Is Tom Brady now best QB of all time?

Tom Brady- best QB of all time now


  • Total voters
    39
At the very least I am just happy almost nobody considers Manning the best QB of this era anymore (Brady now clearly is), so by extension nobody will consider him the best of all time either, regardless if Brady is or isn't.
 

ollinger

G.O.A.T.
When Charles Barkley is asked about never winning a NBA title, he responds "I was never on the best team." Brady is certainly among the all time elites, but he's also played on very good and balanced teams most years with certainly one of the most capable coaches. He's up there with about half a dozen other legendary quarterbacks.
 

LeeD

Bionic Poster
No, he only proves that he's a great dink passer with two great slot recievers that no other team has, except for Denver has one.
 

r2473

G.O.A.T.
Last night's 4 point win was their largest margin of victory in any Tom Brady Super Bowl victory. My point here is, any of them could have gone the other way. But for a few plays, Tom Brady might be known as a Super Bowl 6 time loser. Obviously we don't grade him on "what ifs", but it is interesting to think how close he is from "greatest of all time" to "biggest chocker of all time". But, you might argue that is what makes him so great. His ability to win the close ones.
 

spinovic

Hall of Fame
No, he only proves that he's a great dink passer with two great slot recievers that no other team has, except for Denver has one.

:)

Funny how these great slot receivers are unknowns or journeymen until they get to New England. I guess Tom Terrific is just lucky that they save their greatness solely for him.

Greatest? That is always up for debate and subjective. All that can be said for certain is that he is in the discussion and he is the most accomplished/successful QB in the Super Bowl Era.
 

spinovic

Hall of Fame
Last night's 4 point win was their largest margin of victory in any Tom Brady Super Bowl victory. My point here is, any of them could have gone the other way. But for a few plays, Tom Brady might be known as a Super Bowl 6 time loser. Obviously we don't grade him on "what ifs", but it is interesting to think how close he is from "greatest of all time" to "biggest chocker of all time". But, you might argue that is what makes him so great. His ability to win the close ones.

And, if not for a couple of amazing deep ball catches by the Giants, he could just as easily be 6-0 and even more legendary than he already is in terms of big games and being clutch. The margins in the salary cap era are razor thin. Playing intelligent, disciplined, mistake free football plus having a guy like Brady under center is what enables New England to stay at the top of the game for 15 years. What they have done since Brady became the starter may never be matched.

And, in every Super Bowl they have played, Brady has led his team on a late 4th quarter (or overtime) drive to take the lead. It just so happens that the defense couldn't make a stop in two of them, being victimized by some amazing catches.
 

spinovic

Hall of Fame
As for the GOAT debate...look at who Brady has thrown to or had in the backfield compared to some of the others, namely Montana.

And, if you go back to pre-salary cap (Montana), not only did he get to play with better skill players, he got to keep them year-after-year, developing and building years of chemistry which is so important in the passing game.

Peyton Manning has always been surrounded by elite skill players.

Brady, other than Moss, has generally played with a revolving door of average guys.
 

Feña14

G.O.A.T.
Last night's 4 point win was their largest margin of victory in any Tom Brady Super Bowl victory. My point here is, any of them could have gone the other way. But for a few plays, Tom Brady might be known as a Super Bowl 6 time loser. Obviously we don't grade him on "what ifs", but it is interesting to think how close he is from "greatest of all time" to "biggest chocker of all time". But, you might argue that is what makes him so great. His ability to win the close ones.

As a Seahawks fan, he was the last person I wanted to see with the ball in his hands coming down the stretch. He reads defenes and match ups so well and you just knew he was going to do everything it took to get their noses in front.

Being from England and away from all the Manning v Brady hype and attention i'd like to think i'm in a pretty good position to judge them solely on what they do on the field. How they're portrayed in the media and all the office talk, talk shows etc.. haven't influenced me. From what i've seen over the years I find it strange it's even a debate, it's Brady all day every day for me. Even after he broke my heart yesterday :)

As for greatest of all time, that's hard to say as Montana was before my time (1998 onwards).
 

Mr.Lob

G.O.A.T.
Tony Romo will be considered the best QB of all time when it's all said and done. Go Cowboys! Super Bowl XXXXX winners!!!
 
Tony Romo will be considered the best QB of all time when it's all said and done. Go Cowboys! Super Bowl XXXXX winners!!!

