Tuesday, February 7, 2017

Feedback and Other Debatable Stuff.....


To Tom Brady:  (verb); to rise against and above all rational odds and somehow come out on top of an impossible situation that was previously considered hopeless by everyone else watching.  “I just Tom Bradied the entire poker table and I have all the chips!”

Got Bradied:  (v – past tense); the art of having your heart, lungs and soul ripped out and strewn about by Tom Brady.  “That guy never lost a hand.  He Tom Bradied the entire poker table down to every last man…”


Has anyone ever seen both of these guys at the same time in the same place???

Roger That

I saw this commercial post Superbowl and loyal blog reader added it in the comments yesterday. 

My favorite part, WITHOUT QUESTION, is the very end when the nurse says we’re going to have to get you a bigger locker and Brady’s response is, “Roger That!!!”

Goodell....should just resign today….

NOT the Biggest Comeback in Sports History?

Some of you have commented or sent other messages that I might have been off on my math, the home court or field vs. away venues, etc, as to why overcoming a 3-1 is a lot closer to what the Pats did to the Falcons in the Superbowl than what I have suggested or tried to objectively prove with math.

Fine, whatever.  Someone else tried to argue that overcoming a 3-1 is much more difficult in baseball because it’s the World Series. The World Series being the grandest stage argument fell flat when I simply said, “Uh….Superbowl is a pretty big stage, dude.”

However, one individual is adamant that the team that’s up 3-1 has to make a blunder along the way somewhere similar to what the Falcons did.  Okay, fine.  I’ll give you some lee-way that the same assumption needs to be in place in a 3-1 comeback.  Which is:  The team that’s WAY AHEAD needs to screw up in some way or multiple ways that have extraordinarily low probabilities of occurring in order for the other team to win.

Hey – I’m nothing if not a fair, impartial guy!!!   So, let’s modify the matrix and assume that for the losing teams, there’s an overall probability screw up factor that’s the same for the remaining games left.  But not each and every game. 

So, adding that math:



A 3-1 comeback still has about 28 chances in 1,000 of that happening.  Compared to 9 in the Superbowl LI.  That’s about a 3:1 in favor of the Superbowl Greatest Comeback Ever!

What else you got???? 


I’ll wait….

Brady Is NOT The GOAT???

Sigh…Arguing this one reminds me of arguing with a liberal or a Democrat about…Anything.  No matter what “facts” I present, they will dispute, distrust or discredit the facts with spin, hyperbole or “what if” scenarios that try to make their argument stand up in spite of the facts I’m presenting. 

My criteria:

How many rings you got?

How long have you done it for?

The ultimate success in any league should be the championship trophy.  I know there’s been a lot of great QB’s that have wonderful statistics for their careers…Hell, a couple of them even have a ring or two….

But there’s only 1 with FIVE!!!!  And if he lives up to what he’s saying regarding how long he plays, he will have done it longer than anyone else…

Yet, people still want to argue.  The conversation/argument that really bugs me: 

“Well, if QB “X” had played for Belechick and the Patriots over the same period as Brady, QB “X” would have probably been a lot better statistically and won just as many if not more Superbowls because his statistics from his career where he DID Play were overall better than Brady’s.”

The names most thrown in for “X”:  Manning (P), Favre, Rodgers, Elway and Manning (E).   I tire of this one stupid, idiotic analysis more than any argument out there.  Your QB “X” DIDN’T play for the Pats and had to play the hand he was dealt.  Live with it.  Again, sorry – but this has to be the worst argument of all of them. Get over it and stop with the nonsense, once and for all.  (And on a side note:  Manning (P) never beat his archrival in college and couldn’t win the Heisman in ‘97….nuff said…)

On top of that, here’s a chemistry between Bill and Brady that is unsurpassed.  Your QB “X” would have undoubtedly pissed Belechik off at some point and he would have been traded.  So there’s that, too….

Brady Is The GOAT until someone does it better than him. 

However, I did start to have one semi-intelligent conversation with an individual who, ironically, is a buckeye and he agreed that Brady is the GOAT.  Hands Down. But then he made an even better observation:  Who would be considered the GOAT if Brady hadn’t been born and how would that have impacted Superbowl records and outcomes for those QB’s over the last 15 seasons???

Great Question!

So, let’s take a look.  We’ll assume for a second that Brady was never born, but the Pat’s were still as good without Brady with the exception of Superbowls.  Meaning Belechick would have gotten there but lost each one, 7 times.  (I know, that doesn’t seem plausible, but humor me).

The last one is easiest.  Matty Ryan gets his first ring in the 2015 Superbowl and deserves it as the regular season MVP.

In 2015, New England beat the Seattle Seahawks and Russel Wilson.  Assuming the Seahawks won, Russel Wilson would have one more ring at this point for a total of 2.

In 2005, the Pats beat Philadelphia’s Donovan McNabb which would have given him one Super Bowl Title. 

In 2004, the Pats beat the North Carolina Panthers and Jake Delhomme who would have won his first Super Bowl ring with the victory. 

And Finally, in 2002, Touchdown Tommy got his 1st ring beating the St. Louis Rams and Kurt Warner, who would have won 2 Superbowls if St. Louis wins that game. 

