Madden NFL 10 Ratings: Top 10 by Position (ESPN Videogames)

[TheWatcher]

Quote: Originally Posted by R9NALD9

good points, couldn't agree more

Quote: Originally Posted by Shotgun Styles

And he wasn't throwing for 4000 yards and 50 TDs back then either, now was he? I remember a game where he had FIVE COMPLETIONS and won the game! Those were great TEAMS that Brady just had to keep out of trouble and on schedule. The kicker won all three AFC Championship games and all three Superbowls. I'm not saying Brady sucked. Not at all. I'm just saying that he was not asked to do much during those Superbowl years other than manage the game, and didn't start blowing the doors off statistically until Moss arrived.

You can point to any QB and bring up a game where they played poorly and still won the game from Sammy Baugh, to Johnny Unitas, to Joe Montana. This means nothing.

Secondly, Vinatieri did not win all 3 Super Bowls. For starters, a kicker has to be put into position to make the kick. A kicker can't make an 80+ yarder, lol. Brady put him into position to make those kicks. Secondly, the games were TIED in the 2 Super Bowls where the kicks were needed.

Thirdly, Super Bowl 39 was not won by a field goal. It was won by 3 points yes, but that's because garbage Dexter Reid gave up a late TD when the Pats were up 24-14.

Also, before Moss, Brady had a year where he led the league in TD passes and another where he led the league in passing yards. Game managers never lead the league in anything.

To call Brady a game manager is absurd. Your claim doesn't line up with game footage. Trent Dilfer was a game manager. Brady wasn't asked to just not screw it up, he was asked to make clutch throws because that's what he's always been capable of. Super Bowl 36, they could've sat on the ball and went to overtime, even John Madden thought this is what they'd do. They didn't. Instead, Brady (a first-year starter) threw, drove them downfield and put them into position for the winning FG.

Super Bowl 38, again, he set the Super Bowl record for completions against one of the leagues best defenses, and plenty of those throws were downfield passes and tight passes. And once again, he threw on a final drive, same outcome. Win.

Super Bowl 42, clutch throws again on a final drive and this time it was a TD pass. Eli had his own, but had Eli not we'd still be talking about Brady's final drive.

I'm sorry man, but you're just making this stuff up in your head because you hate Tom Brady, but it's not based in fact. Brady has had so many games where he's been called on to make the clutch throws it's hard to keep count now.

[TheWatcher]

Quote: Originally Posted by shotgun styles

You are subscribing to another myth that the system is just about Xs and Os.

You're ASSUMING that I "subscribe", but I have news for ya... I don't.

Quote: Originally Posted by shotgun styles

If you cannot function outside the system and make plays, you are a system QB. That's Brady and Manning.

This is based on speculation. Zero fact.

You can have an argument--although a very thin one because it is speculation--that Manning couldn't succeed outside of his system because we've never seen him play in anything different. But with Brady there is no argument. As I've stated, he's proven successful in a wide-open system and a controlled passing system. The case is closed there. You're just arguing against an irrefutable historical fact now.

Quote: Originally Posted by shotgun styles

Sure, Brady kept from making mistakes in the SB, but that makes him a game manager not a playmaker.

That's absolute nonsense. This claim does not line up with game footage. If you watched Super Bowl 38, unbiased, there is no way you could hold that view. Nothing about his play that day indicated game manager. Nothing, lol. Game managers don't lead teams on drives to win, he did that 3 times (lost on the 3rd one). That's not the trait of a game manager. Game managers don't set SB records for completions, throw for 354 yards and 3 TD's against a top defense in a Super Bowl. Brady did that. Your game manager claim is not based in fact.

Quote: Originally Posted by shotgun styles

He does not make big plays when the system breaks down. Period.

Untrue. I've seen practically every game the man has played. The year they were bounced out of the playoffs by the Broncos, he made his living making plays in breakdowns. He had no choice because the line was a mess that year. He spent most of the year on his back. I remember commentators chuckling about how many hits Brady was taking that year, but applauding him for the fact that it didn't seem to rattle him.

Quote: Originally Posted by shotgun styles

McNabb does. Favre does. Roethlisberger does. That's the difference, and it can't be measured with a numerical formula.

I'd like to see this formula.

