PDA

View Full Version : Patriots/Miami


hardwork
10-08-2006, 10:50 AM
Miami is a desperate team. If they don't win today then can just about forget it. Therefore I'm not taking them lightly and I highly doubt the Patriots are either.

I'll be watching the game with my mother, age 94, who loves nothing more then to watch the Patriots.

tony hipchest
10-08-2006, 11:29 AM
Miami is a desperate team. If they don't win today then can just about forget it. Therefore I'm not taking them lightly and I highly doubt the Patriots are either.

I'll be watching the game with my mother, age 94, who loves nothing more then to watch the Patriots.thats cool. have fun with your mom. harringtons in for culpepper so miami cant win even if the pats lay down.

Livinginthe past
10-08-2006, 12:40 PM
I would say that Harrington has more chance of beating the Patriots than Culpepper does.

NM

Atlanta Dan
10-08-2006, 12:47 PM
What happened to the field between the hashmarks?

Even Heinz Field does not look that bad until November - these teams in the Northeast and Midwest really need to go to some sort of artificial turf.

Livinginthe past
10-08-2006, 03:13 PM
Well, a tight ugly game all in all.

The D took some punishment through the air early on, but tightened up really well second half - at the half it looked as if Harrington would easily pass for 350 yards.

The run game was effective at chewing up the clock - Maroney got plenty of carries but couldnt break down a good Miami run D.

Corey was effective running the ball - not too sure why he didnt get more carries.

We made the plays/turnovers we had to and were very clutch on 4th downs.

I'll take 4-1 going into the bye.

NM

hardwork
10-08-2006, 04:23 PM
What happened to the field between the hashmarks?

Even Heinz Field does not look that bad until November - these teams in the Northeast and Midwest really need to go to some sort of artificial turf.

Part of the problem is that the Revolution, MLS, plays on that field also.

hardwork
10-08-2006, 04:32 PM
Well, a tight ugly game all in all.

The D took some punishment through the air early on, but tightened up really well second half - at the half it looked as if Harrington would easily pass for 350 yards.

The run game was effective at chewing up the clock - Maroney got plenty of carries but couldnt break down a good Miami run D.

Corey was effective running the ball - not too sure why he didnt get more carries.

We made the plays/turnovers we had to and were very clutch on 4th downs.

I'll take 4-1 going into the bye.

NM

I'm not surprised we couldn't run that well against Miami. Completely different defense then Cincinnati. Cincinnati's D has no speed up front.

I'm not sure what they're doing with Corey. I don't know if maybe he isn't 100% so they're using him sparingly, or what.

tony hipchest
10-08-2006, 06:50 PM
I would say that Harrington has more chance of beating the Patriots than Culpepper does.

NMway to go out on a limb there with an injured culpepper.

you mean harrington has less of a chance of losing, right? i will say it again:

harringtons in for culpepper so miami cant win even if the pats lay down.



(culpepper is an experienced pro bowl qb with playoff experience. harrington is not. a healthy pep has the better shot to win.)

Livinginthe past
10-08-2006, 07:00 PM
way to go out on a limb there with an injured culpepper.

you mean harrington has less of a chance of losing, right? i will say it again:

harringtons in for culpepper so miami cant win even if the pats lay down.



(culpepper is an experienced pro bowl qb with playoff experience. harrington is not. a healthy pep has the better shot to win.)

Dont get too bogged down in semantics, Tony.

Surely Harrington having more of a chance of winning is the same as Harrington having less chance of losing?

From what I have seen this season Culpepper does not resemble anything close to a Pro-bowl level QB - sure he has had the odd good season but will he ever reach that level again?

Doubtful I would say.

I guess this was one of the wins you chalked down for us leading to our 8-8 - as opposed to the Bengals victory which you obviously didn't.

NM

tony hipchest
10-08-2006, 07:12 PM
I guess this was one of the wins you chalked down for us leading to our 8-8 - as opposed to the Bengals victory which you obviously didn't.

