Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from zeitgeist49. Show zeitgeist49's posts

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    In response to DontQuestionBB's comment:

    The only thing the Pats did for Tom Brady this offseason is too sign injury prone Danny A. in favor of the hardest working most dependable slot WR in the game.  They did nothing to give Brady a legit deep threat.  Now that Hernandez is headed to the can,  Brady goes into this season with Donald Jones, Mike Jenkins, and Danny A. as his top WR threats!

     

    The Pats need a real GM!!!!!



    Belichick has always over relied on TB. He thinks Brady can run a great offense with 5 guys off the street. Just think how well TB would have done if he had Gomer's wr's both in Indianopolis and in Denver. i lost confidence in BB as a GM a long time ago.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    In response to GEAUX-TIGRES's comment:

    Just read the facts and stop trying to prove to us BB and your own infallibility. My sole procreation is a neuro surgeon in Bean Town. That puts her a few rungs above your imaginary intelligence ladder, which, by the way means shiot  to participants here. Oh, and my IQ is flirtatiously close to yours, but they both pale verses my daughter's. You've just lost your umteen argument on the Globe. I'll ask my daughter what part of YOUR grey matter was dysfuntionally impaired to make you who you are. I'll get back to you on that. Mean while, argue, berate and continue disparaging people on this forum. It's probably the only pleasurable function you have in life. No. I will not call you a loser or denegrate you. You own the board on that agenda. Now you go on ignore.




    HEAR HEAR! BRAVO! ENCORE!

    (stands and applauds)

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    In response to tcal2-'s comment:

    Time for BB to retire.  His trade down / out philosophy has ruined what could of been a historic run on Super Bowl victory with the greatest QB of all times leading the show.  We have missed out  on at least 4 more Super Bowls due to horrible decisions by BB.

    why pay to keep Richard Seymour.  Why pay for a Free Agent like Julius Peppers when we have Dink and Cunningham.  Why pay for Marshall when you can get Lloyd on the cheap.  None of this would bother me if we weren't constantly $10 million under the cap every year.

    Bad decisions = poor management.




    it's kraft's money not bellichick's and i don't think bellichick can spend what isn't given to spend

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

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    In response to zeitgeist49's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Certainly, you are entitled to your opinion, but I think it's fair to say that you are being just a little bit overly dramatic.  I give TB all the credit in the world for his successes, but I think it is unfair to suggest that, in those situations where the team has come up short, it is only because of everyone else around him.  To suggest that he might have done better with PM's receivers is silly.  He also might have done worse.  Just because a receiver performs at a particular level with one qb does not mean he will necessarily have the same kind of success with another.  Not to mention that you have to take coaching into account and how the offense is run in general.  By the way, when was the last time that TB has had a poor regular season?  The last time I checked, he has only continued to put up awesome numbers.  Seems to me that he has been doing pretty well with what BB provides him.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Gravelten4. Show Gravelten4's posts

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    In response to BosoxJoe5's comment:

    In response to UD6's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Here's an alternate title for this thread: "What I would have done if I were GM: A Revisionist history based purely on hindsight." By Don'tQuestionBB, a troll in fan's clothing, ably supported by the handwringers and told-you-sos.

    Nobody was complaining when they signed Gronk and Hdz to those contracts. The coverage was overwhelmingly favorable. I recall terms like "win-win" and "forward thinking" and "ahead of the curve" being used.

    Now, we know you're all football geniuses and have forgotten more about running a team than BB will ever know, but where were you back then? Just wondering.

     

     

     


    I'm not faulting the patriots decisions, except maybe for Welker, if only because they knew they had injury issues to be resolved with Gronkowski.  They could not have foreseen the Hernandez issue, obviously.  I am only considering their current situation.  And I am not saying I am right, I am just providing discussion fodder. 

    If my remarks are, in your opinion, incorrect then challenge that. 

     

     

    Do the pats not dispassionately view players situations and contracts?  Is this situation now completely in flux?  I heard this week on NFL radio that the pats may now have to "accelerate" Gronkowski's rehab.  Do they really want to do this? But do they not have another choice?  Apparently, Ballard is not yet ready.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    The Pats have had no down field threat. Dobson could be that. If healthy Amendola is probably 90% of Welker. They won games without Hernandez and Gronk last year they could do it again this year. Also a key will be if Ridley can stop the fumbles and the continued develop of Vareen. Another thing that will help the Pats offensive will be the shorter field that a better return game will bring.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    90% of welker? :) that's big talk my brother. be realistic. past performance predicts future performance. Come on....

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

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    In response to zbellino's comment:

     

     


    I never said anything about Tom's mental health or that they should have drafted any of those guys. 

     

    My point was about "developing young WRs."

    Look, if it's BB's philosophy to use 1st round selections on combo-TEs like Graham, and second rounders on multi-purpose KR/WR prospects like Bethel Johnson .... that is fine. 

    If it's his philosophy to go an grab defenders (as in recent years) with first round selections that is fine too. 

    My point was, don't lay the revolving door at WR at Brady's feet. They've made do, and excelled, with an offense that has one first round selection on it, and he's an offensive lineman. 

    Lastly, the fact that none of those teams featured a defense that is near as good as what Troy Brown had backing him then plays a role ... as well as Gronkowksi, who has proven to be as injury prone as he was in college ... dropping off the map just in time for decisive games plays a role in NE not having trophies. 

    But that point is not what my post was about. 

    It was a simple re: developing WRs response. 



    Fair enough, though I wasn't referring to your post specifically re Brady's mental state or my comments overall - they were directed at the thread in general.  

    Obviously it would be ideal if there were less of a revolving door and if some of the picks they made at WR could play, like Johnson, Jackson and Price.  

