Talk:Tom Brady

16 wins

the 'brady became the first quarterback to go 16-0' implies that brady won all of the games single-handedly. the superbowl was proof that his line are just as resposible for winning as brady is. brady to moss doesn't happen when you've got strahan, umenyiora and tuck in your face all game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.15.153.255 (talk) 10:38, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

how does the fact that he is the first qb to go 16-0 imply he won them single handedly? There were qbs with much better offensive lines in the past that didn't go 16-0 but rather 14-2 or 15-1. Brady played that same giants team during the regular season and Brady was pressured heavily, but won. Him being the first qb to go 16-0 is not opinion-its a fact. 67.86.77.111 (talk) 03:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

the patriots as a team went 16-0. you wouldnt say lonie paxton (yes i had to look up their snapper, i dont pretend to be a football expert) is the first long snapper to go 16-0 would you? its not tennis, single players dont win games. everybody has to do their job to win its not an opinion - its fact. im not in any way trying to make light of brady incredible achievement, im just saying that its unfair to pin all the success on brady. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.15.149.209 (talk) 23:06, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

yes, but qbs touch the ball on every offensive play.. it wouldn't sound right for any other position but the qb spot. For example you can say: In 2007 Peyton Manning had a record of 13-3. But you wouldn't say in 2007 adam vinatieri had a record of 13-3 67.86.77.111 (talk) 02:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, qbs don't touch the ball on every offensive play. Also, the statement made in the article is non-bias. RC-0722 ^communicator/_kills

04:12, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

except for a rare direct snap to the rb the qb is touching the ball on every offensive play 67.86.77.111 (talk) 06:26, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't like this wording either. These aren't baseball pitchers.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 06:35, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't sound right to say saying trent dilfer won the superbowl for the ravens in 2000. the quarterback position gets way too much hype, i don't think there any quarterbacks in the league that would be unsuccessful in the colts or patriots offense. theyre like the passing versions of the broncos running game. 'quarterbacks touch the ball on every play' yeah roethlisberger really led his team to a superbowl victory all those times he was handing the ball to his RB. i blame nfl films for all the QB hype —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.15.149.209 (talk) 09:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

If you watch ESPN or CBS Sports, they will state that brady won 100 games faster than anyone else. They don't say Matt light won 100 games faster than anyone else...This game is built around the qb. And the fact of the matter is he went 16-0 and there should be mention of this. Michigan10 (talk) 21:07, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

If you watch ESPN or CBS Sports, they will tell you the patriots went 16-0. the game is about more than QB just look at the titans, vince young threw just 9 touchdowns and didnt scramble for a whole lot either but the titans still made it the to playoffs. They didnt make it to the playoffs because vince young won games, they did it because of their strong running game and defense. who do you think was more responsible for the ravens 2000 superbowl win, trent dilfer or ray lewis? im not trying to say tom brady isnt the best QB in the league right now (cos we all know he's got game on and off the field ;)) but i think it should be changed to something like 'brady led the pats to 16-0' because after all football is the ultimate team sport —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.15.149.209 (talk) 21:42, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

added team to it... Michigan10 (talk) 01:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

It's original research and POV to treat the QB, in a case like this, differently from every other position. Further, if the Patriots were the first team to finish the regular season 16-0, it's completely redundant and unnecessary to state that each and every player (kicker, coach, owner, equipment director, mascot, janitor) was also the first "at their position" to go 16-0. You can say that he was a member of the 16-0 Patriots, but anything further is just stating the obvious. Pats1 ^T/C 01:41, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

postseason passer rating record

brady set the single gamepostseason passer rating record against the jags on 1/12/08. i have a link here, but of course i cant edit the damn page on my own, so could somebody add this inofmration somewhere (postseason records, preferably), along with the link as a cite. heres the link: http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d805efe07 -- even tho it says video, it's not a video. it's just a picture of him and an information box on the right side saying he set the record. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.128.21.5 (talk) 20:05, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

THe NFL.com link says "Tom Brady sets a playoff record with a 141.4 passer rating in win vs. Jaguars." Brady did set a record for completion percentage and he did have a passer rating of 141.4 in that game, but did not set a record for highest passer rating in a postseason game. Several QBs have had a perfect (158.3) rating in a postseason game, so Brady could not have set that record. So that link is either referring to the completion percentage record or is incorrectly stating that Brady set a passer rating record. Chaz ^Beckett 15:18, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Why is it that i can only edit some pages. I like just going through and rewrting stuff so it sounds better. And I love Tommy Brady but i can work on the page

