MattM Posted August 16, 2008 Posted August 16, 2008 http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patrio...ead.php?t=98228 Hope you all find this as interesting as I do. Not rooting for injuries, mind you (I never do), but it looks like one may have already happened to the Golden Child. If that's the case (or if he somehow does get hurt this year), those guys are royally f*cked--have you seen their backup QB play? Why they didn't go for Leftwich or C-Pep I'll never know, but Brady truly is an MVP with that team and without him I'd honestly put them at about .500. Interesting camp as well there in that a bunch of their starters and O-line guys have barely practiced in TC this summer (including Matt Light, Stephen Neal, Mike Vrabel, for ex.). Maybe just some new way to cheat, but even their finds are finding it all a bit odd......
/dev/null Posted August 16, 2008 Posted August 16, 2008 http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patrio...ead.php?t=98228 Hope you all find this as interesting as I do. Not rooting for injuries, mind you (I never do), but it looks like one may have already happened to the Golden Child. If that's the case (or if he somehow does get hurt this year), those guys are royally f*cked If Brady is out for an extended period (4+ weeks) the Bills could sneak away with the AFC East title
Steely Dan Posted August 16, 2008 Posted August 16, 2008 http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patrio...ead.php?t=98228 Hope you all find this as interesting as I do. Not rooting for injuries, mind you (I never do), but it looks like one may have already happened to the Golden Child. If that's the case (or if he somehow does get hurt this year), those guys are royally f*cked--have you seen their backup QB play? Why they didn't go for Leftwich or C-Pep I'll never know, but Brady truly is an MVP with that team and without him I'd honestly put them at about .500. Interesting camp as well there in that a bunch of their starters and O-line guys have barely practiced in TC this summer (including Matt Light, Stephen Neal, Mike Vrabel, for ex.). Maybe just some new way to cheat, but even their finds are finding it all a bit odd...... If this is the same foot from last year that sucks. He may have a lot of problems with it this year. You're right that if he goes down so do the Pets*. I haven't really seen much of their backup but I gotta believe that he's not even close to what Brady can do.
MattM Posted August 16, 2008 Author Posted August 16, 2008 If this is the same foot from last year that sucks. He may have a lot of problems with it this year. You're right that if he goes down so do the Pets*. I haven't really seen much of their backup but I gotta believe that he's not even close to what Brady can do. Cassel and Gutierrez were atrocious last week--absolutely horrible. BB's arrogance won't let him admit that the whole "Matt Leinart's backup" idea is a huge bust and so they've done nothing to go out and get a real backup capable of preserving a winning season for them if Brady goes down. Moronic considering that they're doing things like signing John Lynch for the price they could have gotten a backup left Leftwich, who'd be capable of winning 12 games with that team if Tommy Boy went down.....
AlbanyBill Posted August 16, 2008 Posted August 16, 2008 Not rooting for injuries, mind you (I never do) For Pats* I do...they are anti-christ of all that is good with football
Beerball Posted August 16, 2008 Posted August 16, 2008 This is an impossibility. Earlier this week the pats* injury report listed brady as questionable...shoulder. There was no mention of a foot. The pats* do not mess with the NFL injury report, please check your sources.
Steely Dan Posted August 17, 2008 Posted August 17, 2008 Cassel and Gutierrez were atrocious last week--absolutely horrible. BB's arrogance won't let him admit that the whole "Matt Leinart's backup" idea is a huge bust and so they've done nothing to go out and get a real backup capable of preserving a winning season for them if Brady goes down. Moronic considering that they're doing things like signing John Lynch for the price they could have gotten a backup left Leftwich, who'd be capable of winning 12 games with that team if Tommy Boy went down..... If Brady does go down it will be fun to watch that team implode. Maybe we'll get two first rounders for Losman from them.
MattM Posted August 17, 2008 Author Posted August 17, 2008 For Pats* I do...they are anti-christ of all that is good with football Vince Wilfork might be the one guy I'd root for an injury for. Last season that POS was the dirtiest player in football, hands down.....
WellDressed Posted August 17, 2008 Posted August 17, 2008 If Brady is out for an extended period (4+ weeks) the Bills could sneak away with the AFC East title Yup, and a brand new signed copy of "Winter Prey"
biglukes Posted August 17, 2008 Posted August 17, 2008 For Pats* I do...they are anti-christ of all that is good with the world fixed
MikeInABQ Posted August 17, 2008 Posted August 17, 2008 I want Brady to play against the Bills, at least, both times we play them this season. Two reasons: 1. It's only a fair test of the Bills "improvements" if we play the same guy who beat the crap out of us the last six years or so, and 2. I want the BILLS to be the ones to hurt him.
krazykat Posted August 17, 2008 Posted August 17, 2008 http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patrio...ead.php?t=98228 Hope you all find this as interesting as I do. Not rooting for injuries, mind you (I never do), but it looks like one may have already happened to the Golden Child. If that's the case (or if he somehow does get hurt this year), those guys are royally f*cked--have you seen their backup QB play? Why they didn't go for Leftwich or C-Pep I'll never know, but Brady truly is an MVP with that team and without him I'd honestly put them at about .500. Interesting camp as well there in that a bunch of their starters and O-line guys have barely practiced in TC this summer (including Matt Light, Stephen Neal, Mike Vrabel, for ex.). Maybe just some new way to cheat, but even their finds are finding it all a bit odd...... I don't know about a .500 team, but let's face it, Belichick's never done anything without Brady. I'd say a 10-6 or 11-5 team. I for one would like to see the Pats without Brady for a season. Maroney isn't that good and can't carry the team. Lynch is already better than he is.
devldog131 Posted August 17, 2008 Posted August 17, 2008 This is an impossibility. Earlier this week the pats* injury report listed brady as questionable...shoulder. There was no mention of a foot. The pats* do not mess with the NFL injury report, please check your sources. Per the Sirius 2 minute drill last night, Brady is staying behind in NE due to a foot injury. If the Pats* don't mess around with the injury report, why has Brady been questionable for every game for the last two seasons at least, due to the supposed shoulder.
