Synthetic
-
Posts
5,168 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Synthetic
-
-
6 minutes ago, Jules said:
Bill Belichick has had some terrific defenses, but also some LOUSY defenses. I don't know why everyone at times acts like he is flawless here and walks on water. He has had some choke jobs in the past himself too as a coach. He has been even outcoached before in the past. They have missed out on the draft before as well and with FA picks in NE. They too have had problems from time to time. Since they just won the SB this year everyone acts like they have always been this flawless entity.
Before they got the SB win over Seattle many were screaming everywhere that the DYNASTY IS DONE DONE DONE.
The game is bound to eventually pass him up...it happens to every great coach. Lombardi couldn't do anything in the 70's, Tom Landry (one of my favorite coaches ever, and I mean this in no disrespect) also didn't age well once the 80's rolled over, and neither did Don Shula or Chuck Noll for that record...Bill Parcells was the man in the 80's but was never quite the same in the 90's....Even Mike Holmgren wasn't really the same coach in the 2000's after he left Green Bay.
The game changes decade by decade. That's why Buddy Ryan and Mike Ditka never looked the same again once offenses adapted to the spread and wide open pass happy offenses. If that never happened, every team would be running the 46 defense today.
Bill B has been an exception thus far, but it won't last forever....Eventually, the game will pass him up like it did every other genius coach in the decades before him.
You are right too that we all used to sit around and laugh over the idea of NE getting #4 until it finally happened against Seattle...They went 10 whole years before winning another one.
QuoteBrady isn't the GOAT IMO and that got over hyped this past offseason but I don't even think there IS a real GOAT in sports and certainly not based on ring counts.
This is how I feel about things, entirely. There isn't a GOAT and never will be....The only fair way to put is to break down eras and decades and rank them in their respective era where they belong since it's much more fair to compare them to their contemporaries in the same era. Once you start comparing QB's of today's era to the 80's and 70's, it just isn't fair at all since rule changes and how the game used to be played has to be taking into consideration at all times.
I hate the top lists of QB's. It never looks right cause you have guys from different eras thrown in there and their stats will look bad compared to one another since modern QB's play in such a pass happy era with rules that benefit them. It should be branched off decade by decade. A top 10 list of the best QB's of the 1970's, 1980's, 1990's and new millennium is far more fair then lumping them all together.
There's also those GOOD QB's every decade who are forgotten cause they never won anything and peaked at a rare moment before collapsing, and doing a top 10 list of them by decade, gives people the chance to shine a light on these forgotten good QB's. Every decade has a QB like that. In the 70's it's Bert Jones, in the 80's you have Bernie Kosar and Boomer Esasion, in the 90's there is Jim Harbaugh and late career surge Randall Cunningham...In the last decade, it's probably Philip Rivers as the really good QB who gets forgotten.
-
3
-
-
Given how Goodell has screwed up so many things in recent years, the joke is still on him for being a clown that no one respects at all.
When the day comes that he decides to screw with your team, you'll learn the hard way that the commissioner is a joke and everything is a show to protect "integrity" and all those other excuses...
-
This is a trend that has been going on for several years now. Penalties also drag the length of a game out. I've noticed over the years of going back and watching older games from the 70's and 80's, that they actually go by much faster. Not just over commercials, but because you don't have tons of penalties in the games back then.
-
2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
Best way to go is retiring after winning a SB, only Peyton and Elway have done it.
I think I showed you this article some time back, I know I showed it to Jules.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/tom-brady-will-be-bad-eventually/
I've had my doubts all summer about the Patriots...When they made the Brandin Cooks trade, I felt that hurt their chances on repeating, cause despite all the hype around him, Cooks is not Randy Moss 2.0 and he's never going to get to that level. Randy Moss is arguably a Hall of Fame receiver (If he didn't have all the behavior issues in Minnesota and Oakland, no one would be debating this since he has the numbers). Cooks struggled in NOLA and there is a reason the Saints were so desperate to get rid of him. Tonight he struggled and it will only be a prelude for his future struggles...but that 538 article really sealed it for me that the Patriots aren't repeating. Old QB's coming off career seasons don't age well.
Brady might be among the greatest to ever play the game, but no man is immortal. Age eventually will catch up to him and tonight it looked as if that was beginning to happen...That article clearly demonstrated it when they broke down Brett Favre and Peyton Manning who were in the twilight of their careers and put off amazing seasons, then had a big fall off.
