Redskins Postgame Thread

[Marqui]

To repeat:

The Patriots came within minutes of a SB win without Gronk in 2011, despite having a Godawful secondary. The idea that they can't win without him is simply a fantasy. He's important, not essential.

The Patriots came within minutes of a SB win without Gronk in 2011, despite having a Godawful secondary.

The Patriots came within minutes of a SB

So they didn't win it?

 

[JMC00]

Can't is a bit of stretch, but the task becomes easier with him

fixed

 

[TommyD4207]

To repeat:

The Patriots came within minutes of a SB win without Gronk in 2011, despite having a Godawful secondary. The idea that they can't win without him is simply a fantasy. He's important, not essential.

Seconds, actually. 57.

 

[Gronkowski123]

Why am I not surprised that Marqui disagrees with the assessment of Chandler. His homer blinders must be working overtime.

so far chandler has done thing. cant block either, which is michael williams plays more snaps.
idk i expected 500-700 yards, 5-7 td's...not unreasonable. with dion out, time for chandler to finally step up.

still searching for the perfect TE compliment to gronk.

 

[DaBruinz]

Brady is playing better than he was when he won SBs with less.

Tom Brady can win a SB with this team without Gronk.

Not sure why you are harping on Brady when I never took issue with that part of your statement.

And we'll have to agree to disagree. Brady had some damn good weapons in Troy Brown, David Patton, DeionBranch, David Givens, and Corey Dillon. And the defenses were arguably better.

Since Gronk joined the team, Brady is 1-1 in Super Bowls. The one SB that Gronk was injured, they lost.

 

[Bruins29]

So they didn't win it?

Stop being stupid

Can you?

 

[aluminum seats]

without Gronk there isnt one poster on here would would say this team still couldnt go all the way.

Someone said they couldn't in this thread.

 

[Bruins29]

Not sure why you are harping on Brady when I never took issue with that part of your statement.

And we'll have to agree to disagree. Brady had some damn good weapons in Troy Brown, David Patton, DeionBranch, David Givens, and Corey Dillon. And the defenses were arguably better.

Since Gronk joined the team, Brady is 1-1 in Super Bowls. The one SB that Gronk was injured, they lost.

What Deus said is correct. Anyone who claims otherwise is really either underselling the ability of TB with this team of overselling JG with this team.

This is TB! And now all of a sudden he cant win without Gronk but Jimmy G can with??

Comical

 

[Bruins29]

I never EVER thought I would see the day on Patsfans.com where it would be claimed that Gronk was the lynchpin of Tom Bradys success and that TB still wouldnt lead a very competitive team without Gronk. Especially this loaded team and the way TB is this year breathing fire.

Today I saw it and I am sad.

 

[Soul_Survivor88]

All with varying outcomes of production and outcomes.

Gronk is irreplaceable.

All essential players are irreplaceable....but not all irreplaceable players are essential

That's what separates Gronk from Lewis

 

[TommyD4207]

I never EVER thought I would see the day on Patsfans.com where it would be claimed that Gronk was the lynchpin of Tom Bradys success and that TB still wouldnt lead a very competitive team without Gronk. Especially this loaded team and the way TB is this year breathing fire.

Today I saw it and I am sad.

Not to mention that this is a thing that he has done. More than once.

 

[Bruins29]

Not to mention that this is a thing that he has done. More than once.

And he seems to be playing even better now than he was then and he has more depth than in 2007.

Yeah, this whole debate is Twilight Zone worthy

 

[Deus Irae]

Not to mention that this is a thing that he has done. More than once.

Indeed. Patriots history lesson:

SB wins without Gronk - 3
SB wins without Brady - 0

SB losses, but with leads into the last 2 minutes of a SB without Gronk - 2
SB losses, but with leads into the last 2 minutes of a SB without Brady - 0

 

[Soul_Survivor88]

Indeed. Patriots history lesson:

SB wins without Gronk - 3
SB wins without Brady - 0

SB losses, but with leads into the last 2 minutes of a SB without Gronk - 2
SB losses, but with leads into the last 2 minutes of a SB without Brady - 0

This is a drastic oversimplification

 

[Deus Irae]

This is a drastic oversimplification

Can't win without Gronk is fine, but pointing out that it's been done multiple times, and come within less than 2 minutes also on multiple occasions, is a drastic oversimplification?

You're kidding, right?

 

[Bruins29]

This is a drastic oversimplification

You understand the importance of keeping things "simple" for some here....right?

 

[pwes]

There is a lot of word twisting going on in here.

 

[Soul_Survivor88]

Can't win without Gronk is fine, but pointing out that it's been done multiple times, and come within less than 2 minutes also on multiple occasions, is a drastic oversimplification?

You're kidding, right?

History shows you can win without Gronk....but let's not downplay how important he's been to this team. Belichick went so far as to account for the playoff losses between 2011-2013 because of his poor health and lack of availability.

 

[JMC00]

Just any FYI;

Blount has rushed for 70+ yards in 5 of 7 games this year, those 2 games he didn't he only had 2 and 3 carries.

18 for 78
13 for 74
16 for 93
17 for 72
29 for 129


Homerish cherry picking here but that's an average of 89.2 yards per game when he is fed the ball. Just for a reference of how decent that is Devonta Freeman is #4 in the league with 88.6 per game and Peterson is #3 with 90.4

 

[Deus Irae]

History shows you can win without Gronk....but let's not downplay how important he's been to this team. Belichick went so far as to account for the playoff losses between 2011-2013 because of his poor health and lack of availability.

How the hell am I downplaying Gronk's importance by pointing out the obvious? This is what I posted:

To repeat:

The Patriots came within minutes of a SB win without Gronk in 2011, despite having a Godawful secondary. The idea that they can't win without him is simply a fantasy. He's important, not essential.

That's reality. The Patriots were just a Welker drop (or several other single plays just going their way) away from a likely SB win against the Giants, without Gronk. That happened in the same season where they lost to the Giants in the regular season, with a healthy Gronk. The Brady era Patriots have won 3 Super Bowls without Gronk.