These are the facts

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

    Re: These are the facts

    In response to FrnkBnhm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Brady regular season 2001-2004 passer rating: 87.5

    Brady post season 2001-2004 passer rating: 88.9

    Brady regular season 2007-2012 passer rating: 105.5

    Brady post season 2007-2012 passer rating: 86.1

    He has literally become a worse post season than regular season QB.

    [/QUOTE]

    Have you heard? The better teams get in the playoffs.

    Do you think most QBs put up the same numbers against the best that they put up during the season when they play a number of poor teams?

     
  2. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: These are the facts

    In response to FrnkBnhm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Eli Manning 2011 - Regular Season 92.9 / Post Season 103.3

    Aaron Rodgers 2010 - Regular Season 101.2 / Post Season 109.8

    Drew Brees 2009 - Regular Season 109.6 / Post Season 117.0

    Roethlisberger 2008 - Regular Season 80.1 / Post Season 91.6

    Eli Manning 2007 - Regular Season 73.9 / Post Season 95.7

    All of these guys played better in the post-season.

    [/QUOTE]

    And Brady had a 100.4 in this last post-season. But you don't think that is comparable to these numbers? And he did this despite having to play the NFL's best pass D - the Ravens - 68.8 DPR.

    How much better did you think he should have done in 2010 than his 89 against the Jets' 77 DPR while he was getting sacked 5 times?

    In the 2007 SB he was sacked 5 times as well. Not to mention getting slammed another nearly 15 times.

    Learn the game.

     

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

    Re: These are the facts

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to FrnkBnhm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Here is a list of other Qb's whose postseason QBR is less (common because the competition is usually better) then their regular season QBR.These are all Hall of Famers or future hall of famers:

    Steve Young, Peyton Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, Otto Graham (by more than 20 points), Dan Marino, Roger Staubach, Len Dawson, John Elway, Unitas, Dan Fouts etc.

     There are some QBs whose rating does go up. Bart Star's is up more than 20 points in the post season. He is probably the greatest playoff QB ever. We still know this is a joke because Mark Sanchez has one of the best post season QB ratings ever (the 6th best ever). so yes Frnk you are acting like a troll.

    [/QUOTE]

    I will always maintain that Brady's two Super Bowl losses will forever keep him from passing Montana as the greatest QB of all time. 4-0 in the Super Bowl with 11 TDs and 0 picks will keep Montana in that seat until some one repeats that, but does it one better.

    True that most QBs ratings go down in the playoffs. My point was that Brady's was consistent early in his career, but over the past six season his playoffs rating is 20 points lower than his regular season. 

    I still think Brady is an elite QB in the modern NFL. I still think he is one of the best ever to play the position. My point is that putting up signicantly lower numbers in the playoffs than the regular season is a large part of the reason this team has not hoisted the Lombardi trophy since 2005.

    [/QUOTE]


    If Welker catches that pass last year Brady most likely wins another super bowl MVP (Woodhead seems to be the only other choice) despite not playing a great game. If Merriweather or Samuel (much harder chance) catches the interception in the Giants final drive Brady probably wins another MVP without really playing a great game. Your numbers show Brady plays the same as he always did in the playoffs but they no longer win super bowls, why do you think that is? I'll tell you why i think it is because they no longer have a great defense. They won super bowls because of the defense primarily except for the one against Carolina.

    [/QUOTE]

    Ditto. All those numbers tell me is that a.) you draw weaker defenses in the regular season, and b.) if high 80s was enough to win 14-15 games per season and three Superbowls in the early part of the decade ... and it isn't now ... then something else has changed ... which is obvious to anyone with eyes ... the defense has been a shell of what it was before.

    This is why *defense* wins championships. Look at the Saints ... they won a SB. But they did it  scoring just 17 points on their own as an offense. 

    They got a short field from a brilliant special teams play and a pick six. 

    Offenses always score less in the playoffs because great defenses practically populate the field.  If you want to know, roughly, what you can expect against the playoff field, then average what the offense scored per game against the best defenses they played. Their average score against scrubs is meaningless.

