Mahomes had a woat o line and was robbed out in one of them
There is no such thing as a ‘talent’ or ‘eye test’ argument for Brady vs Mahomes
- Thread starter Braman
- Start date
murksiderock
Superstar
Nothing I said was contradictory, you just misunderstood me:I’m not sure what the sum of all of this means. Seems like some contradictions there
So rings don’t matter, but he needs some more moments in super bowls
Also it sounds like you’re saying he needs to win a few rings, and just play a long time, really well
If that’s the case,
1) Then what exactly are you basing it on?! Multiple QBs can meet that criteria’s so what separates them??
2) How do you arrive at your arbitrary # of acceptable rings? How can you say more rings don’t matter but at the same time say ‘you gotta have a few tho’.So if Mahomes needs more to get in the convo, you DO value rings.
3) Otherwise, why isn’t Marino, or Elway, or manning, or Brees, or Rodgers goat?!? Bc they fit your criteria of ‘play really well, for a long time, at a high level, playoffs, etc’
Bottom line…that seems like a loooot of explaining just to avoid flat out saying ‘he needs to get close to 7 rings’
•where you ultimately land in historical hierarchy is a combination of many factors, including, but not limited to, championship success and longevity;
•I don't have an arbitrary ring count, I stated a declaration of fact. No one is considered a candidate for the greatest ever with less than 2 rings. There was a 3-year or so stretch mf's tried to push Rodgers in there, but it didn't stick because he kept having bad games when it mattered...
The pre-Mahomes trio of greatest QBs ever was a pretty set in stone Brady, Manning, Montana. Brady has 7, Montana has 4, Manning has 2. This pretty clearly indicates that you're not really approaching this convo with fewer than 2 Lombardi's; Mahomes has 2 and counting, he's now a Rushmore guy...
As great as Rodgers was, and he was probably the next closest guy after Manning, there was a pretty substantial gap between he and Manning...
•you can have a long prime at a high level but you need rings to validate your entrance. Marino was a playoff choke artist, nobody is entertained as the GOAT with no ring...
Brees played a long time but was only at best the third best quarterback of his own era. And sure, it was a stacked era, but if you're #3 in you're era you're not in the convo for #1 ever---->and most cats put Rodgers over him so the general opinion is Brees was the 4th greatest QB of his own era...
As with everything, perception evolves with time. 25 years ago we could argue Marino as the GOAT in a league that hadn't yet introduced Brady, Manning, Brees, Rodgers. 25 years later we have more information and just better guys have come along since Marino, period. Elway as well...
....
TLDR, in case you're confused still, you can't be in the convo with no rings, 2 is the threshold for admission; just because you have 2+ doesn't make you automatic (see Eli, Bradshaw, Elway), so it's not simply based on a number, you have to have historic presence along with championship success...
Art Barr
INVADING SOHH CHAMPION
What’s happening is people are applying a Bron vs Jordan mindset and applying it to Mahomes vs Brady. This is stupid for many reasons
1- In hoops, players can play noticeably different. Visually different. Statistically different. There is enough nuance that, one can value points over assists, one can value defense, Playmaking vs scoring, etc. There are enough differences where it can be more subjective
With football, this is not the case. No matter how “talented” a QB is, a 10 yard out is a 10 yard out. A deep crosser is a deep crosser. The concept of a QB finding open men and passing to them is too straightforward, so “talent” cannot manifest at the QB position (for non rushing QBs)
Example, Kyrie is perhaps the most “talented” PG ever. You can SEE it. Hoops is played in a way that he can physically do things outside the box that others can’t. On a nightly basis. For non rushing QBs, this doesn’t exist. In the course of a game, season, hell career, there are only a handful of plays that are genuinely outside the box that displays abnormal “talent”. Ie a throw across the field, or a 70 yard bomb, a no look, etc. The problem is, not only is it far and few between based on how the game is played and defended, but also many QBs can do that. Matt Stafford was doing no looks before Mahomes. Baker mayfield owns the record for longest air yard pass.
Yet these are the type of ambiguous ‘tAlEnt’ arguments people make for Mahomes…it’s even funnier now considering that they no longer play like that
2- There is only 1 path to goat for QBs that’s rings. It is not the same as NBA. Now I could definitely see if someone wants to discount Brady’s first two. Bc he was a game manager. Cool. He still has 5 leftWHILE putting up gaudy stats. This shouldn’t even be an argument. It only is bc 24/7 news culture has fried peoples brain and no one has the patience to see if Mahomes willcatch Brady, they want the immediate debate even when the count is 7 rings to 2.
You are completely wrong.
Plus have failed to note race in this.
As well as the eastern rqcist seaboard blueblood ideal of journalism. Taking precedent in the realm of print and journalism. as it relays to sports and especially football and also basketball.
As you have applied.
a racist misappropriated goat model from basketball. From the misappropriation of bird over bill russell.
then applying michael jordan beating the misappropriated argument of bird over Russell.
Then applying it to brady.
Then failing to understand the goat argument. While never substantiation exactly where this all comes from.
As you can not discuss something. Then showcase disconnect as to how to arose to that discussion.
You showcased complete disconnect to understanding. Just where the current goat fascination came from. Which is based and rooted in complete racism. To deflect away.
the impact of the Civil rights movement change in America.
bill russell instituted As a cacatalyst.
With that.
you are posting from flawed and false doctrine to begin with.
Especially for brady and mahomes.
first...i feel you were not cognitive.
to have watched brady in college. Or understand who drew bledsoe was.
so. This idea you started this thread on. Is easily debunked by the eye test for brady and mahomes.
if you are a skilled scout. Let alone an advanced casual.
since i feel from your posting.
you never saw brady in college. Then i feel you really never saw brady and your eye test theory js flawed. As brady was THEE KILLER QB IN COLLEGE period.
brady passed the eye test.
Plus passed the eye test so easily. How he fell is on the ignorance of the nfl scouts.
Plus owners who really full of shyt snd not willing to really properly staff a team.
when if you saw brady in real time. In college. Plus weighed where he went to school. Plus whom his coach was. In that exact time. Then you should have been able to easily know. That if a team was properly staffed correctly.
you would be able to actualize brady as a pro.
Hence the tuna and belli actualized Bledsoe to brady. Then converting that into a afc finally beats the mfc model in the superbowl. Which brady in college passes the eye test potentially as a player. To warrant his draw pick up. Even with the current passed of a generation in drew Bledsoe on the sideline already
. Plus actualized as a pro.
same as with mahomes on his scouting tapes and reports in college.
it is just the pro sports is some latchkey good ole boi business. That does not allow real talents.
to scout or figure out how to make talent succeed.
the socalled eye test is not being viewed with the correct pair of lensess.
Art Barr
Don't know why this trash ass thread was upped, one of these guys didn't need to deflate footballs or spy on the other teams plays to win games. 
All that other shyt is NOISE
All that other shyt is NOISE
Brady had a WOAT o line versus Denver and people still say Peyton has a winning AFC championship record against him. Despite Peyton throwing as far as I did when I was 3.