(02-29-2020, 12:11 AM)Upper Wrote:

(02-28-2020, 10:35 AM)Kane Wrote: I wouldn't say WAY better
2742 yds 22 TD 6 INT - Tanny
4057 yds 24 TD 8 INT - Brady

And Brady didn't have a TE, didn't have decent WRs, didn't have Henry and the OL was meh

Put Brady on the tacks last year and they might have won the SB, since Tanny couldn't quite get much going in the playoffs.
53% vs NE for 72 yds 
50% vs Balt for 88 yards
Tacks coached like he was Bortles with a lead in the AFCG....

jus sayin...

One of the biggest cases of counting stats lying that I've ever seen. Look at those rate+ stats. I'll just copy the raw numbers, y'all know by now that they're the important per throw stats averaged out to 100 being league average.

Brady - 87 94 95 100 87 93 116 118 95
Tannehill - 145 130 142 131 123 133 104 77 135

Tannehill was basically MVP level and Brady was bad at everything except avoiding interceptions and sacks.

QB rating only? So we can cherry pick which stats matter and which don't?
If a WR catches a ball it improves the QBs stats... if they are missing routes and sucking bad it negatively affects the QBs stats.

Brady was held back by an offense that was inept (Edelman was his only receiver) they won mostly on strong D in a weak division. 
tacks won mostly by running the ball down teams throats and playing with a lead for the most part, with the one exception being the regular season game vs KC.
But even Bortles had a game or two where he just caught fire. For the most part Tanny 'did what he had to do' and wasn't really THE reason for them winning most of their games. Yeah he had solid stats and some good Ratings... but the eye test, especially in the playoffs, shows who he truly was.

---