Standing Ovation

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Standing Ovation

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

    Brady has been mostly embarrassing in the postseason since 2007 except against teams with a bad D.




    In the playoffs since 2007 we have played 6 "top 10 Ds".

    He had 3 TDs, 0 INTs and 262 yards against the Jags.

    He had 2 TD, 1 INT and 299 yards vs the Jets.

    He had 3 TD, 0 INTs and 344 yards against the Texans.

    That's 8 TDs and 1 INT against half the top 10 D's he's played.

     

    So again you are shown to be a LIAR!

     

    Hey, tell us MegaFool, do you expect that QBs generally play better against the good Ds than the bad ones?

     

    Another day........ another bludgeoning of the village imbecile.

     

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

    Re: Standing Ovation

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

    Agreed. The injuries are just legendary at this point. I've never seen a team lose their best starters right down the middle and continue to battle and play pretty well through some other injury issues.

    BB has to be in line for Coach of the Year.



    When your team is built around Tom Brady, a top 5 QB for his ENTIRE career, as long as you don't lose him, it's fine.  You bash Brady at every turn, but he's the reason why the team has won 10 games.  You're inability to recall the pre Brady days, makes you think that no team has ever had it as bad as the Patriots.  It's arrogant and pathetic all at the same time. In your twisted opinion, you think that the Pats have these top5 players at every position and it's so dreadful when they go down.  It's just not the case.  We're not talking about a team loaded with stars here, now or at the beginning of the season. Get over it and stop your freakin crying.



    Meadow, now how many times have you been told to only talk about things you understand. You still need to finish football for girl friends 101.

    Still, it is good that you have learned to appreciate good players like Brady - he is a top 3 QB evey year. But remember Meadow, a few years ago, 2008, around the time you were getting fitted for your first bra, Brady missed an entire season (he was hurt during the first game). And the Patriots won 11 games without him. And without a really good TE or a very good feature RB. ANd without a dominating D. Just a solid all around team using a QB who played smart and was coached smart.

    So remember the first day of football for girl friends class - football is truly a TEAM sport. Only fantasy football fans care only for headline stats.

     



    So, what you're saying is that because 5 years ago, when the 2008 Patriots were coming off an undefeated regular season and a superbowl loss with a veteran team that provided a top 10 defense and a top 10 running game to their backup QB that had spent the previous 3 years with that team and he was able to play servicably and win some games against a weak schedule, but fail to even make the playoffs,  that means that Tom Brady in 2013 is not the only QB that would have done as well as he has with an entirely new offensive cast?   Who then?  Ryan Mallet?  Some other QB that had not played in the system or with any of the Pats roster?  Yeah, that's what I thought.  What a fool.  

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

    Re: Standing Ovation

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

    Agreed. The injuries are just legendary at this point. I've never seen a team lose their best starters right down the middle and continue to battle and play pretty well through some other injury issues.

    BB has to be in line for Coach of the Year.



    When your team is built around Tom Brady, a top 5 QB for his ENTIRE career, as long as you don't lose him, it's fine.  You bash Brady at every turn, but he's the reason why the team has won 10 games.  You're inability to recall the pre Brady days, makes you think that no team has ever had it as bad as the Patriots.  It's arrogant and pathetic all at the same time. In your twisted opinion, you think that the Pats have these top5 players at every position and it's so dreadful when they go down.  It's just not the case.  We're not talking about a team loaded with stars here, now or at the beginning of the season. Get over it and stop your freakin crying.




    I certainly appreciate what TB has done and what he continues to do, but the fact is that you can't honestly say that he is the reason that this team has won ten games, to this point.  He is as culpible as anyone on this team for some of the slow starts and poor play this year.  His overall play, this year, has been sub-standard, for him.  The one thing that I am most excited to see from him, this year though, are his strong finishes.  If he can keep that up in the playoffs then it's all good!  Hopefully, he can find a way to get it going before half the game is over, that's all.



    There is no other QB in the NFL currently that could have won that many games with this team.  You can't replace an entire receiving corps and then sustain the additional loss of players and expect that the offense would even be close to competent. He's underthrown, overthrown, missed, thrown some picks, fumbled and no one else in the NFL could have stepped in and done any better, IMO.  




