Tom Brady to be a DADDY!

[kolbitr]

Can’t dispute? Let’s see:

Bulger (2002-2006): 95 TD, 59 INT, 16,233; 91.3 career rating
Brady (2002-2006) 129 TD, 66 INT 18,715; 88.3 career rating

Playoff record
Brady: 12-2
Bulger: 0-1

Sooner, I have already tried to engage in this debate with him in another thread, and he seemed to lose interest once the discussion turned away from 'personal assessment' to actual stats.

I laugh, though, at the thought that Belichick will bench Brady after a four-interception game or a three-game losing streak, thinking about the child he fathered with an actress out of wedlock.

(It is interesting how a very human situation such as this has brought out some of the worst and most bigoted comments in the posters on the board, cf. rabthepat's thread).

 

[SoonerPatriot]

Sooner, I have already tried to engage in this debate with him in another thread, and he seemed to lose interest once the discussion turned away from 'personal assessment' to actual stats.

I laugh, though, at the thought that Belichick will bench Brady after a four-interception game or a three-game losing streak, thinking about the child he fathered with an actress out of wedlock.

(It is interesting how a very human situation such as this has brought out some of the worst and most bigoted comments in the posters on the board, cf. rabthepat's thread).

I noticed he vanished as well. I guess his mommy made him go to bed or he's running low on time on his free NetZero dialup account.You're right though, he doesn't deal in facts, just broad sweeping (moronic) generalizations. My favorite part is when he clearly implies something and then replies to a post saying "where did I say that?"

Odds are he's a Rams or Colts troll anyway. Oh well. Either way, he's on the fast track to becoming the new NEM.

 

[PF1996]

I noticed he vanished as well. I guess his mommy made him go to bed or he's running low on time on his free NetZero dialup account.You're right though, he doesn't deal in facts, just broad sweeping (moronic) generalizations. My favorite part is when he clearly implies something and then replies to a post saying "where did I say that?"

Odds are he's a Rams or Colts troll anyway. Oh well. Either way, he's on the fast track to becoming the new NEM.

Hmmm...if it's so clear, then it should be very EASY for you to provide the post/quote where I stated or "IMPLIED" what you claim. Of course you can't because your claims (as they pertain to my statements) are false.

Kolbitr - what discussion did I lose interest in once you "brought up stats"? Are you so desperate to be right that you're now resorting to lies? Again, please do point out the specified discussion. Also, I will again ask the question that you appear to be avoiding....would YOU be happy if a female relative started dating a guy with a 2 month pregnant ex-girlfriend?

Brady's playoff record is largely a result of the TEAM he has had around him. Had the defense not played outstandingly in 2001 and 2003 (exclud. the SB), Brady playoff record would not be 12-2. This is why individual QB statistics form a more relevant base for comparison between two QBs because team WINS are a result of the overall composition of the TEAM. Such a comparison reveals the truth about Brady and those facts will not disappear regardless of how much you deny or run from them.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Brady's playoff record is largely a result of the TEAM he has had around him. Had the defense not played outstandingly in 2001 and 2003 (exclud. the SB), Brady playoff record would not be 12-2. This is why individual QB statistics form a more relevant base for comparison between two QBs because team WINS are a result of the overall composition of the TEAM. Such a comparison reveals the truth about Brady and those facts will not disappear regardless of how much you deny or run from them.

So the fact that Brady has led 20+ 4Q/OT game-winning drives, including two in the SB, means absolutely nothing?

And, presumably, that if you put Bulger on this team--all else being equal--HE'd have played in three SBs since 2001?

 

[SoonerPatriot]

Hmmm...if it's so clear, then it should be very EASY for you to provide the post/quote where I stated or "IMPLIED" what you claim. Of course you can't because your claims (as they pertain to my statements) are false.

Kolbitr - what discussion did I lose interest in once you "brought up stats"? Are you so desperate to be right that you're now resorting to lies? Again, please do point out the specified discussion. Also, I will again ask the question that you appear to be avoiding....would YOU be happy if a female relative started dating a guy with a 2 month pregnant ex-girlfriend?

Brady's playoff record is largely a result of the TEAM he has had around him. Had the defense not played outstandingly in 2001 and 2003 (exclud. the SB), Brady playoff record would not be 12-2. This is why individual QB statistics form a more relevant base for comparison between two QBs because team WINS are a result of the overall composition of the TEAM. Such a comparison reveals the truth about Brady and those facts will not disappear regardless of how much you deny or run from them.