MattM Posted August 17, 2008 Author Posted August 17, 2008 Per the Sirius 2 minute drill last night, Brady is staying behind in NE due to a foot injury. If the Pats* don't mess around with the injury report, why has Brady been questionable for every game for the last two seasons at least, due to the supposed shoulder. Because they're cheating dirtbags (but what else is new?) KrazyKat---I might agree with the 10-6 or 11-5 if they had a decent backup, but the guys they've got absolutely suck. Just watch tonight in Brady's absence. If you can't get Randy and Welker the ball, what good are they, and with their banged up o-line (Light and Neal have yet to practice this summer, for ex.) plus much more 8 in the box, just watch Maroney and Jordan try to get out of the backfield. Then flip around and see the result on their aging D of actually having to spend more time on the field that would be the result of decreased offensive production and you'd see those guys sucking wind by halftime. IMHO, it would be hysterical how quickly downhill that team would go if something happened to Tommy Boy (or Randy, for that matter) for an extended period.
krazykat Posted August 17, 2008 Posted August 17, 2008 Because they're cheating dirtbags (but what else is new?) KrazyKat---I might agree with the 10-6 or 11-5 if they had a decent backup, but the guys they've got absolutely suck. Just watch tonight in Brady's absence. If you can't get Randy and Welker the ball, what good are they, and with their banged up o-line (Light and Neal have yet to practice this summer, for ex.) plus much more 8 in the box, just watch Maroney and Jordan try to get out of the backfield. Then flip around and see the result on their aging D of actually having to spend more time on the field that would be the result of decreased offensive production and you'd see those guys sucking wind by halftime. IMHO, it would be hysterical how quickly downhill that team would go if something happened to Tommy Boy (or Randy, for that matter) for an extended period. Well, I'm talking about with this schedule this year. They still have a tough D even if it's not a top 5 D and they have good WRs, TE, and adequate while not notable RBs. I still see them going 4-2 in the division and not having too much trouble with the West in either conference. 6-4 or 7-3 otherwise wouldn't be hard. They would probably lose to Indy and San Diego, but after that they just don't have too many tough teams on the schedule. I wouldn't underrate their D though.
Lori Posted August 17, 2008 Posted August 17, 2008 Per the Sirius 2 minute drill last night, Brady is staying behind in NE due to a foot injury. If the Pats* don't mess around with the injury report, why has Brady been questionable for every game for the last two seasons at least, due to the supposed shoulder. Beerball's sarcasm is well known around here ... but apparently not as much as I thought ...
Fan in Chicago Posted August 17, 2008 Posted August 17, 2008 Aren't Pats* the team that can plug in a nobody in place of a somebody and not miss a beat ?
devldog131 Posted August 17, 2008 Posted August 17, 2008 Well, I'm talking about with this schedule this year. They still have a tough D even if it's not a top 5 D and they have good WRs, TE, and adequate while not notable RBs. I still see them going 4-2 in the division and not having too much trouble with the West in either conference. 6-4 or 7-3 otherwise wouldn't be hard. They would probably lose to Indy and San Diego, but after that they just don't have too many tough teams on the schedule. I wouldn't underrate their D though. I have to agree with MattM. The Pats* D is aged, almost to the point of antique. If they have to spend even 35 minutes on the field in a game, they will be sucking wind, reaching for their walkers and struggling to even keep up with a young, healthy team. I'd love to see an exhausted Seau or Bruschi try to man up and tackle beast mode 1-on-1 toward the end of a game, they might break a hip. I hope they bring their "help, I've fallen, and I can't get up" buttons!
krazykat Posted August 17, 2008 Posted August 17, 2008 Aren't Pats* the team that can plug in a nobody in place of a somebody and not miss a beat ? That's what they say, but look at BB's career before and after Brady. Hell, they started off 0-2 under Bledsoe before going 11-3 with Brady. The year before that with basically the same exact team the Pats were 5-11. Pre Brady BB is 41-57. Post Brady BB is 86-24.
Tim Anderson's Lunch Pail Posted August 17, 2008 Posted August 17, 2008 Cassel and Gutierrez were atrocious last week--absolutely horrible. BB's arrogance won't let him admit that the whole "Matt Leinart's backup" idea is a huge bust and so they've done nothing to go out and get a real backup capable of preserving a winning season for them if Brady goes down. Moronic considering that they're doing things like signing John Lynch for the price they could have gotten a backup left Leftwich, who'd be capable of winning 12 games with that team if Tommy Boy went down..... They spent a 3rd round pick on Kevin O'Connell.
Recommended Posts