Early discussions

Someone should fix his pro bowl numbers. He did not make the pro bowl in 2007. Ummm...he did make the pro bowl however, he opted not to go and participate. Derek Anderson of the Cleveland Browns took his place. So did Chad Johnson taking Randy Moss place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.50.235.195 (talk) 14:55, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

It says Charles WOodson got the sack on Brady during that "Tuck RUle" game, thats not true. If he got the sack, it would have been a fumble. Becasue it was not a sack (as it was an incomplete pass), the ruling was not a fumble.

Shouldn't the caption be 2002 Superbowl MVP? He won for the 2001-2002 season. --Madchester 00:04, 2005 Apr 18 (UTC)

The caption is correct. He won the Super Bowl MVP during the 2001 season for throwing for 150 yards.

Umm, the season runs from 2001-2002... it's even presented that way on the New England Patriots page for Superbowl victories. And it's indicated that Brady was Super Bowl MVP for 2002. Anyway, where's the details of his 2002-2003 season? --Madchester 05:23, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

• Superbowls are named after the year in which the season STARTS. For example, the patriots won the 2004 superbowl, even though it was played in 2005. It can't be named the 2005 superbowl, since the 2005 season started in septmber 2005.

Brady has won the 2001,2003 and 2004 superbowls <<Coburn_Pharr>> 00:37, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Yet the Super Bowl MVP article lists him as the 2002 and 2004 MVP. Which makes more sense, given the fact that the Superbowl wins took place in those respective calendar years. Likewise, the Super Bowl XXXIX article indicates that it was the "2005 title game". Hell, even the Superbowl XXXIX logo indicates the year (2005) that the event took place. It's no different than the naming conventions for the NBA and NHL, which also span two calendar years.--Madchester 05:25, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Quoting the Wikiproject NFL,

For playoffs after the AFL-NFL Merger, the year should be in the form 20xx-yy. This is a compromise between die hard and casual fans. Prior to the 1980s, most of the playoff games were in December. Currently, they are all in January and sometimes February. As a result, many die hard fans still consider the playoffs leading to Super Bowl XXXIX as the 2004 playoffs while many casual fans call it the 2005 playoffs.

Thusly, the seasons as wholes, as well as playoffs, should be reffered to as 2001-2002, 2003-2004, and 2004-2005. I'll make these changes now.82.83.45.230 16:43, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Ok, who is not a Brady fan? NOBODY! He led his team to a victory in superbowl XXXVI (was it 36?). You can check him out on www.nfl.com. In the NFL site you can find any info you want about the players or any team in the NFL. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.6.60 (talk • contribs)

This article wreaks of POV issues. Mithotyn 10:11, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Do you have to use the word "legendary" when speaking about Lloyd Carr? Hardly a "legendary" coach - WAR Ohio State beating Michigan 25-21, November 19th, 2005 (Four out of the last five, baby) T.J. Swartz

It's reffered to as Super Bowl XXXVIII MVP not by the year or season Nickfromredcliff 07:32, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

POV

The professional abilities section is POV. I will delete it in 48 hours unless somebody objects. Deckiller 22:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

....Which section? Are we talking about Debate? I can't find one called "professional abilities." so, until i know what you're talking about, i object. --jfg284 ^{you were saying?} 13:01, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

It was already taken down; I figured that if someone felt strongly, they would just revert. Deckiller 20:01, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Aright, whatever...I actually didn't object 'til I noticed that I couldn't find it. I remember thinking it was POV when I read it, but when I read your message I thought I might be able to work through it. Reading it again, though, you're absolutely right in giving it the axe. --jfg284 ^{you were saying?} 20:43, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Postseason Pass Attempts Per Interception

just the facts: Tom Brady is number two overall when one considers Jake Delhomme's 78.5 pass attempts without interception. however, Delhomme's only attempted 157 passes. opinions?