So, Touchdown Tommy not being born would have resulted in a 2 Superbowl rings column getting a little crowded and really wouldn’t have changed the GOAT discussion for the 4 time winners of Montana and Bradshaw.   And then I’d still be a Montana guy

Even though he played for the Domers….Jeez I hate those guys…

SEE- I can be IMPARTIAL!!!

The BETTER Debate Is….

Who is the greatest ATHLETE in their sport and of those athletes, who is the BEST???

For now, I’m going with this list and if you want to add or delete someone for whatever reason, I’ll listen:

Baseball:      Babe Ruth

Basketball:   Michael Jordan

Football:       Brady

Golf:               Nicklaus/Woods

Hockey:        Gretzky

So, the debate becomes, who is the Greatest of the Greatest?  And what criteria do we use to measure that? 

Again, I have to point to the ultimate achievement for the sport, which is winning trophies and national titles, (or in the case of golf, majors and Championships.)  In the case for golf:

Jack leads Tiger with Majors with 18 to Tiger’s 14.  But Tiger’s 79 Championships surpass Jack’s 73.   And Tiger is still trying to play and Jack also has several titles in the Bogies for Old Fogies Tour…..Er, the Senior Tour.  However, Tiger changed the sport and if it wasn’t for injury and cheating on his wife, well, who knows? 

Easy way to decide?  I guess add em up.  Jack – 91.   Tiger – 93. 

So, it’s Tiger.  But I have to go with Jack because, MAJORS.  Equivalent to “BIG GAME” thing….4 majors annually.  So, really, divide Nicklaus Majors by 4 to get 4.5

Ranking on pure Championships then:

Jordan:         6 NBA Championships (6 Appearances)

Brady:           5 NFL Championships (14 Division Titles, 11 AFC Championship Games, 7 Super Bowl Appearances)

Nicklaus:      4.5 Majors

Babe Ruth:   4 World Series

Gretzky:        4 Stanley Cups

So, you MIGHT think I’m going to give the nod to Jordan, But NO!!!!!!

Why?  Your own criteria said CHAMPIONSHIPS!!!   And with that I agree!  BUT…….Let's face it...Brady won in the most demanding sport played today.  Hockey fans just shut up and go away.  I agree it's a brutal sport with more games.  But not everybody takes hits like an NFL QB. 

AAANNNNDDDD.....The NBA and the NFL have a Different number of franchises!  And the Bulls and Jordan won three titles when the NBA was sitting at 26 and 3 titles when there was 28 teams.  That means the Bulls had a MUCH GREATER CHANCE of winning (1/26 and 1/28 for the given years) than the Pats did for their 5 titles (1/32) with Brady.  It’s a math thing….And here it is in all its ugliness (but I think it’s right….)


There are so many other factors to add including but not limited to Championship appearances, play-offs and “Clutch performances”. 

Suffice it to say – Brady is the Best in The MMQ’s Opinion!!!

And Wojo’s – check out his column today here!


Superbowl Winnings!!!

Then there’s this guy:



If I’ve said it once I’ve said it a half a dozen times this season….

It’s a Must-Win Game for the Michigan Cagers tonight…

Sparty comes to town on a 2-game winning streak while Michigan finds themselves on a bad two game skid.  One loss to the aforementioned Sparty and Saturday to the Suckeyes.

Michigan really, REALLY needs to hold home court and get that “Big Name Win” over a tough opponent, which, with Sparty winning a couple has pushed them into the 40’s in the Kenpom rankings.

Great Comments from SuperFan on the state of UM Hoops:

Excellent post on our GOAT. BTW, a hearty THANKS to LLLLLoyd Carr for failure to recognize and develop the GOAT. Imagine what a good QB coach and four years as a started might have wrought for our Wolverines???
PLEASE Tom, when you are done winning SBs and SB MVPs, come back to our program in some official capacity.
Now for hoops, IRVIN IS THE PROBLEM, more so than any other single issue. Between bad passes and poor shot selection and weak defense, he is the worst senior decision maker I have seen since Gardner. He needs to go back to being strictly a 3 specialist and must not be allowed to touch the ball with less than 10 on the shot clock, unless it is to shoot a three.
Beyond that, we just need to focus on three things and we will win far more games: SHOOT THE 3; DENY THE 3; DON'T FOUL. I know, everyone says we need to focus more in the paint. On the surface, the stats show that M is very 3 centric. But how we lose games follows the same pattern nearly every time; we are competitive, we are on D, the opponent either misses a shot or nearly turns it over or something creates a broken play scenario, we collapse on the ball in or near the paint, the opponent feeds to a WIDE open guy outside the arc....splash and the rally is on. Often we follow this with a turnover trying to feed the post, or a missed shot from inside the arc. If Irvin tries one more fade away shot I may explode! I bet that he is 15% on that shot at best! No team in the country can put 5 legit 3 point shooters on the court at the same time. I know it goes against CW, but M needs to be even more focused on the 3. I am sure that they have the skill to hit a high % from the NBA range, so shoot from even further out. Once those start falling, it will be much easier to score the inside goals

Couldn’t agree more….

Michigan is hanging around, but is right on the cusp ranked in the 50 range.  I was at the Indiana game where Michigan literally abused the Hosiers and gave them more then they could even begin to deal with.  If THAT Michigan team shows up, it’ll be a long night for Sparty…

Otherwise, NIT here we come….

No comments: