Jump to content
TheVillain112

TNF: Chiefs vs. Patriots (Opening Day!!!)

Poll  

110 members have voted

  1. 1. Who wins?

    • Patriots
      62
    • Chiefs
      48


Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Pats#1 said:

You aren't providing any proof of these discussions, your just using anecdotal recollections of discussions you say you had.

I've been a member on this forum for years and I'm telling you the majority of fans that argue Brady is GOAT don't just yell rings, or say he's had zero WRs. They talk about his unique mix of everything that goes into the GOAT conversations.

I've been a member here for years as well.  Yet what you or I see people do on this forum has no bearing on what was experienced elsewhere.

The most common argument is the argument that the talking heads give, rings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Revel8 said:

You don't seem to understand what the argument is in the first place.  The argument is not that more probable, questionable, etc Patriots players played than other teams since 2009.  Though that does seem that could be the case. 

Already showed that the rate at which the Patriots play their Probable, Questionable, Doubtful players isn't more than other teams.

1 hour ago, Revel8 said:

The argument is that the Patriots are different than other teams when it comes to lying on their injury reports over the past decade an a half.  They would do things like putting their key impact players...not all players...as questionable for weeks on end.  Then these key players would suddenly play one week (and typically play well) without ever being put on the injury report as probable.  These types of tactics were frequent for the Patriots, but rarely seen from other teams. 

 

Again, I've shown evidence to support my stance on the matter. At this point you are just throwing whatever you want out there because you know what you're saying takes time to disprove.

 

Give me some examples of what you are claiming. Show me anything to support what you are claiming to be so obvious to yourself, yet not obvious enough to the league or other teams to do something about it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Revel8 said:

I've been a member here for years as well.  Yet what you or I see people do on this forum has no bearing on what was experienced elsewhere.

The most common argument is the argument that the talking heads give, rings.

Rings is part of it sure. But they also talk about his stats which are the best or close to the best in most categories, as well as longevity, coming up in the biggest moments, etc.

You're entire argument is based on strawman you've created.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good defense in playoff will take away the big plays.

So it is about how good a QB can be when his favorite plays are taken away.

Obviously, Brady is the best ever in this situation, therefore he is the main reason that Pats could make SB 7 times and won 5 of them.

If Rodgers or Peyton or any QB cold have done the same in such situations, they would have won lot of SB.

There are two kinds of greatness:

greatness when a QB can do what he loves to do.

greatNess when a QB can't do what he loves to do.

The first one is what regular season MVP for.

The second one gives QB the ultimate success. As QB can't do what he loved to do in such situation, there will be no plays that wow you. but it is damn hard to score like 24 or more in such situations.

Edited by ztoa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, ztoa said:

Good defense in playoff will take away the big plays.

So it is about how good a QB can be when his favorite plays are taken away.

Obviously, Brady is the best ever in this situation, therefore he is the main reason that Pats could make SB 7 times and won 5 of them.

If Rodgers or Peyton or any QB cold have done the same in such situations, they would have won lot of SB.

There are two kinds of greatness:

greatness when a QB can do what he loves to do.

greatNess when a QB can't do what he loves to do.

The first one is what regular season MVP for.

The second one gives QB the ultimate success. As QB can't do what he loved to do in such situation, there will be no plays that wow you. but it is damn hard to score like 24 or more in such situations.

...ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Revel8 said:

I've been a member here for years as well.  Yet what you or I see people do on this forum has no bearing on what was experienced elsewhere.

The most common argument is the argument that the talking heads give, rings.

Top 4 in bulk stats and will move up 

Top  3 in efficiency stats. 

Thats the best combination of rankings in bulk and efficiency stats. 

Only guy that high in both. Only unanimous MVP. One of a handful of multi time MVP winners. Will blowout the record for most regular season wins. One of 2 players to break 50 TD's in a season. Multiple time league leader in yards and touchdowns (both categories, one of only s handful to do that). Crushes everyone in playoff wins and stat records. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ztoa said:

Good defense in playoff will take away the big plays.

So it is about how good a QB can be when his favorite plays are taken away.