I think we should put something like LIMIT: 250 passes. That way, Jake still has a chance this season to get up there with Brady, but not before the full postseason is over. Deckiller 03:03, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

word. i think i actually might've started this discussion! that's loony. either way, Delhomme's stats aren't the best anymore (38.4 PAPI in postseason). Brady again is King! my New England bias will never taint my submissions.

Delete marriage "info"

The added entry on a 2004 marriage is part of a hoax that is currently the subject of an AfD -- see Adriana Brady. Claims include she is an American Idol judge, etc. Clearly nonsense. —ERcheck @ 16:30, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Getting this article Featured

I've been throwing around a few ideas here and there; y'know, ways to improve this article. However, I don't know if it will pass FA because it's such a current article. We might be able to get it to at least good article status. Deckiller 20:23, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

i have a few ideas, too. one thing kinda bugs me:"he threw for 400 yards". Orange Bowl game is referred to here; just wondering if there are any more stats(passes attempted/completed/intercepted/sacks) that could be used there, and given that, where to find them.

also, the first 131+ passes of Tom Brady's career went without interception; he threw his first against Denver and once i find out how many passes he attempted before the first pick in that game, i'll have something in that section detailing his first season.--Nod 06:10, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm working on making the career stats section look better, I'm trying to make it look like the one on John Elway Cryomaniac 11:08, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Other Information

Isn't the comment about him almost playing for the 49ers irrelevant, unless they were planning on taking him since every team would have passed up on him at least 5 times before? I will delete it in 24 hours if no one disagrees.

Debate

Removed Debate section as unsourced, POV, original research. --MichaelZimmer (talk) 14:07, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I suppose it was kind of a silly section, even though I actually contributed to it. The question of who is or is not the quote-unquote "best" quarterback is ultimately irrelevant. Peyton Manning and Brady are both very, very good quarterbacks who play for very good teams. And Brady was the quarterback on 3 Super Bowl winning teams, and won two Super Bowl MVP awards, in his just first five seasons in the league (and just his first 4 as a starter): that is an amazing accomplishment for any quarterback, good, bad or mediocre! Hopefully Manning and Brady will keep this debate going for years to come by continuing their record of success. --User:TimothyHorrigan Timothy Horrigan 20:31, 1 August 2006 (UTC

it takes more than a just a quarterback to win a football game, the steelers won a superbowl and roethlisberger rarely passed that season v —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.11.255.215 (talk) 05:30, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

GA Re-Review and In-line citations

Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. Currently this article does not include in-line citations. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. Agne 21:37, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Source

Provided source for "many consider Brady to already be a future Hall of Famer", the source being Sports Illustrated's Paul Zimmerman, the quote being "Brady is the ultimate warrior, and he's a double yes for first ballot and my vote," the URL being http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/dr_z/07/26/drz0723/1.html. It does however seem to be showing up twice down in the References section despite my best efforts, so sorry for that. Thedoorhinge 02:53, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Charlie Weis Comment

Although funny, this seems pretty much out of whack. Hence the POV tag.

I must have missed this, someone want to slue me in? Trevor GH5 02:16, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

21-game win streak stats

hi. i figured i should've added them. that PAPI number is insane. took the numbers from pro-football-reference.com, and the only one that feels iffy is the passer rating. i was under the impression that sacks were taken into account, but the calculator i used had no such field.Nosirrah Yendor 18:22, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Pay cut?

I heard Brady took a pay cut for the Patriots, but I can't seem to find a source for this. Anyone have more information about this? --W3stfa11 19:51, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes and no, he restructured his contract so that NE could sign Randy Moss, he took a pay cut this season, but next season he will get the difference, so at the end of his contract, he will have gotten paid the same amount-RH

Not exactly. Part of his 2007 salary was converted to a signing bonus, thus prorating it over the 4 remaining years of his contract. [1] Pats1 01:27, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

More POV

"Widely regarded as the greatest postseason quarterback of his generation"? While that is probably true, it's also POV, particularly given that that statement appears without a citation and in the lede. It reads like a lead-in for a sports-talk-radio hour. Brady's record speaks for itself, without the puffery. 69.7.203.153 23:38, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Passer Rating

This article states Tom Brady has the record for the single game passer rating. Though he did achieve this, it should be noted he shares this honor with other quarterbacks

   No. Peyton Manning still holds that record at 121.1 where Brady came to a 117.2 QB rating.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.87.70.135 (talk) 03:49, 14 May 2008 (UTC) 

"Family Guy character" category?