    But I wonder how much it would have mattered in the end?  Would the offense have been that much better?  Any better? I mean how much better could they be? Would they have won the '11 SB or beaten Baltimore last year?

    I think it is clear they've come up short recently because of the things you mentioned, defensive shortcomings, untimely injuries and generally not being at their best in the biggest games.

    There are a bunch of ways to win games in the NFL, but there seems to be only one thing that virtually every SB champ has in common: they got really hot and they got really fortunate. Baltimore makes the playoffs largely because Ray Rice almost impossibly converted a 4th and 29 vs. SD.  They advanced because Denver's secondary collapsed at the worst possible moment. They weren't the best team in the league last year. The Giants were 32nd in rushing in 2011 and not much better than that defensively, they made the playoffs at 9-7. The Packers in 2010 made the playoffs at 10-6 because of a bad call in a game between Detroit and Tampa Bay.

    Anyway, I'm way off point - but not feeling sorry for Brady and not all that worried about who's going to catch his passes this year. They'll figure it out.

    [/QUOTE]

    But I wonder how much it would have mattered in the end?  Would the offense have been that much better?  Any better? I mean how much better could they be? Would they have won the '11 SB or beaten Baltimore last year?

    I think it would have made a big difference. not to jump on the rusty bandwagon, but how many points did our offense score last year against Baltimore? The giants in the SB?

    for whatever reason, when it matters most, our offense seems to not respond and put points on the board. Is it play calling? Bad coaching? player execution?  my guess is that some of it rests on player execution, and some of this is tied to not having pure wr's that are big and can seperate and who have sure hands. 

    I am not looking at what this offense does in the regular season because I don't care as long as we win and get I to the playoffs . Iam more concerned about the eggs they lay in the post season and why this occurs. 

    Again, not on the Russ bandwagon blaming it all on Brady and the offense be ause the defense has plenty of responsibility in these loses. But how does an offense that averages like 28 points a game put up 13 and then go scoreless in a half? 

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

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    I just don't think it's the failure of wide receivers that caused them to fall short against Baltimore or the Giants. It wouldn't hurt to have a deep threat, but they put up 40-something against Houston the week before the AFCCG. 

    Styles make fights. For whatever reason, they have issues scoring against Baltimore sometimes. They moved the ball at least in the first half, but couldn't score it. 

    It's hard not to look at Gronk getting hurt as a major factor the last two years. He's a huge part of what they do, especially in the red area (as BB would say). I also, for the life of me, don't understand why Vereen was absent against Baltimore after torching Houston.

    But again, the best team winning the SB is the exception. Only one #1 seed has won the SB since 2003 (New Orleans in '09). What does that tell you? It tells me it's better to be hot (and lucky) than good. And maybe it's better to lay in the weeds in the RS, get a wild card berth and peak in January. The bye week is clearly overrated.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from gr82bme. Show gr82bme's posts

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    A common theme on these boards - "is this the year the Pats will stop being the Pats because of (insert latest-and-greatest hypothesis)?"  Here's the thing - TB or no TB, BB or no BB, WW or no WW eventually the Pats will slip back to mediocrity, then will have to re-tool.  Thing is, experts and non-experts have been predicting this type of thing to happen for years - and it 'aint happened yet.  Of course, these keyboard commandoes will break their arms patting themselves on the back when they finally get it right - but, you know, keep chirping the same drivel and at some point in the future it'll turn out as "predicted."

    Bottom line:  the Pats have challenges this year, some self-inflicted, some not.  The Pats are still the class of the division and will probably still make the playoffs.  They may not win a SB - oh, God, what to do!!!  Either way, we're going on about year 12 or 13 of a constant playoff team and usually a SB contender and the best some of our fans, and alot of trolls can do is "guestimate" when the sky will fal.  Good grief.

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

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    I just don't think it's the failure of wide receivers that caused them to fall short against Baltimore or the Giants. It wouldn't hurt to have a deep threat, but they put up 40-something against Houston the week before the AFCCG. 

    Styles make fights. For whatever reason, they have issues scoring against Baltimore sometimes. They moved the ball at least in the first half, but couldn't score it. 

    It's hard not to look at Gronk getting hurt as a major factor the last two years. He's a huge part of what they do, especially in the red area (as BB would say). I also, for the life of me, don't understand why Vereen was absent against Baltimore after torching Houston.

    But again, the best team winning the SB is the exception. Only one #1 seed has won the SB since 2003 (New Orleans in '09). What does that tell you? It tells me it's better to be hot (and lucky) than good. And maybe it's better to lay in the weeds in the RS, get a wild card berth and peak in January. The bye week is clearly overrated.



    Well, for one, not having Gronkowski? They dropped 30 points on Baltimore earlier in the season with him. 

    Another is WR related. You don't run through Baltimore. Their strength is the middle. If you have good WRs you can beat them at the outside. 

    The matchup they control is the interior pass rush by the way. NE's struggled with teams that can stop the rush up the middle and pressure the QB up the middle ... the Giants can do it, so can the Ravens. Haloti Ngata is a game changer.

    Developing peripheral threats would help.

    The othe bit is game plan related: this can't be underscored enough.

    NE wasn't trying to score tons of points. They ran the ball 28 times through three and a half quarters. They were trying to have time consuming drives that kept Baltimore off the field.

    The problem came when Ridley fumbled and the Defense cr@pped its pants in a three drive sequence. After that it was over, with NE down three scores with something like 7 minutes to go.

    The best way to beat Baltimore would be to get a defense that can reliably stop their offense and get the ball back .... this is a team that is not exactly an offensive juggernaut but is scoring something like 28 points per game against NE.  

