George Peterson
-
Posts
164 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by George Peterson
-
-
1 hour ago, Yehoodi said:
Perhaps the SB loss may have jarred something with the Krafts, who knows . . . i am in shock also . . .
There's a lot of rumbling from the fans that Belichick mishandled that superbowl, especially with benching Butler. Jonathan Kraft is in love with Belichick, but his son is much less so. Jonathan's response to the schism talk was rather tepid in terms of his support of Belichick.. that has not been forgotten.
The elder Kraft is getting up there and the younger is handling more and more of the team responsibilities... a fan and staff revolt against Belichick that spoke to Jonathan might find a receptive ear, and if Bill saw the writing on the wall and that he'd have to compete with Jonathan for authority in the team, he might decide to abruptly retire -- it would be in his character. He's said in the past he will only coach if he continues to have full control of the team, if that's coming to an end because of an irritated owner, we could see some pretty volcanic things happening in New England in the shockingly near future.
We may have just witnessed the last gasp of the Dynasty.,
-
Philly got away with plenty. There's an uproar in the Patriots forums about both an illegal pick pay and an illegal formation that was let go, both leading to key touchdowns.
The refs kept their flags in their pockets for tons of stuff on both sides. It was a close game and they seemed to REALLY not want to be the difference maker.
As usual, the younger more physical team drew more penalties. It happens.
-
He'll be a Cardinal, Bronco or Bear by this time next season.
-
It was an amazing game. New England is a little bit sour today but I think that's going to fade. We've been on both sides of this thing a few times by now, and this one just plain doesn't hurt anywhere near as much as the 2 to the NYG.
Other than the benching of Butler and the usual number of easy chair referees clogging the forums this morning, the largest number of comments I'm seeing are that it was a great game, and they just wish it had gone differently at the end.
Oh, and full credit to the Eagles for taking away Brady's 2 minute drill. I don't think any team has ever actually managed to do that to Brady before. Brady is solid gold in the 2 minute, and the Eagles managed to beat him at his own game. Brilliant defensive playcalling on the 2 minute defense by the Eagles.
-
9 hours ago, Jules said:
Sorry to the Pats fans here btw who are good posters and good people. It hurts to lose the Super Bowl.
My fiance and love of my life is a Patriots fan (yes it happens lol) but his lifelong obsession is the Red Sox and we do the Celtics thing together. He's actually pretty cool with this and all, he had some drinks earlier out with friends and said it happens. He even had a dream nights ago the Pats lost so I am rubbing off on him with weird sports stuff to prepare him for things since I am used to the Colts never getting things their way lol.
The only thing that stills bothers me actually is why the Pats got rid of Jimmy G. You could start over with him. I mean Brady is still at a high level but it's fools gold to think in his early 40's he can keep this going. The odds just do not favor a QB his age. It's like building currently around Dirk Nowitzki in the NBA.
Patriots are still at least 2 years away from "starting all over." Brady has to stop being in the MVP race for at least one season first. There'd be a riot if we tried to ditch him without any actually valid criticism of Brady's own performance to think about.
I mean you guys didn't ditch Peyton until he got hurt. Why would the Patriots throw away strong contending seasons with Brady before there's any actual sign that he's done or nearly done? He doesn't have the injury issues that were the beginning of the end for Peyton. There's no reason to believe he won't be Tom Brady again next season. Until there is, we kind of have to stay the course.
We're talking about a quarterback who literally carried his team into the Superbowl, and then was a strip sack away from carrying a team who probably didn't even deserve to win the AFC championship game to another Lombardi. A guy who just set the all time record for yards thrown in a Superbowl game for the second year in a row. He's 40 yes. It will end in the next few years yes. But you would be pulling the plug on a guy who is not just still able to play quarterback at the NFL level, but is still elite. Still arguably the best quarterback on the planet in fact. In order to play a guy who had a game and a half of NFL experience and a season ending shoulder injury under his belt at that point. I can't see many teams doing that.
There was simply no way to ditch Brady while he was still doing that, and keeping Garoppolo would have involved ditching Brady.
None of us are blind to the fact that we're going to have to take the hit eventually, that age is going to catch up with Tom Terrific sooner or later. But I think we're kind of committed to riding this thing out at least until we have an actual reason to part ways with TB12.
-
45 minutes ago, csmopar said:
I'm calling it now. Brady retires after the Superbowl.
While he's still playing at an MVP level? While the whole Patriots team is built around him, he's still making everyone around him better, and there's no challenges to his job at the moment?
