Jump to content

greenwichjetfan

Members
  • Posts

    5,290
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by greenwichjetfan

  1. I'll believe it after Brady's appeal plays out.
  2. Absurd. My pats fan colleagues are all saying that Kraft and Brady are innocent but that Goodell wants to make a case against the pats. So, Kraft is not going to appeal in the hopes that it lessens Brady's suspension. WHAT!? 1) Goodell isn't making a case. He's handing out punishments based on other people's cases. 2) Other people couldn't make cases without there being cases to be made. 3*) If Kraft and Brady were truly innocent, they wouldn't have to go through back channels to lessen the suspension. They'd go full steam ahead with the appeal, win the appeal, have all punishment dropped, their name cleared, and Kraft would finally get that apology he's still awaiting. 4) If Kraft and Goodell did come to some agreement in a dark alleyway, that's even more ****ed up than the Pats cheating in the first place. Long story short, I can't believe Patriots fans are allowed to walk around like normal people without parental/societal supervision. * ultimately, #3 is the only point which should matter at all.
  3. The potential was absolutely there. His weak arm was literally his sole deficiency and proved to be his undoing in the playoffs when opposing defenses would jam receivers and play short to intermediary middle zones all day knowing that Penny wouldn't test them deep and didn't have enough on his throws to test them outside. Frankly, I just don't understand the point you're trying to make by calling Tannehill "a Pennington with a stronger arm". That's strong praise, and as much as I was done with Penny by '05, I don't know that Tannehill deserves it yet.
  4. Huh? I hated the Penny experiment, but Pennington with a stronger arm had the potential to be borderline HoF.
  5. 6 ft under is the only place I'd believe it's buried.
  6. Again: Now the fumbles on those touches as according to the ESPN.com website (screencap attached): NE: 536 touches from scrimmage, 0 fumbles, 0 fumbles lost Cin: 524 touches from scrimmage, 5 fumbles, 4 fumbles lost So, explain to me how 524 (touches in Cincy) is equal to 536 (touches in NE). Put another way: are 524 apples = to 536 apples? Is this the same type of math that led you to claim that BJGE also had more starts in Cincy than he did in NE? Or, explain to me how having less of a sample size is more indicative of a trend than more of a sample size; i.e., how do you figure that 12 less touches and two less years of data (in cincy) can "expose" someone who had shown no such trends or traits in more touches over a larger time period (in NE). I'm not even asking for an explanation of both of your claims. Just go ahead and explain either of your two claims to me. I triple dog dare ya, dawg.
  7. This thread lost steam quickly once actual facts were brought up to prove that there is enough reason to infer the patriots have been deflating balls for years.
  8. Where exactly, in all of your posts in this thread, would it seem obvious to anyone that you think they're guilty as charged and then some? I'm so curious.
  9. Uhh, more starts in Cincy than in NE? Nope. But lets say he did...that has no bearing whatsoever in this discussion. His total touches from scrimmage in NE: 536 His total touches from scrimmage in Cin: 524 Those are the only things that matter in this discussion. Whether it took him 2 years or 10 years to compile those touches, those are the totals for the two teams as taken directly from the ESPN.com website (screencap attached). That is statistically almost a perfect comparison....almost 6.5x the proper sample size which means it leaves very little room for randomness, and it very evenly split. Now the fumbles on those touches as according to the ESPN.com website (screencap attached): NE: 536 touches from scrimmage, 0 fumbles, 0 fumbles lost Cin: 524 touches from scrimmage, 5 fumbles, 4 fumbles lost So actually, there was no form of BJGE being more exposed in Cincy. If anything, he had more chances to fumble in NE...and well, the raw data above kinda tells the story for me. I rest my case.
  10. I still don't understand why Pats fans continue to bring up Sharp or his data or his flawed analysis. Truly mind-boggling. The data which I've listed and you quoted was from NFL.com. They were observations; not treated or analysed numbers, and not "inexact data" taken from Sharp's website. In fact, I have never even visited Sharp's site.
  11. Lol omgz took you 5 embarrazzing posts to address clear raw data layed out n the 1th post. you lose you suck so hard at wordz and numberzlol. and to disprove any signs of trends, you put in parenthesis "lol no". Eggseelent rebuttal. lolol kthxbye lol!!!! On a serious note, do you understand what sample size is? 4-7 years of (at minimum) 50 touches as a RB is not a "tiny" sample size. In fact, statistically, anything over 30 is considered a proper sample size, so even only 1 season would do. Teech me moar about numberz plzzzzzz
  12. Oh, if only. You'd finally have a job in that case. Speaking of words: what part of Special Teams is difficult for you to understand? Not once have I referenced that flawed report which you keep referencing, nor have I brought up the ancillary, non-RB players that your bible report brings up. Not once. You continue to, even after I've agreed that it's flawed, because it's the only thing you have to lean on. Alternatively, not once have you addressed the raw data that I've listed (after taking some from daballhawk) directly from NFL.com. I'll post it again: BenJarvus Green-Ellis 0 Fumbles in 4 years (Pats) 5 Fumbles in 2 years (Bengals) Danny Woodhead 2 Fumbles in 3 years (Pats) 2 Fumbles in 1 year (Chargers) Shane Vereen 1 Fumble in 4 years Brandon Bolden 0 Fumbles in 3 years Kevin Faulk 0 fumbles since '07 with Pats 21 fumbles before '07 with Pats Corey Dillon Left Patriots right before the '07 season 8 fumbles in three years preceding the season in question Feel free to ignore, deflect, or otherwise try to make yourself feel better. Also, I'm still waiting on your grand "CV" since you understand numbers so much better than the rest of us.
  13. Raw data taken from observation is flawed? So the amount of times you take a sh*t in a day as observed by you is also a flawed statistic? If you're claiming that the numbers of fumbles pre and post '07 taken as observations directly from NFL.com are flawed, then how do you measure anything? That would mean that all of your golden boy's passing yards, tds, games played, games started, etc are all flawed. What you're trying to say is that you don't want to admit that fundamental difference because it discredits your entire pats legacy. You are leaning on a report that claims that the validity of the quantitative analysis performed on the raw data is flawed. No one has argued that the statistical analysis is flawed. The observations of the amount of fumbles however are raw data. They are incontrovertible. They are not analysed or treated numbers. They are in fact, facts. But I'm sure you know that already. It's delicious what's happened to pats fans- after the euphoric high of finally winning a super bowl after spygate to quiet all the naysayers 3 months ago, you're now reduced to blindly discrediting raw observations. Also, I haven't qualified myself. The various institutions of my past and the work that I do have done that for me. If you weren't so ashamed of being wrong, you could take a gander at all of it by PMing me your linkedin profile (I'd never grant a stranger my Curriculum Vitae), and I'll return the favor.
  14. The Sharp statistical analysis was flawed. The raw data he used was derived directly from NFL.com. Are you saying that the following data is flawed? Or are you choosing to ignore it based on the statistical analysis performed on the data being flawed because it goes against your team? BenJarvus Green-Ellis 0 Fumbles in 4 years (Pats) 5 Fumbles in 2 years (Bengals) Danny Woodhead 2 Fumbles in 3 years (Pats) 2 Fumbles in 1 year (Chargers) Shane Vereen 1 Fumble in 4 years Brandon Bolden 0 Fumbles in 3 years Kevin Faulk 0 fumbles since '07 with Pats 21 fumbles before '07 with Pats Corey Dillon Left Patriots right before the '07 season 8 fumbles in three years preceding the season in question The fact is, before '07- the year in which the true deflating is statistically appearing to have started, people on the Pats fumbled just like every other team. Since then? Not so much. Again, this is all raw data from NFL.com, not Sharp's report. Not saying the numbers prove something, just saying that there's certainly something to infer and look deeply into. Also, trust me when I tell you that your bolded part is untrue. I guarantee I know and understand numbers better than you. If you think that's internet bravado, you can PM me your linkedin profile, and I'll PM you mine.
  15. Hahaha....Hey! Great minds, and all that....I posted this today around noon in a different thread:
  16. Anyone else find it cutesy that wicked awesome refers to the balls as under inflated as opposed to deflated? I just picked up on the in the 3-4 minutes that I actually spent trying to read his drivel. That's cute. They were deflated after being inflated to the appropriate psi. They were not under inflated. As my boy Biggie would say: "Get a grip mother****er"
  17. No, and I never did. I don't think anyone in the entire sporting universe thinks that deflated balls (not underinflated...they were in fact inflated to the proper psi according to the report, and then came back well below the proper psi- thusly, deflated, not underinflated) are the reason the colts thrashed the colts. I do however wonder how much the deflated balls helped them against the Ravens game when they were down 14 at two different points in the game. I also wonder how much it helps those running backs hold on to the ball and run with greater power and confidence knowing they have a tighter grip on the ball. I also wonder how long the deflating of balls has been going on.
  18. What fantasy am I asking you to indulge in? It's a simple question: Do you truly believe that Tom Brady had nothing to do with deflategate? Go ahead and answer that without deflecting or deterring. I triple dog dare you.
  19. Quick question. Forget the evidence angle, the legal angles, and anything that has to do with the report. Forget the suspension and punishments, forget whether it's severe or not; forget whether everyone does it or not. Point blank: Do you think Brady played some role in deflategate?
  20. I've been around some great and awful trolls both here and JI since 2005...TX, Shasta, Raider, BB, Fox, and many other ones over the years that I can hardly remember. Never have I found one so comprehensively unreadable as this wickedawesome dude. His posts are as awful and dripping of masshole as his JN handle. Congrats man, you deserve...well, something.
  21. I would love it if it got to a point where Goodell was so upset with Kraft and the Pats that he has a Jack Nicholson "A Few Good Men" moment and spills all the beans from SpyGate up till now. Lets everything out of the bag just as a final **** you to the Pats for so blatantly putting the NFL in the situation where they have to defend the cheatriots over and over again even after Goodell helped them out the first time by completely destroying the spygate evidence. That would be ideal.
  22. Although I'm not the biggest hockey fan in the world, I have to admit that anytime there's a game 7 in the NHL, it's must see TV for me. Especially when it involves my blueshirts. LGR!
  23. Mick is the same guy who legit believed (and argued) that Leonard would be the number 1 overall pick ahead of Jameis and Marcus. I even offered him a few outs by asking him if he's confusing who he thinks will be the #1 pick with who is the best player in the draft, but nope. He actually believed a DE would go before a QB to a desperate QB needy team. He's also had a history of siding with the Patriots for years dating back to JetsInsider. It's what he does. For those reasons and more, I wouldn't worry too much about his opinions. For my money, I'd be A-OK with the Brady and Belly being banished for life. It wouldn't and shouldn't happen...I think Belly gets off clean and Brady gets a 4 game ban, and I think it's reasonable to expect that. But unlike Mick, I wouldn't cry for them if they were gone for life.
  24. No, the Jets only take the Pats top defensive backs. And we do it with a handshake agreement in a dark alleyway to completely **** with Kraft. And we're not even penalized any draft picks for it. Face it, we're just better than you at everything except cheating. You guys have that all wrapped up.
×
×
  • Create New...