2007 Brady vs. 2011 Rodgers: Who's better?

And before that it was "should Brady keep starting over Bledsoe"? He had some ugly games but his defense saved him.

So now we can see where Tebow's career is headed.

 

So because someone accomplishes it early in their career makes it more valuable? I do know that about age 23 your brain is most able to make quick decisions and your athletic ability is at its best so I would actually say that in fact if you look at it in that light it would take away from it compared to someone who did it at age 28.

 

Why? Because I don't believe for a second Marino in his prime would throw for 7,000 yards in today's NFL? Do you? Really?

 

Meh. What fun is that?

 

Dear LTL, as a matter of fact, there ARE striking similarities between Tebow's 2011 and Brady's 2001 seasons. The reason Belichick kept Brady starting when Bledsoe regained his health wasn't so much Brady's own performance, which had been pretty good but nothing more, but the complete change in the team's overall effort. Teams are more than the sum of their parts, and Brady was a catalyst of performance in a way Bledsoe, a good quarterback in his day, never was.
What sets Brady's career apart is the learning/performance curve. It's like a chart of Google's finances. It never stopped going up, and the process got faster as he kept playing. In his first rookie camp, Brady was TERRIBLE. By 2001, he'd made to second string. And so on to records and championships.

 

I have no idea what you are talking about here. Maybe a 14-year-old is the best QB option for NFL teams?

Marino wrote his name at the top of the record book twice in 1984. It took 24 years to remove it from the top of the yards passed and 21 years to take it off of the TDs in a single season.

I tell you what, even in the era where you cannot hit the QB in the head, knees, a split second after he throws the ball or land on him after you sack him, the next time a QB throws for 5,000 yards and 48 touchdowns in the same season, we can say that season was as good as Marino's. They do 50 and 5,000, then we can call it better.

 

Oh, I know. I looked it up last week -- there was a three-game stretch where I think he threw for less than 600 yards, no touchdowns and a couple of picks and they kept on winning. I remember Belichick proclaimed him the starting quarterback "for the rest of the season," which was an odd proclamation. And then the two playoff games he won for them, they scored 16 and 20 points. (Leaving out Pittsburgh when he was hurt.)

I don't know if Tebow has as much upside as Brady, though. Maybe!

 

This site would be very dull if we all did that.

One more quick point about the trade ... I'm not saying the Giants could have foreseen Roethlisberger's off-field issues, but as buttoned-up as the Maras are, I'm sure that they are happy they have Manning instead. When I first began talking about the trade, I was specifically referring to Manning vs. Rivers/Merriman/Kaeding.

Certainly you can argue the Giants could have parlayed Roethlisberger and those picks into a more valuable trio of players than just Manning, but I think it's hard to say Reese made a mistake.

 

Warner's 1999 season would definitely merit consideration. Manning's 2004 season would have to be there as well. That's another one that is criminally overlooked.