I wish Brady had retired coming off that SB, cause he had an amazing season at age 39, had the big amazing comeback in the SB, and could've rode off into the sunset with that...It would've been like John Elway, who was another old QB who had a terrific year in his final season and capped it off with a SB. Had Elway come back after 1998, he probably has a season where his production dramatically falls off like what happened with Favre and Manning.
-
51 minutes ago, WoolMagnet said:
cleaning crew will have fun picking up 70,000 blue roger goodell towels:
Goodell is still a clown at the end of the day....just wait until he decides to screw with your team, and then you'll learn the hard way...
-
1 hour ago, chad72 said:
Drew Brees and Sean Payton will carve this Patriots D next week, just a gut feeling. The pitch to the RB, the Chiefs did see what Kyle Shanahan did right. Patriots LBs sideline speed can be exploited. It's a pity Kyle stopped doing that in the second half of the SB, he started off doing that to both sides to Freeman and Coleman. Osweiler and the Broncos beat the Pats with a sideline pitch to CJ Anderson too, see a pattern??
Plus, I told you that if Brady doesn't have Edelman, his underneath rhythm is off. Edelman over Welker and his toughness was the biggest factor in key situations in 2014 and 2016 SB
If the Saints offense is as good as it usually is, we should be able to carve their defense up indeed. Tonight was flashes of how bad NE's defense was between 2009 to 2013. They were terrible in zone and got carved up by Alex freaking Smith.
Brady is done too...I wish he would've retired like Manning did after winning his second SB. I know the Pats fans on here are going to hate me for saying this, but I was there when Favre had his final season and it was sad to see him as a complete shadow of his former self. Brady is coming off a career year, as was Favre and Manning when they had their massive drop offs at old age.
I am a bit in fear though facing a Patriots team coming off a hard loss like this...I'd feel a lot more confident if they were coming off a win. I can't even remember if they've ever been 0-2 with Brady.
IMO it's very possible that NE got exposed in the SB by the Falcons. I know they had the big comeback, but they still were down 25 points, and if you look at the stat line to that game, Ryan was 17 for 17 until the 4th quarter came in to play...They were a top 5 ranked defense last year, and that shouldn't be stats for a top 5 ranked D getting carved up like that. Tonight, they gave up a huge 50+ yard run, almost the same way they did in the SB when Freeman had that big run.
-
So much for Brandin Cooks being the next Randy Moss....tried to tell everyone all summer long, there is a reason the Saints were desperately trying to get rid of him after his pouty attitude last year and lackluster play.
-
Brady should've retired after the SB. He could've went out in the sunset like Manning did a few years ago and like Elway back in the day....
This is going to be a rough year for Pats fans if he don't improve.
-
On 9/4/2017 at 8:41 AM, King Colt said:
My upset if you can call it that, is Kansas City over the Pats. KC was 12-4 last year.
You're the winner of this round picking the upset...Kansas City looks sharp
-
NE ain't repeating....Brady looks DONE like Favre did in 2010 and like Manning looked in 2016.
WOW WOW WOW
Who's going to win the AFC now? I don't trust this Patriots team AT ALL....They got shredded by freaking Alex Smith tonight.
-
1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
I said his Stats are Average calm down, he isn't better than Peyton Manning though which has been my whole point the whole point. If you Drafted Bradshaw with a crap team at best you get 8-8, Peyton could take a crap to 12-4 pretty quickly. He went 13-3 in year 2
You clearly have no understanding of the dead ball era. Every QB's stats are average from back then. I showed you a great deal of information, and you still ignore it and are comparing Bradshaw to a QB who played in a pass happy era with rules that greatly benefited QB's and wide receivers. I showed you stats of other QB's to prove he wasn't the only one who looked "average".
I compared Bradshaw to other QB's he played against during his era...That's much more fair than comparing him to a guy who played in a pass happy era where the rules benefited him. I'm pretty sure if you put ALL the top QB's from the 1970's into modern day with passing rules that benefit QB's, then they all would've had dramatically better stats. Not just Bradshaw, they all would've improved since the game benefits QB's now.
Put Peyton Manning in Bradshaw's era and with a bad team around him like you said, and he would look no better than his dad Archie did with the Saints...Completely different era...
QuotePeyton could take a crap to 12-4 pretty quickly. He went 13-3 in year 2
Yeah a crap team that had Marvin Harrison and Edgerrin James - one is in the Hall of Fame, the other lead the league in rushing that year beating out Marshall Faulk. Manning had it sooooo tough throwing to a Hall of Famer and a great running back!
And he still went one and done that year.
How many times did Peyton go one and done at home with a stacked Colts team that went 12-4, 13-3 or 14-2?
