Serious question: Are you on Crack?
I'll let the slur slide for now. But to answer your question, no I am totally sober. Though based on your threads and comments over the last few weeks I'm pretty sure it is safe to say that many in this forum have been questioning your mental stability for a while now.
It's really offensive that you simply spin crap out of thin air...and attribute it to me.
Offensive? Take a look in the mirror.
* Go right ahead and point to where I implied that "Randy Moss is going to lead the league in receiving touchdowns this year."
Re-read your initial post. You talked about how 1989 was the last time the league-leading touchdown receiver had won the Super Bowl, and the Pats just got better by trading Moss. Your point makes no sense unless you are indeed implying Moss is going to lead the league in touchdown receptions. If he doesn't, then your post has no relevance.
While you're at it: Go right ahead and point to where I said we could win "without a strong passing game."
No, you never said those exact words. But you pretty much implied in post #11 that that is the case, with points about how moving the ball down the field five yards at at time and ball control is infinitely more likely to win the Super Bowl. To me, that's implying that a strong passing game is not particularly important in your opinion.
You spun your garbage out of thin air, bubby.
Looks to me like once again you may want to look in the mirror with that last comment. And if you want to go around trying to be an internet bully, may I suggest that you may feel more at home in the comment sections at Pro Football Talk and ESPN. Leave the football talk here to the grownups, bubby. And while you're at it, leave the forum equivalent of writing with crayons (i.e., lots of bold, italics, large fonts and big picture signatures that all shout out "Hey everyone, look at me!") behind too.
My point is incredibly simple:
Dominant Wide Receivers are detrimental to the pursuit of Championships.
What is a "dominant" receiver? One that is top five, or top ten statistically?
The 2009 Super Bowl had four players in the top ten in receiving touchdowns. Two of the top five in receiving yards made it at least as far as the conference championship game.
In 2008 Super Bowl included the receiver who was #2 in yards, and two of the top four in touchdown receptions.
The 2007 SB featured a receiver who led the league in TD receptions and was 2nd in yardage, and was a helmet catch away from having the game-winning reception; it also had the player ranked 4th in TD receptions that year.
In 2006 the winning SB team had players ranked 2nd and 4th in receiving yards, and 2nd and 6th in TD receptions that year.
The 2005 SB included receivers who ranked #3 and #5 in touchdown receptions that year.
I'll accept your apology whenever you're ready.
