Yehoodi

Senior Member
  • Content count

    2,686
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,059 Pro Bowler

1 Follower

Uncategorized

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. Beginning of the end for New England [Merge]

    Agreed, there are many fans that do not like the Pats. At the same time there are folks outside of NE that want to get on the wagon, just like any other team that is good in a sport. Not sure how many Browns fan there are outside of Ohio. With the combined interest there will be attention and clicks. Surely other teams messages boards have fans not liking the Pats but that is likely due to the fact that most folks who frequent message boards are fans of the team of the message board. so the percentage is low of out of town fans on message boards.
  2. Beginning of the end for New England [Merge]

    Agreed, from about 2008-2012 the Pats were in transition with, imo, the 2009 being the weakest version of the Pats in the Brady-BB era. Some of our draft picks/FAs 2006-2009 ish did not stick and so it took some time to get back on our feet. Finally some started to stick around 2010 and these players have matured to the present team 2014-2017. Regarding that Jets playoff loss, altho we beat them 45-3 earlier in the season, the Jets had beaten us 28-14 in week 2. We kind of overachieved that year in the regular season.
  3. Beginning of the end for New England [Merge]

    Yes one never knows, I think the Colts would of kept it going the way they were going before 2011 and they and the fans would of had some fun between 2012-2015. And yes you may have capture another ring. I agree, if i were a fan of Indy I would not try to extrapolate the success in Denver to what might of happened in Indy as the other 52 players are different and that Denver D was certainly an all worldly D. It is not to say the Colts may not of had the same results, just done differently. And I agree, now that Peyton is retired and Luck is only 28, moving forward as a fan, things look a lot more secure than perhaps the "what ifs" of a another QB chosen in a lower round in 2012 draft.
  4. Beginning of the end for New England [Merge]

    Yes it is tough to judge talent coming out of college. Jimmy G. has played well but less than 8 games and perhaps teams have not gotten the "book" on him yet, we will see how well he does in the next two to four years to get a good feedback on his talent. I did like him and heard good feedback from folks, so would not have been upset if TB fell off some and we kept Jimmy G. As for the colts transfer of power it just as tough. Yes, the Colts during most of Peyton's career went with bottom level backups, figuring i assume, that if the backup can only be useful if Peyton is only out a few games (and therefore the team would not get too far behind as a good backup could keep better pace than a lesser backup), they likely figured the chance he is out more than a few games outweighs the money/draft stock going elsewhere. Surely if the starter is out the entire season, it kind of done and thus the backup really only comes into play if the starter is out only a few games, like Brady last year. Luck's college resume had some saying he is an once in a generation talent which makes for tough decision to hold on both the starter and the draftee. Also, makes the trading down tough as franchise QB are so very valuable and older starters have a shelf life. I have no real opinion on the matter, but could easily understand the theory of keeping Peyton for 3-4 years, get a solid 2-3 rounders at QB and fill in the team with the extra draft picks.
  5. Beginning of the end for New England [Merge]

    Yes a QB transition has many layers . . . The Pats have always valued the QB backup and since the later 2000s have use high draft stock to have a QB in waiting. In 2013 TB had a rough start, due both to WR talent and him, with the former being more of the factor imo. However, that does not change the fact that the Pats might of been more mindful that the next 4 yr backup guy might be the next one. In come Jimmy G. and looks like, as of week 4 of 2014 (KC blowout), that Jimmy G. will fit right in 4 years from then to take over for TB. TB has played well causing a log jam at QB. There is really no true right answer when one tries to compare Jimmy G, moving forward against TB for a few years combined with the next heir, and which one would give the better combined results over the next 15 years. Yes with the Colts that argument was a tad easier as Luck coming out of college was touted as one of the best in a while, which would be different has the Colts drafted a run of a mill 2nd rounder. My strongest guess would be that BB is not going anywhere, takes too much time to fire up a team to your way of thinking and install the structure one wishes. As for TB, he only has 2 more years. The Pats could ride that out and not resign him. They could extend him for four years to match the next heir and then play it by ear and maybe trade Brady in years 3 & 4, or somewhere in between. As for the article, there may be some truth to it, but for me most of it was a typically media trying to get attention.
  6. NFL Wildcard Weekend Live Games Thread

