Poll: Calvin Johnson or Darrelle Revis

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

    Re: Poll: Calvin Johnson or Darrelle Revis

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    Another way to make the argument (and maybe it's the start of a mathematical proof) is that if your defense is poor, the average score to win the game will be higher than if your defense is good.  If you assume that the variance around the average is the same percentage in both scenarios, then the actual absolute variance in scoring needed is smaller in the first scenario than the last.  (I know that's not very clearly written.)

     

    Put simply--if your defense is good so that the winning score is usually about 20 points and the variance around the average is 50%, then your offense is almost certain to win if it scores 30 points (about one TD and one FG above the league average).  If your defense is poor so that the winning score is usually around 28 points and the variance around the average is still 50%, then your offense isn't certain to win unless it scores 42 points i(which is three TDs above the league average, and pretty hard to do in games where teams typically only have 11 scoring chances) 



    But, isn't that obvious?  I mean, if a team's D only gives up, say, 17 or 19 points, then all it needs on O is 18 or 20 points.  Conversely, if the D gives up, say, 28 points, then the O needs to score 29 points.

    The problem has been that even though the Patriots' D has held the opposition to less than 20 points in their last two Super Bowls, the O has not been able to score over 17 points.  Seems to me, the way to go is to improve the D even further to try to limit teams to less than two TDs.  Hard to do, but it might prove easier than getting this O to become more productive.



    We used to have joe cool at qb in super bowls, but maybe there is time for him to recapture his old glories.

    The fact these idiots cannot comprehend that wildly underperforming in the biggest game hurts the team is bordering on being deranged.

    The only team in the modern era to score 17 and win a sb was the giants and that took an act of god.

    Brady destroyed sb 46 with 3 egregious errors which in turn affected clock by 5 minutes or more.

    Great 3rd qtr.  Awful 4th qtr, obviously.



    I'm just surprised that "Mr. Know It All Team Builder" shows time and time again that a team built well doesn't need one person to win a game for you. Especially an expert like you, who should clearly be able to look at that defense (instantly) and be able to see they weren't good. Instead you overvalue average, to below average players and make countless excuses for them. And you actually discredit players around the league who are similar - or better. You don't understand football if you think our third down defense is good. Or that our pass rush is good. You don't understand today's football if you can't comprehend the value of pass defense and pass rush...you just don't. And another thing, you don't understand football if you can sit there and say BJGE is a high quality running back capable of carrying a ground attack against a very good defensive front. If you say/think that, you are a moron.

    You will argue the quarterback is the most important position on the field and I will say yes!! And it's why we have won so much! And I will also say Brady would of easily won the Super Bowl MVP award had we won that game, because he was BY FAR the best player on that field for our team that day. Nobody came close, in fact he may of been the best player on that field for both teams.

    I'm stunned you run around here all day spreading your gospel when you don't understand even the simplest concepts of football. It's embarrassing.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Poll: Calvin Johnson or Darrelle Revis

    The Lions have been my team since 1957 but I've been a Pats fan for years too.  If Calvin opted out of Detroit I'd love to see him with the Pats.  Stafford pretty much sucks as a QB.  Can't imagine how great Calvin would be with Brady throwing to him.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Poll: Calvin Johnson or Darrelle Revis

    I'd take any of Revis, Petterson or Sherman over Johnson.  

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from crazy-world-of-troybrown. Show crazy-world-of-troybrown's posts

    Re: Poll: Calvin Johnson or Darrelle Revis

    This should be more like who would you take Rice in his Prime or Johnson?


    If you take Rice, them original Question comes in. I'll take Revis.

    49's won 2 Superbowls before Rice was on Roster.
    Defense Wins Championships. Those 49's teams had one of the most underrated Defenses, in NFL History.

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

    Re: Poll: Calvin Johnson or Darrelle Revis

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    Another way to make the argument (and maybe it's the start of a mathematical proof) is that if your defense is poor, the average score to win the game will be higher than if your defense is good.  If you assume that the variance around the average is the same percentage in both scenarios, then the actual absolute variance in scoring needed is smaller in the first scenario than the last.  (I know that's not very clearly written.)

