Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back a page or two to re-sync the thread and this will then show latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
New England Patriots thread (MOD WARNING - #4503)
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
But that's just completely ignoring that Rivers had none of his 2009 WR/TEs, (and later only a playing-injured Floyd) yet played far better than Brady did when he had his WR/TE corps completely depleted. He wasn't just missing one here or one there - there were times when he was missing all of them
Ignoring? Sorry you posted a list of receivers as if it somehow compared to the Pats roster changes this year. I went through every guy on your list and most were either productively insignificant or had unchanged production from 2009 to 2010. On top of all that, unlike the massive loss Brady endured, nearly all those guys you listed were still on the Chargers roster. So the comparison baffles me.
Unlike Brady, Rivers still had nearly all of his targets available to him from 2009 in 2010. Limping or not limping they were there on the roster for Rivers. In comparison, Brady lost an elite TE tandem and a league leading pass offense. So how in God’s name can you compare the two. Brady has had to rebuild, yes rebuild a new receiving corp primarily based around rookies and that’s unprecedented. He lost 94% of all passing receptions starting the season and that is unparalleled in NFL history.
Regarding you claiming about some players playing injured with Rivers. Well it happens on every team. Gronk is playing now but he’s still not 100% fit or at his usual game sharpness. He’s getting there but he’s not fully there. He played his most snaps on Sunday night since his return, so that will help him. Players playing through injury happens on every team in the league every year. So what’s new about that? It just appears to me to be a pretty futile attempt to try and compare Rivers 2010 experience with Brady’s 2013 experience.
Amendola has missed 4 games already and he should have been our No. 1 WR. but unlike you, I myself won't use his injuries as an excuse for our struggles, nor have I even suggested it in my previous posts. And why? Because WR's will miss games during the seasons and that's normal and to be expected. So there was nothing extraordinary about Rivers having some injured WR's. Brady's 2013 rebuild however, now that has been extraordinary.
Article from last June.....
http://thebiglead.com/2013/06/21/tom-brady-and-historic-receiving-turnover-in-2013-if-hernandez-is-out-top-five-receivers-from-last-year-could-miss-opener/Tom Brady was already facing a historic change in his receiving group, before the Aaron Hernandez news broke this week. If Hernandez does not play in 2013, then it will be the largest turnover for an elite quarterback in the last thirty years. When Brady takes the field in the season opener against the Buffalo Bills, he very well could be without his top five receivers from last season. Wes Welker, Brandon Lloyd, and Danny Woodhead are gone. Rob Gronkowski just had back surgery on Tuesday, and his status for the start of the year is in question. Julian Edelman and his 235 receiving yards could be the leading returning receiver on opening day if Hernandez is also out.
Article from last April before when it was thought Gronk and Hernandez would be starting the season and before Gronk’s back surgery.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1600248-brady-faces-toughest-passing-test-of-career-in-2013When Brady's career is over and his place among the all-time greats is debated, 2013 could be the final nail in the coffin that seals it for him. When we look at the careers of quarterbacks with sustained greatness like Joe Montana, Peyton Manning and John Elway, they never dealt with turnover such as Brady has faced.
2013 presents Brady with a chance to make yet another group of receivers into a dynamic offense. Montana had the luxury of long-term contributions from the same weapons. Dwight Clark led the way to Jerry Rice and Roger Craig. Never was Montana without an elite receiver at his disposal. In 10 years as a starter with the 49ers, one of those three players was his leading receiver every year.
Manning had Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne, one of whom led the Colts in receiving every season except for Manning's rookie year, only because Harrison was limited to 12 games. Meanwhile, in Brady's 12 starting seasons, he's already had five different leading receivers, and 2013 will make his sixth.
To recap on the loss & change once again
- Welker consistently one of the top receivers in the league during his time as a Patriot
- Gronk ( who was out since he broke his arm for the second time in December 2012)
- Hernandez the other part of the best TE tandem in the NFL
- Woodhead a third down master.
- Brandon Lloyd gone.
- Dion Branch was pretty low on our production chart for 2012. But yet he’s a guy who had more production in 2012 than most of the guys you listed for the chargers, had in 2009.
- Vereen - who broke his wrist in game 1 and only returned for game 10. Indeed haven’t I tried to point out to you that all preseason, Vereen was clearly seen to be playing a hugely expanded role in the offense. Then he was gone, so it was a significant loss of preseason prep. Indeed one could make a valid claim, that his loss rendered a significant part of our preseason prep a waste of time..Brady had difficult circumstances for that stretch, but he did slump noticeably below his standards at times and was not playing like Tom Brady And that's OK. It happens to everyone.
Happens to everyone? No, no, fortunately for them they haven't had to face the mammoth task that Brady faced into starting the season. I have never seen Manning, Rodgers, Brees, Rivers, ect, ect, have to endure the rebuild Brady has had to endure this season. But that’s O.K. because they’re not the only ones. Brady's challenge was totally unprecedented on this scale. Yes Brady did a famous rebuild back in 2006 and to a lesser extent in 2007, but 2013 stands alone as being pretty unique.Peyton Manning in 2010 had a really iffy middle of the season when they went 1-4 (he had no defense or running game to bail him out)
Manning plays bad for a couple of games and this compares to Brady having to break in a new pass attack how? I also note that you are now talking about defense. You really don't want me to start boring you about our defense and their plague of injuries this year? I could list out the decimation our defense has endured this season. But the discussion wasn't originally about that, so there's no point.And you're going to completely ignore that preseason gives players like Amendola who was tested in the league time to get used to the system, as well as of course rookies Playing in preseason is a huge advantage for players new to a team or the league, compared to someone who is signed on Monday or Tuesday and starting on Sunday. It's not even debatable.
Someone signing on a Monday or Tuesday is no excuse to Brady? Nope, that's no obstacle to Brady. Sure didn't we sign Austin Collie back in October and a few days later he and Brady destroyed the Saints on that game winning final drive. Collie admitted later he didn't even know the playbook, but that didn't stop Brady. When everyone was dropping passes around him, Collie was catching his and that was the difference. Pity we lost him because of the knee injury.
Now let's look at this amazing preseason, that you think should have given the Pats no excuse for their errors in real season. Firstly, if you don’t think there's any significant difference between preseason and real season play, then I am probably completely wasting my time here. Regardless, I’m now going illustrate the contrast between what happened in preseason and what actually happened in real season.
- Amendola was an an established NFL player, so the transition wasn't so traumatic for him. But that’s only one guy.
- Dobson, Boyce, Thompkins, Moe and Sudfield were to be the guts of Brady targets for 2013 and here’s what happened preseason/real season.
- Sudfeld, labelled mini-Gronk by the media, his fantastic hands & him dropping nothing in preseason had even me excited. Totally lost it when the season started, couldn't catch anything and caused 2 of Brady’s Int’s.
- Moe, tore his Achilles and went to IR
- Dobson and Thompkins also didn't drop a ball in preseason. But when the real football started, they became the ball dropping leaders in the league. Frequently running the wrong routes, under ran routes and pulled up early on routes. But they finally now appear to be getting on the same page as Brady. So the tough growing pains might have been worth it in the end. Their talent should hopefully start coming through more and more now.
- Boyce, has progressed slower than the rest and has been tucked away.
- Jake Ballard, we really tried and tried with Jake. But the poor guy’s knee wasn’t 100%. So we basically entered the season with no TE passing options and our elite TE options obliterated
So when you look at all that and include the pivotal loss of of Vereen in the first game. It is pretty safe to say that what happened in preseason very quickly became irrelevant. The loss of Vereen was a big blow because of the strong preseason focus on him.
List of league leading drops a the end of october..New England leads the league with 24 dropped passes.
• Kenbrell Thompkins – 7
• Aaron Dobson – 6
• Julian Edelman – 5
• Brandon Bolden – 3
• Danny Amendola – 2
• Shane Vereen – 1
I previously said the O line has performed much worse than 2012 at times. Brady is on course for a 43% increase in sacks this year. Vollmer was injured against the Phins, but he was part of some of those bad performances. The replacement you speak off is Marcus Cannon and he has been part of the same O line team that has been together since last year. The O line has surprisingly under performed this year. Often going from excellent to pathetic in the same game. For a stretch there, they were completely falling asleep during the third quarter in games.Vollmer has missed the last 2-3 games and is done obviously but was replaced by a veteran who has been in 3rd year vet all spent in NE.
