Brady's Bedtime Buddies

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by jdlea

Yeah, 7th in the NFL in passing yards isn't very good considering his targets...yes, I'd say he was ripping it up.

7th=ripping it up?

I thought you were in the "Brunell isn't getting it done" corner because top 10-12 wasn't good enough. Brady was better than 10-12 (at least by pass yardage), but if 7th is ripping it up, and 9th or 12th or whatever Brunell was when he got benched isn't, where's the line?

I thought Brady had a sub par year by his own standards. I don't think Caldwell and Gaffney are world beaters of course, but Brady had done much better with mediocre-to-good guys like Branch and Troy Brown, so I don't think having slightly different mediocre receivers changed very much.

[jdlea]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

7th=ripping it up?

I thought you were in the "Brunell isn't getting it done" corner because top 10-12 wasn't good enough. Brady was better than 10-12 (at least by pass yardage), but if 7th is ripping it up, and 9th or 12th or whatever Brunell was when he got benched isn't, where's the line?

I thought Brady had a sub par year by his ohttp://www.thewarpath.net/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=305525
Redskins Warpath - Reply to Topicwn standards. I don't think Caldwell and Gaffney are world beaters of course, but Brady had done much better with mediocre-to-good guys like Branch and Troy Brown, so I don't think having slightly different mediocre receivers changed very much.

Caldwell and Gaffney suck. They're not good football players, that's why they were available. Given his targets, 7th in the league is ripping it up. And the difference wasn't the passing yardage, it was wins and losses with Brunell. Last time I checked, that wasn't much of a problem for the New England Patriots last season. And 1789 in 9 games with 8 td's isn't in the same realm as 2052 with 15 touchdowns. Especially not when Mark Brunell had a top 5 wide out and a top 10 TE and that doesn't even mention Randle El or Lloyd (both of whom were better than everyone on the Pats last season).

So yeah, Brunell wasn't playing well enough, but Tom was. I'd agree he had a down year, but I'm saying that all things considered, Tom had a pretty good season. Take away anybody's top 4 targets and then have him go out and have a good season, show me someone who could.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by jdlea

Caldwell and Gaffney suck. They're not good football players, that's why they were available. Given his targets, 7th in the league is ripping it up. And the difference wasn't the passing yardage, it was wins and losses with Brunell. Last time I checked, that wasn't much of a problem for the New England Patriots last season. And 1789 in 9 games with 8 td's isn't in the same realm as 2052 with 15 touchdowns. Especially not when Mark Brunell had a top 5 wide out and a top 10 TE and that doesn't even mention Randle El or Lloyd (both of whom were better than everyone on the Pats last season).

So yeah, Brunell wasn't playing well enough, but Tom was. I'd agree he had a down year, but I'm saying that all things considered, Tom had a pretty good season. Take away anybody's top 4 targets and then have him go out and have a good season, show me someone who could.

No need to even compare the two at this point. They are not even in the same ballpark. Yes we all know Brunell was a top ten passer. But when it's 3rd & 8 and you complete a 6 yard pass it doesn't do shit as far as helping the team win. It doesn't keep drives alive. Yes, it looks good in the stat sheet but that's about it.

I mean at one point the guy had Jabbar Gaffney, Doug Gabriel, Troy Brown and Caldwell. And they were one first down from making the SB. Yes they got some breaks in the SD game but let's give credit where credit is due. If firmly believe that good teams make find a way to get breaks. You don't win 3 SB's by being lucky all the time.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by jdlea

Caldwell and Gaffney suck. They're not good football players, that's why they were available. Given his targets, 7th in the league is ripping it up. And the difference wasn't the passing yardage, it was wins and losses with Brunell. Last time I checked, that wasn't much of a problem for the New England Patriots last season. And 1789 in 9 games with 8 td's isn't in the same realm as 2052 with 15 touchdowns. Especially not when Mark Brunell had a top 5 wide out and a top 10 TE and that doesn't even mention Randle El or Lloyd (both of whom were better than everyone on the Pats last season).

So yeah, Brunell wasn't playing well enough, but Tom was. I'd agree he had a down year, but I'm saying that all things considered, Tom had a pretty good season. Take away anybody's top 4 targets and then have him go out and have a good season, show me someone who could.

2006 Patriots with Brunell are still WAY better than the 2006 Redskins with Brady. I mean, its hard to dispute that, isn't it.

He had a pretty good season, no arguments here, I'm just asking where the line is drawn between "get him out of there" and "tearin it up", because it seems like there is little middle ground in your argument.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

2006 Patriots with Brunell are still WAY better than the 2006 Redskins with Brady. I mean, its hard to dispute that, isn't it.

He had a pretty good season, no arguments here, I'm just asking where the line is drawn between "get him out of there" and "tearin it up", because it seems like there is little middle ground in your argument.