    1.) Being healthy

    2.) Figuring out how to solidfy against their attack which is a lot of ball control running with stabs deep downfield. 

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

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to UD6's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     


    I am not trying to stir the pot.  I am, however, considering how dispassionately the pats look at players when it comes to value, contracts, and situations.  It is my opinion that Brady has not done a great job developing receivers.  There have been plenty that have come through the pats system that haven't become effective for the pats.  Now, I'll mostly blame the receivers for this, but I do believe that once Brady finds valuable targets and synergy with those targets, he forgets the others - at least that seems to be the case for the last half dozen years. 

    As of today - there isn't a single one of those targets that is anticipated to start the season.  No Gronkowski, no Hernandez, no Welker, no Branch.  Further - another one year project, Lloyd is also gone. 

    When Brady was more game manager and not the focal point (when the pats were winning superbowls) they had a very effective running game and a legendary defense that never let an opponent's offense take over a game.  Do they have either or those now? 

    If the answer is no, then the focus remains on the great Brady with tools with whom he has no long term relationship or synergy. 

    So again, given the way the pats dispassionately evaluate players, values, and situations, a Brady move is worth consideration.  Brady just restructured his contract in a way that nearly any team in the NFL would give away the house for. 

     

     

     




     

     

     

    Okay, what Pat's recievers that TB didn't "develop" went to other teams and were "developed" by those teams and their QB's. 

    Perhaps the recievers they gave him to "develop" weren't capable of being "developed"?

     

     

    [/QUOTE]
    As I noted, I put most of the issue on the receivers that didn't develop, but I do believe Brady locks in to those that work and that inhibits the progress of others.  I accept that I could be wrong, but I stand by my opinion.  Further, receivers that are relegated to teams with significantly lesser QB's will never get that development.  Look how effective Larry Fitzgerald was this year.  Brady has the capability to take receivers to a higher level where most other QB's do not.  I am not sure he has. 

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    who are the receivers he's failed to develop?  please list names.  Edelman? Ocho? Underwood?  Who are all these high potential receivers Brady is ignoring? 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Its not about high potential (or better said - draft position).  If the team didn't think the players had potential, they wouldn't have drafted them, right?  Its about getting some value out of the guys drafted for the their position.  Taylor, Tate, Slater, Jackson, Price, Sam, Johnson.  To be solid at a position, one doesn't need to be top twenty five in the league.   

    I am happy to admit that I am wrong.  I just don't see very many receivers that the pats drafted that ever stick there.  I think Z is on to something.  I think maybe the team drafts for multiple playing options.  The problem is that receiver translates to very few other positions. 

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

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     



    All I asked for was the recievers that he failed to "develop" that were successful elsewhere. That would prove your theory. 


    So are you saying that if Brady had a comprable reciever like Larry Fitzgerald... let's say like Randy Moss that Brady would be unable to to take him to a higher level?

     [/QUOTE]

    I disagree with your assumption based on your sole criteria, and I did say that I put most on the receivers for their own lack of development, but as I noted there are also other factors involved such as to what teams they went and who their QB's were and whether or not the team was stable.  If you wish to place this issue on the team making drafting mistakes, there's that too, but somehow Brady's got to bear some responsibility for not being able to find value in these players. 


    And no about Fitzgerald, the comment was in support of my point that when good receivers are put in poor situations then they can't/won't produce.  They can't throw the ball to themselves.  Where ineffective QB's diminish a WR's talent, a great QB like Brady can allow it to flourish, AND he can turn marginal receivers into effective ones.  But if a guy like Brady has already established who his targets will be, the rest of the receiving group is left to fail.

    [/QUOTE]

    Please, again, provide the names of the ignored receivers. Yes, Brady throws to the same guys over and over.  But the main reason for that is because those same guys are the only guys on the field! 

    [/QUOTE]

    You make a good point, but why aren't these guys on the field? 

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

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    In response to BosoxJoe5's comment:

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Here's an alternate title for this thread: "What I would have done if I were GM: A Revisionist history based purely on hindsight." By Don'tQuestionBB, a troll in fan's clothing, ably supported by the handwringers and told-you-sos.

    Nobody was complaining when they signed Gronk and Hdz to those contracts. The coverage was overwhelmingly favorable. I recall terms like "win-win" and "forward thinking" and "ahead of the curve" being used.

    Now, we know you're all football geniuses and have forgotten more about running a team than BB will ever know, but where were you back then? Just wondering.

     

     

     


    I'm not faulting the patriots decisions, except maybe for Welker, if only because they knew they had injury issues to be resolved with Gronkowski.  They could not have foreseen the Hernandez issue, obviously.  I am only considering their current situation.  And I am not saying I am right, I am just providing discussion fodder. 

    If my remarks are, in your opinion, incorrect then challenge that. 

     

     

    Do the pats not dispassionately view players situations and contracts?  Is this situation now completely in flux?  I heard this week on NFL radio that the pats may now have to "accelerate" Gronkowski's rehab.  Do they really want to do this? But do they not have another choice?  Apparently, Ballard is not yet ready.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    The Pats have had no down field threat. Dobson could be that. If healthy Amendola is probably 90% of Welker. They won games without Hernandez and Gronk last year they could do it again this year. Also a key will be if Ridley can stop the fumbles and the continued develop of Vareen. Another thing that will help the Pats offensive will be the shorter field that a better return game will bring.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I think Brady is great, and I think the team has an offensive scheme and enough talent to win most of the time.  As noted, however, the pats are currently without their top 5 pass catchers from last year, and unless Branch or Lloyd is brought back, it will remain that way. 

