Pats pick up Andre' Davis

[Ramius]

Adding to above:

 

Whats even funnier about the poll is if you look at the voting map...manning wins by a landslide everywhere save mass, NH, and Maine...and colorado for some odd reason...

[Hollywood Donahoe]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/index

Interesting poll on the bottom right...

 

"which QB would you choose when building a franchise from scratch?"

1. Peyton Manning

2. Tom Brady

 

After 28,000 plus votes, its 70% manning, 30% homo [sic]

Indeed, ESPN polls are the ultimate authority on player quality.

 

The matter has been settled. Brady sucks.

[Thurman's Helmet]

Doomed?

[AKC]

This is a "pass in air" statistic.  I remember hearing it during the playoffs, I believe, and I'm presently trying to dig it up in print form.

 

Found it.

 

http://msn.foxsports.com/fantasy/story/3763778

 

415080[/snapback]

 

 

You're still in here choking on your "Long Ball Brady" fantasy?

 

The problem you face is that many of us actually watch football games. Additionally we value others who come here to honestly discuss their views and opinions supported with references.

 

You on the other hand have a different agenda, for instance you represent above some "pass in the air" fantasy in one post, but when your "evidence" is provided it directly contradicts you- nowhere in the Fox article does it suggest the stats are based on "passes in the air". But then, why would I be looking for honesty or accuracy from someone who has designated little skeeter "Long Ball Brady"?

 

As entertaining as your lack of knowledge- and honesty- are, I believe I preferred tha days of well-mannered trolls who offered positive and accurate contributions to our football conversations here.

 

I don't doubt that you've been in a position to call him "Long Ball Brady" in some setting of his choosing, but it surely wasn't on a football field :-0

[Hollywood Donahoe]

You're still in here choking on your "Long Ball Brady" fantasy?

Only it isn't a fantasy. The numbers are right there. I posted them. Keep on ignoring them if you wish, but that won't make them go away.

 

The truth has been stated. Acknowledge it or don't.

[MadBuffaloDisease]

mbd and akc have less eye sight then stevie wonder.first of all,the tuck rule was called correctly BUT never should have been brought up in the first place because of the roughing thev passer call that should have been called on woodson after he b_i_t_c_h slapped brady on the head that play--pats got SCREWED out of an extra 15 yards and a auto first down(nice try though)..

Fine then (and the tuck rule was called incorrectly, BTW). Let's call that penalty, but let's fast-forward to the Rams SB and ALSO call the penalty on Vrabel for b_i_t_c_h slapping Warner on the head on that INT returned for a TD, shall we? So not only do the Pats NOT get the 7 for the TD, the Rams get 15 to move them beyond midfield, and probably get them at least a FG out of that (or maybe even not). Think the game still ends with the Pats winning, seeing as how that was the turning point?

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

Nice try fellas, attempting to get a BILLS fan on a BILLS message board to buy-into your beliefs that Tom Brady is god. Frankly I think Jehovah's Witnesses would be more successful in converting me to THEIR religion, but at least you gave it the college try and I have to give you an "E" for effort.

 

Like I said, Brady is a good QB (and the Pats have been a good team), but Brady has been in a great, if not lucky, situation, and one that more than a few starting QB's in the NFL would have had success in over the past 4 years (not necessarily Bledsoe, outside of 2001 that is). My position on Brady didn't come from one particular play or game, but a whole body of evidence that tells me he's more of a cog in the machine than the machine itself. But his story isn't close to being over. What he does in the next year, and the next 6-7 years, will determine whether he's truly a HOF'er like you're claiming, or a guy in the right place at the right time for a decent-sized stretch of time. So we'll see who the "Nostradumbass" truly is.

[The Jokeman]

Fine then (and the tuck rule was called incorrectly, BTW).  Let's call that penalty, but let's fast-forward to the Rams SB and ALSO call the penalty on Vrabel for b_i_t_c_h slapping Warner on the head on that INT returned for a TD, shall we?  So not only do the Pats NOT get the 7 for the TD, the Rams get 15 to move them beyond midfield, and probably get them at least a FG out of that (or maybe even not).  Think the game still ends with the Pats winning, seeing as how that was the turning point?

