The Instigator
ASB
Pro (for)
Losing
21 Points
The Contender
Loserboi
Con (against)
Winning
36 Points

Tom Brady has never won a Super Bowl only off of his arm and needs a kicker to win for him.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 10 votes the winner is...
Loserboi
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/4/2011 Category: Sports
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,565 times Debate No: 14252
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (10)
Votes (10)

 

ASB

Pro

Super Bowls 36,38, and 39 were all won off of Vinateri's foot. In the Super Bowl against the Giants, Brady was given a chance to come back and win. Little did he know that he was so dependent on having a kicker win the game for him and that he cannot win any other way.
Loserboi

Con

Tom Brady has scored 1 or more touchdowns in all of the Superbowls he went to. Vinateiri connected with three critical field goals, but it was only because Tom Brady drove them down the field each time so that Vinateiri had a good shot at it.

In Tom Brady's 2nd Superbowl, Tom Brady threw for 354 yards and 3 touchdowns in a 32-28 win. Tom Brady's arm scored more than half of the points in that superbowl victory. They only needed a Field goal to win, so the play calling on the coaching side just called plays that would kill the clock and drive down the field to Vinateiri's range. If they needed a touchdown than the play calling would have been done differently. Win by 1 or win by 100 what is the difference? Vinateiri did not drive down that field and set himself up Tom Brady did that.

The 3rd Superbowl Tom Brady scored more than half the team's points again in a 24-21 win with 2 critical touchdowns. This Superbowl did not end with a game winning field goal like the last 2 Superbowls. Tom Brady threw a critical touchdown late in the game after the Eagles came back in the 3rd quarter. What ended this game was Mcnabb's failure to drive down the field to set up his very own Field Goal attempt.

I don't understand how my opponent can make this claim, when two out of three of Tom Brady's superbowl victories, Tom Brady's arm scored more than half of the team's total points. Last time I checked Vinateiri only made 1 FG in every game, Tom Brady had to score Touchdowns.

As for the argument against Brady for Super Bowl 42...
Tom Brady left Eli Manning with 2 and somewhat minutes to drive down the field for a touchdown... as we all know Eli Manning did do that, leaving Tom Brady with 39 seconds to score a FG or Touchdown. I am sorry PRO, but asking any Quarterback to drive 50+ yards in 39 seconds is nearly impossible, considering the fact that in 2007 the NY giants had the number 1 ranked defense in the NFL, and with the Giants constantly running a Prevent defense for the last 39 seconds, Tom Brady had no chance.

No Quarterback is dependent on a kicker to win games for them, kickers are dependent on the QB to make sure they are not kicking way past their means, for example a 50+ yarder. In the game against the Eagles, Vinateiri had to kick a 37 yard FG, which is not difficult, or very far for any professional kicker. Tom Brady was the one who drove the patriots all the way down to the 20 to set up Vinateiri.
Debate Round No. 1
ASB

Pro

This person who argues with me has not proved my statement false. He also claims that the score to a certain super bowl game was 28-32, when in fact the score was 32-29.

All three Super Bowls including the one Tom Brady lost was by a margin of three points.

I am not disputing whether Tom Brady can score touchdowns. My question is can Tom Brady win a Super Bowl without without having to rely on a field goal kicker to bail him out.

The Super Bowl in which Tom Brady lost. The Giants were not even close to being the top defensive team in the NFL. Their team was around 17th place in every category. So a team as good as the Patriots losing 14-17 to an average Giants team is unacceptable.

Win by 1 or 100 that's a good one except Brady only won by three every time.
Loserboi

Con

His arm sets up the FG
His arm scores half of the touchdowns
His arm made him the MVP twice

His arm essentially was the biggest reason why they won all those superbowls.

The Giants were not the number 1 defense that was my bad, I remember 3 years ago i made bets using that evidence but,
The Giants still had a top 10 defense, in 2007 they were ranked 7th overall http://www.nfl.com...
Still with only 38 seconds, it is asking too much from any quarterback, or any team for that fact to drive down the field for 50 yards on a prevent defense.

The Superbowl against Philadelphia was not won because the kicker "Bailed" him out. The kicker scored last but the patriots were already up by 10 points by that time. Tom Brady scored the touchdown and vinateiri followed with a Field Goal leaving 4minutes for McNabb to attempt score two times.