It will just be called Super Bowl 50 (and if Roman numerals were used, it would be "L", not "XXXXX") next year. If Romo wants to get even somewhat close to the conversation of the best all time, he has a lot of work to do. Right now, that is like saying a guy who has 0 slams on his resume is the greatest of all time.
 

Mr.Lob

G.O.A.T.
It will just be called Super Bowl 50 (and if Roman numerals were used, it would be "L", not "XXXXX") next year. If Romo wants to get even somewhat close to the conversation of the best all time, he has a lot of work to do. Right now, that is like saying a guy who has 0 slams on his resume is the greatest of all time.

Super Bowl 50 is a one year deal. Next year they go back to Roman numerals.

I wrote "when all is said and done" Romo will be considered the best. Which means when his career is over.

Does most Super Bowl wins equate to being the best? No. Is Doug Williams better than Marino, and as good as Peyton? Certainly a big part of the equation though.
 

spinovic

Hall of Fame
As a Seahawks fan, he was the last person I wanted to see with the ball in his hands coming down the stretch. He reads defenes and match ups so well and you just knew he was going to do everything it took to get their noses in front.

Being from England and away from all the Manning v Brady hype and attention i'd like to think i'm in a pretty good position to judge them solely on what they do on the field. How they're portrayed in the media and all the office talk, talk shows etc.. haven't influenced me. From what i've seen over the years I find it strange it's even a debate, it's Brady all day every day for me. Even after he broke my heart yesterday :)

As for greatest of all time, that's hard to say as Montana was before my time (1998 onwards).

It is curious, and I agree with you. It seems that Manning gets more credit for his stats than most. And by that I mean this...in most debates post-season success clearly trump regular season numbers and success.

Marino never wins these debates because he never won a Super Bowl. Guys like Troy Aikman and Eli Manning are perceived as better than they actually were/are IMO due to their Super Bowls.
In two seasons, John Elway went from Marino-status to a serious GOAT contender, when, in truth, carrying those average teams to three Super Bowls in 4 years was probably more impressive than winning them with the talented, Terrell Davis-led squads.

In this debate, it seems that the experts and analysts typically side with Peyton, unless Brady has just won a Super Bowl or done something amazing, like the undefeated, 50 TD season.

The weird thing is that I have never heard Manning compared to Montana. Brady has been even prior to winning his fourth. Now that he has matched him with 4 rings, he has superior numbers otherwise...two more Super Bowl appearances, more regular season success, etc.

So now, he is arguably the greatest ever because of this one win, when many talking heads never acknowledged him as better than Manning.

I, for one, thing he is just as smart as Manning, but more adaptable. Peyton has always ran that same offense designed just for him, and as great as it is, I think it has hurt him in the post-season, because he would never stay committed to the run. Brady, on the other hand, has won with every style possible...run-heavy with the QB making a few crucial plays, balanced, pass happy and everything in between. The bottom line is that they are willing and able to attack your weakness and Brady is equally comfortable handing it off as he is throwing it 50+ times.

They are quite unique in that. Most teams are built to win a certain way. Seattle wants to get a lead and pond away with Lynch. Green Bay, Denver, New Orleans want to throw the ball, get a lead and play aggressive defense that forces TO. New England can play any style...they can pond the ball, or they can win shootouts. That's a testament to Brady to some degree as I think some of the elite QBs can get frustrated or lose some sharpness if they don't get to sling it all over the field. He just wants to win and will do whatever gives them their best chance at that.
 

spinovic

Hall of Fame
Super Bowl 50 is a one year deal. Next year they go back to Roman numerals.

I wrote "when all is said and done" Romo will be considered the best. Which means when his career is over.

Does most Super Bowl wins equate to being the best? No. Is Doug Williams better than Marino, and as good as Peyton? Certainly a big part of the equation though.

No. But you need more than one to be in the discussion.

I like Romo and hope he gets at least one before he finishes his career. I think he is severely underrated based on the lack of post-season success. But, he has been asked to carry rosters that were mediocre at best and has done an admiral job of it. Dallas finally wised up, focused on their O-line and committed to running the ball to give Romo some help, and got younger and more athletic on defense and voila - Romo has his best year, an amazing season, they host and win a playoff game and were one "catch or no catch" from likely playing for a Super Bowl berth.

