Pats now must sign a WR

[Brady to Brown]

I am very glad that you made that extra post, because when you copied mine and posted what you did it looked like you were directing that at me.
Sorry for the confusion.
I did think you were calling me out, so i hope you can understand the response.

I only copied your post because you said that you were not going to get into the middle of this. And because you are a Mod. I guess I should just take the advise I give my two daughters (ignore the bully's).

 

[DaBruinz]

Yeah, it's an opinion, yet you don't even come close to disproving that opinion.

Only because you refuse to listen.

Branch only showed up during the playoffs and had huge games, I remember one was in the Super Bowl. Yeah, he wasn't all that

Really? He had one huge game in the play-offs. And that was against the Eagles in the SB. And no, he wasn't all that.

So if the receivers weren't on track then how was Brady the issue? Which one was the REAL issue? Denver stuffed the run and made the Pats beat them through the air because they didn't respect the passing game. I wonder why, they only had CHAMP BAILEY covering Reche Caldwell.

I glad you stopped to think that maybe the receivers AND BRADY could have both been issues. Nothing like opening your mind up to all the possibilities.

Also, its not a matter of Denver NOT RESPECTING the Pats passing game, its a matter of making an opposing offense ONE DIMENSIONAL. Its ignorance to say that Denver didn't respect the Pats passing game when Tom Brady is the QB.

Gee, Chad Pennington managed to stay on his feet. The 'sloppy field' excuse is pure Colts-talk.

Ignorant people are the ones who claim that facts are excuses. You clearly didn't watch the game because Brady was slipping ALL OVER THE PLACE. Why? I don't know. But he damn well couldn't stay on his feet.

77 yards. That's only 5.5 yards PER COMPLETION. Yeah, they were without Maroney, which meant the Pats were screwed b/c the passing game wasn't anything to fear for Miami.

Hmm.. Maybe the Pats were calling short passing plays to cover for their running game. Its called the DINK AND DUNK. You might have heard of it? Well, maybe not.

27 for 51 in a SHORT passing game? Is that supposed to be good? They went short because the deep passes would get Brady killed and they had no chance in hell of completing anything deep anyways (SD's guys had our receivers covered all day).

No, the SD guys didn't have our receivers covered all day. I saw Troy Brown open PLENTY of times only to have Brady go elsewhere. OH, and how would Brady have gotten killed when Merriman and Phillips weren't getting anywhere near Brady? You clearly didn't watch the game.

] Basically, in your analysis you cite the lack of OTHER personnel for the ineffectiveness of the passing game. That's why the passing game wasn't a strong threat in '06, it couldn't pick up the slack where other areas of the offense were hampered. No running game? See Week 3 against Denver. No protection? See Week 14 against Miami.

Basically, what I am saying is that you ome across as looking at the situations in a vacuum and are making incorrect assumptions about what happened.

Brown was still a deep threat in '01. Branch was in '03.

Neither Brown nor Branch were "deep threats." Brown has alwasy been a possession receiver.

] Do "machines" neglect to score TDs until late in the 4th with the game out of reach (or in one case no points at all)? In 2004 the Pats had ONE game in which they didn't score 20. In 2006 the Pats had FIVE such games.

And in 2006, the Pats allowed opposing teams to score 20 or more points 7 times while in 2004, they allowed opposing teams to score 20 or more 8 times. Does that mean the 2004 defense was worse?

Oh, and Machines DO break down at times. It happens when all the parts aren't working together.


If my assumptions were so stupid then why did you confirm those assumptions were correct?[/quote] I didn't confirm your assumptions as correct. Quite the opposite. I proved your assumptions WRONG. Hell, you obviously don't even know what you wrote so let me refresh your memory. Here is your "ASSUMPTION:"

]Unless you believe we're perfectly fine at the LB position.

Obviously, if I feel that the Pats should sign Jarrett Johnson and Carlos Polk as well as draft a LB or 2, then I don't think the LB situation is fine.

 

[DaBruinz]

This is why the internet sucks. I agree with everything you posted, yet you feel that my post was directed at you. I have not seen enough of, or anything in your posts to call you a bully. You are also a Mod and I can't imagine Ian keeping you as a Mod if you were a bully.

I feel there are several bully's on this site and one of them has posted several times in this thread. My comments were directed at him. Very sorry.

In other words, because you don't know how to just reply to a post and quoted people incorrectly, you feel you were treated unfairly.

There are 3 different ways to post. You can do a quick post, a reply, or a quote. To help avoid confusion, you shouldn't quote people you aren't replying to.

 

[richpats]

Well, I guess the banning of NEM didn't liberate us from bullies altogether. Especially those that apparently didn't watch SB38 or the 2nd AFC title game at Pittsburgh, games where Branch was huge.

BTW, if the Pats had another game to play they probably would have given up 20+ points in the Super Bowl.