Reiss: Brooks Back in Play for Pats?

[supafly]

How is that a team with zero pass rush ended up with six sacks against the bills (with two called back after the penalties).

And everyone is entitled to their own opinions. You have made some whopper opinions of your own such as:

1."There is no way we're drafting a corner in the first 100 picks"--and you proceeded to write 6-8 threads on the subject

2."It's a fact that we have split the regular season series with the Jets every time this past decade"--although Brady was 11-2 against them, and the ONLY time we split was in the Brady era was in 06 and 08

3. "It's going to take us at least 100 million each to re-sign Seymour and Wilfork"--in honesty that was insane

4."The Patriots will be favored in every single game this year"--show me any sportsbook who will take a bet on a specific game (wk.7, wk.13, etc) without knowing the specific variables about a game

So, even though you may have your own opinions and I respect them immensily, you are far from being correct a lot of the time.

 

[jeffbiologist]

Why? Guyton has done a decent job at filling in. It wasn't the defense that was the issue yesterday. It was the offense.

Not entirely. Guyton's benefits begin(and end)with his increasing the team speed. Why he is used INSIDE instead of OUTSIDE with this speed, I dont know. But I do know that inside ILB blitzes get to the QB too, just ask TB in the super bowl or Sproles on sunday. Guyton isnt a thumper and he isnt the smartest or most instictive ILB, they arent setting him up to be successful. That in itself is a bit unlike a BB team. And is it me or do I see AD jogging alot? I think there is a reason why he isnt wearing the Green Dot, I mean he wore it last year...

 

[mgteich]

A) I noticed a lack of response to the posted question regarding a team without a pass rush having 6 sacks.

1) I didn't think that we need to draft a corner in the first six rounds. I thought that we had more important needs. All that like our linebacker situation can celebrate that I was so wrong in wanted a linebacker or two in before the end of the second round. And yes, I think Butler will be a fine player.

2) I misread some stats and posted incorrect information.

3) You can believe what you want. I believe that if Seymour and Wilfork were to be signed to a long term contract the total cost of the contracts would be over $100M. You can call it insane if you wish. And you can choose to believe that these players are not worth 5 year $50M contracts. I disagree.

4) There were betting lines out before the season started and before Seymour was traded. We were favored in every game. If you have facts to the contrary, please post them. My QUESTION, and it was that, was whether anyone knew the current betting lines. If you think that there are no such lines, then that is another matter.

5) If I thought I was correct all the time, I probably wouldn't bother posting. I enjoy the discussions and yes in being WRONG.

BTW, how does a team have absolutely no pass rush and get six sacks?

And everyone is entitled to their own opinions. You have made some whopper opinions of your own such as:

1."There is no way we're drafting a corner in the first 100 picks"--and you proceeded to write 6-8 threads on the subject

2."It's a fact that we have split the regular season series with the Jets every time this past decade"--although Brady was 11-2 against them, and the ONLY time we split was in the Brady era was in 06 and 08

3. "It's going to take us at least 100 million each to re-sign Seymour and Wilfork"--in honesty that was insane

4."The Patriots will be favored in every single game this year"--show me any sportsbook who will take a bet on a specific game (wk.7, wk.13, etc) without knowing the specific variables about a game

So, even though you may have your own opinions and I respect them immensily, you are far from being correct a lot of the time.

 

[supafly]

A) I noticed a lack of response to the posted question regarding a team without a pass rush having 6 sacks.

1) I didn't think that we need to draft a corner in the first six rounds. I thought that we had more important needs. All that like our linebacker situation can celebrate that I was so wrong in wanted a linebacker or two in before the end of the second round. And yes, I think Butler will be a fine player.

2) I misread some stats and posted incorrect information.

3) You can believe what you want. I believe that if Seymour and Wilfork were to be signed to a long term contract the total cost of the contracts would be over $100M. You can call it insane if you wish. And you can choose to believe that these players are not worth 5 year $50M contracts. I disagree.

4) There were betting lines out before the season started and before Seymour was traded. We were favored in every game. If you have facts to the contrary, please post them. My QUESTION, and it was that, was whether anyone knew the current betting lines. If you think that there are no such lines, then that is another matter.

5) If I thought I was correct all the time, I probably wouldn't bother posting. I enjoy the discussions and yes in being WRONG.

BTW, how does a team have absolutely no pass rush and get six sacks?

How did you notice a lack of response to the question when I already stated that in the 4 sacks in the Buffalo game, 2 came on the last ditch effort drive that Buffalo was employing? Through the first 59:30 we had 2 sacks, until we went on all out blitzes for the first and only time in the game.

