OCinBuffalo

Brady --- yeah he's way better than Montana. Joe wins Brady loses. There is no contest.

You're not allowed to see that. That was a penalty on the Colts plain and simple.

The irony is magificent - Pats have gone to the luck well one to many times. Sooner or later it comes back to bite u.

I told you they would tell us that we didn't see what we saw, and that we're not allowed to draw conclusions based on what we saw. We are supposed to be agreeing with them no matter what ref calls or lucky bounces happen - or we are retarded(and now pathetic). What is pathetic is that it's so predictable. No matter what actually happens - anyone who doesn't agree with the "Brady/Belechick/Patriots are awsome. Ref calls and luck has nothing to do with it" party doctrine is automatically "pathetic" or "retarded".

And of course Boomer defends the no call on Wayne(which I can see, btw) - but convienently doesn't talk about the one on Clark.

This is par for the course. Like I said you gotta beat the Patriots and the refs.

Oh yeah and that blatant face mask penalty was not called because the skill with which the Patriot player performed it.

BE CAREFUL! If you post that the reason the Patriots win is luck - someone will call you retarded. Worse, when we have evidence like we just saw, they will tell you that you are not allowed to see what u just saw or think what you think - again, unless you want to be called retarded. On a serious note - it's nice to be vindicated by the first drive of the game. However, the Patriots consistently getting most of the key calls and lucky bounces appears to simply be part of their game. As such, any team that wants to beat them, must also be prepared to beat the refs, luck, fate, and whatever else. But anyone still attempting to deny that "The Patriots Get Lucky" is the real retard here. I know that luck is being prepared for opportunity. But please explain how the Patriots prepared for the opportunity to recover that fumble. The fact is they didn't - they simply got lucky, like they always do.

Hey did anybody see how skillfully Maroney fumbled that ball? The Patriots are better than everybody in the league at that play. It all started with Brady - he is much better at playoff hand-off fumbling than Montana ever was. Of course Belichick coaches this team so well that they put this play in last year. Luck, my friends, has nothing to do with the Patriots successes. Nothing at all.

I guess I could have simply posted that! I'm not bashing Randel El. Like I said I met him, he's a great guy, and there is no doubt that he is talented.

Bi-Partisan

HA! Yes I have been watching football for that long. Hehe that just came out. Wow. All fixed now.

I've got some info on Cam. My sister went to Indiana when he was the head coach there. According to her, we should all be cheering right now. Apparently this guy is a nightmare. In fact, the whole Randle El-playing-WR-in-the-pros-but-playing-QB-in-college-and-isn't-that-cool Steelers mantra has nothing to do with Bill Cowher. Rather, Randle El is a natural WR - she knows this because they were friends at school.(Don't bother with the wiseass stuff because I met this guy personally and he is a solid individual) Apparently Cam switched him to QB because he couldn't recruit any actual D1 quality QBs. No one wanted to play for him. So the whole thing came out of necessity, rather than some stroke of genius. She can go on and on about this guy - - so suffice it to say that we should all be happy that he is at Miami. +2 in the win column next year! Also, he was in fact the guy calling the plays for the Chargers last weekend. HAHAHAHAHA - great job keeping the league MVP on the sidelines, there Cam. Here's to Miami - 2-14 in 2007!