((((YAWN)))

Once again, no real facts to back up your OPINIONS, and you know what they say about opinions.

Keep pissing into the wind and spewing the same crapola. About all you got at this point.

 

[SoonerPatriot]

So the fact that Brady has led 20+ 4Q/OT game-winning drives, including two in the SB, means absolutely nothing?

And, presumably, that if you put Bulger on this team--all else being equal--HE'd have played in three SBs since 2001?

It means nothing, unless you're capable of looking at the facts. PF1996 ignores facts, and focuses on his own unique brand of reality which is quite different from literally everyone elses.

 

[PF1996]

((((YAWN)))

Once again, no real facts to back up your OPINIONS, and you know what they say about opinions.

Keep pissing into the wind and spewing the same crapola. About all you got at this point.

Hmmm...let's look at the opinions I expressed in my previous response to you.


1. My opinion - Your claims about my statements are false as you have provided NO evidence to support them.


"REAL" FACT - You have made several statements and attributed those statements to me when I did not make those statements. You have yet to show that I ever MADE or "implied" what you claim I did.

So my opinion is supported by "real" facts.

So, what other tactic are you going to use to try to hide your stupidity? You've already tried the oft-used "mommy" line so you need something more original. Your attempts to deflect attention from your inability to comprehend, support your claims or answer basic questions, while not useful for normal conversation, are still quite amusing.

 

[SoonerPatriot]

Hmmm...let's look at the opinions I expressed in my previous response to you.


1. My opinion - Your claims about my statements are false as you have provided NO evidence to support them.


"REAL" FACT - You have made several statements and attributed those statements to me when I did not make those statements. You have yet to show that I ever MADE or "implied" what you claim I did.

So my opinion is supported by "real" facts.

So, what other tactic are you going to use to try to hide your stupidity? You've already tried the oft-used "mommy" line so you need something more original. Your attempts to deflect attention from your inability to comprehend, support your claims or answer basic questions, while not useful for normal conversation, are still quite amusing.

Ohh somebody's brewing up a fondu in their panties. Hilarious.

Here's a hint, when you come on a message board and make sweeping moronic statements about a quarterback who is in "decline" (This is the part where you'll dance around the word decline), at least have a scintilla of evidence to you know, actually back up the drivel you're throwing out there. If that concept is too advanced, ask an adult and I'm sure he/she will explain it to you.

The log my dog dropped in my backyard this morning has more critical reasoning skills than you do. Of course the difference is the terd will someday fertilize my yard, thus serving a purpose. You, not so much.

I await with baited breath your next (baseless) opinion.

 

[PF1996]

So the fact that Brady has led 20+ 4Q/OT game-winning drives, including two in the SB, means absolutely nothing?

And, presumably, that if you put Bulger on this team--all else being equal--HE'd have played in three SBs since 2001?

Hmmmmm.....


I've given your statement some thought and the strangest thing is that I just cannot recall ever stating that "the fact that Brady has led 20+ 4Q/OT game-winning drives......means absolutely nothing". Could you please point out where I said that - perhaps I could then answer your question


As far as your second question - what has Brady done that Bulger couldn't do? If Brady did something that Bulger couldn't have done during the games leading to those 3 SBs, then the answer would be no. If not, then the answer would be yes. I haven't given much thought to that subject so I can't answer the question right now. Perhaps you could give me your answer - and I'll repeat the question: What specifically did Brady do during the games leading to those three SBs that Bulger couldn't have done?

 

[PF1996]

Ohh somebody's brewing up a fondu in their panties. Hilarious.

Original - well to me at least. Rather blah though...you need to work on the hilarity.

Here's a hint, when you come on a message board and make sweeping moronic statements about a quarterback who is in "decline" (This is the part where you'll dance around the word decline), at least have a scintilla of evidence to you know, actually back up the drivel you're throwing out there. If that concept is too advanced, ask an adult and I'm sure he/she will explain it to you.

Hmmm...this still doesn't answer the question that I posed to you earlier. Please point out the post/quote where I made the statements that you attributed to me. They should be quite easy to find if I made them, no?

