PeterNorth09 Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 Agreed, there's no reason to believe the Pats won't win the East this year. The Jets and Bills have no chance, and I personally believe Miami needs at least another season. I don't think they were as good as their 9-7 mark last season, anyhow. There's another good reason why the Pats will make a Super Bowl run next year. The AFC East is becoming one of the weaker divisions in football: Buffalo is going nowhere with Dick Jauron and J.P Losman. Terrible hire at head coach and Losman is not only mediocre on the field but his teammates hate him. Miami is getting better and could be a 9-7 or 10-6 team next year IF they sign Drew Brees and IF he's healthy. Obviously the Jets are rebuilding. However, if we trade down in the draft and get a couple good free agent acquisitions we could be pretty good next year. Still, we won't beat New England. If New England goes less than 5-1 in divisional games next year I'll be shocked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alk Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 We shall see, pats are very old at LB and still have to sign Givens and AV AV has won all 3 SB's the last i looked Absolutely as a matter of fact in our Super Bowl victories, Vinatieri is 25-30 on FGs, our offense didn't score a single td. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Troll Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 We shall see, pats are very old at LB and still have to sign Givens and AV AV has won all 3 SB's the last i looked Adam Vinatieri has never won a Super Bowl for the Patriots. Mike Martz, Tom Brady, and Donovan McNabb have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afosomf Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 Adam Vinatieri has never won a Super Bowl for the Patriots. Mike Martz, Tom Brady, and Donovan McNabb have. Kasay choked as well, so add him as well:cheers: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 We shall see, pats are very old at LB And they are the youngest team in the NFL on the DLine and secondary. No doubt BB will focus on getting younger at LB through the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afosomf Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 And they are the youngest team in the NFL on the DLine and secondary. No doubt BB will focus on getting younger at LB through the draft. TX - there secondary blows!!!!! Rodney is Kaput as well Dline is fine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garb Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 D-line may not be so fine after this season with the salary demands Seymour is surely to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 TX - there secondary blows!!!!! Rodney is Kaput as well Dline is fine afo, Samuel and Hobbs will be fixtures at CB for years to come. Wilson is also young but his erratic play (especially at the end of the season) has me concerned. I agree with you on Harrison. No way he comes back (his injury plus his age) and plays at the same level. Pats need to find a young, hard hitting SS and rotational nickel and dime guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StillerPaul Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 It just seems with the coaching defections, age and just the plain cyclical nature of sports, the Pats stranglehold is starting to lessen. It will take a season or two, and with Belly, they will always be competitive, but the dominance has definitly started its spiral downward. Agreed. They will still be a damn good football team, but their aura of invincability is gone now. They may control the AFCE for another year or two depending on how the Jets and Dolphins rebuild though. The AFC is about as strong now as the NFC used to be a decade or so ago. It won't be easy for any of us playoff contenders to sustain that kind of consistency IMO. I can't remember the last time that so many AFC teams had good franchise QB'S and above average defenses. Good luck to the NFC trying to win a SB within the next few years IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 They may control the AFCE for another year or two depending on how the Jets and Dolphins rebuild though. The Jets? Stiller, you are as delusional as most Jet fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 Do you guys just make things up? The Pats offense last season was more prolific then any year CW was the OC. Please tx. Explain to us how the pats offense was more "prolific" last year in 2005 than the Charlie Weis era. You and I both know that is bullsh#t. When it mattered most, the pats offense went into a shell and sh^t themselves. More passing yards for Brady? Does that really make them more prolific? Or does it have to do with not having any pulse for a run game? You know you're wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 More passing yards for Brady? Does that really make them more prolific? Or does it have to do with not having any pulse for a run game? Barton, Do you have a reading comprehension problem? Read my earlier posts, I said the Pats running game, and especially Dillon, sucked last year. With that said, Brady had a phenominal year working with a one-dimensional offense. He never had that type of year throwing the football with CW around. Granted, I would prefer a balanced offensive attack, but you got to do what you got to do to move the football. Brady did a great job of doing that last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ten Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Barton, Do you have a reading comprehension problem? Read my earlier posts, I said the Pats running game, and especially Dillon, sucked last year. With that said, Brady had a phenominal year working with a one-dimensional offense. He never had that type of year throwing the football with CW around. The pats WR's led the league in yards after carry by a good couple of hundred yards,the pats ran a **** load of screens and were playing catch up in a fair few games.Brady did not have a phenominal year,he was much better in 04 and the second half of 03. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Brady did not have a phenominal year,he was much better in 04 and the second half of 03. Dude, That's what you call a completely dumbass comment. Brady, as a pure QB, had his best year in his career in 2005. Please explain to me how he was "much better" in 2004 and the latter half of 2003? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ten Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Dude, That's what you call a completely dumbass comment. Brady, as a pure QB, had his best year in his career in 2005. Please explain to me how he was "much better" in 2004 and the latter half of 2003? Every second pass wasn't a bloody screen pass for one,i don't have the stats in front of me but i'm pretty sure he had a higher completion percentage on 3rd down.He was a much more dangerous deep passer in those years too.Plus in general,Brady looked mortal,at times it was quite clear that Brady was beat and couldn't bring the pats back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Every second pass wasn't a bloody screen pass for one,i don't have the stats in front of me but i'm pretty sure he had a higher completion percentage on 3rd down.He was a much more dangerous deep passer in those years too.Plus in general,Brady looked mortal,at times it was quite clear that Brady was beat and couldn't bring the pats back. Give it up. You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about with gibberish like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GimmeShelter Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Dude, That's what you call a completely dumbass comment. Brady, as a pure QB, had his best year in his career in 2005. Please explain to me how he was "much better" in 2004 and the latter half of 2003? 12 TD's --12 INT's on the road in 2005. Brady on the road was average as were the PATS against winning teams. Get over it TX. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
