Bob Ryan gets it right

[captain stone]

Just say no No NO to Ryan, CHB & Mazz. No links, no clicks, no nothing. Aren't there enough new threads already?

Those 3 have sold their New Englander souls to worship at the altar of the 4-letter network, whose creed begins: I believe in hating Bill Belicheat...

Oh, and this defense that's supposed to carry us all season? This ain't 2003/04.

 

[sieglo]

Well, I re-watched all the offensive Cassel-led series against the Chiefs yesterday. I ahve to say, if Cassel plays like that all season long I think the Pats will do just fine.

 

[Section103]

Well, it looks like you have never read much of his earlier columns on the Pats, especially the one where he went after BB and show remarkable lack of class by pulling in BB's personal life.

And among the avoid-the-BG-trinity (Ryan/Shaughnessy/Massaroti) posters, who said anything about this article being anti-Pats?? None of us want to know what his thoughts are about our beloved team. Period. :snob:

I have read his articles, I rarely agree with him, but that's why I read it. I am fine with opposing view points, I am not fine with personal attacks on character but this is a sports columnist. Who needs to agree with each and everything he states and how he states it? He's supposed to be an arse.

'Anti-Pats' is my personal way of labeling the general reason for the hatred of the guy. People have criticized him for being anti-Pats, whether explicitly stated or not. That's why some people don't even want to read the article. I personally can get by my disgust for the guy and take the article independently for what it is. It's a rare diamond in the proverbial rough that is Bob Ryan.

 

[roguepatriot]

As your apparently unhealthy Brady crush blinds you to the team aspect of football (which I assume you have never played at any level or we would not be having this conversation), I will leave you with these thoughts. In 2001, the Pats were up 14-3 with 7 points attributable to a defensive score. The Patriots were outscored 14-6 in the second half (no offensive touchdowns).

In short, against one of the more prolific offenses in NFL history, the Pats offense scored 1 touchdown, the lead was gone and the Rams were getting their offense into gear. Probable outcome of a missed field goal? Rams win, Pats lose. Your Brady vision blinds you to the fact defense put as many points on the board as Brady did in that game passing. And Vinatieri's kick was no chip shot to win the game (48 yards), so the final drive did not stall at the goal line. You may refresh your obviously hazy memory with the box score.

Flash forward to the 2003 championship. The Patriots had lost pretty much the entire secondary to injury (as did the Panthers) and neither team really displayed the ability to stop the other defensively due to those injuries. You may also recall that Tom Brady threw a costly interception when the Pats were in a position for 7 points on an ill advised pass (in the event Brady's halo blocks such memories) that may have avoided the slugfest in the 2nd half. As such, your "win in overtime" theory really amounts to "winning the coin toss." If the Panthers won the toss, the probable outcome would have been another loss given the way the second half went in that game and the defense's injury status.

The fact is great players step up in big games. Tom Brady did. So did Ty Law. So did Tedy Bruschi. So did Corey Dillon. So did Antowain Smith. So did many others it would take too much time to identify. Everyone on this board loves Brady, but the others apparently are sufficiently aware of the fact a QB alone does not win championships (If that is true, explain the 2000 Ravens and the 1991 Redskins - Dilfer and Rypien were great quarterbacks? ) that they can hope that Cassel is enough with all the other talent on the team to get the Patriots to the promised land. If you cannot see this and are still claiming that "Brady is my world, my god," I suggest intensive therapy as even Brady would be frightened by that level of adoration.

Its not often I agree with someone living in Texas, but with regard to Cannonarm and his buddies, you are spot-on. Hopefully this team gets to show some of this over the coming season. If people cannot understand that the real appeal of footbal is that it is a team sport, they should be watching Tennis or WWF

 

[emoney_33]

No, it wasn't all Brady, but it sure as Hell wasn't Kerry Collins, Andrew Walter, Aaron Brooks, Gus Frerotte, and Joey Harrington who were throwing balls to Moss and Welker.

This is bordering on sacrilege. Yes, football is a team sport, but Tom Brady is the greatest QB to ever play in the NFL. The greatest. It matters whether you have the greatest of all time or you have a guy who wasn't good enough to start in college. Show the man the respect he deserves. Matt Cassel may be an okay QB, but he can't hold Brady's jock, and we all know that.

2006: 385 Points
2007: 589 Points

Tell me what changed between 2006 and 2007 that all of a sudden made Tom Brady THAT much better?

 

[NYCPatsFan]

I have read his articles, I rarely agree with him, but that's why I read it. I am fine with opposing view points, I am not fine with personal attacks on character but this is a sports columnist. Who needs to agree with each and everything he states and how he states it? He's supposed to be an arse.

'Anti-Pats' is my personal way of labeling the general reason for the hatred of the guy. People have criticized him for being anti-Pats, whether explicitly stated or not. That's why some people don't even want to read the article. I personally can get by my disgust for the guy and take the article independently for what it is. It's a rare diamond in the proverbial rough that is Bob Ryan.

I hear you and it's not as if many of us here want everyone to say only +ve things on the Pats. In fact, I frequently respond to posters getting upset if some of the 'experts' do not pick the Pats. So what if they don't or happen to criticize us? It's their opinion and it does not bode well if one is unable to accept criticizm or differing view points.

That said, what I detest is when some of these journalists do not take the effort to read up or research and happily spew out something nonsensical and in some cases, get personal. Since that has become a pattern with this trio, I abhor them and it is not due to any of their anti-pats statements as you think.

I don't understand why sports columnists can get a pass with personal attacks (which is what I seem to understand by your comment. Sorry if I misunderstood).

 

[Section103]

Depends what you mean by a 'pass'.

Should I care if he has a skewed and despicable point of view? No, what do I care what he thinks or how he thinks it? What impact does it really have on anyone? It's opinion. It does not make him the scourge of the earth.

Does it mean that he does not deserve criticism for those pieces that he writes? Of course not. He puts it out there, he's asking for criticism and it should be expected.

Now does that mean that any additional works of his can not be looked at independent of what he has previously done? No, of course they can. The question really is, was THIS article good? Did it make a valid point/argument? My impression of the start of the thread was just that. Not, "hey what do you guys think of Bob Ryan's body of work?"