While you think of another 3rd grade insult to try to deflect attention from your inability to support anything you have said - I'll inform you of this widely known fact. This is a messageboard - it's not a courtroom. Which is why people like you can make false statements and then hide behind a wall of immaturity when asked to account for those false statements.

Brady's on field performance declined in 2006 as anyone who saw the games in 2006 AND who were familiar with his PRIOR performances could very well see. Perhaps you lacked access to a television or computer in 2006, so I'll provide you with the COLD HARD FACTS of that decline. It's in numbers....so hopefully you won't have any difficulty with comprehension.

QB rating 2006: 87.9 ; 2005: 92.3
Avg yards: 6.8 vs 7.8
Total yards: 3529 vs 4110
Comp. % 61.8 vs 63.0
Int 12 vs 14
TD 24 vs 26


I'm assuming you do know how to count and so can recognise that 87.9 is LESS than 92.3, representing a DECLINE.....that 6.8 is LESS than 7.8 and represents a DECLINE.....you should get the pattern - it's pretty much a DECLINE in all areas except interceptions. So, now that I've shown you the way with an example, perhaps you can now provide "a scintilla of evidence to you know, actually back up the drivel you're throwing out there".

The log my dog dropped in my backyard this morning has more critical reasoning skills than you do. Of course the difference is the terd will someday fertilize my yard, thus serving a purpose. You, not so much.

I await with baited breath your next (baseless) opinion.

You really do need to work on these if you want them to have the intended effect. I'm assuming the reaction that you are trying to elicit isn't quiet amusement.

 

[SoonerPatriot]

Hmmm...this still doesn't answer the question that I posed to you earlier. Please point out the post/quote where I made the statements that you attributed to me. They should be quite easy to find if I made them, no?

While you think of another 3rd grade insult to try to deflect attention from your inability to support anything you have said - I'll inform you of this widely known fact. This is a messageboard - it's not a courtroom. Which is why people like you can make false statements and then hide behind a wall of immaturity when asked to account for those false statements.

Brady's on field performance declined in 2006 as anyone who saw the games in 2006 AND who were familiar with his PRIOR performances could very well see. Perhaps you lacked access to a television or computer in 2006, so I'll provide you with the COLD HARD FACTS of that decline. It's in numbers....so hopefully you won't have any difficulty with comprehension.

QB rating 2006: 87.9 ; 2005: 92.3
Avg yards: 6.8 vs 7.8
Total yards: 3529 vs 4110
Comp. % 61.8 vs 63.0
Int 12 vs 14
TD 24 vs 26


I'm assuming you do know how to count and so can recognise that 87.9 is LESS than 92.3, representing a DECLINE.....that 6.8 is LESS than 7.8 and represents a DECLINE.....you should get the pattern - it's pretty much a DECLINE in all areas except interceptions. So, now that I've shown you the way with an example, perhaps you can now provide "a scintilla of evidence to you know, actually back up the drivel you're throwing out there".



You really do need to work on these if you want them to have the intended effect. I'm assuming the reaction that you are trying to elicit isn't quiet amusement.

You've mentioned his declining skills several times. I'm not going to bother looking back through 245 responses on this thead to show you what you've written only to have you say you really didn't write that. Maybe later you'll enlighten us all to what the definition of is is (sorry, inside Americano political joke).

The quarterback rating is what it is. Actually, I pointed that out before you did. Of course, to read your baseless hysterical posts one would think the difference is more like 20 points, not 6.8.

Of course in reality Brady's rating didn't decline 6.8 from 2005 to 2006, it actually declined 4.4, if that's what you were trying to point out. You went off the rails a little more than normal there so it was hard to determine. I guess that happens when you don't know anything about football.

Lets review:

By your definition Brady has had one year of decline against six very good years. That would make it 6-1, Brady/Me. And even in your so called year of decline, the difference is so minimal it's barely noticable.

If you were capable of objective, thought based anaylsis, you'd know a quarterback's rating often goes up and down over the course of a career. Indeed, that is the case with Brady. You would have said the same thing in 2003 when his rating was 85.9. Then in 2004, you would have shown your ass when his rating went up to 92.6.

Again, feel free to contact an adult if understanding this is an issue for you. It seems as though it might be.