Daring statement.
-
22 hours ago, CF4L said:
See that's not a realistic thing I say this because you are ignoring that it doesn't matter how well you diet if you have a potentially career threatening injury that will take years off your career it won't matter. Brady is fortunate to not have such a thing happen.
In the NFL you career can end with one bad injury.
Manning might still be playing today if it weren't for his neck.
Agreed. Tom needs to recongize the rule that good fortune has played in his career and stop this "if it can work for me it can work for anybody" stuff. You are a physical outlier by definition, Mr. Brady.
-
29 minutes ago, dodsworth said:
Brady will win as many titles that Goodell and the NFL want him to.
#6 is already in the books and I don't believe the Eagle fan base are
going to take it very well when the phantom calls start being dropped
on them in crunch time.
The NFL/Brady/Patriot love triangle is killing the joy and belief of
the NFL of not being a rigged entity.
I feel bad for you. I hope you can come to a happier place in your life soon.
-
On 1/27/2018 at 10:10 AM, crazycolt1 said:
Look, this forum has already been through this way too many times.
I explained to you why fans of other teams dislike the Patriots that goes past just fandom.
Then we have to hear it's all just jealousy by Patriot fans when the fact is there is just cause to be doubtful.
You bringing this up now after all this time serves no purpose but to stir things up.
I didn't bring this up. People asked what Pat fans think of Indy today. Since I live in the area, I'm in a position to know.
Besides a few repetitions of the same tired old litany of unproven allegations which I was stupid enough to respond to, You and others wanted to argue exactly what role the Colts organization had in the nontroversy. IMHO that doesn't even matter since the topic was about the perception of New England fans, and the litany itself serves as pretty good evidence that perception and truth can diverge significantly.
There's a perception in New England that the Colts franchise had a lot to do with the unfortunate and largely undeserved suspension of their star quarterback. That's going to leave a mark on a fanbase that will take time to erase, and it was only like 3 years ago. The fact of the matter is there's still rather little love lost in New England for the Colts, both for that reason and because of memories of the old rivalry. One thing New Englanders are really good at is holding onto grudges.
-
4 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
Polian had nothing to do with what happened in 2014. That was 2003 in the AFC Title Game where the Pats Defenders were mugging us all game and getting away with Interference the whole game basically. Then Polian got the Interference/Defensive holding rules changed going into 2006. Where Defenders couldn't get away with as much holding on WR's. What happened in 2014 was John Harbaugh calling out Bill Belichick using illegal formations against them in the Divisional Round. In our game at New England, it was Jackson our LB that noticed something wasn't right with the ball after he intercepted it. So he turned the ball in and it was under legal PSI.
Yes it was. Everyone acknowledges that those balls were below PSI. Because the Patriot balls were inflated to the lower end of the legal limit, and in the cold the air in the footballs condensed and reduced the air pressure to below the legal limit. No conspiracy, just physics.
-
2 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:
I am not going back and rehashing that playoffs game in question. It was bad enough where Polian did go the NFL and did accomplish what he set out to do at the time. All he wanted was the rules to be enforced that were already in place.
It was games like this that started not only the Colts thinking the Patriots were getting special treatment but other fan bases as well. Add the so called non fumble-tuck rule that beat the Raiders and it's easy to claim the Patriots have the refs in their pocket. Just too many things that make other fan bases think that.
And don't forget spygate.
The Patriots have been the most fined team in the NFL for a reason.
In an 18 year run of high level play including 16 playoff appearances, it's not going to be hard to find moments when 50-50 plays went in the Patriots' favor, or even when the Patriots benefited from a bad call or two. Since these things tend to stick in the mind, if you have an issue recognizing your own confirmation bias, that litany of instances where the Pats got the call are going to start to look like a conspiracy, even where no conspiracy actually existed.
This is easily exacerbated when the team itself is heavily focused on on-field discipline and is penalized less as a result than an average team is. That does create at least a small bias in the referees' mind that can manifest in the flag staying in the pocket on some borderline plays from time to time. No conspiracy, just reputation
As for Spygate -- that's probably legit, but it's not nearly as significant as people make it out to be. Every team engages in intelligence gathering. Heck the only reason the Pats got pounced on for the incident that we know as Spygate is because they were recording from a non-sanctioned part of the field, as opposed to the sanctioned part where everyone else had their cameras set up. They pushed a little beyond the rules and got slapped. It happens, especially when the Patriots, like any franchise tries to do, pushes to the boundaries of the rules to gain as much competitive advantage as they can.
