Super Bowl XLIX - Seahawks v. Patriots

[tifosi77]

BB won with Joe Flacco/Matt Ryan-level quarterbacking...

As a defensive coordinator working under Bill Parcells.

[MalkinIsMyHomeboy]

I was too young to really watch but Brady did make the Pro Bowl in 2001 and did lead the NFL in passing TDs in 2002. So I wouldn't say he was too bad...

[mikey287]

I was too young to really watch but Brady did make the Pro Bowl in 2001 and did lead the NFL in passing TDs in 2002. So I wouldn't say he was too bad...

Right, probably about Matt Ryan level, give or take. I'd recommend re-watching his MVP-caliber* performance in the Super Bowl vs. St. Louis.

Spoiler:

* = lol

[Troy Loney]

Do his other two SB MVP awards also deserve the *?

[SolidSnake]

I think Peyton himself would say Brady>Peyton if it came down to it

[mikey287]

Do his other two SB MVP awards also deserve the *?

Was there any indication of that?

[MWB]

I'll take Brady. It's definitely not easy to decipher who's more responsible for the success in New England. But, I don't think the Cassell argument is very compelling when you see that Belicheck's pre-Brady record is 41-55. I think they have a very co-dependent relationship though, I choose Brady cause there's a clear record of mediocrity with Belicheck during his career that Brady doesn't have.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Belichick" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That's a very good point that I hadn't really thought about. At some point Belicheck may coach without Brady and we will have a more definitive answer. I'm sure he grew as a coach. How much of that had to do with Brady though?

[Troy Loney]

I think they have a very co-dependent relationship though, I choose Brady cause there's a clear record of mediocrity with Belicheck during his career that Brady doesn't have.

Brady has never played a down in the NFL without Belichick on the sideline, so that's a tough comparison. You have to look further back into Brady's career to find the mediocrity. When he went to Michigan, he was only like 5th or 6th on the depth chart. Even into his senior year, he wasn't the clear #1 starter until halfway through the season. There was absolutely nothing about his game that screamed "future first ballot HOF". He was taken 199th overall for a reason..... he reeked of meh.

I don't think this has any bearing.

QB success is dependent on the other 10 guys on the field doing their job well. Thus, it's impossible to use any of those results in any way.

I think the coach's responsibility is to put the QB in a position to succeed. This is the area where I believe Manning stands out over all QB's in history cause he's like a coach out there. He knows all the individual responsibilities and gets all the players to do their jobs better. Thus putting him in a better place to succeed.

He will always succeed independent of the offensive coaching staff.

But, despite this ability, Manning is a lot more beatable in the playoffs against the other best teams. Maybe he just has too much responsibility and the rest of the offense is too reliant on him to do everything.

[mikey287]

Manning, Elway, Marino, Fouts, Favre...these guys were never insulated - for lack of a better word - in the way that Troy is referring to above...maybe guys like Elway and Favre to a fault even...

Like being a goalie on a bad team vs. being on a good team (defensively)...it's still riding on you, but to what degree and to what level you have to be at to succeed is altered...

[tifosi77]

I think they have a very co-dependent relationship though, I choose Brady cause there's a clear record of mediocrity with Belicheck during his career that Brady doesn't have.

Brady has never played a down in the NFL without Belichick on the sideline, so that's a tough comparison. You have to look further back into Brady's career to find the mediocrity. When he went to Michigan, he was only like 5th or 6th on the depth chart. Even into his senior year, he wasn't the clear #1 starter until halfway through the season. There was absolutely nothing about his game that screamed "future first ballot HOF". He was taken 199th overall for a reason..... he reeked of meh.

I don't think this has any bearing.

QB success is dependent on the other 10 guys on the field doing their job well. Thus, it's impossible to use any of those results in any way.

I think the coach's responsibility is to put the QB in a position to succeed. This is the area where I believe Manning stands out over all QB's in history cause he's like a coach out there. He knows all the individual responsibilities and gets all the players to do their jobs better. Thus putting him in a better place to succeed.

He will always succeed independent of the offensive coaching staff.

But, despite this ability, Manning is a lot more beatable in the playoffs against the other best teams. Maybe he just has too much responsibility and the rest of the offense is too reliant on him to do everything.

I don't really disagree with any of this.

Which is why I'll take the great coach over the great QB.

[Idoit40fans]

Do his other two SB MVP awards also deserve the *?

Was there any indication of that?

Yes, in every other reference you e made to his entire career.

[MWB]

It could just be that Belicheck and Brady and the perfect confluence of coach and player. If he has Favre as a qb, can he adjust to that and make it work? If Brady had a different coach can he adjust to a different offense? They both seemed to be able to adapt a bit.

[shafnutz05]

Getting back to the SB... http://deadspin.com/stop-trying-to-conv ... 1683463031" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Love this article. There have been some "intelligent" commentators using analytics and a bunch of other crap to explain why the pass play was actually a good call. No, no it wasn't. It was awful.

[LeopardLetang]

If I started a franchise I'd take Brady and Belicheck over Manning but I'd take Manning over Brady with any coach other than Belicheck.

[Idoit40fans]

If I started a franchise I'd take Brady and Belicheck over Manning but I'd take Manning over Brady with any coach other than Belicheck.

Chip Kelly?

[MWB]

As always, you can twist stats to say what you want. Sometimes logic just prevails.

[LeopardLetang]

I know I'm in the minority but i don't think that was the most egregious playcall ever. It was overly risky. With one timeout left they may have had to pass once. That down was probably the best time to do it. Though I always favor a play action roll out. I didn't read that linked article yet.

[Idoit40fans]

IF they had no timeouts left, that opens the door for discussion. They had a timeout left, the run was teh correct play there. You run there, use the timeout. pass on third to kill the clock if you don't complete, then do whatever you want on 4th. Of course, throwing short of the endzone like they did kind of turns everythign on its head, but that just adds to the stupidity all around on that play.

[MWB]

The 538 article defending it gets the timing wrong. I really don't think they would have had to throw at all. They let quite a bit of time run off between first and second down that they didn't need to.

[Idoit40fans]

I didn't even look at the article. I'm just considering what should have actually been able to happen.

[shafnutz05]

As the Deadspin article points out, you have to throw "analytics" out the window a little bit when you have Marshawn freaking Lynch. If the Pats were in that exact same situation, I would have had zero issues with the playcall because their running game is very meh and unproven, especially in that game. But....Lynch

[MWB]

The Lynch run on first down started with 1:06 on the clock. The interception was at :26. The people saying they had to throw in order to stop the clock at some point ignore that they let so much time run off between the plays. That skews any "analysis" defending the play call.

[Idoit40fans]

Even if they didn't...you run and that takes(lets be generous) 15 seconds off the clock. Still time to throw on third(obviously a fade to the corner, only safe throw in your bag, you go to that big rookie guy that scored on that pushoff earlier), then run it afterwards.

[LeopardLetang]

IF they had no timeouts left, that opens the door for discussion. They had a timeout left, the run was teh correct play there. You run there, use the timeout. pass on third to kill the clock if you don't complete, then do whatever you want on 4th. Of course, throwing short of the endzone like they did kind of turns everythign on its head, but that just adds to the stupidity all around on that play.

I agree that's the best course of action. But passing on second down wasn't a horrific idea. As for the particular play call I'd have to see again where the throw was. My memory is that the receiver may have been able to fall into the end zone. If not I'd say that's more execution than call. Though that still falls on the call leaving that variable in Wilson's hand. And it was an incredible play by the DB. As someone else noted at least it wasn't a fade.

If it fell incomplete then it's a guessing game for the D on third down. Whereas if a run is stuffed on second a pass is likely on third. Though again I feel a run on second down was the best course based solely on the maybe irrational concept of momentum. Second and goal from the one...Seahawks lineman amped up with belief and the patriots D feeling nearly hopeless. It's not science but the game felt over and that's why the call is being so ridiculed.

[Idoit40fans]

IF they had no timeouts left, that opens the door for discussion. They had a timeout left, the run was teh correct play there. You run there, use the timeout. pass on third to kill the clock if you don't complete, then do whatever you want on 4th. Of course, throwing short of the endzone like they did kind of turns everythign on its head, but that just adds to the stupidity all around on that play.

I agree that's the best course of action. But passing on second down wasn't a horrific idea. As for the particular play call I'd have to see again where the throw was. My memory is that the receiver may have been able to fall into the end zone. If not I'd say that's more execution than call. Though that still falls on the call leaving that variable in Wilson's hand. And it was an incredible play by the DB. As someone else noted at least it wasn't a fade.

If it fell incomplete then it's a guessing game for the D on third down. Whereas if a run is stuffed on second a pass is likely on third. Though again I feel a run on second down was the best course based solely on the maybe irrational concept of momentum. Second and goal from the one...Seahawks lineman amped up with belief and the patriots D feeling nearly hopeless. It's not science but the game felt over and that's why the call is being so ridiculed.

Yeah, the stupdity was on the receiver, that doesn't go on Wilson or the coaching staff, just saying someone was dumb.