Dr. Z on WFAN

[SVN]

http://www.wfan.com/

just heard his podcast on the joe and evan show. He doesnt give much importance to tommorow's game. also things jags and colts have a chance to beat the pats. The colts cant drop the ball like they did in the first game . Of course he forgets the penalties that the colts got that day.

The was asked if the pats win this whole thing are the greatest ever. He says "not even close" and says the pats have only 2-3 hall of famers compared to the 70's steelers and all.

Quite an interesting/odd take.

 

[Disco Volante]

Re: Dr Z on Wfan

The was asked if the pats win this whole thing are the greatest ever. He says "not even close"

What a joke.

 

[BelichickFan]

Re: Dr Z on Wfan

also things jags and colts have a chance to beat the pats. The colts cant drop the ball like they did in the first game . Of course he forgets the penalties that the colts got that day.

Not to mention that ridiculous Addai TD (which wouldn't happen again if we played them 20 times) plus the HF difference.

The was asked if the pats win this whole thing are the greatest ever. He says "not even close" and says the pats have only 2-3 hall of famers compared to the 70's steelers and all.

No way to say if we'd be the best of all time. But we would UNDENIABLY be the most accomplished team of all time.

Scoreboard, Dr. Z., Scoreboard.

 

[LloydBraun]

Re: Dr Z on Wfan

Everyone is on the Jax bandwagon. They'll be lucky to escape Pitt next weekend. Indy definitely has a chance, but if the refs are impartial, I like our chances.

Those Steelers teams would be tough, but I like our D vs. Bradshaw and company. I also like Brady and the spread vs. the Pitt D. I think Brady and co. would find a way to score a few more points than Bradshaw and co.

The best matchup would be vs. the 49ers with Montana, Rice, Taylor, etc. I would like to see how BB would use this D against that team. I think Brady could slice their D up.

 

[FSUPatsFan]

Re: Dr Z on Wfan

I really don't like comparing the number of HOFers on each team to compare which team is better. There is more to a team than number of Hall of Famers. I think it is better to compare players on the years they are having, as opposed to careers, since it is only this particular Patriots team we are comparing.

For instance, Wes Welker is not going to be a HOFer, but he has been one of the most productive WRs in the league this year. We also have 8 probowlers on this team.

Also, its unfair to say we only have 2-3 HOFers on this team. We have 2-3 guaranteed HOFers RIGHT NOW. Tom Brady, Randy Moss (most likely), and Junior Seau are already in the HOF. I would say that Seymour, Wilfork, Samuel, and Harrison all have the potential or an outside shot at getting there.

Also, how does he know that players like Maroney, Brandon Merriweather, James Sanders, Ty Warren, Mankins, Adaleus, etc.. won't one day develop into HOF players? Shoot, for all we know RIGHT NOW, Chad Jackson still has a chance at the HOF, only because he is still young and has a long career in front of him.

 

[LloydBraun]

Re: Dr Z on Wfan

There are some great players on this team. Dr. Z needs to think of this list, some HOF calibre, others of very good calibre. Compare the 2 teams 10 years from now:

Harrison
Bruschi
Vrabel
Seymour
Warren
Wilfork
Seau
Thomas
Samuel

Brady
Moss
Welker
Koppen
Light
Mankins
Stallworth
Maroney
Faulk

 

[RodThePat]

Silly me, I thought they had all those Steelers in the Hall because of what Pittsburgh accomplished in the 70s, not the other way around.

Dr. Z is quickly getting to the "just f'in retire already, god..." stage.

 

[RayClay]

Silly me, I thought they had all those Steelers in the Hall because of what Pittsburgh accomplished in the 70s, not the other way around.

Dr. Z is quickly getting to the "just f'in retire already, god..." stage.

As Troy would say, Bingo!

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Typical that a mediot would think that the way to evaluate a best team ever would be to total up the talent that his peers have or may vote into a HOF...

Who cares if the 70's Steelers paved the way for juicing in professional sports...

I really think there is a bias against this team and it didn't begin with Belichick. It began with the Patsies whose inept management Will McDonough knew 10 times more than, and it emanates even in the wake of 3 Lombardi's from a local media that never hypes OUR players or this team and it's accomplishments because God forbid their peers might perceive them as unenlightened homers who can't see beyond all this winning. It's a wonder we have any Patriot player in the HOF. Oddly media in NY, SF, Dallas, Pittsburgh have never had similar issues. They can be critical when warranted but the also bang the drum for their fans heros who bring them a ring let alone expandable sets of them.

Of course only in this enlightened market would the lone HOF vote rest with an ugly little toad from Oakland whose primary beat was boxing before Will croaked, until his own newspaper career abrutly ended in early retirement following a plagerizing scandal.

 

[Brady to Brown]

I am no longer interested in what the "experts" have to say about the Patriots. I don't need some ***clown telling me how "average" the Patriots are. I have to give Belichick credit for giving them even 5 mins of his day.

 

[spacecrime]

http://www.wfan.com/
The was asked if the pats win this whole thing are the greatest ever. He says "not even close" and says the pats have only 2-3 hall of famers compared to the 70's steelers and all.

Quite an interesting/odd take.

Yoe're right, that is both interesting and odd.

Many of the Steelers Hall of Famers are there BECAUSE the Steelers did so well. Stanley Morgan was better and more prodcutive that Lynn and Stallworth, and the case could be made that it was harder for him because he wasn't on as good a team. But the Steelers had the PR buzz.

Dr Z has no idea how many Hall of Famers will be on the Pats team. If they go 19-0 and sink into obscurity like the 72 Dolphins, probably not many. But if they rip off three SBs in a row or at least win another 3-4 in the next 4-5 years, you will see a lot of Pats in the Hall of Fame.

