Buftex Posted August 22, 2005 Posted August 22, 2005 Their philosophy has been obvious- draft players who catch the ball and stay away from anyone who has any rep for dropping balls regardless of their "talent" level. It's a great strategy in the small passing game they play that functions on reliability, and it's also been hugely important to the success of their QB who is hardly a model of accuracy among NFL starters. The difference has been that his WRs go out and make plays on almost any ball, feeding the realization of "team" perfectly. 414384[/snapback] AKC your Brady envy is bleeding through...please it is very unbecoming of Bills fans....
AKC Posted August 22, 2005 Posted August 22, 2005 Again, have fun living in the past. Brady's become one of the most accurate deep passers in the league over the past couple of years. 414776[/snapback] 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.
AKC Posted August 22, 2005 Posted August 22, 2005 AKC your Brady envy is bleeding through...please it is very unbecoming of Bills fans.... 414777[/snapback] I begrudge no Bill's fan their right to lick troll butt, I just find it a bit distasteful for myself. 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?
Hollywood Donahoe Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 That's quite a feat for a guy who throws 4 deep balls all year. Two in Buffalo (to Givens on 3rd and LOOOOOONG and to Patten to bring the ball near the goal line), one to Bethel in the Seattle game, and two to Branch in the AFCC game. That's 5 just off the top of my head, and in only 3 games. So that makes you...wrong. No surprise there. 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. Yep, only Pats homers appreciate Brady's deep passing skills. That must be why, in the 1/31/05 issue of Sports Illustrated, Paul Zimmerman wrote: "Almost lost in the descriptives of Brady's competitiveness and big-game savvy is the fact that he is probably the NFL's most accurate and consistent deep passer." People who have been watching the games acknowledge this fact. You're obviously not among them.
The Jokeman Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 Pats. Hey Romeo quit helping them out. You are in Cleveland now. 414317[/snapback] Davis along with Antonio Bryant were two WRs I felt were better picks when the Bills took Josh Reed. As both offer up better size/speed. With the addition of Davis I wouldn't be surprised if David Terrell gets let go by the Patriots.
Buftex Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 I begrudge no Bill's fan their right to lick troll butt, I just find it a bit distasteful for myself. 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? 414791[/snapback] Well, you said Brady was an inaccurate passer, not that he had a weak arm. To say he is inaccurate is, well...inaccurate. He may not have the strongest arm of any starting QB in the leauge, but is not as weak as Brady bashers on this wall pretend that it is.... I wasn't really trying to "lick troll butt" as you contend...I just see so much hate for the Patriots on this board. I can understand it, to a degree, but I, for one, think they are a terrific team right now, and I am glad that they are in our division. I still subscribe to the theory that if you want to be the best, you have to beat the best...I have a lot of respect for the Patriots. It is far different from the 80's-90's Dolphins that we always had shoved down our throat as being great teams, when we knew, as Bills fans, that our team was worlds better than theirs, anytime it counted. I love the Bills, but I have come to love the game too. When I see a great team, or a great player, I have learned to see them for what they are, not for what they are not, namely Buffalo Bills players. I was only half-joshing you, you bastard! Now you got me all serious...
Hollywood Donahoe Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 I wasn't really trying to "lick troll butt" as you contend...I just see so much hate for the Patriots on this board. I can understand it, to a degree, but I, for one, think they are a terrific team right now.. I don't mind guys hating on the Pats (fans of division rivals should hate on each other's teams), but at least be realistic about it. I hate the Colts, but I admit they have a dynamic offense that will almost surely lead them to the playoffs yet again. Most posters here hate Brady and the Pats but concede that they are legit. Guys like AKC and MadBuffaloDisease can't bring themselves to, instead falling back on excuses and conspiracy theories. It's sad.
