The D is laughable

[tobias funke]

patslifer is pretty dumb

does he really expect anyone to believe he is a pats fan

seriously though what kind of person has the time to pretend to be a pats fan on a patsfan forum

get a job bro

 

[Patjew]

I just hate the ignore function because it leads to some really choppy threads. Add that in with the unintended comedy these clowns provide and I tend to keep them unignored. It's just gotten to the breaking point with a couple of the biggest assclowns currently posting.

I've gone on the same exact journey. I've gone from 0 to 3 or 4 posters on ignore the past 2 weeks.

 

[PatsfanTN]

omg, i just watched the second 49er touchdown. wowowow, when did the Pats D get so bad? it is laughable right now, and after a bye week?...jeez, this looks like the Bengals defense out there....

Looks like I eat crow(and the Begals D didnt look so bad either). Adjustments were made I see, Im happy to admit I was wrong here. I still think that the secondary looked a little lost early and O'neil still looked that way into the 2nd half. Was it me or did Vrabel look exceptionally slow today? He looked like he was laboring just jogging off the field.

 

[fair catch fryar]

It was not a one game thing. THEY SUCK! The homers can chug the kool-aid, but you all know the truth. No pressure on the qb, terrible pass coverage, and blown assignments all over the place.

You're right, 'cause people were saying the same things about the Giant's defense last year at this time and look how they turned out.

Like Cassell, give 'em time. If they can't pull it together by week 8-9, then I'll stat worrying about NOT winning the Superbowl this year.

Jeesh...how quickly some people forget!

 

[vyrago]

Says who you? Who are you anyway? Hhaha!!!!

I smell a troll.

Dnftec.

 

[jimache]

Say what you want, the d will be exposed before the season is finished, and it will be the cause of our round one loss in the playoffs.

... that sounds like wishful thinking to me ... i might be wrong ... sorry just a homers analysis of your rambling ...

 

[Jimke]

My main criticism of the defense was their inability to sack the

quarterback. They were able to get into the offensive backfield

numerous times but except for one occasion O'Sullivan escaped.

Maybe this is the price you pay for big, slow defensive linemen in

the 3-4 defense.

 

[DaBruinz]

Patslifer - I think its funny that so many people are telling you the same thing I told you two weeks ago.

Keep it up man. I love it.

 

[Deus Irae]

My main criticism of the defense was their inability to sack the

quarterback. They were able to get into the offensive backfield

numerous times but except for one occasion O'Sullivan escaped.

Maybe this is the price you pay for big, slow defensive linemen in

the 3-4 defense.

The team was second in the NFL in sacks last season. Having said that, take a look at the drive charts from last night and relax.

 

[DaBruinz]

No, I just think the defense stinks, and if we make it to the playoffs it will be exposed. All you homers cant handle that!

The problem is that you DON'T think.. You ignore that the Patriots Defense played pretty well for most of the game. They DID get plenty of pressure on the QB.. Just because they weren't sacks doesn't mean it wasn't there.

Do they still have issues? Yep. They do. Just like every other team.

So, please stop with YOUR Internet Tough Guy and Assclown routine because its laughable.

 

[DaBruinz]

My main criticism of the defense was their inability to sack the

quarterback. They were able to get into the offensive backfield

numerous times but except for one occasion O'Sullivan escaped.

Maybe this is the price you pay for big, slow defensive linemen in

the 3-4 defense.

Jimke -
If Bill Belichick says that sacks are over-rated, why can't you give him the benefit of the doubt?

Last I looked, the Pats put pressure on O'Sullivan to the point where he threw 3 interceptions. THAT is what Belichick wants. The turnovers. The drive killers. The morale killers.

 

[DaBruinz]

Oh really? How much would you like to bet that I have had season tickets longer than you have been a fan of the pats. Going on 18 years now. I was there when your mommy was wiping your nose!

I don't care if your'e digusted; I don't know you and your opinion means nothing to me. I think the 2008 pats d is garbage, and I beleive it will be exposed in the playoffs ( if we make it). Be careful what you call me, I was being called the same thing when I was calling Jackson a bust during preseason.... How did that turn out?

Dude - Keep on showing everyone how unintelligent you are. I'll put $50 that MoLewis has been a fan a lot longer than you've had season ticket. I know that I've been a fan a lot longer than that. Since 1982.

