Troy Brown (890 yards & 3TDs), David Patten (824 yards & 5TDs) and Deion Branch (489 & 2TDs) Antowain Smith rushed for 982 yards and averaged 3.9 per carry. 1-1 in that season's playoffs, losing to eventual champion New England. You just proved my point. No big name thousand yard rusher, no huge recievers (1,000+ yards). He was a rookie who filled in for the starter mid year, and has since won 3 super bowls. His lifetime QB rating is 88.5, with a 2 to 1 TD to Interception rating. To say that Brady is overrated, without anything to substantiate it, is crazy. I f Brady keeps compliling these sorts of numbers, and keeps earning those rings, he is a First Ballot Hall Of Famer, who surely isnt overrated. "Big Ben" on the other hand, is overrated by many- especially with the llevel of talent surrounding him. (Ward, Bettis, Parker, Randle El, the huge O- Line). He had lots of things that Brady didnt have for a long time, and never won a ring. If you think Big Ben is overrated thats one thing, but don't drag Brady down too- he's in a level of his own.
No, I didn't prove your point. Just because someone isn't named T.O or Jerry Rice doesn't mean they aren't good. Four receivers with a combination of over 2600 yards means he had good people catching the ball. Personally, I don't agree that Tom Brady is over-rated, nor was I the one who said he was. I think he is a fine quarterback who does a great job of spreading the ball around. Like Big Ben, he controls the game by not making mistakes. But to say he didn't have anyone to throw to and that a running back that gains 3.9 per carry over a season is "no running back" is flat-out wrong. Most of the guys Brady was throwing to in 2002 were still on the team in 2005, so I am not sure where the "he had no one to throw to his first year" stuff comes from. (Besides all of the New England Super Bowls were won by Adam Vinatieri ;) ) But your dilusional if you think that Ben is over-rated. and that the players you named above are any better than the one's Brady had around him in 2001. Jerome Bettis gained all of 368 in 2005. Hines Ward didn't gain 1,000 yards (975) and Randal El only had 558--and only 1 freakin' receiving TD in the regular season (boy did the Washington professional football team overpay for him!). Sure Parker gained 1202, and the OL was good, but only 2 (Alan Faneca, Jeff Hartings) went to the Pro Bowl, and the OL had injury issues all year. So get your facts straight. You can love the Patriots if you want, but don't be hatin' on the Super Bowl Champs. Ben is a damn good quarterback because he listens to his coaches, follows the game plan (RUN, RUN RUN!) and limits his mistakes. Ben has played all of 2 seasons, and has shown again and again that he has talent. Brady has a great set of coaches too, and is smart enough to follow the game plan. Oh, and by the way, 88.5 is an not a quarterback rating to brag about. Jeff Garcia is ranked higher all-time in that
I'm just glad I don't have to refer to my team's qb as "Big Ben"
OK, OK, I'll restate what I said previously, both Brady and Roethlisberger are not just good, they are damned good. Both are potentially HOFers. I say potentially, because injuries and accidents (heaven forbid) can take their toll. The only point I try to make is that ESPN, Fox, and anyone else that has anything to do with the NFL tries to promote the individual player far more than his team. Play a little game in your head. Trade quarterbacks from team to team, and think about what they might do there. Would Ben Roethlisberger have the same degree of success with, say, Arizona as with Pittsburgh? Steve McNair was always very good with Tennessee, but never seemed to have the superhuman status with the media that Brady or Roethlisberger do. IMHO, the team makes the individual greater than he might otherwise be, and by the same token, the individual makes the team better. I never expected to throw that much gasoline onto what wasn't even a fire, but it sure was fun watching (reading?) the flames grow higher. Above all things, GET WELL SOON, BEN.
