Who could have known

ParanoidPatriot

Big member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
15,242
Reaction score
8,250
Points
113
Location
in my shed
I don't think that back in 2000 anyone could have guessed that TFB would become the unquestionable GOAT.
Although in my draft grades I did have him written as a 5th round pick for the Patriots.
I thought he could be a good backup for Drew considering who they had at the time. Never thought that Michael Bishop could step in if Drew went down.
Now TFB has 7 SB wins. That is a record that will never be broken. Look how long it took just to tie Bradshaw and Montana.
 
I don't think that back in 2000 anyone could have guessed that TFB would become the unquestionable GOAT.
Although in my draft grades I did have him written as a 5th round pick for the Patriots.
I thought he could be a good backup for Drew considering who they had at the time. Never thought that Michael Bishop could step in if Drew went down.
Now TFB has 7 SB wins. That is a record that will never be broken. Look how long it took just to tie Bradshaw and Montana.
I agree. And he could get 8 this year.

He has made Bradshaw and Montana a footnote. Just like Bill has with Walsh and Knoll.
 
I agree. And he could get 8 this year.

He has made Bradshaw and Montana a footnote. Just like Bill has with Walsh and Knoll.
And don't forget, Brady was the 4th QB on the depth cart in 2000.
But BB, the horrible GM, saw something in Brady that made him keep 4 QB's. Thats something he has never done, in Cleveland, or after.
 
And don't forget, Brady was the 4th QB on the depth cart in 2000.
But BB, the horrible GM, saw something in Brady that made him keep 4 QB's. Thats something he has never done, in Cleveland, or after.
I wonder why he never did that in Cleveland or after? Might just have been that Brady was that special right out of the gate and worked his tail off as Bill has said in 2000 to jump from 4th to 1 in the depth chart by 2001.

But this brings up a good discussion in terms of Bill and how he has handled Qbs. He brought in Testaverde, who wasn't actually good but had the league's #1 defense and a strong running game. Testaverde in 1994 had 16 TDs and 18 INTS, and no, that wasn't good even back then. They were also 3-0 that year with Mark Rypien.

For whatever reason the narrative is that Bill was ballsy to move on from Kosar. In reality, Testaverde's QB rating in 1994 (70) was far worse than Kosar's in 1993 (77) and 1992 (87).

The fact is the 1994 Cleveland Browns were a good quarterback away from being a real championship contender. They scored 29 points in two playoff games.

What concerns me is that Bill has gone with that Parcells idea of the steady eddie quarterback who is coachable, reliable, though not necessarily good. They signed on Testaverde in 1998 with the Jets, and again, it's not a surprise they were overmatched by John Elway in the AFCCG.

Parcells then went with Bledsoe (!) again when he went to Dallas, even though Bledsoe, like Testaverde, is a guy you can't win with in the modern NFL. He just isn't good; worse than average by that point.

And Belichick? The Cam re-signing is concerning as hell...basically the same exact theme...a guy who is a locker room leader, coachable, etc. but almost exactly like Bledsoe/Testaverde: a former #1 pick, downside of his career, not going to get you to the next level.
 
Last edited:
I wonder why he never did that in Cleveland or after? Might just have been that Brady was that special right out of the gate and worked his tail off as Bill has said in 2000 to jump from 4th to 2 in the depth chart.

But this brings up a good discussion in terms of Bill and how he has handled Qbs. He brought in Testaverde, who wasn't actually good but had the league's #1 defense and a strong running game. Testaverde in 1994 had 16 TDs and 18 INTS, and no, that wasn't good even back then. They were also 3-0 that year with Mark Rypien.

For whatever reason the narrative is that Bill was ballsy to move on from Kosar. In reality, Testaverde's QB rating in 1994 (70) was far worse than Kosar's in 1993 (77) and 1992 (87).

The fact is the 1994 Cleveland Browns were a good quarterback away from being a real championship contender. They scored 29 points in two playoff games.

