18Manning
-
Posts
1,178 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by 18Manning
-
-
Please, do not pretend you're on terra firma here. You were the one who claimed that Brady was not as important to the team as people claim based on Cassel's performance.
The Patriots didn't even make the playoffs with Cassel's, despite going 18-1 the ear before.
Your argument fails right there.
Yet NE made the playoffs in 2009 with only a 10-6 record with Brady playing. WOW, REALLY, SERIOUSLY, ETC.
-
ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!?!?!?
This post , more than any other, proves that you have NO idea what you're talking about.
Cheating the cap allowed for Denver to have Terrell Davis and John Elway on their roster.
Ballghazi isn't proven. Spygate had nothing to do with what happened on the field . All Spygate was, for the misinformed Colt fans out there, was the recording of signals that EVERYONE IN THE FRICKIN STADIUM COULD SEE.
It blows my mind how ridiculously ignorant people are about Spygate.
Whether or not an edge was garnered from the video taping, it was against the rules. BB was fined $500,000.00 and NE fined $250,000.00. Did the NFL levy those fines only to pacify everyone that's not a NE fan? The rule is there for a reason. If there was no potential to realize an edge, then why video tape in the first place?
-
The Colts pointed this problem out in week 11 and it was substantiated not once but twice in the playoffs.
The point is, as Tom pointed out in 2011, he likes using under-inflated/ deflated balls. Obviously the league was cool with it, but not anymore.
Now because of the Colts and Ravens, teams with Qbs who have small hands or weak grips will become obsolete.
Nice try on the spin-job though.
Where do you people come from? Some of the comments posted are so ridiculous.
-
THEY WERE CONSECUTIVE SEASONS.
Wow.
So, a compilation of statistics from 2 consecutive seasons, in your opinion, is enough data for a fair assessment? Okay. Let's go 3 (consecutive) seasons then. That's only 1 more than what you're comparing. We'll use 2007, 2008 and 2009. The average wins is 12. Again, that includes the 16-0 season, which NE has only approached twice before at 14-0, but that was in 2004 and 2010. Using some of your dialogue...WOW, REALLY, SERIOUSLY, ETC.
For anyone else reading this response and not knowing the full context, I compliment how good NE has been over the years, suggesting they would be good even without Brady, and ViriLudant takes me to task. Post whatever you like in response, ViriLudant. I'll waste no more time trying to defend complimenting NE because of your misinterpretation.
-
So much has changed and more will change with the Broncos. Also, getting older, I think he's more prone to injuries. Forget the arm strength. I'm talking about everything else. i.e. a quadriceps. You could tell something was off the last few games. I hope he doesn't retire, but if he does, I can understand.
-
You've got to be kidding me.
Let's look at the math.
From 18-1 to 11-5.
That's a 7 win drop off.
Yeah, the QB makes no difference.
From 2004 to 2013 NE has averaged 12 wins a year. That's an AVERAGE. 2 of those years with Brady playing, NE only won 10 games. Brady goes down in game 1 for 2008 and NE still wins 11 games. That's only 1 less than the average which included a 16-0 run. So, YEAH, NE would probably still be a very good team without Brady.
And I didn't say the QB makes no difference. I said the NE team is a better team than Brady is a QB. That's not the same as me saying Brady is not a top QB, or one of the best QBs ever. I realize, based on many of your posts, you have a hard time engaging in a civil dialogue. I compliment NE and you take issue with me. Aside from anyone saying..."NE is the best team in history. Brady is the best QB in history. There is no competition, or comparison whatsoever historically. There will probably NEVER be a team as grand and great at the Patriots. All other teams pale in comparison", you would probably take issue.
-
You've got to be kidding me.
Let's look at the math.
From 18-1 to 11-5.
That's a 7 win drop off.
Yeah, the QB makes no difference.
You take the absolute single best record of NE and compare to the year Brady was out. You believe that's a fair comparison? That makes no sense.
-
Brady is not young
I don't think it matters that Brady is aging, at least not yet. Here's where I would argue the value of 1 player to a team. Don't any of you NE fans get me wrong. Brady is a very good QB, but the Patriots as a whole (including the head coach) are better. IMO a better team than Brady is a QB. Again, don't misinterpret what I'm suggesting. When Brady was injured in game 1 in 2008, NE still had an excellent record at 11 and 5. I believe you could plug any really good QB into the NE system and get excellent results. On the flip side, look at the Colts the year Peyton was out. The Colts went from a SB contender to getting the first choice in the draft. I'm not suggesting one QB over the other, although an argument could be made based on this example. I'm only suggesting NE is probably the best all around team and has been for quite a while.
-
It would be hilarious if they decided to open vs the Colts in Indy just to remind you all that once again, they would win...even after the deflated balls incident.
Don't get me wrong and go nuts ranting at me, I like your team, but you all know that even without that ball controversy, that was still a loss, and I still think it would have been a blow out cause the Colts match up so poorly vs New England's run game.