 

[PatsFan24]

brady had a down year in 06 but he did have a new set or WRs that he had to learn to work with during the season. he made caldwell and gafney look good. you give him the same set of WRs for a few years to work with and build on he would have higher numbers. manning, montana, young, aikman, they had all the same core star offensive players around them most of their carrers, brady has not. brady only had one season with a solid running game, dillion in 04. 01-03 he had antwon smith and the last two years dillion has been hurt and inconsistant, while they have tried to get a running game going. branch and givens both left, glenn left part way threw 2001. brown has stuck around at least

 

[SoonerPatriot]

brady had a down year in 06 but he did have a new set or WRs that he had to learn to work with during the season. he made caldwell and gafney look good. you give him the same set of WRs for a few years to work with and build on he would have higher numbers. manning, montana, young, aikman, they had all the same core star offensive players around them most of their carrers, brady has not. brady only had one season with a solid running game, dillion in 04. 01-03 he had antwon smith and the last two years dillion has been hurt and inconsistant, while they have tried to get a running game going. branch and givens both left, glenn left part way threw 2001. brown has stuck around at least

You're right of course. I haven't mentioned that in this thread because well, it refuses to acknowledge that as a variable in Brady's "decline".

Some more goodness:
http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?p=327800#post327800

"My opinion that Brady has apparently topped out is based on his subpar play this year. Spare me the "new receivers" chant."

 

[PF1996]

brady had a down year in 06 but he did have a new set or WRs that he had to learn to work with during the season. he made caldwell and gafney look good. you give him the same set of WRs for a few years to work with and build on he would have higher numbers. manning, montana, young, aikman, they had all the same core star offensive players around them most of their carrers, brady has not. brady only had one season with a solid running game, dillion in 04. 01-03 he had antwon smith and the last two years dillion has been hurt and inconsistant, while they have tried to get a running game going. branch and givens both left, glenn left part way threw 2001. brown has stuck around at least

You must not have watched many games this year otherwise you wouldn't throw me this "new receivers" nonsense. Did I expect Brady to put up Peyton numbers after losing Givens and Branch (particularly the latter) and having to acclimate late pickup Gabriel to the offense? Not AT ALL. However what I do expect from Brady, particularly if he's supposedly the "greatest QB ever" is for him to throw ACCURATELY and to make WISE DECISIONS and to NOT REPEAT STUPID DECISIONS. This means completing a 10 yd pass to a wide open receiver. This means throwing the ball to an OPEN guy rather than throwing it to a COVERED guy for an interception. If you watched the games...you would have seen that GUYS GOT OPEN...and Brady, more often than not, simply missed them, either through inaccurate throws or simply not recognising the defense.

Now, if you're satisified with such a performance because we have "won 3 SBs" - good for you. If you'd like to pretend that Brady's performance in 2006 wasn't a decline from his prior performances - that's your perogative. If you'd like to believe, in the absence of any evidence, that Brady will improve his accuracy and his decision making for 2007, forward - go right ahead. I hope you're right and I'm wrong. However, I'm a PATRIOTS fan first and foremost. I want a QB that can help my team win it all and if Brady can no longer do that, then I have NO problem whatsoever with him being replaced. It seems that for some in here, it's more important to maintain the fantasy that Brady is "the greatest QB ever" than it is to give an honest assessment of his performance and what it means to the Patriots ability to win if his performance continues its downswing.

 

[SoonerPatriot]

You must not have watched many games this year otherwise you wouldn't throw me this "new receivers" nonsense. Did I expect Brady to put up Peyton numbers after losing Givens and Branch (particularly the latter) and having to acclimate late pickup Gabriel to the offense? Not AT ALL. However what I do expect from Brady, particularly if he's supposedly the "greatest QB ever" is for him to throw ACCURATELY and to make WISE DECISIONS and to NOT REPEAT STUPID DECISIONS. This means completing a 10 yd pass to a wide open receiver. This means throwing the ball to an OPEN guy rather than throwing it to a COVERED guy for an interception. If you watched the games...you would have seen that GUYS GOT OPEN...and Brady, more often than not, simply missed them, either through inaccurate throws or simply not recognising the defense.

