Brady/Playoff's

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from leonardo0110. Show leonardo0110's posts

    Re: Brady/Playoff's

    So I guess its Brady's fault for giving up that huge lead all the way back in the '06 Championship, It was Brady's fault that Asante couldn't hold on to that easy INT back in the '07 superbowl. It was Brady's fault that Welker didn't catch that pass in the '11 superbowl, its Brady's fault the pats D got called for a 12 man on the field on the biggest game of the year after causing and recovering a fumble. It was Brady's fault the D also couldn't recover a fumble inside the Giant's 25 yard line when there were more patriots players than giants around the ball..It's Brady's fault the offensive line couldn't stop the giants pass-rush in that '07 superbowl....IT'S ALL HIS FAULT PEOPLE!!!

     

    Granted Brady hasn't played like he did before the 2006 season in the playoffs, but we cannot sit here and blame him for everything. Last time I checked they're a team, they need 11 guys on each side of the ball to do their job so the whole unit can perform to their expected level..We can spend our entire life blaming Brady or the D or the Offesinve and Defensive coordinator but that won't change the outcome of those games...You guys should really move on from this and be happy to be a fan of one of the best run organization in all of football, the most successful franchise of the last decade...the best QB/Coach tandem in the league..Or You can go and cheer for the JETS, RAIDERS, BILLS, BROWNS, CHARGERS, KC, ARIZONA....

     

    Just move on!! what's done is done...You never know if 6 years from now you guys will be wanting all of this back after we start going 8-8 7-9 9-7 and missing the playoffs and not getting to the AFCCS for more than a decade..

    By the way you should hold accountable every one because they win as a team and they lose as a team.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Brady/Playoff's

    In response to RockScully's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dwhite1220's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'd be glad to blame Brady if it were his fault...it would make things much simpler. Here's the problem (this one guy) and here's the solution - replace said guy. It's not Brady and its not one guy.

    This team really does have a handful of guys starting that just aren't very good - it happens. It's hard to fill your roster with 52 really really good players. I think over the course of the last five years we've had more like nine starters that are really good players as opposed to say around 12 that were really good. Brady would be in those numbers on both occasions, it's just that he needs to play outstanding to make up for the difference - against playoff teams that is not always possible.

    [/QUOTE]I didn't mean Brady. I should've titled it Pats/Playoffs.I think BB/Brady are great,future HOF'ers and I'm thankfull they coach/play for the Patroits.But the fact remains they are 6-6 in last 12 playoff games. It's pretty simple,TB has a bad game-we loose . Every one knows that.No one else can bail out the offense.The defense is just awful.No pass rush,linebackers can't cover anyone & our secondry ............!!!


    [/QUOTE]

    Explain how this D is "awful".  It's the youngest D in the league and it looks quite good to me, and for years to come, too. This is where you slip up and expose yourself as a troll. I actually thought you weren't at first, but it's apparent you are.

    if ANY QB in the postseason has a bad game, especially the ones he's had like vs the Jets or the Ravens or in the SB, ANY team will lose.

    It's not like he's not responsible for god awful INTs at the worst possible times. If he's not, who is?  Belichick? BB is somehow responsible for Brady's awful decisions and throws?  Really? Explain that.

    It's a QB league, dumbo.  If Gomer Manning throws 2 or 3 INTs in 2004, and Indy loses, why did they lose?  Because he threw multiple INTS!!! That's why. It's also FAR easier to play QB in this era than it was in 2004.  FACT.

    You can't breathe on a QB, drives get extended, there is never holding called, etc, etc, etc.

    All of a sudden WHY we used to mock Gomer changes in 2012 because it's Brady?  It's so hypocritical.  Our board is littered with absolute frauds as NFL fans.

    The QB is a goalie in hockey or an ace on the mound in baseball. As he goes, so does the team. PERIOD.

    The playoffs have good teams in them. This isn't Sept or Oct where Brady or any QB lays an egg and the D can battle to keep the team in the game. The level of separation

    It's why we won 3 SBs for chrissakes, you morons!   BB and his players were the masters of doing the small things right, waiting for the other team to screw up.  Did any of you even watch those SB winning seasons? I did. And, I know WHY we won.  Brady didn't combust into mindnumbling stupid decisions from his role as QB in those playoff years.  

