Tom Brady

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

    Re: Tom Brady

    In response to ClarkGriswold's comment:

    In response to LessPhatRex's comment:

     

    In response to ClarkGriswold's comment:

     

     



    Yeah, 13 points allowed and waiting for the offense to sustain a drive for more than 3 lousy minutes and at least get 1 FG is really "terrible".

     

    Did you just call me an idiot in the other thread saying Baltimore allowing 21 points was not getting lit up or terrible?

    Hmm.

    And that's with a QB in Baltimore who didn't throw moronic INTs or miss wide open WRs to ice games either.

    LOL

    Bludgeoning you in and out of these threads is so easy.  You contradict yourself as much as Pezzy.

     

     




     

    I called you an idiot becasue you are an idiot.  You post idiotic things, thus you are an idiot. And yes I did.  Anyone who thinks that holding Peyton Manning. one of the best QBs in the history of the NFL to 21 points is anything other than good, is an idiot.  Holding Joe Flacco to 28? Not so good.  Giving up a 90 yard drive with 2 minutes left in the game... downright awful.  In fact, it's choke territory.

     




    No, it's not. The Bengals in SB 23 allowed a TD late and they didn't choke. Montana and the offense made the plays and the D for Cincy was gassed from holding down a good offense down to 9 points all game.

     

    The Pats D shoulnd't have to be bailing out a loaded Pats offense every postseason. That's the bottom line.

    It's getting old. It goes back to SB 42 off a wounded duck helmet catch.

    If your offense can't mount drives or score more than 14 points in today's game you might as well not even take the field.

     




    The D has never bailed out the O in the last 6 post seasons, that is the problem.

    I keep telling you, a D can't bail out a team that has the lead, they can only lose the lead and that's what they've done time and time again.  LOSE THE LEAD!

    I don't give a rats azz if it's 13 points or 30.  They still lose the lead.  If the D hadn't lost 2 score leads, twice, in their first meeting, Balt doesn't even make the play-offs and couldn't have beat them the second time.  DOH!

    Their job is to preserve the lead, not lose it. 

    The super bowl D's helped the O.  They got picks and pick 6's, fumble recoveries, did not have the ball for 2/3rds the game and ST helped too with field position and returns for scores.  They also had backs that could punch it in and sustain drives on 3rd and 3. They also had recievers that could catch.

    Just like Joe Flacco and his team.  That's what been missing for the past 6 years. 

    It's called a team.

     

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

    Re: Tom Brady

    Just reading through some of the last 15 or so posts, I think if rusty IS right, then the best GM in the history of sports will easily see the benefits in trading Brady right now. Now we all know Belichick has nerves of steel when dealing with situations like this - the guy cut Bernie Kosar, he cut Lawyer Milloy, he traded Vrabel, he put McGinnest on the expansion draft list...right now Bill is watching every single snap from every single payer on the team...if he feels the same as rusty, Brady will be gone before draft weekend.

    The move would make nothing but sense (if rusty is right) - we'd save millons upon millions in cap space, we have a first round franchise QB as a backup (according to rusty) and the team is stacked on both sides of the ball to ease the transition Mallett would have to make. Belichick gets to see Brady perform everyday - he's sees every single pass, every drop, every decision, every read...if all this Brady analysis from rusty is true, you can bet Belichick can see it too. Now just 6 weeks ago Belichick said that there was not a QB he'd rather have than Tom Brady, that was either a lie or brilliant salesmanship to boost Brady's predraft trade value.

    I think rusty will be proved wrong when Brady is still a part of this team come May. He'll most likely also be proved wrong when Mallett is still a part of this team too. He'll be proven wrong further when the Patriots go heavy on the defensive side of the ball in the draft and free agency. 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxfan94. Show redsoxfan94's posts

    Re: Tom Brady

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    Just reading through some of the last 15 or so posts, I think if rusty IS right, then the best GM in the history of sports will easily see the benefits in trading Brady right now. Now we all know Belichick has nerves of steel when dealing with situations like this - the guy cut Bernie Kosar, he cut Lawyer Milloy, he traded Vrabel, he put McGinnest on the expansion draft list...right now Bill is watching every single snap from every single payer on the team...if he feels the same as rusty, Brady will be gone before draft weekend.