    Now you know why I have that turkey on ignore. Hell, I don't even have you on ignore, so he has to be extra special bad.

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

    Re: Standing Ovation

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    But remember Meadow, a few years ago, 2008, around the time you were getting fitted for your first bra, Brady missed an entire season (he was hurt during the first game). And the Patriots won 11 games without him.

     

     

    You mean the year we missed the playoffs? The year the previously 1-15 Dolphins won the division? That year?


    And give us the list of teams with a winning record that the 2008 team didn't lose to. (We'll nix out the Cards who had clinched.)

    C'mon bright boy. Give us the whole story.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Standing Ovation

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    But remember Meadow, a few years ago, 2008, around the time you were getting fitted for your first bra, Brady missed an entire season (he was hurt during the first game). And the Patriots won 11 games without him.

     

     

    You mean the year we missed the playoffs? The year the previously 1-15 Dolphins won the division? That year?


    And give us the list of teams with a winning record that the 2008 team didn't lose to. (We'll nix out the Crads who had clinched.)

    C'mon bright boy. Give us the whole story.



    THe comment I was addressing was whether the Pats would be competative as reflected in having a competative season and generating a good number of wins. When Manning went down, for example, the COlts lost so many games they got the #1 pick in the draft. This year the Packers are CLEARLY an under .500 team without Rodgers - regardless of who their opponents are.

    When Brady went down the Pats won 11 games. In this passing era 11 and 5 is unheard of when losing a top 5 QB. You have to go back to earlier eras when being able to run and stop the run meant more. There are examples in those eras but even then only very few. 

    Also, because we were division winners the previous year we had a couple of extra games against other reaigning division winners (and so in theory not a cakewalk schedule).

    Like it or not going 11 -5 - especially in this passing league - when you lose your starting QB is saying something. Doing it when you have a top 3 QB and so even more cash into that one player than most teams have in their QB makes it that much harder on a roster with less money in it outside the starting QB. It is also a reflection on the character of the team to rise to the ocassion rather than fall flat like some teams do when they lose a Manning or a Rodgers...

     

    So yes, lets take an objective assessment. I am not arguing your point that Brady is a huge reason for the success of this team. But it is still a team sport. ANd BB keeps winning even when his star QB or ALL WORLD TE, or the center and heart of the D is gutted by losing three players 2 of which have high honors and high regard around the league.

    This is not a Brady v BB post. Like it or not it is not either or... it does not pretend to compare one to the other... 

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

    Re: Standing Ovation

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    But remember Meadow, a few years ago, 2008, around the time you were getting fitted for your first bra, Brady missed an entire season (he was hurt during the first game). And the Patriots won 11 games without him.

     

     

    You mean the year we missed the playoffs? The year the previously 1-15 Dolphins won the division? That year?


    And give us the list of teams with a winning record that the 2008 team didn't lose to. (We'll nix out the Crads who had clinched.)

    C'mon bright boy. Give us the whole story.



    "The Crads"?

    You are just full of excuses aren't you, Diapers?

    Matt Cassel had not taken a snap in a competitive, live game in a DECADE. A DECADE.

    Since 1999.

    He came off the bench in Week 1 and didn't screw it up, and in fact, played very well. The team also had TWO west coast road trips, BACK TO BACK, which meant time zone travel back and forth in successive weeks, TWICE.

    That's about as difficult a series of road trips as ANY NFL team had that year.

    They went 3-1.  They lost in SD only, which at that time, they were loaded and a SB contender in their prime.

    And, finally, the 47-7 win over the "clinching Crads" was not a mirage. NE's offense was trending up and blasting teams in December and the D was also playing much better as  a unit.

    The Crads went to the SB and I would have LOVED to have seen us get a rematch as an underdog in Pitt that year for the title game.

    11-5 is very impressive in that context with Cassel not having played in a game in 10 years.

    FACT

     



    Making excuses for Cassel for 5 years ago?  That's just sad.  Matt got to sit on the bench and learn for THREE YEARS.  If you can't step in at that point and not blow with a veteran team coming off an undefeated season, you should be out of football.   Just out of curiosity, and I don't know the answer to this, how many seasons has Tom Brady had both a top 10 defense and a top 10 running game in the same year as your favorite QB of all time, Matt Cassel did?

