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
-
-
I would say there was a big difference between River's and Tom's situation.But as shown with Rivers, situations like this do happen.
Mainly that only one of Tom's top five 2012 receivers would ever be coming back, and that didn't even occur until week 7.
It wan't that those guys were just out for a few games, and Tom would have to deal with a few new faces for 1-2 games, it would be the entire season and beyond.
I think that's why Tom's situation was unprecedented, which then got worse when people realised that Gronk wasn't returning any time soon, and then Vereen went out for 8 weeks. Coupled with his OL giving up a high sack count, hence why Brady is given some slack.
I would again go back to what media you are following on this. Any QB ranking I've seen have had Manning at the top, with Rodgers usually placed with Brees in the chasing pack. A number of the guys I listen to have even called Rodgers the best QB in the game.Rodgers as another example sometimes doesn't get enough credit for doing what he has done over the last 18 months
The Bayless and Smith debates are just entertainment, at least that's how I view them. They appeal to the masses, but I'm not sure real football fans believe they provide any real insight into the game.
I think it's a select few (Brees/Manning/Rodgers) that may have done what Tom has done in the circumstances. Just look at how Ryan, Flacco, Big Ben have struggled.there are other guys who could get similar results to what Brady did with those WR/TE options
I don't think many would disagree that Tom wasn't playing great, but even if we were mid-table in terms of dropped passes and sacks allowed, then Tom's stats would have been greatly boosted.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.
It's the Romo apologists that grind my gears as they tend to use fantasy points to defend Romo.As for the last bit, I do agree in general though some examples to the contrary really grate me - particularly Matt 'free pass' Ryan
0 -
-
Now I cannot in good conscience allow erroneous claims to continue unchecked. So I will indulge once more.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.
I already pointed out, that at no stage did Rivers have less that 4 pass catchers on the field from 2009, during every game. It averaged out as 5.25 pass catchers from 2009 per game in 2010. So how would that be possible if everyone went down during the season? keep digging a biger hole for yourselfNo it is not true, Rivers never was shortHence why you keep trying to revert to week 1.
Oh so you think I didn't include the remaining weeks for a reason? No, I don’t deal in subterfuge and deceit.
So here you go......
Week 2 against Jacksonville, Rivers had 7 pass catchers from 2009 on the field.
http://omg.wthax.org/5kGkjx.jpg
Week 3 against Seattle, Rivers had 7 pass catchers from 2009 on the field.
http://omg.wthax.org/5FAATP.jpg
Week 4 against the Cardinals, Rivers had 6 pass catchers from 2009 on the field.
http://omg.wthax.org/4QhjJK.jpg
Week 5 against the Raiders, Rivers had 7 pass catchers from 2009 on the field.
http://omg.wthax.org/4FsNbi.jpg
Week 6 against the Rams, Rivers had 5 pass catchers from 2009 on the field.
http://omg.wthax.org/7XwDYR.jpg
Week 7 against the Pats, Rivers had 5 pass catchers from 2009 on the field.
http://omg.wthax.org/7wxegn.jpg
Week 8 against the Titans, Rivers had 4 pass catchers from 2009 on the field.
http://omg.wthax.org/8aj3QC.jpg
I already pointed out week 9 and 11 in my previous post. So on to week 12.
Week 12 against the Colts, Rivers had 6 pass catchers from 2009 on the field.
http://omg.wthax.org/522aaA.jpg
Week 13 against the Raiders, Rivers had 5 pass catchers from 2009 on the field.
http://omg.wthax.org/5Pg6Pb.jpg
Week 14 against the Chiefs, Rivers had 4 pass catchers from 2009 on the field.
http://omg.wthax.org/6znHNL.jpg
Week 15 against the 49er’s, Rivers had 5 pass catchers from 2009 on the field.
http://omg.wthax.org/8mh7W5.jpg
Week 16 against the Bengals, Rivers had 4 pass catchers from 2009 on the field.
http://omg.wthax.org/7zDiGv.jpg
Week 17 against the broncos, Rivers had 5 pass catchers from 2009 on the field.
http://omg.wthax.org/6yvuQ4.jpg
So there you go, the stats clearly speak for themselves. Like I said in my last post. Rivers was never without a significant amount of pass catchers from 2009 during 2010 - established guys who had already caught passes from him the season before.
And you claim everyone went down? So didn't he do well to have at least 4 on the field with him at any time?
