OT: Pierre-Paul

[carolinatony]

Don't watch much exhibition football unless the Pats are On TV here but want to see when they put in Cam Newton. Watching G'men-Panthers.

I'll tell you 2 things you already know. A team has to have a QB(ask the Bills) and someone who can rush the QB.

Paul has been everywhere and looks to be almost un-blockable at times.

I know, we got this guy and that guy instead but anyone who knows football
will tell you the one weakness we have.
He is good.

 

[carolinatony]

re: OT: Pierre-Paul

Just heard CAM coming in now! It will be interesting.

 

[BelichickFan]

re: OT: Pierre-Paul



He went 15th, before we picked. And we took McCourty. So the concept is a non starter, we got a stud ourselves and would have had to trade up. I wish we'd drafted Von Miller too but . . .

 

[jah]

re: OT: Pierre-Paul

I know, we got this guy and that guy instead but anyone who knows football
will tell you the one weakness we have.

Choking in the playoffs?

 

[patchick]

re: OT: Pierre-Paul

I know, we got this guy and that guy instead but anyone who knows football will tell you the one weakness we have.

The trick is, without the "this guy and that guy instead" we might have more than one weakness. Because the "guys" acquired with the 1st + 2nd it would have taken to move up ahead of the Giants were Devin McCourty, Rob Gronkowski, Taylor Price and Aaron Hernandez.

 

[Crazy Patriot Guy]

re: OT: Pierre-Paul

He went 15th, before we picked. And we took McCourty. So the concept is a non starter, we got a stud ourselves and would have had to trade up. I wish we'd drafted Von Miller too but . . .

That's the same thing I thought. I also wish we had drafted Calvin Johnson, Mario Williams and DeMarcus Ware. Since they were all long gone, I guess we'll have to settle for someone that was still available.

 

[DarrylS]

re: OT: Pierre-Paul

If you watch a BB defense, probably will never see a guy who is "everywhere" and is "unblockable".. in this d you have a job, and are expected to do it.. in this d 11 guys do their job, not one.

Not sure the weakness you speak of was all that apparent Thursday Night.. not sure I would change last years draft for anyone short of another LT...

 

[convertedpatsfan]

re: OT: Pierre-Paul

Choking in the playoffs?

I agree. BB and the Patriots are only 14-5 in the play-offs, and have only won 3 Super Bowls. Clearly this franchise and coach have no idea how to get it done in the play-offs... :bricks:

 

[BradfordPatsFan]

re: OT: Pierre-Paul

The trick is, without the "this guy and that guy instead" we might have more than one weakness. Because the "guys" acquired with the 1st + 2nd it would have taken to move up ahead of the Giants were Devin McCourty, Rob Gronkowski, Taylor Price and Aaron Hernandez.

Damn you and your facts and logic.

 

[borg]

re: OT: Pierre-Paul

I was told right before the 2010 draft that the Pats liked Ryan Matthews, Spiller, and Pierre Paul....all gone before the Pats picked(if memory serves me correctly). My gut tells me Matthews was the target but San Diego made a huge jump up for him. At DB, I was told they liked the kid from Fla St (name escapes me). Obviously they like McCourty better, but if Matthews, Spiller, or JPP were still available, my guess was they felt McCourty would be gone by their second pick.
Can't complain with McCourty's year vs JPP(a non factor)

 

[jah]

re: OT: Pierre-Paul

I agree. BB and the Patriots are only 14-5 in the play-offs, and have only won 3 Super Bowls. Clearly this franchise and coach have no idea how to get it done in the play-offs... :bricks:

You can't be serious. How many of the SB-winning players are on the team now, and are as good as they were in their prime? Brady is all that comes to mind. One and done two years in a row after good-to-amazing regular seasons and you don't think that some sort of switch turned off in the playoffs?

 

[RayClay]

re: OT: Pierre-Paul

You can't be serious. How many of the SB-winning players are on the team now, and are as good as they were in their prime? Brady is all that comes to mind. One and done two years in a row after good-to-amazing regular seasons and you don't think that some sort of switch turned off in the playoffs?

Your team is better than 14-5?

 

[townes]

re: OT: Pierre-Paul

You can't be serious. How many of the SB-winning players are on the team now, and are as good as they were in their prime? Brady is all that comes to mind. One and done two years in a row after good-to-amazing regular seasons and you don't think that some sort of switch turned off in the playoffs?