NM

if you have this pinned up in your proverbial "locker room", i think you can atleast get it right. 10-6. (i just said the pats can win the division going 8-8- i expect you to start arguing this point in about 1 minute.) i did give the pats a win against the bengals if it was a. wright starting, and was pretty much a toss up with pep stealing one of 2.

nice try though! :smile:

anyways, once again, i was right. the pats couldnt lose this game if they laid down. (or didnt have a deep threat at wr) harrington simply couldnt get it done. i knew this. you have watched some detroit football the past few years havent you?

Livinginthe past
10-08-2006, 07:20 PM
if you have this pinned up in your proverbial "locker room", i think you can atleast get it right. 10-6. (i just said the pats can win the division going 8-8- i expect you to start arguing this point in about 1 minute.) i did give the pats a win against the bengals if it was a. wright starting, and was pretty much a toss up with pep stealing one of 2.

nice try though! :smile:

Tell you what - 10-6 it is.

Maybe you'll be right about the 8-8 potentially taking the division - Jets and Bills both got blown out of the water today.

NM

hardwork
10-08-2006, 10:58 PM
(or didnt have a deep threat at wr)

Hey, the Steelers had their deep threat going today. I think Ward caught one, what, 7, 8 yards deep? A real game breaker.

tony hipchest
10-09-2006, 10:36 AM
Hey, the Steelers had their deep threat going today. I think Ward caught one, what, 7, 8 yards deep? A real game breaker.
and how does that help the patriots downfield?

hardwork
10-09-2006, 11:19 AM
and how does that help the patriots downfield?

It's the 1 and 3 teams that need a little help. The 4 and 1 teams are doing ok. You'll catch on after you've been following the league for a few years. (I won't hold my breath though)

Livinginthe past
10-09-2006, 11:49 AM
It's the 1 and 3 teams that need a little help. The 4 and 1 teams are doing ok. You'll catch on after you've been following the league for a few years. (I won't hold my breath though)

Come on hardwork,

Dont tell me that while you were watching the Patriots dismantle most teams and lift multiple titles over the last 5 years that you didn't wish they would start messing about with the formula that has brought them success.

Who needs players who are willing to work as a team towards a greater goal ,players whose sum total is more than the individual worth of their talent?

No.

What we need to do is get with the program - give up our No.2 QB, and a 1st rounder for a malcontent WR who may or may not be able to get it done anymore.

That would give us a 'deep threat' you see - and just because we have been successful all these years without a genuine No.1 its no reason not to mortgage the future for another shot at the title this year.

Haven't you learned anything? :wink02:

NM

tony hipchest
10-09-2006, 11:54 AM
(I won't hold my breath though)

you should...for like 15 minutes. :sofunny: j/k

tony hipchest
10-09-2006, 11:59 AM
Come on hardwork,

Dont tell me that while you were watching the Patriots dismantle most teams and lift multiple titles over the last 5 years that you didn't wish they would start messing about with the formula that has brought them success.

Who needs players who are willing to work as a team towards a greater goal ,players whose sum total is more than the individual worth of their talent?

No.

What we need to do is get with the program - give up our No.2 QB, and a 1st rounder for a malcontent WR who may or may not be able to get it done anymore.

That would give us a 'deep threat' you see - and just because we have been successful all these years without a genuine No.1 its no reason not to mortgage the future for another shot at the title this year.

Haven't you learned anything? :wink02:

NM

get a room already.

im sure this is the same stance you took when the pats talked about bringing in dillon right? or did that unprecedented and revolutionary questionning process, and tough interview he did with the pats :rolleyes:, ease your mind?

Livinginthe past
10-09-2006, 12:23 PM
get a room already.

im sure this is the same stance you took when the pats talked about bringing in dillon right? or did that unprecedented and revolutionary questionning process, and tough interview he did with the pats :rolleyes:, ease your mind?

