"Pats D will keep them in the Super Bowl discussion" Great article

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

    Re:

    In response to digger0862's comment:

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

    [QUOTE]It's funny how you mention stats (7th ranked O) and in the same breath, diss them.

     

    Where do the Falcons rate in the EZ?  Where have they ranked in the RZ, going back to last year?

    How many of the D's EZ stops have been actually stops and not unforced errors?

    I'm not going to bother researching that, since apparently stats don't matter, but my eyes tell me.....less than half.  And my eyes tell me that there is ONE guy, playing out of his mind.

    The others, not so much.

    I don't wear glasses .  I used to, but got lasix 3-4 years ago.


    I don't wear glasses either. Discount the Pats defense at your own risk. Receivers get open almost every play in every game in the NFL. Matt Schaub just put up 355 yards on the Seahawks' vaunted defense.

    I don't care if the Patriots have a super bowl defense. I do care if they have a super bowl team. Looking good so far.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    With all due respect, I see no risk in discounting the D.

    I actually hope you are right, against better judgement.

    But my problem is, the eggs all in one basket.

    What happens when Talib (the only guy with picks and most of the PD's) gets injured or teams stop throwing his way and try to beat them with their 2's thru infinity?

    Atlanta tried, but didn't have the guns.

    They have typically been great in taking out teams #1's (by design) but been abysmal with the 2's and beyond.  (STAT)  That's a depth and talent issue.

    See SB 42 & 46 for proof.  Both SB teams.  I see some improvement. But is it enough?

    We shall see.Cool

     

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

    Re:

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    In response to digger0862's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

     

    [QUOTE]It's funny how you mention stats (7th ranked O) and in the same breath, diss them.

     

     

    Where do the Falcons rate in the EZ?  Where have they ranked in the RZ, going back to last year?

    How many of the D's EZ stops have been actually stops and not unforced errors?

    I'm not going to bother researching that, since apparently stats don't matter, but my eyes tell me.....less than half.  And my eyes tell me that there is ONE guy, playing out of his mind.

    The others, not so much.

    I don't wear glasses .  I used to, but got lasix 3-4 years ago.

     


    I don't wear glasses either. Discount the Pats defense at your own risk. Receivers get open almost every play in every game in the NFL. Matt Schaub just put up 355 yards on the Seahawks' vaunted defense.

    I don't care if the Patriots have a super bowl defense. I do care if they have a super bowl team. Looking good so far.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Exactly. Pezz and his dorky buddies clearly don't watch any other NFL games. Clearly.  They have no idea about Goodell's rule changes, how many great QBs there are in the leaue, or the idea it only appears there are "great" QBs due to rule changes.

     

    If a QB doesn't throw for 300 yards every week in this league, you pretty much suck.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Why aren't all these great QB's scoring significantly more.  Why has scoring only increased 1.8 points since these rules have been put it place.

    Truth is, it's easier to make a stop than it is to score, otherwise you would see all QB's scoring on more than 50% of their drives, every game.  Any one who ever watched a game, knows that not to be the norm.   There are a select few who do this and usually playing a pathetic D.

    So do you watch games or just google the box scores?

    If so, you need to pay more attention and see that teams are stopped, way more than they score.  Eli Manning in SB. 42 & 46 being an exception.  Wonder why?  LOL

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

    Re:

     

     Pezz, it seems to me you're still fighting 2011's battle.  Despite the claims of Rusty and others, the defense in 2011 was bad, even in the Super Bowl.  But anyone who watches closely can see that the defense is much improved now.  Is it elite?  We don't know because it hasn't been tested against great offenses.  Is it deep enough to withstand injuries at certain key positions? Probably not.  But if the starters stay healthy it's without a doubt much improved over the dismal 2011 squad.

     

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

    Re:

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to digger0862's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

     

     

     

    [QUOTE]It's funny how you mention stats (7th ranked O) and in the same breath, diss them.

