You know why people hate the Patriots?
Why they REALLY hate them?
It's because their success is unobtainable and can't be replicated. Your team may win the super bowl, but your team almost certainly won't win it back to back, and your team WILL NOT win it 4 times in 3 years to create a dynasty AND THEN come back a decade later with the same quarterback and head coach and win it AGAIN.
A super bowl win is great, but it's still less valuable than what the Patriots did, and that drives fans of other teams mad, because they know even if they win the big game, that's the height of success that team will have.
And it goes further than that with Brady specifically. He looks 10 years younger than he does. He's going on 40 and has a better hairline than you will at 30. He's dating a literal 11. He's outrageously attractive and is as selfless as they come, always putting everything else aside so he can be there for his team mates. He isn't greedy and takes far less money than he could so the team can stay together.
You can try to justify the jealousy with straw grasping allegations of spying and deflating footballs, but at the end of they day, you're just salty that you wern't born in New England and will never have the chance to be a true fan of the most dominent team the game has ever seen.
So basically what you're arguing is that overarching legacy is more important than individual super bowl wins?
I couldn't agree more.
>no one has ever won back to back superbowls before
wow, I knew Patriots were stupid bandwagoners but this is a whole new level of stupid.
Learn the history of the game before you attempt to talk about.
1/10 you got my (you)
That's good, Now you can't be too buttblasted when they get their ass kicked.
>That's good, Now you can't be too buttblasted when they get their ass kicked.
Anon, let's be serious, Peyton is playing like a backup QB. The Pats will rush him and keep him from making the short pass, which is the only pass he is capable of doing anymore.
It literally looks like Hasselbeck is out there.
He clear stated
>your team will never back2back
like it had never been done before.
He's a bandwagoner who doesn't know shit about the game. Typical Patriot fan. He definitely doesn't know that for decades the Patriots were a laughing stock of the league and had basically no fans.
>How much is Brady responsible for each owl win?
30% Pete Carroll
patriots in the 2000s is after the 90s, or correct me if im wrong. you going to continue with you intentional misunderstanding in order to try to convince retards you know what you are talking about?
Irrelevent because last year he got owl MVP ever though everyone knows, including Brady who has admitted it, it belonged to Butler or maybe Gronk [spoiler]or may Pete Carroll/Bevell[/spoiler]
>Don't get me wrong, Brady is a clutch QB, but he's not the primary reason for the pats success.
Everyone knows this.
It still doesn't devalue the Patriots or their success at all.
I'm 20 and have been a pats fan ever since I started watching football when I was roughly 9 or 10.
I don't know how old I need to be to meet your requirements of a "true fan", but I can assure you your requirments are bullshit
The success will never be replicated in the salary cap era, way too much has to come together for it to be possible. The only reason it even happened is because 198 people were somehow chosen over Brady in the 2000 draft, meaning in the end it came down to a fuck ton of luck.
Brady threw 2 ugly ints in owlXLIX. The 2 best scores were more so testaments to Gronk than Brady.
It was the defense that held Seattle to a field goal in the 3rd that would have otherwise become a TD and bring the game into overtime assuming everything else afterwards stayed the same.
It was the defense that held Lynch to the 1 yard line on his last carry.
It was the defense that intercepted Wilson and cemented the win.
they hate brady because he's 38 and still dominating the league, its like a lengthy rape at this point, like the butt hole is already blown the fuck out, they stopped biting the pillow, the tears have dried... now it just burns and stings with every thrust into the end zone
The Seahawks were the only team that had a shot at it and their greed for forcing Wilson to become the center of the team saw an end to that.
Granted, they're still young enough to make a run for another owl, maybe even 2, but dynasty status is probably unreachable for them now.
>they hate brady because he's 38 and still dominating the league, its like a lengthy rape at this point, like the butt hole is already blown the fuck out, they stopped biting the pillow, the tears have dried... now it just burns and stings with every thrust into the end zone
OP here, I thought I made it very clear that while Brady is a big part of the success, he's not the reason they are as good as they are. Rather, the entire team as a unit and their coach is why they are successful.
I don't know why /sp/ dickrides QBs so much and gives them credit for what is from the ground up a team sport. Furthermore, owl rings are not a good metric for individual success, they're the BEST metric however for team success.
It was also defense that let the seahawks march down the field in 30 seconds to tie it.
>The 2 best scores were more so testaments to Gronk than Brady
He had 3 catches for 22 yards in the second half. It's not like he was dominating.
>Brady has the largest comeback in Super Bowl history
There you go again giving all the credit to the QB position. Classic /sp/.
Look m8, I'm a born and raised pats fan, but Brady is not the reason they won the owl.
>It was also defense that let the seahawks march down the field in 30 seconds to tie it.