There are a number of differences between the Dillon trade and your Moss trade scenario.

1. The running game is absolutely critical to New Englands success - despite Antowain Smith not putting up huge numbers in the regular season he still received a large amount of carries.

2. The Patriots traded for a RB who had proven that he could succeed in a team that was otherwise weak. Dillon produced Pro-bowl numbers regularly despite the fact that every team knew he was getting the ball and getting it often with zero production at QB.

3. The New England offense is not built around deep bombs and a quick strike offense - it is based upon ball retention and wearing the other team down.

4. New England traded a 2nd round draft pick right before the draft, so that they would be able to immediately alter their draft strategy to compensate for the arrival or non-arrival of Dillon.
Trading away a recently gained 1st round pick and our back up QB at this stage of the season does not make sense.

5. Randy Moss, as talented as he is, has failed to spark the Raiders in his time there.
Sure they are a poor team but he is supposed to be a difference maker - in 2003 he played 16 games and caught for 1600 yards. In the next 33 games he has managed only 1900.

In short Dillon was worth the 'risk' because he fitted the system, Randy Moss isn't because he doesn't.

NM

tony hipchest
10-09-2006, 03:00 PM
The run game was effective at chewing up the clock - Maroney got plenty of carries but couldnt break down a good Miami run D.



NMhow convinient for you. when the heralded pats running game struggles against miami they are a "good" run D. when willie puts 130 yds and 30 carries on them they are poor, below average, weak, etc. :rolleyes:

Trading away a recently gained 1st round pick and our back up QB at this stage of the season does not make sense.who said anything about this stage of the season? very rare that in season trades of this magnitude made at this stage. cassel and an 07 pick wouldnt help the raiders right now anyways. definitely not as much as moss would. a trade like this would happen after the season although im sure if it COULD happen now the pats would jump ALL over it.

fyi randy moss is not a system wr. he can succeed on any team with a qb capable of getting him the ball, including brady. thats why he has 100 td's in his short career.

Livinginthe past
10-09-2006, 04:05 PM
how convinient for you. when the heralded pats running game struggles against miami they are a "good" run D. when willie puts 130 yds and 30 carries on them they are poor, below average, weak, etc. :rolleyes:

who said anything about this stage of the season? very rare that in season trades of this magnitude made at this stage. cassel and an 07 pick wouldnt help the raiders right now anyways. definitely not as much as moss would. a trade like this would happen after the season although im sure if it COULD happen now the pats would jump ALL over it.

fyi randy moss is not a system wr. he can succeed on any team with a qb capable of getting him the ball, including brady. thats why he has 100 td's in his short career.

I can see you'd like to drag this one off topic.

Sorry, not interested.

To answer the latter half your post ie the part relevant to this discussion - Moss, like all players works best in a particular type of system.

I am not entirely sure how you have come to the conclusion that Moss can 'succeed on any team' - extensive personal research has led me to believe that he has played for only two NFL teams during his career.

He was a success story at one, and not at the other.

I make that about 50% failure rate.

Regardless of the talent levels at Oakland, I can't see how you can project his talents onto the rosters of 31 other teams based upon his outstanding results at one.

NM

hardwork
10-09-2006, 06:40 PM
Hipchest is sharing his insights with the Steeler's coaching staff. That's why they're doing so well.

tony hipchest
10-09-2006, 07:17 PM
I can see you'd like to drag this one off topic.

Sorry, not interested.
i was actually dragging it back on topic. after all it was in the miami/patriots thread where you declared miami a "good" defense for shutting down the pats running attack, whereas a few weeks ago (when it served your purpose) they were a weak defense because willie parker tore them up. :busted:
To answer the latter half your post ie the part relevant to this discussion - Moss, like all players works best in a particular type of system.

I am not entirely sure how you have come to the conclusion that Moss can'succeed on any team' - extensive personal research has led me to believe that he has played for only two NFL teams during his career.