Don't think it would be a sure win if NE played in Indianapolis. Indianapolis has been blown out before only to play well another time. Although NE will probably open as the AFC favorite, they will be challenged. No team is going to lay down and let them just roll on to the SB.
-
Sigh, this scandal didn't even matter to me at the start. Yes, New England has a cheating history, but we got destroyed by them in the AFCCG, so the balls wouldn't have mattered to me anyway. They're beating a dead horse at this point.
You're right in that it wouldn't have mattered in the AFCCG, but it could have mattered in other games. So, it's important to figure out what is the truth, if possible. If it's determined the balls were manipulated, who's to say they weren't manipulated in the game with Baltimore? That was a close game. If Baltimore won, the AFCCG game would have been in Indianapolis. We have faired well against Baltimore lately. Maybe it would have been an Indianapolis vs Seattle SB? I know this in football, but suggesting "They're beating a dead horse" is like not trying to find a person that murdered someone. Well, the person is dead, so why bother? Can't bring them back. A penalty must be levied if proven guilty.
-
All this arguing back and forth doesn't really matter. I assume the full report has not yet been published for anyone to see. Best we just wait and see what the full investigation reveals. Either way, I'd be a little annoyed as a NE fan. Whether or not this proves to be manipulation, public opinion has been set for the most part for many different reasons including spygate. In the eyes of the public, there will always be a question mark.
-
OK...if the allegations are true. The more that comes out about these allegations it seems clear that the story that was leaked was either completely wrong or extremely exaggerated, That's the issue.
It's yet another "latest report". I don't know what the allowed margin of error is in the NFL. I don't know which ball Grigson had in his hand. Although someone else here posted it was the ball that was most underinflated. I don't know exactly what Grigson disclosed or claimed. I don't know any more than anyone else reading what they're finding on the Internet. All I'm saying is, IMO, it's okay to do whatever is needed to insure a full investigation. I don't care if it was the Colts allegedly manipulating the PSI. BTW, if this wasn't such a big deal, which it may end up being the case, why won't the NFL just come out and say so? The rules are the rules and they're in place for a reason. At least regarding what is currently the "latest report" as 1 ball underinflated by 2 lbs., that's 16%. Sure, many of you are saying, "big deal, it's 16%". I'd love to get a 16% raise. I'm currently working on losing about 8% of my body weight. 16% is significant. The designated PSI guideline is there to follow. It's not a suggestion. So if any manipulation of the game balls happened, it's a big deal.
-
I don't have any issue with Griggson reporting it if he felt something was done that required reporting. The issue that I (and most Pats fans) have is the leaking of the story to Kravitz. There's little doubt that Kravitz' source is a Colts insider, either Griggson himself or somebody in the know and not the league itself (which wanted no part of that circus). A lot of things get investigated weekly by the league based on complaints made by other teams, and those things are kept in-house until all the facts have been gathered and there is definitive proof that something actually happened. The leaking of that story during the bye week before the Superbowl seems to be a pretty low move by whoever did it, especially in light of the fact that the story may not be a story at all when all is said and done. It presented a major distraction to a team trying to prepare for the Superbowl, and it's hard not to think that wasn't intentional.
I don't necessarily have a problem with it being "leaked". It happens all the time. That's how a lot of wrongdoings, cheating, etc. get uncovered. It's possible no one would ever hear of this if it didn't get outside of Grigson (assuming it was cheating/rule bending, whatever you want to call it). As I said in a previous post, the NFL is a business. There's a lot of big money, and money makers involved. If there were only a couple of people aware of underinflated balls, it very well could have "gone away". "Leaking" the possibility of deflated balls to the public is a way to insure it won't get buried so easily.
-
Get used to Pats fans hammering at the Colts.. "We're going in there and hanging 70 on them, they're the cheaters and they whine" ect.
I will say this. Throughout the last 2 weeks Pat fan has been saying "just wait for the facts". I think that now that the story narrative is shifting towards exonerating the Pats, we should "just wait for the facts.
If Grigson set this off, he'd better be right- or at least not completely in the wrong.
There's nothing wrong with reporting underinflated balls regardless of how they became underinflated. Even if they became underinflated by natural causes, they were underinflated.
-
It's certainly possible. I think their biggest threat would be Ravens. Ravens play them very well. On another note, if the Ravens knock them out, we tend to play well against the Ravens.
. Don't think Denver will be much of a threat, even if Peyton stays. Peyton will still have a good year if he stays, but he'll be starting over again. Steelers could be a threat, but they seem to be up and down a lot. Colts could be a legitimate threat if we get NE at home. -
I think there are many ways to slice the apple on this. I think with the Pats you are looking at a 15 year run that is really only rivaled by the Niners with their run from 1981-1995. The Niners run though included two Qbs and two HCs whereas the Pats have done theirs with the same HC/QB. I think at this point Brady and Bill are the best Qb/HC combo in the history of the league. But the niners won 5 bowls so you could look at their run as more impressive and the fact that they never lost a bowl either. Of course the Pats reached 6 bowls winning 4. At this point I think it is splitting hairs. IMO I have always viewed this run by the Pats even before Sunday as the best ever because of the cap/FA era. Just so hard to sustain the year in and year out success with the league designed to have teams go 8-8 every year.
