The Weird, Wacky and Awesome World of the NFL - General Banter thread

davyjose · 03-10-2012 5:25pm

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Just to correct you there, the Pats certainly were not a Superbowl caliber team when Brady took over. But they certainly became one once Brady became starting Quarterback.

Anyone who thinks that a wet behind the ears Brady was a significant upgrade over Bledsoe, so much so that it took them from nowhere to the super bowl, is insulting every man on that team.

Onecoolcookie · 03-10-2012 5:28pm

Eire-Dearg wrote: »

Can't think of a better place to ask, does anyone know if the first in the new 30 for 30 series 'Broke' is online anywhere, or if it'll be shown on our ESPN in the not too distant future?

Had a quick look for it myself but couldn't find anything, I'd appreciate a link aswell.

matthew8 · 03-10-2012 5:38pm

I thought the Raiders handled the snow well, but there was another reason the Patriots won that game. The Tuck Rule. One of the greatest abominations in any rulebook.

Hazys · 03-10-2012 5:44pm

davyjose wrote: »

The Pats practice in the snow, the Raiders play in California. Anyone thinking the snow didn't help New England is deluding themselves.

FFS you said the Patriots would have lost against the Raiders if that game was played in a dome.

But somehow that Patriots team, two games later beat argueable the greatest ever team to play in a dome, in a dome.

So what i can conclude from this, is that you consider the 2001 Raiders to be a better in a dome than the 2001 Rams in a dome...which would be ridiculous by anybody's standard.

You also said Brady joined a Superbowl caliber team in 2001 but this Superbowl caliber team only beat a 10-6 Raiders team because of the snow and if they played anywhere else they would have lost...your points are all over the place

davyjose · 03-10-2012 5:50pm

I take it back that they would have lost in the dome. But I do think that as things went, the snow significantly favoured New England.

They won the bloody super bowl that year. How am I wrong calling them a super bowl calibre team? just because 10-6 Oakland pushed them all the way in tough conditions doesn't change that fact.

Son Of A Vidic · 03-10-2012 6:25pm

davyjose wrote: »

Anyone who thinks that a wet behind the ears Brady was a significant upgrade over Bledsoe, so much so that it took them from nowhere to the super bowl, is insulting every man on that team.

This is what I said.

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Just to correct you there, the Pats certainly were not a Superbowl caliber team when Brady took over. But they certainly became one once Brady became starting Quarterback.

So why did I say that? Well lets look at the evidence. In 2000, the Patriots under the leadership of Bledsoe, had a shocking 5-11 season. Actually 23 teams had a superior win-loss record. Superbowl caliber you said, you sure?

But in 2001 when Brady took over, their was a huge improvement in the Pats win loss record to 11-5. It was the same system, same coaches, just a new young gifted QB on the field.

Chucky the tree · 03-10-2012 7:32pm

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

So why did I say that? Well lets look at the evidence. In 2000, the Patriots under the leadership of Bledsoe, had a shocking 5-11 season. Actually 23 teams had a superior win-loss record. Superbowl caliber you said, you sure?

But in 2001 when Brady took over, their was a huge improvement in the Pats win loss record to 11-5. It was the same system, same coaches, just a new young gifted QB on the field.

In 2000 the Pats def. were ranked 17th in points, in 2001 they were ranked 6th. In 2001 they drafted players like richard Seymour and Matt Light. On defense they signed free agents Rodney Harrison, Mike Vrabel and Roman Phifer.

On offense they went from being the 26th ranked to the 13th. They added Antowian Smith as running back who rushed for over 1,000 yards. The previous year their leading rushing was Kevin Faulk who clocked up just under 600 yards. There's probably more signings on offesne and defense that I've missed.

In 2000 Drew Bledsoe's stats were:
17 TDs, 13 Ints, 58% and 3,291 yards

In 2001 Brady:
18 TD, 12 Ints 64% and 2,843 yards.

But yea, it was all down to Brady.

Son Of A Vidic · 03-10-2012 11:28pm

Chucky the tree wrote: »

In 2001 they drafted players like richard Seymour and Matt Light.

I'm afraid Matt Light didn't exactly 'light' up the offensive line when he first became a patriot. You obviously think he did, but you are wrong. In fact Nate Solder is mirroring him right now, undoubtedly very talented and a couple of seasons under his belt will see him reach his full potential. So your point is pointless. Richard Seymour was a defensive lineman for the Patriots btw. Brady was also sacked 41 times in 2001, impressive stuff eh?

Chucky the tree wrote: »

On defense they signed free agents Rodney Harrison, Mike Vrabel and Roman Phifer.

