Originally posted by Davo:
Originally posted by dnewma04:
He already has 3x as many SB victories.


Here we go again with the 'he has...SB victories'. I don't think Tom Brady accomplished this on his own.

Originally posted by dnewma04:
And don't even give me anything about Farve playing on inferior teams. For a good chunk of the mid-late 90s, they had the best team in the league.


But many in this forum


you have a strange definition of many. What are there, 2?
Quote:


(and elsewhere) believe the Pats are the greatest team ever (). So, 1) You would expect that 'Tom Brady has' 3 Super Bowl rings compared to Favre's 1; 2) Since Favre won a championship with an inferior team, that he is a better quarterback than Brady, right?



To be honest, I have heard many people say this teams accomplishments in this period of time is among the most impressive in NFL history. I have yet to hear any NFL "experts" call them the best team ever.

Quote:


Brady's been good for 4 years, Favre that times 3. So if Brady can sustain his level of play for another 8 years, then even I would put him in the same class as Favre.



If he does this for 8 more years, then you can't keep Favre in the same class. Favre fanboism runs wilder than NE fans.
Quote:


But for now, I am very suspicious of rampant Kurt Warnerism here. Warner put up amazing numbers over the course of a couple years and won a championship. He went down, and his replacement did the same. So how amazing is Kurt Warner now? All Tom Brady has to do is prove he isn't Kurt Warner.



Well, when Montana went down, Young was amazing, when Young was hurt, Bono stepped in and played at an all-pro level. Was that just the system? Warner, when healthy, was outstanding.

Right now, if Brady went down with an injury, or got one more super bowl and went down, he would go down in history like Sandy Koufax did in Baseball.

"If you are flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a fire exit" -Mitch Hedberg