Obviously, Brady is the best ever in this situation, therefore he is the main reason that Pats could make SB 7 times and won 5 of them.

If Rodgers or Peyton or any QB cold have done the same in such situations, they would have won lot of SB.

There are two kinds of greatness:

greatness when a QB can do what he loves to do.

greatNess when a QB can't do what he loves to do.

The first one is what regular season MVP for.

The second one gives QB the ultimate success. As QB can't do what he loved to do in such situation, there will be no plays that wow you. but it is damn hard to score like 24 or more in such situations.

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JustAnotherFan said:

giphy.gif

Look, "carry the team" QB have routinely failed in playoff since Dan Marino time. They needed everything : great WR, great RB, great O-line, great D (at least play like top defense in playoff), plus, they needed the best luck a QB can expect : against a lousy QB in SB.

That is how they won SB, but their fans never stop pulling same excuse "Dan Marino would have won 5 SB with Don Shula". 

So the chance that "figure out" will happen is no better than Jets wins the next SB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Pats#1 said:
Quote

Already showed that the rate at which the Patriots play their Probable, Questionable, Doubtful players isn't more than other teams.

According to those numbers, the rate at which the Patriots play their Probable and Questionable players is higher.  Though these numbers aren't even relevant to this discussion in the first place.
 

Quote

 

Again, I've shown evidence to support my stance on the matter. At this point you are just throwing whatever you want out there because you know what you're saying takes time to disprove.


 

 

I don't necessarily disagree with your stance on that matter, as it's a separate topic entirely. 

 


 

Quote

 

Give me some examples of what you are claiming. Show me anything to support what you are claiming to be so obvious to yourself, yet not obvious enough to the league or other teams to do something about it.


 

I've done this multiple times already.  Each time you ignore it.  As was said before, when you don't want to see something, you disavow all evidence.  We see this in science often.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Pats#1 said:

Rings is part of it sure. But they also talk about his stats which are the best or close to the best in most categories, as well as longevity, coming up in the biggest moments, etc.

You're entire argument is based on strawman you've created.

That's not the case.  The primary argument I see Patriots fans make is the rings argument.  This argument is easily debunked by even the most basic knowledge of the game of football. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Revel8 said:

That's not the case.  The primary argument I see Patriots fans make is the rings argument.  This argument is easily debunked by even the most basic knowledge of the game of football. 

 

Brady is the #1 reason that Pats won 5. YOu never debunk the argument.

For example, the only way to beat Falcons was to keep their offense off the fields. With Rodgers, Pats D would have allowed 35-40 pts.

The point here is that with Brady, your team had a chance to win; with Rodgers, you team wouldn't have a chance to win even with the mistakes Falcons made.

and no way Rodgers could score 24 pts with Deion Branch, 

Edited by ztoa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pats made to SB 7 times, how would Rodgers play in those 7 games?
First 3 times, don't tell me Rodgers could score more than 20 pts with Deion Branch or Troy Brown.
The last two, we already know he wouldn't have won a single one.
The 2nd one against Giants, he scored 13 pts plus a TD in garbage time against that Giants, don't tell me Rodgers could score more than Brady with injured Gronk.
The 1st one against Giants, please, that line was even worse than the one in 2nd SB, far worse.

So how on earth would Rodgers be able to accomplish anything with Pats ? Brady's line was penetrated within 3 seconds against great pass rushes.

************************************

The common excuse you have is defense (Packers D was not that bad except 2013).

High flying offense with quick exchange sides always leads to bad defense, like Pats defense between 2010 and 2013.

The only reason that Pats D didn't look so bad on total points during that period was because there were few high flying offense in AFCCG, otherwise Pats D would be in 20s during that periods.

Edited by ztoa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another argument is "system" crap:

There are two systems during Brady era, 2007-2013 high flying offense, like the one under Peyton, and the other one, quick strike and taking what is given (2001-2006 and 2014 to present).