    Isn't that something!  Me, as a Pats fan, intelligent, not infatuated by stats and fantasy football, easily led by anti-BB rubes, knows exactly why we won those SBs and how we win again.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You ignorant cuss.  The difference in the SB years is Brady didn't HAVE to do it all.

    For the past 5 years he has because the Pats defense is and has been repulsive.

    No one in their right mind would say no 3 & outs, no turn overs, no stopping the gints in their own territory even once,  giving up long bombs to lose the game repeatedly, on the field for 2/3rds the game  is good Defensive play.   Honestly if it were any other team woulde you think that crap was good.  Your delusional as I have seen you call defenses that are MUCH better than the Pat's, not good.  Denver ring a bell?  That defense doesn't give up 4th quarter TD's , period.  But they suck and the Pats are good?

    Do you even know the difference between good/bad or right/wrong?  Nobody can tell.

    Stop making excuses for the debacle of a D and realize how hard it is to win (especially when you don't have support from the D), and have to carry the team, period.

    If you can't see the REAL coorelation between TB and PM is that horseface never had a D and TB hasn't for 5 years, than you are as pathetic as the bottom of the barrel defense.

    No wonder you relate to them, and try to deflect how pathetic they have been. 

    It's the story of your life.

    This is the real world:  31st ranked D is bad..... 1st ranked O is good.  Got it?

    What kind of sick person devotes his whole life to bashing one of if not the best to ever play and makes excuses for some of the worst defenses even known to man?  Cancer!

    Get some Chemo, fast!  You're at least a stage 5.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimmytantric. Show jimmytantric's posts

    Re: Brady/Playoff's

    In response to dwhite1220's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Just a quick reminder Pats/Brady are 6-6 in the last 12 playoff games.If you count the Raven's gimmie last year their 5-7. Not to good!

     

    [/QUOTE]


    And I will state that it is due to not having Difference makers on the D side when facing good teams which will happen come playoffs. Remember BOTH losses in the last 2 SBs - tje Pats HAD the lead and NEEDED one more stop to seal the victory---Brady is under constant pressure to put enough points on the board to make up for our bend and break,(in the big games),defense.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccnsd. Show ccnsd's posts

    Re: Brady/Playoff's

    In response to ccsjl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The playoff game against Denver last year was the only one since the 2007 SB that Brady was the better QB..

    [/QUOTE]

    Brady does not get to play against the Pats defense in the playoffs. While his passing may not have been as good as Flacco's even ESPN's goofy QBR said he had a better game than Flacco last year. Just because Brady ran for a TD he loses credit for the drive in your opinion I guess.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccnsd. Show ccnsd's posts

    Re: Brady/Playoff's

    In response to dwhite1220's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Just a quick reminder Pats/Brady are 6-6 in the last 12 playoff games.If you count the Raven's gimmie last year their 5-7. Not to good!

     

    [/QUOTE]


    How was the Raven's game a gimme? That was fought to the final seconds like almost all Pats Ravens games. The Ravens were 12-4 for goodness sakes. Everyone here is turning into Texas Pat. If the game isn't a blow out victory than how can it be good.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccsjl. Show ccsjl's posts

    Re: Brady/Playoff's

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ccsjl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The playoff game against Denver last year was the only one since the 2007 SB that Brady was the better QB..

    [/QUOTE]

    Brady does not get to play against the Pats defense in the playoffs. While his passing may not have been as good as Flacco's even ESPN's goofy QBR said he had a better game than Flacco last year. Just because Brady ran for a TD he loses credit for the drive in your opinion I guess.

    [/QUOTE]

    Check the stats - the Denver game Brady did not throw more INTs than the other QB, he did again in the AFC Champ game last year and again in the SB

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccnsd. Show ccnsd's posts

    Re: Brady/Playoff's

    In response to ccsjl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ccsjl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The playoff game against Denver last year was the only one since the 2007 SB that Brady was the better QB..

    [/QUOTE]

    Brady does not get to play against the Pats defense in the playoffs. While his passing may not have been as good as Flacco's even ESPN's goofy QBR said he had a better game than Flacco last year. Just because Brady ran for a TD he loses credit for the drive in your opinion I guess.

