The Scores Report - The National Sports Blog » Tom Brady

Is Manning better than Montana and Brady?

Anthony Stalter — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 19:45:14 +0000

Ross Tucker of SI.com writes that Peyton Manning is a better NFL quarterback than Joe Montana and Tom Brady.

Here are the highlights of Tucker’s argument:

Montana may have been the most clutch performer ever; his postseason success is almost unprecedented. He did, however, play in an era before the advent of free agency and the salary cap.

He (Brady) did, however, have the benefit of playing for one of the greatest coaches and defensive minds, Bill Belichick. Belichick’s game planning against Manning earlier this decade was a primary factor in the Pats’ success. Brady has also been blessed by a defense that was among the league’s best for a good portion of his career.

But Manning has also shown an ability to adjust, even after losing longtime running mate Marvin Harrison.

His offensive line has never been dominant, and yet their weaknesses have been covered up by his uncanny ability to get rid of the ball before the defender gets to him.

I can’t think of any other player who has as much control over the game plan or play-calling. That, of course, is fitting because I don’t think any other player has ever had quite the same grasp of his offense that Manning does.

Tucker makes some valid points, especially in the case of Manning, who is incredible at what he does. But what he ignores is that quarterbacks will always be graded by their performances in the Super Bowl. The goal for every team at the start of the year is to win a Super Bowl, it’s not to try and rack up as many stats as possible.

Montana was 4-0 in the big game, with 11 touchdowns and no interceptions. He also racked up three Super Bowl MVP awards, the most by any player in SB history.

Brady is 3-1 in the Super Bowl, with two MVP awards and by the time he’s done playing, he might match Montana’s number for victories and MVPs.

Manning’s talent speaks for itself, but he only has one Super Bowl ring, which pails in comparison to Montana and Brady. Do you know what Manning’s postseason record was before this season? A dazzling 7-8. Even if the Colts win this Sunday, Manning’s postseason record will be 10-8, which is pedestrian compared to Montana’s (16-7) and Brady’s (11-4).

Manning is great, but Tucker needs to step off of the Super Bowl XLIV hype train for a second and look at the bigger picture. He acts as though Montana and Brady had a ton of help and Manning has been working on his own, but that argument spits in the face of how underrated the Colts have been over the past decade. Don’t forget that Manning had Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne to throw to for most of his career, while Brady had Troy Brown and Deion Branch, who were fine receivers but who aren’t in Harrison and Wayne’s category.

Granted, if Manning wins three or four Super Bowls before his career is over, then we can re-visit Tucker’s argument. But as of right now, Tucker’s argument is full of holes.

Is Manning better than Montana and Brady?

Photo from fOTOGLIF

NFL Divisional Playoff Preview: Saturday

Mike Farley — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 12:00:46 +0000

Arizona Cardinals at New Orleans Saints
4:30 pm ET
TV—FOX

If last week’s wild card game between Arizona and Green Bay is any indication, the Cardinals are having a difficult time stopping the opposition. And when the opposition is the New Orleans Saints, who boast the top offense in the NFL, you have to believe this game today could get ugly. Pair that with the fact that the Cardinals racked up 51 points last Sunday against the NFL’s second ranked defense, and that New Orleans is 25th overall in team defense (26th against the pass), and there is more fuel to the shootout theory here. Of course, the game plan for each team should be to try and run the ball to control the clock, and if that’s the case, the Saints have a decided edge with their sixth ranked rushing attack. Remember, though, the key word in “game plan” is “plan,” because it’s not likely the Packers or Cards expected to play an arena league game last week. In other words, you can bet Kurt Warner and Drew Brees will wind up airing it out in this one, with those speedy receivers on both sides reducing the game to a track meet. And really, that’s how this game should be. As for the outcome, we’ll give the rested home team a slight edge. THE PICK: SAINTS 52, CARDINALS 49

Baltimore Ravens at Indianapolis Colts
8:15 pm ET
TV—CBS

Speaking of rested players, there is going to be a mutiny in Indianapolis tonight if the Colts lose this game. Head coach Jim Caldwell and owner Bill Polian have been adamant about their belief that resting Peyton Manning and other regulars during most of the final two games, instead of pursuing a perfect 16-0 record, was the prudent thing to do. And while playing those guys would have been a huge risk (see Welker, Wes), you have to believe it was even riskier to not play them. Meanwhile, the Ravens, who come in with a solid ground game that is ranked fifth in the league, are just the kind of team that can give the Colts and their 24th ranked run defense fits anyway. John Harbaugh wants to run Ray Rice all day long and keep it away from Mr. Manning as much as possible, and he’d love to run the ball 52 times like he did against New England. When the Colts do have the ball, they are ranked dead last in rushing offense but second in passing. So guess what they’re gonna do? But the Ravens were in Tom Brady’s face all game last week, and you can expect Ray Lewis and company to try and do the same to Manning, who also has to worry about ball-hawking safety Ed Reed, voted Safety of the Decade earlier this week by USA Today. The Colts are extremely talented and didn’t win 14 games by accident, but that resting players thing is going to bite Caldwell and Polian in the butt. THE PICK: RAVENS 23, COLTS 20

Is Brady’s time with Pats coming to an end?