serphnx Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 The Jets? Stiller, you are as delusional as most Jet fans. You're the delusional one. You're telling me you expected the Patriots to have success based on their history? They were awful before we knocked Bledsoe out. You should get on your knees and thank us for that. We'll be a .500 team probably this year, and next year we'll make our run. Mangini knows your team inside out, but what do you know about OUR team and what we're going to build? Nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETSFAN5180 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 lets hope Vilma doesnt knock Brady out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ten Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Give it up. You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about with gibberish like that. Great response,you've quite clearly replied to my points with well thought out responses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Barton, Do you have a reading comprehension problem? Read my earlier posts, I said the Pats running game, and especially Dillon, sucked last year. With that said, Brady had a phenominal year working with a one-dimensional offense. He never had that type of year throwing the football with CW around. Granted, I would prefer a balanced offensive attack, but you got to do what you got to do to move the football. Brady did a great job of doing that last year. LOL!! Nice spin attempt, tx. You said the pats offense was more prolific in 2005 than any year under Charlie Weis. Brady himself having a fine season is only part of the offense. The running game sucked, dillon was horrible....excuses excuses. You hated it when I talked about the jets defense suffering from a lack of offense, but now you're gonna sit there and tell me the pats offense was more prolific in 2005 despite a crappy running game? And not performing well as they have in the past? You're not making sense. Bottom line. The pats offense in 2005 was not as good as previous years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Bottom line. The pats offense in 2005 was not as good as previous years. Barton, For the last friggn' time. Brady did more last year in an unbalanced offense then he did his prior 3 seasons. Talk about spinning, if it wasn't for Brady last year, the Pats would have finished 6-10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Troll Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Barton, For the last friggn' time. Brady did more last year in an unbalanced offense then he did his prior 3 seasons. Talk about spinning, if it wasn't for Brady last year, the Pats would have finished 6-10. The Pats would not have won six games last year if it wasn't for Brady. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETSFAN5180 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 New England soon to be basement dwellers once again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PETROCK Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Before the start of last season, I predicted that the Pets dynasty was OVER. Now let me see....where is that "Pat myself on the back" smiley. Beter yet, where's that thread where I made that statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Barton, For the last friggn' time. Brady did more last year in an unbalanced offense then he did his prior 3 seasons. Talk about spinning, if it wasn't for Brady last year, the Pats would have finished 6-10. When did we talk about Brady? You said the pats offense was more prolific in 2005 than under Weis. I called you out on it, so you tried skipping out on the truth by talking about how well of a season Brady had. Thats a different topic. The pats OFFENSE is not just tom brady. Fact is, the offense he led was not as good as a whole then in previous years, especially compared to the 2004 season the pats offense had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Fact is, the offense he led was not as good as a whole then in previous years, especially compared to the 2004 season the pats offense had. :eek: Was it that hard to comprehend my original point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Troll Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Anyone that plays fantasy football knows that Brady had his best statistical season last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raffyD Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Anyone that plays fantasy football knows that Brady had his best statistical season last year. Statistically speaking in a fantasy football world, most definitely. Brady was a steal in most drafts going about the 5-7th rounds and I'm pretty sure he had a better season points wise than Peyton who usually is a first round selection in my leagues. However, no way was the PATS*offense more "prolific" last year than in 2004. Let the spiral begin, . . . downwardly! *I realize commentators usually talk only about Brady and not the Pats as a whole so this may be a foreign word to their fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 :eek: Was it that hard to comprehend my original point? What was your point again? How the pats offense in 2005 was not as good as the 2004 offense? I think thats what you were saying, maybe I heard something about Brady having a great season too...or was that another thread? I dunno. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthernJet Posted March 10, 2006 Author Share Posted March 10, 2006 Agreed. They will still be a damn good football team, but their aura of invincability is gone now. They may control the AFCE for another year or two depending on how the Jets and Dolphins rebuild though. The AFC is about as strong now as the NFC used to be a decade or so ago. It won't be easy for any of us playoff contenders to sustain that kind of consistency IMO. I can't remember the last time that so many AFC teams had good franchise QB'S and above average defenses. Good luck to the NFC trying to win a SB within the next few years IMO. thanks,, some have misinterpreted this to where i say they wont win anything,,i still think they are team to beat in AFCE, i just dont see them as favorites to win SuperBowl, as was the case in the past,,simple as that, they are good, always will be with Belly, but the dominance days are over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackout Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Barton, For the last friggn' time. Brady did more last year in an unbalanced offense then he did his prior 3 seasons. Talk about spinning, if it wasn't for Brady last year, the Pats would have finished 6-10. you mean Jesus Belichick would've had a losing record without Cindy?/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.