Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

KARMA is a B!tCH


chknwing

Recommended Posts

Since then, they've accomplished:

18-1 season, sole loss in the Super Bowl

3 #1 Seeds ('07, '10, '11)

4 playoff appearances, only season without one they lost Brady and got screwed by tiebreakers

No season with less than 11 wins

2 SB Appearances, barely lost both

Clearly though, they only had success because they "cheated" (which isn't even really cheating anyway since every team does it anyway; the only problem was the location they did the taping).

It would appear you may have missed the point that PackPanther made. Please re-read. Additionally, every team does not illegally film their opponents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18-1 season, sole loss in the Super Bowl

I'd rather go 9-7 and win 4 playoff games, gaining a championship in the process. It's more impressive. And lol if the refs didn't fug over the Ravens in that monday night game the "undefeated" storyline wouldn't have made it past week 13.

3 #1 Seeds ('07, '10, '11)

lol that no.1 seed went one and done against the jets in 2010 and if the AFC wasn't total poo this year they wouldn't have even made it to the SB so that they could lose to the first 9-7 superbowl champions.

4 playoff appearances, only season without one they lost Brady and got screwed by tiebreakers

lol at the Patriots ever being "screwed", especially by standard tiebreakers that would count against any team in the league.

No season with less than 11 wins

yay

2 SB Appearances, barely lost both

uh-huh. great.

What's interesting about this is that there's a huge misconception going on with NFL fans in general and this Patriots admiration society in the media. Because Belichick does the 2nd-5th best coaching job in any given year after 2004, this means to people that he's no.1 overall in the last 8 years, and it's an atrocity of sports journalism that despite beating him now 2 times in the superbowl within the last 5 years while being perceived as the underdog, it's not going to convince SI or any other entity that covers the NFL that Tom Coughlin is a better coach than Belichick at least right now (which he is), and this sports media flying elvis circle-jerk is going to keep on moving forward with the consensus opinion in coaching rankings continuing to feature Belichick at the top.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, what exactly is your point?

My point was that they still had tremendous success even after they got caught, which means that it clearly wasn't the reason they were having success even before that.

So, I'm sort of looking for where you are actually proving me wrong or something. Of course I'd rather go 9-7 and win a Super Bowl. Never once said otherwise. Simply am stating that the Patriots are still one of the best teams in the league even after the incident which throws out any of the "lol only reason they won sbz cos of det thingy wich isnt rlly illegalz if u lookz at factz" statements New England haters like to throw out. I'm not a big New England fan but I hate uninformed statements like that. Multiple coaches have admitted to doing the same thing and the league even recognized that taping signals isn't illegal (you know, which is why teams change their signals EVERY YEAR); it's just of where they did it what was illegal. Team cameras aren't allowed on the sidelines.

So maybe the sooner people learn the facts, the sooner I won't have to inform them of the facts and the sooner you won't have to make posts that really didn't have much of a purpose to what I was saying or what my point was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So maybe the sooner people learn the facts, the sooner I won't have to inform them of the facts and the sooner you won't have to make posts that really didn't have much of a purpose to what I was saying or what my point was.

if you can find 3 people who really care what your point exactly is on here, i'd be impressed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you can find 3 people who really care what your point exactly is on here, i'd be impressed

Which explains exactly why you felt the need to, quote-by-quote, respond to my post, right? Because you didn't care, right?

I know when I don't care about something, I still decide to respond to it with a paragraph.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which explains exactly why you felt the need to, quote-by-quote, respond to my post, right? Because you didn't care, right?

I know when I don't care about something, I still decide to respond to it with a paragraph.

look i know it's hard for you to put sentences together in such a way that you think typing up a paragraph takes some real fortitude but writing well comes easy for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

look i know it's hard for you to put sentences together in such a way that you think typing up a paragraph takes some real fortitude but writing well comes easy for me.

I like how you're dodging what I said. You obviously cared enough about my post that you felt you needed to respond to it in the manner that you did which was quote-by-quote. The funny thing is, it had little relevance to what I was saying.