     

     

     

     

    Where do the Falcons rate in the EZ?  Where have they ranked in the RZ, going back to last year?

    How many of the D's EZ stops have been actually stops and not unforced errors?

    I'm not going to bother researching that, since apparently stats don't matter, but my eyes tell me.....less than half.  And my eyes tell me that there is ONE guy, playing out of his mind.

    The others, not so much.

    I don't wear glasses .  I used to, but got lasix 3-4 years ago.

     

     

     


    I don't wear glasses either. Discount the Pats defense at your own risk. Receivers get open almost every play in every game in the NFL. Matt Schaub just put up 355 yards on the Seahawks' vaunted defense.

    I don't care if the Patriots have a super bowl defense. I do care if they have a super bowl team. Looking good so far.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Exactly. Pezz and his dorky buddies clearly don't watch any other NFL games. Clearly.  They have no idea about Goodell's rule changes, how many great QBs there are in the leaue, or the idea it only appears there are "great" QBs due to rule changes.

     

     

     

    If a QB doesn't throw for 300 yards every week in this league, you pretty much suck.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Why aren't all these great QB's scoring significantly more.  Why has scoring only increased 1.8 points since these rules have been put it place.

     

     

    Truth is, it's easier to make a stop than it is to score, otherwise you would see all QB's scoring on more than 50% of their drives, every game.  Any one who ever watched a game, knows that not to be the norm.   There are a select few who do this and usually playing a pathetic D.

    So do you watch games or just google the box scores?

    If so, you need to pay more attention and see that teams are stopped, way more than they score.  Eli Manning in SB. 42 & 46 being an exception.  Wonder why?  LOL

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Scoring has absolutely not increased only 1.8%.   What are you even basing that off of? From 2011 to 2012?

     

    You're a moron. Source your data or stop trolling. Everyone and their mother should know what Goodell is up to at this point. All commissioners feel scoring equates to more revenue which it does.

    If they can make changes to the game to stir that pot more, they will and they have.  Why do you think Selig ignored roids? Why do you think Bettman has done what he's done and tries to do more with suggesting net size changes or pad reductions of goalies?

    Are you this dumb?

    Are you not aware of this being a QB an offensive era?

    Leave it to you think we should win SBs scoring 14 or 17 points. LMAO

    [/QUOTE]


    Scoring has increased 1.8 points (not 1.8%) since the rule change.  look it up.

    Again with the reading comprehension problem?

    I don't think we should be winning with 17 points although we just won some games with that many.  I also have enough smarts to know that it takes possessions to score and when you don't have them, scores tend to be low.

    You obviously aren't that smart.

    There are 84 possible points to score in a 12 possession game (more if you go for conversions).  The NFL average is 24.

    You do the math, if you can.  Seems teams are scoring A LOT less than they are not.

    I'm not going to give you the %.  I know you can't handle it.

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

    Re:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

     

     Pezz, it seems to me you're still fighting 2011's battle.  Despite the claims of Rusty and others, the defense in 2011 was bad, even in the Super Bowl.  But anyone who watches closely can see that the defense is much improved now.  Is it elite?  We don't know because it hasn't been tested against great offenses.  Is it deep enough to withstand injuries at certain key positions? Probably not.  But if the starters stay healthy it's without a doubt much improved over the dismal 2011 squad.

     

     




    I agree it has improved, but much is a bit much. 

     

    I think if you take Talib out of the equation, you are slightly better than last year.

    That is all.  I see too many of the same issues.  Sorry. Cool

    Gotta go.  Ya'll have a good day.

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

    Re:

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     Pezz, it seems to me you're still fighting 2011's battle.  Despite the claims of Rusty and others, the defense in 2011 was bad, even in the Super Bowl.  But anyone who watches closely can see that the defense is much improved now.  Is it elite?  We don't know because it hasn't been tested against great offenses.  Is it deep enough to withstand injuries at certain key positions? Probably not.  But if the starters stay healthy it's without a doubt much improved over the dismal 2011 squad.

