leonbus23

Con:

Definitely an epic prediction. Never would have guessed it. It's kind of like predicting Trump to win the election in March of '16. Peterman the lesser of evils. The sad part, like that with the election, is that we now have to actually watch Peterman start at QB.

If he gets on the Brady, Gronk, Edelman roid plan.

Best comeback since Reich!

Coaches tomorrow:

Still think its amazing that we had Watkins, Woods, Goodwin, and Hogan on the same team while Spiller and Jackson were still good. EJ lasted 4 games as starter.

That's what I'm asking. Allen vs. Bengal's starting D compared to Peterman vs. Bengals starting D. Apples to Apples. Would Peterman have played worse, better, or the same?

I wish McDermott would have played Peterman in the second quarter. Then, we'd have a better comparison between qb's. The question is would Peterman have played better than Allen against the Bengals starting D?

The Standard.

Dline having difficulties too.

This has been pretty awful. Is this real? Any silver linings?

Change the question of the thread and rephrase your paragraph a bit. Then, maybe people wont be so hostile. Be a little clearer about what you're asking.

Bodine guarding:

Even magic won't help this OL.

It may destroy the game, but according to the rule, if a player lowers his head to initiate contact, it is irrelevant if the shoulder makes contact. So, when we discuss the demise of the league, let's be precise about the rule. No lowering of the head.

Brady to Hogan for the TD. I hate Brady.

Great point.

I love this video! Thanks for posting!

True. But it also requires men who can use intelligence to employ the best possible strategy. It's a combined effort. Violent people mixed with those who have self control and calculation in battle.

Exactly correct.

Khari Lee made that great catch from Allen. Does he stay if he shows more flashes?

Who wins this fight?

So far, I agree. Perhaps the next game will solidify this. I hope to see a clear cut starter by the end of preseason. I really hope it's Allen!!

This is nonsense. Number one is called the "false equivalence fallacy". Number two is a double dose of logical fallacies, the sweeping generalization fallacy and the appeal to popularity fallacy. Oh, and capitalizing words doesn't make an argument coherent or profound.

I totally agree about the refs, especially seeing the Pats* benefit from referees subjective calls (PI, Holding, etc.) But as I mentioned to a poster last night, hopefully, the helmet rule will alter how players tackle; whereas, the catch rule is absolutely related to referee perception (subjectivity). In other words, the catching situation does not involve altering how players play and is at the discretion of officials. The aim of the helmet rule is to alter how players play. Let's see how it develops.