Help for #12

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rtuinila's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    And you feel that catching in college is like catching in the NFL?

    And you feel if a rookie drops a couple of passes on a play that historically is a low percrentage play, you shouldn't throw it to him any more? Or to Edelman or Amendola?
    Yet if Moss drops a couple it is ok?

    [/QUOTE]

    Some people here have some very absurd expectations when it comes to rookies and zero tolerance when it comes to player development.  Then there is this group of posters who can never allow themselves to believe, for even a moment, that TB is capable of making mistakes, or bares any responsibility for the performance of the offense...except, of course, when it is doing well.

    [/QUOTE]

    And those people are irrational, sick or mentally disturbed.

    [/QUOTE]

    I like to think that they simply see things differently than I do and leave it at that.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bungalow-Bill. Show Bungalow-Bill's posts

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to rtuinila's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    So the real tally is 4 talented receivers during the Moss years compared to 5 talented receivers last year.

    The only reason they lead the league in drops is because if any part of a receiver touches the ball, whether it is catchable or not is called a drop. They all got a lot better once Brady stopped throwing it over their heads or behind them or at the gound in front of them. But you can call them jags if that helps you sleep at night.

    Oh and in case you didn't notice the rules of the game changed again last year. The Polian rules seem to have gone the way of the dinosaur. Defenses are being allowed to be defenses again.

    [/QUOTE]

    Thank god these receivers make Brady look so much better than he really is... smh

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

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to Bungalow-Bill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rtuinila's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    So the real tally is 4 talented receivers during the Moss years compared to 5 talented receivers last year.

    The only reason they lead the league in drops is because if any part of a receiver touches the ball, whether it is catchable or not is called a drop. They all got a lot better once Brady stopped throwing it over their heads or behind them or at the gound in front of them. But you can call them jags if that helps you sleep at night.

    Oh and in case you didn't notice the rules of the game changed again last year. The Polian rules seem to have gone the way of the dinosaur. Defenses are being allowed to be defenses again.

    [/QUOTE]

    Thank god these receivers make Brady look so much better than he really is... smh

    [/QUOTE]

    Is it possible that the receivers, as well as TB, had some bad games?  I think that chemistry is a two way street.  It's not all about the receiver.  The qb has to adjust, as well.  Based on what I saw, I expect the receivers and the qb to show marked improvement working together.

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

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rtuinila's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    And you feel that catching in college is like catching in the NFL?

    And you feel if a rookie drops a couple of passes on a play that historically is a low percrentage play, you shouldn't throw it to him any more? Or to Edelman or Amendola?
    Yet if Moss drops a couple it is ok?

    [/QUOTE]

    Some people here have some very absurd expectations when it comes to rookies and zero tolerance when it comes to player development.  Then there is this group of posters who can never allow themselves to believe, for even a moment, that TB is capable of making mistakes, or bares any responsibility for the performance of the offense...except, of course, when it is doing well.

    [/QUOTE]

    And those people are irrational, sick or mentally disturbed.

    [/QUOTE]

    I like to think that they simply see things differently than I do and leave it at that.

    [/QUOTE]

    They are diseased sycophants. They are not able to see things objectively.

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

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rtuinila's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    And you feel that catching in college is like catching in the NFL?

    And you feel if a rookie drops a couple of passes on a play that historically is a low percrentage play, you shouldn't throw it to him any more? Or to Edelman or Amendola?
    Yet if Moss drops a couple it is ok?

    [/QUOTE]

    Some people here have some very absurd expectations when it comes to rookies and zero tolerance when it comes to player development.  Then there is this group of posters who can never allow themselves to believe, for even a moment, that TB is capable of making mistakes, or bares any responsibility for the performance of the offense...except, of course, when it is doing well.

    [/QUOTE]

    And those people are irrational, sick or mentally disturbed.

    [/QUOTE]

    I like to think that they simply see things differently than I do and leave it at that.

    [/QUOTE]

    They are diseased sycophants. They are not able to see things objectively.

    [/QUOTE]

    LOL!

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bungalow-Bill. Show Bungalow-Bill's posts

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to rtuinila's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    So the real tally is 4 talented receivers during the Moss years compared to 5 talented receivers last year.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Well, Boyce barely played at all last year so what on earth makes you think he is a more talented receiver than a Stallworth or Gaffney? Everyone expected Chad Jackson to be a pretty talented receiver too, and then he played...

    I thought you were a real realist? This post is pure speculation, fantasy land material.