So this has also significantly affected Brady’s play on top of the WR corp changes. He was sacked 5 times alone against the Saints and had another 12hits/pressures. No QB can play in those circumstances. Look how the Jets tormented Brees and how the Colts D terrorised Manning. He wasn't even throwing anything close to a spiral at times, the ball was almost bobbling in the air. I saw a similar nightmare with Luck against the Rams. When a QB is not protected they can’t perform. The blinkered media/idiots will say oh Brady/ Manning/ Brees/Luck had bad stats and didn't play. Their failure to see the obvious RE: lack of protection never ceases to amaze me.
No, that’s not correct, Brees has has 41 different targets not 46. You are probably getting confused with this list that was complied in April 2013....The closest is actually Drew Brees who has thrown TDs to 46 different receivers, and has played one season less than Brady and is 2 years younger.
http://www.patspulpit.com/2013/4/5/4176128/tom-brady-and-receiver-turnover-touchdown-edition
Since that list was compiled, Brady has thrown the ball to the following 4 new targets.
Dobson.
Thompkins.
Amedola
Mulligan
So he is now at 50.
And Brady does not really have an extra year of play under his belt. In reality, Brady (187) has actually only played 7 more regular season games than Drew Brees (180).0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
There was a spell where none of them were available which was the entire point around the media talk. So missing all of his receivers from 2012 (apart from Edelman ) is not 'unprecedented' as the media were making out.Corvus Maximus wrote: »Ignoring? Sorry you posted a list of receivers as if it somehow compared to the Pats roster changes this year. I went through every guy on your list and most were either productively insignificant or had unchanged production from 2009 to 2010. On top of all that, unlike the massive loss Brady endured, nearly all those guys you listed were still on the Chargers roster. So the comparison baffles me.
On the roster doesn't matter if they are not in the game. It is that simple. Otherwise, Gronk and Vereen have been on the roster all season. You can't have it both ways.Unlike Brady, Rivers still had nearly all of his targets available to him from 2009 in 2010. Limping or not limping they were there on the roster for Rivers. In comparison, Brady lost an elite TE tandem and a league leading pass offense. So how in God’s name can you compare the two. Brady has had to rebuild, yes rebuild a new receiving corp primarily based around rookies and that’s unprecedented. He lost 94% of all passing receptions starting the season and that is unparalleled in NFL history.
One guy - Floyd - played injured in week 11. In week 9, he did not play while Rivers with NONE of his 2009 WRs or TEs active. It's not an 'attempt' - it's an out and out fact. Unlike Brady he also did not have a preseason to get used to the new guys, and they likewise did not have any time to learn the system. All of those WRs and TEs were signed days before playing for San Diego.Regarding you claiming about some players playing injured with Rivers. Well it happens on every team. Gronk is playing now but he’s still not 100% fit or at his usual game sharpness. He’s getting there but he’s not fully there. He played his most snaps on Sunday night since his return, so that will help him. Players playing through injury happens on every team in the league every year. So what’s new about that? It just appears to me to be a pretty futile attempt to try and compare Rivers 2010 experience with Brady’s 2013 experience.
You've not been using his injuries as an excuse because you've been using his very presence as one in this whole 'turn over' of WRs, only forgetting to mention that he was a 60+ catch passer in St Louis so you can bring up all the rookies you guys have at WR (that being, two). The fact he has a history of being very injury prone is also a key reason why there wasn't a number of teams looking to break the bank for him this year.Amendola has missed 4 games already and he should have been our No. 1 WR. but unlike you, I myself won't use his injuries as an excuse for our struggles, nor have I even suggested it in my previous posts. And why? Because WR's will miss games during the seasons and that's normal and to be expected. So there was nothing extraordinary about Rivers having some injured WR's. Brady's 2013 rebuild however, now that has been extraordinary.
And yes, having EVERY WR and TE out injured at the same is extraordinary. If completely baffles me how you continue to ignore this.
Like I have said time and time again, yes - that is turnover for the beginning of the year which you can prepare for. Rivers had to deal with it midseason, which you get far, far less time to prepare for.Article from last June.....
http://thebiglead.com/2013/06/21/tom-brady-and-historic-receiving-turnover-in-2013-if-hernandez-is-out-top-five-receivers-from-last-year-could-miss-opener/
Article from last April before when it was thought Gronk and Hernandez would be starting the season and before Gronk’s back surgery.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1600248-brady-faces-toughest-passing-test-of-career-in-2013
The loss of one player on offense does not render the practice that guys at a whole other position got in a waste of time, in Amendola, Thompkins and Dobson.To recap on the loss & change once again
- Welker consistently one of the top receivers in the league during his time as a Patriot
- Gronk ( who was out since he broke his arm for the second time in December 2012)
- Hernandez the other part of the best TE tandem in the NFL
- Woodhead a third down master.
- Brandon Lloyd gone.
- Dion Branch was pretty low on our production chart for 2012. But yet he’s a guy who had more production in 2012 than most of the guys you listed for the chargers, had in 2009.
- Vereen - who broke his wrist in game 1 and only returned for game 10. Indeed haven’t I tried to point out to you that all preseason, Vereen was clearly seen to be playing a hugely expanded role in the offense. Then he was gone, so it was a significant loss of preseason prep. Indeed one could make a valid claim, that his loss rendered a significant part of our preseason prep a waste of time..
Gronk, Welker and Hernandez = Gates, Jackson and Tomlinson
Branch had 16 receptions for 145 yards. If you're writing off marginal WRs for San Diego, then he doesn't count either. The reason I listed those guys by the way is because I was going down through SD's entire depth chart.
It's a big turnover yes, but the fact remains that without Gronk + the guys he used to, he slumped a good deal. This was not unprecedented as Rivers had done the same in 2010 for two games, and put up the following numbers, - without a single WR or TE from 2009: 32-of-47 for 528 yards, 8 TDs, 1 INT while San Diego scored 64 points and won both.Happens to everyone? No, no, fortunately for them they haven't had to face the mammoth task that Brady faced into starting the season. I have never seen Manning, Rodgers, Brees, Rivers, ect, ect, have to endure the rebuild Brady has had to endure this season. But that’s O.K. because they’re not the only ones. Brady's challenge was totally unprecedented on this scale. Yes Brady did a famous rebuild back in 2006 and to a lesser extent in 2007, but 2013 stands alone as being pretty unique.
Only this was done with guys signed off the street days earlier, not guys he had a preseason to get in the swing of things with.
It compares quite simply - a slump in form. All QBs have one, and the media will overlook this gladly if their team continues to win. Brady has played poorly at times this year, and there is simply no denying it. Unless you're an NFL "analyst" in which case... "Where would the Patriots be without Tom Brady? Well, the answer is nowhere" - which is the laughable statement I brought up in the first place.Manning plays bad for a couple of games and this compares to Brady having to break in a new pass attack how? I also note that you are now talking about defense. You really don't want me to start boring you about our defense and their plague of injuries this year? I could list out the decimation our defense has endured this season. But the discussion wasn't originally about that, so there's no point.
Your defense has been playing extremely well. Not sure what you are getting at there, in relation to media coverage of Brady or other top QBs? My point was that according to the article I quoted in the first place, you could have the Saints 2012 defense this season and would still have the same record. Remember that - my initial point that Brady's play slumped for a weeks yet much of the media credited him for the wins and not the defense or rushing game?
That's one. Add four more and make them the only targets at WR/TE.Someone signing on a Monday or Tuesday is no excuse to Brady? Nope, that's no obstacle to Brady. Sure didn't we sign Austin Collie back in October and a few days later he and Brady destroyed the Saints on that game winning final drive. Collie admitted later he didn't even know the playbook , but that didn't stop Brady. When everyone was dropping passes around him, Collie was catching his and that was the difference. Pity we lost him because of the knee injury.
Also complaining about Collie being injured is like complaining about Amendola being injured - both are made of glass, and that was known long before you signed them. That's why a player of his otherwise very NFL-capable calibre was a midseason FA to begin with.
That's always an issue with rookie obviously, but I would personally far prefer that to having to sign an entire WR corps of mostly nobodies in the middle of the season and plug them into the lineup because none of the other WRs or TEs were available.Now let's look at this amazing preseason, that you think should have given the Pats no excuse for their errors in real season. Firstly, if you don’t think there's any significant difference between preseason and real season play, then I am probably completely wasting my time here. Regardless, I’m now going illustrate the contrast between what happened in preseason and what actually happened in real season.
- Amendola was an an established NFL player, so the transition wasn't so traumatic for him. But that’s only one guy.
- Dobson, Boyce, Thompkins, Moe and Sudfield were to be the guts of Brady targets for 2013 and here’s what happened preseason/real season.
- Sudfeld, labelled mini-Gronk by the media, his fantastic hands & him dropping nothing in preseason had even me excited. Totally lost it when the season started, couldn't catch anything and caused 2 of Brady’s Int’s.
- Moe, tore his Achilles and went to IR
- Dobson and Thompkins also didn't drop a ball in preseason. But when the real football started, they became the ball dropping leaders in the league. Frequently running the wrong routes, under ran routes and pulled up early on routes. But they finally now appear to be getting on the same page as Brady. So the tough growing pains might have been worth it in the end. Their talent should hopefully start coming through more and more now.
- Boyce, has progressed slower than the rest and has been tucked away.
- Jake Ballard, we really tried and tried with Jake. But the poor guy’s knee wasn’t 100%. So we basically entered the season with no TE passing options and our elite TE options obliterated
So when you look at all that and include the pivotal loss of of Vereen in the first game. It is pretty safe to say that what happened in preseason very quickly became irrelevant. The loss of Vereen was a big blow because of the strong preseason focus on him.
So it's all on the offensive line, just like it's all on the receivers? Again, I'm lost as to why the run game hasn't felt any of these effects of poor line play?I previously said the O line has performed much worse than 2012 at times. Brady is on course for a 43% increase in sacks this year. Vollmer was injured against the Phins, but he was part of some of those bad performances. The replacement you speak off is Marcus Cannon and he has been part of the same O line team that has been together since last year. The O line has surprisingly under performed this year. Often going from excellent to pathetic in the same game. For a stretch there, they were completely falling asleep during the third quarter in games.
So this has also significantly affected Brady’s play on top of the WR corp changes. He was sacked 5 times alone against the Saints and had another 12hits/pressures. No QB can play in those circumstances. Look how the Jets tormented Brees and how the Colts D terrorised Manning. He wasn't even throwing anything close to a spiral at times, the ball was almost bobbling in the air. I saw a similar nightmare with Luck against the Rams. When a QB is not protected they can’t perform. The blinkered media/idiots will say oh Brady/ Manning/ Brees/Luck had bad stats and didn't play. Their failure to see the obvious RE: lack of protection never ceases to amaze me.
The 'blinkered media idiots' choosing to ignore Brady slumping at times this season and instead crediting him for the wins is EXACTLY what I was getting at to begin with - media coverage of NFL QBs.
I'm well aware of that being from April, which is why I am also curious that you gave Brady the extra 4 from this year, but not Manning (who wasn't even in second) and the extra three he has from this year (Welker, Moreno, J Thomas) which would bring him to 43 not 40? As for Brees...No, that’s not correct, Brees has has 41 different targets not 46. You are probably getting confused with this list that was complied in April 2013....
http://www.patspulpit.com/2013/4/5/4176128/tom-brady-and-receiver-turnover-touchdown-edition
Since that list was compiled, Brady has thrown the ball to the following 4 new targets.
Dobson.
Thompkins.
Amedola
Mulligan
So he is now at 50.
And Brady does not really have an extra year of play under his belt. In reality, Brady (187) has actually only played 7 more regular season games than Drew Brees (180).
Brady had 46. This season he has added 4 more targets to bring him to 50.
Brees had 41. This season he has added 4 TD targets to bring him to 45. [edit]
***Ben Watson, Cadet, Stills, Hill.
Not sure why you left Brees out for Manning the first time though? He is literally directly underneath Brady on that list after all, kind of hard to miss.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
There was a spell where none of them were available which was the entire point around the media talk. So missing all of his receivers from 2012 (apart from Edelman ) is not 'unprecedented' as the media were making out.
Yes unfortunately it is unprecedented and I’m not the media. I've been trying to explain to you as a fan of nearly 32 years, what I know about the Pats team and I've tried to communicate theses fact to you repeatedly in numerous posts.
No QB in NFL history has event entered a season having lost - 94% of all his receptions in 2012. His top 5 receivers were gone It has never happened before, this is not NFL network hype.On the roster doesn't matter if they are not in the game. It is that simple. Otherwise, Gronk and Vereen have been on the roster all season. You can't have it both ways.
Wrong, wrong ,wrong. You are beginning to look really silly now. Don’t you understand? Shane Vereen was placed on IR with a designation to return and he wasn’t eligible to return until week 11. That does not count as a roster spot.
Gronk returned on week 7 in the game against the Jets. He was the only one of Brady’s top 5 targets that could possibly return because the other 4 were permanently gone. So is the clear now? Honestly, when I read those comments about Vereen being on the roster all season. I find myself beginning to suspect, that you might not know what you are talking about.One guy - Floyd - played injured in week 11. In week 9, he did not play while Rivers with NONE of his 2009 WRs or TEs active. It's not an 'attempt' - it's an out and out fact. Unlike Brady he also did not have a preseason to get used to the new guys, and they likewise did not have any time to learn the system. All of those WRs and TEs were signed days before playing for San Diego.
For a guy that played injured in week 11, didn't Floyd do really, really well to score a TD. Not bad for the gimped player you said he was in that game. And you claim that Rivers had no WR’s or TE’s active for the week 9 and week 11 games? Wait until you read further on, boy are you in for a shock.
Anyway I digress, Brady wasn't short of a WR corp for a game. He has had to rebuild, acclimatise and integrate a new passing offense since week 1. And that is why I highlighted Austin Collie in my last post. But once again it appears to be yet another point you were either incapable of getting, or have conveniently overlooked.
Collie came in and a few days later he and Brady dismantled the Saints with that last second drive. He didn't have a preseason with Brady, do you understand? He didn't have a preseason with Brady. So stop using a few WR’s coming in, who had no preseason with Rivers as an excuse.
Because Brady and Collie showed how it can be done. If it wasn't an excuse for Brady, then it shouldn't be used as an excuse for Rivers. Christ sake do you even realise that every team in the league, is continually bringing guys in and cutting guys out. You’ll be shocked to know most wouldn't have had a preseason with the team.you've been using his very presence as one in this whole 'turn over' of WRs, only forgetting to mention that he was a 60+ catch passer in St Louis
So any experienced WR that moves to another team, will automatically hit it off and do well with a new QB? Once again, I suggest you go and do your homework. The NFL history is littered with QB-WR hook up failures. Succeeding somewhere else is no guarantee of success with a new team and it never has been in the NFL.
Wrong yet again, not 2, but 3 - Dobson,Thompkins and Boyce are our three rookie receivers. In fact we had 4 rookie receivers for the first 4 weeks, but Sudfeld was cut after week 4.so you can bring up all the rookies you guys have at WR (that being, two).Like I have said time and time again, yes - that is turnover for the beginning of the year which you can prepare for. Rivers had to deal with it mid-season, which you get far, far less time to prepare for.
I have repeatedly explained to you what happened in preseason and what happened at the start of the season. I have even done out several nice little lists for to make it abundantly clear to you. I am not doing it yet againThe loss of one player on offense does not render the practice that guys at a whole other position got in a waste of time, in Amendola, Thompkins and Dobson.
Brady entered the season with only one guy having ever caught a pass from him in 2012. That was Edelman, a guy who who was number 6 on the depth chart. Brady entered the season with a new offense dependent on a bunch of college kids/NFL rookies. Rivers did this when???????
So off you go and do some research for yourself and see how difficult it is for young rookie WR’s starting off in the NFL. Because you clearly have no idea or knowledge of the difficulties rookies face when entered the big bad world of the NFL.
Then put the entire offense on the shoulders of these rookies from week one. Then throw in the famously complex Pats playbook. A playbook which is regarded as one of the, if not the most complex playbook in the league.
A playbook Belichick and Brady have added and added to for the last 14 seasons. So it is pretty god damn thick. No doubt and based on the evidence so far, you will probably not see the rationale of that last point.Branch had 16 receptions for 145 yards. If you're writing off marginal WRs for San Diego, then he doesn't count either. The reason I listed those guys by the way is because I was going down through SD's entire depth chart.