Manning is about the last QB you can use the argument of having a lack of talent around. Those Colts teams were loaded...They were almost like clones of the 90's Buffalo Bills in terms of firepower on offense. He had far more talent around him than most big name QB's during the 2000's. The opposite of Drew Brees, who didn't have a single Pro Bowl receiver in 2009. If you want to see a QB win it all with an average cast of B and C grade receivers, there you go. Manning on the other side of that SB, had a loaded team...
-
1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
212 TD's and 210 INT's = Average
Right, let's look at other elite QB's numbers from that same era....
Bob Griese - 192 TD/172 INT
Kenny Stabler - 194 TD/222 INT
Roger Staubach - 153 TD/109 INT
They're average too, right?? Since Terry Bradshaw is average, I guess those guys are too....The only career SB winning QB of the whole 70's decade who had a brilliant TD/INT ratio is Staubach, and even he still threw 100+ INTs. If you are saying he was better than Bradshaw, I'd agree. But calling Bradshaw average just shows you aren't taking into consideration the era they played in. These guys didn't get pass friendly rules to help them out like QB's have had in every decade since then.
You also are forgetting that there are people who think Stallworth and Swann have no business being in the Hall of Fame and them getting in was a big deal. They don't get in if Bradshaw isn't there to throw passes to them. I take it you haven't seen many Steelers games from the 70's...Yes, their defense was amazing, but the defense wasn't the entire team. They had an elite offense (at the time, in the era - go look up their stats, and you'll see them ranked in the top 5 of their SB years) that could score when needed.
Watch the SB rematch vs Dallas, where their defense completely collapsed and gave up 31 points...Yeah, that defense totally carried Bradshaw. They lose to Dallas if he isn't there to throw 4 TD's to them. Same thing again with the Rams in 1979. That Rams defense was one of the best to ever lose the SB, and the Steelers don't win if Bradshaw isn't there to throw bombs to Swann in the 4th quarter to put the game away.
I see you conveniently didn't quote anything I told you about the Mel Blount rule. It was entirely different era back then. You can't just throw a QB of the 70's out there and compare them to every other era since rule changes.
Here's the rule changes that ended the 'dead ball' era.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1978_NFL_season
QuoteThe league passed major rule changes to encourage offensive scoring.[2] In 1977 – the last year of the so-called "Dead Ball Era" – teams scored an average of 17.2 points per game, the lowest total since 1942.[3]
-
To open up the passing game, defenders are permitted to make contact with receivers only to a point of five yards beyond the line of scrimmage. This applies only to the time before the ball is thrown, at which point any contact is pass interference. Previously, contact was allowed anywhere on the field. This is usually referred to as the "Mel Blount Rule"
-
The offensive team may only make one forward pass during a play from scrimmage, but only if the ball does not cross the line and return behind the line prior to the pass.
-
Double touching of a forward pass is legal, but batting a pass towards the opponent's end zone is illegal. Previously, a second offensive player could not legally catch a deflected pass unless a defensive player had touched it. This is usually referred to as the "Mel Renfro Rule". During a play in Super Bowl V, Baltimore Colts receiver Eddie Hinton tipped a pass intended for him. Renfro, the Cowboys defensive back, made a stab at the ball and it was ruled that he tipped it ever so slightly (which he denied) into the arms of Colts tight end John Mackey, who ran for a touchdown. Later, this rule was also the one in question during the Immaculate Reception in 1972. But despite these two incidents, the rule change did not occur until this season.
-
The pass blocking rules were extended to permit extended arms and open hands.
- The penalty for intentional grounding is reduced from a loss of down and 15 yards to a loss of down and 10 yards from the previous spot (or at the spot of the foul if the spot is 10 yards or more behind the line of scrimmage). If the passer commits the foul in his own end zone, the defense scores a safety.
Next time you watch a Raiders or Steelers game from before 1978, pay attention to how often their DB's shove receivers to the ground. Blount and Jack Tatum used to completely put receivers on the ground so no pass could go their way.
This is also not taking into consideration how back then, you got an automatic intentional grounding penalty for throwing the ball out of bounds...This rule still existed in the 80's btw.
The blocking rule that I bolded in the quote is major too. If you ever watch older SB's before 1978, you'll clearly see that there is a big difference in blocking before this rule change. Sometimes, the offensive line and defensive line just run into each other.