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

Nice try fellas, attempting to get a BILLS fan on a BILLS message board to buy-into your beliefs that Tom Brady is god.  Frankly I think Jehovah's Witnesses would be more successful in converting me to THEIR religion, but at least you gave it the college try and I have to give you an "E" for effort. 

 

Like I said, Brady is a good QB (and the Pats have been a good team), but Brady has been in a great, if not lucky, situation, and one that more than a few starting QB's in the NFL would have had success in over the past 4 years (not necessarily Bledsoe, outside of 2001 that is).  My position on Brady didn't come from one particular play or game, but a whole body of evidence that tells me he's more of a cog in the machine than the machine itself.  But his story isn't close to being over.  What he does in the next year, and the next 6-7 years, will determine whether he's truly a HOF'er like you're claiming, or a guy in the right place at the right time for a decent-sized stretch of time.  So we'll see who the "Nostradumbass" truly is.

416084[/snapback]

What Brady and the vote does prove is that you don't need to have a "franchise" QB to win a Super Bowl or even three. As I have alsways felt a QB is only as good as the talent you surround him with. The talent around him also supports the old adage that Defense wins championships. . That said I do give Brady credit as he does one thing that helps him win is he has pretty good ball security and doesn't throw many INTs or lose many fumbles.

[MadBuffaloDisease]

What Brady and the vote does prove is that you don't need to have a "franchise" QB to win a Super Bowl or even three. As I have alsways felt a QB is only as good as the talent you surround him with. The talent around him also supports the old adage that Defense wins championships. . That said I do give Brady credit as he does one thing that helps him win is he has pretty good ball security and doesn't throw many INTs or lose many fumbles.

Fine, I can live with that. That doesn't make him a great QB, or even the best QB in the NFL right now. And teams that have won SB's have won with nobodies at QB, but they all have one thing in common: great defenses.

[AKC]

Only it isn't a fantasy.  The numbers are right there.  I posted them.  Keep on ignoring them if you wish, but that won't make them go away.

 

The truth has been stated.  Acknowledge it or don't.

416075[/snapback]

 

Since you insist on being exposed one more time as dishonest, here's your statement:

 

"This is a "pass in air" statistic. I remember hearing it during the playoffs, I believe, and I'm presently trying to dig it up in print form."

 

Here's the link you offered as proof:

 

http://msn.foxsports.com/fantasy/story/3763778

 

I'd wait for you to show me any reference in the article you linked that identifies the passing assumptions as "pass in the air", but then I'd be waiting a long time since there is not one reference that corroborates your original falsehood.

[Hollywood Donahoe]

I'd wait for you to show me any reference in the article you linked that identifies the passing assumptions as "pass in the air"...

"The Patriots also ranked second in medium pass percentage and fourth in deep pass percentage."

 

Do you know of another definition for "deep pass" other than a pass that travels, in the air, over a great distance?

 

The author's use of the words "short," "medium" and "deep" to describe passes very obviously refers to the pass in air, as the wording makes little sense when referring the length of a completed pass+RAC (no on would refer to a 5 yard slant taken 80 yards for a TD as a "deep pass").

 

Understand yet?

[AKC]

"The Patriots also ranked second in medium pass percentage and fourth in deep pass percentage."

 

Do you know of another definition for "deep pass" other than a pass that travels, in the air, over a great distance?

 

 

416140[/snapback]

 

I understand it perfectly Pinocchio- you make claims that are nothing but BS and then try to hide it instead of owning up to the fact that the article NEVER limits it's assumptions to balls in the air.

 

That RAC class I suggested for your earlier has just become mandatory.

[Hollywood Donahoe]

I understand it perfectly Pinocchio- you make claims that are nothing but BS and then try to hide it instead of owning up to the fact that the article NEVER limits it's assumptions to balls in the air.