I know he appeared in an episode, but he's the only actual person in the category- the rest are fictional characters from the show. He probably shouldn't be in the category, but I wanted to confirm this with other Wikipedians before simply removing it. Tozoku 23:59, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I did you the favor of removing the category. There's a separate list of guest stars. W3stfa11/^{Talk to me} 04:40, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Michigan Stats

I want to get in and add brady's Michigan statistics and accomplishments. Notably, him setting the record for most completions (214) in a season. Michigan10 01:52, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

His Michigan career statistics are:

Career Totals

Attempts: 711 Completions: 443 Completion Percentage: 62.3 TD: 35 Int: 19 Total Yards: 5351 Yards/Completions 12.1

Michigan10 02:45, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Photo and years

What happened to the pic that was in here? Trevor GH5 05:50, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

What's with the 2004-05 season and 2005-06 season stuff? Trevor GH5 22:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, the picture was taken at an official White House ceremony, by a governement official Michigan10 21:41, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Well what happened to it? Trevor GH5 11:04, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Somebody put it back in today. Thanks. Trevor GH5 10:43, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Misprint

There is an error in the section "Career regular-season stats (as of December 31, 2006)" as it has the team name listed as NWE the accepted short hand for the New England Patriots is just NE. Everytime you see a game on tv or maybe when your playing madden it is seen as NE. When I first saw this section I didn't understand what I was reading. As I cannot edit this myself I was hoping someone who reads this could do that. Thank you Nick Martin Redcliff,Alberta,Canada July 29th 2007Nickfromredcliff 07:26, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

• Hi Nick! Perhaps we should discuss this a bit. I'm not sure if I agree with you. I've seen it both ways, and most often as NWE. For example: espn.com and SI.com. What needs to happen is the NWE/NE abbreviation needs to be parenthetically included the first time New England is mentioned. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  09:06, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Minor Edits

Well, I honestly doubt that Clint Ingram was accused of illegally stabbing Tom Brady with the blade of his hockey stick (a penalty that one would think would be rather hard to hide from the Referee of a football game), so I removed the spearing link at the end of the 2005-2006 season article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lettuceclock (talk • contribs) 21:09:35, August 19, 2007 (UTC).

I think Brady only had 23 yards receiving in the Dec 22 2001 game against the Miami Dolphins.

Baby Name

Is it worth pointing out that Brady's baby has the initials JET? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.255.45 (talk) 02:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

No

Hahahah, no. Trevor GH5 02:17, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Brady's Personal highest quarterback Rating

Espn.com said that in Tom Brady's most recent game he had a quarterback rating of 150.9, beating his highest previous single game rating of 148.3 against the Colts. Here is the link to his stats, Espn.com. --Runningcupcake03 00:33, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Single game passer rating

It seems to me that in the sections about individual seasons, there is a lot of emphasis placed on the passer rating that Brady achieved in some individual games. Passer rating over a single game is really a meaningless statistic. Over a full season that statistic has a lot more meaning. In any game where a quarterback has several touchdown passes and no interceptions, he will have a huge passer rating. Almost every quarterback can claim a game like that. Rex Grossman, for example, has posted some incredible single game passer ratings. Without a large statistical sample, it really doesn't mean much. LaDanian Tomlinson has a career passer rating above 150. I think that some of the comments about Brady's passer rating in single games should be deleted. Maybe leave them in for his first full season. But, for example, it's probably not necessary to say that he threw for a QB rating of 122.9 in one game in 2003. I don't want to just delete the stuff, unless some other people agree. Any thoughts? - Mary05poppins 20:25, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Agree completely. The issue is notability; what any given QB may have rated in any given game is, in itself, not notable. I think the only justifiable exception is when they are the min or max (0 or 158.3) - and only because there are independent wiki articles with all QBs who have ever achieved that in a single game (158.3 list, 0 list). --Sesameball 03:14, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Seems Tom Brady must have read my post, because he achieved the 158.3 three days after. :P --Sesameball 22:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Edits....

