Is the Patriots offense a "gimmick" offense

[ASG0531]

Originally Posted by PMarsico9

The only butthurt is the continuing stream of Pats fans who post garbage on these boards (not Patriot Reign or even TX who actually like to talk football and not spew bias) who refuse to acknowledge that they haven't won a title since they were caught cheating.

The evidence in that Pats fans need to continually come onto a Jets fans board and remind us how great Brady is simply validation for the truth:

A) No Mo Lewis hit, no Brady.

B) No cheating, no titles.


The continual trashing of Peyton Manning as a "choke artist," is also laughable considering Brady has been Manning since his coach wasn't allowed to cheat anymore.

A) Winning a Super Bowl

B) SpyGate

Those are the only two things that allow really angry, jealous Jets fans such as yourself to sleep peacefully at night.

I don't even hate Peyton, in fact many Pats fans like him. He's a douche, but so is Brady and Rodgers. And of course Brady has to win it all again to prove something, no one is disputing that.

You are desperate for an elite QB and slamming right and left all of the fans of teams who have one.

The Pats have made back-to-back AFC Championship games. Apparently this is an impressive accomplishment.

I get to root for my team next Sunday. What are you gonna do?

[PatriotReign]

Originally Posted by PMarsico9

The only butthurt is the continuing stream of Pats fans who post garbage on these boards (not Patriot Reign or even TX who actually like to talk football and not spew bias) who refuse to acknowledge that they haven't won a title since they were caught cheating.

The evidence in that Pats fans need to continually come onto a Jets fans board and remind us how great Brady is simply validation for the truth:

A) No Mo Lewis hit, no Brady.

B) No cheating, no titles.


The continual trashing of Peyton Manning as a "choke artist," is also laughable considering Brady has been Manning since his coach wasn't allowed to cheat anymore.

The Pats haven't won the Superbowl post spygate (not many teams have, it's kind of tough just to make it to a SB ). However as you noted Brady was one helmet catch away from having a perfect season post spygate and went to two Superbowls post spygate. Not trying to debate you but you summarliy excuse Peyton's pattern of one and done playoff performances and yet dismiss the 2 Pats AFC Champs/ Superbowls post spygate as meaningless as it pertains to how good Brady is. You're cherry picking stats that fall in line with your pro Peyton agenda. If that is an end all to every observation about how great Brady is then I guess that's where it ends with you but it's not very consistent.

[Fixit]

Originally Posted by PMarsico9

The only butthurt is the continuing stream of Pats fans who post garbage on these boards (not Patriot Reign or even TX who actually like to talk football and not spew bias) who refuse to acknowledge that they haven't won a title since they were caught cheating.

The evidence in that Pats fans need to continually come onto a Jets fans board and remind us how great Brady is simply validation for the truth:

A) No Mo Lewis hit, no Brady.

B) No cheating, no titles.


The continual trashing of Peyton Manning as a "choke artist," is also laughable considering Brady has been Manning since his coach wasn't allowed to cheat anymore.

A) You're wrong. Brady was about to take over, anyway. Even if that weren't the case ... what's your point? A guy can't be great if he got his job due to injury? That Lou Gehrig sure shouldn't be in the Hall.

B) Please detail the cheating and how it worked.

[Fixit]

Originally Posted by ASG0531

A) Winning a Super Bowl

B) SpyGate

Those are the only two things that allow really angry, jealous Jets fans such as yourself sleep at night.

I don't even hate Peyton, in fact many Pats fans like him. He's a douche, but so is Brady and Rodgers. And of course Brady has to win it all again to prove something, no one is disputing that.

You are desperate for an elite QB and slamming right and left all of the fans of teams who have one.

18-1!

[ASG0531]

PMarsico is absolutely fuming right now. It's going to probably take a day or two for him to settle so maybe we should all exit this thread and let him settle down. He has Sanchez to look forward to next season.

[Monsterxman]

Originally Posted by Fixit

All playoff games are must-win, and Eli is 8-3. Brady's 17-6 (and counting). Eli also misses the playoffs as much as he makes it, and Brady has a better percentage of comeback wins overall. Eli just has two more glamorous ones, unfortunately.