And that was my point for Christ sake. Do you not understand why I mentioned Branch for the first time in the last post? Branch wasn't significant to our offense in 2012. That’s why I never mentioned him in my earlier posts.
Dion Branch was pretty low on our production chart for 2012. But yet he’s a guy who had more production in 2012 than most of the guys you listed for the chargers, had in 2009. It is only when you listed guys who actually had similar production than Branch. That is when I thought it was time to bring Branch into the equation and include his lost production.
Why where you whining about guys that didn't really have significant production? I used Branch to illustrate that point. I didn't factor him in until my last post, because you were you using guys of similar production as an excuse for Rivers and his difficult season that never was.It's a big turnover yes, but the fact remains that without Gronk + the guys he used to, he slumped a good deal.
Wait, it there hope yet? Have you kind of realised what losing so many receivers can do to a QB's stats?
I clearly outlined in the last several posts, the multiple reason behind Brady not having a Brady like season. then you look at the context and I have never seen Manning, Rodgers, Brees, Rivers, ect, ect, having to endure the rebuild Brady has had to endure this season. Brady's challenge was totally unprecedented on this scale.
Yes Brady did a famous rebuild back in 2006 and to a lesser extent in 2007, but 2013 stands alone as being pretty unique. And then you came out with this little nugget and the game totally changed....This was not unprecedented as Rivers had done the same in 2010 for two games, and put up the following numbers, - without a single WR or TE from 2009: 32-of-47 for 528 yards, 8 TDs, 1 INT while San Diego scored 64 points and won both.
I note that you did not identify the weeks or games there. So I will do it for you. The two games you are speaking off is, the week 9 game played against the Texans on Sunday the 7th of November 2010. And the week 11 Broncos game played on Sunday the 22nd of November 2010 game after the bye week.Here is a snap shot summary of the games.....
The week 9 Texans game...
The week 11 Broncos game....
So that’s a combined 528 Yards, 8TD’s and 2 Int’s. So the first thing you were wrong about there was the Int’s. You said Rivers had only 1, when he clearly had 2.
Now things take a strange turn. You said that Rivers played these games without a single WR or TE playing who was on the 2009 roster.
Wrong......
Against the Texans on the 7th of November this is the reality of what
happened....
Clear to see that despite your claim, kris Wilson the TE from 2009 played in that game in 2010. Rivers also had Sproules, who was the Chargers 4th leading pass catcher in 2009 with 45 receptions and 497 yards. He played in that game. So stop the nonsense and stop trying to embellish difficulties that didn't exist for Rivers in the passing game.
In fact in 2010 Sproules moved from 4th to the 3rd leading pass catcher on the team with 59 receptions for 520 yards. He’s obviously a guy who played a significant part of the Charges pass game in 2009 and 2010.
Now against the Broncos on the 22nd of November, this is the reality of what happened....
So once again you are wrong because not only did Malcolm Floyd the WR from 2009 play, but he also scored a TD in that game. And again Rivers also had Sproules, a leading target for him in the passing game present on the field.
So stop making ridiculous claims, by stating Rivers had no TE or WR’s for these games. Because not only have I corrected this dodgy and patent 'untruth' by pointing out the WR & TE that played.
But I also thought it was important to highlight the big role Sproles played in the Chargers passing game. A guy who played in both those games and who actually scored a passing TD in the Broncos game.
It now appears to me that you are pathetically trying to spin and give the impression that Rivers was missing his passing targets from 2009 in those games. And that I’m afraid that is complete and utter crap.And yes, having EVERY WR and TE out injured at the same is extraordinary. If completely baffles me how you continue to ignore this.
Baffling you say. The only baffling thing has been your persistence in going on about something that never happened and then claiming it as fact.
But moving on, lets look at all pass catchers (WR’s, TE’s and RB’s) on either offense for the preceding year. Which for the Pats is 2012 and the Chargers is 2009.
Brady's total pass catchers for the season ending 2012.
Do you not notice how the top five guys on our passing offense are all gone? Do you notice how a guy who was number 6 on the depth, suddenly became our top reciver. Yes, you know it’s coming don’t you. Totally, that’s totally unprecedented.
Now let’s look at all of Rivers pass catchers for 2009 and see the ‘trauma’ he had to face going into 2010.
Hang on, what’s this? His top 6 pass catchers are still there. In fact look at this for week 1 2010
What is this sorcery? He had 6 passing targets from 2009, present on the field with him. In fact during the whole season in 2010, Rivers never had less than 4 of his 2009 pass catchers on the field with him. He started the season in 2010, with 6 targets on the field from 2009.
Now let's see what pass catchers Brady had for the first game of the season 2013 season against the Bills...
So no, Rivers never experienced anything at all like what Brady has endured so far this season with his offensive rebuild. Trying to put Rivers 2010 season, on a par with Brady’s difficulties this year is not only pretty laughable, but I find it an insult to my intelligence.It compares quite simply - a slump in form. All QBs have one, and the media will overlook this gladly if their team continues to win.
Yet more evidence that you are either unable or perhaps unwilling to look at the big picture. Can you guess what that big picture is? Can you think of any reason why Brady’s stats are different this year?Remember that - my initial point that Brady's play slumped for a weeks yet much of the media credited him for the wins and not the defense or rushing game?
And haven’t I told repeatedly. Yes repeatedly, that Brady himself has given the defense high praise all season. Pats fans have given the defense high praise all season and here you are still going on about something I have explained to you in the previous 3 posts.
And your statement about the media is factually incorrect. A lot of media sources out there have given the defense plenty of credit for their performances this season. A lot of media sources have highlighted the Pats offensive struggles this season. Do some Googling and you'll see what I'm talking about.
Now you initially made a token comment in another thread about the media and used Brady as an example. I responded in kind because I found your comments on Brady completely ironic. All Friday and Saturday I had to endure Manning versus the Chiefs, how will they beat him. He was playing them by himself and apparently the Chiefs must have had no QB of their own.
This hype was all over the Footballing media last week & not just the often ridiculous NFL Network. So in that context, I was completely perplexed why you chose Brady.Also complaining about Collie being injured is like complaining about Amendola being injured - both are made of glass
Lord Jesus in heaven give me the patience. You came out and used guys who had apparently no preseason as an excuse for Rivers and this is what I said in reply...Corvus Maximus wrote: »Someone signing on a Monday or Tuesday is no excuse to Brady? Nope, that's no obstacle to Brady. Sure didn't we sign Austin Collie back in October and a few days later he and Brady destroyed the Saints on that game winning final drive. Collie admitted later he didn't even know the playbook, but that didn't stop Brady. When everyone was dropping passes around him, Collie was catching his and that was the difference. Pity we lost him because of the knee injury.
How can you interpret my expression of pity at the end there, as a sign of me complaining or whining?
“Oh, it’s a pity the dog died.”
“Oh it’s a pity he won’t make the party.”
“It’s a pity he got injured.”
All are expressions of regret, not complaint. Regret = Sorry/loss/disappointment, all of which I could have used as an alternative to intimate my feelings.
RE: Amendola this is what I said...Corvus Maximus wrote: »Amendola has missed 4 games already and he should have been our No. 1 WR. but unlike you, I myself won't use his injuries as an excuse for our struggles, nor have I even suggested it in my previous posts. And why? Because WR's will miss games during the seasons and that's normal and to be expected. So there was nothing extraordinary about Rivers having some injured WR's.
So reading that isn't it clear I didn't and haven’t used Amendola as an excuse for Brady’s difficulties? I have already said in previous posts, that WR’s can and do miss games here and there. Yet you have used it as an sad excuse for Rivers and his amazingly difficult season that never was. Hence the reason I mentioned Amendola in my last post.
Of course you're lost, indeed you appear to be lost for the last three posts. I already asked you what relevance Rushing has on Brady’s rebuilt pass attack this year.So it's all on the offensive line, just like it's all on the receivers? Again, I'm lost as to why the run game hasn't felt any of these effects of poor line play?
It was I that pointed to you how badly our O line has protected Brady. I already told you that Brady’s sack rate is heading for a 43% increase this year.
However I have updated my calculations and it appears the O line’s protection is performing much worse than I feared
Brady was sacked 27 times last season or 1.68 sacks per game.
With 6 games left, he has already exceeded that total for this year.
He is currently at 28 sacks or 2.8 sacks a game. Which puts him on course for 44.8 sacks this year.