Note that in his stats page the #'s do not add up, specifically his wins, if you add them up its 76, not 85, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.65.243 (talk) 19:40, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

2006 season Pro Bowl (i.e., 2007 Pro Bowl)

I was under the impression that Brady was not selected to the 2007 Pro Bowl even though this article states he "ultimately received an invitation" and turned it down. I can't find any references that indicate that he turned down his invitation. Am I missing it in my searches? --Sesameball 03:21, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I remember a discussion on talk shows about Brady's invitation and that he turned it down to play at the Pebble Beach golf course in some sort of tournament. I don't know if there's any information left, it wasn't that big of a deal and it happened awhile back. Tim 03:28, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Discussion corrected; references added. Thanks for pointing it out, Sesameball. AyaK 14:34, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Stats in intro

I removed the following paragraph from the intro because it was too detailed. These facts probably do belong elsewheer in the article, just not the intro. I'll try to find a place for them when I have time if no one else beats me to it. Chaz ^Beckett 15:16, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

As of 2007, he is the 5th rated passer in NFL history with over 20,000 yards (91.8). His career completion percentage (62.7%) ranks 4th all-time among qualifiers (3,000 attempts). On October 1st, 2007, Brady set the NFL record for the highest completion percentage (79%) for a quarterback's first 100 passes to start a season. He also helped set the record for the longest consecutive win streak in NFL history with 21 straight wins over two seasons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChazBeckett (talk • contribs) 15:16, 22 October 2007

• The only thing long about that is the cite. MOS says introductions should summarize what you are going to find in the body of an article, and in this sense, the intro is poor and sparse. Which records are included as a appitite wetter can be debated, but that something ought to be there about a phenom, there is no doubt in my mind! Restoring, though the passer rating after yesterday indubitably has gone up. // FrankB 17:57, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• • It's not the length, it's the level of detail. The intro only needs to be a summary, not full of stats that are already included later in the article. Chaz ^Beckett 18:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Brady Career Highlights

Following the link to Brady's Patriots page, there is a lot of material under that subtitle that imho, ought be in this article. I only follow football articles sporadically, so please take note... Someone familiar with the minutia and jargon should mine that for other stats for the page. I also stubbed in a "Part of Team Records" section, for some accomplishments that are in the best Patriots tradition, not just a QB stat. Some of the QB stat section above that might better be moved into that as well as the many many things I'm sure I've no recollection of any longer. // FrankB 17:57, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Adding {Refimprove}, Section II == TOC formating== (kick off discussion)

There is one editor[2] running amuck who cavalierly reverted 4-6 cited records I added by Brady[3][4]. Since the gentleman in question seems not to understand what a cite with embedded quotation (i.e. FA grade cites), nor evidently, the priciple of respecting others time, I feel it incumbent on me to insist the overall quality of the article be improved in it's citations. Judicious choice of quoted material will allow multiple named references as I did in my edit. When you all think it's sufficient, give me a yell, and I'll look it over. // FrankB 22:35, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Could you point to the text in WP:FACR that states that embedded quotations are preferred for articles? Looking at Today's Featured Article, El Al, there are only a handful of embedded quotes (out of 74 references), none longer than a sentence. Is there any reason why lengthy embedded quotations would be needed for this Tom Brady article? Chaz ^Beckett 00:30, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

They don't have to be lengthy, I added {{refimprove}} because there are far too few— but that doesn't excuse you deleting them entirely—much less your disrespect for others time input and reverting against AGF guidelines AND AGAINST the text in your precious WP:BRD without prior discussion. OTOH, the two used in multiple places probably should stay full or nearly so, as they support disparate entries in the page. If you don't like the supporting information to show in the citation, replace "|quote=" with any dummy parameter name (say "|text="), leaving the basis for the statement, the proof as it were, in the article, or even extract the shorter quote you can live with and leave both. The fact that you didn't even try section editing tells me loudly that you never even looked at it, nor closely at the diff. See: here, the sections you threw away. Asking someone to follow links to find a section of an long article to verify same is rude and as uncaring of their time as your revert was of mine. In a word, juvenile. Please learn to respect others time.
Unexpected use of template {{2}} - see Template:2 for details.Furthermore, you haven't even had the class to restore the text, however cited, in the face of objections here and on our respective talks, a behavior demonstrating an inexcusable license to delete. Do try to amend your ways. I categorically will not revert except under the first assault of such nature, so it's up to you, acting the big shot, or some other interested editor of this page to fix what you broke. A mature person would pick up their own dirty socks. // FrankB 19:44, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

