RND 2. 2. BRADY VS 9. YOUNG

["THE" MoSav]

Speaking of one call away Shallow. How about the Niners in 92 if Harper doesnt catch that slant for like 70 yds late in hte 4th the Niners probably win that game and Dallas and the Niners both get 2 SB's in the 90's..Shoulda Coulda Woulda

[Shallow]

Simms wasn't all that special that year. The Giants were a number 1 ranked defense with a midde of the road offense. And if one kick was made no one would be talking about either QB that year. Ofcourse thanks to Bellichick's hall of fame defensive strategy they held the Bills to a very low score compared to what they were doing to teams in the playoffs.


The defense on the pats outrnaked the offense on every of their superbowl wins so if the defense is very good at best then the offense is just okay, by your standards anway. By mine I'd say being 6th, 1st, 2nd and 2nd in points allowed over the course of 5 years is pretty amazing. I don't care who plays where. If you keep points of the board you're amazing. It wasn't BRady in '94 that kept 49TDs Manning to driving for 3 points total.

Cleveland was pretty good one year and if Bill had Weis, Crennel, and Mangini with him they probably would have done some real damage, but I don't think the 2001-2004 Pats would have had any Superbowls in the Dallas, Dallas, SF, Dallas, Green Bay era, which was about the time Bellichick had the Browns so even if they went to the Superbowl they would have gotten smacked around each year anyway. I think the Pats of trhe past few years at that time would have lost to Buffalo the first two years then made it and lost to SF, and may or may not have beaten Pit the next year but then made it and lost to Green Bay like they did that year anyway.


Dallas was already up by more than a Field goal at the time of that catch so who knows. Besides I already said that SF was hte better team in the close one in between the Cowboy Superbowls I was just showing how close Aikman was to 4 peat compared to Brady who wasn't close at all when I made that statement about Aikman. My point unltimately is that Aikman had those 3 Superbowls and almost 4 in a row and now no one hardly mentions him. Lets hope we will say the same for Brady in ten years. At least I'l hope, peferrably after 3 more Manning Superbowls.

["THE" MoSav]

Simms wasn't all that special that year. The Giants were a number 1 ranked defense with a midde of the road offense. And if one kick was made no one would be talking about either QB that year. Ofcourse thanks to Bellichick's hall of fame defensive strategy they held the Bills to a very low score compared to what they were doing to teams in the playoffs.


The defense on the pats outrnaked the offense on every of their superbowl wins so if the defense is very good at best then the offense is just okay, by your standards anway. By mine I'd say being 6th, 1st, 2nd and 2nd in points allowed over the course of 5 years is pretty amazing. I don't care who plays where. If you keep points of the board you're amazing. It wasn't BRady in '94 that kept 49TDs Manning to driving for 3 points total.

Cleveland was pretty good one year and if Bill had Weis, Crennel, and Mangini with him they probably would have done some real damage, but I don't think the 2001-2004 Pats would have had any Superbowls in the Dallas, Dallas, SF, Dallas, Green Bay era, which was about the time Bellichick had the Browns so even if they went to the Superbowl they would have gotten smacked around each year anyway. I think the Pats of trhe past few years at that time would have lost to Buffalo the first two years then made it and lost to SF, and may or may not have beaten Pit the next year but then made it and lost to Green Bay like they did that year anyway.


Dallas was already up by more than a Field goal at the time of that catch so who knows. Besides I already said that SF was hte better team in the close one in between the Cowboy Superbowls I was just showing how close Aikman was to 4 peat compared to Brady who wasn't close at all when I made that statement about Aikman. My point unltimately is that Aikman had those 3 Superbowls and almost 4 in a row and now no one hardly mentions him. Lets hope we will say the same for Brady in ten years. At least I'l hope, peferrably after 3 more Manning Superbowls.

I always give Aikman the proper credit.
And The Browns Didnt have a good enough QB to do much damage at that time. THey were good in 95 one year thats it

[Shallow]

Simms wasn't all that special that year. The Giants were a number 1 ranked defense with a midde of the road offense. And if one kick was made no one would be talking about either QB that year. Ofcourse thanks to Bellichick's hall of fame defensive strategy they held the Bills to a very low score compared to what they were doing to teams in the playoffs.


The defense on the pats outrnaked the offense on every of their superbowl wins so if the defense is very good at best then the offense is just okay, by your standards anway. By mine I'd say being 6th, 1st, 2nd and 2nd in points allowed over the course of 5 years is pretty amazing. I don't care who plays where. If you keep points of the board you're amazing. It wasn't BRady in '94 that kept 49TDs Manning to driving for 3 points total.