AKC Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 Paul Zimmerman wrote: "Almost lost in the descriptives of Brady's competitiveness and big-game savvy is the fact that he is probably the NFL's most accurate and consistent deep passer." People who have been watching the games acknowledge this fact. You're obviously not among them. 414820[/snapback] It's always cute when a neophyte fan of the game of football quotes Paul Zimmerman. When you graduate from a school that no longer includes "blankies" as part of your daily routine come back and spend some time with us. 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. There's no shame in being a short ball pitcher- but it's absolutely laughable that you appear to actually believe this guy's name should be mentioned with any big arm QBs. You're simply daft on the subject if you are being honest, then again spending your life on a Bill's board suggests you have limited credibility in any Pat's community so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
AKC Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 I love the Bills, but I have come to love the game too. When I see a great team, or a great player, I have learned to see them for what they are, not for what they are not, namely Buffalo Bills players. 414916[/snapback] I thought the most telling thing about the Pat's coordinator losses was Crennel's first interview after taking this new job- asked -"you've worked with two Super Bowl winning coaches- what is the most important thing you'll bring from that as a head coach"- Crennel- "Without a doubt it was Bill Parcell's ability to relate to his players and get the most out of them- I'll try to model myself after Bill Parcells". It would be foolish to deny the Pat's run but I can surely believe there are other QBs in the league who could have won titles with the same Pat's team- for instance I believe Drew Brees or Peyton Manning would have won there along with others playing today. I'm happy to acknowledge greatness but I believe Brady's is far more hype based upon a team who plays an offense that fits him and buys only hands wideouts. If Tom Brady plays without the guys who arguably made the Pats a powerhouse- their assistant coaches- I'll be happy to admit it if I'm wrong after we've seen it. Better yet let him take a big contract in Arizona and let's see if he's anything more than yesterday's Kurt Warner ;-)
MadBuffaloDisease Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 Most posters here hate Brady and the Pats but concede that they are legit. Guys like AKC and MadBuffaloDisease can't bring themselves to, instead falling back on excuses and conspiracy theories. It's sad. LMAO! Yes "legit" is having your bacon saved by a rule as ridiculous as the "tuck" rule, that was incorrectly applied BTW, and then getting away with more stuff in the SB that year. And then getting away with mugging the Colts' WR's 14 times (as per ESPN) in a game the Pats won by 3 points. I can give credit where it's due, just as I gave you last year as being legit since the refs didn't rear their ugly heads, so take some solace in that. If I truly "hated" on the Pats, I wouldn't even give them credit for that, or wouldn't mention it, but I did. And again, lost in all the Brady hype is Bledsoe winning in the Pgh playoff game in 2001, the 2002 non-playoff season (because of a bad defense), and the fact that the Pats have won big games without Seymour, Law, and Bruschi. But hey, keep up the Brady worship. I'm sure he's the only QB who will ever win SB's in the future, by 3 points of course.
Hollywood Donahoe Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 LMAO! Yes "legit" is having your bacon saved by a rule... There's something wrong with playing by the rules. And then getting away with mugging the Colts' WR's 14 times (as per ESPN)... ESPN never exaggerates for emphasis. That game was as clean as any playoff game. Refs keep their flags in their pockets come January. ...in a game the Pats won by 3 points. http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20040118_IND@NE 3 != 10 I can give credit where it's due... just as I gave you last year as being legit You were a year late on that. I chalked that up to inevitability rather than you actually developing enough emotional maturity to admit that you were completely wrong about everything. And again, lost in all the Brady hype is Bledsoe winning in the Pgh playoff game in 2001 Official NFL statistics credit Brady with that win, as does everyone but you and your straggling band of Bledsoe apologists. the 2002 non-playoff season (because of a bad defense) Bringing up the fact that Brady has missed the playoffs just once in 4 years and that he has won the Super Bowl in all the others does nothing to discredit him, believe me. and the fact that the Pats have won big games without Seymour, Law, and Bruschi. Funny you should mention that. The Pats have won big games without just about everyone...except Brady. Wonder what that could mean... But hey, keep up the Brady worship. I'm sure he's the only QB who will ever win SB's in the future... Sure seems that way sometimes, doesn't it? And it's killing you.
Hollywood Donahoe Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 It's always cute when a neophyte fan of the game of football quotes Paul Zimmerman. When you graduate from a school that no longer includes "blankies" as part of your daily routine come back and spend some time with us. 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. There's no shame in being a short ball pitcher- but it's absolutely laughable that you appear to actually believe this guy's name should be mentioned with any big arm QBs. You're simply daft on the subject if you are being honest, then again spending your life on a Bill's board suggests you have limited credibility in any Pat's community so I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Translation: I haven't watched the Patriots play in two and a half years, and despite the fact that a published journalist, who actually has watched Brady play, considers Brady an elite deep passer, I'll just go right on believing that he's still a dink-and-dunker, even though the 2004 Patriots were among the league leaders in average length of attempted pass. Aren't you one of the remaining Bledsoe backers? Do you have any credibility left around here?