Don't forget he was the OC for the Oilers in the Comeback game. If they had found a way to score more than one field goal in the second half, that doesn't happen. Still amazed any team would hire a guy who found a way to blow a 28 point lead. His mom must throw a better one than Forrest Gump's.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, but here's the problem for the Pats - run defense. Last week LT ran all over them. At first this seems like a no-schitt statement but hold on a sec. I have had a chance to watch the game again. I counted 7 times where LT ran for 5+ yards on first down. On 6 out of those seven the Pats d wasn't close to tackling him until he was 3+ yards downfield. What does this mean? The Chargers O line was knocking the snot out of the Pats D. In some cases, I saw a guard pulling across the line, run upfield, and find no one to block because the center and opposite guard/tackle(even the WR) had blown everybody up already. Anybody else notice we didn't' hear Tedi Bruschi's name once? (Well, except for that one time - I suppose that is some sort of league rule - talking about his helmet or something.) Now, for the life of me, I cannot understand why Marty and the gang weren't calling running plays AGAIN on 2nd and 5,4,3 - in some cases 2??? when they had just given a clinic in run blocking the last play. I mean if it's working - and they can't stop it - why change? Seriously, there were some 1st and 10s where everybody in the stadium knew it was gonna be a run play and they still got 6-7 yards. In fact, I only saw 2-3 RUNNING plays where LT was the main reason they went well or where LT had to make something out of nothing. Certainly the passing plays to LT were all him - but they are designed that way. Disclaimer: Except for the running touchdown in the Red zone going left, stopping, and going right - that was ridiculous - LT is the man. Now, I am not saying that Addai/Rhodes = LT. I am saying that if you can give your RB 3+ yards on a play consistently(like the old Broncos O line) it starts not to matter who is carrying the ball(like the string of Broncos running backs who all "automagically" became "star" players). There is no way that the Chargers O Line is better than the Colts. If anything Colts>Chargers. BTW, Manning>Rivers so play action should be deadly. Also, I do not believe that Dungy and his staff are as silly as Marty and his. In fact, I think that this is the key to beating the Pats. You beat them at their own game. They used to be able to demoralize a team by being sucessful calling 5-6 runs in a row. (Of course Brady is the reason why this works - it's his expert handing off skills - much better than Montana's ) But anyway, I think the Charges exposed the Pats D as old and slow last week - they just didn't press home their advantage No way Dungy makes the same mistake - he's too smart and even if he wasn't he just got an object lesson last week from Marty in what not to do.

Trent Dilfer? Cause I know you aren't talking about Kelly.

Assinine? How about addressing my points rather than calling names? With the speed of the defenses now I don't see pure pocket passers like Brady being able to hang on - hence IMO they are done. Maybe you can explain the three picks and 57 passer rating to me - don't forget I am a retard so you will have to speak slowly

Umm, tuck rule, missed field goals, ridiculous ref calls(ones that we never see again), comes to mind -- that wasn't luck? Did u just watch that game? Are u telling me that the Patriots beat the Chargers - or did the Chargers beat themselves and the Patriots just happen to be on the other sideline? How ignorant are we again?

So geting lucky and the other team being basically retarded means that Brady is good, and better than Montana? Now that logic is staggering.

right on - now instead of Brady getting credit for losing the game he's gonna get credit for winning. There is no way in hell Brady is better than Montana. This game proves that clearly. 3 picks? 3 picks in a playoff game = better than Joe Montana? Would the late 80's Dallas or Giants have fumbled away an interception? No fuggin way. The positive for us? This simply means that the Patriots will fall farther next year. From what I've seen they are done. In fact - I think the Colts are gonna smoke them because they finally have a defense.

No doubt about mistakes - RIDICULOUS mistakes - on the Chargers. But those mistakes convienently cover up Brady's horrible game. 57 passer rating - yeah this is the guy who is supposed to be better than Montana? Please.

No it isn't - not when you have 3-4 times the people in a media market. And repeating yourself doesn't make you any more right j/k

No it isn't - not when you have 3-4 times the people in a media market.

(Looks like Gary M beat me to this one:) but I will leave it anyway) Q: how many people does the Super Dome seat? A: 69,000 Q: how many people does the Ralph seat? A: 78,000 We are a smaller area with a larger stadium - in fact, we have a larger stadium than most other teams. We could always do the Jacksonville thing - use tarps to cover the seats in the top corners of the upper deck - but that would be gay IMHO. Or, we could adjust the blackout policy. Which is what Schumer and others are lobbying for with the league.