BTW the Tuck rule was called correctly. It's one of those things that looks wrong but was actually the correct call for the situation, similar to the Jesse James incompletion this year that felt like a catch but wasn't, also the Tuck Rule wasn't a new rule in 2001 and that was hardly the first game in which it was enforced. They got rid of the rule later, fine, that's entirely fair and legitimate, but the 2001 AFCCG has to be called based on the rules that existed in 2001, and at the time, the Tuck Rule was a thing and called correctly in the game.
-
5 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:
On a side note :: It was Polian who was responsible for making an issue of enforcing rules that were already on the books. The Patriots used and abused the receivers in the game in question. Thus is why Colt fans started having negative issues with the Patriots.
I'd like some examples of that. Are you talking about the eligible receiver shenanigans the Patriots were engaged in that playoff?
-
34 minutes ago, King Colt said:
Above all I hope there is not a "controversial" catch or fumble or penalty that the media will then argue for weeks cost one of the teams the game. I thought the Jags would do a better job of getting at Brady but maybe the Eagles will. Denver rocked his world a couple years ago and that is the only way to beat him. But for the millions of Brady/Pats haters do you all hate Joe Louis, Mickey Mantle, Arnold Palmer, Daryl Earnhardt Jr, the U of Conn. women's basketball team? If my team gets beat I want it from a worthy opponent not some third string flea flickin' ball boy. Look at Brady's SB record. Not much more than 500.
5-2 is now "not much more than .500."
Nice to know.
I also hope that there isn't a controverial play, but even if there wasn't, I trust the creatively salty to figure out some way to complain about the game.
-
1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:
#1- For one thing it was John Harbaugh who made the issue about eligible receiver issues, not Polian.
#2- It was Brady's lack of cooperating with the NFL that made things 10 worse that they needed to be.
Playing the victim will not work in this forum. sorry.
In no possible scenario in the Deflategate nontroversy are the Colts "the victim." For that to be the case there would have to be at least some evidence that footballs were ever intentionally deflated, and there is none. There would also have to be some kind of evidence for exactly what competitive advantage was gained from the alleged deflation, and I've never seen anyone even try to tackle that one.
The Colts were "victimized" by being utterly crushed by the team that went on to win the Superbowl that year. There's been plenty of insinuation and literally zero hard proof that deflated footballs had anything to do with that.
-
4 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
Pats/Colts was the biggest Rivalry in Football from 2003-2010 so yeah the encounters we all have had with Pats fans have been memorable. Pats fans in general don't consider us a rival anymore but they respect our franchise because we have had a Great one. They also know we have Luck and if he gets healthy, they know we will be Good again. Patriots really don't have a Plan B at this point once Tommy retires or BB leaves but if they win their 6th SB they probably wont even think about it for a while.
I live in New England and there's still some bitterness towards the Colts -- not because of on field stuff, but for two reasons
1: the sense that Bill Polian was behind several of the rules changes that put a stop to several of Bill Belichick's more innovative shenanigans, with the most prominent example being the eligible receiver deceptions he was pulling off in the 2014-2015 playoffs
2: The fact that the Deflategate nontroversy and all the nonsense that arose from it started with a playoff game against the Colts and it was their initial reaction to the story that helped it to blow up like it did.
I don't think there's the kind of active hatred or rivalry there used to be -- but personal insults get remembered in New England, and a lot of Pats fans took those things personally.
-
19 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:
Blowing Myles Jack down on that fumble recovery was robbery.
It was a bang bang play and thre's some question of whether that was even a fumble (slow mo shows Lewis may have regained possession with a knee down). Refs split the difference, gave the Jags possession but negated the breakaway run. Sometimes on a really tight play that's all you can do.
-
45 minutes ago, JoseyWales said:
How many holding calls on either offensive line all day?
I'd have to look, but I don't think either team got flagged for a single holding call.
-
For the record I came away from the Pats-Jags game heartily impressed by the players and coaches of the Jacksonville Jaguars. They came into one of the most hostile playing environments in the entire NFL very nearly won. No shame to be beat by the best in the league, and they sure gave the Pats a good run for their money. Might be remembered as the game of the year, "Minnesota Miracle" notwithstanding
-
On 1/22/2018 at 6:54 AM, 21isSuperman said:
I hate blaming refs, but they definitely did their part on Sunday. I saw multiple Pats OLs holding onto the Jags DLs and not getting penalties. One side has 100 yards in penalties, the other has 1 penalty total. The Jags lost because they didn't play well enough, but I don't think the reffing was very good
The reffing was fine. Both sides were getting away with WWE moves on the line. The refs were only calling the ovbious stuff and otherwise were letting them play.