     
  11. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Standing Ovation

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    But remember Meadow, a few years ago, 2008, around the time you were getting fitted for your first bra, Brady missed an entire season (he was hurt during the first game). And the Patriots won 11 games without him.

     

     

    You mean the year we missed the playoffs? The year the previously 1-15 Dolphins won the division? That year?


    And give us the list of teams with a winning record that the 2008 team didn't lose to. (We'll nix out the Crads who had clinched.)

    C'mon bright boy. Give us the whole story.



    "The Crads"?

    You are just full of excuses aren't you, Diapers?

    Matt Cassel had not taken a snap in a competitive, live game in a DECADE. A DECADE.

    Since 1999.

    He came off the bench in Week 1 and didn't screw it up, and in fact, played very well. The team also had TWO west coast road trips, BACK TO BACK, which meant time zone travel back and forth in successive weeks, TWICE.

    That's about as difficult a series of road trips as ANY NFL team had that year.

    They went 3-1.  They lost in SD only, which at that time, they were loaded and a SB contender in their prime.

    And, finally, the 47-7 win over the "clinching Crads" was not a mirage. NE's offense was trending up and blasting teams in December and the D was also playing much better as  a unit.

    The Crads went to the SB and I would have LOVED to have seen us get a rematch as an underdog in Pitt that year for the title game.

    11-5 is very impressive in that context with Cassel not having played in a game in 10 years.

    FACT

     




    Jump on that typo Megatool. The tiny victories help ease the pain of your tremendous bludgeonings as of late (meaning for the last 4 years).

     

    I get that you like to blow a lot of hot air, but I'm still waiting to hear the list of winning teams that didn't beat that team.

     

    The schedule was a joke dumbkoff. Your lies and spin can't change that.

     

    And you can shove your "context" where your older gent "friend" likes to shove it.

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

    Re: Standing Ovation

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    But remember Meadow, a few years ago, 2008, around the time you were getting fitted for your first bra, Brady missed an entire season (he was hurt during the first game). And the Patriots won 11 games without him.

     

     

    You mean the year we missed the playoffs? The year the previously 1-15 Dolphins won the division? That year?


    And give us the list of teams with a winning record that the 2008 team didn't lose to. (We'll nix out the Crads who had clinched.)

    C'mon bright boy. Give us the whole story.



    "The Crads"?

    You are just full of excuses aren't you, Diapers?

    Matt Cassel had not taken a snap in a competitive, live game in a DECADE. A DECADE.

    Since 1999.

    He came off the bench in Week 1 and didn't screw it up, and in fact, played very well. The team also had TWO west coast road trips, BACK TO BACK, which meant time zone travel back and forth in successive weeks, TWICE.

    That's about as difficult a series of road trips as ANY NFL team had that year.

    They went 3-1.  They lost in SD only, which at that time, they were loaded and a SB contender in their prime.

    And, finally, the 47-7 win over the "clinching Crads" was not a mirage. NE's offense was trending up and blasting teams in December and the D was also playing much better as  a unit.

    The Crads went to the SB and I would have LOVED to have seen us get a rematch as an underdog in Pitt that year for the title game.

    11-5 is very impressive in that context with Cassel not having played in a game in 10 years.

    FACT

     



    ALL true. AND - (this is for you Babe) - consider the play and the record of Cassel SINCE that year. BB coached that roster, that team with a guy who had not started since HIGH SCHOOL and who was a young player in the NFL and who has essentially shown since that he is NOT starting material let alone able to QB an average team to 8 and 8.

    In reflection that year is very telling.

    And still this is NOT a Brady v BB thing AT ALL. 

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

    Re: Standing Ovation

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:


    Yeah, because our offense sucked!!!  The all time greatest offense sucks when it matters most and you're proud of that?

    Take your pink hat and leave.




    Yeah, because of the god awful o-line in that game. You think NY had anything to do with that? No, it was all Brady's fault, right? Loser.

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

    Re: Standing Ovation

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    But remember Meadow, a few years ago, 2008, around the time you were getting fitted for your first bra, Brady missed an entire season (he was hurt during the first game). And the Patriots won 11 games without him.

     

     

    You mean the year we missed the playoffs? The year the previously 1-15 Dolphins won the division? That year?


