GoPats
-
Posts
4,315 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by GoPats
-
-
2 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:
I gave my respect to Brady. I did not let my fandom say Manning was better as some Colts fan has said just for arguments sake.
Calling any QB in football the GOAT depends on so many things falling in place. Who caught those passes he threw? Who gave him the blocking to make those passes complete? What RBs made the passing game work? What RB got those TDs when needed? What kicker hit those game winning kicks?
What about the defense who made stops, interceptions and forced fumbles at opportune times?
Like I said, QBs are as only as successful as the team put around them.
Brady and all the great QBs of every era all had one thing in common. There were all on great teams.
Fandom calls for the QBs to get all the fame even tho football is a team game.
Some good points by you. The only thing I'd say in response is that, when you do what Brady has done over the course of 18 seasons, it makes a lot of the questions you asked (in bold) null and void. A guy doesn't "get lucky" or get carried by his team or coach for almost two decades. Brady has been the one constant (on the field). His line has changed, skill positions have changed, his defense has evolved, they've undergone changes to their coaching staff, etc. But he brings it all together, regardless of the faces around him.
And while the 2008 team did fairly well without him, I don't think you could say the same if Brian Hoyer was quarterbacking them this year.
Like I said though, I completely get your point and it's totally valid.
-
1 hour ago, JimJaime said:
Not in that game, outside of the one bad Roughing the passer call they were allowing the Chiefs D get away with anything.. especially illegal contact and PI.. and they sure didn’t let the Pats get away with PI.. 2 scores because of it and 1 TO negated by them.. if anything the refs were keeping the Chiefs in the game by calling it ONE WAY.. (not saying were bad calls just they missed just as blatant PI etc the other way)
Finally re-watched the game. The long completion from Mahomes to Watkins on the Chiefs' final TD drive --- the play where Romo pointed out the illegal pick --- was completely ridiculous. Especially since they called Dorsett for offensive PI on an earlier play where it wasn't as blatant as the Watkins reception.
So the Patriots had a very fortunate roughing the passer call on a 2nd-and-7, while the Chiefs got away with one on a 2nd-and-10, both on 4th quarter drives. I'd say that basically evens out.
The other SMH penalty was the PI call on JC Jackson, also on Watkins, on the throw down the right sideline. I can understand why they called him on the play where Kelce fumbled (that would have basically ended the game right there), but the call on the throw to Watkins was really marginal at best.
I also noticed while re-watching that Kelce also basically pushes off on every route. I know most TEs (including Gronk) do that, but some of his were really blatant.
-
I think the first INT may have changed the narrative a bit. That was 100% on Brady. Not sure what he was thinking there. Looked like he was impersonating Big Ben or something.
The 2nd INT (and what would have been the 3rd had the Patriots not been fortunate to get that offsides call) was really on Edelman. Throw was a bit high but certainly catchable. Seems like there were a lot of those this year, not just for NE, but other QBs as well.
-
21 minutes ago, Superman said:
This topic is always a breeding ground for lots of ideas.
I'm still wondering what's wrong with just giving both teams possession, and playing the game out past those two initial possessions, if necessary.
The Pats went down and scored on the first possession. Now the Chiefs get the ball. One of three things happens: 1) The Pats stop the Chiefs and win the game; 2) The Chiefs score a TD, go for two, and either win or lose; 3) The Chiefs score a TD, kick the XP, and the next score wins.
It's simple. It's the same game, same rules, without favoring either team on the basis of a coin flip.
This would make for interesting strategy as well.
Do you take the ball if you win the coin toss? That gives you first crack at scoring, BUT...
If you opt to kick off and take the "second" possession, there could be an advantage to that. Say the first possession for your opponent results in a TD. So you have to match. You've effectively removed punting from the equation and are in 4-down territory the rest of the way, regardless of field position. Not ideal, but... with the clock not being a factor, it means you get one extra play for every first down you earn.