Cheers, that illustrates my point that the team was still having to be built, after Brady became the starter. He didn't inherit a ready made Superbowl winning team as some have suggested.

Chucky the tree wrote: »

There's probably more signings on offesne and defense that I've missed.

Chucky the tree wrote: »

In 2000 Drew Bledsoe's stats were:
17 TDs, 13 Ints, 58% and 3,291 yards

In 2001 Brady:
18 TD, 12 Ints 64% and 2,843 yards.

You left out the most important stat of all there, one was a veteran QB, the other was a newb. Pretty impressive work for a newb. Especially in a era when the QB was still taking some serious hits.

Chucky the tree wrote: »

But yea, it was all down to Brady. :rolleyes:

I love the juvenile use of rolls eyes. The point obviously went over your head of course. With Bledsoe, the Patriots finished a poor 5-11 season in 2000. Ironically, your post (RE:team building ect) contributes toward my point. Brady's leadership lifted the team and started to turn things around. The evidence speaks for itself. Playing within the same system, the contrast in the teams fortunes when Brady took over from Bledsoe was pretty apparent. The Patriots became a winning team as Brady's star began to rise.

Where did I say that Brady did everything btw? Look back through the posts and you will see some people wrongly suggested that Brady inherited a winning team, well he didn't I'm afraid. Getting sacked 41 times in 2001, brought the reality home to him of how shítty the offense line was. And yet he still led the team to a 11-5 season.

Amazingly enough, Brady also worked with an offensive coordinator, a QB coach and a Head coach when he started with the Pats. But according to some, Peyton Manning had absolutely no team and no coaching staff whatsoever when he became a Colt. Oh wait, it all makes sense now........

Disclaimer: I love Peyton and have great respect for him. Photo was only used for illustration purposes.

Chucky the tree · 04-10-2012 1:17am

But the evidence doesnt speak for itself. I could claim that Seymour is the reason the team turned it around. It was his leadership that lifted the team and turned things around. I don't really care what original point you were making about Pats being a good before or not, I never claimed that. I am just saying that your claim about the team turning it around because of Brady only is BS.

davyjose · 04-10-2012 5:00am

Brady is clearly a much better QB than Bledsoe was, but to give all that kudos to a young QB is wide of the mark. Chucky mentioned a number of players that came into that team, all of whom were an upgrade, and played a role in the superbowl. That Defense held the RAMS (AFAIR) to their lowest points total of the season. They might not have been Super Bowl calibre in 2000, but they were in 2001. Peyton's first year he went 3-13. meybe Brady is better, but Jesus* he didnt single-handedly reel in a super Bowl.

* Or is that "Peyton"

davetherave · 04-10-2012 11:25am

I think we have all skipped over the most important aspect of this conversation so far

malachyscott wrote: »

Tim Tebow > Tom Brady and Peyton Manning.
Discuss ?

Son Of A Vidic · 04-10-2012 11:28am

Chucky the tree wrote: »

But the evidence doesnt speak for itself.

There'll be a small sample of this evidence at the end of this post.

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I could claim that Seymour is the reason the team turned it around. It was his leadership that lifted the team and turned things around.

A defense can be as tough and mean as it wants, but if the offense ain't putting points on the board then it doesn't mean a damn thing. Guess who was leading the offense and putting points on the board?

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I don't really care what original point you were making about Pats being a good before or not, I am just saying that your claim about the team turning it around because of Brady only is BS.

davyjose wrote: »

Brady is clearly a much better QB than Bledsoe was, but to give all that kudos to a young QB is wide of the mark

You guys aren't Patriots fans, so obviously ye aren't aware of what the real turning point for the Pats was in 2001.

2001, week 4 - the Pats defence had given up 44 points against the Colts to make it 1-3 for the season.

2001, week 5 - the Pats were 1-3, playing against the Chargers. 4th quarter, 10 points down and about to go 1-4. But then the NFL world witnessed their first of the famous Brady comeback drives that would become his trademark.

With 8 minutes left on the clock, Brady led consecutive scoring drives tying the score with 36 seconds left and leading them to a dramatic win in overtime. 33-54 for 364 yards and 2 TD's on the day. The Pats went on a winning streak that got them right into the playoff picture. Amazing stuff from a kid that went from 4th on the QB depth chart, to starter in less than a year. That was the game that many former Pats will tell you, they knew they now had someone special leading the team.

Brady had that intangible no other Pats QB had before him - totally Ice cool under pressure and supremely confident in his ability. It was the game that won him respect in the dressing room and amongst the fans. A young snot nosed kid who was a born leader, wouldn't give up on the team or the game, rallying the troops and leading his team to a late victory.

My point all along was to illustrate the impact Brady had on the team, it's in the stats, it's in the archives. I never said Brady WAS the team, but he brought that immeasurable to the Pats that Bledsoe never had.

Chucky the tree · 04-10-2012 12:02pm

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

A defense can be as tough and mean as it wants, but if the offense ain't putting points on the board then it doesn't mean a damn thing. Guess who was leading the offense and putting points on the board?
.

He had one extra touchdown over Bledsoe on the season.

Son Of A Vidic · 04-10-2012 1:26pm

Chucky the tree wrote: »

He had one extra touchdown over Bledsoe on the season.

Are you for real? If you think the difference was only one TD, then I suspect you might have a lot to learn about the game.

Justin10 · 04-10-2012 1:33pm

Haha Oooo dear

Chucky the tree · 04-10-2012 1:38pm

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Are you for real? If you think the difference was only one TD, then I suspect you might have a lot to learn about the game.

It obviously his amazing leadership skills that willed the players on.

04-10-2012 1:43pm

If Tim Tebow had the weapons that Tom Brady or Peyton Manning had, he would have won more superbowls than both combined.

Brady and Manning caught a lucky break to be drafted on such talented teams.

Son Of A Vidic · 04-10-2012 2:04pm

Chucky the tree wrote: »

It obviously his amazing leadership skills that willed the players on.

At a key moment in 2001? Let's review what really happened again..

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

2001, week 4 - the Pats defence had given up 44 points against the Colts to make it 1-3 for the season.

2001, week 5 - the Pats were 1-3, playing against the Chargers. 4th quarter, 10 points down and about to go 1-4. But then the NFL world witnessed their first of the famous Brady comeback drives that would become his trademark.

With 8 minutes left on the clock, Brady led consecutive scoring drives tying the score with 36 seconds left and leading them to a dramatic win in overtime. 33-54 for 364 yards and 2 TD's on the day. The Pats went on a winning streak that got them right into the playoff picture. Amazing stuff from a kid that went from 4th on the QB depth chart, to starter in less than a year. That was the game that many former Pats will tell you, they knew they now had someone special leading the team.

Brady had that intangible no other Pats QB had before him - totally Ice cool under pressure and supremely confident in his ability. It was the game that won him respect in the dressing room and amongst the fans. A young snot nosed kid who was a born leader, wouldn't give up on the team or the game, rallying the troops and leading his team to a late victory.

My point all along was to illustrate the impact Brady had on the team, it's in the stats, it's in the archives. I never said Brady WAS the team, but he brought that immeasurable to the Pats that Bledsoe never had.

Speaks for itself really and as Churchill once said....

"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is."

The further wasting of my time is now over.

Chucky the tree · 04-10-2012 3:17pm

As I said, it was obviously his elite leadership skills. Nothing to do with any of the other players at all, it was all Brady.

nerd69 · 04-10-2012 3:28pm

Can't link on the phone but a few posts back some1 dismissed Semore because he's a defensive player where would the ravens have won anything without ray Lewis I think the raiders ripped the pats off and the pats would have at least 1 more sb with Semore still there

mongoman · 04-10-2012 5:43pm

Chucky the tree wrote: »

As I said, it was obviously his elite leadership skills. Nothing to do with any of the other players at all, it was all Brady.

You just need to get over the fact that Corvus bitched slapped you and just moved on.

SantryRed · 04-10-2012 6:20pm

Lads,

Where can I buy an American Football in Dublin? Close to Santry preferably

Chucky the tree · 04-10-2012 6:25pm

mongoman wrote: »

You just need to get over the fact that Corvus bitched slapped you and just moved on.

haha, oh dear.

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

2001, week 4 - the Pats defence had given up 44 points against the Colts to make it 1-3 for the season.

This is completely wrong. The Pats scored 44 points against the Colts defense. Making them 1-2, they lost the following week 1-3 to the Dolphins. In the colts game Brady played a blinder, 56% with 168 yards and 0 touchdowns. Smith and Faulk both rush for 140+ yards and 3 touchdowns. New Englands defense had 3 interceptions, two returned for touchdowns. But yea, that **** was all on Brady.

JaMarcus Hustle · 04-10-2012 7:30pm

Stats Schmats.

Tom Brady is the best Quarterback of all time. Need proof? Look at his wife. Deal with it

mongoman · 04-10-2012 7:37pm

Chucky the tree wrote: »

mongoman wrote: »

You just need to get over the fact that Corvus bitched slapped you and just moved on.

haha, oh dear.

