Careful: New England still dangerous even without Gronk

Typical Pats fan..completely glosses over the fact he talks out of his ***...

So..Neuron..can I get a flat guarantee right now..you'll be here after Sundays game..no matter the outcome?


Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

Lol...yeh that's what I thought. Done talking to u now that I can see you have no balls

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

you are pretty good at saying the same thing over and over and over...makes me wonder who you really are trying to convince of all this cuz it sure isn't any Dolphan on this message board.

 

yea because the only thing that matters is Tom Brady is Tom Brady and all else pales in comparison...

 

Lmao this thread is still going on. Wow. They are so nervous about this game it's not even funny. More nervous than I am, that's for sure. But hey, I have a functioning brain and the proper amount of chromosomes.

And Update: My new favorite part of this thread:
Apparently, According to this guy.....QBR no longer determines a QBs worth in the slightest.... So, since the metric that takes into account near-every function a quarterback does and rates him on it doesn't dictate how a QB is doing, please tell me what metric YOU use. Height? Tallest QB best QB maybe? Number of hair follicles per square inch?

Lmfao. The most important stat a QB could possibly have aside from MAYBE total yards (which is pretty much factored in anyway) means NOTHING just because it is 1 stat, and not multiple ones. It's great because no one is saying it is the "end all be all" stat. Yet anyone with common sense knows it's the most common and most telling metric we can use in a single number. But not pats fans, nope. If it's not Tawm Bradeh Pakhin' tha cah in tha havahd yahd, then it's not good. Period.

And this officially marks like the 19th time he has brought "education" related insults into the this thread when no one else is. That is text book compensation at it's finest. Don't worry bro, just another 3 or 4 years and you'll have that AA degree. You don't need to keep trying to impress an internet board.

It's always fun when you can tell they are the kind of people that would say things on a forum but never to someones face, just by their attitude and e-ignorance.

 

With all due respect. When Brady/ Belly retire, Mallet will be in the mix to be the predecessor of a retired QB. That's if he's still there.
Everything else around him will be different.

 

Again, you're unintelligent & uneducated. This is why I constantly bring it up.

Regardless of how much emphasis you want to put on QB rating, it is not the sole determinant. Pay attention, stupid - QB rating is not, has never been, nor will it ever be, the sole determinant of what makes a QB good.

Now, even if you want to compare QB ratings, doing so as the other poster did is invalid. McCown did not play a full game 5 games ago. Using his QB rating from a game where he came off the bench and only had 9 pass attempts as part of an average over 5 games is nonsense. In fact, simply averaging the QB rating over those games is also nonsense. You would have to take the totals of the variables used in the formula for QB rating (yards, TDs, INTs, etc) over those 5 games and input them into the formula.

Let me reiterate: you're unintelligent & uneducated.

 

LMFAO.

I'm waiting for YOUR SINGLE metric that has more weight on how good a QB is other than QBR. Waiting.........

Please name it.

I'll be here forever I'm sure.

Best part it - I've said multiple times that No one uses QBR as the "sole factor in what makes a QB good". It doesn't. and I didn't say that. But.... that would require.... you know.... reading at more than a 4th grade level.

I'll try and help by quoting myself. Read it slowly though, don't hurt yourself.

Where again did I say that is the "sole determinant on what makes a QB good" ???????

Because you can't read, and got proven consistently wrong on 4 straight pages, I'm unintelligent. Lol. Awesome. I'd rather be unintelligent and uneducated more than having ANY redeeming quality YOU yourself could possibly possess as a human being.

 

Is Reshad Jones out for Sunday?

 

A combination of things. Yards, TDs, TD/INT ratio, win-loss record, game winning drives, would be the significant ones. Strength of the opposition pass defense should also be taken into consideration. Carolina, Pittsburgh, Houston, and Cleveland are all in the top 10 in passing yards allowed per game. Carolina, Pittsburgh and Houston were actually top 5 in that category when we played them.

 

So what you're saying in a few unnecessary sentences is that you do NOT have a single metric to measure QBs with that is better than QBR. Yeah, Congrats. I too can compile a list of 17 different stats that would carry more weight than a single vague QB rating. Derp. For the 17th time, It's not the sole determinant. No one said that. Please read. There must be a Sylvan learning center near you....right?

