RG3 posts the highest QBTG ever.

[cphil006]

I realize that you think you have made a good argument for your position. As I read it, all you have done is to confirm that you overvalue the QB position. Most people do, including football coaches who should know better.

Brian Billick, blogging for the NFL, recently wrote that Eli Manning, having won two Super Bowls, should now be considered elite. He was making the same error you are making. He was giving the QB -- Eli -- far more credit than he deserves for a team accomplishment. Someone must have pointed out that his two Super Bowl requirement denied the "elite" label to a whole lot of outstanding QBs, including Peyton Manning, because, when I went back a couple of days later to read the article again, it had been edited. There was no mention of Eli in it.

So, your argument that "...people who know football far more than either one of us ever will..." agree with you falls on deaf ears. It's the experts like Brian Billick who start the bandwagon going. Then others, like you, jump on without really thinking.

As I realize you've given no support for your arguement that Tom Brady is overrated.

"including head coaches who should know better"... and apparently you know more than NFL head coaches? I find it comical that you feel your football IQ is superior to a former Super Bowl winning head coach. Sure Head Coaches make dumb calls or say dumb things or play less-than-talented players (Stanley Richard, thanks Norv Turner), but your starting to believe the things you're declaring and giving yourself too much credit.

Winning a Super Bowl doesn't make necessarily make a QB elite (see Trent Dilfer) nor did I make that claim... but playing awesome for 10+ seasons, winning 3 in 5 appearances, plus throwing 50 TDs, going 16-0, and winning multiple MVP awards (for being the most-valuable player) does make a QB elite... which is why Tom Brady is elite and one of the greatest of all time.

You called RG3 the greatest QB you've ever seen... after seeing 10 games. Your reasoning is because he rated so high in your quasi-athletic measurement grading system that you deem measures talent... which it does not... it grades a couple of physical attributes for a QB.

Perhaps you should clarify that RG3 has the best physical tools for a QB in your opinion... not necessarily the most talented. I think Tom Brady and Aaron Rogers are far more talented right now even though they would not score as high on your "quasi-athletic grading system" or QAGS

[KDawg]

As I realize you've given no support for your arguement that Tom Brady is overrated.

To go back a page, here's what I said:

He's saying, in the context of the thread, that Brady is overrated because he's receiving too much credit for the team's success, and too many people detract from the other players and give Brady the credit. I thoroughly agree. Saying he's a grade A passer but being overrated may look odd in a nutshell, but it's really not. It's a concession that Brady, despite the fact that physically he's not a specimen, is an outstanding passer. But it's also saying that the credit he receives for the teams success is a bit overboard. There is a myriad of reasons the Patriots were successful. Brady's skill is one of them. Belichick's scheme and putting his players in a position to succeed is another. Brady's supporting cast, despite being "weak" (in many people's opinions) in some of the skill positions was strong in many other places, including virtually the entire defense. He had support systems in place that helped him succeed. Saying any single player won a Super Bowl in and of themselves is a dead giveaway of a single player being overrated, or to put it in another term, being given too much credit. I would think that Brady would concede that as well. Without teammates and coaches, Brady can't win. His guys put in the work and Brady's incredible skill combined with his coaches scheme won those Super Bowls. Not Brady alone.

I think he has, as I explained above. He's giving Brady a grade A as a pocket passer. But I believe, and he will correct me if I'm wrong, that he's saying giving Brady as much credit as he receives for those Super Bowls is a defining characteristic of overrated. I don't believe he's speaking of Brady's ability to run Belichick's offense. Just the fact that he's given the lion's share of the credit. But I could be wrong.

"including head coaches who should know better"... and apparently you know more than NFL head coaches? I find it comical that you feel your football IQ is superior to a former Super Bowl winning head coach.

Is it not possible that a Super Bowl head coach isn't incredibly efficient in EVERY area of intelligence? I believe so. Billick is an incredibly smart man, but to say he's smarter than Oldfan in EVERY way simply because he won a Super Bowl is misguided. Again, I'm not saying Oldfan knows everything, I've disagreed with him in the past and I will again. But it's entirely possible that Oldfan's point is accurate. Or maybe its not. But to write it off simply because it goes against what a "Super Bowl Winning" head coach said is faulty logic.

You called RG3 the greatest QB you've ever seen... after seeing 10 games.

From a physical standpoint. Keep that in perspective.

