CHFF has been pimping a certain stat for months.  I've long considered refuting it, but was never sufficiently annoyed until now.

They've been pushing the idea that Tom Brady is the best QB in football history at "carrying his team".  That standard is arbitrary defined as a game when he throws at least 40 times.  There are of course, tons of problems with this theory.  There is a huge difference between a team choosing to throw 40 times because of a strategic advantage and a QB who has to throw 40+ times because his team is trailing or can't run the ball.  To lump all games with 40+ attempts into one basket is foolish and misleading.

The misconception is that the team had their QB throw 40+ times because they HAD to.  That hasn't been true of the Patriots under Belichick.

You see this clearly in Brady's games.  Three times he threw ball more than 40 times in blowout games where his team won by at least three touchdowns.  In another game, the Pats won by 16 points. It can hardly be said that he "carried the Pats" in those games.  New England has a proclivity to throw when already leading by a lot.  In other words, Brady's "carrying the team" stats are padded because of the team's philosophy.  Brady's team averages 25.4 points a game when he throws that much (I don't have the time to filter out defensive scores, sorry), but if you take out the blowout games where it wasn't necessary, the number drops to 23.8 points. Beyond that his defense allowed an average of just 22.6 points in those games.  The Pats chose to pass; they were not forced to pass.

Compare that with Manning; he's never thrown 40+ times in a blowout win.  The Colts only have one double digit win in game where he threw 40+ times.  That's the difference between having a coach that calls off the dogs late and a coach that keeps throwing until the final gun.  Beyond that, Mannings' teams averaged 22.3 points when he throws 40+ times.  That's lower than Brady's mark for sure, but that "extra field goal" would only have made the difference in 5 of the 49 games.  Ironically, one was the game at San Diego two years ago when Vinatieri missed a short field goal that would have won it.  Simply put, Tom Brady's slight advantage in points generated when throwing 40+ times would not have led to many more wins at all.

There are two other factors to consider:

1.  The Colts defense gave up 27.6 ppg in games where Manning was forced to throw 40+ times

2.  Manning has had to throw 40+ times a whopping 49 times in his career.  Brady has only had to do it 25 times.   The Pats have had the luxury of letting Brady throw a lot only when it suits them to do so.  The Colts have depended on Manning far more often.  That creates an imbalance where one passer is set up for success and the other for failure.

Now CHFF is going gaga over Brady's record when throwing 50 or more passes.  When forced to throw that often, Brady has a great record in part because his defense only allowed 24.2 ppg in those games.  Manning's defenses?  31.6 ppg. That's a more than a touchdown difference.  Considering that four of Manning's seven losses in those games were by 8 points or less, I'd say that an extra 7.4 points fewer on defense would have made a big difference.

Tom Brady on the other hand?  Every time he's had to throw 50+ times in a Pats victory, his team has won by a 3 points or less.  Simply put, if Brady had to play those same games with the Colts defense he would have ZERO wins.

Brady's record when throwing frequently is impressive, but irrelevant.  His team's philosophy in blowouts lends to victories with high passing totals.  His team's defense has enabled him to have to throw 40-50+ times only when it suits the Patriots needs.

In other words, he's not really carrying his team.  His team is carrying him.

Comments (20)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Once again
written by J.C., September 15, 2009

Your counter argument is hollow.

What BOTH of you two clowns should do is determine what his (or whoever's) record is when they have to throw the ball X amount of times in the FOURTH QUARTER.

That, and nothing else can touch it, is indicative of how badly they need to throw.

Even when the Patriots win by fifty and Brady throws 56 times, a fraction of them are in the last frame.

I'd set X at 12 and over. Maybe a little bit higher. Any time a QB has to attempt in the neighborhood of 15 times in the fourth quarter, it's out of necessity.

• 
• -2
• 
• 

Plus
written by J.C., September 15, 2009

To use a hypothetical and substitute the Colt's defense is ridiculous.

Maybe they'd perform better IF Belichick was their coach.

Can't let you off the hook on that one bro. It's weak.

• 
• -2
• 
• 

...
written by npb1985, September 15, 2009

You are absolutely right. Brady's success is only in part to the success of his team. When his team is mediocre, he is mediocre. He throws 50+ times a game because he has to, and luckily, Randy Moss is damn good at getting open, as is Wes Welker.

There is a difference between the actual Tom Brady and the Tom Brady ESPN and the big market media have created. He is a good quarterback with a pretty thrown, good accuracy, and confidence under pressure. Yet, he is not the greatest at anything. His team's success leads to his success. He has never had to "carry" his team. Ever. Peyton has had to the majority of the years he's been in Indy. Without Peyton, I see a lot of 5 and 6 win seasons. Without Brady....well see last year. ESPN and CHFF won't settle for things like "facts" and "objectivity," though.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

And finally
written by J.C., September 15, 2009

'The best defense is a good offense'

By dropping 21 on a team in the first quarter, it completely takes them - I don't care who it is - out of their game and makes them one dimensional.

