Bold Statement: 2014 receiving corps is the best in franchise history

[Bruins29]

The majority isn't always right. You could go to an Indy or Denver board and the majority would claim that Manning > Brady. You could go to a lot of other boards and the majority may think Denver 2013 offense > Pats 2007 offense.

When the facts are laid out though, the 2014 offense (without much of a running game) outperformed the much more balanced 2007 offense against top 10 defenses when you consider both regular season + postseason. When you consider only the postseason, the difference in passing yards per game and points scored isn't even close.

Well, that is not how it works here and nobody here cares what the "majority" thinks in the real world. This is the most respected Patriots forum with the most knowledgeable posters on the team anywhere.

You don't come here and tell everyone the way it is. They tell you!

The poll is going up. Whatever team loses will decide who takes the vacation. It is done.

 

[FourierSeries]

Well, that is not how it works here and nobody here cares what the "majority" thinks in the real world. This is the most respected Patriots forum with the most knowledgeable posters on the team anywhere.

You don't come here and tell everyone the way it is. They tell you!

The poll is going up. Whatever team loses will decide who takes the vacation. It is done.

I appear to be the only one who is consistent. The arguments made in favor of 2007 are the exact same arguments made by Peyton worshippers. As Pats fans, we've spent over a decade debunking such arguments. Now all of a sudden they are being used in this thread.

Put up any poll you want, I'm not taking any "vacation" from the board.

 

[Bruins29]

I appear to be the only one who is consistent. The arguments made in favor of 2007 are the exact same arguments made by Peyton worshippers. As Pats fans, we've spent over a decade debunking such arguments. Now all of a sudden they are being used in this thread.

Put up any poll you want, I'm not taking any "vacation" from the board.

Oh! So you want to tell us your are absolutely right but you are too much of a chicken **** to see if its really true.

Ahhhh, the real FourierSeris is exposed finally. You are a chicken ****.

http://www.cameronherold.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/Chicken-****.jpg

 

[Schmo]

I skipped about 10 pages, so excuse me. As much as my initial reaction was to poo-poo the idea, I think you may have a point (in my 22 years following the pats). Gronk and moss. Edelman and Welker. Stallworth and LaFell. It's close, but i think we'll end up looking back at Jules as a superior player to Welker. I also feel much better about LaFell's year than I did Stallworth's in 07...maybe that's the sb.

Imagine if we got a REAL superman type WR1 like DT,DB or CJ. That's how Tom deserves to finish out his years.

 

[upstater1]

Even though the 2006 WR core was crappy, Brady still had them humming in the AFCCG, and were it not for total BS on the part of many, they would have won the Super Bowl.

 

[glm]

These arguments are getting worse and worse. I am now more convinced than ever that my initial claim was correct.

Hush up. You still haven't giving me those quotes and it's been days. You lost kiddo.

 

[TheFlyingWedge]

I actually think that 14 Gronk and 07 Moss are not that far off. I'd probably have to go with Moss if I had to pick one, but it's pretty close and they have a few things in common.

Both are the best at their respective positions in the game (hall of fame levels really), demand double teams and major game-planning on the part of the defense, and they open up all kinds of opportunities for other players.

 

[glm]

I skipped about 10 pages, so excuse me. As much as my initial reaction was to poo-poo the idea, I think you may have a point (in my 22 years following the pats). Gronk and moss. Edelman and Welker. Stallworth and LaFell. It's close, but i think we'll end up looking back at Jules as a superior player to Welker. I also feel much better about LaFell's year than I did Stallworth's in 07...maybe that's the sb.

Imagine if we got a REAL superman type WR1 like DT,DB or CJ. That's how Tom deserves to finish out his years.

How you not gonna mention jabar gaffney or ben watson?

 

[FourierSeries]

Hush up. You still haven't giving me those quotes and it's been days. You lost kiddo.

It's not my job to hold your hand through this conversation, junior. That subject has been addressed multiple times. Read through the posts.

After that, try to come up with a better argument.

 

[glm]

It's not my job to hold your hand through this conversation, junior. That subject has been addressed multiple times. Read through the posts.

After that, try to come up with a better argument.

You didn't mention an injured Tom Brady in any of your posts. At all.

I'll make it very simple for you:

Injured Tom Brady + Bad Oline play = Low Receiving Production.

Fact.

Let's look at the PPG before and after Tom injured his ankle (The AFC Championship being the game where he injured his ankle):

Before Tom got injured = 36.5 PPG.

After Tom got injured = 17.5 PPG.

That'sa 19 PPG dropoff for those of you keeping track at home

How about passer rating? Let's take a look:

Before Tom got injured his stat line read:
606-424-5068-53-8 = 118.88.

After Tom got injured:
81-51-475-3-3 = 75.90.