Not to worry, I'm sure you'll get over it.

Chucky the tree wrote: »

This is completely wrong. The Pats scored 44 points against the Colts defense. Making them 1-2

Completely wrong? That's a bit rich coming from you don't you think?

This is what I read...

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

2001, week 4 - the Pats defence had given up 44 points against the Colts to make it 1-3 for the season.

2001, week 5 - the Pats were 1-3, playing against the Chargers. 4th quarter, 10 points down and about to go 1-4. But then the NFL world witnessed their first of the famous Brady comeback drives that would become his trademark.

With 8 minutes left on the clock, Brady led consecutive scoring drives tying the score with 36 seconds left and leading them to a dramatic win in overtime. 33-54 for 364 yards and 2 TD's on the day. The Pats went on a winning streak that got them right into the playoff picture. Amazing stuff from a kid that went from 4th on the QB depth chart, to starter in less than a year. That was the game that many former Pats will tell you, they knew they now had someone special leading the team.

Brady had that intangible no other Pats QB had before him - totally Ice cool under pressure and supremely confident in his ability. It was the game that won him respect in the dressing room and amongst the fans. A young snot nosed kid who was a born leader, wouldn't give up on the team or the game, rallying the troops and leading his team to a late victory.

My point all along was to illustrate the impact Brady had on the team, it's in the stats, it's in the archives. I never said Brady WAS the team, but he brought that immeasurable to the Pats that Bledsoe never had.

It's pretty obvious Week 4 was only briefly mentioned there in passing, to lead into week 5 of the season. The emphasis was clearly on week 5 there and maybe if you actually processed what was posted. Then you might have learned something, instead of clogging up the thread with silly rubbish.

But if all you have is a win getting mixed up with a loss? Then you really need to give up man, cos now you're just clasping at straws at this stage. :rolleyes:

DDC1990 · 04-10-2012 8:28pm

IMO, and Im not an expert by any means, Brady is a slightly better QB, but thats no slight on Payton.

Both brilliant QB's in their own rights.

I don't have stats to back that up, or examples, but if I had a choice between Brady to lead my team to the Superbowl, or Payton to lead my team to the Superbowl i'd pick Brady.

kmart6 · 04-10-2012 8:59pm

Ah I remember hen you could come into this thread and find some interesting tidbits instead of page after page of arguments of QB standards and who's better, something that could have just been given a separate thread, like it has many times before!

Chucky the tree · 04-10-2012 9:59pm

JaMarcus Hustle wrote: »

Stats Schmats.

Tom Brady is the best Quarterback of all time. Need proof? Look at his wife. Deal with it

I never disagreed with that.

mongoman wrote: »

Not to worry, I'm sure you'll get over it.

Completely wrong? That's a bit rich coming from you don't you think?

This is what I read...

It's pretty obvious Week 4 was only briefly mentioned there in passing, to lead into week 5 of the season. The emphasis was clearly on week 5 there and maybe if you actually processed what was posted. Then you might have learned something, instead of clogging up the thread with silly rubbish.

But if all you have is a win getting mixed up with a loss? Then you really need to give up man, cos now you're just clasping at straws at this stage. :rolleyes:

Are you a bit simple? The part I quoted was completely wrong. My point is that despite Brady playing very poorly the Pats still managed to win thanks the defence. It obvious that he used week 4(actually 3) as an example of how bad the Pats defense was and how it was all on Brady, got it badly wrong somehow though.

mongoman · 04-10-2012 10:50pm

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Are you a bit simple?

Thankfully no, but maybe ask yourself that question. It is you after all, that hasn't seemed able to grasp the point Corvus was making in his posts on Brady.

Chucky the tree wrote: »

It obvious that he used week 4(actually 3) as an example of how bad the Pats defense was and how it was all on Brady, got it badly wrong somehow though.

No, I think it's pretty obvious he used week 5 to demonstrate a seminal moment in Patriot history during the chargers game. He didn't say nothing about defense or blame them for their woes.

He made it clear they were 1-3, on the verge of going 1-4 with the game nearly over and then Brady stepped up and started the first of many famous game winning comeback drives.

I mean how clearer can this be?

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

My point all along was to illustrate the impact Brady had on the team, it's in the stats, it's in the archives. I never said Brady WAS the team, but he brought that immeasurable to the Pats that Bledsoe never had.

Short of using Ladybird books, I don't think it can be any clearer.

Eire-Dearg · 04-10-2012 11:07pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4HmfATSZ0E

Get on it, doubt it's gonna last long.

The Weird, Wacky and Awesome World of the NFL - General Banter thread

Comments