    [/QUOTE]

    Check the stats - the Denver game Brady did not throw more INTs than the other QB, he did again in the AFC Champ game last year and again in the SB

    [/QUOTE]

    The Pats won against the Ravens 23-20 if I recall. The Pats had one of the worst defenses in the NFL while the Ravens had probably the 2nd or 3rd best. The Ravens only allowed 23 points 4 times that year. The Pats had 5 long drives in that game but struggled in the red zone. People forget the Pats were losing going into the 4th quarter and Gronkowski was hurt. I felt the Pats had a very gutsy win with their best playmaker hurt. It was a great victory.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Brad34. Show Brad34's posts

    Re: Brady/Playoff's

    Oline struggles early in the 2 superbowl losses and some of the other games had something to do with it as well. 

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Section136. Show Section136's posts

    Re: Brady/Playoff's

    In response to RockScully's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dwhite1220's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'd be glad to blame Brady if it were his fault...it would make things much simpler. Here's the problem (this one guy) and here's the solution - replace said guy. It's not Brady and its not one guy.

    This team really does have a handful of guys starting that just aren't very good - it happens. It's hard to fill your roster with 52 really really good players. I think over the course of the last five years we've had more like nine starters that are really good players as opposed to say around 12 that were really good. Brady would be in those numbers on both occasions, it's just that he needs to play outstanding to make up for the difference - against playoff teams that is not always possible.

    [/QUOTE]I didn't mean Brady. I should've titled it Pats/Playoffs.I think BB/Brady are great,future HOF'ers and I'm thankfull they coach/play for the Patroits.But the fact remains they are 6-6 in last 12 playoff games. It's pretty simple,TB has a bad game-we loose . Every one knows that.No one else can bail out the offense.The defense is just awful.No pass rush,linebackers can't cover anyone & our secondry ............!!!


    [/QUOTE]

    Explain how this D is "awful".  It's the youngest D in the league and it looks quite good to me, and for years to come, too. This is where you slip up and expose yourself as a troll. I actually thought you weren't at first, but it's apparent you are.

    if ANY QB in the postseason has a bad game, especially the ones he's had like vs the Jets or the Ravens or in the SB, ANY team will lose.

    It's not like he's not responsible for god awful INTs at the worst possible times. If he's not, who is?  Belichick? BB is somehow responsible for Brady's awful decisions and throws?  Really? Explain that.

    It's a QB league, dumbo.  If Gomer Manning throws 2 or 3 INTs in 2004, and Indy loses, why did they lose?  Because he threw multiple INTS!!! That's why. It's also FAR easier to play QB in this era than it was in 2004.  FACT.

    You can't breathe on a QB, drives get extended, there is never holding called, etc, etc, etc.

    All of a sudden WHY we used to mock Gomer changes in 2012 because it's Brady?  It's so hypocritical.  Our board is littered with absolute frauds as NFL fans.

    The QB is a goalie in hockey or an ace on the mound in baseball. As he goes, so does the team. PERIOD.

    The playoffs have good teams in them. This isn't Sept or Oct where Brady or any QB lays an egg and the D can battle to keep the team in the game. The level of separation

    It's why we won 3 SBs for chrissakes, you morons!   BB and his players were the masters of doing the small things right, waiting for the other team to screw up.  Did any of you even watch those SB winning seasons? I did. And, I know WHY we won.  Brady didn't combust into mindnumbling stupid decisions from his role as QB in those playoff years.  

    Isn't that something!  Me, as a Pats fan, intelligent, not infatuated by stats and fantasy football, easily led by anti-BB rubes, knows exactly why we won those SBs and how we win again.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You have some really good points in most of your posts. Unfortunately, you fill them with such venom and mean spirited statements that I find myself skipping them because I just can't wade through your nastiness to get to your point. I don't always agree with you but you often have made me think about my viewpoint and I thank you for that.

    I am a regular at a local watering hole and we often have spirited and passionate exchanges about a lot of subjects - some even get heated. But they never get to the point where words such as moron, idiot, troll etc. are used. We rarely agree 100%, but we never lose sight that everybody is entitled to their opinion. There is usually a lot of laughter and good natured kidding - it's fun.

    It seems to me that your opinion is very important to you and having a forum to express it is as well. I find it very curious that you don't get that the reactions you get and the fact that you have to regularly re-register under different names hasn't made you examine the manner in which you deliver your message.

    I don't write this to chastise or criticize you, but it is sad that most don't read your comments for their content. They read them looking for things they can "stomp" on you for because that's what you try to do to them.