     

     




    I agree it has improved, but much is a bit much. 

     

    I think if you take Talib out of the equation, you are slightly better than last year.

    That is all.  I see too many of the same issues.  Sorry. Cool

    [/QUOTE]

    The big difference is they are not giving up long pass plays nearly as often as they did the past few years.  I know they haven't been tested by top QBs yet (though Ryan is a respectable one), but in the past even terrible QBs looked good against them.  Now terrible QBs look terrible as they should.

    We'll see when they face Brees in two weeks.  That's the first good test of the improvement in passing. 

    I do think that Talib, Dennard, McCourty, Gregory and Arrington all getting experience playing together for a while has improved that unit's collective performance even if Talib is the only individual who is a significant upgrade.  Also, Hightower, Ch. Jones and even Nink have improved with experience, while Kelly is better than Love in the middle.  We'll have to see how much of an effect the loss of Wilfork is. 

     

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

    Re:

    On the scoring issue, I posted this a while ago.  

    Re: Defense wins championships after all . . .

    posted at 8/3/2013 7:58 PM EDT

    Here's the actual average scoring per team per game over the past 40 seasons. Over the whole period the average is 20.5 points per game per team.  Since 2007, there's been a jump of about 2 points per team per game on average.  It's significant (a 10% increase in scoring), but not as big as I think some people imagine.   

     

    Season  Avg Pts/ Game/ Team

     

    1973  19.5

    1974  18.2

    1975  20.6

    1976  19.2

    1977  17.2

    1978  18.3

    1979  20.1

    1980  20.5

    1981  20.7

    1982  20.2

    1983  21.8

    1984  21.2

    1985  21.5

    1986  20.5

    1987  20.2

    1988  20.3

    1989  20.6

    1990  20.1

    1991  19.0

    1992  18.7

    1993  18.7

    1994  20.3

    1995  21.5

    1996  20.4

    1997  20.7

    1998  21.3

    1999  20.8

    2000  20.7

    2001  20.2

    2002  21.7

    2003  20.8

    2004  21.5

    2005  20.6

    2006  20.7

    2007  21.7

    2008  22.0

    2009  21.5

    2010  22.0

    2011  22.2

    2012  22.8

     
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    The big difference is they are not giving up long pass plays nearly as often as they did the past few years.  I know they haven't been tested by top QBs yet (though Ryan is a respectable one), but in the past even terrible QBs looked good against them.  Now terrible QBs look terrible as they should.

    We'll see when they face Brees in two weeks.  That's the first good test of the improvement in passing. 

    I do think that Talib, Dennard, McCourty, Gregory and Arrington all getting experience playing together for a while has improved that unit's collective performance even if Talib is the only individual who is a significant upgrade.  Also, Hightower, Ch. Jones and even Nink have improved with experience, while Kelly is better than Love in the middle.  We'll have to see how much of an effect the loss of Wilfork is.


    If Ryan isn't a top QB then that means there are less than a handful playing in the NFL. Brady, Manning, Rodgers and Brees are about it. Come playoff time, the chances of meeting one of these guys are slim.

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

    Re:

    In response to digger0862's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    [QUOTE]The big difference is they are not giving up long pass plays nearly as often as they did the past few years.  I know they haven't been tested by top QBs yet (though Ryan is a respectable one), but in the past even terrible QBs looked good against them.  Now terrible QBs look terrible as they should.

     

    We'll see when they face Brees in two weeks.  That's the first good test of the improvement in passing. 

    I do think that Talib, Dennard, McCourty, Gregory and Arrington all getting experience playing together for a while has improved that unit's collective performance even if Talib is the only individual who is a significant upgrade.  Also, Hightower, Ch. Jones and even Nink have improved with experience, while Kelly is better than Love in the middle.  We'll have to see how much of an effect the loss of Wilfork is.


