Rally C

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

    Rally C

    If the shotgun spread works the best for the Pats,and I am one of those posters that the problem was overuse,basically I came to the conclusion run the ball 4-6 times more a game which they did and things became worse LOL. Would some designed roll outs for Tom help, what can the offense do to not be shut down in the big games?

     
  2. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Rally C

    In response to ReturnofBologna's comment:

     

    If the shotgun spread works the best for the Pats,and I am one of those posters that the problem was overuse,basically I came to the conclusion run the ball 4-6 times more a game which they did and things became worse LOL. Would some designed roll outs for Tom help, what can the offense do to not be shut down in the big games?

     



    The shotgun's overuse in the PATS case when not in the "hurry up" is to allow for TOM to get a more time to survey the coverage pre-snap. This compensates for his poor foot speed and time lost during his 3, 5, 7 step drops as he gets a quicker committment from the D to show what they are doing and more time to evaluate. This gives the receivers and the QB better ideas as to what the option routes can be. Though a well placed designed roll out could work, its unlikely as those rolls are intended to put pressure on the edge guys with a run/pass option. In Tom's case, he ain't running, therefore, the pressure isn't there. So, no, not a good idea. What would be nice to see is if they would get back to their more robust screen packages, but with them keeping Tom in the shotgun, the D is forced into a beter position to stop the screen. They'd have to get back to Tom under center more, which means in order to keep the D honest from teeing off on Tom each time they'd have to run even more. But then we are talking less time for him to do what HE does best, read, throw. Perplexing for sure......As far as what else they can do: Mc Daniels knows better than I as I am a CB.

     

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

    Re: Rally C

    In response to ReturnofBologna's comment:

    If the shotgun spread works the best for the Pats,and I am one of those posters that the problem was overuse,basically I came to the conclusion run the ball 4-6 times more a game which they did and things became worse LOL. Would some designed roll outs for Tom help, what can the offense do to not be shut down in the big games?




    TB is not so good on roll outs. That is not the answer. HAving healthy TEs will help. But having a more dominant OL, which means upgrading the interior, would also be meaningful.

    Bottom line is that you have to consider what talent you have available at any one time and what the matchups are. What might work against Denver may not work so well against Balt. So there is no ONE answer - unless you can dominate everyone with some part of your arsenal.

    I do think we want to upgrade the running game anyway. That has been true since the year we drafted both TEs. I think we have improved there. The question will be whether this years group is enough. ANd part of that answer is, as always, whether weare healthy through the payoffs. If we had the Ravens health and they had ours we might very well be SB champs.

    Running draws is a sketchy way to try to overcome other weaknesses (matchup wise) because a D ready for it can make you pay.

    Bottom line is that we need to be more reliable getting 1-3 yards on the ground in short yardage and goal line against the best Ds and we need to be more reliable in getting both meaningful yards on the ground on first or second down and also to have enough big play ability to keep the D (and pass rush) honest. Getting 4-8 yards is fine but if you dont make enough big plays on the ground the D doesnt have to worry. Worst thing is they give up a first down, not a big play. ANd so they can t off and go for TB.

    If Canon can break out at RG and Connolly can beat out Wendell for C we might have upgrade two of the three interior positions. WIth Ballard holding the fort till Gronk is ready (game 7) and Ridley and Vereen playing "bigger" we might just have a top 4 running offense to go with a TB led top 4 passing offense.

     

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

    Re: Rally C

    In response to RallyC's comment:

    In response to ReturnofBologna's comment: 

    If the shotgun spread works the best for the Pats,and I am one of those posters that the problem was overuse,basically I came to the conclusion run the ball 4-6 times more a game which they did and things became worse LOL. Would some designed roll outs for Tom help, what can the offense do to not be shut down in the big games?