    They should average something in the mid-20s across a playoff field, with a low in the high teens and a high in the low thirties given how they've performed against *plus* defenses this season. 

    Two things: that is a *phenomenal* scoring range against plus defenses, which typically allow an average in the teens. When your low is the league average, your offense is special. Two, that is almost exactly what the scoring spread was last season. 

    Also of note: New England went 4-4 against plus defenses. So taking it as a given that they are going to roll on playoff opponents is just naive. You can also look at that as a barometer of what to expect. Unfortunately. 

    NE struggles against good defenses. Why? Their offense slows down, and their defense hasn't been able to stop mediocre offenses like Baltimore or NY in the past.

    Here is hoping the defense comes to play, unlike last postseason. They are going to need it, because the offense isn't going to run the table scoring 30 a game. 

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

    Re: These are the facts

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to FrnkBnhm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Here is a list of other Qb's whose postseason QBR is less (common because the competition is usually better) then their regular season QBR.These are all Hall of Famers or future hall of famers:

    Steve Young, Peyton Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, Otto Graham (by more than 20 points), Dan Marino, Roger Staubach, Len Dawson, John Elway, Unitas, Dan Fouts etc.

     There are some QBs whose rating does go up. Bart Star's is up more than 20 points in the post season. He is probably the greatest playoff QB ever. We still know this is a joke because Mark Sanchez has one of the best post season QB ratings ever (the 6th best ever). so yes Frnk you are acting like a troll.

    [/QUOTE]

    I will always maintain that Brady's two Super Bowl losses will forever keep him from passing Montana as the greatest QB of all time. 4-0 in the Super Bowl with 11 TDs and 0 picks will keep Montana in that seat until some one repeats that, but does it one better.

    True that most QBs ratings go down in the playoffs. My point was that Brady's was consistent early in his career, but over the past six season his playoffs rating is 20 points lower than his regular season. 

    I still think Brady is an elite QB in the modern NFL. I still think he is one of the best ever to play the position. My point is that putting up signicantly lower numbers in the playoffs than the regular season is a large part of the reason this team has not hoisted the Lombardi trophy since 2005.

    [/QUOTE]


    If Welker catches that pass last year Brady most likely wins another super bowl MVP (Woodhead seems to be the only other choice) despite not playing a great game. If Merriweather or Samuel (much harder chance) catches the interception in the Giants final drive Brady probably wins another MVP without really playing a great game. Your numbers show Brady plays the same as he always did in the playoffs but they no longer win super bowls, why do you think that is? I'll tell you why i think it is because they no longer have a great defense. They won super bowls because of the defense primarily except for the one against Carolina.

    [/QUOTE]

    Ditto. All those numbers tell me is that a.) you draw weaker defenses in the regular season, and b.) if high 80s was enough to win 14-15 games per season and three Superbowls in the early part of the decade ... and it isn't now ... then something else has changed ... which is obvious to anyone with eyes ... the defense has been a shell of what it was before.

    This is why *defense* wins championships. Look at the Saints ... they won a SB. But they did it  scoring just 17 points on their own as an offense. 

    They got a short field from a brilliant special teams play and a pick six. 

    Offenses always score less in the playoffs because great defenses practically populate the field.  If you want to know, roughly, what you can expect against the playoff field, then average what the offense scored per game against the best defenses they played. Their average score against scrubs is meaningless.

    They should average something in the mid-20s across a playoff field, with a low in the high teens and a high in the low thirties given how they've performed against *plus* defenses this season. 

    Two things: that is a *phenomenal* scoring range against plus defenses, which typically allow an average in the teens. When your low is the league average, your offense is special. Two, that is almost exactly what the scoring spread was last season. 

    Also of note: New England went 4-4 against plus defenses. So taking it as a given that they are going to roll on playoff opponents is just naive. You can also look at that as a barometer of what to expect. Unfortunately. 

    NE struggles against good defenses. Why? Their offense slows down, and their defense hasn't been able to stop mediocre offenses like Baltimore or NY in the past.