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

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:

    In response to Bungalow-Bill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rtuinila's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    So the real tally is 4 talented receivers during the Moss years compared to 5 talented receivers last year.

    The only reason they lead the league in drops is because if any part of a receiver touches the ball, whether it is catchable or not is called a drop. They all got a lot better once Brady stopped throwing it over their heads or behind them or at the gound in front of them. But you can call them jags if that helps you sleep at night.

    Oh and in case you didn't notice the rules of the game changed again last year. The Polian rules seem to have gone the way of the dinosaur. Defenses are being allowed to be defenses again.



    Thank god these receivers make Brady look so much better than he really is... smh

    [/QUOTE]

    Is it possible that the receivers, as well as TB, had some bad games?  I think that chemistry is a two way street.  It's not all about the receiver.  The qb has to adjust, as well.  Based on what I saw, I expect the receivers and the qb to show marked improvement working together.

    [/QUOTE]

    They think brady is perfect and a robot. Seriously.  That is why they say that. With bungy bill, he is bustchise trying to tilt the scales to bash bb.

    Pezzy claims he grew up in foxboro in the sullivan years.  Can you imagine his anger then?

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bungalow-Bill. Show Bungalow-Bill's posts

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Is it possible that the receivers, as well as TB, had some bad games?  I think that chemistry is a two way street.  It's not all about the receiver.  The qb has to adjust, as well.  Based on what I saw, I expect the receivers and the qb to show marked improvement working together.

    [/QUOTE]

    Sure it is but one is clearly more important than the other. Without Brady the team probably wins 6 or 7 games last year. Can't say the same about any of the receivers.

    Rtunila is putting a lot on Brady's shoulders.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to Bungalow-Bill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Is it possible that the receivers, as well as TB, had some bad games?  I think that chemistry is a two way street.  It's not all about the receiver.  The qb has to adjust, as well.  Based on what I saw, I expect the receivers and the qb to show marked improvement working together.

    [/QUOTE]

    Sure it is but one is clearly more important than the other. Without Brady the team probably wins 6 or 7 games last year. Can't say the same about any of the receivers.

    Rtunila is putting a lot on Brady's shoulders.

    [/QUOTE]

    Thankfully, we didn't have to find out.  However, I believe BB would have found a way to eek out at least ten wins, had that happened.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to Bungalow-Bill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Is it possible that the receivers, as well as TB, had some bad games?  I think that chemistry is a two way street.  It's not all about the receiver.  The qb has to adjust, as well.  Based on what I saw, I expect the receivers and the qb to show marked improvement working together.

    [/QUOTE]

    Sure it is but one is clearly more important than the other. Without Brady the team probably wins 6 or 7 games last year. Can't say the same about any of the receivers.

    Rtunila is putting a lot on Brady's shoulders.

    [/QUOTE]

    Brady is the supposed greatest, bustchise.  He has not been for years through an entire playoffs even with loaded talent.

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

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:

    In response to Bungalow-Bill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Is it possible that the receivers, as well as TB, had some bad games?  I think that chemistry is a two way street.  It's not all about the receiver.  The qb has to adjust, as well.  Based on what I saw, I expect the receivers and the qb to show marked improvement working together.



    Sure it is but one is clearly more important than the other. Without Brady the team probably wins 6 or 7 games last year. Can't say the same about any of the receivers.

    Rtunila is putting a lot on Brady's shoulders.

    [/QUOTE]

    Brady is the supposed greatest, bustchise.  He has not been for years through an entire playoffs even with loaded talent.

    [/QUOTE]

    Hey Douggie! What happened to the Beano handle?  Did you say more really dumb stuff and then delete it out of embarrassment to run from your own posts again?  Sounds about right.  

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

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to Bungalow-Bill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rtuinila's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    So the real tally is 4 talented receivers during the Moss years compared to 5 talented receivers last year.

    The only reason they lead the league in drops is because if any part of a receiver touches the ball, whether it is catchable or not is called a drop. They all got a lot better once Brady stopped throwing it over their heads or behind them or at the gound in front of them. But you can call them jags if that helps you sleep at night.

    Oh and in case you didn't notice the rules of the game changed again last year. The Polian rules seem to have gone the way of the dinosaur. Defenses are being allowed to be defenses again.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Thank god these receivers make Brady look so much better than he really is... smh

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Is it possible that the receivers, as well as TB, had some bad games?  I think that chemistry is a two way street.  It's not all about the receiver.  The qb has to adjust, as well.  Based on what I saw, I expect the receivers and the qb to show marked improvement working together.