That's a drop off of 42.98.

It is PAINFULLY OBVIOUS that the only reason the 07 Pats offense dropped off a cliff in the playoffs is because Tom got injured and in the Super Bowl his oline gave an all time worst performance.

Yet you're trying to blame it on the receiving corp. Just give it up, you couldn't be more wrong.

 

[Kontradiction]

You didn't mention an injured Tom Brady in any of your posts. At all.

I'll make it very simple for you:

Injured Tom Brady + Bad Oline play = Low Receiving Production.

Fact.

Let's look at the PPG before and after Tom injured his ankle (The AFC Championship being the game where he injured his ankle):

Before Tom got injured = 36.5 PPG.

After Tom got injured = 17.5 PPG.

That'sa 19 PPG dropoff for those of you keeping track at home

How about passer rating? Let's take a look:

Before Tom got injured his stat line read:
606-424-5068-53-8 = 118.88.

After Tom got injured:
81-51-475-3-3 = 75.90.

That's a drop off of 42.98.

It is PAINFULLY OBVIOUS that the only reason the 07 Pats offense dropped off a cliff in the playoffs is because Tom got injured and in the Super Bowl his oline gave an all time worst performance.

Yet you're trying to blame it on the receiving corp. Just give it up, you couldn't be more wrong.

 

[FourierSeries]

You didn't mention an injured Tom Brady in any of your posts. At all.

I'll make it very simple for you:

Injured Tom Brady + Bad Oline play = Low Receiving Production.

Fact.

Let's look at the PPG before and after Tom injured his ankle (The AFC Championship being the game where he injured his ankle):

Before Tom got injured = 36.5 PPG.

After Tom got injured = 17.5 PPG.

That'sa 19 PPG dropoff for those of you keeping track at home

How about passer rating? Let's take a look:

Before Tom got injured his stat line read:
606-424-5068-53-8 = 118.88.

After Tom got injured:
81-51-475-3-3 = 75.90.

That's a drop off of 42.98.

It is PAINFULLY OBVIOUS that the only reason the 07 Pats offense dropped off a cliff in the playoffs is because Tom got injured and in the Super Bowl his oline gave an all time worst performance.

Yet you're trying to blame it on the receiving corp. Just give it up, you couldn't be more wrong.

It's only painfully obvious if you think correlation implies causation. But that would be a logical fallacy.

He was in a walking boot for a couple of days, then was seen walking around with no limp. He was moving around fine in warm ups and during the game. Stop trying to hype up one injury, and try to downplay the ones that players played through in this year's postseason. He was nowhere near as hobbled as Rodgers was this year, and Rodgers played well regardless. I refuse to believe that Rodgers is able to perform better with an injury than Brady, given that mobility is a large part of Rodgers' game while Brady is strictly a pocket passer.

This year in the postseason: Edelman was battling a hip injury, Stork missed a game and a half due to a knee injury and wasn't 100% in the SB, and both Edelman and Amendola likely sustained concussions in the SB.

Try again.

 

[fresnostatealum]

It's only painfully obvious if you think correlation implies causation. But that would be a logical fallacy.

He was in a walking boot for a couple of days, then was seen walking around with no limp. He was moving around fine in warm ups and during the game. Stop trying to hype up one injury, and try to downplay the ones that players played through in this year's postseason. He was nowhere near as hobbled as Rodgers was this year, and Rodgers played well regardless. I refuse to believe that Rodgers is able to perform better with an injury than Brady, given that mobility is a large part of Rodgers' game while Brady is strictly a pocket passer.

This year in the postseason: Edelman was battling a hip injury, Stork missed a game and a half due to a knee injury and wasn't 100% in the SB, and both Edelman and Amendola likely sustained concussions in the SB.

Try again.

Talk about trying to hype up injuries...

As long as none of those names are "Tom Brady", it's incomparable.

 

[FourierSeries]

Talk about trying to hype up injuries...

As long as none of those names are "Tom Brady", it's incomparable.

Right, because our #1 receiver who some argue could have been SB MVP is insignificant.

 

[fresnostatealum]

Right, because our #1 receiver who some argue could have been SB MVP is insignificant.

He played just fine didn't he? Every player has little knick knack injuries at the end of the year. Not every player is walking around in a walking boot right before the Super Bowl.

And it's funny you keep mentioning that they *might* have had a concussion to fluff up your injury report. I can say Moss "might" have had the flu before the game and it would count the same.

 

[glm]

It's only painfully obvious if you think correlation implies causation. But that would be a logical fallacy.

He was in a walking boot for a couple of days, then was seen walking around with no limp. He was moving around fine in warm ups and during the game.