Anthony Stalter — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 15:00:56 +0000

Albert R. Breer of the Boston Globe broke down the questions the Patriots face while heading into the offseason, including the expiring contract of one Tom Brady.

What about the quarterback? Brady’s deal expires after the 2010 season, and this is the closest he’s come to the end of a contract since becoming a Patriot in 2000. He signed a four-year extension in 2002 with two years left on his rookie deal, then inked a six-year deal in 2005 with two seasons left on that accord.

In August, Eli Manning and Philip Rivers signed six-year contracts worth $16.25 million and $15.5 million per season, respectively. Jay Cutler got a two-year, $30 million extension in October. Peyton Manning is headed for a contract year as well, and Colts owner Jim Irsay said an extension is “a given.’’

Brady’s never been one to siphon every last dime. But with the possibility the Colts once again could reset the market for quarterbacks in an uncapped environment, this one could be complicated.

To me, the Patriots already made this decision this past offseason when they traded Matt Cassel to the Chiefs and retained Brady. Cassel had proven that he could run the offense and he’s much younger than Brady. If there was ever a time for a changing of the guard, it was when the Patriots had both quarterbacks on the roster.

They made a commitment to Brady and unless he’s a complete disaster in 2010, then I highly doubt he’s going anywhere. Was he the same player this year that he was in previous years? Of course not, but he was also coming back from major reconstructive surgery. Give him another full year and then let’s see where he and the Patriots stand.

Photo from fOTOGLIF

Is the dynasty over? Ravens wax Patriots in Foxboro.

Anthony Stalter — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 22:23:30 +0000

Consider this:

- A Bill Belichick-coached team has never allowed 24 points in the first quarter of any game.

- The Patriots haven’t allowed more than 20 points in a home playoff game since 1978, when they lost to the Houston Oilers, 31-14.

- The most points New England allowed at home this year was 24 to the Bills in Week 1. The Pats were undefeated while playing at Foxboro this season.

To say the Ravens beat the Patriots on Sunday would be a vast understatement. In its 33-14 blowout, Baltimore dominated in every phase of the game, was clearly the more prepared team and set the tone from the first play (which was a 83-yard touchdown run by Ray Rice, by the way) to the last.

I don’t want to sound like another member of the media that overstates things after just one game, but you have to wonder whether or not we just witnessed the end of the Patriots’ dynasty. There were signs all season that this wasn’t the same team that we had grown accustomed to over the past decade and all of their faults were on full display on Sunday.

I don’t know if he was hurt or not, but Tom Brady didn’t look right. Like many times this season, he looked uncomfortable in the pocket, was high with his passes and made poor decisions. There were times when he didn’t have any time to throw, but even when he did he was inaccurate. It was just a brutal effort on his part, and on Belichick’s for that matter.

Based on the way they recognized formations and diagnosed plays, it was almost like the Ravens were in the Patriots’ huddle every snap. That’s on Belichick and his coaching staff for not having a better game plan in place. I realize New England was shorthanded without Wes Welker, but even if he had played I don’t know how much he would have helped.

Give credit to the Ravens – they were outstanding. Rice (159 yards), Willis McGahee and the rest of the running game was excellent and so was the defense. They had the right game plan, were fired up from the start and they executed. They’ve proven two years in a row that they can win on the road in the playoffs and John Harbaugh deserves a lot of credit for having his team prepared.

The Ravens came thisclose to beating the Colts in the regular season, so next weekend should be interesting. Of course, Joe Flacco will need to throw for more than 34 yards to match Peyton Manning, but a Colts-Ravens matchup should be a great one to tune into.

Is the Patriots' Dynasty over?

Photo from fOTOGLIF

NFL Playoff Preview: Sunday games

Mike Farley — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 12:00:47 +0000

Baltimore Ravens at New England Patriots
1:00 pm ET
TV—CBS

Last season, the Ravens began their playoff journey as a wild card by upsetting the AFC East champion Dolphins, and then upsetting the top seeded Tennessee Titans, before losing to the eventual champion Steelers in the AFC championship game. This season the Ravens went 10-6 and eked into the playoffs in Week 17, but their losses have mostly been close games, including a 27-21 defeat in New England in Week 4. The Ravens’ fifth ranked rushing attack is led by RB Ray Rice, and they will once again use their stout defense (ranked third overall) to try and stop Tom Brady, Randy Moss and company. The Patriots will try to run the ball to control the clock and keep it away from Rice, and also try to use said running game to allow Brady and his receivers to stretch the field. Of course, everyone knows that Wes Welker is out for the season after jamming his knee into the Reliant Stadium turf last Sunday. But did anyone expect rookie WR (and 7th round draft pick) Julian Edelman to catch 10 passes for 103 yards and run up and down the field looking like a Welker clone doing it? Not really. Still, Brady didn’t have guys named Lewis, Suggs and Reed lining up on the other side last week, and those guys in purple jerseys could force him into making a few mistakes. The bottom line, however, is that the Patriots are 8-0 at home this season, and a Bill Belichick coached team is a tough out in the playoffs.
THE PICK: PATRIOTS 26, RAVENS 17