They should be right back in the mix again barring key injuries.
 

mightyrick

Legend
I have never known how to answer this question objectively. It becomes easy if you go by Super Bowl rings. Easy if you solely go by combinations of yardage or touchdowns. Easy if you go by combinations of all of those. Easy if you go solely by career winning percentage.

Personally, I know of no metric which objectively describes "best QB ever". There always seems to be exceptions. Guys like Elway. Guys like Marino. Unitas. Aikman.

So I will just be totally subjective and say that the greatest QB I have ever seen throw a football in big moments is: Kurt Warner.

Yes, you read that correctly.

The guy who I would put second is Joe Montana. But I put Warner first because of his supporting cast compared to Montana's supporting cast.
 

TennisCJC

Legend
Voted NO.

Brady is great but not GOAT. Joe Montana and Dan Marino were better. Steve Bartkowski from the 1980 was a much better passer.

Marino and Bartkowski were perhaps the best pure passers of all-time.

Brady is great but has played on great teams with great coach. Marino and Bartkowski could pass much better once you get beyond the 10 yard route distance. Brady throws loads of short routes but so did Montana but Montana actually moved better in and out of the pocket and was quite capable of throwing the ball downfield.
 
Rating the best ever is always much harder in a team sport than an individual one. Failures and successes are determined by more than just a single person's performance in a team sport.
 

Raul_SJ

G.O.A.T.
It's hard to pick one, but I suppose if the criteria is wins for for an entire career, a case can be made for Brady as the GOAT.

But for a single season in their prime, I will take Steve Young over Tom Brady. His running ability made him very dangerous.
 

spinovic

Hall of Fame
Like I said, it is subjective. But, Brady has the strongest case. When people try to make a case against them, they have to bring out subjective analysis, such as Player X was a better pure passer, etc. the fact is, Brady has covered all the bases...he is tied for most Super Bowl wins, has played in the most Super Bowls, has the longest period of success, has posted great individual numbers, and has done it all in the most competitive era of the salary cap where sustained excellence is almost impossible to achieve.

To me, he is the best I've ever seen, but I thought that before they won last night. The fourth Super Bowl simply eliminated the argument that Montana had more Super Bowls.
 

Feña14

G.O.A.T.
Voted NO.

Brady is great but not GOAT. Joe Montana and Dan Marino were better. Steve Bartkowski from the 1980 was a much better passer.

Marino and Bartkowski were perhaps the best pure passers of all-time.

Brady is great but has played on great teams with great coach. Marino and Bartkowski could pass much better once you get beyond the 10 yard route distance. Brady throws loads of short routes but so did Montana but Montana actually moved better in and out of the pocket and was quite capable of throwing the ball downfield.

Never really understood why there's such an emphasis on the big pass. To me, a quarterback is the orchestrator of the offense. The identifying matchups, reading defenses, making the opposition change their gameplan, clock management, staying one step ahead of the D, understanding situations, leadership, clutch when it matters etc..

The quick passes and sending people in motion are the ways to get to get to Seattle and Brady did it perfectly. He always knew when Gronkowski had a match up against a linebacker and he went to him on a handful of big plays.

As much as losing still feels horrible, it was a masterful performance from Brady imo.
 

spinovic

Hall of Fame
Never really understood why there's such an emphasis on the big pass. To me, a quarterback is the orchestrator of the offense. The identifying matchups, reading defenses, making the opposition change their gameplan, clock management, staying one step ahead of the D, understanding situations, leadership, clutch when it matters etc..

The quick passes and sending people in motion are the ways to get to get to Seattle and Brady did it perfectly. He always knew when Gronkowski had a match up against a linebacker and he went to him on a handful of big plays.

As much as losing still feels horrible, it was a masterful performance from Brady imo.

I agree. I think Brady, for anyone who has watched him much, has more than proven his ability to throw a great deep ball and drive the ball down the field. It is his ability to excel at all facets of the position that make him great...I'm certain he would have attacked downfield if that had been Seattle's weakness.

Peyton Manning doesn't throw the prettiest ball, but he is great nonetheless.
 