    In this season we could all take a look at what we contribute to our fellow humans. This is a football forum - it's not feeding the starving, curing cancer or saving 20 six year olds from evil. Lighten up, Francis.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from rtuinila. Show rtuinila's posts

    Re: Brady/Playoff's

    DWhite, NYTimes employee sent here to generate clicks!

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Brady/Playoff's

    I'll give my opinion of this defense and what will happen to it in the playoffs this season. Dennard and Talib will help (or be an upgrade to previous seasons, which is very good). We will need our corners to hold up because the pass rush is not there, doesn't matter if we are blitzing or not...we don't get there consistently. A prime example is an all out blitz against San Fran that left Arrington alone on Crabtree - we didn't get there and the whole time I'm thinking...we sent the house and we didn't get within shouting distance of this rookie QB! Boom! Touchdown! And we just scored 4 touchdowns to tie it up...over, just like that.

    I think we can put a solid game in to stop the run in the playoffs because of Wilfork, Mayo and Spikes. I think if we start to get thrown on that will change. I wish Hightower wasn't a rookie and was a better player right now, because it would add a dimension to the defense that we need (a guy that can get after the QB and stop the run). I hope Chandler Jone's health improves by leaps and bounds come playoff time, because we need him to play like he was before the ankle injury. I like Chad Scott and Francis giving us a little something on the outside as pass rushers, but up the middle from our big guys we are weak in the pass rush. The middle of the field is also a weakness in coverage...weather it's Chung or Gregory...a good QB is going to eat them alive.

    If Wilfork plays like the monster we saw in the Houston game and the Jet's game on Thnksgiving, none of the above matters...we will win everything. Period. When he plays like that everything changes...everything. A guy that weighs 340 pounds moving through a line like a hot knife through butter changes everything. The problem is a guy that weighs 340 pounds can't always play like that...if he eats too many burritos or trays of lasagna the day of or before the game he won't be able to move like that. And we're not good enough on that side of the ball to have him play anything less than Watt like. Wilfork out shined Watt that last game, he needs to play like that all the time if we are going to win another Super Bowl with THIS team. Next year if they sign or draft a defensive tackle that can pass rush, Vince won't have to.   

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccsjl. Show ccsjl's posts

    Re: Brady/Playoff's

    Another thing that Brady has not done for awhile until the last few games is run with the ball. If you watch last years SB, on the very play he threw the INT looking for Gronkowski, there was at least 20 yards of open field in front of Brady. He could have easily run for the first and more....

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Brady/Playoff's

    In response to ccsjl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Another thing that Brady has not done for awhile until the last few games is run with the ball. If you watch last years SB, on the very play he threw the INT looking for Gronkowski, there was at least 20 yards of open field in front of Brady. He could have easily run for the first and more....

    [/QUOTE]


    If you watch that play again you'll notice that Brady already ran for his life on that play scrambling away from preasure - that play could of and should of been a sack. I honestly wonder how much more running he could of done on that play and just how fast that defense could of closed in on him if he did run. The interception turned out to be what equates to a punt anyway. If we had won that game Brady wins the MVP...there was nobody close on either side of the ball or either team.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Muzwell. Show Muzwell's posts

    Re: Brady/Playoff's

    Peyton Manning is 9-10 lifetime in the postseason.

    Matt Schaub has never started a playoff game.  

    What does any of that mean this year? Nothing.

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from patsbandwagonsince76. Show patsbandwagonsince76's posts

    Re: Brady/Playoff's


    Getting into the mindset that is hard to win in the playoffs and that the any given Sunday (or Saturday) rule definitely applies makes following the Patriots or any team much more enjoyable.

     

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hetchinspete. Show Hetchinspete's posts

    Re: Brady/Playoff's

    [/QUOTE]

    It's been that way since 2007 for two reasons:

    1. He didn't have to with Moss and Welker on the scene.

    2. After blowing out his leg in 2008, he's been very skittish in the pocket in general, replete with those phantom dodging moves when no one is near him. 

    He needs to run more. No question. It was great to see him do it vs Houston.  Ds never even think he will, so it's actually a GREAT weapon for him on broken plays just like it would be for any QB, except he has more of an advantage since he never does it.

    [/QUOTE]

    Rocky, 
    the one thing Brady doesn't need to do is run more. He would be leaving himself open to more cheap shots from blood thirsty linebackers and defensive. The last thing the Pats need is to lose TB to a freak injury. He'll run ocassionally when he has to but only ocassionally. RGIII brady is not. 