So that represents a 65.9% increase in sacks on 2012. Feck me, it’s worse than I thought, the O line are performing worse than my previous estimation. Judging on how it has gone so far, it wouldn't surprise me if you can't acknowledge how such a deterioration, would effect any QB's passing game.
Since this was all originally about Brady and the unprecedented rebuild in 2013. The discussion cannot take place with also analysing the level of pass protection from the O line and the key role an O line will play for any QB.
It’s a fact I don’t think you understand, since you have already demonstrated a clear inability to look at the bigger picture regarding Brady's stats this season. You can’t discuss any pass attack and ignore a QB’s pass protection.I'm lost as to why the run game hasn't felt any of these effects of poor line play?
You are wrong yet again, you need to stop doing that my friend. But since you’ve been rabbiting on about the Pats rushing game for a couple of posts. I suppose I might as well humour you. No doubt you’ll be disappointed to learn that our rushing game is performing worse that 2012
In 2013: we are averaging 126.9 rushing yards and 1.1 rushing TD’s per game
In 2012: we averaged 136.5 yards and 1.56 TD’s per game
If our current game averages persist in 2013, then we are on course for...
A 8% reduction in total rushing yards
and
A 30% reduction in total rushing TD’s
So there you go, to correct you earlier inaccurate claim, our rushing game is worse than 2012.
The only one blinkered here is you. When I read a naive comment like ‘slump’ I have to ask myself, do you even understand the role of a QB and how key factors influence his game, his stats, his performance?The 'blinkered media idiots' choosing to ignore Brady slumping at times this season and instead crediting him for the wins is EXACTLY what I was getting at to begin with - media coverage of NFL QBs.
I have been patiently trying to explain all these factors for a number of posts now and have obviously been wasting my time. Yet you still seem unable to understand, the factors that have impacted Brady’s stats and performances this season.I'm well aware of that being from April, which is why I am also curious that you gave Brady the extra 4 from this year, but not Manning (who wasn't even in second) and the extra three he has from this year (Welker, Moreno, J Thomas) which would bring him to 43 not 40?
Why are you curious? Now it was hardly rocket science to realise if the list was from last April, then extra WR’s would be added to Brady, Brees and Manning list. I gave you the updated numbers for Brady, didn't I only mention Brady’s current number in the last post? You were well capable of amending Manning & Brees additions since April yourself. So what’s the big deal? There really is only so much spoon feeding that I am willing to do.
But since we are back on the QB-Receiver all time turnover list. you won't like this.....Brady has lacked the consistent weapons that Montana had in Dwight Clark, Jerry Rice and Roger Craig, and Manning had in Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne.
Brady has had turnover at the receiver position that neither of his rivals experienced until they switched teams late in their careers, and he'll again have to overcome it this season after losing 62 percent of the receptions he threw last year.
Regardless of who Brady has played with, he's still won at an epic rate and turned no-names into stars (Wes Welker) and stars into superstars (Randy Moss).
[URL="[url]http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1660627-3-reasons-tom-brady-is-the-greatest-nfl-qb-of-all-time[/url]"][/url]http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1660627-3-reasons-tom-brady-is-the-greatest-nfl-qb-of-all-time
**** The article was written on June 7th, when it was expected that Gronk and Henandez would start the season. So the lost 62% of lost receptions mentioned , became 94% of receptions lost when the season started.*****
Let’s now put that list in an even better context RE: Brady’s amazing turnover of receiving targets. Manning and Brees have played for two different teams, therefore they have naturally increasing their chances of playing with a larger pool of receivers by playing for two teams.
Yet Brady is ahead of both, despite having played for only 1 team. And what does that tell us? Well it clearly demonstrates the sheer volume and turnover of receiving targets, that have come through Gillette during Brady’s reign. That’s just one team, 50 different receivers, wow, totally unprecedented.
*******************
I have created probably the longest post in Boards.ie history and probably all to no avail.
So let’s be clear from here on mate. It has now become very apparent to me that you are completely wasting my time. Your petty attempts to try and make an issues out of nothing. Like me not adding up Manning & Brees new tallies for you, when all that was required was a bit of sense on your part.
I have posted enough links and enough illustrations to highlight Brady’s monumental and unprecedented rebuild in 2013. Your Rivers comparison has now I’m sorry to say, become laughable. His massive rebuild and monumental task in 2010 never happened.
You're trying to twist and spin an expression of regret earlier, into an expression of complaint was pathetic. Yet not for the first time, you conveniently overlook the point that preceded it. Clearly you are clutching straws,
You highlighted games where you claimed no TE/WR played in them. And you even stated it as fact. Remember this...One guy - Floyd - played injured in week 11. In week 9, he did not play while Rivers with NONE of his 2009 WRs or TEs active. It's not an 'attempt' - it's an out and out fact.
The only fact there is your claim being out and out bull**** or you just being untruthful. It's either one or the other and only you know yourself. So I had to point out actually who played in those games and that you were wrong. Not only were they present, but a significant pass catcher like Sproles (4th overall 2009 & 3rd overall 2010) was also present. So regardless of whether you were deliberately being untruthful or just bull****ting me, I’m not tolerating it any more.
You claimed Vereen was counted on the roster, when in fact he was on IR with a designation to return after week 10.
You don’t even know how many rookies receivers are on the team. You stated there was 2 when there are 3. Why do you speak on subject matter you clearly know nothing about?
You tried to twist and spin my comments on Branch. When he was only mentioned in my last post. Because you kept on about guys who had less or equal production that him, being significant losses to Rivers. So if they were relevant to Rivers, then I had to make Branch relevant to Brady.
So all this naturally leads me to question, do you know what you are talking about? You claim the Pats rushing game was better, when in fact it is worse. And I have clearly illustrated this fact for you.
In summary, I am clearly wasting my time here and therefore there is no further point, in my trying to reason or logic with you. This has continued since last Saturday and enough is enough.
As a rule, I don’t tolerate time wasters on this site. I originally gave you the benefit of the doubt on this topic. I tried to reason and logic with you, but that was clearly a mistake on my part. But you live and learn I suppose. I don’t suffer fools gladly.
- Do not engage with me again, or direct any commentary at me regarding this topic any further.
- Do not quote me again on this topic any further.
- Or I promise you, I will take this further.
- And since you appear to have had difficulty interpreting my points, I strongly suggest you interpret this last one correctly.
I rendered these pointless, when I decided to reply earlier.0 -
-
-
-
No, but I am assuming you are purposely missing the point at this stage - not in the game = not in the game. Yet you seem dead set on ignoring the fact that pretty much everyone went down during the season.Wrong, wrong ,wrong. You are beginning to look really silly now. Don’t you understand? Shane Vereen was placed on IR with a designation to return and he wasn’t eligible to return until week 11. That does not count as a roster spot.
Gronk returned on week 7 in the game against the Jets. He was the only one of Brady’s top 5 targets that could possibly return because the other 4 were permanently gone. So is the clear now? Honestly, when I read those comments about Vereen being on the roster all season. I find myself beginning to suspect, that you might not know what you are talking about.
For a guy that played injured in week 11, didn't Floyd do really, really well to score a TD. Not bad for the gimped player you said he was in that game. And you claim that Rivers had no WR’s or TE’s active for the week 9 and week 11 games? Wait until you read further on, boy are you in for a shock.
And yes, Floyd had 2 catches for 24 yards and 1 TD... you can see his TD here at 0:45 - http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2010112200/2010/REG11/broncos@chargers#menu=highlights&tab=recap - incredibly acrobatic stuff from a guy who could nto at all have been injured.
:pac: He and Brady combined for 2 catches for 24 yards. Yeah, it really was the Brady + Collie show that day that tore NO apart. Nothing at all to do with Ridley getting 96 yards and 2 TDs running, or the four other receivers who got more catches and yards than him? No no no, it was all about those two catches for 24 yards.Anyway I digress, Brady wasn't short of a WR corp for a game. He has had to rebuild, acclimatise and integrate a new passing offense since week 1. And that is why I highlighted Austin Collie in my last post. But once again it appears to be yet another point you were either incapable of getting, or have conveniently overlooked.
Collie came in and a few days later he and Brady dismantled the Saints with that last second drive. He didn't have a preseason with Brady, do you understand? He didn't have a preseason with Brady. So stop using a few WR’s coming in, who had no preseason with Rivers as an excuse.