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

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to UD6's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

    In response to UD6's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

     

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

     

     

    In response to UD6's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

     

     

     


    I am not trying to stir the pot.  I am, however, considering how dispassionately the pats look at players when it comes to value, contracts, and situations.  It is my opinion that Brady has not done a great job developing receivers.  There have been plenty that have come through the pats system that haven't become effective for the pats.  Now, I'll mostly blame the receivers for this, but I do believe that once Brady finds valuable targets and synergy with those targets, he forgets the others - at least that seems to be the case for the last half dozen years. 

    As of today - there isn't a single one of those targets that is anticipated to start the season.  No Gronkowski, no Hernandez, no Welker, no Branch.  Further - another one year project, Lloyd is also gone. 

    When Brady was more game manager and not the focal point (when the pats were winning superbowls) they had a very effective running game and a legendary defense that never let an opponent's offense take over a game.  Do they have either or those now? 

    If the answer is no, then the focus remains on the great Brady with tools with whom he has no long term relationship or synergy. 

    So again, given the way the pats dispassionately evaluate players, values, and situations, a Brady move is worth consideration.  Brady just restructured his contract in a way that nearly any team in the NFL would give away the house for. 

     

     

     

     

     

     

     




     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Okay, what Pat's recievers that TB didn't "develop" went to other teams and were "developed" by those teams and their QB's. 

    Perhaps the recievers they gave him to "develop" weren't capable of being "developed"?

     

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]
    As I noted, I put most of the issue on the receivers that didn't develop, but I do believe Brady locks in to those that work and that inhibits the progress of others.  I accept that I could be wrong, but I stand by my opinion.  Further, receivers that are relegated to teams with significantly lesser QB's will never get that development.  Look how effective Larry Fitzgerald was this year.  Brady has the capability to take receivers to a higher level where most other QB's do not.  I am not sure he has. 

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    All I asked for was the recievers that he failed to "develop" that were successful elsewhere. That would prove your theory. 

     

     

     

     

    So are you saying that if Brady had a comprable reciever like Larry Fitzgerald... let's say like Randy Moss that Brady would be unable to to take him to a higher level?

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I disagree with your assumption based on your sole criteria, and I did say that I put most on the receivers for their own lack of development, but as I noted there are also other factors involved such as to what teams they went and who their QB's were and whether or not the team was stable.  If you wish to place this issue on the team making drafting mistakes, there's that too, but somehow Brady's got to bear some responsibility for not being able to find value in these players. 

     

     

     

     

    And no about Fitzgerald, the comment was in support of my point that when good receivers are put in poor situations then they can't/won't produce.  They can't throw the ball to themselves.  Where ineffective QB's diminish a WR's talent, a great QB like Brady can allow it to flourish, AND he can turn marginal receivers into effective ones.  But if a guy like Brady has already established who his targets will be, the rest of the receiving group is left to fail.

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    We are going to agree to disagree. My sole criteria was in response to your allegation that "brady has not done a great job developing recievers.

     

     

     

    I asked for some examples of recievers he failed to "develop" that went to other teams and were "developed". This would give credence to your assertion. So your premise is just an opinion without any facts or anecdotal evidence to support it.

    What is funny is somehow Brady got Brandon LLoyd 70 + catches and lloyd is not even on an NFL 90 man roster. Seems to me he does what he can with what they give him.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Look Jri, unlike many here I don't assume that my opinions aren't arguable.  That said, I made the statement based on my thoughts not yours.  And yours don't discredit mine, so you can maintain your opinion based on your your criteria and I'll maintain mine. 

     

     

    Brandon Llloyd was another vet receiver, not one Brady needed to develop.  But you bring up a good point.  Why does management keep taking away receivers who appear to produce? 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    That's fine about your opinion. It is easy to throw sh*t against the wall to see if some sticks. Or you can give an opinion backed with some facts and anecdotal evidence that could possibly add validity to the opinion you are offering. I guess then you are going with the 1st option. as you gave zero factual based information or anecdotal information to support your "opinion".

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I disagree with this assessment as well.  development of receivers by other teams  that the pats drafted then later dropped isn't the sole criteria and I gave a few reasons why.  Sorry you didn't like them.  I can point to at least one other QB that has taken lower round talent and made them a productive part of the system at the position they were drafted.

    Maybe its all Belichick's fault.  Maybe he's too impatient with receivers.  But I think its Brady locking in and trusting just a few. 

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

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    I can't believe that I'm even posting on this thread much less that it's actually extended to 3 pages.  And it unfolded exactly as threads of this kind unfold:

    1) Fan-baiting thread begins

    2) Disruptive posters smack their lips and spew

    3) Occasional rational posts appear but are drowned out by 2) above or

    4) The oh-so-predictable exchanges:  BB sux, TB sux, BB is God, TB is God, etc etc etc

    5) And then eventually it runs out of steam and on we go to the next off-season topic of irrelevance.

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

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    In response to UD6's comment:

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:

     

    In response to UD6's comment:

     

     

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to UD6's comment:

     

     

     

     

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

     

    In response to UD6's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    In response to UD6's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     


    I am not trying to stir the pot.  I am, however, considering how dispassionately the pats look at players when it comes to value, contracts, and situations.  It is my opinion that Brady has not done a great job developing receivers.  There have been plenty that have come through the pats system that haven't become effective for the pats.  Now, I'll mostly blame the receivers for this, but I do believe that once Brady finds valuable targets and synergy with those targets, he forgets the others - at least that seems to be the case for the last half dozen years. 

    As of today - there isn't a single one of those targets that is anticipated to start the season.  No Gronkowski, no Hernandez, no Welker, no Branch.  Further - another one year project, Lloyd is also gone. 