     

    Put simply--if your defense is good so that the winning score is usually about 20 points and the variance around the average is 50%, then your offense is almost certain to win if it scores 30 points (about one TD and one FG above the league average).  If your defense is poor so that the winning score is usually around 28 points and the variance around the average is still 50%, then your offense isn't certain to win unless it scores 42 points i(which is three TDs above the league average, and pretty hard to do in games where teams typically only have 11 scoring chances) 



    But, isn't that obvious?  I mean, if a team's D only gives up, say, 17 or 19 points, then all it needs on O is 18 or 20 points.  Conversely, if the D gives up, say, 28 points, then the O needs to score 29 points.

    The problem has been that even though the Patriots' D has held the opposition to less than 20 points in their last two Super Bowls, the O has not been able to score over 17 points.  Seems to me, the way to go is to improve the D even further to try to limit teams to less than two TDs.  Hard to do, but it might prove easier than getting this O to become more productive.



    We used to have joe cool at qb in super bowls, but maybe there is time for him to recapture his old glories.

    The fact these idiots cannot comprehend that wildly underperforming in the biggest game hurts the team is bordering on being deranged.

    The only team in the modern era to score 17 and win a sb was the giants and that took an act of god.

    Brady destroyed sb 46 with 3 egregious errors which in turn affected clock by 5 minutes or more.

    Great 3rd qtr.  Awful 4th qtr, obviously.



    I'm just surprised that "Mr. Know It All Team Builder" shows time and time again that a team built well doesn't need one person to win a game for you. Especially an expert like you, who should clearly be able to look at that defense (instantly) and be able to see they weren't good. Instead you overvalue average, to below average players and make countless excuses for them. And you actually discredit players around the league who are similar - or better. You don't understand football if you think our third down defense is good. Or that our pass rush is good. You don't understand today's football if you can't comprehend the value of pass defense and pass rush...you just don't. And another thing, you don't understand football if you can sit there and say BJGE is a high quality running back capable of carrying a ground attack against a very good defensive front. If you say/think that, you are a moron.

    You will argue the quarterback is the most important position on the field and I will say yes!! And it's why we have won so much! And I will also say Brady would of easily won the Super Bowl MVP award had we won that game, because he was BY FAR the best player on that field for our team that day. Nobody came close, in fact he may of been the best player on that field for both teams.

    I'm stunned you run around here all day spreading your gospel when you don't understand even the simplest concepts of football. It's embarrassing.



    Did you just type "would of"?  Did you?

    Sterling Moore outplayed Brady.  Ouch.



    did YOU just type "evem?" The grammar/spelling policeman FAILS AGAIN........tears

    ----------


    DougIrwin
    Posts: 1432
    First: 3/27/2014
    Last: 7/11/2014
    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

    If evem 1 of those does not happen, we win sb 46.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Poll: Calvin Johnson or Darrelle Revis

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:

    A typo from a phone is not the same as not knowing correct grammar, bustchise.  I know you are dumb enough to think that, but that is because you are a really dumb human.

    Did you ever tell the board why you think using different board names is so important in your life as a jets loser on a pats board?

    Lastly, you're a moron not knowing how to use the quote function yet.  Lmao



    another deflection from the guy who corrects people right and left, no matter what. "A typo from a phone????"

    and yes Crusty...you caught me.....I am Rico, Bustify, Mile High Mike and ALL the other names you count as Bustchise.....you are brilliant to do so.....NOT. You "feed" the people you want off this board with your consistently idiotic rants and outright lies, so who's the moron? Maybe I'll go log onto my other 3 accounts and flood you with replies.....

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from crazy-world-of-troybrown. Show crazy-world-of-troybrown's posts

    Re: Poll: Calvin Johnson or Darrelle Revis

    Best line I ever heard was by Bill Walsh, you only take WO in first round when everything else is fixed. Lions are perfect example.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Poll: Calvin Johnson or Darrelle Revis

    The fact that Sterling Moore was starting for a Super Bowl defense is further proof that defense wasn't very good. This is what I'm talking about...marginal players, playing because we had no one better to play for us. Despite all of that we still win...why? Because we have a guy who plays the most important position in football (quarterback), playing it very very well. And because we have a coach that can take a guy who would be a third stringer on another team and hide him in his scheme, where he won't be exposed until we play a real team. That's why.

    So I ask our regional football expert once again, if you are such an expert on football, why can't you instantly see that our defense wasn't very good?? Why is that? Someone that knows football would almost instantly be able to see that our linebackers couldn't cover, that our safeties were nothing more than fill in players not capable of covering tight ends or playing in the box, and that our corners weren't very big (or good). You'd know this instantly, yet YOU didn't. You'd also know that our defensive line was pretty good against the run - not great - but offered almost nothing as pass rushers. You would recognize this immediately if you knew football, but you don't. Someone that knew football would know - beyond a doubt - that we had some decent players at certain spots that were coached very well, but weren't able to cover up for the many problems with our defense (lack of pass rush, lack of coverage, lack of fast physical difference makers than can make the players around them better).

    God willing those play makers will be on this defense next year...Revis, C. Jones, Collins, Browner, Easley...to go along with Mayo, Wilfork and Nink, because that is what was missing...playmakers.

     

     
  14. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Poll: Calvin Johnson or Darrelle Revis

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    The fact that Sterling Moore was starting for a Super Bowl defense is further proof that defense wasn't very good. This is what I'm talking about...marginal players, playing because we had no one better to play for us. Despite all of that we still win...why? Because we have a guy who plays the most important position in football (quarterback), playing it very very well. And because we have a coach that can take a guy who would be a third stringer on another team and hide him in his scheme, where he won't be exposed until we play a real team. That's why.

    So I ask our regional football expert once again, if you are such an expert on football, why can't you instantly see that our defense wasn't very good?? Why is that? Someone that knows football would almost instantly be able to see that our linebackers couldn't cover, that our safeties were nothing more than fill in players not capable of covering tight ends or playing in the box, and that our corners weren't very big (or good). You'd know this instantly, yet YOU didn't. You'd also know that our defensive line was pretty good against the run - not great - but offered almost nothing as pass rushers. You would recognize this immediately if you knew football, but you don't. Someone that knew football would know - beyond a doubt - that we had some decent players at certain spots that were coached very well, but weren't able to cover up for the many problems with our defense (lack of pass rush, lack of coverage, lack of fast physical difference makers than can make the players around them better).

    God willing those play makers will be on this defense next year...Revis, C. Jones, Collins, Browner, Easley...to go along with Mayo, Wilfork and Nink, because that is what was missing...playmakers.

     



    He was not starting.  He also had a pick 6 in december and outplayed brady in the title game.

    Triple OUCH.




    You can't answer any of my questions because you either don't understand football (option A) or are too stupid to answer them correctly (option B).

    I don't care that Sterling Moore "had a pick 6 in December"...yippee!!! And as far as him "outplaying Brady"...you are a world class moron...total bozo...buffoon.

    What's Sterling Moore doing nowadays? If he is all you think, then he is a starting corner in the NFL halfway through his 35 million dollar contract, but he's not...he's out of football. Big surprise. So what you are saying is that a guy out of football is better than Brady, correct? Just like when you said Brady plays as well as Mark Sanchez, right? The fact that you are even allowed to post here on a daily basis is astounding to me.

    Our "Super Bowl defense" was made up of guys like Steerling Moore...the Deadericks of the world...the Kyle Loves...the Arringtons...the Patrick Chungs. It's a miracle we even got there, you can thank Brady and Belichick the coach for that.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Poll: Calvin Johnson or Darrelle Revis

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    The fact that Sterling Moore was starting for a Super Bowl defense is further proof that defense wasn't very good. This is what I'm talking about...marginal players, playing because we had no one better to play for us. Despite all of that we still win...why? Because we have a guy who plays the most important position in football (quarterback), playing it very very well. And because we have a coach that can take a guy who would be a third stringer on another team and hide him in his scheme, where he won't be exposed until we play a real team. That's why.