-
17 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:
Now your fandom aimed at Brady is showing.
.If you don't think a head coach has the most influence over a QB and the whole team I don't know what to tell you.
What was the record of the Patriots for the games played without Brady?
I suppose you think Bill Walsh had nothing to do with the success of Montana and Young?
I suppose you think Jimmy Johnson had nothing to do with the success of Aikman?
Of coarse Lomardi didn't do anything for Starr.
Every team in the NFL are looking for head coaches that can make their team successful. If they don't, they are fired.
Belichick has taken whatever team he has put together and made winners out of them.
What you seem to forget is no QB can get any wins without a total team around him. They are as only as good as the other players play as a team. Belichick has the system and the knowledge to put those teams together.
When any QB gets a win the very first thing they say it's all about the team. That is not something said to please the fans wanting to put him on a pedestal.
As far as my integrity, I am not the one who comes into a Patriot forum and insults the intelligence of being open minded.
Sorry if I got too personal in my last response. I wrote all of that poorly and conveyed the wrong tone.
Colts fans have been making the same argument for over 10 years now when it comes to the 2008 season (when Brady tore his ACL and the Patriots went 11-5). But did you watch every New England game that season? Matt Cassel is no superstar, but he is LIGHT YEARS ahead of anyone that Indy had in Manning's lost season.
I can see --- if someone just checked the final standings for 2008 and said, "Hmm, 11-5..." --- how they would come to the conclusion that Brady was easily replaced by Cassel. The 2007 team (that went 16-0 regular season) wasn't really dismantled until 2009. In 2008, it was essentially the same roster. Cassel started 15 games and went 10-5. He played well... but the drop-off from Brady was significant:
Brady 2007:
- 68.9 completion %
- 4806 yards
- 50 TDs, 8 INTs
Cassel 2008:
- 63.4 completion %
- 3693 yards
- 21 TDs, 11 INTs
And just for good measure... Brady had 578 pass attempts in 2007, while Cassel had 516 in 2008. Pretty close. Divided by 16 games, that's 36.12 attempts/game for Brady, and 32.25 attempts/game for Cassel.
Five fewer wins... 589 points in 2007, 410 points in 2008... twice as many passing TDs... fewer picks than Cassel, even though Brady had more attempts.
All I'm saying is that boiling it down to "the Patriots went 11-5 without Brady in 2008" is oversimplifying a situation that --- in many cases --- is agenda-driven, not objective. When you look at the specifics it becomes pretty clear.
If you want to get into 2016, when Brady was suspended, they again had a very capable backup in Jimmy G, and a capable 3rd stringer in Brissett. Worth noting, though, that one of Brissett's starts was the first time the Patriots were shut out at Gillette stadium in something like 20-25 years. They went 3-1 and really didn't beat anyone of note in that first quarter of the season.
Anyway...
Of course Belichick has had an enormous hand in the overall success of the team. He's the Godfather, the Big Boss, the Man in Charge. As a coach, he has no equal, in my opinion. But as a GM, he's had good moments and bad ones, and has constantly shuffled the cast of characters and skill players surrounding Brady. He's also had some moments (ie: benching Malcolm Butler in last year's Super Bowl) that were borderline inexplicable.
-
15 hours ago, coltsfansince65 said:
But you can imagine that happening there right?
Nah. Drone-mounted laser pointers would be much more effective.
-
15 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:
This is the one area I feel coaches neglect practicing, The Coin Toss.
Ha! Agreed... I think scouts are falling behind in this area as well. When a guy is coming out of college I like to know if he's a "heads" guy or a "tails" guy.
-
17 hours ago, Gramz said:
I think I addressed this earlier, but I have been thinking about it a little more, and yes, you were very gracious Peyton's final year when the Broncos beat the Pats and he and the Broncos went on and he got his 2nd SB
.