I wonder how will you try and wriggle away from that reality? Your attempts so far have been nothing if not very original, so kudos for that. Yesterday I admittedly grew tiresome of it. But now I can appreciate the uniqueness of it.
Wasn't it I that told you he scored a TD in the last post. Did I not also give you the proof? Now you are admiring the acrobatic score after I referenced it and telling me his stats after I referenced them? Seriously....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/201011...ghts&tab=recap - incredibly acrobatic stuff from a guy who could nto at all have been injured.
In what appeared to be a desperate attempt to compare Rivers with Brady previously. You said that Floyd played injured, you mentioned nothing else, probably in the hope that I would swallow it and rule Floyd out as a real passing option for Rivers in the game.
Having become naturally suspicious of everything you now post and with good reason. I posted the evidence of the game in question. On it you not only saw Floyds production, but also the listing for the TD he scored. You of course never mentioned anything about this when you brought it up initially. And why that was, well only you know the answer?Corvus Maximus wrote: »
Collie again? You tried to use new WR’s coming in during the season as an excuse for Rivers. It was you that started harping on about guys having no preseason with him. So I mentioned Collie to show you that it was no issue for Brady. He was only on the roster a couple of days, but it didn't stop him from doing his job with Brady on that final drive. So to repeat this for the third time if it was no excuse for Brady then it should be no excuse for Brady. But you don’t want to face that fact, so now you’re going on about about Ridleys production. I am confused.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.
New WR’s coming in for Rivers during the season – a big excuse for you.
New WR coming for Brady during the season – not an excuse imo.
Quote:Again... not on that scale. But feel free to continue to completely ignore that.
What scale? Rivers started the season with 6 of his pass catchers on the field and never had less than 4. I have already asked you how does that compare with Brady’s losses?
If there’s one thing you should have learned by now and that is I never ignore. Now take your head out of the sand because I have gone through preseason with you in nearly every post.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.
Isn’t Boyce a rookie and have I not mentioning the new rookie receiving corp from the outset? Here was yet another rookie we needed to perform. Doesn't his lack of production only serve to make my point yet again? Do you realise that you are making my point?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?
You really do love to be selective as and when it suits.
He has contributed much less than we expected. He has struggled more than Dobson and Thompkins in adapting and learning the playbook. So the Coaching staff hasn't pushed him like they have the other rookies. Although I think he may start getting more snaps as he begins to settle in more.
It’s yet another small factor I suppose that compounds the difficulties Brady has had to face. I didn't think it warranted a mention but since you brought it up, I think it probably does, cheers for that.
Now to deal with this..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?)
And this
He's not a rookie. Edelman's not a rookie. Amendola's not a rookie. What in God’s name is this now? Yet again I have to repeat myself and once again you are totally wrong.You already got this information in my last post RE:HooMan,RE:Edelman, RE:Amendola and RE: BoyveNice 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?
Didn’t I clearly identify them for you here...
That is a list of the Receivers who started the season. Do you see the red writing there? I listed out for you. I clearly identified who was a rookie, I clearly identified who was a new WR, I clearly identified who was an established receiver coming back in 2013 and what their position on the 2012 depth chart was.Corvus Maximus wrote: »Now let's see what pass catchers Brady had for the first game of the season 2013 season against the Bills...
Now scan down and you will see Hoo man, now do you notice the red writing beside his name? Now read the red writing and you will see how it says numbers 9 on the 2012 depth chart. Now pause and consider this, I not only mentioned Hoo man but I gave you what his position on the 2012 passing depth chart was. How can you even try to make this an issue? Have you no how idea how ridiculous it looks?
Now here’s the other list...Corvus Maximus wrote: »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 receiver. Yes, you know it’s coming don’t you. Totally, that’s totally unprecedented.
Now looking at its context do you see why it was done to point out the top 5 guys being gone? Do you see how I pointed out, how the number 6 pass catcher (Edelman) became our top and most experienced receiver stating the season, based on his passes caught with Brady in 2012
Now do you see where I crossed out Hoo Man? Yes of course you do, because you were like a drowning man with a life buoy with it.
Now look at Daniel Fells below him. Daniel Fells was the guy I meant to cross out there and not Hoo Man. Because Fells was cut during the summer.