The current one can't possibly be BB's system, here are five reasons :
(1) in 2000, Pats offense scored 276 pts, in first 2 games with Bledsoe, Pats offense scored 20 pts, average 10 pts a game. In next 14 games with Brady, Pats offense scored 351 pts, that is 100+ pt more in 16 games.
(2) You almost never see Brady talked to Belichick on sidelines, it is hard to imagine that he was the one who guide Brady but they almost never talked on fields.
(3) a 14 year old can tell that there are huge difference between the system in 2007 and that in 2006. It is utterly stupid to claim that Belichick created a system in 2001 with huge success, then in 2007 switched to another system
(4) Brady needed only 3.5 seconds in pockets against ANY pass rushes, BB never worked hard to get Brady such a line.
(5) No QB before Brady moved chains with Dink n Dunk, which is fundamentally different from WCO.
 

Edited by ztoa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, tonyto36 said:

So you're moving the goalposts?

No they're not.  You're taking your preconceived bias and assuming they are.  

Do you have any proof of this?  As a Pats fan I only remember impact players ever being questionable if they actually ever were.  And in my memory, it more often than not they ended up either not playing that week, were purposefully limited in role/snap count, or missed time the week prior or after.

"They played well" is completely ambiguous, opinion based, and unsupported by any sort of evidence.  I can just as easily (and honestly) say that I don't ever remember ONE incident of a Patriots player being listed as questionable and playing as well as they had in prior or later weeks when healthy.  Sure Gronk might be questionable and then get 80 yards, 2 TD.  That doesn't take into account context or how he scored or how he was played.  Gronk could be obviously limited and still get 2 TDs pretty easily.

Players?  Or Aqib Talib who felt lowballed by the Patriots and replaced by Revis?  The same Talib who literally shot himself on accident.  That is not exactly the kind of credibility you want to build your entire argument on.  One single account from one single former player who felt betrayed by the team, and is by most accounts a complete moron.  

There have been LOTS of Patriots who have been unexpectedly cut or traded and left on bad terms.  Belichick more than anyone is known for being cut throat with cuts/trades.  Lots of players have all the reason in the world to hate Bill and the Patriots who were former players.  Besides Aqib Talib, leg shooting sniper, where are the accounts of players like you say there are?

EDIT:

And just another thing for the whole general "Patriots cheat" bit.  I've heard nothing but how Belichick is borderline maniacal about making sure no funny business goes on and has gone over the top since 2007 because he didn't want any small nonsense to blow up in his face again.  He doesn't even let players gamble on flights anymore playing cards which is common practice for every sports team in America.

No, the goalposts haven't budged.  You haven't even touched them. 

The argument has been, and continues to be that the Patriots are different than other teams when it comes to lying on their injury reports over the past decade an a half.  They would do things like putting their key impact players...not all players...as questionable for weeks on end.  Then these key players would suddenly play one week (and typically play well) without ever being put on the injury report as probable.  These types of tactics were frequent for the Patriots, but rarely seen from other teams. 

This argument was pointed out here last week.

This is why an entire roster of players doesn't apply here.  It was done with key impact players, not irrelevant depth players, to the point that it was virtually impossible to gain any strategic advantage through looking at the Patriots' injury reports. 

We don't see multiple players of former teams declaring that those teams have a special way of reporting injuries.  Yet with the Patriots, we do. 

Another Spygate? Former Patriots say team is cheating injury reports

http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/another-spygate-former-patriots-say-belichick-is-cheating-injury-reports-032014

This should be of no surprise to anyone who has paid close attention for the past 15 years.  It should be common knowledge by now.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, lancerman said:

Top 4 in bulk stats and will move up 

Top  3 in efficiency stats. 

Thats the best combination of rankings in bulk and efficiency stats. 

Only guy that high in both. Only unanimous MVP. One of a handful of multi time MVP winners. Will blowout the record for most regular season wins. One of 2 players to break 50 TD's in a season. Multiple time league leader in yards and touchdowns (both categories, one of only s handful to do that). Crushes everyone in playoff wins and stat records. 

 

There's no doubt that Brady is an all-time great.  At the same time, he tends to get overrated due to the quality of Belichick's rebuild, coaching, and management.  Not to mention recency bias. 

Each NFL era is different for different positions, so judging the greatest of all time is almost impossible.  Especially where astonishing all-time greats like Otto Graham are concerned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×