Home Sports Talk

What defines the GOAT acronym?

2»

Comments

  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 30,636 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Maywood said:
    I will agree that Tom Brady is mentally superior to most other QB's, but to be honest, since he played when he did his physical toughness was never really tested. If you went back and looked at his games there are some where he's never touched. That's not a tribute to HIS toughness but it certainly speaks well of the players charged with protecting him. Those are the guys that need to be judged as tough. And running backs, especially, in any era. When guys are carrying the ball 200-300 times a season there's no comparing "toughness" with a modern QB.

    But think what you will, some of you guys see Brady as god-like and incapable of any weakness, I get that. I just don't subscribe to it.

    I could say the same thing about your fandom, you think everything goes right through Ohio and everything else is secondary

    Jim Brown, Otto Graham??

  • thisistheshowthisistheshow Posts: 9,386 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I am now starting my argument that Tom Brady was a physically tough quarterback.

    There is much I wish to say, and much that I will.

    I am busy and tired tonight, so I will uncharacteristically keep this succinct and relatively focused.

    My first thought is of something that many Patriots fans know. He was always available to start, and that was because he played hurt.

    https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/tom-brady-history-playing-through-injury-patriots-buccaneers/#:~:text=Brady played with three broken,Albert Haynesworth in the preseason.

    Please read and respond, @Maywood

  • thisistheshowthisistheshow Posts: 9,386 ✭✭✭✭✭
  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 30,636 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @thisistheshow said:
    I am now starting my argument that Tom Brady was a physically tough quarterback.

    There is much I wish to say, and much that I will.

    I am busy and tired tonight, so I will uncharacteristically keep this succinct and relatively focused.

    My first thought is of something that many Patriots fans know. He was always available to start, and that was because he played hurt.

    https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/tom-brady-history-playing-through-injury-patriots-buccaneers/#:~:text=Brady played with three broken,Albert Haynesworth in the preseason.

    Please read and respond, @Maywood

    It don't matter though, for people who don't subscribe to Brady and his "God Like" pedestal like us Pats fans do he will find ways to refute anything we say.

    23 years in the NFL and he isn't "Tough" according to some people lol

  • thisistheshowthisistheshow Posts: 9,386 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Before I make any more arguments on behalf of Brady's physical toughness, I am going to wait for some replies from the naysayers. In the meantime, let me add a few comments about my first two arguments.

    Common sports adage...availability is the best kind of ability. Brady was an ironman. And he didn't talk about it, he was about it. And for anyone who read the linked article and dismissed the (non-exhaustive) list of proof solely because they don't believe the first item mentioned, I have two points. Please don't dismiss his body of work (playing hurt) because you think one example is hyperbole. Also, please consider that Brady embodies a current day, real example of the type of player who, when spoken about generations from now, often has some of his successes and accolades dismissed as fiction for the reason that they just sound too amazing to believe.

    Regarding the QB sneak...think about what @galaxy27 preaches. Think about the current discussion around Hurts and the rugby formation sneak. Then think about the effectiveness of Brady's sneaks, combined with the fact that he did them without selling out to the defense (leaving his team with the option to run alternative plays), and add to that the fact that the tough QB de jour, Mahomes (ankle sprain SB winning run memorialized and bronzed by forumites here) isn't even allowed to any longer attempt QB sneaks due to the danger the play imposes for injury.

  • thisistheshowthisistheshow Posts: 9,386 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @maywood and others...the ball is in your court. I will not be replying further to this argument until I read your replies.

  • thisistheshowthisistheshow Posts: 9,386 ✭✭✭✭✭

    💪💪 🐐

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,363 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @thisistheshow
    @perkdog

    No one is questioning the toughness of Tom Brady.

    He is the current product of changes in football designed to protect players short term and long term from injury. The game continues to become safer for players. From basic things like equipment to significant changes in the rules. In the early days of football, President Teddy Roosevelt had in intervene with rule changes because too many people were dying. Even look into how changing the rules around intentional grounding stopped guys from being sitting ducks. Or how one of Brady’s best attributes- getting rid of the ball quicker than anyone - doesn’t matter when the DB can lock the WR up at the snap throwing off any and all timed routes. It was pretty much throw to a receiver, run or take a sack - throwing the ball away is much different now and has dramatically increased the safety of the position.

