Shefter: Dez Bryant expected to be released

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

The highest scoring offense ever lost the sn because allowing 21 points is considered a lack of defense that excuses the offense?

unless you can't read it says the OL had a bad game,if they couldn't protect the QB they aren't going to produce points enough to win the game - which they didn't - If a team loses a game its the fault of pretty much both sides when its all said and done,yeah the defense had their chances with Asante's failed attempt at an INT and Eli coming out of the pack like houdini to make the throw that crushed this team.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

Jay?

Ray's twin, last seen giving a motivational speech to Dev Bryant.

 

[Love The Drake]

Titans make sense

 

[DW Toys]

Titans make sense

Panthers make even more sense.
Sleepers? Steelers. Chargers
DW Toys

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Redskins or 49ers

 

[Ring 6]

unless you can't read it says the OL had a bad game,if they couldn't protect the QB they aren't going to produce points enough to win the game - which they didn't - If a team loses a game its the fault of pretty much both sides when its all said and done,yeah the defense had their chances with Asante's failed attempt at an INT and Eli coming out of the pack like houdini to make the throw that crushed this team.

That isn’t “losing because of a lack of defense”

 

[Uptown]

Dark Horse Team: Houston Texans

Dez wouldn’t have to relocate (very far, if at all)
Still no state tax
HOU has ~$32-35 million in cap space
Nice young/dynamic QB
He can play 2nd fiddle at WR to Hopkins

 

[1960Pats]

1 - NY would ship Beckam out of town.
2 - Bryant is no where near the problem that Beckam is.

Fraudger is going to temporarily wave the salary cap for the Giants so they can have both.

Of course that's a joke, but so is Fraudger, which makes it possible.

 

[maust]

M

Moss was a huge reason why they GOT to the Super Bowl ...just didn't win it because of a miracle catch,bad OL play and a lack of defense

The highest scoring offense ever lost the sn because allowing 21 points is considered a lack of defense that excuses the offense?

That isn’t “losing because of a lack of defense”

This is what your brain works like when you are looking for an argument when there really isn't a worthwhile one to be had. You ignore that the post you are assailing pointed out the bizarre nature of The Helmet Catch, the fact the post specifically and correctly calls out the bad OL play (arguably the biggest Pats failing in the game) and lock in on the 'lack of defense' comment while you make the real mistake in the exchange and post an erroneous PA of 21 (PA in XLII was 17). The wording of the phrase 'a lack of defense' rather than it specifically saying 'defensive breakdowns and mismatches on the game winning drive' gave you all the reason you felt was required to release the hounds when any reasonable person would have realized what was meant. It's not quite your usual straw man tactic but it was a heck of a reach nonetheless. When the poster falls into your need to argue trap with a reasoned and logical response then you come back with your standard straw man:

That isn’t “losing because of a lack of defense”

If you look hard enough there's more than enough blame to go around in most losses but truthfully in SB XLII the Giants won because they made more plays, fewer mistakes and caught a fortunate break (Helmet Catch). Most of us call that football.

(SMH at myself. I can't believe I unblocked AJ to understand what PFIPA was posting about when the kind of nonsense he was responding to was the reason for the block in the 1st place. lmfao)

 

[1960Pats]

This is what your brain works like when you are looking for an argument when there really isn't a worthwhile one to be had. You ignore that the post you are assailing pointed out the bizarre nature of The Helmet Catch, the fact the post specifically and correctly calls out the bad OL play (arguably the biggest Pats failing in the game) and lock in on the 'lack of defense' comment while you make the real mistake in the exchange and post an erroneous PA of 21 (PA in XLII was 17). The wording of the phrase 'a lack of defense' rather than it specifically saying 'defensive breakdowns and mismatches on the game winning drive' gave you all the reason you felt was required to release the hounds when any reasonable person would have realized what was meant. It's not quite your usual straw man tactic but it was a heck of a reach nonetheless. When the poster falls into your need to argue trap with a reasoned and logical response then you come back with your standard straw man:



If you look hard enough there's more than enough blame to go around in most losses but truthfully in SB XLII the Giants won because they made more plays, fewer mistakes and caught a fortunate break (Helmet Catch). Most of us call that football.

(SMH at myself. I can't believe I unblocked AJ to understand what PFIP was posting about when the kind of nonsense he was responding to was the reason for the block in the 1st place. lmfao)

Let me see if I understand you correctly. You put a guy on ignore but still have one of his comments as your sig? And now you want to take another shot at him?

The fact is, the poster @AndyJohnson responded to did claim a lack of defense as one of the reasons the Pats lost that game. And TBH I'm so sick of hearing that ridiculous claim from Pats fans that I gave him a winner rating.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

I don’t understand anyone who blames the defense in SB 42 and 46.