The article mentions "deep balls," which are obviously balls that travel far through the air.

 

I don't know why you object to this definition of the term, since you yourself define "deep" and "deep balls" in the same way:

 

That's quite a feat for a guy who throws 4 deep balls all year.

 

There's a long list of deep passers in the NFL- you've lost any ability to see through your homer goggles if you include Brady in it.

 

Why don't you follow your worship of the troll with some support for his laughable contention that Brady is now a great deep threat passers in the league?

 

Almost anyone at the level we're talking about can give a team 5 or 6 long balls a season- but that in no way indicates a "deep ball" threat.

 

If Brady were in a long ball offense he'd last for a half season before his noodle was fully moistened.

 

You are talking about passes that traveled far in the air in each of these posts. You used multiple terms - "deep balls," "long balls" - but never felt the need to indicate that you were talking about "passes in air." Neither did Zimmerman in writing his article. Neither did the author of the FoxSports piece on Brady's deep passing abilities. In short:

 

YOU'RE ALL USING THE SAME TERMS.

 

Get it yet?

 

The facts have been established. Brady throws many deep balls per season, more than the vast majority of other NFL QBs. It's all there in writing.

[Hollywood Donahoe]

It seems no one throws more endzone picks in critical times (championship games and Super Bowls) than Brady.  If his defense didn't save him, he'd be toast by now.

You repeat this theme like a mantra, so I'm going to call you on it.

 

Brady has thrown 3 career post-season INTs. The first was in the Snow Bowl against the Raiders, and was not in the end zone.

 

The second was against Indianapolis in the '03-'04 playoffs. I'll give you that the defense bailed him out on that one, but keep in mind, Christian Fauria did drop 2 TD passes in that game. Doesn't absolve Brady of blame, but kind of puts things in perspective.

 

The third was also in the end zone, against Carolina in Super Bowl XXXVIII. I would like you to explain how the defense bailed Brady out of that one, given that:

 

- the defense gave up a LOOOOOOONG go-ahead TD 3 plays after the INT.

- Brady immediately put the Pats back up with a flawless TD drive that ended with a TD pass.

- the defense quickly surrendered the lead, allowing a long TD drive to tie the game.

- Brady led the Pats into FG range on another great drive with time running out.

 

I've posted this sequence of events in response to one of you now-standard "Brady's defense bails him out of his EZ INTs" posts, but you didn't reply. Not surprising.

 

So two EZ INTs in 9 playoff games is a lot? Even though he bailed himself out of one of them?

 

Illogical, to say the least.

[The Jokeman]

You repeat this theme like a mantra, so I'm going to call you on it.

 

Brady has thrown 3 career post-season INTs.  The first was in the Snow Bowl against the Raiders, and was not in the end zone.

 

The second was against Indianapolis in the '03-'04 playoffs.  I'll give you that the defense bailed him out on that one, but keep in mind, Christian Fauria did drop 2 TD passes in that game.  Doesn't absolve Brady of blame, but kind of puts things in perspective.

 

The third was also in the end zone, against Carolina in Super Bowl XXXVIII.  I would like you to explain how the defense bailed Brady out of that one, given that:

 

- the defense gave up a LOOOOOOONG go-ahead TD 3 plays after the INT.

- Brady immediately put the Pats back up with a flawless TD drive that ended with a TD pass.

- the defense quickly surrendered the lead, allowing a long TD drive to tie the game.

- Brady led the Pats into FG range on another great drive with time running out.

 

I've posted this sequence of events in response to one of you now-standard "Brady's defense bails him out of his EZ INTs" posts, but you didn't reply.  Not surprising.

 

So two EZ INTs in 9 playoff games is a lot?  Even though he bailed himself out of one of them?

 

Illogical, to say the least.

416163[/snapback]

 

 

That reminds me, another thing Brady is very good at (that didn't originally give him credit for) is his abilty to run the two minute drill very wel most notably his two drives in the Rams and Panthers Super Bowls. Infact as a Bills fan it angers me still to this day that Jim Kelly didn't run more play before the infamous "Wide Right" kick when there was 11 seconds left on the clock. I detest Brady as much as the next Bills fan but have to give the guy credit when he deserves it but as stated earlier in the thread still think his success is not soley based on him.