    As for being skittish in the pocket, Brady moves around well enough in the pocket to avoid getting sacked. He was skittish at first when coming back from injury. I won't argue that point, but he stands in the pocket and as well as anyone in the NFL these days.

    Hetch 

     

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Brady/Playoff's

    In response to RockScully's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ccsjl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Another thing that Brady has not done for awhile until the last few games is run with the ball. If you watch last years SB, on the very play he threw the INT looking for Gronkowski, there was at least 20 yards of open field in front of Brady. He could have easily run for the first and more....

    [/QUOTE]


    If you watch that play again you'll notice that Brady already ran for his life on that play scrambling away from preasure - that play could of and should of been a sack. I honestly wonder how much more running he could of done on that play and just how fast that defense could of closed in on him if he did run. The interception turned out to be what equates to a punt anyway. If we had won that game Brady wins the MVP...there was nobody close on either side of the ball or either team.

    [/QUOTE]


    Dear Mr. Ignorant,

     

    The interception came on FIRST DOWN. FIRST DOWN.

    The INT did this:

    1. Shifted momentum after the D holding to two FGs had shifted back in favor of NE.

    2. It didn't kill more clock, clock that would have affected how the Giants ran their last drive.

    3. They were almost in FG range, which would have been a possible 3 points at least, which combined with the clock (a possible 2 minutes of clock incuding lining up for a FG), may have been enough to win the game.

    Your ignorance is so amazing, it needs to be studied and then a whole new drug could be developed fom it.  You'd be the first and maybe the ONLY person they'd need for the trial itself.

    I love how you and Washers just cast off the THREE KILLER plays in the SB that all effectively had a direct part in the loss in some fashion, most notably all of them tied to the aspect of the clock.

    Safety, INT or the high throw to the wrong shoulder down the seam to a wide open Welker, all represent bad plays but also plays that stopped the clock.

    Please seek help and get back to baking that poundcake. 

    Thanks,

    Real Pats Fans

    [/QUOTE]


    No not a good play, but it should of been a sack and quite possibly a fumble. Bad play. It happens against good defenses...if you'll notice (which I'm sure you won't) that Manning never had to be put in that situation against our defense. He was able to sit back there comfy and survey the entire field. Same could be said for Flacco - for god's sake Flacco was made to look like a real QB!

    I hope this defense this year is better than that, I really do and I think it is (minus the San Fran game). It just makes me laugh that you are so agenda driven that you don't notice things about the defense...it's gone on for years and it's really pointless now. I mean even Parcells told Belichick that he needed to fix his defense (not that he needed to be told) and he went out and spent almost his entire draft on that side of the ball. Guess what? It's not fixed yet either, but hopefully it's close enough.

    You really need to start being honest, you really do because you can't be this stupid...you just can't. I would love to watch a game with you someday because I really would be interested in seeing what you do during it. I'd look right at you when the safeties are 20 yards away from helping anyone and ask...what the hell is that, good defense? Or when our hall of fame linebacker gets blocked by some third string tight end to let a runner boot for 15 yards on the outside...or when we blitz and the QB has time to eat a snack. Seriously what do you think when that happens? Just part of a young and ascending defense's learning curve? And then when Brady goes 7 for 7 on a long drive to a score, what do you do then? What do you chaulk that up as? I'd love to hear your responses.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccnsd. Show ccnsd's posts

    Re: Brady/Playoff's

    In response to RockScully's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RockScully's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ccsjl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Another thing that Brady has not done for awhile until the last few games is run with the ball. If you watch last years SB, on the very play he threw the INT looking for Gronkowski, there was at least 20 yards of open field in front of Brady. He could have easily run for the first and more....

    [/QUOTE]


    If you watch that play again you'll notice that Brady already ran for his life on that play scrambling away from preasure - that play could of and should of been a sack. I honestly wonder how much more running he could of done on that play and just how fast that defense could of closed in on him if he did run. The interception turned out to be what equates to a punt anyway. If we had won that game Brady wins the MVP...there was nobody close on either side of the ball or either team.

    [/QUOTE]


    Dear Mr. Ignorant,

     

    The interception came on FIRST DOWN. FIRST DOWN.

    The INT did this:

    1. Shifted momentum after the D holding to two FGs had shifted back in favor of NE.

    2. It didn't kill more clock, clock that would have affected how the Giants ran their last drive.

    3. They were almost in FG range, which would have been a possible 3 points at least, which combined with the clock (a possible 2 minutes of clock incuding lining up for a FG), may have been enough to win the game.

