Hate to Admit it but Brady on Montana's Level

[Scott99]

If you did indeed read it (with help I assume), it's obvious you did so with an eye of searching for things to exonerate wrongdoing from people who wear a uniform you like. Your posts here are so chock full of logical breakdowns, ludicrous assumptions and flat-out incorrect statements, it's not really even worth continuing a conversation with you. I think if you had the mental capacity for it, I'm pretty sure you'd be embarrassed about what a fool you're making of yourself.

Like I said in my original post, some people will have an open mind, others will let their hate guide them. Read the FULL Wells Report and then come back to me. That being said, it's very difficult to get your point across in a message board. I too am tired of typing 800 words to get a reply saying essentially nothing. I tell you what, I live in NY, I'd be glad to meet any Jet's fan for a beer to discuss the subject. I like most Jet's fans, very passionate fans.

[AFCEastFan]

Good points. Bottom line, the Giants were the better team in both games. In 2007, the attacked the Pat's main weakness, their O-Line. Very smart game plan. In 2011, they were just a better team, the Pats were nowhere as good as in 2007. 

I was at that Steelers game last year. My mom is a HUGE Jet's fan and I try to take her to a game every year.

As a Patriots fan myself, I actually think you have this completely backwards.  Don't be blinded by the 16-0 record: The 2007 Patriots team peaked at around week 11.  By the time the playoffs rolled around, they were nowhere near the same juggernaut.  That Giants team was a terrible mismatch for the Patriots and I think they would have taken around 7 games in a 10 game match.  

The 2011 Giants team, on the other hand, benefitted immeasurably from Gronk's injury in the AFCC.  He was playing at 20% (at best) in the Super Bowl, to the point that one of the league's most un-athletic linebackers (Chase Blackburn) had no trouble covering him one-on-one.  And the Patriots still probably would have won if Welker hadn't done his usual alligator arm act in the clutch.   I have no doubt that the Patriots would have won comfortably with a healthy Gronk.  

[Scott99]

As a Patriots fan myself, I actually think you have this completely backwards.  Don't be blinded by the 16-0 record: The 2007 Patriots team peaked at around week 11.  By the time the playoffs rolled around, they were nowhere near the same juggernaut.  That Giants team was a terrible mismatch for the Patriots and I think they would have taken around 7 games in a 10 game match.  

The 2011 Giants team, on the other hand, benefitted immeasurably from Gronk's injury in the AFCC.  He was playing at 20% (at best) in the Super Bowl, to the point that one of the league's most un-athletic linebackers (Chase Blackburn) had no trouble covering him one-on-one.  And the Patriots still probably would have won if Welker hadn't done his usual alligator arm act in the clutch.   I have no doubt that the Patriots would have won comfortably with a healthy Gronk.  

good points about Gronk, I believe he had ankle surgery 2 days after the SB against the Giants. He wasn't Gronk as people know him. He just had no explosion running or jumping. He's a huge difference maker.