These rule changes were major and opened up offenses. 1978 was the first year we had "inflated" stats for QB's. Archie Manning magically had the best year of his career after this rule change. Every QB benefited from it. Soon after it, the Air Coryell offense took off in San Diego and Dan Fouts put up record breaking numbers, and then in 1984, Marino broke the record books again.
If you're going to call Bradshaw "average", then you better also say it about Griese, Stabler, Staubach and other QB's of that era before the rule change. None of their stats are pretty...If you want to cherry pick his bad stats, you can do that with all of them. There isn't a QB in that era before 1978 who really has amazing jaw dropping stats like QB's since then where the passing rule changes favor them.
-
To open up the passing game, defenders are permitted to make contact with receivers only to a point of five yards beyond the line of scrimmage. This applies only to the time before the ball is thrown, at which point any contact is pass interference. Previously, contact was allowed anywhere on the field. This is usually referred to as the "Mel Blount Rule"
-
3 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
You are only going by Championships when you say that though. Look at Terry's stats, he was the one guy where his D really carried him a lot. I would take Marino over Bradshaw and he won 0 SB's
I did look at Terry Bradshaw's stats, they're actually pretty good for the era he played in. They were good enough to win an MVP, lead the league in touchdowns at one time, and rack up SB MVP's.
You are forgetting that Bradshaw played in what is called the "dead ball era". Every QB before 1977 had a 20-25% INT rate. Look at all the stats, and the only two QB's who consistently didn't rack up INT numbers, were Roger Staubach and Bert Jones, and even they had rough years where their TD/INT ratios aren't that impressive.
Look up the Mel Blount rule. Prior to 1977, corners and safeties could bump and knock down receivers after 5 yards from the line of scrimmage. All QB's back then had inflated INT numbers. Even Manning and Brady would've been tossing them everywhere.
-
5 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
I don't see them beating Dallas or Green Bay if push comes to shove. Marshawn Lynch was their best player, those days are over. The still have a solid Defense but nothing like 2013 or 14.
Zeke will probably play all season now the way things are looking. Dallas vs NE in the SB IMO
This is arguably the best Seattle's defense has been since 2013. They could possibly have 8 or 9 pro bowlers.
Green Bay went 5-5 last year when they weren't playing their god awful division, and then did nothing to really upgrade their team this past year. Packers are overrated every year just due to Rodgers name alone. In the past two years, Green Bay has benefited from playing their crappy division in a way the Colts used to dominate the bad AFC South for years. They go 5-1 vs the division, then 5-5 the rest of the year to barely make it to 10-6.
Dallas lost half their defense and is going to be starting rookies in their entire secondary. That isn't going to bold well, regardless if they have Ezekiel Elliot or not. They'll be lucky to even go back to the playoffs given how much their defense is bound to struggle.
-
15 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
IMO I think if we just put Tom and Peyton in the Top 2 we can call it a day. That seems like the only real debate on every discussion Board I ever read over the last 10 years. Even it isn't a debate because Tom has 5 Rings now it still is in a lot of ways because, Peyton won 2 SB's with 2 different teams and has 5 MVP's to Tom's 2. So Peyton will always be in this discussion along with Montana who I would be disrespectful to leave him out with his 4-0 in SB's and 0 INT's in all 4 games.
You left out Terry Bradshaw, the other guy who went 4-0 in the SB and played in a much different era. Easily the most disrespected great QB to ever play the game.
I don't even get how Peyton is in this conversation. Brady already had won rings while Manning was still trying to win a playoff game. Probably the best regular season QB ever, but not the guy I would want in the playoffs...There's at least 5 other QB's I would trust before I trust Manning with home field advantage in the playoffs...
-
16-6 Rams, will be an ugly game...
-
Saints over Vikings, cause I want to see the Saints defense maul Sam Bradford to the point they all start crying BOUNTYGATE again.
-
I only know of him from the Tecmo Super Bowl games....
The Colts on those games have JEFF GEORGE who is a pick throwing machine if you're playing with them or against them. Potts also is a fumble machine too in that game. I usually swap him for Rodney Culver.
Most INT's I ever threw with George by playing as the Colts - 4, vs the Buffalo Bills and lsot 31-17 since one of them was a pick six.
Most INT's caught by playing against the Colts - 6!!! Rod Woodson is the Tecmo Super Bowl god, and Darren Perry and Carnel Lake had some bomb interceptions thrown to them in that same game.