Thanks for wasting your time typing things no one is asking for and proving you have some serious comprehension issues, Genius.

 

Why would anyone assume that when I said Brady has been the best QB in the league over the past 5 games I was referring to a single metric? The other poster tried to debunk that claim using QB rating alone. That is nonsense. When you look at a wide range of statistics, record, and game winning drives, Brady has been the best in the league.

 

Because if you're going by whatever random metrics you chose, it's officially an opinion. Not a fact. (like you wanted it to seem).

So.... the poster used logic and used the UNIVERSAL rating for ALL QBs over the last 5 games to prove you wrong. Regardless of the rating being flawed or not, doesn't matter...... God forbid someone uses the most popular universal stat for QBs in a conversation about QB metrics. Shame on them.

I can also say I think X player is the best player in the last 500 games because of these random reasons, doesn't make it true, its an opinion.

 

I wasn't picking and choosing. my point was that a wide range of stats needed to be looked at. From the stats that are readily available to the public (which includes yards, TDs, INT, TD/INT ratio, completion %, as well as win-loss record and game winning drives) you will be hard pressed to find a better QB over the past 5 games.

 

And to think, it could have been presented that way INITIALLY.... and that's without bashing someone for using the most common QB metric known to football AND THEN putting words in peoples mouths about it that they never even said in the first place.

Who woulda thought!

Edit: don't forget about the unnecessary compensation-filled personal attacks either.

 

If you think this year's Pats D in any way compares to the Pats championship defenses, I just don't know what to say! I mean, it's well beyond any kind of logic I'm aware of.

Those championship Pats teams had great players up and down the defensive roster, guys who made plays in the clutch. You're really comparing it to this year's very average D???

Ummm .... what!?!

 

logic =/= pats fans =/= logic.

 

No need to compare them to those defenses. We can compare them to other defenses this year. When healthy, we have a top 5 passing D and a top 5 scoring D. That is a fact. We have been trending downwards due to injuries to our secondary. Our run D is horrid due to the absence of Wilfork, Kelly, Mayo.

Our secondary showed what it was capable of when it held Manning to 52% completion rate and 4.2 yards per attempt.

If we can get healthy, we easily have one of the top passing defenses in the league. Run D will continue to be a weakness even though it has slightly improved.

 

Hyperbole anyone?

6 Sacks, 2 FF, 0 INT.

 

If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.

 

Dude

Wakenado was better.

 

We are rank 9 pass defense with injuries. Including our CB who is NFL rank 5 in interceptions ...and that's while playing quite a bit less than half of a season.

You are rank 14 with your injuries. Relativity.

Bold facts.

If any team had things go the way they wanted with injuries, they could be anything.

we "could" be"X" if it wasn't for "Y" has ZERO substance or weight.......ever......

But you know.... According to you folks Grimes is only 'good'.

 

Yeah that is a bet I would put an ungodly amount of money on. And you wouldn't.

 

Man, it's really going to be embarrassing when you lose.

 

He actually averages less sacks than that over the last 5 years. He has 8 FF in those 5 years, and 4 INTs in those 5 years. So explain to me if I am "stupid," on where his "machine" like numbers are, because I don't see them. He had 5 FF last year, which is actually an anomaly for him, as he had 1 in his previous 47 games with NE. Educate me oh football genius.

 

Bill Belicheats first coaching job with the browns... got fired for being BEYOND mediocre and posting a negative record.

Not every coach can have a HOF QB fall in their lap and make them look good.

But hey lets talk **** about a coach halfway through his second year. Because god knows Belicheat was an allstar during his first few.

 

Yeah Pariah, The Patriots are #12 in the league in sacks, whereas Miami is #5. WE are the ones that should be afraid. Especially since our o-line is now playing at their highest level of the season.

 

I bet these immature trolls won't tell us what website they call home??

You wouldn't do that would you??

 

And then went 5-11 in his last season before getting fired.

What does that have to do with him losing his job for being a scrub and having a negative record?

OR having a HOF QB fall into his lap and carry him?