LeeD

Bionic Poster
As great as Brady might be, or might have played, he had all but given up hope when Lynch ran the 4 yarder to the one yard line.
He probably gave up after that deflected bouncing pass.
LUCK, and luck alone, gave Brady his 4th win in this game. Yes, he was very good, but most everyone expected Seattle to score with less than 30 seconds left on the clock.
 

spinovic

Hall of Fame
As great as Brady might be, or might have played, he had all but given up hope when Lynch ran the 4 yarder to the one yard line.
He probably gave up after that deflected bouncing pass.
LUCK, and luck alone, gave Brady his 4th win in this game. Yes, he was very good, but most everyone expected Seattle to score with less than 30 seconds left on the clock.

But they didn't.

"Luck", as you deem it, is part of the game. And, since we're on the subject, let's be consistent and acknowledge the "luck" that put Seattle in that position to begin with.

New England is lucky Seattle called that play at that moment. The play itself was not luck. It was the result of great scouting and preparation, as Butler obviously knew exactly what was coming, jumped the route and beat the receiver to the spot. That part of it was preparation and talent.

The fact is that in the salary cap era, NFL teams are so evenly matched that virtually every game could have a different winner if the losing team had made just one more play...

New England intercepts a Flacco pass in the end zone late in the 4th quarter...
Green Bay bats down a 20 yard Hail Mary 2pt conversion, or recovers an onside kick...
Dez Bryant holds on to the ball...

Super Bowl 49 could have easily been played between Baltimore and Green Bay or...Dallas and Indianapolis or...pretty much any combination of playoff teams. Which again is what makes New England's level of consistency so impressive. More often than not, they find a way to come out on top in these close games. Over that long of a time, it has to be more than coincidence.

6-3 in AFC Championship games, 4-2 in Super Bowls
 

SystemicAnomaly

Bionic Poster
Super Bowl 50 is a one year deal. Next year they go back to Roman numerals...

Can't imagine a Super Bowl LI. Just duzn't look right. It may take longer to get back to Roman numerals. Or perhaps we could switch to hexadecimal, binary or, better yet, tally marks.
 

Feña14

G.O.A.T.
Can't imagine a Super Bowl LI. Just duzn't look right. It may take longer to get back to Roman numerals. Or perhaps we could switch to hexadecimal, binary or, better yet, tally marks.

Super Bowl LI is the first half of my name, so it sounds good to me :)

This probably means i'll be called upon to kick the winning the field goal in OT, the NFL loves a good story!
 

oztennisfan

Professional
LUCK, and luck alone, gave Brady his 4th win in this game. Yes, he was very good, but most everyone expected Seattle to score with less than 30 seconds left on the clock.

luck plays for indy...

45-7, cant be lucky all the time
 

volleygirl

Rookie
that would be NO. Dan Marino, Joe Montana, and JIm Macmahan is better than him.


Even McMahon would crack up if he read this. He wouldnt even make the top 100.

I think the top 3 have to include Montana, Elway, and Brady. The order those 3 are put in can be argued forever but theyre the best 3 I've seen.
 

tenniscasey

Semi-Pro
Absolutely not. There's no way to know how long or how much he was the beneficiary of under-inflated footballs and high-tech eavesdropping.
 
Last edited:
......

When Charles Barkley is asked about never winning a NBA title, he responds "I was never on the best team." Brady is certainly among the all time elites, but he's also played on very good and balanced teams most years with certainly one of the most capable coaches. He's up there with about half a dozen other legendary quarterbacks.

He's done more with less than any QB. Who was Wes Welker before New England? Julian Edleman? It's all Brady/Belichek. They can plug most players into that system and win.
 
Double Standard

Absolutely not. There's no way to know how long or how much he was the beneficiary of under-inflated footballs and high-tech eavesdropping.

What about all the Seahawk players that got busted for Aderol? How about Seattle getting busted for cheating by the NFL in the pre-season regarding practice violations etc.

You guys only know what the media feeds you. But Seattle has been PROVEN to cheat. All teams have.
 

tenniscasey

Semi-Pro
What about all the Seahawk players that got busted for Aderol? How about Seattle getting busted for cheating by the NFL in the pre-season regarding practice violations etc.

You guys only know what the media feeds you. But Seattle has been PROVEN to cheat. All teams have.

This thread is about Tom Brady.
 

spinovic

Hall of Fame
Even McMahon would crack up if he read this. He wouldnt even make the top 100.

I think the top 3 have to include Montana, Elway, and Brady. The order those 3 are put in can be argued forever but theyre the best 3 I've seen.