The Pats D made a solid block on 4th down that only counted as a catch because it bounced off lockett's body and never touched the ground.
Seahawks played a better game, but the Pats coached a better game, and I'm not one of those guys that says "New England only won because of Carroll's decision"
No, I give Butler all the credit in the world for that interception, but the fact remains that was an abysmal play call and was most likely done to ellevate Wilson to a higher team status as the face of the team.
>implying Brady didn't have the single best 4th quarter performance in Super Bowl history against the most dominant defense of the past decade and defending Super Bowl champions, I'm what was essentially a road game with no running game for support.
And into the trash it goes.
It's one of the main reasons. They won the owl thanks to Brady being clutch in the 4th quarter and defense forcing the Seahawks to go three and out.
Saying Brady was carried by the D is stupid though.
Ehhh, Brady met his win condition.
His performance however didn't hold the game in the balance.
The defense was the tipping point.
Game was entirely out of Brady's control and I don't believe he deserved the MVP for that game.
Brady and the offense put up 28 points on a phenomenal defense. Gtfo with all your other shit. It doesn't matter what the defense did or didn't do. Brady played decently in that game. His redzone int sucked, but, as always, he played best when it counted, scoring 14 points in the fourth quarter.
And as always it was done without any semblance of a running game.
>It's one of the main reasons. They won the owl thanks to Brady being clutch
Even Brady himself has admitted this is not true.
I don't get it, as a Pats fan you would think people would want to give credit to their team, not take it away and surround it around 1 player.
All I can think of is that it's memeposting from shallow lurkers that don't have a strong hold on the depth of the game.
It's like the debate sticky on /pol/ the other day. In case you missed it, last night's debate was far more centered around the economy, the affordable care act, wall street, and the campaign contribution system. The majority of /pol/ clearly knew nothing about any of this and instead kept asking "when are they going to talk about Isis?", "can't wait to see more based trump", etc.
I even saw someone post asking "What the Fuck is a deductible?"
Brady even gave him the car he got for MVP.
Watch the game again. The Seattle D was nowhere near phenomenal in the game, especially by the 4th Quarter. That's not to discredit the Pats win by any means, but Brady wasn't the catalyst for the win. He did what he needed to do. It was a team win, centered on the defense.
In this world of egos and not being able to handle shame, the patriots have shamed alot of people. That's why they are hated.
I'm not saying defense didn't play a gigantic part in that win, cause they did. They managed to hold the seahawks to 0 points when the Patriots needed D to step up the most.
However I'm also saying that without the Brady led offense going on those two perfect drives they would not have won that game.
Butler played a fraction of the game. He made a great play but that basically his only one of that game.
Should David Tyree gotten the MVP in the last Patriots Super Bowl?
His catch didn't clinch the game.
Brady doing his job doesn't instantly make him the best player on the field.
That one play saved the Pats, no matter what you or any other moron thinks.
Brady couldn't have come back with 30 seconds against the Hawks on his own 20.
I know it's tough for you to understand by the second the game was clinched, the so called MVP wasn't even on the fucking field.
>No I hate that all the "people" I know who are patriots fans are bandwagoners from this era.
The thing is, most patriots fans started being fans during their dynasty era, so is it really fair to consider them bandwagoners?
Are you really bandwagoners unless you team has struggled.
Well, the 49ers won their first in '81 and their last in '94, if you want to call that whole stretch one dynasty. So, their dynasty lasted for 13 years and in that time they compiled a record of 159-56-1 (that's a win% of 73.6%).
The Steelers won their first ring in '74 and the last of that dynasty in '79, so it was definitely shorter lived. To be generous, let's extend the start of their dynasty to '72, when they won their first division championship. In that span, they compiled a record of 88-27-1 (a win% of 75.8%).
The Patriots won their first Super Bowl in the 2001 season and their most recent in the 2014 season. In that span they compiled a record of 182-58 (win% of 75.8%).
So, to recap:
13 years, 73.6% win ratio
7 years, 75.8% win ratio
13 years, 75.8% win ratio
Notice anything? The 49ers/Steelers were not both "better longer", one was just as good and one was just as long - but neither was better or longer (honestly didn't even know that would be the end result, kind of funny though). And that's only IF the Pats don't win another Owl. So, you're free to have your opinion about the 49ers/Steelers dynasties being longer and better - just know you are completely, objectively, factually incorrect.
FACT: Tom Brady is just an slightly above average QB
FACT: If Tom had been drafted or signed on any other team he would have never reached a superbowl
FACT: The only reason the Patriots are successful is because they have the 2nd best Head Coach of all time (Behind Tom Landry) with Bill Belichik
FACT: Bill can literally take any other QB to a Superbowl
Oh yeah, you're totally right, GOAT QB doesn't contribute at all to his team's success and just stands around and takes the glory. Yup. Totally.