You know, Frank, I think we're both trying to improve the article here; we just have different opinions on how to improve it. I'm assuming the best intentions on your part and all I'm asking for is some civility and an end to the personal attacks. Can we actually discuss the content now? ;) Chaz ^Beckett 19:55, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

TOC formating

The same genius disrespects and dislikes the {{TOCnestright}} applied in my next edit.[5] which raises the TOC up and nests it beside infoboxes and images and such[6], plus has the benefit of allowing MOS/FA quality length introductions. This intro is little more than a stub and doesn't begin to capture the sense of recapping the article for a reader. Admittedly, I chose a narrower maxwidth parameter than necessary as it wrapped well with "Notable accomplishments", and I consider several of the article section titles to be egregiously and unnecessarily long. FAT TOC's are not a good idea with the limitations wikimarkup has in rendering HTML. Compare [7]. The other nice thing TOCnestright accomplishes is it does not take the reader out of the flow of reading the article by interupting his eye with a fat TOC, he may not currently have any interest in reading... and kills off all that ugly whitespace. Like "dead air" on the radio, something which should be avoided when possible. // FrankB 22:35, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Personal attacks are never helpful. Please focus on content, not editors. I beleiev that the intro is in much better shape than before; what do you propose should be added? Keep in mind that an intro should summarize the article, not present detailed information (such as stats) than can be found later in the article. Chaz ^Beckett 00:15, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Frank regarding the TOC. Trevor GH5 02:22, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

2007 Season

I noticed there currently isn't a section for the 2007 season. Is this just because it hasn't been written yet or is this something that is usually added after the season is complete? Would anyone object if such a section were added now? With the amazing season Brady and the Pats are having, there's more than enough info. Thanks, Chaz ^Beckett 14:10, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Done a while ago. :) Samer (talk) 05:01, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Consecutive Starts

Tom Brady is third among active QUARTERBACKs in consecutive starts, not third amongst all NFL players as the section suggests. Could someone mike note of this in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.58.98.186 (talk) 18:53, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

That sentence clearly states it's about quarterbacks... Pats1 ^T/C 22:34, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

The Comebacks?

I clicked Tom Brady in the Comebacks article and it redirected me here. Did he direct that movie or should someone change the link. I figure if he did direct that movie, it would be listed here. Just wondering what was up. I wanted more info on the director of the Comebacks but I obvious haven't found it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.23.114.124 (talk) 22:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

It's a different Tom Brady. Thanks for bringing this to someone's attention. I'll go fix that other wikilink now. --Sesameball^Talk 22:48, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

To add the information here. Tom Brady (film director). Also, his imdb profile: [8] --Sesameball^Talk 22:50, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

1997 MNC College Title was a Split

FYI:

Michigan won the AP Poll

Nebraska won the Coaches/ESPN poll

The article is not factually correct. WAR Nebraska(Unranked):32 Michigan(20): 28 - 2005 Alamo Bowl —Preceding unsigned comment added by Corbykissler (talk • contribs) 03:16, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Current event tag

I added a current event tag to this article since--in the midst of what appears to be a record-setting season--I suspect there will be significantly more changes to this article. If this is an inappropriate use of the tag, I apologize. Samer (talk) 05:00, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

NFL Records?

Has Brady broken any NFL Records? The article shows some franchise records. I think the NFL records should be included too. --MicroX 00:11, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

How about his 94-2 all time record when holding a 4th Quarter or Overtime lead. SOmeone put that up —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.65.243 (talk) 23:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Charitable Efforts?

I have never seen Brady involved in any charitable efforts or anything like that...Is he just not caring or has it ever been mentioned that he has done any charitable efforts. I know some other players do charitable efforts. I am just wondering. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.19.14.33 (talk) 13:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Brady is part of the "One" Campaign and went to Africa during the offseason. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.231.138.65 (talk) 21:01, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Possible Political career

I have a source here that Tom Brady once said his craziest ambition was to become a U.S Senator. Should we add that? (To see, scrool down to his name)America69 (talk) 20:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Possibly worthy of including, but I'd rather have a more direct link to a quote saying he wants to be a Senator. Merry Christmas _{from Sasha} 18:04, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I call adding the record!