    Lol, my phone would not let me put the text outside the quote
  7. NFL Wildcard Weekend Live Games Thread

    True but you can not give up a field goal either, bills choose field position
  8. Beginning of the end for New England [Merge]

    I think one thing that has helped the Pats beyond the intrinsic value of Kraft, BB, TB and its players is timing. BB was only 48 when he took over at HC of the Pats in 2000, we had a solid core of players (some of which cut their teeth in SB31 loss), added some more in 2001, the core had been maturing through he late 90s, so when TB came along we had a lot of the pieces to the puzzle. Given the player safety rules, QBs are hit less and can play longer and given BB being only 48 there was a potential which was recognized for a QB/Coach tandem to go 15-20 years. There was a rollover from the first team which too some time and not the best drafting with our 2009 being our weakest version, but the drafting has gotten better and players have stuck and the team has matured to its present form. Surely BB and TB have helped but things were set up to give them the potential to be together for a long time, had a owner that basically stays out of things, and new players have come along to fill out the present team.
  9. Beginning of the end for New England [Merge]

    Agreed . . . I never liked just looking at numbers and things need to be looked in perspective. Getting back to Bledsoe 2000/2001. Although the Pats went 5-11 (2000) and 0-1 (2001) and then went on to win 3 SBs in 4 years, there are caveat imo there too. 2000 was BB's first year, we brought in some more folks in 2001, Vrabel, Cox, Phifer, drafted Light and Seymour, etc. and maybe the pats under achieved in 2000 too. So all these qualify the difference in those years. Surely Brady helped some, but I was never with the Brady heads crowd,he may of been the last piece in the puzzle but not necessarily the savior. Overall i think things can balance out, the points i made to qualify 2000 can be balance with factors in 2008. And yes it was a fluke to not make the playoffs at 11-5. Even if one can not outpace his division 11-5 still should of been good enough to get a wild card. We just could not beat a good team that year. BB certainly helped with Pats success and yes football has three phases in the game, two of which the QB is sitting on the bench. As the QB touches the ball for about 1/3 of the game he does have some impact, he just needs to make sure he is not part of the reason for a loss and take advantage and raise his game if need to be to help a team win in a given situation. Be nice to see BB coach the Pats for a significant person of time with another solid QB. He did not have a great record in Cleveland but it was Cleveland, he did improve the teams record and it was a team that ended up winning a SB in 2000.
  10. Beginning of the end for New England [Merge]

    i hear yah, none of us will ever know the final details or what is going on, regardless of the Pats joint statement. Will all QB transitions, it is not a perfect science unless the next one comes just at the time of the prior's retirement. in the end there is always an overlap where a judgment call needs to be made comparing the remaining years of the present QB coupled with a future prospect against handing the rains to the next guy for the future. TB does appear to have gas in the tank and Jimmy G. understandably did not want to be a back up if starting jobs are open, thus making the overlap decision tough. If Jimmy G. is what we think he is, i can understand a person decision to let TB go a few years too early in exchange for all Jimmy G. going forward as one does not know what the next heir will bring. My two cents is that BB would of like to keep Jimmy G., but if the overlap decision was tough I can see BB also erring on the side of sentiment, given what Kraft, BB, and Brady has done over the last 18 years.
  11. Beginning of the end for New England [Merge]

    Yes time will tell as coaches & players movement and results will given a good picture of the extent of things mentioned in the article. And i agree, nothing will come of this by getting into the details as it will just cause distractions that the team does not need in December. My gut feeling is that Kraft would yield to BB on the Brady situation as he has done so in the past with other key player decisions. Indeed, BB was allow to trade Bledsoe basically a year after we signed him to be our franchise QB, not to mention not to let him back on the field after he returned from injury. Also, too BB maybe might yield to Kraft a bit, given how Brady has help both their resumes and that TB is still going strong over these last four years. I may be wrong but my sense was the team wanted to keep Jimmy G for 2 or more years and let TB go around 42-43, but that was not in the cards.
  12. Beginning of the end for New England [Merge]