    And give us the list of teams with a winning record that the 2008 team didn't lose to. (We'll nix out the Crads who had clinched.)

    C'mon bright boy. Give us the whole story.




    You are just full of excuses aren't you, Diapers?

     

    ^ This is priceless. He claims I'm full of excuses.

    Then goes on below to make a post full of excuses.......     because he can't answer the simple question of, what winning teams didn't beat that team that year.

     

    Matt Cassel had not taken a snap in a competitive, live game in a DECADE. A DECADE.

    Since 1999.

    He came off the bench in Week 1 and didn't screw it up, and in fact, played very well. The team also had TWO west coast road trips, BACK TO BACK, which meant time zone travel back and forth in successive weeks, TWICE.

    That's about as difficult a series of road trips as ANY NFL team had that year.

    They went 3-1.  They lost in SD only, which at that time, they were loaded and a SB contender in their prime.

    And, finally, the 47-7 win over the "clinching Crads" was not a mirage. NE's offense was trending up and blasting teams in December and the D was also playing much better as  a unit.

    The Crads went to the SB and I would have LOVED to have seen us get a rematch as an underdog in Pitt that year for the title game.

    11-5 is very impressive in that context with Cassel not having played in a game in 10 years.

    FACT

     


    So fun to bludgeon the village imbecile.

     

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

    Re: Standing Ovation

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

    In response to danemcmenamin's comment:

    In response to joepatsfan111111's comment:

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

    In response to joepatsfan111111's comment:

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:



    Brady would need to finish strong. I'd put Foles above Brady at this point. The 19 TDs in the amount of games he's played with 0 INTs has been impressive for such a young QB.

    Cam Newton should be in that discussion, too.

     



    nah, 1. Manning 2. Brady 3. Wilson 4. Cam

    its Most Valuable Player. i think if ryan mallet was starting this year we'd be 4-9 tops



    Brady 2?

    Foles rescued the bust Vick who just threw his first INT this past weekend in a blizzard for the ages. 20 TDs, 1 INT in ten games! That's pretty insane and clearly better than Brady's production.

    He's played in less games, has less talent around him on a crappier team and has almost as many TDs at this point.

    Manning, Foles, Newton.

     



    less talent? DeSean Jackson, LeSean McCoy? really? less talent? nah and that 1 int is a joke because there have been atleast 4-5 balls thrown into double coverage or at DBs that have not been picked. he also been lucky..



    I thought the same thing, Rusty you're clearly mentally ill or selectively so. Foles is having a great season no doubt but to say that he has less talent than Brady is crazy. Which position on the offense are the Pats more talented than the Eagles?  



    TE, OL.

    Foles is a 2nd year QB!  How many 2nd year/1st time off the bench starting QBs have failed when they get the chance with some talent? Pretty much every one!

    Jesus.  20 TDs and 1 INT in 10 games is insane production.

     

     



    The Patriots O-line has not been good! You probably still think Solder is the best LT in the AFC. LMAO@U

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

    Re: Standing Ovation

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

     

    11-5 is very impressive in that context with Cassel not having played in a game in 10 years.

    FACT

     



    I was impressed. That doesn't change the fact that the scedule was a joke MegaFool.

     
  • This post has been removed.

     
  • This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Standing Ovation

    When the Patriots suck it up you say that its not BB's fault because he doesn't play the games but when they win its all him. You're such a toolchest.

    Remember on the game thread when you said, "How can someone be outcoached when they don't play the games." Bwahahahahah

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

    Re: Standing Ovation

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

    Agreed. The injuries are just legendary at this point. I've never seen a team lose their best starters right down the middle and continue to battle and play pretty well through some other injury issues.

    BB has to be in line for Coach of the Year.



    When your team is built around Tom Brady, a top 5 QB for his ENTIRE career, as long as you don't lose him, it's fine.  You bash Brady at every turn, but he's the reason why the team has won 10 games.  You're inability to recall the pre Brady days, makes you think that no team has ever had it as bad as the Patriots.  It's arrogant and pathetic all at the same time. In your twisted opinion, you think that the Pats have these top5 players at every position and it's so dreadful when they go down.  It's just not the case.  We're not talking about a team loaded with stars here, now or at the beginning of the season. Get over it and stop your freakin crying.