Green Bay Packers at Arizona Cardinals
4:40 pm ET
TV—FOX

Amazingly, this game is the third contest of the weekend that is a rematch of a Week 17 game, and like the Philly/Dallas game, this one is also in the same building, at University of Phoenix Stadium in Arizona. Will it be the same outcome though? Last week, the Packers played all of their starters in annihilating the defending NFC champs 33-7, but Cardinals coach Ken Whisenhunt did not use star QB Kurt Warner after the first quarter. Still, how much of that crap about tipping your hand before playing an opponent again do you believe? This is the NFL, and the team that executes their game plan usually wins. Packers’ coach Mike McCarthy believed that letting Aaron Rodgers and his receivers stretch the field against the Cardinals’ 23rd ranked pass defense, as well as mixing in a heavy dose of Ryan Grant and Ahman Green to run the ball and keep it away from Warner and Matt Leinart was an effective strategy. Of course, McCarthy’s Packers boast the #1 rushing defense in the NFL and the #5 passing defense, so they feel like they can stop whoever is trying to move the ball against them anyway, especially if star CB Charles Woodson suits up after aggravating a shoulder injury last week. Remember, though, that the Cardinals are recently playoff tested, and came within a brilliant Santonio Holmes touchdown catch from winning it all less than a year ago.
THE PICK: PACKERS 33, CARDINALS 30

Are we witnessing the end of the Pats’ dynasty?

Anthony Stalter — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 19:45:49 +0000

It wasn’t supposed to be like this for the New England Patriots. In the preseason, the general consensus was that the Pats were going to put on an offensive show reminiscent of 2007 this season now that Tom Brady was back under center. But while the offense has been outstanding this season (they are third in the NFL in total offense and second in the AFC in points scored behind the Chargers), the Pats have been far from dominant.

At the root of the issue has been a defense that has been average at best this year. The Pats have the No. 11 overall defense, but the stats don’t paint the full picture. Opponents have been able to move the ball successfully against them this season, mostly notably on the ground where NE is giving up over 110 rushing yards per game.

Compounding New England’s problems is that they haven’t been as clutch as they have been in previous seasons. Brady has had his issues with turnovers, the defense has struggled coming up with a big stop and regardless of whether or not you agree with Belichick’s decision-making this season, the bottom line is that they haven’t worked. The fourth down gaffe against Indianapolis wasn’t the only time Belichick has rolled the dice this season and came up short.

The good thing is that the Patriots have been here before. They have loads of postseason experience and have been a different team at home this season than on the road. The problem (outside of everything else that has already been mentioned) is that they face a confident Ravens team that has already proven it can go toe-to-toe with them in Foxboro, and that they’ll be without their most consistent offensive weapon in Wes Welker, who suffered a season-ending knee injury last Sunday in Houston.

The rule of thumb has always been that you never doubt Belichick and the Patriots when their backs are against the wall. But that line of thinking has changed based on the results of this season. This was once a team that never lost back-to-back games, but in late November they were steamrolled by the Saints in New Orleans and then proceeded to give away a win in Miami the very next week. The Pats just don’t have the same air about them as they did before.

There’s a good chance that the Patriots will win this Sunday in Foxboro. After all, Baltimore has struggled defending the pass this season and there’s no doubt that Belichick will put the ball in the air plenty of times this weekend, with or without Welker. But the Ravens do have an offense that can strike for big plays and find weak links in New England’s defense. Plus, Ray Rice has been outstanding this season and if Baltimore can control this game on the ground, then New England might find itself trailing late in the second half and unable to produce a defensive stop.

Maybe now that they’ve reached the playoffs again, the Patriots will rise to the challenge like they always have. But if the regular season was any indication of how they’ll perform in the postseason, then we might be witnessing the end of the Pats’ dynasty.

This is why teams considering resting starters: Wes Welker tears ACL

Anthony Stalter — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 01:58:59 +0000

ESPN.com is reporting that Patriots’ receiver Wes Welker has been diagnosed with a torn ACL and MCL and will miss the entire postseason. Welker suffered the injury while trying to make a cut during New England’s 34-27 loss to Houston in Week 17.

For those fans that complain about teams resting starters late in the season, this is why they do it. I understand this isn’t the same as the Colts conceding a perfect season by pulling Peyton Manning and the rest of their starters last week, and I’m not trying to compare the situations. But did Welker have to play today? Did he absolutely need the extra work? If he took the week off, would he and Tom Brady not be able to complete a bubble screen next week in the postseason after successfully completing 4,350 bubble screens this season?

I get it – momentum is vital in sports. Teams don’t want to have a losing mindset entering the postseason and it’s key for coaches to keep their players confident. But what was this all for in the end? What if this had been Brady? I’m sorry, but I disagree with those that think teams with nothing to play for should keep their starters in through Week 17. I get that injuries can happen in practice and even in the player’s own homes, but the risk factor is amplified in a live game.

I feel bad for Wes Welker. He worked his ass off all season to help his team get to the playoffs and now he’ll have to watch from the sidelines because Bill Belichick and his coaching staff decided that he needed to play in a semi-meaningless game against Houston.