What you are saying is that just because the Patriots won by three points it wasn't due mainly to Tom Brady's arm.
If McNabb failed to score that touchdown with 4minutes left and just settled for a field goal would that have meant that Tom Brady's arm was the sole reason just because they won by 7?

Tom Brady needed a kicker to win, but the main reason they won in the first place was because of Tom Brady's arm.
Debate Round No. 2
ASB

Pro

Do you see that is the reason why this is a debate that you cannot win because Tom Brady has yet to win by a convincing enough margin.

In a Super Bowl where he should have creamed the opposition he loses to a defense that was ranked 17th in points allowed with 21.9 ppg.

If you look at my topic statement it reads Tom Brady has never won a Super Bowl off of only his arm.

This is true. He has never carried a team with his arm in scoring through his defense. He has had plenty of chances to do so through his Super Bowl appearances but he hasn't.

You said what if McNabb didn't... well he did score that touchdown. You make it seem as if they are not a part of the game.

I'm not trying to take anything away from Tom Brady, but all of the Super Bowl history, only six games have been decided by field goal kicks and or missed opportunities to kick field goal kicks, or missed field goal kicks. Four games have involved Tom Brady.

Is this odd to you that Tom Brady scoring ability does not come through in the Super Bowl. These performances are not normal.

So the next time you say 1 or 100 points you think about all of those other teams that did not have to worry about a kicker coming through for the team.
Loserboi

Con

Look your argument like you have said in the previous rounds is that Tom Brady needs a kicker to "bail" him out.

Bail out means that he needed to rely on the kicker to essentially win the game for him like his first superbowl, where the final play essentially did fall on vinateiri making that FG.

The scores for 2 of the 4 of Tom Brady's superbowl went past 21points for both teams which is essentially a high score for any superbowl.

The superbowl against the Eagles, Tom Brady did not need Vinateiri to "bail" him out, he needed Donavan Mcnabb to fail in scoring on two consecutive drives. Vinateiri's FG was not the final play, and the entire game did not rest on him making that FG, Tom Brady did not fail to score at a critical moment, Donavan Mcnabb did.

My argument is just that because they only won by 3points in his 3rd superbowl appearance does not mean the kicker won it for him, if McNabb scored a FG, instead of a touchdown, then Tom Brady gets all the credit? One FG kick in the middle of the 4th quarter does not mean that Vinateiri bailed out Tom Brady. A FG during the final play like the 1st superbowl does.
Debate Round No. 3
ASB

Pro

My debater includes a bunch of what ifs in his arguments and doesn't realize that every point of a game counts.

A person who says that whether a team wins by 1 or 100 does not realize that every single point in a game matters.
The only Super Bowl he lost was the one where nobody was there to kick a field goal for him in any part of the game.

In every single Super Bowl Tom Brady has won whether the field goal was made in the first period or last seconds has had his games rely on that one field goal.
Loserboi

Con

It does not mean that game rested solely on Vinateiri making that FG, They won those superbowls because of Tom Brady's arm and multiple touchdowns. The kicker did not win the game for him. Winning by 3 points does not mean that Tom Brady couldn't win on his own. Having the kicker make one 37 yard FG in a game, and not kicking the ball ever again for the last 4 minutes, does not mean he bailed Tom Brady out. The Philadelphia game rested solely on McNabb failing to score, and not Vinateiris one FG with 4minutes left on the clock.
Debate Round No. 4
ASB

Pro

They won those super bowls because of Tom Brady's arm and multiple touchdowns. The kicker did not win the game for him.

Tom Brady needed a kicker to win, but the main reason they won in the first place was because of Tom Brady's arm.

Do you recognize these words this is you these are your words.
These are contradictions, my main argument was that Tom Brady has NEVER won a super bowl off of his arm alone.

There are quarterbacks that have won without their kickers.

I also never said the kicker was the sole reason why Brady won. I said that Brady needed a kicker to win.
Loserboi

Con

Let's just start voting
Debate Round No. 5
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by callmeking 6 years ago
callmeking
how many qbs can u honestly say hav won super bowls purely on their arms?? if that was the case dan marino would hav won plenty of super bowls! fact of the matter is, if it wasnt for brady vinateri wouldnt hav even been in a super bowl to kick
Posted by ASB 6 years ago
ASB
Hey BLACK VOID, why dont you go look at the scores of each Super Bowl and tell me if "BLOWING TEAMS OUT IS AN ABNORMAL TASK!!!"