    The shotgun's overuse in the PATS case when not in the "hurry up" is to allow for TOM to get a more time to survey the coverage pre-snap. This compensates for his poor foot speed and time lost during his 3, 5, 7 step drops as he gets a quicker committment from the D to show what they are doing and more time to evaluate. This gives the receivers and the QB better ideas as to what the option routes can be. Though a well placed designed roll out could work, its unlikely as those rolls are intended to put pressure on the edge guys with a run/pass option. In Tom's case, he ain't running, therefore, the pressure isn't there. So, no, not a good idea. What would be nice to see is if they would get back to their more robust screen packages, but with them keeping Tom in the shotgun, the D is in a beter position to stop them. They'd have to get back to Tom under center more, but then we are talking less time for him to do what HE does best, read, throw. As far as what else they can do: Mc Daniels knows better than I as I am a CB. 



    I understand everything in your post, Rally, except the comment about his poor foot speed relative to him dropping back.  Tom's lack of foot speed is apparent to anyone who has seen him run and I certainly don't question that.  However, I've always been under the impression that his ability to set up in the pocket and his movement within the pocket were really quite good.  Is that a misperception on my part?

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ghostofjri37. Show ghostofjri37's posts

    Re: Rally C

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    In response to ReturnofBologna's comment:

     

    If the shotgun spread works the best for the Pats,and I am one of those posters that the problem was overuse,basically I came to the conclusion run the ball 4-6 times more a game which they did and things became worse LOL. Would some designed roll outs for Tom help, what can the offense do to not be shut down in the big games?

     




    TB is not so good on roll outs. That is not the answer. HAving healthy TEs will help. But having a more dominant OL, which means upgrading the interior, would also be meaningful.

     

    Bottom line is that you have to consider what talent you have available at any one time and what the matchups are. What might work against Denver may not work so well against Balt. So there is no ONE answer - unless you can dominate everyone with some part of your arsenal.

    I do think we want to upgrade the running game anyway. That has been true since the year we drafted both TEs. I think we have improved there. The question will be whether this years group is enough. ANd part of that answer is, as always, whether weare healthy through the payoffs. If we had the Ravens health and they had ours we might very well be SB champs.

    Running draws is a sketchy way to try to overcome other weaknesses (matchup wise) because a D ready for it can make you pay.

    Bottom line is that we need to be more reliable getting 1-3 yards on the ground in short yardage and goal line against the best Ds and we need to be more reliable in getting both meaningful yards on the ground on first or second down and also to have enough big play ability to keep the D (and pass rush) honest. Getting 4-8 yards is fine but if you dont make enough big plays on the ground the D doesnt have to worry. Worst thing is they give up a first down, not a big play. ANd so they can t off and go for TB.

    If Canon can break out at RG and Connolly can beat out Wendell for C we might have upgrade two of the three interior positions. WIth Ballard holding the fort till Gronk is ready (game 7) and Ridley and Vereen playing "bigger" we might just have a top 4 running offense to go with a TB led top 4 passing offense.

     




    I think you may be pleasantly surprised at Vareens ability to run in between the tackles. i am not advocating that he be the lead back or they do this on a consistant basis but based on what he did at Cal and some of the runs as a patriot the ability to run tight is there.

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

    Re: Rally C

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    In response to RallyC's comment:

     

    In response to ReturnofBologna's comment: 

    If the shotgun spread works the best for the Pats,and I am one of those posters that the problem was overuse,basically I came to the conclusion run the ball 4-6 times more a game which they did and things became worse LOL. Would some designed roll outs for Tom help, what can the offense do to not be shut down in the big games?



    The shotgun's overuse in the PATS case when not in the "hurry up" is to allow for TOM to get a more time to survey the coverage pre-snap. This compensates for his poor foot speed and time lost during his 3, 5, 7 step drops as he gets a quicker committment from the D to show what they are doing and more time to evaluate. This gives the receivers and the QB better ideas as to what the option routes can be. Though a well placed designed roll out could work, its unlikely as those rolls are intended to put pressure on the edge guys with a run/pass option. In Tom's case, he ain't running, therefore, the pressure isn't there. So, no, not a good idea. What would be nice to see is if they would get back to their more robust screen packages, but with them keeping Tom in the shotgun, the D is in a beter position to stop them. They'd have to get back to Tom under center more, but then we are talking less time for him to do what HE does best, read, throw. As far as what else they can do: Mc Daniels knows better than I as I am a CB. 

