Discussion in 'The Practice Squad' started by F0nSY, Dec 22, 2011.
Can you imagine it ? Would we win 3 superbowls without Tom Brady? .
Let's try imagine it.
Why would I want to? No and let's not.
You can do what you want...
Let's hope they won't look like the Colts w/o Manning.......
Every time I see your avatar I think someone has hacked my account ...
They would still be great.
It would be worse without BB.
They would be in St Louis without Kraft.
Patsfans.com wouldn't exist.
Hey....how'd you get my picture?
Sorry about that...will go find another...unless you think the site can handle two Rico's!!!!
...I could be your younger twin bro???
Hah! I think at one point we had three posters here with Godzilla avatars so it wouldn't be unprecedented. Maybe you can use a different pic (like the one in your profile) so others know who's speaking; my posts are confusing enough!
And, uh, welcome to the board!
We now return to our regular thread ....
I'd rather imagine getting my toes eaten by fire ants.
Well the one thing we have already seen is their commitment to being competitive. Unlike, the disgraceful way the Colts went about it. Even if someone wants to argue they played their hearts out, fine. Their contingency plan was non exhistant.......
I don't have to imagine it. I saw it for many years.
Once upon a time, the world was created...
And then a year later, it was 2002.
They would not be even close to great without Brady. This year, without Brady, they would have been competing for Andrew Luck.
I was talking to a football fan out here about Montana and Young and Favre and Rodgers and he actually said "You guys had that with Bledsoe and Brady" after I stopped laughing I explained to him about the tipped balls and Interceptions and throwing the ball out of bounds on the last play of the game and brooding when your team won the Super Bowl and crippling a girl at the Mosh Pit and etc etc etc. Yeah, there before Brady. And there was after Brady.
In about 4 years we'll be spending our time remembering how great it was to have him as our QB. But while we have him, the OP wants us to take time away from the success, and spend time thinking about what if we sucked?
Yeah I'll get right to that.
Nope. Welker, Gronk, AH and Branch would still be one of the best receiving corps in the league, our OL would still be one of the best in the league and Hoyer would have this offense around league average. That, along with a D that creates a bunch of turnovers, will get you more than the 2 wins and therefore take you out of the luck sweepstakes.
Would we be great? No. Would we be close to getting Luck? No.
Is it too late to "Suck for Luck"?
You don't think with that defense over from 01-07 that they would not find a QB to to take them to the playoffs consistently? They would not be a dynasty but they would be successful. As long as BB doesn't get canned after the 01 season I firmly believe that they would field competitive teams for years. Look at 2008.
I love the dum dums on here saying we'd have exactly the same results as the Colts had this year, because hey look! They lost manning and they're 2-13! That means if we lost Brady we'd be 2-13!
It just clarifies to me that they've been casual Pats fans at best, at least up to 2008.
Dum dums: We lost Brady and Matt Cassel took us to 11-5. Now granted the football Gods had decreed we would just not make the playoffs that year, but do the math.
Beside the fact that the Colts are just not that spirited or talented without laser-rocket-arm, there's the way he fits in their offense to think about.
The Pats have a playbook and a system. I remember back in the day, when we talked Brady-Manning wars, they'd say Brady is a "system quarterback."
They're right. So is Manning. Their "System" is a basic playbook, and TBH it wouldn't matter what's in it. Manning changes every play at the line of scrimmage. That's the system: One guy w/tremendous football vision and smarts changing the play on the fly to exploit weaknesses.
A quick moment of appreciation for Seyton Manning, please? He's really, really, really good at that.
Now Brady can audible, Brady can shift the pocket around, Brady can hit the open man, and Brady's a winner. It would be nice if he started doing more of that winning stuff in the playoffs for the last few years, mebbe 3 more rings, whatevah. But he doesn't do what Peyton does.
That's a good thing, because if he did, this team would indeed be toast without him. You can't replace that with a random playbook du jour and expect similar results.
I also think a lot of the Colts have thrown in the towel already. Some no, Freeny was still performing, but come on. 2-13? And probably 1-14, if it weren't that *cough* the Houston Texans are their Super Bowl...
Anyway, if they throw/lose (hard to tell which it is this year) next week, best of Luck (pun intended) in the post-Manning era.
Like the Colts brass says, you don't just replace Seyton... if he's back and all the way healthy, they'll have a shot. Otherwise, let the rebuilding begin. Window'll be closed a few years, sorry.
Post-Brady Pats? With BB alive? Rebuilding might dump us down to 8-8 (I think.) We'll see. But I think 2008 was a very heartening preview. This team lucked out on a superstar pick. Yay us. But I think Brady's skills have overshadowed everything supporting him.
After all, he's a (heh) "system quarterback."
It's hard to compare '08 to this season. That was a really different team - with a much better defense, just for starters.
The current team likely does not go 11-5 without Brady, or even close to it. I don't think they're 2-13 like the Colts, but they're probably .500.
5-11 or 6-10 is my guesstimate.
I love this board....it's like a Dali painting..
OK, the Pats LOST Brady and they still went 11-5...that happened...as in that was REAL.
every negative response in this thread and on the other one puts forth the exact same flawed assertion....the Pats COULD/WOULD go much worse if it was this year. You CANNOT make that judgement against what HAS occurred with what HAS NOT occurred.
You have a body of work over a decade that shows a high rate of success every season, no matter what dire situations occur, but you all want to assert that IF it was THIS season, then, well, it'd definitely be all bad because...well...because you just KNOW it would be.That's fine, it's your OPINION, but it has zero to do with established fact.
..but your conversation is better than the original thread
After all, would the Chicago Bulls have won six championships without Michael Jordan. Let's try to imagine it.
Exactly. We might have won 1 or 2 during those years. Defensive playmakers and an effective running game were crucial to those championships. It's no coincidence that once the Poilan rules began having their full effect the well went dry. Every year we've become more and more reliant on TFB to carry the team. Result: Patriots are now officially the Indianappolis Colts of the NFL, minus defensive studs like Mathis Freeney and Sanders.
Plus, the '08 team could have gone all the way if Favre, Mangini and the Jets hadn't deliberately tanked their last game to keep us out of the playoffs, Rodney Harrison hadn't gotten hurt, or if we had had a decent RB to take pressure off a non-GOAT QB.
There is nothing dumber than using 2008 as a comparison to what the Colts have faced this season. The 2008 Patriots had the most talented roster in the league and a top-20 (at the very least) quarterback under center. This was the same squad that was a helmet catch away from being 19-0 one year earlier. Oh, and they had one of the easiest schedules in recent memory, facing both the NFC and AFC West in the very same season. That team lost to every single quality opponent it faced (Pittsburgh, Indy, Jets, Chargers and Dolphins). The 2008 Patriots were a serious threat to go undefeated again with Tom Brady under center, without him they were a little above average and ended up missing the playoffs.
You are out of you goddamned mind if you think this 2011 edition of the Patriots without Tom Brady would be closer to 11-5 than 2-14. Really, it's just preposterous.
I lol'd at the Sanders part.
Oh, wonder if Rex has tried that.
Separate names with a comma.