Rodney's thoughts on Moss

[Deus Irae]

So you're deflecting again because you don't have an actual response to the point that I made. Typical.

I'm not deflecting anything. I'm pointing to your own argument. You've chosen "B", which is something you accused me of doing.

Your post here is just a continuation of that, as you attempt to toss out a red herring rather than just admit to something.

So, I'll give you another chance...

Is eMoney making an assumption when he claims that the Panthers did not adjust the defense due to Randy's poor showing? If you claim he's not, how is your claim not based upon an assumption, since he's offered no proof of his claim?

 

[BradyFTW!]

​

On running plays is Brady handling the ball off and then looking over to Moss and seeing what he is doing....?

On running plays, Gamble would have more important things to worry about than whether or not Moss was 'dogging it' (like making a play, which he consistently failed to do).

 

[BradyFTW!]

I'm not deflecting anything. I'm pointing to your own argument. You've chosen "B", which is something you accused me of doing.

Your post here is just a continuation of that, as you attempt to toss out a red herring rather than just admit to something.

I asserted the null hypothesis. You're the one claiming that Carolina had the option of spreading the coverage around since Moss wasn't giving 100%, yet you've failed repeatedly to offer any evidence that even suggests that that was the case. Do you have evidence or not?

I'll tell you what- give even a handful of examples where Gamble *didn't* have help on Moss and you might be able to save some face here. You can probably find one or two if you look hard enough (I can remember two off the top of my head), but those both looked like busted coverages. Maybe they weren't, though, so if you can find a few more you might actually have a leg to stand on.

 

[The Dynasty]

On running plays, Gamble would have more important things to worry about than whether or not Moss was 'dogging it' (like making a play, which he consistently failed to do).

He most certainly can...he can see how Moss comes off the ball which could even be a give away to him that it is in fact a running play. That argument is 100% off base.

 

[ausbacker]

This thread is going around and around in circles. Randy Moss is entitled to have quiet days. They happen.... it just appears to be an issue because he is a superstar. The Patriots won the game and that's all that matters to me.

As for Gamble, enjoy the post-season.

 

[Deus Irae]

I asserted the null hypothesis. You're the one claiming that Carolina had the option of spreading the coverage around since Moss wasn't giving 100%, yet you've failed repeatedly to offer any evidence that even suggests that that was the case. Do you have evidence or not?

Do you ignore the meaning of the term "option" now?

Shaq shoots about 50% from the free throw line, and Dwight Howard shoots free throws at about a 60% pace. Teams know this, which means that they will have the option of fouling them rather than giving up a dunk for the near certain 2 points.

Not surprisingly, however, they don't always do that, because other factors are involved. Is that evidence those players aren't shooting free throws at about a 60% rate or less?

You've gone completely in the tank on this.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Is eMoney making an assumption when he claims that the Panthers did not adjust the defense due to Randy's poor showing? If you claim he's not, how is your claim not based upon an assumption, since he's offered no proof of his claim?

Technically, yes, every post on this forum is an assumption. If you're really trying to make such an asinine point, then congrats I guess. Even Rodney Harrison's opinion is an assumption, at the core of it. There is a gulf of difference, however, between an 'assumption' that is supported by a great deal of evidence and one that some guy on a message board pulls out of his ass and can't even find cursory evidence to support. eMoney is the former, you're the latter.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

BB and Brady are not looking at Moss on every play. Gamble was lined up 3 feet from him every play, he knows more than anyone whether he is giving his best effort. Its the same way in basketball you can tell if the player you are guarding is giving their best effort more than anyone else watching. I dont understand why this isnt such a hard concept for everyone to understand.

It's hard to understand because because your case is idiotic.

Was Gamble given a copy of the gameplan? Sorta of reverse Spygate?

BB/TB were actaully at the game. What were they doing? Can they watch non Spygate film?

This might be hard to fathom but even great players have terrible games.