I don't know where you're getting the "Peyton is better in the regular season" stuff. Brady's win % dwarfs Manning's, as does his TD/int ratio. Their cumulative numbers (when adjusted for # of seasons played) are just about equal. He's led 4 of the top 12 scoring offenses (including #1 and #3) of all-time with a revolving cast of characters and coaches. His overall QB rating is better (both indoors and outdoors when compared to Manning), and Brady has played his entire career outdoors in the Northeast, not at bare minimum 9 games a year indoors.

Good grief, what does a guy have to do?

Manning has played 14 years, and Brady has played 13.

If Manning were to retire after this year, then by my calculations - all Brady would need to next year to be equal is:

Throw for 14,681 yards – 102 tds, and about 75% percentage



I love clueless Pat fans. At least you used to be able to say (before Eli proved more clutch) Tom Brady is clutch in the playoffs!

Eli - last year - 9 tds - 1 ints and monster yards too... far better than Brady ever performed.
Sorry just speaking the truth.

[PMarsico9]

Originally Posted by PatriotReign

The Pats haven't won the Superbowl post spygate (not many teams have, it's kind of tough just to make it to a SB ). However as you noted Brady was one helmet catch away from having a perfect season post spygate and went to two Superbowls post spygate. Not trying to debate you but you summarliy excuse Peyton's pattern of one and done playoff performances and yet dismiss the 2 Pats AFC Champs/ Superbowls post spygate as meaningless as it pertains to how good Brady is. You're cherry picking stats that fall in line with your pro Peyton agenda. If that is an end all to every observation about how great Brady is then I guess that's where it ends with you but it's not very consistent.

Simply put, I will readily say that Brady is at least on par with Montana and Bradshaw if they win another title and nothing surfaces that's fishy at all.

It's that simple.

With that said, Manning is a superior regular season QB. He's got 100 more TD's than Brady, a higher career completion percentage, 15,000 more yards, and is only a year older than Brady, meaning Brady will likely finish his career behind Peyton in those statistical categories.

As I said before: Marino is the best QB I've ever seen. He never won a title. That is my opinion.

[Fixit]

Originally Posted by Monsterxman

Manning has played 14 years, and Brady has played 13.

If Manning were to retire after this year, then by my calculations - all Brady would need to next year to be equal is:

Throw for 14,681 yards – 102 tds, and about 75% percentage



I love clueless Pat fans. At least you used to be able to say (before Eli proved more clutch) Tom Brady is clutch in the playoffs!

Brady's started 11 seasons. He didn't play as a rookie in 2000 (you're really reaching if you want to include that), and he missed all of 2008.

Brady's played 177 games, Manning 224. That's a difference of 47 games ... three seasons.

Good math, though.

[Fixit]

Originally Posted by PMarsico9

With that said, Manning is a superior regular season QB. He's got 100 more TD's than Brady, a higher career completion percentage, 15,000 more yards, and is only a year older than Brady, meaning Brady will likely finish his career behind Peyton in those statistical categories.

OMG, not a higher completion %! And 15,000 more yards playing 47 more games and playing inside most of the time! And not 86 more picks!

Let's ignore Brady's higher QB rating, ridiculously better TD/int ratio, otherworldly winning % ...

Jesus.

[Monsterxman]

Originally Posted by Fixit

Brady's started 11 seasons. He didn't play as a rookie in 2000 (you're really reaching if you want to include that), and he missed all of 2008.

Brady's played 177 games, Manning 224. That's a difference of 47 games ... three seasons.

Good math, though.

Oops. i'm at work, give me a break. lol.

I was wrong, they are close/similar statistically.
Manning is still the better reg. season QB in my mind, but I guess it can be argued.

Brees however will have them both beat by a large margin when all is said and done.

[Fixit]

Originally Posted by Monsterxman

Oops. i'm at work, give me a break. lol.

I was wrong, they are close/similar statistically.
Manning is still the better reg. season QB in my mind, but I guess it can be argued.

Brees however will have them both beat by a large margin when all is said and done.

It's all good.

Brees will definitely have a shot at having the most TDs.

[chesapeakejet]

I only wonder if you were able to switch venue's between Brady and Manning, would Brady fared as well? My point is IMHO, Tom has been the benefactor of much better coaching than Manning. And I think that makes a difference statistically, especially since this is the ultimate team sport. Don't get me wrong, I think Tommy Boy is one helluva QB, and one of the best to ever play the game (again IMHO), but I just wonder if situations were reversed.....

