll see how Brady's twilight drags those down (if any) but presently, Brady's YPG (3%), rating (nearly 4%) and TD% (17%) are really large gaps given the volume of games / attempts / level of play. That doesn't even get in to game winning drives or clutch stats. And Brady did that with less talented skill players.

I guess what I am saying is clutch is the single talent that travels. Are you really that confident in even a player like Manning, making all the plays, in all the big spots that Brady did? The more opportunities you get, the harder it is to sustain. Manning appeared in I think 14 playoffs too. What are his defining moments? What game changing plays did he make? 9 times he lost in round 1. It's a team game but that is a staggering stat......and in a handful, he had some ugly lines:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MannPe00/gamelog/post/

6 of those were at home. Yikes.

I think this is an incredibly imperfect argument either way but statistically, even if you want to throw out W/L's, Brady is just in a different tier. When you are talking several percentage points difference, given the absolute elite play of the guys at the top of these lists, that is just an enormous gap that I have a hard time reconciling.
 
Last edited:
Actually never mind I’m out this thread brady is a system qb and someone believes in deflategate. I’m out of here
 
I think as well we're all fatigued by it.

Since 2001? They have been to 9 Super Bowls. They are currently 5-3, with this one to go.

That's a bit insane. I think, again, their only contemporary really in that area would be the Browns under Paul Brown.

They may very stumble to 10 somehow if Brady finds the fountain of youth for one more season and they're able to mask any faults

I think that in a decade or so, that will be the default comparison for "Greatest team ever" in the vain that the 49ers and Steelers teams of the past were. But I think we're all somewhat fed up with their success.

Especially in a market like Boston. Just...exhausting.
 
Triple-S said:
I think as well we're all fatigued by it.

Since 2001? They have been to 9 Super Bowls. They are currently 5-3, with this one to go.

That's a bit insane. I think, again, their only contemporary really in that area would be the Browns under Paul Brown.

They may very stumble to 10 somehow if Brady finds the fountain of youth for one more season and they're able to mask any faults

I think that in a decade or so, that will be the default comparison for "Greatest team ever" in the vain that the 49ers and Steelers teams of the past were. But I think we're all somewhat fed up with their success.

Especially in a market like Boston. Just...exhausting.
Click to expand...

Pretty much my view, especially since I despise Boston sports with all my heart, Patriots, Sox, Bruins, Celtics... fuck 'em all.

Same thing is happening in the NBA. If the Warriors make the finals again this year, I'm not even going to watch, because who gives a fuck at that point?

That's why baseball is still my favorite sport, since there's typically a fresh matchup almost every season. There's only been back to back league champions twice this century, the Dodgers in 2018 and 2017, and the Rangers in 2010 and 2011. Those teams also lost all four of those appearances. Baseball has had 12 different champions (Yanks, D'Backs, Angels, Marlins, Red Sox, White Sox, Cardinals, Phillies, Giants, Royals, Cubs, & Astros) in the past 18 years.

Hate on it and call it boring if you want, but at least we tend to get fresh champions relatively frequently. There hasn't been a back to back World Series winner since the Yankees won 3 in a row from 1998-2000.
 
Stark said:
Pretty much my view, especially since I despise Boston sports with all my heart, Patriots, Sox, Bruins, Celtics... fuck 'em all.

Same thing is happening in the NBA. If the Warriors make the finals again this year, I'm not even going to watch, because who gives a fuck at that point?
Click to expand...

Again...generally in any normal situation? The Patriots would have been done about 5 years or so again at bare minimum.

Brady would be fucking around doing NBC's pre-game show or in the booth for MNF or something.

Belichick would be coaching UConn because he got bored in retirement. etc, etc.

I think that's why this is disappointing.

Everyone in this thread was psyched because the Chiefs looked like a great fun team this year. A long suffering fanbase that found lightning in a bottle and offense that would have made the 99 Rams go "Damn son"

We all thought we'd be entering into this new awesome and more fun era of the NFL.

We got served a shit sandwich instead because this team will not go the fuck away.

And agree with baseball...just wish the Dolans would be gearing up for one more run and throwing money at it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-14: "Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:14: " Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey."
Top