Aside from a select group, I think the majority of NFL fans, and fellow athletes and players were also very happy for him. It's a little different scenario. than watching Tom and the Pats in practically every AFC game and several Super Bowls for the better part of the past two decades.
Years earlier it appeared that Peyton may have be done for good... after his surgery he could barely toss the football to his wife Ashley, let alone step foot on the field and be competitive. He worked Hard to get back to where he was. It was impressive, it was admirable, and pretty spectacular that he accomplished that. I still get emotional when I think of how hard he worked.
You knew how much that SB win meant to me, and you did reach out with very kind comments. I remember well.
If I said something this week that you thought was harsh, I meant no offense to you personally, and if I said something that gave you that impression, I apologize.
I know you are happy to see your team return to the big stage once again. As a friend, I am happy for you, just not happy about the overall situation. The outcome of the Saints/Rams game and the drama involved with the non-call had left a sour taste with me regarding the NFL before the Pats/Chiefs game even started. At this point I have no interest in watching the game. That is in no way meant to be offensive to you. I understand your excitement. I've been there several times myself.
Enjoy the game!
Thank you Gramz! My interactions with you over the years have definitely had an influence on how I felt about the rivalry, etc. There is always a silver lining and mine was folks like you and Jaric getting to enjoy the thrills of watching your team win. I appreciate your response very much and my apologies as well if anything this week was over-the-line.
-
2
-
-
18 hours ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:
Back at ya! I have a lot of respect for BB, Brady and what the Pats have accomplished.
You're a classy Pats fan.
Thank you sir, glad we could get past all that!
17 hours ago, Roger said:Well excuse me, Herr GoPats. I typed it from memory. Bet you looked it up.
I did, lol... figured it was obvious! My apologies to you as well, I was messing around here but didn't make that clear enough. Sorry about that!
-
1
-
-
26 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:
You're being very vague and dodgy about why you're so active right now.
It's very coincidental that a number of Pats fans seem to have come out of the woodwork on this forum after the Pats won the other night...
I can't really say one way or the other if we (Pats fans) have been coming out of the woodwork or not. I only check here occasionally... I got sucked into the rabbit hole yesterday. Admittedly.
I first started posting on this board (or a version of it) back in 2004. I've made some friends over the years. I was here for "Krafty Bob" and "Tuba Guy" and many colorful personalities from both sides of the rivalry.
If I've offended you or anyone these past two days, I apologize - that's not my MO here. I tend to treat people in the same manner in which I'm treated. A lot of newer posters who maybe didn't know me before have taken their shots at me and other Pats fans, so... that's the whole "poetic justice" kind of thing. I took a long break after Deflategate (over 2 years if I recall correctly) because of what I considered to be personal attacks. But whatever, that's not a big deal and it certainly has nothing to do with you. I've always enjoyed your lighthearted posts and sense-of-humor. If we were having this conversation in person, I'd offer to buy the beer.
Enjoying the success of the Patriots is not a case of me reveling in the misfortune of others. If I wanted to do that, I've had plenty of opportunities, since the Colts have only recently reemerged as a contender in the AFC. But between Deflategate, the Josh McDaniels situation, and other general (misguided) animosity that's been directed at me and my fellow Pats fans... yes, I've stooped lower than I wanted to at times, or meant to. I'm human, what can I say.
I wish you guys no ill will. Sports are fun but sometimes we all take it a little too seriously.
Cheers to you, and peace out. You're a good guy.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:
Ok, so why are you, a Pats fan, so active on a Colts forum right after the Pats win another AFCCG?
Explain the poetic justice.
I guess to see if people have come to their senses about a lot of things? But obviously they have not!
It's all good. Solider on.
-
1 hour ago, 18to87 said:
I can't think of any time in the playoff careers of Manning or Brees where they have been as lucky as Brady was in those games. They should have both been losses on Brady's resume (both teams should have run the ball; Atlanta dropping an INT), regardless of how he inspired comebacks in each.