Of course, it is different now than it was then. The turnover is higher. Many of the Pats who were mart of the earlier SBs are gone. The Steelers had a more stable team.

Anyway, it is an odd comment that a team with a lot of Hall of Famers is better than a team that goes undefeated with fewer Hall of Famers. A team is more than a collection of individual talent.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Your point about turnover is key.
This is the era of free agency and salary caps.
Players do not stay as long on a given team.

Agree with others that Rings make HOFers.

 

[FrontSeven]

Here we go again with another "who is better" thread.

I don't think I can bear this "we're better and anybody who says otherwise is an idiot" stuff.

First of all, nobody actually knows who is better and nobody ever will. Aside from that have a nice argument.

The truth of it for me is that I'm happy that the Pats are in the discussion. Good enough. I stop right there. Best ever? Who knows and who will ever know? It's like arguing the Mohamed Ali and Rocky Marciano argument. You don't know, nobody knows, give it up. There's nothing wrong with discussing it for entertainment purposes, but to take it seriously should be taken as evidence that you have wasting-brain-disease.

 

[Grizzafted]

Dr. "locker room chemistry will destroy the 2007 patriots" Z?

What did he say now?

 

[Sam Malone]

Wow,he said Seymour plays when he feels like it

 

[the taildragger]

HILARIOUS interview....what a grouchy old bastard. Joe and Evan could barely contain their laughter.

Even if Pats go all the way he thinks they are "maybe top 15".....his #1 team was '76 Steelers that didn't even win the SB, because hypothetically speaking, had they been healthier, they COULD/MIGHT/WOULD HAVE been the most dominant. His point was that they suffered because they lost their running game....

Shouldn't the greatest team ever assembled win despite the loss of Harris and Bleier, while relying instead on an elite passing game and elite defense? Not according to Z. Clearly those Steelers were too one-dimensional to compensate the blow to their running attack. If anything 76 suggests the Steelers might've been overrated. The Pats and Niners were able to win multiple championships substituting the run with the short pass....I guess Z's favorite team couldn't do this despite having Stallworth and Swann....and the Steel Curtain D.

So going down in flames despite still having a boatload of hall of famers who had not been injured, somehow makes your season legendary, but going 19-0 makes you "maybe top 15."

Clearly we're not as smart as PhD Zimmerman, or we could figure these things out.

Hypothetically speaking, if we had Morris and Colvin and everyone else who is hurt we could be even more dominant too.

Parcells has been saying all week that this team would beat all the great teams of history, but I guess Z knows more than a 2-time SB winning HC.

Z is one of these old schoolers who thinks the parity era sucks, and that football was much better when there were only a few teams with a prayer.
In Z's world, the 30s Packers and 40s Bears were better than the '07 Pats because they had more HoFers....nevermind that there are twice as many teams today, ten times as many great players, and a far more grueling schedule.

To Z, everything was better in the olden days. Dude probably doesn't own a microwave.

When you haven't had good sex in about 30 years you become an angry pompous contrarian curmudgeon....which probably qualifies him for his own radio show in New England.

 

[KoolAidDrinker]

Z is one of these old schoolers who thinks the parity era sucks, and that football was much better when there were only a few teams with a prayer.
In Z's world, the 30s Packers and 40s Bears were better than the '07 Pats because they had more HoFers....nevermind that there are twice as many teams today, ten times as many great players, and a far more grueling schedule.

To Z, everything was better in the olden days. Dude probably doesn't own a microwave.

IMO, nostalga is over-rated. Truth be known, today's athletes are bigger, better, faster, brighter, more disciplined, and infinitely better coached.

IMO, if the 2007 Patriots got on the same field as the great Cowboy, Niners, or Steeler teams of the past, those old time teams would be completely demolished. The Pats would score at will. Hell, the 2007 Dolphins would score at will.

History belongs to history. The human body has evolved. The very process of producing a high quality football team has evolved. There is NO comparison.

 

[Fanfrom1960]

IMO, nostalga is over-rated. Truth be known, today's athletes are bigger, better, faster, brighter, more disciplined, and infinitely better coached.

IMO, if the 2007 Patriots got on the same field as the great Cowboy, Niners, or Steeler teams of the past, those old time teams would be completely demolished. The Pats would score at will. Hell, the 2007 Dolphins would score at will.

History belongs to history. The human body has evolved. The very process of producing a high quality football team has evolved. There is NO comparison.

Exactly. Just an example, take the Steelers vaunted linebacking corps of the 70s teams, consisting of Jack Lambert, Jack Ham and Andy Russell. All played at 225 pounds or less, Lambert more like 210 - 215, and he was the middle linebacker! Lambert and Ham are both in the Hall of Fame. Today, they'd have to put on a lot more weight to compete at linebacker, or try out as safeties. I guess you could "tolerate" one smallish linebacker, like Lofa Tatupu today, but not all three. 2007 Patriots would beat the mid 70s Steelers team easily, although it's foolish to even imagine such a game, although again even Bill Parcells is being called on to do so (he picked the Patriots, FWIW).

 

[flasox27]

They should take away his license due to advanced senility. He is a joke on the SI site. He probably thinks Frank Gifford is still playing for the Giants.

 

[godef]

http://www.wfan.com/

just heard his podcast on the joe and evan show. He doesnt give much importance to tommorow's game. also things jags and colts have a chance to beat the pats. The colts cant drop the ball like they did in the first game . Of course he forgets the penalties that the colts got that day.

The was asked if the pats win this whole thing are the greatest ever. He says "not even close" and says the pats have only 2-3 hall of famers compared to the 70's steelers and all.

Quite an interesting/odd take.

Did he mean the "steroid enhanced" Steelers?