This tends to be my view as well. I know the two Super Bowls at the end are what is remembered, but carrying those average teams to Super Bowls three times in 4 years is the most impressive thing on Elway's resume. He was an amazing QB.

I would probably rank them Brady, Elway, Montana.
 

heninfan99

Talk Tennis Guru
No
829099266.gif
 

hollywood9826

Hall of Fame
It shard to compare Brady and any current QB with the past guy.

From pure arm talent and making the most ridiculous throws look easy Marino is no 1.

But if you discredit Marino by saying he didnt win a Bowl that means bowls are important.

I think Bradshaw, Montana, and Brady are the only guys with 4 bowls. Bradhsaw and Montana were 4-4 having not lost. Bradhsaw over time seems to not get the level of credit i think he deserves. But I also agree he is not #1.

I'll take Brady over Montana if I had to pick becuase I think brady has a stronger arm. Pretty much the only reason.

B
 

T1000

Legend
5 > 4

And he's only won 1 super bowl as the man. First three he was a gsme manager behind elite defenses. Next two when he was the man he choked hard (his offenses averaged 38 and 34 ppg and he only put up 17 and 14 in the big game) you can say the defense stepped up or other players production dropped but when the qb gets all the credit for wins then he deserves a ton of blame for losses especially when the offense puts up less than half the points they average and he's supposed to be the leader and the play maker.
 

spinovic

Hall of Fame
5 > 4

And he's only won 1 super bowl as the man. First three he was a gsme manager behind elite defenses. Next two when he was the man he choked hard (his offenses averaged 38 and 34 ppg and he only put up 17 and 14 in the big game) you can say the defense stepped up or other players production dropped but when the qb gets all the credit for wins then he deserves a ton of blame for losses especially when the offense puts up less than half the points they average and he's supposed to be the leader and the play maker.

Every QB is a game manager. It is part of the job description.

Montana got to play with elite offenses and defenses. Bradshaw was surrounded by HOFers and their Steel Curtain defense is still the Gold Standard. Do they get docked for that?
 

volleygirl

Rookie
Every QB is a game manager. It is part of the job description.

Montana got to play with elite offenses and defenses. Bradshaw was surrounded by HOFers and their Steel Curtain defense is still the Gold Standard. Do they get docked for that?


Brady taking the Patriots to 6 Super Bowls and winning 4 with almost no HOF players around him is unreal. The 49ers and Steelers teams probably had as many HOFers as any teams in NFL history so saying Brady was just a game manager like Trent Dilfer is a joke.
 

T1000

Legend
Every QB is a game manager. It is part of the job description.



Montana got to play with elite offenses and defenses. Bradshaw was surrounded by HOFers and their Steel Curtain defense is still the Gold Standard. Do they get docked for that?


.......... Ok you don't know what a game manager is. His first three Super Bowls he had elite defenses (like the Seahawks now) and was told go out there and not make mistakes (like wilson now) the next three Super Bowls he his role was to be the man and make things happen and be the reason they win.

No one talks about Bradshaw as the goat because of his defense. Montana had hofers in his team Brady has the best tight end to ever play the game for two of his sb appearances and had moss for one. Welker is a wr1 or 2 on most teams when he played in New England Revis and browner are pretty damn good too. Really sick of this Brady has no help when he has elite defenses for 3 a very solid defense this year a top 5 goat coach the goat tight end an all time great corner etc. at the end of the day Brady is 1-2 in Super Bowls as the man and had talent around him all 3 times and only got it done once. He's not the goat and won't be unless he gets 6
 

volleygirl

Rookie
.......... Ok you don't know what a game manager is. His first three Super Bowls he had elite defenses (like the Seahawks now) and was told go out there and not make mistakes (like wilson now) the next three Super Bowls he his role was to be the man and make things happen and be the reason they win.

No one talks about Bradshaw as the goat because of his defense. Montana had hofers in his team Brady has the best tight end to ever play the game for two of his sb appearances and had moss for one. Welker is a wr1 or 2 on most teams when he played in New England Revis and browner are pretty damn good too. Really sick of this Brady has no help when he has elite defenses for 3 a very solid defense this year a top 5 goat coach the goat tight end an all time great corner etc. at the end of the day Brady is 1-2 in Super Bowls as the man and had talent around him all 3 times and only got it done once. He's not the goat and won't be unless he gets 6


Oh ok,,,,if you say so
 

Vcore89

Talk Tennis Guru
Tom is Goat, just wait and see for him to collect no. 5 next year and 4th SB MVP (and he is unselfish enough to devour all the money he could've made but instead he made a huge sacrifice monetarily [years ago!] -- team unity before everything else)! And, he doesn't need a ton of HOFers by his side. All he need is Gronk! Book it!;-) Oh, don't forget, winning immediately meant he was A LOT better than Luck (Andrew will win his--in due time)!