Again... not on that scale. But feel free to continue to completely ignore that.Because Brady and Collie showed how it can be done. If it wasn't an excuse for Brady, then it shouldn't be used as an excuse for Rivers. Christ sake do you even realise that every team in the league, is continually bringing guys in and cutting guys out. You’ll be shocked to know most wouldn't have had a preseason with the team.
Hence the advantage of a preseason to get them working together, especially with Amendola being a reasonably similar lot receiver to Welker. But no no no, let's just ignore that too.So any experienced WR that moves to another team, will automatically hit it off and do well with a new QB? Once again, I suggest you go and do your homework. The NFL history is littered with QB-WR hook up failures. Succeeding somewhere else is no guarantee of success with a new team and it never has been in the NFL.
Ok, so you spent some of the previous posts writing off peripheral players for the Chargers as irrelevant, but now Boyce is? Boyce? One catch all season for 24 yards Boyce?Wrong yet again, not 2, but 3 - Dobson,Thompkins and Boyce are our three rookie receivers. In fact we had 4 rookie receivers for the first 4 weeks, but Sudfeld was cut after week 4.
You really do love to be selective as and when it suits.
Nice and convenient failure to mention Hoomanawanui by the way. If you're including Boyce as a relevant player this year, he was a relevant Patriots player in 2012. Why have you failed to mention him yet?I have repeatedly explained to you what happened in preseason and what happened at the start of the season. I have even done out several nice little lists for to make it abundantly clear to you. I am not doing it yet again
Brady entered the season with only one guy having ever caught a pass from him in 2012. That was Edelman, a guy who who was number 6 on the depth chart. Brady entered the season with a new offense dependent on a bunch of college kids/NFL rookies. Rivers did this when???????
He's not a rookie. Edelman's not a rookie. Amendola's not a rookie.
The simple fact remains that Brady had time to get used to all of these guys in preseason, Rivers did not when he was playing with a completely decimated WR/TE corps. You can ignore it all you want, or bring up a guy with 2 catches for 24 yards as proof of "dismantling" the opposition. Good luck with that.
Jordan Reed, Keenan Allen and Deandre Hopkins all have more catches than Dobson - playing in Washington, SD and Houston respectively (two teams with QB issues this year). Tavon Austin, Taylor Eifert, Terrence Williams, Marlon Brown and Robert Woods all have all had more than Thompkins. WR and TE can take time to develop in, but let's not pretend some guys don't hit the ground running in those spots either.So off you go and do some research for yourself and see how difficult it is for young rookie WR’s starting off in the NFL. Because you clearly have no idea or knowledge of the difficulties rookies face when entered the big bad world of the NFL.
Then put the entire offense on the shoulders of these rookies from week one. Then throw in the famously complex Pats playbook. A playbook which is regarded as one of the, if not the most complex playbook in the league.
A playbook Belichick and Brady have added and added to for the last 14 seasons. So it is pretty god damn thick. No doubt and based on the evidence so far, you will probably not see the rationale of that last point.
The complexity of a playbook is also largely subjective. I guess then in those 14 years with all that WR turnover they have not at all in any way adapted it for plug-and-play situations or to have a base for WRs to adapt to relatively quicky? No. No no no. Of course not.
You're more than happy to bring up Boyce though...And that was my point for Christ sake. Do you not understand why I mentioned Branch for the first time in the last post? Branch wasn't significant to our offense in 2012. That’s why I never mentioned him in my earlier posts.
Dion Branch was pretty low on our production chart for 2012. But yet he’s a guy who had more production in 2012 than most of the guys you listed for the chargers, had in 2009. It is only when you listed guys who actually had similar production than Branch. That is when I thought it was time to bring Branch into the equation and include his lost production.
Why where you whining about guys that didn't really have significant production? I used Branch to illustrate that point. I didn't factor him in until my last post, because you were you using guys of similar production as an excuse for Rivers and his difficult season that never was.
And I never said it was the whole season, you just seem really eager to attack that straw man you've created. I said he had faced a similar loss of WR/TEs from the year previous for a few games, which he had.
Another straw man of yours. Time and again I have said that a drop off was understandable. you have ignored that. My point is that the drop off was more than it should have been for Brady, and as with other top QBs the media was happy to ignore it and actually credit Brady for those wins (despite as you say, Brady himself crediting the defence).Wait, it there hope yet? Have you kind of realised what losing so many receivers can do to a QB's stats?
But you're intent on having a different argument, so here we are.
I do love how you ignore turnover and injuries on the offensive lines, and running games (or lack thereof) also. But beyond that we have already established that Brees' WR turnover through his career has been almost identical to Brady's. You just chose to ignore it. Again. Selective much?I clearly outlined in the last several posts, the multiple reason behind Brady not having a Brady like season. then you look at the context and I have never seen Manning, Rodgers, Brees, Rivers, ect, ect, having to endure the rebuild Brady has had to endure this season. Brady's challenge was totally unprecedented on this scale.
Yes Brady did a famous rebuild back in 2006 and to a lesser extent in 2007, but 2013 stands alone as being pretty unique. And then you came out with this little nugget and the game totally changed....
And again your disingenuous selective nonsense continues. I explicitly stated that Floyd played the Broncos game buy was injured. Here again at 0:45 is a link to his TD - http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2010112200/2010/REG11/broncos@chargers#menu=highlights&tab=recap - it's a pass from the 6 yard line that's he was wide open for. But that's ok, you can ignore that too.I note that you did not identify the weeks or games there. So I will do it for you. The two games you are speaking off is, the week 9 game played against the Texans on Sunday the 7th of November 2010. And the week 11 Broncos game played on Sunday the 22nd of November 2010 game after the bye week.Here is a snap shot summary of the games.....
The week 9 Texans game...
The week 11 Broncos game....
So that’s a combined 528 Yards, 8TD’s and 2 Int’s. So the first thing you were wrong about there was the Int’s. You said Rivers had only 1, when he clearly had 2.
Now things take a strange turn. You said that Rivers played these games without a single WR or TE playing who was on the 2009 roster.
Wrong......
Against the Texans on the 7th of November this is the reality of what
happened....
Clear to see that despite your claim, kris Wilson the TE from 2009 played in that game in 2010. Rivers also had Sproules, who was the Chargers 4th leading pass catcher in 2009 with 45 receptions and 497 yards. He played in that game. So stop the nonsense and stop trying to embellish difficulties that didn't exist for Rivers in the passing game.
In fact in 2010 Sproules moved from 4th to the 3rd leading pass catcher on the team with 59 receptions for 520 yards. He’s obviously a guy who played a significant part of the Charges pass game in 2009 and 2010.
Now against the Broncos on the 22nd of November, this is the reality of what happened....
So once again you are wrong because not only did Malcolm Floyd the WR from 2009 play, but he also scored a TD in that game. And again Rivers also had Sproules, a leading target for him in the passing game present on the field.
So stop making ridiculous claims, by stating Rivers had no TE or WR’s for these games. Because not only have I corrected this dodgy and patent 'untruth' by pointing out the WR & TE that played.
But I also thought it was important to highlight the big role Sproles played in the Chargers passing game. A guy who played in both those games and who actually scored a passing TD in the Broncos game.
It now appears to me that you are pathetically trying to spin and give the impression that Rivers was missing his passing targets from 2009 in those games. And that I’m afraid that is complete and utter crap.
And for the record Hoomanawanui doesn't need to be mentioned (in fact, you went as far as to cross him off in the image below?) despite having more production in 2012 than Wilson in 2009? Selective, selective, selective.
Sproles is not a WR or TE, but nice try. Brady has had Ridley's running game behind him to help keep defences honest as well. If you want to continue to shift those goal posts, Brady has a top 10 rushing attack in yards per game and per attempt. The 2010 Chargers were below average on both.
It's crazy how when the guys ahead of someone on the depth cart get injured, that guy gets more catches, eh? You've been using this tragically flawed line of argument for a bit now. Edelman's targets and receptions are way up, he leads your team in both. So hey, I guess there's no problem in him being the #1 guy then.
Oh, but that's OK because Edelman's targets and catches have gone up... right? It was your argument for Floyd and Sproles, and so it must stand for Edelman too.Baffling you say. The only baffling thing has been your persistence in going on about something that never happened and then claiming it as fact.
But moving on, lets look at all pass catchers (WR’s, TE’s and RB’s) on either offense for the preceding year. Which for the Pats is 2012 and the Chargers is 2009.