Quote: Originally Posted by shotgun styles

Brady is the best in the game only because the rules of the NFL are designed to be unfair to defenses.

Then you could say the same thing about every QB that's played in the modern era. This argument is nothing more than an attack on the modern era and one I don't "subscribe" to. For as much as the rules have over time changed to favor offenses, the thought that all of those QB's from the past would be successful today is laughable. The sophistication of defensive personnel usage alone would be a headache, but the scheming by itself would be a nightmare for most QB's of yesteryear, not to mention the increased defensive athleticism.

Back in the old days, the QB was the most athletic player on the field often times, but that same QB by today's standards would be among the least. It's not like those guys were running 4.3's, lol. They were still pretty slow, it's just that their opponents were slower. Times have changed. Johnny Unitas used to run around and make yards from time to time, even faking out defenders! He'd be looking through his earhole while leaving on a stretcher if he tried that in this era.

Quote: Originally Posted by shotgun styles

Brady is a product of the system that he plays in,

No such thing. The player makes the system successful, not the other way around. Football 101. Ask any coach at any level.

Quote: Originally Posted by shotgun styles

and the rules designed to allow him to cheat when he's in trouble. If he couldn't slide or throw the ball away he would start to be exposed. Go a step further and remove the rediculous 5 yard chuck rule (the Mel Blount Rule) and now he HAS to make plays because everyone isn't going to be running downfield untouched. This game has been around a long time. But in the last 30 years has become less and less fair to defenses. Brady and Manning are manufactured superstars who lack the physical talent to play in a league that does not cater to their weakness. People always want to know why there is so much bad QB play in the NFL. The answer is that these pink jersey rules surrounding QBs and the passing game have bred so much weakness and cowardice into the position that most of these guys don't have what it takes to survive adversity. Manning and Brady have always played on very talented teams, and faced very little on-field adversity (Tom's knee being the worst). I submit to you that if either played for the Raiders or Lions nobody outside of hardcore fans would have heard of them.

I disagree with pretty much all of that. But my question is, why do you watch the NFL today? You clearly have no respect for it.

[Sanchez_Mareno]

Quote: Originally Posted by droopizzle34

Dude are you serious???? Being on forums I had come to realize that people are just haters of greatness. Tom Brady wasn't even projected to be a great QB. The guy put in th work and dedication to be a good QB,and he is one. This guy put up 3,000+ yards throwing to Reche Caldwell and Jabar Gafney. What did you think would happen when he got a monster to throw to?I'd expect Manning's numbers to be astronomical if he was throwing to Moss. The proof is in the pudding.The guy was putting up numbers with average WRs,winning SuperBowls with game winning drives with average WRs. I can't stand the Pats,but I give them and Tom Brady especially RESPECT for being one of the elite. You guys with these wild dumb comments should go to a corner. You really have no idea what you're talking about.People need to learn to respect the great talent you see instead of bombing them with dumb insults.It's not even criticsm,it's just dumb mindless opinions of a *****. I guess me being an athlete myself,I can respect the talent and greatness of elite athletes.They are where they are through their hard work,study skills,and dedication to what they do. You can say system all you want,but you still have to make the reads,you still have to make the throws.And all those grocery baggers are bagging because they couldn't do it.

This.

[KILLAKAVOR]

I hope this madden will get a rating somewhere in the 9 catagory. The last four years its been 2009= 8.0, 2008=8.5, 2007=7.9, 2006=7.4, I hope this year maddens overall rating will be like a 9.5 or atleast 9.0...I think they have done wonders to the game so far.

[vols bravesfan]

So Frank Gore is better than Chris Johnson?

[MJenness]

Quote: Originally Posted by KILLAKAVOR

I hope this madden will get a rating somewhere in the 9 catagory. The last four years its been 2009= 8.0, 2008=8.5, 2007=7.9, 2006=7.4, I hope this year maddens overall rating will be like a 9.5 or atleast 9.0...I think they have done wonders to the game so far.

Good God, how many threads are you going to copy and paste this statement into? It isn't even relevant to most of the topics you're putting it in!!

[KILLAKAVOR]

I hope this madden will get a rating somewhere in the 9 catagory. The last four years its been 2009= 8.0, 2008=8.5, 2007=7.9, 2006=7.4, I hope this year maddens overall rating will be like a 9.5 or atleast 9.0...I think they have done wonders to the game so far.