That's what the 2007 offense did to every team we played, save for a few.

• 
• -1
• 
• 

...
written by npb1985, September 15, 2009

J.C., your entitled to your opinion. Yet, the point is that CHFF is incapable of being objective. It was one thing to say Tom Brady does a good job carrying his team when he has to, but to say he is the best at it is ludicrous. He has never really "had" to, and he is not even close to being the greatest at it. He had to carry the team in SB 42 and the '06 AFC Championship and failed to deliver. If you don't think Manning is better, that's fine, but he is not worse than Brady.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by npb1985, September 15, 2009

By the way, DZ, i tip my hat to you for posting stuff like this. I always use it as my own fuel when arguing Manning vs. Brady. I have yet to hear a clever counter argument from anyone of my friends. The only thing they have after I disprove the 3 rings, 50 td makes him better argument, all they have is, "Colts suck!" aka "You win. I concede and resort to generic fan insults."

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by DZ, September 15, 2009

@JC

Actually, I love that idea. I wish there was some easy way to track that other than filtering through 10 years of NFL gamebooks.

Part of the problem is that CHFF defines the parameters in such an arbitrary and stupid way. Personally, I think a QB has to "carry" a team if: the defense gives up more than 24 points AND the team runs for less than 80 yards.

I pulled those numbers out of the air, but they are more reflective of carrying a team than 40 attempts.

I whole wholeheartedly agree that there is a better standard than the one CHFF used. I'm open to arguments (14+ attempts in the fourth quarter of a game is a good place to start).

As for your other arguments, the best D is a good offense, ect...that's all fine, but it doesn't change the fact that when BB has a big lead, he keeps throwing. When Dungy had a big lead, Manning stopped passing. The Colts had plenty of 21-0 leads, but then he'd pull Manning, run the ball, ect and Manning never got to 40 attempts. The Colts like to get a lead and then run the ball.

My point on the Colts D is just that the Colts mostly let Manning throw 40+ times in games where the defense is out of control bad.

It's always stupid to compare "records" of quarterbacks. It's doubly stupid to do so under circumstances where there is a dramatic difference in the performance of the defenses in question.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Wait, am I missing something?
written by Josh K, September 15, 2009

I could be missing something in this paragraph:

"Tom Brady on the other hand? Every time he's had to throw 50+ times in a Pats victory, his team has won by a 3 points or less. Simply put, if Brady had to play those same games with the Colts defense he would have ZERO wins."

... and I get what you're saying about how he would have lost if the defense was worse. But doesn't the small margin of victory ALSO support the idea that he did, in fact, eke out a win through the high-volume passing?

(I like the DZ/JC thread in the comments; I just wanted to check on my read of that one point.)

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by DZ, September 15, 2009

Sure, he eeked out victories with 50+ attempts, but part of what made that possible is that his defense performed reasonably. 24 points isn't a good game, but it's not impossible to overcome either.

When Manning threw 50+ times, the Colts D allowed an average of more than 31 points a game. That's pretty tough to overcome.

When Brady threw 50+ time the Pats D gave up just 24 points a game. Considering that all his 50 throw games were basically close games, a good part of his great record is due to the fact that a 'bad' game from the Pats D is about a TD better than a bad game from the Colts D.

I'm not disparaging Brady at all. I'm just saying that the standard of wins with 40 or 50 attempts isn't valid. You can't say:

QB A is 7-1 with 50+ attempts
QB B is 1-7 with 50+ attempts

QB A carries his team better than QB B.

You could compare records when both teams defenses gave up 28 points or more maybe. But to compare records based on attempts, while ignoring that QB Bs defense gave up a full TD more per game, is silly.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

ugh - this again?
written by Schultz950, September 15, 2009

"...and, luckily, Randy Moss is damn good at getting open, so is Wes Welker."

You know who else is good at getting open? Reggie Wayne, Dallas Clark, and Marvin Harrison in his prime.

Let me preface by saying that CHFF doesn't know what they're talking about, and I agree with DZ that the numbers are off. But I've got to agree with a lot of what J.C. said. You don't need numbers to back it up - just watch tape of last night's game. Without Brady they lose that game, even with the fumble and everything else. It was a terrific fourth-quarter performance just like Peyton last year in Minnesota (or any other 4th quarter comeback of his).