Now, if you're satisified with such a performance because we have "won 3 SBs" - good for you. If you'd like to pretend that Brady's performance in 2006 wasn't a decline from his prior performances - that's your perogative. If you'd like to believe, in the absence of any evidence, that Brady will improve his accuracy and his decision making for 2007, forward - go right ahead. I hope you're right and I'm wrong. However, I'm a PATRIOTS fan first and foremost. I want a QB that can help my team win it all and if Brady can no longer do that, then I have NO problem whatsoever with him being replaced. It seems that for some in here, it's more important to maintain the fantasy that Brady is "the greatest QB ever" than it is to give an honest assessment of his performance and what it means to the Patriots ability to win if his performance continues its downswing.

Please point out where he said Brady was "the greatest QB ever".

 

[PatsFan24]

You must not have watched many games this year otherwise you wouldn't throw me this "new receivers" nonsense. Did I expect Brady to put up Peyton numbers after losing Givens and Branch (particularly the latter) and having to acclimate late pickup Gabriel to the offense? Not AT ALL. However what I do expect from Brady, particularly if he's supposedly the "greatest QB ever" is for him to throw ACCURATELY and to make WISE DECISIONS and to NOT REPEAT STUPID DECISIONS. This means completing a 10 yd pass to a wide open receiver. This means throwing the ball to an OPEN guy rather than throwing it to a COVERED guy for an interception. If you watched the games...you would have seen that GUYS GOT OPEN...and Brady, more often than not, simply missed them, either through inaccurate throws or simply not recognising the defense.

Now, if you're satisified with such a performance because we have "won 3 SBs" - good for you. If you'd like to pretend that Brady's performance in 2006 wasn't a decline from his prior performances - that's your perogative. If you'd like to believe, in the absence of any evidence, that Brady will improve his accuracy and his decision making for 2007, forward - go right ahead. I hope you're right and I'm wrong. However, I'm a PATRIOTS fan first and foremost. I want a QB that can help my team win it all and if Brady can no longer do that, then I have NO problem whatsoever with him being replaced. It seems that for some in here, it's more important to maintain the fantasy that Brady is "the greatest QB ever" than it is to give an honest assessment of his performance and what it means to the Patriots ability to win if his performance continues its downswing.

i did not say brady is the best ever, however i think he can be when he retires. he still is the best big game QB in the NFL, his only bad postseason games were denver and sd, and the chargers game they won! i cant imagine replacing brady. so many teams would love to have brady as their qb. if you want to replace him who do you think the pats are gonna get that is better?

 

[PF1996]

You've mentioned his declining skills several times. I'm not going to bother looking back through 245 responses on this thead to show you what you've written only to have you say you really didn't write that. Maybe later you'll enlighten us all to what the definition of is is (sorry, inside Americano political joke).

Your attempts to again deflect attention from the fact that you have YET to support your claims certainly aren't unsuccessful through lack of trying. I never denied that I stated that Brady's skills declined in 2006. You won't have to "look back through 245 responses" to get that quote because I STATED IT in my last response to you.

However, the claim which you made that you still haven't provided a "scintilla of evidence" for is: "My favorite part is when he clearly implies something and then replies to a post saying "where did I say that?". Please do provide the post/quote to support such a claim or admit to the obvious - that you're a liar. I'll stop rubbing your nose in it then.

The quarterback rating is what it is. Actually, I pointed that out before you did. Of course, to read your baseless hysterical posts one would think the difference is more like 20 points, not 6.8. .

A tip - don't use words for which you don't know the meaning. Makes you look less like a fool and saves me the trouble of going "huh" when I read your senseless statements.

Actually, you did provide Brady's stats - I'm afraid I missed it before. Odd, that you provided the stats that showed Bulger's better career numbers and then asked "what better career numbers". LOL - that was quite funny.

Of course in reality Brady's rating didn't decline 6.8 from 2005 to 2006, it actually declined 4.4, if that's what you were trying to point out. You went off the rails a little more than normal there so it was hard to determine. I guess that happens when you don't know anything about football.

Hmm....not only do you have problems understanding basic english but you also have difficulty grasping simple numbers. The 6.8 referred to his NUMBER OF YARDS PER ATTEMPT in 2006 vs 7.8, his average in 2005. Your stupidity really has no boundary.... Anyway - back to the topic. As the numbers that you found for yourself clearly demonstrated....Brady's performance DECLINED in 2006, just as I've stated. So, please, do show me how I have not "provided one scintilla of evidence" to support my statement.