    Your ignorance is so amazing, it needs to be studied and then a whole new drug could be developed fom it.  You'd be the first and maybe the ONLY person they'd need for the trial itself.

    I love how you and Washers just cast off the THREE KILLER plays in the SB that all effectively had a direct part in the loss in some fashion, most notably all of them tied to the aspect of the clock.

    Safety, INT or the high throw to the wrong shoulder down the seam to a wide open Welker, all represent bad plays but also plays that stopped the clock.

    Please seek help and get back to baking that poundcake. 

    Thanks,

    Real Pats Fans

    [/QUOTE]


    No not a good play, but it should of been a sack and quite possibly a fumble. Bad play. It happens against good defenses...if you'll notice (which I'm sure you won't) that Manning never had to be put in that situation against our defense. He was able to sit back there comfy and survey the entire field. Same could be said for Flacco - for god's sake Flacco was made to look like a real QB!

    I hope this defense this year is better than that, I really do and I think it is (minus the San Fran game). It just makes me laugh that you are so agenda driven that you don't notice things about the defense...it's gone on for years and it's really pointless now. I mean even Parcells told Belichick that he needed to fix his defense (not that he needed to be told) and he went out and spent almost his entire draft on that side of the ball. Guess what? It's not fixed yet either, but hopefully it's close enough.

    You really need to start being honest, you really do because you can't be this stupid...you just can't. I would love to watch a game with you someday because I really would be interested in seeing what you do during it. I'd look right at you when the safeties are 20 yards away from helping anyone and ask...what the hell is that, good defense? Or when our hall of fame linebacker gets blocked by some third string tight end to let a runner boot for 15 yards on the outside...or when we blitz and the QB has time to eat a snack. Seriously what do you think when that happens? Just part of a young and ascending defense's learning curve? And then when Brady goes 7 for 7 on a long drive to a score, what do you do then? What do you chaulk that up as? I'd love to hear your responses.

    [/QUOTE]

    It's sad that you saw/have seen BB employ a "bend/don't break" D which is largely strategic in nature, and you see that as "we make Flacco look good".

    We saw JT O'Sullivan look great in 2008 with Seymour, Vrabel and Bruschi here. We saw Schaub light that 2005 D up in Atlanta.

    You don't get it. BB doesn't show all the tricks in Sept, Oct or even Nov or Dec.  Part of this is what the media doesn't get either.  Blowing your wad in Sept and Oct like what a Pete Carroll or a Rex Ryan do so they can satisfy an ego and toot their own horn, only hurts defenses like that later iin the year.  A 4-3 pin your ears back D usually runs out of gas. Versatility and options is what BB wants. He'll never want a one dimensional D even if it was some locked down tight stellar D. He wants them to do different things and it's clear the turnovers are a HUGE, huge part of what he wants, especially after this D leads the NFL the last 3 years (total) in turnovers created. Not a coincidence.

    He's the best defensive coordinator/coach ever in terms of baiting a trap and then watching the trap work. I am thrilled Joe Flacco could barely put up 17 points in the AFC title game. It would have been less if not for 2 Brady INTs.  lol Personally, I loved it when Spikes dropped into that zone baiting Flacco underneath like that last year. The false sense of security in and out of man/zone coverages worked perfectly.  Just think, if Brady doesn't immediately try to be a hero on a 45 yard bomb and throw a god awful INT, we probably put that game away with a nice TD drive or even just a FG. 

    I go by what this team does in the playoffs.  Period. I don't panic like a little girl in Sept, Oct or Nov, because I know what BB is trying to do for the end result.

    As for your comment about Brady "going 7/7" on a drive sort of proves my point. You're more infautated with his personal stats and you seriously think he's beyond reproach in a game, over 4 qrs if he only looks great on 1 or 2 drives or makes some pretty passes.

    You just don't get the game and prove it over and over.  This isn't about fantasy football.

    [/QUOTE]


    So you weren't panicking after the Arizona game when you wanted Brady traded.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccnsd. Show ccnsd's posts

    Re: Brady/Playoff's

    I don't think anyone panics more on these boards than you except for Texas Pat. Brady had a bad game today so  like the true fairweather fan you are everywhere here gloating. Root for the Jets somewhere else.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share