    Here is hoping the defense comes to play, unlike last postseason. They are going to need it, because the offense isn't going to run the table scoring 30 a game. 

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

    Re: These are the facts

    I think the keys for the Pats going far into the playoffs are two:

    1. Pass defense needs to be better than it has been the past few years

    2. O-line has to be healthy and play better than in the past

    Things that I see as unlikely to be problems, include:

    • Offensive skill positions (another downfield receiver would help, but they are fine at QB, RB, and generally with receivers as long as Gronk, Welker, Hern, and Lloyd are all healthy)
    • Run defense 
    • Coaching (including game planning and play calling)
    • Kicking game (though the kick return unit could be better)

     

     

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

    Re: These are the facts

    In response to zbellino's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Here is hoping the defense comes to play, unlike last postseason. They are going to need it, because the offense isn't going to run the table scoring 30 a game. 

    [/QUOTE]

    This offense is actually built to win a low scoring affair now because it has a running game, something that's been missing that you'll never allow yourself to see because of your rigid dogma.  

    The same grind it out approach that the Giants stuck with in last year's Super Bowl should be our blueprint on how to beat the best teams in the playoffs... we should know it well, it's how we won three rings from 2001-2004.

    As soon as we win a tighly contested, low scoring playoff game by controlling the TOP expect me to dredge this post up to remind you of this.

    That I have to remind our "fans" of what Patriot football used to look like is sad, but it is what it is...

     

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

    Re: These are the facts

    In response to FrnkBnhm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RockScully's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to palookaski's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RockScully's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dreighver's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Why is there so much hate and aggression on this forum? We can all disagree at times, but the rate at which people attack one another is ridiculous. We're all Pats fans, right? And the Pats went 12-4 and got a first-round bye, right? Why is everyone so tense and angry?

    [/QUOTE]

    SB 42, blame BB for the witch hunt known as Spygate, Brady blows out a leg, Pats are in transition 1 and done, Pats inexperienced and rebuilding 1 and one, Pats lose SB.

    Through all of this, the only thing that some fans have cared about is if Brady can come close to his 2007 stats record. It's almost like one group of fans only cares about THAT and THAT only v.s. realizing how tough it is to be locking down the divsion every year and BB laying this incredible foundation around Brady. It's not like Brady waves a magic wand or moves mountains by himself.

    And, it's INCREDIBLY annoying to hear our own fans think that Brady made BB. That's what Jets fans and other jealous fans do because Brady is "nicer" than BB.  BB left the Jets at the altar, wisely so, so the Jets fan premise is "Brady made BB".  How covenient!  Sure, the best coach of all time somehow was made by Brady even though his defensive genius and obvious cap genius is a big reason to provide this backdrop. It's pathetic. And, our own fans take on that Jets based rhetoric as tthey've bashed BB for 3 straight years here almost as if he's the reason why our offense didn't play better in SB 42 or 46.

    I could give two squats about that or continuing to look for scapegoats, mostly towards BB who didn't deliver a top flight veteran D to help Brady be better on offense for a SB win.

    Our fans are VERY spoiled here and have ZERO perspective. They also have this weird fixation with being jealous of these media darling teams every year who clearly ain't winning a SB.

    The Jets in 2010, last year it was Houston or SF, this year it's Seattle. 

    Finally, their anger also really stems from Brady not playing as well in the postseason like he used to, so when it's pointed out to them, they lash out.  It's like father in American Beauty who is homophobic, but is actually gay. lol

    Those are our Ballwashers here.

    The only thing that can cure is for Brady to deliver as everyone knows he can. It's the one thing we've been missing in the playoffs, most of the time recently, for a long time.

    [/QUOTE]

    I find your comment incredibly amusing. The man whom your answering has 4 ? in his comment. You answer him with the name BRADY 11 times. So Brady is the root cause of all the mans 4 questions of, Why the, Hate and Agression , anger, Attacks and tenseness????

    Is that correct? It's been Brady all along? Not the Trolls at all?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    No.   It's the fact we're looking at Brady's last SB in in February of 2005.    He's been in 2 SBs since then, and under-performed.

    That's what it means.

