I love Brady and firmly believe he is the GOAT, but I am not ready to say it was all him. Those early 2000s teams had very special defenses and a system around Brady that just clicked perfectly. While Brady has clearly carried the load for a while now, I doubt he would have 6 SBs if BB wasn't leading the way when the dynasty began. 3 SBs in [essentially] your first four seasons as a QB is absolutely unheard of.
Pats fans should be super thankful we had both guys over the same 20 year span - just an incredible run.
Rare/not many teams have been able to win the superbowl with a mediocre qb
But an elite qb has been able to will their teams to wins
The adv goes to qb. Unless the coach has won SBs with multiple teams
This just isn't true at all. There are plenty of teams in the last 20 years who have won a SB with a QB who wasn't elite. Just going down the list:
2017 Eagles (Foles)
2015 Broncos (Peyton was well past his prime and didn't even play the majority of the reg. season
2011 Giants (E Manning)
2007 Giants (E Manning)
2002 Bucs (B Johnson)
2000 Ravens (Dilfer)
That's literally 6 of 14 SBs (not including NE's wins). I never said Brady was mediocre in his early days. He was very very good and fit the system like a glove. His poise under pressure was also unmatched; but he never was a big stats guy and he wasn't expected to carry the team like he did for the majority of his career. All I'm saying is that Brady and Belichick were a perfect match for each other and it created an epic dynasty. No need to play favorites now as it just isn't a fair comparison based on circumstances.
You are wrong bout the Manning brothers
1st. The manning brothers are top end QBs. It doesn't matter if Peyton was 40 (he was still considered a strong QB). Eli won twice, and he was one of the key reasons why the Giants won
So thats 3 out of 14. Not including NE/TB12 wins.
well he didn't have Flacco on there and Eli has never been an elite QB. I mean Eli has as many losses as he does wins at 117-117. He has 366 TD's, but also 244 INT's. His QB Rating is 84.1 which is 45th all time (hard stat to really use b/c of the lack of passing in history) but for some context that is behind guys like Jameis Winston, Andy Dalton, Nick Foles, Matt Schaub, Derek Carr, etc. But the real kicker is his best season of 93.6 ties him for the 243rd best season in history.
And he was absolutely right about Peyton in 2015. He played in 10 games in the regular season and had 9 TD's and 17 INT's and was so bad he got benched for Brock Osweiler (and then was magically hurt and missed a bunch of games). Now they brought Peyton back in towards the end of the year and the playoff run, but he wasn't much better in the playoffs. I mean against Pittsburgh he was 21 of 37 for 222 yards with 0 TD and 0 INT (he did fumble, but it was recovered by Denver). He wasn't much better against New England at 17 of 32 for 176 yards, but did have 2 TD's and 0 INT's (though did lose a fumble). His Superbowl was one of the worst QB performance from a winning QB ever at 13 of 23 for 141 yards with 0 TD's and 1 INT along with 2 fumbles (1 lost). Honestly, I don't think you will find 3 consecutive playoff games as badly played from a QB ever, and I'm including QB's that had 3 straight losses over 3 seasons. Peyton Manning was awful the year he won in Denver. It really isn't debatable. The Broncos defense was just incredible that year. They gave up 16, 18, and 10 points in their 3 playoff games.
And one of the few players that can actually challenge Peyton for a worse Superbowl and yet the team still won was Big Ben in 2005. In that Superbowl, Ben was 9 of 21 for 123 yards with 0 TD's and 2 INT's. He did rush 7 times for 25 yards and a TD. Really the only saving grace. Hasselbeck significantly outperformed him and he was pretty bad overall. Ben obviously went on to have an elite level career but he wasn't much more than a game manager in his 2nd year and first Superbowl.