     



    I understand everything in your post, Rally, except the comment about his poor foot speed relative to him dropping back.  Tom's lack of foot speed is apparent to anyone who has seen him run and I certainly don't question that.  However, I've always been under the impression that his ability to set up in the pocket and his movement within the pocket were really quite good.  Is that a misperception on my part?

     

     


    "Foot speed" and "foot work" are often confused. Tom is an absolute tactician in the foot work area. His drp back passing ability was incredible when he was able to take advantage of the timing routes.  And, Tom's maneuverability in the confines of the pocket is way above average. He has an amazing ability to identify pressure, and does the unnatural thing to evade it by stepping into the pocket instead of away from the pressure. This is especially counterintuitive for a QB who had his knee destroyed. Flight away from potential contact is always the normal instinct. The key to Tom's success in the beginning was that the PAT's scheme was mostly timing. Step, Step, Step, read, read, throw. This is foot work. More recently, the D's have become more aggressive in taking the receivers "off their marks" and this forced us to revert to the Shotgun more often to allow for more time and "option route" strategies with flexibility for Tom and his smarter receivers. The problem now is that when the coverage is good and they take the receivers off hteir designed routes, Tom is exposed with terrible foot speed. Drop back good footwork, Shotgun evading terrible foot speed.

     

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

    Re: Rally C

    In response to RallyC's comment:

    The shotgun's overuse in the PATS case when not in the "hurry up" is to allow for TOM to get a more time to survey the coverage pre-snap. This compensates for his poor foot speed and time lost during his 3, 5, 7 step drops as he gets a quicker committment from the D to show what they are doing and more time to evaluate. 

    What the heck does foot speed have to do with dropbacks?  I don't believe for a second that there is any substantive difference between the speed with which Brady drops back from under center versus other QBs.

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

    Re: Rally C

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

     

    In response to RallyC's comment:

     

    The shotgun's overuse in the PATS case when not in the "hurry up" is to allow for TOM to get a more time to survey the coverage pre-snap. This compensates for his poor foot speed and time lost during his 3, 5, 7 step drops as he gets a quicker committment from the D to show what they are doing and more time to evaluate. 

     

     

    What the heck does foot speed have to do with dropbacks?  I don't believe for a second that there is any substantive difference between the speed with which Brady drops back from under center versus other QBs.

     


    Not true. Not all 3, 5, 7-step drops are the same for all QBs. The QB executes his drop, which is practiced to be at the same pace everytime for each individual play in order for the rythym and timing of the throw to match the planned location for the receiver. When Tom does it, it may take up to .5 seconds longer and read then throw vs. what RG3 does on the same play. That would  allow for more reaction time and closure by the D on a regular basis. So it does make a bit of difference.  For perspective, if a guy runs a 4.5 40-yd dash, thats about 8.9-yards per second. 1/2 of that is nearly 5-yards space eaten up by the D-line, the DB's, etc. in closure with a slower footed QB vs. the nimble footed ones with that much less time or space to make the read. Make sense?

     

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

    Re: Rally C

    In response to CliffordWasHere's comment:

    I know I am not RallyC, but I am open to ANY kind of plays that Tom isn't used to running.  Even a QB draw from time to time.  A designed check down to our RB.  How about even that? Or, to our FB?

    There was a play last year, I forget which game, where Brady hit Hooman on a back side check down and it was like a 12 yard gain.

    WHy not more of that stuff that is designed to lure coverage forward, not backward or towards the middle of the field?

     




    ask the coach!

     

    Seriously I think we all wanna see more diverse plays but you seem to be the only one that thinks Brady is at fault for that. I agree on most of what you said but Brady running Qb draws!??!  Really, for what? The guy isnt fast, I dont know why you advocate for him to run so much when he is an immoble, pocket passer. Must want him to get hurt knowing you....lol

    :)

    All we need is more playaction with dump offs to the fullback. Its ALWAYS open in ANY offense, and when the backers creep up, you chuck it downfield.