That is my edit! AcesOfClubs (talk) 03:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Uh, We usually don't update until NFL.com does. RC-0722 (talk) 04:10, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

But it's OK as long as it's accurate. Thanks! RC-0722 (talk) 04:14, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Unsubstantiated claims

The portion of this article referring to the 2006 season makes an unsubstantiated claim regarding Brady's sexuality. Such rubbish should never have made it into the article, and should be deleted immediately. ---- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.140.228.82 (talk) 12:34, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I deleted the unsupported claim. CoppBob (talk) 15:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

2007 Was Brady's Best Year!!!

It says that 2004 "was also his best year statistically". This simply isn't true. In 2007 he had very aguably the best year in NFL history. How can you argue with 50 touchdowns passing, as well as an insanely good passer rating, interception total, passing yards total, completions, etc. etc. etc. Plus, of course, he led them to 16-0. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.6.179.134 (talk) 22:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm assuming this information will be updated once the season has concluded. Lara❤Love 23:39, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Most likely. RC-0722 (talk) 23:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I think the description of the SuperBowl this year should include that the Giants knocked Tom Brady to the ground 23 times (!). That was a total offensive-line breakdown, and it's clearly not Brady's fault. For him to have taken the lead with 2:43 left in the game while subjected to that onslaught is remarkable, even if his defense then let him down by not shutting down the last Giants drive. No quarterback should have to put up with protection that lousy. I would add this info myself, but the page is locked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.14.154.3 (talk) 20:26, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Personal records

This section doesn't make much sense to me (at least now that he holds some NFL records). I almost went in and deleted "lowest touchdown total" and "lowest interception total" until I figured out what the section was trying to get across. Should someone have the time, it might be better to make separate sections of this entitled "NFL or AFC records" (or whatever is appropriate, i.e., regular season records) and "Other Personal Season Highs". Just a thought... Ψν^Psi_nu 16:15, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Draft

Why isn't the story about Tom Brady's draft in here? After he was drafted, Brady told Kraft that he just won himself a Super Bowl. I think this is a pretty uncanny event that should be in the main page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cuzman3721 (talk • contribs) 03:18, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Find a verifiable source, and it'll get added. (FWIW, my understanding is he actually said something along the lines of "drafting me was the best decision you'll ever make.") Samer (talk) 14:28, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

cheating?

I thought they were caught cheating? To have a good article you must put that on there, as they were caught. Thank you.--Kennedyniles (talk) 01:42, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree. The patriots cheating should be mentioned if we are to have a good article. Thank you for pointing that out, kennedyniles. RC-0722 (talk) 02:00, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

That has nothing to do with this article. See 2007 New England Patriots season or Bill Belichick. That's where the factual information belongs, and that's where it is. Pats1 ^T/C 02:42, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Even the notion of putting a cheating section here is ridiculous. There is nothing linking Brady to the scandal, it has no place here.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 02:44, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

He plays for the Patriots, correct? He played in the Jets game, correct? He defended his coaches, correct? That automatically links him to the cheating scandal. RC-0722 (talk) 17:12, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

The Tom Brady article is linked to the 2007 New England Patriots season article, which contains a section on the videotaping incident. It's not necessary or appropriate to mention the incident in every article that's even remotely related. That's what links are for. Chaz ^Beckett 17:40, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it should be here. Like Pats1 said, it's already covered in two more relevant articles. Although, Tom did defend the coaches, we all would probably do the same thing in his position. Burner0718 (talk) 23:32, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

COME ON!

Is his middle name really "Perfect?" I don't think so. That should probably be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.137.219.194 (talk) 16:05, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

No it isn't and yes I'll remove it. RC-0722 ^communicator/_kills 14:57, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

The Tape

There is a tape of Tom Brady on youtube currently where it shows him being recruited from his high school which was sent to all of the colleges by Brady's college coach. Should you add this fact? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.106.73.244 (talk) 14:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Good link to add

I cannot because i'm just an ip editor - but http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d8022063d is a video on tom brady and the story behind his selection ... it's from the NFL Top 10 Draft Steals series. 71.56.118.64 (talk) 20:42, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

---

How do I lock Peyton Manning's page like you guys did Brady's? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.165.114.171 (talk) 11:21, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

You dont need to lock it as long as YOU STOP removing content from that article. So, please stop. Prashanthns (talk) 11:35, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Beating all 31 NFL teams.

