Asante Samuel or Tom Brady - Whose loss has made a bigger difference?

[RichSeymour]

Tom Brady. OK, now it's my turn....John Lennon or Boy George - Which one had a greater impact on music?

LMAO! Nice....

 

[Deus Irae]

Tom Brady. OK, now it's my turn....John Lennon or Boy George - Which one had a greater impact on music?

Well, all Lennon did was help lead the Beatles to the top of the music world. Boy George took a complete absence of talent, wrapped it up in a fat, flamboyant, homosexual bow and repeated the same line more than 30 times a song all the way to the top of the charts.

Advantage: kidnapper

 

[WhiZa]

There has to be some rule on this forum where when a boy george image is posted the thread gets locked. :hijacked:

 

[Deus Irae]

There has to be some rule on this forum where when a boy george image is posted the thread gets locked. :hijacked:

One can only hope

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

There has to be some rule on this forum where when a boy george image is posted the thread gets locked. :hijacked:

How about instead ban the idiots who hijacked the thread, that was a serious and intelligent question because they personally don't like the thread.

 

[billdog3484]

is this thread a joke

 

[Calciumee]

Short Term - Samuel. Our pass defence is nothing special without him.

But long term - Brady. Good CB are hard to come by, but there are a few around, whereas with Brady, he is irreplaceable. There isn't another Brady.

 

[Dragda]

Come on man...it's Brady and this is a no brainer.

See everyone? This is how you disagree without being a jerk about it. You don't have to be insulting to make a strong opinion.

 

[PatsFan37]

As amazing as it sounds, the dropoff from Samuel to O'Neal at this point is great than the dropoff from Brady to Cassel.

Samuel=9
O'Neal=3

Brady=10
Cassel=7

Take a close look at the games and see how many passes are thrown poorly or into traffic. Cassel is inconsistent on deep throws -- occasionally good but more frequently over- or underthrown. Last week on many plays there were receivers open for a first down (including Moss) and Cassel threw short to Welker in tight coverage.

Cassel is doing exceptionally well for a seventh-round pick in his first real time as a QB. Against a piss-poor pass defense like Seattle, he barely won, relying heavily on a single receiver. In the same situation, Brady would have been the target of articles on running up the score.

You forget how Brady reads the coverage, throws to the correct shoulder in-stride where only his receiver can get the ball. You forget how he audibles at the line to winning plays in the redzone. Would he have thrown 2 INTs and taken 2 strip-sacks against Pittsburgh in Gillette?

Samuel can frustrate a receiver. Brady can frustrate an entire defense. There's no comparison to how much each contributes to a win.

Sorry, this isn't about the thread police, the OP is nuts.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

No - Some of you simply don't understand the question

Pass to a simpler thread that you understand better

This has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with Asante's value vs. Brady as a professional NFL player - THAT IS NOT CLOSE OR EVEN A CONVERSATION

This has to do with value loss at THIER RESPECTIVE POSITION THIS YEAR and the replacements THIS YEAR - Not next year or the year after that, THIS year

If you still don't understand the nature of the question I won't waste more time explaining it - Not worth it.

Putting aside your snide comments about those who disagree with you, you say that you are asking whether the falloff from Tom Brady to Matt Cassel is greater than the falloff from Asante Samuel to Ellis Hobbs. ("This has to do with value loss at their respective position this year and the replacements this year..."). I just don't see how there is any rational discussion possible about the difference between going from a HOF QB (who is arguably one of the best to play that position in the history of the league) to a very competent first time starter and the difference between going from an exellent corner with many years experience to a solid corner who is not as experienced but who also helps the team with Kickoff returns (1,140 yards worth so far this year).

Looking for something objective on which to hang this opinion, I note that another poster has observed that without Brady, we have gone from an offense that produced nearly 37 points a game to one that produces 23 points a game. I checked, and we have also gone from the number one offense in the league to the 18th in terms of points scored, or a drop off of 17 places into the second tier of the league. On defense, we have gone from the number four defense to the number 14 defense in terms of points allowed, a drop off of "only" 10 places, but still in the top tier of the league.

I just don't see how there is any reasonable question about this and am amazed that I have taken the time to write this and that the thread itself is now on its fifth page--probably a reflection of the bad weather in New England and that a lot of folks are stuck inside.

 

[spacecrime]

That is one dumbassed question.

