Tom Brady

[Calzone Lord]

He has yet to win a single Super Bowl with a team where his offense was higher rated than his defense.

In a 52-man game, where virtually about 40 of those 52 men count for A LOT every single game ... I've never understood the importance of a championship as it relates to one man.

However, if championships are going to be your top criteria for rating an individual player, Does Brady get credit for winning Super Bowls with 3 different teams whose strong suit was on the defensive side of the ball (Brady never played a single snap of defense in 2001, 2003, or 2004) ?

Since this team has transitioned to an offensive team ... he hasn't "won a ring" as the saying goes.

Don't get me wrong ... I think he is a great player, But, if you're such a great QB, AND you have the NFL's #2 most stingy defense like he did in 2003, or #1 most stingy defense like he did in 2004 ... do you really have to be that great to win a championship when you don't play defense?

For instance, when Ray Lewis won his single Super Bowl, he did it with a defense that was the NFL's most stingy, but his offense was merely 14th in points scored.

Ultimately, if "rings" are supposed to be a individual measure and not a team measure ... does Ray Lewis and his one ring with a 14th ranked offense in terms of points and 16th ranked in terms of yards ... trump Brady's 3 "rings" which all came with elite defenses led by long retired stalwarts.