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • thisistheshowthisistheshow Posts: 9,386 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @1951WheatiesPremium I didn't say that you were questioning Brady's physical toughness.

    However, @Maywood might have done did just that when he said (referring to Brady) "since he played when he did his physical toughness was never really tested." This statement is patently false and was made to discredit the notion of Brady as GOAT.

  • thisistheshowthisistheshow Posts: 9,386 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @1951WheatiesPremium

    I (and most Patriots fans here) agree that Brady's unusually long tenure was only made possible due to the era in which he played.

    Do you feel as though Brady's resume showed him to have risen above his positional peers in terms of physical toughness? For the record, I do.

  • MaywoodMaywood Posts: 2,097 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Below is what I posted:
    I will agree that Tom Brady is mentally superior to most other QB's, but to be honest, since he played when he did his physical toughness was never really tested. If you went back and looked at his games there are some where he's never touched. That's not a tribute to HIS toughness but it certainly speaks well of the players charged with protecting him. Those are the guys that need to be judged as tough. And running backs, especially, in any era. When guys are carrying the ball 200-300 times a season there's no comparing "toughness" with a modern QB.

    I guess you can infer what you'd like to which seems to be that I said Tom Brady isn't tough when what I clearly said is "his physical toughness was never really tested" in terms of getting knocked around. I then compared that "toughness" to Offensive Lineman and Running Backs. I won't presume to know what others understood from that post but it appears at least some know what I meant.

    Currently a QB is overly protected as a result of Owners/Buyers wanting to protect their investment. The player can't be hit above the shoulders or below the knees, when QB's run they are afforded the "hook slide" for protection and they can intentionally ground the ball within the rules to avoid contact. In short, they are shielded from contact which results in their recovery from contact almost removed which is probably a good thing because the equipment they wear offers less protection than other players.

    @perkdog paints me as an Ohio-homer and I can stand under that, the thing is that I never bring those players up unless it's in the context of a thread calling for some type of comparison. Such was the case here, @craig44 laid out his qualifications for the GOAT and I simply posted about Otto Graham. Instead of entering into a discussion of Graham vs. Brady the reply was lame as expected, I've gotten used to that. Pretty much the same thing with Jim Brown. I can name other players from other teams but it wouldn't matter because no "objective" discussion can come from the Brady bunch. Remove your emotional reaction to anyone who doesn't agree with you and maybe we can discuss.

  • thisistheshowthisistheshow Posts: 9,386 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Maywood

    I know what you said, my friend, I know what to said...

    since he played when he did his physical toughness was never really tested

    I replied to you by stating that his physical toughness was in fact tested. He not only played through many injuries, but he did so often quietly and always successfully. He also was able to help his team better than any other QB with his sneak ability. This is relevant for many reasons, one of which is that the Chiefs are afraid to let Mahomes do it due to the injury risks it presents.

    You said that his physical toughness was never tested because of the era in which he played. I said that, despite playing in such era, his physical toughness was not only tested, but proven.

  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 30,636 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Maywood said:
    Below is what I posted:
    I will agree that Tom Brady is mentally superior to most other QB's, but to be honest, since he played when he did his physical toughness was never really tested. If you went back and looked at his games there are some where he's never touched. That's not a tribute to HIS toughness but it certainly speaks well of the players charged with protecting him. Those are the guys that need to be judged as tough. And running backs, especially, in any era. When guys are carrying the ball 200-300 times a season there's no comparing "toughness" with a modern QB.

    I guess you can infer what you'd like to which seems to be that I said Tom Brady isn't tough when what I clearly said is "his physical toughness was never really tested" in terms of getting knocked around. I then compared that "toughness" to Offensive Lineman and Running Backs. I won't presume to know what others understood from that post but it appears at least some know what I meant.

    Currently a QB is overly protected as a result of Owners/Buyers wanting to protect their investment. The player can't be hit above the shoulders or below the knees, when QB's run they are afforded the "hook slide" for protection and they can intentionally ground the ball within the rules to avoid contact. In short, they are shielded from contact which results in their recovery from contact almost removed which is probably a good thing because the equipment they wear offers less protection than other players.

    @perkdog paints me as an Ohio-homer and I can stand under that, the thing is that I never bring those players up unless it's in the context of a thread calling for some type of comparison. Such was the case here, @craig44 laid out his qualifications for the GOAT and I simply posted about Otto Graham. Instead of entering into a discussion of Graham vs. Brady the reply was lame as expected, I've gotten used to that. Pretty much the same thing with Jim Brown. I can name other players from other teams but it wouldn't matter because no "objective" discussion can come from the Brady bunch. Remove your emotional reaction to anyone who doesn't agree with you and maybe we can discuss.

    No, we can "Discuss" anything anytime but you can believe that every time you throw out your little jabs under the cover of a vague generalized statement I'm going to call you out on it.

  • HydrantHydrant Posts: 7,773 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 21, 2023 8:18AM

    @Maywood said:

    ....But think what you will, some of you guys see Brady as god-like and incapable of any weakness, I get that......

  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 30,636 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @thisistheshow said:
    @1951WheatiesPremium I didn't say that you were questioning Brady's physical toughness.

    However, @Maywood might have done did just that when he said (referring to Brady) "since he played when he did his physical toughness was never really tested." This statement is patently false and was made to discredit the notion of Brady as GOAT.

    To add to this even though we both are on the GOAT train with Brady I do not have an issue with others not agreeing as long as it's another reasonable choice as I said before.

  • thisistheshowthisistheshow Posts: 9,386 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @perkdog said:

    @thisistheshow said:
    @1951WheatiesPremium I didn't say that you were questioning Brady's physical toughness.

    However, @Maywood might have done did just that when he said (referring to Brady) "since he played when he did his physical toughness was never really tested." This statement is patently false and was made to discredit the notion of Brady as GOAT.

    To add to this even though we both are on the GOAT train with Brady I do not have an issue with others not agreeing as long as it's another reasonable choice as I said before.

    👍👍

  • thisistheshowthisistheshow Posts: 9,386 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Hydrant said:

    @Maywood said:

    ....But think what you will, some of you guys see Brady as god-like and incapable of any weakness, I get that......

    ...
    @hydrant you (should) know better. Get that kind of 🤬 outta here. Please.

  • MaywoodMaywood Posts: 2,097 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @perkdog said: I do not have an issue with others not agreeing as long as it's another reasonable choice as I said before.

    And I made a very reasonable choice in Otto Graham and presented the argument.

  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 30,636 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Maywood said:
    @perkdog said: I do not have an issue with others not agreeing as long as it's another reasonable choice as I said before.

    And I made a very reasonable choice in Otto Graham and presented the argument.

    I got no problems with you talking Otto Graham at all, it's great for the convenience at hand

    It's your little jabs that your famous for, it doesn't bother me but don't get defensive when I call you out on it

    You know what I'm talking about, whether you want to admit it or not

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,363 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @thisistheshow said:
    @1951WheatiesPremium

    I (and most Patriots fans here) agree that Brady's unusually long tenure was only made possible due to the era in which he played.

    Do you feel as though Brady's resume showed him to have risen above his positional peers in terms of physical toughness? For the record, I do.

    Above? Tough to say and tough to quantify. He was certainly near the top of the league and stood in the pocket with the best of them, if that’s what you mean, and I certainly don’t question Tom Brady’s toughness.

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • coinkatcoinkat Posts: 23,097 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Otto Graham was a tough competitor- mentally and physically. He was the best in a different grouping of QBs that played at an earlier time that simply cannot be compared to the NFL of today. His career was amazing... And worthy of respect. Sadly, over time Graham's legacy remains strong for those that remember or just choose to do a little research to investigate his accomplishments. Look at the uniforms, the helmets and other protective equipment that was used in the 1940s up through the mid 1950s. Look at the equipment and technology of today which clearly favors modern players over those that made the game what it is. Graham helped make the NFL what it is which is different discussion than arguing about a GOAT.

    Brady is among the best, if not the best of the post 1967 QBs. But the NFL would still be what it is with or without a player of Brady's accomplishments. But within what GOAT allegedly is set out to define and mean, that really is not a productive discussion for the reasons I previously outlined in a prior thread.

    Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.