 

[maust]

Let me see if I understand you correctly. You put a guy on ignore but still have one of his comments as your sig? And now you want to take another shot at him?

The fact is, the poster @AndyJohnson responded to did claim a lack of defense as one of the reasons the Pats lost that game. And TBH I'm so sick of hearing that ridiculous claim from Pats fans that I gave him a winner rating.

You do not understand me correctly. Look at the quote in my sig again .
The post in question called out the lack of D as ONE of the reasons but not the only reason. The D did come a bit unglued on the game winning drive but as I said in my comment it was far from the only reason.

 

[Ring 6]

Let me see if I understand you correctly. You put a guy on ignore but still have one of his comments as your sig? And now you want to take another shot at him?

The fact is, the poster @AndyJohnson responded to did claim a lack of defense as one of the reasons the Pats lost that game. And TBH I'm so sick of hearing that ridiculous claim from Pats fans that I gave him a winner rating.

Don’t worry about that tool.

 

[maust]

I don’t understand anyone who blames the defense in SB 42 and 46.

Wow, AJ sure is taking some folks down the rabbit hole with him. The D was the smallest part of the problem in XLII & XLVI, they only gave up 17 & 21 respectively. What I can't understand is why no one gives the Giants any credit at all.

 

[Ring 6]

Wow, AJ sure is taking some folks down the rabbit hole with him. The D was the smallest part of the problem in XLII & XLVI, they only gave up 17 & 21 respectively. What I can't understand is why no one gives the Giants any credit at all.

I'm the one who said it was wrong to say 'lack of defense' cost them the game.

 

[TheRainMaker]

If you look hard enough there's more than enough blame to go around in most losses but truthfully in SB XLII the Giants won because they made more plays, fewer mistakes and caught a fortunate break (Helmet Catch). Most of us call that football.

I don't know how it got to this point but I watched an interesting show on ESPN a while ago with Josh McDaniels and Steve Spagnolo talking about that game. Spagnolo admitted that if they had any chance of beating the Pats in that game he had to switch up his defense to try to throw them off. McDaniels admitted they were thrown off that game and showed specific plays they prepared for. One play was where the Giants would always blitz the same LB on 3rd downs but Spagnolo switched it up and had guys blitz (Kawika Mitchell) who didn't blitz the entire year. The result was a gaping hole up the middle of the O-line like a nano blitz in Madden.

Michael Strahan also has admitted several times he and their D-line had to play the game of his lives to even have a shot in that game.

McDaniels then showed a play early in the game where there was a screen to Maroney. Someone shoe string tackled him and it would've been a long TD as nobody was there to tackle him downfield. It was a moot point anyway as the Pats scored but it just took longer than it could have.

 

[TheRainMaker]

Wow, AJ sure is taking some folks down the rabbit hole with him. The D was the smallest part of the problem in XLII & XLVI, they only gave up 17 & 21 respectively. What I can't understand is why no one gives the Giants any credit at all.

Because the Giants offense bailed them out, you could argue the Giants Defense actually failed first. Had the Pats stopped them on that last drive the narrative would've been "Giants D played them tough but not good enough" and "Eli doesn't have what it takes to win big games". And I still can't get over the choke holds and Eli being in the grasp before the helmet catch. I was screaming "hold" and "in the grasp" from my couch. I couldn't believe not one flag came out.

 

[maust]

I'm the one who said it was wrong to say 'lack of defense' cost them the game.

Yes you absolutely are the one that cherry picked that one portion of the OP's statement while conveniently ignoring the rest of it as well as his response and mine. What I don't understand is why given this:

Don’t worry about that tool.

You are bothering to engage me at all

 

[Deus Irae]

I don’t understand anyone who blames the defense in SB 42 and 46.

They probably watched the games

 

[maust]

Because the Giants offense bailed them out, you could argue the Giants Defense actually failed first. Had the Pats stopped them on that last drive the narrative would've been "Giants D played them tough but not good enough". And I still can't get over the choke holds and Eli being in the grasp before the helmet catch. I was screaming "hold" and "in the grasp" from my couch. I couldn't believe not one flag came out.

Bailed then out??? The Giants D held the best offense the game had ever seen up to that point to 14 points. If the Pats had won the narrative would have been "Perfect Patriots" and the Giants D would have been lauded for only giving up 2 TD's in a 14-10 loss. The Pats D made more mistakes in the Giants winning drive than they had made through 2 previous playoff games and 57+ minutes of that SB and it still took The Helmet Catch and Manning's great escape to beat them. No one will ever convince me the Pats 'lost' that game rather than the Giants won it.