    Some of our Irrationals/Washers, while not trolls, behave like trolls, but are actually sick Pats fans who don't get that we aren't winning a SB with an under-performing offense in an offensive era.

    As a Pats fan, this is not amusing to me whatsoever.

    [/QUOTE]

    I could not agree with this more. In fact, in the playoffs in general, Brady has under performed since the last Super Bowl victory. Early in his career (when the Pats won 3 in 4 years) Brady played consistently from the regular season to the playoffs.

    Since he started putting up the big regular season number (2007-present). He has not been able to recreate his regular season success when the playoffs begin.

    Brady regular season 2001-2004 passer rating: 87.5

    Brady post season 2001-2004 passer rating: 88.9

    Brady regular season 2007-2012 passer rating: 105.5

    Brady post season 2007-2012 passer rating: 86.1

    He has literally become a worse post season than regular season QB.

    [/QUOTE]


    you must be another one of rustys account or just another poster who doesnt know football. from 01-04, do you think teams gameplanned for Brady the way they have since 07'??  ONe word answer please...lol @ these phony fans who think they know the game.  You take away a great RB and your QB's game gets better and the attention will turn to the star QB and he will have to do MUCH more and this aint even talking about the decline in the defenses since 05...LMAO

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

    Re: These are the facts

    Has this board come down to this? If you don't agree with a pink hatter's statements, you're a "troll"? If you have a rational bone in your body, and you know which end of the football gets thrown first, yet don't agree with these laughable "greatest" claims, you're a troll?

    I've made the claim that the majotiry of today's "fans" can barely remember 10 minutes ago, and this tripe proves it.

    Greatest coach? If I need an absolute "must win" game, give me Lombardi, he who THE trophy is named after, patrolling the sideline. Hands down. He was doing it when there were fewer teams, more and bigger rivalries (ie: you played EVERY TEAM every year, no salary cap, no 1000 assistants to assistants to assistant assistants on the sidelines. He did it with a lower active roster too. Plus there's the economics of the game..... no HUGE national TV revenue to spend on players. All this from a speck on the map called Green Bay. Ever been there? Won't find any any glitz or glimmer there.  Now, if you're goinfg to make Super Bowl Wins comparisons, he won 2 and NEVER LOST one.

    Brady, greatest QB ever? Again, yesterday DID happen. If you want oure stats, he ain't it. If you want post season wins, he's near the top. If you want Super Bowl Wins (you know, that little stat we kept throwing at The Forehead in the "he hasn't won anything!" debate, he still ain't it (recall Montana and Bradshaw?) either. Stats? There's guys names Marino and Favre that far out-stat him. Plus there's this nagging Super Bowl thing going on.... Oh, yeah. They, too, NEVER lost one. Brady, two 4th Qtr gaks in his last two moment of glory, times to shine, which would have cemented him as The Greatest, IF he won. Didn't happen.

    Pats offense? For today, with the rules heavily geared towards offensive productivity, I'll give them their due. But, let's temper it a tad seeing how they play 6 games vs The Sisters Of The Poor, Lame, Sick, and Blind. Throw in two other last place teams (one from an AFC division they play, and the other from the NFC conference division they play, plus two 3rd place teams), and it's relatively easy to do. Then, of course, when the offense spoutters it's NEVER Brady's fault. Babe will sweat to that.

    Their defense? Sure, like last season, they came on at the end. But, in the end of their last two SB appearences, they gakked it at the end. Either that, or Brady couldn't do it. Go ahead, I'll lwet YOU make that call.  There is no doubt that the DB's this year gave us all fits (being gashed continually by QB'd who'd normally have to pay admission to get into Canton). Yet, they did come on. This doesn't mean that all ill have been cured. It's still as scary bunch back there, and it wouldn't surprise me to see the REAL Schaub show up Sunday. I said it before, and I'll repeat it: this defense does NOT strike any fear into any other team.