Cleveland was pretty good one year and if Bill had Weis, Crennel, and Mangini with him they probably would have done some real damage, but I don't think the 2001-2004 Pats would have had any Superbowls in the Dallas, Dallas, SF, Dallas, Green Bay era, which was about the time Bellichick had the Browns so even if they went to the Superbowl they would have gotten smacked around each year anyway. I think the Pats of trhe past few years at that time would have lost to Buffalo the first two years then made it and lost to SF, and may or may not have beaten Pit the next year but then made it and lost to Green Bay like they did that year anyway.


Dallas was already up by more than a Field goal at the time of that catch so who knows. Besides I already said that SF was hte better team in the close one in between the Cowboy Superbowls I was just showing how close Aikman was to 4 peat compared to Brady who wasn't close at all when I made that statement about Aikman. My point unltimately is that Aikman had those 3 Superbowls and almost 4 in a row and now no one hardly mentions him. Lets hope we will say the same for Brady in ten years. At least I'l hope, peferrably after 3 more Manning Superbowls.

I always give Aikman the proper credit.
And The Browns Didnt have a good enough QB to do much damage at that time. THey were good in 95 one year thats it

And I'll always give Jim Kelly the proper credit but that doesn't mean he'll ever get much praise in the NFL media ever again.

The Browns didn't have a good enough a lot of things. With Brady on that team they'd still suck.

["THE" MoSav]

Simms wasn't all that special that year. The Giants were a number 1 ranked defense with a midde of the road offense. And if one kick was made no one would be talking about either QB that year. Ofcourse thanks to Bellichick's hall of fame defensive strategy they held the Bills to a very low score compared to what they were doing to teams in the playoffs.


The defense on the pats outrnaked the offense on every of their superbowl wins so if the defense is very good at best then the offense is just okay, by your standards anway. By mine I'd say being 6th, 1st, 2nd and 2nd in points allowed over the course of 5 years is pretty amazing. I don't care who plays where. If you keep points of the board you're amazing. It wasn't BRady in '94 that kept 49TDs Manning to driving for 3 points total.

Cleveland was pretty good one year and if Bill had Weis, Crennel, and Mangini with him they probably would have done some real damage, but I don't think the 2001-2004 Pats would have had any Superbowls in the Dallas, Dallas, SF, Dallas, Green Bay era, which was about the time Bellichick had the Browns so even if they went to the Superbowl they would have gotten smacked around each year anyway. I think the Pats of trhe past few years at that time would have lost to Buffalo the first two years then made it and lost to SF, and may or may not have beaten Pit the next year but then made it and lost to Green Bay like they did that year anyway.


Dallas was already up by more than a Field goal at the time of that catch so who knows. Besides I already said that SF was hte better team in the close one in between the Cowboy Superbowls I was just showing how close Aikman was to 4 peat compared to Brady who wasn't close at all when I made that statement about Aikman. My point unltimately is that Aikman had those 3 Superbowls and almost 4 in a row and now no one hardly mentions him. Lets hope we will say the same for Brady in ten years. At least I'l hope, peferrably after 3 more Manning Superbowls.

I always give Aikman the proper credit.
And The Browns Didnt have a good enough QB to do much damage at that time. THey were good in 95 one year thats it

And I'll always give Jim Kelly the proper credit but that doesn't mean he'll ever get much praise in the NFL media ever again.

The Browns didn't have a good enough a lot of things. With Brady on that team they'd still suck.

In 95 with Brady they could have done some damage

[Shallow]

I think you mean '94 (unless you're talking about January '95) when they were best team in the league at keep points from being scored. Vinnie took them past the first round and they lost to Pit, but I don't know if Brady could have orchestrated over 29 points on that D on that Cleveland offense. Particularly with out Weis and with out that NE O-line to move the line. And even if they did get though Pit which I think would be unlikely since Pit owned Cleveland all season and probably get through SD they'd get slaughtered by San Fran in the Superbowl just like any AFC team would have gotten that season.

["THE" MoSav]

I think you mean '94 (unless you're talking about January '95) when they were best team in the league at keep points from being scored. Vinnie took them past the first round and they lost to Pit, but I don't know if Brady could have orchestrated over 29 points on that D on that Cleveland offense. Particularly with out Weis and with out that NE O-line to move the line. And even if they did get though Pit which I think would be unlikely since Pit owned Cleveland all season and probably get through SD they'd get slaughtered by San Fran in the Superbowl just like any AFC team would have gotten that season.

yeah i was thinking bout them in the 95 playoffs losing to Pitt.