I'm sure his ankle was feeling peachy when he was getting absolutely massacred by the Giants d-line. And it's HILARIOUS that you didn't mention the all time worse performance by our olne that game YET AGAIN. Why is that? Because anybody who has a basic understanding of football knows that a poor oline = a poor passing game (Unless they're like Russell Wilson, which Brady most definitely is not).

Stop trying to hype up one injury, and try to downplay the ones that players played through in this year's postseason.

Hype up an injury? Just stating facts. I'm sorry if Tom being injured doesn't support your argument.
And child, none of those injuries in the Super Bowl were TOM FRICKEN BRADY.

If Tom had the same injury in this Super Bowl do you think he throws 4 td's on the Legion of Boom? Yes or no.

He was nowhere near as hobbled as Rodgers was this year, and Rodgers played well regardless. I refuse to believe that Rodgers is able to perform better with an injury than Brady, given that mobility is a large part of Rodgers' game while Brady is strictly a pocket passer.

Aaron Rodgers offensive line also didn't display an all time worse performance. Rodgers wasn't getting his tooken off every other play.

This year in the postseason: Edelman was battling a hip injury, Stork missed a game and a half due to a knee injury and wasn't 100% in the SB, and both Edelman and Amendola likely sustained concussions in the SB.

All I'm reading here is that the greatest quarterback that ever existed wasn't injured, which is always a good thing for the Super Bowl.

Face it, your arguing in circles, blatantly ignoring facts that don't suit your arguments (horrible o-line play), and downplaying significant details (Tom being injured).

There's a reason why EVERYBODY in this topic says you are COMPLETELY and UTTERLY WRONG.

It's because you are

 

[FourierSeries]

He played just fine didn't he? Every player has little knick knack injuries at the end of the year. Not every player is walking around in a walking boot right before the Super Bowl.

And it's funny you keep mentioning that they *might* have had a concussion to fluff up your injury report. I can say Moss "might" have had the flu before the game and it would count the same.

He was walking fine with no limp. The walking boot was temporary.

The injury happened in the 3rd quarter. The passing offense struggled long before that.

 

[FourierSeries]

That's part of what makes this 2014 receiving corps better. They weren't nearly as reliant on superb pass blocking as that the 2007 one was. The Oline this year was inconsistent. Brady was hit relentlessly in Buffalo earlier in the year but was able to get the ball out quickly. He was hit/pressured quite a bit in the Baltimore game but again, the ball came out quickly. Same with the Seattle game. Why is that? He's always had a quick release. The difference was the ability of these speedy receivers to get open and allow him to dump the ball off to them. They also turned those quick 5 yard passes into large gains with very impressive YAC.

 

[glm]

That's part of what makes this 2014 receiving corps better. They weren't nearly as reliant on superb pass blocking as that the 2007 one was. The Oline this year was inconsistent. Brady was hit relentlessly in Buffalo earlier in the year but was able to get the ball out quickly. He was hit/pressured quite a bit in the Baltimore game but again, the ball came out quickly. Same with the Seattle game. Why is that? He's always had a quick release. The difference was the ability of these speedy receivers to get open and allow him to dump the ball off to them. They also turned those quick 5 yard passes into large gains with very impressive YAC.

So this years receiving corp is better cause we don't have a deep threat?

No. Just no.

If you actually watched the Pats in 07 then you'd know we weren't just a throw deep type of offense.
They would literally kill you in every single level of the passing game.

Wanna go short? Throw it to Wes and Kevin Faulk.

Wanna hit the intermediate routes? Well we got Jabar Gaffney.

Deep threats? We literally have the best one of all time in Moss and we got Stallworth too.

The 2007 receiving corp was much more complete and much deeper too.

You know what Bill loves to say: "Do your job."
Well, if the oline DID THEIR JOB, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Now hit me with another poverty post of yours. I'm ready.

 

[FourierSeries]

So this years receiving corp is better cause we don't have a deep threat?

No. Just no.

If you actually watched the Pats in 07 then you'd know we weren't just a throw deep type of offense.
They would literally kill you in every single level of the passing game.

Wanna go short? Throw it to Wes and Kevin Faulk.

Wanna hit the intermediate routes? Well we got Jabar Gaffney.

Deep threats? We literally have the best one of all time in Moss and we got Stallworth too.

The 2007 receiving corp was much more complete and much deeper too.

You know what Bill loves to say: "Do your job."
Well, if the oline DID THEIR JOB, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Now hit me with another poverty post of yours. I'm ready.

Is your level of reading comprehension that poor? Where did I say this receiving corps is better because we don't have a deep threat? We may not have anyone on Moss's level in terms of attacking deep, but Gronk is our "deep threat." It's better because it can excel at times even when protection breaks down which allows Brady to get the ball out almost immediately. And a lot of times, especially in the clutch, those plays result in large YAC.

This year's receiving corps made plays even when pass protection failed.