So, for the most part, we had 2 sacks through 59:30 in the BUF game, and 2 more sacks yesterday. As I stated, it's not solely my opinion, it's the general consensus of the boards, and the fan base as a whole. If you posted a poll, I am pretty sure you would get the consensus that we could use more pressure on the QB--so you really shouldn't single me out like a made a thread on turning Ben Watson into a LB, or should we go after Michael Crabtree or some ridiculous subject.

Saying we could use more pressure when we have guys like Wilfork, Warren, Green, Brace, Pryor, TBC, Burgess, Adalius Thomas, Pierre Woods, Guyton, etc, isn't that big of a pronouncement, is it? You can keep pretending that we are perfect at the position, but the fact remains that it could be shored up--that's nothing more than a fact. Again, why you'd single me out, when it's been mentioned in about 10 threads today is beyond me, but that's your perogitive. The main point, again, was to show that we shouldn't be complacent, because we could add to what we have--that's why it was in the D.Brooks thread. I'm not really 'ripping' the pass rush, just saying it could be improved.

And as far as being 'favored,' not only do underdogs win about 50-52% of the time, but the only lines that you can wager on is the next week's line, or AFC/NFC as a whole Super Bowl. There isn't a bookie alive that would allow you to wager for example, the next NYJ game, because you cannot predict injuries, scoring, streaks, or records--because they are UNDETERMINED variables. We could lose 3 out of the next 4 games, and Moss could get hurt for the season, in order to properly handicap a game, you need hard data. If you saw some 'futures' lines somewhere--it meant absolutely nothing. The thread was basically pointless.

 

[supafly]

First of all, the pass rush was non existent yesterday, that isn't my opinion, that is the general opinion of the boards.

second of all, we had 4 sacks in the BUF game--but basically 2, because the final 2 came on all out blitzes on the last drive.

If you're opinion is that the pass rush look good, fine. Mine, and many others is that it can be improved.

And as this was my original response to your question, I really don't see where your confusion lies?

 

[supafly]

Again, just to reiterate the facts on the being favored in every game subject, how do you know the New Orleans Saints aren't 10-0 when we play them? (not sure the specific week, just an example)

How do you know that Brees doesn't keep throwing 3,4--even 5 TD's every game? How can you tell me what are injuries will be then? What if we didn't win another game from now until then? Would we still be 'favored' by Vegas and all of the handicappers to win v. New Orleans in their dome where they hardly lose as it is?

That is my point. You cannot tell me with a straight face that you know what these variables will be. Not to mention that being favored means absolutely nothing.

 

[mgteich]

A) No one but you is discussing what the odds will be when we play the games during the year. The discussion was about what the odds are now on those future games.

B) And you can consider your views as hugely important and wise and think that the view of those who actually put their money on the game "means absolutely nothing". That is certainly your priviledge. For me, I have found that the betters have a better record over time than posters and writers.

Again, just to reiterate the facts on the being favored in every game subject, how do you know the New Orleans Saints aren't 10-0 when we play them? (not sure the specific week, just an example)

How do you know that Brees doesn't keep throwing 3,4--even 5 TD's every game? How can you tell me what are injuries will be then? What if we didn't win another game from now until then? Would we still be 'favored' by Vegas and all of the handicappers to win v. New Orleans in their dome where they hardly lose as it is?

That is my point. You cannot tell me with a straight face that you know what these variables will be. Not to mention that being favored means absolutely nothing.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

belichick won't do it. the same way he didn't allow Corey Dillon to come back to the team in the middle of 07' when Dillon said he would be interested. that's despite our run game was suffering when Morris went down. sometimes i think BB thinks too much of his coaching ability.

 

[supafly]

A) No one but you is discussing what the odds will be when we play the games during the year. The discussion was about what the odds are now on those future games.

B) And you can consider your views as hugely important and wise and think that the view of those who actually put their money on the game "means absolutely nothing". That is certainly your priviledge. For me, I have found that the betters have a better record over time than posters and writers.

WTF is that supposed to mean, this time you haven't a clue what you're talking about for sure.

I happened to just have bought an Audi A6 quattro on my "gambling skills," as I've been a member of sportsbook.com for almost 9 years now.

Nice try though..

Edit: and I apologize for giving personal information, or sounding like an ass, but I have more than an 'average' interest in the games, and am not "just a poster" as you say--when it comes to this subject, I do know what I am talking about. There are many subjects where I don't know as much, but then again, I don't act like I do either

 

[supafly]

A) No one but you is discussing what the odds will be when we play the games during the year. The discussion was about what the odds are now on those future games.

B) And you can consider your views as hugely important and wise and think that the view of those who actually put their money on the game "means absolutely nothing". That is certainly your priviledge. For me, I have found that the betters have a better record over time than posters and writers.

And for the record...I said that "being favored means absolutely nothing"

And it doesn't, as underdogs come in more often

I NEVER said the bettors who put money on the games mean absolutely nothing, now you're putting words in my mouth

All of this because I said that our pass rush could be improved....?

 

[supafly]

A) No one but you is discussing what the odds will be when we play the games during the year. The discussion was about what the odds are now on those future games.

THERE ARE NO ODDS RIGHT NOW on the future games....

You are the ONLY one who actually believes this, as it's the whole basis of my discussion

Show me anywhere where we can see week 9 or week 12 or week 15 odds...you can't because THEY DON'T EXIST

 

[supafly]

A) No one but you is discussing what the odds will be when we play the games during the year. The discussion was about what the odds are now on those future games.

B) And you can consider your views as hugely important and wise and think that the view of those who actually put their money on the game "means absolutely nothing". That is certainly your priviledge. For me, I have found that the betters have a better record over time than posters and writers.

Because you took such a hatred to my pointing out that the pass rush could be improved and wasn't perfect, and you're upset because I pointed out your thread on being "favored" in every game this yr, why don't we just solve this and move on?

Go to the site where I have wagered for the past 9 yrs, the one advertised on ESPN, and USA Today---click on football, and SHOW ME where you can wager on any given game or week...Then I will tell you that you are correct, and we'll be done with this..

The site is Sportsbook.comSports Betting, Online Betting, Football Betting at Sportsbook.com

But...you can't, and just won't admit facts so we can move on

 

[mgteich]

A) If you say that Vegas sportsbooks don't take future bets on individual games, then I believe you. I thought that they did in the past. I also thought that the Brits sportsbooks bet on almost anything. So, yes we can move on.

However, there are certainly futures bets on the SB, the division and number of games. Do you know whether these of odds have moved down much over the past three weeks?

B) I agree that all aspects of the defense could be improved. I think the pass-rush is much improved from last year. But whether it is good enough remains to be seen.

Because you took such a hatred to my pointing out that the pass rush could be improved and wasn't perfect, and you're upset because I pointed out your thread on being "favored" in every game this yr, why don't we just solve this and move on?

Go to the site where I have wagered for the past 9 yrs, the one advertised on ESPN, and USA Today---click on football, and SHOW ME where you can wager on any given game or week...Then I will tell you that you are correct, and we'll be done with this..

The site is Sportsbook.comSports Betting, Online Betting, Football Betting at Sportsbook.com

But...you can't, and just won't admit facts so we can move on

 

[supafly]

Thank you for ending this pissing match, and I apologize on my end.

As I have said in my original response to you, I respect your opinions tremendously, and love what you bring here. In my opinion, you are one of the posters who always brings a lot to these forums.

I was simply pointing out some examples of you not always being right, and maybe that was a bit childish, but the point was that we all have opinions and no one is always correct. I try and not put myself out on a limb too much, in fear of being called out on, as I may be if we do better than my 11-5/12-4 pre-season prediction. (other than that I try not to guess or predict)

To answer the question about the futures, yes you certainly can wager on divisional crowns, AFC/NFC crowns, etc--although many do not because they do not want to wait until January to get paid if they win. There are still a number of bettors who do, but most don't have the patience to wait. You can click on the sportsbook.com site I mentioned, click on 'football' and check any lines you want yourself right on the main page. I do not think they have changed much, if at all, however they will soon if teams like DEN, BAL, and ATL, NEW ORL, etc keep winning, as they won't let themselves get crushed on any major players.

Anyway, thanks for moving on, and always, upmost respect to you and everyone.

 

[mgteich]

Thank you for the kind words.

And just BTW, I think that we will know much better after this week how far away this defense is from being a playoff-quality defense. My guess is that we have a long way still to go, in addition to getting Mayo and perhaps Meriweather back.

Thank you for ending this pissing match, and I apologize on my end.

As I have said in my original response to you, I respect your opinions tremendously, and love what you bring here. In my opinion, you are one of the posters who always brings a lot to these forums.

I was simply pointing out some examples of you not always being right, and maybe that was a bit childish, but the point was that we all have opinions and no one is always correct. I try and not put myself out on a limb too much, in fear of being called out on, as I may be if we do better than my 11-5/12-4 pre-season prediction. (other than that I try not to guess or predict)

To answer the question about the futures, yes you certainly can wager on divisional crowns, AFC/NFC crowns, etc--although many do not because they do not want to wait until January to get paid if they win. There are still a number of bettors who do, but most don't have the patience to wait. You can click on the sportsbook.com site I mentioned, click on 'football' and check any lines you want yourself right on the main page. I do not think they have changed much, if at all, however they will soon if teams like DEN, BAL, and ATL, NEW ORL, etc keep winning, as they won't let themselves get crushed on any major players.

Anyway, thanks for moving on, and always, upmost respect to you and everyone.