Exception right here. Even if you take away his football success and the laundry, he's the best looking guy for my money.But all of the women in my life think that he's not.
Exception right here. Even if you take away his football success and the laundry, he's the best looking guy for my money.But all of the women in my life think that he's not.
Is it like...I admire a super ripped dude, whereas my preference in women is a tad more 'normal'?I’ve thought a little about this. I think guys tend to think guys who are very pretty/symmetrical are handsome. Like I think Matt Bomer, Jimmy, whatever. But women seem to prefer men with slightly more rugged or distinctive faces. Obviously, not across the board. But just more often than not from what I’ve seen.
I’m not disagreeing with this point per se but I think I’d want to see another season of him playing at this level before I’d say the bolded. Which isn’t to say he isn’t in decline but as you say in another post there are a lot of things that have gone into his numbers this year – not least of which have been Sub Gronk and JE11 being a tick off for most of the year.Yes, but numbers are up. As noted in another thread it’s ok to recognize he didn’t have his best year. Doesn’t mean he’s off the cliff but beyond the numbers it’s easy to see he’s in decline. Which is perfectly expected and fine, he’s still a great qb.
Wait, what!? I have literally never heard one woman say he wasn’t physically attractive, though a few haters buy into the bad husband left his pregnant wife fake news.So...this seems to be a thing...
All of the guys in my life (and myself) think that he's handsome.
But all of the women in my life think that he's not.
Is Tom Brady a man's man?
Wasn’t his wife yoloWait, what!? I have literally never heard one woman say he wasn’t physically attractive, though a few haters buy into the bad husband left his pregnant wife fake news.
Not one? Ive found its actually quite common. In general my experience is consensus among straight women about who is attractive is far far far less common than it is among straight men.Wait, what!? I have literally never heard one woman say he wasn’t physically attractive, though a few haters buy into the bad husband left his pregnant wife fake news.
That’s what I’m saying.Not one? Ive found its actually quite common. In general my experience is consensus among straight women about who is attractive is far far far less common than it is among straight men.
I think each of us is going to suffer from small sample size issues. Personally, I've definitely heard girls say Jimmy is more attractive, but I can't recall a single girl ever saying Tom Brady wasn't very attractive. Maybe a couple Pats haters.Wait, what!? I have literally never heard one woman say he wasn’t physically attractive, though a few haters buy into the bad husband left his pregnant wife fake news.
For my money there isn’t a better looking dude on the planet than Matt Bomer.I’ve thought a little about this. I think guys tend to think guys who are very pretty/symmetrical are handsome. Like I think Matt Bomer, Jimmy, whatever. But women seem to prefer men with slightly more rugged or distinctive faces. Obviously, not across the board. But just more often than not from what I’ve seen.
I’d have to agree with that.For my money there isn’t a better looking dude on the planet than Matt Bomer.
I agree with that. And most of his TV characters are really cool (Bryce Larkin and Neal Caffrey).For my money there isn’t a better looking dude on the planet than Matt Bomer.
Idris Elba in a landslide. Bomer's definitely a good-looking man, though.For my money there isn’t a better looking dude on the planet than Matt Bomer.
Thanks for making me question my post five minutes after making it.Idris Elba in a landslide. Bomer's definitely a good-looking man, though.
FWIW, I hear the deadbeat dad angle a lot, mostly from non-sports fans.Wait, what!? I have literally never heard one woman say he wasn’t physically attractive, though a few haters buy into the bad husband left his pregnant wife fake news.
So they don’t know what “deadbeat” means?FWIW, I hear the deadbeat dad angle a lot, mostly from non-sports fans.
I wonder if they know what "pull the goalie" means.So they don’t know what “deadbeat” means?
I laughed.I wonder if they know what "pull the goalie" means.
I used this term with one woman who hates him because of that (and because she’s a stupid Jets fan...from Maine), and did not receive a positive reaction!I wonder if they know what "pull the goalie" means.
Handsomeness is at 100.In their final grades, PFF graded TB12 out as the #5 QB and passer in the league this year. His 90.7 overall grade would have been better than every QB except himself last season.
I couldn’t find their handsomeness and fathering scores.
This makes sense. Brady has regressed since last season, and the perceived extent of his regression is exacerbated by the better quality of his fellow QBs.In their final grades, PFF graded TB12 out as the #5 QB and passer in the league this year. His 90.7 overall grade would have been better than every QB except himself last season.
I couldn’t find their handsomeness and fathering scores.