In that situation. the cold, caculating, disciplined, fundamentally sound veteran team who has had years to learn what they can and cannot get away with, drawing far fewer penalties than the brash, young, energetic, eager, physical team who hadn't ever been this deep in the playoffs before, is hardly surprising.
The only actual controversial call in the entire game was the Lewis fumble/Mack recovery. And frankly I think the Refs split a 50-50 call down the middle there.
One could make an argument that Mack might have been untouched. One could also make an argument that Lewis regained control while down by contact and there was no fumble at all. Splitting the difference is probably the least unfair way they could have handled that situation.
Setting the homer glasses aside for the moment, in my honest opinion, looking at the game as a whole rather than cherry picking individual plays to be mad about, the refs did an excellent job of favoring neither team and called a very fair game. The disparity of penalties is explained mostly by the disparity in experience, everything else was entirely reasonable..
-
6 hours ago, indyagent17 said:
In retrospect...
Not only did Luck get an ample time to heal properly but this season allowed us to be able to build through the draft correctly starting at #3
Lot of positives to take home from the season. We have some talent on this team, a great starting QB and a backup who is capable of hanging around in a game. Just need to put the pieces together
-
3 hours ago, Narcosys said:
You are really trying to compare someone personal sexting controversy to tampering with things to affect a football game?
You don't see the difference there...really?
Considering that there's still no actual evidence that anyone tampered with any footballs at all in the 2014 AFCCG, and there's a sound scientific explanation readily available why the allegations in the Wells report was so much hot air (I could use a less charitable term than "hot air" here, but this forum is clearly trying for a family friendly feeling) I might turn that question around on you.
Using a story that has been discredited by every single individual in America who has ever picked up a physics textbook? That's where you're going with that?
-
2 hours ago, jskinnz said:
That is a stretch.
Other than just being a Head Coach in the league again, I have to think the thing that intrigued McDaniels most about this particular job is the chance to work with Luck. I think he'd be in Tennessee otherwise.
Given Luck's health concerns, the fact that the backup is a guy mcDaniels is familiar with did not hurt.
-
11 hours ago, Boiler_Colt said:
I always wondered whether they are intentionallly holding off starting his throwing program until after a coach is hired. That way if anything goes south, the coach is already signed. That would be pretty sucky though.
Considering how well this particular HC knows Brissett. I actually think Luck's health concerns would be a lesser problem for McDaniels than literally anyone else.
-
12 hours ago, bluebombers87 said:
Per the rule, once a defender is contacted by a receiver, the defender is allowed to defend themselves. This idea that no defender ever touches a receiver is just plain silly.
And he never cut him off. Please re-read my previous posts as I don’t feel like repeating myself again. It’s poor form to ignore previous points in a thread.
He completely cut him off. The hand fighting rode Cooks out of bounds. Bouye is entitled to his space, but he's not entitled to run a receiver off the road. His entitlement to his space does not also entitle him to use body position to force a receiver to either run through him or run out of bounds, which is exactly what Bouye was doing on that play.
"the idea that no defender ever touches a receiver is just plain silly."
You're right. Refs will let things go if it's a 50-50 thing, or it doesn't have a real effect on the play, or if they aren't sure of what they saw, or if they feel the defender is trying to stay within the spirit of the rules. This was not a 50-50 play. Bouye had both hands on Cooks and rode him out of bounds not even 10 feet from an official where he had a perfect view of exactly what happened. No referee in the entire NFL is going to keep his flag in his pocket if he sees that.
The closest thing you have to a point is that we've all seen worse PI let go by the officials. Doesn't really have any bearing on this incident though, which is textbook PI. Bouye manhandled Cooks out of bounds and prevented him from getting to the ball. You can't do that legally in pro football and refs have the right to throw the flag whenever they see that behavior.
McDaniels rejects Colts.
in NFL General
Posted
I honestly doubt it. Good faith is one thing, but the burden of proof is on the Colts to establish they have a verbal contract. If you can't prove there's a verbal or written contract (and when the burden of proof is on you, an understanding on its own is not sufficient), I don't think the Colts have a leg to stand on under contract law -- unless there's some specific NFL rules that contradict that.