    So I ask our regional football expert once again, if you are such an expert on football, why can't you instantly see that our defense wasn't very good?? Why is that? Someone that knows football would almost instantly be able to see that our linebackers couldn't cover, that our safeties were nothing more than fill in players not capable of covering tight ends or playing in the box, and that our corners weren't very big (or good). You'd know this instantly, yet YOU didn't. You'd also know that our defensive line was pretty good against the run - not great - but offered almost nothing as pass rushers. You would recognize this immediately if you knew football, but you don't. Someone that knew football would know - beyond a doubt - that we had some decent players at certain spots that were coached very well, but weren't able to cover up for the many problems with our defense (lack of pass rush, lack of coverage, lack of fast physical difference makers than can make the players around them better).

    God willing those play makers will be on this defense next year...Revis, C. Jones, Collins, Browner, Easley...to go along with Mayo, Wilfork and Nink, because that is what was missing...playmakers.

     



    He was not starting.  He also had a pick 6 in december and outplayed brady in the title game.

    Triple OUCH.




    You can't answer any of my questions because you either don't understand football (option A) or are too stupid to answer them correctly (option B).

    I don't care that Sterling Moore "had a pick 6 in December"...yippee!!! And as far as him "outplaying Brady"...you are a world class moron...total bozo...buffoon.

    What's Sterling Moore doing nowadays? If he is all you think, then he is a starting corner in the NFL halfway through his 35 million dollar contract, but he's not...he's out of football. Big surprise. So what you are saying is that a guy out of football is better than Brady, correct? Just like when you said Brady plays as well as Mark Sanchez, right? The fact that you are even allowed to post here on a daily basis is astounding to me.

    Our "Super Bowl defense" was made up of guys like Steerling Moore...the Deadericks of the world...the Kyle Loves...the Arringtons...the Patrick Chungs. It's a miracle we even got there, you can thank Brady and Belichick the coach for that.



    Or option 3, moron...i am busy working unlike your unemployed self.

    I do not care what the names on the jersey said in 2011. In the postseason, the d outperformed the offense in the postseason.

    That is a fact.  Indisputable.

    It is a miracle we got there because brady looked so awful, it appeared he was on the take for chrissakes.

    2 and 3 ints in afc title games since 2007.  You with me?  That is god awful.  Asante samuel bailed out brady in the 2007 afc title game. Spikes and moore in 2011s.

    Eat it, cupcake.  You cannot change history and that is me knowing the 2011 d wasn't great at all.  It was pretty good, but flawed vs the pass. It still does not excuse how flippin' awful brady can be choosing to throw 40+ times with leads given to him by a d that creates at least 2 turnovers per game.

    The 1 game 2 fumbles bounced wrong for the d, brady still could not pull his own pretty giselle induced weight in sb 46.




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    The D outperformed no one.  They were worse than their 31st ranking.  WORSE!!!

    THAT is indisputable, not your fckd up backassward, logic that rivals an infant's thought process.

    Why was Serling Moore NOT resigned, moron?  Just answer that.  We'll wait for you to finish your unemployment request for payment.

    Pretty much everything you say is the OPPOSITE of the truth and the converse of reality..

    Is that by design because I hate to think you are really that ignorant. 

    You'd have to be in the lower 1% of the IQ spectrum. 

    And if you are so busy why the 100 other posts?

    LIAR!  FRAUD!

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

    Re: Poll: Calvin Johnson or Darrelle Revis

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    Another way to make the argument (and maybe it's the start of a mathematical proof) is that if your defense is poor, the average score to win the game will be higher than if your defense is good.  If you assume that the variance around the average is the same percentage in both scenarios, then the actual absolute variance in scoring needed is smaller in the first scenario than the last.  (I know that's not very clearly written.)

     

    Put simply--if your defense is good so that the winning score is usually about 20 points and the variance around the average is 50%, then your offense is almost certain to win if it scores 30 points (about one TD and one FG above the league average).  If your defense is poor so that the winning score is usually around 28 points and the variance around the average is still 50%, then your offense isn't certain to win unless it scores 42 points i(which is three TDs above the league average, and pretty hard to do in games where teams typically only have 11 scoring chances) 



    But, isn't that obvious?  I mean, if a team's D only gives up, say, 17 or 19 points, then all it needs on O is 18 or 20 points.  Conversely, if the D gives up, say, 28 points, then the O needs to score 29 points.