    If Ryan isn't a top QB then that means there are less than a handful playing in the NFL. Brady, Manning, Rodgers and Brees are about it. Come playoff time, the chances of meeting one of these guys are slim.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah, I guess I'd say there are only four guys who are really exceptional in the league right now--Brady, P. Manning, Rodgers, and Brees.  Ryan is in the second tier of good, but not exceptional QBs.  There are also a lot of pretty mediocre guys starting.  Truly top QBs are extraordinarily hard to find. 

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    Yeah, I guess I'd say there are only four guys who are really exceptional in the league right now--Brady, P. Manning, Rodgers, and Brees.  Ryan is in the second tier of good, but not exceptional QBs.  There are also a lot of pretty mediocre guys starting.  Truly top QBs are extraordinarily hard to find.

    And we have the good fortune of watching the best one perform every week. :)

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

    Re:

    In response to digger0862's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    [QUOTE]Yeah, I guess I'd say there are only four guys who are really exceptional in the league right now--Brady, P. Manning, Rodgers, and Brees.  Ryan is in the second tier of good, but not exceptional QBs.  There are also a lot of pretty mediocre guys starting.  Truly top QBs are extraordinarily hard to find.


    And we have the good fortune of watching the best one perform every week. :)

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Yep.  

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

    Re:

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

     

     

    On the scoring issue, I posted this a while ago.  

    Re: Defense wins championships after all . . .

    posted at 8/3/2013 7:58 PM EDT

    Here's the actual average scoring per team per game over the past 40 seasons. Over the whole period the average is 20.5 points per game per team.  Since 2007, there's been a jump of about 2 points per team per game on average.  It's significant (a 10% increase in scoring), but not as big as I think some people imagine.   

     

    Season  Avg Pts/ Game/ Team

     

    1973  19.5

    1974  18.2

    1975  20.6

    1976  19.2

    1977  17.2

    1978  18.3

    1979  20.1

    1980  20.5

    1981  20.7

    1982  20.2

    1983  21.8

    1984  21.2

    1985  21.5

    1986  20.5

    1987  20.2

    1988  20.3

    1989  20.6

    1990  20.1

    1991  19.0

    1992  18.7

    1993  18.7

    1994  20.3

    1995  21.5

    1996  20.4

    1997  20.7

    1998  21.3

    1999  20.8

    2000  20.7

    2001  20.2

    2002  21.7

    2003  20.8

    2004  21.5

    2005  20.6

    2006  20.7

    2007  21.7

    2008  22.0

    2009  21.5

    2010  22.0

    2011  22.2

    2012  22.8

     

     



    3 straight seasons of 22 reflects a patten trending up. Case closed. Also, a 2% hike like that is a large increase when you look at 32 teams in the context.

     

     

    I could show you the 1980s and early 1990s NHL scoring averages and then show you the late 90s/early 2000s when the neutral zone trap and larger goalie pads started being allowed and the drop would be a similar percentage, which is a big one.

    We have QBs in the NFL like Manning, Brady and Brees setting records every year for crying out loud.  What, 4 QBs threw for 5000 yards in 2011?

    But somehow offensive production is not trending up and fast?

    bwahahah

    aabaabhwhwhaha

     



    Sure, there is an upward trend.  And as I said, it's significant, but not quite as large as I think people think.  It amounts to less than a field goal per game.  If you look at just offensive TDs (ignoring defensive and special team TDs and FGs), here's the average number of TDs per season per team since the league increased to 32 teams in 2002:

     

    2002 36.1

    2003 33.8

    2004 35.9

    2005 33.6

    2006 33.5

    2007 34.6

    2008 35.1

    2009 35.6

    2010 35.9

    2011 35.8

    2012 36.2

    Teams are averaging about one or two more offensive TDs per season.  That's significant, but it's not a gigantic increase. 