Montana? He's had [mucho!] help--a lot! Young? Same as Montana [frankly though, never saw them play but thanks to Google (Where would we be without Google? Unless, we want to call them Golgol.:-|). Anyway, if Google was the only point of reference, in my case, then I'd just say Johnny Unitas is/was GOAT; no pun intended.].

And last but not the least, Tom's 4 is no lesser than Joe's 4 BUT consider the tech advancement!
 

spinovic

Hall of Fame
.......... Ok you don't know what a game manager is. His first three Super Bowls he had elite defenses (like the Seahawks now) and was told go out there and not make mistakes (like wilson now) the next three Super Bowls he his role was to be the man and make things happen and be the reason they win.

No one talks about Bradshaw as the goat because of his defense. Montana had hofers in his team Brady has the best tight end to ever play the game for two of his sb appearances and had moss for one. Welker is a wr1 or 2 on most teams when he played in New England Revis and browner are pretty damn good too. Really sick of this Brady has no help when he has elite defenses for 3 a very solid defense this year a top 5 goat coach the goat tight end an all time great corner etc. at the end of the day Brady is 1-2 in Super Bowls as the man and had talent around him all 3 times and only got it done once. He's not the goat and won't be unless he gets 6

Where to begin? I'll just go in order.

1. How do you define a game manager?
2. New England had very good defenses in Brady's first three Super Bowls and in this one. This is true. They weren't as good as Seattle's Legion of Boom. The Patriot defenses have never been mentioned in the discussion for best ever, like Seattle's has been.
3. Brady is supposed to try to take care of the football. Like every other QB in the history of the game...unless you can enlighten me with an example of a QB that was instructed to make mistakes.
4. Football is a team game. Brady has never been asked to win games by himself. He. But, make no mistake, he was " the man" as you say, after their first title. If you want to say he underperformed in the two losses, I won't argue. Montana once lost 49-3 to the Giants in a playoff game. Nobody plays perfect all the time. He is still 4-2 as the starting QB in Super Bowls.
5. Nobody says Brady has no help. The comment is relative to the other guys who won 3-4 Super Bowls. Nobody, except you perhaps, would ever mistake Brady's supporting casts with Montana, Bradshaw or Aikman. And, that is the point. Every other guy to win comparable to Brady has been surrounded by HOFers and Pro Bowlers and played for legendary coaches.

Brady is a three time Super Bowl MVP. There are only a handful of QBs who have started that many Super Bowls.

Super Bowl 49 - 37/50, 328 yds, 4 TD, 2 Int (lead team on game winning drive with TD pass with 2:02 left in the game)

Super Bowl XLVI - 27/41, 276 yds, 2 TD, 1 Int (Giants scored the winning TD with 0:57 left to play)

Super Bowl XLII - 29/48, 266 yds, 1 TD (lead team to go ahead TD with 2:42 to play, Giants scored winning TD with 0:35 left)

Super Bowl XXXIX - 23/33, 236 yds, 2 TD

Super Bowl XXXVIII - 32/48, 354 yds, 3 TD, 1 Int (lead team to go-ahead TD and 2-pt conversion with 2:51 to play, then lead them to game-winning FG with 4 seconds left after Carolina tied the game)

Super Bowl XXXVIII - 16/27, 145 yds, 1 TD (St Louis tied the game with 1:30 remaining, with no timeouts Brady lead a 9 play, 53 yard drive that resulted in a game winning FG as time expired - he was 5/6 for 53 yards on that drive)


I'm sure every team would like to have a lowly game manager like Brady under center. But look, if you don't like 'em, you aren't going to give them credit. I get that. Just own it though. Don't try to argue with numbers and facts, because they all support Brady.

Oh yeah...Gronk may end up being the GOAT TE. We will have to see how his career plays out, but he is undoubtedly a great player.
 
Top