Theres one more for you idiot.
INSULT DELETED

[shotgun styles]

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

You can point to any QB and bring up a game where they played poorly and still won the game from Sammy Baugh, to Johnny Unitas, to Joe Montana. This means nothing. Secondly, Vinatieri did not win all 3 Super Bowls. For starters, a kicker has to be put into position to make the kick. A kicker can't make an 80+ yarder, lol. Brady put him into position to make those kicks. Secondly, the games were TIED in the 2 Super Bowls where the kicks were needed.

Oh you want to go point by point? *DING DING* LET'S GET IT ON!
(God I miss Mills Lane)

"where the kicks were needed". Key word: needed. Why? Because Brady just dinked and dunked it, and did NOT score. He threw easy passes against the "prevent" defense. He benefited from coaches who were playing not-to-lose rather than playing to win.

But that's not greatness. It's part luck (bad opponent coaching) and part game management (easy dinks and dunks). But make no mistake, Viniatari WON THOSE GAMES. The winning score was made by him, and that means he won the games. If he misses, they don't win because of the Tom Brady dink and dunk drives. Period.

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

To call Brady a game manager is absurd. Your claim doesn't line up with game footage. Trent Dilfer was a game manager. Brady wasn't asked to just not screw it up, he was asked to make clutch throws because that's what he's always been capable of. Super Bowl 36, they could've sat on the ball and went to overtime, even John Madden thought this is what they'd do. They didn't. Instead, Brady (a first-year starter) threw, drove them downfield and put them into position for the winning FG.

I didn't get an answer about this from another poster, so I'll ask you: How is throwing 6 yard flat routes to wide open HBs who are playing against PREVENT DEFENSES, making "clutch throws"? Manning to Tyree was a clutch throw. McNabb on 4th and 26 was a clutch throw. Roethlisberger to Holmes in the corner to WIN the Superbowl was a clutch throw. All of these throws had a level of difficulty to them. Brady's drives came on VERY routine, low risk passes and he made NO ATTEMPT to score himself.

Andy says: that's not clutch.

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

Super Bowl 38, again, he set the Super Bowl record for completions against one of the leagues best defenses, and plenty of those throws were downfield passes and tight passes. And once again, he threw on a final drive, same outcome. Win. Super Bowl 42, clutch throws again on a final drive and this time it was a TD pass. Eli had his own, but had Eli not we'd still be talking about Brady's final drive.

But Brady HAD another drive. But he needed a TD this time. And what was the result? EPIC FAIL.

When Tom needs a touchdown HE CAN'T DO IT.

Haven't you noticed that Tom has NOT won a SB since Adam left, but Adam has?

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

I'm sorry man, but you're just making this stuff up in your head because you hate Tom Brady, but it's not based in fact. Brady has had so many games where he's been called on to make the clutch throws it's hard to keep count now.

The fact is, you don't like facts. You are labelling conjecture as fact and any differing opinion as conjecture. The bottom line is, Tom won because his teams were good. Not because he is spectacular in any way.

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

This is based on speculation. Zero fact. You can have an argument--although a very thin one because it is speculation--that Manning couldn't succeed outside of his system because we've never seen him play in anything different. But with Brady there is no argument. As I've stated, he's proven successful in a wide-open system and a controlled passing system. The case is closed there. You're just arguing against an irrefutable historical fact now.

It is based on facts. Tom slides and throws the ball away. It's what he does. He's not out there making plays when the protection breaks down and no one is open. It's not what he does. He gets out of the pocket and throws his little "pink pass" out of bounds and moves on to the next play. He's not going to man up and make a play for his team because he'd just mess it up anyway. That makes him prudent.

Romo is basically the same kind of player, but he tries to make plays when the system breaks down. But like Tom, he has next to zero athletic ability and generally makes a fool out of himself. Tom is smart to play within himself and to take advantage of the pink jersey rules that allow him to cheat.

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

That's absolute nonsense. This claim does not line up with game footage. If you watched Super Bowl 38, unbiased, there is no way you could hold that view. Nothing about his play that day indicated game manager. Nothing, lol. Game managers don't lead teams on drives to win, he did that 3 times (lost on the 3rd one). That's not the trait of a game manager. Game managers don't set SB records for completions, throw for 354 yards and 3 TD's against a top defense in a Super Bowl. Brady did that. Your game manager claim is not based in fact.