  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 30,636 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @coinkat said:
    Otto Graham was a tough competitor- mentally and physically. He was the best in a different grouping of QBs that played at an earlier time that simply cannot be compared to the NFL of today. His career was amazing... And worthy of respect. Sadly, over time Graham's legacy remains strong for those that remember or just choose to do a little research to investigate his accomplishments. Look at the uniforms, the helmets and other protective equipment that was used in the 1940s up through the mid 1950s. Look at the equipment and technology of today which clearly favors modern players over those that made the game what it is. Graham helped make the NFL what it is which is different discussion than arguing about a GOAT.

    Brady is among the best, if not the best of the post 1967 QBs. But the NFL would still be what it is with or without a player of Brady's accomplishments. But within what GOAT allegedly is set out to define and mean, that really is not a productive discussion for the reasons I previously outlined in a prior thread.

    Otto Graham was phenomenal and worthy of being in the discussion without question.

    I've said that the NFL greats should be broken down by decade , and for his time Graham was on a different level

  • thisistheshowthisistheshow Posts: 9,386 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Otto Graham's name has come up in my reading about Brady over the years. I am no expert, but I've enjoyed my forays into his career. Like Perkdog said, different era GOATs is a reasonable way to look at things. It won't stop me from calling Brady the GOAT, but I can support the argument that the eras are not comparable as well. And having weighed over 14 lbs at birth, Graham is pretty fascinating. 🤔

  • MaywoodMaywood Posts: 2,097 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @coinkat said: Look at the uniforms, the helmets and other protective equipment that was used in the 1940s up through the mid 1950s.

    Up till around 1950 helmets were made of leather and were essentially a protective skull cap with no strap or face mask/guard. Those didn't come along till 1955-1960 and were closely followed by a 15 yard penalty for Grabbing The Face mask!! Shoulder pads started out as little more than pads of leather that were tied onto a player, became bigger and more restrictive for everyone until they started to get streamlined for QB's and receivers during the 60's-70's. In a strange twist, shoulder pads were actually in use for quite awhile before they figured out that the head needed some protection!! :D

    With the lightweight materials in use today along with kevlar and other advanced material it's hard to imagine the punishment that the players of yesteryear endured. I imagine the BenGay and AtomicBalm came in 55-gallon drums.

  • thisistheshowthisistheshow Posts: 9,386 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Maywood said:
    @coinkat said: Look at the uniforms, the helmets and other protective equipment that was used in the 1940s up through the mid 1950s.

    Up till around 1950 helmets were made of leather and were essentially a protective skull cap with no strap or face mask/guard. Those didn't come along till 1955-1960 and were closely followed by a 15 yard penalty for Grabbing The Face mask!! Shoulder pads started out as little more than pads of leather that were tied onto a player, became bigger and more restrictive for everyone until they started to get streamlined for QB's and receivers during the 60's-70's. In a strange twist, shoulder pads were actually in use for quite awhile before they figured out that the head needed some protection!! :D

    With the lightweight materials in use today along with kevlar and other advanced material it's hard to imagine the punishment that the players of yesteryear endured. I imagine the BenGay and AtomicBalm came in 55-gallon drums.

    That's good stuff!

    Yes, I have read about all of this, but it's always good to have a reminder of how these things have changed.

  • MaywoodMaywood Posts: 2,097 ✭✭✭✭✭

  • coinkatcoinkat Posts: 23,097 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Look at the 1943 helmet and Otto Graham likely used a similar helmet while at Northwestern. Look at the Cleveland Browns helmet from 1955. That would likely be the helmet used at the end of his career.

    Now look at the helmets from 1997 to the present...

    Which would you rather use? I rest my case

    Toughness?

    Not seeing where Graham has much to explain

    Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.

  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 30,636 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @coinkat said:
    Look at the 1943 helmet and Otto Graham likely used a similar helmet while at Northwestern. Look at the Cleveland Browns helmet from 1955. That would likely be the helmet used at the end of his career.

    Now look at the helmets from 1997 to the present...

    Which would you rather use? I rest my case

    Toughness?

    Not seeing where Graham has much to explain

    Who is saying Graham wasn't tough?

    This argument that modern players are not as tough has more holes in it than a strainer though

  • thisistheshowthisistheshow Posts: 9,386 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @perkdog said:

    @coinkat said:
    Look at the 1943 helmet and Otto Graham likely used a similar helmet while at Northwestern. Look at the Cleveland Browns helmet from 1955. That would likely be the helmet used at the end of his career.