     

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

    Re:

     

     There have been other periods where offenses have been as productive as they've been the past few years.  In the mid 80s, in fact, teams were averaging more offensive TDs per season than they are now:

     

    1983 37.9

    1984 36.6 

    1985 37.2 

     

    I think the change in the pass defense rules have helped offenses a bit recently, but there may be other factors involved too, just as there were in the mid 80s.  It could partly be due to recent offensive innovation that defenses haven't fully caught up with.  

     
  14. This post has been removed.

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

    Re:

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    Pezzy's silly premise is that offense is not on the rise via Goodell and he's wrong again. As usual.



    Really Megatool?

    The average points per game over NFL history were highest in descending order for these years - 1948, 1965, 1950, 2012, 1958, 1949, 1962 and 1952. (pro-football-reference.com)

    No need to run from you dumbkoff. Now you run along and act like the facts were never shown to you, just like you always do.

     

    Another day, another bludgeoning of the village imbecile. LMAO@U

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

    Re:

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

     


    Exactly. Pezz and his dorky buddies clearly don't watch any other NFL games. Clearly.  They have no idea about Goodell's rule changes, how many great QBs there are in the leaue, or the idea it only appears there are "great" QBs due to rule changes.

     

    If a QB doesn't throw for 300 yards every week in this league, you pretty much suck.

     


    Really Megatool?

    Why then are the top 3 years for passing TDs per game in the NFL; 1965, 1947 and 1948?

     

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

    Re:

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

     

    I am still waiting for them to tell the board which NFL team has had better drafts than ours from 2010-2012.

    They run away in fear of that challenge and I know why.

     


    You've been told this 100 times liar.

    The teams that have won SBs over the 8 years of BB's mediocre team-building have obviously done better.

    There, now you've been told 101 times dum bass.

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

    Re:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    But anyone who watches closely can see that the defense is much improved now.

     



    Well yeah, it improved when Talib arrived and McCourty was moved. It went from terrible to decent.

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

    Re:

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    They have no idea about Goodell's rule changes, how many great QBs there are in the leaue, or the idea it only appears there are "great" QBs due to rule changes.

     


    No Megatool. The rules changes have raised the league passer rating by about 3 or 4 measley points compared the the average before the rules change. That is mostly because INTs are a bit down due to the restricted contact.

    1995, 2005 and 2011 have a total spread of 5 points.

    2012 = 83

    2011 = 82

    2010 = 82

    2009 = 81

    2008 = 81

    2007 = 80

    2006 = 78

    2005 = 78

    2004 = 81

    2003 = 77

    2002 = 79

     

    1995 = 77

    1994 = 77

     

    You lose again dumbkoff.       Happens;  every    single    day. LMAO@U

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

    Re:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    But anyone who watches closely can see that the defense is much improved now.

     

     



    Well yeah, it improved when Talib arrived and McCourty was moved. It went from terrible to decent.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    There are other improvements too, Babe.  I think the whole secondary is playing better as a unit.  They didn't have a ton of time to work together in their current positions last year.  McCourty was moving back and forth between corner and safety, Talib was a late acquisition, it took a while for Dennard to crack the starting line up, Gregory was in and out of the starting line up, etc.  This year, the constitution of the group has been pretty stable and they were able to practice as a unit starting in training camp. I think that's helped their communication and understanding of how to best play together.  

    I'd also argue that Hightower has improved.  Maybe most important is the D line has been more effective getting pressure.  It goes unmentioned, but on passing downs, moving Jones inside and playing Buchanon at end has really helped with pressure. Last year they were moving Francis inside and keeping Jones outside, but this combination has been much more effective.  Nink is also having a very good season so far.  He started to really improve as an end late last season.  This season he looks very good. 

    I agree the old D was terrible--you and I have always been on the same page there.  And I do think it's still too early to really judge how good this D is (and the Wilfork injury does potentially change things).  But still, they aren't making bad QBs look great, which is something they were prone to doing for the past three years or so.  That's a huge upgrade in my opinion. 