    I'll agree that this is a relatively young team, and I like the potential of what I see. But, as they learn, they need to apply it in key situations. They had the opportunity to REALLY make a statement against the Niners, at home, and played like the Texans did the week before. GOOD teams don't do that. Any REAL Pats fan that doesn't see this is only kidding themselves, and it gets more painful seeing the denials when the results stay the same.  Results = Super Bowl wins. Win 12-14 games a season, year in and year out makes you a favorite to win.

    Despite what most posters here say, yesterday was nice, but it's over. This new bunch of Pats have no reputation other than "can't win the big one". Anyone else hear "Cowboys" in that statement?  It's fine time they go out, strap it up, and get the job done. THEN I'll be convinced that they COULD be the 'greatest".

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

    Re: These are the facts

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to zbellino's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Here is hoping the defense comes to play, unlike last postseason. They are going to need it, because the offense isn't going to run the table scoring 30 a game. 

    [/QUOTE]

    This offense is actually built to win a low scoring affair now because it has a running game, something that's been missing that you'll never allow yourself to see because of your rigid dogma.  

    The same grind it out approach that the Giants stuck with in last year's Super Bowl should be our blueprint on how to beat the best teams in the playoffs... we should know it well, it's how we won three rings from 2001-2004.

    As soon as we win a tighly contested, low scoring playoff game by controlling the TOP expect me to dredge this post up to remind you of this.

    That I have to remind our "fans" of what Patriot football used to look like is sad, but it is what it is...

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You generally take a grind it out approach if your offense is weaker than your opponents' offense and your defense is stronger than their defense.  In that case, you're trying to win with defense.  Slowing the rate of scoring on offense only makes sense if you have a complementary defense that can keep the other team from scoring too.

     

     

     

     

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

    Re: These are the facts

    In response to zbellino's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    NE struggles against good defenses. Why? Their offense slows down, and their defense hasn't been able to stop mediocre offenses like Baltimore or NY in the past.

    [/QUOTE]


    Ding ding ding.  We have a winner.

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

    Re: These are the facts

    In response to TripleOG's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to FrnkBnhm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RockScully's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to palookaski's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RockScully's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dreighver's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Why is there so much hate and aggression on this forum? We can all disagree at times, but the rate at which people attack one another is ridiculous. We're all Pats fans, right? And the Pats went 12-4 and got a first-round bye, right? Why is everyone so tense and angry?

    [/QUOTE]

    SB 42, blame BB for the witch hunt known as Spygate, Brady blows out a leg, Pats are in transition 1 and done, Pats inexperienced and rebuilding 1 and one, Pats lose SB.

    Through all of this, the only thing that some fans have cared about is if Brady can come close to his 2007 stats record. It's almost like one group of fans only cares about THAT and THAT only v.s. realizing how tough it is to be locking down the divsion every year and BB laying this incredible foundation around Brady. It's not like Brady waves a magic wand or moves mountains by himself.

    And, it's INCREDIBLY annoying to hear our own fans think that Brady made BB. That's what Jets fans and other jealous fans do because Brady is "nicer" than BB.  BB left the Jets at the altar, wisely so, so the Jets fan premise is "Brady made BB".  How covenient!  Sure, the best coach of all time somehow was made by Brady even though his defensive genius and obvious cap genius is a big reason to provide this backdrop. It's pathetic. And, our own fans take on that Jets based rhetoric as tthey've bashed BB for 3 straight years here almost as if he's the reason why our offense didn't play better in SB 42 or 46.

    I could give two squats about that or continuing to look for scapegoats, mostly towards BB who didn't deliver a top flight veteran D to help Brady be better on offense for a SB win.

    Our fans are VERY spoiled here and have ZERO perspective. They also have this weird fixation with being jealous of these media darling teams every year who clearly ain't winning a SB.

    The Jets in 2010, last year it was Houston or SF, this year it's Seattle. 

    Finally, their anger also really stems from Brady not playing as well in the postseason like he used to, so when it's pointed out to them, they lash out.  It's like father in American Beauty who is homophobic, but is actually gay. lol

    Those are our Ballwashers here.

    The only thing that can cure is for Brady to deliver as everyone knows he can. It's the one thing we've been missing in the playoffs, most of the time recently, for a long time.