Guys,

With the 52-7 win over the Redskins on 10/28/2007 Brady has beaten all 31 football clubs. I think it's worth mentioning.

Ciao.

Kiran. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiran313 (talk • contribs) 15:32, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

editsemiprotected

{{editsemiprotected}} Tom Brady and the Wolverines won the Rose Bowl against Washington State in 1998, not Arkansas in the Citrus Bowl...  Not done This link shows that the did beat Arkansas. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 00:10, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

2008 Injury

{{editsemiprotected}} Can somebody add details on his right knee injury today in the first game of the Pats' NFL season? thanks. I will add information to this request when it is available.

Suggested text (under the new section "2008 Season"):

2008 Season

In the season opener against Kansas City, Tom Brady's right knee was injured after a direct hit to the fully extended leg. Inside reports say that Tom Brady may make a return as early as week 9. (Boston Chronicle)

In my conlusion of Thomas Brady's injury I have determined the fact that Tom's injury is no more then a stress fracture. My Coleagues and I were said to have a report in by a certain deadline which led us to the acusation that he had torn his anterior cruciate ligament. Tom will be expected to return before week 10 and at least week 6. We will give a news conference discussing the new data discovered at 5:05 p.m. E.T. on Sunday. By: Joyce Davis; Edward Brady; Muhamad Zakeigh —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.63.212.2 (talk) 18:56, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Leftwing (talk) 17:35, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. If it has been reported by a news source then I would say include it. RC-0722 ^361.0/1 18:04, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

This isn't a blog. There is no need to provide injury updates on this article; if Brady returns later in the game (unlikely), or even next week, then the injury really isn't notable. But providing "live updates" like this is generally discouraged on Wikipedia. Pats1 ^T/C 18:28, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

There should be no more than 1-2 sentences on this in the article. Something like "Brady was hurt in this game and is scheduled to get an MRI. That's all. It could possibly be not notable by next week.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 21:52, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

i just heard he tore his ACL and will probably be out for the season —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.109.62.4 (talk) 01:30, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Brady's season over after injuring knee vs. Chiefs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.24.138.10 (talk) 02:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Now that he's out for the season, this is clearly highly, highly notable, not just for Brady but the entire league -- As information becomes available, it's appropriate to expand this section.Johnelwayrules (talk) 02:37, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Initial report has been added, with a few references. No doubt there will be more info in the news soon. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 02:37, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

There has been no official statement yet from the Patriots that Tom Brady will be out the remainder of the season as of 11:00pm Sun, Sept 7 2008. Several news outlets have reported that they have sources which claim that Brady is out. This is fine to include from verifiable and reliable sources, and this is a current event so information is bound to change rapidly, but wording this Wikipedia article as if this is official yet is erroneous. --Amwestover (talk) 03:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Your clarification in the article looks fine to me, thanks. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 03:19, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, now it's official. Crap :-( --Amwestover (talk) 19:25, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Tom Brady Offical Site Incorrect

{{editsemiprotected}} http://www.tb12inside.com is no longer Tom Brady's official website. Tom Brady's official site is: http://www.tombrady.com.

 Done, the old site redirects to the new one anyway - link updated. Thanks ~ mazca ^t|c 17:03, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

mr.hamzlicious is tom bradys biggest fan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.192.23.185 (talk) 17:19, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Brady injury situation picking up steam

Brady's not healing very fast and the infection has required additional surgery. Apparently the Patriots are not happy that Brady used a family-suggested doctor in California instead of a team doctor for the surgery. I'll let the "powers that be" determine whether expanding on it in the article is wiki-worthy. Stylteralmaldo (talk) 16:14, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Here's the article reported by ESPN: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3658987

brady rocks

cum laude from Michigan

Someone should delete that Tom Brady graduated cum laude from Michigan. Nobody graduates cum laude or magna cum laude from Michigan; they do not call it that. One can graduate with honors, high honors, or highest honors, but I kind of doubt that he even did that since it's not GPA-based; one has to write an honors thesis in their major. FYI, I graduated from Michigan in 1999 with high honors, so I know this sort of trivial nonsense.  :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeninphilly (talk • contribs) 02:58, 12 November 2008 (UTC)