PHOENIX — Tom Brady is one of the greatest quarterbacks who has ever lived.
He will be one of the greatest quarterbacks who ever lived if the Patriots win Sunday, and he will still be one of the greatest quarterbacks who has ever lived if they lose Sunday.
Let’s not even play the game. Tom Brady is great. The end.
No, wait. That’s a terrible idea.
NFL, do not cancel the Super Bowl. You will lose money, and fans will be perturbed.
Point being, Super Bowl XLIX won’t make or break Brady’s legacy, which, like anyone’s opinion on DeflateGate, has been decided dependent upon which region of the country you’re asking.
A win will merely cement Brady as “THE greatest quarterback in the history of ever” to all Patriots fans. They decided long ago that Brady is “the greatest evah, kid,” and four Super Bowl titles and six AFC Championships will only strengthen their already solid argument.
“SpyGate, DeflateGate and having perhaps the greatest NFL head coach ever, be damned. Brady won those four championships. Super Bowl rings are a quarterback stat. Wins, lack of weaponry, clutch, hooray!”
A loss will only strengthen the argument by fans of Peyton Manning, Johnny Unitas, John Elway, Joe Montana, and whomever else.
“Brady’s only .500 in Super Bowl. Brady only won three Super BowlS because of the Patriots’ defense. Brady turned into a choke artist. Deflated footballs, video taped practices, boo this man!”
This isn’t a legacy-defining game, and it might not even be a legacy-cementing game. Brady comes out looking pretty darn good regardless of the result.
No other quarterback has appeared in six Super Bowls. He holds NFL records in yards and touchdown passes in the games that matter most.
Sure, it looks good that Joe Montana was 4-0 in the biggest game of the year, but why should he be rewarded for losing non-Super Bowl playoff appearances, including conference championship games in 1983 and 1990? Why should one-and-dones in 1985, 1987, 1988 and 1994 somehow strengthen his argument for best-ever?
As Brady has stated before, it is really difficult to get this far. News flash: It is really difficult to win Super Bowls. By my calculations — and I am no mathematician — there is a 6.2 percent chance of getting to the Super Bowl each year. Those chances are seven times greater if Tom Brady is your quarterback.
If Brady wins it, he probably does deserve the “best ever” tag. He has the stats, longevity, wins and rings. Should wins and rings be considered a quarterback stat? Eh.
The quarterback is the most important player on the field. The Patriots can probably win with a so-so performance by Brady and an extraordinary effort from their defense and running backs, but it’s not like Brady sloughed off throughout the season. He got them here. He gets them to the playoffs every season, even when his receivers are some combination of Reche Caldwell, Kenbrell Thompkins, Chad Ochocinco and Doug Gabriel.
Wins and rings don’t define a quarterback, but they certainly supplement his resume. There is a reason why subpar signal-callers traditionally don’t win Super Bowls. The Trent Dilfers and Brad Johnson are rare beasts.
If Brady loses? He’s still in the argument for best ever, and his career isn’t over. A .500 Super Bowl record doesn’t change history. What if he wins next year and the year after? Did losing this one tarnish his legacy? Is Super Bowl XLIX the end all, be all of title games?
Of course not.
Brady is great. Is he the best ever? That will always depend on who you ask.
Thumbnail photo via Mark Humphrey/Associated Press