    The problem has been that even though the Patriots' D has held the opposition to less than 20 points in their last two Super Bowls, the O has not been able to score over 17 points.  Seems to me, the way to go is to improve the D even further to try to limit teams to less than two TDs.  Hard to do, but it might prove easier than getting this O to become more productive.




    We're not talking about a single game here.  We're talking about what a team does on average and how much variance there typically is around the average.  The basic idea (again one that I intuitively think is right, but that I'm not 100% sure is right because I haven't proved it to myself mathematically), is that being able to win by limiting points on defense is better than having to win by scoring lots of points on offense.  The reason is if your defense averages giving up a small number of points, the normal variance in performance is still going to result in a relatively small number of scores for the other team.  If the norm is giving up 15 points and the variance is 50% around the norm, then the likely range of scores for your opponent will be 7 to 22 points.  If your offense normally scores 30 points a game, and the variance around the norm is still 50%, then the range of scores for your own team will be 15 points to 45 points.  The spread is twice as large going the high points (offensive) route than going the (defensive) low points route.  Again, there may be some flaw in my logic (I havent' thought this all the way through and I'm suspicious of assuming that variance is constant with big and small numbers or can be measured in percentages), but basically I'm saying that winning offensively means you will be in more high scoring games and (because there are lots of points to work with) there will be greater absolute variation in scores.  Winning defensively means you are likely involved in more low scoring games and (because there are fewer points to work with) there will be less absolute variation in scores.  With high scores and high variation in scores, he offense is bound to come up short periodically, while with low scores and low variation, the offense will find it hard to come up short.

    As far as the Super Bowl, number of possessions would be a variable to consider in this analysis as well. 

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

    Re: Poll: Calvin Johnson or Darrelle Revis

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    The fact that Sterling Moore was starting for a Super Bowl defense is further proof that defense wasn't very good. This is what I'm talking about...marginal players, playing because we had no one better to play for us. Despite all of that we still win...why? Because we have a guy who plays the most important position in football (quarterback), playing it very very well. And because we have a coach that can take a guy who would be a third stringer on another team and hide him in his scheme, where he won't be exposed until we play a real team. That's why.

    So I ask our regional football expert once again, if you are such an expert on football, why can't you instantly see that our defense wasn't very good?? Why is that? Someone that knows football would almost instantly be able to see that our linebackers couldn't cover, that our safeties were nothing more than fill in players not capable of covering tight ends or playing in the box, and that our corners weren't very big (or good). You'd know this instantly, yet YOU didn't. You'd also know that our defensive line was pretty good against the run - not great - but offered almost nothing as pass rushers. You would recognize this immediately if you knew football, but you don't. Someone that knew football would know - beyond a doubt - that we had some decent players at certain spots that were coached very well, but weren't able to cover up for the many problems with our defense (lack of pass rush, lack of coverage, lack of fast physical difference makers than can make the players around them better).

    God willing those play makers will be on this defense next year...Revis, C. Jones, Collins, Browner, Easley...to go along with Mayo, Wilfork and Nink, because that is what was missing...playmakers.

     



    He was not starting.  He also had a pick 6 in december and outplayed brady in the title game.

    Triple OUCH.




    You can't answer any of my questions because you either don't understand football (option A) or are too stupid to answer them correctly (option B).

    I don't care that Sterling Moore "had a pick 6 in December"...yippee!!! And as far as him "outplaying Brady"...you are a world class moron...total bozo...buffoon.

    What's Sterling Moore doing nowadays? If he is all you think, then he is a starting corner in the NFL halfway through his 35 million dollar contract, but he's not...he's out of football. Big surprise. So what you are saying is that a guy out of football is better than Brady, correct? Just like when you said Brady plays as well as Mark Sanchez, right? The fact that you are even allowed to post here on a daily basis is astounding to me.

    Our "Super Bowl defense" was made up of guys like Steerling Moore...the Deadericks of the world...the Kyle Loves...the Arringtons...the Patrick Chungs. It's a miracle we even got there, you can thank Brady and Belichick the coach for that.