Yet more attempts at diversions. Not only have you repeatedly tried to deflect from Brady’s unprecedented turnover in his receiving corp this year. But you are now trying to take it on a new tangent about individual rookie’s production. I’ll briefly humour you. Did any of the QB’s on those teams lose their top 5 pass catchers entering a season? Did any of those QB’s lose 94% of passing receptions entering the season?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.
No of course not and you just answered you own question. The playbook complexity has happened because we have had the same HC/QB tandem insitu for 14 years. It’s no mystery, as a receiver you either learn it or it’s bye, bye time.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.
I only mentioned Boyce once and don’t you know why? Here’s why....You're more than happy to bring up Boyce though
So you came out and told me that we had 2 rookies WR’s.Yet more factually incorrect information from you. So I tried to enlighten you with this..you can bring up all the rookies you guys have at WR (that being, two).Corvus Maximus wrote: »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.
Wrong, you repeatedly used the word ‘slump’ without ever acknowledging the context of why that occurred. I have repeatedly told throughout why it occurred. I have outlined the multiple reasons behind why it occurred. All of which you just don’t seem willing to acknowledge.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).
I seriously have no clue what you are even attempting to say there. I think you are referring to our O line. Now you previously suggested that you were seeing no problem with our running game. So I had to point out to you how our rushing yards and rushing TD’s have dropped off this season. So you were wrong.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?
Now you’re trying to tell me about the injuries and turnover of our O line. The most significant loss was Vollmer. But did I not already point out to you 2 posts back, that Vollmer was also on the field when the O line was performing badly.
I also told you that our O line unit is still intact from 2012. So there should be no excuse for the drop off in performance. If you know anything about Scar? You would realise that injuries are no excuse, versatility is key.
I posted a list of QB’s with the most receiving turnover for you two post back and wasn't Brees number two on the list. The list was from April 2013, I gave you Brady’s current number. I said in the last post that you were more than capable of updating Manning’s and Brees current number for yourself. I gave you a list out of the goodness of my heart and you have tried to make a ridiculous issue out of nothing.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?
You have repeatedly tried to twist, ignore and go off in tangents. To try and smog over the facts. The all time Receiver turnover list is a perfect example of this. I posted it, I brought it up and your response has spoken for itself. And it is this mindset of yours, which never allowed a logical, mature and genuine discussion to take place.
This is what you said....I explicitly stated that Floyd played the Broncos game buy was injured.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.
In week 9 you said it was an out and out fact that Rivers had none of his 2009 WR’s or TE’s for week 9?
And look what I posted last, hey look below, there’s Wilson the TE, He actually played in that week 9 game.Corvus Maximus wrote: »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
Remember this...Here again at 0:45 is a link to his TD - http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201011...ghts&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.Corvus Maximus wrote: »
See the TD listed there under his name? If it was me that gave you that information, how in the name of Christ could I be ignoring anything?Sproles is not a WR or TE
Did you say he was? Because I certainly didn’t. Go back and read. But just in case you’re attempting to play down his significant role in the chargers passing game, don’ bother.
In 2009 Passing: 45 Recs for 497 Yards and 4TDs.
In 2009 rushing 93 attempts for 342 Yard and 3 TD
In 2010 passing he had 59 receptions for 520 Yards and 2 TD’s
In 2010 Rushing he had 50 attempts for 267 Yards and 0 TD’s
He was way more productive in the passing game than he ever was in the rushing game. And you think he was underutilised? He was the 4th leading pass catcher in 2009 and the 3rd leading pass catcher in 2010. All of which suggests that he made a very significant contribution to the passing game overall.
Now when you came out in the last post and tried to make out the Rivers had no passing options in the Texans and Broncos game. I corrected this wrong claim by also including Sproles. He was one of the consistent top passing options on the Chargers pass attack. There's no denying his production. As a guy who finished third amongst all passing production for 2010. Sproles was clearly amongst a favored target for Rivers.
Now the 3 Pats RB's from the 2012 roster who started the season with Brady.
Vereen,
Ridley
Bolden
In the passing game they had a combined 16 receptions for 211 Yards and 1 TD. That's the total for three guys and it kinda shows the significance of the Sproles role in the Chargers pass attack. Rivers had damn fine pass option RB with him 2010. We have still to replace the loss of Woodhead.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.
I'm kinda confused here? Who was talking about Edelman’s targets and catches? Read what I said and not what you think I said here...........Corvus Maximus wrote: »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???????
