But they did win... They won eleven games which most seasons would get you into the playoffs but the emergence of the wildcat gimmick prevented that. They were playing pretty good ball and the chips did not fall in the right places for them. If they had made the playoffs they may (I use may because it is speculation) have done something because they were better than the majority of the teams that made the playoffs for the AFC...
Forgive me if I am wrong here because I was a little young when Montana left San Fran but didn't the west coast offense follow Montana to KC? As far as Young goes, he had a lot of success after montana left that system despite the aging dynasty and loss of the brain of the system.
I would never argue with you about BB being a great coach because he is and I do beleive that Brady is a good QB but he is nowhere near the greatest in this time frame.
You have always factored too much of a QBs worth to how well they do in the playoffs and SB. This is still a team game and an entire team structure must be in place for a team to win it all. This has allways been the center of your argument for Mark Sanchez but in truth he is not a very good QB but becuase he has had success in the playoffs you have always had beer goggle love for him.
I was talking about winning championships since Brady has it so easy in the BB systame, the system that is well undre .500 w/o him despite Matt Cassell going 10-5 as a starter in 2008(the same guy who would lead KC to a div title 2 years later).
Steve Young was handed the keys to a dynasty, he was a Peyton-type player- great reg season stat guy who struggled in big games and needed chaos on his rivals team to finally break through. For Steve it was the johnson-Jones divorce and Dallas hiring Switzer to finally get past Dallas, for Peyton it was having reche Caldwell and Jabar Gaffney as Brady's top weapons that finally helped him get past NE and both had cupcake SBs- Young vs. Stan Humpheries and SD and Peyton vs. Rex Grossman and Chicago.
On teams that have SB caliber talent I judge Qbs a little different, Peyton has had SB caliber talent around almost since day 1 and he only has 3 title game apps and 2 SBs.
You are. You will use a win against the 09 Jets as an example of a good win (even though they had a very poor regular season) becasue they made it to the AFCC game, but then you will discredit a win against the Cardinals (who made it to the Super Bowl) becasue they had a bad regular season and played poorly on the EC. You mention that the Pats missed out on a tie breaker in 02 (they only won 9 games that year with Brady) trying to make it seem like they had a better season than they did, but don't mention that they also missed out on a tie breaker in 08 and won 11 games without Brady.
I'm specifically talking about the 01 season. There are two things that we know about that year. They had a very easy schedule, and without the outstanding D and ST play, they wouldn't have won in the playoffs. Brady led them to 0 points in the AFCC game. The D held the Steelers to 17 points and the D and ST put 14 points on the board. How can that be considered anything other than being carried. Brady gets way too much credit for the 01 season.
Sure we can. Martin had 2 long runs that were not difference makers in that game. Those 2 runs significantly boosted his average. Smith was much better in the Super Bowl than Martin was. (3.8 YPC for Martin and 5.1 YPC for Smith)
Not sure which game you are talking about. If you are talking about 01, you can't tell me his passing was more important than the D holding Oak to 13, or holding the Steelers to 17 while putting 14 points on the board themselves.
What is your point? They had it 1st and 10 on the Pitt 36 before that. Brady got sacked and lost 11 yards on the play. He threw a 7 yard pass to make it 3rd and 14 on the Pitt 40. He threw an incomplete pass after that. Brady had all but 1:40 of the first half and led them to 0 points.
The whole division was competitive in 08. The last place team was only 1 game under .500 and the top 2 were 2 games better than the top 3 teams in 02.
The standings in 02 were:
Jets 9-7
Dolphins 9-7
Patriots 9-7
Bills 8-8
That is a combined 35-29
In 08 They were
Dolphins 11-5
Patriots 11-5
Jets 9-7
Bills 7-9
That is a combined 38-26
I know you are going to say that more wins in 08 wasn't as good as 02 becasue of the easy schedule, so I will respond with one of your own arguments. In 08 the Pats, Jets, Dolphins and Bills each faced 4,3,3,3 (respectively) "Playoff bound" opponents outside of their own division.
In 02 the Pats, Jets, Dolphins, and Bills faced 4,3,3,2 "Playoff bound" opponents outside of their own division. The AFC East faced more "Playoff bound" opponents in 08 than they did in 02.
We don't have 2 years, we have 1 which was his first season as a head coach. Belichick's record in Cle a decade earlier has nothing to do with his tenure in NE.
It happens when a new coach takes over. They had a super easy schedule in 01 and things would have turned around even if Brady had not come in. I don;t think they would have had the same long term success, but 01 would have probably played out the same. Let's just agree to disagree. People seem to be sick of this discussion and are ready to move on.
The Jets in '09 didn't have a consistent pattern of losing like Ari '08 did. Ari '08 in the NE lost by a combined 151-62 in 3 games- that's an average of 50(yes FIFTY) to 21. The Jets didn't have any bad blowouts in 2009.
9 wins in 2002 was much better than 11 wins in 2008 b/c the competition was better.
Brady wasn't carried in '01, he turned their season around. he wasn't the leader of a great offene like he has been later in his career but he made plays when they mattered most unlike Peyton or Bledsoe.
In the title game the D/STs won the game, in the div rd the D kept them in the game in a blizzard where 2 offenses couldn't score but w/ the game on the line what happened? yeah they got a break w/ the tuck rule but they still had to execute after that and he led them to the tying and winning scores. The 2001 Pats D was the best of their dynasty years but the D still blew a 14 pt 4th qtr lead in the SB before Brady led one of the greatest drives in SB history.
NE abandoned the run in '96 in the SB and allowed Bledsoe to lose the game. Curtis only had 11 carries, Smith did nothing of significance in that SB.
They won the SB through the air, at their own 17 w/ just over aminute left and NO timeouts Brady led them to the GW FG.
My point is you mentioned w/ Brady they had it at the Pitt 40 and didn't score, they were two totally different situations. he set them up to score before he left, not every game is 40-37.
use the eye test, the '02 Jets, Phins and Pats would have killed the '08 Jets, Phins & Pats. keep in mind both Miami and the Jets were lonly 9-7 b/c of some key injuries and NE was having a SB hangover after winning their first SB.
In 2002 The Jets had to face Cle, GB, Oak, den, in 2008 they had to face Ten and Arizona.
yes we do have 2 years, we have more than 2 years- 2000, 2008 and part of 2001. BB in Cle does have something to do w/ his tenure in NE- w/o Brady he is a complete failure as a HC.
The 2000 sched wasn't difficult and in many cases new coaches have success in year 1. Look at Sparano, Rex, Harbaugh, Tomlin, Payton, etc...
'01 would not have played out the same, Brady was a difference maker. BB was already on the hot seat barely over a year into the job, would they have won some games? sure but they wouldn't have been close to 11-5 or a playoff spot. The '85 Bears wouldn't win a SB w/ Bledsoe at QB.
It's amusing how jest homers like the metrosexual and others are so petrified over the possibility that we sign Peyton that they're either manufacturing bogus reasons the Fins wouldn't be a good fit for him and/or mounting preemptive campaigns to discredit his impact when in reality his addition would be raining on their parade, not ours!
IMO a reasonable argument can be made that although close, Manning still would not be the franchise's best-ever QB. However he'd nevertheless be miles better than any QB the jest ever fielded.
You are so insecure about the Jets it is comical. I don't want Peyton, I'd rather he go to Miami.
based on what....your OPINION
funny how when others make a case for something or debate something its "whining" but when you as you always do state something, its a fact, its scripture, junc can never be proven wrong
I didn't say the new guy was whining- he's debating my points and we are having a productive discussion. I am saying folks like you and vaark who bring nothing to the discussion other than whinging about the direction of the thread are the ones whining.