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

    Re: Rally C

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

     

    In response to CliffordWasHere's comment:

     

    I know I am not RallyC, but I am open to ANY kind of plays that Tom isn't used to running.  Even a QB draw from time to time.  A designed check down to our RB.  How about even that? Or, to our FB?

    There was a play last year, I forget which game, where Brady hit Hooman on a back side check down and it was like a 12 yard gain.

    WHy not more of that stuff that is designed to lure coverage forward, not backward or towards the middle of the field?

     

     




     

    ask the coach!

     

    Seriously I think we all wanna see more diverse plays but you seem to be the only one that thinks Brady is at fault for that. I agree on most of what you said but Brady running Qb draws!??!  Really, for what? The guy isnt fast, I dont know why you advocate for him to run so much when he is an immoble, pocket passer. Must want him to get hurt knowing you....lol

    :)

    All we need is more playaction with dump offs to the fullback. Its ALWAYS open in ANY offense, and when the backers creep up, you chuck it downfield.

     


    Yup. Tom is both our best asset for success in the near term, yet our biggest hinderance to a having a dynamic offense. Bottom line is that as long as we have a "pro style QB" as in the last decade's style QB, we are limited and must find great balance in our offense between run and pass, and continue to rule in the turnover ratio, if we are to remain successful. Common sense, I know. WE have to win on special teams, penalties, and all of the intangibles.

     

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

    Re: Rally C

    In response to RallyC's comment:

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

     

    In response to CliffordWasHere's comment:

     

    I know I am not RallyC, but I am open to ANY kind of plays that Tom isn't used to running.  Even a QB draw from time to time.  A designed check down to our RB.  How about even that? Or, to our FB?

    There was a play last year, I forget which game, where Brady hit Hooman on a back side check down and it was like a 12 yard gain.

    WHy not more of that stuff that is designed to lure coverage forward, not backward or towards the middle of the field?

     

     




     

    ask the coach!

     

    Seriously I think we all wanna see more diverse plays but you seem to be the only one that thinks Brady is at fault for that. I agree on most of what you said but Brady running Qb draws!??!  Really, for what? The guy isnt fast, I dont know why you advocate for him to run so much when he is an immoble, pocket passer. Must want him to get hurt knowing you....lol

    :)

    All we need is more playaction with dump offs to the fullback. Its ALWAYS open in ANY offense, and when the backers creep up, you chuck it downfield.

     

    Yup. 



    Is it really THAT simple and straightforward?  As complex as this offense apparently is a simple check down to the fullback?

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

    Re: Rally C

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    In response to RallyC's comment:

     

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

     

    In response to CliffordWasHere's comment:

     

    I know I am not RallyC, but I am open to ANY kind of plays that Tom isn't used to running.  Even a QB draw from time to time.  A designed check down to our RB.  How about even that? Or, to our FB?

    There was a play last year, I forget which game, where Brady hit Hooman on a back side check down and it was like a 12 yard gain.

    WHy not more of that stuff that is designed to lure coverage forward, not backward or towards the middle of the field?

     

     




     

    ask the coach!

     

    Seriously I think we all wanna see more diverse plays but you seem to be the only one that thinks Brady is at fault for that. I agree on most of what you said but Brady running Qb draws!??!  Really, for what? The guy isnt fast, I dont know why you advocate for him to run so much when he is an immoble, pocket passer. Must want him to get hurt knowing you....lol

    :)

    All we need is more playaction with dump offs to the fullback. Its ALWAYS open in ANY offense, and when the backers creep up, you chuck it downfield.

     

    Yup. 

     



    Is it really THAT simple and straightforward?  As complex as this offense apparently is a simple check down to the fullback?