AKC Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 the 2004 Patriots were among the league leaders in average length of attempted pass. 415069[/snapback] When nap time is over you might sneak a look into the "RAC" seminar.
Hollywood Donahoe Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 When nap time is over you might sneak a look into the "RAC" seminar. 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 are some numbers for you to chew on in the meantime, since I'm assuming that you include the Colts in your oh-so-exclusive list of teams that throw a lot of deep balls: In 2004, Manning threw 495 passes. Remember, this is throw distance, no Yards After Catch. 63 behind the line 225 thrown 1-10 yards 143 thrown 11-20 yards 48 thrown 21-30 yards 14 thrown 31-40 yards 2 thrown 41+ yards So 58% were thrown 10 yards beyond the LoS or less. And 87% were thrown 20 yards beyond the LoS or less. FWIW, here are Brady's numbers : 64 behind the line 172 thrown 1-10 yards 129 thrown 11-20 yards 39 thrown 21-30 yards 21 thrown 31-40 yards 14 thrown 41+ yards 54% thrown 10 yards beyond the LoS or less. 83% were thrown 20 yards beyond the LoS or less. The really interesting thing is throws (not gains) of 31+, Manning had 16 whereas Brady had 35 despite 439 attempts for Brady vs. 495 for Manning. So Brady threw the ball 31+ yards 7.9% of the time whereas Manning did 3.2% of the time . . . As for the "nap time" comment, haven't we been over your personal attacks before? You really should learn to treat others with civility.
Buftex Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 I thought the most telling thing about the Pat's coordinator losses was Crennel's first interview after taking this new job- asked -"you've worked with two Super Bowl winning coaches- what is the most important thing you'll bring from that as a head coach"- Crennel- "Without a doubt it was Bill Parcell's ability to relate to his players and get the most out of them- I'll try to model myself after Bill Parcells". It would be foolish to deny the Pat's run but I can surely believe there are other QBs in the league who could have won titles with the same Pat's team- for instance I believe Drew Brees or Peyton Manning would have won there along with others playing today. I'm happy to acknowledge greatness but I believe Brady's is far more hype based upon a team who plays an offense that fits him and buys only hands wideouts. If Tom Brady plays without the guys who arguably made the Pats a powerhouse- their assistant coaches- I'll be happy to admit it if I'm wrong after we've seen it. Better yet let him take a big contract in Arizona and let's see if he's anything more than yesterday's Kurt Warner ;-) 415057[/snapback] Okay, I see what you are saying, and belive me, I am not trying to kiss any Patsy trolls butt. However to say that Drew Brees or Peyton Manning could have won in the same situations that Brady have been in is really underestimating what the guy did. To me, the last drive of the Pats first Super Bowl victory, coupled with the fact that he has followed it up with solid play every year since, puts Brady on a level above Manning or Brees. Do you realize in that first Super Bowl, Brady was, for the season, much more of an underdog than Losman will be this year? He started that season as the backup QB, was thrust into the starting role, performed well in every situation (yeah, I know, Bledsoe won the AFC championship game for them, you will contend), right up to the ultimate pressure situation, clock winding down, waining moments of the Super Bowl, championship on the line. Anyone who was wathcing, who has watched football over the years, knows that in almost any other instance, the Patriots should have just run the clock out, and played for overtime. Imagine what a legend Losman would be, in Buffalo, if he repeated a similar feat! The fact that Brady has done nothing, except lead his team to two more Super Bowl championships in the three years since, putting in very solid performances along the way, is proof that the guy is the real deal. The Joe Monatana comparisons are not as whacked out as Patriot haters act. When Patriot haters want to argue that they are not that good a team, they say their roster is loaded with nothing but nobodys and role players. Yet, when they want to argue that Brady is overrated, they use the "he's a system QB, on a great team "team" argument. Then the same people will argue that Bellichek is overrated. These arguments are all contradictory. Answer me this, how does a sh*tty QB, on a team made up of sh*t, coached by an overrated turd, manage to win 3 Super Bowls in 4 years? Somebody must be doing something right in Foxboro...or is it all just referees and dumb luck? Just think about it the next time you get your pantys in a wad because somejackass writer disses our 90's Super Bowl participating teams as being "overrated". What does it take to impress people? I would never deny that Manning is a great QB, and likely has a better arm than Brady, but above the shouders (which counts for a lot in my book) Brady is far superior. Manning, with all the offensive talent he is surrounded with every year, is honestly, a stiff in crunch time. Problem for him is, with their Madden Football offense, Manning and the Colts are rarely in clutch situations. They either blow teams off the field, or get blown off it themselves. Honestly, I would not be surprised if Mannings' flashy career ends much the same as Dan Marino's, with no SB championships.