-
6 hours ago, BloodyChamp said:
There is no question about Belichik without Brady. Even if he didn't sack Elway in the endzone to all but put away that SB like Brady intercepted Wilson in the endzone to put away that SB, he's a good coach without Brady. If you had to think of a question it would be whether or not he was in the GOAT discussion or not. The guy won 2 rings as a DC, and had the Browns on the right track before Modell dropped that bomb. Ya'll act like he was 0-2 working on an 0-16 season they year Brady came in. I'm a homer to, the Ole Gunslinger, but I think Holmgren would have won a game or 2 in 1992 without Favre. O and he turned down a coaching gig if you remember. How often does that happen (to a guy looking for a job in the NFL anyway)? It doesn't happen unless the guy knows he's a good coach.
Don't forget Bill B's coaching in the 1990 SB vs the Buffalo Bills. Most people only remember Scott Norwood's missed field goal at the end (Even though Norwood was only 1 for 5 from 40 yards out, meaning this was a long shot to begin with), but they leave out the fact that the Giants had to crawl out of a 9 point hole, and they had the #1 ranked offense in the league shut down that entire game to just 19 points. Buffalo had not converted a third down all day long until that final drive where Thurman Thomas took off.
It's always amazing to go back to that SB cause the entire lead up was how the Giants were old and their best players were near retirement and Buffalo's offense was supposed to be too much for them, and then they shocked the world with shutting them down.
As for Holmgren, I'm still bitter he left Favre behind to go get a gig in Seattle. If Holmgren stays, I think Favre would've at least made it back to the SB and not been handcuffed down to Mike Sherman and McCarthy's bad coaching.
-
5 hours ago, dgambill said:
It was a pretty badly botched finish of the game. The other thing I took from the game was how great TO played. He was coming off like a broken femur and he was very productive. As bad as he was at times he really balled out. He was basically unstoppable. I know that people like to say certain people choked etc....but when your hyper ventilating on the field and throwing up that's not a good look...especially to your team mates your leading....and Andy look bewildered as well....honestly I don't think Andy has ever gotten better at time management...seems his teams still struggle with that...to a lesser degree....yeah this andy over bill vote was clear trolling...no doubt. I will say I could be wrong but I don't think its the first time Maurice has taken little pot shots at Bill....if someone knows better they may be able to bring up stuff but I'm thinking he may have something personal against Bill....or maybe has thought his teams have played dirty going after his injuries etc in the past.
Oh yes, definitely. I should've mentioned T.O., he played phenomenal in this game. Despite how bad his quarterback had been screwing up, he still had a terrific game.
I liked the Pats pass rush early in this game. Bruschi was all over McNabb and on the first drive, there was a fumble that Reid challenged that I thought looked questionable and should've went to the Pats, but it was objective and I can see how people would argue against it.
The 2004 Pats are IMO their best team out of all the SB winning ones. I know most are going point to 2007 and the recent team, but it's something about the 2004 team that scares me a lot more than any of their other teams. I favor their defense on the 2004 team over some of the other NE teams.
-
On 9/2/2017 at 5:39 PM, King Colt said:
Look up Tampa Bay's record for their first year in the league.
Completely different era and they were an expansion team. New Orleans and Atlanta were punching bags for the whole NFL too in their very first seasons.
Expansion teams being awful hasn't really changed in recent years either. The new Browns starting in 1999 were terrible, as were the Texans in their inaugural season. The Panthers and Jaguars are an exception to post winning seasons in their second years.
The Jets seem to have a long history of doing this...
-
4 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:
Hasn't worked for the 76ers or maybe it was the terrible drafting
The Sixers are pretty hyped up right now with all their first round picks, so it might go their way. It definitely helped San Antonio when they got Duncan.
-
12 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:
Because of the The Lottery system the NBA uses tanking is not feasible
And yet teams still tank in there. Right now, the Atlanta Hawks are setting themselves up for full tank. The Lakers were doing it a few years ago, San Antonio had the most blatant one back in the 90's when they tanked to get Duncan.
-
2 hours ago, -JJ- said:
Lol- this always comes up as if it's possible.
You cannot tank in the NFL. There are huge fines for it.
Nor do players want to- they are competitive.
True here. You can tank in the NBA, but it's harder in the NFL.
How many times did Peyton go one and done at home with a stacked Colts team that went 12-4, 13-3 or 14-2?
Week One Colts vs. Rams Prediction Thread
in Colts Football
Posted
I've got 16-6 Rams.
Wade Philips has a trend where in the first year, his defenses are amazing and rise to a top 5 unit. The Rams do have talent defensively, so he should be able to shape them up.
The Colts have so many issues at hand, and while I can't stand Goff and think he's a major bust, I don't see where the Colts defense is really going to stop him...