    [/QUOTE]

    They think brady is perfect and a robot. Seriously.  That is why they say that. With bungy bill, he is bustchise trying to tilt the scales to bash bb.

    Pezzy claims he grew up in foxboro in the sullivan years.  Can you imagine his anger then?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I said I grew up near Foxborough and worked at the track.  Do you ever get anything straight?

    "Straight"??????  BWAHAHAHA  NOT!

    Wasn't any anger because no one expected much back then. 

    Now, I expect the bestest gm, eva, NOT to have bottom feeder defenses for YEARS and an entire receiving cast to be more than rookies and quadriplegics.

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

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Bungalow-Bill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Is it possible that the receivers, as well as TB, had some bad games?  I think that chemistry is a two way street.  It's not all about the receiver.  The qb has to adjust, as well.  Based on what I saw, I expect the receivers and the qb to show marked improvement working together.

    [/QUOTE]

    Sure it is but one is clearly more important than the other. Without Brady the team probably wins 6 or 7 games last year. Can't say the same about any of the receivers.

    Rtunila is putting a lot on Brady's shoulders.

    [/QUOTE]

    Brady is the supposed greatest, bustchise.  He has not been for years through an entire playoffs even with loaded talent.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yet your idol continues to start him. Curious eh Russ?

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Help for #12

    I don't know where people get the idea that our receivers were that good.  In the two playoff games here are the receiving totals:

    • Edelman--16 receptions for 173 yards
    • Vereen--7 receptions for 75 yards
    • Collie--5 receptions for 72 yards
    • Amendola--3 receptions for 77 yards
    • Hoomanawanui--3 receptions for 39 yards
    • Dobson--2 receptions for 33 yards
    • Mulligan--1 reception for 6 yards

    When I look at that list, I simply don't see an impressive list of talent, nor do I see strong results.  You can blame it on Brady or the play calling, but really how does anyone delude themselves into thinking the Pats had "elite" NFL talent at the receiving positions in the playoffs last year?  

     

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

    Re: Help for #12

    HIn response to PatsLifer's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Bungalow-Bill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Is it possible that the receivers, as well as TB, had some bad games?  I think that chemistry is a two way street.  It's not all about the receiver.  The qb has to adjust, as well.  Based on what I saw, I expect the receivers and the qb to show marked improvement working together.

    [/QUOTE]

    Sure it is but one is clearly more important than the other. Without Brady the team probably wins 6 or 7 games last year. Can't say the same about any of the receivers.

    Rtunila is putting a lot on Brady's shoulders.

    [/QUOTE]

    Brady is the supposed greatest, bustchise.  He has not been for years through an entire playoffs even with loaded talent.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yet your idol continues to start him. Curious eh Russ?

    [/QUOTE]

    Ummm ..who is bb supposed to start?  It is not bb's job to control brady's play.  How immature.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Help for #12

    I love the rubes who think "developing" players is still a good option in the NFL. Ahhhh, no. You don't "develop" a guy over 4 years and finally get something worthwhile only to realize that he is now a FA. That's what clueless GMs do. You want draft picks to hit the ground running. If they aren't having a good impact relative to the resource investment by the second year, they probably weren't a good decision.

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

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Bungalow-Bill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Is it possible that the receivers, as well as TB, had some bad games?  I think that chemistry is a two way street.  It's not all about the receiver.  The qb has to adjust, as well.  Based on what I saw, I expect the receivers and the qb to show marked improvement working together.

    [/QUOTE]

    Sure it is but one is clearly more important than the other. Without Brady the team probably wins 6 or 7 games last year. Can't say the same about any of the receivers.

    Rtunila is putting a lot on Brady's shoulders.

    [/QUOTE]

    Brady is the supposed greatest, bustchise.  He has not been for years through an entire playoffs even with loaded talent.

    [/QUOTE]


    List the "loaded talent", lamebrain. I could use a good laugh.

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

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:

    HIn response to PatsLifer's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Bungalow-Bill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Is it possible that the receivers, as well as TB, had some bad games?  I think that chemistry is a two way street.  It's not all about the receiver.  The qb has to adjust, as well.  Based on what I saw, I expect the receivers and the qb to show marked improvement working together.



    Sure it is but one is clearly more important than the other. Without Brady the team probably wins 6 or 7 games last year. Can't say the same about any of the receivers.

    Rtunila is putting a lot on Brady's shoulders.

