This sucks. As a Pats fan, I hope Tedy can come back in '06 and help us go for a fourth-straight title. As a fan of Tedy Bruschi, though...I just hope he doesn't get himself killed.
"He is the most overrated piece of crap in the league. He bitched and whined after he got his ass beaten in New England last year, so the NFL changed the rules. Then he got his ass beaten in New England again. Every year he's the top MVP candidate. Every year he's supposed to be the best. Every year he's going to carry the Colts to the Super Bowl. And every single year he goes to New England and gets his ass beaten. And his brother's a whiny little bitch." -A friend of mine, on Peyton Manning
This news sucks. Tedy's been one of the faces of the Pats, one of those who balance with class the rantings of a TO or Freddie Mitchell, and while he obviously needs the rest/time off it's also a shame he won't be out on the field.
We're the middle children of history...no purpose or place. We have no Great War, no Great Depression. Our great war, our defining crucible, is a spiritual war.
So, I keep seeing these stupid commercials for "Quite Frankly" on ESPN about the Patriots that end with, "Oh yeah... and they have Tom Brady. Quite frankly, that's all you need."
This drives me fucking nuts. The Pats have one of the greatest defensive teams of all time. Without Tedy Bruschi and company, there *are* no Patriots. While Brady has certainly proven time and again that he can get the job done, I cannot stand how much of the credit his unduly given for this team.
Urgh.
-Jag
And as mad as I still am for the Pats beating my Cats, I really hope Tedy makes a full recovery and comes back to kick at least a few mores years worth of ass.
Yes, but you're over-thinking the show. There is just no reason for it to exist. Mostly because the opinion espoused in the ad makes raquet_girl (of "Sharapova is great!" incessant The Pulse promo fame) look profound.
You wanted the best, you got... Out of Context Quote of the Week.
"I'll understand if you all just threw up in your mouths reading that..." (Reverend J Shaft)
Originally posted by JaguarAllow me to quickly derail this thread:
So, I keep seeing these stupid commercials for "Quite Frankly" on ESPN about the Patriots that end with, "Oh yeah... and they have Tom Brady. Quite frankly, that's all you need."
This drives me fucking nuts. The Pats have one of the greatest defensive teams of all time. Without Tedy Bruschi and company, there *are* no Patriots. While Brady has certainly proven time and again that he can get the job done, I cannot stand how much of the credit his unduly given for this team.
Urgh.
Truthfully, up until this year I though he didn't get enough credit for the Pats success. The past few years, you always heard more hype about Manning, McNab, and Vick. Between the 3 of those QB's there is only 1 Super Bowl appearance. If anything, the Pats success isn't really dependant on one player. It's a total team effort.
It's like I've heard said. There are 3 parts to football. Offense, Defense, and Special Teams. Let's say Offense and Defense each decide 40% of the game, and Special Teams decides 20%. Well, the QB really doesn't have any effect on the running game (unless he's Michael Vick, or in a way, if he's really bad), so that means that he has no effect on half of the offense. This means that at most a QB can affect 20% of a game, which, by itself, is obviously not enough to get a win. So no QB should be praised (or penalized, for that matter) by how many wins his team has. Or let's put it another way. How many rings would Manning, McNabb, Culpepper (I'm not including Vick because he can't throw) have if they were the QB of New England?
Check out how The-W.Com's WWE Fantasy League is going at smartass.atspace.com. Thanks to SOK for the hosting! Last updated July 18th, 2005
Originally posted by Mr. BoffoIt's like I've heard said. There are 3 parts to football. Offense, Defense, and Special Teams. Let's say Offense and Defense each decide 40% of the game, and Special Teams decides 20%. Well, the QB really doesn't have any effect on the running game (unless he's Michael Vick, or in a way, if he's really bad), so that means that he has no effect on half of the offense. This means that at most a QB can affect 20% of a game, which, by itself, is obviously not enough to get a win. So no QB should be praised (or penalized, for that matter) by how many wins his team has. Or let's put it another way. How many rings would Manning, McNabb, Culpepper (I'm not including Vick because he can't throw) have if they were the QB of New England?
Except a good QB can have an effect on the running game the same way a bad QB can. A defense can't stack up against the run when they have to always be ready for a good QB to strike the same way a defense playing a bad QB can load up the box because the opposing QB is not a threat.
Also, the offense, defense and special teams all work together to gain field position, rest and so on. A good offense gives their defense rest while controlling the ball and also doesn't hand the ball to the opposing offense in good field position. It's {edit: NOT} like the three facets of the game are completely independent of each other.