    Now look at the helmets from 1997 to the present...

    Which would you rather use? I rest my case

    Toughness?

    Not seeing where Graham has much to explain

    Who is saying Graham wasn't tough?

    This argument that modern players are not as tough has more holes in it than a strainer though

    ...
    There are different arguments/discussions here, you are correct.

    Just based on the modern amenities, equipment, and rule changes of the game, no modern player can be considered to have gone through as much physically as the older ones. But we still debate which of our current players are tough, regardless. And this conversation is about Brady and whether or not he was tough, and was he even tested physically in a way that could reveal his toughness if it did exist. There is an over-riding narrative from some that diminishes Brady in this category, and I have been looking to correct that.

  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 30,636 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @thisistheshow said:

    @perkdog said:

    @coinkat said:
    Look at the 1943 helmet and Otto Graham likely used a similar helmet while at Northwestern. Look at the Cleveland Browns helmet from 1955. That would likely be the helmet used at the end of his career.

    Now look at the helmets from 1997 to the present...

    Which would you rather use? I rest my case

    Toughness?

    Not seeing where Graham has much to explain

    Who is saying Graham wasn't tough?

    This argument that modern players are not as tough has more holes in it than a strainer though

    ...
    There are different arguments/discussions here, you are correct.

    Just based on the modern amenities, equipment, and rule changes of the game, no modern player can be considered to have gone through as much physically as the older ones. But we still debate which of our current players are tough, regardless. And this conversation is about Brady and whether or not he was tough, and was he even tested physically in a way that could reveal his toughness if it did exist. There is an over-riding narrative from some that diminishes Brady in this category, and I have been looking to correct that.

    Agreed 100%

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Imagine an NFL QB leading the league in rushing and passing 6 straight seasons!

    Orr would have led the league in scoring 6 straight years if not for Esposito who only was ahead of Orr because he played with the Goat.

    If Phil was on Chicago no chance for Phil to beat Orr.

    6 straight scoring and 6 straight Norris.

    Imagine Brady winning QB of the year and defensive player of the year 6 straight years.

    That’s Bobby Orr.

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    You may now return to your Brady love fest.

  • coinkatcoinkat Posts: 23,097 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 25, 2023 6:01AM

    YOUR POST COULD BE HERE

    PRIME SPACE WITH IMMEDIATE AVAILABILITY-

    Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.

  • thisistheshowthisistheshow Posts: 9,386 ✭✭✭✭✭

    ^^^^^
    It's not too late to delete that. As of the time of my comment, anyway.

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,363 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Goldenage said:
    Is it true that Jim Brown was brown and Otto Graham a cracker ?

    😂

    Maybe, but we all know Bobby Orr carries their clubs when they golf.

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 24, 2023 5:18AM

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @Goldenage said:
    Is it true that Jim Brown was brown and Otto Graham a cracker ?

    😂

    Maybe, but we all know Bobby Orr carries their clubs when they golf.

    October 2004 is still bothering you isn’t it ?

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    A nice pic of 1951WP caddying for Bobby .

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,363 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Goldenage said:
    A nice pic of 1951WP caddying for Bobby .

    Which guy is which?

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • thisistheshowthisistheshow Posts: 9,386 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Goldenage said:

    @thisistheshow said:
    ^^^^^
    It's not too late to delete that. As of the time of my comment, anyway.

    Are Graham crackers offensive to anyone ?

    Geez. What a world we live in.

    Jim Brown was a Cleveland Brown, yes ?

    Ok. I see I forgot the “a” after Brown was “a” Brown.

    ..
    I'm not offended at all. I said what I said because we live in a world that is easily offended, and also all it takes is one person to make a stink out of it and you find yourself cancelled here.

    I was just trying to look out for a good poster who I'd hate to see banned. 🤷

  • thisistheshowthisistheshow Posts: 9,386 ✭✭✭✭✭
  • Steven59Steven59 Posts: 8,680 ✭✭✭✭✭

    { I said what I said because we live in a world that is easily offended, and also all it takes is one person to make a stink out of it and you find yourself cancelled here.

    I was just trying to look out for a good poster who I'd hate to see banned. 🤷}

    And BOOM............... just like that.................Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.

    "When they can't find anything wrong with you, they create it!"

Sign In or Register to comment.