    Well I guess that closes the case then . . . . In other news, ne interesting to see how things play out in the next few weeks. Given the response one guess the Pats will not response to this again. It will also be interesting to see how things go in the up coming years and we can look back to see if the article is on point or the Pats joint statement, or maybe somewhere in between.
  13. Beginning of the end for New England [Merge]

    (Valpo2004, sorry for long response) There are only two games that I did not include in the stats mentioned. That being the games Bledsoe got injured (game 2, 2001)(loss) and Brady (game 1, 2007)(win). Regarding the resting their starters game, there are included but only a few. If my memory is correct from 2000-2017, the Pats have only rested their starters for most or part of the game in the following years: 2005 v. Mia (the game which BB pulled Brady late in the game to put in Cassell who blew the game so they could avoid Pitt in the first round), 2009 v. Hou, and 2014 v. Buf. All of where starts by Brady but ended in losses as the team was not going full force. So 3 losses on Brady resume, if we remove them Brady resume goes to 195-52 (0.789). And agreed with you we can not hold the 2014 Buf game against Jimmy G. as the starters were not in the game, but that is not included under Jimmy G. as i included under TB as he started that game. And lastly, as a caveat we can looked to the last two games in the 2015 season, both looses, when the Pats were trading keeping the players healthy in exchange for not going all out. Which would bring TB resume to 195-50 (0.796) in games fought in anger. To the question of "back-up" QB I think the real question for me is not the label of "backup" but how good is that QB. If Aaron Rodgers is the "backup" in Indy and they go 12-4 without Luck, does that mean Luck talent is qualified cause the "backup" went 12-4? Or do we look to the backup as a QB and judge from his talent? Minn is the #2 seed with a back-up, last years Cowboys went 13-3 with a back-up For the most part Pats back-ups have been solid QBs. Bledsoe was the starter for us and was in 2001/2, and overall is a 0.500 QB with and without NE, Matt Cassell started for other teams, had a 10-5 season with KC, and overall is 26-40 outside of NE, Jimmy has yet to lose a start, Jacoby B. did what he did in Indy this year. Brian Hoyer who has not started for the Pats is 16-21 and 16-15 outside of SF. So the Pats back-ups fare pretty well outside of NE. They are not Rodgers nor are they Painter. Agreed, the Pats FO does do a good job with fielding a good team and agreed that a QB is just part of the overall machine. In the end for me, a QB can help sway the results of a handful of game throughout the year and may include playoff games. For me the difference between a great QB and average QB is a small handful of games in the regular season and one or two in the playoffs.
  14. Beginning of the end for New England [Merge]

    Just a few points . . . First and most critically, BB, TB and the Pats have been together since 2000. From 2000 to the present time the Pats are 195-55 (0.780) when Brady has started and 18-18 (0.500) when Brady has not been the starter, so a 0.280 difference (these numbers do not include the games in which Bledsoe and Brady got injured, numbers do include the few games which the team rested its starters at the end of seasons). Second, in 2008 the AFCE had a very easy schedule with three of the teams finishing over 0.500 (and the fourth, Buffalo, going 7-9). This has only happened three times in the division, 2002, 2004 and 2008. Also Miami, in a 10 year span from 2004 to 2014 Miami has only two winnings seasons (2008 11-5, 2005 9-7), and indication they are not the strongest team thereby qualifying the 2008 11-5 season may not have been that difficult to come by if the no so strong Fins can get 11 wins. Third, yes we were not great in 2009 and likely is our weakest team. This is also the year that the team had turmoil and has traded or lost to retirement most of its early 2000s team and was in a rebuilding mode. I" do agree with your point on this matter of 2009 but wanted to bring up the above points. In the end one must look at all things to get a better perspective on TB's contribution to the team and how the team has fared without him under center, and the analysis is not limited to just a few numbers from 2008, 2008, 2014 or 2000.