This assumes that game managers won't throw to open guys if they happen to be open deep. It is a bad assumption on your part. Tom is a check down QB. But he's not going to check down to a dink if his guy is wide open 40 yards down field. That would be stupid, and I have never accused Tom of being stupid. Quite the opposite. He is one of the most pragmatic players in the NFL, and will do whatever it takes (within his abilities) to win.

But he's not going to thread the needle and fire the ball into tight spaces. That's not his game, and he doesn't have the arm for it anyway. Tom is not the gunslinger type. He does not take risks, he operates the system and checks down when he doesn't get what he wants downfield.

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

Untrue. I've seen practically every game the man has played. The year they were bounced out of the playoffs by the Broncos, he made his living making plays in breakdowns. He had no choice because the line was a mess that year. He spent most of the year on his back. I remember commentators chuckling about how many hits Brady was taking that year, but applauding him for the fact that it didn't seem to rattle him.

If he "made his living" off of busted plays, THEN WHY DIDN'T HE WIN THE GAME?

I've seen alot of Tom myself. When the play breaks down he does not even attempt to make a play. He throws the pink ball. Tom is not a physically couragous man. He's not going up against those linebackers like Elway or Favre would. He's going to curl up and take his two-hand-touch sack and move on to the next play. That's who Tom is, and in a league that caters to soft QBs he is going to be successful doing it.

My gripe is not with Brady, it's with the rules. Brady is the NFL's ideal. He is the guy the NFL designed it's rules to produce. A pretty face for magazines who doesn't need much actual talent to succeed, but who makes the NFL look good. He's the Justin Timberlake of sports.

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

Then you could say the same thing about every QB that's played in the modern era. This argument is nothing more than an attack on the modern era and one I don't "subscribe" to. For as much as the rules have over time changed to favor offenses, the thought that all of those QB's from the past would be successful today is laughable. The sophistication of defensive personnel usage alone would be a headache, but the scheming by itself would be a nightmare for most QB's of yesteryear, not to mention the increased defensive athleticism.

I'm not making a judgement about the old timers playing today. I'm making a judgement about the modern players merely surviving, let alone playing, in their time.

Today's NFL rules are blatantly and INTENTIONALLY unfair. I have a problem with that. But I have an equally negative view of people who want to make gods out of players who are products of that unfair system.

Tom Brady is a fraud. He is a manufactured superstar who would not last half a season in the NFL if the rules were fair. He does not belong on the field with world class athletes like James Harrison and Shawn Merriman. But he not only survives, but THRIVES, because he is allowed to cheat and those players are forced to play with one hand tied behind their backs.

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

Back in the old days, the QB was the most athletic player on the field often times, but that same QB by today's standards would be among the least. It's not like those guys were running 4.3's, lol. They were still pretty slow, it's just that their opponents were slower. Times have changed. Johnny Unitas used to run around and make yards from time to time, even faking out defenders! He'd be looking through his earhole while leaving on a stretcher if he tried that in this era.

Again, I'm not claiming that the old timers were better athletes than today's defensive players. I'm saying that if today's QBs were held to the same standard we'd have alot more talent and courage at the position. Currently there is alot of bad QB play, and that's due largely to the NFL rules (and the NCAA and high school leagues that emulate it) that breed weakness and cowardice into the position.

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

No such thing. The player makes the system successful, not the other way around. Football 101. Ask any coach at any level.

Really? So then why were all those massively successful college QBs at Texas Tech not great pros? Danny Weurfell set the NCAA record books on fire, how come he didn't light up the NFL? Because they weren't put in the kind of system that they played in back in college, nor did they have the overwhelming skill position talent advantage that they had in college.

And that's what "coaches at any level" will tell you.

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

I disagree with pretty much all of that. But my question is, why do you watch the NFL today? You clearly have no respect for it.

I love the NFL, love it's history and pedigree. And I love watching fake, overratted pretty boy QB's like Brady get embarassed just like he did against the Giants. I root for the underdogs of the league: NFL defenses.

18 and 1. It was beautiful.