     

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

    Re:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

    But anyone who watches closely can see that the defense is much improved now.

     

     

     



    Well yeah, it improved when Talib arrived and McCourty was moved. It went from terrible to decent.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    There are other improvements too, Babe.  I think the whole secondary is playing better as a unit.  They didn't have a ton of time to work together in their current positions last year.  McCourty was moving back and forth between corner and safety, Talib was a late acquisition, it took a while for Dennard to crack the starting line up, Gregory was in and out of the starting line up, etc.  This year, the constitution of the group has been pretty stable and they were able to practice as a unit starting in training camp. I think that's helped their communication and understanding of how to best play together.  

     

    I'd also argue that Hightower has improved.  Maybe most important is the D line has been more effective getting pressure.  It goes unmentioned, but on passing downs, moving Jones inside and playing Buchanon at end has really helped with pressure. Last year they were moving Francis inside and keeping Jones outside, but this combination has been much more effective.  Nink is also having a very good season so far.  He started to really improve as an end late last season.  This season he looks very good. 

    I agree the old D was terrible--you and I have always been on the same page there.  And I do think it's still too early to really judge how good this D is (and the Wilfork injury does potentially change things).  But still, they aren't making bad QBs look great, which is something they were prone to doing for the past three years or so.  That's a huge upgrade in my opinion. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I must point out that the making stiff QBs look great was mostly before the Talib/McCourty change.


    I'm not going to contest if there are some other general improvements, since I haven't seen enough against good competition to conclude that. But I will say any other improvements are more subtle than the Talib/McCourty impact.

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    The teams that have won SBs over the 8 years of BB's mediocre team-building have obviously done better.

    Your argument is flawed. Obviously when a team wins a super bowl they are doing something right but looking at the Giants and Steelers struggling so badly right now shows their way isn't better. The Patriots put together a super bowl contending team most every year. Those other teams have not obviously done better.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re:

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    Does that include when our supposed GOAT QB is mediocre or chokes in TWO SBs in those years?

    Your argument is foolish. Brady made some mistakes but he didn't choke. No football player is perfect so why should you expect Brady to be? Besides, it's a team game. You win as a team and you lose as a team.

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

    Re:

    Did Matt Ryan have a career day against the Patriots defense last week?  It seems like many QB's have career days vs the Patriots defense.  I hope Dalton doesn't have a career day vs the Patriots tomorrow.

    Why does this keep happening?  If Tom Brady isn't able to have big days then this defense is doomed.  Why do the Patriots have to put so many points on the board to win?  Why can't they win the tough games if the offense doesn't put up 20+?

    **

    Back in '82, I used to be able to throw a pigskin a quarter mile.

    How much you wanna make a bet I can throw a football over them mountains?... Yeah... Coach woulda put me in fourth quarter, we would've been state champions. No doubt. No doubt in my mind.

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

    Re:

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

    I am still waiting for them to tell the board which NFL team has had better drafts than ours from 2010-2012.

    They run away in fear of that challenge and I know why.

     

     

     

     

     


    You've been told this 100 times liar.

    The teams that have won SBs over the 8 years of BB's mediocre team-building have obviously done better.

    There, now you've been told 101 times dum bass.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Does that include when our supposed GOAT QB is mediocre or chokes in TWO SBs in those years?

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Tell us dumbkoff.....

     

    How did he choke in 2007 getting sacked 5 times and hit 20 times? Hunh? Spit it out goofball!

     

    And in 2011 he had a 100 passer rating going into the final desperation drive the D collapse forced on him. Explain how a 100 passer rating is choking dum bass but a collapsing D isn't.

     

    What is especially hilarious about your stupidity is that TWO for defensive collapses in two SBs at the end you have NEVER called a "choke".

    You are a phoney, a liar and worthless here.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share