    When Brady was more game manager and not the focal point (when the pats were winning superbowls) they had a very effective running game and a legendary defense that never let an opponent's offense take over a game.  Do they have either or those now? 

    If the answer is no, then the focus remains on the great Brady with tools with whom he has no long term relationship or synergy. 

    So again, given the way the pats dispassionately evaluate players, values, and situations, a Brady move is worth consideration.  Brady just restructured his contract in a way that nearly any team in the NFL would give away the house for. 

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     




     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Okay, what Pat's recievers that TB didn't "develop" went to other teams and were "developed" by those teams and their QB's. 

    Perhaps the recievers they gave him to "develop" weren't capable of being "developed"?

     

     

     

     

     

     


    As I noted, I put most of the issue on the receivers that didn't develop, but I do believe Brady locks in to those that work and that inhibits the progress of others.  I accept that I could be wrong, but I stand by my opinion.  Further, receivers that are relegated to teams with significantly lesser QB's will never get that development.  Look how effective Larry Fitzgerald was this year.  Brady has the capability to take receivers to a higher level where most other QB's do not.  I am not sure he has. 

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     



    All I asked for was the recievers that he failed to "develop" that were successful elsewhere. That would prove your theory. 

     

     

     

     

     

    So are you saying that if Brady had a comprable reciever like Larry Fitzgerald... let's say like Randy Moss that Brady would be unable to to take him to a higher level?

     

     

     

     



    I disagree with your assumption based on your sole criteria, and I did say that I put most on the receivers for their own lack of development, but as I noted there are also other factors involved such as to what teams they went and who their QB's were and whether or not the team was stable.  If you wish to place this issue on the team making drafting mistakes, there's that too, but somehow Brady's got to bear some responsibility for not being able to find value in these players. 

     

     

     

     

     

    And no about Fitzgerald, the comment was in support of my point that when good receivers are put in poor situations then they can't/won't produce.  They can't throw the ball to themselves.  Where ineffective QB's diminish a WR's talent, a great QB like Brady can allow it to flourish, AND he can turn marginal receivers into effective ones.  But if a guy like Brady has already established who his targets will be, the rest of the receiving group is left to fail.

     

     

     

     



    We are going to agree to disagree. My sole criteria was in response to your allegation that "brady has not done a great job developing recievers.

     

     

     

     

    I asked for some examples of recievers he failed to "develop" that went to other teams and were "developed". This would give credence to your assertion. So your premise is just an opinion without any facts or anecdotal evidence to support it.

    What is funny is somehow Brady got Brandon LLoyd 70 + catches and lloyd is not even on an NFL 90 man roster. Seems to me he does what he can with what they give him.

     

     

     



    Look Jri, unlike many here I don't assume that my opinions aren't arguable.  That said, I made the statement based on my thoughts not yours.  And yours don't discredit mine, so you can maintain your opinion based on your your criteria and I'll maintain mine. 

     

     

     

    Brandon Llloyd was another vet receiver, not one Brady needed to develop.  But you bring up a good point.  Why does management keep taking away receivers who appear to produce? 

     



    That's fine about your opinion. It is easy to throw sh*t against the wall to see if some sticks. Or you can give an opinion backed with some facts and anecdotal evidence that could possibly add validity to the opinion you are offering. I guess then you are going with the 1st option. as you gave zero factual based information or anecdotal information to support your "opinion".

     

     



    I disagree with this assessment as well.  development of receivers by other teams  that the pats drafted then later dropped isn't the sole criteria and I gave a few reasons why.  Sorry you didn't like them.  I can point to at least one other QB that has taken lower round talent and made them a productive part of the system at the position they were drafted.

     

    Maybe its all Belichick's fault.  Maybe he's too impatient with receivers.  But I think its Brady locking in and trusting just a few. 



    I just re-read through our discussion and the only thing you provided to back your arguement up was that Brady finds "synergy" with only a few recievers and that is why he can't develop WR's. I countered with please show me a reciever that Brady failed to develop and went on to have success with another QB in a different system. Brady fails to develop recievers because they do not have the capacity to be developed.

     

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

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    In response to UD6's comment:

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to UD6's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

    In response to UD6's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

     

    In response to UD6's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

     

     

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:

     

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    In response to UD6's comment:

     

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     


    I am not trying to stir the pot.  I am, however, considering how dispassionately the pats look at players when it comes to value, contracts, and situations.  It is my opinion that Brady has not done a great job developing receivers.  There have been plenty that have come through the pats system that haven't become effective for the pats.  Now, I'll mostly blame the receivers for this, but I do believe that once Brady finds valuable targets and synergy with those targets, he forgets the others - at least that seems to be the case for the last half dozen years. 

    As of today - there isn't a single one of those targets that is anticipated to start the season.  No Gronkowski, no Hernandez, no Welker, no Branch.  Further - another one year project, Lloyd is also gone. 

    When Brady was more game manager and not the focal point (when the pats were winning superbowls) they had a very effective running game and a legendary defense that never let an opponent's offense take over a game.  Do they have either or those now? 

    If the answer is no, then the focus remains on the great Brady with tools with whom he has no long term relationship or synergy. 

    So again, given the way the pats dispassionately evaluate players, values, and situations, a Brady move is worth consideration.  Brady just restructured his contract in a way that nearly any team in the NFL would give away the house for. 

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     




     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Okay, what Pat's recievers that TB didn't "develop" went to other teams and were "developed" by those teams and their QB's. 

    Perhaps the recievers they gave him to "develop" weren't capable of being "developed"?