You can say the same thing about the three Super Bowls the Patriots have lost.
They're about a dozen plays away from being 0-8 in Super Bowls, and a dozen plays away from being 8-0 in them.
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, Roger said:
Shadenfreude is the word. Colts fans want Brady's goat to die.
Close. It's actually "Schadenfreude."
-
6 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:
You're saying you're on a Colts forum to gloat about the Pats and rub it in about the Colts?
That's pretty sad.
Nope, never said that.
You have no idea where I'm going with this and you're a mile off, so... we'll just leave it at that.
-
31 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:
Overlooking and disregarding the history of the NFL is what people do when they only concentrate on what they know or let their fandom enter the picture.
I said in a different thread that Manning, Brady and the new and upcoming QBs are playing in an era where the QBs are treated like prima donnas. The owners pass rules that protect their franchise QBs. (understandable) . Brady is a fantastic QB but if you put Manning, Fouts and Marino and maybe a couple of other QBs in Brady's position they would have been just as successful.
The key to Brady's success is Belichick.
In the playoffs Brady has been the recipient of quite a few breaks with the teams he played gave the game away. He also has won a couple of games where the Refs gave him the chance to win games. (tuck rule as an example) Just this last week he won a game because of a bone head play by the Chiefs. Brady has won a lot of game with skill but luck has played a huge part of it.
The sentence in bold is where you lost me and, quite frankly, where your integrity comes into question on this issue.
The idea that a great coach can produce the most accomplished QB in the history of the NFL is beyond far-fetched. Coaching is important, but every NFL team talks about execution.
You're basically saying that Brady could be ANY player, and that over the course of almost 20 years, where he has been the ONLY constant on the field, he is interchangeable with several other players.
That, right there, is a Colts fan being reluctant to give Brady his due.
-
2 hours ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:
What is?
And how so?
Not that complicated, and you already introduced the concept of someone reveling in the misfortune of other people...
-
16 hours ago, JimJaime said:
I never understand how people equate 4-0 being better than 5-3..
how can you say Montana is better based off those stats? He played with Jerry Rice for all those championships and had the same cast around him all the time..
Jerry Rice, who was illegally using stick'em the whole time! Haha...
Seriously though, I never understood this argument. Somehow it's better to be eliminated earlier in the playoffs?
Montana was 16-7 in the postseason (includes 2-2 record with KC). I think he had at least three one-and-dones. -
20 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:
If all fairness don't you think the eras are totally different?
Do you honestly think Brady would be playing at 40 if he took the beatings that Unitas, Y A Tittle and most all of the QBs who played before the rules were put in place that made them prima donnas?
Thanks for an actual response and not just an insulting jab!
No of course he wouldn't still be playing at 41. That doesn't really mean anything relative to comparing the two, however.
Unitas also didn't have to play every game against the same kind of elite, freakish athletes that are in today's NFL. Guys are faster, bigger, and stronger.
You can't directly compare eras. You just won't find very many people who really know football who would tell you that Unitas was better than Brady has been.
-
17 hours ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:
You sure have been awfully active in this forum today. Is it just a coincidence, or is it because the Pats won last night?
Are you enjoying Colts fans' misery?
They have a word for people that find joy in the misery of others...
There are actually lots of words for those people. Most of them aren't allowed here.
It's all about your perspective. For me, this is poetic justice.
-
I can't even imagine the maelstrom of nonsense and channeled outrage that would ensue if this had been any other QB playing at Gillette.
-
1
-
-
20 hours ago, NFLfan said:
Is that what I asked you? Lol.
Check out Yehoodi, another Pat's fan. He is great to have around. He never would have posted a link to movie times in Indy or anything to troll the fans of this board.
It is great to have fans of other teams here. That's one of the reasons I joined.
Nowhere in my reply did I question your being here because you are not a Colts fan. I am questioning why you are concerned that fans are "bitter". Enjoy your win and celebrate. But you looked up movie times in Indy to troll fans. SMH
Combined two of your posts.