BuffOrange Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 When Patriot haters want to argue that they are not that good a team, they say their roster is loaded with nothing but nobodys and role players. Yet, when they want to argue that Brady is overrated, they use the "he's a system QB, on a great team "team" argument. Then the same people will argue that Bellichek is overrated. These arguments are all contradictory. 415083[/snapback] That is very very true. I've pretty much given up on flaming the Patriots. The last 2 SB's have proved that Bellichek and Brady are just that good. I will still contend until the day I die that Brady was vastly overrated in 2001 and it was the biggest fluke season of any team in the history of organized sports. I truely believe that, but even that's almost fruitless to argue anymore since: A) The last 2 SB's make it *look* like they weren't lucky in '01, even though one has nothing to do with the other. B) Them winning 2 more SB's actually makes it easier to live with. I mean, I think I'd go insane if Pats fans used the "Rings" argument if they only had one and it was tainted. It still sucks, but at least they have 2 legit titles now. C) When the refs screwed us in the '01 OT game and gave them a 1st round bye, it actually ended up hurting Miami a lot. Oh well - as Spurrier would say - my "give a damn" rating for both Miami and Oakland are pretty low.
Hollywood Donahoe Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 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 The relevant portion: "New England also has a very clear idea of what role they want their passing game to serve in their overall offensive philosophy. When the Patriots pass, they want to do one of two things. They either want to use the passing game to augment their running game, or they want to get vertical. The best way to illustrate this is by their percentage of short, medium and deep passes. "The Patriots had the lowest percentage of short passes in the entire league, and there's a clear reason for this. Their short passing game is simply a tool to accomplish three things: 1) To keep defenses from putting eight defenders in the box; 2) To make sure the defense backs don't stay too far off the line to cheat for the deeper passes; and 3) As a checkoff in the event the deep pass isn't open. The Pats also run a very safe short passing game. Brady only had one poor decision on a short pass all year, and that was in the Miami Monday night game. "The Patriots also ranked second in medium pass percentage and fourth in deep pass percentage. I haven't looked at the combined percentages for these metrics for the entire league, but I'd have to think that this probably makes them either No. 1 or a close No. 2."
BRH Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 "New England also has a very clear idea of what role they want their passing game to serve in their overall offensive philosophy. When the Patriots pass, they want to do one of two things. They either want to use the passing game to augment their running game, or they want to get vertical. Their short passing game is simply a tool to accomplish three things: 1) To keep defenses from putting eight defenders in the box; 2) To make sure the defense backs don't stay too far off the line to cheat for the deeper passes; and 3) As a checkoff in the event the deep pass isn't open. 415260[/snapback] Good Christ. Is this not true of EVERY offense? They make it sound like New England invented passing.
SACTOBILLSFAN Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 Yeah, it's a real Dan Pastorini Offense you're running up there. Hell, I can toss 15 yard balls on the numbers when there's no pressure. At the same time I've seen loafer-boy in the instances when the scheme broke down and he faced the same pressure others QBs play with all the time- and he's looked a lot more like Rick Mirer than a solid NFL starter. His WRs bail him out regularly and that's a huge plus for the Pats. BTW-We're all looking forward to seing him without Jabba Da Hut running the offense ;-) 414761[/snapback] I really hate the patsies but you can't argue the championships. I would take Rick Mirer if it meant a championship for the bills.
Hollywood Donahoe Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 Good Christ. Is this not true of EVERY offense? They make it sound like New England invented passing. Yeah, it is a bit of a splooge-fest. But the numbers are there.
Recommended Posts