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]
    As I noted, I put most of the issue on the receivers that didn't develop, but I do believe Brady locks in to those that work and that inhibits the progress of others.  I accept that I could be wrong, but I stand by my opinion.  Further, receivers that are relegated to teams with significantly lesser QB's will never get that development.  Look how effective Larry Fitzgerald was this year.  Brady has the capability to take receivers to a higher level where most other QB's do not.  I am not sure he has. 

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    All I asked for was the recievers that he failed to "develop" that were successful elsewhere. That would prove your theory. 

     

     

     

     

     

    So are you saying that if Brady had a comprable reciever like Larry Fitzgerald... let's say like Randy Moss that Brady would be unable to to take him to a higher level?

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I disagree with your assumption based on your sole criteria, and I did say that I put most on the receivers for their own lack of development, but as I noted there are also other factors involved such as to what teams they went and who their QB's were and whether or not the team was stable.  If you wish to place this issue on the team making drafting mistakes, there's that too, but somehow Brady's got to bear some responsibility for not being able to find value in these players. 

     

     

     

     

     

    And no about Fitzgerald, the comment was in support of my point that when good receivers are put in poor situations then they can't/won't produce.  They can't throw the ball to themselves.  Where ineffective QB's diminish a WR's talent, a great QB like Brady can allow it to flourish, AND he can turn marginal receivers into effective ones.  But if a guy like Brady has already established who his targets will be, the rest of the receiving group is left to fail.

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    We are going to agree to disagree. My sole criteria was in response to your allegation that "brady has not done a great job developing recievers.

     

     

     

     

    I asked for some examples of recievers he failed to "develop" that went to other teams and were "developed". This would give credence to your assertion. So your premise is just an opinion without any facts or anecdotal evidence to support it.

    What is funny is somehow Brady got Brandon LLoyd 70 + catches and lloyd is not even on an NFL 90 man roster. Seems to me he does what he can with what they give him.

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Look Jri, unlike many here I don't assume that my opinions aren't arguable.  That said, I made the statement based on my thoughts not yours.  And yours don't discredit mine, so you can maintain your opinion based on your your criteria and I'll maintain mine. 

     

     

     

    Brandon Llloyd was another vet receiver, not one Brady needed to develop.  But you bring up a good point.  Why does management keep taking away receivers who appear to produce? 

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    That's fine about your opinion. It is easy to throw sh*t against the wall to see if some sticks. Or you can give an opinion backed with some facts and anecdotal evidence that could possibly add validity to the opinion you are offering. I guess then you are going with the 1st option. as you gave zero factual based information or anecdotal information to support your "opinion".

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I disagree with this assessment as well.  development of receivers by other teams  that the pats drafted then later dropped isn't the sole criteria and I gave a few reasons why.  Sorry you didn't like them.  I can point to at least one other QB that has taken lower round talent and made them a productive part of the system at the position they were drafted.

     

    Maybe its all Belichick's fault.  Maybe he's too impatient with receivers.  But I think its Brady locking in and trusting just a few. 

    [/QUOTE]

    UD, as far as I can tell, you still haven't named a single receiver Brady should have "developed" but didn't.  Are you talking about Ocho?  Underwood?  Salas?  Edeman? Who?

    As far as "locking" into guys--would that be Gronk? Lloyd? Welker? Hernandez? Branch? . . . all of whom have gotten a fair number of receptions over the past few years.  

    It seems to me that Brady throws to the guys with talent. Those also happen to be the guys on the field most of the time.  Guys like Underwood and Ocho aren't out there because they aren't very good.  It has nothing to do with Brady not "developing" them . . .

     

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

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    Prolate - Here's the list I provided.  these are receivers drafted by the pats in the Tom Brady Era that didn't stick:

    Its not about high potential (or better said - draft position).  If the team didn't think the players had potential, they wouldn't have drafted them, right?  Its about getting some value out of the guys drafted for the their position.  Taylor, Tate, Slater, Jackson, Price, Sam, Johnson.  To be solid at a position, one doesn't need to be top twenty five in the league.   

     

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

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    In response to UD6's comment:

    Prolate - Here's the list I provided.  these are receivers drafted by the pats in the Tom Brady Era that didn't stick:

    Its not about high potential (or better said - draft position).  If the team didn't think the players had potential, they wouldn't have drafted them, right?  Its about getting some value out of the guys drafted for the their position.  Taylor, Tate, Slater, Jackson, Price, Sam, Johnson.  To be solid at a position, one doesn't need to be top twenty five in the league.   

     




    i don't mean to answer for Pro but in reference to our discussion...

    So the question is where did these players go and get developed by another QB or thrive in another system? How is this on Brady if these guys were not capable of being developed?

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

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:

     

    In response to UD6's comment:

     

     

    Prolate - Here's the list I provided.  these are receivers drafted by the pats in the Tom Brady Era that didn't stick:

    Its not about high potential (or better said - draft position).  If the team didn't think the players had potential, they wouldn't have drafted them, right?  Its about getting some value out of the guys drafted for the their position.  Taylor, Tate, Slater, Jackson, Price, Sam, Johnson.  To be solid at a position, one doesn't need to be top twenty five in the league.   

     

     

     




     

     

    i don't mean to answer for Pro but in reference to our discussion...

    So the question is where did these players go and get developed by another QB or thrive in another system? How is this on Brady if these guys were not capable of being developed?



    Lets say that they didn't.  Does that mean that Brady could not have?  Other QB's have developed drafted receivers who became productive in their system, that weren't expected to be star quality. 