    [/QUOTE]

    I find your comment incredibly amusing. The man whom your answering has 4 ? in his comment. You answer him with the name BRADY 11 times. So Brady is the root cause of all the mans 4 questions of, Why the, Hate and Agression , anger, Attacks and tenseness????

    Is that correct? It's been Brady all along? Not the Trolls at all?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    No.   It's the fact we're looking at Brady's last SB in in February of 2005.    He's been in 2 SBs since then, and under-performed.

    That's what it means.

    Some of our Irrationals/Washers, while not trolls, behave like trolls, but are actually sick Pats fans who don't get that we aren't winning a SB with an under-performing offense in an offensive era.

    As a Pats fan, this is not amusing to me whatsoever.

    [/QUOTE]

    I could not agree with this more. In fact, in the playoffs in general, Brady has under performed since the last Super Bowl victory. Early in his career (when the Pats won 3 in 4 years) Brady played consistently from the regular season to the playoffs.

    Since he started putting up the big regular season number (2007-present). He has not been able to recreate his regular season success when the playoffs begin.

    Brady regular season 2001-2004 passer rating: 87.5

    Brady post season 2001-2004 passer rating: 88.9

    Brady regular season 2007-2012 passer rating: 105.5

    Brady post season 2007-2012 passer rating: 86.1

    He has literally become a worse post season than regular season QB.

    [/QUOTE]


    you must be another one of rustys account or just another poster who doesnt know football. from 01-04, do you think teams gameplanned for Brady the way they have since 07'??  ONe word answer please...lol @ these phony fans who think they know the game.  You take away a great RB and your QB's game gets better and the attention will turn to the star QB and he will have to do MUCH more and this aint even talking about the decline in the defenses since 05...LMAO

    [/QUOTE]

    Hmmmm... IF the other teams are out there "gameplanning" Brady, seems to me BB missed class on developing other CONSISTENT offensive weapons, like a ground game. Your excuse is like saying the NFL has caught up to the Pats, but the Pats haven't caught up to the NFL. Laughable, especially when teh ultimate results aren't there.  

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: These are the facts

    In response to shenanigan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Tom Brady is the greatest QB of all time

    Bill Belichick is the greatest coach of all time

    The Patriots offense is historically great

    The Patriot defense has improved and will be a factor.

     

    These are facts that any Patriot fan will agree with-

    step up and identify yourself as a jealous troll if you disagree.

     

    Troll List

    Rusty

    Jints

    Underdog

    Leon

    Phatrex

    Frnkbnhm

    [/QUOTE]


    Very interesting that we have a thread here designating others and it is receiving no disdain from the board.  If I do it however, its as if I've committed a felony. 

    BTW - you've got some of your facts wrong. 

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

    Re: These are the facts

    Lots of finger pointing here.  This is one of those discussions in which there is plenty to argue about with no satisfactory result other than more name calling!

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

    Re: These are the facts

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Lots of finger pointing here.  This is one of those discussions in which there is plenty to argue about with no satisfactory result other than more name calling!

    [/QUOTE]

    Actually Shenanigan is right - it's a fact that all those people are trolls.  Probably the same person with multiple accounts.

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

    Re: These are the facts

    .

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

    Re: These are the facts

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to FrnkBnhm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Eli Manning 2011 - Regular Season 92.9 / Post Season 103.3

    Aaron Rodgers 2010 - Regular Season 101.2 / Post Season 109.8

    Drew Brees 2009 - Regular Season 109.6 / Post Season 117.0

    Roethlisberger 2008 - Regular Season 80.1 / Post Season 91.6

    Eli Manning 2007 - Regular Season 73.9 / Post Season 95.7

    All of these guys played better in the post-season.

    [/QUOTE]

    And Brady had a 100.4 in this last post-season. But you don't think that is comparable to these numbers? And he did this despite having to play the NFL's best pass D - the Ravens - 68.8 DPR.

    How much better did you think he should have done in 2010 than his 89 against the Jets' 77 DPR while he was getting sacked 5 times?