What I find interesting about the book ends of this run is the Pats beat the greatest show on turf in the Rams who were also seeking their second championship in 3 years and the beginning of a dynasty back in 2001. Now in 2014 the Hawks with the legion of boom were seeking their second ring and a claim at the beginning of a dynasty. So the two rings on either by the Pats stopped the two best teams in the league. I am interested to see if the Hawks fade out the way the Rams did. That call by Carroll may be their undoing on top of having to pay Wilson and Lynch. It will be very interesting to watch. One thing is for sure, we are very blessed here in NE to have had this run. I will always be thankful to Kraft for what he has done for the past 21 years.
I agree NE would be the best team in recent history even excluding the SB wins. Look only at the statistics and it's obvious.
-
This whole deflate-gate is really getting out of hand, but I hope grigs really didn't do anything
Why wouldn't you want Girgson to notify the NFL of someone breaking the rules?
-
Whether or not the balls were intentionally deflated does matter. The fact NE won the Super Bowl changes nothing in that regard.
-
So what you're saying, then, is that Manning and Rodgers don't have four Super Bowl wins because they're not patient enough to take what the defense gives them and eventually they "get bored" and decide to throw one down-field?
That makes a lot of football sense.
Personally, I think it's very difficult to pin the label of best QB on any 1 person. I think it's a little easier to label a team as great or the greatest, but even then it gets a little fuzzy. For instance, regarding NE's wins, you hear radio personalities talk all the time about how NE could easily have 6 SB wins. NE could have had just as easily 5 SB losses as the scores were so close. As far as equating QB greatness to SB wins, if not for Vinatieri kicking a couple of FGs, Brady would be minus 2 of his rings. If not for a goofy call in this last Super Bowl, there's a good chance NE doesn't win that game either. I know this response is a little off subject, but wanted to put my 2 cents in. Unless you equate ONLY SB wins to being the greatest, there's no way to put a label on a player or team.
-
Still completely stunned by how all that ended. What a roller coaster ride.
Brady's joined a very elite club. He made a couple of huge mistakes but overall that was a great and gutty performance. That Seahawks' D makes you earn every yard... those guys are the real deal. But Brady's short passing game and quick recognition are exactly the way to beat those guys.
On a side note... I actually feel sorry for those of you still trying to dump on the Patriots. Apparently you're ignoring the latest news and have already passed judgement. It's your right to do so, but it's getting sillier and sillier between the details that are coming out and the way the Pats responded on the field in the second half of the AFCCG and SB. They looked pretty good against the NFL's best defense playing with league-managed balls. If you're expecting the NFL to drop the hammer, I'd brace yourself for some major disappointment.
I never expected the NFL to do anything major regardless of the findings. The NFL would find some way to minimize any wrongdoing. And Goodell has not had a good track record. There's a lot of big money and big players involved. Call it a conspiracy if you like, but it's just big business doing what big business does.
-
*4 Super Bowls
You forgot the asterisk
I agree 100% with this post. Personally, I won't bring this up in every conversation regarding the Pat's 4 Super Bowls, but it will ALWAYS be a question with a fair percentage of the public. It's a shame as the Pats, I suspect, are pretty darn good without garnering an edge via means against the rules.
-
Lynch got stopped on 1st and Goal.
No guarantee he gets it. After those solid completions from Wilson, and he was having a great second half up to then, why wouldn't you throw it?
It's ridiculous to take a chance on a pass at the 1 yard line. There are no guarantees for anything, but I suspect statistically, a run would have been the better option (not hindsight is 20/20, it was just stupid). Seattle basically gave the Super Bowl to the Pats because of a stupid play choice.
-
I believe this will be swept under the rug too. I love watching football, but this will be very disappointing if the league does not hand down some type of SERIOUS discipline. I will not be watching the Superbowl this year. Not that anyone really cares, but if this is not dealt with properly, I'll make a serious attempt to wean myself off football next season. I am that annoyed with this.
Liar lol
Ha, I did say attempt...
-
I believe this will be swept under the rug too. I love watching football, but this will be very disappointing if the league does not hand down some type of SERIOUS discipline. I will not be watching the Superbowl this year. Not that anyone really cares, but if this is not dealt with properly, I'll make a serious attempt to wean myself off football next season. I am that annoyed with this.
. Don't think Denver will be much of a threat, even if Peyton stays. Peyton will still have a good year if he stays, but he'll be starting over again. Steelers could be a threat, but they seem to be up and down a lot. Colts could be a legitimate threat if we get NE at home.
Do you see Brady winning a 5th Super Bowl
in NFL General
Posted
That's my point. NE has been an all-around excellent TEAM for several years. I believe any top QB could be plugged in to that system and have success. I don't know that NE would have the same level of success, but would still be a very good team.