The whole "with the Colts defense, Brady would suck!" argument is so bunk. Brady won Super Bowls with Bethel Johnson, Antowain Smith, Deion Branch, Kevin Faulk, and David Givens. If anything the Pats defensive firepower is certainly evened-out by all the toys (Edge, Marvin, Reggie, etc.) that Peyton has had with that Colts offense in his career.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by DZ, September 15, 2009

I disagree. I think there are about 15 QBs that could have won that game last night. Throwing a TD against the shell prevent the Bills played wasn't that complicated. After the fumble, the Pats needed just 30 yards to score.

It was dramatic, but it wasn't that impressive a performance from a QB perspective. Lots of guys would have led that same comeback.

It's why I don't get hyped up about Manning's role in the Houston comeback last year. He made some plays, but that was caused by the defense. Lots of QBs could have led that comeback. That's the better comparison.

• 
• +1
• 
• 

I agree with JC on the defense substitutions
written by bobman, September 15, 2009

It works for me in a logical sense and I DO feel 18 would have many more wins than 12 this decade if they traded Defenses. But as a proof or logic argument it is just too flimsy. How about putting Carson Palmer there? Okay, now a Palmer who never injured his leg? Same for Culpepper. McNabb. It becomes a misty spider web of suppositions that can never be acurately measured.

Now a clear measurement is defensive points allowed--that's clear-cut and objective. I think that's a great idea to combine the 24 pts allowed, moderate run game, and maybe things like 14 throws in the 4th qtr, possibly combined with losing the TO battle not due to INTs, etc. I bet somebody at SBnation would take this challenge on. Just like 12 has a smaller sample size than 18 when comparing the games with 40 or more throws, he'll have a MUCH smaller sample size--possibly insignificant, when looking for 24 pt D games combined with 40 throws. I say he'll have fewer than 10, which any stats professor would throw out. (You try for an N of 20 at least.)

Ironically, this is a pretty silly argument anyway--I think we all agree that 18 and the Colts got better globally when 18 stopped carrying the team like he did from 1998-2003. When his supporting cast and D improved, he forced fewer balls, took fewer risks, checked to runs and threw the ball away more often when under pressure. All of those things reduce stats but made for a better QB and a better team. So while carrying a team is impressive, it is not desirable. I'd rather have a game where 18 handed off 35 times and threw only 20.

JC, you are wrong on at least one item: putting up 21 pts in the first quarter does NOT take the opponent out of it... if only that were true! From 98-2004 (approx) that was the Colts MO--generate a huge lead, and then let the D and ST give it back. There were plenty of games when we were up by 14 at the break and ended up winning or losing by 3 in the end. Generally the pre-Dungy days, but that's 35% of Manning's starts, so they have a pretty big influence on any career-spanning measurement.

BTW, Richard Seymour looked pretty damn good last night, after just one walk-thru practice. I was surprised.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by DZ, September 15, 2009

I'm working on a post comparing the QBs play in game where the other team scored 25 points or more. It's not the best standard, but I think it's waaaaay better than attempts.

I do throws by quarter, but I'm not sure that data is easily available.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by project GEO, September 15, 2009

"Tom Brady is the best QB in football history at carrying his team."

That's quite possibly the dumbest thing I've ever read. I can't put into words how obscenely and truly stupid that is, nevermind devoid of any knowledge on the subject in question. It makes me wonder if the people in charge have actually watched professional football of any prolonged period and exposure during the last ten years or so.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by project GEO, September 15, 2009

and I would add, before the last ten years for that matter as well.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Interesting possibilities
written by bmerryman, September 15, 2009

Consider the possibility that the Colts Defense and Special Teams will be better than the Patriots over the next three to four years. I think it's a distinct possibility. If so, I'd bet dollars to donuts the tables turn with these types of statistics.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by scb, September 15, 2009

Side note -- No one mentioned pass protection! It's a helluva lot more important than the quality of the receivers. If QB A sits back in an easy chair and has all day to throw for big yardage and points, what idiot would say he carried the team? Even if the defense was getting torched and the game was close, the QB wouldn't be "carrying the team".

Now to the meat -- A QB "carries the team" when his team wins games that his surrounding talent shouldn't be good enough to win and he makes up the difference with exceptional play. Period. Doesn't matter if he does it with his audibles, the no huddle, his running, his faking, his setting up of the run for the RB, his passing, or the threat of his passing.

The QB who succeeds when the line is crap and his receivers barely present a window is carrying his team. Even if his numbers suffer. Who cares how many times he throws?! Of all the statistics to fold, spindle, and mutilate in an effort to slobber on Captain Dink n Dunk, CHaFF comes up with attempts?! WTF?

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by DZ, September 15, 2009

Posted a look at games where the D gives up 25 or more points.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by MattH, September 25, 2009

How about the number of times the QB has to come from behind in a game? What was it, 4 in this Miami game? Any way to track that stat?

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Brady's a F'in joke!
written by ESPNakaBradyBallLicker, September 28, 2009

Nuff said.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Name

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

Add Comment