If we put Brady on our team the whole offense is different. It would go from a don't make any mistakes, shotgun only on 3rd and long, short passing game to probably a spread out the field more with 3-4-5 wr sets, more aggressive playcalling, shotgun on first down type of offense. Not sure if that would translate into more wins w/ our defense but I know our offense would be MUCH better.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

If we put Brady on our team the whole offense is different. It would go from a don't make any mistakes, shotgun only on 3rd and long, short passing game to probably a spread out the field more with 3-4-5 wr sets, more aggressive playcalling, shotgun on first down type of offense. Not sure if that would translate into more wins w/ our defense but I know our offense would be MUCH better.

If Brady was the Tom Brady from NE...not a whole lot would be different. Brady still plays a really conservative game. I mean, certainly you've realized this. Why do you think his INT totals are so low? He plays it safe.

If we asked him to open it up, inevitably we'd get more mistakes.

Of course Brady>Brunell. He's considerably younger and a bit more efficient. No one is arguing the contrary. But its a reasonable comparision because they approach offense fairly similarly.

Aggressive does not always equal better. Aggressive is one thing. Better is something else.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

If Brady was the Tom Brady from NE...not a whole lot would be different. Brady still plays a really conservative game. I mean, certainly you've realized this. Why do you think his INT totals are so low? He plays it safe.

If we asked him to open it up, inevitably we'd get more mistakes.

Of course Brady>Brunell. He's considerably younger and a bit more efficient. No one is arguing the contrary. But its a reasonable comparision because they approach offense fairly similarly.

Aggressive does not always equal better. Aggressive is one thing. Better is something else.

I don't know about that. I watch this guy constantly throw deep over the middle to the TE all the time. I mean all the time. And I've seen them open it up many times. Example. Minnesota on Mon. night. They just went to 4-5 wr sets the whole game. Didn't even bother running the ball that much casue they knew it was going to be tough to run against Minn. So they just said the hell with this. We will just throw it on these guys. I also remember NE doing the same thing to Chi. Just the fact that they would even try that type of game plan w/ below average wr's tell's you the confidence the coaching staff has in Brady. No way could our offense EVER do that, or would we ever even try and do that. W/ our offense we have the "we must run to win" mentality. And that is what I love about the NE coaching staff. They have the "do what it takes to win" mentality.

Brady's INT totals are low because he's a great QB who see's the entire field. He has the ability to come off to his 2nd, 3rd and 4th options. It's not because he isn't aggressive. Not at all.

I'm hoping we see a little more of an open offense this year. It's all going to depend if JC can handle it.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I don't know about that. I watch this guy constantly throw deep over the middle to the TE all the time. I mean all the time. And I've seen them open it up many times. Example. Minnesota on Mon. night. They just went to 4-5 wr sets the whole game. Didn't even bother running the ball that much casue they knew it was going to be tough to run against Minn. So they just said the hell with this. We will just throw it on these guys. I also remember NE doing the same thing to Chi. Just the fact that they would even try that type of game plan w/ below average wr's tell's you the confidence the coaching staff has in Brady. No way could our offense EVER do that, or would we ever even try and do that. W/ our offense we have the "we must run to win" mentality. And that is what I love about the NE coaching staff. They have the "do what it takes to win" mentality.

Brady's INT totals are low because he's a great QB who see's the entire field. He has the ability to come off to his 2nd, 3rd and 4th options. It's not because he isn't aggressive. Not at all.

I'm hoping we see a little more of an open offense this year. It's all going to depend if JC can handle it.

Ok. You have some solid points with the flexibility of the NE offense, and having a QB of Brady's caliber certainly gives them that flexibility, but spreading the defense out does not necessarily imply aggression. I mean they can be and usually are very safe and smart with their throws, and it's a credit to Tom Brady's patience as a QB.

And Mark Brunell certainly did not display the same level of patience as Brady did this year, but that was as much a function of some inconsistent protection as it was with age and fragility.

But once given the clear differences between a great 28 year old QB in the prime of his career and a once great 36 year old QB in the twilight of his career, its still not hard to see that they do a lot of stuff similar, even this year. Brady is obviously in a better situation as far as system and protection goes, whereas Brunell is in a better situation after the completion with guys like Moss and Cooley who excell after the catch.

Both guys do a great job in taking what the defense gives them. That doesn't translate to wins if you have the 32nd ranked defense, but both guys do their jobs.

Brady's INT totals are low because he's a great QB who see's the entire field. He has the ability to come off to his 2nd, 3rd and 4th options. It's not because he isn't aggressive. Not at all.

Replace "Brady's" with "Brunell's" and the statement stays accurate. I mean, the term "great" is quite subjective, but as far as 36 year old QBs go, I'd say Brunell is great for his age.