    I certainly appreciate what TB has done and what he continues to do, but the fact is that you can't honestly say that he is the reason that this team has won ten games, to this point.  He is as culpible as anyone on this team for some of the slow starts and poor play this year.  His overall play, this year, has been sub-standard, for him.  The one thing that I am most excited to see from him, this year though, are his strong finishes.  If he can keep that up in the playoffs then it's all good!  Hopefully, he can find a way to get it going before half the game is over, that's all.



    There is no other QB in the NFL currently that could have won that many games with this team.  You can't replace an entire receiving corps and then sustain the additional loss of players and expect that the offense would even be close to competent. He's underthrown, overthrown, missed, thrown some picks, fumbled and no one else in the NFL could have stepped in and done any better, IMO.  




    FALSE.

    Philly's D is atrocious again this year as they rebuild that disaster.  Atrocious. Nick Foles has Philly rolling. Too bad he didn't get the chance sooner.

    Vick was a busted signing from the beginning which I predicted. Many fell for it here. I remember pointing out back in 2011 how he only had a good game against awful Ds. I believe it was a game on national tv he had that year and I had to point it out to some people here to not fall for it.

    Now look at it. His career is finally over/he'll be a backup from here on out.

    This is a QB league in an offensive era. We fully realize your Jets are morons finding a solid QB to groom in this era, but it doesn't change this fact, Bustchise Moron.

    Got it? Good.

    The days of giving passes to Tom Brady for mindnumbingly dumb decisions or wasted opporturnities to WIDE OPEN receivers because he cheated on reading his progressions by staring down Gronk or whomever for an entire half, ARE OVER.

    OVER.

    I am certainly not happy Gronk is hurt again, but it was ALARMING seeing what Brady and the offense was doing through 3 qtrs at home on Sunday.



    Hmmm, let's see.  You're logic is that becasue Nick Foles has played well with the same team and core players that he had last year including their probowl RB who runs for 100 yards per game, their probowl WR that means he would have played that well in NE, on a new team, new offense, zero player continuity?  Things like this is why you are mocked.  Well, this and the fact that you are a complete moron.

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

    Re: Standing Ovation

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

     

    ALL true. AND - (this is for you Babe) - consider the play and the record of Cassel SINCE that year.



    Okay, lets.

    Cassel went on to have a pro-bowl season in 2010 with the Chiefs.

    Give me the list of teams with a winning record that 2010 Chiefs team beat?

    It was the same weak weak weak schedule as the 2008 year.

    Cassel is a very lucky guy. He's a multi-millionaire with merely backup talent.

    Of course I said exactly that when he left here, as others were wanting to replace Brady with him. Told people he would flop in KC. They were all up in arms when he had the easy 2010 year. But they are quiet now.

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

    Re: Standing Ovation

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

    Agreed. The injuries are just legendary at this point. I've never seen a team lose their best starters right down the middle and continue to battle and play pretty well through some other injury issues.

    BB has to be in line for Coach of the Year.



    When your team is built around Tom Brady, a top 5 QB for his ENTIRE career, as long as you don't lose him, it's fine.  You bash Brady at every turn, but he's the reason why the team has won 10 games.  You're inability to recall the pre Brady days, makes you think that no team has ever had it as bad as the Patriots.  It's arrogant and pathetic all at the same time. In your twisted opinion, you think that the Pats have these top5 players at every position and it's so dreadful when they go down.  It's just not the case.  We're not talking about a team loaded with stars here, now or at the beginning of the season. Get over it and stop your freakin crying.




    I certainly appreciate what TB has done and what he continues to do, but the fact is that you can't honestly say that he is the reason that this team has won ten games, to this point.  He is as culpible as anyone on this team for some of the slow starts and poor play this year.  His overall play, this year, has been sub-standard, for him.  The one thing that I am most excited to see from him, this year though, are his strong finishes.  If he can keep that up in the playoffs then it's all good!  Hopefully, he can find a way to get it going before half the game is over, that's all.



    Exactly. I don;t understand why the Brady Ballwashers can't accept our point of view.

    It's fair to factor in rookies, Gronk and Vereen out, etc, but that has little do with missing wide open receivers, poor throws or at times, poor leadership on the field. He also brainfarted two fumbled snaps earlier this year in games we could have lost and then said "we need to work on that", which basically throws Wendell under the bus, which is really weak.  Each of those were Brady pulling back too soon, obviously.

