I think coming back from being down 28-3 is more important than the total number of points they scored.

Atlanta's defense improved over the course of the season. But I think the Pats were finally able to exploit a defense playing 8 players with less than 2 years of experience. Brady had much more time in the 2nd half to make plays. In the 1st half he was under siege.

My opinion is that yards and points given up is overemphasized. If a team gets an early lead, especially a big lead, the defense plays looser. They play to prevent big plays. Yardage against can be substantial.

Posted by DoctorKz on 2/7/2017 9:47:00 PM (view original):
I think coming back from being down 28-3 is more important than the total number of points they scored.

Atlanta's defense improved over the course of the season. But I think the Pats were finally able to exploit a defense playing 8 players with less than 2 years of experience. Brady had much more time in the 2nd half to make plays. In the 1st half he was under siege.

My opinion is that yards and points given up is overemphasized. If a team gets an early lead, especially a big lead, the defense plays looser. They play to prevent big plays. Yardage against can be substantial.

They had to get down 28-3 in the first place.

I think you're kind of making my point for me here, honestly. Brady wasn't able to succeed for over half the game because his offensive line wasn't doing a good enough job for him to play well. That's not 100% on him. But all the wide open receivers that the Falcons secondary left available for him aren't really something for which he deserves a lot of credit either. I think Ryan made more great throws in the game than Brady did, and he threw a lot fewer passes. He also had Julio Jones helping him out on one or two. I'd still rather have Brady than Ryan, especially if I needed somebody to throw 60 passes in a game. But my point all along has been that it's not because of this one game.

Posted by dino27 on 2/7/2017 9:40:00 PM (view original):
toddcommish...eat **** and die.

Typical analysis... Liberal doesn't know what he's talking about, gets exposed, resorts to lashing out in anger...

Maybe you should riot and burn some **** and claim that you're protesting my policies when you're just vandalizing.... That should make you feel better.

I was drunk and posted about Brady in a baseball forum....How'd we get here

Human nature?

fair enough

You claimed to know Otto Graham's history, when you clearly didn't. You claimed to know about Unitis [sic] and Van Brocklin, but couldn't spell Unitas, nor did you seem aware that Graham retired before Unitas played a game.

You might NOT be a moron (i'll grant you the name was gratuitous), but you don't know pre-1980's football... at all.

Also, the fact that you blast off with "eat **** and die" and just as suddenly leap to "sad and angry" and "mental illness" for calling you out on your utter lack of knowledge and self-awareness says more about you than anyone else.

Posted by dino27 on 2/7/2017 9:40:00 PM (view original):
toddcommish...eat **** and die.

Clearly, mental health is your strong point.