The point was how he was propelled up the chart, by the loss of so many of Brady's targets. Yet another example of you attempting to divert from what I posted. Edelman was propelled to number1 from number 6 on the chart. By virtue of the other 5 guys being taken out of the equation entering the 2013 season. How complicated can that be?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.
You seem to have that backwards. Do you know why he was number 7 on the 2012 passing chart? Well it’s because he ranked number 7th amongst all pass catchers on the 2012 chart. You did read the list I posted didn't you? I suspect you might need to reverse what you are trying to say, because you appear to have it aresways. He finished 7th amongst all pass caught in 2012.
So when I gave you information for 2012, how is it even possible for you to think that I was downgrading him for 2013? I mean Lord above.
Haven’t I repeatedly said he was expected to be a key player in the 2013 offense. I can’t believe you are genuinely doing this, you have to be taking the piss.
Going forward into the 2013, big things were expected. He played a pivotal role during the preseason. And to once again repeat myself. With the loss of our elite TE’s and out leading WR’s, Vereen was expected to play a big role in the 2013 passing game.
Do you remember what he did against the Texans in the playoffs? Well that was the plan for him to build on in 2013. But he broke his wrist during game 1 and only came back in week 11. And so another huge dent was put into the offensive plans for the season.
So where did my downgrade of him occur? Because I am completely stumped.
Do you know of any Pats fan, that might told you that Brady praised the defense? Oh wait, that was me and I’ve been telling you that since this started in the other forum. Yet more pointless having to repeat myself over and over and over again crap.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.
Ah sure maybe you’re right, ah sure maybe losing 94% of all receptions for the new season is really a great thing really I suppose. Maybe every QB should have to experience it, sure it’s great craic, a piece of piss as they say.You keep bringing up the turnover of receivers as a negative
So now there’s an issue because I haven’t praised or admired Amendola enough for you? How many tangents are you actually going to take?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.
Again you continue to get your facts wrong. I said nothing about being a fan for 30 years. I said I was a fan for nearly 32 years, so get it right.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.
Now haven’t I pointed out the poor performance from the O line in pass protection. Haven’t I told you that our running game is worse so far this year than it was last year. Now shouldn't you be able to see the significant of all that?
The new receiving corp has been crap at getting open in some games. Brady has deliberately overthrown balls, because the rookies have under ran and pulled up too soon on routes. So can you now see how QB’s stats will be affected by even these few issues alone?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?
In fairness though, things have picked up in recent games. The incessant drops and errors have steadily decreased from the the first few games. The poor kids were thrown into the fire, so errors were expected. Their upside was way to good not to persist with them.
No idea what that’s about. But since you mentioned it, a man with Brady’s footballing CV needs no one to ‘big him up’ really.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.
No you mentioned Brady as part of your initial post.You specifically mentioned Brady and because of this, you made the conversation relevant to me as a Pats fan.
And when did Aaron lose his top 5 receivers at the start of a season? When did he lose 94% of all receptions going in to a season? Now if Aaron or Drew or Peyton ect, Were to start 2014 with say 7 of their leading pass catchers gone from this year. Then I could safely say that would probably be the greatest challenge ever facing a QB’s passing game. But they haven’t, well not yet anyway. But who knows, it could yet happen.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
But on the point of Manning, Brees and Rodgers doing what Tom did. You could probably throw in Flacco and Eli, providing they turn up to play. When those two guys are switched on, they are outstanding QB’s.
Yes they can play crappy at times. But do you know what, those two guys are well capable of switching on and going right through to the SB this season. Of course I hope they don’t switch on. But I have to included them in the above, because I also have tremendous admiration for them.Again with your manipulated statistics... your pards per carry is actually UP this season. I wonder why you didn't mention that?
Lies, lies and damn statistics eh? No the stats RE: the drop in our 2013 run game don’t lie. And once again, I have to implore that you reread what was posted.......
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 now you are talking about YPC being up from 2012 and trying to make this the lastest issue/side track attempt.
Explain to me how does YPC change the fact, that we are on course for a 8% reduction in rushing TD’s for 2013 and a 30% reduction in rushing yards per game in 2013
So YPC is up by 0.1 yards a carry. So that must mean, that the overall drop in yards and TD's per game this year mustn't be real at all. Does it really mean that?
