Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?

  1. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?

    Delete this post. Ban this idiot. 

    Thanks. 
     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from myaim45. Show myaim45's posts

    Re: Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?

    Just another troll that will go away when the Giants start losing.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from palookaski. Show palookaski's posts

    Re: Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?

    In Response to Re: Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?:
    [QUOTE]Delete this post. Ban this idiot.  Thanks. 
    Posted by murghkhor[/QUOTE]

    He will be gone soon, don't need this crap any more. What amazes me is why anyone with a clear mind would want to answer this deranged fool. Only people who are insecure themselves and NEED TO BE NOTICED! He's gone, bet on it!

    Life is worth living! Cardinal Fulton J Sheen.


     
  6. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?

    IIRC, the gift of 2006 were several blowns call by the officials, who appologized for it by sending NE DB Ellis Hobbs a letter of apology. Seems we're still waiting on Peyton to actually "win" something.
     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?

    I think this guy is obsessed with the Pats and with Brady (no shame in it - most fans of other teams are, they win). 
    And WOW pal, missing Gomer Pyle last year must have really hurt for you to do so much research or skew stats to make Brady look bad.
    I got a couple stats for you:
    3 rings
    1 ring, self explanitory
    Touchdown record, best completion %, most attempts w/ out an INT.  Suck on that for a while D B.
     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?

    In Response to Re: Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?:
    [QUOTE]IIRC, the gift of 2006 were several blowns call by the officials, who appologized for it by sending NE DB Ellis Hobbs a letter of apology. Seems we're still waiting on Peyton to actually "win" something.
    Posted by xxxcrwn[/QUOTE]

    And I am still waiting to see a copy of that letter.  Surely, someone besides Hobbs has seen it, right?   As it stands today, that letter currently resides in the "allegedly" mailbox of reality.
     
  14. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?

      There are some people on here, that really need a life.   Peyton, Tom or Eli or Brees, these are all winners and would love to have any of them on my team.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from DanishPastry. Show DanishPastry's posts

    Re: Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?

    He is a hater, and I fear he will troll the forum for quite some time. I know I should ignore him, but I cannot resist the temptation.

    By his own logic, the Colts' SB win must be tainted by cheating.

    Spygate must be "cheating", because rules regarding the placement of cameras were broken. When the Colts won the AFCCG in 2007 the league sent a letter of apology to Ellis Hobbs, admitting that a crucial PI call should not have been called. So that means the rules of the game were broken. Which of course means that the Patriots were cheated, and that the Colts were the beneficiaries of this cheating. And THAT means that their SB is tainted.

    And by the way, Brady may or may not be as clutch as he used to be, but nobody ever mistook Manning the Elder for being clutch. I'll take Brady over Manning 7 times a week and twice on (Super) Sunday.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from NCPatsFan1971. Show NCPatsFan1971's posts

    Re: Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?

    Another Post from this fraud who I have on Ignore.  However, his vile crapola takes up valuable space.

    Where are the moderators?  

    Manning Rules needs to go.  
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from davedsone2. Show davedsone2's posts

    Re: Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?

    In Response to Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?:
    [QUOTE]The Mods don't believe in freedom of speech around here. This is my second time posting this thread. I'll bet they delete it again within 30 seconds. 
    Posted by ManningRules[/QUOTE]

    You are just so stupid.  Only the most pathetic type of loser is more interested in someone else's team than his own, and in *trying* to create drama and angst than in actually having a football discussion.  I would really just enjoy just smacking the cr@p out of you.  

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

    Re: Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?

    Just a question to this OP...you don't really believe people here actually read your post, do you?
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from dastardly. Show dastardly's posts

    Re: Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?

    In Response to Re: Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something? : Yes, I hope they do. What do you think? Why isn't Brady as clutch as he use to be?
    Posted by ManningRules[/QUOTE]

    Don't get your hopes up.  A message is only effective if you can actually get people to read it.  None of us did, so you basically wasted your time.  You could've actually heaped praise on the Patriots and Brady somewhere in the middle of your pointless drivel and none of us would've known better.

    One thing I did read is your username, and I'm almost certain you're not a real manning fan.

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

    Re: Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?

    One man does not a team make. Anyone that cannot figure that out is a troll or  a high school drop out.

    FYI Brady had 15 4th quarter comebacks/game winning drives since he last won a superbowl in 2005, a six year span from 06-11.

    During his three superbowls a five year span from 01-05 he had 21.

    Not bad considering he didn't have the defense he had from 01-05 backing up the offense and the incredible rate of reciever turnover.

    Have a nice day!
     
  22. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?

    In Response to Re: Didnt they use to call Tom "Mr.Clutch" or something?:
    [QUOTE]One man does not a team make. Anyone that cannot figure that out is a troll or  a high school drop out. FYI Brady had 15 4th quarter comebacks/game winning drives since he last won a superbowl in 2005, a six year span from 06-11. During his three superbowls a five year span from 01-05 he had 21. Not bad considering he didn't have the defense he had from 01-05 backing up the offense and the incredible rate of reciever turnover. Have a nice day!
    Posted by WCPatsFan[/QUOTE]
    WC - keep in mind, the more 4th quarter comebacks a QB is credited with simply means their team was losing in the 4th quarter a lot more often than the Pats and as a result Brady did not need to have as many 4th quarter comebacks as other QBs.  I'd rather be having my victory toast early than chewing on my fingernails like some of these fans who like to boast about 4th quarter comebacks!
     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share