Perhaps you should clarify that RG3 has the best physical tools for a QB in your opinion... not necessarily the most talented.

He has. He says "talent" but he's made it clear several times that he's speaking on physical ability and what he calls "talent". Talent can be all encompassing, it could be purely physical or it could be mental. You're arguing semantics.

[cphil006]

To go back a page, here's what I said:

Is it not possible that a Super Bowl head coach isn't incredibly efficient in EVERY area of intelligence? I believe so. Billick is an incredibly smart man, but to say he's smarter than Oldfan in EVERY way simply because he won a Super Bowl is misguided. Again, I'm not saying Oldfan knows everything, I've disagreed with him in the past and I will again. But it's entirely possible that Oldfan's point is accurate. Or maybe its not. But to write it off simply because it goes against what a "Super Bowl Winning" head coach said is faulty logic.

Then I'm still waiting for the reasoning on which he disagrees that Tom Brady is great. That's the main arguement here.

All you've pointed out is Tom Brady recieves too much credit. Does he? How so? Bellicheck receives most of the credit, yet he couldn't do squat in Cleveland. If anything I'd say Bellicheck is overrated and rides the coattails of Tom Brady. Wes Welker receives a ton of credit, then couldn't catch the clutch pass in the playoffs. They've gone through several Offensive coordinators (not necessarily Bellicheck's offense) and less than stellar WRs and he's still produecd, so I've at least damaged the "support" arguement to a degree. Even if he had a support system, he's a great and elite QB, that much I know and challenge anyone to present an arguement to the contrary.

From a physical standpoint. Keep that in perspective.

He has. He says "talent" but he's made it clear several times that he's speaking on physical ability and what he calls "talent". Talent can be all encompassing, it could be purely physical or it could be mental. You're arguing semantics.

The greatest QB ever seen and "extremely athletic" are very different... I think we can all agree that talent for a QB is not limited to a couple of physical traits in his QAGS (Quasi-Athletic Grading System) that he deems is a true measure of a quarterbacks greatness.

[Oldfan]

...He has. He says "talent" but he's made it clear several times that he's speaking on physical ability and what he calls "talent". Talent can be all encompassing, it could be purely physical or it could be mental. You're arguing semantics.

When posters start debating word definitions and insisting theirs is the only right way to define the terms, I take it as a sign that they're grasping at straws. I'd let it go, if I were you.

[skinnyskins]

Is it not possible that a Super Bowl head coach isn't incredibly efficient in EVERY area of intelligence? I believe so. Billick is an incredibly smart man, but to say he's smarter than Oldfan in EVERY way simply because he won a Super Bowl is misguided. Again, I'm not saying Oldfan knows everything, I've disagreed with him in the past and I will again. But it's entirely possible that Oldfan's point is accurate. Or maybe its not. But to write it off simply because it goes against what a "Super Bowl Winning" head coach said is faulty logic.

Billick is just one example of somebody who thinks Brady is pretty gosh darn good. He has won multiple MVPs which are voted by 50 members of the AP. They are generally regarded as experts in their field; OF and people who post to these boards are not. In 2010, Brady got a unanimous 50 MVP votes (out of 50) (he also won in 2007). Are you now saying that OF is smarter than all 50 of those people, not to mention the parade of coaches, fans, and GMs that would also agree that Brady is awesome at what he does? To discredit what Brady did that season (or any season) and imply that an average QB could have done just as well if he had a system tailored to him is simply not true. Everybody realizes that this is a team game and nobody is giving Brady credit for single handily winning all those Superbowls, Superbowl MVP, AFC Championships, AFC East Titles, MVP awards, Player of the week awards, Player of the month awards, etc. However, he is a very special player and deserves credit where credit is due. If you want to argue it was Belichick all along then please remember that he flopped in Cleveland without a player like Brady. Also, nearly every OC and receiver has failed when they left NE for other opportunities and didn't have Brady to rely on (to be clear, Im not saying that Brady is the sole reason for NE's success, but he is a major reason).

[DogofWar1]

People keep harping on Brady, which makes me wonder about Peyton Manning. Looking at their careers, their best years are similar in terms of rating, their worst years are similar in terms of rating, and their career average is within a couple points.

I find it hard to believe that anyone would consider Manning overrated here, the guy is the stuff of legend.

We've already discussed Brady's 2006 campaign, when he had some of the worst WR help in the league, yet ended up with a mid-80s rating. Similarly, Manning's worst years were before Wayne and Clark arrived, and he was getting in the 80s in terms of ratings too.