    In the 2007 SB he was sacked 5 times as well. Not to mention getting slammed another nearly 15 times.

    Learn the game.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Not to mention they are comparing stats in a 16 game regular season to a (in TB's case, 1-3 game post season) or in Eli, Brees.  ect 3 game season.  One bad game in a 16 game regular season will not necessarily skew those stats but one bad game in a 1-3 game postseason will greatly reduce QBR.

    And yes, the D's play in limiting possessions greatly decreased QBR as did the 8 dropped passes in the SB.  Passes completed and yards gained would have INCREASED dramatically, without those.

    In other words, it takes a village.

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

    Re: These are the facts

    In response to AZPAT's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TripleOG's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to FrnkBnhm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RockScully's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to palookaski's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RockScully's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dreighver's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Why is there so much hate and aggression on this forum? We can all disagree at times, but the rate at which people attack one another is ridiculous. We're all Pats fans, right? And the Pats went 12-4 and got a first-round bye, right? Why is everyone so tense and angry?

    [/QUOTE]

    SB 42, blame BB for the witch hunt known as Spygate, Brady blows out a leg, Pats are in transition 1 and done, Pats inexperienced and rebuilding 1 and one, Pats lose SB.

    Through all of this, the only thing that some fans have cared about is if Brady can come close to his 2007 stats record. It's almost like one group of fans only cares about THAT and THAT only v.s. realizing how tough it is to be locking down the divsion every year and BB laying this incredible foundation around Brady. It's not like Brady waves a magic wand or moves mountains by himself.

    And, it's INCREDIBLY annoying to hear our own fans think that Brady made BB. That's what Jets fans and other jealous fans do because Brady is "nicer" than BB.  BB left the Jets at the altar, wisely so, so the Jets fan premise is "Brady made BB".  How covenient!  Sure, the best coach of all time somehow was made by Brady even though his defensive genius and obvious cap genius is a big reason to provide this backdrop. It's pathetic. And, our own fans take on that Jets based rhetoric as tthey've bashed BB for 3 straight years here almost as if he's the reason why our offense didn't play better in SB 42 or 46.

    I could give two squats about that or continuing to look for scapegoats, mostly towards BB who didn't deliver a top flight veteran D to help Brady be better on offense for a SB win.

    Our fans are VERY spoiled here and have ZERO perspective. They also have this weird fixation with being jealous of these media darling teams every year who clearly ain't winning a SB.

    The Jets in 2010, last year it was Houston or SF, this year it's Seattle. 

    Finally, their anger also really stems from Brady not playing as well in the postseason like he used to, so when it's pointed out to them, they lash out.  It's like father in American Beauty who is homophobic, but is actually gay. lol

    Those are our Ballwashers here.

    The only thing that can cure is for Brady to deliver as everyone knows he can. It's the one thing we've been missing in the playoffs, most of the time recently, for a long time.

    [/QUOTE]

    I find your comment incredibly amusing. The man whom your answering has 4 ? in his comment. You answer him with the name BRADY 11 times. So Brady is the root cause of all the mans 4 questions of, Why the, Hate and Agression , anger, Attacks and tenseness????

    Is that correct? It's been Brady all along? Not the Trolls at all?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    No.   It's the fact we're looking at Brady's last SB in in February of 2005.    He's been in 2 SBs since then, and under-performed.

    That's what it means.

    Some of our Irrationals/Washers, while not trolls, behave like trolls, but are actually sick Pats fans who don't get that we aren't winning a SB with an under-performing offense in an offensive era.

    As a Pats fan, this is not amusing to me whatsoever.

    [/QUOTE]

    I could not agree with this more. In fact, in the playoffs in general, Brady has under performed since the last Super Bowl victory. Early in his career (when the Pats won 3 in 4 years) Brady played consistently from the regular season to the playoffs.

    Since he started putting up the big regular season number (2007-present). He has not been able to recreate his regular season success when the playoffs begin.

    Brady regular season 2001-2004 passer rating: 87.5

    Brady post season 2001-2004 passer rating: 88.9

    Brady regular season 2007-2012 passer rating: 105.5

    Brady post season 2007-2012 passer rating: 86.1

    He has literally become a worse post season than regular season QB.