 

[The Dynasty]

This thread is going around and around in circles. Randy Moss is entitled to have quiet days. They happen. The Patriots won the game and that's all that matters to me.

As for Gamble, enjoy the post-season.

What is up with the hate for Gamble? He didnt do anything wrong, he was asked a question and he answered it. He wasnt trying to offend anyone. He would know better than any of us whether Moss gave 100% effort yesterday

 

[BradyFTW!]

Do you ignore the meaning of the term "option" now?

Shaq shoots about 50% from the free throw line, and Dwight Howard shoots free throws at about a 60% pace. Teams know this, which means that they will have the option of fouling them rather than giving up a dunk for the near certain 2 points.

Not surprisingly, however, they don't always do that, because other factors are involved. Is that evidence those players aren't shooting free throws at about a 60% rate or less?

You've gone completely in the tank on this.

You could certainly point to many examples where teams have chosen to foul both players due to their atrocious FT percentage. There is a ton of evidence backing up that claim, above and beyond the percentages themselves.

Where's the evidence backing up the Moss claim? When has anyone stopped doubling him on virtually every play?

Or are you claiming that it's an 'option' that everyone's chosen against? In that case, it's not really an option at all. It's an option in much the same sense that Belichick has the 'option' of putting Brady in at RB. Sure, he could theoretically do it, but it's such an outrageously stupid idea that he wouldn't even consider it.

When people start covering Moss man-to-man with anything even remotely resembling regularity, you might have a point. For now, you pretty obviously don't.

 

[The Dynasty]

It's hard to understand because because your case is idiotic.

Was Gamble given a copy of the gameplan? Sorta of reverse Spygate?

BB/TB were actaully at the game. What were they doing? Can they watch non Spygate film?

This might be hard to fathom but even great players have terrible games.

Comparing spygate to this is completely off base.

First of all, yes great players have terrible games but it is not because of lack of effort. Moss not only dropped 2 passes and fumble, but he didnt run the crisp quick routes that Patriot fans and players are used to seeing. It is the effort part that gets fans and the media upset.

Gamble doesnt need a copy of the game plan to see whether he was giving his all or not. You must have not played a sport in your life if you dont understand this concept. You can definitely tell the player you are guarding is giving their best effort, whether it is in football, basketball, soccer or lacrosse. It doesnt take a genious to figure that out.

 

[Deus Irae]

Technically, yes, every post on this forum is an assumption. If you're really trying to make such an asinine point, then congrats I guess. Even Rodney Harrison's opinion is an assumption, at the core of it. There is a gulf of difference, however, between an 'assumption' that is supported by a great deal of evidence and one that some guy on a message board pulls out of his ass and can't even find cursory evidence to support. eMoney is the former, you're the latter.

And again you go with "B".


Well, the humor value is high on this thread, at least.


Where is this "evidence" you're asserting? Did you breakdown all the coverages? Did eMoney?

Gamble was the only player mentioned who was lined up against Moss and, thus, his perspective was the only one of import.

Now, if you had an issue with what I was saying, it would have made sense to argue that you felt Brady's perspective was more important because he had to deal with decisions about where to throw the ball, or that Belichicks' was more important because he had to coach around any such analysis. I'd have disagreed with you, but those are at least relevant.

This "Did the Panthers change...." crap is not, particularly when the two biggest proponents of that argument on this thread apparently didn't even bother to break down the coverages to verify their claims.

 

[Deus Irae]

You could certainly point to many examples where teams have chosen to foul both players due to their atrocious FT percentage. There is a ton of evidence backing up that claim, above and beyond the percentages themselves.

Where's the evidence backing up the Moss claim? When has anyone stopped doubling him on virtually every play?

One could ask Mr. Revis about that, to start. Then, while you're at it, you could stop tossing out the red herrings.

 

[ausbacker]

What is up with the hate for Gamble? He didnt do anything wrong, he was asked a question and he answered it. He wasnt trying to offend anyone. He would know better than any of us whether Moss gave 100% effort yesterday

I've nothing against Gamble, I just don't care for his opinion. That's really the crux of it.