[OJ's Glove]

That reminds me, another thing Brady is exceptional at (that didn't originally give him credit for) is his abilty to run the two minute drill very well. I detest Brady as much as the next Bills fan but have to give the guy credit when he deserves it but as stated earlier in the thread still think his success is not soley based on him.

416172[/snapback]

 

 

No quarterback's success is "solely based on him", nor is anyone making that argument. Again, to pretend that a change in QB's in 2001 had nothing to do with the turnaround from losing to winning is absurd.

 

Anyone interested in looking at the Patriots record with Brady starting and the defense giving up 20 or more points? I'll bet it's damned good. Nearly all championship teams have good defenses, but the question is will your QB be good enough to compensate for the times the defense isn't playing it's best?

 

Super Bowl XXXVIII is the highest-profile example of what I'm talking about.

[Hollywood Donahoe]

Anyone interested in looking at the Patriots record with Brady starting and the defense giving up 20 or more points?

Actually, someone over at the KFFL boards did just that. Brady was first in the league, if I recall.

[OJ's Glove]

You repeat this theme like a mantra, so I'm going to call you on it.

 

So two EZ INTs in 9 playoff games is a lot?  Even though he bailed himself out of one of them?

 

Illogical, to say the least.

416163[/snapback]

 

Everyone forgets the dumb things that "legendary" players do, and never seem to let those things influence their arguments. And the further back in the past, the worse it is. "Illogical" is the tamest thing to call it.

 

Like the fact that Montana threw three INT's in the 81 NFCCG, and SF's defense still needed to come up big and stop the Cowboys after "The Catch". But nobody remembers that stuff - they just remember Montana to Clark in the back of the endzone and how great Montana was.

 

Thinking about stuff like that makes me chuckle when I hear people talk about Brady throwing bad INT's and having his defense bail him out, when the numbers don't even support it.

 

"He's just in a great situation, etc." He's a HUGE reason why the "situation" is so great. Or should we pretend Montana was just "lucky" to have Bill Walsh, Jerry Rice and the premier front office and ownership in football?

[Hollywood Donahoe]

Couldn't have said it any better myself, OJ's Glove. In fact, I've been trying to. Couldn't get it as succinct as that.

[Ghost of BiB]

Pats.

 

Hey Romeo quit helping them out. You are in Cleveland now.

414317[/snapback]

 

Look what you started.

 

But I know you have no shame.

[dave mcbride]

I understand it perfectly Pinocchio- you make claims that are nothing but BS and then try to hide it instead of owning up to the fact that the article NEVER limits it's assumptions to balls in the air.

 

That RAC class I suggested for your earlier has just become mandatory.

416148[/snapback]

 

as a fanatical bills fan who has been subjected to a merciless barrage of pats games the past couple of years, may i humbly suggest that you really don't know what you're talking about. brady, unfortunately, has become one of the better deep passers in the league (he wasn't always). he was a mediocre deep thrower at best in 01, became a good bit better in 02, a lot better in 03, and an extremely good one in 04 despite not having a torry holt/isaac bruce-like tandem to throw to (although branch and givens are excellent players despite their not receiving much hype). his ypa this past season was 7.8, a full yard better than his career best. weis had him go deep in pretty much every game as well -- it has become a stock part of the offense. the fun thing (or painful thing, depending upon your perspective) was watching them play "small ball" for a quarter and then completely shifting gears the next one and going for the home run. if you're a football fan, it was truly a thing of beauty. we'll see what happens without weis. however, since i think brady is hands down the best qb in the league, my guess is that the success will continue. i hope not, of course.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/stats?playerId=2330

 

ne's offense has gone from 19 (01) to 22 (02) to 18 (03) to 7 (04). some of it's corey dillon, but more of it is tom brady.