    [/QUOTE]


    you must be another one of rustys account or just another poster who doesnt know football. from 01-04, do you think teams gameplanned for Brady the way they have since 07'??  ONe word answer please...lol @ these phony fans who think they know the game.  You take away a great RB and your QB's game gets better and the attention will turn to the star QB and he will have to do MUCH more and this aint even talking about the decline in the defenses since 05...LMAO

    [/QUOTE]

    Hmmmm... IF the other teams are out there "gameplanning" Brady, seems to me BB missed class on developing other CONSISTENT offensive weapons, like a ground game. Your excuse is like saying the NFL has caught up to the Pats, but the Pats haven't caught up to the NFL. Laughable, especially when teh ultimate results aren't there.  

    [/QUOTE]

    well its not an excuse. Its called Corey Dillon retired. Everyone outside of Rusty knows that Benny HIll was not good enough to take attention from Brady, so I guess there are 2 people now..  Congratulations on aligning with Rusty and his Brady Bashing Agenda! I understand you are frustrated but dont come in here with your sh*tstorm right before the playoffs start when you havent posted all year because then you look and sound like a troll and trolls arent respected here.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: These are the facts

    I just so stupid that I can wrap my mind around the fact that in the Super Bowl Tom Brady will be playing the best defenses so naturally his Rating will go down Depending on the level of competition and a hobbling GRONK.

    Lets see....last year's Super Bowl ended with what 4 or 5 dropped passes? Thats gotta hurt a QB's rating, you think?  Hard for a troll to see the Forest through the hate.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: These are the facts

    When we got beat in the superbowls it was because the giants generated a pass rush. Whether it was due to the O line breaking down, scheme or what ever, it worked.  

    For this game we need a pass rush. We get that our corners look al pro and we will beat anyone. Time for chandler jones to step up and be the force he can be. If they have to double him the other side can have a lot of fun.  

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: These are the facts

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    You generally take a grind it out approach if your offense is weaker than your opponents' offense and your defense is stronger than their defense.  In that case, you're trying to win with defense.  Slowing the rate of scoring on offense only makes sense if you have a complementary defense that can keep the other team from scoring too.  

    [/QUOTE]

    You act as though a grind it out approach was something that you always have a choice about?  In a perfect world your offense would blow everybody off the ball. Grind it out happens whether you like it or not, when two evenly matched playoff teams meet and we find out who blinks first.

    Belichick's defense will do what it does every year when the playoffs start, stiffen up, play better...

    It's the offense that has to toughen up, has to impose it's will on the opposition, needs to have the ball in the final minutes and has to move the chains when everything is on the line.  If they have the slimmest of leads and are trying to run the clock out (like they proved they could do in their final game vs the Dolphins) when the opposition knows they will run, but they do it anyway. 

    This isn't the domain of finesse offense's, this is where smashmouth football teams thrive and soft, pass happy offense's die.  

    You guys are in total denial that there is a difference between these two philosophies, that running matters, we'll find out this year.  

    And even if we win with this style you'll still deny the obvious, I've resigned myself to the fact that many posters here can't admit they're wrong or can't remember how we won titles as recent as eight to ten years ago.

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

    Re: These are the facts

    No, we think it's important to be able to sustain drives and run when running makes sense.  What we don't buy is that "smashmouth ground and pound" is the only formula or a sure formula for success.  

    If it were the 49ers would have beaten the Giants in the playoffs last year.  But they didn't win, despite running more than they threw.  Funny, SF couldn't control TOP either. . . the Giants did it by passing 64 times.  

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

    Re: These are the facts

    49ers lost because of three fumbled kick returns, don't get it twisted.

    A smashmouth team can spread out and play finesse, a finesse team can't necessarily do the same, at least we haven't been able to, the Manning Colt's couldn't...

    The only stats that matter are points scored, points against and turnovers.  

    The Patriots of old that won rings were "smashmouth" teams, the Patriot teams that have lost every year since were not.

     

Share