He was a success story at one, and not at the other.

I make that about 50% failure rate.

Regardless of the talent levels at Oakland, I can't see how you can project his talents onto the rosters of 31 other teams based upon his outstanding results at one.

great job of taking my quote out of context to serve your futile purpose. another tactic you use when youre sinking in a debate. what you left out was "capable of getting him the ball". did i say he could suceed with 31 teams? no. i said he can succeed with brady. obviously youre not as confident in brady as i am.

i'll make this simple for you. moss has much better chances to suceed with a great qb and a good team than a sucky qb and sorry team. of course your narrow football mind would rather judge him on what hes done with the piss poor raiders (as if they suck because of him) newsflash! tom brady would suck on the raiders right now. if hes only played with 2 teams how can you say he wont succeed in boston?

again nice try, but i think people see through your misquotes, deception and deflection. get back to me whether miami is a good or bad defense when you make up your mind.

hardwork
10-09-2006, 07:31 PM
i was actually dragging it back on topic. after all it was in the miami/patriots thread where you declared miami a "good" defense for shutting down the pats running attack, whereas a few weeks ago (when it served your purpose) they were a weak defense because willie parker tore them up. :busted:


great job of taking my quote out of context to serve your futile purpose. another tactic you use when youre sinking in a debate. what you left out was "capable of getting him the ball". did i say he could suceed with 31 teams? no. i said he can succeed with brady. obviously youre not as confident in brady as i am.

i'll make this simple for you. moss has much better chances to suceed with a great qb and a good team than a sucky qb and sorry team. of course your narrow football mind would rather judge him on what hes done with the piss poor raiders (as if they suck because of him) newsflash! tom brady would suck on the raiders right now. if hes only played with 2 teams how can you say he wont succeed in boston?

again nice try, but i think people see through your misquotes, deception and deflection. get back to me whether miami is a good or bad defense when you make up your mind.



Why don't you run along son, you have no idea what you're talking about. Your post are obnoxious, full of BS, provoked by jealousy, and boring. The Steelers stink so far this year. Roethlisberger can't hold a candle to Brady. My 94 year old mother knows more about football then you do. Everybody is tired of your cry baby act. Get lost.

Livinginthe past
10-10-2006, 01:19 AM
i was actually dragging it back on topic. after all it was in the miami/patriots thread where you declared miami a "good" defense for shutting down the pats running attack, whereas a few weeks ago (when it served your purpose) they were a weak defense because willie parker tore them up. :busted:


great job of taking my quote out of context to serve your futile purpose. another tactic you use when youre sinking in a debate. what you left out was "capable of getting him the ball". did i say he could suceed with 31 teams? no. i said he can succeed with brady. obviously youre not as confident in brady as i am.

i'll make this simple for you. moss has much better chances to suceed with a great qb and a good team than a sucky qb and sorry team. of course your narrow football mind would rather judge him on what hes done with the piss poor raiders (as if they suck because of him) newsflash! tom brady would suck on the raiders right now. if hes only played with 2 teams how can you say he wont succeed in boston?

again nice try, but i think people see through your misquotes, deception and deflection. get back to me whether miami is a good or bad defense when you make up your mind.



Maybe Tony Hipchest should enlighten us as to the Official List Of Teams Capable Of Getting Moss The Ball.

I've tried searching this important stat on NFL.com and footballoutsiders - but alas, no luck.

Of course Moss has a much higher chance of succeeding at New England than Oakland, that is true of any player in the Oakland locker room.

But it isn't worth New England trading away their back-up QB and a 1st rounder for.

Oh and my perception of teams does tend to change as the season progresses - Miami aren't a good team but they have a solid run D.

Its just a shame that Pittsburgh's only win has come against the basement team in the AFCE.

What you have attempted here is called circular logic Tony.

You have basically said, that Moss is capable of succeeding at teams where he is going to be successful.