But hey, I also never included when I discussed it in the last post
-Longest Rush per game
-Number of Rushes over 20 Yards per game
-Total rushing First Downs per game.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"
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.
Here's ‘The List’ again. It’s like a film sequel.
The Return Of The List,
The List Strikes Back,
I Know What You did with The List Last Summer,
The Lord Of The List
The Return Of the List
The Two Lists
Anyway, yes the list, did I not give you the list, I updated Brady’s numbers for you from that list. I told you it was from April 2013. Were you not capable of updating Brees and Manning’s numbers yourself? Oh wait, I think you did, so where’s the issue here. Do you think there a conspiracy because I didn't bother my arse to find out the new numbers for Brees and Manning.
Haven’t I not gone to enough trouble as it is, posting up numerous links and helpful pieces of information for you? But like the ridiculous issue you raised RE: Hoo Mans name being crossed out on one list, when it is clearly on another. Is this all you can contribute? Constantly ignoring the empirical evidence I'm giving, constantly wriggling and trying to create new sidetracks?
You’re like a politician on The Vincent Brown show. You think by making enough noise and flapping about enough, you will sidetrack the discussion. Sorry pal, you’ll not side track me. Philip Rivers has never experienced the loss of production that Brady faced. He did not lose his top five receivers, 4 of which are permanently gone. He did not have a passing offense built around an almost entirely new receiving corp.
No not really. A great player like Peyton Manning doesn’t need an offensive coordinator. He is the offensive coach. When he moves team he brings his offense with him. He didn’t learn a new offense in Denver, he is the offense. The same could be applied to Drew.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.
Ah yes, it’s all making sense now. I knew you’re real agenda would soon emerge, so maybe just leave you ‘issues’ aside please. Because in all my posts, I have been repeatedly trying to explain and illustrate to you. Why 2013 has been the greatest challenge, loss of production and change of targets that any QB has faced going into a new season.
The talk of infallibility has come from you not me. I have only been talking about football facts and the season Brady has faced.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.
‘Escalating’? Was that a Freudian slip? That’s pretty confrontational terminology,are you now revealing what your true intent was all along? Did I say this previously in the other thread......Corvus Maximus wrote: »Billy86 - You will find the reply to your last post in the Pats thread. I briefly posted it here, but had a change of heart since it's not fair to other users to be clogging the thread with specific team talk.
You see I didn't want to clog up a general themed The Weird, Wacky and Awesome World of the NFL - General Banter thread with this. I thought it wiser to take it in here to the relevant team thread.
And here's why.........Why NFL media coverage is such a joke at times
"Most would agree that the quarterback is the most important player on the field (the possible exception being a kicker in OT). Where would the Patriots be without Tom Brady? Well, the answer is nowhere and if the team doesn't clean up its pass protection against the Panthers this weekend he could be in trouble."
Brady's one of the best ever don't get me wrong, but come on for f*** sake! He's picked it up the last few weeks, but has been pretty brutal for much of the season. Yes I know he has been throwing to nobodies a good deal, but put a good 8-10 other QBs in his place (this year, not for his career of course) and the Patriots are likely exactly where they are, maybe even better. Wasn't his QBR in the low/mid 70s before the Steelers game only two weeks back? It's like that never happened! But hey, I guess once you hit that top level you become infallible. :rolleyes:
Your total and utter focus was on Brady and Brady alone there. What other QB did you mention? I can't see any other name. Of course you are entitled to say whatever you want about Brady and that's not the issue. Praise or insult him as much you want. But he's the only guy you mentioned in your OP and since he is the Pats QB, wasn't it logical to discuss it here?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,
Fortunately I have a healthy respect for horses and tend to keep off them. As I have clearly outlined for you, the only QB you ever mentioned was Tom Brady. Do you think that because were discussing it in here, that you are no longer the OP? Who said you weren't?
So since you only QB you mentioned was Tom Brady, wasn't it cop on to discuss the topic in the relevant team thread. Instead of us spamming a thread with specific team talk that nobody would want in there.
Argument? Is that the mindset that initiated the discussion? Where you were looking for an argument? Because all I was trying to do was correct some apparent misconceptions you were displaying about Brady’s season.But I initially told Corvus that this was not where I was coming from with the argument,
Easier to argue for your team? Not even knowing you, I expected a good interesting discussion. I was genuinely intrigued to see how Rivers ‘struggles’ in 2010, could compare with Brady’s challenge in 2013. But you quickly disappointed me. You couldn’t back up your claims and why? Because Rivers comparative difficult season never existed in the first place.