    The move would make nothing but sense (if rusty is right) - we'd save millons upon millions in cap space, we have a first round franchise QB as a backup (according to rusty) and the team is stacked on both sides of the ball to ease the transition Mallett would have to make. Belichick gets to see Brady perform everyday - he's sees every single pass, every drop, every decision, every read...if all this Brady analysis from rusty is true, you can bet Belichick can see it too. Now just 6 weeks ago Belichick said that there was not a QB he'd rather have than Tom Brady, that was either a lie or brilliant salesmanship to boost Brady's predraft trade value.

    I think rusty will be proved wrong when Brady is still a part of this team come May. He'll most likely also be proved wrong when Mallett is still a part of this team too. He'll be proven wrong further when the Patriots go heavy on the defensive side of the ball in the draft and free agency. 


    if RG3, luck, or kaepernick were offered for brady, you take that deal in a heartbeat.....that would mean there would be no rebuilding, just reloading.

    do i think they will trade brady? no, no way in hell.

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

    Re: Tom Brady

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    Couple of things here...

    Rusty says the player is spoiled, dictating the offense, stat driven, and ineffective in the post season causing us loses. He also thinks Ryan Mallett is a first round talent and highly sought after player that teams want badly to acquire. So the obvious question becomes this...why are we going to trade Mallett, he's younger, much much cheaper and Brady is old and very expensive..why not keep Mallett and trade Brady? Clearly if both of these arguments that Rusty believes is true..are true, then anyone would make the smart and no brainer decision to part ways with the expensive and poor game managing Tom Brady. Correct?

    RESPONSE: Of course, the flaw in your reasoning is that you're taking Rusty seriously...LOL!!! Sorry, but based on the little I've seen of Mallett, I don't see him as the heir apparent to the Terrific One. He's even less mobile than Tom. But, I do like the idea of making preparations to move on from Brady. Football is a young man's game.   

    So if Mallett is this smart, tall, athletic, gun slinging, cheap, young first round talent that is worth more in terms of trade value than RG3 (what he said yesterday), then clearly the smart move for the best GM of all time will be trade Brady and NOT Mallett.

    RESPONSE: Again...you can't put too much stock in what untrusty Rusty has to say. I don't see Mallett as being "athletic".

    What can we get for Brady? 2 firsts? How much money can we potentially save? 20 million? No brainer.

    RESPONSE: Where would the Pats trade him? Does Tom have a no trade clause in his contract? At this stage of his career, Brady would want to play with a contender. I can envision Dallas, Arizona, Tampa, Minnesota, Kansas City, Oakland, and the Jets as the teams with the most interest in Tom.   

    Of course there is the possibilty that Rusty is as wrong as humanly possible in all this - I believe that if Belichick doesn't trade Brady this off season and start the Mallett revolution, it proves three things...one, that Brady is NOT a problem. Two, that Mallett is not some sure fire first round selection. And three, rusty is wrong and usually is.

    RESPONSE: Bingo!! LOL!!!




     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Tom Brady

    Clark do you work or are you retired?If you work then you are stealing from your employer. If you are retired then I suggest another hobby rather then posting these extremely long winded epic posts.

    Go to the gym,pick up a book,take a golf lesson etc etc but for the love of the everything Holy keep your posts short and concise...straight to the point.

    Thanks from everyone.

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

    Re: Tom Brady

    Well I guess Belichick spoke loud and clear today on how he feels about Brady. The greatest GM of all time thought enough of Brady to extend a 36 year old QB...it must mean he's a pretty good player, no?

    So the Mallett revolution won't begin anytime soon - which probably means that Mallett isn't this first round, franchise player...then again he was drafted in the third round.

    Now, can we finally stop the whole "Brady stinks in the post season, he's spoiled, he needs to get back under center, he dictates the offense, he's not a good game manager, Alex Smith is a better player", stuff? And can we stop talking about how it's impossible to knock money off your salary cap? We just saved 8 million and it took two hours of work.

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

    Re: Tom Brady

    :-)

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from patsbandwagonsince76. Show patsbandwagonsince76's posts

    Re: Tom Brady

    In response to LessPhatRex's comment:

    In response to patsbandwagonsince76's comment:

    I think Brady will restructure anyway..hopefully the cap space won;t be a problem.

    Restructure?  How will that work?  ~22 mil in 2013, ~22 mil in 2014, then he's a FA.  Why don't you throw around a few numbers on how this restructuring might work.



    HAHAHAHA...you are an expert!!

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share