    Or option 3, moron...i am busy working unlike your unemployed self.

    I do not care what the names on the jersey said in 2011. In the postseason, the d outperformed the offense in the postseason.

    That is a fact.  Indisputable.

    It is a miracle we got there because brady looked so awful, it appeared he was on the take for chrissakes.

    2 and 3 ints in afc title games since 2007.  You with me?  That is god awful.  Asante samuel bailed out brady in the 2007 afc title game. Spikes and moore in 2011s.

    Eat it, cupcake.  You cannot change history and that is me knowing the 2011 d wasn't great at all.  It was pretty good, but flawed vs the pass. It still does not excuse how flippin' awful brady can be choosing to throw 40+ times with leads given to him by a d that creates at least 2 turnovers per game.

    The 1 game 2 fumbles bounced wrong for the d, brady still could not pull his own pretty giselle induced weight in sb 46.




    Unemployed? Oh my heavens no (thank God for that), if that were the case I wouldn't be packing right now to leave for the Cayman Islands tomorrow. You know how it is, we usually do Aruba, but it's just lost it's touch a little bit there...not a lot, but a little. I hear the Caymans are the new Aruba, so we shall see. Do you know what it costs to pay for a family of four to go to these places? Awful.

    You coming up to Revere beach for a week? Maybe you can rent an Iroc Z? If my room has wifi I'll try to check in sometime next week...until then try to understand what makes a good defense...what it's like to have the luxury of a great quarterback...and how important it is to have a coach that can cover up the mistakes of his GM. Lol!!!

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

    Re: Poll: Calvin Johnson or Darrelle Revis

    I'd rather have Revis, and a defense that can hold a lead. We won three super bowls without big name WRs, built and stud defenses




     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from mellymel3. Show mellymel3's posts

    Re: Poll: Calvin Johnson or Darrelle Revis

    Great D always tops great O, especially in the playoffs...REVIS!

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

    Re: Poll: Calvin Johnson or Darrelle Revis

    In response to NoMorePensionLooting's comment:

    Calvin Johnson....and it ain't even close...

    With Stafford as his QB....he's a game changer...google up his catch highlights.

    With Brady, his numbers would be sick crazy.... beyond great.

    He is indefensible and a game changer.




    No player is indefensible if you have a good NFL D. Not a great but a good NFL D. Proof is no team with the best wr in the league has won the superbowl since SF did it with Rice.

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

    Re: Poll: Calvin Johnson or Darrelle Revis

    In response to oklahomapatriot's comment:


    I'd rather have Revis, and a defense that can hold a lead. We won three super bowls without big name WRs, built and stud defenses









    Okay, I just can't let this go.  The fact is, none of the Super Bowl winning D's were what you would call shutdown or "stud" defenses.  None of them "held a lead".  In SB 36, the D gave up 14 points in the second half and the O scored 6; in SB 38, the D gave up 19 points in the second half and the O scored 18; in SB 39, the D gave up 14 points in the second half and the O scored 17 points.


    Now, looking at the two losses, in SB 42 the D gave up 14 points in the second half and the O scored 7; in SB 46 the D gave up 12 points in the second half and the O scored 7.


    In two out of the three wins the D gave up more, in the second half, than the O scored.  In the two losses, the D gave up more, in the second half, than the O scored.  In one of those losses, that was the fewest points the D gave up in the second half in any of those 5 SB's.


    Go figure.


    Anyway, I'm with you.  I'd take Revis.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Poll: Calvin Johnson or Darrelle Revis

    If Revis gets back to pre ACL then Revis by a long shot

    Its been proven that BB , and usually has been successful, by taking the best offensive guy off the table/

    Whereas Revis, can take one guy out all by his lonesome and leave double teams for others, and can cause DB sacks. If Revis cannot do taht then it is CJ

    Besides we have some one better than Johnson , and that is the Gronk - I know he has been injured but really the last injury was any player that is going to be hit full force by a helmet on the knee. too me one of the great cheap shots of all time. yah he aimed for his knee cause he didnt want to hitGronk's  head - about 3 1/2 ft higher - Glad that dirtbag isnt on our team


    Pat's Fan lost in Jet Land

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share