View single post by BayouBoogie
 Posted: Fri Feb 3rd, 2012 02:03 am
PM Quote Reply Full Topic
BayouBoogie



Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana USA
Posts: 6864
Status: 
Offline
stingmark wrote:
BayouBoogie wrote:
stingmark wrote:
Married Jo wrote:
Even if he wins Sunday, Brady is 3rd out of the 3 because he lost one..Terry and Joe never did.

This too.


I can't get that logic at all. Going 18-0 on the way to losing in the last minute of a great Super Bowl is worse than losing in the playoffs and never making the Super Bowl at all?? :?


True. However, any way you slice it, Brady has a loss in the sb, whereas the other 2 do not. 18-0 or not, Brady didnt win. When/if they lose on SS, he'll then be 3-2 in sbs....how would he be considered " the best evah" w/2 sb losses, and others who are undefeated in sbs, wouldnt be ranked higher/ better? Hell, if he loses again, Aikmen would be " better" than Brady imo, why? Aikmen has same amnt of rings, and no sb losses.


Sorry, but I don't consider losing in your 4th of 5 Super Bowls to be ANY kind of failure. Even if we weren't talking about an undefeated season ended on one of the biggest miracle plays in NFL history, I will never consider losing a tight Super Bowl to be something that actually lowers your status. I actually think that thinking is ludicrous.

The idea that one QB is better than another because he has the same amount of wins in fewer trips doesn't compute to me. Jim Kelly, Fran Tarkenton and Dan Marino are 0-8 in Super Bowls and I can name a slew of Super Bowl winners who aren't in their league.

Last edited on Fri Feb 3rd, 2012 02:36 am by BayouBoogie