[PMarsico9]

Originally Posted by Fixit

OMG, not a higher completion %! And 15,000 more yards playing 47 more games and playing inside most of the time! And not 86 more picks!

Let's ignore Brady's higher QB rating, ridiculously better TD/int ratio, otherworldly winning % ...

Jesus.

I don't know what satisfaction you draw from this, but as I've said multiple times:

I would pay money to watch Dan Marino play QB ahead of any others in history.

It's that simple. If you don't like my assessment, tough ****. Go to the Pats boards and blow Brady like everybody else.

No matter what you say or do, the margins are too tight and I can subjectively make the call here:

Peyton's better than Brady.
Marino's better than both.
Bradshaw and Montana are both also better than Brady from a purely winning standpoint, but if Brady can win a title without his head coach cheating, then I will move him ahead of Bradshaw.

That does not change the fact that he exists largely on YAC and isn't as much fun to watch as any of the other QB's on here, even Bradshaw, who lived largely off the acrobatics of Stallworth and Swann, Montana and Rice, Marino and whatever scrub he felt like making a Pro-Bowler or Peyton being the offensive coordinator and QB at the same time and is scarily accurate.

Brady ranks 5th on my list with an asterisk. I posted it earlier. There's nothing to argue.

Your perspective is your's mine is mine.

Hell if I'm paying, I'll even admit that I find Brees, Rodgers, RG3, and Eli more entertaining to watch than Brady.

Brady is a great QB, but it's alot of dinky-doo. I don't find multiple set slot passes exciting. I don't think Welker's any better than Chrebet.

I don't like the Ron Earhardt/Weis offense cool or fun or interesting.

[Fixit]

Originally Posted by PMarsico9

Your perspective is your's mine is mine.

Agreed. Only one of ours is actually based on performance and facts, though. But entertainment value is definitely more important than those things.

At least you're consistent.

[PMarsico9]

Originally Posted by Fixit

Only one of ours is actually based on performance and facts

Well the only fact that matters is that you haven't won a Super Bowl since Spygate.

How come your team hasn't won a Super Bowl since Spygate? Please enlighten me on the facts, so I can be clear here, since you are obviously fact-based and can confirm that the Pats never cheated from 2000-07.

[Fixit]

Originally Posted by PMarsico9

Well the only fact that matters is that you haven't won a Super Bowl since Spygate.

How come your team hasn't won a Super Bowl since Spygate? Please enlighten me on the facts, so I can be clear here.

Gee, I dunno ... maybe because the other team in both Superbowls they've been in since happened to score a few more points on that day. Winning Super Bowls is hard. I imagine that winning all five that you've played in 11 years is even harder.

You keep bringing up cheating. Please explain how taping signals helps them win games.

I look forward to your deflection.

[PMarsico9]

Originally Posted by Fixit

Gee, I dunno ... maybe because the other team in both Superbowls they've been in since happened to score a few more points on that day. Winning Super Bowls is hard. I imagine that winning all five that you've played in 11 years is even harder.

You keep bringing up cheating. Please explain how taping signals helps them win games.

I look forward to your deflection.

It's largely irrelevant. This is from a respected NFL coach, John Harbaugh:

"The funny thing about that is in the end everything is brought before the light of day when it's all said and done," Harbaugh said. "So what happens is, even the thing in New England, no matter whether those things had any impact on their championships or not, they've got asterisks now. They've been stained."

Did Clemens take steroids after the Sox let him go? A US court found him innocent.

As the Hall of Fame writers pointed out, it did not exonerate them in the court of public opinion.

I would go so far as to wager, in fact, that the only people who don't view their titles as tainted are Patriots fans.

What I think about taping signals is irrelevant. The court of public opinion finds them guilty.

Each SB loss makes it worse, too.

The weak penalties levied on the Patriots by the NFL honestly compounds this, with Bountygate furthering the perception that Kraft is favored by the NFL above other owners.

[Fixit]

Originally Posted by PMarsico9

It's largely irrelevant. This is from a respected NFL coach, John Harbaugh:

Did Clemens take steroids after the Sox let him go? A US court found him innocent.

As the Hall of Fame writers pointed out, it did not exonerate them in the court of public opinion.

I would go so far as to wager, in fact, that the only people who don't view their titles as tainted are Patriots fans.

What I think about taping signals is irrelevant. The court of public opinion finds them guilty.