In his defense, he has actually asked stupider questions. Hard to believe, but true.

 

[spacecrime]

I am going to go with Asante Samuel.

TB is great and all, but his replacement has been doing pretty damn good job.

THere is no doubt that Matt Cassel is a fine replacement, but that wasn't the question. Using this logic, the loss of Lonnie Paxton would be greater than the loss of Tom Brady because we don't have decent long snapper.

That is what is so stupid about the original question. It is asking to compare Matt Cassel with Deltha O'Neil and then using that to compare Tom Brady and Asante Samuel.

It would be very funny coming from one of my Cub Scouts. Well, maybe the Tiger Cubs. Webelos are above this sort of asininity.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

In his defense, he has actually asked stupider questions. Hard to believe, but true.

A member who uses a word that does not exist in normal human speech calls me stupid?

How many scrabble games have you won? - I am guessing NONE

Bet even your cub scouts don't use stupider in a sentence


Stupider - (Pot calling the kettle black)

 

[Deus Irae]

A member who uses a word that does not exist in normal human speech calls me stupid?

How many scrabble games have you won? - I am guessing NONE

Bet even your cub scouts don't use stupider in a sentence


Stupider - (Pot calling the kettle black)

Ummm......

stupider definition | Dictionary.com

stu·pid (stōō'pĭd, styōō'-) Pronunciation Key
adj. stu·pid·er, stu·pid·est

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

Ummm......

stupider definition | Dictionary.com

Sorry Deus,People don't use 'stupider' - At least no adult I know of,but then again I am in PA - Don't know the 'language' in the New England area

BTW: Wont work in scrabble either

 

[Deus Irae]

Sorry Deus,People don't use 'stupider' - At least no adult I know of,but then again I am in PA - Don't know the 'language' in the New England area

BTW: Wont work in scrabble either

I don't know what more to tell you. Here it is in the Oxford English dictionary:

AskOxford: stupid

stupid

• adjective (stupider, stupidest)

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Sorry Deus,People don't use 'stupider' - At least no adult I know of,but then again I am in PA - Don't know the 'language' in the New England area

BTW: Wont work in scrabble either

I was about to point out to you that the Oxford English Dictionary gives "stupider" as the comparative form of "stupid," but I see that Deus just did. But, I guess your Scrabble dictionary is a more valid source.

Come on, guy. Give it up. You're wrong on the issue at hand, you're wrong on this narrow question of English spelling and grammar and you are certainly wrong to be insulting your fellow posters when you don't have a leg to stand on (or, "a leg on which to stand," in case you want to criticize me over the construction of my sentence).

I'm still amazed that we (myself included) have allowed this thread to enter its sixth page, but I guess that's what can happen on a cold saturday in December.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

O.K. I guess this thread is just 'stupider' than any recent ones posted lately - Happy?

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

THere is no doubt that Matt Cassel is a fine replacement, but that wasn't the question. Using this logic, the loss of Lonnie Paxton would be greater than the loss of Tom Brady because we don't have decent long snapper.

That is what is so stupid about the original question. It is asking to compare Matt Cassel with Deltha O'Neil and then using that to compare Tom Brady and Asante Samuel.

It would be very funny coming from one of my Cub Scouts. Well, maybe the Tiger Cubs. Webelos are above this sort of asininity.

The question is not stupid.

However, the responses are.

And yes, the loss of Lonnie Paxton could be a significant loss. However, it is unlikely to be a long term loss as you could get one off waiver wire. There are Jets fans that maintain that for the lack of a place kicker the Jets would have won the first Pat-Jets game. They may be right. So that was a more significant injury for that game, than the Brady injury was for the Patriots in the KC game, b/c the Pats won anyway.

And yes the analysis is comparing the delta between O'Neil and Samuel with the delta between Cassel and Brady.

This is the exact same type of analysis that Belichick uses on draft day. Not is player A better than player B, but which player is the biggest improvement over the player I would bench/cut to make room for him.

If this type of analysis is to difficult for you, you don't need to do it, but it doesn't make the question stupid, just over your head.

 

[PATSNUTme]

How about instead of saying the thread is "dumb" or "stupid", using a little football logic.

Zant had the years he had because an offense with Brady forced teams to throw more because they were being scored apon. So certainly Brady's loss hurts more in spite of Matt's good play. Matt is no Tom Brady and that is not a slap at him.