     

     


    ATJ, Tom is both our best asset for success in the near term, yet our biggest hinderance to a having a dynamic offense. Bottom line is that as long as we have a "pro style QB" as in the last decade's style QB, we are limited and must find great balance in our offense between run and pass, and continue to rule in the turnover ratio, if we are to remain successful. Common sense, I know. We have to win on special teams, penalties, and all of the intangibles. That's the Patriot Way and has been for a decade plus, no? 

     

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

    Re: Rally C

    In response to RallyC's comment:


    ATJ, Tom is both our best asset for success in the near term, yet our biggest hinderance to a having a dynamic offense. Bottom line is that as long as we have a "pro style QB" as in the last decade's style QB, we are limited and must find great balance in our offense between run and pass, and continue to rule in the turnover ratio, if we are to remain successful. Common sense, I know.



    There is nothing "common sense" about this post.  Arguing the HOF QB and greatest player in franchise history is preventing us from having a dynamic offense because of his lack of speed is easily the most illogical thing I have ever read on this forum (and that's saying something).  There is literally no way you ever played football at any level let alone professionally.

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

    Re: Rally C

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

     

    In response to RallyC's comment:

     


    ATJ, Tom is both our best asset for success in the near term, yet our biggest hinderance to a having a dynamic offense. Bottom line is that as long as we have a "pro style QB" as in the last decade's style QB, we are limited and must find great balance in our offense between run and pass, and continue to rule in the turnover ratio, if we are to remain successful. Common sense, I know.

     



    There is nothing "common sense" about this post.  Arguing the HOF QB and greatest player in franchise history is preventing us from having a dynamic offense because of his lack of speed is easily the most illogical thing I have ever read on this forum (and that's saying something).  There is literally no way you ever played football at any level let alone professionally.

     

     


    OK. Just becasue you refuse to believe that Tom is 35 and in decline means you are not a realist and won't believe the truth. We are who Tom Brady is. A HOF QB who has won multiple Superbowls and who still can, even at a lesser personal talent level. Sure they can win it this year, and I never said anything less. BUT, Tom Brady will not be THE reason it happens this year. Look for an imprved Defense and more balance on Offense with the intagibles being what propels this team, if we win it. You'll see. It doesn't matter who I am dude. But, I am exactly who I said I am. Peace! OH, and after just reading your last post.....ANY casual fan, forget about former player, can see that you are simply in denial. 35 and dynamic does not go together for tall, slow, old, white dudes. Sorry.....

     

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

    Re: Rally C

    In response to RallyC's comment:

     

    ATJ, Tom is both our best asset for success in the near term, yet our biggest hinderance to a having a dynamic offense. Bottom line is that as long as we have a "pro style QB" as in the last decade's style QB, we are limited and must find great balance in our offense between run and pass, and continue to rule in the turnover ratio, if we are to remain successful. Common sense, I know. WE have to win on special teams, penalties, and all of the intangibles. That's the Patriot Way and has been for a decade plus, no?  



    Implicit in your response (or perhaps more subtlely explicit) is that in order for an offense, any offense, to be really successful in today's NFL the team must have a quarterback ala RGIII or Kaepernick.  I'm not entirely sure that I agree but I'll defer to your insight.  And I guess I took too literally your one word response in the post that preceded the one from which I'm quoting i.e. yup.  If the offense with Brady cannot be dynamic then I'm still not clear as to how the apparently simple solution of Brady under center with the occasional check-down to the F/B resolves that.  Or perhaps I'm not really fully comprehending your explanation.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from csylvia79. Show csylvia79's posts

    Re: Rally C

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    In response to RallyC's comment:

     


    ATJ, Tom is both our best asset for success in the near term, yet our biggest hinderance to a having a dynamic offense. Bottom line is that as long as we have a "pro style QB" as in the last decade's style QB, we are limited and must find great balance in our offense between run and pass, and continue to rule in the turnover ratio, if we are to remain successful. Common sense, I know.

     



    There is nothing "common sense" about this post.  Arguing the HOF QB and greatest player in franchise history is preventing us from having a dynamic offense because of his lack of speed is easily the most illogical thing I have ever read on this forum (and that's saying something).  There is literally no way you ever played football at any level let alone professionally.