     

    As for how its on Brady - I give him that much credit.  He's that good.  Other great QB's have done it, so I assume he should as well.  Maybe you are right.  Maybe these guys were dirt from from the outset and drafting them was a total mistake.  Obviously, you can't say that about 5-7th rounders, 3-4th should have expectations.  1st and 2nd's should produce. 

    I am not naive enough to know that those expectations don't always work out.  Where the pats drafted receivers in the Brady era are concerned, they almost never do.  Branch and Givens looked like they could have, but then they were gone.  Effectively, there's nothing else since or before.  tight ends - different story. 

    To get back to the thinking - The pats are effectively now without their top 5 pass catchers from last year to start the season (assuming Hernandez is out and they don't bring back Lloyd or Branch).  I believe Brady has become a QB who develops rapport with a few guys and doesn't work hard on developing the others.  (Maybe part of that is that he doesn't need to.)

    As of this writing and based on those assumptions - none of his developed rapport is left.  None.  That's a really tall order, while this guy provides more value than any other player in the league at this time given talent and contract. 

    Tom Brady won his SB's with marvelous defenses and stronger running games.  Unless that's what you think he's got now, this year may be more of a struggle than NE's seen in the past.  If, in the past, the pats have dispassonately released/traded/etc - valuable players on the back end of their careers - doesn't the current situation appear similar now? 

    I wouldn't do it, but don't you think this thought is rolling around in Belichick's head now?

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

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    In response to UD6's comment:

    Prolate - Here's the list I provided.  these are receivers drafted by the pats in the Tom Brady Era that didn't stick:

    Its not about high potential (or better said - draft position).  If the team didn't think the players had potential, they wouldn't have drafted them, right?  Its about getting some value out of the guys drafted for the their position.  Taylor, Tate, Slater, Jackson, Price, Sam, Johnson.  To be solid at a position, one doesn't need to be top twenty five in the league.   

     



    That's a pretty weak list, given that none of those guys have gone on to do well after leaving the Pats.  You've got to balance that with all the new guys who have come in and contributed right away.  Brady had no problem integrating Gronk or Hern or Lloyd the first years they joined the team.  The difference is that those guys had talent.  Guys like Taylor Price and Brandon Tate just aren't that good (and Tate got his receptions too--similar to what he's done with the Bengals).  Ocho was good once, but he is washed up, wasn't a good match for the system and flamed out in Miami too.  The lack of developed receivers doesn't reflect on Brady--it reflects on player evaluation and player acquisition.  BB and his team have simply done a poor job of bringing in talented receivers other than Moss and Welker and the TEs.  It isn't Brady's fault the players you list haven't developed.  Look at last year: Brady did fine getting a back up like Hoomananui contributing.  The difference (compared to Ocho) is Hoomananui ran the right routes.  It's hard to integrate a guy when he can't learn the system or when he really doesn't have much talent.  I think you're stretching to blame Brady here when the more obvious reason for the lack of receiver development is the receivers themselves!  A lot of them just aren't/weren't that good--and all the good ones have been developed just fine.  

     

     

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

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    In response to UD6's comment:

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:

     

    In response to UD6's comment:

     

     

    Prolate - Here's the list I provided.  these are receivers drafted by the pats in the Tom Brady Era that didn't stick:

    Its not about high potential (or better said - draft position).  If the team didn't think the players had potential, they wouldn't have drafted them, right?  Its about getting some value out of the guys drafted for the their position.  Taylor, Tate, Slater, Jackson, Price, Sam, Johnson.  To be solid at a position, one doesn't need to be top twenty five in the league.   

     

     

     




     

     

    i don't mean to answer for Pro but in reference to our discussion...

    So the question is where did these players go and get developed by another QB or thrive in another system? How is this on Brady if these guys were not capable of being developed?



    Lets say that they didn't.  Let's say they didn't??? How about none of those players went anywhere and had success. Does that mean that Brady could not have? Well seeing some of these players never played in the league after leaving the Pat's and the rest are JAGS at best with the teams they are with i would say no. It is most likely him or any other QB could have developed them beyond what they are..  Other QB's have developed drafted receivers who became productive in their system, that weren't expected to be star quality. Those are few and far between for every QB and team as they are with brady. Most of the time it is because the team mis judged that players talent or the player matured into a good reciever once in the league.

    As for how its on Brady - I give him that much credit.  He's that good.  Other great QB's have done it, so I assume he should as well.  Maybe you are right.  Maybe these guys were dirt from from the outset and drafting them was a total mistake.  Obviously, you can't say that about 5-7th rounders, 3-4th should have expectations.  1st and 2nd's should produce. I don't disagree with that but the 1st & 2nd rounders that washed out in NE are either out of the league or are being used a return specialists elsewhere. Again, how is this on Brady?

    I am not naive enough to know that those expectations don't always work out.  Where the pats drafted receivers in the Brady era are concerned, they almost never do.  Branch and Givens looked like they could have, but then they were gone.  Effectively, there's nothing else since or before.  tight ends - different story. 

    To get back to the thinking - The pats are effectively now without their top 5 pass catchers from last year to start the season (assuming Hernandez is out and they don't bring back Lloyd or Branch).  I believe Brady has become a QB who develops rapport with a few guys and doesn't work hard on developing the others. That would be an opinion which your entitled to but I find it hard to believe he does'nt work at it. If anything he asks his recievers to be as accountable as he is.  (Maybe part of that is that he doesn't need to.)

    As of this writing and based on those assumptions - none of his developed rapport is left.  None.  That's a really tall order, while this guy provides more value than any other player in the league at this time given talent and contract. 