Brady's total pass catchers for the season ending 2012.
Do you not notice how the top five guys on our passing offense are all gone? Do you notice how a guy who was number 6 on the depth, suddenly became our top reciver. Yes, you know it’s coming don’t you. Totally, that’s totally unprecedented.
And here is your disingenuous cherry picking showing up again. You keep going back to the start of the season, despite me constantly saying that it was during the season where the Chargers had these injures. So for the point in the season I was referring to, take away Gates. Take away Jackson. Take away Floyd for one of the games, and have him playing injured in the second. And take away Nanee as well. then don't replace them with guys who had the full preseason to get in the swing of things, or . But with guys who were signed and needed to jump right in - like Austin Collie with his world beating 2 catches for 24 yards did to pretty much single handedly destroy the Saints. :pac:Now let’s look at all of Rivers pass catchers for 2009 and see the ‘trauma’ he had to face going into 2010.
Hang on, what’s this? His top 6 pass catchers are still there. In fact look at this for week 1 2010
Also take a running game to help offset, which Brady has had all this time.
Again, there you go reverting to the start of the season... that is not what is being discussed. Your reading comprehension needs work, or you need to stop cherry picking - one or the other.What is this sorcery? He had 6 passing targets from 2009, present on the field with him. In fact during the whole season in 2010, Rivers never had less than 4 of his 2009 pass catchers on the field with him. He started the season in 2010, with 6 targets on the field from 2009.
Oh, and Brady has never had less than four of his 2012 pass catches on the field either - Vereen, Edelman, Hoomanawanui and Bolden.
So now Vereen has gone from being 'a huge part of the Patriots new offense' to merely '#7 on the 2012 depth chart'? Again being disingenuous. Do make your mind up, you are moving those goal posts so often that you might as well slap some wheels on the bottom of them at this point.[/quote]Now let's see what pass catchers Brady had for the first game of the season 2013 season against the Bills...
Yes he has. It's that simple. He had a pass catching RB who the Chargers never used to his full potential (hence why NO got him quite easy and all the attention he garnered in 2011) and then two guys with 13 catches between them - guys you wrote off as irrelevant. Brady on the other hand had two guys with 27 catches between them previously, and while he did not have a pass catching RB he did have a very, very solid running game to keep the team in games (like Ridley running for 96yds and 2 TDs vs the Saints while Collie was "destroying" them for 24 yards).So no, Rivers never experienced anything at all like what Brady has endured so far this season with his offensive rebuild. Trying to put Rivers 2010 season, on a par with Brady’s difficulties this year is not only pretty laughable, but I find it an insult to my intelligence.
Which completely proves my point - that even Brady is saying the defence was the difference in those games or deserved credit for the wins. Yet according to the media without Brady they "would be nowhere". Which you seem in agreement with.Yet more evidence that you are either unable or perhaps unwilling to look at the big picture. Can you guess what that big picture is? Can you think of any reason why Brady’s stats are different this year?
And haven’t I told repeatedly. Yes repeatedly, that Brady himself has given the defense high praise all season. Pats fans have given the defense high praise all season and here you are still going on about something I have explained to you in the previous 3 posts.
You had to 'endure'? You sound like one of those classic cases of being stuck on one side of the Manning vs Brady fanboy arguments that never go anywhere. For the record, I said the same about Manning not deserving MVP last because that team already showed it could get to the playoffs with Tebow under centre.Now you initially made a token comment in another thread about the media and used Brady as an example. I responded in kind because I found your comments on Brady completely ironic. All Friday and Saturday I had to endure Manning versus the Chiefs, how will they beat him. He was playing them by himself and apparently the Chiefs must have had no QB of their own.
This hype was all over the Footballing media last week & not just the often ridiculous NFL Network. So in that context, I was completely perplexed why you chose Brady.
The 'pity' was almost an inevitability, there is no denying that. Oh, and once again Collie had 2 catches for 24 yards vs the Saints. Please stop harping on like he was the best receiver out there. In his two games, he had 3 catches for 34 yards on 7 targets. You'll excuse me if I'm not jumping up and down with excitement over that.Lord Jesus in heaven give me the patience. You came out and used guys who had apparently no preseason as an excuse for Rivers and this is what I said in reply...
How can you interpret my expression of pity at the end there, as a sign of me complaining or whining?
“Oh, it’s a pity the dog died.”
“Oh it’s a pity he won’t make the party.”
“It’s a pity he got injured.”
All are expressions of regret, not complaint. Regret = Sorry/loss/disappointment, all of which I could have used as an alternative to intimate my feelings.
You keep bringing up the turnover of receivers as a negative, and you keep alluding to the rookies without much mention of Amendola to further compound this. I don't see any other mention of you saying "Amendola is our #1 guy/a decent WR" or anything like that.RE: Amendola this is what I said...
So reading that isn't it clear I didn't and haven’t used Amendola as an excuse for Brady’s difficulties? I have already said in previous posts, that WR’s can and do miss games here and there. Yet you have used it as an sad excuse for Rivers and his amazingly difficult season that never was. Hence the reason I mentioned Amendola in my last post.
If you don't understand the impact that a good running game can have on a passing attack after 30 years watching the sport, then I can't say there is much hope for you.Of course you're lost, indeed you appear to be lost for the last three posts. I already asked you what relevance Rushing has on Brady’s rebuilt pass attack this year.
It was I that pointed to you how badly our O line has protected Brady. I already told you that Brady’s sack rate is heading for a 43% increase this year.
However I have updated my calculations and it appears the O line’s protection is performing much worse than I feared
Any info on how long he is taking to get rid of the ball this year compared to last? And how much of that is to do with his receivers failing to get open compared to Brady's confidence or lack thereof in them?Brady was sacked 27 times last season or 1.68 sacks per game.
With 6 games left, he has already exceeded that total for this year.
He is currently at 28 sacks or 2.8 sacks a game. Which puts him on course for 44.8 sacks this year.
So that represents a 65.9% increase in sacks on 2012. Feck me, it’s worse than I thought, the O line are performing worse than my previous estimation. Judging on how it has gone so far, it wouldn't surprise me if you can't acknowledge how such a deterioration, would effect any QB's passing game.
As much as you may like to, you can't just scapegoat everyone around Brady to big him up without full info, sorry.
Actually no, this was originally about the media perception and coverage of top level QBs as infallible. You hijacked it.Since this was all originally about Brady and the unprecedented rebuild in 2013. The discussion cannot take place with also analysing the level of pass protection from the O line and the key role an O line will play for any QB.
Irony. Just keep overlooking that running game, though.It’s a fact I don’t think you understand, since you have already demonstrated a clear inability to look at the bigger picture regarding Brady's stats this season. You can’t discuss any pass attack and ignore a QB’s pass protection.
Also, you can look at Rodgers' poor pass protection and complete lack of a running game for good chunks of his career - but this has not impacted his play anything near like it did Brady's earlier in the season (even with WRs out, albeit not to the level of Rivers/Brady). Brady had a mini slump, end of discussion.
Again with your manipulated statistics... your pards per carry is actually UP this season. I wonder why you didn't mention that?You are wrong yet again, you need to stop doing that my friend. But since you’ve been rabbiting on about the Pats rushing game for a couple of posts. I suppose I might as well humour you. No doubt you’ll be disappointed to learn that our rushing game is performing worse that 2012
In 2013: we are averaging 126.9 rushing yards and 1.1 rushing TD’s per game
In 2012: we averaged 136.5 yards and 1.56 TD’s per game
If our current game averages persist in 2013, then we are on course for...
A 8% reduction in total rushing yards
and
A 30% reduction in total rushing TD’s
So there you go, to correct you earlier inaccurate claim, our rushing game is worse than 2012.
And how many of those TDs were goalline situations compared to this year? Like Brady's 4 running TDs for example. I'm going to assume they were all sneaks.
You said "Brady has thrown a TD pass to 50 different targets in his career . No other QB comes even close. The closes is Peyton who has thrown a TD to 40 different targets"Why are you curious? Now it was hardly rocket science to realise if the list was from last April, then extra WR’s would be added to Brady, Brees and Manning list. I gave you the updated numbers for Brady, didn't I only mention Brady’s current number in the last post? You were well capable of amending Manning & Brees additions since April yourself. So what’s the big deal? There really is only so much spoon feeding that I am willing to do.