What concerns me is that Bill has gone with that Parcells idea of the steady eddie quarterback who is coachable, reliable, though not necessarily good. They signed on Testaverde in 1998 with the Jets, and again, it's not a surprise they were overmatched by John Elway in the AFCCG.

Parcells then went with Bledsoe (!) again when he went to Dallas, even though Bledsoe, like Testaverde, is a guy you can't win with in the modern NFL. He just isn't good; worse than average by that point.

And Belichick? The Cam re-signing is concerning as hell...basically the same exact theme...a guy who is a locker room leader, coachable, etc. but almost exactly like Bledsoe/Testaverde: a former #1 pick, downside of his career, not going to get you to the next level.
Jesus Christ, Brady could not beat out Michael Bishop or Friez. He sat in the stands eating popcorn during games for most of the 2000 season.
Yet, BB took a much needed roster spot and kept Brady. BB is the one in charge of who stays and who goes.
So yes, BB saw something in Brady, enough to do what he has never done before or since.
Brady did not make that choice, BB did.
 
Jesus Christ, Brady could not beat out Michael Bishop or Friez. He sat in the stands eating popcorn during games for most of the 2000 season.
Yet, BB took a much needed roster spot and kept Brady. BB is the one in charge of who stays and who goes.
So yes, BB saw something in Brady, enough to do what he has never done before or since.
Brady did not make that choice, BB did.
What? He was not eating popcorn in 2000. He was working his tail off as he beat out them all in TC of 2001. Bill had said that. He wanted to start Brady in 2001 but knew he did not have the clout yet to sit Bledsoe.
 
What? He was not eating popcorn in 2000. He was working his tail off as he beat out them all in TC of 2001. Bill had said that. He wanted to start Brady in 2001 but knew he did not have the clout yet to sit Bledsoe.
As a Brady groupie you must have heard Tom say that he was inactive for many games in 2000. He said that he sat in the stands eating (something) during those games.
How could you have possibly missed that? Your Brady groupie badge has just received a demerit.
 
As a Brady groupie you must have heard Tom say that he was inactive for many games in 2000. He said that he sat in the stands eating (something) during those games.
How could you have possibly missed that? Your Brady groupie badge has just received a demerit.
Of course! But I took your post to insinuate that he was loafing when in fact he was working his tail off to become the starter in 2001. My apologies for misunderstanding your post.
 

Been over this a hundred times and won't get much into it again. Bill created the organizational philosophy and Brady to his credit thrived in it. Not not hard to understand.

I hope you don't respond with more obtuse BS. It's truly tiresome.
 

Not what my question was. More obtuseness.

You have a serious brain problem.

Cya.
 

You are so far do outta the objective reality you deny exists that I really don't know how you remember to not breath underwater.
 
Last edited:
Bill is sub .500 without Brady. One could easily make the case that Brady won in spite of Bill's philosophy because everyone else has sucked playing in it for any length of time.

It is also worth mentioning since Brady won in year one with a GM that actually gets it and knows how to build a great team in the cap era that Brady would have won MORE elsewhere.
 
Bill is sub .500 without Brady. One could easily make the case that Brady won in spite of Bill's philosophy because everyone else has sucked playing in it for any length of time.

It is also worth mentioning since Brady won in year one with a GM that actually gets it and knows how to build a great team in the cap era that Brady would have won MORE elsewhere.

Hahaha!! That is quite the twisted take for 6:50 in the morning. I think Chevss may be right, you wake up and it is of huge value to you for some reason to throw out absurd statements that get everyone worked up all over the place even where inappropriate.

You may wanna take a look at that, something seems a little unhealthy in your thought process.
 
Of course! But I took your post to insinuate that he was loafing when in fact he was working his tail off to become the starter in 2001. My apologies for misunderstanding your post.
I just stated a well known fact.
It was your sensitivity to anything that "implies" that TFB wasn't great from birth lead to your misunderstanding.
 
Back
Top