You are an idiot and have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
-The Patriots were 5-11 in the 2000-2001 season.
-The Patriots were 0-2 in the 2001-2002 season before Brady replaced Drew Bledsoe. Afterwards they finished the season 11-5 and won the Super Bowl.
-The Patriots receivers in their three Super Bowl wins: David Givens, David Patten, Deion Branch, and Troy Brown.
-The backs? Kevin Faulk (primarily a third down back), Antowain Smith, J.R. Redmond, and Corey Dillon. The best of the bunch is clearly Corey Dillon, but he only had one great year with the Patriots.
-The 2001-2002 defense is the lowest ranked defense to ever win a Super Bowl.
-The defenses in the ensuing Super Bowls were much better, but nothing to brag about. Do you honestly think people will mention the Patriots defense with the Bucs and the Ravens defense?
-Bill Belichick had a losing record as a head coach before Brady stepped in.
-To further debunk that asinine claim that Brady is a system quarterback, he went through four different offensive coordinators: Charlie Weis, Bill Belichick/early Josh McDaniels, all Josh McDaniels, and back to Belichick. Manning on the other hand had Tom Moore his entire career. If anything, Manning is a better example of a system quarterback.
First of all, I never said that Brady was a system QB, merely that he had superior teammates compared to other players such as Brees. Also, while you rattle off all these stats, you have to take into consideration: the other player's that I mentioned had even worse teams than the Patriots, with the exception of Peyton Manning (which, if you had read my post, you would have noticed I excluded from the "bad teammates" comment).
I thought it was a team game?
It is, which is way Brady win more than those QBs. Those QBs have more individual talent than Brady, but that doesn't mean they are going to win more games because they have terrible teams.
How exactly is Manning better than Brady?
See other's posts, I'm not even going to bother. He consistantly puts up superior stats, even when he has inferior teammates (any year after the Patriots received Randy Moss is a year in which Brady had better receivers than Manning, because Moss is unarguably the best receiver in the history of the NFL and has as much talent as Wayne and Harrison combined.)
1. Manning is the least sacked quarterback in the league. Read my post, I said Manning was the exception.
2. Reggie Wayne, Dallas Clark, Donald Driver, and Greg Jennings aren't talented? Your lack of comprehension skills are showing here again. Also, Driver and Jennings are good players, just not as good as Moss/Welker/etc.
3. What are you talking about? The Saints have the most balanced offense in the league and Ryan Grant ran for 1,200 yards on 4.4 yards per carry. The Colts run game, while not great, is not as bad as people say it is. Look at Brady's backfield: Laurence Maroney, a liability, Fragile Fred, and Sammy Morris. Colts have already been covered, also they have the absolute worst running game in the NFL, so that statement makes you look even more ignorant. Grant boosted his stats by playing against terrible defenses, and he was never a deciding factor in any of Green Bay's victories. Rodgers put the team on his back every single time they managed to win a game this season. As for the Saints, the only reason they have a "balanced" offense is because their coach isn't a complete asshole and actually tries to run out the clock when his team is winning by 3-4 touchdowns. If the Saints were in close games the whole season, I can guarantee that their play call selction would be much different.
...Ignoring the fact that improved offensive line play is the key reason why the Packers are in the playoffs. According to your asinine logic you have to be on your ass constantly to be great. No, not at all. I'm just saying that Brady has a hell of a lot easier of a time than other quarterbacks, much like Manning does, because his offensive line is so good. Rodgers could very easily have put up similar if not better numbers than Brady did in 2007 if he had the same team.
Establishing the run is completely overrated. LOL. This statement alone shows all that needs to be said about your football intelligence. Are you kidding me? If a team doesn't even try to run the ball, then the opposing defense can just sit back and play pass defense all day. I don't think you understand something: the defense has a massive advantage against the offense if they know what the offense is going to be doing. The offense only has 5 players that they can use as targets (unless they want to use a linemen as a receiver), while the defense can use all 11 men in coverage if they so choose.
Peterson fumbled eight times and lost the ball six times. That doesn't help at all. No, it doesn't. I used to think Peterson was the best RB in the NFL, but then I realized how foolish that was. Both CJ and MJD have proven time after time that they are more consistent and simply more talented than AP. AP might put up some better stats if he didn't have the shittiest playcalling ever, but he really isn't very good.