I feel all you have done since is to totally disregard information I have given. The YPC issue provides a perfect summary, I clearly illustrated the drop in rushing offense, but rather than acknowledge that point, you grab onto to the YPC issue. Yes total yards and TDs are down, but YPC improved by 0.1 yard. So were you trying to imply that I was deceiving you by not mentioning it?
I have done nothing apart from continually state and post facts pertinent to the conversation. Now I have grown increasingly exasperated and frustrated by your continuous evasion of those facts. But no, I’m certainly not arguing. But was I pursuing your logic behind how two QB's with different seasons, can be compared as having equal seasons? Absolutely yes.
I don't like thinking that someone is trying to pull wool over my eyes. I have too much self respect to tolerate or put up with that. I love this forum too much to endure it. So the more you denied and evaded, the more I had to try and reason with you. Yesterday I grew tired of it and I didn't want to continue. But today I’ve had a change of heart.
I deliberately posted relevant team data, mainly via image captures, so as not to be accused of manipulating data and to put the relevant info right there in front of you. But that was all to no avail. To actually have stats and lists put under you nose and to then try and deny these facts, twist them, try to wriggle away from them. Then to even link the same information back to me, information that I already gave you? Well I have honestly never seen carry on like that on Boards.ie.
The way you have responded my posts, I believe demonstrates a lack of sincerity on your part, to even properly discuss the subject matter. American Football is a game of stats and to repeatedly ignore them, to try to twist them and to even deny them. Not only insults me, but it also insults the neutral reader here in this forum.
But I'm big enough and mature enough to move on from all of this. I'll be honest by saying that you have made me naturally wary of you. But I believe in water under the bridge. Us Pats fans have had our fair share of disagreements in here over multiple issues. We can get heated and passionate times. But the respect remains.
But at the end of the day were all on the same side here. And that for me applies to the entire forum and not just the team thread. We all love a minority sport in this part of the world and long overdue that we all had a pint ffs. And you know what Billy, I'd genuinely buy you the first one.
I've was involved in contact sports and martial arts for years, yes I can't even touch my knees now, never mind touch my toes
. But in those days guys knocked lumps out of me and I returned the compliment. Many's a time we'd have the few pints after a game or a fight. Best pint you could ever have imo. My point is, I learned early in life not to hold grudges. So I won't be, because it's not who I am. How you respond is up to you but it won't change what I just said. 0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
JaMarcus Hustle wrote: »It's snowing in Foxboro
Any idea what the forecast is predicting for during the game mate? I'd love to see a snow game 0 -
-
Any idea what the forecast is predicting for during the game mate? I'd love to see a snow game
http://www.weather.com/weather/hourbyhour/graph/Foxboro+MA+02035:4:US
http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriotsWeather conditions: This is a game where the elements will be a significant factor -- both with temperature and wind. It is currently 24 degrees and expected to dip into the teens by kickoff. The wind is whipping through around 20 miles per hour, with the orange flags on top of the goalposts rippling consistently. With the wind chill, it will feel closer to 5 degrees by kickoff, according to.
So converting that to our readings, temperature is currently at -4, but wind chill will make it feel like -15c during the game.0 -
Corvus Maximus wrote: »http://www.weather.com/weather/hourbyhour/graph/Foxboro+MA+02035:4:US
http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots
So converting that to our readings, temperature is currently at -4, but wind chill will make it feel like -15c during the game.
Cheers for that. The more averse the weather, the better from my point of view
Probably good news for you lads too. Manning is 3-7 in his career in games when the weather is below 32 degrees (0 degrees in our money). He's only played one game in such conditions for the Broncos, and that was the divisional round game against the Ravens last season.0 -
Cheers for that. The more averse the weather, the better from my point of view
Probably good news for you lads too. Manning is 3-7 in his career in games when the weather is below 32 degrees (0 degrees in our money). He's only played one game in such conditions for the Broncos, and that was the divisional round game against the Ravens last season.
The only problem is our defense is pretty much out on it's feet now with all the injuries.0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Corvus Maximus wrote: »Ireland - United - Patriots.
As my late Mother used to say "Everything happens in threes."
Ireland-West Ham-Pats.
Terrible weekend although im used to **** and bad luck for the first two:(:(0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement