NFL Regular Season

[Mexal]

Unfortunately, we don't. Last night, the Panthers made the Bengals look like the 1970s Steelers. It felt good as I realized we aren't the worst team in the league, just the second worst. This will be a long season but the future is bright.

[Rockroi]

doublepost

[Rockroi]

Okay, lets finally start the 2011 ASoIaF NFL Message Thread season!

Uh, in none of those years (2008-2010) was he as good as he was in 2007.

Uh... that's because 2007 was the greatest statistical season by a QB... EVER. That's not the correct metric because its an outlier. No QB is going to get there again. Not Manning, not Rogers not Breese not Zombie Pryor. Nobody. So, to use THAT as your metric of Brady's peak is absurd.

The proper metric is to compare Brady not to ... Brady (its amazing that you do that btw) but to all other QBs currently employed in the NFL.... and its not close. The metric that needs to be focused on is "How do Brady's Stats compared to other QBs" and NOT "How Does Brady's Stats compare to the greatest QB performance of all time".

So, you know here this is going and I will not bore you with the build up BUT...

According to YOUR BIBLE - Football Outsiders - who had the best statistical seasons from, say, 2007 to 2010? Let's check the numbers (just to remind people, FO.com ranks QBs by DYAR primarily):

2007: T.Brady DYAR 2,788 (1)

YAR 2,698 (1)

DVOA 56.9% (1)

VOA 54.7% (1)

Eyrd 7110 (1) (and just to point out the GAP between Brady and everyone else is gigantic. I cannot do it justice in mere words)

2008: N/A

2009: T.Brady (that season FO actually ran a piece that explained why Brady had the best season of any QB in 2009)

DYAR 2,170 (1)

YAR 1,799 (6)

DVOA 44.2% (2)

VOA 34.7% (6)

EYrd 6113 (1)

2010: T.Brady DYAR 2,137 (1)

YAR 1,987 (1)

DVOA 53.3% (1)

VOA 48.8% (1)

Eyrd 5,574 (2)

Please note that in 2007, Brady was throwing to Randy Moss, possibly the greatest WR to play the game since Jerry Rice (TO and Andre Johnson are the only others in the discussion). For the VAST majority of 2010 Brady was throwing to three WRs whose combined height was 16 feet. Obviously, Deion Branch's addition was key because he was just burning the joint up in Seattle ... oh wait, that's right, he sucked up there... my bad. Brady's INT to TD ratio was also better in 2010. Yes, statistically, Brady had better year, but comparing the two is not indicative of a decline or even that Brady cannot hit the high note any longer. Again, you are splitting hairs trying to say, "Well, its not his apex." The record reflects that without that marquee WR, Brady is still jaw-dropping amazing. Apex-worthy.

The metric that must be used- the definition of APEX - is how is Brady performing against other QBs? The answer... ah, he's not competing against them; he's annihilating them. He is the best QB of his day, and its not close. And the stats bear that out. To say otherwise is to ignore the actual numbers.

While the Pats offense was very good last year, a lot of that was because of their running success - not just because Brady was good.

So, what you are saying is that the reason the Pats were good was NOT because our QB had a 3900 yeard season with 36 TDs and only 4 INTs. No. Its because Ben Jarvis Green Elis rushed for 1008 yards? (Woodhead, btw, didn't have nearly enough carries to qualify for that list). Hmm... look, BJGE had a terrific season and his footballoutsiders.com stats bear that out- he actually had a better season in DYAR and Eyrds than Jones-Drew and Peterson. So ...

Oh, wait that's right, Brady had the best season by any QB as far as DYAR went and was considered the best QB ... by a country freakin' mile. He outpaces the entire NFL. That is- by definition - the APEX because no other QB can touch him. So, is your argument that the running game made the Pats great? That's extraordinary logic because YOU YOURSELF say time and time again that its a MYTH that the you need to run the ball to set up the pass (and FO supports this thesis 100%). To now try to say, "You know, it was the 1000 rushing yards that set up the 3900 passing yards" is the culmination of wishful thinking to support your erroneous position.

So far the stats bear that out. 2009 was not nearly as good (while it was his second-best statistical year, that's not saying much given that his stats year by year were not particularly impressive prior to 2007), 2010 was certainly better but they leaned much more heavily on the running game than in years past.

MMm... nope... In 2010, the Pats relied on one guy: Tom Brady and everything spun from him. I cannot even name a game where the running game took over. And there was a reason for that. Also, Brady's numbers- when compared to EVERYONE ELSE -are just flat out better.

Also note something you might put more weight on, Rockroi: how many times have the Pats won a playoff game since 2007? How many wins does Brady have in playoff games? How far have they gone in the playoffs? IIRC, the Pats have been in two playoff games since 2007 and lost both of them, rather handily. And in both games it was their offense that ended up stinking up the place, with Brady harried and having to deal with a lot of pressure. How does that go against my claim here?

For starters, the 2009 game is particularly horrid because the prior week, the Pats lost Welker. Good teams can deal with injuries, even to their #1 WR. However, with only one week? Total disaster. No Running game and the D was TERRIBLE! Brady basically was told "Go out there and do everything." IT was horrible. Yeah, not sure what that has to do with anything. This past season... pressure? Uh.,.. the Jets never even blitzed! The Pats lost because their D was terrible- statistically one of the worst defenses ever (on third down they were 1AA worthy). Brady, as Ron Borges put it, did not lose them that game, "He wasn't 'God awful'; he just wasn't 'God'." Well, sorry but that shit happens. The D lost us that game because they could not stop Mark Sanchez. How is that a reflection on Brady? /shrug.

Mind you, I think Brady will have a lot of good years to go. I don't think he's going to suck any time soon or suddenly turn into Marino or Favre in their last years.

I know you;re not. I completely understand what you are and are not saying.

But I don't think he'll have another incredible year or even a year as good as 2009.

But will he have years better than the other QBs out there? That's all that really matters. But you knew that already. Even if you won't write it.

(Edited because I hit the "TAB" button and that prematurely posted my ... post).

[Mexal]

Are we really having the Brady argument again? Sigh. Every year, same argument, same people. I hate Brady as much as the next guy but the guy is the best QB in the league. He has the stats and has the Super Bowls. There is no argument.

[Greywolf2375]

Are we really having the Brady argument again? Sigh. Every year, same argument, same people. I hate Brady as much as the next guy but the guy is the best QB in the league. He has the stats and has the Super Bowls. There is no argument.

Not sure if it is really an argument or Rock just warming up for the season, he did say he was a little out of posting shape, so this is kinda his two-a-days, especially with the double post.

[Rockroi]

Not sure if it is really an argument or Rock just warming up for the season, he did say he was a little out of posting shape, so this is kinda his two-a-days, especially with the double post.

DING DING DING DING !!!!!!

Think of it as the warm up. The storm before the Storm if you will.

[Rhom]

Mexal, I placed my call to the Bengals ticket office today. Should have two tickets to the home opener. I can't say that I'll be rooting for the Bengals, but I'll be rooting for a good game. Will that be sufficient? :lol:

Not sure if it is really an argument or Rock just warming up for the season, he did say he was a little out of posting shape, so this is kinda his two-a-days, especially with the double post.

:rofl:

[Mexal]

Mexal, I placed my call to the Bengals ticket office today. Should have two tickets to the home opener. I can't say that I'll be rooting for the Bengals, but I'll be rooting for a good game. Will that be sufficient? :lol:

Well it is the Browns v Bengals. Not sure what will constitue a good game in that match up but Paul Brown Stadium is very nice.

[Rhom]

Well it is the Browns v Bengals. Not sure what will constitue a good game in that match up but Paul Brown Stadium is very nice.

Ah, I must have made a mistake, the list of dates I have show the 9/25 match against SF as the first date (other than preseason). So anyways, I'm going to the SF game. It's my first NFL game, so I'm looking forward to it.

[Kalbear]

Uh... that's because 2007 was the greatest statistical season by a QB... EVER. That's not the correct metric because its an outlier. No QB is going to get there again. Not Manning, not Rogers not Breese not Zombie Pryor. Nobody. So, to use THAT as your metric of Brady's peak is absurd.

Why is using the best season of a QB's career as a peak absurd? I honestly don't get this. By that token all of Brady's seasons since 2007 are also outliers, including last year's; he has significantly more seasons where he didn't do as well as 2007 or 2010, so presumably by that logic we should throw all of that out and then just use the median? Or the average? Come on. That's idiocy.

The proper metric is to compare Brady not to ... Brady (its amazing that you do that btw) but to all other QBs currently employed in the NFL.... and its not close. The metric that needs to be focused on is "How do Brady's Stats compared to other QBs" and NOT "How Does Brady's Stats compare to the greatest QB performance of all time".

Why?

You're saying that if there are three world record holders in sprinting competing and one gets a bronze (but a better time than anyone except those two) then that's worse than winning the gold despite coming in, say, 50th. It's not like the league has changed significantly in passing difficulty between 2007 and 2010, nor is it like QBs haven't been able to do great performances in that time. This really is bad form, Rock. These arguments don't even make surface sense.

When talking about Brady's ascent and decline, the only proper way to compare him is by looking at prior seasons. You can adjust them by national averages for QBs (which DVOA and DYAR does) but at the end of the day you're talking about measuring the peak of a specific player's performance, not stack ranking them as far as how good they are compared to everyone else. The latter is good if you're offering raises at a company or something, but it's useless as far as measuring overall productivity.

Oh, wait that's right, Brady had the best season by any QB as far as DYAR went and was considered the best QB ... by a country freakin' mile. He outpaces the entire NFL. That is- by definition - the APEX because no other QB can touch him.

I never said anything to the contrary.

FO says that his apex was 2700 DYAR. Then in 2009 it was 2170. Then it's 2137. Those numbers...are decreasing.

Would it help you freak out less, Rock, if I said unequivocally that Brady was by far the best regular season QB in the NFL in 2007, 2009 and 2010? That there is no contest there? That no other QB can touch him in the regular season?

But while I can say that, I can also say that he is in decline. And both statements can be right, can be backed by the same facts, and are perfectly reasonable to state.

So, what you are saying is that the reason the Pats were good was NOT because our QB had a 3900 yeard season with 36 TDs and only 4 INTs. No. Its because Ben Jarvis Green Elis rushed for 1008 yards? (Woodhead, btw, didn't have nearly enough carries to qualify for that list). Hmm... look, BJGE had a terrific season and his footballoutsiders.com stats bear that out- he actually had a better season in DYAR and Eyrds than Jones-Drew and Peterson. So ...

Actually, no. I'm saying their running game - with BJE, Morris, Faulk, and Woodhead - was very good. From FO: their passing offense was #1 as you indicated - but their running offense was #2 in the NFL last year. And it's funny that you use DYAR to point out how good Brady was but use one player's rushing yards as an indicator that they weren't as good. Nice misuse of stats!

If you're curious, this is the same ranking as in 2007, but in 2007 they had better passing and slightly worse rushing.

Also, just FYI: I don't use FO entirely any more. It's certainly better than basic stats to measure quality, but it has some glaring holes in how valuable drives and field position are that are coming more to life. There's a reason that Philly and NE are ranking so well every year in offense, and it primarily has to do with the value of the west coast offensive style. Again, I think Brady had a great year last year and was clearly better than any other QB last year - but I don't think FO measures it as well as they could.

But will he have years better than the other QBs out there? That's all that really matters. But you knew that already. Even if you won't write it.

Oh, please. You're really ascribing motives to me that aren't there. Here, I'll write it: chances are that Brady will be the best QB in the league this year and even next year, provided nothing drastic happens to their line or to him. Heck, I've said that the Pats should be favored to go to the superbowl this year and I fully expect Brady to rip the league up in the first 8 games.

Doesn't mean Brady's not in decline. Doesn't mean Brady hasn't lost a step.

For starters, the 2009 game is particularly horrid because the prior week, the Pats lost Welker. Good teams can deal with injuries, even to their #1 WR. However, with only one week? Total disaster. No Running game and the D was TERRIBLE! Brady basically was told "Go out there and do everything." IT was horrible. Yeah, not sure what that has to do with anything. This past season... pressure? Uh.,.. the Jets never even blitzed! The Pats lost because their D was terrible- statistically one of the worst defenses ever (on third down they were 1AA worthy). Brady, as Ron Borges put it, did not lose them that game, "He wasn't 'God awful'; he just wasn't 'God'." Well, sorry but that shit happens. The D lost us that game because they could not stop Mark Sanchez. How is that a reflection on Brady? /shrug.

YOu're really using Ron Borges as a source? The guy who called Vince Wilfork a bust and wanted Bledsoe back ASAP? I'm not even from Boston and know what a useless douchebag Borges is. As to the 2010 game - Brady had a 89.0 average, an interception. According to FO after this game their offense dropped by 10 full percentage points overall. And they had a 7% offensive DVOA for that game - which is basically just above average, and includes defensive adjustments against the Jets (though you're right, their defense was atrociously bad). Their unadjusted offensive performance was -3%. If you want to look at DYAR for that game, Brady got 50. Heck, Jay Cutler outplayed him that week. Also, if the Jets didn't blitz it didn't seem to matter; Brady took 5 sacks in that game, though I'll admit that the reason Brady got sacked was not because of blitzing but because his receivers were very well covered and he had to check down or eat it a lot of the time.

This was a really bad point of yours. If I were your coach in the offseason, I'd make you go run wind sprints.

Can't have it both ways, Rock. Can't use DVOA and DYAR to show how incredible Brady and the Pats are and then ignore it when he doesn't do well.

[Kalbear]

Man, this board.

[Greywolf2375]

Man, this board.

See what this lockout has done? Even Kal is getting impacted...everyone needs to step up for the season.

[Jaime L]

Fucking preseason: Jarvis Jenkins tore his ACL - he's out for the year. Sucks to lose a guy who looked like he'd help bring our D-line light years ahead from where it was last year. It ain't as bad as the rash of season ending injuries the Giants have suffered but still blows.

OTOH, call me crazy, but Beck looks pretty good to me. Athletic, able to run the Shanahan bootleg offense, stands in against the blitz. Some unpolished moments sure, but less than I would've thought. Statwise, he hasn't distanced himself from the Cannon, who has been mostly solid, but I'm drinking the Shanny Koolaid on Beck having the higher upside.

Also hope Timmy Hightower can keep some of the preseason magic going into the regular season. If you can run against the Steelers and Ravens first teamers that bodes well, right? Still not sure about Haslett as a D Coordinator but the offense for the first time has resembled the Shanahan scheme I watched all those years in Denver. Here's hoping they still look this way when games actually count.

[Quoth]

I have it on good authority (So Spake Rex) that the Jets are going to win the Super Bowl. The season seems so much more anti-climactic now...

[Jaxom 1974]

Doesn't mean Brady's not in decline. Doesn't mean Brady hasn't lost a step.

Well said. When you're 5 steps ahead of everyone else excepting one or two others, you're still going to be 3 or 4 steps ahead of the pack once your decline begins...

[Mya Stone]

Well said. When you're 5 steps ahead of everyone else excepting one or two others, you're still going to be 3 or 4 steps ahead of the pack once your decline begins...

Why must you insist on using the Official Hammer Style when posting lately, Jax? You hoarding canned goods and stocking up on gold, too?

[Sivin]

Actually, Peyton Manning's uber-season in 2004 was actually better than Tom Brady's in 2007. Peyton hit the 49th touchdown pass in the best pass play I've ever seen (I was at the game).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2NfjC3WSVc

(I couldn't find the specific pass, but it's in there in the highlights)

That 49th touchdown pass. He did it with three games left in the season. After that, Tony Dungy started pulling him after the first series of the remaining 3 games.

If you divide 50 by 16, you get 3.125 touchdown passes a game.

If you divide 49 by 13, you get 3.769230.

Peyton's quarterback rating in 2004 was 121.1

Tom Brady's quarterback rating in 2007 was 117.2

Just saying.

[Jaxom 1974]

Why must you insist on using the Official Hammer Style when posting lately, Jax? You hoarding canned goods and stocking up on gold, too?

I have no idea what you're talking about... :P

[Kalbear]

Eh. While I can see a point that they called off the dogs with Manning before they did Brady, there were plenty of games where Manning just feasted on inept teams as well. Manning threw more interceptions, had a lower completion rate and played against worse defenses in that year. It was an amazing season for Manning, don't get me wrong - but Brady in 2007 was better.

[Sivin]

Eh. While I can see a point that they called off the dogs with Manning before they did Brady, there were plenty of games where Manning just feasted on inept teams as well. Manning threw more interceptions, had a lower completion rate and played against worse defenses in that year. It was an amazing season for Manning, don't get me wrong - but Brady in 2007 was better.

Brady threw the ball 81 more times, and while they ran the score up a bit in Indy, it was a different situation. The Colts had a defense that they knew probably couldn't hold onto their leads if they started slowing down. So they made sure that the other team wasn't going to catch them. But they always stopped in the fourth quarter.

As opposed to the Patriots and Brady. Who milked every second of the clock against the Dolphins so that they could get Brady those extra touchdowns. It is the sum of douchebaggery to do what they did against a winless dolphins team. There's running up the score because you can, and you're letting your team have fun, and then there's actively insulting the other team

Don't get me wrong. If I could trade Jim Caldwell or Tony Dungy for Bill Bellicheck. I would do so in an instant. I'd just want to keep Peyton Manning, and I'd be aware that Bellicheck is a total dick when compared to Caldwell and Dungy. (But hey, I'd kind of like that, I'll take 4th and 2 over "quick they're running the ball! Call a timeout to make sure they're not confused!" Any day.)

Don't even get me started on the pass protection that they both had, either.

This is fun! I've not had this argument in a long time. And it's always been against a bunch of idiots who don't understand anything except "Tom Brady had Randy Moss, that makes him better"...