So no, again you did mention Manning and put him at 40. Despite him being at 43. And despite Brees being the youngest of the three and being on 45. It's just more of the standard disingenuous statistical manipulation you've been doing a poor job of throughout.
And on the flip side it says that those two have had to adjust to different coaches, fans, systems, etc more so than Brady. I'm not sure why you think I would 'not like' that, though? It's as if you think I have some big hang up against Brady... which I don't. And have stated multiple times. you just really seem to be struggling to view him as anything other that completely infallible.But since we are back on the QB-Receiver all time turnover list. you won't like this.....
[URL="[url]http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1660627-3-reasons-tom-brady-is-the-greatest-nfl-qb-of-all-time[/url]"][/url]http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1660627-3-reasons-tom-brady-is-the-greatest-nfl-qb-of-all-time
**** The article was written on June 7th, when it was expected that Gronk and Henandez would start the season. So the lost 62% of lost receptions mentioned , became 94% of receptions lost when the season started.*****
Let’s now put that list in an even better context RE: Brady’s amazing turnover of receiving targets. Manning and Brees have played for two different teams, therefore they have naturally increasing their chances of playing with a larger pool of receivers by playing for two teams.
Yet Brady is ahead of both, despite having played for only 1 team. And what does that tell us? Well it clearly demonstrates the sheer volume and turnover of receiving targets, that have come through Gillette during Brady’s reign. That’s just one team, 50 different receivers, wow, totally unprecedented.
No, you purposely gave Manning's number from before the season while giving Brady's from week 11. You also completely left Brees out and specifically named Manning's 40 (not even the real number anymore) at the 'next closest' - that is a complete misrepresentation of the facts. But that is what you have been doing all along.So let’s be clear from here on mate. It has now become very apparent to me that you are completely wasting my time. Your petty attempts to try and make an issues out of nothing. Like me not adding up Manning & Brees new tallies for you, when all that was required was a bit of sense on your part.
Don't complain about me wasting your time, when you were the one dead-set on escalating this on the other thread, and in dragging it in here so you could have ab easier time shifting the goalposts time and again, and creating multiple straw men.
See? Straw man.I have posted enough links and enough illustrations to highlight Brady’s monumental and unprecedented rebuild in 2013. Your Rivers comparison has now I’m sorry to say, become laughable. His massive rebuild and monumental task in 2010 never happened.
I never said he had a 'massive rebuild' in 2010. I said he played weeks 9 and 11 with a similarly depleted lineup to what Brady has for much of this season. And that is true, and you know it. Hence why you keep trying to revert to week 1.
Ah yes, like you and Hoomanawanui. Or your attempts to bring the Saints RBs into the equation, but not the Patriots.You highlighted games where you claimed no TE/WR played in them. And you even stated it as fact. Remember this...
Like you trying to claim the Chargers' WR/TEs being active in week 1 meant they were not out in weeks 9/11.You claimed Vereen was counted on the roster, when in fact he was on IR with a designation to return after week 10.
Yes, because Bryce's 1 catch makes him count this year. But Hoomanawanui's 5 from last year makes him not count. Not moving the goalposts at all at all...You don’t even know how many rookies receivers are on the team. You stated there was 2 when there are 3. Why do you speak on subject matter you clearly know nothing about?
Rich. Very, very rich.You tried to twist and spin my comments on Branch. When he was only mentioned in my last post. Because you kept on about guys who had less or equal production that him, being significant losses to Rivers. So if they were relevant to Rivers, then I had to make Branch relevant to Brady.
Again, you are failing to mention that the yards per carry is UP on last season.So all this naturally leads me to question, do you know what you are talking about? You claim the Pats rushing game was better, when in fact it is worse. And I have clearly illustrated this fact for you.
[quote[In summary, I am clearly wasting my time here and therefore there is no further point, in my trying to reason or logic with you. This has continued since last Saturday and enough is enough.
As a rule, I don’t tolerate time wasters on this site. I originally gave you the benefit of the doubt on this topic. I tried to reason and logic with you, but that was clearly a mistake on my part. But you live and learn I suppose. I don’t suffer fools gladly. [/quote]Indeed you do live and learn. I definitely know who not to go to for an hones debate in future, at least on anything Tom Brady related. Of course, coming from the guy who was completely up in arms over the Gronkowski non-call the other night and right after said the holding call in the Saints game was 'just excellent blocking, no penalty'... what else was I to expect?
Jump off your self important high horse for a minute and remember that YOU replied to ME on this subject, to a post which was relating to the media pass that top QBs get, and decided to drag it in here for obvious reasons I have already mentioned. Tell you what, I'm just going to throw you on ignore and save the hassle of you "taking this further".- Do not engage with me again, or direct any commentary at me regarding this topic any further.
- Do not quote me again on this topic any further.
- Or I promise you, I will take this further.
- And since you appear to have had difficulty interpreting my points, I strongly suggest you interpret this last one correctly.
---
EDIT: Apologies to any Patriots fans I might have offended here. As I have repeatedly said, Brady is AT LEAST in the top 3-5 GOAT discussion, has done very well in difficult circumstances many times in his career (and has not been horrendous or anything this season, again due to circumstances). But I initially told Corvus that this was not where I was coming from with the argument, that I was not looking to get into a slagging match and was making a point over how QBs tend to get all the glory despite the talent around them (see: Ryan, Matt). I also wasn't looking to clutter your thread with this - but he was eager on badgering on about it time and again, and on dragging it in here because it's always easier to argue for your team (and move goalposts endlessly, misrepresent a lot of statistics, as well as create straw men) when than it would be in an 'NFL general' type thread.0 -
-
/\ /\ /\
Good post, and I pretty much agree with nearly all of it. Don't get me wrong either, I do fully understand that Brady had particularly difficult circumstances early this year, which is why I still said he was performing as good as about 8-10 other QBs. But as shown with Rivers, situations like this do happen. The exact circumstances vary, but Rodgers as another example sometimes doesn't get enough credit for doing what he has done over the last 18 months with a huge number of injuries - both starting tackles have been out for the last year or so (yet with Manning, there was a huge clamour from the media when his two went out), the C position has been in a pretty awful state throughout (Jeff Saturday, like milk on a hot day, was a bad choice) - his pass protection at times was so bad that it seemed like he had to wriggle/run away from a certain sack on over half his pass attempts. This was only compounded by the fact that there have been numerous injuries all over his WR/TE corps (though not at the same time to the extent of a Brady/Rivers situation) and injury prone that he was only 60-odd yards off being Green Bay's leading rusher from 2010-12 (872 vs 934 for Starks), meaning teams could drop 7 and rush with four nearly every play and be guaranteed to still get right through, while never really paying the price if we ran it (thank God for Eddie Lacy on that note). On top of this he has had his own defensive co-ordinator in Dom Capers absolutely trolling Green Bay ever since we won the SB so had to force things nearly all the time rather than 'do enough'. Yet his numbers have been as good as about anyone's over both of those periods.
This is why in my mind Brady did also slump beyond his circumstances (but allowing for those circumstances, was still playing at a top 8-10 level). I thought the comment of "where would the Patriots be this year without Tom Brady? Nowhere" was ridiculous from the original article I quoted on the other thread. You definitely have a point on the media sources also, 30 seconds of Skip Bayless is enough to prove that theory correct. If Brady had gone down and been replaced by Mallet then yes of course the Patriots would have been screwed. Put a poor-to-average QB in there, and they would have been screwed again. But in my mind, there are other guys who could get similar results to what Brady did with those WR/TE options, given the defence and running game - some with their arms, others with improv or their legs (Cam being an example there). He didn't light it up, or have to in the circumstances, but he did very well doing 'just enough'. Which is where the other half of the Brady/Belichick partnership really shone - hence why it's such an infuriatingly great duo to have.
It's not a slight on Brady. He had really tough conditions, but also had a small slump below his usual standards to compound this. The running game, defence and Belichick picked it up and did enough to keep it at 7-3 thus far, and now of course some guys like Gronk and Vereen are back too which can only help further. That's the sign of an excellently run team, but there's no surprise there given it's New England.
As for the last bit, I do agree in general though some examples to the contrary really grate me - particularly Matt 'free pass' Ryan . I've got at that as well recently, it's just a hang up of mine - likewise with people who view special teams as irrelevant. 0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement