The Krafty one is starting to get reflective

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

    Re: The Krafty one is starting to get reflective

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

    and exactly what is this supposed to show? you're gonna have to break down each teams individual schedules outside their divisions and conferences for this to mean anything to begin with-then lets see these results from oh say 07 till last season-you know after the team parcells helped build had run it's course and it was bellichicks alone

    besides digger please stop with silly crap like this when u know exactly what i am saying: the pats have been in a divisipn with 3 BAD franchises for almost all of bellichicks run-and there wasn't a year i can think of when two teams were actually good at once, it was jets for a couple of years, the fins for a year or two, bills? dont think so...and the qb's in that division? jeez outsie of a good year or so from pennington and a rare unexpected moment or two from a now gone fitzpatrick in an age of qb being the most important part of a team (you know the so-called goodell offensive era) the afe easy has been pitiful-jeeez romo may throw ill advised picks but on a bad day he is better than anything that crap division has thrown up in a decade

    really, stop with the out of context stuff masking as a cogent point-you know just what i am saying about the afc east: the pats and three stiffs for years now

    Giving you won/loss records is out of context and silly crap? How else do you rate teams? Using your critical eyes? It's a 10 year sample, that's enough evidence. If the AFC East was as pitiful as you say then the Patriots' record outside of the AFC East division should suffer.

    From 2000-2009
    Patriots vs AFC East 42-18 .700
    Patriots vs rest of NFL 70-30 .700

    If the AFC East is pitiful then so is the rest of the NFL.

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

    Re: The Krafty one is starting to get reflective

    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:


    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:


    In response to pezz4pats' comment:


    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:


    In response to pezz4pats' comment:


    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:


    In response to pezz4pats' comment:


    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:


    In response to pezz4pats' comment:


    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:


    No. You'd have to be brain dead to pretend the forward pass becoming popular in the 1940s with Sammy Baugh or the 1970s when the league changed or now with the Goodell rules somehow aren't turning points, and then comparing averages.


    The difference between how the NFL is being run from 2000-2004 and 2005 until now, especially the last few years with a focus on reducing the way Ds play, is VAST.

    A lot of it had to do with lawsuits, the hitting, the money tied to QBs now, etc.

    Enjoy your bludgeoning.


    Didn't say they weren't turning points.  Just stated a fact.  Points per game were higher during those times, than they are now with Goody's rules. Therefore, your point is mute.


    Defenses adjust.  They play with parameters but they adjust.  Not all D's suck.  Some haven't caught on yet but it's not because they play by different rules, it's because they suck.

    Stop spinning, you lose.


    They are turning points. They want them on the plus side.  It;s happening right in front of our eyes. Every offseason, hte rules are tweaked to help offenses.


    My point is mute?  Why do you think Tagliabue was asked to resign, professor?

    That fact the avefrage jumped so suddenly after it being stagnant for years is also more proof.

    That's actually a big jump. It's not a coincidence it jumped and stayed high where it will be higher.

    You have this hard time understanding trends, don't you?



    Sorry, 1 point a game is not a jump.  That's the point.  You can't blame defenses struggles on rules because there has been NO significant change in the amount of points scored per game.  It's also logical to think that when D's get better, as they will, that the 1 insignificant point will go back to where it was.  Just like they did with the other times.


    BTW.  Those 23 points are based on an average 12 possession game.  The average # of possessions have not changed.  That indicates offenses and defenses are NOT spending any more time per possession or that average would drop.  If offenses were holding the ball more, there would be an imbalance in the amount of possessions and time of possession.  That's just another indication the rules are having no great impact on either sides of the ball.  If offensive possession times increased, that would be a problem, but they haven't.   Well, not for good D's anyway.


    The yards is the key. The yards, now mostly passing is where the Ds "rankings" are affected. Throw in a BB D now or then as a D that gives up yards and then holds in the red zone, then you lose again.


    Defenses today should not be judged on yards allowed, in particular, passing yards allowed.

    So, when NE is "ranked" 27th or whatever, any Pats fan with a brain knows that means less than it did in 2001 when NE's D was ranked "24th". No one cares, nor should care and it means less now more than ever. It's why the JEts D sucked in reality, NE's was much better and they "ranked" higher based on only passing yards. They had no balance on D. We did.

    It mean LESS no more than ever based on the traditional metrics. Get it, Corky?


    Nope, and you need to get that the yards haven't increases for everyone.  If it's increased at all it's proportionate and does not discriminate because the Media or Goody doesn't like the Pats.


    There is a vast difference between the amount of yards allowed for a first ranked D and a 31st ranked D.    It's worse for defenses that allow 100 passes over 20.  Get it?


    Again, this goes back to 4 rookies on D in 2010 or a young D with no camp off a lockout in 2011. No one with a brain is expecting some lock down veteran D in these seasons when it's clear what BB is doing. 


    It also doesn't remove Brady from poor 2007 postseason play. That's your denominator. Brady. His offense. Shotgun spread. His preference. Deal with it.

    THe comical part is, the D as limited as it was in 2011 was BETTER to its ceiling than the offense was in in the postseason, so you're argument sucks.

    We lost SB 46 because our offense in a shotgun spread pissed away a lead, led by Brady's god awful INT to start the 4th qtr.

    The drop/high throw only helped the loss to happen.

    Give it up already. The board is tired of you trying to rewrite history.



    Better to it's 31st ranked ceiling?  Laughable!  It can't get any worse.  Better than it's 105 DPR?    None worse!  Not a NFL SB defense.  Not even close!


    Yup, if the Jest or any team had a D that couldn't force a 3 & out, stealing valuable possessions from the O because they think they're supposed to be on the field for 2/3rds the game or couldn't get a rz stop or on and on and on, I'm sure you'd be praising them.   bwahahaha.  What a phoney baloney.

    You're right though, you can't rewrite history and it's in the books!  Worst SB D eva!!!

    Nighty night!



    Who cares about a 3 and out when you're allowing only 13 points and a "number 1" ranked offense looks average or at times bad? Did you want to see Brady use more shotgun as he gets older and older for more thrown away SBs? Why?

    13 points is an incredible score defended against through 3 qtrs in a SB in this era.

    Why does the crappy offense that was worse in terms of what it was capable of, become acceptbale with their performance?

    17 points has only been enough off a wounded duck pass by Eli Manning, ironically when Tom Brady and his offense crapped it up good in that same SB.

    Cannot be made up. Brady wanted weapons, wanted the shotgun and then crapped it up when it counted.

    Brady needs to set down that drawbridge, lose some weight and be ready to scurry back the 4 -7 steps he should be doing under Center vs being lazy in the shotgun throwing games away.




    So offensive 3 & outs matter in a close game but the defensive lack of them doesn't?

    Oh , I see that makes perfect sense (if you are a moron!)

    Low points are a result of low possessions.  The D caused low possessions, both games! Live with it.  Oh and your boy Riddley was responsible for losing 14 points in the AFC, not TB!

    Live with that too!

    Case closed!

    Who cares about 3 & outs?


    Well, you do, crusty!  As evidenced every time you scream to high heaven when the O (who were the best in the league at NOT having them) got one.  You are a fraud.

    Teams care about 3 & outs.

    BB, your idol, cares about 3 & outs because for every extra minute the D stays on the field; it robs your offense of that very same minute or minutes...  That in turn, robs your O of possessions. 

    Offenses need possessions and minutes to score all those high points.

    The D robbed the O of 4 possessions  because of those missing 3 & outs and 26, 1st downs.

    No QB in the NFL has ever scored a point by sitting on the bench.  EVER!

    It is the D's J.O.B. to make sure that doesn't happen.

    When the coach basically has to pull the D off the field and allow the other team to score, you have a HUGE problem.




    In a close game, I care about our offens e going 3 and out over and over and over, yes. I don't care about it in the big scheme of things when only allowing 13 points on the defensive side. If they allowed 25+ points AND didn't do well on 3rd downs, then yes, you'd be correct.


    Get it?

    There is no way around it. Everyone knows it. Our offense and Brady has SUCKED since 2007 in the postseason a lot more than our D has.   Everyone at the nursing home and your mother has been asking "what happened to Tom Brady"? 

    13 or 14 points ain't winning a game in October vs the Raiders, dummy, let alone a postseason game!


  3. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The Krafty one is starting to get reflective

    You can't read, period!  Where did Kraft say that?  I can't find it?  What paragraph is it on?

    Duh, you underlined it in your own thread.  Whoooppps!

    Remember that one?  

    Ya, this new software places comments in the middle, sometimes.  Can you fix it for me?