If you didn't care, you wouldn't have replied. You did reply which means you obviously cared enough that you needed to put up a rebuttal to what you felt was "wrong." Unless, of course, you just felt like wasting time (which, regardless, you were doing whether you cared or not).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mage do you remember when the pats won like 10 playoff games in a row instead of going one and done or losing SBs to teams that broke records for worst regular season winning percentage for championship winners as a consequence because IMHO the former era doesn't make the latter look tremendously successful

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like how you're dodging what I said. You obviously cared enough about my post that you felt you needed to respond to it in the manner that you did which was quote-by-quote. The funny thing is, it had little relevance to what I was saying.

If you didn't care, you wouldn't have replied. You did reply which means you obviously cared enough that you needed to put up a rebuttal to what you felt was "wrong." Unless, of course, you just felt like wasting time (which, regardless, you were doing whether you cared or not).

how pathetic does your social life have to be that you think someone who heckles you on a vbulletin message board cares about you so very very much

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mage do you remember when the pats won like 10 playoff games in a row instead of going one and done or losing SBs to teams that broke records for worst regular season winning percentage for championship winners as a consequence because IMHO the former era doesn't make the latter look tremendously successful

I'm still not sure why you are telling me this stuff. I never said otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how pathetic does your social life have to be that you think someone who heckles you on a vbulletin message board cares about you so very very much

I never said you cared about me. You just cared about my post and felt you needed to respond and "prove me wrong." Why did you respond in the manner that you did if you didn't care about my post?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I gave you a full breakdown and examples from last year as to why I think it's unfair to expect 1k from T-Mac this year if everyone stays healthy. But the TLDR version is we will have 4 legitimately good WRs next year, most rookies who get to 1,000 yards don't have any others on the team with them let alone 3 others, it will be hard for him to put up 1k with out the others being injured or falling short of expectations themselves, but in 2026 without Thielen it's different.
    • Ulcerative Colitis is not CTE. 
    • Last year Thielen had 615 yards in 10 games (had more ypg than his 1k season in 23).  XL had 497 in 16 games with tons of drops and Coker had 478 in 11. They also only had only 192 of our 518 targets to get those numbers. So if Thielen has 1,000 yards again, XL and Coker each improve to say 600 yards each, and T-Mac comes in at 800 yards, you're going to say that's not good enough?  Especially if he ends up with close to, if not getting to, double digit TD's like I think he will, as he's going to be a red zone monster for Bryce? Because if that's the breakdown of just the Top 4 and Bryce plays all 17 games, he's going to be pushing a 4,000 yard season as the TEs, RBs, and other WRs will probably add up to 750-1k yards as well, and I think that would be far more than anyone here could be expecting of him this season. Last year the Giants only had 2 players with more than 331 yards besides Nabers and they were 699 and 573 while Nabers "only" had 1,200 yards (granted in 15 games).  While the Jags second leading receiving was a TE with 411 yards and BTJ also "only" had 1,282 but in all 17 games. If everyone stays healthy and XL/Coker have improved, I think Bryce is going to spread the ball around rather than focus on T-Mac in a way that most of the 1k rookies have been able to get. Again I point to MHJ and the Cardinals last year. They had 3,859 yards receiving.   McBride had 1,146, MHJ had 885, then their 3rd and 4th in rec yards were 548 and 414. Take the 146 and 85 that McBride/MHJ had over my example for our guys and give them to the other two and they get to 7 yards shy of the 600 I'm using for XL/Coker, while the rest of the team added up to 866 yards. So, if you expect T-Mac to get to 1k, where are you taking those yards from? if anything, XL and Coker each getting 600 yards seems like a low projection, so they wouldn't come from there. Maybe they come from Thielen now that we have T-Mac as the true #1.  But I think if anything, having T-Mac draw attention will just make it easier for Thielen to get open and him and Bryce have great chemistry already, he's not going to stop throwing his way if he can pick up easy chunks of yards there. So maybe they come from the RBs, TEs, other WRs, but it's I think a very fair example to show why expecting 1,000 yards if everyone stays healthy isn't necessarily fair to him. It's also why I said I'd then expect at least 1,200 yards in 2026, as once Thielen leave and all 3 of T-Mac/XL/Coker get better, they absorb that 1,000 yards Thielen leaves behind with T-Mac probably taking close to half of it and the other two splitting up the other half.
×
×
  • Create New...