What if all players paychecks(and bonuses) were determined by one stat - wins and losses? I know this may sound stupid or obvious but bear with me. Let's assume that each player has a contract that he either got as a rookie or established in FA. That contract determines how much he is paid per game -> a game check(this is exactly what happens today, btw). Now, after each game, the NFL sets a rule that the guys on the losing TEAM have to give up(or in reverse - don't get bonused) a set number - say %25 - of their paycheck. Not enough to really hurt the losers, but enough to get their attention. The NFL takes that money, and, after doing whatever else with it, GIVES it to the winning team. The winning team divides the proceeds porportional to the value of the winners existing game checks. Guys that are injured during the game or from before don't count. This does, however, apply to the entire 53 man roster so even if you are one of the inactive guys that week you still get/give based on wins/losses. Make no mistake, we don't have to completely overhaul the FA system. You can keep everything the way it is now, and simply add this. Which means that if a guy just ran for 100 yds in a game and his contract says he gets a bonus, he may lose those bonus dollars if his team loses the game. In fact he may lose those dollars to the very defense he just ran for 100 yds on. Something tells me he will take all his duties - pass blocking, special teams, receiving, just as seriously as when gets the ball handed to him. Ok, why would this help? 1. If you know ahead of time that your Benjamins will stop being yours and start being someone else's the minute you lose the game you are a hell of a lot more likely to choose the team you are willing to sign a FA deal with carefully. In fact, you are prolly gonna stay with a team you know, putting trust in the guys you know, rather than jumping from the frying pan just for an extra $10 mil since the tools on your new team may end up costing you $12 mil. However, if the team you are on is a nightmare, or has drafted young talent to replace you, the coach is a douche, whatever, you still have the benefit of choosing to change your situation. It's up to the player. This will keep teams together, and for the right reason - winning. 2. Based on 1, I think that some of the posters here who are unhappy with the "parity" concept will see a lot more of the old days. Players will be much more likely to want to stick together - because they will do much better in this enviroment, in a group - than on their own. Agents will be forced to take a back seat to what is now, and should have always been, more important - winning. 3. The rewards system is based on positive TEAM play. Right now the major complaints posted above have a root cause. I believe that root cause for these issues is agent/endorsement-sponsored focus on the INDIVIDUAL in a TEAM game. So we eliminate individual stats(20 TD/Season = $4 extra million) as contributing factors to how a guy gets paid and place the emphasis on how he helps his team. All the talk and "intangibles" and stats like Kelly Holcomb's comp. % will mean nothing at all(not that they do now) - the only thing that will matter is a W. 4. It's not the end of the world if one guy has a Romo Moment. Next game it starts all over again, and you can get your money back from another team. 5. Rivalries will go through the roof - if I am a Bills player and the Dolfags took $6000 out of my last paycheck - I am looking to get that back - now! A season sweep of a division rival means you got 25% of 2 of their paychecks this year and there is nothing they can do about it till next year(darn i wish we had it this year) 6. If you are inactive on a sh!tty team - you have all the incentive in the world to get made active, get on the field, and try to win - you are only screwing yourself by not doing what you are supposed to anyway - be the best football player possible. 7. The permanent end of Terrel Owens-type behavior/players. I don't know how many of you know what a code red is but it's easy to understand that if a player was causing a problem on or off the field that directly affected the outcome of games it would not take very long for the other players (outside of the coaching chain of command) to, let's say "have an attitude adjustment session" with the offending player. The mere threat alone - who want's to go on TV and have to explain why you were in the locker room hanging upside down by your jockstrap? - would do the trick. 8. The permanent end of the hated "contract year" concept. Every year, in fact every game, becomes vitally important. Not just the year before a contract is up. It takes the pressure off the player because so what if its the last year - that guy has been thinking in terms of each game for his entire contract. So in summary, this idea(very rough I know) could work because it uses the FA system main strengths - player freedom, owner freedom - to counterbalance the BS. Rather than railing against the FA system - which ain't ever gonna change, btw, this would simply make it better. Maybe I'm nuts but adding a simple, transparent performance indicator, in this case winning games, to someone's job and driving their raises/bonuses off of that indicator has worked great in many industries - why not football?