There could be something to that. He has always been more of a possession QB than some others, excepting the stupid 2007 year. And we have embraced the run this year (I realize that's a chicken vs. egg thing).I wonder if the new rules favor QBs with different strengths and weapons than Brady. Like is there any evidence that they favor guys who throw deep more often, and if so would that mean that the other QBs are better or just look better because the NFL wants more points.
I wonder if it is the rules vs the Pats' receving corps, though I've never thought Brady's greatness was a function of his ability to throw bombs.I wonder if the new rules favor QBs with different strengths and weapons than Brady. Like is there any evidence that they favor guys who throw deep more often, and if so would that mean that the other QBs are better or just look better because the NFL wants more points.
No no.Handsomeness is at 100.
The 100 is on a scale of 1 to 10.No no.
On a scale of one to ten, he’s...a twelve.
Actually, of the 4 QBs rated above him, only Mahomes threw significantly more deep balls (balls thrown at least 20 yards downfield) or had significantly more success than TB. (Mahomes had 92attempts of 20+ for 1514 yards.)I wonder if the new rules favor QBs with different strengths and weapons than Brady. Like is there any evidence that they favor guys who throw deep more often, and if so would that mean that the other QBs are better or just look better because the NFL wants more points.
Let’s see how Jimmy G ages. Like some have said, Tom is better looking now than when he came out of college. Another case, Al Pacino didn’t hold onto his Godfather days looks for long.He’s no Jimmy G....
If there's broken glass around it's a good bet Jimmy will tear his Achilles on it. Dude could play only 6 quarters as a starter for the Pats before getting hurt, and got hurt this year because he stayed in bounds instead of sensibly going out. He lacks the field sense to avoid injury and long-term I think the 49ers are going to regret that contract for him, not because he sucks but because he's brittle.My fiancée doesn’t find TB attractive at all. She’d probably crawl through broken glass if Jimmy G was at the other end of it.
Does this mean that the Patriots get $5M in extra cap space rolled into next season? That would be quite valuable.Brady didn't hit his incentives this year, costing him $5 million.
https://www.fanduel.com/theduel/posts/6260370-tom-brady-earned-none-of-his-5-million-worth-of-incentives-in-2018
Does this mean that the Patriots get $5M in extra cap space rolled into next season? That would be quite valuable.
Most of gronk's were "not likely to be earned" so i believe they were not counted against the 2018 cap. Whatever he had hit, would have applied to the 2019 cap.Wouldn't this apply to Gronk too?
I am sorry but we were looking for "Flexible". We also would have accepted "Pliable". ~ Alex G.Meanwhile, Brady is unbreakable – he takes a licking and keeps on ticking. It’s Tom Vs. Timex – and I think it’s the in the running for the single most overlooked aspect of his greatness.
You're right - the Pats (purposely) set all the incentives slightly higher than his 2017 numbers so that they would qualify as NLTBE.Most of gronk's were "not likely to be earned" so i believe they were not counted against the 2018 cap. Whatever he had hit, would have applied to the 2019 cap.
I had incorrectly thought Brady's feel in the same category
Jinx much?I have been saying this about Brady vis a vis Jimmy for over two years. I think the ACL injury in 2008 has somehow obscured the fact that in a league where quarterbacks are routinely left for dead on the football field, Brady has had one—ONE—significant injury in 18 years. Rodgers has one every 6 games or so. Jimmy, every 6 quarters. Even “tough” or “big” quarterbacks like Big Ben and Cam are routinely dinged up, miss games and are subject to long stretches of underperformance. Meanwhile, Brady is unbreakable – he takes a licking and keeps on ticking. It’s Tom Vs. Timex – and I think it’s the in the running for the single most overlooked aspect of his greatness.
What does that have to do with how handsome he is?If there's broken glass around it's a good bet Jimmy will tear his Achilles on it. Dude could play only 6 quarters as a starter for the Pats before getting hurt, and got hurt this year because he stayed in bounds instead of sensibly going out. He lacks the field sense to avoid injury and long-term I think the 49ers are going to regret that contract for him, not because he sucks but because he's brittle.
That's actually a really interesting article. Makes me think about things a little differently.No but this guy is running the reverse jinx if I ever seen one:
No but this guy is running the reverse jinx if I ever seen one:
It was an interesting article, and I do like the use of some different stats, but some of that is still lacking context. But the title (Is Brady a liability now) at least hints at a slight bias no how much the author says it is all facts.That's actually a really interesting article. Makes me think about things a little differently.