    ANyway...no need to rehash more, but it's tiring watching disingenuous Brady Ball Washers here.  They will do anything to deflect, spin, lie and shape a situation back to his favor. It's quite sick.  

    Meanwhile, the rest of us just call it like it is.

    He and McDaniels just need to have a better plan/chemistry and feel for the game and how the opponent shows itself earlier in these games.

    I would try to be very efficient and diverse and get the OL moving more instead of just doing these playaction drop back plays when the run game hasn't been established. Keep Mulligan mostly in line, but also run a designed check down to him and Develin at some point out of the I Formation in the 1st qtr if you can.

    Obviously, those guys are mainly blockers, but if you can show diversity with the player early in the game it sets you up in much better position later on in the game.

    The first half vs Cleveland was an abomination. Way too many play calls that featured Gronk in the gameplan.   

    Against Miami and Baltimore and in the AFC Title game, I want the rock hammered until there is some momentum with it.

    The team they face in the divisional rd likely won't have that capability, which is why Brady's best postseasn games since 2007 came in the divisional rd, minus the Jets match up in 2010.

    Jax in 2007 and Denver in 2011.  The Jets had the advantage of being in the division and being slapped by the Pats twice, so the drive was certainly there with nothing to lose in their mind.  

    I was on here saying what the Jets should do before that game. Did the same thing prior to the December match up, but stupid Rex had Cromartie on Branch.  lmao

     



    Yes moron, a lack of chemistry and players that are just not very good don't contribute to missing throws.  Because, after all, you know all the plays and what each guy is suppose to do and where he should be.  Right?

     
  • This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Standing Ovation

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    But remember Meadow, a few years ago, 2008, around the time you were getting fitted for your first bra, Brady missed an entire season (he was hurt during the first game). And the Patriots won 11 games without him.

     

     

    You mean the year we missed the playoffs? The year the previously 1-15 Dolphins won the division? That year?


    And give us the list of teams with a winning record that the 2008 team didn't lose to. (We'll nix out the Crads who had clinched.)

    C'mon bright boy. Give us the whole story.



    THe comment I was addressing was whether the Pats would be competative as reflected in having a competative season and generating a good number of wins. When Manning went down, for example, the COlts lost so many games they got the #1 pick in the draft. This year the Packers are CLEARLY an under .500 team without Rodgers - regardless of who their opponents are.

    When Brady went down the Pats won 11 games. In this passing era 11 and 5 is unheard of when losing a top 5 QB. You have to go back to earlier eras when being able to run and stop the run meant more. There are examples in those eras but even then only very few. 

    Also, because we were division winners the previous year we had a couple of extra games against other reaigning division winners (and so in theory not a cakewalk schedule).

    Like it or not going 11 -5 - especially in this passing league - when you lose your starting QB is saying something. Doing it when you have a top 3 QB and so even more cash into that one player than most teams have in their QB makes it that much harder on a roster with less money in it outside the starting QB. It is also a reflection on the character of the team to rise to the ocassion rather than fall flat like some teams do when they lose a Manning or a Rodgers...

     

    So yes, lets take an objective assessment. I am not arguing your point that Brady is a huge reason for the success of this team. But it is still a team sport. ANd BB keeps winning even when his star QB or ALL WORLD TE, or the center and heart of the D is gutted by losing three players 2 of which have high honors and high regard around the league.

    This is not a Brady v BB post. Like it or not it is not either or... it does not pretend to compare one to the other... 




    You cover a lot here. I'll one-line the major points.

     

    The Colts sucked for Luck and had a joke backup.

     

    2008 Pats D is far better than the 2013 Pack D, and they are playing musical chairs at QB; Rodgers isn't missing the whole year.

     

    The 2008 team won 11 games against the same schedule the previously 1-15 Dolphins won the division on; Pennington went 0-3 the following year with a 20+ point lower PR.

     

    Yeah, we had a couple of tough opponents in 2008, and we lost to all of them.

     

    We won 11 games (and still missed the playoffs) because the schedule was a joke.

     

    That is all. No amount of spin in the world will change that reality.

     
  • Sections
    Shortcuts

    Share