     



    I played football thru college and for quite a few years in inter-army league.  I wasn't the greatest natural ability and size on the field but I enjoyed it   I have met many Pro's and great college guys, they never have flaunted it the way this guy does.  He doesn't even read like a 51 year old... Maybe I'm totally off but his actions just seem out of place for his age and what should be his knowledge.  Playing word semantics and hardly talking realistic football scenarios has me confused. 

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

    Re: Rally C

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    In response to RallyC's comment:

     

     

    ATJ, Tom is both our best asset for success in the near term, yet our biggest hinderance to a having a dynamic offense. Bottom line is that as long as we have a "pro style QB" as in the last decade's style QB, we are limited and must find great balance in our offense between run and pass, and continue to rule in the turnover ratio, if we are to remain successful. Common sense, I know. WE have to win on special teams, penalties, and all of the intangibles. That's the Patriot Way and has been for a decade plus, no?  

     



    Implicit in your response (or perhaps more subtlely explicit) is that in order for an offense, any offense, to be really successful in today's NFL the team must have a quarterback ala RGIII or Kaepernick.  I'm not entirely sure that I agree but I'll defer to your insight.  And I guess I took too literally your one word response in the post that preceded the one from which I'm quoting i.e. yup.  If the offense with Brady cannot be dynamic then I'm still not clear as to how the apparently simple solution of Brady under center with the occasional check-down to the F/B resolves that.  Or perhaps I'm not really fully comprehending your explanation.

     

     


    Bigger, faster, stronger, isn't just an idealistic dream. It is a fact of life and a requirement for winning at the pro level. The team with the biggest, fastest, strongest men at each position will enventually rule in any sport given that the skill level is commensurate. We cannot be a "dynamic" offense with Tom Brady in my opinion. We must be a DIVERSE offense with creativity and balance. Tom will spend much of his time still in the shot gun. We must run much more and more effectively. "Yup" was inteded to clarify that Tom B. ain't running the ball at 35 just to get injured. It must be done other ways. A blend of run, drop back and shot gun, with great defense, and winning the intagibles, turnover ration, discipline, etc. Sorry, but that is what we have.

     

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

    Re: Rally C

    You have a very strange understanding of the word dynamic if you think Brady has to have RGIII level athleticism to lead a dynamic offense.  Funny how we scored more points than any of those dynamic QBs last year.

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

    Re: Rally C

    In response to csylvia79's comment:

     

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

     

    In response to RallyC's comment:

     


    ATJ, Tom is both our best asset for success in the near term, yet our biggest hinderance to a having a dynamic offense. Bottom line is that as long as we have a "pro style QB" as in the last decade's style QB, we are limited and must find great balance in our offense between run and pass, and continue to rule in the turnover ratio, if we are to remain successful. Common sense, I know.

     



    There is nothing "common sense" about this post.  Arguing the HOF QB and greatest player in franchise history is preventing us from having a dynamic offense because of his lack of speed is easily the most illogical thing I have ever read on this forum (and that's saying something).  There is literally no way you ever played football at any level let alone professionally.

     

     



     

    I played football thru college and for quite a few years in inter-army league.  I wasn't the greatest natural ability and size on the field but I enjoyed it   I have met many Pro's and great college guys, they never have flaunted it the way this guy does.  He doesn't even read like a 51 year old... Maybe I'm totally off but his actions just seem out of place for his age and what should be his knowledge.  Playing word semantics and hardly talking realistic football scenarios has me confused. 

     


    Sorry to confuse you. I think I will just leave you to your ignorance now. How does one with an alias flaunt anything????? You are amazing people. I guess nobody ever told you that you were good enough to be engaged by someone like me. Damn shame. I'm no different than you except I was a much better athlete. Are you looking for some kind of God? Sorry to be just another man.........Had you scored higher on the ASVAB testing, maybe the Air Force woulda taken you. I have a brother there and he believes who I am.......