You can think that the Pats D is garbage, but you're not doing ANYTHING to support your claim.

As for your calling Jackson a bust, even a blind squirrel can find a nut in the woods. So, I'll continue to believe that you are an idiot until you prove otherwise. And it would seem most others in here feel the same way I do.

 

[DaBruinz]

Of course, those are 4 of the worst defenses in the NFL. Still, holding any NFL team to under 200 yards is impressive.

Arizona isn't one of the worst defenses.

 

[DaBruinz]

Cassel is in no way shape or form better than Brady was in 2001, it only looks that way.
Brady had squat to deal to, Cassel has All-Stars,and a future Hall of Famer.
Cassel has better TE'S AND RB'S to throw to as well(Faulk is MUCH better now).
Brady had a hodge Podge line in front of him, not an 'All Pro" line like Cassel does either.
Cassel also has had FOUR years to TRY and wrap his brain around the playbook, Brady had ONE.

Bah

1) I don't think that the Cassel of 2008 is better than the Brady of 2001.
2) Can't deny the talent that Cassel has around him.
3) This line is not an "ALL PRO" line. Sorry. They've been very inconsistent so far this year.
4) This is Cassel's 4th year. So he's had 3 years, but very limited reps. I'd say that Brady having one doesn't mean anything because they went with an extremely limited play-book for Brady. That's a fact you can't deny.

 

[DaBruinz]

The D was bad today at 1st but started getting 3 and outs in the 2nd and 3rd quarters, had 3 INTS and did not give up a big running play to Gore. What bothers me is the front 7's inability to get sacks, O'Sullivan got free on 5 potential sacks today and Bruce torched the secondary, overall i would agree with Patslifer because the D was only on the field for 20 minutes. Can you imagine how many points they would of given up if on the field for 40 minutes? The offense definitely picked up the D today. Hopefully the D can put up a better performance next week, they will need to.

Patslifer, is it really the D that sucks or is it the DC/playcalling?

Sorry Dude. But Sacks are over-rated. Belichick says so. I'll take his word over yours any day.

 

[DW Toys]

I keep saying it, pull the plug on J. Sanders and let Wheatley in there at CB. Sanders sucks so bad, he never makes plays and can't takle worth a crap.

A last someone else with sense. Careful, they don't like you saying that about James except remember James is a "safety" (how ironic is that).
I would take Lynch over Sanders 1,000%. At least he can tackle and he is no slower than Sanders.
DW Toys

 

[Leave No Doubt]

Sorry Dude. But Sacks are over-rated. Belichick says so. I'll take his word over yours any day.

Sacks are awesome to watch but I'll take an INT anyday. INTs put the ball right back in your hands,gives you a chance to score,and forces the opponent's D to get right back out there again. INT's change games more often than not,sacks are good too but they don't necessarily put the ball in your hands.

 

[DaBruinz]

I'm calling BS right back at you, the D was on the field the majority of the game against Miami and gave up 38 points, if you think that was a good showing by the D then you need help. I gave credit to the 3 and outs, holding Gore and the INTS but we need a 60 minute better performance by the D in SD next week to win that game, don't you agree? Or are you expecting the offense to control the ball for 40 minutes all year? Come back to reality, there will be more games where the D is on the field most of the game again.

You can call BS all you want, but you are contradicting yourself.

1) The defense spent a majority of the game on the field against Miami because the D-line was horrible that game.

2) The O-line was horrible against Miami as well.

3) I can agree that the Pats need a more consistent play from both sides of the ball, but you are severely over-reacting to the few bad palys.

 

[DaBruinz]

A last someone else with sense. Careful, they don't like you saying that about James except remember James is a "safety" (how ironic is that).
I would take Lynch over Sanders 1,000%. At least he can tackle and he is no slower than Sanders.
DW Toys

I'll tell you the same thing I told him. SANDERS wasn't to blame. Sanders wasn't playing CB.

But, far be it from you to know wtf you are talking about.

He has no sense on the subject like YOU have no sense on the subject.

 

[PATSNUTme]

95 post on this thread telling someone that he is wrong, he is a troll, he is a bad fan, and so on. Then someone actually sent a complaint in after engaging the OP.

Simple solution, don't post on these types of threads. Why do you think threads like this and others get started? The OP wants attention? Just a wild guess on my part. And by all these replies, he getting it.