Rodney's thoughts on Moss

[Deus Irae]

well..gamble said thats what everyone other player inthe league on defense he has talked to said about randy . apparently he didnt talk to bailey ...

1.) I obviously don't think that Gamble has spoken to every other player in the league on defense.

2.) A Champ Bailey quote from October is irrelevant to yesterday's game.

 

[emoney_33]

Oh, joy, another idiotic straw man...

If the shoe fits... Rest assured I will not run away from an argument if/when proven wrong.

This is the problem with homers that don't bother to even try grasping what's being said. They say stupid things.

Moss' production in the past month hasn't been anywhere near "as much as he has for a decade".

Catches over that time:

5
3
2
1

Yards over that time:

34
67
66
16

Touchdowns

1
0
1
0

Moss has clearly seen his production dip over the course of the past 4 weeks. Had it been a small dip, it would have been of little import, because he was producing at an extremely high level earlier in the season. However, because he was producing so well, the drop has been easy to spot.

Oh OK a receiver in his 12th year can't have any struggles, my bad. The O-line struggles and Brady's inconsistency has nothing to do with it. The fact that we have NO other deep threats (aside from Watson who has been blocking mostly) has nothing to do with it either.

We know where Moss' talent lies, he's not going to run the same routes as Welker and many factors have contributed to Moss lack of productivity from what many expect of him the past 4 weeks.

The fact that you instantly attribute his personal statistical production to "dogging" , while there are FAR more logical reasons, does not make ME look foolish at all.

 

[Deus Irae]

So Gamble has the ability to correctly determine that Moss is dogging it and you disregard Bailey's statements that Moss is very deceptive? Cool, whatever fits

Gamble was the one on the field opposing Moss. Of the group of people that BradyFTW! pointed to, his was the only perspective that mattered, simply because he was the only one who was in a position to have to defend Moss in the game, on the field. How the hell is that eluding you?

And, again, Bailey's comments from October are irrelevant when talking about what Gamble says he noted in yesterday's game.

 

[Deus Irae]

Oh OK a receiver in his 12th year can't have any struggles, my bad. The O-line struggles and Brady's inconsistency has nothing to do with it. The fact that we have NO other deep threats (aside from Watson who has been blocking mostly) has nothing to do with it either.

We know where Moss' talent lies, he's not going to run the same routes as Welker and many factors have contributed to Moss lack of productivity from what many expect of him the past 4 weeks.

The fact that you instantly attribute his personal statistical production to "dogging" , while there are FAR more logical reasons, does not make ME look foolish at all.

The fact that this is what you've taken from my posts is precisely what makes you look foolish.

 

[Deus Irae]

If the shoe fits... Rest assured I will not run away from an argument if/when proven wrong.

Leaving a thread is not the same as running away from an argument and, if I was proven wrong, that's certainly news to me.



Seriously, are you in need of counseling or something?

 

[emoney_33]

1.) I obviously don't think that Gamble has spoken to every other player in the league on defense.

2.) A Champ Bailey quote from October is irrelevant to yesterday's game.

When the point is that Moss is deceptive and lulls DBs then yes they have merit. Because Moss had a bad day does not mean his deception wasn't there, it may just mean they were unable to capitalize on it that day. It doesn't mean anything changed from his demeanor and body language in comparison to days where he busts out for 100+ yards. All we know is that Moss had a bad day, and the idiot from the losing team thinks they were so smart in making Moss quit on the day.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

sometimes, even when moss looks like he isn't trying, he beats double-teams

 

[emoney_33]

Gamble was the one on the field opposing Moss. Of the group of people that BradyFTW! pointed to, his was the only perspective that mattered, simply because he was the only one who was in a position to have to defend Moss in the game, on the field. How the hell is that eluding you?

And, again, Bailey's comments from October are irrelevant when talking about what Gamble says he noted in yesterday's game.

So defending Moss gives you the right to determine what his body language means? You have to be the one covering him to see him play? Gamble doesn't know Moss, I'm sure if they play again Moss would burn him deep after making him think he's figured him out. Part of Moss game is making the DB think they have a tell on him and the pass isn't going his way.

 

[Deus Irae]

So defending Moss gives you the right to determine what his body language means? You have to be the one covering him to see him play? Gamble doesn't know Moss, I'm sure if they play again Moss would burn him deep after making him think he's figured him out. Part of Moss game is making the DB think they have a tell on him and the pass isn't going his way.

Ok, you just keep ignoring the obvious. OF THE PEOPLE BRADYFTW! POINTED TO, the only one who's perspective "mattered during the game and on the field" was Gamble. I didn't say that he was the only person in the world with insight into Moss. I didn't say that Moss told him he was going to dog it. I didn't say that Moss wasn't injured (In fact, I noted it in the list of possible justifications). Brady's perspective didn't matter. Belichick's perspective didn't matter. Bob the plumber from Waltham didn't matter. The only people who's perspective mattered, in context, were those trying to defend Moss and the Patriots on the field, in the game. Whether their take on it was right or wrong is irrelevant, because their perception and resultant actions allowed them to hold Moss to his worst production of the season, and generated a fumble from his as well.

Now, if you have something that applies to my point, please bring it up. If you're just going to keep posting the same type of gibberish, go play homer with someone else.

 

[emoney_33]

Ok, you just keep ignoring the obvious. OF THE PEOPLE BRADYFTW! POINTED TO, the only one who's perspective "mattered during the game and on the field" was Gamble. I didn't say that he was the only person in the world with insight into Moss. I didn't say that Moss told him he was going to dog it. I didn't say that Moss wasn't injured (In fact, I noted it in the list of possible justifications). Brady's perspective didn't matter. Belichick's perspective didn't matter. Bob the plumber from Waltham didn't matter. The only people who's perspective mattered, in context, were those trying to defend Moss and the Patriots on the field, in the game. Whether their take on it was right or wrong is irrelevant.

Now, if you have something that applies to my point, please bring it up. If you're just going to keep posting the same type of gibberish, go play homer with someone else.

How the hell does BB and Brady's perspectives not matter? They both can see Moss on the field too ya know. You don't have to be directly in front of Moss to determine how he's playing.

WTF does "go play homer" mean? Seriously you are just an argument machine. You pick tiny things out of thin air and just argue till you find the next thread to argue in.

 

[Deus Irae]

How the hell does BB and Brady's perspectives not matter? They both can see Moss on the field too ya know. You don't have to be directly in front of Moss to determine how he's playing.

WTF does "go play homer" mean? Seriously you are just an argument machine. You pick tiny things out of thin air and just argue till you find the next thread to argue in.

You're the one defending Moss on about 500 threads right now (Your commentary going after Rob on the Felger thread is priceless), and ignoring what people are posting, and you're calling me an argument machine.

Thanks for the giggles.

As for the BB/Brady perspectives..... they weren't in a position where they had to defend Moss on the field. I'm not sure how this is going over your head.

Look, I've been a Moss defender here from the beginning. I'll likely continue to be a Moss defender moving forward. But being a defender of a player doesn't require that I ignore negatives. He just had his worst game of the season. The players defending against him felt that he quit in the game. That sort of thing allows them to change the way they are defending the Patriots.

And if you don't think that rounding off that out route was something that could be perceived as playing with less than 100% effort and focus, that's on you.

 

[emoney_33]

Look, I've been a Moss defender here from the beginning. I'll likely continue to be a Moss defender moving forward. But being a defender of a player doesn't require that I ignore negatives. He just has his worst game of the season. The players defending against him felt that he quit in the game. That sort of thing allows them to change the way they are defending the Patriots.

And if you don't think that rounding off that out route was something that could be perceived as playing with less than 100% effort and focus, that's on you.

So what changed in how they were defending the patriots? At what point did they determine Moss quit on the game and adjusted their strategy?


Receptions / Yards

1st Half:

Welker: 3/24
Watson: 0/0

2nd Half:

Welker: 7/81
Watson: 3/37

 

[BradyFTW!]

You're about as far off on my point as you can possibly be. Perhaps a re-read is in order.

I fully understand what you're saying, but it makes no sense. The only way that your point works is if the guy defending Moss is somehow in a position to judge whether or not he's 'dogging it', while his quarterback, running back (who are on the field with him) and head coach are not. Since you're not going to be able to do that (due to the fact that it's an absurd position), your argument is pointless.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Look, I've been a Moss defender here from the beginning. I'll likely continue to be a Moss defender moving forward. But being a defender of a player doesn't require that I ignore negatives. He just had his worst game of the season. The players defending against him felt that he quit in the game. That sort of thing allows them to change the way they are defending the Patriots.

So, if they felt that Moss was quitting, then that changes how they defended him? What changed, then? As far as I can tell, they were covering him the same in the second half as they were in the first. They certainly didn't stop doubling him. By your own logic, either they didn't think that he quit or it didn't change how they defended him, and either way you're wrong.

 

[Deus Irae]

I fully understand what you're saying, but it makes no sense. The only way that your point works is if the guy defending Moss is somehow in a position to judge whether or not he's 'dogging it', while his quarterback, running back (who are on the field with him) and head coach are not. Since you're not going to be able to do that (due to the fact that it's an absurd position), your argument is pointless.

From this post, you don't understand it. Anyone who watched the game is "in a position to judge whether or not he's 'dogging it'". That's not the same as

talking from a perspective that mattered during the game and on the field

 

[Deus Irae]

So, if they felt that Moss was quitting, then that changes how they defended him? What changed, then? As far as I can tell, they were covering him the same in the second half as they were in the first. They certainly didn't stop doubling him. By your own logic, either they didn't think that he quit or it didn't change how they defended him, and either way you're wrong.

If I'm playing against player "A", and I think he's having a bad game for any reason other than the attention being paid him, I can pay more attention to other players. It doesn't mean that I won't cover him, but it does mean that I can spread my focus out.

This is basic stuff in any team sport.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

From this post, you don't understand it. Anyone who watched the game is "in a position to judge whether or not he's 'dogging it'". That's not the same as

Great, now we have "judges"

The New England patriots are now officially in figure skating.

You were posed a fair question.

If Moss quit, why didn't they stop double teaming him?

A real quitter should have been nobody covered, since he like quit.

 

[emoney_33]

If I'm playing against player "A", and I think he's having a bad game for any reason other than the attention being paid him, I can pay more attention to other players. It doesn't mean that I won't cover him, but it does mean that I can spread my focus out.

This is basic stuff in any team sport.

So then why didn't he or the Panthers spread their focus out?

 

[Deus Irae]

So then why didn't he or the Panthers spread their focus out?

You're assuming they didn't. Given your position on people evaluating Moss, that's probably not the best angle for you to take.

 

[emoney_33]

You're assuming they didn't. Given your position on people evaluating Moss, that's probably not the best angle for you to take.

This post doesn't make sense.