    Tom Brady won his SB's with marvelous defenses and stronger running games. I guess you missed the end of the rams game and the Carolina game.  Unless that's what you think he's got now, this year may be more of a struggle than NE's seen in the past. So what is considered struggling??? 9,10,11 wins??? If, in the past, the pats have dispassonately released/traded/etc - valuable players on the back end of their careers - doesn't the current situation appear similar now?  

    I wouldn't do it, but don't you think this thought is rolling around in Belichick's head now? Nope, they are riding him for at least 2 more years and then it will be up to Brady after that. They don't extend guys who don't figure prominately in their plans.




    see anwers in red.

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

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

     

     

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    To get back to the thinking - The pats are effectively now without their top 5 pass catchers from last year to start the season (assuming Hernandez is out and they don't bring back Lloyd or Branch).  I believe Brady has become a QB who develops rapport with a few guys and doesn't work hard on developing the others.  (Maybe part of that is that he doesn't need to.)

     

    You gave a list of some bad players (extending over years).  Let's focus on the last three or four years.  Who did he ignore?  There isn't a long list to choose from.

    Taylor Price?

    Sean Underwood?

    Ochocinco?

    Here are his receivers since 2009--who would you say he failed at developing?

    2009

    Wes Welker 123 1,348 11.0 58 4 Randy Moss 83 1,264 15.2 71 13 Julian Edelman 37 359 9.7 29 1 Kevin Faulk 37 301 8.1 38 1 Benjamin Watson 29 404 13.9 36 5 Sam Aiken 20 326 16.3 81 2 Sammy Morris 19 180 9.5 35 0 Chris Baker 14 142 10.1 36 2 Laurence Maroney 14 99 7.1 17 0 Joey Galloway 7 67 9.6 19 0 Isaiah Stanback 3 22 7.3 9 0 BenJarvus Green-Ellis 2 11 5.5 6 0 Fred Taylor 2 17 8.5 13 0

     

    2010

    Wes Welker 86 848 9.9 35 7 Deion Branch 48 706 14.7 79 5 Aaron Hernandez 45 563 12.5 46 6 Rob Gronkowski 42 546 13.0 28 10 Danny Woodhead 34 379 11.1 50 1 Brandon Tate 24 432 18.0 65 3 BenJarvus Green-Ellis 12 85 7.1 16 0 Randy Moss 9 139 15.4 35 3 Julian Edelman 7 86 12.3 40 0 Sammy Morris 7 77 11.0 22 0 Alge Crumpler 6 52 8.7 27 2 Kevin Faulk 6 62 10.3 21 0 Taylor Price 3 41 13.7 18 0 Fred Taylor 2 6 3.0 7

    0

     

    2011

    Wes Welker 122 1,569 12.9 99 9 Rob Gronkowski 90 1,327 14.7 52 17 Aaron Hernandez 79 910 11.5 46 7 Deion Branch 51 702 13.8 63 5 Danny Woodhead 18 157 8.7 16 0 Chad Ochocinco 15 276 18.4 53 1 BenJarvus Green-Ellis 9 159 17.7 53 0 Kevin Faulk 7 34 4.9 18 0 Julian Edelman 4 34 8.5 11 0 Stevan Ridley 3 13 4.3 8 0 Tiquan Underwood 3 30 10.0 13 0 Matthew Slater 1 46 46.0 46 0

     

    2012

    Wes Welker 118 1,354 11.5 59 6 Brandon Lloyd 74 911 12.3 53 4 Rob Gronkowski 55 790 14.4 41 11 Aaron Hernandez 51 483 9.5 31 5 Danny Woodhead 40 446 11.2 25 3 Julian Edelman 21 235 11.2 56 3 Deion Branch 16 145 9.1 25 0 Shane Vereen 8 149 18.6 83 1 Stevan Ridley 6 51 8.5 20 0 Michael Hoomanawanui 5 109 21.8 41 0 Daniel Fells 4 85 21.3 35 0 Brandon Bolden 2 11 5.5 11 0 Donte' Stallworth 1 63 63.0 63 1 Kellen Winslow 1 12 12.0 12 0

     

     

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

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    I can't believe that I'm even posting on this thread much less that it's actually extended to 3 pages.  And it unfolded exactly as threads of this kind unfold:

    1) Fan-baiting thread begins

    2) Disruptive posters smack their lips and spew

    3) Occasional rational posts appear but are drowned out by 2) above or

    4) The oh-so-predictable exchanges:  BB sux, TB sux, BB is God, TB is God, etc etc etc

    5) And then eventually it runs out of steam and on we go to the next off-season topic of irrelevance.



    Perfect! The life cycle of a thread. Not unlike that of humans.

    We're born, puberty (lip smacking and spew), young adulthood including moments of rational thought and actual achievement generally overshadowed by immature acts, the predictable hum drum of later adulthood, then we run out of steam and slobber all over ourselves until it all ends. 

    I wonder if maybe the Internet will evolve into something better, something with a greater purpose? 

    Nah.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Would any other NFL team treat Tom Brady like this?

    In response to GEAUX-TIGRES' comment:

    Just read the facts and stop trying to prove to us BB and your own infallibility. My sole procreation is a neuro surgeon in Bean Town. That puts her a few rungs above your imaginary intelligence ladder, which, by the way means shiot  to participants here. Oh, and my IQ is flirtatiously close to yours, but they both pale verses my daughter's. You've just lost your umteen argument on the Globe. I'll ask my daughter what part of YOUR grey matter was dysfuntionally impaired to make you who you are. I'll get back to you on that. Mean while, argue, berate and continue disparaging people on this forum. It's probably the only pleasurable function you have in life. No. I will not call you a loser or denegrate you. You own the board on that agenda. Now you go on ignore.




    LIKE A BOSS!!

    Well done, Sir!

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share