Originally posted by Mr. BoffoIt's like I've heard said. There are 3 parts to football. Offense, Defense, and Special Teams. Let's say Offense and Defense each decide 40% of the game, and Special Teams decides 20%. Well, the QB really doesn't have any effect on the running game (unless he's Michael Vick, or in a way, if he's really bad), so that means that he has no effect on half of the offense. This means that at most a QB can affect 20% of a game, which, by itself, is obviously not enough to get a win. So no QB should be praised (or penalized, for that matter) by how many wins his team has. Or let's put it another way. How many rings would Manning, McNabb, Culpepper (I'm not including Vick because he can't throw) have if they were the QB of New England?
The Patriot Super Bowls have to be looked at through different prisms. And this is leaving out whatever percentages coaching and weather gets: The first was about 50% defense, 35% special teams and 15% offense. Brady was a second year back-up QB, and his job was not to screw it up. He came through with big drives for them, but it was primarily the defense and special teams making big plays, especially in the AFC Title Game against Pittsburgh. They were a team that wanted to play the game in the teens, and were successful doing it. The second was more of a 45% defense, 40% offense, 15% special teams (the punter sucked). They could shut teams down or they could win shoot-outs. They could win a 10-6 game or a 38-34 game. The third flipped it to 45% offense, 35% defense, 20% special teams (punting didn't suck). Though they still had a very good defense, the defense was vulnerable deep along the sidelines due to the cornerback injuries. The offense was improved as they had a reliable running game that gave Brady the ability to play action, and a receiving corp that allowed him to throw deep. They could keep teams down at times (Jets, Ravens, Colts in playoffs), but they were more likely to beat a team 31-20.
As for the McNabb/Culpepper/Manning question: McNabb would have a ring. Culpepper wouldn't, but that is more fumbling QB playing in cold weather than anything else. That, and 41-0 the only time he got to a conference title game. Manning is interesting, because he wouldn't have to face Belichick, but whether he could win a title playing on a team that deals with elements instead of playing on a fast-track in a bubble is a difficult question. On another Manning tangent: Is the biggest game of his career this November when the Colts go to Foxboro? The weather probably won't be awful (although there was a major November snowstorm each of the last 2 years) and if the Colts lose that game, it is probable they will have to play at least 1 round, if not 2, on the road in January, in all likelihood in a cold weather stadium.
See, the homefield argument is why I roll my eyes whenever people talk about Peyton as one of the great QBs. Everyone is like "Well, if the Colts ever get home-field, watch out," but if they were a real team, they'd just get it done no matter where they played. You never saw Joe Montana whine about not being able to play playoff games in Candlestick; he'd just go into Texas Stadium or Giants Stadium or RFK or wherever and take care of business. The fact that the Colts haven't yet adapted to playing in the cold (after a few seasons of being kicked around by the Pats) tells me that there is something fundamentally wrong with that team that home-field won't fix. Maybe it's time for Tony Dungy to move on in order to get the team really blossom, like with the Bucs and Gruden.
But anyway, back to Bruschi. It sucks to see such a class guy suffer such a random injury. Best of luck on a full recovery for 2006. And, not to go all Paul Maguire, but you're telling me that the Patriots won't adopt a 'Win one for Bru' attitude this year?
(edited by Big Bad on 25.7.05 1525) "You can look the other way once, and it's no big deal, except it makes it easier for you to compromise the next time, and pretty soon that's all your doing; compromising, because that's the way you think things are done. You know those guys I busted? You think they were the bad guys? Because they weren't, they weren't bad guys, they were just like you and me. Except they compromised... Once." -- Jack Bauer
Originally posted by Big BadSee, the homefield argument is why I roll my eyes whenever people talk about Peyton as one of the great QBs. Everyone is like "Well, if the Colts ever get home-field, watch out," but if they were a real team, they'd just get it done no matter where they played. You never saw Joe Montana whine about not being able to play playoff games in Candlestick; he'd just go into Texas Stadium or Giants Stadium or RFK or wherever and take care of business. The fact that the Colts haven't yet adapted to playing in the cold (after a few seasons of being kicked around by the Pats) tells me that there is something fundamentally wrong with that team that home-field won't fix. Maybe it's time for Tony Dungy to move on in order to get the team really blossom, like with the Bucs and Gruden.
Also, they could...I don't know...actually EARN homefield advantage by being the BEST team. That's a thought.
The Colts-Pats AFC Divisional Playoff "Game of the Week" recap on NFL Network is the best show on TV. I could watch it every day.
“To get ass, you’ve got to bring ass." -- Roy Jones Jr.
"Your input has been noted. I hope you don't take it personally if I disregard it." -- Guru Zim
Ladies and Gentlemen, your world champions, the New England Patriots. Not much to say, other than the fact that I'm now $20 richer, but I think a few music quotes are in order.
Thread rated: 4.46
#
#