This isn't some sort of 14-year-plan on my part to troll Colts fans. You and I had a pleasant exchange a few years ago if I recall correctly. I've been posting less than I used to (due to life in general mainly, but also because of sensitive topics like Deflategate and Josh McDaniels).
I'm not posting movie links as anything but a joke. A pretty mild one at that. There's more of a double standard here now than there used to be, I guess!
20 hours ago, Narcosys said:Impossible?
Do you not see the refs on the field? Did you not see the PI that wasn't called that allowed the Rams to win? Numerous other games with no calls or phantom calls like the roughing the passer that saved the patriots drive and game. Draft picks and four games is not enough to prevent the games from being scripted.
How about this
Or just this fun fact:
The NFL argued in court that it is not a competitive sport, rather sports entertainment. They won and are LEGALLY allowed to fix games for the best entertainment, that which gives them the best profits and ratings.
Only other "sports entertainment" is WWE and roller derby.
They are not obligated to ensure fair games, as made evident in the Chiefs Colts game. When Chris Collinsworth says that its bad when talking about the Colts, that says something lol.
Kraft got Goodell the job and has kept him in power. Repayment is championships. It is also grand entertainment when Brady overcomes these 'setbacks' and still manages to win. Even players have hinted at it in the past.
Refs have huge sway over the outcome of the game. And if the league understands it is about entertainment, then they will comply. When the league shares revenue as they do, then it is in the leagues best interest to ensure the storyline that will generate the most revenue, not the actual best teams. That's just one example of how the league is set up to benefit from entertainment and not competition.
Would a colts and cowboys game really generate as much ratings and revenue as the patriots and rams? Not saying they aren't the best teams, just giving example.
There's tons of shady things when you go looking. The most famous argument is SB III, without it, the league would not be what it is today.
I'm just saying look into it.
I respect your opinion but personally I think you're taking human error and turning it into something it's not.
-
Yeah those two games this past weekend take the prize. NO got ripped off and KC had to watch another team get a trophy named for their past owner in their own stadium.
-
1
-
-
I don't get the Romo hate. He's actually dead-on with most of his commentary. When you look at the alternatives/competition (Phil Simms, Troy Aikman, Dan Fouts, etc-etc) I don't think anyone does it better than Romo.
-
7
-
2
-
-
5 minutes ago, coltsorioles said:
Remember Brady's team won the super bowls not just brady. Football is the ultimate team game. And this is why Peyton is not only better than Brady but much better. Peyton misses the season colts go 2-14. Brady misses the season and the patriots go 11-5. Denver wins the super bowl with Peyton , he retires and they dont even make the playoffs. Brady is suspected 4 games they go 3-1 beat 2 playoff teams and at Arizona without gronk as well. Brady has always had the better team with the best coach ever and reliable kicking and special teams
“I love that Serena Williams won the Australian Open while carrying a child. I mean, that’s even more impressive than two years ago when the Denver Broncos’ defense won the Super Bowl while carrying me.”
- Peyton Manning
.
Mahomes vs. Brady Mirror of Namath vs Unitas?
in NFL General
Posted
This really started with your comment:
"Brady is a fantastic QB but if you put Manning, Fouts and Marino and maybe a couple of other QBs in Brady's position they would have been just as successful."
Sorry but I find that to be 100% speculation. It's not fact. You don't KNOW what any of those guys would have done in Brady's position. Assuming they would have done just as well is discrediting Brady for his accomplishments.
Brady has done this over the course of his (very long) career with an almost constantly-evolving cast of characters around him on offense, and defenses that have ranged anywhere from "outstanding" to "truly bad." So to an extent, it doesn't matter who's around him, he's been successful regardless. Belichick and Brady are the reasons the Patriots have been competitive for the past 18 seasons. They've both been integral and irreplaceable.