If you look at the Super Bowl scores, mostly all of the games were not even close. An extra point is one point.
Even if a feild goal kickers missed all of the Extra Points the games would still be blow outs.
Posted by BlackVoid 6 years ago
BlackVoid
"BLOWING TEAMS OUT IN THE SUPERBOWL IS NOT AN ABNORMAL TASK."

You have got to be kidding me.

I understand that your argument is that Brady has never won a super bowl by himself. I'm not saying thats not true, but the meaning behind the words is wrong. You are essentially trying to discredit Brady for winning three super bowls that he had a major part in winning, which I feel is ridiculous. Furthermore, winning a super bowl only off your arm has never happened in the history of the NFL, not just the super bowl. Kickers are needed to kick extra points, so no QB can ever be expected to score 100% of his team's points.
Posted by Blank 6 years ago
Blank
It sounds more like Tom Brady NEEDED Vinateiri to win the superbowl, but that cannot be proven. If Vinateiri did not hit those FGs than Tom Brady would have had Overtime to win the game. The only proof you have is Tom Brady could not score on a Giant's defense with only 39seconds left on the clock. ASB did you watch the Eagles vs Patriots Superbowl? the deciding factor was not Vinateiri's FG that happened way before the game ended, the deciding factor was the Patriots defense stopping Mcnabb. Winning by 3 points is just a coincidence, it's not a failure on Tom Brady's part its just a turn of events and a failure on the defense's part. They were up 10 points when Vinateiri hit that FG, his FG in that game did not essentially "bail" out tom brady.
Posted by ASB 6 years ago
ASB
Black void... you fail to realize that all four games brady played in, were won by margins of three...
the three points in all four games were made off of field goals...

6 count that 6 games out of 40+ games had a margin of 3 POINTS...

ONE OUT OF THE SIX WAS LOST OVER A MISSED FIELD GOAL KICK.

4 of those games were owned by BRADY winning or losing.

My STATEMENT WAS BRADY CANNOT WIN WITHOUT THE CONTRIBUTION OF A KICKER

BLOWING TEAMS OUT IN THE SUPERBOWL IS NOT AN ABNORMAL TASK.
Posted by BlackVoid 6 years ago
BlackVoid
You are asking Brady to beat a super bowl team by so many points that kickers are out of the question. Do you know how hard it is to even get to the super bowl?
Posted by ASB 6 years ago
ASB
This is pretty much what ive been arguing this whole time.
Posted by ASB 6 years ago
ASB
You know it is very funny how people think that kickers are automatic.
People get reminded that field goals are not made all of the time... whenever a kicker misses one.

So what if Viniteri did miss a field goal????
hmm, scary thought that one.

A SUPER BOWL HAS BEEN LOST BY A MISSED FIELD GOAL KICK.

My opponent kept on saying what if McNabb's kicker scored a field goal of his own.
He didn't. IF Viniteri missed the field goal to put his team up by 10.

McNabb wouldve tied up the game on his touchdown.

So why are people saying that Viniteri did not help Brady win.

By voting against me your saying that the kicker did not help Brady by kicking that field goal...

Nobody is even reading my topic statement.

PLENTY of quarterbacks have won without DEPENDING on THREE points by a kicker.
Posted by BlackVoid 6 years ago
BlackVoid
What he said.
Posted by sllewuy 6 years ago
sllewuy
so if a kicker makes a FG in the first quarter and the quarterback scores 7 passing touchdowns but the opposing team's quarterback manages to also score 7 touchdowns was the game bailed out by the kicker too?
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Macho 6 years ago
Macho
ASBLoserboiTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:43 
Vote Placed by SuperRobotWars 6 years ago
SuperRobotWars
ASBLoserboiTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:32 
Vote Placed by scorr7 6 years ago
scorr7
ASBLoserboiTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:16 
Vote Placed by sllewuy 6 years ago
sllewuy
ASBLoserboiTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by sahara1121 6 years ago
sahara1121
ASBLoserboiTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Deistdude90 6 years ago
Deistdude90
ASBLoserboiTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by BlackVoid 6 years ago
BlackVoid
ASBLoserboiTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by cherokee15 6 years ago
cherokee15
ASBLoserboiTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by II_SoMG_II 6 years ago
II_SoMG_II
ASBLoserboiTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Floid 6 years ago
Floid
ASBLoserboiTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07