Each SB loss makes it worse, too.

The weak penalties levied on the Patriots by the NFL honestly compounds this, with Bountygate furthering the perception that Kraft is favored by the NFL above other owners.

You missed some: “My reference was to the perception out there that came as a result of the league’s actions,’’ the statement said. “I could have been more clear that I was referring to those viewpoints.

“I totally believe that the Patriot and Saint coaches and players earned those championships. Bill and Sean [Payton, New Orleans coach] both know that. There has been some distortion about what I said.’’

The public perception is what it is because people are goddamn uninformed idiots.

But I'm not talking about public perception. I've repeatedly asked you point blank about how taping signals helps them win games. And you can't do it.

Here we go: I'm your tape guy. I've been taping signals for the first half (it shows the line of scrimmage, the opposing coaches on the other side of the field, and down and distance). Halftime's coming up. How do we use the tape to win? (All irrelevant, seeing as Matt Walsh testified that he always had the tapes until after the game). But, just for the sake of argument ...

You obviously feel strongly enough about Spygate to keep running off at the mouth. Now, for the love of God, man up and answer a question.

[PMarsico9]

The public perception is what it is because people are goddamn uninformed idiots.

You conveniently forget the part where the only people who aren't "uninformed idiots" regarding Spygate are also Patriots fans.

But I'm not talking about public perception. I've repeatedly asked you point blank about how taping signals helps them win games. And you can't do it.

I have no authority to make such a call. I am not a NFL coach. I am just another "uninformed idiot." As such, I have no idea why my opinion matters as to how the material that was found to be illegal by the NFL would be utilized to cheat.

Here we go: I'm your tape guy. I've been taping signals for the first half (it shows the line of scrimmage, the opposing coaches on the other side of the field, and down and distance). Halftime's coming up. How do we use the tape to win? (All irrelevant, seeing as Matt Walsh testified that he always had the tapes until after the game). But, just for the sake of argument ...

If you are asking me to hypothesize how this would work to be an advantage, it's not really that complicated. You have an intern or some low pay employee with some knowledge of defensive schemes effectively watch the DC's hand signals prior to the play then watch the reactions of each position during a play. As such incredibly detailed and in-depth scientific study dictates that you will know what a defense will do as hand signals come out from the other side.

You obviously feel strongly enough about Spygate to keep running off at the mouth. Now, for the love of God, man up and answer a question.

The only thing I feel 100% certain about is that the Patriots have not won a Super Bowl since Spygate. That is honestly the only fact that matters.

It is either an odd coincidence or some deductive reasoning can sort out that the taping of defensive hand signals did in fact have an impact on the success of your football team.

I also find it fascinating that a Patriots fan has such massive compulsion to defend his team on a NY Jets fan site. The Jets are of no consequence to you. They have the worst roster in the league, one of the worst owner in the league, and will not be threat to your Patriots until your QB retires if by then even.

Why not go on the Dolphins or Bills boards? Both have more to be afraid of. Why troll Jets boards?

If you want, I'll let you admit to me that Mo Lewis did have a large impact on your team's fortunes. And I'll thank you for our Hall of Famer, Curtis Martin.

[The Boston Patriot]

Originally Posted by PMarsico9

NO.



Bradshaw and Montana have one more Super Bowl win each. Montana also has a NCAA National Championship.

Brady has not won a Super Bowl since his team was caught cheating. These are facts. Neither Bradshaw nor Montana EVER played for teams that were suspected of cheating.

Moreover, neither Bradshaw nor Montana were protected by ridiculous QB rules instituted because their owners were in bed with the commissioner at the time. It was MUCH more difficult to pass back then. WR's and QB's are protected like the Hope Diamond now.

Brady/Kraft have fostered ratification of the Tuck rule and the "no hitting a QB below the knees" rules and Welker's mush brain have contributed to the "defenseless receiver" garbage.

It's not even comparable.

Bradshaw was largely carried by a defense but Chuck Noll used to call out Jack Tatum during the great Steelers/Raiders rivalry years as straight up being a criminal for how he used to hit guys.

But did he have the Rooneys go whine to the commissioner about rule changes?

NO.

You conveniently forgot the most important items. They played without a salary cap and free agency. If you don't think that had a huge impact, I've got a great bridge to sell you. "It's not even comparable" is a correct statement.