Lets review:

By your definition Brady has had one year of decline against six very good years. That would make it 6-1, Brady/Me. And even in your so called year of decline, the difference is so minimal it's barely noticable.

Actually, Brady's decline was quite noticeable in the rankings:

QB rating - 3 spots ; AYP - 9 spots ; Pct. - 5 spots ; ToYds - 6 spots


Such a decline may not be disturbing to you (and the more you "talk", the more I understand why) but that doesn't change the REALITY of that decline.

What relevance does Brady's prior performances have to my statement that he declined, except to use as a baseline? I didn't comment on the nature of Brady's PRIOR performances except to note that his 2006 performance represented a DECLINE from those prior performances. The fact that he had good years in 2004 & 2005 doesn't change the fact that he played poorly in 2006. Why is this so difficult for you to grasp?

If you were capable of objective, thought based anaylsis, you'd know a quarterback's rating often goes up and down over the course of a career. Indeed, that is the case with Brady. You would have said the same thing in 2003 when his rating was 85.9. Then in 2004, you would have shown your ass when his rating went up to 92.6.

Well, I'd actually "know" because of the fact that it has occurred throughout NFL history...it wouldn't require "objective, thought based analysis"
Again....what does this have to do with my factual statement that Brady's performance declined in 2006? You can continue to point to Brady's prior performances or assume that he will improve next year but the FACT remains that his performance DECLINED in 2006. So again, please demonstrate how my statement about Brady's decline is incorrect.

Again, feel free to contact an adult if understanding this is an issue for you. It seems as though it might be.

Keep trying. This, in itself is rather bland but your increasingly desperate attempts are rather amusing.

 

[SoonerPatriot]

i did not say brady is the best ever, however i think he can be when he retires. he still is the best big game QB in the NFL, his only bad postseason games were denver and sd, and the chargers game they won! i cant imagine replacing brady. so many teams would love to have brady as their qb. if you want to replace him who do you think the pats are gonna get that is better?

Your attempts to again deflect attention from the fact that you have YET to support your claims certainly aren't unsuccessful through lack of trying. I never denied that I stated that Brady's skills declined in 2006. You won't have to "look back through 245 responses" to get that quote because I STATED IT in my last response to you.

However, the claim which you made that you still haven't provided a "scintilla of evidence" for is: "My favorite part is when he clearly implies something and then replies to a post saying "where did I say that?". Please do provide the post/quote to support such a claim or admit to the obvious - that you're a liar. I'll stop rubbing your nose in it then.




A tip - don't use words for which you don't know the meaning. Makes you look less like a fool and saves me the trouble of going "huh" when I read your senseless statements.

Actually, you did provide Brady's stats - I'm afraid I missed it before. Odd, that you provided the stats that showed Bulger's better career numbers and then asked "what better career numbers". LOL - that was quite funny.



Hmm....not only do you have problems understanding basic english but you also have difficulty grasping simple numbers. The 6.8 referred to his NUMBER OF YARDS PER ATTEMPT in 2006 vs 7.8, his average in 2005. Your stupidity really has no boundary.... Anyway - back to the topic. As the numbers that you found for yourself clearly demonstrated....Brady's performance DECLINED in 2006, just as I've stated. So, please, do show me how I have not "provided one scintilla of evidence" to support my statement.



Actually, Brady's decline was quite noticeable in the rankings:

QB rating - 3 spots ; AYP - 9 spots ; Pct. - 5 spots ; ToYds - 6 spots


Such a decline may not be disturbing to you (and the more you "talk", the more I understand why) but that doesn't change the REALITY of that decline.

What relevance does Brady's prior performances have to my statement that he declined, except to use as a baseline? I didn't comment on the nature of Brady's PRIOR performances except to note that his 2006 performance represented a DECLINE from those prior performances. The fact that he had good years in 2004 & 2005 doesn't change the fact that he played poorly in 2006. Why is this so difficult for you to grasp?




Well, I'd actually "know" because of the fact that it has occurred throughout NFL history...it wouldn't require "objective, thought based analysis"
Again....what does this have to do with my factual statement that Brady's performance declined in 2006? You can continue to point to Brady's prior performances or assume that he will improve next year but the FACT remains that his performance DECLINED in 2006. So again, please demonstrate how my statement about Brady's decline is incorrect.