Anyway, we can see if this trade happens - it would maintain your highly impressive grasp of 'trade value' - a grasp that is obviously superior than the Seattle and New England FO's.


NM

tony hipchest
10-10-2006, 08:21 AM
Why don't you run along son, you have no idea what you're talking about. Your post are obnoxious, full of BS, provoked by jealousy, and boring. The Steelers stink so far this year. Roethlisberger can't hold a candle to Brady. My 94 year old mother knows more about football then you do. Everybody is tired of your cry baby act. Get lost.listen here gramps. when i told you to quit breathing i didnt mean unplug the oxygen tank and everything. im thinking if your mom knows who randy moss is then she knows 2x as much fottball as her oxygen deprived son. ask her shell tell you moss will help the pats. and litp thinks doug flutie or matt cassell is more valuable :sofunny:.

jar jar binks gaffney? LOL

tony hipchest
10-10-2006, 08:45 AM
again litp, so all the fine sf posters can be wary of you tricks, you wanna explain how you twist this:

fyi randy moss is not a system wr. he can succeed on any team with a qb capable of getting him the ball, including brady. thats why he has 100 td's in his short career.


into this:




I am not entirely sure how you have come to the conclusion that Moss can 'succeed on any team' - extensive personal research has led me to believe that he has played for only two NFL teams during his career.


I can't see how you can project his talents onto the rosters of 31 other teams based upon his outstanding results at one.

NM

again your reading comprehension skills and deception have failed you. and saying moss couldnt help the pats win and be a better team makes you look like a complete idiot. atleast when hardwork says it it just makes him look normal.

while your at it why dont you expand more on this miami defense theory you have. it inrigues me. a defense is only good if they face the pats and shut them down? i havent seen the stats on this at nfl.com. how are all other teams judged that dont face the pats? way to waffle there bro :busted:

Livinginthe past
10-10-2006, 10:31 AM
again litp, so all the fine sf posters can be wary of you tricks, you wanna explain how you twist this:



into this:


again your reading comprehension skills and deception have failed you. and saying moss couldnt help the pats win and be a better team makes you look like a complete idiot. atleast when hardwork says it it just makes him look normal.

while your at it why dont you expand more on this miami defense theory you have. it inrigues me. a defense is only good if they face the pats and shut them down? i havent seen the stats on this at nfl.com. how are all other teams judged that dont face the pats? way to waffle there bro :busted:

Can Moss help New England be a better team?

Sure, talent wise there isn't too much doubt.

But you have to take into account multiple factors, such as his demands to receive the amount of passes he feels to be deserving of his stature.

New England under BB like to spread the ball about and I dont think anyone can argue with the results - Brady has been consistently the guy who can get it done with WR's most of the league consider to be in 'who dat' territory.

Why would you screw with a formula that has served the team so well?

Its very possible that Moss would 'upset the applecart' if he came to the Patriots and then didnt receive as many balls as he thought he should - which is likely bearing in mind New England passing strategy.

For years the Patriots have been derided for their lack of talent on the O-Line, in the WR corps and in the DB corps - yet we consistently get it done.

I dont know how else to spell this out, as I have already tried numerous times.

New England doesnt need to sacrafice a No.1 pick and Matt Cassell (Doug Flutie retired btw) in order to trade for a WR like Moss - the 1st rounder would be better spent on a young talented LBer.

Now thats my opinion, and if you think that makes me an idiot then so be it, but I wont be losing any sleep over it.

The way in which I rate teams and their components changes throughout the season and the performances they give and who they are against.

For example, Chicago wouldn't have scared anyone with their passing attack before week1, yet now they are looking pretty good in this area - therefore I would have thought the DB's they faced in week1 would have underperformed at the time, but in hindsight not so much.

Threfore Willie's performance in week1 can be upgraded.

It has nothing specifically to do with who does and doesn't play the Patriots.

NM