In that way, I think the two are very similar, and are very very close in terms of skill. One could argue that Manning, who's gone through multiple coaches, is better because he's had coaching changes, but at the same time Manning basically ran the offense in Indy for years, and the OCs were more for show. Hell, the HCs were for show, their job was to get a defense, and let Peyton do the rest.

[Oldfan]

...In 2010, Brady got a unanimous 50 MVP votes (out of 50) (he also won in 2007). Are you now saying that OF is smarter than all 50 of those people...

Would you believe Tom Brady if he said that the MVP is a team award? Well, that's what he said.

The QB position is the most important on the field. So, unless a player at another position has a monster game, the MVP is going to go to the QB by default. But, it's still a team award.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Would you believe Tom Brady if he said that the MVP is a team award? Well, that's what he said.

The QB position is the most important on the field. So, unless a player at another position has a monster game, the MVP is going to go to the QB by default. But, it's still a team award.

Not to mention, a player can win (and deserve to win) awards and championships and still be overrated. Success doesn't disprove someone being overrated.

[skinnyskins]

Would you believe Tom Brady if he said that the MVP is a team award? Well, that's what he said.

The QB position is the most important on the field. So, unless a player at another position has a monster game, the MVP is going to go to the QB by default. But, it's still a team award.

Yeah, because the classy thing for Brady to do when winning the MVP multiple times would be to claim sole responsibility. Only an a-hole would do that and Brady has class.

Football is a team game, but some are much better at it than others.

You even say that the QB is the most important position on the field. So how do you reconcile that with stripping Brady of any credit for leading one of the most prolific offenses the league has ever seen?

[Oldfan]

...I find it hard to believe that anyone would consider Manning overrated here, the guy is the stuff of legend...

I think the QB position is vastly overvalued, thus all QBs on winning teams are overrated including Peyton. To me the man is remarkable for getting the absolute maximum perormance from limited talent. He's not a great passer. But, that weakness is masked by the fact that he was given a very smart NFL scheme by Tom Moore which he's still using in Denver.

http://smartfootball.com/offense/pey...-colts-offense

[cphil006]

When posters start debating word definitions and insisting theirs is the only right way to define the terms, I take it as a sign that they're grasping at straws. I'd let it go, if I were you.

I just noticed you seemed to use Greatest, Most talented, and most athletic interchangeably, and because Tom Brady is not the extremely athletic or rates low in your QAGS rating, is that why you deem him overrated and not a great QB?

This whole arguement stems from me calling Tom Brady great and you calling Tom Brady overrated... I've exhausted examples of his greatness yet you've presented no real concrete support for him being overrated or not great.

[Oldfan]

...You even say that the QB is the most important position on the field. So how do you reconcile that with stripping Brady of any credit for leading one of the most prolific offenses the league has ever seen?

Quote me. What did I say that gave you the idea that I give him no credit?

[skinnyskins]

People keep harping on Brady, which makes me wonder about Peyton Manning. Looking at their careers, their best years are similar in terms of rating, their worst years are similar in terms of rating, and their career average is within a couple points.

I find it hard to believe that anyone would consider Manning overrated here, the guy is the stuff of legend.

We've already discussed Brady's 2006 campaign, when he had some of the worst WR help in the league, yet ended up with a mid-80s rating. Similarly, Manning's worst years were before Wayne and Clark arrived, and he was getting in the 80s in terms of ratings too.

In that way, I think the two are very similar, and are very very close in terms of skill. One could argue that Manning, who's gone through multiple coaches, is better because he's had coaching changes, but at the same time Manning basically ran the offense in Indy for years, and the OCs were more for show. Hell, the HCs were for show, their job was to get a defense, and let Peyton do the rest.

Brady is tied for the second highest career passer rating of all time (96.8) (minimum of 1500 attempts). But, OF doesn't care because he has his personal opinions and is smarter than the collective knowledge of the world.

[cphil006]

Not to mention, a player can win (and deserve to win) awards and championships and still be overrated. Success doesn't disprove someone being overrated.

So what makes Tom Brady not great? Do you feel Tom Brady is not elite? Overrated?

[cphil006]

Quote me. What did I say that gave you the idea that I give him no credit?

Pray tell why Tom Brady is overrated and not great. Is this the arguement you stand by?