It's good you can recognize the standard for the Patriots is nothing short of a Super Bowl Champions hat, whereas for the Jets the Division Champions hat is the standard. Given that it's remarkable the Patriots actually have more SB hats than the jets have Division Hats over the past decade.

Nothing says LOSERS like 40 years and counting, and that's the Jets team motto.

 

[sbpatfan]

re: OT: Pierre-Paul

Omg jpp looked amazing in this preseason game. He was like, all unblockable and stuff.

 

[BradyFTW!]

re: OT: Pierre-Paul

Brady, Branch, Light, Faulk, Koppen, Wilfork. How many teams have more SB-winning key contributors than that? A few, basically the ones that won SBs in the last year or two, but not many.

 

[DarrylS]

re: OT: Pierre-Paul

You can't be serious. How many of the SB-winning players are on the team now, and are as good as they were in their prime? Brady is all that comes to mind. One and done two years in a row after good-to-amazing regular seasons and you don't think that some sort of switch turned off in the playoffs?

Teams turn over talent, players retire, scenarios change in the NFL, the draft adds new players, the shelf life of an average NFL Player is shorter than 4 years.. so of course there will not be a lot of players from the last Super Bowl Team.

 

[Defsoul]

re: OT: Pierre-Paul

Don't watch much exhibition football unless the Pats are On TV here but want to see when they put in Cam Newton. Watching G'men-Panthers.

I'll tell you 2 things you already know. A team has to have a QB(ask the Bills) and someone who can rush the QB.

Paul has been everywhere and looks to be almost un-blockable at times.

I know, we got this guy and that guy instead but anyone who knows football
will tell you the one weakness we have.
He is good.

Thanks, but no thanks. I'll keep a CB who become an All-Pro in his first season over a pass rusher who might crack the starting lineup in his second.

 

[resdubwhite]

re: OT: Pierre-Paul

Thanks, but no thanks. I'll keep a CB who become an All-Pro in his first season over a pass rusher who might crack the starting lineup in his second.

Exactly.

Moer than happy wwe could get the player that we had with extra draft picks to boot.

McCourty was a steal at 27.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

re: OT: Pierre-Paul

You can't be serious. How many of the SB-winning players are on the team now, and are as good as they were in their prime? Brady is all that comes to mind. One and done two years in a row after good-to-amazing regular seasons and you don't think that some sort of switch turned off in the playoffs?

No, I don't think some "switch" turned off in the play-offs. That's such a stupid concept, no offense. And I think it comes from Patriots fans being totally spoiled by the remarkable success and consistency we've enjoyed over the years with Brady and BB. Look at the other dominant teams of this decade.

Peyton Manning started his career by losing his first 3 play-off games. Is the switch off? In 2003 and 2004, he finally wins a game or two but then loses (to us ). Is he starting to learn to win in the play-offs? But then in 2005 he was one-and-done again. Is the switch back off? Then he wins a Super Bowl.

So the switch is on now? No. In the next two seasons, he goes one-and-done again. So the switch is off? No, then he goes back to the Super Bowl. Is the switch on? No, he goes one-and-done again.

For Pittsburgh, Big Ben won his play-off debut and then lost to us. The next season, they win the Super Bowl. Then they don't even make the play-offs, followed by a one-and-done. Is the switch off? No. Then Ben wins another Super Bowl. Switch on? Don't even make the play-offs. Switch off? Back to the Super Bowl.

And at the start of last season, lots of talking heads had started wondering if Aaron Rodgers could ever win a big game. He had lost a lot of close games in his first season, and though he did better in his second season, it ended with a one-and-done.

Yeah, we went one-and-done twice. It really sucks. But does that mean the switch has gone off? No. It means our team wasn't good enough in 2009, and it was too young and too decimated on the DL by injuries in 2010. I don't think BB and Brady have suddenly forgotten what it takes to win, and two seasons is a pretty small sample to make stupid conclusions.

 

[Deus Irae]

re: OT: Pierre-Paul

You can't be serious. How many of the SB-winning players are on the team now, and are as good as they were in their prime? Brady is all that comes to mind. One and done two years in a row after good-to-amazing regular seasons and you don't think that some sort of switch turned off in the playoffs?

I think 2009 was a case of a team losing its best receiver the week before the playoffs and failing to overcome it, either mentally or physically.

I think 2010 was a case of a team with 3 major flaws that was exposed in a playoff game, but only after that team screwed itself out of two touchdowns which would have changed the entire game.

Neither was about a switch being turned off in the playoffs.