    [/QUOTE]

    Brady is the supposed greatest, bustchise.  He has not been for years through an entire playoffs even with loaded talent.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yet your idol continues to start him. Curious eh Russ?

    [/QUOTE]

    Ummm ..who is bb supposed to start?  It is not bb's job to control brady's play.  How immature.

    [/QUOTE]


    Ignorance at it's finest.

    Who is he supposed to start?  HMMM how about the 1st round talent back-up, that nobody wants?  Or the emergency QB, Edelman?   Or maybe he can bring back O'Connel.  I heard he's available.   How about his son.  I heard he threw a ball once.  Or the man in the moon?  He ought to be able to light up the sky.

    Thanks for proving bb is not very adapt in team building.  10 years of suffering threw Brady's ineptitude and no viable solution.  Geesh.

    Glad they got Lombardi to straighten him out.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Help for #12

    One other small point.  A lot of people are insinuating that those of us who have questions about last year's rookie receivers are somehow ignoring player development.  This is a silly argument too.  I've been watching football since the 1970s and have seen a lot of players come and go.  I don't expect rookies to play like vets, but I also need to see enough in their rookie year to feel comfortable about their potential.  Just looking at a few random rookies in recent years, here's how I've felt:

    • Chandler Jones--no concerns at all about him going into his second year; athleticism was obvious 
    • Hightower--some questions, but generally was pretty optimistic
    • Darius Butler--never sold on him; beat too often; seemed to let bad plays go to his head
    • Patrick Chung--never sold on him; not a playmaker; poor in coverage
    • Ras-I Dowling--looked okay in one game; injuries were huge question mark
    • Brandon Tate--hopeful, but question marks right from the beginning; hands didn't seem good enough
    • Duron Harmon--I feel optimistic about this kid; played above what I expected
    • Aaron Dobson--uncertain--could be Brandon Tate; didn't see enough from him; don't like the broken foot; felt he was very inconsistent in his routes
    • Boyce--didn't show anything last year; most fourth round picks don't make it--he hasn't shown me anything to make me think he's better than other fourth rounders
    • Thompkins--enigmatic; have some hope he'll develop into a possible number 3 or 4, but was an inconsistent performer last year

    Looking at these receivers, I can't say definitively whether they'll get better or whether they're on the Butler/Tate trajectory. 

    Boyce is the one where I think fans are way over optimistic.  He was a fourth round pick who can run fast, but he was still just a fourth rounder.  Last year, he couldn't get on the field--even as a kick returner, which was a big need, and with multiple injuries at receiver.  I just don't see anything there that makes me think he'll even be in the league three years out.  Yet, people are already talking about him as if he's better than Stallworth and Gaffney.  Stallworth and Gaffney (our third and fourth receivers in 2007) may not have been hall of famers, but they both had long, solid NFL careers. You simply can't put Boyce in the same category--or Dobson or Thompkins.  All three of those guys could all turn out to be Taylor Prices or Brandon Tates.  If they reach the Jabbar Gaffney level, they will have done very well for themselves.  I don't think Randy Moss quality is likely from any of them. Remember Moss was dominant as a rookie.  If they had anything like that kind of talent, we would have seen it already. 

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    They have 3 young WRs from last year who showed some promise. They say the biggest jump in progress is between years one and two. Having had a year in the system, Dobson, Boyce and Thompkins might be much better and more reliable this year. I wouldn't give up on them yet. There is no guarantee that whoever is brought in will have a huge impact, as we have seen several times over the past seasons. I'm more interested in another big receiving TE who can also block. 

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree regarding the 3 rookie WRs from last year. I dont expect all three become solid players but actually they all could. I do expect at least one of them to step up. Boyce is the most likely to not make the grade as Thompkins showed some good signs and Dobson looks like he might be a good player once he feels comfortable.

     

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

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to portfolio1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    They have 3 young WRs from last year who showed some promise. They say the biggest jump in progress is between years one and two. Having had a year in the system, Dobson, Boyce and Thompkins might be much better and more reliable this year. I wouldn't give up on them yet. There is no guarantee that whoever is brought in will have a huge impact, as we have seen several times over the past seasons. I'm more interested in another big receiving TE who can also block. 

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree regarding the 3 rookie WRs from last year. I dont expect all three become solid players but actually they all could. I do expect at least one of them to step up. Boyce is the most likely to not make the grade as Thompkins showed some good signs and Dobson looks like he might be a good player once he feels comfortable.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Dobson's stress fracture foot makes him ???? for the future

     

Share