Keep trying. This, in itself is rather bland but your increasingly desperate attempts are rather amusing.

I admire your steadfast ignorance. It really is something to behold.

The fact is you have one season to point to that represents this so called decline. Wouldn't you need yet another to truly prove your "theory" beyond a shadow of a doubt? Not much of a sample you have there. One year? A QB rating down 4.4 points? A yards per completion average one yard less than the year before? It's so absurd it makes me laugh. File under: square peg, round hole.

And actually, when one clearly holds some sort of bizarre resentment towards one player as you clearly do which is clear in numerous posts you've made throughout the season, looking at stats and actually forming an objective thought based anaylsis is impossible. That's why you have such difficulty with it.

If you did not have this strange fixation on Brady's sex life, and his "declining" skills, you'd look at those numbers and see Brady has had 6 very good seasons compared to 1 subpar (by your definition) season and conclude it could be an abberation, an off year, a mulligan, but hardly enough to conclude that he has "topped out". Of course, again, that would require something beyond a knee jerk thought process which you apparently are incapable of. File under: Moonbat.

As to your query about you implying this and that, you have in fact stated that Brady's baby issue coupled with his so called "declining" skills would give BB political cover with fans should he decide to release or trade him. Will you now attempt to deny that as well, or will you actually stand behind something you've said in previous posts?

Of course what you didn't factor into this "theory" are the cap ramifications of such a move which would be disasterous to the organization. I guess that fact escaped you while you were busy sharpening your ax and desperately trying to cobble together your next semi-coherent response.

I wonder if Brady's YPC drops by another yard next year if he will make that move? Somehow I doubt it.

Cassel can do what Brady can? Hilarious. If that's so, why isn't he doing it? The coaching staff felt so comfortable with him, they signed Testaverde. Bulger could do what Brady did in the SB? If that's so, why hasn't he done it? Near as I can tell, Tory Holt and Steven Jackson are excellent weapons. Why is Bulger 0-1 in playoff appearences?

Furthermore, how do you know Bulger could do it when he's never been put in that situation? Maybe he could, maybe he couldn't. Of course we don't know because he hasn't been there. Brady has proven he can. Care to disagree? Or did we all imagine 3 SB wins and 2 SB MVPs he played a major role in? This is the part where you minimize Brady's contributions to those wins with the impotent "it's a team game" response. I'll go ahead and respond. Indeed it is a team game. But some positions are more important than others and QB happens to be one of them.

Again, please keep desperately trying to prove this so called decline and how we could plug Cassel, whoever, into the lineup and be just fine. You brought that point up in a thread earlier this year, which I'm sure you've now convienently forgotten. It really is quite amusing in a train wreck, look at the freak, kind of way. I can't help but notice nobody is jumping in to validate your "theory". I wonder why? Clearly, you have no doubts about your "theory" , it's interesting there aren't legions of posters rallying to your side.

Regardless, I'll keep rubbing your nose in it. It's quite enjoyable. Easy, but enjoyable. I find it's the simple things in life that make it so worthwhile and this is quite simple. Until next time...

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Hmmmmm.....

I've given your statement some thought and the strangest thing is that I just cannot recall ever stating that "the fact that Brady has led 20+ 4Q/OT game-winning drives......means absolutely nothing". Could you please point out where I said that - perhaps I could then answer your question

Did you literally say those words? No.

But what you did say is that were it not for the defense, Brady's record wouldn't be 12-2. But, nevertheless, that doesn't change the fact that it took a late-game drive led by Brady to win many of those 12 games.

As far as your second question - what has Brady done that Bulger couldn't do? If Brady did something that Bulger couldn't have done during the games leading to those 3 SBs, then the answer would be no. If not, then the answer would be yes. I haven't given much thought to that subject so I can't answer the question right now. Perhaps you could give me your answer - and I'll repeat the question: What specifically did Brady do during the games leading to those three SBs that Bulger couldn't have done?

Apparently, given that the only time Bulger has ever made the playoffs, he threw a game-killing INT in OT, there's no evidence to suggest that Bulger can win in the playoffs when the game is on the line (or, for that matter, win at all). We know that Brady's done it numerous times.

 

[WestPat]

is PF1996 Mark Bulger's cousin or something?