Re: Tom Brady is out for the Year
Hey you, hang yourself. Not for disagreeing with me, but because you take anger at stupidity as frustration with disagreement. Learn the difference, please.
I find it interesting that the guy from Philly has a problem with Brady because he's apparently a snob (the SB loss wouldn't have anything to do with that, right?), though I often see Brady speak on TV and a sometimes surprised by how kind and genuine he acts. I don't understand why it's proper to attack their character. If there's anything to dislike, it's the willingness to knowingly break the rules by doing that illegal taping, whether the advantage gained is significant or not.
And everybody I talk to seems to be convinced that the Patriots would be nothing without Brady. Well guess what, guys? The Steelers would be a 3-13 team this year without Roethlisberger. The Cowboys would fall flat on their face and not even make the playoffs without Romo. The Colts would have a hard time winning a single game without Manning. I mean, who here is ready for the Jim Sorgi era to start?
The point here is the quarterback is a vital position in football, regardless of team, and saying that your team needs a great quarterback is like saying you've got to have legs to run. And then I hear people saying the Patriots would not have such good stats from their receivers if the offensive line weren't so great. That's kind of true. And that's exactly why the best teams require best players at all positions, and excellent play in all three stages of the game. Take the Steelers for instance. Aside from their injuries, the main thing that hurt them last year was obviously their offensive line. Parker was great and would probably have had the NFL rushing title had he not broken his leg, but his 4.1 average yards per carry saw him getting stuffed at the line almost every time, and he's been woeful as the goal-line back. No support from the O-line. Roethlisberger got sacked 47 times last year, vs the 23 when the Steelers won the superbowl. No O-line. How can your receivers get good stats if the quarterback has no chance to throw? No O-line there either. Last year, the Steelers had the number one overall defense, even without Polamalu half the time, an injured Polamalu the rest, and no Aaron Smith through the last part of the year. Hines Ward set the Steelers WR TD record. Roethlisberger set a club record with TDs. His passer rating was 104.1, second in the league, only second to Tom Brady and his record-breaking season. But you know what? The Steelers went 10-6 and were knocked out in the first round of the playoffs. There are many unfortunate circumstances working against them in that last half of the season, but part of the reason their 7-2 start deteriorated into a 10-6 playoff disaster is because even though they had a lot of great players doing very well, they just didn't have all the pieces yet. Without that, you're not going to be as good as you can be.
Oh, sorry, Mystic, I just came in here to flame. My bad.
Hey you, hang yourself. Not for disagreeing with me, but because you take anger at stupidity as frustration with disagreement. Learn the difference, please.
I find it interesting that the guy from Philly has a problem with Brady because he's apparently a snob (the SB loss wouldn't have anything to do with that, right?), though I often see Brady speak on TV and a sometimes surprised by how kind and genuine he acts. I don't understand why it's proper to attack their character. If there's anything to dislike, it's the willingness to knowingly break the rules by doing that illegal taping, whether the advantage gained is significant or not.
And everybody I talk to seems to be convinced that the Patriots would be nothing without Brady. Well guess what, guys? The Steelers would be a 3-13 team this year without Roethlisberger. The Cowboys would fall flat on their face and not even make the playoffs without Romo. The Colts would have a hard time winning a single game without Manning. I mean, who here is ready for the Jim Sorgi era to start?
The point here is the quarterback is a vital position in football, regardless of team, and saying that your team needs a great quarterback is like saying you've got to have legs to run. And then I hear people saying the Patriots would not have such good stats from their receivers if the offensive line weren't so great. That's kind of true. And that's exactly why the best teams require best players at all positions, and excellent play in all three stages of the game. Take the Steelers for instance. Aside from their injuries, the main thing that hurt them last year was obviously their offensive line. Parker was great and would probably have had the NFL rushing title had he not broken his leg, but his 4.1 average yards per carry saw him getting stuffed at the line almost every time, and he's been woeful as the goal-line back. No support from the O-line. Roethlisberger got sacked 47 times last year, vs the 23 when the Steelers won the superbowl. No O-line. How can your receivers get good stats if the quarterback has no chance to throw? No O-line there either. Last year, the Steelers had the number one overall defense, even without Polamalu half the time, an injured Polamalu the rest, and no Aaron Smith through the last part of the year. Hines Ward set the Steelers WR TD record. Roethlisberger set a club record with TDs. His passer rating was 104.1, second in the league, only second to Tom Brady and his record-breaking season. But you know what? The Steelers went 10-6 and were knocked out in the first round of the playoffs. There are many unfortunate circumstances working against them in that last half of the season, but part of the reason their 7-2 start deteriorated into a 10-6 playoff disaster is because even though they had a lot of great players doing very well, they just didn't have all the pieces yet. Without that, you're not going to be as good as you can be.
Oh, sorry, Mystic, I just came in here to flame. My bad.
Comment