That's why he has all those 4th quarter comebacks and game winning drives and shit on his resume. That's why he owns every playoff record and the best winning percentage ever.
Imagine caring this much about a team of LITERAL cheaters whose legacy will ALWAYS be thought of as a giant *
>Bill can literally take any other QB to a Super Bowl
That's why he was so successful with the Browns, right? And why he won 7 less games with Cassel than he did with Brady the year prior (the whole starting roster was the exact same) and failed to win the division. Also
>Tom Landry GOAT
He made the Browns win a playoff game
THats practically a superbowl for that franchise
And he brought a career terrible QB in Cassel to 11-5 and would have won a superbowl with him if Miami didn't meme into the playoffs instead
Tom is literally nothing without Bill and Bill is still a HC diety without Tom. This is legit fact
>using unadjusted win ratios
The 49ers had a much tougher schedule than the Patriots did over that course of time. One of the few times the 49ers didn't make the playoffs during that stretch, they had the 8th best record in the NFC with a record of 10-6 - and that was when there were only 14 teams in each conference.
Brady is a great QB because he can almost perfectly adhere to and succede at Bill's system, and that not a bad thing.
He might not have the most power, or the best arm ever, but he has a very good ratio of actually claccomplishing what the coach tells him to do cinsistantly, and I'd rather have that than a QB who might be more athletic or more physically gifted.
I don't know the 49ers SoS during that time and honestly don't give a shit enough to look so I'm not saying you aren't correct, but that was a horrible example. In 2008, without Brady, when the Pats had a record of 11-5 (eleven and five) they missed the playoffs.
Honestly this. I have a feeling all these people saying Brady would be Alex Smith without Belichick have never watched Brady live. It's very noticeable how fast he makes his decision and how quickly he gets the ball out of his hand, it's incredible. I've seen a lot of QBs live and never seen one like him.
Alright, well they won 4 owls in 13 years and the 49ers won 5 in 13 years (hint: Pats will probably win another one) so I don't see how you consider one a dynasty and not the other. But either way, it doesn't matter if you call them a dynasty or not - the bottom line (and the point of my original post) is that >>65029043
is objectively incorrect. I'm not a Pats fan, so I don't really give a shit if they're considered a "dynasty" or not.
The patriots have a 4 year dynasty then a 10 year stretch before another owl.
Or are you actually arguing that the Pats owl win actually extends their dynasty through a 10 year gap of no owl wins?
Because LITERALLY nobody believes that.
I'm not arguing shit, once again I don't give a fuck about if the Pats are a dynasty or not. Other than saying I think the Pats will win another Owl, I literally have not given a single opinion - I've even explicitly said I do not give a fuck about the Pats and am not a fan of them - I don't know why you're still being a retard and trying to argue. All I'm doing is show FACTS and STATISTICS that show over their period of having the same HC/QB and winning an excessive amount of games while still not being a dynasty: they lasted as long as the 49ers and won as often as the Steelers. I swear, if you hit the reply button and still try to argue you are honestly a massive idiot.
>nobody else will ever win 3 owls in 4 years
Given how much the rules benefit qbs nowadays, I guarantee there will be another team to do this within the next 20 years. The next super elite qb who has yet to make his way to the nfl will do it pretty handily.
Seattle is the only team positioned to make it back to the owl more than once in the next 5 years and their management staff seems he'll bent on keeping that from hapoenj g via the dumbest decisions in the league.
Honestly, Seattle probably has the third most invasively cancerous ownership and management in the NFL behind only the Jets and the niners.
Fair point then, makes more sense when you elaborate/put it into perspective. Do you know if the NFC was consistently that good in the 80s/early 90s or if that was a standout year?
I could see it not happening just because teams reach for "elite" QBs so much now and there's so much pressure for them to reach immediate success - with the same teams constantly drafting QBs in the first round it's hard to build up the rest of the team.
>Who has more to lose in terms of legacy in the AFC Championship game, Brady or Manning?
If he loses, he'll be seen as an old man that should have stopped playing last year and is out of his league.
If Brady loses, big woop, the won the owl last year, it's fine.
That being said, if Manning goes on to win the owl, he will cement his legacy as the GOAT
15 years of greatness will do that
Brady is about to go to his 7th owl
do you people have amnesia? Rewatch the 4th quarter of that game, and try to tell me Brady wasn't the MVP, literally perfect on those last 2 drives to take the lead, and the seahawks had a helmet catch moment with kearse to put them in position to win
>Game was entirely out of Brady's control and I don't believe he deserved the MVP for that game.
He scored two touchdowns in the 4th quarter to get them the lead against the best defense in the league. If they were down by a touchdown on the last drive, Brady would have scored. The defense just happened to be on the field during the last series and not the offense.