     

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

    Re: Rally C

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

     

    You have a very strange understanding of the word dynamic if you think Brady has to have RGIII level athleticism to lead a dynamic offense.  Funny how we scored more points than any of those dynamic QBs last year.

     


    I think you are looking for the word EFFICIENT, not dynamic. See, when you win the turnover battle the way we did, you get a lot more chances. Learn the game then come talk to me. YOU SIR, are the real fraud here. Thanks. Hmmmmm, lets see, OLD slow white dude vs. Olympic caliber athlete who has a cannon for an arm and runs like the wind. You are a genious!

     

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

    Re: Rally C

    Rally, I take you at your word as to who you are and what you've done but I must confess that I'm having some difficulty following your explanations.  And, no, I don't find you intimidating at all nor do I have any expectations beyond reasoned and insightful responses to our inquiries.  I acknowledge that your responses may be all of that but I'm just not able to 'get there from here.'  No disrespect intended; just being candid.

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

    Re: Rally C

    In response to RallyC's comment:

    I think you are looking for the word EFFICIENT, not dynamic. See, when you win the turnover battle the way we did, you get a lot more chances. Learn the game then come talk to me. YOU SIR, are the real fraud here. Thanks. Hmmmmm, lets see, OLD slow white dude vs. Olympic caliber athlete who has a cannon for an arm and runs like the wind. YOu are a genious!



    The Patriots offense led the league in points per possession so your little diatribe about the turnover margin is moot.  In addition the Patriots ran the "fastest" offense in the league in terms of length of time between plays.  If that isn't "dynamic" then I don't know what is.

    As for your amusing personal attack I would just point out that if athleticism was all that mattered at the QB position then Vick would have been the greatest QB in NFL history.  Learn the game.

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

    Re: Rally C

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    Rally, I take you at your word as to who you are and what you've done but I must confess that I'm having some difficulty following your explanations.  And, no, I don't find you intimidating at all nor do I have any expectations beyond reasoned and insightful responses to our inquiries.  I acknowledge that your responses may be all of that but I'm just not able to 'get there from here.'  No disrespect intended; just being candid.

     


    ATJ, I am sorry that I can't be more clear on what I try to say. The fact that some folks here actually believe that I should speak a certain way, or present myself according to a standard is confusing to me too. See, when I listen to Majic Johnson analyze basketball, I accept that he's not a professor, but just a dude who played basketball very well. I guess I should be a football technologist! Thanks, ATJ. You wouldn't happen to be in Atlanta now with those initials, would ya? If so, we are neighbors. 

     

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

    Re: Rally C

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

     

    In response to RallyC's comment:

     

    I think you are looking for the word EFFICIENT, not dynamic. See, when you win the turnover battle the way we did, you get a lot more chances. Learn the game then come talk to me. YOU SIR, are the real fraud here. Thanks. Hmmmmm, lets see, OLD slow white dude vs. Olympic caliber athlete who has a cannon for an arm and runs like the wind. YOu are a genious!

     



    The Patriots offense led the league in points per possession so your little diatribe about the turnover margin is moot.  In addition the Patriots ran the "fastest" offense in the league in terms of length of time between plays.  If that isn't "dynamic" then I don't know what is.

     

    As for your amusing personal attack I would just point out that if athleticism was all that mattered at the QB position then Vick would have been the greatest QB in NFL history.  Learn the game.

     


    Nope, you are wrong again! CREATIVE is what you are talking about there. look up dynamic, Sir, and you will be better off.  As for points per possession: If what you say is correct, then are you telling me that you don't think that we had most points because we had all those extra possessions? Dude, think before you speak! As for Mike Vick, in the right system, with the right coach, with the right attitude, HE COULD HAVE BEEN the greatest QB in NFL history, please say that you don't believe that and you prove your ignorance to everyone watching. Just because you don't like him doesn't make it unture! NOW, please show me where I said all that mattered was athleticism......IGNORANT! Athleticism allows for dynamics, otherwise efficiency is the best road to follow. Get it?

     

     

Share