 

[The Dynasty]

I've nothing against Gamble, I just don't care for his opinion. That's really the crux of it.

He was asked for his opinion and he gave it though, he didnt do anything wrong. He wasnt trying to make a huge show out of it

 

[ausbacker]

He was asked for his opinion and he gave it though, he didnt do anything wrong. He wasnt trying to make a huge show out of it

You act like I don't know what's going on. I simply don't care what Gamble's opinion is just the same as the idiotic reporting to cut Moss. It's not that hard to work out.

 

[WhoaDirty]

Re-read the post. I did not make that claim. Here's what post #7 reads:



Note that it's about 'perspective that mattered', not 'best position to judge'. The person who was in the best position to judge is Randy Moss.

Moss was clearly not giving 100% focus and effort, from the defenders' perspective. Anyone questioning this should just go back and look at the out route.

I agree that Moss wasn't at 100%, but you arguing "perspective that mattered" and "best position to judge" is pure semantics. If Moss is the best position to judge, then he was also the best perspective that mattered.

 

[Deus Irae]

I agree that Moss wasn't at 100%, but you arguing "perspective that mattered" and "best position to judge" is pure semantics. If Moss is the best position to judge, then he was also the best perspective that mattered.

It's not pure semantics at all. BradyFTW! posted:

So on one hand, we have Bruschi, Harrison. Brady, Faulk and Belichick saying one thing. On the other hand, we have Chris Gamble saying the opposite. And people here actually believe Gamble?

My response was specifically to that and noted the difference in perspective. BradyFTW! knows full well that the Patriots players can be expected to have Moss' back, yet he threw out his misleading post.

Now, before you call me out on "misleading", let's get to it. Here's Harrison:

Former Patriots Rodney Harrison, now an NBC analyst, said he didn't think Moss gave up, though he added he thought the receiver "quit on one route."

"I don't think he quit but he didn't play as hard as he could play," Harrison said.

Panthers say Randy Moss gave up on Patriots; is it true? - The Huddle: Football News from the NFL - USATODAY.com

That's sure as hell not saying the opposite of what Gamble said:

"We knew he was going to shut it down," Panthers cornerback Chris Gamble told me after the game. "That's what we wanted to do him. That's what we did. ... He'd just give up a lot ... Slow down, he's not going deep, not trying to run a route. You can tell, his body language."

Gamble continued ... "I know everyone who plays against him, they can sense that. Once you get into him in the beginning of the game, he shuts it down a little bit."

Now, let's toss in Gamble's teammate:

"You get physical with him, and I don't want to say he quits, but he kind of doesn't run the routes the way they're supposed to be run," safety Chris Harris told me. "If you get a jam on him, he'll just ease up. He had the one catch, and he fumbled. ... We stayed on top of him. We were not gonna let him catch a deep pass. That's his game. If he can't get it going, he gets out of sync."

Panthers say Moss 'shut it down' - Extra Points - Boston.com

If you want to talk about "pure semantics", take that up with BradyFTW!. He and eMoney have gone insane in this thread.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Gamble was the only player mentioned who was lined up against Moss and, thus, his perspective was the only one of import.

Why? You keep claiming this, but it never made sense to begin with, and it still doesn't There are 21 other guys on the field, and 10 of them are Moss's teammates who actually know what Moss is supposed to be doing on any given play. Gamble isn't one of those 10. Does his perspective matter? Certainly. But to claim that the perspective of, say, Tom Brady (only the guy who's passing to him) doesn't matter is just dumb. Not to even mention Belichick.

 

[captain insano]

So on one hand, we have Bruschi, Harrison. Brady, Faulk and Belichick saying one thing. On the other hand, we have Chris Gamble saying the opposite. And people here actually believe Gamble?

i believe what my eyes showed me during the game.